3 CONFERENCES AT PRAGUE AND BERGEN AND THE LOOMING WAR 243inquiries were Bonnet; Célestin Bouglé, a professor in the field of his-
tory and social economy at the Sorbonne and director since 1935 of the
École normale supérieure; Condliffe; Dennery; Lange; Mantoux; Count
Pál Teleki, a former prime minister of Hungary, chair of the Hungarian
Coordinating Committee for International Studies and professor at the
University of Budapest: Toynbee; and Webster. Another respondent was
Eric Voegelin, a professor at the University of Vienna and secretary of
the Austrian Coordinating Committee for International Studies. In con-
trast to the American responses to Walker’s questions, the responses
emanating from Britain and Europe, while agreeing on the point that the
ISC needed reform, were ‘emphatically affirmative’ as to its utility.^8
For the benefit of the foundation in New York, Kittredge prepared a
preliminary analysis of the replies to his letters concerning the progress
of the ISC sent from Britain and Europe. In that analysis, Kittredge
highlighted the fact that younger scholars such as Dennery and Voegelin,
both of whom had participated in the 1937 ISC, had stressed the ‘spe-
cific advantages’ of the conference: it had seen the production of ‘new
documentation on significant international problems’ and had pro-
vided ‘opportunities...for work and free discussion of essential issues.’
Kittredge pointed out in his analysis that although Toynbee had not
attended the 1937 conference, he had been closely associated with the
ISC since 1927. What Kittredge meant by this was that Toynbee had
collaborated in that year with Zimmern, then the deputy director of
the IIIC, in making arrangements for the ISC’s foundational meeting
in Berlin in 1928. Kittredge stated that Toynbee was ‘more than ever
convinced’ of the value of the conference in light of the deteriorating
international situation. Kittredge recorded that Toynbee had observed
that the ‘outlook would be very black indeed’ if scholars were ‘unable
to talk across frontiers’ and had stressed that the ISC remained ‘one of
the few unbroken bridges which still permits reasonable and amicable
discussions of burning problems between scholars of different coun-
tries’. Indeed, Toynbee had stressed, Kittredge noted in concluding his
(^8) Tracey B. Kittredge, Preliminary analysis of replies to letters concerning the progress of
the International Studies Conference, Paris, September 26, 1937, AG-IICI-K-I-4.b, UA.
For the occupations of Célestin Bouglé, Tracey B. Kittredge, Pál Teleki, and Eric Voegelin
see ‘List of Participants,’ in International Studies Conference, Peaceful Change, 622, 626,
630–31.