Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The League of Nations and Origins of the International Studies Conference

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Story of International Relations, Part One

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in International Relations ((PSIR))

  • 455 Accesses

Abstract

The aftermath of the war saw the appearance of a growing number of private organisations devoted to the study of international affairs, one such being Zimmern’s Geneva School of International Studies, which he founded in 1925. In that same year, the first institution devoted to organisation of international studies on an international basis was formed: the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR).

The second such body was the International Studies Conference (ISC). Largely modelled on the IPR, the ISC was the outgrowth of the conference that Zimmern had initiated and which was convened under the heading of the Committee of Experts for the Coordination of Higher International Studies. The conference took place in March 1928 in Berlin within the confines of the German Political Academy (Deutsche Hochschule für Politik). Founded in 1920 by Zimmern’s friend Ernst Jäckh, the academy was the venue at which in March 1927 Shotwell had outlined the first suggestion of what became the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy (1928), also known as the Pact of Paris. Shotwell presented a draft of this treaty at the IPR’s second conference, which took place in Honolulu in July 1927.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    ISIPR, ‘Fifth Biennial Conference of the IPR, 14–26 August 1933,’ prepared by the ISIPR, Honolulu, 1933, Reports on activities from the Institute of Pacific Relations, AG 1-IICI-K-VI-2, UA.

  2. 2.

    James Brown Scott, ‘Public Opinion in Relation to War and Peace: The Work of Non-official Organizations,’ in The Problems of Peace: Lectures Delivered at the Geneva Institute of International Relations at the Palais des Nations (New York: Books for Libraries Press, 1970), 320. Originally published in 1927. See also Ernest Nys, ‘The Codification of International Law,’ American Journal of International Law 5, no. 4 (1911):871–900, 888–91; Louis Renault, Introduction à l’étude du droit international (Paris: L. Larose, 1879), 52–3; and Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 1n. The membership of the Institute of International Law included such noted legal publicists as Pasquale Stanislao Mancini (its first president), Carlos Calvo, Johann Kaspar Bluntschli, William Edward Hall and John Westlake. The push to codify international law was furthered also by the Association for the Reform and Codification of the Laws of Nations, which had its origin in a proposal submitted to the English Association for the Advancement of Science in 1866 to draft a code of international law. It was established in October 1873 and renamed the International Law Association in 1895. Early examples of these peace movements included the Peace Society, which was founded in 1815 (and which merged with other peace groups in 1828 to form the American Peace Society), and the London-based Society for the Promotion of Permanent and Universal Peace, which had already commenced its propaganda work by 1817.

  3. 3.

    Devise de l’Institut de droit international, 1873, quoted in Sandi E. Cooper, introduction to Louis Bara, La science de la paix, C. Potvin, ed. (New York: Garland Publishing, 1972), 10.

  4. 4.

    C. John Colombos, ‘The Paris Pact, Otherwise Called the Kellogg Pact,’ Transactions of the Grotius Society 14 (1928): 87–101, 87. See also Nys, ‘The Codification of International Law,’ 891; Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 1n; and Rudolf Broda, ‘New International Agencies for Intellectual Cooperation,’ The Antiochian 9, no. 2 (1927). At the 1899 session of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, a body founded in Paris in 1889, the council of the union was asked to draft a code concerning the rights and duties of states. At its 1906 session in London, it expressed support for the development and codification of the law of nations by an international committee as had been discussed at the 1899 Hague Peace Conference. The Universal Peace Congress at Stockholm in August 1910 also played an important role in terms of the codification of the laws of war. The year 1910 saw the foundation of the World Peace Federation in America and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Among the less well-known organisations that emerged in the years immediately before 1914 was the International Institute for the Exchange of Social Experience which was established in 1909 by Rudolf Broda. It later became an autonomous part of the League for the Organisation of Progress which was founded in 1911.

  5. 5.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 1–2. Among the UIA publications devoted to the topic, Bailey mentions in particular the publications La vie internationale and L’Annuaire de la vie internationale. See also Alfred Zimmern ed., University Teaching of International Relations: A Record of the Eleventh Session of the International Studies Conference, Prague, 1938 (Paris: IIIC, 1939), 214–5. Zimmern expressed his consternation that in the twelfth volume of the Cambridge Modern History which appeared in 1910 and which was entitled The Latest Age, not a single chapter was devoted to the subject of international relations. He also observed that political scientists, although preoccupied with the institution of the state, ignored the phenomena behind it.

  6. 6.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 2.

  7. 7.

    Grayson Kirk, The Study of International Relations in American Colleges and Universities (New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1947), 2.

  8. 8.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 2n.

  9. 9.

    Kirk, The Study of International Relations in American Colleges and Universities, 3.

  10. 10.

    Zimmern , University Teaching of International Relations, 213.

  11. 11.

    Jiri F. Vranek to Tracy B. Kittredge and Stanley Hartnoll Bailey, 17 May 1938, Enseignement universitaire des relations internationales, 1 May to 1938 to October 1946, AG 1-IICI-K-I-14.c, UA.

  12. 12.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 2.

  13. 13.

    Ibid., 1.

  14. 14.

    ‘Appendix 6: Handbook of the Institute of Pacific Relation,’ in Bruno Lasker and William L. Holland eds., Problems of the Pacific, 1931: Proceedings of the Fourth Conference of the Institute of Pacific Relations, Hangchow and Shanghai, China, October 21 to November 2 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1932), 528. A preliminary draft of this handbook was edited by John Bell Condliffe and was circulated before the Fourth Biennial Conference of the IPR. It was published in the proceedings of that conference with slight amendments.

  15. 15.

    Lucian Ashworth points out that all of these authors were ‘independent scholars and journalists’ and not members of the academy. He also points out that The Great Illusion first appeared as a pamphlet in 1909. Lucian M. Ashworth, Creating International Studies: Angell, Mitrany and the Liberal Tradition (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited, 1999), 48. On Leonard Woolf’s study, see Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 3n.

  16. 16.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 3n–4n.

  17. 17.

    Kirk, The Study of International Relations in American Colleges and Universities, 3.

  18. 18.

    As laid down in the Royal Charter, the declared aims of the RIIA included that of advancing ‘the sciences of international politics, economics and jurisprudence and the study, classification and development of the literature of these subjects,’ promoting the study of international questions, serving as a source of information and enlightenment on such questions and encouraging an ‘understanding of the conditions and views of nations and peoples.’ A further aim was that of facilitating the establishment of similar institutes in the Dominions. Appendix C: Eighth International Studies Conference, RIIA, 1934–1935, AG 1-IICI-K-VI-1, UA. On the British Institute of International Affairs formal inauguration, see F. B. Bourdillon, ‘The Royal Institute of International Affairs,’ International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation [hereafter IIIC], Bulletin for University Relations 4, no. 1 (1928): 24–31, 28, IICI/033, UA. See also William McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989), 309.

  19. 19.

    Nicholas J. Cull, ‘Selling Peace: The Origins, Promotion and Fate of the Anglo-American New Order during the Second World War,’ Diplomacy & Statecraft 7, no. 1(1996): 1–28, 7.

  20. 20.

    Edith Ware, The Study of International Relations in the United States: Survey for 1934 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1934), 75–6. For Bliss’s role at the meeting, see Frederick Whyte, ‘The British Institute of International Affairs,’ The New Europe, July 1920, 308–9. For the joint committee, see M. L. Dockrill, ‘Historical Note: The Foreign Office and the “Proposed Institute of International Affairs 1919,”’ International Affairs 56, no. 4 (1980): 665–72, 667.

  21. 21.

    Cull, ‘Selling Peace,’ 4 and Deborah Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ in Bosco and Navari eds., Chatham House and British Foreign Policy 1919–1945, 62.

  22. 22.

    Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ 62.

  23. 23.

    The Round Table: Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs; History, https://www.commonwealthroundtable.co.uk/journal/history/.

  24. 24.

    Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ 62.

  25. 25.

    Ibid., 63.

  26. 26.

    ‘Appendix Two: Holland-Hooper Interviews,’ in Paul F. Hooper, ed., Remembering the Institute of Pacific Relations: The Memoirs of William L. Holland (Tokyo: Ryukei Shyosha, 1995), 208.

  27. 27.

    Lionel Curtis, ‘The Commonwealth,’ The Round Table 18, no. 69 (1927): 1–5.

  28. 28.

    Arnold Toynbee, Arnold Acquaintances (London: Oxford University Press, 1967), 146.

  29. 29.

    Deborah Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Idea of Commonwealth,’ in Frederick Madden and D. K. Fieldhouse, eds., Oxford and the Idea of Commonwealth: Essays Presented to Sir Edgar Williams (London: Croon Helm, 1982), 101.

  30. 30.

    Madariaga, ‘Gilbert Murray and the League,’ 181.

  31. 31.

    Ibid. Emphasis added.

  32. 32.

    Madariaga, ‘Gilbert Murray and the League,’ 181. Emphasis added.

  33. 33.

    Inderjeet Parmar, ‘Chatham House and the Anglo-American Alliance,’ Diplomacy & Statecraft 3, no. 1 (1992): 23–47, 25.

  34. 34.

    Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Idea of Commonwealth,’ 101.

  35. 35.

    Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ 61. Donald Cameron Watt describes Curtis’s Round Table group ‘as an instrument for the modernisation and perpetuation of the British Empire as a group of self-governing but permanently allied nations, united by a common culture of Empire.’ Donald Cameron Watt, foreword to Bosco and Navari eds., Chatham House and British Foreign Policy 1919–1945, 62.

  36. 36.

    The Round Table: The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs: History, https://www.commonwealthroundtable.co.uk/journal/history/.

  37. 37.

    Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ 63.

  38. 38.

    Lionel Curtis, ‘Windows of Freedom,’ The Round Table 9, no. 33 (1918): 1–47, 35.

  39. 39.

    Ibid., 35–6.

  40. 40.

    Ibid., 1, 36.

  41. 41.

    Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ 62.

  42. 42.

    Bourdillon , ‘The Royal Institute of International Affairs,’ 26 See also Michael Dockrill, ‘The Foreign Office and the Creation of Chatham House,’ in Bosco and Navari eds., Chatham House and British Foreign Policy 1919–1945, 84. Dockrill records that Bourdillon had been a member of the Admiralty Intelligence Department from 1916 to 1919, was part of the Foreign Office’s advisory attachment to the Political Section of the Paris Peace Conference and was secretary of the RIIA from 1926 to 1929.

  43. 43.

    Report of the Institute’s Provisional Committee, 1919, quoted in Bourdillon, ‘The Royal Institute of International Affairs,’ 26–7. See also Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ 62. Lavin points out that many officials in Paris regularly complained about the lack of information available to them.

  44. 44.

    Robert D. Schulzinger, Wise Men of Foreign Affairs: The History of the Council of Foreign Relations (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984), 2.

  45. 45.

    Charles DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ Political Science Quarterly 89, no. 2, 1974: 379–395, 385. See also James T. Shotwell, At the Paris Peace Conference (New York: Macmillan, 1937), 4–6.

  46. 46.

    DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ 385. Tomoko Akami notes that The Inquiry group ‘drafted most of the Fourteen Points on territorial solutions.’ Tomoko Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific: The United States, Japan and the Institute of Pacific Relations in War and Peace, 1919–1945 (London: Routledge, 2002), 27.

  47. 47.

    Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific, 26. See also DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ 385.

  48. 48.

    DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ 385.

  49. 49.

    James T. Shotwell, ‘The Paris Peace Conference,’ in Charles E. Andrews and Alfred E. Zimmern, eds., George Louis Beer: A Tribute to His Life and Work in the Making of History and the Molding of Public Opinion (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1924), 83.

  50. 50.

    Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific, 27.

  51. 51.

    Dockrill, ‘Historical Note: The Foreign Office and the “Proposed Institute of International Affairs 1919,”’ 667.

  52. 52.

    DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ 385.

  53. 53.

    Lionel Curtis, 1919, quoted in Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific, 28. See also Whyte, ‘The British Institute of International Affairs,’ 308. Curtis later stated in the report of the joint committee that the ‘tragedy of the situation was that this better understanding between thinkers and workers within the narrow circle of Paris availed so little to affect the main issues of the settlement.’ Report of the Institute’s Provisional Committee, quoted in Whyte, ‘The British Institute of International Affairs,’ 308. See also Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ 62. Lavin notes that this report was written by Curtis and records the full title of the joint committee as follows: ‘Provisional Committee appointed to prepare a Constitution, and select the original members of the British Branch of the Institute of International Affairs.’

  54. 54.

    Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific, 42 and Cull, ‘Selling Peace,’ 7.

  55. 55.

    Ware , The Study of International Relations in the United States: Survey for 1934, 76. Akami points out that many in America, ‘including post-League internationalists, were reluctant to be involved with European organizations.’ For this reason, they ‘decided to form a similar, but independent organization, which soon merged with a group of bankers and lawyers initially organized by Elihu Root,’ the president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace: the CFR. Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific, 42–3. Robert D. Schulzinger records that Isaiah Bowman, James T. Shotwell and Whitney H. Shepardson, the first and third members of this group also being involved in establishing the Anglo-American institute, told Curtis in London in June 1921 ‘that American public opinion would not permit them to join with the British.’ Schulzinger, Wise Men of Foreign Affairs: The History of the Council on Foreign Relations, 5.

  56. 56.

    Parmar, ‘Chatham House and the Anglo-American Alliance,’ 24; McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 122; and Bourdillon, ‘The Royal Institute of International Affairs,’ 28–30. Bourdillon records that Chatham House was presented to the RIIA by Colonel and Mrs R. W. Leonard of St. Catherine’s Ontario, Canada. Deborah Lavin explains that the ‘single greatest gesture of support enabling the Institute to grow—the purchase of Chatham House—was if anything anti-American in motive, and came from Canada. The scheme had originated as an initiative by which the Institute would collaborate with the English-Speaking Union to found a library in memory of the American Ambassador Walter Page. When this fell through, the Institute’s prestigious headquarters at 10 St. James’s Square, the home of Chatham and Gladstone, was donated by Colonel Reuben Leonard, a Canadian magnate who had been converted by Curtis to the idea of Commonwealth and who hoped thereby to counteract the Institute’s declared Anglo-American emphasis.’ Lavin, ‘Lionel Curtis and the Founding of Chatham House,’ 66.

  57. 57.

    Appendix D: Eighth International Studies Conference, Department of International Politics, University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, 1934–1935, AG 1-IICI-K-VI-1, UA. Students were able to undertake a course in comparative politics and a course in international politics in the third year and also at Honours level. In order to complete a full programme, students were required to undertake courses offered by the Economics and History Departments of the university. For Lilian F. Vranek’s maiden name, see Patricia Owens, ‘Women and the History of International Thought, International Studies Quarterly 62, no. 3 (2018): 467–81.

  58. 58.

    Zimmern had already prepared the way for Philip Noel-Baker in commencing a series of eight lectures at the LSE on November 12, 1923, entitled The League of Nations at Work. Zimmern stated that these lectures, ‘while dealing principally with the aims and achievements of the League, will treat also of the general international situation and of the position which the League can and should occupy in international politics.’ LSE: International Relations; Foundation and History of the International Relations Department, http://www2.lse.ac.uk/internationalrelations/aboutthedepartment/historyofdept.aspx.

  59. 59.

    London School of Economics and Political Science (University of London), Department of International Studies, Session 1934–35, AG 1-IICI-K-VI-1, UA. See also LSE: International Relations; Foundation and History of the International Relations Department. The first reference to a department of international relations is in a professorial council minute of February 26, 1930, although the expression international studies continued to be used thereafter.

  60. 60.

    Appendix E: Eighth International Studies Conference; University of Oxford: Montague Burton Chair of International Relations 1934–1935, AG 1-IICI-K-VI-1, UA.

  61. 61.

    Paul Rich, ‘Reinventing Peace: David Davies, Alfred Zimmern and Liberal Internationalism in Interwar Britain,’ International Relations 16, no. 1 (2002): 117–133, 120.

  62. 62.

    Ellery C. Stowell, ‘The Second Conference of Teachers of International Law and Related Subjects held in Washington, April 23–25, 1925,’ American Journal of International Law 19, no. 3 (1925): 542–6,542–3. While the Fourth Conference was originally scheduled for April 1930, it was moved forward in order to coincide with the meeting of the Institute of International Law at Briarcliff Manor on October 10–17, 1929, with a view to internationalising the conference. On the third of these conferences, see Edwin D. Dickinson, ‘The Third Conference of Teachers of International Law,’ The American Journal of International Law 22, no. 3 (1928): 620–4.

  63. 63.

    Stowell, ‘The Second Conference of Teachers of International Law and Related Subjects held in Washington, April 23–25, 1925,’ 544–6. On the alternative name of the conference, see J. David Thompson to Zimmern, 30 April 1929 and Werner Picht to Isaiah Bowman, 24 May 1929, Conférence permanente des hautes études internationales: Généralités, AG 1-IICI-K-I-3, UA.

  64. 64.

    James Brown Scott, ‘Public Opinion in Relation to War and Peace: The Work of Non-official Organizations,’ in The Problems of Peace: Lectures Delivered at the Geneva Institute of International Relations at the Palais des Nations, August 1926, 323.

  65. 65.

    Thompson to Picht, 15 June 1929, AG 1-IICI-K-I-3. See also Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 18n.

  66. 66.

    Thompson to Picht, 10 February 1931, Conférence permanente des hautes études internationales, publication (préparation): Répertoire international des centres de documentation politique, 1931–1939, AG 1-IICI-K-II-2.b, UA. The director of the school commenced duties on February 15, 1930.

  67. 67.

    Moral disarmament and the International Co-ordination of the Study and Teaching of International Affairs: The Conference of Institutions for the Scientific Study of International Relations; its organisation and activities, 19 January 1932, Désarmement moral, 1931–1937, AG 1-IICI-B-V-9, UA.

  68. 68.

    The IIIC’s report on the work of the ISC for the Conference for the Reduction and Limitation of Armaments stated that ‘the creation of this organ of co-ordination and study was largely made possible in the first place by the changes which had taken place inside a number of countries. The numerous tasks of a practical order, which the Conference has already accomplished and the special programme of research which it is at present elaborating would seem to associate it intimately with the work of moral disarmament’ (ibid.).

  69. 69.

    International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation [hereafter IIIC], The International Studies Conference: Origins, Program and Organisation (Paris: International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, 1937), 12, IICI/033, UA. See also IICI, L’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle: 1925–1946, 250.

  70. 70.

    The Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial was merged with the Foundation in January 1929. The merger resulted in the Rockefeller Division of Social Sciences; the three fields of research with which it was to be concerned were ‘international relations, economic stabilization, and public administration.’ Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 61–3.

  71. 71.

    Zimmern ed., University Teaching of International Relations, 308.

  72. 72.

    Nicholas Murray Butler had previously touched on this idea in his opening address as chairman of the Lake Mohonk Conference on May 22, 1907. ‘One of the chief problems of our time is to bring the nations’ minds and the nations’ consciences to bear on the moral problems involved in international relations.’ Nicholas Murray Butler, The International Mind: An Argument for the Judicial Settlement of International Disputes (New York: Charles, Scribner’s Sons, 1913), 5,102. See also Nicholas Murray Butler, ‘The International Mind: How to Develop It,’ Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science in the City of New York 7, no. 22 (1917): 16–20.

  73. 73.

    La Dotation Carnegie pour la Paix Internationale, Le Centre européen de la Division des relations internationals et de l’éducation: foundation, administration, activité (Paris: Centre européen de la Dotation Carnegie, 1931), 15, 17.

  74. 74.

    Ibid., 34, 38. The establishment of such a centre was proposed by Butler on June 3, 1911.

  75. 75.

    La Dotation Carnegie pour la Paix Internationale, Le Centre européen de la Division des relations internationals, 35.

  76. 76.

    Ibid., 54.

  77. 77.

    Alfred Zimmern, ‘The Development of the International Mind,’ Problems of Peace Lectures Delivered at the Geneva Institute of International Relations at the Palais des Nations, August 1926, 1.

  78. 78.

    W. G. L. C., ‘The International Mind,’ Nature, 132, no. 3335 (1933), 493–5.

  79. 79.

    My emphasis. Recueil des cours professés à l’académie du droit international de la Haye: Établie avec le concours de la Dotation Carnegie pour la Paix Internationale (Paris: Librairie du Recueli Sirey, 1934), AG 1-IICI-K-I-1.m, UA.

  80. 80.

    André Tibal, ‘The Activity of the European Carnegie Endowment in the Field of the University Teaching of International Relations,’ in Zimmern ed., University Teaching of International Relations, 157–8. For Tibal’s background, see Dotation Carnegie pour la Paix Internationale, Le Centre européan de la Division des relations internationales et de l’éducation, 46.

  81. 81.

    Tibal, ‘The Activity of the European Carnegie Endowment in the Field of the University Teaching of International Relations,’ 158–9.

  82. 82.

    Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 63.

  83. 83.

    Zimmern ed., University Teaching of International Relations, 318.

  84. 84.

    Ibid., 318–9.

  85. 85.

    Paul Guggenheim, ‘The Study of International Relations in the Swiss Universities,’ in Zimmern, ed., University Teaching of International Relations, 144–5.

  86. 86.

    Ware , The Study of International Relations in the United States: Survey for 1934, 30, 81, 347–8. On the German High Commissioner for Refugees, see Barbara H. M. Metzger, ‘The League of Nations and Refugees: The Humanitarian Legacy of Fridtjof Nansen,’ in United Nations Library (Geneva), League of Nations Archives, The League of Nations 1920–1946: Organization and Accomplishments, 79.

  87. 87.

    Geneva Research Center: Study, 22 January 1937, and Geneva Research Center, Constitution, December 14, 1936, Geneva Research Center (Bureau d’études internationales, Genève), 1935–1940, AG 1-IICI-K-V-3, UA and Ware, The Study of International Relations in the United States: Survey for 1934, 426–7. ‘The American Association for International Cooperation and the League of Nations Non-Patrisan Committee merged on January 10, 1923 to become the League of Nations Non-Partisan Association. This name was shortened in 1929 to become the League of Nations Association.’ League of Nations Association Collected Records, 1916, 1922–1945, Swarthmore College Peace Collection, http://www.swarthmore.edu/Library/peace/.

  88. 88.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 5, 10, 14–5. The other two currents of influence Bailey mentions concern moral disarmament and education for citizenship, both of which are addressed in part 2 of The Story of International Relations.

  89. 89.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 4.

  90. 90.

    IIIC, School Textbook Revision and International Understanding, 2nd ed. (Paris: IIIC, 1933), 10, IICI/12/2, UA.

  91. 91.

    Ibid., 11.

  92. 92.

    Robert Milliken, the Belgium-based American replacement for George E. Hale on the ICIC, raised the issue in a letter to Bergson dated November 2, 1922. It was also raised by the Argentinean Léopoldo Lugones at the ICIC in 1924. Lugones stated that the ‘purely narrative history of each country and individual continents should be transformed into the history of civilization.’ Lugones’s proposal was restated by the Uruguayan Juan Antonio Buero at a 1925 meeting of the ICIC during which he noted that considerable progress had been made in Latin American countries ‘in encouraging through School teaching the formation of an international conscience’ (ibid., 11–2).

  93. 93.

    Ibid., 12–3.

  94. 94.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 11. Reform of the teaching of history, especially the teaching of ‘war, battles and militarism,’ had been proposed by the American Peace Society in 1906 in the United States context. Raul d’Eça, ‘The Convention on the Teaching of History Signed at the Seventh Pan American Conference,’ World Affairs 97, no. 2 (1934): 109–113, 109.

  95. 95.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 5. Note that education in the ideals enshrined in the LON also formed part of the June 21, 1920, resolution of the executive committee of the French Association of the League of Nations.

  96. 96.

    Société des Nations [hereafter SDN], Comment faire connaître la Société des Nations et développer l’esprit de Coopération Internationale: Recommendations du Sous-Comité d’Experts de la Commission internationale de Coopération intellectuelle de la Société des Nations (Geneva: Société des Nations, 1927), 5, IICI/33, UA. See also Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 9.

  97. 97.

    SDN, Comment faire connaître la Société des Nations, 6. See also Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 9.

  98. 98.

    SDN, Comment faire connaître la Société des Nations, 6–9. See also Société des Nations, La Société des Nations et la Coopération Intellectuelle (Genève: Secrétariat de la SDN, 1926), 28, ICIC/28, UA.

  99. 99.

    SDN, L’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle: 1925–1946, 19–20. On its status as a technical organisation, see Henri Bonnet, L’œuvre de l’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle (Paris: Recueil Sirey, 1938), 26, IICI/17, UA. It was only in 1931 through another resolution of the assembly that the OIC received a definitive constitution.

  100. 100.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 9.

  101. 101.

    SDN, Comment faire connaître la Société des Nations, 24. The subcommittee’s recommendations were adopted by the council and the assembly on July 26 and September 22, 1927, respectively. The Comité d’entente des grandes associations internationales was founded on December 10, 1925, in association with the IIIC to which it was attached in light of the 1924 assembly resolution on education. It comprised international non-government associations, especially those concerned with the instruction of youth. It also included associations specifically concerned with adult education and the education of women. In a declaration issued in May 1926, it expressed support for instruction at all levels that favoured the work of the League. The committee stated that there exists ‘… between the diverse peoples … a community of rights and duties,’ and noted the fact of ‘ever-growing’ interdependence. ‘The child’, it declared, ‘must learn that civilisation has been and remains the common work of all peoples.’ IICI, Le Comité d’entente des grandes associations internationales: dix années d’activité (Paris, Institut International de la Coopération Intellectuelle, 1936), 16–7, 45–6, IICI/23, UA.

  102. 102.

    Bailey, International Studies in Modern Education, 9n and League of Nations [hereafter LON], How to make the League of Nations known and to develop the Spirit of International Co-operation: Recommendations of the Sub-Committee of Experts, International Committee of Intellectual Co-operation (Geneva: League of Nations, 1927), 9, IICI/24 UA. See also Alfred E. Zimmern, Learning and Leadership: A Study of the Needs and Possibilities of International Intellectual Cooperation (Geneva: League of Nations, 1927), IICI/32, UA. Zimmern’s report was republished in 1928 by Oxford University Press under the same heading.

  103. 103.

    Alfred Zimmern, The Intellectual Foundations of International Co-operation (Paris: League of Nations, International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, Presses universitaires de France, 1926). For the publication details of this report, see International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation [hereafter IIIC], Bulletin of the Section of Information and Reference, no. 13 (1927), 11, IICI/01, UA.

  104. 104.

    Alfred Zimmern, ‘International Law and Social Consciousness,’ Transactions of the Grotius Society 20 (1934): 25–44, 26. On the Greek Commonwealth, see D. J. Markwell, ‘Sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited: Fifty Years On,’ Review of International Studies 12, no. 4 (1986): 279–92, 279 and Gordon Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ in Bosco and Navari eds., Chatham House and British Foreign Policy 1919–1945, 20.

  105. 105.

    Alfred Zimmern, 1910, quoted in Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 20.

  106. 106.

    Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 17.

  107. 107.

    Alfred Zimmern, 1905, quoted in Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 17.

  108. 108.

    Reginald Coupland, 1905, quoted in Markwell, ‘Sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited,’ 287.

  109. 109.

    R. W. Seton-Watson, J. Dover Wilson, Alfred E. Zimmern and Arthur Greenwood, The War and Democracy (London: Macmillan, 1915), vii. See also Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 23. Gilbert Murray encouraged Zimmern in the preparation of the chapters he wrote for this book.

  110. 110.

    Seton-Watson, Dover Wilson, Zimmern and Greenwood, War and Democracy, viii.

  111. 111.

    Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 20, 22–4. See also Markwell, ‘Sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited,’ 280. Zimmern had involved himself in working class education since 1907. In the years between 1912 and 1915 he served as an inspector for the Board of Education.

  112. 112.

    Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 20.

  113. 113.

    Alfred Zimmern, 1905, quoted in Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 18.

  114. 114.

    Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 18.

  115. 115.

    Alfred E. Zimmern, Nationality and Government with Other War-Time Essays (New York: Robert Mc Bride, 1918), 46.

  116. 116.

    Ibid., 47.

  117. 117.

    Alfred Zimmern, lecture on ‘The Passing of Nationality,’ delivered at King’s Hall, London, November 23, 1917, paraphrased and quoted in Russell, Theories of International Relations, 382.

  118. 118.

    Henry R. Winkler, The League of Nations Movement in Great Britain 1914–1919 (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1952), 65–6.

  119. 119.

    Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 29.

  120. 120.

    On March 18, 1918, a debate took place in the House of Lords on the LON. During that debate, Lord Parker invoked the British principle of the ‘hue and cry,’ explaining that at the base of every legal order lay the strong feeling that ‘an act of violence done to the person or property of one member of the community has been resented as a wrong to all its members. In such a case neutrality is impossible. It is a disgrace, a crime. The hand of every man is against the wrongdoer. He becomes an outlaw … Everyone must join in his arrest and punishment.’ Lord Parker, 1918, quoted in Alfred Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law (London: Macmillan, 1936), 174–6, 190–2.

  121. 121.

    Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 29.

  122. 122.

    Alfred Zimmern, 1917, quoted in Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 29. On the influence of the philosophy of ethical idealism on Zimmern, see Rich, ‘Reinventing Peace,’ 120.

  123. 123.

    ‘Zimmern, Sir Alfred Eckhard,’ in E. T. Williams and Helen M. Palmer, eds., Dictionary of National Biography 1951–1960 (London: Oxford University Press, 1971), 1096.

  124. 124.

    The memorandum is reproduced in Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 195–208.

  125. 125.

    Gordon Martel notes that Eustace Percy had collaborated ‘closely’ with Zimmern ‘in drafting British proposals for the Covenant of the League.’ Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 19.

  126. 126.

    Markwell, ‘Sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited,’ 280.

  127. 127.

    H. G. Wells, Experiment in Autobiography: Discoveries and Conclusions of a Very Ordinary Brain (Since 1866) (London: Victor Gollancz, 1934), 715.

  128. 128.

    Zimmern, ‘The Development of the International Mind,’ 6.

  129. 129.

    Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 189–90.

  130. 130.

    Alfred Zimmern, ‘The War and Democracy,’ published in December 1914 and reprinted as ‘Nationality and Government: German Culture and the British Commonwealth,’ in Zimmern, Nationality and Government, 20.

  131. 131.

    Zimmern, ‘The Development of the International Mind,’ 6.

  132. 132.

    Markwell, ‘Sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited: Fifty Years On,’ 285. The Pact of Paris or General Treaty for Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy was also known as the Kellogg-Briand Pact after its two official authors: US Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg and the French foreign minister Aristide Briand. In the United States and elsewhere, it was sometimes simply called the Kellogg Pact.

  133. 133.

    Paul Rich observes that as the marriage could not be ‘tolerated’ by the university, Zimmern was thus compelled to resign. Rich, ‘Reinventing Peace,’ 121. See also Markwell, ‘Sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited,’ 120.

  134. 134.

    Markwell, ‘Sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited,’ 281 and Rich, ‘Reinventing Peace,’ 121.

  135. 135.

    LSE: International Relations: Foundation and History of the International Relations Department.

  136. 136.

    Markwell, ‘Sir Alfred Zimmern Revisited,’ 281.

  137. 137.

    O. Halecki to G. W. Luckey, 10 November 1925, The International Education Research Council and World Bureau of Education. Document de G. W. Luckey, 1925–1926, AG 1-IICI-B-VI-4, UA. On Picht’s appointment, see IIIC Bulletin of the Section of Information and Reference, no. 9 (1927), 2.

  138. 138.

    SDN, L’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle: 1925–1946, 8.

  139. 139.

    IICI, L’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle: 1925–1946, 249.

  140. 140.

    Ibid. The plan for an international university ‘for the education of statesmen, diplomats, politicians, political writers, professors of political science and the like’ was first discussed by the ICIC at its Fifth Session of July 27–30, 1925. At that time, the committee ‘felt that the plan went beyond what is could then consider, though it aphorised that the matter be further studied.’ See Broda, ‘New International Agencies for Intellectual Cooperation,’ The Antiochian 9, no. 2 (1927). See also Nathan and Norden, eds., Einstein on Peace, 76.

  141. 141.

    IICI, L’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle: 1925–1946, 249. Luchaire noted that ‘important institutions’ in France, Germany, the Netherlands and Switzerland had been approached in relation to forming a ‘consortium’ to this end. IICI, Travaux de L’Institut de Coopération Intellectuelle pendant l’année 1926, 17.

  142. 142.

    Zimmern, The Intellectual Foundations of International Cooperation, 3.

  143. 143.

    Ibid.

  144. 144.

    Ibid.

  145. 145.

    Ibid.

  146. 146.

    Ibid., 5–6. Emphasis added.

  147. 147.

    Ibid., 5.

  148. 148.

    Ibid., 3.

  149. 149.

    Ibid., 4.

  150. 150.

    Ibid., 3–4.

  151. 151.

    Ibid., 6.

  152. 152.

    Ibid., 6–7.

  153. 153.

    Ibid., 7.

  154. 154.

    Ibid., 8.

  155. 155.

    Ibid., 9.

  156. 156.

    Ibid.

  157. 157.

    Ibid.

  158. 158.

    Ibid.

  159. 159.

    Ibid., 13.

  160. 160.

    Ibid., 15.

  161. 161.

    Ibid., 17. On the notion of an international career, see also Alfred Zimmern, ‘The League of Nations and International Intellectual Co-operation,’ in The Problems of Peace: Lectures Delivered at the Geneva Institute of International Relations at the Palais des Nations, August 1926, 149.

  162. 162.

    Zimmern, The Intellectual Foundations of International Cooperation, 19.

  163. 163.

    Ibid., 19.

  164. 164.

    Although Zimmern did not directly mention his contact school in his report, he nonetheless pointed out in his introduction to The New Germany that ‘fuller details of the aims and work’ of the school can be found in his Intellectual Foundations of Intellectual Co-operation. See Alfred Zimmern, introduction to Ernst Jäckh, The New Germany: Three Lectures (London: Oxford University Press, 1927), 8.

  165. 165.

    Memorandum for the Geneva School of International Studies prepared by Nicholas J. Spykman, Yale University, Geneva School of International Studies, 1927–1929, AG 1-IICI-B-IV-19, UA. Zimmern stated that the federation had ‘generously consented to this extension of its scope and to the consequent change in the type of organization.’ Zimmern, introduction to Jäckh, The New Germany, 7.

  166. 166.

    Zimmern, introduction to Jäckh, The New Germany, 8.

  167. 167.

    Memorandum for the Geneva School of International Studies prepared by Nicholas J. Spykman, AG 1-IICI-B-IV-19, UA.

  168. 168.

    International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation [hereafter IIIC], Bulletin of the Section of Information and Documentation, no. 2 (1926), 5, IICI/01, UA.

  169. 169.

    Zimmern, introduction to Jäckh, The New Germany, 7. On Zimmern’s relationship with Luchaire, see Northedge, International Intellectual Co-operation within the League of Nations, 365–366. Arnold Toynbee stated that Zimmern’s school in Geneva was his ‘chef d’œuvre in this special line of his, in which intellectual stimulus was humanized by a kindly touch.’ Toynbee, Acquaintances, 61.

  170. 170.

    The school also held public lectures while the assembly was in session, offering daily commentary on the assembly’s work. Delegates to the LON and ‘other eminent personalities’ were invited to give evening talks. Zimmern, introduction to Jäckh, The New Germany, 8.

  171. 171.

    Memorandum for the Geneva School of International Studies prepared by Nicholas J. Spykman, AG 1-IICI-B-IV-19, UA.

  172. 172.

    Ibid.

  173. 173.

    Ibid. See also Zimmern, introduction to Jäckh, The New Germany, 7.

  174. 174.

    Introduction to The Problems of Peace: Lectures Delivered at the Geneva Institute of International Relations at the Palais des Nations, August 1926, v. One American group involved with the Geneva Institute for International Relations was the American Non-Partisan Association. See also John Eugene Harley, International Understanding: Agencies Educating for a New World (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1931), 245–6. For the history and use of the Glass Room and the location of the secretariat, see Frank Moorehouse, Grand Days (Sydney: Pan Macmillan Australia, 1993), 28; Warren F. Kuehl and Lynn K. Dunn, Keeping the Covenant: American Internationalists and the League of Nations, 1919–1939 (Kent, Ohio: Kent State University Press, 1997), 82; and Bailey Van Hook, Violet Oakley: An Artist’s Life (Lanham, Maryland: University of Delaware Press, 2016) 333. For the construction of the Palais des Nations, see Jean-Claude Pallas, ‘L’histoire du Palais des Nations,’ in United Nations Library (Geneva), League of Nations Archives, The League of Nations 1920–1946: Organization and Accomplishments, 98–119.

  175. 175.

    Zimmern, ‘The Development of the International Mind,’ 12.

  176. 176.

    Ibid., 13. One part of the so-called Japanese amendment, which was intended to be the third and last paragraph of Article 5 of the Geneva Protocol, read as follows: ‘If the question is held by the Court [of arbitration] or by the Council to be a matter solely within the domestic jurisdiction of the State, this decision shall not prevent consideration of the situation by the Council or by the Assembly under Article 11 of the Covenant.’ For a discussion of this and the other part of the amendment, see David Hunter Miller, The Geneva Protocol (New York: Macmillan, 1925), 46–9, 64–7.

  177. 177.

    IIIC, International Studies Conference, 15. On the connection between Zimmern’s report and the report on the proposal for an international university, see IIIC, Bulletin of the Section of Information and Documentation, no. 2 (1926) 1. ‘There was equivocation on the earlier proposal to create an international school of higher political studies.’ Einstein supported this proposal, however, he ‘was told that some of the major universities already had a somewhat international character and that the committee should limit itself to emphasizing such existing opportunities.’ Nathan and Norden, eds., Einstein on Peace, 82.

  178. 178.

    IICI, L’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle: 1925–1946, 252, and ‘L’Organisation de la Coopération Intellectuelle et les relations universitaires: Réunion des experts pour la coordination des hautes études internationales,’ Institut International de la Coopération Intellectuelle [hereafter [IICI], Bulletin des relations universitaires, 4, no. 2 (1928), 72, IIIC/033, UA.

  179. 179.

    Ware , The Study of International Relations in the United States: Survey for 1934, 20, 429. See also ‘Experts pour la coordination des hautes études internationales: Réunion des 22–24 Mars 1928—Berlin,’ Institut International de la Coopération Intellectuelle [hereafter IICI], Bulletin de la Section d’Information et de Documentation, no. 19 (1928), 9, IICI/01, UA.

  180. 180.

    Ware , The Study of International Relations in the United States: Survey for 1934, 20, 40, 168, 429.

  181. 181.

    Ibid., 429.

  182. 182.

    Alfred Zimmern, ‘L’Organisation de la Coopération Intellectuelle et les relations universitaires: Report to the Sub-Committee on University Relations on the Meeting of Representatives of Scientific Institutions for the Study of Politics,’ IIIC, Bulletin for University Relations 4, no. 3–4 (1928), 171. See also IIIC, International Studies Conference, 15 and IICI, L’Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle: 1925–1946, 252.

  183. 183.

    League of Nations, How to make the League of Nations known and to develop the Spirit of International Co-operation, 14, 34–5. The Report was presented to the ICIC in the same month. It was adopted by the LON Assembly on September 22.

  184. 184.

    Zimmern, Learning and Leadership, 81–3.

  185. 185.

    Ibid., 82.

  186. 186.

    Ibid., 87–9.

  187. 187.

    Ibid., 90–1.

  188. 188.

    Ibid., 91–2.

  189. 189.

    Jäckh, The New Germany, 84–5.

  190. 190.

    Jacques Bariéty, ‘Germany’s Entry into the League of Nations,’ in United Nations Library (Geneva), League of Nations Archives, The League of Nations 1920–1946: organization and accomplishments 64; Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 364; and Detlev J. K. Peukert, The Weimar Republic: The Crisis of Classical Modernity (London: Penguin Books, 1991), 199.

  191. 191.

    Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 367. Neither Britain nor Italy received any security guarantees under the treaty. Italy did not take part in the negotiations, deciding only at the final moment to undertake a security guarantee. Detlev J. K. Peukert notes that under French pressure, Germany also signed treaties with Poland and Czechoslovakia, according to which the parties agreed to peacefully resolve their disputes. However, Stresemann ‘firmly refused to agree to a recognition of the eastern frontier through a multilateral security treaty.’ Peukert, The Weimar Republic, 199.

  192. 192.

    Stresemann quoted in Jäckh, The New Germany, 84–5.

  193. 193.

    Jäckh, The New Germany, 85.

  194. 194.

    Georges Scelle and René Cassin, ‘French Public Opinion and the Problem of Collective Security,’ in Maurice Bourquin ed., Collective Security: A Record of the Seventh and Eighth International Study Conferences, Paris 1934-London 1935 (Paris: International Institute of Intellectual Cooperation, 1936), 71.

  195. 195.

    Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 353.

  196. 196.

    Zimmern, Learning and Leadership, 90–2.

  197. 197.

    Zimmern stated that the effect of the definitions of aggression offered by the protocol was to deny individual members of the council ‘a large measure of discretion in judging an emergency situation as a whole.’ Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 342, 345–6. He also pointed out that in certain cases a verdict could be delivered by the council on the basis of a two-thirds majority.

  198. 198.

    Ibid., 350.

  199. 199.

    Ibid.

  200. 200.

    Ibid., 356–8.

  201. 201.

    Zimmern records that the proposal put forward by German Foreign Office was originally intended to ‘prepare the way for a world convention to include all states along the lines of the Protocol drawn up by the League of Nations’ (ibid., 359–60, 365).

  202. 202.

    Ibid., 400.

  203. 203.

    Ibid. See also Jäckh, The New Germany, 84. Against the background of the Locarno negotiations, Briand referred to Germany’s ‘moral membership’ of the League.

  204. 204.

    Toynbee, ‘Intellectual Cooperation, 1926,’ AG 1-IICI-B-IV-18, UA.

  205. 205.

    Renoliet, L’Unesco Oubliée, 65.

  206. 206.

    Toynbee, ‘Intellectual Cooperation,’ 8 and Arnold J. Toynbee, ‘Note pour la sous-commission chargée de préparer le règlement intérieur du future Institut: Note sur la organisation de l’enquête dans les cadres des six sections de l’Institut et des publications,’ May 1925, AG 1-IICI-B-IV-18, UA.

  207. 207.

    Toynbee to Luchaire, 21 January and 16 September 1927 and Luchaire to Toynbee, 8 September 1927, AG 1-IICI-B-IV.18, UA. See also Alfred Zimmern, ‘Geneva School of International Studies: Report on the Fourth Session, July 11 to September 4, 1927,’ IIIC, Bulletin for University Relations 4, no. 1 (1927): 39–43.

  208. 208.

    Luchaire to Toynbee, 18 January 1927, B.IV.18, UA.

  209. 209.

    Zimmern to Toynbee, 25 October 1927, ibid. Toynbee was ‘closely associated’ with the ISC since 1927. See Preliminary Analysis of Replies to Letters Concerning the Progress of the International Studies Conference, 28 September 1937, AG 1-IICI-K-I-4 UA.

  210. 210.

    Arnold J. Toynbee, Nationality & the War (London: J. M. Dent and Sons, 1915), ix.

  211. 211.

    Arnold J. Toynbee, 1930, quoted in Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 21.

  212. 212.

    Rich, ‘Reinventing Peace,’ 123.

  213. 213.

    Arnold J. Toynbee, 1919–1920, quoted in McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 96.

  214. 214.

    McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 96.

  215. 215.

    Ibid.

  216. 216.

    On Murray’s encouragement of Toynbee, see Martel, ‘From Round Table to New Europe,’ 23. On Lindsay’s influence on the young Toynbee, see McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 25–6, 267. See also Toynbee, Nationality & the War, ix.

  217. 217.

    Toynbee, Nationality & the War, 1.

  218. 218.

    Ibid., 1–2.

  219. 219.

    Ibid., 411.

  220. 220.

    Ibid., 10.

  221. 221.

    Ibid., 11, 411–2.

  222. 222.

    Ibid., 412.

  223. 223.

    Ibid., 19, 60–1, 476 and McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 71.

  224. 224.

    Toynbee, Nationality & the War, 7.

  225. 225.

    Ibid., 20, 488–9.

  226. 226.

    Ibid., 10–1.

  227. 227.

    Ibid., 29.

  228. 228.

    Ibid., 30.

  229. 229.

    Ibid., 30–1.

  230. 230.

    Ibid., 486–8.

  231. 231.

    Ibid., 486–7.

  232. 232.

    Ibid., 493.

  233. 233.

    Ibid., 495–6.

  234. 234.

    McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 71.

  235. 235.

    Ibid., 72–4.

  236. 236.

    Ibid., 75.

  237. 237.

    Toynbee, 1919, quoted in McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 81.

  238. 238.

    McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 118, 120–2.

  239. 239.

    Publications on International Affairs (London: Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1933), AG 1-IICI-K-VI-1UA.

  240. 240.

    Picht to Otto Hoetzsch, 4 March 1931, AG 1-IICI-K-II-2.b, UA. This was how the surveys were later described. See also McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 121–2.

  241. 241.

    McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 123–4. Veronica Boulter’s name would be attached to the Surveys, dating from the publication of Survey of International Affairs, 1925, pt. 2.

  242. 242.

    McNeill, Arnold J. Toynbee: A Life, 120, 126–8, 131. The quotation given is from Sir Daniel Stevenson’s preamble to the indenture of endowment as quoted in Bourdillon, ‘The Royal Institute of International Affairs,’ 29–30. The terms regarding the chair were revised by the RIIA, London University and Stevenson in 1928 such that Toynbee became thereafter research professor in international history at the University of London.

  243. 243.

    Alfred Zimmern, preface to Jäckh, The New Germany, 13–4. On Jäckh’s activities on behalf of the Foreign Office, see Steven D. Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic? Cosmopolitans and Their Enemies at the Deutsche Hochschule für Politik,’ Central European History 39, no. 3 (2006): 394–430, 398–9. On Jäckh’s involvement with the development of the ISC, see Ernst Jäckh (address, Sixth CISSIR, London, 1 June 1933), AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA.

  244. 244.

    Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’ 394 and Jäckh, ed., Politik als Wissenschaft, v, AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA.

  245. 245.

    Dedication in Jäckh, The New Germany and Jäckh (address, Sixth CISSIR, London, 1 June 1933), AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA.

  246. 246.

    Jäckh (address, Sixth CISSIR, London, 1 June 1933), AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA.

  247. 247.

    Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’ 402.

  248. 248.

    Ibid., 396.

  249. 249.

    Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’ 394–5.

  250. 250.

    Ibid., 396.

  251. 251.

    On official involvement in establishing and supporting the German Political Academy, see Deutsche Hochschule für Politik: Aufbau und Arbeit (Berlin, 1926), 2–5, and Jäckh, ed., Politik als Wissenschaft, vi, AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA. On the academy’s elite connections, see also Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’, 398–400 and Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 69. Among its board of trustees were Walter Simons, the industrialist Robert Bosch and the banker Hjalmar Schacht.

  252. 252.

    ‘Akademische Feier des zehnjährigen Bestehens der Deutschen Hochschule für Politik,’ in Berichte der Deutschen Hochschule für Politik, vol. 8, November 1930, 113–129, AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA.

  253. 253.

    Jäckh, The New Germany, 88. On Stresemann’s association with the academy, see also Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 70.

  254. 254.

    Bariéty, ‘Germany’s Entry into the League of Nations,’ 61.

  255. 255.

    Ibid., 65. See also Jonathan Wright, Gustav Stresemann: Weimar’s Great Statesman (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 208. Wright notes that Stresemann had several meetings with Richard Reidl in 1923.

  256. 256.

    On the academy’s role in relation to the Locarno Treaties, see Jäckh (address, Sixth CISSIR, London, 1 June 1933) and Ernst Jäckh, ‘Beiträge zum Locarno und Kellogg-Vertrag,’ in Jäckh ed., Politik als Wissenschaft, 3–4, G 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA. See also RIIA, ‘Conference of Institutions for the Scientific Study of International Relations,’ Journal of the Royal Institute of International Affairs 8, no. 33 (1929): 185–202, 197.

  257. 257.

    Jäckh, The New Germany, 87. On Reidl’s advocacy of a Rhineland Pact, see Ernst Jäckh, ‘Beiträge zum Locarno und Kellogg-Vertrag,’ in Jäckh, ed., Politik als Wissenschaft, 3–4, AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA.

  258. 258.

    Jäckh, The New Germany, 87.

  259. 259.

    Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’ 395.

  260. 260.

    Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 65.

  261. 261.

    Ibid., 67.

  262. 262.

    DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ 386 and James T. Shotwell, ‘A Mechanism for Peace in Europe,’ Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science 17, no. 3 (1937): 15–24, 16. The 152-volume History took seventeen years to complete. Shotwell was appointed its general editor in 1920.

  263. 263.

    Ibid., 67.

  264. 264.

    Muriel K. Grindrod, ‘The Institut für Auswärtige Politik, Poststrasse 19, Hamburg,’ International Affairs 1, no. 22 (1931): 223–9, 223 and Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 67.

  265. 265.

    On Albrecht Mendelssohn Bartholdy’s academic post, see Grindrod, ‘The Institut für Auswärtige Politik, Poststrasse 19, Hamburg,’ 223–4. The other authors of the memorandum were Professors Hans Delbrück and Max Weber and General Count Max Montgelas. The idea was also supported by the head of the German delegation at Versailles, namely, Count Brockdorff-Rantzau, its secretary Walter Simons and Carl Melchior, the delegation’s Hamburg member.

  266. 266.

    Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 67–8. See also Grindrod, ‘The Institut für Auswärtige Politik: Poststrasse 19, Hamburg,’ 228. In collaboration with the IAP, the German Political Academy produced a series of volumes called Politische Wissenschaft.

  267. 267.

    Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 69.

  268. 268.

    Ibid., 69–70.

  269. 269.

    Ibid., 70.

  270. 270.

    Dotation Carnegie pour la Paix Internationale, Le Centre européan de la Division des relations internationals et de l’éducation, 47–9.

  271. 271.

    RIIA, ‘Conference of Institutions for the Scientific Study of International Relations,’ 199. On the media interest in these lectures, see Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’, 403.

  272. 272.

    Dotation Carnegie pour la Paix Internationale, Le Centre européan de la Division des relations internationals et de l’éducation, 49.

  273. 273.

    On Holborn’s appointment, see Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’, 406–7. Rietzler notes that the reorganisation of the chair also stemmed from the concern expressed by the German Political Academy that the ‘existing set-up was not academic enough.’ Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 70.

  274. 274.

    La Dotation Carnegie pour la Paix Internationale, Le Centre européan de la Division des relations internationals et de l’éducation, 48.

  275. 275.

    DeBenedetti, James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics, 381, 386.

  276. 276.

    Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 65.

  277. 277.

    RIIA, ‘Conference of Institutions for the Scientific Study of International Relations,’ 197–8.

  278. 278.

    On the German Political Academy’s role in the development of the Pact of Paris, see Jäckh (address, Sixth CISSIR, London, 1 June 1933), AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA.

  279. 279.

    James T. Shotwell, War as an Instrument of National Policy and its Renunciation in the Pact of Paris (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1929), 3.

  280. 280.

    Shotwell, War as an Instrument of National Policy and its Renunciation in the Pact of Paris, 7 and DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ 386.

  281. 281.

    Russell, Theories of International Relations, 364.

  282. 282.

    Zimmern, League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 390. For the date of the interview, see James T. Shotwell and J. P. Chamberlain, ‘Section 27: Draft Treaty of Permanent Peace Between the United States and …,’ in John B. Condliffe ed., Problems of the Pacific, 1927: Proceedings of the Second Conference of the Institute of Pacific Relations, Honolulu, Hawaii, July 15 to 29, 1927 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1928), 507.

  283. 283.

    Aristide Briand, 1927, quoted in Zimmern, League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 390. See also Henry Kittredge Norton, ‘The Story of the Kellogg Pact,’ The Saturday Review of Literature, January 26, 1929, 619–620.

  284. 284.

    On Shotwell’s campaign in favour of the Pact of Paris, see Condliffe, ‘International Collaboration in the Study of International Relations,’ AG 1-IICI-K-I-3, UA.

  285. 285.

    Condliffe, ‘International Collaboration in the Study of International Relations,’ 13–4. On the role played by other prominent figures in the campaign, see Shotwell, War as an Instrument of National Policy, chapters 7–9 and Zimmern, League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 390.

  286. 286.

    Zimmern, League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 390.

  287. 287.

    Nicholas Murray Butler, ‘Briand Proposes Eternal Peace with the US: An Important Message to the American People which Butler Fears has Escaped Full Attention,’ New York Times, April 25, 1927.

  288. 288.

    Condliffe, ‘International Collaboration in the Study of International Relations,’ 14 and ‘Appendix 3: John Condliffe’s Reminiscences,’ in Hooper, ed., Remembering the Institute of Pacific Relations, 460. On the two earlier treaties, see Shotwell and Chamberlain, ‘Section 27: Draft Treaty of Permanent Peace Between the United States and …’ 507.

  289. 289.

    Shotwell and Chamberlain, ‘Section 27: Draft Treaty of Permanent Peace Between the United States and …,’ 507. For the full text of the Bryan Peace Treaties, see Treaties for the Advancement of Peace Between the United States and Other Powers Negotiated by the Honourable William J. Bryan, Secretary of State of the United States, with an introduction by James Brown Scott (Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1920).

  290. 290.

    Condliffe, ‘International Collaboration in the Study of International Relations,’ 14. See also Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific, 113.

  291. 291.

    Shotwell and Chamberlain, ‘Section 27: Draft Treaty of Permanent Peace Between the United States and …,’ 503, 508.

  292. 292.

    DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ 386–7 and Condliffe, ‘International Collaboration in the Study of International Relations,’ 14.

  293. 293.

    Condliffe, ‘International Collaboration in the Study of International Relations,’ 14. Akami argues that Japanese foreign policy experts debated the draft treaty ‘not as a multinational treaty for peace, but as a bilateral US-Japan Security Treaty. They were unanimous over the need for such a treaty with the United States because it was not a member of the League of Nations and welcomed the draft proposal. Nonetheless, they criticised the draft as to American-centred.’ Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific, 114. Shotwell and Chamberlain observed that a study of the ‘document will show that it involves no real departure from … [the] … settled policies’ of the United States, adding that it is a document that ‘carefully safeguards American sovereignty with reference to every other prerogative except that of aggressive war’ and that it ‘has avoided all the entanglements of the League Covenant.’ Shotwell and Chamberlain, ‘Section 27: Draft Treaty of Permanent Peace Between the United States and …,’ 508. Henry Forbes Angus, a member of the Canadian unit of the IPR, pointed out that at the Honolulu conference in 1927 the Japanese ‘in particular criticised’ the draft presented by Shotwell ‘as not going far enough and as being one-sided.’ Henry F. Angus, The Problem of Peaceful Change in the Pacific Area: A study of the Work of the Institute of Pacific Relations and its Bearing on the Problem of Peaceful Change (London: Oxford University Press, 1937), 68. On the role of public opinion, see Shotwell, War as an Instrument of National Policy, vii. On Shotwell’s consultation with Japanese IPR members, see Takayanagi Kenzō, ‘Manchuria—A Case Problem,’ in Lasker and Holland eds., Problems of the Pacific, 1931, 231.

  294. 294.

    ‘Appendix 3: John Condliffe’s Reminiscences,’ in Paul F. Hooper, ed., Remembering the Institute of Pacific Relations, 460.

  295. 295.

    Colombos, ‘The Paris Pact,’ 88 and Russell, Theories of International Relations, 365.

  296. 296.

    Alejandro Alavarez, Le panaémericanisme et la sixième conférence panaémericaine tenue à la Havane en 1928. (Paris: Les Éditions internationales, 1928), 183–4. C. John Colombos notes that this resolution was adopted ‘unanimously by twenty-one American Republics, seventeen of which … [were] … members of the League.’ Colombos, ‘The Paris Pact,’ 89.

  297. 297.

    On the failure to arrive at a definition of aggression, see Ian Brownlie, International Law and the Use of Force by States (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1963), 75, https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198251583.001.0001.

  298. 298.

    Ibid. Ian Brownlie points out that ‘the question remained unsettled in relation to the American continent until 1936’ (ibid., 225).

  299. 299.

    Ibid., 246. See also Quincy Wright, ‘The Meaning of the Pact of Paris,’ American Journal of International Law 27, no. 1 (1933), 39–61, 41.

  300. 300.

    Denys P. Myers, ‘Origin and Conclusion of the Paris Pact: The Reconstruction of War as an Instrument of National Policy,’ World Peace Foundation Pamphlets 12, no.2 (1929), 135–6. Identic notes were sent to the governments of Australia, Belgium, Canada, Czechoslovakia, France, Germany, Great Britain, India, Irish Free State, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Poland and South Africa, and an accompanying Draft Multilateral Treaty for the Renunciation of War was delivered to their respective foreign offices on June 23, 1928.

  301. 301.

    Wright, ‘The Meaning of the Pact of Paris,’ 46.

  302. 302.

    Executive Report no. 1, 70th Cong., 2nd Sess., Con. Rec. vol. 70, 15 January 1929, 1730, reproduced in Myers, ‘Origin and Conclusion of the Paris Pact,’ 68–70.

  303. 303.

    Wright , ‘The Meaning of the Pact of Paris,’ 46–7.

  304. 304.

    Ibid., 47.

  305. 305.

    Executive Report no. 1, in Myers, ‘Origin and Conclusion of the Paris Pact,’ 69–70.

  306. 306.

    Wright, ‘The Meaning of the Pact of Paris,’ 47.

  307. 307.

    Wright , ‘The Meaning of the Pact of Paris,’ 44. William Edward Hall observed the following: ‘As the measures taken by when a state protects itself by violating the sovereignty of another are confessedly exceptional acts, beyond the limits of ordinary law, and permitted only for the supreme motive of self-preservation, they must evidently be confined with the narrowest limits consistent with obtaining the required end. It is therefore more than questionable whether a state can use advantages gained by such measures to do anything beyond that which is necessary for immediate self-protection, which it would not otherwise be in a position to do.’ ‘It is frequently maintained that every violation is excused so long as it was caused by the motive of self-preservation; but it becomes more and more recognised that violations of other States in the interest of self-preservation are excused in cases of necessity only.’ William Edward Hall, International Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1880), 229.

  308. 308.

    Daniel Webster, 1842, quoted in Wright, ‘The Meaning of the Pact of Paris,’ 44.

  309. 309.

    Wright, ‘The Meaning of the Pact of Paris,’ 44.

  310. 310.

    Ibid.

  311. 311.

    Ibid., 41–3.

  312. 312.

    Ibid., 43–4.

  313. 313.

    Condliffe, ‘International Collaboration in the Study of International Relations,’ 14.

  314. 314.

    Akami, Internationalizing the Pacific, 113.

  315. 315.

    ‘Appendix 3: John Condliffe’s Reminiscences,’ in Paul F. Hooper, ed., Remembering the Institute of Pacific Relations, 460.

  316. 316.

    The 1929 conference of the IPR heard that Shotwell’s book War as an Instrument of National Policy was ‘indirectly a product’ of the 1927 Honolulu Conference. See ISIPR, ‘A Pacific Research Program: A Record of Six Years of International Cooperation in Research Among the Member Countries of the Institute of Pacific Relations,’ IPR Document no. 2, submitted to the Sixth CISSIR, London, 29 May–2 June 1933, 19, AG 1-IICI-K-VI-2 UA. See also DeBenedetti, ‘James T. Shotwell and the Science of International Politics,’ 386.

  317. 317.

    Shotwell, War as an Instrument of National Policy, viii, 6–7. Colombos argues that the significance of the pact was that it involved ‘renunciation of war in general terms and subject to no qualification.’ Colombos, ‘The Paris Pact,’ 87.

  318. 318.

    Frederick L. Schuman, International Politics (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1933), 682.

  319. 319.

    Shotwell, War as an Instrument of National Policy, 6–7.

  320. 320.

    Manley O. Hudson, Progress in International Organization (California: Stanford University Press, 1932), 95–6.

  321. 321.

    Société des Nations [hereafter SDN, Institut International de Coopération Intellectuel [hereafter IICI], ‘L’enseignement universitaire des relations internationales,’ Coopération Intellectuelle, no. 57–58 (1935), 483–502, 490–1, IICI/01, UA.

  322. 322.

    Deutsche Hochschule für Politik: Vorlesungs-Verzeichnis für das Winterhalbjahr Semester 1926/27, AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA. This programme was established at a time when political science was not recognised as a distinct discipline in other German universities. See also Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’, 395.

  323. 323.

    Rietzler, ‘Philanthropy, Peace Research, and Revisionist Politics,’ 70.

  324. 324.

    Ibid., 65.

  325. 325.

    Zimmern, preface to Jäckh, The New Germany, 13.

  326. 326.

    Ibid., 14.

  327. 327.

    Ibid., 14–5.

  328. 328.

    Deutsche Hochschule für Politik: Aufbau und Arbeit, 13 and Jäckh (address, Sixth CISSIR, London, 1 June 1933), AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA. See also Nathan and Norden, eds., Einstein on Peace, 87.

  329. 329.

    Korenblat, ‘A School for the Republic?’ 399.

  330. 330.

    Jäckh was a member of the German League of Nations Union. Indeed, he claimed that it was he who founded it on September 10, 1918. Jäckh further claimed that it was the ‘first organization of its kind in the world.’ Jäckh, The New Germany, 81–2. Note that the International Federation of League of Nations Societies had held its 11th Plenary Congress in Berlin in May 1927. On Eisenmann’s role, see Jäckh (address, Sixth CISSIR, London, 1 June 1933), AG 1-IICI-K-IV-2.c, UA.

  331. 331.

    Zimmern , ‘The League of Nations and International Intellectual Co-operation,’ 150.

  332. 332.

    See the article drafted by the IIIC for publication in the Annual Survey of International Affairs, 22 November 1927; Luchaire to Toynbee, 18 January 1927; and Toynbee to Luchaire, 21 January 1927, B.IV.18, UA.

  333. 333.

    Jäckh, The New Germany, 74.

  334. 334.

    Ibid. On the IIIC’s role, see Bourdillon, ‘The Royal Institute of International Affairs,’ 31n.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Jo-Anne Pemberton

Authors
  1. Jo-Anne Pemberton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jo-Anne Pemberton .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Pemberton, JA. (2020). The League of Nations and Origins of the International Studies Conference. In: The Story of International Relations, Part One. Palgrave Studies in International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-14331-2_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation