From the Archives: The Archbold Expeditions to New Guinea: A preliminary survey of archival materials held at the American Museum of Natural History,New York City

In accounts of the Kanak (Melanesian) opposition to the recruitment of volunteers for the Great War in 1916–17 and of the war that followed in the north of New Caledonia in 1917–18, the involvement of a district grand chef, Téâ Antoine Katélia, was the subject of conflicting testimonies. Drawing extensively upon archival materials dating from before, during and after the war, this paper examines the contested authority of a Kanak chief in the early-20th century and contributes to the local history of the Koné region.     

THE CITY OF GOD AND AFTER: RELIGIOUS CHANGE AND ORGANISATIONAL DECLINE IN GREAT ENGLISH TOWNS SINCE C. 1850

Abstract

The demands and effects of warfare have not been one of the traditional concerns of historians of early modern English towns. This essay looks at the way in which the townsmen of York, Hull and Beverley responded to the demands of war. It explores the level of urban involvement in the king's wars, mainly but not exclusively against the Scots, and the way in which the pressure of war acted to transform relations within towns and relations between towns and their neighbours. In a period when towns were experiencing rapid economic, social and religious change, war provided one means of renegotiating power relations and allowed urban elites to expand their authority, through partnership with the Crown, vis-à-vis their fellow citizens and non-urban elites. The balance between profiting from war and being ruined by its demands was a fine one, however, exemplified by the experience of Hull in the 1540s.     

The British Archaeological Association and the Genesis of J. C. Bruce’s The Roman Wall

On 31 July 1849, John Collingwood Bruce gave a lecture on Hadrian’s Wall at the British Archaeological Association’s annual Congress in Chester. This was his first lecture outside his native North-East on the subject on which he was soon to become the leading authority. Two primary accounts of the occasion survive, but are contradictory in several details. These contradictions are explored, the accuracy of the account in the JBAA upheld and the importance of the occasion emphasised.     

Sur les traces de Cortés: L'expédition du Mexique d'après Le Monde illustré

Unlike L'Illustration, with which it competed under the Second Empire, the weekly Le Monde illustré, which first appeared in 1857 and which was protected by the imperial government, did not count among the political newspapers overtaxed under Napoléon the Third's repressive regime. For this reason, it made great strides thanks to its blind allegiance to a French imperialism that had asserted its authority during the Crimean war, but which spent itself during the war against Juárez and his republican partisans in Mexico. While the French liberal press criticized the Second Empire foreign policy, Le Monde illustré persisted in turning the Mexican war into an antijuarist pacification favorable to a new Latin colonial empire, as well as to an application of the Saint-Simonian doctrine on Mexican industry and economy. In order to achieve this, the illustrated reports on the expeditionary force, military operations, and French victories were a warmongering that aimed to place this campaign in the afterglow of the conquistadors' era, as well as to idealize the imperial army as a symbol of the French nation.     

A New Model of Executive Power: A Montesquieuan Explanation of the Obama Presidency

Abstract

The perennial concern over executive overreach continues well into Obama's presidency, leading many to wonder if the “unitary executive” is here to stay. Discussions of executive war powers focus on three models. The Hamiltonian perspective gives presidents the lead position in foreign affairs; the second model, following Madison, presents Congress as the leader when initiating hostilities. Finally, Jeffersonians present emergency powers as extra-legal, giving presidents a sphere of actions that cannot be contained within constitutional discussions. Problematically, current scholarship implicitly or explicitly grounds these explanations in Locke's political philosophy. This occurs despite a dearth of references to Locke during the Constitutional Convention and infrequent references to his thought during early debates over executive-congressional divisions of war powers. Comparatively, all of these seminal American figures frequently mention Montesquieu, often fighting over the specifics of his theory. While scholars widely acknowledge this influence, they rarely mention him during discussions of war powers or the nature of executive power in general. This article examines the Montesquieuan understanding of executive power and shows how this model represents a viable alternative to the Lockean one. Most importantly, examining the executive from a Montesquieuan perspective provides solutions to current problems that the Lockean perspective does not.     

The Supreme Court and the Interstate Slave Trade: A Study in Evasion, Anarchy, and Extremism

Opponents of slavery often argued that the federal government possessed the constitutional authority to outlaw the interstate slave trade. At its founding in 1833, the American Anti‐Slavery Society declared that Congress “has a right, and is solemnly bound, to suppress the domestic slave trade between the several States.” The idea had been endorsed earlier, during the Missouri controversy of 1819–1820, by both John Jay and Daniel Webster. Later on, in the 1840s and 1850s, it was supported by such prominent politicians as John Quincy Adams, Salmon P. Chase, and Charles Sumner. Defenders of slavery were, of course, horrified by the suggestion that the South's peculiar institution might be attacked in this way, and they vehemently denied that the Constitution permitted any such action. The prolonged debate over the issue focused on two key provisions of the Constitution. One was the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3), which says that Congress has the power to “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.” The other was the 1808 Clause (Article I, Section 9, Clause 1), which says that the “Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight.” Abolitionists held that the Constitution sanctioned congressional interference in the domestic slave trade both generally, by virtue of the Commerce Clause, and specifically, by virtue of the 1808 Clause. They argued that since slaves were routinely bought and sold, they obviously were articles of commerce, and therefore Congress had unlimited authority over interstate slave trafficking. Furthermore, they said, the words “migration or importation” in the 1808 Clause meant that as of January 1, 1808 Congress had acquired the right not only to ban the importation of slaves, but also to prohibit their migration from one state to another. Defenders of slavery replied that Congress could not interfere in property rights and that the power to regulate commerce did not include the power to destroy it. They also said that the word “migration” in the 1808 Clause referred, not to the domestic movement of slaves, but to the entry into the United States of white immigrants from abroad. ¹     

Silencing the laws to save the fatherland: Rousseau’s theory of dictatorship between Bodin and Schmitt

ABSTRACT

Jean-Jacques Rousseau devoted an important chapter of his Social Contract to the dictatorship. Carl Schmitt interpreted Rousseau’s chapter as marking the transition from ‘commissarial’ to ‘sovereign dictatorship’. This article argues that Schmitt’s interpretation is historically and conceptually inaccurate. Instead of paving the way for sovereign dictatorship, Rousseau carefully distinguished the dictatorship from the people’s sovereign authority. Taking position in the ‘debate’ between Bodin and Grotius on the relation between dictatorship and sovereignty, he argued that the dictator could provisionally suspend the people’s sovereign authority, but not abolish it. More particularly, the dictator did not possess the power to make generally binding laws, which had to remain the exclusive authority of the popular assembly. However, this did not prevent Rousseau from recognizing the dictatorship as a means for democratic reform. Rousseau thus conceived of the dictatorship as a time-limited and revocable commission to protect the constitution and to provide for a more stable and effective state organization based on the principle of popular sovereignty.     

Waging peace: a new generation of Ixiles confronts the debts of war in Guatemala

ABSTRACT

This article describes the impunity embedded in the Guatemalan peace process after the genocide that shapes how Ixiles approach the debts (incurred by complicity, death and kinship) of war, as illustrated by their response to the 2013 trial of Efraín Ríos Montt. The trial preceded a precipitous 2015 political crisis over corruption within the government of Otto Pérez Molina, a former army general and intelligence chief for Ríos Montt. The question that haunts the trial and these more recent marches for justice, in a country where citizens have long been subject to a life of democratic dictatorship, is how men like Pérez Molina and Ríos Montt maintain and grow their power even while their names are synonymous with murder, torture and clandestine graves. By examining the assumptions made by those in authority as they determine forgiveness, punishment, amnesty and reparations, I show how wartime debts act through generations. In the mixed reaction, popularly called pensamientos divididos, ‘divided thoughts’ or aq’olaj iyol yansa’m, of young Ixiles to the Ríos Montt trial, I illustrate a disjuncture that occurs when radically different forms of care intersect in the area most impacted by the genocide. Through fifteen years of ethnographic engagement, I trace the story of one Ixil family and their reactions to the trial to show how humanitarian efforts to confront war crimes are not simply restorative. While the trial opens the possibility for a collective remembering of violence and the (re)ordering of social ethos, in the Ixil area it also produces a moral economy of violence.     

Body as weapon: the archaeology of a war victim’s narrative

ABSTRACT

The soldier's body is the most important subject of violence and destruction in war. Humans live primarily through their body in the material world, and when the body is destroyed, their whole existence is affected, both physically and non-physically. Therefore, the first locus on which we can observe the effects of war and violence is the human body, mainly soldiers. In modern wars, the soldier’s body is combined with weapons and machines of war, but is also the first target of killing whether in attack or defence. On the one hand it is targeted and killed, but on the other hand the body itself targets and kills. In warfare, bodies are trained to be the mechanism of killing and they are employed on battlefields according to the political objectives of their sovereign power. Thus, the soldier’s body becomes a weapon separated from the individual human body by the political authority.     

Responsibility,Humility, and Intervention

Abstract

This paper proposes an analysis of The Responsibility to Protect that is rooted in the Christian realism of Reinhold Niebuhr. R2P rests on three central claims: sovereignty ought to be understood in terms of responsibility rather than control, the just cause criterion for war should include humanitarian protection, and rightful authority ought to be relocated to multilateral institutions. In turn, Niebuhr’s Christian realism proposes a dialectic of responsibility and humility that shapes our understanding of justice and coercion. While examining R2P through a Niebuhrian lens shows some compatibility between the two moral frameworks, it also reveals the insufficient understanding of humility with respect to human motivations and limitations that underlies R2P’s criteria.     

Rethinking Power and Authority: Symbolic Violence and Subjectivity in Nepal's Terai Forests

Recent work on authority, power and the state has opened up important avenues of inquiry into the practices and contexts through which power is exercised. Why certain forms of authority emerge as more durable and legitimate than others remains a challenge, however. In this article we bring together two bodies of thought to engage this issue, feminist theories of power and subjectivity and Bourdieu's ideas of symbolic violence, in order to explore how power and authority are reproduced and entrenched. Our purpose is to advance theorizing on power and authority in the context of contentious political situations and institutional emergence. This unusual theoretical synergy allows us to illustrate how power is exercised in relation to natural resource management and the ways in which the conflict/post‐conflict context creates institutional forms and spaces which simultaneously challenge and reinforce antecedent forms of authority. To animate our theoretical concerns, we draw on work in community‐based forestry in Nepal, with a focus on some of the conflicts that have arisen in relation to the valuable Sal forests of the Terai, or lowland plains.     

Halliday's revenge: revolutions and International Relations

Fred Halliday saw revolution and war as the dual motors of modern international order. However, while war occupies a prominent place in International Relations (IR), revolutions inhabit a more residual location. For Halliday, this is out of keeping with their impact—in particular, revolutions offer a systemic challenge to existing patterns of international order in their capacity to generate alternative orders founded on novel forms of political rule, economic organization and symbolic authority. In this way, dynamics of revolution and counter‐revolution are closely associated with processes of international conflict, intervention and war. It may be that one of the reasons for Halliday's failure to make apparent the importance of revolutions to IR audiences was that, for all his empirical illustrations of how revolutions affected the international realm, he did not formulate a coherent theoretical schema which spoke systematically to the discipline. This article assesses Halliday's contribution to the study of revolutions, and sets out an approach which both recognizes and extends his work. By formulating ideal‐typical ‘anatomies of revolution’, it is possible to generate insights that clarify the ways in which revolutions shape international order.     

Writing and Publishing the Cold War: John Berger and Seeker & Warburg

Following Christopher Lasch's early study, accounts of the ‘culturalcold war’ have become largely synonymous with the activitiesof the Congress for Cultural Freedom. The major accounts ofthe Congress have drawn on a comparatively narrow range of archivesources, personal papers, memoirs, and interviews Recent studiesof cold war broadcasting have broadened the scope of the ‘cultural’and made extensive use of previously inaccessible archive materialin Europe, North America, and the former Soviet Union This articlecontinues the process of broadening our understanding of thecultural dimensions of the cold war by focusing on the publishersSeeker & Warburg and highlighting, more generally, the opportunitiesthat publishers' archives afford for opening up new areas ofinvestigation and research on the cold war ^*I would like to thank John Berger, Mary Eagleton, Simon Gunn,Louise Jackson, and an anonymous referee for comments on anearlier version of this article I would also like to thank RandomHouse and Independent Labour Publications for permission toquote from material in the Seeker & Warburg Archive andthe ILP Archive Material from the Blair, E correspondence ispublished courtesy of the Lilly Library, Indiana University,Bloomington, IN Finally, I would like to thank Michael Bottand his colleagues at the University of Reading for their assistancein identifying relevant material in the Seeker & WarburgArchive     

Lincoln as Commander-in-Chief

Abstract

Abraham Lincoln's presidency was defined and dominated by war, yet Lincoln himself had very little direct experience with warfare; nor had the American presidency been truly tested by war when he took office. Lincoln had to negotiate very difficult political and constitutional terrain as he waged the Civil War: issues of executive authority, constitutional powers and their limitations, and the nature of civil liberties during war constantly bedeviled him. His guiding principle in all these matters, and the greatest lesson we can learn from him today, was his flexibility and his pragmatism.     

Property and Authority in a Migrant Society: Balinese Irrigators in Sulawesi,Indonesia

Multiple definitions of resources as property lead to competition over legitimate authority between state and non‐state organizational and institutional arrangements. This article focuses on the overlapping and competing domains of the water users’ association, WUA, and the ‘traditional’ Balinese irrigators’ institution, subak. While the former is backed up by the power of state regulation and administration, the latter derives legitimacy from Balinese irrigators. The author presents a case study of the establishment and transformation of property rights in an irrigation‐based Balinese migrant society in Indonesia; he concludes that, in the ongoing process of competition for authority and mutual adjustment, both institutions undergo important transformations.     

On the nature of the beast: Re-charting political geographies of the European Union

This review paper begins with the premise that since the European Union remains a process of construction with no agreed or pre‐designated end‐point, its power structure is open to a diverse range of interpretations. Moreover, the apparent novelty of the EU renders it hard to characterize according to familiar taxonomies. The novelty lies in part in the complex territorial configurations of authority in the EU. Different conceptualizations of the EU are varied readings of the structure, balance and scales of authority — which thereby invoke different actions and spaces of possibility.     

The Supreme Court Argument that Saved the Union: Richard Henry Dana, Jr., and the Prize Cases

On January 1, 1863, Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation, claiming constitutional authority to do so “as a fit and necessary war measure.” The epic struggle between North and South had been raging for nearly two years. There were over a million soldiers under arms. At Antietam there had been more than 20,000 casualties in the bloodiest single day of battle in American history. ¹ But was it, in point of law, a war?     

The Crimean War and its lessons for today

Orlando Figes's book The Crimean War: a history, based on English, Russian, French and Turkish sources, throws a new light on the Crimean War in a number of ways. It shows that the conflict was far from being a small war, but a landmark event. It was the only example of a war between Britain and Russia—and it led to enormous casualties. It also represented a stage in medical history, since most of the casualties were caused by disease. In Britain, it marked a new advance in the power of the press, which did much to fuel anti‐Russian sentiment. The war was also fuelled, on both sides, by religious and nationalist sentiment—but its most important cause related to the fate of the Ottoman Empire, then in decline, and fears that its collapse could result in a dangerous power vacuum. The war still has a significance for the present day because the collapse of communism has failed to resolve the antagonism between Russia and the West. Here, the book throws an important light on the development of British and western attitudes towards Russia, many of which were shaped in the nineteenth century. The book deserves attention, both here and in Russia.