Civilising Violence: International Law and Colonial War in the British Empire, 1850–1900
Christopher Szabla
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/15718050-bja10081
2023-04-06
Journal of the History of International Law
Abstract:What was the relationship between international law and colonial warfare in the period of both increasingly formal imperialism and international law's professionalisation and codification in the nineteenth-century's second half? Existing work may lead to assumptions that international law would not be seen to apply to colonial wars, or served to justify them alone. This article turns away from previous focuses on the intellectual history of international law, prescriptive sources such as military manuals, and approaches extending from criminal law and colonial policing to demonstrate how and why imperial officials, politicians, and activists believed international law applied to colonial wars. Examining the British Empire, it shows how arguments about the use of international law in this period initially varied in the service of imperial interests, how and why public activism increasingly encouraged a more consistent approach – and discusses implications for the history and present of the law of armed conflict. What was the relationship between international law and colonial warfare in the period of both increasingly formal imperialism and international law's professionalisation and codification in the nineteenth-century's second half? Existing work may lead to assumptions that international law would not be seen to apply to colonial wars, or served to justify them alone. This article turns away from previous focuses on the intellectual history of international law, prescriptive sources such as military manuals, and approaches extending from criminal law and colonial policing to demonstrate how and why imperial officials, politicians, and activists believed international law applied to colonial wars. Examining the British Empire, it shows how arguments about the use of international law in this period initially varied in the service of imperial interests, how and why public activism increasingly encouraged a more consistent approach – and discusses implications for the history and present of the law of armed conflict. What was the relationship between international law and colonial warfare in the period of both increasingly formal imperialism and international law's professionalisation and codification in the nineteenth-century's second half? Existing work may lead to assumptions that international law would not be seen to apply to colonial wars, or served to justify them alone. This article turns away from previous focuses on the intellectual history of international law, prescriptive sources such as military manuals, and approaches extending from criminal law and colonial policing to demonstrate how and why imperial officials, politicians, and activists believed international law applied to colonial wars. Examining the British Empire, it shows how arguments about the use of international law in this period initially varied in the service of imperial interests, how and why public activism increasingly encouraged a more consistent approach – and discusses implications for the history and present of the law of armed conflict. What was the relationship between international law and colonial warfare in the period of both increasingly formal imperialism and international law's professionalisation and codification in the nineteenth-century's second half? Existing work may lead to assumptions that international law would not be seen to apply to colonial wars, or served to justify them alone. This article turns away from previous focuses on the intellectual history of international law, prescriptive sources such as military manuals, and approaches extending from criminal law and colonial policing to demonstrate how and why imperial officials, politicians, and activists believed international law applied to colonial wars. Examining the British Empire, it shows how arguments about the use of international law in this period initially varied in the service of imperial interests, how and why public activism increasingly encouraged a more consistent approach – and discusses implications for the history and present of the law of armed conflict.