Chivalry: A Principle of the Law of Armed Conflict?

Chapter

Abstract

This contribution explores the role and relevance of chivalry in relation to warfare past and present and its relationship to the law of armed conflict and poses the question whether it still is a principle of that body of the law. It also briefly addresses the question of what its potential relevance is as a guiding principle in the interpretation of legal and extra legal obligations alongside rules contained in conventional and customary law.

References

Official Documents

  1. British Manual (1958) British manual of military law. The Law of War, vol III. United Kingdom Ministry of Defence, HMSO (1958)Google Scholar
  2. Canadian Joint Forces Manual (2001) Canadian Joint Forces manual on the Law of Armed Conflict, B-GJ-005-104/FP-021Google Scholar
  3. ICRC (2008) Interpretive guidance on the notion of direct participation in hostilities under International Humanitarian Law, adopted by the Assembly of the International Committee of the Red Cross on 26 Feb 2009, 90 IRRC, No. 872 (Dec 2008), pp 991–1047Google Scholar
  4. UK Manual (2004) Joint Service Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict. Joint Services Publication 383, United Kingdom Ministry of DefenceGoogle Scholar
  5. US Army Manual (1956) US Army manual law of land warfare, FM 27-10 1956Google Scholar
  6. US Navy (1997) US Navy, annotated supplement to the commander’s handbook of the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 9 (REV A)/FMFM 1-10 1997Google Scholar
  7. US Navy (2007) US Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard Commander’s handbook on the Law of Naval Operations, NWP 1-14MGoogle Scholar

Literature

  1. Ackerman F (2003) “Never to do outrageousity nor murder”: the world of Malory’s Morte Darthur. In: French S (ed) Code of the warrior: exploring warrior values past and present. Rowman and Littlefied Publishers, Lanham, pp 115–137Google Scholar
  2. Anderson N, Anderson D (1988) The generals: Ulysses S. Grant and Robert E. Lee. Alfred A. Knopf Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Figes O (2010) Crimea. Penguin Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Franck T (1995) Fairness in international law and institutions. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. French S (2003) Code of the warrior: exploring warrior values past and present. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Lanham, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  6. Gill T (2007) Het Haags Landoorlogreglement na 100 jaar (The Hague Regulations on Land Warfare after 100 years). Mededelingen van de Nederlandse Vereniging voor Internationaal Recht 135:71Google Scholar
  7. Green L (2000) The contemporary law of armed conflict, 2nd edn. Manchester University Press, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  8. Greenwood C (2008) Historical development and legal basis. In: Fleck D, Bothe M (eds) The handbook of international humanitarian law, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 1–43Google Scholar
  9. Hays Parks W (2010) Part IX of the ICRC “Direct participation in hostilities” study: no mandate, no expertise and legally incorrect. NYU J Int’l L & Pol 42:769Google Scholar
  10. Henckaerts J-M, Doswald-Beck L (2005) Customary international humanitarian law: Rules, ICRC, vol I. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. http://www.icrc.org/eng/war-and-law/treaties-customary-law/customary-law/index.jsp
  11. Hibbert C (1990) Redcoats and rebels: the merican revolution through British eyes. Avon Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Howard M (1976) War in European history. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Jones A (1987) The art of war in the Western world. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  14. Keegan J (1978) The face of battle. Penguin Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Keegan J (1987) The mask of command. Penguin Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Kershaw R (2009) It never snows in September: the German view of market garden and the battle of Arnhem. Ian Allen Publishing, Hersham, SurreyGoogle Scholar
  17. Lachouque H, Brown A (1997) The anatomy of glory: Napoleon and his guard. Greenhill Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Lyons M, Jackson D (1997) Saladin: the politics of holy war. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Melzer N (2010) Keeping the balance between military necessity and humanity: a response to four critiques of the ICRC’s interpretive guidance on the notion of direct participation in hostilities. NYU J Int’l L & Pol 42:831Google Scholar
  20. Schmitt M (2010) Deconstructing direct participation in hostilities: the constitutive elements. NYU J Int’l L & Pol 42:697Google Scholar
  21. Van Hoof G (1983) Rethinking the sources of international law. Kluwer Law and Taxation Publishers, DeventerGoogle Scholar
  22. Walzer M (1977) Just and unjust wars: a moral argument with historical illustrations. Penguin Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Watkin K (2010) Opportunity lost: organized armed groups and the ICRC direct participation in hostilities interpretive guidance. NYU J Int’l L & Pol 42:641Google Scholar
  24. Weider History Group (2012) Raid on St. Nazaire: Operation Chariot during World War II. http://www.historynet.com/raid-on-st-nazaire-operation-chariot-during-world-war-ii.htm. Accessed 21 Nov 2012

Copyright information

© T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author(s) 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Military LawUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Military LawThe Netherlands Defence AcademyBredaThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations