2 Much of this will be rejected by historians who remain highly skeptical about both legalism and international organization. Nevertheless, Boyle reminds us not to sidestep this issue. And yet, this should have been a better book. It is editorially challenged, filled with long, rambling sentences and stylistic inconsistencies. It is also over-footnoted.
Some notes are mere window dressing.
Additionally, Boyle's fondness for generalizing about his legalist heroes tends to flatten an understanding of their differences. Legalists often disagreed in respect to American policy. Unfortunately, their disagreements are mostly hidden in this account. Gary B. Ostrower Alfred University Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.