gardens or graveyards of scholarship? festschriften in the...

Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 22, No. 2 (2002), pp. 227–252

Gardens or Graveyards of Scholarship?Festschriften in the Literature of the

Common Law

MICHAEL TAGGART∗

Abstract—The German word Festschrift has become the universally accepted termfor a published collection of legal essays written by several authors to honour adistinguished jurist or mark a significant legal event. The genre dates back to themid-19th century on the Continent, but until recently it has made little impressionon the literature of the common law. Less than a dozen legal Festschriften had beenpublished in the United Kingdom up to 1968, but since then more than a hundredlegal Festschriften have appeared. This article traces the rise of the legal Festschrift inthe United Kingdom, and attempts to account for its recent popularity. The natureof legal Festschriften, and the processes and problems of their production, areaddressed. Emphasis is placed on the systemic failure to index contributions to legalFestschriften. This gap in the bibliographic resources of the common law consignsan enormous amount of scholarship to oblivion; hence the reference in the title to‘graveyards of scholarship’. An indication of the magnitude of this problem is thatthe total number of contributions to legal Festschriften between 1969 and 2000almost equals the total number of articles published in three leading British lawreviews over the same period. The article concludes that the failure to indexcontributions to legal Festschriften by author and subject matter is lamentable, andundercuts the reasons for publishing legal Festschriften in the first place.

This article is prompted by the appearance of an ever-increasing number ofbooks of essays honouring distinguished common lawyers. As a genre of legalwriting it is of recent origin in the common law world, but it follows a muchlonger Continental tradition. Up to 1968 there are fewer than a dozen suchbooks published in the United Kingdom—the comparable figure in Germanyalone being 70 times that—whereas today they are pouring forth in spate in the

∗ Faculty of Law, The University of Auckland, New Zealand. Comments and criticisms welcome:[email protected]. Several people assisted with this article. Thanks, with the usual disclaimer, to BernardBrown, Peter Cane, Brian Coote, David Dyzenhaus, Christopher Forsyth, Richard Hart, Paul Myburgh, MarkPerry, Mary-Rose Russell, Barbara Tearle, John Turner, Sir David Williams and Peter Zawada. I benefitedconsiderably also from the research assistance of Joshua Pringle, Chapman Tripp Research Scholar, and wouldlike to thank him and the partners of the New Zealand law firm of Chapman Tripp for their generous funding ofthe Research Scholar Programme. Tracking down legal Festschriften in the Squire Law Library in Cambridge, theInstitute of Advanced Legal Studies in London and the Bodleian Law Library in Oxford was made possible bythe award of the Maines Visiting Fellowship at the Centre for Public Law in the University of Cambridge in 2001.I would like to thank in that regard Jack Beatson, Christopher Forsyth, and Ivan Hare. For the record, I havecontributed to two Festschriften and several other collections of essays, and have edited two collections of essays.

2002 Oxford University Press

VOL. 22Oxford Journal of Legal Studies228

home of the common law.1 This essay explores the strengths and weaknesses ofthe genre, and speculates on why this explosion of legal writing is occurring andwhat needs to be done about it.

1. The Festschrift TraditionThere is a long tradition on the Continent of collections of essays honouringdistinguished jurists or institutions. In Germany these go by the name Festschrift(singular) or Festschriften (plural), and mark an event (retirement or the attainmentof a certain age) of a distinguished jurist (which in the Continental traditionalmost always means academic lawyer, rather than judge or practitioner) or, lessfrequently, the anniversary of an event or institution. Over the last century theGerman word has become the internationally accepted designation for suchhomage publications.2 It is not correct, however, to view the genre as a Teutonicinstitution or of German origin.3

To a scholar, the gift of the scholarship of others is a most appropriate one.Festschriften, according to Rounds and Dow, are intended to serve ‘the grandobject of all scholarly devotion, namely the increase of scholarly interest andknowledge’, while simultaneously paying ‘a public and tangible tribute to onescholar by other scholars’.4

Beyond the literal translation of the German—Fest meaning ‘celebration’and Schrift meaning ‘writing’5—the features of a legal Festschrift derive fromconvention. Lilly M. Roberts defined legal Festschriften as published collectionsof legal essays by different authors, specifically written to honour an individual,institution or an event.6 She included memorial publications as well as special

1 In L.M. Roberts (comp.), A Bibliography of Legal Festschriften (Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, 1972) 12Festschriften are listed as originating in England. There is no entry for Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland. Thisinvaluable resource covered Festschriften published between 1868 and 1968 from materials available in the Universityof Michigan Law Library. The compiler stressed it was an incomplete list. Roberts listed 356 Festschriften underGermany for this period; whereas a European-based bibliographer recorded 851 legal Festschriften published inGermany between 1864–1979: H. Dau (comp. and ed.), Bibliography of Legal Festschriften Titles and Content:Germany, Switzerland, Austria (Berlin Verlag, Arno Spitz) in several volumes: 1864–1944 (1984); 1945–61 (1962),1962–66 (1967), 1967–74 (1977), 1975–79 (1981). Roberts’ list for England covers events (commemoration ofMagna Charta, anniversary of Matrimonial Causes Act), an institution (jubilee of Sheffield Law School) and eighthonorands either domiciled in England or whose Festschrift was published there: H. Bond, W.W. Buckland, G.Kenny (in one volume, 1926), W.W. Buckland (again in 1948), F. de Zulueta (1959), H. Mannheim (1964), A.G.Davis (1965), A.D. McNair (1965) and G.W. Keeton (1967).

2 Cf. A.P. Kenney and L.J. Workman, ‘Volumes of Homage’ (1980) 11 Journal of Scholarly Publishing 143,144–45 (denying that Festschrift, which ‘trips awkwardly off the English-speaking tongue’, has gained ascendancy,and preferring homage volume).

3 R. Pick, ‘Some Thoughts on Festschriften and a Projected Subject Index’ (1959) 12 German Life & LettersN.S. 204, 204–5.

4 D. Rounds and S. Dow, ‘Festschriften’, 8 Harvard Library Bulletin 283, 291–92 (1954).5 Entry under ‘Festschrift’ in J. Pearsall and B. Trumble (eds), The Oxford English Reference Dictionary (Oxford

University Press, Oxford, 2nd ed., 1996) at 514.6 Roberts, above n 1, viii. The absence of an entry for Festschrift in D.M. Walker, The Oxford Companion to Law

(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1980) suggests the tradition is a new one in the common law. Ten years later DavidM. Walker received a Festschrift: A.J. Gamble (ed.), Obligations in Context: Essays in Honour of Professor D.M. Walker(W. Green, Edinburgh, 1990).

SUMMER 2002 Festschriften in the Literature of the Common Law 229

issues of law reviews, but excluded publications that did not reveal ‘their homage’in the title.7

For my purpose here, I have excluded from the category of legal Festschriftenthe special issue of a law review or journal honouring a person, event orinstitution.8 First, as Roberts acknowledged, they are difficult to locate. Afterthe covers are removed to bind the volume, a special issue may be very difficultto detect except by laboriously thumbing every volume of every journal. Second,and this is more to the point developed below, those contributions to scholarshipwill be indexed in the usual way and hence will be accessible through standardbibliographic reference works. They will not be lost or buried.9 Third, there issomething more significant, weighty and permanent about a stand-alone tome.This is not to disparage the practice, most common in the United States, ofdedicating a law review issue to a distinguished lawyer. Such dedicated issuessimply lack the gravitas of a stand-alone Festschrift.10

I take issue with Roberts’ criterion that the person, event or institutionhonoured must be mentioned in the title for it to qualify as a Festschrift.11 Theverdict from practice supports her view, but I would not want to exclude thoseworks that satisfy all other criteria for inclusion.12 However, it hardly seems wiseto omit mention of the honorand in the title and somewhat defeats the purpose.

Occasionally the honorand dies before publication, necessitating a change intitle to celebration or tribute.13 Some volumes are organized either immediatelyor some time after an honorand’s (usually) unexpected death.14

One especially valuable feature of Festschriften is the customary inclusion of acomplete bibliography of the honorand’s published work. The honorand can helpwith this but should not be relied upon as the exclusive source. This is veryimportant because a surprising number of eminent jurists do not maintain complete

7 Ibid., ix. Cf. her earlier work: L.M. Roberts, ‘Legal Festschriften’ (1963) 56 Law Library Journal 47, 55.8 As a consequence I have not included in the list of common law Festschriften in the Appendix any special

issues of law reviews republished in book form.9 I disagree with the late Francis de Zulueta’s description of a Festschrift as ‘merely a periodic of which there is

only one issue’ and with F.H. Lawson’s accompanying comment that ‘its contents are as difficult to trace as thoseof any other periodical’. See F.H. Lawson, ‘The Present State of Legal Bibliography’ in A. Malmstrom and S.Stromholm (eds), ACTA Instituti Upsaliensis Jurisprudentiae Comparativae IX: Rapports Generaux au VII CongresInternational De Droit Compare; Uppsala, 6–13 aout 1966 (Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm, 1968) at 650, 654. Theyare much more difficult to trace. Both de Zulueta and Lawson received Festschriften: D. Daube (ed.), Studies inthe Roman Law of Sale Dedicated to the Memory of Francis de Zulueta (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1959); P. Wallingtonand R.M. Merkin (eds), Essays in Memory of Professor F.H. Lawson (Butterworths, London, 1986).

10 On the positive side, however, such special issues offer the contributors and the honorand wider circulation(often within the honorand’s field of speciality) and better bibliographic referencing: E.S. Gleaves, ‘A Watch andChain and a Jeweled Sword; or, The Graveyard of Scholarship: The Festschrift and Librarianship’ (1984) 24 RQ466, 470. See also T. Weir, Book Review [1984] CLJ 176.

11 In an earlier article she described them as ‘hidden’ Festschriften and pointed out the difficulty for librarycataloguers, but did not exclude them from the class: Roberts, above n 7 at 55.

12 Those few that I have found are identified in the Appendix by the addition of square brackets after thecitation, indicating who or what the volume honours.

13 This occurred recently in relation to the Festschrift for John Fleming, the noted Torts scholar. See P. Caneand J. Stapleton (eds), The Law of Obligations: Essays in Celebration of John Fleming (Clarendon Press, Oxford,2000).

14 See, e.g. G.M. Wilner (ed.), Jus et Societas: Essays in Tribute to Wolfgang Friedmann (Martinus Nijhoff, TheHague, 1979). Wolfgang Friedmann (1907–72) was born and educated in Germany, fled the Nazis and was astudent and then a law teacher at the University of London, before moving on to the Universities of Melbourne,Toronto and Columbia University. He was murdered during a mugging in New York city.


or accurate lists of their writings. After a long, productive and successful career, itcan be very time-consuming, not to say frustrating, to compile a complete pub-lications list. The assistance of a professional law librarian is often essential.

Another feature of Festschriften is the inclusion of biographical details aboutthe person honoured. As the editors of an American legal Festschrift said: ‘WithoutHamlet, what is the play?’.15 Understandably, however, there is a good deal ofvariation in the depth of coverage and the matters covered. Allowance must bemade for the wishes and sensibilities of the honorand, and the editors. Not everyhonorand wants a trumpet blown and nor would every editor want to do it. Thetravail of a Festschrift might be considered homage enough.

An awkwardness for contributors is to know how to acknowledge—if at all—thefact that the piece was written for the honorand. To a considerable extent, itseems to depend on the degree of acquaintanceship and the personalities involved.Does one start out with the salute in the first line, or in the last, or is it placedbelow the Plimsoll line in a note? Or should one pretend it is a non-commissionedlaw review article?

An occasional lapse is the absence of a centralized list of contributors andtheir institutional affiliations. It is irritating when this is combined with a laissez-faire policy of allowing each individual contributor to decide whether or not toindicate institutional affiliation at the foot of each contribution.16 Who thecontributors are and whence they come is part of the story the Festschrift shouldtell. It is also a matter of regret that legal Festschriften seldom have tables of casesand legislation or adequate indexes.

The norm is one Festschrift per jurist. The exceptions usually concern personswho bestride countries, legal systems, and disciplines—or are truly profoundscholars. The German convention of taking certain ages as markers for Festschriften,usually turning 60, 70 or 80 years old, mean that the long-lived scholar mightenjoy two or more.17 The Continental jurist appears to find no embarrassment inmultiple Festschriften for the same person. The common law Festschrift traditionis so young that it is hardly a problem yet. Early on, W.W. Buckland receivedtwo,18 and in the period covered here Otto Kahn-Freund, Alan Watson, H.L.A.Hart and Tony Honore received two each, and David Daube three.19

15 R. Pound, E.N. Griswold and A.E. Sutherland (eds), Perspectives of Law: Essays in Honour of John WakemanScott (Little, Brown & Co, Boston, 1964) at x.

16 See, e.g. M. Hoeflich (ed.), Lex et Romanitas: Essays for Alan Watson (The Robbins Collection, University ofCalifornia at Berkeley, San Francisco, 2000).

17 An early review of the genre outside law found that half of all Festschriften celebrated sixtieth or seventiethbirthdays: S.G. Morley, ‘The Development of the Homage-Volume’ (1929) 8 Philological Quarterly 61, 64.

18 One was shared with two other scholars and the other was a special issue of an American law review (whichI exclude from the category). See Roberts, above n 1 at 14.

19 See: F. Gamillscheg, J. de Givry, B. Hepple and J-M. Verdier (eds), International Collection of Essays: InMemoriam Sir Otto Kahn-Freund 17.11.1900–16.8.1979 (C.H. Beck, Munich, 1980); Lord Wedderburn, R. Lewisand J. Clark (eds), Labour Law and Industrial Relations: Building on Kahn-Freund (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1983);P.M.S. Hacker and J. Raz (eds), Law, Morality, and Society: Essays in Honour of H.L.A. Hart (Clarendon Press,Oxford, 1977); R. Gavison (ed.), Issues in Contemporary Legal Philosophy: The Influence of H.L.A. Hart (ClarendonPress, Oxford, 1987); N. MacCormick and P. Birks (eds), The Legal Mind: Essays for Tony Honore (ClarendonPress, Oxford, 1986); P. Cane and J. Gardner (eds), Relating to Responsibility: Essays in Honour of Tony Honore onhis 80th Birthday (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2001); M. Hoeflich (ed.), Lex et Romanitas: Essays for Alan Watson(The Robbins Collection, University of California at Berkeley, San Francisco, 2000); J. W. Cairns & O. Robinson


There is an understanding that pieces commissioned for a Festschrift are writtenspecifically for it and will not be republished elsewhere. This has both humanand financial aspects. The human side is that the exclusivity accentuates thegenerosity of giving something of one’s self to the person honoured, and whichwill only appear in a book with the honorand’s name on the cover. Re-publicationtarnishes the lustre of a Festschrift. The financial aspect is that the publisher doesnot want sales undercut by some or all of the pieces being ‘free-to-air’ inother fora. There is frequently a contractual undertaking to that effect. Specialarrangements are no doubt made, but even then, it may be difficult to suppressthe feeling of ‘breaking ranks’ when some deny themselves while others do not.As we will see, the temptation to break ranks and re-publish stems from the factthat contributions to Festschriften are relatively inaccessible to many.

2. Selection of the Honorand and ContributorsTo be worthy of a Festschrift it should go without saying that the person isdistinguished. Can distinction be gainsaid? Will any honorand of a common lawFestschrift suffer the indignity of the honorand of an historical one, the review ofwhich said the honorand was unworthy, had supervised no graduate students andwas insignificant in the discipline.20 Nor did the inclusion of eminent contributorsto this volume ward off a vicious review. The contributions of many were describedby the reviewer as ‘slight’—mere shavings from their workbenches’—and that ofthe renowned J.G.A. Pocock was described as ‘sawdust’!21

For there to be a Festschrift, one or more persons (almost invariably academics)have to be ready, willing and able to go to considerable effort and trouble tohonour the person. These persons—the putative editors—must have the desireto mark that person’s influence and accomplishments.22 The editors will thenapproach other like-minded persons, most of them well-established in the field,to contribute. As explained below, the more high-powered the line-up the better.

At some point potential publishers will be approached. Some honorands areso deserving and some editors so trustworthy that a publisher may sign a contractwith the editors without prior commitment by contributors. In other cases, afully-developed proposal may be necessary.

(eds), Critical Studies in Ancient Law, Comparative Law and Legal History (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2001); A.Watson (ed.), Daube Noster; Essays in Legal History for David Daube (Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh &London, 1974); B.S. Jackson (ed.), Studies in Jewish Legal History: Essays in Honour of David Daube (JewishChronicle Publications, London, 1974) (a reprint of a special issue of the Journal of Legal Studies, and so technicallyoutside the coverage of this article: above at n 8); C.M. Carmichael (ed.), Essays on Law and Religion: The Berkeleyand Oxford Symposia in Honour of David Daube (The Robbins Collection, University of California at Berkeley, SanFrancisco, 1993). David Daube attracted yet another Festschrift in the field of Biblical studies: E. Bammel, C.K.Barrett and W.D. Davies (eds), Donum Gentilicium: New Testament Studies in Honour of David Daube (ClarendonPress, Oxford, 1978).

20 Review by Mark Kishlansky of H. Nenner (ed.), Politics and the Political Imagination in Later Stuart Britain:Essays Presented to Lois Green Schwoerer (University of Rochester Press, Rochester, 1997) in (1998) 42 AmJLegHis304, 305–6.

21 Ibid, 305.22 See Gleaves, above n 10 at 468.


The issues of who is chosen to be honoured, the self-selection of editors andwho is approached to contribute can raise sensitive issues. Why are some eminentscholars honoured in this way but not other, seemingly equally worthy scholars?Why was there no (posthumous) Festschrift for the great but tragically cut-downStanley de Smith but there is for the happily long-lived Sir William Wade—bothpioneers in the field of administrative law? Sticking to the administrative lawfield, there are Festschriften for W.A. Robson, J.A.G. Griffith and J.D.B. Mitchellbut not, for example, for Harry Street or Gabriele Ganz.23

Indeed, in the short history of the common law Festschriften not one womanhas been honoured. Of the 197 editors of the 106 common law Festschriftenlisted in the Appendix, only 18 (or 9.14%) are women.24 That may explain whythe preponderance of invited contributors, in some instances exclusively so, aremen. The percentage of essays written by women for common law Festschriften(including co-authored contributions) amounts to a fraction over 10%.25 If aninvitation to contribute to a Festschrift is seen as an honour and a privilege (as Ithink it should be) then one can see where these academic spoils are going.From the point of view of women legal scholars that does not seem to be a causefor celebration.26 It may be only a matter of time, of course.27

There is a discernible element of self-perpetuation in legal Festschriften of bothcivilian and common law varieties. Many of the editors of, and contributors to,Festschriften are in turn honoured by homage volumes themselves.28 Some hardysouls have edited more than one common law Festschrift.29

23 It is invidious to name names. There may be many reasons why some are honoured in this way but otherscholars are not. Some may discourage the idea. See Morley, above n 17 at 65. Others may not appreciate thethought, or misunderstand the motivation. R.G. Collingwood, the Oxford polymath, described a Festschrift as ‘thelast humiliation of an aged scholar, when his juniors conspire to print a volume of essays and offer it to him as asign that they now consider him senile’: R.G. Collingwood, An Autobiography (Oxford University Press, Oxford,1939; rep. 1978) 119. (Thanks to Tony Weir for this reference.) It appears Collingwood never suffered thathumiliation. Of course, there is more than one way to honour a distinguished jurist. I note that there are annuallecture series named after Harry Street (at Manchester) and Gabriele Ganz (at Southampton).

24 Only three women have edited common law Festschriften solo—Carol Harlow (1986), Ruth Gavison (1987)and Caroline Bridge (1997). The others jointly edited Festschriften with men. Only one common law Festschrift sofar has more women contributors than men: C. Bridge (ed.), Family Law towards the Millennium: Essays for P.M.Bromley (Butterworths, London, 1997). Due to the difficulty of discovering gender when initials are used insteadof first name(s) or when the first name(s) are not of English origin, the figure of 18 women editors may be on thelow side.

25 The ratio is 167 out of 1663 contributions (counting jointly written contributions once only) or 10.04%. Ofthose 167 contributions by women to Festschriften, 13 contributions (or 7.78%) were jointly authored, all withmen.

26 See generally A. van Blerk, ‘Why is a great work termed seminal and not ovular? Feminism and the law’(1997) 60 Tydskrif Vir Hedendaage Romeins-Hollandse Reg 589 and C. Wells ‘Working out women in law schools’,(2001) 21 Legal Studies 116.

27 This is not unique to legal Festschriften. See R. Lewis, ‘Festschriften Honor Exceptional Scientific Careers,Scholarly Influence’ (1996) 10 (17) Scientist 15 (2 Sept. 1996).

28 See also Roberts, above n 7 at 51, n 32. The list of editors who subsequently became honorands includesIan Brownlie, David Daube, John Griffith, Georg Schwarzenberger, Kenneth Simmonds, Alan Watson, LordWedderburn. Gareth Jones edited one after he received his own. Many more contributors to Festschriften havebecome honorands subsequently. In fact, very few honorands have not contributed previously to Festschriftenhonouring other scholars.

29 The list includes Mads Andenas, Peter Birks, John Bridge, Peter Cane, David L. Carey Miller, Mary Footer,Bob Hepple, John Hudson, Dominic Lasok, Vaughan Lowe, Neil MacCormick, Patrick McAuslan, Frank Meisel,Joseph Norton, David Perrott, Richard Plender, Barry Rider, Francis Rose, Ian Scott, Jane Stapleton, LordWedderburn and Robin White.


3. Publishing and Publicizing FestschriftenThe books are usually handsomely produced. The appearance of the book, aswell as the content, has to be pleasing.30 This makes Festschriften more expensiveto produce than some other types of law books. Often the unit price is high inorder to recoup costs, as anticipated sales are low and consequently the printrun is small. This can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.31 Small sales figuresinevitably restrict immediate access by researchers outside centres with large andwell-resourced law libraries.

It appears to be the case that many law books are sold on the basis of bookreviews. Festschriften, by definition, honour what we can compendiously describeas ‘the great and the good’. One might suppose that a book honouring one ofthat circle should sell widely simply on name recognition and law librarians’desire for the ‘complete works’ of, and on, so-and-so. But this does not appearto be the case.32 Law book requesters and law book buyers may not systematicallytrawl each and every book publishers’ catalogue. Even if they do, remarkably,publishers’ blurbs sometimes give little or no clue as to content or contributors.Moreover, some Festschriften are published by lesser known law publishinghouses. This is particularly true of the institutional or ‘event’ Festschriften. Alsothe comparatively high cost of Festschriften will be an important factor for manylibraries. So book reviews remain a major source of information and publicity,and a litmus test of value for money. Many libraries have a policy of awaitingreviews before making purchasing decisions.

Some Festschriften are not reviewed at all, and this alone can consign theFestschrift, and all the scholarship contained in it, to the grave, to be disinterred,if at all, only by luck or by the truly determined. Of course, the contributorsmay in future refer to their own or other contributions, and that may ensuresome publicity and impact.33

But how does one review a Festschrift? First, we must go back a step to surveythe art of reviewing law books; itself a neglected topic. There are no rules aboutreviewing law books, except that if a reviewer writes for long enough it is‘upgraded’ to a review essay. When that occurs the reviewer is expected to be‘original’, and in any case is taken more seriously. A review essay counts as a‘real’ publication, the equivalent of an article, in contrast to a mere review, whichattracts almost no academic credit. The equation of quality with length is

30 See J.G. Rogers, Book Review, 48 Harv LR 1455, 1459 (1935) (‘[i]n quality and dignity the [Festschrift underreview] is what it ought to be, the crest of scholarship and format’).

31 Gleaves described this as the ‘vicious circle’ of ‘limited circulation’: above n 10 at 470–71.32 A search of the catalogues of 20 leading UK research libraries using www.copac.ac.uk disclosed remarkable,

and often unexpected, variation in the number and geographic location of holdings for the common law Festschriftenlisted in the Appendix.

33 There is also the avenue of republication of one’s own articles and papers in a collection: a sort of Festschriftto one’s self. This was popular in the first half of the 20th century before the advent of the photocopier, and wasan excellent way of making work first published in less-than-accessible places available to a wider audience. Thisgenre has had a revival in the last 20 or so years, with the welcome consequence that some of the English languagecontributions of leading common lawyers to foreign-sourced Festschriften is somewhat easier to access. But thesesole author collections of essays are no better treated bibliographically than Festschriften. It should be noted thatthe standard definitions of Festschrift exclude a collection of a single author’s articles in one volume.


misguided, of course, but endemic. This is just the most obvious way in whichbook reviewing is systematically marginalized in academic culture.34

It is notoriously difficult to persuade academics to review any type of lawbook.35 A perverse form of free ridership operates. Everyone acknowledges thata review can be very significant in terms of sales and advancement for theauthor(s), but few want to do it. The incentives are to write your own book andnot to delay by reviewing those of others, all the while hoping that someone willreview your book when it is published. Many academics free ride in that way.

In my view, reviewing a book is, in part, an act of generosity and a publicservice. Ideally, a reviewer reads the book and then more attentively than mightotherwise be the case.36 Book reviews, however, are largely disregarded in termsof publication credit, and, unless witheringly negative, are quickly forgotten byreaders (but seldom by the author or editor of the book reviewed).

But the review format not only attracts the selfless and the public spirited, thelaw book reviewing menagerie includes the axe-grinders, the nitpickers, thesadists, the back-scratchers, the duellists, the bibliophiles and so on. This classiclist, sorely in need of updating, is in Graham Parker’s A Field Guide to BookReviewing.37 There is a curious aspect of reviews that has always intrigued me.Generally speaking, book reviews are overwhelmingly negative in tone. In thisthey reflect the academic enterprise. Reviewers find fault more easily than theybestow praise. Perhaps it is thought there is little mileage in raving about awonderful book. Or is it that unqualified acclaim of another’s work providesothers with a yardstick to measure one’s own ability, acumen, judgement,etc? Safer to express doubts, quibbles, reservations, grand disagreements—allfrightening away the principle of charity.

So much for law book reviewing in general. There are obvious and specialdifficulties in reviewing legal Festschriften.38 There is the ‘everyone-who-is-anyone-in-the-field-contributed-to-the-book’ problem. Not only are many of the obviouschoices of reviewer ruled out because they are contributors to the volume, butpeople who are not contributors often do not want to advertise the fact. Also,the array of luminaries might well put off all but the lion-hearted or the malevolentfrom undertaking a review. Sometimes all that can be hoped for is the ‘non-review’, where a reviewer simply brings the book to the notice of others whileheaping more glory on the honorand.39 This is more like a book notice, an evenlower form of life on the intellectual food chain. At least, the ‘non-review’ serves

34 See D.F. Cavers, ‘Book Reviews in Law Reviews: An Endangered Species’ 77 Mich LR 327 (1979).35 F.A. Allen, ‘In Praise of Book Reviews’ 79 Mich LR 557, 560–61 (1981).36 See W. Friedmann, ‘Reviewmanship: How to be Successful in Reviewing Law Books Without Really Trying’

(1962) 14 Journal of Legal Education 508.37 G.E. Parker, ‘A Field Guide to Book Reviewing’ (1967) 20 Journal of Legal Education 169. Parker never

updated the Field Guide but his scathing review of G. Calabresi’s A Common Law for the Age of Statutes (HarvardUniversity Press, Cambridge, 1982) demands the inclusion of a ‘belly flop’ category: Book Review, (1984) 6Supreme Court Law Review 511.

38 K. Lipstein, Book Review [1993] CLJ 179 (‘How to review a Festschrift is a problem which has never beensolved successfully’).

39 Mea culpa: see Book Review (2001) 51 UTLJ 188. See also, e.g. Lord Steyn, Book Review (1999) 115 LQR678 (noticing the Festschrift for John Fleming).


the useful function of advertising the book, but often does not identify all of thecontents.

If a reviewer can be found and does decide to engage with the contributions,they may be defeated still by the unthematic or eclectic nature of some Festschriften.Can a reviewer focus on some of the contributions without seeming to castaspersions on the rest? Even if the collection has a focus or foci the reviewermay not feel competent, or want to commit the time, to review all the parts.This runs the risk of the ‘lop-sided’ review, with certain contributions gettingall of the (often critical) attention.

There remains the option, little exercised today, of the ‘full Monty’ review,whereby every single contribution is commented upon seriatim. The classicexample is a review by Max Rheinstein of a collection in honour of Hessel E.Yntema published in the American Journal of Comparative Law under the hopefullytongue-in-cheek title ‘How to Review a Festschrift’.40 In 38 pages the reviewerlays bare the same number of individual contributions to the volume. ‘Theresult’, said Rheinstein, ‘may be tedious to the reader . . . [b]ut any other methodwould fail to present the richness of the book . . . [a]nd it would also have impliedpossible invidious distinction’.41

That particular review illustrates also perhaps the potential difficulty of re-viewing the work of others with whom one is or has been associated. The volumewas commissioned by the Board of Editors of the American Journal of ComparativeLaw, and was edited on the Board’s behalf by three of its number in honour ofthat Journal’s editor-in-chief. The reviewer was also on the editorial board. But,in fairness, the reviewer was critical of one of the themes in the collection (whichincluded a contribution by one of the editors), the reading of which had permittedRheinstein to put his finger on the cause of his unease with American conflictof laws scholarship. But, he noted knowingly, ‘a book review is not the bestplace to express ideas believed to be new. As a matter of fact, it may constitutea sure way to hide them from the attention of those whom one hopes to reach’.42

As noted above, we—the academic we, here—expect ideas and insights to bepackaged in larger parcels than book reviews to be noteworthy.

Although it is more difficult to find reviewers for Festschriften, once a reviewis in—as with any other type of law book—it matters who reviewed it, wherethe review appears and what it says.43 A review in the right place might beenough to rescue the volume from oblivion. The Festschrift for Kurt Lipstein (aconflict of laws scholar who taught at Cambridge) was published in Germany,although many of the contributions are in English. The only timely Englishlanguage review it attracted was a well-judged and warm one in the Law Quarterly

40 (1962) 11 AmJCompL 632–68. In due course Rheinstein received his own Festschrift: E. von Caemmerer, S.Mentschikoff and K. I. Zweigert (eds), Ius Privatum Gentium: Festschrift fur Max Rheinstein zum 70 (J.C.B. Mohr,Tubingen, 1969).

41 Ibid, 633.42 Ibid, 633–34.43 In an early article it was suggested that the quality of reviews of (general) Festschriften was poor overall. See

Rounds and Dow, above n 4 at 295. That is not my impression of reviews of common law Festschriften.


Review by Ronald Graveson, an elder statesman among conflict of laws scholars.44

The only other English language review I know of is a notice by Tony Weir, fullof bonhomie and his characteristic wit.45

But book reviews will not always succeed in ensuring visibility of a Festschrift.An example of this is the Festschrift for J.A.G. Griffith entitled Public Law andPolitics.46 This attracted one-and-a-half book reviews, but it is rarely referred toin the public law literature.47 The most obvious reason for this obscurity is thatthe title did not refer to J.A.G. Griffith by name. Mention is made of the factthat the book honours him only in the preface, not on the title page.48 It appearsthat omission may have proved fatal in terms of impact or influence.49

4. Anti-Festschriften and the Middle GroundThis counter-genre deserves a mention.50 Far less numerous but no less worthyfor that, these are attacks on the work and philosophy of the ‘great man’,deprecating his baleful influence. Philosophers and philosopher-kings seemparticularly susceptible to this fate. H.L.A. Hart, the subject of two Festschriften,was the subject of an anti-Festschrift.51 At a lower level of abstraction, so wasLord Denning, which levelled the score.52

In between the Festschrift and the anti-Festschrift is a book of essays by severalauthors examining the work and ideas of a particular jurist, which is neithercelebratory in the sense of a Festschrift nor as unrelentingly critical as an anti-Festschrift. The person’s work is taken seriously, explored and usually built upon.It is easier to illustrate by way of example than describe this category in theabstract because there is no clear cutting line at either end. There is not yet a

44 R.H. Graveson, Book Review (1981) 97 LQR 493. Graveson, who contributed to many Festschriften and alsoco-edited a German one for Imre Zajtay, never received one himself.

45 T. Weir, Book Review [1984] CLJ 176: ‘Like the Ph.D and the Christmas tree, the Festschrift is a Germanimport. As a stimulus to output, indeed, it is like a combination of them, but like them, the Festschrift has itsunfortunate aspects also’.

46 C. Harlow (ed.), Public Law and Politics (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1986). In the ‘Preface’ it is said that‘[t]he book is not and never was intended as a formal collection of essays ‘‘in honour of’’ John Griffith. It is asmall gift from a few of the people who share . . . [his] interests and have enjoyed talking and working with him. . . The theme was chosen in the hope of giving pleasure to John Griffith’ (p. v). This is a Festschrift in my book.

47 M. Loughlin, Book Review [1987] PL 291; J.P. Casey, Book Review (1986) Irish Jurist 158 (joint review). Itwas reviewed also in India: U. Baxi, Book Review (1989) 31 Journal of the Indian Law Institute 412.

48 For some this would rule the book out of the Festschrift category: Roberts, above n 1 at ix. Martin Loughlinbemoaned the fact that it was not a Festschrift in his review: above n 47.

49 See Pick, above n 3 at 207: ‘By omitting a name [from the title page] editors needlessly reduce what slenderchances of survival [the Festschrift] has in a technical age; they also put superfluous difficulties in the way ofreaders, bibliographers and librarians’.

50 This term is coined by H. Lucke, Book Review (1985–86) 10 Adelaide LR 267.51 P. Leigh and P. Ingram (eds), The Jurisprudence of Orthodoxy: Queen’s University essays on H.L.A. Hart

(Routledge, London, 1988).52 Compare P. Robson and P. Watchman (eds), Justice, Lord Denning and the Constitution (Gower, Farnborough,

1981) and J.L. Jowell and J.P.W.B. McAuslan (eds), Lord Denning: The Judge and the Law (Sweet & Maxwell,London, 1984). As Simon Lee noted, Lord Denning was the subject of many books, most of which he wrotehimself: Judging Judges (Faber & Faber, London, 1988) at 127.


Festschrift as such for Ronald Dworkin, but there are several books with Dworkin’sname in the title examining his thought and contribution to jurisprudence.53

One reason for uncertainty in this regard is that, although the common lawhas imported the genre, it has not adopted the name Festschrift in book titles. AGerman writer has praised the English for giving homage volumes straightforwardtitles, such as ‘Essays in Honour . . .’; thereby easing the tasks of librarians andusers.54 But editors of common law Festschriften pay homage mostly in the sub-(or even sub-sub-) title, and by and large have not resisted the Continentalpractice of vague, esoteric, evocative or catchy main titles.55 The tendency ofcataloguers, reviewers, law review editors and writers to prune citations meansthat the sub-titles are often ignored and the homage aspect lost from sight.

There is a related difficulty of determining who is within the discipline of lawfor the purpose of inclusion in a list of common law or legal Festschriften.Economists, historians and philosophers cause the most hand wringing. Robertsattempted to overcome the interdisciplinary difficulty by stipulating that the essayshad to be ‘predominantly legal’.56 That excludes, for example, the Festschriften forFriedrich von Hayek, who had lots to say about law.57 Much depends on whatone conceives of as law.

5. Other Collections of Legal EssaysBy focusing on legal Festschriften in this essay I do not want to be taken necessarilyto imply there is a difference in kind between them and other collections of legalessays either commissioned by editors or arising out of conferences and the like.The raison d’etre of these collections is not honouring one individual or in-stitution, but rather a conference, gathering or exploration of a theme. Thesecollections have yet to be dignified by a name. Tony Weir has recently proposedthe unflattering term ‘bookette’.58 The reasons for the vast increase in the numberof these collections seem to me likely to differ from those suggested below forthe explosion of common law Festschriften, although I cannot take up that matterhere. Casual empiricism suggests that there is a greater unevenness of quality ofcontribution to these other essay collections than with Festschriften. Thesecollections share, however, the bibliographic fate of Festschriften. However, theweight of that tombstone is not discouraging the would-be editors and publishersdriving the phenomenal growth in the number of these collections.

53 See, e.g. M. Cohen (ed.), Ronald Dworkin and Contemporary Jurisprudence (Duckworth, London, 1984). Inthis middle ground also is J. Coleman (ed.), Hart’s Postscript: Essays on the Postscript to The Concept of Law (OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford, 2001).

54 Pick, above n 3 at 207.55 Gleaves, above n 10 at 469.56 Roberts, above n 1 at x.57 See, e.g. E. Streissler (ed.), Roads to Freedom: Essays in Honour of Friedrich A. von Hayek (Routledge & Kegan

Paul, London, 1969) and K.R. Leube and A.H. Zlabinger (eds), Hayek, Co-ordination and Evolution: His Legacyin Philosophy, Politics, Economics and the History of Ideas (Philosophia Verlag, Munich, 1985).

58 Book Review [1998] LMCLQ 594. Roberts described them as ‘composite volumes’: L.M. Roberts, ‘TheImportance of Legal Festschriften for Work in International and Comparative Law’ (1962) 11 AmJCompL 403.


6. Gardens of Scholarship?In theory, common law Festschriften should be gardens of scholarship. If the verybest scholars are being honoured by the presentation of original work by carefullyselected experts, who give this work priority over everything else, then how canthe resultant collage be anything other than stellar. But like a garden, a Festschriftneeds careful planting and tending to be first class.

Who then tends the garden? It is the editors who conceive and execute theidea, get a publisher on board, gather the contributors and try to keep them onthe straight and narrow to publication.59 They are usually close friends and/orcolleagues of the honorand or otherwise have a special reason for wanting toundertake the relatively thankless task (affiliation with institution, etc). The moredistinguished the editors are themselves the better, for that reflects more gloryupon the honorand, and likely generates a more star-studded cast of contributorsand attracts a more prestigious publisher.

Publishers know that ‘big names’ and high name-recognition sells law books.That is true of the person honoured and is true also of the editors and thecontributors. So usually editors try to assemble the most distinguished group ofcontributors possible, who are of like mind in wanting to honour the personconcerned. How distinction is gauged will depend in part on the honorand’s,the editors’ and the publisher’s preferences, the subject-matter or themes (ifany) of the collection, and geographical and other considerations.60 A significantfeature of Festschriften in the Continental tradition is their internationalcharacter,61 and, of course, many common lawyers have contributed to them,both before and after the genre transplanted into the common law.

Seeking out ‘big name’ contributors can have a downside, however. The factis that the greater the reputation of the persons asked to contribute, the greaterthe likely demands on their time. Unless every contributor makes a conscientiouseffort to prioritize researching and completing high-quality work for a Festschrift,it is possible for the garden to contain less than the best blooms. This mattersless in graveyards, of course, because few find and smell them. Even the casualreader of Festschriften will recognize this phenomenon: no names, no pack-drill!

There is also the invisible, ‘no-show’ factor. These are the contributors, oftenlined up many months in advance, who simply cannot meet the final, finaldeadline (in some cases, one thinks in exasperation, any deadline). How longeditors are prepared to wait depends on a number of factors, but it is clear thatdelinquent contributors can delay publication to the annoyance of editors,publishers, and, not least, the other contributors who submitted papers on time.This sort of unreliability can lead to the ‘airline booking’ problem, whereby

59 I use the plural—editors—throughout this article, in recognition that a large number of Festschriften are jointlyedited. This contrasts with the editorship of other collections of essays, which more frequently have a sole editor.

60 In a recent instance all the contributors were former postgraduate students of the honorand, but this isuncommon: G.S. Goodwin-Gill and S. Talmon (eds), The Reality of International Law: Essays in Honour of IanBrownlie (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1999).

61 Roberts, above n 7 at 53.


more contributions are sought than the publisher or editors want or need, therebyallowing for ‘slippage’. Publishers have the same problems as airlines whensurprisingly everyone turns up on time, but the consequence for the former willbe a bigger book than that budgeted for, and hence a more expensive one thananticipated.

Does cost matter? How elastic is the demand/supply curve for Festschriften?Other factors may intrude here. It depends in part on the motivation of thepublisher. Several publishers (especially the long-established University Presses)accept responsibility for publishing Festschriften honouring persons who havebeen successful authors for the Press over a long period or who are otherwisedistinguished within the University under whose auspices the Press operates. Itis less clear whether this commitment extends to the cross-subsidization ofpublication costs. The relatively high market cost of Festschriften—compared,say, to the cost of other collections of essays—suggests not. In the Continentaltradition such books were often paid for in part or whole by subscription amongfriends or colleagues or by other forms of subvention, but this is not a featureof common law Festschriften. The high market cost of many common lawFestschriften must reflect a prediction of low sales by the publisher. No doubt,that is based in part on past experience and may reflect the view that the marketfor Festschriften is largely law libraries. This exacerbates problems of physicalaccess to the volumes by researchers.

The most common failings of Festschriften—and the staple of any reviews—arethe lack of theme(s), insufficient evidence of strong editorial hands at work anduneven quality throughout the collection. Lilly Roberts wrote the followingnearly 40 years ago, and it still rings far too true today for comfort:62

The main objections against homage volumes are that they are miscellany of unevenvalue and often covering scattered subjects; furthermore that they are issued in smalleditions and available only at large libraries; that for these reasons their contents remainunknown and they are rarely used.

Obviously, contributions to a Festschrift are commissioned by the editors. It isextremely difficult and awkward to reject commissioned pieces once submitted.63

It is embarrassing all round. In those instances when a piece is not up to scratchthe burden falls on the editors to make it so. The editors are the book’s consciencein this regard but in a work of this nature they will seldom feel they have anentirely free hand, even in the editing process. Whatever the failings of the blindrefereeing process used in law reviews, they pale in comparison to quality-controlefforts by editors of Festschriften.

62 Ibid. Recently, Tony Weir said of Festschriften that they ‘normally pressurize contributors with nothingparticular to say into writing pieces which then go irretrievably into the limbo of a volume coherent only throughthread and glue’: Book Review [1998] LMCLQ 594.

63 See T. Lipscombe, ‘The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Pitfalls of Publishing Proceedings, etc’ (2000) 31Journal of Scholarly Publishing 179, 182.


Of course, that does not mean that the quality of contributions is not as goodas, or even better than, that in leading law reviews.64 I doubt whether it can beproved one way or the other, and I have not attempted to do so. My point issimply that there are fewer formal and independent processes in place to ensureconsistent quality throughout the Festschrift. It all depends on the editors andpossibly in extremis the publishers. After publication accountability rests uponsuch reviews as the Festschrift garners, the judgement of the honorand, thereaction of the market place and professional opinion.

7. Or Graveyards?One factor, however, that does lessen somewhat the incentive to place excellentwork in Festschriften is the notorious obscurity and lack of impact of the scholarshipcontained therein. As noted more than 30 years ago:65

Festschriften, or homage publications, present peculiar problems to the legal researcherand to the law librarian. There is no uniformity in methods of cataloguing, no readymeans of tracing contributions by particular authors, and no ready means of identifyingthe subject matter of a particular volume, or of contributions within it.

Hence the apt description of Festschriften as ‘graveyards of scholarship’.66 Oncethe Festschrift is launched the contributions to it can sink from view. As notedabove, Festschriften are difficult to review and hence are less frequently reviewedthan other types of law books. If scholars place their best work in Festschriften—which is certainly the expectation of the audience, the editors and publishers,and the point of the exercise—then it can disappear from view, and not havethe impact that conventional law review publication might have. This is entirelycounter-productive, indeed it perverts the primary purposes in producing Fest-schriften. As was noted nearly 50 years ago:67

The problem is to ensure that . . . [Festschriften] are designed and published in such away as actually to serve the ends of scholarship instead of defeating them. It is a poorreward for [the honorand’s] scholarship that buries what [other] scholars write [in hisor her honour] and makes scholarship more difficult for everyone.

Of course, Festschriften are graveyards only because the most commonly usedbibliographic resources do not list common law Festschriften or index individualcontributions to them.68 Nor are library catalogue listings as much help as onemight expect. It can be a hit-or-miss exercise as the titles can be ‘too vague orcatchy to be helpful’69 and seldom is there a subject catalogue entry for Festschriften

64 For a brief discussion of how contributions to Festschriften differ from law review articles, see Roberts, aboven 7 at 54. See generally Gleaves, above n 10, and Rounds and Dow, above n 4 at 292–93.

65 Roberts, above n 1, back cover of book.66 W.H. Alexander, Book Review (1953) 46 Classical Weekly 153 (2 March 1953), quoted in Roberts, above n

56 at 410.67 Rounds and Dow, above n 4 at 292.68 I have in mind Current Law, Index to Legal Periodicals, Current Law Index and Legal Journals Index. For an

overview see R.G. Logan, ‘British Legal Bibliography’ (1989) 81 Law Library Journal 691.69 Gleaves, above n 10 at 469.


or the like. Again, there is no listing or indexing of contributions to Festschriftenin most library catalogues. This gap in legal bibliography has been acknowledgedfor many years,70 but little has been done to improve the situation. Indeed,matters have got worse rather than better, as some of the sources that used toprovide this information have disappeared and others are now out-of-date.

The only English-language research tool I know of that consistently lists legalFestschriften, as well as itemizing the contributions, is the Index to Foreign LegalPeriodicals. Understandably, given its remit, that Index generally only collectsforeign-sourced Festschriften, and is selective. References are sometimes made tocomparative or international law Festschriften published in the United States.Common law Festschriften published by British presses are not usually included.

English language contributions to German, Swiss and Austrian Festschriftencan be tracked down by contributor’s name in Helmut Dau’s multi-volumeBibliography of Legal Festschriften Titles and Contents.71 The daunting Bibliographyon Foreign and Comparative Law, compiled and edited by Charles Szladit formany years, covered English language articles dealing with non-common lawlegal systems and comparative law, and included contributions to some Fest-schriften. Since 1984 this publication (now named after its founder) covers bothcommon law and other legal systems, and has a entry for ‘Collections ofessays, festschrifts and melanges’, which is extremely useful but by no meanscomprehensive.72

For the years from 1961–81 the Harvard Annual Legal Bibliography was avaluable source of citations to legal Festschriften in general, and the emergingcommon law variety in particular. Also the Index to Legal Essays, compiled forthe British and Irish Association of Law Librarians under the editorship ofBarbara Tearle, is excellent but limited to collections of essays (includingFestschriften) published between 1975–79.73 The enormous gaps left have notbeen adequately filled.

The starting point for book research in the United Kingdom is often DonaldRaistrick’s Lawyers’ Law Books which lists some common law Festschriften undersubject headings.74 The collection, however, is not complete, and, of course,there is no listing of the individual contributions. There is also no subject headingfor Festschriften or the like.

70 B. Tearle (ed.), Index to Legal Essays: English language legal essays in Festschriften, memorial volumes, conferencepapers and other collections, 1975–1979 (Maunsell Publishing, London, 1983) at x (collections of essays ‘erraticallyand inadequately indexed in existing bibliographies’). See also Morley, above n 17 at 66.

71 H. Dau (comp. and ed.), Bibliography of Legal Festschriften Titles and Content: Germany, Switzerland, Austria(Berlin Verlag, Arno Spitz) in nine volumes: 1864–1944 (1984); 1945–61 (1962), 1962–66 (1967), 1967–74(1977), 1975–79 (1981), 1980–84 (1986), 1985–87 (1989), 1988–90 (1992), 1991–93 (1995). This is a Germanlanguage publication, but English titles are given for those contributions in English. These and other bibliographicefforts brought forth a Festschrift: R. Lansky and R-E. Walter (eds), In the Service of the Law and Legal Literature:Festschrift fur Helmut Dau zum 65 (Berlin Verlag, Berlin, 1992).

72 V. Pechota (comp. and ed.), Szladits’ Bibliography on Foreign and Comparative Law: Books and Articles inEnglish (Oceana Publications, Dobbs Ferry , New York). The new series covers from 1984 onwards.

73 See above n 68.74 D. Raistrick, Lawyers’ Law Books: A Practical Index to Legal Literature (Bowker Saur, London, 3rd ed. 1997).


The bibliographic databases are not much help either.75 The OCLC WorldCat, RLIN or CURL databases cannot identify Festschriften, and are no morereliable than library card catalogues in picking up common law Festschriften.Even if a Festschrift is found, often there is no list of contents.

The dream of an international index to legal Festschriften remains just that.76

There is an urgent need for the most commonly used bibliographic resources tosystematically list common law Festschriften and to index the contributions undersubject and author headings. The omission to do so might have been justifiablea generation or two ago when this ‘foreign element’77 was a rarity in the commonlaw, and they clustered around Roman law, comparative law and internationallaw, but the avalanche of common law Festschriften in recent years and thebroadening of subject-matter demands inclusion in the most commonly usedbibliographic resources.

Just how much scholarship in common law Festschriften is not indexed is shownby a comparison of the number of ‘substantive’ contributions to Festschriftenbetween 1969 and 2000 and the number of full length articles published inleading United Kingdom law reviews over the same period.78 The total numberof articles that appeared in the Cambridge Law Journal, Law Quarterly Reviewand Modern Law Review between 1969 and 2000 is 1812.79 The total numberof substantive contributions to common law Festschriften over the same periodis 1672 (or 92.27%). So the number of contributions to common law Festschriftenalmost equals the total number of articles published in these three leading UnitedKingdom law reviews over the last 30 years or so. Indeed, in the 1990s thenumber of contributions to common law Festschriften outstripped the totalnumber of articles appearing in the same three law reviews.80 Much of thisscholarship in Festschriften disappears without trace for want of title, author andsubject indexing. It is a scandalous state of affairs.

8. Finding and Footnoting FestschriftenIn these days of rampant computer-driven research and (increasing) student-assisted research, research often goes along well-worn paths. As we have seen,the chaotic state of legal bibliography in the common law world as regards

75 I am indebted to Barbara Tearle, Bodleian Law Librarian at Oxford, for the information in this paragraph,and for much other assistance.

76 Roberts, above n 1 at viii.77 The phrase is taken from F.H. Lawson, but used in a different sense. See ‘Doctrinal Writing: A Foreign

Element in English Law’ in von Caemmerer, Mentschikoff and Zweigert, above n 40, vol. 1, 191; reprinted inF.H. Lawson, Many Laws: Selected Essays, Volume 1 (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977) at 207.

78 The count of contributions to common law Festschriften excludes personal tributes and the like, andbibliographies.

79 The individual figures are Cambridge Law Journal (393), Law Quarterly Review (596) and Modern Law Review(823). I have put to one side the Oxford Journal of Legal Studies as it began in 1981. However, in case any one isinterested, between 1981–2000, 329 articles have appeared in this Journal.

80 The number of contributions to common law Festschriften between 1990–99 (743) well exceeds the totalnumber of articles published in the Cambridge Law Journal, Law Quarterly Review and Modern Law Review (596)over that period.


Festschriften (and other collections of essays) stymies easy access to these gardensof scholarship. I do not think this is a good thing, but as long as this situationpersists there are plaudits to be won by the determined. Such influence andreferences will differentiate the work product of some scholars from others.81

Finding the roses in the Festschriften gardens requires determination, curiosityand access to good law libraries. A reasonably good memory or the habit oftaking notes over time helps. Years of serendipitous research pays off, findingmore in the book next to the book you went looking for in the law library.(Remember the days when law libraries were about books rather than terminals,and when books were stacked on open shelves and one could browse.)

Furthermore, even when citations are unearthed, the books will often be heldsomewhere else and have to be sent for, often at some cost in terms of effort,time and money. This inaccessibility (in both senses) makes references tocontributions in Festschriften harder won than references to journal articles orstandard texts. If it is true that only the best blooms appear in the gardens ofFestschriften then access will give a considerable research edge. At the very least,people will envy the industry evident in the footnotes and perhaps seek out thatmaterial also. As John Kenneth Galbraith once said: ‘Footnotes . . . provide anexceedingly good index of the care with which a subject has been researched’.82

In the absence of reliable bibliographic resources for Festschriften this form ofcopycat referencing is the most common way knowledge of the scholarshipspreads.83

9. The Increase and an ExplanationAs noted at the beginning, there were fewer than a dozen common law Festschriftenpublished up to 1968. In the Appendix there is an incomplete list of thosepublished since then that exceeds 100. In the 1970s there was a gradual build-up, augmented by foreign-sourced Festschriften honouring distinguished emigrelegal academics the likes of F.A. Mann, Ernst Cohn, Clive Schmitthoff and OttoKahn-Freund84 with higher-than-usual numbers of common lawyers contributing.In this, as in many other respects, these scholars enriched the common law of

81 On one view this is what footnotes are all about. See A.D. Austin, ‘Footnotes as Product Differentiation’(1987) 40 Vanderbilt LR 1131.

82 J.K. Galbraith, ‘A Note on Sources’ in The Great Crash (first published in 1955, reprinted in 1997 byHoughton Mifflin, Boston) at xv.

83 Another way is wide-spread offprint distribution. A form of self-promotion that improbably has survived theages of the photocopier and e-mail.

84 W. Flume, H.J. Hahn, G. Kegel and K.R. Simmonds (eds), International Law and Economic Order: Essays inhonour of F.A. Mann on the occasion of his 70th birthday on August 11, 1977 (C.H. Beck, Munich, 1977); F. Fabricus(ed.), Law and International Trade: Festschrift fur Clive M. Schmitthoff zum 70 (Athenaum, Frankfurt, 1973);A.G. Chloros and K.H. Neumayer (eds), Liber Amicorum Ernst J. Cohn: Festschrift fur Ernst J. Cohn zum 70(Verlagsgesellschaft Recht und Wirtschaft, Heidelberg, 1975); F. Gamillscheg, J. de Givry, B. Hepple and J-M.Verdier (eds), International Collection of Essays: In Memoriam Sir Otto Kahn-Freund 17.11.1900–16.8.1979 (C.H.Beck, Munich, 1980). Subsequently, Schmitthoff and Kahn-Freund received common law Festschriften. See J.Adams (ed.), Essays for Clive Schmitthoff (Professional Books, Abingdon, 1983); and Lord Wedderburn, R. Lewisand J. Clark (eds), Labour Law and Industrial Relations: Building on Kahn-Freund (Oxford University Press, Oxford,1983).


their adopted country.85 The trickle built to a substantial stream in the 1980sand the floodgates opened in the 1990s, with no evidence of abatement in thenew millennium.

So why the massive increase in the number of common law Festschriften? Arethere more brilliant lawyers in the last 30 or so years than previously? Or arewe more into hero-worship than our predecessors, or simply less reserved indemonstrating admiration or adulation?86 It is impossible to know. There iscertainly a greater number of academics to assist in producing Festschriften. Andthese academics, by and large, are a more professional lot,87 and more dependantthan ever upon publication for their own advancement and for that of theirinstitutions. The research assessment exercise fuels this, but it does not seem tobe driving the production of common law Festschriften. The greater availabilityof publishing outlets must be a factor, as must the increase in size of the lawbook market nationally and internationally. The much talked about ‘Euro-peanization’ of British law and legal education88 may be accelerating the trendtowards adopting European academic trappings.

While no doubt there are multiple and complex causes, the association of thegenre with Germany is an important clue to at least one cause.89 The emergentgroup of English academic common lawyers (from the 1870s onwards) enviedthe exalted place of the jurist in German legal circles,90 and this extended toFestschriften.91 In 1895 Sir Frederick Pollock commented that the issue of theHarvard Law Review honouring Christopher Columbus Langdell ‘need not fearany comparison with the festival collection of essays produced at any German

85 See T.H. Bingham, ‘‘‘There is a World Elsewhere’’: The Changing Perspectives of English Law’ (1992) 41ICLQ 513, 527. It has been said that scientists fleeing Hitler’s Germany brought the genre to the United States:Lewis, above n 27. This seems an appropriate place to record my indebtedness to Lilly Melchior Roberts, whosewritings about legal Festschriften have proved invaluable in preparing this article. She was educated in Germanyand was an appellate court judge in Berlin before leaving Germany in the 1930s. She worked first as a researchassistant at Michigan Law School from 1940–45 and from then until her death in 1966 she worked in the MichiganLaw School Library. The corps of distinguished German emigre academic lawyers had its counterpart in lawlibrarianship. Perhaps not entirely coincidentally, from the outset the University of Michigan was receptive toGerman ideas of scholarship. See P.D. Carrington, ‘Influences of Continental Law on American Legal Educationand Legal Institutions, 1776–1933’ in Towards Comparative Law in the 21st Century: The 50th anniversary of TheInstitute of Comparative Law in Japan, Chuo University (Chuo University Press, Chuo, 1998) at 1037, 1045.

86 The small number of UK-sourced Festschriften in any discipline in the first half of the 20th century (seeRounds and Dow, above n 4 at 290) was explained by Griswold Morley in terms of ‘English individualism, orAnglo-Saxon reserve’ (above n 17 at 62).

87 See W. Twining, ‘Goodbye to Lewis Eliot: The Academic Lawyer as Scholar’ (1980) 15 JSPTL 2.88 See R. Bakker, ‘Europeanization of Law and Lawyers v. National Provincialism in Legal Education’ in B.S.

Jackson and D. McGoldrick (eds), Legal Visions of the New Europe: Essays Celebrating the Centenary of the Facultyof Law University of Liverpool (Graham and Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff, London, 1993) at 325.

89 For discussion in the (general) Festschriften literature about the importance of the German tag and itslimitations, see Pick, above n 3 at 206–7.

90 Common law scholars of this period were fascinated by the idea, prevalent in Germany, of law as a science.See M. Reimann, ‘Nineteenth Century German Legal Science’ 31 Boston College LR 837 (1990). See generally E.Campbell, ‘German Influences in English Legal Education and Jurisprudence in the 19th Century’ (1959) 4UWALR 357 and M. Graziadei, ‘Changing Images of the Law in XIX Century English Legal Thought (TheContinental Impulse)’ in M. Reimann (ed.), The Reception of Continental Ideas in the Common Law World 1820–1920(Duncker and Humblot, Berlin, 1993) at 115.

91 Lilly M. Roberts traced the first legal Festschrift back to 1868: Roberts, above n 1 at vii and 9 (entry under‘Bethmann-Hollweg’).


university’.92 ‘In other words’, says Mathias Reimann, ‘it was like a German‘‘Festschrift’’, and at least for Pollock that was praise enough’.93

The English tradition, of course, differs markedly from the German.94 Theacademic role has not been as glorious, central or appreciated.95 In contrast tothe ‘strong tradition of legal scholarship in Europe’, John Merryman observedyears ago, ‘the tradition of legal scholarship in the common-law world is neithervery old nor very strong’.96 Furthermore, as Carol Harlow felicitously put it,‘[i]n the English variant of the common law tradition . . . scholars may not bejudges and judges have seldom been scholars’.97 The barricades between theacademy and the profession were real, and were constructed on both sides. Theyhave not been completely removed today, but they are diminishing.98

Festschriften not only honour the distinguished academic, but boost the import-ance of the academic enterprise generally. And when academics (and judges)are not honouring distinguished academics, who do academics (for they areinvariably the editors and prime-movers of Festschriften) select to honour? Nosurprise that it turns out to be judges, but only those of scholarly dispositionand/or those most hospitable to academic writing and hence influence.99 Thereis, of course, nothing wrong with mutual admiration, this is the very stuff ofFestschriften. But the timing of the emergence of this genre in the literature ofthe common law is not unrelated, in my view, to the search for greater legitimacyand influence by academic lawyers. Have we finally caught up with the Germans?

92 Quoted in M. Reimann, ‘Career in Itself: The German Professoriate as a Model for American Legal Academia’in Reimann, above n 90 at 165, 172.

93 Ibid. In the 1890s ‘festival’ writing or ‘festival’ collection meant Festschrift. See the entry under ‘Festschrift’in T. McArthur (ed.), The Oxford Companion to the English Language (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1992) at401.

94 F.H. Lawson, A Common Lawyer looks at the Civil Law (University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 1953) at69–76.

95 Compare P. Birks, ‘Adjudication and Interpretation in the Common Law: A Century of Change’ in B.S.Markesinis (ed.), The Clifford Chance Lectures: Volume 1- Bridging the Channel (Oxford University Press, Oxford,1996) at 135; I. Fletcher, ‘An English Tragedy: The Academic Lawyer as Jurist’ in T.M. Charles-Edwards, M.E.Owen and D.B. Walters (eds), Lawyers and Laymen: Studies in the History of Law presented to Professor DafyddJenkins on his seventy-fifth birthday Gwyl Ddewi 1986 (University of Wales Press, Cardiff, 1986) at 316; K.G.C.Reid, ‘The Third Branch of the Profession: The Rise of the Academic Lawyer in Scotland’ in H.L. MacQueen(ed.), Scots Law into the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of W.A. Wilson (W. Green/Sweet & Maxwell, Edinburgh,1996) at 39.

96 J.H. Merryman, The Loneliness of the Comparative Lawyer And Other Essays in Foreign and Comparative Law(Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 1999) at 75, 80–81 (reprinted from a contribution to a Festschrift publishedin 1966). Merryman has been the subject of a Festschrift himself. See D.S. Clark (ed.), Comparative and PrivateInternational Law: Essays in Honor of John Henry Merryman on his Seventieth Birthday (Duncker & Humblot, Berlin,1991).

97 C. Harlow, ‘Changing the Mindset: The Place of Theory in English Administrative Law’ (1994) 14 OJLS419, 420.

98 See generally F. Maher, ‘Ivory Towers and Concrete Castles: A Hundred Years War’ (1986) 15 MULR 637.99 Of the 88 common law Festschriften honouring individualslisted in the Appendix only 5 honour judges—namely,

Lords Denning, Cooke, Goff, Slynn and Wilberforce. Lord Denning was ‘one of the biggest supporters of citingacademic articles in reasons for judgment’: R. Smyth, ‘Academic Writing and the Courts: A Quantitative Studyof the Influence of Legal and Non-legal Periodical Articles in the High Court’ (1998) 17 UTasLR 164, 167–68.Lord Goff was once an academic and his praise of academic work, both judicial and extra-judicial, is well-known.All have impressive academic credentials. For example, Richard Wilberforce stood in the first rank at Oxfordalongside a distinguished group, including Richard Crossman (later Sir Richard), Quintin Hogg (later LordHailsham), and John Willis (a brilliant administrative lawyer who moved to Canada and made his academic careerthere). See Oxford University Calendar for the year 1930.


10. ConclusionI have come neither to praise nor bury common law Festschriften, but simply todraw attention to the fact that the genre is here and needs to be properlyaccommodated in the common law tradition and accounted for in its bibliographicresources. In so far as any legal writing outside standard, practitioner-orientatedtextbooks can influence the development of legal thought and doctrine,100 onecan reasonably assume contributions to common law Festschriften should beamongst the most influential. These contributions are intended to be the bestcurrent work (by convention, not displayed elsewhere) from the workbenchesof handpicked lawyers honouring distinguished jurists. That work product shouldbe worth indexing, cataloguing, collecting, reading and engaging with. If not, itwill be like a ‘bouquet’101 that wilts and dies soon after been laid at the feet ofthe honorand.

APPENDIXA list of common law Festschriften published since 1969.102

IndividualsJ.A. Andrews (ed.), Welsh Studies in Public Law (University of Wales Press,

Cardiff, 1970) [To mark the services to Welsh legal education of D.J. LlewelfrynDavies]

F. Fabricus (ed.), Law and International Trade: Festschrift fur Clive M. Schmitthoffzum 70 (Athenaum Verlag, Frankfurt, 1973)

A. Watson (ed.), Daube Noster; Essays in Legal History for David Daube (ScottishAcademic Press, Edinburgh & London, 1974)

R. Hood (ed.), Crime, Criminology and Public Policy: Essays in Honour of Sir LeonRadzinowicz (Heinemann Educational, London, 1974)

J.E.S. Fawcett and R. Higgins (eds), International Organisation: Law in Movement:Essays in Honour of John McMahon (Oxford University Press for the RoyalInstitute of International Affairs, Oxford, 1974)

100 For a sceptical American view see P.D. Carrington, ‘Aftermath’ in P. Cane and J. Stapleton (eds), Essaysfor Patrick Atiyah (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1991) at 113. This essay is an example of a frustratingly obscure titlethat gives the researcher little, if any, clue as to what the contribution covers. Only the high quality of Carrington’swork and the controversy his work sometimes engenders would lead one to give such an unhelpfully titled piecethe time of day. It would be even more difficult evaluating it from the entry or entries (under which heading(s)?)in an index. If a Festschrift can be a graveyard then such titled contributions are the equivalent of the unmarkedgrave!

101 See Morley, above n 17 at 64 (likening a Festschrift to ‘a bouquet laid on a teacher’s desk’).102 The year 1969 is chosen to dovetail with Lilly Roberts’ collection: above n 1. Generally, I have restricted

the catchment to common law Festschriften published in the UK or where the honorand is or was associated closelywith the UK legal scene. This excludes almost all common law Festschriften from other parts of the Commonwealthand the USA. In a few instances, however, I have included common law Festschriften from elsewhere honouringthose whose specialities or reputations transcend common law jurisdictions. Admittedly, this is somewhat arbitrary.The list does not pretend to completeness. I would be grateful to learn of omissions. The capitalization andpunctuation in the titles varies considerably. An attempt has been made to impose some standardization.


A.G. Chloros and K.H. Neumayer (eds), Liber Amicorum Ernst J. Cohn: Festschriftfur Ernst J. Cohn zum 70 (Verlagsgesellschaft Recht und Wirtschaft, Heidelberg,1975)103

J.A.G. Griffith (ed.), From Policy to Administration: Essays in Honour of WilliamA. Robson (George Allen & Unwin, London, 1976)

P.M.S. Hacker and J. Raz (eds), Law, Morality, and Society: Essays in Honour ofH.L.A. Hart (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1977)

W. Flume, H.J. Hahn, G. Kegel and K.R. Simmonds (eds), International Lawand Economic Order: Essays in Honour of F.A. Mann on the occasion of his 70thbirthday on August 11, 1977 (C.H. Beck, Munich, 1977)

T.W. Bechtler (ed.), Law in a Social Context: Liber Amicorum Honouring ProfessorLon L. Fuller (Kluwer, Deventer, 1978)

P.R. Glazebook (ed.), Reshaping the Criminal Law: Essays in Honour of GlanvilleWilliams (Stevens, London, 1978)

R.F. Hunnisett and J.B. Post (eds), Medieval Legal Records edited in Memory ofC.A.F. Meekings (HMSO, London, 1978)

G.M. Wilner (ed.), Jus et Societas: Essays in Tribute to Wolfgang Friedmann(Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, 1979)

F. Gamillscheg, J. de Givry, B. Hepple and J-M. Verdier (eds), InternationalCollection of Essays: In Memoriam Sir Otto Kahn-Freund 17.11.1900–16.8.1979(C.H. Beck, Munich, 1980)

P. Feuerstein and C. Parry (eds), Multum Non Multa: Festschrift fur Kurt Lipsteinaus Anlass seines 70 (C.F. Muller, Juristischer Verlag, Heidelberg, 1980)

B. Tierney and B. Linehan (eds), Authority and Power: Studies in Medieval Lawand Government presented to Walter Ullmann on his seventieth birthday (CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, 1980)

C.F.H. Tapper (ed.), Crime, Proof and Punishment: Essays in Memory of Sir RupertCross (Butterworths, London, 1981)

M.S. Arnold, T.A. Green, S.A. Scully and S.D. White (eds), On the Laws andCustoms of England: Essays in Honor of Samuel E. Thorne (University of NorthCarolina Press, Chapel Hill, 1981)

Lord Wedderburn, R. Lewis and J. Clark (eds), Labour Law and IndustrialRelations: Building on Kahn-Freund (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1983)

St. J. Bates, W. Finnie, J.A. Asher and H. Wildberg (eds), In Memoriam J.D.B.Mitchell (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1983)

P.G. Stein and A.D.E. Lewis (eds), Studies in Justinian’s Institutes in memory ofJ.A.C. Thomas (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1983)

J. Adams (ed.), Essays for Clive Schmitthoff (Professional Books, Abingdon, 1983)A.R. Blackshield (ed.), Legal Change: Essays in Honour of Julius Stone (But-

terworths, Sydney, 1983)J.L. Jowell and J.P.W.B. McAuslan (eds), Lord Denning: The Judge and the Law

(Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1984)103 Ernst Cohn was a German Jew emigre law professor who retrained in England and became a very successful

practitioner, part-time teacher and influential writer.


A.N. Doob and E.L. Greenspan (eds), Perspectives in Criminal Law: Essays inHonour of John Ll.J. Edwards (Canada Law Book, Aurora, 1985)104

R. Dhavan, R. Sudarshan and S. Khurshid (eds), Judges and the Judicial Power:Essays in Honour of Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1985)

P. Wallington and R.M. Merkin (eds), Essays in Memory of Professor F.H. Lawson(Butterworths, London, 1986)

R. Tur and W. Twining (eds), Essays on Kelsen (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1986)C. Harlow (ed.), Politics and Public Law (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1986)T.M. Charles-Edwards, M.E. Owen and D.B. Walters (eds), Lawyers and Laymen:

Studies in the History of Law presented to Professor Dafydd Jenkins on his seventy-fifth birthday Gwyl Ddewi 1986 (University of Wales Press, Cardiff, 1986)

N. MacCormick and P. Birks (eds), The Legal Mind: Essays for Tony Honore(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1986)

M. Bos and I. Brownlie (eds), Liber Amicorum for The Rt. Hon. Lord Wilberforce,PC, CMG, OBE, QC (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1987)

D.J. Cusine (ed.), A Scots Conveyancing Miscellany: Essays in Honour of ProfessorJ.M. Halliday (W. Green, Edinburgh, 1987)

P. Smith (ed.), Criminal Law: Essays for J.C. Smith (Butterworths, London,1987)

R. Gavison (ed.), Issues in Contemporary Legal Philosophy: The Influence of H.L.A.Hart (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1987)

B. Cheng and E.D. Brown (eds), Contemporary Problems of International Law:Essays in Honour of Georg Schwarzenberger on his eightieth birthday (Stevens,London, 1988)

P. Birks (ed.), New Perspectives in the Roman Law of Property: Essays for BarryNicholas (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1989)

R. Plender (ed.), Legal History and Comparative Law: Essays in Honour of AlfredKiralfy (Frank Cass, London, 1990)

I.R. Scott (ed.), International Perspectives on Civil Justice: Essays in Honour of SirJack I.H. Jacob Q.C. (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1990)

D. Freestone (ed.), Children and The Law: Essays in Honour of Professor H.K.Bevan (Hull University Press, Hull, 1990)

A.J. Gamble (ed.), Obligations in Context: Essays in Honour of Professor D.M.Walker (W. Green, Edinburgh, 1990)

R. White and B. Smythe (eds), Current Issues in European and International Law:Essays in Memory of Frank Dowrick (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1990)

G. Hand and J. McBride (eds), Droit Sans Frontieres: Essays in Honour of L.Neville Brown (Holdsworth Club, Birmingham, 1991)

P. Cane and J. Stapleton (eds), Essays for Patrick Atiyah (Clarendon Press,Oxford, 1991)

104 This may be thought a doubtful inclusion but the British origins of both the honorand and his successfulbook—Law Officers of the Crown: A Study of the Offices of Attorney-General and Solicitor-General of England with anaccount of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1964)—justify inclusion.


D.L. Carey Miller and D.W. Meyers (eds), Comparative and Historical Essays inScots Law: A Tribute to Professor Sir Thomas Smith QC (Butterworths and TheLaw Society of Scotland, Edinburgh, 1992)

C.M. Carmichael (ed.), Essays on Law and Religion: The Berkeley and OxfordSymposia in Honour of David Daube (The Robbins Collection, University ofCalifornia at Berkeley, San Francisco, 1993)

R.F. Hunter (ed.), Justice and Crime: Essays in Honour of The Right HonourableThe Lord Emslie, M.B.E., P.C., LL.D., F.R.S.E. (T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh,1993)

Lord Wedderburn, M. Rood, G. Lyon-Caen, W. Daubler and P. van der Heijden(eds), Labour Law in the Post-Industrial Era: Essays in Honour of Hugo Sinzheimer(Dartmouth, Aldershot, 1994)

K.D. Ewing, C.A. Gearty and B.A. Hepple (eds), Human Rights and LabourLaw: Essays for Paul O’Higgins (Mansell Publishing Ltd, London, 1994)

W. Krawietz, N. MacCormick and G. Henrik von Wright (eds), PrescriptiveFormality and Normative Rationality in Modern Legal Systems: Festschrift forRobert S. Summers (Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, 1994)

J.L. Coleman and A. Buchanan (eds), In Harm’s Way: Essays in Honour of JoelFeinberg (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994)

G. Garnett and J. Hudson (eds), Law and Government in Medieval England andNormandy: Essays in Honour of Sir James Holt (Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, 1994)

V. Lowe and C. Warbrick (eds), The United Nations and the Principles of Inter-national Law: Essays in Memory of Michael Akehurst (Routledge, London, 1994)

H.L. MacQueen (ed.), Scots Law into the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of W.A.Wilson (W. Green/Sweet & Maxwell, Edinburgh, 1996)

F.D. Rose (ed.), Consensus ad idem: Essays in the Law of Contract in Honour ofGuenter Treitel (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1996)

P. Davies, A. Lyon-Caen, S. Sciarra and S. Simitis (eds), European CommunityLabour Law: Principles and Perspectives; Liber Amicorum Lord Wedderburn ofCharlton (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1996)

A.I.L. Campbell and M. Voyatzi (eds), Legal Reasoning and Judicial Interpretation ofEuropean Law: Essays in Honour of Lord Mackenzie-Stuart (Trenton, Hampshire,1996)

V. Lowe and M. Fitzmaurice (eds), Fifty Years of the International Court ofJustice: Essays in Honour of Sir Robert Jennings (Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, 1996)

D. Feldman and F. Meisel (eds), Corporate and Commercial Law: Modern De-velopments (Lloyd’s of London Press, London, 1996) [In Honour of R.R.Pennington]

P. Rishworth (ed.), The Struggle for Simplicity in Law: Essays for Lord Cooke ofThorndon (Butterworths, Wellington, 1997)

R. Cranston (ed.), Making Commercial Law: Essays in Honour of Roy Goode(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1997)


K. Hawkins (ed.), The Human Face of Law: Essays in Honour of Donald Harris(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1997)

C. Bridge (ed.), Family Law towards the Millennium: Essays for P.M. Bromley(Butterworths, London, 1997)

E.Z. Lomnicka and C.G.J. Morse (eds), Contemporary Issues in Commercial Law:Essays in Honour of A.G. Guest (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1997)

C. Forsyth and I. Hare (eds), The Golden Metwand and the Crooked Chord: PublicLaw Essays in Honour of Professor Sir William Wade QC (Clarendon Press,Oxford, 1998)

B.A.K. Rider (ed.), The Realm of Company Law: A Collection of Papers in Honourof Professor Leonard Sealy, S.J. Berwin Professor of Corporate Law at the Universityof Cambridge (Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 1998)

J.J. Norton, M. Andenas and M. Footer (eds), The Changing World of InternationalLaw in the Twenty-First Century: A Tribute to the late Kenneth R. Simmonds(Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 1998)

B.A.K. Rider (ed.), The Corporate Dimension: An exploration of developing areas ofcompany and commercial law. Published in Honour of Professor A.J. Boyle (Jordan,Bristol, 1998)

W.R. Cornish, R. Nolan, J. O’Sullivan and G. Virgo (eds), Restitution: Past,Present and Future: Essays in Honour of Gareth Jones (Hart Publishing, Oxford,1998)

N. Doe, M. Hill and R. Ombres (eds), English Canon Law: Essays in Honour ofBishop Eric Kemp (University of Wales Press, Cardiff, 1998)

A. Thornton and W. Godwin (eds), Construction Law: Themes and Practice: Essaysin Honour of I.N. Duncan Wallace Q.C. (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1998)

P. Cane and J. Stapleton (eds), The Law of Obligations: Essays in Celebration ofJohn Fleming (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1998)

A. Ashworth and M. Wasik (eds), Fundamentals of Sentencing Theory: Essays inHonour of Andrew von Hirsch (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1998)

G. Drewry and C. Blake (eds), Law and the Spirit of Inquiry: Essays in Honourof Sir Louis Blom-Cooper, Q.C. (Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 1999)

D. Butler, V. Bogdanor and R. Summers (eds), The Law, Politics, and theConstitution: Essays in Honour of Geoffrey Marshall (Oxford University Press,Oxford, 1999)105

W. Swadling and G. Jones (eds), The Search for Principle: Essays in Honour ofLord Goff of Chieveley (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999)

G.S. Goodwin-Gill and S. Talmon (eds), The Reality of International Law: Essaysin Honour of Ian Brownlie (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999)

J. Beatson and Y. Cripps (eds), Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Information:Essays in Honour of Sir David Williams (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000)

F.D. Rose (ed.), Lex Mercatoria: Essays on International Commercial Law in Honourof Francis Reynolds (Lloyd’s of London Press, London, 2000)

105 Geoffrey Marshall’s writings on law justify the inclusion of a political scientist in this list.


M. Hoeflich (ed.), Lex et Romanitas: Essays for Alan Watson (The RobbinsCollection, University of California at Berkeley, San Francisco, 2000)

D. O’Keefe and A. Bavasso (eds), Liber Amicorum for Lord Slynn of Hadley:Volume I: Judicial Review in European Union Law (Kluwer Law International,The Hague, 2000)

M. Andenas (ed.), Liber Amicorum in Honour of Lord Slynn of Hadley: Volume II:Judicial Review in International Perspective (Kluwer Law International, TheHague, 2000)

J. Faundez, M. Footer and J.J. Norton (eds), Governance, Development andGlobalization: A Tribute to Lawrence Tshuma (Blackstone Press, London, 2000)

F. Meisel and P.J. Cook (eds), Property and Protection: Legal Rights and Restrictions:Essays in Honour of Brian W. Harvey (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2000)

K. O’Donovan and G.R. Rubin (eds), Human Rights and Legal History: Essaysin Honour of Brian Simpson (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001)

J.W. Cairns and O. Robinson (eds), Critical Studies in Ancient Law, ComparativeLaw and Legal History (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2001) [Dedicated to AlanWatson]106

P. Cane and J. Gardner (eds), Relating to Responsibility: Essays in Honour of TonyHonore on his 80th Birthday (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2001)

Institutions/EventsJ.W. Bridge, D. Lasok, D.L. Perrott and R.O. Plender (eds), Fundamental Rights:

A volume of essays to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the founding of theLaw School in Exeter 1923–1973 (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1973)

Then and Now 1799–1974: Commemorating 175 Years of Law Bookselling andPublishing (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1974)

G.P. Morice (ed.), David Hume: Bicentenary Papers (Edinburgh University Press,Edinburgh, 1977)

D. Lasok, A.J.E. Jaffey, D.L. Perrott and C. Sachs (eds), Fundamental Duties:A volume of essays by present and former members of the Law Faculty of theUniversity of Exeter to commemorate the Silver Jubilee of the University (PergamonPress, Oxford, 1980)

I.R. Scott (ed.), Jubilee Lectures Celebrating the Foundation of the Faculty of Law,University of Birmingham (Wildy & Sons, London, 1981)

D.M. Walker (ed.), Stair Tercentenary Studies (Stair Society, Edinburgh, 1981)D.C. Hoath (ed.), 75 Years of Law at Sheffield 1909–1984 (University of Sheffield,

Sheffield, 1985)107

P. McAuslan and J.F. McEldowney (eds), Law, Legitimacy, and the Constitution:Essays marking the centenary of Dicey’s Law of the Constitution (Sweet & Maxwell,London 1985)

106 The dust jacket declares the book to be Essays in Honour of Alan Watson but the title page makes no mentionof this and the book is simply dedicated to him.

107 For the earlier jubilee anniversary volume, see O.R. Marshall (ed.), The Jubilee Lectures of the Faculty of Law,University of Sheffield (Stevens, London, 1960).


R.C. Simmons (ed.), The United States Constitution: The first 200 years (ManchesterUniversity Press, Manchester, 1989)

F. Patfield and R. White (eds), The Changing Law (Leicester University Press,Leicester, 1990) [To mark the Silver Jubilee of the Law School at LeicesterUniversity]

G. Kolilinye and P.K. Menon (eds), Commonwealth Caribbean Legal Studies: AVolume of Essays to Commemorate the 21st Anniversary of the Faculty of Law inthe University of the West Indies (Butterworth, London, 1992)

B.S. Jackson and D. McGoldrick (eds), Legal Visions of the New Europe: EssaysCelebrating the Centenary of The Faculty of Law University of Liverpool (Graham& Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff, London, 1993)

G. P. Wilson (ed.), Frontiers of Legal Scholarship: Twenty five years of WarwickLaw School (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1995)

City University Centenary Lectures in Law (Blackstone Press, London, 1996)J. Hudson (ed.), The History of English Law: Centenary Essays on Pollock and

Maitland (Oxford University Press for the British Academy, Oxford, 1996)R. Rawlings (ed.), Law, Society and Economy: Centenary Essays for the London

School of Economics and Political Science 1895–1995 (Clarendon Press, Oxford,1997)

D.L. Carey Miller and R. Zimmermann (eds), The Civilian Tradition and ScotsLaw: Aberdeen Quincentenary Essays (Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, 1997)

A.J. Kinahan (ed.), Now and Then: A Celebration of Sweet & Maxwell’s Bicentenary1999 (Sweet & Maxwell, London, 1999)

B.A.K. Rider (ed.), Law at the Centre: The Institute of Advanced Legal Studies atFifty (Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 1999)

K. Economides, L. Betten, J. Bridge, A. Tettenborn and V. Shrubsall (eds),Fundamental Values (Hart Publishing, Oxford, 2000) [To Mark the 75thAnniversary of the Founding of the Law School at Exeter, 1923–1998]

gardens or graveyards of scholarship? festschriften in the...

Documents