The Palgrave Handbook of Disciplinary

and Regional Approaches to Peace 1st

Edition Oliver P. Richmond
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-disciplinary-and-regional-a
pproaches-to-peace-1st-edition-oliver-p-richmond/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Palgrave Handbook of the Hashemite Kingdom of

Jordan P. R. Kumaraswamy

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-the-
hashemite-kingdom-of-jordan-p-r-kumaraswamy/

The Palgrave Handbook of Infertility in History

Approaches Contexts and Perspectives 1st Edition Gayle
Davis

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-
infertility-in-history-approaches-contexts-and-perspectives-1st-
edition-gayle-davis/

The Palgrave Handbook of European Banking Union Law

Mario P. Chiti

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-
european-banking-union-law-mario-p-chiti/

Peace formation and political order in conflict

affected societies 1st Edition Richmond

https://textbookfull.com/product/peace-formation-and-political-
order-in-conflict-affected-societies-1st-edition-richmond/
Approaches to Peace: A Reader in Peace Studies David
Philip Barash

https://textbookfull.com/product/approaches-to-peace-a-reader-in-
peace-studies-david-philip-barash/

Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Regional and Global

Security Pawe■ Frankowski

https://textbookfull.com/product/cross-disciplinary-perspectives-
on-regional-and-global-security-pawel-frankowski/

The Palgrave Handbook of Anarchism 1st Edition Carl

Levy

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-
anarchism-1st-edition-carl-levy/

The Palgrave Handbook of Ethnicity 1st Edition Steven

Ratuva

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-
ethnicity-1st-edition-steven-ratuva/

The Palgrave Handbook of the Afterlife 1st Edition

Yujin Nagasawa

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-palgrave-handbook-of-the-
afterlife-1st-edition-yujin-nagasawa/
The Palgrave Handbook of Disciplinary and Regional
Approaches to Peace
The Palgrave Handbook of
Disciplinary and Regional
Approaches to Peace
Edited by

Oliver P. Richmond
Research Professor, University of Manchester, UK, International Professor, Kyung Hee University,
Korea & Visiting Professor, University of Tromso, Norway

Sandra Pogodda
Lecturer, University of Manchester, UK

and

Jasmin Ramović
Doctoral Candidate, University of Manchester, UK
Editorial selection and content © Oliver P. Richmond, Sandra Pogodda and
Jasmin Ramović 2016
Individual chapters © Respective authors 2016
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 2016 978-1-137-40759-7

All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this

publication may be made without written permission.
No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted
save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence
permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency,
Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS.
Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication
may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.
The authors have asserted their rights to be identified as the authors of this
work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
First published 2016 by
PALGRAVE MACMILLAN
Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited,
registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke,
Hampshire RG21 6XS.
Palgrave Macmillan in the US is a division of St Martin’s Press LLC,
175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010.
Palgrave Macmillan is the global academic imprint of the above companies
and has companies and representatives throughout the world.
Palgrave® and Macmillan® are registered trademarks in the United States,
the United Kingdom, Europe and other countries.

ISBN 978-1-137-40760-3 ISBN 978-1-137-40761-0 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-1-137-40761-0

This book is printed on paper suitable for recycling and made from fully
managed and sustained forest sources. Logging, pulping and manufacturing
processes are expected to conform to the environmental regulations of the
country of origin.
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Richmond, Oliver P., editor.
Title: The Palgrave handbook of disciplinary and regional approaches to
peace / edited by Oliver P. Richmond, Research Professor, University of
Manchester, UK ; Sandra Pogodda, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of
Manchester, UK ; Jasmin Ramovic, University of Manchester, UK.
Other titles: Handbook of disciplinary and regional approaches to peace
Description: New York, NY : Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. | Includes
bibliographical references.
Identifiers: LCCN 2015033206 |
Subjects: LCSH: Peace-building—Case studies. | Peace-building—
International cooperation—Case studies.
Classification: LCC JZ5566.4 .P35 2016 | DDC 303.6/6—dc23
LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2015033206
Contents

List of Figures viii

Acknowledgements ix

Notes on the Editors x

Notes on the Contributors xi

Introduction 1
Oliver P. Richmond, Sandra Pogodda and Jasmin Ramović

Part I Disciplinary Perspectives

1 Peace in History 21
John Gittings

2 Politics and Governance: From Emergency to Emergence 32

David Chandler

3 The Philosophy of Peace 45

Nicholas Rengger

4 Peace in International Relations Theory 57

Oliver P. Richmond

5 Anthropology: Implications for Peace 69

Geneviève Souillac and Douglas P. Fry

6 Arts and Theatre for Peacebuilding 82

Nilanjana Premaratna and Roland Bleiker

7 Sociology: A Sociological Critique of Liberal Peace 95

Nicos Trimikliniotis

8 Economics: Neoliberal Peace and the Politics of Social Economics 110

Brendan Murtagh

9 Geography and Peace 123

Nick Megoran, Fiona McConnell and Philippa Williams

10 Peace and Development Studies 139

Caroline Hughes

11 Post-Colonialism: A Post-Colonial Perspective on Peacebuilding 154

Vivienne Jabri

v
vi Contents

12 Religion: Peace through Non-Violence in Four Religious

Traditions 168
Caron E. Gentry

13 Gender: The Missing Piece in the Peace Puzzle 181

Annika Björkdahl and Johanna Mannergren Selimovic

14 Education: Cultural Reproduction, Revolution and Peacebuilding

in Conflict-Affected Societies 193
Tejendra Pherali

15 Children and Peace 206

Bennett Collins and Alison Watson

16 Social Psychology and Peace 220

Shelley McKeown Jones and Daniel J. Christie

17 Humanitarianism and Peace 233

Jenny H. Peterson

18 International Law: To End the Scourge of War . . . and to Build a

Just Peace? 247
Wendy Lambourne

19 Indigeneity and Peace 259

Morgan Brigg and Polly O. Walker

20 Critical Security Studies and Alternative Dialogues for Peace:

Reconstructing ‘Language Barriers’ and ‘Talking Points’ 272
Faye Donnelly

Part II Regional Perspectives

21 South Africa’s Incomplete Peace 287
Andries Odendaal

22 Peace in West Africa 299

Patrick Tom

23 The Great Lakes Region of Africa: Local Perspectives on Liberal

Peacebuilding from the Democratic Republic of Congo 312
Josaphat Musamba Bussy and Carol Jean Gallo

24 Peace in the Horn of Africa 325

Christopher Clapham

25 Peace through Retribution or Reconciliation? Some Insights and

Evidence from South-East Asia 336
Sorpong Peou
 Contents vii

26 East Asia: Understanding the Broken Harmony in Confucian Asia 350

Ching-Chang Chen

27 Human Development and Minority Empowerment: Exploring

Regional Perspectives on Peace in South Asia 363
Florian Krampe and Ashok Swain

28 Peace and the Emerging Countries: India, Brazil, South Africa 376
Kai Michael Kenkel

29 Central Asia: Contested Peace 387

David Lewis

30 Middle East and North Africa: Hegemonic Modes of Pacification

in Crisis 398
Sandra Pogodda

31 Peace in Europe 411

Roberto Belloni

32 Peace in the Balkans: (En)countering the European Other 424

Jasmin Ramović

33 Peacebuilding in South America 438

Roddy Brett and Diana Florez

34 Central America: From War to Violence 450

Jenny Pearce

35 North America: Peace Studies versus the Hegemony of Realist and

Liberal Methods 463
Henry F. Carey

36 Peace in the Pacific: Grounded in Local Custom, Adapting to

Change 476
Volker Boege

Bibliography 489

Index 555
Figures

8.1 SRRP social impact analysis 119

viii
Acknowledgements

The editors would like to thank the hard-pressed authors who contributed to
this handbook. They have all tolerated difficult scheduling demands on their
time, in a very good-natured and supportive manner. We also thank the review-
ers, whose comments proved invaluable. The result is a handbook we all feel
proud of.

ix
Editors

Oliver P. Richmond is Research Professor of IR, Peace and Conflict Studies in

the Humanitarian and Conflict Response Institute, University of Manchester,
UK. He is also international professor, College of International Studies, Kyung
Hee University, Korea, and a visiting professor at the Centre for Peace Stud-
ies, University of Tromso, Norway. His publications include Failed Statebuilding
(2014), A Very Short Introduction to Peace (2014), A Post Liberal Peace (2011),
Liberal Peace Transitions (with Jason Franks, 2009), Peace in IR (2008) and The
Transformation of Peace (Palgrave Macmillan, 2005/7). He is the editor of the
Palgrave book series Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies and co-editor of the
journal Peacebuilding.

Sandra Pogodda is Lecturer in Peace and Conflict Studies in the Humanitarian

and Conflict Response Institute at the University of Manchester. She com-
pleted her PhD in international relations at the University of Cambridge as a
Marie Curie Fellow. Subsequently, she worked at Johns Hopkins University, the
US Institute of Peace and the University of St Andrews. Her research focuses on
state-formation processes in the revolutionary societies of the Arab region; resis-
tance movements; (post-)revolutionary challenges to peace and conflict studies;
and critical development studies.

Jasmin Ramović is a doctoral candidate at the Humanitarian and Conflict

Response Institute, University of Manchester. His research focuses on the role
of local agency in peacebuilding in the Balkans. Previously, he worked as a
lecturer, teaching undergraduate courses in political science and international
relations. As a UK Government Chevening scholar, he holds a master’s in inter-
national security studies from the University of St Andrews. He completed his
degree in political science at the University of Sarajevo. He has extensive expe-
rience working with various international organizations, including the United
Nations and the European Union missions to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

x
Contributors

Roberto Belloni is Associate Professor of International Relations at the Univer-

sity of Trento, Italy. Previously, he held research and teaching positions at the
University of Denver, Harvard, Johns Hopkins and Queens Belfast. His main
research interest is in post-conflict international intervention in deeply divided
societies, with particular reference to South-Eastern Europe. His publications
include Statebuilding and International Intervention in Bosnia (2008) as well as
more than 40 journal articles and book chapters.

Annika Björkdahl is Professor of Political Science at Lund University, Sweden.

Her research includes international and local peacebuilding, with a particular
focus on urban peacebuilding, and gender and transitional justice, and she is
currently directing three research projects on these themes. Among her recent
publications are the co-edited Rethinking Peacebuilding: The Quest for Just Peace
in the Middle East and the Western Balkans (2013) and the co-edited special issue
‘Precarious Peacebuilding: Friction in Global–Local Encounters’, Peacebuilding
1(3). Her articles have appeared in Peace and Change, Human Rights Review,
Journal of European Public Policy, International Peacekeeping and Security Dialogue.

Roland Bleiker is Professor of International Relations at the University of

Queensland. His books include Popular Dissent, Human Agency and Global Poli-
tics (2000), Divided Korea: Toward a Culture of Reconciliation (2005) and Aesthetics
and World Politics (Palgrave Macmillan, 2009). His most recent co-edited vol-
umes are Mediating across Difference: Pacific and Asian Approaches to Security and
Conflict (2010) and Emotions and World Politics (Forum in International Theory,
Fall 2014). He is currently working on a project that examines how images, and
the emotions they engender, shape responses to humanitarian crises.

Volker Boege is a research fellow at the School of Political Science and Interna-
tional Studies, University of Queensland, Australia. His fields of work include
post-conflict peacebuilding and state formation; non-Western approaches to
conflict transformation; and natural resources, environmental degradation and
conflict. His regional areas of expertise include the South Pacific, South-East
Asia and West Africa. He is currently working on a number of externally funded
projects. These projects address issues of peacebuilding, conflict resolution and
state formation in Pacific Island Countries and West Africa (Ghana and Liberia).
He has published numerous articles, papers and books in peace research and
contemporary history.

xi
xii Notes on the Contributors

Roddy Brett is a lecturer at the School of International Relations, University

of St Andrews, and Co-convenor of the M. Litt in Peace and Conflict Studies.
He has lived for over a decade in Latin America, principally in Guatemala and
Colombia, working as a scholar-practitioner in the fields of conflict and peace
studies, political and other forms of violence, genocide studies, social move-
ments, indigenous rights, democratization and transitions. He has published
and co-edited eight books and a series of articles on these subjects. He has acted
as advisor to the United Nations System in Latin America and to the Norwegian
Embassy in Guatemala.

Morgan Brigg is a senior lecturer at the School of Political Science and Inter-
national Studies, University of Queensland. His research examines questions
of culture, governance and selfhood in conflict resolution, peacebuilding and
development studies. In particular, he aims to develop ways of knowing across
cultural differences that work with local and Indigenous approaches to polit-
ical community and conflict management to advance conflict resolution and
peacebuilding efforts. His books include The New Politics of Conflict Resolution:
Responding to Difference, Mediating across Difference: Oceanic and Asian Approaches
to Conflict Resolution (co-edited with Roland Bleiker) and Unsettling the Settler
State: Creativity and Resistance in Indigenous Settler-State Governance (co-edited
with Sarah Maddison).

Josaphat Musamba Bussy is an instructor of graduate courses in international

relations and political science at the Free University of the Great Lakes and
at the University of Simon Kimbangu (USK) Bukavu, where he is also research
assistant to Professor Godefroid Muzalia of the study group on conflict. He has
a degree in international relations from USK Bukavu and is also a researcher
at the Centre of Research and Strategic Studies in Africa (CRESA), where his
research is focused on the dynamics of armed groups in the Great Lakes region;
post-conflict stabilization; and regional security.

Henry F. (Chip) Carey is Associate Professor of Political Science at Georgia

State University, where he has been based since 1998. He has published many
books and articles on international law, human rights and comparative democ-
ratization. He holds a PhD from Columbia University. His books include
Understanding International Law through Moot Courts: Genocide, Torture, Habeas
Corpus, Chemical Weapons and the Responsibility to Protect (2014), European Insti-
tutions, Democratization, and Human Rights Protection in the European Periphery
(2014), Trials and Tribulations of International Prosecution (2013), Privatizing the
Democratic Peace: Policy Dilemmas of NGO Peacebuilding (2012) and Reaping What
You Sow: A Comparative Examination of Torture Reform in the United States, France,
Argentina, and Israel (2012). His forthcoming edited volume is provisionally
 Notes on the Contributors xiii

titled European Governance in Turmoil but Not Tatters? He is the editor of United
Nations Law Reports, currently in its fiftieth year of publication.

David Chandler is Professor of International Relations and Director of the

Centre for the Study of Democracy, University of Westminster. His research
focuses on new forms of international intervention and regulation. He is the
founding editor of the journal Resilience: International Policies, Practices and Dis-
courses. He is the author of a number of monographs, including Resilience: The
Governance of Complexity (2014), Freedom vs Necessity in International Relations
(2013), International Statebuilding: The Rise of Neoliberal Governance (2010) and
Hollow Hegemony: Rethinking Global Politics, Power and Resistance (2009).

Ching-Chang Chen is an associate professor in the Department of Global

Studies, Ryukoku University, Japan. Before joining Ryukoku, he taught at
Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University (2009–15), including various field study
programmes in China, Korea and Taiwan. His current research focuses on crit-
ical security studies with reference to East Asia and non-Western international
relations theory. He has appeared in the media, including Al Jazeera and NHK,
and published articles in Issues & Studies, Journal of Chinese Political Science, Inter-
national Relations in the Asia-Pacific, Asian Perspective and Perceptions. His latest,
co-edited volume is Regional Responses to the North Korea Problem (2015). He
graduated from National Taiwan University and holds a PhD in international
politics from Aberystwyth University, Wales.

Daniel Christie is professor emeritus at Ohio State University, Visiting

Researcher at the University of South Africa and Fulbright Specialist in Peace
and Conflict Studies. His research and writing are focused on harmony and
equity in relationships and systems. He is the editor and founder of the Peace
Psychology Book Series, which currently includes more than 20 books, and The
Encyclopedia of Peace Psychology, a three-volume set. As a Fulbright Specialist, he
develops Peace and Conflict Studies programmes around the world.

Christopher Clapham is based at the Centre of African Studies, Cambridge

University, and has recently retired after 15 years as editor of The Journal of
Modern African Studies. Until December 2002, he was Professor of Politics and
International Relations at Lancaster University, England. He is a specialist in the
politics of Ethiopia and the Horn of Africa, and his books include Transforma-
tion and Continuity in Revolutionary Ethiopia (1988), Africa and the International
System: The Politics of State Survival (1996) and African Guerrillas (1998).

Bennett Collins is a research fellow with the Centre for Global

Constitutionalism at the School of International Relations, University of St
xiv Notes on the Contributors

Andrews, Scotland. His research interests focus on the fields of genocide stud-
ies, post-colonial studies, peacebuilding and transitional justice, particularly
with regard to minority and indigenous peoples. He is the editor of the spe-
cial issue for Peacebuilding, ‘Moving Forward in the Eastern Congo: Roles to Be
Played by the International Community’ (2014), and recently contributed to
the edited volume Indigenous Peoples’ Access to Justice, Including Truth and Rec-
onciliation Commissions (2014), edited by Elsa Stamatopoulou and Chief Wilton
Littlechild. He is currently leading and developing projects documenting and
examining truth and reconciliation commissions in North America and East
Africa.

Faye Donnelly is a lecturer in the School of International Relations at the

University of St Andrews. She is the author of Securitization and the Iraq
War: The Rules of Engagement (2013). Her most recent article, ‘The Queen’s
Speech: Desecuritizing the Past, Present and Future of Anglo-Irish Relations’,
has appeared in EJIR (2015). Currently, her research interests cut across the
fields of critical security, securitization and border studies, and coalesce around
an interest in the emergence of different lexicons and modalities of security.
In particular, she is exploring how security is communicated, expressed and
understood in non-verbal media.

Diana Florez is a practitioner who works at the United Nations Development

Programme in Colombia. She is a technical assistant in the UNDP office in
Norte de Santander, Colombia. Her research analyses issues of peacebuilding,
transitional justice and human rights.

Douglas P. Fry is a professor and chair of the Anthropology Department at

the University of Alabama at Birmingham, US, and concurrently Docent in the
Developmental Psychology Program at Åbo Akademi University in Finland. Fry
holds a doctorate in anthropology from Indiana University. He is the author
of Beyond War (2007) and The Human Potential for Peace (2006) and co-editor
of Keeping the Peace: Conflict Resolution and Peaceful Societies around the World
(2004) and Cultural Variation in Conflict Resolution: Alternatives to Violence (1997).
His most recent edited book is War, Peace and Human Nature (2013/15), which
brings together contributions from peace studies, evolutionary ecology, prima-
tology, forager studies, cultural anthropology, psychology and related fields to
explore the latest findings relevant to a peaceful view of human nature.

Carol Jean Gallo is a PhD student at Cambridge University. Her disserta-

tion is on Congolese peacebuilding actors’ perspectives on the disarmament,
demobilization and reintegration of ex-combatants in the Congo, and in par-
ticular on the World Bank’s Multi-Country Demobilization and Reintegration
 Notes on the Contributors xv

Program (MDRP). She spent most of 2013 in Bukavu, where she interned with
the Life & Peace Institute. She has an MA in African Studies from Yale, where
she had a fellowship to study Swahili.

Caron E. Gentry is a lecturer in the School of International Relations at the

University of St Andrews. Her work has focused on gender and terrorism for
over a decade. She has written on women’s involvement in politically violent
groups with articles in various journals, and her publications also include (with
Laura Sjoberg) Mothers, Monsters, Whores: Women’s Violence in Global Politics
(2007) and the edited volume Women, Gender, and Terrorism (2011). She has also
published in political theology, with a focus on the just war tradition and its
relationship with marginalized persons in international affairs. Her most recent
book is Offering Hospitality: Questioning Christian Approaches to War (2013).

John Gittings has specialized in Cold War studies and in the history of mod-
ern China, and was on the staff of The Guardian for 20 years as East Asia editor
and foreign leader writer. He was active in the early years of the Campaign
for Nuclear Disarmament, and in the International Confederation for Disarma-
ment and Peace. He left The Guardian in 2003 to return to the field of peace
studies, joining the editorial team of the Oxford International Encyclopedia of
Peace (2010). He is the author of The Glorious Art of Peace: From the Iliad to Iraq
(2012), The Changing Face of China (2005), Superpowers in Collision (with Noam
Chomsky and Jonathan Steele, 1982) and The World and China (1974). He is a
research associate at the China Institute, School of Oriental and African Studies,
London University.

Caroline Hughes is Professor of Conflict Resolution and Peace at the Univer-

sity of Bradford. She is the author of Dependent Communities: Aid and Politics in
Cambodia and East Timor (2009) and The Political Economy of Cambodia’s Tran-
sition (2003) and the co-author of The Politics of Accountability in South East
Asia (2014). She has also edited several collections on Asian politics, and has
written more than 50 articles, reports and chapters on aid and development
in post-conflict countries. She was previously the Director of the Asia Research
Centre at Murdoch University in Australia, and has a long-standing position
as an external advisor to the Cambodia Development Resource Institute in
Phnom Penh, Cambodia. She has been a faculty member at the universities
of Birmingham and Nottingham in the UK, and has held visiting positions at
the Australian National University and the University of Melbourne.

Vivienne Jabri is Professor of International Politics in the Department of War

Studies, King’s College London, Coordinator of the Research Centre for Inter-
national Relations and Director of the King’s Interdisciplinary Social Science
xvi Notes on the Contributors

Economic and Social Research Council Doctoral Training Centre (ESRC DTC).
She joined the department in 2003, having previously lectured at the Uni-
versity of St Andrews and the University of Kent. Her research draws on
critical and post-structural social and political theory to investigate the nexus
between international politics and war. Her current research and writing focus
on war/violence and conceptions of cosmopolitan political community in a
globalized world. She serves on the editorial boards of the journals International
Political Sociology and Security Dialogue, and the International Studies Associa-
tion’s new Journal of Global Security Studies. Her publications include Postcolonial
Subject: Claiming Politics/Governing Others in Late Modernity (2012), War and
the Transformation of Global Politics (Palgrave Macmillan, 2007), Discourses on
Violence (1996) and Mediating Conflict (1990).

Kai Michael Kenkel is an assistant professor in the Institute of International

Relations at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro, where he is
Director of Graduate Studies. He holds MA and PhD degrees from the Grad-
uate Institute (then IUHEI) in Geneva and an AB from the Johns Hopkins
University. His principal areas of research include United Nations peace oper-
ations, intervention and the responsibility to protect, as well as small arms.
He has published and advised extensively on these topics and is the editor of
three books. He has been editor of the Brazilian international relations journal
Contexto Internacional.

Florian Krampe is a peace researcher at the Department of Peace and Con-

flict Research and Director of the Forum for South Asia Studies at Uppsala
University. He is working on peacebuilding as well as environmental security
in Kosovo, Nepal and Afghanistan. In his current research, he is focusing on
environmental peacebuilding, particularly the consequences of climate change
mitigation for peacebuilding, resilience and critical local agency in Nepal.
In 2013, he published The Liberal Trap – Peacemaking and Peacebuilding in
Afghanistan after 9/11, which retraces the Afghanistan negotiations from 2001
and the role of external peacebuilders during the implementation phase in
Afghanistan. In addition, he has published on environmental/climate change
and conflict, as well as ‘new wars’, peacebuilding and reconciliation, dealing,
among others, with Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Afghanistan, South Africa,
Zimbabwe, Mozambique and Angola.

Wendy Lambourne is Deputy Director of the Centre for Peace and Conflict
Studies, University of Sydney. Her interdisciplinary research on transitional jus-
tice, trauma healing and peacebuilding after genocide and other mass violence
has a regional focus on sub-Saharan Africa and Asia/Pacific. Recent publica-
tions include chapters in Transitional Justice Theories (2014), Critical Perspectives
 Notes on the Contributors xvii

in Transitional Justice (2012) and The Development of Institutions of Human Rights

(Palgrave Macmillan, 2010), as well as articles in the Journal of Peacebuilding
and Development, International Journal of Transitional Justice, Genocide Studies
and Prevention and African Security Review. She has served as Co-convenor of
the Reconciliation and Transitional Justice Commission of the International
Peace Research Association since 2006, and holds postgraduate degrees in
international relations and international law.

David Lewis is Senior Lecturer in Politics in the Department of Politics, Uni-

versity of Exeter, UK. He previously worked as a senior research fellow and
senior lecturer in the Department of Peace Studies, University of Bradford.
He also spent five years working for the Brussels-based think-tank, the Inter-
national Crisis Group, in Central Asia and in Sri Lanka. He has published
widely on politics and security in the former Soviet Union, particularly focus-
ing on the states of the Caucasus and Central Asia. His recent research focuses
on the impact of non-Western states on discourses and practices of liberal
peacebuilding.

Johanna Mannergren Selimovic is a post-doctoral research fellow at the

Swedish Institute of International Affairs. Her research concerns peace pro-
cesses, with a special interest in reconciliation processes, politics of memory,
urban peacebuilding and gender. She is currently involved in two research
projects: Gender and Transitional Justice, and Divided Cities – Challenges
to Post-Conflict Peacebuilding and Development. Recent publications include
‘Challenges of Post-Conflict Coexistence: Narrating Truth and Justice in a
Bosnian Town’, Political Psychology (2015), ‘Gendered Justice Gaps in Bosnia-
Herzegovina’, Human Rights Review (co-authored with Annika Björkdahl, 2013)
and ‘Making Peace, Making Memory. Peacebuilding and Politics of Remem-
brance at Memorials of Mass Atrocities’, Peacebuilding (2013).

Fiona McConnell is Associate Professor of Human Geography at the Univer-

sity of Oxford and Tutorial Fellow at St Catherine’s College, Oxford. She holds
a PhD in geography from Queen Mary, University of London, and previously
worked at Newcastle University and Trinity College, Cambridge. As a politi-
cal geographer, she is interested in how communities officially excluded from
formal state politics are nevertheless engaging with aspects of statecraft, and
in using such seemingly anomalous cases as a lens to critically examine the
‘norms’ of governance. A significant part of her research to date has focused
on the Tibetan government-in-exile based in India. She has ongoing research
projects on geographies of peace; constructions and contestations of political
legitimacy; social and labour mobility in India’s post-liberal economy; and the
diplomatic practices and cultures of unrecognized polities.
xviii Notes on the Contributors

Shelley McKeown Jones is Lecturer in Psychology at the University of Bristol.

Her research focuses primarily on how social-psychological theories, such as
social identity theory and contact theory, can be used to understand and
improve intergroup relations. She has written a number of journal articles and
book chapters as well as a book on identity, segregation and peacebuilding in
Northern Ireland.

Nick Megoran is Lecturer in Political Geography at Newcastle University. He

writes about the role of nationalist territorial claims in international con-
flict, and has principally worked on the Danish–German, Uzbek–Kyrgyz and
Israeli–Palestinian interfaces. He also explores the role of religion in framing
geopolitical visions that are variously violent or pacific. He is also Co-convenor
of the Northumbria and Newcastle Universities Martin Luther King Peace Com-
mittee, which brings geographers and activists together to build cultures of
peace.

Brendan Murtagh is a reader in the School of Planning, Architecture and Civil

Engineering at the Queens University Belfast. He has researched and written
widely on ethnic segregation, urban planning and social economics.

Andries Odendaal is a senior associate at the Centre for Mediation in Africa,

University of Pretoria. He was a regional coordinator of the Western Cape
Peace Committee during South Africa’s transition to democracy in the early
1990s, and subsequently a project coordinator at the Centre for Conflict Res-
olution, University of Cape Town. He has written several journal articles and
book chapters, as well as A Crucial Link: Local Peace Committees and National
Peacebuilding (2013).

Jenny Pearce is Professor of Latin American Politics in the Department of Peace

Studies, University of Bradford, England. Her research focuses on violence,
social change, peacebuilding and participation in Latin America, particularly
Colombia and Central America, and she has published widely in these fields.
She has also worked on methodologies for researching violence, security and
peace, and since 2010 has collaborated with the Observatorio de Seguridad
Humana of Medellin on a participatory approach to building security in
contexts of chronic violence.

Sorpong Peou is a professor and chair of the Department of Politics and Pub-
lic Administration, Ryerson University, Toronto. Formerly, he served as chair
of the Department of Political Science, University of Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Prior to these appointments, he was Professor of International Security at
Sophia University, Tokyo, and a fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian
 Notes on the Contributors xix

Studies (Singapore). His fields of academic expertise are security and democ-
racy studies, with a regional focus on the Asia-Pacific. His publications include
Human Security Studies: Theories, Methods and Themes (2014), Peace and Security
in the Asia-Pacific (2010), Human Security in East Asia: Challenges for Collabora-
tive Action (ed., 2008) and International Democracy Assistance for Peacebuilding:
Cambodia and Beyond (Palgrave Macmillan, 2007). He is on the editorial boards
of Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies (Palgrave Macmillan) and the peer-
reviewed journal Asian Politics & Policy and serves as a regional editor of the
peer-reviewed journal The Asian Journal of Peacebuilding.

Jenny H. Peterson works in the Department of Political Science and Van-

tage College at the University of British Columbia. She is broadly interested
in the politics of international aid, with her past work analysing process of lib-
eral peacebuilding and critiques thereof. Engaging with debates on agonism,
resistance, hybridity and political space, she is now exploring diversity and
innovation, both local and international, in peace/justice movements.

Tejendra Pherali is Senior Lecturer in Education and International Devel-

opment at the UCL Institute of Education, University College London. His
research, teaching and consultancy focus mainly on interactions between edu-
cation, conflict and post-conflict peacebuilding in fragile environments. He
was the coordinator of a recently completed European Erasmus Intensive Pro-
gramme on Globalisation, Conflict and Learning Societies, in partnership with
four European universities from Denmark, Finland, Estonia and the UK. He was
also the principal investigator of an international research project on develop-
ing a higher education course on teacher education programmes in Cambodia
and Nepal. He is currently leading an inter-sectoral research project that focuses
on educational and health responses to the Syrian refugee crisis in Jordan
and Lebanon. His research publications have appeared in international jour-
nals, including International Journal of Educational Development and Prospects.
He holds a PhD in education and post-conflict peacebuilding, with a specific
focus on Maoist rebellion and school education in Nepal.

Nilanjana Premaratna is a PhD candidate at the School of Political Science and

International Studies, University of Queensland. Her current research focuses
on the role of theatre for peacebuilding in South Asia. She has published on art,
gender, peacebuilding and local conflict resolution methods in Sri Lanka.

Nicholas Rengger is Professor of Political Theory and International Relations at

the University of St Andrews and head of the School of International Relations.
He is also a Carnegie Council Global Ethics Fellow emeritus at the Carnegie
Council for Ethics and International Affairs, New York. He has held visiting
xx Notes on the Contributors

positions at the London School of Economics (1992), University of Southern

California (1995–96) and Centre for Theology and Philosophy at the University
of Nottingham (2010), and has served on the Executive of the British Interna-
tional Studies Association (2003–10) and the Governing Council of the Royal
Institute for International Affairs, Chatham House (1997–2010). He is a fellow
of the Academia Europaea.

Geneviève Souillac is presently conducting research on peace ethics at the

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in the Faculty of Theology and Religious Stud-
ies. Previously, she was senior university researcher in the Tampere Peace
Research Institute (TAPRI) at the University of Tampere, Finland, Senior Asso-
ciate Professor of Philosophy and Peace Studies at the International Christian
University in Tokyo, Japan, lecturer at Sydney University’s Centre for Peace and
Conflict Studies in Sydney, Australia, and earlier, academic program associate
at the United Nations University’s Peace and Governance Program in Tokyo,
where she directed a project on the ethics of international NGOs which led
to the publication Ethics in Action (2006). Her interests include contemporary
European philosophy, the philosophy and ethics of peace, religious ethics, and
civilizational dialogue. She is the author of Human Rights in Crisis. The Sacred
and the Secular in Contemporary French Thought (2005), The Burden of Democracy.
The Claims of Cultures, Public Culture, and Democratic Memory (2011) and A Study
in Transborder Ethics: Justice, Citizenship, Civility (2012).

Ashok Swain is Professor of Peace and Conflict Research at Uppsala University

and a professor at the Uppsala Centre for Sustainable Development, Depart-
ment of Earth Sciences. He holds a PhD from the Jawaharlal Nehru University,
New Delhi, and since 1991 he has been teaching at the Uppsala University.
He has been a MacArthur Fellow at the University of Chicago and a visit-
ing professor at the UN Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva;
University Witwatersrand, South Africa; University of Science, Malaysia; Uni-
versity of British Columbia; University of Maryland; Stanford University; and
McGill University. He has written extensively on security and development
issues.

Patrick Tom is co-founder, writer, editor and proof-reader at Mindleag Limited

and board member of the Zimbabwe Policy Dialogue Institute. He holds a PhD
in international relations from the University of St Andrews. He has taught
philosophy at the University of Zimbabwe, Arrupe College, United Theologi-
cal College and Christian College of Southern Africa, Zimbabwe. He interned
at the Foundation for Human Rights Initiative, Uganda, where he developed
a human rights training manual for the organization’s schools outreach pro-
gramme. His research interests include local and international peacebuilding,
 Notes on the Contributors xxi

African politics, conflict transformation, environmental philosophy, NGOs and

peacebuilding, Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Nicos Trimikliniotis is an associate professor at the School of Social Sciences,

University of Nicosia. He heads the Cyprus team for the Fundamental Rights
Agency of the EU. He is also a practising barrister. He has researched on integra-
tion, citizenship, education, migration, racism, free movement of workers, EU
law, discrimination and labour law. He is the national expert for Cyprus for the
European Labour Law Network. He is part of the international team working
on world deviance, which has produced Gauging and Engaging Deviance 1600–
2000 (2014) and is currently working on its sequel Scripts of Defiance. His work
includes: Mobile Commons, Migrant Digitalities and the Right to the City (Palgrave
Macmillan, 2015), Beyond a Divided Cyprus: A State and Society in Transformation
(Palgrave Macmillan, 2012), The Nation-State Dialectic and the State of Excep-
tion (2010) and Rethinking the Free Movement of Workers: The European Challenges
Ahead (2009).

Polly O. Walker is of Cherokee and Anglo-American descent, and is a member

of the Cherokee Southwest Township in New Mexico. She serves as Assistant
Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies at Juniata College, lecturer at James
Cook University and chair of the Indigenous Education Institute. She holds
a PhD in conflict transformation from the University of Queensland. Her work
has appeared in a range of peer-reviewed journals and edited volumes, and
focuses on conflict transformation involving Indigenous and settler peoples,
recentring Indigenous knowledge systems, and the role of ritual and cere-
mony in peacebuilding. She is co-editor of Acting Together on the World Stage:
Performance and the Creative Transformation of Conflict. Vol. I Resistance and Recon-
ciliation in Regions of Violence and Vol. II Building Just and Inclusive Communities,
contributor to the documentary Acting Together on the World Stage and co-author
of the Acting Together Toolkit.

Alison Watson is Professor of International Relations at the University of St

Andrews, UK, and a member of the Centre for Global Constitutionalism. Her
primary research interest lies in an emphasis upon grassroots perspectives on
peace and peacebuilding. This has included a body of work on the place of chil-
dren and youth in the international system and an ongoing examination into
questions of rights and agency. She is currently working on issues surrounding
the rights and representations of Indigenous peoples in North America and East
Africa.

Philippa Williams is Lecturer in Human Geography at Queen Mary Uni-

versity of London and holds a PhD from the University of Cambridge. Her
xxii Notes on the Contributors

research is animated by questions concerning violence and non-violence, cit-

izenship and justice, marginalization and the politics of development. She is
currently involved in projects on the geographies of peace, material politics
of transnational citizenship, social and labour mobility in India’s post-liberal
economy and the politics of development in India.
Introduction
Oliver P. Richmond, Sandra Pogodda and Jasmin Ramović

Dimensions of peace: Disaggregating disciplinary and regional

approaches

Recent developments and debates have outlined the need for more inter-
disciplinary work in international relations and peace and conflict studies.
Scholars, students and policy makers are often disillusioned with universalist
and Northern-dominated approaches, in terms of methodology and epistemol-
ogy.1 Universal blueprints on how to promote, build and sustain peace have
to contend with not only ineffective policy designs, but also resistance within
their ‘subject’ populations.2 What is needed is a better understanding of the
variations of peace and its building blocks, both theoretically, in different aca-
demic disciplines, and empirically, across different regions, in order to promote
a more differentiated notion of peace based on comparative analysis.3 Such an
aim points to significant methodological requirements.4
This endeavour is particularly relevant given the recent centennial anniver-
sary of the start of the First World War, which set in motion the fall of European
empires and influenced perceptions on a number of important issues such as
the state, nationalism, genocide, hegemony, democracy and decolonization.
One consequence was the establishment of the discipline of international rela-
tions (IR), which, in its early days at least, had peace – through international
organization – at its focus. One century later, it is crucial to revisit the question
of peace in IR and how the discipline has moved away from its original focus.
Moreover, this anniversary provides an incentive to compare how perceptions
and practices of peace have evolved over time in different parts of the world and
across different disciplines. The twentieth century saw the development of late
colonial, social and authoritarian versions of peace, and contemporary liberal
peace arguments. The end of direct colonialism, and later the Cold War, was fol-
lowed by the emergence of liberal internationalism, which has now morphed
into liberal institutionalism, the democratic peace and the liberal peace – all
variations on a similar theme. This evolution has formed the backbone of the

1
2 Introduction

contemporary architecture for peace. However, it is currently being challenged

from a range of perspectives, including by state and non-state actors, markets
and capital, and various organizations, as well as from different normative and
cultural positions.
For example, the recent rise of non-Northern actors has increasingly led
to their associated interests and values being inserted into debates and pol-
icy. To a greater or lesser extent, this has been reflected across the different
venues for peacemaking. These include a powerful internal critique of Western
social science and its epistemic power. Further challenges have arisen from
the contradictions within the liberal democratic, capitalist peace model. Such
dynamics represent a moving target for scholars. Nonetheless, these phenom-
ena need to be captured, according to the evolving nuances in debates on peace
in disciplines other than IR and political science, as well as epistemic vari-
ations in regional studies approaches. This volume provides leading scholars
in many different areas with space to consider the social, cultural, economic,
political and environmental underpinnings of peace from their intellectual per-
spectives. In the following chapters, selected authors explain how peace is
debated and contested internally/locally, as well as their views of Northern
approaches to peacebuilding, statebuilding, development and conflict reso-
lution/transformation from these perspectives. Contributors respond to the
following questions in various ways:

(i) How is peace understood in each discipline/region?

(ii) How far does this understanding diverge from the still-dominant liberal
peace?
(iii) What are the relevant debates on peace in your field, and are they essential
within each discipline?
(iv) Has the notion of peace changed over time, and if so, what has effected
this change?

Regional experts will, moreover, try to tease out the particular, empirical char-
acteristics of peace processes, their systemic obstacles and underlying driving
forces in their areas, through the following questions:

(i) How has peace been contested in each region, by whom, through which
strategies, and to what effect?
(ii) Is peacemaking mainly a top-down project or driven by local peace
agencies (or both)?
(iii) How do international and grassroots strategies for peace interact?

Given the diversity of perspectives covered in this book, the editors cannot (and
do not want to) predict how disciplinary and regional perspectives connect.
 Oliver P. Richmond, Sandra Pogodda and Jasmin Ramović 3

This book is intended to prompt this debate and illuminate the divergence and
similarities between different perspectives. That said, in the following section
we make a preliminary attempt to point to key patterns and connections. The
contributors’ chapters on disciplinary or regional debates do not present a uni-
fied approach, but they do allow the editors to capture the internal debates and
rationalities of each.

A summary of disciplinary approaches

The first section of the book outlines many important disciplinary perspec-
tives on peace. Though politics, IR and anthropology are crucial, none of
them can solve the problem of peace, from their international or grassroots
positionality, without a historical perspective on the requirements for peace
and justice. History offers a rich platform from which to view debates about
social peace, the state and international order. It enables an understanding
of the long-term practices of power and peace, and the obstacles to order
that both address. Historians have been reassessing the conventional narra-
tives of international history, particularly since the end of the Second World
War, and challenging the dominant Realist approach. Historical revisionism
provided some bases for peace historians to examine the development of the
Cold War as well as the liberal peace era, as Chapter 1, by John Gittings,
argues.
Chapter 2 covers the discipline with probably the longest-standing and (from
a critical perspective) most unsatisfactory perspective on peace. Emerging from
political theory, the debate on the good life, the nature of the state and cit-
izenship was partly aimed at understanding how peace and justice might be
aligned with politics and institutions. In its longue durée, from Plato to Cicero,
from Hobbes to Marx, and on to more contemporary debates influenced by
the likes of Foucault, there have been numerous shifts in understanding policy
making for the governance of peace. In David Chandler’s chapter, he points to
the emergence of a model of intervention, focusing on the problem of society’s
own capacities and needs and internal and organic processes. Yet, the state and
related practices of statebuilding in this guise have been paralleled by a grow-
ing scepticism over attempts to export or impose Western models based on an
epistemological consensus first resting on liberal and now on neoliberal models
of politics and statehood. The search for a linear rationality of the development
of peaceful politics, embodied in the state and its position in modern regional
relations and the global economy, has maintained an interventionist mindset,
without specialist knowledge of anything other than abstract notions of politi-
cal economy. While the first millennia of political theorizing over the state and
its relation to the good life and citizenship opened up questions of justice and
equality, recent political approaches to peace suggest a bureaucratic mentality
4 Introduction

lacking the essence of politics. This unleashes the possibility, if not the right, of
intervention.
Without an understanding of the various norms of peace and the methods
by which the search for the good life might be achieved, key disciplinary con-
tributions cannot succeed. As Nicholas Rengger argues in Chapter 3, political
and moral cases for peace tend to be problematic where they search for absolute
positions, even such as pacifism. What is more important is constant prepara-
tion and readiness for peace, a debate that has long been carried forward in
discussions of just war.
In Chapter 4 Oliver Richmond outlines how IR theory has been reluctant to
engage with peace beyond the confines of state-centric and elite relations, as
outlined in Realist and Liberal theories. Its engagement with so-called bottom-
up, social ontologies is a rather recent trend. Similarly, the development of an
empathetic account of emancipation (in its global form) based upon mutual
ontologies and methods of peace is new to the discipline. As IR theory has
evolved, it has become clearer that to understand the conditions of peace, inter-
disciplinary and cross-cutting coalitions of scholars, policy makers, individuals
and civil society actors must develop discursive understandings of peace and
its construction. Developing multiple conceptions of peace, focused upon the
everyday life of their constituents in the context of an institutional framework
and social contract, involves an exploration of different and hybrid ontologies
of peace.
Many disciplines have, at some time or other, foregrounded context, includ-
ing the subaltern, local agency and custom, as well as identity, as sources of
legitimacy and knowledge for peace. Sometimes legitimacy and knowledge are
contradictory, requiring resolution and reconciliation. Human societies wedded
to exclusive forms of identity face the same need. An anthropology of peace,
as Geneviève Souillac and Douglas P. Fry argue in Chapter 5, can serve to lay
the ground for the reconciliation of difference while also respecting this very
difference. According to the authors, all societies have conflict management
and resolution mechanisms, which challenge internal and external notions of
cultural superiority, and focus on building a normative consensus about the
necessary conditions of human well-being. At the same time, though, such
‘local knowledge’ and attendant systems are often undermined by direct and
structural forms of power (militarization, industrialization or external incur-
sions). In a pattern repeated throughout the chapters in this book, local and
indigenous conflict resolution practices do respond and try to recover, even if
they are confronted with violent change. To cope with overwhelming societal
needs, such localized praxis often turns to the international for support.
In Chapter 6, we learn that beyond the realms of rationality, facts, norms and
utilitarianism, and as we move more deeply into ethnographic considerations,
peace is connected to the aesthetics, creativity and emotions associated with
 Oliver P. Richmond, Sandra Pogodda and Jasmin Ramović 5

the arts. Nilanjana Premaratna and Roland Bleiker highlight several potential
contributions (while acknowledging the regressive aspects of the arts), related
to overcoming entrenched discourses in conflict-prone communities, dealing
with emotions and trauma, reaching the grassroots and bringing out multiple
and often marginal voices to create a discourse and possibly even a practice of
reconciliation.
In this direction, the debate begins to return to the social. In Chapter 7,
Nicos Trimikliniotis argues that liberal peace ‘remedies’ are no longer ade-
quate or feasible. He argues that sociological modes of explaining peace
point to a ‘critical peace’ that requires a fundamental reconsideration of
peacebuilding, peacekeeping and reconstruction. ‘Critical conflict sociology’
thus enables social self-reflexivity and transformation, so far lacking from
militarized, political or economic intervention.
Chapter 8 turns to another very controversial discipline in the discussion of
peace: economics. Brendan Murtagh examines the question of the everyday as
a source of peace from an economic perspective. He argues that neoliberalism
undermines everyday struggles and agency and the essence of society itself,
which clearly is contradictory to the aim of peace. Social economics offers one
site of agency that may recondition mainstream neoliberal economics and its
tendency to place profit and efficiency over peace even in societies where the
proscription against violence in some quarters has been lost.
The following chapter offers a new perspective on a discipline seemingly
rarely mentioned in peace and conflict studies: geography. Nick Megoran,
Fiona McConnell and Philippa Williams argue that there are shifting geo-
graphic contours of and for peace, and the discipline has long been committed
to thinking about peace. They themselves have been aiming to introduce a
more critical approach to peace within the discipline, especially relating to
‘power, equity and justice in places and between spaces’. Places and spaces
reproduce the dynamics of conflict. Hence, peace needs to be also spatially
constructed through concepts such as hospitality, cooperation and solidarity.
Such insights challenge the growing neoliberalization of the academy as well
as policy making relevant to peace matters.
In Chapter 10, Caroline Hughes traces the relationship between develop-
ment studies and peace studies. She shows how this link has consistently
reflected the ideological orientations of the great powers, something to which
both disciplines have mounted a long-standing challenge. Voices from the
Global South and from non-state institutions directed structural critiques ear-
lier on, and more recently post-structural critiques, engaging with material
and identity questions. On occasion, such critiques of mainstream develop-
ment have become influential, but these concepts were quickly translated into
something less radical than would be expected in the service of a positive
peace.
6 Introduction

If much of what has preceded represents views of peace from a

Western/Northern and Eurocentric perspective, then the next step would be to
begin to open up the historical dynamics and lingering effects of colonialism
on peace in international and domestic politics. This implies the difficult task of
teasing out the epistemic dynamics of a post-colonial understanding of peace,
as Vivienne Jabri does in Chapter 11.
Caron E. Gentry discusses how the four major world religions understand
peace in Chapter 12. She argues that all recognize that individual actions
have external impacts that need to be regulated by norms, among which non-
violence is common to all the main religions. The spiritual dimension of reli-
gions promotes creative solutions to conflicts by valorizing love, social justice
and empathy among other positive, relational qualities in a world of difference.
In Chapter 13, Annika Björkdahl and Johanna Mannergren Selimovic offer
a gender perspective of and for peace. They argue that gender issues and
feminist research have made possible an important rethinking of structure
and agency leading to a productive critique of mainstream understandings of
peace. They point to problematic assumptions related to gender and agency,
which close down the plurality of subjects and spaces involved in peace. This
points to the need for a gender-sensitive consideration of the everyday and the
connections between the personal and the international. They also point to
matters of structural violence in gendered terms, connecting it also to tempo-
ral dimensions of justice. Their complex and reflective reading leads to a clear
statement about peace from a gender perspective: peace is plural and must per-
tain at the everyday level, including gender equality as well as equal rights and
opportunities.
In Chapter 14, Tejendra Pherali analyses the connection between education
and peace. He identifies education as both the target and a tool for the perpetu-
ation of globalization’s most worrisome impacts: militarization and inequality.
In this chapter, education is characterized as a dual-purpose instrument, either
serving societal unity and the transformation of cultures of violence, or fuelling
conflict through exclusion and marginalization.
Bennett Collins and Alison Watson turn to the perspective of children and
peace in Chapter 15. The authors highlight a paradox at the heart of the liberal
peace: while children are central to contemporary conceptions of human rights,
and thus to the liberal peace project itself, they tend to remain excluded from
its conceptual development and marginalized in the practice of peace processes.
As the future of any conflict-affected society, children and their welfare should
be central to peace and its study, requiring an alternative epistemology upon
which to ground peace.
In Chapter 16, the book turns to social psychology. Shelley McKeown Jones
and Daniel J. Christie illustrate how social psychologists have enabled micro-
level perspectives of peace and war, which have not been thoroughly utilized
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 print, and yet we had to send to England for paper to do the
job. Also all the pronunciation marks for Webster’s dictionary
were to be put in, and we did not have the type or the
matrices. I had to have the letters cut on wood, and matrices
made; this was a world of trouble. Some of the letters were
cut over half-a-dozen times or more, and after all they were
far from perfect. I also had a set of shaped music types cut,
and this took a deal of time and pains to get them all properly
cut, as also to get the matrices made. I finally succeeded
quite well in both respects.... I also experimented not a little in
stereotyping, and succeeded in doing fair work. I trained one
boy who stereotyped Matthew before I left. In order to carry it
on effectually and rapidly I had a furnace and press made and
fitted up, which after sundry changes worked very well.... I
also had a new style of case for Chinese type made, which I
think will be an improvement on the old. I also had a complete
and thorough overhauling of the matrices, reassorted them
all, and had new cases made. This was a serious job, but it
will I am sure prove a very great help to the efficient working
of the establishment.

He consented to manage the press only until a competent man

could be secured to take it off his hands. When casting about for
such a person, his mind had been directed to his brother John,
nearly a year before he was himself forced into this position. John
had hoped to go to college, and to prepare for the ministry, and to go
out as a missionary, but, on account of certain tendencies developed
as to his health, he was compelled to abandon his purpose. As to his
mechanical gifts and his ability to turn them into use in a great
variety of ways, he resembled Calvin; and the latter was so confident
that John could soon fit himself to be a competent superintendent of
the press at Shanghai that he advised the Board of Missions to make
inquiry in regard to him. The result was that eventually he was
selected for the place, and he arrived in China early in August, 1871.
Before he could satisfactorily enter on his duties it was necessary for
him to acquire some knowledge of the language and to acquaint
himself with the business committed to his charge. This detained
Calvin until late in that year; and after a period of some three months
spent at Tengchow, he returned to Shanghai to assist John in moving
the press to new and much better premises that had been
purchased. The moving proper was a heavy job, requiring a week of
hard, dirty labor. The distance was about a mile, mostly by water, but
by land a hundred or more yards at either end. While thus engaged,
although he was no longer officially at the head of the business, he
took the main charge, so as to allow his brother to give his time
chiefly to the acquisition of the language and to other things that he
needed to learn.
The new place is the same now occupied by the press in Peking
Road. Under the superintendency of Rev. G. F. Fitch, it has become
the center not only of the Presbyterian missions, but of the general
missionary activity all over China. In writing to his brother as early as
November, 1869, he said of this plant: “It is a very important place,
and would give you an extensive field for doing good. The
establishment is not very large, it is true, as compared with similar
establishments in such cities as New York or Philadelphia; yet it is
the largest and best of the kind in China. It not only does all the
printing for all our missionaries, but a great deal of job work for
others; besides making and selling a large amount of type.” After he
had completed his term of the management, and while helping John
to get into the traces, he wrote to one of the secretaries of the Board:

I am not in favor of enlargement, but I would be very sorry

to see the present efficiency of the press curtailed. It is doing
a great and a good work not only for our missions, but for all
China. It has exerted a prodigious collateral influence both in
China and in Japan, affording facilities for the production of all
kinds of scientific books, dictionaries, and so forth. Aside from
any general interest in the missionary work, having at no
small sacrifice left my proper work and given more than a
year to the press, and also having a brother here in charge of
it, I feel a lively interest in its future.
 The last record that has come down to us concerning his work
there is: “We have just sold to the Chinese government a large font
of Chinese type. They are going to use movable metal type. This is a
large step for them to take, and it will do good. China yields slowly,
but she is bound to yield to Christianity and Christian civilization.”
At no subsequent period of his life had he any part in the
management of a printing establishment, but indirectly he continued
to have much to do with the press. He was a member of a joint
committee of the Shantung and the Peking mission, in charge of
publications, and as such he had to acquaint himself with what was
needed, and with what was offered, so as to pass intelligent
judgment. Unofficially and as a friend whose aid was solicited, he
revised one or more of the books which his associates submitted to
him for criticism. At the General Conference of Missionaries, held at
Shanghai in 1877, a committee, of which he was a member, was
appointed to take steps to secure the preparation of a series of
schoolbooks for use in mission schools. Not long afterward he
published an elaborate paper on the subject, discussing in it the
character which such publications should have, and especially
calling attention to the need of peculiar care as to the Chinese words
which ought to be employed in the treatises on the sciences. That
committee diligently set itself to work, and initiated measures for a
rather comprehensive set of books by various missionaries to meet
the want recognized in this general field. He was himself called upon
to prepare several books, some of which he was willing to undertake;
others he put aside as not properly falling to him. In one or two
instances he claimed for himself precedence as to treatises
suggested for others to write. Some friction occurred, and when the
Conference met again in 1890 that committee was discharged, and
an Educational Association, composed of missionaries familiar with
the needs of schools, and confining its functions more exclusively to
the publication of books for teaching—largely under his leadership—
was formed. He was its first chairman. This change he had warmly
favored, and he was an active member of the Association. In it he
was chairman of a committee on scientific terms in Chinese, a
subject of great difficulty, and of prime importance in the preparation
of text-books. In the subsequent years he was so much occupied
with the revision of the Mandarin Bible, and with other duties, that he
could give to the technical terms only a secondary place in his
activities. Still, six years after he accepted this chairmanship he
says: “I have collected a large number of lists of subjects for terms in
chemistry, physics, mathematics, astronomy, geology, metallurgy,
photography, watch-making, machinery, printing, music, mental and
moral philosophy, political economy, theology, and so forth.”
Subsequently he continued this work.
The first literary production of his own pen in Chinese was a tract
on infant baptism; this was called forth by local conditions at
Tengchow. A small sheet tract, entitled “A Prayer in Mandarin,” also
followed early. As chairman of the committee appointed by the
Educational Association, he made a report on chemical terms, and
recommended a new and distinctively Chinese method for the
symbols in that science. This was printed.
In a preliminary report of the Shanghai press, made in September,
1871, he, in a list of books in course of preparation, mentions under
his own name as author the following: “1. Catechism on Genesis,
with answers to the more difficult questions,—finished, needing only
a slight revision. 2. An explanation of the moral law as contained in
the ten commandments,—half-finished. 3. Scripture Text-Book and
Treasury, being Scripture references by subjects, supplying in great
part the place of a concordance,—one-third finished.” All of these
had been under way for several years, but had been frequently
shunted off the track by other imperative work. Very soon after that
date the catechism was published. He had a good deal to do with
Julia’s “Music Book,” especially in coining appropriate terminology,
though he never claimed joint authorship in it. Along with Dr. Nevius,
he published a hymn book for use in Chinese services; and down to
the close of his life, especially on a Sabbath when he did not preach,
he now and then made an additional Chinese version of a hymn. In
fact, whenever he heard a new hymn that especially moved him he
wished to enrich the native collection by a translation of it into their
speech. One which the Chinese came greatly to like was his
rendering of the Huguenot song, “My Lord and I.” A subject that was
always dominant in his mind and heart was the call to the ministry,
and it was significant that one of the last things on which he worked
was a translation of the hymn which has the refrain, “Here am I, send
me.” It was not quite finished when his illness compelled him to lay
down his pen; but recently at a meeting of the Chinese student
volunteers, constituting a company rising well toward one hundred
and fifty, that hymn was printed on cards, and a copy was given to
each of these candidates for the ministry. In 1907 he had carried a
theological class through the Westminster Shorter Catechism, and
as an outcome his translation was published. This is the last
religious book he made in Chinese. During his long service as a
missionary he taught a number of theological classes in various
studies, and his lectures were regarded as very superior, but he
published none of them.
His schoolbooks all originated in the necessities of his own work
as a teacher. The first thus to force itself upon his attention was an
arithmetic. He was already at work on it in 1868, and it went to press
while his brother John was superintending the plant at Shanghai.
The preparation of such a book, to one unacquainted with the
conditions under which this one was made, may seem to have been
a rather easy undertaking, and to have required little more than a
sufficient mastery of the Chinese language and of English; yet there
were some perplexing questions that arose in connection with it. For
instance, the method of writing numbers horizontally was wholly
unknown to the Chinese. Should the new arithmetic use the western,
or should it retain the Chinese method? To retain the Chinese would
be to train the pupils in a usage that would be confusing in
subsequent reading of western mathematics; to abandon it would be
equally confusing in printing the text of the book, which, according to
Chinese usage, must be arranged perpendicularly. The difficulty was
gotten over by duplicating each pattern example, giving it once
horizontally and once perpendicularly. Pupils using the book were
permitted to take their choice in performing their work, but in the text
proper all numbers appeared vertically. Such lines as those dividing
the numerator and denominator of a fraction stood perpendicularly,
with the figures to the right and the left. Until he published his
arithmetic, the Chinese numerals had been employed; he introduced
the Arabic. At the dawn of the new era subsequent to the Boxer
outbreak, almost the first book in demand by Chinese teachers and
pupils outside the mission schools was a western arithmetic; and
among others put upon the market were many “pirated” editions of
Mateer’s book, printed on cheap paper and with wooden blocks. The
publishers had not yet learned the significance of “copyright.” The
circulation of the book, however brought about, had at least the
effect of immediately increasing the reputation of its author among
the scholarly classes outside the church. Of the editions issued by
the press at Shanghai tens of thousands of copies have been sold.
Dr. Fitch writes that “it is impossible to state the total number,” and
that “the book has gone into all parts of the empire.”
In October, 1884, he submitted to the schoolbook committee of the
Educational Association the manuscript of his geometry, and in doing
so he said of it:

It is the result of much pains and labor.... The book is

written in plain Wen-li, and much pains has been taken to
make it smooth in style and accurate in meaning. In the few
equations used I have introduced the mathematical signs
employed in the West, of which I have given a full explanation
in the beginning of the book.... Mathematical signs and
symbols are a species of universal language, used alike by all
civilized nations, and it is unwise to change them until it is
absolutely necessary. The young men who have given most
effective assistance in the preparation of this geometry are
decided in their opinion that we should not change or garble
the mathematical symbolism of the West, but give it to them in
its integrity. The only change made is in writing equations
perpendicularly instead of horizontally,—a change which is
necessitated by the form of Chinese writing.

The book was published the following year. To the same

committee he reports in March, 1882, that his algebra was then all in
manuscript, and only needing revision and some rearrangement
before printing. The geometry was followed by his algebra, first part.
These have had a large sale, though, because fewer studied this
branch, not the equal of the arithmetic.
On January 14, 1908, he sent to the manager of the press the
preface to the second volume of his algebra, which covers the same
ground as the “University” edition in the United States. Of this Dr.
Hayes says: “Over twenty years ago he began the preparation of
Part II of his algebra, and the draft then made was used in
manuscript for many years. Other duties pressed upon him, and he
was compelled to lay it away unfinished. Yet he had not forgotten it,
but from time to time he would make a step in advance. It was only a
few months before his death that the work was completed and
published.”
There were a number of other books which he planned, on some
of which he did considerable work, but none of which he completed.
One of these was so colossal in its projected scope and scholarship
that it deserves special notice because indicative of the large things
to which early in his missionary career he was already eager to give
his time and abilities. This was a Mandarin dictionary. In its
preparation he sought to associate with himself Rev. Chauncey
Goodrich, of Peking; and in writing to him under date of June 6,
1874, he thus stated his conception of the work:

My idea of the book is a dictionary of the spoken language

of north China, in all its length and breadth, including on the
one hand all the colloquialisms that the people use in
everyday life,—all they use in Chi-li and in Shantung, and in
all the Mandarin-speaking provinces, so far as we can get it,
noting, of course, as such, the words and phrases we know to
be local. Further, let it include as a prominent feature all sorts
of ready-made idiomatic phrases, and in general all
combinations of two or more characters in which the meaning
coalesces, or varies from the simple rendering of the separate
characters.

Considerable preliminary work had already been done, when the

death of Mrs. Goodrich compelled her husband to withdraw from the
partnership; and the project was abandoned by Mateer, though with
a hope that it might be resumed. In 1900, however, as the fruit of this
and kindred studies he published an analysis of two thousand one
hundred and eighteen Chinese characters. This little book was
designed to help children in dictation exercises to write characters,
and is still largely used for this purpose by mission schools. The
huge dictionary, though never completed, had three direct
descendants. With Dr. Goodrich it produced first a Chinese phrase
book, and then a pocket Chinese-English dictionary, which for brevity
and comprehensiveness is a marvel, and which is regarded by
almost every student of Chinese as a necessity. In marked contrast
with these two volumes is an immense dictionary left behind in
manuscript by Dr. Mateer. It is wholly in Chinese; and as it lies
unfinished it occupies more than a cubic foot of space, and consists
of a set of volumes. No comprehensive dictionary of the Chinese
language has been published for two hundred and fifty years, and
the last issued had been mainly classical. The object of this was to
supply the evident need of a great new work of that sort. One
insurmountable difficulty encountered was a phonetic arrangement
commanding common usage. None had the requisite approval.
Fortunately, on this undertaking Dr. Mateer did not spend his own
time, except so far as that was necessary to direct the preparation of
it by his scribes when they were not otherwise employed.
In his letter to his college classmates in 1897 he says that he has
“well in hand a work on electricity, and one on homiletics prepared
when teaching theology.” Neither of these was finished and
published. To his college classmate, S. C. T. Dodd, Esq., he wrote in
1898 that he was trying also to finish a work on moral philosophy. In
March, 1878, he wrote to Dr. W. A. P. Martin, of Peking: “You will
remember probably that when you were here I spoke of my intention
to make a natural philosophy by and by. You said, ‘Go ahead,’ and
that you would retire in my favor by the time mine was ready, say, ten
years hence. If I am spared I hope to have the book ready within the
time, if not sooner. As you know, natural philosophy is my hobby, and
I have taught it more thoroughly probably than has been done in any
other school in China. I intend when I visit America to prepare myself
with the material and the facilities for such work.” He was not able to
find time for this work; and when later Dr. Martin invited him to write
for the revised edition of his treatise the chapter on electricity, this
privilege had for the same reason to be put aside. He had also
advanced far toward the completion of a translation of “Pilgrim’s
Progress” into Mandarin.
His “Mandarin Lessons” was published early in 1892, and
immediately commanded a success even larger than its author may
have anticipated. Ever since, it has gone on toward a more general
use by foreigners wishing to master the language, and has now far
outstripped every other work of its kind. He was a quarter of a
century in making the book. June 28, 1873, he made the following
entry in his Journal concerning it:

Most of last week and this I have spent in making lessons

and planning a much larger number than I have made. Mr.
Mills urged me to work at them for Dr. ⸺’s benefit, as he did
not seem to take hold of Wade. I did not think of what a job I
was sliding into when I made three lessons for Maggie a few
years ago. I have now laid out quite an extensive plan, and if I
am spared I trust I shall be able to finish it, though it will take
a deal of work. I believe that I can produce a far better book
than any that has yet been brought forth. I was not intending
to do this work now, and cannot work much more at it, as
other matters imperatively demand attention.

Guided by the hint in this quotation, we are able to trace the book
still farther back to its very beginning. June 20, 1867, he said in his
Journal: “Maggie Brown [Julia’s sister] has been pushing on pretty
lively with the Chinese. I made her lessons for a good while, which
she studies, and now she is reading ‘The Peep of Day.’ I tried to
make her lessons with a view to bringing out the peculiarities of
Chinese idiom. It led me to a good deal of thinking and investigating.
I have a mind to review and complete the work, and may some day
give it to the world. My great difficulty is in classifying the results
attained.”
 As the years went by his ideas of the plan for the work took
definite shape. In one of his letters concerning it he wrote:

Each lesson illustrates an idiom, the word idiom being

taken with some latitude. The sentences, as you will see, are
gathered from all quarters, and introduce every variety of
subjects. I have also introduced every variety of style that can
be called Mandarin, the higher style being found chiefly in the
second hundred lessons. The prevailing object, however, is to
help people to learn Mandarin as it is spoken. I have tried to
avoid distinct localisms, but not colloquialisms. A large
acquaintance with these is important, not to say essential, to
every really good speaker of Mandarin. It is, of course,
possible to avoid the most of them, and to learn to use a
narrow range of general Mandarin which never leaves the
dead level of commonplace expressions, except to introduce
some stilted book phrase. This, however, is not what the
Chinese themselves do, nor is it what foreigners should seek
to acquire. Many colloquialisms are very widely used, and
they serve to give force and variety to the language,
expressing in many instances what cannot be expressed in
any other way. I have tried to represent all quarters, and in
order to do so I have in many cases given two or more forms.

In the pursuit of his plan he sought the aid of competent scholars

in the north and in central China, so as to learn the colloquialisms
and the usage of words; also in the preparation of a syllabary of the
sounds of characters as heard in each of the large centers where
foreigners are resident. To accomplish this he also traveled widely.
Late in 1889, after a summer spent in studying the dialects of China,
he, in company with Julia, made a three months’ trip to the region of
the Yangtse, going down on the Grand Canal, spending a month on
the great river, and remaining a month at Nanking; always with the
main purpose of informing himself as to the current Mandarin, so as
to perfect his book. This tour enabled him to give it the final revision;
and in his opinion it “more than doubled the value” of the “Lessons.”
As finished, they were a huge quarto of six hundred pages, which
with the help of Mrs. Julia Mateer he saw through the press down at
Shanghai. In 1901, assisted by Mrs. Ada Mateer, he issued a more
elementary work of the same general nature.
The protracted study and care which he put upon the “Lessons”
were characteristic of him in all his literary productions. Upon this
subject no one is better qualified to bear testimony than is Dr.
George F. Fitch, Superintendent of the Presbyterian Mission Press,
at Shanghai, who speaks from direct personal observation. He says:

One very marked characteristic of Dr. Mateer was the

almost extreme painstaking with which he went over any work
which he was getting ready for publication; revising and re-
revising, seeking the judgment of others, and then waiting to
see if possibly new light might dawn upon the subject. I
remember reading shortly after I came to China the
manuscript of a paper which he had prepared with great labor,
upon the much-mooted “term question”; and in which he had
collected, with infinite pains, seemingly a great number of
quotations from the Chinese classics and other native works,
bearing on the use of Shen as the proper word for God in
Chinese. I urged him to publish at once, as I thought it might
be useful in helping settle that question. But he stoutly
refused, saying that it was not yet complete. Nor did it finally
see the light, in print, until nearly twenty years afterward.

None of his books at all reveal the protracted and toilsome

process of the preparation. We see only the result of years of
research. For instance, in his library there was a long row of Chinese
books each one of which showed a large number of little white slips
at the top. Each one of this multitude of marks had been placed
there by some student whom he had employed respectively to read
works in Chinese likely to use the word Shen, in order to indicate the
passages at which he needed to look. All these were canvassed,
and the different shades of meaning were classified.
 From the “Mandarin Lessons,” and recently from the arithmetic, he
received substantial pecuniary returns, though not at all sufficient to
entitle him to be regarded as wealthy. In his manner of living he
would have been untrue to his training and impulses if he had not
practiced frugality, economy, and simplicity. As the means came into
his possession he used them generously both for personal friends
and for the promotion of the cause to which he had consecrated his
life. Of his outlays for the school and college we shall presently need
to speak. The expenses of the Yangtse trip came out of his own
pocket. March 9, 1895, he wrote to one of the secretaries of the
Board:

The mission minutes spoke, if you remember, of my

intention to erect a building for a museum and public lecture
room, and present it to the Board. This I intend to do at once.
It will cost about twelve hundred dollars, possibly more. I may
say in the same connection also that my “Mandarin Lessons”
has fully paid all the cost of printing, and so forth, and I expect
during the next year to pay into the treasury of the Board one
thousand dollars, Mexican. This I do in view of the liberality of
the Board in giving me my time while editing and printing the
book. When the second edition is printed I expect to pay over
a larger amount. I need not say that I feel very much gratified
that the book has proved such a success: especially do I feel
that it has been, and is going to be, very widely useful in
assisting missionaries to acquire the Chinese language. My
scientific books are also paying for themselves, but as yet
have left no margin of profits.

May 20, 1905, he wrote to a secretary: “I may say, however, that in

view of the great importance of the school both to the Tengchow
station and as a feeder to the college at Wei Hsien, I have set apart
from the profit of my ‘Mandarin Lessons’ enough to support the
school for the present year.” December 13, 1906, he wrote to a
friend in the United States: “My brother is now holding a large
meeting of elders and leading men from all the stations in this field.
There are about three hundred of them. It is no small expense to
board and lodge so many for ten days. I am paying the bill.” In one of
his latest letters to me he mentions this ability pecuniarily to help as
affording him satisfaction.
 X
THE CARE OF THE NATIVE CHRISTIANS

“The need of the hour in China is not more new stations with expensive
buildings and wide itinerating. It is rather teaching and training what
we have, and giving it a proper development. Most of all we should
raise up and prepare pastors and preachers and teachers, who are
well grounded in the truth, so that the Chinese Church may have wise
and safe leaders.... There are already enough mission stations, or
centers, in the province, if they were properly worked. The need of the
hour is to consolidate and develop what we have, and by all means in
our power develop native agency, and teach and locate native
pastors,—men who are well grounded in the faith.”—letter to
secretary fox, of the American Bible Society, January 6, 1906.

Dr. Mateer believed that sooner than most missionaries

anticipated the Chinese Christians will join together and set up an
independent church. He meant by this not merely a union of the
ministers and churches of the various Presbyterian denominations at
work in the country, such as has already been effected, but an
organization that would include in its membership all the Protestant
Christians, and that would leave little or no place for the service of
foreign missionaries. He regarded this as inevitable; and for that
reason he considered it to be of prime importance that such an
effective preliminary work should promptly be done, that this coming
ecclesiastical independence might not be attended by unsoundness
as to creed or laxity in life. At the same time, in holding up the care
and the training of the native Christians as so important a part of the
work of the foreign missionary in China, in anticipation of what is
ahead, he was only for an additional reason urging what he had in all
his long career recognized as second to no other in importance. Of
course, at the beginning of the effort to give the gospel to a people it
is indispensable to do “the work of an evangelist”; that is, to seek by
the spoken word and by the printed book to acquaint them with
elementary Christian truth, and to endeavor to win them to Christ;
and we have already seen how diligent Dr. Mateer was in this
service, especially in his earlier missionary years. But he was just as
diligent in caring for the converts when gained; and in the school and
college it was the preparation of men for pastors and teachers and
evangelists that was constantly his chief aim.
The first body of native Christians with whose oversight he had
anything to do was that very small band that had been gathered into
the church at Tengchow. Mills was the senior missionary, and as
such he presided over that little flock until his death. In 1867 he was
installed as the pastor, and he continued in this office nearly twenty
years. During this long period Dr. Mateer at times supplied the pulpit
and cared for the church in Mills’s absence or illness, but for most of
the time it was only as a sort of adviser that he could render help in
that field. We have no reason to think specially unfavorably of
Chinese converts because some of those with whom he then had to
do at Tengchow, or elsewhere, proved themselves, to him, to be a
discouraging set of professing Christians. Were not a good many of
Paul’s converts very much of the same grade when he traveled
among the churches, and wrote his letters? Did it not take much
patience, and fidelity, and persistence on the part of Christ to make
anything worth while out of his select disciples? Yet these constituted
the membership of the primitive church from which even the
missionaries of our day have originated. At any rate some of the
earliest experiences of Dr. Mateer with the native Christians were of
a very depressing sort. In his Journal, under date of March 17, 1864,
he made this record:

Since coming to Tengchow there have been great

difficulties in the native church. Several of the members were
accused by common fame of various immoral practices,—one
of smoking opium, another of lying and conforming to
idolatrous practices, and another of breaking the Sabbath.
The second of these confessed his fault, and was publicly
reproved; the third also confessed, and on his profession of
penitence was restored to the confidence of the church. But
 though the first confessed to the use of the ashes of opium,
he gave no certain assurance of amendment; and he was
suspended, and so remains. These matters gave us all a
great deal of anxiety and sorrow of heart. It is sad thus to find
that even those who profess the name of Christ are so much
under the power of sin. It is one of the great discouragements
of the missionary work. Yet God is able to keep even such
weak ones as these unto eternal life.

Under date of September 15, 1866, he told of a worse case of

discipline:

We had a hearing with the accused, and gave him notice

that he would be tried, and of the charges and witnesses. We
wrote to Mr. Corbett at Chefoo, to get depositions for us. He
did so, and we met, and tried him. The evidence was
sufficient to convict him of lying, and of forging an account,
and of adultery; notwithstanding, he denied it all, endeavoring
to explain away such evidence as he was forced to admit. We
decided to excommunicate him, and it was done two weeks
ago.

It must not be supposed that there was a great deal of such

discouraging work; as a rule, the native Christians tried to live correct
lives; and the worst that could be said of most of them at those early
dates was that they were “babes” in Christ. But we cannot appreciate
what the missionary needs to do as to the professed converts unless
we look at this depressing phase. Besides, incidentally we are thus
shown one of the methods by which the native Christians were
trained in the conduct of their own churches. Each case is dealt with
just as is required by the regulations of the denomination with which
the church is associated. The same formalities and processes are
employed as if in the United States; the same fairness and fullness
of investigation, with witnesses and hearing of the accused; and the
same effort neither to fall below nor to exceed what justice and
charity combined demand for the good of the individual and of the
organization as a whole. As to this, in these particular cases no
exceptional credit can be claimed for Dr. Mateer; but we can be
perfectly sure that it commanded his hearty approbation. This was a
practical school also in which was called into exercise a quality of
which a young missionary, and especially a man of his type, seldom
has enough,—that of mingling a firm adherence to truth and
righteousness with a forbearing kindness that will not break a
bruised reed or quench the smoking flax. Gradually this became so
characteristic of him that the boys in his school and the Christians in
the churches were accustomed to come to him and unburden
themselves not only of sorrows, but of faults, with no expectation that
he would condone wrong or shield them from its just consequences,
but confident that he would feel for them, and help them if he could.
Nor was it to these classes alone that his heart and hands opened.
As they came to know him better, the professor in the imperial
university sought his advice and the coolie turned to him in his need;
and never in vain.
But there was a brighter side to the experience of those early
days. Several of the boys in the school were converted. What joy this
afforded, we who live in Christian lands cannot appreciate. The little
church at Tengchow also steadily moved forward in those early days
of its history. In 1869 it had risen to about fifty members, and the
attendance was such that a building solely for its services became
indispensable; and in due time an appropriation was made by the
Board of Missions, first for a lot, and soon after for a house of
worship. Pastor Mills was then absent, and by appointment of
presbytery Dr. Mateer acted as stated supply. As such, having first
bought the lot, he made an appeal to the Board for the new edifice,
saying:

We hold our services in the boys’ schoolroom, which has

been kept inconveniently large, for this very purpose. It is the
only room that will seat all, and it will not do it sometimes. The
desks have to be carried out every Sabbath; and all the
benches, chairs, and so forth, about the establishment carried
in, making a decidedly nondescript collection. Aside from the
 inconvenience, two serious drawbacks are felt. One is the
want of sacred associations about the place. All heathen are
wanting in reverence, and no small part of what they need is
to have this idea instilled into their minds. We greatly need in
this work a house especially devoted to the worship of God.
The other drawback is the disorganizing effect the Sabbath
and week-day services have on the school. The room being in
the midst of the premises, it is impossible to prevent a large
amount of lounging, gossiping, and so forth, in the boys’ room
before the service begins. The superintendent feels that it is a
very serious drawback to the school, as well as an injury to
the native Christians.

Any American who is familiar with students and their habits will
perceive that in this matter Chinese young men and boys are very
much like those of our own land.
In that appeal there is another paragraph that deserves
transcription here:

It has been said that the Christians in heathen lands ought

to build their own churches, but this is impossible in the early
stages of the work, especially at the center of operations,
where the foreigner preaches and teaches in person, and
where a large part of his hearers are often from a distance.
The church at this place gives character to the whole work in
the eyes of the people at large, and must of necessity differ in
many respects from churches in small places presided over
by native pastors. Concerning these last we have already
taken a decided stand, requiring the natives to help
themselves to a great extent.

Dr. Mateer was appointed by the presbytery to serve a second

year as stated supply of the Tengchow church; and had it not been
that he was called in 1870 to Shanghai to take charge of the mission
press, he no doubt would have given his personal supervision to the
erection of the new house of worship. It was built during his absence,
and when he came back he rejoiced in its completion. At the death of
Mills in 1895, Dr. Mateer was chosen pastor, and was installed as
such,—a position he was able to assume because he had found in
Mr. Hayes a substitute for himself in the presidency of the college.
He remained pastor until he went with the college to Wei Hsien. Dr.
Hayes had already for years worked quietly and efficiently in the
school, under the presidency of Dr. Mateer, and had shown himself
to be a man of exceptional ability and energy—a man after Dr.
Mateer’s own heart. After he assumed the presidency Dr. Mateer
was still to assist in the college, but he was so often absent or
otherwise engaged that both the college and the preaching were
largely in the hands of Dr. Hayes.
According to the “Form of Government” of the Presbyterian
Church in the United States of America, when a “call” is made out for
a pastor it must be certified to have been voted by a majority of the
people entitled to exercise this right; and it must fill the blank in the
following clause: “And that you may be free from worldly cares and
avocations, we hereby promise and oblige ourselves to pay to you
the sum of ... in regular quarterly (or half-yearly, or yearly) payments
during the time of your being and continuing the regular pastor of this
church.” In the settling of native pastors over the Chinese churches
scattered through the country, the filling of that blank, and the actual
subscription of the funds needed for this and other expenses of the
organization, usually require the presence of a missionary and of his
earnest stimulation and guidance. Sometimes the pledges are very
liberal, if estimated by ability of the members; and sometimes it is
with great difficulty that they are brought up to the measure of their
duty. The salaries, however, are almost incredibly small, and even
according to Chinese standards are scarcely sufficient for a
livelihood. We need to keep this state of things in mind in order to
appreciate the amount that was inserted in the blank in Dr. Mateer’s
call to the pastorate of the Tengchow church. In reporting the entire
procedure to the Board of Missions, he said: “The church in
Tengchow in calling me for their pastor promised a salary of cash
amounting to fifty dollars, which is to be used to employ an
evangelist whom I am to select and direct.” Of course, he continued
to receive his own pay as a missionary from the funds of the Board.
The fifty dollars was probably a creditable amount, as contributed by
the native members out of their narrow means; and as a salary for a
native evangelist it was at least a fair average.
When reporting this pastorate to the Board of Missions, Dr. Mateer
said, “This is work that I love to do, especially the preaching.” When
doing the work of an evangelist among the people at large,
sermonizing could have no place. Even formal addresses of any sort
were rarely practicable. The best that the missionary can do when
itinerating is to get attention by any legitimate means, and then to
talk, and hear and answer questions, and bear with all sorts of
irrelevancies and interruptions. But when a church is organized, a
sermon, consisting of a passage of Scripture and a discourse built
upon it, is just as much in place as it is in one of our home houses of
worship on the Sabbath. It was to the opportunity for that form of
service that he refers when he expressed his pleasure in the
pastorate. In this also he greatly excelled. Some who knew him most
intimately, and who appreciated fully his great worth and efficiency,
did not regard him as a very eloquent preacher in an English pulpit.
He commanded the attention of his audience by his strong, clear,
earnest presentation of the great religious truths which he believed
with all his soul. The personality and consecration of the man were a
tremendous force when he stood in a pulpit in his own land; what he
lacked was the ability which some speakers possess of carrying his
audience with him, almost irrespective of the thoughts to which they
give utterance. But in preaching to the Chinese he took on an
extraordinary effectiveness. There was in the man, in the movement
of his thought, in his mastery of the language, in the intense
earnestness of his delivery, in the substance of his sermons and
addresses, much that captivated the native Christians, and made
others bow before his power. Mr. Baller, who had heard him
frequently, says: “His sermons were logical, direct, a unit in thought
and enriched with a copious vocabulary and illustrations. His points
were usually put from the Chinese point of view, so that a foreign air
was conspicuously absent.” To this day some of his addresses are
recalled as triumphs of real eloquence of speech; perhaps the most
notable of these being an address which he delivered at the opening
of the English Baptist Institution at Tsinan fu, in 1907. It was an