Abstract
The lack of theoretical interest in diplomacy alluded to in the Introduction, does not imply any dearth of literature on the subject. On the contrary, there is an abundance of narratives of various kinds dealing with diplomacy Before setting out on our own theorizing effort, we therefore need to give a brief account of the existing literature and ask ourselves what can be learned from it. The second question we address in this chapter concerns the causes of the relative lack of theorizing of diplomacy and its marginalization in IR theory.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Cf. J.S. Levy, “Explaining Events and Developing Theories: History, Political Science, and the Analysis of International Relations,” in C. Elman and M.F. Elman (eds), Bridges and Boundaries: Historians, Political Scientists, and the Study of International Relations (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001);
J.S. Levy, “Too Important to Leave to the Other: History and Political Science in the Study of International Relations,” International Security, 22 (1997) 22–33.
See K. Nag, Theories of Diplomacy in Kautilya’s Arthasastra (Calcutta: Writers Workshop Publications, 1997);
B. Mukherjee, Kautilya’s Concept of Diplomacy: A New Interpretation (Calcutta: Minerva, 1976).
See G. Mattingly, Renaissance Diplomacy (London: Jonathan Cape, 1955), pp. 28–30.
M. Keens-Soper, “Wicquefort,” in G.R. Berridge, M. Keens-Soper and T.G. Otte, Diplomatic Theory from Machiavelli to Kissinger (Houndmills and New York: Palgrave, 2001), p. 88.
H. Nicolson, Diplomacy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1939);
H. Nicolson, The Evolution of Diplomatic Method (London: Constable, 1954);
H. Bull, The Anarchic Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (London: Macmillan, 1977), p. 182.
K. Hamilton and R. Langhorne, The Practice of Diplomacy: Its Evolution, Theory and Administration (London and New York: Routledge, 1995), p. 89.
S. Haber, D.M. Kennedy and S.D. Krasner, “Brothers Under the Skin: Diplomatic History and International Relations,” International Security, 22 (1997) 34–43.
M. Hunt, “The Long Crisis in U.S. Diplomatic History: Coming to Closure,” Diplomatic History, 16 (1992) 115–16.
G.P. Lauren, “Diplomacy: History, Theory, and Policy,” in G.P. Lauren (ed.), Diplomacy: New Approaches in History’ Theory and Policy (New York: Free Press, 1979), p. 4.
J.M. Munn-Rankin, “Diplomacy in Western Asia in the Early Second Millennium BC,” Iraq, XVIII, pt 1 (1956) 68–110.
W.L. Moran (ed. and trans.), The Amarna Letters (Baltimore, MD and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992);
R. Cohen and R. Westbrook (eds), Amarna Diplomacy: The Beginning of International Relations (Baltimore, MD and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000);
M. Liverani, International Relations in the Ancient Near East, 1600–1100 BC (Houndmills: Palgrave, 2001).
G. Beckman, Hittite Diplomatic Texts (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1996).
R.L. Walker, The Multi-State System of Ancient China (Hamden, CT: Shoe String Press, 1953);
R. Britton, “Chinese Interstate Intercourse before 700 BC,” in C. Jönsson and R. Langhorne (eds), Diplomacy, Volume II (London: Sage, 2004).
G.J. Roy, Diplomacy in Ancient India (New Delhi: Janaki Prakashan, 1981);
F. E. Adcock and J. Mosley, Diplomacy in Ancient Greece (London: Thames and Hudson, 1975);
J.D. Mosley, “Envoys and Diplomacy in Ancient Greece,” Historia: Zeitschrift für alte Geschichte, Einzelschriften, Heft 22 (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1973);
C.P. Jones, Kinship Diplomacy in the Ancient World (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999).
A. Watson, Diplomacy: The Dialogue Between States (London: Eyre Methuen, 1982), pp. 89–92.
B. Campbell, “Diplomacy in the Roman World (c. 500 BC-AD 235),” Diplomacy and Statecraft, 12 (2001) 1.
J. Shepard and S. Franklin (eds), Byzantine Diplomacy (Aldershot: Variorum, 1992);
D.E. Queller, The Office of the Ambassador in the Middle Ages (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1967).
B. Hocking, “Catalytic Diplomacy: Beyond ‘Newness’ and ‘Decline,’ “ in J. Melissen (ed.), Innovation in Diplomatic Practice (London: Macmillan, 1999).
R. Numelin, The Beginnings of Diplomacy: A Sociological Study of Inter-tribal and International Relations (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1950), p. 14.
See, for example, W.R. Jacobs, “Wampum: The Protocol of Indian Diplomacy,” William and Mary Quarterly, 6 (1949) 596–604;
F. Jennings et al. (eds), The History and Culture of Iroquois Diplomacy (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1985);
D. Flores, “Bison Ecology and Bison Diplomacy: The Southern Plains from 1800 to 1850,” Journal of American History, 78 (1991) 465–85;
J.A. Brandao and W.A. Starna, “The Treaties of 1701: A Triumph of Iroquois Diplomacy,” Ethnohistory, 43 (1996) 209–44.
See, for example, R. Smith, “Peace and Palaver: International Relations in Pre-Colonial West Africa,” Journal of African History, 14 (1973) 599–621;
G.W. Irwin, “Precolonial African Diplomacy: The Example of Asante,” International Journal of African Historical Studies, 8 (1975) 81–96;
R. Reid, “Mutesa and Mirambo: Thoughts on East African Warfare and Diplomacy in the Nineteenth Century,” International Journal of African Historical Studies, 31 (1998) 73–89.
For overviews, see C. Jonsson, “Diplomacy, Bargaining and Negotiation,” in W. Carlsnaes, T. Risse and B.A. Simmons (eds), Handbook of International Relations (London: Sage, 2002);
P. Sharp, “For Diplomacy: Representation and the Study of International Relations,” International Studies Review, 1 (1999) 33–57;
R. Cohen, International Politics: The Rules of the Game (London and New York: Longman, 1981).
S. Simpson, “Education in Diplomacy,” in S. Simpson (ed.), Education in Diplomacy: An Instructional Guide (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1987), p. 26.
J. Thomson, Mercenaries, Pirates, and Sovereigns: State-Building and Extraterritorial Violence in Early Modern Europe (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 15.
M. Emirbayer, “Manifesto for a Relational Sociology,” American Journal of Sociology, 103 (1997) 281–317;
M. Somers, “ ‘We’re No Angels’: Realism, Rational Choice, and Rationality in Social Science,” American Journal of Sociology, 104 (1998) 722–84;
A. Abbott, “Things of Boundaries,” in A. Abbott (ed.), Time Matters: On Theory and Method (Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press, 2001).
M. Albert, D. Jacobson and Y. Lapid (eds), Identities, Borders, Orders: Rethinking International Relations Theory (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2001);
P.T. Jackson and D.H. Nexon, “Relations Before States: Substance, Process and the Study of World Politics,” European Journal of International Relations, 5 (1999) 291–332.
A. Giddens, The Nation State and Violence (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1985), p. 263.
C. Tilly, Stories, Identity, and Political Change (New York: Rowman and Littlefield, 2002), p. 34.
M. Mann, The Sources of Social Power I: A History of Power from the Beginning to ad. 1760 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), p. 1.
R. Van Krieken, “Norbert Elias and Process Sociology,” in G. Ritzer and B. Smart (eds), Handbook of Social Theory (London: Sage, 2001), p. 357.
J.G. Ruggie, Constructing the World Polity: Essays on International Institutionalization (London: Routledge, 1998), p. 180.
H.J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, 3rd edn (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1966), p. 139.
R. Aron, Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations (New York: Praeger, 1966), p. 40.
R. Gilpin, War and Change in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), p. 45.
B. Buzan, C. Jones and R. Little, The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993), p. 40.
A. Moravcsik, “Taking Preferences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics,” International Organization, 51 (1997) 513.
R.O. Keohane, “Theory of World Politics: Structural Realism and Beyond,” in R.O. Keohane (ed.), International Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1989), p. 52.
J.S. Nye, Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power (New York: Basic Books, 1990), p. 256.
R. Rosecrance, The Rise of the Trading State: Commerce and Conquest in the Modern World (New York: Basic Books, 1986).
See, for example, I. Wallerstein, The Capitalist World Economy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979);
A.G. Frank and B.K. Gills (eds), The World System: Five Hundred Years or Five Thousand? (London: Routledge, 1993)
See, for example, R.W. Cox, Production, Power, and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987);
S. Gill, American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990).
See, for example, J. Rosenberg, The Empire of Civil Society (London: Verso, 1994);
B. Teschke, The Myth of 1648: Class, Geopolitics and the Making of Modern International Relations (London: Verso, 2003).
O. Waever, “Four Meanings of International Society: A Trans-Atlantic Dialogue,” in B.A. Robertson (ed.), International Society and the Development of International Relations Theory, 2nd revised edn (London: Continuum, 2002), p. 84.
J.N. Rosenau, Turbulence in World Politics: A Theory of Change and Continuity (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990), ch. 2.
See, for example, T. Dunne, Inventing International Society: A History of the English School (London: Macmillan, 1998);
B.A. Roberson (ed.), International Society and the Development of International Relations Theory, 2nd revised edn (London: Continuum, 2002);
B. Buzan, From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).
P. Sharp, “The English School, Herbert Butterfield, and Diplomacy,” all papers presented at the International Studies Association Annual Conference, New Orleans, 23–27 March 2002.
I.B. Neumann, “The English School on Diplomacy,” Discussion Papers in Diplomacy, No. 79 (The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International Relations “Clingendael,” 2002), p. 7
H. Bull, The Anarchical Society (London: Macmillan, 1977).
A. Watson, The Evolution of International Society (London and New York: Routledge, 1992).
J. Der Derian, On Diplomacy: A Genealogy of Western Estrangement (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987), p. 23.
C. Reus-Smit, The Moral Purpose of the State: Culture, Social Identity, and Institutional Rationality in International Relations (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999), p. 14.
I. Neumann, “ ‘Grab a Phaser, Ambassador’: Diplomacy in Star Trek,” Millennium, 30 (2001) 603–24;
I. Neumann, “Returning Practice to the Linguistic Turn: The Case of Diplomacy,” Millennium, 31 (2002) 627–51.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2005 Christer Jönsson and Martin Hall
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jönsson, C., Hall, M. (2005). The Study of Diplomacy. In: Essence of Diplomacy. Studies in Diplomacy and International Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511040_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511040_2
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-54341-0
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-51104-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)