Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Context, reception, and the study of great thinkers in international relations

  • Claire Vergerio (a1)

Abstract

While the discipline of International Relations (IR) has a long tradition of celebrating ‘great thinkers’ and appropriating their ideas for contemporary theories, it has rarely accounted for how these authors came to be seen as ‘great’ in the first place. This is at least partly a corollary of the discipline’s long-standing aversion to methodological reflection in its engagement with intellectual history, and it echoes IR’s infamous tendency to misportray these great thinkers’ ideas more broadly. Drawing on existing attempts to import the methodological insights of historians of political thought into IR, this article puts forward a unified approach to the study of great thinkers in IR that combines the tenets of so-called ‘Cambridge School’ contextualism with those of what broadly falls under the label of reception theory. I make the case for the possibility of developing a coherent methodology through the combination of what is often seen as separate strands of intellectual history, and for the value of such an approach in IR. In doing so, the article ultimately offers a more rigorous methodology for engaging with the thought of great thinkers in IR, for analyzing the way a specific author’s ideas come to have an impact in practice, and for assessing the extent to which these ideas are distorted in the process.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Context, reception, and the study of great thinkers in international relations
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Context, reception, and the study of great thinkers in international relations
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Context, reception, and the study of great thinkers in international relations
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author. Email: c.vergerio@fsw.leidenuniv.nl

References

Hide All
Allison, Graham. 2017. Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
Amorosa, Paolo. 2018. The American Project and the Politics of History: James Brown Scott and the Origins of International Law. PhD Thesis, Helsinki: Eric Castren Institute for International Law and Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki.
Aquinas, Thomas. 2015. Summa Theologica. Cologne: Xist Publishing.
Armitage, David. 2017. Civil Wars: A History in Ideas. London: Yale University Press.
Armitage, David. 2012a. Foundations of Modern International Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Armitage, David. 2004. “The Fifty Years Rift: Intellectual History and International Relations.” Modern Intellectual History 1(1):97109.
Armitage, David. 2000. The Ideological Origins of the British Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Armitage, David. 2012b. “What’s the Big Idea? Intellectual History and the Longue Durée.” History of European Ideas 38(4):493507.
Armitage, David, and Jo, Guldi. 2014. “The Return of the Longue Durée: An Anglo-American Perspective.” Victoria 700:722.
Bain, William, and Terry, Nardin. 2017. “International Relations and Intellectual History.” International Relations 31(3):213226.
Barthes, Roland. 1984. Le bruissement de la langue: Essais critiques IV. Paris: Seuil.
Bell, Duncan S. A. 2001. “International Relations: The Dawn of a Historiographical Turn?” British Journal of Politics & International Relations 3(1):115126.
Bell, Duncan S. A. 2002. “Language, Legitimacy, and the Project of Critique.” Alternatives: Global, Local, Political 27(3):327350.
Bell, Duncan S. A. 2003. “Political Theory and the Functions of Intellectual History: A Response to Emmanuel Navon.” Review of International Studies 29(1):151160.
Bell, Duncan S. A. 2014. “What is liberalism?” Political Theory 42(6):682715.
Bevir, Mark. 2009. “Contextualism: From Modernist Method to Post-analytic Historicism?” Journal of the Philosophy of History 3(3):211224.
Bevir, Mark. 2000. “On Tradition.” Humanitas 8(2):2853.
Bevir, Mark. 2011. “The Contextual Approach.” In The Oxford Handbook of the History of Political Philosophy, edited by George Klosko, 1125. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bevir, Mark. 1999. The Logic of the History of Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, Chris. 2017. “Political Thought, International Relations theory and International Political Theory: An Interpretation.” International Relations 31(3):227240.
Bull, Hedley. 2002. The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Bull, Hedley. 1966. “The Grotian Conception of International Society.” In Diplomatic investigations: essays in the theory of international politics, edited by Herbert Butterfield and Martin Wight. London: Allen & Unwin.
Burke, Martin J., and Melvin, Richter. 2012. Why Concepts Matter: Translating Social and Political Thought. Leiden: Brill.
Burke, Peter. 2013. “The History and Theory of Reception.” In The reception of Bodin, edited by Howell A. Lloyd, 2138. Leiden: Brill.
Certeau, Michel de. 1980. L’invention du quotidien. Paris: Union générale d’éditions.
Collini, Stefan. 1985. What is Intellectual History? History Today. Available at http://www.historytoday.com/stefan-collini/what-intellectual-history.
Devetak, Richard. 2014a. “A Rival Enlightenment? Critical International Theory in Historical Mode.” International Theory 6(3):417453.
Devetak, Richard. 2014b. “Historiographical Foundations of Modern International Thought: Histories of the European States-System from Florence to Göttingen.” History of European Ideas 41:116.
Devetak, Richard. 2017. “‘The Battle Is All There Is’: Philosophy and History in International Relations theory.” International Relations 31(3):261281.
Doyle, Michael W. 1983. “Kant, Liberal Legacies, and Foreign Affairs.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 12(3):205235.
Doyle, Michael W. 1998. Ways of War and Peace: Realism, Liberalism, and Socialism. New York; London: W.W. Norton.
Dunn, John. 1996. The History of Political Theory and Other Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dunne, Timothy. 1993. “Mythology or Methodology? Traditions in International Theory.” Review of International Studies 19(3):305318.
Easley, Eric S. 2004. The War Over Perpetual Peace: An Exploration into the History of a Foundational International Relations Text. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Farneti, Roberto. 2002. Il canone moderno. Filosofia politica e genealogia. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
Fiocchi Malaspina, Elisabetta. 2013. “Emer de Vattel’s «Le droit des gens»: Its Circulation and Reception in the 19th Century.” Materiali per una storia della cultura giuridica 43(2):303320.
Fiocchi Malaspina, Elisabetta. 2014. “Le droit des gens di Emer de Vattel: La Genesi di un Successo Editoriale Secolare.” Nuova Rivista Storica 98(2):733754.
Fiocchi Malaspina, Elisabetta, and Nina, Keller-Kemmerer. 2014. “International Law and Translation in the 19th Century.” Rechtsgeschichte-Legal History 22:214226.
Freeden, Michael. 2008. Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 2004. Truth and Method. Translated by Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall. Second edition. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Goldie, Mark. 1999. The Reception of Locke’s Politics: From the 1690’s to the 1830’s. London: Pickering & Chatto.
Grimm, Gunter. 1977. Rezeptionsgeschichte: Grundlegung einer Theorie: mit Analysen und Bibliographie. München: WFink.
Grotius, Hugo. 2005. The Rights of War and Peace. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
Guilhot, Nicolas. 2011. The invention of international relations theory: realism, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the 1954 Conference on Theory. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Guldi, Jo, and David, Armitage. 2014. The History Manifesto. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hall, Ian. 2017. “The History of International Thought and International Relations Theory: From Context to Interpretation.” International Relations 31(3):241260.
Hirsch, Eric Donald. 1976. The Aims of Interpretation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Hirsch, Eric Donald. 1967. Validity in Interpretation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Hobsbawm, Eric, and Terence, Ranger. 1992. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hoekstra, Kinch. 2008. A Source of War: Gentili’s Thucydides. Milan: A. Giuffrè.
Hoekstra, Kinch. 2016. “Hobbes’s Thucydides.” In The Oxford handbook of Hobbes, edited by Aloysius Martinich, and Kinch Hoekstra, 547574. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Holden, Gerard. 2002. “Who Contextualizes the Contextualizers: Disciplinary History and the Discourse About IR Discourse.” Review of International Studies 28(2):253270.
Holub, Robert. 1982. “Trends in Literary Theory: The American Reception of Reception Theory.” The German Quarterly 55(1):80.
Holub, Robert C. 1984. Reception Theory: A Critical Introduction. New Accents (Methuen & Co.). London: Methuen.
Hunter, Ian. 2007. “The History of Philosophy and the Persona of the Philosopher.” Modern Intellectual History 4(3):571600.
Hunter, Ian. 2006. “The History of Theory.” Critical Inquiry 33(1):78112.
Hurrell, Andrew. 1990. “Kant and the Kantian Paradigm in International Relations.” Review of International Studies 16(03):183.
Hutchings, Kimberly, Bartelson, Jens, Keene, Edward, Ypi, Lea, Kinsella, Helen M., and David, Armitage. 2014. “Critical Exchange: Foundations of Modern International Theory.” Contemporary Political Theory 13(4):387418.
Iser, Wolfgang. 1984. Der Akt des Lesens: Theorie ästhetischer Wirkung. München: WFink.
Jahn, Beate. 2006. “Introduction.” In Classical Theory in International Relations, edited by Beate Jahn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jauss, Hans Robert. 1970. Literaturgeschichte als Provokation. Erstausgabe. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Jeffery, Renée. 2006. Hugo Grotius in International Thought. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jeffery, Renée. 2005. “Tradition as Invention: The ‘Traditions Tradition’ and the History of Ideas in International Relations.” Millennium: Journal of International Studies 34(1):5784.
Keene, Edward. 2002. Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, Colonialism and Order in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keene, Edward. 2006. “Images of Grotius.” In Classical Theory in International Relations, edited by Beate Jahn, 233252. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keene, Edward. 2017. “International Intellectual History and International Relations: Contexts, Canons and Mediocrities.” International Relations 31(3):341356.
Keene, Edward. 2005. International Political Thought: A Historical Introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Keene, Edward. 2015. “The Reception of Thucydides in the History of International Relations.” In A Handbook to the Reception of Thucydides, edited by Christine Lee, and Neville Morley, 355372. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.
Keene, Edward. 2013. “Three Traditions of International Theory.” In Guide to the English School in international studies, edited by Cornelia Navari and Daniel Green. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Kingsbury, Benedict. 1997. “A Grotian Tradition of Theory and Practice: Grotius, Law, and Moral Skepticism in the Thought of Hedley Bull.” Quinnipac Law Review 17:333.
Koskenniemi, Martti. 2013. “Histories of International Law: Significance and Problems for a Critical View.” Temple International and Comparative Law Journal 27:215240.
Lane, Melissa. 2012. “Doing Our Own Thinking for Ourselves: On Quentin Skinner’s Genealogical Turn.” Journal of the History of Ideas 73(1):7182.
Lauterpacht, Hersch. 1946. “The Grotian Tradition in International Law.” British Yearbook of International Law 23:153.
Lee, Christine, and Neville, Morley. eds. 2014. A Handbook to the Reception of Thucydides. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.
Lehmann, Hartmut, and Melvin, Richter. eds. 1996. The Meaning of Historical Terms and Concepts: New Studies on Begriffsgeschichte. Washington, DC: German Historical Institute.
Lifschitz, Avi. 2016. Engaging with Rousseau: Reaction and Interpretation from the Eighteenth Century to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MacIntyre, Alasdair C. 1966. A Short History of Ethics. New York: Macmillan.
MacKay, Joseph, and Christopher David, LaRoche. 2017. “The Conduct of History in International Relations: Rethinking Philosophy of History in IR Theory.” International Theory 9(2):203236.
Malcolm, Noel. 2002. “Hobbes’ Theory of International Relations.” In Aspects of Hobbes, edited by Noel Malcolm, 433455. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
McMahon, Darrin, and Samuel, Moyn. 2014. Rethinking Modern European Intellectual History. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Menchi, Silvana Seidel. 1987. Erasmo in Italia, 1520-1580. Torino: Bollati Boringhieri.
Molloy, Seàn. 2017. Kant’s International Relations. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Moyn, Samuel, and Andrew, Sartori. 2013. Global Intellectual History. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Muldoon, James. 1999. Empire and Order: The Concept of Empire, 800-1800. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.
Nabulsi, Karma. 1999. Traditions of War: Occupation, Resistance, and the Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nabulsi, Karma, and Sudhir, Hazareesingh. 2008. “Using Archival Sources to Theorize About Politics.” In Political Theory: Methods and Approaches, edited by David Leopold, and Marc Stears, 150170. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
O’Driscoll, Cian, and Daniel, Brunstetter. eds 2017. Just War Thinkers: From Cicero to the 21st Century. New York: Routledge.
Orford, Anne. 2013a. “On International Legal Method.” London review of international law 1(1):166.
Orford, Anne. 2013b. What Is the Place of Anachronism in International Legal Thinking. Université Paris 1. Available at http://www.sam-network.org/video/what-is-the-place-of-anachronism-in-international-legal-thinking. Accessed 28 February 2016.
Osiander, Andreas. 2001. “Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth.” International organization 55(02):251287.
Palonen, Kari. 2014. Politics and Conceptual Histories: Rhetorical and Temporal Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury.
Palonen, Kari. 1999. “Rhetorical and Temporal Perspectives on Conceptual Change.” Finnish Yearbook of Political Thought 3:6073.
Pitts, Jennifer. 2017. “International Relations and the Critical History of International Law.” International Relations 31(3):282298.
Pocock, J. G. A. 2009. Political Thought and History: Essays on Theory and Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pocock, J. G. A. 1972. Politics, Language and Time: Essays on Political Thought and History. London: Methuen.
Pocock, J. G. A. 1975. The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Poirson, Martial. 2012. Ombres de Molière: naissance d’un mythe littéraire à travers ses avatars du XVIIe siècle à nos jours. Paris: Armand Colin.
Reid, Julian. 2006. “Reappropriating Clausewitz: The Neglected Dimensions of Counter-Strategic Thought.” In Classical Theory in International Relations, edited by Beate Jahn, 277295. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Reus-Smit, Christian, and Duncan, Snidal. 2008. The Oxford Handbook of International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Richter, Melvin. 1995. The History of Political and Social Concepts: A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ricœur, Paul. 1981. “Appropriation.” In Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action, and Interpretation, edited and translated by John B. Thompson, 182193. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ringmar, Erik. 1996. Identity, Interest and Action: A Cultural Explanation of Sweden’s Intervention in the Thirty Years War. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rothschild, Emma. 2006. “Arcs of Ideas: International History and Intellectual History.” In Transnationale Geschichte: Themen, Tendenzen und Theorien. 217-226: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
Schmidt, Brian. 1998. The Political Discourse of Anarchy: A Disciplinary History of International Relations. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Schwartz, Benjamin. 1959. “Some Polarities in Confucian Thought.” In Confucianism in Action, edited by David S. Nivison, and Arthur F. Wright. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Skinner, Quentin. 2008. “A Genealogy of the Modern State (British Academy Lecture).” Proceedings of the British Academy 162:325370.
Skinner, Quentin. 1988a. “A Reply to my Critics.” In Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics, edited by James Tully, 231288. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Skinner, Quentin. 2014a. Belief, Truth and Interpretation: A Lecture presented at the Ideengeschichte: Traditionen und Perspektiven Conference, Ruhr-University Bochum.
Skinner, Quentin. 2014b. Forensic Shakespeare. Clarendon Lectures in English; 2011. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skinner, Quentin. 1998. Liberty Before Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Skinner, Quentin. 1969. “Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas.” History and theory 8:353.
Skinner, Quentin. 1988b. “Some Problems in the Analysis of Political Thought and Action.” In Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics, edited by James Tully, 97118. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Skinner, Quentin. 1978. The Foundations of Modern Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Skinner, Quentin. 2002. Visions of Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Skodo, Admir. 2009. “Post-Analytic Philosophy of History.” Journal of the Philosophy of History 3(3):308333.
Straumann, Benjamin. 2016. Crisis and Constitutionalism: Roman Political Thought from the Fall of the Republic to the Age of Revolution. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Teschke, Benno. 2003. The Myth of 1648: Class, Geopolitics, and the Making of Modern International Relations. London: Verso.
Thompson, Martyn. 1993. “Reception Theory and the Interpretation of Historical Meaning.” History and Theory 32(3):248.
Tribe, Keith. 2015. The Economy of the Word: Language, History, and Economics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tuck, Richard. 2001. The Rights of War and Peace. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van Ittersum, Martine. 2016. “Hugo Grotius: The Making of a Founding Father of International Law.” In The Oxford Handbook of the Theory of International Law, edited by Anne Orford, Florian Hoffmann, and Martin Clark. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Vaughan, Geoffrey M. 2000. “The Decline of Sovereignty in the Liberal Tradition: The Case of John Rawls.” In Souveränitätskonzeptionen: Beiträge zur Analyse politischer Ordnungsvorstellungen im 17. bis zum 20. Jahrhundert, edited by Peter Schröder, and Martin Peters, 157185. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
Vigneswaran, Darshan, and Joel, Quirk. 2010. “Past Masters and Modern Inventions: Intellectual History as Critical Theory.” International Relations 24(2):107131.
Vitalis, Robert. 2015. White World Order, Black Power Politics: The Birth of American International Relations. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Wallenius, Tomas. 2017. “The Case for a History of Global Legal Practices.” European Journal of International Relations, doi:10.1177/1354066117743560
Waltz, Kenneth Neal. 2001. Man, the State, and War: A Theoretical Analysis. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
Warren, Christopher. 2017. “Henry V, Anachronism, and the History of International Law.” In The Oxford Handbook of English Law and Literature, 1500-1700, edited by Lorna Hutson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Welch, David A. 2003. “Why International Relations Theorists Should Stop Reading Thucydides.” Review of International Studies 29(3):301319.
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge studies in international relations; 67. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wigen, Einar. 2015. “Two-Level Language Games: International Relations as Inter-Lingual Relations.” European Journal of International Relations 21(2):427450.
Wight, Gabriele, and Brian, Porter. eds. 1991. International Theory: The Three Traditions: Martin Wight. Leicester: Leicester University Press for the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
Wight, Martin. 1960. “Why Is There No International Theory?” International Relations 2(1):3548.
Williams, Michael C. 2006. “The Hobbesian Theory of International Relations: Three Traditions.” In Classical theory in international relations, edited by Beate Jahn, 253276. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed