International History versus International Relations

1. International History versus International Relations Different means and different ends?

2. Structure 1. What is international history? 2. What is international relations? 3. How are the two related?

3. Why do IR scholars need history? ·   Why can I.R. scholars avoid history? ·   What are the distinguishing characteristics between ‘historical’ and ‘political/social science’ or international political theory approaches to international affairs?

4. Useful essays on IH/IR Colin Elman and M F Elman (eds) Bridge and Boundaries. Historians, Political Scientists and the Study of International Relations (MIT Press, 2001). Introductory essays on theory and history Four case studies with 3-4 chapters in each on the 30 year crisis, the rise and fall of British hegemony, the cold war, and the Revolution in Military affairs 'Special Issue' on International History/International Relations, in International Security - available 'online' vol. 22 Summer 1997 Excellent collection of essays on International History / IR interface

5. International Historians versus IR Scholars Need to distinguish how international historians (e.g. NW) write international history from how IR theorists make use of the past (e.g. MR) e.g. Dr Matthew Rendall is an IR scholar who uses history e.g. Dr Neville Wylie is an international historian. Other historians in School of Politics and International Relations past & present e.g. Matthew Jones, Alex Danchev, Malika Rahal etc.

6. History & I.R • British tradition + Nottingham strength • Particular characteristic of I.R. team at Nottingham • Yet built on ‘British’ tradition Differences between two disciplines appear greater in US than Europe

7. The British International History Group ‘The British International History Group (BIHG) was founded in 1987, as a sub-group of the British International Studies Association (BISA).  It exists to draw together all those interested in teaching and researching into the history of international relations at university level in the United Kingdom. As well as organising panels at the BISA conference each December, the Group holds its own conference in September, which includes the annual general meeting. The BIHG committee, elected at the conference, also acts as a link to other institutions such as the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and The National Archives.’ http://www.bihg.ac.uk/

8. Organisations in the field of International History British International Studies Association (BISA) – the parent organisation of BIHG Centre for Contemporary British History Foreign and Commonwealth Office Institute of Historical Research H-Diplo for those interested in diplomatic method Royal Historical Society Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations Transatlantic Studies Association http://www.bihg.ac.uk/Links/Organisations.aspx - see here for links

9. Approaches of international historians What are the research techniques and methodologies adopted by international historians? (NW) Key Text: Marc Trachtenberg, The craft of international history: a guide to method (PUP, 2006)

10. Principal Differences between IH/IR • 1. Questions • What drives the analysis? • Lumping or splitting • Parsimony over ‘thick’ description • Deductive logic vs coherent narrative

11. 2. Approach towards ‘the past’ • 2.Historical: - Locate a Problem/Issue - assess quantity/quality of sources - balance sources : issue via selection of particular ‘approach’ Pol Sci. - Formulate hypothesis - test by applying theory and empirical study - Refine theory

12. 3. Subject Matter Human society: continuity or change Versus Underlying patterns and structures 4. Audience Policy relevant research? ‘Academic historians’ ‘Popular’ historians’

13. 5. Sources • Primary v Secondary • Official documentation v interviews • Closed/confidential v open. • Qualitative data v quantitative data • http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/

14. National Archives, Kew Gardens Tube, London

15. ‘Understand the archives in minutes’ • http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/gettingstarted/understand-the-archive/default.htm?WT.ac=mh-understand-the-archives

16. Security or defence archives • http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/securityhistory/?WT.ac=sa-securityhistory

17. IH/IR on Origins of First World War • Historian’s perspective • IR perspective • Innenpolitik vs Aussenpolitik explanations; polarity; power transitions and preventive war; offence-defence theory, cognitive psychology  

18. IH & IR on the Concert of Europe The IR scholar may seek to apply IR theories/methods to events over 150 years ago The Concert of Europe 1. Historian’s perspective 2. IR perspective (MR) • Realist/institutionalist debate • Was the Concert a successful collective security regime?

19. IR/IH from below? • History of Mat Salleh Rebellion during British Protectorate rule of North Borneo under North Borneo Chartered Company 1882-1946 • North Borneo inland non-literate groups entering world history • Colonial company records in Malaysia and UK • Limits of company records, memoirs etc • Use of oral history – oral tradition to reconstruct history • Historical/anthropological account contributing to IR understanding of conflict & politics of peace negotiations and conflict management (or its failure) • Plus understanding of stateless society and an anarchic system • Potential relevance to understanding international system as anarchic system • PhD research Sanen Marshall, November 2009

20. IH/IR Differences can be exaggerated • 1. Questions • General v Specifics • What’s the bigger picture? • So what? 2. Narrative = not un-analytical. • Narrative = implicit theoretical assumptions, priorities etc. • 3. General/Particular • Historians - explain the particular, refer to the general • Political Scientists – explain the general by generalising the particular. 

21. IH/IR Differences can be exaggerated • 4. Sources • ‘30’ Year rule makes us all Political Scientists/theorists. • Selective release of official papers. • Government control • Scaling the mountain • Use of theories to sift sources and fill gaps • 5. Approach • Demise of ‘structural explanations’ in I.R. theory in favour of ‘constructivism’ plus postmodern turn in both leading to more overlap again

22. What can I.R. scholars ‘take’ from History? • 1. Perspective • Perspective – transient over historically important. Extend the hinterland • Prediction • I.R. claims for predictive quality frequently misplaced • 2. Understanding of Historian’s craft to improve quality of case study method • 3. Better Selection of Material & Choice of Case-Studies: • Learn to ‘fit’ and ‘unfit’, rather than ‘use’ and ‘abuse’ • 4. Heighten sensitivity to human agency and contingency. • 5. Shift from structuralism to constructivism in IR. • But criticism theoretical turn in IR in 1990s also guilty of neglect of empirical

23. IR theoretical turn & neglect of empirical? • IR theory in Britain – the New Black? • CHRIS BROWN • Review of International Studies, Volume 32, Issue 04, October 2006, pp 677-687 • ‘Anniversaries are occasions for celebration and reflection. The thirtieth anniversary of BISA presents the opportunity to look back over what has been achieved in the eventful years since the foundation of the Association, but also the duty of identifying things that have gone wrong, paths not taken or promising avenues that turned out to be dead-ends. We owe it to the people who founded BISA – some still here, others, sadly, gone – to preserve the critical spirit even when celebrating our achievements, and I will certainly honour that debt in this talk.’ • Transcript of a plenary lecture given at the British International Studies Association, University of St. Andrews, December 2005.

24. Footnote: History debatesHistorical Narrative • Postmodernist challenge: its culturally relative and merely a figment of imagination • Is one narrative better than another? • Is a narrative merely a reflection of our current concerns and vantage point • Is there an historical ‘truth’? • Has the craft of history improved?

25. Theory in history • Scepticism towards prejudicing ‘objective’ reading of the events by admitting to pre-conceived ideas/expectations • Theoretical assumptions = grounded on contemporary experience – which is an antithetical to the task of reconstructing past events

26. Assumptions But – what about implicit assumptions about the past, or our subject: do they have a theoretical basis? Isn’t our choice of subject affected by our theoretical outlook? Historians as theorists – Gaddis, Schroeder

27. Key to Historical craft = sensitivity • What evidence are you looking for • Where are you likely to find it • What’s its provenance? • How do you ‘read’ the document – what does it tell us about the past – explicitly and implicitly? Dangers? • Is the ‘archive’ an analogue of reality? • Who has selected what, for preservation? • How can you scale the mountain? • Freedom of Information Act (Foia!)

28. Dangers? • Is the ‘archive’ an analogue of reality? • Who has selected what, for preservation? • How can you scale the mountain? • Freedom of Information Act (Foia!)

29. Thank You and Happy Study & Vacation from me Remember final lecture next week with Dr Sabine Carey