history research methodology pdf

• Architecture and Design
• Asian and Pacific Studies
• Business and Economics
• Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
• Computer Sciences
• Cultural Studies
• Engineering
• General Interest
• Geosciences
• Industrial Chemistry
• Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies
• Jewish Studies
• Library and Information Science, Book Studies
• Life Sciences
• Linguistics and Semiotics
• Literary Studies
• Materials Sciences
• Mathematics
• Social Sciences
• Sports and Recreation
• Theology and Religion
• Publish your article
• The role of authors
• Promoting your article
• Abstracting & indexing
• Publishing Ethics
• Why publish with De Gruyter
• How to publish with De Gruyter
• Our book series
• Our subject areas
• Your digital product at De Gruyter
• Contribute to our reference works
• Product information
• Tools & resources
• Product Information
• Promotional Materials
• Orders and Inquiries
• FAQ for Library Suppliers and Book Sellers
• Repository Policy
• Free access policy
• Open Access agreements
• Database portals
• For Authors
• Customer service
• People + Culture
• Journal Management
• How to join us
• Working at De Gruyter
• Mission & Vision
• De Gruyter Foundation
• De Gruyter Ebound
• Our Responsibility
• Partner publishers

Your purchase has been completed. Your documents are now available to view.

Research Methods for History

• Lucy Faire and Simon Gunn
• X / Twitter

Please login or register with De Gruyter to order this product.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Edinburgh University Press
• Copyright year: 2016
• Audience: College/higher education;
• Main content: 288
• Other: 24 B/W illustrations
• Keywords: History
• Published: July 8, 2016
• ISBN: 9781474408745

The Princeton Guide to Historical Research

• Zachary Schrag

Before you purchase audiobooks and ebooks

Please note that audiobooks and ebooks purchased from this site must be accessed on the Princeton University Press app. After you make your purchase, you will receive an email with instructions on how to download the app. Learn more about audio and ebooks .

Support your local independent bookstore.

• United States
• United Kingdom

The essential handbook for doing historical research in the twenty-first century

• Skills for Scholars

• Look Inside
• Request Exam Copy
• Download Cover

The Princeton Guide to Historical Research provides students, scholars, and professionals with the skills they need to practice the historian’s craft in the digital age, while never losing sight of the fundamental values and techniques that have defined historical scholarship for centuries. Zachary Schrag begins by explaining how to ask good questions and then guides readers step-by-step through all phases of historical research, from narrowing a topic and locating sources to taking notes, crafting a narrative, and connecting one’s work to existing scholarship. He shows how researchers extract knowledge from the widest range of sources, such as government documents, newspapers, unpublished manuscripts, images, interviews, and datasets. He demonstrates how to use archives and libraries, read sources critically, present claims supported by evidence, tell compelling stories, and much more. Featuring a wealth of examples that illustrate the methods used by seasoned experts, The Princeton Guide to Historical Research reveals that, however varied the subject matter and sources, historians share basic tools in the quest to understand people and the choices they made.

• Offers practical step-by-step guidance on how to do historical research, taking readers from initial questions to final publication
• Connects new digital technologies to the traditional skills of the historian
• Draws on hundreds of examples from a broad range of historical topics and approaches
• Shares tips for researchers at every skill level

Skills for Scholars: The new tools of the trade

Awards and recognition.

• Winner of the James Harvey Robinson Prize, American Historical Association
• A Choice Outstanding Academic Title of the Year

• Introduction: History Is for Everyone
• History Is the Study of People and the Choices They Made
• History Is a Means to Understand Today’s World
• History Combines Storytelling and Analysis
• History Is an Ongoing Debate
• Autobiography
• Everything Has a History
• Narrative Expansion
• From the Source
• Public History
• Research Agenda
• Factual Questions
• Interpretive Questions
• Opposing Forces
• Internal Contradictions
• Competing Priorities
• Determining Factors
• Hidden or Contested Meanings
• Before and After
• Dialectics Create Questions, Not Answers
• Copy Other Works
• History Big and Small
• Pick Your People
• Add and Subtract
• Narrative versus Thematic Schemes
• The Balky Time Machine
• Local and Regional
• Transnational and Global
• Comparative
• What Is New about Your Approach?
• Are You Working in a Specific Theoretical Tradition?
• What Have Others Written?
• Are Others Working on It?
• What Might Your Critics Say?
• Primary versus Secondary Sources
• Balancing Your Use of Secondary Sources
• Sets of Sources
• Sources as Records of the Powerful
• No Source Speaks for Itself
• Languages and Specialized Reading
• Choose Sources That You Love
• Workaday Documents
• Specialized Periodicals
• Criminal Investigations and Trials
• Official Reports
• Letters and Petitions
• Institutional Records
• Scholarship
• Motion Pictures and Recordings
• Buildings and Plans
• The Working Bibliography
• The Open Web
• Limits of the Open Web
• Bibliographic Databases
• Full-Text Databases
• Oral History
• What Is an Archive?
• Archives and Access
• Read the Finding Aid
• Follow the Rules
• Work with Archivists
• Types of Cameras
• How Much to Shoot?
• Managing Expectations
• Duck, Duck, Goose
• Credibility
• Avoid Catastrophe
• Complete Tasks—Ideally Just Once, and in the Right Order
• Maintain Momentum
• Kinds of Software
• Word Processors
• Means of Entry
• A Good Day’s Work
• Word Count Is Your Friend
• Managing Research Assistants
• Research Diary
• When to Stop
• Note-Taking as Mining
• Note-Taking as Assembly
• Identify the Source, So You Can Go Back and Consult if Needed
• Distinguish Others’ Words and Ideas from Your Own
• Allow Sorting and Retrieval of Related Pieces of Information
• Provide the Right Level of Detail
• Notebooks and Index Cards
• Word Processors for Note-Taking
• Plain Text and Markdown
• Reference Managers
• Note-Taking Apps
• Relational Databases
• Spreadsheets
• Glossaries and Alphabetical Lists
• Image Catalogs
• Other Specialized Formats
• The Working Draft
• Variants: The Ten- and Thirty-Page Papers
• Thesis Statement
• Historiography
• Sections as Independent Essays
• Topic Sentences
• Answering Questions
• Invisible Bullet Points
• The Perils of Policy Prescriptions
• A Model (T) Outline
• Flexibility
• Protagonists
• Antagonists
• Bit Players
• The Shape of the Story
• The Controlling Idea
• Alchemy: Turning Sources to Stories
• Turning Points
• Counterfactuals
• Point of View
• Symbolic Details
• Combinations
• Speculation
• Is Your Jargon Really Necessary?
• Defining Terms
• Word Choice as Analysis
• Period Vocabulary or Anachronism?
• Integrate Images into Your Story
• Put Numbers in Context
• Summarize Data in Tables and Graphs
• Why We Cite
• Citation Styles
• Active Verbs
• People as Subjects
• Signposting
• First Person
• Putting It Aside
• Reverse Outlining
• Auditing Your Word Budget
• Writing for the Ear
• Conferences
• Social Media
• Coauthorship
• Tough, Fair, and Encouraging
• Manuscript and Book Reviews
• Journal Articles
• Book chapters
• Websites and Social Media
• Museums and Historic Sites
• Press Appearances and Op-Eds
• Law and Policy
• Graphic History, Movies, and Broadway Musicals
• Acknowledgments

"This volume is a complete and sophisticated addition to any scholar’s library and a boon to the curious layperson. . . . [A] major achievement."— Choice Reviews

"This book is quite simply a gem. . . . Schrag’s accessible style and comprehensive treatment of the field make this book a valuable resource."—Alan Sears, Canadian Journal of History

"A tour de force that will help all of us be more capable historians. This wholly readable, delightful book is packed with good advice that will benefit seasoned scholars and novice researchers alike."—Nancy Weiss Malkiel, author of "Keep the Damned Women Out": The Struggle for Coeducation

"An essential and overdue contribution. Schrag's guide offers a lucid breakdown of what historians do and provides plenty of examples."—Jessica Mack, Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media, George Mason University

"Extraordinarily useful. If there is another book that takes apart as many elements of the historian's craft the way that Schrag does and provides so many examples, I am not aware of it."—James Goodman, author of But Where Is the Lamb?

"This is an engaging guide to being a good historian and all that entails."—Diana Seave Greenwald, Assistant Curator of the Collection, Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum

"Impressive and engaging. Schrag gracefully incorporates the voices of dozens, if not hundreds, of fellow historians. This gives the book a welcome conversational feeling, as if the reader were overhearing a lively discussion among friendly historians."—Sarah Dry, author of Waters of the World: The Story of the Scientists Who Unraveled the Mysteries of Our Oceans, Atmosphere, and Ice Sheets and Made the Planet Whole

"This is a breathtaking book—wide-ranging, wonderfully written, and extremely useful. Every page brims with fascinating, well-chosen illustrations of creative research, writing, and reasoning that teach and inspire."—Amy C. Offner, author of Sorting Out the Mixed Economy

historyprofessor.org website, maintained by Zachary M. Schrag, Professor of History at George Mason University

Stay connected for new books and special offers. Subscribe to receive a welcome discount for your next order. 

• ebook & Audiobook Cart

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

30 Historical Methods

Joel Quirk is an RCUK Fellow, Department of Law and Wilberforce Institute for the Study of Slavery and Emancipation, University of Hull.

• Published: 02 September 2009
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

Research into both international and intellectual history has flourished in recent times. This article highlights a number of recent contributions, paying particular attention to the relationship between history, theory, and method. The article is organized into five distinct sections. The first section offers a brief sketch of the vagaries of history as a field of study. The second section is concerned with the search for universal models, and the relationship between rationalist theories, radical simplification, and international history. The third section is concerned with critical responses to the historical limitations of radical simplification, and allied attempts to come to terms with questions of contingency and complexity. The fourth section explores more recent developments in rationalist theory. Using innovations in realist theory as an explicatory focal point, it examines a number of recent contributions that have placed rationalist approaches on a stronger historical footing. The main focus throughout this discussion is the origin and operation of the state system, which has long been a premier site for historical inquiry in international relations circles. The final section takes up the parallel field of intellectual history, exploring how recent works on the history of ideas have been shaped around contemporary agendas.

For most international relations scholars, historical inquiry is not simply (or even primarily) an end in itself, but also serves as an essential platform for the advancement of a range of theoretical goals. This self‐conscious orientation extends to the study of both international and intellectual history. It not only plays a decisive role when it comes to the methods adopted by scholars from various schools, but also helps to ensure that historical projects are routinely organized around the demands of modern theoretical arguments. In this intellectual environment, the importance attached to making a theoretical contribution can be both an asset and an obstacle. International relations scholars have marshaled an arsenal of valuable tools, techniques, and templates, offering important insights into many vital questions, but these contributions can also come at the price of historical depth, with complex, multicausal issues ending up as testing grounds for partisan efforts to corroborate abstract theoretical models.

Historical inquiry is often identified as a neglected area in international relations circles ( Teschke 2003, 14 ; Keene 2005, 1–3 ). This might have been true in the past, but it is no longer true today, as research into both international and intellectual history has flourished in recent times. Although silences and problem areas remain, especially when it comes to long‐standing Eurocentrism, there has nonetheless been tremendous growth over the last two decades. In this chapter I highlight a number of recent contributions, paying particular attention to the relationship between history, theory, and method. This project is organized into five distinct sections. The first section offers a brief sketch of the vagaries of history as a field of study. The second section is concerned with the search for universal models, and the relationship between rationalist theories, radical simplification, and international history. The third section is concerned with critical responses to the historical limitations of radical simplification, and allied attempts to come to terms with questions of contingency and complexity. The fourth section explores more recent developments in rationalist theory. Using innovations in realist theory as an explicatory focal point, I examine a number of recent contributions that have placed rationalist approaches on a stronger historical footing. The main focus throughout this discussion is the origin and operation of the state system, which has long been a premier site for historical inquiry in international relations circles. The final section of the chapter takes up the parallel field of intellectual history, exploring how recent works on the history of ideas have been shaped around contemporary agendas.

1 On History

In his famous work What is History ?, E. H. Carr (1962, 6) observes that “the belief in a hard core of historical facts existing objectively and independently of the interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy, but one which it is very hard to eradicate.” It is not necessary to be a postmodernist to recognize the merits of this position. Many different forms of interpretation are involved in the complex relationship between historical events and their contemporary representation. The recollections of relevant participants will not always point in a single direction. Many competing factors, both proximate and long term, will necessarily be involved. Subsequent records are unlikely to be complete, and those that are available will inevitably reflect parochial orientations and preoccupations. Other key issues include the selection of events that become “history,” rather than falling by the wayside, and the level of importance that ends up being attached to any number of potentially relevant factors. It is also clear, moreover, that the vagaries of historical inquiry also extend to contemporary orientations and agendas, where it is not unusual for people to “study history less for what they might learn than for what they want to prove” ( Hinsley 1963, 13 ). The classical example here is the “Whig interpretation” of history, which refers to a long‐standing tendency among Anglo‐Saxon historians to “emphasise certain principles of progress in the past and to produce a story which is the ratification if not the glorification of the present” ( Butterfield 1965, v ). This represents the most well‐known manifestation of a much larger conundrum, as contemporary preoccupations can end up influencing how the historical record is represented in a variety of ways.

These considerations apply to all forms of historical inquiry. When we focus our attention upon international relations, a number of additional issues come to light, starting with differences between history and international relations (as a form of social or political science). This issue is complicated by internal variations within disciplines, which make it difficult to speak of anything more than general tendencies. There is widespread agreement, however, that the two disciplines ultimately favor different approaches. One synopsis comes from Jack Levy (1997, 32) , who maintains “that the distinctive difference between history and political science is that historians describe and explain the connections between a series of events, whereas political scientists formulate and test general theoretical propositions about relationships between variables or classes of events.” Another reading comes from John Gaddis (2002, 62–3) , who observes that all forms of social inquiry inevitably involve generalizations, but that historians tend to embed generalizations within narratives, while social scientists tend to embed narratives within generalizations. Academic international relations' attachment to general theoretical propositions has also ensured that international relations theorists are often heavily reliant upon the works of historians for information. This widespread dependence on secondary sources raises difficult methodological questions, which are rarely explicitly addressed. Historians may not always make their underlying assumptions explicit, but this does not mean that they simply compile historical data, detached from theoretical or methodological commitments ( Lustick 1996 ; Kratochwil 2006 ; Roberts 2006 ). This has led to a slightly odd situation where international relations theorists draw extensively upon the often painstaking research conducted by historians, yet regularly disconnect these contributions from the nuanced, case‐specific, and typically multicausal approach that most historians favor.

The main point at issue here is the close relationship between history, theory, and method. In order fully to understand the various ways in which the historical record has been conceptualized and discussed amongst international relations scholars one must first interrogate both the theoretical aspirations involved, and the methods utilized to advance these goals. This is particularly important when it comes to more recent works, as modern scholars typically end up structuring their arguments around the strengths and weaknesses of previous contributions. Many disciplines tackle “big picture,” macro‐historical projects, yet these projects tend to be organized on very different lines to equivalent projects in academic international relations. These projects may end up exploring similar historical topics, but they remain embedded within different academic discourses. In the case of international relations, this has both positive and negative dimensions. International relations scholars have offered valuable insights into many important questions, yet theorists can sometimes lose sight of history as a distinctive field of study, with its own methodological and interpretative challenges (see Pierson 2004 ; Trachtenberg 2006 ). Theory will always need history, since past events offer an indispensable platform against which various models come to be formulated and evaluated, but there will always be a danger of theory becoming an end in itself, rather than a valuable tool.

2 Rational Action, Materialism, and Functionalism

In any given sequence of international events, an extraordinary number of factors will be in play. These factors can be evaluated inductively, by taking into account a range of competing influences, but as more issues are taken into account it invariably becomes harder to move beyond case‐specific idiosyncrasies and thereby identify unambiguous causal patterns or universal models. Modern social scientists have sought to resolve this dilemma through various forms of radical simplification. This has chiefly been expressed in three overlapping strategies: rational action, materialism, and functionalism. Each of these strategies comes with considerable intellectual baggage. In this setting, I am primarily concerned with their theoretical dimensions and methodological rationale.

Rational action is designed to cut through the vagaries of human behavior by treating individuals as atomized utility maximizers. For some detractors, this constitutes “a caricature of the human condition” ( Jackson 2000, 47 ), yet this objection loses some of its force if we view rational action as a qualified methodological move, rather than a totalizing ontological stance. The key point at issue is not whether every actor operates according to a hyper‐rational calculus, but whether it is heuristically useful to structure theoretical inquiry around this universal behavioral model. Rational action is commonly coupled with various forms of materialism, building upon the underlying notion that the organization and distribution of material capabilities ultimately define the structural context within which political actors pursue their strategic interests. Material properties do not always exist in isolation, but often gain depth and definition through the ideational orientations that surround them, yet it can still be useful to operate as if material forces were entirely separate. The final component in this theoretical triad is functionalism, which often serves as a bridge between rational action and materialism, as the origin and operation of various institutional forms is explained by their strategic functions, or utilitarian purposes. Functionalism can operate on multiple levels. On the one hand, we have institutional arrangements between political communities, such as regimes or international organizations, which are said to reflect strategic interests in developing institutions that serve favorable political and economic functions. On the other, we have institutional arrangements within communities, as the genesis and subsequent development of various political and economic complexes can be traced to utilitarian responses to competition amongst powerful vested interests.

This triad has been central to an ongoing theoretical quest for universal models, clear causal connections, and definitive predictions. From this standpoint, it is difficult to imagine a more effective set of tools. Rational action cuts through the vagaries of human behavior, materialism delineates both interests and capabilities, and functionalism provides an explanation for the origin and operation of various institutional forms. The primary goal is not to blend together a range of considerations, but to specify a small number of key mechanisms that clearly account for variations across multiple cases. This has in turn given rise to two overlapping axes of theoretical contention. The first axis is defined by wide‐ranging disputes over the application of these overlapping strategies, as theorists of various persuasions share an underlying commitment (albeit with some modifications or additions) to rational action, materialism, and functionalism, yet disagree over their substantive ramifications. This dynamic has been central to debates amongst neorealists and neoliberal institutionalists. It also extends to differences among many exponents of rational choice theory, neoclassical realism, the new liberalism, and other theories that draw inspiration from economic models. Not all rationalist theories are universal in scope. Some theories become applicable only in particular circumstances, such as international negotiations, leading to sophisticated debates over the specific consequences of universal behavioral models operating within narrowly defined parameters. The second axis of contention revolves around a host of issues, actions, and idiosyncrasies that have frequently been marginalized as part of a methodological commitment to radical simplification. This dynamic is chiefly concerned with questions of identity, ideology, epistemology, and contingency. It is also especially relevant to the study of international history, as the search for enduring axioms has frequently overshadowed the distinctive qualities of less familiar historical settings.

In order to illustrate these themes, I turn to a familiar point of departure: Kenneth Waltz's outstanding Theory of International Politics   (1979) . The main features of Waltz's theory are well known, starting with the state‐centric character of the international system and the enduring effects of anarchy, both institutional (like‐units, functional adaptation) and behavioral (self‐help, rational action), and then extending to the structural dimensions of relative material capabilities, and more specific points regarding bipolarity and economic interdependence. In many ways, the path Waltz takes is more interesting than his ultimate destination. Rejecting the “inductivist route,” Waltz (1979, 4, 7) argues that “explanatory power … is gained by moving away from ‘reality’, not by staying close to it.” A theorist must cut through complexity by identifying a bounded realm of activity, within which generalizable patterns become explicable through the integration of a small number of heuristically powerful, ruthlessly simplified mechanisms. This means embracing a systemic approach that excludes domestic politics, or regime type, not because they are irrelevant, but because they can force us “back to the descriptive level,” unduly complicating our grasp of “big, important, and enduring patterns” stemming from international anarchy ( Waltz 1979, 65, 70 ). This ruthless strategy ends up “bracketing out” a tremendous range of issues. Of particular importance here is Waltz's static approach to international history, which is encapsulated in his claim that “the texture of international politics remains highly constant, patterns recur, and events repeat themselves endlessly. The relations that prevail internationally seldom shift rapidly in type or in quality” ( Waltz 1979, 66 ).

Waltz's theory has played a central role in numerous debates. His main contribution to the study of international history has been as a critical foil. In this context, his work has been regularly presented as an emblem of the more general historical shortcomings of “mainstream” approaches. This association may not be entirely fair, since Waltz is not necessarily the strongest example available, but it has nonetheless served as an important starting point for a range of historical projects. While these projects differ in many important respects, they can be loosely integrated around a shared critique of the historical limitations of radical simplification. From here, the theoretical quest for universal essences has given way to a more qualified focus upon contingent properties, as scholars have (re)turned to a range of issues previously marginalized on methodological grounds.

3 Historical Complexity and Contemporary Theory

for theorists like Waltz, the current status quo is best viewed as an unbroken extension of enduring axioms. This totalizing stance has provoked a sustained barrage of historically oriented critique. One of the main objections to this perspective is that it ends up incorrectly projecting recent innovations backward through time, thereby elevating contingent structures and orientations to the status of transhistorical essences. This line of argument is nicely summarized by John Hobson (2002) , who argues that international relations scholarship often suffers from two distinct modes of ahistoricism: chronofetishism and tempocentrism. The former is said to denote “a ‘sealing off’ of the present such that it appears as an autonomous, natural, spontaneous and immutable entity.” The latter refers to the extrapolation of this “naturalized” present “backwards through time such that discontinuous ruptures and differences between historical epochs and states systems are smoothed over and consequentially obscured” ( Hobson 2002, 9 ).

One of the key points at issue here is the relationship between theoretical parsimony and historical complexity. The main advantage of radical simplification is that it enables theorists to cut through complexity, making it possible to speak of definitive, universal causes that unite otherwise disparate cases, yet this source of strength can also be a source of weakness, as the search for transhistorical essences has also tended to “smooth over” both distinctive historical features and fundamental differences. This trade‐off is especially acute in the cases of neorealism and neoliberal institutionalism, which both played major roles within theoretical debates during the 1980s and 1990s, and thus regularly served as focal points for historical and theoretical critique. Among the many strategies that have been employed here, three main impulses can be identified: (1) a concerted effort to catalogue the historical shortcomings of rational action, materialism, and functionalism; (2) a concerted effort to interrogate the complexities and idiosyncrasies that have shaped particular historical milieux; and (3) a concerted effort to challenge aspects of contemporary life that might otherwise appear natural, or immutable.

From this vantage point, an important point of departure is provided by John Ruggie (1993) . Expressing profound frustration with a widespread inability to conceptualize meaningful challenges to the modern state system, Ruggie famously looks to the transition from medieval to modern forms of political rule for guidance. This transition poses severe problems for Waltz, who posits a sharp, consistent demarcation between domestic and international. This image is difficult to reconcile with medieval history, where political life was organized around a heteronomous order of cross‐cutting jurisdictions, both religious and secular, together with a significant level of functional differentiation (non‐like‐units). If political life has been organized on fundamentally different terms, how did the states system arise? For Ruggie (1993, 151) , modern statehood is defined by a commitment to “territoriality defined, fixed, and mutually exclusive enclaves of legitimate dominion.” This unique model is said to have emerged within a relatively short timeframe, with a range of cumulative factors paving the way for a decisive moment of radical disjuncture in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which Ruggie tentatively frames in terms of epochal change, or a form of punctuated equilibrium.

In making this argument, Ruggie (1993, 141) is explicit about the inherent limitations of his project, observing that much of his work is limited to searching “for a vocabulary and … research agenda by means of which we can start to ask systematic questions about the possibility of fundamental international transformation today.” His case is strongest when it comes to substantive differences between medieval and modern, but his explanation of the transformation from one order to the other remains fairly suggestive. On this point, a theoretically more rigorous argument has recently been advanced by Daniel Philpott. According to Philpott (2001, 4) , the constitutional structure of our current global order can be traced to two seminal revolutions in sovereignty, the Treaty of Westphalia and colonial independence, which in turn reflect “prior revolutions in ideas about justice and political authority.” To substantiate these claims, he identifies two distinct roles played by ideas in shaping these momentous events. The first role is concerned with identities, as ideas are said to persuade actors to take on new forms of identification through reason of reflection. The second role is concerned with social power, as ideas are said to “alter the costs and benefits facing those who are in a position to promote or hinder the policies that the ideas demand” ( Philpott 2001, 58 ). Ideas do not operate in isolation from other factors, but neither are they reducible to material structures or strategic calculations.

Philpott's argument is well suited to decolonization (see also Jackson 1990 ; Crawford 2002 ), but has proved to be more contentious when it comes to Westphalia. Like Ruggie, Philpott favors a decisive moment of radical disjunc‐ ture, but this formula has been challenged on several fronts. Some scholars accept Westphalia as a key turning point, but also identify a further transformation from absolutist sovereignty to sovereign nationhood ( Reus‐Smit 1998 ; Hall 1999 ). Others question its status as a decisive moment ( Osiander 2001 ). On this front, several neo‐Marxist scholars have developed an alternative methodological approach to historical transformation. In one pioneering contribution, Justin Rosenberg favors a quite different form of “structural discontinuity,” which separates pre‐capitalist orders from the modern capitalist system. This emerges from a strident critique of realism, as the widely held notion of an essential continuity in relations between states is discarded in favor of a comparative approach that connects variations in geopolitical behavior to underlying forms of political and economic organization. In this model, the distinctive qualities of the modern state system are said to correspond to the unique social structures of capitalist society ( Rosenberg 1994 ). This line of argument has recently been expanded and further refined by Benno Teschke (2003) , who charts a staggered progression through medieval, absolutist, and modern capitalist politics. In developing his argument, Teschke is careful to balance historical complexity and theoretical parsimony, giving due consideration to uneven development while nonetheless making a strong case for the role of property regimes in (re)structuring the identities of political communities. In this context, “the decisive shift towards modern international relations is not marked by the Peace of Westphalia, but comes with the rise of the first modern state: post‐revolutionary England” ( Teschke 2003, 249 ).

Interest in sovereignty and modernity has not been limited to international history, but also extends to intellectual history. A complex amalgam of these two related fields can be found in the work of Jens Bartelson. Focusing on the relationship between sovereignty and knowledge, Bartelson offers a genealogical history that spans the Renaissance, the “Classical Age,” and Modernity. The genealogical method has become increasingly popular in recent times. Commonly associated with Friedrich Nietzsche and Michel Foucault, a genealogy “is strategically aimed at that which looks unproblematic and is held to be timeless; its task is to explain how these present traits, in all their vigour and truth, were formed out of the past” ( Bartelson 1995, 73 ). For Bartelson, this translates into an episodic narrative that builds upon a series of textual exemplars, as impromptu shifts in political discourse are traced to mutations in the epistemic and ontological foundations of intellectual inquiry. Another prominent exponent of a discursive approach to sovereignty is Cynthia Weber (1995) , who focuses upon changing boundaries between sovereignty and intervention. Instead of stabilizing the definition of sovereignty (or intervention), and evaluating substantive historical practices against an abstract standard, Weber contends that individual states are “written,” or constituted, according to logics of representation and simulation. To be sovereign, a state needs to “organize its affairs in such a way that its foundation of sovereign authority is authorized to speak for its particular domestic community in international affairs” ( Weber 1995, 124 ). Through a series of case studies, she connects ruptures in this symbolic relationship to a range of interventionary practices, demonstrating that claims about (true) sovereign authority are not always incompatible with intervention, but have also been invoked to validate incursions that transgress conventional notions of territorial demarcation.

The genesis, operation, and ongoing evolution of the state system is now firmly established as a premier focal point for historical research in international relations circles. It is here that tremendous progress has been made over the years, yet this heavy concentration upon one historical milieu, however important, also opens the door to charges of Eurocentrism. On this front, academic international relations remains shamefully weak, yet is slowly improving. Of particular significance here is the macro‐historical work of Barry Buzan, Charles Jones, and Richard Little. For these scholars, Waltz's theory remains a useful starting point, but is unnecessarily restrictive. Moving beyond a static association between anarchy and like‐units, they identify four possible combinations of political units and international structure: (1) hierarchy and like‐units, (2) anarchy and like‐units, (3) hierarchy and un‐like‐units, and (4) anarchy and un‐like‐units ( Buzan, Jones, and Little 1993, 37–47 ). These variations serve dramatically to undercut “the Westphalian Straightjacket” ( Buzan and Little 2001, 25 ), giving pride of place to different forms of organization, from empires and suzerain networks, to tribal orders and city states (see also Watson 1992 ; Buzan and Little 2000 ). This perspective also reflects a substantial debt to the expansive approach of prominent “English School” figures such as Martin Wight and Hedley Bull ( Wight 1977 ; Bull and Watson 1984 ). This debt is shared by many modern scholars, most notably when it comes to the theory and practice of international society. Historical discussion of international society usually begins with the premise that there are different kinds of society, which have evolved over time in response to various dynamics. This theoretical starting point has been successfully applied to a range of historical cases, proving to be especially valuable as a framework for evaluating relationships between European and non‐European peoples ( Keene 2002 ).

The approaches outlined above are loosely bound together by a shared rejection of radical simplification. Once we move beyond this common affinity we quickly encounter significant variations. This is partially a question of the specific strategies and orientations that particular approaches favor, and partially a question of the overarching goals to which they aspire. For many scholars, the main purpose of historical inquiry is to provide a more compelling explanation of particular events, and/or persuasive theoretical argument. This can translate into “thick description,” various forms of causal and constitutive analysis, or more traditional historical narratives. For other scholars, the primary purpose of historical inquiry is to shatter prevailing orthodoxies into both complicit and contestable fragments, paving the way for either modernist reform or postmodern resistance.

4 Renewing Rationalism

The various works considered in the previous section collectively pose a fundamental challenge to rationalist theories of international relations. In most cases, the main axis of contention is not metaphysical, but empirical, as critics have repeatedly documented the difficulties involved in reconciling various historical experiences with rational action, materialism, and/or functionalism. In response to this ongoing challenge, rationalist scholars from various schools have recently offered a range of innovative theoretical models and historical elaborations, while striving to uphold the overall tenor of the social scientific project. These works may not convince every critic, but they collectively go a considerable way in reinvigorating the historical credentials of rationalist approaches. In this context, Waltz once again occupies a key position. This has both negative and positive dimensions. In the case of the former, more nuanced works can end up being indirectly overshadowed, as Waltz's shortcomings are often held to epitomize rationalist shortcomings more generally. This is problematic, as other projects frequently have more to offer ( Gilpin 1981 ; Doyle 1986 ). Many forms of historical analysis, such as debates over the “democratic peace” or the obsolescence of major war, have chiefly taken place amongst rationalists of various stripes, with relatively limited external input. It is also clear, however, that Waltz continues to serve as a major historical and theoretical foil. This is particularly evident when it comes to realist theory, where more recent scholarship has cautiously returned to some of the key issues and developments that Waltz deliberately excluded.

In this context, two pioneering contributions have come from Stephen Walt (1987) , who highlights the role of intentions, and Jack Synder (1991) , who focuses on domestic politics. Walt offers a sophisticated, policy‐driven analysis of the formation of international alliances, both formal and informal. His primary empirical evidence comes from the diplomatic history of the Middle East between 1955 and 1979, where he identifies thirty‐six alliances, both bilateral and multilateral, which involve eighty‐six national decisions. This evidence is marshaled to evaluate a number of interlinked hypotheses, revolving around the prevalence of balancing and bandwagoning, the role of ideology, foreign aid, and transnational penetration. Walt's major contribution (1987, 172) emerges out of a compelling critique of traditional notions of the balance of power, where he concludes that “examining the impact of several distinct sources of threat can provide a more persuasive account of alliance formation than can solely focusing on the distribution of aggregate capabilities.” Balance‐of‐threat theory gives considerable weight to material resources, an essential component of Waltz's theory, but introduces an additional set of considerations, based upon the intentions of the actors involved. Another influential reformulation of realist theory comes from Synder (1991, 19) , who argues that “realism must be recaptured from those who look only at politics between societies, ignoring what goes on within societies.” This model is expressed in a case‐study driven analysis of imperial overexpansion. Building upon an analysis of the evolving policies of Germany, Japan, Britain, the USSR and the United States, Snyder argues that imprudent, counter‐productive expansionary policies can be chiefly traced to domestic coalition‐making and ideological mythmaking. While expansion may not be in the national interest, or the interests of the general population, logrolling domestic coalitions are held to have successfully mobilized various institutional and ideological resources to advance their parochial interests.

These works represent early examples of a larger trend, as realist theory has experienced a renaissance in the aftermath of the cold war. Echoing Walt and Synder, this new generation of realist scholarship has regularly ended up “sacrificing some of Waltz's parsimony” ( Schweller 1998, 10 ) in the pursuit of greater theoretical precision and historical sophistication. The best example here is arguably Dale Copeland (2000, 3) , whose theory of dynamic differentials seeks to explain the causes of major war, integrating “power differentials, polarity, and declining power trends into one cohesive logic.” This innovative synthesis is then tested against a series of empirically rich case studies from the twentieth century, followed by a more limited survey of earlier cases within Europe, as Copeland argues that declining yet still dominant great powers are most likely to initiate (or risk) major war. In this model, estimations of the inevitability and severity of decline are mediated by international polarity, sustaining enduring systemic pressures that tend to overshadow, but not entirely eliminate, unit‐level dynamics. This reformulation of systemic theory constitutes one of two main avenues of recent inquiry (see also Schweller 1998 ; Mearsheimer 2001 ). Other contributions have followed Snyder in taking up internal factors such as elite behavior and (mis)perceptions, or a combination of internal and international dynamics ( Wohlforth 1993 ; Van Evera 1999 ). Some of these moves have proved controversial ( Legro and Moravcsik 1999 ), but they have also enhanced the explanatory power of realism on multiple fronts. Historical inquiry has been an essential part of this equation, as theorists have sought to validate their preferred approach using detailed case studies, measures, and models. Rather than rejecting rational action, materialism, and functionalism, the underlying impulse has instead been to formulate strategies to place these models on a stronger historical footing.

In keeping with larger trends, these works have been primarily organized around debates within rationalist circles. Those involved are well versed with larger critiques, but have here concentrated their energies upon getting their own house in order. This does not mean, of course, that there have been no explicit rejoinders. Especially prominent here is Stephen Krasner's work on sovereignty, which is organized around the idea that logics of consequences, based upon strategic calculations, have consistently trumped logics of appropriateness, based upon rules and identities ( Krasner 1999, 5–6 ). The history of sovereignty, a premier site for rationalist critics, is framed in terms of “organized hypocrisy,” as states are said to have routinely deviated from prevailing norms, decoupling political behavior from institutional scripts. This argument finds expression in thematic studies of minority rights, human rights, sovereign lending, and state creation from the nineteenth century onwards. In this model, ideas are not entirely irrelevant, but material power and strategic interests remain the decisive arbiter.

The preceding discussion is by no means exhaustive. As other chapters in this volume can attest, realism is by no means the only theory available here. I would argue, however, that the trajectory of realist theory reveals a great deal about the evolving relationship between rationalist methods and historical research. From the 1950s onwards, academic international relations attached considerable importance to parsimonious, universal models, leading to various forms of radical simplification. This reached its most influential expression in the work of Waltz, who ruthlessly sacrificed historical detail in the pursuit of theoretical elegance, introducing a focal point for critique in which questions of historical contingency emerged as vital issues. In the face of this challenge, more recent scholarship has favored a higher degree of theoretical precision and empirical rigor, furnishing realism with a stronger historical foundation. It is also worth noting, however, that the various works identified above continue to assume, rather than explain, the existence of the state, thereby largely sidestepping Ruggie's concern with epochal change. It is not that rationalist theories have little to offer here (see Spruyt 1994 ), but when it comes to the ongoing search for universal models, this could very well be one major historical variable too many.

5 Intellectual History and Contemporary Theory

In each of the approaches outlined above, the content of historical inquiry is primarily structured around the requirements of modern conceptions of the nature and purpose of theoretical endeavor. A similar dynamic also applies to the closely related field of intellectual history, where various aspects of the history of ideas have been consistently called upon to validate a range of contemporary causes and theoretical positions. The relationship between intellectual history and international history is not always easy to pin down. There have recently been some innovative attempts to combine the two realms ( Johnston 1995 ; Hopf 2002 ), but it is also not unusual to see textual sources being presented as major influences, or historical exemplars, without direct verification of the impact of their often esoteric content on parallel historical developments. In this context, discussion of the history of ideas can end up as an unacknowledged substitute for detailed research into international history.

The main point at issue here, however, is the relationship between intellectual history and contemporary theory. Intellectual inquiry into international relations was not consistently differentiated from the study of law, philosophy, history, economics, and/or religion until the twentieth century. A key component in the development of this modern innovation has been a cumulative, retroactive effort to forge genealogical links with earlier intellectual endeavors, resulting in a range of mainly European scholars being recruited to a range of theoretical causes. This widespread practice raises several methodological issues, which have not always been explicitly addressed ( Schmidt 2002a, 6–7 ). Much like the study of international history, the study of intellectual history has flourished in recent times. Three main areas of inquiry can be identified here: (1) the composition of the realist tradition, (2) the integration of political and international theory, and (3) the early history of the international relations discipline.

The search for universal templates is not confined to international history, but also extends to intellectual history, where canonical figures have been routinely presented as exemplars of timeless ideas or eternal conversations. This approach has been comprehensively challenged in other disciplines, but remains popular within international relations circles, with the two most prominent exponents being the realist tradition ( Gilpin 1984 ) and Martin Wight's expansive differentiation (1991) between realism, rationalism, and revolutionism. Both schemes project modern categories backward through time, with the realist tradition placing luminaries such as Thucydides, Niccolò Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, and Jean‐Jacques Rousseau alongside more recent innovations. Modern realists have regularly invoked this pedigree to bolster various theoretical claims, provoking two main lines of critique. The first line of critique questions the attribution of a realist persona to various scholars, leading to charges that those involved should not be caricatured as realists ( George 1994, 70–4 ; Walker 1993, 26–47 ). The second (sometimes tentatively) accepts that these figures belong to an identifiable tradition, and instead uses their vaunted status to interrogate modern conceptions of realist theory ( Haslam 2002 ; Williams 2005 ). The best example of this approach arguably comes from Richard Lebow, who bases his work upon detailed, contextual case studies of Thucydides, Carl von Clausewitz, and Hans Morgenthau. This serves as a platform from which to re‐evaluate modern conceptions of realism, supporting Lebow's contention (2003, 58) that “the modern academy has introduced a false dichotomy between political and moral behavior and political and moral theorizing.”

This line of argument resonates with recent moves to integrate political and international thought. Early international relations scholarship presented political and international theory as discrete categories, with the scarcity of the latter being unfavorably contrasted with the bounty of the former ( Wight 1966 ). Recent scholarship has challenged this formulation, embracing an integrated framework under the rubric of international political theory. This forms part of the rapid growth of normative theorizing during the 1990s ( Schmidt 2002b ). In this context, the history of ideas has once again been called upon to bolster contemporary agendas, as scholars have sought out compelling antecedents for more recent endeavors. One influential approach comes from Chris Brown (1992) , who organizes the history of ideas into cosmopolitan and communitarian strands, with Immanuel Kant exemplifying the former and Georg Hegel exemplifying the latter. Another comes from David Boucher (1998) , who bases his expansive historical survey upon a tripartite division between empirical realism, universal moral order, and historical reason. In both of these frameworks dominant conceptions of value‐neutral explanation give way to an explicitly normative orientation. This also extends to recent works on “classical” theory ( Clark and Neumann 1996 ; Jahn 2006 ), which are similarly organized around tensions between past and present intellectual models (see also Jackson 2000 ). Some contributions have provided variations on the timeless ideas framework. Others have concentrated upon key differences between historical milieux. In the case of the latter, the goal is to “illuminate our contemporary intellectual situation by establishing contrasts rather than affinities with the past, to call attention to the fact that at different times thinkers have conceptualized international politics … in quite different ways” ( Keene 2005, 17 ). This line of argument shares many features in common with Hobson's indictment of academic international relations' widespread tendency to “smooth over” underlying historical differences.

The final focal point for recent research into intellectual history has been the early development of academic international relations, where there has been a concerted effort to move beyond perfunctory treatments of immature idealism ( Long and Wilson 1995 ; Long and Schmidt 2005 ). This has found expression in a stream of detailed critiques, as scholars have argued that conventional narratives offer a grossly distorted picture of the intellectual history of the early twentieth century, most notably when it comes to the story of a “first great debate” ( Wilson 1998 ; Quirk and Vigneswaran 2005 ). Many eminent figures from this period have also been subject to critical reappraisal, including realist icon Carr ( Jones 1998 ; Cox 2000 ). The best example from this now extensive literature arguably comes from Brian Schmidt, who contends that international relations scholars have routinely confused retroactive analytical constructs for authentic traditions, and thereby incorrectly elevated the historiographical (by)products of current agendas to the status of historical realities. Schmidt instead embraces an alternative methodological approach, which he describes as a critical internal discursive history, that strives to “reconstruct as accurately as possible the history of the conversation that has been constitutive of academic international relations” ( Schmidt 1998, 37 ).

The eclectic contributions outlined here can be loosely grouped together around two main impulses. On the one hand, we have a common desire to offer a distinctive account of the intellectual contribution of particular authors and/or eras. In many cases, this is primarily a question of offering a more detailed account than those currently available, and thereby deflating problematic representations. On the other hand, we have a common desire to utilize the history of ideas as an authoritative platform from which to speak to contemporary theoretical debates. In many cases, this translates into attempts to open space for different models of intellectual inquiry, as earlier authors and eras are held to have operated in quite different ways from current theoretical conventions. Beyond these overarching impulses we encounter considerable variation. While the timeless ideas framework remains popular, recent scholarship has continued a now long‐standing practice of looking outside academic international relations for inspiration, drawing upon scholars such as John Gunnell (1993) and Quentin Skinner (2002) .

6 Concluding Remarks

All forms of historical inquiry invariably have important normative and praxeological dimensions. For theorists who view history as a realm of recurrence and repetition, the key point at issue is effective management. By exploring cyclic historical patterns, they cautiously seek to identify ways of mitigating the worst effects of enduring structural forces. For theorists who view history as a realm of contingency and complexity, the key point at issue is fundamental change. By exploring historical ruptures and essential differences, they cautiously seek to identify nascent potentials within contemporary life that point to ways of reorienting international order. This perspective does not necessarily translate into historical determinism, since future cataclysms are always possible, but it does suggest that aspects of the current status quo that otherwise appear natural, or immutable, are best understood as contingent expressions of a long‐term process of historical contestation. Within both these perspectives we encounter further variation, as scholars regularly offer divergent accounts of the strategies and orientations that are required to promote and/or evaluate either effective management or fundamental change.

International relations theory has served as a common medium through which these differences have been conceptualized and discussed, helping to provide purpose and structure to an eclectic array of historical projects. On this front, the main axis of contention has been an ongoing search for universal models, clear causal connections, and definitive predictions. This has been chiefly expressed in various forms of radical simplification, based upon rational action, materialism, and functionalism. The most influential example of this approach has been the work of Kenneth Waltz. More recent contributions have introduced powerful modifications of Waltz's abstract vision, offering a higher degree of historical rigor and theoretical precision while remaining committed to social scientific ideals. These contributions have gone against the grain of recent trends in historical research within international relations circles, which have been heavily populated by critics of rationalist approaches. The search for transhistorical essences that operate across various time periods and regions will always be tremendously challenging. It is easy to be overly critical when scholars fall short in pursuing such a difficult theoretical task. The real sticking point, however, has less do with individual shortcomings than with the uncertain wisdom of the overall exercise. As we have seen, this has often translated into a referendum on the merits of radical simplification, and the relative importance of various issues and idiosyncrasies that have been marginalized in the pursuit of theoretical parsimony. Both international and intellectual history have been central to this often fractious debate, as scholars have highlighted historical developments and intellectual contributions that do not conform with prevailing models. This central relationship between history, theory, and method has ultimately ensured that historical research within academic international relations is not so much an end in itself as an expansive platform for the advancement of various contemporary goals.

Bartelson, J.   1995 . A Genealogy of Sovereignty . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Boucher, D.   1998 . Political Theories of International Relations: From Thucydides to the Present . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brown, C.   1992 . International Relations Theory: New Normative Approaches . New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

Bull, H. and Watson, A. (eds.) 1984 . The Expansion of International Society . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Butterfield, H.   1965 . The Whig Interpretation of History . New York: W. W. Norton.

Buzan, B.   Jones, C. and Little, R.   1993 . The Logic of Anarchy: Neorealism to Structural Realism . New York: Columbia University Press.

—— and Little, R.   2000 . International Systems in World History: Remaking the Study of International Relations . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Buzan, B. and Little, R.   2001 . Why international relations has failed as an intellectual project and what to do about it.   Millennium: Journal of International Studies , 30: 19–39. 10.1177/03058298010300010401

Carr, E. H.   1962 . What is History? London: Macmillan; originally published 1961.

Clark, I. and Neumann, I. (eds.) 1996 . Classical Theories of International Relations . London: Macmillan.

Copeland, D.   2000 . The Origins of Major War . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Cox, M. (ed.) 2000 . E. H. Carr: A Critical Appraisal . Hampshire: Palgrave.

Crawford, N.   2002 . Argument and Change in World Politics: Ethics, Decolonization, and Humanitarian Intervention . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Doyle, M.   1986 . Empires . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Gaddis, J.   2002 . The Landscape of History: How Historians Map the Past . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

George, J.   1994 . Discourses of Global Politics: A Critical (Re)Introduction to International Relations . Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner.

Gilpin, R.   1981 . War and Change in World Politics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

—— 1984 . The richness of the tradition of political realism.   International Organization , 38: 287–304. 10.1017/S0020818300026710

Gunnell, J.   1993 . The Descent of Political Theory: The Genealogy of an American Vocation . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hall, R.   1999 . National Collective Identity: Social Constructs and International Systems . New York: Columbia University Press.

Haslam, J.   2002 . No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations since Machiavelli . New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.

Hinsley, F. H.   1963 . Power and the Pursuit of Peace: Theory and Practice in the History of Relations between States . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hobson, J.   2002 . What's at stake in “bringing historical sociology back into international relations?” Transcending “chronofetishism” and “tempocentrism” in international relations. Pp. 3–41 in Historical Sociology of International Relations , ed. S. Hobden and J. Hobson . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hopf, T.   2002 . Social Construction of International Politics: Identities and Foreign Policies, Moscow, 1955 and 1999 . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Jackson, R.   1990 . Quasi‐States: Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Third World . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

—— 2000 . The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jahn, B. (ed.) 2006 . Classical Theory in International Relations . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Johnston, A.   1995 . Cultural Realism: Strategic Culture and Grand Strategy in Chinese History . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Jones, C.   1998 . E. H. Carr and International Relations: A Duty to Lie . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Keene, E.   2002 . Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, Colonialism and Order in World Politics . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

—— 2005 . International Political Thought: A Historical Introduction . Cambridge: Polity.

Krasner, S.   1999 . Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Kratochwil, F.   2006 . History, action and identity: revisiting the “second” great debate and assessing its importance for social theory.   European Journal of International Relations , 12: 5–29. 10.1177/1354066106061323

Lebow, R.   2003 . The Tragic Vision of Politics: Ethics, Interests, and Orders . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Legro, J. and Moravcsik, A.   1999 . Is anybody still a realist?   International Security , 24: 5–55. 10.1162/016228899560130

Levy, J.   1997 . Too important to leave to the other: history and political science in the study of international relations.   International Security , 22: 22–33. 10.2307/2539325

Long, D. and Schmidt, B. (eds.) 2005 . Imperialism and Internationalism in the Discipline of International Relations . New York: State University of New York Press.

—— and Wilson, P. (eds.) 1995 . Thinkers of the Twenty Years' Crisis: Inter‐War Idealism Reassessed . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Lustick, I.   1996 . History, historiography, and political science: multiple historical records and the problem of selection bias.   American Political Science Review , 90: 605–18. 10.2307/2082612

Mearsheimer, J.   2001 . The Tragedy of Great Power Politics . New York: W. W. Norton.

Osiander, A.   2001 . Sovereignty, international relations, and the Westphalian myth.   International Organization , 55: 251–87. 10.1162/00208180151140577

Philpott, D.   2001 . Revolutions in Sovereignty: How Ideas Shaped Modern International Relations . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Pierson, P.   2004 . Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Quirk, J. and Vigneswaran, D.   2005 . The construction of an edifice: the story of a first great debate.   Review of International Studies , 31: 89–107.

Reus‐Smit, C.   1998 . The Moral Purpose of the State: Culture, Social Identity, and Institutional Rationality in International Relations . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Roberts, G.   2006 . History, theory and the narrative turn in IR.   Review of International Studies , 32: 703–14. 10.1017/S0260210506007248

Rosenberg, J.   1994 . The Empire of Civil Society: A Critique of the Realist Theory of International Relations . London: Verso.

Ruggie, J.   1993 . Territoriality and beyond: problematizing modernity in international relations.   International Organization , 47: 139–74. 10.1017/S0020818300004732

Schmidt, B.   1998 . The Political Discourse of Anarchy: A Disciplinary History of International Relations . Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

—— 2002 a . On the history and historiography of international relations. Pp. 3–22 in Handbook of International Relations , ed. W. Carlsnaes , T. Risse , and B. Simmons . London: Sage.

—— 2002 b . Together again: reuniting political theory and international relations theory.   British Journal of Politics and International Relations , 4: 115–40. 10.1111/1467-856X.41073

Schweller, R.   1998 . Deadly Imbalances: Tripolarity and Hitler's Strategy of World Conquest . New York: Columbia University Press.

Skinner, Q.   2002 . Visions of Politics, Vol. i. Regarding Method . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Spruyt, H.   1994 . The Sovereign State and its Competitors: An Analysis of Systems Change . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Synder, J.   1991 . Myths of Empire: Domestic Politics and International Ambition . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Teschke, B.   2003 . The Myth of 1648: Class, Geopolitics, and the Making of Modern International Relations . London: Verso.

Trachtenberg, M.   2006 . The Craft of International History: A Guide to Method . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Van Evera, S.   1999 . Causes of War: Power and the Roots of Conflict . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Walker, R. B. J.   1993 . Inside/Outside: International Relations as Political Theory . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Walt, S.   1987 . The Origins of Alliances . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Waltz, K.   1979 . Theory of International Politics . Reading, Mass.: Addison‐Wesley.

Watson, A.   1992 . The Evolution of International Society: A Comparative Historical Analysis . London: Routledge.

Weber, C.   1995 . Simulating Sovereignty: Intervention, the State, and Symbolic Exchange . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wight, M.   1966 . Why is there no international theory? Pp. 17–34 in Diplomatic Investigations: Essays in the Theory of International Politics , ed. H. Butterfield and M. Wight . London: George Allen and Unwin.

—ߞ 1977 . Systems of States . Leicester: Leicester University Press.

—— 1991 . International Theory: The Three Traditions . Leicester: Leicester University Press.

Wilson, P.   1998 . The myth of the “first great debate.”   Review of International Studies , 24: 1–15. 10.1017/S0260210598000011

Williams, M.   2005 . The Realist Tradition and the Limits of International Relations . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wohlforth, W.   1993 . The Elusive Balance: Power and Perceptions during the Cold War . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

3. The History of Social Research Methods

Related Papers

Hynek Jerabek

International Journal of Social Research Methodology

Pertti Alasuutari

This is a pre-publication version. The actual paper (with some changes) has been published In Pp. 118-128 in Routledge Handbook of Cultural Sociology, edited by John Hall, Laura Grindstaff, and Ming-Cheng Lo. Routledge

John W Mohr

Stephen Turner

This is a review of a book by Jennifer Platt that argued that funding was not the reason sociology went quantitative during the postwar period.

International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2nd edition. James D. Wright (ed.) Elsevier

Our focus is on methods of cultural analysis, and specifically on those methods that are formal in the sense that they rely upon the purposeful gathering (or simulating) of cultural data and a systematic analysis that involves at least some mathematically based technique. The meaning of culture is more complex, as scholars have understood cultural phenomena in very different ways across the decades and across the disciplines. These different goals in cultural analysis give rise to different types or styles of formal methods of cultural analysis. We briefly review the history of these methods in the social sciences and finish with a description of some of the main arenas within which formal methods of cultural analysis are being deployed and actively developed today.

Laurentiu B

Levon Yengibaryan

Media History and the Foundations of Media Studies (John Nerone, Ed)

Karin Wahl-Jorgensen

While the Chicago School has subtly but profoundly shaped and influenced the direction of scholarship on mass media, the history of its engagement with mass communication researchers is also a history of missed connections and opportunities. At least two different stories can be told in tracing the legacies of the Chicago School on work in media studies. One is a tale of triumph: The Chicago School has had a significant impact on scholarship in the field, in its normative assessment of the media’s role in society and its empirical work in understanding it. Another is a tale of loss and marginalization, witnessed by the decline of the socially engaged and often qualitative approach of the school and its diminishing presence within the collective conscience of the discipline today. Both of these stories are true. The Chicago School arose out of a particular moment, with its companion preoccupations and anxieties, but its contributions subsequently fell to the wayside in the face of profound epistemological shifts. The Chicago School gave voice to the idea that media and communication have a central role to play in shaping individual and collective lives, and in cementing identities and communities. This idea has helped to justify and solidify the notion that we cannot understand society without understanding how we communicate with each other and how the media shape our social bonds and social worlds.

Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences

Martin Bulmer

Pippa Norris

One of the most dramatic recent developments, transforming the field of comparative politics during recent decades, has been the expanding range of survey resources facilitating the systematic cross-national analysis of public opinion around the globe. This process started more than four decades ago, with Gabriel Almond and Sidney Verba's path-breaking The Civic Culture (1963), which was immediately recognized and acclaimed by Philip Converse (1964) as 'an instant classic'.

RELATED PAPERS

Qualitative Inquiry

Sharlene Hesse-Biber

Marketing Theory

mark tadajewski

Abdulhameed O L A I T A N Ridwanullah

Meliora lamare

Brigitte Nerlich

Michèle Lamont

Camelia Florela VOINEA

Emma Uprichard

Review of Sociology

Ferenc Moksony

History Education Research Journal

Roland Bernhard

IJPINT International Journal , Charlotte Brookfield

Public Administration Research

Margaret Stout

Qualitative Sociology

Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung

Peter Simonson

Jane Gilgun

Educational Researcher

Felipe Martinez Rizo

Terry Clark

Diego Ezequiel Pereyra

DR. JASHIM UDDIN AHMED

Chehou OUSSOUMANOU

The American Sociologist

Gina A . Zurlo, Ph.D.

The Oxford Handbook of Cultural Sociology, edited by Jeffrey Alexander, Ronald Jacobs and Philip Smith. Oxford University Press, Pp. 70-113.

International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., vol. 15

Christian Dayé

Qualitative research practice

Qurrotul Anfaa

David Pontille

Nurma Linda

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024