История международных отношений и дипломатии

none
the history of international relations
Diplomatic history deals with the history of international relations between states. Diplomatic history can be different from international relations in that the former can concern itself with the foreign policy of one state while the latter deals with relations between two or more states. Diplomatic history tends to be more concerned with the history of diplomacy, but international relations concern more with current events and creating a model intended to shed explanatory light on international politics.

In the 5th century BCE the Greek historian Thucydides was highly concerned with the relations among states. However Leopold von Ranke (1795–1886), the leading German historian of the 19th century, codified the modern form of diplomatic history. Ranke wrote largely on the history of Early Modern Europe, using the diplomatic archives of the European powers (particularly the Republic of Venice) to construct a detailed understanding of the history of Europe wie es eigentlich gewesen ist ("as it actually happened"). Ranke saw diplomatic history as the most important kind of history to write because of his idea of the "Primacy of Foreign Affairs" (Primat der Aussenpolitik), arguing that the concerns of international relations drive the internal development of the state. Ranke's understanding of diplomatic history relied on using as sources the large number of official documents produced by modern western governments; he argued that historians should examine such sources in an objective and neutral spirit.

A group of French historians centered around Pierre Renouvin (1893–1974) and his protégés Jean Baptiste Duroselle and v=sup started a new type of international history in the 1950s that included taking into account what Renouvin called forces profondes (profound forces) such as the influence of domestic politics on French foreign policy. However, Renouvin and his followers still followed the concept of la décadence with Renouvin arguing that French society under the Third Republic was “sorely lacking in initiative and dynamism” and Baumont arguing that French politicians had allowed "personal interests" to override "any sense of the general interest". In 1979, Duroselle's book La Décadence offered a total condemnation of the entire Third Republic as weak, cowardly and degenerate.

At the same time, in 1961 when the German historian Fritz Fischer published Griff nach der Weltmacht, which established that Germany had caused the First World War led to the fierce "Fischer Controversy" that tore apart the West German historical profession. One result of Fischer's book was the rise in the Primat der Innenpolitik (Primacy of Domestic Politics) approach. Hillgruber and Hildebrand made a case for the traditional Primat der Aussenpolitik approach to diplomatic history with the stress on examining the records of the relevant foreign ministry and studies of the foreign policy decision making elite. Wehler, who favored the Primat der Innenpolitik approach, for his part contended that diplomatic history should be treated as a sub branch of social history, calling for theoretically based research, and argued that the real focus should be on the study of the society in question. Moreover, under the influence of the Primat der Innenpolitik approach, diplomatic historians in the 1960s, 70s and 80s start to borrow models from the social sciences. Mason argued that “Nazi Germany was always bent at some time upon a major war of expansion”. However, Mason argued that the timing of such a war was determined by domestic political pressures, especially as relating to a failing economy, and had nothing to do with what Hitler wanted. Mason argued that the Nazi leaders were deeply haunted by the November Revolution of 1918, and was most unwilling to see any fall in working class living standards out of the fear that it might provoke another November Revolution. Mason contended that when faced with the deep socio economic crisis the Nazi leadership had decided to embark upon a ruthless “smash and grab” foreign policy of seizing territory in Eastern Europe which could be pitilessly plundered to support living standards in Germany. Mason's theory of a "Flight into war" being imposed on Hitler generated much controversy, and in the 1980s he conducted a series of debates with economic historian Richard Overy over this matter. Overy maintained the decision to attack Poland was not caused by structural economic problems, but rather was the result of Hitler wanting a localized war at that particular time in history. For Overy, a major problem with the Mason thesis was that it rested on the assumption that in a way unrecorded by the records, that information was passed on to Hitler about the Reich economic problems. Overy argued that there was a major difference between economic pressures inducted by the problems of the Four Year Plan, and economic motives to seize raw materials, industry and foreign reserve of neighboring states as a way of accelerating the Four Year Plan. Moreover, Overy asserted that the repressive capacity of the German state as a way of dealing with domestic unhappiness was somewhat downplayed by Mason. A sign of the changing times was the rise to prominence of such diplomatic historians such as the Japanese historian Chihiro Hosoya, the British historian Ian Nish, and the American historian Akira Iriye, which was the first time that Asian specialists became noted diplomatic historians.

The Cold War and decolonization greatly added the tendency to a more global diplomatic history. The Vietnam War led to the rise of a revisionist school in the United States, which led many American historians such as Gabriel Kolko and William Appleman Williams to reject traditional diplomatic history in favor of a Primat der Innenpolitik approach that saw a widespread examination of the influence of American domestic politics together with various social, economic and cultural forces on foreign policy making. In general, the American Cold War revisionists tended to focus on American foreign policy decision making with respect to the genesis of the Cold War in the 1940s and on how the United States became involved in Vietnam in the 1960s. Starting in the 1960s, a ferocious debate has taken place within Cold War historiography between the advocates of the “orthodox” school which saw the Cold War as a case of Soviet aggression such as Vojtech Mastny against the proponents of the “revisionist” school which saw the Cold War as a case of American aggression. Latterly, a third school known as "neo orthodox" whose most prominent member is the American historian John Lewis Gaddis has emerged, which holds through the United States borne some responsibility for the Cold War, the lion's share of the responsibility goes to the Soviet Union.

In Europe diplomatic history fell out of favor in the late Cold War era. Since the collapse of communism in 1989–91, however, there has been a renaissance, led especially by historians of the early modern era, in the history of diplomacy. The new approach differs from previous perspectives by the wholesale incorporation of perspectives from political science, sociology, the history of mentalities, and cultural history. In the U. S. since the 1980s, the discipline of diplomatic history has become more relevant to and better integrated with the mainstream of the academic history profession. It has taken the lead in internationalization of American historical studies. Since it explores the interaction of domestic and international forces, the field has become increasingly important for its study of culture and identity and the exploration of political ideologies as applied to foreign affairs. There have been major influences from other new approaches such as Orientalism and globalism, as well as gender and racial history. The history of human rights has become important as well. Despite all these innovations, however, the core endeavor of diplomatic history remains the study of the state interacting with other states, which is also a key to its broadening appeal, since considerations of America's superpower status is essential to understanding the world internationally. In the early 1980s, historian Jeffrey Kimball surveyed the ideological preferences of 109 active diplomatic historians in the United States as well as 54 active military historians. He reports that:
Of historians in the field of diplomatic history, 7% are Socialist, 19% are Other, 53% are Liberal, 11% are None and 10% Conservative. Of military historians, 0% are Socialist, 8% are Other, 35% are Liberal, 18% are None and 40% are Conservative.

In Europe, diplomatic history fell out of favor in the late Cold War era. Since the collapse of communism, there has been a renaissance, led especially by historians of the early modern era, in the history of diplomacy. The new approach differs from previous perspectives by the wholesale incorporation of perspectives from political science, sociology, the history of mentalities, and cultural history. In the U. S. since 1980, the discipline of diplomatic history has become more relevant to and integrated with the mainstream of the historiographic profession, having been in the forefront of the internationalization of American historical studies. As a field that explores the meeting of domestic and international forces, the study of US foreign relations has become increasingly important for its examination of both the study of culture and identity and the exploration of political ideologies. Particularly shaped by the influence of studies of Orientalism and globalism, gender studies, race, and considerations of national identity, diplomatic history was often at the cutting edge of historical research. Despite such innovations, however, the core endeavor of diplomatic history remains the study of the state, which is also a key to its broadening appeal, since considerations of US state power are essential to understanding the world internationally.

Anderson, M. S. The Rise of Modern Diplomacy 1450 1919 (1993) excerpt how diplomats operated
Black, Jeremy. A History of Diplomacy (2010)
Boia, Lucian, ed. Great Historians of the Modern Age: An International Dictionary (Greenwood, 1991), 868 pp. Crean, Jeffrey. The Fear of Chinese Power: An International History (Bloomsbury, 2023). Kissinger, Henry. Diplomacy (1994), historical studies of diplomatic crises
Stearns, Peter N. An Encyclopedia of World History (6th ed. 2001) 1244pp; very detailed outline; see also previous editions edited by William L. Langer, which have even more detail. Woolf, Daniel R., ed. A global encyclopedia of historical writing (2 vol. Routledge, 2014) vol 2 online.

Albrecht Carrié, René. A Diplomatic History of Europe Since the Congress of Vienna (1958), 736pp; a basic introduction, online free to borrow
Black, Jeremy. European International Relations, 1648 1815 (2002) excerpt and text search
Hill, David Jayne. A history of diplomacy in the international development of Europe (3 vol. 1914) online v 3, 1648 1775; also online; vol 2 online 1313 1648
Langer, William. European Alliances and Alignments 1870 1890 (2nd ed. 1950); advanced coverage of Bismarckian system
Langer, William L. The Diplomacy of Imperialism 1890 1902 (2 vol, 1935); advanced analysis
Leira, Halvard. "Diplomacy: The world of states and beyond." in Routledge Handbook of Historical International Relations (Routledge, 2021). 302–310. [
Mowat, R. B. A History of European Diplomacy 1815 1914 (1922), basic introduction
Mowat, R. B. History of European Diplomacy, 1451–1789 (1928) 324 pp online free
Petrie, Charles. Earlier diplomatic history, 1492–1713 (1949), covers all of Europe; online
Petrie, Charles. Diplomatic History, 1713–1933 (1946), broad summary online
Roosen. William J. "The functioning of ambassadors under Louis XIV." French Historical Studies 6.3 (1970): 311–332. online

Schroeder, Paul. The Transformation of European Politics 1763–1848 (1994) online; advanced diplomatic history
Schweizer, Karl W., and Matt Schuman. The Seven Years War (2010)
Sowerby, Tracey A., and Jan Hennings, eds. Practices of diplomacy in the early modern world c. 1410 1800 (Taylor & Francis, 2017) online. Steiner, Zara. The Lights that Failed: European International History 1919 1933 (2007) excerpt and text search
Steiner, Zara. The Triumph of the Dark: European International History 1933 1939 (2011) excerpt and text search
Taylor, A. J. P. The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1848–1918 (1957) excerpt and text search, advanced coverage of all major powers

Dietrich, Christopher RW, ed. A Companion to US Foreign Relations: Colonial Era to the Present (Wiley, 2020) online
Dobson, Alan and Steve Marsh. US Foreign Policy Since 1945 (2nd ed. 2006)
Gleijeses, Piero. America's road to empire: foreign policy from independence to World War One (Bloomsbury, 2021)
McMahon, Robert J., and Thomas W. Zeiler, eds. Guide to US foreign policy: A diplomatic history (CQ Press, 2012). Pauly, Robert J., ed. The Ashgate research companion to US foreign policy (2010) online. Reeder, Tyson, ed. The Routledge History of U. S. Foreign Relations (2021) online

Cannon, John Ashton et al. eds. The Blackwell dictionary of historians (1988). short biographies of hundreds of historians from many countries. 495pp
Carrió Invernizzi, Diana. "A New Diplomatic History and the Networks of Spanish Diplomacy in the Baroque Era." International History Review 36.4 (2014): 603–618. Carvalho, Benjamin de et al. eds. Routledge Handbook of Historical International Relations (2021) online
Crapol, Edward P. "Coming to Terms with Empire: The Historiography of Late Nineteenth Century American Foreign Relations." Diplomatic History (1992) 16#4 pp: 573–598. Elman, Colin, and Miriam Fendius Elman. "Diplomatic history and international relations theory: respecting difference and crossing boundaries." International Security (1997) 22#1: 5 21. Online
Forrest, Alan, and Peter Hicks, eds. The Cambridge History of the Napoleonic Wars: Volume 3, Experience, Culture and Memory (2022)
Gaddis, John Lewis. "New conceptual approaches to the study of American Foreign Relations: interdisciplinary perspectives." Diplomatic History (1990) 14#3 pp: 405–424. Giudici, Giacomo. "From new diplomatic history to new political history: The rise of the holistic approach." European History Quarterly 48.2 (2018): 314–324. Hogan, Michael J. and Thomas G. Paterson, eds. Explaining the History of American Foreign Relations, (2004), articles originally appeared in Diplomatic History and cover all main fields of American diplomatic history

Plummer, Brenda Gayle. “The Changing Face of Diplomatic History: A Literature Review.” History Teacher 38#3 (2005), pp. 385–400. online. focus on United States
Schweizer, K. W. and M. J. Schumann. “The Revitalisation of Diplomatic History: Renewed Reflections,” Diplomacy and Statecraft 19 (2008): 149–186
Sowerby, Tracey A. "Early Modern Diplomatic History" History Compass (2016) 14#9 pp 441–456 DOI: 10.1111/hic3.12329; Europe 1600–1790
Watkins, John. "Toward a new diplomatic history of medieval and early modern Europe." Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 38.1 (2008): 1–14. Zeiler, Thomas W. ed. American Foreign Relations since 1600: A Guide to the Literature (2007), online
Zelikow, Philip, Niall Ferguson, Francis J. Gavin, Anne Karalekas, and Daniel Sargent. "Forum 31 on the Importance of the Scholarship of Ernest May" H DIPLO Dec. 17, 2021 online