The ‘traditions tradition’ in international relations theory.

Using the development of the ‘Grotian tradition’ in the works of Hersch Lauterpacht, Martin Wight and Hedley Bull as an example, this paper investigates the impact of what can be termed the ‘traditions tradition’ on the presentation and schematisation of knowledge in International Relations scholarship. In doing so, it highlights the extent to which International Relations scholars have, despite employing the term with alarming frequency, failed to adequately consider the meaning of the term ‘tradition’ itself. As such, it discusses a range of contending conceptualisations of the term ‘tradition’, paying particular attention to that variant evident in the works of Michael Oakeshott, before introducing Brian C. Schmidt’s critique of tradition in international relations. Drawing on Schmidt’s distinction between ‘historical’ and ‘analytical’ traditions, the remainder of the paper is concerned with the specific construction of the ‘Grotian tradition’ of international relations and argues that its pattern of development evident in the works of Wight and Bull confirms Schmidt’s contention that international relations theorists display a tendency for viewing analytically constructed traditions as actual historical ones. The paper concludes by addressing some of the implications for the presentation of ideas indicated by this trend. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]