The Case for Historical Analysis within IR Theory: The Amarna System (CA. 1365-1335 B.C.).

Traditionally, the historiography of the academic discipline of IR, ever since its institutionalization (1919−), has been divided into three great debates. As a legacy of these debates the 'behavioralists', or those who believed in the methods of the natural sciences, left their mark on the field in the 1950s and 1960s. Although the positivistic approach is not anymore prevalent within the discipline, there's a clear indication that the IR theory has, even today, an exaggerated interest in the scientific explanation. This article will argue that the scholarly study should lean more on 1) historical analysis and there should be room for research agenda that is less focused on 'presentism', i.e. on contemporary history and current policy issues. Secondly, too much emphasis is put on Eurocentrism: important research topics outside the Occidental world are hence disregarded. As a result a distorted image emerges of how the modern international system came about. Perhaps more importantly, this state of affairs, to which the 'English school' has paid attention on its part, limits the understanding of classical concepts such as the balance of power, sovereignty, or even diplomacy reducing them exclusively to the domain of European states system. The aim of the paper is thus to examine the mutually beneficial interplay between history and IR theory by analyzing the 2) interstate relations in the Ancient Near East during the Late Bronze Age. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]