ABSTRACT
The purpose of this chapter is to situate the argument in relation to existing IR theory, specifically those scholars who have taken history seriously as an object of inquiry and as a place from which to theorise . This, however, does not mean that I will engage in an exhaustive discussion of the dominant theoretical perspectives in IR: constructivism, liberalism and realism. In fact, they will receive relatively little direct attention. What I will do is try to tease out the various attempts to theorise trans-historically and cross-culturally about IR and the overriding tendency to fall back on an essential notion of the state as the key universal parameter of comparison. The account will focus mainly on the sparse collection of works that have adopted a truly trans-historical perspective, i.e. those that have moved beyond European history (Watson 1992; Ferguson and Mansbach 1996; Buzan and Little 2000; Pijl 2007; Tang 2013). Attention will also be paid to those scholars who have problematised the essential notion of the state in various ways (Walker 1993 and 2010; Spruyt 1994; Ferguson and Mansbach 1996; Osiander 2007; Nexon 2009; Cerny 2010). The aim is to explain and justify the conceptual shift I propose from essential actors/units (the state) to social institutions in the fundamental English School sense.
