ABSTRACT
In the last thirty years or so, but more intensively in the years since the Second World War, the study of politics has been rocked by disagreements over its scope, theories, and methods. Nevertheless, by the late sixties, it has become reasonably clear that most of the controversies have involved what one may call, as in so many other fields of cultural endeavor, "the battle of the ancients versus the moderns". The real issue, it turns out, is the issue of tradition and innovation in scientific development. A similar convergence of what were at one time considered ancient and modern ways of political inquiry occurred in the controversy over synchronic versus diachronic analysis. It is in the nature of a renaissance to look both forward and backward, to seek out what seems worthwhile in the past in order to shape a more viable future.
