Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T04:31:36.573Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A rival Enlightenment? Critical international theory in historical mode

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2014

Richard Devetak
Richard Devetak*
Affiliation:
School of Political Science and International Studies, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
*
E-mail: r.devetak@uq.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article proposes an understanding of critical international theory (CIT) as an historical rather than philosophical mode of knowledge. To excavate this historical mode of theorizing it offers an alternative account of CIT’s intellectual sources. While most accounts of critical international theory tend to focus on inheritances from Kant, Marx and Gramsci, or allude in general terms to debts to the Frankfurt School and the Enlightenment, this is not always the case. Robert Cox, for example, has repeatedly professed intellectual debts to realism and historicism. The argument advanced here builds on Cox by situating CIT in a longer intellectual heritage that extends from Renaissance humanism and passes through Absolutist historiography before reaching Enlightenment civil histories, including Vico’s history of civil institutions. The critical element in this intellectual heritage was the formation of a secular political historicism critically disposed to metaphysical claims based on moral philosophies. By recovering this neglected inheritance of criticism, we can articulate not only a critical theory to rival problem-solving theories, but propose a conception of theory as a historical mode of knowledge that rivals philosophical modes yet remains critical by questioning prevailing intellectual assumptions in International Relations theory.

Keywords

critical theoryhistoricismcontextualistintellectual historyRenaissance humanismenlightenmentsGiambattista Vico
Type
Original Papers
Information
International Theory , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , November 2014 , pp. 417 - 453
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arendt, Hannah. 1958. The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Armitage, David. 2004. “The Fifty Years’ Rift: Intellectual History and International Relations.” Modern Intellectual History 1(1):97–109.Google Scholar
Armitage, David 2013. Foundations of Modern International Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ashley, Richard K. 1981. “Political Realism and Human Interests.” International Studies Quarterly 25(2):204–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ball, Terence. 1995. “Vico and Marx on ‘Making’ History.” In Reappraising Political Theory, 212–228. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Becker, Carl. 1932. The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth-Century Philosophers. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Bell, Duncan. 2001. “International Relations: The Dawn of a Historiographical Turn?” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 3(1):115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, Duncan 2002. “Language, Legitimacy, and the Project of Critique.” Alternatives 27(3):327–350.Google Scholar
Bell, Duncan 2009. “Writing the World: Disciplinary History and Beyond.” International Affairs 85(1):3–22.Google Scholar
Berlin, Isaiah. 1976. Vico and Herder. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
Bodin, Jean. [1566] 1969. Method for the Easy Comprehension of History, Translated by Beatrice Reynolds. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
Botero, Giovanni. 1956. The Reason of State, Translated by P. J. and D. P. Waley. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Brincat, Shannon. 2010. “Towards a Social-Relational Dialectic for World Politics.” European Journal of International Relations 17(4):679–703.Google Scholar
Carpanetto, Dino, and Ricuperati, Giuseppe. 1987. Italy in the Age of Reason, 1685–1789. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Cassirer, Ernst. [1932] 1951. The Philosophy of the Enlightenment, Translated by Fritz Koelln and James Pettigrove. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Collingwood, R. G. 1939. An Autobiography. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Copenhaven, Brian P, and Schmitt, Charles B. 1992. Renaissance Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, Robert W. 1981. “Social Forces, States and World Orders: Beyond International Relations Theory.” Millennium 19(2):126–155.Google Scholar
Cox, Robert W. 1987. Production, Power, and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, Robert W. 1996. “Influences and commitments.” In Approaches to World Order, edited by Robert W. Cox, and Timothy J. Sinclair, 19–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, Robert W. 2012. “For Someone and For Some Purpose: An Interview with Robert W. Cox.” In Critical Theory in International Relations and Security Studies: Interviews and Reflections, edited by Shannon Brincat Laura, Lima, and João Nunes, 15–34. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Croce, Benedetto. [1911] 1913. The Philosophy of Giambattista Vico, Translated by R. G. Collingwood. London: Howard Latimer.Google Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1992. The Other Heading: Reflections on Today’s Europe, Translated by Pacale-Anne Brault and Michael B. Naas. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Devetak, Richard. (forthcoming) Historiographical Foundations of Modern International Thought: Histories of the European States-System from Florence to Göttingen.” History of European Ideas.Google Scholar
Devetak, Richard 2009 “Critical Theory’.” In Theories of International Relations, 4th ed., edited by Scott Burchill Andrew Linklater, Richard Devetak, Jack Donnelly, Terry Nardin, Matthew Paterson, Christian Reus-Smit, Jacqui True, 159–282. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Devetak, Richard 2012. “Vico contra Kant: The Competing Critical Theories of Cox and Linklater.” In Critical Theory in International Relations and Security Studies, edited by Shannon Brincat, Laura Lima, and João Nunes, 115–126. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Devetak, Richard 2013. ““The Fear of Universal Monarchy”: Balance of Power as an Ordering Practice of Liberty.” In Liberal World Orders, edited by Tim Dunne, and Trine Flockhart, 121–137. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Devetak, Richard, and Gout, Juliette. 2013. “Obligations Beyond the State: Andrew Linklater’s Men and Citizens in the Theory of International Relations.” In Classics of International Relations: Essays in Criticism and Appreciation, edited by Henrik Bliddal, Casper Sylvest, and Peter Wilson, 177–186. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dunn, John. 1980. “The Identity of the History of Ideas.” In Political Obligation in its Historical Context: Essays in Political Theory, by John Dunn, 13–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edkins, Jenny, and Vaughan-Williams, Nick, eds. 2009. Critical Theorists and International Relations. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fasolt, Constantin. 2004. The Limits of History. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Fisch, Max H. 1975. “The Critic of Institutions.” In The Owl of Minerva: Philosophers on Philosophy, edited by Bontempo Charles J., and S. Jack Odell, 135–151. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Fluck, Matthew. 2010. “Truth, Values and the Value of Truth in Critical International Relations Theory.” Millennium 40(1):259–278.Google Scholar
Funkenstein, Amos. 1986. Theology and the Scientific Imagination: From the Middle Ages to the Seventeenth Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Garin, Eugenio. 1965. Italian Humanism: Philosophy and Civic Life in the Renaissance, Translated by Peter Munz. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gay, Peter. 1969. The Enlightenment: An Interpretation, Volume 2: The Science of Freedom. London: Wildwood House.Google Scholar
Germain, Randall. 2000. “E. H. Carr and the Historical Mode of Thought.” In E. H. Carr: A Critical Appraisal, edited by Michael Cox, 322–336. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Grafton, Anthony. 1999. “The Humanist as Reader.” In A History of Reading in the West, Translated by Lydia Cochrane, edited by Gugliemo Cavallo, and Roger Chartier, 179–212. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Felix. 1965. Machiavelli and Guicciardini: Politics and History in Sixteenth-Century Florence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goetsch, James Robert. 1995. “Vico’s Speculative Geometry of the Civil World.” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 9(4):279–295.Google Scholar
Haakonssen, Knud. 2006. “The History of Eighteenth-Century Philosophy: History or Philosophy?.” In The Cambridge History of Eighteenth-Century Philosophy, Volume 1, edited by Knud Haakonssen, 3–25. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1974. Theory and Practice, Translated by John Viertel. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1987. The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, Translated by Frederick G. Lawrence. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, Translated by Thomas Burger. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Haddock, Bruce A. 1976. “Vico and the Problem of Historical Reconstruction.” Social Research 43(3):512–519.Google Scholar
Haddock, Bruce A 1978. “Vico on Political Wisdom.” European History Quarterly 8(2):165–191.Google Scholar
Hampson, Norman. 1968. The Enlightenment. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Hankins, James. 1996. “Humanism and the Origins of Modern Political Thought.” In The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Humanism, edited by Jill Kraye, 118–141. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hankins, James 2007. “Humanism, Scholasticism, and Renaissance Philosophy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy, edited by James Hankins, 30–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hazard, Paul. [1946] 1965. European Thought in the Eighteenth Century, Translated by J. Lewis May. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Hoffman, Mark. 1987. “Critical Theory and the Inter-Paradigm Debate.” Millennium 16(2):231–249.Google Scholar
Horkheimer, Max. [1933] 1993. “Materialism and Morality.” In Between Philosophy and Social Science: Selected Early Writings, by Max Horkheimer, Translated by G. Frederick Hunter, Matthew S. Kramer, John Torpey, 15–47. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Horkheimer, Max [1937] 1972. “Traditional and Critical Theory.” In Critical Theory: Selected Essays, edited by Matthew J. O’Connell, 206–224. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Horkheimer, Max, and Adorno, Theodor. 1972. Dialectic of Enlightenment, Translated by Edmund Jephcott. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Hunter, Ian. 2001. Rival Enlightenments: Civil and Metaphysical Philosophy in Early Modern Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hunter, Ian 2006. “The History of Theory.” Critical Inquiry 33(1):78–112.Google Scholar
Hunter, Ian 2007. “The History of Philosophy and the Persona of the Philosopher.” Modern Intellectual History 4(3):571–600.Google Scholar
Ianziti, Gary. 1991. “Humanism’s New Science: The History of the Future.” I Tatti Studies: Essays in the Renaissance 4:59–88.Google Scholar
Ianziti, Gary 2012. Writing History in Renaissance Italy: Leonardo Bruni and the Uses of the Past. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Imbruglia, Girolamo. 2007. “Enlightenment in Eighteenth-Century Naples.” In Naples in the Eighteenth Century: The Birth and Death of a Nation State, edited by Girolamo Imbruglia, 70–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Israel, Jonathan. 2010. A Revolution of the Mind: Radical Enlightenment and the Intellectual Origins of Modern Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jahn, Beate. 1998. “One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: Critical Theory as the Latest Edition of Liberal Idealism.” Millennium 27(3):613–642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jay, Martin. 1973. The Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923–1950. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. [1784] 1970. “Answer to the Question: ‘What is Enlightenment?’.” In Kant’s Political Writings, Translated by H. B. Nisbet, edited by Hans Reiss, 54–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keene, Edward. 2005. International Political Thought: A Historical Introduction. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Kelley, Donald R. 1970. Foundations of Modern Historical Scholarship: Language, Law, and History in the French Renaissance. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Koselleck, Reinhart. 1988. Critique and Crisis: Enlightenment and the Pathogenesis of Modern Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kurki, Milja. 2011. “The Limitations of the Critical Edge: Reflections on Critical and Philosophical IR Scholarship Today.” Millennium 40(1):129–146.Google Scholar
Kurki, Milja, and Wight, Colin. 2010. “International Relations and Social Science.” In International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity, second edition, edited by Tim Dunne, Milja Kurki, and Steve Smith, 14–35. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Leira, Halvard. 2008. “Justus Lipsius, Political Humanism and the Disciplining of 17th Century Statecraft.” Review of International Studies 34(4):669–692.Google Scholar
Leysens, Anthony. 2008. The Critical Theory of Robert W. Cox: Fugitive or Guru? London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Lilla, Mark. 1994. G. B. Vico: The Making of an Anti-Modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Linklater, Andrew. 1982. Men and Citizens in the Theory of International Relations. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Linklater, Andrew 1990. Beyond Realism and Marxism: Critical Theory and International Relations. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Linklater, Andrew 1996. “The Achievements of Critical Theory.” In International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, edited by Steve Smith, Ken Booth, and Marysia Zalewski, 279–298. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linklater, Andrew 1998. The Transformation of Political Community: Ethical Foundations of the Post-Westphalian Era. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Lobkowicz, Nicholas. 1977. “On the History of Theory and Praxis.” In Political Theory and Praxis: New Perspectives, edited by Terence Ball, 13–27. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.Google Scholar
Machiavelli, Niccolò. 2003. The Prince, Translated by George Bull. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Machiavelli, Niccolò 2004. Machiavelli and his Friends: Their Personal Correspondence, Translated by James B. Atkinson and David Sices. DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Maclean, John. 1981. “Political Theory, International Theory, and Problems of Ideology.” Millennium 10(2):102–125.Google Scholar
Marshall, David L. 2010. Vico and the Transformation of Rhetoric in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Momigliano, Arnaldo. 1966. “Vico’s Scienza Nuova: Roman “Bestioni” and Roman “Eroi”.” History and Theory 5(1):3–23.Google Scholar
Moore, Cerwyn, and Farrands, Chris. 2010. International Relations Theory and Philosophy: Interpretive Dialogues. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Morton, Adam David. 2006. “The Grimly Comic Riddle of Hegemony in IPE: Where is Class Struggle?” Politics 26(1):62–72.Google Scholar
Neufeld, Mark. 1995. The Restructuring of International Relations Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Neufeld, Mark 2000. “Thinking Ethically, Thinking Critically: International Ethics as Critique.” In Value Pluralism, Normative Theory, and International Relations, edited by Maria Lensu and Jan-Stefan Fritz, 41–58. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1969. On the Genealogy of Morals and Ecce Homo, Translated by Walter Kaufmann and R. J. Hollingdale. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Oestreich, Gerhard. 1982. Neostoicism and the Early Modern State, Translated by David McLintock. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1975. The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1987. The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law: A Study of English Historical Thought in the Seventeenth Century, A Reissue with a Retrospect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1997. “Enthusiasm: The Antiself of Enlightenment.” Huntington Library Quarterly 60(1/2):7–28.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 1999. Barbarism and Religion, Volume Two: Narratives of Civil Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 2005. “The Politics of Historiography.” Historical Research 79(199):1–14.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 2007. “Perceptions of Modernity in Early Modern Historical Thinking.” Intellectual History Review 17(1):55–63.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 2009. The History of Political Thought: A Methodological Inquiry, Political Thought and History: Essays on Theory and Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pocock, J. G. A. 2011. “Historiography as a Form of Political Thought.” History of European Ideas 37(1):1–6.Google Scholar
Porter, Roy, and Teich, Mikulas, eds. 1981. The Enlightenment in National Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pufendorf, Samuel. [1686] 2013. An Introduction to the History of the Principal Kingdoms and States of Europe, Translated by Jodocrus Crull, 1695, edited by Michael J. Seidler. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
Reus-Smit, Christian. 1999. The Moral Purpose of the State: Culture, Social Identity, and Institutional Rationality in International Relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Reus-Smit, Christian 2008. “Reading History Through Constructivist Eyes.” Millennium 37(2):395–414.Google Scholar
Review of International Studies. 2012. “Forum on Critical Realism” 38(1):187–274.Google Scholar
Risse, Thomas. 2000. ““Let’s Argue!” Communicative Action in World Politics.” International Organization 54(1):1–39.Google Scholar
Roach, Steven C. 2007. “Critical International Theory and Meta-Dialectics: Fourth Debate or Fifth Dimension?” Millennium 35(2):321–344.Google Scholar
Roach, Steven C. 2010. Critical Theory of International Politics: Complementarity, Justice and Governance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Robertson, John. 2005. The Case for the Enlightenment: Scotland and Naples 1680–1760. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Robertson, William. [1769] 1869. History of the Reign of Charles the Fifth. London: George Routledge and Sons.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J. G. 1983. “Continuity and Transformation in the World Polity: Toward a Neorealist Synthesis.” World Politics 35(2):261–285.Google Scholar
Ruggie, J. G 1989. “International Structure and International Transformation: Space, Time and Method.” In Global Changes and Theoretical Challenges, edited by James Rosenau and Ernst-Otto Czempiel, 21–35. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Sarpi, Paolo. [1619] 1640. The Historie of the Councel of Trent: In Eight Books. London: Robert Young and John Raworth.Google Scholar
Schmidt, James. 1992. “What Enlightenment was: How Moses Mendelssohn and Immanuel Kant Answered the Berlinische Monatsschrift.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 30(1):77–101.Google Scholar
Schmidt, James 2003. “Immanuel Kant: Texts and Contexts.” Eighteenth Century Studies 37(1):147–161.Google Scholar
Schmidt, James 2011. “Misunderstanding the Question: “What is Enlightenment?”: Venturi, Habermas and Foucault.” History of European Ideas 37(1):43–52.Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1995. The Construction of Social Reality. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Skinner, Quentin. 1978. The Foundations of Modern Political Thought, Volume One: The Renaissance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Skinner, Quentin 1998. Liberty Before Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Skinner, Quentin 2002. Visions of Politics, Volume 1: Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Steve. 1996. “Positivism and Beyond.” In International Theory: Positivism and Beyond, edited by Steve Smith, Ken Booth, and Marysia Zalewski, 11–44. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Soll, Jacob. 2005. Publishing The Prince: History, Reading, and the Birth of Political Criticism. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Strange, Susan. 1988. “Review of Production, Power, and World Order: Social Forces in the Making of History, by Robert W. Cox.” International Affairs 64(2):269–270.Google Scholar
Trevor-Roper, Hugh. 1967. “The Religious Origins of the Enlightenment.” In Religion, the Reformation and Social Change, by Hugh Trevor-Roper, 179–218. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Vaughan-Williams, Nick. 2009. Border Politics: The Limits of Sovereign Power. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Venturi, Franco. 1971. Utopia and Reform in the Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Venturi, Franco 1972. Italy and the Enlightenment: Studies in a Cosmopolitan Century, Translated by Susan Corsi. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Vico, Giambattista. [1731] 1944. The Autobiography of Giambattista Vico, Translated by Max Harold Fisch and Thomas Goddard Bergin. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Vico, Giambattista [1710] 1982. “On the Ancient Wisdom of the Italians taken from the Origins of the Latin Language.” In Vico: Selected Writings, edited and Translated by Leon Pompa, 47–78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vico, Giambattista [1709] 1990. On the Study Methods of Our Time, Translated by Elio Gianturco. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Vico, Giambattista [1744] 2001. New Science: Principles of the New Science Concerning the Common Nature of Nations, Translated by David Marsh, edited by Anthony Grafton. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Vico, Giambattista [1720–1722] 2009. “A New Science is Essayed: From On the Constancy of the Jurisprudent.” In Giambattista Vico, Keys to the New Science: Translations, Comentaries, and Essays, edited by Thora Ilin Bayer and Donald Phillip Verene, 45–59. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Vigneswaran, Darshan, and Quirk, Joel. 2010. “Past Masters and Modern Inventions: Intellectual History as Critical Theory.” International Relations 24(2):107–131.Google Scholar
Viroli, Maurizio. 1998. Machiavelli. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Walker, R. B. J. 1981. “World Politics and Western Reason: Universalism, Pluralism, Hegemony.” Alternatives 7(2):195–227.Google Scholar
Walter, Ryan. 2011. A Critical History of the Economy: On the Birth of the National and International Economies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weber, Martin. 2005. “The Critical Social Theory of the Frankfurt School, and the “Social Turn” in IR.” Review of International Studies 31(1):195–209.Google Scholar
Williams, Michael C. 2012. “The Potential and Perils of Opposition.” In Critical Theory in International Relations and Security Studies: Interviews and Reflections, edited by Shannon Brincat, Laura Lima, and João Nunes, 197–206. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wootton, David. 1983. Paolo Sarpi: Between Renaissance and Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar