Back.to the Main Diplomatic History Page.
The term "diplomatic history" refers to relationships between governments. The subject of 'foreign relations', on the other hand, refers to relations between peoples, economies, and cultures, and is only lightly touched upon in diplomatic history.
Distinctly European in nature, originating with the Greeks and Romans, diplomacy still did not become the accepted academic discipline we know today until the 19th century.
The first occurance of modern diplomatic thought that we can trace begins with Thucydides of ancient Greece, who wrote 'The Peleponesian War.' He discusses the nature of man and the nature of war. He was the first 'realist' of diplomatic theory. He concluded that war, as a means to settle differences, is neither effective nor desirable.
Diplomacy began with the diplomats of ancient Greece. Orators of city states visted other city states to make their case and concerns known.
The Romans, while best known for their adaptation and refinement of Greek techniques, did leave us with the concept of 'International Law.'
Medieval Diplomats were the representatives of Feudal Lords. They acted as spies, keeping an eye on enemies. The respect for envoys was lost and the art fell into its own dark age.
Modern diplomacy came into being first in the Italian city-states during the Renaissance. Venice created the system to maintain their status as a great commercial power without the expense of a massive army. Theirs was the first large, well-organized diplomatic organization.
This is the point at which the term 'diplomat' began to be used. It meant 'those who carry letters' from the word 'diploma.'
Others adapted and perfected this diplomatic system. Especially France, Spain and England. Diplomats worked to assure the interests of their kings. Foreign affairs structure's evolved. The idea of an office of foreign ministry to run and organize diplomatic affairs appeared.
By the end of the Napoleonic Wars (1815) the modern diplomatic system had been established. America, Asia, and the Middle-East had to learn to relate in European terms.
But there were components of the European system that Americans could not accept. The concepts of intrigue and the lie were accepted norms in Europe. National survival was at stake, and the rulers of Europe would do anything necessary to guarantee their survival. Conspiracy and Intrigue were just part of survival. The goal of the diplomat was to avoid beingdeceived while always deceiving others. They were shrewd plotters, dealers in bribes, honorable spies. They would do things in the political arena that would have them ostrasized from their community were they cought acting in a similar manner at home.
"The first duty of the ambassador is to do and think and say and advise whatever may best serve the survival and agrendizement of the state and its interests." Diplomacy was the great engine used by civilized society for the purpose of maintaining peace.
American's trying to enter this game had to face all the worst of Continental Diplomacy. They refused to accept the intrigue and deceptiveness. Known for being straitforward, what they said, they meant. They saw the old world as a morally corrupt and dirty place, and America as a clean slate and stronghold of morality.
Binational or multinational interactions.
Nation to Nation interactions and inter-governmental relations. Gives the historian the ability to asses and evaluate the impct and effectiveness of American Foreign Policy. It treats the nations as actors.
Working with political scientists, Diplomatic Historians serve the President. they speak the languages and undertsand the history of our national relations.
What kind of 'relations' do you analyze?
People to people relations and culture to culture relations. How people see and react to each other.
Analysis of decision making process.
What kind of 'internal factors' do you analyze?
<Question: Who makes American foreign policy? Not a simple concept, like in a dictatorship. Things are nebulous. Immediate responsibility is on the president, for 60 days, then congress, senate foreign relations committee, and eventually the judicial powers (the Supreme Court) has a say. In the long term it is controlled and effected by labor organizations, the press, the pentagon, the NSA, foreign lobbies, and the UN.>
Diplomatic History at the Individual level.
Who?: See the question above: Presidents, congress, senate foreign relations committee, labor organizations, the press, judges, diplomats, the pentagon.
What aspects of the Individual do you analyze?: Temperament, background, intillect, ideology, prejudices, psychological and physical state, etc.
Diplmatic history as national history is the examination of all the factors that contribute to the decision-making process. They are compared, contrasted, and analyzed in order to come to a conclusion or result. For Example:
--------
President
White House
-----------
State Department
----------------
Congress
---------------- <-----> Another Nation
Military
----------------
Private Organizations
---------------------
Public Organizations
---------------------
Political, ideological,
economic, social, racial,
and cultural factors.
Back.to the Main Diplomatic History Page.
This page hosted by 
Get your own Free Home Page