¹ For example, Hoffmann, Stanley, Contemporary Theory in International Relations, New York, 1960Google Scholar; Sprout, Harold, “International Politics and the Scholar,” Princeton Alumni Weekly, Vol. LIX, January 23, 1959Google Scholar; Charles McClelland, “The Function of Theory in International Relations,” Journal of Conflict Resolution (forthcoming); Snyder, Richard C., “Some Recent Trends in Theory and Research Focussed on International Relations,” paper, International Political Science Association Conference, University of Michigan, September 12–16, 1960.Google Scholar

² George Schwarzenberger is an exception; see his Power Politics, London, 1941. See also Corbett, Percy, Law and Society in the Relations of States, New York, 1951Google Scholar; Gross, Feliks, “The Sociology of International Relations: Research and Study,” International Social Science Journal, XII, No. 2 (1960), pp. 269–76.Google Scholar

³ The anthropological term is perhaps more properly a segmentary society.

⁴ Vine, Robert A. Le, “Problems in the Study of Stateless Societies,” paper, Central States Anthropological Society, 1959.Google Scholar

⁵ Glock, Charles Y., “Issues That Divide: A Postscript,” Journal of Social Issues, No. 3 (1956), pp. 3–11.Google Scholar

⁶ Politics Among Nations, New York, 1956; Scientific Man vs. Power Politics, Chicago, 1946.

⁷ Man, the State, and War, New York, 1959.

⁸ The Structure of Nations and Empires, New York, 1959.

⁹ The question: Is international relations a discipline? does not necessarily lead to fruitful discussion when it is taken literally.

¹⁰ In this particular essay, Morgenthau regards international relations and international politics as synonymous.

¹¹ The War Potential of Nations, Princeton, N.J., 1956.

¹² Man-Milieu Relationship Hypotheses in the Context of International Politics, Center of International Studies, Princeton University, 1956.

¹³ “The Balance of Power: Prescription, Concept, or Propaganda?” World Politics, V, No. 4 (July 1953), pp. 442–77.

¹⁴ Dahl, Robert A., “The Concept of Power,” Behavioral Science, II, No. 3 (July 1957), pp. 201–15Google Scholar; Simon, Herbert, “Notes on the Observation and Measurement of Political Power,” Journal of Politics, XV, No. 4 (November 1953), pp. 500–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar; March, James G., “An Introduction to the Theory and Measurement of Influence,” American Political Science Review, XLIX, No. 2 (June 1955), pp. 431–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar; French, John, “The Bases of Social Power,” in Dorwin Cartwright, ed., Studies in Social Power, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1959.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Sullivan, Denis, “The Concept of Power in International Relations,” paper, Mid-west Conference of Political Scientists, Bloomington, Ind., April 29, 1960.Google Scholar

¹⁶ “Scientific International Politics,” World Politics, XI, No. 1 (October 1958), pp. 83–86.

¹⁷ The Strategy of Conflict, Cambridge, Mass., 1960.

¹⁸ Snyder, , op.cit., pp. 141–16Google Scholar; McClelland, , op.cit., esp. pp. 38ff.Google Scholar

¹⁹ “International Relations: The Long Road to Theory,” World Politics, XI, No. 3 (April 1959), pp. 346–77.

²⁰ Kaplan, Morton A., System and Process in International Relations, New York, 1957Google Scholar; Haas, Ernst B., “The Comparative Study of the United Nations,” World Politics, XII, No. 2 (January 1960), pp. 298–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²¹ Campbell, Donald, “Common Fate, Similarity, and Other Indices of the Status of Aggregates of Persons as Social Entities,” Behavioral Science, III, No. 1 (January 1958), pp. 14–25.Google Scholar

²² Guetzkow, Harold, “Conversion Barriers in Using the Social Sciences,” Administrative Science Quarterly, IV, No. 1 (June 1959), pp. 68–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar