History and International Relations: The Question of Additional Nomenclature

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorODEH, Lemuel Ekedegwa
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-23T19:29:53Z
dc.date.available2017-11-23T19:29:53Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.description.abstractThe nature of this argument stemmed out of the protracted and obvious devaluation attached to the word 'History' as a discipline. History is a course and not a curse and so there is no basis for it to go into extinction neither is there any reason for it to change its nomenclature before the value and importance of history could be acknowledged and appreciated. The position of this paper therefore is that 'the hood does not make a monk'. International Relations as a concept came after the failure of the League of Nations to prevent further destruction in the global arena. International Relations concerns herself chiefly with political discourse and action which indeed is an integral part of history. It is therefore the argument of this paper that we do not need additional nomenclature to make the study of History attractive to the studentsen_US
dc.identifier.issn1117-9481
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/56
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPublished by the Department of Sociology, University of Ilorin, Ilorin pp265-275en_US
dc.subjectInternational Relations, Nomenclature, History, Human Activitiesen_US
dc.titleHistory and International Relations: The Question of Additional Nomenclatureen_US
dc.title.alternativeIlorin Journal of Sociology Vol. 4 No 1 Dec, 2012,en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
History and International Relations, the question of additional Nomenclature(1).pdf
Size:
1.1 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download

Collections