The agent-structure debate has proceeded in International Relations for some time now. Within an initial `first wave' of debate, this revolved around proposing various `solutions' to the problem of how to appreciate the mutually constitutive relationship between agency and structure. The ensuing debate was then characterized by an apparent intellectual cul-de-sac. There were always `two stories to tell' about agency and structure — one an explanatory account, the other an interpretative account. More recently, a `second wave' of agent-structure debate is under way in which the stakes have been raised. Yet throughout the various waves of debate it seems that the contributions of an historicist neo-Gramscian perspective developed by Robert Cox have been overlooked. This article explores some of the issues raised by such an approach. Attention is drawn to the many issues developed by neo-Gramscian perspectives that combine accounts of agency-structure as well as modes of explanation and understanding. We remain sceptical about whether the dualism of agency-structure can be successfully transcended by combining accounts that both explain and understand the social world. As such, the problem of agency-structure may well be a Gordian knot that cannot be unravelled or solved. Yet, by starting to take seriously the approaches to agency-structure within various neo-Gramscian perspectives, we aim to propel discussion into further avenues within the second wave of the agent-structure debate.