Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

The purpose of this book is to enter into the history of the mental-social phenomena that are the word sovereignty and the myth of Westphalia. Given the circularity of language, the project proposes to examine the reality-creating role of language, as an organic instrument of social power within humanity. In semiotic terms, the complex structures of words and also myths form part of sign-systems in which they can both represent and create reality. These are the passive and active functions of language, which explain that words and myths not only represent and describe reality but may also play a leading part in creating and transforming reality, thus demonstrating and being used to carry fabulous power within humanity. The Peace of Westphalia is analysed to show that, in spite of what actually took place in 1648, Westphalia has had an incredible social effect in international law, standing for the proposition that it signalled the beginning of a new era based on state sovereignty. However, it is argued that Westphalia constitutes a myth, an aetiological myth, which has provided a way for society to explain itself to itself, that is, a way for international society to explain its genesis to itself. As regards sovereignty , it is shown that Jean Bodin introduced the word in Six Livres for the purpose of having the French ruler enjoy supreme power in the hierarchical organisation structure of society. This is the original creative and transforming social effect on the shared consciousness of humanity for which the linguistic sign must be credited, which has continued, unaltered, to this day. With respect to Droit des Gens , it is demonstrated that Emer de Vattel utilised and actually changed the reality associated with sovereignty also for a specific reason, namely, to carry out its externalisation - the ruling entity was now to enjoy exclusive power to govern, which entailed being the sole representative of the people both internally and externally, and also meant that it could not be submitted to any foreign state or to any higher law externally. Vattel's use of the word has had an extraordinary effect on the shared consciousness of society, including that of the emerging international society, which is still very much present today. These two archetype cases in which 'sovereignty' developed show how this word has really had two paradigms over the years, that is, it has represented and created the two distinct realities of the internal and the international.

Thirty Years' War, 1618-1648 --- Sovereignty --- Peace --- History --- Language --- Counter-Reformation --- State sovereignty (International relations) --- International law --- Political science --- Common heritage of mankind (International law) --- International relations --- Self-determination, National --- Law and legislation --- Peace. --- History. --- Language. --- Thirty Years' War, 1618-1648 - Peace --- Sovereignty - History --- Sovereignty - Language

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Over recent decades, the responsibility for the past actions of the European colonial powers in relation to their former colonies has been subject to a lively debate. In this book, the question of the responsibility under international law of former colonial States is addressed. Such a legal responsibility would presuppose the violation of the international law that was applicable at the time of colonization. In the ‘Scramble for Africa’ during the Age of New Imperialism (1870-1914), European States and non-State actors mainly used cession and protectorate treaties to acquire territorial sovereignty (imperium) and property rights over land (dominium). The question is raised whether Europeans did or did not on a systematic scale breach these treaties in the context of the acquisition of territory and the expansion of empire, mainly through extending sovereignty rights and, subsequently, intervening in the internal affairs of African political entities.

Africa, Sub-Saharan --- Land tenure --- Sovereignty --- State sovereignty (International relations) --- International law --- Political science --- Common heritage of mankind (International law) --- International relations --- Self-determination, National --- Agrarian tenure --- Feudal tenure --- Freehold --- Land ownership --- Land question --- Landownership --- Tenure of land --- Land use, Rural --- Real property --- Land, Nationalization of --- Landowners --- Serfdom --- International status --- History --- Law and legislation --- Africa, Black --- Africa, Subsaharan --- Africa, Tropical --- Africa South of the Sahara --- Black Africa --- Sub-Sahara Africa --- Sub-Saharan Africa --- Subsahara Africa --- Subsaharan Africa --- Tropical Africa --- Colonization --- Africa, Sub-Saharan - International status - History - 19th century --- Africa, Sub-Saharan - International status - History - 20th century --- Land tenure - Law and legislation - Africa, Sub-Saharan - History - 19th century --- Land tenure - Law and legislation - Africa, Sub-Saharan - History - 20th century --- Sovereignty - History - 19th century --- Sovereignty - History - 20th century --- Statut International --- XIXe-XXe s., 1801-2000 --- Régime foncier --- Droit --- Législation --- Souveraineté --- Colonisation --- Afrique subsaharienne --- Africa, Sub-Saharan - Colonization - Case studies