<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<title>Číslo 2</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/96233" rel="alternate"/>
<subtitle>Issue 2</subtitle>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/96233</id>
<updated>2026-04-12T18:33:07Z</updated>
<dc:date>2026-04-12T18:33:07Z</dc:date>
<entry>
<title>Amalgamation, Land/Mineral Ordinances and Socio-economic Developments in Nigeria since c. 1914 A.D: A Reflection</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/97201" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name/>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/97201</id>
<updated>2024-08-09T11:54:22Z</updated>
<published>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">Amalgamation, Land/Mineral Ordinances and Socio-economic Developments in Nigeria since c. 1914 A.D: A Reflection; 
; ; Generally, the Amalgamation of 1914 brought together the protectorates of Northern and Southern Nigeria, thus forming one country — Nigeria. However, the ordinances of the colonial government did not reflect that as it denied the people access to the land and mineral resources, vesting both in the Crown. This has in turn impacted on the Socio-economic development of the Nigeria area even years after independence. This is because the ordinances under the new gab of Land and Mineral Acts, have offered the neo-colonial actors and their allies the opportunity to continue to corner for themselves large spans of land and oil blocs. This in the opinion of the paper is largely responsible for mass landlessness, low economic activities/productivity among the people (especially among professionals whose means of livelihood are tied to land), boundary disputes as well as occupational conflicts in parts of the country. The paper using qualitative analysis, seeks to interrogate the relationship between the Amalgamation, Land/Mineral Ordinances and the implications of these on socio-economic developments in the area.
</summary>
<dc:date>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>The Invasion of Prince Louis of France to England, 1216–1217</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/97096" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name/>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/97096</id>
<updated>2024-08-09T11:54:22Z</updated>
<published>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">The Invasion of Prince Louis of France to England, 1216–1217; 
; ; This article’s main aim is to summarise the crucial period of the reign of King John of England during so-called first barons’ war of 1215–1217 and through the examination of contemporary sources show possible attitudes to the invasion of Prince Louis of France in 1216, when he was invited by English barons to become their new king, which eventually turned to the usurpation when King John died and his son Henry became the King of England with support of those who had been adherents of Louis before. In June 1215, English barons persuaded King John to agree with terms of Magna Carta, limiting royal power in various branches of law. When Magna Carta was proclaimed null and unlawful by Pope Innocent III allowing John not to be bound by its terms, it meant open war with English rebels. They negotiated an invasion of Prince Louis, the eldest son of Philip II, the King of France, and they promised him a crown of England. In October 1216, King John suddenly died in the middle of war and he was succeeded by his son Henry. Henry III was in relatively short time accepted by most of rebellious barons leaving Louis in very precarious situation and it eventually led to Louis’ defeat in 1217. The treaty of Lambeth (September 1217) ended this war with Plantagenets still on English throne.
</summary>
<dc:date>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>The Ottoman Empire at the Beginning of Tanzimat Reforms</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/97080" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name/>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/97080</id>
<updated>2024-08-09T11:54:22Z</updated>
<published>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">The Ottoman Empire at the Beginning of Tanzimat Reforms; 
; ; This article deals with analysis of publication of Gülhane noble decree (3 November 1839) which is an eminent event in the modern history of the Ottoman Empire. Promises of sultan Abdülmecid I contained in this document in fact opened the door for a reform period called tanzimat, which is mostly put between years 1839–1876. This article also focuses on earlier attempts of reorganization and modernization of the empire, especially on reforms of sultan Selim III and sultan Mahmut II. Knowledge of these reforms is necessary for understanding the events of 1839. An important part of this article is formed by analysing circumstances of Gülhane decree origins and the English version of its text.
</summary>
<dc:date>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>The Methodology of State Succession in the 20th Century</title>
<link href="http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/97072" rel="alternate"/>
<author>
<name/>
</author>
<id>http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11956/97072</id>
<updated>2024-08-09T11:54:22Z</updated>
<published>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
<summary type="text">The Methodology of State Succession in the 20th Century; 
; ; The dissolution and succession of federal states in the 20th century was heavily influenced by international legislation. If we view it from a methodological perspective, we can see that the dissolution of the Turkish Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy was regulated by the peace treaties ending the First World War. The matter was different with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, because the Vienna agreements of international law provided legal measures. The Vienna Convention of 1978 concerns the succession and settlements of pastagreements. The Vienna Convention of 1983 deals with the succession of property and debt. In case of the breakup of a union (integration) it must remain a primary rule that the parties involved must reach an agreement on the distribution of property (archives) and debt. The pertaining Vienna agreement of 1983 has not yet come into force, and it is unlikely that it will in the foreseeable future. Despite the fact that the agreement is left to the parties, it would be desirable to regulate the process with legal means as well. In it, however, economic indicators must have an important role to play which we can see in the presented 20th century examples. On the other hand, political decisions are also present in the distribution of property and debt, in many cases at the expense of economic means. The regulation of the matter would be a common task, because it would prevent the uncertain outcomes of a series of forced decisions and agreements generating disputes just as we can witness their unregulation even today.
</summary>
<dc:date>2016-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</entry>
</feed>
