Lavinia Stan and Lucian Turcescu
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- September 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780195308532
- eISBN:
- 9780199785728
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195308532.003.0005
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
In 1989 the Romanian state was called to return Roman and Greek Catholic property confiscated by communist authorities and transferred to the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church's refusal to return ...
More
In 1989 the Romanian state was called to return Roman and Greek Catholic property confiscated by communist authorities and transferred to the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church's refusal to return disputed churches hampered the Orthodox‐Catholic dialogue, both locally and internationally. The property restitution case study illustrates the dilemma of a state torn between its need to maintain popularity with the Orthodox electorate and its desire to meet standards of religious freedom required for accession to the European Union. We analyze the different arguments proposed by the Orthodox, the Greek Catholics, and the Romanian state for and against restitution.Less
In 1989 the Romanian state was called to return Roman and Greek Catholic property confiscated by communist authorities and transferred to the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church's refusal to return disputed churches hampered the Orthodox‐Catholic dialogue, both locally and internationally. The property restitution case study illustrates the dilemma of a state torn between its need to maintain popularity with the Orthodox electorate and its desire to meet standards of religious freedom required for accession to the European Union. We analyze the different arguments proposed by the Orthodox, the Greek Catholics, and the Romanian state for and against restitution.
Randy E. Barnett
- Published in print:
- 2000
- Published Online:
- November 2003
- ISBN:
- 9780198297291
- eISBN:
- 9780191598777
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0198297297.003.0013
- Subject:
- Political Science, Political Theory
In a polycentric constitutional order, as distinct from a monocentric one, multiple legal systems exercise the judicial function and law enforcement agencies exercise the executive function. These ...
More
In a polycentric constitutional order, as distinct from a monocentric one, multiple legal systems exercise the judicial function and law enforcement agencies exercise the executive function. These multiple decision‐makers operate within constitutional constraints that permit them to co‐exist and adjust to each other. A decentralized or polycentric constitutional order provides an institutional framework to address more effectively the problem of enforcement abuse. Such an order will arise naturally if two new constitutional principles are adopted: the nonconfiscation principle stipulates that law enforcement and adjudicative agencies should not be able to confiscate their income by force, but should have to contract with the persons they serve; the competition principle stipulates that law enforcement and adjudicative agencies should not be able to put their competitors out of business by force. How a polycentric legal order better handles the problems of selection, corruption, capture, and the halo effect is explained.Less
In a polycentric constitutional order, as distinct from a monocentric one, multiple legal systems exercise the judicial function and law enforcement agencies exercise the executive function. These multiple decision‐makers operate within constitutional constraints that permit them to co‐exist and adjust to each other. A decentralized or polycentric constitutional order provides an institutional framework to address more effectively the problem of enforcement abuse. Such an order will arise naturally if two new constitutional principles are adopted: the nonconfiscation principle stipulates that law enforcement and adjudicative agencies should not be able to confiscate their income by force, but should have to contract with the persons they serve; the competition principle stipulates that law enforcement and adjudicative agencies should not be able to put their competitors out of business by force. How a polycentric legal order better handles the problems of selection, corruption, capture, and the halo effect is explained.
Thomas J. Laub
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- February 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199539321
- eISBN:
- 9780191715808
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199539321.003.0004
- Subject:
- History, Military History, European Modern History
‘Setting the precedent’ examines efforts by first the German embassy in Paris and later the Einsatzstab Rosenberg to confiscate works of art owned by Jews. Allegedly acting on instructions from ...
More
‘Setting the precedent’ examines efforts by first the German embassy in Paris and later the Einsatzstab Rosenberg to confiscate works of art owned by Jews. Allegedly acting on instructions from Hitler, Ambassador Otto Abetz and diplomats attached to the German embassy in Paris began to confiscate objets d'art from wealthy French Jews immediately after the end of military operations. Citing international law that prohibited such actions, Franz Graf Wolff Metternich and the military administration complained to superiors and blocked diplomatic confiscations. With support from Himmler and Göring, the Einsatzstab Rosenberg (Special Action Staff Rosenberg) picked up where the German embassy in Paris left off, secured the right to confiscate Jewish property, and ransacked museums throughout occupied France. Distraught by the loss of France's artistic patrimony, leaders of the Vichy regime complained to Otto Abetz and the Military Commander in France to no avail. In March of 1942, Hitler ignored French protests, described attacks against Jews as an essential part of the war effort, and revealed his role in the confiscation of Jewish property.Less
‘Setting the precedent’ examines efforts by first the German embassy in Paris and later the Einsatzstab Rosenberg to confiscate works of art owned by Jews. Allegedly acting on instructions from Hitler, Ambassador Otto Abetz and diplomats attached to the German embassy in Paris began to confiscate objets d'art from wealthy French Jews immediately after the end of military operations. Citing international law that prohibited such actions, Franz Graf Wolff Metternich and the military administration complained to superiors and blocked diplomatic confiscations. With support from Himmler and Göring, the Einsatzstab Rosenberg (Special Action Staff Rosenberg) picked up where the German embassy in Paris left off, secured the right to confiscate Jewish property, and ransacked museums throughout occupied France. Distraught by the loss of France's artistic patrimony, leaders of the Vichy regime complained to Otto Abetz and the Military Commander in France to no avail. In March of 1942, Hitler ignored French protests, described attacks against Jews as an essential part of the war effort, and revealed his role in the confiscation of Jewish property.
David H. Price
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- May 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195394214
- eISBN:
- 9780199894734
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195394214.003.0005
- Subject:
- Religion, History of Christianity
This chapter describes the attempt, which began in 1509, to promote conversion by confiscating Jewish books. Supported by the Franciscan and Dominican Orders as well as the University of Cologne, ...
More
This chapter describes the attempt, which began in 1509, to promote conversion by confiscating Jewish books. Supported by the Franciscan and Dominican Orders as well as the University of Cologne, Johannes Pfefferkorn agitated for universal expulsion of Jews or, that failing, destruction of their “blasphemous” and “heretical” books (with emphasis on the Talmud and liturgical books). The chapter offers extensive analysis of the inflammatory anti-Jewish pamphlets published to support this campaign. In 1509, the anti-Jewish effort scored a major success: Emperor Maximilian issued a mandate authorizing confiscation of Jewish books.Less
This chapter describes the attempt, which began in 1509, to promote conversion by confiscating Jewish books. Supported by the Franciscan and Dominican Orders as well as the University of Cologne, Johannes Pfefferkorn agitated for universal expulsion of Jews or, that failing, destruction of their “blasphemous” and “heretical” books (with emphasis on the Talmud and liturgical books). The chapter offers extensive analysis of the inflammatory anti-Jewish pamphlets published to support this campaign. In 1509, the anti-Jewish effort scored a major success: Emperor Maximilian issued a mandate authorizing confiscation of Jewish books.
David H. Price
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- May 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195394214
- eISBN:
- 9780199894734
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195394214.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, History of Christianity
This chapter explains the complex legal maneuvers undertaken to oppose and support the imperial mandates authorizing confiscation. It offers a new reconstruction and interpretation of the actual ...
More
This chapter explains the complex legal maneuvers undertaken to oppose and support the imperial mandates authorizing confiscation. It offers a new reconstruction and interpretation of the actual campaign against Jewish books. While the confiscations were being conducted in the Rhineland with the support of the Archbishop of Mainz, the University of Mainz, and the University of Cologne, the city of Frankfurt and its Jewish community were nonetheless able to negotiate a stay of execution for the mandate. As this occurred, the office of the Papal Inquisition for the province of Teutonia, under Jacob Hoogstraeten, was assuming effective leadership of the campaign and taking steps to resume the empire-wide confiscation. This was the context of Johannes Reuchlin's intervention and the reason the inquisition immediately turned its sights on him and his arguments. The chapter analyzes the evolution of Emperor Maximilian's Jewish policy (including his support of expulsions) and the phenomenon of divided authority over Jewish communities in the empire. It argues that Reuchlin's defense was a conscientious effort to strengthen the eroding legal status of Jewry in the empire. His pamphlet also offered an unprecedented acknowledgment of the theological significance and integrity of the Jewish tradition (including defense of the Talmud).Less
This chapter explains the complex legal maneuvers undertaken to oppose and support the imperial mandates authorizing confiscation. It offers a new reconstruction and interpretation of the actual campaign against Jewish books. While the confiscations were being conducted in the Rhineland with the support of the Archbishop of Mainz, the University of Mainz, and the University of Cologne, the city of Frankfurt and its Jewish community were nonetheless able to negotiate a stay of execution for the mandate. As this occurred, the office of the Papal Inquisition for the province of Teutonia, under Jacob Hoogstraeten, was assuming effective leadership of the campaign and taking steps to resume the empire-wide confiscation. This was the context of Johannes Reuchlin's intervention and the reason the inquisition immediately turned its sights on him and his arguments. The chapter analyzes the evolution of Emperor Maximilian's Jewish policy (including his support of expulsions) and the phenomenon of divided authority over Jewish communities in the empire. It argues that Reuchlin's defense was a conscientious effort to strengthen the eroding legal status of Jewry in the empire. His pamphlet also offered an unprecedented acknowledgment of the theological significance and integrity of the Jewish tradition (including defense of the Talmud).
Delia Cortese and Simonetta Calderini
- Published in print:
- 2006
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780748617326
- eISBN:
- 9780748671366
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Edinburgh University Press
- DOI:
- 10.3366/edinburgh/9780748617326.003.0006
- Subject:
- Religion, Islam
There was evidence of women as noticeable recipients of wealth and riches during the Egyptian phase of the Fatimid dynasty. Women and male relatives of the early imam-caliphs were fully dependent ...
More
There was evidence of women as noticeable recipients of wealth and riches during the Egyptian phase of the Fatimid dynasty. Women and male relatives of the early imam-caliphs were fully dependent upon the allowances that the imams bestowed on them. In Egypt, however, while the male relatives of the imam-caliph continued to remain fully dependant on these allowances, the royal women were able to acquire much wealth through a diversified system of salaries, allocations and gifts, as well as revenues and land grants. This chapter explores female wealth and patronage at the Fatimid court in Cairo, with references to Zirid and Sulayhid royal women. It discusses the affluence of Fatimid royal ladies within the context of international rivalry and exchanges between the courts of the time. It also examines how wealth and riches were acquired and how they were lost through confiscation, women's wealth management and spending strategies, women as patrons of architecture, and architectural patronage under the caliphate of al-'Aziz.Less
There was evidence of women as noticeable recipients of wealth and riches during the Egyptian phase of the Fatimid dynasty. Women and male relatives of the early imam-caliphs were fully dependent upon the allowances that the imams bestowed on them. In Egypt, however, while the male relatives of the imam-caliph continued to remain fully dependant on these allowances, the royal women were able to acquire much wealth through a diversified system of salaries, allocations and gifts, as well as revenues and land grants. This chapter explores female wealth and patronage at the Fatimid court in Cairo, with references to Zirid and Sulayhid royal women. It discusses the affluence of Fatimid royal ladies within the context of international rivalry and exchanges between the courts of the time. It also examines how wealth and riches were acquired and how they were lost through confiscation, women's wealth management and spending strategies, women as patrons of architecture, and architectural patronage under the caliphate of al-'Aziz.
Thomas Bartlett
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199583119
- eISBN:
- 9780191744822
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199583119.003.0003
- Subject:
- History, British and Irish Early Modern History
The history of Ulster since 1603 was part of the history of Scotland and England, as well as of Ireland, and it is important to bear these three sets of reference points in mind when seeking to ...
More
The history of Ulster since 1603 was part of the history of Scotland and England, as well as of Ireland, and it is important to bear these three sets of reference points in mind when seeking to understand the complex political developments of the seventeenth century. The rebellion of O’Neill and other Ulster chiefs ended in 1603. The confiscation of Gaelic and Catholic-owned estates that followed was a major cause of the 1641 rebellion and the notorious massacre of Protestant settlers in that year. There followed two decades of “massacre and mayhem”. The Williamite wars at the end of the century virtually completed the objective of confiscating Catholic estates. The eighteenth century was remarkably quiescent, by comparison, though the insurrection of the United Irishmen in 1798 and subsequent reprisals brought the century to a bloody end.Less
The history of Ulster since 1603 was part of the history of Scotland and England, as well as of Ireland, and it is important to bear these three sets of reference points in mind when seeking to understand the complex political developments of the seventeenth century. The rebellion of O’Neill and other Ulster chiefs ended in 1603. The confiscation of Gaelic and Catholic-owned estates that followed was a major cause of the 1641 rebellion and the notorious massacre of Protestant settlers in that year. There followed two decades of “massacre and mayhem”. The Williamite wars at the end of the century virtually completed the objective of confiscating Catholic estates. The eighteenth century was remarkably quiescent, by comparison, though the insurrection of the United Irishmen in 1798 and subsequent reprisals brought the century to a bloody end.
John Syrett
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780823224890
- eISBN:
- 9780823240852
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Fordham University Press
- DOI:
- 10.5422/fordham/9780823224890.003.0002
- Subject:
- History, American History: 19th Century
By December 1861 there were several indications in the North that some form of confiscation, mostly related to slavery, had gained public support. On December 9, Trumbull introduced the Second ...
More
By December 1861 there were several indications in the North that some form of confiscation, mostly related to slavery, had gained public support. On December 9, Trumbull introduced the Second Confiscation Act. Several other Republicans followed suit with their own confiscation bills while other members of the party urged caution. Opponents of the second act offered a pessimistic vision of what the South would become if confiscation were implemented. Their bleak assessment derived in part from the promise made by a few Republicans that confiscated land would go to freedmen and Union soldiers and in part from the Southern fear about confiscation. The confiscation debates often focused on the constitutionality of secession. This issue was integral to any definition of the war, and therefore to Reconstruction. Many argued that the Union was a compact in which each state was free to dissolve the bond at its pleasure.Less
By December 1861 there were several indications in the North that some form of confiscation, mostly related to slavery, had gained public support. On December 9, Trumbull introduced the Second Confiscation Act. Several other Republicans followed suit with their own confiscation bills while other members of the party urged caution. Opponents of the second act offered a pessimistic vision of what the South would become if confiscation were implemented. Their bleak assessment derived in part from the promise made by a few Republicans that confiscated land would go to freedmen and Union soldiers and in part from the Southern fear about confiscation. The confiscation debates often focused on the constitutionality of secession. This issue was integral to any definition of the war, and therefore to Reconstruction. Many argued that the Union was a compact in which each state was free to dissolve the bond at its pleasure.
John Syrett
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780823224890
- eISBN:
- 9780823240852
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Fordham University Press
- DOI:
- 10.5422/fordham/9780823224890.003.0003
- Subject:
- History, American History: 19th Century
Republican differences over the Second Confiscation Act reveal the limits of the radicals' influence in the Thirty-seventh Congress, at least on confiscation. The Senate Judiciary Committee, ...
More
Republican differences over the Second Confiscation Act reveal the limits of the radicals' influence in the Thirty-seventh Congress, at least on confiscation. The Senate Judiciary Committee, dominated by Republicans, circumscribed Trumbull's original proposal from its inception. And from the start of debate in both houses the moderates prevailed in both rhetoric and legislative compromises. The bill encouraged many, especially freed slaves, to expect land reform even as it scared others, particularly in the South, about the potential of confiscation and reconstruction and helped create a false reputation for radicals. Supporters of confiscation tried various arguments to assuage the critics' claims that in rem proceedings violated the Constitution, which requires that the trials of all crimes, other than impeachment cases, shall be by jury in the state where the crime occurred. Lincoln signed the second act into law on July 17, 1862.Less
Republican differences over the Second Confiscation Act reveal the limits of the radicals' influence in the Thirty-seventh Congress, at least on confiscation. The Senate Judiciary Committee, dominated by Republicans, circumscribed Trumbull's original proposal from its inception. And from the start of debate in both houses the moderates prevailed in both rhetoric and legislative compromises. The bill encouraged many, especially freed slaves, to expect land reform even as it scared others, particularly in the South, about the potential of confiscation and reconstruction and helped create a false reputation for radicals. Supporters of confiscation tried various arguments to assuage the critics' claims that in rem proceedings violated the Constitution, which requires that the trials of all crimes, other than impeachment cases, shall be by jury in the state where the crime occurred. Lincoln signed the second act into law on July 17, 1862.
John Syrett
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780823224890
- eISBN:
- 9780823240852
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Fordham University Press
- DOI:
- 10.5422/fordham/9780823224890.003.0004
- Subject:
- History, American History: 19th Century
Lincoln acknowledged the importance of the second act in a number of instances in the weeks after its passage. He and Attorney General Edward Bates chose not to implement the law vigorously. The ...
More
Lincoln acknowledged the importance of the second act in a number of instances in the weeks after its passage. He and Attorney General Edward Bates chose not to implement the law vigorously. The second act proved important before it became law as a threat of change and as a symbol to both slaves and Southerners of what the government could do if it wished to reconstruct the South. There are a number of reasons why the Second Confiscation Act was an imperfect instrument. Congress's expanded role during the war was new and unexpected. Bates's administration of the laws was honest, sincere and careful; it lacked any conviction they were just or useful laws. The problems of implementing confiscation also involved the roles of the military and Treasury Department.Less
Lincoln acknowledged the importance of the second act in a number of instances in the weeks after its passage. He and Attorney General Edward Bates chose not to implement the law vigorously. The second act proved important before it became law as a threat of change and as a symbol to both slaves and Southerners of what the government could do if it wished to reconstruct the South. There are a number of reasons why the Second Confiscation Act was an imperfect instrument. Congress's expanded role during the war was new and unexpected. Bates's administration of the laws was honest, sincere and careful; it lacked any conviction they were just or useful laws. The problems of implementing confiscation also involved the roles of the military and Treasury Department.
