Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Military law – England – 18 century »

The life path, scientific-pedagogical and public activity of Volodymyr Sokurenko – a prominent Ukrainian jurist, doctor of law, professor, talented teacher of the Lviv Law School of Franko University are analyzed. It is found out that after graduating from a seven-year school in Zaporizhia, V. Sokurenko entered the Zaporizhia Aviation Technical School, where he studied two courses until 1937. 1/10/1937 he was enrolled as a cadet of the 2nd school of aircraft technicians named after All-Union Lenin Komsomol. In 1938, this school was renamed the Volga Military Aviation School, which he graduated on September 4, 1939 with the military rank of military technician of the 2nd category. As a junior aircraft technician, V. Sokurenko was sent to the military unit no. 8690 in Baku, and later to Maradnyany for further military service in the USSR Air Force. From September 4, 1939 to March 16, 1940, he was a junior aircraft technician of the 50th Fighter Regiment, 60th Air Brigade of the ZAK VO in Baku. The certificate issued by the Railway District Commissariat of Lviv on January 4, 1954 no. 3132 states that V. Sokurenko actually served in the staff of the Soviet Army from October 1937 to May 1946. The same certificate states that from 10/12/1941 to 20/09/1942 and from 12/07/1943 to 08/03/1945, he took part in the Soviet-German war, in particular in the second fighter aviation corps of the Reserve of the Supreme Command of the Soviet Army. In 1943 he joined the CPSU. He was awarded the Order of the Patriotic War of the 1st degree and the Order of the Red Star (1943) as well as 9 medals «For Merit in Battle» during the Soviet-German war. With the start of the Soviet-German war, the Sokurenko family, like many other families, was evacuated to the town of Kamensk-Uralsky in the Sverdlovsk region, where their father worked at a metallurgical plant. After the war, the Sokurenko family moved to Lviv. In 1946, V. Sokurenko entered the Faculty of Law of the Ivan Franko Lviv State University, graduating with honors in 1950, and entered the graduate school of the Lviv State University at the Department of Theory and History of State and Law. V. Sokurenko successfully passed the candidate examinations and on December 25, 1953 in Moscow at the Institute of Law of the USSR he defended his thesis on the topic: «Socialist legal consciousness and its relationship with Soviet law». The supervisor of V. Sokurenko's candidate's thesis was N. Karieva. The Higher Attestation Commission of the Ministry of Culture of the USSR, by its decision of March 31, 1954, awarded V. Sokurenko the degree of Candidate of Law. In addition, it is necessary to explain the place of defense of the candidate's thesis by V. Sokurenko. As it is known, the Institute of State and Law of the USSR has its history since 1925, when, in accordance with the resolution of the Presidium of the Central Executive Committee of March 25, 1925, the Institute of Soviet Construction was established at the Communist Academy. In 1936, the Institute became part of the USSR Academy of Sciences, and in 1938 it was reorganized into the Institute of Law of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In 1941–1943 it was evacuated to Tashkent. In 1960-1991 it was called the Institute of State and Law of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In Ukraine, there is the Institute of State and Law named after V. Koretsky of the NAS of Ukraine – a leading research institution in Ukraine of legal profile, founded in 1949. It is noted that, as a graduate student, V. Sokurenko read a course on the history of political doctrines, conducted special seminars on the theory of state and law. After graduating from graduate school and defending his thesis, from October 1, 1953 he was enrolled as a senior lecturer and then associate professor at the Department of Theory and History of State and Law at the Faculty of Law of the Lviv State University named after Ivan Franko. By the decision of the Higher Attestation Commission of the Ministry of Higher Education of the USSR of December 18, 1957, V. Sokurenko was awarded the academic title of associate professor of the «Department of Theory and History of State and Law». V. Sokurenko took an active part in public life. During 1947-1951 he was a member of the party bureau of the party organization of LSU, worked as a chairman of the trade union committee of the university, from 1955 to 1957 he was a secretary of the party committee of the university. He delivered lectures for the population of Lviv region. Particularly, he lectured in Turka, Chervonohrad, and Yavoriv. He made reports to the party leaders, Soviet workers as well as business leaders. He led a philosophical seminar at the Faculty of Law. He was a deputy of the Lviv City Council of People's Deputies in 1955-1957 and 1975-1978. In December 1967, he defended his doctoral thesis on the topic: «Development of progressive political thought in Ukraine (until the early twentieth century)». The defense of the doctoral thesis was approved by the Higher Attestation Commission on June 14, 1968. During 1960-1990 he headed the Department of Theory and History of State and Law; in 1962-68 and 1972-77 he was the dean of the Law Faculty of the Ivan Franko Lviv State University. In connection with the criticism of the published literature, on September 10, 1977, V. Sokurenko wrote a statement requesting his dismissal from the post of Dean of the Faculty of Law due to deteriorating health. During 1955-1965 he was on research trips to Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Austria, and Bulgaria. From August 1966 to March 1967, in particular, he spent seven months in the United States, England and Canada as a UN Fellow in the Department of Human Rights. From April to May 1968, he was a member of the government delegation to the International Conference on Human Rights in Iran for one month. He spoke, in addition to Ukrainian, English, Polish and Russian. V. Sokurenko played an important role in initiating the study of an important discipline at the Faculty of Law of the Lviv University – History of Political and Legal Studies, which has been studying the history of the emergence and development of theoretical knowledge about politics, state, law, ie the process of cognition by people of the phenomena of politics, state and law at different stages of history in different nations, from early statehood and modernity. Professor V. Sokurenko actively researched the problems of the theory of state and law, the history of Ukrainian legal and political thought. He was one of the first legal scholars in the USSR to begin research on the basics of legal deontology. V. Sokurenko conducted extensive research on the development of basic requirements for the professional and legal responsibilities of a lawyer, similar to the requirements for a doctor. In further research, the scholar analyzed the legal responsibilities, prospects for the development of the basics of professional deontology. In addition, he considered medical deontology from the standpoint of a lawyer, law and morality, focusing on internal (spiritual) processes, calling them «the spirit of law.» The main direction of V. Sokurenko's research was the problems of the theory of state and law, the history of legal and political studies. The main scientific works of professor V. Sokurenko include: «The main directions in the development of progressive state and legal thought in Ukraine: 16th – 19th centuries» (1958) (Russian), «Democratic doctrines about the state and law in Ukraine in the second half of the 19th century (M. Drahomanov, S. Podolynskyi, A. Terletskyi)» (1966), «Law. Freedom. Equality» (1981, co-authored) (in Russian), «State and legal views of Ivan Franko» (1966), «Socio-political views of Taras Shevchenko (to the 170th anniversary of his birth)» (1984); «Political and legal views of Ivan Franko (to the 130th anniversary of his birth)» (1986) (in Russian) and others. V. Sokurenko died on November 22, 1994 and was buried in Holoskivskyi Cemetery in Lviv. Volodymyr Sokurenko left a bright memory in the hearts of a wide range of scholars, colleagues and grateful students. The 100th anniversary of the Scholar is a splendid opportunity to once again draw attention to the rich scientific heritage of the lawyer, which is an integral part of the golden fund of Ukrainian legal science and education. It needs to be studied, taken into account and further developed.

Research on military capital punishment is a neglected topic in criminology. This article is part of a long-term examination of the capital executions of U.S. soldiers, especially those of World War II. It briefly describes the crimes, defendants, and victims for 18 military executions that took place in England from 1943 to 1945, and it analyses the details of these executions and the burials that followed. The executions were ignominious and well organized mechanical rituals performed by soldiers who overall experienced only one execution. The executions became increasingly truncated events as the military became more familiar with them. After the current U.S. Supreme Court decides the constitutionality of this punishment in Loving v. U.S., 94-1996, military executions may resume after an absence of 35 years.

In trying to trace the development of church-state relations in Britain since 1961, one encounters the difficulty that conceptions of both ‘church’ and ‘state’ have changed radically in the half-century since then. This is most obviously true of the state. The British state in 1961 was (outside Stormont-governed Northern Ireland) a unitary state governed from London. It still had colonies, and substantial overseas military commitments. One of its Houses of Parliament had until three years before been (a few bishops and law-lords apart) completely hereditary. The prime minister controlled all senior appointments in the established Church of England, and Parliament had the final say on its worship and doctrine. The criminal law still embodied Christian teaching on issues of personal morality.

The article analyzes some features of the state-legal arrangement of the territories of the North Caucasus region after joining the Russian Empire, the difficulties and excesses made by the tsarist administration in the formation of a new administrative and legal system in the region, the specifics of military-people's management in some areas of the North Caucasus. The author emphasizes that the systemic combination of Russian state restrictions in the military-popular administration with guarantees of non-interference in internal Affairs indicates that the final stabilization was achieved not by suppression, as some researchers believe, but by a political compromise proposed to all mountaineers. Analyzing the interaction of Imperial and customary law in the formation of a single national legal space, the author stresses that in the field of civil rights the Russian authorities in all provinces including in the North Caucasus, avoiding sharp breaking, ignoring the legal traditions of the population, and left out in the effect on the controlled territory of traditional law. In order to ensure political and statelegal stability in the North Caucasus region, the tsarist administration in its activities combined the principle of restriction allowed by the military-people's administration with the principle of non-interference in the traditional way of life of the mountain population, especially in the sphere of civil and family-legal relations.

The Annual Bibliography of British and Irish History published for 1991, contains 393 items in section G, “Britain 1714-1815,” a section that excludes works devoted to “long periods” that also cover the period. Of those 393, twenty were in Ga “General,” thirty-six in Gb, “Politics,” eight in Gc “Constitution, Administration and Law,” thirty-two in Gd “External Affairs” and thirty-seven in Ge “Religion.” Though politics is in theory restricted to Gb, in practice it overlaps with these other categories, and, indeed, in part, with the categories Economic Affairs, Social Structure and Population, Naval and Military, and Intellectual and Cultural. Restricting, however, the survey to Gb, the figures for 1988, 1989 and 1990 respectively were fifty-six, fifty-two and fifty-four. It is thus clear that while political history no longer dominates eighteenth-century historiography as it once did, there is still a formidable quantity of it produced. This is not a situation to be regretted, but it does emphasize the subjectivity of any assessment of recent work and of current problems. Such a situation, however, is not simply a question of problems derived from quantity, for any attempt to produce an historiographical account focusing on earlier scholarship would itself encounter many difficulties. The absence of consensus among modern scholars extends to their assessment of historiographical trends. This was demonstrated clearly by Jonathan Clark in 1986. Having, the previous year, in his English Society 1688-1832: Ideology, Social Structure and Political Practice during the Ancien Regime (Cambridge, 1985), asserted the strength of conservatism and religious identity and the marginality of reform and radicalism in eighteenth-century England, he offered, inter alia, in his Revolution and Rebellion: State and Society in England in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Cambridge, 1986), a combative interpretation of the methodology and historiography of the period.

If liberal England died strangely, no moment in its passing was more bizarre than the close encounter it experienced between the army and a political system from which the military had been banished since the seventeenth century. Habitually all but invisible at home, confining its exploits to lands without the law, and maintaining a political silence equal—though in easier circumstances—to that of the neighboring grande muette, the British army moved to the center of the public stage. It obtained a popular following. This was not merely the result of Britain's involvement in world war. Manifestations of popular militarism, albeit sporadic or marginal, were evident in the later nineteenth century. The second Boer War accelerated a shift in social attitudes. Hostility to “pro-Boers,” if not beginning to resemble the hysteria of 1914, adumbrated the response of a shaken community temporarily recovering cohesion through warlike solidarity. Most public energy was expended in mafficking, but vocal groups continued to campaign for national efficiency and universal military service. The scout movement was the precipitant of a considerable mass sentiment, solidarized by suspicion of Germany and giving back a faint but clear echo of the leagues formed to support the expansion of the German army and navy.Yet if a novel enthusiasm was eroding traditional aversion to the army, it was scarcely capable of creating a public tolerance for its involvement in domestic affairs. Unlike the navy, whose nature more or less precluded its domestic employment, the army was a suspect weapon. The cultivation of nonpolitical professionalism represented in part a functional response to such public suspicion. Modern major generals would not think of doing what their Cromwellian predecessors had done.

<p>Polish research on Roman law is traditionally concerned first of all on the private law and its reception in European legal systems. However, very few publications deal with the role Roman law played on the British Isles. One of the important exceptions is Łukasz Jan Korporowicz’s research from the University of Lodz. This article analyzes his last book entitled <em>Prawo rzymskie w Anglii w XVIII wieku. Nauczanie, studia, nauka</em>. It describes the system of teaching Roman law in England in the 18^th century and the role that graduates of Roman studies at Oxbridge played in English society at the time. First of all, the pioneering nature of reviewed work was indicated, as a similar one has not yet been published not only in Poland, but also in the world. By analyzing the subsequent parts of the book, their critical analysis was made and its strong and weaker elements were indicated. The conclusions indicate a very high scientific level of the reviewed book.</p>

A dichotomy of government and society in the exploration of the State’s transition from Medieval to Ētat modern opens new opportunities to understand the Kingdom of England’s history on the eve of the early modern period. On the one hand, gentry remained its importance under unstable political authority, arbitrariness and lawlessness from country’s nobility. On the other hand, political evolution of power was determined by growing role of king’s prerogative. The development of ideas about the function of serving the authority was reflected in a number of anonymous tractates of that time and isolated events. Government used a figure of wise and righteous monarch against the background of serious political-military failures of the 30s in Hundred Years&apos; War. One of the tractate states that the King and his Council assumed the burden of service and responsibility in difficult time for the kingdom with minimal focus on commons. The other one of that time has the phenomenon of publicity filled with nostalgia, represented through discourses of historic memory. An anonymous author from the king’s inner circle describes an alternative of country’s political course of Anglo-French opposition. The author calls for the restoration of kingdom’s past glory as strong military Power, above all, at sea, rather than the war on the mainland. He brings back the reader images of famous monarchs, where sea power guaranteed prosperity of the realm and its subjects. An understanding of a new place and the role of England in the last phase of Hundred Years&apos; War, somehow, that favoured public interests and expectations, is formed. An understanding of monarch’s duty and responsibility underwent significant changes in anonymous tractate of the late 40s. The ruler must promote well-being and prosperity of his nationals, know their needs and requirements, listen for their opinion, which is the wisdom and justice of the monarch. Dialogue between government and society developed by participants’ demands of Jack Cade rebellion. King cannot be above the law and commons are always ready to support him. England’s socio-political processes of that time are characterized by the increase of publicity, strengthening of authority’s representation. Nevertheless, keeping faith with the figure of wise and righteous monarch, the patron and protector of his subjects could not stop impending socio-political crisis of the second part of the century.

AbstractThe closeness of a work from Rubens' studio in the English Royal Collection, known as Equestrian Portrait of a Knight of the Golden Fleece (Fig. I, Note 1), to two equestrian portraits painted by Van Dyck during his stay in Genoa, from 1621 to 1626 (Figs. 2, 3, Note 2) has led to the identification of the sitter. A number of other pictures from the circle of Rubens and Van Dyck show horses and/or riders in related poses and the dates on some of them reveal them to have been painted before Van Dyck's portraits. This applies to The Riding School by or after Rubens, which is generally dated 1610-12 (Fig. 4, Note 3), a Paradise Landscape by Jan Brueghel of 1613 (Note 4) and Sight dated 1617 by the same artist (Fig.5, Note 5), which features a horseman known as Archduke Albert. A number of undated paintings inspired by the same model include six supposed to be of Archduke Albert (Notes 6, 10), three by Casper de Crayer (Fig. 6, Note 13) and eguestrian portraits of Louis XIII (Note 14) and Ladislaw IV of Poland. Thus it seems likely that these followers of Rubens', Van Dyck included, based themselves on one and the same equestrian portrait by their teacher. Since Van Dyck almost certainly painted the two equestrian portraits in Genoa during his stay in that city, his model or a replica of it must also have been there between 1621 and 1626. In fact, probably at the request of his patrons (Note 17), he often used models by Rubens, who had worked in Genoa for a time in 1606 (Note 16). However, his two equestrian portraits are not based on the only Genoese one by Rubens now known, that of the Marchese Doria (Fig. 7, Note 18), which is very different and has a liveliness quite, unlike Van Dyck's quiet static compositions. The equestrian portrait in the English Royal Collection was bought by George I in 1723 as a Rubens. The sitter is clad in the Spanish costume of the early 17 th century while the towers in the background could be those of Antwerp (Note 36). The sitter has been identified as the Archduke Albert, but he actually bears no resemblance to other portraits of the Archduke, who was also much older than this at the time of Ruberas' stay in Genoa in 1606. The most likely candidate is Ambrogio Spinola (Note 32) , the statesman and general, of whom both Rubens and Van Dyck painted more than one portrait. Spinola was commander of the Spanish troups in the Southern Netherlands, a friend of Rubens and Knight of the Golden Fleece, and he also came from Genoa, where this portrait could have been painted during a visit he made to the city in 1606 (Notes 33, 34). Stylistically too the portrait seems to fit in with the series of portraits painted by Rubens in Genoa in that year. The physiognomy of the sitter is certainly close to that of the known portraits of Spinola (Figs. 8-1, Note 35), while the details of Spinola's life also support the identification. Spinola (1569-1630), who was Marquis of Sesto and Venafro, belonged to one of the group of closely related, families of bankers who held key positions in Genoa. He arrived in the Netherlands around 1602 at the head of a large and unusually well-trained body of troops. In 1603 he provided funds to prevent a mutiny among the Spanish troups and after his capture of Ostend in 1604 he was appointed second in command to Archduke Albert. He was made a Knight of the Golden Fleece on I March 1605 and in the same year he was put in charge of military finances. From 1606 until his departure for Spain in 1628 he was superintendent of the military treasury and' mayordomo mayor' to the Archdukes Albert and Isabella. After the death of Albert in 1621 he became principal adviser to Isabella and thus the most powerful man in the Spanish Netherlands. His amiable character brought him many friends, even among the ranks of the enemy, notably the Princes Maurice and Frederick Henry, with whom he had a great deal of contact during the Twelve Years Truce. It was probably one of them who bought the Portrait of Spinola by Van Miereveld (Fig. 8). After a disappointing mission to Spain in 1628, Spinola was relieved of his command of the Army of Flanders and put in charge of the Spanish troups in Lombardy. He died in his castle in Piedmont in 1630. During the years 1603-5 and later Spinola made several visits to Madrid, where he will undoubtedly have met the powerful Duke of Lerma and probably also seen the equestrian portrait that Rubens painted of him in 1603 (Fig. 12, Note 39). He must also have known of the portraits Rubens painted in Genoa in 1606, since at least three and probably five of them are of members of the Spinola family, while there survives a letter to Rubens from Paolo Agostino Spinola on the subject of portraits (Note 40). All this makes it likely that Spinola would have had his own Portrait painted too and that Rubens may well have painted his first portrait of the man who was to become his lifelong friend as early as 1606. Although Rubens was sometimes irritated by Spinola's lack of interest in his work (Note 41) , he admired him greatly (Note 42). He cultivated Spinola's friendship after his return to Antwerp in 1608 and will doubtless have introduced Van Dyck to him. Van Dyck later painted more than twenty pictures for the five Spinola palaces (Note 43) in Genoa and his work also became known in Madrid via Spinola and his son-in-law Don Diego Felipez Messia Guzman de Legañes, who owned many works by Van Dyck (Note 44). The presumed equestrian portrait of Spinola was much copied, as were other portraits of him by Rubens. Spinola was admired all over Europe and that may have been why other commanders and princes wanted to have themselves portrayed in the same way. The original or a replica may have hung in Spirtola's palace in Brussels, where the first to have seen it would have been Archduke Albert, which may explain the many equestrian portraits of him by Rubens' followeers which were based on it. Another possibility is that Rubens himself may have painted an equestrian portrait of the Archduke very similar to that of Spinola around 1610, but that this is no longer known. Caspar de Crayer of Brussels, a friend, though not a pupil of Rubens, was also influenced by the Spinola equestrian portrait. Furthermore, when he was invited to paint a set of equestrian portraits for the Huis ten Bosch, he sent the young Antwerp painter Thomas Willeboirts Bosschaert to The Hague in his place (Note 46) and it was in this way that Rubens' model came to the Northern Netherlands, where it was copied only once, by Isaac Isacsz. in his equestrian portrait of William the Silent (Note 47). The equestrian portrait of Sigmund III of Poland (Fig. 13), a cousin of Archduke Albert, could also have been painted in Van Dyck's studio in Genoa, which was probably visited by his son Prince Ladislaw in 1624 (Note 48). This picture too still owes much to Rubens' model which Van Dyck used again ten years later for his equestrian portraits of Charles I of England (Fig. 14, Note, 50) and Francisco de Moncada (Note 51).

National security has evolved both into a discipline of study and a sphere of policy application. It is a commonly used phrase in strategic literature and international statecraft. The modern concepts of national security arose in the 17th century during the Thirty Years War in Europe and the Civil War in England, and it was considered in terms of state sovereignty. In the aftermath of World War II, the concept of national security evolved into superpower contestation, also called the Cold War. During this period, national security had been seen through the prism of military security of the state against external threats – traditional security. In the US, the national security concept transited into a normative paradigm when President Truman signed the National Security Act on July 26, 1947, which also led to the establishment of the US National Security Council. Some 21 variants of the National Security Council exist in 51 countries today. The concept of national security is also seen from the prism of the concept of national power and elements of national power that include diplomacy, information operations, military, economic, financial, intelligence operations and law enforcement – commonly referred to as DIMEFIL. States either have national security policies or strategies and some – including Pakistan, publish an unclassified version for public distribution. Contemporary national security discourse adjusts to and even shapes the geopolitical environment. It has gradually evolved into a concept called comprehensive national security. It is an inclusive framework that encompasses all internal and external affairs of the state and society. Comprehensive national security helps safeguard both national security interests and human security requirements. Bibliography Entry Khan, Ehsan Mehmood. 2022. "Comprehensive National Security: Contemporary Discourse." Margalla Papers 26 (1): 1-17.

Defence date: 25 March 1998
Supervisor: Luis María Díez-Picazo ; Jury member: J. Brewer
PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017

Abstract Ralph Rishton first married in 1531, when he was 8 or 9 years old. After his first wife succumbed to mental illness and he returned from military service in wars with Scotland, he secured a forged certificate of annulment from church officials in order to marry another woman, whom he had gotten pregnant. The first part of this chapter reconstructs the narrative of this part of Ralph’s life, with an emphasis upon the ways in which witnesses in court depositions conveyed their observations and impressions of married life. The chapter then goes on to examine child marriage among the Lancashire gentry and yeomanry in the sixteenth century, based upon dozens of cases in the consistory court of the Diocese of Chester. Child marriage was a common experience, entwined with family strategies for alliance building and property acquisition, and cases subsequently initiated to annul such marriages on grounds of underage compulsion offer detailed insight into expectations surrounding marriage. Lancashire gentry also married much closer to home, geographically speaking, than their counterparts elsewhere in England. One result was a tightly knit propertied class, intensely local in outlook, who acted for each other in a wide range of legal capacities, especially in relation to their property.

L’Estoile’s journals are a major confluence of legal and tragic discourses on villainy, including high-brow tragedy. Chapter 18 focuses on a tragic problem coursing throughout this book: why the nobility, especially prominent military leaders, found it so difficult to shake off villainy even at the point of death. This chapter covers two notorious examples: Louis Bussy d’Amboise and Charles de Gontaut, Duc de Biron. L’Estoile was among the first of many observers to reflect on the high drama of their deaths. Between law and literature, L’Estoile records the lineaments of an ambivalent discourse on valour and villainy that would develop more fully as the ‘discursive space’ expanded into England. The debasement of Bussy and Biron was revisited in stage tragedies by George Chapman, whose work afforded a transcultural meditation on two haughty malcontents who thought they were above common and criminal law.