scholarly journals The United States-Rumanian Claims Settlement Agreement of March 30, 1960

1961 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 617-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon A. Christenson

On March 30, 1960, the United States and Eumania settled by agreement certain claims of American nationals against Rumania. The agreement provides for the payment by Rumania of a lump sum in discharge of those claims.In recent years the device of the en bloc or lump-sum settlement of international claims has to some extent replaced the use of the mixed claims commission. Lump-sum settlements between nations are not unique to the 20th century, however, and as early as 1802, the United States paid Great Britain a lump sum of £600,000 ($2,664,000) to settle certain debt claims. In the 19th century also, the United States obtained lump-sum settlements from Prance, Spain, Great Britain, Denmark, Peru, Belgium, Mexico, Brazil and China. Early in the present century mixed claims commissions were used in deciding claims between the United States and Great Britain, war damage claims against Germany, Austria and Hungary, claims between the United States and Mexico, and claims between Panama and the United States. When the work of the United States-Mexican General Claims Commission remained uncompleted after two successive conventions which extended the existence of the Commission, and when practical difficulties beset the United States-Mexican Special Claims Commission, an en-bloc settlement of all claims was the only solution. That settlement signaled disillusionment with mixed claims commissions. Thereafter, the major international claims settlements involving the United States were on a lump-sum basis. The very next settlement was one concluded on October 25, 1934, with Turkey. It provided for the payment of a lump sum of $1,300,000 to settle certain outstanding claims of American citizens against Turkey.

Classics ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Macaulay-Lewis

Since the Western Roman Empire collapsed, classical, or Greco-Roman, architecture has served as a model to articulate the cultural, artistic, political, and ideological goals of later civilizations, empires, nations, and individuals. The Renaissance marked the first major, widespread re-engagement with classical antiquity in art, literature, and architecture. Debates over classical antiquity and its relation to the modern world continued ever since. One such important debate was that of the quarrel between the Ancients and Moderns, which resulted when Charles Perrault published his Parallèles des anciens et des modernes in 1688. This dispute focused on whether the modern age could surpass antiquity, especially in literature. The Greco-Roman controversy (1750s and 1760s) was another example of Europeans engaging with the classical past; this debate focused on whether Greek or Roman art was of greater historical value; an argument has continued unabated to this day. Figures like Johann Joachim Winckelmann argued (in publications such as Winckelmann 1764, cited under Early Archaeological Publications on Greece and Classical Ruins in the Roman East, on Greek art) for the supremacy of Greek forms, while others like Giovanni Battista Piranesi (whose 1748–1778 views of Rome are reproduced in Ficacci 2011, cited under Early Archaeological Publications on Italy) advocated for Rome’s preeminence. Such debates demonstrate how classical antiquity was an essential part of the intellectual and artistic milieu of 18th-century Europe. This bibliography focuses on the appropriation of classical architecture in the creation of built forms from 1700 to the present in Europe and North America, which is typically called neoclassical or neo-classical, both of which are acceptable. Scholars often define the neoclassical period as lasting from c. 1750 to 1830, when European art and architecture predominantly appropriated classical forms and ideas. The influence of classical architecture continued in popularity throughout the 19th century and early 20th century in the United States. The early 19th century saw the flourishing of the Greek Revival, where Greek forms dominated artistic and architectural production, both in Europe and the United States. The ascendance of Queen Victoria in 1837 marked a shift toward a preference for the Gothic and Medieval forms. Neoclassical forms saw a resurgence in the second half of the 19th century, as Roman architectural forms became increasingly popular as an expression of empire. The term “Neo-classical” was coined as early as January 1872 by Robert Kerr, who used the term positively. It later took on certain negative overtones, when it was used as a derogatory epithet by an unknown writer in the Times of London in 1892. Neoclassical architecture has fared no better with the rise of modernism in the early 20th century onward and since then it has been seen as old-fashioned and derivative. Neoclassical architecture was not a mindless imitation of classical architectural forms and interiors. The interest in classical architecture and the creation of neoclassical architecture was spurred on by important archaeological discoveries in the mid-18th century, which widened the perception of Greek and Roman buildings. The remarkable flexibility of ancient architecture to embody the grandeur of an empire, as well as the principles of a nascent democracy, meant that it had great potential to be interpreted and reinterpreted by countless architects, patrons, empires, and nation states—in different ways and at different times from the 18th to the 20th century. This bibliography is organized thematically (e.g., General Overviews; Companions, Handbooks, and Theoretical Works; Reference Works; Early General Archaeological Publications; The Reception of Pompeii, Herculaneum, and the Bay of Naples; and World’s Fairs and Expositions) and then geographically, creating country- or region-specific bibliographies. While this model of organization has some flaws, it aims to avoid repetition and highlights the interconnected nature and process of the reception of classical architecture in later periods.


Prospects ◽  
1999 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 491-520
Author(s):  
Dmitry Shlapentokh

In the 19th century, some Russian intellectuals concluded that democracy was the country's probable future. By the middle of the century, this eventually led to the West and its democratic traditions being directly linked to images of Utopia. From that date forward, this approach to the West has had a central role in modern Russian political thought.


Gesnerus ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 51 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 84-100
Author(s):  
Josef M. Schmidt

After an enormous spread in the United States of America during the 19th century homeopathy had almost completely vanished from the scene by the beginning of the 20th century. For the past two decades, however, it seems once again to experience a kind of renaissance. Major aspects of this development—in terms of medical and cultural history, sociology, politics, and economics—are illustrated on the basis of a general history of homeopathy in the United States. Using original sources, a first attempt is made to reconstruct the history of homeopathy in San Francisco which has some institutional peculiarities that make it unique within the whole country.


Author(s):  
Anne Humpherys

George William Macarthur Reynolds (b. 1814–d. 1879) was at his death labeled “the most popular writer of our time” by the Bookseller in its short obituary. This popularity rested on two achievements: first, the mammoth twelve-volume series of “mysteries” novels, The Mysteries of London (1846–1848) and The Mysteries of the Court of London (1848–1855), and, second, his involvement with Chartist politics, which led in 1850 to his founding and editing the radical Sunday newspaper Reynolds’s Newspaper, which lasted in some form until 1962. The Mysteries novels were also constantly in print in a variety of cheap formats for most of the 19th century. Reynolds was a controversial figure both among working-class radicals, who doubted his commitment, and among the middle-class literary establishment, which abhorred his popular sensationalist novels. Dickens was probably referring to him as the “draggled fringe on the Red Cap, Pander to the basest passions of the lowest natures—whose existence is a national reproach” in the opening number of Household Words in 1850. Sometime shortly after 1860, Reynolds essentially stopped writing and editing. But the influence of his mysteries series continued, especially in the United States, India, and other countries. His novels fell out of print in the early 20th century; he himself became relatively unknown among historians and literary critics. This neglect lasted until the second half of the 20th century, at which point a number of scholars began to analyze Reynolds’s importance in 19th-century popular literature, politics, and the periodical press, a development that gathered force in the first decade of the 21st century. There is now a G.W.M. Reynolds Society, available online.


Author(s):  
Farley Simon Nobre ◽  
Andrew M. Tobias ◽  
David S. Walker

The practice of organizing is ancient, but formal study of organizations is relatively new. The search for knowledge on organizations through scientific methods of investigation has received increasing attention since the beginning of the 20th century. Such investigations have found enough maturity and formality to constitute a new discipline known today as organization theory. Principles of organizations evolved with ancient and medieval civilizations, and developed and matured after the Industrial Revolution in Europe in the 18th century and latterly in the United States of America in the 19th century. Such a transformation flourished gradually after the apogee of the Renaissance in Europe which was marked by a period of revolution in thinking, supported by religious, economic, social and political changes (Wren, 1987).


1983 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 166-167
Author(s):  
Marian Nash Leich

On September 14, 1982, the Department of State submitted proposed legislation (S. 2967) to Congress that would authorize the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission to adjudicate “small” claims of U.S. nationals against Iran, i.e., those for less than $250,000, in the event of an agreement between the United States and Iran for an en bloc settlement to cover such claims. The Commission’s adjudications would be made in accordance with the provisions and procedures of the International Claims Settlement Act of 1949, as amended, subject to the provisions of the relevant claims settlement agreements (the Claims Settlement Agreement of the Algiers Accords and any lump sum settlement agreement negotiated with Iran).


Author(s):  
Lorgia García Peña

The formation of Dominican identity has been linked to the historical nexus that placed Dominicans in relationship to Haiti, Spain, and the United States. The foundational literature of the 19th century sought to shape national identity as emerging from racial hybridity through notions of mestizaje that obscured Dominican African roots. In the early to mid-20th century, at the hands of the Trujillo intelligentsia, these myths shaped legal, educational, and military structures, leading to violence and disenfranchisement. Since the death of Trujillo in 1961, Dominican writers, artists, and scholars have been articulating other ways of being Dominican that include Afro-Dominican episteme and accounts for the experiences of colonialisms, bordering, and diasporic movements. These articulations of dominicanidad have led to a vibrant, exciting, and incredibly diverse literary production at home and abroad.


1978 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 265-282
Author(s):  
Arnold Lewis

European criticism of American architecture was superficial and condescending until the last quarter of the 19th century. After the Philadelphia Centennial in 1876 the quantity of studies increased slowly, but only by 1885 was a corresponding rise in quality noticeable. From this year through the wake of the Columbian Exposition held in Chicago in 1893, European architects and critics, particularly in London, Paris, and Berlin, studied closely the approaches and practices of architects in the United States and discussed their merits vigorously. For many, American work became a model of sensible, contemporary methodology and design, offering clues to the possible nature of architecture in the 20th century. For others, the buildings of the United States proved the cultural superiority of the "senior nations" of the Old World. If the value of American architecture was uncertain to Europeans, its characteristics were not. They treated it as a definable entity with recognizable traits, a distinctive national architecture distinguishable both in theory and practice from European work in general and their nation's work in particular. This body of criticism reveals those aspects of design Europeans considered typically American. Because they approached this architecture with presuppositions and assumptions shaped by European experiences, visitors frequently saw artistic and practical features hidden to or discounted by native commentators. They often discovered characteristics that American professionals did not consciously regard as characteristics. Their dissimilar vantage points and their need for comprehendible explanations encouraged them to risk interpretations of relationships between causes and final form; they attempted to explain why the Americans built as they did.


2021 ◽  

Sufism in the United States is notable for its diverse origins, multiple routes of transmission, and variegated forms. West African Muslims were the first to practice Sufism in the Americas, attempting to maintain Sufi-Islamic traditions under the oppressive conditions of 17th-century plantation slavery. In the 19th century, Sufism emerged as a phenomenon with broader cultural impact in the region through American literary interest in Persian Sufi poetry. As the 19th century drew to a close, American fascination with all things occult, metaphysical, and mystical coincided with a draw toward “the wisdom of the East.” In this milieu, Sufism was embraced by small circles of seekers, frequently coming from Theosophical groups. During the 1930s and 1940s, several Black American converts to Islam joined Sufi orders and transmitted Sufi teachings to mosque communities they established in New York and Ohio. The reform of immigration laws in 1965 resulted in the establishment of immigrant Muslim communities throughout the United States. Sufi teachers from Iran, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, and Turkey, among other countries, settled in America and established Sufi groups in the following decades. The second half of the 20th century witnessed the center of gravity of academic study of Sufism shift from Europe to North America, with the proliferation of Sufi works in English translation in the following decades. By the late 20th century, Sufism had matured as a multifaceted example of American religiosity, encompassing immigrant and local Muslim practice as well as esoteric or mystical teachings functioning apart from Muslim identity. Currently, Sufism in the United States can be found as a conspicuous expression of Islamic spirituality, as a spiritual path not necessarily connected to Islam, as a niche within the broader spiritual marketplace, and as a practice with a varied online presence.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document