So called, wrote Gaius, "because the footing of both parties is equal, neither being exclusively plaintiff or defendant, but both playing both parts, and both being addressed by the praetor in identical terms." (Poste & Whittuck 1904, p. 587.) Poste, Edward; Whittuck, E.A. (1904). Gai Institvtiones or Institutes of Roman Law by Gaius (4th ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press. Retrieved 21 March 2022.
Nessi 2011, p. 626 §2. Nessi, Giuseppe (2011). "Uti possidetis Doctrine"(PDF). In Wulfrum, Rüdiger (ed.). The Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law. Vol. X. Oxford. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
Nessi 2011, p. 627 §7. Nessi, Giuseppe (2011). "Uti possidetis Doctrine"(PDF). In Wulfrum, Rüdiger (ed.). The Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law. Vol. X. Oxford. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
Nessi 2011, p. 627 §6. Nessi, Giuseppe (2011). "Uti possidetis Doctrine"(PDF). In Wulfrum, Rüdiger (ed.). The Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law. Vol. X. Oxford. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
Nessi 2011, p. 630 §19. Nessi, Giuseppe (2011). "Uti possidetis Doctrine"(PDF). In Wulfrum, Rüdiger (ed.). The Max Planck Encyclopedia of International Law. Vol. X. Oxford. Retrieved 3 April 2022.
Schiller 1968, pp. 506–7. Schiller, A. Arthur (1968). "Review: Roman Litigation by J. M. Kelly". The American Journal of Philology. 89 (4). The Johns Hopkins University Press: 506–508. doi:10.2307/292842. JSTOR292842.
Gordley & Mattei 1996, p. 300. Gordley, James; Mattei, Ugo (1996). "Protecting Possession". The American Journal of Comparative Law. 44 (2). Oxford University Press: 293–334. doi:10.2307/840711. JSTOR840711.
Ratner 1996, p. 593. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Fisher 1933, p. 415. Fisher, F. C. (1933). "The Arbitration of the Guatemalan-Honduran Boundary Dispute". The American Journal of International Law. 27 (3). Cambridge University Press: 403–427. doi:10.2307/2189971. JSTOR2189971. S2CID147670425.
A translation of the Treaty and background explanation is in Greenlee 1945, pp. 158–59 and passim. Greenlee, William B. (1945). "The Background of Brazilian History". The Americas. 2 (2): 151–164. doi:10.2307/978215. JSTOR978215.
The line was supposed to run 370 leagues west of the Cape Verde islands, but the Treaty did not specify which of those islands. Nor did it specify which sort of league: several kinds were in use. (Tambs 1966b, p. 166) Tambs, Lewis A. (1966b). "Brazil's Expanding Frontiers". The Americas. 23 (2). Cambridge University Press: 165–179. doi:10.2307/980583. JSTOR980583. S2CID147574561.
"Actually the line of Tordesillas in the New World probably should have run between Belém do Pará and Santos": Tambs 1966b, p. 166. Tambs, Lewis A. (1966b). "Brazil's Expanding Frontiers". The Americas. 23 (2). Cambridge University Press: 165–179. doi:10.2307/980583. JSTOR980583. S2CID147574561.
Burns 1995, pp. 1, 3. Burns, E. Bradford (1995). "Brazil: Frontier and Ideology". Pacific Historical Review. 64 (1). University of California Press: 1–18. doi:10.2307/3640332. JSTOR3640332.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 356. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 363. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Burns 1995, p. 2. Burns, E. Bradford (1995). "Brazil: Frontier and Ideology". Pacific Historical Review. 64 (1). University of California Press: 1–18. doi:10.2307/3640332. JSTOR3640332.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 362. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Maxwell 1968, pp. 619, 628, 629. Maxwell, Kenneth R. (1968). "Pombal and the Nationalization of the Luso-Brazilian Economy". The Hispanic American Historical Review. 48 (4). Duke University Press: 608–631. doi:10.2307/2510901. JSTOR2510901.
Tambs 1966a, p. 255. Tambs, Lewis A. (1966a). "Rubber, Rebels, and Rio Branco: The Contest for the Acre". The Hispanic American Historical Review. 46s (3). Duke University Press: 254–273. doi:10.2307/2510627. JSTOR2510627.
Ratner 1996, p. 590. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Fisher 1933, pp. 415, 416. Fisher, F. C. (1933). "The Arbitration of the Guatemalan-Honduran Boundary Dispute". The American Journal of International Law. 27 (3). Cambridge University Press: 403–427. doi:10.2307/2189971. JSTOR2189971. S2CID147670425.
Ratner 1996, pp. 590–624. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Epps 2004, pp. 869–70. Epps, Valerie (2004). "Review: Title to Territory in International Law: A Temporal Analysis by Joshua Castellino and Steve Allen". The American Journal of International Law. 98 (4). Cambridge University Press: 869–872. doi:10.2307/3216726. JSTOR3216726. S2CID230237911.
"And as it is far more advantageous to possess than to claim the possession; there is generally, indeed, nearly always, a great effort made to obtain the possession. The advantage of possessing consists in this, that even though the thing be not his who possesses it, yet if the plaintiff cannot prove that it is his, the possession remains where it is. and, for this reason, when the rights of both parties are doubtful, it is usual to decide against the claimant." JUST. IV, xv, §5 (Mears 1882, p. 562). Mears, T. Lambert (1882). The Institutes of Gaius and Justinian. London: Stevens and Sons. Retrieved 30 March 2022.
The Treaty of Madrid 1750 was annulled and replaced by the Treaty of San Idelfonso 1777. But the 1777 Treaty did not define the boundaries between the Spanish and Portuguese empires; it merely provided for boundary commissioners to survey the disputed areas and resolve them. Portugal delayed sending commissioners to the disputed areas and, before anything could happen, Spain attacked Portugal during the Napoleonic wars – the so-called War of the Oranges, which was extended to the South American colonies. By the Peace of Badajoz (1801) no provision was made for the restoration of the status quo ante bellum. The 1777 Treaty was admittedly annulled. (Moore 1904, pp. 5–6) Moore, John Bassett (1904). Brazil and Peru Boundary Question. New York: Knickerbocker Press. Retrieved 4 April 2022.
Lalonde 2001, p. 33 and n.(31). Lalonde, Suzanne (2001). "Uti Possidetis: Its Colonial Past Revisited". Revue Belge de Droit International / Belgian Review of International Law. 34 (1). E-ditions BRUYLANT, Bruxelles: 23–99. Retrieved 15 April 2022.
Schiller 1968, pp. 506–7. Schiller, A. Arthur (1968). "Review: Roman Litigation by J. M. Kelly". The American Journal of Philology. 89 (4). The Johns Hopkins University Press: 506–508. doi:10.2307/292842. JSTOR292842.
Gordley & Mattei 1996, p. 300. Gordley, James; Mattei, Ugo (1996). "Protecting Possession". The American Journal of Comparative Law. 44 (2). Oxford University Press: 293–334. doi:10.2307/840711. JSTOR840711.
Ratner 1996, p. 593. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Fisher 1933, p. 415. Fisher, F. C. (1933). "The Arbitration of the Guatemalan-Honduran Boundary Dispute". The American Journal of International Law. 27 (3). Cambridge University Press: 403–427. doi:10.2307/2189971. JSTOR2189971. S2CID147670425.
A translation of the Treaty and background explanation is in Greenlee 1945, pp. 158–59 and passim. Greenlee, William B. (1945). "The Background of Brazilian History". The Americas. 2 (2): 151–164. doi:10.2307/978215. JSTOR978215.
The line was supposed to run 370 leagues west of the Cape Verde islands, but the Treaty did not specify which of those islands. Nor did it specify which sort of league: several kinds were in use. (Tambs 1966b, p. 166) Tambs, Lewis A. (1966b). "Brazil's Expanding Frontiers". The Americas. 23 (2). Cambridge University Press: 165–179. doi:10.2307/980583. JSTOR980583. S2CID147574561.
"Actually the line of Tordesillas in the New World probably should have run between Belém do Pará and Santos": Tambs 1966b, p. 166. Tambs, Lewis A. (1966b). "Brazil's Expanding Frontiers". The Americas. 23 (2). Cambridge University Press: 165–179. doi:10.2307/980583. JSTOR980583. S2CID147574561.
Burns 1995, pp. 1, 3. Burns, E. Bradford (1995). "Brazil: Frontier and Ideology". Pacific Historical Review. 64 (1). University of California Press: 1–18. doi:10.2307/3640332. JSTOR3640332.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 356. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 363. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Burns 1995, p. 2. Burns, E. Bradford (1995). "Brazil: Frontier and Ideology". Pacific Historical Review. 64 (1). University of California Press: 1–18. doi:10.2307/3640332. JSTOR3640332.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 362. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Mullan 2001, p. 156. Mullan, Anthony Páez (2001). "Review: La Cartografia Iberoamericana by M. Luisa Martín-Merás, Max Justo Guedes and José Ignacio González Leiva". Imago Mundi. 53: 156. JSTOR1151583.
Maxwell 1968, pp. 619, 628, 629. Maxwell, Kenneth R. (1968). "Pombal and the Nationalization of the Luso-Brazilian Economy". The Hispanic American Historical Review. 48 (4). Duke University Press: 608–631. doi:10.2307/2510901. JSTOR2510901.
Williams 1980, p. 20. Williams, John Hoyt (1980). "The Undrawn Line: Three Centuries of Strife on the Paraguayan-Mato Grosso Frontier". Luso-Brazilian Review. 17 (1). University of Wisconsin Press: 17–40. JSTOR3513374.
Tambs 1966a, p. 255. Tambs, Lewis A. (1966a). "Rubber, Rebels, and Rio Branco: The Contest for the Acre". The Hispanic American Historical Review. 46s (3). Duke University Press: 254–273. doi:10.2307/2510627. JSTOR2510627.
Ratner 1996, p. 590. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Fisher 1933, pp. 415, 416. Fisher, F. C. (1933). "The Arbitration of the Guatemalan-Honduran Boundary Dispute". The American Journal of International Law. 27 (3). Cambridge University Press: 403–427. doi:10.2307/2189971. JSTOR2189971. S2CID147670425.
Ratner 1996, pp. 590–624. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Epps 2004, pp. 869–70. Epps, Valerie (2004). "Review: Title to Territory in International Law: A Temporal Analysis by Joshua Castellino and Steve Allen". The American Journal of International Law. 98 (4). Cambridge University Press: 869–872. doi:10.2307/3216726. JSTOR3216726. S2CID230237911.
semanticscholar.org
api.semanticscholar.org
Ratner 1996, p. 593. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Fisher 1933, p. 415. Fisher, F. C. (1933). "The Arbitration of the Guatemalan-Honduran Boundary Dispute". The American Journal of International Law. 27 (3). Cambridge University Press: 403–427. doi:10.2307/2189971. JSTOR2189971. S2CID147670425.
The line was supposed to run 370 leagues west of the Cape Verde islands, but the Treaty did not specify which of those islands. Nor did it specify which sort of league: several kinds were in use. (Tambs 1966b, p. 166) Tambs, Lewis A. (1966b). "Brazil's Expanding Frontiers". The Americas. 23 (2). Cambridge University Press: 165–179. doi:10.2307/980583. JSTOR980583. S2CID147574561.
"Actually the line of Tordesillas in the New World probably should have run between Belém do Pará and Santos": Tambs 1966b, p. 166. Tambs, Lewis A. (1966b). "Brazil's Expanding Frontiers". The Americas. 23 (2). Cambridge University Press: 165–179. doi:10.2307/980583. JSTOR980583. S2CID147574561.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 356. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 363. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Russell-Wood 2005, p. 362. Russell-Wood, A. J. R. (2005). "Introduction: New Directions in Bandeirismo Studies In Colonial Brazil". The Americas. 61 (3, Rethinking Bandeirismo in Colonial Brazil). Cambridge University Press: 353–371. doi:10.1353/tam.2005.0048. JSTOR4490919. S2CID201789918.
Ratner 1996, p. 590. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Fisher 1933, pp. 415, 416. Fisher, F. C. (1933). "The Arbitration of the Guatemalan-Honduran Boundary Dispute". The American Journal of International Law. 27 (3). Cambridge University Press: 403–427. doi:10.2307/2189971. JSTOR2189971. S2CID147670425.
Ratner 1996, pp. 590–624. Ratner, Steven R. (1996). "Drawing a Better Line: UTI Possidetis and the Borders of New States". The American Journal of International Law. 90 (4): 590–624. doi:10.2307/2203988. JSTOR2203988. S2CID144936970.
Epps 2004, pp. 869–70. Epps, Valerie (2004). "Review: Title to Territory in International Law: A Temporal Analysis by Joshua Castellino and Steve Allen". The American Journal of International Law. 98 (4). Cambridge University Press: 869–872. doi:10.2307/3216726. JSTOR3216726. S2CID230237911.