3 ms·
> And fwiw, the literal translation of terra nullius isn't "nobody's land" it's "empty land". But isn't terra nullius a play on res nullius, which in Roman law
by Svip 7y ago
> And fwiw, the literal translation of terra nullius isn't "nobody's land" it's "empty land".
But isn't terra nullius a play on res nullius, which in Roman law meant a thing nobody owned? Perhaps it literally meant 'empty thing'. (My Latin is very weak.)
- simonebrunozzi 7y agoI don't think it has to do with Roman law. It seems the term originated much later: "Starting in the 17th century, terra nullius denoted a legal concept allowing a European colonial power to take control of "empty" territory that none of the other European colonial powers had claimed." [0]: http://homepages.gac.edu/~lwren/AmericanIdentititesArt%20folder/AmericanIdentititesArt/Terra%20Nullius.html http://homepages.gac.edu/~lwren/AmericanIdentititesArt%20fol...
- bjourne 7y agoWell, the literal translation of res nullius is "thing empty" but it is true that phrase was used in Roman law for "unowned things". But the defining feature of res nullius was that it could be taken possession of by means of occupatio. For example, a tree in the forest would be res nullius until someone cut it down and made logs of it. But it would be the act of cutting down - occupatio - that made the tree cutter the legal owner. It wouldn't be enough for him to just wander into a forest, see a lot of trees and declare "those trees are mine!" In a way he would be required to "fill the void" so to speak. The relation between res nullius and terra nullius is dubious to say the least. During the Middle Ages "unowned things" disappeared as a legal concept. Instead most everything became the property of God or the monarch. It is questionable if the European colonizers ever actually used the terra nullius doctrine to justify conquest. For example, Manhattan was purchased from the Native Americans. Had terra nullius been applicable they could have just taken it.
- jcranmer 7y agoThe closest thing to a historical application of terra nullius is Australia, where the British (and later Australian) government did not consider the natives to have any legal title to the land, and therefore no one had any title that would need to be extinguished for the settlers to occupy. Countries like the US did recognize that the native Americans held title to the land, and this title was somewhat orthogonal to the rights acquired via European diplomacy (e.g., Louisiana purchase). The native rights were extinguished via treaties that were quite often violated, but there was definitely a recognition that indigenous peoples had a claim to their territory that needed legal processes to be extinguished in favor of the settlers.
- leetcrew 7y ago> Well, the literal translation of res nullius is "thing empty" why do you translate it like this? a literal translation cannot totally drop the sense of the genitive.