Resultado de búsqueda
Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth. A. Osiander. Published in International Organization 1 March 2001. Political Science. The 350th anniversary of the Peace of Westphalia in 1998 was largely ignored by the discipline of international relations (IR), despite the fact that it regards that event as the beginning of the ...
Andreas Osiander. The 350th anniversary of the Peace of Westphalia in 1998 was marked by a of conferences and publications by historians, but it was largely ignored in the discipline of international relations (IR). This oversight is odd because in IR the of the Thirty Years' War is regarded as the beginning of the international with which the ...
Andreas Osiander (19 de diciembre de 1498 - 17 de octubre de 1552) fue un teólogo y editor literario protestante alemán. Es fundamentalmente recordado por la polémica misiva o prefacio que añadió a la principal obra de Nicolás Copérnico, De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium (Sobre la revolución de las esferas celestes).
PDF | This paper focuses on the main structure and transformation of the eschatological views of Andreas Osiander (1498-1552), the reformer of the free... | Find, read and cite all the...
28 de oct. de 2022 · Policies and ethics. Andreas Osiander was a Lutheran theologian of the first generation of reformers. He was a preacher and worked as a teacher of Hebrew in Nuremberg. He is renowned in theology due to his polemics with Martin Luther and Philipp Melanchthon concerning the doctrine of...
- Tomáš Nejeschleba
- tomas.nejeschleba@upol.cz
28 de feb. de 2001 · Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth. Andreas Osiander. 28 Feb 2001 - International Organization (Cambridge University Press) - Vol. 55, Iss: 02, pp 251-287. TL;DR: The 350th anniversary of the Peace of Westphalia in 1998 was largely ignored by the discipline of international relations (IR), despite the fact ...
6 de dic. de 2007 · Andreas Osiander. Published: 6 December 2007. Cite. Permissions. Share. Abstract. This book challenges the habit of conventional historiography of taking the ‘essential’ state – a ‘bounded entity’ equipped with a ‘sovereign’ central power — for granted in any period and of not taking period political terminology seriously.
