...
首页> 外文期刊>Great Plains Research >Book Review: Pagans in the Promised Land: Decoding the Doctrineof Christian Discovery By Steven T. Newcomb
【24h】

Book Review: Pagans in the Promised Land: Decoding the Doctrineof Christian Discovery By Steven T. Newcomb

机译:书评:应许之地的异教徒:解读基督教发现论作者:史蒂文·T·纽科姆

获取原文
           

摘要

In 1793, the Indians of the Northwest Territory declared themselves “free to make any bargain or cession of lands, whenever & to whomsoever we please.” Three decades later, however, the United States Supreme Court held in Johnson v. M’Intosh that the original inhabitants of America “are to be considered merely as occupants, to be protected, indeed, while in peace, in the possession of their lands, but to be deemed incapable of transferring the absolute title to others.” Chief Justice John Marshall concluded that the rights of Indians “to complete sovereignty, as independent nations, were necessarily diminished . . . by the original fundamental principle, that discovery gave exclusive title to those who made it.” This “doctrine of discovery” has never been repudiated by the United States and remains a basic principle of federal Indian law.In Pagans in the Promised Land, Steven Newcomb endeavors “to decode the hidden biblical, or, more specifically, Old Testament, background of the Johnson ruling.” He argues that Indian law scholars fail to appreciate the religious dimensions of Marshall’s decision, and contends that “it is accurate to refer to the main conception that runs through the Johnson ruling as Christian discovery rather than simply discovery or European discovery.” Newcomb, who is Shawnee/ Lenape, also breaks new ground by making use of “the tools and methods of cognitive theory” in order to expose—and challenge—the “negative, oppressive, and dominating concepts that have been mentally and, from an indigenous perspective, illegitimately imposed on our existence.”
机译:1793年,西北地区的印第安人宣布自己“随时随地与我们讨价还价,可以任意讨价还价或割让土地”。然而,三十年后,美国最高法院在Johnson v。M'Intosh案中裁定,“美国的原住民只应被视为占领者,实际上是在和平中拥有自己土地的情况下受到的保护。 ,但被视为无法将绝对所有权转让给他人。”首席法官约翰·马歇尔(John Marshall)得出结论,印第安人“作为独立国家实现主权的权利”必定会减少。 。 。根据最初的基本原理,这一发现赋予了创造者专有的权利。”这种“发现论”从未被美国否决,它仍然是印度联邦法律的基本原则。在应许之地的异教徒中,史蒂文·纽康(Steven Newcomb)努力“解码隐藏的圣经背景,或更具体地说,是旧约圣经的背景”。约翰逊裁决的内容。”他辩称,印度法律学者未能理解马歇尔裁决的宗教层面,并认为“将贯穿约翰逊裁决的主要概念称为基督教发现,而不是简单的发现或欧洲发现,是正确的。”肖尼/莱纳佩(Shawnee / Lenape)的纽科姆(Newcomb)也通过利用“认知理论的工具和方法”开辟了新天地,以揭露和挑战“精神,心理和精神上的消极,压迫和支配的概念”土著观点,非法强加于我们的生存。”

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号