Under the UN transition authority from 1989 to 1993, the country was named the State of Cambodia. Under the communist rule from 1975 to 1979, it was referred to as Democratic Kampuchea. From 1970 to 1975 it was named the Khmer Republic. Between 19, the country was renamed the Kingdom of Cambodia. Although there was opposition to the change of name from some quarters, the move to use Persia and Iran interchangeably changed the perception of the people and today the country freely referred to as Iran.Ĭambodia has changed its name several times, especially when the new ruling party wanted to erase the traces of the previous one. The countries obliged and the name “Iran” began to appear in official documents. The suggestion to change the name is thought to have been influenced by Iranian ambassador to Germany who had also been influenced by the Nazis. In 1935, the government of Iran directed the countries it had diplomatic relations with to refer to it as Iran instead of Persia. The region covering the present day Iran was occupied by the Persians who established the Persian Empire. Historically, Iran was referred to as Persia due to the Greek writings. Here are ten countries that have successfully changed their names. A country may also change its name to improve their image and to erase an unpleasant event or memory in its history. A country or state may also change its name for purely commemorative reasons, especially in honor of an influential person or an important event in the country. A name change is often done for political or nationalistic reasons such as removing traces of colonial rule or reflecting the ideologies of the government in power. Instead of having been passive objects in a history driven by colonial forces, they continued to pursue their own agendas, sometimes subverting colonial authority.Many cities, states, towns, and provinces around the world have undergone a name change for different reasons. Local actors are shown to have responded actively to the circumstances created by colonial rule. The basis for these rights was established in the struggles over land discussed in this article. It thus becomes possible to understand that people today hold rights in land at several geographically dispersed places.
Second, the land-use pattern laid out should be interpreted in terms of kin-group-based 'pools of territories' rather than in terms of 'atomized' production units.
First, the establishment of Moose institutions in the aire-refuge preceded colonial control of the region. While many movements to the northern aire-refuge were motivated by the wish to escape colonial exactions, the dispersion of population did not necessarily entail social and political disruption.
Contrary to what is often assumed, colonial rule was not solely disruptive in its consequences for local social organization. At the same time, actors directly involved in the conflicts secured and extended their own, their descendants and/or their larger kin group's claims to land. In the process, the chieftaincy of Piugtenga expanded and the territory effectively under ritual control of 'firstcoming' population groups was enlarged. Drawing on a number of cases of conflict over land during the 1920s and 1930s along the border separating the Moose chieftaincies of Piugtenga and Ratenga, it is demonstrated that this land occupation is to be understood in terms of multiple projects and multiple actors. This article retraces the occupation of land during the first decades of the twentieth century in the northern part of the province of Sanmatenga, Burkina Faso.
0 kommentar(er)
