МЕТОДОЛОГІЧНІ ПІДХОДИ «ДЕ-ЮРЕ» ТА «ДЕ-ФАКТО» В КОНТЕКСТІ ПІЗНЬОАНТИЧНОЇ І РАННЬОСЕРЕДНЬОВІЧНОЇ ІСТОРІЇ МІЖНАРОДНОЇ ПРАВОСУБ’ЄКТНОСТІ

Abstract

Melnyk V. METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES “DE JURE” & “DE FACTO” IN THE CONTEXT OF LATE ANTIQUE AND EARLY MEDIEVAL HISTORY OF INTERNATIONAL LEGAL PERSONALITY
The article is devoted to the relationship between the concepts of “de jure” and “de facto”. Peculiarities of methodological correlation were demonstrated on the historical examples of Empires (periods of late antiquity and early Middle Ages). The Legal Philosophy discourse of the correlation between “de jure” and “de facto” lies in the fundamental dispute between two approaches - legal and political. The first is based on determining the ideal state of affairs, while the second reflects reality with all its deviations from the ideal theorizing. Thus, the main difference between legal interpretation of state history, in contrast to the interpretation of political science, is the existence of norms and formalities that can in no way be subject to legislative doubt (at the same time, these norms are questionable from the standpoint of everyday life). For example, the phenomenon of “empire” power lies in its “universal”, “worldwide” scale. This legal “fact” wasn’t questioned either in the legal framework or in the diplomatic practices of the time. Only “empires” could be considered as a “source of statehood”; only emperors
distributed the titles and virtues of “kings”, “khagans”, “princes”,
“dukes”, “counts” etc. No wonder the term “sovereignty” comes from the Latin concept of “suzerainty”. Given the legal “fact” of imperial superpower (empires were perceived and imagined as Commonwealth of States, “kingdoms of kingdoms”), only mutual recognition of empires by each other could become the institutional basis for the creation of the international law system. This system developed on the basis of the institutio of international legal personality, where the mutual recognition of subjectivity used exclusively by empires with “universal ambitions”. Our definition applies primarily to the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantium), the Persian Empire (Iran), the Kushan Empire (India) and the late antique Hаn ch6o (Chinese Empire). Separately, being in the context of the history of international legal personality, the article is designed to acquaint readers with a three-step method of historical facts processing (local events level + international events level + subjective interpretation level). Thus, the genesis of Ukrainian statehood (Kyivan Rus’) presented and fits into the context of this article as a local aspect of international history, which can be interpreted differently by historians, political scientists and lawyers. The theory of the Byzantine origin of the legal forms of the Kyivan Rus’ aims to confirm the discrepancy of the political (political sceince point of view) and legal (history of law point of view) understanding of the phenomenon of the genesis of state formations.