Thesis (Ph. D.)--Columbia University, 1928. / Vita. Published also as Studies in history, economics, and public law, ed. by the Faculty of political science of Columbia university, no. 303. Bibliography: p. 435-447.

Thesis (M.A. in National Security Affairs)--Naval Postgraduate School, Dec. 2004. / Thesis Advisor(s): Harold A. Trinkunas. Includes bibliographical references (p. 79-84). Also available online.

Thesis (M.A.)--Georgia State University, 2005. / Title from file title page. Jennifer L. McCoy, committee chair; Henry Carey, William Downs, committee members. Description based on contents viewed Aug. 12, 2009. Includes bibliographical references (p. 98-110).

Zugl.: Kassel, Univ., Diss., 2008

Zugl.: Berlin, Freie Univ., Diss., 2007

Thesis--Ohio State University. / Bibliography: leaves 366-373.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1968. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Universiẗat, Diss., 2004--Bremen.

A questão Essequibo tem sido assunto de pauta na política externa da Venezuela, desde o séc. XIX, quando foi assinado o Laudo de Paris, em 1899, por aquele país e pela então Guiana Britânica, como forma de dar solução à disputa fronteiriça entre as duas nações. No transcorrer da primeira metade do séc. XX, o problema persistiu como uma agenda aberta, dada a dificuldade de se estabelecer negociações eficazes com os britânicos, em função da instabilidade política e alternância de poder entre caudilhos e ditadores militares. Com a divulgação do Memorandum Mallet-Prevost, no final da primeira metade do séc. passado, a Venezuela passou a insistir pela anulação do Laudo, em decorrência de denúncias apontadas no Memorandum . Só após a democratização do país, no início dos anos 60, o assunto passou a ser pauta de negociações entre chanceleres das duas nações. Assunto que se tornou mais persistente com a proximidade da independência da Guiana, quando a Venezuela sela o Acuerdo de Ginebra, com o propósito de resolver a pendência fronteiriça no âmbito das comissões mistas, criadas sob os auspícos da ONU. Foi uma época de intensificação de propaganda pró-Essequibo na Venezuela, levando a região reclamada a constar, inclusive, no mapa venezuelano como zona en reclamación. No entanto, dada a conjuntura política na Guiana, decorrente da polarização ideológica entre o People’s Progressive Party – PPP – e o People´s National Congress – PNC –, a questão pouco progrediu, mesmo com a assinatura do Protocolo de Puerto España, em 1970, como previa o Acuerdo. O instituto do buen oficiante, como mediador proposto pela ONU, não impediu, tampouco, ações armadas contra o território guianense. Quadro este que permaneceu assim até o início da Era Chávez, quando o bolivarianismo e sua ideologia transnacionalista levou a Venezuela a aproximar-se de país latinos e caribenhos, incluindo a Guiana. Porém, concomitante ao andamento da agenda bolivariana, grupos pró-Essequibo, de ideologia nacionalista, constituídos por muitos membros da oposição à política chavista, passaram a propalar a conquista da região reclamada, numa clara evidência de que a questão Essequibo é parte de uma agenda persistentemente aberta, podendo ser utilizada por diferentes forças políticas da República Bolivariana de Venezuela contra a Guiana. / Essequibo has been a subject of discussion in Venezuela’s policy, since the 19th century, when the Award of Paris was signed in 1899 by that country and also by British Guiana, to solve the border dispute between the two nations. In the first half of the 20th century, the problem persisted as an open question, because of the difficulties to establish effective negotiations with the British, due to political instablility and alternation of power between the military dictators and the warlords. With the release of the Memorandum Mallet- Prevost, at the end of the past first half century, Venezuela insisted on cancelling the award because of complaints which there were in the Memorandum . Only after the democratization of the country in the early 60’s, the situation started with the negotiation between the foreign ministers of both nations, and it became more persistent with the proximity of Guyana’s independence. At that time Venezuela had sealed the “Acuerdo de Ginebra”, in order to solve the border problems with the mixed commissions created under the auspices of the UN. In Venezuela they started an intensified propaganda pro Essequibo, requiring the claimed area to be included in the Venezuelan map as “Zona en Reclamacíon”. However, because of the political situation in Guyana, due to the polarization between the People’s Progressive Party – PPP – and the National People’s Congress – PNC – the situation did not improve, even with the signing of the Port of Spain Protocol, in 1970. The Institute Buen Oficiante, proposed by the UN as a mediator, could not stop armed actions against the Guyanese territory. Remaining like that until the beginning of Chávez era when the bolivarism and his transnationalist ideology led Venezuela to approach the Latin and Caribbean countries, including Guyana. The groups pro Essequibo with a nationalist ideology, formed by the members of political opposition to Chávez, began to spread ideas of conquest of that claimed area, showing that Essequibo is a question of discussion and which can be used by different political forces of the Bolivian Republic of Venezuela against Guyana.

This dissertation addresses the intersection of rhetoric and material exchange in the construction of political alliance and conflict between the Waraos indigenous population and the non-indigenous institutions and political actors in the Orinoco Delta, Venezuela. It deals with the discursive and material strategies used to construct political reality at the moment of the emergence of one of the so-called new South American left wing populist governments (Hugo Chavez presidency since 1998). These historical circumstances present an opportunity to open a discussion bringing together the recent developments of discourse-centered approaches to culture, language ideologies, and the most classical theories on material exchange. This research's aim is to understand how multiple sign systems (in this case language and material gifts) interact, contradict, and support each other. In sum, this dissertation uses the advances of discourse-centered approaches to culture and the anthropological theories of exchange to understand how language and gift giving has shaped history and political imagination in the Orinoco Delta and Venezuela.