Abstract:
Treaties and agreements have long been intrinsic components of diplomatic relations among political entities throughout history. While these treaties, particularly those of a political nature, held immense historical significance within their respective contexts and intended objectives, some were tarnished by discrepancies and errors -whether deliberate or inadvertent- in their wording and translation. These errors, on numerous occasions, gave rise to ambiguities in interpreting the content of treaty articles, often resulting in alterations of their intended meanings to favor one party over the other. Consequently, such discrepancies directly contributed to the emergence of disputes between the signatory parties.
This study delves into a notable instance of these disparities within treaty versions. It meticulously examines the distinctions between the Algerian versions (in Ottoman Turkish) of the 1746 and 1772 treaties on the one hand, and the Danish versions (in Danish and French) on the other. By scrutinizing these treaties articles, this analysis aims to unveil the contradictions and ambiguities that inevitably fueled tensions in the relations between these two countries. This examination is conducted while taking into account the historical context, as well as the local and international circumstances in which these treaties were ratified. In conclusion, this paper contends that both the 1746 and 1772 treaties were marred by lapses and deficiencies in the Algerian and Danish versions respectively, ultimately leading one party to interpret them in their favor and compelling the other party to invalidate them in defense of its own interests.
