Sven makes this stuff up and tries to see who he can get to believe it. It has been interesting to watch his claims morph over time to grow more complex and detailed. But never, not once, has Sven posted anything to support them.
Try asking Sven for anything, anything at all, to support his fanciful tales. You'll never see a whit of proof or support.
Try asking Sven for anything, anything at all, to support his fanciful tales. You'll never see a whit of proof or support.
Sven did provide some supporting evidence for a question I once asked him, but I have heard he tends to do a "drive by shooting" with his theories from time to time. I didn't say that I accepted his theory, just that I will keep it in mind pending evidence one way or the other. Despite what your side may think, I will change my opinion on the basis of evidence that contradicts any of my current working theorys. For example, I have recently gone from believing that natural born citizen was based mostly on jus sangunius, and the founders were in complete agreement to that MOST of the founders believed natural born citizenship citizenship was based on jus sanguinus, while some of them still clung to the British "jus soli" version.
In other words, there is enough evidence to convince me that not everyone was on the same page. I still think MOST were, but obviously some were not. I think during ratification, not everyone was familiar with Vattel's definition. Those that knew about it, assumed that others did as well, those that didn't assumed they were referring to the British version.