Definition
To accredit. In international law, the term carries two related but distinct meanings:
1. To receive a foreign envoy in an official diplomatic capacity, recognizing his credentials and granting him the rank and privileges appropriate to his station.
2. To dispatch a representative to a foreign sovereign or government with the formal credentials necessary to establish his diplomatic authority.
The term describes both sides of the same diplomatic transaction: the sending state accredits its envoy, and the receiving state accredits him in turn by accepting that envoy's credentials as valid.
---
Common Confusion
ACOREDIT is an archaic spelling variant of ACCREDIT as used in the diplomatic sense. Modern usage has settled entirely on "accredit," and researchers encountering "acoredit" in older legal texts, treatises, or international instruments should treat the terms as identical in meaning. The double-meaning structure — both sending and receiving — can cause confusion; context generally reveals which direction of the diplomatic relationship is intended.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term appears almost exclusively in older international law materials. Researchers will not encounter "acoredit" in modern sources; it survives only in historical legal dictionaries and the texts they drew upon. The significance for corpus research lies in recognizing the term at all — its unusual spelling means keyword searches for "accredit" will not surface documents using this variant.
The dual-directional meaning is substantively important in historical international law research. A document stating that a sovereign "accoredited" an envoy could describe either the act of commissioning and sending that envoy or the act of receiving and recognizing one sent by another power. Surrounding context — particularly whether the subject is the sending state or the receiving state — resolves the ambiguity.
Black's 2nd edition cites Burke for the receiving sense and Webster's Dictionary for the sending sense, suggesting the two usages had distinct intellectual lineages by the time the entry was written. Researchers tracing the diplomatic law of a particular period may find it useful to chase both sources for period usage and nuance.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed.) is the sole historical source in the Law Mind corpus for this entry, and it handles the term economically: two numbered definitions, each attributed to a separate authority. The citation to Burke for the receiving function and to Webster's Dictionary for the sending function indicates that neither meaning was uniquely a lawyer's invention — both were in circulation in diplomatic and general learned discourse.
No other shelf dictionaries in the standard historical legal reference set appear to have carried a standalone entry for this spelling. The absence of the term from later editions of Black's and from competing dictionaries of the same era suggests the archaic spelling fell out of legal use relatively quickly, absorbed into the standard orthography of "accredit."
---