Contrary to the received understanding that Francisco de Vitoria and Francisco Suárez ruled out religious war by grounding just cause in natural law, they supported a robust view of papal authority for war when necessary for the defense of the church against heretics, schismatics, and pagans as well as for the spread of Christianity and Christendom throughout the world. They believed that religious wars were in accord with natural law as a means to its fulfillment in Christianity, (...) as a justification for the defense of the church as the one true faith, and as a moral obligation to provide all of humanity with the opportunity to receive Christian truth and grace. The neo‐Thomists' vigorous support for religious war was in the mainstream of the Christian just war tradition from the time of the wars against pagans in the early middle ages through their own time. This finding and the continuation into the modern era of sanctified patriotism stemming from the mixing of church and state especially during war that began in early Middle Ages, along with the historic roots of the recently prominent presumption against war, argue for a more complex understanding of the normative Christian just war tradition than that found among supporters of the classic interpretation of that tradition. (shrink)

In discussing the works of 16th-century theorists Francisco de Vitoria and Alberico Gentili, this article examines how two different conceptions of a global legal community affect the legal character of the international order and the obligatory force of international law. For Vitoria the legal bindingness of ius gentium necessarily presupposes an integrated character of the global commonwealth that leads him to as it were ascribe legal personality to the global community as a whole. But then its legal (...) status and its consequences have to be clarified. For Gentili on the other hand, sovereign states in their plurality are the pinnacle of the legal order(s). His model of a globally valid ius gentium then oscillates between being analogous to private law, depending on individual acceptance by states and being natural law, appearing in a certain sense as a form rather of morality than of law. (shrink)

The history of prudence is often depicted as a history of loss. According to one version, the scientification of moral knowledge in medieval philosophy calls into question the role of prudence in moral action. And while Thomas Aquinas still tries to integrate prudence into a scientific framework of moral knowledge, the Salmantine theologian Francisco de Vitoria eventually abandons this approach and excludes prudence from moral knowledge altogether. I would like to argue, however, that Vitoria plays a different (...) role in this development: He does not exclude prudence from scientific moral knowledge but gives an integrated account that Aquinas lacks. But this integration comes at a price because he is eventually unable to explain how prudence allows an agent to deal with the problem of contingency in action. (shrink)

In general, the development of the theory of the legal system has focused on the contributions of legal positivism authors, leaving to one side the contributions of natural law theory. This study seeks to rebuild the theory of the legal system developed by the School of Salamanca’s founder, Francisco de Vitoria, showing its explanatory advantages in comparison with the first analytical legal theory of legal system formulated by John Austin. This study shows that, just as in Austin, it (...) is possible in Francisco de Vitoria to reconstruct the existence and identity criteria of legal systems from the notions of command and sovereignty. These findings allow us to maintain that 300 years before Austin, and in a non-analytical environment, Francisco de Vitoria developed a theory of legal system. (shrink)

Readers have found at least two distinct and perhaps contradictory accounts of civil authority in the works of Francisco de Vitoria, and some hold that Vitoria himself holds contradictory positions. This article argues that Vitoria holds one consistent position, namely that civil power is based on a necessity that is rooted in human nature, and in particular on the final cause of human life, and not on a necessity that is a result of any historical decision (...) or process on its own. Rulers receive from the community their authority, which is a power to act on behalf of the community. In general, scholars have failed to consider how Vitoria’s understanding of civil power is Aristotelian and Thomistic to the extent that it is based on the thesis that the political community is natural in a way similar to how families and individuals are natural. (shrink)

In 1538–39 Francisco de Vitoria delivered two relections:De IndisandDe iure belli.This article distills from these writings the topic of free trade as a “human right” in accordance withius gentiumor the “law of peoples.” The right to free trade is rooted in a more fundamental right to communication and association. The rights to travel, to dwell, and to migrate precede the right to trade, which is also closely connected to the rights to preach, to protect converts, and to constitute (...) Christian princes. This has significant repercussions on the field of business ethics: the right to free trade is ultimately founded directly on natural law and indirectly on divine law; trade is not independent of ethics; and trade is presented as an opportunity to develop the virtues of justice and friendship, among other repercussions. Vitoria is portrayed as a defender of private initiative and free markets. (shrink)

Humanitarian intervention is a staple of current discussions about relations among states. Should powerful states interfere in the internal affairs of weaker ones, particularly those identified as failed states, in order to bring peace and stability when it is clear that the existing government can not do so? The concept is an old one, not a new one. European nations that engaged in overseas expansion generally justified their conquests on the grounds that they would seek to civilise and Christianise the (...) peoples whom they encountered. The most extensive discussion of the right ? or the responsibility ? of strong states to intervene on a humanitarian basis occurred among sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Spanish intellectuals who sought to justify the Spanish conquest of the Americas. The most famous of these figures was Francisco de Vitoria (1485?1546) whose De Indis outlined all of the arguments that could be raised for and against such intervention. His line of argument suggests that in the long run, intervention even with the best of intentions, may well lead to tragic consequences. It may even be hubris, the sin of those who would play God. (shrink)

The work of Francisco de Vitoria has always been related to the founding of the Salamanca School and the defense of the rights of the Indians, as well as with the origin of other similar groups as Coimbra, Évora or Mexico that constitute the Iberian School of Peace. But in recent years it has been questioned that Francisco de Vitoria was the only creator of these schools of thought. Some researchers affirm that there were other thinkers (...) before him who should be recognized for this merit. The purpose of this study is to show the originality of Victoria’s doctrines and to see how they were assimilated by the members of the groups that form the Iberian School of Peace. From our point of view, with independence of the recent debates that have emerged around him, Francisco de Vitoria should continue to be considered the creator of the School of Salamanca as well as of the Iberian School of Peace. (shrink)

The figure of Francisco de Vitoria, founder of the so-called School of Salamanca and one of the most important professors of the University of Salamanca in the 16th century, has been considered on different occasions as an admirable model of a university professor. On one side, this article describes the scientific commitment of the School of Salamanca as a sign of an important dimension of university life: research. On the other side, the main features of Vitoria as (...) a teacher will be exposed. His teaching abilities will be taken into account, but also his capacity to involve other colleagues in a joint search for truth will be described. Finally, the renewing character of Vitoria’s Thomism in the framework of philosophy as a great ally of scientific dialogue will be considered. (shrink)

Francisco de Vitoria (c. 1485-1546) is well-known for his philosophical contributions to natural rights and international law. However, his extensive work on the conflict between civil authority and the authority of the Catholic Church has been largely neglected by political theorists and intellectual historians. While scholars have recently recognized the significant role played by natural law in the history of political secularism, they have focused almost exclusively on the “modern” natural law theories of Hobbes, Pufendorf, and Thomasius, as (...) opposed to the “scholastic” natural law of early modern Thomists like Vitoria. This essay undertakes an analysis of Vitoria’s use of natural law theory in his approach to civil-ecclesiastical conflict. Contrary to critiques from the “modern” natural lawyers, it argues that Vitoria’s idea of natural law spearheads a forceful defence of the autonomy of civil power from ecclesiastical power. Based on his sharp distinction between the natural and the supernatural spheres of human life, Vitoria argues for a “dualist” position in which civil and ecclesiastical powers are independent and equally binding on human consciences. The essay acknowledges that Vitoria’s dualism ultimately gives way to his endorsement of papal supremacy over all Christian princes. However, this papalist conclusion does not follow from Vitoria’s natural law theory but rather from an opposing political principle: the notion of the universal Christian commonwealth. (shrink)

Francisco de Vitoria offers a stimulating vision of moral cosmopolitanism that foreshadows the cosmopolitanism implicit in contemporary Catholic social teaching. After drawing a distinction between moral cosmopolitanism and political cosmopolitanism, this essay retrieves Vitoria’s cosmopolitan vision in his efforts to defend “the rights of the Indians” through concepts such as subjective rights, ius gentium, the right to travel, and the inherent human dignity of all people. Nonetheless, he opposes all claims of universal sovereignty. Vitoria thus appears (...) as advocating moral but not political cosmopolitanism, perhaps because his political imagination is shaped by monarchies, with their totalitarian tendencies, rather than by modern democracies. The final part of the essay explores how the distinction between different kinds of cosmopolitanism illuminates the variety of positions on the subject to be found in contemporary Catholic social teaching. (shrink)

In the international sphere, sovereignty and fundamental rights are often at odds, giving these rights little space for action and, in general, only after crisis has led to tragedy, and tragedy to disgrace. International Law, on the other hand, consistently succumbs to forms of domination and power, and its scope of action is often limited to certain codifications which are frequently suspended by political exception. Sixteenth century Dominican theologian, Francisco de Vitoria, established the principles for a Law of (...) the people, based on secular civil power that, while still exercising internal sovereignty, could defend and privilege the “rights of all men” over the exercise of power and private interest. This article focuses on this dispute to show Vitoria’s position, who long preceded the great declarations of human rights of the 18 th century, presenting an original doctrine within the framework of an emerging globalization and based on the defense of fundamental rights. (shrink)

Victoria's idea of International Society is not an unfeasible Utopia. The harmony between experience/reason and reason/faith which he imbibes from St. Thomas Aquinas can be appreciated in his methodology. His anthropology is also realistic, that is to say, objectivistic: human nature is the same in all men; their dignity and rights as persons are not given or taken by their faith. Vitoria applies to the Indians the Tomist thesis on the person and the relationship faith/reason, nature/over nature.

Las copias de los manuscritos de las Relecciones de Francisco de Vitoria se multiplicaron, y enseguida atravesaron el océano, para llegar muy pronto a manos de universitarios y misioneros. En España llegaron a la corte imperial, provocando una rápida censura, y al humanista J. Ginés de Sepúlveda, que asume el texto como favorable a su imperialismo. En ultramar el catedrático agustino Alonso de Veracruz aprueba y enriquece sus argumentos, y el dominico Bartolomé de Las Casas se queda sólo (...) con los condicionantes del propio Vitoria. Creo que esos condicionantes merecen ser conocidos en su entorno para su justa valoración. Lo dedico a los grandes vitoriólogos que honraron con sus estudios a esta revista.The manuscript copies of the Relecciones by Francisco de Vitoria multiplied and crossed the ocean to fall very soon in the hands of university students and missionaries . In Spain they reached the imperial court causing a rapid censorship and the humanist J. Ginés de Sepúlveda who takes the text as in favor of his imperialism. Overseas the Augustinian professor of university Alonso de Veracruz approves and enriches his arguments, the Dominican Bartolome de las Casas remains alone with the own Vitoria’s Condicionnantes. I think that those Condicionantes are worth being known in their context to value them appropriately. I devote it to Vitoria’s great friends who honored this journal with their studies. (shrink)

Following Thomas Aquinas, Francisco de Vitoria's analysis of justice in exchanges takes place by commenting on the corresponding questions of the Summa Theologica. The identification of the just price with that of common estimation occurs under a sufficient concurrence of sellers and buyers. A high level of concurrence limits the ability to take advantage of the need on the other side of the market. This fact guaranties a full consent of the parties involved in trading. Under conditions of (...) market power or when some authority fixes a legal price, just price should also be taken as a normative ideal. (shrink)

This article intends to argue that Francisco de Vitoria’s conception of the Spanish Conquest of America is based upon notions that stem from various sources of the 14th and 15th Century. One of his most important source is the Opus septipertitum de contractibus, written by the German theologian Conradus Summenhart, whom Vitoria quotes frequently. By comparing both thinkers it can be shown that Vitoria’s basic terminology concerning rights and dominion is in greatly indebted to Summenhart’s account.

This article outlines Francisco de Vitoria’s conception of natural law and natural right in an effort to amend a number of interpretations in the academic literature on his political and international thought that misapprehend Vitoria’s iusnaturalism. In this view, his use of the Thomist doctrine of natural law and justice lays the founda­tion for his works on politics, society and international relations since the doctrine itself espouses equality and justice both within the domestic realm and between discrete (...) communities. In an implicit appeal to the link between ethics and politics, his doctrine of natural law, moreover, fulfills a critical and constitutional role by designating justice and the common good as a pattern of order to which power and authority must conform in order to be legitimate. (shrink)

At the end of the first half of the XVI century, Vitoria worked on the problem of the legitimacy of the conquest of America, developing a series of statements about fair war. An important number of his investigations were focused on the possible justification of a war enterprise, motivated by th..

Sixteenth-century Spanish thought is constitutive of an established, though insufficiently studied, tradition of European political theorizing. As against the politics of Machiavellism, the Spanish tradition argued in favor of an ethical perspective on statecraft. As an introduction to the subject, this article addresses key concepts set forth by the Dominican theologian-jurist Francisco de Vitoria regarding the natural foundations and teleology of the state and its coercive power. Terms such as "natural law", "dominium", and "perfect community" describe the Thomistic (...) basis of his political philosophy and illustrate the moral significance and legitimate basis of political society in early modern Spanish politico-theological thought. El pensamiento español del siglo XVI constituye una tradición establecida de teorización política europea poco estudiada en los círculos académicos angloparlantes. En contraste con el maquiavelismo, la tradición española argumentó a favor de una perspectiva ética en torno al arte de gobernar. Como introducción a dicha temática, se abordan los conceptos clave establecidos por Francisco de Vitoria res-pecto de los fundamentos naturales y la teleología del Estado y su poder coercitivo. Conceptos tales como "ley natural", "dominio" y "comunidad perfecta" describen la base tomista de su filosofía política e ilustran el significado moral y fundamento legítimo de la sociedad política en el pensamiento político-teológico de la época. (shrink)

Chronological typologies of racial ideologies have always been somewhat controversial, but in contemporary academe, a general consensus has emerged, one that integrates the theories of Ladelle McWhorter, on the one hand, and Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, on the other hand. In this schema, the invention of racism in the early modern period was defined by morphological racism or, in McWhorter’s words, “physical appearance,”1 followed by the creation of a biological or scientific racism that can be roughly dated to the Industrial Revolution. After (...) the various social movements for racial justice in the mid-twentieth century, and the turn to “political correctness,” many theorists such as Carr and Bonilla-Silva have argued... (shrink)

Gaëlle Demelemestre | Résumé : On attribue à la Réforme la paternité de notre intelligence libérale du pouvoir et de la société civile. La tradition théologique classique, maintenant la possibilité d’une médiation entre l’homme et Dieu, ne serait pas parvenue à dégager la sphère des activités proprement humaines à partir de laquelle la modernité a pris son essor. Nous nous proposons ici d’évaluer cette thèse en comparant la pensée de Luther à celle d’un de ses contemporains prenant explicitement le contre-pied (...) de ses positions, Vitoria, sur trois points précis : leur intelligence de la relation homme-Dieu, la nature de l’action humaine et de la loi naturelle qui s’en déduit, et leur théorisation subséquente du pouvoir politique. |: The Reformation is considered as the promoter of our liberal understanding of the political and civil society. The classical theological tradition, implying the possibility of a mediation between men and God, wouldn’t have been able to achieve the proper sphere of human activity from which modernity has taken off. Hereafter, we try to challenge this thesis by a comparison between Luther’s thought and the intellectual positions of one of his contemporaries, explicitly against Luther’s positions, Vitoria, on three precise points : their understanding of the God-men relation, the nature of human action and natural law which proceed from it, and their consequent theorization of the political power. (shrink)

Gaëlle Demelemestre | : On présente généralement Francisco de Vitoria, Domingo de Soto et Domingo Bañez comme des auteurs de la Seconde Scolastique, et plus précisément de sa première vague. Il est de ce fait supposé que leurs positions intellectuelles sont suffisamment similaires pour que l’on puisse les traiter ensemble, et qu’elles soient exposées et complétées les unes par les autres. Des personnalités d’une telle envergure peuvent-elles cependant réellement avoir fondu leurs objet et visée propres en une thèse (...) commune qu’elles auraient perpétuée? C’est la question que nous nous poserons en comparant précisément la façon dont ils comprennent les notions de dominium et de ius. | : Francisco de Vitoria, Domingo de Soto and Domingo Bañez are generally presented as authors of the Second Scholastic, and more precisely of his first wave. It is thereby assumed that their intellectual positions are sufficiently similar to be treated together, and exposed and completed the one by the others. However, such personalities could they really have flow together their own object and aim in one same position that they have perpetuated? That’s the question we will ask in comparing precisely their meaning of the notions of dominium and ius. (shrink)

The purpose of this paper is to analyze some of the philosophical problems that derived of the Spanish conquest of America in the perspective of the Spanish Dominican Francisco de Vitoria. Specifically this paper will try to prove that Vitoria considered the Indian commonwealths in the New World, or least some of them, as genuine political entities with the same rights to exercise dominium of their lands and goods as their Europeans counterparts. To justify this, it will (...) be necessary to analyzed key concepts in Vitoria’s thought such as dominium, natural law, and the origins of the civil society. Nevertheless, at the end, it will be examined in which ways Vitoria considers Indian commonwealths inferior to the Europeans, in order to justify the Spanish conquista of the New World. (shrink)

The article presents a set of articles on the present and projection of the scholastic tradition. The starting point is the anthropological turn that, within scholasticism and at the beginning of the fourteenth century, privileged the study of ethics, law and politics and, consequently, the forced development of a moral theology concerned with the human coexistence. The second scholasticism, prolonging this tradition throughout the 16th and 17th centuries, could not remain oblivious to the implications of the profound changes that were (...) taking place: the Discovery of America, the Protestant Reformation, the development of a commercial proto-capitalism and the strengthening of the monarchies. As the Reformation was consolidated in a good part of the European territories, intellectual borders were raised between the various confessions. However - and this is the focus of the papers presented - these borders were porous and, despite the climate of confrontation, various indirect communication channels managed to maintain a single intellectual republic. (shrink)

Las nociones de dominio y derecho natural durante el siglo XVI las desarrollaron distintamente Vitoriay De la Veracruz. El tránsito se vio influenciado por Sto. Tomás de Aquino, Escoto y cierto nominalismomoderado. En el segundo, el tema de la variabilidad de las potencias racionales, fundamentalmentede la voluntad, era más fuerte que el tema vitoriano de la autoridad por encima de la deliberaciónpersonal y del preconocimiento moral. Lejos de una interpretación fijista y relativista de ley natural, esteautor siguió una vía media (...) apoyándose en el acto prudencial. El axioma que subyace en la argumentaciónes «evitar caer en la servidumbre», es decir, el dominio del obrar humano que compete a la causa intrínsecade la naturaleza racional.This article studies Francisco de Vitoria´s relectio De Indis and Alonso de la Veracruz´s SpeculumConiugiorum relectio proving important differences on either texts. Both authors disert on dominium andnatural rights, but Vitoria recognizes a more important influence of the authority and external causes onmoral acts whereas de la Veracruz gives all the importance to intrinsic principles of human decisions. Aspeargues that these differences are due to two different elements involved on Alonso´s arguments: his directcontact within american indians, while Vitoria never came to America and didn´t experienced the encounter of «the others», and, a more profound philosophical influence from Escoto and moderate nominalist Jean Charlier Gerson. (shrink)

Resumen: El artículo examina dos conceptos centrales en la doctrina internacional de Vitoria: la idea de orbe como comunidad universal de todos los hombres y de todos los pueblos unidos por el vínculo de la común naturaleza humana, y el ius gentium como Derecho universal de la humanidad que rige en todo el orbe. El trabajo destaca el equilibrio entre tradición (universalismo cosmopolita de raíces estoicas y cristianas y iusnaturalismo clásico) e innovación (ideas de derechos naturales, de igualdad e (...) independencia de todos los pueblos y concepción de la comunidad internacional como una comunidad jurídica) y la antropología no individualista que subyace a la doctrina internacional de Vitoria. Abstract: The article analyzes two central concepts in the international doctrine of Vitoria: the idea of the orb as a universal community of all human beings and of all peoples united by the bond of common human nature, and ius gentium as the universal law of humanity rules around the world. The work highlights the balance between tradition (cosmopolitan universalism of Stoic and Christian roots and classical natural ius) and innovation (ideas of natural rights, equality and independence of all peoples and conception of the international community as a legal community) and the non-individualistic anthropology that underlies the international doctrine of Vitoria. (shrink)

A força actual da microeconomia enquanto chave para a compreensão da vida económica, e a predominância dos mercados sobre as instituições políticas na nova ordern mundial, coloca novos desafios à Ética Económica. Por outro lado, urna teoria da Justiça focalizada em instituições macrosociais dificilmente poderá responder de modo adequado a tais desafios. Neste sentido, o presente artigo tenta sobretudo explorar as enormes potencialidades associadas com a teoria Escolástica da Justiça, teoria essa que focaliza a sua atenção nas decisões dos agentes (...) económicos. Ora é precisamente em ordern a atingir tal objectivo que o autor do artigo recorre ao pensamento de Francisco de Vitoria (ca. 1486-1546) como principal fonte de inspiração. Mostra-se, desta forma, até que ponto a tradição Escolástica de reflexão sobre o problema da Justiça se revela perfeitamente integrável nos temas e nas preocupações éticas associadas com a microeconomia do nosso tempo. De resto, é por isso mesmo que o autor do artigo sugere este tipo de abordagem como uma das linhas de resposta mais promissoras aos desafios lauçados ao pensamento, e à reflexão ética em particular, pelas novas realidades e pelas novas abordagens da Economia contemporânea. According to the author, the current strength of Microeconomics as a key for understanding economic life, and the predominance of markets over political institutions in the new world order, poses new challenges to Economic Ethics. On the other hand, it is also taken into account the fact that a theory of justice focused on macrosocial institutions is not particularly well suited to undertake those challenges. The article, therefore, aims at explodng some of the potentialities of the Scholastic theory of justice, a theory that is precisely focused on the decision of economic agents. By choosing the works of Francisco de Vitoria (ca. 1486-1546) as his main reference, the author shows how one of the most distinctive marks of the Scholastic approach consists precisely in the way it facilitates, and promotes, a close integration with Microeconomics. The final purpose of the article, therefore, is to propose such programmatic idea as a promising line of answer to the challenges that the new realities and approaches of economics are now posing anew to the ethical reflection. (shrink)

Vitoria and Suárez defend the categorical immunity of the innocent not to be intentionally killed. But they allow for inflicting collective punishment on the innocent and the noninnocent alike during and after a just war. So they allow for deliberately harming them. Inflicting harm on the innocent can often result in their death. Hence, holding both claims seems incoherent. First, the objections against using the term “innocent” are explained. Second, their views on just war are explored. And third, by (...) appealing to Aquinas' double-effect reasoning, it is shown how they try to avoid the above-mentioned incoherence. Still, their appeal might be insufficient to palliate the tension between the above-mentioned claims. If just wars are possible, the deliberate harming of the innocent is reasonably unavoidable for defeating and punishing those who wage them. Hence, defenders of just wars, whether from a religious or a secular perspective, must live with such a tension. (shrink)

In light of recent reevaluations of the work of Hugo Grotius, this essay analyzes the respective roles of Francisco de Vitoria and Grotius in the construction of the “Grotian tradition” of international law and human rights. In contrast to conventional accounts which understand the two within a progression, this essay argues that Vitoria and Grotius can alternatively be understood as representing two distinct strains of international law and ethics, forms of which persist to this day. The first (...) is that strain which privileges local governance based on the natural law and which insists that international law must have a moral or equitable valence (represented today by liberal internationalism). The second, competing strain which, with its focus on “neutral” rules of commerce and international order, presumes that it need not have such a valence (essentially, neoliberalism). In the process, this essay examines the role of the natural law in Vitoria’s thought, which for him was most often a reason against interference or intervention, not for. The essay also highlights the role of the Eighty Years’ War between the Dutch United Provinces and Spain in the development of Grotius’s understanding of sovereignty, in contrast to the Thirty Years’ War which is given more prominence in conventional accounts. (shrink)

This book offers the first comprehensive account and re-appraisal of the formative phase of what is often termed the 'Grotian tradition' in international relations theory: the view that sovereign states are not free to act at will, but are akin to members of a society, bound by its norms. It examines the period from the later fifteenth to the mid-seventeenth centuries, focusing on four thinkers: Erasmus, Vitoria, Gentili and Grotius himself, and is structured by the author's concept of international (...) society. Erasmus' views on international relations have been entirely neglected, but underlying his work is a consistent image of international society. The theologian Francisco de Vitoria concerns himself with its normative principles, the lawyer Alberico Gentili - unexpectedly, the central figure in the narrative - with its extensive practical applications. Grotius, however, does not re-affirm the concept, but wavers at crucial points. This book suggests that the Grotian tradition is a misnomer. (shrink)

The article studies some of the most important political ideas present in the origins of the modern State, especially the notion of political sovereignty, which, borne and developed in the maiestas of the imperial roman law and in the averroistic interpretation of the aristotelian idea of the perfect community, is accepted and developed by Francisco de Vitoria in the De potestate civili. Vitoria characterizes sovereignty with the features of supremacy in the domestic activity of the State and (...) independence with regard to other States. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Vitoria, Cajetan, and the ConciliaristsKatherine Elliot van LiereFrancisco de Vitoria, professor of theology at the University of Salamanca from 1526 until his death in 1546, is widely recognized as the leader of the sixteenth-century scholastic revival and one of the foremost Catholic political thinkers of his day. His surviving relectiones (the lectures given in Salamanca at the end of each university term) cover a wide range of (...) issues from the morality of cannibalism to the legality of Henry VIII’s divorce. 1 Yet modern scholarly interest in Vitoria and his disciples (collectively known as “the School of Salamanca”) has focused mainly on issues relevant to the moral and legal problems of secular nation-states. Between this century’s two great wars Spanish and American scholars took a renewed interest in Vitoria’s published relectiones, seeing in them early expressions of the doctrine of international law, and arguing that Vitoria deserved some of the credit generally given to Hugo Grotius as the inventor of this concept. 2 Since then Spanish, American, and British scholarship on Vitoria and the School of Salamanca has continued to center mainly on such issues as just war, conquest, and slavery. 3 In the 1980s Anthony Pagden [End Page 597] revisited these questions, interpreting the School of Salamanca’s neo-Scholastic teachings as part of the “ideological armature of what [was arguably] the first early modern nation state.” 4 From a similar methodological perspective, Richard Tuck and Quentin Skinner have described the neo-Thomist revival of natural law as an important influence on the development of modern legal and political concepts like the subjective theory of natural rights and the Lockean contractual theory of political obligation. 5 Most recently, Pagden and Jeremy Lawrance have edited and translated into English a selection of Vitoria’s “political writings,” which will serve as a welcome aid for future research on any of these themes. 6Yet Vitoria’s end-of-term lectures in Salamanca also discussed a number of other themes apart from the political theory of secular states. Among these, the theme of the structure and power of ecclesiastical government has so far received less attention than it deserves. 7 Ecclesiastical power, or “the power of the Church,” was one of only two subjects to which Vitoria devoted two relectiones each (the other being the famous debate about Spanish rights to dominion in America). Vitoria delivered his two lectures on ecclesiastical government, both entitled De potestate ecclesiae, in 1532 and 1533. In 1534 he lectured on the closely related theme of “the power of the pope and the council” (De potestate papae et concilii). 8 Vitoria’s treatment, in these three lectures, of the authority of the Church, the pope, and the general council is worth examining more closely not only for the intrinsic interest of these issues but perhaps even more for the light it sheds on the formation of Vitoria’s thinking about secular political power. All three relectiones preceded the two famous Relectiones de indiis (“On the American Indians”) which Vitoria delivered in [End Page 598] 1538 and 1539. For churchmen like the Dominican Vitoria, ecclesiastical and secular political power were inextricably linked; theories posited in one sphere had implications in the other, and in some cases these implications proved politically or theologically awkward enough to force a thinker back to the drawing board. The political theories about the natural origins of secular political power which Vitoria articulated in the late 1530s in his Relectiones de indiis reflect this painful process. They were not only inspired by Vitoria’s awareness of the plight of the American Indians under Spanish colonial rule; they were also shaped by his protracted struggle with the theological implications of natural law theory, a struggle which can be observed in his lectures of the early 1530s on ecclesiastical power.Observing this intellectual struggle in Vitoria’s writing affords more than just one more illustration of how all political thought is rooted in particular social contexts. For Francisco de Vitoria stood at a particularly significant juncture in the history of political thought. The position he carefully defined in the 1530s was characterized by a strong emphasis on the distinction between... (shrink)

Francisco de Vitoria is regularly included in the genealogy of humanitarian intervention. He is invoked as both historical precedent and legitimizing authority, which raises the question of his trans-historical relevance in contemporary debates on humanitarian intervention. This article argues that Vitoria's thinking about defending the innocent cannot be abstracted from his theology and remain coherent. Specifically, it argues that the illocutionary force of his position is entirely lost once it is separated from the belief that man is (...) created in the image of God. The article concludes by arguing that Vitoria's thought has little prescriptive value in contemporary debates. Nevertheless, his thought is still worth engaging because it is suggestive of the kinds of questions that contemporary scholars must pose and answer, albeit in the circumstances of their own time and place. (shrink)

The idea of free trade in Grotius's Mare liberum and his legal opinion De iure praedae has a strong theological basis. Grotius called the right to travel and trade freely a ius sanctissimum, a 'sacrosanct law'. He also perceived the Freedom of the Seas as being a direct result of the will of God. This theological background was strategically necessary because Grotius developed the Mare liberum and the De iure praedae to argue against Spanish-Portuguese claims to a trade monopoly that (...) also had theological underpinnings. But the theological aspect of Grotius's theory was also emphasized by the references he made to the Dominican friar Francisco de Vitoria's ius communicationis. This precursor to Grotius's Freedom of the Seas, which Vitoria had developed in his De indis, is connected to the legal justification of Christian mission and so has a clear theological connotation. In Grotius's work, Vitoria's concept of a universal right to Christian mission supervised by the pope was transformed into a theologically supported right to free trade. With this transformation of the ius communicationis into the principle of the Mare liberum, Grotius develops a theological basis not for politics but for economics. One can speak therefore, following Giorgio Agamben, of an 'economic theology' in regard to Grotius, a term that is, in turn, derived from Carl Schmitt's notion of 'political theology'. (shrink)

A pesar de que el nombre de Francisco de Vitoria no aparece en los tratados y autores del siglo xvm, no por eso su doctrina fue ignorada. Muy por el contrario, sus tesis, no obstante ser atribuidas a Hugo Grocio, son mantenidas y aceptadaspor autores tan importantes y destacados como Locke o Kant.The fact that the name of Francisco de Vitoria does not appear in the treatises and among the authors of the 18th century does not (...) mean that his doctrine was unknown. On the contrary, his thesis although credited to Grotius were known. On the contrary, his thesis although credited to Grotius were known and accepted by many important authors such as Locke or Kant. (shrink)

This response suggests that in writing the history of ethics, it is important to take seriously what the principals wrote and believed, distinguishing it carefully from our own responses to their writings, or from subsequent uses to which their writings may have been put. For example, when reading Thomas Aquinas and Francisco de Vitoria on just war against non‐Christian peoples, forcible conversion and conquest are clearly condemned. Whatever the attitudes of their contemporaries, not to mention later thinkers up (...) to the present, there is no foundation in Aquinas and Vitoria for holy war or “exceptionalism,” American or otherwise. (shrink)

ABSTRACT This article traces the considerable development of a language of representation derived from Cicero's De officiis from late antiquity into early modern scholastic political thought. Cicero turned to the term persona, which signified the mask worn by actors of ancient theatre, to describe the particular duty of a magistrate who was understood ‘to bear the person of the city [se gerere personam civitatis]’. Thomas Hobbes's reliance on this terminology for his theory of the state in Leviathan is well known, (...) and we are now increasingly aware of its centrality before Hobbes in parliamentary and humanist discourse. What we have yet to register, however, is the extent and depth of scholastic appropriations and refashionings of this vocabulary. Cicero's language of representation is persistently at work in scholastic writing, from Augustine and Aquinas to Suárez and Bellarmine, and it functions in ways that reveal remarkable continuities and discontinuities with respect to its classical origins. The first task of this article is to expose this neglected channel through which this language was transmitted into early modernity. The second is to begin illuminating the early stages of political representation in the ‘second scholastic’ with an analysis of Francisco de Vitoria's De potestate civili (1528). (shrink)

This essay addresses one of the central questions in the ongoing debate about just war theory: are soldiers morally responsible for serving in unjust wars? Francisco de Vitoria addressed this question in the sixteenth century using the concepts of invincible and vincible ignorance. He excused soldiers serving in unjust wars, if they did not know the war was unjust and if they did not have the means to overcome their ignorance; if they had the means, they were morally (...) culpable. In modern just war theory, ignorance is still used both to blame and excuse military service in unjust wars. This essay identifies ten different ways that scholars have used ignorance to argue about the moral responsibilities of soldiers. It then applies the different meanings of ignorance to soldiers serving in Western nations and, using Vitoria’s means tests, evaluates if modern soldiers do indeed have the means to overcome their ignorance. Since many soldiers do have the means, invincible ignorance should no longer be used as an excuse for their service in unjust wars; furthermore, soldiers may, in fact, be morally culpable for serving in them. (shrink)

In his famous Der Nomos der Erde, while discussing the foundational role of Francisco de Vitoria’s work for the emergence of international law, especially with regard to the legal and political justifications of the territorial conquest of a new world, Carl Schmitt—quite well-known as an enemy of modern and contemporary humanism—offers the following reflection.

Generally speaking, just war theory (JWT) holds that there are two just causes for war: self-defence and ‘other-defence’. The most common type of the latter is popularly known as ‘humanitarian intervention’. There is debate, however, as to whether these can serve as just causes for preventive war. Those who subscribe to JWT tend to be unified in treating so-called preventive war with a high degree of suspicion on the grounds that it fails to satisfy conventional criteria for jus ad bello; (...) – particularly the just cause and last resort criteria. Francisco di Vitoria held that the only just cause for war was ‘a wrong received’, which renders impossible any justification for preventive war. There are assumptions implicit in recent military practice, however – most notably, the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 – that challenge this ban on preventive war. Interestingly, both supporters and critics attempt to justify their views through the broader logic of JWT; viz., through a conception of what is good for both political communities and individuals, and through a legitimate defence of these goods. Supporters point to situations where so-called rogue states represent ‘grave and imminent risk’ of committing acts of aggression as grounds that justify preventive war; critics argue that to attack another political community on the basis of crimes not yet committed is a breach of the very rights JWT was created to defend. The advocate of preventive war does not appreciate important aspects concerning the morality of war. In the ongoing tension between Iran and The United States and her allies – if the rhetoric is to be believed – I am asked to tolerate a threat to my security and liberty, and to risk suffering aggression in defence of the rights of the antagonistic, but not yet aggressive, state. The crucial question is how such tolerance and risk fit in with the logic of just war: at what point, if any, does the risk of being attacked become great enough to justify declaring war in anticipation? In this paper I highlight some of the theoretical and practical difficulties in determining what counts as a grave and imminent threat, focusing especially on the complicated case of ‘imminence’ in the face of so-called ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’. Secondly, I will argue that not only is the notion of preventive war inconsistent with the defence of the rights of political communities that JWT requires; it is also forbidden by the proportionality requirement of jus ad bellum. A risk of being subjected to aggression is the price for global peace. Whilst political communities can do much to prevent aggression and prepare themselves in case it occurs, the conditions for just war require that this prevention and preparation stop short of declaring war. We must live with a certain degree of risk in this area. (shrink)

There are numerous studies that, from different perspectives, have dealt with the debate held in the Spanish Empire during the 16th century on the slavery of the American Indians, starring –among others– by Francisco de Vitoria and his disciples from the School of Salamanca, and also –outside the academic sphere– by Fray Bartolomé de las Casas and Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda. The purpose of this work is to study whether this debate made its mark in Spanish society. For (...) this, it is analyzed three theatrical pieces from the Golden Age signed by playwrights of the stature of Tirso de Molina, Lope de Vega and Pedro Calderón de Barca, who –given their enormous popularity– had the capacity to reach the wide audience that congregated in the corrals of comedies. Were these three writers influenced by the controversy over the Indians carried out, among other authors, by Vitoria, Las Casas and Sepúlveda? Did they fully grasp in their works the subtle debate that Vitoria, Las Casas and Sepúlveda maintained when they interpreted Aristotelian arguments on slavery and the consequences that derived from them in terms of the possibility of enslaving or not the Indians? (shrink)