Search

Sobre la base de un diálogo permanente con santo Tomás, los escolásticos de los siglos XVI-XVII elaboraron una teoría general acerca de la ley humana. De todos ellos, este trabajo se concentra solo en Francisco de Vitoria, Domingo de Soto, Luis de León y Francisco Suárez, y solamente en el modo como enfrentan el problema de la definición, efecto y carácter derivado de la ley humana. Vitoria casi solo repite a santo Tomás. Soto razona con mayor libertad, si bien nunca sale del marco de las tesis tomistas. León sí sale de ese marco, lo que le permite ofrecer una lectura verdaderamente original de aquellas tesis. Por su parte, Suárez reinterpreta la doctrina de santo Tomás e incluso la corrige cuando le parece necesario.

El obispo diocesano es un cargo fundamental de la organización eclesiástica. Esto se manifiesta claramente en que, hasta su vértice, el romano pontífice, está íntimamente relacionado con el oficio capital de una diócesis. El tema fue importante en el concilio de Trento: un catalizador de las ideas de los pensadores de la Escuela de Salamanca sobre el episcopado. Ellos dieron especial relevancia a la razón natural y libertad humanas, temas fundamentales de la Modernidad. Este artículo analiza el oficio del obispo diocesano en seis escritores salmantinos tanto previos como posteriores al mencionado concilio: Francisco de Vitoria, Domingo de Soto y Bartolomé Carranza, Gaspar de Villarroel, Diego de Avendaño y Pedro Murillo Velarde. Los autores analizan la potestad del cargo y enfatizan la necesidad de la coherencia vital de quien lo ejerce, fundada en el conocimiento de la verdad y la adhesión voluntaria al bien. En una época de transformaciones en la visión del mundo como es la Modernidad, los escritores combinan los nuevos paradigmas con la fidelidad a la fe.

Scholars look to early modern canonical texts to understand the philosophical underpinnings of R2P. Meanwhile, critiques argue these origins couch Western imperial intentions. This article complicates the story by returning to a pivotal historical moment – the Spanish encounter with the Aztecs – to explore protective war from an overlooked angle: that of Spain's indigenous allies, the Tlaxcaltecas. Despite being oppressed by the imperialistic Aztecs, canonical Western texts related to R2P and post-colonial critiques both elide the Tlaxcaltecas' precarious agency – the rights and duties moulded by endemic structures of violence before, during, and after protective intervention – by problematically embracing simple binaries of European oppressor and indigenous oppressed. Restoring the Tlaxcaltecas to the story complicates tropes about imperial projections of force and the pervasive assumption in R2P discussions of the 'innocent oppressed'. Our conclusions provide new perspective from which to view future Pillar 3 dilemmas by recognising that the protected sometimes have a bellicose role to play. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1538–39 Francisco de Vitoria delivered two relections: De Indis and De iure belli. This article distills from these writings the topic of free trade as a "human right" in accordance with ius gentium or 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

O frei dominicano Francisco de Vitória foi um dos maiores representantes da escolástica espanhola. Foi justamente como competente intelectual e professor da universidade de Salamanca que o religioso fez uma releitura da teoria da guerra justa visando responder algumas questões que emergiram a partir da descoberta do Novo Mundo. Sua teoria se torna uma obra-chave não apenas pela forte influência que exerceu sobre seus coetâneos do século XVI, mas, sobretudo, porque as discussões levantadas por ele ainda guiam as reflexões contemporâneas acerca da guerra. Assim, diante das contribuições do pensamento de Vitória acerca da guerra, é imperativo indagar: quais são os argumentos que justificam uma guerra e lhe dão legitimidade? Esse questionamento buscará luz a partir das Relectiones de Vitória como também por meio da literatura ligada à guerra justa com o fito de aprofundar as discussões sobre a temática do conflito bélico que atualmente ganha contorno planetário.

Copyright of Prudentia Iuris is the property of Pontificia Universidad Catolica Argentina and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Direito e Práxis is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

International law and scholarship tend to ascribe certain perceived human attributes to States and to call upon those attributes as a basis for rationalizing how States conduct themselves in the international system and—particularly—to justify international norms and distributive outcomes.  Specifically, like humans, States are presumed to be (1) choice-driven, (2) rational, and (3) predominantly autonomous.  These, and other anthropomorphic attributions, pervade social science and, as Professor Jean d’Aspremont confirms, are particularly commonplace in international legal scholarship.[1] However, this anthropomorphic conception of the State actor is empirically unsubstantiated and is an incomplete model for understanding why and how States do what they do and for justifying the international legal order.  Because much of the international legal order relies on these empirically unsubstantiated ideas, a theoretical discrepancy exists between what international lawyers believe is happening and the actual reality of global law and governance.These attributions are congenital.  They played a key role in how modern international law originated, which explains why they are still operative in how contemporary international law functions.  To demonstrate this, I propose a historical account of one of the processes through which international law came to incorporate and depend on these attributions.  I start with the explicit assertion often made by the early theorists of international law, in this instance Francisco de Vitoria, that international legal actors must—and in fact do—possess reason.  I argue that because these assertions were often made in a throwaway manner, mainstream historical works in international law tend to either miss or underappreciate their significance. I show that Vitoria’s belief that the legal actor is a rational being is not peripheral but rather central to his account of international law for three main reasons.  First, Vitoria suggests that possession of reason or rationality is the sole basis of legal subjectivity in the law of nations.  Relatedly, because they possess reason, international legal actors are necessarily autonomous.  Second, by arguing that all legal actors are similar because they reason, Vitoria suggests that international law can properly apply to them in a fair and neutral fashion.  In effect, the attribution of rationality allows Vitoria to legitimize an overarching normative framework within which relations between the legal actors may be assessed from an objective standpoint.  Third—and finally—to reinforce this framework, Vitoria characterizes any opposition to the common normative framework as emanating from the actors’ self-interest or bad faith and, accordingly, as inherently inimical to the common interest of all subjects of jus gentium. [1].       d’Aspremont writes, for instance, that “anthropomorphism is rather commonplace in social sciences.  In the thinking about international law it is almost a dominant trait.”  Jean d’Aspremont, The International Law of Recognition: A Reply to Emmanuelle Tourme-Jouannet, 24 Eur. J. Int’l L. 691, 693 (2013).

It is possible to begin the social history with the following question: How do people live better/happier? Particularly, as if the history of political thought consists of efforts to find the desired answer to this ancient question. This question, naturally, brings up many more similar questions like; what is the best form of political organization? How can obedience to political authority be justified? What is justice and how can it be achieved? What is freedom? Who should manage? The search for answers to these questions which has pursued mankind since the beginning of society continued on its way with many suggestions. This ideal (or not) new world order conception which suggests that every human being could live in equality, justice, happiness, etc. generally has been attractive to people throughout history in terms of their promises. So, the subject of this study is to retrace the "ideal", universal new world order conceptions in the thoughts of Augustine and Vitoria in the post-Christian period who have effects on the political philosophy of Europe until the present day. It is thought that the study will open a door to question the operability of such proposals in terms of their intentions, promises, and results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Francisco de Vitoria's relections De Indis and De iure belli, free trade is presented as a "human right" in accordance with ius gentium. This right is rooted in the right of communication and association. The rights to travel, dwell and emigrate precede it and it is also closely related to the rights to preach, to protect converts and to constitute Christian princes. It is argued how the right to free trade has as its ultimate foundation on natural law and indirectly on divine law; trade is not independent of ethics; and it allows for the development of justice and friendship, among other repercussions. Francisco de Vitoria is presented as a defender of private initiative and the free market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article analyzes the philosophy of international law of the Second, or Modern Scholasticism. The author of the article concentrates on the just war theory mainly developed by Francisco de Vitoria and Francisco Suarez. The objectives of the article are to clarify and classify the main principles of the above-mentioned theory as well as to grasp its relevance nowadays. In order to achieve these objectives doxographical, analytical as well as hermeneutical methods are applied. Based on them, the principles and rules of just war are divided into two fundamental types. The article comes to conclusion that these types correspond to the parts of contemporary just war theory entitled as jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Another significant conclusion is that the vast majority of the principles of just war presented in Modern Scholasticism (e.g. just cause of the war, adversary’s warning of intended offensive actions, the inviolability of ambassadors and peaceful population, prohibition on killing prisoners of war and hostages, the compliance of reparations with the damage caused before and during the war, the illegality of religious and confessional wars) are also relevant nowadays.

The "School of Salamanca", as a historiographical concept, has been discussed in relation to its dating, the members who would be part of it and its characteristics. This paper analyzes the emergence and the origin of this concept in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries with the purpose of knowing if the characteristics that were given to this group of thinkers when for the first time they were spoken of as a school, can clarify some of the debates that are taking place today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In contrast to traditional historiography which, until recently, has generally explained the origin of probabilism based on works written in the European academic context, this article explores pragmatic works written mostly by —and for— experienced actors making practical use of their knowledge in fields such as trade, commerce and sacraments within the new global horizon of the Hispanic Monarchy. I propose a new, more global explanation of the progressive emergence of probabilism as a theological doctrine and method for the resolution of cases. Particular attention is granted to the use of probabilistic arguments in works of American missionary literature and writings of moral theology produced in the changing context of the central decades of the sixteenth century. This analysis allows us to understand their focus on evaluating probable alternatives in unfamiliar contexts and with unforeseen doubts that already existed in Vitoria’s ideas on economy and mission. As I show in this article, this emerging focus is a tendency that later Salamancan disciples such as the novohispano theologians Alonso de la Vera Cruz (1509-1584) and Tomás de Mercado (1523-1575) went on to radicalize by appealing to the need to follow merely probable opinions in a growing range of cases. Both of them adapted European moral and religious norms to a wide range of specifically early modern problems. The evaluation of the family or marriage customs of the indigenous American peoples and of frequent practices in the transatlantic economy such as money exchange and sale on credit were among the most discussed.

Si bien los Derechos Humanos se han edificado desde el principio de libertad e igualdad a la hora de mediar un encuentro interidentitario, tal como se expone en el postulado de Francisco de Vitoria, con el pensamiento de Emmanuel Lévinas pueden sufrir una conversión para ser erigidos desde otros principios: la responsabilidad y la illeidad. Ésta puede ser una importante conversión si la consideramos en un encuentro entre civilizaciones tan importante como el dado en 1492, cómo no, en la isla de Bohío (actual República Dominicana). Asimismo, desde la Doctrina sobre los indios de Francisco de Vitoria, se descifran puntos de sintonía y divergencia que ayudan a la reflexión levinasiana de los Derechos Humanos: los Derechos del otro humano.

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.

Francisco de Vitoria ha sido considerado tradicionalmente uno de los primeros, sino el primero, autores en tratar sobre los derechos humanos, a los que considera derechos naturales. Sin embargo, no se ha estudiado el alcance de su defensa de los derechos humanos, que es mucho más limitada de la que se esperaría en un teórico de los derechos humanos, porque en su obra sobre el derecho de la guerra introduce excepciones al ejercicio de ciertos derechos, como el libertad personal y propiedad, que hoy consideraríamos inaceptables. En este artículo exponemos cuáles son los derechos humanos defendidos por Vitoria, y el alcance de tal defensa, llegando a la conclusión de que solo defiende de modo absoluto el derecho a la vida.

This article analyzes the philosophy of international law of the Second, or Modern Scholasticism. The author of the article concentrates on the just war theory mainly developed by Francisco de Vitoria and Francisco Suarez. The objectives of the article are to clarify and classify the main principles of the above-mentioned theory as well as to grasp its relevance nowadays. In order to achieve these objectives doxographical, analytical as well as hermeneutical methods are applied. Based on them, the principles and rules of just war are divided into two fundamental types. The article comes to conclusion that these types correspond to the parts of contemporary just war theory entitled as jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Another significant conclusion is that the vast majority of the principles of just war presented in Modern Scholasticism (e.g. just cause of the war, adversary’s warning of intended offensive actions, the inviolability of ambassadors and peaceful population, prohibition on killing prisoners of war and hostages, the compliance of reparations with the damage caused before and during the war, the illegality of religious and confessional wars) are also relevant nowadays. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofía is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofía is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

En este trabajo se aborda la larga trayectoria que va del pensamiento jurídico romano hasta la explicación que da Locke del origen de la propiedad, del dinero y, en última instancia, del poder político (civil government). Tanto Vitoria y Suárez como Locke parten de considerar un estado prepolítico primigenio (de inocencia en Vitoria y Suárez, de naturaleza en Locke) de igual libertad para todos (omnium una libertas) y propiedad común (communis omnium possessio), en el que se habría encontrado la humanidad antes del establecimiento de las instituciones características del estado civil. A pesar de la presencia de elementos de continuidad con respecto a Vitoria y a Suárez, mediante la sustitución del estado de inocencia prelapsario por un status naturae que no precisa de lectura teológica alguna, y que Locke sitúa en un tiempo histórico realmente existente, el autor inglés formula una teoría estrictamente secular, basada en la larga tradición del ius naturale, sobre los orígenes del gobierno civil y de la propiedad privada.

Son numerosos los estudios que, desde diferentes perspectivas, han tratado el debate mantenido en el Imperio español durante el siglo XVI sobre la esclavitud del indio americano, protagonizado –entre otros– por Francisco de Vitoria y sus discípulos de la Escuela de Salamanca, y también –fuera del ámbito académico– por fray Bartolomé de las Casas y Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda. El objeto de este trabajo es estudiar si este debate caló en la sociedad española. Para ello se analizan tres piezas teatrales del Siglo de Oro firmadas por dramaturgos de la talla de Tirso de Molina, Lope de Vega y Pedro Calderón de Barca, que –dada su enorme popularidad– tuvieron capacidad de llegar al considerable público que se congregaba en los corrales de comedias. ¿Se impregnaron estos tres dramaturgos de la controversia sobre los indios protagonizada, entre otros autores, por Vitoria, Las Casas y Sepúlveda? ¿Captaron plenamente en sus obras el sutil debate que mantuvieron Vitoria, Las Casas y Sepúlveda cuando interpretaron de forma diferente los argumentos aristotélicos sobre la esclavitud y las consecuencias que de ellos se derivaban en cuanto la posibilidad de esclavizar o no a los indios?

The massive scale of forced displacement across the globe discloses the fractured state of the modern international order. Francisco de Vitoria's theological approach to the law of nations, in the context of the Spanish conquest of the Americas, had a significant influence on this order's development. This paper argues that recovering his innovative insights today can help refurbish a collective sense of international responsibility for refugees. Vitoria's bold assertion of indigenous Americans' dominion affirmed all human beings as members of a world commonwealth with equal claims to basic rights. The "right to travel" he articulated, by its orientation to "natural partnership and communication," can promote refugee rights and global fraternity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article aims to articulate a set of general principles of a Christian ethic of mass immigration. Toward this end, it considers: biblical and theological grounds for cosmopolitanism (and 'open borders'); biblical and theological caveats against cosmopolitanism; elements of a Christian ethic of the treatment of near and distant neighbours; what Francisco de Vitoria's 'On the American Indians' has to contribute; what lessons should be learned from the history of European colonialism; and the nature of mass immigration into twenty-first-century Europe and the problems it entails. The article concludes with six principles: relevant empirical data should be mastered before developing a judgement; concerns about mass immigration should not be dismissed out of hand as 'racist'; care of the alien may take a variety of forms, not only that of granting asylum; illegal economic immigrants should normally be returned home; compassion should look in several directions—not only at the migrant, but also at the working-class competitor for jobs and services, and at members of government burdened with the responsibility of making hard decisions; and the Christian is obliged to exercise, not only compassion, but justice and prudence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

El trabajo pretende encuadrar teórica e históricamente y presentar un conjunto de artículos sobre la actualidad y proyección de la tradición escolástica. El punto de partida es el giro antropológico que, en el seno de la escolástica y al principio del siglo XIV, privilegió el estudio de las ciencias prácticas, en particular la ética, el derecho y la política y, en consecuencia, el obligado desarrollo de una teología moral preocupada por la convivencia humana. La segunda escolástica, prolongando esta tradición a lo largo de los siglos XVI y XVII, no pudo permanecer ajena a las implicaciones de los profundos cambios que estaban teniendo lugar: el Descubrimiento de América, la Reforma protestante el desarrollo de un protocapitalismo comercial y el fortalecimiento de las monarquías. Conforme la Reforma se consolidaba en buena parte de los territorios europeos, entre las diversas confesiones se levantaron fronteras intelectuales. No obstante -y este es el centro de los trabajos presentados- estas fronteras resultaron porosas y, a pesar del clima de enfrentamiento, diversas vías de comunicación indirecta consiguieron mantener una única república intelectual.

This paper makes a parallel between Francisco de Vitoria's Relectio De Matrimonio and Hegel's view on matrimony in his Philosophy of Right. Although the principles were different, the scholastic Thomist, based on Natural Law, agrees with the German idealist in many aspects, being on monogamy, prohibition on consanguinity, essentiality of the freedom from both sides and even some circumstances of dissolubility of the matrimonial bound. Even though both were theoretical and not jurists in the practical sense, their reflections have in common the unity between theory and practice that may be the true key to discover the reason why they get to many similar conclusions in different periods of thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Studia Histórica: Historia Moderna is the property of Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Cauriensia: Revista Anual de Ciencias Eclesiásticas is the property of Instituto Teologico San Pedro de Alcantara de Caceres and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Anales del Seminario de Historia de la Filosofía is the property of Universidad Complutense de Madrid and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Quaestio Iuris (QI) is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Pravnik is the property of Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of State & Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract This article examines a key element of the power relations underpinning international politics, namely coloniality. It delineates the coloniality of international politics, and elucidates the fundamental aspects of its operationalisation on the one hand, and its crystallisation into international politics on the other. The article is structured into three sections. First, it explores the meaning of coloniality, and outlines its fundamental characteristics. Next, it delineates a crucial operative element of coloniality, the idea of race, and the double movement through which coloniality is rendered operational – the colonisation of time and space. Finally, the article analyses two structuring problematisations that were fundamental to the crystallisation of coloniality in international politics – the work of Francisco de Vitoria, and the Valladolid Debate. It argues that the way in which these problematisations framed the relationship between the European Self and the ultimate Other of Western modernity – the indigenous peoples in the Americas – crystallised the pervasive role of coloniality in international politics.

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 defense 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Chilena de Derecho is the property of Revista Chilena de Derecho and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

La ética de la conquista de América y su evaluación en la universidad vivió un antes y un después del magisterio de Francisco de Vitoria. Éste sometió a riguroso examen los problemas que estaba planteando el descubrimiento de América con su consiguiente colonización y evangelización. Para buscar una solución adecuada quiso someter a rigurosa revisión la política colonial española en la Escuela de Salamanca. El proceso de sus reflexiones están orientados a estudiar los principios jurídicos, teológicos y filosóficos sobre los que habría que cimentar la nueva situación del mundo. En el artículo se recogen y se reflexiona sobre las denuncias de las figuras protagonistas de esta época y una evaluación del papel de la Corona y el fin evangelizador de la conquista.

The present essay attempts to understand the representations of the American indigenous peoples in the Francisco de Vitoria’s relecciones by using the theoretical tools from the history of concepts. In order to do this, the historically ascribed meanings of the two main concepts applied to the indigenous peoples had been reconstructed, which are barbarian and savage, both already existing by the time of America’s invasion. Then, taking into consideration these ethnocentric concepts, it is explored the thought of Francisco de Vitoria on international law

This article investigates legal philosophy of the Second, or Modern Scholasticism. Doxographical, analytical as well as hermeneutical methods are applied. The author of the article concentrates on the list of fundamental rights of nations presented by Francisco de Vitoria including rights to existence, mutual equality and political independence; rights of international migration and trade; as well as the right and even duty of humanitarian or even military help. The article comes to conclusion that the above-mentioned list does not lose its relevance in contemporary world and society, as the rights from this list are regularly infringed. It is also asserted that, having been transferred into cultural - civilizational field, the elements of Vitoria’s list would become universal rights of every culture and civilization. As those rights share respectful, protective and fostering orientation towards various cultures and civilizations, they could be applied as measures of starting, fostering, maintaining and safeguarding intercultural/intercivilizational communication and dialogue.