The Law of Nations in Hugo Grotius

Vauthier Borges de Macedo, Paulo Emílio

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59403-3_6

Paulo Emílio Vauthier Borges de Macedo⁴

Part of the book series: Studies in the History of Law and Justice ((SHLJ,volume 9))

430 Accesses

Abstract

I saved the best for this final chapter. Here, I shall analyze Grotius’ concept of the Law of Nations and demonstrate how close it is to Suárez’s. So far, despite the Scholastic influence on Grotius and the fact that these two authors tackled the notion of subject rights, Suárez and Grotius were kept somewhat separate. In Chap. IV, I presented James St. Leger’s thesis and found it inconclusive. After spending most part of the entire last century in disbelief, Grotius is more original than previously thought. Still, Suárez exerted some influence over the Grotian jus gentium.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 89.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 119.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 169.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
“Aliunde igitur quam ex legum Romanarum corpore petenda est praestabilis illa scientia, quam Cicero dicit consistere in foederibus, pactionibus, conditionibus populorum regum exterarumque nationum, in omnni denique belli jure ac pacis.” (DJPC, p. 6).
2.
“(…) aut ius illud, quod inter populos plures aut populorum rectores intercedit, sive ab ipsa natura profectum, aut divinis constitutum legibus, sive moribus et pacto tacito introductum” (DJBP. prolegomenon 1).
3.
DJBP. prolegomenon 34.
4.
Haggenmacher (1983), pp. 564–565.
5.
DJBP. prolegomenon 52.
6.
“(…) regi aut civitati imperium habenti, nihil iniustum quod utile” (DJBP. prolegomenon 3). The author states that this sentence implies a “proposition similar to the one that considers men in the peak of fortune, that bigger or smaller equity depends on bigger or smaller force and it is not possible to rule a State without injustice” [“cui simile illud, in summa fortuna id aequius quod validius, et rempublicam sine iniuria geri non posse”]. This corresponds to an opinion that prevents legal and moral judgements on war. Law and War would be antithetical realities.
7.
Kissinger (1994), p. 61. When Pope Urban VIII was informed on Richelieu’s death, he would have delivered the following epitaph on his tomb: “if there is a God, the Cardinal de Richelieu will have much to answer for. If not… well, he had a successful life.” (p. 58).
8.
Tucídides (2001), p. 348.
9.
Tucídides (2001), p. 349.
10.
Tucídides (2001), p. 351.
11.
Tucídides (2001), p. 353.
12.
Guimarães Pinto (1999), p. 7.
13.
Erasmo de Roterdão (1999), p. 28.
14.
Erasmo de Roterdão (1999), p. 29.
15.
Erasmo de Roterdão (1999), p. 29.
16.
Erasmo de Roterdão (1999), p. 31.
17.
Erasmo de Roterdão (1999), p. 66.
18.
“Medicina ergo utrisque adhibenda fuit, tum ne nihil, tum ne omnia crederentur licere” (DJBP. prolegomenon 29).
19.
DIB, I, 6, 1.
20.
“Armata in armatum exsecutio bellum dicitur” (DJPC, p. 30).
21.
“Bellum est publicorum armorum iusta contentio” (DIB. I, 2, 1).
22.
DJPC, p. 30.
23.
DJPC. pp. 31–42.
24.
DJPC, p. 59.
25.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 65.
26.
DIB. I, 7, 3.
27.
DJPC, p. 60.
28.
Haggenmacher (1983), pp. 76–148.
29.
DJPC. pp. 63–64.
30.
Haggenmacher (1983), pp. 148–151.
31.
DJPC, pp. 67–68.
32.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 182.
33.
“(…) justum est bellum his, qui voluntarie gerunt, in singulos et in rempublicam, quaeve cujusve magistratus injuriam fecerunt et in rempublicam, quae civem injuriae auctorem tuetur inque eorum omnium, qui injuriam faciunt, qua tales sunt, socios et subditos” (DJPC, p. 75).
34.
“Subditis id bellum justam habet causam, quod jubetur a superiore, dum ratio probabilis subditorum non repugnet.” (DJPC, p. 80).
35.
“(…) eorum qui voluntarie agunt respectu, bellum ex utraque parte justum non datur.” (DJPC, p. 83).
36.
DJPC, p. 84.
37.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 222.
38.
DJPC, p. 95.
39.
DJPC, p. 101.
40.
DJPC, p. 107.
41.
DJPC, p. 115.
42.
DJPC, p. 26.
43.
“Hoc est: hi qui voluntarie agunt justo animo bellum gerunt, quod juris adipiscendi gratia gerunt” and “subditi justo animo id bellum gerunt, quod gerunt ut obediant superiori” (DJPC. pp. 125–127).
44.
Haggenmacher (1983), pp. 406–407.
45.
“Videbam per Christianum orbem vel barbaris gentibus pudendam bellandi licentiam: levibus aut nullis de causis ad arma procurri, quibus semel sumtis nullam iam divini, nullam humani iuris reverentiam, plane quasi uno edicto ad omnia scelera emisso furore.” (DJBP. prolegomenon 28).
46.
“(…) sit bellum status per vim certantium, qua tales sunt” (DJBP. I, 1, 2, 1).
47.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 458.
48.
DJBP. III, 21, 1, 1.
49.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 461.
50.
“At post cognita sequi notionem convenientiae rerum cum ipsa ratione quae corpore est potior; atque eam convenientiam, in qua honestum sit propositum, pluris faciendam, quam ad quae sola primum animi appetitio ferebatur; quia prima naturae commendent nos quidm rectae rationi, sed ipsa recta ratio carior nobis esse debeat quam, illa sint a quibus ad hanc venerimus. Haec cum veras int et ab omnibus, qui judicio sano sunt praediti; facile sine alia demonstratione assensum impetrent; sequitur in examinando jure naturae primum videndum quid illis naturae initiis congruat, deinde veniendum ad illud, quod quanquam post oritur, dignius tamen est; neque sumendum tantum, si detur, sed omni modo expetendum.” (DJBP. I, 2, 1, 2).
51.
DJBP. I, 2, 1, 4-5.
52.
DJBP. I, 2, 2-3.
53.
DJBP. I, 2, 4, 2.
54.
DJBP. I, 2, 5, 5.
55.
DJBP. I, 2, 8 (full).
56.
DJBP. prolegomenon 35.
57.
De Bello, Proemium. Haggenmacher himself had already called attention to this similarity (Haggenmacher, 1983, p. 529).
58.
ST. 2-2 q. 40-42.
59.
DJBP. I, 3, 2, 1.
60.
DJBP. I, 3, 2, 2.
61.
DJBP. I, 3, 3, 9.
62.
DJBP. I, 3, 4, 1-2 and I, 3, 5.
63.
DJBP. II, 1, 1, 1.
64.
“Causa iusta belli suscipiendi nulla esse alia potest, nisi injuria.” (DJBP. II, 1, 1, 4).
65.
“Unica est et sola causa iusta inferendi bellum, iniuria accepta.” (De indis II. De Jure Belli, 13, p. 825).
66.
DJBP. II, 1, 2, 2. Many commentators (for example, Yasuaki, 1993, p. 79) tend to atribute to Grotius only three just causes for war. However, such attribution stems from a superficial reading of this passage: the author first states a general opinion, which he himself feels is not precise, and then differs in personam rights from in rem rights. This division is reflected in the very structure of book II of DJBP, in which Grotius adresses in rem rights from chapter 1 through 10 and in personam rights from chapter 11 through 19.
67.
Straumann, 2006, p. 13.
68.
“Ac plane quot actionum forensium sunt fontes, totidem sunt belli” (DJBP. II, 1, 2, 1).
69.
DJBP. III, 2, 2,1.
70.
DJBP. III, 4, 3 and 4.
71.
DJBP. III, 3, 11 and III, 6, 1, 1.
72.
“Legenda mihi retro vestigia, et eripienda bellum gerentibus pene omnia quae largitus videri possum, nec tamen largitus sum nam cum primum hanc juris gentium partem explicare sum aggressus, testatus sum juris esse aut licere multa dici eo quod impune fiant, partim etiam quod judicia coactiva sua illis auctoritatem accommodent, quae tamen aut exorbitent a recti regula, sive illa in jure stricte dicto, sive in aliarum virtutum praecepto posita est, aut certe omittantur sanctius et cum majori apud bonos laude.” (DJBP. III, 10, 1, 1).
73.
Basdevant (1904), p. 238.
74.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 581.
75.
This expression belongs to Haggenmacher (1983), p. 584.
76.
“Quod ut probe intelligatur, sciendum est justum nos non illud dicere, quod aliquo civili jure permittitur, aut potius, cui leges connivent: quod enim sic impune fertur atque adeo licere dicitur, cum revera justum non sit, ne honestum quidem est, ut jurisconsulti praedicant: sed de eo nos loqui, quod immutabili lege naturae decretum atque constitutum est.” (DJPC, p. 301).
77.
“Interdum enim licere dicitur id quod rectum ex omni parte piumque est, etiamsi forte aliud quid fieri possit laudabilius” and “Alias vero licere aliquid dicitur, non quod salva pietate et officiorum regulis fieri potest, sed quod apud homines poenae non subjacet” (DJBP. III, 4, 2, 1 and 2).
78.
DJBP. I, 1, 17, 2.
79.
DJBP. I, 15, 11.
80.
“(…) verbum licere non debere intelligi cum proprietate, ut dicitur de re licita et honesta. (…) Debet ergo verbum licere late sumi et in ordine ad humanum iudicium, prout licere dicitur quod impune fit et quod usu toleratur; quod perinde est ac permitti. Vel dici etiam potest et fere in idem redit naturaliter, id est, iure gentium id licere, id est, non prohiberi; non quia ius naturale rigorosum id non prohibeat, sed quia jus gentium, prout humanum est, non addit specialem prohibitionem” (DL. II, 20, 4).
81.
DJBP. II, 18, 1.
82.
“Saepe enim proximi caritas non permittet at summo jure utamur” and “(…) latius patere caritatis quam juris regulas” (DJBP. III, 13, 4 and III, 1, 4, 2).
83.
“Ex proposito juste interfici nemo potest, nisi aut in poenam justam aut quatenus absque eo vitam et res nostras tueri non possumus: quanquam illud ipsum ob res caducas hominem occidere, etiam si a justitia stricte dicta non abeat, a caritatis tamen lege discedit.” (DJBP. III, 11, 2).
84.
Bobbio (1991), pp. 134–137.
85.
“Ita civitatis species una est, consociatio juris atque imperii; altera, relatio partium inter se earum quae regunt, et quae reguntur. Hanc spectat Politicus, illam Iurisconsultus (…)” (DJBP. II, 9, 8, 2).
86.
“Facultas ergo moralis civitatem gubernandi” (DJBP. I, 3, 6, 1).
87.
“Sic regia postestas sub se habet et patriam et dominicam potestatem” (DJBP. I, 1, 6).
88.
DJBP. I, 3, 6, 2.
89.
“Hinc factum ut statim quisque hominum ad suos usus arripere posset quod vellet, et quae consumi poterant consumere. Ac talis usus universalis juris erat tum vice proprietatis. Nam quod quisque sic arripuerat, id ei eripere alter nisi per injuriam non poterat.” (DJBP. II, 2, 2, 1).
90.
DJBP. II, 7, 27, 1.
91.
DJBP. II, 5, 15, 2.
92.
DJBP. II, 2, 20 and 21, 1.
93.
DJBP. II, 2, 2, 5.
94.
ML. Caput V, p. 18.
95.
“Nam libertas cum natura competere hominibus aut populis dicitur, id intelligendum est de jure naturae praecedente factum omne humanum, et de libertate, non de ea quae est, hoc est ut natura quis servus non sit, non ut jus habeat ne unquam serviat” (DJBP. II, 22, 11).
96.
DJBP. II, 5, 1.
97.
“Est autem civitas coetus perfectus liberorum hominum, juris fruendi et communis utilitatis causa sociatus.” (DJBP. I, 1, 14, 1). It is importante to emphazise that the notion of “perfect community” brings the Grotian theory of the State closer to the Scholastic cultural universe. However, for an eclectic thinker such as Grotius, one influence is not enough. Del Vecchio discovered how Grotius’ definition resembled that of his favorite ancient source, Cicero. In República. L, 1, 25, 39: “Est igitur (…) res publica res populi, populus autem non omnis hominum coetus quoquo modo congregatus, sed coetus multitudinis juris consensu et utilitatis communione sociatus.” (Del Vecchio, 1962, p. 261). This is another example of eclectic coincidence in Grotius.
98.
DJBP. II, 5, 24, 1.
99.
DJBP. I, 3, 8, 3-6.
100.
DJBP. II, 5, 23.
101.
Borschberg (2006), p. 10.
102.
DJBP. II, 24, 6, 1-2.
103.
DJBP. II, 14, 8.
104.
Tuck (1979), p. 79.
105.
DJBP. I, 3, 8.
106.
DJBP. I, 5, 1.
107.
Tuck (1979), p. 80.
108.
“Non nego a lege etiam humana quosdam virtutis actus posse praecepi, sub certo morris periculo, ut de statione non deferenda; sed nec temere ea voluntas legem condentis fuisse intelligitur, neque videntur homines in se, et alios tantum jus acepisse, nisi quatenus summa necessitas id exigat. Ferri enim legis ab hominibus solent et debent cum sensu humanae imbecillitatis. (…) Hi vero si interrogarentur an velint omnibus hoc onus imponere, ut mori praeoptent, quam ullo casu vim superiorum armis arcere, nescio an velle se sint responsuri, nisi forte cum hoc additamento, si resisit nequeat, nisi cum maxima reipublicae perturbatione, aut exitio plurimorum innocentium. Quod enim tali circusntantia caritas commendaret, id in legem quoque humanam deduci posse non dubito.” (DJBP. I, 4, 7, 2).
109.
Vincent (2002), p. 241 et seq.
110.
DJBP. II, 22, 13, 1.
111.
DJBP. II, 22, 14, 1-3.
112.
“Ex his apparet puniendi causas esse naturales et ex ea lege procedere, quam nos primam descripsimus. Quid ergo, nonne puniendi potestas reipublicae propria est? Imo vero ut a republica ad magistratum, ita ad rempublicam jus omne a singulis devenit (…). Quare cum transferre nemo possit, quod non habuit, jus illud antiquius penes privatos fuisse quam penes rempublicam necesse videtur.” (DJPC, p. 91).
113.
Grotius, Hugo. Traité du Pouvoir du Magistrat Politique sur les choses sacrées. Trad. Lescalopier de Nourar. Londres: s/n, 1751, p. 2.
114.
“Haec ergo summa potestas, quod subjectum habeat videamus. Subjectum aliud est commune, aliud proprium: ut visus subjectum commune est corpus, proprium oculos. ita summae potestatis subjectum commune est civitas, quam perfectum coetum esse supra diximus.” and “Subjectum ergo commune summae potestatis esto civitas, ita ut jam diximus intellecta. Subjectum proprium est persona uma pluresve, pro cujusque gentis legibus ac moribus” (DJBP. I, 3, 7, 1 and 3).
115.
Haggenmacher (1983), pp. 540–541. It is worth pointing out that the common and proper objects correspond to the Scholastic distiction between the universal and the singular. See chapter III.
116.
“(…) cujus legem Cicero nihil aliud esse ait, nisi rectam et a numine Deorum tractam rationem” (DJPC, p. 12).
117.
“(…) quicquid pmnes republicae significarunt se velle id in omnes ius est” (DJPC, p. 26).
118.
“Ne respublica neu civis in alteram rempublicam alteriusve civem jus suum nisi judicio exsequatur” (DJPC, p. 27; sheets 12’a and 12’).
119.
Kosters (1925), p. 43.
120.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 361.
121.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 363.
122.
“(…) sive jus gentium quod recte ac proprie secundarium dicitur” (DJPC, p. 26; sheet 12’).
123.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 366.
124.
DJPC, p. 119.
125.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 370.
126.
“Id enim non ex primario ut diximus gentium jure procedit, sed ex jure positivo, cujus pars magna sunt consuetudines. Deinde non ex condicto venit, ut respublicas obliget, sed quasi fortuito consensu, a quo singulis populis, ubi ita videtur, recedere liberum est” (DJPC, p. 157).
127.
“(…) ex jure gentium, non illo naturali, sed positivo” (DJPC, p. 122).
128.
Haggenmacher (1983), p. 376.
129.
“Error est non minus vetus quam pestilens, quo multi mortales, ii autem maxime, qui plurimum vi ataque opibus valent, persuadent sibi, aut, quod verius puto, persuadere conantur, justum atque injustum non suapte natura, sed hominum inani quadam opinione, atque consuetudine distingui.” (ML. Ad Principes Populosque Líberos Orbis Christiani, p. 10).
130.
ML. Caput VII, p. 28.
131.
Peter Haggenmacher is one of the few commentators of Grotius to examine the text referred to above and to suggest its connection with Suárez (Haggenmacher, 1983, pp. 388–397).
132.
Armitage, 2004, p. xviii.
133.
Burigny, 1754. pp. 26–27.
134.
ML. Caput V. pp. 17–21.
135.
Welwod (2004), p. 69.
136.
“Negare nolo interdum, apud historicos maxime, jus gentium abusive sumi non pro eo jure quod inter se habent gentes, sed pro eo quod quaedam nations altera alterius exemplum secuta sibi juris statuerunt, hoc est pro jure civili diversorum populorum.” (Grotius, Hugo. Defensio Capitis quinti Maris Liberi oppugnati a Guilielmo Welwodo Iuris Civilis professore capite XXVII eius libri scripti Anglico sermone cui titulum fecit Compedium legum Maritimarum. A Collotype Reproduction of the Manuscript. New York: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, s.a. Sheet 10'a. Henceforth, DCQ).
137.
“Nam sicut in uno populo, etiamsi populos non convenerit ipse tamen usus et consuetudo taciti consensus index jus facit, ita et humani generis prisca consuetudo vim habet legis. Et hinc est quod multa Juris gentium dicuntur introducta moribus.” (DCQ. sheet 10').
138.
“Adde iam quod Mare non tantum dicitur a Jurisconsultis esse commune gentium jure, sed sine ulla adjectione dicitur esse Juris gentium, quibus in locis jus non potest significare normam aliquam justi, sed facultatem moralem in re: ut cum dicimus haec res est juris mei, id est habeo in ea dominium aut usum aut simile aliquid.” (DCQ. sheet 10’a).
139.
DJBP. I, 2, 4, 1 and 2.
140.
“Haec ideo annotavimus, neque reperta juris gentium voce apud Romani juris auctores statim id jus intelligat quod mutari non possit: sed diligenter distinguat naturalia praecepta ab his quae pro certo statu sunt naturalia, et jura multis populis feorfim communia, ab his quae societatis humanae vinculum continent.” (DJBP. II, 8, 26).
141.
“Romani Iurisconsulti ubi de acquirendo rerum dominio agunt, complutes ejus acquirendi recensent modos, quo juris gentium vocant: sed si quis recte advertat, inveniet eo omnes, excepto belli jure, non pertinere ad jus gentium illud de quo agimus: seda ut referendos ad jus naturae, non quidem merum, sed quod sequatur introductum jam dominium, et legem omnem civilem antecedat, aut ad ipsam legem civilem, non solius populi Romani, sed multarum circa nationum” (DJBP. II, 8, 1, 1).
142.
Latius autem patens est jus Gentium, id est quod Gentium omnium aut multarum voluntate vim obligandi accepit. Multarum addidi, quia vix ullum jus reperitur extra jus naturale, quod ipsum quoque gentium dici solet, omnibus gentibus commune.” (DJBP. I, 1, 14, 1).
143.
“Probatur autem hoc jus gentium pari modo quo jus non scriptum civile, uso continuo et testimonio peritorum.” (DJBP. I, 1, 14, 2).
144.
“(…) unde et ab uno populo aliis inconsultis mutari potuit, imo et hoc evenire ut aliis locis atque tem.
145.
“Cui simillimum quid in consuetudine apparet. Nam haec quoque, semotis legibus civilibus quae certo tempore ac modo eam introduci volunt, a populo súbdito introduci potest ex eo quod ab imperium habente toleratur: tempus vero quo illa consuetudo effectum juris accipit, non est definitum, sed arbitrarium, quantum fatis est ut concurrat ad significandum consensum.” (DJBP. II, 4, 5, 2).
146.
“(…) ut omnia inter se membra consentiunt, quia singula servari totius interest, ita homines singulis parcent, quia ad coetum geniti sumus. Salva autem esse societas, nisi amore et custodia partium non potest.” (DJPC, p. 13).
147.
DJPC, p. 26.
148.
“Sciendum est igitur in primordiis vitae humanae aliud quam nunc est dominium, aliud communionem fuisse.” (DJPC, p. 214).
149.
“Deus humano generi generaliter contulit jus in res hujus inferiores naturae statim a mundo condito, atque interum mundo post diluvio reparato.” (DJBP. II, 2, 2, 1).
150.
DJBP. prolegomenon 17.
151.
“Sed et historia sacra, praeter id quod in praeceptis consistit, affectum illum socialem non parum etiam eo excitat quod nos docet ab iisdem primis parentibus ortos homines omnes, ita ut eo quoque sensu dici recte possit quod alio dixit Florentinus, cognationem inter nos a natura constituam” (DJBP. prolegomenon 14).
152.
“(…) nulla est tam valida civitas quae non aliquando aliorum extra se ope indigere possit, vel ad comercia, vel etiam ad arcendas multarum externarum gentium junctas in se vires” ( DJBP. prolegomenon 22).

References

Armitage, David. Introduction. In: Grotius, Hugo. The Free Seas. With William Welwod’s critique and Grotius’s Reply. Trad. Richard Hakluyt. Edited by David Armitage. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2004. (Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics).
Google Scholar
Basdevant, Jules. Hugo Grotius. In: Pillet, Antoine (ed.). Les Fondateurs du Droit International. Paris: V. Giard & E. Brière, 1904.
Google Scholar
Bobbio, Norberto. Thomas Hobbes. Trad. Carlos Nelson Coutinho. Rio de Janeiro: Campus, 1991.
Google Scholar
Borschberg, Peter. Grotius, the Social Contract and Political Resistance: a study of the unpublished Theses LVI. IILJ Working Paper 2006/7 (History and Theory of International Law Series). New York: New York University School of Law, 2006. Available at <http://www.iilj.org>.
Burigny, Jean-Levesque de. Vie de Grotius, avec l’histoire de ses ouvrages, et de négociations auxquelles il fut employé. Amsterdam: M.M. Rey, 1754.
Google Scholar
Del Vecchio, Giorgio. Grotius and the Foundation of International Law. New York University Law Review, v. 37, n. 260, pp. 260-266, April 1962.
Google Scholar
Erasmo de Roterdão. A Guerra e a Queixa da Paz. Translated by A. Guimarães Pinto. Lisboa: Edições 70, 1999.
Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. Defensio Capitis quinti Maris Liberi oppugnati a Guilielmo Welwodo Iuris Civilis professore capite XXVII eius libri scripti Anglico sermone cui titulum fecit Compedium legum Maritimarum. A Collotype Reproduction of the Manuscript. New York: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, s.a.
Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. The Freedom of the Seas, or the right which belongs to the Dutch to take part in the East Indian Trade. Translated by Ralph van Deman Magoffin. Introduction by James Brown Scott. New York: Oxford University Press, 1916.
Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. De Iure Belli ac Pacis libri tres. In quibus ius naturae et Gentium: item iuris publici praecipua explicantur. Parisiis: Nicolaum Buon, 1625.
Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. De Iure Belli ac Pacis libri tres. In quibus ius naturae et Gentium: item iuris publici praecipua explicantur. Amsterdã: I. Blaeu, 1646. Edited by James Brown Scott. Oxford, London: Clarendon Press, Geoffrey Cumberlege, 1925. (The Classics of International Law).
Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. De Iure Belli ac Pacis libri tres. In quibus ius naturae et Gentium: item iuris publici praecipua explicantur. Cum Annotationibus Auctoris, ejusdemque Dissertatione de Mari Libero; Ac Libello singulari De Aequitate, Indulgentia et Facilitate: Nec non Joann. Frid. Gronovii Notis in totum opus de Jure Belli ac Pacis, Ex altera recensione Joannis Barbeyracii. Amsterdã: apud Janssonio-Waesbergios, 1735.
Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. De Jure Praedae Commentarius. La Haye: Hamaker, Nijhoff, 1868.
Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. De Jure Praedae Commentarius. I: Trad. Gwladys Williams e Walter Zeidel. II: The Collotype Reproduction of the Original Manuscript of 1604 in the Handwriting of Grotius. Edited by James Brown Scott. Oxford, London: Clarendon Press, Geoffrey Cumberlege, 1950. 2 v. (The Classics of International Law).
Google Scholar
Grotius, Hugo. Traité du Pouvoir du Magistrat Politique sur les choses sacrées. Trad. Lescalopier de Nourar. Londres: s/n, 1751.
Google Scholar
Guimarães Pinto, António. Introdução. ERASMO DE ROTERDÃO. A Guerra e a Queixa da Paz. Trad. A. Guimarães Pinto. Lisboa: Edições 70, 1999.
Google Scholar
Haggenmacher, Peter. Grotius et la doctrine de la guerre juste. Genève, Paris: Heige, Presses Universitaires de France, 1983.
Google Scholar
Kissinger, Henry. Diplomacy. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994.
Google Scholar
Kosters, Jan. Les Fondements du Droit des Gens. Contribution à la théorie générale du droit des gens. La Hague: Lugduno-Batavae, 1925. (Biblioteca Visseriana, v. IX, t. IV).
Google Scholar
Straumann, Benjamin. Is Modern Liberty Ancient? Roman Remedies and Natural Rights in Hugo Grotius’ Early Works on Natural Law. IILJ Working Paper 2006/11 (History and Theory of International Law Series). New York: New York University School of Law, 2006. Available at <http://www.iilj.org>.
Tucídides. História da Guerra do Peloponeso. Trad. Mário da Gama Kury. 4.ed. Brasília: UNB; São Paulo: Imprensa Oficial do Estado de São Paulo, 2001.
Google Scholar
Tuck, Richard. Natural Rights Theories: their origin and development. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Google Scholar
Vincent, R.J. Grotius, Human Rights and Intervention. In: Bull, Hedley; Kingsbury, Benedict; Roberts, Adam (ed.). Hugo Grotius and International Relations. Oxford, New York: Oxford University, Clarendon Press, 2002.
Google Scholar
Vitoria, Francisco de. De Indis II. De Jure Belli. In: ______. Obras de Francisco de Vitória. Relecciones Teologicas. Elaboradas bajo la dirección de Teofilo Urdanoz. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1960.
Google Scholar
Welwod, William. Of the Community and Property of the Seas. In: Grotius, Hugo. The Free Seas. With William Welwod’s critique and Grotius’s Reply. Translated by Richard Hakluyt and edited by David Armitage. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2004. (Natural Law and Enlightenment Classics).
Google Scholar
Yasuaki, Onuma. War. In: Yasuaki, Onuma (ed.). A Normative Approach to War: peace, war and justice in Hugo Grotius. Oxford: Clarendom Press, 1993.
Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Leme, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Paulo Emílio Vauthier Borges de Macedo

Authors

Paulo Emílio Vauthier Borges de Macedo
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paulo Emílio Vauthier Borges de Macedo .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Vauthier Borges de Macedo, P.E. (2017). The Law of Nations in Hugo Grotius. In: Catholic and Reformed Traditions in International Law. Studies in the History of Law and Justice, vol 9. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59403-3_6

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-59403-3_6
Published: 29 August 2017
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-59402-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-59403-3
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics