Pub Date : 2020-12-11DOI: 10.1163/18760759-2020z001
R. Volterra
{"title":"Michael P. Scharf, Milena Sterio and Paul R. Williams, The Syrian Conflict’s Impact on International Law","authors":"R. Volterra","doi":"10.1163/18760759-2020z001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-2020z001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48267682","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-11-23DOI: 10.1163/18760759-41020010
G. Silvestrini
{"title":"The Law of Nations and Natural Law 1625–1800, ed. by Simone Zurbuchen","authors":"G. Silvestrini","doi":"10.1163/18760759-41020010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-41020010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44130804","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1163/18760759-04101011
Tom Sparks
{"title":"Territorial Sovereignty: A Philosophical Exploration, written by Anna Stilz","authors":"Tom Sparks","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04101011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04101011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04101011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43541955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1163/18760759-04101003
Giovanni Chiodi
The idea that a simple unilateral promise, until it is accepted, is not binding according to natural law is defended by Grotius in his major work with an argumentation drawn directly from Lessius, an important source of inspiration for the Dutch jurist, who in turn solves the dispute rooted in the tradition of ius commune. This article aims to reconstruct, in its essential stages, an itinerary through the main positions of medieval and early modern civil and canon lawyers about this controversial issue. These sources constitute the background of early modern scholastics and Grotius as well. The paper analyses some of the principal texts of both bodies of law, highlighting arguments and adding new findings. Notably it is shown that Lessius’s and Grotius’s statements represent a turning point, as far as they react against the resumption of the theory of the binding force of simple unilateral promises in the sixteenth century. With Lessius and Grotius, on the other hand, acceptance became a necessary requirement for every transfer of rights and duties to be enforceable.
{"title":"The Binding Force of Unilateral Promises in the Ius Commune before Grotius","authors":"Giovanni Chiodi","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04101003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04101003","url":null,"abstract":"The idea that a simple unilateral promise, until it is accepted, is not binding according to natural law is defended by Grotius in his major work with an argumentation drawn directly from Lessius, an important source of inspiration for the Dutch jurist, who in turn solves the dispute rooted in the tradition of ius commune. This article aims to reconstruct, in its essential stages, an itinerary through the main positions of medieval and early modern civil and canon lawyers about this controversial issue. These sources constitute the background of early modern scholastics and Grotius as well. The paper analyses some of the principal texts of both bodies of law, highlighting arguments and adding new findings. Notably it is shown that Lessius’s and Grotius’s statements represent a turning point, as far as they react against the resumption of the theory of the binding force of simple unilateral promises in the sixteenth century. With Lessius and Grotius, on the other hand, acceptance became a necessary requirement for every transfer of rights and duties to be enforceable.","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04101003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42090231","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1163/18760759-04101006
S. Penner
Thanks to Barbeyrac, Pufendorf and others, there is a long-familiar picture of Grotius as offering a groundbreaking account of natural law. By now there is also a familiar observation that there is no agreement what makes Grotius’s account innovative. Sometimes this leads to skepticism about how innovative Grotius’s account of natural law really is. Some scholars suggest that Grotius’s account of natural law resembles Suárez’s account. But others continue to argue that Barbeyrac is right to see Grotius as breaking the ice of previous philosophy and laying the groundwork for a distinctively modern moral philosophy. I plan to contribute to the debate by arguing that, properly understood, Grotius’s position is similar to Suárez’s on a range of fundamental questions, and, furthermore, that seeing Grotius as making a radical break with the past violates his own self-conception. 1
{"title":"Making Use of the Testimonies: Suárez and Grotius on Natural Law","authors":"S. Penner","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04101006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04101006","url":null,"abstract":"Thanks to Barbeyrac, Pufendorf and others, there is a long-familiar picture of Grotius as offering a groundbreaking account of natural law. By now there is also a familiar observation that there is no agreement what makes Grotius’s account innovative. Sometimes this leads to skepticism about how innovative Grotius’s account of natural law really is. Some scholars suggest that Grotius’s account of natural law resembles Suárez’s account. But others continue to argue that Barbeyrac is right to see Grotius as breaking the ice of previous philosophy and laying the groundwork for a distinctively modern moral philosophy. I plan to contribute to the debate by arguing that, properly understood, Grotius’s position is similar to Suárez’s on a range of fundamental questions, and, furthermore, that seeing Grotius as making a radical break with the past violates his own self-conception.\u00001\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04101006","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43958198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1163/18760759-04101004
Sören Koch
This article discusses to what extent the widely accepted hypotheses of Hugo Grotius’s crucial impact on the theory of contract law – also in Scandinavia – may be maintained or even positively confirmed. Although few direct references to the works of Grotius can be found in Scandinavian legal literature of the seventeenth and eighteenth century, it would be premature to draw a negative conclusion. An impact of Grotius’s thoughts may rather be demonstrated by thoroughly analysing patterns of argumentation concerning specific contractual topics both in legal literature and case law. The article provides the reader with necessary information on the institutional and intellectual preconditions for the reception of Grotius in the Scandinavian legal orders before discussing the impact of the ‘will-theory’ on the requirements of a legally binding contractual agreement in the works of selected influential legal scholars and in case law in more detail. The analysis confirms that Grotius’s work contributed substantially to shaping the intellectual framework in which the first contract law doctrines in Scandinavia evolved.
{"title":"Grotius’s Impact on the Scandinavian Theory of Contract Law","authors":"Sören Koch","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04101004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04101004","url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses to what extent the widely accepted hypotheses of Hugo Grotius’s crucial impact on the theory of contract law – also in Scandinavia – may be maintained or even positively confirmed. Although few direct references to the works of Grotius can be found in Scandinavian legal literature of the seventeenth and eighteenth century, it would be premature to draw a negative conclusion. An impact of Grotius’s thoughts may rather be demonstrated by thoroughly analysing patterns of argumentation concerning specific contractual topics both in legal literature and case law. The article provides the reader with necessary information on the institutional and intellectual preconditions for the reception of Grotius in the Scandinavian legal orders before discussing the impact of the ‘will-theory’ on the requirements of a legally binding contractual agreement in the works of selected influential legal scholars and in case law in more detail. The analysis confirms that Grotius’s work contributed substantially to shaping the intellectual framework in which the first contract law doctrines in Scandinavia evolved.","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04101004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48248643","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1163/18760759-04101001
W. Decock
In textbooks on international law, Grotius’s De iure belli ac pacis is frequently cited as proof of the Protestant origins of international law. Reaching back to Enlightenment commentaries on Grotius, this claim was reinforced at the threshold of the twentieth century and has prospered ever since, thanks to Hamilton Vreeland Jr.’s influential biography designating Grotius as the ‘father of the modern science of international law’.1 Not unlike Weber’s account of the ‘Protestant origins of capitalism’, this claim has developed into a grand narrative about the ‘Protestant origins of modern international law’ that has become popular not only among jurists, but also historians, philosophers and political scientists. Yet, this claim must be nuanced,2 and against the background of growing confessional rivalry between Protestants and Catholics at the turn of the twentieth century, it has also been subject to criticism. Catholic jurists trying to vindicate the importance of their own tradition have developed a counter-narrative. James Brown Scott, the American ‘dean of international law’, played a crucial role in this endeavor. He emphasized the fundamental contribution to the rise of modern natural and international law by Catholic teólogos-juristas, notably Francisco de Vitoria and Francisco Suárez.3 Scott’s endeavor, however, was born not out of mere academic
在国际法教科书中，格劳秀斯的《和平论》(De iure belli ac pacis)经常被引用为证明国际法起源于新教的证据。追溯到启蒙运动对格劳秀斯的评论，这一主张在20世纪初得到了加强，并从此蓬勃发展，这要归功于汉密尔顿·弗里兰(Hamilton Vreeland Jr.)颇具影响力的传记，他将格劳秀斯称为“现代国际法科学之父”与韦伯关于“资本主义的新教起源”的说法不同，这一说法已经发展成为一种关于“现代国际法的新教起源”的宏大叙述，不仅在法学家中流行，而且在历史学家、哲学家和政治科学家中也很流行。然而，这种说法必须是微妙的，而且在二十世纪之交，新教徒和天主教徒之间日益激烈的忏悔竞争的背景下，它也受到了批评。天主教法学家试图证明他们自己传统的重要性，却发展出一种相反的叙述。美国“国际法院长”詹姆斯·布朗·斯科特(James Brown Scott)在这一努力中发挥了至关重要的作用。他强调天主教teólogos-juristas，特别是弗朗西斯科·德·维多利亚和弗朗西斯科·Suárez.3对现代自然法和国际法兴起的根本贡献然而，斯科特的努力并不仅仅是出于学术目的
{"title":"Hugo Grotius’s Views on Consent, Contract and the Christian Commonwealth – Introductory Remarks","authors":"W. Decock","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04101001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04101001","url":null,"abstract":"In textbooks on international law, Grotius’s De iure belli ac pacis is frequently cited as proof of the Protestant origins of international law. Reaching back to Enlightenment commentaries on Grotius, this claim was reinforced at the threshold of the twentieth century and has prospered ever since, thanks to Hamilton Vreeland Jr.’s influential biography designating Grotius as the ‘father of the modern science of international law’.1 Not unlike Weber’s account of the ‘Protestant origins of capitalism’, this claim has developed into a grand narrative about the ‘Protestant origins of modern international law’ that has become popular not only among jurists, but also historians, philosophers and political scientists. Yet, this claim must be nuanced,2 and against the background of growing confessional rivalry between Protestants and Catholics at the turn of the twentieth century, it has also been subject to criticism. Catholic jurists trying to vindicate the importance of their own tradition have developed a counter-narrative. James Brown Scott, the American ‘dean of international law’, played a crucial role in this endeavor. He emphasized the fundamental contribution to the rise of modern natural and international law by Catholic teólogos-juristas, notably Francisco de Vitoria and Francisco Suárez.3 Scott’s endeavor, however, was born not out of mere academic","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04101001","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42493294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1163/18760759-04101008
Christoph A. Stumpf
In this article Grotius’s perception of the legal relevance of consent is analysed with respect to its ongoing importance for an ethical fundament of public international law. It is argued that Grotius views the function of consent as an aspect of human law, which is limited, but also supported by what he views as the overarching framework of divine law. This can be particularly illustrated by Grotius’s idea of a duty of granting consent: such duty reflects the ethical quality of individual interaction within international law.
{"title":"Consent and the Ethics of International Law Revisiting Grotius’s System of States in a Secular Setting","authors":"Christoph A. Stumpf","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04101008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04101008","url":null,"abstract":"In this article Grotius’s perception of the legal relevance of consent is analysed with respect to its ongoing importance for an ethical fundament of public international law. It is argued that Grotius views the function of consent as an aspect of human law, which is limited, but also supported by what he views as the overarching framework of divine law. This can be particularly illustrated by Grotius’s idea of a duty of granting consent: such duty reflects the ethical quality of individual interaction within international law.","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04101008","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46496064","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1163/18760759-04101009
Ivo Cerman
The article discusses the reception of Grotius by Catholic lawyers at the university of Prague. It focuses on the Grotius commentary by Nicolaus Ignaz Königsmann (1688–1752), which was meant as a response to the discussion of Central European Catholic lawyers on questions of toleration and permissions in law. I argue that Königsmann agreed with Grotius because his conception could be combined with the Catholic belief in free will and dictamen sanae rationis. He grounded natural law in rational human nature and rejected attempts to derive natural law from the highest principle.
{"title":"Nicolaus Ignaz Königsmann: Natural Law in Prague Before 1752","authors":"Ivo Cerman","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04101009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04101009","url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses the reception of Grotius by Catholic lawyers at the university of Prague. It focuses on the Grotius commentary by Nicolaus Ignaz Königsmann (1688–1752), which was meant as a response to the discussion of Central European Catholic lawyers on questions of toleration and permissions in law. I argue that Königsmann agreed with Grotius because his conception could be combined with the Catholic belief in free will and dictamen sanae rationis. He grounded natural law in rational human nature and rejected attempts to derive natural law from the highest principle.","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04101009","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45711394","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-06-16DOI: 10.1163/18760759-04101010
J. Stievermann
This essay examines the reception of Grotius’s pioneering Annotata ad Vetus Testamentum (1644) in the ‘Biblia Americana’ (1693–1728), a scriptural commentary written by the New England theologian Cotton Mather (1663–1728). Mather engaged with Grotius on issues of translation, biblical authorship, inspiration, the canon, and the legitimate forms of interpreting the Hebrew Bible as Christian Scripture. While frequently relying on the Dutch Arminian humanist in discussing philological problems or contextual questions, Mather (as a self-declared defender of Reformed orthodoxy) in many cases rejected, ignored, or significantly modified Grotius’s farther-reaching conclusions on dogmatically sensitive topics. This strategy marks Mather’s ‘Biblia Americana’ as an exemple of a highly sophisticated but ultimately apologetic type of biblical criticism in the context of the early Enlightenment in British North America.
{"title":"Admired Adversary: Wrestling with Grotius the Exegete in Cotton Mather’s Biblia Americana (1693–1728)","authors":"J. Stievermann","doi":"10.1163/18760759-04101010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18760759-04101010","url":null,"abstract":"This essay examines the reception of Grotius’s pioneering Annotata ad Vetus Testamentum (1644) in the ‘Biblia Americana’ (1693–1728), a scriptural commentary written by the New England theologian Cotton Mather (1663–1728). Mather engaged with Grotius on issues of translation, biblical authorship, inspiration, the canon, and the legitimate forms of interpreting the Hebrew Bible as Christian Scripture. While frequently relying on the Dutch Arminian humanist in discussing philological problems or contextual questions, Mather (as a self-declared defender of Reformed orthodoxy) in many cases rejected, ignored, or significantly modified Grotius’s farther-reaching conclusions on dogmatically sensitive topics. This strategy marks Mather’s ‘Biblia Americana’ as an exemple of a highly sophisticated but ultimately apologetic type of biblical criticism in the context of the early Enlightenment in British North America.","PeriodicalId":42132,"journal":{"name":"Grotiana","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2020-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18760759-04101010","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44994930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：