SigPhiSigPhi

论印第安人与战争法之重讲(卡内基经典丛书,贝特译,1917)

弗朗西斯科·德·维多利亚

语言:
英语
译者:
J. P. Bate
状态:
完整作品
作者归属:
作者本人所著
文本状况:
文本清晰
篇幅:
约 160,000 词 · 759 个段落
引用本作品
  • APA弗朗西斯科·德·维多利亚. (n.d.). 论印第安人与战争法之重讲(卡内基经典丛书,贝特译,1917). SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/francisco-de-vitoria/de-indis-et-de-iure-belli-relectiones-carnegie-classics-bate-tr-1917
  • MLA弗朗西斯科·德·维多利亚. "论印第安人与战争法之重讲(卡内基经典丛书,贝特译,1917)." SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/francisco-de-vitoria/de-indis-et-de-iure-belli-relectiones-carnegie-classics-bate-tr-1917.
  • Chicago弗朗西斯科·德·维多利亚. 论印第安人与战争法之重讲(卡内基经典丛书,贝特译,1917). SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/francisco-de-vitoria/de-indis-et-de-iure-belli-relectiones-carnegie-classics-bate-tr-1917.

内容简介

维多利亚的两篇“复讲”:论美洲印第安人,以及论战争法。拉丁原文附英译。

背景与流传

须先知道何谓“复讲”(relectio)以及它如何传到我们手里:那是在萨拉曼卡大学所作的隆重讲授,而维多利亚生前什么也没有出版过。这些文本是根据学生笔记重建而成的。其主张相当有力:他认为印第安人是其土地的真正所有者;教宗的赐予与“发现”都不构成夺取的权原;而不信教或有罪也不使人丧失所有权。近代关于“民族之权利”的讨论,正由此发端。

这是编辑性背景,不是可引用的来源:与作品本身的段落不同,这些说明无法在语料库中核对。

开篇
The passage to he discussed is from St. Matthew s Gospel: “ Teach ali nations, baptizing them in the name of the F ather and Son and Holy Spirit,” last chapter. 1. 2. 3- 8. 9- SUMMARY OF THE FIRST SECTION. How a person in doubt on any matter, to obtain safety of conscience, should consuit those whose business it is to give instruction in such matters. After one in doubt has taken such ad vice he ought to follow what the wise have laid down, else he will not be safe. . , Whether one in doubt ought, consistently with safety of conscience, to tollow the advice given by the wise in a doubtful matter when they lay down that to be now lawful which in other circumstances is unlawful. Whether the Indian aborigines before the arrival of the Spamards were true owners in public and in private law; and whether there were among them any true princes and overlords. . Examination of the error of those who assert that persons living in mortal sin can not have ownership of anything at ali. Mortal sin does not preclude civil ownership of the true kind. Whether ownership is lost by reason of unbelief. , , . , The divine law does not make heresy a cause of forfeiture 01 the heretic s property. Whether heresy causes loss of ownership by human law. A heretic incurs the penalty of confiscation of his property as from the date of the commission of his offense. . But although the heretic’ s offense is patent, the nsc may not seize his property before condemnation. . , , , r c Even though condemnation issues after the heretic s death, conhscation of property dates back to the time of the commission of the offense, no matter who is vested with the property. . . , Sales, gifts, and ali other modes of alienation by a heretic are void as from the date of the commission of the offense, etc. .…

阅读全文 →

← 返回弗朗西斯科·德·维多利亚