海洋自由論
- 语言:
- 英语
- 状态:
- 完整作品
- 作者归属:
- 作者本人所著
- 文本状况:
- 未检测到扫描噪点 (对全文的自动评估,未经人工核对)
- 篇幅:
- 约 50,700 词 · 241 个段落
引用本作品
- APA胡果·格劳秀斯. (n.d.). Mare Liberum (The Freedom of the Seas) [海洋自由論]. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/hugo-grotius/mare-liberum-the-freedom-of-the-seas
- MLA胡果·格劳秀斯. Mare Liberum (The Freedom of the Seas) [海洋自由論]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/hugo-grotius/mare-liberum-the-freedom-of-the-seas.
- Chicago胡果·格劳秀斯. Mare Liberum (The Freedom of the Seas) [海洋自由論]. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/zh/works/hugo-grotius/mare-liberum-the-freedom-of-the-seas.
这是 SigPhi 所复制版本的引用:SigPhi 是其数字复制品,不是出版者。元数据中没有版本年份(因此写作“n.d.”),译者只有在有记录时才列出。
内容简介
《海洋自由论》(1609):海洋的自由。
背景与流传
格劳秀斯二十六岁时主张:海不属于任何人,任何人都可以在海上航行和贸易。这份委托来自荷兰东印度公司,用意是对付葡萄牙的垄断,但论证活得比那件事久:它是现代国际法的基础之一。
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。
Sed contra exstiterunt nullo non saeculo viri liberi, sapientes, religiosi, qui falsam hanc persuasionem animis simplicium evellerent ceteros autem eius defensores impudentiae convincerent. Deum quippe esse monstrabant conditorem rectoremque universi, imprimis autem humanae naturae parentem, quam ideo, non uti cetera animantia, in species diversas, variaque discrimina segregasset, sed unius esse generis, una etiam appellatione voluisset contineri, TO THE RULERS AND TO THE FREE AND INDEPENDENT NATIONS OF CHRISTENDOM The delusion is as old as it is detestable with which many men, especially those who by their wealth and power exercise the greatest influence, persuade themselves, or as I rather believe, try to persuade themselves, that justice and injustice are distinguished the one from the other not by their own nature, but in some fashion merely by the opinion and the custom of mankind. Those men therefore think that both the laws and the semblance of equity were devised for the sole purpose of repressing the dissensions and rebellions of those persons born in a subordinate position, affirming meanwhile that they themselves, being placed in a high position, ought to dispense all justice in accordance with their own good pleasure, and that their pleasure ought to be bounded only by their own view of what is expedient. This opinion, absurd and unnatural as it clearly is, has gained considerable currency; but this should by no means occasion surprise, inasmuch as there has to be taken into consideration not only the common frailty of the human race by which we pursue not only vices and their purveyors, but also the arts of flatterers, to whom power is always exposed.