R O C Z N I K I F I L O Z O F I C Z N E T o m X I.VII. ze sz y t 2 - 1999
B P S T A N I S Ł A W W I E L G U S P ł o c k - L u b l i n
THE GENESIS AND HISTORY OF
1US G E N T I U MIN THE ANCIENT WORLD AND THE MIDDLE AGES
The Kraków School is often deseribed in popular Polish tekxtbooks as if it was the beginning of the evolution of international law; hence, one must main- tain a certain sense of proportion as regards the achievem ents o f its mediaeval masters. Altough they played a distinguished and still insufficiently appreciated role in world literaturę on the subject they w ere not the creators, as such. of International law.
The roots o f ius gentium reach back into prehistorical times. Even at that time customs existed among peoples which regulated their mutual relations in matters of how to conduct warfare properly treat ambassadors, conclude agree- rnents, designate places of asylum, etc. They were not based, how ever, on mutually recognized legał principles but, above all, on religious beliefs and the customs associated with them. The im munity o f an a m b assa d o r derived from his being under the special protection of the gods and his use of religious sym- bols. Contracts were concluded with religious oaths and sacrifices offered to the gods according to defined rituals. The essential role in m aintaining p rope r relations am ong different peoples or tribes was carried out by th eir com m on religious eult. as in the case o f the ancient G reek t r ib e s 1.
M ontesąuieu says, in his D e 1'esprit des lois, that practically all peoples applied the law of nations. According to Nussbaum , ethnologists do not share that opiniom They state that even today am ong certain p rim itive p eo p les one cannot discern a difference between States o f war and peace, sińce one o f the fundamental principles guiding them is ceaseless hatred and enm ity towards
1 A u g u s t W i l h e l m H e I I I e r. D a s e u r o p d i s c h e V d l k e r r e c h t d e r G e g e n w a r t, B e r l i n : E. H. S c h r a e d e r , 1 8 6 1 , p. 8.
3 3 6 BP STAN ISŁAW WIELGUS
their neighbours. The „ o th er” is treated by them in principle as if he was „not „2
a man .
The first explicit signs of the existence of a „law o f n a tions” reach back to the fourth m illen iu m B.C., am ong the Sumerians. The closer we com e to m o dern times, the m ore we e nc ounte r a practically universal recognition of that law in all cultures: both in Babylon and Egypt as well as in ancient India and China. T hat law regulated the sealing o f treaties, the making o f peace and the prosecution o f war, the taking and dividing of war spoils and slaves, and the w artim e trea tm e nt o f an enemy's fields and settlem ents3.
In ancient Greece people lived from earliest times as if they were within the scope o f two horizons. On the one hand, they felt them selves connected with their own polis, or city-state. At the same time, because of a common language, religious cult, the Olym pic games, etc., they felt a strong bond to the Panhel- lenic com m unity. T hey treated non-G reeks as their natural enem ies and re- garded war against them as j u s tif ie d by n aturę4. One can find expiicit traces o f such attitudes tow ards others in, for exam ple, A risto tle3.
In ancient R om e the principle o f personal law obliged, i.e., that a person was bound by the laws of the civitas to which he belonged regardless of where he was. The prim ordial sources o f Rom an ius civile w ere custom, royal sta- tutes, and the resolutions o f popular assem blies (leges, p leb iscita ). In earliest times p riestly colleges served as interpreters of the law, thereby giving birth to the science o f law. Foreigners at first rem ained outside the law in Rome; hence, R om an law only affected Roman citizens. It was their ius civile to which foreigners were not subject because they would not be perm itted to be part o f it. In their relations with Romans, however, foreigners could apply their own personal laws because Romans, in turn, could not take advantages of those laws. Legał relations between Romans and foreigners or between foreigners on the territory o f R om e were thus o f necessity based upon the norm o f customs existing am ong the peoples of the M editerranean region. At the basis of these custom s lay n a tu ra lis ratio. That collection o f norm s was called the ius
- A r t h u r N u s s b a u m. G esc h ic h te d es V ó lkerrech ts in ged rćin g ter D a r s ie th m g , M un chen
u n d Berlin: C. H. B e c k s c h c V e r la g s B u c h h a n d l u n g , 1960, p. 1. ’ I b i d e m , p. 6. 4 B e n e d e tt o B r a v o a n d E w a W i p s z y c k a , H is to r ia s ta r o ż y tn y c h G r e k ó w [The H is to r y o f the A n c ie n t G re e ks], W a r s a w : P a ń s t w o w e W y d a w n i c tw o N a u k o w e , 1988, vol. 1, p. 137. 5 S ee B e n ja m in A p t h o r p G o u ld F u l l e r , H is to r ia fil o z o f i i [T he H is to r y o f P h ilo so p h y ], trans l. Z y g m u n t G lin k a , W arsa w : P a ń s t w o w e W y d a w n i c tw o N a u k o w e , 1966, vol. 1, p. 177.
TH E GENESIS AND HISTORY OF IUS GENTIUM 3 3 7
gentium. Concretely summarizing the matter, it originated from the experience of praetors responsible for pilgrims. It was also applied when R om e becam e an empire o f worldwide proportions and swallowed up various nations. U nde r those conditions working out the principles o f a law w hich had intern a tio n al scope. binding in the whole state, bec am e a necessity. The p rinciples o f ius gentium were relatively simple and the basis upon which the various sides were bound by it were their mutual trust (fides) as well as the principles o f utility and justic e (a e ą u ita s fi.
Ius gen tiu m was basically a private law, i.e., regulating m utual re la tions among individuals. That u nderstanding o f ius gen tiu m , how ever, was subject to certain changes with the passage o f time. Gaius (2nd century A.D.), the author o f the In stitu tio n e s, a collection in four books containing a narrow and systematic survey of Rom an civil law, differentiated ius c iv ile (i.e., the law a given people [populus] made for itself) from ius gentium (i.e., established by all peoples on the basis of natural reason and, in this u n d e rsta nding, accepted by all peoples [gentes]). This signified a philosophical g en e raliza tion o f the legał relations which existed in Rome. Thus understood, ius gentium contained in itself all the rules and legał institutions (w hich in Gaius' opinion were uni- versal) such as marriage, protection o f property, c o m pensa tion for injuries, diplomatic immunity, etc. From this it results that Gaius' ius g en tiu m is made up both of public and private law. Mediaeval lawyers took over this distinction between ius gentium and ius civile to such an extent that the fo rm e r becam e a synonym for universal law. Only in the 17th century was ius gen tiu m turned into a technical term to designate the law accepted by in d ep en d e n t States to regulate relations am ong th em 7.
A. N ussbaum regards the universal identification o f ancient and m ediaeval ius gentium with the „law of nations” or „international law ” as erroneous. This fallacious identification can be seen in various languages in the constant trans- lation of ius gentium by terms like „Volkerrecht” , „law of nations” , „droits des gens” , etc., even though the ancient and mediaeval ius g en tiu m did not in the
(1 Jo h n E p p s t e i n, C a th o lic s a n d In te r n a tio n a l P o litic s, or, T h e C a th o lic C itiz e n : H is
N a tio n a l a n d In te r n a tio n a l R e s p o n s ib ilitie s , L o n d o n : Ca th. T ro th So cict y, 1924, p. 7; L u d w i k
E h r 1 i c h, P ra w o n a r o d ó w [T he L a w o f N a tio n s J, 3d e d it i o n , K ra k ó w : N a k ł a d e m K s ięgarni S tefan a K a m iń s k ie g o , 1948, p. 12; H en ry k K u p i s z e w s k i , P ra w o r z y m s k ie a w s p ó ł
c zesność [R om an L a w a n d C o n tem p o ra n e ity J, W arsa w : P a ń s tw o w y Instytut W y d a w n ic z y , 1988,
p. 19.
3 3 8 BP STAN ISŁAW WIELGUS
O
l e a s t e n c o m p a s s t h e m o d e r n u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f „ l a w o f n a t i o n s . T h a t o p i n i o n d o e s n o t , h o w e v e r , s e e m j u s t i f i e d . T h e s o m e w h a t d i f f e r e n t c o m p a s s o f the m o d e r n „ l a w o f n a t i o n s ” is c o n n e c t e d , a f t e r all, w i t h t h e e v o l u t i o n o f t h e ius g e n tiu m o v e r m a n y c e n t u r i e s . It is t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n o f ius g e n tiu m, n o t s o m e c o m p l e t e l y n e w r e a l i t y . F r o m t h e G r e e k t r a d i t i o n t h e r e a r i s e s s ti ll a n o t h e r t e r m i n o l o g i c a l p r o b l e m in d e f i n i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n ius g entium a n d
ius naturale (ius naturae). T h e id e a o f a la w o f n a t u rę a s u n i v e r s a l l y o b l i g a t o r y r u l e s w h o s e e o n t e n t a r e i m m a n e n t in h u m a n r e a c h e s b a c k to G r e e k ( a n d m o r e p r e c i s e l y , S t o i c ) p h i l o s o p h y o f t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y B . C . 9 T h e R o m a n s t o o k o v e r S t o i c p h i l o s o p h y a n d , t h a n k s to C i c e r o , t h e n o t i o n o f ius na tura le e n t e r e d R o m a n l a w . M a r c u s A u r e l i u s (d. 180), a n o t h e r S t o i c , a l s o a c c e p t e d t h i s i d e a a s d i d t h e e a r l y F a t h e r s o f t h e C h u r c h , w h o c l a i m e d t h a t w e r e c e i v e d n a t u r a l la w a s a c o n s e q u e n c e o f t h e fali o f o u r f i r s t p a r e n t s , w h o u p u n t i l th e m o m e n t o f o r i g i n a l sin n e e d e d n o l a w 10. N a t u r a l la w is s a n c t i o n e d by G o d , w h o is the a u t h o r o f n a t u r ę , h e n c e , e v e r y h u m a n l a w m u s t c o n f o r m to t h e la w o f n a t u r ę . T h i s l i k e w i s e a p p l i e s to t h e l a w s o f n a t i o n s 11. In R o m a n s o u r c e s ius n a tu ra le w a s v e r y o f t e n i d e n t i f i e d w i t h t h e p h i l o - s o p h i c a l ius g en tiu m, s i ń c e th e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f d e f i n e d l e g a ł r u l e s w e r e t r e a t e d a s a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c q u a l i t y o f n a t u r ę a n d h u m a n r e a s o n . G a i u s ' d e f i n i t i o n o f ius g entium e x p l i c i t l y a p p e a l s to „ n a t u r a l r e a s o n ” a n d , t h e r e f o r e . to th e e l e m e n t o f n a t u r ę a s t h e f o u n d a t i o n o f t h a t la w . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , s o m e R o m a n s o u r c e s o p p o s e ius gentium to ius naturale. T h e g r e a t R o m a n l a w y e r U l p i a n u s (d. A D 2 2 8 ) , a u t h o r o f a c o m m e n t a r y to t h e p r e t o r i a n e d i c t , L ibri ad edictum ( in 81 b o o k s ) d i f f e r e n t i a t e s t h o s e t w o t y p e s o f l a w v e r y e x p l i c i t l y , s t a t i n g t h a t ius natu ra le a p p l i e s n o t o n l y to p e o p l e b u t to all l iv i n g b e i n g s in t h o s e t h i n g s th a t th e y a n d m a n h a v e in c o m m o n . Ius gentium , o n th e o t h e r h a n d , is a la w w h i c h s e r v e s t h e h u m a n r a c e 12. 8 Ibidem, p. 16.
9 Ibidem, p. 16; Jan R o h i s, G eschichte d e r E thik, Tiibingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1991, p. 148; Bertrand R u s s e I 1, A H istory o f W estern P hilosophy, London: George Allen and Unwin LTD, 1947, p. 292.
10 J. E p s t e i n, Catholics, p. 7; L. E h r 1 i c h. Prawo narodów, p. 20; A. N u s s - b a u m, Geschichte, p. 17.
11 J. E p s t e i n, C atholics, p. 8.
12 A. N u s s b a u m, Geschichte, p. 17; Władysław R o z w a d o w s k i , Prawo rzymskie
TH E GENESIS AND HISTORY O F IUS GENTIUM 3 3 9
To the Roman mind, naturę makes man a free being. On the basis o f ius nuturale all people com e into the w orld as free beings. If, despite this, some- one becam es a slave it is either a m atter o f the ius gen tiu m or by force o f the ius civiłe. Ulpianus expressed those thoughts and the Em pire Justinian (d. A D
i o
565) repeated them , the latter being convinced that natural law com es from God and defining it as „those principles which are observed in the sam e way among all peoples, and established by Divine P rovidence, alw ays re m a in in g permanent and im m utable” * \
Over the course o f several centuries foilow ing the fali o f the W e ste rn R o man Em pire, the C hurch developed a legał system know n as „canon law ” , codified in several basie collections which together constitu te d the C orpus iu ris canonici (in contrast to Justinian's C orpus iuris civilis, p u b lish ed u n d er that title by Dionysius Gothofred in 1583). Canon law was neither national nor international law. As A. Nussbaum puts it, it was a supra-national and univer- sal law, inasmuch as it touched C hristians th ro u g h o u t the world. C anon law primarily regulated ecclesiastical issues, matters of faith and morality. It never- theless also intruded, directly and indirectly into territory proper to the secular a u th o rities1' . V arious ideological factors, such as a certain notion o f the su- premacy of spiritual over secular authority, determined this. One must also take account of the fact that the Church was the only w e ll-organized institution at that time. As such, it was the only one capable of giving stability to social and political life. H aving at its disposal a host o f people who w ere re la tiv e ly well-discipiined and at the sam e time the best educated o f th eir day, the Church could be of help in the governing o f States. It was even fo rced to as- sume these functions, roles which p a r e .u ellen ce are domain o f the lay State16. It is therefore u n d ersta ndable that the Church was p artic ula rly e n title d and even predestined to establishing the norm s o f international relations in those days. One also cannot forget that at a time when the consciousness o f belong- ing to christianitas was incomparably stronger than the aw areness o f belonging to a given State, the C hurch had at its disposal serious sanctions, like excom
-1 ' W. R o z w a d o w s k i . P ra w o , p. 25.
14 In stitu lio n e s , I, 1 , 2 , I I ; W, R o z w a d o w s k i , P ra w o , p. 25. 15 A. N u s s b a u m, G e sc h ic h te , p. 19.
16 S ta n is ła w W i e 1 g u s, O m ic ie „ c ie m n e g o " ś r e d n io w ie c z a i „ ś w ia tłe j” n o w o ż s tn o ś c i
p o le m ic z n ie [On the M yth o f the „ D a r k ” M id d le A g e s a n d „ E n lig h te d " M o d e rn T im es: A P o le m ic ). in: Z b a d a ń n a d śred n io w iec ze m [R esearch on the M id d le A g es], L ubli n: R e d ak c ja
3 4 0 BP STAN ISŁAW WIELGUS
m unication and interdict, which were recognized everyw here. Perhaps the g reatest contribution o f the C hurch to the sphere o f secular life dealt with the law o f war and peace. One must keep in mind that for many centuries so-called „private w a rs ” w ere a real plague and weighty Divine scourge on Western Europę. These wars went on almost endlessly among feudal lords, cities, tribes, etc. T hey som etim es broke out over very insignificant reasons. When the ch ro n ic le rs or other m ediaeval authors wrote about the cruelties o f war, they alm ost alw ays had in m ind private wars (with their tragic conse ąuenc es for ordinary people), not the great wars about which we read in history books. The C hurch n eith er could n or wanted to tolerate such collective insanity which, w ithout exaggeration, had the characteristics o f cruel and bloody sp o rt17. The C hurch thus m ade m axim um use o f all o f its possibilities to elim inate these
1 Q
wars, or at least to limit them to a m inim um . The proclam ation of the
so-called „D ivine P e a c e ”, for exam ple, served this purpose. The „Divine P e a c e ” was a period when such conflicts were prohibited under heavy ecclesia- stical sanctions. Thus the Church in France decreed, in 1041, a period of peace e very w eek from sundow n W ednesday to sunset M onday. The T hird Lateran Council, in 1 179, gave that decree the character of a universal law. That Coun- cil also introduced a prohibition on the taking of prisoners-of-war into slavery. Kings and emperors followed the eclesiastical example. In I 152 Emperor Fred- erick B arb a ro ssa introduced peace into his whole country; in 1235 Frederick II re new ed the decree. Private wars were forbidden in E ngland from the time o f the N orm an C o n ąu est. E m perors also issued laws aimed at protecting for- eigners and the s h i p w re c k e d 19.
B eing unable to eliminate private wars completely, the Church strove as far as she could to te m p e r them . For that reason the S econd L ateran Council (1139) forbade the use in battle o f crossbow s and bows as „lethal weapons particulary hated by God". There emerges here explicit associations with today, to u tes p ro p o rtio n s gardees, regarding the use o f Chemical, biological, or nu- clear w e a p o n s 20.
17 A. N u s s b a u m, G e sc h ic lite , p. 19.
lS S. W i e 1 g u s, O m ic ie , p. 40; A. N u s s b a u m , G e sc h iclite , p. 19. 19 A. N u s s b a u m, G e s c h ic h te , pp. 20, 24.
7() C o n ciliu m L a tera n e n se II G enerale suh ln n o ce n tio U, Siniiitw P a ntifice, canon XXIX; „De ballistariis et sagittariis, in Sacrorum conciliorum n o m , et am plissim a collectio, 29 vls. ed. loannes Dom inic us Mansi. Venciiis: Apud Anionium Zatta. 1796, vol. 21, col. 533: «Artcm autem illam mortiteram et Deo odibilcm ballistariorum et sagittariorum advcrsus Christianos et Catholicos cxerceri dc caetcro sub analhemate pr ohibem us» ” ; A. N u s s b a u m, G eschichte, p. 20.
THE GENESIS AND HISTORY O F IUS GENTIUM 341
T roughout the entire M iddle Ages the custom o f sw earing to agreem ents according to solemn and strictly defined forms was maintained. T hese customs had great significanse for the preservation o f the agreem ents m ade bec au se breaking them not only entailed political and military c o n s e ą u e n c e s but also brought about the worst ecclesiastical punishm ents leading, for the deeply believing Christian, to eternal dam nation. M ediaeval iu s g en tiu m was thus deeply rooted in canon law as well as in Christian theological and philosophi- cal theories. The identification o f natural law with the Divine Will led to treat- ing the form er as the universal norm for all hum an law, in cluding the ius gentium . Christian theologians and philosophers had no doubts that natural law was inborn to hum an reason. A t the same time they believ e d that re ason was darkened by original sin. Driven by love for humanity, God was in some sense compelled to reveal that law once again in S acred Scripture. T h e c onse quence of such convictions was the postulate that man, a nation or nations must design their laws in conform ity with the natural law as illum inated by the revealed
9 i
law" . St. Augustine (d. 430) had a trem endous influence within C hristianity on the reception and u nderstanding o f Stoic law. (One m ight note in passin g that one already finds among the Sophists an explicit differentiation o f natural law \j)hysei] - from positive human law [thesei]'). Augustine recognized natural law as immanent to human reason and will but, unlike the Stoics, did not iden- tify it with fate, the causative law o f the Logos. He treated it instead as the order of creation, existing archetypically in the D ivine Mind. T a k in g into ac- count the stances o f Tertullian (d. 230) and Origen (d. 254), who had invoked Scripture to proclaim a Tołstoy-like pacifism and opposition to C h ristia n par- ticipation in warfare (even to military service), St. A u g u stin e form ulate d a Christian teaching on war. According to that teaching a Christian had a right to serve in the military and to take part in war, u n d er condition that the w ar was just. A just war was allowed only then when it was undertaken to fight an injustice. Wars undertaken at the desire o f rulers, for plunder or vengeance are never just. Like Cicero, St. A ugustine pro c la im e d that war should serve as a means towards obtaining a lasting peace, which is som ething superb. W a r should therefore be treated as a last resort. In his „L e tte r to D a riu s ” St. Augustine says: „M aioris est gloria ipsa bella verbo occidere q u a m hom ines
21 Jan R o k i s, G e sc h ich te d e r E th ik , T u b in g e n : J. C. B. M o h r [P a u l S i e b e c k ] , 1991, p. 149.
3 4 2 BP STAN ISŁAW W IELGUS
ferro”22. St. Augustine's theory became the doctrinal foundation for the Church in its struggle against war, and the problem o f the so-called „just w ar” was extraordinarily freąuently analyzed by Christian scholars. One of them, Isidore of Seville (d. 636) invoked relevant Roman, and in particular C iceronian texts in his doctrine on war. Isidore accepted Gaius' use of ius gentium , understood as universal law, but modified his definition by adding that the universality of
77
that law will be preserved if it is accepted by „alm ost” all n a tions—. That qualification was s u bseąuently universally accepted. One should note that Isidore dealt with only the following ąuestions of the ius gentium , which later entered into the structure o f the m odern law of nations: taking over, creating and arm in g m ilitary bases; war; slavery; covenants; peace agreements; ceasefires; diplomatic immunity; etc. Hence the author of the famous Etymolo- g ies anticipated in surprising fashion modern international law. A certain lack of clarity in his theory o f the ius g en tiu m was brought about by accepting U lpianus' notion o f ius m ilitare. The problem comes from the fact that the com pass o f ius m ilita re partially coincides with ius g entium . Both, for exam- ple, deal with the m atter o f declaring war, o f m aking agreem ents, etc. The Isidoran notion o f ius m ilita re w ould subseąuently serve modern, particulary Spanish authors in form ulating the principles o f military law 24. The use of natural law u nderstood as com m on to all nations and im manent in human na turę as well as Isidore's use o f ius gentium were taken up by the Decretals of Gratian (1 1 5 0 ),“ in which all the most im portant canons dealing with war derive from various works of St. A u g u stin e26.
“ A u r e 1 i u s A u g u s t i n u s , D o m in o m e rito in lu s tr i cl M a g n ific e n tis sim o a tą u e in
C h rista C a r is s im o F ilio D a r io , in: S. A u r e li A u g u s tin i H ip p o n e n s is E p is c o p i E p is lu la e ,
R e c e n s u i t et c o m m e n ta r io critico in s tru x it A lo is iu s G o ld b a c h e r , V i n d o b o n a e : F. T e m p s k y , L ip s ia e : G. F re y tag , 1911, E p is tu la C C X X I X , p. 4 9 8 [C o rp u s S c r ip to r u m E c c le s ia s tic o ru m
L a tin o r u m , e d it u m c o n s i li o et im p e n s is A c a d e m ia e L itte r a r u m C a es a r e a e V in d o b o n e n s i s . vol.
L V II. S. A u r e li A u g u s tin i O p e ritm , S e c ti o II, S. A u g u s tin i E p is tu la e ]; A. N u s s b a u m,
G esc h ich te, p. 39; J. E p p s t e i n, C atholics, p. 9: E rnes t N y s, L es o rig in e s d u d ro il in te rn a tio n a l, B ru ss els: A. C a s ta ig n e , 1894, p. 45.
- ' i s i d o r u s H i s p a l e n s i s . E ty m o lo g ia r u m lih r i X X , lib. V, cap. VI, P L voI. 82. eol. 199-2 0 0 : „Ius g e n ti u m est s e d iu m o c c u p a tio , aed ific a tio . m u n it io , bella, c ap tiv it ates, ser- vitutes, postlinnnia, toed era, paces, indu ciae, leg a to ru m non v io la n d o ru m religio, c o n n u b ia inter a li e n ig e n a s p r o h ib ita . Et in d e ius g en ti u m appellatur, quia eo iure om ncs f e r e g e n te s u tu n lu r ” . - 4 A. N u s s b a u m, G eschichte, p. 40; L. E h r 1 i c h, P raw o n a ro d ó w , p. 22; J. R o b i s,
G e s c h ic h te , p. 149.
25 J. R o h 1 s, G e s c h ic h te , p. 149.
- h L u d w i k E h r I i c h, P o ls k i w y k ła d p r a w a w o jn y X V w ieku , W ars z a w a : W y d a w n ic tw o P r a w n i c z e , 1955. p. 19.
TH E GENESIS AND HISTORY O F IUS GENTIUM 3 4 3
The distinguished m ediaeval masters appealed above all to the th o u g h t o f St. Augustine. This was especially true o f the Franciscans, in p artic u la r
Alex-77
ander o f Hales (d. 1245) and B o naventure (d. 1274) . O ne should also note
in passing that A lexander of Hales had a particularly strong influence on Cracovian theologians of the fifteenth century . P a w e ł W ło d k o w ic [Paulus Vladimiri] also found him self to a certain d eg ree u n d er influence, as will be later discussed.
Regardless o f the various available options, T hom as A ą u in a s ' (d. 1274) theory o f the ius gentium became dom inant in the thirteenth century. He deve- loped it in the second part o f the Sum m a theologiae, fo c u sin g prim arily on matters o f war. O ther ąuestions connected with the law o f nations w hich had been given prim ary attention by Isidore o f Seville, are treated only in passing and by accident. R eplying to the ąuestion he poses to h im self - „Is it always sinful to wage war?” - Thomas answers: not always. One can pro se cu te a war if the three following principles are observed: (1) It is authorized by competent authority (a u cto rita s p rin c ip is): (2) the war takes place because o f an appro- priate reason ( iusta causa), i.e., due to some w rong on the part o f the other side {propter aliąuam culpam )\ (3) those prosecuting the war are guided by an appropriate intention (recta in ten tio), i.e., to the end o f aiding a threatened good or to defeat evil.
The essence o f the Thom istic doctrine o f j u s t w ar is the iu sta causa men- tioned above. Thomas treated that condition (like, in the finał analysis, all the others) as a norm o f morał theology, by which he conn e cted the p ro b le m of warfare to the jurisd ictio n o f Church authority' '. G enerally considered, the Thomistic doctrine o f ju s t war does not go beyond Augustine's. Yet given the enormous authority he possessed, it was T hom as u n d ersta n d in g that becam e one of the pillars of the Church's official doctrine on war, even though Catho- lic authors also universally ap pe aled to A ugustine's theory o f war. As stated above, T hom as made the doctrine o f ju s t war a part o f m orał theology. T his had an influence on the connecting o f religious-moral teaching on ju st war with
22 J. R o h 1 s, G e sc h ich te, pp. 149-150.
28 S ta n is ła w W i e l g u s , D ie T h e o rie d e s M en sclie n in den W erb en K r a k a u e r T h e o lo g e n
a n s d e r zw e ite n H d lfte d e s XV. J u h rh lin d e rts. in: H is to r ia P h ilo so p h ia e M e d ii A e v i, B u r k h a r d
M o jsisc h t and O l a f P luta, eds., A m s t e r d a m / P h i la d e l p h i a : B.R. G riin er, 199 1, vol. 2, p. 1064. See also S. W i c 1 g u s, Ś re d n io w ie c zn a ła ciń sk o języc zn a b ib listy ka p o lsk a , L u b lin : R e d a k c ja W y d a w n ic tw K U L, 1992, pp. 9 7 -9 8 , 122 -1 23 .
29 T h o m a s A ą u i n a s , S u m m a th e o lo g ia e , 11-11, 40, 1; J. E p p s t e i n, C a th o lic s , p. 9; A. N u s s b a u m, G e sc h ic h te , pp. 4 0 -4 1 .
3 4 4 BP STAN ISŁAW WIELGUS
the ius g en tiu m . T hat connection had its basis in the m ediaeval understanding of the law o f naturę, which played a preem inent role in international relations am ong the Christian nations of mediaeval Europę. As was hitherto pointed out, the Fathers of the Church connected the law of naturę to Christian theology as the D iv in e Law standing above human law. T hom as introduced new elements into the categories o f the Fathers by d is tinguishing Eternal Law, the eternal plan of Divine W isdom which surpasses human mtelligence and rules the entire u niversu m , from the Law o f Naturę, which constitutes the imperfect participa- tion, willed by God, o f human reason in Eternal Law. The highest principle of that law declares: ,,Do good and avoid evil” . The law o f naturę, understood broadly, obviously enc o m p a sses all living beings, even the entire created world, as U lpianus had already said. T h o m a s ’ understanding o f the law of na turę m orally u nderstood, en c o m p a ssin g both morał and legał norms, had a fundam ental significance for the evolution o f the ius gentium . Aąuinas' theo ry o f w ar was in fact based on that norm. Law and morality are here insepara- bly jo in e d . Only the differentiation o f natural law (w hich has divine origin) from laws m ade by man was im portant to T hom as as well as other mediaeval authors. A c c o rd in g to that differentiation they treated the law o f naturę as su p erio r to hum an law. As a c o n se ąu en c e, in the consciousness o f people of the M id d le Ages no law, decree, sentences, agreem ents, treaties, etc. had any significance if they were not in accord with the law o f naturę or if they vio- lated them. The finał resolution o f such matters was left to the co m pete nce of the C h u rc h 30.
O th er mediaeval authors spoke out on the subject o f ju st war in this spirit. It should be noted that 15th century C racovian scholars m ade use o f these a uthors to a high degree. A m o n g these authors R aym ond o f Penyaford (d. 1275) belongs in first place. He is the author o f the well-known work Summa casuum con scien tia e, in which he deals with the problem o f war in the course o f treating various morał ąuestions. Am ong other things he provided five con- ditions for a j u s t war. T hey were: (1) only lay people could take part in war; (2) one could only pro se cu te war in defense o f one's country or to recover captured possesions; (3) war must be necessary means to achieve the return of peace; (4) the m otive for w ar cannot be hatred, revenge, or greed but only a .sense o f ju s tic e and zeal in fulfilling the Divine Law; (5) it should be
sup-30 A. N u s s b a u m, G eschichte, pp. 42-43: Stefan S w i c ż a w s k i, U źró d eł n o w o ży tn ej
e ty k i [,S o u rc e s o f C o n te m p o r a r y E lliics: M o ra ł P h ilo s o p h y in I 5 th C e n tu r y E u r o p e \. Kraków :
TH E GENESIS AND HISTORY O F IUS GENTIUM 3 4 5
ported with the authority o f the Church, particularly when it is begun on behalf of the faith. In addition, R aym ond addressed issues like the use o f forbidden weapons in war, the fate o f disbanded soldiers and their possessions, inheri- tances, reparations, e tc 31.
W ilhelm of Rennes (R edonensis, 13th century) wrote an extensive gloss to the Sum m a o f Raymond, in which he added a series o f im portant supplements. He developed the m atter o f war reparations owed by those w ho initiated an unjust war. He also wrote that war was not permitted if one's opponent agreed to resolution o f the conflict by arbitration or ju d icial m eans “ .
The A p p a ra tu s D e creta liu m o f Innocent IV (S inibald da F iesco, d. 1254) played a very im portant role in the history o f ius g en tiu m . Innocent becam e famous in the history o f international relations for his liberał view s on re la tions with non-Christians, to whom he assigned the same rights as C hristians, and on the possession of nations and property, arguing that the world had been created for all peoples, not ju s t Christians. Innocent allowed only one excep- tion not o f an im m ediately defensive cha rac te r to the q uestion o f the perm issibility o f war: he perm itted w ar against the S aracens to re co v er the Holy Land, who in his day had taken it over u n ju s tly 33.
Henry of Segusio (Ostiensis, Hostiensis, d. 1271), the author o f the famous Sum m a u u re a , expressed opinions on w ar and the trea tm e nt o f pagans and other unbelievers by C hristians contrary to those o f Innocent IV. He reveals himself in that work as a defender of the idea o f offensive war against pagans and an advocate o f the then-w idespread theory that original sin d eprive d p a gans o f the right to possess a family, private property, and their own country. Their property was destined to become no one's property, res n ullius. A fter the com ing o f C hrist the right to all property and to possess their ow n countries belonged only to Christians. They also were the only ones capable o f disposing
1' R a y m o n d o f P e n y a f o r t , S u m m a c a s u u m c o n s c ie n tia e , K r a k ó w , B i b li o t e k a Jagielloń sk a, M.S. 2189, f.88v; Wrocław, Biblioteka Uniwersytecka, M .S . II Q 28, f. 1 1 5 v -l 16r; See L. E h r 1 i c h, P o ls ki w ykła d , pp. 23- 28 , 94, 96; S. S w i e ż a w s k i , U ź r ó d e ł , p. 247.
' - W i l h e l m o f R e n n e s , C lo s s a s u p e r S u m m a m c a su u m c o n s c ie n tia e R a y m u n d i
de P e n y a fo r d . Kra ków , B i b li o t e k a J a g ie llo ń s k a , M .S . 2 1 8 9 , ff. 88 v , 8 9 v - 9 0 r , 9 0 v ; W r o c ł a w ,
B iblio teka Uniwersytec ka, M.S. Q 28, ff. 1 16r, 1 17v, 1 18r; S e e L. E h r 1 i c h, P o ls ki w ykła d , pp. 2 8 -30, 100, 102, 106, 110, 112.
33 In n o c e n ti p a p a e ą u a r ti A p p a r a tu s q u in q u e lib r o r u m D e c r e ta liu m ( S l r a s s b u r g 147 8 and 1495), III, 34, 8 „Q u o d s u p e r ltiis” ; See: L. E h r 1 i c h, P o ls k i w y kła d , pp. 3 0 - 3 1 , 134, 138.
3 4 6 BP STAN ISŁAW WIELGUS
o f res n u lliiis34. P a w e ł W łodkow ic (d. 1435/36) polem ized with Henry's opi- nions and, like Stanisław o f S karbim ierz (d. 1431), came out unam biguously in fa vour of Innocent IV's position on these matters.
A source having significance for the evolution o f ius g entium was also the very well dissem inated in the M iddle Ages T abula M artiniem u o f Martin the Pole o f O pa w a (d. 127/9), containing an alphabetically arranged summary of the norm s found in the D ecretals o f G ra tia n 35.
One o f the most famous canonists of the first half of the fourteenth century was O ldradus de Ponte (d. 1335). He was author o f the highly valued collec- tion o f legał opinion, C onsilia seu Responsa et Q ua estion es aureae, in which he c o n sid ered , am o n g other things: (1) w hether a C hristian can without sin m ake use o f the help o f non-believers in self-defense; (2) whether war against the Saracens is permitted; (3) whether a monarch can, without legitimate cause, expel pagans and other non-believers from his lands. O ldradus replied firmly only to the second ąuestion, having in mind the Saracens who in his day had unjustly invaded Spaim’6.
Jo h an n e s A ndre ae (d. 1348) was another well-know n canonist o f the four
teenth century, known universal!y as ,/on.s et tuba iu ris . A u th o r of L iber
additionum „Speculi lu d ic ia lis ” G uillelm i D urantis, he addressed the ąuestions and answers about the prosecution o f war and treatment of non-believers which O ldradus had ,K.
John de Lignano's (d. 1383) treatise. De bello, de repressaliis et de ditello, appeared several decades later, in 1360. John, a distinguished lawyer and the m aster o f Francis Z abarella (d. 1417) addressed the ąuestion of the p erm issibility o f war, presented exclusively on the basis o f the D ecretals of Gratian. In it he reaffirmed, following Innocent IV, that war for the Holy Land w as perm issible. He did not deal with the p roblem o f m aking use o f the help of non-believers in ju st war. On the other hand he underscored imperial sover- eignty over „alm ost” Catholic peoples. He also described in systematic fashion
74 K arol G ó r s k i , Z a k o n K r z y ż a c k i a p o w s ta n ie p a ń s tw a p r u s k ie g o \T h e O rtle r o f T e u -
to n ic K n ig h ts a n d th e O r ig in o f th e P m s s ia n S ta te ], W ro cław : Z ak ład N a r o d o w y im.
O s s o l i ń s k i c h , 1977, p. 132.
L. E h r 1 i c h, P o ls k i w y k ła d , p. 33. 86 Ib id em .
87 J o h a n n F r i e d r ic h v o n S c h u i t e, D ie G e sc h ic h te d e r Q u e lle n m u l L ite r a tu r des
C a n o n is c h e n R e c h ts , Stuttg art : E n k e. 1877, p. 205.
THE GENESIS AND HISTORY OF IUS GENTIUM 3 4 7
all types o f wars, i.e., spiritual, territorial, corporeal, m orał, private, public, particular and other wars. He devoted considerable space to the organization of defensive forces, the right to initiate w ar and to p artic isp a tio n in it, prohi- bited times for military action, m atters o f spoils and prisoners, the necessity of showing mercy towards the latter, e tc 39.
M ediaeval legał literaturę, particularly Italian literaturę, was not w ithout influence on the evolution o f ius gentium . The C orpus iuris civilis introduced by Justinian was, after all, functioning in Italy. In the 12th and 13th centuries the University o f Bologna as well as other Italian universities, u n d e rto o k sys- tematic studies of Rom an law. W e find a reflection o f this in the n u m erous glossal com m entaries to that collection. which becam e the point o f departure for numerous legał works at the height o f the development of Italian law in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. This was the period w hen scholars like Bartolus (d. 1357) and his student Baldus (d. 1410) w ere active. Both were actively interested in the problem o f the relationship betw een the im perial power and the independent Italian cities. B artolus re cognized the e m p ero r as lord of the world while sim ultaneously affording fuli fre e d o m and indepen- dence to the Italian cities. Baldus went even further. A c c e p tin g the F rench theory which can be formulated as R ex in regno suo est im perator regni sui he stated at the same time that only the Pope and em p ero r are entitled to prose- cute war. In addition Bartolus was author of the tract, classic for ius g e n tiu m , on: the m eans o f revenge applied in a j u s t war; legał m eans against the coer- cion of Christian prisoners-of-war; and on war spoils, which he directed to be handed over to the authorities who were to deal with their ju s t division.
The greatest contribution by Italian law yers was m ade in that field which had already been begun by the ancient Romans and which we today cali „pri- vate international law ” , dealing with the right and duties o f physical persons in international relations40.
Various theories that tried to resolve the vitally im portant co n tem p o rary question of defining the proper relationship between Church and Em pire, Pope and Emperor also had great significance for the evolution o f ius g entiu m in the Middle Ages. These theories appealed to legał, theological, philosophical, and even mystical premises. They were expressed in the famous m ediaeval „theory of two sw o rd s” of which there is m ention in Luke's Gospel („Lord, here are two swords. He answered them: Enough!” [Lk 22:38]). T hose swords,
accord-39 Ib idem , pp. 3 5 -3 7 , 8 0 -81; J. S c h u 1 t e, D ie G e s c h ic h te , p. 258. 40 A. N u s s b a u m, G e s c h ic h te , pp. 4 4 -4 6 .
3 4 8 BP STA N ISŁA W W IELGUS
ing to the c o n victions o f m ediaeval theologians, sym bolized clerical and lay p o w e r at the same time indicating that Christ has fuli pow er over them, which he has passed on to his successors, i.e., Peter and the p o p e s 41.
The fo u rte e n th century was a very difficult time for Europę. Feudalism collapsed and the dynam ie grow th o f towns began. Agrarian crisis broke out, social ten sio n s heightened, and rebellions by the starving multiplied. An al- ready difficult situation was made worse by natural disasters like bad harvests, plagues, etc. All this led to doubts about the seeming inviolability of the prin- ciples o f social life which had hitherto been taken for granted. In place of a universal em pire there arose num erous nation-states and the Church itself was divided by schism s both internally and externally. In such a situation the com p etin g pow ers-em peror and papacy, later em peror and nation-states strove to document their rights in legał fashion. As a conseąuence the following three distinct political theories arose:
(1) T h e papai option, which appealed to the relationship betw een Church and E m p ire d efin e d by T hom as Aquinas. Its main representatives were Aegidius the Roman (d. 1316) and Augustine Trium phus (de Ancona, d. 1328). In their u n d e rs ta n d in g the Pope, as representative o f C hrist on earth, jo in s in h im se lf the two powers, spiritual and tem poral. He therefore has the right in a finał m an n er to decide m atters o f faith and m orals, including having the co m p e te n c e to e n throne and dethrone em perors. The only pow er which the Pope has over h im self is God, w hereas the E m peror ought to be subordinate to the P o p e 4".
(2) The H o h e n sta u ff ideology, reborn in Dante's De m o n a rch ia , which sought a balanc e betw een em p ero r and Pope. A c c o rd in g to Dante both the tem poral as well as ecclesiastical p ow e r has its source in God. Ecclesiastical pow er has a purely spiritual cha rac te r and needs protection from the Emperor who alone has a universal temporal power over all peoples. Only he can assure the w orld o f order and establish laws binding on all nations. The principle Q uo d p r in c ip i placet, legis h ab et vigorem applies to him 43.
41 Ib idem .
42 J. R o h 1 s, G e s c h ic h te , pp. 1 5 9 -1 6 0 ; K u r t R o t t g e r s, „ M a c lit", in: H isto risc h e s
W o rterb u ch d e r P hilo so p h ie, vol. 5, Basel/Stuttgart: S c h w a b e & C o.A G. Verlag, 1980, col. 591.
42 Slanislaus F. B e 1 c h, P a u lu s V la d im iri a n d H is D o c trin e C o n c e m in g In ter n a tio n a l L aw
a n d P o litic ts , 2 vols. ( L o n d o n - T h e H a g u e - P a r i s : M o u t o n & C o ., 1965), p. 56; J. R o h I s, G esch ich te, pp. 161 -16 2; W ła d y s ław S e ń k o , W stęp [Introductio nl, in: Jo h a n n es F alkenberg, „D e m o n a r c h ia m u n d i ”, „ M a te r ia ł y d o H istorii F ilo zo fii Średniow iecznej w Polsc e". IX ( XX)
T H E GEN ESIS AND HISTOR Y O F IUS GENTIUM 3 4 9
(3) The third theory originated in the M unich Court. It was advanced by
thinkers like W illiam o f O c kham (d. ca 1350), w hom E m p ero r L u d w ig the Bavarian patronized, and Marsilius of Padua (d. ca 1343), author o f the famous work D e fe n so r pa cis. They tied them selves to the theory of national sover- eignty worked out by John Quidort. A ccording to that theory all p o w e r origi- nally was found in the nation, which remains the central source o f power. God gives pow er neither to Pope nor E m p ero r but to the nation, which loans its power to the em peror or the king. It thus follow s that the ruler is alw ays an- swerable to the nation which has the pow e r to remove him. T h e P ope's pow er is limited exclusively to the spiritual realm. M arsilius transferred his theory of national sovereignty to the C hurch as well. L ike the nation, God gives com- plete pow er to the society o f the faithful. T he C hurch's R ock is not the Pope but always only Christ. The Pope is fallible and the m easure o f this orthodoxy is Sacred Scripture which alone is infallible. The com munity o f the faithful is the sole sovereign in the C hurch. It loans spiritual authority to the dignitaries of the Church and it can deprive them o f that authority. The proper representa- tive of the orthodox community is the ecumenical council, which is the highest authority in the C hurch44.
An interesting contribution to the law o f nations in the M id d le A ges was also the theory o f P eter Dubois (d. ca 1312), author o f the bro c h u re De R ecuperatione Terrae Sanctae [On the Repeated Recapture o f the Holy Land], which dem anded the creation of universal peace in the w hole o f C hristian territory. This was to be a co n d itio n for a new C rusade. In the opinion of Dubois an ecumenical council should be called, before which should appear all spiritual and temporal rulers. The C ouncil should pro h ib it all types o f wars among Christians. All conflicts would be resoWed by an arbitral tribunal made up of three temporal and three spiritual dignitaries from each side w ho would be chosen by the Counsil. In the case o f any violation o f the p rohibition against war all Christian rulers would be obliged to bring the violator immedia- tely to order. T he violator should be punished by deprivation o f all his digni- ties and possessions and then exiled to the Holy Land w here he m ight satisfy his desires to wage war. In Dubois plan there was no discussion o f any prero- gatives for the Emperor, which was typical for the French vision o f E u ro p ę 45.
44 J. R o h 1 s, G e s c h ic h te , pp. 162 -164.
45 A. N u s s b a u m, G esch ich te, pp. 47- 48; E. H. M e y e r, S ta a ts- u n d v ó lk e r r e c h tlic h e
k le e n von P e te r D u b o is (1 9 08); K n i g h t, A m e d ia e v a l p a c ifis t - P ie r r e d u B o is , „ T ra n s a c-
3 5 0 BP STAN ISŁAW W IELGUS
G E N E Z A I H I S T O R I A IU S G E N T IU M W S T A R O Ż Y T N O Ś C I I W Ś R E D N I O W I E C Z U
S t r e s z c z e n i e
Iu s g e n tiu m s ię g a s w o im i k o r z e n ia m i c z a s ó w p r e h is to r y c z n y c h . Z w i ą z a n e b y ło w ów cz as
z w ie r z e n ia m i re lig ijn y m i i o p a rty m i na n ich o b y c za ja m i. P r z e k o n a n i e j e d n a k w c ze ś n ie js zy c h a u to r ó w , w y r a ż o n e c h o c i a ż b y p rz ez M o n t e s k i u s z a , j a k o b y w s zy s tk ie lu dy s to s o w ały prawo n a r o d ó w , w ś w ie tle w s p ó łc z e s n y c h b a d a ń o k a z u j e się b łęd n e . W w ielu k u ltu r a c h takie p raw o nie w y s tę p o w a ł o . U n i e k t ó r y c h p r y m it y w n y c h n a r o d ó w j e s z c z e d ziś „ o b c y ” tr a k to w a n y jes t z z a s a d y j a k „ n ie c z ło w ie k " .
P r a w o n a r o d ó w sto so w ali j e d n a k j u ż w c zw arty m tysiącleciu przed C h ry stu se m Su merowie. W y s t ę p u j e o n o r ó w n i e ż w s ta ro ży tn y ch k u ltu r a c h B ab ilo n ii. E g ip tu , Indii i Chin. S taro ży tn i G recy st osow ali j e tylko do tych ludzi, z którymi tączyt ich wspóln y j ęz y k , kult religijny, igrzy s k a o l im p i js k ie itp. N i e g r e k ó w trak to w ali j a k o n a tu r a ln y c h w ro g ó w . R o z w ó j i p re c y z a c ja ius
g en tiu m d o konały się w starożytnym Rzymie, gdy stał się imperium o światowym zasięgu i wchło
ną ł l ic z n e n a r o d y . P r a w o to o b e j m o w a ł o z e s p ó ł n o r m r e g u lu ją c y c h p r a w n e s to s u n k i m ię dzy R z y m i a n a m i a o b c y m i. Z b i e g i e m czasu uleg a ło ew o lu cji. G a iu s (II w. po C h r.) r o z ró ż n ił ius
civile - p raw o u s ta n o w io n e przez o k re ślo n y n a ród dla siebie - od ius g e n tiu m , tj. prawa ustano
w i o n e g o p r z e z w s z y s tk ic h ludzi w o p a r c i u o n a tu r a ln y r o z u m (n a tu r a lis ra tió ). R o z r ó ż n ie n ie p o w y ż s z e p rzy ję li i ro z w in ęli p r a w n i c y ś r e d n i o w i e c z n i , k tórz y iu s g e n tiu m uznal i za synon im p r a w a u n i w e r s a l n e g o . P r z y j m u j ą c z g re ck iej tradycji r o z ró ż n i e n i e m ię d z y iu s g e n tiu m a ius
n a tu r a e , liczni a u to r z y rzy m s cy , z w ła s z c z a stoicy (Cyc ero, M arek A u re liu s z), a także wcześni
O j c o w i e K o ś c io ła , utożs am iali p raw o n a ro d ó w z p ra w em natury. Byli j e d n a k także tacy, którzy te d w a p r a w a s o b i e p r z e c iw s ta w ia li ( U l p i a n u s , f 2 2 8 ) , s tw ie rd za ją c , że iu s g e n tiu m d o ty cz y w y ł ą c z n ie r o d z a ju l u d z k i e g o , p o d c z a s gdy iu s n a tu r a e ro z c ią g a się na w s zy s tk ie żyw e istoty. Po u p a d k u Z a c h o d n ie g o C e sarstw a R zy m s k ie g o Kościół rozwinął system prawny zw any pr awem k a n o n ic z n y m . N ie b y ło o n o ani p r a w e m n a r o d o w y m , ani m ię d z y n a r o d o w y m . M ia ło c h ara k te r p r a w a p o n a d n a r o d o w e g o , d o t y c z ą c e g o w s zy s tk ic h ch rze ś c ija n . Ze w z g l ę d u na u n iw e r s a ln y - p o l it y c z n i e i s p o ł e c z n ie - c h a r a k te r ó w c z e s n e g o K o ś cio ła, p r a w o k a n o n ic z n e r e g u lo w a ł o nie ty lk o ży cie w e w n ą tr z k o ś c ie ln e , lecz także s to s u n k i m ię d z y n a r o d o w e , z w ła s z c z a w o d n ie s ie n iu do w ojny i pokoju. K o ś ció ł w y k o rz y sty w a ł p r a w o k a n o n ic z n e i sa n k c je , któ re mu o n o daw ało, d o ł a g o d z e n i a o b y c z a jó w i do eli m in a cji r ó ż n e g o r o d z aju w o je n , w tym z w ła s z c z a tzw. w ojen p ry w atn y ch , które stanowiły szczególnie d o tk liw ą plagę śr e d n io w iec zn y c h s p o łeczeń s tw Z a c h o d niej E u ro p y . W ty m celu pod karą e k sk o m u n ik i p ro k lam o w ał tzw. Bo ży pokój i zakazyw ał uży w a n i a do walki b ro n i s z c z e g ó ln i e gro źn ej i p o d s t ę p n e j , a m ia n o w i c ie k u sz i łuków . Ś r e d n i o w ie cz ne ius g en tiu m było więc głębo ko zako rzenione w prawie kanonic znym , c h o ciaż po zost aw a ło r ó w n ie ż pod d u ż y m w p ły w e m c h r z e ś c ija ń s k ic h teo rii te o l o g i c z n y c h i f ilo z o ficz n y ch . M y ś li c ie lam i. któr zy wy warli znac zą cy w pływ na j e g o o b l ic z e i r o z w ó j, z w ła s z c z a w o d n ie s ie n iu do tzw. d o k try n y w o jn y s p ra w ied liw e j o r a z do p o k o ju m ię d z y n a r o d a m i, byli: św. A u g u s ty n , Ter- tu lia n , O r y g e n e s o r a z I z y d o r z Sew illi ( f 636), k tó r y z m o d y f i k o w a ł G a i u s o w ą d e fin icję iu s
g e n tiu m , d o d a ją c , że u n i w e r s a l n o ś ć p r a w a n a r o d ó w b ę d z ie z a c h o w a n a , jeś li z a a k c e p t u ją je
„ p raw ie " wszystk ie n a r o d y . Iu s g e n tiu m w uj ęciu Iz y d o ra o b e jm o w a ł o nie tylk o s p ra w y wojny i p o k o j u , lec z ta k ż e takie z a g a d n ie n i a , j a k t w o r z e n i e i z b r o je n ie ba z w o j s k o w y c h , niew ola, przymierze, układ pokojow y, zawieszenie broni, nietykaln oś ć p osłów itp. U jęcie Izy d o ra w łą cz o n e z o s t a ł o do D e k r e tu G r a c j a n a ( 1 1 5 0 ). F r a n c is z k a ń s c y ucze ni ś re d n i o w i e c z n i , p o d e jm u ją c y
TH E GEN ESIS AND HISTOR Y O F IUS GENTIUM 3 5 1
ro z w a ż a n ia na ten tem a t (np. A l e k s a n d e r z H ales i B o n a w e n t u r a ) , n a w i ą z y w a li d o m y śli św. A u g u s ty n a . D o m i n u ją c ą j e d n a k w XIII w. o p c j ą stała się te o r ia iu s g e n tiu m w u j ę c i u T o m a s z a z A k w in u , k tó ry k o rz y s tając z teo rii pra w a n a r o d ó w św. A u g u s ty n a o r a z I z y d o r a z S e w i l li , w n ió sł d o niej n o w e ujęc ie, a d o k t r y n ę w o jn y s p r a w ie d liw e j w p r o w a d z ił n a st a le d o teo lo g ii moralnej. K orz ystając z doro b k u swoich pop rzedników , tem a te m w o jn y sp ra w ied liw e j z ajm ow ali się w s p o s ó b s z c z e g ó ln y n a s tę p u ją c y a u to r z y ś r e d n io w ie c z n i: R a j m u n d z P e n n a f o r t , W il h e lm
7. R ennes , p apie ż In n o cen ty IV, H enryk de S egusio (H osti ensi s) , M a rcin P o l a k z O p a w y , O ld r a - du s de P o n te , l o a n n e s de L ig n a n o , B a rto lu s , B a ld u s , Idzi R z y m i a n in , A u g u s ty n z A n k o n y , D ante, W il h e lm O c k h a m , M a r s y liu s z z P a d w y , Jan Q u id o r t, P i o t r D u b o i s i in ni. G o d n a s z c z e gólnej uw agi j e s t k o n t r o w e rs j a na tem a t w o jn y o r a z tr a k t o w a n ia prz ez c h r z e ś c ij a n p o g a n i i n nych n iew ie rnych, k tó ra to k o n t r o w e rs j a w y s tą p iła m ię d z y I n n o c e n t y m IV - p r z y zn a ją c y m n ie c h r z e ś c ij a n o m takie sam e p ra w a, j a k i e m a j ą c h r z e ś c ij a n ie - a H e n r y k i e m d e S e g u s i o , który uw ażał, że p o g a n ie nie m a j ą p r a w a do p o s i a d a n i a ro d z in y , w ł a s n o ś c i p r y w a t n e j i w ł a s n e g o p aństw a. T rze b a zaz nac zyć, że polscy śre dniow ieczni ucze ni ( S ta n is ła w ze S k a r b i m i e r z a , P a w e ł W ło d k o w ic i inni) j e d n o z n a c z n ie o pow iadali się za s ta n o w is k ie m In n o c en teg o IV. D u ż e z n a c z e nie d la ro z w o ju ś r e d n i o w i e c z n e g o iu s g e n tiu m m ia ły t ak ż e r ó ż n e t e o r ie u s i ł u ją c e r o z w ią z a ć kw est ię o k re ś len ia w ła ś c iw ej relacji m ię d z y K o ś c i o ł e m a C e s a r s t w e m , p a p ie ż e m a c e s arz em . W XIV w. o p r a c o w a n o trzy głó w n e teorie na ten temat: opcję p a p ie s k ą (Idzi R z y m i a n in , A u g u styn de A n c o n a), p r z y z n a ją c ą p a p ie żo w i a b s o l u t n ą w ł a d z ę d u c h o w ą i ś w ie c k ą; o p c ję D a n t e g o , preze ntu jącą id eo lo g ię H o h e n s t a u fó w p o s z u k u ją c ą rów n o w ag i m ię dzy w ł a d z ą p a p ie ża i cesarza; oraz o p c ję O c k h a m a i M a r s y l i u s z a z P a d w y , p r z y z n a ją c y c h c a ł ą w ł a d z ę ś w i e c k ą n a r o d o w i , a d u c h o w n ą w s p ó ln o c ie w ie rn y ch . I n te r e s u ją c y w k ła d d o teo rii p r a w a n a r o d ó w w n ió s ł także P iotr z D u b o is (113 12) , który d o m ag a ł się u s ta n o w ien ia p o w s z e c h n e g o p o k o ju w o b r ę b ie cał ego chrze ścija ństwa. Pokój ten w inien zapew nić sp ecjalny trybunał pow ołany przez s p e c ja ln ie z w o ł a ny sobór, w któ rym winni w ziąć udz iał wszy scy liczący się d o s to jn ic y c h rze ś c ija ń s c y - z a r ó w n o kośc iel ni, j a k i świeccy.
