The development of the doctrine of Res Communes in medieval and early modern Europe

Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis

Volumn 70, Issue 1-2, 2002, Pages 69-93

  Perruso, Richard ^a  

^a NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 63849341872     PISSN: 00407585     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/15718190219686006     Document Type: Article

References (119)

1. D. 1,8,2
2. D. 1,8,5
3. D. 43,8,4
4. D. 39,2,4
5. D. 47,10,13,7
6. D. 41,1,3,2
7. D. 1,8,3
8. D. 41,1,50
9. D. 43,8,1
10. D. 41,1,14
11. D. 41,1,34
12. D. 41,1,15
13. M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht, 2., neubearbeitete Aufl. Munich 1971, vol. I. 380
14. Such public property, however, might be said to have a common use, or to be open to all. for example, D. 39,2,24. Gaius, 2,11. be open to all. See for example, D. 39,2,24. Gaius, 2,11
15. Kaser (n. 14), vol. I. 380, n. 48
16. P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano, Rome 1926, vol. II. 45
17. U. Robbe, La differenza sostanziale fra 'res nullius ' e 'res nullius in bonis' e la distinzione delle 'res' pseudo-marcianea 'che non ha ne capo ne coda', [Pubblicazioni dell'Istituto di scienze giuridiche, economicheolitiche e sociali della Universitàdi Messina, n. 112], I, Milan 1979. 132. bonis' e la distinzione delle 'res' pseudo-marcianea 'che non ha ne capo ne coda', [Pubblicazioni dell'Istituto di scienze giuridiche, economicheolitiche e sociali della Universitàdi Messina, n. 112], I, Milan 1979. 132
18. Cicero, De Officiis, I, xvi [51 f]
19. Other Roman writers made allusions to sharing water and fire. See Plautus, Trinummus, [679], Rudens, [434]
20. Seneca, De Beneficiis, IV, [xxix, 2]
21. Plutarch, Symposiacae, vi
22. Ciceroro Sexto Roscio Amerino, xxvi [71]
23. See the discussion in Robbe (n. 15). 783-784
24. Ovid, Metamorphoses, I, 135
25. See E. Costa, Cicerone Giureconsulto, Bologna 1927, vol. 1. 92-93
26. See for example Robbe (n. 15). 212
27. '… la communanza internazionale dell'uso è un concetto etico risalta più squisitamente nelle acque, nel mare, ne' lidi che risalta più squisitamente nelle acque, nel mare, ne' lidi…': Bonfante (n. 15), vol. II. 65
28. Inst. 2,1. The opinion of Marcian at D. 1,8,2 does not mention public things, but only res communes, res universitatis, and res nullius, as types of non-private property. This might also be seen as suggesting a systematic approach. However, there is no development of any of these categories in the opinion, except that air, flowing water, the sea, and the shores of the sea are provided as examples of common property. No breakdown of property similar to that in Inst. 2,1 the Institutes of Gaius, which only mention public things 'which are thought of as belonging to the whole body of the people', ipsius enim universitatis esse creduntur, and private things: Gaius, 2,11. things, but only res communes, res universitatis, and res nullius, as types of non-private property. This might also be seen as suggesting a systematic approach. However, there is no development of any of these categories in the opinion, except that air, flowing water, the sea, and the shores of the sea are provided as examples of common property. No breakdown of property similar to that in Inst. 2,1 appears in the Institutes of Gaius, which only mention public things 'which are thought of as belonging to the whole body of the people', ipsius enim universitatis esse creduntur, and private things: Gaius, 2,11
29. Inst. 2,1,2
30. Bonfante (n. 15), vol. II. 53
31. Gloss Profluens on Inst. 2,1 (ed. Geneva 1625, col. 122), Bartholomeus de Novara, Commentary on Inst. 2,1ublished under the name of Baldus, In Quattuor Institutionum Libros, Venice 1577, tom. IX, fol. 18vb. Novara, Commentary on Inst. 2,1ublished under the name of Baldus, In Quattuor Institutionum Libros, Venice 1577, tom. IX, fol. 18vb
32. For attribution of this work to Bartholomeus de Novara, see D. Maffei Bartolomeo da Novara autore della 'Lectura Institutionum' attribuita a Baldo degli Ubaldi in: Studi in memoria di Mario E. Viora, Rome 1990. 423-440. Bartolomeo da Novara autore della 'Lectura Institutionum' attribuita a Baldo degli Ubaldi in: Studi in memoria di Mario E. Viora, Rome 1990. 423-440
33. Robbe (n. 15). 885
34. Inst. 2,1,5
35. Inst. 2,1,4
36. Rudolf Weigand asserts that the Roman jurists were the only significant influence on ideas of common property during the period of the glossators: R. Weigand, Die Naturrechtslehre der Legisten und Dekretisten von Irnerius bis Accursius und von Gratian bis Johannes Teutonicus, Münchener Theologische Studien, III: Kanonistische Abteilung, Bd. 26, Munich 1967. 87, 91-92. Many of the sources by the glossators for common property have been collected and analyzed by Weigand in this work influence on ideas of common property during the period of the glossators: R. Weigand, Die Naturrechtslehre der Legisten und Dekretisten von Irnerius bis Accursius und von Gratian bis Johannes Teutonicus, [Münchener Theologische Studien, III: Kanonistische Abteilung, Bd. 26], Munich 1967. 87, 91-92. Many of the sources by the glossators for common property have been collected and analyzed by Weigand in this work
37. See n. 1, supra
38. Bartholomeus de Novara, Commentary on Inst. 2,1 (ed. n. 29, torn. IX fol. 18vb). Angélus a Gambiglionibus, Commentary on Inst. 2,1, In Quattuor Institutionum Justiniani Libros Commentaria, Venice 1585, fol. 61vb. fol. 18vb). Angélus a Gambiglionibus, Commentary on Inst. 2,1, In Quattuor Institutionum Justiniani Libros Commentaria, Venice 1585, fol. 61vb
39. See Weigand (n. 34). 86-87
40. D. 1,1,3
41. D. 1,1,4
42. Angelus, Commentary on Inst. 2,1 (ed. n. 36, fol. 61 vb)
43. Jacques de Revigny, Commentary on Inst. 2,1ublished under the name of Bartolus, Super Institutionibus Iuris Civilis Commentaria, Lyon 1559. 183
44. For attribution of this work to Jacques de Revigny, see E.M. Meijers Etudes d'Histoire du Droit, vol. III, Leiden 1959. 68-71
45. Gloss Publicus, on Inst. 2,5 (ed. n. 29, col. 124)
46. Gloss Item lapilli gemmae, on D. 1,8,3 (ed. n. 29, col. 115)
47. See Weigand (n. 34). 90-91
48. See supra at n. 7. The language relating to the interdict is based on D 43,8,9 and D. 47,10,13,7. 43,8,9 and D. 47,10,13,7
49. Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages, Berkeley 1974. 107-108
50. William Langland, The Vision of Piers the Plowman, (ed. W. Skeat), Oxford 1886, 'B' text, 20.274. 594. 1886, 'B' text, 20.274. 594
51. The apparent implication is that the friars were inciting the peasants to rebellion. London rebellion. See M. Keen, The Outlaws of Medieval Legend, London 1961. 165
52. C. 6,61,8,7
53. D. 1,8,10
54. For canonical sources, see Weigand (n. 34). 326
55. 'nam iure naturali primevo etiam alia essent communia'; Gloss Naturali iure on Inst. 2,1,1 (ed. n. 29, col. 122). iure on Inst. 2,1,1 (ed. n. 29, col. 122)
56. See Iacobus de Arena, Commentary on D. 1,8,2, Commentarii in Universum Civile, [Opera Iuridica Rariora XVI], Bologna 1971 (reprint of the Lyon ed. 1541) fol. 66va. lus Civile, [Opera Iuridica Rariora XVI], Bologna 1971 (reprint of the Lyon ed. 1541) fol. 66va
57. Ecce Vicit Leo, quoted in Weigand (n. 34). 327
58. Dicta Gratiani ante D. 8 c. 1: 'Differt etiam ius naturae a consuetudine et constitutione. Nam iure naturae sunt omnia communia omnibus, quod non solum inter eos servatum creditur, de quibus legitur: 'Multitudinis autem credentium erat cor unum et anima una, etc' verum etiam ex precedenti tempore a philosophis traditum invenitur. Unde apud Platonem illa civitas iustissime ordinata traditur, in qua quisque proprios nescit affectus. lure vero consuetudinis vel constitutionis hoc meum est, illud vero alterius'. et constitutione. Nam iure naturae sunt omnia communia omnibus, quod non solum inter eos servatum creditur, de quibus legitur: 'Multitudinis autem credentium erat cor unum et anima una, etc' verum etiam ex precedenti tempore a philosophis traditum invenitur. Unde apud Platonem illa civitas iustissime ordinata traditur, in qua quisque proprios nescit affectus. lure vero consuetudinis vel constitutionis hoc meum est, illud vero alterius'
59. See St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, London: 1916-1935, Q. 66, Art 2, Vol. II, 1477
60. Summa De Iure Canonico Tractaturus, quoted in Weigand (n. 34). 326 For a discussion of the development of this idea in canon law, K. Seelmann, Die Lehre des Fernando Vazquez de Menchaca vom Dominium, [Schriftenreihe Annales Universitatis Saraviensis: Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Abteilung, Bd. 89], Cologne 1979. 112 et seq. For a discussion of the development of this idea in canon law, see K. Seelmann, Die Lehre des Fernando Vazquez de Menchaca vom Dominium, [Schriftenreihe Annales Universitatis Saraviensis: Rechts- und Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Abteilung, Bd. 89], Cologne 1979. 112 et seq
61. Johannes Faber, Commentary on Inst. 2,1, In IV Libros Institutionum Commentarii, Venice 1565, f. 29rb. Johannes' view is quoted by Angelus on Inst. 2,1 (ed. n. 36, fol. 62ra). Commentarii, Venice 1565, f. 29rb. Johannes' view is quoted by Angelus on Inst. 2,1 (ed. n. 36, fol. 62ra)
62. Johannes Faber, Commentary on Inst. 2,1 (ed. n. 57, fol. 29rb)
63. F. Lane, Venice, A Maritime Republic, Baltimore 1973. 61-65
64. Baldus, Commentary on D. 1,8,1 (ed. n. 37, torn. I, fol. 45rb)
65. Baldus, Commentary on D. 1,8,2 (torn. I, fol. 48rb)
66. Some medieval writers suggested that the 'Imperium of the Roman people' did not extend to land held by the Saracens. Gloss Populus, on D. 43,8,3 (ed. n. 29, col. 658). did not extend to land held by the Saracens. See Gloss Populus, on D. 43,8,3 (ed. n. 29, col. 658)
67. Bartholomaeus Caepolla, Tractatus de Servitutibus: Tam Urbanorum, Quam Rusticorum Praediorum, Lausanne 1737, Tract. II, c. 26 § 6
68. See J. Canning, The Political Thought of Baldus de Ubaldis, Cambridge 1987. 117
69. According to Bartolus, a city-state that had jurisdictio over a territory also had a jurisdiction over the adjoining sea up to one hundred miles. However, this jurisdictio appears to have been limited to 'the purging of bad men', the capture and punishment of pirates. Bartolus, Consilia, Quaestiones et Tractatus, Lyon 1581, fol. 137rb. also had a jurisdiction over the adjoining sea up to one hundred miles. However, this jurisdictio appears to have been limited to 'the purging of bad men', the capture and punishment of pirates. Bartolus, Consilia, Quaestiones et Tractatus, Lyon 1581, fol. 137rb
70. For the development of prescription by long possession in the classical period, Cologne period, see D. Nörr, Die Entstehung der longi temporis praescriptio, Cologne 1969
71. D. 41,3,45
72. 'Das mittelalterlich fortgebildete römische Recht mit seiner Rücksichtnahme auf Privilegien, Regalien und Gewohnheiten der vielen souveränen oder halbsouveränen Herrschaften einer von den verschiedensten Kräften und Tendenzen erfüllten Universalmonarchie war in den hier zu erörternden Fragen viel weniger kategorisch als die Pandekten selbst'; E. Reibstein, Die Anfänge des Neueren Natur- und Völkerrechts: Studien zu den 'Controversiae illustres ' des Fernandus Vasquius, Bern 1949. 229. Rücksichtnahme auf Privilegien, Regalien und Gewohnheiten der vielen souveränen oder halbsouveränen Herrschaften einer von den verschiedensten Kräften und Tendenzen erfüllten Universalmonarchie war in den hier zu erörternden Fragen viel weniger kategorisch als die Pandekten selbst'; E. Reibstein, Die Anfänge des Neueren Natur- und Völkerrechts: Studien zu den 'Controversiae illustres ' des Fernandus Vasquius, Bern 1949. 229
73. Caepolla (ed. n. 63), Tractat. II, c. 26 § 7
74. Baldus, Commentary on D. 1,8,1 (ed. n. 37, torn. I, fol. 45rb). It is unclear from the text whether Baldus required possession to be from time immemorial. Rivers, according to Baldus, could only be prescribed by possession from time immemorial; Ibid., (tom. I, fol. 48va). unclear from the text whether Baldus required possession to be from time immemorial. Rivers, according to Baldus, could only be prescribed by possession from time immemorial; Ibid., (tom. I, fol. 48va)
75. Angelus, Commentary on Inst. 2,1 (ed. n. 36, fol. 61va)
76. Baldus, Commentary on D. 1,8,1 (ed. n. 37, tom. I, fol. 45rb)
77. Bartolus, Commentary on D. 47,10,13,7, Omnia quae extant opera, Venice 1615, tom. VI, fol. 130vb. 1615, tom. VI, fol. 130vb
78. D. 1,3,32
79. See for example, D. 12 c. 6
80. Canning (n. 64). 100 et seq
81. According to Bartolus, custom is a right disposed of by the consensus of an entire people, or by agreement together of the greater part, while prescription is a right disposed of by consent of an individual; Bartolus, Commentary on C. 8,52 (ed. n. 74, tom. VIII, fol. 114ra, Baldus says that a right is acquired by prescription when it is taken from someone and given to someone else, but by custom when it is given to someone without being taken from someone else; Baldus, Commentary on D. 1,8,1 (ed. n. 37, tom, I, fol. 45rb, Caepolla at times seems to blur both concepts and speak of things being 'prescribed by custom, Caepolla (ed. n. 63, Tractat. II, c. 26 § 6; Canning n. 64. 102-104. For a discussion of a clearer distinction by Jacques de Revigny, L. Waelkens, La Theorie de la Coutume chez Jacques de Revigny, Rechtshistorische studies, nr. 10, Leiden 1984. 245 et seq an entire people, or by agreement together of the greater part, while prescription is a right disposed of by consent of an individual; Bartolus, Commentary on C. 8,52 (ed. n. 74, tom. VIII, fol. 114ra). Baldus says that a right is acquired by prescription when it is taken from someone and given to someone else, but by custom when it is given to someone without being taken from someone else; Baldus, Commentary on D. 1,8,1 (ed. n. 37, tom,. I, fol. 45rb). Caepolla at times seems to blur both concepts and speak of things being 'prescribed by custom'; Caepolla (ed. n. 63), Tractat. II, c. 26 § 6; see Canning (n. 64). 102-104. For a discussion of a clearer distinction by Jacques de Revigny, see L. Waelkens, La Theorie de la Coutume chez Jacques de Revigny, [Rechtshistorische studies, nr. 10], Leiden 1984. 245 et seq
82. D. 41,2,45
83. Angelus, Commentary on Inst. 2,1 (ed. n. 36, fol. 61rb-61va)
84. For a discussion of the idea of non-recognition of a superior in Baldus' political thought, Canning (n. 64). 117. political thought, see Canning (n. 64). 117
85. Baldus, Commentary on D. 1,8,1 (ed. n. 37, tom. I, fol. 45). Caepolla (ed. n. 63), Tractat. II, c. 26 § 7. (ed. n. 63), Tractat. II, c. 26 § 7
86. D. 8,4,13
87. D. 8,1,14,2
88. Gloss Privata on D. 8,4,13 (ed. n. 29, col. 1023)
89. See for example P. Potter, The Freedom of the Seas in History, Law, and Politics, New York 1924. 152
90. F. Carpintero, Del Derecho Natural Medieval al Derecho Natural Moderno [Acta Salmanticensia, Derecho, 35], Salamanca 1977. 270. [Acta Salmanticensia, Derecho, 35], Salamanca 1977. 270
91. See H. Coing, Handbuch der Quellen und Literatur der neuen Privatrechtsgeschichte europäischen Privatrechtsgeschichte, Munich 1973, II/1. 304
92. Carpintero (n. 90). 270, n. 99
93. Allegatio XVII is a commentary on litigation involving the town of Sant Associación Francisco Vitoria Ander. For a detailed discussion of Suarez' commentary on the sea, Ander. For a detailed discussion of Suarez' commentary on the sea, see L. Garcia-Arias, La Libertad de los Mares segün Rodrigo Suarez, Anuario de la Associación Francisco Vitoria 17 (1969-1970). 44
94. Carpintero (n. 90). 270
95. Roderici Suarez, Allegationes et Consilia, Salamanca 1568, Allegatio XVII, § 4, fol. 43vb
96. Suarez, however, draws no clear distinction between common and public things. Garcia-Arias (n. 93). 44. things. See Garcia-Arias (n. 93). 44
97. Suarez, Allegationes (ed. n. 95), Allegatio XVII, § 6, fol. 44ra
98. Compare with Grotius: 'Tumvero etiam qui alienis incumbant, aut communia intercipiunt, certa quadam possessione se tuentur. Quia enim prima, ut diximus, occupatio res proprias fecit, iccirco imaginem quandam dominii praefert quamvis iniusta detentio'; Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Osnabrück 1978 (reprint of the Leiden ed. 1618), c. 5. 57. intercipiunt, certa quadam possessione se tuentur. Quia enim prima, ut diximus, occupatio res proprias fecit, iccirco imaginem quandam dominii praefert quamvis iniusta detentio'; Hugo Grotius, Mare Liberum, Osnabrück 1978 (reprint of the Leiden ed. 1618), c. 5. 57
99. Suarez, Allegationes (ed. n. 95), Allegatio XVII, § 13, fol. 45ra
100. 'Secundo enim quod in mari et portubus eius reges et principes aliquod ius haberent, seu acquisissent, seu ad concedendum aliquid in eis, vel sive ad aliquid vectigal in eis imponendum, tamen non ex hoc sequitur quod ad utendum eis, ut iura permittunt, esset licentia principis necessaria: quod inferre ridiculum esset. Stant namque ista simul, scilicet quod princeps habeat aliquod ius in his: non tamen quod ex hoc sequatur, ut homines habeant uti rebus communibusuta portu, mari, fluminibus cum licentia regis, et aliter non'; Ibid., Allegatio XVII, § 13, fol. 45ra. ius haberent, seu acquisissent, seu ad concedendum aliquid in eis, vel sive ad aliquid vectigal in eis imponendum, tamen non ex hoc sequitur quod ad utendum eis, ut iura permittunt, esset licentia principis necessaria: quod inferre ridiculum esset. Stant namque ista simul, scilicet quod princeps habeat aliquod ius in his: non tamen quod ex hoc sequatur, ut homines habeant uti rebus communibusuta portu, mari, fluminibus cum licentia regis, et aliter non'; Ibid., Allegatio XVII, § 13, fol. 45ra
101. This could be explained in either of two ways. Accursius had said that other things, besides those listed by Marcian, were common under primeval natural law, implying that such property had subsequently been removed from the operation of that law. Gloss Naturali iure on Inst. 2,1,1 ed. n. 29, col. 122 other things, besides those listed by Marcian, were common under primeval natural law, implying that such property had subsequently been removed from the operation of that law. Gloss Naturali iure on Inst. 2,1,1 (ed. n. 29, col. 122)
102. Duns Scotus, by contrast, had suggested that natural law continues to apply to all property, but that, as the result of changed circumstances after the fall of man, natural law no longer requires all property to be held in common; Duns Scotus, Summa Theologica, Rome 1902, Art. 5, 94, 4. 616. apply to all property, but that, as the result of changed circumstances after the fall of man, natural law no longer requires all property to be held in common; Duns Scotus, Summa Theologica, Rome 1902, Art. 5, 94, vol. 4. 616
103. Alberico Gentili, De Iure Belli Libri Tres, Buffalo-New York 1995 (reprint of the Hanau ed. 1612), I, c. 1. (reprint of the Hanau ed. 1612), I, c. 1
104. Grotius, Mare Liberum (ed. n. 97), c. 5. 33
105. Reibstein, Anfänge (n. 68). 37
106. Or more precisely, Vasquez says that the primeval law of the gentes is that part of natural law that pertains to humans, rather than to brutes, and that natural law differs from the primeval law of the gentes as genus does from species. Fernando Vasquez de Menchaca, Controversiae Illustres, Valladolid 1932, II, c. 59, § 23, 4. 423-124. that part of natural law that pertains to humans, rather than to brutes, and that natural law differs from the primeval law of the gentes as genus does from species. Fernando Vasquez de Menchaca, Controversiae Illustres, Valladolid 1932, II, c. 59, § 23, vol. 4. 423-124
107. Whether Vazquez can in general be credited with the rediscovery more generally of stoic ideas on natural law has been the subject of debate. Here again, the underlying issue is whetherarticularly in light of medieval canonical writings on natural law, such ideas can be said to have ever disappeared. E. Reibstein, Völkerrecht. Eine Geschichte seiner Ideen in Lehre und Praxis, Bd. I: Von der Antike bis zur Aufklärung, FreiburgMunich 1958. 289, and Seelmann n. 56. 20-22 generally of stoic ideas on natural law has been the subject of debate. Here again, the underlying issue is whetherarticularly in light of medieval canonical writings on natural law, such ideas can be said to have ever disappeared. Cf. E. Reibstein, Völkerrecht. Eine Geschichte seiner Ideen in Lehre und Praxis, Bd. I: Von der Antike bis zur Aufklärung, FreiburgMunich 1958. 289, and Seelmann (n. 56). 20-22
108. Gentili, De Iure Belli (ed. n. 102), I, c. 19
109. H. Bull, The Importance of Grotius in the Study of International Relations, in H. Bull, B. Kingsbury, and A. Roberts (eds.), Hugo Grotius and International Relations, Oxford 1990. 70-71. Relations, in H. Bull, B. Kingsbury, and A. Roberts (eds.), Hugo Grotius and International Relations, Oxford 1990. 70-71
110. Grotius quotes Book I of the De Officiis, '… factas esse veteri occupatione res eorum qui quondam in vacua venerant'; Grotius, Mare Liberum (ed. n. 97), c. 5. 38. occupatione res eorum qui quondam in vacua venerant'; Grotius, Mare Liberum (ed. n. 97), c. 5. 38
111. 'Occupatio in mobilibus est apprehensio, in immobilibus instructio aut limitatio …'; Ibid., c. 5. 38. limitatio …'; Ibid., c. 5. 38
112. 'undefined, and determined by no boundaries'; Ibid., c. 5. 39
113. Grotius, recognizes an exception where a small section is enclosed: 'Si exiguum ita occupari potest, id occupanti conceditur' quid tamen exiguum ita occupari potest, id occupanti conceditur'; Ibid., c. 5. 45-46
114. Later, Grotius expanded this exception to allow for the possession of bays and straits where the claim is made by someone who holds land on both sides: 'Ad hoc exemplum videtur et mare occupari potuisse ab eo qui terras ad latus utrumque possideat, etiamsi aut supra pateat ut sinus, aut supra et infra, ut fretum, dummodo non ita magna sit pars maris, ut non cum terris comparata portio earum videri possit'; Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli ac Pacis, B.J.A. de Kanter - Van Hettinga Tromp, ed. Leiden 1939, II, c. 3, § 8. bays and straits where the claim is made by someone who holds land on both sides: 'Ad hoc exemplum videtur et mare occupari potuisse ab eo qui terras ad latus utrumque possideat, etiamsi aut supra pateat ut sinus, aut supra et infra, ut fretum, dummodo non ita magna sit pars maris, ut non cum terris comparata portio earum videri possit'; Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli ac Pacis, B.J.A. de Kanter - Van Hettinga Tromp, ed. Leiden 1939, II, c. 3, § 8
115. Grotius, Mare Liberum (ed. n. 97), c. 5. 37 and 39
116. 'et mare, et per hoc litora maris'
117. Grotius, Mare Liberum (ed. n. 97), c. 5. 45
118. Samuel Pufendorf, De Jure Naturae et Gentium Libri Octo, Frankfurt a Main 1716, IV, c. 5, § 9
119. I would like to thank Prof. James Gordley for his advice and assistance in the preparation of this piece. I would also like to thank Prof. Laurent Mayali for his comments on an earlier draft in the preparation of this piece. I would also like to thank Prof. Laurent Mayali for his comments on an earlier draft