School of Salamanque
The term École of Salamanque ( Escuela de Salamanca ) indicates in a generic way the rebirth of the thought, in various fields, which carried out of the theologists Spanish following the work Intellectuel S and teaching started by Francisco de Vitoria.
When the Renaissance had been propagated in all the Europe, at the beginning of the 16th century, the traditional designs of the Homme, his relation with God and the world had been shaken by the appearance of the Humanisme, by the Réforme, the Grandes discoveries and their effects on the Connaissance S (Géographique S in particular). These new questions were tackled by the School of Salamanque.
Francisco de Vitoria, Domingo de Soto, Martín d' Azpilcueta (or Azpilicueta), Tomás de Mercado or Francisco Suárez, all jusnaturalist S and Moralist S, are the founders of a school of theologists and lawyers which reconciled the Thomisme with the new economic order. The subjects of studies concentrate mainly on the man and his practical problems (Moraux, economic S, legal…), but it is not a question of a truly single corpus admitted by all, as the dissensions prove it or, even, the polemical sournesses between them.
By the extent of the treated fields, there is habit to distinguish two schools, that of the Salmanticenses and that of the Conimbricenses . The first would start with Francisco de Vitoria (towards 1483 - 1546), and arrives at its apogee with Domingo de Soto (1494 - 1560) and Melchor Cano (1509 - 1560). The school of Conimbricenses is formed by the Jésuite S which, since the end of the 16th century took the intellectual changing of the Dominicain S. Among the Jésuite S one finds names as known as Luis of Molina (1535 - 1600) and Francisco Suárez (1548 - 1617).
Right and justice
The legal doctrines of the School of Salamanque meant the fine medieval concepts of the Droit, with a claim of unusual Liberté in the Europe of the time. The natural Right of the man became, in one way or another, the center of interest, so much for those relating to the body (right to the life, with the property) that those related to the spirit (right to freedom of thought, with dignity).
natural Right and human rights
the School of Salamanque reformulated the concept of natural Right. This one even comes from nature, and all that exists according to the natural order shares this right. The obvious conclusion is thus that all the men sharing same nature share also the same rights like the equality or freedom. Vis-a-vis the prevalent design in Spain and Europe, regarding the Indian of America as minors or incompetents, the great innovation was the recognition of their rights, like those to reject forced conversion or the right to the property of their grounds. Since the man does not live not isolated but in company, the natural law is not limited to the individual. Thus, for example, justice is an example of natural law which is carried out in the company. For Gabriel Vázquez (1549 - 1604) to act with justice is a duty dictated by the natural law.
Sovereignty
the School of Salamanque distinguished two capacities, the natural or civil field, and the supernatural field, which were not different with the Moyen-âge. A direct consequence of the separation of the capacities is that the king or the emperor does not have authority on the hearts, nor the Pape of temporal power. They even proposed that the capacity of the leader has his limits. Thus, according to Luis of Molina a Nation is similar to a commercial company in which the leaders would be the administrators, but where the capacity lies in the whole of its managed considered individually. However, the capacity of the company on the individual is larger than this one of the individual on itself, since the capacity of the leader is an emanation of the divine capacity.
The English crown extended the theory of the royal capacity by divine will (the only legitimate receiver of the emanation of the capacity of God is the king), in such a way that the subjects could only respect the orders not to contravene this intention. Vis-a-vis this theory, various members of the School supported that the people is the receiver of the Souveraineté, which transmits to the prince directing according to various conditions. The principal defender of this thesis was probably Francisco Suárez, whose work Defensio Fidei Catholicae adversus Anglicanae sectae errores (1613) was the best plea of the time of the sovereignty of the people . The men are born free by nature and not to serve another man, and can disobey and even détrôner an unjust sovereign. Just like of Molina, he affirms that the political power does not belong to anybody in particular, but he differs from this last by regarding that the receiver is the people like a whole, not as a whole of sovereign individuals. For Suárez the political power of the company is contractual in its origin because the community is formed by the consensus of the free wills. The consequence of this contractual theory is that the shape of natural government is the Démocratie, while the Oligarchie or the Monarchie seems secondary institutions, which are right only if they are the choice of the people.
Right of the people and international law
Francisco de Vitoria was perhaps the first to develop a theory on the ius gentium (right of the people) which without any doubt can be described as modern. It developed its ideas of a legitimate sovereign capacity on the company with the international framework, by concluding that this framework must also be governed by right and respectful rules of the rights of all. The community property of the universe is of row higher than the good of each state. That means that the relations between states were not to be justified by the force any more, but to be justified by the right and justice. It is what makes of Francisco de Vitoria the creator of the International law.
One broke up the ius gentium . Francisco Suárez, which worked already on these quite distinct categories, distinguished between ius inter gentes and ius will intra gentes . While the ius inter gentes , which would correspond to the modern international law, was common to the majority of the countries (being a positive Droit, not naturalness, should not be obligatory with all the people), the ius will intra people or Civil law is specific to each nation.
War right
Since the war is one of the worst evils of which can suffer the man, the members of the School deduced from it that one cannot resort to it in all the occasions, but only to avoid a larger evil . It is even preferable to have a reasonable agreement rather than to begin a conflict. Examples of war right are:
- for its own defense, provided that it has possibilities of success. If she is condemned in advance with the failure, this war would be only one useless overflowing of blood
- preventive Guerre against a tyrant who is about to attack
- Guerre of punishment against a guilty enemy
But a war is licit or illicit not only according to the reason release, but must also fill a whole series of additional conditions :
The wars expansionist, plundering are unjust, with an aim of conversion of the infidels or pagan, by glory, etc
See also: Doctrines of the war right
Conquest of America
In this beginning of the Colonialism, the Spain was the only European Nation in which an important group of intellectuals proposed to study the conditions of legitimacy of a conquest instead of trying to justify it by traditional reasons.
Francisco de Vitoria began its analysis of the conquest by rejecting the illegitimate titles . It was the first to dare to deny that the bubbles of Alexandre VI (gathered under the term of the Bulles of the Donation ) were a valid title of possession of the grounds discovered. Not more universal primacy of the emperor that the authority of the Pape (which misses temporal power) were not acceptable, nor a tender or a conversion volunteers of the Indiens of America. They could not be considered sinning or not very intelligent, but were free by nature and rightful owners their grounds. When the Spaniards arrived to America they did not carry any legitimate title to occupy these grounds which had some already.
Vitoria also analyzed the possible existence of reasons which would justify a certain type of domination on the grounds discovered. It found up to eight legitimate titles of domination.
The first which it indicates, perhaps most fundamental, is in connection with the communication between the men, who form a universal company together. the ius peregrinandi and degendi is the right of any human being to travel and treat on all the ground, independently of the government or the religion of each territory. If the Indians did not allow the unrestricted passage, it was right to be defended, and to remain on the territories obtained by this war.
The second title refers to another right of which empèchement was also a cause of war right. The Indians could voluntarily reject conversion, but were not to prevent the Spaniards from preaching, without what one found oneself in a situation similar to that of the first title. However Vitoria points out that even if it were a cause of war right, it would however not be convenient because of the deaths which it could cause. The following titles, of less of importance, are:
- If the pagan sovereigns force the converts to turn over to the idolatry.
- If there is a sufficient number of converted Christians, they can receive from the Pope a Christian leader.
- If there is tyranny or damage made with the innocent ones (sacrifices…)
- Because of partners and friends attacked, like the tlaxcaltecas, combined subjected Spaniards but, like many people, by the Aztec S.
- the last legitimate title, although qualified by Vitoria itself of doubtful, is the lack of right laws, agricultural magistrates, techniques, etc In any case, it would be always justified by Christian charity and for many Indiens.
These legitimate and illegitimate titles did not satisfy the emperor Charles Quint, since they meant that the Spain did not have any specific right extend its empire, this is why it tested without success which the theologists cease expressing their opinions on these subjects.
Economy
The final dedication of the denomination of the economists of the School of Salamanque was given by Joseph Schumpeter in his Histoire of the economic analysis (1954), even if many economic historians had already employed this denomination before him. Schumpeter studied the doctrines scholastic in general and Spanish in particular, and spoke in praise of the high level of the economic scenes in Spain at the 16th century. According to him this school was the group which deserves more the title of founders of the economic scenes. The School of Salamanque did not manage to work out complete economic doctrines, but established the first modern economic theories while being confronted with the new problems which had appeared. Unfortunately, there was no prolongation after the end of the 17th century, and much of these contributions ended up being forgotten, to be Re-discoveries in the following decades. Although there was not of direct influence, the School of Salamanque often was compared with the Austrian École.
Antecedents
In 1517 Francisco de Vitoria, which was then with the Sorbonne, was consulted then by Spanish tradesmen established with Antwerp as for moral legitimacy to trade to grow rich. From a current point of view, it was an interrogation on the company spirit. Consequently, Vitoria and other theologists paid an attention to the economic affairs. They moved away from the already obsolete medieval positions and tried to replace them by new principles extracted the natural law. The natural order bases freedom of circulation people, goods and ideas, so that the men can know each other between them and increase their feelings of fraternity. This implied that the tradesmen not only were not morally reprovable, but concluded an important service for the general wellbeing.
Private property
With the flowering of the Ordres beggars at the 13th century a movement developed which, each time with more force, insisted on the poverty and the fraternity of the men, by deploring the accumulation of richnesses by the Église. The orders beggars regarded the possession of goods and the private property as, at least, morally reprehensible. Vis-a-vis them the Dominican ones in general, and Thomas d' Aquin in particular, defended that the private property is a morally neutral human institution.
The members of the School of Salamanque considered that the property causes beneficial to stimulate the economic activity, and thus general wellbeing. Diego de Covarrubias Leiva (1512 - 1577) considered there that the owners had not only property right on the good, but also, which is already a modern characteristic, had exclusive right for the benefits which could derive from the good, even if those could benefit the Community. In any case, in period of great need all the goods are common.
Luis of Molina (1535 - 1601) regarded it as an institution with the positive practical effects since, for example, the goods were maintained better by an owner than if they were the common property.
Money, value and price
The most complete and methodical development of a theory of value is due to Martín d' Azpilcueta (1493 - 1586) and Shine of Molina. Interested by the effect of the noble metals which arrived from America, Martín d' Azpilcueta noted that in the countries where those were rare, the Prix goods were lower than those of the countries having an abundance of these metals. The noble metals are goods like the others, more they are abundant less they make it possible to acquire other goods. It thus developed the theory of value-shortage precursory of the quantitative theory of the money , in advances of more than one decade on Jean Bodin (1530 - 1596). The prevalent theory of value until this time was a medieval theory of the production costs like fair price . Diego Covarrubias and Luis of Molina developed a subjective theory of the value and price which consists in considering that, since the utility of a good varies from one person to another, its fair price will be reached by the mutual agreement on an open market (without Monopole, frauds or intervention of the government). In current terms, the members of the school defended the free market, where the fair price is determined by the Loi of supply and.
Interest
wear (as one named at that time with any loan with interest) always had been very badly seen by the Church. The Second council of Lateran had condemned the refunding of a debt to a value higher than the lent capital; the Concile of Vienna had explicitly prohibited wear and had described as heretic any legislation which would tolerate it; the first scholastics rejected the cashing of interest. In the medieval economy the loans were the consequence of the need (bad harvest, sets fire to in the workshop) and, under these conditions, it could at the very least only be morally reprovable to charge an interest for that.
With the Renaissance the greatest mobility of the people made favourable the development of the trade and the appearance of favorable conditions so that contractors start news and lucrative businesses. Since the loan was not already any more for subsistence farming but for the production, it could not be considered under another angle. The School of Salamanque found various reasons to justify the perception an interest . Thus, the person who received the loan obtained a benefit at the price of the money obtained. In addition the interest could be regarded as a premium for the risk which his money had the borrower to lose. But also like a Shortfall, since the borrower lost the possibility of using the money with another thing. Finally, and it is one of the most original contributions, was the consideration according to which the money was goods which one could receive a benefit (which would be the interest).
Martín d' Azpilcueta took into account the influence of time. Under equal conditions, it is preferable to receive a sum immediately that to receive it in the future. For which is more attractive it must be larger. In this case the interest corresponds to the payment of time.
Theology
During the Renaissance the Théologie was in decline vis-a-vis the triumphing Humanisme, as well as the Scolastique transformed into empty and routine methodology. The Université of Salamanque led especially, following Francisco de Vitoria, Domingo de Soto and Melchor Cano a revival of theology like the rebirth of the Thomisme, which influenced the cultural life in general and other European universities. The fundamental contribution of the School of Salamanque to theology is perhaps the study of problems much closer to the men, who had been previously ignored, in addition to the study of questions until then unknown. One used sometimes the term positive theology to underline his practical character vis-a-vis the theology scholastic .
Morals
At one time when the Religion (Catholicism, Calvinism, Islamism…) all impregnated, to analyze the morality of the acts was the most practical and useful study which could be made to serve the company. Thus the new contributions were pushed until the right and with the economy by the School of Salamanque are not in their origins but concrete analyzes of the challenges and the moral problems imposed on the company by the new situations.
A revolutionary idea is that one can make the evil even if one is believer, and one can make the good even if one is not it. I.e. the Morale does not depend on God. This proved particularly important for the relations with the pagan ones, since the fact that they are not Christian did not imply that they are not good.
With the passing of years one obtained a Casuistique answers in front of moral dilemmas. But as a casuistry could never be complete, a rule or a more general principle was also sought. From here started to be already developed the Probabilisme , where the last criterion was not the truth, but safety not badly not to choose. Developed mainly by Bartolomé de Medina and continued by Gabriel Vázquez and Francisco Suárez, probabilism was transformed into the moral school most important of the following centuries.
Polemic Of auxiliis
This polemic between Jésuites and Dominican was a conflict - which was solved at the end of the 16th century - on the Tolérance and the Prédestination, i.e., how can one reconcile the human freedom with the omniscience of God . In 1582 the Jesuit Prudencio Montemayor and the brother Luis of Leon discoursed publicly on human freedom. Domingo Báñez considered that they gave an excessive weight to it and that they had employed terms which sounded in manner heretic, this is why it showed them in front of the Holy Office of Pélagianisme . These doctrines carried to naked the free human will to the detriment of the Original sin and the tolerance granted by God. The result was that Prudencio Montemayor and the Luis brother of Leon had to leave teaching and one prohibits to them to defend these ideas.
Báñez was shown in front of the the Holy Office by the brother Luis of Leon to make the error of Luther. According to these doctrines, which are at the base of the Protestantisme, the man is corrupted following the original sin and it cannot be saved by its own merits, but only if God grants his grace. Báñez was expelled.
However this did not put a term at the polemic, which continued with Luis of Molina and its Concordia liberi arbitrii cum gratiae donis (1588). This one was regarded as the best expression of the position of the Jesuits. The polemic continued during years, including an attempt of Dominican so that the Pope Clément VIII condemns the Concordia of Molina. Finally Paul V in 1607 recognized the freedom of the Jésuites and the Dominicain S to defend their ideas, while prohibiting that none them is qualified Hérésie.
Existence of the evil in the world
Vitoria provided a new image of the divinity to try to explain the presence of evil in the world. The existence of the evil made difficult to believe that God can be at the same time infinitely good and infinitely powerful . Vitoria explained this paradox by calling upon the Libre will of the man. Since freedom is granted by same God to each man, it is not possible that the man acts by always choosing the good. The consequence is that the man can voluntarily cause the evil.
External bonds
- a very complete article on the “School of Salamanque and the Intellectuals ''”
- a page on the “School of Salamanque” on a site devoted to the history of the economic thinking
| Random links: | The Day of the ants | Observatory (administration) | Metal framing | Sphaerodactylus leucaster | Split of Brest | Comté_de_Robeson,_la_Caroline_du_Nord |