Characteristic of 16th Century legal theory, just as with mediaeval legal theory, is that it saw neither any real difference, contradiction, nor conflict between natural law and positive law. Positive law was the manifestation of natural law and in which capacity positive law made the abstractions of natural law concrete and helped to fill its gaps.68 According to the 16th Century definition, natural law was a set of universal norms (in reality a few principles of Roman law and the Decalogue) prescribing what Nature taught all living beings.69 However, the notion of natural law differed from that of Roman law on one central point. This was with regard toius gentium, which according to Roman legal theory consisted of the principles of law that a comparative analysis of different national legal systems could extract, in other words, a notion of law primarily applied with reference to the positive law common to civilized nations.70 In the post mediaep a r t v i i , c h a p t e r 1 580 1.3 Modern Era: The Axiomatization of Natural Law 1. 3. 1 16th - 17th century: the end of scholast ici sm 68 Schröder, Recht alsWissenschaft, p. 18. 69 SeeVerdross, Abendl. Rechtsph., pp. 82-88. For a short description of the notion of the generality of natural law, for Protestants and Catholics alike saw natural law as being a set of rules endowing all persons, regardless of nationality and creed, with identical rights and duties, and the same is ex analogia true for the rights and duties of nations. See also Lindberg, Naturrätten i Uppsala 1655-1720, pp. 169-179; Schröder, Recht als Wissenschaft, pp. 9-11. 70 Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law, Berger, ed., Ius gentium and Ius naturale.The exact relationship and status between ius gentium and ius naturale is disputed, even if the prevailing opinion is that to the Romans ius gentiumwas a positive system of law, according to which disputes between Roman citizens and free non-citizens could be settled, which, for instance, the judicial activities of the praetor peregrinus shows. See also Kaser, Ius gentium, pp. 3-8 and 23-25.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=