142 shows that Schefferus in his concept of natural lawwas most strongly influenced by Cicero and, of course, Hugo Grotius, but also by Samuel Pufendorf and English authors such as John Selden. Schefferus held lecturesonSciagraphiaJuris Naturaeat UppsalaUniversity in 1675 and the years thereabout. Earlier, in the 1650’s, some smaller works of Schefferus had appeared in print; a printed compendiumwith the title Grotius Enucleata for a time enjoyed reknown in Europe for its simplicity and clarity. The analysis of Sciagraphia shows that Schefferus’ teachings in natural lawseem to have been rather conventional. The major concept within natural law is the idea that humanity consists of individuals who are equal and equally good by nature. Noone is born a slave, no one is born to rule, and all possess natural insight into what is just and what is unjust. That which »sanctions» natural law is the sense of well-being when we act justly and the pangs of remorse when we have acted unjustly. The result of the author’s analysis of Sciagraphia shows that Schefferus seemed to have conceived an idea of mankind as being classified according to three different grounds. First, there was mankind, the great human brotherhood or »the community of all men.» As a member of that community each individual had by nature, irregardless of sex, age, or social standing, certain rights and certain duties. Each and every one was obligated naturally to love God and to love his neighbour, and no one had the right to another’s lifenor to take his own life — the life of each individual belonged to »society». Secondly, according to Schefferus, there was the household community. If one scrutinizes his statements on this community one notes rather quickly, that the idea of natural rights which all individuals possess as human beings was an elastic concept. When Schefferus described the family it is obvious beyond a doubt that the father had not only the decisive influence, but that the father, in practice, was portrayed as owner o{ the wife, children, and servants. (Naturally, he did not mean that women could be bought and sold as inanimate effects. On the other hand, the borrowing of another’s wife for sexual use was something which the natural lawof the seventeenth century regarded as a matter of course, at least according to Schefferus.) Thirdly, all people weremembers of thestate, theassociation of citizens under a ruler. Could the individual as a citizen assert his rights against the government? Did the subjects in other words »by nature» have the right to refuse to obey or oppose a »tyrant»? The author has paid special attention to this question. Here is revealed an interesting shift in Schefferus’ view. In the earlier, printed works on natural law Schefferus advocates a viewpoint similar to that of Grotius in De Jure Belli ac Pads, that is, to the right of the individual also belongs the right to defend himself by military means, and that right extends so far that the subjects »by nature» have the right to make war upon their own government if it rules in a
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=