In Onuma Yasuaki’s research, international law must, as a necessary condition, be interpreted from a historical perspective. The historical reconstruction enables him to point out a precise relation between the past and the future of international law, highlighting the distance that separates the age of natural law and the subsequent positivist period from the instability of the current international legal order. At the root of this instability is the crisis of the West-centricity of the contemporary international order, suggesting the need to rethink this order from a transcivilizational perspective. But what is the meaning of this concept? According to Onuma, the transcivilizational perspective charts a middle course between two opposite perspectives—one of them Westand state-centric, the other instead centred on the role of the actors in civil society who view themselves as representatives of the “global community”. It constructs a “cognitive and evaluative framework based on the recognition of the plurality of civilizations and cultures that have long existed throughout human history”. Onuma adds that if we take account of civilizations and the cultures they consist of, we need to take a relativistic and functionalistic approach. This means that there are always cultural and civilizational factors that shape international law. A fundamental question thus arises: In what way have civilizations historically influenced the successive normative orders of international law? By taking this perspective, Onuma can clearly point out the twofold aim of his book: on the one hand, he sets out to analyze the functioning of international law conceived as a “social construct”, proceeding from a precise concept of the law as historically determined and from the values espoused by the members of the international society; at the same time, he seeks to present a corrected concept of international law which aims to rectify erroneous historical interpretations of it, outlining a normative

中文翻译：

---

反对国际关系体系的超文明国际法：大沼康明的规范选择

在大沼康昭的研究中，必须从历史的角度解释国际法，作为必要条件。历史的重建使他能够指出国际法的过去与未来之间的精确关系，突出了将自然法时代和随后的实证主义时期与当前国际法律秩序的不稳定区分开的距离。这种不稳定的根源在于当代国际秩序以西方为中心的危机，这表明有必要从文明化的角度重新考虑这一秩序。但是这个概念是什么意思呢？根据大沼（Onuma）的观点，跨文明视角描绘了两个相对视角之间的中间路线，其中两个相对视角是西方和以国家为中心，另一个则以行为者在民间社会中的角色为中心，他们将自己视为“全球社区”的代表。它构建了一个“基于对人类历史上长期存在的多种文明和文化的认识的认知和评估框架”。大沼补充说，如果我们考虑到文明及其构成的文化，就需要采取相对论和功能主义的方法。这意味着总是有影响国际法的文化和文明因素。由此产生了一个基本问题：文明在历史上以什么方式影响了国际法的接连的规范秩序？通过这种观点，大沼可以清楚地指出他的书的双重目标：一方面，他着手从历史上确定的精确法律概念和国际社会成员所拥护的价值观出发，分析被视为“社会建构”的国际法的功能；同时，他力图提出一个正确的国际法概念，旨在纠正对国际法的错误历史解释，概述一项规范性