In light of recent reevaluations of the work of Hugo Grotius, this essay analyzes the respective roles of Francisco de Vitoria and Grotius in the construction of the “Grotian tradition” of international law and human rights. In contrast to conventional accounts which understand the two within a progression, this essay argues that Vitoria and Grotius can alternatively be understood as representing two distinct strains of international law and ethics, forms of which persist to this day. The first is that strain which privileges local governance based on the natural law and which insists that international law must have a moral or equitable valence (represented today by liberal internationalism). The second, competing strain which, with its focus on “neutral” rules of commerce and international order, presumes that it need not have such a valence (essentially, neoliberalism). In the process, this essay examines the role of the natural law in Vitoria’s thought, which for him was most often a reason against interference or intervention, not for. The essay also highlights the role of the Eighty Years’ War between the Dutch United Provinces and Spain in the development of Grotius’s understanding of sovereignty, in contrast to the Thirty Years’ War which is given more prominence in conventional accounts.

中文翻译：

---

维多利亚和格罗蒂乌斯对国际法和自然法传统的贡献之间的关系

鉴于最近对雨果·格罗蒂乌斯（Hugo Grotius）的工作进行了重新评估，本文分析了弗朗西斯科·德·维多利亚（Francisco de Vitoria）和格罗蒂乌斯（Grotius）在构建国际法律和人权“格罗蒂亚传统”中的各自作用。与理解渐进过程中的两者的传统说法相反，本文认为，维多利亚和格罗蒂乌斯可以替代地理解为代表国际法和道德的两种截然不同的派别，其形式一直延续到今天。首先是这种应变，这种应变使基于自然法的地方治理享有特权，并坚持认为国际法必须具有道德或公平的效价（今天由自由国际主义代表）。第二种竞争压力，其重点是“中立”的商业规则和国际秩序，假定它不需要这样的价（本质上是新自由主义）。在此过程中，本文探讨了自然法在维多利亚思想中的作用，这对他来说通常是反对干涉或干预的原因，而非原因。这篇文章还强调了荷兰联合省和西班牙之间的八十年战争在格罗蒂乌斯对主权的理解的发展中所起的作用，与之相比，三十年来的战争则在传统上更加突出。