Francisco de Vitoria

Life and Intellectual Context

Francisco de Vitoria (c.1483–1546) was a Spanish Dominican friar, theologian, and jurist, often regarded as a major figure of the School of Salamanca and a forerunner of modern international law. Born in Vitoria (in today’s Basque Country), he joined the Dominican Order as a youth and pursued studies at the University of Paris, then a leading centre of Scholastic theology.

In Paris he absorbed and helped revive Thomism, the thought of Thomas Aquinas, against both nominalist currents and some late-medieval interpretations. In 1526 he assumed the prestigious Chair of Theology (Prima) at the University of Salamanca, where his teaching attracted students from across Europe and the Iberian world. Vitoria did not publish systematic treatises in his lifetime; his influence comes primarily from his relectiones—formal lectures on specific questions—which circulated in manuscript and were printed posthumously.

His career coincided with Spain’s imperial expansion into the Americas. News of the conquest, treatment of indigenous populations, and disputes over the legitimacy of Spanish rule reached Salamanca and formed the background to some of his most famous reflections. Vitoria also engaged with contemporary issues such as the Reformation, the authority of the pope and councils, and the ethics of economic life.

Natural Law, Sovereignty, and the Law of Nations

Vitoria worked within a natural law framework derived from Aquinas. He held that all humans possess rational nature, and thus share access to basic moral principles known by reason. From this he articulated a layered legal hierarchy: eternal law (God’s ordering of creation), natural law (moral principles accessible to reason), human positive law, and ius gentium or law of nations.

For Vitoria, ius gentium consisted of norms arising from the rational needs and practices of the global community of peoples: free communication, travel, trade, and mutual assistance. These norms did not depend solely on the will of rulers or the Church, but on the very structure of human sociability. This perspective allowed him to argue that certain rights and obligations held between states and peoples, not merely within them.

On sovereignty, Vitoria advanced ideas that limited both royal and papal power. He maintained that:

• Political power resides originally in the community; rulers govern by a form of consent.
• The pope has spiritual authority but no direct temporal dominion over non-Christian rulers or their territories.
• Christian princes have no automatic jurisdiction over infidel peoples purely by virtue of religion.

These claims, though framed theologically, contributed to later notions of state sovereignty and the separation of spiritual and temporal authority.

The Americas, Just War, and Indigenous Rights

Vitoria’s most cited works concern Spain’s presence in the New World, especially the relectio De Indis (On the American Indians) and relectio De iure belli (On the Law of War). Responding to debates within Spain and the Church, he examined whether the Spanish Crown held legitimate title to rule in the Americas and under what conditions war or coercion could be justified.

A central thesis is that the indigenous peoples of the Americas are true owners (domini veri) of their lands and political communities. Vitoria argued that:

• Indigenous peoples are rational, capable of self-government, and thus have natural rights to property and political authority.
• Their unbelief or non-Christian status does not extinguish these rights.
• The mere fact of papal donation or imperial discovery provides no sufficient title for Spanish domination.

At the same time, Vitoria did not simply condemn Spanish presence. He proposed a list of possible “just titles” that might, in his view, ground limited Spanish rights in the New World, such as:

• The natural right of Spaniards to travel, trade, and communicate with other peoples.
• The right to preach the Christian gospel peacefully.
• The protection of converts and innocents from grave injustice.
• Intervention against practices he regarded as violations of natural law (for example, certain forms of human sacrifice), subject to strict conditions.

From this, he reworked just war theory. War could be waged only in response to a genuine and proportionate violation of rights, as a last resort, and with careful attention to discrimination and proportionality. Even in war, the innocent should be spared as far as possible. Proponents of Vitoria highlight his insistence that conquest and forced conversion are illegitimate, and that war cannot be justified simply by religious difference or imperial ambitions.

Critics, however, emphasize the ambivalence of his position. They argue that his catalogue of “just titles” could be interpreted expansively to rationalize continuing Spanish intrusion and control, especially when Europeans unilaterally defined what counted as violations of natural law. From this perspective, Vitoria’s framework simultaneously challenged and subtly stabilized colonial domination by recasting it in juridical and moral terms.

Legacy and Reception

Vitoria’s lectures strongly influenced later members of the School of Salamanca, including Domingo de Soto, Melchor Cano, Francisco Suárez, and Bartolomé de las Casas (who, though critical on many points, shared a concern for indigenous rights). Through these channels his thought helped shape early modern debates on sovereignty, commerce, and war.

In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, international lawyers such as James Brown Scott championed Vitoria as a “father of international law,” seeing in his concept of ius gentium an anticipation of later doctrines of universal human rights and international order. Some contemporary scholars endorse this view, stressing his recognition of non-European peoples as subjects of law and his efforts to bind Christian powers by shared norms.

Other scholars offer more cautious or critical readings. They contend that, while innovative, Vitoria’s thought remained deeply Eurocentric and mission-oriented, framing indigenous cultures through a Christian natural-law lens and leaving significant room for paternalistic intervention. Debates continue over whether his work should be read as primarily emancipatory, primarily imperial, or as a complex combination of both.

Despite these disagreements, Vitoria is widely regarded as a pivotal figure at the intersection of medieval scholasticism and early modern political-legal thought. His attempt to articulate a universal moral and legal order, binding on all peoples and rulers, remains a reference point in discussions of human rights, just war, and the ethical dimensions of global politics.