Translations of modern natural law by means of the justification of colonialism and slavery, as well as the origins of theories of race

该项目研究殖民主义和种族理论的早期版本之间的联系，以及与他们从伊比利亚迁移到北方欧洲背景下的理论变化。在这个项目中使用的分析工具是翻译的概念已经在以前的DFG项目中使用的关于主观权利的发展。这个新项目审视了对人和人类的反思之间的相互作用，这些反思来自（自然）法，神学和（自然）科学，从所谓的西班牙经院哲学家开始，塑造了对殖民征服，跨大西洋奴隶贸易和殖民奴隶制的辩护和批评。这些概念从神学主导的语境中迁移到现代的世俗辩论中，显示出一种特殊的对比：尽管在16世纪，关于人的平等没有共同的观点，但战争和奴隶制的正当性，例如维托里亚和莫利纳，仍然是以这样一种方式构思的，它们可能也会说服非基督徒和非欧洲人。相反，在18世纪，我们发现了一种关于所有人作为人平等的共同观点，以及一种关于非白人种族劣等的无争议的假设。从理论上讲，所有人的普遍自由与从非洲到美洲的大规模驱逐没有什么不同。殖民主义的理由被从其学术框架中抽出来，以与定居者殖民主义有关的世俗方式对待，而无人土地（无主地）的概念对定居者殖民主义至关重要。在哲学论述中，早期种族理论与殖民主义理由之间复杂的相互关系迄今为止一直被边缘化。在那里，我们发现一些观点，要么将自然法的支持者解释为欧洲中心主义扩张政治的同谋，要么将现代法的出现理解为与殖民统治体系及其合法化（指的是原始人口的状态）无关。该项目的任务是超越上述概括，调查辩论中的几个重要人物，包括他们的接受情况。沿着这些路线，其中一个子项目涉及（前）科学种族理论的早期版本，而另一个项目涉及在殖民统治的理由中明确或隐含地发现的关于最近征服领土居民的人类学预设。虽然早期的西班牙裔论点大多表现出一种自然主义的特征，但后来在英语和荷兰语背景下使用的论点则倾向于指个别定居者。这两个项目旨在从不同的角度把握这一发展的初始步骤。

The project examines the connections between early versions of colonialism and race theory as well as the theoretical changes linked to their migration from an Iberian to a Northern European context. The instrument of analysis used in this project is the concept of translation already utilized in a former DFG-project concerning the development of subjective right. The new project scrutinizes the interplay between reflections about man and human beings stemming from (natural) law, theology, and the (natural) sciences that have, starting with the so called Spanish Scholastics, shaped both the justifications and criticism of colonial conquest, of transatlantic slave trade, and of colonial slavery. The migration of these conceptions from a theologically dominated context into the secular debate of modern times shows a special kind of contrast: Although in the 16th century there was no common view regarding the equality of men, the justifications of war and slavery, e.g. by Vitoria and Molina, were nevertheless conceived in such a way that they could potentially convince non-Christians and non-Europeans as well. Conversely, in the 18th century we find a shared opinion concerning the equality of all men as persons together with a non-contested supposition concerning the inferiority of non-white races. General freedom of all men is not contrasted, on a theoretical level, with mass-deportations from Africa to the Americas. Justifications of colonialism are taken out of their scholastic framework and treated in a secular manner related to a colonialism of settlers, to which the concept of a no mans land (terra nullius) is essential. Within the philosophical discourse, the complex interrelations between early race theory and justifications of colonialisms have thus far been marginalized. There we find views that either interpret proponents of natural law as complicit in the Eurocentric politics of expansion or understand the emergence of modern law as detached from their association to the colonial system of rule and its legitimation, which refers to the state of original population. The task of the project is to move beyond the above-mentioned generalizations and to investigate several significant figures within the debate, including their reception. Along these lines, one of the subprojects deals with early versions of (pre)scientific race-theory, while the other project deals with the anthropological presuppositions about the inhabitants of recently conquered territories to be found explicitly or implicitly within the justifications of colonial rule. While the early, mostly Hispanic arguments show mostly an etatistic character, later arguments used in both the English and Dutch contexts show a tendency to refer to individual settlers. The two projects intend to grasp the initial steps of this development from different perspectives.