Pufendorf on the Law of Sociality and the Law of Nations

In his grand exposition of natural law, De jure naturae et gentium (hereafter jng),1 Samuel Pufendorf denied the existence of a separate law of nations as a set of positive legislation agreed by all nations. Following Thomas Hobbes, he maintained that the norms which prevailed between sovereign states were nothing but the application of the law of nature to interstate relations.2 The fundamental principle of natural law, in turn, was the duty to cultivate and maintain sociality towards other human beings.3 This much about Pufendorf ’s views can be said without much disagreement among modern commentators. But once we ask what he meant by the endorsement of sociality, among individuals or between states, things become complicated and scholarly opinion diverges. One reason for rival interpretations is that Pufendorf ’s remarks on the law of nature oscillated between two seemingly incompatible positions. On the one hand, he not only observed that human beings are by nature preoccupied with their personal safety and welfare, but also emphasized that observing natural law serves their longterm interests. With such remarks, he appeared to follow Hobbes in deducing natural law from the requirements of