Rome and the Economics of Ancient Law II

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Parsons Miller
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Roman Economy ◽  
Economic Methods ◽  
Ancient Law ◽  
Broad Overview

This chapter provides a broad overview of the chapters in the second volume of Roman Law and Economics. The subjects addressed in this volume include slavery and the Roman economy credit, property, dispute resolutions, and remedies, and finally wrongdoing and Roman law. The focus of my discussion is on the role that economic theory plays in the work of the various authors, who represent ancient historians, scholars of Roman law, lawyers, and economists. The chapter will provide a perspective on the contents of the book as a whole and will seek to explain why economic methods are a fruitful way to understand Roman law.

Rome and the Economics of Ancient Law I

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Parsons Miller
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Academic Discipline ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Ancient Economy ◽  
Roman World ◽  
Economic Methods ◽  
Ancient Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter serves as an introduction to the essays in this collection by exploring the ways in which contemporary economic theory can be used to ask new questions about the law and economies of ancient societies. The chapter begins with a review of the importance of Roman law as an academic discipline to legal historians. It then introduces the overall theme of the collection by reviewing the ways in which historians of the ancient economy and of ancient law have made use of economic theory to understand better the relationship between law and the economy in the Roman world. The chapter then goes on to discuss the individual chapters in this volume. It focuses in particular on the ways in which economic theory informs the approaches that the authors, both legal and economic historians, take in their essays. The chapter will thus set the individual chapters in a broader scholarly perspective and will seek to explain why economic methods are a fruitful way to understand Roman Law and Roman economic history.

Moral Norms, Adaptive Preferences, and Hedonic Psychology

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-54
Author(s):  
Jonathan S. Masur
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Human Behavior ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Moral Norm ◽  
Moral Norms ◽  
Adaptive Preferences ◽  
The Government ◽  
Behavioral Law And Economics ◽  
Hedonic Approach

Abstract In a series of important papers published roughly twenty years ago, Professor Robert Cooter developed a comprehensive economic theory of moral norms. He explained the value of those norms, described the process by which norms are adopted, and offered a set of predictions regarding the circumstances under which an individual will choose to adopt a particular moral norm. This brief Article applies behavioral law and economics and hedonic psychology to expand upon Professor Cooter’s path-breaking theory. In particular, understanding welfare in hedonic terms — rather than preference-satisfaction terms — suggests a multitude of further situations in which individuals will justifiably seek to internalize moral norms. The hedonic approach to welfare then further suggests an enhanced role for the government to play in encouraging the adoption of welfare-enhancing norms. Cooter’s theory, combined with modern understandings of welfare and human behavior, thus offers powerful predictive and prescriptive possibilities.

Ruling Regions, Exploiting Resources

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Mattingly
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Economic Activity ◽  
Regional Economies ◽  
Colonial Discourse ◽  
Roman Economy ◽  
Roman Imperialism ◽  
Role Of The State ◽  
Imperial Power ◽  
Global And Local

In recent years, debate has started to explore the tensions between global and local aspects of the Roman economic world. This chapter argues that the Roman economy is not only best understood as an agglomeration of globalized regional economies but that we can also define a series of major mechanisms at work that governed discrete areas of economic activity. In particular, it focuses on the role of the state as a motor of economic activity through its status as an imperial power. It constructs some simple models built around colonial discourse analysis, rather than complex economic theory. The main purpose of this chapter is not to outline a new general model for the Roman economy but to reignite debate about the economic face of Roman imperialism.

Parallel developments in Roman law and maritime trade during the Late Republic and Early Principate

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
pp. 53-72
Author(s):  
Peter Candy
Keyword(s):  
Economic Development ◽  
Ice Cores ◽  
Domestic Animal ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Data Sets ◽  
General Direction ◽  
Roman Economy ◽  
Roman Italy ◽  
Arctic Ice ◽  
Intensive Growth

Between the Second Punic War and the Early Principate several sources of evidence indicate that the Roman economy experienced some measure of (limited) growth. The case for intensive growth is founded on two complementary approaches. The first has been to construct an “argument from convergence”, which observes that several archaeological data-sets, such as Mediterranean shipwrecks, deposits of domestic animal bones at Italian sites and samples of lead and copper pollution from Arctic ice cores and lake sediments, show an increase in chronological distribution during the Late Republic and Early Empire.1 If taken as proxies for the volume and intensity of exchange, consumption and production, respectively, then, as W. Scheidel has argued, “we may reasonably assume that [these data-sets] indicate at least the general direction of economic development”.2 A second approach has attempted to quantify the GDP of the Roman economy. Although highly conjectural, where such estimates are possible they provide an insight into the trajectory of economic development by giving a rough indication of the rate at which it was probable to have grown or contracted over a given period.3 P. Kay‘s “probabilistic quantification” of the GDP of Roman Italy for the 2nd and early 1st c. B.C.4 concludes that the economy experienced extensive and probably also intensive growth because the rate of inflation remained at a relatively low level.5 His estimate that prices rose by 95% between 150 and 50 B.C. (i.e., at a compound rate of 0.67% per annum) accords with the broadly similar conclusions reached by other scholars.6 Although Kay warns that “the estimates we have produced are assumptions, not facts”, the results are both plausible and credible from a comparative perspective.7

Foundations of legal tradition: the case of ancient Greece

Legal Studies ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-260
Author(s):  
Neil Duxbury
Keyword(s):  
Ancient Greece ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Legal Tradition ◽  
Law System ◽  
The World ◽  
Ancient Law ◽  
History Of ◽  
History Of Law

Much has often been made of Maine's striking opening sentence to his Ancient Law, in which he states that the most celebrated system of jurisprudence in the world, the Roman law system, ‘begins, as it ends, with a code.’ It is a remark which serves well those who argue that law has evolved as a predominantly written culture. Yet, as Maine points out, the publication of the Twelve Tables (these traditionally being regarded as the foundation of Roman law) ‘is not the earliest point at which we can take up the history of law.’

Book Reviews

2011 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 1289-1291
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
University Of Florida ◽  
Analysis Group ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
College Of Law ◽  
The University ◽  
Florida College

Pierre Y. Cremieux of Analysis Group Inc. reviews “Monopsony in Law and Economics” by Roger D. Blair and Jeffrey L. Harrison. The EconLit abstract of the reviewed work begins, “Expanded second edition explores the law and economics of monopsony. Discusses the antitrust laws and monopsonistic forms of conduct; the economic theory of monopsony; the antitrust response to monopsony and collusive monopsony; cooperative buying efforts; bilateral monopoly; monopsony and antitrust enforcement; monopsony in action--agricultural markets; monopsony in action--the NCAA; and monopsony in action--Physician Collective. Blair is Walter J. Matherly Professor of Economics at the University of Florida. Harrison is Stephen C. O'Connell Chair and Professor of Law at the University of Florida College of Law. Bibliography; index.”

Coase, Ronald H. (1910–)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian H. Bix
Keyword(s):  
Economic Theory ◽  
Industrial Organization ◽  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Real World ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Economic Analysis Of Law ◽  
Economic Thinking

Coase’s work reshaped the economic analysis of law and government policy, and began the law-and-economics movement. His writings, over the course of decades, have consistently emphasized the importance to clear economic thinking of observing actual practice. While economic theory had often been grounded on abstract models that assumed the absence of any costs for commercial transactions, Coase has shown how recognizing the pervasive presence of frequently substantial transaction costs in the real world requires rethinking established economic ideas about industrial organization and government regulation.

The Case of the Collapsing Watercourse: Builders' Responsibility for Damage in Classical Roman Law

1986 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 423-437
Author(s):  
Susan Martin
Keyword(s):  
Roman Law ◽  
Building Industry ◽  
Classical Period ◽  
Private Law ◽  
Building Projects ◽  
Roman Economy ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Full Picture ◽  
High Degree

The jurists of the classical period of Roman private law (50 B.C.—250 A.D.) encountered a variety of legal problems arising from the activity of those employed in the city's building industry. This segment of the Roman economy was prosperous and busy. Yet, despite the Romans' zeal for construction, a detailed description of how building projects were organized has proved illusive. This is the result of two factors. First, the Romans, unlike the Greeks, tended not to preserve on stone details about the actual construction of their edifices. A second, more general cause is found in the nature of construction as an enterprise. Although building furnishes a basic need, the demand for it is episodic and unstable. Forces of labor and supplies of materials are procured in response to specific commissions. In addition, there are many possible ways in which these productive forces can be organized, and building is typically characterized by a high degree of diversity in regard to methods of organization. For these reasons, builders and building have not been particularly accessible topics for researchers. It is only in the juristic sources that we get a relatively full picture of the activities of builders at Rome.

To What Extent Should We Enrich Law and Economics? On Calabresi and his Future of Law and Economics

Global Jurist ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Régis Lanneau
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Economic Theory ◽  
Real World ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Future ◽  
Epistemological Point ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Abstract In this paper, I argue that the “expanded” economic theory advocated in Calabresi’s book “The Future of Law and Economics” could be interpreted in at least three different ways, all of which are compatible. First, Calabresi’s book could be interpreted as an attempt to incentivize lawyer-economists to explore laws and regulations from different angles or perspectives rather than merely apply neoclassical theories. Second, it could be considered an attempt to justify the introduction of the notion of moral costs into law and economics to better explain some legal realities. Third, it could be considered an attempt to advocate, in a more normative way, the need to incorporate moral costs into real world analysis to better improve upon decision making. This paper will address and discuss each of these possible interpretations. It will be clear that, from an epistemological point of view, if the first interpretation might be more widely accepted because it is less controversial, the second and third interpretations remain more problematic. Admittedly, the concept of moral costs could obscure and even distort our understanding of some legal realities. Moreover, the introduction of such costs for decision making is raising questions which cannot be answered through economic theory alone.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document