Reading the Talmud in Prison

Author(s):  
Steven Grosby

A corollary of Hebraism’s orientation to this world is law as the vehicle by which to organize this world. This chapter examines the Hebraic understanding of law, its relation to tradition, and its national jurisdiction in contrast to the universal jurisdiction of Roman law and canon law. Regarding this contrast, the Lex Salica, François Hotman’s Francogallia, and Hugo Grotius’ Antiquity of the Batavian Republic are discussed briefly. The contrast does not mean that universal principles of justice are absent in national law, but the relation between those principles and a national jurisdiction presents a problem, as Edward Coke saw. Within the Christian tradition, the prototype of national law is the law of ancient Israel and subsequently Jewish law. In his examination of Jewish law, especially the Noahide laws of the Talmud, John Selden recognized an affinity between Jewish and English common law that supports Hebraism as a cultural category.

Author(s):  
Thomas Izbicki

During the Middle Ages, law loomed large in efforts to manage life situations, beginning with the adaptation of late imperial law to the successor or barbarian kingdoms of the West. Alongside local law and custom, the learned law was increasingly used to answer questions and settle disputes about family issues such as marriages and dowry, property and inheritance, contracts, and crime. Study of the law, not only as taught at the universities but as used to advise judges who lacked formal training, illuminates the status of women and children under patriarchy. Although Roman law was geared more to private than public law, political issues were addressed. Moreover, Romanistic procedure had a wide influence across Europe. Even where Roman law was not received, it had its influence via canon law and specialized courts. This is evident in England, where the common law governed real property, but canon law introduced the possibility of testamentary disposition of certain possessions. Similarly, the admiralty courts dealt with issues such as navigation and salvage on the basis of civil law. Roman law began in the Republic, beginning with the Twelve Tables of the Law (450 bce), resulting from struggles between patricians and plebeians. Under the Republic certain men knew the laws; but there were no legal careers. The most important judicial document was the praetor’s edict about procedure, the foundation of later jurisprudence. Both the popular assemblies and the Senate legislated for both the private and the public spheres, and the jurisconsults of the imperial period commented on their enactments. The Roman Empire produced jurisconsults able to give authoritative advice, and some wrote on the laws. Emperors legislated, and collections of their laws were compiled. The most important, the Theodosian Code (438–439 ce), influenced the Latin churches and the codes of the Western barbarian kingdoms. In the East, the study of law continued. Eventually Justinian I ordered systematization of centuries of jurisprudence. The Institutes served as a textbook. The works of the jurisconsults were divided topically in the Digest (Pandects). Imperial decrees were collected in Justinian’s Code with supplements in the Novellae. This Corpus iuris civilis (529–534 ce) was diffused throughout Justinian’s empire but had little influence in the West for centuries. The largest part of Justinian’s corpus is concerned with private, rather than public, law. Later jurists retained that focus in most of their writings. Revived study of Roman law in the West is tied traditionally to recovery of the Digest (c. 1070 ce). The teaching of law took root at the University of Bologna. The Glossators expounded texts and annotated (glossed) them. The Bolognese curriculum divided the Digest into Old Digest, Infortiatum, and New Digest. The first nine books of the Code were treated together, while the Institutes, last three books of the Code and Authenticum, a version of the Novellae, with two books on feudal law, made up the Volume. The direction of study changed in the 14th century. The Commentators (Post-Glossators) created detailed expositions of the entire corpus. The Commentators predominated even after humanists criticized their Latin and their interpretative methods. Works on procedure or specific topics, records of disputations, and opinions (consilia) on cases were written. All of these genres originated in the manuscript milieu, but many texts were printed beginning in the 15th century. Lawyers trained at the universities taught, provided advice, served as judges, and worked as bureaucrats. In much of Italy, the learned law was fused with elements of feudal law in the ius commune (common law). Most consilia engaged both the common law and the ius proprium of localities to be relevant in specific contexts. The Roman law was received through much of Europe in the late medieval and Early Modern periods, but its influence in England was mostly indirect.


1979 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. H. Baker

In 1845 a master of English commercial law wrote that there was “no part of the history of English law more obscure than that connected with the maxim that the law merchant is part of the law of the land.” Since then there have been detailed studies of the medieval law merchant and of the later development of English mercantile law, but the precise status of the law merchant in England and the nature of the process by which it supposedly became fused with the common law remain as obscure as they were in 1845. The obscurity begins with the very concept of the “law merchant,” which has been differently understood by different writers and continues to be used in widely divergent senses. Some have regarded it as a distinct and independent system of legal doctrine, akin in status to Civil or Canon law, and perhaps derived from Roman law. Others have supposed it to be a particular aspect of natural law, or the universal ius gentium, and as such akin to international law.


1975 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ralph V. Turner

In Maitland's words, “Of all the centuries the twelfth was the most legal.” It was a time of growth for the great legal systems in the West: English common law, revived Roman law, and canon law. Students of medieval England have rarely concerned themselves with the question of the connection between these legal systems. For six centuries, from Bracton until the rise of modern legal history with Maitland, the study of English law was insular, ignoring the continental legal systems. When a seventeenth-century civilian wrote that “our common law, as we call it, is nothing else than a mixture of the Roman and the feudal,” he aroused the anger of Coke and the common lawyers. Recently scholars have taken such a view more seriously, and a number of studies have sought Roman or canonistic influences on English law. It might be useful, then, to reconsider the matter of the impact of Rome on English law in the light of recent scholarship, asking three questions: To what extent was Roman law known and studied in England before the time of Bracton? What influences, if any, do scholars find that it had on the legal innovations of Henry II and his sons? Why did the English fail to ‘receive’ Roman law in the way that countries on the Continent did?Any influence of Roman law in England during the centuries after the withdrawal of Roman legions and before the Norman Conquest can be dismissed quickly. Once Christianity was re-introduced to the island, the revival of Roman Law, or at least of some notion of Roman legal concepts, was possible.


2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-30
Author(s):  
Javier Martínez-Torrón ◽  
Lorraine Hernández

In this paper, the author questions the conventional view that the civil law and common law traditions are radically different in their reception of Roman Law. He argues that Roman Law concepts, mediated by canon law, exerted a considerable influence over the common law. He identifies a number of channels through which this influence has shaped common law concepts. Thus, canonical equitas probably served as a model for the equitable rules bases on good faith. Although common law evolved in a distinctive way, because of procedural considerations, its evolutionary path had already been followed by that of canon law.


Author(s):  
Christoph Strohm

Abstract Religion and Law in the Early Modern history. The devaluation of the canon law by Protestant Reformers promoted the system-oriented presentations of law based on Roman law. Also in ius publicum there is a significant majority of Protestant authors. The situation differs from natural law and law of nations where the discourse of the 16th century was broadly determined by Catholic authors, specifically by the so called Spanish late scholasticism. In the Spanish empire fundamental works on natural law and law of nations were created. This came to an end in consequence of a „re-theologisation“ of the judicial discourse in the Jesuit led Tridentine Counter- Reformation. During the 17th century - starting with Hugo Grotius (1625) - we see primarily Protestant authors in the field.


2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
WDH Sellar

This article is the revised text of the lecture delivered to the Stair Society at its Annual General Meeting in November 1997. It defends the proposition that Scots law, from the time of its emergence in the Middle Ages, has been a “mixed” system, open to the influence of both the English Common Law and the Civilian tradition. It also compares and contrasts the Reception of the Anglo-Norman law with that of Roman law. The former was quite specific as regards both time and substantive legal content. The Reception of Roman law, on the other hand, took place over a considerable period of time, and its effects were complex and diffuse. Above all, the Civilian tradition and the wider ius commune provided an intellectual framework against which to measure Scots law. Both Receptions exercised a profound influence on the continuing development of Scots law.


2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-22
Author(s):  
Marek Maciejewski

The origin of universities reaches the period of Ancient Greece when philosophy (sophists, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, stoics and others) – the “Queen of sciences”, and the first institutions of higher education (among others, Plato’s Academy, Cassiodorus’ Vivarium, gymnasia) came into existence. Even before the new era, schools having the nature of universities existed also beyond European borders, including those in China and India. In the early Middle Ages, those types of schools functioned in Northern Africa and in the Near East (Baghdad, Cairo, Constantinople, cities of Southern Spain). The first university in the full meaning of the word was founded at the end of the 11th century in Bologna. It was based on a two-tiered education cycle. Following its creation, soon new universities – at first – in Italy, then (in the 12th and 13th century) in other European cities – were established. The author of the article describes their modes of operation, the methods of conducting research and organizing students’ education, the existing student traditions and customs. From the very beginning of the universities’ existence the study of law was part of their curricula, based primarily on the teaching of Roman law and – with time – the canon law. The rise of universities can be dated from the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of modernity. In the 17th and 18th century they underwent a crisis which was successfully overcome at the end of the 19th century and throughout the following one.


Author(s):  
Matthias Armgardt

AbstractReuven Yaron (1924–2014) in memoriamThe importance of Ancient Jewish Law for Roman Law and Ancient Legal History – the example of the Rabbinic reception and modification of the Greco-Hellenistic diathēkē as dîjathîqî and the donatio mortis causa. This paper aims to show that ancient Jewish law is of greatest importance for interpreting Roman law and understanding ancient legal history. After exemplifying the close relation of the Pentateuch and the cuneiform law, we focus on the reception and modification of the Greco-Hellenistic diathēkē (testament), which came into Jewish law during tannaitic times as dîjathîqî and was reinterpreted by the rabbis as donation. Finally, we compare the rabbinic dîjathîqî and the Roman donatio mortis causa.


1966 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 84-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard J. Meislin

The two jurisdictions with the greatest volume and complexity of laws dealing with usury are the United States and Israel. England, the wellspring of our common law, and one of present-day Israel's legal fonts, did away with all regulation of interest over a century ago. All of continental Europe contains only two or three jurisdictions which apply legal limits to interest on loans. The communist countries present a special situation since private loans at interest have no official place in the economic system. Islamic countries, like Pakistan, constitutionally frown on interest but it is present in practice, thereby embarrassing the secular authorities. However, the extent of legal experience with loans at interest in all other jurisdictions combined does not rival that wealth of elaborate study which is to be found in judicial decisions and legislative documents in American and Jewish law. It is, therefore, of interest to examine from a comparative standpoint the approach to usury taken by United States' courts and by Jewish legal authorities to see in which respects they differ and are similar.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document