Le ius commune européen : « hareng rouge » de l’approche comparative des traditions juridiques anglaise et française
| Autor: | Alain Wijffels |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | francouzština |
| Rok vydání: | 2022 |
| Předmět: |
ius commune
French historiography Cowell John (1554-1611) Common law Philosophy English usus modernus French Character (symbol) Historiography usus modernus anglais Microbiology language.human_language English law Dead end Wood Thomas (1661-1722) Civil law (legal system) language historiographie française Humanities Order (virtue) Jones William (1746-1794) |
| Zdroj: | Alain Wijffels |
| Popis: | Resume [*] : Pour saisir l'ancien droit anglais dans une approche comparative, le ius commune constitue une tete de pont inefficace. Au depart, l'historien du droit francais est mal prepare, principalement en raison des carences de son historiographie nationale, laquelle, trop exclusivement axee sur les specificites francaises, ignore largement les caracteristiques europeennes de la tradition romaniste et son evolution aux Temps Modernes. Mais meme en supposant que cette defaillance puisse etre surmontee, la civil law anglaise ne permet d'apprehender ni le genie de la common law, ni meme l'esprit dans lequel l'Equity s'est developpee a l'epoque moderne. L'interface que constitue dans l'orbis exiguus du ius commune la methode moderne – l'usus modernus systematisant ratione materiae et operant une fusion substantielle du ius commune et des iura propria d'un territoire – a ete trop peu developpee par les juristes anglais du XVIe au XVIIIe siecle, qu'il furent des civil lawyers comme John Cowell ou Thomas Wood, ou, exceptionnellement, un common lawyer comme Sir William Jones. Mots-cles : ius commune – usus modernus anglais – historiographie francaise – John Cowell – Thomas Wood – Sir William Jones Abstract : In order to understand the late-medieval or early-modern English law in a comparative perspective, an approach based on ius commune only leads to a dead end. The French legal historian is handicapped from the start because his national historiography focuses too exclusively on specific French developments and fails to grasp the essential and changing features of the early-modern European civil law tradition. Even supposing that these constraints could be overcome, the English civil law does not pave the way to a proper understanding of the character of the English common law or early-modern Equity. In the small world of European ius commune, the early-modern method (i.e. the usus modernus, which merged ius commune and territorial iura propria in a systematisation by subject-matter) maintained an interface between continental legal systems, but the English usus modernus literature of early-modern English writers such as the civilians John Cowell and Thomas Wood or (exceptionally) a common lawyer such as Sir William Jones was too peripheral to have any major impact on English law. Keywords : ius commune – English usus modernus – French historiography – John Cowell – Thomas Wood – Sir William Jones |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|