MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2560716322 · doi:10.3138/cjh.48.3.479

<i>The Invention of Law in the West</i>, by Aldo Schiavone, translated by Jeremy Carden and Anthony Shugaar

2013· article· en· W2560716322 sur OpenAlexaffvenue
Lionel Smith

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of History · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueLegal principles and applications
Établissements canadiensMcGill University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésArtSociology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The Invention of Law in the West, by Aldo Schiavone, translated by Jeremy Carden and Anthony Shugaar. Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 2012. x, 624 pp. $49.95 US (cloth). In this book, the very learned Aldo Schiavone tells the story of how the Roman jurists, over a period of centuries, created, discovered, or--as the title would suggest --invented law, as law is understood in the West. The story is both fascinating and profoundly important. The creation of a legal system occurred only twice in the West, and it happened first in Rome. Roman law still lives today. All over the world, and especially on the Continent, there are legal systems known as civilian, a label that tells us that their basic private law--the law of property, contracts, and of the family--is descended from the ius civile, the Roman law for Roman citizens. And Roman law lives even in legal systems that descend from another invention, which took place in London over a thousand years later. The basic grammar of private law in all Western systems--the organizing concepts of ownership, obligation, debtor and creditor, wrongful harm, the enforcement of promises, and so on--was created by the Roman jurists. How this happened, and why it happened, are questions of enduring significance, and Schiavone's book makes an important contribution to our understanding. The development and evolution of the law generally takes place over very long periods of time. Milsom warned that the importance of such long periods is one of the reasons why it is easy to misinterpret legal history [see S.F.C. Milsom, A Natural History of the Common Law (New York, 2003), pp. xix-xxii]. Moreover, in the study of how Roman law came to be, it must be remembered that the most interesting things .about Roman law are not the parts that are tied to the particularities of Roman society. The law of slavery, the patriarchal nature of Roman family law, the physical recourse that a creditor could have against the body of his debtor: these are of interest only to the specialist. The elements that are of interest to every jurist are the ones that turned out to be timeless, and relevant to every Western society: the basic concepts of private law that have already been mentioned. Schiavone is fully aware of both of these issues. His project deserves praise in that it does not fall into a trap of merely identifying law with power, and thence of trying to understand the evolution of Roman law as the deployment and development of this power. Roman law was not just politics by another name (for example, pp. 172-73, 200); a system of that kind could not possibly have had the subsequent history--we might say, the subsequent success all over the world--that Roman law has had. Schiavone rightly takes a long view of his subject matter, starting at the very foundation of Rome. He focuses on crucial stages in the development of the law, from a mysterious normative order that was a part of religious belief, to an abstract form of normative reasoning that is recognizable to the modern jurist of any tradition. These stages still resonate today: articulation of reasons, justifications for rules and for the outcomes of cases, and the concomitant abstraction of reasoning from particular disputes that leads to the evolution of powerful and general normative ideas like obligation and ownership. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,175
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,709

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,260
Écart entre enseignants0,243 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of HistoryMême sujetLegal principles and applicationsTravaux en français237 207