Suchergebnisse

Frederick Levi Attenborough (1887-1973) studied at Cambridge and was a Fellow of Emmanuel College between 1920 and 1925. He later became the Principal of University College, Leicester. In 1922 Cambridge University Press published his edition of the early Anglo-Saxon laws, with a facing-page modern English translation. A few years earlier, Felix Lieberman had published his monumental three-volume Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen, which is still the definitive specialist edition of the laws (as Attenborough rightly predicted), and which is also reissued in the Cambridge Library Collection. Attenborough explains that his work is for social and legal historians who do not read German, or do not require the full critical apparatus and contextual material provided by Lieberman. Attenborough's book covers the laws from Aethelbert to Aethelstan; in 1925 Cambridge published a continuation by Agnes Robertson, The Laws of the Kings of England from Edmund to Henry I, which is also available

This edition of the laws promulgated by successive Anglo-Saxon rulers over a period of five centuries was published in three volumes between 1903 and 1916 by the German historian Felix Lieberman (1851-1925), and is still regarded as authoritative. This unique body of early medieval legal writing, unparalleled in other Germanic languages, provides valuable source material for scholars of Old English and of legal history, and Lieberman's thorough engagement with the manuscripts has never been surpassed. Volume 2 contains a dictionary of the Old English, Latin and French words found in the texts in Volume 1. The dictionary is presented in one alphabetical sequence, and is followed by a German glossary of legal terms listing references in the texts, other medieval works and later scholarship. Frederick Attenborough's The Laws of the Early English Kings (1922), providing a modern English translation of early Anglo-Saxon laws, is also reissued in this series

Das legislative Wirken Konstantins des Großen auf dem Gebiet des Privatrechts steht in dem Ruf, mit der bis zu Diokletian fortgeführten Tradition des klassischen römischen Rechts zu brechen. Der Vergleich der Rechtssetzung beider Kaiser leidet freilich unter einer erheblichen Asymmetrie der Überlieferung, weil von Diokletian vorwiegend Reskripte, von Konstantin dagegen nur allgemeine Gesetze erhalten sind. Während jene die gesamte Privatrechtsordnung abbilden, sind diese auf punktuelle Neuerungen beschränkt und vermitteln keinen Überblick über das zu Konstantins Zeit geltende Recht. Lässt es sich daher auch nicht in seiner Gesamtheit rekonstruieren, kann man in den Konstitutionen Konstantins doch gewisse übergreifende Züge ausmachen. Hervorstechend sind einerseits das Bemühen um die Verwirklichung der rechtsgeschäftlichen Absicht als Erscheinungsform einer dogmatisch konsequenten Rechtsfortbildung, die ungeachtet ihrer rhetorischen Verbrämung in Konstantins Gesetzgebung vorherrscht. Andererseits stoßen wir auf das gegenläufige Streben nach Rechtssicherheit als dominierendes Element unter den politisch motivierten Entscheidungen. Konstantin wird dabei nicht zugunsten der beteiligten Privatrechtssubjekte, sondern allein im öffentlichen Interesse an Vermeidung und Beschleunigung von Rechtsstreitigkeiten tätig. / »Utilitas Constantiniana. Private Law Legislation at the Beginning of the Fourth Century« -- The legislative work of Constantine the Great in the area of private law has the repute of breaking with the tradition of classical Roman law continued up to Diocletian. The comparison of the legislation of both emperors suffers, though, from the asymmetry of the transmission, because only regular laws with selective innovations by Constantine have been preserved. Nevertheless, one can identify overarching traits: on the one hand, the effort to realise the intention behind legal transactions as part of a dogmatically consistent further development of the law, on the other hand, the opposing striving for legal certainty as the dominant element among the politically motivated decisions.

This edition of the laws promulgated by successive Anglo-Saxon rulers over a period of five centuries was published in three volumes between 1903 and 1916 by the German historian Felix Lieberman (1851-1925), and is still regarded as authoritative. This unique body of early medieval legal writing, unparalleled in other Germanic languages, provides valuable source material for scholars of Old English and of legal history, and Lieberman's thorough engagement with the manuscripts has never been surpassed. Volume 3 provides introductions to each set of laws presented in Volume 1, and detailed line-by-line explanatory notes that complement the dictionary and glossary of terms found in Volume 2. Frederick Attenborough's The Laws of the Early English Kings (1922), providing a modern English translation of early Anglo-Saxon laws, is also reissued in this series

General introduction / Jeroen Vervliet (p. ix-xxviii): 1. The political setting and origins of Mare liberum -- 2. Legal argument in Mare liberum -- 3. Aftermath, bilateral negotiations and a battle of books around Mare liberum -- Editor's introduction / Robert Feenstra (p. xxxi-lxiv) -- Edition of the Latin text and English translation on facing pages

Letter from the burgermasters and City Council of Ravensburg to Archduke Sigismund of Austria, December 17, 1484 -- Guarantee of good behavior (Urfehde), Ravensburg, October 23, 1484 -- Instruction from Bishop Georg of Brixen to his ecclesiastical subordinates, July 23, 1485 -- Letter of Bishop Georg of Brixen to Institoris, September 21, 1485 -- Letter from Bishop Georg of Brixen to Archduke Sigismund, September 21, 1485 -- Letter from Archduke Sigismund of Austria to Bishop Georg of Brixen, October 8, 1485 -- Letter of Biship Georg of Brixen to Sigismund Sämer, parish priest in Axams, undated (mid-October, 1485) -- Vernacular protocol -- Latin protocols against the seven accused women -- Latin articles of suspected crimes and list of questions for further investigation of the seven suspects after their release -- Record of the proceedings against the seven accused women, October 29-31 and November 3, 1485 -- Letter from Bishop Georg of Brixen to Institoris, November 14, 1485 -- Letter from Bishop Georg of Brixen to an unnamed parish priest in Innsbruck, November 14, 1485 -- Letter of Bishop Georg of Brixen to Brother Nicolas, February 9, 1486 -- Letter of Bishop Georg of Brixen to Institoris, February 9, 1486 -- The Brixen memorandum.

Der Autor erschließt einen lateinischen Rechtstext aus dem späten 6. oder 7. Jh., eine kurze Zusammenfassung des damals unter den Römern im Frankenreich geltenden Rechts. Der Text ist in einer einzigen Handschrift aus dem 8. Jh. erhalten und vieles dort ergibt keinen Sinn; deshalb glaubte man, ihn vernachlässigen zu können. Der Unsinn ist das Ergebnis einer Kette von Abschriften, deren Schreibern vor allem an einer schönen Schrift gelegen war, der Sinn des Niedergeschriebenen kümmerte sie nicht. Die ursprüngliche Fassung lässt sich rekonstruieren, was hier erstmals unternommen wird. Dabei haben sich mannigfache Abweichungen vom Ausgangstext, der ›Lex Romana Visigothorum‹ aus dem frühen 6. Jh. ergeben, aber auch von anderen späteren Kurzfassungen derselben, mehr Abweichungen und interessantere als in allen vergleichbaren Texten. Die Übersetzung aus einem frühmittelalterlichen Latein erleichtert das Verständnis und der Kommentar hält die Abweichungen von jener ›Lex Romana‹ fest und erörtert sie. / »Scintilla de libro legume. Roman Vulgar Law under the Merowingians According to the Fulda Epitome of the Lex Romana Visigothorum. Reconstruction, Translation, and Commentaries«: The author deciphers a legal text in Latin that summarises the law in effect under the Romans in the Frankish Realm from the 7th century, whose content has only been preserved in a corrupt manuscript from the 8th century. The original version, however, can be reconstructed, as was done here. Various deviations from the original text, the Lex Romana Visigothorum from 506 AD, were made to modernise certain regulations. The German translation facilitates our understanding, and the commentaries explain and discuss such deviations.