The roots of modern Western legal institutions and concepts go back nine centuries to the Papal Revolution, when the Western church established its political and legal unity and its independence from emperors, kings, and feudal lords. Out of this upheaval came the Western idea of integrated legal systems consciously developed over generations and centuries. Harold J. Berman d...
The roots of modern Western legal institutions and concepts go back nine centuries to the Papal Revolution, when the Western church established its political and legal unity and its independence from emperors, kings, and feudal lords. Out of this upheaval came the Western idea of integrated legal systems consciously developed over generations and centuries. Harold J. Berman describes the main features of these systems of law, including the canon law of the church, the royal law of the major kingdoms, the urban law of the newly emerging cities, feudal law, manorial law, and mercantile law. In the coexistence and competition of these systems he finds an important source of the Western belief in the supremacy of law. Written simply and dramatically, carrying a wealth of detail for the scholar but also a fascinating story for the layman, the book grapples with wideranging questions of our heritage and our future. One of its main themes is the interaction between the Western belief in legal evolution and the periodic outbreak of apocalyptic revolutionary upheavals. Berman challenges conventional nationalist approaches to legal history, which have neglected the common foundations of all Western legal systems. He also questions conventional social theory, which has paid insufficient attention to the origin of modem Western legal systems and has therefore misjudged the nature of the crisis of the legal tradition in the twentieth century.
小帆
中国大百科全书出版社1993版（其他版本）
时雨
法律出版社2008版（其他版本）
南风🌈
中国大百科全书出版社1993版（其他版本）
海底捞尔
法律出版社2018版（其他版本）
理一分殊
中国大百科全书出版社1993版（其他版本）
Lowlibrarian
法律出版社2008版（其他版本）
考拉🐨
法律出版社2018版（其他版本）
1 有用 陈别扭 2021-06-04 02:24:52
Oestmann教授提醒我“毕竟成书也是近四十年前了”，意思是不可尽信。当然不可尽信，但是并不妨碍它在法史中的地位，再多溢美之词也不为过。以德国法学家的标准，美国法史学家的书写往往有新意，常常很流畅，但总是不够扎实，过度依赖二手文献。确实是的，但如果按德国标准来写，恐怕本书完稿时在正文内容上不会有什么不同，只不过永远不会有完稿的那天。