当前位置: X-MOL 学术The Journal of Legal History › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The Limits of Legal Pluralism in the Roman Empire
The Journal of Legal History Pub Date : 2019-05-04 , DOI: 10.1080/01440365.2019.1625202
Kimberley Czajkowski 1
Affiliation  

ABSTRACT The Roman empire was legally pluralistic. But what exactly does this entail in concrete terms? With the growth in historical studies of legal pluralism in the Roman empire, some significant differences in approach have emerged. This article tests and clarifies some of the limits in the current ‘legal pluralism’ conceptual landscape, focussing on disputes and dispute resolution. It is argued that a clearer distinction should be drawn between ‘normative’ and ‘jurisdictional’ pluralism, though both approaches still raise certain conceptual problems. The place of disputes within the family within this wider institutional picture is then taken as a case study in the final part of the paper, and it is suggested that while family disputes can evidence ‘legal pluralism’ in the ‘norms’ sense, there is less to suggest that there were a multitude of officially sanctioned legal fora available for resolving family disputes. As a result, many went beyond the law. This has wider implications for the study of legal pluralism in antiquity and the problem of integrating alternative dispute resolution (ADR) into the pluralistic picture.

中文翻译:

罗马帝国法律多元化的局限

摘要 罗马帝国在法律上是多元化的。但这具体意味着什么?随着对罗马帝国法律多元化的历史研究的发展,出现了一些显着的方法差异。本文测试并澄清了当前“法律多元化”概念格局中的一些限制,重点关注争议和争议解决。有人认为,应该在“规范”和“司法”多元主义之间进行更明确的区分,尽管这两种方法仍然会引起某些概念上的问题。然后,本文最后部分将家庭内部纠纷在这个更广泛的制度图景中的位置作为案例研究,并提出虽然家庭纠纷可以证明“规范”意义上的“法律多元化”,没有什么表明有许多官方认可的法律论坛可用于解决家庭纠纷。结果,许多人超越了法律。这对古代法律多元化的研究以及将替代性争议解决 (ADR) 纳入多元化图景的问题具有更广泛的意义。
更新日期:2019-05-04
down
wechat
bug