Printable View
roman law is usually touted as one of the great benefits they gave to civilization. but what aspects of it did they create that western civilization still retains ? as far as i know, trail by jury, laws being written down, and a lot of other legal precedents were created by other peoples before the romans. what did they add? i am most unfamiliar with this and would appreciate someone explaining it in simple terms [non legaleeze.]
The Roman low , as a whole , is (as you know) the base of modern western low . again , as a whole .
Btw , the lex Valeria (c. 500 bce) is the first low considering the right of appeal before the people .
Quote:
The Roman low , as a whole , is (as you know) the base of modern western low . again , as a whole .
Btw , the lex Valeria (c. 500 bce) is the first low considering the right of appeal before the people
Not really; the appeal here is not one of superior court to lesser court but to the people over a magistrates opinion (I think, but for a lot of early Roman history your interpretation of the relative merits of the annalist traditions, and how well they are communicated by Livy or Diodorus, allows for some rather varied interpretations) the right to a fair trial before a random jury of the people clearly belongs to the Athenian democracy. The appeal aspect of the Valerian laws has no real counter in Athenian law only because the Athenian's never invested any magistrate with the power to order executions...
Quote:
Originally Posted by conon394
So ? it is still was the first time that a citizen could appeal to the people against the Magistrate decision .
Just remember , the Consul acted like a court in the field as all comanders in all ancient civila' , including Athens . again , it was for the first time . never mentiond that it was an appeal against a lesser court to a superior court .
Btw , if you don't belive Livy , Dio , Diodoros , Dionysius , Polybius and the other historians who wrote abuot Rome , why are not questioning the historians who wrote about greece ?
i know that roman law is supposed to be the basis of western law, but i still don't know; what they added, to what their predecessors did, that is still around today. so caesar44, if i am understanding you correctly, you are saying that the right of 'appeal to the people' over a magistrate is a roman invention. but in a modern day court in france let's say, if a man is convicted of murder, he can't appeal to the t.v. audience to get a different verdict. i hope this helps to clarify what i am asking. what exactly did they create that we still use today? and i don't mean legal terms unless they were the first to create the terms. so the word 'client' wouldn't count even though it is a roman legal term, unless the romans were the ones to introduce the concept of a 'client.'
Even if a lot of Roman law had been seen elsewhere before the Romans used it, then it was the Romans who really spread it to places like Britain. I think that because they did this, a lot of laws, even if the Romans weren't the first to use them, are regarded as Roman laws.
Thomas rufner -
"Why is Roman Law still important today?
Today Roman Law has been replaced by modern codes. These codes, however, did not create new law from scratch. But rather, to a large extent, the rules of Roman Law which had been transmitted, were placed in a statutory framework which provided a modern, systematic order. This is particularly true in regard to the German Civil Code. So, in order to fully understand the German Civil Code, it is necessary to know about the legal foundation upon which it rests. As this is true in regard to German law, it is eqully true in regard to most modern European legal systems.
Most important of all, Roman Law will have great significance in regard to the formation of uniform legal rules which further the process of political integration in Europe. Roman Law is the common foundation upon which the European legal order is built. Therefore, it can serve as a source of rules and legal norms which will easily blend with the national laws of the many and varied European states."
:book:
so their contribution is that
1) they were the first ones to bring a legal system to these places that had not had them before?
2) the current legal systems of these places are ultimately derived from the first legal system of these places which happen to be roman?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nokhor
"In the late 3d cent. B.C., Roman law could no longer limit itself to the inhabitants of the republic but was forced to take account of the surrounding non-Roman peoples. Thus, to the jus civile, which governed relations among the Romans and those admitted to Roman status, was added the jus gentium, the law applied in dealings with a foreigner. The jus gentium incorporated much of the highly developed commercial law of the Greek city-states and of other maritime powers. Such provisions, being better adapted to Rome's expanding economic needs than the unyielding provisions of the jus civile, in time tended to be applied universally."
Another contributiuons -
"Another important statute from the Republican era is the lex Aquilia of 286 BC, which may be regarded as the root of modern tort law. However, Rome’s most important contribution to European legal culture was not the enactment of well-drafted statutes, but the emergence of a class of professional jurists and of a legal science. This was achieved in a gradual process of applying the scientific methods of Greek philosophy to the subject of law—a subject which the Greeks themselves never treated as a science."
"Roman jurists clearly separated the legal right to use a thing (ownership) from the factual ability to use and manipulate the thing (possession). They also found the distinction between contract and tort as sources of legal obligations.
The standard types of contract (sale, contract for work, hire, contract for services) regulated in most continental codes and the characteristics of each of these contracts were developed by Roman jurisprudence.
The classical jurist Gaius (around 160) invented a system of private law based on the division of all material into personae (persons), res (things) and actiones (legal actions). This system was used for many centuries. It can be recognized in legal treatises like William Blackstone 's Commentaries on the Laws of England and enactments like the French Code civil. "
Another effect of Roman Law is somewhat harder to perceive. When Irnerius began teaching on Roman Law in Europe in the eleventh century, he began the rebirth of western secular jurisprudence. Many of the lawyers and judges who went on to develop national legal traditions in later centuries were trained in Roman law, and the basic principles and ideas of Roman law thus affected the legal traditions of virtually every European nation. It is sometimes difficult to prove which ideas were imports from Roman law and which were native developments, but undoubtedly many of the basic legal principles recognized in legal codes throughout Europe today are Roman inspired.
thanks for the info guys.