satisfy the expanding legal necessities imposed by advance of culture;

(2) in the notion of the Roman as being a Law available for the world in general (ratio scripta);

(3) in the idea and theory of the Middle Ages as to the continuity of the older Roman and the Germanic Empire."

The reception was brought about

(a) by the teaching of Roman Law at the newly founded German Universities;

(B) by the calling of men learned in the law (doctores iuris) to the higher public offices, to the councils of cities, and to the highest courts of the Empire and the Principalities;

(y) by the practice of the Spiritual courts; and

(8) by the rise of a popular literature of a Roman Law, which helped to naturalise it in the circles of unlearned men of business. The immediate validity of Roman Law for Germany found legal expression in the ordinance of 1495 as to the Imperial Kammergericht.'

C

§ 14. THE REFORM AND ADVANCE OF JURISPRUDENCE IN THE SIXTEENTH AND SEVENTEENTH CENTURIES. The revival of Classical studies gradually also gave an incomparable impetus to Jurisprudence, brought a new method into dominance, and led to a more thorough and more elegant treatment of Roman Law, which now first acquired a truly scientific stamp.

Roman Law began to be studied historically, critically and exegetically for its own sake, as a portion of classical antiquity, without immediate reference to practical application; and an endeavour was made to penetrate to the spirit of the classical Roman jurists, because the classical literature in general (especially the then newly discovered remains of the ante-Justinian jurisprudence) was applied to the interpretation of Iustinian's legal system. Pioneers of the new ten

dency were Andreas Alciatus in Italy (ob. 1550), and Ulrich Zasius in Germany (Recorder and Professor at Freiburg), who was born in 1461 and died in 1535.

The new method was fully developed in the hands of the FRENCH School, with whom the Romanistic jurisprudence reached its climax, and who founded a SECOND epoch in the history of the Roman Law in modern times. The two Coryphaei of this school were—

Jacobus Cujacius (Cujas), born 1522, ob. 1590, He was a professor at Bourges, and the greatest interpreter of the sources of Law-which he expounded thoroughly, and in nearly all parts and passages. He struck out a new path for the critical and historical treatment of the Roman Law. Cujas' chief works are: Observationes et emendationes,' in 28 Books, and commentaries on the fragments in the Digests of Africanus, Papinian and Paulus."

a Edd. of his

1658, 1722,

Hugo Donellus (Doneau), born 1527. He was 'Opera omnia," a professor at Bourges, Heidelberg, Leyden and 1757, 1758. Altdorf, and died in 1591. Doneau was a manysided scientific opponent of Cujas. He introduced the systematic arrangement of Law by his Commentarii iuris civilis,' but was also very eminent in exegesis.

The following also must be mentioned

Franc. Duaren-us, born 1509, ob. 1559. He was teacher of Doneau.

Franc. Hotomanus (Hotman), born 1524, ob. 1590 at Basle. He was an erudite, philological and antiquarian jurist.

Barn. Brisson-ius, born 1531, ob. 1591, was an eminent lexicographer and legal historian with more of an antiquarian tendency.

Jac. Gothofredus (Godefroy), born 1587,ob. 1652, was a legal historian of remarkable learning, although more a philologer and antiquary than a jurist.d The method of the French School wrought a revival in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries in the Netherlands. The so-called DUTCH School of the

Opera om

nia,' 1762.

e Cf. note to $5.

d See notes to $$ 7,9

a See note to

§ 8.

elegant jurisprudence' preferred to cultivate jurisprudence on its philological and antiquarian side, and distinguished themselves by painstaking application of the classical literature to the criticism and exegesis of the law-sources and the history of Roman Law, and thus sometimes certainly wasted labour in trifles. The leaders of this school, who were eminent as well for sagacity as for comprehensive learning applied to the sources, were

Gerhard Noodt, born 1647, ob. 1725. He was a professor at Leyden, celebrated for compressed brevity of style. He has been called 'the Dutch Cujas.'

Ant. Schulting, born 1659, ob. 1734."

Corn. v. Bynkershoek, born 1673, ob. 1743. He was President of the Great Council, and a discreet investigator in the different departments of Law.

As noteworthy representatives of the modern scientific tendency to whom also we must call attention are the following:

In Italy: Ant. Faber, born 1557, ob. 1624. He was President of the Senate and Governor of the Savoy, a jurist highly gifted and learned, but treating the Roman Law with far too great temerity, which became almost proverbial.

In Spain: a teacher of Law in the University of Salamanca-Ramos del Manzano, born 1605, ob. 1683; Suarez de Mendoza, ob. 1681, and Fernandez de Retes, born 1620, ob. 1678. They were celebrated for the thoroughness of their inquiries and many-sided humanistic culture, often paraded by them.

In Germany: Hub. Giphanius (Giffen), born 1534, ob. 1609, was a personal opponent of Doneau in Altdorf. Amongst the German jurists he was the most important leader of the modern school, especially in exegesis. He has been called The German Cujas. To the eighteenth century belongs

Joh. Gottl. Heineccius (Heineke), born 1681, ob. 1741. He was a thoroughly learned master of the Roman as of the German Law, of wide culture, and has rendered good service to the history of Roman Law.

15. THE GERMAN PRACTICAL JURISTS.

The rapid advance of Jurisprudence and deepening of legal study wrought by the French School and their successors made little impression upon Germany. The new method gained no footing, and further, men still allowed themselves to be dominated by the authority of commentators." The traditional material of Law a cf. § 12. alone for immediate practical application, in the form of compendia, commentaries, collections of controversies and the like, was converted into a usus modernus Pandectarum (iurisprudentia forensis), in which Roman and German rules of law, ancient and modern ideas, were uncritically thrown together. Contemporaneously with this spiritless practical jurisprudence, a rationalistic Law of Nature held sway. This, with its capri- cf. § 2. cious treatment of the subject, hindered both a correct apprehension of positive law and a grasp of legal relations. Although the dominant jurisprudence had no scientific character, its practical tendency must not hinder the recognition of such merits as it possessed

(1) as a counterpoise to the method pursued by the French and Dutch Schools, to the danger of confounding jurisprudence with learning that was purely unpractical, philological, antiquarian, and

(2) in its successful effort to shape the Roman Law, in spite of its mistakes and misapprehensions, into a Common Law of practical use for the present time.

§ 16. THE HISTORICAL SCHOOL OF LAW.

The rapid advance of philological and historical studies which dates from the end of the eighteenth

G

8

century exercised also a lively influence on Jurisprudence. After that Hugo (1764-1844) had in the most express way opposed to the spiritless practical tendency of which we have spoken his historical and systematic method, and had promoted the scientific study of Law for its own sake, the bane of its mechanical treatment, which in Germany was threatening Jurisprudence with complete stagnation, was removed by the epoch-making work of Friedrich Carl von SAVIGNY. He was born in 1779, until 1842 was a professor at Berlin, and after having been Minister of Justice from 1842 to 1848, died there in 1861. Savigny was the greatest jurist of modern times, and for long was generally recognised as the first authority in legal science. The work in question was his treatise upon 'The Law of Possession' (1803). To this we must add the foundation (1814) by him of the HISTORICAL School of jurists, who have endeavoured to comprehend the Roman Law in its purity and its own spirit. The efforts of the Historical School-in agreement with their principle that the Law of every people has sprung from its nationality, and has come into existence hisCf. Holland torically"—were exerted to place Roman Law on the basis of historical investigation, as well as to treat Positive Law as an organism that has grown out of the relationships of life, and is adequate to them. This still dominant method of the Historical School, the foundation of which is to be designated the THIRD epoch of the Roman Law in modern times, has raised to a height before unattained, not only the criticism and exegesis of the sources of Law and legal history, but especially also the systematic arrangement of Roman Law.

pp. 50-51.

As the most eminent representatives of this school, who by profound labours and by teaching have advanced the Romanistic jurisprudence, we must

mention

Christ. Gottl. Haubold (1766-1824), whose labours in part preceded the foundation of the His