The History of the Roman Civil Process as a Universal Model of the Evolution of the Rules of the Ancient World
Abstract
The article examines the main stages of the evolution of the civil process in Ancient Rome. On the basis of extensive legal, historical and cultural material, it has been proved that the evolution of Roman procedural law refl ects the general laws of the development of the legal order of the Ancient world. The author highlights three major trends in the historical dynamics of civil proceedings in Rome: first, the strengthening of the role of the state; secondly, the unequal ratio of the formal and semantic aspects of the civil process at various stages of its evolution; third, the modification of the form of claims.
As shown in the work, the form of claims provided for by Roman private law has evolved from the commission of non-verbal actions to oral statements and written documents. The trends considered are due to the general cultural patterns of the evolution of Roman private law and typologically identical legal orders of antiquity. The work highlights two such patterns: firstly, the transition from non-verbal gesture communication, first to oral speech, and then to written communication in the legal sphere. Secondly, a phased transition from regulation, carried out mainly based on the subjective rights and obligations of the participants, to normative regulation.
According to the author, the visual manifestation of these patterns in the Roman civil procedure makes it a universal model for studying the evolution of the legal order of the Ancient world.
About the Author
N. V. Razuvaev
North-West Institute of Management of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Head of the Chair of Civil and Labor Law, Doctor of Jurisprudence,
St. Petersburg
References
1. Ando, C. Substantive Justice in Provincial and Roman Legal Argument // The Impact of Justice on the Roman Empire. Proceedings of the Thirteenth Workshop of the International Network Impact of Empire (Gent, June 21– 24, 2017). Leiden : Brill, 2017. Pp. 138–156.
2. Arkhipov, V. V., Polyakov A. V., Timoshina E. V. Adaptation of Precedent Legal Systems Experience to The Russian Legal System: a Problem Statement [Adaptatsiya opyta sistem pretsedentnogo prava k rossiiskoi pravovoi sisteme] // News of Higher Educational Institutions. Jurisprudence [Izvestiya vysshikh uchebnykh zavedenii. Pravovedenie]. 2012. No. 3 (302). Pp. 113–134. (in rus)
3. Baron, Y. The System of Roman Civil Law: In 6 vols. [Sistema rimskogo grazhdanskogo prava: V 6 kn.] SPb.: Ed. R. Aslanov “Legal Center-Press” [Izd. R. Aslanova «Yuridicheskii Tsentr-Press»], 2005. 1100 p. (in rus)
4. Barton, R. E. The Kalingas: Their Institution and Custom Law. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1949. 275 p.
5. Baty, Th. The Difference between Arbiter in the Roman Sense and Modern Arbitrators // University of Pennsylvania Law Review and American Law Register. 1917. Vol. 65. № 8. Pp. 732–736.
6. Belov, V. A. Subject-Methodological Problems of Civil Science [Predmetno-metodologicheskie problemy tsivilisticheskoi nauki] // Civil law: Actual Problems of Theory and Practice [Grazhdanskoe pravo: aktual’nye problemy teorii i praktiki] / under total. ed. V. A. Belova. M.: Yurayt-Izdat [Yurait-Izdat], 2007. Pp. 124–160. (in rus)
7. Benveniste, E. Dictionary of Indo-European social terms [Slovar’ indoevropeiskikh sotsial’nykh terminov]. M.: Progress-Univers [Progres-Univers], 1995. 456 p. (transl. from French)
8. Betancourt, F. Derecho romano clásico. 3a ed., rev. y aument. Sevilla : Universidad de Sevilla, 2007. 672 p.
9. Boas, F. Some Problems of Methodology in the Social Sciences // Boas F. Race, Language and Culture. New York : The MacMillan Company, 1940. Pp. 260–269.
10. Bonner, R. J. Administration of Justice in the Age of Homer // Classical Philology.1911. Vol. 6. Pp. 12–36.
11. Bonner, R. J., Smith G. The Administration of Justice from Homer to Aristotle. Vol. 2. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1938. 320 p.
12. Bunse, R. Die klassische Prätur und die Kollegialitat (par potestas) // Zeitschrift der Savigny — Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. R. A. 2002. Bd. 119. Pp. 29–43.
13. Cantarella, E. Violence privee et le process // La violence dans les mondes grec et romain / Ed. J.-M. Bertrand. Paris : Annee d edition, 2005. Pp. 339–347.
14. Cargill, J. Athenian settlements of the fourth century B.C. Leiden : Brill, 1995. 487 p.
15. Chehata, Ch. Le testament dans l Egypte pharaonique // Revue historique de droit française et etranger. 1954. Vol. 31. Pp. 1–21.
16. Dement’eva, Vera V. Magisterial Power in the Roman Republic: the Meaning of imperium [Magistratskaya vlast’ Rimskoi respubliki: soderzhanie ponyatiya imperium] // Journal of Ancient History [Vestnik drevnei istorii]. 2005. № 4 (254). Pp. 46–75. (in rus)
17. Dernburg, G. Pandekty. T. I. Part 2. Property Law [Pandekty. T. I. Ch. 2. Veshchnoe pravo]. SPb.: University. pub. [Universitetsk. tip.], 1905. 363 p. (transl. from German)
18. Dozhdev, D. V. Ars boni et aequi in the definition of Celsus: the Right between Art and Science [Ars boni et aequi v opredelenii Tsel’sa: pravo mezhdu iskusstvom i naukoi] // Proceedings of IGPRAN [Trudy IGPRAN]. 2016. No. 4. Pp. 61–73. (in rus)
19. Dozhdev, D. V. Roman Private Law. Ed. 3rd, rev. and add. [Rimskoe chastnoe pravo. Izd. 3-e, ispr. i dop.] Moscow : Norma, INFRA-M, 2013.784 p. (in rus.)
20. Edwards, М. W. The Iliad: а commentary / Ed. G. S. Kirk. Vol. V: Books 17–20. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1991. 374 p.
21. Ershova, G. G. Anthroposystem: Communicative Models and Regulated Integration [Antroposistema: kommunikativnye modeli i reguliruemaya integratsiya] // Historical Journal: Scientific Research [Istoricheskii zhurnal: nauchnye issledovaniya]. 2012. No. 4. Pp. 11–25. (in rus)
22. Ershova, G. G. Maya: Secrets of Ancient Writing [Maiya: tainy drevnego pis’ma]. M.: Aleteya [Aleteiya], 2004. 296 p. (in rus.)
23. Fasmer, M. Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language. In 4 Volumes. Vol. II [Ehtimologicheskii slovar’ russkogo yazyka. V 4 t. T. II]. M.: Progress, 1986. 671 p. (transl. from German)
24. Gallo, F. Sulla definizione celsina del diritto // Gallo F. Opuscula selecta. Padova : CEDAM, 1999. Pp. 551–604.
25. Gardiner, A. H. Egyptian Grammar. 3rd ed. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1957. 682 p.
26. Gardner, R. A., Gardner B. T. Teaching Sign Language to a Chimpanzee // Science. New Series. 1969. Vol. 165. № 3894. Pp. 664–672.
27. Grevesmühl, G. Die Gläubierangfechtung nach klassischen Römischen Recht. Göttingen : Wallstein Verlag, 2003. 208 p.
28. Golub, K. Y. Judicial Precedent in the Systems of International and European Law [Sudebnyi pretsedent v sistemakh evropeiskogo i mezhdunarodnogo i evropeiskogo prava] // Izvestiya of Saratov University. Series: Economics. Management. Law. [Izvestiya Saratovskogo universiteta. Seriya: Ehkonomika. Upravlenie. Pravo.] 2007. T. 7. No. 1. Pp. 92–96. (in rus)
29. Grosso, G. Lezioni di storia di diritto romano. 3 ed. Torino : Giappichelli, 1955. 548 p.
30. Hoffner, H. A. The Laws of the Hittites. Waltham : Brandeis University Press, 1963. 362 p.
31. Hohfeld, W. N. An Additional Note on the Confl ict between Common Law and the Law of Justice [Dopolnitel’noe zamechanie otnositel’no konfl ikta obshchego prava i prava spravedlivosti] // Basic Legal Concepts of Wesley N. Hofeld [Osnovnye yuridicheskie ponyatiya Uehsli N. Khofel’da]. SPb.: Alef-Press, 2016. Pp. 160–165.
32. Huizinga, J. Homo Ludens. Articles on the History of Culture [Homo Ludens. Stat’i po istorii kul’tury]. M.: Progress-Tradition [Progress-Traditsiya], 1997. 416 p. (transl. from Dutch)
33. Jhering, R. Spirit of Roman Law at Various Stages of Its Development. Part 1 [Dukh rimskogo prava na razlichnykh stupenyakh ego razvitiya. Ch. 1]. SPb.: Pub. V. Bezobrazova and Co. [Tip. V. Bezobrazova i Ko], 1876. 321 p. (in rus)
34. Jolowicz, H. F., Nicholas B. A Historical Introduction to the Study of Roman Law. 3rd ed. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1972. 528 p.
35. Kaser, M. Das Römische Zivilprozessrecht. München : C. H. Beckische Verlagbuchhandlung, 1966. 570 p.
36. Kaser, M. Das Urteil als Rechtsquelle im Römischen Recht // Festschrift für Fritz Schwing / hrsg. von R. Strasser. Wien : Metzger, 1978. Pp. 116–130.
37. Kaufmann, H. Zur Geschichte des Aktionenrechtlichen Denkens // Juristen Zeitung. 1964. № 15/16. Pp. 482– 489.
38. Khvostov, V. M. History of Roman Law [Istoriya rimskogo prava]. Ed. 3rd, rev. and add. M.: Type. t-va Sytina [Tip. t-va Sytina], 1907. 463 p. (in rus)
39. Kipp, T. History of Sources of Roman Law [Istoriya istochnikov rimskogo prava]. SPb.: Ed. N. K. Martynova, 1908. 152 p. (in rus)
40. Knorozov, Yu. V. On the Classification of Signaling [K voprosu o klassifi katsii signalizatsii] // Basic Problems of African Studies [Osnovnye problemy afrikanistiki]. Moscow : Nauka, 1973. Pp. 324–334. (in rus)
41. Knorozov, Yu. V. Writing of the Maya Indians [Pis’mennost’ indeitsev maiya]. M. ; L.: Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR [Izd-vo AN SSSR], 1963. 664 p. (in rus)
42. Kocourec, A. The Formula Procedure of Law // Virginia Law Review. 1922. Vol. 8. № 6. Pp. 337–355.
43. Kovkel, N. F. Review of the First International Legal Philosophy School (Belarus Republic, Minsk, 16–20 August 2019) // Proceedings of the Institute of State and Law of the RAS [Trudy Instituta gosudarstva i prava RAN], 2019. No. 14 (6), Pp. 197–218. DOI: 10.35427/2073-4522-2019-14-6-kovkel (in rus)
44. Koptev, A. V. Codification of Theodosius II and Its Preconditions [Kodifi katsiya Feodosiya II i ee predposylki] // Ancient Law [Drevnee pravo]. 1996. No. 1. Pp. 247–261. (in rus)
45. Kofanov, L. L. The Role of the Responsa of the Roman Jurists in Disputatio Forensis in the Roman Civil Community of the 5th–1st Centuries B. C. [Rol’ responsa rimskikh yuristov v disputatio forensis v rimskoi grazhdanskoi obshchine V–I vv. do n. eh.] // Journal of Ancient History [Vestnik drevnei istorii]. 2014. No. 4 (291). Pp. 87–110. (in rus)
46. Krawietz, W. Juridische Kommunikation im modernen Rechtssystem in rechtstheoretischer Perspektive // Rechtsphilosophie im 21. Jahrhundert / hrsg W. Brugger, U. Neumann, S. Kirste. Fr. a. / M.: Suhrkamp, 1998. Pp. 181–206.
47. Labruna, L. Vim fieriveto. Alle radici di una ideologia. Napoli : Jovene, 1972. 319 p.
48. Leesen, T. M. Gaius Meets Cicero: Law and Rhetoric in the School Controversies. Leiden ; Boston : M. Nijoff Publishers, 2010. 357 p.
49. Lenel, O. Das Edictum perpetuum. Ein Versuch seiner Wiederherstellung. 3. Aufl . Leipzig : B. Tauschnitz Verlag, 1927. 574 p.
50. Lipshits, E. E. Law and Court in Byzantium IV–VIII centuries [Pravo i sud v Vizantii IV–VIII vv.]. L.: Science [Nauka], 1976. 230 p. (in rus)
51. Loginov, A. V. Judicial Scene on the “Shield of Achilles” in the Iliad and the legislative actio sacramento process [Sudebnaya stsena na «shchite Akhilla» v «Iliade» i protsess legis actio sacramento] // Judicial reform in Russia: past, present, future: Collection of reports of the VII International Scientific and Practical Conference [Sudebnaya reforma v Rossii: proshloe, nastoyashchee, budushchee: Sbornik dokladov VII Mezhdunarodnoi nauchno-prakticheskoi konferentsii]. M.: Publishing house of Moscow State Law Academy named after O. A. Kutafin [Izd-vo MGYUA im. O. A. Kutafina], 2015. Pp. 144–147. (in rus)
52. Loginov, A. V., Trofimov A. A., Linko A. V. Retribution from the Proto-Indo-Europeans, Mycenaean and Homeric Greeks [Vozmezdie u praindoevropeitsev, mikenskikh i gomerovskikh grekov]. M.: Academia, 2017. 390 p. (in rus)
53. Loginov, A. V., Shelestin V. Yu. Court and Punishment in Mycenaean Greece and the Hittite Kingdom [Sud i nakazanie v Mikenskoi Gretsii i Khettskom tsarstve]. Moscow : Academia, 2019.288 p. (in rus)
54. Lurie, I. M. Essays on Ancient Egyptian Law of the 16th–10th Centuries B. C. [Ocherki drevneegipetskogo prava XVI–X vv. do n. eh.]. L.: Ed. State Hermitage Museum [Izd. Gos. Ehrmitazha], 1960. 354 p. (in rus)
55. Maltsev, G. V. Revenge and Retribution in the Ancient World [Mest’ i vozmezdie v Drevnem mire]. Moscow : Norma — INFRA-M, 2012.736 p. (in rus)
56. Martino, F. de. Storia della Costituzione Romana. Vol. I. Napoli : E. Jovene, 1958. 510 p.
57. Marr, N. Ya. Ishtar (From the Goddess of Matriarchal Afro-Eurasia to the Heroine of Love in Feudal Europe) [Ishtar’ (ot bogini matriarkhal’noi Afroevrazii do geroini lyubvi feodal’noi Evropy)] // Japhetic Collection [Yafeticheskii sbornik]. Issue 5. L.: Publishing House of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR [Izd-vo AN SSSR], 1927. Pp. 109–178. (in rus)
58. Marr, N. Ya. Language [Yazyk] // Marr N. Ya. Selected works. T. II. Basic questions of linguistics [Izbrannye raboty. T. II. Osnovnye voprosy yazykoznaniya]. M. ; L.: Sotsehkgiz, 1936. Pp. 128–135. (in rus)
59. Metzger, F. Roman Judges, Case Law and Principles of Procedure // Law and History Review. 2004. Vol. 22. № 2. Pp. 243–275.
60. Moreno, A. The Attic Neighbour. The Cleruchy in the Athenian Empire // Interpreting the Athenian Empire / Ed. by J. Ma. London : Duckworth, 2009. Pp. 211–221.
61. Muromtsev, S. A. On the Conservatism of Roman Jurisprudence [O konservatizme rimskoi yurisprudentsii] // Muromtsev S. A. Selected Works on Roman and Civil Law [Izbrannye trudy po rimskomu i grazhdanskomu pravu]. M.: Statut, 2002. Pp. 59–212. (in rus)
62. Nagy, G. Homeric Responses. Austin : University of Texas Press, 2003. 100 p.
63. Osvetimskaya, I. I. Game as a Method for Increasing the Efficiency of Legal Thinking [Igra kak metod povysheniya ehffektivnosti yuridicheskogo myshleniya] // Russian Journal of Legal Studies [Rossiiskii zhurnal pravovykh issledovanii]. 2019. Vol. 6. No. 3. Pp. 87–97. (in rus)
64. Polyakov, A. V. Normativeness of Legal Communication [Normativnost’ pravovoi kommunikatsii] // Polyakov A. V. Communicative Legal Understanding: Selected Works [Kommunikativnoe pravoponimanie: Izbrannye trudy]. SPb.: Publishing House “Alef-Press” [ID «Alef-Press»], 2014. Pp. 139–155. (in rus)
65. Price, J. M. The Oath in Court Procedure in Early Babylonia and the Old Testament // Journal of American Oriental Society. 1929. Vol. 49. Pp. 22–39.
66. Pringheim, F. Bonum et aequum // Zeitschift der Savigny — Stiftung für Rechtsgeshichte. Romanistische Abteilung. 1932. Bd. LII. S. 78–155.
67. Proskurin, S. G. Evolution of Law in the Light of Semiotics [Ehvolyutsiya prava v svete semiotiki] // Questions of Philology [Voprosy filologii]. 2010. No. 3. Pp. 106–111. (in rus)
68. Riccobono, S. Lineamenti della storia delle fonti del diritto romano. Milano : Giuffre, 1949. 247 p.
69. Rudorff, A. F. Edicti perpetui quae regula sunt. Lipsiae : Hirzelium, 1869. 292 p.
70. Sanctis, G. de. Storia dei Romani. Vol. II. La Conquista del primato in Italia. Firenze : Fb & c Ltd., 2017. 602 p.
71. Santucci, G. Die reivindicatio im klassischen Römischen Recht: ein Überblick // Fundamina. 2014. Vol. 20. No. 2. Pp. 833–846.
72. Saveliev, V. A. Justice (Aequitas) and Good Faith (Bona Fides) in Roman Law of the Classical Period [Spravedlivost’ (aequitas) i dobrosovestnost’ (bona fides) v rimskom prave klassicheskogo perioda] // State and Law [Gosudarstvo i pravo]. 2014. No. 3. Pp. 63–72. (in rus)
73. Schiller, A. A. Roman Law: Mechanisms of Development. The Hague ; Paris ; New York : Mouton Publisher, 1978. 606 p.
74. Schulz, F. History of Roman Legal Science. Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1953. 358 p.
75. Searle, J. R. Classification of Illocutionary Acts [Klassifikatsiya illokutivnykh aktov] // New in Foreign Linguistics. Issue 17. The Theory of Speech acts [Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike. Vyp. 17. Teoriya rechevykh aktov]. Moscow : Nauka, 1986. Pp. 170–194. (in rus)
76. Seidl, E. Einführung in die ägyptische Rechtsgeschichte bis zum Ende des neuen Reiches. Glückstadt : J. J. Augustin, 1951. 69 p.
77. Sinyukov, V. N. Digital Law and Problems of Gradual Transformation of the Russian Legal System // Lex Russica. 2019. No. 9 (154). Pp. 9–18. (in rus)
78. Spiegelberg, W. Studien und Materialen zum Rechtswesen des Pharaonenreiches der Dynastien XVIII–XXI (c. 1500–1000 v. Chr). Hannover : Comissions — Werlag der Hahnischen Bucchandlung, 1892. 142 p.
79. Stewart, R. Public Office in Early Rome. Ritual Procedure and Political Practice. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press, 1998. 255 p.
80. Streitberg, W. Gotisch fraujinond, frauja // Indogermanische Forschungen. Zeitschrift für Indogermanische Sprach- und Altertumskunde / hrsg. von K. Brugmann, W. Streitberg. Strassburg : Karl J. Trübner Verlag, 1892. Bd. 23. Pp. 117–120.
81. Surikov, I. E. Problems of Early Athenian Legislation [Problemy rannego afinskogo zakonodatel’stva]. M.: Languages of Slavic Culture [Yazyki slavyanskoi kul’tury], 2004. 144 p. (in rus)
82. Van Hook, M. Law as Communication [Pravo kak kommunikatsiya]. SPb.: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University, LLC “University Publishing Consortium” [ID SPBGU, OOO «Universitetskii izdatel’skii konsortsium»], 2012. 288 p. (transl. from English)
83. Vlasova, O. A. The Imperium of the Roman Praetor: The Question of Interpretation [Imperii rimskogo pretora: k probleme interpretatsii] // Bulletin of the Volga University. V. N. Tatishcheva [Vestnik Volzhskogo universiteta im. V. N. Tatishcheva]. 2018. Vol. 1.No. 2. Pp. 5–12. (in rus)
84. Zhdanov, V. V. Evolution of the Maat Category in Ancient Egyptian Thought. [Ehvolyutsiya kategorii Maat v drevneegipetskoi mysli]. Moscow : Modern notebooks [Sovremennye tetradi], 2006. 136 p. (in rus)
Review
For citations:
Razuvaev N.V. The History of the Roman Civil Process as a Universal Model of the Evolution of the Rules of the Ancient World. Theoretical and Applied Law. 2020;(3):47-64.
Views:
6315
Email this article 