法律史就是写文本吗?

Boudewijn Sirks
{"title":"法律史就是写文本吗?","authors":"Boudewijn Sirks","doi":"10.1163/15718190-20241204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h2>Summary</h2><p>The question, what constitutes the methodology of the legal history research, is answered in different ways. One is that it is the same as for general history: writing on history according to a set of rules which constitute its methodology, because in the end all research on history is just creating a text. It follows from this that legal history is a variation of history and belongs to history faculties, since there is no connection with legal methodology. It is maintained in this article that this view is based on too simple a view of history as science: there is not one methodology but various methodologies (‘discourses’, not only in history but in science in general), each with its own conditions and requirements. Legal history’s discourse has a particular distinguishing element, viz. legal analysis and methodology, which sets it apart from history in general. Its natural place is consequently in law faculties.</p>","PeriodicalId":501512,"journal":{"name":"The Legal History Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is legal history just writing a text?\",\"authors\":\"Boudewijn Sirks\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718190-20241204\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h2>Summary</h2><p>The question, what constitutes the methodology of the legal history research, is answered in different ways. One is that it is the same as for general history: writing on history according to a set of rules which constitute its methodology, because in the end all research on history is just creating a text. It follows from this that legal history is a variation of history and belongs to history faculties, since there is no connection with legal methodology. It is maintained in this article that this view is based on too simple a view of history as science: there is not one methodology but various methodologies (‘discourses’, not only in history but in science in general), each with its own conditions and requirements. Legal history’s discourse has a particular distinguishing element, viz. legal analysis and methodology, which sets it apart from history in general. Its natural place is consequently in law faculties.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501512,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Legal History Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Legal History Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718190-20241204\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Legal History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718190-20241204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要对于什么是法律史研究的方法论这一问题,有不同的回答。一种说法是,它与一般历史学相同:根据一套构成其方法论的规则来撰写历史,因为所有的历史研究归根结底都是在创造文本。由此可见,法律史是历史学的一种变体,属于历史系,因为与法律方法论无关。本文认为,这种观点是建立在过于简单地将历史学视为科学的基础之上的:不存在一种方法论,而是存在各种方法论("话语",不仅在历史学中,而且在一般科学中),每种方法论都有其自身的条件和要求。法律史的论述有一个特殊的区分要素,即法律分析和方法论,这使其有别于一般的历史学。因此,它自然而然地属于法学系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Is legal history just writing a text?

Summary

The question, what constitutes the methodology of the legal history research, is answered in different ways. One is that it is the same as for general history: writing on history according to a set of rules which constitute its methodology, because in the end all research on history is just creating a text. It follows from this that legal history is a variation of history and belongs to history faculties, since there is no connection with legal methodology. It is maintained in this article that this view is based on too simple a view of history as science: there is not one methodology but various methodologies (‘discourses’, not only in history but in science in general), each with its own conditions and requirements. Legal history’s discourse has a particular distinguishing element, viz. legal analysis and methodology, which sets it apart from history in general. Its natural place is consequently in law faculties.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Donationem non facit? Donations to people in potestate of the donor in Roman law Private legal practice and public authority in early Venetian Ithaca: thirteen new notarial documents (1575–1599) ‘Scriptura recepta et usitata’: The impact of the Lex citandi on Justinian’s Digest The issue of sexuality in Italian penitentiary law: a 1930s debate between international influences and fascist prison policies Is legal history just writing a text?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1