Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T17:57:13.808Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Erasmus and the Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2019

Laurens Winkel
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Erasmus is generally regarded as a model of tolerance and equanimity. As such, he very well could have an educational part to play in the ideology of equality and the non-discriminatory principle of our modern rule of law as embedded in Article 1 of the Dutch Constitution since 1983 which claims equality for all people on the Dutch territory. On the face of it, it would certainly seem worthwhile to examine whether Erasmus influenced the law of his age and might therefore also be relevant to views on the law of our present age. A closer look at this idealised view of Erasmus shows, however, that some qualifications are in order. It was not very long ago that some valid accusations of anti-Semitism were made against him: anti-Semitic statements were found in some of his letters. It should be noted that he is no exception in this: Luther, his contemporary, is also known to have made statements in a similar vein.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Legal Information , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , Summer 2011 , pp. 227 - 236
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 by The Institute for International Legal Information 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Süß, R. in the NRC Handelsblad, 27 July 1995.Google Scholar

2 See also Kunst, A.J.M., Europees rechtsleven in Erasmus’ tijd, inaugural lecture NEH Rotterdam (Zwolle. 1963). p. 3 et seq. In Maffei's, D. well-known book Gliinizi dell'umanesimo giuridico (Milan 1956/1972), Erasmus’ role is negligible. A highly readable, but older introduction to the life and work of Erasmus in general is still Conrad Busken Huet's book Erasmus (1882–1884, republished: Amsterdam [1969]).Google Scholar

3 Huizinga, J., Erasmus, 2nd edition (Haarlem 1925), p. 83.Google Scholar

4 Post, R.R., The Modern Devotion – Confrontation with Reformation and Humanism (Leiden 1968), pp. 658–676.Google Scholar

5 de Jongh, A.J., Erasmus' denkbeelden over staat en regering (Amsterdam 1927).Google Scholar

6 De Jongh, ibid, p. 118.Google Scholar

7 Jensma, G. Th. et al., Erasmus, De actualiteit van zijn denken (Zutphen, 1986), quotes on pp. 66–67.Google Scholar

8 Hermesdorf, B.H.D., ‘Erasmus en de juristen van zijn tijd', in: Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis XV (1937), pp. 1–24.Google Scholar

9 Stephen, Rowan. Ulrich Zasius, a jurist in the German Renaissance, 1461-1535. Frankfurt/M 1987; J. Otto, 'Ulrich Zasius', in: Stolleis, M. (ed.), Juristen. Ein biographisches Lexikon. Von der Antike bis zum 20. Jahrhundert (Munich [1995]). pp. 667–668; cf. K.H. Burmeister, Das Studium der Rechte im Zeitalter des Humanismus im deutschen Rechtsbereich (Wiesbaden 1974), p. 187.Google Scholar

10 For more about this so-called 'politische Romidee' see Koschaker, Paul, Europa und das Römische Recht (Munich-Berlin 1946/1966), p. 38.Google Scholar

11 For more about Viglius van Aytta, See Postma, F., Viglius van Aytta als humanist en diplomaat (Zutphen 1983) and R.M. Sprenger, Viglius von Aytta und seine Notizen über Beratungen am Reichskammergericht (1535-1537) (Nijmegen 1988).Google Scholar

12 See also the new edition of the Paraphrasis of Theophilus: Theophili antecessoris Paraphrasis Institutionum, ediderunt Lokin, J.H.A., Meijering, Roos, Stolte, B.H., van der Wal, N., with a translation of A.F. Murrison, Groningen 2010.Google Scholar

13 See also Hagemann, H.-R., Die Rechtgutachten des Bonifacius Amerbach, -Basler Rechtskultur zur Zeit des Humanismus (Basle/Frankfurt am Main [1997]).Google Scholar

14 Dekkers, R., Het humanisme en de rechtswetenschap in de Nederlanden (Antwerp 1938). p. 3, no. 3.Google Scholar

15 Vervaart, O.M.D.F., Studies over Nicolaas Everaerts (1462-1532) en zijn Topica, Ph.D. dissertation EUR (Arnhem 1994). p. 76.Google Scholar

16 van den Bergh, G.C.J.J., Geleerd recht. Een geschiedenis van de Europese rechtswetenschap in vogelvlucht, 5th edition (Deventer 2007), pp. 57 et seq.Google Scholar

17 I will not take sides in the controversy of whether he was born in 1466 or in 1469.Google Scholar

18 Troje, H.E., Graeca leguntur. Die Aneignung des byzantinischen Rechts und die Entstehung eines humanistischen Corpus iuris civilis in der Jurisprudenz des 16. Jahrhunderts (Cologne-Vienna 1971), p. 283.Google Scholar

19 Huizinga, op. cit.(n. 4), pp. 65–66; see also Troje, op. cit. (n. 19), p. 285.Google Scholar

20 In this publication, however, Erasmus had not shown any particular interest in this phrase. We were unable to gain access to the editio princeps, but we consulted the Lyon 1547, Antwerp 1556 and Leiden 1692 publications (the latter with notes by Jacobus Gronovius). The 1556 publication is the only one that refers to Erasmus's Adagia, to Budé's commentary on the first Digests title (De iustitia et de iure) and to other works by Melanchthon in Bertuleius's commentary added to that publication.Google Scholar

21 Kuhn, Thomas S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edition [Chicago 1970].Google Scholar

22 Kisch, G., Erasmus und die Jurisprudenz seiner Zeit (Basle 1960). p. 37; see also Jill Kraye in: Ch.B. Schmitt. Q. Skinner (eds.), the Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy (Cambridge 1988). p. 339 et seq.Google Scholar

23 Peter Stein, Regulae iuris – from juristic rules to legal maxims (Edinburgh 1966), p. 162.Google Scholar

24 Cfr. J.-L. Thireau. “Du Moulin, Charles”, in: Arabeyre, Patrick, Halpérin, Jean-Louis, Krynen. Jacques (Eds.) Dictionnaire historique des juristes français, Paris 2007, pp. 276–278.Google Scholar

25 See my article “Alcune osservazioni sulla classificazione delle obbligazioni e sui contratti nominati nel diritto romano”, Bullettino dell'Istituto di Diritto Romano, IIIa serie, CII1-CIV (2000–2001) [publ. 2009], p. 51–66, esp. p. 53 et seq‥Google Scholar

26 Pitlo, A., Evolutie in het privaatrecht (Haarlem 1969), passim.Google Scholar

27 Cfr. my article “Some historical remarks on the use of open norms in Dutch private law: good faith in contract, social decency in tort”, in: Leges sapere, studies for Janusz Sondel, Kraków, 2008, pp. 675–682.Google Scholar

28 Feenstra, R., ‘Hugues Doneau et les juristes neerlandais du XVIIe siecle, - L'influence son “systeme” sur l'evolution du droit prive avant le Pandectisme', in: Jacques Godefroi (1587–1652) et l'humanisme juridique A Geneve, Actes du colloque Jacques Godefroi édités par B. Schmidlin et A. Dufour (Basle etc. 1991), pp. 231–243. See also R. Feenstra, “La systématique dans l'oeuvre de grotius', in: La systema giuridica – Storia, teoria e problemi attuali (Rome 1991), pp. 333-343. Both essays were reprinted in: R. Feenstra, Legal Scholarship and Doctrines of Private Law, 13th-18th Centuries ([Aldershot] 1996), pp. 231-243 and pp. 333-343 respectively.Google Scholar