Our systems are now restored following recent technical disruption, and we’re working hard to catch up on publishing. We apologise for the inconvenience caused. Find out more: https://www.cambridge.org/universitypress/about-us/news-and-blogs/cambridge-university-press-publishing-update-following-technical-disruption
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 October 2011
Kenneth Ledford has provided an insightful commentary on the two articles on Catalonia. He generously notes their contribution to debates on normativity in the history of civil law codification, for which I thank him. More important, Ledford raises several questions that need to be addressed before we can be convinced that “the Catalan experience can be used to refine and reshape assessments of any general European phenomena regarding civil law codification” (Ledford, 390). I shall use this space to briefly address each of his three questions.
1. See Ledford, Kenneth F., “Codification and Normativity: Catalan ‘Exception’ and European ‘Norm,’” Law and History Review 20 (2002): 385–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Ledford comments on Stephen Jacobson, “Law and Nationalism in Nineteenth-Century Europe: The Case of Catalonia in Comparative Perspective,” and Siobhán Harty, “Lawyers, Codification, and the Origins of Catalan Nationalism, 1881–1901,” ibid., 307–17 and 349–84.
2. Harty, Siobhán, “The Institutional Foundation of Substate National Movements,” Comparative Politics 33 (2001): 191–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. On the distinction between nationalism and republicanism, see Meadwell, Hudson. “Republics, Nations and Transitions to Modernity,” Nations and Nationalism 5 (1999): 19–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
