Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "Roman" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
Wyświetlanie 1-15 z 30
Tytuł:
Franciszek Bossowski (1879–1940). Szkic do biografii
Autorzy:
Szczygielski, Krzysztof
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621437.pdf
Data publikacji:
2009
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Roman law
Opis:
Franciszek Bossowski (1879–1940) was a professor of Roman law. He worked at Stefan Batory University in Vilnius from 1920 to 1939. In this period he was a Dean of Faculty of Law in academic years 1927/1928 and 1928/1929. Bossowski is an author of many valuable papers concerning history and institutions of Roman law, among other things: Znalezienie skarbu wedle prawa rzymskiego (Finding of treasure according to the Roman law); Ze studiów nad pierwotnym testamentem rzymskim (Studies on a primitive Roman testament), Actio ad exhibendum w prawie klasycznem i justyniańskiem (Actio ad exhibendum in classical and in Justinian’s law), Cura prodigi et luxuriosi and Ze studiów nad rei omanistsn. Problem legitymacji biernej (Studies on rei vindicatio. The problem of passive capacity to be a party in a lawsuit). He kept scientific contacts with famous Italian romanists – Salvatore Riccobono and Pietro Bonfante, who both have received doctorates honoris causa of the Vilnius University in 1929. Professor Bossowski was also interested in civil law and comparative law. He was a member of many international and domestic scientific societes. After the outbreak of World War II he was arrested by the Nazis and imprisoned in Sachsenhausen concentration camp. He died in Cracow in 1940, after returning from lager in mortal state.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2009, 7; 71-83
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Deductio in domum mariti and the conclusion of an iustum matrimonium
Autorzy:
Benincasa, Zuzanna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621605.pdf
Data publikacji:
2012
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Mariage, Roman family law, Roman mariage rites, wedding
Opis:
According to the communis opinio the classical Roman law did not know any formal procedure of concluding a marriage, since its conclusion required only the mutual consent of a man and a woman (affectio maritalis, consensus). Nonetheless, the Roman culture developed a number of ritual acts related to the conclusion of a marriage, most of them deeply rooted in Roman tradition and history and being of a great symbolic significance. The central moment of a wedding ceremony seems to be deductio in domum mariti i.e. a ritual introduction of the bride into her future husband’s household. The significance of such a ritual is reflected in the field of language, since the expression uxorem ducere (to lead a wife) is the most common expression used as a synonym of “to marry” and also in the field of law since, according to some jurists, when deductio in domum mariti had been accomplished, the couple was considered duly and legally married. The main function of the deductio was thus to give proof that the wedding had taken place and to manifest mutual affectio maritalis. Deductio in domum mariti played a special role in the case of the conclusion of a marriage inter absentes (although it seems that the only person permitted to be absent could be the groom and not the bride). In this case, the formal ceremony of deductio seems to be an indispensable act constituting the only way in which a mutual affectio maritalis could be expressed. Since the bride’s procession to her new husband’s house was considered to be the public declaration of a consensus necessary for concluding a legal marriage, in the case of a “groomless” wedding such a ceremony was necessary as a proof that mutual affectio maritalis had been expressed and thus a marriage had taken place. Nonetheless, the necessity of leading the bride to her husband’s home in the case of a matrimonium inter absentes could not be misunderstood with the constitutive character of deductio in domum mariti. A consensus still remained the only constitutive element and deductio in domum mariti constituted only the formal way in which, due to the particular circumstances, this consensus had to be expressed.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2012, 11; 13-26
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Pretor urzędnikiem magistratury rzymskiej. Zarys problematyki
Praetor as a Magistrate in the Ancient Rome. A Few Remarks
Autorzy:
Kołodko, Piotr
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621276.pdf
Data publikacji:
2013
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Pretorship, Roman public law, Roman law, magistrates of the Rome.
Opis:
The main point of this text is an attempt to present a few duties of the praetor and try to stipulate the origins of them. First of all it should be noted that the term praetor was not consistently used to describe only the jurisdictional magistrate, and it was used in relation, for example, to the consuls. This was probably because the sound etymological sense of the word (praeire: “to go before, to precede, to lead the way”). The appointment of praetor urbanus in 367 BC under leges Licniae Sextiae was not associated with the need to carry out a jurisdictional competence. The origins of the magistrate were strictly military in its nature, which since the end of the third century BC gave way to the area of jurisdiction. Raised considerations apply also to the praetor for foreigners (praetor peregrinus), who has not resolved disputes between the Romans and foreigners (peregrini), and his role was to ensure the military security of Italy. The jurisdictional competence of the pretorship as the most “famous” begins to emerge in the late third century BC, which is likely to be linked not only with the increase in the number of praetors, but mainly obviates external threat from the Carthage. It seems to indicate that the jurisdictional competence (civil and criminal) was not assigned to pretorship at the beginning of this office. It appears at least at the end of the third century BC and starts to become predominant among others which were associated with this office in ancient Rome.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2013, 12; 31-55
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Rzymskie regulacje prawne związane z ochroną dziecka poczętego
Autorzy:
Niczyporuk, Piotr
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621170.pdf
Data publikacji:
2009
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Roman law, nasciturus, pregnancy
Opis:
Legal problems connected with the defining of pregnancy and with the protection of the interests of the unborn child were at first regulated in Senatus consultum Plancianum de liberis agnoscendis, and next in the edict de inspiciendo ventre custodiendoque partu and in the rescriptum divi Fratres. Senatus consultum Plancianum regulated only the question of establishment of paternity in marriage. Edict de inspiciendo ventre custodiendoque partu regulated the procedure, which should have been undertaken after the husband’s death, when former wife claimed to be pregnant. The main reason for these regulations was to eliminate the growing number of illegal practice concerning establishment of paternity, when the child was born after the death of his father or after the divorce of his parents. The results of applying the edict de inspiciendo ventre custodiendoque partu could have the legal importance for the future position of the unborn child. The edict regulated the procedure, which should have been applied after the death of husband, when woman was claiming to be pregnant. Once the procedure was applied, the praetor could grant bonorum possessio (D. 25, 4, 1, 10 i D. 25, 4, 1, 15). According to edictum, you could apply: inspectio ventris, custodia ventris and custodia partus to a pregnant woman. These institutions were used to confirm the fact of pregnancy and to observe the pregnant woman and the delivery. The edict de inspiciendo ventre custodiendoque partu was in use in case of the death of a husband of a pregnant wife and the purpose of this edict was to protect from simulation of pregnancy. According to the edict, the widow had to inform everybody potentially interested (or legal representatives) about pregnancy in one month’s time. The most important group which had to be informed, comprised of heirs of the dead person. According to the Ulpianus’s commentary, both testimonial and ab intestato heirs should have been informed.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2009, 8; 27-40
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Abrogation of legal effects of usurpations in the late Roman Empire
Autorzy:
Kondek, Jędrzej M.
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621603.pdf
Data publikacji:
2012
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
usurper, Roman constitutional law, Constitutions, abrogation
Opis:
Usurpations were not unusual situations in Ancient Rome. However, the term “tyrranus” was understood differently from its modern meaning. This word technically means “someone who came to power unlawfully”, but in fact a person defeated by a new ruler was called an usurper, regardless of a way he had come to power. In such a way, e.g. Licinius was declared “tyrranus” although he had come to power as a legal augustus. Constitutions against usurpers in the Theodosian Code do not constitute a homogenous group. We could divide them into acts regarding an usurper’s legislation, acts regarding civil law actions (e.g. slave emancipations), acts regarding public law actions (e.g. nominations of magistrates) and acts regarding the emperor’s sentences. It is meaningful that there is no usurper against whom all the above-mentioned types of constitutions were promulgated. Civil law acts and sentences were generally upheld. In most cases, legislation was abolished only to the extent in which it was contra ius. Only Constantinus against Licinius (CTh. XV, 14, 1) and Honorius and Theodosius II against Heraclianus (CTh. XV, 14, 13) decided to abrogate the entire the legal output of the usurpation. Valenitianus II, Theodosius II and Honorius were the only emperors (except CTh XV, 14, 13) who abrogated all sentences of the usurpers. In almost all cases, nominations made by the usurper were annulled. However, while all usurpations (except Licinius’s usurpation) had taken place only in its Western Part, it should be noticed that all the analyzed constitutions were promulgated by all simultaneous rulers of the Empire even after 395 AD. The question is why Theodosian compilers decided to include the analyzed constitutions into the Code. In my opinion, the most probable answer is that the Chapter De infirmandis... should have served for the legitimation of the rules of the current Emperor, as until the end of the Empire there were no rules of succession of power. In all analyzed constitutions, the legal emperor referred to an output of the illegal ruler. Theodosius, evoking those constitutions and demonstrating his continuity with their authors, presented himself as the legal ruler and put all his opponents in the position of usurpers.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2012, 11; 27-60
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Searching for the Roots. Vis vi depulsa in the Concept of Cicero
Autorzy:
Tarwacka, Anna
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621599.pdf
Data publikacji:
2012
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Self defence, force, Roman criminal law, Cicero
Opis:
The jurist Cassius is believed to be the author of the brocard Vim vi repellere licet . However, in Cicero’s speeches the are many fragments concerning repelling force by force. It therefore seems that it might have been him who had first made the rule common, maybe as vim vi depellere licet. The context in which the orator placed it, implied restoring order in the state, in which violence ruled. Cicero claimed that – in order for the law to prevail – it was first necessary to fight force with force. Only later was the rule transferred by the jurist into private law.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2012, 11; 77-88
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Gaius’ Concept of The Law of Nations ( Ius Gentium ) and Natural Law ( Ius Naturale )
Autorzy:
Brtko, Róbert
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1833877.pdf
Data publikacji:
2018
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
rzysmkie prawo klasyczne
ius gentiu
ius naturale
ius civile
jursyta Gaius
Instytucje Gaiusa
jurusprudencja rzymska
classical Roman law
ius gentium
Roman jurist Gaius
Institutes of Gaius
Roman jurisprudence
Opis:
The paper, after a brief presentation of the classical Roman jurist Gaius and his mostimportant and best known work, Gai Institutionum commentarii quattuor, presentsand analyzes his legal texts concerning mainly ius gentium and its relationship to iusnaturale. At the beginning of his textbook, this Roman jurist distinguishes only twotypes of law: civil law – ius civile and the law of nations – ius gentium (Gai Inst. 1, 1).Gaius mentions the law of nations (ius gentium) explicitly in the above mentionedfragment in a way that he relates it to “natural ratio” – natural order or natural reason.Gaius defined the concept of ius gentium two centuries after Cicero. Unlike Cicerowho was more a philosopher than a lawyer and perceived “ius gentium” mainly inan abstract sense, Gaius came up with the concrete concept of ius gentium, whichwas clearly separated from the concept of ius civile. Ius gentium is the law which iscommon for all nations. On the other hand ius civile is the law which concerns onlyRoman citizens. Ius gentium is the law which obliges both Romans and foreigners,because its basis is “naturalis ratio”.In addition, Gaius, in characterizing ius gentium, gives attention to two elements:a) any standards apply to all nations; b) or standards come out of natural reason(naturalis ratio). Gaius in this way presented two perspectives on one and the sameius gentium which are intrinsically and therefore necessarily linked. The first point ofview is concrete and the second one is abstract. In other words Gaius presented somelegal institutions which belong to the area of ius gentium from the concrete point ofview, the other ones from the abstract point of view, which is based on the so-called“naturalis ratio”.As far as the category of ius naturale is concerned, Gaius, in terms of content, identifiedit with ius gentium. So ius gentium differs from ius naturale only on the basis ofa point of view, which individual standards or legal institutions are expressed through.If legal standards are expressed from the concrete point of view (i.e. in standardsthere is an explicit mention that they apply to all nations), then they can be includedin the category of ius gentium. If they are formulated from the abstract point of view(i.e. in standards there is a mention of their origin from “naturalis ratio”), they can beincluded in the category of natural law.
W artykule, po krótkiej prezentacji sylwetki jurysty Gaiusa i jego najważniejszeji najbardziej znanej pracy, Gai Institutionum commentarii quattuor, autor skoncentrował się na jego spostrzeżeniach dotyczących głównie ius gentium i jego związkuz ius naturale. Na początku swojego podręcznika ten rzymski jurysta wyróżnił tylko dwa rodzaje prawa: prawo cywilne – ius civile i prawo narodów – ius gentium(Gai Inst. 1, 1). Gaius wyraźnie przywołał prawo narodów (ius gentium) we wspomnianym fragmencie w taki sposób, że odnosiło się do naturalis ratio – porządkunaturalnego. Zdefiniował pojęcie ius gentium dwa wieki po Cyceronie. W przeciwieństwie do niego, który był bardziej filozofem niż prawnikiem i postrzegał iusgentium głównie w sensie abstrakcyjnym, Gaius wymyślił konkretną koncepcję iusgentium, która była wyraźnie oddzielona od pojęcia ius civile. Ius gentium było prawem wspólnym dla wszystkich narodów. Z drugiej strony ius civile to prawo, któ-re dotyczyło tylko obywateli rzymskich. Ius gentium to prawo, które zobowiązujeRzymian i cudzoziemców, ponieważ jego podstawą jest naturalis ratio.Ponadto Gaius, charakteryzując ius gentium, zwracał uwagę na dwa elementy:a) wszelkie normy mają zastosowanie do wszystkich narodów; b) lub normy pochodzą z naturalnego rozumu (naturalis ratio). W ten sposób przedstawił dwie perspektywy na jedno i to samo ius gentium, które są wewnętrznie ze sobą powiązane.Pierwszy punkt widzenia jest konkretny, a drugi abstrakcyjny. Innymi słowy, Gaiusprzedstawił pewne instytucje prawne, które należą do obszaru ius gentium z konkretnego punktu widzenia, pozostałe z abstrakcyjnego punktu widzenia, który opierał sięna tak zwanym naturalis ratio. Jeśli chodzi o kategorię ius naturale, Gaius pod względem treści zidentyfikował ją zapomocą ius gentium. Więc ius gentium różni się od ius naturale tylko na podstawiepunktu widzenia, przez który wyrażane są poszczególne standardy lub instytucjeprawne. Jeśli normy prawne są wyrażone z konkretnego punktu widzenia (czyli w normach istnieje wyraźna wzmianka, że mają one zastosowanie do wszystkich narodów),wówczas mogą one zostać włączone do kategorii ius gentium. Jeśli są sformułowanez abstrakcyjnego punktu widzenia (czyli w normach jest wzmianka o ich pochodzeniuz naturalis ratio), mogą one zostać włączone do kategorii prawa naturalnego.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2018, 17, 2; 39-54
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Rzymski proces cywilny i rzymski proces karny Rzymian w ujęciu ks. prof. Stanisława Płodzienia (uwagi na marginesie maszynopisu BU KUL 1443A)
Roman Civil Trial and Roman Criminal Trial as Seen by Rev. Prof. Stanisław Płodzień (Remarks on the Margin of the Typescript of BU KUL 1443A)
Autorzy:
Jońca, Maciej
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/27308721.pdf
Data publikacji:
2023
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Stanisław Płodzień
rzymski proces karny
rzymski proces cywilny
Biblioteka Uniwersytecka KUL
Roman criminal trial
Roman civil trial
KUL University Library
Opis:
Oddział Zbiorów Specjalnych Biblioteki Uniwersyteckiej KUL przechowuje spuściznę po urodzonym na Podlasiu romaniście – ks. prof. Stanisławie Płodzieniu. Autor wykładał prawo rzymskie i kanoniczne na Katolickim Uniwersytecie Lubelskim w latach 50. i na początku lat 60. XX w. Jego świetnie zapowiadającą się karierę przerwała jednak nagła śmierć w 1962 r. Wśród pozostawionych przez niego niepublikowanych materiałów znajduje się skrypt przygotowany dla studentów I roku prawa kanonicznego zatytułowany Rzymski proces cywilny. To znalezisko cenne, ponieważ w XIX i XX w. ogłoszono w języku polskim jedynie dwie monografie poświęcone procedurze cywilnej Rzymian. Analiza skryptu pokazuje, że jego autor w największym stopniu wzorował się na monografii Leopolda Wengera Institutionen des römischen Zivilprozessrechts. Od niego zaczerpnął ideę, by odrębny wywód poświęcić różnicom pomiędzy procesem cywilnym Rzymian a ich postępowaniem karnym i administracyjnym. W tekście znalazł się podpunkt zatytułowany Stosunek procesu cywilnego rzymskiego do procesu karnego i administracyjnego. Autor w rzeczowy sposób przedstawił specyfikę wszystkich trzech rodzajów procedur, a także podkreślił, że pewnymi kategoriami współczesnymi myśleli już Rzymianie. Na szczególną uwagę zasługuje odejście od koncepcji podziału prawa na publiczne i prywatne w oparciu o tzw. kryterium korzyści (utilitas). Ksiądz Płodzień podkreśla, że pojęcie interesu państwa w czasach rzymskich było równie nieostre, jak obecnie. W narracji subtelnie wykorzystano współczesną terminologię cywilistyczną.
The Special Collections Department of the University Library of the Catholic University of Lublin preserves the legacy of the Podlasie-born Romanist Rev. Prof. Stanisław Płodzień. The author taught Roman and Canon Law at the Catholic University of Lublin in the 1950s and early 1960s. However, his promising career was interrupted by his sudden death in 1962. Among the unpublished materials he left behind is a script prepared for first-year students of canon law, entitled „The Roman Civil Trial”. This is a valuable find, since in the 19th and 20th centuries only two monographs on the Roman civil procedure were published in Polish. An analysis of the script shows that its author drew mostly on Leopold Wenger’s monograph „Institutionen des romischen Zivilprozessrechts”. It is from him that he took the idea of devoting a separate discussion to the differences between Roman civil trials and their criminal and administrative proceedings. The text included a subsection entitled “The Relationship between the Roman Civil Trial and Criminal and Administrative proceedings”. The author presented the peculiarities of all three types of proceedings in a factual manner, emphasizing that certain contemporary categories had already been contemplated by the Romans. Particularly noteworthy is the departure from the concept of dividing law into public and private based on the so-called criterion of benefit (utilitas). Rev. Płodzień emphasizes that the concept of state interest in Roman times was as vague as it is today. The narrative makes subtle use of modern civilist terminology.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2023, 22, 1; 419-434
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Augustus nova officia excogitavit (Suet., Aug. 37). Oktawian August twórcą cura urbis?
Augustus nova officia excogitavit (Suet., Aug. 37) Octavian Augustus the Creator of the Cura Urbis?
Autorzy:
Kamińska, Renata
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621311.pdf
Data publikacji:
2013
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Augustus, Suetonius, Roman public law, cura urbis, curatores urbi.
Opis:
The curatores urbi, together with the prefects, are a part of the most characteristic Roman offices during the period of the principate. Thanks to the available source texts, particu- lary De aquaeductu urbis Romae, as well as thanks to the inscriptions, nowadays we have fairly precise information about the functions fulfilled by those officials. The doubts concern primarily the moment and the circumstances of the creation of the curatores urbi. According to Suetonius those officials, and especially curatores aquarum, curatores riparum et alvei Tiberis, curators aedium sacrarum et operum locorumque publicorum and curatores viarum were created by Augustus. However, that opinion raises doubts. The purpose of this very article is to determine to what extent the opinion of Suetonius is true and correct.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2013, 12; 13-29
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Kilka spostrzeżeń o prawie rzymskim w Gimnazjum i Liceum w Krzemieńcu
Some remarks upon Roman law in Krzemieniec Middle and High School
Autorzy:
Godek, Sławomir
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621845.pdf
Data publikacji:
2018
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
prawo rzymskie, Krzemieniec, XIX w.
Roman Law, Krzemieniec, XIX century,
Opis:
Krzmieniec Middle (est. 1805) and later on High School (est. 1819) in Volhynia wasfamous for its high educational standards and wide curriculum, whose importantpart constituted legal courses. The following subjects were lectured in Krzemieniec:natural law, political system, Polish as well as Russian border law, Polish-Lithuanianlaw (domestic law), and Roman law. The last two were lectured alternately bythe graduates of Vilnius University – Ignacy Oładkowski, Józef Jaroszewicz, andAleksander Mickiewicz. The teaching staff did not confine themselves solely todidactic activity, but they pursued ambitious scientific goals as well. Ołdakowski wasone of the first Poles to deal with the philosophy of law. He was also comparing Polishlaw with the Napoleonic Code. Jaroszewicz, who was following the newest scientifictrends, excitedly received the discovery and publication of the Institutes of Gaius.He was exploring the influence of Roman law on Old-Polish law. This very scientificproblem was also within Mickiewicz’s field of interest. Some preserved manuscriptsenable us to recreate the main outline of the lectures, as well as bibliography used bythe professors, or even the number of listeners attending the courses.
Założone w 1805 r. Gimnazjum w Krzemieńcu (przekształcone w 1819 r. w Liceum)słynęło z wysokiego poziomu nauczania i szerokiej oferty dydaktycznej, której istotną część stanowiły przedmioty prawnicze. W Krzemieńcu wykładano mianowicieprawo natury, polityczne, prawo graniczne (polskie i osobno rosyjskie), prawo krajowe (czyli polsko-litewskie) oraz rzymskie. Te dwa ostatnie przedmioty były wykładane naprzemiennie (rok po roku) przez absolwentów Uniwersytetu Wileńskiego,kolejno – Ignacego Ołdakowskiego, Józefa Jaroszewicza, Aleksandra Mickiewicza.Wymienieni profesorowie nie ograniczali się tylko do wykonywania obowiązkówdydaktycznych, ale stawiali sobie także ambitne cele naukowe. Ołdakowski był jednym z pierwszych Polaków, zajmujących się naukowo filozofią prawa. Ponadto, tenwykładowca prowadził badania porównawcze nad prawem krajowym (polsko-litewskim) i francuskim (Kodeksem Napoleona). Jaroszewicz śledził najnowsze trendyw romanistyce, a w szczególności z wielkim zainteresowaniem przyjął odkrycie i wydanie Instytucji Gaiusa. Badał też problem wpływu prawa rzymskiego na dawne prawo polskie. Tym ostatnim zagadnieniem naukowo zajmował się także Mickiewicz.Zachowane źródła rękopiśmienne pozwalają na odtworzenie, przynajmniej zarysu,problematyki wykładów z dziedziny prawa. Umożliwiają także identyfikację bibliografii wykorzystywanej do zajęć, a nawet ustalenie liczby uczniów, uczestniczącychw wykładach.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2018, 17, 2; 189-213
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Entre glosas y censuras. Recepción y circulación del Corpus Iuris Civilis en la Nueva España (siglos XVI y XVII)
Between comments and censorships. The reception and circulation of the Corpus Iuris Civilis in the New Spain (XVI and XVII centuries)
Autorzy:
Hernández Santiago, Oscar
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1944428.pdf
Data publikacji:
2021-03-27
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Corpus Iuris Civilis
legal reception
Mexico
New Spain
Roman law
Opis:
The purpose of this article is to show the reception and circulation of the Corpus Iuris Civilis the New Spain (Mexico) during the XVI and XVII centuries. It analyzes the importance of the Roman law as a part of the phenomenon of legal reception in the Spanish America. It studies the readings, comments and censorships of the different editions of these books, which were introduced extensively since the first decades of the American conquest. In the recent years, the Latin American historiography has analyzed the reception of the ius commune in the Spanish colonies, but it appears to give more priority to other legal sources as laws and customs. As a result of this point of view, it has been forgotten the knowledge contained in the legal books. In this research, my main sources are the books preserved in the Mexican National Library. The choice of the materials is due to it preserves the prints of some of the major libraries during this period (university, seminars and religious colleges). In order to achieve this objective, I analyze my period according to the Robert Darnton’s communication circuit. This methodological model focuses on the role of authors, publishers, printers, distributors and readers in the process of production, distribution and consumption of the books.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2020, 19, 1; 395-420
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
O roli prawa rzymskiego w kształceniu polskich prawników. Uwagi na marginesie książki Bożeny Anny Czech-Jezierskiej, Nauczanie prawa rzymskiego w Polsce w okresie międzywojennym (1918–1939), Wydawnictwo KUL, Lublin 2011, 309 stron
The role of Roman law in the education of Polish lawyers
Autorzy:
Szczygielski, Krzysztof
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621222.pdf
Data publikacji:
2014
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Prawo rzymskie, system nauczania, prawnicy polscy
Roman law, teaching, Polish lawyers
Opis:
The article concerns the role of Roman law in the education of Polish lawyers. The author compares the conditions and methods of teaching the law of ancient Romans at law faculties in Poland during the period between the two World Wars with those of today. In conclusion, the author states that Roman law is undoubtedly one of the most important components of ancient culture, which has exerted a specific influence on shaping the modern world. The study of Roman law offers a possibility of histori- cal perspective on law, enriches students’ knowledge on the theory and dogmatics of law and teaches the ways of legal thinking. It is impossible to comprehensively under- stand the evolution and functioning of many modern European legal systems, which stem from solutions formerly adopted already in the law of ancient Rome, without the competence derived from the study of Roman law.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2014, 13, 1; 305-325
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Leonard Piętak – wspomnienie w setną rocznicę śmierci
Autorzy:
Szczygielski, Krzysztof
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621256.pdf
Data publikacji:
2009
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
Leonard Piętak, Roman law, commercial and exchange law, University of Lvov
Opis:
Leonard Piętak (1841–1909) was a Polish professor of law. He worked at the University of Lvov. He was interested in both Roman law and actual legislation problems of Austrian commercial and exchange law. Piętak is an author of many valuable papers, particularly Prawo spadkowe rzymskie (Roman law of succession, vol. 1–2, 1882–1888). He was twice elected Rector of University of Lvov – in academic years 1881/1882 and 1888/1889. He was elected Dean of the Law Faculty as well – three times (in academic years 1878/1879, 1883/1884 and 1890/1891). Professor Piętak was a member of many international and domestic scientific societies. Besides of his research, Piętak was also engaged strongly in politics, holding an office of minister for Galicia to an imperial government in Vienna from 1900 to 1906.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2009, 8; 59-72
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Czy stosunek do prawa rzymskiego jest miarą kultury prawnej? Rozważania na przykładzie III Rzeszy
If the attitude to Roman Law is a measure of legal culture? Reflections on the example of the Third Reich
Autorzy:
Zmierczak, Maria
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621921.pdf
Data publikacji:
2016
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
odrzucenie prawa rzymskiego przez reżim nazistowski, prawo rzym- skie w programie NSDAP, paremie rzymskie a praktyka III Rzeszy.
rejection of Roman law by Nazi regime, NSDAP Programme and Roman legal tradition, Roman legal paremiae in the practice of the III Reich.
Opis:
The NSDAP programme of 1920 contained the point 19, where one reads “We demand replacement of Roman law, serving the materialistic world order, by the German com- munity law”. This phrase was repeated by all Nazi lawyers and politicians, one can find it not only in Roland Freisler’s, Hans Frank’s and the statements of other politicians, but in almost all doctoral thesis, academic manuals and the like. The question here, is what did it mean. Analysis of the Nazi texts leads to the conclusion, that it was used to break with and justify rejection of many of the Roman general legal rules (paremiae), for instance “lex retro non agit”, “dura lex sed lex”, “nulla poena sine lege”, to annihilate and destroy the difference between “ius publicum and ius privatum”, and especially the Roman idea of property, understood as “ius utendi, fruendi et abutendi”. The verbal rejection of Roman legal tradition enabled justification of the deep changes in law, both criminal and civil, which not only presented the possibility of retroaction in criminal law, of which lex van der Lubbe was the best known but not unique example, it also served to deny the essence of property changing it into a kind of feudal possession, which meant that the owner had to act only on behalf and in the interest of the German people. Generally, because the Roman law meant certain formalism, clear formulation of legal notions and because the Nazis refused to accept any limitation of state activity, they fre- quently repeated that law is not in the statutes but it is in the hearts of Germans. It seems, that Roman law was also rejected in any totalitarian states, such regimes in principle reject any legal control over the scope of state activity. Carl Joachim Friedrich once stated, that they don’t even deserve the name “state”, because they don’t accept the legal basis of state power. Adam Lityński’s studies on Soviet law also confirm that Roman law and especially its most general rules, cannot be accepted by any totalitarian regime.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2016, 15, 2; 73-83
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Tytuł:
Kilka uwag na marginesie Tit.Ulp. 20.16
few remarks in the margin Tit. Ulp. 20.16
Autorzy:
Świrgoń-Skok, Renata
Powiązania:
https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/621809.pdf
Data publikacji:
2018
Wydawca:
Uniwersytet w Białymstoku. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
Tematy:
niewolnik, testament, niewolnik publiczny, prawo rzymskie
slave, will, public slave, Roman law
Opis:
In Roman law, a precondition for testamenti factio activa was having freedom. In theClassic and Justinian Law the major matter that was considered while determiningsuccession in case of death, was whether the testator was a free person. This generallydoes not raise major controversies. Statements of classic jurists, amongst others,refer thereto in Justinian Digests and imperial constitutions.It is not affected by the fact that in the preserved source material of Roman law, onecan find a fragment from Titulae ex corpore Ulpiani, which grants public slaves thecapacity to manage half of their peculium, should they have any. Such a possibilitywas not present for private slaves even if they possessed peculium profecticium. Theyalso could not obtain the consent of their owner in this scope to carry out such legalaction, because the ability to draw up a testament was classified in public law, notprivate law, which cannot be changed on the grounds of any agreements. However, thisprivilege is not known to Justinian law. Again, the privilege of testamentary capacityfor public slaves is granted by the Byzantine emperor – Leon VI Philosopher.
W prawie rzymskim warunkiem koniecznym przy testamenti factio activa byłoposiadanie wolności. Zarówno w prawie klasycznym, jak i poklasycznym pierwsząkwestią, jaką brano pod uwagę, przy ustalaniu następstwa na wypadek śmierci,było to, czy testator był osobą wolną czy nie. Nie budzi to co do zasady większychkontrowersji. Wskazują na to m.in. wypowiedzi prawników klasycznych, umieszczone następnie w Digestach justyniańskich, jak i konstytucje cesarskie.Nie wpływa na to fakt, że w zachowanym materiale źródłowym prawa rzymskiegomożna jednak odnaleźć fragment pochodzący z Titulae ex corpore Ulpiani, któryprzyznaje zdolność rozporządzenia w testamencie niewolnikom publicznym połowąswojego peculium, o ile takie posiadali. W dalszym ciągu takiej możliwości nie mielibowiem niewolnicy prywatni, chociażby posiadali peculium profecticium. Nie moglitakże w tym zakresie uzyskać zgody swojego właściciela na dokonanie takiej czynnościprawnej, ponieważ zdolność do sporządzenia testamentu była zaliczana do normprawa publicznego, a nie prywatnego, którego nie mogą być zmieniane na podstawieporozumień. Natomiast przywilej ten nie jest znany prawu justyniańskiemu.Ponownie przywilej umożliwiający testowanie niewolnikom publicznym przyznajecesarz bizantyjski Leon VI Filozof.
Źródło:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica; 2018, 17, 2; 115-126
1732-9132
2719-9991
Pojawia się w:
Miscellanea Historico-Iuridica
Dostawca treści:
Biblioteka Nauki
Artykuł
Wyświetlanie 1-15 z 30

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies