"Enregistrement" and "publication" of royal legislation by inferior courts in France of Ancien Regime

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

The results of this study can be summarized as follows. First of all, the perspectives and materials for this comparative study between jurisprudence and rhetoric in ancient Greece and Rome are broadened to a great extent. The previous studies only focused on the relationships between Ciceronian rhetoric and jurisprudence in the later Republic, or between doctrines of stoic philosophy (such as natural law, justice and equity) and classical Roman law. This study embraces such topics as previously have not been tackled, for example Greek law and forensic oratory Isaeus, Demosthenes), rhetoric in the high Roman Empire including political speeches of Pliny and Seneca, and patristic oratory such as Ammianus Marcellinus in the later Roman Empire. Secondly, new methodologies are employed, for example, comparisons from the argumentative perspectives (dialectic and paradigm, in other words, arguments from analogy and polarity, associative thinking). This methodology opens new possibilities in bridging classical Roman law and its later developments in Medieval and Modern periods, also Roman jurisprudence and canonistic jurisprudence. Thirdly, new translations and commentaries are produced. In particular, de inventione of Cicero is translated with comprehensive commentary from legal points of view, for example, terminologies in the status theory are now freshly translated into Japanese, which contributes to the new understanding of Ciceronian rhetoric. Lastly, there remain few things to be done. Above all, the work in collecting and editing principal sources for the comparison between rhetoric and jurisprudence has not fully extended. All the collaborators in this study agree that sources presenting conflict scenes (both factual and imaginary) including formal court procedures must be folly listed and collected in the right order.