Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 10 of 19 items for
- Author or Editor: Tamás Nótári x
- Refine by Access: All Content x
A legis actio sacramento in rem mindmáig a római jog szakirodalmának legvitatottabb kérdései közé tartozik, irodalma mára könyvtárnyivá duzzadt, annak hozzávetőleges feldolgozása is önálló tanulmány tárgyát képezhetné. A legis actio sacramento in rem eredetének magyarázata kapcsán több, egymástól többé-kevésbé világosan elkülönülő irányzatot különböztethetünk meg, vizsgálódásunk szempontjából a legfontosabbnak az esküelméletet és a magánharcról szóló teóriát tekinthetjük. A legis actio sacramento eredendően szakrális jellegét hangsúlyozza az esküteória, amely szerint a pervesztes fél hamis esküjét, sacramentumát megtorló istenség expiatiója lehetett a közösségi kontroll fő célja, ezt az elméletet a vindicatio erősen formalizált, vallási-mágikus carmenként megjelenő szövege is alátámasztja. Jheringre vezetik vissza - noha jóval korábbi - a magánharcelméletet, amelynek az a lényege, hogy a felek kezdetben tényleges harcot folytattak a köztük vita tárgyát képező dologért, ám a közösség (az állam) a belső békét megőrizendő e harcot saját ellenőrzése alá vonta, s ezért e harcra a legis actio sacramento in rem általunk ismert formájában már csak szimbolikusan, a lándzsa (hasta) helyett használt pálca (festuca) jelzésszerű alkalmazásával került sor. Célunk csupán annyi, hogy egy - főként a forrásokra, részben a szakirodalom eddigi eredményeire alapozott - lehetőséget villantsunk fel, amely a legis actio sacramento in rem struktúrájában a szakralitás és a magánharc motívumait nem egymásnak ellentmondó, hanem szerves kiegészítő komponensként elegyíti.
The social structure of the 8th c. Bavaria reveals a highly dynamic picture: by the age of the last two ruling dukes of the Agilolfing dynasty, Odilo and Tassilo III, a system of personal statuses had crystallised that can be reconstructed from legal sources and charters, on the one hand; and the development of Bavarian nobility and the manifestation of this process in legislation can be dated to this period, on the other. After outlining the political/historical background (I.); this paper intends to give an in-depth investigation of this issue: following comments on the concept of libertas , the legal status of freemen (liberi) and servants (servi) will be looked at in the mirror of Lex Baiuvariorum (II); then, the relation between the duke and ancient Bavarian genealogiae , the development of the layer of the adalscalhae , the birth of the Bavarian order of nobles and its appearance in the resolutions of the Council of Dingolfing, and the issue of Bavarian counties prior to the Carolingians seizing power will be exposed relying on legal and literary sources (III).
Enea Silvio Piccolomini in his work entitled De Europa written in 1458, tells an interesting story defined as a legend in terms of genre about a duke called Ingo, who lived during the reign of Charlemagne. This narrative claims that in 790 dux gentis Ingo held a feast for the inhabitants of his province where food was served to the peasants allowed to appear before him in golden and silver bowls, while to the dignitaries standing further away from him in bowls made of clay. The researchers’ attention is deservedly raised by the query how come that this parabolical story with biblical tone was included in Enea Silvio’s work; if it had been borrowed who the auctor might have been he borrowed it from. The answer seems to be very simple: from the Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum drafted regarding the lawsuit proceeded against Methodius. In the case narrated in the Conversio Ingo sent a charter or much rather a parchment without any writing, or letters on it (carta sine litteris) , which provided his legate with sufficient authenticity to demand obedience from the people.In this study-after having compared the two narratives and outlined the place of De Europa in Enea Silvio Piccolomini’s oeuvre and the circumstances of the drafting and tendencies of the Conversio Bagoariorum et Carantanorum-the author attempts to answer the following questions. To what extent can duke Ingo, mentioned by Enea Silvio and not questioned in the literature for long centuries, be considered a real historical person? Does the Conversio refer to Ingo as a duke, and if it does, what is his existence as a duke and introduction in the literature as a duke owing to? What could the meaning of carta sine litteris referred to in Conversio have been, and why did Enea Silvio not take this item over although he could have put it forward as a further proof of Ingo’s dignity? To what literary prefigurations can the description of the feast held by Ingo be traced back to, and what role did it play in the Conversio? Regarding the borrowing of the Ingo story by Enea Silvio, what possible intermediary writing and author can be reckoned with?
The Commentariolum petitionis written in 64 B.C. is the oldest campaign strategy document that has been preserved for us. In this handbook Quintus Tullius Cicero, younger brother of the most excellent orator of the Antiquity, Marcus Tullius Cicero, gives advice to his elder brother on how Marcus can win consul’s elections, that is, how he can rise to the highest position of the Roman Republic. In the present paper Commentariolum will be analysed in detail examining the following aspects: the Antique genre commentary (I.); the issue of authorship of Commentariolum (II.); the characterisation of the competitors, Antonius and Catilina, provided in Commentariolum (III.); the system of elections in Anciet Rome and the crime of election fraud/bribery, i.e. the crimen ambitus (IV.) and the role of associations and clients in Roman elections (V.).
The present paper intends to highlight some aspects of Cicero’s speech in defence of Marcus Caelius Rufus on 4 April 56 BC on the first day of the Ludi Megalenses. In 56 BC, as a result of peculiar coincidence of political and private relations, Cicero was given the opportunity to deal a heavy blow on Clodius and Clodia in his Pro Caelio, whom he mocked in the trial with murderous humour using the means of Roman theatre, and, thus, arranged a peculiar theatre performance during the Megalensia, which anyway served as the time of the Ludi scaenici. After outlining the circumstances of the lawsuit (I.) and the background of the Bona Dea case that sowed the seeds of the conflict between Cicero and the gens Clodia (II.) in our paper we intend to analyse the rhetoric situation provided by the Ludi Megalenses and genially exploited by Cicero (III.) and the orator’s tactics applied in the speech in defence of Caelius (IV.).
The statement of the defence delivered in the criminal action (causa publica) of Aulus Cluentius Habitus-Cicero’s longest actually delivered speech left to us-is from 66, that is, the year when Cicero was praetor. In certain respect, it is the precious stone of Cicero’s ars oratoria since its narrative is vivid, full of turns like a crime story; events, scenes, planes of time replace one another boldly, sometimes seemingly illogically but, being subordinated to the effect the orator means to attain, in an exactly premeditated sequence. Cluentius was charged, on the one hand, with poisoning his stepfather, Statius Albius Oppianicus. The other part of the charge was founded on the criminal proceedings under which eight years before Cluentius charged Oppianicus with poisoning attempt against him, as a result of which Oppianicus was compelled to go into exile-in the current lawsuit, however, the prosecution brought it up against him that the former court of justice declared Oppianicus guilty purely because Cluentius had bribed the judges. Lex Cornelia de sicariis et veneficis of 81 served as basis for judging crimes that provide grounds for the charge of poisoning; however, the prohibition of bribing judges applied to the order of senators only, and Cluentius belonged to the order of knights. First, we intend to outline the historical background of the oration, so to say, the historical facts of the case (I.); then, we turn our attention to the opportunity of applying statutory facts of the case, i.e. lex Cornelia de sicariis et veneficis. (II.) Finally, we examine the rhetorical tools of Cicero’s strategy to explore how the orator handled, modified or distorted the system of the charges and chronology-to support the argument, which can be considered brilliant with a lawyer’s eyes, too. (III.)
In the present paper we analyse the state of facts of robbing of a grave in German folk laws. We pay special regard to the issue to what extent the impacts of Roman law and the Church and primarily German customary law can be demonstrated in the system of state of facts and sanctions of specific laws. This investigation requires the analysis of the legal source base as well as some examination in the history of language, which allows a comparative analysis of the issue and helps to highlight the various layers of the norms of German folk laws by the example of this state of facts.
This paper intends to analyse the Bavarian linguistic elements of Lex Baiuvariorum,2 the written Bavarian Volksrecht 3 created between 737 and 743 from philological aspects and draw further conclusions from findings for legal history considerations. First we will examine expressions where the active predicate in first person plural reveals that the Bavarians assisting in making the law inserted them in relevant passages as words of their own folk language. (I) After that, we will analyse phrases accompanied by active predicate in third person plural and passive predicate in third person singular or plural either naming Bavarians as the subject or not where the text makes it clear that these words were used by Bavarians to express the given meaning. (II) Atfer analysing Bavarian personal names, primarily names of genealogiae (III), we will discuss Bavarian/South German expressions in the text of the Bavarian law that apparently correspond to or overlap the relevant loci of Lex Alamannorum (IV). In the light of all these, the paper will make an attempt to arrive at some deductions on the usage of Lex Baiuvariorum that can be supported by proofs and go beyond hypothesis.
