How does law come to be stated as substantive rules, and then how does it change? In this collection of discussions from the James S. Carpentier Lectures in legal history and criticism, one of Britain's most acclaimed legal historians S. F. C. Milsom focuses on the development of English common law -- the intellectually coherent system of substantive rules that courts bring to bear on the particular facts of individual cases -- from which American law was to grow. Milsom discusses the differences between the development of land law and that of other kinds of law and, in the latter case, how procedural changes allowed substantive rules first to be stated and then to be circumvented. He examines the invisibility of early legal change and how adjustment to conditions was hidden behind such things as the changing meaning of words. Milsom points out that legal history may be more prone than other kinds of history to serious anachronism. Nobody ever states his assumptions, and a legal writer, addressing his contemporaries, never provided a glossary to warn future historians against attributing their own meanings to his words and therefore their own assumptions to his world. Formal continuity has enabled nineteenth-century assumptions to be carried back, in some respects as far back as the twelfth century. This book brings together Milsom's efforts to understand the uncomfortable changes that lie beneath that comforting formal surface. Those changes were too large to have been intended by anyone at the time and too slow to be perceived by historians working within the short periods now imposed by historical convention. The law was made not by great men making great decisions but by man-sized men unconcerned with the future and thinking only about their own immediate everyday difficulties. King Henry II, for example, did not intend the changes attributed to him in either land law or criminal law; the draftsman of De Donis did not mean to create the entail; nobody ever dreamed up a fiction with intent to change the law.
评分
评分
评分
评分
与其说这是一本关于普通法的历史,不如说它是一本关于“秩序如何诞生”的哲学著作。作者的思考远远超出了法律实务的范畴,他探讨了群体认同感、地方自治权与中央集权之间永恒的张力,并指出普通法正是这种张力下的动态平衡点。阅读此书,我的思路时常被引导到对现代社会治理模式的反思上。那些看似遥远的古代判例,其内在的伦理考量和实践智慧,在今天依然具有惊人的现实意义。行文之中,偶尔穿插的作者的个人见解,虽然简短,但如点睛之笔,透露出一种对人类社会复杂性的深刻理解和一种温和的悲悯情怀。这本书的阅读体验是渐进式的,越往后读,越能体会到其布局之宏大和用心之深沉,它不仅是知识的传递,更是一种心智的磨砺过程。
评分读完这本书,我最大的感受是震撼于其文献的广博和考据的严谨。它绝非一本轻松的读物,更像是置身于一座巨大的、由法律典籍构成的迷宫中进行探险。作者似乎将他毕生精力所收集的各种原始资料,甚至是那些被主流历史学家忽视的边缘文献,都巧妙地融入了论证体系之中。尤其是关于土地所有权和继承法演变的那几个章节,那种层层剥茧、逻辑环环相扣的推理过程,简直堪称学术典范。它不是在讲述一个简单的故事,而是在构建一个复杂的、多维度的历史模型。有些段落的句子结构极其复杂,充满了从拉丁文和古英语中提炼出的精确措辞,这使得初次接触的读者可能会感到些许吃力,但这恰恰是其真实性和学术价值的体现。它要求读者必须全神贯注,用对待严肃学术论文的审慎态度去对待它,一旦跟上节奏,那种豁然开朗的智力满足感是无与伦比的。
评分我一直以为自己对英美法系的起源略知一二,但这本书彻底颠覆了我的预设。作者的笔锋犀利而富有洞察力,他毫不留情地揭示了许多我们习以为常的法律原则背后,其实蕴藏着漫长而血腥的权力斗争。这不是一本歌颂历史的赞美诗,而是一部冷静、甚至略带批判性的解剖报告。阅读过程中,那种被历史的洪流裹挟前行的感觉非常强烈,你不得不承认,许多“永恒不变”的法律真理,不过是特定历史时期妥协的产物。特别是对于不同文化(比如诺曼征服带来的影响)在法律体系融合过程中的摩擦与整合的描述,细致到令人叹服。这本书的语言风格有一种古典的庄重感,用词精准,没有丝毫的浮夸或卖弄,纯粹是为了阐述事实和逻辑而服务,这种朴素的力量反而更具说服力。
评分这本书的结构设计极为精妙,它没有采用简单的时间轴叙事,而是围绕几个核心的法律主题,像雕刻家一样,反复打磨和深化主题。比如,关于“公正审判”的概念是如何从宗教裁判的概念中逐步脱离,转变为世俗化、程序化的过程,作者用了近百页的篇幅进行阐述,将神学、哲学、政治学等多个领域的知识融为一炉。这种写作手法使得阅读体验如同在欣赏一件多面体的艺术品,从任何一个角度切入,都能看到新的光泽和纹理。我尤其喜欢它在解释一些关键转折点时所采用的比喻,那些比喻既形象又贴合法律的内在逻辑,有效地降低了理解难度,让非专业人士也能领略到其中蕴含的智慧。它真正做到了化繁为简,而非简单地堆砌复杂性。
评分这部书的篇幅实在令人敬畏,它不仅仅是对法律条文的梳理,更像是一次对时间长河中人类社会形态演变的深刻考察。作者在开篇就展现了其深厚的学识,他没有急于进入枯燥的法律案例分析,而是从更宏大的视角切入,探讨了“习惯”是如何在无形中塑造了法律的骨架。我特别欣赏他对于早期法律思想的追溯,那种将法律视为一种有机生长的生命体的观点,让人耳目一新。阅读过程中,我时常需要停下来,回味那些关于“常识性判断”如何在司法实践中逐步固化成“判例”的论述。这种细致入微的剖析,使得那些原本晦涩难懂的法律概念变得生动起来,仿佛能够触摸到中世纪审判庭里泥土的气息和木椅的粗糙纹理。整本书的叙事节奏把握得极佳,张弛有度,让人在被复杂历史细节淹没之前,总能被作者高屋建瓴的总结拉回主线。可以说,这是一部需要耐心细品的鸿篇巨著,它挑战了我们对“法律”二字的所有固有认知。
评分纪念
评分纪念
评分纪念
评分纪念
评分纪念
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2026 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有