{"title":"Is legal history just writing a text?","authors":"Boudewijn Sirks","doi":"10.1163/15718190-20241204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h2>Summary</h2><p>The question, what constitutes the methodology of the legal history research, is answered in different ways. One is that it is the same as for general history: writing on history according to a set of rules which constitute its methodology, because in the end all research on history is just creating a text. It follows from this that legal history is a variation of history and belongs to history faculties, since there is no connection with legal methodology. It is maintained in this article that this view is based on too simple a view of history as science: there is not one methodology but various methodologies (‘discourses’, not only in history but in science in general), each with its own conditions and requirements. Legal history’s discourse has a particular distinguishing element, viz. legal analysis and methodology, which sets it apart from history in general. Its natural place is consequently in law faculties.</p>","PeriodicalId":501512,"journal":{"name":"The Legal History Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Legal History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718190-20241204","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Summary
The question, what constitutes the methodology of the legal history research, is answered in different ways. One is that it is the same as for general history: writing on history according to a set of rules which constitute its methodology, because in the end all research on history is just creating a text. It follows from this that legal history is a variation of history and belongs to history faculties, since there is no connection with legal methodology. It is maintained in this article that this view is based on too simple a view of history as science: there is not one methodology but various methodologies (‘discourses’, not only in history but in science in general), each with its own conditions and requirements. Legal history’s discourse has a particular distinguishing element, viz. legal analysis and methodology, which sets it apart from history in general. Its natural place is consequently in law faculties.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
