人的实践与皇帝的颁布:遗嘱机制变化的动力

E. A. Meyer
{"title":"人的实践与皇帝的颁布:遗嘱机制变化的动力","authors":"E. A. Meyer","doi":"10.55740/2023.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyses the historical accuracy of a statement made in Justinian's Institutes about the development of the late-antique tripartite will, and finds that the enactments of emperors are given too much credit, and the practice of men too little. The paper follows the chronologically uneven and geographically disparate ways in which writing came to be used in wills, and notes the ways in which the problems writing could pose were systematically ignored by imperial enactments until very late.","PeriodicalId":151901,"journal":{"name":"Roman Legal Tradition","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Practice of Men and the Enactments of Emperors: Dynamics of Change in the Mechanics of Testaments\",\"authors\":\"E. A. Meyer\",\"doi\":\"10.55740/2023.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper analyses the historical accuracy of a statement made in Justinian's Institutes about the development of the late-antique tripartite will, and finds that the enactments of emperors are given too much credit, and the practice of men too little. The paper follows the chronologically uneven and geographically disparate ways in which writing came to be used in wills, and notes the ways in which the problems writing could pose were systematically ignored by imperial enactments until very late.\",\"PeriodicalId\":151901,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Roman Legal Tradition\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Roman Legal Tradition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55740/2023.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Roman Legal Tradition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55740/2023.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文分析了查士丁尼《行法典》中关于古代晚期三意志发展的论述的历史准确性,并发现皇帝的法令被给予了太多的信任,而人的实践被给予了太少的信任。这篇论文追踪了书写在遗嘱中的使用方式在时间上的不均匀和地理上的不同,并指出书写可能带来的问题直到很晚才被帝国法令系统地忽视。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Practice of Men and the Enactments of Emperors: Dynamics of Change in the Mechanics of Testaments
This paper analyses the historical accuracy of a statement made in Justinian's Institutes about the development of the late-antique tripartite will, and finds that the enactments of emperors are given too much credit, and the practice of men too little. The paper follows the chronologically uneven and geographically disparate ways in which writing came to be used in wills, and notes the ways in which the problems writing could pose were systematically ignored by imperial enactments until very late.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信