{"title":"阿尔勒凯撒里乌斯布道中的法律框架","authors":"I. Filippov","doi":"10.1179/1366069114Z.00000000015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The texts of Caesarius of Arles are rightly counted among the most important historical sources for the Early Middle Ages. Despite this well-known fact they are insufficiently studied from the point of view of social history. The domain of law is especially neglected. Information on this subject is contained mainly in the numerous comparisons which Caesarius drew between the religious beliefs, attitudes, and practices he strove to impose on his flock, and the social realities of Arles of his day. The juridical terminology which he occasionally used is also quite revealing. Most of the data is of course on canon law. It is less informative than one could have hoped but it does shed light on some important areas, such as the social make-up of the parishioners; attendance at church by women, youngsters, and slaves; baptismal practices; the tithe, and almsgiving. Caesarius’ sermons also contain valuable facts pertaining to the persistence of many Roman legal notions and practices belonging to what can be qualified as ‘civil law’. Of special interest are the different data concerning ownership rights. On the one hand, the sermons prove that Arlesians of the sixth century were for the most part content with quasi-legal notions sufficient to describe their rights in this domain. On the other hand, the bishop’s use of words leaves no doubt that the predominant legal notion regarding ownership, to the detriment of all others, was possession.","PeriodicalId":38182,"journal":{"name":"Medieval Sermon Studies","volume":"58 1","pages":"65 - 83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1179/1366069114Z.00000000015","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legal Frameworks in the Sermons of Caesarius of Arles\",\"authors\":\"I. Filippov\",\"doi\":\"10.1179/1366069114Z.00000000015\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The texts of Caesarius of Arles are rightly counted among the most important historical sources for the Early Middle Ages. Despite this well-known fact they are insufficiently studied from the point of view of social history. The domain of law is especially neglected. Information on this subject is contained mainly in the numerous comparisons which Caesarius drew between the religious beliefs, attitudes, and practices he strove to impose on his flock, and the social realities of Arles of his day. The juridical terminology which he occasionally used is also quite revealing. Most of the data is of course on canon law. It is less informative than one could have hoped but it does shed light on some important areas, such as the social make-up of the parishioners; attendance at church by women, youngsters, and slaves; baptismal practices; the tithe, and almsgiving. Caesarius’ sermons also contain valuable facts pertaining to the persistence of many Roman legal notions and practices belonging to what can be qualified as ‘civil law’. Of special interest are the different data concerning ownership rights. On the one hand, the sermons prove that Arlesians of the sixth century were for the most part content with quasi-legal notions sufficient to describe their rights in this domain. On the other hand, the bishop’s use of words leaves no doubt that the predominant legal notion regarding ownership, to the detriment of all others, was possession.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38182,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Medieval Sermon Studies\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"65 - 83\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1179/1366069114Z.00000000015\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Medieval Sermon Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1179/1366069114Z.00000000015\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medieval Sermon Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1179/1366069114Z.00000000015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Legal Frameworks in the Sermons of Caesarius of Arles
Abstract The texts of Caesarius of Arles are rightly counted among the most important historical sources for the Early Middle Ages. Despite this well-known fact they are insufficiently studied from the point of view of social history. The domain of law is especially neglected. Information on this subject is contained mainly in the numerous comparisons which Caesarius drew between the religious beliefs, attitudes, and practices he strove to impose on his flock, and the social realities of Arles of his day. The juridical terminology which he occasionally used is also quite revealing. Most of the data is of course on canon law. It is less informative than one could have hoped but it does shed light on some important areas, such as the social make-up of the parishioners; attendance at church by women, youngsters, and slaves; baptismal practices; the tithe, and almsgiving. Caesarius’ sermons also contain valuable facts pertaining to the persistence of many Roman legal notions and practices belonging to what can be qualified as ‘civil law’. Of special interest are the different data concerning ownership rights. On the one hand, the sermons prove that Arlesians of the sixth century were for the most part content with quasi-legal notions sufficient to describe their rights in this domain. On the other hand, the bishop’s use of words leaves no doubt that the predominant legal notion regarding ownership, to the detriment of all others, was possession.