Author Archives: Annamaria

BOOK: ‘NON PIÙ SATELLITE’. Itinerari giuscommercialistici tra Otto e Novecento

Itinerari giuscommercialistici tra Otto e Novecento

A cura di Italo Birocchi
Edizioni ETS: Pisa, 2019 – ISBN: 9788846755858

Come nacque e si sviluppò la scienza commercialistica nel processo di passaggio dall’antico ius mercatorum al diritto commerciale codificato? È il problema dell’autonomia della disciplina che riguarda fondamentalmente il duplice rapporto con la civilistica – considerata, nell’immaginario ottocentesco, l’officina di produzione delle categorie e del linguaggio dell’universo giuridico e dunque la scienza per eccellenza ­– e con l’economia, ritenuta la materia su cui si innestavano le forme del diritto commerciale. In quel processo venne rovesciata l’idea che la giuscommercialistica fosse una scienza satellitare del diritto civile e si affermò di converso la ‘commercializzazione’ della vita civile. 
In un arco temporale compreso, grossomodo, tra i decenni centrali dell’Ottocento e gli anni Trenta del Novecento, i saggi raccolti in questo libro esaminano diverse figure di giuristi (protagonisti o membri del coro), strumenti (riviste, prolusioni, saggi, trattati), provvedimenti e progetti normativi, momenti del reclutamento accademico (candidati e loro formazione, prove concorsuali, commissari), esperimenti didattici. 
L’ottica è transnazionale, come nella vocazione del commercio e come soprattutto suggerisce il continuo rimbalzare di tematiche, personaggi e opere da una esperienza ordinamentale all’altra. Così capita di riscontrare che Serafini fosse impegnato nei lavori preparatori dell’Obligationenrecht svizzero e che questo venisse abbondantemente commentato in Italia nelle sue due edizioni, che il Corso di Vidari venisse letto e discusso dai protagonisti della giuscommercialistica brasiliana, che autori come Vidari e Bolaffio fossero attentamente compulsati nell’importante manuale di Soler in Spagna, che il giovanissimo Mossa fosse attratto dalla più recente dottrina tedesca.

Table of contents:

Call for papers: Professions and Methods in Comparative Legal History, ESCLH 6th Biennal Conference, Lisbon 1-3 July 2020

ESCLH 6th Biennal Conference 

Professions and Methods in Comparative Legal History

1-3 July 2020, Universidad de Lisboa, Faculdade de Direito

The Organising Committee of the 6th Biennal Conference and the Executive Council of the ESCLH are pleased to call for papers for the upcoming conference to be held. The main theme picks up threads of thought from the earlier ESCLH conferences in Valencia (2010), Amsterdam (2012), Macerata (2014), Gdansk (2016), Paris (2018) to explore what roles Professions and Methods have played, and continue to play, within comparative legal history. Offers of papers should be submitted by 15 November 2019 (details below).

The conference will focus on legal professions and method, especially the methods of legal professionals across Europe and the world. Judges, lawyers and other legal professions have developed differently from country to country and even now, we can find substantial differences in training, method, role and work. Legal methodology, including the motivation of judicial decisions, lawyerly style and method of arguing cases needs to be studied in historical and comparative perspective to understand where we are now, and where we might be heading.

Papers could probe the process of emergence and evolution of legal professions, from their institutional aspects and their understanding of their jobs, through to technical matters of method. They could also study the effects of structure of legal professions on the on the way law functions, most obviously through case law. Papers which also look through the lens of the historical context of the countries in which the legal professions operated are welcome.

Papers should be novel, properly researched and referenced. They should address the conference theme, exploring doctrinal, theoretical, cultural or methodological aspects of comparative legal history. They must also be comparative, addressing more than one system of laws. The organisers particularly welcome addressing multiple legal systems or cultures. This includes where a similar legal system functions in different cultural circles.

Practical details:

To offer a paper, please send the title of their paper, a short abstract (of 200-400 words, no more, and a short CV (no more than 1 page) by 15 November 2019 to the organizing committee, c/o
The presentations should be in English.
It is also possible to submit a complete proposal for one or more panels (3 papers normally).
The list of accepted papers will be announced by early December 2019.
Shortly, a conference website will be launched with fuller details of the conference. For the moment, some transport and accommodation information follows.

Lisbon offers many accommodation possibilities ranging from five-star hotels, through smaller hotels and private rooms to beds in youth and student hostels. For some postgraduates the University of Lisbon, might be able to offer cheaper accommodation in student dormitories, and anything available will be advertised in due course.

Organising Committee:

Pedro Barbas Homem, Susana Antas Videira, Ana Fouto, Jorge Silva Santos

Workshop: Les professeurs allemands en Belgique, ULB/VUB, 4 APRIL 2019


Brussels: ULB/VUB, 4 APR 2019

“Les professeurs allemands en Belgique. Circulation des savoirs juridiques et enseignement du droit (1817-1914)”

09h30 – 09h55 : Accueil

Introduction : Raphaël Cahen (Vrije Universiteit Brussel – FWO/Marie Sklodowska Curie).

10h15 – 11h00 Pieter Dhondt (University of Eastern Finland), The appointment of foreigners as a bonus or a pure necessity? Belgian discussions in a European perspective.

11h00 – 11h45 : Christoph-Eric Mecke (Leibniz Universität Hannover), Leopold August Warnkönig – ein europäischer Vermittler auf dem Gebiet von Rechtswissenschaft und Wissenschaftspolitik im 19. Jahrhundert.

11h45-12h30 : Vincent Génin (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven – FWO), Un socialisme de la chaire avant l’heure. George Wagemann à Liège (1819-1825).

13h45 – 14h30 : Jean-Louis Halpérin (École Normale Supérieure), Les circulations transnationales en matière d’enseignement du droit : une perspective globale.

14h30 – 15h15 : Wolfgang Forster (Universität Tübingen), Belgian origins of Krausism – Heinrich Ahrens in Brussels.

15h15 – 16h00 : Maxime Jottrand (Université libre de Bruxelles – Boursier FRESH, FNRS), La mobilité étudiante et les bourses de voyage de l’État (1836-1914). Un instrument de circulation des savoirs juridiques.

Conclusions :  Jérôme de Brouwer (Université libre de Bruxelles)


Jeudi 4 avril 2019

Université Libre de Bruxelles

Centre d’histoire du droit et d’anthropologie juridique

  1. Jeanne 58-60 – 1050 Bruxelles.

Renseignements : / 02.650.36.13

Accès :


Comité organisateur
Jérôme de Brouwer (ULB)
Raphael Cahen (VUB-FWO)
Frederik Dhondt (VUB/Anvers)
Maxime Jottrand (ULB-FNRS)

Comité scientifique

Pierre Bonin (Paris 1-Panthéon-sorbonne) 

Jacques Bouineau (La Rochelle Université)

Jean-François Gerkens (ULg)

Dirk Heirbaut (UGent)

Michael Stolleis (Max Planck Institut für europäische Rechtsgeschichte)

Latest Issue: The American Journal of Comparative Law, Symposium Legal History and Comparative Law

The American Journal of Comparative Law, Volume 66, Issue 4, December 2018


Publisher’s website

Abstract: Comparative law and legal history are witnessing a remarkable moment of reorientation in their methods and perhaps even in their disciplinary identities. Historically linked to and emerging from a shared paradigm of historical jurisprudence, both disciplines have developed their own institutions, canons of knowledge, mechanisms of communication, and academic practices over the last century. Both flourished under the juridical nationalism of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and this national paradigm has shaped their analytical framework and categories. Both disciplines are now also facing similar challenges due to the transnationalization of their object and of their institutional structures, but also due to the broad recognition of the importance of context and traditions. Consequently, both are increasingly situating their research on a global horizon, and both are endeavoring to decentralize their approaches and to expose themselves to new notions of law and justice.1 This situation suggests that there should be renewed dialogue between the two disciplines, but it also leads us to question what shape such a dialogue might take. What can they learn from each other?





SEMINARS: Seminari di Storia e Cultura giuridica, Università di Napoli Federico II

Università di Napoli Federico II, Dipartimento di Giurisprudenza

Seminari di Storia e Cultura giuridica 2019

Coordinamento scientifico: Cristina Vano

I Seminari di Storia e Cultura giuridica hanno la finalità di stimolare dialoghi interdisciplinari e di valorizzare la componente storica del discorso giuridico contemporaneo. 
Mostrando la varietà dei ruoli che l’esperienza storica assume in diversi ambiti disciplinari, e più in generale nella cultura giuridica odierna, vorremmo rendere più concreta, agli occhi degli studenti, la funzione formativa della storia del diritto di età medievale, moderna e contemporanea nel curriculum del giurista federiciano. Una funzione che non va intesa come meramente decorativa o genericamente “culturale”, e va invece collocata tra le componenti interne alla costituzione di un lessico tecnico consapevole per il giurista.
L’iniziativa aspira a mostrare, nel confronto con il passato, le potenzialità di trasformazione insite in ciascun ordine giuridico vigente.
L’edizione attuale conserva l’obbiettivo di coniugare internazionalizzazione, comparazione e interdisciplinarietà, in continuità con le analoghe esperienze degli anni scorsi, che hanno incontrato la partecipazione attiva degli studenti, e si sono giovate del contributo di numerosi studiosi apprezzati nella comunità scientifica internazionale.

BOOK: Concordanze lessicali italiane e francesi del Codice Napoleone

Concordanze lessicali italiane e francesi del Codice Napoleone

Nel gennaio 1806 il re d’Italia e imperatore dei Francesi, Napoleone Bonaparte, approvò la traduzione italiana del Codice civile francese, che nello stesso anno entrò in vigore nel Regno d’Italia. 
Il Codice civile napoleonico, noto come «Codice Napoleone», segnò in gran parte dell’Europa la nascita della codificazione moderna. Un solo testo di 2.281 articoli, stampabile anche in piccolo formato, conteneva il diritto civile, eliminando un sistema legislativo stratificato nei secoli. 
Le Concordanze del «Codice», frutto di molti anni di lavoro, offrono per la prima volta a giuristi, linguisti e storici un accurato strumento di studio sull’influenza che il testo del «Codice» ha avuto sulla lingua giuridica italiana. 
Il confronto diretto di ogni parola con l’originale francese facilita la conoscenza del «Codice», consente di approfondirne l’interpretazione, la tecnica di traduzione, le novità lessicali, l’innovativa tecnica linguistica che usa frasi brevi, definizioni, formule, esempi. 
La pubblicazione delle «Concordanze» è anche un’occasione per riaccostare il nome di Napoleone a quello dell’Accademia della Crusca, ristabilita in forma indipendente, nel 1811, proprio da Napoleone. 






Dissent, polemics and rivalry have always been at the center of intellectual development. The scholarly Streitkultur was given a fresh impetus by the newly founded universities in the High Middle Ages and later turned into a quintessential part of early modern intellectual life. It was not only mirrored in various wellknown intellectual debates and controversies – e.g. between Aristotelians and Augustinians, scholastics and humanists, Catholics and Protestants – but also embodied in numerous literary genres and nonliterary modes of expression – e.g. disputationes, invectives, consilia, images, carnivalesque parades, music, etc. – and discursive or political strategies – patronage, networks and alliances. Moreover, the harsh debates notwithstanding, consensus was also actively searched for, both within particular disciplines
and within society as a whole. The aforementioned genres and strategies are all modes of negotiating dissent, which raises several important questions regarding these intellectual ‘warriors’. What were the most important issues at stake and how were they debated? Did the debates in the public sphere reflect the private opinions of the scholars involved? What access do we have to those private opinions? Can we approach such controversies in terms of authenticity and truthfulness, or consistency and coherence? Is there a contrast between egodocuments and the published part of an author’s oeuvre?

Starting from these questions, the aim of this conference is to study the polemical strategies and the modes of rivalry and alliance in scholarly debate from the twelfth through the seventeenth centuries.

Topics of interest may include, but are not limited to:

  • the role of alliances and polemics in establishing intellectual networks;
  • the presentation of rivaling views and the depiction of adversaries;
  • the discrepancy or congruency between private and public persona;
  • hitherto neglected disputes or new perspectives on well-known controversies;
  • non-literary modes of negotiating dissent;
  • the relation and connections between various literary and non-literary genres, also across
    different semiotic modes (literature, visual arts, performative arts, …);
  • the role of socio-cultural and economic background in polemics;
  • the role of language (e.g.: vernacular vs. Latin);
  • similarities and differences across disciplines (philosophy, civil and canon law, theology,
    medicine…) with regard to polemization and the negotiation of dissent.


Please submit your proposal via email ( by April 15, 2019.


Glossae. European Journal of Legal History 15 (2018): Comparative Legal History

Glossae. European Journal of Legal History 15 (2018): Comparative Legal History 


Beyond particular traditions:
Comparative Legal History

The papers published under this general title are the proceedings of the conference held on 12 May 2017 at the Collège de France. They were included in the programme of the College’s
European Chair 2016-2017. The contributors represent a range of legal scholars and
historians who have all written on issues of comparative legal history. They come from
different European legal traditions and have all extensive personal experience in researching
legal systems different from that of their own legal education. Several have left their native
country and teach permanently in a different European country. Their research therefore
reflects, for periods from the Middle Ages until Modern Times, how a legal culture can
incorporate and transcend the particular interests which have affected legal developments in
The contributors had been asked to address the question at the heart of the European Chair’s
central theme: How to apprehend a European legal culture? Legal history presents models of
common laws which assume particular legal traditions. Comparative law requires, in order to
be able to proceed to any comparison, an interface between distinct legal systems.
Comparative legal history endeavours to trace back how the interaction between different
social groups, in different polities which may partly overlap, has contributed to legal
developments, to some extent through the construction of so-called authoritative ‘sources’ of
the law. At all levels of political governance, the legal instruments produced and used by that
governance always have their own particular features. However intricate that public
governance may be, its particular character is always exposed to actors from different
systems of governance, whether within its own domestic jurisdiction or in the course of its
foreign relations. Comparative legal history makes it possible to recognise, in a long-term
historical perspective, shared foundations of normativity which prove necessary in order to
ensure that the interactions may be worked out in peaceful order.
Several contributions published in this issue were presented in a different language at the
2017 conference. Those by Emanuele Conte, Yves Mausen, Mia Korpiola, Luisa Brunori,
Luigi Lacché, and John Bell were originally delivered in French; those by Anja AmendTraut, Wolfgang Ernst, and Aniceto Masferrer in English. The proceedings follow the same
order in which they were presented at the conference, by and large based on their
chronological references.
The co-editor who held the European Chair wishes to thank all the contributors for their
valuable cooperation, and in particular his two colleagues who assisted him in preparing the
publications of the conference’s proceedings (not without going through the peer review
process). The editorial work which resulted in the publication of these proceedings was a
collaborative venture undertaken by the three co-editors and co-authors of the present
foreword – a foreword inviting the readers of Glossae to find in these proceedings some
encouragement and food for thought for their own research in the field of comparative legal

Luisa Brunori Aniceto Masferrer Alain Wijffels

CALL FOR PAPERS: Court proceedings treasures

Court proceedings treasures
The archives of the Imperial Chamber Court of Wetzlar
(15th– 19th century)

Archéoforum de Liège (Belgium)
21 October 2019

Hundreds of linear metres of archives from Ancien Regime courts still need to be processed and explored. But the case files of the Imperial Chamber Court conserved at the State Archives in Liège are now sorted and ready to be used in research that started in the 1970s in Germany.
The Imperial Chamber Court has produced thousands of proceeding files, of which over 2,000
are conserved at the State Archives in Liège. Their historical and archival importance cannot be underlined enough. These proceedings are mainly characterised by their written nature. Research might be of particular interest about the supporting documents whose iconographical and aesthetical value commands admiration.
In 1495, the Holy Roman Empire Saint-Empire was given a new court of justice. The
Reichskammergericht became the supreme court for civil matters. At first it was an ambulatory
court, before establishing in the land of Hesse, more precisely in the city of Wetzlar. Since then, the city’s name is closely associated with the history of the Imperial Chamber Court and its archives.
While historical science has mainly been focussed on politics, diplomacy and military history in the course of the 19th and early 20th centuries, it now delves into social history and microhistory.
An interesting reflection is taking place about the relation between archives and (state) power,
between the archivist and his or her commitment. From a civil point of view, archives might form a sort of “total history”. But this bears the question: can these archives considered as “total archives”? There are, among others, still many gaps in the history of law in the early modern period, regarding access to justice, efficiency of the justice system, quality and corruption of the judiciary, and the role of women.
As a follow-up to colloquium “Case closed! Case files from the Ancien Regime and perspectives for historical research” held on 11 March 2013 in Brussels, and the related inventory and works, as well as the exposition about the case files from the Imperial Chamber Court concerning Liège, the State Archives in collaboration with the Gesellschaft für Reichskammergerichtsforschung organises a new colloquium on 21 October 2019.

Draft papers (maximum 500 words including bibliography and notes) can be submitted until
1 March 2019 



Call for papers: FEDER UND RECHT

Feder und Recht.
Schriftlichkeit und Gerichtswesen in der Vormoderne

17. Nachwuchstagung des Netzwerks Reichsgerichtsbarkeit
vom 19. bis 21. September 2019 in Mühlhausen

Einsendeschluss: 15.03.2019

 Seit Jahrzehnten arbeiten Rechtshistoriker, (Kultur-)Historiker und Archivare gleichermaßen intensiv mit schriftlich überlieferten Quellen der vormodernen Gerichte. Es scheint deutlich zu sein: Schriftlichkeit vor Gericht ist vor allem dokumentiert durch gerichtliche Akten, aber auch durch Protokoll- und Urteilsbücher. Nicht alle Verfahrensarten und Verfahrensstadien sind jedoch gleichermaßen durch Aktenüberlieferung verschriftlicht worden, obgleich komplexe Sachverhalte wohl nur im Rahmen eines überwiegend schriftlichen Verfahrens sachgerecht zu durchdringen sind.
Vor allem zu Beginn der Frühen Neuzeit traten vermehrt auch in der Niedergerichtsbarkeit Elemente der Schriftlichkeit im Rahmen des Verfahrens in den Vordergrund. Dabei ist das schriftliche Urteil, das im Zivilprozess den Parteien eröffnet oder zugestellt wurde, nur die Spitze des Eisbergs. Abgesehen davon, dass es dem Anspruch des Klägers schon deshalb größeres Gewicht verlieh, weil der Urteilsspruch die Gegenseite ohne weitere Zwischenschritte zur Rechtsbefolgung animieren konnte, wurde dem Kläger auf dieser Grundlage auch ein Titel zur Vollstreckung verliehen. Sofern es sich bei den Kontrahenten um Herrschaftsträger handelte, konnte das Urteil überdies auch im Rahmen späterer Auseinandersetzungen zum Nachweis von festgestellten Rechtspositionen dienen. Neben der Schriftlichkeit des Urteils ist die Schriftlichkeit des dem Urteil vorausgehenden Verfahrens augenfällig. Obwohl die Gerichte im Heiligen Römischen Reich in all ihrer Vielfalt zunehmend von einem überwiegend schriftlichen Gerichtsverfahren geprägt waren, fehlt dennoch bislang eine die Gerichtslandschaften übergreifende Untersuchung von Schriftlichkeit im Gerichtswesen.

CfP_Feder und Recht