Legal humanists
The mos gallicus (Latin: the Gaulish / French custom / habit ) is a specific way, as learned jurists in the early modern period dealt with the texts of traditional law books Corpus Juris Civilis Corpus Juris Canonici and. The mos gallicus was also called humanist jurisprudence; as the founder of this alignment are Guillaume Budé (1468-1540), Andreas Alciatus (1492-1550) and for Germany Ulrich Zasius ( 1461-1535 ). Other representatives of the mos gallicus are Jacques Cujas (1522-1590), Donellus (1527-1591), Dionysius Gothofredus (1549-1622) and Iacobus Gothofredus ( 1587-1652 ).
Humanistic influences
In the Middle Ages it was interested in timeless truths. In the early modern period began to take an interest again for old times, especially for the Greco-Roman antiquity. Humanists therefore operated more accurate speech testing than had been the case in the Middle Ages. In particular, we now sought to ensure proper use of the Latin language, and learned and we again used the Greek language. Many humanists were also Protestants, because both views were due to similar logical conclusions. This made the spread of the mos gallicus, as Protestants were suppressed in many parts of Europe.
Criticism of the mos italicus
In the Middle Ages and the beginning of the early modern period the right according to the custom of the Italians ( mos italicus ) was taught at the universities in the medieval tradition.
Lawyers who were members of the newly formed scientific direction of humanism, now discovered that the learned at the universities of Corpus Juris Civilis had hitherto been sufficiently addressed by the representatives of the mos italicus linguistically part. In addition, it was discovered that the common in the former law legal texts do not match the original ancient legal texts. The common law texts originated in parts of flawed copies of ancient originals ( Littera Florentina ). With the correct translation of the ancient original, some legal points denominated otherwise than in the usual versions.
The humanist jurists realized by their linguistic training that the legal texts of the Corpus Juris Civilis are not uniform and that they were created at different times ( there are several centuries between the dates of origin of the oldest and the youngest legal texts ). In such a long time, also had the right to develop. Even Emperor Justinian I had had to revise some of the legal texts in the creation of the Corpus Iuris Civilis. The revisions (so-called " interpolations " ) were sometimes not entirely successful. In addition, we had other antique, original writings found which could come to light compared the changes. In short: You could by the jurists of the mos italicus stated hypothesis does not maintain that the Corpus Juris Civilis a ahistorical, free of contradictions contained law.
Finally, it was recognized that the views of the jurists of the mos italicus was very focused on the legal practice. To bring the Corpus Juris Civilis with the applied law in practice match, you had deviated from some rules of the Corpus Juris. Also this law deviations criticized the humanist jurists.
Mos gallicus
Based on this review the submissions made primarily French legal scholar, began to work on the law of the Corpus Iuris Civilis different. They tried to take into account the most mos italicus criticism here. In particular, it sought the restoration of the ancient original text. They tried to find the revisions by the legislation of Justinian Commission. Also wanted to ancient Roman law again grasp of itself, regardless of its legal practicality.
All of these goals of humanistic lawyers they put in contrast to the scientific representatives of the mos italicus. Since the mos italicus was also further taught in the universities, so created two different scientific lines such as the Corpus Iuris Civilis could be studied scientifically. The mos gallicus was mainly in France leader (where it was created ), the mos italicus, mainly in Italy but also in Germany.
Since the mos gallicus especially was scientifically interested in the circumstances of the historic Roman law, its effect remained mostly confined to the universities, in legal practice invaded the humanistic findings to sparse; there continued to dominate the mos italicus.
Recent research shows, for example, for the Imperial Court of Justice a different picture. There was a judge at the Imperial Court of Justice, who argued entirely on the basis of the mos italicus and worked, for example, the judge Mathias Alber ( RKG: 1532-1533 ). Other judges, as Viglius van Aytta ( RKG: 1535-1537 ), however, note the mos gallicus.