Summary 22>7 Chapter 4. Ancient usage according to law and legal doctrine In the seventeenth century, the Roman concept oipossessio became increasingly important m Swedish legal practice. This was not the case in the medieval legal codes, even though a seventeenth-century lawyer like Claes Ralamb was at pains to show that this concept, and the procedural and economic advantages it entailed, were indeed part and parcel of good, well-established Swedish law. The advantages in question were: • a possessor did not have the burden of proof {onusprobationis) in the event of his landholding being questioned; • a possessor had a right to the produce fromhis land; • a possessor was also presumed to be the rightful owner; • a possessor was generally believed to be more trustworthy than somebody with no land. Thus, from the moment a person became possessed of land, he acquired a strong legal position. Lawyers adhered to the principles outlined above. At the same time, they seemto have been aware of the dangers entailed by such rules and endeavoured not tt^ accord the advantages described to anyc'me who was not a rightful possessor. Consequently, the problemof distinguishing rightful from non-rightful possession was of paramount importance. Nevertheless, ancient usage seems to have been associated with the general benefits connected withpossessio. Translated into Latin, the Swedish concept of urminnes hävd was referred to as either possessio immemorialis or praescriptio immemorialis. It was also argued (in seventeenth-century academic dissertations) that it was a highly useful institution in society, putting an end to any disputes and providing an incentive to work and care for land. Ancient usage was also described as a privilege. It was argued that holding land on the grounds of ancient usage did not harm the rights of others, because if anyone else had once had a claimon the land in question that right had ceased to exist because of long silence and tacit consent. The overall picture is that ancient usage was seen as a highly valuable institution. There are, however, rare indications of a more sceptical view. Georg Stiernhielm (a lawyer, but also one of Swe-
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=