enment” and seen it as belonging to the same legal ideological tradition as the French Code Civil of 1804.37 Claes Peterson, on the other hand, claims that the Swedish code continued a well-established European legal thinking. In particular, Peterson points out, the statements made by the preparatory commission regarding the qualities of an “Ideal Law” continued a tradition traceable far back in time. Society and law were regarded from the viewpoint of a theological-normative programme, with the aim of coming as close as possible to the divine order.38 A similar opinion is expressed by Kjell Åke Modéer, who has written that the Code of 1734 was not a forward-looking or remodelling legislation but contained those rules that in different ways had been accepted by statutes and court decisions.39 Rolf Nygren has emphasised the significance of the reception and that the code can be seen as the consequence of a “second surge” of Roman law influences which trickled down from the practice of the courts of appeal.Thus, every paragraph of the code’s Book of Commerce (Sw. Handelsbalken) could be regarded as a codification of this case law.The opposite contemporary movement, which emphasised the specific Swedish traits, was of less legal significance. Furthermore, the documents of the law commission, which was appointed in 1686 and prepared the code, show a similar strong influence from abroad.40 Konrad Zweigert and Hein Kötz assert that even if the Swedish Code of 1734was produced in a period of massive influence from the European continent, particularly through the appellate courts, it shows few signs of influence from Roman law.They use this conclusion as one of several points of departure for treating the c o n t i n u i t y a n d c o n t r ac t 35 37 Klami 1981, p. 11. 38 Peterson, C1985, pp. 273-299. See also Lindberg, B H1992. 39 Modéer 1997, pp. 106-112. See alsoWagner 1986, p. 30. 40 Nygren 1998, pp. 103-109.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=