In 1934 Hägerström wrote an article for the memorial publication celebrating the 200th anniversary of the promulgation of the Statute Book of Sweden (Sveriges Rikes lag).The main object of the study was to shed light upon the genesis of the Swedish18th Century legal scholar David Nehrman-Ehrenstråle’s theory of legal rights and duties, and Hägerström took this opportunity to elaborate upon a few of the ideas that he had earlier presented.61 As anyone acquainted with the works of Hägerström knows, a distinctive trait is the historical perspective that he applies to his investigations, wherein he describes and explains the development of different concepts with reference to historically occurring ideas. “Nehrman-Ehrenstråles uppfattning av grunden för ett löftes juridiskt bindande kraft, belyst genom å ena sidan romersk, å andra sidan naturrättslig rättsåskådning” (Recht, Pflicht und bindende Kraft desVertrages: nach Römischer und Naturrechtlicher Anschauung, 1965) is no exception. Here, he analyzes the Roman law of obligations as well as the Roman law of things (hereinafter Roman private law) in order to explain the differences between the concept of legal rights and duties according, on the one hand, to classical Roman law and jurisprudence, and on the p a r t v i 396 Case Study: The Promise - Its Binding Power according to, on the one hand, Roman Law and, on the other, Natural Law chap te r 2 61 In “Nehrman-Ehrenstråles uppfattning” (pp. 571-572, Recht, Pflicht etc, p. 10) Hägerström refers to Obligationsbegriff I and II (published posthumously 1941).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=