Phillippe Cocatre-Zilgien economic integration of Europe and the increasing internationalization of education has led to changes in many old habits, even in France. Legal nationalism in France is rooted deep in the past. Since the Middle Ages, French legal thinking has been independent from— and barely respectful of - the two pan-European legal systems: canon law and Roman Law. This could be observed as clearly under the Ancien Regime as after the Revolution. Canon lawwas widely taught in France as early as the 13th century. In fact, in certain universities, especially in Paris, only canon lawwas taught. But canonical scholarship in France soon fell victimto the struggle between the papacy and the monarchv. By the 14th century, french canonists had begun distancing themselves, to the point of showing open hostility, from the universal canon law defined by pontifical decretals. In contrast, thev applied themselves to defending and elaborating the particular legal heritage of the “Gallican Church” (which the Gallicans considered to be the original common lawof the Ghurch). By the 17th and 18th centuries, French canonical scholarship (now completely forgotten) had arguably become cut off fromthe European canonical tradition. The French thus resolutely turned their backs on this first type of “pan-European” legal system. French resistance to Roman Lawhas been almost as long-standing and constant. It was at its peak at two different periods: the 13th centur}’ and the 16th century. In the 13th century, hostility to Roman law was fed by two preoccupations. The first was fear of the Germanic Roman Emperor, who occasionally fancied himself to be the successor to the imperial legislator of antiquity. The second was a desire to preserve the exclusive authority of the Capetian king over the legal system of his kingdom. This hostility had as one consequence that the teaching of Roman Law in French universities became subject to a number of restrictions. For example, at the request of Philipp Augustus, Innocent III issued a Papal Bull Super Specula (1219) forbidding the teaching of Roman Law at the faculty of Paris. This did not prevent Roman Law from being taught at other universities, nc^tably at Orléans (Papal Bull of Gregory IXof Januarv 17, 1235). But it was no longer taught at the premier university (the so-called “fille ainee des rois de France”) of the kingdom, in the city where the highest court of the kingdom, namely theparlernent, had its seat. Another consequence was that French legists asserted that Roman Lawwas not binding as such. The ordinance of Philippe The Fair (1285-1314) concerning the privileges of the University of Orléans (1306?) determined official doctrine for the following centuries. The kingdomwas nc'it to be ruled by the civil lawof the Romans, but by its own customs. Roman Lawcould not be invoked to support a legal decision, except imperio rationis, that is, for reasons of justice and logic. It ct^uld not be applied ratione imperii, that is, because of its source in an imperial authority held to be superior to that of the King of France. This attitude of Parisian legists faced no resistance in the northern part of the king248
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=