part iv • intellectual legal history • søren koch ing legislation from late mediaeval times and texts on universally applicable, rational, natural law, were collected, translated, and reissued in new formats. These compilations established the framework that enabled writers to compare local positive law with Roman and natural law, and to systemize, reform, and amend national law.29 When analysing the function and impact of legal compilation, it helps to define the aims of such a survey. The first is to chart the compilers’ methodological strategies and their intentions, which will reveal the extent to which they explicitly indicated or obscured the distinctions between compilation and original authorship. This, in turn can enhance our understanding of these concepts in the legal literature and their impact on the text’s perceived authority. The second is to consider the function of compilation in an era when new technologies for dissemination of texts became available, and thus enhance our understanding of the impact printing had on law. The third is to examine how readers used compilations, and the difference in their treatment and reputation relative to other types of legal writings. It will be interesting to analyse how this relationship has changed over time. The fourth and most important is to explore the relationship between compilation and the creation of legal authority.30 All these questions can be addressed to different types of legal compilations. We can distinguish between three basic types of legal compilation: compilation as a technique or method of producing and disseminating legal scholarly texts and the products of this endeavour; compilation as a legislative technique; and the compiling of case notes in edited collections. Of the three, the last is of more limited importance for Danish–Norwegian legal culture, as will be seen. This is not the place for a claims to see the direct impact of imperial law (Constitutio Criminalis Carolina); however, note that Hemmingsen’s impact both on legal scholars and the applicable law was very limited. 29 See, for example, Holberg 1716; Clitau 1736; Reuss 1740. Højer’s and Kofod Ancher’s præcognita juris (a guide for law students) were heavily influenced by German. However, all agreed to reject the direct application of Roman law in Denmark and Norway. Still, they maintained that studying Roman law was recommended for law students to learn how to systematize the law. 30 Jansen 2010, 90–2. 206
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=