body. But this follows remarkably similar cases where an actio iu facturn is gi\ en. V \\ hat about lustinian's sources of law and their authority? I he onl\’ source of law was to be imperial legislation. Justinian is adamant that e\ en the opinions of jurists set out in the Digest are law only because he has adopted them. Part of (.'. 1.14.12.c (.\.d. •^29) runs: "d'he emperor alone will properly be judged the interpreter of the law just as he is the founder, d'his law derogates in no way from the interpreters of the old law because the imperial majesty permitted this to them also." ' But for a ruler to claim he is the sole fount of law has nothing particular abtnit it. VI Fundamental for the future was the histitutcs. Fhe Institutes was a brilliant conception; at the same time statute law [Imperatoriaw maiestatem § 4) and elementärt' te.xtbook for first-year students. It was to hat e a magnificent future. \et in some ways it is a most peculiar work which illuminates nothing of the spirit of the era.'- .\s I hat e already said it was modeled on elementary books of the classical jurists, abot e all on the Institutes of Ciaius. But why should it hat e been, and at that so rigidly? It is not difficult to understand that in using the w ritings of the classical jurists to huild up the balance of the interest (d the jurists was retai21 Cf. C. 1.14.12 22 See nowWatson, Out of Context, pp. 22ff. 54
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=