ot a concept of V^w/Rccht/ Jrott were what caught nu' attention as such linguistic constructions more often than not bespoke a national lawt'er culture rather than anv particular common legal theort- to he shared hv legal historians across borders. 1 e\ en began to question to what degree legal historians ha\e a coherent legal theorw .\nd if they do not, ought the\’ to." Such questions prompted this stud\': what, if anv, legal theor)- do legal histcmians hax e.- What legal theorv ought thev to ha\ e." And how ought a legal theorA’ figure in constructing a past.- 1 conduct the .stud\ within certain limits. \\y focus is on how hi.stor\’ is written in books that ha\ e aspiring lawyers as the intended audience in Ihigland, Cierman\ and France - course literature, in other words. Criteria of selection 1 ha\ e none apart from recommendations from professors, often indigenous, as to a fairh wellwritten and representative work fromeach of the countries. For now, these works are j. IF Baker, A;/ Introduction to [-'.nglish legul history', .\dolf Laufs, Rirbtscnni'icklungcn in Deutschland' and Jean-Fouis (iazzaniga, Introduction historiquc an droit dcs obligations^ Before I mo\e on to the actual texts, 1 wish to address the more fundamental issue of what 1 ought to mean bv a historx’. 1 shall not commit much space to this question here but a few remarks are in place in order to orientate the reader as to mv language and approach. Reading books in the field of legal histor\’, 1 am often struck bv how most perceit e their work as a more or le.s.s successful effort of retelling r/^epast zcic cs cigcntlichge-c'csen, as it really was.‘ Fhe underK ing comiction seems to be that the historian uses her skills to as objectixeK' as possible retell the past bv means of axailable sources and acceptable techniques of source criticism. The historian is on a search for the essence of a past, as were there one. 18
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=