Abstract
Two developmental tendencies from the 16th to the 18th century are fundamentally apparent: first, the concept of interpretation became more restricted as interpretation came to consist only of determining the meaning of a law; of identifying the legislator’s intention. Interpretation no longer allowed the reasonable development of law through the application of the remoter “ratio” of a statute. Second, the means of interpretation were extended by including the history of the statute as a means of determining the legislator’s intention. Both factors are easily comprehensible when one considers the modification of the concept of law in the 17th century. Law was no longer perceived as necessarily a reasonable decree; rather, it was merely an expression of the legislator’s intention. During the 16th and early 17th centuries, interpretation depended on a reasonable result; during the late 17th and 18th centuries, it depended on the order of the legislator: not truth, but authority made the law.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See generally Vogenauer, Stefan: Die Auslegung von Gesetzen in England und auf dem Kontinent. Eine vergleichende Untersuchung der Rechtsprechung und ihrer historischen Grundlagen, Tübingen 2001, pp. 430 sqq., 669 sqq.; Schröder, Jan: Recht als Wissenschaft. Geschichte der juristischen Methode vom Humanismus bis zur historischen Schule (1500–1850), München 2001, pp. 48 sqq., 130 sqq.; idem (ed.): Theorie der Interpretation vom Humanismus bis zur Romantik – Rechtswissenschaft, Philosophie, Theologie, Stuttgart 2001 (papers on legal interpretation by Maximiliane Kriechbaum, p. 47 sqq., Klaus Luig, p. 133 sqq., Gerhard Otte, p. 191 sqq., Joachim Hruschka, p. 203 sqq., Joachim Rückert, p. 287 sqq.).
- 2.
See e.g. Hotomanus, Franciscus: Iurisconsultus, sive de optimo genere iuris interpretandi, Basel 1559 (grammatical, dialectical and juridical interpretation, dialectical interpretation concerns the scientifical order, p. 63 sqq.); Forster, Valentin Wilhelm: Interpres, sive de interpretatione juris libri duo, Wittenberg 1613, ed. Otto, Everardus: Thesaurus iuris Romani, II, Leiden 1726, col. 945–1068, lib. 1, cap. 1, nr. 5, col. 956 (Breviter, dicimus interpretationem juris, eorum quae in jure continentur, rectam & artificiosam explanationem aut explicationem, & expositionem); Placcius, Vincentius: De jurisconsulto perfecto, sive interpretatione legum in genere, Stockholm and Hamburg 1693, pp. 53, 186 sqq.
- 3.
The broader concept is preferred by Rogerius, Constantius: Singul.(aris?) tractatus de iuris interpretatione, Lugduni et Taurini 1550, pp. 33–35, especially nr. 4–6; Caepolla, Bartholomaeus: De interpretatione legis extensiva, Venice 1557, fol. 8v, nr. 17; Alciatus, Andreas: De verborum significatione libri quatuor, Lyon 1530, col. 1, 48. The narrower concept is preferred by Phedericis, Stephanus de: De interpretatione iuris commentarii IV, Lyon 1536, Praefatio, p. 8 sq.; Everardus a Middelburg, Nicolaus: Loci argumentorum legales, Lyon 1579, loc. 79, nr. 4, p. 437; Forster, V. W. (n. 1), lib. 2, cap. 4, nr. 1; Suarez, Franciscus: Tractatus de legibus ac deo legislatore (1612) = Opera omnia, ed. Berton, C., VI, Paris 1856, lib. 6, cap. 2, nr. 1, p. 8.
- 4.
Forster, V. W. (n. 2), lib. 2, cap. 2, § 1, nr. 21, col. 1012 (extension “propter similitudinem et paritatem rationis. Nam si ratio est eadem, tunc non est tam extensio quam comprehensio”), see also § 3, nr. 11, col. 1023. Cf. also Rogerius, C. (n. 3), p. 92; Caepolla, B. (n. 3), fol. 17v, nr. 124; Phedericis, S. de (n. 3), p. 15; Lagus, Conrad: Iuris utriusque methodica traditio…, Frankfurt 1543, fol. 12v.
- 5.
See generally Ziegler, K.-H.: Laesio enormis, Handwörterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte, ed. Erler, A. and Kaufmann, E., vol. 2, 1978, col. 1350 sq.; Schulze, Wolfgang Georg: Die laesio enormis in der deutschen Privatrechtsgeschichte, Diss. iur. Münster 1973; Luig, Klaus: Vertragsfreiheit und Äquivalenzprinzip im gemeinen Recht und im BGB, Aspekte europäischer Rechtsgeschichte. Festgabe für Helmut Coing zum 70.Geburtstag, ed. Bergfeld, C. et al., Frankfurt am Main 1982, p. 171 sqq.; Becker, Christoph: Die Lehre von der laesio enormis in der Sicht der heutigen Wucherproblematik, Köln etc. 1993.
- 6.
For example, in the 16th century Everardus a Middelburg, N. (n. 3). loc. 79, nr. 77 sq., p. 480 sq.
- 7.
Thomasius, Christian: Ausübung der Vernunft-Lehre, Halle 1691, 3. Hauptstück, nr. 25, p. 163 sq.
- 8.
Thomasius, C. (n. 7), 3. Hauptstück, nr. 34, p. 166.
- 9.
Pufendorf, Samuel: De iure naturae et gentium libri VIII (1672), Gesammelte Werke, IV, ed. Böhling, Frank, Berlin 1998, lib. 5, cap. 12, § 1, p. 524.
- 10.
Thibaut, Anton Friedrich Justus: Theorie der logischen Auslegung des römischen Rechts, 2nd ed., Altona 1806, p. 11. See also the quotations in Schröder, J. (n. 1), pp. 138, 143.
- 11.
Pufendorf, S. (n. 9), lib. 5, cap. 12, § 17, p. 535. “Neque sufficit extendendae v. g. legi alicui, si in aliquem casum quadret ratio, similis illi, quae in ista lege est; sed oportet, ut ratio sit eadem”. See also Thomasius, Christian: Institutionum jurisprudentiae divinae libri III (1688), 7th ed., Halle 1730, lib. 2, cap. 12, nr. 89, p. 238; Glück, Christian Friedrich: Vollständige Erläuterung der Pandekten nach Hellfeld. Ein Commentar, 1. Theil, 2nd ed., Erlangen 1797, § 36, p. 259 sq.
- 12.
Thibaut, A. F. J. (n. 10), p. 71. Also see the quotations in Schröder, J. (n. 1), pp. 139, 155.
- 13.
Thomasius, Christian: De aequitate cerebrina: l. 2 c. de rescind. vendit. et ejus usu practico (1706), Halle 1713; Holderrieder, Johannes Laurentius: Dissertatio iuridica inauguralis De principiis interpretationis legum adaequatis, Leipzig 1736, S. 49.
- 14.
Cf. Piano Mortari, Vincenzo: Ricerche sulla teoria dell’ interpretazione del diritto nel secolo XVI. I: Le premesse, Milano 1956, pp. 63 sqq., 100 sqq.; Maclean, Ian: Interpretation and meaning in the Renaissance. The case of law, p. 142 sqq.; Raisch, Peter: Juristische Methoden. Vom antiken Rom bis zur Gegenwart, Heidelberg 1995, S. 26 f.; Schröder, J.: Recht als Wissenschaft (n. 1), p. 59 sq.
- 15.
Everardus a Middelburg, N. (n. 3), loc. 79, nr. 18/19, p. 445 (“ratio enim legis et mens legis idem esse videntur”). See also Rogerius, C. (n. 3), S. 17, nr. 17 (“ratio legis nihil aliud est, quam mens legis”); Caepolla, B. (n. 3), fol. 17v, nr. 126/127 (“mens legis nihil aliud est, quam anima legis… quia mens et ratio legis ab ipsa non differt”), fol. 18v, nr. 135 (“mens legis colligitur ex ratione legis”); Zasius, Ulrich: In Digestum vetus, zu D. 1, 3, 17 nr. 18, Sp. 377, Opera omnia I, Lyon 1550, p. 191: the “mens” will be concluded from the “ratio”; Donellus, Hugo: Commentarii de iure civili (1589), 6th ed., I, Nürnberg 1801, lib. 1, cap. 13, § 9, p. 89 (“ratio nihil est, nisi voluntas legis”); Forster, V. W. (n. 2), lib. 2, cap. 2, nr. 2, Sp. 1006 (“ratio seu mens legis”).
- 16.
Derrer, Sebastian: Jurisprudentiae liber primus, instar disciplinae institutus et axiomatibus magna ex parte conscriptus…, Lyon 1540, lib. 1, tit. 7, nr. 19/20. See also Piano Mortari, V. (n. 14), p. 32; Schröder, J. (n. 1), p. 60.
- 17.
See the partly different catalogues of means at Donellus, H. (n. 15), lib. 1, cap. 13, § 6, p. 88, cap. 15, §§ 6–9, pp. 122–126; Forster, V. W. (n. 2), lib. 2, cap. 3, nr. 7, 19, col. 1029, 1032, lib. 2, cap. 4, nr. 19–22, col. 1039 (cf. also lib. 1, cap. 2, nr. 36–41, col. 967); Grotius, Hugo: De iure belli ac pacis libri III (1625), ed. de Kanter-van Hettinga Tromp, B. J. A., Leiden 1939, new edition with annotations by R. Feenstra et al., Aalen 1993, lib. 2, cap. 16, §§ 5–8, p. 410 sq.
- 18.
Phedericis, S. de (n. 3), p. 16 sq.; Forster, V. W. (n. 2), lib. 2, cap. 2, § 1, nr. 1–17, col. 1009 sqq.
- 19.
Caepolla, B. (n. 3), fol. 44r, nr. 141; Phedericis, S. de (n. 3), S. 163, 174; Alciatus, A. (n. 3), col. 59; Forster, V. W. (n. 2), lib. 2, cap. 2, § 3, nr. 6, col. 1021 f.; Donellus, H. (n. 15), lib. 1, cap. 14, § 9, p. 115 sq. See also Schröder, J. (n. 1), p. 70 sq.
- 20.
Kantorowicz, Hermann: Albertus Gandinus und das Strafrecht der Scholastik, vol. 2, Berlin and Leipzig 1926 (= critical edition of Gandinus’ “Tractatus de maleficiis”), p. 374 sq. See also Vogenauer, S. (n. 1), Teil 1, 4. Kap., p. 561 sq.
- 21.
Baldus: Commentaria in primam Digesti veteris partem, Lyon 1585, at D. 1, 3, 39, fol 28v; Dinus (quoted by Bartolus, at D. 32, 1, 78, 4); Phedericis, S. de (n. 3), S. 174; Caepolla, B. (n. 3), fol. 44r, nr. 141. The opposite opinion is held by Bartolus and Alciatus, A. (n. 3), col. 60.
- 22.
Phedericis, S. (n. 21): “Nam quoniam eae leges non vi rationis, sed voluntate tantum superioris nos obligant, non videntur offendi, nisi in eo in quo verbis expressae sunt”, Caepolla, B. (n. 21).
- 23.
Pufendorf, S. (n. 9), lib. 5, cap. 12, § 10, p. 531.
- 24.
Pufendorf, S. (n. 23); Thomasius, C.: Jurisprudentia divina (n. 11), lib. 2, cap. 12, nr. 69, p. 235; Eckhard, Christian Heinrich: Hermeneutica iuris (1750), new edition by Walch, Karl Wilhelm, Leipzig 1802, lib. 1, cap. 1, § 33, p. 28; Thibaut, A. F. J. (n. 10), p. 12 (“Gründe, worauf seine Vorschrift beruht”).
- 25.
Pufendorf, S. (n. 23): there is only required the legislator’s will; Holderrieder, J. L. (n. 13), p. 40.
- 26.
Cf. Schröder, Jan: Zur Geschichte der historischen Gesetzesauslegung, Der praktische Nutzen der Rechtsgeschichte. Hans Hattenhauer zum 8. September 2001, ed. Eckert, Jörn, Heidelberg 2003, p. 481–495 (also in Schröder, Jan: Rechtswissenschaft in der Neuzeit, Tübingen 2010, pp. 143–158).
- 27.
Hotomanus, F. (n. 2), p. 61 sq. (grammatical interpretation); Hopper, Joachim: Seduardus seu De Vera Juris prudentia (1590), in: Hermann Conring: Opera, ed. Goebel, Johann Wilhelm, VI, Braunschweig 1730, Reprint Aalen 1973, p. 37 sqq., lib. 4, tit. 16, p. 45 (historical interpretation); Forster, V. W. (n. 2), lib. 1, cap. 5: “De Historica Interpretandi ratione” (col. 975–984).
- 28.
Von Felde, Johannes: Scientia interpretandi, Helmstedt 1689, p. 1062, examples pp. 1063–1065; Placcius, V. (n. 2), p. 105 sq. (several kinds of causae of a statute, which can only be explored historically); Thomasius, C.: Jurispr. Divina (n. 11), lib. 2, cap. 12, nr. 83, 84, p. 237 (the “ratio” of contracts has to be investigated ex lectione diligent historiarum), Thomasius, C.: Ausübung (n. 7), 3. Hauptstück, nr. 85, p. 195 sq. (politics and other means).
- 29.
Holderrieder, J. L. (n. 13), § 13, p. 33 (history is one of five means of interpretation); Eckhard, C. H. (n. 24), lib. 1, cap. 1, § 35, p. 30 (the “ratio legis” can be found out by history); Glück, C. F. (Fn. 11), 1.Buch. 1. Titel, § 29, p. 206 sq., § 36, p. 246 sq. (history is necessary to find out the will of the legislator and the ratio legis). But see also the critical remarks by Thibaut, A. F. J. (n. 10), p. 29 sq.
- 30.
Thomasius, C.: Ausübung (n. 7), 3. Hauptstück, nr. 123, p. 213 sq.
- 31.
Pufendorf, S. (n. 9), lib. 5, cap. 12, § 17, annotation (a) ed. Hert, J. N., Frankfurt am Main 1716, S. 770. See also Holderrieder, J. L. (n. 13), p. 41; Ritter, Carl August: Regulae interpretationis juridicae praestantiores, Leipzig 1740, p. 6.
- 32.
von Kreittmayr, Wigulaeus Aloys Xaver: Anmerkungen über den Codicem Maximilianeum Bavaricum civilem (1758 sqq.), new ed. 1821, 1.Theil, 1. Kap., § 10, p. 17.
- 33.
A historical survey is given by Schröder, Jan: Zur Entwicklung des Rechtsbegriffs in der Neuzeit, Gedächtnisschrift für Jörn Eckert, ed. Hoyer, Andreas et al., Baden-Baden 2008, pp. 835–845.
- 34.
Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologiae, II 1, quaest. 90, art. 4 ad 1.
- 35.
Connanus, Franciscus: Commentariorum iuris civilis libri X, Basel 1562, lib. 1, cap. 8, nr. 7, p. 44; Wesenbeck, Matthaeus: In Pandectas iuris civilis et Codicis Iustiniani lib. IIX commentarii, Basel 1582, lib. 1, tit. 3, nr. 2 (“honestum legitimate potestatis decretum”); Donellus, H. (n. 15), lib. 1, cap. 5, §§ 1, 2, p. 25 (“constitutio omnis iubens in publicum, permittensve, quae recta sunt, prohibens que contraria”), idem, lib. 1, cap. 5, § 6, p. 28: “recta sunt, quae honesta et aequa per sese, aut quae omnibus vel pluribus in eadem civitate utilia”.
- 36.
Zasius, Ulrich: In titulos aliquot Digesti veteris commentaria, ad D. 1,1,1, § “Huius studii”, nr. 41, Opera omnia (n. 15) I, p. 128.
- 37.
Bodin, Jean: Les six livres de la république, Paris 1583, I, 8, p. 131.
- 38.
Montaigne, Michel de: Essais, livre 3, chap. 13 (1588), German edition by Lüthy, Herbert, Zürich 1953, p. 851.
- 39.
Hobbes, Thomas: De cive (1642), cap. 6, nr. 9: “Leges civiles… nihil aliud sunt, quam ejus, qui in civitate summa potestate praeditus est, de civium futuris actionibus mandata (= idem; Opera philosophica quae latine scripsit omnia, ed. Molesworth, William [1839–1845], vol. 2, p. 222; idem: Leviathan (1651) (= idem, Opera…, vol. 3, cap. 26, p. 202, “autoritas, non veritas, facit legem”).
- 40.
Pufendorf, Samuel: De officio hominis et civis juxta legem naturalem libri duo (1673), lib. 2, cap. 12, § 1 = Gesammelte Werke, vol. 2, ed. Hartung, Gerald, Berlin 1997, p. 80 (“decreta summi imperantis civilis”).
- 41.
Pufendorf, S. (n. 9), lib. 2, cap. 3, § 24, p. 163 (“ex nudo legislatoris arbitrio”).
- 42.
Kant, Immanuel: Die Metaphysik der Sitten, 1. Theil: Metaphysische Anfänge der Rechtslehre, 2nd ed., Königsberg 1798, p. 44 (B 1).
- 43.
For example, Wolff, Christian: Institutiones juris naturae et gentium, Halle 1750, § 1068, p. 664, cf. also § 39; Böhmer, Justus Henning: Introductio in ius Digestorum (1704), I, 9th ed., Halle 1756, lib. 1, tit. 1, § 14, p. 10. Further quotations in Schröder, J. (n. 1), p. 98.
- 44.
Thibaut, Anton Friedrich Justus: Über den Einfluß der Philosophie auf die Auslegung der positiven Gesetze, idem: Versuche über einzelne Theile der Theorie des Rechts (1798), 2nd ed., Jena 1817, p. 173. See Schröder, J. (n. 1), pp. 148–150.
- 45.
Rümelin, Gustav: Werturteile und Willensentscheidungen im Civilrecht, Freiburg im Breisgau 1891, p. 6. Summarizing Schröder, Jan: Zur Theorie der Gesetzesinterpretation am Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts (forthcoming).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schröder, J. (2011). The Concept and Means of Legal Interpretation in the 18th Century. In: Morigiwa, Y., Stolleis, M., Halperin, JL. (eds) Interpretation of Law in the Age of Enlightenment. Law and Philosophy Library, vol 95. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1506-6_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1506-6_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1505-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1506-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)