The Future of Legal History

Being faced with the task of writing an essay on the future of one’s own subject is both a tremendous opportunity and an outrageous risk: an opportunity, because one has to render an account of the current state of research as well as its capacities for future development. One might even be able to caution the community about possible aberrations or meanders. However, this creative power has to be weighed against the risk that one’s obviously subjective assessments might be rejected. This danger is particularly great if one strives to present a finely nuanced and sophisticated view, as one always runs the risk of getting caught between two stools. Nevertheless, scientific progress hinges on dissent and on a passionate, insatiable thirst for knowledge. The following brief considerations should hence serve as a thought-provoking impulse as well as a subjective snapshot of the inner workings of the discipline of ‘Roman law’, which generally considers itself as a sub-discipline of legal history, at least in the context of university structures. Any suggestions that might help stop gaps, mend errors, or even provide alternatives to the observations given here, are therefore warmly welcome.

Context (archaeology) · Dissent · Impulse (physics) · Law and economics · Legal history · Political science · Snapshot (computer storage) · Sociology · Computer Science · Conflict of Laws and Jurisdiction · History · Law · Law, logistics, and international trade · Legal principles and applications

• De-canonising Theory, Junūn-ising Canon

  Divya Dwivedi•Parallax•2024

  Add to list