Roman law as an instrument for promoting equality in the Napoleonic Code

(1)

Jakub J. Szczerbowski

Roman law as an instrument for

promoting equality in the Napoleonic

Code

Studia Prawnoustrojowe nr 25, 43-50

2014

(2)

2014

Jakub J. Szczerbow ski

S zkoła W yższa Psychologii Społecznej w W arszaw ie

Roman law as an instrum ent for prom oting

equality in the N apoleonic Code

In tr o d u c tio n

T he R om an law is o ften tim es co n sid ered a s a p ro to ty p ical leg al sy stem w h e n it com es to c o n sid erin g inequality. T he m o st p ro m in e n t ex am p le of in e q u a lity in R o m an law is th e in s titu tio n a liz a tio n o f slavery. A n o th e r often- ra is e d ex a m p le o f a n in s titu tio n , w hich pro m o tes in eq u ality , is th e pow er of h u s b a n d over wife. T his s te re o ty p e h a s to be p u t, how ever, in a h isto ric a l a n d social con text. R o m an law becom es a n in te re s tin g case b ecau se it did n o t in te rfe re w ith m a n y o f th e social in s titu tio n s ; it m e re ly re g u la te d in frin g e m e n ts of social ord er; in o th e r w ords, m a n y of th e legal ru le s w ere m irro r im ag es of th e social in s titu tio n s . T he q u e stio n I w a n t to pose in th is a rtic le is w h e th e r th e ru le s of R o m an s u b s ta n tiv e law, a n d th e R o m an sty le of la w m a k in g w as a force, w h ich p ro m o ted e q u a lity in th e N apoleonic Code a n d o th e r codes, w h ich w ere clea rly in flu en c ed by it. E q u a lity h e re is m e a n t in b o th form al a n d econom ic sense. E q u a lity is a concept, w h ich is u s u a lly th o u g h t of as a s ta te of a ffairs in a g iven p o in t in tim e. In h is to ric a l re s e a rc h it is m ore u sefu l to th in k of e q u a lity n o t only as a s ta te of affairs, b u t also as a process of becom ing m ore e g a lita r ia n th ro u g h leg al a n d social change. C learly Ro m a n law did n o t g u a ra n te e e q u a lity in a m o d e rn sen se, b u t th is is n o t a n in te re s tin g q u estio n . R om an law h a s to be v iew ed as a n e le m e n t of a n a n c ie n t w orld. A v ery in te re s tin g e lem e n t, a s it c o n tin u e d evolving in la te r c e n tu rie s, beyond th e existence of th e s ta te , w h ich c re a te d it.

T h is p a p e r is c o n c e n tra tin g on th e , so-called, p illa rs of th e N apoleonic C ode1, i.e. concept of p roperty, freedom of c o n tra ct, a n d th e g e n e ra l c lau se of

1 J. Gordley, M yths o f the French C ivil Code, “American Journal of Comparative Law” 1994, no. 42, p. 459.

(3)

44 J a k u b J. Szczerbow ski

lia b ility in delict. I t is th e re fo re u se fu l to an a ly z e th e o rig in a lity o f th ose concepts, a n d th e a m o u n t of in flu en ce R o m an law h a d in th e ir creatio n . By th is in d ire c t m e a n s it is possible to a sse ss w h e th e r th e R o m an law w as p ro m o tin g equality. T he te x t does n o t an a ly z e th e in s titu tio n of m a rria g e , or th e o th e r a sp e cts of fam ily law. L aw of p ro perty, law o f c o n tra c t a n d th e law o f delict a re also in te re s tin g for th e q u e stio n s th e y a n sw e r are sim ple, y e t th e a n sw e rs a re com plex. J u s t like in m a th e m a tic s th e m o st b e a u tifu l p ro b lem s a re sim p ly s ta te d b u t difficult to solve. F am o u s F e rm a t’s L a s t T h e orem could be w ritte n in one lin e 2, b u t p ro o f of it elu d ed m a th e m a tic ia n s for ce n tu rie s. L ikew ise, p roperty, c o n tra c t a n d to r t a s k s im ila rly sim ple q u estio n s b u t th e a n sw e rs elu d e law y e rs for m ille n n ia . P ro p e rty law is th e re to an sw e r: W h a t re so u rces sh o u ld be p riv a te a n d w h a t re so u rces sh o u ld be public? W h a t a re th e lim its o f exclusive a n d p ublic u se of re so u rces? C on tr a c t law striv e s to a n sw e r q u e stio n s su ch as: W h a t p ro m ises b e tw e e n in d iv i d u a ls deserve e n fo rce m e n t by th e s ta te ? L aw of d elict is co ncerned w ith th e q u estio n : H ow to m in im ize th e social cost of ac cid en ts a n d in te n tio n a l in ju rie s to body, m ind, a n d reso u rces? T hose q u e stio n s w hile sim p le in w o rding a re ex tre m ely difficult to answ er.

1. S o m e h is to r ic a l rem a rk s

It is o ften said, t h a t every la w y e r looks a t th e law by th e p ris m of th e f irs t leg al sy ste m he le a rn s. T h is p ro b lem w as n o t a lie n to th e d ra fte rs o f th e N apoleo nic Code. S h o u ld th e y gone th e w ay of re c re a tin g th e in s titu tio n s from th e b eg in n in g th e y w ould, m o st probably, still en d up tr a n s la tin g th e re v o lu tio n a ry concepts in to th e do gm atic of iu s com m une. I f th e y w ere to c re a te th e sy ste m of p riv a te law from com pletely ex nih ilo , th e n som e o f th e a n sw e rs R om an law gave to th e q u e stio n s above. Som e o f th e a n sw e rs w ere in co m p atib le w ith th e re v o lu tio n a ry s p irit, b u t m o st of th e w ere v alu ab le , one w ould be te m p te d to say tru e , so lu tio n s to th e p rob lem s of in te ra c tio n s b e tw e e n ac to rs of society.

T he Code C ivil did n o t s h a re th e s p irit of F re n c h R ev olutio n for th e above re aso n s. A t th e tim e of th e d ra ftin g o f th e Code th e te rr ito r y of F ran c e w as d ivid ed am ong v a rio u s le g a l sy stem s. T he la w in th e s o u th of F ran c e w as b a se d la rg e ly on th e re cep tio n of R o m an law. R o m an la w w as th ere fo re n o t a n a lie n e le m e n t in th e d ra ftin g process. T he n o rth of F ra n c e u sed a v a rie ty of c u sto m a ry law s, w ith th e C om m on L aw of P a ris as a m ost p ro m in e n t ex a m p le 3.

2 It states that no three positive integers a, b, and c can satisfy the equation

a n + bn = cn for n > 2.

3 E. Stankovic, Influence o f R om an Law on N apoleon’s Code Civil, “Fundamina” 2005, no. 11, p. 310.

(4)

T h is division b e tw e e n tw o p a r ts o f F ra n c e c re a te d a p erceiv ed n ee d for u n ificatio n . T he F re n c h R ev olution proved to be a h isto ric a l m o m en t w hen u n ific a tio n w as possible. E qu ality , lib e rty a n d fr a te rn ity w ere th e v alu es aim ed to provide a n in d iv id u a l w ith a fram ew o rk to p u rs u e h a p p in e s s in any m an n er, r e s tr a in e d only by n e g a tiv e ly s ta te d p rin cip les o f society. T he revo lu tio n a ry v a lu e s w ere su p p o sed to m ak e it in to th e Code, as it is difficult to im a g in e th e re v o lu tio n a ry v a lu e s come to life w ith o u t a p riv a te law, w hich w ould e n s h rin e a n d p ro te c t th em .

2. O bject a n d lim its o f p r o p e r ty r ig h ts

T he R om an law o f p ro p e rty c a n n o t be easily divided to th e p ro p e rty of people a n d th e p ro p e rty of th in g s. T he division serv es only to clarify th e p ro blem from th e m o d e rn p ersp ectiv e. O n th e o th e r h a n d s , R om an s w ere perfectly a w a re t h a t slav es a re people. F o r R om an law slav ery d id n o t m e a n th e re d u c tio n of slav es to in a n im a te objects, o r th e ir tr e a tm e n t a s an im als. F o r R om an law slav es re m a in e d h u m a n s , a n d i t show s in th e leg al sources, e.g. th e In s titu tio n s of G aiu s m e n tio n s slaves in th e c h a p te r ab o u t person s.

2.1. Slavery

T he R om ans did n o t in v e n t th e concept o f slav e ow n ersh ip . M an y a n cie n t civ ilizatio n s re lie d on slav ery as a n im p o rta n t p a r t o f a n econom ic sy stem . Som e a rg u e, t h a t w hile h u m a n s a re n o t su b ject to p ro p e rty rig h ts in m o d ern sy stem , econom ically m a n y of th e social classes still p lay th e role of slaves, h a v in g m in im a l w ages a n d n o t b ein g o w n ers of th e h o u sin g th ey occupy. T h is opinions show, t h a t th e concept o f sla v e ry h a s a n o rm a tiv e la y e r a n d a n econom ic layer. I t is th e re fo re n e c e ssa ry to ex a m in e b o th asp ects w hile th in k in g ab o u t R om an slavery.

F irs tly i t is n e c e ssa ry to ex a m in e th e source o f slav es in th e a n c ie n t Rome. As in m a n y a n c ie n t societies slav es w ere c a p tu re d d u rin g w a r4. O nly in la te r perio d a s u b s ta n tia l p a r t of slav es w ere th e d e sc e n d a n ts o f o th e r slaves. T he o w ner could free a slave, a n d u s u a lly h e w ould n o t n ee d any p e rm it from th e a u th o ritie s . T h is s ta n d s co m pletely in c o n tra d ic tio n w ith m ore m o d e rn sy stem s of slavery. T his is u s u a lly c a u se d by th e connection m ad e b etw een race a n d social sta tu s . T his associatio n m ad e it n ecessary to lim it m an u m issio n s in legal sy stem s su ch as L ou isiana. T he connection b etw e en race a n d slave s ta tu s w as even pronounced by a p re su m p tio n . T he S u p erio r C o u rt of th e te rrito ry of O rle an s decided in A dele v. B e a u re g a rd (1809) th a t

4 J. Kelleher Schafer, R om an Roots o f the L ouisiana L aw o f Slavery: E m ancipation in Am erican Louisiana, 1803-1857, “Louisiana Law Review” 1996-1995, no. 56, p. 410.

(5)

M u la tto e s w ere p re s u m e d to be free a n d N egroes w ere p re s u m e d to be sla v e s5. T his p re su m p tio n m a k e s th e th e n A m eric an law m u ch h a r s h e r th a n th e R om an law, w h e re th e p re s u m p tio n of freed om w as th e rule.

A n o th e r im p o rta n t difference w as th e k in d of w orks done by th e slaves in R om e vs. th e slav ery o f th e re c e n t c e n tu rie s. R o m an slav es o ften w orked a s a r tis a n s , te a c h e rs, m u sic ia n s etc. T his im plied, t h a t th e s ta tu s o f slave w as n o t n e c e ssa rily in d icativ e of m e n ta l deficits. A gain, q u ite c o n tra ry to th e law s of N o rth A m erica, w h e re slav ery w as b a s e d on th e a s su m p tio n t h a t race in d ic a te s m e n ta l capacity, to th e p o in t w h e re som e s ta te s e n a c te d le g isla tio n p ro h ib itin g e d u c a tio n o f th e sla v e s6.

It is th e re fo re ju s tifie d to say, t h a t R o m an law w as n o t a ju s tific a tio n for m o d ern s sy stem s of slavery. T he R o m an sy ste m of sla v e ry w as j u s t in d ic a ti ve o f th e a n c ie n t economy; th e y j u s t did n o t develop th e u n d e r s ta n d in g of th e econom ics of labor, w h ich allow ed for th e dev elo p m en t o f e th ic a l fra m e w ork flow ing from th e re a liz a tio n t h a t slav ery is n o t a n econom ic necessity.

2.2. P rop erty o f th in gs

A rt. 544 of Code Civil is one of th e m o st o ften cited d efin itio n s of p ro p e r ty in th e w hole of legal history. I t e x p resses a n in d iv id u a listic ap proach, w h ich e n a b le s th e o w n er to do w h a te v e r h e p le a se s w ith a th in g , u n le ss it is c o n tra ry to law s or re g u la tio n s 7. T his a p p ro a c h is a g e n e ra liz a tio n o f th e ru le s , w h ich form ed th e law of th in g s in th e a n c ie n t R o m an law, a n d w as a lre a d y fu lly developed in th e d efin itio n of B a rto lu s, d o m u n i u m e s t i u s d e re c o r p o r a l i p e r f e c t e d i s p o n e n d i n i s i le g e p r o h i b e a t u r . T he w orks of B a rto lu s are j u s t a dev elo p m en t of R o m an law feel for p ro p erty , a co n jectu re on a p ro b a ble d efin itio n of th e concept in an tiq u ity . I t is o ften sa id R om an s did not develop th e d efin itio n o f p ro p e rty b u t it is m ore p recise to say, t h a t th e scarce sources of law t h a t re m a in do n o t c o n ta in su c h a definition.

T h e R o m an law of p ro p e rty la id b a se to th e m o d e rn th in k in g ab o u t it. In th e classical R o m an la w th e re e x iste d tw o k in d s of p ro perty , one “t r u e ” p ro perty, a n d th e o th e r “in b o n u m ” property. T h e divisio n d is a p p e a re d in th e l a te r law a n d th e re s u ltin g s in g u la r p ro p e rty is th e so rt, w h ich is in tu itiv e ly u n d e rsto o d by us. D ifferent k in d s of p ro p e rty are n o t alie n to re c e n t legal system s. A lthough we th in k of p ro p e rty as u n ita ry concept th e re ex ist m an y sim ila ritie s to th e R om an d u al property. F o r exam ple, th e a b ility of foreign n a tio n a ls in P o la n d to acq u ire la n d is g re a tly lim ited. T he ru le s w hich govern th e process of su ch acquisitio n belong to th e re a lm o f a d m in is tra tiv e law, however, fun ctionally it is h a rd to redu ce p ro p e rty rig h ts to a single definition.

5 Ibidem. 6 Ibidem, p. 411.

(6)

T he m a in dev elo p m en t of R o m an law w as to s e p a ra te p ro p e rty from po ssession, a non-obvious tric k , w hich m ad e it possible to th in k of p ro p e rty as a rig h t a n d n o t as a th in g . A n o th e r a b s tra c tio n w as th e concept o f r e s tr ic te d p ro p e rty rig h ts , a n d in consequence - im p ro v ed econom ic flexibility of th e concept of property. T his flexibility is o ften u n d e ra p p re c ia te d in th e discu ssio n s a b o u t freedom a n d equality. R o m an la w u n d e rsto o d p ro p e rty as a te c h n ic a l concept, n o t as a p o litica l s ta te m e n t. B ein g a te c h n ic a l (legal) concept, p ro p e rty could b e ad o p ted to th e co n cep tu al n e t o f th e Age of E n li g h te n m e n t.

3. B o u n d a r ie s o f th e la w o f d e lic t

T he la w of delict in th e N apoleonic Code is m o st fam o us for its a rt. 13828. It is a g e n e ra l clau se of lia b ility in delict, a n d it im poses lia b ility b a se d on th re e p illa rs: fa u lt, c a u s a lity a n d h a rm . T he n o rm o f th e a r t. 1382 is a g e n e ra liz a tio n of lex A quilia. R om an s u se d w ords d elictu m a n d m alefi- ciu m to signify a n illicit act. T he m o st im p o rta n t catego ry of delict w as co n tain e d in lex A quilia, w hich re g u la te d d e s tru c tio n a n d h a r m done to a th in g , in clu d in g slav es a n d a n im als. Lex A q u ilia developed th e concept of co nnecting th e a m o u n t of d am ag e s w ith th e e x te n t of h a rm . A ccording to Z im m e rm an n , it w as a t th e tim e, th e m o st im p o rta n t law in th e a n c ie n t R om e9.

T he firs t c h a p te r of lex A q u lia pro v id ed ac tio n for k illin g of a slave o r a n an im al: G. 3.210. D a m n i i n i u r i a e a c t i o c o n s t i t u i t u r p e r le g e m A q u i l i a m , c u i u s p r i m o c a p i t e c a u t u m e s t, u t s i q u i s h o m i n e m a l i e n u m a l i e n a m v . q u a d r u p e - d e m q u a e p e c u d u m n u m e r o s i t i n i u r i a o c c i d e r i t , q u a n t i e a r e s i n eo a n n o p l u r i m i f u e r i t , t a n t u m d o m i n o d a r e d a m n e t u r . I t prov id es a ru le for a s s e s sing v alu e of th e d estro y e d th in g , w h ich g u a r a n te e s t h a t th e o w ner c a n bu y a s im ila r th in g for th e dam ages.

T he th ir d c h a p te r of lex A q u ilia is ev en m ore im p o rta n t h isto rically , it allow ed for fu r th e r g e n e ra liz a tio n s, a n d fin ally fo rm a tio n of th e g e n e ra l clau se of th e a rt. 1382: D. 9.2.27.5 U lp ia n u s 18 ad ed. T e r t io a u t e m c a p i t e a i t e a d e m l e x a q u i l i a : “c e t e r a r u m r e r u m p r a e t e r h o m i n e m e t p e c u d e m o c c is o s s i q u i s a l t e r i d a m n u m f a x i t , q u o d u s s e r i t f r e g e r i t r u p e r i t i n i u r i a , q u a n t i e a r e s e r i t i n d i e b u s t r i g i n t a p r o x i m i s , t a n t u m a e s d o m i n o d a r e d a m n a s e s t o ”. T he th ir d c h a p te r w as su b ject to l a t e r in te rp re ta tio n a n d allow ed for c re a tio n of new ty p es of liability. A lread y in th e classica l perio d, lex A q u lia w as u se d to

8 Article 1382: Tout fait quelconque de l’homme, qui cause a autrui un dommage, oblige celui par la faute duquel il est arrive a le reparer.

9 R. Zimmermann, The Law o f Obligations, Oxford University Press, New York 1996, p. 953.

(7)

c re a te lia b ility for w h a t we call to d ay p u re econom ic loss. In th e fra g m e n t of U lp ia n a n ac tio n is g iven to a n o w n er of a fla t, w ho su ffers loss b ec au se of a th ir d p a r ty co m m ittin g a delict for w h ich h e is liable: D. 9.3.5.4 U lp ia n u s 23 ad ed. C u m a u t e m l e g i s a q u i l i a e a c t i o n e p r o p t e r h o c q u i s c o n d e m n a t u s e s t, m e r i t o e i, q u i o b h o c , q u o d h o s p e s v e l q u i s a l i u s d e c e n a c u l o d e i e c i t , i n f a c t u m d a n d a m e s s e la b e o d i c i t a d v e r s u s d e i e c t o r e m , q u o d v e r u m e s t. p l a n e s i lo c a v e - r a t d e ie c t o r i , e t i a m e x lo c a t o h a b e b i t a c t i o n e m .

T h e co n tem p o rary law of delict, g re a tly in flu en c ed by th e lex A quilia, developed along th e lin es of R o m an cases. A lth o u g h o th e r c u ltu re s m u s t h av e h a d th e sam e cases, i t w as th e m eth o d of th in k in g developed by th e ju r is ts , w hich led to th e ela b o ra tio n of m o d ern law of delict. R o m an s u n d e r

stood t h a t th e p u rp o se o f th e law of delict is n o t only to p u n is h th e to rtfe asor, b u t also to en c o u rag e p re c a u tio n a t a n a p p ro p ria te level. T he p re c a u tio n e le m e n t allow s for th e d ev elo p m en t of th e d o ctrin e s of objective a n d su b jectiv e lia b ility form h a rm . U n d e rs ta n d in g o f th e n ec essity to s tim u la te p re c a u tio n is a key fe a tu re of th e law of delict. T h is fe a tu re allow s u s to live in a society w h e re ac cid en ts h a p p e n b u t, supposedly, th e cost of ac cid en ts is m inim ized.

4. F r e ed o m o f c o n tr a c t

T h e g e n e ra l c lau se o f freed om of c o n tra c t is a n in te re s tin g in s titu tio n . At th e tim e of th e e n a c tm e n t of th e N apoleon ic Code it w as a n ew in stitu tio n . O n th e o th e r h a n d , i t w as seen by m an y as a g e n e ra liz a tio n o f th e R om an sy ste m of co n tra c ts. D e sp ite th e v ery b ro a d w ord in g o f th e a r t. 113410, th e concept of c o n tra c t w as c o n s tra in e d by th e re q u ire m e n t o f ca u sa. T h is b a s i cally m e a n s, t h a t th e p a r tie s to th e c o n tra c t n ee d to h av e com p atib le econo m ic goals. B u t still, freedom of c o n tra c t allow ed for fu r th e r g e n e ra liz a tio n s tw o h u n d re d y e a rs la te r, w h e n th e d ra fte rs of th e D ra ft C om m on F ra m e of R eference decided t h a t th e re q u ire m e n t o f c a u s a is n o t n ecessary, i t w ould be su fficien t to a s c e rta in t h a t th e p a r tie s a g re e d on a c e rta in c o n te n t of th e c o n tra c t a n d t h a t th e y w a n t to, or can re a so n a b ly be ex p ected to w a n t to e n te r in to a legally b in d in g re la tio n sh ip .

D e sp ite a n ew w ay o f th in k in g ab o u t co n tra c ts, w h ich cam e from th e school of n a tu r a l law, i t is difficult to overlook th e in flu en c e R om an law h a d a t th e sy ste m of co n tra c ts c o n ta in e d in th e N apo leon ic Code. T he m a in a rg u m e n t is, t h a t th e freed om o f c o n tra c t is n o t n e c e ssa ry for a sy ste m of

10 Article 1134: Les conventions légalement formées tiennent lieu de loi à ceux qui les ont faites. Elles ne peuvent être révoquées que de leur consentement mutuel, ou pour les causes que la loi autorise. Elles doivent être exécutées de bonne foi.

(8)

co n tra c ts to p ro m o te freedom a n d equality. F reed o m of c o n tra c t m e a n s th e legal sy stem s accepts a ty p ic a l p ro m ises a s v a lid co n tra c ts. T h is h a s n o t re a lly m u ch to do w ith freedom a n d its positive asso ciatio n s. In fact, freedom of c o n tra c t does n o t n ee d to be explicit. It ca n be h id d e n in a d ifferen t dogm atic. T he R om ans from a v ery e a rly sta g e h a d a u n ila te ra l co n tra c t called s tip u la tio n . U n d e r th is c o n tra c t a n o b lig atio n to p erfo rm an y co n sid e ra tio n could b e c reated . M ost o f th e econom ic re s u lts of l a te r c o n tra c ts could be ach iev ed by tw o c o n tra ry s tip u la tio n s, e.g. one p a r ty s tip u la te s to give a c e rta in a m o u n t of money, a n o th e r p a r ty s tip u la te s to give a c e rta in th in g. T his, of course, did n o t solve all th e pro b lem s re la te d to th e d e ta ils of su ch tra n s a c tio n , how ever, s tip u la tio n p rovided a lot of e la stic ity to th e R o m an law of co n tra ct. A n o th e r dev elo p m en t o f in R o m an law w as th e g ra d u a l in s titu tio n a liz a tio n of p ac ts, i.e. in fo rm al a g reem en ts.

C o n c lu sio n s

I t is difficult to conclude w h e th e r th e R o m an law p ro m o ted e q u a lity in h isto ric a l p ersp ectiv e, how ever, I th in k th e g e n e ra liz a tio n s o f R o m an in s t it u tio n s w h ere n o t p ro m o tin g e q u a lity to th e sam e e x te n t th e o rig in al did. M an y in d ic a te th e Age of E n lig h te n m e n t as th e m o st in flu e n tia l p erio d w h en it com es to p ro m o tin g e q u a lity b u t still, th e e q u a lity cam e a t g re a t price. T he bloody re v o lu tio n alleg ed ly led to tw o w orld w ars. R o m an law is b la m e d for n o t ab o lish in g slav ery b u t its d efen d ers claim , t h a t it w as u n th in k a b le in A ntiquity. T h is defense is n o t convincing b ecau se it is ea sy to sa y a fte r th e fact t h a t th e in te lle c tu a l clim a te fo rbade th e ch a n g e to h ap p e n . I f th e F re n c h revo lu tio n failed, som e w ould come to th e sam e conclusion as th e y did w ith th e R o m an law. T his is p u re ly tau to lo g ical. T he defense of R o m an law sho uld be b a se d on th e re le v a n t issu es. T hose re le v a n t in s titu tio n s a re th o se, w h ich c re a te th e co n cep tu al b a sis for a stab le econom ic system .

O ne fe a tu re o f R o m an law w hich w as n o t re ta in e d by th e codification m ov em ent, a n d I th in k it is a m o st re g re tta b le fact, is th e ju r is tic m eth o d w hich allow ed for c re a tio n of th e w o n d erfu l ru les of R om an s u b s ta n tiv e law. T he ju ris tic m eth o d w as developed by e lim in a tio n o f m o ral a n d p e rso n a l a rg u m e n ts from leg al d isco u rse11. T his om ission is one of th e m o st in flu e n tia l facto rs sh a p in g th e legal sy stem s of c o n tin e n ta l E u ro p e a n d o th e r leg al sy ste m u n d e r th e ir influence.

11 T. Giaro, Knowledge o f L aw as Knowledge o f Facts. The R om an Experience, [in:] T. Giaro (ed.), Rom an L aw a n d Legal Knowledge. S tu d ies in M emory o f H enryk Kupiszewski,

(9)

R e su m en

D erecho R om an o com o h e rra m ie n ta p a r a la prom ocion d e u g u a ld a d en el C odigo d e N apoleon

Palabras clave: Derecho Romano, la igualdad, el código napoleónico, la economfa del derecho privado.

El Código Napoleónico fue preparado en un perfodo de cambio social tumultuosa. Nuevos conceptos y radical de la sociedad se transforman en realidad, entre otros, los medios de la reforma legislativa. Curiosamente, en la época de la Revolución Francesa hubo un “jugador” que no encaja en la imagen: el derecho romano. Era antigua, una palabra despreciado por los revolucionarios. Permitió mantener los esclavos. ^Cómo es entonces que la ley de los romanos sobrevivió en las normas del Código de Napoleón? El papel del derecho romano derivado de sus instituciones, en especial de la ley de propiedad y el derecho de las obligaciones. Los conceptos de posesión, propiedad, derechos reales limitados, el contrato, la solidaridad, la responsabilidad en materia delictual etc. resultaron tan util que seria muy poco prâctico para reinventar los conceptos de cumplir un capricho.

S tr e s z c z e n ie

P ra w o rzym sk ie ja k o n a rzę d zie p ro p a g o w a n ia rów ności w K odeksie N a p o leo n a

S3owa kluczowe: prawo rzymskie, Kodeks Napoleona, ekonomia prawa prywatnego.

Kodeks Napoleona powstawał w okresie burzliwych zmian społecznych. Nowe i radykalne koncepcje społeczeństwa zostały wprowadzone w życie za pomocą m.in. reform prawnych. Co ciekawe, w okresie rewolucji francuskiej istniał jeden czynnik, który nie wpisywał się w ogólny obraz sytuacji - prawo rzymskie, zezwalające np. na posiadanie niewolników. Było ono „antyczne”, a samym tym słowem rewolucjoniści pogardzali. Jak zatem doszło do tego, że przetrwało w normach Kodeksu Napoleoń skiego? Siła prawa rzymskiego bierze się z jego instytucji, zwłaszcza tych wykształco nych na gruncie prawa rzeczowego i prawa zobowiązań. Koncepcje posiadania, wła sności, ograniczonych praw rzeczowych, kontraktów, solidarności, odpowiedzialności deliktowej itp. okazały się tak użyteczne, że byłoby skrajnie niepraktyczne opisywanie ich na nowo tylko w tym celu, aby zaspokoić kaprysy ideologii.