The principle cause of unjust occidental laws is the ingenuousness of the legislator. As it was mentioned in the previous section, Christian lawyers tend towards divinizing law. If in some cases the public is angered due to an unjust verdict, those lawyers would say that the public is not aware of the complexity and intricacy of law.
Laws are there for humans, and not the other way around; if this already applies to divine law, how much more should it apply to human law? If the public is angered, it is an unequivocal sign that something is not working (not necessarily the wording of the law — its enforcing can also fail). In any case, blaming the public’s ignorance reveals the failure to grasp the essential: laws are the medium by which peace and liberty in society are secured. Even though the law …show more content…
Germanic tribes of the 12th century used the term ‘weregild’ (from the Latin ‘vir’, man, and the Saxon ‘geld’, money) for the price of a homicide. Among the Alemannic tribes the female weregild was twice the male’s (assuming equal social rank). For the Saxons it was the other way around, more in line with contemporaneity. Much ahead of their times, these Alemannic!
The distinction between public delicts (crimes) and private ones was already known among the Romans in the 5th century B.C., and written down in “the laws of the XII Tables” (also called “of roman equality”, or “decemviral”) and contained norms regulating daily life of the roman people. Crimes were persecuted by the state, while all other delicts were treated privately. During the Republic and the Empire the private domain was gradually absorbed into the public domain.
During the Middle Ages (5th through 11th centuries) the three sources of law (roman, feudal, and Canon) mixed to some degree. These were times in which delict and sin were interchangeable, and likewise punishment and liberation. The end of the middle Ages
Laws are there for humans, and not the other way around; if this already applies to divine law, how much more should it apply to human law? If the public is angered, it is an unequivocal sign that something is not working (not necessarily the wording of the law — its enforcing can also fail). In any case, blaming the public’s ignorance reveals the failure to grasp the essential: laws are the medium by which peace and liberty in society are secured. Even though the law …show more content…
Germanic tribes of the 12th century used the term ‘weregild’ (from the Latin ‘vir’, man, and the Saxon ‘geld’, money) for the price of a homicide. Among the Alemannic tribes the female weregild was twice the male’s (assuming equal social rank). For the Saxons it was the other way around, more in line with contemporaneity. Much ahead of their times, these Alemannic!
The distinction between public delicts (crimes) and private ones was already known among the Romans in the 5th century B.C., and written down in “the laws of the XII Tables” (also called “of roman equality”, or “decemviral”) and contained norms regulating daily life of the roman people. Crimes were persecuted by the state, while all other delicts were treated privately. During the Republic and the Empire the private domain was gradually absorbed into the public domain.
During the Middle Ages (5th through 11th centuries) the three sources of law (roman, feudal, and Canon) mixed to some degree. These were times in which delict and sin were interchangeable, and likewise punishment and liberation. The end of the middle Ages