|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910777599603321 |
|
|
Autore |
Milsom S. F. C (Stroud Francis Charles), <1923-2016.> |
|
|
Titolo |
A natural history of the common law [[electronic resource] /] / S.F.C. Milsom |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
New York ; ; Chichester, : Columbia University Press, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
1-280-59797-6 |
9786613627803 |
0-231-50349-0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (175 p.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
Common law - England - History |
Common law - History |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Note generali |
|
Description based upon print version of record. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di bibliografia |
|
Includes bibliographical references and index. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di contenuto |
|
Front matter -- Contents -- Preface -- Abbreviations -- Introduction -- Chronological List of Publications -- I. MAKING LAW: LAWYERS AND LAYMEN -- II. CHANGING LAW: FICTIONS AND FORMS -- III. MANAGEMENT, CUSTOM, AND LAW -- IV. HISTORY AND LOST ASSUMPTIONS -- NOTES -- INDEX |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
How does law come to be stated as substantive rules, and then how does it change? In this collection of discussions from the James S. Carpentier Lectures in legal history and criticism, one of Britain's most acclaimed legal historians S. F. C. Milsom focuses on the development of English common law-the intellectually coherent system of substantive rules that courts bring to bear on the particular facts of individual cases-from which American law was to grow. Milsom discusses the differences between the development of land law and that of other kinds of law and, in the latter case, how procedural changes allowed substantive rules first to be stated and then to be circumvented. He examines the invisibility of early legal change and how adjustment to conditions was hidden behind such things as the changing meaning of words. Milsom points out that legal history may be more prone than other kinds of history to serious anachronism. Nobody ever states his assumptions, and a legal writer, addressing his |
|
|
|
|