Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T06:55:11.845Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Legal Policy and Reforms of Hadrian1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

Fritz Pringsheim
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The reign of Hadrian marks the beginning of a new epoch in Roman administration and in the history of Roman Law. Hadrian's visit to Britain is immortalised by the Wall which he built from Tyne to Solway. Its construction is characteristic of the Emperor's willingness to renounce further conquests and even to abandon land which had been Roman. The Wall marked the limit of the districts which he was prepared to retain and administer. It followed, not the shortest and easiest route, but a line beyond the fortified area whence a look-out could be kept over the barbarians outside, and its object was the completion and definition of the fortified frontier region whereby it became easier to civilise and to pacify the country which lay to the south. Hadrian's aim was to bring order and peace to the land bounded by the new frontiers of the Roman world. Thus Hadrian may be sharply contrasted with his predecessor Trajan, the soldier on the throne, who owed his elevation to his successful wars in the Rhine region, and who as Emperor extended the frontiers of the Empire on the lower Danube and in the East. On Hadrian's accession the Empire was more powerful than ever before or afterwards, but its financial and military resources were strained to the utmost, and indeed frequently had been overstrained. The small peasant owners and small towns, sources of Roman culture and prosperity, had begun to suffer and disappear.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , 1934 , pp. 141 - 153
Copyright
Copyright © Name of Author 1934

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Hitzig, H. F., Die Stellung Kaiser Hadrians in der römischen Rechtsgeschichte (1892)Google Scholar; Visscher, De, Conferenze per il XIV centenario delle Pandette (Milano, 1931), p. 62 ffGoogle Scholar.

3 Collingwood, R. G., The Archaeology of Roman Britain (1930), p. 77 ffGoogle Scholar.

4 Rostovtzeff, , Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire (1926), p. 119Google Scholar.

5 Perret, L., La titulature impériale d'Hadrien (1929), pp. 31, 98Google Scholar.

6 Bonfante, P., Corso di Diritto Romano, vi (Le successioni, 1930), 393 ff.Google Scholar: ‘l'imperatore Adriano, il principe pin rivoluzionario dell'era classica.’

7 Gregorovius, F., Kaiser Hadrian (3rd ed., 1884), p. 439 ff.Google Scholar; Henderson, B. W., The Life and Principate of the Emperor Hadrian (1923), p. 235 ffGoogle Scholar.

8 Rostovtzeff, l.c., p. 315 ff.

9 Dio 69, 6, 3.

10 Haenel, , Corpus legum ab imp. Rom. ante Just. latarum (1857), pp. 85–101Google Scholar.

11 Digest 5, 3, 20, 6.

12 Digest 48, 8, 14.

13 Digest 47, 21, 2: ‘… quod si per ignorantiam aut fortuito. …’

14 Digest 22, 5, 3, 1; 22, 5, 3, 2; 22, 5, 3, 3; 22, 5, 3, 4; 22, 5, 3, 6; 48, 18, 1, 2; 48, 18, 1, 22; 48, 18, 17, 2; 48, 18, 21.

15 S. C. Tertullianum.

16 Digest 34, 5, 9, 1; cf. Beseler, , Sav. Z. (Roman. Abt.) xliv (1924), 373Google Scholar.

17 Hadriani Sent. 14.

18 Gaius, Inst. 1, 80Google Scholar.

19 Gaius, Inst. 1, 77Google Scholar.

20 Digest 48, 9, 5, interpolated according to Albertario, Riv. Internaz. di Filosofia del Dir. xii (1932), 12Google Scholar; Roberti, , Studi Albertoni i (1933), 261Google Scholar; but it strikes me as fitting in tolerably well with the Stoic conception of Hadrian.

21 Spart. Hadr. 18.

22 Digest 1, 6, 2; Collatio 3, 3, 4.

23 Digest 48, 18, 1, 1.

24 Spart. Hair. 18.

25 Digest 29, 5, 1, 28.

26 Gaius, Inst. 3, 121Google Scholar.

27 Digest 28, 3, 6, 7; Digest 29, 1, 34 pr.

28 Digest 48, 21, 3, 5.

29 Justinus, Apol. 1, 68Google Scholar.

30 Kornemann, Die röm. Kaiserzeit (Gercke-Norden, , Einl. in d. Alt.-Wiss. iii3, vol. 2, 3, 1933), p. 81Google Scholar.

31 Rostovtzeff, l.c., p. 318.

32 Hirschfeld, , Die kais. Verwaltungsbeamten (2nd ed., 1905), p. 426 ff.Google Scholar; Kornemann, l.c., p. 103; Stein, A., Der röm. Ritterstand (Münch. Beitr. zur Papyrusforschung ix, 1927), pp. 362, 442 ffGoogle Scholar.

33 Illustrations in Rostovtzeff, l.c., p. 316.

34 A. Stein, l.c., p. 431; B. Kübler, Röm. Rechtsgeschichte (1925), p. 213 ff.

35 A. Stein, l.c., p. 458 ff., 478; Kornemann, l.c.

36 Gaius, Inst. 1, 7Google Scholar; cf. 1, 2: ‘Constant autem iura populi Romani ex … responsis prudentium.’

37 ‘Quorum omnium si in unum sententiae concurrunt, id quod ita sentiunt legis vicem obtinet; si vero dissentiunt, iudici licet quam velit sententiam sequi; idque rescripto divi Hadriani significatur.’

38 Digest 1, 1, 7 pr.

39 C. Theod. 1, 4, 3 (426): ‘… scripta firmamus … Ubi autem diversae sententiae proferuntur, potior numerus vincat auctorum. … Ubi autem pares sententiae recitantur, quorum par censetur auctoritas, quos sequi debeat, eligat moderatio iudicantis.’

40 Fr. Wieacker, Quellen zur Hadrianischen Justizpolitik (Freih. Rechtsgesch. Abhandl. 1934).

41 Jolowicz, H. F. (Hist. Introd. to the Study of Roman Law (1932), p. 366 f.)Google Scholar, agreeing with Wlassak, says that Hadrian's rescript was intended to make it quite clear that only a definite common opinion to be discovered from the works of jurists who had the ‘ius respondendi’ was to be taken as law. But he forgets that Gaius speaks of ‘responsa prudentium’ and not of the ‘auctoritas prudentium’; cf. Buckland, W. W., Institutions of Rom. Priv. Law (1931), p. 14Google Scholar; Manual of Rom. Priv. Law (1925), p. 18: G. C. Cheshire in Henderson, l.c., p. 205, n. 3 (‘only extended to the actual case’).

42 Digest 1, 2, 49.

43 C. Tanta, § 18.

44 C. Δέδωκεν § 18: ‥τοὺς ἐν ἀρχαῖς τοῦτο‥θεραπεύειν.

45 M. Wlassak, Die klass. Prozessformel (Abb. Wien., Sitzungsberichte, 202, Abb. 3, 1924), p. 99.

46 Bernhardy, , Röm. Lit.-G. (5 ed.), p. 86Google Scholar.

47 Gellius, , Noct. Att. 13, 13, 1Google Scholar; Bremer, F. P., Rechtsschulen (1868), p. 15Google Scholar.

48 Digest 27, 1, 6, 8.

49 Digest 27, 1, 6, 12 (but cf. Index Interpol.).

50 Pringsheim, , Höhe u. Ende der röm. Jurisprudenz, (Freib. Wiss. Ges. Fasc. 22, 1933), p. 7Google Scholar.

51 Krüger, P., Quellen (2 ed.), p. 163Google Scholar.

52 Salzmann, E., Hadrian u. d. Problem seiner Persönlichkeit (Neue Jahrb. f. Wiss. u. Jug. Bild. ii, (1926), 520 ff.Google Scholar), tries with the aid of modern psychology to expose the unity of character, but neglects the work.

53 These achievements strike me as being more characteristic for an evaluation of the Emperor than his amateurish attempts in art.

54 On his travels: Kornemann, , Kaiser Hadrian (1905), p. 41 ff.Google Scholar; W. Weber, Untersuch. z. Gesch. d. K. Hadrian (1907), p. 86 ff.

55 von Ranke, Leopold, Weltgeschichte (4th ed.), iii, 153–4Google Scholar. ‘Hadrian seems to have felt deeply what it meant to be the leading man among all the peoples surrounding the Mediterranean. He was truly a man of universal culture, which was never more widespread or seemed of greater importance to humanity than at that time.’