티보와 사비니의 법전편찬 논쟁에 대한 재평가
Revaluation of the Thibaut-Savigny Controversy about German Codification
- 주제(키워드) 티보 , 사비니 , 법전편찬 논쟁 , 독일 민법전 , 역사법학파 , Thibaut , Savigny , 1814 , Codification , Historical School
- 주제(기타) 기타법학
- 설명문(URI) https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002731047
- 등재 KCI등재
- 발행기관 이화여자대학교 법학연구소
- 발행년도 2021
- URI http://www.dcollection.net/handler/ewha/000000183055
- 본문언어 한국어
- Published As http://dx.doi.org/10.32632/ELJ.2021.25.4.501
초록/요약
In 1814, Anton Friedrich Thibaut drafted a pamphlet urging Germans to codify a national code of law, as the French had done in 1804. Thibaut lamented the scattered laws throughout Germany and especially the costs and delays from them. Noting that Austria had, in 1811, adopted a national civil code, Thibaut suggested a unified German civil code. Savigny wrote a reply arguing that codification was premature; that the German law lacked any foundation for codification. Savigny emphasized that the law evolved slowly and did not necessarily lend themselves to being set in writing. The two publications set German academics and politicians into two camps and the debate raged for decades. There were two results. First, the victory of Savigny’s side postponed codification. Indeed, the German civil code did not come until 1900. Secondly, Savigny was able to create a new legal discipline named “Historical School of Law.” It brought Savigny and German jurisprudence a international reputation. Today it is highly recommended that we evaluate the debate between Thibaut and Savigny more fairly.
more