Elegant Scholastic Humanism? Arias Piñel’s (1515–1563) Critical Revision of Laesio Enormis
Elegant Scholastic Humanism? Arias Piñel’s (1515–1563) Critical Revision of Laesio Enormis
Broad tags such as ‘humanism’ and ‘scholasticism’ fail to do justice to the ‘hybrid’ nature of legal as well as theological sources of the early modern period, certainly in the Iberian world. A case in point are the Commentarii ad rubricam et legem 2, C. de rescindenda venditione by the Portuguese jurist Arias Piñel. By submitting C. 4,44,2 to thorough philological and historical analysis, Piñel wanted to investigate the ‘true’ meaning of leasio enormis. Against the medieval gloss and the communis opinio doctorum, he claimed that the remedy by virtue of C. 4,44,2 was unknown to the Roman jurists before the time of Emperors Diocletian and Maximian. Piñel wanted to highlight the fundamental difference between the pagan legal culture that had informed the classical Roman jurists, on the one hand, and the new, Christian mentality of the ius commune as it developed during the late Middle Ages.
Keywords: Roman law, humanism, scholasticism, contract law, laesio enormis
Edinburgh Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.
