Chapter XLIV: Idea Of The Roman Jurisprudence.—Part IV. 第四十四章 罗马法学述要——第四节
¶
When Justinian ascended the throne, the reformation of the Roman jurisprudence was an arduous but indispensable task. In the space of ten centuries, the infinite variety of laws and legal opinions had filled many thousand volumes, which no fortune could purchase and no capacity could digest. Books could not easily be found; and the judges, poor in the midst of riches, were reduced to the exercise of their illiterate discretion. The subjects of the Greek provinces were ignorant of the language that disposed of their lives and properties; and the barbarous dialect of the Latins was imperfectly studied in the academies of Berytus and Constantinople. As an Illyrian soldier, that idiom was familiar to the infancy of Justinian; his youth had been instructed by the lessons of jurisprudence, and his Imperial choice selected the most learned civilians of the East, to labor with their sovereign in the work of reformation. 71 The theory of professors was assisted by the practice of advocates, and the experience of magistrates; and the whole undertaking was animated by the spirit of Tribonian. 72 This extraordinary man, the object of so much praise and censure, was a native of Side in Pamphylia; and his genius, like that of Bacon, embraced, as his own, all the business and knowledge of the age. Tribonian composed, both in prose and verse, on a strange diversity of curious and abstruse subjects: 73 a double panegyric of Justinian and the life of the philosopher Theodotus; the nature of happiness and the duties of government; Homer’s catalogue and the four-and-twenty sorts of metre; the astronomical canon of Ptolemy; the changes of the months; the houses of the planets; and the harmonic system of the world. To the literature of Greece he added the use of the Latin tongue; the Roman civilians were deposited in his library and in his mind; and he most assiduously cultivated those arts which opened the road of wealth and preferment. From the bar of the Praetorian præfects, he raised himself to the honors of quaestor, of consul, and of master of the offices: the council of Justinian listened to his eloquence and wisdom; and envy was mitigated by the gentleness and affability of his manners. The reproaches of impiety and avarice have stained the virtue or the reputation of Tribonian. In a bigoted and persecuting court, the principal minister was accused of a secret aversion to the Christian faith, and was supposed to entertain the sentiments of an Atheist and a Pagan, which have been imputed, inconsistently enough, to the last philosophers of Greece. His avarice was more clearly proved and more sensibly felt. If he were swayed by gifts in the administration of justice, the example of Bacon will again occur; nor can the merit of Tribonian atone for his baseness, if he degraded the sanctity of his profession; and if laws were every day enacted, modified, or repealed, for the base consideration of his private emolument. In the sedition of Constantinople, his removal was granted to the clamors, perhaps to the just indignation, of the people: but the quaestor was speedily restored, and, till the hour of his death, he possessed, above twenty years, the favor and confidence of the emperor. His passive and dutiful submission had been honored with the praise of Justinian himself, whose vanity was incapable of discerning how often that submission degenerated into the grossest adulation. Tribonian adored the virtues of his gracious master: the earth was unworthy of such a prince; and he affected a pious fear, that Justinian, like Elijah or Romulus, would be snatched into the air, and translated alive to the mansions of celestial glory. 74
查士丁尼(Justinian)登基之时,整顿罗马法学既是一桩艰巨的工程,也是一件势在必行之事。一千年间,法律条文与法学见解千头万绪,堆成数千卷帙,再殷实的家资也买不齐,再过人的脑力也读不尽。典籍难以寻觅,法官们守着如山的法条,却仍如一无所有,只能凭自己浅陋无学的主见断案。希腊各行省的臣民,不懂主宰自己身家性命的语言;而拉丁人这种粗鄙的方言,贝鲁图斯(Berytus)与君士坦丁堡学府中人也只学得一知半解。查士丁尼出身伊利里亚的行伍,自幼便熟习这种语言;少年时又受过法学的熏陶;登极之后,他遴选东方最渊博的法学家,与自己一同投身这场整顿之业。71教授们的理论,辅以讼师的实务与官员的历练;而整桩事业的灵魂,则是特里波尼安(Tribonian)。72此人非同凡响,毁誉参半,乃潘菲利亚(Pamphylia)锡德(Side)城人氏;他天资卓绝,一如培根(Bacon),把当世的一切事务与学问尽揽为己有。无论散文还是韵文,特里波尼安都动笔涉猎,题材之驳杂离奇,令人咋舌:73有献给查士丁尼的两篇颂词,有哲学家特奥多图斯(Theodotus)的传记;有论幸福之本质、为政之职责的文字;有对荷马船只名录的疏解、对二十四种格律的辨析;有托勒密的天文表,有月份的推移、行星的宫位,还有宇宙的谐和之律。除希腊文的学养外,他还兼通拉丁文;罗马历代法学家的著作,既藏于他的书斋,也烂熟于他的胸中;而那些通往财富与晋升之途的门道,他更是孜孜以求、悉心经营。他先在禁卫军长官的法庭充任辩护之士,继而步步高升,历任财务官、执政官,直至诸司大臣;在查士丁尼的御前会议上,众人倾听他雄辩而睿智的议论;他举止温和亲切,旁人的嫉妒也因此消减了几分。然而,不敬神明与贪得无厌这两项指摘,玷污了特里波尼安的德行,至少也损了他的声名。朝廷偏执成风、动辄迫害,这位首辅大臣被人指控暗中厌弃基督信仰,据说心怀无神论者兼异教徒的思想;人们也曾把这两种彼此颇为矛盾的思想,一并归到希腊最后几位哲人头上。至于他的贪婪,则证据确凿,世人感受尤深。他执掌司法时若当真收受贿赂,人们便又会想起培根的先例;倘若他果真亵渎了本行的神圣,倘若法律天天出于他谋取私利的卑劣算计而增订、修改或废除,那么特里波尼安纵有再大的才具,也抵偿不了他的卑污。君士坦丁堡爆发暴乱时,朝廷顺应民众的鼓噪,或许也是顺应他们正当的义愤,将他革职;但这位财务官旋即复职,此后二十余年,直到瞑目之日,始终蒙受皇帝的恩宠与信任。他那副唯命是从、恭顺听话的姿态,竟博得查士丁尼本人的褒扬;皇帝的虚荣使他看不出,这份恭顺有多少次已堕落为最露骨的谄媚。特里波尼安对这位仁慈君主的德行推崇备至,直说人间配不上这样一位圣主;他还煞有介事地佯作虔敬之忧,说查士丁尼终有一日会像以利亚(Elijah)或罗慕路斯(Romulus)那样被攫入云霄,活生生地迁往天国的荣光殿堂。74
¶
If Caesar had achieved the reformation of the Roman law, his creative genius, enlightened by reflection and study, would have given to the world a pure and original system of jurisprudence. Whatever flattery might suggest, the emperor of the East was afraid to establish his private judgment as the standard of equity: in the possession of legislative power, he borrowed the aid of time and opinion; and his laborious compilations are guarded by the sages and legislature of past times. Instead of a statue cast in a simple mould by the hand of an artist, the works of Justinian represent a tessellated pavement of antique and costly, but too often of incoherent, fragments. In the first year of his reign, he directed the faithful Tribonian, and nine learned associates, to revise the ordinances of his predecessors, as they were contained, since the time of Adrian, in the Gregorian Hermogenian, and Theodosian codes; to purge the errors and contradictions, to retrench whatever was obsolete or superfluous, and to select the wise and salutary laws best adapted to the practice of the tribunals and the use of his subjects. The work was accomplished in fourteen months; and the twelve books or tables, which the new decemvirs produced, might be designed to imitate the labors of their Roman predecessors. The new Code of Justinian was honored with his name, and confirmed by his royal signature: authentic transcripts were multiplied by the pens of notaries and scribes; they were transmitted to the magistrates of the European, the Asiatic, and afterwards the African provinces; and the law of the empire was proclaimed on solemn festivals at the doors of churches. A more arduous operation was still behind—to extract the spirit of jurisprudence from the decisions and conjectures, the questions and disputes, of the Roman civilians. Seventeen lawyers, with Tribonian at their head, were appointed by the emperor to exercise an absolute jurisdiction over the works of their predecessors. If they had obeyed his commands in ten years, Justinian would have been satisfied with their diligence; and the rapid composition of the Digest of Pandects, 75 in three years, will deserve praise or censure, according to the merit of the execution. From the library of Tribonian, they chose forty, the most eminent civilians of former times: 76 two thousand treatises were comprised in an abridgment of fifty books; and it has been carefully recorded, that three millions of lines or sentences, 77 were reduced, in this abstract, to the moderate number of one hundred and fifty thousand. The edition of this great work was delayed a month after that of the Institutes; and it seemed reasonable that the elements should precede the digest of the Roman law. As soon as the emperor had approved their labors, he ratified, by his legislative power, the speculations of these private citizens: their commentaries, on the twelve tables, the perpetual edict, the laws of the people, and the decrees of the senate, succeeded to the authority of the text; and the text was abandoned, as a useless, though venerable, relic of antiquity. The Code, the Pandects, and the Institutes, were declared to be the legitimate system of civil jurisprudence; they alone were admitted into the tribunals, and they alone were taught in the academies of Rome, Constantinople, and Berytus. Justinian addressed to the senate and provinces his eternal oracles; and his pride, under the mask of piety, ascribed the consummation of this great design to the support and inspiration of the Deity.
假使当年是恺撒来完成罗马法的整顿,凭他那经思索与钻研而愈发通透的创造天才,他本可为世人贡献一套纯粹而自出机杼的法学体系。可无论谄谀之辈如何撺掇,这位东方皇帝却不敢把一己之见立为公平的准绳;他虽握有立法大权,却仍要借重前代的时光积淀与众家之说,因此他那些煞费苦心的编纂,都有往昔的贤哲与法制为之护持。查士丁尼的这些著作,不像艺术家亲手以整模浇铸的一尊塑像,倒像一片镶嵌铺就的地面:所用碎料固然古雅而贵重,却往往彼此扞格、拼凑难合。即位第一年,他便命忠心的特里波尼安率九位博学的同僚,去修订历代先帝的敕令——这些敕令自哈德良以来,分别收在《格雷戈里安努斯法典》《赫尔莫格尼安努斯法典》与《狄奥多西法典》(Theodosian Code)之中;其职责是廓清其中的讹误与抵牾,删去一切陈腐冗赘之处,遴选那些明智而有益、最切合法庭审理与臣民日用的法条。此事历时十四个月而竣。这批新的“十人立法团”编成十二卷(或称十二表),或许有意仿效他们罗马前辈的功业。这部崭新的《查士丁尼法典》既以他之名命名,又经他御笔签署以昭确认;公证人与缮写吏笔录不辍,正本副本层出不穷,分送欧罗巴、亚细亚,继而阿非利加各行省的官长;每逢庄严的节庆,帝国的法律便在教堂门前当众宣示。然而更艰巨的一步尚在后头——须从罗马历代法学家的裁断与臆测、诘问与争辩之中,提炼出法学的精髓。皇帝委任十七位法学家,以特里波尼安为首,全权裁处前人的著作。这桩差事,他们即便用十年办成,查士丁尼也会对其勤勉感到满意;而《学说汇纂》(Pandects)竟在三年之内匆匆编就,此举究竟该褒该贬,还要看成书的质量如何。75他们从特里波尼安的藏书中,选出前代最负盛名的四十位法学家;76两千部论著缩编为五十卷;据人细心记载,原本三百万行文句,经此撮要,只剩下并不算多的十五万行。77这部巨著的刊行,比《法学阶梯》(Institutes)晚了一个月;先出门径、后出汇纂,让入门之书走在罗马法总汇之前,倒也在情理之中。皇帝一经嘉许他们的劳绩,便以立法之权,将这些私家学者的思辨追认为法;他们对《十二铜表法》(Twelve Tables)、《永久告示》、平民大会的立法以及元老院决议所作的注疏,取代原典而承其权威;至于原典本身,则被当作虽可敬却无用的古物弃置一旁。于是,《法典》《学说汇纂》与《法学阶梯》被宣布为民法学的正统体系;唯有它们获准在法庭上援引,也唯有它们得在罗马、君士坦丁堡与贝鲁图斯的学府中讲授。查士丁尼把他这些“永世不易的神谕”颁告元老院与各行省;他的骄矜披着虔敬的外衣,将这一宏图的告成归功于神明的扶助与启示。
¶
Since the emperor declined the fame and envy of original composition, we can only require, at his hands, method, choice, and fidelity, the humble, though indispensable, virtues of a compiler. Among the various combinations of ideas, it is difficult to assign any reasonable preference; but as the order of Justinian is different in his three works, it is possible that all may be wrong; and it is certain that two cannot be right. In the selection of ancient laws, he seems to have viewed his predecessors without jealousy, and with equal regard: the series could not ascend above the reign of Adrian, and the narrow distinction of Paganism and Christianity, introduced by the superstition of Theodosius, had been abolished by the consent of mankind. But the jurisprudence of the Pandects is circumscribed within a period of a hundred years, from the perpetual edict to the death of Severus Alexander: the civilians who lived under the first Caesars are seldom permitted to speak, and only three names can be attributed to the age of the republic. The favorite of Justinian (it has been fiercely urged) was fearful of encountering the light of freedom and the gravity of Roman sages.
既然这位皇帝不愿去博取原创的美名、也不愿招致随之而来的嫉恨,我们对他所能苛求的,便只有条理、取舍与忠实——这些虽属编纂者卑微却不可或缺的德行。编排材料的方式千变万化,很难说哪一种更有道理;可是查士丁尼的三部著作各用一套次序,这样一来,三种次序可能全都失当,而至少有两种必定不对,则是确凿无疑的。遴选古代法律时,他对历代先帝似乎一视同仁,并无妒忌之心:所收诸帝敕令,原本就上溯不过哈德良一朝;而狄奥多西(Theodosius)出于迷信划下的那道异教与基督教的狭隘界限,也早已被世人一致摒弃。然而《学说汇纂》所收的法学,却只限于一百年的范围之内:自《永久告示》颁行,到亚历山大·塞维鲁驾崩为止;生活在最初几位恺撒治下的法学家难得有置喙的机会,而可归入共和时代的更是仅有三人之名。有人激烈地指斥说:查士丁尼的那位宠臣,是害怕直面自由的光芒与罗马先贤的庄重威严。
¶
Tribonian condemned to oblivion the genuine and native wisdom of Cato, the Scaevolas, and Sulpicius; while he invoked spirits more congenial to his own, the Syrians, Greeks, and Africans, who flocked to the Imperial court to study Latin as a foreign tongue, and jurisprudence as a lucrative profession. But the ministers of Justinian, 78 were instructed to labor, not for the curiosity of antiquarians, but for the immediate benefit of his subjects. It was their duty to select the useful and practical parts of the Roman law; and the writings of the old republicans, however curious or excellent, were no longer suited to the new system of manners, religion, and government. Perhaps, if the preceptors and friends of Cicero were still alive, our candor would acknowledge, that, except in purity of language, 79 their intrinsic merit was excelled by the school of Papinian and Ulpian. The science of the laws is the slow growth of time and experience, and the advantage both of method and materials, is naturally assumed by the most recent authors. The civilians of the reign of the Antonines had studied the works of their predecessors: their philosophic spirit had mitigated the rigor of antiquity, simplified the forms of proceeding, and emerged from the jealousy and prejudice of the rival sects. The choice of the authorities that compose the Pandects depended on the judgment of Tribonian: but the power of his sovereign could not absolve him from the sacred obligations of truth and fidelity. As the legislator of the empire, Justinian might repeal the acts of the Antonines, or condemn, as seditious, the free principles, which were maintained by the last of the Roman lawyers. 80 But the existence of past facts is placed beyond the reach of despotism; and the emperor was guilty of fraud and forgery, when he corrupted the integrity of their text, inscribed with their venerable names the words and ideas of his servile reign, 81 and suppressed, by the hand of power, the pure and authentic copies of their sentiments. The changes and interpolations of Tribonian and his colleagues are excused by the pretence of uniformity: but their cares have been insufficient, and the antinomies, or contradictions of the Code and Pandects, still exercise the patience and subtilty of modern civilians. 82
特里波尼安把加图(Cato)、历代斯凯沃拉(Scaevola)与苏尔皮基乌斯(Sulpicius)纯正而土生土长的智慧一概付诸遗忘,却偏偏召来与自己意气相投的一路人物:叙利亚人、希腊人和阿非利加人——这些人涌向帝国朝廷,把拉丁文当作外语来学,把法学当作生财的行当来做。不过,查士丁尼的这班大臣奉命行事,本就不是为了满足古物爱好者的好奇,而是为了臣民眼下的实惠。78他们的职责,是从罗马法中拣出实用而切于施行的部分;至于共和时代那些旧人的著作,无论多么珍奇卓越,都已不再合乎风俗、宗教与政制的新格局。也许,假如西塞罗的师友们如今仍在世,我们平心而论也得承认:除了文辞纯净这一点,他们的真实造诣其实不及帕皮尼安(Papinian)与乌尔比安(Ulpian)一派。79法律之学,本是时间与经验缓慢孕育的产物;无论在体例还是在材料上,后出的著述者自然占尽便宜。安敦尼诸帝(Antonines)在位时的法学家,早已研读过前人的著作;他们那种富于思辨的精神,缓和了古法的严苛,简化了诉讼的程式,也摆脱了各敌对学派之间的门户之见与偏私。《学说汇纂》采信哪些权威,全凭特里波尼安一人判断;然而君主的权力,并不能免除他对真实与忠信应尽的神圣义务。查士丁尼身为帝国的立法者,尽可废除安敦尼诸帝的法令,也尽可把罗马末代法学家所秉持的自由原则斥为“乱政之言”;80但已经发生的事实,却是专制权力触及不到的。皇帝损毁这些文本的原貌,把自己这个奴颜婢膝之世的言辞与观念署上那些可敬的名字,81又凭借权势,把载有他们真实见解的纯正原本尽行压下,这就犯下了作伪与篡改之罪。特里波尼安及其同僚的这些改动与窜入,都以“求其划一”为托词;然而他们用心虽勤,终究不够周密,《法典》与《学说汇纂》之间那些二律背反、彼此抵牾的条文,至今仍在考验着近代法学家的耐心与巧思。82
¶
A rumor devoid of evidence has been propagated by the enemies of Justinian; that the jurisprudence of ancient Rome was reduced to ashes by the author of the Pandects, from the vain persuasion, that it was now either false or superfluous. Without usurping an office so invidious, the emperor might safely commit to ignorance and time the accomplishments of this destructive wish. Before the invention of printing and paper, the labor and the materials of writing could be purchased only by the rich; and it may reasonably be computed, that the price of books was a hundred fold their present value. 83 Copies were slowly multiplied and cautiously renewed: the hopes of profit tempted the sacrilegious scribes to erase the characters of antiquity, 8311 and Sophocles or Tacitus were obliged to resign the parchment to missals, homilies, and the golden legend. 84 If such was the fate of the most beautiful compositions of genius, what stability could be expected for the dull and barren works of an obsolete science? The books of jurisprudence were interesting to few, and entertaining to none: their value was connected with present use, and they sunk forever as soon as that use was superseded by the innovations of fashion, superior merit, or public authority. In the age of peace and learning, between Cicero and the last of the Antonines, many losses had been already sustained, and some luminaries of the school, or forum, were known only to the curious by tradition and report. Three hundred and sixty years of disorder and decay accelerated the progress of oblivion; and it may fairly be presumed, that of the writings, which Justinian is accused of neglecting, many were no longer to be found in the libraries of the East. 85 The copies of Papinian, or Ulpian, which the reformer had proscribed, were deemed unworthy of future notice: the Twelve Tables and praetorian edicts insensibly vanished, and the monuments of ancient Rome were neglected or destroyed by the envy and ignorance of the Greeks. Even the Pandects themselves have escaped with difficulty and danger from the common shipwreck, and criticism has pronounced that all the editions and manuscripts of the West are derived from one original. 86 It was transcribed at Constantinople in the beginning of the seventh century, 87 was successively transported by the accidents of war and commerce to Amalphi, 88 Pisa, 89 and Florence, 90 and is now deposited as a sacred relic 91 in the ancient palace of the republic. 92
查士丁尼的仇敌散布过一则毫无实据的谣言,说这位《学说汇纂》的编者曾把古罗马的法学付之一炬,只因他狂妄地认定:这些旧法如今非谬即冗,已无存留之必要。其实皇帝大可不必去揽下如此招怨的差事:只消交给世人的蒙昧与岁月的流逝,这一毁弃旧法的心愿自会稳稳实现。在印刷术与纸张问世之前,抄写所需的人工与材料,唯有富人方能负担;据此不妨合理推算,当时书籍的价钱,约合今日的百倍。83抄本增添得极慢,重抄旧本也格外审慎;渎神的抄写吏为利所诱,刮去了古人的字迹,8311于是索福克勒斯(Sophocles)或塔西佗的著作只得让出羊皮,改写弥撒经书、布道讲章与《金色传说》。84天才最优美的篇章尚且落得这般下场,一门过时之学那些枯燥乏味的著作,又哪里指望得上长存于世?法学典籍少有人感兴趣,更无人拿来消遣;它们的价值全系于眼下的用处,一旦时尚翻新,或有更高明的著作、或有官方的权威取而代之,它们便永远沉没无踪。在西塞罗与末代安敦尼诸帝之间那段承平而好学的岁月里,散佚的典籍便已不少;学界或讼坛上的某些巨擘,好古之士也只能凭口耳相传与传闻而略知其名。此后三百六十年的动乱与衰颓,更加速了遗忘的脚步;因此不妨公允地推断:人们指责查士丁尼所忽视的那些著作,其实有许多早已不见于东方的各家藏书。85帕皮尼安或乌尔比安的抄本一经这位改革者明令摈弃,便被视作不值得后人再加理会之物;《十二铜表法》与历代裁判官告示于不知不觉间湮没无闻,古罗马的种种法制遗产,也在希腊人的嫉妒与无知中遭到冷落乃至毁弃。便是《学说汇纂》本身,也是历尽艰险、才从这场普遍的覆没中侥幸逃生;而考据家断言,西方一切刊本与抄本,皆源出同一部原稿。86这部原稿于七世纪初在君士坦丁堡缮写而成,87后因战乱与商旅的种种机缘,辗转运抵阿马尔菲(Amalphi)、88比萨(Pisa)89与佛罗伦萨,90如今被当作圣物一般,91珍藏于这个共和国的古老宫邸之中。92
¶
It is the first care of a reformer to prevent any future reformation. To maintain the text of the Pandects, the Institutes, and the Code, the use of ciphers and abbreviations was rigorously proscribed; and as Justinian recollected, that the perpetual edict had been buried under the weight of commentators, he denounced the punishment of forgery against the rash civilians who should presume to interpret or pervert the will of their sovereign. The scholars of Accursius, of Bartolus, of Cujacius, should blush for their accumulated guilt, unless they dare to dispute his right of binding the authority of his successors, and the native freedom of the mind. But the emperor was unable to fix his own inconstancy; and, while he boasted of renewing the exchange of Diomede, of transmuting brass into gold, 93 discovered the necessity of purifying his gold from the mixture of baser alloy. Six years had not elapsed from the publication of the Code, before he condemned the imperfect attempt, by a new and more accurate edition of the same work; which he enriched with two hundred of his own laws, and fifty decisions of the darkest and most intricate points of jurisprudence. Every year, or, according to Procopius, each day, of his long reign, was marked by some legal innovation. Many of his acts were rescinded by himself; many were rejected by his successors; many have been obliterated by time; but the number of sixteen Edicts, and one hundred and sixty-eight Novels, 94 has been admitted into the authentic body of the civil jurisprudence. In the opinion of a philosopher superior to the prejudices of his profession, these incessant, and, for the most part, trifling alterations, can be only explained by the venal spirit of a prince, who sold without shame his judgments and his laws. 95 The charge of the secret historian is indeed explicit and vehement; but the sole instance, which he produces, may be ascribed to the devotion as well as to the avarice of Justinian. A wealthy bigot had bequeathed his inheritance to the church of Emesa; and its value was enhanced by the dexterity of an artist, who subscribed confessions of debt and promises of payment with the names of the richest Syrians. They pleaded the established prescription of thirty or forty years; but their defence was overruled by a retrospective edict, which extended the claims of the church to the term of a century; an edict so pregnant with injustice and disorder, that, after serving this occasional purpose, it was prudently abolished in the same reign. 96 If candor will acquit the emperor himself, and transfer the corruption to his wife and favorites, the suspicion of so foul a vice must still degrade the majesty of his laws; and the advocates of Justinian may acknowledge, that such levity, whatsoever be the motive, is unworthy of a legislator and a man.
一个改革者最先操心的,便是杜绝日后任何再行改革的可能。为维护《学说汇纂》《法学阶梯》与《法典》的文本,凡使用略符与缩写者,一律严加禁止;查士丁尼想起当年《永久告示》曾被层层注疏压得不见天日,于是下令:凡有胆大妄为的法学家擅自诠释或曲解君主意旨者,一概以伪造之罪论处。阿库尔修斯(Accursius)、巴尔托鲁斯(Bartolus)、屈雅斯(Cujacius)门下的学者,除非敢于质疑查士丁尼有无权力束缚后继君主的权威、束缚人心天生的自由,否则便该为自己积下的重重“罪愆”而汗颜。然而,皇帝连自己的反复无常也管束不住;他一面夸口重演了狄俄墨得斯(Diomede)的那桩交换,化铜为金,一面又发觉,自己这块“金子”还须把掺进去的贱金属提炼出去才行。93《法典》颁行还不到六年,他便另出一部更为精审的新版,等于自认前一部尚不完善;新版中增添了他本人的两百条法律,以及针对法学上最晦涩、最棘手之处的五十项裁断。在他漫长的治世里,每一年——照普罗柯比(Procopius)的说法,简直是每一天——都有某项法律上的新花样。他的诸多法令,有的经他自己撤销,有的被后继者废弃,有的则随时间而湮灭;但其中十六道敕令与一百六十八条《新律》(Novels),终究被纳入民法学的正式法体之中。94有一位见识超乎本行偏见的哲人认为:这些没完没了、且大多无关宏旨的更易,唯一的解释便是这位君主贪贿的秉性——他毫不知耻地把自己的裁断与法律拿去出售。95那位秘史作者的指控固然直白而激烈,但他所举出的唯一实例,其实既可归因于查士丁尼的贪婪,也同样可归因于他的虔敬。有一位富有的宗教狂热者,把遗产悉数遗赠给埃梅萨(Emesa)教会;一名手段高明的伪造能手更抬高了这笔遗产的价值:他冒用叙利亚几位首富的名字,签下一张张借据与还款保证。那些被冒名的富人援引三四十年的既定时效为自己申辩,却被一道溯及既往的敕令驳回:敕令把教会追索债权的期限一举延长到一百年。这道敕令不公之甚、为祸之烈,以致一达成这桩临时的目的,便在同一朝内审慎地废止了。96即便本着公道为皇帝本人开脱,把这份腐败推到他妻子与宠臣头上,可单是沾上这般肮脏恶习的嫌疑,也足以贬损其法律的尊严;就连查士丁尼的辩护者也不妨承认:这样的轻率,无论出于何种动机,都有辱一位立法者、乃至一个堂堂男子的身分。
¶
Monarchs seldom condescend to become the preceptors of their subjects; and some praise is due to Justinian, by whose command an ample system was reduced to a short and elementary treatise. Among the various institutes of the Roman law, 97 those of Caius 98 were the most popular in the East and West; and their use may be considered as an evidence of their merit. They were selected by the Imperial delegates, Tribonian, Theophilus, and Dorotheus; and the freedom and purity of the Antonines was incrusted with the coarser materials of a degenerate age. The same volume which introduced the youth of Rome, Constantinople, and Berytus, to the gradual study of the Code and Pandects, is still precious to the historian, the philosopher, and the magistrate. The Institutes of Justinian are divided into four books: they proceed, with no contemptible method, from, I. Persons, to, II. Things, and from things, to, III. Actions; and the article IV., of Private Wrongs, is terminated by the principles of Criminal Law. 9811
君王难得肯屈尊去做臣民的师长;因此查士丁尼倒也有几分值得称道之处——正是奉他之命,才将一套浩繁的体系浓缩为一部简明的入门之作。在罗马法形形色色的“阶梯”类著作中,97盖尤斯(Gaius)所著的一部在东西方最为流行;98它之广受采用,本身便可视作其价值的明证。奉皇命受托的特里波尼安、塞奥菲鲁斯(Theophilus)与多罗修斯(Dorotheus)选中了这部书;而安敦尼诸帝时代的自由与纯正之上,也就此覆上了一层衰世的粗劣外壳。正是这部书,曾引领罗马、君士坦丁堡与贝鲁图斯的青年循序渐进地研读《法典》与《学说汇纂》;时至今日,它对史家、哲人与法官仍弥足珍贵。《查士丁尼法学阶梯》共分四卷:其编排颇有可取的条理,先论一、人,再及二、物,由物而及三、诉讼;至于第四目“私人侵害”,则以刑法诸原则收束全书。9811
Notes 注释
71
↩
For the legal labors of Justinian, I have studied the Preface to the Institutes; the 1st, 2d, and 3d Prefaces to the Pandects; the 1st and 2d Preface to the Code; and the Code itself, (l. i. tit. xvii. de Veteri Jure enucleando.) After these original testimonies, I have consulted, among the moderns, Heineccius, (Hist. J. R. No. 383—404,) Terasson. (Hist. de la Jurisprudence Romaine, p. 295—356,) Gravina, (Opp. p. 93-100,) and Ludewig, in his Life of Justinian, (p.19—123, 318-321; for the Code and Novels, p. 209—261; for the Digest or Pandects, p. 262—317.)
为考查士丁尼的立法工作,我研读了《法学阶梯》的序言,《学说汇纂》的第一、第二、第三篇序言,《法典》的第一、第二篇序言,以及《法典》本身(l. i. tit. xvii. de Veteri Jure enucleando)。参酌了这些原始文献之后,我又查阅了近人的著述:海涅克丘斯(Hist. J. R. No. 383—404)、特拉松(Hist. de la Jurisprudence Romaine, p. 295—356)、格拉维纳(Opp. p. 93-100),以及路德维希(Ludewig)的《查士丁尼传》(p. 19—123, 318—321;《法典》与《新律》见 p. 209—261;《学说汇纂》见 p. 262—317)。
72
↩
For the character of Tribonian, see the testimonies of Procopius, (Persic. l. i. c. 23, 24. Anecdot. c. 13, 20,) and Suidas, (tom. iii. p. 501, edit. Kuster.) Ludewig (in Vit. Justinian, p. 175—209) works hard, very hard, to whitewash—the blackamoor.
关于特里波尼安其人,可参普罗柯比(Persic. l. i. c. 23, 24. Anecdot. c. 13, 20)与苏达斯(tom. iii. p. 501, edit. Kuster)的记述。路德维希(见《查士丁尼传》,p. 175—209)煞费苦心、费尽气力,只想把这块“洗不白的黑炭”漂白。
73
↩
I apply the two passages of Suidas to the same man; every circumstance so exactly tallies. Yet the lawyers appear ignorant; and Fabricius is inclined to separate the two characters, (Bibliot. Grae. tom. i. p. 341, ii. p. 518, iii. p. 418, xii. p. 346, 353, 474.)
苏达斯书中两处记载的种种情节无不严丝合缝,我便认定说的是同一个人。可法学家们对此似乎一无所知,法布里丘斯(Fabricius)也倾向于把这两个人物拆作二人(Bibliot. Grae. tom. i. p. 341, ii. p. 518, iii. p. 418, xii. p. 346, 353, 474)。
74
↩
This story is related by Hesychius, (de Viris Illustribus,) Procopius, (Anecdot. c. 13,) and Suidas, (tom. iii. p. 501.) Such flattery is incredible! —Nihil est quod credere de se Non possit, cum laudatur Diis aequa potestas. Fontenelle (tom. i. p. 32—39) has ridiculed the impudence of the modest Virgil. But the same Fontenelle places his king above the divine Augustus; and the sage Boileau has not blushed to say, “Le destin a ses yeux n’oseroit balancer” Yet neither Augustus nor Louis XIV. were fools.
此事见于赫西基乌斯(de Viris Illustribus)、普罗柯比(Anecdot. c. 13)与苏达斯(tom. iii. p. 501)的记载。这般谄媚简直令人难以置信!——Nihil est quod credere de se Non possit, cum laudatur Diis aequa potestas(凡被奉承得与神明比肩的人,对自己便没有什么不敢相信的了)。丰特奈尔(tom. i. p. 32—39)曾讥笑谦逊的维吉尔那份厚颜;可就是这个丰特奈尔,却把本国的君王抬得高过神一般的奥古斯都;而睿智的布瓦洛(Boileau)也毫不脸红地说:“Le destin a ses yeux n’oseroit balancer”(命运在他眼前也不敢有所迟疑)。然而奥古斯都与路易十四(Louis XIV)都并非蠢人。
75
↩
General receivers was a common title of the Greek miscellanies, (Plin. Praefat. ad Hist. Natur.) The Digesta of Scaevola, Marcellinus, Celsus, were already familiar to the civilians: but Justinian was in the wrong when he used the two appellations as synonymous. Is the word Pandects Greek or Latin—masculine or feminine? The diligent Brenckman will not presume to decide these momentous controversies, (Hist. Pandect. Florentine. p. 200—304.) Note: The word was formerly in common use. See the preface is Aulus Gellius—W
“广收博采之书”(意即无所不收的总集)本是希腊杂纂常用的名目(Plin. Praefat. ad Hist. Natur.)。斯凯沃拉、马尔切利努斯(Marcellinus)、塞尔苏斯(Celsus)所著的《法学汇编》(Digesta),法学家们早已熟知;但查士丁尼把“Digesta”与“Pandects”二名当作同义词来用,却是用错了。“Pandects”一词究竟是希腊文还是拉丁文——是阳性还是阴性?勤勉的布伦克曼(Brenckman)也不敢擅自裁断这些重大的聚讼(Hist. Pandect. Florentine. p. 200—304)。* 编者按:此词从前本是通用之语,参见奥卢斯·革利乌斯(Aulus Gellius)的序言。—W
76
↩
Angelus Politianus (l. v. Epist. ult.) reckons thirty-seven (p. 192—200) civilians quoted in the Pandects—a learned, and for his times, an extraordinary list. The Greek index to the Pandects enumerates thirty-nine, and forty are produced by the indefatigable Fabricius, (Bibliot. Graec. tom. iii. p. 488—502.) Antoninus Augustus (de Nominibus Propriis Pandect. apud Ludewig, p. 283) is said to have added fifty-four names; but they must be vague or second-hand references.
安杰卢斯·波利齐亚努斯(l. v. Epist. ult.)列举了《学说汇纂》所引证的三十七位法学家(p. 192—200)——这份名单学识可观,就当时而言更堪称非凡。《学说汇纂》的希腊文索引开列了三十九位,而不知疲倦的法布里丘斯则举出四十位(Bibliot. Graec. tom. iii. p. 488—502)。据说安东尼努斯·奥古斯图斯(de Nominibus Propriis Pandect. apud Ludewig, p. 283)又补出五十四个名字;但这些多半是含混或转手的引证。
77
↩
The item of the ancient Mss. may be strictly defined as sentences or periods of a complete sense, which, on the breadth of the parchment rolls or volumes, composed as many lines of unequal length. The number in each book served as a check on the errors of the scribes, (Ludewig, p. 211—215; and his original author Suicer. Thesaur. Ecclesiast. tom. i. p 1021-1036).
古抄本中所谓的“行”,严格说来,是指意思完整的一句或一段;在羊皮卷或书册的幅面上,这样的一句一段便构成一行行长短不齐的文字。每卷所记的行数,可用来核查抄写吏的讹误(Ludewig, p. 211—215;其所本的原作者见 Suicer, Thesaur. Ecclesiast. tom. i. p. 1021-1036)。
78
↩
An ingenious and learned oration of Schultingius (Jurisprudentia Ante-Justinianea, p. 883—907) justifies the choice of Tribonian, against the passionate charges of Francis Hottoman and his sectaries.
斯胡尔廷(Schulting)吉乌斯有一篇立论精巧、学识渊博的演说(Jurisprudentia Ante-Justinianea, p. 883—907),为特里波尼安的取舍辩护,以驳斥弗朗西斯·奥特曼(Francis Hottoman)及其党徒那些意气用事的指控。
79
↩
Strip away the crust of Tribonian, and allow for the use of technical words, and the Latin of the Pandects will be found not unworthy of the silver age. It has been vehemently attacked by Laurentius Valla, a fastidious grammarian of the xvth century, and by his apologist Floridus Sabinus. It has been defended by Alciat, and a name less advocate, (most probably James Capellus.) Their various treatises are collected by Duker, (Opuscula de Latinitate veterum Jurisconsultorum, Lugd. Bat. 1721, in 12mo.) Note: Gibbon is mistaken with regard to Valla, who, though he inveighs against the barbarous style of the civilians of his own day, lavishes the highest praise on the admirable purity of the language of the ancient writers on civil law. (M. Warnkonig quotes a long passage of Valla in justification of this observation.) Since his time, this truth has been recognized by men of the highest eminence, such as Erasmus, David Hume and Runkhenius.—W.
剥去特里波尼安加在上面的那层硬壳,再把术语的使用考虑在内,就会发现《学说汇纂》的拉丁文其实无愧于白银时代。十五世纪那位苛求的文法家劳伦提乌斯·瓦拉(Laurentius Valla)曾对它大加挞伐,为瓦拉(Valla)辩护的弗洛里杜斯·萨比努斯(Floridus Sabinus)也随声附和;而为它辩护的,则有阿尔恰蒂(Alciat),以及一位佚名的辩护者(多半是雅各布·卡佩鲁斯(James Capellus))。他们的各篇论著,由迪克尔(Duker)汇为一编(Opuscula de Latinitate veterum Jurisconsultorum, Lugd. Bat. 1721, in 12mo.)。* 编者按:吉本在瓦拉一事上有误。瓦拉虽痛斥其同时代法学家那种粗鄙的文风,却对古代民法著作家语言那令人叹服的纯正备极赞誉。(瓦恩克尼希(Warnkonig)引了瓦拉的一大段文字来印证这一点。)自瓦拉以来,这一事实已为伊拉斯谟(Erasmus)、大卫·休谟(David Hume)、伦肯尼乌斯(Runkhenius)等第一流的名家所公认。—W.
80
↩
Nomina quidem veteribus servavimus, legum autem veritatem nostram fecimus. Itaque siquid erat in illis seditiosum, multa autem talia erant ibi reposita, hoc decisum est et definitum, et in perspicuum finem deducta est quaeque lex, (Cod. Justinian. l. i. tit. xvii. leg. 3, No 10.) A frank confession! * Note: Seditiosum, in the language of Justinian, means not seditious, but discounted.—W.
Nomina quidem veteribus servavimus, legum autem veritatem nostram fecimus. Itaque siquid erat in illis seditiosum, multa autem talia erant ibi reposita, hoc decisum est et definitum, et in perspicuum finem deducta est quaeque lex(大意:名号我们固然保留了前人的,法律的实质却已归我们所有;因此其中凡有“乱政”之处——而这类内容原本收录甚多——皆已裁定厘清,每一条法律都被导向明确的结论)(Cod. Justinian. l. i. tit. xvii. leg. 3, No 10)。好一句坦率的招供!* 编者按:seditiosum 一词,在查士丁尼的用语里并非指“煽动叛乱的”,而是指“已被废止、打了折扣的”。—W.
81
↩
The number of these emblemata (a polite name for forgeries) is much reduced by Bynkershoek, (in the four last books of his Observations,) who poorly maintains the right of Justinian and the duty of Tribonian.
这些 emblemata(对“伪作”一种客气的叫法)的数目,被宾克斯胡克(Bynkershoek)大加削减(见其《观察集》最后四卷);他勉力为查士丁尼的权利与特里波尼安的职责辩护,却难以令人信服。
82
↩
The antinomies, or opposite laws of the Code and Pandects, are sometimes the cause, and often the excuse, of the glorious uncertainty of the civil law, which so often affords what Montaigne calls “Questions pour l’Ami.” See a fine passage of Franciscus Balduinus in Justinian, (l. ii. p. 259, &c., apud Ludewig, p. 305, 306.)
《法典》与《学说汇纂》之间那些二律背反、彼此对立的法条,有时是民法那份“光荣的不确定性”的根由,更常被用作它的托词;而这种不确定性,也就一再造出蒙田(Montaigne)所谓的“留给朋友的难题”(Questions pour l’Ami)。可参弗朗西斯库斯·巴尔杜伊努斯(Franciscus Balduinus)论查士丁尼的一段妙文(l. ii. p. 259, &c., apud Ludewig, p. 305, 306)。
83
↩
When Faust, or Faustus, sold at Paris his first printed Bibles as manuscripts, the price of a parchment copy was reduced from four or five hundred to sixty, fifty, and forty crowns. The public was at first pleased with the cheapness, and at length provoked by the discovery of the fraud, (Mattaire, Annal. Typograph. tom. i. p. 12; first edit.)
当福斯特(Faust)(又作福斯图斯(Faustus))在巴黎把他最早印出的几部《圣经》充作手抄本出售时,一部羊皮本的价钱便从四五百克朗压到了六十、五十乃至四十克朗。世人起初为其低廉而欣喜,末了却因识破了这场骗局而大为光火(Mattaire, Annal. Typograph. tom. i. p. 12; first edit.)。
8311
↩
Among the works which have been recovered, by the persevering and successful endeavors of M. Mai and his followers to trace the imperfectly erased characters of the ancient writers on these Palimpsests, Gibbon at this period of his labors would have hailed with delight the recovery of the Institutes of Gaius, and the fragments of the Theodosian Code, published by M Keyron of Turin.—M.
迈先生及其追随者锲而不舍、卓有成效地在这些重写本上辨认古代著作家未刮净的字迹,使若干典籍失而复得;其中有都灵(Turin)的凯龙(Keyron)先生所刊布的盖尤斯《法学阶梯》与《狄奥多西法典》残篇,吉本著书至此,若能见到它们复得,定会额手称庆。—M
84
↩
This execrable practice prevailed from the viiith, and more especially from the xiith, century, when it became almost universal (Montfaucon, in the Memoires de l’Academie, tom. vi. p. 606, &c. Bibliotheque Raisonnee de la Diplomatique, tom. i. p. 176.)
这种可恶的做法自八世纪起便已盛行,到十二世纪尤甚,几乎无处不见(Montfaucon, in the Memoires de l’Academie, tom. vi. p. 606, &c. Bibliotheque Raisonnee de la Diplomatique, tom. i. p. 176.)。
85
↩
Pomponius (Pandect. l. i. tit. ii. leg. 2) observes, that of the three founders of the civil law, Mucius, Brutus, and Manilius, extant volumina, scripta Manilii monumenta; that of some old republican lawyers, haec versantur eorum scripta inter manus hominum. Eight of the Augustan sages were reduced to a compendium: of Cascellius, scripta non extant sed unus liber, &c.; of Trebatius, minus frequentatur; of Tubero, libri parum grati sunt. Many quotations in the Pandects are derived from books which Tribonian never saw; and in the long period from the viith to the xiiith century of Rome, the apparent reading of the moderns successively depends on the knowledge and veracity of their predecessors.
庞波尼乌斯(Pandect. l. i. tit. ii. leg. 2)指出:民法的三位奠基者——穆奇乌斯(Mucius)、布鲁图斯(Brutus)与马尼利乌斯(Manilius)——其著作 extant volumina, scripta Manilii monumenta(大意:其著作尚存,马尼利乌斯之作堪称丰碑);某些共和时代的老法学家,则 haec versantur eorum scripta inter manus hominum(其著作仍在世人手中流传)。奥古斯都时代的八位法学贤者,其著述已被缩成一部纲要:卡斯凯利乌斯(Cascellius) scripta non extant sed unus liber(著作不存,仅余一书),如此等等;特雷巴提乌斯(Trebatius) minus frequentatur(问津者较少);图贝罗(Tubero) libri parum grati sunt(其书不甚受欢迎)。《学说汇纂》中的许多引文,出自特里波尼安从未寓目的书籍;而在罗马纪年第七至第十三世纪这段漫长的时期里,后人看似读过的书,其实是一代代辗转相承,靠的是前人的学识与诚信。
86
↩
All, in several instances, repeat the errors of the scribe and the transpositions of some leaves in the Florentine Pandects. This fact, if it be true, is decisive. Yet the Pandects are quoted by Ivo of Chartres, (who died in 1117,) by Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury, and by Vacarius, our first professor, in the year 1140, (Selden ad Fletam, c. 7, tom. ii. p. 1080—1085.) Have our British Mss. of the Pandects been collated?
所有这些本子,在若干处都一并重复了佛罗伦萨抄本《学说汇纂》里抄写员的讹误以及某些叶片的错乱。此说若确,便是铁证。然而《学说汇纂》曾为沙特尔的伊沃(Ivo of Chartres)(卒于1117年)、坎特伯雷(Canterbury)大主教西奥博尔德(Theobald),以及我们不列颠的第一位法学教授瓦卡里乌斯(Vacarius)所征引,时在1140年(Selden ad Fletam, c. 7, tom. ii. p. 1080—1085)。不知我们不列颠所藏的《学说汇纂》抄本,可曾有人校勘过?
87
↩
See the description of this original in Brenckman, (Hist. Pandect. Florent. l. i. c. 2, 3, p. 4—17, and l. ii.) Politian, an enthusiast, revered it as the authentic standard of Justinian himself, (p. 407, 408;) but this paradox is refuted by the abbreviations of the Florentine Ms. (l. ii. c. 3, p. 117-130.) It is composed of two quarto volumes, with large margins, on a thin parchment, and the Latin characters betray the band of a Greek scribe.
关于这部原稿的描述,见布伦克曼(Hist. Pandect. Florent. l. i. c. 2, 3, p. 4—17, 及 l. ii)。热情有余的波利齐亚诺(Politian)推崇它,视之为出自查士丁尼本人之手的真本标准(p. 407, 408);然而佛罗伦萨抄本中的种种缩写,恰恰驳倒了这一悖谬之说(l. ii. c. 3, p. 117-130)。此稿由两卷四开本组成,页边留白宽阔,写在薄薄的羊皮之上,而其拉丁字母的笔迹,泄露出乃是一位希腊抄写员的手笔。
88
↩
Brenckman, at the end of his history, has inserted two dissertations on the republic of Amalphi, and the Pisan war in the year 1135, &c.
布伦克曼在其史著末尾,附有两篇专论,分别论述阿马尔菲共和国以及1135年前后的那场比萨战争等等。
89
↩
The discovery of the Pandects at Amalphi (A. D 1137) is first noticed (in 1501) by Ludovicus Bologninus, (Brenckman, l. i. c. 11, p. 73, 74, l. iv. c. 2, p. 417—425,) on the faith of a Pisan chronicle, (p. 409, 410,) without a name or a date. The whole story, though unknown to the xiith century, embellished by ignorant ages, and suspected by rigid criticism, is not, however, destitute of much internal probability, (l. i. c. 4—8, p. 17—50.) The Liber Pandectarum of Pisa was undoubtedly consulted in the xivth century by the great Bartolus, (p. 406, 407. See l. i. c. 9, p. 50—62.) Note: Savigny (vol. iii. p. 83, 89) examines and rejects the whole story. See likewise Hallam vol. iii. p. 514.—M.
《学说汇纂》于阿马尔菲被发现一事(公元1137年),最早由卢多维库斯·博洛尼努斯(Ludovicus Bologninus)提及(时在1501年)(Brenckman, l. i. c. 11, p. 73, 74, l. iv. c. 2, p. 417—425),所据乃一部比萨编年史(p. 409, 410),既无作者之名,也无年月可考。这整段故事,虽为十二世纪所不知,又经蒙昧诸世代的添枝加叶,且为严苛的考据所疑,但就其内在的情理而言,倒也并非全无可信之处(l. i. c. 4—8, p. 17—50)。比萨所藏的《学说汇纂抄本》(Liber Pandectarum),十四世纪时确曾为大法学家巴尔托鲁斯所参阅(p. 406, 407. 参见 l. i. c. 9, p. 50—62)。* 编者按:萨维尼(vol. iii. p. 83, 89)审视并否定了这整段故事,另可参哈勒姆(Hallam) vol. iii. p. 514。—M
90
↩
Pisa was taken by the Florentines in the year 1406; and in 1411 the Pandects were transported to the capital. These events are authentic and famous.
比萨于1406年为佛罗伦萨人(Florentines)所攻取,1411年,《学说汇纂》被运往首府。这些事件确凿而著名。
91
↩
They were new bound in purple, deposited in a rich casket, and shown to curious travellers by the monks and magistrates bareheaded, and with lighted tapers, (Brenckman, l. i. c. 10, 11, 12, p. 62—93.)
它被重新以紫色封面装帧,安放在一只华美的匣中;修士与官员们向好奇的游客展示它时,无不脱帽免冠,并手持点燃的烛火(Brenckman, l. i. c. 10, 11, 12, p. 62—93)。
92
↩
After the collations of Politian, Bologninus, and Antoninus Augustinus, and the splendid edition of the Pandects by Taurellus, (in 1551,) Henry Brenckman, a Dutchman, undertook a pilgrimage to Florence, where he employed several years in the study of a single manuscript. His Historia Pandectarum Florentinorum, (Utrecht, 1722, in 4to.,) though a monument of industry, is a small portion of his original design.
继波利齐亚诺、博洛尼努斯(Bologninus)与安东尼努斯·奥古斯提努斯(Antoninus Augustinus)的校勘,以及陶雷卢斯(Taurellus)所刊那部华美的《学说汇纂》版本(1551年)之后,荷兰人亨利(Henry)·布伦克曼又如朝圣一般前往佛罗伦萨,在那里花了好几年功夫,只为研究这一部抄本。他的《佛罗伦萨学说汇纂考》(Historia Pandectarum Florentinorum,Utrecht, 1722, in 4to.)虽是一座勤勉的丰碑,却不过是他原定宏图中的一小部分而已。
93
↩
Apud Homerum patrem omnis virtutis, (1st Praefat. ad Pandect.) A line of Milton or Tasso would surprise us in an act of parliament. Quae omnia obtinere sancimus in omne aevum. Of the first Code, he says, (2d Praefat.,) in aeternum valiturum. Man and forever!
“Apud Homerum patrem omnis virtutis”(语出《学说汇纂》第一篇序言,意谓“据一切德行之父荷马所言”)。倘若在一纸议会法案里读到弥尔顿(Milton)或塔索(Tasso)的诗句,我们定会大吃一惊。“Quae omnia obtinere sancimus in omne aevum”(我们制定这一切,令其永世通行)。谈及第一部《法典》时,他又说(第二篇序言)它将“in aeternum valiturum”(永久有效)。凡人之作,竟要“永世长存”!
94
↩
Novellae is a classic adjective, but a barbarous substantive, (Ludewig, p. 245.) Justinian never collected them himself; the nine collations, the legal standard of modern tribunals, consist of ninety-eight Novels; but the number was increased by the diligence of Julian, Haloander, and Contius, (Ludewig, p. 249, 258 Aleman. Not in Anecdot. p. 98.)
“Novellae”作形容词是古典用法,作名词却是不合古典的俗用(Ludewig, p. 245)。查士丁尼本人从未把这些《新律》汇集成编;作为近代法庭法律准绳的那九次汇编(collationes),共收《新律》九十八条;其数目后来又经尤利安(Julian)、哈洛安德(Haloander)与孔提乌斯(Contius)的勤力而有所增补(Ludewig, p. 249, 258. Aleman. Not in Anecdot. p. 98)。
95
↩
Montesquieu, Considerations sur la Grandeur et la Decadence des Romains, c. 20, tom. iii. p. 501, in 4to. On this occasion he throws aside the gown and cap of a President a Mortier.
孟德斯鸠,《罗马盛衰原因论》(Considerations sur la Grandeur et la Decadence des Romains),c. 20, tom. iii. p. 501, in 4to。在这里,他抛开了高等法院庭长(président à mortier)的法袍与法帽。
96
↩
Procopius, Anecdot. c. 28. A similar privilege was granted to the church of Rome, (Novel. ix.) For the general repeal of these mischievous indulgences, see Novel. cxi. and Edict. v.
普罗柯比,Anecdot. c. 28。类似的特权也曾授予罗马教会(Novel. ix)。至于这些贻害无穷的恩赦终遭普遍废止,可参《新律》第一一一条与《敕令》第五号(Novel. cxi. et Edict. v)。
97
↩
Lactantius, in his Institutes of Christianity, an elegant and specious work, proposes to imitate the title and method of the civilians. Quidam prudentes et arbitri aequitatis Institutiones Civilis Juris compositas ediderunt, (Institut. Divin. l. i. c. 1.) Such as Ulpian, Paul, Florentinus, Marcian.
拉克坦提乌斯(Lactantius)在其《基督教原理》(Institutiones Divinae)——一部文辞优雅、颇能取信于人的著作——中,有意仿效法学家们的书名与体例。“Quidam prudentes et arbitri aequitatis Institutiones Civilis Juris compositas ediderunt”(大意:某些明达而公允的贤者曾编纂并刊行《民法阶梯》)(Institut. Divin. l. i. c. 1)。此处所指,便是乌尔比安、保卢斯、弗洛伦提努斯(Florentinus)、马尔西安(Marcian)一流人物。
98
↩
The emperor Justinian calls him suum, though he died before the end of the second century. His Institutes are quoted by Servius, Boethius, Priscian, &c.; and the Epitome by Arrian is still extant. (See the Prolegomena and notes to the edition of Schulting, in the Jurisprudentia Ante-Justinianea, Lugd. Bat. 1717. Heineccius, Hist. J R No. 313. Ludewig, in Vit. Just. p. 199.)
尽管盖尤斯早在二世纪结束之前便已辞世,查士丁尼皇帝却称他为“吾之盖尤斯”(suum)。他的《法学阶梯》为塞尔维乌斯(Servius)、波爱修斯(Boethius)、普里西安(Priscian)等人所征引;而阿里安(Arrian)所作的《节本》至今尚存。(参见斯胡尔廷校订本的绪论与注释,见 Jurisprudentia Ante-Justinianea, Lugd. Bat. 1717;Heineccius, Hist. J. R. No. 313;Ludewig, in Vit. Just. p. 199。)
9811
↩
Gibbon, dividing the Institutes into four parts, considers the appendix of the criminal law in the last title as a fourth part.—W.
吉本把《法学阶梯》分作四部分,是将末目所附的刑法部分算作第四部分。—W