English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The material form of a legal text—nowadays regulated in details and the conformity with established rules, which define: author, form and place of publication—is a condition of its legal validity. In analyzing Roman sources of law we often transpose this modern perspective, expecting that their validity also depends on a set of rules defining their linguistic form, issuing body and publication method. According to a generally accepted view of romanistic doctrine which originates in the late 19th century, the period of great codifications of law, the Roman imperial constitutions are divided into four categories, which embrace: edicts (edicta), instructions for imperial administration (mandata), sentences issued in the extra ordinem process (decreta) and written opinions in respond to a legal question (rescripta).1 The latter were subsequently divided by Wilcken in letters (epistulae) and subscripts (subscriptiones).2 The modern authors define for each of the types its issuing office, language, literary style, publication method and the scope of normative application.3 This notion of Roman imperial law is rooted in the analysis of the constitutions collected in two large anthologies which came down to our times: the Codex Theodosianus and the Codex Justinianus. From this perspective, the imperial decisions known as ἀποκρίματα, which are found in the papyri, are being identified with one of the known types of constitutions, most commonly with the subscripts.4 The aforementioned classification finds its confirmation in two fragments of ancient law handbooks called institutiones by two classical Jurists: Gaius5 and Ulpian6.

Material Aspects of Severan Legislation in the Light of Documentary Papyri