建構與解構之間的法學發生史──以伊爾內留斯學案爲視角

The Polemic of Jurisprudence’s Renaissance between Construction and Deconstruction: From the Perspective of Study of the Imeriusy Question

近代法學的起源是西方法律史的核心問題，數百年來爭論不斷，幷且以波倫那大學和伊爾內留斯爲中心，較爲清晰地呈現出“建構”與“解構”這兩個相反相成的論述脉絡，塑造了法律史學內在的性格矛盾。唯有細緻梳理西方學界對于伊爾內留斯問題的研究史，揭示以伊爾內留斯爲中心的客觀歷史與主觀歷史之閭的巨大反差，我國法學界對于西方法學發生史的理解偏差才能得到修正。 The origin of modem law is the core issue in western legal history, which experiences continuous aca­demic debate during hundreds of years. With the discussion of the Imerius’ Question, two kinds of contradic­tory narrative paradigm between Construction and Deconstruction emerged, which made legal history get its character with the contradictions. By combing the study of Imerius’ Question, the article aims to reveal the significant contrast of Imerius between the objective and subjective history, in further, to correct the devia­tion in general understanding in Chinese textbook of legal history.

The origin of modem law is the core issue in western legal history, which experiences continuous aca­demic debate during hundreds of years. With the discussion of the Imerius’ Question, two kinds of contradic­tory narrative paradigm between Construction and Deconstruction emerged, which made legal history get its character with the contradictions. By combing the study of Imerius’ Question, the article aims to reveal the significant contrast of Imerius between the objective and subjective history, in further, to correct the devia­tion in general understanding in Chinese textbook of legal history.