Giuseppe Falcone
Related Authors
![HISTORY, LAW & LEGAL HISTORY [HLLH]](https://0.academia-photos.com/241453701/96331854/85363891/s200_hllh.history_law_legal_history.jpeg)
Interests
Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
Related Authors
University of Messina
University of Cagliari
University of Salento
Università degli Studi di Palermo
University of Salerno Italy
Università degli Studi di Torino
Università degli Studi di Napoli "Federico II"
Uploads
All by Giuseppe Falcone
interpretation that the Justinian’s ban on commentaries was established only for the Digest and was not specifically addressed to law teachers, but rather concerned the forensic use of the Digest; furthermore, starting from Scheltema’s idea that forbidden commentaries were marginal notes placed directly in the manuscripts, the author hypothesizes that the prohibition aimed at avoiding a writing practice attested in many
fields during late Antiquity, i.e. the creation of ‘chaines’ (catenae) of marginalia, which collected different interpretations from other people’s commentaries: such a practice would have contrasted the propaganda of the overcoming of interpretatives controversies realized thanks the Digest.
law, which were fostered by Jan Lokin, and of the scientific profile of the late scholar, the author
tackles a textual comparison between the versions of a constitution of Arcadius preserved in the Theodosian
Codex and in the Justinian Codex of 534. In the latter, the concluding statement of Arcadius’s lex,
which contained the rule that an action cannot be commenced by the heir of a person who had not been
the holder of the same action, was eliminated by the compilers of 534: it was in fact in contrast to a constitution
of Justinian of 531, which, on the contrary, stated that actions can be commenced by and
against heirs and which, in substance, reiterated a provision already issued in 528. A passage from the Basilics,
generally overlooked by scholars, shows that Arcadius’ constitution had already been included in the
Code of 529 and that it also contained the rule deleted in 534. Evidently, the compilers of the first Justinian
Code had not taken the lex of 528 into account and this circumstance probably explains the very insistent
and resolute wording with which Justinian in 531 expressly abolished the rule enunciated by Arcadius.
This also explains the presence in the 534 Code of both Justinian’s constitutions of 528 and 531,
which has been the object of discussion among scholars.
his own essay on Chiazzese’s Confronti testuali; he also reports some passages of an unpublished manuscript containing the work plan of Chiazzese’s research.