title: La critique du texte du Digeste dans l’université de Bologne au XIIe et au début du XIIIe. Le cas des commentaires sur D. 34.5.13.3
metadata.name: dc.contributor.author
metadata.value: Mazhuga, Vladimir I.
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.accessioned
metadata.value: 2024-12-03T17:34:32Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.available
metadata.value: 2024-12-03T17:34:32Z
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.date.issued
metadata.value: 2024-03
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.citation
metadata.value: Mazhuga V. I. La critique du texte du Digeste dans l’université de Bologne au XIIe et au début du XIIIe. Le cas des commentaires sur D. 34.5.13.3. Philologia Classica 2024, 19 (1), 134–145. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2024.109
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.identifier.other
metadata.value: https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2024.109
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.identifier.uri
metadata.value: http://hdl.handle.net/11701/48095
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.description.abstract
metadata.value: Seven commentaries on D. 34.5.13.3 are examined, for the most part from the text found by
  the author in six codices written at the turn of the 13th century. The fugitive notice of Rogerius
  (d. around 1162) provoked attempts to correct the paragraph of the Digest and gave rise to
  a whole series of commentaries in the form of glosses, but also more developed commentaries,
  that of Ioannes Bassianus taking the form of a treatise. The Roman jurist has dealt in the
  paragraph with two variants of one and the same stipulation. Except for Bassianus, the medieval
  commentators could not understand the meaning of a fine distinction between these
  variants, and they were seduced by Rogerius’s idea that the elimination of the negative particle,
  employed in each of these variants, would have given an alternative character to two similar
  formulas of stipulation, by giving more movement and vigour to the thought of the Roman
  author. Rogerius wrote his entry in the first person. Next to this notice lies its paraphrase,
  written in the third person, probably by Placentin (d. between 1180 and 1192), Rogerius’ successor
  at the legal school of Provence. An interesting discussion focused on this paraphrase.
  The crux of the dispute was whether the negative particle should be eliminated in the first or
  second stipulation formula. In the heat of the discussion, the faithful followers of Bassianus,
  Hugolinus and Nicholas the Furious, largely ignored their master’s opinion.
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.language.iso
metadata.value: fr
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.publisher
metadata.value: St Petersburg State University
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.relation.ispartofseries
metadata.value: Philologia Classica;Volume 19; Issue 1
metadata.lang: -
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: medieval glosses
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Roman law
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Bologna jurists
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.subject
metadata.value: Rogerius’ authorship
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.title
metadata.value: La critique du texte du Digeste dans l’université de Bologne au XIIe et au début du XIIIe. Le cas des commentaires sur D. 34.5.13.3
metadata.lang: en_GB
metadata.name: dc.type
metadata.value: Article
metadata.lang: en_GB
resources.filename: 09.pdf
resources.url: https://dspace.spbu.ru/bitstream/11701/48095/1/09.pdf
resources.format: Adobe PDF
resources.size: 690,34 kB