The Commercial Jurisdiction of Nuremberg. Early Modern Merchant’s Legal Opinions, Legal Practices and their contribution to the development of the Normativity of Commercial Law

• Applicant: Professorin Dr. Anja Amend-Traut
• Subject Area: Principles of Law and Jurisprudence
• Term: from 2014 to 2021
• Project identifier: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) - Project number 263014947

The file collection of the commercial jurisdiction of Nuremberg, so far largely unresearched in terms of legal history, shall be evaluated with regard to its so called parere. All in all, the empirical analysis of those Legal opinions, furnished non-procedural or arised from legal proceedings, shall contribute to the understanding of pre-modern history of commerce and law. In particular, new insights into the relationship between domestic German law and adopted Roman law shall be gained in order to find answers to one of the central problems of usus modernus. Especially commercial disputes are generally suited to distinguish themselves from the previous findings due to their underlying primarily statutory regulations and customary practices, for example with respect to the question to what extent theoretical jurisprudence was actually applied.Legal opinions can inform about how and to what extent legal concepts, especially customary ones, were equally implemented, developed and spread. A systematic examination of the so-called Parere has been requested in research since the 19th century, because these expert opinions circulated among all relevant European trade centres and are fundamental for understanding the special commercial jurisdiction established in many trade centres in early modern times.Furthermore, the question is to be investigated whether the local jurisdiction as a whole emancipated itself through the national significance of the Parere. Finally, the discussion on a lex mercatoria by legal historians shall also gain new impetus. It is to be clarified whether a commercial law beyond particulars emerged from the Parere, because the legal opinions had on the one hand primarily been drawn up by merchants for merchants, and on the other hand they were presumably also consulted for decisions on similar cases beyond the concrete case to which they applied.

• DFG Programme: Research Grants