The second of this year’s Law’s Two Bodies sessions, on 7 November 2017, marked something of a departure. Previous interviews had been with legal practitioners, including judges; the interviewee on this occasion was Angela Wilson, former Assistant Chief Constable, Tayside Police. The fascinating interview uncovered differences and similarities to views and uses of the law previously found amongst legal practitioners. Answers also brought very interesting perspectives on law and morality and on law and emotions.
The project ‘Civil Law, Common Law, Customary Law: Consonance, Divergence and Transformation in Western Europe from the late eleventh to the thirteenth centuries’ invites applications for two PhD studentships, for applicants to start PhDs at the University of St Andrews in September 2018. Each student will examine the development of land law within a chosen region of western Europe in the period 1050-1250. Preference may be given to candidates working on France, Catalonia, or Italy, but applications to work on other areas will be considered too.
For further information on the project, see http://clicme.wp.st-andrews.ac.uk/.
Applicants should have completed a taught-postgraduate degree (or equivalent) by September 2018. The studentships are fully funded covering stipend and fees for UK and EU resident students. Non-EU students can also be considered for further University scholarships for international fees.
Applicants should apply for a PhD place via the University of St Andrews standard application process: https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/study/pg/apply/research/. In addition, they should submit a research outline of a maximum of 500 words directly to to Professor John Hudson by email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
The deadline for applications is 15 January 2018.
In mid-October John Hudson taught classes in Emanuele Conte and Angela Condello’s ‘Law and Humanities’ course at the University of Roma Tre. The classes concentrated on the presentation of law within the acclaimed HBO series ‘The Wire’. Comparison was made between the state-based law of police and judicial system on the one hand, and on the other the customary norms of ‘The Game’, that is, the culture and practices of the drug trade and its participants, as well as the customary norms of medieval Icelandic law as revealed by Njál’s Saga. Also considered were the differences of Common and Civil Law practices for televisual presentation; does the Common Law’s adversarial trial system particularly suit dramatic purposes, be it for depiction of straightforward contests between good and evil or of more nuanced conflicts? does the audience stand in the same place as the Common Law jury? may an inquisitorial system in the Civil Law break down some of the genre differences between police and legal drama? With a class from four continents and ten countries, we were able to assess such questions not just in terms of authorial aims, but also of audience reception. Those from Civil Law systems watched The Wire’s trial scenes in subtly different ways than those from Common Law systems, whereas that difference of legal tradition had less effect on perception of the customary norms that can be uncovered in ‘The Game’ or in Njál’s Saga.
The first of this year’s Law’s Two Bodies events, an interview with Benjamin Earl, Procurator General of the Dominican Order, took place on 3 October 2017. John Hudson interviewed the Procurator about his role in the Order and his use of law in this role. As the first canon lawyer interviewed for the series, the Procurator provided a fascinating and different perspective on the law in the ecclesiastical sphere.
The Institute of Legal and Constitutional Research’s annual Academic Lecture was delivered by Professor Don Herzog of the University of Michigan Law School on 28 September 2017. Professor Herzog’s title was ‘Sovereignty, RIP: Part of the Story’. He proposed that arguments concerning sovereignty continue to be dominated by ideas that were developed in the early modern period. Such ideas, with their emphasis on the undivided, unlimited, and indivisible nature of sovereignty, may have been well-suited to that period but are now not merely outdated but also pernicious and malign in their effect. Even in earlier contexts such as eighteenth-century conflicts over American independence and the U.S. Constitution, debates framed by both sides in terms of sovereignty were often rendered harder to solve by use of the concept and in particular emphasis on indivisibility. Often, argued Professor Herzog, abandonment of ideas of sovereignty and their replacement by ones such as ‘jurisdiction’ would have a beneficial effect.