History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law
Identifieur interne : 001D62 ( Istex/Checkpoint ); précédent : 001D61; suivant : 001D63History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law
Auteurs : RBID : ISTEX:853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986Abstract
This essay offers a survey and analysis of the principal methodologies adopted and the aims pursued by‘modern’historians of the common law in England, Canada, and America, from Blackstone's time to the opening of the twenty‐first century. From the beginning of this period through to the1950s, the analysis reveals a steady current of contention amongst legal historians in respect of what legal history could do andjust how these aims might be realised. The post‐1950s era is characterised by the accelerating influence of the methodologies and objectives of extra‐legal disciplines. These include, most especially, the work and techniques of social and political historians, and, eventually, the various manifestations of the postmodernist challenge to the segregation of‘objective’historical interpretation from the polemical and creative reconstruction of the past. It is argued that the infusion of this methodological new blood has been largely beneficial, enhancing the reach and subtlety of legal historiography, and boosting its overall capacity to act as an intellectually enriching discipline.
Url:
DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-121X.2001.tb00573.x
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law</title><author><name sortKey="Smith, K J M" uniqKey="Smith K">K J M Smith</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Professor of Law, Cardiff University</mods:affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">Cardiff University</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Mclaren, J P S" uniqKey="Mclaren J">J P S McLaren</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Lansdowne Professor of Law, University of Victoria, British Columbia</mods:affiliation><wicri:noCountry code="subField">British Columbia</wicri:noCountry></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986</idno><date when="2001">2001</date><idno type="doi">10.1111/j.1748-121X.2001.tb00573.x</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">003260</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Curation">003260</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Checkpoint">001D62</idno></publicationStmt><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0261-3875</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="eng">This essay offers a survey and analysis of the principal methodologies adopted and the aims pursued by‘modern’historians of the common law in England, Canada, and America, from Blackstone's time to the opening of the twenty‐first century. From the beginning of this period through to the1950s, the analysis reveals a steady current of contention amongst legal historians in respect of what legal history could do andjust how these aims might be realised. The post‐1950s era is characterised by the accelerating influence of the methodologies and objectives of extra‐legal disciplines. These include, most especially, the work and techniques of social and political historians, and, eventually, the various manifestations of the postmodernist challenge to the segregation of‘objective’historical interpretation from the polemical and creative reconstruction of the past. It is argued that the infusion of this methodological new blood has been largely beneficial, enhancing the reach and subtlety of legal historiography, and boosting its overall capacity to act as an intellectually enriching discipline.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>wiley</corpusName><copyrightdate>2001</copyrightdate><author><json:item><name>K J M Smith</name><affiliations><json:string>Professor of Law, Cardiff University</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>J P S McLaren</name><affiliations><json:string>Lansdowne Professor of Law, University of Victoria, British Columbia</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><genre><json:string>Serial article</json:string></genre><host><genre></genre><language></language><issn><json:string>0261-3875</json:string></issn><title>Legal Studies</title><doi><json:string>10.1111/(ISSN)1748-121X</json:string></doi></host><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><abstract>This essay offers a survey and analysis of the principal methodologies adopted and the aims pursued by‘modern’historians of the common law in England, Canada, and America, from Blackstone's time to the opening of the twenty‐first century. From the beginning of this period through to the1950s, the analysis reveals a steady current of contention amongst legal historians in respect of what legal history could do andjust how these aims might be realised. The post‐1950s era is characterised by the accelerating influence of the methodologies and objectives of extra‐legal disciplines. These include, most especially, the work and techniques of social and political historians, and, eventually, the various manifestations of the postmodernist challenge to the segregation of‘objective’historical interpretation from the polemical and creative reconstruction of the past. It is argued that the infusion of this methodological new blood has been largely beneficial, enhancing the reach and subtlety of legal historiography, and boosting its overall capacity to act as an intellectually enriching discipline.</abstract><title>History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law</title><pubdate>2001-06</pubdate><doi><json:string>10.1111/j.1748-121X.2001.tb00573.x</json:string></doi><id>853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986</id><fulltext><json:item><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><extension>pdf</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><extension>zip</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><json:item><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><extension>txt</extension><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader type="text"><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="alt" xml:lang="">History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><availability><p>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</p></availability><date>2006-04-27</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="">History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law</title><author><persName><forename type="first">K J M</forename><surname>Smith</surname></persName><note type="biography">* We are much indebted to Raymond Cocks, Roger Cotterrell and Michael Lobban for their many enlightening observations on an earlier draft of this essay. The project was supported by a British Academy award.</note><affiliation>Professor of Law, Cardiff University</affiliation></author><author><persName><forename type="first">J P S</forename><surname>McLaren</surname></persName><note type="biography">* We are much indebted to Raymond Cocks, Roger Cotterrell and Michael Lobban for their many enlightening observations on an earlier draft of this essay. The project was supported by a British Academy award.</note><affiliation>Lansdowne Professor of Law, University of Victoria, British Columbia</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Legal Studies</title><idno type="pISSN">0261-3875</idno><idno type="eISSN">1748-121X</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1748-121X</idno><imprint><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><pubPlace>Oxford, UK</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2001-06"></date><biblScope unit="vol">21</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">2</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="251">251</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="324">324</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1111/j.1748-121X.2001.tb00573.x</idno><idno type="ArticleID">LEST251</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2006-04-27</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>This essay offers a survey and analysis of the principal methodologies adopted and the aims pursued by‘modern’historians of the common law in England, Canada, and America, from Blackstone's time to the opening of the twenty‐first century. From the beginning of this period through to the1950s, the analysis reveals a steady current of contention amongst legal historians in respect of what legal history could do andjust how these aims might be realised. The post‐1950s era is characterised by the accelerating influence of the methodologies and objectives of extra‐legal disciplines. These include, most especially, the work and techniques of social and political historians, and, eventually, the various manifestations of the postmodernist challenge to the segregation of‘objective’historical interpretation from the polemical and creative reconstruction of the past. It is argued that the infusion of this methodological new blood has been largely beneficial, enhancing the reach and subtlety of legal historiography, and boosting its overall capacity to act as an intellectually enriching discipline.</p></abstract></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2006-04-27">Created</change><change when="2001-06">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Wiley component found"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:document><component version="2.0" type="serialArticle" xml:lang="en"><header><publicationMeta level="product"><publisherInfo><publisherName>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisherName><publisherLoc>Oxford, UK</publisherLoc></publisherInfo><doi origin="wiley" registered="yes">10.1111/(ISSN)1748-121X</doi><issn type="print">0261-3875</issn><issn type="electronic">1748-121X</issn><idGroup><id type="product" value="LEST"></id><id type="publisherDivision" value="ST"></id></idGroup><titleGroup><title type="main" sort="LEGAL STUDIES">Legal Studies</title></titleGroup></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="part" position="06002"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/lest.2001.21.issue-2</doi><numberingGroup><numbering type="journalVolume" number="21">21</numbering><numbering type="journalIssue" number="2">2</numbering></numberingGroup><coverDate startDate="2001-06">June 2001</coverDate></publicationMeta><publicationMeta level="unit" type="article" position="0025100" status="forIssue"><doi origin="wiley">10.1111/j.1748-121X.2001.tb00573.x</doi><idGroup><id type="unit" value="LEST251"></id></idGroup><countGroup><count type="pageTotal" number="74"></count></countGroup><eventGroup><event type="firstOnline" date="2006-04-27"></event><event type="publishedOnlineFinalForm" date="2006-04-27"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:BPG_TO_WML3G version:2.3.2 mode:FullText source:Header result:Header" date="2010-03-15"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WILEY_ML3G_TO_WILEY_ML3GV2 version:3.8.8" date="2014-02-01"></event><event type="xmlConverted" agent="Converter:WML3G_To_WML3G version:4.1.7 mode:FullText,remove_FC" date="2014-10-31"></event></eventGroup><numberingGroup><numbering type="pageFirst" number="251">251</numbering><numbering type="pageLast" number="324">324</numbering></numberingGroup><linkGroup><link type="toTypesetVersion" href="file:LEST.LEST251.pdf"></link></linkGroup></publicationMeta><contentMeta><countGroup><count type="referenceTotal" number="29"></count><count type="linksCrossRef" number="4"></count></countGroup><titleGroup><title type="main">History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law</title></titleGroup><creators><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr1" affiliationRef="#a1" noteRef="#fn1"><personName><givenNames>K J M</givenNames><familyName>Smith</familyName></personName></creator><creator creatorRole="author" xml:id="cr2" affiliationRef="#a2" noteRef="#fn1"><personName><givenNames>J P S</givenNames><familyName>McLaren</familyName></personName></creator></creators><affiliationGroup><affiliation xml:id="a1"><unparsedAffiliation>Professor of Law, Cardiff University</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation><affiliation xml:id="a2"><unparsedAffiliation>Lansdowne Professor of Law, University of Victoria, British Columbia</unparsedAffiliation></affiliation></affiliationGroup><abstractGroup><abstract type="main" xml:lang="en"><p>This essay offers a survey and analysis of the principal methodologies adopted and the aims pursued by‘modern’historians of the common law in England, Canada, and America, from Blackstone's time to the opening of the twenty‐first century. From the beginning of this period through to the1950s, the analysis reveals a steady current of contention amongst legal historians in respect of what legal history could do andjust how these aims might be realised. The post‐1950s era is characterised by the accelerating influence of the methodologies and objectives of extra‐legal disciplines. These include, most especially, the work and techniques of social and political historians, and, eventually, the various manifestations of the postmodernist challenge to the segregation of‘objective’historical interpretation from the polemical and creative reconstruction of the past. It is argued that the infusion of this methodological new blood has been largely beneficial, enhancing the reach and subtlety of legal historiography, and boosting its overall capacity to act as an intellectually enriching discipline.</p></abstract></abstractGroup></contentMeta><noteGroup><note xml:id="fn1"><label>*</label><p>We are much indebted to Raymond Cocks, Roger Cotterrell and Michael Lobban for their many enlightening observations on an earlier draft of this essay. The project was supported by a British Academy award.</p></note></noteGroup></header></component></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.5"><titleInfo><title>History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative"><title></title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">K J M</namePart><namePart type="family">Smith</namePart><affiliation>Professor of Law, Cardiff University</affiliation><description>* We are much indebted to Raymond Cocks, Roger Cotterrell and Michael Lobban for their many enlightening observations on an earlier draft of this essay. The project was supported by a British Academy award.</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">J P S</namePart><namePart type="family">McLaren</namePart><affiliation>Lansdowne Professor of Law, University of Victoria, British Columbia</affiliation><description>* We are much indebted to Raymond Cocks, Roger Cotterrell and Michael Lobban for their many enlightening observations on an earlier draft of this essay. The project was supported by a British Academy award.</description><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre>Serial article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Oxford, UK</placeTerm></place><dateCreated encoding="w3cdtf">2006-04-27</dateCreated><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2001-06</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2001</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="eng">This essay offers a survey and analysis of the principal methodologies adopted and the aims pursued by‘modern’historians of the common law in England, Canada, and America, from Blackstone's time to the opening of the twenty‐first century. From the beginning of this period through to the1950s, the analysis reveals a steady current of contention amongst legal historians in respect of what legal history could do andjust how these aims might be realised. The post‐1950s era is characterised by the accelerating influence of the methodologies and objectives of extra‐legal disciplines. These include, most especially, the work and techniques of social and political historians, and, eventually, the various manifestations of the postmodernist challenge to the segregation of‘objective’historical interpretation from the polemical and creative reconstruction of the past. It is argued that the infusion of this methodological new blood has been largely beneficial, enhancing the reach and subtlety of legal historiography, and boosting its overall capacity to act as an intellectually enriching discipline.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Legal Studies</title></titleInfo><identifier type="ISSN">0261-3875</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1748-121X</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/(ISSN)1748-121X</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">LEST</identifier><part><date>2001</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>21</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>2</number></detail></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1111/j.1748-121X.2001.tb00573.x</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">LEST251</identifier><part><extent unit="pages"><start>251</start><end>324</end><total>74</total></extent><extent unit="references"><total>29</total></extent></part><recordInfo><recordOrigin>WILEY</recordOrigin><recordContentSource>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Linguistique/explor/CharterV3/Data/Istex/Checkpoint
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001D62 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd -nk 001D62 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Linguistique
|area= CharterV3
|flux= Istex
|étape= Checkpoint
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:853888E86F168E8C5008512BCDFB4B2AD138A986
|texte= History's living legacy: an outline of‘modern’historiography of the common law
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.07. |  |