SAVIGNY, FRIEDRICH KARL VON (1779-1861), Germanjurist, was born at Frankfort-on-Main on the 21st of February1779. He was descended from an ancient family, which figures inthe history of Lorraine, and which derived its name from thecastle of Savigny near Charmes in the valley of the Moselle. Leftan orphan at the age of 13, he was brought up by his guardianuntil, in 1795, he entered the university of Marburg, where,though suffering at times severely from ill-health, he studiedunder Professors Anton Bauer (1772-1843) and Philipp FriedrichWeiss (1766-1808), the former one of the most conspicuouspioneers in the reform of the German criminal law, the latterdistinguished for his knowledge of medieval jurisprudence.After the fashion of German students, Savigny visited severaluniversities, notably Jena, Leipzig and Halle; and returning toMarburg, took his doctor's degree in 1800. At Marburg helectured asPrivatdozent on criminal law and the Pandects.In 1803 he published his famous treatise,Das Recht des Besitzes(the rights of possession). It was at once hailed by the great juristThibaut as a masterpiece; and the old uncritical study of Romanlaw was at an end. It quickly obtained a European reputation,and still remains a prominent landmark in the history ofjurisprudence. In 1804 Savigny married Kunigunde Brentano, thesister of Bettina von Arnim and Clemens Brentano the poet, andthe same year started on an extensive tour through France andsouth Germany in search of fresh sources of Roman law. In thisquest, particularly in Paris, he was successful.

In 1808 he was appointed by the Bavarian governmentordinary professor of Roman law at Landshut, where he remaineda year and a half. In 1810 he was called, chiefly at the instanceof Wilhelm von Humboldt, to fill the chair of Roman law at thenew university of Berlin. Here one of his services was to create,in connexion with the faculty of law, a “Spruch-Collegium,”an extraordinary tribunal competent to deliver opinions on casesremitted to it by the ordinary courts; and he took an active partin its labours. This was the busiest time of his life. He wasengaged in lecturing, in the government of the university (ofwhich he was the third rector), and as tutor to the crown princein Roman, criminal and Prussian law. Not the least importantconsequence of his residence in Berlin was his friendship withNiebuhr and Eichhorn. In 1814 appeared his pamphletVomBeruf unserer Zeit für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft (newedition, 1892). It was a protest against the demand for codification,and was intended as a reply to Thibaut's pamphlet urgingthe necessity of forming a code for Germany which should beindependent of the influence of foreign legal systems. In thisfamous pamphlet Savigny did not oppose the introduction ofnew laws, or even a new system of laws, but only objected to theproposed codification on two grounds: (1) that the damagewhich had been caused by the neglect of former generationsof jurists could not be quickly repaired, and that time wasrequired to set the house in order; and (2) that there was greatrisk of the so-callednatural law, with its “infinitearrogance”and its “shallow philosophy” ruining such a scheme. Indeed,the enduring value of this pamphlet is that it saved jurisprudencefor all time from the hollow abstractions of such a work as theInstitutiones juris naturae et gentium of Christian Wolff (1679-1754),and conclusively proved that a historical study of thepositive law was a condition precedent to the right understandingof the science of all law.

In 1815 he founded, with Karl Friedrich Eichhorn, andJohann Friedrich Ludwig Göschen (1778-1837), theZeitschriftfür geschichtliche Rechtswissenschaft, the organ of the new historicalschool, of which he was the representative. In this periodical(vol. iii. p. 129 seq.) Savigny made known to the world thediscovery at Verona, by Niebuhr, of the lost text of Gaius,pronouncing it, on the evidence of that portion of the MS.submitted to him, to be the work of Gaius himself and not, as Niebuhrsuggested, of Ulpian. The record of the remainder of Savigny'slife consists of little else than a list of the merited honours whichhe received at the hands of his sovereign, and of the works whichhe published with indefatigable activity. In 1815 appeared thefirst volume of hisGeschichte des römischen Rechts im Mittelalter,the last of which was not published until 1831. This work, towhich his early instructor Weiss had first prompted him, wasoriginally intended to be a literary history of Roman law fromIrnerius to the present time. His design was in some respectnarrowed; in others it was widened. He saw fit not to continuethe narrative beyond the 16th century, when the separation ofnationalities disturbed the foundations of the science of law.His treatment of the subject was not merely that of a bibliographer;it was philosophical. It raised the veil which hadhung over the history of Roman law, from the breaking up of theempire until the beginning of the 12th century, and showed how,though considered dead, the Roman law yet lived on through thesedark centuries, in local customs, in towns, in ecclesiasticaldoctrines and school teachings, until it blossomed out once morein full splendour in Bologna and other Italian cities. Thishistory was the parent of many valuable works in which Savignypublished the result of his investigations.^[1]In 1817 he wasappointed a member of the commission for organizing thePrussian provincial estates, and also a member of the departmentof justice in the Staatsrath, and in 1819 he became a member ofthe supreme court of appeal for the Rhine Provinces. In 1820he was made a member of the commission for revising thePrussian code. In 1822 a serious nervous illness attacked him,and compelled him to seek relief in travel. In 1835 he began hiselaborate work on contemporary Roman law,System des heutigenrömischen Rechts (8 vols., 1840-1849). His activity as professorceased in March 1842, when he was appointed “Grosskanzler”(High Chancellor), the title given by Frederick II. in 1746 tothe official at the head of the juridical system in Prussia, as in thisposition he carried out several important law reforms in regard tobills of exchange and divorce. He held the office until 1848,when he resigned, not altogether to the regret of his friends,who had seen his energies withdrawn from jurisprudence withoutbeing able to flatter themselves that he was a great statesman.In 1850, on the occasion of the jubilee of his obtaining his doctor'sdegree, appeared in five volumes hisVermischte Schriften,consisting of a collection of his minor works published between1800 and 1844. This event gave rise to much enthusiasm throughoutGermany in honour of “the great master” and founder ofmodern jurisprudence. In 1853 he published his treatise onContracts (Das Obligationenrecht) , a supplement to his work onmodern Roman law, in which he clearly demonstrates thenecessity for the historical treatment of law. Savigny died atBerlin on the 25th of October 1861. His son, Karl Friedrichvon Savigny (1814-1875), was Prussian minister of foreignaffairs in 1849. He represented Prussia in important diplomatictransactions, especially in 1866.

Savigny belongs to the so-called historical school of jurists,though he cannot claim to be regarded as its founder, an honourwhich belongs to Gustav Hugo. In the history of jurisprudenceSavigny's great works are theRecht des Besitzes and theBerufunserer Zeit für Gesetzgebung above referred to. The formermarks an epoch in jurisprudence. Professor Jhering says:“With theRecht des Besitzes the juridical method of the Romanswas regained, and modern jurisprudence born.” It marked agreat advance both in results and method, and rendered obsoletea large literature. Savigny sought to prove that in Roman lawpossession had always reference to “usucapion” or to“interdicts”;that there is not a right to continuance in possession but onlyto immunity from interference; possession being based on theconsciousness of unlimited power. These and other propositionswere maintained with great acuteness and unequalled ingenuityin interpreting and harmonizing the Roman jurists. Thecontroversy which has been carried on in Germany by Jhering,Baron, Gans and Bruns shows that many of Savigny'sconclusions have not been accepted.^[2]TheBeruf unserer Zeit, inaddition to the more specific object the treatise had in view,which has been already treated, expresses the idea, unfamiliar in1814, that law is part and parcel of national life, and combatsthe notion, too much assumed by French jurists, especially in the18th century, and countenanced in practice by Bentham, thatlaw might be arbitrarily imposed on a country irrespective of itsstate of civilization and past history. Of even greater valuethan his services in consolidating “the historical school ofjurisprudence” is the emphatic recognition in his works of thefact that the practice and theory of jurisprudence cannot bedivorced without injury to both.

• 75%

• Subpages
• Headers applying DefaultSort key