document_title: Criminal justice

question_text: what is the role of law enforcement in the criminal justice system

root

text: Criminal justice

text: Law[edit]

text: The Law From Old English lagu (something laid down or fixed) (Harper, Douglas. "law". Online Etymology Dictionary. ); legal comes from Latin legalis, from lex "law," "statute" (Harper, Douglas. "legal". Online Etymology Dictionary. ) is a system of rules usually enforced through a set of institutions. The purpose of law is to provide an objective set of rules for governing conduct and maintaining order in a society.

tag: p

text: The oldest known codified law is the Code of Hammurabi, dating back to about 1754 BC. The preface directly credits the laws to the code of hammurabi of Ur. In different parts of the world, law could be established by philosophers or religion. In the modern world, laws are typically created and enforced by governments. These codified laws may coexist with or contradict other forms of social control, such as religious proscriptions, professional rules and ethics, or the cultural mores and customs of a society.

text: Within the realm of codified law, there are generally two forms of law that the courts are concerned with. Civil laws are rules and regulations which govern transactions and grievances between individual citizens. Criminal law is concerned with actions which are dangerous or harmful to society as a whole, in which prosecution is pursued not by an individual but rather by the state. The purpose of criminal law is to provide the specific definition of what constitutes a crime and to prescribe punishments for committing such a crime. No criminal law can be valid unless it includes both of these factors. The subject of criminal justice is, of course, primarily concerned with the enforcement of criminal law.

text: Criminal justice system[edit]

text: Definition[edit]

text: The criminal justice system consists of three main parts: (1) Law Enforcement (police officers, FBI, Department of Homeland Security, etc...) ; (2) Courts (attorneys, judges, etc...) ; and (3) corrections (jails, prisons, probation and parole). In the criminal justice system, these distinct agencies operate together both under the rule of law and as the principal means of maintaining the rule of law within society.[5]

text: For the purposes of section 8(6) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995 and section 194A(6) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, the criminal justice system includes, in particular, the investigation of offences and the treatment of offenders.[6]

text: Law enforcement[edit]

text: The first contact a defendant has with the criminal justice system is usually with the police (or law enforcement) who investigate the suspected wrongdoing and make an arrest, but if the suspect is dangerous to the whole nation, a national level law enforcement agency is called in . When warranted, law enforcement agencies or police officers are empowered to use force and other forms of legal coercion and means to effect public and social order. The term is most commonly associated with police departments of a state that are authorized to exercise the police power of that state within a defined legal or territorial area of responsibility. The word comes from the Latin politia ("civil administration"), which itself derives from the Ancient Greek πόλις, for polis ("city").[7] The first police force comparable to the present-day police was established in 1667 under King Louis XIV in France, although modern police usually trace their origins to the 1800 establishment of the Marine Police in London, the Glasgow Police, and the Napoleonic police of Paris.[8][9][10]

text: Police are primarily concerned with keeping the peace and enforcing criminal law based on their particular mission and jurisdiction. Formed in 1908, the Federal Bureau of Investigation began as an entity which could investigate and enforce specific federal laws as an investigative and "law enforcement agency" in the United States;[11] this, however, has constituted only a small portion of overall policing activity.[12] Policing has included an array of activities in different contexts, but the predominant ones are concerned with order maintenance and the provision of services.[13] During modern times, such endeavors contribute toward fulfilling a shared mission among law enforcement organizations with respect to the traditional policing mission of deterring crime and maintaining societal order.[14]

text: Courts[edit]

text: The courts serve as the venue where disputes are then settled and justice is administered. With regard to criminal justice, there are a number of critical people in any court setting. These critical people are referred to as the courtroom work group and include both professional and non professional individuals. These include the judge, prosecutor, and the defense attorney. The judge, or magistrate, is a person, elected or appointed, who is knowledgeable in the law, and whose function is to objectively administer the legal proceedings and offer a final decision to dispose of a case.

text: In the U.S. and in a growing number of nations, guilt or innocence (although in the U.S. a jury can never find a defendant "innocent" but rather "not guilty") is decided through the adversarial system. In this system, two parties will both offer their version of events and argue their case before the court (sometimes before a judge or panel of judges, sometimes before a jury). The case should be decided in favor of the party who offers the most sound and compelling arguments based on the law as applied to the facts of the case.

text: The prosecutor, or district attorney, is a lawyer who brings charges against a person, persons or corporate entity. It is the prosecutor's duty to explain to the court what crime was committed and to detail what evidence has been found which incriminates the accused. The prosecutor should not be confused with a plaintiff or plaintiff's counsel. Although both serve the function of bringing a complaint before the court, the prosecutor is a servant of the state who makes accusations on behalf of the state in criminal proceedings, while the plaintiff is the complaining party in civil proceedings.

text: A defense attorney counsels the accused on the legal process, likely outcomes for the accused and suggests strategies. The accused, not the lawyer, has the right to make final decisions regarding a number of fundamental points, including whether to testify, and to accept a plea offer or demand a jury trial in appropriate cases. It is the defense attorney's duty to represent the interests of the client, raise procedural and evidentiary issues, and hold the prosecution to its burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Defense counsel may challenge evidence presented by the prosecution or present exculpatory evidence and argue on behalf of their client. At trial, the defense attorney may attempt to offer a rebuttal to the prosecutor's accusations.

text: In the U.S., an accused person is entitled to a government-paid defense attorney if he or she is in jeopardy of losing his or her life and/or liberty. Those who cannot afford a private attorney may be provided one by the state. Historically, however, the right to a defense attorney has not always been universal. For example, in Tudor England criminals accused of treason were not permitted to offer arguments in their defense. In many jurisdictions, there is no right to an appointed attorney, if the accused is not in jeopardy of losing his or her liberty.

text: The final determination of guilt or innocence is typically made by a third party, who is supposed to be disinterested. This function may be performed by a judge, a panel of judges, or a jury panel composed of unbiased citizens. This process varies depending on the laws of the specific jurisdiction. In some places the panel (be it judges or a jury) is required to issue a unanimous decision, while in others only a majority vote is required. In America, this process depends on the state, level of court, and even agreements between the prosecuting and defending parties. Some nations do not use juries at all, or rely on theological or military authorities to issue verdicts.

text: Some cases can be disposed of without the need for a trial. In fact, the vast majority are. If the accused confesses his or her guilt, a shorter process may be employed and a judgment may be rendered more quickly. Some nations, such as America, allow plea bargaining in which the accused pleads guilty, nolo contendere or not guilty, and may accept a diversion program or reduced punishment, where the prosecution's case is weak or in exchange for the cooperation of the accused against other people. This reduced sentence is sometimes a reward for sparing the state the expense of a formal trial. Many nations do not permit the use of plea bargaining, believing that it coerces innocent people to plead guilty in an attempt to avoid a harsh punishment.

text: The entire trial process, whatever the country, is fraught with problems and subject to criticism. Bias and discrimination form an ever-present threat to an objective decision. Any prejudice on the part of the lawyers, the judge, or jury members threatens to destroy the court's credibility. Some people argue that the often Byzantine rules governing courtroom conduct and processes restrict a layman's ability to participate, essentially reducing the legal process to a battle between the lawyers. In this case, the criticism is that the decision is based less on sound justice and more on the lawyer's eloquence and charisma. This is a particular problem when the lawyer performs in a substandard manner. The jury process is another area of frequent criticism, as there are few mechanisms to guard against poor judgment or incompetence on the part of the layman jurors. Judges themselves are very subject to bias subject to things as ordinary as the length of time since their last break.[15]

text: Manipulations of the court system by defense and prosecution attorneys, law enforcement as well as the defendants have occurred and there have been cases where justice was denied.[16] [17]

text: Corrections and Rehabilitation[edit]

text: Offenders are then turned over to the correctional authorities, from the court system after the accused has been found guilty. Like all other aspects of criminal justice, the administration of punishment has taken many different forms throughout history. Early on, when civilizations lacked the resources necessary to construct and maintain prisons, exile and execution were the primary forms of punishment. Historically shame punishments and exile have also been used as forms of censure.

text: The most publicly visible form of punishment in the modern era is the prison. Prisons may serve as detention centers for prisoners after trial. For containment of the accused, jails are used. Early prisons were used primarily to sequester criminals and little thought was given to living conditions within their walls. In America, the Quaker movement is commonly credited with establishing the idea that prisons should be used to reform criminals. This can also be seen as a critical moment in the debate regarding the purpose of punishment.

text: Punishment (in the form of prison time) may serve a variety of purposes. First, and most obviously, the incarceration of criminals removes them from the general population and inhibits their ability to perpetrate further crimes. A new goal of prison punishments is to offer criminals a chance to be rehabilitated. Many modern prisons offer schooling or job training to prisoners as a chance to learn a vocation and thereby earn a legitimate living when they are returned to society. Religious institutions also have a presence in many prisons, with the goal of teaching ethics and instilling a sense of morality in the prisoners. If a prisoner is released before his time is served, he is released as a parole. This means that they are released, but the restrictions are greater than that of someone on probation.

text: There are numerous other forms of punishment which are commonly used in conjunction with or in place of prison terms. Monetary fines are one of the oldest forms of punishment still used today. These fines may be paid to the state or to the victims as a form of reparation. Probation and house arrest are also sanctions which seek to limit a person's mobility and his or her opportunities to commit crimes without actually placing them in a prison setting. Furthermore, many jurisdictions may require some form of public or community service as a form of reparations for lesser offenses. In Corrections, the Department ensures court-ordered, pre-sentence chemical dependency assessments, related Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative specific examinations and treatment will occur for offenders sentenced to Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative in compliance with RCW 9.94A.660.

text: Execution or capital punishment is still used around the world. Its use is one of the most heavily debated aspects of the criminal justice system. Some societies are willing to use executions as a form of political control, or for relatively minor misdeeds. Other societies reserve execution for only the most sinister and brutal offenses. Others still have discontinued the practice entirely, believing the use of execution to be excessively cruel or.(ACJS)1963 JUSTICE SCIENCES 2015-04-25. 2015-05-07 ACJS HISTORY 243-252 CRIMINAL JUSTICE.4:243-2546790

text: Academic discipline[edit]

text: The functional study of criminal justice is distinct from criminology, which involves the study of crime as a social phenomenon, causes of crime, criminal behavior, and other aspects of crime. It emerged as an academic discipline in the 1920s, beginning with Berkeley police chief August Vollmer who established a criminal justice program at the University of California, Berkeley in 1916.[18] Vollmer's work was carried on by his student, O.W. Wilson, who led efforts to professionalize policing and reduce corruption. Other programs were established in the United States at Indiana University, Michigan State University, San Jose State University, and the University of Washington.[19] As of 1950, criminal justice students were estimated to number less than 1,000.[citation needed] Until the 1960s, the primary focus of criminal justice in the United States was on policing and police science.

text: Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, crime rates soared and social issues took center stage in the public eye. A number of new laws and studies focused federal resources on researching new approaches to crime control. The Warren Court (the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren), issued a series of rulings which redefined citizen's rights and substantially altered the powers and responsibilities of police and the courts. The Civil Rights Era offered significant legal and ethical challenges to the status quo.

text: In the late 1960s, with the establishment of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) and associated policy changes that resulted with the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968. The LEAA provided grants for criminology research, focusing on social aspects of crime. By the 1970s, there were 729 academic programs in criminology and criminal justice in the United States.[19] Largely thanks to the Law Enforcement Education Program, criminal justice students numbered over 100,000 by 1975. Over time, scholars of criminal justice began to include criminology, sociology, and psychology, among others, to provide a more comprehensive view of the criminal justice system and the root causes of crime. Criminal justice studies now combine the practical and technical policing skills with a study of social deviance as a whole.

text: Criminal justice degree programs at four-year institutions typically include coursework in statistics, methods of research, criminal justice, policing, U.S court systems, criminal courts, corrections, community corrections, criminal procedure, criminal law, victimology, juvenile justice, and a variety of special topics. A number of universities offer a Bachelor of Criminal Justice.

text: History[edit]

text: The modern criminal justice system has evolved since ancient times, with new forms of punishment, added rights for offenders and victims, and policing reforms. These developments have reflected changing customs, political ideals, and economic conditions. In ancient times through the Middle Ages, exile was a common form of punishment. During the Middle Ages, payment to the victim (or the victim's family), known as wergild, was another common punishment, including for violent crimes. For those who could not afford to buy their way out of punishment, harsh penalties included various forms of corporal punishment. These included mutilation, branding, and flogging, as well as execution.

text: Though a prison, Le Stinche, existed as early as the 14th century in Florence, Italy,[20] incarceration was not widely used until the 19th century. Correctional reform in the United States was first initiated by William Penn, towards the end of the 17th century. For a time, Pennsylvania's criminal code was revised to forbid torture and other forms of cruel punishment, with jails and prisons replacing corporal punishment. These reforms were reverted, upon Penn's death in 1718. Under pressure from a group of Quakers, these reforms were revived in Pennsylvania toward the end of the 18th century, and led to a marked drop in Pennsylvania's crime rate. Patrick Colquhoun, Henry Fielding and others led significant reforms during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.[21]

text: Modern police[edit]

text: The first modern police force is commonly said to be the Metropolitan Police in London, established in 1829 by Sir Robert Peel.[22][23] Based on the Peelian principles, it promoted the preventive role of police as a deterrent to urban crime and disorder.[24][25] In the United States, police departments were first established in Boston in 1838, and New York City in 1844. Early on, police were not respected by the community, as corruption was rampant.

text: In the 1920s, led by Berkeley, California police chief, August Vollmer and O.W. Wilson, police began to professionalize, adopt new technologies, and place emphasis on training and professional qualifications of new hires. Despite such reforms, police agencies were led by highly autocratic leaders, and there remained a lack of respect between police and the community. Following urban unrest in the 1960s, police placed more emphasis on community relations, enacted reforms such as increased diversity in hiring, and many police agencies adopted community policing strategies.

text: In the 1990s, CompStat was developed by the New York Police Department as an information-based system for tracking and mapping crime patterns and trends, and holding police accountable for dealing with crime problems. CompStat has since been replicated in police departments across the United States and around the world, with problem-oriented policing, intelligence-led policing, and other information-led policing strategies also adopted.


document_title: Signing of the United States Declaration of Independence

question_text: who were the presidents that signed the declaration of independence

text: Date of signing[edit]

text: The Second Continental Congress adopted the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, with 12 of the 13 colonies voting in favor and New York abstaining. The date that the Declaration was signed has long been the subject of debate. Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams all wrote that it was signed by Congress on the day when it was adopted on July 4, 1776.[1] That assertion is seemingly confirmed by the signed copy of the Declaration, which is dated July 4. Additional support for the July 4 date is provided by the Journals of Congress, the official public record of the Continental Congress. The proceedings for 1776 were first published in 1777, and the entry for July 4 states that the Declaration was engrossed and signed on that date (the official copy was handwritten).[2]

text: In 1796, signer Thomas McKean disputed that the Declaration had been signed on July 4, pointing out that some signers were not present, including several who were not even elected to Congress until after that date.[3] "No person signed it on that day nor for many days after", he wrote.[4] His claim gained support when the Secret Journals of Congress were published in 1821.[5] The Secret Journals contained two previously unpublished entries about the Declaration.

text: On July 15, New York's delegates got permission from their convention to agree to the Declaration.[6] The Secret Journals entry for July 19 reads:

text: Resolved That the Declaration passed on the 4th be fairly engrossed on parchment with the title and stile of "The unanimous declaration of the thirteen united states of America" & that the same when engrossed be signed by every member of Congress.[7]

text: The entry for August 2 states:

text: The declaration of Independence being engrossed & compared at the table was signed by the Members.[8]

text: In 1884, historian Mellen Chamberlain argued that these entries indicated that the famous signed version of the Declaration had been created following the July 19 resolution, and had not been signed by Congress until August 2.[9] Subsequent research has confirmed that many of the signers had not been present in Congress on July 4, and that some delegates may have added their signatures even after August 2.[10] Neither Jefferson nor Adams ever wavered from their belief that the signing ceremony took place on July 4, yet most historians have accepted the argument which David McCullough articulates in his biography of John Adams: "No such scene, with all the delegates present, ever occurred at Philadelphia."[11]

text: Legal historian Wilfred Ritz concluded in 1986 that about 34 delegates signed the Declaration on July 4, and that the others signed on or after August 2.[12] Ritz argues that the engrossed copy of the Declaration was signed by Congress on July 4, as Jefferson, Adams, and Franklin had stated, and that it was implausible that all three men had been mistaken.[13] He believes that McKean's testimony was questionable,[14] and that historians had misinterpreted the July 19 resolution. According to Ritz, this resolution did not call for a new document to be created, but rather for the existing one to be given a new title, which was necessary after New York had joined the other 12 states in declaring independence. He reasons that the phrase "signed by every member of Congress" in the July 19 resolution meant that delegates who had not signed the Declaration on the 4th were now required to do so.[15]

text: List of signers[edit]

text: Fifty-six delegates eventually signed the Declaration of Independence:

text:
President of Congress

1.  John Hancock (Massachusetts Bay)
New Hampshire

2.  Josiah Bartlett
3.  William Whipple
4.  Matthew Thornton
Massachusetts Bay

5.  Samuel Adams
6.  John Adams
7.  Robert Treat Paine
8.  Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island and Providence Plantations

9.  Stephen Hopkins
10.  William Ellery
Connecticut

11.  Roger Sherman
12.  Samuel Huntington
13.  William Williams
14.  Oliver Wolcott
New York

15.  William Floyd
16.  Philip Livingston
17.  Francis Lewis
18.  Lewis Morris

New Jersey

19.  Richard Stockton
20.  John Witherspoon
21.  Francis Hopkinson
22.  John Hart
23.  Abraham Clark
Pennsylvania

24.  Robert Morris
25.  Benjamin Rush
26.  Benjamin Franklin
27.  John Morton
28.  George Clymer
29.  James Smith
30.  George Taylor
31.  James Wilson
32.  George Ross
Delaware

33.  Caesar Rodney
34.  George Read
35.  Thomas McKean
Maryland

36.  Samuel Chase
37.  William Paca
38.  Thomas Stone
39.  Charles Carroll of Carrollton

Virginia

40.  George Wythe
41.  Richard Henry Lee
42.  Thomas Jefferson
43.  Benjamin Harrison
44.  Thomas Nelson, Jr.
45.  Francis Lightfoot Lee
46.  Carter Braxton
North Carolina

47.  William Hooper
48.  Joseph Hewes
49.  John Penn
South Carolina

50.  Edward Rutledge
51.  Thomas Heyward, Jr.
52.  Thomas Lynch, Jr.
53.  Arthur Middleton
Georgia

54.  Button Gwinnett
55.  Lyman Hall
56.  George Walton

tag: table

text: Signer details[edit]

text: Eight delegates never signed the Declaration, out of about 50 who are thought to have been present in Congress during the voting on independence in early July 1776:[16] John Alsop, George Clinton, John Dickinson, Charles Humphreys, Robert R. Livingston, John Rogers, Thomas Willing, and Henry Wisner.[17] Clinton, Livingston, and Wisner were attending to duties away from Congress when the signing took place. Willing and Humphreys voted against the resolution of independence and were replaced in the Pennsylvania delegation before the August 2 signing. Rogers had voted for the resolution of independence but was no longer a delegate on August 2. Alsop favored reconciliation with Great Britain and so resigned rather than add his name to the document.[18] Dickinson refused to sign, believing the Declaration premature, but he remained in Congress. George Read had voted against the resolution of independence, and Robert Morris had abstained—yet they both signed the Declaration.

text: The most famous signature on the engrossed copy is that of John Hancock, who presumably signed first as President of Congress.[19] Hancock's large, flamboyant signature became iconic, and John Hancock emerged in the United States as an informal synonym for "signature".[20] Future presidents Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were among the signatories. Edward Rutledge (age 26) was the youngest signer and Benjamin Franklin (age 70) the oldest.

text: Some delegates were away on business when the Declaration was debated, including William Hooper[22] and Samuel Chase, but they were back in Congress to sign on August 2. Other delegates were present when the Declaration was debated but added their names after August 2, including Lewis Morris, Oliver Wolcott, Thomas McKean, and possibly Elbridge Gerry. Richard Henry Lee and George Wythe were in Virginia during July and August, but returned to Congress and signed the Declaration probably in September and October, respectively.[23]

text: New delegates joining the Congress were also allowed to sign. Eight men signed the Declaration who did not take seats in Congress until after July 4: Matthew Thornton, William Williams, Benjamin Rush, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, George Ross, and Charles Carroll of Carrollton.[24] Matthew Thornton did not take a seat in Congress until November.[25]  By the time that he signed it, there wasn't any space for his name next to the other New Hampshire delegates, so he placed his signature at the end of the document.[26]

text: The first published version of the Declaration was the Dunlap broadside. The only names on that version were Congress President John Hancock and Secretary Charles Thomson, and those names were printed rather than signatures. The public did not learn who had signed the engrossed copy until January 18, 1777, when the Congress ordered that an "authenticated copy" be sent to each of the 13 states, including the names of the signers.[27] This copy is called the Goddard Broadside; it was the first to list all the signers[28] except for Thomas McKean, who may not have signed the Declaration until after the Goddard Broadside was published.  Congress Secretary Charles Thomson did not sign the engrossed copy of the Declaration, and his name doesn't appear on the Goddard Broadside, even though it does appear on the Dunlap broadside.

text: Stories and legends[edit]

text: Various legends emerged years later concerning the signing of the Declaration, when the document had become an important national symbol. In one famous story, John Hancock supposedly said that Congress, having signed the Declaration, must now "all hang together", and Benjamin Franklin replied: "Yes, we must indeed all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately." The quotation did not appear in print until more than 50 years after Franklin's death.[29]


document_title: Hinilawod

question_text: who save halawod and alunsina from being drowned in a flood

text: Hinilawod

text: Significance[edit]

text: Hinilawod is a 29,000-verse epic that takes about three days to chant in its original form, making it one of the longest epics known, alongside that of Tibet's Epic of King Gesar. Hinilawod is one of the many pieces of oral literature passed from one generation to the next, changed and morphed by the chanter to one degree or another as he told it to his audience. The Hinilawod is not just a literary piece but also a source of information about culture, religion and rituals of the ancient people of Sulod; showing us that ancient Filipinos believed in the "sacred," in the importance of family honour and in personal courage and dignity.

text: Hinilawod was first discovered "by accident" in 1955, when Filipino anthropologist F. Landa Jocano became interested in native folklore. He travelled the hinterlands of his home island of Panay with two colleagues collecting folk songs, stories, and riddles. It was during one of those trips to the upland barrios of Lambunao, Maasin, Janiuay, and Calinog in Iloilo that his attention was called to a long and popular tale called Hinilawod. Portions of the story were sung to him and his colleague by an old man called Ulang Udig.

text: Returning the following year with a radio technician from Central Philippine University, he then recorded a portion of the story on tape in 1956. However, when he returned, in 1957 to make a recording of the complete story, Ulang Udig refused to cooperate. Weeks later, he was introduced to a mountain singer named Hugan-an, who, after much cajoling, allowed herself to be taped recounting both her story and the Hinilawod. It took three weeks to complete the recording of the 30-hour epic poem.

text: A concise version of the story of Hinilawod can be found in the book Philippine Mythology authored by Jocano.

text: Plot[edit]

text: Hinilawod,[4] recounts the story of the exploits of three Suludnon demigod brothers: Labaw Donggon, Humadapnon and Dumalapdap of ancient Panay.

text: The Story Alunsina and Datu Paubari[edit]

text: Kaptan, the king of the Gods, decreed that the beautiful Alunsina (also called Laun Sina, "the Unmarried One") marry upon reaching her maidenhood. Though all the unmarried gods from every corner of the universe tried to win her hand in marriage, she chose to marry a mortal, Datu Paubari, ruler of the Halawod.

text: Angered by Alunsina's decision, her suitors conspired to harm the newlywed couple. Maklium-sa-t'wan, the God of the Plains, called a council meeting of the gods. The deities decided to destroy the couple's home, Halawod, by flood.

text: Fortunately for Alunsina and her husband, her sister, Suklang Malayon (Goddess and Guardian of Happy Homes) discovered the evil plot and warned them of it. Before the flood, the new couple sought refuge on a higher ground and escaped the gods' wrath undetected. They returned to the plains and settled near the mouth of the Halawod River after the flood has subsided and lived in secrecy.

text: After several months, Alunsina became pregnant with triplets. The couple was ecstatic and Datu Paubari prepared the things needed for childbirth including the siklot. When the triplets were born, the couple called them Labaw Dongon, Humadapnon and Dumalapdap.

text: Immediately after giving birth, Alunsina summoned the high priest Bungot-Banwa to perform the rites of the gods of the Mount Madya-as to ensure that the triplets will have good health. During the ritual, Bungot-Banwa burned some alanghiran fronds and a pinch of kamangyan (incense) in an altar that he made himself. He opened the windows of the north side of the room after the ceremony, and in came a cold wind that transformed the infants into strong, mighty and handsome young men.

text: The adventures of Labaw Donggon[edit]

text: When he reached adulthood, Labaw Donggon, the eldest of the triplets, decided to go on a quest to find himself a wife. He heard of the beauty of Angoy Ginbitinan of Handug and wanted her for a wife. He asked his mother to prepare the things he will need for the journey—a magic cape, hat, belt, and kampilan (a large, two-handed sword).

text: The journey to Handug took several days. Labaw Donggon had to pass by plains, valleys and mountains to get there. When he finally arrived, he asked for an audience with Angoy Ginbitinan's father and asked for her hand in marriage. The father agreed in one condition: Labaw Donggon must kill the monster Manalintad as part of his dowry.

text: Labaw Donggon agreed and went away to confront the monster. With the help of his magic belt, he was able to kill the Manalintad. He cut off the tail of the monster and brought it back to Handug as a proof of his victory. Angoy Gibintinan's father was satisfied with the proof and allowed Labaw Donggon to marry his daughter.

text: After the wedding, Labaw Donggon and his new bride started their journey back to his home. Along the way, they met a group of young men who were on their way to Tarambang Burok to win the hand of Abyang Durunuun, sister of Sumpoy, the lord of the underworld. According to these young men, Abyang Durunuun has beauty that equals no other. Labaw Donggon and Angoy Gibintinan continued on their journey. Upon reaching home, Labaw Donggon asked his mother to take care of his new wife and told her that he will be going on another quest. This time he will be going to Tarambang Burok and vie for the hand of the beautiful Abyang Durunuun.

text: On his way to Tarambang Burok, Labaw Donggon had an encounter with the giant Sikay Padalogdog. This giant had a hundred arms and he won't let the young demi god pass without a fight. And fight they did. In the end, the hundred-armed giant admitted defeat and allowed the Labaw Donggon to pass the ridge.

text: Labaw Donggon won the hand of the legendary Abyang Durunuun and also took her home to his mother. Thereafter, the demigod went on third quest to Gadlum. This time the object of his desire is Malitong Yawa Sinagmaling Diwata, the young bride of the Lord of Darkness, Saragnayan.

text: Aboard his biday nga inagta (black boat), Labaw Donggon sailed across many seas on his way to Gadlum. He also traveled across the region of the clouds and the Land of Stones before he found himself at the shores of Tulogmatian, the seaside fortress of Saragnayan, the Lord of Darkness. Upon setting foot on the shore, Saragnayan asked who he was and what was his business. When Labaw Donggon expressed his desire to have Saragnayan's young wife, Malitong Yawa Sinagmaling Diwata, the Lord of Darkness just laughed and told him it was impossible. The young demigod then challenged Saragnayan to a duel.

text: The duel lasted for years. Labaw Donggon held Saragnayan's head underwater for seven years but Saragnayan still lived. With the help of his pamlang (amulet), Saragnayan defeated Labaw Donggon and imprisoned him beneath his house.

text: Meanwhile, Labaw Donggon's two wives gave birth to a son each. Angoy Ginbitinan called her child Aso Mangga, while Abyang Durunuun called her son Abyang Baranugon. Both sons went in search of their father a few days after they were born. They arrived in Tulogmatian and asked Saragnayan to free their father. Saragnayan told Abyang Baranugon to go home to his mother when he noticed that the young lad still has an umbilical cord. The young lad took offense and challenged the lord of the darkness to a duel.

text: Saragnayan accepted the challenge and fought with Abyang Baranugon. The Lord of Darkness was no match for the strength of Abyang Baranugon and was defeated in the process. Abyang Baranugon earned the freedom of his father and took him home.

text: The adventures of Humadapnon[edit]

text: Meanwhile, the defeat of Labaw Donggon in the hands of Saragnayan and his subsequent imprisonment angered his brothers Humadapnon and Dumalapdap. Humadapnon swore to the gods of Madya-as and vowed that he would seek revenge on all of Saragnayan's kinsmen and followers. He then embarked on a journey to Saragnayan's land. He took with him a man known for his exceptional swordsmanship, Buyong Matanayon of Mount Matiula. Together they traveled the same path that Labaw Donggon took.

text: After seven months of staying in Tarambang Buriraw, Buyong Matanayon remembered that they brought some ginger with them. He thought of a plan to break Piganun's spell over his friend. One evening, at dinner, Buyong Matanayon threw seven slices of ginger into the fire. Upon smelling the burning ginger, Piganun ran away from the room. Buyong Matanayon struck Humadapnon in the head, which rendered the latter unconscious. He then dragged his body away from the place and managed to escape.

text: Humadapnon rose to the challenge and took off his magic cape. He then used it to lift the huge boulder off the center of the village and hurled it back to the mountain. Datu Umbaw Pinaumbaw honored his word and gave his daughter's hand in marriage to Humadapnon. The two were married and a big feast was held. During the wedding feast, a guest minstrel sang and paid tribute to the beauty of Burigadang Pada Sinaklang Bulawan, the Goddess of Wealth and Greed. Enchanted with the story, Humadapnon started on a quest to seek the goddess' hand in marriage.

text: He met Buyong Makabagting, son of the Datu Balahidyong of Paling Bukid, who was also hoping to win the hand of Burigadang Pada Sinaklang Bulawan. The two fought in a duel and Humadapnon emerged victorious. The defeated Buyong Makabagting helped Humadapnon in his quest. Humadapnon eventually married the goddess of greed and brought her home to his mother.

text: Below are verses from the first two stanzas of the second part of Sugidanun I (First Narration) of the Sulodnon epic Hinilawod: Adventures of Humadapnon chanted by Hugan-an and recorded by Dr. F. Landa Jocano. The epic is in the original Sulodnon language.[5]

text:
Sugidanun I: Pangayaw

2. Himos

tag: ul

text: English translation by Dr. F. Landa Jocano

text: The adventures of Dumalapdap[edit]

text: Shortly after Humadapnon left their home to seek revenge on Saragnayan's family and followers, Dumalapdap embarked on a quest of his own. He decided go to Burutlakan-ka-adlaw and marry the maiden Lubay-Lubyok Hanginun si Mahuyokhuyokon. With him was Dumasig, the most powerful wrestler in Madya-as.

text: After several months of traveling, the two warriors came face to face with a two-headed monster called Balanakon. The monster guarded the ridge that led to the place where the maiden lived. They managed to kill the monster but were confronted with another kind of monster when they reached the gate of the palace where the maiden lived. Called Uyutang, the monster was similar to a bat with sharp, poisonous claws.

text: Dumalapdap fought with the Uyutang for seven months. He was able to defeat the monster when he grabbed its ankle and broke it. Then he took his twang daniwan (magic dagger) and struck Uyutang under the armpit. The monster howled in pain, causing an earthquake that broke the ridge they were fighting in into two. Half of the ridge became an island that is known today as Negros, while the other half became Panay.

text: With the monster Uyutang dead, Lubay-Lubyok Hanginun si Mahuyokhuyokan was free to marry Dumalapdap. He brought her home and was reunited with his family. Datu Paubari celebrated the return of his three sons with a very big feast. His sons left for different parts of the world after the feast. Labaw Donggon ventured north, Humadapnon went south, and Dumalapdap embarked to the west. Datu Parubari was left to rule in the east.

text: The quest of Humadapnon continues[edit]

text: Humdapnon was visited by his spirit friends Taghoy and Duwindi in his dream and told him of lovely maiden who lived in a village by the mouth of the Halawod River. The demigod left his dominion to look for the maiden named Nagmalitong Yawa. He brought with him a boatful of crew.

text: Humadapnon and his men safely traversed a blood-coloured sea with the help of his spirit friends. They landed on an island that was inhabited by beautiful women and headed by the sorceress, Ginmayunan. For seven years, Humadapnon and his crew were imprisoned in the island until Nagmalitong Yawa helped them escape by disguising as a boy. Humadapnon and Nagmalitong Yawa were married soon after in Halawod.

text: During the wedding feast, Humadapnon's brother, Dumalapdap fell in love with Huyung Adlaw and asked his brother to help him talk to the parents of the maiden. Humadapnon left his new wife and accompanied his brother to the Upperworld where Huyung Adlaw lived.

text: It took the brothers seven years to come back from their journey to the Upperworld. They arrived just in time for the ceremony that will have Nagmalitong Yawa married to Buyung Sumagulung, an island fortress ruler, in a ceremony. The brothers were enraged and killed all the guests and the groom. Humadapnon also stabbed his wife because the treachery only to feel remorse later on. He asked his spirit friends and found out that his wife only agreed to marry Buyung Sumagulung because her mother, Matan-ayon, convinced her that Humadapnon is not coming back.

text: Upon learning of this, Humadapnon asked his sister, Labing Anyag, to use her powers to bring Nagmalitong Yawa back to life. Seeing how remorseful he is, Labing Anyag agreed. However, Nagmalitong Yawa was so ashamed of agreeing to marry Buyung Sumagulung that she ran away to the underworld and sought the protection of her uncle Panlinugun, who is lord of the earthquake.

text: Humadapnon had to kill an eight-headed serpent in his pursuit of Nagmalitong Yawa. Then he had to duel with a young man who spirited his wife away. The duel ended when Alunsina intervened and revealed that the young man is also her son, Amarotha. This son died during childbirth and was brought back from the dead to keep Alunsina company. Alunsina decided that both Humadapnon and Amarotha deserved a piece of Nagmalitong Yawa so she cut the girl in half and gave a piece each to her sons. Each half turned into a whole live person. Humadapnon brought his wife back to Panay.

text: In theatre[edit]

text: An abridged version was the first stage performance of the epic during the inauguration of the Cultural Center of Western Visayas on the campus of West Visayas State University in Iloilo City, Philippines in March 1983 under the patronage of the Cultural Center of the Philippines and the former First Lady of the Philippines, Imelda Marcos. The cultural group, Panayana performed the epic before the representatives of the First Lady and the high officials of the Cultural Center of the Philippines.

text: Art Geroche, a local Ilonggo artist and Staff of the West Visayas State College (now a State University), provided a mural painting (oil on canvas) depicting the epic, for the lobby of the Cultural Center. The painting captures the important scenes in the adventures of the heroes of Hinilawod, in one panoramic view within a six by twelve feet opus of Geroche.

text: This epic, which is orally transmitted from one generation to another, is still very much a part of the culture of the Sulod Nation in the mountains of Jamindan, Capiz. In April 1999, Alejo Zata recorded the epic as it was chanted by the natives of Sulod.[6]

text: University of San Agustin Little Theater (USALT) has staged its version of the Humadapnon fragment of the Hinilawod titled "Tarangban" ("Cave"). It first staged the play in 2004.

text: The production was revised to include the participation of then 17-year-old Manilyn "Tata" Glemer, a member of the Panay Bukidnon tribe in Tapaz, Capiz. Glemer knows how to chant the epic. Research was conducted with Glemer's mother, Gemma, the chieftain of their tribe and her grandmother, Lola Gamak, a binukot and chanter of the tribe.

text: Since 2006, the late-January Hirinugyaw-Suguidanonay Festival of the town of Calinog in Central Panay (which started in 1988 as an adaptation of the Dinagyang Festival where it was then known as the Sirinayaw, then Hirinugyaw Festival) has used segments and tales of the Hinilawod as performance themes of its competing tribes.[7] Each performance's authenticity is enhanced through the use of authentic Panay Bukidnon (Sulod) costumes, known as Panubok, and the performing tribes' employment of Panay-Bukidnon Manunuguids (Chanters, hence the 'Suguidanonay' in the festival's name) from the Balay Tulun-an Cultural Preservation School in the Panay-Bukidnon settlement in Brgy. Garangan in Calinog's mountainous areas. Of note is the fact that the town itself sits squarely beside the river Jalaur the ancient name of which was Halawud, the river that gave the epic its name.[8]

text: It had subsequent stagings of excerpts in 2010 for the "Tanghal 4: The National University and Colleges Theater Festival and Conference" [9][10] on Feb. 2 at De La Salle-College of Saint Benilde and for "Pasinaya Festival" at Tanghalang Huseng Batute of the Cultural Center of the Philippines on Feb. 7.

text: There was also a performance on March 1, 2010 at the USALT auditorium.[11][12]

text: In 2010, Hiyas Kayumanggi staged their version of the Hinilawod at Luce Auditorium of Silliman University.

text: In 2011, the group staged their production at Tanghalang Nicanor Abelardo of the Cultural Center of the Philippines on September 3 and 4.[13]

text: In 2013, Ateneo Entablado staged Nicanor Tiongson's play Labaw Donggon: Ang Banog ng Sanlibutan in Cervini Field, Ateneo de Manila University. The production was directed by Jerry Respeto with composers Jema Pamintuan and Teresa Barrozo, costume and set designer Gino Gonzales, lighting designer Voltaire de Jesus, and choreographers Gio Gahol and Elena Laniog.[14][15]

text: Further reading[edit]

text:
Hinilawod: Adventures of Humadapnon, chanted by Hugan-an and recorded by Dr. F. Landa Jocano, Metro Manila: 2000, Punlad Research House, ISBN 9716220103, 9789716220100.
HINILAWOD... the discovery in Hiyas Kayumanggi, Hesed Adriel, 6 August 2011.


document_title: Roman law

question_text: what was the written law code of the romans

text: Roman law

text: Development[edit]

text: Before the Twelve Tables (754–449 BC), private law comprised the Roman civil law (ius civile Quiritium) that applied only to Roman citizens, and was bonded to religion; undeveloped, with attributes of strict formalism, symbolism, and conservatism, e.g. the ritual practice of mancipatio (a form of sale). The jurist Sextus Pomponius said, "At the beginning of our city, the people began their first activities without any fixed law, and without any fixed rights: all things were ruled despotically, by kings".[2] It is believed that Roman Law is rooted in the Etruscan religion, emphasising ritual.[3]

text: The Twelve Tables[edit]

text: The first legal text is the Law of the Twelve Tables, dating from the mid-5th century BC. The plebeian tribune, C. Terentilius Arsa, proposed that the law should be written, in order to prevent magistrates from applying the law arbitrarily.[4] After eight years of political struggle, the plebeian social class convinced the patricians to send a delegation to Athens, to copy the Laws of Solon; they also dispatched delegations to other Greek cities for like reason.[4] In 451 BC, according to the traditional story (as Livy tells it), ten Roman citizens were chosen to record the laws (decemviri legibus scribundis). While they were performing this task, they were given supreme political power (imperium), whereas the power of the magistrates was restricted.[4] In 450 BC, the decemviri produced the laws on ten tablets (tabulae), but these laws were regarded as unsatisfactory by the plebeians. A second decemvirate is said to have added two further tablets in 449 BC. The new Law of the Twelve Tables was approved by the people's assembly.[4]

text: Modern scholars tend to challenge the accuracy of Roman historians. They generally do not believe that a second decemvirate ever took place. The decemvirate of 451 is believed to have included the most controversial points of customary law, and to have assumed the leading functions in Rome.[4] Furthermore, the question on the Greek influence found in the early Roman Law is still much discussed. Many scholars consider it unlikely that the patricians sent an official delegation to Greece, as the Roman historians believed. Instead, those scholars suggest, the Romans acquired Greek legislations from the Greek cities of Magna Graecia, the main portal between the Roman and Greek worlds.[4] The original text of the Twelve Tables has not been preserved. The tablets were probably destroyed when Rome was conquered and burned by the Gauls in 387 BC.[4]

text: The fragments which did survive show that it was not a law code in the modern sense. It did not provide a complete and coherent system of all applicable rules or give legal solutions for all possible cases. Rather, the tables contained specific provisions designed to change the then-existing customary law. Although the provisions pertain to all areas of law, the largest part is dedicated to private law and civil procedure.

text: Early law and jurisprudence[edit]

text: Many laws include Lex Canuleia (445 BC; which allowed the marriage—ius connubii—between patricians and plebeians), Leges Licinae Sextiae (367 BC; which made restrictions on possession of public lands — ager publicus — and also made sure that one of the consuls was plebeian), Lex Ogulnia (300 BC; plebeians received access to priest posts), and Lex Hortensia (287 BC; verdicts of plebeian assemblies — plebiscita — now bind all people).

text: Another important statute from the Republican era is the Lex Aquilia of 286 BC, which may be regarded as the root of modern tort law. However, Rome's most important contribution to European legal culture was not the enactment of well-drafted statutes, but the emergence of a class of professional jurists (prudentes, sing. prudens, or jurisprudentes) and of a legal science. This was achieved in a gradual process of applying the scientific methods of Greek philosophy to the subject of law, a subject which the Greeks themselves never treated as a science.

text: Traditionally, the origins of Roman legal science are connected to Gnaeus Flavius. Flavius is said to have published around the year 300 BC the formularies containing the words which had to be spoken in court to begin a legal action. Before the time of Flavius, these formularies are said to have been secret and known only to the priests. Their publication made it possible for non-priests to explore the meaning of these legal texts. Whether or not this story is credible, jurists were active and legal treatises were written in larger numbers the 2nd century BC. Among the famous jurists of the republican period are Quintus Mucius Scaevola who wrote a voluminous treatise on all aspects of the law, which was very influential in later times, and Servius Sulpicius Rufus, a friend of Marcus Tullius Cicero. Thus, Rome had developed a very sophisticated legal system and a refined legal culture when the Roman republic was replaced by the monarchical system of the principate in 27 BC .

text: Pre-classical period[edit]

text: In the period between about 201 to 27 BC, we can see the development of more flexible laws to match the needs of the time. In addition to the old and formal ius civile a new juridical class is created: the ius honorarium, which can be defined as "The law introduced by the magistrates who had the right to promulgate edicts in order to support, supplement or correct the existing law."[5] With this new law the old formalism is being abandoned and new more flexible principles of ius gentium are used.

text: The adaptation of law to new needs was given over to juridical practice, to magistrates, and especially to the praetors. A praetor was not a legislator and did not technically create new law when he issued his edicts (magistratuum edicta). In fact, the results of his rulings enjoyed legal protection (actionem dare) and were in effect often the source of new legal rules. A Praetor's successor was not bound by the edicts of his predecessor; however, he did take rules from edicts of his predecessor that had proved to be useful. In this way a constant content was created that proceeded from edict to edict (edictum traslatitium).

text: Thus, over the course of time, parallel to the civil law and supplementing and correcting it, a new body of praetoric law emerged. In fact, praetoric law was so defined by the famous Roman jurist Papinian (Amilius Papinianus—died in 212 AD): "Ius praetorium est quod praetores introduxerunt adiuvandi vel supplendi vel corrigendi iuris civilis gratia propter utilitatem publicam" ("praetoric law is that law introduced by praetors to supplement or correct civil law for public benefit"). Ultimately, civil law and praetoric law were fused in the Corpus Juris Civilis.

text: Classical Roman law[edit]

text: The first 250 years of the current era are the period during which Roman law and Roman legal science reached its greatest degree of sophistication. The law of this period is often referred to as the classical period of Roman law. The literary and practical achievements of the jurists of this period gave Roman law its unique shape.

text: The jurists worked in different functions: They gave legal opinions at the request of private parties. They advised the magistrates who were entrusted with the administration of justice, most importantly the praetors. They helped the praetors draft their edicts, in which they publicly announced at the beginning of their tenure, how they would handle their duties, and the formularies, according to which specific proceedings were conducted. Some jurists also held high judicial and administrative offices themselves.

text: The jurists also produced all kinds of legal punishments. Around AD 130 the jurist Salvius Iulianus drafted a standard form of the praetor's edict, which was used by all praetors from that time onwards. This edict contained detailed descriptions of all cases, in which the praetor would allow a legal action and in which he would grant a defense. The standard edict thus functioned like a comprehensive law code, even though it did not formally have the force of law. It indicated the requirements for a successful legal claim. The edict therefore became the basis for extensive legal commentaries by later classical jurists like Paulus and Ulpian. The new concepts and legal institutions developed by pre-classical and classical jurists are too numerous to mention here. Only a few examples are given here:

text:
Roman jurists clearly separated the legal right to use a thing (ownership) from the factual ability to use and manipulate the thing (possession). They also found the distinction between contract and tort as sources of legal obligations.
The standard types of contract (sale, contract for work, hire, contract for services) regulated in most continental codes and the characteristics of each of these contracts were developed by Roman jurisprudence.
The classical jurist Gaius (around 160) invented a system of private law based on the division of all material into personae (persons), res (things) and actiones (legal actions). This system was used for many centuries. It can be recognized in legal treatises like William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England and enactments like the French Code civil or the German BGB.

text: The Roman Republic had three different branches:

text:
Assemblies
Senate
Consuls

text: The Assemblies could decide whether war or peace. The Senate had complete control over the Treasury, and the Consuls had the highest juridical power.[6]

text: Post-classical law[edit]

text: By the middle of the 3rd century, the conditions for the flourishing of a refined legal culture had become less favourable. The general political and economic situation deteriorated as the emperors assumed more direct control of all aspects of political life. The political system of the principate, which had retained some features of the republican constitution, began to transform itself into the absolute monarchy of the dominate. The existence of a legal science and of jurists who regarded law as a science, not as an instrument to achieve the political goals set by the absolute monarch, did not fit well into the new order of things. The literary production all but ended. Few jurists after the mid-3rd century are known by name. While legal science and legal education persisted to some extent in the eastern part of the Empire, most of the subtleties of classical law came to be disregarded and finally forgotten in the west. Classical law was replaced by so-called vulgar law.

text: Substance[edit]

text: Concept of laws[edit]

text:
ius civile, ius gentium, and ius naturale – the ius civile ("citizen law", originally ius civile Quiritium) was the body of common laws that applied to Roman citizens and the Praetores Urbani, the individuals who had jurisdiction over cases involving citizens. The ius gentium ("law of peoples") was the body of common laws that applied to foreigners, and their dealings with Roman citizens. The Praetores Peregrini were the individuals who had jurisdiction over cases involving citizens and foreigners. Jus naturale was a concept the jurists developed to explain why all people seemed to obey some laws. Their answer was that a "natural law" instilled in all beings a common sense.
ius scriptum and ius non scriptum – meaning written and unwritten law, respectively. In practice, the two differed by the means of their creation and not necessarily whether or not they were written down. The ius scriptum was the body of statute laws made by the legislature. The laws were known as leges (lit. "laws") and plebiscita (lit. "plebiscites," originating in the Plebeian Council). Roman lawyers would also include in the ius scriptum the edicts of magistrates (magistratuum edicta), the advice of the Senate (Senatus consulta), the responses and thoughts of jurists (responsa prudentium), and the proclamations and beliefs of the emperor (principum placita). Ius non scriptum was the body of common laws that arose from customary practice and had become binding over time.
ius commune and ius singulare – Ius singulare (singular law) is special law for certain groups of people, things, or legal relations (because of which it is an exception from the general rules of the legal system), unlike general, ordinary, law (ius commune). An example of this is the law about wills written by people in the military during a campaign, which are exempt of the solemnities generally required for citizens when writing wills in normal circumstances.
ius publicum and ius privatum – ius publicum means public law and ius privatum means private law, where public law is to protect the interests of the Roman state while private law should protect individuals. In the Roman law ius privatum included personal, property, civil and criminal law; judicial proceeding was private process (iudicium privatum); and crimes were private (except the most severe ones that were prosecuted by the state). Public law will only include some areas of private law close to the end of the Roman state. Ius publicum was also used to describe obligatory legal regulations (today called ius cogens—this term is applied in modern international law to indicate peremptory norms that cannot be derogated from). These are regulations that cannot be changed or excluded by party agreement. Those regulations that can be changed are called today ius dispositivum, and they are not used when party shares something and are in contrary.

text: Public law[edit]

text: The Roman Republic's constitution or mos maiorum ("custom of the ancestors") was an unwritten set of guidelines and principles passed down mainly through precedent. Concepts that originated in the Roman constitution live on in constitutions to this day. Examples include checks and balances, the separation of powers, vetoes, filibusters, quorum requirements, term limits, impeachments, the powers of the purse, and regularly scheduled elections. Even some lesser used modern constitutional concepts, such as the block voting found in the electoral college of the United States, originate from ideas found in the Roman constitution.

text: The constitution of the Roman Republic was not formal or even official. Its constitution was largely unwritten, and was constantly evolving throughout the life of the Republic. Throughout the 1st century BC, the power and legitimacy of the Roman constitution was progressively eroding. Even Roman constitutionalists, such as the senator Cicero, lost a willingness to remain faithful to it towards the end of the republic. When the Roman Republic ultimately fell in the years following the Battle of Actium and Mark Antony's suicide, what was left of the Roman constitution died along with the Republic. The first Roman Emperor, Augustus, attempted to manufacture the appearance of a constitution that still governed the Empire, by utilising that constitution's institutions to lend legitimacy to the Principate, e.g. reusing prior grants of greater imperium to substantiate Augustus' greater imperium over the Imperial provinces and the prorogation of different magistracies to justify Augustus' receipt of tribunician power. The belief in a surviving constitution lasted well into the life of the Roman Empire.

text: Private law[edit]

text: Stipulatio was the basic form of contract in Roman law. It was made in the format of question and answer. The precise nature of the contract was disputed, as can be seen below.

text: Rei vindicatio is a legal action by which the plaintiff demands that the defendant return a thing that belongs to the plaintiff. It may only be used when plaintiff owns the thing, and the defendant is somehow impeding the plaintiff's possession of the thing. The plaintiff could also institute an actio furti (a personal action) to punish the defendant. If the thing could not be recovered, the plaintiff could claim damages from the defendant with the aid of the condictio furtiva (a personal action). With the aid of the actio legis Aquiliae (a personal action), the plaintiff could claim damages from the defendant. Rei vindicatio was derived from the ius civile, therefore was only available to Roman citizens.

text: Status[edit]

text: To describe a person's position in the legal system, Romans mostly used the expression togeus. The individual could have been a Roman citizen (status civitatis) unlike foreigners, or he could have been free (status libertatis) unlike slaves, or he could have had a certain position in a Roman family (status familiae) either as the head of the family (pater familias), or some lower member.*alieni iuris-which lives by someone else's law. Two status types were senator and emperor.

text: Litigation[edit]

text: The history of Roman Law can be divided into three systems of procedure: that of legis actiones, the formulary system, and cognitio extra ordinem. The periods in which these systems were in use overlapped one another and did not have definitive breaks, but it can be stated that the legis actio system prevailed from the time of the XII Tables (c. 450 BC) until about the end of the 2nd century BC, that the formulary procedure was primarily used from the last century of the Republic until the end of the classical period (c. AD 200), and that of cognitio extra ordinem was in use in post-classical times. Again, these dates are meant as a tool to help understand the types of procedure in use, not as a rigid boundary where one system stopped and another began.[7]

text: During the republic and until the bureaucratization of Roman judicial procedure, the judge was usually a private person (iudex privatus). He had to be a Roman male citizen. The parties could agree on a judge, or they could appoint one from a list, called album iudicum. They went down the list until they found a judge agreeable to both parties, or if none could be found they had to take the last one on the list.

text: No one had a legal obligation to judge a case. The judge had great latitude in the way he conducted the litigation. He considered all the evidence and ruled in the way that seemed just. Because the judge was not a jurist or a legal technician, he often consulted a jurist about the technical aspects of the case, but he was not bound by the jurist's reply. At the end of the litigation, if things were not clear to him, he could refuse to give a judgment, by swearing that it wasn't clear. Also, there was a maximum time to issue a judgment, which depended on some technical issues (type of action, etc.).

text: Later on, with the bureaucratization, this procedure disappeared, and was substituted by the so-called "extra ordinem" procedure, also known as cognitory. The whole case was reviewed before a magistrate, in a single phase. The magistrate had obligation to judge and to issue a decision, and the decision could be appealed to a higher magistrate.

text: Legacy[edit]

text: In the East[edit]

text: When the centre of the Empire was moved to the Greek East in the 4th century, many legal concepts of Greek origin appeared in the official Roman legislation.[8] The influence is visible even in the law of persons or of the family, which is traditionally the part of the law that changes least. For example, Constantine started putting restrictions on the ancient Roman concept of patria potestas, the power held by the male head of a family over his descendents, by acknowledging that persons in potestate, the descendents, could have proprietary rights. He was apparently making concessions to the much stricter concept of paternal authority under Greek-Hellenistic law.[8] The Codex Theodosianus (438 AD) was a codification of Constantian laws. Later emperors went even further, until Justinian finally decreed that a child in potestate became owner of everything it acquired, except when it acquired something from its father.[8]

text: The codes of Justinian, particularly the Corpus Juris Civilis (529-534) continued to be the basis of legal practice in the Empire throughout its so-called Byzantine history. Leo III the Isaurian issued a new code, the Ecloga,[9] in the early 8th century. In the 9th century, the emperors Basil I and Leo VI the Wise commissioned a combined translation of the Code and the Digest, parts of Justinian's codes, into Greek, which became known as the Basilica. Roman law as preserved in the codes of Justinian and in the Basilica remained the basis of legal practice in Greece and in the courts of the Eastern Orthodox Church even after the fall of the Byzantine Empire and the conquest by the Turks, and also formed the basis for much of the Fetha Negest, which remained in force in Ethiopia until 1931.

text: The Roman Laws up to Justinian (first 50 years) are almost fully in US Federal Code to be found (or US regulations), though not always applying as wide as they had been originally written (statutory interpretation). (Many of Justinian's Christian laws were repealed later, though religion was still high in consideration by law.)

text: It should be remembered that the first university (not to be confused with college) was in Rome (not England) and taught these laws to spread them to all of Europe "the same" (without modification): universal law. The Roman "university" was popular in its time. University law, then medicine (also an advancement of Romans - surgical tools), were taught at universities with the concept that all of them taught exactly the same words and meanings. Many of today's universities have long lapsed into being "colleges" but incorrectly retain the title. (Two students from different schools may not be able to relate to one another as the teachings and words are different. It was the intent of the Roman University to prevent the same happening with their body of law.)[citation needed]

text: In the West[edit]

text: In the west, Justinian's political authority never went any farther than certain portions of the Italian and Hispanic peninsulas. In Law codes were issued by the Germanic kings, however, the influence of early Eastern Roman codes on some of these is quite discernible. In many early Germanic states, Roman citizens continued to be governed by Roman laws for quite some time, even while members of the various Germanic tribes were governed by their own respective codes.

text: The Codex Justinianus and the Institutes of Justinian were known in Western Europe, and along with the earlier code of Theodosius II, served as models for a few of the Germanic law codes; however, the Digest portion was largely ignored for several centuries until around 1070, when a manuscript of the Digest was rediscovered in Italy. This was done mainly through the works of glossars who wrote their comments between lines (glossa interlinearis), or in the form of marginal notes (glossa marginalis). From that time, scholars began to study the ancient Roman legal texts, and to teach others what they learned from their studies. The center of these studies was Bologna. The law school there gradually developed into Europe's first university.

text: The students who were taught Roman law in Bologna (and later in many other places) found that many rules of Roman law were better suited to regulate complex economic transactions than were the customary rules, which were applicable throughout Europe. For this reason, Roman law, or at least some provisions borrowed from it, began to be re-introduced into legal practice, centuries after the end of the Roman empire. This process was actively supported by many kings and princes who employed university-trained jurists as counselors and court officials and sought to benefit from rules like the famous Princeps legibus solutus est ("The sovereign is not bound by the laws", a phrase initially coined by Ulpian, a Roman jurist).

text: There are several reasons that Roman law was favored in the Middle Ages. Roman law regulated the legal protection of property and the equality of legal subjects and their wills, and it prescribed the possibility that the legal subjects could dispose their property through testament.

text: By the middle of the 16th century, the rediscovered Roman law dominated the legal practice of many European countries. A legal system, in which Roman law was mixed with elements of canon law and of Germanic custom, especially feudal law, had emerged. This legal system, which was common to all of continental Europe (and Scotland) was known as Ius Commune. This Ius Commune and the legal systems based on it are usually referred to as civil law in English-speaking countries.

text: Only England and the Nordic countries did not take part in the wholesale reception of Roman law. One reason for this is that the English legal system was more developed than its continental counterparts by the time Roman law was rediscovered. Therefore, the practical advantages of Roman law were less obvious to English practitioners than to continental lawyers. As a result, the English system of common law developed in parallel to Roman-based civil law, with its practitioners being trained at the Inns of Court in London rather than receiving degrees in Canon or Civil Law at the Universities of Oxford or Cambridge. Elements of Romano-canon law were present in England in the ecclesiastical courts and, less directly, through the development of the equity system. In addition, some concepts from Roman law made their way into the common law. Especially in the early 19th century, English lawyers and judges were willing to borrow rules and ideas from continental jurists and directly from Roman law.

text: The practical application of Roman law and the era of the European Ius Commune came to an end, when national codifications were made. In 1804, the French civil code came into force. In the course of the 19th century, many European states either adopted the French model or drafted their own codes. In Germany, the political situation made the creation of a national code of laws impossible. From the 17th century, Roman law in Germany had been heavily influenced by domestic (common) law, and it was called usus modernus Pandectarum. In some parts of Germany, Roman law continued to be applied until the German civil code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, BGB) came into force in 1900.[citation needed]

text: Colonial expansion spread the civil law system.[10]

text: Today[edit]

text: Today, Roman law is no longer applied in legal practice, even though the legal systems of some countries like South Africa and San Marino are still based on the old jus commune. However, even where the legal practice is based on a code, many rules deriving from Roman law apply: no code completely broke with the Roman tradition. Rather, the provisions of the Roman law were fitted into a more coherent system and expressed in the national language. For this reason, knowledge of the Roman law is indispensable to understand the legal systems of today. Thus, Roman law is often still a mandatory subject for law students in civil law jurisdictions.

text: As steps towards a unification of the private law in the member states of the European Union are being taken, the old jus commune, which was the common basis of legal practice everywhere in Europe, but allowed for many local variants, is seen by many as a model.