De tekst van het inauguraal college dat ik in het kader van de OVR-Wisselleerstoel 2020-2021 te Amsterdam hield aan de Vrije Universiteit, (zie eerder) is gepubliceerd in het tweede nummer van de vierentwintigste jaargang van het tijdschrift Pro Memorie. Bijdragen tot de Rechtsgeschiedenis der Nederlanden.
Lees het artikel hier (DOI 10.5117/PROM2022.2.006.DHON).
The debate on the recognition of King Victor Emmanuel II of Piemonte-Sardinia as King of Italy in the Belgian Chamber of Representatives in the Fall of 1861 illustrates the challenges generated by constitutional change in the long nineteenth century. Recognition can be seen as a purely political decision, decided by the executive branch under supervision of the legislature. However, the terms of the debate between the ruling Liberal party and the Catholic opposition make clear that both the law of nations and constitutional history were used as arguments. Belgian constitutional history, and especially the revolution of 1830, had provided legitimating concepts sustained by both political parties. The recognition of Piemontese annexations was decried as a violation of Belgium’s permanent neutrality, and a potential precedent undermining the position of ‘secondary nationalities’. It is doubtful whether legal motives, rather than economic interests, played a decisive role in the outcome of the debate. However, the main actors’ legal training and historical curiosity urged the governmental Liberals to explain their position in a common legal vocabulary.
Read the fulltext for free (among with the articles by Pietro Costa, Elisabetta Fiocchi Malaspina, Raphaël Cahen, Inge Van Hulle and Lisa Ford) here (DOI 10.26032/FHI-2022-014).
Ik schreef samen met collega Toon Moonen (UGent) een bijdrage voor het liber amicorum van Jan Velaers. In het licht van de invoering (onder zeer strikte voorwaarden) van elementen van directe democratie voor de gewesten met de Zesde Staatshervorming, gaan we terug naar de (mislukte) poging van Leopold II om in België een "koninklijk referendum" in te voeren (bij de eerste herziening van de Grondwet in 1893).
Het boek is verkrijgbaar bij Die Keure.
Op 21 oktober 2022 had ik het genoegen de 11de ACCA-conferentie (Assistentenconferentie/Conférence des Assistants) in te leiden op de VUB, namens de decaan van de Faculteit Recht en Criminologie.
De tekst (NL/FR) kan op PURE worden geraadpleegd.
On 2 and 3 March, prof. Elisabetta Fiocchi Malaspina welcomed numerous colleagues in Zürich for the conference Entangled National and International Legal Orders in the Long Nineteenth Century. The proceedings, edited with dr. Raphaël Cahen and your humble servant, are available in open access in the peer reviewed journal Forum Historiae Iuris.
The common introduction and the first article by prof. em. Pietro Costa (Firenze) were released on 14 October. The other contributions (Prof. Inge Van Hulle/KULeuven-MPI, Prof. Lisa Ford/UNSW) will be released in the ensuing weeks.
Ik was vorige week te gast bij de Universiteit van Vlaanderen over de Spaanse Successieoorlog, of "waarom oorlog geen zin heeft".
Ik was vandaag te gast in De Wereld Vandaag (Gert Geens) over de sociale actualiteit in Frankrijk.
Herbeluister hier (vanaf 16:40).
As the moments of relative calm are scarce, I hope the reader of the present blog can forgive me for adding a small transcription "vieux style" (à la main) to the existing small stock. This short letter (ff. 18r°-19v°) is written in Paris and dated (Friday) 16 May 1738 N.S. George II's ambassador extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary, James 1st Earl of Waldegrave, descibes the situation at court. Britain had earlier spent the War of the Polish Succession (1733-1735/1738) as a neutral power, whereas France had allied itself with Spain and Savoy-Sardinia against the House of Austria and most of the German princes. Waldegrave is one of the most prominent British diplomats of the age: he spent two years at Charles VI's court in Vienna (1728-1730) before moving for a ten year-period to Paris, where the British ambassador could at times be seen as a "secretary of state in residence".
Britain (and the Dutch Republic) failed to insert themselves as mediators in the negotiations that pacified the conflict (cf. abdication of Francis Stephen (husband of Archduchess Maria Theresia) as Duke of Lorraine, replacement by Stanislas Leczszynski, Louis XV's father-in-law, in return for this renunciation to the throne of Poland; recognition of Augustus the Strong's son as King of Poland, and of Francis Stephen as Grand Duke of Tuscany; recognition of Charles of Spain as King of Naples and Sicily). France recognised Emperor Charles VI's "Pragmatic Sanction", or constitutional settlement allowing his daughters to succeed him in the Habsburg hereditary lands, bypassing the daughters of his elder brother, the late Emperor Joseph I.
Fleury's secrétaire d'Etat des Affaires Étrangères, Germain-Louis Chauvelin, who had pleaded for war in the German Space, had resigned in 1737. The Cardinal himself had always cultivated a cordial relationship with Britain. Consequently, Waldegrave hoped to renew the Franco-British treaty of alliance which James Stanhope and Guillaume Dubois had initiated late in 1716. Britain and France continued to be rivals on the imperial or global stage, but had managed their mutual rivalries on the ground overseas after the Peace of Utrecht (cf. John Shovlin's recent study on the matter, or my micro-study on French merchants' complaints in the Mediterranean). In Waldegrave's letter, neither the Prime Minister, nor the ministers competent for the French maritime empire (incl. colonies) and Foreign Affairs seemed to have time for him.
Waldegrave's mission was of course further complicated by Old Regime court politics, masterfully described by Peter Campbell in his work on Fleury. The cardinal, born in 1653, was already well over eighty. The question of longevity and physical ability logically arises. Managing the ship of state in a frenzied court is never evident. As Louis XV (born in 1710), who confided in and trusted the Cardinal (his erstwhile preceptor) grew older, it was to be supposed that martial vigour and personal ambition would inspire the Cardinal's rivals to hijack his moderate and prudent modus operandi (descibed for instance in my article on the Congress of Soissons, which can be read in open access here).
The letter below is a beaufitul example of the itinerant nature of the French court, well after the completion of Versailles in the 1680s. Louis XV's geography of curial power extends to Rambouillet (where he attends the Countess of Toulouse, see below; used by several French presidents to receive hosts) and Compiègne (cf. July (f. 18v°), the later residence of Napoleon III, in the vincinity of Soissons) or Fontainebleau (where Louis XIV equally spent time in Summer). Information is never sure, and hints of division, or of a weakening position of the Cardinal-Prime Minister, are of course prominent (e.g. f. 18v°: it is said that Louis XV imposed his will on the Cardinal: the court will go to Rambouillet).
Rambouillet is immediately tied (ibid.) to the Count of Toulouse, Louis XIV's natural son with Madame de Montespan. Toulouse, amiral de France (and thus a very wealthy man) died on 31 December 1737 in this castle. His widow, the nearly 50 year-old Marie Victoire de Noailles, belongs to the (prominent) Noailles family, which is loathed by Waldegrave's source, 'who knows the interiour of the Court'. Waldegrave implicitly suggests that his source uses Fleury as a strawman to highlight the pernicious nature of the Noailles family.
(image: Marie Victoire de Noailles, comtesse de Toulouse, d'après Coypel; source: Pop (Ministère de la Culture)
After describing court gossip, Waldegrave turns to another aspect of palatial geography: Louis XV had just been to Marly, which Louis XIV had created to isolate himself even further with selected company than in the Grand Trianon. Waldegrave remarks that Foreign Minsiters do not see the King (f. 19r°). On return from marly, Louis XIV's great-grandson took care to receive Waldegrave exceeding civilly, taking quite some time for conversation with his Brittanick (and Hanoverian) Majesty. He states that the King (who had slimmed down and spoke with a stronger voice) was far from being likely to die soon of a consumption.
56 years separated the King from his former teacher. Fleury, as Waldegrave testified, suffered 'a small fainting fit', transformed into a decisvely life-threatening event by capital gossip. When the ambassador showed up at the Cardinal's lodgings to verify this... 'he seemed as hearty as in my preceding visits.' The next attack would 'carry him off', or... 'perhaps not the hundreth'.
André-Hercule de Fleury would live for another four years and almost nine months, and reach the age of 89.
My Lord
The same reason, that M. de Maurepas [Secrétaire d'État de la Marine]
gives for his not proceeding upon our American
affairs, is given me likewise by M. Amelot [Secrétaire d'État des Affaires Étrangères] for
his having done nothing in consequence of our
Counter Project for the Deffensive Alliance. I fancy
by what I just hear, of His Most Christian
Majesty's going next Sunday [18 May] to Rambouillet for
three days [21 May], That the Cardinal will come then to
Issy, and that I shall have a Conference there
with him and M. Amelot on this subject. When
I asked the Cardinal last Tuesday [12 May], if he had yet
considered our Counter Project, he said he had
not had time, that he was hurried by every body to
death, but he hoped in the following week to have
two or three days to himself, and then he would
work upon it. He neither said where, nor how
which I took notice of at the time, and attributed[v°]
his indecision to the State he was in; but I am
now told, that this journey to Rambouillet (which
is to be followed by three or four more before that
to Compiegne, where the French king removes the
Beginning of July) hurts the Cardinal, and has been
strenuously opposed by him. It is however carried
against him, or at least he has been brought to
consent to it. The Person I have this from,
knows the interior of the Court, as well as any
Man in France, he hates the Noailles cordially,
and fears that Madame de Toulouse will get
ground on this occasion; for certain it is, that
hitherto the journeys to Rambouillet were
attributed to the French King's personal
Friendship for Count de Toulouse; but from its extending
in so publick a manner to his widow, who is
known to be a very intriguing woman, of an
intriguing family, and as she will undoubtedly
take care to have such company with her as will
make the French King's stay there agreable to
him, it is taken for granted, that she has schemes[r°]
ready made in favour of her Family, and to
the Cardinal's Prejudice. Endless Conjectures
are drawn from these appearances, which time
alone will make out.As to other matters here, I do not see
any reason to alter my mind since my last,
excepting in the French King's Person. The
Court having been at Marly, where Foreign
Ministers do not see him, last Tuesday [13 May] was
the first time I had an opportunity of paying
my Court to His Most Christian Majesty since
my arrival here; He received me exceeding
civilly, and talked to me a good deal. It is
true he is pretty much taken away; but really had
I not expected it, and had I not known him
fatter some time ago, I should not have taken
much notice of his leanness; for his complexion
was clearer, his Eyes more lively, and his Voice
much stronger, than I have observed this great
while. In fine, in my opinion, bhe is far from being
likely to die soon of a consumption, as the generality[v°]
here will have it.
The Cardinal hd a small fainting fit
on Monday Morning [12 May], which occasioned a Report
in Paris, that he was dying; but I was at his
lodgings the next Morning [13 May] by half an hour
after eight, and found he was gone to Mass. At
his return before nine I had my audience of
him, and he seemed as hearty as in my
preceding visits. One of those Fits will probably
carry him off; perhaps the first, and perhaps
not the Hundreth.I am with the greatest Respect
Mylord
Yr graces most
humble and most
obedient servantWaldegrave
Source: The National Archives (Kew), State Papers Foreign, 78 (France), vol. 218.
I wrote a review for the Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte - Kanonistische Abteilung on the 6th volume of the series Der Einfluss der Kanonistik auf die europäische Rechtskultur.
First sentences:
The series „Einfluss der Kanonistik auf die europäische Rechtskultur“, of which the present volume is the sixth and final, aims to demonstrate how canon law (and theology) have influenced not only norms and rules, but also the legal culture of practitioners and theorists of law in Europe. Nearly all manuals of the history of international law devote considerable attention to the contribution of theology to the jus ad bellum, but this approach is mostly constructed outside-in.
Read the review here (DOI 10.1515/zrgk-2022-0026).
(Image source: Uni Lodz)
Abstract:
John Gilissen (1912–1988) was a high-profile legal academic at the Université libre de Bruxelles (°1834) and the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (°1969). Personal – albeit fragmentary – archival records deposited with these universities permit to reconstruct his teaching (both ex cathedra-courses for big groups and intensive tutorials), impressive global scientific network and insatiable scientific curiosity. Gilissen is the author of standard works on many aspects of domestic legal history (both public and private), and acquired renown as the secretary-general of the Société Jean Bodin pour l’histoire comparative des institutions. His influential position as a public prosecutor, law professor and legal historian generates a unique insider’s perspective on the confessional, linguistic and constitutional transformation of the country from World War One to the First Reform of the State. The current law curriculum at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel still bears marks of Gilissen’s comparative approach to the history of civil law and his interest in the contemporary relevance of institutional history.
Read more here (DOI 10.18778/0208-6069.99.03).
Last week on Thursday, I presented an aspect of my recent longer article on the Congress of Soissons (see SSRN) at the 6th Biennial Conference of the European Society for Comparative Legal History, organised by Prof. Pedro Barbas Homem and dr. Ana Isabel Barcelo Caldeira Fouto of the Universidade da Lisboa. The paper was part of Panel 16 ("Non-Legal Professions and Legal Discourse on Trade and Empire"), with contributions by drs. Florenz Volkaert (UGent/FWO) and dr. Inge Van Hulle (MPILHLT, Frankfurt am Main).
All abstracts and speaker cvs can be downloaded for free in the abstracts book.
Ik schreef een stukje voor De Morgen over de tweede ronde van de Franse parlementsverkiezingen. Lees meer hier.
Ik schreef een stukje voor de Tijd over de "Zwarte Zondag". Zie hier.
Gianni Paelinck (VRT NWS) interviewde me over de institutionele mogelijkheden na de verkiezingen van de Assemblée Nationale gisteren.
Lees verder hier.
Vandaag verscheen op de site van de Volkskrant (morgen gedrukt) de laatste afleving van het expertpanel over Frankrijk, n.a.v. de wetgevende verkiezingen van gisteren en vorige week.
Lees meer hier.
Abstract:
This contribution reconstructs the Congress of Soissons (1728-1730), a consequence of the Parisian Preliminaries (31 May 1727), an agreement that prevented the eruption of a general war in Europe between the League of Hanover (France, Britain-Hanover, Dutch Republic) and the League of Vienna (Emperor, Spain, Brandenburg-Prussia). The ‘sleeping’ congress did not generate a final peace agreement. Soissons was a congress of peacekeeping (Burkhardt), and in part contributed to the European culture of peace engineering (Ghervas). Besides the central commercial claims that opposed the Maritime Powers to Spain, the delegations reflected on geopolitical questions from the East Indies to Scandinavia, the Baltic and the Mediterranean. They were solicited by multiple actors of the European Society of Princes (Bély), down to the level of private individuals, who hoped for diplomatic intercession. France’s position as equidistant director of various bilateral and collective talks becomes clear through the itineraries of the delegates between Soissons, Fontainebleau, Compiègne and Versailles. The sociability of the congress is not purely curial or Parisian, but also includes life on the countryside. French archives highlight the material and logistical challenges of turning a regional hub as Soissons into an international one. The Hop Archives, which contain a synthesis of the daily reports of the Dutch delegation, and the British diplomatic archives (State Papers Foreign) are complemented by the press and the letters of George Lyttelton, who spent several months in Soissons on his Grand Tour. Not only this public circulation of news on the congress, but also the material culture of the print resources consulted by the diplomats allow to identify this eighteenth-century meeting place within the broader European republic of books, news and letters.
I wrote a review of Gabriela Frei's monograph on Great Britain, International Law and the Evolution of Maritime Strategic Thought (Oxford Historical Monographs, 2020) for the Journal of the History of International Law/Revue d'histoire du droit international.
The text can be read on Brill's site (DOI 10.1163/15718050-12340205).
Ik schreef een stukje voor de website van de Tijd. Meer informatie hier.
Ik schreef voor SamPol een stukje over het programma van de "Nupes". Meer hier.
.jpg/713px-Map_of_Amsterdam_-_Amstelodami_Celeberrimi_Hollandiae_Emporii_Delineatio_Nova_(J.Blaeu%2C_1649).jpg)
De stichting
OVR (Stichting tot Uitgaaf der Bronnen van het Oud-Vaderlandse Recht)
verleende me de eer om als gasthoogleraar de maand mei door te brengen aan de
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, op uitnodiging van collega proximus Prof. Hylkje
De Jong. In het kader van deze tweejaarlijkse leerstoel (die omwille van de
pandemie verschoven werd naar dit academiejaar) kunnen de rechtenfaculteiten in
de Noordelijke en Zuidelijke Nederlanden een rechtshistoricus van de overzijde
uitnodigen, om via vijftien uur colleges, oefeningen en lezingen de onderlinge
banden aan te halen en te interageren met de plaatselijke universitaire
gemeenschap.
Conform het
reglement van de leerstoel gaat op woensdag 18 mei in de namiddag een
publieke lezing met receptie door, met als titel “Hoe modern was het
negentiende-eeuwse neutraliteitsrecht ?”.
Een
volledige activiteitenlijst voor de leerstoel kan gevonden hier gevonden worden.
This event is a presentation of 175 pages of manuscript course notes on the law of nations (Le droit des gens) linked to a course taught at the Belgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the Belle Époque, retrieved in Louis (Léon) Arendt's private papers in the Belgian State Archives (Fund BE-A0510.320). The inventory can be consulted on the State Archives' website.
Edouard Louis Léon Marie Arendt (1843-1924) was the director-general of political affairs (1886) in the Belgian Foreign Office in the heyday of King Leopold II's reign. He entered the Ministry as 'attaché' in 1870. Belgium's security on the European continent, and of course the affairs of the Congo Free State were the dominant themes of his time in office as a civil servant (1870-1912).
Biographical details can be found in the entry by Jacques Willequet in the Biographie nationale de Belgique. His father, Academy member and Professor at the Catholic University of Leuven Wilhelm Arendt (1808-1865) authored a seminal treatise on Belgian permanent neutrality in 1845. The text can be consulted on Google Books.
Louis Arendt authored 'hundreds' of legal memoranda elaborating the theory and practice of Belgian permanent neutrality. For an introduction to the topic. Henri Haag devoted a lenghthy article to Arendt's memorandum written in 1911 and its use on the eve of World War One (Bulletin of the Royal Commission for History, open access on Persée).
Arendt provided a hand-written 'Préface' on the left-hand side of the first page, stating:
Jusqu'à la page 82 (lois de la guerre) ce cours a été copié, sous révision préalable, sur un cahier déjà ancien d'un élève peu rigoureux. D'où des fautes, des vieilleries, des phrases incorrectes. La suite elle-même n'a subi aucune correction, mais a été donnée à mes chers élèves. 3 septembre 1904. Tiré à 9 exemplaires.
The purpose of this OSF-site is not to provide a full-fledged analysis of Arendt's treatise. That is the subject of research articles and chapters. The current wiki shares the text in a transcription as it can be found in the State Archives. We did not interpolate (i.e. errors in the text are indicated with [sic]), since most the French grammar and vocabulary used in 1904 largely conforms to what we use nowadays.
My oral contribution at the conference "Law(s) and International Relations", held in Orléans (15-17 Sept 2021) can provide a glimpse of the richness of this source.
This event is hybrid: participants can either go physically to the Faculty of Law's Council Room, or register for the Teams-event here.
Ik was te gast bij de Afspraak voor een gesprek over de Franse presidentsverkiezingen met Phara de Aguirre en Mia Doornaert.
De uitzending kan hier worden herbekeken.
Ik schreef een opiniebijdrage voor de Tijd over de tweede ronde, na een eerste over de eerste ronde van de présidentielles.
Lees meer hier.
Vanmiddag was ik te gast op Nieuwe Feiten (Radio 1) bij Lieven Vandenhaute.
Te herbeluisteren hier (rond 23:39).
Maarten Rabaey (De Morgen) interviewde me op 24 april 's avonds over de Franse persidentsverkiezingen.
Meer hier.
Ik was vanochtend te gast op de VRT in Brussel voor een VRT NWS live met Stef Meerbergen en Steven Decraene (vanuit Parijs) over de Franse presidentsverkiezingen.
Meer informatie hier.
Ik schreef een stukje in De Morgen. Meer informatie hier.
Ik werd vanmiddag geïnterviewd door Lieven Vandenhaute voor Radio 1 (Nieuwe Feiten).
Herbeluisteren vanaf 22:20 hier.
Ik werd geïnterviewd door Jeroen Deblaere (Het Nieuwsblad) over het debat tussen Le Pen en Macron.
Lees meer hier.
Ik schreef een blogpost op verzoek van de Nederlandse website Nederlandrechtsstaat.nl.
Meer informatie hier.
Kamiel Vermeylen interviewde me over de tweede ronde Macron/Le Pen. Lees meer hier.
(image source: Twitter)
Op vrijdag 22 april nam ik deel aan de studiedag ter gelegenheid van het emeritaat van voorzitter van het Grondwettelijk Hof Daoût rond de Laïcité (de "neutraliteit van de overheid", of de "scheiding tussen Kerk en Staat") en de vele verschillen tussen dit heel Franse concept en de regeling in België.
Een programma kan hier worden gevonden. De acta worden later door Anthémis en die Keure uitgegeven.
Ik schreef een opiniestuk voor de Tijd over de eerste rond van de Franse presidentsverkiezingen.
Lees meer hier.
Ik werd geïnterviewd door Dieter Bauwens van De Morgen over de eerste ronde van de Franse presidentsverkiezingen. Meer hier.
Eri Raspoet (Knack) interviewde me in het kader van een portret van de Franse president voor de verkiezingen.
Meer informatie hier.
%2C_marquis_de_Torcy.jpg)
Gisteren was ik te gast bij De Wereld Vandaag (Ruth Roets) over Versailles als diplomatiek kruispunt, gelet op de informele Europese top die er plaatsgrijpt.
Het interview kan hier worden herbeluisterd.
Abstract:
The battle of Oudenarde (11 July 1708) is one of the numerous defeats of the end of Louis XIV’s reign. The event seems disconnected from legal history. Yet, several layers of analysis allow to connect the battle to the constitutional systems of the belligerents, as well as to the law of nations. This article treats first the military confrontation of two mass armies, representing rulers from Granada to Königsberg, and the local perception of this sudden foreign military presence, through a satire on ‘French vanity and consternation’. In an ensuing stage, the German allies of Louis XIV and his opponents offer a perspective on the law of the Holy Roman Empire. Finally, the battle in itself being far from decisive, diplomatic manoeuvres announced the blueprint of the agreement that would bring the war to an end in 1713-1714. The interconnectedness of all ‘Theatres of War’ (Italy, Spain, Germany, Low Countries, Scotland) equally transpires in the iconography used in Schenk’s Schouwburg van den Oorlog.
Read the article in open access (DOI 10.25518/1370-2262.1360).
The students of the EUTopia Connected Learning Community Legal History:Minority Rights will report on the Peak Event where lecturers and students from the five partner institutions (UPF Barcelona, CY Paris, Ljubljana, VUB and Warwick) gathered physically on 18 and 19 February.
Read more on the EUTopia CoLeCo Legal History:Minority Rights blog.
Cet ouvrage collectif résulte d’une coopération entre historiens, philosophes et juristes belges, français et allemands menée à l’occasion d’une journée d’études organisé par le centre de recherches Contextual Research in Law de la Vrije Universiteit Brussel et le Centre d’Histoire du Droit et d’Anthropologie Juridique de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles. Il vise à combler un vide historiographique relatif à l’étude du phénomène de la migration des professeurs allemands de droit dans les universités belges au XIXème siècle. Il apporte également un éclairage sur les circulations des savoirs juridiques ainsi que sur l’enseignement du droit dans une perspective transnationale et comparatiste. Il présente à la fois quelques figures typiques (Warnkönig, Ahrens) de la circulation académique, mais aussi l’importance des séjours d’études dans la formation des juristes. Il livre une réflexion plus large sur les circulations transnationales à travers les époques en matière d’enseignement du droit ainsi que sur le recrutement des professeurs étrangers tant en Belgique qu’en Europe, avec des incidences sur le monde entier dans le contexte impérial et colonial. Avec les contributions de Raphaël Cahen, Jérôme De Brouwer, Pieter Dhondt, Wolfgang Forster, Jean-Louis Halpérin, Maxime Jottrand et Christoph-Eric Mecke.
Sur les directeurs de la publication/les contributeurs:
Raphaël Cahen (1982) est juriste et historien. Il est chercheur postdoctoral et professeur invité au sein du centre de recherches Contextual Research in Law à la Vrije Universiteit Brussel où il enseigne l’histoire du droit. Ses recherches portent sur l’histoire des idées politiques, du droit public et du droit international dans le long XIXe siècle. Jérôme de Brouwer (1974) est historien et juriste. Professeur à la Faculté de droit et de criminologie de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles, chercheur au sein du Centre d’histoire du droit et d’anthropologie juridique, il enseigne l’histoire du droit et des institutions. Ses recherches portent principalement sur l’histoire du droit et des pratiques pénales, sur l’histoire des professions juridiques ainsi que sur l’histoire des représentations du monde judiciaire au cours de la période contemporaine. Frederik Dhondt (1984) est juriste et historien. Il dirige le centre de recherches Contextual Research in Law à la Vrije Universiteit Brussel, et y enseigne l'histoire politique et l'histoire du droit. Ses recherches portent sur l'histoire du droit public et du droit international aux XVIIIe et XIXe siècles. Pieter Dhondt (1976) is Senior Lecturer in general history and Head of the Department of Geographical and Historical Studies at the University of Eastern Finland. He published extensively on, for instance, the intercultural transfer of university ideas within Europe in the nineteenth century, the history of academic mobility, student revolts and university celebrations. His current research focuses primarily on medical history, including the development of medical education and the history of medical uncertainty. Wolfgang Forster is Professor for civil, comparative and philosophy of Law at the Universität Tübingen since 2011. He did his PhD at the LMU in Munich (2000) as well as his Habilitation (2005) and was Visiting Professor at the University of Wisconsin Law School (2010). He is also the Dean of the Law Faculty in Tübingen since October 2020. He published widely on a variety of subjects in German, English, French and Spanish and especially upon the philosophy of Karl Christian Friedrich Krause and Krausismo. Jean-Louis Halpérin a été successivement professeur d'histoire du droit à l'Université Lyon III (1988-1998), à l'Université de Bourgogne (1998-2003) et il enseigne le droit à l'Ecole normale supérieure - PSL depuis 2003. Membre de l'Institut Universitaire de France (2013-2018), il dirige le Centre de Théorie et Analyse du Droit (UMR 7074). Ses recherches portent sur l'histoire du droit à l'époque contemporaine. Maxime Jottrand (1992) est doctorant au sein du Centre d’histoire du droit et d’anthropologie juridique et au sein du centre de recherche Mondes Modernes & Contemporains (Université Libre de Bruxelles). Sa thèse de doctorat porte sur l’histoire de la formation des juristes en Belgique de 1830 à 1914. Ses recherches se concentrent sur l’évolution des relations entre les facultés de droit et le monde professionnel. Christoph-Eric Mecke a étudié le droit, l’histoire et la sociologie aux universités de Passau, Tours et Göttingen, docteur de la faculté de droit à l’Université de Göttingen (2007), habilité à diriger des recherches à la faculté de droit à l’Université de Wroclaw (Pologne) en 2019, il a été professeur suppléant à l’Université Humboldt de Berlin en 2020/2021, et il est depuis septembre 2021, professeur invité à l’Université de Zielona Góra (Pologne).
(source: ASP)
Ik heb de eer deel te mogen uitmaken van een panel dat voor de Volkskrant commentaar levert bij de Franse politiek en instellingen.
De eerste aflevering kan hier worden geconsulteerd, de tweede hier, de derde hier, de vierde hier, de vijfde hier, de zesde hier, de zevende hier.
