Historical evolution of the Law

Assoc. Prof. Petru Tărchilă

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences

“Aurel Vlaicu” University of Arad

Abstract

Along with the evolution of human society and its organization in families, races and tribes,

we witness the emergence of first behaviour rules embedded in skills, habits, customs, etc.

The entire community acted according to these rules because their disobedience had an

influence on the survival of the entire community, as they had a powerful mystical and

religious character. Sanction measures evolved along with the evolution of communities and

they were applied to individuals who disobeyed and broke these rules. Thus, the first forms of

human community used the death penalty (blood revenge 1) as means of punishment for

serious violation of the rules of coexistence. Later on, death penalty was replaced by the

individual`s expulsion from the community and as communities evolved, material

redemption was used instead of expulsion. The first judicial norms (the germs of law)

developed among these social cohabitation, organization and behaviour rules. Judicial norms

differed from other rules due to their compulsory character and by appeal to the coercive force

of the community when they were broken by certain individuals. The change of social,

customized norms into judicial norms and the emergence of law as independent entity take

place along with the occurrence of state and public power rooted in the Greek – Roman

Antiquity. It has been set that law is a social phenomenon incidental to human society; thus,

Romans have expressed this statement through the phrase: “ubi societas, ibi jus”, namely

law occurs along with the society. Law, like society is not a static, immutable entity issued

once and for all; they are under constant development and social-historical evolution. As

1
see I. Craiovan, Teoria generala a dreptului, Ed. Sibila, Craiova, 2009, pp. 11-15.
social phenomenon, social law experiences a constant historical evolution, bearing the mark

of historical periods and cultural, spiritual and religious features of nations.

Keywords: custom, social norm, juridical norm, regulation.

1. Classification of the Law as independent institution

Man is a social and sociable creature whose place in within a community. Thus

emerge the needs for organization, order, discipline, all leading to the occurrence of

behaviour rules, to sets of norms that would harmonize the individuals` interests to

the interests of the community as part of the collective interest. Along with the

evolution of human society and its organization in families, races and tribes, we

witness the emergence of first behaviour rules embedded in skills, habits, customs,

etc. The entire community acted according to these rules because their disobedience

had an influence on the survival of the entire community, as they had a powerful

mystical and religious character.

Behaviour rules have developed and evolved along with the evolution of human

communities, changing into social norms of cohabitation, organization and

behaviour. The evolution of the community brought about the evolution of penalties

applied to individuals who disobeyed or broke those rules. Thus, the first forms of

human community used the death penalty (blood revenge 2) as means of punishment

for serious violation of the rules of coexistence. Later on, death penalty was replaced

by the individual`s expulsion from the community and as communities evolved,

material redemption was used instead of expulsion. The first judicial norms (the

germs of law) developed among these social cohabitation, organization and

behaviour rules. Judicial norms differed from other rules due to their compulsory

character and by appeal to the coercive force of the community when they were

broken by certain individuals. The change of social, customized norms into judicial

norms and the emergence of law as independent entity take place along with the

occurrence of state and public power rooted in the Greek – Roman Antiquity. It has

been set that law is a social phenomenon incidental to human society; thus, Romans
2
see I. Craiovan, Teoria generala a dreptului, Ed. Sibila, Craiova, 2009, pp. 11-15.
have expressed this statement through the phrase: “ubi societas, ubi jus”, namely

law occurs along with the society. Law, like society is not a static, immutable entity

issued once and for all; they are under constant development and social-historical

evolution. As social phenomenon, social law experiences a constant historical

evolution, bearing the mark of historical periods and cultural, spiritual and religious

features of nations. Over time there have been several theories on the classification

and ordering of the law. Some of them are listed below:

 a theory centred on the basic characteristics of form and content of the law

classifies it into law systems or law families. For instance, the Roman-

Germanic law system founded on the Roman Law and blended with German,

Spanish, French, etc. doctrine; the common-law system founded on the

English Law, etc.

 another theory founded on the chronological and historical criterion of the

emergence of judicial norms groups the law in types of law. Thus, the Marxist

Theory mentions four types of law: slave-owning, feudal, burgher and

proletarian (socialist). The following classification of types of law can be taken

into consideration:

- incipient law (early law) typical for the primitive society;

- Medieval law typical for the Middle Ages;

- modern law typical for the beginning of Capitalism;

- contemporary law which tends to share common features due to

international public and private law but can still be grouped into:

- the law of democratic societies;

- socialist law;

- the law of developing countries;

- community law, etc.

1.1. Factors which influence the law and its judicial norms

The analysis of factors which influence the judicial norms of the law involves the

identification of causes and metrical forces that generate it and determine a judicial
regulation or another. Various concepts and philosophical theories have sought to

identify these factors, referring to politics, morality, ideology, economy, etc. Thus,

there are the following factors:

a) geographical, demographic, biological factors where human existence develops

These factors influence judicial norms to a certain extent.

See the differences between judicial norms of overpopulated countries and those of

underpopulated ones, between states placed in arid and dry areas and those placed

in wet, green areas.

b) historical, ethnical, national factors

These factors take into account historical conditions and the ethnical-national

peculiarities of population. See the differences between states with homogenous

ethnical structure and those with multi-ethnical population or consisting of several

minorities.

c) social-economic factors

These factors are determined by the level of economic development, the nature of

property forms, the structure of social layers, professional categories of the society,

etc. See the effort made by Romania to create the legal framework for economic

reformation after the shift to a market economy. We can notice that there is

interdependence and mutual influence between economy and law and the role of

law in regulating social relations increases along with the historical development of

a society.

d) political factors

These factors play a determining role in the development of judicial norms in a

certain society. Changes in the political regime in former socialist states after the fall

of totalitarian regimes had an overwhelming consequence on all branches of law,

especially on constitutional law.

e) cultural – ideological factors

which will occur in judicial norms of all branches of law in a society at a certain

point. (called the reference point).

f) international factors

These factors refer to the international situation, the relationship with the

neighbouring countries, the state`s relationship to international institutions, etc.,

factors with a powerful influence on the judicial norms (international public and

private law, diplomatic law, etc.).

The sum of these factors influences to a larger or smaller extent the elaboration and

evolution of judicial norms of a society at a certain reference point. But specialists in

judicial norms consider that the fundament of law in a society is the human factor in

his complexity and dynamics of his features and relationships. Thus, the needs,

interests, aspirations and actions in various situations (citizen, owner, public servant)

have to be taken into account. This factor along with other factors will bring about

the elaboration, transformation and replacement of judicial norms with newer ones

and thus determine the evolution of law in a society.

2. THE NOTION OF THE LAW

2.1. Law as independent institution

The core of law can be expressed in terms of will and interests of a society at a

certain reference point. In law, the role of will has a double significance. It is the

general will of social classes or even the society`s, governed by general interests and

made official by the state as a guarantor for law obedience. On the other hand it is

the individual`s, the citizen`s will visible in the process of law application.

Law can be presented in various ways. It is the product of social deeds and

the man`s will, a historical phenomenon and normative order, an aggregate of will

acts and authority, of freedom and constraint.3

3
See Sofia Popescu, Conceptii contemporane despre drept, Ed. Academiei, Bucuresti, 2010, pp. 74-75.
 The problem with defining law is not of mere theoretical importance but it

has also practical implications. As an author noticed, the legal advisor has to seek

solutions and not aspects related to the definition of law and its sources of

knowledge. But how the legal advisor uses the technique, his horizon and the

quality of approached solutions depend on the answer to these issues. Kant, in his

work “Metaphysical Elements of Justice” drew attention upon the fact that solution

in law, according to the text of positive law, issues the question: what is justice, what

is the law itself?

Those who study law have to accept the pluralism of answers, that several

definitions of law are available, their variety and relativity but also their tendency to

present the core of law. Their perennial character is marked by a series of objective

and subjective factors such as: historical time, philosophy of the period, various

judicial movements and law schools as well as the author`s personality.

In this perspective, law as it has been seen throughout the years is not mere

historical illustration but a necessary endeavour for the understanding of its

complex significances.

In judicial writings, authors have tried to group the definitions of law and

therefore in 1985, J.F. Bergel`s work “Theorie general du droit” classifies them as

follows:

1. Definitions of formal – normative type, which present law as an aggregate

of behaviour rules which regulate social reports in a more or less organized society;

their obedience is ensured by public constraint, if necessary”.

2. Definitions of substantial type – they aim the reason of being, the origin,

justification and conclusiveness of law.

Definitions given by different authors are undoubtedly very significant for the

judicial beliefs of the author, thus the famous philosopher Immanuel Kant defines

law as “the sum of conditions when an individual`s free will can coexist with

everyone`s free will according to an universal law of freedom.”

Mircea Djuvara (1886-1945). He considered that “law is a product of human reason

no matter how rudimentary it was in primitive societies and the manner law

functions is the result of this product”.

Professor Djuvara classifies law in: rational law and positive law. Rational law

involves abstract judgements and results in appreciations on what is just or unjust,

legal or illegal.

Positive law is represented by the law practiced in society and is contained by

bills, customs, jurisprudence and other sources. The Romanian recent judicial

doctrine through the voice of professor I. Ceterchi defined law as “the system of

behaviour norms, written or acknowledged by the state, which guide human

behaviour according to the social values of a society, setting rights and judicial

obligations whose obedience is enforced by public power, if necessary (represented

by the state and its institutions).

Professor Nicolae Popa defines law as “an aggregate of state-guaranteed rules

whose purpose is to organize and discipline human behaviour in the main

relationships of a society, in a freedom-governed climate that protects human rights

and social justice”. After analysing various definitions of law issued throughout the

years, we can list its main characteristics. Thus, law has a:

a. social character because it places the human being in relation and interactivity

with another human being.

b. anti-entropic character, namely its ability to oppose to disaggregation, disorder

and social conflicts. Law has always been a regulating and ordination factor in the

society because it confers certainty, peace, safety and protection to the people who

obey it.

c. normative character because it represents what is and what should be in a society

in the form of specific, general and impersonal rules.

provision must be obeyed by all people and its disobedience will be punished by the

coercive force of the state (through its institutions).

e. value character which is generated, structured and directed in relationship with

other values of the society, according to historical time it has been issued.

f. educational character which involves its ability to develop a collective but also

compelling relationship to those who break the law

g. architect of social life characterized by its ability to accustom to good discipline

and educate the society`s behaviour so as to respect and defend social values.

h. historical character which is represented by the influence of spatial-temporal

coordinates upon judicial norms and law in general. Thus, law is subjected to

historical evolution, judicial norms are specific configurations of one country or

another; it is influenced by the historical period it was issued in because of the

influence of natural, social, economic, cultural, political and international factors.

The functions and finalities of law are complex, dynamic and contradicting. They

sum up several ways, manners and moral, cultural and normative mechanisms

through which society imposes the individual (all members of a society) a series of

constraint and interdictions. Thus, the individual has to obey norms and basic values

promoted and defended by the society.

This process takes place under social control which identifies the main mechanisms

and levers by means of which society ensures the social cohesion of its members, the

stability and functionality of its institutions.

The term “social control” was introduced into the vocabulary of judicial sociology by

the American school of “sociological jurisprudence”. It stipulates that law has an

important role and it is considered the most perfectible and complex manner of

social control. The sociological theory of law considers it highly dependent on the

global social system of a society. The functions of law have been defined as

fundamental directions or orientations of the judicial mechanism. The whole system

involved in achieving these directions.

The Italian professor V. Ferrari5 considers that law as three may functions:

1) social regulation

2) conflict solving

3) legitimation of power

Professor N. Popa believes that law fulfils the following four main functions:

1) institutionalization and judicial formalization of social-political organization

2) preservation, defence and guarantee for the fundamental values of a society

3) rule over society

4) normative function

Law as part of the social system is perfective. It is subjected to constant

changes and its positive effects on the social life and economic, administrative and

political activities of a society are visible.

There are also cases when the relationship between the law and the social

system is subjected to severe disturbing phenomena. They can generate real legal

dysfunctions6 represented by the law`s impossibility to express itself efficiently or by

distorting the law. The situations can be the following:

1. when law misses from social relations or from fields where it should be

used. The phenomenon was analysed by the French professor J. Carbonnier and

called “non-law” phenomenon. It can be have the following characteristics:

-self-limitation of law in time and space, namely judicial activity is not

enforced on certain days, holidays or at night.

For example: trials are not held on legal holidays, houses are not searched

during the night, etc.

2. lack of validity and efficiency. These causes can be determined by internal

or external causes, in situations when laws do not take into consideration the
4
see N Popa, Teoria generala a dreptului, Ed. Actomi, Bucuresti, 1996, p. 80.
5
see V. Ferrari, Funzioni del Diritto, bari, 1987, p. 25
6
see I. Craiovan, Teoria generala a dreptului, Ed. Sibila, Craiova, 2009.
technical legal conditions or certain judicial principles. Here count also laws that face

public resistance or have lost their object, thus becoming obsolete.

3. the existence of judicial norms that affect seriously the social values and

even the notion of social justice (unjust law).

4. repressive (oppressive) law when the harmful effects of unjust judicial

norms are experienced by certain social classes or categories, thus violating the

human fundamental rights and freedom7.

We need to have a closer look on the finalities of the law in order to be able to

establish its role, importance and place in the society. The understanding and

analysis of law finalities means presenting its reason of being, goal and ideals as well

as its development tendencies.

CONCLUSIONS

Along with the evolution of human society and its organization in families,

races and tribes, we witness the emergence of first behaviour rules embedded in

skills, habits, customs, etc. The entire community acted according to these rules

because their disobedience had an influence on the survival of the entire community,

as they had a powerful mystical and religious character. Sanction measures evolved

along with the evolution of communities and they were applied to individuals who

disobeyed and broke these rules. Thus, the first forms of human community used the

death penalty (blood revenge 8) as means of punishment for serious violation of the

rules of coexistence. Later on, death penalty was replaced by the individual`s

expulsion from the community and as communities evolved, material redemption

was used instead of expulsion. The first judicial norms (the germs of law) developed

among these social cohabitation, organization and behaviour rules. Judicial norms

differed from other rules due to their compulsory character and by appeal to the

coercive force of the community when they were broken by certain individuals. The

7
See D. Banciu, Control social si sanctiuni sociale, Ed. Hyperion, Bucuresti, 2012, p. 10
8
change of social, customized norms into judicial norms and the emergence of law as

independent entity take place along with the occurrence of state and public power

rooted in the Greek – Roman Antiquity. It has been set that law is a social

phenomenon incidental to human society; thus, Romans have expressed this

statement through the phrase: “ubi societas, ubi jus”, namely law occurs along with

the society. Law, like society is not a static, immutable entity issued once and for all;

they are under constant development and social-historical evolution. As social

phenomenon, social law experiences a constant historical evolution, bearing the

mark of historical periods and cultural, spiritual and religious features of nations.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Banciu, D., Control social si sanctiuni sociale, Ed. Hyperion, Bucuresti, 2012, p. 10

2. Craiovan, I., Teoria generala a dreptului, Ed. Sibila, Craiova, 2009.

3. Djuvara, M., Teoria generala a dreptului, Bucuresti, 1930.

4. Popa, N., Teoria generala a dreptului, Ed. Actomi, Bucuresti, 1996, p. 80.

5. Popescu, S., Conceptii contemporane despre drept, Ed. Academiei, Bucuresti, 2010, pp.

74-75.