oa Fundamina : A Journal of Legal History - Quanti ea res erit : wat vertellen we onze studenten?
To what extent do Dutch textbooks on Roman law reflect the controversy that has continued for almost a century over the interpretation of caput 3 of the lex Aquilia? In 1945, Van Oven discussed the relevant literature of his day, but since then Kaser's view has been favoured, even though, in 1976, Feenstra inclined towards Daube's alternative interpretation of quanti ea res erit and this led to the ongoing debate. The interpretation of caput 3 is clearly more controversial than students are usually led to believe.
Article metrics loading...