33 Kaspar Manz, a German Jurist in the Seventeenth Century: A Man of Theory and Practice

GUNTER WESENER (GRAZ)

As well as authoring numerous important treatises on ancient Roman law, Alan Watson has dealt with the problems of the reception of Roman law, especially with the reception in Scotland.¹ In this context he mentions two Scottish jurists of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, Thomas Craig (1538-1608) and Sir Thomas Hope, Lord Advocate (who died in 1646), who had stressed the importance of Roman law (ius civile) for Scotland.²

The following chapter, dedicated to Alan Watson on the occasion of his jubilee, deals with a German jurist of the seventeenth century, Kaspar Manz (1606-1677), who, on the one hand, was a typical representative of his time’s jurisprudence and, on the other hand, adopted a new course, namely a new modus docendi et discendi.

¹ A Watson, Legal Transplants (Edinburgh, 1974; 2nd edn Athens, Ga, 1993) 44.

² cf. P Stein, “The Influence of Roman Law on the Law of Scotland”, (1963) Juridical Review 205, esp. at 218-19; idem, “Roman Law in Scotland”, (1968) IRMAE, V, 23 b 50.

³ Not in H Conrad, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte (Karlsruhe, 1962-66); E Dohring, Geschichte der deutschen Rechtspflege seit 1500 (Berlin, 1953); Kleinheyer and Schroder, Deutsche und Europaische Juristen aus neun Jahrhunderten (4th edn, 1996); M Stolleis (ed), Staatsdenker im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt a.M, 1977) nor in the more recent histories of civil law by Wieacker, H Schlosser or Wesenberg and Wesener, has Manz been mentioned.We find a short notice in R Stintzing, Geschichte der Deutschen Rechtswissenschaft (Munich, 1880) I, 657-8, in A Sollner in H Coing (ed), Handbuch der Quellen und Literatur der neueren europaischen Privat- rechtsgeschichte (Munich, 1977) vol.

⁴ C Prantl, Geschichte der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat in Ingolstadt, Landshut, Munchen, (Munich, 1872) (hereafter Prantl, Geschichte} i, 424; Th. Specht, Geschichte der ehemaligen Universitat Dillingen (1549—1804) (Freiburg i.Breisgau, 1902) (hereafter Specht, Geschichte) 334-5.

⁵Vol. 20, 281.

⁶K Neumaier, Ius publicum. Studien zur barocken Rechtsgelehrsamkeit an der Universitat

MANZ’S LIFE

Kaspar Manz (Caspar Manzius) was born on 7 April 1606 in Gundelfingen in the duchy of Neuburg, the son of a Protestant burgomaster.⁷ It seems likely that he became a Roman Catholic during the counter-reformation which took place in Neuburg in the years 1616 and 1617. He attended the Gymnasium in Gunzburg, studied philosophy first in Ulm and then in Dillingen. He was the first out of forty candidates who obtained the philosophical baccalaureate on 22 April 1624. On 1 July 1625, at the age of nineteen, he was again the first to obtain the Magisterium of Philosophy.⁸ He subsequently studied law for two years in Ingolstadt and then at French universities (Dole, Dijon, Orleans). At the University of Dole he took his doctor’s degree utriusque iuris (presumably in 1629).⁹

In 1630 Manz became consiliarius of Bishop Heinrich of Augsburg.¹⁰ But in the following year he succeeded Volbert Mozel as associate Professor of Institutions at the University of Dillingen.¹¹ He held this office until 1634. During the Swedish occupation that began at Easter 1632, the lectures on law did not take place, however, at least not the public ones.¹² In 1633 Manz lec­tured on metaphysics at the Faculty of Philosophy.

In 1636 Manz was appointed associate Professor of Institutions at the University of Ingolstadt as successor of Arnold R Rath (1599—1671), who was promoted Professor of Pandects.¹³ As early as the next year (1637) he was elected Rector of the University; he was subsequently to occupy this office six times.

Ingolstadt (Berlin, 1974) (hereafter Neumaier) 71, 134-5, 177-8, 239, 254; idem, “Barocke Rechtsgelehrsamkeit”, in L Boehm and J Sporl (eds), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat Ingolstadt— Landshut—Munchen 1472—1972 (Berlin, 1972) 157, esp. at 170-1.

⁷ Cf. Chr G Jocher, Allgemeines Gelehrten-Lexicon, vol. 3 (1751), s.v. “Manz”; Jocher and Adelung, Allgemeines Gelehrten-Lexicon, Fortsetzungen und Erganzungen (1813) vol. 4, s.v. “Manz”; J N Mederer, Annales Ingolstadiensis Academiae III (1782) 27; A M Kobolt, Baierisches Gelehrten-Lexikon (1795), s.v. “Manz”; idem, Erganzungen und Berichtigungen (1824); Nachtrage zu den Erganzungen und Berichtigungen (1824), s.v. “Manz”. cf. A Baader, Das gelehrte Baiern (Nurnberg and Sulzbach, 1804), s.v. “Manz”; Eisenhart, (1884) 20 ADB 281; Prantl, Geschichte, supra n.4, vol. 1, 415, 424-5, 486, 511, vol. 2, 500, n.116; Stintzing, Geschichte, supra n.3, vol. 1, 657-8; Specht, Geschichte, supra n.4; Neumaier, supra n.6; idem, “Barocke Rechtsgelehrsamkeit”, supra n.6. cf. L Huttl, Caspar von Schmid (1622—93), ein kurbayerischer Staatsmann aus dem Zeitalter Ludwigs XIV (Munich, 1971) (= Miscellanea Bavarica Monacensia H. 29) 4; Helmut Wolff, Geschichte der Ingolstadter Juristenfakultat 1472—1625 (Berlin, 1973) 140, 259; Sollner, in Handbuch PRG, supra n.3, vol. II/1, 535.

⁸Specht, Geschichte, supra n.4, 334-5.

⁹Eisenhart, supra n.7, 281; Neumaier, supra n.6.

¹⁰ Eisenhart, supra n.7, 281.

¹¹ Specht, Geschichte, supra n.4, 335. Mozel, consiliarius of the prince-bishop, was the first pro­fessor of civil law in Dillingen. He taught from 1629 to 1631 (Specht, 122-3, 292).

¹² Ibid. 123, 335.

¹³ Prantl, Geschichte, supra n.4, vol. 1, 423, vol. 2, 499 (no. 114); Reusch, (1888) 27 ADB 349; Neumaier, supra n.6, 58-9, 75-6, 235.

After Christoph Besold’s death on 15 September 1638,^[1024] Manz immediately took over his lectures on the ius publicum; later also the lectures on criminal law.

In any case by 1643 Manz was already consiliarius of the Duke of Pfalz- Neuburg. In 1653 he was appointed Hofkanzler by Duke Philipp Wilhelm of Pfalz-Neuburg, with the task of settling the disrupted administration of justice. His clever efforts succeeded.

In 1660, Manz took the opportunity to return to the University of Ingolstadt. After the death of Kaspar Denich on 2 January 1660,^[1027]7 Manz was appointed full professor of Pandects and of public law with an income of 600 fl. At the same time he became director of the University Archive (with an income of 100 fl.) as well as also secretary of the Pfleggericht of Hirschberg (with an income of 50 fl.).^[1028] Moreover he became a member of the Ratskollegium of Ingolstadt.^[1029] In 1671 he was promoted Professor for the Code.^[1030]

Manz remained the adviser of Duke Philipp Wilhelm of Pfalz-Neuburg and of the Bavarian Kurfurst (Elector) Ferdinand Maria, who named him in 1660 kur- furstlicher Hofrat.

He married first Maria Katharina, who came from the renowned patrician family Vischer of Deufstetten in Ingolstadt. She died in 1635. He then married the oldest daughter of Arnold Rath.^[1031]

At the age of sixty-seven, Manz resigned in 1673 because of ill-health. He died on 28 March 1677, at the age of seventy-one years, in Ingolstadt and was buried there in the Liebfrauenkirche.^[1032]

MANZ AND LEGAL EDUCATION

Legal training in the Middle Ages and in early modern times strictly followed the order of the legal sources which were to be expounded. The Institutions, the Digest, the Code of Justinian and canon law were what was read and taught. It was not until the second half of the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries that a change in exposition took place, moving from the legal order of the sources to a system based on subject matter.^[1033]

At most universities there traditionally were four to five professorships (lecturae) that were devoted to canon law (Decretals), Code, Pandects and Institutions.

At the foundation of the University of Ingolstadt in 1472 the Faculty of Law consisted of two chairs for canon law and three chairs for civil law (Code, Pandects, Institutions).^[1035] In the first half of the sixteenth century, canon law lost quite a lot of its importance; from 1537 there remained only one chair of canon law. By the year 1564 at the latest, the Faculty had a fourth professorship of civil law. The Pandects were now usually represented by two professors (the subject matter was divided into digestum vetus et infortiatum and digestum novum). Full professors, licentiates, extraordinary professors or “doctores auf prob” (= doctors on probation) in a frequent exchange held the chair of Institutions.^[1036]

In Ingolstadt, as at most German universities, jurisprudence followed the mos Italicus.^[1037] This meant that, not only the Justinianic sources, but also, and above

all, the teachings of the Glossators and Commentators were the subjects of legal education. The exegetic-dialectic method of the mos Italicus is clearly expressed in a famous distich of M Gribaldus Mopha (from Chieri, born after 1500, died 1564) in his work, De methodo ac ratione studendi libri tres (1541):

“Praemitto, scindo, summo casumque figuro, perlego, do causas, connoto, objicio”.²⁸

The plan of studies (lecture programme) of the University of Ingolstadt of March 1571 for the Faculty of Law reads:

“Lectiones in utroque iure tum ex statutis colegij, tum ex laudabili ac per diuturna consuetudine sic institutae ac divisae sunt, ut ordini legendi, qui in Italicis gymnasijs servatur, omnia, vel quam maxime fieri potest, respondeant.

Thus, the mos Italicus (ordo legendi, qui in Italicis gymnasiis servatur) was maintained for a long time at German universities for the practical reason that it would enable the students to transfer easily to Italian universities. They should be able to continue their legal studies in ordo nostro and not be forced to listen to lectures on the same subjects once again.³⁰

In 1610 the ducal councillors issued a reminder about the observance of this plan of studies. They claimed in a report to the Duke that the jurists should accommodate their lectures ad lectiones italicas. The division into ordinary and extraordinary books, on which ordinarie vel extraordinarie lectures were to be given, was already superseded by another development. Full professors had to see to the lectio ordinaria (matutina vel postmeridiana) with interpretation of texts. The pure reading of texts, first of all of the Code and the Institutions, was assigned as lectio extraordinaria to the younger professors, particularly the licentiates.³¹

deutsche Privatrechtsgeschichte (4th edn, Wien-Koln, 1985) 31; J G Lautner, Zur Bedeutung des romischen Rechts fur die europaische Rechtskultur und zu seiner Stellung im Rechtsunterricht (Zurich, 1976) 17 and 22; A Cavanna, Storia del diritto moderno in Europa. Le fonti e il pensiero giuridico (Milan, 1979) vol. 1, 105, 137; G Kisch, Humanismus und Jurisprudenz. Der Kampf zwis- chen mos italicus und mos gallicus an der Universitat Basel (Basel, 1955); K H Burmeister, Das Studium der Rechte im Zeitalter des Humanismus im deutschen Rechtsbereich (Wiesbaden, 1974); H-R Hagemann, �Rechtsunterricht im 16. Jahrhundert. Die juristischen Vorlesungen im Basler AmerbachnachlaE', (1992) 14 Zeitschrift fur Neuere Rechtsgeschichte 162.

2 ⁸ On this distich see Stintzing, Geschichte, supra n.3, vol. 1, 107; Wieacker, PRG, supra n.27, 68; F Calasso, Medio evo del diritto (Milan, 1954) vol. 1, 594—5, Wolff, Geschichte, supra n.7, 33; in detail Burmeister, Das Studium der Rechte, supra n.27, 241; K Luig, “Mos gallicus, mos italicus”, in A Erler and E Kaufmann (eds) Handworterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte, (Berlin, 1971) vol. 3, cols. 692-3.

²⁹ See A Seifert, Die Universitat Ingolstadt im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert. Texte und Regesten (Berlin, 1973) nos 78, 259 and 261.

³⁰ See Wolff, Geschichte, supra n.7, 34-5.

³¹ Ibid. 35 and 48.

In the middle of the seventeenth century at the University of Ingolstadt as else­where a reform of instruction took place.³² In 1647 the full professors of the Ingolstadt Faculty of Law were asked by the Elector Maximilian I to give their opinions on reform of legal education. In October 1647 opinions were presented by Arnold Rath (Pandects), Kaspar Denich (Canon Law), Kaspar Manz (Institutions, Ius Publicum, and Criminal Law), Johann Jakob Lossius (Institutions) and Johann Anton Crollanza (Institutiones Juris Canonici).³³

In his opinion of 13 October 1647 Kaspar Manz points out “wie der seithero gebrauchte modus docendi et discendi ius canonicum et civile zue verbessern” [“how the modus docendi et discendi ius canonicum et civile could be improved”]³⁴ and maintained that a distinction should be made between the lec­tiones publicae et privatae.³⁵ In the field of the collegia publica he distinguished the methodus antiqua, methodus moderna and his methodus peculiaris.

The methodus antiqua corresponds to the mos Italicus; the lectures follow the legal order.³⁶ The methodus moderna was already a dogmatic-systematic treat­ment of the subject matter.³⁷ This was refined by Manz' own method (metho-

³² cf. generally Stintzing, Geschichte, supra n.3, vol. 1, 655; Wieacker, PRG, supra n.27, 208.

³³ These opinions are published in Neumaier, supra n.6, 234; see also 53—4, 69—70, and supra nn.13 and 19.

³⁴ Neumaier, supra n.6, 239.

³⁵ cf. Wolff, Geschichte, supra n.7, 48.

³⁶ “Vor disem und noch zue meiner zeitt, alβ ich studierte, haben die professores im brauch gehabt, uber iede leges et paragraphos zue commentiern, die glossas et interpretationes Bartoli, Baldi, Saliceti et aliorum weittleuffig zue examiniern; dannehero erfolgt, daβ sie iahr und tag mit einem titulo umbgangen und ich selbsten, alβ ich schier zwey iahr auff e. churfrstl. dhlt. universitet ze Ingolstatt gestudiert, solche gantze zeitt uber einen einzigen titulum, den ich bey einem zue schreiben angefangen, nitt zue end gebracht; welches ein unnutzlich ding wahr, in beder Corpora (Juris) die leges nitt ordenlich auffeinander gehen, und wan einem ein quaestion furgefallen, selbige nitt gewusst, in seinen scriptis zue suechen und zue finden.”

³⁷ “Darumben sie hernach von diesem modo abgewichen und imer ein gewisse materiam furgenommen, selbige in capita vel titulos abgethailt, und waβ hinc inde sparsim in corpore iuris zuefinden, zuesamen in ein tractatum gezogen und der lange nach ausgefuhrt, besser zue sein erach- tende (wie man ohne daβ in wenig iahren propter juris prolixitatem nitt kan ferttig werden) ein materiam der notdurfft nach auβzuefuhren alβ vil der sachen zue durch nempben.”

This modern method of teaching is also called the ramistic or dichotomic method (see Stintzing, Geschichte, supra n.3, vol. 1, 145, vol. 2, 24—5, and 143). This name goes back to the French Humanist and Philosopher Petrus Ramus (Pierre de la Ramee, 1515—1572), whose dialectic mainly aims at the classification of concepts and arguments; his theory of method serves in the first place as a description of knowledge regarded as warranted. Cf. Coing, Europaisches Privatrecht, supra n.3, vol. 1, 24—5 and 67; idem, in Handbuch PRG, supra n.3, vol. II/1, 6; HE Troje, in ibid. vol. II/1, 736 n.1, 737—8; K Luig, (1982) NDB 13 738 (s.v. Lauterbach); N Hammerstein, Jus und Historie, supra n.23, 29—30; H Hubner, “Jurisprudenz als Wissenschaft im Zeitalter des Humanismus”, in Festschrift fur K. Larenz zum 70. Geburtstag (1973) 52—3; P J Winters, in M Stolleis (ed), Staatsdenker im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (Frankfurt a.M, 1977) 30; W J Ong, Ramus, Method and the Decay of Dialogue. From the Art of Discourse to the Art of Reason (Cambridge, Ma, 1958). On the theory of method of the usus modernus see J Schroder, in D Simon (ed), Akten des 26. Deutschen Rechtshistorikertages (Frankfurt, 1986) (= Ius commune, (1987) Sonderheft 30) 253; on the ordo analyticus, see ibid. 286. On the question of Ramus' influence on M Wesenbeck cf. Stintzing, Geschichte, supra n.3, vol. 1, 357, H Hubner, Jurisprudenz (cited supra) 53; Sollner, in Handbuch PRG, supra n.3, vol. II/1, 531.

dus mea peculiaris) in which specific material was dealt with in one treatise, being divided into tituli vel capita and these into quaestiones.^[1038] Various texts, scattered through the Corpus Juris were collected and treated together.

Manz was of the view that it must be possible to impart universalis cognitio iuris over five years in lectiones publicae without lengthy treatises but using a compendium-like presentation:^[1039]

"Nichtsdestoweniger bin ich der meinung, es konte und moge daβ studium juris auch inter quinquennium in scholis, saltem auff solche weiβ wie die theologia scholastica absolviert werden, wan namblich die ausfuhrliche tractatus abgethann und der Canonist alle iahr ein librum decretalium in compendio, alβ wie der Valentis in parati- tlis suis gethan, absolvierte, und zween professores in iure civili namlich der codicisst und pandectist angestellt werden, welche die materias abthailen, der eine von anfang, der andere in der mitte daβ corpus iuris ergreiffen und iede titulos in summam, inter paratitlorum, contrahierten; und dieweilen in digestis codice et novellis offtermalen correspondentes titulis zuefinden, selbige alle zue samen zugen”.^[1040]

Manz goes on to oppose abuses in collegia privata;^[1041] he suggests certain rules and restrictions for them.^[1042]

Johann Jakob Lossius in his opinion recommended treating the Digest and the Code “paratitl weyβ^,' “kurz und methodice” by skipping the outmoded materials, so that this could be done in four to five years.^[1043]

In a letter of the Electress and Regent Maria Anna of Bavaria in the year 1654, professors of law were asked to use the method of the so-called Paratitla instead of treating the single titles at length.^[1044] In this method, the material is presented in a systematic way, following the sequence of titles of the sources.^[1045] This corresponds to a great extent to the methodus moderna as Manz had presented it.

manz's publications

Manz himself prepared the list of his publications (Catalogus Librorum a me Scriptorum et editorum) given at the beginning of the second edition of his com­mentary on the Institutes (described in the next paragraph).^[1046] Manz divides his writings as follows: (1) Institutiones, (2) Digesta, (3) Criminalia, (4) Materia calamitosi belli, (5) Varii generis, (6) Politici et juris publici, (7) Philosophici; followed by works not yet published. This list contains 50 items.

Institutiones

Probably the most important work is the Commentarius Ratio-Regularis in quatuor libros Institutionum Imperialium, quo omnium, non modo in singulis Paragraphis, sed etiam versiculis traditorum, Rationes redduntur, et in breves ut plurimum Regulas resolvuntur (1st edn, Ingolstadii, 1645, 1661; 2nd edn, Noribergae, 1671; 3rd edn, Noribergae, 1701, 1722). This work was widely known and highly respected. Emperor Leopold i wished that the elementary instruction of law should only be taught using this commentary on the Institutions.^[1047] Manz wrote an abstract of this work: Commentariolus Rationalis in quatuor libros Institutionum Imperialium... extractus ex Commentario Ratio-Regulari majori (Ingolstadii, 1661). As early as 1648 there was a Synopsis Institutionum Manzianarum, extracta ex Commentario Ratio- Regulari authoris, in quatuor libros Institutionum Imperialium (Ingolstadi, 1648, in octavo). Manz thus also contributed to the genre of the compendium.^[1048] The compendia on the Institutions of the usus modernus indicate the aim, “den Stoff auf einfache Gesichtspunkte zuruckzufuhren und Ubersichtlich nach logi- schen Regeln zu gliedern” [“to lead the subject matter back to simple points of view and to classify them clearly according to the rules of logic”].^[1049] In these compendia attempts were often made to present the Institutions in a system other than the system of the Corpus Juris. Here were the roots of the attempts at systematization by Vultejus (1555-1634) and Althusius (1557-1638).^[1050]

Manz also wrote an Epitome successionis ab intestato Ratio-Regularis, qua tota materia legitimarum haereditatum rationibus illustratur (Ingolstadii, 1640). His own list of publications omits the Tractatus Ratio-Regularis de Actionibus, quo nova et facillima methodo, difficilis alioquin, forensium actionum materia... explicatur (Ingolstadii, 1643).^[1051]

Digesta

In the section on the Digest quite a number of treatises were mentioned, such as: Dissertatio juridica de pactis et transactionibus, disputata Anno 1661, Mense Julio, Ingolstadii; Tractatus de advocatis, procuratoribus, defensoribus, syndi­cis, et negotiorum gestoribus (1659); Tractatus de restitutione in integrum (Augustae Vindelicorum, 1662); Tractatus de servitutibus personalibus, usufructu, usu, habitatione, operis servorum, et quibusdam aliis (Ingolstadii, 1657); Tractatus de servitutibus praediorum urbanorum et rusticorum (Augustae Vindelicorum, 1657); Tractatus rationalis absolutissimus de tutelis et curis (Ingolstadii, 1652); Tractatus ratio-regularis de fidejussoribus, publice dis­putatus Ingolstadii, mense septembri, An. 1641 (Eadem materia de novo edita, et nonnihil aucta, Augustae Vindelicorum, 1666); Tractatus rationalis abso­lutissimus de testamento valido, vel invalido ex capite testatoris, voluntatis, solennitatum, testium, Institutionis, Praeteritionis, Exhaeredationis, legitimae, bonorum relictorum, et causae finalis (Augustae Vindelicorum, 1661; denuo edi­tus Frankfurt, 1680); Parvus libellus, sive Responsum Juris, quo pleraque, quae de validitate testamenti interrogari, et examinari possunt, continentur, discu­tiuntur, et definiuntur (Dilingae, 1633); Tractatus rationalis et legitima libero­rum, parentum, fratrum, et sororum, et incidenter de legitima filii arrogati, patroni, et legali portione conjugum (publice praelectus Ingolstadii, et impres­sus An. 1658). Furthermore another work is mentioned under the title Pandectae melius, quam in corpore Juris, Digestae, sive tituli Pandectarum ordine magis concinno distributi, et inter se justa serie continuati, et connexi (Ingolstadii, 1664).

Criminalia

In the field of criminal law Manz wrote a Commentarius Rationalis in Carolinam Sanctionem criminalem, vulgo die Peinliche Halfigerichts-Ordnung dictam, quatenus de processu criminali agitur (publice praelectus, Anno 1642 et Ingolstadii Anno 1650 editus) as well as a Summa Processus criminalis juxta praescriptum Caroli V Imperatoris, Maximiliani Bavariae Ducis, et Electoris, et praxin communem, extracta ex commentario in Carolinam (Ingolstadii, 1645).

Materia calamitosi belli

In this section, are mentioned works that deal with problems of procedural exe­cution, especially with the position of debtors who had become impoverished because of the war, and with certain protective rules for these persons.⁵² Examples are the treatise Patrocinium debitorum calamitate belli depauperato- rum (Ingolstadii, 1639; Noribergae, 1640). Here Manz fights against usury.⁵³

Varii generis

This classification included the following works: Decas illustrium quaestionum feudalium (1643); Centuria decisionum Palatinarum, seu rerum in supremo Dicasterio Neoburgico majori ex parte judicatarum, vel saltem in controver­siam vocatarum (Augustae, 1659; ed. sec. Francofurti et Ratisbonae, 1672); Specialia in jure communi, sive causae praecipuae, ob quas antiqui legumla­tores, et jurisconsulti, a regulis juris communis recesserunt (Augustae, 1668); Tractatus brevis et summarius, de civitatibus municipalibus, von Land- StadtenZoder Fursten-Stadten/ quid in jure communi de iis provisum (Ingolstadii, 1670). The Centura decisionum Palatinarum is a collection of precedents that contains one hundred important decisions of the highest courts of Pfalz-Neuburg.⁵⁴

Politici et iuris publici

Among the publications Politici et juris publici the following are mentioned: Status Imperii Romani, antiquus et novus, ab urbe condita usque ad praesens

⁵² On relief for persons who suffered losses caused by war, cf. G Wesenberg, “Die Privatrechtsgesetzgebung des Heiligen romischen Reiches von den Authenticae bis zum Jungsten Reichsabschied und das romische Recht”, in Studi Koschaker (1954) vol. 1, 196, esp. at 201; Wesenberg and Wesener, PRG, supra n.27, 89.

⁵³ cf. Neumaier, supra n.6, 206; Eisenhart, supra n.7, 284.

⁵⁴ Neumaier, supra n.6, 205. cf. H Gehrke, Die privatrechtliche Entscheidungsliteratur Deutschlands (Ius commune, Sonderheft 3 (1974)), 136, n.123. tempus, sive pars prima, seu summa juris publici, qua breviter exponitur: quis antiquitus fuerit status Romani Imperii, usque ad Imperatores Germanos. Pars secunda, de progressu Imperii Romani, a Carlo Magno usque ad moderna tem­pora. In 1673 this work was published in Augsburg with the title Fundamenta urbis et orbis seu Reipublicae Romanae, id est tractatus fundamentalis de ortu et progressu Imperii Romani, ab urbe condita, usque ad tempora moderna. Here the legal-historical viewpoint was adopted.^[1052]

Posthumous publications

After his death, the collected papers of Manz (consisting of eight treatises) were published:^[1053] Bibliotheca aurea, iuridico-politico-theoretico-practica (Franco- furti ad Moenum, 1695); Bibliothecae aureae iuridico-politico-theoretico, prac- ticae volumen novum (Francofurti ad Moenum, 1701). A new edition of the Tractatus duo de fidejussoribus et de advocatis, procuratoribus, syndicis et negotiorum gestoribus was published in 1773 in Nordlingen.^[1054]

Also after Manz’s death the work De eo, quod interest was published. This had been written jointly with Friedrich Martini (who died 1630). It was edited by Philipp Jacob Krazer, JUL, in Ingolstadt in 1706.^[1055] Martini was a professor at the Faculty of Law in Ingolstadt from 1579 to August 1589, from 1582 pro­fessor of canon law.^[1056] In 1589 he accepted a call to the University of Freiburg im Breisgau.^[1057]

MANZ’S SCHOLARLY AIMS AND ACHIEVEMENTS

In the “Praefatio ad Lectorem” of the Commentarius ratio-regularis in quatuor libros Institutionum Imperialium (2nd edn, 1671) Manz describes his method in the following manner (p. 3v.): Primo: ut rationes singularum decisionum adduc­erem; deinde ex illis universalem aliquam regulam, quantum fieri posset, eruerem, et hypothesin ad thesin transferrem. From the rationes of the single decisions Manz wants to derive a general rule, and to make a hypothesis a thesis.

For the application of this method he gives three reasons (p. 3v.):

“Tum ut tyrones juris (meos praesertim auditores) in suis studiis juvarem, eaque facil- itando, profectum illorum promoverem: tum ut officio meo rite fungerer, et modum docendi exactissimum, a sapientibus, et peritis laudatum, et probatum, tenerem: tum denique, ut Jurisprudentiam in formam artis redigerem. Quorum omnia et singula me obtinuisse arbitror, Institutiones Ratio-Regulares concinnando.”

First reason

First of all Manz wants to support his students (tyrones juris) in their studies by putting the legal material into rules. “Regulae enim materiam juris et aequitatis late patentem breviter enarrant, ut eo felicius intelligatur, ac memoria haereat. Oldendorp.^[1058] in suis antinom^[1059]2 reg. I” (Praefatio, p. 4). “Istae ergo regulae, et juris axiomata studiosis maxime sunt indulcanda”. The legal rules have to be impressed on the students in a high degree. What is more useful and necessary than to be able to decide legal cases from an axiom, and to solve difficult prob­lems [“posse unico tali axiomate decidere, et quaestiones saepe difficiles resol­vere”].

Second reason

Turning to the modus docendi, Manz writes (Praefatio p. 4v.): “Doctorem maxime decet, ut veritatem sequatur, conveniens est igitur, ut dictorum a se rationem reddat, quia per Rationem veritas maxime habetur, per l. sola, 4. ubi Dd. C. de testib” (= C. 4.20.4).

Manz quotes Lancelottus (in epistola Institutionibus juris canonici sub­nexa):^[1060] “In docendo ratiocinandi modus magis necessarius, quam authorita- tum enumeratio, quippe quod artis fundamenta sunt aperienda, et fontes, ac origo rerum demonstranda”.^[1061] The teaching of the modus ratiocinandi is more important than the enumeration of authorities, because reason deals with the principles, sources and origins of things.

Third reason

In dealing with the third causa “ut jurisprudentiam in formam artis redigerem” (Praefatio p. 4v. and 5) Manz writes:⁶⁵

“Apud omnes compertum et indubitatum est, quod perfecta scientia non tantum ex singularium, sed ex universi cognitione pendeat, et quod illa non de rebus detur infini­tis, sed finitis. Si respiciamus nunc jus nostrum, prout compilatores in Corpus juris congesserunt, videbimus illud in solis fere singularibus factis esse positum, iisque pene infinitis. Ego igitur, qui aliqualem saltem juris scientiam affecto, si eam comparari posse autumo, si a conditionibus individuantibus (ut cum Philosophia loquar) libere­tur, et a factorum varietate generalia praecepta abstrahantur, si regulae universales ex causarum singularium decisionibus extruantur. Consentit Goeddeus⁶⁶ in proleg. prae­fixis erotematibus Wolfii, ubi ait: per aequitatis axiomata collecta Jurisprudentia in artem et formam scientiae redigitur. Et Gribald.⁶⁷ cap. 4 causas ait, universales esse, et finitas, quae facile in formam artis possint redigi”.

Manz wants to put jurisprudence into a forma artis. For this reason general rules should be derived from the decisions of single cases.

Manz’s merits concerning philosophy, ius publicum and journalistical histo­riography have been duly appreciated by Klaus Neumaier.⁶⁸ The present con­tribution has tried to indicate the work of Manz in the field of the ius civile, and especially to show his new method of teaching and exposition. Manz was a rep­resentative of the methodus moderna, which he improved and refined. He adopted the Paratitla method and the compendia form, as can also be seen in the work of WA Lauterbach (1618-1678).⁶⁹

Like many jurists of his time, Kaspar Manz was at once teacher and practi­tioner of law, consiliarius, Chancellor, archivist, clerk to the principality (Landschreiber). Neumaier⁷⁰ characterizes him as the “progressive” element in the Ingolstadt Law faculty, whose teaching activities and writings are of similar importance to those of Christoph Besold (1577-1638).⁷¹ Both the reputation Manz enjoyed and his importance are demonstrated by the fact that a number of his treatises were edited even after his death.

⁶⁵ On Cicero’s lost work De iure civili in artem redigendo and its aftermath, cf. H J Mette, Ius civile in artem redactum (Gottingen, 1954); D Norr, in (1976) ANRW II 15 527; F Wieacker, Romische Rechtsgeschichte (Munich, 1988) vol. 1, 628. In Pomponius D. 1.2.2.7 one finds the words actiones in formam redigere.

⁶⁶ On Johannes Goeddaeus (1555-1632), see Stintzing, Geschichte, supra n.3, 708-9; H Muller, (1879) 9 ADB 312-13.

⁶⁷ On Gribaldus see supra n.28.

⁶⁸ Neumaier, supra n.6, 71, 119, 123, 134-5, 140-1, 175, 177-8.

⁶⁹ Compendium juris (Tubingen, 1679). On this see Stintzing, Geschichte, supra n.3, vol. 2, 142; (for presentation according to the Ramistic method, see supra n.37). On Lauterbach, K Luig, (1982) 13 NDB 736. On compendia cf. Sollner, in Handbuch PRG, supra n.3, vol. II/1, 546; G Theuerkauf, Lex, Speculum, Compendium iuris. Rechtsaufzeichnung und Rechtsbewufitsein in Norddeutschland vom 8. bis zum 16. Jahrhundert (Koln, 1968).

⁷⁰ Neumaier, supra n.6, 71.

⁷¹ See supra n.14.

* For the English translation I have to thank Dr Dorothea Myer-Maly and Professor Olivia Robinson.