The research focuses on a passage - notoriously believed to be altered - from Africanus Quaestiones, found in D. 20.4.9.3, and hypothesizes that the text available to us is, more the result of a compression operated during the editing of the Digest, so as to arrive at the idea that Julian was discussing a regula, likely affirmed by rescriptum or epistula, and its derogability because of the concrete case examined.
Giuliano e la convalescenza ‘revocatoria’ del pegno successivo
Fercia, Riccardo
2025-01-01
Abstract
The research focuses on a passage - notoriously believed to be altered - from Africanus Quaestiones, found in D. 20.4.9.3, and hypothesizes that the text available to us is, more the result of a compression operated during the editing of the Digest, so as to arrive at the idea that Julian was discussing a regula, likely affirmed by rescriptum or epistula, and its derogability because of the concrete case examined.
File in questo prodotto:
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Fercia.pdf
Solo gestori archivio
Tipologia:
versione editoriale (VoR)
Dimensione
180.2 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
180.2 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
