Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-swr86 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T20:51:46.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bibliography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2021

Nikitas E. Hatzimihail
Nikitas E. Hatzimihail
Affiliation:
University of Cyprus
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
Preclassical Conflict of Laws , pp. 543 - 575
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Primary Sources

Bartolus, da Sassoferrato. Repetitio supra lege cunctos populos [D.1.1.1]. Vatican City, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, MS Vat. Lat. 2589 fol. 68v–76v.Google Scholar
Accursius, . [Corpus iuris civilis] commentariis Accursii, scholiis Contii, paratitlis Cuiacii. novae accesserunt ad ipsum Accursium Dionysii Gothofredi. 1–6, Lyon: Horatius Cardon, 1604.Google Scholar
Accursius, . Corpus Iuris Civilis Iustinanianei cum Commentariis Accursii, Scholiis Conti, D. Gothofredi Lucubrationibus ad Accursium. 1–5, Lyon: 1627.Google Scholar
Tartagnus, Alexander (Imolensis). Consiliorum seu responsorum Libri VII. Venice: 1610Google Scholar
d’Argentré, Bertrand. Commentarii in patrias Britonum leges, seu Consuetudines generales antiquiss. Ducatus Britanniae. 8th ed. Antwerp: 1664.Google Scholar
Azo, . Summa Azonis. Venice: 1581.Google Scholar
Baldus, . Repertorium Lect. Baldi super Codice. Lyon: 1539.Google Scholar
Baldus, . Commentaria in primum, secundum & tertium Codicis lib. Turin: 1576.Google Scholar
Baldus, . Commentaria in primam Digesti veteris partem. Venice: 1616.Google Scholar
Bartholomaeus a Saliceto, B. Commentarii ad I, II, III, et IV Lib. Codicis. Lyon: 1560.Google Scholar
Bartolus, da Sassoferrato. Commentarius super prima parte Codicis. Lyon: 1533.Google Scholar
Bartolus, da Sassoferrato. In Ius Universum Civile Commentaria. 1–6, 1562.Google Scholar
Bartolus, da Sassoferrato. Omnia, quae extant, opera. 1–11, Venice: 1602.Google Scholar
Bouhier, J. Histoire des commentateurs de la Coutume du Duché de Bourgogne. Dijon: 1742.Google Scholar
Bouhier, J. Les coutumes du Duché de Bourgogne. 2 vols. Dijon: 1742–1746Google Scholar
Boullenois, L. Questions sur les demissions de biens. Paris: 1727.Google Scholar
Boullenois, L. Dissertations sur des Questions qui naissent de la contrarieté des loix et des coutumes. Paris: 1732.Google Scholar
Boullenois, L. Traité de la personnalité, et de la realité des loix, coutumes ou statuts. 2 vols. Paris: Guillaume Desprez, 1766.Google Scholar
Burgundus, N. Ad consuetudines Flandriae aliarumque gentium tractatus controversiarum. Antwerp: 1666.Google Scholar
Challine, P. Méthode génerale pour l’intelligence des coustumes de France. Paris: 1666.Google Scholar
Coquille, G. Questions et responses sur les Articles des Coustumes de France. Paris: 1644.Google Scholar
Dumouchet du Bac, P. Traité sur les Questions Mixtes, ou Examen des Loix et Jurisdictions qu’on doit suivre pour décider les contestations entre les hommes de différentes Nations, de différentes Provinces, de différens Districts, &c. Paris: 1787.Google Scholar
Froland, L. Mémoires concernant l’observation du Senatusconsulte velléien dans le Duché de Normandie et diverses questions mixtes qui en dependent avec les arrests qui les ont decidées. Paris: 1722.Google Scholar
Froland, L. Mémoires concernans la nature et la qualité des statuts; diverses questions mixtes de droit et de coutume, et la plupart des arrests qui les ont décidées. Paris: 1729.Google Scholar
Grotius (de Groot), H. De Iure Belli ac Pacis. Paris: Apud Nicolaum Buon, 1625.Google Scholar
Grotius (de Groot), H. Inleiding tot de Hollandsche Rechtsgeleerdheid. Middelburg: Pieter Gillissen, 1767.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Heedensdaegse Rechtsgeleertheyt, Soo elders, als in Frieslandt gebruikelyt. Leuwarden: 2 vols. 1686.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Praelectionum Juris Civilis Pars Prior, Quae est secondum Institutiones, Justiniananaeas. vol. 1. Franeker: 1687.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Praelectiones Juris Civilis. vol. 1. Franeker: 1690.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Beginselen der Hedendaegse Rechtskunde, so eelders als in Frieslandt gebruik. 2nd ed. Leeuwarden: Nauta, 1696.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Beginselen der Rechtskunde gebruikelijk in Friesland, 2nd ed. Leeuwarden: 1696.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Digressiones Justinianeae. 3rd ed. Franeker: 1696.Google Scholar
Huber, U. De Jure Civitatis, Libri Tres. 4th ed. Franeker: 1698.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Praelectionum Juris Romani et Hodierni pars II Que ad Libros 21 priores Pandectarum. 2nd ed. vol. 2. Franeker: 1700.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Praelectionum Juris Civilis Tomi III. Leipzig: 1735.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Heedensdaegse Rechtsgeleertheyt, Soo elders, als in Frieslandt gebruikelyt. 4th ed. Amsterdam: Johannes Rotterdam, 1742.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Heedensdaegse Rechtsgeleertheyt, Soo elders, als in Frieslandt gebruikelyt. 5th ed. Amsterdam: 1768.Google Scholar
Jacobus (de Arena), . Commentarii in universum Ius Civile. 1541.Google Scholar
Molineaus (Dumoulin), C. Omnia quae extant opera. vols. 1–4. Paris: Apud viduam Gervasii Alliot & Antonium Clement, 1558.Google Scholar
Molineaus (Dumoulin), C. Omnia quae extant opera. vols. 1–5. Paris: Ioannes Guignard, 1581.Google Scholar
Odofredus, . Lectura super Codice. Lyon: 1602.Google Scholar
Rodenburgius, C. Tractatus de jure conjugum … cum tractatione praeliminari de jure, quod oritur ex statutorum, vel consuetudinum discripantium conflictu, Köln: 1699.Google Scholar
Sande, I. Decisiones Frisicae, sive Rerum in Suprema Frisiorum Curia Iudicatarum, Libri V. Leeuwarden: 1638.Google Scholar
Van der Linden, J. Regtsgeleerd, practicaal en koopmans handbook. Amsterdam: Johannes Allart, 1806.Google Scholar
Vattel, E. Le droit des gens, ou des principes de la loi naturelle, appliquées à la conduite et aux affaires des Nations et des Souverains. vol. 1. London: 1758.Google Scholar
Voet, J. Commentarius ad Pandectas. In quo praeter Romani juris principia ac controversias illustriores, jus etiam hodiernum, & praecipuae fori quaestiones excutiuntur. vol. 1. The Hague: 1698–1704.Google Scholar
Voet, P. De statutis, eorumque concursu, liber singularis. Amsterdam: 1661.Google Scholar
Voet, P. De statutis, eorumque concursu, liber singularis (Nova Editio Auctior & Correctior). Brussels: 1715.Google Scholar
Barry, Andrew. Bartolus, ad C.1.1.1 Available online at www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/cdonahue/courses/lhsemclh/RdgsDownloads/BartolConflFormatted.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bonolis, G. Questioni di diritto internazionale in alcuni consigli inediti di Baldo degli Ubaldi: Testo e commento. Pisa: E. Spoerri, 1908.Google Scholar
Guthrie, W. Friedrich Carl von Savigny: A Treatise on the Conflict of Laws. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1880, 433–452 (Bartolus), 452–461 (Molinaeus), 462–508 (P. Voet), 508–516 (Huber).Google Scholar
Hänel, M. (ed.). Dissensiones dominorum sive controversiae veterum iuris Romani interpretum qui glossatores vocantur. Leipzig: 1843.Google Scholar
Meijers, E. M. Tractatus duo de vi et potestate statutorum. Haarlem: H. D. Tjeenk Willink & zoon, 1939.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Le commentaire de Bartole ad legem cunctos populos sure la glosse quod si bononiensis” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 165–187.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “La Lectura de Balde sur Cunctos Populos” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 188–204.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Charles Dumoulin, Conclusions sur les Statuts et coutumes locaux” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 241–251.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Bertrand d’Argentré, Commentaire de la Coutume de Bretagne” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 254–281.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Ulrich Huber, Du conflits des lois différentes dans des États différents” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 341–351.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Jean Voet, De Statutis” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 354–385.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Johann Nikolaus Hert, De Collisione Legum” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 387–406.Google Scholar
Beale, J. H. Bartolus on the Conflict of Laws. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914.Google Scholar
Birks, P. and McLeod, G.. Justinian’s Institutes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
Clarence Smith, J. A. “Bartolo on the Conflict of Laws.” American Journal of Legal History 14 (1970), 157–183, 247–275.Google Scholar
Frier, B. W. (ed.). The Codex of Justinian. 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Gane, P. Huber’s The Jurisprudence of My Time (Heedensdaegse Rechtsgeleertheyt). Trans. Gane, P.. 2 vols. Durban: Butterworth & Co. (Africa) Ltd., 1939.Google Scholar
Gane, P. The Selective Voet; being the Commentary on the Pandects, Paris edition of 1829, and the Supplement to that work by Johannes van der Linden. 8 vols. Durban: Butterworth, 1955.Google Scholar
Llewellyn Davies, D. J. “The Influence of Huber’s De Conflictu Legum on English Private International Law.” British Yearbook of International Law 18 (1937), 49–63.Google Scholar
Lorenzen, E. G. “Huber’s De Conflictu Legum.” Illinois Law Review 13 (1919), 401–418.Google Scholar
Neff, S. Hugo Grotius On the Law of War and Peace (Student Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Google Scholar
Tuck, R. (ed.). Hugo Grotius: The Rights of War and Peace. 3 vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2005.Google Scholar
Valladão, H. Beale, Bartolo: Conflito de leis. Rio de Janeiro: Estabel. Graph. Canton & Reile, 1938.Google Scholar
Valladão, H. Ulrik Huber, Conflito de leis. Rio de Janeiro: 1951.Google Scholar
Watson, A. The Digest of Justinian, rev. ed. 4 vols. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998.Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

Bartolus, da Sassoferrato. Repetitio supra lege cunctos populos [D.1.1.1]. Vatican City, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana, MS Vat. Lat. 2589 fol. 68v–76v.Google Scholar
Accursius, . [Corpus iuris civilis] commentariis Accursii, scholiis Contii, paratitlis Cuiacii. novae accesserunt ad ipsum Accursium Dionysii Gothofredi. 1–6, Lyon: Horatius Cardon, 1604.Google Scholar
Accursius, . Corpus Iuris Civilis Iustinanianei cum Commentariis Accursii, Scholiis Conti, D. Gothofredi Lucubrationibus ad Accursium. 1–5, Lyon: 1627.Google Scholar
Tartagnus, Alexander (Imolensis). Consiliorum seu responsorum Libri VII. Venice: 1610Google Scholar
d’Argentré, Bertrand. Commentarii in patrias Britonum leges, seu Consuetudines generales antiquiss. Ducatus Britanniae. 8th ed. Antwerp: 1664.Google Scholar
Azo, . Summa Azonis. Venice: 1581.Google Scholar
Baldus, . Repertorium Lect. Baldi super Codice. Lyon: 1539.Google Scholar
Baldus, . Commentaria in primum, secundum & tertium Codicis lib. Turin: 1576.Google Scholar
Baldus, . Commentaria in primam Digesti veteris partem. Venice: 1616.Google Scholar
Bartholomaeus a Saliceto, B. Commentarii ad I, II, III, et IV Lib. Codicis. Lyon: 1560.Google Scholar
Bartolus, da Sassoferrato. Commentarius super prima parte Codicis. Lyon: 1533.Google Scholar
Bartolus, da Sassoferrato. In Ius Universum Civile Commentaria. 1–6, 1562.Google Scholar
Bartolus, da Sassoferrato. Omnia, quae extant, opera. 1–11, Venice: 1602.Google Scholar
Bouhier, J. Histoire des commentateurs de la Coutume du Duché de Bourgogne. Dijon: 1742.Google Scholar
Bouhier, J. Les coutumes du Duché de Bourgogne. 2 vols. Dijon: 1742–1746Google Scholar
Boullenois, L. Questions sur les demissions de biens. Paris: 1727.Google Scholar
Boullenois, L. Dissertations sur des Questions qui naissent de la contrarieté des loix et des coutumes. Paris: 1732.Google Scholar
Boullenois, L. Traité de la personnalité, et de la realité des loix, coutumes ou statuts. 2 vols. Paris: Guillaume Desprez, 1766.Google Scholar
Burgundus, N. Ad consuetudines Flandriae aliarumque gentium tractatus controversiarum. Antwerp: 1666.Google Scholar
Challine, P. Méthode génerale pour l’intelligence des coustumes de France. Paris: 1666.Google Scholar
Coquille, G. Questions et responses sur les Articles des Coustumes de France. Paris: 1644.Google Scholar
Dumouchet du Bac, P. Traité sur les Questions Mixtes, ou Examen des Loix et Jurisdictions qu’on doit suivre pour décider les contestations entre les hommes de différentes Nations, de différentes Provinces, de différens Districts, &c. Paris: 1787.Google Scholar
Froland, L. Mémoires concernant l’observation du Senatusconsulte velléien dans le Duché de Normandie et diverses questions mixtes qui en dependent avec les arrests qui les ont decidées. Paris: 1722.Google Scholar
Froland, L. Mémoires concernans la nature et la qualité des statuts; diverses questions mixtes de droit et de coutume, et la plupart des arrests qui les ont décidées. Paris: 1729.Google Scholar
Grotius (de Groot), H. De Iure Belli ac Pacis. Paris: Apud Nicolaum Buon, 1625.Google Scholar
Grotius (de Groot), H. Inleiding tot de Hollandsche Rechtsgeleerdheid. Middelburg: Pieter Gillissen, 1767.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Heedensdaegse Rechtsgeleertheyt, Soo elders, als in Frieslandt gebruikelyt. Leuwarden: 2 vols. 1686.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Praelectionum Juris Civilis Pars Prior, Quae est secondum Institutiones, Justiniananaeas. vol. 1. Franeker: 1687.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Praelectiones Juris Civilis. vol. 1. Franeker: 1690.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Beginselen der Hedendaegse Rechtskunde, so eelders als in Frieslandt gebruik. 2nd ed. Leeuwarden: Nauta, 1696.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Beginselen der Rechtskunde gebruikelijk in Friesland, 2nd ed. Leeuwarden: 1696.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Digressiones Justinianeae. 3rd ed. Franeker: 1696.Google Scholar
Huber, U. De Jure Civitatis, Libri Tres. 4th ed. Franeker: 1698.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Praelectionum Juris Romani et Hodierni pars II Que ad Libros 21 priores Pandectarum. 2nd ed. vol. 2. Franeker: 1700.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Praelectionum Juris Civilis Tomi III. Leipzig: 1735.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Heedensdaegse Rechtsgeleertheyt, Soo elders, als in Frieslandt gebruikelyt. 4th ed. Amsterdam: Johannes Rotterdam, 1742.Google Scholar
Huber, U. Heedensdaegse Rechtsgeleertheyt, Soo elders, als in Frieslandt gebruikelyt. 5th ed. Amsterdam: 1768.Google Scholar
Jacobus (de Arena), . Commentarii in universum Ius Civile. 1541.Google Scholar
Molineaus (Dumoulin), C. Omnia quae extant opera. vols. 1–4. Paris: Apud viduam Gervasii Alliot & Antonium Clement, 1558.Google Scholar
Molineaus (Dumoulin), C. Omnia quae extant opera. vols. 1–5. Paris: Ioannes Guignard, 1581.Google Scholar
Odofredus, . Lectura super Codice. Lyon: 1602.Google Scholar
Rodenburgius, C. Tractatus de jure conjugum … cum tractatione praeliminari de jure, quod oritur ex statutorum, vel consuetudinum discripantium conflictu, Köln: 1699.Google Scholar
Sande, I. Decisiones Frisicae, sive Rerum in Suprema Frisiorum Curia Iudicatarum, Libri V. Leeuwarden: 1638.Google Scholar
Van der Linden, J. Regtsgeleerd, practicaal en koopmans handbook. Amsterdam: Johannes Allart, 1806.Google Scholar
Vattel, E. Le droit des gens, ou des principes de la loi naturelle, appliquées à la conduite et aux affaires des Nations et des Souverains. vol. 1. London: 1758.Google Scholar
Voet, J. Commentarius ad Pandectas. In quo praeter Romani juris principia ac controversias illustriores, jus etiam hodiernum, & praecipuae fori quaestiones excutiuntur. vol. 1. The Hague: 1698–1704.Google Scholar
Voet, P. De statutis, eorumque concursu, liber singularis. Amsterdam: 1661.Google Scholar
Voet, P. De statutis, eorumque concursu, liber singularis (Nova Editio Auctior & Correctior). Brussels: 1715.Google Scholar
Barry, Andrew. Bartolus, ad C.1.1.1 Available online at www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/cdonahue/courses/lhsemclh/RdgsDownloads/BartolConflFormatted.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bonolis, G. Questioni di diritto internazionale in alcuni consigli inediti di Baldo degli Ubaldi: Testo e commento. Pisa: E. Spoerri, 1908.Google Scholar
Guthrie, W. Friedrich Carl von Savigny: A Treatise on the Conflict of Laws. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1880, 433–452 (Bartolus), 452–461 (Molinaeus), 462–508 (P. Voet), 508–516 (Huber).Google Scholar
Hänel, M. (ed.). Dissensiones dominorum sive controversiae veterum iuris Romani interpretum qui glossatores vocantur. Leipzig: 1843.Google Scholar
Meijers, E. M. Tractatus duo de vi et potestate statutorum. Haarlem: H. D. Tjeenk Willink & zoon, 1939.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Le commentaire de Bartole ad legem cunctos populos sure la glosse quod si bononiensis” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 165–187.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “La Lectura de Balde sur Cunctos Populos” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 188–204.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Charles Dumoulin, Conclusions sur les Statuts et coutumes locaux” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 241–251.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Bertrand d’Argentré, Commentaire de la Coutume de Bretagne” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 254–281.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Ulrich Huber, Du conflits des lois différentes dans des États différents” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 341–351.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Jean Voet, De Statutis” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 354–385.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Johann Nikolaus Hert, De Collisione Legum” in Ancel, B. (ed.), Élements d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas, 2017, 387–406.Google Scholar
Beale, J. H. Bartolus on the Conflict of Laws. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1914.Google Scholar
Birks, P. and McLeod, G.. Justinian’s Institutes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
Clarence Smith, J. A. “Bartolo on the Conflict of Laws.” American Journal of Legal History 14 (1970), 157–183, 247–275.Google Scholar
Frier, B. W. (ed.). The Codex of Justinian. 3 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Gane, P. Huber’s The Jurisprudence of My Time (Heedensdaegse Rechtsgeleertheyt). Trans. Gane, P.. 2 vols. Durban: Butterworth & Co. (Africa) Ltd., 1939.Google Scholar
Gane, P. The Selective Voet; being the Commentary on the Pandects, Paris edition of 1829, and the Supplement to that work by Johannes van der Linden. 8 vols. Durban: Butterworth, 1955.Google Scholar
Llewellyn Davies, D. J. “The Influence of Huber’s De Conflictu Legum on English Private International Law.” British Yearbook of International Law 18 (1937), 49–63.Google Scholar
Lorenzen, E. G. “Huber’s De Conflictu Legum.” Illinois Law Review 13 (1919), 401–418.Google Scholar
Neff, S. Hugo Grotius On the Law of War and Peace (Student Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.Google Scholar
Tuck, R. (ed.). Hugo Grotius: The Rights of War and Peace. 3 vols. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2005.Google Scholar
Valladão, H. Beale, Bartolo: Conflito de leis. Rio de Janeiro: Estabel. Graph. Canton & Reile, 1938.Google Scholar
Valladão, H. Ulrik Huber, Conflito de leis. Rio de Janeiro: 1951.Google Scholar
Watson, A. The Digest of Justinian, rev. ed. 4 vols. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Ailes, E. H. “Substance and Procedure in the Conflict of Laws.” Michigan Law Review 39 (1941), 392–418.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. Les conflits de qualifications à l’épreuve de la donation entre époux. Paris: Dalloz, 1977.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Review of P. Dominguez Lozano, Las circunstancias personales determinantes de la vinculación con el derecho local. Estudio sobre el derecho local altomedieval y el derecho local de Aragón, Navarra y Cataluña (Madrid, 1988).” Revue critique de droit international privé 79 (1990), 238–241.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. Histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas Paris II, 2008.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. “Le commentaire de Bartole ad legem Cunctos populos sur la glosse Quod si Bononiensis mis en français” in d’Alteroche, B. (ed.), Mélanges en l’honneur d’Anne Lefebvre-Teillard. Paris: Editions Panthéon-Assas, 2009.Google Scholar
Ancel, B. Éléments d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Panthéon Assas Paris II, 2017.Google Scholar
Anton, A. Private International Law. Edinburgh: W. Green & Son, 1967.Google Scholar
Armstrong, L. and Kirshner, J. (eds.). The Politics of Law in Late Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2011.Google Scholar
Asser, T. M. C. “Droit international privé et droit uniforme.” Revue de droit international et de législation comparée 12 (1880), 5–22.Google Scholar
Asser, T. M. C. Eléments de droit international privé ou du conflit de lois. Trans. Rivier, A.. Paris: 1884.Google Scholar
Audit, B. La fraude à la loi. Paris: Dalloz, 1974.Google Scholar
Audit, B. “A Continental Lawyer Looks at American Choice-of-law Principles.” American Journal of Comparative Law 27 (1979), 589–603.Google Scholar
Audit, B. “Le caractère fonctionnel de la règle de conflit.” Recueil des cours 186 (1984), 220–397.Google Scholar
Audit, B. “Le droit international privé en quête d’universalité (cours général).” Recueil des cours 305 (2001), 9–487.Google Scholar
Audit, B. Droit international privé. 4th ed. Paris: Economica, 2006.Google Scholar
Audit, M. “L’intérpretation autonome du droit international privé Communautaire.” Clunet 130 (2004), 789–816.Google Scholar
Aynès, L., Gautier, P. Y., and Terré, F. “Antithèse de ‘l’entité’ (à propos d’une opinion sur la doctrine).” Dalloz (1997), 229–230.Google Scholar
Baker, J. H. An Introduction to English Legal History. 5th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019.Google Scholar
Ballarino, T. Diritto Intenazionale Privato. 3rd ed. Padova: CEDAM, 1999.Google Scholar
Banu, R. Nineteenth-Century Perspectives on Private International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018.Google Scholar
Bar, L. V. Internationales Privat- und Strafrecht. Hannover: Hahn’sche Hofbuchhandlung, 1862.Google Scholar
Bar, L. V. Theorie und Praxis des Internationalen Privatrechts. vol. 1. Hannover: Hahn’sche Hofbuchhandlung, 1889.Google Scholar
Barde, L. Théorie traditionnelle des Statuts – ou Principes du droit réel et du statut personnel d’après le droit civil français. Bordeaux: J. Pechade, 1880.Google Scholar
Barile, G. “La fonction historique du droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 116 (1965), 305–376.Google Scholar
Barnich, L. “Le lieu des actes juridiques: paradigme perdu de droit international privé.” Unpublished dissertation, Free University of Brussels, 2000.Google Scholar
Barnich, L. Les actes juridiques en droit international privé. Brussels: Bruylant, 2001.Google Scholar
Barry, A. “Bartolus on the Conflict of Laws.” Unpublished third-year (J.D.) paper, Harvard Law School, 1998.Google Scholar
Barry, H. “Comity.” Virginia Law Review 12 (1926), 353–375.Google Scholar
Bartin, É. “De l’impossibilité d’arriver à la suppression définitive des conflits de lois.” Clunet 25 (1897), 225–255, 466–495, 720–738.Google Scholar
Bartin, É. “Les dispositions d’ordre public. La théorie de la fraude à la loi, et l’idée de la communauté internationale.” Revue de droit international et de législation comparée 29 (1897), 385–427, 613–658.Google Scholar
Bartin, É. “Les conflits entre dispositions législatives de droit international privé: Théorie du renvoi.” Revue de droit international et de législation comparée 30 (1898), 129–187, 272–320.Google Scholar
Bartin, E. A. Principes de droit international privé selon la loi et la jurisrpudence françaises. vol. 1. Paris: Domat-Montchrestien 1930.Google Scholar
Basile, M. et al. Lex Mercatoria and Legal Pluralism: A Late Thirteenth-Century Treatise and Its Aftermath. Cambridge, MA: The Ames Foundation, 1998.Google Scholar
Baszkiewicz, J. “Quelques remarques sur la conception de dominium mundi dans l’oeuvre de Bartolus” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il VI Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962.Google Scholar
Batiffol, H. Les conflits de lois en matière de contrats: Etude de droit international privé comparé. Paris: Recueil Sirey, 1938.Google Scholar
Batiffol, H. Traité élémentaire de droit international privé. Paris: LGDJ, 1949.Google Scholar
Batiffol, H. Aspects philosophiques du droit international privé. Paris: Dalloz, 1956.Google Scholar
Batiffol, H. “Observations sur les liens de la compétence judiciaire et de la compétence legislative” in Batiffol, H. (ed.), De Conflictu Legum: Essays Presented to Roeland Duco Kollewijn & Johannes Offerhaus at Their Seventieth Birthday. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, 1962, 55–66.Google Scholar
Batiffol, H. “Le pluralisme des méthodes en droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 139 (1973), 75–148.Google Scholar
Batiffol, H. and Lagarde, P. Droit international privé. 8th ed. vol. 1. Paris: LGDJ, 1993.Google Scholar
Baty, T. Polarized Law. London: Stevens and Haynes, 1914.Google Scholar
Bayly, C. A. The Birth of the Modern World, 1780–1914: Global Connections and Comparisons. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.Google Scholar
Beale, J. H. A Treatise on the Conflict of Laws. 3 vols. New York: Baker, Voorhis & Co., 1935.Google Scholar
Bederman, D. International Law in Antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.Google Scholar
Behn, M. Die Entstehungsgeschichte der einseitigen Kollisionsnormen des EGBGB. Frankfurt: Haag & Herchen, 1980.Google Scholar
Bellomo, M. Ricerche sui rapporti patrimoniali tra coniugi: contributo alla storia della famiglia medievale. Milan: Giuffré, 1961.Google Scholar
Bentham, J. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. reprint of 1823 ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1879.Google Scholar
Bentwich, N. “Le développement récent du principe du domicile en droit anglais.” Recueil des cours 49 (1934), 377–465.Google Scholar
Berlin, I. (ed.). “The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoy’s View of History” in The Proper Study of Mankind. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 1997, 436–498.Google Scholar
Bezemer, C. H. Les répétitions de Jacques de Révigny: recherches sur la répétition comme forme d’enseignement juridique et comme genre littéraire, suivies d’un inventaire des textes. Leiden: E. J. Brill/Leiden University Press, 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birks, P. and McLeod, G. “Introduction” in Birks, P. and McLeod, G. (eds.), Justinian’s Institutes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987, 7–28.Google Scholar
Bisping, C. “Avoid the Statutist Trap: The International Scope of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.” Journal of Private International Law 8 (2012), 35–62.Google Scholar
Blagojević, B. “Théories des statuts à la lumière de l’histoire générale de l’évolution de la société” in De Conflictu Legum: Essays Presented to Roeland Duco Kollewijn & Johannes Offerhaus At Their Seventieth Birthday. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, 1962, 67–81.Google Scholar
Boden, D. “L’ordre public: limite et condition de la tolérance: Recherches sur le pluralisme juridique.” Unpublished dissertation, University of Paris I, 2002.Google Scholar
Bogdan, M. “Private International Law as Component of the Law of the Forum : General Course on Private International Law.” Recueil des cours 348 (2011), 9–252.Google Scholar
Boggiano, A. Derecho Internacional Privado. vol. 1. Buenos Aires: LexisNexis, 2006.Google Scholar
Bonnichon, A. “La notion de conflit des souverainetés dans la science des conflits des lois.” Revue critique de droit international privé 38 (1949), 615–635, 39 (1950), 11–32Google Scholar
Boosfeld, K. “Die beiden Statutenlehren: Geschichte eines rechthistorischen Missverständnisses.” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte (Germanistische Abteilung) 136 (2019), 76–93.Google Scholar
Borchers, P. “The Internationalization of Contractual Conflicts Law.” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 28 (1995), 421–486.Google Scholar
Boüard, A. D. Manuel de diplomatie française et pontificale, vol. II: Actes privés. Paris: Picard, 1948.Google Scholar
Boucher, C. “La conférence des avocats et le droit international privé au XVIIIe siècle.” Clunet 63 (1935), 45–58.Google Scholar
Breschi, B. “Alcune osservationi sul contributo recato da Bartolo alla teoria degli statute” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il VI Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962, 49–59.Google Scholar
Brilmayer, L. “Post-modernism in American Choice of Law” in Erauw, J. (ed.), Liber Memorialis François Laurent. Brussels: E. Story–Scientia, 1989, 695–705.Google Scholar
Brilmayer, L. Conflict of Laws. 2nd ed. Boston: Little Brown, 1995.Google Scholar
Brilmayer, L. “The Role of Substantive and Choice of Law Policies in the Formation and Application of Choice of Law Rules.” Recueil des cours (1995), 9–111.Google Scholar
Brundage, J. Law, Sex and Christian Society in Medieval Europe. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 1987.Google Scholar
Bucher, A. “Vers l’adoption de la méthode des intérêts ? Réflexions à la lumière des codifications récentes.” Travaux du Comité français de droit international privé 12 (1993), 209–237.Google Scholar
Bucher, A. and Bonomi, A. Droit International Privé. Basel: Helbing Lichtenhahn, 2001.Google Scholar
Buckland, W. W. A Text-Book of Roman Law. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963.Google Scholar
Buzan, B. and Little, R. International Systems in World History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Caglioni, D. “‘Regnativa prudentia.’ Diritto e teologia nel ‘Tractatus testimoniorum’ bartoliano” in Caglioni, D. (ed.), Théologie Et Droit Dans La Science Politique De L’état Modern. Rome: École française de Rome, 1991, 155–170.Google Scholar
Calasso, F. Medio Evo del diritto. Milan: Giuffré, 1954.Google Scholar
Calasso, F. “Bartolo da Sassoferrato.” Annali di storia del diritto 9 (1965), 472–520.Google Scholar
Callé, P. L’acte public en droit international privé. Paris: Economica, 2004.Google Scholar
Calvo Caravaca, A.-L. and Carrascosa González, J. Derecho Internacional Privado. 6th ed. Granada: Comares, 2005.Google Scholar
Canning, J. The Political Thought of Baldus de Ubaldis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
Canning, J. “Introduction: politics, institutions and ideas” in Burns, J. H. (ed.), The Cambridge History of Medieval Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
Canning, J. Ideas of Power in the Late Middle Ages 1296–1417. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.Google Scholar
Cassesse, A. “Remarks on Scelle’s Theory of “Role Splitting” (dédoublement fonctionnel) in International Law.” European Journal of International Law 1 (1990), 210–231.Google Scholar
Castel, J.-G. Droit international privé québécois. Toronto: Butterworths, 1988.Google Scholar
Catellani, E. L. Il diritto internazionale privato e il suoi recenti progressi. vol. I, 2nd ed. Turin: Stamperia dell’Unione Tipografico-Editrice, 1895.Google Scholar
Cavers, D. “A Critique of the Choice-of-Law Problem.” Harvard Law Review 47 (1933), 173–208.Google Scholar
Cesar, F. J. “Popular Autonomy and Imperial Power in Bartolus of Saxoferrato: An Intrinsic Connection.” Journal of the History of Ideas 65 (2004), 369–381.Google Scholar
Chavannes, R. D. “E. M. Meijers and the Recodification of the Dutch Civil Code after World War II.” Unpublished paper, University of Oxford, 1997.Google Scholar
Checchini, A. “Presupposti giuridici dell’evoluzione storica dalla ‘Bartoliana’ teoria degli statuti al moderno diritto internazionale private” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il VI Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962, 61–105.Google Scholar
Clarence Smith, J. A. “Bartolo on the Conflict of Laws.” American Journal of Legal History 14 (1970), 157–183, 247–275.Google Scholar
Clarence Smith, J. A. Medieval Law Teachers and Writers, Civilians and Canonists. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1975.Google Scholar
Clermont, K. and Palmer, J. “French Article 14 Jurisdiction, Viewed from the United States.” Cornell Law Faculty Publications 13 (2004).Google Scholar
Collier, J. Conflict of Laws. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.Google Scholar
Collins, H. The Law of Contract. 4th ed. London: Butterworths, 2003.Google Scholar
Collins, L. (ed.). Dicey, Morris and Collins on the Conflict of Laws. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2012.Google Scholar
Collins, R. The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Condorelli, O. “Bartolo e il diritto canonico” in Tudertina, C. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato Nel Vii Centenario Della Nascita: Diritto, Politica, Società (Atti Del L Convegno Storico Internazionale, Todi–Perugia, 13–16 Ottobre 2013). Spoleto: Fondazione Centro Italiano di Studi sul Basso Medioevo, 2014, 463–557.Google Scholar
Copolla, G. “Nascita e declino dell’adagio ‘nemo pro parte testatus pro parte intestatus decedere potest’.” Teoría e Storia del Diritto Privato 5 (2012), 1–172.Google Scholar
Cornu, G. Droit civil: Introduction au droit. 12th ed. Paris: LGDJ, 2005.Google Scholar
Courbe, P. Droit international privé. Paris: Armand Colin, 2000.Google Scholar
Currie, B. “Married Women’s Contracts: A Study In Conflict-of-Laws Method.” University of Chicago Law Review 25 (1958), 227–268.Google Scholar
Dawson, J. The Oracles of the Law. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Law School, 1968.Google Scholar
de Nova, R. “A Historical and Comparative Introduction to the Conflict of Laws (General Course.” Recueil des cours 118 (1966), 443–622.Google Scholar
de Vries, J. and van der Woude, A. The First Modern Economy: Success, Failure, and Perseverance of the Dutch Economy, 1500–1815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Delaume, G.-R. Les conflits de lois à la veille du Code civil: Contribution à l’histoire du droit international privé français. Paris: Sirey, 1947.Google Scholar
Delaume, G.-R. Les conflits de lois à la veille du Code civil dans les traités diplomatiques. Paris: Sirey, 1948.Google Scholar
Demangeat, C. Histoire de la condition civile des étrangers en France dans l’ancien et dans le nouveau droit. Paris: 1844.Google Scholar
Despagnet, F. Précis de droit international privé. 5th ed. Paris: Sirey, 1909.Google Scholar
Dhont, F. “‘L’histoire, Parole Vivante Du Droit?’ François Laurent En Ernest Nys Als Historiografen Van Het Volkenrecht” in Debaenst, B. (ed.), De Belle Époque Van Het Belgisch Recht. Brugge: die Keure, 2016, 91–115.Google Scholar
Diago Diago, M. del P. Pactos o Capitulaciones Matrimoniales en Derecho Internacional Privado. Zaragoza: El Justicia de Aragón, 1999.Google Scholar
Dicey, A. V. The Law of Domicil as a Branch of the Law of England Stated in the Form of Rules. London: Stevens & Sons, 1879.Google Scholar
Dicey, A. V. A Digest of the Law of England with Reference to the Conflict of Laws. London: Stevens & Sons, 1896.Google Scholar
Dniestranski, S. Zur Geschichte und Theorie des internationalen Privatrechts. Vienna: M. Perles, 1929.Google Scholar
Dodge, W. S. “Extraterritoriality and Conflict-of-Laws Theory: An Argument for Judicial Unilateralism.” Harvard International Law Journal 39 (1988), 101–169.Google Scholar
Domingo, R. The New Global Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010.Google Scholar
Dominguez Lozano, P. Las circunstancias personales determinantes de la vinculación con el derecho local. Estudio sobre el derecho local altomedieval y el derecho local de Aragón, Navarra y Cataluña. Madrid: Ediciones de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 1988.Google Scholar
Donahue, C. “Medieval and Early Modern Lex mercatoria: An Attempt at the probatio diabolica.” Chicago Journal of International Law (2004), 21–37.Google Scholar
Donahue, C. Jr. “What Causes Fundamental Legal Ideas? Marital Property in England and France in the Thirteenth Century.” Michigan Law Review 78 (1979), 59–88.Google Scholar
Donahue, C., Why the History of Canon Law Is Not Written. London: Selden Society, 1986.Google Scholar
Donahue, C., “Ius Commune, Canon Law and Common Law in England.” Tulane Law Review 66 (1992), 1745–1780.Google Scholar
Donahue, C., “Jus in the Subjective Sense in Roman Law: Reflections on Villey and Tierney” in Donahue, C. Jr. (ed.), A Ennio Cortese. Rome: Il Cigno Edizioni, 2001, 506–535.Google Scholar
Donahue, C., “Private Law without the State and during Its Formation.” American Journal of Comparative Law 56 (2008), 541–566.Google Scholar
Donahue, C., Law, Marriage, and Society in the Later Middle Ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Drucker, A. “Soviet Views on Private International Law.” International and Comparative Law Quarterly 4 (1955), 384–389.Google Scholar
du Plessis, P. and Cairns, J. (eds.). Reassessing Legal Humanism and Its Claims: Petere Fontes? Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2015.Google Scholar
Edwards, A. B. “The Appeal to Ex Aequo et Bono in the Seventeenth to Eighteenth Century Conflict of Laws.” Fundamina 2 (1996), 261–284.Google Scholar
Ehlrich, E. “Internationales Privatrecht.” Deutsche Rundschau 126 (1906), 419–433.Google Scholar
Ehlrich, E. “Les tendances actuelles du droit international privé.” Revue de droit international privé 4 (1908), 902–924.Google Scholar
Ehrenzweig, A. A. “The Transient Rule of Personal Jurisdiction: The “Power” Myth and Forum Conveniens.” Yale Law Journal 65 (1956), 289–314.Google Scholar
Ehrenzweig, A. A. “Beale’s Translation of Bartolus.” American Journal of Comparative Law 12 (1963), 384–385.Google Scholar
Elden, S. The Birth of Territory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013.Google Scholar
Elhoueiss, J.-L. “Personnalité et territorialité en droit international privé.” Unpublished dissertation, Paris II Panthéon-Assas University, 2000.Google Scholar
Engdahl, D. E. “English Marriage Conflicts Law before the Time of Bracton.” American Journal of Comparative Law 15 (1966), 109–135.Google Scholar
Engdahl, D. E. “The Canonical and Metaphysical Background of the Classic Dutch Marriage Conflicts Rule.” Nederlands Tijdschrift voor International Recht 15 (1968), 42–67.Google Scholar
Engdahl, D. E. “‘Full Faith and Credit’ in Merrie Olde England: New Insight for Marriage Conflicts Law from the Thirteenth Century.” Valparaiso University Law Review 5 (1970), 1–25.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. Wills and Wealth in Medieval Genoa, 1150–1250. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984.Google Scholar
Erasmus, H. J. “Natural Law: Voet’s Criticism of De Groot.” Fundamina 22 (2016), 40–52.Google Scholar
Ercole, F. “L’istituto dotale nella pratica e nella legislazione statutaria dell’Italia superiore.” Rivista italiana per le scienze giuridiche 45–46 (1908), 191–302.Google Scholar
Ercole, F. “Impero universale e Stati particolari: la ‘civitas sibi princeps’ e lo Stato modern” in Ercole, F. (ed.), Da Bartolo All’Althusio: Saggi Sulla Storia Del Pensiero Pubblicistico Del Rinascimento Italiano. Florence: Vallechi, 1932, 49–156.Google Scholar
Ercole, F. “L’origine francese della formola Bartoliana ‘civitas superiore, non recognoscens est sibi princeps” in Ercole, F. (ed.), Da Bartolo All’Althusio: Saggi Sulla Storia Del Pensiero Pubblicistico Del Rinascimento Italiano. Florence: Vallechi, 1932, 157–217.Google Scholar
Farrely, M. “The New Italian School of International Law.” Juridical Review 5 (1893), 105–124, 197.Google Scholar
Fassbender, B. and Peters, A. (eds.). Oxford Handbook of the History of International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.Google Scholar
Fassberg, C. W. “The Choice-of-Law Problem: Continuity and Change.” Unpublished S.J.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1982.Google Scholar
Fawcett, J. and Carruthers, J. M. Cheshire, North & Fawcett: Private International Law. 14th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
Feenstra, R. Bibliografie van hoogleraren in de rechten aan de Franeker Universiteit tot 1811. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2003.Google Scholar
Fentiman, R. “Domicile Revisited.” Cambridge Law Journal 50 (1991), 445–463.Google Scholar
Fentiman, R. “Choice of Law in Europe: Uniformity and Integration.” Tulane Law Review 82 (2008), 2022–2051.Google Scholar
Fentiman, R. International Commercial Litigation. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.Google Scholar
Figgis, J. N. “Bartolus and the Development of European Political Ideas.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (n.s.) 19 (1905), 147–168.Google Scholar
Figueira, R. “Glossa Ordinaria: Roman Law” in Kleinherz, C. (ed.), Medieval Italy: An Encyclopedia. New York: Routledge, 2004, 437–439.Google Scholar
Fliniaux, A. “Le manuscrit 141 de la Bibliothèque municipale d’Avranches et le problème de l’introduction en France au Moyen-âge de texte des compilations du justinien” in Fliniaux, A. (ed.), Atti De Congresso Internazionale Di Diritto Romano (Bologna Et Roma, 17–28 Aprile 1934. Pavia: Tip. successori F.lli Fusi, 1934, 313–327.Google Scholar
Foignet, R. Manuel élémentaire de droit international privé à l’usage des étudiants en droit et des candidats aux carrières diplomatique et consulaire. 2nd ed. Paris: Arthur Rousseau, 1909.Google Scholar
Forsyth, C. “The Value of the Comparative Ethos to the Judicial Process in the Conflict of Laws” in Visser, C. (ed.), Essays in Honour of Ellison Kahn. Cape Town: Juta, 1989, 151–172.Google Scholar
Forsyth, C. Private International Law. 5th ed. Cape Town: Juta, 2012.Google Scholar
Foster, J. “La théorie anglaise du droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 65 (1938), 399–557.Google Scholar
Francescakis, P. La théorie du renvoi et les conflits de systèmes en droit international privé. Paris: Sirey, 1958.Google Scholar
Francescakis, P. “Quelques précisions sur les ‘lois d’application immédiate’ et leurs rapports avec les règles de conflits de lois.” Revue critique de droit international privé 55 (1966), 1–18.Google Scholar
Frankenstein, E. Internationales Privatrecht (Grenzrecht). vol. 1. Berlin: Rothschild, 1926.Google Scholar
Franzina, P. “Bartolus” in Basedow, J., Rühl, G., and Ferrari, F. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Private International Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2017, 158–163.Google Scholar
Gamillscheg, F. Der Einfluss Dumoulins auf die Entwicklung des Kollisionsrechts. Berlin–Tübingen: Walter de Gruyter–J. C. B. Mohr, 1955.Google Scholar
Gamillscheg, F. “Überlegungen zum Text und zur kollisionsrechtslichen Methode bei Bartolus” in Behrends, O. et al. (eds.), Festschrift Für Franz Wieacker Zum 70. Göttingen: Geburtstag, Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1978, 235–235.Google Scholar
Garcimartín Alvarez, F. J. “Regulatory Competition: A Private International Law Approach.” European Journal of Law and Economics 8 (1999), 251–270.Google Scholar
Garlati, L. “Women’s Succession from the Middle Ages to the Modern Era” in di Renzo Villata, M. G. (ed.), Succession Law, Practice and Society in Europe Across the Centuries. Cham: Springer, 2018, 207–230.Google Scholar
Garnett, R. Substance and Procedure in Private International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.Google Scholar
Gaudemet-Tallon, H. Récherches sur les origines de l’article 14 du Code Civil. Paris: PUF, 1964.Google Scholar
Gaudemet-Tallon, H. “Le pluralisme en droit international privé: richesses et faiblesses.” Recueil des cours 312 (2005), 9–488.Google Scholar
Getman-Pavlova, I. “The History of Private International Law: The Theory of Belgian Realism in the 16th Century.” Sociology International Journal 2 (2018), 431–437.Google Scholar
Geuss, R. Morality, Culture and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. Runaway World: How Globalization Is Reshaping Our Lives. London: Routledge, 2002.Google Scholar
Gillis, J. R. For Better, For Worse: British Marriages, 1600 to Present. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985.Google Scholar
Gilmore, M. P. Argument from Roman Law in Political Thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1941.Google Scholar
Giuliani, A. “Una nota sul bartolismo” in Tudertina, C. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato Nel VII Centenario Della Nascita: Diritto, Politica, Società (Atti del L Convegno Storico Internazionale, Todi–Perugia, 13–16 Ottobre 2013). Spoleto: Fondazione Centro Italiano di Studi sul Basso Medioevo, 2014, 585–600.Google Scholar
Glenn, H. P. “The Nationalist Heritage” in Legrand, P. and Munday, R. (eds.), Comparative Legal Studies: Traditions and Transitions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, 76–127.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, W. Sistema y Filosofia del Derecho Internacional Privado. 2nd ed. vol. 1. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Jurídicas Europa-América, 1951.Google Scholar
Gordley, J. The Philosophical Origins of Modern Contract Doctrine. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Gothot, P. “Le renouveau de la tendance unilatéraliste en droit international privé.” Revue critique de droit international privé 60 (1971), 1–36, 209–243, 415.Google Scholar
Gothot, P. “La méthode unilatéraliste face au droit international privé des contrats.” Travaux du Comité français de droit international privé (1979), 201–232.Google Scholar
Gothot, P. “La place d’Henri Batiffol dans la doctrine.” Travaux du Comité français de droit international privé 11 (1994), 21–31.Google Scholar
Grewe, W. G. The Epochs of International Law. Trans. Byers, M.. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2000.Google Scholar
Gruber-Magitot, S. Les conflits de coutumes en matière de contrats dans la jurisprudence des Parlements: de Dumoulin au Code Civil. Paris: PUF, 1980.Google Scholar
Guterman, S. L. “The Principle of the Personality of Law in the Early Middle Ages: A Chapter in the Evolution of Western Legal Institutions and Ideas.” University of Miami Law Review 21 (1966), 259–348.Google Scholar
Gutzwiller, M. “Le développement historique du droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 29 (1929), 287–400.Google Scholar
Gutzwiller, M. “Internationales Privatrecht” in Stammler, R. (ed.), Das Gesamte Deutsche Recht in Systematischer Darstellung. Berlin: 1931, 1511–1661.Google Scholar
Gutzwiller, M. “Das Internationalprivatrecht der Haager Konferenzen: Vergangenheit und Zukunft.” Annuaire suisse de droit international 2 (1945), 48–68.Google Scholar
Gutzwiller, M. “Aus den Anfängen des zwischenstaatlichen Erbrechts: ein Gutachten des Petrus Baldus de Ubaldis um 1375” in Gutzwiller, M. (ed.), Zum Schweizerischen Erbrecht: Festschrift Zum 70. Zurich: Geburtstag Von Peter Tuor, Polygraphischer Verlag, 1946, 145–178.Google Scholar
Gutzwiller, M. 70 Jahre Jurisprudenz: Erinnerungen eines Neunzigjährigen. Neuauflage anlässlich des 100. Geburtstags von Max Gutzwiller. Basel: Helbing & Lichtenhahn, 1989.Google Scholar
Halpérin, J.-L. Histoire du droit privé français depuis 1804. Paris: PUF, 1996.Google Scholar
Halpérin, J.-L. Entre Nationalisme Juridique et Communauté du Droit. Paris: PUF, 1999.Google Scholar
Harding, M. Conflict of Laws. 4th ed. Abingdon: Routledge, 2014.Google Scholar
Harrison, F. “Le droit international privé ou le conflit des lois au point de vue analytique, particulièrement en Angleterre.” Clunet 7 (1880), 533–551.Google Scholar
Harrison, F. On Jurisprudence and the Conflict of Laws. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1919.Google Scholar
Hartwieg, O. and Korkisch, F. Die geheimen Materialen zur Kodifikation des deutschen Internationalen Privatrechts 1881–1896. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1973.Google Scholar
Hatzimihail, N. E. “Prehistorical Private International Law.”Google Scholar
Hatzimihail, N. E. “On Mapping the Conceptual Battlefield of Private International Law.” Hague Yearbook of Private International Law 13 (2000), 57–64.Google Scholar
Hatzimihail, N. E. “Pages of History: Friedrich Juenger and the Historical Consciousness of Modern Private International Law” in Pereznieto Castro, L., Treves, T., and Seatzu, F. (eds.), Tradition and Innovation of Private International Law At the Beginning of the Third Millennium: Liber in Memoriam of Professor Friedrich K. Juenger. Hunington, NY: Juris Publishing, 2006, 81–123.Google Scholar
Hatzimihail, N. E. “Bartolus on the Conflict of Laws.” Revue hellénique de droit international 60 (2007), 11–79.Google Scholar
Hatzimihail, N. E. “The Many Lives – and Faces – of Lex Mercatoria: History as Genealogy in International Business Law.” Law & Contemporary Problems 71 (2008), 169–190.Google Scholar
Hatzimihail, N. E. “Genealogies of lex mercatoria” in Hatzimihail, N. E. (ed.), In Studies in Memoriam of Professor Anthony M. Antapassis. Athens: Ant.N.Sakkoulas, 2013, 311–351.Google Scholar
Hatzimihail, N. E. “Reflections on the International Dimension of Private International Law” in Jafferali, R., Marquette, V., and Nuyts, A. (eds.), Liber Amicorum Nadine Watté. Brussels: Larcier, 2017, 287–302.Google Scholar
Hatzimihail, N. E. “On the Doctrinal Beginnings of Private International Law.” Yearbook of Private International Law 21 (2019), 101–133.Google Scholar
Hazard, G. C. “A General Theory of State Court Jurisdiction.” Supreme Court Review 6 (1965), 241–288.Google Scholar
Helmholz, R. H. The Ius Commune in England: Four Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.Google Scholar
Herlihy, D. Pisa in the Early Renaisance: A Study of Urban Growth. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1958.Google Scholar
Hermans, M. M. “Wat lazen Friezen aan het einde van de Middeleeuwen.” De Vrije Fries 70 (1970), 7–38.Google Scholar
Herrmann, G. Johann Nikolaus Hert und die deutsche Statutenlehre. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1963.Google Scholar
Hertogh, M. (ed.). Living Law: Reconsidering Eugen Ehrlich. Oxford: Hart, 2008.Google Scholar
Hewett, M. “Quae Legentem Fefellissent, Transferentem Fugere non Possunt” in van den Bergh, R. et al. (eds.), Ex Justa Causa Traditum: Essays in Honour of Eric H. Pool. Pretoria: UNISA, 2006, 163–171.Google Scholar
Hewett, M. Ulric Huber (1636–1694), “De ratione juris docendi & discendi diatribe per modum dialogi : nonnullis aucta paralipomenois”: with a translation and commentary. Nijmegen: Gerard Noodt Instituut, 2010.Google Scholar
Holland, T. E. Elements of Jurisprudence. 7th ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1895.Google Scholar
Holleaux, D. Compétence du juge étranger et reconnaissance des jugement. Paris: Dalloz, 1970.Google Scholar
Horwitz, M. The Transformation of American Law, 1780–1850. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977.Google Scholar
Hudault, J. “Statut personnel et droit naturel dans l’oeuvre judiciaire de G. J.-B. Target.” Revue critique de droit international privé 87 (1998), 1–25.Google Scholar
Ibbetson, D. A Historical Introduction to the Law of Obligations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Institut für Ausländisches und Internationales Privat-und Wirtschaftsrecht. In memoriam Max Gutzwiller: Gedächtnisfeier der Juristischen Fakultät Heidelberg am 3. November 1989 im “Gutzwiller-Saal” des Instituts für Ausländisches und Internationales Privat-und Wirtschaftsrecht. Heidelberg: Winter, 1990.Google Scholar
Irmer, H. B. G. “Comity”: Een studie van het Internationaal Privaatrecht van de Verenigde Staten. Nijmegen: Berkhout, 1948.Google Scholar
Israel, J. I. The Dutch Republic: Its Rise, Greatness and Fall. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
James, H. The Creation and Destruction of Value: The Globalization Cycle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Janis, M. W. “Jeremy Bentham and the Fashioning of ‘International Law’.” American Journal of International Law 74 (1984), 405–418.Google Scholar
Jayme, E. Pasquale Stanislao Mancini: Internationales Privatrecht zwischen Risorgimento und Praktischer Jurisprudenz. Ebelsbach: Verlag Rolf Gremer, 1980.Google Scholar
Jayme, E. “Considérations historiques et actuelles sur la codification du droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 177 (1982).Google Scholar
Jayme, E. “Identité culturelle et intégration: le droit international privé postmoderne.” Recueil des cours 251 (1995), 9–268.Google Scholar
Jayme, E. “Le droit international privé du nouveau millénaire: la protection de la personne humaine face à la globalisation [conférence].” Recueil des cours 282 (2000), 9–40.Google Scholar
Jayme, E. Internationales Privatrecht: Ideengeschichte von Mancini und Ehrenzweig zum Europäischen Kollisionsrecht. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller, 2009.Google Scholar
Jessurun d’Oliveira, H. U. “The Artifact of ‘Sham Marriages’.” Yearbook of Private International Law 1 (1999), 49–83.Google Scholar
Jestaz, P. and Jamin, C. “The Entity of French Doctrine: Some Thoughts on the Community of French Legal Writers.” Legal Studies 18 (1998), 414–435.Google Scholar
Jestaz, P. and Jamin, C. La doctrine. Paris: Dalloz, 2004.Google Scholar
Jitta, D. J. La méthode du droit international privé. The Hague: Belinfante Frères, 1890.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. S. “Exctinctive Prescription—Conflict of Laws—Sources of Quebec Rules.” University of Toronto Law Journal 4 (1941), 109–130.Google Scholar
Jolley, N. “Metaphysics” in Rutherford, D. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Early Modern Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, 95–135.Google Scholar
Jones, P. The Italian City-State: From Commune to Signoria. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
Juenger, F. K. “A Page of History.” Mercer Law Review 35 (1984), 419–460.Google Scholar
Juenger, F. K. Choice of Law and Multistate Justice. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1993.Google Scholar
Juenger, F. K. “A Third Conflicts Restatement?” Indiana Law Journal 75 (2000), 403–416.Google Scholar
Juenger, F. K. “The Lex Mercatoria and Private International Law.” Louisiana Law Review 60 (2000), 1133–1150.Google Scholar
Juenger, F. K. “Some Random Remarks from Overseas” in Berger, K.-P. (ed.), The Practice of Transnational Law. The Hague: Kluwer, 2001, 81–89.Google Scholar
Kadens, E. “The Myth of the Customary Law Merchant.” Texas Law Review 90 (2012), 1153–1206.Google Scholar
Kadens, E. “The Medieval Law Merchant: The Tyranny of a Construct.” Journal of Legal Analysis 7 (2015), 251–289.Google Scholar
Kahn-Freund, O. “General Problems of Private International Law.” Recueil des cours 143 (1974), 139–474.Google Scholar
Kahn, E. “The ‘Territorial School and Comity School’ of the Conflict of Laws in the Roman-Dutch Era” in Huldigingsbundel Aangebied Aan Professor Daniel Pont. Cape Town: A. A. Balkema, 1970, 219–239.Google Scholar
Kahn, F. “Gesetzeskollisionen: Ein Beitrag zur Lehre des internationalen Privatrecht.” Jahrbücher für die Dogmatik des heutigen römischen und deutschen Privatrechts (Jherings Jahrbücher) 30 (1891), 1–143.Google Scholar
Kalma, J. J. and de Vries, K. (eds.). Friesland in het rampjaar 1672. Leeuwarden: Fryske Akademy, 1972.Google Scholar
Kegel, G. and Schurig, K. Internationales Privatrecht. 8th ed. Munich: C. H. Beck, 2000.Google Scholar
Kegel, G. and Schurig, K. Internationales Privatrecht. Munich: C. H. Beck, 2000.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Da. “Primitive Legal Scholarship.” Harvard International Law Journal 27 (1986), 1–98.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Da. “Receiving the International.” Connecticut Journal of International Law 10 (1990), 1–26.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Da. “The International Style in Postwar Law and Policy.” Utah Law Review (1994), 7–104.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Da. “International Law and the Nineteenth Century: History of an Illusion.” Quinnipiac Law Review 17 (1997), 99–138.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Da. “New Approaches to Comparative Law: Comparativism and International Governance.” Utah Law Review (1997), 545–593.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Da. “The Disciplines of International Law and Policy.” Leiden Journal of International Law 12 (1999), 9–135.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Du. “Form and Substance in Private Law Adjudication.” Harvard Law Review 89 (1976), 1685–1778.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. “From the Will Theory to the Principle of Private Autonomy: Lon Fuller’s ‘Consideration and Form’.” Columbia Law Review 100 (2000), 94–175.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. “Legal Formalism” in N. J. Smelser and P. B. Baltes (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier, 2001, 8634–8638.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. The Rise and Fall of Classical Legal Thought. Washington, DC: Beard Books, 2006.Google Scholar
Kim, K. Aliens in Medieval Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Kirshner, J. “Civitas Sibi Faciat Civem: Bartolus of Sassoferrato’s Doctrine on the Making of a Citizen.” Speculum 48 (1973), 694–713.Google Scholar
Kirshner, J. “‘Made Exiles for the Love of Knowledge’: Students in Late Medieval Italy.” Medieval Studies 70 (2008), 163–202.Google Scholar
Kirshner, J. Marriage, Dowry, and Citizenship in Late Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015.Google Scholar
Kirshner, J. “Materials for a Gilded Cage: Nondotal Assets in Florence, 1300–1500” in Kirshner, J. (ed.), Marriage, Dowry, and Citizenship in Late Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015, 74–93.Google Scholar
Kirshner, J. “‘Pisa’s Long-Arm” Gabella Dotis (1420–1525), Issues, Cases, Legal Opinions” in Kirshner, J. (ed.), Marriage, Dowry, and Citizenship in Late Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2015, 197–214.Google Scholar
Kirshner, J. and Pluss, J. “Two Fourteenth-Century Opinions on Dowries, Paraphernalia and Non-Dotal Goods.” Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law 9 (1979), 65–65.Google Scholar
Koessler, M. “‘Subject,’ ‘Citizen,’ ‘National,’ and ‘Permanent Allegiance’.” Yale Law Journal 56 (1946), 58–76.Google Scholar
Kogan, T. “A Neo-Federalist Tale of Personal Jurisdiction.” Southern California Law Review 63 (1990), 257–372.Google Scholar
Köhler, H. Internationales Privatrecht. Vienna: Springer, 1966.Google Scholar
Kollewijn, R. D. Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse Wetenschap van het Internationaal Privatrecht tot 1880. Amsterdam: Noord-Hollandsche Uitgeversmij, 1937.Google Scholar
Köpcke, M. A Short History of Legal Validity and Invalidity. Cambridge: Intersentia, 2019.Google Scholar
Koschaker, P. Europa und das römisches Recht. Munich: Biederstein, 1947.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, M. The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870–1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, M. From Apology to Utopia: The Structure of International Legal Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Kossmann, E. H. The Low Countries: 1780–1940. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Krčmář, J. “Beiträge zur Geschichte des internationalen Privatrecht” in Krčmář, J. (ed.), Festschrift Zur Jahrhundertfeier Des Allgemeinen Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuches. Vienna: Juristische Gesellschaft, 1911, 133–161.Google Scholar
Kretzmann, N. et al. (eds.). The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.Google Scholar
Kropholler, J. Internationales Privatrecht. 6th ed. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006.Google Scholar
Kruger, T. “Habitual Residence: The Factors that Courts Consider” in Beaumont, P. et al. (eds.), Cross-Border Litigation in Europe. Oxford: Hart, 2017, 741–754.Google Scholar
Kuehn, T. Emancipation in Late Medieval Florence. Rutgers: Rutgers University Press, 1982.Google Scholar
Kuehn, T. Law, Family and Women: Toward a Legal Anthropology of Renaissance Italy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1991.Google Scholar
Kuehn, T. “Law, Death and Heirs in the Renaissance: Repudiation of Inheritance in Florence.” Renaissance Quarterly 45 (1992), 484–516.Google Scholar
Kuehn, T. Heirs, Kin, and Creditors in Renaissance Florence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
Kuehn, T. “Property of Spouses in Law in Renaissance Florence” in di Renzo Villata, M. G. (ed.), Family Law and Society in Europe From the Middle Ages to the Contemporary Era. Cham: Springer, 2016, 109–134.Google Scholar
Kuehn, T. “Materia Est Valde Periculosa: Interpreting Testaments in Quattrocento Florence” in di Renzo Villata, M. G. (ed.), Succession Law, Practice and Society in Europe Across the Centuries. Cham: Springer, 2018, 249–270.Google Scholar
Laboulaye, E. Histoire du droit de propriété foncière en Occident. Paris, 1839.Google Scholar
Lainé, A. Introduction au droit international privé. 2 vols. Paris: Librairie Cotillon, 1888–1892.Google Scholar
Lainé, A. “Etude sur le titre préliminaire du project de révision du Code Civil Belge.” Bulletin de la Société de législation comparée 19 (1890), 315–341, 383–413, 449–470, 525–567.Google Scholar
Lainé, A. “La rédaction du Code civil et le sens de ses dispositions en matière de droit international privé.” Revue de droit international privé 1 (1905), 21–60, 443–479.Google Scholar
Lalive, P. “Tendances et méthodes en droit international privé (Cours général).” Recueil des cours 155 (1977), 1–424.Google Scholar
Lando, O. “The Conflict of Laws of Contracts - General Principles.” Recueil des cours 189 (1984), 225–446.Google Scholar
Lando, O. “Some Features of the Law of Contract in the Third Millenium.” Scandinavian Studies in Law 40 (2000), 345–501.Google Scholar
Lange, H. Römisches Recht im Mittelalter. Munich: C. H. Beck, 1997.Google Scholar
Laurent, F. Droit civil international. 8 vols. Brussels: Bruylant-Christophe, 1880–1881.Google Scholar
Laurent, F. Avant-projet de révision du code civil. 6 vols. Brussels: Bruylant-Christophe, 1882–1885.Google Scholar
Laurent, F. Principes de droit civil français. 33 vols. Brussels: Bruylant-Christophe, 1887.Google Scholar
Laurent-Bonne, N. “Droits savants et coutumes dans la France médiévale et moderne: l’exemple du don mutuel entre époux.” Revue historique de droit français et étranger 92 (2014), 335–356.Google Scholar
Le Bras, G. “Bartole et le droit canon” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il Vi Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962, 297–308.Google Scholar
Leflar, R. American Conflicts Law. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merril, 1967.Google Scholar
Lehmann, M. “Regulation, Global Governance and Private International Law: Squaring the Triangle.” Journal of Private International Law 16, 2020, 16–30.Google Scholar
Lemarignier, B. La conférence des avocats et les conflits des statuts concernant les effets du mariage au début du XVIIIe siècle. Faculté de Droit et Sciences Économiques de Paris, 1961.Google Scholar
Lequette, Y. “L’influence de l’œuvre d’Henri Batiffol sur la jurisprudence française.” Travaux du Comité français de droit international privé 11 (1991), 32–54.Google Scholar
Lesaffer, R. “International Law and Its History” in Craven, M., Fitzmaurice, M., and Vogiatzi, M. (eds.), Time, History and International Law. Leiden: Brill, 2007.Google Scholar
Lesaffer, R. European Legal History: A Cultural and Political Perspective. Trans. Arriens, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Lewald, H. “Conflits de lois dans le monde grec et romain.” Revue critique de droit international privé 57 (1968), 419–440, 615.Google Scholar
Link, C. Herrschaftsordnung und bürgerliche Freiheit: Grenzen der Staatsgewalt in der älteren deutschen Staatslehre. Vienna: Böhlau, 1979.Google Scholar
Lipert, K., ed. Historischer Statutismus und Neo-Statutismus der USA. Zurich: Juris-Verlag, 1979.Google Scholar
Lipstein, K. “Conflict of Laws 1921–1971: The Way Ahead.” Cambridge Law Journal 31 (1972), 67–120.Google Scholar
Lipstein, K. “The General Principles of Private International Law.” Recueil des cours 135 (1972), 97–230.Google Scholar
Lipstein, K. “One Hundred Years of Hague Conferences on Private International Law.” International & Comparative Law Quarterly 42 (1993), 553–653.Google Scholar
Livermore, S. Dissertations on the Questions which arise from the Contrariety of the Positive Laws of Different States and Nations (New Orleans, 1828)Google Scholar
Llewellyn Davies, D. J. “The Influence of Huber’s De Conflictu Legum on English Private International Law.” British Yearbook of International Law 18 (1937), 49–63.Google Scholar
Lobban, M. “The Development of Tort Law” in Cornish, W. et al. (eds.), Oxford History of the Laws of England XII: 1820–1914 Private Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, 877–902.Google Scholar
Lokin, J. H. A., Brandsma, F., and Jansen, C. Roman-Frisian Law of the 17th and 18th Century. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2003.Google Scholar
Lorenzen, E. G. “Huber’s De Conflictu Legum.” Illinois Law Review 13 (1919), 375–418.Google Scholar
Lorenzen, E. G. “The Qualification, Classification or Characterization Problem in the Conflict of Laws.” Yale Law Journal 50 (1941), 743–761.Google Scholar
Louis-Lucas, P. “Conflits de méthodes en matière de conflits de lois = Conflicts of methods as regards conflicts of laws.” Clunet 83 (1956), 774–823.Google Scholar
Loussouarn, Y. “The French Draft on Private International Law and the French Conference on Codification of Private International Law.” International & Comparative Law Quarterly 5 (1956), 378–394.Google Scholar
Loussouarn, Y. “Cours général de droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 139 (1973), 269–386.Google Scholar
Loussouarn, Y., Bourel, P., and Vareilles-Sommières, P. D. Droit international privé. Paris: Dalloz, 2004.Google Scholar
Lunz, L. A. Internationales Privatrecht: Allgemeiner Teil. Berlin: Deutscher Zentralverlag, 1961.Google Scholar
Luther, G. “Der Einfluss von Bartolus auf das deutsche internationale privat- und Strafrecht” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il Vi Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962, 309–331.Google Scholar
Magnus, U. “Introduction” in Magnus, U. and Mankowski, P. (eds.), Brussels I Regulation. 2nd ed. Munich: Sellier, 2012, 1–46.Google Scholar
Maiolo, F. Medieval Sovereignty: Marsilius of Padua and Bartolus of Saxoferrato. Delft: Eburon, 2007.Google Scholar
Makarov, A. N. Précis de droit international privé d’après la législation et la doctrine russes. Trans. Pereverweff, E. N. P.. Paris: Marcel Giard, 1932.Google Scholar
Mancini, P.-S. “De l’utilité de rendre obligatoires pour tous les Etats, sous la forme d’un ou de plusieurs traités internationaux, un certain nombre des règles générales du Droit international privé pour assurer la décision uniforme des conflits entre les différentes législations civiles et criminelles.” Clunet 1 (1874), 221–239, 285.Google Scholar
Mansel, H.-P. “L’adoption du principe de la nationalité par le EGBGB du 18 août 1896” in Erauw, J. (ed.), Liber Memorialis François Laurent. Brussels: E. Story–Scientia, 1989, 869–779.Google Scholar
Maridakis, G. “Le marriage des Grecs orthodoxes hors de Grèce.” Revue critique de droit international privé 41 (1952), 661–671.Google Scholar
Maridakis, G. “Introduction au droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 105 (1962), 375–515.Google Scholar
Maridakis, G. “L’inapplicabilité du droit étranger à Byzance” in Limpens, J. (ed.), Liber Amicorum Baron Louis Frédéricq. Ghent: Faculteit der Rechtsgeleerldheid te Gent, 1965.Google Scholar
Maridakis, G. Idiōtikon Diethnes Dikaion. 2nd ed. Athens: Ant.N.Sakkoulas, 1967.Google Scholar
Martin, J. A. Conflict of Laws. Boston: Little, Brown, 1978.Google Scholar
Martines, L. Lawyers and Statecraft in Renaissuance Florence. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1968.Google Scholar
Mayer, P. “Les lois de police étrangères.” Clunet 108 (1981), 277–345.Google Scholar
Mayer, P. “Le mouvement des idées dans le droit des conflits de lois.” Droits: Revue française de théorie juridique 2 (1985), 129–143.Google Scholar
Mayer, P. Droit international privé. 6th ed. Paris: Montchretien, 1998.Google Scholar
McClean, D. “A Common Inheritance? An Examination of the Private International Law Tradition of the Commonwealth.” Recueil des cours 260 (1997), 13–98.Google Scholar
McClean, D. “De Conflictu Legum: Perspectives on Private International Law at the Turn of the Century.” Recueil des cours 184 (2000), 41–228.Google Scholar
McClean, D. and Beevers, K. Morris The Conflict of Laws. 7th ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2009.Google Scholar
McDougal, L. “‘Private’ International Law: Ius Gentium versus Choice of Law Rules or Approaches.” American Journal of Comparative Law 38 (1990), 521–537.Google Scholar
McEleavy, P. “Regression and Reform in the Law of Domicile.” International & Comparative Law Quarterly 56 (2007), 453–462.Google Scholar
Meeusen, J. Nationalisme en Internationalisme in het Internationaal Privaatrecht: Analyse van het Belgische Conflictenrecht. Antwerp/Groningen: Intersentia, 1997.Google Scholar
Meijers, E. M. “Nieuwe Bijdrage tot het onstaan van het beginsel der realiteit.” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 3 (1922), 61–93.Google Scholar
Meijers, E. M. “L’histoire des principes fondamentaux du droit international privé à partir du Moyen Age, spécialement dans l’Europe occidentale.” Recueil des cours 49 (1934), 543–682.Google Scholar
Meijers, E. M. “Introduction à la publication d’oeuvres inédites de Balde et de Van der Keesel.” Revue critique de droit international privé 35 (1946), 203–219.Google Scholar
Meijers, E. M. “Contribution à l’histoire du droit international privé et pénal en France et dans les Pays-Bas aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles” in Timbal, P.-C. and Metman, J. (eds.).Google Scholar
Meijers, E. M. Études d’histoire du droit international privé. Paris: Éditions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1967.Google Scholar
Meili, F. “Die theoretischen Abhandlungen von Bartolus und Baldus über das internationale Privaat- und Strafrecht.” Niemeyers Zeitschrift für internationales Recht 4 (1894), 269–269, 340–346, 446–465.Google Scholar
Meili, F. “Argentraeus und Molinaeus und ihre Bedeutung im internationalen Privat- und Strafrecht.” Niemeyers Zeitschrift 5 (1895), 363–380, 452–472, 554–566.Google Scholar
Meili, F. “Ein Specimen aus der holländischen Schule des IPR (Ulricus Huber 1636–1694).” Niemeyers Zeitschrift 8 (1898), 189–200.Google Scholar
Mendels, D. “The Five Empires: A Note on a Propagandistic Topos.” American Journal of Philology 102 (1981), 330–337.Google Scholar
Meredith, P. “Jeremy Bentham and the Fashioning of ‘International Law’.” American Journal of International Law 78 (1984), 405–423.Google Scholar
Merzyn, G. Der Beitrag Benedikt Carpzovs zur Entwicklung des Kollisionsrechts. Göttingen: O. Schwartz, 1963.Google Scholar
Meylan, P. “Les statuts réels et personnels dans la doctrine de Du Moulin” in Meylan, P. (ed.), Mélanges Paul Fournier. Paris: Recueil Sirey, 1929, 511–526.Google Scholar
Meylan, P. “Nemo pro parte testatus pro parte intestatus decedere potest” in Meylan, P. (ed.), Zum Schweizerischen Erbrecht: Festschrift Zum 70. Zurich: Geburtstag Von Peter Tuor, Polygraphischer Verlag, 1946, 179–200.Google Scholar
Miaja de la Muela, A. Derecho internacional privado. 8th ed. Madrid: Atlas, 1979.Google Scholar
Michaels, R. “Two Paradigms of Jurisdiction.” Michigan Journal of International Law 27 (2006), 1003–1069.Google Scholar
Michaels, R. “Globalizing Savigny? The State in Savigny’s Conflict of Laws Theory, and the Challenge of Europeanization and Globalization” in Stolleis, M. and Streeck, W. (eds.), Aktuelle Fragen Politischer Und Rechtlicher Steuerung Im Kontext Der Globalisierung. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2007, 119–144.Google Scholar
Michaels, R. “The New European Choice-of-Law Revolution.” Tulane Law Review 82 (2008), 1607–1644.Google Scholar
Michaels, R. “After the Revolution: Decline and Return of U.S. Conflict of Laws.” Yearbook of Private International Law 11 (2009), 11–30.Google Scholar
Michaels, R. “Legal Medievalism in Lex Mercatoria Scholarship.” Texas Law Review 90 (2012), 259–268.Google Scholar
Michaels, R. “Wächter, Carl Georg von” in Basedow, J., Rühl, G., and Ferrari, F. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Private International Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2017, 1825–1832.Google Scholar
Mills, A. The Confluence of Public and Private International Law: Justice, Pluralism and Subsidiarity in the International Constitutional Ordering of Private Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Mills, A. “Rethinking Jurisdiction in International Law.” British Yearbook of International Law 84 (2014), 187–239.Google Scholar
Mills, A. Party Autonomy in Private International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018.Google Scholar
Mistelis, L. A. Charakterisierungen und Qualifikation im internationalen Privatrecht : zur Lehre einer parteispezifischen Qualifikation im Kollisionsrecht der privaten Wirtschaft. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1999.Google Scholar
Mohnhaupt, H. “Von den ‘leges fundamentales’ zur modernen Verfassung in Europa. Zum begriffs- und dogmengeschichtlichen Befund (16–18 Jahrhundert)” in Mohnhaupt, H. (ed.), Historische Vergleichung Im Bereich Vom Staat Und Recht: Gesammelte Aufsätze. Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 2000, 35–72.Google Scholar
Mortensen, R., Garnett, R., and Keyes, M. Private International Law in Australia. Melbourne: LexisNexis Australia, 2006.Google Scholar
Motulsky-Falardeau, A. “Les aspects historiques de la qualification de la prescription en droit international privé.” Cahiers du droit 55 (2014), 829–876.Google Scholar
Muir Watt, H. “Aspects économiques du droit international privé (réflexions sur l’impact de la globalisation économique sur les fondements des conflits de lois et de juridictions).” Recueil des cours 307 (2004), 25–383.Google Scholar
Muir Watt, H. “European Federalism and the ‘New Unilateralism’.” Tulane Law Review 82 (2008), 1983–1998.Google Scholar
Muir Watt, H. and Fernandez Arroyo, D. (eds.). Private International Law and Global Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.Google Scholar
Nadelman, K. “Book review of Héléne Gaudemet-Tallon, Récherches sur les origines de l’article 14 du Code Civil.” American Journal of Comparative Law 14 (1965), 348–350.Google Scholar
Nadelmann, K. H. “Marginal Remarks on the New Trends in American Conflicts Law.” Law & Contemporary Problems 28 (1963), 860–869.Google Scholar
Nadelmann, K. H. “Wächter’s Essay on the Collision of Private Laws of Different States.” American Journal of Comparative Law 13 (1964), 414–428.Google Scholar
Nadelmann, K. H. “Mancini’s Nationality Rule and Non-Unified Legal Systems: Nationality and Domicile.” American Journal of Comparative Law 17 (1969), 418–451.Google Scholar
Nadelmann, K. H. “Internationales Privatrecht: A Source Book on Conflicts Theory Analyzed and Reviewed.” Harvard International Law Journal 17 (1976), 657–677.Google Scholar
Neidhardt, A. H. “The Transformation of Private International Law: A Genealogy of the Family Antinomy.” Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, European University Institute, 2018.Google Scholar
Neuhaus, P. H. “Die Krise im internationalen Privatrecht.” Deutsche Rechts-Zeitschrift 3 (1948), 86–87.Google Scholar
Neuhaus, P. H. “Savigny und die Rechtsfindung aus der Natur der Sache.” Rabels Zeitschrift 15 (1949), 364–381.Google Scholar
Neumeyer, K. Die gemeinrechtliche Entwickelung des internationalen Privat- und Strafrechts bis Bartolus. 2 vols. Munich: J. Schweitzer, 1901–1916.Google Scholar
Neumeyer, K. “Zur Geschichte des internationalen Privatrechts in Frankreich und den Niederlanden.” Zeitschrift für Völkerrecht 11 (1920), 190–204.Google Scholar
Neumeyer, K. “Das Kanonische Recht und Die Lehren Der Kanonisten in Ihrem Einfluss Auf Die Entwicklung Des Internationalen Privatrechts (1250–1357).” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 33 (1965), 177–197.Google Scholar
Ní Shúilleabháin, M. Cross-Border Divorce Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.Google Scholar
Niboyet, J.-P. “Froland, les conflicts de qualification et la question du renvoi.” Revue de droit international privé 21 (1926), 1–25.Google Scholar
Niboyet, J.-P. “La théorie de l’autonomie de la volonté.” Recueil des cours 16 (1927), 1–114.Google Scholar
Niboyet, J.-P. Traité de droit international privé français. Paris: Sirey, 1944.Google Scholar
Niboyet, J.-P. Traité de droit international privé français. 2nd ed. Paris: Sirey, 1947.Google Scholar
Niboyet, J.-P. “Territoriality and Universal Recognition of Rules of Conflict of Laws.” Harvard Law Review 65 (1952), 582–596.Google Scholar
Niboyet, M.-L. and La Pradelle, G. D. G. Droit international privé. Paris: LGDJ, 2007.Google Scholar
Niederer, W. “Ceterum quaero de legum imperii romani conflictu.” Revue critique de droit international privé 49 (1960), 137–150.Google Scholar
Niedner, A. Das Einführungsgesetz vom 18 August 1896. 2nd ed. Berlin: Heymann, 1913.Google Scholar
Nishitani, Y. Mancini und die Parteiautonomie im internationalen Privatrecht. Heidelberg: Winter Verlag, 2000.Google Scholar
Nishitani, Y. “Mancini e l’autonomia della volontà nel diritto internazionale privato.” Rivista di diritto internazionale privato e processuale 37 (2001), 23–44.Google Scholar
Nuyts, A. L’exception de forum non conveniens. Brussels: Bruylant, 2003.Google Scholar
Nygh, P. E. “The Reasonable Expectations of the Parties as a Guide to the Choice of Law in Contract and Tort.” Recueil des cours 251 (1995), 271–400.Google Scholar
Nygh, P. E. Autonomy in International Contracts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
O’Rource, K. and Williamson, J. “When Did Globalization Begin?” European Review of Economic History 6 (2002), 23–50.Google Scholar
Onclin, W. “La doctrine de Bartole sur les conflits de lois et son influence en Belgique” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il VI Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962, 373–392.Google Scholar
Oppetit, B. “Le droit international privé, droit savant.” Recueil des cours 234 (1992), 331–434.Google Scholar
Ormrod, D. The Rise of Commercial Empires: England and the Netherlands in the Age of Mercantilism, 1650–1770. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
Ourliac, P. and Gazzaniga, J.-L. Histoire du droit privé français de l’an mil au Code civil. Paris: A. Michel, 1985.Google Scholar
Pakter, W. “Les origines canoniques de la règle forum regit actum dans le droit international privé.” Recueil des mémoires et travaux publié par la Société d’histoire et des institutions des anciens pays de droit écrit 11 (1980), 1–22.Google Scholar
Pamboukis, C. L’acte public étranger en droit international privé. Paris: LGDJ, 1993.Google Scholar
Pamboukis, C. “Droit international privé holistique: droit uniforme et droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 330 (2007), 9–474.Google Scholar
Pamboukis, C. Idiōtiko Diethnes Dikaio. Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki, 2020.Google Scholar
Paras, E. L. Philippine Conflict of Laws. 7th ed. Manila: Rex Book Store, 1990.Google Scholar
Paul, J. R. “The Isolation of Private International Law.” Wisconsin International Law Journal 7 (1988), 149–178.Google Scholar
Paul, J. R. “Comity in International Law.” Harvard International Law Journal 32 (1991), 1–79.Google Scholar
Paul, J. R. “The Transformation of International Comity.” Law & Contemporary Problems 71 (2008), 19–38.Google Scholar
Pennington, K. The Prince and the Law, 1200–1600. University of California Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Philimore, R. Commentaries upon International Law. Berkeley: William Benning & Son, 1861.Google Scholar
Piccone, P. “Les méthodes de coordination entre ordres juridiques en droit international privé: cours général de droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 276 (1999), 9–296.Google Scholar
Pillet, A. Principes de droit international privé. Paris, 1903.Google Scholar
Pillet, A. Droit international privé: Résumé du cours, 1904–1905. Paris: Pedone, 1905.Google Scholar
Pillet, A. “L’oeuvre de M. Lainé.” Revue de droit international privé 5 (1909), 1–11.Google Scholar
Pollock, F. and Maitland, F. W. The History of English Law before the Time of Edward I. 2nd ed Reissue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968.Google Scholar
Pontier, J. A. Conflictenrecht: grondslagen, methoden, beginselen en belangen. Nijmegen: Ars Aequi Libri, 1997.Google Scholar
Popkin, R. H. (ed.). The Columbia History of Western Philosophy New York: Columbia University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Popper, K. The Poverty of Historicism. New York: Basic Books, 1957.Google Scholar
Posch, W. Bürgerliches Recht VII: Internationales Privatrecht. 3rd ed. Vienna: Springer, 2002.Google Scholar
Prak, M. The Dutch Republic in the Seventeenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.Google Scholar
Prosser, W. “Interstate Publication.” Michigan Law Review 51 (1953), 959–1000.Google Scholar
Putnam, T. Courts without Borders: Law, Politics and US Extraterritoriality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Quadri, R. Lezioni di Diritto internazionale privato. 5th ed. Naples: Liguori, 1961.Google Scholar
Quadri, R. “Quelques considérations sur la contribution du Professeur Wengler au progrès du droit international privé” in Quadri, R. (ed.), Multitudo Legum Ius Unum: Festschrift Für Wilhelm Wengler. Berlin: Inter Recht, 1973.Google Scholar
Quaglioni, D. “‘Regnativa prudentia’. Diritto e teologia nel ‘Tractatus testimoniorum’ bartoliano” in Quaglioni, D. (ed.), Théologie Et Droit Dans La Science Politique De L’État Moderne. Actes De La Table Ronde De Rome (12–14 Novembre 1987), 1991, 155–170.Google Scholar
Raape, L. Internationales Privatrecht. 5th ed. Berlin: Valen, 1961.Google Scholar
Raape, L. and Sturm, F. Internationales Privatrecht. Munich: Valen, 1977.Google Scholar
Raath, A. W. G. “Aspects of Ulrich Huber’s Theory of Universal Public Law and Post-Constitutional Contracting.” Tydskrif vir Hedendaagse Romeins-Hollandse Reg 75 (2012), 206–222.Google Scholar
Rabel, E. The Conflict of Laws: A Comparative Study. 4 vols. Ann Arbor/Chicago: University of Michigan Press/Callaghan & Co., 1945.Google Scholar
Raeburn, W. “Dispensing with the Personal Law.” International & Comparative Law Quarterly 12 (1963), 125–125.Google Scholar
Ranouil, V. L’autonomie de la volonté: naissance et évolution d’un concept. Paris: PUF, 1980.Google Scholar
Reese, W. M. “Choice of Law: Rules or Approach.” Cornell Law Review 57 (1972), 315–334.Google Scholar
Reese, W. M., Rosenberg, M., and Hay, P. Cases and Materials on the Conflict of Laws. 9th ed. Westbury, NY: Foundation Press, 1990.Google Scholar
Rehbinder, M. Die Begründung der Rechtssoziologie durch Eugen Ehrlich. 2nd ed. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1986.Google Scholar
Reimann, M. Conflict of Laws in Western Europe: A Guide through the Jungle. Irvington, NY: Transnational Publishers, 1995.Google Scholar
Renault, L. Introduction au droit international. Paris: Larose, 1879.Google Scholar
Richard, H. “La place du président Bouhier dans l’histoire du droit international privé.” Mémoires de la Société pour l’histoire du droit et des institutions des anciens pays bourguignons, comtois et romands 32 (1973), 87–172.Google Scholar
Rigaud, L. “Contribution des canonistes aux plus anciens doctrines du droit international privé et influence de celui-ci sur le ‘Codex juris canonici’” in Rigaud, L. (ed.), Actes du Congrès de Droit Canonique: Livre du Cinquantainnaire de la Faculté de Droit Canonique (Paris, 22–26 Avril 1947). Paris: Letouzey & Ané, 1950, 376–386.Google Scholar
Rigaux, F. “Rapport de synthèse: Pour une relecture de François Laurent en 1987” in Erauw, J. (ed.), Liber Memorialis François Laurent. Brussels: E. Story–Scientia, 1989, 663–668.Google Scholar
Robertson, A. H. Characterization in the Conflict of Laws. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1940.Google Scholar
Robinson, O. F. Ancient Rome: City Planning and Administration. London: Routledge, 1992.Google Scholar
Robinson, O. F., Fergus, T. D., and Gordon, W. M. European Legal History. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Rolin-Jaequemyns, G. “De la nécessité d’organiser une institution scientifique permanente pour favoriser l’étude et les progress du droit international.” Revue de droit international et de législation comparée 5 (1873), 463–491.Google Scholar
Romano, G. P. “La bilatéralité éclipsée par l’autorité : développements récents en matière d’état des personnes.” Revue critique de droit international privé (2006), 457–519.Google Scholar
Romano, G. P. “Le droit international privé à l’épreuve de la théorie kantienne de la justice.” Clunet 139 (2012), 61–94.Google Scholar
Romano, G. P. L’unilateralismo nel diritto internazionale privato moderno. Geneva: Schulthess, 2014.Google Scholar
Romano, G. P. Le dilemme du renvoi en droit international privé : la thèse, l’antithèse et la recherche d’une synthèse. Geneva: Schulthess, 2014.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, J. The Follies of Globalization Theory. London: Verso, 2000.Google Scholar
Roumy, F. “L’ignorance du droit dans la doctrine civiliste des XIIe-XIIIe siècles.” Cahiers de recherches médiévales et humanistes 7 (2007), 1–20.Google Scholar
Rühl, G. “Party Autonomy in the Private International Law of Contracts” in Gottschalk, E. et al. (eds.), Conflict of Laws in a Globalized World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007, 153–183.Google Scholar
Ryan, M. “Territory in the Political Thought of the Medieval Lawyers.”Google Scholar
Ryan, M. “Bartolus of Sassoferrato and Free Cities (the Alexander Prize Lecture, read 23 April 1999).” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (6th series) 10 (2000), 65–89.Google Scholar
Ryan, M. “Political Thought” in Johnston, D. (ed.), Cambridge Companion to Roman Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015, 423–451.Google Scholar
Sack, A. “Conflicts of Laws in the History of the English Law” in Reppy, A. (ed.), Law: A Century of Progress, 1835–1935 (Contributions in Celebration of the Founding of the School of Law of New York University). New York: New York University Press, 1937, 342–454.Google Scholar
Salvi, S. T. “A Difficult Legacy. Initial Comments on the Inheritance Rights of Filii Clericorum in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Period” in di Renzo Villata, M. G. (ed.), Succession Law, Practice and Society in Europe across the Centuries. Cham: Springer, 2018, 381–419.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Moreno Ellart, C. “The Late Roman Law of Inheritance: The Testament of Five or Seven Witnesses” in Caseau, B. and Huebner, S. (eds.), Inheritance, Law and Religions in the Ancient and Mediaeval Worlds. Paris: ACHCByz, 2014.Google Scholar
Savigny, F. C. V. “Über den Zweck dieser Zeitschrift.” Zeitschrift für geschichtliche Rechtswissenschaft 1 (1815), 1–17.Google Scholar
Savigny, F. C. V. System des heutigen römisches Rechts. 8 vols. Berlin: Veit, 1840.Google Scholar
Savigny, F. C. V. Geschichte des Römischen Rechts im Mittelalter. 2nd ed. Heidelberg: J. C. B. Mohr, 1850.Google Scholar
Savigny, F. C. V. System of the Modern Roman Law. Trans. Holloway, W.. Madras: J. Higginbontham, 1867.Google Scholar
Savigny, F. C. V. Private International Law and the Retrospective Operation of Statutes: A Treatise on the Conflict of Laws, and the Limits of Their Operation in Respect of Time and Place. 2nd ed. Trans. Guthrie, W.. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1880.Google Scholar
Sbriccoli, M. L’ interpretazione dello statuto: Contributo allo studio della funzione dei giuristi nell’età comunale. Milan: Giuffrè, 1969.Google Scholar
Scelle, G. Manuel de droit international public. Paris: Domat-Monchretien, 1948.Google Scholar
Schiller, R. Narrative Economics: How Stories Go Viral and Drive Major Economic Events. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2019.Google Scholar
Schlag, P. “Rules and Standards.” UCLA Law Review 33 (1985), 379–430.Google Scholar
Schnell, J. “Über die Zuständingkeit zum Erlass von gesetzlichen Vorschriften über die räumliche Herrschaft der Rechtnormen.” Niemeyers Zeitschrift 5 (1895), 337–343.Google Scholar
Schöffer, I. “The Batavian Myth during the Sixteenth and Seventeeth Century” in Bromley, J. S. and Kossmann, E. H. (eds.), Britain and the Netherlands V: Some Political Mythologies. The Hague: Springer, 1975, 78–101.Google Scholar
Schwander, I. Einführung in das international Privatrecht. 3rd ed. St. Gallen/Lachen: Dike, 2000.Google Scholar
Schwind, F. “L’influsso di Bartolo sulla evoluzione del diritto internationale privatto” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il VI Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962, 503–512.Google Scholar
Scoles, E. et al. Conflict of Laws. 3rd ed. St. Paul, MN: West, 2000.Google Scholar
Sheedy, A. T. Bartolus on Social Conditions in the Fourteenth Century. New York: Columbia University Press, 1942.Google Scholar
Shreve, G. A Conflict of Laws Anthology. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson, 1997.Google Scholar
Siehr, K. “The Hague Conference on Private International Law and Germany.” Netherlands International Law Review 40 (1993), 129–142.Google Scholar
Siehr, K. “Revolution and Evolution in Conflicts Law.” Louisiana Law Review 60 (2000), 1353–1360.Google Scholar
Siehr, K. Das Internationale Privatrecht der Schweiz. Zurich: Schulthess, 2002.Google Scholar
Simó Santonja, V.-L. Aportación al estudio de los estatutarios españoles. Valencia: Diputación Provincial de Valencia, 1959.Google Scholar
Simon-Depitre, M. Droit international privé. Paris: Librairie Armand Colin, 1964.Google Scholar
Singer, J. W. “Real Conflicts.” Boston University Law Review 69 (1989), 1–129.Google Scholar
Singer, J. W. “A Pragmatic Guide to Conflicts.” Boston University Law Review 70 (1990), 731–819.Google Scholar
Sperdutti, G. “Théorie du droit international privé.” Recueil des cours 122 (1967), 173–336.Google Scholar
Spiro, E. The General Principles of the Conflict of Laws. Cape Town: Juta, 1982.Google Scholar
Stein, P. “Bartolus, the Conflict of Laws and the Roman Law” in Stein, P. (ed.), Multum Non Multa : Festschrift Für Kurt Lipstein Aus Anlass Seines 70. Geburtstages. Heidelberg: C. F. Müller, 1980, 251–258.Google Scholar
Stein, P. Legal Evolution: The Story of an Idea. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Stille, A. L. G. A. “Asser et Rolin-Jaequemyns. Compte-rendu de quelques contacts personnels entre deux contemporains de Laurent” in Erauw, J. (ed.), Liber Memorialis François Laurent. Brussels: E. Story–Scientia, 1989, 1089–1097.Google Scholar
Stone, P. “The Concept of Habitual Residence in Private International Law.” Anglo-American Law Review 29 (2000), 342–367.Google Scholar
Storti, C. “Early ‘Italian’ Scholars of Ius Gentium” in Bartolini, G. (ed.), A History of International Law in Italy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020, 19–47.Google Scholar
Story, J. Commentaries on the Conflict of Laws, Foreign and Domestic, in regard to Contracts, Rights, and Remedies, and especially in regard to Marriages, DIvorces, Wills, Successionsm and Judgments. Boston: Hillard, Gray & Co., 1834.Google Scholar
Strikwerda, L. “Fries Recht in America. Over Ulrik Huber, Joseph Story en internationale contracten.” Groningen opmerkingen en mededelingen 4 (1987), 55–78.Google Scholar
Sturm, F. “Comment l’Antiquité réglait-elle ses conflits de lois?” Clunet 106 (1979), 259–273.Google Scholar
Surville, F. “La théorie des statuts d’après Bartole et Dumoulin.” Clunet 48 (1921), 1–15.Google Scholar
Surville, F. and Arthuys, F. Cours élémentaire de droit international privé conforme au programme des facultés de droit. Paris: Arthur Rousseau, 1895.Google Scholar
Swain, W. The Law of Contract 1670–1870. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.Google Scholar
Symeonides, S. C. “Territoriality and Personality in Tort Conflicts” in Einhorn, T. and Siehr, K. (eds.), Intercontinental Cooperation through Private International Law: Essays in Memory of Peter E. Nygh. The Hague: TMC Asser, 2004, 401–433.Google Scholar
Symeonides, S. C. The American Choice-of-Law Revolution: Past, Present and Future. Leiden: Brill, 2006.Google Scholar
Symeonides, S. C. American Private International Law. Netherlands: Kluwer Law International, 2008.Google Scholar
Symeonides, S. C. “The American Revolution and the European Evolution in Choice of Law: Reciprocal Lessons.” Tulane Law Review 82 (2008), 1741–1799.Google Scholar
Symeonides, S. C. “The First Conflicts Restatement through the Eyes of Old: As Bad as Its Reputation?” Southern Illinois University Law Journal 32 (2008), 39–82.Google Scholar
Symeonides, S. C. “Private International Law: Idealism, Pragmatism, Eclecticism.” Recueil des cours 384 (2017), 9–385.Google Scholar
Symeonides, S. C., Perdue, W., and von Mehren, A. T. Conflict of Laws: American, Comparative, International. St Paul, MN: West, 1998.Google Scholar
Szászy, I. Private International Law in the European People’s Democracies. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó, 1964.Google Scholar
ten Wolde, M. “Huber, Ulrik” in Basedow, J., Rühl, G., and Ferrari, F. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Private International Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2017, 876–880.Google Scholar
Teubner, G. “De Collisione Discursuum: Communicative Rationalities in Law, Morality and Politics.” Cardozo Law Review 17 (1996), 901–916.Google Scholar
Teubner, G. “Altera Pars Audiatur: Law in the Collision of Discourses” in Rawlins, R. (ed.), Law, Society and Economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997, 149–176.Google Scholar
Thorne, S. E. “Sovereignty and the Conflict of Laws” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il VI Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962, 673–689.Google Scholar
Timbal, P.-C. “La contribution des auteurs et de la pratique coutumière au droit international privé du moyen âge.” Revue critique de droit international privé 44 (1955), 17–32.Google Scholar
Trias y Giro, J. D. D. and Trias de Bes, J. M. Estudios de derecho internacional privado. Barcelona: Sociedad General de Publicationes, 1921.Google Scholar
Trigger, B. A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Tsouca, C. “Les règles étrangères d’application immédiate et leur impact sur la nature méthodologique du droit international privé.” Koinodikaion 3 (1997), 227–269.Google Scholar
Tudertina, C. (ed.). Bartolo da Sassoferrato nel VII Centenario della Nascita: Diritto, Politica, Società. Spoleto: Fondazione Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, 2014.Google Scholar
Tzounakas, S. “Cato’s laudatio Pompei in Lucan’s De Bello Civili” in Tzounakas, S. (ed.), Praises of Roman Leaders in Latin Literature. Nicosia: Stamoulis, 2014, 205–221.Google Scholar
Vacari, P. “Utrum jurisdictio cohaereat territorio” in Perugia, U. D. (ed.), Bartolo Da Sassoferrato: Studi E Documenti Per Il VI Centenario. Milan: Giuffrè, 1962, 735–753.Google Scholar
Valéry, J. Manuel de droit international privé. Paris: Fontemoing, 1914.Google Scholar
van Hecke, G. “The Catholic Origins and Calvinist Orientation of Dutch Reformed Church Law” in van Hecke, G. (ed.), Mélanges En L’Honneur De Jean Dabin. Brussels: Bruylant–Sirey, 1963, 939–954.Google Scholar
van Hove, A. “La territorialité et la personnalité des lois en droit canonique depuis Gratien (vers 1140) jusqu’à Jean Andre (1348).” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 3 (1922), 277–322.Google Scholar
van Loon, J. H. A. “Quelques réflexions sur l’unification progressive du droit international privé dans le cadre de la Conférence de la Haye” in Erauw, J. (ed.), Liber Memorialis François Laurent. Brussels: E. Story–Scientia, 1989.Google Scholar
Vaquette, T. Cours résumé du droit international privé. 1884.Google Scholar
Vareilles-Sommières, G. D. La synthèse du droit international privé. Paris: F. Pichon, 1897.Google Scholar
Vareilles-Sommières, G. D. “Un Sedan juridique: Etude sur le droit des conflits successorales.” Revue de Lille 13 (1902), 832–852.Google Scholar
Veen, T. J. Recht en nut: studiën over en naar aanleiding van Ulrik Huber (1636–1694). Zwolle: Tjeenk Willink, 1976.Google Scholar
Volken, P. “How Common Are the General Principles of Private International Law? America and Europe Compared.” Yearbook of Private International Law 1 (1999), 85–102.Google Scholar
von Mehren, A. T. “Une esquisse de l’évolution du droit international privé aux Etats-Unis.” Clunet 100 (1973), 116–157.Google Scholar
von Mehren, A. T. “Adjudicatory Jurisdiction: General Theories Compared and Evaluated.” Boston University Law Review 63 (1983), 279–340.Google Scholar
Vrellis, S. Idiōtiko Diethnes Dikaio. 3rd ed. Athens: Nomiki Bibliothiki, 2001.Google Scholar
Wächter, C. G. V. “Über die Collision der Privatrechtsgesetze verschiedener Staaten.” Archiv für die Civilistiche Praxis 24 (1841), 230–311, 25 (1842), 1–60, 161–200, 361–419.Google Scholar
Waelkens, L. La théorie de la coutume chez Jacques de Révigny: Edition et analyse de sa répétition sur la loi De quibus (D. 1,3,32). Leiden: E. J. Brill/Leiden University Press, 1984.Google Scholar
Wallerstein, I. The Modern World System I: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011.Google Scholar
Wardle, L. D., Rogers, W. S., and Hogue, L. L. Interstate and International Conflict of Laws: Cases and Materials. Provo, UT: 1999.Google Scholar
Warlomont, R. François Laurent, juriste, homme d’action et publiciste. Brussels, 1948.Google Scholar
Watson, A. Joseph Story and the Comity of Errors. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Watts, J. C. The Making of Polities: Europe 1300–1500. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Weber, H. Die Theorie der Qualifikation: Franz Kahn, Etienne Bartin und Entwicklung ihrer Lehre bis zur universalen Annerkerung der Qualifikation als allgemeines Problem des Internationales Privatrechts (1890–1945). Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986.Google Scholar
Wegner, A. Geschichte des Völkerrechts. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1936.Google Scholar
Weinstein, J. “The Dutch Influence on the Conception of Judicial Jurisdiction in 19th Century America.” American Journal of Comparative Law 38 (1990), 73–101.Google Scholar
Weinstein, J. “The Early American Origins of Territoriality in Judicial Jurisdiction.” St Louis University Law Journal 37 (1992), 1–61.Google Scholar
Weintraub, R. International Litigation and Arbitration. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 2001.Google Scholar
Wessels, J. W. History of the Roman-Dutch Law. Grahamstown: African Book Co., 1908.Google Scholar
Westlake, J. A Treatise on Private International Law, on the Conflict of Laws, with Principal Reference to Its Practice in the English and Cognate Systems of Jurisprudence. London, 1858.Google Scholar
Westlake, J. A Treatise on Private International Law with Principal Reference to Its Practice in England. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1890.Google Scholar
Whincop, M. J. and Keyes, M. Policy and Pragmatism in the Conflict of Laws. London: Routledge, 2001.Google Scholar
White, G. E. Tort Law in America: An Intellectual History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
Whitman, J. “Commercial Law and the American Volk: A Note on Llewellyn’s German Sources for the Uniform Commercial Code.” Yale Law Journal 97 (1987), 156–175.Google Scholar
Whitman, J. The Legacy of Roman Law in the German Romantic Era: Historical Vision and Legal Change. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.Google Scholar
Whitman, J. “A Note on the Medieval Division of the Digest.” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 59 (1991), 269–284.Google Scholar
Whitman, J. Q. “The Moral Menace of Roman Law and the Making of Commerce: Some Dutch Evidence.” Yale Law Journal 105 (1996), 1841–1889.Google Scholar
Wieacker, F. A History of Private Law in Europe with Particular Reference to Germany. Trans. Tony, W.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
Wiecek, W. M. The Lost World of Classical Legal Thought: Law and Ideology in America, 1886–1937. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Wickham, C. Medieval Europe. New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Witte, E. “The Battle for Monasteries, Cemeteries and Schools: Belgium” in Clark, C. and Kaiser, W. (eds.), Culture Wars: Secular-Catholic Conflict in Nineteenth-Century Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, 102–128.Google Scholar
Witte, J. “The Catholic Origins and Calvinist Orientation of Dutch Reformed Church Law.” Calvin Theological Journal 28 (1993), 328–351.Google Scholar
Witte, J. From Sacrament to Contract: Marriage, Religion and Law in the Western Tradition. Lousville, KY: Westminister John Knox, 1999.Google Scholar
Witte, J. Law and Protestantism: The Legal Teachings of the Lutheran Reformation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Wittman, T. Das Goldene Zeitalter der Niederlande. Leipzig: Koehler & Amelang, 1975.Google Scholar
Wolff, M. Private International Law. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1950.Google Scholar
Wood, D. P. “Extraterritorial Enforcement of Regulatory Laws.” Recueil des cours 401 (2019), 9–126.Google Scholar
Woolf, C. N. S. Bartolus of Sassoferrato: His Position in the History of Medieval Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1913.Google Scholar
Yntema, H. “‘Autonomy’ in Choice of Law.” American Journal of Comparative Law 1 (1952), 341–358.Google Scholar
Yntema, H. “The Historic Bases of Private International Law.” American Journal of Comparative Law 2 (1953), 297–317.Google Scholar
Yntema, H. “Basic Issues in Conflicts Law.” American Journal of Comparative Law 12 (1963), 474–482.Google Scholar
Yntema, H. “The Comity Doctrine.” Michigan Law Review 65 (1966), 9–32.Google Scholar
Ziegler, K.-H. Völkerrechtsgeschichte. 2nd ed. Munich: C. H. Beck, 2007.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, R. “Savigny’s Legacy: Legal History, Comparative Law, and the Emergence of a European Legal Science.” Law Quarterly Review 112 (1996), 576–605.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, R. The Law of Obligations: Roman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, R. “‘In der Schule von Ludwig Mitteis’: Ernst Rabels rechtshistorische Ursprünge’.” Rabels Zeitschrift 65 (2001), 1–38.Google Scholar
Zimmermann, R. “Was Heimat hieß, nun heißt es Hölle’: The emigration of lawyers from Hitler’s Germany: political background, legal framework , and cultural context,” in Beatson, J. and Zimmermann, R. (eds.), Jurists Uprooted: German-speaking Émigré Lawyers in Twentieth-century Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, 1–71.Google Scholar
Zitelmann, E. “Der Name ‘internationales Privatrecht’.” Niemeyers Zeitschrift 27 (1918), 177–196.Google Scholar
Zuber, C. K. “Plague and Family Life” in Jones, M. (ed.), New Cambridge Medieval History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008, 124–154.Google Scholar
Zweigert, K. “Die Dritte Schule Im Internationalen Privatrecht: Zur Neuren Wissenschaftsgeschichte Des Kollisionsrechts” in Ipsen, H.-P. (ed.), Festschrift Für Leo Raape Zu Seinem Siebzigsten Geburtstag. Hamburg: 1948, 35–52.Google Scholar
Zweigert, K. “Some Reflections on the Sociological Dimensions of Private International Law or What Is Justice in Conflict of Laws?” University of Colorado Law Review 44 (1973), 283–300.Google Scholar
Zweigert, K. and Kötz, H. An Introduction to Comparative Law. Trans. Weir, T.. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Ζwierlein, C. “Resisting the Thomist Temptation: A Good Political Order According to Calvin” in Maag, K. and Hujgen, A. (eds.), Calvinus Frater in Domino: Papers of the Twelfth International Congress on Calvin Research. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2020, 125–148.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Bibliography
  • Nikitas E. Hatzimihail, University of Cyprus
  • Book: Preclassical Conflict of Laws
  • Online publication: 08 July 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139016674.022
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Bibliography
  • Nikitas E. Hatzimihail, University of Cyprus
  • Book: Preclassical Conflict of Laws
  • Online publication: 08 July 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139016674.022
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Bibliography
  • Nikitas E. Hatzimihail, University of Cyprus
  • Book: Preclassical Conflict of Laws
  • Online publication: 08 July 2021
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139016674.022
Available formats
×