摘要： 独立的法律史学,既不能仅作为历史解释而沦为法释义学的附庸,也不应仅着眼于一般史学的因果描述而丧失规范性,更不能陷入历史哲学的空想。避免滑入这些窠臼的出路,是以法制度史的方法为切入点,并通过一般史学的方法进入制度规范的历史语境之中,分析其中的因果关系,再结合思辨和想象,进而生产一般法理论。从法律史到法理论的飞跃,这一过程会面临来自自然主义的批判,即经验事实与价值规范之间的认识论鸿沟。并且,法律史生产的法理论的规范性是有限不自足的。但是,法律史学仍可以从具体或抽象的法律问题出发,通过一般史学和哲学思辨的加持,来提炼、推导中观乃至宏观的一般法学说或理论。借助比较法律史的视野和法律史与法理论之间的交流对话,普遍法律史的空想和法制度史的“现代主义”有望被克服,法律史的法理论生产由此可以得到最大程度的检视、修正和批判。

关键词: 法律史学, 一般法理论, 法制度史, 罗马法律史, 耶林

Abstract: Independent legal historiography should neither be reduced to a subsidiary of legal doctrine by serving merely as a historical explanation, nor be confined to causal descriptions typical of general historiography at the expense of its normative dimension, nor should it lapse into the abstractions of historical philosophy.The way to avoid these pitfalls lies in adopting the historical approach of legal doctrines and employing methods of general historiography to situate institutions and norms within their historical contexts and to analyze their causal relations, and then, through reflection and imagination, producing general legal theories.The leap from legal history to legal theory inevitably encounters the critique of naturalism—that is, the epistemological gap between empirical facts and normative values.Moreover, the general normativity produced by legal theory grounded in legal history is necessarily limited and incomplete.Nevertheless, legal historiography can still begin from specific or abstract legal problems and, with the aid of general historical methods and philosophical reflection, distill and derive meso- or macro-level general doctrines or ideas of law.Through the comparative perspective of legal history and the dialogical interaction between legal historiography and legal theory, the speculation of universal legal history and the “modernism” of the history of legal doctrine can be overcome.In this way, the legal-theoretical production of legal history can be subjected to the most thorough examination, revision, and critique.

Key words: Legal Historiography, General Legal Theory, History of Legal Doctrine, Roman Legal History, Jhering