The Signoria's Delegazioni: (notice n° 451547)
[ vue normale ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 02773cam a2200157 4500500 |
| 005 - DATE AND TIME OF LATEST TRANSACTION | |
| control field | 20250121025436.0 |
| 041 ## - LANGUAGE CODE | |
| Language code of text/sound track or separate title | fre |
| 042 ## - AUTHENTICATION CODE | |
| Authentication code | dc |
| 100 10 - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Sambo, Alessandra |
| Relator term | author |
| 245 00 - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | The Signoria's Delegazioni: |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. | |
| Date of publication, distribution, etc. | 2016.<br/> |
| 500 ## - GENERAL NOTE | |
| General note | 46 |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc. | In the early modern period, the Venetian state—consisting of the city (known as La Dominante), the western regions of the Terraferma, and the coastal territories in the Mediterranean—was a complex entity, in which different cultures and juridical systems coexisted. This article analyzes a frequently used type of petition, designed to adjourn a trial and delegate the proceedings to another court in Venice itself or outside of the city. Reading the procedures and guiding principles of this delegation or delegazione according to the interpretative categories of the premodern “jurisdictional state” opens up new interpretations of the Venetian legal system, which subsequently appears more consistent with the law of other European countries. A subject who feared that the outcome of a trial would be compromised by differences in position or resources between the parties had the right to petition the Signoria to have it delegated to another court. The procedure for granting this favor or grace—which should be considered as a political act—was based on a cross-examination of both parties resulting in a judgment. Although this trial was subject to the same guarantees as ordinary civil or criminal procedures, the “mixed” nature of the delegazione meant that its resolution did not simply depend on the application of strict legal standards. Instead, the judgment was a discretionary act on the part of the patrician judges, based on a political reading of the case and its context. Rather than seeking to present the legal truth, the petitions thus expressed political accounts of the facts in order to be persuasive. Moreover, the procedure also fostered negotiations between the parties, who enjoyed a great deal of autonomy in managing the conflict. In fact, sometimes the goal of a petition for delegazione was not to obtain a court decision but rather to create better conditions for an extrajudicial, nonviolent resolution of the dispute. This negotiatory aspect contributed to the procedure's popularity. In return, by bringing local disputes to the city of Venice, the petitioners laid the foundations for a cross-cultural legal “contamination,” the seed of a common vocabulary shared by the different legal subsystems that made up the Venetian State. |
| 786 0# - DATA SOURCE ENTRY | |
| Note | Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales | 70th Year | 4 | 2016-02-16 | p. 819-848 | 2268-3763 |
| 856 41 - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS | |
| Uniform Resource Identifier | <a href="https://shs.cairn.info/journal-annales-2015-4-page-819?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080">https://shs.cairn.info/journal-annales-2015-4-page-819?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080</a> |
Pas d'exemplaire disponible.
Réseaux sociaux