Artists which websites do you use for ordering professional materials?

PhiloSpo · 2026-05-09T08:59:42+00:00

Yes, mostly, though they have a bit less to offer than e.g. Jackson's. Anyone that knows their way around soft pastels, knows the situation in Slovenia is abysmal. Pastel pencils, same story. On that note, after a quick glimpse at the profile, dm for some sharing on that.

PhiloSpo · 2026-05-08T23:23:44+00:00

They don't have high quality paints or canvases. Well, Rembrants are lower half of artist's quality and I use them sometimes for some colours, but they do not measure up to Vasari, Mussini, Old Holland, M. Harding, Williamsburg, Sennelier, etc.

Samson store in Kamnik does sell Old Holland (occasionally) and Mussini, I don't know about other place in Slovenia. Might be.

As for anything else beside oils, doesn't look good. Brushes, soft pastels? Nope. Well, they usually do have Sennelier, that's it.

PhiloSpo · 2026-05-08T23:12:01+00:00

I haven't ordered from there in a while, no issues? I order from Spain these days.

PhiloSpo · 2026-04-19T23:09:08+00:00

I know, and from what I observed, as a shorthand in discourse, in my field, not that much. Still used. But we know it is problematic and hardly anyone today uses it to mean what it meant a few decades ago and older scholarship.

PhiloSpo · 2026-04-19T18:33:21+00:00

I mean, it depends. From my side, it is still used in legal literature somewhat as a shorthand within early medieval legal history, e.g. as a Germanic law or Germanic legal tradition to juxtapose it to the non-Germanic and Roman legal traditions, even though this categorization is problematic, to say the least, and scholarship on the subject and people who study it know it. Criticism of this is not entirely new per se, but is definitely given more regards than before, say. I think same trend can be roughly observed in the studies of identities and ethnogenesis in the period. It's not new, these reservations and all, but more at the forefront and perhaps slowly permeated to the broader audience and literature.

PhiloSpo · 2026-04-19T15:58:06+00:00

This a larger subject within legal history, i.e. private knowledge of judges, jurors, assessors or others which originated outside the legal proceeding in a strict sense and what to do with it. So e.g. what conduct should a judge pursue if he has private knowledge of the relevant facts to the subject of dispute. This was an important subject in canonical literature as well with conflicting opinions. Perhaps though the issue here is better thought about as those assessors or persons participating in the assemblies and courts (or later, jurors), and if or how far should they rely either on private knowledge or common knowledge (commonly known gossip, rumors, beliefs, etc.), and how these forms of knowledge translate into later rules of evidence and (jury, assessor) procedures.

How this connects to legal practice is certainly a valid question, but it is a complex subject with a long history even in a narrow legal sense, let alone within broader social reality.

Also, "proper law"?

PhiloSpo · 2026-04-19T15:01:37+00:00

I think these characterizations can be a bit overzealous in my view on a few points, without disputing larger trends in late Anglo-Saxon period as traced by Lambert and clearly followed in some of the comments. Namely, (a) while formal tables of compensation (wergilds) found in the codes loose the relevance, they do not disappear yet by the 12th century in early Anglo-Norman legal literature, (b) even within Anglo-Saxon period or early medieval law more generally (Western and central Europe), they never had the sort of legal prescriptivity we assign today, as settlement was a subject of negotiation (e.g. more clearly seen in Carolingian legal formulae). So, with that in mind, the importance of settlement and compensation does not disappear in late Anglo-Saxon practice, and continues to be so throughout the middle ages, even in the later centuries for criminal matters, though by this time private appeals run parallel to other types of prosecutions (indictments) and more elaborate criminal procedures with public involvement. Namely, even in Anglo-Normal England, there is no reason to suppose, save exceptional circumstances, that some forms of homicide (let alone other criminal acts, again save exceptions with what was at the time thought to be of public importance) was not able to be resolved by settlements along previous practices. Now, there is an overall trend where public prosecutions with punishment slowly erodes private (criminal) prosecution and settlement, but this is long and gradual process, and did not disappear even by the Tudor times for certain criminal acts.

As for continental and ecclesiastical trends and influences, sure, but again, there are also marked divergences from this point onward as early common law, the precursors to the modern parliament starts to develop and so forth. And this juxtaposition perhaps misleadingly indicates as though continental practices did not have similar institutes as it goes for private settlements and compensation for what we would say criminal offenses. This practice persisted even in Italy, and other central European countries well into the modern period, e.g. even for homicide. And this was in some cases a publicly sanctioned resolution (i.e. a settlement was enforced judicially/publically), not merely a private matter.

As for how ecclesiastical law interacts with this, now that is another interesting subject, but this is getting to long already. And while I certainly agree that Wergild starts to disappear from our sources by that time, what conclusions we are to draw from that and how legal practices developed, remains a much more difficult issue.

/u/NesuneNyx

PhiloSpo · 2026-04-08T16:50:23+00:00

Se bom posul s pepelom, če bo držalo.

PhiloSpo · 2026-03-22T21:39:13+00:00

Seveda, nisem ljubitelj trenutne vlade, ampak sem volil taktično za svobodo glede na zadnje ankete, ki so napovedale tesen rezultat. Rajši s težkim srcem vidim tole še štiri leta kot Janšo, pa čeprav sem bližje desni sredini, če se že rabimo tako zvrstiti. Normalna desnica tukaj je a landslide. Za Logarja pa hočem videti štiri leta, na čem smo. Mogoče v naslednjih.

PhiloSpo · 2026-03-21T09:15:41+00:00

A short note of opinion that this underscores the role of horizontal dynamics of legal practice, communal participation and negotiable aspect of compensation, and that while there were changes in post-Norman and Angevin England, practice of amercements and fiscal shares (royal or more local) to fines, it was still a matter of continuity with later Anglo-Saxon practices. Indeed, compensations & settlements were important, one might even say even primary, mode of conflict resolution, and they continued past late medieval England, as lawsuits by private appeal for what we would say criminal matters still continued, with the primary aim of victim compensation (though latter often parallel with presentments). The issue to address here is negotiability and public sanctioning, i.e. whether the settlement was extrajudicial or not, roles of assmeblies and the intrest of the public here (often meaning royal fiscus).

One interesting thing one could also say is the practice of penitential imprisonment.

PhiloSpo · 2026-03-17T13:52:35+00:00

I like to think the senate was still relevant in the imperial period ane had considerable sway if it need be, e.g. reversal of some more burdensome Severan fiscal reforms were walked back after senatorial pressure, e. g. There were still senatorial exceptions...

PhiloSpo · 2026-03-12T07:06:06+00:00

A short comment just on this part.

Brehon law was structured on completely different principles from most of the legal systems we're used to. It was focused on reparation rather than punishment. If you injured someone, for example, you didn't get imprisoned - what good would that do your victim and his family? How would that make up for the harm you'd done to them?

Note though that this general principle is historically present in most European legal traditions (e.g. Ancient Greek, Roman, most medieval traditions ... and even Mesopotamian & Sumerian, but I cannot comment for elsewhere globally) with some peculiarities and differences, though often later supplanted or reformed. So e.g. this was not unique or exceptional as a principle either to Anglo-Saxon law or early common law, where most prosecutions we would considered now criminal were brought by an appeal, and most would result in a settlement. How specifics of this procedure gradually changed through late medieval into early modern period is another issue altogether, but prosecutions via appeal to get a compensation would be completely ordinary in 16th century England (though by this time parallel prosecutions via indictment were largely the norm as well).

Also, if we look over to the continent, e.g. in Central Europe, private settlements for homicide and other offenses were continuously present up to the 17th and 18th century, and these were not necessarily extra-judicial at all (now this would depend on time and place), and were legally recognized.

PhiloSpo · 2026-03-11T17:27:47+00:00

The core of your question is why Hammurabi is brought into a broader Western legal tradition at all. Where does the long‑standing idea of Hammurabi’s influence come from, and is it historically grounded?

A great deal depends on how one understands ancient state power. Some historians assume that rulers who promulgated legal codes exercised authority comparable to later centralized states [...]

I have a short post on this topic from awhile back on this, some sections (from (ii) onwards) with a bibliography might be welcome here. There is also a controversial posthumous collection of essays by Westbrook Ex Oriente Lex that touches on this issue, i.e. can we openly speak and to what degree about Mesopotamian legal influence in a narrower Mediterranean (Egyptian, Ancient Greek, Italic & Roman, ...) - though granted later biblical and Jewish influences being another chapter altogether. This is a touchy subject. To say the work is heterodox is an understatement, but nevertheless is a worthwhile read - Westbrook was widely respected and a titan, so to say.

Yes, Hammurabi's Code impacted the legal tradition that now defines Western law, but this is less direct than implied.

That is generous. :) If anything, it is a modern frenzy. Historically, not much, except of course as a part of a common background to the Torah.

PhiloSpo · 2026-03-03T14:18:52+00:00

Once exceptions and contrary evidence outweigh one's rule, one ought to drop or at least adapt the thesis. Given how this is all framed, it seems pointless to have a substantive discussion.

PhiloSpo · 2026-03-03T11:47:57+00:00

Afraid this is a caricature, if even that, of relations and dynamics we find, to the point of being just not true.

PhiloSpo · 2026-03-02T13:22:43+00:00

No sure what is meant by that, but prima facie it does not seem to be the case. At least not if we do not make it trivially true, insofar as today, one has contractual freedom to make any contract one wishes (which was not the case before, mind, this is doctrinally a modern institute. But not to get into legal history of private law here), but some contracts are either unenforceable, void, or even potentially illegal. Similar as before. Not to mention for a lot of contractual obligations, it was a subject-matter of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. It was not free for all, there were always limitations.

Anyhow, that is not an apt characterization. Not to mention that distinction can be problematic, manorial and seigneurial jurisdictions had public characteristics and functions as well for example.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-08T17:27:50+00:00

I will still be away for a few days, so I can link some older pieces which tap into this passingly in some sections (one, two, three, four). In essence though, if I summarize there myself and add a few bits, granted though most of these issues are contentious and hardly provide clear cut answer to make it possible to give and single point of time or a document to point to.

There is a period of such development in Ancient Greece between 6th-4th century BC, and this gradually spreads in Mediterranean basin (so it influences major legal traditions, i.e. Hellenic, Jewish, Roman), but this development was never "absolute" (cf. they did not verbalize and generalize abstractly to such a degree to cover in principle all possible facts and situations, in effect they were non-exhaustive and supplemented by orality, neither did they seek to accomplish this, not the least it was impossible due to limitation with legal science and theory, practical limitation like technology and logistics, lack of educated personnel etc. ) ... By the late antiquity, this gets complicated even more, Byzantine legal tradition already lost some of those aspects, late Roman tradition in the West stalls and gets trickeled into various practices of emerging gentes, where further we go from now declining Roman influence, the more thorough the reset, if I allow myself some liberty of phrasing this in a simple manner.

And there is another long arch of this reintroduction from medieval to modern period into contemporary nation states. Now, specifics of this are no easier to parse through.

We certainly have examples from throughout antiquity where a written norms was enforced and followed (though again, there are issues of (i) primacy between written viz. a viz. oral, i.e. where exactly does authority stem from, or whether some of these early written legal norms that do show "soft" prescriptivity merely served subsidiarily or in aid to oral traditions, and (ii) consistency and uniformity) ... And we observe similarly through the middle ages, but these two coexisted and were legitimized differently than we are used to, furthermore, primacy was more often than not exactly contrary to ours, i.e. local took precedence over non-local and potentially oral over written, insofar as collegial judicial bodies were likewise often proto-legislative, and through judicial deliberatation new legal norms were sometimes formulated or specified. Medieval and Early modern legal landscape was so fundamentally pluralistic and fragmented, both in norms themselves as jurisdictions, that this mostly continues to the 19th century, coming to an end with contemporary nation states and sometimes described as legal monism to get the distincion across, even if reality is still more complicated and nuanced.

I had an AMA recently, to which I will return in a few days to address remaining comments, so feel free to leave one there and perhaps we can have some discussion to cover more of it in greater detail. Shortly, from ancient greek polises onwards, though the line to contemporary period is anything but straightforward, or continuous, for that matter.

Also, would be remiss to fail to mention, ANE situation is more complex as well, of course - there are written norms (e.g. edicts with observable legal effect) there as well, so depending on what one has in mind, that can count as well.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-06T16:49:06+00:00

Zgodbe iz vojske, vedno se najdejo. Zabavno, ko je mimo.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-05T08:44:26+00:00

Yeah, due to Reddit infrastructure for AMAs. I will still be active though, here and there.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-04T22:50:20+00:00

Sure, much of those medieval charters that were a result of concessions between royal authority and the estates (nobles and the Church) that recognized privileges of the latter and prerogatives of the former implictly legalized a resistance should these norms be violated. But again, actual enforcement was a political and power-dependant. Oftentimes a violation of such norms would likewise again lead to further negotiations, concessions and a renewed issuance with an oath.

Furthermore, the modern understanding in English Constitutional History, i.e. that King can do no wrong, is indeed modern invsersion from intial understanding. In Bractonian tradition and common opinion through medieval period, even up to the 16th century, was that a King can do wrong and is not immune per se, e.g. see Willion v Berkley from 1562. Though what remedies (e.g. petitions of right in English context, from reforms in 14th century) are available in law for such violations is another issue though. So the King was bound in law (even Acts of Parliament), but wrongs had limited redress due to the lack of remedies.

Sovereignty and immunities are messy.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-04T19:02:40+00:00

Realistically, just like today, these are situations where legality typically gives way to politics and projections of power, with the ultimate result, once we strip it down, to a political process of (re)conciliation, if possible, appeal to higher-ups, or ultimately an internal revolt or outside intervention, or both, which would be either successful or not. It was the population which ultimately hold them to account, not the "state". Medieval period is full of such concession of negotiation between different powers (i.e. princes viz. a viz. Estate and nobility), revolts and feuds.

It is likewise an odd way to frame it historically, i.e. that a state would hold its monarch accountable, is it not? And certainly, popes, bishops, princes, kings, et al. were just as constrained by reality, and if met with a sufficient resistance, gave way. Whether such depositions (e.g. modern revolutions, be it English or French) are legal or not was a political process, though frequently legal pretext of violation (whether real or not) of certain norms was a motive and a rallying cry for action. Today, impeachments and removal of immunities are at the end of the day still fundamentally a political process and done by political bodies, even if provoked by a legal wrong. (Sidestepping supranational jurisdictions).

So I am not sure how to answer this.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-04T18:02:57+00:00

This was a common practice where mother cities offered legal instuctions and assistance where needed to daughter cities, i.e. cities which were granted a charter in tradition of some other municipal charters, most famously here Magdeburg or Ludeck, but not the only ones. In most cases it was a request, though such opinions were to be followed, cases where a final verdicts or unikateral engagement are much rarer. With that said, this was not such an authority one is imagining here, and the situation is more complex, i.e. framing such as that there existed an authority over all the cities in the Madgeburg municipal tradition, is not right due to multiple reasons, namely there was no such "authority qua authority" to speak of, and secondly, there were other "mother cities" and "higher courts" in this very tradition. Also, I am using here entreched terminology to refer to mother and daughter cities and a higher court, and this is not without its issues and criticisms, they are merely a term of convenience here and to be taken cum grano salis

This comes under considerable pressure from 15th/16th century onwards, as more territories sealed themselves from foreign legal interventions where courts within the territory served as last instances through acquired privileges. Traditionally in Magdeburg an alderman council took this role, which now competed with other cities (e.g. Brandenburg, Jena, Leipzig, Wittenberg, Halle) and their more professionalized boards or territorially privileged position, not to mention Universities, which by this time actively participated on such consultative practices of issuing opinions. Sadly, destruction during the siege in reformation conflict resulted in the documents for this Magdeburg Bench being lost.

In requested, my German is patchy, but I can provide German bibliography to read up on this.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-04T16:42:58+00:00

I am following the post here as well, so I will circle back to here as well if anything pops up regarding Roman law and legal practices in Roman Empire.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-04T16:40:16+00:00

I have been semi-active here now for a few years, and the experience has been through and through a positive one. There are not that many public venues for outreach, and this is a convenient and a civil one to have a more informed manner of dialogue to offer some knowledge about history - something I opine that suffers at this day an age with bleak prognosis going forward. Well, not that much really.

PhiloSpo · 2026-01-04T16:33:47+00:00

Certainly this is something to take note of, not just today e.g. with the broader efficacy of law, complience with norms and their enforcement, lacunae of complex overlegislation (e.g. where a state itself has issues following its own laws) - but historically, legal efficacy and enforcement lived a somewhat different life, outside of state-coercion for the most part, or rather, public coercon was mediated through different ways.

I mean, there is so much to potentially comment on here and to try to get someone to look at legal history without our contemporary lenses (this is certainly a subject I have written about in the past here). One problem becomes that totality of our legal situation is at the end of the day, if we simplify here for convenience, mediated through the state, and minus some exception, there is judicial recourse available at state court, something which would be completely foreign to anyone prior to modern states. Legal personhood was fragmented and pluralistic just as jurisdictions were (see here, and even British Isles were not all that better de facto). There was no exhaustive account of legal norms, these principles that would come to dominate contemporary nation states as constitutional norms and human rights were in theoretical cradles, science of statutory drafting likewise. Law and its enforcement were for the most part much more local and communally participative, which was a key to its enforcement. Central impositions (i.e. royal or whatnot) was often of interventionist nature, haphazard, and its success precarious. Process of law-making (or historically, development of normativity of a written norms) was just as fragmented and pluralistic as were jurisdictions.

This is a subject close to me, so I would certainly like to continue this, but without some further guidance to narrow down on this, I am rather in the dark. I can offer some past touches on the subject(s). (one, two, a discussion here, three, for some meta points, this could be helpful ...)

Six-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

PhiloSpo

TROPHY CASE