The objective of this paper are the proof issues of the exceptio doli in the formular process. The author examines different texts from Roman lawyers regarding not only the proof of the exceptiones, but of the dolus as well, turning back to the problem of onus probandi in the classical process. One of the premises of this work is that the Exceptio doli has a bigger complexity than other exceptiones. These issues found a safer treatment when created the exceptio non numeratae pecuniae. The hypothesis is that this Exceptio should be seen as an alternative to the Exceptio doli every time the defendant has no chance to prove the facts that constitute the plaintiff’s Dolus (a positive fact). And this situation would be related to the fact that the reversal of burden of proof in case of negative facts was sufficiently known in the classic process and therefore the rescript of C. 4,30,3 was unnecessary for that goal.
The Cod. arab. 7 in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich, which contains a large number of glosses in Latin and Romance, is important because it is, together with the Qurʾān in Ms. BNF arabe 384 and Ms. A-5-2 in the Escuela de Estudios Árabes in Granada, one of the only three known copies of the Qurʾān in Arabic that also contains numerous Latin glosses. The Paris manuscript has a large corpus of Latin glosses, signed by Riccoldo de Montecroce, made with the help of a second Latin translation of the Qurʾān by Mark of Toledo in 1210. In addition, the Arabic Qurʾān in Ms. A-5-2, probably elaborated in Algeciras in al-Andalus in 1599, gives the names of the Suras 1–19 in Latin.
The objective of this article is to characterize the argumental strategy of Juan de Solórzano Pereira in one of the chapters of the Política Indiana, by distinguishing the special features of his thought-structures and their goals. The methodology of this article is based on the Model-reader concept to characterize the adressee of Solórzanos’s work and to discover the effect he sought. Likewise, the article envolves the premise that historical legal argumentation rules are a meaningful manifestation of the Spanish colonial legal culture. The main outcome of this article is the evidence of the political function of Solórzanos’s legal argumentation.
From a comparative perspective, I will study two anti-Islamic Castilian writings produced during the period of the transition between the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Era: Alonso de Espina’s Fortalitium fidei (1460) and Gonzalo de Arredondo’s Castillo inexpugnable defensorio de la fe (1528). This study compares the terms in which each of these works addresses (a) the confrontation with Islam, (b) dissensions within Christianity, and (c) the king’s role in the midst of those conflicts. The contrastive approach to these analogous works, which were written almost seven decades apart, will allow an analysis of two different articulations of anti-Saracen Christian discourse in Spain, both before and after some key milestones in European history. These different perceptions of Islam had an impact on the conception of Christianity and Europe itself at the very beginning of the early modern period.