Abstract
In the 2nd century AD, the jurist Gaius wrote(D., 1, 2, 1) : " I note in all things that what is perfect is that which is composed of all its parts ; and, certainly, the most powerful part is the beginning ". Gaius was thinking about the role of the past : talking about the beginning allows us to approach the present in its completeness.
Contrary to popular belief, jurists were not averse to history. The compilers of Justinian's Digest, whose aim was to simplify, often eliminated references to the past they found in the works of the jurists from whom they drew passages for their compendium.
Recourse to the past was therefore part of the jurists' arsenal, but it was not a neutral recourse. For example, in a passage from Paul(D., 41, 2, 1 pr.), we see how Nerva the Younger makes possession the first form of appropriation, a situation he imagines taking place in an imaginary pre-civilized space. Occupation, i.e. the acquisition of ownership by the mere act of apprehending a thing (which subsists, for example, in hunting), would be a trace(vestigium) left by this imaginary past. To explain the distinction between possession and ownership, which are legal institutions of the present, the jurist has imagined a past, an evolution. Discovering the uses of the past therefore means gaining access to the mentality of jurists, but also possessing criteria for evaluating the information they provide us with.
