ИСТИНА

General concept of contract and general provisions on contracts in the academic treatises and the civil codes became the indispensable hallmark of the civil-law legal style (Zweigert) and the 'spirit of codifications' (Cabrillac), at least since the early 19th century. Such generalizations were regarded as too abstract by legal professionals in many other legal systems, including English common law, Sharia law, Roman law. Yet, during the 'long 19th century' generalization of contract law gained more supporters in the core civil law countries (France and Germany) and in the neighboring lands. In this presentation I intend to examine the arguments in favor of generalizing contract law put forward by the leading French, German and Russian jurists during the codification debates of the 19th century (according to the academic publications and the preparatory papers of the drafting committees in the French republic, the German Kaiserreich and the Russian Empire). I will limit myself with the most popular arguments: 1) the 'academic argument' (general provisions reveal the 'natural' / 'scientific' order of contract law in any 'civilized' society and are indispensable for comprehensive understanding of this branch of law) 2) the 'didactic argument' (general provisions render contract law much more understandable for students of law / normal citizens who would benefit from acting in accordance with these general rules) 3) the 'practical argument' (general rules on contracts serve as major premises in the syllogistic model of dispute-resolution, and so they make the adjudication process more predictable, consistent, transparent, and ultimately promote the rule of law). Finally, I will argue that each of the arguments above was ardently discussed because they touched upon a profound conflict of universal instrumentalist vision of contract law with the concerns of protecting national identity from foreign influence (termed 'individualistic', 'western', or 'Roman').