摘要：In an essay from 1998 the comparative law scholar Pierre Legrand asked the question “are civilians educable?” It was a theme that had preoccupied him for some years as he agonized over what he regarded as the intolerant, totalizing, and normalizing manner in which civilian legal systems and their acolytes encounter other legal traditions. He had documented, for example, the ways in which Quebec's new 1994 Civil Code constructively sought to suppress and exclude the significant and historically relevant Anglophone community in Quebec. Legrand argued that this domineering posture is a product of the civil law's cosmological and autarkic mentality. “The difficulty,” Legrand lamented, “is that the civil law mind … is reflexively imperialistic … because of its penchant for universalization.” Far more than his disquiet over the precarious future of Quebec's Anglophone community, Legrand came to be concerned about the fate of the English common law tradition in the face of the European Union's convergence agenda. This was, to Legrand's mind, an apocalyptic confrontation between England's still-proud legal culture and Europe's horsemen of convergence: the ECJ, the Commission, the Parliament. With increasing distress Legrand turned his attention to the way in which the European Community (and later the Union) “is liable to achieve … the marginalization of one of the subcultures that have defined western Europe historically.” He would go on to insist that “European legal systems are not converging” and to raise ever-more strident objections to the idea of a European civil code. This would not cease until Legrand had written “Antivonbar,” an incendiary manifesto aimed at salvaging the English common law from what he viewed as the Union's closed-fisted and violent politics of supremacy, which had taken the form of the proposed European Civil Code.
