Marianne Webers 'Ehefrau und Mutter in der Rechtsentwicklung'. Beziehungsmodelle zwischen römischem Recht und deutscher Kodifizierung by Evelyn Höbenreich (review)

Abstract

Book Reviews 129© Max Weber Studies 2021. of moral relativism as heralded by Nietzsche and its impact on Weber. After the influential critiques by Leo Strauss (via philosophy) and Wolfgang Mommsen (via history), there seems no way of circumventing this challenge for any serious appraisal of Weber as a politico-ethical thinker, especially for a book whose avowed goal is to revisit his ethic of responsibility per se. Still, neither Strauss nor Mommsen (or others who follow their suit) is directly engaged on this point, a conspicuous loophole that could have been filled by bringing in Nietzsche to bear upon Weber and confront the question of moral relativism in politics more directly. This ghost of the past could have been confronted earnestly for all its good or ill—not only for a compelling reevaluation of Weber’s ethic of responsibility, but also for the good of the book‘s own ethical prescription for the present and the days yet to come. To be fair, the author seems aware of the overall connection between Nietzsche and Weber as indicated in the very first sentence of the book: ‘If the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche has to be recognised as the herald of the decline of traditional Christian and humanist ethics, the sociologist Max Weber deserves recognition of being the first to venture a sociological explanation for this decline’ (1). This opening insight might as well have been heeded throughout the book. Sung Ho Kim Department of Political Science, Yonsei University. Evelyn Höbenreich, Marianne Webers ‘Ehefrau und Mutter in der Rechtsentwicklung’. Beziehungsmodelle zwischen römischem Recht und deutscher Kodifizierung (Lecce: Edizioni Griffo, 2018), 368 pp. (hbk). ISBN 9788869941597. €28.00. Marianne Weber’s Ehefrau und Mutter in der Rechtsentwicklung (Wife and Mother in the Development of Law) is a groundbreaking study of the legal, social, and economic standing of women from antiquity through to the book’s publication date in 1907. Her examination of the institution of marriage pioneered women’s studies in the history of law, and her work’s reception has by now certainly expanded beyond a fleeting mention in footnotes. In her monograph Marianne Webers ‘Ehefrau und Mutter in der Rechtsentwicklung’, Evelyn Höbenreich not only fundamentally examines the role of prehistoric and ancient legal structures and gender issues, but also assesses how these may have impacted Marianne Weber’s reflections on the existence and purpose of women’s legal situation. 130 Max Weber Studies© Max Weber Studies 2021. Höbenreich,aprofessorofRomanlawattheUniversityofGraz,focusses on the style of Weber’s work, her goals, methodology, and selection of sources, and utilizes these categories to follow a comparative historical approach. Höbenreich’s prime achievement with this work is embedding of Marianne Weber’s book into the European context of its time, which she accomplishes primarily by contrasting Marianne Weber’s work with Paul Gide and Adhémar Esmein’s, Robert Bartsch’s, and Carlo Francesca Gabba’s contemporary studies on the female condition. Throughout its 368 pages, Höbenreich’s analysis of Marianne Weber’s Ehefrau und Mutter in der Rechtsentwicklung and its European contemporaries is distinguished by both its methodical rigidity and mischievous wit, exemplified by wellchosen and well-placed quotes and references. Höbenreich tackles Marianne Weber’s ‘footnote existence’ head on by taking this expression as the prologue’s title (11). Initially, she outlines how the fundamental works of Marianne Weber’s time generally dealt with women’s history in a cursory manner at best (13 ff). She points out that the German Civil Code did not precede the first attempts at emancipation; the ‘women’s issue’ did not play a significant role at the time of its adoption and was, in fact, limited to questions of family and succession law. The origins of Marianne Weber’s Ehefrau und Mutter in der Rechtsentwicklung cannot be separated from her environment, specifically from the debate on the Civil Code and associated women’s movements. Höbenreich references that backdrop not only with regard to the ideas Marianne Weber developed in this work but also in appreciation of her far-reachinguniversalistconception,despiteherlackofformaleducation. Höbenreich touches on Max Weber’s influence and the couple’s intense exchange of ideas, but does not determine...