While some jurists were busy arguing that law comes from morality and others insisted it comes from sovereign commands, Friedrich Carl von Savigny entered the jurisprudential battlefield with the energy of a wise historian saying, “Relax everyone, law grows naturally over time.” According to Savigny, laws are not randomly invented by governments sitting in air-conditioned rooms surrounded by paperwork and stress. Instead, law develops gradually from the customs, traditions, beliefs, and culture of society itself. In simple terms, Savigny believed law evolves the same way family traditions do — slowly, emotionally, and with at least one elder insisting that everything was better in the old days.
Savigny was the leading thinker of the Historical School of Jurisprudence. He strongly opposed the idea that laws should be suddenly imposed or artificially created without considering the history and culture of society. According to him, law is not made; it is discovered within the spirit of the people. This idea became famous as Volksgeist, a German term meaning “spirit of the people.” Even though the word sounds like the name of a luxury perfume or a villain from a Marvel movie, it became one of the most important concepts in jurisprudence.
The Historical School believes that every society develops its own legal system according to its customs and historical experiences. Savigny argued that laws should reflect the traditions and social consciousness of the people. For example, many legal practices in India evolved through customs long before they were formally codified. Marriage customs, property traditions, and local dispute resolution systems all influenced the development of modern law. Savigny would probably look at modern legal reforms and ask, “But does this match the cultural soul of society?” Meanwhile legislators would quietly pretend they did extensive social consultation before passing anything.
Savigny’s ideas became especially important during debates about codification of laws. In his time, there was pressure to create a uniform civil code in Germany inspired by the French legal system. Savigny strongly opposed this sudden codification. He believed laws cannot simply be copied from one country and imposed on another because every nation has its own unique historical development. According to him, forcing foreign legal ideas onto society is like forcing someone’s grandmother to suddenly start using cryptocurrency — technically possible, but emotionally catastrophic.
One of the major strengths of Savigny’s theory is that it recognizes the importance of social traditions and cultural continuity. Law does not exist in isolation; it grows alongside society. This explains why different countries have different legal systems even when dealing with similar issues. Historical development shapes legal identity. Savigny reminded jurists that legal systems are not machines assembled overnight but living institutions shaped by generations of human experience.
The Historical School also emphasized customs as an important source of law. Before modern legislatures became powerful, customs played a central role in regulating societies. Even today, customs influence various branches of law, especially personal laws and traditional practices. Savigny believed customs reflect the true needs and values of society more authentically than artificially imposed legislation. This theory feels especially relatable in India, where unofficial social rules sometimes appear stronger than actual written laws. Anyone who has attended an Indian wedding knows there are approximately 900 customs everyone must follow without ever asking who made them.
However, Savigny’s theory also faced criticism. Critics argued that blindly following traditions can sometimes preserve outdated or unjust practices. Society changes constantly, and laws must also adapt to modern realities. If law depended entirely on historical customs, progressive reforms relating to equality, gender justice, and human rights might become extremely difficult. Sociological jurists later argued that law should actively shape social progress instead of passively waiting for customs to evolve. In other words, critics believed Savigny loved history slightly too much.
Another criticism is that the concept of Volksgeist is somewhat vague. How exactly do we identify the “spirit of the people” in diverse and multicultural societies? In modern nations with multiple religions, languages, and cultures, determining one collective social spirit becomes incredibly complicated. At this point, even society itself may not fully agree on what its “spirit” actually is. Social media debates alone prove humanity struggles to agree on almost anything peacefully.
Despite criticism, Savigny’s influence remains enormous. His ideas shaped legal history, comparative law, and modern understanding of legal evolution. He reminded the world that law is deeply connected with culture, tradition, and collective social experience. Even today, lawmakers and judges often consider historical practices and societal values while interpreting laws and constitutions.
For CLAT PG aspirants, Savigny and the Historical School are highly important topics because questions frequently appear on Volksgeist, custom as a source of law, and criticism of codification. But beyond exams, Savigny teaches an important lesson: law is not just created by governments and courts; it is shaped by the lives, traditions, and experiences of ordinary people over generations. Also, he unintentionally proved that one German word can successfully terrify law students across the world for centuries.
