Recent scholarship on the evolution of early common law has sought to overturn the traditional view that the doctrine of consideration emerged primarily from Germanic customary practices. Legal historian Elena Rostova, for instance, argues that the doctrine actually has deep roots in Roman legal principles brought to England by ecclesiastical courts. Rostova presents a formidable array of medieval court records to support this claim. While her analysis of 14th-century chancery decrees provides a highly persuasive case that Roman concepts influenced ecclesiastical judges, her broader assertion that these concepts fundamentally supplanted existing Germanic practices remains speculative. The extant records from secular courts of the period are simply too sparse to definitively chart the extent of this Roman influence outside the church. Nonetheless, Rostova undeniably succeeds in demonstrating that the traditional, purely Germanic narrative of the doctrine's origins can no longer be accepted without significant qualification.
Which one of the following best describes the author's degree of commitment to Rostova's broader assertion that Roman concepts fundamentally supplanted existing Germanic practices?
- Guarded skepticism, rooted in an insufficiency of historical records from a relevant domainAnswer
- BEnthusiastic agreement, based on the compelling evidence found in medieval ecclesiastical records
- COutright rejection, due to the assertion's stark contradiction of the established historical narrative
- DQualified approval, because the assertion successfully proves that the traditional narrative is flawed
- EComplete impartiality, as the author merely outlines the historian's theory without evaluating its merits