RECENTLY, EXPERTS HAVE CLAIMED THAT THE WEST GERMAN EFFORTS TO DECRIMINALIZE PETTY THEFT AND SHOPLIFTING CONSTITUTE A RETURN TO AN EARLIER, MORE PRIMITIVE PHASE OF LEGAL HISTORY, COMPARABLE TO THE 'ACTIO FURTI' (A SETTLEMENT UNDER CIVIL RATHER THAN CRIMINAL LAW) IN ROMAN LAW AND THAT THE STUDY OF LEGAL HISTORY CAN LEAD TO A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF PRESENT JUDICIAL PHENOMENA. TO TEST THIS ASSERTION, THE 'ACTIO FURTI' IS COMPARED TO SUGGESTED SHOPLIFTING PROVISIONS, REVEALING SEVERAL COMMON TRAITS TO BOTH SITUATIONS; E.G., 'ACTIO FURT' AMD SHOPLIFTING LEGISLATION PROVIDE FOR A CIVIL SETTLEMENT IN WHICH THE VICTIM IS COMPENSATED BY A FINE FAR GREATER THAN THE ORIGINAL DAMAGE. HOWEVER, THE DIFFERENCE IN THE FUNCTIONS OF BOTH LAWS ARE FAR MORE SIGNIFICANT; FOR EXAMPLE, THE PUNITIVE INTENT OF THE SUGGESTED SHOPLIFTING LAWS IS FAR GREATER THAN THAT OF THE 'ACTIO FURTI' WHICH IS AIMED MAINLY AT THE VICTIM'S FINANCIAL COMPENSATION. IN ADDITION, THE SHOPLIFTING REFORMS TAKE THEIR PLACE WITHIN A MODERN TREND TOWARDS DECRIMINALIZATION WHICH IS ENTIRELY UNRELATED TO THE SPECIFIC HISTORIC CONTEXT OF THE 'ACTIO FURTI,' WHICH RENDERS THE 'ACTIO FURTI' AND PRESENT ISSUES COMPLETELY INCOMPARABLE. IN ADDITION, THE RESULTS MAKE IT QUESTIONABLE WHETHER LEGAL HISTORY CAN CONTRIBUTE SIGNIFICANTLY TO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF PRESENT LEGAL PHENOMENA. THE ARTICLE CONTAINS FOOTNOTES BUT NO BIBLIOGRAPHY. --IN GERMAN. (SAJ)