Differences in the comparative theories of Alan Watson and Patrick Glenn

Contemporary comparativists Alan Watson and Patrick Glenn, the founders of the theory of transplants law and the traditional theory, although belonging to the same era of comparative legal disciplines, greatly differ in their ways of approaching contemporary issues of comparative law. At the beginning, the borrowing of legal traditions as the only common element of these scholars and history as a transition point and a path "from agreement to disagreement" was emphasized. The author analyzes the relationship between the theories Watson and Glenn advocate. First, the difference in the understanding of legal history that appears as a result of different legal theories that comparativists advocate is emphasized. Then, the author points out and analyzes the differences in the significance and role of comparative law and legal tradition, which represent an unrecognizable gap in the views of these scholars