51。Leg。2,Cod。dejureliberorum。Institutes,tit。3,§4,desenatusconsult。Tertul。
  52。Leg。9,Cod。desuisetlegitimisliberis。
  53。Leg。12,ibid。,andNov。118,127。
  BookXXVIII。OftheOriginandRevolutionsoftheCivilLawsamongtheFrench1。DifferentCharacteroftheLawsoftheseveralPeopleofGermany。
  AftertheFrankshadquittedtheirowncountry,theymadeacompilationoftheSaliclawswiththeassistanceofthesagesoftheirownnation。[1]ThetribeoftheRipuarianFrankshavingjoineditselfunderClovis[2]tothatoftheSalianspreserveditsowncustoms;andTheodoric,[3]KingofAustrasia,orderedthemtobereducedtowriting。
  HecollectedlikewisethecustomsofthoseBavariansandGermans,whoweredependentonhiskingdom。[4]ForGermanyhavingbeenweakenedbythemigrationofsuchamultitudeofpeople,theFranks,afterconqueringallbeforethem,madearetrogrademarchandextendedtheirdominionintotheforestsoftheirancestors。VerylikelytheThuringiancodewasgivenbythesameTheodoric,sincetheThuringianswerealsohissubjects。[5]AstheFrisiansweresubduedbyCharlesMartelandPepin,theirlawcannotbepriortothoseprinces。[6]Charlemagne,thefirstthatreducedtheSaxons,gavethemthelawstillextant;andweneedonlyreadtheselasttwocodestobeconvincedtheycamefromthehandsofconquerors。AssoonastheVisigoths,theBurgundians,andtheLombardshadfoundedtheirrespectivekingdoms,theyreducedtheirlawstowriting,notwithanintentofobligingthevanquishednationstoconformtotheircustoms,butwithadesignoffollowingthemthemselves。
  ThereisanadmirablesimplicityintheSalicandRipuarianlaws,aswellasinthoseoftheAlemans,Bavarians,Thuringians,andFrisians。
  Theybreatheanoriginalcoarsenessandaspiritwhichnochangeorcorruptionofmannershadweakened。Theyreceivedbutveryfewalterations,becauseallthosepeople,excepttheFranks,remainedinGermany。EventheFranksthemselveslaidtherethefoundationofagreatpartoftheirempire,sothattheyhadnonebutGermanlaws。ThesamecannotbesaidofthelawsoftheVisigoths,oftheLombardsandBurgundians;theircharacterconsiderablyalteredfromthegreatchangewhichhappenedinthecharacterofthosepeopleaftertheyhadsettledintheirnewhabitations。
  ThekingdomoftheBurgundiansdidnotlastlongenoughtoadmitofgreatchangesinthelawsoftheconqueringnation。GundebaldandSigismond,whocollectedtheircustoms,werealmostthelastoftheirkings。ThelawsoftheLombardsreceivedadditionsratherthanchanges。
  ThelawsofRothariswerefollowedbythoseofGrimoaldus,Luitprandus,Rachis,andAstulphus,butdidnotassumeanewform。ItwasnotsowiththelawsoftheVisigoths;[7]theirkingsnew—mouldedthem,andhadthemalsonew—mouldedbytheclergy。
  ThekingsindeedofthefirstracestruckoutoftheSalicandRipuarianlawswhateverwasabsolutelyinconsistentwithChristianity,butleftthemainpartuntouched。[8]ThiscannotbesaidofthelawsoftheVisigoths。
  ThelawsoftheBurgundians,andespeciallythoseoftheVisigoths,admittedofcorporalpunishments;thesewerenottoleratedbytheSalicandRipuarianlaws;[9]theypreservedtheircharactermuchbetter。
  TheBurgundiansandVisigoths,whoseprovincesweregreatlyexposed,endeavouredtoconciliatetheaffectionsoftheancientinhabitants,andtogivethemthemostimpartialcivillaws;[10]butastheKingsoftheFrankshadestablishedtheirpower,theyhadnosuchconsiderations。[11]
  TheSaxons,wholivedunderthedominionoftheFranks,wereofanintractabletemper,andpronetorevolt。Hencewefindintheirlawstheseveritiesofaconqueror,[12]whicharenottobemetwithintheothercodesofthelawsofthebarbarians。
  WeseethespiritoftheGermanlawsinthepecuniarypunishments,andthespiritofaconquerorinthoseofanafflictivenature。
  Thecrimestheycommitintheirowncountryaresubjecttocorporalpunishment;andthespiritoftheGermanlawsisfollowedonlyinthepunishmentofcrimescommittedbeyondtheextentoftheirownterritory。
  Theyareplainlytoldthattheircrimesshallmeetwithnomercy,andtheyarerefusedeventheasylumofchurches。
  ThebishopshadanimmenseauthorityatthecourtoftheVisigothKings,themostimportantaffairsbeingdebatedincouncils。Allthemaxims,principlesandviewsofthepresentinquisitionareowingtothecodeoftheVisigoths;andthemonkshaveonlycopiedagainsttheJewsthelawsformerlyenactedbybishops。
  InotherrespectsthelawsofGundebaldfortheBurgundiansseemprettyjudicious;andthoseofRotharis,andoftheotherLombardprinces,arestillmoreso。ButthelawsoftheVisigoths,thoseforinstanceofRecessuinthus,Chaindasuinthus,andEgigasarepuerile,ridiculousandfoolish;theyattainnottheirend;theyarestuffedwithrhetoricandvoidofsense,frivolousinthesubstanceandbombasticinthestyle。
  2。ThattheLawsoftheBarbarianswereallpersonal。Itisadistinguishingcharacteroftheselawsofthebarbariansthattheywerenotconfinedtoacertaindistrict;theFrankwastriedbythelawoftheFranks,theAlemanbythatoftheAlemans,theBurgundianbythatoftheBurgundians,andtheRomanbytheRomanlaw;nay,sofarweretheconquerorsinthosedaysfromreducingtheirlawstoauniformsystemorbody,thattheydidnoteventhinkofbecominglegislatorstothepeopletheyhadconquered。
  TheoriginalofthisIfindinthemannersoftheGermans。Thesepeoplewerepartedasunderbymarshes,lakes,andforests;andC?sarobserves[13]theywerefondofsuchseparations。TheirdreadoftheRomansbroughtabouttheirreunion;andyeteachindividualamongthesemixedpeoplewasstilltobetriedbytheestablishedcustomsofhisownnation。Eachtribeapartwasfreeandindependent;andwhentheycametobeintermixed,theindependencestillcontinued;thecountrywascommon,thegovernmentpeculiar;theterritorythesame,andthenationsdifferent。Thespiritofpersonallawsprevailedthereforeamongthosepeoplebeforeevertheysetoutfromtheirownhomes,andtheycarrieditwiththemintotheconqueredprovinces。
  WefindthiscustomestablishedintheformulasofMarculfus,[14]inthecodesofthelawsofthebarbarians,butchieflyinthelawoftheRipuarians[15]andthedecreesofthekingsofthefirstrace,[16]
  whencethecapitulariesonthatsubjectinthesecondracewerederived。[17]Thechildrenfollowedthelawsoftheirfather,[18]thewifethatofherhusband,[19]thewidowcamebacktoherownoriginallaw,[20]andthefreedmanwasunderthatofhispatron。[21]Besides,everymancouldmakechoiceofwhatlawshepleased;buttheconstitutionofLothariusI[22]requiredthatthischoiceshouldbemadepublic。
  3。CapitalDifferencebetweentheSalicLawsandthoseoftheVisigothsandBurgundians。WehavealreadyobservedthatthelawsoftheBurgundiansandVisigothswereimpartial;butitwasotherwisewithregardtotheSaliclaw,foritestablishedbetweentheFranksandRomansthemostmortifyingdistinctions。WhenaFrank,abarbarian,oronelivingundertheSaliclawhappenedtobekilled,acompositionof200solswastobepaidtohisrelatives;[23]only100uponthekillingofaRomanproprietor,[24]andnomorethanforty—fiveforaRomantributary。Thecompositionforthemurderofoneoftheking’svassals,ifaFrank,was600sols;[25]ifaRoman,thoughtheking’sguest,[26]
  only300。[27]TheSaliclawmadethereforeacrueldistinctionbetweentheFrankandRomanlord,andtheFrankandRomancommoner。
  Further,ifanumberofpeopleweregottogethertoassaultaFrankinhishouse,[28]andhehappenedtobekilled,theSaliclawordainedacompositionof600sols;butifaRomanorafreedmanwasassaulted,onlyone—halfthatcomposition。[29]Bythesamelaw,[30]ifaRomanputaFrankinirons,hewasliabletoacompositionof30sols;butifaFrankhadthususedaRoman,hepaidonly15。AFrank,strippedbyaRoman,wasentitledtothecompositionof621/2sols,andaRomanstrippedbyaFrankreceivedonly30。SuchunequaltreatmentmustneedshavebeenverygrievoustoaRoman。
  Andyetacelebratedauthor[31]formsasystemoftheestablishmentoftheFranksinGaul,onasuppositionthattheywerethebestfriendsoftheRomans。TheFranksthen,thebestfriendsoftheRomans,theywhodid,andtheywhosufferedfromtheRomanssuchaninfinitedealofmischief![32]TheFranks,thefriendsoftheRomans,theywho,aftersubduingthembytheirarms,oppressedthemincoldbloodbytheirlaws!
  TheywereexactlythefriendsoftheRomansastheTartarswhoconqueredChinawerethefriendsoftheChinese。IfsomeCatholicbishopsthoughtfittomakeuseoftheFranksindestroyingtheArianKings,doesitfollowthattheyhadadesireoflivingunderthosebarbarouspeople?
  AndcanwehenceconcludethattheFrankshadanyparticularregardfortheRomans?Ishoulddrawquitedifferentconsequences;thelesstheFrankshadtofearfromtheRomans,thelessindulgencetheyshowedthem。
  TheAbbéduBoshasconsultedbutindifferentauthoritiesforhishistory,suchaspoetsandorators;worksofparadeandostentationareimproperfoundationsforbuildingsystems。
  4。InwhatmannertheRomanLawcametobelostintheCountrysubjecttotheFranks,andpreservedinthatsubjecttotheGothsandBurgundians。Whathasbeenabovesaidwillthrowsomelightuponotherthings,whichhavehithertobeeninvolvedingreatobscurity。
  ThecountryatthisdaycalledFrancewasunderthefirstracegovernedbytheRomanlaw,ortheTheodosiancode,andbythedifferentlawsoftheBarbarians,[33]whosettledinthoseparts。
  InthecountrysubjecttotheFranks,theSaliclawwasestablishedfortheFranks,andtheTheodosiancode[34]fortheRomans。InthatsubjecttotheVisigoths,acompilationoftheTheodosiancode,madebyorderofAlaric,[35]regulateddisputesamongtheRomans;andthenationalcustoms,whichEuriccausedtobereducedtowriting,[36]determinedthoseamongtheVisigoths。Buthowcomesit,somewillsay,thattheSaliclawsgainedalmostageneralauthorityinthecountryoftheFranks,andtheRomanlawgraduallydeclined;whilstinthejurisdictionoftheVisigothstheRomanlawspreaditself,andobtainedatlastageneralsway?
  MyansweristhattheRomanlawcametobedisusedamongtheFranksbecauseofthegreatadvantagesaccruingfrombeingaFrank,aBarbarian,[37]orapersonlivingundertheSaliclaw;everyone,inthatcase,readilyquittingtheRomantoliveundertheSaliclaw。
  Theclergyaloneretainedit,[38]asachangewouldbeofnoadvantagetothem。Thedifferenceofconditionsandranksconsistedonlyinthelargenessofthecomposition,asIshallshowinanotherplace。Nowparticularlaws[39]allowedtheclergyasfavourablecompositionsasthoseoftheFranks,forwhichreasontheyretainedtheRomanlaw。Thislawbroughtnohardshipsuponthem;andinotherrespectsitwasmostproperforthem,asitwastheworkofChristianemperors。
  Ontheotherhand,inthepatrimonyoftheVisigoths,astheVisigothlaw[40]gavenociviladvantagestotheVisigothsovertheRomans,thelatterhadnoreasontodiscontinuelivingundertheirownlawinordertoembraceanother。TheyretainedthereforetheirownlawswithoutadoptingthoseoftheVisigoths。
  Thisisstillfurtherconfirmedinproportionasweproceedinourinquiry。ThelawofGundebaldwasextremelyimpartial,notfavouringtheBurgundiansmorethantheRomans。ItappearsbythepreambletothatlawthatitwasmadefortheBurgundians,andtoregulatethedisputeswhichmightarisebetweenthemandtheRomans;andinthelattercasethejudgeswereequallydividedofaside。Thiswasnecessaryforparticularreasons,drawnfromthepoliticalregulationsofthosetimes。[41]TheRomanlawwascontinuedinBurgundy,inordertoregulatethedisputesofRomansamongthemselves。Thelatterhadnoinducementtoquittheirownlaw,asinthecountryoftheFranks;andratherastheSaliclawwasnotestablishedinBurgundy,asappearsbythefamousletterwhichAgobardwrotetoLouisthePious。
  Agobard[42]desiredthatprincetoestablishtheSaliclawinBurgundy;
  consequentlyithadnotbeenestablishedthereatthattime。ThustheRomanlawdid,andstilldoessubsistinsomanyprovinces,whichformerlydependedonthiskingdom。
  TheRomanandGothiclawscontinuedlikewiseinthecountryoftheestablishmentoftheGoths,wheretheSaliclawwasneverreceived。WhenPepinandCharlesMartelexpelledtheSaracens,thetownsandprovinceswhichsubmittedtotheseprincespetitionedforacontinuanceoftheirownlawsandobtainedit;[43]this,inspiteoftheusagesofthosetimes,whenalllawswerepersonal,soonmadetheRomanlawtobeconsideredasarealandterritoriallawinthosecountries。
  ThisappearsbytheedictofCharlestheBald,givenatPistesintheyear864,whichdistinguishesthecountrieswherecausesweredecidedbytheRomanlawfromwhereitwasotherwise。[44]
  TheedictofPistesshowstwothings;one,thattherewerecountrieswherecausesweredecidedbytheRomanlaw,andotherswheretheywerenot;andtheother,thatthosecountrieswheretheRomanlawobtainedwerepreciselythesamewhereitisstillfollowedatthisveryday,asappearsbythesaidedict:[45]thusthedistinctionoftheprovincesofFranceundercustomandthoseunderwrittenlawwasalreadyestablishedatthetimeoftheedictofPistes。
  Ihaveobservedthatinthebeginningofthemonarchyalllawswerepersonal;andthuswhentheedictofPistesdistinguishesthecountriesoftheRomanlawfromthosewhichwereotherwise,themeaningisthat,incountrieswhichwerenotoftheRomanlaw,suchamultitudeofpeoplehadchosentoliveundersomeorotherofthelawsoftheBarbariansthattherewerescarcelyanywhowouldbesubjecttotheRomanlaw;andthatinthecountriesoftheRomanlawtherewerefewwhowouldchoosetoliveunderthelawsoftheBarbarians。
  Iamnotignorantthatwhatishereadvancedwillbereckonednew;butifthethingswhichIassertbetrue,surelytheyareveryancient。
  Afterall,whatgreatmatterisit,whethertheycomefromme,fromtheValesiuses,orfromtheBignons?
  5。ThesameSubjectcontinued。ThelawofGundebaldsubsistedalongtimeamongtheBurgundians,inconjunctionwiththeRomanlaw;itwasstillinuseunderLouisthePious,asAgobard’sletterplainlyevinces。
  Inlikemanner,thoughtheedictofPistescallsthecountryoccupiedbytheVisigothsthecountryoftheRomanlaw,yetthelawoftheVisigothswasalwaysinforcethere;asappearsbythesynodofTroyesheldunderLouistheStammerer,intheyear878,thatis,fourteenyearsaftertheedictofPistes。
  InprocessoftimetheGothicandBurgundianlawsfellintodisuseevenintheirowncountry,whichwasowingtothosegeneralcausesthateverywheresuppressedthepersonallawsoftheBarbarians。
  6。HowtheRomanLawkeptitsGroundintheDemesneoftheLombards。Thefactsallcoincidewithmyprinciples。ThelawoftheLombardswasimpartial,andtheRomanswereundernotemptationtoquittheirownforit。ThemotivewhichprevailedwiththeRomansundertheFrankstomakechoiceoftheSaliclawdidnottakeplaceinItaly;hencetheRomanlawmaintaineditselfthere,togetherwiththatoftheLombards。
  ItevenfelloutthatthelattergavewaytotheRomaninstitutes,andceasedtobethelawoftherulingnation;andthoughitcontinuedtobethatoftheprincipalnobility,yetthegreatestpartofthecitiesformedthemselvesintorepublics,andthenobilitymoulderedawayofthemselves,orweredestroyed。[46]Thecitizensofthenewrepublicshadnoinclinationtoadoptalawwhichestablishedthecustomofjudiciarycombats,andwhoseinstitutionsretainedmuchofthecustomsandusagesofchivalry。Astheclergyofthosedays,aclergyeventhensopowerfulinItaly,livedalmostallundertheRomanlaw,thenumberofthosewhofollowedtheinstitutionsoftheLombardsmusthavedailydiminished。
  Besides,theinstitutionsoftheLombardshadnotthatextent,thatmajestyoftheRomanlaw,bywhichItalywasremindedofheruniversaldominion。TheinstitutionsoftheLombardsandtheRomanlawcouldbethenofnootherusethantofurnishoutstatutesforthosecitiesthatwereerectedintorepublics。Nowwhichcouldbetterfurnishthem,theinstitutionsoftheLombardsthatdeterminedonsomeparticularcases,ortheRomanlawwhichembracedthemall?
  7。HowtheRomanLawcametobelostinSpain。ThingshappenedotherwiseinSpain。ThelawoftheVisigothsprevailed,andtheRomanlawwaslost。Chaindasuinthus[47]andRecessuinthusproscribedtheRomanlaws,[48]andevenforbadecitingthemintheircourtsofjudicature。
  RecessuinthuswaslikewiseauthorofthelawwhichtookofftheprohibitionofmarriagebetweentheGothsandRomans。[49]Itisevidentthatthesetwolawshadthesamespirit;thiskingwantedtoremovetheprincipalcausesofseparationwhichsubsistedbetweentheGothsandtheRomans。Nowitwasthoughtthatnothingmadeawiderseparationthantheprohibitionofintermarriages,andthelibertyoflivingunderdifferentinstitutions。
  ButthoughthekingsoftheVisigothshadproscribedtheRomanlaw,itstillsubsistedinthedemesnestheypossessedinSouthGaul。[50]Thesecountriesbeingdistantfromthecentreofthemonarchylivedinastateofgreatindependence。WeseefromthehistoryofVamba,whoascendedthethronein672,thatthenativesofthecountryhadbecometheprevailingparty。[51]HencetheRomanlawhadgreaterauthorityandtheGothicless。TheSpanishlawsneithersuitedtheirmannersnortheiractualsituation;thepeoplemightlikewisebeobstinatelyattachedtotheRomanlaw,becausetheyhadannexedtoittheideaofliberty。
  Besides,thelawsofChaindasuinthusandofRecessuinthuscontainedmostsevereregulationsagainsttheJews;buttheseJewshadavastdealofpowerinSouthGaul。TheauthorofthehistoryofKingVambacallstheseprovincesthebrotheloftheJews。WhentheSaracensinvadedtheseprovinces,itwasbyinvitation;andwhocouldhaveinvitedthembuttheJewsortheRomans?TheGothswerethefirstthatwereoppressed,becausetheyweretherulingnation。WeseeinProcopius,thatduringtheircalamitiestheywithdrewoutofNarbonneGaulintoSpain。[52]
  Doubtless,underthismisfortune;theytookrefugeinthoseprovincesofSpainwhichstillheldout;andthenumberofthosewhoinSouthGaullivedunderthelawoftheVisigothswastherebygreatlydiminished。
  8。AfalseCapitulary。DidnotthatwretchedcompilerBenedictusLevitaattempttotransformthisVisigothestablishment,whichprohibitedtheuseofRomanlaw,intoacapitulary[53]ascribedsincetoCharlemagne?
  Hemadeofthisparticularinstitutionageneralone,asifheintendedtoexterminatetheRomanlawthroughouttheuniverse。
  9。InwhatmannertheCodesofBarbarianLawsandtheCapitulariescametobelost。TheSalic,theRipuarian,Burgundian,andVisigothlawscame,bydegrees,tobedisusedamongtheFrenchinthefollowingmanner:
  Asfiefsbecamehereditary,andarrière—fiefsextended,manyusageswereintroduced,towhichtheselawswerenolongerapplicable。Theirspiritindeedwascontinued,whichwastoregulatemostdisputesbyfines。Butasthevalueofmoneywas,doubtless,subjecttochange,thefineswerealsochanged;andweseeseveralcharters,[54]wherethelordsfixedthefines,thatwerepayableintheirpettycourts。Thusthespiritofthelawwasfollowed,withoutadheringtothelawitself。
  Besides,asFrancewasdividedintoanumberofpettylordships,whichacknowledgedratherafeudalthanapoliticaldependence,itwasverydifficultforonlyonelawtobeauthorised。And,indeed,itwouldbeimpossibletoseeitobserved。Thecustomnolongerprevailedofsendingextraordinaryofficers[55]intotheprovincestoinspecttheadministrationofjusticeandpoliticalaffairs;itappears,evenbythecharters,thatwhennewfiefswereestablishedourkingsdivestedthemselvesoftherightofsendingthoseofficers。Thus,whenalmosteverythinghadbecomeafief,theseofficerscouldnotbeemployed;
  therewasnolongeracommonlawbecausenoonecouldenforcetheobservanceofit。
  TheSalic,Burgundian,andVisigothlawswere,therefore,extremelyneglectedattheendofthesecondrace;andatthebeginningofthethird,theywerescarcelyevermentioned。
  Underthefirstandsecondrace,thenationwasoftenassembled;thatis,thelordsandbishops;thecommonswerenotyetthoughtof。Intheseassemblies,attemptsweremadetoregulatetheclergy,abodywhichformeditself,ifImaysospeak,undertheconquerors,andestablisheditsprivileges。ThelawsmadeintheseassembliesarewhatwecalltheCapitularies。Hencefourthingsensued:thefeudallawswereestablishedandagreatpartofthechurchrevenueswasadministeredbythoselaws;
  theclergyeffectedawiderseparation,andneglectedthosedecreesofreformationwheretheythemselveswerenottheonlyreformers;[56]acollectionwasmadeofthecanonsofcouncilsandofthedecretalsofpopes;[57]andthesetheclergyreceived,ascomingfromapurersource。
  Eversincetheerectionofthegrandfiefs,ourkings,aswehavealreadyobserved,hadnolongeranydeputiesintheprovincestoenforcetheobservanceoftheirlaws;andhenceitisthat,underthethirdrace,wefindnomorementionmadeofCapitularies。
  10。ThesameSubjectcontinued。SeveralcapitularieswereaddedtothelawoftheLombards,aswellastotheSalicandBavarianlaws。Thereasonofthishasbeenamatterofinquiry;butitmustbesoughtforinthethingitself。Therewereseveralsortsofcapitularies。Somehadrelationtopoliticalgovernment,otherstoeconomical,mostofthemtoecclesiasticalpolity,andsomefewtocivilgovernment。Thoseofthelastspecieswereaddedtothecivillaw,thatis,tothepersonallawsofeachnation;forwhichreasonitissaidintheCapitulariesthatthereisnothingstipulatedthereincontrarytotheRomanlaw。[58]Ineffect,thosecapitulariesregardingeconomical,ecclesiastical,orpoliticalgovernmenthadnorelationtothatlaw;andthoseconcerningcivilgovernmenthadreferenceonlytothelawsofthebarbarouspeople,whichwereexplained,amended,enlarged,orabridged。Buttheaddingofthesecapitulariestothepersonallawsoccasioned,Iimagine,theneglectoftheverybodyoftheCapitulariesthemselves;intimesofignorance,theabridgmentofaworkoftencausesthelossoftheworkitself。
  11。OtherCausesoftheDisuseoftheCodesofBarbarianLaws,aswellasoftheRomanLaw,andoftheCapitularies。WhentheGermannationssubduedtheRomanempire,theylearnedtheuseofwriting;and,inimitationoftheRomans,theywrotedowntheirownusages,anddigestedthemintocodes。[59]TheunhappyreignswhichfollowedthatofCharlemagne,theinvasionsoftheNormansandthecivilwars,plungedtheconqueringnationsagainintothedarknessoutofwhichtheyhademerged,sothatreadingandwritingwerequiteneglected。Henceitis,thatinFranceandGermanythewrittenlawsoftheBarbarians,aswellastheRomanlawandtheCapitulariesfellintooblivion。TheuseofwritingwasbetterpreservedinItaly,wherereignedthePopesandtheGreekEmperors,andwheretherewereflourishingcities,whichenjoyedalmosttheonlycommerceinthosedays。TothisneighbourhoodofItalyitwasowingthattheRomanlawwaspreservedintheprovincesofGaul,formerlysubjecttotheGothsandBurgundians;andsomuchthemore,asthislawwasthereaterritorialinstitution,andakindofprivilege。
  ItisprobablethatthedisuseoftheVisigothlawsinSpainproceededfromthewantofwriting,andbythelossofsomanylaws,customswereeverywhereestablished。
  Personallawsfelltotheground。Compositions,andwhattheycallFreda,[60]wereregulatedmorebycustomthanbythetextoftheselaws。
  Thus,asintheestablishmentofthemonarchy,theyhadpassedfromGermancustomstowrittenlaws;someagesafter,theycamebackfromwrittenlawstounwrittencustoms。
  12。OflocalCustoms。RevolutionoftheLawsofbarbarousNations,aswellasoftheRomanLaw。Byseveralmemorialsitappears,thattherewerelocalcustoms,asearlyasthefirstandsecondrace。Wefindmentionmadeofthe"customoftheplace,"[61]ofthe"ancientusage,"[62]of"custom,"[63]of"laws,"[64]andof"customs。"Ithasbeentheopinionofsomeauthorsthatwhatwentbythenameofcustomswerethelawsofthebarbarousnations,andwhathadtheappellationoflawweretheRomaninstitutes。Thiscannotpossiblybe。KingPepinordained[65]thatwhereverthereshouldhappentobenolaw,customshouldbecompliedwith;butthatitshouldneverbepreferredtothelaw。Now,topretendthattheRomanlawwaspreferredtothecodesofthelawsoftheBarbariansissubvertingallmemorialsofantiquity,andespeciallythosecodesofBarbarianlaws,whichconstantlyaffirmthecontrary。
  Sofarwerethelawsofthebarbarousnationsfrombeingthosecustoms,thatitwastheseverylaws,aspersonalinstitutions,whichintroducedthem。TheSaliclaw,forinstance,wasapersonallaw;butgenerally,oralmostgenerally,inplacesinhabitedbytheSalianFranks,thisSaliclaw,howpersonalsoever,became,inrespecttothoseSalianFranks,aterritorialinstitution,andwaspersonalonlyinregardtothoseFrankswholivedelsewhere。NowifseveralBurgundians,Alemans,orevenRomansshouldhappentohavefrequentdisputes,inaplacewheretheSaliclawwasterritorial,theymusthavebeendeterminedbythelawsofthosepeople;andagreatnumberofdecisionsagreeabletosomeofthoselawsmusthaveintroducednewcustomsintothecountry。ThisexplainstheconstitutionofPepin。ItwasnaturalthatthosecustomsshouldaffecteventheFrankswholivedonthespot,incasesnotdecidedbytheSaliclaw;butitwasnotnaturalthattheyshouldprevailovertheSaliclawitself。
  Thustherewereineachplaceanestablishedlawandreceivedcustomswhichservedasasupplementtothatlawwhentheydidnotcontradictit。
  Theymightevenhappentosupplyalawthatwasinnowayterritorial;
  andtocontinuethesameexample,ifaBurgundianwasjudgedbythelawofhisownnation,inaplacewheretheSaliclawwasterritorial,andthecasehappenednottobeexplicitlymentionedintheverytextofthislaw,thereisnomannerofdoubtbutthatjudgmentwouldhavebeenpasseduponhimaccordingtothecustomoftheplace。