No More Learning

This very remarkable classification of the parts of the Digest,
which long persisted in European scholarship, has been explained, on
the basis of the traditional views of the glossators, as the result of the
transfer of the Justinianean manuscripts from Ravenna to Bologna.
Irnerius, when he began to work on the manuscripts at Bologna, did not
have the full text of the Digest ; and, when he afterwards became familiar
with the missing portion in the middle of the manuscripts, he named it
the Infortiatum (the “fortification” or “fortifying addition "). What-
ever may be the value of this traditional view, reported by Odofred, one
of the Bolognese glossators, and now generally accepted by scholars, it
clearly points to the fact, as Calisse, in his Storia del diritto italiano,
has pointed out, that this triple division of the Digest's contents must
have been made at Ravenna before the time of Irnerius. It was but
CH. XXI.


## p. 736 (#782) ############################################

736
Methods of the Glossators
natural that a long manuscript, such as that of the Digest, should have
been physically divided into parts for the scholar's or student's con-
venience; but, as remarked by Calisse, “why the division should have
fallen at those particular books is the unexplainable feature; unless we
regard it as a reminiscence of Justinian's own instructions (persisting
into the Middle Ages), for the study of his law-books. "ı
The Glossators treated the several parts of Justinian's codification as
an entirety and as forming, together with certain other legal sources, the
Corpus iuris civilis. They distributed the matters of the Corpus iuris
civilis into five volumes (volumina). The three parts of the Digesta,
formed in the manner already explained, they placed in the first three
volumes ; while in the fourth volume they put the first nine books of
the Coder. The fifth volume embraced all the rest of the subject-matter
of the Corpus iuris civilis, namely, the Institutiones, one hundred and
thirty-four of the Novellae in Latin (known as the Authenticum), and
the remaining three books of the Codex (tres libri). In addition to all
these Justinianean materials the Glossators also inserted in the fifth book
of the Corpus iuris civilis—immediately after the Authenticum—the text
of the Lombard feudal law (libri feudorum) and several laws of the
Emperors Frederick I, Frederick II, and Conrad. Inasmuch as
the fifth volume, with its miscellaneous contents, could not be
referred to by its general character, as in the case of the first four
volumes, it was known by the Glossators as Volumen simply, or, by reason
of the fact that it was much smaller than the other volumes, as Volumen
Parvum.
The method adopted by the jurists who established the fame of the
Bologna law school was that of the gloss (ywooa, equivalent to verbum,
lingua, vox), or textual interpretation. The jurists themselves thus came
to be known as the Glossators; and it was they who gave to the school
its earlier tendency and character. Glosses were not a new thing ; within
the field of law they had already been employed in the study of medieval
Lombard and Roman Law. The new feature of the Bolognese school, the
one which gives it its unique position, was the application of the glossa-
torial method for the first time to the texts of the law-books of Justinian.
The adoption of this method at Bologna came about quite naturally,
inasmuch as the law school was itself an outgrowth of the grammar
school; and there was also the additional reason to be found in the
persistent tradition of Justinian's order that his laws should not be
altered in sense by a liberal as distinct from a literal interpretation.
Literal interpretation, moreover, was particularly needful as a means of
arriving at a correct text of the Justinianean codification. Although at
first, therefore, the gloss was but a short explanation or interpretation
of a difficult single word in terms of an equivalent, it soon became also,
1 Constitutio Omnem, prefixed to the Digest. See Buckland, Roman Law from
Augustus to Justinian, p. 49.


## p. 737 (#783) ############################################

The Glossators and their works
737
in the hands of the jurists, an explanation of a passage or of an entire
lex or even of a legal principle embodied in the text. These two forms
of the gloss became known respectively as the “interlinear” and the
“ marginal. ” The explanation of a single word was placed above it,
between the lines (" interlinear"), while the explanation of a passage was
placed beside it on the margin of the text (" marginal ”); and to each
gloss the glossator affixed his initials or some other mark or indication
of his identity. As the work of the school advanced, the gloss became
more and more elaborate and lost its original signification. It became,
in fact, the means of embodying the results of the master's legal re-
searches. “It included,” says Calisse', “ critical notes on the variant
readings (variantia) of different manuscripts. It brought together loci
paralleli, which helped to elucidate the point. When these passages were
in conflict (antinomia), it sought to reconcile them or to decide on
the preferable one. Thus, finally, we find the gloss developing into a
genuine commentary, with all its proper appurtenances—the summary
(summa), the putting of illustrative cases (casus), the deduction of a
genuine maxim (brocardus), and the discussion of concrete legal problems
(quaestiones). "
The creative work of the Glossators falls within the period from the
early part of the twelfth to the middle of the thirteenth century. Pepo,
the Pisan jurist who migrated to Bologna, was the one who first taught
by the new method, but the real establisher of the glossatorial school,
the lucerna iuris, was Irnerius. His glosses covered the whole range of
the Justinianean texts, and, inasmuch as he had practised at the bar and
had close touch with the actualities of legal life, his teaching combined
in a striking manner both theory and practice. The work of Irnerius was
followed by that of the famous “Four Doctors”—Bulgarus, Martinus,
Jacobus, and Hugo-the activities of these four Glossators constituting
perhaps the most illustrious period in the whole history of the Bologna
school. Two pupils of Bulgarus—Johannes and Rogerus—were at the
same time the teachers of Azo and Hugolinus. Azo's greatest work was
his Summa of the Institutes and the Codex, a work which superseded,
within its field, all previous productions of the school. At the bar there
was a proverb that “who has not Azo, goes not to court (chi non ha Azzo,
non vada a palazzo). ” In the study of Roman Law Azo's Summa was
regarded as essential as the very text of the Corpus iuris civilis itself;
and a knowledge of it was necessary to one who would enter the gild of
judges. To the school of Glossators belonged also other distinguished
jurists, among them being Placentinus, Vacarius, Burgundio, Carolus of
Tocco, and Roffredus of Benevento. Accursius, the last of the pro-
minent Glossators, is also the most famous of them all. He was born near
Florence in 1182. After a period of study at Bologna, he taught there
1 See General Survey of Events, Sources, Persons and Movements in Continental
Legal History (Continental Legal History Series, Vol. 1), p. 137.
47
C. MET). H. VOL. V. CH. XXI.


## p. 738 (#784) ############################################

738
The Accursiana
for over forty years, retired in order to finish his gloss, and died about
1260. The gloss of Accursius was marked off from those of all the other
Glossators as the Accursiana or ordinaria. Accursius and his gloss soon
came to represent everything that the Bologna school meant in juris-
prudence. His work embodied the results of all his predecessors; and, in
a way, he supplanted all of them. The accumulated glossatorial learning
of a century and a half was confusing, in the wealth of its details and in
the variety of juridical opinions, to the practitioners in the courts. They
found it difficult or even impossible to make their way through the maze
which the Glossators had gradually erected. To the practitioners, there-
fore, the comprehensive and orderly collection of Accursius was the new,
the up-to-date luminary of the law which the work of Irnerius had
been at an earlier time. In the schools the Accursiana supplanted all the
other glosses and even the Justinianean text itself. In the practice of the
courts the saying, Quidquid non agnoscit glossa nec agnoscit curia, a
variant of the proverb chi non ha Azzo non vada a palazzo, was pre-
valent"; the gloss of Accursius, that is, was held by the courts to be the
law. This very saying in the courts shews us, however, that the school
of the Glossators was already in rapid process of decay. For a time
Accursius was followed by other Glossators, such as Odofred; but, on
the whole, it is fair to say that the great gloss of Accursius virtually
terminated the work of the school of Glossators. The Accursiana was
itself the main symptom of decadence in the school. The original intent
of the Glossators, in the days of Pepo and Irnerius, had been to focus
attention upon the texts of Justinian's codification as the primary and
pure sources of the law. To the early Glossators the revival of the
Justinianean law meant that the texts themselves should be the basis of
study and practice alike. The discarding of the text for the gloss, the
mechanical following of the Accursiana, indicated that the science of the
pure Roman Law had yielded place to practice; for it was the gloss which
adapted and applied the sixth-century texts to the practical course of
thirteenth-century judicature. What society in the fourteenth century
needed, therefore, was a new juristic method in place of the stereotyped
mechanism of the Accursiana represented by the maxim Quidquid non
agnoscit glossa nec agnoscit curia. The time was ripe for the emergence
of a method of jurisprudence which should base itself upon contemporary
Roman Law, and not upon the Roman Law of the classical jurists and of
Justinian in times gone by. The method which was developed to supply
this social need of medieval Italy and Europe was the method of the Post-
Glossators—the "Commentators. "
The method of the Commentators—the one which had its rise in the
latter part of the thirteenth century at a time when Accursius was still
in his ascendency-represented a reaction against the gloss. The path
1 On the history of this saying in Germany, see Dernburg, Pandekten, 6th edn,
$$ 3, 4.


## p. 739 (#785) ############################################

The Commentators and their methods
739
chosen by the jurists of the newer tendency was the well-worn path of
scholasticism as distinct from the route marked out for them by the
fourteenth-century literary writers of the Renaissance, such as Dante,
Petrarch, and Boccaccio. To the claims of this great intellectual
awakening the lawyers, bound as they were by tradition and narrowed
by the practice of courts, did not respond until, at a much later period,
they turned from the narrow path of scholasticism into the broader ways
of the humanists. Calisse remarks that, when the system of the Commen-
tators “after a formative period was finally developed, it stood forth as
the apotheosis of a painstaking logic. The jurist's ideal now was to
divide and subdivide; to state premises and then to draw the inferences;
to test the conclusion by extreme cases sometimes insoluble and always
sophistical; to raise objections and then to make a parade of over-
throwing them—in short, to solve all problems by a fine-spun logic. He
who nearest reached this ideal was accorded the highest fame in his
science. ” Although already antiquated by the time of the Commentators,
the dialectic method as followed by them no doubt put new life into
juristic studies. But decay set in rapidly. Prolixity upon easy topics and
silence upon difficult ones became the rule. Cujas justly passes this
sentence upon the Commentators as a school: Verbosi in re facili, in
difficili muti, in angusta diffusi. A copious mass of books, written in a
crude harsh style, poured forth: a mass which, it is said, would have
made multorum camelorum onus. Once more the original texts of the
Justinianean law were lost to view in the intricacies of the dialectic exer-
cises of the Commentators. The worship of authorities followed as a
necessary consequence; it is said that lecturers, practitioners, and judges
did hardly more than cite authorities by name and treatise. Ultimately
came the doctrine of communis opinio, the doctrine that the juristic view
which had the greater number of supporters in the books was the sound
view; and thus, after the lapse of nearly ten centuries, there was
practically a return to the famous Law of Citations of Theodosius II and
Valentinian III (426). Judged by the standards of the classical jurists of
Rome, or by those of the Glossators in their period of brilliance, the
Commentators stand on a far lower plane in respect of originality and
fruitfulness of juristic thought. One of the main reasons is that they
stood aloof from the spirit and purpose of the Renaissance. It is, however,
generally agreed by scholars that the school of the Commentators had
merits as well as faults. Although their modes of thought and their
methods were of the past, their gaze was upon the present. The Glossators
sought only to know the Roman Law of Justinian's time; the Commen-
tators endeavoured to know the Roman Law of their own day. The real
achievement of the Commentators consisted in their adaptation of the
older law of Justinian to the legal conditions of their time, their har-
monising of the Justinianean texts with the other legal sources invoked
by the courts, notably the city statutes, feudal and Germanic customs,
CH. XXI.
47—2


## p. 740 (#786) ############################################

740
Bartolus of Sassoferrato
the rules and principles of Canon Law. In the words of Calisse, “the
old science was made over into a new one; and Roman law was trans-
formed into an Italian law. ” The special talent of the Commentators
created a literature-a body of commentaries on Romano-Italian Law
—which acquired the force of binding law and played a rôle of great
importance in legal life. Their method—known as the mos Italicus or
Italian method—was itself destined to have a far-reaching influence;
for it was adopted in other European countries, chiefly in France and
Germany.
To the school of the Commentators belonged the poet Cino of
Pistoia (1270–1336), Albericus of Rosate (ob. 1354), Bartolus of Sasso-
ferrato (1314-1357), Baldus of the Ubaldi (1327-1400), Luke of Penna
(lecturer in 1345), Bartholomew Salicetus (1330-1412), Raphael Ful-
gosius (1367-1471), Paul of Castro (ob. 1441), Marian and Bartholomew
Socinus of Siena, Philip Decius, and Jason Mainus. Of all the Com-
mentators, Bartolus of Sassoferrato, who died at the age of forty-
three in his early prime, stands out as the greatest and most in-
fluential. He studied under Cino at Perugia and also under Raniero of
Forlì; at the age of twenty he became a lecturer at Bologna, later
moving to Pisa and finally to Perugia ; and, among his public appoint-
ments, he held the post of councillor to the Emperor. His writings,
which cover nearly the whole range of the law and are of a higher
quality than those of the other Commentators, include lectures at
Bologna, commentaries on all the titles of the Digest, legal opinions
(consilia), and many treatises or essays on various branches of public and
private law. The chief title of Bartolus to fame rests upon his great
contribution to the work of his school in transforming the legal growths
of the past into the law of the fourteenth century. The lawyers of his
school came to be known simply as “Bartolists. ” The eminence of
Bartolus is also strikingly manifest in the professional maxim that no one
is a jurist who is not a Bartolist (Nemo iurista nisi sit Bartolista).
many parts of Europe the opinions of the great Commentator were held
to be the law itself. The most distinguished of all the successors of
Bartolus was his own pupil, Baldus of the Ubaldi, who was a Canonist
as well as a Romanist; he taught not only at Bologna, but also at Pisa,
Florence, Padua, and Pavia.
The school of the Commentators long held dominance in Italy. Even
the attacks of Dante, Petrarch, and Boccaccio, and the great movement
of humanism in the fifteenth century, did not turn the jurists to freer
and more enlightened methods of legal science. Boccaccio's remark, that
law had ceased to be a science at all, summarised the antipathy of the
new scholarship to the communis opinio, the casuistry, the mos Italicus, of
the Commentators. The attack of the fifteenth-century humanists re-
sulted in a protest against the Corpus iuris civilis itself. Tribonian was
reproached for mutilating the writings of the classical jurists; and even
In


## p. 741 (#787) ############################################

Influence of humanism on legal studies
741
the fragments of those writings embodied in the Digest were now, declared
the humanists, buried beneath a mass of crude medieval commentaries.
These attacks, however, did not turn into new channels the main current
of professional thought and activity. Even into the sixteenth and seven-
teenth centuries the lawyers proceeded on the lines marked out by Bartolus.
The “practical jurists” continued the work of the Commentators by
adapting the mass of Roman legal materials to the needs of daily practice
in the courts. For them practice, as distinct from legal science or the
theory and the history of the law, was the main thing. Despite the
defects of the school of practical jurists, their work was nevertheless of
real value; for it brought prominently to view the fact that the law was
changing day by day, and that the Roman element in the law must be
shaped and adapted to social needs. Only in modern times has this view-
point of the Commentators and the practical jurists been fully recognised
as a true contribution to the science of law.
Humanism was not without its effects upon Italian legal studies in
the fifteenth century; but, on the whole, the new movement was
represented, within the domain of law, by the work of classical scholars
and poets and not by that of professionally-trained lawyers. Lorenzo
Valla (ob. 1457), Pomponius Leto (1428-1498), and Angelo Politian
(1454-1496), were among the leaders of the new humanist school of legal
science; and to the enthusiastic study of the Roman legal texts-not
only the Justinianean codification but more especially the earlier materials,
such as the fragments of the classical jurists and the Theodosian Code-
these scholars turned their learning and their skill. Their aim was to
restore the Roman Law of the classical jurists as the basis of Justinian's
law-books and of later legal growth; they sought to establish legal
science on the broad foundations of history and philosophy. Legal
research, both in textual criticism and in methods of dealing with the
substantive law embodied in the texts, was thus given new and more
advanced tendencies. While preserving contempt for the Commentators,
these early Italian humanists in law always recognised the soundness of
the methods of the Glossators. Their full sympathy with the general
movement of humanism, however, enabled Valla, Leto, Politian, and their
successors to disregard the limitations which bound the Glossators; and
it is the general view of scholars that their work meant indeed a real
advance in Romanist legal studies. The work of these earlier humanists
was carried on by Andrew Alciat (1492-1552), whose legal writings and
career have given him a deserved place of fame among Italian jurists and
have caused him to stand out as the personification of the new school of
legal thought. His main work, however, was done abroad; for, in 1518,
he proceeded to Avignon and transplanted to France the methods of the
science he had learned in Italy.
Let us for a moment retrace our steps to consider the study and
teaching of Canon Law in the Italian Middle Age.
CH. XXI.


## p. 742 (#788) ############################################

742
Study and teaching of Canon Law
We have already seen that Gratian himself taught Canon Law in the
convent of St Felix at Bologna, and that in many of the schools influenced
by the great law school of Bologna the Canon Law, no less than the
Civil Law, formed a part of the curriculum. The schools or universities
made doctores decretorum as well as doctores legum. In the teaching of the
Canon Law the magistri gave oral lessons (lecturae) based directly on the
text; and it was the short remarks, originally written in the margin of
the text, in explanation of its words, which became the glosses of the
masters. The glosses, constantly increased by additions, took permanent
form. They were reproduced in later copies of the manuscripts and finally
included in the printed editions of the Corpus iuris canonici, notably in
the official Roman edition of 1582 prepared by the correctores romani in
the pontificate of Gregory XIII. The Italian school of Glossators was
not, therefore, confined to the civilians, embracing as it did the magistri
who glossed the canonical texts; and this is a feature of the revival of
juristic studies, at Bologna and other Italian schools, of far more than
ordinary interest.
Among the chief glossators of the Decretum were Paucapalea,
Gratian's first disciple, Rufinus (1160–1170), John of Faenza (c. 1170),
Joannes Teutonicus (c. 1210). The gloss of Teutonicus, as revised and
completed by Bartholomeus Brixiensis (of Brescia), became the glossa
ordinaria decreti. Vincent the Spaniard and Bernard of Botone (Ber-
nardus Parmensis, who died in 1263) wrote glosses on the Decretals,
that of the latter being the glossa ordinaria. The well-known Joannes
Andreae (c. 1340) was the author of the glossa ordinaria on the Liber
Sextus. That on the Clementinae, begun by Andreae, was finished by
Cardinal Zabarella (ob. 1417).
Apart from the glosses, the writings of the canonists, like those of the
civilians, fall into several groups. Thus, the canonistic literature consists
chiefly of Apparatus, Summue, Quaestiones, and Consilia. But while,
owing to differences in method, different schools of the civilians may be
distinguished, the canonists are not in general divided into schools, except
upon questions as to the relations of the Papacy to the national Churches
and the secular powers. The systematic Canon Law of the Middle Age is
embodied very largely in the Summae. Some of the early disciples of
Gratian wrote Summae, including Paucapalea (1150), Roland Bandinelli
(later Alexander III, c. 1150), Rufinus (c. 1165), Étienne of Tournai
(Stephanus Tornacensis, c. 1168), John of Faenza (c. 1170), Sicard, Bishop
of Cremona (c. 1180), and, perhaps more important than all, Huguccio
or Hugucius (c. 1180). Writers of Summae of the Decretals include
Bernard of Pavia (c. 1195), Sinibaldo Fieschi (Innocent IV, c. 1240),
Wilhelmus Durantis (Durandus), Joannes Andreae, and Nicholas de
Tudeschis. The Summa Aurea or Summa Hostiensis, written by Henry
of Susa (ob. 1271), who was Cardinal-bishop of Ostia, is a work of
the highest value. The numerous treatises dealing with canonical pro-
1


## p. 743 (#789) ############################################

Roman and Canon Law in Spain
743
cedure, which form a special branch of canonistic literature, are called
Ordines Iudiciarii and are to be compared with the similar treatises of the
legistae or civilians. The Ordo Iudiciarius of Tancred (1214-1216)
largely displaced the works of earlier canonists on this subject". The
fifteenth century, although it is identified with the Spaniard John of
Torquemada and the Italian Panormitanus, is not as rich in canonistic
literature as the earlier ones. In the period after the Council of Trent
many distinguished canonists wrote commentaries on the Corpus iuris
canonici.
VII.
It is time to glance at the history of the spread of Roman and Canon
Law in medieval Spain.
The mixture of racial elements in the peninsula from the very
beginning of its history gives to Spanish legal history a complexity which
distinguishes it from the history of most of the other bodies of European
Law. Even to-day Spanish Law reflects the historical movements and
changes which finally produced the Spanish nation and gave it political
unity and imperial dominion. Of all the factors which have created the
Spanish legal system in a long process of evolution Roman influence has
been predominant; back to the law of Rome, Spain, of all the nations of
Western Europe, traces her law in most direct descent. Numerous legal
sources survive to prove that Roman legal influence was profound and
that it left an indelible imprint on the law of succeeding ages. In many
ways the history of peninsular law under the domination of the Romans
constitutes one of the most enlightening chapters in the history of the
spread of Roman Law to the provinces before the disappearance of the
Western Empire. Profound as was the Romanisation of law in Spain, it
was nevertheless not absolute. In Spain, as in other provinces of the
Empire, the Roman Law came into contact with native (here Ibero-
Celtic) customs and possibly also with Phoenician and Greek Law intro-
duced by the early colonists from the East. Native law persisted, at least
in some regions, after the coming of the Romans; though there is no
evidence that it still persisted in the latest period of the Western Empire.
Apart from the place filled by pre-Roman Law in the Roman period, there
was also the opportunity for the growth of indigenous legal institutions;
and it is clear from the evidence that down to the last the mos provincialis
was recognised. Hybrid legal institutions were created by the contact
of native and Roman legal types, and indigenous variants were either
juxtaposed or fused with the legal forms of the Roman province. Some
of these indigenous legal growths survived the Roman period; thus, the
betrothal custom of Cordova as to kisses—the penalty of lessened
i Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law, 2nd edn, Vol. 1, p. 207: Bracton
" levied contributions from the canonist Tancred. ”
CH. XXI.


## p. 744 (#790) ############################################

744
Roman and Visigothic times
inheritance for kissing the bride, before marriage, except in the presence
of eight relatives or neighbours – was adopted as general law by a
constitution of Constantine in 336, included in the Lex Romana Visigo-
thorum, and embodied in Castilian codes of medieval and modern times.
Indeed, at many points native peninsular law influenced the Roman Law;
and this influence was one of the main factors in the growth of Roman
provincial law in Spain. Roman Law, both public and private, was in fact
introduced into the peninsula and there moulded, under the political and
social influences of the time, into that Roman provincial law, partly
customary and partly regional written law, which was revealed in some
measure, a century after the fall of Rome, in the Lex Romana Visigothorum
of the Germanic conquerors. The stages in the evolution of this
provincial Roman Law in Spain follow in general the main lines of the
development of provincial law throughout the Empire: two of these
stages are marked by the growth of the jus gentium and the grant
of citizenship to the inhabitants of the provinces. In divers ways, indeed,
the introduction of Roman Law materially affected the growth of law in
Spain. It meant, in the first place, that the legal institutions and
doctrines of the Romans in respect to persons, things, and obligations
were to serve as one of the fundamental bases of future legal development;
and, in general, it led to the substitution of individualism for the
communistic ideas which had formerly permeated the law of the
peninsula. But the Germanic invasions and the fall of the Western
Empire interrupted this evolution. The stream of Roman Law still
continued to flow under Visigothic rule: it now flowed, however, partly in
the old and partly in new channels:
In this period of the Germanic invasions and Visigothic dominion
(400-700) the outstanding feature of Spanish legal history is the in-
troduction of the Germanic Law of the Visigoths into regions long
governed, in the main, by the peninsular system of Roman Law. The
meeting of these two different bodies of law produced results of the
highest importance and gave to the Spanish Law of later times some of its
characteristic features. There was an influence of the Roman Law on the
Visigothic and of the Visigothic Law on the Roman.
One of the ultimate
effects of these influences and counter-influences was the growth of hybrid
legal institutions-a feature of legal evolution which was characteristic of
the Romano-Germanic civilisation of Europe in general. A striking
example of these hybrid growths is furnished by the Formulas Visigoticas
(615-620), the formularies or models of public documents.
Until the time of Chindaswinth (642-653) the Spanish population--
composed of the Hispano-Romans and the Visigoths—lived under a legal
system based on the principle of the personality of law. The first king
who gave law to the Visigoths was Euric (467-485), whose code, although
largely a written statement of Germanic custom, displayed nevertheless
some traces of Roman influence. Euric's code was applied to the Visigoths;
1
1


## p. 745 (#791) ############################################

The Fuero Juzgo
745
and such of its parts as embodied public in contrast with private law were
also applied to the whole population generally. In respect of their own
inter-relations the Hispano-Romans continued to live under Roman
private law, modified somewhat by Germanic custom. Alaric's Breviary
—the Lex Romana Visigothorum (506), based on the Gregorian, Hermo-
genian, and Theodosian Codes, as well as upon other imperial sources
--solemnly confirmed to the Roman population their own code of
personal law. Private relations between the Hispano-Romans and the
Visigoths were governed, however, by the code of Euric.
With Chindaswinth (642-653) an important change took place. The
Lex Romana Visigothorum was abrogated. A common code--the Fuero
Juzgo (Forum Judicum)—was promulgated for both peoples, a code
which harmonised and fused the Germanic and Roman legal rules and
ideas. Some of these rules and ideas of the Fuero Juzgo shew a
preponderance of Visigothic Law, as in the case of the law of marriage
and of persons. Others are especially marked by Roman influence, as in
matters of inheritance, prescription, and contract. On the whole,
Chindaswinth's code represents the firm establishment of Germanic legal
institutions within a region which had been highly Romanised in the
pre-Visigothic period. The tide of Romanist influence was to flow more
freely and with greater force in later times.
In the period of the Christian and Moorish kingdoms (700–1300)
vast transforming processes were at work in the law of the several regions
of Spain; but many of the details and even some of the main tendencies
of this development are as yet but imperfectly understood. The history
of the Fuero Juzgo in this period has not yet been written. But we
know in a general way that this code, compounded of Germanic and
Roman elements, remained as one of the principal bases of practice in the
several kingdoms. Apart from the prevalence of the Romanic features of
this code, a code which in some regions at least was a sort of common law,
Roman influence—although it may be detected in the municipal fueros,
the charters, the acts of councils and cortes, and the judgments of
courts--appears to have been, on the whole, slight. The Church exerted
an influence upon the growth of the law; but, in its general character,
this was more a moral than a legal influence. Not until the period of
the Christian reconquest were ecclesiastical legal tendencies marked. Cer-
tain features of Spanish Law, such as partnership, are said to be derived
from Muslim legal culture. French Law was indubitably influential, not
only in the Pyrenean regions but also in other parts of the peninsula.
One of the outstanding features of the legal history of Spain in this
period, and especially from the early part of the eleventh century
onwards, is the firm establishment of four distinct and different legal
regions—the Castilian, the Aragonese, the Catalan (including in its
infuence Valentia and the Balearic Isles), and the Navarro-Basque, the
latter of which was in large measure a mingling of Castilian and Aragonese
CH. XXI.


## p. 746 (#792) ############################################

746
Spread of Justinianean and Canon Law
1
!
origins. This fourfold differentiation, based on many social, economic,
and legal causes, it is well for us to remember; for, when we come to
the next period of Spanish legal history (1252–1511), we shall see that
the Justinianean and Canon Laws were worked into the legal systems
of these four regions in varying degrees of intensity and effect. The way
for this renaissance of Romanism in the later Middle Age was partly
prepared during our present period (700-1300) by the study of Roman
and Canon Law in the several kingdoms, and by the establishment,
notably in Aragon, of right reason and equity as supplementary sources
of the law. But, although Romanism during the period from the middle
of the thirteenth century to the end of the Middle Age came into Spain
as a unifying force, it had in fact differing effects in the four several legal
regions-effects which corresponded to the reaction opposed to Romanism
on the part of each one of the indigenous legal systems.
We must remember, indeed, that the dominant characteristic of legal
growth in this period of the Christian reconquest and the political
unification of the peninsula (1252–1511) is the spread of the Justi-
nianean and the Canon Laws in the several kingdoms. The whole period
was rich in legal sources, more particularly in legislative acts; and
one of the chief tasks of the legal historian is to describe the process by
which this mass of legal materials was influenced by the legislation of
Justinian and the Canon Law. In periods prior to the one now under
review, Roman and Canonical institutions and principles of law had
exerted a notable influence on the law of Spain. So far as Roman Law
is concerned, indeed, this influence was in large measure an influence of
the pre-Justinianean law. Even before the thirteenth century, however,
the law of Justinian had not been without its influence in Spain'; and it
is possible that it was introduced into the Spanish territories ruled by
the Byzantines. But from the end of the eleventh century onwards the
western European re-birth of the codification of Justinian, due in large
measure to the work of Italian and French jurists, produced clear and
unmistakable effects in the peninsula. In the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries Roman Law was studied by Spanish jurists. The texts of
Justinian were diffused throughout the kingdoms. Works inspired by
the legal system of Justinian were written in Spain by Spanish lawyers.
Indeed, the thirteenth century may be taken as the time when the Roman
Law, in the form given to it by the great legislator at Constantinople,
acquired real importance in the Spanish kingdoms; and from that time
onwards the influence of the Justinianean law upon Spanish Law steadily
increased. Coincident with this Romanising process there was also a
steady diffusion of the Canon Law. Not only was the Canon Law enforced
in the ecclesiastical courts of the peninsula, it was also employed as an
instrument for the modification of the secular law.
The details of this development in the several kingdoms-during the
period from 1252 to 1511- are of absorbing interest. The temptation
1


## p. 747 (#793) ############################################

The Fuero Real. Las Partidas
747
to sketch the main features of the Romanising process, as it penetrated
into all parts of the peninsula, must, however, be resisted. We
may
but
glance for a moment at Castile and Leon in the thirteenth century.
The Fuero Real, issued by Alfonso X in 1254, is the only legal work
of a truly legislative character that was inspired by the Justinianean law
during the thirteenth century in Castile. The elements which compose
the Fuero Real are, however, predominantly indigenous. The code has
as its basis the earlier fueros, including the Fuero Juzgo, but with
additions; and it preserves, with some changes, the general character
of the Visigothic, Castilian, and Leonese law evolved during the first
centuries of the period of reconquest. While the Roman element in the
Fuero Real is thus in part due to Roman influence upon the earlier
sources taken up into it, it is also, in part, the result of direct borrowings
by the compilers from the Roman and Canonical legal systems. Among
the novelties introduced in this way into Castilian law from the Roman
Law a considerable part of the theory of contracts, the accession of insula
nata, certain of the rules of intestate succession and testamentary
executors, may be mentioned. Likewise in the matter of adoption, the
compilers of the Fuero Real adjusted the indigenous law to the system
of Justinian.
In the history of Roman and Canon Law in Castile and Leon the
reign of Alfonso X is also notable by reason of the compilation of the
Libro de las Leges, a great legal encyclopedia, which, owing to its
division into seven parts, came to be known in the fourteenth century
as the Leges de Partidas or Las Partidas, names which are still used to
designate it. The jurists who compiled the Partidas under the super-
vision of the king, between the years 1256 and 1265, drew upon three
classes of sources: the customs and fueros of Castile and Leon, including
the Fuero Juzgo, the Fuero Real, and the fueros of Cuenca and Cordova;
the accepted Canon Law (the Decretals); and the writings of the Roman
jurists included in the Digest, together with the works of Italian jurists
dealing with the law of Justinian. The main materials drawn upon by
the compilers were the sources of the Roman and Canon Laws. Indeed, Las
Partidas may best be described as a systematic compendium of these two
legal systems, modified in some particulars by Alfonso's jurists in order
to adapt them to Spanish conditions. In the legal history of Castile the
Partidas is of supreme importance; for it not only adds new elements to
the law, but also modifies materially the earlier Visigothic and indigenous
foundations of the Castilian system. In fact, it seems to have been the
king's purpose to express in his compilation the new influences of Roman
and Canon Law, to impose the code as a common law upon all his subjects,
and thus to annul the municipal fueros, the Fuero Juzgo, and even the
Fuero Real itself. Although this latter purpose was not effected, the fieros
retaining their force, the Partidas-embodying many fundamental features
of the Roman and Canon systems-steadily gained ground. Among
CH. XXI.


## p. 748 (#794) ############################################

748
Spanish legal science
lawyers and students Alfonso's work was used as a reference and text-
book; and ultimately it was confirmed both in the practice of the courts
and by act of the Cortes. The compilation of Las Partidas thus marks
an important stage in the gradual adoption of Roman and ecclesiastical
legal rules and principles, a process which by the close of the Middle Age
had given a dominant stamp to the legal system of Castile.
The permeation of the legal systems of Spain by Roman and Canon
Law in the later Middle Age furthered the growth of Spanish legal science.
The Spanish jurists of the period include civilians and canonists of great
ability. They were teachers in Spanish, Italian, and French schools of
law; they were writers of legal treatises ; they were editors of legal texts.
Among them may be mentioned Juan Garcia el Hispano, who lectured
on Civil and Canon Law at Bologna and wrote learned works; Cardinal
Torquemada, who lectured at Paris and wrote commentaries on Gratian's
Decretum ; Raymond de Peñafort, professor at Bologna and compiler,
by order of Pope Gregory IX, of the Decretals in the Liber Extra; and
Antonio de Nebrija (1444-1522), who revised the glosses of Accursius
and wrote Observaciones sobre las Pandectas and a Lexicon Juris Civilis.
By the close of the Middle Age Spanish Law, in its several regional
growths, had assumed its main permanent features.
VIII.
The main characteristic of legal growth in France before the twelfth
century, as it was also the central feature of the history of law in other
parts of Europe during the same period, was the meeting and the
mingling of Germanic law and the Roman and Canon Laws. Under the
system of the personality of law the leges romance and the leges bar-
barorum were both in force within their respective spheres. While under
this system the Church as an institution lived by the Roman Law, the
evolution of the Canon Law meant that in France, as elsewhere, the
Church courts, within their own province, enforced this newer or secondary
body of Roman legal doctrine. The process of feudalisation furthered
the growth of the notion that law was territorial ; and the Capitularies
of the Frankish rulers introduced a body of imperial law, applicable to
all subjects, which embodied Roman and Canonical principles and had
territorial validity as law in contrast with the various systems of per-
sonal law.
In time, as Esmein has pointed out', the personal laws and the
Capitularies fell into desuetude. In their place many territorial customs
gradually developed. The Roman Law, in certain regions at least, ceased
to be invoked as written law, its rules being regarded as a part of
unwritten custom. This process—developing during the chaotic period
of the tenth and eleventh centuries and coming to a definite result in
1 Histoire du Droit Français, 7th edn, pp. 705-707.


## p. 749 (#795) ############################################

Roman and Canon Law in France
749
the course of the twelfth century-determined in many ways the whole
future history of law in France. In the second part of the eleventh
century, however, the Roman written law emerged once more as with
a re-birth; and during the next two centuries it played a highly important
rôle. It either had validity alongside custom or it shaped and modified
custom itself. Down to the very end of the ancien régime the Roman
Law remained in force as binding law, but in a measure which varied
with subject-matter and locality. In the course of the twelfth century
a new and vigorous source of law appeared in the form of royal legis-
lative power. From the fourteenth century onwards the ordonnances of
the kings evolved a body of public and private law of very great im-
portance; and during the course of the sixteenth century they trans-
formed most of the important coûtumes into true lois.
Meanwhile, during the centuries when this long process of develop-
ment was taking its course, the Canon Law, profoundly influenced by the
renaissance of Roman Law, had slowly taken its place as a world-wide
system of jurisprudence. In France the canonical system not only exerted
on many parts of the secular law a remarkable influence, but, down to
the close of the ancien régime, it also retained, up to a certain point, the
character of a body of laws binding the State as well as the Church.
The period from 1100 to 1500 is of special interest. The gradual
adoption of the principle that law was territorial and not personal, an
evolution due in large measure, as we have seen, to the establishment of
feudalism, led to the division of France into two parts, the regions of
written law (pays de droit écrit) and the regions of customary law (pays
de coûtumes). The pays de droit écrit is the southern part of France, about
one-third of the entire country; while north of an irregular line of
boundary, running from the Ile d'Oléron to the Lake of Geneva, lies the
pays de coûtumes. The place of Roman Law in each one of these two
distinct parts of France forms one of the most instructive chapters in the
history of French medieval law.
In the south the Roman population greatly exceeded in numbers the
Germanic population. Under the system of the personality of laws the
Roman Law had been applied to the Romans, and when the principle of
the territoriality of laws was established the Roman Law, being the law
of the majority, was applied to all persons, Roman and Germanic, as the
customary and common law of the southern regions. The point that
Roman Law was applied as the Custom of the South is worthy of special
note. The authority of the Roman Law in the pays de droit écrit was
not derived from any official promulgation in the Roman or Germanic
periods of French history; it was derived from its character as local
custom, and as such it was recognised as binding by the rulers of the
southern regions. The fact that the Roman Law was applied as custom
helps us to understand why it varied, in respect of its scope and force,
from province to province and from century to century, and why, from
CH. XXI.


## p. 750 (#796) ############################################

750
Pays de droit écrit. Pays de coûtumes
time to time, one set of Roman legal sources supplanted another as the
guide to the nature of legal rules and principles. For the very reason
that the Roman Law in those regions was treated as custom, the earlier
sources of that law were easily abandoned for the later ones as repositories
of custom; and we find indeed that the gradual spread of the Justinianean
compilations displaced not only the Theodosian Code but also the
Breviary of Alaric and the Lex Romana Burgundionum. For the same
reason we find that the customary Roman Law was modified by local
statutes.
In the north-the pays de coûtumes—the place of the Roman legal
system was different. In these regions the customary law was composed
of diverse elements: mixed remnants of Germanic and Roman Law, Canon
Law, the Capitularies which had not fallen into desuetude, and local
usages. From an early time the Roman Law—the common law of all
Christian peoples-possessed, even in the pays de coûtumes, a very great
authority as the embodiment of juristic theory. From the universities
came the lawyers; and in the universities the Roman and Canon Laws
were the only subjects of legal study. At an early period the texts of
the Digest and the writings of the Bolognese jurists were translated into
French. In the interpretation and application of the coûtumes, courts
and legal writers alike employed the Roman Law as a kind of universal
legal logic and as the fountain of supplementary rules, helpful analogies,
and principles of interpretation. During the sixteenth century Roman
Law played so important a rôle in legal education, in the practice of the
courts, and in the literature of the law, that jurists raised the question
whether the Roman Law was not, after all, the common law of the pays
de coûtumes. The question thus raised has been the subject of learned
dispute from that day to this; and French lawyers have never really
reached full accord. The better view seems to be, however, that in the
regions of the coûtumes the Roman Law did not become, as it did in the
regions of the droit écrit, the common law. In the north, as distinct
from the south, Roman Law possessed a theoretical or juristic authority.
This authority, although it was not absolutely binding, had persuasive
power, influencing judges, practitioners, and legislators. The authority
exerted was the authority of legal reason; and as legal reason the Roman
Law spread throughout the regions of the coûtumes and influenced them,
ultimately colouring them when they were reduced to writing.
In the manner and with the effect thus briefly indicated the Roman
Law established itself in both parts of medieval France—the pays
de
droit écrit and the pays de coûtumes. Transmitted in this form to later
ages, the Roman Law was ultimately embodied, as one of its fundamental
elements, in the codified Civil Law of modern France.
The influence of the Roman and Canon Laws on the development of
medieval law in France is to be observed in the legal literature of the
time. Thus, in his compilation of the customs and usages of Vermandois,


## p. 751 (#797) ############################################

Legal literature and legal education
751
Pierre de Fontaines, one of the councillors of St Louis, translates passages
from Justinian's Digest and Code. The private work known as the
Anciens Usages d'Artois (1283-1302) has citations from Roman and
Canonical legal sources; while the Livre de Jostice et de Plet, a work con-
cerned with the usages of Orléans and probably written shortly after 1259,
is for the most part a translation of Roman texts. Philip de Rémy, lord
of Beaumanoir (1246 or 1247-1296), employs as the sources of his
Coûtumes de Beauvaisis not only the settled usages and the judgments of
courts, but also the Roman Law, “the law which is common to the whole
of France. ” Jehan Boutillier, who died about 1395, gives us in his Somme
Rural—which is a sort of encyclopedia of the whole of the French Law at
the close of the fourteenth century—the picture of a confused mingling
of Roman and Canon Law with the customary law. At an early time the
writings of Bolognese jurists, including the Summa of Azo, were translated
into French.
In the Middle Ages the Civil and Canon Laws were both taught in the
French universities; but not until modern times was French Law added
to the curriculum. A break in the continuity of teaching Roman Law
occurred, however, in the thirteenth century. Honorius III in 1219, by
the papal decretal Super specula, expressly forbade the teaching of
Roman Law at Paris ; and a century later, in 1312, Philip the Fair con-
firmed the decretal in a royal ordinance. Down to 1679, when it was
brought back once more into the official curriculum, Roman Law could be
taught at Paris only privatim; Cujas, the great Romanist of the sixteenth
century, was obliged to secure the express authority of the Parlement in
order that he might teach it. It is not difficult to see that the Church
had an interest in strengthening the position of Canon Law, at the expense
of Civil Law, in the very centre of European theological studies. Inasmuch
as the Ile de France, with Paris as its capital, was a region of custom as
distinct from written law, there was of course less practical need for the
teaching of Roman Law at Paris than at other French universities.
Nevertheless, the prohibition of the King of France seems at first sight
surprising. The explanation may well lie, as Brissaud suggests, in a fear
of the political influence of the civilians of Bologna, who were at that
time teaching the doctrine that the King of France was a subject of the
Holy Roman Emperor.
Instruction in Roman Law at medieval French universities other
than Paris was encouraged by the Church. In the period of the person-
ality of laws the Church had lived by the Roman Law (ecclesia vivit lege
Romana); and the Roman Law had contributed much to the formation
of the Church's system of Canon Law. These features of the legal history
of the Church seem to have played a part in leading the ecclesiastics to
take a favourable view of the teaching of Roman Law at all the French
universities except theological Paris. Furthermore, many jurists of the
Middle Age were canonists as well as civilians; and a considerable number
CH. XXI.


## p. 752 (#798) ############################################

752
Influence of Italian jurists
of them seem to have supported the Papacy's ultramontane doctrines.
This factor in the situation may also have influenced Church policy as to
Roman Law teaching.
The medieval civilians and canonists of France were greatly influenced,
as were civilians and canonists in all European countries, by the methods
of the Italian jurists—the Glossators and the Commentators. A little
later, humanistic learning spread from Italy to France: it was Alciat, the
Milanese, who carried to France the new jurisprudential methods of the
humanists in the early part of the sixteenth century. In France—at
famous Bourges and also at other universities—a flourishing school of
humanistic legal thought soon came into being, which included such great
Romanists as Cujas, Baudouin, Doneau, Douaren, and Hotman. Pothier,
in the middle of the eighteenth century, summed up the work of the
school in his Pandectae Justinianeae in nor'um ordinem redactae (1748). It
was the work of this school which prepared the way for the great Code
Civil and the many codes of civil law in other countries that have
drawn their inspiration and much of their form and substance from
Napoleon's.
IX.
In the early periods of the history of law in the regions now mostly
within the German Republic—the Germanic epoch and the age of
Frankish ascendency- the basis of the law was a great variety of
Germanic customs. In the course of time the customs had been some-
what modified by the Roman and Canon Laws as they slowly penetrated,
by direct or indirect channels, into the regions held by the various
Germanic peoples; and in the days of the Frankish Empire these foreign
influences were more marked than in the earlier centuries. But, looking
at Germany as a whole at the close of the tenth century, we can see that,
save for the natural modifications due to the progress of the several
peoples in the scale of civilisation, their laws still retained, in most
fundamental features, their original Germanic character.
From the eleventh to the fifteenth centuries the main characteristics
of legal growth in Germany were particularism and diversity. The
written laws of the earlier period—the laws of the Saxons, Franks, and
other Germanic peoples, and the Capitularies of Charlemagne and his
successors—had gradually fallen into a state of disuse in German territories;
for in Germany, in contrast with Italy, Germanic legal sources had not
been made constantly the subject of legal instruction, nor had they formed
the basis of a legal literature. Political and social changes vitally affected
legal development. The principle of the personality of law was displaced,
largely as the result of the rise of feudalism, by the notion that law was
territorial and that it applied to every inhabitant. The old tribal laws
were transformed, therefore, into the unwritten customary laws of localities.


## p. 753 (#799) ############################################

Legal growth in Germany. The Sachsenspiegel 753
It is true that there were royal courts and even royal-enacted laws; but
there was no coherent central judicial organisation of sufficient strength
to combat particularistic tendencies. German territories were covered by
a network of special courts, such as the courts of feudal lords and of
towns, and in these courts German Law was enforced. In Germany
as a whole there was no legal unity, no common law. Legal particu-
larism and diversity split the law into many laws enforced by many
courts.
When we remember these legal conditions, we need not be surprised
to find that German jurists endeavoured to produce orderly and consistent
treatises of German Law out of the complex and diverse materials which
they collected. Nor need it be a source of surprise to discover that these
juristic efforts failed to achieve their main purpose of German legal unity
ere the rising tide of foreign legal influence submerged large portions of
the native law by the introduction or reception of Roman, Canon, and
Lombard feudal Law. One of these native juristic attempts to produce
order out of the chaos of German legal conditions deserves special notice.
At a time when the Italian Glossators were reaching the end of their
labours and Gregory IX's collection of decretals (1234) was added to the
corpus of Canon Law, Eike von Repkow, a German knight who had long
served as a lay-judge, seems to have realised the danger to the native law
of his race from the foreign and rival systems. In the Sachsenspiegel,
composed between 1198 and 1235, and probably in the third decade of
the thirteenth century, Eike brought together the principles of Saxon
customary law and gave them coherence and systematic order; and upon
Eike's famous work some of the most important of the later treatises on
German Law were based. A comparison of the Sachsenspiegel with the
contemporary treatise of Bracton on the law of England shews us that
Eike's work is distinguished from Bracton's by its originality and its
freedom from the influence of the Glossators! Eike's book of Saxon native
jurisprudence and the works of other German lawyers helped for a time
indeed to stem in some fashion the rising influence of Roman Law in
northern Germany. But the conflict between German Law and the foreign
laws was an unequal one from the beginning. The Sachsenspiegel marks,
in fact, the end of the creative period in the evolution of German national
law. Most of the main factors which determine legal growth in a period
of conflict between competing laws—the fact, for example, that the
Roman law-books contained a systematic corpus of general principles
suitable to an advancing civilisation—were on the side of the foreign
laws. Their reception in Germany turned—and turned permanently-
the whole current of legal evolution into new channels. Even to-day the
law of Germany is still flowing in the channels cut deep down into the
i It is possible, however, that the Sachsenspiegel owes something to the writings
of Italian canonists. See K. Zeumer's essays cited in the bibliography appended to
this chapter.
C. MED. H. VOL. V. CH. XXI.
48


## p. 754 (#800) ############################################

754
Reception of Roman and Canon Law
soil of German life and civilisation by this vast process of adopting the
extraneous laws. The Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch of 1900 is a code of German
private law-but at the same time it is a code of German private law in
which Romanistic legal traditions form a constituent element as pervasive
and important as the Germanic.
The “Reception" of foreign laws in Germany means the adoption of
three systems-Roman Law, Canon Law, and the Lombard feudal law. Of
the reception of the Lombard feudal law nothing need here be said ; and
of the Reception of Roman and Canon Law only the barest sketch can be
given. First of all, let two things be specially noted. The reception of
these two bodies of foreign law formed a long historical process extending
through several centuries; it was not accomplished by a single sovereign
fiat. Furthermore, although the reception of the two Romanic systems
constituted, in a sense, but one single process, yet this process embraced
two movements which differed one from the other in respect of their
causes and their course. Scholars still dispute in regard to the matter of
chronological priority as between these two movements. Brunner regards
the Reception of Roman Law as first in point of time and of influence, and
treats the Reception of Canon Law as its consequence, while Stintzing holds
that the Canon Law came first into Germany, and, preparing the way,
drew the Roman Law after it. When Brunner and Stintzing have spoken
and have disagreed, other doctores iuris utriusque may be tempted to
exercise the scholar's prerogative of silence.
In the history of the Reception of Roman Law two stages are to be
distinguished—the stage of the theoretical and the stage of the practical
Reception. The one consists of the gradual rooting of the conviction in
the minds of German rulers, statesmen, and jurists that Roman Law may
rightfully claim to be the law of Germany; the other consists of the
actual embodiment of Roman Law in German judge-made law.
The theoretical Reception has its beginnings in the notion that
the Roman Empire of the German nation was a continuation of the
Roman Empire of ancient times, and that, in consequence, the Roman
Law of the ancient Empire possessed subsidiary force in the medieval
Empire. This notion gained ground in proportion as the native German
Law became more and more enmeshed in the complex web of particularism.
The spread of the knowledge of Roman Law by the many German
students who obtained their legal education in the Italian law schools
also furthered the growth of the idea. German legal literature—for
example, the Schwabenspiegel, probably written about 1275, the glosses
on the Sachsenspiegel, and the works of Nikolaus Wurms and Johannes
von Brünn-shewed an influence of the Roman Law.