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。