Medieval Academy of America

Crimen Laesae Maiestatis in the Lex Romana Wisigothorum Author(s): Floyd Seyward Lear Source: Speculum, Vol. 4, No. 1 (Jan., 1929), pp. 73-87 Published by: Medieval Academy of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2847127 . Accessed: 23/06/2013 09:06
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Medieval Academy of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Speculum.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CRIMEN LAESAE MAIESTATIS IN THE LEX ROMANA WISIGOTHORUM1

BY FLOYD SEYWARD LEAR

and treason of tese-majestg undertheRomanLaw crimes in his withcareby Theodor Mommsen have beeninvestigated someadditional evidence Romisches Strafrecht (Leipzig, 1899),while on Maiestasand Perduellio in thearticles has beenbrought forward in Daremberg and Saglio'sDicand Ch. Lecrivain by G. Humbert a brief tionaire desAntiquites etRomaines.2 Morerecently Grecques
I The standard edition of the Breviaryis Lex Romana Visigothorum, ed., G. Haenel in Haenel's (Leipzig, 1849). In the presentstudy I referto the provisionsof the Breviary to thisworkwill be designated editionunder the abbreviationL.R.V., whileotherreferences Alaricianum. R6misches simplyHaenel. A valuable aid to researchis M. Conrat,Breuiarium Darstellung(Leipzig, 1903), which providesa Reich in Systematischer Rechtim Frdnkischen of the materialin the Breviary. For the various texts and systematictopical arrangement (Vol. I, part 1) ofthe Mommsee the Prolegomena and its epitomes, redactions ofthe Breviary sen-Meyereditionof the TheodosianCode (Berlin,1905), pp. lxv-cvi. der Deutschen Lehrbuch Rechtsgeschichte For essentialsecondaryworks,see R. SchroSder, Berlinand Leipzig: de Gruyter, 1922), pp. 252-253, with nn. (6th ed. by E. von Klinstberg, Rechtsgeschichte (2d ed., Leipzig, 1906), I, 510-516; Deutsche 5-6 (Bibliography);H. Brunner, der 0. Karlowa,RimischesRechtsgeschichte (Leipzig,1885), II, 976-982; M. Conrat,Geschichte im Friiheren des R6mischen Rechts Mittelalter (Leipzig, 1891), I, 41-46; Quellenund Literatur desRimischen Rechts(2d ed., und Litteratur der Quellen 89-90; 218-252; P. Kruger,Geschichte Handbuch der DeutschenRechtswissenschaft; Leipzig, 1912), pp. 308-316, in Systematisches (Madrid, 1905), pp. 296-323; F. C. R. de Urefiay Smenjaud, La Legislaci6nG6tico-Hispana des R6mischen Rechtsim Mittelalter (2d ed., Heidelberg,1834), II, von Savigny, Geschichte Romaines 37-67; Haenel, pp. v-xl; A. Tardif,Histoiredes Sourcesdu DroitFranCais,Origines (Paris, 1890), pp. 129-143; H. 0. Taylor. The MediaevalMind (4thed., New York: Macmillan, compiled and edited Legal History, 1925), II, 272-273, 278; SelectEssays in Anglo-American by a Committeeof the Associationof AmericanLaw Schools (Boston, 1907), I, 15 ff.; H. D. Medieval History(CamHazeltine, 'Roman and Canon Law in the Middle Ages,' Cambridge bridge: Macmillan, 1926), V, 721-722. 2 Mommsenwas, by no means,the first scholarto deal withthisphase of Roman Law, as luridica, one may observeifhe scan through the listsin the variouseditionsofthe Bibliotheca and compiledby of legal literature widelyused in the 18th century an extensive bibliography of modern the culminating accomplishment M. Lipenius,but ratherhis Strafrecht represents ofthe 16th,17th,and 18thcenturies were,as a rule,comstudyin this field. Also the writers or legal theorists, whereasMommsendetermined factsin accordancewithmodern mentators scientificmethods of research. Note the works of Mommsen's immediate predecessors: bis zum Tode Justinian's(Leipzig, 1842), des Riimischen G. Geib, Geschichte Criminalprocesses der R6mervonRomulusbis auf Justinianus(Leipzig, pp. 50-66; W. Rein, Das Criminalrecht der Rbmischen Republik(Berlin,1865-69) 1844), pp. 504-597; A. Zumpt,Das Criminalrecht and maiestas; especially I (2), 324-338 on perduellio;II (1), 226-264; 376-392 on perduellio II (2), 62-78 on crimen falsi.

THE

73

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

74

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

in Part I ofa monograph has appeared oftheseoffences treatment Offences entitled ofLondon, byPandiasM. SchisasoftheUniversity but is incomplete repreLaw.' Thisstudy in Roman the State against Mommsen stillour remains research.However, sentsindependent will near thatthe future and it seemsunlikely standard authority, inthefield ofRomanpublic contribution add greatly tohisdefinitive did not carry thesestudies Mommsen law. Unfortunately criminal 2 or thePapianus; and an analysis ofthese intoeither theBreviary to know what ofthe if we are provisions oflawmust be made, bodies againstthe state werecarried RomanLaw dealingwithoffences and Burgundian romanae the Visigothic when the overinto leges Romansubcodesfortheir to the task of providing kingsturned or Lex Romana the the two, jects. Of Wisigothorum Breuiarium in and far-reaching is by farthemoresignificant Alarici(Breviary) in of examination the object it alone constitutes and influence, its thisarticle. by a has beendealtwithat length of theBreviary The history jurisin legalhistory and historical specialists of accepted number for It was compiled no detailed discussion. and requires prudence, ofjurists ofsouthern Gaulbya commission theuseofthe prouinciales II to examine suchRomanlaws byKingAlaric whowere appointed The resulting code was use in his dominions.3 as werein current at Airein Gascony and waspromulin506at an assembly approved
1 P. M. Schisas, Offences of London againsttheStatein RomanLaw (London: University Press, 1926), pp. 3-15. 2 Various names have been applied to this compilation. The confusion in terminology sources. The followseemsto have arisenmainlybecause of the variationsof the manuscript of this ing list gives severaltitleswhichI have chancedupon in the courseof the preparation Liber study,and does not exhaustthe possibilities:Lex Romana, Lex Romana Wisigothorum, Lex Romanorum, Liber Aniani, Liber Legum, Liber LegumRomanarum, LegumRomanorum, OriginaliaLegum,CorpusLegum,Liber luris, Liber luriLiber Legis, Liber Legis Doctorum, Liber Breuiatus,Breuiarium, dicus, Lex Theodosii,Corpus Theodosii,Corpus Theodosianum, Alaricianum. See H. Brunner, op. cit.,I, 512; P. Kruger, Alarici,and Breuiarium Breuiarium op. cit.,p. 309; Haenel, p. vi, n. 6. belongs to the group of laws designatedlegesromanae The Lex Romana Wisigothorum or ForumIudicum of later fromthe Leges Wisigothorum carefully and must be distinguished termedlegesbarbarorum. date whichare properly 3 Brunner was caused by in his Roman provincials believesthat Alaric's sudden interest attack at the hands of Clovis and his no altruisticimpulsebut by the threatof impending op. cit.,I, 511. Franks. Cf. H. Brunner,

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

75

gatedby the kingas the sole code forhis Roman subjects. ConofRomanLaw, it is a curious directly uponthefoundations structed Code in large theThzeodosian drawn ofmaterials partfrom collection of Paulus.' The textof the RomanLaw is quoted and Sentences are accompanied by an interpretauerbatim,2 and manyprovisions form thesense in briefer expresses which usually tion(interpretatio) do notreflect a Visigothic attempt Theseinterpretationes ofthetext.3 undertheycouldbetter which theRomanLaw in terms to restate represent probably stand,but,as HenryOsbornTaylor remarks, of the of the leges,withthe exposition 'the approvedexposition in the law schoolsof of Paulus, current alreadyarchaicSentences 4 Maitlandsays in his helpful in article century.' Gaul in thefifth 'It is thought Legal History: Essays in Anglo-American the Select of Gaius version and thesorry thatthis"interpretation" nowadays Roman science. but degenerate not Gothicbarbarism, represent, understand their A timehad come whenlawyers could no longer
1 These are the onlyportions materialbearingon treasonand of the Breviary containing emperors, the Nouellaeof Theodosiusand succeeding relatedoffences.The textsderivedfrom Gregorianand HermogenianCodes, Responsa of Papinian, and Liber Gaii yield nothingof importance. formof the Liber Gaii. 2 Save forthe Institutes of Gaius whichappear in the corrupted 3 Cf. Codex Theodosianus, The in7, 1, 1 (L.R. V. Codex 7, 1, 1) with its interpretatio. disappears in the interpretatio vidious relationbetweenbarbariand Romani in the constitutio brigands,i.e., the interpretatio and epitomes. Marauding barbariansgive way to plundering the law. Cf.anothersimilarcase in C. Th.,15, 14, 14 (L.R.V. C. 15, 3. 1). Also the generalizes are sometimes suggestive. However,all evidenceof this sort omissionsof the interpretationes are not completeanalyses and comis, in the main,negative. The Visigothicinterpretationes or re-statement comparableto portionsof the Lombard withsome re-formulation mentaries expositiones.They were 'often not so much explanatoryof the text as qualificativeor corrective.' Cf. H. Goudy, 'Roman Law,' Encyclopaedia Britannica (Ilth ed., Cambridge, 1911), XXIII, 572. 4 H. 0. Taylor,op. cit.,II, 272. Cf. 0. Karlowa, op. cit.,II, 977-979, regarding a basis of and giving the views of Fitting, for constructing the interpretationes earlier commentaries Dernbergand Degenkolb; H. Brunner,op. cit.,I, 514; P. KrUger,op. cit.,pp. 311-313; M. Conrat,Quellen,I, 89-90; Haenel, pp. x-xi, especiallynotes 37-38. Haenel remarks: erat: ut explanarentur leges et ad praesentem duplex potissimum 'Finis interpretationis ad uerbum quare compluriumlegum interpretatio Romanorumstatum accommodarentur, facta est, contra aliarum eum in modum, quem praesens Romanorum status et usus proquibus leges correctaerebusue pertinent, uinciae postulauit. Ad hoc genus interpretationes simileslegescommemorantur. sunt,aut in quibus aliorumlibrorum aliundesumtisamplificatae et hunc existimarent, Eae moueruntdoctos, ut a Wisigothisfactam esse interpretationem ueramesse nego.' ad Romanos deferretur, quam sententiam ut ius Gothorum quidem in finem, For the older contrary view, see F. von Savigny,op. cit.,II, 54-55.

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

76

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

I Little withdebasedabridgments.' and were content ownold texts legalideasmaybe obtained between Romanand Germanic contrast it accompanies. withthetextwhich theInterpretatio by comparing anyoriginality from little valuearising possesses Thus,theBreviary whatRomanlaws,bearing ofits own,but it does serveto indicate to weretransmitted and other relatedpublicoffences, on treason thegreatlegalcompend for sinceit remained thewestern Germans period.2BeItaly,as late as theCarolingian thosepeoplesoutside it was reducedto epitomes and tenthcenturies tweenthe eighth thelexand theinterpreand combining thework lessbulky making littlenew lightis cast upon the prohowever, tatio.3In general,
Legal History(Boston, 1907), I, 15. SelectEssays in Anglo-American Cf. 0. Karlowa, op. cit.,II, 977: 'Sie (Savigny,Haenel, Fitting)haben gezeigt,dass sie Reichs zu furdie damaligen Zustaindedes westgotischen als eine wichtigeErkenntnisquelle aber auch, wennsie auch keinenWerthat furdie Kenntnisdes klassischen ist,ferner betrachten Reich Rechts, doch Aufschlussgiebt tiberden Rechtszustandim westromischen romischen nach Chr.' um die Scheide des 5. und 6. Jahrhr. and shows that it H. Brunner, op. cit.,I, 515, discussesthe later historyof the Breviary remainedthe chiefbook on Roman Law in France, Germany,and England as late as the century. It was retainedin the Frankishlands, althoughits use in Spain had been twelfth by Recceswinth. Cf. H. 0. Taylor, op. cit.,II, 272. discontinyed made to subsequentlegislation, the Breviary what contributions In determining precisely von Wretno studentof mediaeval law shouldoverlookthe highlydetailed analysisof Alfred Code (Berlin,1905), editionof the Theodosian schko in Vol. I, Part 1, ofthe Mommsen-Meyer per Hispaniam, Galliam, pp. cccvii-ccclx(De Usu Breuiarii Alariciani Forensi et Scholastico Vicinas). Italiam Regionesque (Papianus) and of the Edictum Theoof the Lex Romana Burgundionum The influence and the possible influenceof a Roman 'Vulgdrrecht' doriciwas much more circumscribed, whereinRoman law became debased to a kind of popular custom among the Gallo-Roman positiveconclusions.However, mustbe subjectedto special studybeforereaching provincials much material,not contained in the I doubt that this customaryRoman law transmitted Breviary.Cf. H. 0. Taylor,op. cit.,II, 268, 275, 277, on Romanesque or popularRoman law; Century (Cambridge:Harvard University also C. H. Haskins, The Renaissanceof theTwelfth France) Press,1927), pp. 195-196,who says: 'For mostpeople(in partsofItaly and in Southern theRoman law came to restupon local custom,a popularizedand, in somerespectsdegenerate as theVulgar to theclassicaljurisprudence thesame relation formoflaw, whichboresomewhat bore to the classical speech.' Latin of the provinces Also it should be borne in mind that therewere other channels,less obvious than the wherebyRoman legal ideas might find theirway into the leges barbarorum.Cf. Breviary, in the Bavarian and Lomelements M. Conrat,Quellen,I, 3, withnotes8-9, 13-14, regarding bard laws derivedfromthe CorpusIuris Ciuilis and ecclesiasticallegislation. 3 As a rule,the epitomes ratherthan the original tendto be based upon the interpretationes of the op. cit.,I, 515-516. The best discussions textofthe Ronian lexand ius. Cf.H. Brunner, and M. Conrat,Quellen, I, 292-252,286-292,with and glossesare Haenel, pp. xxiii-xl, epitomes notes, and A. Tardif,Histoiredes Sources,pp. 136-142. Haenel, Conrat, and Tardif agree,
2

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

77

visions relating to publiccriminal law by either theinterpretationes or theepitomes.New ideas are rarely added,while alterations and excisions seldommodify the original in a vital manner.' meaning The chief exceptions to thisrulemaybe found intheEpitomeSancti Galli. Following theclassification oftheRomanLaw, themostserious offences against thestateare included under theprovisions oflaesa maiestas,2 and in theBreviary thecrime oflaesa maiestas is defined intheterms ofthewell-known passage from theSentences ofPaulus:I
in the main,on problems concerning the date and place oforigin ofthe epitomes, as herelisted: EpitomeAegidii (8th century, southern France); Scintillaor EpitomeCodicisParisiensis10753 (formerly Suppl. Lat. 215) (8th century, France); EpitomeMonachi (8th century, France); EpitomeCodicisGuelpherbytani (8th century, France?); EpitomeCodicisLugdunensis (7th-9th century,France); Epitome Codicis Seldeni (19th-century English MS., based on earlier Frankish sources?); and Epitome Sancti Galli, variouslyknown as Lex Romana Utinensis, Lex Romana Curiensis,Lex Romana Raetica,and Lex Romana Raetica Curiensis(ca. 8th century,Switzerland). The exact place of originof the EpitomeS. Galli has longbeen disputedA Various places have been suggestedincludingLombardy,Istria, southernGermany, ar i the regionof Switzerland(Rhaetia), whichis generally accepted at present. See C-- , I, 288, n. 6; 289, n. 1; 290, n. 4; 291, n. 1. The EpitomeS. Galli alone possessesany largesignificance for this study inasmuch as it displays the influence of Germanicelementsmarkedly:'Die Lex Romana Curiensis- von germanisch-rechtlichen Einfltissen starkdurchsetzt ist' (Conrat, I, 9238);'[La Rex Curiensis]nous fournitdes renseignements precieux sur le droit romain vulgairede cette epoque' (Tardif,p. 141). 1 This statement is by no means trueof the provisions relatingto mattersin privatelaw, and must not be accepted too narrowly in any case. For the relationof the epitomesto the of a Roman 'Vulgdrrecht' development underthe influence of Germaniclaw, see H. Brunner, op. cit.,I, 516, especiallyn. 26. 2 Note other offences against the state, listed in the Bretiary,whichare closelyrelated and sometimesinvolvedwith maiestas: C. Th., 9, 10, 1 and 3-4 (L. R. V. C. 9, 7, 1-3) Ad LegemIuliam de Vi Publica et Priuata; Paulus, Sententiae, 5, 26, 1-4 (L.R.V. P. 5, 28, 1-4) Ad Legemluliam de Vi Publica et Priuata; C.Th., 9, 27, 1 and 4 (L.R.V. C. 9, 21, 1-2) Ad Legem1uliam Repetundarum; Paul. Sent.,5, 28, 1 (L.R.V. P. 5, 30, 1) Ad LegemIuliam RepeC. Th., 9, 19, 1 and 4 (L.R.V. C. 9, 15, 1-2) Ad LegemCorneliam tundarum; de Falso; Paul. Sent.,4, 7, 1-6 (L.R.V. P. 4, 7, 1-6) De Lege Cornelia;5, 25, 1-2 and 4-13 (L.R.V. P. 5, 27, 1-12) Ad LegemCorneliamTestamentariam; C. Th., 9, 34. 1 and 9 (L.R.V. C. 9, 24, 1-2) De Famosis Libellis; 9, 39, 1-3 (L.R.V. C. 9, 29, 1-3) De Calumniatoribus; Paul. Sent., 5, 27, 1 (L.R.V. P. 5, 29, 1) Ad LegemIuliam Peculatus; 5, 30a, 1 (L.R.V. P. 5, 32, 1) Ad Legem Iuliam Ambitus. 3 Paul., Sent.,5, 29, 1-2 (L.R.V. P. 5, 31, 1-2) Ad LegemIuliam Maiestatis: 1. Lege Julia maiestatisteneturis, cuius ope consilioaduersus imperatorem uel rempublicam arma mota sunt, exercitusueeius in insidias deductus est: quiue iniussu imperatoris bellum gesserit, dilectumue habuerit, exercitumcomparauerit,sollicitauerit,deserueritimperatorem. His antea in perpetuum aqua et igni interdicebatur: nunc uero humilioresbestiisobiiciuntur uel uiui exuruntur; honestiorescapite puniuntur. Quod crimennon solum facto, sed et uerbis impiisac maledictis maximeexacerbatur. 2. In reummaiestatisinquiripriusconuenit, quibus

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

78

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

to the Lex lulia Maiestatishe shall be held by whose aid I. According 1 or public and counsel arms have been taken up against the emperor authority,2 or the armiesof the emperorhave been betrayed:I or who has or or levied troops,4 waged war withoutthe lawfulconsentof the emperor, stirredup disturbancewithin the army,5or deserted the emperor.6All from fire and water; 7 the morehumble such shall be perpetually interdicted (humiliores) shall be cast to the beasts or burnedalive whilethoseof higher shall be punishedcapitally.8 Also this offence restsnot rank (honestiores) 9 aggravatedby (impiousdisrespectful) on overtact alone but is particularly wordsand maledictions.10
opibus, qua factione,quibus hoc auctoribus fecerit:tanti enim criminisreus non obtentu adulationisalicuius, sed ipsius admissi causa puniendusest. Et ideo quum de eo quaeritur, nulla dignitasa tormentis excipitur. Cf. Digest,48, 4, 3 (Ad LegemIuliam Maiestatis): Marcianus libroquartodecimoinstitupublicamlaeserit,teneri: tionum . . . lex autem Juliamaiestatispraecipiteum,qui maiestatem aut castraconcesserit. eadem legetenetur qualis est ille,qui in belliscesserit aut arcemtenuerit comparauerit:quiue, et qui iniussu principisbellum gesseritdilectumuehabueritexercitum exercum ei in prouinciasuccessumesset, exercitum successorinon tradidit,quiue imperium citumuepopuli Romani deseruerit: quiue priuatuspro potestatemagistratuue quid sciensdolo malo gesserit:quiue quid eorum,quae, supra scriptasunt,facerecurauerit. Maledixerit nor C. Th., It shouldbe noted that neitherC. Th., 9, 4, 1, Si Quis Imperatori (cf. Codex Iustinianus, 9, 5, 1 Ad LegemIuliam Maiestatis was taken over into the Breviary are drawn in the Breviary defining maiestas 9, 7, 1 and 9, 8, 3). Hence mostpositivestatements ofthe emperors. the constitutiones from the juristicliterature, as indicatedabove, and not from Cf. Ulpian in Dig., 48, 4, 1-2, and Scaevola in Dig., 48, 4, 4. (Leipzig, 1899), pp. 549-555. ' Cf. T. Mommsen,Rbmisches Strafrecht 2 Cf. Dig., 48, 4, 1 and 3; C. Iust., 9, 8, 5 Ad LegemIuliam Maiestatis. 3 Cf. T. Mommsen, op. cit.,pp. 546-49; Dig., 48, 4, 3-4, Ad LegemIuliam Maiestatis;48, 4, 10: 'Maiestatis crimineaccusari potest,cuius ope consiliodolo malo prouinciauel ciuitas 4 Cf. Dig.. 48, 4, 3. hostibusproditaest'; 49, 16, 6, 4 De Re Militari. 5 Cf. Dig., 48, 4, 1; 49, 16, 3, 20 De Re Militari; C. Iust., 9, 8, 5. 6 Cf. T. Mommsen,op. cit.,pp. 537-538; Dig., 48, 4, 2-3; 49, 15, 19, 8 De Captiuis et de Postliminioet Redemptis ab Hostibus;49, 16, 3 De Re Militari; 4, 5, 5, 1 De Capite Minutis. in exercitudeseruerit.' Does this conveythe EpitomeAegidiisays: 'uel ipsum imperatorem Germanicidea of deserting the armywhenthe kingis presentor suggestthe Frankishoffence of herisliz? Cf. Ethelred, c. 5, 98; 6, 35; Cnut, 2, 77-78; Leges Henrici Primi, 13, 19; 43, 7; c. 90; CapitulareTicinense (a. 801), c. 2; Capitulare Edictum Rothari, c. 7; LegesAlamannorum, Bononiense(a. 811), c. 4. 7Cf. T. Mommsen,op. cit.,p. 549, for'aquae et ignis interdictio.' Cf. Dig., 48, 19, 28 13-14 De Poenis forbreakiing the ban of exile. 8 Cf. Dig., 48, 19, 38, 1-2 De Poenis; 49, 16, 3, 10 De Re Mllilitari; 49, 16, 6; 3, 2, 11, 3 De lIis Qui Notantur Infamia. 9 TVerbis language to a 'godimpiis refers in this passage to the addressingof unseemly who werenow Chrisblasphemy, but among the Visigoths king' and is not farremovedfrom as reduced tians and their coniverted Roman subjects,the forceof impiis mustbe considered to 'disrespectful' or some similarcorrelative meaning. 10 Note that maledictionappears a mitigating ratherthan an aggravatingcircumstance, C. lust.,9, 7, 1. The at least in certaincases, in C. Th., 9, 4, 1 Si Quis Imperatori Maledixerit;

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

79

II. In any accusation of maiestas it should be asked throughwhat resources, by what faction,and throughwhat agents this act was performed:and the person accused of so great a crimemust be punishednoit as a pretextforfawning flattery (non obtentu adulationis)but on account of acknowledgedguilt.' Hence when evidence is soughtin such cases, no dignityshall be exemptedfromtorture.2 It is noteworthythat this statement of the crime,which is one of the most comprehensive in Roman Law, should have been incorporated into the Breviary. The authorities of the Digest expand and amplify the subject, but adhere in a general way to the categories mentioned by Paulus. His rather bare outline preserved the essential features of the Roman theory of treason for the Latin West.3 Under the heading Ne Praeter CrimenMaiestatis Seruus Dominum uel Patronum Libertus seu Familiaris Accuset,4L.R.V. C. 9, 3, 1-2, states the Roman Law relative to accusations of laesa maiestas 5 and emphasizes the important exception, namely, that information regarding crimes against majesty is not included among the prohibited delations. The best summary is, perhaps, the Interpretatio of L.R.V., C. 9, 3, 2:
law can hardlybe construed ironically:'eum poenae nolumussubiugarineque durumaliquid nec asperumsustinere, quoniam si id ex leuitateprocesserit, contemnendum est, si ex insania, miseratione dignissimum, si ab iniuria, remittendum.' Cf. Dig., 48, 4, 7, 3. Note Dig., 48, 4, 3: 'facere curauerit.' 1 Cf. Dig., 48, 4, 7, 3: 'Hoc tamencrimeniudicibusnon in occasioneob principalis maiestatis uenerationem habendumest, sed in ueritate.' 2 Cf. C. Iust.,9,8, 3-5; C. Th.,9,5, 1 AdLegemluliamMaiestatis; 9,35, 1 De Quaestion.ibus. On the torture of slaves, see C. Iust., 9, 8, 6, 1 Ad Legemluliam Maiestatis. I Paulus is comprehensive in the sense that his statementincludes the most important elemenits of laesa maiestas,but his outlineis bare because the separate topics have not been developedin the completemannerof Digest48, 4 Ad Legemluliam Maiestatis. 4 C. Th., 9, 6, 2-3 (L.R.V. C. 9, 3, 1-2). Cf. Paul. Sent.,5, 13, 3 (L.R.V. P. 5, 15, 3) on delation (De Delatoribus). Cf. C. Th., 9, 5, 1 Ad Legem luliam Maiestatis, which states: 'In seruisquoque uel libertis,qui dominosaut patronosaccusare aut deferre temptauerint, professiotam atrocis audaciae statim in admissi ipsius exordioper sententiamiudicis conprimaturac denegata audientia patibulo adfigatur.' This sentence is lacking in C. Iust., 9, 8, 3 Ad Legemluliam Maiestatis. Cf. C. Iust., 9, 8, 4-5; 9, 41, 1 De Quaestionibus; Diq., 48, 4, 7, 1-2; 48, 4, 8; 5, 1, 53 De Iudiciis.
5 Cf. L.R.V. C. 9, 3, 1, which speaks not of crimen laesae maiestatis(crime of injured majesty) but employs the unusual term,closely synonymous, of crimen appetitaemaiestatis (crimeof attacked majesty). Cf. C. Iust., 9, 24, 2 De Falsa Moneta mentionscrimen obnoxii maiestatis, but the expression is not foundin L.R.V. C. 9, 17, 1 De Falsa Moneta.

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

80

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

If a slave shall accuse his masteror inform against him in the matter of any crimewhatsoeveror if any follower or servantor freedman shall do likewisein the case of his patron,let the swordbe his punishment immediately at the very beginningof his accusation, since we wish to cut off such a voice, not listen to it: unless perchancethe masteror patron shall proveto have been involvedin the crimeof majesty.

A mostsignificant difference arisesherebetween thetextofthe constitutio and theinterpretatio (L.R.V., C. 9, 3, 2) on theonehand, and thetextoftheEpitome S. Gallion theother, as maybe noted:
Interpretatio. Si seruusdominum aut amicusuel domesticus siue libertus patronumaccusauerituel detulerit cuiuslibetcriminis reum,statimin ipso initio accusationis gladio puniatur: quia uocem talem exstinguiuolumus, non audiri, nisi fortedominumaut patronumde criminemaiestatistractasse probauerit. Epitome S. Galli. Intrepretatio. Si quis seruus dominumsuum aut liberatuspatronumsuumaccusare uoluerint nisiforsitan probarepotuerint quid ipse dominusaut patronuscontradominumblasfemasset aut jpaganus eos probarepotuerit de tale accusationelicenciam habeantet si uerodixerint ipse liberatusaut seruus sine omne iniurialiberiabscedant nam si de hoc mentierint aut si forsitan de alia qualecumque: causa liberatuspatronum aut seruusdominum suumad qualecumque: iudiceaccusauerint de presente in ipsa ora accusationeiudex eos capite punirefaciat.

Thus the greatexception in the RomanLaw is transformed from maiestas to blasphemy and adherence to paganism. The Epitome Aegidii, Epitome Monachi, Epitome Lugdunensis, and Epitome Guelpherbytani, all follow theoriginal interpretatio closely and represent thelaw ofGallo-Romans, buttheEpitome S. Galliexhibits profound modification under Christian and Germanic influence. Thispassage offers added evidence concerning the frequent failure of the Leges Barbarorum to adopt the Roman idea of maiestas and the very general to employ failure thewordmaiestas itself.'
1 Cf.headingofEpitomeS. Galli (L.R.V., C. 9, 3, 2), whichreads Ne propter Crimen MagistatisSeruus DominumvelPatronut Liberatus seu FamiliaresAcuset;Epit. S. Galli (L.R.V. C. 10, 5, 4): 'Si quis homo in crimine magistatis inuentusfuerit'; Epit. S. Galli (L.R.V. C. 9, 32, 1): 'si de criminemagistatisacusatus fuerit.' I have found the genitiveformmagistatis three timesin the EpitomeS. Galli, once in a heading althoughtherelackingin the ensuinglex,and twice in the main body of the lex,all as indicatedin the references above, but I have notedno otherdeclension forms ofthewordmagistas. The entiresubjectofthe incorporation ofthe con-

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

81

in the laws The greatexception, likewise, makesit appearance and that nobleprinciple of inheritance, of the RomanLaw which shallperish withits author' is expressly denied saysthat'thecrime in the cases of the children of thosewho have been application IMPP. to the constitutio condemned forlaesa maiestas.According VALENTINIANVS ET VALENS AA. AD SYMMACHVM PE. v. (25 November,364): 1
ad liberos damnatorum peruenire, et in qualibet Substantiam integram liberosheredesesse praecipimus, causa positisparentibus excepta sola animoassumit, iustepoenam maiestatis quaestione:quam si quis sacrilego
ad suos etiam posterosmittit.2

ofa traitor, thuswithheld from hischildren The property (nisiforte damnatus sit aliquis,quorum etiam crimine maiestatis filiosde bonis shallbe confiscate iubemus to thefiscus damnati patris fieri alienos), reserves the of theprince unsought gifts although privilege making ofsuchgoodsat his discretion.3
is nowbeinginvestigated ceptionmaiestasand of the wordmaiestasinto the LegesBarbarorum Cf. H. Brunner,op. cit., II, 687-688; by me in connectionwith the Leges Wisigothorum. (3d ed., Berlin,1880), II (1), 195-196; Pollock and G. Waitz, DeutscheVerfassungsgeschichte 1898), II, the Timeof Edward I (2d ed., Cambridge, of EnglishLaw before Maitland, History Politiquesde l'AncienneFrance (La 502; also Fustel de Coulanges, Histoire des Institutions Monarchie Franque), (5th ed., Paris: Hachette, 1924), Ch. VII (.9tenduedu PouroirRoyal), especiallypp. 132-135. 1 C. Th.,9, 491, 6 (L.R. V. C. 9, 32, 1) De Bonis Proscriptorum seu Damnatorum.Cf. C. Iust. 9, 49, 10. the force 2 I thinkthis statement clearlyimpliesattainderof blood. In the Interpretatio of the passage is weakened to mere disinheritance.If one takes the libertyto combinelex he may secure this forceful expression:'Si quis pro criminesuo occidi uel and interpretatio, crimencum auctore deficiat:nisi fortemaiestatis criminedamnatus sit damnari meruerit, aliquis' (Int.), 'iuste poenam ad suos etiam posterosmittit' (lex). Cf. Dig., 48,4, 11, quoting 'Is, qui in reatu decedit,integristatus decedit: extinUlpianus librooctauodisputationum: guiturenim crimenmortalitate. nisi fortequis maiestatis reus fuit: nam hoc criminenisi impliesattainder hereditasfiscouindicatur.' The use of purgetur a successoribuspurgetur, whichmust be cleansed away. SubsequentlyUlpian limitsthis harsh rule to those guiltyof only. Cf. C. Iust., 9, 49, 10, 5: 'Excepta sola maiestatisquaestione: quam si quis perduellio sacrilego animo adsumpserit,iuste poenam ad suos etiam posteros mittit' (ca. A.D. 426). However,note Dig., 48, 19, 26 De Poenis: 'Crimen uel poena paterna nullam maculam filio potest'; 48, 19, 20. infligere 3 Cf. C. Th., 10, 10, 15 (L.R.V., C. 10, 5, 4) De Petitionibus et UltroDatis et Delatoribus: 'Si quid tamen nullo petente,proprioarbitriode talibus bonis cuiquam dederiInterpretatio: permaneat.' mus, donatio huius modi firma

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

82

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

to thepenalties aresubject ofprivate for injured prisons ]Keepers themajesty oftheprince is injured if Alsobyimplication majesty.1 theimperial with as heir, treasury theemperor through suitis entered calumniandi exprincipali maiestate capi oportet.2 facultatem necenim that lese-majestg by anyone one may infer was incurred Similarly or soothsayers harharioli, (mathematici, whoconsulted astrologers thehealthor security oftheprince uaticinatores) regarding uspices, ofthestate, andbythose whomadereplies andprophorthewelfare fortheoffence was punished capitally.3 And eciesin suchmatters, ofbookstreating to be in possession ofthe was discovered whoever while his goodswereto be magicartsshouldbe exiledto an island, in public. Humiliores shouldbe punished capiseizedand burned huiusartisprofessio, sed etiam scientia prohibita tally. Non tantum thatoverhung thelater est.4Suchwas thepall offearand suspicion Even slaveswho consulted empire.5 despotsof Rome's declining to be crucified, masters wereordered and aboutthehealthoftheir to the minesor was eithercondemned the offending soothsayer exileduponan island.6 too far,but it is imPerhapsthe parallelshouldnot be forced thatthepotestas ofthemaster to escapethesuggestion over possible in kind, within his dominium was similar the slavesand freedmen oftheprince limited in scope,to themaiestas overthe more though links Thislineofthought or imperium. hisregnum beneath subjects have been punished as a whichmayoriginally up withparricide,
1 C.Th., 9, 11, 1 (L.R.V. C. 9, 8, 1) De Priuati CarcerisCustodia. Note variant reading Inhibendis. in Epit. S. Galli. Cf. C. Iust., 9, 5, 1 De Priuatis Carceribus 2 L.R.V. P., 5, 14, 4-5 De Fisci Aduocato. 3 Paul., Sent.,5, 21, 3 (L.R.V. P. 5, 23, 3) De Vaticinatoribus and 5, 23, et Mathematicis; forthose states that the punishment de Sicariis et Veneficis 17 (5, 25, 11) Ad LegemCorneliam while the magicians (magi) them'magicae artis conscios' shall be the beasts or crucifixion, selves shall be burnedalive. Cf. C.Th., 9, 16, 3-4 and 7 (L.R.V. C. 1-3) De MaleficisetMatheSimilibus. maticiset Ceteris 4 Paul. Sent., 5, 21, 4 (5, 23, 4); 5, 23, 18 (5, 25, 12) Ad LegemCorneliam de Sicariis et Vieneficis. 5 Cf. Lex Wisigothorum Eos adque (ed. K. Zeumer), 6, 2 De Maleficiset Consulentibus Historica(Leges,Sectio I, Tomus I). Note especially6, 2, Germaniae in Monumenta V'eneficis, and and hence indicate the diffusion 1 and 6, 2, 4, whichwere taken over fromthe Breviary continuanceof older Roman ideas among the Visigothsof the seventhcentury. that under 1 Paul., Sent.,5, 21, 4 (5, 23, 4). In this connectionit must be remembered slaves could not inform against theirmasters. circumstances ordinary

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

83

a rudimentary andso haveconstituted ofthepatria potestas violation in an age whenthefamilythefamily-group oftreason within form character.'In any case of a semi-public functions groupfulfilled againstthe sacredties of blood.2 offence was an heinous parricide to thelexPompeiade parPaulus states:'According Of thiscrime, mother, grandhe shallbe held who has killedhis father, ricidiis and alor patroness, sister, patron, brother, grandmother, father, castintothesea boundin a sack in earlier daysall suchwere though aliveorcastto thebeasts.'3 burned nowbe either letthem (culeus), thecoinagewhich and debasing ofcounterfeiting In thematter in RomanLaw,4two of lese-majestg instance a cardinal constitutes Code. The from the Theodosian may be foundderived provisions an concerning willbe givenforinformation saysthata reward first while the accused monetarius), moneyer(adulterinus adulterine of his crimeshall be burned.5The second if convicted moneyer counterfeit solidi(figuradeclares thatwhoever clipssolidior offers The discapitally.6 shallbe punished imitatione) adultera tum solidum shouldbe keptin money debasedand counterfeit tinction between at law. The offence in thesamelight regarded were mind both though
1 On the relationof parricideto treason,see E. C. Clark, History of Roman PrivateLaw Press, 1919), pp. 588 ff.,604 ff. (Part III, Regal Period), (CambridgeUniversity 2 Parricideseems to have involved the ideas of pollutionand sacrilege. Note Dig., 48, 4, 1: 'Proximumsacrilegocrimenest, quod maiestatisdicitur.' 3 Paul., Sent., 5, 24, 1 (L.R.V. P. 5, 26, 1) Ad LegemPompeiamde Parricidiis. Cf. C.Th., alongwith and patrona whichfailsto listthe patronus 9, 15, 1 (L.R.V. C. 9, 12 1) De Parricidio, the propinqui. 4 The variousphases of crimen falsi are again associated withtreasonwhen one comes to Angliae,ed. G. E. the later English codes. Cf. H. de Bracton,De Legibuset Consuetudinibus Press, 1922), f. 119b: 'Est et aliud genus criminis Woodbine (New Haven: Yale University quia ultimuminducitsuppliciumet mortis laesae maiestatisquod intergrauioranumeratur, falsi'; R. de Glanville, Tractatusde Legibus,14, 7; also Britton, occasionem,scilicetcrimen I, 41; Fleta, p. 32. 5 C.Th., 9, 21, 5 (L.R.V. C. 9, 17, 1) De Falsa Moneta. Cf. C.ITh., 9, 21, 9, wherecountermaiestatis. Also Paul., Sent.,5 25, 1 (L.R. V. P.5, 27, 1) Ad is declaredto be crimen feiting LegemCorneliamTestamentariam: 'Lege Cornelia testamentariatenetur... quine nummos aureos,argenteosadultauerit, uitiauerit: uultuue principumsignatam monetam, raserit, corruperit, lauerit, conflauerit, humiliores quidem in insula deportantur, reprobauerit. Et honestiores praeteradulterinam, aut in crucem tolluntur. Serui autem post admissum autem aut in metallum damnantuir manumissicapite puniuntur.' Ibid., 5, 25, 5 (5, 27, 4). Inciderituel 6 C.Th., 9, 22, 1 (L.R.V. C. 9, 18, 1) Si Quis Solidi CirculumExteriorem Subiecerit. in Vendendo Adulteratum

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

84

Crimen Laesae Maiestatis

of the image of the divine to majestyconsistedin the desecration likeness,' though the ecoemperorthroughmaking a fraudulent nomicconsequencesof the crimewerepossiblyconsideredalso. In to note that the EmperorConstanit is interesting this connection that 'our on this subject by affirming tine opens his constitutio are one.' 2 The extentto whichpagan countenanceand veneration exercised of 'god-kingship' upon the conception elements depending among the provincialsof the West in the sixth century influence must have been negligible.At any rate the evidenceof the Forum the legal ideas prevailing Iudicum (ca. 650-675), whichincorporates that containsno suggestion in Spain duringthe previouscentury, view.3 would supporta contrary ofthe public peace one finds: and disturbance As regardssedition according or populardisturbance, of seditionand rioting instigators cast to the beasts or exiled;4 if to theirstation,shall be crucified, let himbe subjectto the heaviest anyonerousesthepeople to revolt, I fines; if anyoneshall obtainbootyin companywithpublicenemies or shall divide the booty with brigands,let him be burned.6 The seditioand perfirsttwo provisionsresemblethe laws concerning
I A similar of statues in legislation the desecration regarding point of view is maintained of the emperors. Cf. Dig., 47, 10, 38 De Iniuriis et Famosis Libellis; 48, 4, 7, 4; 48, 4, 4, 1; de iudiciis publicis. Qui librosecundo 48, 4, 5; and especially48, 4, 6: 'Venuleius Saturninus aliudue quid simileadmiserint, conflauerint iam consecratas statuas aut imaginesimperatoris tenentur.' Cf. T. Mommsen,op. cit.,p. 585, and notes; also T. Hodgkin, lege lulia maiestatis 1892), I (2), 470-509,whichdiscussesthe insurrection Italy and Her Invaders(2d ed., Oxford, of the imperial statues. Cf. Tacitus, Annals i, 73-74; of Antiochin 387 and the overthrowing 1896). iii, 36, 70, withthe notesin the editionof Furneaux(Vol. I, 2d ed., Oxford, 2 C.Th., 9, 22, 1 (9, 18, 1): 'Omnes solidi,in quibus nostriuultus ac ueneratiouna est, uno pretioaestimandisunt atque uendendi.' 3 Lex Wisigothorum and Erwigentitled 7, 6, 2. This is a law ofRecceswinth (ed. Zeumer), It is based upon L.R.V. C. 9, 18, 1 (InterpreAdultauerint. De His, Qui SolidosetMonetam tatio)and L.R.V. P. 5, 27, 1. 4 Paul., Sent.,5, 22, 1 (L.R.V. P. 5, 24, 1 ) De Seditiosis;Ibid., 5, 3, 1 (5, 3, 1) De His, loss in a case of 'res pecuniaria,per Quae per TurbamFiunt,providesthat those who suffer shall receivedouble damages and personalinjuriesshall be vindicated turbamseditionemue,' of the the capital punishment of the judge, but nothingis said regarding at the discretion we read: 'Hi, qui aedes alienas uillasueexpilauerint, In L.R.V. P. 5, 3, 3, however, offenders. si quidemid turba cum telis coacta fecerint, capite puniuntur.' expugnauerint, effregerint, 5 C.Th., 9, 33, 1 Interpretatio contra Pub. (L.R.V. C. 9, 23, 1) De His, Qui PlebemAudent licam Colligere Disciplinam. 6 C.Th., 7, 1, 1 Interpretatio (L.R.V. C. 7, 1, 1) De Re Militari. Cf. C.Th., 9, 29, 2 (9, 22, 1) Reos Occultauerint. De His, Qui Latronesuel Aliis Criminibus

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

85

duelliowhichhad a largersignificance in the timeof the Roman Republic, whileall three are incorporated eventually intothe Germaniccrime ofbreaking thepeace (pax) oftheland (Landesverrat), orperhaps evolveintoscandalum or spoliation.1 A surveyof the evidencegivenabove will indicatethe broad scope of Roman legal principles to the general relating subjectof treason which were madeaccessible to thewestern Germans through themedium oftheLex RomanaWisigothorum. The lawsconcerning majestas extended the fieldof hightreasonbeyondthe limitsof Germanic customary on a different law,sincethey depended conceptionofsovereignty.2 The crime was notlimited to suchovertacts ofviolence as wouldbring personal to theruler injury but cameto include maledictions as wellas mere offensive expressions ofopinion. The conception ofviolated majesty from ranged aggravated assault and attempted assassination ofthemonarch to counterfeiting, which had longbeen a form of laesa maiestas in RomanLaw.' The provisions, intent regarding guilty (dolusmalus)which appeared later in the Digest,4 do not seem to have been carriedover into the Breviary, one finds no good reasonto supposethatthese although general juristic rulesdidnotprevailamong the Romanprovincials ofSpainand Gaul. The jus heldthe intent to thedeed, equivalent while instigators and accomplices, embracedunderthe formula cuiusopeconsilio, werepunished in thesamewayas theauthors of thecrime, though withsomewhat perhaps less severity.5 Violated majesty, more thantheelements however, comprehended which entered later intohigh treason since itembraced treason against
I Cf. EdictumRothari, c. 8; 35-41, on scandalum; also c. 4 ('inimicu'sintra prouincia'), and c. 5 ('escamaras intraprouincia'). 2 In the earliest and purestGermaniccustom,treasonconsistsin the mainof Landesverrat and Treubruch and is closely associated with crimesof infamy. See my Early (infidelitas), History of Treason(unpubl. Harvard Univ. diss., 1925), pp. 105 ff.;250 ff., Tacitus, Germania, cap. 12-14; H. Brunner,op. cit. (Leipzig, 1892), II, 685 if.; P. Bisoukides, Der Hochverrat (Berlin,1903), pp. 34-40; K. von Amira,Das Altnorwegische Vollstreckungsverfahren (Munich, 1874), pp. 921-25;and especiallyW. E. Wilda, Gesch. d. deutschen I (Halle, 1842), Strafrechts, 21, 989, quoting from the Old-NorwegianFrostapingslgg. Suggestivematerialmay be found scatteredthrough the Icelandic sagas. 3 T. Mommsen,op. cit.,pp. 580-587. 4 Dig., 48, 4, 1, 1; 48, 4, 3; 48, 4, 7, 2; 48, 4, 10; 49, 16, 3, 11. 5 Dig., 48, 4, 1, 1-3. Cf. Daremberg et Saglio, Dictionnairedes Antiquite's Grecques et Romaines,article'Maiestas' by G. Humbertand Ch. L6crivain (Paris, 1904), III (2), 1559, 1560.

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

86

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

land and folk(Landesverrat) as well.1Other components ofLandesverrat have beenderived from thelawsconcerning sedition, rioting, and breachof the peace,but the military crimes suchas desertion did not pass extensively intotheBreviary their despite in presence the Theodosian Code.2Many factors whichhave hastened the development ofpetty treason passedoverto theMiddleAgesfrom the laws on accusation and parricide.3 In each case thesanctity ofthe bondbetween patron and clientis emphasized. The client mayinform thepatron against onlywhenthelatter is guilty ofa violation ofmaiestas, and ifhe killshispatron, it is thebasestsortofcrime. Thus,a certain parallelis suggested herewiththe laterrelation of lordand vassal,justas thelawsofmaiestas thelaterrelation suggest of kingand subject.4Of course, thisrelation mustnot be pushed too farand mustbe considered in itsmore purely legalbearings. Finally, it must be addedthat, in anycase,theBreviary preserved thecharacteristic and fundamental features ofRomanpubliccriminal law forthe MiddleAges,albeitin an excised and fragmentary form.But we stillfacethe solution of certain problems: Was the mediaeval legal mindsufficiently mature to understand and apply theearlier Romantheory ofmaiestas? Did thecircumstances attendingGermanic customary law admittheapplication ofRomanrules
1 Cf. Paul., Sent.,5. 29, 1 (L.R.V. P. 5, 31, 1), whichrepresents in the main the earlier law of the Republic and is directedagainst Landesverrat. The wording has been modified to meet the conditionsof the Principate,and the additionof 'sed et uerbisimpiisac maledictis maximeexacerbatur'refers to hightreasonagainst the personof the emperor. 2 Cf. C.Th., 7, 18, 1-17 De Desertoribus et Occultatoribus Eorum. 3 E. C. Clark,op. cit., pp. 2692-263, especiallyn. 22. Also cf.ibid.,pp. 588 ff.; T. Mommsen, op. cit.,p. 527, regarding the close associationof parricidium and perduellio in the earlyRoman Law. I See Pollock and Maitland, op. cit., II, 504: 'Petty treasonperpetrated against a lord was but slowlymarkedofffrom hightreasonperpetrated against the king; and in much later days our law stillsaw, or spoke as ifit saw, the essenceofhightreasonin a breachofthe bond of "ligeance." ' That the relationof clientto patronor even of slave to masterin the Roman Law was interpreted by the lawyersof the later Middle Ages as bearingupon the matterof feudalallegiancemay be inferred from the argument in II, 504, n. i. Here Pollock and Maitland quote fromBracton,f. 105: 'Igne concremantur qui salute dominorum suoruminsidiauerint,'and point out that he copies with certainomissionsfromDig., 48, 19, 28, 11 De Poenis: 'Igni cremanturplerumqueserui,qui saluti dominorum suorum insidiauerint, nonnumquam etiam liberiplebeii et humiles personae.' 'He [Bracton]holds therefore that to plot against one's lord's lifeis a capital crime. We imaginethat this crimewould have been punishedin England ratherby drawingand hangingthan by burning.'

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CrimenLaesae Maiestatis

87

ofoffences againstthestate? Werethe in thematter and practice customary ofRomanpubliclaw and ofGermanic ofoperation fields and combine?The or did theyinteract exclusive, law mutually ofthepubliclaw awaita careful analysis to thesequestions answers and correlation codes,and its comparison in the barbarian matter MiddleAges. earlier the during accessible theRomanmaterials with
THE RICE INSTITUTE, HOUSTON, TEXAS

This content downloaded from 150.214.40.140 on Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:06:54 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions