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。