During the period of about a thousand years, intervening between the Justinian and Caroline (_vide infra_) codes, the advancement of medicine and jurisprudence suffered almost complete arrest. The guilt or innocence of an accused person was determined rather by his own confession under torture, or by “the judgment of God” as shown by ordeal or by judicial combat, than by testimony either expert or of fact. Even during the night of the Middle Ages, instances are recorded in which the opinions of physicians were sought to determine questions of fact in judicial proceedings. In the duchy of Normandy, in 1207-45, the laws provided for the examination of those claiming to be sick (to evade military service or appeal to judicial duel), of persons killed, and of women.[26] In a decretal of Innocent III., in 1209, the question whether a certain wound was mortal was determined by physicians.[27] There is extant in the statutes of the city of Bologna, under date of 1249, an entry to the effect that Hugo di Lucca had been assigned the duty, when called upon by the podesta, and after having been sworn, to furnish a true report in legal cases.[28] In the kingdom of Jerusalem (_ca._ 1250) a person claiming exemption from trial by battle because of sickness or of wounds was visited by a physician (_fisicien au miége_) and a surgeon (_sérorgien_), who examined him and made oath as to his condition.[29] Sworn surgeons to the king are also mentioned in letters patent of Philippe le Hardi in 1278, of Philippe le Bel in 1311, and of Jean II. in 1352.[30] That of Philippe le Bel refers to Jean Pitardi as one of “his well-beloved sworn surgeons in his Chastelet of Paris,” whose functions are partly indicated by the extracts from the registers given below.