[11] Branding was a penalty rarely imposed under the Visigothic system,
and was deemed especially infamous on account of it being reserved for
crimes involving unusual turpitude. He who was “_notatus infamia_”
was deeply burned upon the forehead with a red-hot iron, which left an
ineffaceable scar. Few offences were more detested by the Visigoths
than perjury.--[ED.]
[12] There were various degrees of slavery recognized by the Visigoths.
Slaves in the service of the Crown were often highly educated and
accomplished for that age; exercised important and responsible
employments at court; enjoyed many privileges, and were exempt from
many restrictions ordinarily attaching to the servile condition. They
were rather serfs than bondsmen; and could themselves own, and, under
certain conditions, dispose of, slaves: a singular anomaly which could
hardly exist, for any length of time, in a thoroughly civilized state.
While the Roman master, under the law, was invested with absolute
control over his slave, even to the extent of putting him to death,
the Visigoth could exert no such irresponsible power. The worst
features of the Roman System, rendered necessary where slaves existed
in immense numbers, were rejected by the Visigoths, who displayed,
in this instance, far more humanity than their polished and corrupt
predecessors. Among them the Roman legal axiom, “_Partus sequitur
ventrem_,” did not exclusively prevail; as the children followed
the condition of the father as well as that of the mother. In both the
Roman and the Visigothic codes the slave was considered as devoid of
all personality; and was merely a chattel, with which debts and other
obligations could be discharged, as with any other article of portable
property. The _servus idoneus_, or slave of superior rank, was
distinguished for his ability and integrity, or for the confidence
reposed in him by his master; the _servus vilis_ was ignorant,
debased, and frequently criminal. In the infliction of penalties, a
distinction was made between the individuals belonging to these two
classes, and always in favor of the former. Freeborn persons who, by
the sentence of the law, were reduced to slavery, a common occurrence
under the Visigothic system, and a penalty from which tyrannical and
corrupt judges were not exempt, were designated _mancipia_.
Slaves belonging to the Church were generally of a high order of
ability and trustworthiness, like those who were the property of the
Crown. The owner was made liable in damages for any injury committed
by his slave; as the latter not being a person, and still less a free
agent, was legally presumed to be under the control of his master,
who, consequently, was responsible for his acts. The Visigothic Code
in comparison with others, protects the rights of slaves with great
impartiality, and often treats their minor offences with marked
indulgence.--[ED.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account