[24] Priests and deacons, under the Visigothic ecclesiastical system, which, it must not be forgotten, was at all times practically independent of papal authority, were permitted to marry; as were their Arian predecessors. Such a union, however, was subject to certain restrictions. It could only be entered into once; the bride had to be a virgin; and where the husband was raised to a higher dignity in the Church he was compelled to, at once, repudiate his wife. The marriage itself was an impediment to promotion, as priests without families were much more sure to rise in their profession than those who had contracted marital obligations.--[ED.] [25] The holding of a plurality of livings by a single ecclesiastic, an abuse which, in after times, assumed such gigantic proportions under papal rule, especially in England, where, by reason of the hardships it produced, it promoted in no small degree the progress of the Reformation, was scarcely known to the Arian, or Catholic clergy of Spain. The enjoyment of the revenues of one, or a greater number of benefices by a layman, no matter how wealthy or powerful the latter might be--a custom elsewhere so prevalent--was not provided for by the sacerdotal legislature of the Visigoths in their Code of laws; for the reason, no doubt, that such a thing was deemed too improbable for serious consideration.--[ED.] [26] The institution of patron and _libertus_, or client, adopted by the Visigoths almost without alteration, dates back to the primitive ages of Rome. The regulation was recognized by the Law of the Twelve Tables, and was modified by various enactments during the eras of the Republic and the Empire. Its survival, during all the vicissitudes attending the Roman domination, attests its peculiar adaptability to the national character, and to the political and social organization of the people who established it. It presents a greater analogy to the Highland clan than to any other modern institution, although marked and radical differences exist between the two; the strongest resemblance being in the devoted allegiance due to both the _patronus_ and the chieftain. By the ordinary act of manumission the slave became a _libertus_ or freedman; a term of much more limited significance than it has at present. The former master then became the protector and guardian of his freedman; and, in return for this protection, the latter was bound to perform certain duties, which he could not evade without the reproach of ingratitude, and the certainty of punishment. One of these obligations was that of military service, which differed from those subsequently required by the law of the Feudal System, only in that it was not especially rendered as a condition for the tenure of a fee. The relation of patron and client, which, under the Romans, could only be dissolved between individuals by death, or by the loss of his freedom by the client for misconduct or insolence, was not so strictly observed among the Visigoths.