[74] L. 34, § 1, Dig., XLVIII, 5, ad. leg. Jul.: L. 101, Dig. dev. sign. "It may need to be said that only a crime to which a married woman was a party could be called adulterium. The Romans held that the jus tori pertained to the husband. He could not commit this crime against his wife."—Woolsey, op. cit., 90, note. Cf. Freisen, Geschichte des can. Eherechts, 617.
[75] "Constantine the Great imposed death with confiscation of goods on the adulterer. His sons punished the adulteress with burning and took away from her paramour the privilege of appeal, but this seems to have been only a case of extraordinary and temporary legislation. Under Valentinian the guilty woman was again sentenced to death. Justinian's legislation shut up the woman in a cloister, making it illegal for her husband to take her back within two years. If the parties were not reconciled at the end of this term the marriage was dissolved, and the woman's imprisonment in the cloister was perpetual. As for the offending man, he was visited with death, but not with confiscation of goods, if he had near relatives in the direct line."—Woolsey, op. cit., 91, 92; Rein, Criminalrecht, 848-52; Nov., 134, § 10. In general, on the development of the law relating to adultery, see Freisen, op. cit., 615-35, 830 ff.; Esmein, Le mariage en droit canonique, I, 102, 103, 111, 384-90; II, 61, 62, 90 ff., 125, 296 ff.; idem, Mélanges, 157 ff.; Bennecke, Ehebruch, 13-33.
[76] Nov., 117, cc. 8, 9. Cf. Geffcken, op. cit., 26, 27; Woolsey, Divorce, 99, 100; Wächter, op. cit., 206, 207, 222 ff.
[77] On divorce bona gratia see Wächter, op. cit., 224 ff.
[78] Cf. the conclusions of Geffcken, op. cit., 28, 29; Woolsey, op. cit., 101.
[79] Geffcken, op. cit., 33, 34, 43, 44. With this view Jeaffreson, Brides and Bridals, II, 295, 296, agrees: The Anglo-Saxon wife, he says, could be repudiated at will by her "master." But many writers hold that divorce by mutual consent is recognized in the ancient Teutonic law. Thus Heusler, Institutionen, II, 291, 292, declares that there was absolute liberty of separation by agreement, and that one-sided divorce (by Kündigung) was very restricted. A similar opinion is held by Zoepfl, Deutsche Rechtsg., III, 37, 38; Pollock and Maitland, Hist. of English Law, II, 390; Glasson, Le mariage civil et le divorce, 185 ff., 195; Freisen, Geschichte des can. Eherechts, 779-81; Loening, Geschichte des deut. Kirchenrechts, II, 617; Schroeder, Rechtsgeschichte, I, 174. In general, cf. Brunner, Rechtsgeschichte, 302 ff.; Weinhold, Deutsche Frauen, II, 43 ff.; Grimm, Rechtsalt., 454; Walter, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, I, 134-36; Glasson, Histoire du droit et des inst. de l' Angleterre, I, 119, 120.
[80] For examples among Franks and Alamanni see Meyrick, in Dict. Christ. Ant., II, 1111.
[81] Geffcken, op. cit., 34, 43, 44. "Das erste Volksrecht, welches die freiwillige Scheidung ganz analog dem römischen divortium communi consensu gestattet, ist der seiner Entstehung nach in die erste Hälfte des 7. Jahrhunderts fallende pactus Alamannorum."—Ibid., 44. The first formulary (libellum or libellus repudii) for a divorce by mutual consent in the folk-laws appears in the formulae Andegavenses, a collection made in the last quarter of the same century: ibid., 44; also Brunner, Rechtsgeschichte, 403, 404; Freisen, op. cit., 778, 779. The following formulary for such a divorce is taken from Marculf (II, 30) by Glasson, op. cit., 186, though it may have been intended for the Roman population living on Frankish territory: "Idcirco dum et inter illo et conjuge sua ... discordia regnat ... placuit utriusque voluntas ut se a consortio separare deberent.... Propterea has epistolas inter se uno tenore conscriptas fieri et adfirmare decreverunt, ut unusquisque ex ipsis, sive ad servitium Dei in monasterio aut ad copulam matrimonii se sociare voluerit, licentiam habeat."
[82] Lex Visig., III, 6, c. 2 (adultery); Lex Burgund., 34, 3 (adultera, maleficia, sepulcrorum violatrix): Freisen, op. cit., 779.
[83] Pact. Alam., III, 3; Lex Bajuw., VII, 14; Lex Burg., tit. 34, c. 2; Lex Vis., III 6, c. 2; Freisen, op. cit., 779.