[1] It must be remembered that under the Gothic polity, the legislator, invariably a member of the ecclesiastical order, was frequently called upon to exercise the exalted functions of the judge. In some instances, the two officials had concurrent jurisdiction; in others, the bishop was authorized to decide questions of law and fact in the absence of the magistrate. Especially was this the case where the interests of the Church were, in any way, concerned. Hence arises the apparent confusion of the duties of legislator and judge, in this and other chapters of the Visigothic Code.—[Ed.]
[2] Preambles, such as the above, which are of frequent occurrence in this body of laws, show unmistakably its ecclesiastical origin, and the theocratic principles, which, at all times, dominated those who framed it. The Mosaic Code alone, among those of great antiquity, is constantly pervaded by similar religious sentiments; which, emanating from the high authorities of the Church, undoubtedly exerted great and beneficial influence over an ignorant and superstitious people. Such additions to legal enactments would seem strangely out of place at the present day.—[Ed.]
[3] The first sentence of this chapter is directly at variance with the maxim subsequently inculcated with such diligence by the Church of Rome; through the rigid enforcement of which it long maintained its despotic empire, and which it still regards as one of the most important sources of its power: “Ignorance is the mother of Devotion.”
It may be conjectured from the above, that the familiar legal axiom, “Ignorantia legis neminem excusat,” already ancient, and well established in the seventh century, is probably as old as the law itself.—[Ed.]
[4] The Visigothic Councils, whose authority was presumed to emanate from Heaven, and whose alleged sacred character invested also, to a certain extent, the monarchs elected by them, presumed to legislate for all coming time. Instances often occur where future kings are declared to be bound irrevocably by the acts of their predecessors, and by the decrees of the collected wisdom and piety of the nation, represented by the ecclesiastical assemblies of Toledo. Despite the solemn adjurations of prince and prelate, however, few kings hesitated to repeal or abolish the laws of their ancestors, when those laws either offended their prejudices, or interfered with their ambition.
The manifest injustice and iniquity now recognized by nearly all civilized nations as attaching to ex post facto laws, were not appreciated by the Visigothic legislator, or sovereign. Laws were frequently made retroactive, and were enforced with great severity in cases affecting questions of religious belief, as well as in those relating to the rights and privileges of the Crown.—[Ed.]
[5] Considering that the crown was elective; that the monarch was only “Primus inter pares,” and that the subject had apparently the right to sometimes admonish his sovereign of his errors, a relic of the sturdy independence which characterized all northern barbarians; the doctrine of lesé-majesté seems to have early acquired great importance among the Visigoths, judging from the severe penalties visited upon those guilty of the offence.—[Ed.]
[6] The coins principally in use among the Visigoths were those of the Byzantine Empire at that epoch, as follows:—Gold, The Libra, or pound, twelve ounces in weight, and divided into seventy-two Tremisæ, or twenty-four Siliqæ; and Silver, The Libra, containing twenty Solidi, and the Solidus, containing twenty Denarii of copper. The smaller coins, of which there were many, were those of ancient Rome, and of the Eastern Empire.
The Libra of gold was worth $368, and the one of silver worth $88, or, at the present value of money, $4,048, and $968, respectively. The Solidus ($56 gold, and $44 silver,) was the standard coin in circulation.
The gold Tremisa was the only coin struck by the royal mints during the Visigothic domination. Heavily alloyed, rude in design, and coarse in execution, these clumsy medals disclose the primitive conditions of the numismatic art of the period, being notably inferior to the contemporary examples of Byzantine coinage, themselves far below the artistic models of ancient Rome.