Sinnstiftungen eines Rechtsbuchs: Die Lex Salica im Frankenreich by Karl Ubl

Abstract

Reviewed by: Sinnstiftungen eines Rechtsbuchs: Die Lex Salica im Frankenreich by Karl Ubl Wilfried Hartmann Ubl, Karl. Sinnstiftungen eines Rechtsbuchs: Die Lex Salica im Frankenreich. Quellen und Forschungen zum Recht des Mittelalters 9. Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke Verlag, 2017. 313 pp. €39.00. ISBN: 978-3-7995-6089-4. In his book published in 2017 on the Lex Salica (henceforth: LS), which played a role for almost a millennium (from the 5th to the 14th century), Karl Ubl seeks to understand it as a 'contribution to the cultural history of law'.1 He provides a series of key questions for his investigation.2 1. 'Where did the unlikely persistence of the law book come from'? 2. 'What relevance has been attributed to it over the centuries'? 3. 'Why could it provide a foundation for a completely different political configuration of Frankish history'? 4. 'For what reason did it never undergo substantial changes despite social, political, and cultural changes'? 5. 'What does a "biography" of this legal book tell us about the function and symbolic meaning of legislation'? It becomes clear with the last question in particular that this book is not only a special investigation into a text of secular law from the early Middle Ages but also about general and fundamental questions regarding legislation. The beginning of the work includes an overview of the historiography, which is concerned above all with the tradition of 'German' legal history, a tradition which looked for the Germanic origins and thus—in the understanding of the time—the origins of German law. This approach has largely informed the study of the LS since the middle of the nineteenth century, but since the 1970s is no longer prevalent in Germany. Ubl has already dealt with the special features of the LS in a paper [End Page 389] published in 2014.3 In his opinion, the LS holds a 'special status' as compared to the other legal books produced in Gaul, such as the Edict of Eurich and the Burgundian Liber constitutionum. Unlike in fifth-century Roman vulgar law, punishments in the LS are not considered damages, but appear as fines, which usually reach an 'exorbitant height'. The fine is an attempt to establish a public criminal law with a rational penal purpose. In chapter 2 ('Why Barbarians Make Laws') the book deals not only with the beginnings of the LS, but also with other 'barbaric' codifications from Gaul in the fifth and sixth centuries. The edict of the Visigothic King Eurich (466-484) represents a 'legislative new beginning',4 as the text does not recognize a recourse to Roman law. The legal book, only fragmentarily preserved, was obviously geared toward the problems of the practice; approximately one-half of the titles apply to criminal law. Furthermore, agrarian life is important, which means that not only the elite of the new empire should be addressed. His son, Alaric II (484-507), created a legal book for the Gallo-Roman population, the so-called Lex Romana Visigothorum (or Breviarium Alarici), which is a short version of the Codex Theodosianus. The Burgundian Liber constitutionum were issued around 500 by King Gundobad (c. 476-516) and would soon after be supplemented with novellae. Like Eurich, the Burgundian king made a fresh start without directly referencing Roman law, and he too focused on criminal law. Gundobad emphasized the non-Roman nature of his legislation; he described his people as barbarians and adhered to barbarous habits such as the 'wergeld' or relatives' liability. In even more detail than Eurich, Gundobad takes into account the interests of the rural population. The focus of the legal book is the 'consolidation of Burgundian identity'.5 Ubl expressly rejects the thesis of Patrick Wormald, who has considered the codifications [End Page 390] in Gaul from the period around 500 as merely 'ideological positioning' and would grant them no influence on judicial practice. In the last part of chapter 2, Ubl examines the question of the period of origin of the LS. He rejects an origin during the rule of Clovis (between 507 and 511) and prefers an origin under Chlodwig's father, Childerich, 'in the decade between 475 and 486/87'.6 The LS was...