Note 12 — BOOK II. CONCERNING THE CONDUCT OF CAUSES.

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.]