Page:1909historyofdec04gibbuoft.djvu/169

chap, xxxviii] OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE 137 in others, could not be proved without the interposition of a miracle. Such miracles were readily provided by fraud and credulity ; the most intricate causes were determined by this easy and infallible method ; and the turbulent Barbarians, who might have disdained the sentence of the magistrate, submis- sively acquiesced in the judgment of God. 85 But the trials by single combat gradually obtained superior judicial credit and authority among a warlike people, who could not believe that a brave man deserved to suffer, or that a coward deserved to live. 86 Both in civil and criminal proceedings, the plaintiff, or accuser, the defender, or even the witness, were exposed to mortal challenge from the antagonist who was des- titute of legal proofs ; and it was incumbent on them either to desert their cause or publicly to maintain their honour in the lists of battle. They fought either on foot or on horseback, according to the custom of their nation ; 87 and the decision of the sword or lance was ratified by the sanction of Heaven, of the judge, and of the people. This sanguinary law was intro- duced into Gaul by the Burgundians ; and their legislator Gundobald 88 condescended to answer the complaints and ob- jections of his subject Avitus. "Is it not true," said the king of Burgundy to the bishop, " that the event of national wars, and private combats, is directed by the judgment of God ; and that his providence awards the victory to the juster cause?" By such prevailing arguments, the absurd and cruel practice of judicial duels, which had been peculiar to some tribes of Ger- 85 Muratori, in the Antiquities of Italy, has given two Dissertations (xxxviii. xxxix.) on the judgments of God. It was expected that fire would not burn the innocent ; and that the pure element of water would not allow the guilty to sink into its bosom. 86 Montesquieu (Esprit des Loix, 1. xxviii. c. 17) has condescended to explain and excuse " la maniere de penser de nos peres," on the subject of judicial combats. He follows this strange institution from the age of Gundobald to that of St. Lewis ; and the philosopher is sometimes lost in the legal antiquarian. 87 In a memorable duel at Aix-la-Chapelle (a.d. 820), before the emperor Lewis the Pious, his biographer observes, secundum legem propriam, utpote quia uterque Gothus erat, equestri pugna [leg. proelio] congressus est (Vit. Lud. Pii, c. 33, in [Bouquet], torn. vi. p. 103). Ermoldus Nigellus (1. iii. 543-628, in torn. vi. p. 48-50), who describes the duel, admires the ars nova of fighting on horseback, which was unknown to the Franks. 88 In his original edict, published at Lyons (a.d. 501), Gundobald establishes and justifies the use of judicial combat (Leg. Burgund. tit. xlv. in torn. ii. p. 267-268). Three hundred years afterwards, Agobard, bishop of Lyons, solicited Lewis the Pious to abolish the law of an Arian tyrant (in torn. vi. p. 356-358). He relates the conversation of Gundobald and Avitus.