Q: Roman Law Vs. Germanic Law Vs. Celtic Law

I've come across these terms from time to time while researching, and while i understand that the terms are mostly used to denote the origins of legal practices, what I don't understand is what characterizes/differentiates these particular legal systems.

For example, i have skimmed articles related to Welsh laws and they seem extremely similar to things I've seen in germanic law codes.

I guess what im asking is if theres anything substantive about these categories or if they're basically meaningless
 
I've come across these terms from time to time while researching, and while i understand that the terms are mostly used to denote the origins of legal practices, what I don't understand is what characterizes/differentiates these particular legal systems.

For example, i have skimmed articles related to Welsh laws and they seem extremely similar to things I've seen in germanic law codes.

I guess what im asking is if theres anything substantive about these categories or if they're basically meaningless

Roman Law of course initially referred to the laws of the Roman people. Justice is, with the exception of certain crimes like treason and sacrilege, a largely private affair, with no real public prosecution existing. Guilt or innocence is decided by a single judge chosen from a limited pool by a Praetor, who also establishes a specific formula via which to pass sentence and thus exercises great control over the process. Inheritance is generally agnatic-cognatic, i.e. intestate succession prefers to follow the male line but can follow the female if there is no male-line heir, and men and women both have inheritance rights (though the rights of women are limited in some cases). However, in the present day, it is often used as a synonym for civil law. Civil law is a legal system based heavily on law codes, often initially based on Roman codes such as the Corpus Iuris Civilis, wherein the power of the judge to interpret the law and the strength of legal precedent are limited in favor of authoritative codes and interpretations promulgated by the legislative or executive. Often, though not always, countries using a civil/Roman law system will also use a system of Inquisitorial Justice, wherein the judge's primary job is to determine the facts of the case, rather than serve as the arbiter between prosecution/plaintiff and defense.

Germanic Law refers to various customary laws of the Germanic peoples. In contrast to Roman Law, where compensation is generally determined on a case-by-case basis, Germanic Law often relies on the weregild--the 'man-price'--to determine compensation for most crimes, with a person's weregild based on their status and different crimes requiring a different portion of the weregild in compensation. Decisions of guilt and innocence are generally made by juries. Inheritance tends to be absolutely agnatic, i.e. inheritance through the female line is disallowed, and the inheritance rights of women are limited. Furthermore, titles and property tends to be split among heirs, whilst in Roman law a testator has the right to name a sole heir. A good example of 'classical' Germanic Law is the Salic Law, which demonstrates most of these features. Today, the only surviving Germanic Law tradition is the English Common Law and its descendants in former English colonies, though it has borrowed heavily from Roman and other sources. In contrast to Roman/Civil law systems, however, the Common Law judge retains a high degree of authority to interpret the law and create precedent, which may or may not be binding. Common Law systems almost always use adversarial justice for all but the most minor offenses, where the judge arbites between prosecution/plaintiff and defense but plays a limited or nonexistent role in investigating the truth of the matter.

Celtic Law refers to the customary laws of the Celtic-speaking peoples. The best documented Celtic Law codes are the Brehon Laws of early Ireland, early Welsh law, and similar. Brehon law shows concern for status and formally defines a web of clientage superficially similar to the Roman one. The law is interpreted, and questions of guilt or innocence decided, by the King (Ruire), who interestingly has little authority to promulgate law. Compensation for injury is, interestingly enough, determined by a physician. Women were, at least initially, given a great degree of legal equality relative to other law codes of the period. However, inheritance was still determined agnatically, though it seems that a man could inherit through certain cognate ties. Inheritance was generally divided amongst heirs, with male heirs receiving a division of land and female heirs receiving some movables. Unlike with the Germanic and Roman systems, no countries today use a Celtic Law system.
 
The law is interpreted, and questions of guilt or innocence decided, by the King (Ruire), who interestingly has little authority to promulgate law.
So if celtic law had survived, somehow, it would tend to be inquisitorial and code based like roman/civil law?
 
So if celtic law had survived, somehow, it would tend to be inquisitorial and code based like roman/civil law?

It could have gone in several ways. I would imagine that it would resemble a common law system with the Ruire having power to set precedent, though possibly using an inquisitorial-esque system, since it was incredibly hard to promulgate new law in the Celtic system. Since Ruiri were already a semi-elected monarchy via the Tanaist system (Tanistry) I could see it evolving into an elected judiciary and lasting in some form to the present day.

However, Ireland before the English Conquest was drawing more and more heavily towards Canon Law as a primary secular code of sorts, which predicts that it would end up being replaced at some point by plain civil law. Either option is possible, or one I haven't mentioned, depending on the timeline.
 
Very very simplified, but Roman law was similar to common law today while Germanic is more akin to civil ( funny enough civil is based in middelage schoolarship on late ( Justinian ) Roman law)
 

Skallagrim

Banned
Germanic Law refers to various customary laws of the Germanic peoples. In contrast to Roman Law, where compensation is generally determined on a case-by-case basis, Germanic Law often relies on the weregild--the 'man-price'--to determine compensation for most crimes, with a person's weregild based on their status and different crimes requiring a different portion of the weregild in compensation. Decisions of guilt and innocence are generally made by juries. Inheritance tends to be absolutely agnatic, i.e. inheritance through the female line is disallowed, and the inheritance rights of women are limited. Furthermore, titles and property tends to be split among heirs, whilst in Roman law a testator has the right to name a sole heir. A good example of 'classical' Germanic Law is the Salic Law, which demonstrates most of these features. Today, the only surviving Germanic Law tradition is the English Common Law and its descendants in former English colonies, though it has borrowed heavily from Roman and other sources. In contrast to Roman/Civil law systems, however, the Common Law judge retains a high degree of authority to interpret the law and create precedent, which may or may not be binding. Common Law systems almost always use adversarial justice for all but the most minor offenses, where the judge arbites between prosecution/plaintiff and defense but plays a limited or nonexistent role in investigating the truth of the matter.

Some notes to this: it should be kept in mind that this description refers to mediaeval law codes. When comparing these to Germanic practices in earlier ages, there are some stark differences. Also, the dominance of specifically Frankish legal traditions should not be taken to mean that these were always dominant. I've bolded some parts that are relevant here.

-- Guilt and innocence. Actually very differently understood in the Germanic world. The concept of 'culpability' was absent; the question being decided was whether you had done a thing (which had consequences), and not whether you had done it knowingly, on purpose etc. Whether you stabbed a man to death on purpose or accidentally tripped while hlding a knife and stabbed him to death accidentally... he was dead either way. And you owed wergild either way. Germanic law heavily tends to look only at the outcomes, and not at the intentions of any deed.

-- Juries. The actual question of guilt ("did you do it") was more commonly decided by judges. The appropriate punishment was more often decided by juries (or rather: assemblies). There were differences in how judges were appointed. Such a figure (called a 'greef' or 'greve' in Dutch; the English word 'reeve' has the same origin) could be an authority figure in the community, or could be selected by lot out of the members of the assembly. Sometimes there was just one; sometimes it was three who had to be uninimous in their guilty verdict for it to be valid. The point is that traditionally, the germanic way tended to be the exact opposite of what's now normal in the Anglo-Saxon world. Instead juries deciding guilt and judges deciding punishments, it was often precisely the other way around.

-- Inheritance through the female line doesn't seem to have been traditionally disallowed at all. It varied greatly, and one side of things ultimately won out and set the standard, but before the Franks started empire-building, traditions were far more wildly varied.
 
Some notes to this: it should be kept in mind that this description refers to mediaeval law codes. When comparing these to Germanic practices in earlier ages, there are some stark differences. Also, the dominance of specifically Frankish legal traditions should not be taken to mean that these were always dominant. I've bolded some parts that are relevant here.

-- Guilt and innocence. Actually very differently understood in the Germanic world. The concept of 'culpability' was absent; the question being decided was whether you had done a thing (which had consequences), and not whether you had done it knowingly, on purpose etc. Whether you stabbed a man to death on purpose or accidentally tripped while hlding a knife and stabbed him to death accidentally... he was dead either way. And you owed wergild either way. Germanic law heavily tends to look only at the outcomes, and not at the intentions of any deed.

-- Juries. The actual question of guilt ("did you do it") was more commonly decided by judges. The appropriate punishment was more often decided by juries (or rather: assemblies). There were differences in how judges were appointed. Such a figure (called a 'greef' or 'greve' in Dutch; the English word 'reeve' has the same origin) could be an authority figure in the community, or could be selected by lot out of the members of the assembly. Sometimes there was just one; sometimes it was three who had to be uninimous in their guilty verdict for it to be valid. The point is that traditionally, the germanic way tended to be the exact opposite of what's now normal in the Anglo-Saxon world. Instead juries deciding guilt and judges deciding punishments, it was often precisely the other way around.

-- Inheritance through the female line doesn't seem to have been traditionally disallowed at all. It varied greatly, and one side of things ultimately won out and set the standard, but before the Franks started empire-building, traditions were far more wildly varied.

Thanks for clarifying! My knowledge of Germanic jurisprudence is much less developed than of Roman.
 
It could have gone in several ways. I would imagine that it would resemble a common law system with the Ruire having power to set precedent, though possibly using an inquisitorial-esque system, since it was incredibly hard to promulgate new law in the Celtic system. Since Ruiri were already a semi-elected monarchy via the Tanaist system (Tanistry) I could see it evolving into an elected judiciary and lasting in some form to the present day.

However, Ireland before the English Conquest was drawing more and more heavily towards Canon Law as a primary secular code of sorts, which predicts that it would end up being replaced at some point by plain civil law. Either option is possible, or one I haven't mentioned, depending on the timeline.
I was thinking more in a welsh context, but thats interesting to note
 
Top