The Etymologies of Isidore of Seville - Pot-pourri

Book V
Laws and times (De legibus et temporibus)
i. The originators of laws (De auctoribus legum) 1.
Moses of the Hebrew people was the first of all to explain
the divine laws, in the Sacred Scriptures. King Phoroneus
was the first to establish laws and legal processes for the
Greeks. 2. Mercury (i.e. Hermes) Trimegistus first gave
laws to the Egyptians. Solon was first to give laws to
the Athenians. Lycurgus first devised legal structures
for the Spartans by the authority of Apollo. 3. Numa
Pompilius, who succeeded Romulus to the throne, first
established laws for the Romans. Then, when the population
was no longer able to bear the factious magistrates,
they brought the Decemvirs (lit. the “ten men”)
into being to write laws; these men set forth in the Twelve
Tables the laws which had been translated from the books
of Solon into the Latin language. 4. These men were:
Appius Claudius, Genucius, Veterius, Julius, Manlius,
Sulpicius, Sextius, Curatius, Romilius, and Postumius.
These Decemvirs were selected to draw up laws. 5. The
consul Pompey first wanted to undertake the collection
of the laws into books, but he did not continue for fear
of detractors. Then Caesar began to do this, but he was
killed first. 6. And gradually the ancient laws became
obsolete due to age and neglect; although none of them
is still in use, nevertheless a knowledge of them seems
needful. 7. Newlaws originated from Emperor Constantine
and the others following him, but they were
mixed and disordered. After this, Theodosius Augustus
the younger instituted a code, made in imitation of those
of Gregorius and Hermogenianus, of decrees from the
time of Constantine, arranging them under the name of
each emperor; he called it the Theodosian Code after his
ownname.
ii. Divine laws and human laws (De legibus divinis et
humanis) 1.All laws are either divine or human. Divine
1 The Latin term ius has a broad range of meaning and application,
with no single English equivalent. We have generally translated it
as “jurisprudence,” but have also used the terms “right,” “law,” or
“justice,” according to the context.
117
laws are based on nature, human law on customs. For this
reason human laws may disagree, because different laws
suit different peoples. 2. Fas is divine law; jurisprudence
(ius)ishuman law. To cross through a stranger’s property
is allowed by divine law; it is not allowed by human
law.
iii. How jurisprudence, laws, and customs differ from
each other (Quid differunt inter se ius, leges, et mores)
1.Jurisprudence is a general term, and a law is an aspect
of jurisprudence. It is called jurisprudence (ius)because
it is just (iustus). 1 All jurisprudence consists of laws and
customs. 2.Alaw is a written statute. A custom is usage
tested by age, or unwritten law, for law (lex,gen.legis)is
named from reading (legere), because it is written. 3.But
custom (mos) isalongstanding usage drawn likewise
from ‘moral habits’ (mores, the plural of mos). ‘Customary
law’ (consuetudo) isacertainsystemofjustice
established by moral habits, which is taken as law when
alaw is lacking; nor does it matter whether it exists in
writing or reasoning, since reason also validates law. 4.
Furthermore, if law is based on reason, then law will be
everything that is consistent with reason – provided that
it agrees with religion, accords with orderly conduct, and
is conducive to well-being. Customary law is so called
because it is in ‘common use’ (communis usus).
iv. What natural law is (Quid sit ius naturale) 1. Law
is either natural, or civil, or of nations. Natural law (ius
naturale)iscommon to all nations, and, because it exists
everywhere by the instinct of nature, it is not kept by
any regulation. Such is the union of a man and woman,
the children’s inheritance and education, the common
possession of everything, a single freedom for all, and
the right to acquire whatever is taken from the sky, the
earth, and the sea. 2.Alsothereturn of something which
was entrusted and of money which was deposited, and
the repulsion of violence by force. Now this, or whatever
is similar to it, is never unjust, but is held to be natural
and fair.