The subject of this excursus

One of the cornerstones of my comparative view of the European early Middle Ages is that the search for consensus was one of the principal purposes of every form of legal behaviour. We have seen that Charlemagne himself dispatched his missi to read new dispositions in public in order to receive the approval of his subjects, who would subscribe to them in the mallus. We shall see in Chapter 9 the exaggerated use made of oaths of allegiance, while elsewhere I shall seek to show the frequency of settlements in court. In this excursus I shall attempt to demonstrate that judges throughout Europe took care to surround themselves with other personages whose names they recorded in their report on the case; and furthermore that the extent of consensus is attested by formulas which stress the large numbers attending the hearing in the twofold capacity of witnesses and participants (it often happens that trial records make no distinction between the two).

Royal courts well attended

The courts of the Merovingian kings in the middle of the seventh century were dominated by the comes palatii, who had the status of vir inlustet - the same status given to the king in preambles to documents. The court consisted of the bishops and various categories of officials, nobles and optimates in general. The vagueness of the terminology highlights the breadth of consensus even when the names of individuals are not recorded.