In his paper, “Law ethnicity and taxes in Ostrogothic Italy: a case for continuity, adaptation and departure”, Shane Bjornlie considers the social status between the Goths and the Romans in Italy. Bjornlie makes the connection between the two by looking at the legal and administrative regime of the Ostrogothic state. Bjornlie argues that distinctions made between the Goths and the Romans were primarily based on one's economic conditions and their land tenure at the time in Italy, rather than their “ethnicity”. He also touches upon the issues of legal differences between the Goths and Romans as well as the matter of accommodating soldiers in Italy and fiscal resources available to the Ostrogothic court.
Bjornlie shows the legal differences …show more content…
The first letter was Patza stating his complainants and ordering the other husband (Brandila) to restrain his wife. The second letter it becomes clear the Brandila had taken Regina as a second wife, during Regina’s husband's absence. Bjornlie d.aws a logical conclusion from this fact assuming that the original wife of Brandila had been aggravated by his taking of a second wife and took out her anger on Regina. The second letter suggests that Brandila married Regina under the assumption that her first husband (Patza) had died on a campaign. Whereas the first letter had been addressed to Brandila, the second letter had been addressed to a Gothic military commander whom it orders to confirm the truth about the charges against Brandila and Regina.
Bjornlie now looked at these two cases together states that each case deals with issues of some marriage infidelity and adds that both are different scenarios for the crime of Raptio. Raptio is, “ The removal of a female from a previous familial association without the express approval of her legal guardians. Late antique legal sources describe raptio in various ways: involuntary abduction and forced marriage that involved physical rape; abduction for the purpose of …show more content…
Rather, the court would have shown more interest into what could benefit the government. Bjorlie does this by showing two cases, both of which the defendants could be charged guilty of the same thing, but are not. The reasons why social and ethnicity were not looked at and how, why the government was considered about its financial status and keeping the flow of the economy going and how in the end fiscal administration was the top priority when deciding charges. Bjorlie does all thing in a well worded and well formed article with excellent sources with great accountability on how the sixth century OStrogothic court would have functioned at the
Bjornlie shows the legal differences …show more content…
The first letter was Patza stating his complainants and ordering the other husband (Brandila) to restrain his wife. The second letter it becomes clear the Brandila had taken Regina as a second wife, during Regina’s husband's absence. Bjornlie d.aws a logical conclusion from this fact assuming that the original wife of Brandila had been aggravated by his taking of a second wife and took out her anger on Regina. The second letter suggests that Brandila married Regina under the assumption that her first husband (Patza) had died on a campaign. Whereas the first letter had been addressed to Brandila, the second letter had been addressed to a Gothic military commander whom it orders to confirm the truth about the charges against Brandila and Regina.
Bjornlie now looked at these two cases together states that each case deals with issues of some marriage infidelity and adds that both are different scenarios for the crime of Raptio. Raptio is, “ The removal of a female from a previous familial association without the express approval of her legal guardians. Late antique legal sources describe raptio in various ways: involuntary abduction and forced marriage that involved physical rape; abduction for the purpose of …show more content…
Rather, the court would have shown more interest into what could benefit the government. Bjorlie does this by showing two cases, both of which the defendants could be charged guilty of the same thing, but are not. The reasons why social and ethnicity were not looked at and how, why the government was considered about its financial status and keeping the flow of the economy going and how in the end fiscal administration was the top priority when deciding charges. Bjorlie does all thing in a well worded and well formed article with excellent sources with great accountability on how the sixth century OStrogothic court would have functioned at the