{"slug":"tmp1375.tmp1375.opp-lat1","id":"latin:ogl-pl:tmp1375.tmp1375.opp-lat1","title":"Ecclesiasticae Praeceptiones. Decretio De Servis Et Asilis [AD 0595]","title_source":"Ecclesiasticae Praeceptiones. Decretio De Servis Et Asilis [AD 0595]","author":"Chlotarius II Francorum Rex","genre":"canon-law","date":"","tradition":"latin","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-15T06:03:07Z","cost_usd":0.002367},"source":{"registry_id":"latin:ogl-pl:tmp1375.tmp1375.opp-lat1","work_id":"tmp1375.tmp1375.opp-lat1","edition":"ogl-pl","language":"","license":"Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/tmp1375/tmp1375/tmp1375.tmp1375.opp-lat1.xml"},"stats":{"passages":4,"english_words":771,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":2769,"commentary_units":24,"commentary_kinds":7,"derived_notes":0,"ambiguities":6,"work_notes":5,"external_links":4,"timeline":5},"summary":{"work":"tmp1375.tmp1375.opp-lat1","abstract":"The Ecclesiasticae Praeceptiones, specifically the Decretio De Servis Et Asilis attributed to King Chlotarius II of the Franks (dated to AD 595), is a Merovingian-era canon-law decree that addresses ecclesiastical asylum and the legal status of slaves. It survives in the Patrologia Latina edition, a modern compilation, with an unclear original manuscript tradition. The decree blends Roman and Germanic legal traditions, reflecting early Frankish efforts to regulate the intersection of royal and ecclesiastical authority. It influenced later Frankish and Carolingian legislation, appearing in collections such as the Pseudo-Isidorian decretals. The text is structured as three clauses, covering territorial subdivisions (centena), tracking of thieves, and composition payments (compositio) within warbands (trustis).","historical_context":"The decree is dated to AD 595, during the reign of Chlotarius II (584–629), king of the Franks, specifically of Neustria. This places it in the Merovingian period, a time of consolidation of royal and ecclesiastical authority following the fragmentation of the Frankish kingdom. The text survives in the Patrologia Latina edition, a modern compilation, but its original manuscript tradition is unclear; it may have been transmitted through canonical collections. The attribution to Chlotarius II is traditional but not securely attested in contemporary sources, and the decree may be a later compilation or interpolation. The decree reflects early Frankish efforts to regulate ecclesiastical asylum and slave recovery, blending Roman and Germanic legal traditions. It influenced later Frankish and Carolingian legislation, appearing in collections such as the Pseudo-Isidorian decretals. The text is structured as three clauses, each addressing a distinct scenario: establishment of hundreds and liability (I), tracking and capture of thieves (II), and thieves found in a trustis (III).","significance":"This decree is significant as an early example of Merovingian canon law that blends Roman and Germanic legal traditions, particularly in regulating ecclesiastical asylum and slave status. It influenced later Frankish and Carolingian legislation, appearing in collections such as the Pseudo-Isidorian decretals, and provides insight into the consolidation of royal and ecclesiastical authority in the early medieval period.","timeline":[{"date":"584–629","event":"Reign of Chlotarius II, king of the Franks (Neustria)."},{"date":"AD 595","event":"Attributed date of the decree Ecclesiasticae Praeceptiones. Decretio De Servis Et Asilis."},{"date":"6th–7th c.","event":"Merovingian period of Frankish consolidation of royal and ecclesiastical authority."},{"date":"9th c.","event":"Influence on Carolingian legislation and inclusion in Pseudo-Isidorian decretals."},{"date":"19th c.","event":"Publication in Patrologia Latina, a modern compilation of Latin texts."}],"relations":[{"work":"Pseudo-Isidorian decretals","relation":"influenced","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Carolingian legislation on ecclesiastical asylum","relation":"influenced","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Roman legal traditions","relation":"blended with","key":"","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Germanic legal traditions","relation":"blended with","key":"","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[{"key":"wikipedia:Chlothar II","label":"Chlothar II","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlothar_II","reason":"Historical context of the attributed author."},{"key":"wikipedia:Merovingian dynasty","label":"Merovingian dynasty","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merovingian_dynasty","reason":"Political and cultural setting."},{"key":"wikipedia:Patrologia Latina","label":"Patrologia Latina","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrologia_Latina","reason":"Modern compilation source."},{"key":"wikipedia:Pseudo-Isidore","label":"Pseudo-Isidore","url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-Isidore","reason":"Later collection influenced by the decree."}],"cautions":["The attribution to Chlotarius II is traditional but not securely attested in contemporary sources; the decree may be a later compilation or interpolation.","The original manuscript tradition is unclear; the text survives only in the modern Patrologia Latina edition without a critical apparatus.","The date AD 595 is traditional and may not be precise; the decree could be from a later period."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.000469,"generated":"2026-11-15T06:03:07Z"},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Open Greek and Latin Patrologia Latina","url":"https://github.com/OpenGreekAndLatin/patrologia_latina-dev/blob/master/data/tmp1375/tmp1375/tmp1375.tmp1375.opp-lat1.xml"}],"checks":{"work":"tmp1375.tmp1375.opp-lat1","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":4,"translated":4,"commentary_passages":4,"commentary_units":24,"english_words":771,"source_letters":2769,"commentary_kinds":7},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The decree is dated to AD 595, during the reign of Chlotarius II, king of the Franks. This places it in the Merovingian period, a time of consolidation of royal and ecclesiastical authority.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The text survives in the Patrologia Latina edition (ogl-pl), which is a modern compilation. The original manuscript tradition is unclear, and the decree may have been transmitted through canonical collections.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This decree influenced later Frankish and Carolingian legislation on ecclesiastical asylum and the status of slaves, appearing in collections such as the Pseudo-Isidorian decretals.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The attribution to Chlotarius II is traditional but not securely attested in contemporary sources. The decree may be a later compilation or interpolation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This edition does not provide a critical apparatus or variant readings from other manuscripts. The user cannot assess textual stability or scribal interventions.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation could be identified: a language model asked twice could not name one, though it could not rule one out either. That is not proof that none exists — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: canon-law in Latin; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 4 narrative."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: ogl-pl — Available under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":4},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"CHLOTARII II FRANCORUM REGIS ECCLESIASTIAE PRAECEPTIOINES. DECRETIO DE SERVIS ET ASILIS, DATA CIRCA ANNUM CHRISTI 593.\n\n(Baluz., Capitul., t. I.)\n\nI. Decretum est, ut quia in vigiltias constitutas nocturnos fures non caperent, eo quod per diversas intercedente conludio, scelera praetermissa custodias exercerent, centenas fieri. In qua centena aliquid deperierit, capitale qui perdiderat recipiat, et latro insequatur. Vel si in alterius centena appareat, et adhuc admoniti si neglexerint, quinos sol condemnentur. Capitale tamen qui perdiderit, a centena illa accipiat absque dubio, hoc est, de secunda vel tertia custodia.\n\nII. Si vestigius comprobatur latronis, tamen praes ntia nihil longe multando. Aut si persequens latronem suum comprehenderit, integram sibi compositionem accipiat.\n\nIII. Quod si in truste invenitur, medietatem compositionis inistis adquirat, et capitale exigat a latrone.","english":"Decrees of Chlotar II, King of the Franks, on Ecclesiastical Precepts. Decree concerning Slaves and Sanctuaries, issued around the year of Christ 593.\n\n(Baluz., Capitul., t. I.)\n\nI. It has been decreed that, because on the appointed vigils the night thieves were not being caught, since through various collusion intervening, crimes were being committed while the guards were performing their duties, hundreds should be established. In which hundred, if something has been lost, the one who lost the property shall receive the capital, and the thief shall be pursued. Or if he appears in another hundred, and if, after being warned, they have neglected it, they shall be condemned to pay five solidi each. Nevertheless, the one who lost the property shall receive the capital from that hundred without doubt, that is, from the second or third guard.\n\nII. If the thief is proven by tracks, yet the present [thief] is not to be fined anything further. Or if the pursuer has captured his thief, he shall receive the full composition for himself.\n\nIII. But if he is found in a trustis, he shall acquire half of the composition in the trustis, and shall demand the capital from the thief.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"Chlotarius II Francorum Rex","severity":"info","text":"Chlotar II (584–629) was a Merovingian king of Neustria. This decree, dated circa 593, reflects early Frankish efforts to regulate ecclesiastical asylum and slave recovery, blending Roman and Germanic legal traditions.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"centena","severity":"info","text":"Centena (hundred) refers to a territorial subdivision in Frankish administration, responsible for local policing and justice. The decree mandates its establishment to improve night watch effectiveness against theft.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"trustis","severity":"info","text":"Trustis denotes a warband or retinue under a lord's protection, a key institution in Merovingian society. Here, it is a venue where a thief may be found, affecting composition payments.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"compositio","severity":"info","text":"Compositio (composition) is a legal term for monetary compensation paid to a victim or kin for injury or loss, central to Germanic law. The decree specifies how it is divided when a thief is caught in a trustis.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"I. Decretum est... II. Si vestigius... III. Quod si","severity":"info","text":"The decree is structured as three numbered clauses, each addressing a distinct scenario: establishment of hundreds and liability (I), tracking and capture of thieves (II), and thieves found in a trustis (III).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"praes ntia","severity":"caution","text":"The Latin 'praes ntia' is likely a scribal error or abbreviation for 'praesentia' (presence). The sense is that if a thief is proven by tracks but not caught, no further fine is imposed.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The exact meaning of 'vigiltias constitutas' (appointed vigils) is unclear; it may refer to church vigils or secular night watches. The phrase 'de secunda vel tertia custodia' (from the second or third guard) is ambiguous, possibly indicating successive watches or levels of responsibility."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"IV. Si quis in domo alterius, ubi clavis est, furtum invenerit, dominus domus de vita componat.\n\nV. Si quis cum furto capitur, antedictae subjaceat legi.\n\nVI. Si de suspicione inculpatur, ad fortem veniat.\n\nVII. Si mala forte priserit, Latro tamen, ad utram que partem sint ternas personas electas, ne conludius fieri possit.\n\nVIII. De servis Ecclesiae aut fisci, vel cujuslibet, quicunque inculpatur, ad fortem veniat, aut ad plebium promoveatur, aut ipse precius a domino reformetur. Nam probari periculo subjacebunt.\n\nIX. Si quis cujuslibet de potentioribus servis qui per diversa possident, de crimine habetur suspectus, domino secretius cum testibus condicatur, ut intra viginti noctes ipsum ante judicem debeat praensentare. Quod si in statutum tempus interludente conludio non fecerit, dominus status sui juxta modum culpae inter fredum et faidum compensabitur.","english":"IV. If anyone discovers a theft in another’s house where a key is kept, the master of the house shall make composition with his life.\n\nV. If anyone is caught in the act of theft, he shall be subject to the aforementioned law.\n\nVI. If anyone is accused on suspicion, he shall come to the ordeal.\n\nVII. If an evil lot should be drawn, yet the thief, in either case, three persons from each side shall be chosen, so that collusion cannot occur.\n\nVIII. Concerning slaves of the Church or of the fisc, or of anyone else: whoever is accused shall come to the ordeal, or be promoted to the plebium, or the price shall be refunded by the master. For they shall be subject to the peril of proof.\n\nIX. If any slave of a more powerful person, who holds possessions in various places, is suspected of a crime, the master shall be summoned secretly with witnesses, so that within twenty nights he must present him before the judge. But if, through intervening collusion, he does not do so within the appointed time, the master shall be compensated for his status according to the measure of the fault, between the fredum and the faida.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"fortem","severity":"info","text":"The term 'fortem' (ordeal) refers to a judicial ordeal, likely by lot or hot iron, common in early medieval Germanic law as a means of divine judgment.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"plebium","severity":"info","text":"'Plebium' is obscure; possibly a scribal error for 'plebem' (the people) or a local assembly. It may denote a public judicial body or a status of freedom.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"fredum et faida","severity":"info","text":"'Fredum' is a fine paid to the king or public authority; 'faida' is a blood-feud or private vengeance. The master compensates for his status between these two penalties.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This decree reflects early Merovingian efforts to regulate church asylum and slave liability, blending Roman ecclesiastical law with Germanic customary procedures like ordeal and composition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Sections IV–IX form a coherent block on theft and slave accountability, moving from general theft (IV–V) to ordeal procedure (VI–VII) and specific rules for slaves (VIII–IX).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"conludius","severity":"caution","text":"The term 'conludius' (collusion) in VII and IX is a hapax; the text may be corrupt. The sense is clear, but the exact legal mechanism for preventing collusion is uncertain.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The meaning of 'plebium' in VIII is uncertain; it may be a corruption or a technical term for a public assembly or status.","The phrase 'ad utram que partem sint ternas personas electas' in VII is syntactically awkward; the intended procedure for selecting three persons per side is ambiguous."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"X. Si servus ante admonitum dominum defuerit, capitale dominus restituat, et de servo faciat cessionem; et quum inventus fuerit, detur in vindiciam.\n\nXI. Si quis occulte de re sibi furata a quolibet latrone compositionem acceperit, utraque latronis culpa subjaceat. Fur tamen judici praesentetur.\n\nXII. Ut continuo capitale ei qui perdiderit reformare festinet, et latronem perquirat. Quem si in truste perinvenerit, medietatem sibi vindicet vel delaturam. Si fuerit de facultate latronis, et qui damnum pertulit, saliatur. Nam si persequens latronem ceperit, integram sibi compositionem simul et solutionem, vel quidquid dispendii fuerit, revocavit; frepus tamen judici, iu cujus pago est, reservetur.\n\nXIII. Nullus latronem vel quemlibet culpabilem, sient summis episcopis convenit, de atrio ecclesiae trahere praesumat. Quod si sunt ccclesiae quibus atria clausa non sint, ab utraque parte parietum terrae spatium, arpennis pro atrio observetur.","english":"X. If a slave is absent before his master has been warned, the master shall restore the capital value and make a formal surrender of the slave; and when the slave is found, he shall be given over to punishment.\n\nXI. If anyone secretly accepts composition from any thief for something stolen from him, he shall be subject to both penalties of the thief. Nevertheless, the thief shall be presented to the judge.\n\nXII. That he shall immediately hasten to restore the capital value to the one who has lost it, and shall search for the thief. If he finds him within a trustis, he shall claim half for himself or make a delatura. If it is from the thief’s property, and the one who suffered the loss is satisfied. For if the pursuer captures the thief, he shall recover the full composition and payment together, or whatever loss there was; however, the frepus shall be reserved for the judge in whose pagus it is.\n\nXIII. No one shall presume to drag a thief or any guilty person from the atrium of a church, as is agreed by the highest bishops. But if there are churches whose atria are not enclosed, a space of land on either side of the walls, of one arpent, shall be observed as the atrium.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"frepus","severity":"info","text":"The term 'frepus' is obscure; it likely denotes a judicial fee or fine owed to the judge, possibly a variant of 'fredus' (composition paid to the court).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"trustis","severity":"info","text":"'Trustis' refers to a Frankish warband or retinue bound by oath; here it indicates a social group within which the thief may be found, affecting the distribution of composition.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"delaturam","severity":"info","text":"'Delaturam' likely means an accusation or information laid before a judge; the sense is that the pursuer may either claim half the composition or report the thief to the court.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"atrium ecclesiae","severity":"info","text":"The church atrium was a recognized place of asylum in Merovingian law; canon 39 of the Council of Orléans (511) and later synods protected fugitives within church precincts.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"arpennis","severity":"info","text":"'Arpennis' (arpent) is a Gallo-Roman land measure, roughly 0.2–0.5 hectares; its use here shows adaptation of Roman units for defining church asylum boundaries.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"sient summis episcopis convenit","severity":"caution","text":"The phrase 'sient summis episcopis convenit' is textually uncertain; 'sient' may be a scribal error for 'sicut' or 'sciens', and the clause likely means 'as has been agreed by the highest bishops'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The reading 'sient' in canon XIII is ambiguous; it is interpreted as a corruption of 'sicut' (as) or possibly 'sciens' (knowingly). The term 'frepus' in canon XII is of uncertain meaning; it is taken as a judicial due. The phrase 'saliatur' in canon XII is obscure; it may mean 'is compensated' or 'is satisfied'."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]},{"i":4,"ref":"p4","source":"XIV. Nullus confugiens foris ante dicta loca pro operarum cupiditate se dicat exiie. Quod si fecerint, et capti fuerint, ad dignum sibi supplicium condemnentur.\n\nXV. Quod si cujuslibet servus deserens suum dominum ad ecclesias confugerit, et ibi primitus dominus ejus advenerit, contentio excusatur; reddatur furtum, ut se de pretio redimat.\n\nXVI. Si quis ad vestigium minandum vel latronem persequendum admonitus venire noluerit, quinque solidis condemnetur.\n\nXVII. Ea quae in Dei nomine pacis tenore constituimus, in perpetuum volumus custodire.\n\nXVIII. Hoc statuentes, ut si quis ex judicibus hoc decretum violare praesumpserit, vitae periculum subjacere cognoscat.","english":"XIV. No one fleeing to the places mentioned above shall claim, out of desire for work, that he has gone out. If they do so and are captured, they shall be condemned to a punishment befitting them.\n\nXV. If a slave of anyone, deserting his master, takes refuge in churches, and his master first arrives there, the dispute is excused; the stolen property shall be returned, so that he may redeem himself with the price.\n\nXVI. If anyone, when summoned to pursue a track or to chase a thief, refuses to come, he shall be condemned to five solidi.\n\nXVII. Those things which we have established in the name of God under the terms of peace, we wish to keep in perpetuity.\n\nXVIII. Decreeing this, that if any of the judges presumes to violate this decree, he shall know that he incurs the peril of death.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"XIV. Nullus confugiens foris ante dicta loca pro operarum cupiditate se dicat exiie.","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'se dicat exiie' is problematic; 'exiie' may be a scribal error for 'exire' (to go out) or 'exisse' (to have gone out). The sense is that no fugitive should falsely claim to have left the asylum for work.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"exiie","severity":"caution","text":"The word 'exiie' is not standard Latin; it likely represents a corrupt form of 'exire' or 'exisse'. The translation 'has gone out' follows the probable intended meaning.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"XV. servus ... ad ecclesias confugerit","severity":"info","text":"This provision reflects the early medieval right of asylum in churches, which protected fugitive slaves but required the master to reclaim them and pay a redemption price. The 'furtum' (stolen property) likely refers to the slave himself as property.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"parallel","kind":"parallel","basis":"text","lemma":"XVI. ad vestigium minandum vel latronem persequendum","severity":"info","text":"The duty to pursue thieves and track them is a common provision in early Frankish law, paralleling similar obligations in the Lex Salica and other Germanic codes.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"XVII. Ea quae in Dei nomine pacis tenore constituimus","severity":"info","text":"This concluding clause frames the decrees as a perpetual peace established in God's name, typical of early medieval royal legislation that invokes divine authority to ensure obedience.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"XVIII. si quis ex judicibus hoc decretum violare praesumpserit, vitae periculum subjacere cognoscat","severity":"info","text":"The threat of capital punishment for judges who violate the decree underscores the seriousness with which Chlotarius II sought to enforce these asylum and peace regulations.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The reading of 'exiie' in XIV is uncertain; it may be a scribal error for 'exire' or 'exisse'.","In XV, 'reddatur furtum' could refer to the stolen property or to the slave as stolen goods; the translation takes it as the slave."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]}]}