<論説>プラキタと七～九世紀フランク王国の文書制度

Abstract

国王法廷の判決を記録するプラキタ文書はメロヴィング朝期には数多く作成されたが、カロリング朝期に入ると次第に用いられなくなる。プラキタはもともと国王役人に判決を伝達する文書であった。メロヴィング朝の国王証書はすべて国王役人への命令の形式で作成されていたため、プラキタは国王証書たり得た。しかし、カロリング家とともに国王証書は国王役人との結合を絶たれる。かくして、プラキタは勝訴当事者の権利保証のために作成されるようになる。それと同時に国王証書の法的側面がより明瞭に意識され、主体的に権利を設定する特権状と法律行為の客観的記録とを区別する傾向が現れる。前者が王権の支配道具としてより重要な文書となっていくのに対して、プラキタは国王裁判の客観的な記録とみなされ始め、国王証書から排除されることになる。カロリング朝期に入って国王証書は次第に王権による主体的な権利の賦与もしくは確認へと変化していくのである。

Even though numerous Royal Judgments (placita) survive from the late Merovingian period, they almost completely disappear during the ensuing Carolingian age. Analysis of this transformation reveals a profound shift occurring from the seventh through the ninth centuries, from Roman notions of government, to a more "medieval" notion of state, as characterized by direct bonds between king and subject. The Merovingian Royal Chancery originally referred to royal judgments (placita) as praeceptio(-nes), which suggests that they were originally drafted to inform officials of the judgement of a royal tribunal. By contrast, the Carolingians tended to call them notitia, and recorded them in order to protect the rights of a victorious litigant. This shift is likewise reflected in changing definitions of royal charters. In contrast to Merovingian practice, Carolingian charters ceased to be addressed to royal officials. Consequently, a distinction arose in Carolingian parlance concerning diplomas. Charters (carta) came to delineated legal rights in the Carolingian age, and were distinguished between notices (notitia), where orders were conveyed, which tended to function as a instrument of royal governance. Placita became defined as notices (notitia) and accordingly were no longer considered to be charters. Hence, placita primarily survived in the Merovingian period, when royal judgements (praeceptiones) confirmed land rights via orders to royal officials. The disappearance of placita thus reflects the establishment of the charter as a vehicle for conveying land rights, and also shows how the state shifted from adhering to Roman imperial traditions, to a "medieval" state, characterized by a greater degree of land rights, and the direct bonds between king and subjects.