Stephani de Malescot Iuriscos. ac Belarborensis Theophilologi, de Nuptiis Liber Paradoxicus, nova & recenti methodo compositus

are considered. For the conjunction of bodies (they say) was not necessary by Civil Law for a just marriage. They strive to confirm this with the rescript of the Emperor Zeno, even though (he says) certain Egyptians coupled the wives of deceased brothers in matrimony because they were said to have remained virgins after their deaths. They believed, as pleased certain founders of laws, that since they had not met in body, marriage did not seem to have been contracted, and such unions celebrated at that time were confirmed. Nevertheless, we decree by the present law that if any such marriages were contracted, they and those born from them are subject to the tenor of the ancient laws, and they are not seen to have been confirmed, nor are they to be confirmed, following the example of the Egyptians. Thus far Zeno. But they are greatly mistaken. Because the Emperor does not deny that the conjunction of bodies is necessary, but he wants to keep incestuous marriages away from the form of the Republic. For by divine law, in the time of Moses, a brother was compelled to take the wife left by his deceased brother without offspring and to raise up seed for the dead. Therefore, to exclude incestuous and now-prohibited marriages, Zeno rejects the example of the Egyptians and such marriages, along with the Emperors Valentinian, Theodosius, Arcadius, and Anastasius. Much less does it confirm their opinion

t Law "It is permitted," Code regarding incestuous marriages.

u Deuteronomy, chapter 25.

a Law "of the brother," Code regarding incestuous marriages.

b Law last, Code on the same.