he
absence of legitimate children) one-sixth of his property; moreover,
they might be fully legitimated by the subsequent marriage of their
parents.

In the East, the emperor Leo the Philosopher (d. 911) insisted on formal
marriage as the only legal status; but in the Western Empire concubinage
was still recognized even by the Christian emperors. The early
Christians had naturally preferred the formless marriage of the Roman
law as being free from all taint of pagan idolatry; and the
ecclesiastical authorities recognized concubinage also. The first
council of Toledo (398) bids the faithful restrict himself "to a single
wife or concubine, as it shall please him";[2] and there is a similar
canon of the Roman synod held by Pope Eugenius II. in 826. Even as late
as the Roman councils of 1052 and 1063, the suspension from communion of
laymen who had a wife and a concubine _at the same time_ implies that
mere concubinage was tolerated. It was also recognized by many early
civil codes. In Germany "left-handed" or "morganatic" marriages were
allowed by the Salic law between nobles and women of lower rank. In
different states of Spain the laws of the later middle ages recognized
concubinage under the name of _barragania_, the contract being
lifelong, the woman obtaining by it a right to maintenance during life,
and sometimes also to part of the succession, and the sons ranking as
nobles if their father was a noble. In Iceland, the concubine was
recognized in addition to the lawful wife, though it was forbidden that
they should dwell in the same house. The Norwegian law of the later
middle ages provided definitely that in default of legitimate sons, the
kingdom should descend to illegitimates. In the Danish code of Valdemar
II., which was in force from 1280 to 1683, it was provided that a
concubine kept openly for three years shall thereby become a legal wife;
this was the custom of _hand vesten_, the "handfasting" of the English
and Scottish borders, which appears in Scott's _Monastery_. In Scotland,
the laws of William the Lion (d. 1214) speak of concubinage as a
recognized institution; and, in the same century, the great English
legist Bracton treats the "concubina _legitima_" as entitled to certain
rights.[3] There seems to have been at times a pardonable confusion
between some quasi-legitimate unions and those marriages by mere word of
mouth, without ecclesiastical or other ceremonies, which the church,
after some natural h