Definition
The Edicts of Justinian are thirteen imperial constitutions issued by the Emperor Justinian I (r. 527–565 CE) governing administrative and regulatory matters in specific provinces of the Byzantine Empire. They appear in most complete editions of the Corpus Juris Civilis, positioned after the Novels (Novellae Constitutiones). Unlike the major components of the Corpus Juris Civilis — the Institutes, Digest, and Codex — the Edicts addressed localized concerns of provincial governance rather than the general private law that shaped later European legal systems. Their subject matter falls broadly under what historical sources call "matters of police," meaning the administration and public order of particular territories such as Africa, Egypt, and other eastern provinces.
Common Confusion
The Edicts of Justinian are distinct from the better-known Novels of Justinian, which are also appended to the Corpus Juris Civilis and which carry substantially greater doctrinal weight. Researchers encountering references to "Justinian's later legislation" should distinguish between the two: the Novels represent Justinian's general legislative output after the Codex was finalized, while the Edicts are narrower, provincial instruments. The Edicts are also unrelated to the classical Roman praetorian edict (Edictum Perpetuum), which was a separate body of magistrate-issued procedural law codified under Hadrian centuries earlier.
Why It Matters in Research
For researchers working in the Law Mind corpus, the Edicts of Justinian are primarily of structural and bibliographic significance rather than doctrinal weight. Several practical points:
First, location within the Corpus Juris Civilis varies by edition. The Edicts appear after the Novels in most standard editions, but not all editions treat them with equal prominence or include complete texts. When consulting historical commentaries on the Corpus Juris Civilis, a source that discusses the Novels without mentioning the Edicts has not necessarily omitted them in error — they were routinely treated as minor supplements.
Second, the dismissive characterization in historical legal dictionaries ("of little use") reflects a civilian scholarly consensus that persisted from the early modern period onward. This consensus is accurate as a guide to the Edicts' limited influence on civil law doctrine but should not be read to mean the texts are irrelevant for legal historians studying Byzantine provincial administration, late antique governance, or the transmission of Roman law into specific regional contexts.
Third, researchers tracing how the Corpus Juris Civilis was received in medieval and early modern Europe will find that the Edicts were largely bypassed by the glossators and commentators who built the ius commune tradition. Citations to Justinianic authority in later civil law sources almost always draw from the Digest, Codex, or Novels — rarely if ever from the Edicts. Absence of citation to the Edicts in a secondary source is normal and expected.
Fourth, any research touching on Roman law in Egypt, Africa Proconsularis, or the eastern provinces of the late empire may find the Edicts directly relevant in ways that purely doctrinal research would not.
Historical Dictionary Support
The three source dictionaries — Black's (1st and 2nd editions) and Bouvier's — are in near-complete agreement on this entry, and all three reproduce essentially the same text with minor variation. All identify thirteen constitutions, all place them after the Novels in the Corpus Juris Civilis, and all describe their subject matter as "matters of police in the provinces." All three conclude that they are "of little use."
This unanimity reflects the settled civilian view rather than independent analysis. The entries do not identify which thirteen edicts are included, do not describe their individual subjects, and do not distinguish the Edicts from one another. For basic orientation this is sufficient; for substantive research into the Edicts themselves, these dictionary entries are a starting point only.
Bouvier's entry adds the related headword EDICTUM, defining it simply as "an edict; a mandate or ordinance" — a useful reminder that the Latin term has broader application in Roman law beyond this specific collection.
What the historical dictionaries do not address: the transmission history of the Edicts, their varying inclusion across manuscript and print editions of the Corpus Juris Civilis, or the scholarly debate about their precise number and authenticity in some editions.
Jurisdictional Note
The Edicts of Justinian have no operative legal force in any modern jurisdiction. Their relevance is purely historical. Civil law systems whose foundations trace to the Corpus Juris Civilis — including French, Spanish, Italian, and Louisiana law — draw that lineage from the Digest, Codex, and Novels, not the Edicts.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See Law Mind Encyclopedia: Corpus Juris Civilis; Novels of Justinian; Roman Law Reception in Europe