Definition
A Latin term used in old European and civil law with two related but distinct meanings:
1. A letter, charter, or written instrument. In medieval European legal usage, any document in writing used to convey lands or confirm contracts. Spelman traces the usage to the post-Roman period, noting that all deeds and charters were commonly called epistolae during and after the later Roman Empire, referencing Cassiodorus and Marculfus as authorities.
2. (Plural: EPISTOLAE) In Roman civil law, rescripts or written opinions issued by the emperors in response to legal questions submitted to them for decision. These were not spontaneous pronouncements but responsive documents — answers to petitions or formal queries. Written opinions of eminent jurists (jurisconsulti) such as Ulpian, given in response to questions of law proposed to them, were similarly designated epistolae in some usages.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): "Epistle" — a letter, especially a formal or didactic one; specifically, one of the letters in the New Testament.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): "Epistle" — a writing sent to a person or persons; a letter; specifically, one of the apostolic letters in the New Testament.
The common meaning carries the sense of a personal or religious letter. The legal sense extends well beyond correspondence into the domain of formal instruments — deeds, charters, and imperial rescripts. A researcher encountering epistola in a legal source should not assume the document is mere correspondence; it may be a binding conveyance or an authoritative legal ruling.
Recognized Forms
/SUBTYPES
EPISTOLAE (plural) — the dominant form in civil law contexts, referring specifically to imperial rescripts. Functionally related to, but distinguished from, other forms of imperial pronouncement such as edicta (general edicts) and decreta (judicial decisions in specific cases). Juristic opinions styled as epistolae represent a subset of what Roman law called responsa prudentium.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working in medieval European legal records, canon law materials, or Roman civil law sources will encounter epistola in both senses, sometimes in the same document collection. The primary interpretive trap is conflating the two meanings: a conveyancing instrument and an imperial rescript are functionally and legally quite different things.
In sources dealing with Roman law, epistolae as imperial rescripts belong to a larger classification system of imperial constitutions. Understanding where epistolae sit relative to edicta, mandata, and decreta is essential for correctly interpreting the authority and scope of any given pronouncement. Rapalje & Lawrence notes that imperial epistolae were responses to cases submitted for decision — making them analogous in function to advisory opinions or judicial answers to certified questions, not general legislation.
In post-Roman and medieval European sources, the conveyancing sense dominates. Spelman's Glossary and Cassiodorus are the authorities cited across the historical dictionaries for this usage. Researchers consulting early English or continental charters should be alert to epistola as a synonym for carta or instrumentum — a usage that largely disappeared from English legal practice as common law conveyancing vocabulary standardized.
The term has no significant modern legal survival in common law jurisdictions. Researchers will encounter it almost exclusively in historical, civil law, or ecclesiastical sources.
Historical Dictionary Support
The historical dictionaries converge on both meanings without significant disagreement. Black's (both editions) and Rapalje & Lawrence offer concise parallel definitions; Burrill provides the most developed treatment of the conveyancing sense, supplying the Latin formulation from Spelman (instrumentum quo prædia conceduntur, pactionesque firmantur — "an instrument by which lands are granted and agreements confirmed") and noting the precise historical window: during and after the decline of the Western Empire.
Rapalje & Lawrence gives the clearest treatment of epistolae in the civil law sense, emphasizing the responsive character of these opinions — they arose from questions submitted, not from imperial initiative. All sources cite Calvin's Lexicon and Spelman's Glossary as the foundational authorities.
What the historical dictionaries collectively omit is any treatment of epistolae within the broader taxonomy of Roman imperial constitutions — a gap that leaves researchers without the connective tissue needed to place the term in its jurisprudential context. For that, the civil law treatise literature is necessary.
Jurisdictional Note
Epistola has no operative meaning in modern common law jurisdictions and is not used in contemporary American or English legal instruments. It appears primarily in Roman civil law scholarship, canon law, and historical research into medieval European documents. Civil law jurisdictions with Roman roots may carry vestigial terminology, but epistola itself is a historical rather than a working legal term everywhere.