Legal profession, vocation that is based on expertise in the law and in its

applications. Although there are other ways of defining the profession, this simple
definition may be best, despite the fact that in some countries there are several
professions and even some occupations (e.g., police service) that require such
expertise but that may not regarded as within the “legal profession.”
History
Distinct legal systems emerged relatively early in history, but legal professions of size
and importance are relatively modern. There is not the slightest trace in ancient times
of a distinct legal profession in the modern sense. The earliest known legal specialist
was the judge, and he was only a part-time specialist. The chief, prince, or king of
small societies discharged the judicial function as part of the general role of political
leader. As his power spread, he delegated the function, though not to legal specialists;
in the secular stages of the early systems, legal duties were taken over by royal
officials who were “generalists.” In the wake of powerful religious or quasi-religious
movements, priests or wise men often judged or advised the judges. It may be that in
some of these cases specialized legal aid to the ordinary citizen did exist, but at levels
of social status below the notice of chroniclers or tomb inscriptions and perhaps
without benefit of official approval.

Classical beginnings

A distinct class of legal specialists other than judges first emerged in Greco-
Roman civilization, and, as with the law itself, the main contribution was from Rome
in the period from 200 BCE to 600 CE. In the early stages of both Greece and Rome, as
later among the German tribes who overran the Roman Empire, there was
a prejudice against the idea of specialists in law being generally available for a fee.
The assumption was that the citizen knew the customary law and would apply it in
transactions or in litigation personally with advice from kinsmen. As the law became
more complex, men prominent in public life—usually patricians—found it necessary
to acquire legal knowledge, and some acquired reputations as experts. Often they
spent periods serving as magistrates and in Rome as priests of the official religion,
having special powers in matters of family law. Among the German tribes, noble
experts were allowed to assist in litigation, not in a partisan fashion but as interpreters
(Vorsprecher) for those who wished to present a case but felt uncomfortable doing so
themselves. The peculiar system of development of early Roman law, by annual edict
and by the extension of trial formulas, gave the Roman patrician legal expert an
influential position. He became the jurisconsult, the first nonofficial lawyer to be
regarded with social approbation, but he owed this partly to the fact that he did not
attempt to act as an advocate at trial—a function left to the separate class of orators—
and was prohibited from receiving fees.

The modern legal professional, earning his living by fee-paid legal services, first
became clearly visible in the late Roman Empire, when the fiction that a jurisconsult
received only gifts was abandoned and when at the same time the permissible fees
were regulated. Changes in the methods of trial and other legal developments caused
the jurisconsult to disappear in time. The orator, who now was required to obtain legal
training, became the advocate. A subordinate legal agent of the classical system,
the procurator, who attended to the formal aspects of litigation, took on added
importance because later imperial legal procedure depended largely on written
documents that the procurators produced. The jurisconsults had been important as
teachers and writers on law; with their decline this function passed to government-
conducted law schools at Rome, Constantinople, and Berytus (now Beirut) and to
their salaried professors. There was also a humbler class of paid legal documentary
experts, the tabelliones, who were useful in nonlitigious transactions.
Get exclusive access to content from our 1768 First Edition with your

Medieval Europe
This late Roman pattern of legal organization profoundly influenced the Europe that
began to arise from 1000 CE after the barbarian invasions; even during the invasions
the methods of Roman imperial administration never ceased to be used in some parts
of southern France and in central Italy. The Christian church, which became the
official Roman imperial church after 381 CE, developed its own canon law, courts,
and practitioners and followed the general outline of later Roman legal organization.
Because of its success among the invaders, the church was in a position to establish
its jurisdiction in many matters of family law and inheritance. Hence, both the idea of
a legal profession and the method of its operation retained sufficient force to offset
Germanic and feudal objections to legal representation. After the revival of learning in
the 12th century, in particular the renewed study of Roman law at Bologna, the
influence of the late Roman professional system was greatly strengthened.
From then on, every country in continental Europe acquired, by various stages and
with numerous local variations, a legal profession in which four
main constituents could be observed. Procurators attended to the formal and especially
the documentary steps in litigation. Advocates, who usually were university graduates
in Romanist learning, gave direct advice to clients and to procurators and presented
oral arguments in court. Among a miscellany of legal scribes, the notaries acquired
importance because, in addition to being drafting experts, they also authenticated
documents and maintained archives. University teachers of law took over the main
task of explaining and adapting the mixture of Roman law and Germanic custom that
produced the modern laws of the major European countries and continued to dominate
in the scholarly interpretation of the law even after the 19th-century codifications. The
relative importance of these classes varied enormously from place to place and from
century to century. At times the teaching doctors almost supplanted the advocates; in
some courts the procurators swallowed up the advocates, and in others the converse
occurred; only the notaries managed to survive with little change.

England after the Conquest

England after the Norman Conquest of 1066 also was influenced by Roman example,
and the clerics who staffed the Norman and Plantagenet monarchies and who provided
the earliest of their judges enabled the notion of a legal profession, and especially
of litigious representation, to be accepted. Only in the ecclesiastical and admiralty
courts, however, did procurators (proctors) and doctors of the civil and canon laws
become established as practitioners. The native “common law” was developed by a
specialized legal society, the Inns of Court, in London; there, through lectures and
apprenticeship, men acquired admission to practice before the royal courts. More
particularly, they could become serjeants—the most dignified of the advocates, from
whom alone after about 1300 the royal judges were appointed. Various agents for
litigation resembling procurators also became known. The “attorneys,” authorized by
legislation, at first shared the life of the Inns with the “apprentices” in advocacy, who
themselves in time acquired the title of barrister. Indeed, there were cases of men
working as both barristers and attorneys. When in the 16th century the Court of
Chancery was established as the dispenser of “equity,” the appropriate agent for
litigation was called a solicitor, but the common-law serjeants and barristers secured
the right of advocacy in that court. It was not until the 17th century that the attorneys
and solicitors were expelled from the Inns and the division between advocate and
attorney became rigid, and not until the 18th century did the barristers accept a rule
that they would function only upon being engaged by an attorney—not upon being
retained directly by a client. Other types of legal agents also developed in England,
but in the 19th century all of the nonbarristers were brought under the one name,
solicitor. The order of serjeants was eliminated, leaving only barristers, of whom the
most senior could be made Queen’s (or King’s) Counsel.
In its final development the English legal profession thus bore a resemblance to the
European professions—particularly to that of northern France, where
the parlements (courts) had a corporate life and apprentice training not unlike that of
the Inns. But there were four significant differences between England and the
Continent. No distinct class of university teachers and commentators on the national
law developed in England. Development of the law took place chiefly
through precedent based on the reported judgments of the courts, rather than through
legislation. The continental monarchies also developed a system of career judicial
office, in which the young university licentiate went straight into government service,
whereas in England appointment of judges from the senior practicing profession
remained the settled practice. In addition, the division between barristers and
solicitors ultimately became much more rigid in England than did the division
between the advocate and procurator on the Continent, which never adopted an
equivalent of the English practice of requiring a barrister to be employed by a
solicitor; both the procurator and the advocate were separately and directly employed
by the client. Finally, England never developed the profession of notary, so that the
whole burden of transactional work fell on those who are now the solicitors, with
legal advice from the bar.
Worldwide legal profession

Contrary to conventional understanding, there were antecedents of a legal profession

outside Europe prior to the spreading of such ideas through European colonialism. In
China, for example, there was a long history of unofficial legal advisers—often young
men preparing to take imperial examinations for official appointment—who assisted
merchants and other laymen in the preparation of legal documents, including those
needed to commence litigation. Although operating in the shadow of an imperial legal
code that prohibited the instigation of litigation, these quasi-lawyers also enjoyed a
fair measure of tolerance from officialdom, which suggests that at least some of them
may have served a useful purpose.
Such indigenous developments notwithstanding, the rise outside Europe of a modern
legal profession—in the sense of a class of specialists recognized by the state and yet
operating with some measure of independence from it—is generally associated with
European colonial expansion. In Britain’s North American colonies, and particularly
in the United States soon after independence, lawyers assumed a prominent role in
both public and private life, which led the French social observer Alexis de
Tocqueville to write early in the 19th century that “it is at the bar or bench that the
American aristocracy is found.” The English system also provided a model for most
former English colonies in Africa, for most of the Indian subcontinent, and for
Australia, Hong Kong, Malaysia, New Zealand, and Singapore. The Romano-
Germanic practices that in time became the civil law made their influence felt in
Scandinavia, eastern Europe, Latin America, and many Muslim countries in the
Middle East; in French, Spanish, Belgian, and Portuguese colonies in Africa; and
in Japan, Thailand, the French colonies of Southeast Asia, and, in some measure,
the Republic of China (which existed on the Chinese mainland prior to 1949 and
today exists on Taiwan). It should be noted, however, that the association between the
modern legal profession and colonialism was not always felicitous. Although lawyers
were in some instances at the forefront of their countries’ independence movements
(as were Mohandas Gandhi in India and Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore), in other cases
they worked to uphold colonial rule.
To be sure, both the common-law and the civil-law models of lawyering underwent
considerable modification by both the countries of export and the countries of
reception. In particular, the specialization of procurator-advocate and solicitor-
barrister tended to be replaced by a “fused” profession of legal practitioners qualified
to perform both functions and usually doing so. Such a fusion occurred gradually
in Germany between the 16th and 18th centuries, and it has taken place more recently
in France (except before the courts of appeal). Although the division still formally
exists in Italy, it is no longer of practical importance. In Latin America the fused
profession is general. Notaries as a separate specialized branch of the profession exist,
however, in most civil-law countries.