Military testaments. DE TESTAMENTIS MILITUM. 103 109. Sed haec diligens observatio in ordinandis testamentis militibus propter nimiam inperitiam constitutionibus Principum remissa est. nam quamvis neque legitimum numerum testium adhibuerint, neque vendiderint familiam, neque nuncupaverint testamentum, recte nihilominus testantur. (110.) Praeterea permissum est iis et peregrinos et Latinos instituere heredes vel iis legare; cum alioquin peregrini quidem ratione civili prohibeantur capere hereditatem legataque, Latini vero per legem Iuniam. (III.) Caelibes quoque qui lege Iulia hereditatem legataque capere vetantur, item orbi, id est qui liberos non habent, quos lex Papia plus quam semissem capere prohibet [23 lin.]. 112. Sed senatus divo Hadriano auctore, ut supra quoque signi 109. But these strict regulations as to the making of testaments have been relaxed by constitutions of the Emperors in the case of soldiers, on account of their great want of legal knowledge. For their testaments are valid, though they have neither employed the lawful number of witnesses, nor sold (mancipated) their familia, nor nuncupated their testament'. 110. Moreover, they are allowed to institute foreigners or Latins as their heirs, or to leave legacies to them: although, in other cases, foreigners are prohibited by the civil law from taking inheritances, and Latins by the Lex Junia. III. Unmarried persons also, who by the Lex Julia3 are forbidden to take an inheritance or legacies, also orbi, i.e. those who have no children, whom the Lex Papia prevents from taking more than half the inheritance (can be appointed heirs by soldiers)...... 112. But the senate, at the instance of the late emperor 1 The testaments of soldiers made irregularly were only valid for one year after their leaving the service. Ulpian, XXIII. 10. I. 23. 3 The Lex Julia de maritandis ordinibus (temp. Augusti) is meant. Coelibes could by that law take what was bequeathed to them only in case they married within 100 days from the time when they became entitled. Ulpian, XVII. I. The Lex Julia was enacted A.D. 4, but it did not come into operation till A.D. 10, in which year the Lex Papia Poppaea was also passed. The two laws being thus connected both in their object and their date are generally spoken of together, and sometimes, though not quite correctly, as if they were one law, Lex Julia et Papia. 104 Testaments of women. Testamenti factio. ficavimus, mulieribus etiam coemptione non facta testamentum facere permisit, si modo maiores facerent annorum XII tutore auctore; scilicet ut quae tutela liberatae non essent ita testari deberent. (113.) Videntur ergo melioris condicionis esse feminae quam masculi: nam masculus minor annorum XIIII testamentum facere non potest, etiamsi tutore auctore testamentum facere velit; femina vero post XII annum testamenti faciundi ius nanciscitur. 114. Igitur si quaeramus an valeat testamentum, inprimis advertere debemus an is qui id fecerit habuerit testamenti factionem: deinde si habuerit, requiremus an secundum iuris civilis regulam testatus sit; exceptis militibus, quibus propter nimiam inperitiam, ut diximus, quomodo velint vel quomodo possint, permittitur testamentum facere. Hadrian (as we stated above also), allowed women to make a testament, even though they had not entered into a coemptio', provided only they were above twelve years of age and made it with the authorization of their tutor; that is, (the senate ruled) that women not freed from tutela should so make their testaments2. 113. Women, therefore, seem to be in a better position than men: for a male under fourteen years of age cannot make a testament, even though he desire to make it with the authorization of his tutor: but a woman obtains the right of making a testament after her twelfth year 3. 114. If then we are considering whether a testament be valid, we first ought to consider whether he who made it had testamenti factio*: then, if he had it, we shall enquire whether he made the testament according to the rules of the civil law: except in the case of soldiers, who, as we have stated, on account of their great want of legal knowledge, are allowed to make a testament as they will and as they can. Institution of heir. Bonorum possessio. 105 115. Non tamen, ut iure civili valeat testamentum, sufficit ea observatio quam supra exposuimus de familiae venditione et de testibus et de nuncupationibus. (116.) Ante omnia requirendum est an institutio heredis sollemni more facta sit: nam aliter facta institutione nihil proficit familiam testatoris ita venire, testesve ita adhibere, aut nuncupare testamentum, ut supra diximus. (117.) Sollemnis autem institutio haec est: TITIUS HERES ESTO. sed et illa iam conprobata videtur: TITIUM HEREDEM ESSE IUBEO. at illa non est conprobata : TITIUM HEREDEM ESSE VOLO. set et illae a plerisque inprobatae sunt: HEREDEM INSTITUO, item HEREDEM FACIO. 118. Observandum praeterea est, ut si mulier quae in tutela sit faciat testamentum, tutoris auctoritate facere debeat: alioquin inutiliter iure civili testabitur. (119.) Praetor tamen, si septem signis testium signatum sit testamentum, scriptis heredibus secundum tabulas testamenti bonorum possessionem pollicetur : et si nemo sit ad quem ab intestato iure legitimo perti 115. But to make a testament valid by the civil law, the observances which we have explained above as to the sale of the familia and the witnesses and the nuncupations, are not sufficient. 116. Above all things, we must enquire whether the institution of the heir was made in solemn form: for if it have been made otherwise, it is of no avail for the familia of the testator to be sold, or to call in witnesses, or to nuncupate the testament, in the manner we have stated above. 117. The solemn form of institution is this: "Titius be heir." But this also seems approved: "I order Titius to be heir." This, however, is not approved: "I wish Titius to be heir." These, too, are generally disapproved: "I institute heir," and "I make heir1." 118. We must further observe that if a woman who is in tutela make a testament, she ought to make it with the authorization of her tutor otherwise she will make a testament invalid at the civil law. 119. The Praetor, however, if the testament be sealed with the seals of seven witnesses, promises to the written heirs possession of the property in accordance with the testament: and if there be no person to whom the inheritance belongs on 1 The form to be solemn must be imperative, not precative or a mere statement. Ulpian, xxI. 2 II. II2. neat hereditas, velut frater eodem patre natus aut patruus aut fratris filius, ita poterunt scripti heredes retinere hereditatem. nam idem iuris est et si alia ex causa testamentum non valeat, velut quod familia non venierit aut nuncupationis verba testator locutus non sit. (120.) Sed videamus an non, etiamsi frater aut patruus extent, potiores scriptis heredibus habeantur. rescripto enim Imperatoris Antonini significatur, eos qui secundum tabulas testamenti non iure factas bonorum possessionem petierint, posse adversus eos qui ab intestato vindicant hereditatem defendere se per exceptionem doli mali. (121.) quod sane quidem ad masculorum testamenta pertinere certum intestacy by statutable right', as a brother born from the same father, or a father's brother, or a brother's son, the written heirs will in such a case retain the inheritance. The rule is the same if the testament be invalid from other causes, as for instance, because the familia has not been sold, or because the testator has not spoken the words of nuncupation3. 120. But let us consider whether or not, supposing a brother or father's brother exist, they will be considered to have a better title than the written heirs. For it is laid down in a rescript of the emperor Antoninus, that those who claim possession of goods in accordance with a testament not made in due form, can defend themselves by an exceptio doli mali1 against those who claim the inheritance by intestacy3. 121. That this (rescript) found themselves obliged to supplement the law by these grants of bonorum possessio, whereby they sometimes prevented an inheritance becoming ownerless, and in other cases left the bare name of heir to the person marked out by law, but gave the practical benefits of the succession to one more justly entitled either on natural grounds, as for instance by relationship, or on account of the expressed wish of the testator, when the testator did not pass over some person on whose appointment the law insisted. 3 See on this point D. 37. II. I. 8, where several cases of this nature are examined. Praeterition of a suus heres. 107 est; item ad feminarum quae ideo non utiliter testatae sunt, quod verbi gratia familiam non vendiderint aut nuncupationis verba locutae non sint: an autem et ad ea testamenta feminarum quae sine tutoris auctoritate fecerint haec constitutio pertineat, videbimus. (122.) Loquimur autem de his scilicet feminis quae non in legitima parentium aut patronorum tutela sunt, sed de his quae alterius generis tutores habent, qui etiam inviti coguntur auctores fieri: alioquin parentem et patronum sine auctoritate eius facto testamento non summoveri palam est. 123. Item qui filium in potestate habet curare debet, ut eum vel heredem instituat vel nominatim exheredet; alioquin si eum silentio praeterierit, inutiliter testabitur: adeo quidem, ut nostri praeceptores existiment, etiamsi vivo patre filius defunctus sit, neminem heredem ex eo testamento existere posse, applies to testaments of men is certain: also to those of women who have made an invalid testament, because, for instance, they have not sold their familia, or have not spoken the words of nuncupation: but whether the constitution also applies to those wills of women which they have made without authorization of the tutor, is a matter for us to consider. 122. But we are speaking about those women, of course, who are not in the tutela legitima of parents or patrons, but who have tutors of another kind, who are compelled to authorize even against their will: that in the other case, a parent or a patron cannot be set aside by a testament made without his authorization is plain'. 123. Likewise, he who has a son in his potestas, must take care either to appoint him heir or to disinherit him by name*: otherwise, if he pass him over in silence, the testament will be void so that, according to the opinion of our authorities, even if the son die in the lifetime of the father, no heir can exist under that testament, that is, because the institution § 123 et seqq.) do not apply to any but descendants, so that the written heirs are preferred to a brother or father's brother. Under Justinian's legislation, however, the brother sometimes could wrest the possession from them. Just. Inst. II. 18. I. 1 This paragraph is an answer to the question implied in "videbimus" at the end of § 121. The testaments of women under fiduciary tutors will be supported by the praetor's grant of bonorum possessio secundum tabulas, but not those of women in tutela legitima. See I. 192. 2 Ulpian, XXII. 14-23, and Cic. De Oratore, 1. 38 apud finem. |