59. Inter eas enim personas quae parentum liberorumve locum inter se optinent nuptiae contrahi non possunt, nec inter eas conubium est, velut inter patrem et filiam, vel matrem et filium, vel avum et neptem : et si tales personae inter se coierint, nefarias atque incestas nuptias contraxisse dicuntur. et haec adeo ita sunt, ut quamvis per adoptionem parentum liberorumve loco sibi esse coeperint, non possint inter se matrimonio coniungi, in tantum, ut et dissoluta adoptione idem iuris maneat: itaque eam quae nobis adoptione filiae aut neptis loco esse coeperit non poterimus uxorem ducere, quamvis eam emancipaverimus. 60. Inter eas quoque personas quae ex transverso gradu cognatione iunguntur est quaedam similis observatio, sed non tanta. (61.) Sane inter fratrem et sororem prohibitae sunt nuptiae, sive eodem patre eademque matre nati fuerint, sive alterutro eorum. sed si qua per adoptionem soror mihi esse coeperit, quamdiu quidem constat adoptio, sane inter me et 59. Thus between persons who stand to one another in the relation of ascendants and descendants, marriage cannot be contracted, nor is there conubium between them, for instance, between father and daughter, or mother and son, or grandfather and granddaughter; and if such persons cohabit, they are said to have contracted an unholy and incestuous marriage. And these rules hold so universally, that although they enter into the relation of ascendants and descendants by adoption, they cannot be united in marriage; so that even if the adoption have been dissolved the same rule stands: and therefore we cannot marry a woman who has come to be our daughter or granddaughter by adoption, even though we have emancipated her. 60. Between persons also who are related collaterally there is a rule of like character, but not so stringent'. 61. Marriage is certainly forbidden between a brother and a sister, whether they be born from the same father and the same mother, or from one or other of them3. But if a woman become my sister by adoption, so long as the adoption stands, marriage certainly cannot subsist between us; but when the adoption 3 i. e. Whether they be of the whole or half blood. eam nuptiae non possunt consistere; cum vero per emancipationem adoptio dissoluta sit, potero eam uxorem ducere ; set et si ego emancipatus fuero, nihil inpedimento erit nuptiis. 62. Fratris filiam uxorem ducere licet: idque primum in usum venit, cum divus Claudius Agrippinam, fratris sui filiam, uxorem duxisset. sororis vero filiam uxorem ducere non licet. et haec ita principalibus constitutionibus significantur. Item amitam et materteram uxorem ducere non licet. 63. Item eam quae nobis quondam socrus aut nurus aut privigna aut noverca fuit. ideo autem diximus quondam, quia si adhuc constat eae nuptiae per quas talis adfinitas quaesita est, alia ratione inter nos nuptiae esse non possunt, quia neque eadem duobus nupta esse potest, neque idem duas uxores habere. 64. Ergo si quis nefarias atque incestas nuptias contraxerit, neque uxorem habere videtur, neque liberos. hi enim qui ex eo coitu nascuntur, matrem quidem habere videntur, patrem vero has been dissolved by emancipation', I can marry her: and moreover if I have been emancipated there will be no bar to the marriage. 62. It is lawful to marry a brother's daughter, and this first came into practice when Claudius took to wife Agrippina, the daughter of his brother". But it is not lawful to marry a sister's daughter. And these things are so laid down in constitutions of the emperors. Likewise it is unlawful to marry a father's or mother's sister. 63. Likewise one who has aforetime been our mother-in-law or daughter-in-law or step-daughter or step-mother. The reason for our saying "aforetime" is that if the marriage still subsists whereby such affinity has been brought about, marriage between us is impossible for another reason, since neither can the same woman be married to two husbands, nor can the same man have two wives. 64. If then any man has contracted an unholy and incestuous marriage, he is considered as having neither wife nor children. For the offspring of such a cohabitation are regarded as having a mother indeed, but no father at all: and hence they 1 I. 132. 2 This connection was again prohibited by Justinian, see Inst. I. 10, § 3. 22 : Patria Potestas. Causae Probatio. non utique nec ob id in potestate eius sunt, sed quales sunt ii quos mater vulgo concepit. nam nec hi patrem habere omnino intelleguntur, cum his etiam incertus sit; unde solent spurii filii appellari, vel a Graeca voce quasi σπорádηy concepti, vel quasi sine patre filii. 65. Aliquando autem evenit, ut liberi qui statim ut nati sunt parentum in potestate non fiant, ii postea tamen redigantur in potestatem. (66.) Itaque si Latinus ex lege Aelia Sentia uxore ducta filium procreaverit, aut Latinum ex Latina, aut civem Romanum ex cive Romana, non habebit eum in potestate at causa probata civitatem Romanam consequitur cum filio: simul ergo eum in potestate sua habere incipit. 67. Item si civis Romanus Latinam aut peregrinam uxorem duxerit per ignorantiam, cum eam civem Romanam esse crederet, et filium procreaverit, hic non est in potestate, quia ne quidem civis Romanus est, sed aut Latinus aut peregrinus, id are not in his potestas, but are as those whom a mother has conceived out of wedlock. For these too are considered to have no father at all, inasmuch as in respect of them also he is uncertain and therefore they are called spurious children, either from a Greek word, being as it were conceived σñopádŋv (at random), or as children without a father'. 65. Sometimes, however, it happens that descendants, who at the moment of their birth are not in the potestas of their ascendants, are subsequently brought under their potestas. 66. For instance, if a Latin, having married a wife in accordance with the Lex Aelia Sentia, have begotten a son, whether a Latin son by a Latin wife or a Roman citizen by a Roman wife, he will not have him in his potestas, but when his case has been proved', he and his son together attain to Roman citizenship and therefore at the same instant he will begin to have him in his potestas. : 67. Likewise if a Roman citizen through ignorance have married a Latin or a foreign woman, believing her to be a Roman citizen, and have begotten a son, this son is not in his potestas, because he is not even a Roman citizen, but either a Latin or a foreigner, that is, of the condition of which his 1 Ulpian, IV. 2. Sinepatrii according to the second derivation is contracted down into spurii. 21. 29. Ulp. VII. 4. est eius condicionis cuius et mater fuerit, quia non aliter quisquam ad patris condicionem accedit, quam si inter patrem et matrem eius conubium sit: sed ex senatusconsulto permittitur causam erroris probare, et ita uxor quoque et filius ad civitatem Romanam perveniunt, et ex eo tempore incipit filius in potestate patris esse. Idem iuris est, si eam per ignorantiam uxorem duxerit quae dediticiorum numero est, nisi quod uxor non fit civis Romana. (68.) Item si civis Romana per errorem nupta sit peregrino tamquam civi Romano, permittitur ei causam erroris probare, et ita filius quoque et maritus ad civitatem Romanam perveniunt, et aeque simul incipit filius in potestate patris esse. Idem iuris est si peregrino tamquam Latino ex lege Aelia Sentia nupta sit: nam et de hoc specialiter senatusconsulto cavetur. Idem iuris est aliquatenus, si ei qui dediticiorum numero est, tamquam civi Romano aut Latino e lege Aelia Sentia nupta sit: nisi quod scilicet qui dediticiorum nu mother is, since a man does not follow his father's condition unless there be conubium between his father and mother: yet by a senatusconsultum' he is allowed to prove a cause of error, and so both the wife and son attain to Roman citizenship, and from that time the son begins to be in the potestas of his father. The rule is the same if through ignorance he marry a woman who is in the category of the dediticii, except that the wife does not become a Roman citizen'. 68. Likewise if a Roman woman by mistake be married to a foreigner thinking him to be a Roman citizen, she is allowed to prove a cause of error3, and thus both the son and the husband attain to Roman citizenship, and at the same time the son begins to be in his father's potestas. The rule is the same, if she be married in accordance with the Lex Aelia Sentia to a foreigner under the impression that he is a Latin, for as to this special provision is made by the senatusconsultum*. The rule is the same to some extent, if she be married in accordance with the Lex Aelia Sentia to one who is in the category of the dediticii, under the impression that he is a Roman citizen or a Latin, except, that is to say, that he who is in the category of the dediticii remains 1 Temp. Vespasiani, according to Gans. 3 Ulp. VII. 4. 4 L 67. mero est, in sua condicione permanet, et ideo filius, quamvis fiat civis Romanus, in potestatem patris non redigitur. (69.) Item si Latina peregrino, quem Latinum esse crederet, nupserit, potest ex senatusconsulto filio nato causam erroris probare, et ita omnes fiunt cives Romani, et filius in potestate patris esse incipit. (70.) Idem iuris omnino est, si Latinus per errorem peregrinam quasi Latinam aut civem Romanam e lege Aelia Sentia uxorem duxerit. (71.) Praeterea si civis Romanus, qui se credidisset Latinum, duxisset Latinam, permittitur ei filio nato erroris causam probare, tamquam si ex lege Aelia Sentia uxorem duxisset. Item his qui licet cives Romani essent, peregrinos se esse credidissent et peregrinas uxores duxissent, permittitur ex senatusconsulto filio nato causam erroris probare: quo facto peregrina uxor civis Romana fit et filius quoque ita non solum ad civitatem Romanam pervenit, sed etiam in potestatem patris redigitur. (72.) Quaecumque de filio esse diximus, eadem et de filia dicta intellegemus. (73.) Et quantum ad erroris causam probandam attinet, nihil interest cuius aetatis filius in his condition, and therefore the son, although he is a Roman citizen by birth, is not brought under his father's potestas. 69. Likewise if a Latin woman be married to a foreigner, thinking him to be a Latin, she can, by virtue of the senatusconsultum, after a son is born, prove a cause of error, and so they all become Roman citizens, and the son is at once in his father s potestas. 70. The same rule holds in every respect if a Latin by mistake marry a foreign woman in accordance with the Lex Aelia Sentia, under the impression that she is a Latin or a Roman citizen. 71. Further, if a Roman citizen, who believed himself to be a Latin, have married a Latin woman, he is permitted, after the birth of a son to prove a cause of error, just as though he had married in accordance with the Lex Aelia Sentia. Likewise men, who, although they were Roman citizens, believed themselves to be foreigners and married foreign wives, are allowed by the senatusconsultum, after the birth of a son, to prove a cause of error: and on this being done the foreign wife becomes a Roman citizen, and the son also in this way not only attains to Roman citizenship, but is brought under the potestas of his father. 72. Whatever we have said of a son, we shall consider to be also said of a daughter. 73. And so far as regards the proving of a cause |