Causae Probatio.

25

sive filia sit

Latinus

qui causa probari non potest. nec me praeterit in aliquo rescripto divi Hadriani ita esse constitutum, tamquam quod ad erroris quoque causam probandam [desunt 2. lin.] Imperator

nisi minor anniculo sit filius filiave,

tuendam dedit. (74.) Item peregrino [3 lin.] uxorem duxisset et filio nato alias civitatem Romanam consecutus esset, deinde cum quaereretur an causam probare posset, rescripsit Imperator Antoninus perinde posse eum causam probare, atque si peregrinus mansisset. ex quo colligimus etiam peregrinum causam probare posse. (75.) Ex iis quae diximus apparet

errore matrimo

ea quae superius

76. [2 lin.] uxorem duxerit, sicut supra quoque diximus, iustum matrimonium contrahi et tunc ex iis qui nascitur, civis Romanus est et in potestate patris erit. (77.) Itaque si civis

..........

of error, it matters not of what age the son or daughter be'. 74. Likewise in the case of a foreigner...(who) had married, and after the birth of his son had obtained Roman citizenship in some other way, when afterwards the question was raised whether he could prove a cause of error, the emperor Antoninus declared in a rescript that he could as well prove a cause as if he had remained a foreigner. Whence we gather that a foreigner too can prove a cause of error.

75.

76. .2 has married,...as we also said above, a lawful marriage is contracted, and then the child of such parents is a Roman citizen and in the potestas of his father. 77. Likewise if a Roman woman be married to a foreigner, although

1 The rest of this paragraph is corrupt, but it seems plain that Gaius goes on to say, that although in proving a cause of error the age of the child is immaterial; yet it is not so when a Junian Latin applies to the Praetor in virtue of the Lex Aelia Sentia, for his claim is not entertained unless the child is above one

year

of age.

§ 75 is so corrupt that any translation of it must be mere guess-work. The commencement of § 76 is also mutilated, but obviously Gaius is speaking of the case of a Roman marrying a woman of a nation with which there is conubium. See I. 56.

Romana peregrino nupserit, is qui nascitur, licet omni modo peregrinus sit, tamen interveniente conubio iustus filius est, tamquam si ex peregrina eum procreasset. hoc tamen tempore e senatusconsulto quod auctore divo Hadriano factum est, etsi non fuerit conubium inter civem Romanam et peregrinum, qui nascitur iustus patris filius est. (78.) Quod autem diximus inter civem Romanam peregrinumque matrimonio contracto eum qui nascitur, peregrinum [desunt 11 lin.]. (79.) Adeo autem hoc ita est, ut [desunt 3 lin.] sed etiam, qui Latini nominantur: sed ad alios Latinos pertinet, qui proprios populos propriasque civitates habebant et erant peregrinorum numero. (80.) Eadem ratione ex contrario ex Latino et cive Romana qui nascitur, civis Romanus nascitur. fuerunt tamen qui putaverunt ex lege Aelia Sentia contracto matrimonio Latinum nasci, quia videtur the child is in every case a foreigner, yet if conubium exist between his parents, he is a lawful son, as much as if the foreigner had begotten him upon a foreign woman. At the present time, however, by a senatusconsultum which was enacted at the instance of the late emperor Hadrian, even if conubium do not exist between the Roman woman and the foreigner, the child is the lawful son of his father. 78. But when we said that on a marriage taking place between a Roman woman and a foreigner, the child is a foreigner'. 79. 80. On the same principle, in the converse case, the child of a Latin man and a Roman woman is a Roman citizen by birth. Some, however, have thought that when a marriage is contracted in accordance with the Lex Aelia Sentia, the child is a Latin, because it is considered that conubium is granted between them in that case by the Leges Aelia Sentia and

1 The rule that the child in this case should follow the condition of the father rather than that of the mother is anomalous; and Göschen conjecturally fills up the lacuna in § 78, with an explanation that a special lex (Mensia) had settled that the rule of the child's condition being that of the mother when no conubium subsisted, should in this particular instance be set aside. See Ulpian, v. 8, and D. I. 5. 24.

2 This paragraph again is altogether in confusion. Probably what

.........

2

is implied by it is that except in the case touched by the Lex Mensia, the child of a marriage without conubium follows his mother's condition by the jus gentium. Then follows the further explanation, that as marriages without conubium are all liable to this incident, it matters not whether the Latins concerned are technical Latins (Juniani), or actual Latins by birth, "alios Latinos" as Gaius terms them, who, as we now learn, were classed among the foreigners.

eo casu per legem Aeliam Sentiam et Iuniam conubium inter eos dari, et semper conubium efficit, ut qui nascitur patris condicioni accedat: aliter vero contracto matrimonio eum qui nascitur iure gentium matris condicionem sequi. at vero hodie civis Romanus est; scilicet hoc iure utimur ex senatusconsulto, quo auctore divo Hadriano significatur, ut omni modo ex Latino et cive Romana natus civis Romanus nascatur. (81.) His convenienter etiam illud senatusconsulto divo Hadriano auctore significatur, ut ex Latino et peregrina, item contra ex peregrino et Latina qui nascitur, matris condicionem sequatur. (82.) Illud quoque his conveniens est, quod ex ancilla et libero iure gentium servus nascitur, et ex libera et servo liber nascitur. (83.) Animadvertere tamen debemus, ne iuris gentium regulam vel lex aliqua vel quod legis vicem optinet, aliquo casu commutaverit. (84.) Ecce enim ex senatusconsulto Claudiano poterat civis Romana quae alieno servo volente domino eius

Junia, and conubium always has the effect that the child follows the condition of the father': but that when the marriage is contracted in any other way the child by the jus gentium follows the condition of the mother. Nowadays, however, he is a Roman: inasmuch as we adopt this rule by reason of a senatusconsultum, in which at the instance of the late emperor Hadrian it is laid down that the child of a Latin man and Roman woman is in every case a Roman citizen by birth. 81. Agreeably to these principles this rule is also stated in the senatusconsultum (passed) at the instance of the late emperor Hadrian', that the child of a Latin man and a foreign woman, and conversely of a foreign man and a Latin woman, follows the condition of his mother. 82. With these principles too agrees the rule, that the child of a slave woman and a free man is a slave by birth by the jus gentium, and that the child of a free woman and a slave man is a free man by birth3. 83. We ought, however, to be on our guard lest any lex, or anything equivalent to a lex, may have changed in any instance the rule of the jus gentium. 84. Thus, for example, by a senatusconsultum of Claudius, a Roman woman who cohabited with another person's slave with the master's consent, might herself

1 1. 30, 56, 67. Ulpian, v. 8.

2 I. 66.

3 Ulp. v. 9.

coiit, ipsa ex pactione libera permanere, sed servum procreare : nam quod inter eam et dominum istius servi convenerit, ex senatusconsulto ratum esse iubetur. sed postea divus Hadrianus iniquitate rei et inelegantia iuris motus restituit iuris gentium regulam, ut cum ipsa mulier libera permaneat, liberum pariat. (85.) Ex lege......ex ancilla et libero poterant liberi nasci: nam ea lege cavetur, ut si quis cum aliena ancilla quam credebat liberam esse coierit; si quidem masculi nascantur, liberi sint, si vero feminae, ad eum pertineant cuius mater ancilla fuerit. sed et in hac specie divus Vespasianus inelegantia iuris motus restituit iuris gentium regulam, ut omni modo, etiam si masculi nascantur, servi sint eius cuius et mater fuerit. (86.) Sed illa pars eiusdem legis salva est, ut ex libera et servo alieno, quem sciebat servum esse, servi nascantur. by special agreement remain free, and yet bear a slave'; for whatever was agreed upon between her and the master of that slave, was by the senatusconsultum ordered to be binding. But afterwards, the late emperor Hadrian, moved by the want of equity in the matter and the anomalous character of the rule2, restored the regulation of the jus gentium that when the woman herself remains free, the child she bears shall also be free. 85. By the Lex3...... the children of a slave woman and a free man might be born free: for it is provided by that lex that if a man cohabited with another person's slave, whom he imagined to be free, the children, if males, should be free; if females, should belong to him whose slave the mother was. But in this instance, too, the late emperor Vespasian, moved by the anomalous character of the rule, restored the regulation of the jus gentium, that in all cases, even if males were born, they should be the slaves of him to whom the mother belonged. 86. But the other part of the same law remains in force, that from a free woman and another person's slave whom she knew to be a slave, slaves are born. Amongst nations, therefore,

3

11. 91, 160. Taciti Ann. XII. 53. 2 See as to this word inelegantia, Austin, Lect. xxx. p. 231 (p. 552, third edition).

3 Whether the Lex here referred to is the Lex Aelia Sentia or some later Lex, or whether it is the Senatusconsultum above specified, is a moot

point among commentators, but not of sufficient importance to be examined at length. It is certainly improbable that so accurate a writer as Gaius should have used Lex and Senatusconsultum as convertible terms.

itaque apud quos talis lex non est, qui nascitur iure gentium matris condicionem sequitur et ob id liber est.

87. Quibus autem casibus matris et non patris condicionem sequitur qui nascitur, iisdem casibus in potestate eum patris, etiamsi is civis Romanus sit, non esse plus quam manifestum est. et ideo superius rettulimus, quibusdam casibus per errorem non iusto contracto matrimonio senatum intervenire et emendare vitium matrimonii, eoque modo plerumque efficere, ut in potestatem patris filius redigatur. (88.) Sed si ancilla ex cive Romano conceperit, deinde manumissa civis Romana facta sit, et tunc pariat, licet civis Romanus sit qui nascitur, sicut pater eius, non tamen in potestatem patris est, quia neque ex iusto coitu conceptus est, neque ex ullo senatusconsulto talis coitus quasi iustus constituitur.

89. Quod autem placuit, si ancilla ex cive Romano conce

who have no such law, the child by the jus gentium follows the mother's condition, and therefore is free'.

87. Now in all cases where the child follows the condition of the mother and not of the father, it is more than plain that he is not in the potestas of his father, even though he be a Roman citizen: and therefore we have stated above that in certain cases, when by mistake an unlawful marriage has been contracted, the senate interferes and makes good the flaw in the marriage, and thus generally causes the son to be brought under his father's potestas. 88. But if a female slave conceive by a Roman citizen, be then manumitted and made a Roman citizen, and then bear her child, although the child is a Roman citizen, just as much as his father is, yet he is not in his father's potestas, because he is neither born from a lawful cohabitation, nor is such a cohabitation put on the footing of a lawful one by any senatusconsultum.

89. The rule, however, that if a slave woman conceive by a

1 The case treated of in § 84 is that of a woman cohabiting with a slave with his master's consent; the case in § 91, that of her cohabiting with the slave against the master's warning. The present case is that of there being neither warning nor express consent.

2

1.67-73.

3 Senatus here meaning the Legislature by a senatusconsultum. The senate never interfered in cases of

this sort (erroris probatio) directly, and as a court or body. Indirectly no doubt it did, i. e. by the publication of an enactment on the particular subject.