Page images
PDF
EPUB

HOMINEM EX IURE QUIRITIUM MEUM ESSE AIO, ISQUE MIHI EMPTUS EST HOC AERE AENEAQUE LIBRA: deinde aere percutit libram, idque aes dat ei a quo mancipio accipit, quasi pretii loco. (120.) Eo modo et serviles et liberae personae mancipantur. animalia quoque quae mancipi sunt quo in numero habentur boves, equi, muli, asini; item praedia tam urbana quam rustica quae et ipsa mancipi sunt, qualia sunt Italica, eodem modo solent mancipari. (121.) In eo solo praediorum mancipatio a ceterorum mancipatione differt, quod personae serviles et liberae, item animalia quae mancipi sunt, nisi in praesentia sint, mancipari non possunt: adeo quidem, ut eum qui mancipio accipit adprehendere id ipsum quod ei mancipio datur necesse sit: unde etiam mancipatio dicitur, quia manu res capitur. praedia vero absentia solent mancipari. (122.) Ideo autem aes et libra adhibetur, quia olim aereis tantum nummis utebantur; et erant asses, dupondii, semisses et quadrantes, nec ullus aureus vel argenteus

Quiritium'; and he has been bought by me by means of this coin and copper balance:" then he strikes the balance with the coin, and gives the coin, as though by way of price, to him from whom he receives the thing in mancipium. 120. In this manner persons, both slaves and free, are mancipated. So also are animals which are res mancipi, in which category are reckoned oxen, horses, mules, asses; likewise such estates, with or without houses on them3, as are res mancipi, of which kind are those in Italy, are mancipated in the same manner. 121. In this respect only does the mancipation of estates differ from that of other things, that persons, slave and free, and likewise animals which are res mancipi, cannot be mancipated unless they are present; and so strictly indeed is this the case, that it is necessary for him who takes the thing in mancipium to grasp that which is so given to him in mancipium: whence the term mancipation is derived, because the thing is taken with the hand: but estates can be mancipated when at a distance*. 122. The reason for employing the coin and balance is that in olden times men used a copper coinage only, and there were asses, dupondii, semisses, and quadrantes, nor was any coinage of

1 II. 40, 41.

2 II. 15.

3 Ulpian, XIX. I.

4 But a sod, a brick or a tile must be brought to be handled.

[blocks in formation]

nummus in usu erat, sicut ex lege XII tabularum intellegere possumus; eorumque nummorum vis et potestas non in numero erat, sed in pondere nummorum. veluti asses librales erant, et dipondii tum erant bilibres; unde etiam dipondius dictus est quasiduo pondo: quod nomen adhuc in usu retinetur. semisses quoque et quadrantes pro rata scilicet portione libra aeris habebant certum pondus. item qui dabant olim pecuniam non adnumerabant eam, sed appendebant. unde servi quibus permittitur administratio pecuniae dispensatores appellati sunt et adhuc appellantur. (123.) Si tamen quaerat aliquis, qua re vero coemptione emta mancipatis distet: ea quidem quae coemptionem facit, non deduciter in servilem condicionem, a

gold or silver in use, as we may see from a law of the Twelve Tables': and the force and effect of this coinage was not in its number but its weight. For instance the asses weighed a pound each, and the dupondii two; whence the name dupondius, as being duo pondo; a name which is still employed. The semisses (half-asses) and quadrantes (quarter-asses) had also a definite weight, according to their fractional part of the pound of copper. Those, likewise, who gave money in the olden times. did not count it out, but weighed it'; and thus slaves who have the management of money entrusted to them were called dispensatores (weighers out), and are still so called. 123. But if any one should inquire in what respect a woman purchased in coemptio by a husband differs from those who are mancipated3: (it is that) a woman who makes a coemptio is not reduced to the condition of a slave, whilst those mancipated by

1 Probably Tab. II. 1. 1.

2 Isidor. Orig. XVI. c. 24. 3 When a free person is transferred from potestas, or as in the present case from manus, by mancipatio, the authority appertaining to the purchaser is neither potestas nor manus, but mancipium. The person has been sold, as though he were a slave, and after the sale is "in servi loco, and although the slavery is fictitious and free from most of the incidents of real slavery, yet that mentioned in the text with regard to his appointment as heir remains,

[ocr errors]

The

full signification of his "being ordered to be free," will be better understood after reading II. 186, 187, &c.

Read notes on I. 132, 134, and see I. 138.

The reading proposed by Huschke is adopted: "Quâ re vero coemptione emta mancipatis distet," instead of Gneist's: "Quare citra coemptionem feminae etiam mancipantur." Huschke says with truth that no satisfactory meaning can be got out of the latter.

parentibus vero et a coemptionatoribus mancipati mancipataeve servorum loco constituuntur, adeo quidem, ut ab eo cuius in mancipio sunt neque hereditatem neque legata aliter capere possint, quam si simul eodem testamento liberi esse iubeantur, sicuti iuris est in persona servorum. sed differentiae ratio manifesta est, cum a parentibus et a coemptionatoribus iisdem verbis mancipio accipiuntur quibus servi; quod non similiter fit in coemtione.

124. Videamus nunc, quibus modis ii qui alieno iuri subiecti sunt eo iure liberentur. (125.) Ac prius de his dispiciamus qui in potestate sunt. (126.) Et quidem servi quemadmodum potestate liberentur, ex his intellegere possumus quae de servis manumittendis superius exposuimus.

127. Hi vero qui in potestate parentis sunt mortuo eo sui iuris fiunt. Sed hoc distinctionem recipit. nam mortuo patre sane omnimodo filii filiaeve sui iuris efficiuntur. mortuo vero avo non omnimodo nepotes neptesque sui iuris fiunt, sed ita, si post mortem avi in patris sui potestatem recasuri non sunt. itaque

parents and coemptionators are brought into that condition, so that they can neither take an inheritance nor legacies from him in whose mancipium they are, unless they be also ordered in the testament to be free, as is the case with slaves. But the reason of the difference is plain, inasmuch as they are received in mancipium from the parents and coemptionators with the same form of words as slaves are: which is not the case in a coemptio.

124. Now let us see by what means those who are subject to the authority of another are set free from that authority. 125. And first let us discuss the case of those who are under potestas. 126. How slaves are freed from potestas we may learn from the explanation of the manumission of slaves which we gave above 1.

127. But those who are in the potestas of an ascendant become sui juris on his death. This, however, admits of a qualification. For, undoubtedly, on the death of a father sons and daughters in all cases become sui juris: but on the death of a grandfather grandsons and granddaughters do not become

[blocks in formation]

Liberation from Fotestas.

43

si moriente avo pater eorum et vivat et in potestate patris fuerit, tunc post obitum avi in potestate patris sui fiunt: si vero is, quo tempore avus moritur, aut iam mortuus est, aut exiit de potestate patris, tunc hi, quia in potestatem eius cadere non possunt, sui iuris fiunt. (128.) Cum autem is cui ob aliquod maleficium ex lege poenali aqua et igni interdicitur civitatem Romanam amittat, sequitur, ut qui eo modo ex numero civium Romanorum tollitur, proinde ac mortuo eo desinant liberi in potestate eius esse: nec enim ratio patitur, ut peregrinae condicionis homo civem Romanum in potestate habeat. Pari ratione et si ei qui in potestate parentis sit aqua et igni interdictum fuerit, desinit in potestate parentis esse, quia aeque ratio non patitur, ut peregrinae condicionis homo in potestate sit civis Romani parentis.

129. Quod si ab hostibus captus fuerit parens, quamvis ser

sui juris in all cases, but only if after the death of the grandfather they will not relapse into the potestas of their father. Therefore, if at the grandfather's death, their father be alive and in the potestas of his father, then after the death of the grandfather they come under the potestas of their father: but if at the time of the grandfather's death, the father either be dead or have passed from the potestas of his father, then the grandchildren, inasmuch as they cannot fall under his potestas, become sui juris. 128. Again, since he who is interdicted from fire and water for some crime under a penal law loses his Roman citizenship', it follows that the descendants of a man thus removed from the category of Roman citizens cease to be in his potestas, just as though he were dead: for it is contrary to reason that a man of foreign status should have a Roman citizen in his potestas. On like principle, also, if one in the potestas of an ascendant be interdicted from fire and water, he ceases to be in the potestas of his ascendant: for it is equally contrary to reason that a man of foreign status should be in the potestas of an ascendant who is a Roman citizen.

129. If, however, an ascendant be taken by the enemy,

1 I. 90.

Ulpian, X. 3.

2 Ulpian, X. 4. The nature of the jus postliminii is partly explain ed in the text. Its effect was that all things and persons taken by the

enemy were, on recapture, replaced in their original condition. Property retaken was returned to the original owners, and not left in the hands of the recaptor; liberated captives were

vus interim hostium fiat, pendet ius liberorum propter ius postliminii, quia hi qui ab hostibus capti sunt, si reversi fuerint, omnia pristina iura recipiunt. itaque reversus habebit liberos in potestate. si vero illic mortuus sit, erunt quidem liberi sui iuris; sed utrum ex hoc tempore quo mortuus est aput hostes parens, an ex illo quo ab hostibus captus est, dubitari potest. Ipse quoque filius neposve si ab hostibus captus fuerit, similiter dicemus propter ius postliminii potestatem quoque parentis in suspenso esse. (130) Praeterea exeunt liberi virilis sexus de patris potestate si flamines Diales inaugurentur, et feminini sexus si virgines Vestales capiantur. (131.) Olim quoque, quo tempore populus Romanus in Latinas regiones colonias deducebat, qui iussu parentis profectus erat in Latinam coloniam, e patria potestate exire videbatur, cum qui ita civitate Romana cesserant acciperentur alterius civitatis cives.

although for the while he becomes a slave of the enemy, yet by virtue of the jus postliminii his authority over his descendants is merely suspended; for those taken by the enemy, if they return, recover all their original rights. Therefore, if he return, he will have his descendants in his potestas; but if he die there, his descendants will be sui juris; but whether from the time when the ascendant died amongst the enemy, or from the time when he was taken by the enemy, may be disputed'. If too the son or grandson himself be taken by the enemy, we shall in like manner rule that, by virtue of the jus postliminii, the potestas of the ascendant is merely suspended. 130. Further, male descendants escape from their father's potestas, if they be admitted flamens of Jupiter, and female descendants if elected vestal virgins. 131. Formerly also, at the time when the Roman people used to send out colonies into the Latin districts, a man who by command of his ascendant set out for a Latin colony was regarded as exempt from patria potestas, since those who thus abandoned Roman citizenship were received as citizens of another state 3.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »