Page images

40 Mancipatio.


aere percutit Hbram, 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, quali« sunt Italica, eodem modo solent mancipari. (121.) In eo solo praedioram mancipatio a ceterorum mancipatione differt, quod personae servi/es et liberae, item animalia quae mancipi sunt, nisi in praesentia sint, mancipan, non possunt: adeo quidem, ut eum qui mancipio acc/pit adprehendere id ipsu»í quod ei mancipio datur necesse sit: unde etiam mancipatio dicitur, quia manu res capitur. praedia vero absentia solent mancipari. (122.) Ideo au tem aes et libra adhibetur, quia olim aereis tantum nummis utebantur; et erant asses, dupondii, semisi«. et quadrantes, nec ullus aureus vel argenteus

Quiritium1; 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 mancipi3, 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 distance4.

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. 4 But a sod, a brick or a tile must

* п. 15. be brought to be handled.

3 Ulpian, XIX. 1.

Mancipatio. 41

nummus in usu erat, sicut ex lege x1 1 tabularum intellegere possumus; eorumque nummorum vis et potes/as non in numero erat, sed in pondere nummorum. tre/uti asses librales erant, et dipondii tum erant bilibres; unde etiam d/pondius dictus est quasiduo pondö: quod nomen adhuc in usu retinetur. semissiSr quoque et quadrant&r pro rata scilicet portione libra; aeris haithant cerium pondus, item qui daba«/ olim ресшлaт non «<Äiumeraba«t eam, sed a//endeba/zt. unde servi quibus permittitur a<Äninisfratio pecuniae dispensatores appellati sunt et adhuc appellanXxsx. (123.) Si tamen quaerat aliquis, qua re vero coemptione emta mancipatis distet: ea quidem quae coemptionem faci/, 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 it2; 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. I. full signification of his "being or

2 Isidor. Orig. XVI. с 24. dered to be free," will be better un

3 When a free person is transferred derstood after reading II. 186, 187, from potestas, or as in the present &c.

case from manus, by mancipatio, the Read notes on I. 132, 134, and

authority appertaining to the pur- see 1. 138.

chaser is neither potestas nor manus, The reading proposed by Husbut mancipium. The person has chke is adopted: "Qua re vero cobeen sold, as though he were a slave, emptione emta mancipatis distet," and after the sale is "in servi loco," instead of Gneist's: "Quare citra and although the slavery is fictitious coemptionem feminae etiam manciand free from most of the incidents pantur." Huschke says with truth of real slavery, yet that mentioned that no satisfactory meaning can be in the text with regard to his ap- got out of the latter, pointment as heir remains. The

Liberation from Potestas.

frarentibus vero et a coemptionatoribus mancipa// mancipataeve servorum loco constituuntur, adeo quidem, ut ab eo cuius in mancipio sunt neque hereditatez« neque legata aliter capere poss/nt, 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 zisdem verbis mancipio accipiuntur quibus servi; quod non similiter f\t in coemitione.

124. Videamus nunc, quibus modis ii qui «lieno iurc sub/ecti sunt eo iure liberentur. (125.) Ac pri«j de his dispiciamus qui in potestate sunt. (126.) Et quidem servi ^wemadmodum potestate liberentur, ex his intellegere possumus quae de servis marmmittendis jwperius cxposuimus.

127. Hi vero qui in potestateparentis sunt mortuo eo sui iuris fiunt. Sed hoc rtVjtinctionem recipit. nam mortuo patre sane omnimodo filii filiaeve sui iuris efficiuntor. mortuo vero aw 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 Jearn from the explanation of the manumission of slaves which we gave above1.

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

1 1. 13, &c. 2 Ulpian, x. 2.

Liberation from Totestas. 43

si moriente avo pater eorum et vivat et in potestate patris fuerit, tunc post obitum avi in potestate patm sui fiunt: si vero is, quo tempore a.vus 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 pivnali 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 citizenship1, 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. со. Ulpian, X. 3. enemy were, on recapture, replaced

3 Ulpian, X. 4. The nature of in their original condition. Property

the jus postliminii is partly explain- retaken was returned to the original

ed in the text. Its effect wrs that owners, and not left in the hands of

all things and persons taken by the the recaptor; liberated captives were 44 Jtis Postliminii.

vus interim hostium fiat, pendet ius liberorum propter ius postliminii, quia hi qui ab hostibus capti sunt, si reversi fuerint, omnw 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 horfibus captus est, dubitari potest. Ipse quoque filius neposve si ab hostibus captus fuerit, similiter dic«nus 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 zussu parentis profectus erat in Latinam coloniam, e patria potestate exire videbatur, cum qui ita civitate Romana cesserant <7<xiperentur 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 disputed1. 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 state3.

regarded as having never been ab- sui juris from the time of the cap

sent. See D. 45. 15, especially 11. ture. Inst. I. 12. 5.

4 and 12, where the technlcalitits 2 Ulpian, x. 5. Taciti Ann. IV.

of the subject are discussed and ex- 16.

amined. 3 Notes on 1. 22, I. 95. See Cic.

1 Justiman decided they should be pro Caecin. cap. 33, 34; pro domo,

« PreviousContinue »