Justinian•CODEX
Abbo Floriacensis1 work
Abelard3 works
Addison9 works
Adso Dervensis1 work
Aelredus Rievallensis1 work
Alanus de Insulis2 works
Albert of Aix1 work
HISTORIA HIEROSOLYMITANAE EXPEDITIONIS12 sections
Albertano of Brescia5 works
DE AMORE ET DILECTIONE DEI4 sections
SERMONES4 sections
Alcuin9 works
Alfonsi1 work
Ambrose4 works
Ambrosius4 works
Ammianus1 work
Ampelius1 work
Andrea da Bergamo1 work
Andreas Capellanus1 work
DE AMORE LIBRI TRES3 sections
Annales Regni Francorum1 work
Annales Vedastini1 work
Annales Xantenses1 work
Anonymus Neveleti1 work
Anonymus Valesianus2 works
Apicius1 work
DE RE COQUINARIA5 sections
Appendix Vergiliana1 work
Apuleius2 works
METAMORPHOSES12 sections
DE DOGMATE PLATONIS6 sections
Aquinas6 works
Archipoeta1 work
Arnobius1 work
ADVERSVS NATIONES LIBRI VII7 sections
Arnulf of Lisieux1 work
Asconius1 work
Asserius1 work
Augustine5 works
CONFESSIONES13 sections
DE CIVITATE DEI23 sections
DE TRINITATE15 sections
CONTRA SECUNDAM IULIANI RESPONSIONEM2 sections
Augustus1 work
RES GESTAE DIVI AVGVSTI2 sections
Aurelius Victor1 work
LIBER ET INCERTORVM LIBRI3 sections
Ausonius2 works
Avianus1 work
Avienus2 works
Bacon3 works
HISTORIA REGNI HENRICI SEPTIMI REGIS ANGLIAE11 sections
Balde2 works
Baldo1 work
Bebel1 work
Bede2 works
HISTORIAM ECCLESIASTICAM GENTIS ANGLORUM7 sections
Benedict1 work
Berengar1 work
Bernard of Clairvaux1 work
Bernard of Cluny1 work
DE CONTEMPTU MUNDI LIBRI DUO2 sections
Biblia Sacra3 works
VETUS TESTAMENTUM49 sections
NOVUM TESTAMENTUM27 sections
Bigges1 work
Boethius de Dacia2 works
Bonaventure1 work
Breve Chronicon Northmannicum1 work
Buchanan1 work
Bultelius2 works
Caecilius Balbus1 work
Caesar3 works
COMMENTARIORUM LIBRI VII DE BELLO GALLICO CUM A. HIRTI SUPPLEMENTO8 sections
COMMENTARIORUM LIBRI III DE BELLO CIVILI3 sections
LIBRI INCERTORUM AUCTORUM3 sections
Calpurnius Flaccus1 work
Calpurnius Siculus1 work
Campion8 works
Carmen Arvale1 work
Carmen de Martyrio1 work
Carmen in Victoriam1 work
Carmen Saliare1 work
Carmina Burana1 work
Cassiodorus5 works
Catullus1 work
Censorinus1 work
Christian Creeds1 work
Cicero3 works
ORATORIA33 sections
PHILOSOPHIA21 sections
EPISTULAE4 sections
Cinna Helvius1 work
Claudian4 works
Claudii Oratio1 work
Claudius Caesar1 work
Columbus1 work
Columella2 works
Commodianus3 works
Conradus Celtis2 works
Constitutum Constantini1 work
Contemporary9 works
Cotta1 work
Dante4 works
Dares the Phrygian1 work
de Ave Phoenice1 work
De Expugnatione Terrae Sanctae per Saladinum1 work
Declaratio Arbroathis1 work
Decretum Gelasianum1 work
Descartes1 work
Dies Irae1 work
Disticha Catonis1 work
Egeria1 work
ITINERARIUM PEREGRINATIO2 sections
Einhard1 work
Ennius1 work
Epistolae Austrasicae1 work
Epistulae de Priapismo1 work
Erasmus7 works
Erchempert1 work
Eucherius1 work
Eugippius1 work
Eutropius1 work
BREVIARIVM HISTORIAE ROMANAE10 sections
Exurperantius1 work
Fabricius Montanus1 work
Falcandus1 work
Falcone di Benevento1 work
Ficino1 work
Fletcher1 work
Florus1 work
EPITOME DE T. LIVIO BELLORUM OMNIUM ANNORUM DCC LIBRI DUO2 sections
Foedus Aeternum1 work
Forsett2 works
Fredegarius1 work
Frodebertus & Importunus1 work
Frontinus3 works
STRATEGEMATA4 sections
DE AQUAEDUCTU URBIS ROMAE2 sections
OPUSCULA RERUM RUSTICARUM4 sections
Fulgentius3 works
MITOLOGIARUM LIBRI TRES3 sections
Gaius4 works
Galileo1 work
Garcilaso de la Vega1 work
Gaudeamus Igitur1 work
Gellius1 work
Germanicus1 work
Gesta Francorum10 works
Gesta Romanorum1 work
Gioacchino da Fiore1 work
Godfrey of Winchester2 works
Grattius1 work
Gregorii Mirabilia Urbis Romae1 work
Gregorius Magnus1 work
Gregory IX5 works
Gregory of Tours1 work
LIBRI HISTORIARUM10 sections
Gregory the Great1 work
Gregory VII1 work
Gwinne8 works
Henry of Settimello1 work
Henry VII1 work
Historia Apolloni1 work
Historia Augusta30 works
Historia Brittonum1 work
Holberg1 work
Horace3 works
SERMONES2 sections
CARMINA4 sections
EPISTULAE5 sections
Hugo of St. Victor2 works
Hydatius2 works
Hyginus3 works
Hymni1 work
Hymni et cantica1 work
Iacobus de Voragine1 work
LEGENDA AUREA24 sections
Ilias Latina1 work
Iordanes2 works
Isidore of Seville3 works
ETYMOLOGIARVM SIVE ORIGINVM LIBRI XX20 sections
SENTENTIAE LIBRI III3 sections
Iulius Obsequens1 work
Iulius Paris1 work
Ius Romanum4 works
Janus Secundus2 works
Johann H. Withof1 work
Johann P. L. Withof1 work
Johannes de Alta Silva1 work
Johannes de Plano Carpini1 work
John of Garland1 work
Jordanes2 works
Julius Obsequens1 work
Junillus1 work
Justin1 work
HISTORIARVM PHILIPPICARVM T. POMPEII TROGI LIBRI XLIV IN EPITOMEN REDACTI46 sections
Justinian3 works
INSTITVTIONES5 sections
CODEX12 sections
DIGESTA50 sections
Juvenal1 work
Kepler1 work
Landor4 works
Laurentius Corvinus2 works
Legenda Regis Stephani1 work
Leo of Naples1 work
HISTORIA DE PRELIIS ALEXANDRI MAGNI3 sections
Leo the Great1 work
SERMONES DE QUADRAGESIMA2 sections
Liber Kalilae et Dimnae1 work
Liber Pontificalis1 work
Livius Andronicus1 work
Livy1 work
AB VRBE CONDITA LIBRI37 sections
Lotichius1 work
Lucan1 work
DE BELLO CIVILI SIVE PHARSALIA10 sections
Lucretius1 work
DE RERVM NATVRA LIBRI SEX6 sections
Lupus Protospatarius Barensis1 work
Macarius of Alexandria1 work
Macarius the Great1 work
Magna Carta1 work
Maidstone1 work
Malaterra1 work
DE REBUS GESTIS ROGERII CALABRIAE ET SICILIAE COMITIS ET ROBERTI GUISCARDI DUCIS FRATRIS EIUS4 sections
Manilius1 work
ASTRONOMICON5 sections
Marbodus Redonensis1 work
Marcellinus Comes2 works
Martial1 work
Martin of Braga13 works
Marullo1 work
Marx1 work
Maximianus1 work
May1 work
SUPPLEMENTUM PHARSALIAE8 sections
Melanchthon4 works
Milton1 work
Minucius Felix1 work
Mirabilia Urbis Romae1 work
Mirandola1 work
CARMINA9 sections
Miscellanea Carminum42 works
Montanus1 work
Naevius1 work
Navagero1 work
Nemesianus1 work
ECLOGAE4 sections
Nepos3 works
LIBER DE EXCELLENTIBUS DVCIBUS EXTERARVM GENTIVM24 sections
Newton1 work
PHILOSOPHIÆ NATURALIS PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA4 sections
Nithardus1 work
HISTORIARUM LIBRI QUATTUOR4 sections
Notitia Dignitatum2 works
Novatian1 work
Origo gentis Langobardorum1 work
Orosius1 work
HISTORIARUM ADVERSUM PAGANOS LIBRI VII7 sections
Otto of Freising1 work
GESTA FRIDERICI IMPERATORIS5 sections
Ovid7 works
METAMORPHOSES15 sections
AMORES3 sections
HEROIDES21 sections
ARS AMATORIA3 sections
TRISTIA5 sections
EX PONTO4 sections
Owen1 work
Papal Bulls4 works
Pascoli5 works
Passerat1 work
Passio Perpetuae1 work
Patricius1 work
Tome I: Panaugia2 sections
Paulinus Nolensis1 work
Paulus Diaconus4 works
Persius1 work
Pervigilium Veneris1 work
Petronius2 works
Petrus Blesensis1 work
Petrus de Ebulo1 work
Phaedrus2 works
FABVLARVM AESOPIARVM LIBRI QVINQVE5 sections
Phineas Fletcher1 work
Planctus destructionis1 work
Plautus21 works
Pliny the Younger2 works
EPISTVLARVM LIBRI DECEM10 sections
Poggio Bracciolini1 work
Pomponius Mela1 work
DE CHOROGRAPHIA3 sections
Pontano1 work
Poree1 work
Porphyrius1 work
Precatio Terrae1 work
Priapea1 work
Professio Contra Priscillianum1 work
Propertius1 work
ELEGIAE4 sections
Prosperus3 works
Prudentius2 works
Pseudoplatonica12 works
Publilius Syrus1 work
Quintilian2 works
INSTITUTIONES12 sections
Raoul of Caen1 work
Regula ad Monachos1 work
Reposianus1 work
Ricardi de Bury1 work
Richerus1 work
HISTORIARUM LIBRI QUATUOR4 sections
Rimbaud1 work
Ritchie's Fabulae Faciles1 work
Roman Epitaphs1 work
Roman Inscriptions1 work
Ruaeus1 work
Ruaeus' Aeneid1 work
Rutilius Lupus1 work
Rutilius Namatianus1 work
Sabinus1 work
EPISTULAE TRES AD OVIDIANAS EPISTULAS RESPONSORIAE3 sections
Sallust10 works
Sannazaro2 works
Scaliger1 work
Sedulius2 works
CARMEN PASCHALE5 sections
Seneca9 works
EPISTULAE MORALES AD LUCILIUM16 sections
QUAESTIONES NATURALES7 sections
DE CONSOLATIONE3 sections
DE IRA3 sections
DE BENEFICIIS3 sections
DIALOGI7 sections
FABULAE8 sections
Septem Sapientum1 work
Sidonius Apollinaris2 works
Sigebert of Gembloux3 works
Silius Italicus1 work
Solinus2 works
DE MIRABILIBUS MUNDI Mommsen 1st edition (1864)4 sections
DE MIRABILIBUS MUNDI C.L.F. Panckoucke edition (Paris 1847)4 sections
Spinoza1 work
Statius3 works
THEBAID12 sections
ACHILLEID2 sections
Stephanus de Varda1 work
Suetonius2 works
Sulpicia1 work
Sulpicius Severus2 works
CHRONICORUM LIBRI DUO2 sections
Syrus1 work
Tacitus5 works
Terence6 works
Tertullian32 works
Testamentum Porcelli1 work
Theodolus1 work
Theodosius16 works
Theophanes1 work
Thomas à Kempis1 work
DE IMITATIONE CHRISTI4 sections
Thomas of Edessa1 work
Tibullus1 work
TIBVLLI ALIORVMQUE CARMINVM LIBRI TRES3 sections
Tünger1 work
Valerius Flaccus1 work
Valerius Maximus1 work
FACTORVM ET DICTORVM MEMORABILIVM LIBRI NOVEM9 sections
Vallauri1 work
Varro2 works
RERVM RVSTICARVM DE AGRI CVLTURA3 sections
DE LINGVA LATINA7 sections
Vegetius1 work
EPITOMA REI MILITARIS LIBRI IIII4 sections
Velleius Paterculus1 work
HISTORIAE ROMANAE2 sections
Venantius Fortunatus1 work
Vico1 work
Vida1 work
Vincent of Lérins1 work
Virgil3 works
AENEID12 sections
ECLOGUES10 sections
GEORGICON4 sections
Vita Agnetis1 work
Vita Caroli IV1 work
Vita Sancti Columbae2 works
Vitruvius1 work
DE ARCHITECTVRA10 sections
Waardenburg1 work
Waltarius3 works
Walter Mapps2 works
Walter of Châtillon1 work
William of Apulia1 work
William of Conches2 works
William of Tyre1 work
HISTORIA RERUM IN PARTIBUS TRANSMARINIS GESTARUM24 sections
Xylander1 work
Zonaras1 work
CJ.6.54.0. Ut in possessionem legatorum vel fideicommissorum servandorum causa mittatur et quando satisdari debet.
CJ.6.55.0. De suis et legitimis liberis et ex filia nepotibus ab intestato venientibus.
CJ.6.56.0. Ad senatus consultum tertullianum.
CJ.6.54.0. That one be sent into possession for the sake of preserving legacies or fideicommissa, and when security must be furnished.
CJ.6.55.0. On sui and legitimi children and on grandchildren through a daughter who come to the inheritance in case of intestacy.
CJ.6.56.0. On the Tertullian senatus consultum.
Sin vero secundo vel tertio eum susceperit, praeter ipsum duos vel tres alios vel praedictam aestimationem pro unoquoque domino repraesentet: in minorum persona tutoribus vel curatoribus poena simili imminente. <a 317 d.V k.Iul.Thessalonicae gallicano et basso conss.>
But if indeed he has received him a second or third time, besides him let him present two or three others, or the aforesaid valuation, for each master: in the case of minors, a similar penalty impends upon their tutors or curators. <a 317 on the 5th day before the Kalends of July (27 June), at Thessalonica, under the consuls Gallicanus and Bassus.>
Sane mancipium torqueri oportet, ut manifestetur, utrum propter lucrum capiendum callide a domino ad domum vel agrum eius qui suscepit immissus est, an non. <a 317 d.V k.Iul.Thessalonicae gallicano et basso conss.>
Indeed, the slave ought to be put to the question, so that it may be made manifest whether, for the sake of gain, he was craftily sent in by his master into the house or field of the one who received him, or not. <a 317 on the 5th day before the Kalends of July, at Thessalonica, in the consulship of Gallicanus and Bassus.>
Mancipia diversis artibus praedita, quae ad rem publicam pertinent, in isdem civitatibus placet permanere, ita ut, si quis tale mancipium sollicitaverit vel avocandum crediderit, cum servo altero sollicitatum restituat, duodecim solidorum summa inferenda rei publicae illius civitatis, cuius mancipium abduxit: libertis quoque artificibus, si sollicitati fuerint, cum eadem forma civitati reddendis: ita ut pro fugitivo servo, si sollicitudine defensoris non fuerit requisitus et revocatus, idem defensor duo vicaria mancipia exigatur, nec beneficio principali nec venditione in eius persona iam de cetero valituris. * const. a. ad ia nuarium.
Mancipia endowed with diverse arts, which pertain to the commonwealth, it is decreed to remain in the same cities, such that, if anyone has solicited such a mancipium or has thought him to be called away, he shall restore the one solicited together with another slave, with a sum of twelve solidi to be paid to the commonwealth of that city from which he led the mancipium away: likewise freedmen artisans, if they shall have been solicited, are to be returned to the city under the same form: such that, for a fugitive slave, if by the solicitude of the defensor he shall not have been sought out and recalled, the same defensor shall be required to provide two vicarian slaves, nor shall either an imperial favor or a sale henceforth be valid in regard to his person. * const. a. ad ia nuarium.
Cum servum quispiam repetit fugitivum et alius vitandae legis gratia, quae in occultantes mancipia certam poenam statuit, proprietatem opponet, vel in vocem libertatis eum animaverit, ilico nequissimus verbero super quo ambigitur tormentis subiciatur, ut aperta veritate diceptationi terminus fiat. * const. a. ad tiberianum com.
When someone demands back a fugitive slave, and another person, for the sake of evading the law which establishes a fixed penalty upon those who conceal slaves, will assert ownership, or will have encouraged him into the voice of liberty, immediately the most worthless scoundrel, the person about whom there is dispute, shall be subjected to tortures, so that, the truth laid open, an end may be put to the disputation. * the emperor to Tiberianus, Count.
Si qui publicorum servorum fabricis seu aliis operibus deputati tamquam propriae condicionis immemores domibus se alienis et privatarum ancillarum consortiis adiunxerit, tam ipsi quam uxores eorum et liberi confestim condicioni pristinae laborique restituantur. * valentin. theodos.
If any of the public slaves deputed to workshops or to other works, as though unmindful of their own condition, shall have attached themselves to others’ households and to the consortia of private maidservants, both they themselves and their wives and children shall forthwith be restored to their pristine condition and labor. * Valentinian, Theodosius.
Si pecunia tua mandantibus servis quidam praedia comparaverunt, eligere debes, utrum furti actionem et condictionem an mandati potius inferre debeas.Neque enim aequitas patitur, ut et criminis causam persequaris et bonae fidei contractum impleri postules. * sev. et ant.
If certain persons have purchased estates with your money at the mandate of your slaves, you must choose whether you ought to bring an action for theft and a condiction, or rather an action on mandate. For equity does not allow that you both pursue a criminal cause and demand that a contract of good faith be fulfilled. * Severus and Antoninus
Adversus eum dumtaxat, quem servum tuum sollicitasse dicis, si eum deterioris animi fecit, servi corrupti agere potes. quod si sollicitatum occultavit, etiam furti cum eo agere potes. quas actiones etiam per procuratorem exercere minime prohiberis.
Against that man only, whom you say has solicited your slave, if he has made him of a worse disposition, you can bring the action for a corrupted slave. But if he has concealed the solicitation, you can also bring an action of theft against him. You are by no means forbidden to pursue these actions also through a procurator.
Civile est, quod a te adversarius tuus exigit, ut rei, quam apud te fuisse fatearis, exhibeas venditorem. nam a transeunte etiam ignoto emisse dicere non convenit volenti evitare alienam boni viri suspicionem. * alex.
It is civil that which your adversary demands of you: that you produce the seller of the thing which you confess to have been in your keeping. For to say that you bought it from a passer-by, even an unknown one, does not befit one wishing to avoid a good man’s suspicion regarding someone else’s property. * alex.
Etiam furti actione tributorum exactor tenetur, si non cessante te in tributoria exactione sciens, quod nihil deberetur, ancillam tui iuris abduxit aut vendidit. quae res facit, ut nec emptor usucaperet vindicatioque tibi ipsius competat. * alex.
Even by the action for theft the collector of tributes is liable, if, you not being in default in the collection of the tribute, and knowing that nothing was owed, he carried off or sold a slave-girl under your right. This fact brings it about that neither would the buyer acquire by usucapion, and a vindicatio for her lies to you. * alex.
Si abducta mancipia furto vel plagio venumdata praeses provincias perspexerit, cum nec ab emptore propter cohaerens vitium, antequam ad dominum possessio revertatur, usucapi possunt, et te ei cuius fuerunt successisse reppererit, restitui tibi providebit. * diocl. et maxim.
If the provincial governor has ascertained that slaves carried off by theft or by kidnapping have been sold, since, on account of the inherent defect, they cannot be acquired by usucapion by the buyer before possession returns to the owner, and has found that you have succeeded to the one to whom they belonged, he will see to it that they are restored to you. * Diocletian and Maximian.
De his, quae subtraxisse novercam pupilli tui precibus significas, rectorem adi provinciae, qui si eam, posteaquam dominus rerum is pro quo supplicas factus est , aliquid furatam cognoverit, non ignorat in quadruplum manifesti, nec manifesti vero dupli actione furti constituta condemnationem formare. * diocl. et maxim.
Concerning the things which you signify by petitions that the stepmother of your ward has removed, go to the governor of the province, who, if he learns that she, after the person on whose behalf you supplicate has become master of the goods, has stolen anything, does not ignore to frame the condemnation with the action of theft established: for manifest theft fourfold, but for non-manifest theft indeed double. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Quapropter furti actione et condictione vel adversus possidentem vindicatione de mancipiis uti non prohiberis, cum altera poenam continens alterius electione minime tolli possit. <a 293 d. id. oct. sirmi aa. conss.>
Wherefore you are not prohibited from using, concerning slaves, the action for theft and the condictio, or, against the possessor, the vindicatio, since the one containing a penalty cannot at all be taken away by the choice of the other. <a in the year 293, on the Ides of October, at Sirmium, in the consulship of the Augusti.>
Quamvis etiam hereditatis expilatae crimine promiscuus usus exemplo actionis furti ream uxorem fieri non patiatur, tamen heredes idemque filii super his, quae de patris bonis possidet, adversus eam in rem actione experiri non prohibentur. * diocl. et maxim.
Although even in the crime of a plundered inheritance the promiscuous (common) use, after the example of the action for theft, does not allow the wife to be made a defendant, nevertheless the heirs, and likewise the sons, concerning those things which she possesses from the father’s goods, are not prohibited from proceeding against her with an in rem action. * Diocletian and Maximian.
In eum, qui ex naufragio vel incendio cepisse vel in his rebus damni quid dedisse dicitur, infra annum utilem ei cui res abest quadrupli, post in simplum actionem proditam praeter poenam olim statutam edicti forma perpetui declarat. * diocl. et maxim.
Against him who is said to have taken from a shipwreck or a conflagration, or to have given some damage in these matters, the perpetual form of the edict declares that an action has been provided to the one from whom the thing is absent: for quadruple within the useful year, thereafter for the simple, besides the penalty once established. * diocl. and maxim.
Si quis servo alieno suaserit aliquam rem domini sui subripere et ad se deducere , servus autem hoc domino manifestaverit et domino concedente res eius ad iniquum huiusmodi suasionis auctorem pertulerit, et ipse inventus fuerit rem detinere , quali tenetur actione is qui res suscepit, utrumne pro occasione furti an pro servo, quia eum corrumpere voluit, ut non solum furti, sed etiam servi corrupti is obligetur, veteres dubitaverunt. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 530 d. k. aug.
If someone has suggested to another’s slave to subrept some thing of his master and to bring it to himself , but the slave has made this manifest to the master and, with the master conceding, has carried his things to the iniquitous author of such suasion, and he himself has been found to detain the thing , by what action is he who received the things held—whether on the occasion of theft or on account of the slave, because he wished to corrupt him, so that he be bound not only for theft but also for a corrupted slave—the ancients doubted. * Justinian Augustus to Julian, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 530, on the Kalends of August.
Nobis itaque eorum altercationes decidentibus placuit non solum furti actionem, sed etiam servi corrupti contra eum dare. licet enim servus deterior minime factus est, tamen consilium corruptoris ad perniciem probitatis servi introductum est: et quemadmodum secundum iuris regulas furtum quidem non est commissum, quia is videtur furtum committere, qui contra domini voluntatem res eius contractat, ipse autem furti actione propter dolum suum tenetur, ita et servi corrupti contra eum actio propter suum vitium non ab re extendatur, ut sit ei poenalis actio imposita, tamquam re ipsa fuisset servus corruptus, ne ex huiusmodi impunitate et in alium servum, qui possit corrumpi, hoc facere pertemptet. <a 530 d. k. aug.
Therefore, with us deciding their altercations, it has pleased us to grant not only the action of theft, but also the action for a corrupted slave against him. For although the slave has by no means been made worse, nevertheless the counsel of the corrupter has been introduced to the ruin of the slave’s probity: and just as, according to the rules of law, theft indeed has not been committed—because he is considered to commit theft who handles the master’s property against his will—yet he himself is held by the action of theft on account of his deceit; so too the action for a corrupted slave against him, on account of his own fault, is not inappositely extended, so that a penal action be imposed on him, as though the slave had in fact been corrupted, lest from such impunity he also attempt to do this in regard to another slave who can be corrupted. <a 530 d. k. aug.
Apud antiquos quaerebatur, si servus, quem aliquis bona fide possidebat, furtum commiserit alienarum rerum vel ipsius apud quem constitutus est, si ipse qui bona fide eum detinet noxalem furti actionem adversus verum dominum habet, vel ipse ab eo qui furtum passus est praedicta convenitur actione. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 530 d. k. oct.
Among the ancients it was asked whether, if a slave whom someone possessed in good faith committed theft of another’s property or of the very person with whom he is set, the one who in good faith detains him has the noxal action of theft against the true owner, or whether he himself is sued by the one who suffered the theft by the aforesaid action. * justinian to julianus, praetorian prefect. * <in the year 530 on the Kalends of October.
Cumque generalis regula ab antiqua prudentia exposita est huiusmodi hominis gratia, pro quo noxalem furti actionem suscipere aliquis compellitur, adversus alium furti actionem habere non concedens, quidam ita eam per coniecturam interpretati sunt, adversus bona fide quidem possessorem nullo modo furti actionem extendi, ipsi autem, si furtum fuerit passus, adversus verum dominum furti actionem noxalem recte decerni: tunc autem bona fide possessorem furti nomine, quod passus est, noxalem actionem contra dominum habere posse, quando servus sub domini sui fuerit constitutus possessione: et pro his rebus posse eum adversus dominum habere actionem, non solum quas servus subtraxerit iam apud eum constitutus, sed et pro his quas furatus est, quando fugit quidem a bona fide possessore, adhuc autem nondum sub domini sui manibus fuerit constitutus. <a 530 d. k. oct. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
And since a general rule has been set forth by ancient prudence in favor of the sort of person for whose sake someone is compelled to undertake a noxal action of theft, not allowing him to have an action of theft against another, certain persons have thus interpreted it by conjecture: that the action of theft is in no way extended against a bona fide possessor; but that, if he has suffered a theft, a noxal action of theft is rightly decreed by him against the true owner; and then that the bona fide possessor can have a noxal action against the owner under the name of the theft which he has suffered, when the slave has been established in the possession of his own owner; and that he can have an action against the owner for those things not only which the slave removed after he had already been established with him, but also for those which he stole when he did indeed flee from the bona fide possessor, but had not yet been established under his owner’s hands. <a 530 on the Kalends of Oct., at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Cum igitur bona fide possessor domini cogitatione furem possidet, merito, donec apud eum constitutus est, et aliis tenetur noxali actione, si extranei furtum a servo fuerint passi, et ipse adversus verum dominum non habet actionem secundum regulam dicentem: qui habet adversus alium furti actionem, ipse ea teneri non potest. sin autem desinat in servi retentione et ille apud verum dominum fuerit inventus, tunc ipse quidem noxali furti actione minime potest teneri, adversus verum autem dominum habet ipse furti noxalem actionem, id est pro rebus, quas vel nunc furatus est, cum est apud verum dominum, vel antea, postquam bona fide possessoris retentionem excesserit necdum apud verum dominum factus. <a 530 d. k. oct.
Accordingly, when a bona fide possessor, in the contemplation of a master, possesses the thief, rightly, so long as he is established with him, he too is held by a noxal action by others, if outsiders have suffered theft at the hands of the slave; and he himself does not have an action against the true owner, according to the rule stating: he who has a theft action against another cannot himself be held by it. But if he ceases from the retention of the slave and the latter has been found with the true owner, then he himself can by no means be held by a noxal action for theft; rather he himself has a noxal theft action against the true owner, that is, for the things which the slave has either now stolen while he is with the true owner, or earlier, after he has gone beyond the retention of the bona fide possessor and before he has yet come to be with the true owner. <a 530 d. k. oct.
Et sic iterum regulae generali casus evenit consentaneus: qui enim habet tunc furti actionem adversus dominum, ipse aliis teneri furti actione non potest. sic ex tempore omnibus discretis vetustissima dubitatio nostro foedere conquiescat et bona fide possessor in parte certa temporis et habeat actionem et non teneatur, et ipse dominus in alio tempore non teneatur actione et in alio sub actione constituatur. <a 530 d. k. oct.
And thus again there occurs a case consonant with the general rule: for he who then has an action of theft against the owner cannot himself be held by an action of theft by others. Thus, with all the times distinguished, let a most ancient doubt come to rest by our covenant, and let the possessor in good faith, in a certain portion of time, both have an action and not be held; and let the owner himself at one time not be held by an action and at another be set under an action. <a 530 on the Kalends of October.
De eo autem, qui liber constitutus ab alio bona fide tenetur, si furtum commiserit, recte et sine aliqua dubitatione dicitur posse eum, qui liber est cognitus, et ab ipso qui bona fide eum detinet pro furto conveniri, et bona fide possessorem, si ab extraneo furtum liber commiserit, non posse conveniri, sed ipsum pro suo furto respondere, quia generalis regula de servo prolata est, et pro eo, qui non servus, sed liber et suae potestatis est, noxalem moveri actionem impossibile nostrisque legibus incognitum est. <a 530 d. k. oct. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
As to one who, though established as free, is held by another in good faith, if he should commit theft, it is rightly and without any doubt said that he who is known to be free can be sued for theft by the very person who detains him in good faith; and that the possessor in good faith, if the free man committed theft from an outsider, cannot be sued, but he himself must answer for his own theft, because the general rule was promulgated concerning a slave, and as to one who is not a slave but is free and of his own power, to bring a noxal action is impossible and unknown to our laws. <a 530, on the Kalends of October, at Constantinople, when Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, were consuls.>
Sed quaerebatur apud antiquos legum interpretes, si quis commodavit alii rem ad se pertinentem et ipsa res subtracta est, an furti actio adversus furem institui possit ab eo qui rem utendam accepit, idoneo scilicet constituto, quia et ipse commodati actione a domino pro ea re conveniri potest. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
But it was asked among the ancient interpreters of the laws, if someone lent (by commodatum) to another a thing belonging to himself, and the thing itself was carried off, whether an action of theft could be instituted against the thief by him who received the thing for use—an adequate surety, of course, having been constituted—since he too can be sued by an action of commodatum by the owner on account of that matter. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Sed ea satis increbuit dubitatio, si tempore quo furtum committebatur idoneus erat is qui rem commodandam accepit, postea autem ad inopiam pervenit, antequam moveatur actio quae ei antea competebat, an debeat actio quae semel ei adquisita est firmiter apud eum manere vel ad dominum reverti, cum et hoc quaerebatur, an in hoc casu furti actio ambulatoria sit nec ne. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
But this doubt has become quite prevalent: if at the time when the theft was being committed the one who had received the thing to be lent (commodated) was suitable/solvent, but afterwards came into want, before the action which previously lay to him is set in motion, whether the action which once was acquired by him ought to remain firmly with him or revert to the owner, since this too was being asked, whether in this case the action for theft is ambulatory or not. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Tales itaque ambiguitates veterum, immo magis, quod melius dicendum est, ambages nobis decidentibus in tanta rerum difficultate simplicior sententia placuit, ut in domini sit voluntate, sive commodati actionem adversus res accipientem movere desiderat sive furti adversus eum qui rem subripuit, et alterutra earum electa dominum non posse ex paenitentia ad alteram venire. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Therefore such ambiguities of the ancients—indeed rather, what is better said, their roundabout ambages—being cut away by us amid so great a difficulty of the matters, the simpler judgment has pleased us: that it be in the owner’s discretion, whether he desires to bring the action of commodatum against the recipient of the thing, or the action of theft against him who surreptitiously removed the thing; and, once either of them has been chosen, the owner cannot, out of a change of mind, come over to the other. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Sed si quidem furem elegerit, illum qui rem utendam accepit penitus liberari: sin autem quasi commodator veniat adversus eum qui rem utendam accepit, ipsi quidem nullo modo competere posse adversus furem furti actionem, eum autem, qui pro re commodata convenitur, posse adversus furem furti habere actionem, ita tamen, si dominus sciens rem esse subreptam adversus eum qui eam accepit perveniat. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
But if indeed he should choose the thief, the one who received the thing for use is wholly freed: but if, however, he comes as a commodator against the one who received the thing for use, then to him indeed an action of theft can in no way be competent against the thief, but the one who is sued on account of the thing lent for use can have an action of theft against the thief—yet only so, if the owner, knowing the thing to have been stolen, proceeds against him who received it. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Sin autem nescius et dubitans rem non esse apud eum commodati actionem instituit , postea autem re comperta voluit remittere quidem commodati actionem, ad furti autem pervenire, tunc licentia ei concedatur et adversus furem venire, nullo obstaculo ei opponendo, quoniam incertus constitutus movit adversus eum qui rem utendam accepit commodati actionem, ( nisi domino ab eo satisfactum est: tunc etenim omnimodo furem a domino quidem furti actione liberari, suppositum autem esse ei, qui pro re sibi commodata domino satisfecit), cum manifestissimum est, etiam si ab initio dominus actionem instituit commodati ignarus rei subreptae, postea autem hoc ei cognito adversus furem transivit, omnimodo liberari eum qui rem commodatam suscepit, quemcumque causae exitum dominus adversus furem habuerit: eadem definitione obtinente, sive in partem sive in solidum solvendo sit is qui rem commodatam accepit. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
But if, however, being unaware and doubting whether the thing was with him, he instituted the action of loan-for-use, but afterwards, the fact having been discovered, he wished indeed to remit the action of loan-for-use, and to proceed to the action of theft, then license shall be granted to him also to come against the thief, with no obstacle opposed to him, since, being in uncertainty, he set in motion the action of loan-for-use against him who received the thing for use, (unless satisfaction has been made to the owner by him: for then in every way the thief is freed by the owner from the action of theft, but is substituted to him who, on account of the thing lent to him, satisfied the owner), since it is most manifest that, even if from the beginning the owner, ignorant of the thing having been filched, instituted the action of loan-for-use, but afterwards, this having become known to him, transferred against the thief, in every way he who received the thing on loan-for-use is freed, whatever outcome of the case the owner may have had against the thief: the same definition obtaining, whether the one who received the loaned thing be solvent in part or in solidum. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Sed cum in secunda dubitatione incidebat, quid statuendum sit, si quis rem commodatam habuerit, quam aliquis furto subtraxerat et lite pulsatus condemnationem passus fuerat non tantum in rem furtivam, sed etiam in poenam furti, et postea dominus rei venerit omnem condemnationem accipere desiderans utpote ex suae rei occasione ortam, alia dubitatio incidit veteribus, utrumne rem tantummodo suam vel eius aestimationem consequatur, an etiam summam poenalem. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
But when he fell into the second doubt—what should be decreed if someone had a thing on loan which another had removed by theft, and, being sued, had undergone a condemnation not only for the stolen thing but also for the penalty of theft, and afterwards the owner of the thing came wishing to receive the whole condemnation, as having arisen on the occasion of his own thing—another question occurred to the ancients: whether he obtains only his own thing or its estimation, or also the penal sum. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Et licet ab antiquis variatum est et ab ipso papiniano in contrarias declinante sententias, tamen nobis haec decidentibus papinianus, licet variavit, eligendus est, non in prima, sed in secunda eius definitione, in qua lucrum statuit minime ad dominum rei pervenire: ubi enim periculum, ibi et lucrum collocetur, nec sit damno tantummodo deditus qui rem commodatam accepit, sed liceat ei etiam lucrum sperare. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
And although there has been variation among the ancients, and by Papinian himself, inclining to contrary opinions, nevertheless, for us deciding these matters Papinian—although he varied—is to be chosen, not in his first but in his second definition, in which he established that profit by no means comes to the owner of the thing: for where the peril is, there also let the profit be placed; nor let him who received the thing on loan (commodatum) be devoted only to loss, but let it be permitted to him also to hope for profit. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Cum autem in confinio earum dubitationum tertia exorta est, quare non et eam decidimus? cum enim apertissimi iuris est non posse maritum constante matrimonio furti actionem contra suam uxorem habere, quia lex ita atrocem actionem dare in personas ita sibi coniunctas erubuit, huiusmodi incidit veterum sensibus quaestio. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Since, however, on the boundary of those doubts a third arose, why do we not also decide it? For since it is of the most evident law that a husband, while the marriage is standing, cannot have an action of theft against his own wife, because the law blushed to grant so atrocious an action against persons so closely conjoined, a question of this kind occurred to the minds of the ancients. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Quidam etenim re sibi commodata huiusmodi rei furtum a sua muliere passus est: et dubitabatur, utrumne domino rei furti actio contra mulierem praestatur, an propter necessitatem causae et maritus eius utpote commodati actioni suppositus potest habere furti actionem. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
For indeed a certain man, with a thing lent to him for use, suffered the theft of such a thing by his own wife; and it was doubted whether the action of theft is afforded to the owner of the thing against the wife, or whether, on account of the necessity of the case, even the husband, as being subjected to the action on the commodatum, can have an action of theft. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Si enim domino dedimus electionem ad quem voluit pervenire, sive ad eum qui rem commodatam accepit, sive contra eum qui furtum commisit, et in hac specie maritus quidem propter matrimonii pudorem non furti, sed rerum amotarum actionem habeat, si ipsum dominus elegerit, dominus autem omnem licentiam possideat sive adversus maritum commodati sive adversus mulierem furti actionem extendere: ita tamen ut, si ipse qui rem commodatam accepit solvendo sit, nullo modo adversus mulierem furti actio extendatur, ne ex huiusmodi occasione inter maritum et uxorem, qui non bene secum vivunt, aliqua machinatio oriatur, et forsitan marito volente uxor eius et trahatur et furti patiatur poenalem condemnationem. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
For if we have granted to the owner the choice to proceed against whom he wishes—either against the one who received the thing on loan for use (commodatum), or against the one who committed theft—and in this case let the husband, on account of the modesty of marriage, have not the action of theft, but the action for things removed (rerum amotarum), if the owner has chosen him, while the owner possesses full license to extend the action of theft either against the husband under the commodatum or against the woman: provided, however, that if the very one who received the thing on loan for use is solvent, in no way shall the action of theft be extended against the woman, lest on an occasion of this sort some contrivance arise between husband and wife who do not live well together, and perhaps, with the husband willing it, his wife both be dragged off and suffer a penal condemnation for theft. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Si tempore manumissionis operae tibi impositae sunt, scis te eas praestare debere. solet autem inter patronos et libertos convenire, ut pro operis aliquid praestetur, licet pretium non possit, nisi quando propter inopiam pro alimentis id extra ordinem peti necessitas suaserit, cum, etsi operae non erant impositae, defectis tamen facultatibus patroni alere eum cogebaris. * sev.
If at the time of manumission services (operae) were imposed upon you, you know that you must render them. It is, however, customary for an agreement to be made between patrons and freedmen that, in return for the services, something be furnished, although a price cannot be stipulated, unless when, on account of indigence, necessity has suggested that this be sought, out of the ordinary, for maintenance; since, even if services had not been imposed, yet, with the patron’s resources failing, you were compelled to support him. * sev.
Si quam pecuniam tibi a liberto tuo ex venditione operarum deberi probaveris, restitui tibi a liberto tuo praeses iubebit ( ex hoc enim liberam testamenti factionem libertus habet) , modo si non onerandae libertatis gratia emissam cautionem probabitur. * ant. a. valeriano.
If you shall have proved that any money is owed to you by your freedman from the sale of his services, the governor will order it to be restored to you by your freedman ( for from this the freedman has free testamentary capacity) , provided that it shall not be proved that the bond was issued for the purpose of burdening his freedom. * Antoninus to Valerianus.
Mater tua ab eo, quem ex causa fideicommissi manumisit, operas impositas petere non potest, nisi eius tantummodo temporis, quo eum ante manumisit, quam dies fideicommissae libertatis existeret. sed nisi ei honorem patronis debitum exhibuerit, adeat competentem iudicem pro modo admissi vindicaturum. * ant.
Your mother cannot demand the imposed services from him whom she manumitted on account of a fideicommissary trust, except only for that period during which she manumitted him before the day on which the fideicommissary liberty would arise. But unless he shows to her the honor owed to patrons, let her approach the competent judge, who will vindicate according to the measure of the offense committed. * Antoninus.
Titius si, cum testamentum faceret, servo suo libertatem cum condicione hac dedit: " gaium servum meum a die mortis meae annis tribus peractis manumitti volo, ita ut praestet heredibus meis, sicut me vivo praestabat", et cum idem servus testatori diurnum quiddam praestabat et post mortem eius usque ad diem praestandae libertatis etiam heredibus praestiterat, manifestum est, quod adeptus libertatem ad eandem praestationem compelli non possit. * alex. a. herculiano.
If Titius, when he was making a testament, gave freedom to his slave with this condition: "I wish my slave Gaius to be manumitted upon the completion of three years from the day of my death, on condition that he render to my heirs, just as he rendered while I lived," and since the same slave used to render a certain daily amount to the testator and, after his death, had also rendered it to the heirs up to the day on which freedom was to be rendered, it is manifest that, having obtained freedom, he cannot be compelled to the same prestation. * alexander augustus to herculianus.
Qui manumittuntur, liberum ubi voluerint commorandi arbitrium habent nec a patronorum filiis, quibus solam reverentiam debent, ad serviendi necessitatem redigi possunt, nisi ingrati probentur, cum neque cum patrono habitare libertos iura compellunt. * diocl. et maxim.
Those who are manumitted have the free discretion of residing wherever they wish, and they cannot be reduced by the sons of their patrons— to whom they owe only reverence— into the necessity of serving, unless they are proved ungrateful, since the laws do not compel freedmen to live with the patron. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Multum interest, utrum quis suis nummis emptus ac manumissus sit ab emptore, an a domino suo data pecunia mereatur libertatem. priore enim casu ad contra tabulas admitti patronum non placet, posteriore omnia iura patronatus retinet. * sev.
It makes much difference whether someone has been purchased with his own coins and manumitted by the buyer, or merits liberty with money given by his own master. For in the former case it is not approved that the patron be admitted to succession against the will; in the latter he retains all the rights of patronage. * sev.
Et ideo cum sabiniani patroni filii, qui plenum ius habuit, ut hostis publici bona fisco vindicata sunt, secundum ea, quae divo pertinaci placuerunt et nos secuti sumus, in iura libertorum eius fiscus noster successit. <a 210 pp. v non. iul.
And therefore, since the son of Sabinianus’s patron—who had full right—being a public enemy, his goods were claimed by the fisc; accordingly, in accordance with what pleased the deified Pertinax and which we have followed, our fisc has succeeded to his rights over his freedmen. <a 210 pp. 5 before the Nones of July (3 July).
Si quis patronum in posterum huiusmodi narrationem conceperit vel in libertatibus, quae inter vivos actitantur, vel in his, quae ex testamento vel codicillis scriptis vel sine scriptis habitis proficiscuntur, ut liberti eorum a iure patronatus liberentur, antiqua interpretatione semota non dubitet etiam patronatus ius ex sola tali verborum conceptione libertis esse remittendum nec successionibus quae ab intestato descendunt, quas veteres et post huiusmodi actus servari in libertorum bonis decreverunt, a nobis patronis integris reservandis. * iust. a. demostheni pp. * <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani.
If anyone hereafter should conceive such a declaration for a patron, either in manumissions which are transacted between the living, or in those which proceed from a testament or from codicils, written or unwritten, to the effect that their freedmen are to be freed from the right of patronage, with the ancient interpretation set aside, let him not doubt that even the right of patronage, from such wording alone, must be remitted to the freedmen, nor that the successions which descend ab intestato—which the ancients decreed to be preserved in the goods of freedmen even after such acts—are by us to be reserved to patrons intact. * justinian augustus to demosthenes, praetorian prefect. * <a 529, recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of justinian.
Sed quemadmodum in natalium restitutione omne ius tollitur patronatus, ita et in huiusmodi verbis eandem esse vim observandam omnes non ignorent. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani. d.Iii k.Nov.Decio vc.Cons.>
But just as in the restoration of natal rights every right of patronage is removed, so too in words of this sort let all not be ignorant that the same force is to be observed. <in 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistorium of the palace of justinian. d. 3 k. nov. decius, most distinguished man, consul.>
Idem que iuris est, si inter vivos manumissione imposita in ultimis voluntatibus concessio data fuerit patronatus: ita tamen, ut in omnibus natalium restitutiones, ex quibus paene solis ingenuitas mera libertis competit, tam obtineant quam in nostra re publica polleant, cum nobis cordi est ingenuis magis hominibus quam libertis eam frequentari. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani. d.Iii k.Nov.Decio vc.Cons.>
And the same law applies, whether, between living persons, manumission has been imposed, or in last wills a grant of patronage has been given: provided, however, that in all cases restitutions of birth—which are almost the sole means by which pure freeborn status accrues to freedmen—should obtain and have force in our commonwealth, since it is dear to us that freeborn status be more frequently found in freeborn men than in freedmen. <a year 529, recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of justinian. on the 3rd day before the kalends of november, under decius, most distinguished man, consul.>
Reverentia tamen, quae a libertis debetur, et iure, quod adversus ingratos libertos patronis competit, integris reservandis, et si per verborum conceptionem secundum a nobis inductum modum ius patronatus fuerit amissum, cum etiam haec ingenuitatis praemio tolluntur, quam paene sola natalium restitutio inducit. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani. d.Iii k.Nov.Decio vc.Cons.>
Nevertheless, the reverence that is owed by freedmen, and the right which belongs to patrons against ungrateful freedmen, are to be preserved intact; and even if, by a formulation of words according to the manner introduced by us, the right of patronage should have been lost, these too are removed by the reward of freeborn status, which almost only the restitution of birth introduces. <year 529, read out at the seventh milestone in the new consistorium of the Palace of Justinian. On the 3rd day before the Kalends of November. Decius, a most distinguished man, consul.>
His videlicet casibus, per quos poenalibus modis ius patronatus quasi ab indignis patronis eripitur, in suo robore durantibus. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani. d.Iii k.Nov.Decio vc.Cons.>
These, namely, cases—by which in penal modes the right of patronage is, as it were, snatched from unworthy patrons—remaining in their own strength. <a 529 recited at the seventh milestone, in the new consistory of the palace of Justinian. on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November, Decius, a most distinguished man, consul.>
Nam si qua tibi pecunia debebatur sive de rebus adversus patronum disceptatio fuerat, non protinus ad litigandum currere debueras: maxime autem si hoc facere auderes, sine atrocitate certe verborum aequitatem petitionis tuae commendare iudici potuisti, omni honore patrono debito reservato. <a 224 pp. prid. k. oct.
For if any money was owed to you, or if there had been a disputation about property against your patron, you ought not straightway to have run to litigation: and especially, if you dared to do this, you could surely, without atrocity of words, commend to the judge the equity of your petition, with all honor due to the patron reserved. <a 224 pp. prid. k. oct.
Si manumissus ingratus circa patronum suum extiterit et quadam iactantia vel contumacia cervices adversus eum erexerit aut levis offensae contraxerit culpam, a patronis rursus sub imperia dicionemque mittatur, si in iudicio vel apud pedaneos iudices patroni querella exserta ingratum eum ostendat: filiis etiam qui postea nati fuerint servituris, quoniam illis delicta parentium non nocent, quos tunc ortos esse constiterit, dum libertate illi potirentur. * const. a. ad maximum pu. * <a 326 pp. id. april.
If a manumitted person has proved ungrateful toward his patron and, with a certain vaunting or contumacy, has raised his neck against him, or has incurred guilt for a slight offense, let him be sent back by the patrons under their commands and dominion, if in court or before pedaneal judges the patron’s complaint, brought forward, shows him ungrateful: the sons also who shall have been born thereafter are not to be in servitude, since the offenses of parents do not harm them—those who shall be established to have been born at the time when they were in enjoyment of liberty. * const. a. to Maximus pu. * <in 326 on the Ides of April.
Sane si is, qui in nostro consilio vindicta liberatus est, post coercitionem ex paenitentia dignum se praestiterit, ut ei civitas romana reddatur, non prius fruetur beneficio libertatis, quam si hoc patronus eius oblatis precibus impetraverit. <a 326 pp. id. april. romae constantino a. vii et constantio c. conss.>
Indeed, if the one who in our council has been freed by the vindicta, after coercion, through penitence has shown himself worthy that Roman citizenship be restored to him, he shall not enjoy the benefit of liberty before his patron has obtained this by presenting petitions. <a 326, the day before the ides of april, at rome, constantine as augustus for the 7th time and constantius as caesar, consuls.>
Liberti non modo adversus patronos non audientur, verum etiam eandem quam patronis ipsis reverentiam praestent heredibus patronorum, quibus ingrati actio sicut ipsis manumissoribus deferetur, si illi datae sibi libertatis immemores nequitiam receperint servilis ingenii. * honor. et theodos.
Freedmen will not only not be heard against their patrons, but they shall also show to the heirs of the patrons the same reverence as to the patrons themselves, to whom the action for ingratitude will be afforded just as to the manumitters themselves, if they, unmindful of the liberty given to them, have resumed the wickedness of a servile disposition. * Honorius and Theodosius.
Quamdiu per facti quaestionem incertum est, utrumne secundum tabulas an ab intestato, et ex quo capite possessio sit delata, ne tibi tempus agnoscendae bonorum possessionis praefinitum cedat, superstitiosam geris sollicitudinem. * diocl. et maxim.
So long as, by inquiry into the facts, it is uncertain whether the possession has been conferred according to the tablets or from intestacy, and under which head, you are carrying an over-scrupulous anxiety lest the time prescribed for acknowledging the bonorum possession should elapse. * diocl. et maxim.
Ipse autem pupillus bonorum possessionem sine tutoris auctoritate amplecti non potest, nisi etiam impuberi sine tutoris auctoritate hoc postulanti sciens hoc competens iudex dedit bonorum possessionem: tunc enim emolumentum successionis videtur praetorio iure quaesitum esse. <a 305 vi id. sept. constantio et maximiano conss.>
However, the ward himself cannot embrace the possession of goods without the authority of his tutor, unless, even to a prepubescent requesting this without the tutor’s authority, the competent judge, knowing this, has given the possession of goods: for then the emolument of succession is seen to have been acquired by praetorian law. <a 305 6 id. sept. constantius and maximianus consuls.>
Quicumque res ex parentum vel proximorum successione iure sibi competere confidit, sciat sibi non obesse, si per rusticitatem vel ignorantiam facti vel absentiam vel quamcumque aliam rationem intra praefinitum tempus bonorum possessionem minime petisse noscatur, quoniam haec sanctio huiusmodi consuetudinis necessitatem mutavit. * const. a. ad dionysium.
Whoever trusts that property from the succession of parents or of next-of-kin belongs to him by right, let him know that it is not to his detriment, if through rusticity or ignorance of the fact or absence or any other rationale he is known not at all to have petitioned for possession of the goods within the pre-defined time, since this sanction has altered the necessity of a custom of this kind. * a constitution to dionysius.
Ut verborum inanium excludimus captiones, ita haec observari decernimus, ut apud quemlibet iudicem vel etiam apud duumviros qualiscumque testatio amplectendae hereditatis ostendatur, statutis prisco iure temporibus coartanda, eo addito, ut , etiamsi intra alienam vicem, id est prioris gradus, properantius exseratur, nihilo minus tamen efficaciam parem, quasi suis sita curriculis, consequatur. * const. a. ad pop.
As we exclude the captious snares of empty words, so we decree that these things be observed: that before any judge, or even before the duumvirs, whatever attestation of embracing an inheritance be shown, it is to be constrained by the times set by ancient law, with this added, that , even if it is put forward more hastily within another’s turn, that is, of a prior degree, nonetheless it shall obtain equal efficacy, as if set in its own courses. * const. a. ad pop.
Quotiens pluribus liberis cessante legitima successione bonorum possessio defertur, beneficium edicti perpetui quibusdam omittentibus his solis qui bonorum possessionem agnoverunt portionem non petentium adcrescere in dubium non venit. * gord. a. marcianae.
Whenever, the legitimate succession ceasing, the bonorum possessio is conferred upon several children, by the benefit of the perpetual edict—certain persons having omitted [to claim]—it is not in doubt that the share of those not petitioning accrues to these alone who have accepted the bonorum possessio. * Gordian Augustus to Marciana.
Verum si eundem numerum adfuisse sine scriptis testamento condito doceri potest, iure civili testamentum factum videri ac secundum nuncupationem bonorum possessionem deferri explorati iuris est. <a 242 pp.Xii k.Mart. attico et praetextato conss.>
But if it can be shown that the same number were present without writings when the testament was constituted, by civil law the testament is deemed to have been made, and it is settled law that, according to the nuncupation, bonorum possessio is conferred. <in the year 242, on the 12th day before the Kalends of March, Atticus and Praetextatus, consuls.>
Postumo nato, qui neque heres institutus a patre neque nominatim exheredatus est , testamentum rumpitur: et si contra tabulas bonorum possessio infanti a tutore petita est, secundum tabulas possessio locum habere non potest. * alex. a. hilarae.
With a posthumous child born, who was neither instituted heir by the father nor expressly disinherited is , the testament is broken: and if possession of the goods against the will has been sought for the infant by the tutor, possession according to the will cannot have place. * alexander augustus to hilara.
Licet ex causa fideicommissi manumissus sit, quem ex voluntate patris cum sorore te manumisisse proponis, tamen, si extraneos scripsit heredes, partis legitimae contra tabulas eius bonorum possessionem petendo, vel contra nuncupationem, si testamentum sine scriptis conditum est, intra tempora edicto praestituta eam partem poteris obtinere. * gord. a. herculiano.
Although he was manumitted on the ground of a fideicommiss, whom you assert that you manumitted, together with your sister, in accordance with your father’s will, nevertheless, if he appointed outsiders as heirs, by petitioning for the bonorum possessio of the legitimate share against his tablets (will)—or against the nuncupation, if the testament was made without writings—you will be able to obtain that share within the times prescribed by the edict. * gordian augustus to herculianus.
Qui se patris post avum intestatum defuncti negat heredem, mortui avi paterni suscipere facultates non potest, maxime emancipatus, nisi per bonorum possessionem ad huiusmodi beneficium pervenerit. * constantius a. ad leontinum com. orientis.
He who denies that he is the heir of his father, deceased after a grandfather who died intestate, cannot receive the assets of his deceased paternal grandfather, especially if emancipated, unless he has come to such a benefit through bonorum possessio. * constantius a. to leontinus, count of the east.
Si mater tua propter furorem suum patrui sui bonorum possessionem non accepit, tu filius eius ad eorundem bonorum patrui magni possessionem ex edicto, quo prioribus non petentibus sequentibus permittitur, admissus es. * alex. a. iulio. * <a 223 pp.Iiii id.Dec maximo ii et aeliano conss.>
If your mother, on account of her madness, did not accept the possession of the goods of her paternal uncle, you, her son, have been admitted to the possession of those same goods of your great-uncle under the edict, by which, the prior not petitioning, it is permitted to the subsequent. * Alexander Augustus to Julius. * <year 223, on the 4th day before the Ides of December, under the consuls Maximus 2 and Aelianus.>
Si aviae frater eorum, de quorum successione agitur, velut ex testamento adiit hereditatem, quos intestatos decessisse ac falsum testamentum prolatum contendis , et ab intestato non petita bonorum possessione vita functus est, ac tu licet quinto gradu constitutus ex successorio capite petisti bonorum possessionem vel necdum exclusus petas, eorum successionem potes vindicare. nam si is, quem quarto gradu constitutum non ambigitur, ex edicto petiit nec hoc te latuit, frustra nobis supplicasti. * diocl.
If the brother of the grandmother of those whose succession is at issue, as though from a testament, entered upon the inheritance, whom you contend to have died intestate and that a false testament was produced , and he departed this life without possession of goods from intestacy having been sought, and you, although placed in the fifth degree of kinship, have sought possession of goods on a successorial ground or, not yet excluded, are seeking it, you can vindicate their succession. For if he, who is without doubt placed in the fourth degree, sought it under the edict and this did not escape your notice, you have supplicated us in vain. * Diocletian.
Si tibi ac filio tuo status ab his contra quos supplicas movetur quaestio, perspicis praemature rerum, quas velut de patris successione filius tuus vindicat, restitutionem postulari, cum, si in pupillari permaneat aetate, secundum formam edicti carboniani data bonorum possessione satisdatione impleta tunc demum in possessionem eum constitui conveniat vel hac non oblata portionem ab omnibus quam vindicat possideri, servitutis vero quaestionem in tempus differri pubertatis. * diocl. et maxim.
If a question of status is being raised as to you and your son by those against whom you petition, you perceive that a restitution of the things which your son claims as though from his father’s succession is being demanded prematurely; since, if he remains in pupillary age, in accordance with the form of the Carbonian edict, once possession of the goods has been granted and a surety (satisdatio) furnished, then at length it is proper that he be established in possession; or, if this is not offered, that the portion which he claims be possessed by all; but that the question of servitude (slave status) be deferred to the time of puberty. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Carbonianum edictum sub personis legitimis indubitato matrimonio, custodito partu et probata legitima successione defertur, scilicet ut in possessione novus heres constitutus usque ad pubertatis annos sine inquietudine rebus utatur interdum alienis. * valentin. theodos.
The Carbonian Edict is conferred under legitimate persons, with the marriage indubitable, the birth safeguarded, and the legitimate succession proven; namely, that a new heir established in possession may, up to the years of puberty, without disturbance make use of property that is sometimes another’s. * valentin. theodos.
Si pater intestato decessit relictis duobus filiis et filia, cuius nomine dotem promiserat, portiones hereditatis aeque sunt et dos nihilo minus ita conferanda est, ut pro portionibus fratres eius a necessitate praestandae eius liberentur. * alex. a. primo.
If a father has died intestate, leaving two sons and a daughter, for whose sake he had promised a dowry, the portions of the inheritance are equal, and nonetheless the dowry is to be contributed in such a way that, in proportion to the shares, her brothers are freed from the necessity of furnishing it. * alexander augustus to primus.
Pactum dotali instrumento comprehensum, ut contenta dote quae in matrimonio collocabatur nullum ad bona paterna regressum haberet, iuris auctoritate improbatur nec intestato patri succedere filia ea ratione prohibetur. dotem sane quam accepit fratribus qui in potestate manserunt conferre debet. * alex.
A pact contained in the dowry instrument, that she who was being settled in marriage with the provided dowry should have no return to the paternal goods, is disapproved by the authority of law, nor is the daughter for that reason prohibited from succeeding to her father intestate. the dowry indeed which she received she ought to collate with the brothers who remained under paternal power. * Alex.
Filiae dotem in medium ita demum conferre coguntur, si vel ab intestato succedant vel contra tabulas petant: nec dubium est profecticiam seu adventiciam dotem a patre datam vel constitutam fratribus qui in potestate fuerunt conferendam esse. his etenim, qui in familia defuncti non sunt, profecticiam tantummodo dotem post varias prudentium opiniones conferri placuit. * gord.
Daughters are compelled to collate a dowry into the common stock only then, if either they succeed ab intestato or bring an action contrary to the tablets; nor is there any doubt that a profectitious or an adventitious dowry given or constituted by the father must be collated to brothers who were under his power. For, to those who were not in the household of the deceased, it has been settled, after various opinions of the jurists, that only the profectitious dowry be collated. * gord.
Dotis quidem petitio perseverante matrimonio tibi non competebat: quamvis enim eam intestato patre defuncto fratri conferre debueras, non tamen eo nomine adversus maritum tibi actio potuit esse, cum eo minus in partem tibi delatae successionis patris auferre potueris. * gord. a. alexandrae.
A petition for the dowry, with the marriage continuing, did not lie for you: although indeed, your father having died intestate, you ought to have conferred it upon your brother, nevertheless on that ground you could not have an action against your husband, since still less could you carry it off into the share of your father’s succession that had accrued to you. * Gordian Augustus to Alexandra.
Si soror tua in paternorum bonorum divisione te fefellit nec dotem, quam acceperat a patre vestro intestato diem functo, contulit, praeses provinciae examinatis partium adlegationibus cum bonis dotem confundi iubebit et, quod deducta ratione plus apud eam esse animadverterit, restitui tibi iubebit. idem est et si arbitro dato divisio celebrata est. * diocl.
If your sister, in the division of the paternal goods, has defrauded you and has not contributed the dowry which she had received from your father, who departed this life intestate, the provincial governor, after the parties’ allegations have been examined, will order the dowry to be merged with the goods, and will order that whatever, once the reckoning is made, he observes to be in excess with her be restored to you. The same holds even if the division has been conducted with an arbiter appointed. * diocl.
Si emancipati utrique fuistis a patre, collatio cessat. si autem frater tuus in potestate mortis tempore fuerat nec ullum testamentum relictum vel novissimum iudicium communis patris teque emancipatum probatum fuerit, ab intestato te ad successionem paternam venientem ad collationem forma edicti perpetui certo iure provocat. * diocl.
If you both were emancipated by your father, collation ceases. But if your brother was in his power at the time of his death, and no testament or last judgment of your common father had been left, and it has been proven that you were emancipated, then, as you come by intestacy to the paternal succession, the form of the Perpetual Edict, by established law, calls you to collation. * Diocletian.
Postumo praeterito patris testamentum rumpenti atque intestato succedenti emancipatum petita bonorum possessione conferre debere bona sua perpetuo edicto cavetur, cum his etiam, qui sui futuri essent, si vivo patre nati fuissent, conferri manifeste significatur, et emancipatis, si legi datae collationi non pareatur, denegandas actiones non est ambigui iuris. * diocl. et maxim.
With a posthumous child, having been passed over, who breaks the father’s testament and succeeds as in intestacy, it is provided by the Perpetual Edict that an emancipated son, upon seeking bonorum possessio, must collate his own goods; since it is clearly signified that a collation is to be made also with those who would be sui if they had been born while the father was alive; and as to emancipated persons, if the collation ordered by law is not obeyed, it is no matter of doubtful law that actions are to be denied. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Quin autem fratres tui durantes in familia patris peculium, si hoc neque castrense neque relictum eis doceatur, praecipuum habere non possint, sed in divisione paternae veniat hereditatis, nec quicquam mutet, penes quem res ex hoc proficiscentes et in eadem causa durantes constitutae reperiantur, absoluti manifestique iuris est. <a 294 d.Xi k.Febr.Sirmi cc.Conss.>
But indeed, as for your brothers remaining in the father’s familia, the peculium—if this is shown to be neither castrense nor left to them—cannot be held as a praecipuum, but comes into the division of the paternal inheritance; nor does it change anything as to the person with whom the things arising from this and persisting in the same condition are found to have been constituted—a matter of settled and manifest law. <a 294 d.11 k.Febr.Sirmi cc.Conss.>
Si donatione tibi post mortem patris quaesisti fundum, soror tua portionem eius vindicare non potest. nam si is filiae familias constitutae tibi a patre donatus est, cum sorore patri communi succedens eum praecipuum habere contra iura postulas. * diocl.
If by a donation you have acquired for yourself an estate after your father’s death, your sister cannot vindicate a portion of it. For if it was given to you by your father while you were established as a filia familias, then, succeeding with your sister to your common father, you seek to hold it as a praecipuum, contrary to the laws. * diocl.
Si maritus quondam tuus ab intestato patri suo heres extitit et ei postumus editus successit, actionem hereditariam amitae filii vestri, quam habuit patris sui mortis tempore dotem non conferenti, denegare praeses non dubitabit. * diocl. et maxim.
If your former husband became heir to his father who died intestate, and a posthumous son born to him succeeded him, the governor will not hesitate to deny to your son’s paternal aunt the hereditary action, she not having contributed the dowry which she had at the time of her father’s death. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Filiam cum fratribus suis heredibus intestato patri succedentem ultra relictum codicillis non conferentem dotem iudicio familiae erciscundae nihil posse consequi summa cum ratione placuit. * diocl. et maxim.
It has been decided with the greatest reason that a daughter, succeeding to her father who died intestate together with her brothers as heirs, and not contributing her dowry, beyond what has been left by codicils, can obtain nothing by the action for partition of the family estate. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Ut liberis tam masculini quam feminini sexus, iuris sui vel in potestate constitutis, quocumque iure intestatae successionis, id est aut testamento penitus non condito vel, si factum fuerit, contra tabulas bonorum possessione petita vel inofficiosi querella mota rescisso, aequa lance parique modo prospici possit, hoc etiam aequitatis studio praesenti legi credidimus inserendum, ut in dividendis rebus ab intestato defunctorum parentium tam dos quam ante nuptias donatio conferatur, quam pater vel mater, avus vel avia, proavus proavia paternus vel maternus dederit vel promiserit pro filio vel filia, nepote vel nepte aut pronepote sive pronepte, nulla discretione intercedente, utrum in ipsas sponsas pro liberis suis memorati parentes donationem contulerint, an in ipsos sponsos earum, ut per eos eadem in sponsas donatio celebretur: ut in dividendis rebus ab intestato parentis, cuius de hereditate agitur, eadem dos vel ante nuptias donatio ex substantia eius profecta conferatur: emancipatis videlicet liberis utriusque sexus pro tenore praecedentium legum, quae in ipsa emancipatione a parentibus suis ( ut adsolet fieri) consequuntur vel post emancipationem ab isdem adquisierint, collaturis. * leo a. erythrio pp. * <a 472 d.V k.Mart.Marciano cons.>
In order that children of both the male and the female sex, whether sui iuris or established under power, by whatever title of intestate succession—that is, either with a testament not made at all, or, if it has been made, rescinded by a possession of goods sought against the tablets or by a complaint of undutifulness having been brought—may be provided for with an equal balance and in a like manner, we have believed, out of a zeal for equity, that this too should be inserted in the present law: that, in dividing the property from the intestacy of deceased parents, both the dowry (dos) and the donation before nuptials be brought into contribution, which a father or mother, a grandfather or grandmother, a great‑grandfather or great‑grandmother, paternal or maternal, has given or has promised for a son or daughter, a grandson or granddaughter, or a great‑grandson or great‑granddaughter, with no distinction intervening, whether the aforesaid parents have conferred the donation upon the brides themselves for their children, or upon the bridegrooms of those brides, so that through them the same donation may be celebrated upon the brides: that, in dividing the property from the intestacy of the parent whose inheritance is in question, the same dowry or donation before nuptials that proceeded from his or her substance be brought into contribution: namely, with emancipated children of either sex to contribute, according to the tenor of the preceding laws, what they obtain from their parents at the very emancipation ( as is wont to be done) or have acquired from the same after emancipation. * Leo Augustus to Erythrius, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 472 on the 5th day before the Kalends of March, in the consulship of Marcianus>
Liberos, qui nostrae legis auctoritate per oblationem precum et imperiale rescriptum sui iuris effecti fuerint, ad similitudinem ceterorum, qui emancipati ex antiquo iure sunt, collationes facere iubemus compelli secundum ea, quae super ceteris emancipatis statuta sunt. * anastas. a. constantino pp. * <a 502 d.Xii k.Aug.Constantinopoli probo et avieno iuniore conss.>
We order that children who, by the authority of our law, have been made sui juris through the oblation of petitions and an imperial rescript, be compelled to make collations (contributions) in the likeness of the others who are emancipated under the ancient law, according to the provisions established concerning the other emancipated persons. * anastasius augustus to constantine, praetorian prefect. * <a 502 d.12 k.Aug. at Constantinople, Probus and Avienus the Younger, consuls.>
Nam si intestatus quis defunctus esset filio vel filiis vel filia vel filiabus relictis et ex mortua filia cuiuscumque sexus aut numeri nepotibus, vel si qua intestata defuncta esset filio quidem vel filiis similiter relictis, ex mortuo vero filio vel filia itidem nepotibus cuiuscumque sexus, de modo quidem successionis minime dubitabatur, sed palam erat, quod huiusmodi nepotes duas partes maternae vel paternae portionis tantummodo haberent, tertiam partem patruis suis vel avunculis vel amitis vel materteris pro iam posita constitutione concedentes. <a 528 d. k. iun. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. ii cons.>
For if someone had died intestate, with a son or sons or a daughter or daughters left, and from a deceased daughter grandchildren of whatever sex or number, or if any woman had died intestate with a son indeed or sons likewise left, but from a deceased son or daughter likewise grandchildren of whatever sex, there was by no means any doubt about the mode of succession, but it was clear that such grandchildren had only two parts of the maternal or paternal portion, conceding the third part to their paternal uncles or maternal uncles or paternal aunts or maternal aunts according to the constitution already set forth. <in the year 528, on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, under our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, consul for the 2nd time.>
De collatione vero dotis vel ante nuptias donationis, quam defuncta persona pro filio vel filia superstitibus et pro mortuo vel mortua filio vel filia dedisset, multa dubitatio orta est, superstitibus quidem filiis defunctae personae non debere se dotem et ante nuptias donationem pro se datam a suo patre vel matre conferre filiis mortui fratris sui vel mortuae sororis suae contendentibus eo, quod nulla constitutio super huiuscemodi collatione posita est, nepotibus vero mortuae personae non tantum huic resistentibus, sed etiam illud adserentibus, quod onus collationis constitutione arcadii et honorii divae memoriae sibi impositum in personis tantummodo suorum avunculorum, non etiam patruorum vel amitarum vel materterarum locum habere potest. <a 528 d. k. iun. constantinopoli dn. iustini ano a. pp. ii cons.>
But concerning the collation of a dowry or of a donation before nuptials, which the deceased person had given on behalf of a surviving son or daughter and on behalf of a son or daughter who had died, much doubt arose, the surviving sons of the deceased person indeed contending that they ought not to collate the dowry and the donation before nuptials given for themselves by their own father or mother to the sons of their dead brother or their dead sister, on the ground that no constitution has been set down concerning a collation of this kind; whereas the grandchildren of the deceased person not only resisted this, but also asserted that the burden of collation, imposed upon them by the constitution of Arcadius and Honorius of divine memory, can have place only with respect to their maternal uncles (avunculi), and not also to paternal uncles (patrui) or to paternal or maternal aunts (amitae or materterae). <at constantinople, on the kalends of june, year 528, under our lord justin, augustus, in his 2nd consulship.>
Talem igitur subtilem dubitationem amputantes praecipimus tam filios vel filias defunctae personae dotem vel ante nuptias donationem a parentibus suis sibi datam conferre nepotibus vel neptibus mortuae personae, quam eosdem nepotes vel neptes patruis suis aut avunculis, amitis etiam et materteris dotem et ante nuptias donationem patris sui vel matris, quam pro eo vel ea mortua persona dedit, similiter conferre, ut commixtis huiusmodi collationibus cum bonis mortuae personae duas quidem partes nepotes vel neptes habeant illius portionis, quae patri vel matri eorum, si superesset, deferebatur, tertiam vero eiusdem portionis partem una cum sibi competentibus portionibus filii vel filiae defunctae personae, cuius de hereditate agitur, capiant. <a 528 d. k. iun. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. ii cons.>
Therefore, cutting off such a subtle doubt, we order both that the sons or daughters of the deceased person collate to the grandsons or granddaughters of the deceased the dowry or the donation before the nuptials that was given to them by their parents, and that those same grandsons or granddaughters similarly collate to their paternal uncles or maternal uncles, and also to aunts on the father’s side and on the mother’s side, the dowry and the donation before the nuptials of their father or mother, which the deceased person gave on account of him or her, so that, these kinds of collations being mingled with the goods of the deceased person, the grandsons or granddaughters may have two parts of that portion which would be conveyed to their father or mother, if he or she were surviving, while the third part of the same portion they shall take, together with the portions competent to the son or daughter of the deceased person whose inheritance is in question. <a 528 on the Kalends of June at Constantinople, under our lord Justinian, Augustus, in his 2nd consulship.>
Illud sine ratione a quibusdam in dubietatem deductum plana sanctione revelamus, ut omnia, quae in quarta portione ab intestato successionis computantur his, qui ad actionem de inofficioso testamento vocantur, etiam si intestatus is decesserit, ad cuius hereditatem veniunt, omnimodo coheredibus suis conferant. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 529 d. viii id. aug.
We reveal by a plain sanction that point which, without reason, has been brought into doubt by some: that all things which, in the fourth portion of intestate succession, are computed for those who are called to the action concerning an inofficious testament, even if the person to whose inheritance they come has died intestate, they shall in every way collate to their coheirs. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 529 d. viii id. aug.
Quod tam in aliis quam in his, quae occasione militiae uni heredum ex defuncti pecuniis adquisitae lucratur is qui militiam meruit, locum habebit, ut lucrum, quod tempore mortis defuncti ab eum pervenire poterat, non solum testamento condito quartae parti ab intestato successionis computetur, sed etiam ab intestato conferatur. <a 529 d. viii id. aug. constantinopoli decio vc. cons.
This will have place as much in other cases as in those in which, by reason of military service, acquisitions made out of the deceased’s monies to one of the heirs are profited by the one who has served, namely that the lucre which at the time of the deceased’s death could have come to him is not only, a testament having been made, computed into the fourth part of succession ab intestato, but is also conferred under intestacy. <a 529 dated on the 8th day before the Ides of August, at Constantinople, in the consulship of Decius, a most distinguished man.
Haec autem regula, ut omnia quae portioni quartae computantur etiam ab intestato conferantur, minime e contrario tenebit, ut possit quis dicere etiam illa quae conferuntur omnimodo in quartam partem his computari, qui ad de inofficioso querellam vocantur: ea enim tantummodo ex his quae conferuntur memoratae portioni computabuntur, pro quibus specialiter legibus, ut hoc fieret, expressum est. <a 529 d. viii id. aug. constantinopoli decio vc. cons.
But this rule, that all things which are computed toward the fourth portion are also to be conferred from an intestate estate, will by no means hold conversely, so that someone could say that even those things which are contributed are in every way to be computed into the fourth part for those who are summoned to a de inofficioso complaint: for only those things out of what is contributed will be computed to the aforementioned portion, for which it has been expressly set forth by the laws that this be done. <a 529 on the 8th day before the Ides of August, at constantinople, decius, a most distinguished man, consul.
Ad haec, cum ante nuptias donatio vel dos a patre data vel matre vel aliis parentibus pro filio vel filia, nepote vel nepte ceterisque descendentibus conferatur, si unus quidem vel una liberorum ante nuptias tantummodo donationem vel dotem, non etiam simplicem donationem accepit vel acceperit, alter vero vel altera neque dotem neque donationem ante nuptias a parente suo suscepit vel susceperit, sed simplicem tantummodo donationem, ne ex eo iniustum aliquid oriatur, ea quidem persona, quae ante nuptias donationem vel dotem suscepit, conferre eam cogenda, illa vero, quae simplicem tantummodo donationem meruit, ad collationem eius minime coartanda: si quid huiusmodi accidit vel acciderit, iubemus ad similitu dinem eius, qui ante nuptias donationem vel dotem conferre cogitur, etiam illam personam, quae nulla dote vel ante nuptias donatione data solam simplicem donationem a parentibus suis accepit, conferre eam nec recusare collationem eo, quod simplex donatio non aliter confertur, nisi huiusmodi legem donator tempore donationis suae indulgentiae imposuerit. <a 529 d. viii id. aug. constantinopoli decio vc. cons.
To this, when an ante-nuptial donation or a dowry given by the father or mother or other parents on behalf of a son or daughter, grandson or granddaughter, and the other descendants is to be brought into collation: if one of the children before marriage has received only an ante-nuptial donation or dowry, and not also a simple donation, but another has received neither dowry nor ante-nuptial donation from his or her parent, but only a simple donation—lest something unjust arise from this—the person who received the ante-nuptial donation or dowry is to be compelled to collate it, but the one who merited only a simple donation is by no means to be constrained to its collation. If anything of this sort has happened or shall happen, we order, in likeness to the one who is compelled to collate the ante-nuptial donation or dowry, that even that person who, with no dowry or ante-nuptial donation having been given, received only a simple donation from his or her parents, shall collate it, and shall not refuse collation on the ground that a simple donation is not otherwise collated unless the donor, at the time of his donation, imposed such a condition upon his liberality. <a 529 on the 8th day before the Ides of August, at Constantinople, under Decius, a most distinguished man, consul.
Ut nemini super collatione de cetero dubietas oriatur, necessarium duximus constitutioni, quam iam favore liberorum fecimus, hoc addere, ut res, quas parentibus adquirendas esse prohibuimus, nec collationi post obitum eorum inter liberos subiaceant. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 532 d.Xv k.Nov.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.Anno secundo.>
So that no one hereafter may have doubt concerning collation, we have deemed it necessary to add this to the constitution which we have already made in favor of children: that the things which we have prohibited from being acquired for parents shall not be subject to collation among the children after their death. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 532, on the 15th day before the Kalends of November. Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls. In the second year.>
Ut enim castrense peculium in communi conferre in hereditate dividenda ex prisci iuris auctoritate minime cogebantur, ita et alias res, quae minime parentibus adquiruntur, proprias liberis manere censemus. <a 532 d.Xv k.Nov.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.Anno secundo.>
For just as they were by no means compelled, by the authority of the ancient law, to contribute the military peculium to the common fund upon the division of an inheritance, so also we deem that other things which are by no means acquired for the parents remain proper to the children. <a 532 d.15 k.Nov.Lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.Anno secundo.>
Frater tuus miles si te specialiter bonis quae in paganico habebat heredem fecit , bona quae in castris reliquit petere non potes, etiamsi is qui eorum heres institutus est adire ea noluerit: sed ab intestato succedentes veniunt, modo si in eius loco substitutus non est et liquido probatur fratrem tuum castrensia bona ad te pertinere noluisse. nam voluntas militis expeditione occupati pro iure servatur. * ant.
If your brother, a soldier, specifically made you heir to the goods which he had in paganic (civilian) life , you cannot claim the goods which he left in the camp , even if the one who was instituted heir of them has been unwilling to enter upon them : but those who succeed ab intestato come in , provided that no substitute was appointed in his place and it is clearly proven that your brother did not wish the castrensian (camp) goods to pertain to you. For the will (intention) of a soldier occupied on expedition is observed in place of law. * ant.
Miles si castrensium tantummodo bonorum commilitonem suum instituit heredem, cetera bona eius ut intestati defuncti mater eius iure possedit. quod si extraneum scripsit heredem isque adiit hereditatem, bona eius in te transferri non iure desideras. * ant.
If a soldier appointed his fellow-soldier as heir only of the camp-goods, his remaining goods his mother lawfully possessed as of one deceased intestate. But if he wrote an outsider as heir and he entered upon the inheritance, you seek that his goods be transferred to you contrary to law. * Antoninus.
Quamquam militum testamenta iuris vinculis non subiciantur, cum propter simplicitatem militarem quomodo velint et quomodo possint ea facere his concedatur, tamen in valeriani quondam centurionis testamento institutio etiam iure communi accepit auctoritatem. * ant. a. vindiciano.
Although the testaments of soldiers are not subjected to the bonds of law, since on account of military simplicity it is granted to them to make them as they wish and as they can, nevertheless in the testament of Valerianus, once a centurion, the heir‑institution even under the common law received authority. * Antoninus Augustus to Vindicianus.
Nam cum pater familias filiam ex duabus unciis, uxorem ex uncia heredem scripserit nec de residuis portionibus quicquam significaverit, in tres partes divisisse eum apparet hereditatem, ut duas habeat quae sextantem accepit, tertiam quae ex uncia est heres instituta. <a 213 pp.K.Nov.Antonino a.Iiii et balbino conss.>
For when a paterfamilias has written his daughter as heir for two unciae and his wife for one uncia, and has indicated nothing about the remaining portions, it appears that he divided the inheritance into three parts: that the one who received a sextans should have two, and the third to her who was instituted heir for one uncia. <a 213 pp.K.Nov.Antonino a.4 et balbino conss.>
Quod si idem testator causam manumittendi te habuit, quae probabilis vivo manumittente consilio futura esset, quia per fideicommissum data libertas a quolibet minore annis ei, cuius causa probari potuit, praestari debet, et ex testamento militis eiusmodi servis iustam libertatem competere consequens est. <a 222 pp.Xvi k.Dec.Alexandro a.Cons.>
But if the same testator had a cause for manumitting you, which would be probable in the counsel of the manumitter were he alive, since liberty given by fideicommiss to anyone a minor in years ought to be afforded to him whose cause could be approved, it follows that from the testament of a soldier just liberty is competent to slaves of this sort. <a 222 pp.16 k.Dec.Alexander a.Cons.>
Ex testamento militis, sive adhuc in militia sive intra annum missus honeste decessit, hereditas et legata omnibus quibus relicta sunt debentur, quia inter cetera, quae militibus concessa sunt, liberum arbitrium quibus velint relinquendi supremis suis concessum est, nisi lex specialiter eos prohibuerit. * alex. a. sozomeno.
From the will of a soldier, whether he died while still in military service or, having been honorably discharged, within a year, the inheritance and legacies are owed to all to whom they were left, because among the other things that have been conceded to soldiers, a free discretion of bequeathing their last dispositions to whom they wish has been granted, unless a law has specially prohibited them. * Alexander Augustus to Sozomenus.
In testamento quidem eius, qui non miles fuit, si duobus heredibus institutis, altero, cui potuit usque ad tempus pubertatis parens facere testamentum, altero, cui posteaquam heres extitit substituere non potuit, invicem substitutio eisdem verbis facta esset, in eum solum casum eam locum habere et sententiis prudentium virorum et constitutionibus divorum parentium meorum placet, quo utrique pari ratione potuit substitui. * alex. a. valenti.
In the testament, indeed, of one who was not a soldier, if, two heirs having been instituted—one for whom a parent could make a testament up to the time of puberty, the other for whom, after he had become heir, he could not make a substitution—a reciprocal substitution with the same words had been made, it is my pleasure, both by the opinions of prudent men and by the constitutions of my deified parents, that it have effect only in that case in which a substitution could be made for each on equal terms. * alexander augustus to valens.
Sed cum ex testamento militis controversiam esse proponas, defuncta parvula eius filia, posteaquam heres extitit patri, cum qua simul aequis partibus heres institutus eras substitutione invicem facta, et mater quidem intestatae filiae sibi successionem defendat, tu autem ex substitutione ad te pertinere contendas, iuris quidem ratio manifesta est licere militibus proprio privilegio etiam heredibus extraneis, posteaquam heredes extiterint, mortuis substituere. <a 225 pp. xii k. mai. fusco et dextro conss.>
But since you propose that there is a controversy arising from the testament of a soldier—his little daughter having died after she had become heir to her father, with whom at the same time you had been instituted heir in equal parts, a reciprocal substitution having been made—and while the mother indeed asserts for herself the succession of the intestate daughter, you, however, contend that by virtue of the substitution it pertains to you, the rationale of the law is manifest: by their own privilege it is permitted to soldiers to appoint substitutes even for extraneous heirs, after they have become heirs, in the event of their death. <in the year 225, on the 12th day before the Kalends of May, under the consuls Fuscus and Dexter.>
At enim cum testatorem militem fuisse proponas, si non errore ductus libertum te credidit, sed dandae libertatis animum habuit, libertatem, et quidem directam, competere tibi, sed et legati vindicationem habere praerogativa militaris privilegii praestat. <a 229 pp. xii k. iul. alexandro a. iii et dione conss.>
But indeed, since you allege that the testator was a soldier, if he did not, led by error, believe you to be a freedman, but had the intention of granting liberty, liberty—and indeed direct—belongs to you; and the prerogative of the military privilege also affords the vindication of the legacy. <a 229 twelve days before the Kalends of July, alexander augustus 3 and dio, consuls.>
Sicut certi iuris est militem, qui scit se filium habere aliosque scripsit heredes, tacite eum exheredare intellegi, ita si ignorans se filium habere alios scribat heredes, non esse filio ademptam hereditatem, sed minime valente testamento, si sit in potestate, eum ad successionem venire in dubiis non habetur. * gord. a. valerio.
Just as it is of settled law that a soldier, who knows that he has a son and has written others as heirs, is understood to have tacitly disinherited him, so, if, being unaware that he has a son, he writes others as heirs, the inheritance is not taken away from the son, but with the testament in no way valid, if he is under paternal power, it is not held in doubt that he comes to the succession. * gordian augustus to valerius.
Si, cum vel in utero haberetur filia inscio patre milite, ab eo praeterita sit, vel cum in rebus humanis eam non esse falso rumore prolato pater putavit, nullam eius testamento fecit mentionem, silentium huiusmodi exheredationis notam nequaquam infligit. * philipp. a. et philipp.
If, when a daughter was being held in the womb, the father, a soldier and unaware, passed her over; or if, when a false rumor had been spread that she was not among human affairs (i.e., not among the living), the father supposed this and made no mention of her in his testament, silence of this kind by no means inflicts the note of disinheritance. * philip, the augustus, and philip.
Si a fratre suo militante mater vestra scripta heres successionem eius sibi quaesiit, quamvis testamenti scriptura non continet iuris observationem, hanc hereditatem fratrem testatoris vel eius filios ab intestato evincere non potuisse iure constitit. * diocl. et maxim.
If, from her brother who was on military service, your mother, designated in writing as heir, sought his succession for herself, although the testamentary writing does not contain observance of the law, it is established in law that the testator’s brother or his sons could not have prevailed to recover this inheritance on intestacy. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Milites in expeditione degentes, si uxores aut filios aut amicos aut commilitones suos, postremo cuiuslibet generis homines amplecti voluerint supremae voluntatis adfectu, quomodo possint ac velint testentur, nec uxorum aut filiorum eorum , cum voluntatem patris reportaverunt, meritum aut libertas dignitasque quaeratur. * constant. a. ad pop.
Soldiers dwelling on campaign, if they should wish to embrace by the impulse of a supreme (last) will their wives or sons or friends or their fellow-soldiers—finally people of whatever kind—let them declare how they can and wish; nor, when they have brought back the father’s will, let the merit or the freedom and rank of their wives or children be inquired. * constantine augustus to the people.
Proinde sicut iuris rationibus licuit ac semper licebit, si quid in vagina aut in clipeo litteris sanguine suo rutilantibus adnotaverint, aut in pulvere inscripserint gladio sub ipso tempore, quo in proelio vitae sortem derelinquunt, huiusmodi voluntatem stabilem esse oportet. <a 334 d.Iii id.Aug.Nicomediae optato et apulino conss.>
Therefore, just as by the reasons of law it has been permitted and will always be permitted, if they have noted anything on a scabbard or on a shield in letters glowing red with their own blood, or have inscribed it in the dust with a sword at the very moment when, in battle, they abandon the lot of life, such a will ought to be valid. <a 334 on the 3rd day before the Ides of August, at Nicomedia, under Optatus and Apulinus as consuls.>
Scriniarios vel apparitores, qui virorum magnificorum magistrorum militum iussionibus vel actibus obtemperant, etsi nomina eorum matriculis militaribus referri videantur, nullatenus in ultimis a se conficiendis voluntatibus iuris militaris habere facultatem decernimus. * anastas. a. hierio pp. * <a 496 d.Id.Febr.Constantinopoli paulo vc. cons.>
We decree that scriniarii or apparitors, who obey the commands or acts of the most magnificent Masters of the Soldiers, even if their names seem to be entered on the military rolls, shall in no way have the privilege of military law in the last wills to be drawn up by themselves. * anastasius augustus to hierius, praetorian prefect. * <a 496 d.Id.Febr.Constantinopoli paulo vc. cons.>
Ne quidam putarent in omni tempore licere militibus testamenta quomodo voluerint componere, sancimus his solis, qui in expeditionibus occupati sunt, memoratum indulgeri circa ultimas voluntates conficiendas beneficium. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 529 d.Iiii id.April.Constantinopoli decio vc. cons.>
Lest certain people think that at every time it is permitted for soldiers to compose testaments however they wish, we sanction that to those alone who are occupied on expeditions the aforementioned benefit be granted with respect to composing last wills. * Just. Aug. to Mena, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 529, on the 4th day before the Ides of April, at Constantinople, Decius, a most distinguished man, consul.>
Licet antiquis legibus permittebatur pupillis, si tribunatum numeri mereantur, ultimum elogium conficere posse, attamen indignum nostris temporibus esse videtur eum, qui stabilem mentem nondum adeptus est, propter privilegia militum sapientium hominum iura pertractare et in tenera aetate ex tali licentia parentibus forte suis vel aliis propinquis nocere propriam substantiam extraneis relinquentem. ideoque hoc fieri nullo modo concedimus. * iust.
Although by ancient laws it was permitted to wards, if they should merit the tribunate of a regiment, to be able to draw up a final testament, nevertheless it seems unworthy of our times that someone who has not yet attained a stable mind, by reason of the privileges of soldiers, should handle the laws of wise men, and, in tender age, by such license, perhaps harm his own parents or other relatives, leaving his own property to outsiders. Therefore we in no way permit this to be done. * iust.
Si is, qui tecum uxorem tuam heredem scripsit, quando testamentum ordinavit, sanae mentis fuerit nec postea alicuius sceleris conscientia obstrictus, sed aut impatiens doloris aut aliqua furoris rabie constrictus se praecipitem dedit, eiusque innocentia liquidis probationibus commendari potest a te, adscitae mortis obtentu postremum eius iudicium convelli non debet. * diocl. et maxim.
If he who, together with you, appointed your wife heir, when he drew up the testament, was of sound mind and was not afterward bound by the conscience of any crime, but, either impatient of pain or constrained by some frenzy of madness, cast himself headlong, and his innocence can be established by you with clear proofs, his final judgment ought not to be rescinded on the pretext of a self-chosen death. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Eunuchis liceat facere testamentum, componere postremas exemplo omnium voluntates, conscribere codicillos salva testamentorum observantia. * constantius a. ad rufinum pp. * <a 352 d. v k. mart. sirmi constantio a. v et constantio c. conss.>
Let eunuchs be allowed to make a testament, to compose last wills on the model of all, to write codicils, with the observance of testaments preserved. * Constantius Augustus to Rufinus, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 352 given on the 5th day before the Kalends of March, at Sirmium, in the consulship of Constantius Augustus for the 5th time and Constantius Caesar.>
Si quis imperatorem forte heredem instituerit, habeat mutandi iudicii facultatem , et quemcumque voluerit secundum leges in testamento suo heredem scribendi. * constantius a. ad volusianum pu. * <a 355 d. xii k. mart. mediolani arbitione et lolliano conss.>
If anyone should by chance have appointed the emperor as heir, let him have the faculty of changing his judgment , and of writing in his testament as heir whomever he wishes according to the laws. * constantius augustus to volusianus, urban prefect. * <a 355 on the 12th day before the kalends of march, at milan, arbitio and lollianus, consuls.>
Cum heredes instituuntur imperator seu augusta, ius commune cum ceteris habeant: quod et in codicillis vel fideicommissariis epistulis iure scriptis observandum erit. et sicuti priscis legibus cautum est, imperatori quoque vel augustae testamentum facere liceat et mutare. * valentin.
When the emperor or the Augusta are instituted as heirs, let them have the common law along with the others: which likewise must be observed in codicils or in fideicommissary letters written according to law. And just as it has been provided by ancient laws, let it be permitted also to the emperor or to the Augusta to make and to change a testament. * valentin.
Hac consultissima lege sancimus, ut carentes oculis seu morbo vel ita nati per nuncupationem suae condant moderamina voluntatis, praesentibus septem testibus, quos aliis quoque testamentis interesse iuris est, tabulario etiam: ut cunctis ibidem collectis primum ad se convocatos omnes, ut sine scriptis testentur, edoceat, deinde exprimat nomina specialiter heredum et dignitates singulorum et indicia, ne sola nominum commemoratio quicquam ambiguitatis pariat, et ex quanta parte vel ex quotis unciis in successionem admitti debeant et quod unumquemque legatarium seu fideicommissarium adsequi velit: omnia denique palam edicat, quae ultimarum capit dispositionum series lege concessa. * iustinus a. demostheni p p. * <a 521 d. k. iun. constantinopoli iustiniano et valerio conss.>
By this most prudent law we sanction that those lacking eyes either by disease or born thus may by nuncupation settle the governance of their will, with seven witnesses present—whom it is the law also to be present at other testaments—and with the tabularius as well: so that, when all have been gathered there, first he instruct all whom he has summoned to himself to testify without writings; then let him specify in particular the names of the heirs and the dignities of each and identifying marks, lest the mere mention of names produce any ambiguity; and from how large a share or by how many ounces they ought to be admitted into the succession; and what he wishes each legatee or fideicommissary to obtain: finally, let him openly declare all things which the series of final dispositions permitted by law comprises. * Justinus Augustus to Demosthenes, Praetorian Prefect. * <at Constantinople on the Kalends of June in the year 521, in the consulship of Justinian and Valerius.>
Quibus omnibus ex ordine peroratis uno eodemque loco et tempore, sed et tabularii manu conscriptis sub obtentu septem ( ut dictum est) testium et eorundem testium manu subscriptis, dehinc consignatis tam ab isdem testibus quam a tabulario , plenum obtinebit robur testantis arbitrium. <a 521 d. k. iun. constantinopoli iustiniano et valerio conss.>
When all these things have been set forth in order in one and the same place and time, and moreover written by the hand of the record-keeper under the attendance of seven ( as has been said) witnesses and subscribed by the hand of those same witnesses, then, once they have been sealed both by those same witnesses and by the record-keeper , the testator’s determination will obtain full force. <a 521 on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, in the consulship of Justinian and Valerius.>
( 1) at cum humana fragilitas mortis praecipue cogitatione turbata minus memoria possit res plures consequi, patebit eis licentia voluntatem suam sive in testamenti vel in codicilli tenore compositam cui velint scribendam credere, ut in eodem postea collocatis testibus et tabulario, re etiam ( ut dictum est) patefacta, cuius causa convocati sunt, et chartula prometur, quam susceptam testatori recitabit tabularius simul et testibus, ut, ubi tenor eorum cunctis innotuerit, elogium ipse suum profiteatur agnoscere et ex animi sui quae lecta sunt disposuisse sententia, et in fine subscriptio sequatur testium nec non omnium signacula tam testium ( prout dictum est) quam tabularii. <a 521 d. k. iun. constantinopo li iustiniano et valerio conss.>
( 1) but since human frailty, disturbed especially by the thought of death, can with diminished memory less readily keep track of many matters, there shall be open to them the license to entrust their will—whether composed in the tenor of a testament or of a codicil—to whomever they wish for writing, so that in the same place thereafter, with the witnesses and the notary assembled, the matter also ( ut dictum est) laid open, for the sake of which they have been convened, a paper slip be produced, which, once taken up, the notary shall recite to the testator and likewise to the witnesses, so that, when its tenor has become known to all, he himself may profess that he acknowledges his own written declaration and that he has disposed what has been read by the judgment of his own mind, and in the end let the subscription of the witnesses follow, and also the seals of all, both of the witnesses ( prout dictum est) and of the notary. <a 521 d. k. iun. constantinopo li iustiniano et valerio conss.>
Sed quia tabulariorum copia non in omnibus locis datur quaerentibus, iubemus, ubi tabularius reperiri non possit, octavum adhiberi testem, ut, quod tabulario pro supra dicto modo commisimus, id per octavum testem effectum capiat: libera potestate concedenda suas voluntates in praedictum modum ordinantibus chartulam ita subscriptam, ita denique consignatam, ut antelatae formae declarant, cui velint ex testibus custodiendam mandare. sic fieri namque confidimus, ut non recipiat se tantum in caecis testandi licentia, sed ne locum quidem ullum relinquat insidiis tot oculis spectata, tot insinuata sensibus, tot insuper in tuto locata manibus. <a 521 d. k. iun.
But because a supply of notaries is not afforded in all places to those seeking them, we order that, where a notary cannot be found, an eighth witness be employed, so that what we have entrusted to the notary according to the above-mentioned mode may take effect through the eighth witness: with free authority being granted to those arranging their wills in the aforesaid manner to entrust for safekeeping to whichever of the witnesses they wish the paper thus subscribed, thus finally sealed, as the aforesaid forms declare. For we are confident that it will thus be done, that the license of testating will not hide itself in obscurities, but will leave no place at all for ambushes, being seen by so many eyes, insinuated to so many senses, and moreover placed in safety in so many hands. <a 521 d. k. iun.
Furiosum in suis indutiis ultimum condere elogium posse, licet ab antiquis dubitabatur, tamen et retro principibus et nobis placuit: nunc autem hoc decidendum est, quod simili modo antiquos animos movit, si coepto testamento furor eum invasit. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 530 d. k. sept.
That a madman, in his own lucid intervals, can compose his last will, although it was doubted by the ancients, nevertheless has pleased both former emperors and us: now, however, this must be decided, which in like manner moved the minds of the ancients, if, after the will has been begun, madness seized him. * Justinian Augustus to Julian, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 530 the day before the Kalends of September.
Sancimus itaque tale testamentum hominis, qui in ipso actu testamenti adversa valetudine tentus est, pro nihilo esse. sin vero voluerit in dilucidis intervallis aliquod condere testamentum vel ultimam voluntatem et hoc sana mente et inceperit facere et consummaverit nullo tali morbo interveniente, stare testamentum sive quamcumque ultimam voluntatem censemus, si et alia omnia accesserint, quae in huiusmodi actibus legitima observatio sequitur. <a 530 d. k. sept.
We therefore ordain that the testament of a man who, in the very act of making a testament, is seized by adverse ill-health, is to be null. But if he should wish, in lucid intervals, to make some testament or last will, and this with a sound mind, and both has begun to do and has completed it with no such disease intervening, we judge the testament or whatever last will to stand, if also all the other things are present which lawful observance requires in acts of this kind. <in the year 530, on the Kalends of September.
Discretis surdo et muto, quia non semper huiusmodi vitia sibi concurrunt, sancimus, si quis utroque morbo simul laborat, id est ut neque audire neque loqui possit, et hoc ex ipsa natura habeat, neque testamentum facere neque codicillos neque fideicommissum relinquere neque mortis causa donationem celebrare concedatur nec libertatem sive vindicta sive alio modo imponere: eidem legi tam masculos quam feminas oboedire imperantes. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 531 d. x k. mart.
Distinguishing the deaf person and the mute person, since defects of this kind do not always concur in the same person, we sanction that, if anyone suffers at the same time from both diseases, that is, so that he can neither hear nor speak, and has this from nature itself, it shall not be permitted to make a testament or codicils or to leave a fideicommissum or to celebrate a donation mortis causa, nor to impose liberty either by the vindicta or by any other mode: ordering that both males and females obey the same law. * Justinian Augustus to Julian, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 on the 10th day before the Kalends of March.
Ubi autem et in huiusmodi vitiis non naturalis sive masculo sive feminae accedit calamitas, sed morbus postea superveniens et vocem abstulit et aures conclusit, si ponamus huiusmodi personam litteras scientem, omnia, quae priori interdiximus, haec ei sua manu scribenti permittimus. <a 531 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But where, moreover, in defects of this sort the calamity is not natural to either a male or a female, but a disease afterwards supervening has both taken away the voice and closed the ears, if we suppose a person of this kind to know letters, all the things which we interdicted previously, these we permit to one writing with his own hand. <a 531, on the 10 Kalends of March, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most illustrious men.>
( 1) sin autem infortunium discretum est, quod ita raro contingit, et surdis, licet naturaliter huiusmodi sensus variatus est, tamen omnia facere et in testamentis et in codicillis et in mortis causa donationibus et in libertatibus et in aliis omnibus permittimus. <a 531 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
( 1) but if the misfortune is distinct, which so rarely occurs, then for the deaf, although by nature this sense is altered, nevertheless we permit them to do everything, both in testaments and in codicils and in donations mortis causa and in manumissions and in all other things. <a given at Constantinople on the 10th day before the Kalends of March, 531, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most illustrious men.>
Si enim vox articulata ei a natura concessa est, nihil prohibet eum omnia quae voluit facere, quia scimus quosdam iuris peritos et hoc subtilius cogitasse et nullum esse exposuisse, qui penitus non exaudit, si quis supra cerebrum illius loquatur, secundum quod iuventio celso placuit. <a 531 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
For if an articulated voice has been granted to him by nature, nothing prevents him from doing all that he wished, since we know that certain jurists have considered this too more subtly and have set forth that there is no one who does not hear at all, if someone should speak above his brain, according to what pleased Juventius Celsus. <a 531 on the 10th day before the Kalends of March, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
In eo autem, cui morbus superveniens auditum tantummodo abstulit, nec dubitari potest, quin possit omnia sine aliquo obstaculo facere. <a 531 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But in the case of one upon whom a supervening illness has taken away hearing only, it cannot be doubted that he is able to do everything without any obstacle. <a 531 on the 10th day before the Kalends of March, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men>
Sin vero aures quidem apertae sint et vocem recipientes, lingua autem penitus praepedita, licet a veteribus auctoribus saepius de hoc variatum est, attamen si et hunc peritum litterarum esse proponamus, nihil prohibet et eum scribentem omnia facere, sive naturaliter sive per interventum morbi huiusmodi infortunium ei accessit. <a 531 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if indeed the ears are open and receiving the voice, while the tongue is thoroughly impeded, although the ancient authorities have often varied on this point, nevertheless, if we suppose this man too to be skilled in letters, nothing prevents even him from doing everything by writing, whether this kind of misfortune has come to him naturally or through the intervention of disease. <in the year 531, on the tenth day before the Kalends of March, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most illustrious men.>
Nemo ex lege, quam nuper promulgavimus, in rebus, quae parentibus adquiri non possunt, existimet aliquid esse innovandum, et permissum fuisse filiis familias cuiuscumque gradus vel sexus testamenta facere, sive sine patris consensu bona possideant secundum nostrae legis distinctionem, sive cum eorum voluntate. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. iiii k. aug.
Let no one, from the law which we recently promulgated, suppose that in matters which cannot accrue to parents anything is to be innovated, or that it has been permitted to filii familias (children under paternal power) of whatever rank or sex to make testaments, whether they possess goods without the father’s consent according to the distinction of our law, or with their will. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 d. 4 k. aug.
Nullo etenim modo hoc eis permittimus, sed antiqua lex per omnia conservetur, quae filiis familias nisi in casibus certis testamenta facere nullo concedit modo , et in his personis, quae huiusmodi facultatem habere iam concessae sunt. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
For in no way do we permit this to them; rather, let the ancient law be preserved in all respects, which concedes in no way to sons under paternal power to make testaments except in certain cases, and in the case of those persons who have already been granted to have such a faculty. <year 531, on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Omnes omnino, quibus quasi castrensia peculia habere ex legibus concessum est, habeant licentiam in ea tantummodo ultimas voluntates condere secundum nostrae constitutionis tenorem, quae talibus testamentis de inofficiosi querella immunitatem praestavit. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. k. sept.
Absolutely all, to whom it has been conceded by the laws to have quasi-castrense peculia, shall have license to make last wills in these only, according to the tenor of our constitution, which has afforded to such testaments immunity from the inofficious complaint. * Justinian Augustus to John, praetorian prefect. * <in the year 531, on the Kalends of September.
Testes servi an liberi fuerunt, non oportet in hac causa tractari, cum eo tempore, quo testamentum signabatur, omnium consensu liberorum loco habiti sunt nec quisquam eis usque adhuc status controversiam moverit. * hadr. a. catonio vero.
Whether the witnesses were slaves or free ought not to be handled in this case, since at the time when the testament was being signed, by the consensus of all they were held in the position of free men, nor has anyone up to now raised a controversy about their status. * Hadrian Augustus to Catonius Verus.
Errore scribentis testamentum iuris sollemnitas mutilari nequaquam potest, quando minus scriptum, plus nuncupatum videtur. et ideo recte testamento facto, quamquam desit " heres esto", consequens est existente herede legata sive fideicommissa iuxta voluntatem testatoris oportere dari. * diocl.
The legal solemnity of a testament cannot by any means be impaired by the error of the scribe, since, where less was written, more was nuncupated. And therefore, with the testament rightly made, although " let him be heir" is lacking, it follows that, an heir existing, legacies or fideicommissa ought to be given according to the will of the testator. * Diocletian.
Testes enim huiusmodi morbo oppresso eo tempore iungi atque sociari remissum est , non etiam conveniendi numeri eorum observatio sublata. <a 290 s. k. iul. ipsis iiii et iii aa. conss.>
For, in the case of one oppressed by such an illness, it has been relaxed that the witnesses be joined and associated at that time; but the observance of the number of those to be convened has not been removed. <in the year 290, on the Kalends of July, the emperors themselves being consuls for the 4th and 3rd time.>
De his autem, quae interleta sive supra scripta dicis, non ad iuris sollemnitatem, sed ad fidei pertinet quaestionem, ut appareat, utrum testatoris voluntate emendationem meruerunt, vel ab altero inconsulte deleta sunt, an ab aliquo falso haec fuerint commissa. <a 293 s. prid. non.
Concerning those things, however, which you say are interlined or written above, it pertains not to the solemnity of law, but to a question of good faith, so that it may appear whether, by the testator’s will, they merited emendation, or were injudiciously deleted by another, or whether these things were fraudulently committed by someone. <a 293 s. prid. non.
Quoniam indignum est ob inanem observationem irritas fieri tabulas et iudicia mortuorum, placuit ademptis his, quorum imaginarius usus est, institutioni heredis verborum non esse necessariam observantiam, utrum imperativis et directis verbis fiat an inflexa. * const. a. ad pop.
Since it is unworthy that, on account of empty observance, wills and the judgments of the dead be made void, it has pleased that, with those trappings removed whose use is imaginary, in the institution of an heir observance of the words is not necessary, whether it be done with imperative and direct words or with inflected ones. * a constitution addressed to the people.
Nec enim interest, si dicatur " heredem facio" vel " instituo" vel " volo" vel " mando" vel " cupio" vel " esto" vel " erit", sed quibuslibet confecta sententiis, quolibet loquendi genere formata institutio valeat, si modo per eam liquebit voluntatis intentio, nec necessaria sint momenta verborum, quae forte seminecis et balbutiens lingua profudit. <a 339 s. d. k. febr. laodiceae constantio a. ii et constante a. conss.>
For it makes no difference whether one says " heredem facio" or " instituo" or " volo" or " mando" or " cupio" or " esto" or " erit", but let the institution be valid, composed with any statements whatsoever, formed in whatever mode of speaking, provided only that through it the intention of the will is clear; nor are the niceties of words necessary, which perhaps a half-dead and stammering tongue has poured out. <in the year 339, on the sixth day before the Kalends of February, at Laodicea, under the consulship of Constantius, Augustus, for the 2nd time, and Constans, Augustus.>
Et in postremis ergo iudiciis ordinandis amota erit sollemnium sermonum necessitas, ut, qui facultates proprias cupiunt ordinare, in quacumque instrumenti materia conscribere et quibuscumque verbis uti liberam habeant facultatem. <a 339 s. d. k. febr. laodiceae constantio a. ii et constante a. conss.>
And therefore, in arranging last wills, the necessity of solemn words shall be removed, so that those who desire to order their own estates may have free liberty to write it up on whatever material of instrument and to use whatever words. <a 339 s. d. k. febr. laodiceae constantio a. ii et constante a. conss.>
Illud adiciendum est, ut, qui ex testamento vel ab intestato heres extiterit, etsi voluntas defuncti circa legata seu fideicommissa seu libertates legibus non sit subnixa, tamen, si sua sponte agnoverit, implendi eam necessitatem habeat. <a 380 s. d. k. iul. thessalonicae gratiano v et theodosio aa. conss.>
It is to be added that whoever has become heir either by testament or ab intestate, even if the will/intention of the deceased concerning legacies, or fideicommissa, or manumissions is not supported by the laws, nevertheless, if he has acknowledged it of his own accord, he shall have the necessity/obligation of fulfilling it. <a 380 on the Kalends of July, at Thessalonica, under the consuls Gratian (5) and Theodosius, Augusti.>
Testamenta omnia ceteraque, quae apud officium censuale publicari solent, in eodem reserventur nec usquam pemittatur fieri ulla translatio. mos namque retinendus est fidelissimae vetustatis, quem si quis in hac urbe voluerit immutare, irritam mortuorum videri faciet voluntatem. * arcad.
Let all testaments and the other things which are wont to be published at the censual office be kept in the same place, and let no transfer be permitted to be made anywhere. For the custom of most faithful antiquity is to be retained; and whoever shall have wished to alter it in this city will make the will of the dead appear void. * Arcadius.
Sicut igitur securus erit, qui actis cuiuscumque iudicis aut municipum aut auribus privatorum mentis suae postremum publicavit iudicium, ita nec de eius umquam successione tractabitur, qui nobis mediis et toto iure, quod nostris est scriniis constitutum, teste succedit. <a 413 d. xii k. mart. ravennae post consulatum honorii viiii et theodosii v aa.>
Thus, accordingly, he will be secure who has made public, in the acts of whatever judge or of the municipal authorities or to the ears of private persons, the final judgment of his mind; so neither will there ever be discussion about the succession of him who inherits with us mediating and with as witness the entire law that is established in our archives. <a 413 on the 12th day before the Kalends of March, at Ravenna, after the consulship of Honorius 9 and Theodosius 5, the Augusti.>
Nec sane illud heredibus nocere permittimus, si rescripta nostra nihil de eadem voluntate responderit. voluntates etenim hominum audire volumus, non iubere, ne post sententiam nostram inhibitum videatur commutationis arbitrium, cum hoc ipsum, quod per supplicationem nostris auribus intimatur, ita demum firmum sit, si ultimum comprobatur nec contra iudicium suum defunctus postea venisse detegitur. <a 413 d. xii k. mart.
Nor indeed do we permit that to harm the heirs, if our rescripts have made no reply about that same will. For we desire to hear the wills of men, not to command, lest after our sentence the discretion of change seem inhibited, since this very thing which is intimated to our ears by a supplication is only then firm, if the final one is approved and the deceased is not afterward detected to have come contrary to his own judgment. <a 413 d. 12 k. mart.
Ne quid sane praetermisisse credamur huiusmodi institutionis successoribus designatis, omnia quae scriptis heredibus competunt iubemus eos habere nec super bonorum possessionis petitione ullam controversiam nasci, cum pro herede agere cuncta sufficiat et ius omne ipsa complere aditio videatur. <a 413 d. xii k. mart. ravennae post consulatum honorii viiii et theodosii v aa.>
Lest indeed we be thought to have omitted anything for the successors designated by an institution of this kind, we order that they have everything which pertains to heirs instituted in writings, and that no controversy arise over the petition for possession of goods, since it suffices to act as heir in all respects, and the very entry upon the inheritance appears to complete the whole right. <in 413, on 18 February, at Ravenna, after the consulship of Honorius 9 and Theodosius 5, Augusti.>
Omnibus etenim praestandum esse censemus, ut libero arbitrio, cui testandi facultas suppetit, successorem suum oblatis possit precibus declarare et stabile sciat esse quod fecerit, nec institutus heres pertimescat, cum oblatas preces secundum voluntatem defuncti idoneis possit testibus approbare, si ei alia nocere non possunt. <a 413 d. xii k. mart. ravennae post consulatum honorii viiii et theodosii v aa.>
For we judge that provision must be afforded to all, so that, with free choice—whenever the faculty of testating is at hand—one may be able to declare his successor by petitions presented, and may know that what he has done is stable; nor need the instituted heir be afraid, since he can approve the petitions presented, in accordance with the will of the deceased, by suitable witnesses, if other things cannot harm him. <a 413 on the twelfth day before the kalends of march, at ravenna, after the consulship of honorius 9 and theodosius 5, emperors.>
Omnibus enim privatis et militantibus interdicimus, ut huiusmodi perhibeant testimonia, et falsi criminis reos teneri praecipimus, si, cum scriptae iure ac sollemniter deficientium extiterint voluntates, non scriptum aliquid sub nostrorum nominum mentione falso adstruere moliantur. <a 416 d. iiii id. mart. constantinopoli theodosio a. vii et palladio conss.>
For we interdict all private persons and those serving in the military from giving testimonies of this kind, and we command that they be held guilty of the crime of falsum, if, when the wills of the deceased have appeared in writing according to law and with due solemnity, they attempt to adduce something not written by a false mention of our names. <a 416, day 4 before the Ides of March, at Constantinople, Theodosius, Augustus, 7, and Palladius, consuls.>
Nemo itaque relictus heres vel legibus ad successionem vocatus nostrum vel potentium nomen horrescat: nemo ferre testimonia in hunc modum vel suscipere gestis huiusmodi voces audeat nostro vel etiam privatorum potentium nomine. <a 416 d. iiii id. mart. constantinopoli theodosio a. vii et palladio conss.>
Therefore let no one who has been left as heir or who is called by the laws to succession shudder at our name or the name of the powerful: let no one dare to bear testimonies in this manner or to receive into the gesta words of this kind in our name or even in the name of powerful private persons. <a 416, on the 4th day before the Ides of March, at Constantinople, in the consulship of Theodosius Augustus 7 and Palladius, consuls.>
Hac consultissima lege sancimus licere per scripturam conficientibus testamentum , si nullum scire volunt quae in eo scripta sunt, signatam vel ligatam vel tantum clausulam involutamque proferre scripturam vel ipsius testatoris vel cuiuslibet alterius manu conscriptam, eamque rogatis testibus septem numero civibus romanis puberibus omnibus simul offerre signandam et subscribendam, dum tamen testibus praesentibus testator suum esse testamentum dixerit quod offertur eique ipse coram testibus sua manu in reliqua parte testamenti subscripserit: quo facto et testibus uno eodemque die ac tempore subscribentibus et consignantibus valere testamentum nec ideo infirmari, quod testes nesciant quae in eo scripta sunt testamento. * theodos. et valentin.
By this most well-advised law we sanction that it is permitted, by writing, to those completing a testament , if they wish that no one know the things which are written in it, to produce a document sealed or tied or only closed and wrapped, written by the hand either of the testator himself or of any other person, and to present it, the witnesses having been requested, to be signed and subscribed by witnesses, seven in number, all Roman citizens of full age, all together, provided, however, that with the witnesses present the testator shall have said that the testament which is offered is his, and that he himself, before the witnesses, shall have subscribed with his own hand in the remaining part of the testament: this having been done, and the witnesses subscribing and sealing on one and the same day and at the same time, the testament is valid and is not for that reason invalidated, because the witnesses do not know the things which are written in that testament. * theodosius and valentinian.
In omnibus autem testamentis, quae praesentibus vel absentibus testibus dictantur, superfluum est uno eodemque tempore exigere testatorem et testes adhibere et dictare suum arbitrium et finire testamentum. sed licet alio tempore dictatum scriptumve proferatur testamentum, sufficiet uno eodemque die nullo actu interveniente testes omnes, videlicet simul nec diversis temporibus, subscribere signareque testamentum. <a 439 d. prid.
In all testaments, moreover, which are dictated with witnesses present or absent, it is superfluous at one and the same time to require the testator, to bring in the witnesses, to dictate his will, and to finish the testament. But even if at another time the testament, whether dictated or written, is produced, it will suffice on one and the same day, with no act intervening, for all the witnesses, namely, together and not at different times, to subscribe and seal the testament. <a 439 d. prid.
Per nuncupationem quoque, hoc est sine scriptura, testamenta non alias valere sancimus, nisi septem testes, ut supra dictum est, simul uno eodemque tempore collecti testatoris voluntatem ut testamentum sine scriptura facientis audierint. <a 439 d. prid. id. sept.
We also sanction that by nuncupation, that is, without writing, testaments shall not otherwise be valid, unless seven witnesses, as said above, assembled together at one and the same time, have heard the will of the testator making a testament without writing. <in the year 439, given the day before the ides of september.
Si quis autem testamento iure perfecto postea ad aliud pervenerit testamentum, non alias quod ante factum est infirmari decernimus, quam id, quod secundum facere testator instituit, iure fuerit consummatum, nisi forte in priore testamento scriptis his, qui ab intestato ad testatoris hereditatem successionemve venire non poterant, in secunda voluntate testator eos scribere instituit, qui ab intestato ad eius hereditatem vocantur. eo enim casu, licet imperfecta videatur scriptura posterior, infirmato priore testamento secundam eius voluntatem non quasi testamentum, sed quasi voluntatem intestati valere sancimus. <a 439 d. prid.
But if anyone, after a testament has been duly perfected in law, should thereafter come to another testament, we decree that what was done before is not otherwise to be invalidated than when that which the testator has instituted to effect by the second has been consummated in law—unless perhaps in the prior testament he wrote down those who could not, by intestacy, come to the testator’s inheritance or succession, while in the second intention the testator set himself to write those who are called by intestacy to his inheritance. For in that case, although the later writing may appear imperfect, with the prior testament annulled, we sanction that his second intention is to be valid not as a testament, but as the intention of an intestate. <a 439, the day before.
Dictantibus testamenta vel aliam quamlibet ultimam voluntatem legatum vel fideicommissum vel quodcumque aliud quolibet legitimo titulo testatorem posse relinquere minime dubitandum est. testibus etiam ad efficiendam voluntatem adhibitis pro suo libitu quod voluerit testator relinquere non prohibetur. * zeno a. sebastiano pp. * <a 480 d. k. mai.
for those dictating wills or any other last will, there is no doubt at all that the testator can leave a legacy or a fideicommissum or whatever else by any lawful title. with witnesses also employed to effect the will, the testator is not prohibited, at his own pleasure, from leaving whatever he has wished. * zeno the augustus to sebastian, praetorian prefect. * <in the year 480, given on the kalends of may.
Consulta divalia, quibus considerate prospectum est, ne voluntates ultimae deficientium in hac regia urbe confectae apud alium aperiri possint quam virum clarissimum pro tempore census magistrum, monumentis intervenientibus pro iuris ordine, neve in hereditate, cuius summa centum aureorum pretium non excedit, mercedis quicquam aut sumptuum censum administrantes aut censualis apparitio super intimandis isdem elogiis audeant adsequi, firma nunc quoque edicimus ac repetita promulgatione non solum iudices quorumlibet tribunalium, verum etiam defensores ecclesiarum, quos turpissimum intimationis genus inrepserat, praemonendos censemus, ne rem attingant, quae nemini prorsus omnium secundum constitutionum praecepta quam census magistro competit. absurdum est namque, si promiscuis actibus rerum turbentur officia et alii creditum alius subtrahat, ac praecipue clericis, quibus opprobrium est, si peritos se velint disceptationum esse forensium: poena etiam feriendis temeratoribus praesentis sanctionis quinquaginta librarum auri. nec enim concedendum est, ut suprema vota deficientium eversionis quicquam ex incongrua insinuatione contrahant, dum res ab incongruis usurpatur audacter.
The divine consultations, by which it has been thoughtfully provided that the last wills of the deceased, executed in this royal city, cannot be opened before anyone other than the most illustrious man, the master of the census for the time, with the documents intervening according to the order of law; and that in an inheritance whose total value does not exceed the price of 100 gold pieces, neither the administrators of the census nor the census apparitorial staff shall dare to exact anything of fee or expenses for giving notice of those same notices, we now likewise declare to be firm; and by repeated promulgation we judge that not only the judges of whatever tribunals, but also the defenders of the churches—into whom a most shameful kind of intimation had crept—must be forewarned not to touch a matter which, according to the precepts of the constitutions, belongs to no one at all except the master of the census. For it is absurd if offices are disturbed by indiscriminate acts of business and one man snatches away what is entrusted to another, and especially for clerics, for whom it is a reproach if they wish to be experts in forensic disputes: with a penalty also to be inflicted on the violators of the present sanction of 50 pounds of gold. For it must not be permitted that the final wishes of the deceased incur any subversion from an incongruous insinuation, while the matter is audaciously usurped by unsuitable persons.
Ambiguitates, quae vel imperitia vel desidia testamenta conscribentium oriuntur, resecandas esse censemus et, sive institutio heredum post legatorum dationes scripta sit vel alia praetermissa sit observatio non ex mente testatoris, sed vitio tabellionis vel alterius qui testamentum scribit, nulli licentiam concedimus per eam occasionem testatoris voluntatem subvertere vel minuere. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 d. k. ian.
We judge that ambiguities, which arise either from inexperience or from sloth of those drafting testaments, must be cut away; and whether the institution of heirs has been written after the givings of legacies, or some other observance has been omitted, not from the mind of the testator but by the fault of the notary or another who writes the testament, we grant to no one license on that pretext to subvert or diminish the testator’s will. * Justinian Augustus to Mena, the Praetorian Prefect. * <in 528, on the Kalends of January.
Praeposteri reprehensionem, quam novella constitutio in dotalibus instrumentis sustulisse noscitur, in aliis quoque omnibus tam contractibus quam testamentis tollimus, ut tali exceptione cessante et stipulatio et alii contractus et testatoris voluntas indubitate valeat, exactione videlicet post condicionem vel diem competente. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 s. d. vii id. dec.
We abolish the preposterous objection, which a new constitution is known to have removed in dowry instruments, in all other cases as well, both in contracts and in testaments, so that, with such an exception ceasing, both stipulation and other contracts and the will of the testator may undoubtedly be valid, with enforcement, namely, becoming due after the condition or the day. * Justinian Augustus to Mena, praetorian prefect. * <in the year 528, on the 7th day before the Ides of December.
In testamentis sine scriptis faciendis omnem formalem observationem penitus amputamus, ut, postquam septem testes convenerint, satis sit voluntatem testatoris vel testatricis simul omnibus manifestari significantis, ad quos substantiam suam pervenire vellet vel quibus legata vel fideicommissa vel libertates disponeret, etiamsi non ante huiusmodi dispositionem praedixerit testator vel testatrix illa formalia verba: ideo eosdem testes convenisse, quod sine scriptis suam voluntatem vel testamentum componere censuit. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 s. d. iiii id. dec.
In making testaments without writings, we utterly cut off every formal observance, so that, after seven witnesses have convened, it is enough that the will of the testator or testatrix be made manifest at the same time to all, signifying to whom he or she would wish his or her substance to come, or for whom he or she would dispose legacies, fideicommissa, or manumissions, even if before such a disposition the testator or testatrix has not predeclared those formal words: that therefore the same witnesses had convened, because he or she judged to compose his or her will or testament without writings. * Justinian Augustus to Mena, Praetorian Prefect. * <year 528, on the 4th day before the ides of December.
Sancimus, si quis legitimo modo condidit testamentum et post eius confectionem decennium profluxit, si quidem nulla innovatio vel contraria voluntas testatoris apparuit, hoc esse firmum. quod enim non mutatur, quare stare prohibetur? quemadmodum enim, qui testamentum fecit et nihil voluit contrarium, intestatus efficitur?
We decree that, if anyone has constituted a testament in a legitimate manner and, after its completion, a decade has flowed by, if indeed no innovation or contrary will of the testator has appeared, this is to be firm. For that which is not altered, why is it forbidden to stand? For how is it that one who made a testament and willed nothing contrary becomes intestate?
Sin autem in medio tempore contraria voluntas ostenditur, si quidem perfectissima est secundi testamenti confectio, ipso iure prius tollitur testamentum. <a 530 d. xv k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
But if, however, in the meantime a contrary intention is shown, if indeed the most perfect execution of a second testament has been completed, the prior testament is annulled by operation of law. <a 530 on the 15th day before the Kalends of April, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Sin autem testator tantummodo dixerit non voluisse prius stare testamentum, vel aliis verbis utendo contrariam aperuit voluntatem, et hoc vel per testes idoneos non minus tribus vel inter acta manifestaverit et decennium fiat emensum, tunc irritum esse testamentum tam ex contraria voluntate quam ex cursu temporali. <a 530 d. xv k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
But if the testator has only said that he did not wish the prior testament to stand, or by using other words has disclosed a contrary will, and has made this manifest either through suitable witnesses, no fewer than three, or in the official record, and a decade has elapsed, then the testament is void both by reason of the contrary will and by the passage of time. <a 530, on the 15th day before the Kalends of April, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Cum antiquitas testamenta fieri voluit nullo actu interveniente et huiusmodi verborum compositio non rite interpretata paene in perniciem et testantium et testamentorum procederet, sancimus in tempore, quo testamentum conditur vel codicillus nascitur vel ultima quaedam dispositio secundum pristinam celebratus observationem ( nihil enim ex ea penitus immutandum esse censemus) , ea quidem, quae minime necessaria sunt, nullo procedere modo, quippe causa subtilissima proposita ea quae superflua sunt minime debent intercedere. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 530 d. vi k. april.
Since antiquity wished testaments to be made with no formal act intervening, and the composition of such words, not rightly interpreted, was proceeding almost to the ruin both of testators and of testaments, we sanction that at the time when a testament is established or a codicil is born or some final disposition is celebrated according to the pristine observance ( for we judge that nothing at all ought to be changed from it ) , those things indeed which are least necessary shall in no way proceed, since, a most subtle case being proposed, those things which are superfluous ought by no means to intervene. * Justinian Augustus to Julianus, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 530 d. 6 k. april.
Si quid autem necessarium advenerit et in ipsum corpus laborantis respiciens contigerit, id est vel victus necessarii vel potionis oblatio vel medicaminis datio vel impositio, quibus relictis ipsa sanitas testatoris periclitatur, vel si quis necessarius naturae usus ad depositionem superflui ponderis immineat vel testatori vel testibus, non esse ex hac causa testamentum subvertendum licet morbus comitialis, quod et factum esse comperimus, uni ex testibus contigerit, sed eo quod urguet et imminet repleto vel deposito iterum solita per testamenti factionem adimpleri. <a 530 d. vi k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
But if anything necessary should supervene and, having regard to the very body of the one laboring (ailing), should occur—namely, either the offering of necessary sustenance or of drink, or the giving or application of a medicament—abandonment of which puts the testator’s very health in jeopardy; or if any necessary use of nature for the depositing of superfluous weight should be imminent either for the testator or for the witnesses—the testament is not on this account to be subverted, even if the comitial disease (epilepsy), which we have also found to have happened, should befall one of the witnesses; but, when that which presses and impends has been either filled (satisfied) or deposited (discharged), the usual things are again to be fulfilled through the testamentary procedure. <in the year 530, on the 6th day before the Kalends of April, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Et si quidem a testatore aliquid fiat testibus paulisper separatis, cum coram his facere aliquid naturale testator erubescat, iterum introductis testibus consequentiam factionis testamenti procedere. <a 530 d. vi k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
And if indeed something is done by the testator with the witnesses for a short time separated, since the testator blushes to do something natural in their presence, then, the witnesses having been brought in again, the continuation of the testamentary act should proceed. <a 530 d. vi k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
Si tamen in quendam vel quosdam testium aliquid tale contingat, si quidem ex brevi temporis intervallo necessitas potest transire, iterum eorundem testium reversum expectari et sollemnia peragi. <a 530 d. vi k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
If, however, something of this sort should happen to a certain one or to certain ones of the witnesses, if indeed by a brief interval of time the necessity can pass, the return of the same witnesses is to be awaited again and the solemnities performed. <a 530 d. vi k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
Sin autem longiore spatio refectio fortuiti casus indigeat, et maxime si salus testatoris periclitantis immineat, tunc illo vel illis testibus, circa quos aliquid tale eveniet, separatis alios subrogari et ab eo vel ab eis tam testatorem quam alios testes sciscitari, si ea, quae eorum praesentiam antecedunt, omnia coram eis processissent. <a 530 d. vi k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
But if the repair of the fortuitous case should require a longer span, and especially if the safety of the testator in peril is impending, then, with that witness or those witnesses, about whom something of this sort has happened, set apart, others are to be subrogated; and by him or by them both the testator and the other witnesses are to be inquired of, whether all those things which precede their presence had proceeded before them. <a 530 on the 6th day before the Kalends of April, at Constantinople, under Lampadius and Orestes, most illustrious men, consuls.>
Et si hoc fuerit undique manifestum, tunc eos vel eum una cum aliis testibus ea quae oportet facere, etsi in medio subscriptiones testium iam fuerant subsecutae. sic etenim et naturae medemur et mortuorum elogia in suo statu facimus permanere. <a 530 d. vi k. april.
And if this shall be evident on all sides, then let them or him, together with the other witnesses, do what is proper, even if in the meantime the subscriptions of the witnesses had already followed. For thus indeed we both apply a remedy to nature and make the elogia of the dead remain in their own state. <a 530 d. vi k. april.
Cum autem constitutione, quae de testamentis ordinandis processit, cavetur, quatenus septem testium praesentia in testamentis requiratur et subscriptio a testatore fiat vel alio pro eo, et constitutio sic edixit: " octavo subscriptore adhibito", et quidam testamentum suum omne manu propria conscripsit et post eius litteras testes adhibiti suas subscriptiones supposuerunt aliaque omnia sollemniter in testamento peracta sunt et testamentum ex hoc, de quo dubitatur, irritum factum est, eandem constitutionem corrigentes sancimus, si quis sua manu totum testamentum vel codicillum conscripserit et hoc specialiter in scriptura reposu erit, quod sua manu hoc confecit, sufficiat ei totius testamenti scriptura et non alia subscriptio requiratur neque ab eo neque pro eo ab alio , sed sequantur huiusmodi scripturam et litterae testium et omnis quae expectatur observatio, et sit testamentum validum, et codicillus, si quinque testium litterae testatoris scripturae coadunentur, in sua firmitate remaneat, et nemo callidus machinator huiusmodi iniquitatis in posterum inveniatur. <a 530 d. vi k. april. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
Since by the constitution which proceeded concerning the ordering of testaments it is provided that the presence of seven witnesses be required in testaments and that a subscription be made by the testator or by another for him, and the constitution thus proclaimed: " with an eighth subscriber being employed", and someone wrote out his whole testament with his own hand, and after his letters the witnesses employed set their subscriptions beneath, and all other things were performed solemnly in the testament, and the testament on this ground, which is in doubt, was made void, correcting that same constitution we sanction that, if anyone has written with his own hand the whole testament or codicil and it has been specifically set down in the writing that he made this with his own hand, the writing of the whole testament shall suffice for him and no other subscription shall be required, neither by him nor by another for him , but let letters of the witnesses follow such writing and every observance which is expected, and let the testament be valid; and let the codicil, if the letters of five witnesses are joined to the testator’s writing, remain in its own firmness; and let no crafty contriver of iniquity of this sort hereafter be found. <a 530 on the 6th day before the Kalends of april, at constantinople, lampadius and orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Iubemus omnimodo testatorem, si vires ad scribendum habeat, nomen heredis vel heredum in sua subscriptione vel in quacumque parte testamenti ponere, ut sit manifestum secundum illius voluntatem hereditatem esse transmissam. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 531 d. k. mart.
We command, in every way, that the testator, if he has the ability for writing, place the name of the heir or heirs in his own subscription (signature) or in any part of the testament, so that it may be manifest that the inheritance has been transmitted according to his volition. * Justinian Augustus to Julianus, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 on the Kalends of March.
Sin autem forsitan ex morbi acerbitate vel litterarum imperitia hoc facere minime poterit, testibus testamenti praesentibus nomen vel nomina heredis vel heredum ab eo nuncupari, ut omnimodo sciant testes, si non ipse subscribere potest, qui sunt scripti heredes, et ita certo heredis nomine successio procedat. <a 531 d. k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if perchance, from the acerbity of the disease or lack of skill in letters, he is in no way able to do this, let the name or names of the heir or heirs be pronounced by him with the witnesses of the testament present, so that the witnesses may in every way know, if he himself cannot subscribe, who are written as heirs, and thus let the succession proceed with the heir’s name certain. <a 531 on the Kalends of March, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Si enim talis est testator, qui neque scribere neque articulate loqui potest, mortuo similis est et falsitas in elogiis committitur, quam, ut exul fiat a re publica nostra, maxime in testamentorum confectione cupientes hanc edictalem legem in orbem terrarum ponimus. <a 531 d. k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
If indeed the testator is such a one who can neither write nor speak articulately, he is like a dead man, and falsehood is committed in the clauses; which falsehood, that it may become an exile from our commonwealth—especially in the making of testaments—we therefore promulgate this edictal law throughout the whole world. <a 531 d. k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Quod si non fuerit observatum et nomen heredis vel heredum non fuerit manu testatoris scriptum vel voce coram testibus nuncupatum, hoc testamentum stare minime patimur vel in totum, si tota heredum nomina fuerint praetermissa, vel in eius heredis institutionem, cuius nomen neque lingua neque manus testatoris significavit. <a 531 d. k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if this has not been observed, and the name of the heir or of the heirs has not been written by the hand of the testator or nuncupated by voice before witnesses, we do not at all permit this testament to stand either in its entirety—if all the names of the heirs have been omitted—or as to the institution of that heir whose name neither the tongue nor the hand of the testator signified. <a 531 d. k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Sed ne aliqua forsitan oblivio testium animis incumbat pluribus interdum nominibus heredum expressis, ipsi testes in suis subscriptionibus, cum testator non haec scripserit, sed nuncupaverit, eorum nomina scribere non differant ad aeternam rei memoriam. <a 531 d. k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But lest perhaps some forgetfulness weigh upon the minds of the witnesses, when several names of heirs are sometimes specified, let the witnesses themselves, in their own subscriptions—when the testator has not written these things, but has nuncupated them—not delay to write their names, for the eternal memory of the matter. <a 531 on the day of the Kalends of March, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sin vero ipse testator in qualicumque parte testamenti nomina heredum ( sicut dictum est) scripserit, supervacuum est testes in sua subscriptione hoc exprimere , cum forsitan nescire eos testator suos heredes voluit et semel causa ex ipsius testatoris scriptura appareat. <a 531 d. k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if indeed the testator himself has written the names of the heirs ( as has been said) in whatever part of the testament, it is superfluous for the witnesses to express this in their subscription , since perhaps the testator wished them not to know his heirs and the case appears at once from the testator’s own writing. <a 531 d. k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Oportet enim omnimodo vel ex litteris testatoris vel ex voce quidem testatoris, litteris autem testium, qui ad elogium conficiendum fuerint convocati, nomina manifestari heredum. quemadmodum enim in elogio, quod sine scriptura conficitur, necesse est testatorem voce exprimere nomen vel nomina heredum, ita oportet et in testamentis per scripturam conficiendis, cum ipse testator manu sua scribere heredes vel noluerit vel minime potuerit, voce tamen eius eos manifestari. <a 531 d. k. mart.
For it is in every way requisite that either from the writing of the testator, or indeed from the voice of the testator, but with the letters of the witnesses who have been called together to draw up the elogium, the names of the heirs be made manifest. For just as in an elogium which is composed without writing it is necessary that the testator declare by voice the name or names of the heirs, so also in testaments to be composed by writing, when the testator himself either is unwilling or is by no means able to write the heirs with his own hand, yet by his voice they must be made manifest. <a 531, on the Kalends of March.
Quae in posterum tantummodo observari censemus, ut, quae testamenta post hanc novellam nostri numinis legem conficiuntur, haec cum tali observatione procedant: quid enim antiquitas peccavit, quae praesentis legis inscia pristinam secuta est observationem? scituris et tabellionibus et his qui conficienda testamenta procurant, quod, si aliter facere ausi fuerint, poenam falsitatis non evitabunt, quasi dolose in tam necessaria causa versati. <a 531 d. k. mart.
We judge that the following only is to be observed for the future: that the testaments which are drawn up after this novella of our divinity proceed with such an observance: for what fault has antiquity, which, ignorant of the present law, followed the former observance? Let the tabellions (notaries) and those who procure the making of testaments know that, if they shall have dared to do otherwise, they will not avoid the penalty of falsity, as though they had conducted themselves fraudulently in a matter so necessary. <a 531 the day of the Kalends of March.
Nostram provisionem, maxime circa ultima elogia defunctorum, nunc etiam extendi properamus. unde cum invenimus quasdam controversias veteribus iuris interpretatoribus exortas propter testamentum, quod legitimo modo conditum est septemque testium signa habens, postea fortuito casu vel per ipsius testatoris operam lino toto vel plurima eius parte incisa in ambiguitatem inciderit, solitum ei praebemus remedium sancientes, si quidem testator linum vel signacula inciderit vel abstulerit utpote voluntate eius mutata, testamentum non valere: sin autem ex alia quacumque causa hoc contigerit, durante testamento scriptos ad hereditatem vocari, maxime cum nostra constitutio, quam super tuitione testamentorum promulgavimus, testatorem disposuit vel sua manu nomen heredis scribere vel, si imper itia litterarum vel adversa valitudine seu alio modo hoc facere non potest, testes ipsos audito nomine heredis sub praesentia ipsius testatoris nomen heredis suis subscriptionibus declarare. * iust.
We are now eager to extend our provision, especially concerning the final elogia of the deceased. Hence, when we find that certain controversies have arisen among the ancient interpreters of the law on account of a testament that was established in a legitimate manner and bearing the seals of seven witnesses, but afterwards, by a fortuitous chance or by the agency of the testator himself, the cord, either in its entirety or for the greater part, having been cut, has fallen into ambiguity, we furnish to it the accustomed remedy, decreeing that, if indeed the testator cut or removed the cord or the seals, his intention having changed, the testament is not valid; but if this has happened from any other cause whatsoever, while the testament remains in force, those written are called to the inheritance—especially since our constitution, which we promulgated concerning the safeguarding of testaments, has ordained that the testator either write with his own hand the name of the heir, or, if through lack of skill in letters or adverse ill-health or in some other way he is not able to do this, that the witnesses themselves, the name of the heir having been heard, under the presence of the testator himself, declare the name of the heir by their own subscriptions. * Justinian.
Et ab antiquis legibus et a diversis retro principibus semper rusticitati consultum est et in multis legum subtilitatibus stricta observatio eis remissa est, quod ex ipsis rerum invenimus documentis. cum enim testamentorum ordinatio sub certa definitione legum instituta est, homines rustici et quibus non est litterarum peritia quomodo possunt tantam legum subtilitatem custodire in ultimis suis voluntatibus? ideo ad dei humanitatem respicientes necessarium duximus per hanc legem eorum simplicitati subvenire.
And by ancient laws and by various former princes provision has always been made for rusticity, and in many subtleties of the laws strict observance has been relaxed for them, as we find from the very documents of the matters themselves. since indeed the ordering of testaments has been instituted under a fixed definition of the laws, how can rustic men and those who do not have skill in letters keep such subtlety of the laws in their last wishes? therefore, looking to the humanity of God, we have deemed it necessary by this law to come to the aid of their simplicity.
Sancimus itaque in omnibus quidem civitatibus et in castris orbis romani, ubi et leges nostrae manifestae sunt et litterarum viget scientia, omnia, quae etiam libris nostrorum digestorum seu institutionum et imperialibus sanctionibus nostrisque dispositionibus in condendis testamentis cauta sunt, observari nullamque ex praesenti lege fieri innovationem. <a 534 d. iii non. iul.
We therefore decree that, in all cities indeed and in the camps of the Roman world, where both our laws are manifest and the science of letters flourishes, all the things which are also provided for in the books of our Digests or Institutions and by imperial sanctions and by our dispositions in the making of testaments be observed, and that no innovation be made by the present law. <a 534, on the 3rd day before the Nones of July.
In illis vero locis, in quibus raro inveniuntur homines litterati, per praesentem legem rusticanis concedimus antiquam eorum consuetudinem legis vicem obtinere , ita tamen, ut, ubi scientes litteras inventi fuerint, septem testes, quos ad testimonium vocari necesse est, adhibeantur et unusquisque pro sua persona subscribat: ubi autem non inveniuntur litterati, septem testes et sine scriptura testimonium adhibentes admitti. <a 534 d. iii non. iul.
In those places, indeed, in which literate men are rarely found, by the present law we grant to the rustics that their ancient custom obtain the force of law , only so that, where men knowing letters shall have been found, seven witnesses, whom it is necessary to call to testimony, be brought in and each one subscribe for his own person: but where literate men are not found, seven witnesses giving testimony without writing are to be admitted. <in the year 534, on the 3rd day before the Nones of July.
Si vero unus aut duo vel plures scierint litteras, liceat his pro ignorantibus litteras, praesentibus tamen, subscriptionem suam imponere, sic tamen, ut ipsi testes cognoscant testatoris voluntatem et maxime quem vel quos heredes sibi relinquere voluerit, et hoc post mortem testatoris iurati deponant. <a 534 d. iii non. iul.
But if indeed one or two or more should know letters, let it be permitted to these, for those ignorant of letters—while the latter are present—to affix their subscription; provided, however, that these witnesses know the will of the testator and especially whom or which persons he wished to leave to himself as heirs, and that they depose this under oath after the testator’s death. <a 534 on July 5.
Pater tuus si ex residua parte heres institutus est, quam alter heres scriptus capere non posset, isque ad nullam partem hereditatis propter condicionem suam admitti potuit, ex asse heres extitit: nam residui commemoratio etiam totum admittit. * ant. a. caecilio.
If your father was instituted heir from the residual part, which the other written heir could not take, and he, on account of his condition, could be admitted to no part of the inheritance, he became heir of the whole: for the mention of the residue admits even the whole. * Antoninus Augustus to Caecilius.
Cum proponas alexandrum equitem testamento primo loco iulianum ut libertum suum heredem instituisse eique substituisse his verbis: " quod si ex aliqua causa primus hereditatem meam adire noluerit vel non potuerit, tunc in locum secundum heredem substituo vitalem", post mortem autem testatoris iulianum servum communem fuisse defuncti militis et zoili fratris eius apparuerit, an tu ex substitutione admittereris, voluntatis est quaestio. * alex. a. vitali mil.
Since you set forth that Alexander, a horseman, by his testament in the first place instituted Julian, as his freedman, as heir, and to him substituted in these words: "But if for any cause the first should be unwilling to, or should not be able to, enter upon my inheritance, then in the second place I substitute Vitalis as heir", but after the testator’s death it has appeared that Julian was a common slave of the deceased soldier and of Zoilus his brother, whether you would be admitted under the substitution is a question of intention. * Alexander the Augustus to Vitalis, soldier.
Nam si credens eum proprium et suum libertum heredem instituit nec per eum ad alium quemquam hereditatem pertinere voluit, extitit condicio substitutionis tibique delata hereditas est. <a 223 pp. vi k. mai. maximo ii et aeliano conss.>
For if, believing him to be his own and proper freedman, he appointed him as heir and did not wish the inheritance to pertain through him to anyone else, the condition of the substitution has arisen and the inheritance has been conferred upon you. <year 223, on the 6th day before the Kalends of May, Maximus 2 and Aelianus consuls.>
Quod si verba substitutionis subscriptae ad ius rettulit, ut si nec per semet ipsum alium fecisset heredem ( potuit enim quamvis iubente domino nolle adire), ita demum substitutus vocaretur, si tamen paruit domino et adiit, substitutioni locus non est. <a 223 pp. vi k. mai. maximo ii et aeliano conss.>
But if he referred the words of the subscribed substitution to law, so that, if he had not made another heir even by himself (for he could, although with the master ordering, be unwilling to enter upon it), then only would the substitute be called; if, however, he obeyed the master and entered, there is no place for the substitution. <a 223, on the 6th day before the Kalends of May, under the consuls Maximus for the 2nd time and Aelianus, consuls.>
Si pater tuus eum quasi filium heredem instituit, quem falsa opinione ductus suum esse credebat, non instituturus, si alienum nosset, isque postea subditicius esse ostensus est, auferendam ei successionem divi severi et antonini placitis continetur. * gord. a. ulpio.
If your father instituted as heir, as if a son, one whom, led by a false opinion, he believed to be his own—being not about to institute him, had he known him to be another’s—and he was afterward shown to be a supposititious child, it is contained in the decrees of the deified Severus and Antoninus that the succession must be taken away from him. * Gordian Augustus to Ulpius.
Nec apud peregrinos fratrem sibi quisquam per adoptionem facere poterat. cum igitur, quod patrem tuum voluisse facere dicis, irritum sit, portionem hereditatis , quam is adversus quem supplicas velut adoptatus frater heres institutus tenet, restitui tibi curae habebit praeses provinciae. * diocl.
Nor among the peregrines could anyone make for himself a brother by adoption. Since therefore what you say your father wished to do is null, the governor of the province will have care that the portion of the inheritance , which the one against whom you supplicate holds as though an adopted brother instituted as heir, be restored to you. * diocl.
Hereditatis vel legati seu fideicommissi aut donationis titulo domus aut annonae civiles aut quaelibet aedificia vel mancipia ad ius inclitae urbis vel alterius cuiuslibet civitatis pervenire possunt. * leo a. erythrio pp. * <a 469 d. v k. mart. marciano et zenone conss.>
By the title of inheritance or legacy or fideicommissum or donation, houses or the civil annonae, or any edifices or slaves, can come to the right of the renowned city or of any other city whatsoever. * leo augustus to erythrius, praetorian prefect. * <in 469, on the 5th day before the kalends of march, under marcian and zeno, consuls.>
Quotiens certi quidem ex certa re scripti sunt heredes vel certis rebus pro sua institutione contenti esse iussi sunt, quos legatariorum loco haberi certum est, alii vero ex certa parte vel sine parte, qui pro veterum legum tenore ad certam unciarum institutionem referuntur, eos tantummodo omnibus hereditariis actionibus uti vel conveniri decernimus, qui ex certa parte vel sine parte scripti fuerint, nec aliquam deminutionem earundem actionum occasione heredum ex certa re scriptorum fieri. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 529 d. viii id. april.
Whenever certain persons have been written as heirs from a specific thing, or have been ordered to be content with certain things in place of their institution—who are certainly held in the position of legatees—while others are written from a specific share or without a share, who, according to the tenor of the ancient laws, are referred to a determinate institution of unciae (ounces, i.e., twelfths), we decree that only those who have been written from a specific share or without a share may employ or be convened by all hereditary actions, and that no diminution of those same actions be made on account of heirs written from a specific thing. * Justinian Augustus to Mena, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 529 d. 8 Id. April.
Quidam testamentum faciens ita instituit: " sempronius plotii heres esto". veteres quidem existimabant errorem nominis esse et sic institutionem valere, quasi testator plotius nominaretur et sempronium sibi scripsisset heredem. <d. iii k. aug. post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Someone, making a testament, instituted thus: " sempronius plotii heres esto". The ancients indeed thought there was an error of the name, and that thus the institution was valid, as if the testator were named Plotius and had written Sempronius as his heir to himself. <d. 3 k. Aug. after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sed huiusmodi sententiam crassiorem esse existimamus: neque enim sic homo supinus, immo magis stultus invenitur, ut suum nomen ignoret. sed si quidem ipse testator plotio cuidam heres extitit, manifestissimum esse sibi sempronium heredem instituisse, ut per mediam ipsius personam plotii heres efficiatur: et hoc argumentamur ex antiqua regula, quae voluit heredem heredis testatoris esse heredem. <d. iii k. aug.
But we judge a sentiment of this sort to be more crass: for a man is not found so supine—nay, rather more foolish—as to be ignorant of his own name. But if indeed the testator himself had become heir to a certain Plotius, it is most manifest that he appointed Sempronius as heir to himself, so that through the intermediary person of himself Sempronius might be made heir of Plotius: and we argue this from the ancient rule, which willed that the heir of the heir of the testator is heir. <d. iii k. aug.
Sin autem nihil tale factum est, supervacuam esse et inanem huiusmodi institutionem, nisi prius herede plotio sibi instituto sic adiecit:" sempronius plotii heres esto". tunc etenim existimandum est eum dixisse, si non plotius heres sibi fuerit, tunc sempronium in locum partemve plotii ex substitutione vocari, ut ita ex consequentia verborum plotius quidem institutus, sempronius autem substitutus inveniatur. <d. iii k. aug. post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if, however, nothing of the sort has been done, an institution of this kind is superfluous and inane, unless he first, with Plotius appointed as heir to himself, thus added: "Let Sempronius be the heir of Plotius." For then it is to be thought that he said: if Plotius shall not be heir to him, then Sempronius is called, by way of substitution, into the place or share of Plotius, so that thus, from the consequence of the words, Plotius indeed is instituted, but Sempronius is substituted. <on the 3rd day before the Kalends of August, after the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sin autem neque ipse testator plotio heres extitit neque plotium heredem antea scripsit et sic sempronium plotio heredem voluit esse, nullius esse momenti talem institutionem, cum non est verisimile in suum nomen quendam errasse. <d. iii k. aug. post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if, however, neither did the testator himself turn out to be heir to plotius nor had he previously written plotius as heir, and thus he wished sempronius to be heir to plotius, such an institution is of no effect, since it is not plausible that someone erred in his own name. <on the 3rd day before the Kalends of August, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Cum avum maternum ea condicione filiam tuam heredem instituisse proponas, si anthylli filio nupsisset, non prius eam heredem existere, quam condicioni paruerit aut anthylli filio recusante matrimonium impeditum fuerit, manifestum est. * sev. et ant.
Since you allege that your maternal grandfather instituted your daughter as heir on this condition, that she should marry the son of Anthyllus, it is manifest that she does not become heir before she has obeyed the condition or the marriage has been impeded by the son of Anthyllus refusing. * Severus and Antoninus.
Condicioni, sub qua testamento matris tuae heres instituta es, si non paruisti, substitutio locum habet. nec enim videri potest sub specie turpium nuptiarum viduitatem tibi indixisse, cum te filio sororis suae consobrino tuo probabili consilio matrimonio iungere voluerit. * ant.
If you have not complied with the condition under which, by your mother’s testament, you were instituted heir, the substitution takes effect. For she cannot be seen to have imposed widowhood upon you under the pretext of disgraceful nuptials, since by reasonable counsel she wished to join you in marriage to her sister’s son, your first cousin. * ant.
Nec extraordinario auxilio indiges, cum ex his quae libello complexa es declaretur non per eum stetisse, quominus supremae voluntati matris tuae testatricis satisfieret. <a 213 pp.Viii id.Mart.Romae antonino a.Iiii et balbino conss.>
Nor do you need extraordinary aid, since from the things which you have included in the libellus it is declared that it was not by him that satisfaction was not made to the last will of your mother, the testatrix. <year 213, 8 days before the Ides of March, at Rome, Antoninus for the 4th time and Balbinus, consuls.>
Si mater vos sub condicione emancipationis heredes instituit et, priusquam voluntati defunctae pareretur, sententiam pater meruit vel aliter defunctus est, morte eius vel alio modo patria potestate liberati ius adeundae hereditatis cum sua causa quaesistis. * ant. a. maxentio et aliis.
If your mother appointed you heirs on the condition of emancipation, and, before obedience was rendered to the will of the deceased, your father incurred a sentence or otherwise died, then, being freed from paternal power by his death or in some other way, you have acquired the right of entering upon the inheritance with its incidents. * Antoninus to Maxentius and others.
Cum autem trans mare et longe te agentem sub hac condicione heredem scriptum esse dicas, si in patriam, quae in provincia mauritaniae erat, regressus fuisses, nec exheredatum te adleges, si in eum locum non redisses, manifestum est multis casibus non voluntariis sed fortuitis evenire potuisse, ut eam implere non posses: et ideo adire non prohiberis hereditatem. <a 224 pp.Vi.K.April.Iuliano et crispino conss.>
But since you say that, being across the sea and living far away, you were written as heir under this condition, that if you had returned to your homeland, which was in the province of Mauretania, and you do not allege that you were disinherited if you did not return to that place, it is manifest that many cases not voluntary but fortuitous could have occurred, such that you could not fulfill it; and therefore you are not prohibited from entering upon the inheritance. <a year 224 pp. 6 Kal. April. Julianus and Crispinus, consuls.>
Generaliter sancimus, si quis ita verba sua composuerit, ut edicat: " si filius vel filia intestatus vel intestata" vel etiam " sine liberis" aut " sine nuptiis decesserit", et ipse vel ipsa vel liberos sustulerit vel nuptias contraxerit sive testamentum fecerit, firmiter res possideri et non esse locum substitutioni vel restitutioni: si enim nihil ex his fuerit subsecutum, tunc valere condicionem et res secundum verba testamenti restitui, ut incertus successionis morientis exitus videatur certo substitutionis vel restitutionis fine concludi. cui enim ferendus est intellectus, si forsitan testamentum quidem non fecerit, posteritatem autem habuerit, propter huiusmodi verborum angustias liberos eius omni paene fructu paterno defraudari? viam itaque impiam obstruentes, ut ne quis et alius deviaverit, huiusmodi facimus sanctionem et hanc legem in perpetuum valituram inducimus tam patribus quam liberis gratam: quo exemplo etiam aliis personis, licet extraneae sunt, de quibus huiusmodi aliquod scriptum fuerit, medemur.
Generally we ordain that, if someone has composed his words so as to declare: “if a son or daughter dies intestate” or also “without children” or “without nuptials,” and he or she has either reared children or contracted nuptials or made a testament, the property is to be firmly possessed and there is to be no place for substitution or restitution; for if nothing of these has followed, then the condition is to be valid and the property restored according to the words of the testament, so that the uncertain outcome of the dying person’s succession may seem to be concluded by a certain end of the substitution or restitution. For what interpretation can be borne, that if perhaps he has not made a testament, yet has had posterity, his children should, on account of the narrowness of such words, be defrauded of almost every paternal fruit? Therefore, obstructing an impious path so that no one else should also deviate, we make such a sanction and introduce this law to be valid in perpetuity, pleasing both to fathers and to children: by which example we also remedy other persons, although they are extraneous, about whom some such writing shall have been made.
Cum autem invenimus excelsi ingenii papinianum in huiusmodi casu, in quo pater filio suo substituit nulla liberorum ex his procreandorum adiectione habita, ex optimo intellectu disposuisse evanescere substitutionem, si is qui substitutione praegravatus est pater efficiatur et liberos sustulerit, intellegentem non esse verisimile patrem, si de nepotibus cogitaverit, talem fecisse substitutionem: humanitatis intuitu hoc et latius et pinguius interpretandum esse credidimus. <a 530 d. xi k. aug. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
However, when we have found Papinian, a man of exalted genius, in a case of this kind—in which a father appointed a substitute for his son, with no addendum made concerning children to be begotten from him—to have, by the best understanding, determined that the substitution vanishes if the one burdened by the substitution should become a father and have reared children, understanding that it is not likely that a father, if he had thought of grandsons, would have made such a substitution: out of regard for humanity we have believed that this ought to be interpreted both more broadly and more liberally. <a 530 day 11 before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Et si quis naturales habuerit filios et partem eis reliquerit vel dederit usque ad modum, quem nos statuimus, et substitutioni eos subiugaverit nulla liberorum eorum mentione facta, et hic intellegi evanescere substitutionem, liberis eam excludentibus et intellectu optimo his qui ad substitutionem vocantur obsistente et non concedente ad eos eam partem venire, sed ad filios vel filias, nepotes vel neptes, pronepotes vel proneptes morientis transmittente, et non aliter substitutione locum accipiente, nisi ipsi liberi sine iusta subole decesserint: ut, quod inter iustos liberos sanctum est, hoc et in naturales filios extendatur. <a 530 d. xi k. aug. constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
And if anyone shall have had natural children and shall have left to them or given to them a share up to the measure which we have set, and shall have subjected them to a substitution with no mention made of their children, then here too it is to be understood that the substitution vanishes, their children excluding it, and with the best understanding resisting those who are called to the substitution and not permitting that share to come to them, but sending it over to the sons or daughters, grandsons or granddaughters, great‑grandsons or great‑granddaughters of the deceased; and the substitution takes effect in no other way, unless the children themselves have died without lawful issue: so that what is sacred among legitimate children is extended also to natural children. <a 530 on the 11th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Si quis heredem scripserit sub tali condicione: " si ille consul fuerit factus" vel " praetor", vel ita filiam suam heredem instituerit: " si nupta erit", vivo autem testatore vel ille consul processerit vel praetor fuerit factus vel filia eius nupta fuerit et adhuc vivo testatore consulatum quidem vel praeturam illi deposuerint, filia autem eius diverterit, omni dubitatione veterum explosa sancimus, quandocumque impleta fuerit condicio, sive vivo eo sive mortis tempore sive post mortem, condicionem videri esse completam. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. viiii k. aug.
If anyone has written an heir under such a condition: "if that man shall have been made consul" or "praetor," or has thus instituted his daughter as heir: "if she shall be married," and, while the testator is alive, either that man has advanced to the consulship or has been made praetor or his daughter has been married, and, still with the testator alive, he has laid down the consulship or the praetorship, but his daughter has separated (divorced), with all ancient doubt exploded we decree that whenever the condition has been fulfilled, whether while he is alive or at the time of death or after death, the condition is to be regarded as completed. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 on the 9th day before the Kalends of August.
Quod et in legatis et in fideicommissis et in libertatibus obtinendum esse censemus, ne, dum nimia utimur circa huiusmodi sensus subtilitate, iudicia testantium defraudentur. <a 531 d. viiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
We judge that this is to be maintained also in legacies, in fideicommissa, and in liberties, lest, while we employ excessive subtlety concerning senses of this kind, the intentions of testators be defrauded. <a 531 on the 9th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Si testamentum ita scriptum inveniatur: " ille heres esto secundum condiciones infra scriptas", si quidem nihil est adiectum neque aliqua condicio in testamento posita est, supervacuam esse condicionum pollicitationem sancimus et testamentum puram habere institutionem. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. vi k. aug.
If a testament is found written thus: "let that man be heir according to the conditions written below," if indeed nothing has been added nor any condition set in the testament, we sanction that the promise of the conditions is superfluous and that the testament has a pure institution. * Justinian Augustus to John, praetorian prefect. * <a 531 d. 6 k. aug.
Et argumento utimur, quod papinianus respondit vicos rei publicae relictos, qui proprios fines habebant, non ideo ex fideicommisso minus deberi, quod testator fines eorum et certaminis formam, quam celebrari singulis annis voluit, alia scriptura se declaraturum promisit ac postea morte praeventus non fecit. <a 531 d. vi k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
And we use as an argument that Papinian responded that the vici left to the commonwealth, which had their own boundaries, were not for that reason any the less owed under the fideicommissum, because the testator promised that he would declare by another writing their boundaries and the form of the contest which he wished to be celebrated each year, and afterwards, being forestalled by death, did not do it. <a 531 on the 6th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sin autem condiciones quasdam in quavis parte testamenti posuit, tum videri ab initio condicionalem esse institutionem et sic omnia compleri, tamquam si testator ipsas institutiones eisdem condicionibus copulasset, quae infra scriptae sunt. <a 531 d. vi k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if he has placed certain conditions in any part of the testament, then the institution is seen to be conditional from the beginning, and thus all things are completed as if the testator had coupled the very institutions with the same conditions which are written below. <a 531, on the 6th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Cum quidam praegnantem habens coniugem scripsit heredem ipsam quidem uxorem suam ex parte, ventrem vero ex alia parte, et adiecit, si non postumus natus fuerit, alium sibi esse heredem, postumus autem natus impubes decessit, dubitabatur, quid iuris sit, tam ulpiano quam papiniano viris disertissimis voluntatis esse quaestionem scribentibus, cum opinabatur papinianus ideo testatorem voluisse postumo nato et impubere defuncto matrem magis ad eius venire successionem quam substitutum. si enim et suae substantiae partem uxori dereliquit, multo magis et luctuosam hereditatem ad matrem venire curavit. * iust.
When a certain man, having a pregnant spouse, wrote that his wife herself was heir as to one share, but the womb as to another share, and added that, if no posthumous child should be born, another would be his heir, yet a posthumous was born and died underage, it was doubted what the law is—both Ulpian and Papinian, most eloquent men, writing that it is a question of intention—since Papinian supposed that for this reason the testator had wished, the posthumous having been born and having died impubes, that the mother should rather come to his succession than the substitute. For if he also left a part of his own substance to his wife, much more did he take care that even the mournful inheritance should come to the mother. * just.
Nos itaque in hac specie papiniani dubitationem resecantes substitutionem quidem in huiusmodi casu, ubi postumus natus adhuc impubes viva matre decesserit, respuendam esse censemus. tunc autem tantummodo substitutionem admittimus, cum postumus minime editus fuerit vel post eius partum mater prior decesserit. <a 531 d. iii k. aug.
We therefore, in this kind, cutting away Papinian’s doubt, judge that a substitution in a case of this sort, where a posthumous child, still underage, has died while the mother is alive, is to be repudiated. Only then, however, do we admit a substitution, when the posthumous child has not been born at all, or, after his birth, the mother has died first. <a 531 d. 3 k. Aug.
CJ.6.26.1: Imperator t. ael. ant.: Cum heredes ex disparibus partibus instituti et invicem substituti sunt nec in substitutione facta est ullarum partium mentio, verum est non alias partes testatorem substitutioni tacite inseruisse, quam quae manifeste in institutione expressae sunt. * t. ael.
CJ.6.26.1: The Emperor t. ael. ant.: When heirs have been appointed in unequal shares and have been substituted for one another, and in the substitution no mention has been made of any shares, it is true that the testator has tacitly inserted into the substitution no shares other than those which are manifestly expressed in the institution. * t. ael.
Hereditatem quidem intestati filii delatam tibi dubitari non oportet. substitutio enim testamento patris facta ad pubertatis tempora porrigi non potest, quia ipso et aliis non eiusdem condicionis heredibus institutis et invicem substitutis propter eorum personam, quibus in unum casum dumtaxat substitui potest, etiam in filio idem debere servari et ratio suadet et divus marcus pater constituit. * sev.
You ought not to doubt that the inheritance of your intestate son, devolved upon you, is yours. For a substitution made by the father’s testament cannot be extended to the time of puberty, because when he himself and other heirs not of the same condition have been instituted and mutually substituted, on account of the person of those for whom substitution can be made only for one single case, both reason urges and the deified Marcus my father established that the same rule must be observed even in the case of a son. * sev.
Proinde si substitutus hereditatem amplexus est, actionibus quae adversus matrem competebant ipsum convenire, non successionem ab intestato potes vindicare. <a 223 pp. xi k. sept. maximo ii et aeliano conss.>
Accordingly, if the substitute has embraced the inheritance, you can proceed against him with the actions which were competent against the mother; you cannot claim intestate succession. <a 223, on the 11th day before the Kalends of September, in the consulship of Maximus for the second time and Aelianus.>
Quamvis placuerat substitutionem impuberis, qui in potestate testatoris fuerit, a parente factam ita: " si heres non erit" porrigi ad eum casum, quo, posteaquam heres extitit, impubes decessit, si modo non contrariam defuncti voluntatem extitisse probetur: cum tamen proponas ita substitutionem factam esse: " si mihi firmianus filius et aelia uxor mea ( quod abominor) heredes non erunt, in locum eorum publius firmianus heres esto", manifestum est in eum casum factam substitutionem, quo utrique heredum substitui potuit. * alex. a. firmiano.
Although it had been settled that a substitution of an underage (impubes) person, who was under the power of the testator, made by a parent in this form: "if he will not be heir," be extended to the case in which, after he became heir, the underage person died—provided that it is not proven that there existed a contrary intention of the deceased—yet since you set forth that the substitution was made thus: "if my son firmianus and my wife aelia (which I abhor) will not be my heirs, in their place publius firmianus shall be heir," it is manifest that the substitution was made for that case in which substitution could be made to each of the heirs. * alex. a. to firmianus.
Si testamento facto intra pupillarem aetatem et in sua potestate constitutae filiae, si intra pubertatem decesserit, directis verbis pater substituit, heredem te factum ex testamento post eventum condicionis intestati successionem exclusisse constitit. * diocl. et maxim.
If, a testament having been made for a daughter who was within pupillary age and under his own power, the father in express words appointed a substitute if she should die before puberty, it is established that you, made heir under the testament after the event of the condition, have excluded the intestate succession. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Precibus tuis manifestius exprimere debueras, maritus quondam tuus miles defunctus, quem testamento facto heredem communem vestrum filium instituisse proponis et secundum heredem scripsisse, utrumne in primum casum an filio suo, quem habuit in potestate mortis tempore, si intra quartum decimum aetatis suae annum an postea decesserit. * diocl. et maxim.
In your petition you ought to have expressed more clearly whether your former husband, a soldier now deceased—whom you assert, after making a testament, to have instituted your common son as heir and to have written a second (substitute) heir—did this either for the first contingency, or for his own son, whom he had under his power at the time of death, in case that son should die within his 14th year of age or thereafter. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Si vero substitutio in secundum casum vel expressa vel compendio non usque ad certam aetatem facta reperiatur, si quidem infra pubertatem decessit, eos habeat heredes, quos pater ei constituit et adierunt hereditatem: si vero post pubertatem, te eius successionem obtinente velut ex causa fideicommissi bona, quae cum moreretur patris eius fuerunt, a te possunt petere. <a 293 s.K.Ian.Sirmi aa. conss.>
If, however, the substitution for the second contingency—whether expressed or in summary—should be found not to have been made up to a certain age, then, if he died below puberty, let him have as heirs those whom his father constituted for him and who have entered upon the inheritance; but if after puberty, you, obtaining his succession, may be required, as on the ground of a fideicommissum, to deliver the goods which, at the time when he died, were his father’s, and they can demand them from you. <a 293 s.K.Ian.Sirmi aa. conss.>
Humanitatis intuitu parentibus indulgemus, ut, si filium vel nepotem vel pronepotem cuiuscumque sexus habeant nec alia proles descendentium eis sit, iste tamen filius vel filia vel nepos vel neptis vel pronepos vel proneptis mente captus vel mente capta perpetuo sit, vel si duo vel plures isti fuerint, nullus vero eorum saperet, liceat isdem parentibus legitima portione ei vel eis relicta quos voluerint his substituere, ut occasione huiusmodi substitutionis ad exemplum pupillaris nulla querella contra testamentum eorum oriatur, ita tamen, ut, si postea resipuerit vel resipuerint, talis substitutio cesset, vel si filii aut alii descendentes ex huiusmodi mente capta persona sapientes sint, non liceat parenti qui vel quae testatur alios quam ex eo descendentes unum vel certos vel omnes substituere. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 d.Iii id.Dec.Constantinopoli dn.Iusti niano a. pp. ii cons.>
Out of regard for humanity we grant to parents that, if they have a son or grandson or great‑grandson of whatever sex and have no other issue in the descending line, but this son or daughter or grandson or granddaughter or great‑grandson or great‑granddaughter is perpetually of unsound mind, or if there are two or more of these and none of them is sane, it shall be permitted to the same parents, the legitimate portion having been left to him or to them, to substitute for him or them whom they wish; so that, on the occasion of such a substitution, after the example of the pupillary, no complaint may arise against their testament; provided, however, that if thereafter he or they recover their senses, such substitution shall cease; or, if the sons or other descendants from such a person of unsound mind are sane, it shall not be permitted to the parent who is making the will to substitute any others than descendants from that person, whether one, certain ones, or all. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 d.Iii id.Dec.Constantinopoli dn.Iusti niano a. pp. ii cons.>
Sin vero etiam alii liberi testatori vel testatrici sint sapientes, ex his vero personis quae mente captae sunt nullus descendat, ad fratres eorum unum vel certos vel omnes eandem fieri substitutionem oportet. <a 528 d.Iii id.Dec.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano a. pp. ii cons.>
But if indeed there are also other children of the testator or testatrix who are sane, and from those persons who are of unsound mind no descendant issues, the same substitution ought to be made to their brothers—whether to one, to certain ones, or to all. <a 528 d.Iii id.Dec.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano a. pp. ii cons.>
Cum quidam duobus impuberibus filiis suis heredibus institutis adiecit, si uterque impubes decesserit, illum sibi esse heredem, et dubitabatur apud antiquos legum auctores, utrumne tunc voluit substitutum admitti, cum uterque filius eius in prima aetate decesserit, an alterutro decedente ilico substitutus in eius partem succedat, placuit sabino substitutionem tunc locum habere, cum uterque decesserit: cogitasse enim patrem primo decedente fratrem suum in eius portionem succedere. * iust. a. iohanni.Pp. * <a 531 d.Vi k.Aug.Constintinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
When a certain man, having instituted his two underage sons as heirs, added that, if both underage should die, that man should be his heir, and there was doubt among the ancient authors of the laws whether he wished the substitute to be admitted then, when both his sons had died in early age, or whether, upon either one dying, the substitute should immediately succeed into his share, it pleased Sabinus that the substitution should take place then, when both had died: for he thought that the father, upon the first dying, intended that his brother should succeed into his portion. * iust. a. iohanni.Pp. * <a 531 d.Vi k.Aug.Constintinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Si quis duobus heredibus institutis filio suo impuberi eos una cum alio tertio substituit et verba testamenti ita composuerit: " quisquis mihi heres erit, et titius filio meo heres esto", secundum quod apud ulpianum invenimus, mortuo impubere filio quaerebatur, quomodo ad substitutionem vocentur tres substituti: utrumne duo priores, qui et patri heredes fuerant scripti, in dimidiam vocantur et titius in reliquam dimidiam, an tres substituti unusquisque ex triente ad substitutionem vocantur? alia applicata dubitatione, si quis ita heredem scripserit: " titius una cum filiis suis et sempronius heredes mihi sunto". et in praesente etenim specie quaerebatur secundum ulpianum voluntas testantis: utrumne titium una cum suis filiis in dimidiam vocat et sempronium in aliam dimidiam, an omnes in virilem portionem? * iust.
If someone, two heirs having been instituted, for his underage son substitutes them together with a third and composes the words of the testament thus: " whoever shall be my heir, let him and Titius be heir to my son," then, according to what we find in Ulpian, after the underage son has died it was asked how the three substitutes are called to the substitution: whether the two former, who also had been written as heirs to the father, are called to one half and Titius to the remaining half, or whether the three substitutes are each called to the substitution for one third? With another doubt appended, if someone has thus written an heir: " Titius together with his sons and Sempronius, let them be my heirs." And indeed in the present case, according to Ulpian, the will of the testator was inquired: whether he calls Titius together with his sons to one half and Sempronius to the other half, or all to a virile portion? * iust.
Nobis autem in prima quidem specie videtur tres substitutos unumquemque in trientem vocari, in secunda autem specie, cum et natura pater et filius eadem persona paene intelleguntur, dimidiam quidem partem titio cum filiis, alteram autem partem sempronio adsignari. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
However, to us, in the first form it seems that the three substitutes are each called to a third; in the second form, however, since by nature father and son are almost understood as the same person, one half is assigned to Titius with his sons, and the other half to Sempronius. <a 531 on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Si tutor ancillam tuam contubernio suo coniunxit ac post heredem instituit, neque dominium ex huiusmodi facto tibi auferri potuit et, ut eius aditione iussu tuo tibi per hanc successio quaeratur, iure concessam habes facultatem. * diocl. et maxim.
If a guardian joined your maidservant to his own contubernium and afterwards instituted her as heir, neither could ownership be taken away from you by a deed of this kind, and you have the lawfully granted faculty that, by her aditio (entry upon the inheritance) at your order, succession be sought for you through her. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Cum quidam suum pupillum heredem instituit et servo directis verbis libertatem reliquit et in secundo gradu, in quo pupillarem substitutionem faciebat, ipsum servum sine libertate pupillo suo substituit, quaerebatur inter prudentes, si ex huiusmodi substitutione heres necessarius pupillo existat. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.
When someone appointed his own pupil as heir and, in express words, left liberty to a slave, and in the second degree—in which he was making a pupillary substitution—he substituted that same slave to his pupil without liberty, it was inquired among the jurists whether from a substitution of this sort a necessary heir would arise for the pupil. * Justinian Augustus to Julian, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 530 on the 15th day before the Kalends of December, at Constantinople, when Lampadius and Orestes, most illustrious men, were consuls.
Causa etenim altercationis ex vetere regula orta est, quia omnibus placuerat hunc servum necessarium heredem domino fieri, cui in eodem gradu et hereditas et libertas relinquebatur, in praesenti autem non in unum tam libertas quam substitutio congregata est, sed in alium et alium gradum. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss. >
For the cause of the altercation arose from an old rule, because it had pleased everyone that this slave become a necessary heir to his master, to whom in the same degree both the inheritance and liberty were left; but in the present case both liberty and substitution have not been congregated into one, but into different degrees. <year 530 on the 15th day before the Kalends of December, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls. >
Nobis itaque eandem altercationem decidentibus mirabile visum est, si quis putet ex huiusmodi scrupulositate impediri testatoris voluntatem, et maxime domini, et existimet non fieri servum heredem necessarium, sed ei licentiam praestet et libertatem consequi et hereditatem respuere et domini voluntati reclamare: qui si hoc differre temptaverit, etiam puniendus est. sit itaque et vivo pupillo liber, quia testator hoc voluit, et mortuo pupillo necessarius heres, quia et hoc testator voluit. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.
Therefore, as we are deciding that same altercation, it has seemed remarkable to us if anyone should think that by such scrupulosity the will of the testator—and most of all of the master—is impeded, and suppose that the slave does not become a necessary heir, but that license be afforded to him both to obtain liberty and to spurn the inheritance and to protest against the master’s will: and if he attempts to defer this, he is to be punished as well. Therefore let him be free even while the pupil is alive, because the testator willed this, and, when the pupil is dead, a necessary heir, because the testator also willed this. <a 530 on the 15th day before the Kalends of December, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.
Quidam, cum testamentum conderet, duobus heredibus scriptis unum quidem ex parte instituit, servum autem suum, cuius et nomen addidit, ex reliqua parte sine libertate scripsit heredem et postea eundem servum alii legavit, vel post institutionem heredis servum per legatum alii adsignavit et tunc heredem eum sine libertate instituit: et dubitabatur, si huiusmodi legatum vel institutio aliquas vires potest habere et cui adquiritur legatum vel institutio. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. ii k. mai.
A certain man, when he was drawing up a testament, with two heirs written in, instituted one indeed for a share, but he wrote as heir his slave—whose name he also added—from the remaining part without liberty; and afterwards he bequeathed that same slave to another; or, after the institution of the heir, he assigned the slave to another by a legacy, and then instituted him as heir without liberty: and it was doubted whether a legacy or institution of this kind can have any force, and to whom the legacy or the institution is acquired. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 531, on the 2nd day before the Kalends of May.
Dubitationis autem materia erat, quod adhuc servum suum constitutum heredem sine libertate scripserat, et tanta inter veteres exorta est contentio, ut vix possibile sit videri eandem decidere. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But the matter of doubt was that he had written his own slave, constituted as heir, without liberty; and so great a contention arose among the ancients that it seems scarcely possible to decide the same. <in the year 531, on the 2nd day before the Kalends of May, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Cum igitur invenimus a nostro iure hoc esse inductum, ut, si quis servum suum tutorem filiis suis reliquerit sine libertate, ex ipsa tutelae datione praesumatur etiam libertatem ei favore pupillorum imposuisse, quare non hoc et in hereditate et humanius et favore libertatis inducimus, ut, si quis servum suum scripserit heredem sine libertate, omnimodo civis romanus efficiatur? <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Since therefore we have found that this has been introduced by our law, that if anyone has left his slave as tutor to his children without freedom, from the very grant of tutelage it is presumed that he has also imposed liberty upon him in favor of the wards, why do we not introduce this also in inheritance, both more humanely and in favor of liberty, that, if anyone has written his slave as heir without freedom, he shall in every way be made a Roman citizen? <Given on April 30, 531, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Quo inducto neque adquisitio neque tam effusus veterum atque inextricabilis tractatus locum habeat. neque enim ferendum est supponere quosdam ita esse supinos, ut eundem servum et heredem instituant sine libertate et item alii per legatum eundem servum adsignent. <a 531 d. ii k. mai.
With this introduced, neither acquisition nor that so diffuse and inextricable tractation of the ancients will have place. For it is not to be borne to suppose that certain men are so supine as to institute the same slave as heir without freedom, and likewise that others assign the same slave by legacy. <a 531 d. ii k. mai.
Sed cum veteres et aliam proposuerunt ambiguitatem dicentes, si quis servum suum in testamento quidem heredem ex parte sine libertate scripsisset, in codicillis autem libertatem ei reliquisset, si possit institutio valere et ille tam heres quam liber fieri, ne videatur per codicillos hereditas confirmari, in quibus hereditas dari secundum veterem regulam non potest: nos in tali dispositione, licet in codicillis fuerit scripta, et libertatem et hereditatem simul servis per nostram liberalitatem et benignam interpretationem indulgemus, ut gratulentur, cum non servi remaneant, sed et liberti et heredes efficiantur, cum tanta in eos nostri numinis benivolentia effusa est, ut, etsi libertas eis neque testamento neque codicillis data est, tamen hereditate servis relicta quasi iniunctam et libertatem esse videri. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But since the ancients also proposed another ambiguity, saying that, if someone in his testament had indeed written his slave as heir in part without liberty, but in codicils had left liberty to him, whether the institution could be valid and he become both heir and free—lest the inheritance seem to be confirmed by codicils, in which, according to the ancient rule, an inheritance cannot be given—we, in such a disposition, although it was written in codicils, by our liberality and benign interpretation grant both liberty and inheritance together to slaves, so that they may rejoice, since they do not remain slaves, but are made both freedmen and heirs; since so great a benevolence of our divinity has been poured out upon them that, even if liberty has been given to them neither by testament nor by codicils, nevertheless, with an inheritance having been left to slaves, liberty also is seen as, so to speak, enjoined. <a 531 on the 2nd day before the kalends of may, at constantinople, after the consulship of lampadius and orestes, most distinguished men.>
Non tamen ita impii heredes existant, ut liberalitatem testatoris servilis laboris debita remuneratione defraudare conentur et non derelictum, licet adhuc servis constitutis, donent. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Nevertheless, let not the heirs be so impious as to attempt to defraud the testator’s liberality of the due remuneration of servile labor, and not give what was left, although they are still constituted as slaves. <a 531, on the 2nd day before the Kalends of May, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Quae iuris nostri definitio etiam ad aliam speciem dubitatam benigne extendatur. si quis etenim in principali testamento servum suum cuidam legaverit, in pupillari autem substitutione eundem servum filio suo sine libertate substituerit, quaerebatur, sive utilis esset talis substitutio et per servum legatum substitutio post mortem pupilli legatario adquiritur, sive inutilis est huiusmodi substitutio, quia sine libertate in servum proprium facta est. <a 531 d. ii k. mai.
Let that definition of our law also be benignly extended to another doubtful species. For if someone, in the principal testament, has bequeathed his slave to a certain person, but in a pupillary substitution has substituted the same slave to his son without liberty, the question was raised whether such a substitution is valid, and, through the slave bequeathed, the substitution is acquired by the legatee after the ward’s death, or whether a substitution of this kind is invalid, because it has been made upon one’s own slave without liberty. <a 531 on the 2nd day before the Kalends of May.
Melius itaque nobis videtur legatario eum non statim adquiri sancire, sed expectandum esse substitutionis eventum. et si quidem pupillo mortuo locus fuerit substitutioni, et liber et heres efficiatur: sin autem substitutio minime locum habuerit, forsitan pupillo iam in pubertatem perveniente, tunc ad legatarii dominium transeat. <a 531 d. ii k. mai.
Therefore it seems better to us to sanction that it is not acquired by the legatee at once, but that the outcome of the substitution must be awaited. And if indeed, the ward having died, there is room for the substitution, let him become both free and heir: but if the substitution has in no way taken place, perhaps with the ward now having reached puberty, then let it pass to the legatee’s dominion. <a 531, day 2 before the Kalends of May.
Quemadmodum enim veteres, si cum libertate substitutio fuisset, hoc inducebant quatenus in suspenso fiat libertas et statuliber intellegatur, ita et ex nostra interpretatione et sine adiectione libertatis in substitutione et liber et heres pupillo existat. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
For just as the ancients, if the substitution had been made together with liberty, introduced this, to the extent that liberty be in suspense and the person be understood as statuliber, so also by our interpretation, even without the addition of liberty in the substitution, the person shall stand both as free and as heir to the ward. <a 531, on the 2nd day before the Kalends of May, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Decisione nostra, quam fecimus sancientes eum, qui a domino suo sine libertate heres instituitur, videri libertatem accepisse, in propria firmitate durante, si quis servum suum pure quidem heredem instituit, libertatem autem sub condicione ei donavit, si quidem condicio talis sit, quae in potestate servi posita est: ille autem eam neglexerit minimeque compleverit, et libertate eum et hereditate sua culpa defraudari. sin autem casualis est condicio et ex fortunae insidiis defecerit, tunc humanitatis intuitu libertatem quidem ei omnimodo competere, hereditatem autem, si quidem solvendo sit, ad alios venire, quos leges vocabant, si non aliquis fuisset substitutus. sin autem solvendo non sit, ut necessarius he res constitutus simul et libertatem et hereditatem obtineat.
By our decision, which we made sanctioning that one who is instituted heir by his master without freedom is to be deemed to have received freedom, remaining in its own firmness: if someone does indeed institute his slave purely as heir, but grants freedom to him under a condition, and if the condition is such as is placed in the power of the slave, but he has neglected it and by no means fulfilled it, then, by his own fault, he is to be defrauded both of freedom and of his inheritance. But if the condition is casual and he has failed by the ambushes of fortune, then, out of regard for humanity, freedom in every way is to belong to him, but the inheritance, if indeed he is solvent, is to come to those whom the laws called, if no one had been substituted. But if he is not solvent, then, being constituted a necessary heir, he is to obtain both freedom and the inheritance at the same time.
Cum post omnes heredum gradus exheredatio scribatur, si adiciat testator ab omnibus se gradibus exheredare, non dubitatur iuri satisfactum. et ideo, etiamsi id non adiciatur, appareat tamen eum cum eo consilio scripsisse, ut ab omnibus exheredaret, recte factum testamentum videtur. * sev.
When, after all the degrees of heirs, the exheredation is written, if the testator adds that he is exheredating with respect to all the degrees, it is not doubted that satisfaction has been given to the law. And therefore, even if that is not added, nevertheless, if it appears that he wrote with that intention—that he exheredate as to all—the testament is deemed rightly made. * sev.
Proinde cum pater familias filiis institutis et invicem substitutis filiam exheredaverit, intellegendus est exheredationem ab utroque gradu fecisse. nam cum idem heredes instituti sunt, nulla ratio reddi potest, quare videatur in posteriore tantum casu exheredare voluisse. <a 204 pp. vi k. iul.
Accordingly, when a paterfamilias, with sons instituted as heirs and substituted for one another, has disinherited his daughter, he is to be understood to have made the disinheritance from both degrees. For since the same persons are instituted as heirs, no reason can be rendered why he should be thought to have wished to disinherit only in the latter case. <a 204, 6 days before the Kalends of July.
Si avus tuus, qui patrem tuum et novercam aequis portionibus heredes instituit, cum te quoque haberet in potestate, testamento nominatim non exheredavit, mortuo patre tuo vivo avo sine impedimento legis vellaeae succedendo in patris tui locum rupisti avi testamentum et ad te hereditas eius tota pertinuit. * alex. a. heraclidae.
If your grandfather, who instituted your father and your stepmother as heirs in equal portions, while he also had you in his power, did not disinherit you by name in the testament, then, your father having died while your grandfather lived, by succeeding into your father’s place without impediment from the Vellaean law, you ruptured your grandfather’s testament, and the whole of his inheritance pertained to you. * Alexander Augustus to Heraclides.
Si quis filium proprium ita exheredaverit:" ille filius meus alienus meae substantiae fiat", talis filius ab huiusmodi verborum conceptione non praeteritus, sed exheredatus intellegatur. cum enim manifestissimus est sensus testatoris, verborum interpretatio nusquam tantum valeat, ut melior sensu existat. * iust.
If anyone has disinherited his own son in this way: "let that son of mine be alien to my substance," such a son, from the conception of words of this sort, is to be understood not as passed over, but as disinherited. For since the intention of the testator is most manifest, the interpretation of the words should nowhere so prevail as to be better than the intention. * iust.
Maximum vitium antiquae subtilitatis praesenti lege corrigimus, quae putavit alia esse iura observanda in successione parentum, si ex testamento veniant, in masculis et in feminis, cum ab intestato simile ius utrique sexui servaverunt, et aliis verbis exheredari debere filium sanxerunt, aliis filiam, et inter nepotes exheredandos alia iura civilia, alia praetoris introduxerunt. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
We correct by the present law the greatest fault of the ancient subtlety, which thought that different laws had to be observed in the succession of parents, if they come by testament, for males and for females, whereas from intestacy they preserved a like right for either sex; and they sanctioned that a son must be disinherited by one set of words, a daughter by another; and, as to grandchildren to be disinherited, they introduced different rules, some of the civil law, others of the praetor. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 531, on the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Et si praeteritus fuerat filius, vel ipso iure testamentum evertebat vel contra tabulas bonorum possessionem in totum accipiebat, filia autem praeterita ius adcrescendi ex iure vetere accipiebat, ut eodem momento et testamentum patris quodammodo ex parte iure adcrescendi evertat et ipsa quasi scripta legatis supponeretur, ex praetore autem habebat contra tabulas bonorum possessionem in totum, constitutio autem magni antonini eam in tantum coartabat, in quantum ius adcrescendi competebat. qui enim tales differentias inducunt, quasi naturae accusatores existunt, cur non totos masculos generavit, ut, unde generentur, non fiant. <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
And if a son had been passed over, he either overturned the testament by the law itself or received, against the tablets, possession of the estate in its entirety; but a daughter passed over received from the old law the right of accretion, so that at the same moment she both, in a certain way, overthrows the father’s testament in part by the right of accretion, and she herself is, as it were, inserted as if written in, with the legacies put beneath; moreover, from the praetor she had possession of the estate in its entirety against the tablets, but the constitution of the great Antoninus restricted it to the extent to which the right of accretion was applicable. For those who introduce such differences are, as it were, accusers of nature—why did it not generate males only, so that those from whom they are generated might not exist. <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Nam haec corrigentes et maiorum nostrorum sequimur vestigia, qui eandem observationem colere manifestissimi sunt. scimus etenim antea simili modo et filium et alios omnes inter ceteros exheredatos scribere esse concessum, cum etiam centumviri aliam differentiam introduxerunt. <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
For correcting these things we also follow the footsteps of our ancestors, who are most manifest to have cultivated the same observance. For we know that formerly in a similar manner it was permitted to write as disinherited both the son and all others among the rest, since even the centumvirs introduced another difference. <on 531, on the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Et ex hac iniquitate vitium emersit, quale ex libris ulpiani, quos ad edictum fecit praetoris, inventum a triboniano viro gloriosissimo nostro quaestore ceterisque viris facundissimis compositoribus iuris enucleati ad nostras aures relatum est. <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
And from this iniquity a defect emerged, such as—from the books of Ulpian, which he composed on the praetor’s Edict—having been discovered by Tribonian, a most glorious man, our quaestor, and by the other most eloquent men, compilers of elucidated law, has been reported to our ears. <a 531 on the Kalends of September at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Nam cum ultimum adiutorium de inofficiosi querella positum est et nemo ex alio ortus praesidio ad hanc decurrere possit, inventa fuerat filia praeterita minus habens quam filia exheredata. cum enim per contra tabulas bonorum possessionem vel ius adcrescendi semissem substantiae filia praeterita accipiebat et omnibus legata praestare compellebatur, scilicet usque ad dodrantem suae portionis, remanebat ei sescuncia tantummodo in sua successione. <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
For since the ultimate aid is set in the complaint of undutifulness, and no one arising from another kind of protection can resort to this, a pretermitted daughter had been found to be worse off than a disinherited daughter. For since, through possession of the goods against the will or by the right of accretion, the pretermitted daughter received a half of the estate, and was compelled to discharge all legacies, namely up to three-quarters of her portion, there remained to her only a sescuncia (one-eighth) in her own succession. <a 531 AD Sept. Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Quod si fuisset exheredata, quarta pars omnimodo totius substantiae ei relinqui debebat, et quam iniuria dignam pater existimabat, amplius habebat ea, quam taciturnitate in institutione praeteriit: et si secundum nostrae constitutionis definitionem, quam de supplemento quadrantis posuimus, repletio fuerat introducta, simili modo exheredatae in quarta repletio accedebat et ita vitium permansit, ut nec ex nostra constitutione emendationem aliquam sentiret. <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But if she had been disinherited, a fourth part in every way of the whole estate had to be left to her; and she whom the father judged worthy of injury had more than she whom he passed over in silence in the institution: and if, according to the definition of our constitution which we set down concerning the supplement of the quarter, a replenishment had been introduced, in like manner a replenishment up to the fourth accrued to the disinherited woman; and thus the defect remained, so that she perceived no amendment from our constitution. <a 531 AD, Sept., at Constantinople, after the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sancimus itaque, quemadmodum in successionibus parentium, quae ab intestato deferuntur, aequa lance et mares et feminae vocantur, ita et in scriptura testamentorum eas honorari et similibus verbis exheredationes nominatim procedere et contra tabulas possessionem talem habere, qualem filius suus vel emancipatus, ut et ipsa, si fuerit praeterita, ad instar filii emancipati vel sui vel testamentum ipso iure evertat vel per contra tabulas bonorum possessionem stare hoc non patiatur. <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
We ordain, therefore, that just as in the successions of parents which are conferred ab intestato, males and females are summoned with an even balance, so also in the drafting of testaments they (women) are to be honored, and disinheritances are to proceed by name with similar words, and that they have such possession contra tabulas as a natural (suus) or emancipated son, so that she also, if she has been passed over, after the manner of an emancipated or suus son, either overturn the testament by the law itself or not allow this to stand through a bonorum possessio contra tabulas. <a 531, on the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sed quia et aliud vitium fuerat sub obtentu differentiae introductum et alia iura exheredationis in postumis, alia in iam natis observabantur, cum necesse fuerat postumam inter ceteros exheredatam etiam legato honorari, filiam autem iam progenitam et sine datione, et hoc brevissimo incremento verborum ad plenissimam definitionem deduximus sancientes eadem iura obtinere et in postumis exheredandis, sive masculini sive feminini sexus sint, quae in filiis et filiabus iam statuimus, ut etiam ipsi vel ipsae nominatim exheredentur, id est postumi vel postumae facta mentione. <a 531 d.K.Sept constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But because another defect, too, had been introduced under the pretext of a distinction, and different laws of disinheritance were being observed for posthumous children and for those already born—since it had been necessary that a posthumous girl, when disinherited among the others, also be honored by a legacy, whereas a daughter already begotten could be [disinherited] even without any grant—we have by a very brief increment of words brought this to a most full definition, sanctioning that the same laws obtain also in the disinheriting of posthumous children, whether they are of the male or female sex, as we have now established for sons and daughters, so that they too are disinherited by name—that is, with mention made of posthumous sons or posthumous daughters. <a 531, on the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Si post testamentum factum, quo postumorum suorum nullam mentionem testator fecit, filiam suscepit, intestato vita functus est, cum agnatione postumae cuius non meminit testamentum ruptum sit: ex rupto autem testamento nihil deberi neque peti posse explorati iuris est. * ant. a. brittiano.
If, after a testament has been made, in which the testator made no mention of his posthumous children, he then received a daughter, he died intestate, since by the agnation of the posthumous daughter of whom he did not make mention the testament is broken: and from a broken testament nothing is owed nor can be sought; this is established law. * Antoninus Augustus to Brittianus.
Quod certatum est apud veteres, nos decidimus. cum igitur is qui in ventre portabatur praeteritus fuerat, qui, si ad lucem fuisset redactus, suus heres patri existeret, si non alius eum antecederet et nascendo ruptum testamentum faciebat, si postumus in hunc quidem orbem devolutus est, voce autem non emissa ab hac luce subtractus est, dubitabatur, si is postumus ruptum facere testamentum potest. * iust.
What was contested among the ancients, we decide. Since therefore he who was carried in the womb had been passed over—who, if he had been brought to the light, would have become his father’s proper heir, if no other had preceded him, and by being born would make the testament broken—if the posthumous has indeed been brought down into this world, but, no voice having been emitted, has been withdrawn from this light, it was doubted whether that posthumous can make the testament broken. * iust.
Veteres animi turbati sunt, quid de paterno elogio statuendum sit. cumque sabiniani existimabant, si vivus natus est, etsi vocem non emisit, ruptum testamentum , apparet, quod, etsi mutus fuerat, hoc ipsum faciebat, eorum etiam nos laudamus sententiam et sancimus, si vivus perfecte natus est, licet ilico postquam in terram cecidit vel in manibus obstetricis decessit, nihilo minus testamentum corrumpi, hoc tantummodo requirendo, si vivus ad orbem totus processit ad nullum declinans monstrum vel prodigium. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
The opinions of the ancients were unsettled as to what should be determined concerning the paternal testamentary provision. And since the Sabinians thought that, if he was born alive, even if he did not emit a voice, the testament was broken, it is apparent that, even if he were mute, he would bring about this very result; we also praise their opinion and sanction that, if he was born alive in perfect form, although he died immediately after he fell to the ground or in the hands of the midwife, nonetheless the testament is vitiated—this only being required: that, if alive, he came forth wholly into the world, deviating into no monstrosity or prodigy. <a 530 d.Xv k.Dec.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Quidam, cum testamentum faciebat, his verbis usus est: " si filius vel filia intra decem mensuum spatium post mortem meam fuerint editi, heredes sunto" vel ita dixit: " filius vel filia, qui intra decem menses proximos mortis meae nascentur, heredes sunto". iurgium antiquis interpretatoribus legum exortum est, an videantur non contineri testamento et hoc ruptum facere. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 530 d.Xii k.Dec.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.
Someone, when he was making a testament, used these words: " if a son or daughter within a span of ten months after my death shall have been brought forth, let them be heirs" or he said thus: " a son or daughter, who will be born within the ten months next following my death, let them be heirs". A quarrel arose among the ancient interpreters of the laws, whether they seem not to be contained in the testament and to render this void. * Justinian Augustus to Julian, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 530 on the 12th day before the Kalends of December at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.
Nobis itaque eorum sententias decidentibus, cum frequentissimas leges posuimus testatorum voluntates adiuvantes, ex neutra huiusmodi verborum positione ruptum fieri testamentum videtur, sed sive vivo testatore sive post mortem eius intra decem menses a morte testatoris numerandos filius vel filia fuerint progeniti, maneat testatoris voluntas immutilata, ne poenam patiatur praeteritionis, qui suos filios non praeteriit. <a 530 d.Xii k.Dec.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss. >
Accordingly, as we settle their opinions, since we have set forth very numerous laws assisting testators’ wills, from neither placement of words of this kind does a testament seem to be rendered broken; but whether, with the testator alive, or after his death, within ten months to be counted from the death of the testator, a son or daughter shall have been begotten, let the will of the testator remain unmutilated, lest he suffer the penalty of preterition, who has not omitted his own children. <a 530 on the 12th day before the Kalends of December at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most illustrious men, consuls. >
Si a patre emancipata eo defuncto bonorum possessionem non agnovisti, frustra vereris, ne hereditati paternae sis obligata, quod servum eius nullo iure manumisisti resque et mancipia quaedam propter funeris impensas distraxisti. * ant. a. titiae.
If, having been emancipated from your father, after his death you did not accept the possession of the estate, you fear in vain that you are bound to the paternal inheritance, on the ground that you manumitted his slave with no right and sold off certain things and mancipia on account of the funeral expenses. * antoninus augustus to titia.
Si fratris tui filius mortis tempore in patris sui fuit potestate, sive ex asse heres institutus est, etiam clausis tabulis heres potuit existere, sive ex parte , nihilo minus statim suus heres ei extitit nec eapropter, quod intra paucos dies mortis patris sui concessit in fatum, tu ad eiusdem fratris tui potes accedere successionem. * gord. a. florentino mil.
If your brother’s son at the time of death was under his father’s power, whether he was instituted heir to the whole, even with the tablets sealed he could come to be heir, or to a part , nonetheless he immediately stood as his own heir to him; nor on that account, because within a few days after his father’s death he departed to his fate, can you accede to the succession of that same brother. * gordian aug. to florentinus, soldier.
Quod si, cum sui iuris esset, ante aditam hereditatem decessit tuque fratri tuo legitimus heres extitisti seu intra tempora edicto praefinita bonorum possessionem agnovisti: quae facultatum sunt vel quae ab alio iniuria detinentur, praesidis diligentia tibi restituentur. <a 241 pp. xv k. sept. gordiano a. ii et pompeiano conss.>
But if, while he was sui iuris, he died before the inheritance was entered upon, and you came forth as the legitimate heir to your brother, or you acknowledged possession of the goods within the times prescribed by the edict: whatever pertains to the assets, or whatever is unjustly detained by another, will be restituted to you by the diligence of the governor. <a 241, 15 days before the Kalends of September, in the consulship of Gordian, for the 2nd time, and Pompeianus, consuls.>
Si avia tua patrem tuum ex duabus unciis scripsit heredem, et sola animi destinatione pater tuus heres fieri poterat. igitur si testamento suo easdem uncias ad te petinere decrevit, apud rectorem provinciae duarum unciarum ius persequi poteris. * diocl.
If your grandmother appointed your father heir for two unciae (twelfths), and by mere mental determination your father could become heir, then if by her testament she decreed that the same unciae pertain to you, you will be able to pursue before the rector of the province the right to the two unciae. * Diocletian.
Quoniam sororem tuam prius defunctam esse proponis, quam cognosceret, an a fratre sibi aliquid hereditatis fuisset relictum, manifestum atque evidens est, antequam pro herede gereret vel bonorum possessionem admiserit, defunctam successionem eam non potuisse ad heredes suos transmittere. * diocl. et maxim.
Since you allege that your sister died before she learned whether anything of the inheritance had been left to her by her brother, it is manifest and evident that, before she had acted as heir or had admitted possession of the goods, she, being deceased, could not have transmitted the succession to her own heirs. * diocl. and maxim.
Si curatoris tui quondam testamento iure facto vel ab intestato legitima delata successio est, hoc casu ei qui non repudiavit hereditatem eam licet adire. rector igitur aditus provinciae, si hereditati necdum sunt obligati, eos an heredes sint interrogare debebit ac, si tempus ad deliberandum petierint, moderatum statuet. * diocl.
If the succession of your former curator has been devolved by a lawfully made testament or as legitimate succession ab intestato, in this case it is permitted for him who has not repudiated the inheritance to enter upon it. Therefore the governor of the province who has been approached, if they are not yet bound to the inheritance, ought to ask them whether they are heirs and, if they request time for deliberating, he will set a moderate one. * diocl.
Si te bonis paternis maior quinque et viginti annis miscuisti, neque inopia patris te excusat neque vis fratris portionem tuam vel testamentum eripientis arcere te exactione creditorum, qui iure civili pro hereditaria te portione conveniunt, potest. * diocl. et maxim.
If, being over twenty-five years old, you have mingled yourself with paternal goods, neither the father’s indigence excuses you, nor can the force of a brother snatching away your portion or the testament ward you off from the exaction of creditors, who by civil law sue you for your hereditary portion. * diocl. and maxim.
Si infanti, id est minori septem annis, in potestate patris vel avi vel proavi constituto vel constitutae hereditas sit derelicta vel ab intestato delata a matre vel linea ex qua mater descendit vel aliis quibuscumque personis, licebit parentibus eius sub quorum potestate est adire eius nomine hereditatem vel bonorum possessionem petere. * theodos. et valentin.
If to an infant, that is, one under 7 years, established in the power of a father or grandfather or great-grandfather, an inheritance has been left, or has devolved ab intestate, by the mother or the line from which the mother descends or by any persons whatsoever, it shall be permitted to the parents under whose power he or she is to enter upon the inheritance in his or her name, or to seek possession of the goods (bonorum possessio). * theodos. et valentin.
Sed si hoc parens neglexerit et in memorata aetate infans decesserit, tunc parentem quidem superstitem omnia ex quacumque successione ad eundem infantem devoluta iure patrio quasi iam infanti quaesita capere. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
But if the parent has neglected this and the infant has died at the aforesaid age, then the surviving parent is to take, by parental right, all things from whatever succession had devolved upon that same infant, as if already acquired for the infant. <a 426, d. 8 before the Ides of Nov., at Ravenna, when Theodosius 12 and Valentinian 2, Augusti, were consuls.>
Parente vero non subsistente, si quidem post eius obitum tutor infanti sit vel datus fuerit, posse eum etiam adhuc infante pupillo constituto nomine eius adire hereditatem sive vivo parente sive post mortem eius ad eum devolutam vel bonorum possessionem petere et eo modo eidem infanti hereditatem quaerere. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
But if the parent is not subsisting, if indeed after his death a guardian is or has been appointed for the infant, he can, even while the infant is still constituted a ward, in his name enter upon the inheritance—whether devolved to him while the parent was alive or after his death—or seek the possession of the goods, and in that way acquire the inheritance for the same infant. <a 426 d. 8 id. nov. ravennae theodosio 12 et valentiniano 2 aa. conss.>
Sin vero vel non sit tutor vel, cum sit, ea facere neglexerit, tunc eodem infante in ea aetate defuncto omnes hereditates ad eum devolutas et non agnitas ita intellegi, quasi ab initio non essent ad eum delatae, et eo modo ad illas personas perveniant, quae vocabantur, si minime hereditas infanti fuisset delata. ea vero, quae de infante in potestate parentium constituto statuimus, locum habebunt et si quacumque causa sui iuris idem infans inveniatur. <a 426 d. viii id. nov.
But if either there be no guardian, or, though there is one, he has neglected to do these things, then, if that same infant dies at that age, all inheritances devolved upon him and not claimed are to be understood as though from the beginning they had not been delated to him, and in that way let them pass to those persons who would have been called if in no way the inheritance had been delated to the infant. But the provisions which we have established concerning an infant constituted under the power of his parents shall apply also if for whatever cause the same infant is found to be of his own right (sui iuris). <a 426 d. viii id. nov.
Sin autem septem annos aetatis pupillus excesserit et priore parente mortuo in pupillari aetate fati munus impleverit, ea obtinere praecipimus, quae veteribus legibus continentur, nulla dubietate relicta, quin pupillus post impletos septem annos suae aetatis ipse adire hereditatem vel possessionem bonorum petere consentiente parente, si sub eius potestate sit, vel cum tutoris auctoritate, si sui iuris sit, poterit vel, si non habeat tutorem, adire praetorem et eius decreto hoc ius consequi. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
But if the ward has exceeded seven years of age, and the earlier parent, having died, has fulfilled the duty of fate during the ward’s age, we prescribe that those things obtain which are contained in the ancient laws, leaving no doubt that after completing seven years of his age the ward himself can enter upon the inheritance or seek possession of the goods with the consenting parent, if he is under that parent’s power, or with the authority of a tutor, if he is sui iuris; or, if he does not have a tutor, he may approach the praetor and by his decree obtain this right. <in the year 426, on the eighth day before the ides of november, at ravenna, theodosius 12 and valentinian 2, the augusti, consuls.>
Cum antiquioribus legibus et praecipue in quaestionibus iulii pauli invenimus filios familias paternam hereditatem deliberantes posse et in suam posteritatem hanc transmittere, et aliis quibusdam adiectis, quae in huiusmodi persona praecipua sunt: eam deliberationem et in omnes successores sive cognatos sive extraneos duximus esse protelandam. * iust. a. demostheni pp. * <a 529 recitata septimo in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani.
Whereas in the more ancient laws, and especially in the Questions of Julius Paulus, we find that sons under paternal power (filii familias), when deliberating concerning the paternal inheritance, are able also to transmit this to their own posterity, with certain other matters added which are principal in a person of this kind: we have deemed that that deliberation ought to be extended also to all successors, whether cognates or strangers. * Justinian Augustus to Demosthenes, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 529 recited on the seventh in the new consistory of the palace of Justinian.
Ideoque sancimus: si quis vel ex testamento vel ab intestato vocatus deliberationem meruerit vel hoc quidem non fecerit, non tamen successioni renuntiaverit, ut ex hac causa deliberare videatur, sed nec aliquid gesserit, quod aditionem vel pro herede gestionem inducit, praedictum arbitrium in successionem suam transmittat, ita tamen, ut unius anni spatiis eadem transmissio fuerit conclusa. <a 529 recitata septimo in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani. d. iii k. nov.
Therefore we decree: if anyone, called either by testament or ab intestate, has obtained leave for deliberation, or indeed has not done this, yet has not renounced the succession, so that from this cause he may seem to be deliberating, and has not done anything which induces adition of the inheritance or acting as heir, let him transmit the aforesaid choice into his own succession; provided, however, that the same transmission be concluded within the span of one year. <a 529 recited the seventh in the new consistory of the Palace of Justinian. on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November.
Et si quidem is, qui sciens hereditatem sibi esse vel ab intestato vel ex testamento delatam deliberatione minime petita intra annale tempus decesserit, hoc ius ad suam successionem intra annale tempus extendat. <a 529 recitata septimo in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani. d. iii k. nov.
And if indeed the person who, knowing that an inheritance has been conferred upon him either ab intestate or by testament, has died within the annual period, with deliberation not at all requested, let this right be extended to his own succession within the annual period. <a 529 read on the seventh in the new consistory of the palace of Justinian. on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November.
Si enim ipse, postquam testamentum fuerit insinuatum, vel ab intestato vel ex testamento vel aliter ei cognitum sit heredem eum vocatum fuisse, annali tempore translapso nihil fecerit, ex quo vel adeundam vel renuntiandam hereditatem manifestaverit, is cum successione sua ab huiusmodi beneficio excludatur. <a 529 recitata septimo in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani. d. iii k. nov.
For if he himself, after the testament has been registered, whether from intestacy or from the testament or otherwise it has become known to him that he was called as heir, and, with the annual period having elapsed, has done nothing by which he has made manifest either the entering upon or the renouncing of the inheritance, he, together with his succession, shall be excluded from such a benefit. <a 529 recited for the seventh time in the new consistory of the palace of Justinian. d. 3 k. nov.
Sin autem instante annali tempore decesserit, reliquum tempus pro adeunda hereditate suis successoribus sine aliqua dubietate relinquat, quo completo nec heredibus eius alius regressus in hereditatem habendam servabitur. <a 529 recitata septimo in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani. d. iii k. nov.
But if, however, with the annual term pressing he should have died, let him leave the remaining time for entering upon the inheritance to his successors without any doubt; and when this is completed, no further return for obtaining the inheritance will be preserved even for his heirs. <a 529 recited as the seventh in the new consistory of the palace of Justinian. on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November.
Quidam elogio condito heredem scripsit in certas uncias et post certa verba testamenti eunem in alias uncias vel tantas vel quantascumque et tertio vel in aliam partem hereditatis vel quendam unciarum modum, ille autem unam institutionem vel duas admittens unam vel duas vel quantascumque respuendas esse censuit: quaerebatur apud veteres, si hoc ei facere permittitur. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. prid.
Someone, with an elogium composed, appointed an heir for certain ounces (twelfths), and after certain words of the testament the same person for other ounces, either so many or however many, and, thirdly, either to another part of the inheritance or to a certain measure of ounces; but he, admitting one or two appointments, judged that one or two, or however many, must be rejected: it was inquired among the ancients whether this is permitted for him to do. * justinian augustus to john, praetorian prefect. * <a. 531, day before [sc. the stated calendar day]>
Similique modo dubitabatur, si impuberem quis filium suum heredem ex parte instituit et quendam extraneum in aliam partem, quem pupillariter substituit, et postquam testator decessit, pupillus quidem patri heres extitit, extraneus autem hereditatem adiit, et postea adhuc in prima aetate pupillus constitutus ab hac luce subtractus est et pupillaris substitutio locum sibi vindicavit: cumque substitutus eandem partem admittere noluit, quaesitum est, si potest iam heres ex principali testamento factus pupillarem substitutionem repudiare. <a 531 d. prid. k. mai.
In a like manner it was doubted, if someone instituted his prepubescent son as heir to a part and some stranger to another part, whom he substituted in pupillary fashion; and after the testator deceased, the ward indeed stood forth as heir to his father, while the stranger entered upon the inheritance; and afterwards, the ward, still constituted in his first age, was taken from this light, and the pupillary substitution claimed place for itself: and since the substitute was unwilling to admit that same share, the question was asked whether one already made heir by the principal testament can repudiate the pupillary substitution. <in the year 531, on the day before the Kalends of May.
Utramque igitur dubitationem simul decidendam esse censemus: placuit etenim nobis sive in institutionibus sive in pupillari substitutione, ut vel omnia admittantur vel omnia repudientur et necessitas imponatur heredi particulari facto vel aliam aut alias partes hereditatis admittere vel etiam substitutionem pupillarem. <a 531 d. prid. k. mai.
We therefore judge that both doubts must be decided at the same time: for it has pleased us, whether in the institutions of heirs or in a pupillary substitution, that either all be admitted or all be repudiated, and that necessity be imposed upon a particular heir who has been instituted to accept either another part or other parts of the inheritance, or also the pupillary substitution. <a 531, on the day before the Kalends of May.
Cum aliquis scripsit heredem eum, qui de sua condicione ei qui dominium eius vindicabat in iudicio adversabatur, is autem qui dominum sese dicebat adire eum hereditatem imperabat, ut adquisitio hereditatis per eum celebretur, indignatus est quasi domino ei parere. dubitatio veteribus exorta est, si qua poena ei imponitur huiusmodi insolentiae. * iust.
When someone wrote as heir a man who, concerning his own condition, was opposing in court the person who was vindicating dominion over him, and the one who said he was the owner commanded him to enter upon that inheritance, so that the acquisition of the inheritance might be celebrated (effected) through him, he became indignant at obeying him as a master. A doubt arose among the ancients whether any penalty is imposed upon him for insolence of this kind. * iust.
Et si quidem ita scripta est institutio: " illum servum illius heredem instituo" , quia apertissimum est intuitu domini esse institutionem conscriptam, necesse est omnimodo per competentem iudicem eum compelli adire quidem hereditatem et eam adquirere, nulli autem ex postfacto subici gravamini, si liber pronuntietur, sed omne sive lucrum sive damnum ad eum redundare qui in servitutem eum trahebat et denegari ei et adversus eum omnes hereditarias actiones, nullo ex hoc ei praeiudicio generando. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
And if indeed the institution is written thus: " that slave of that man I institute as heir" , since it is most manifest that the institution was drafted in consideration of the master, it is necessary in every way that by a competent judge he be compelled to enter upon the inheritance and to acquire it, but to be subjected to no burden arising afterward, if he is pronounced free; rather, every profit or loss is to redound to him who was dragging him into servitude; and all hereditary actions are to be denied both to him and against him, generating no prejudice to him from this. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Sin autem quasi liber institutus est nulla domini vel servi mentione in institutione habita, tunc nullo compelli modo eum adire hereditatem nec denegari ei liberale iudicium, sed et hereditatem per suum ius decurrere et liberale iudicium suam expectare sententiam sive agente eo sive pulsato, ut, si quidem servus pronuntietur, tunc domino suo hereditatem adquirat, sin autem liber, eam adipiscatur, si adire maluerit. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if he has been instituted as if a free man, no mention of master or slave having been made in the institution, then in no way is he to be compelled to enter upon the inheritance, nor is the judgment on liberty to be denied him; rather both the inheritance is to proceed according to his own right, and the liberty-suit to await its own sentence, whether he is acting or is being sued, so that, if he is pronounced a slave, then he acquires the inheritance for his master; but if free, he obtains it, if he prefers to enter upon it. <a 531 d. 2 k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Scimus iam duas esse promulgatas a nostra clementia constitutiones, unam quidem de his, qui deliberandum pro hereditate sibi delata existimaverunt, aliam autem de improvisis debitis et incertu exitu per diversas species eis imposito. sed etiam veterem constitutionem non ignoramus, quam divus gordianus ad platonem scripsit de militibus, qui per ignorantiam hereditatem adierint, quatenus pro his tantummodo rebus conveniantur, quas in hereditate defuncti invenerint, ipsorum autem bona a creditoribus hereditariis non inquietentur: cuius sensus ad unam praefatarum constitutionum a nobis redactus est. arma etenim magis quam iura scire milites sacratissimus legislator existimavit.
We know that two constitutions have already been promulgated by our clemency, one indeed concerning those who judged that deliberation was to be had with respect to an inheritance delated to them, and another about unforeseen debts and an uncertain outcome imposed upon them through diverse species. But we also are not ignorant of the old constitution which the deified Gordian wrote to Plato concerning soldiers who, through ignorance, had entered upon an inheritance, to the extent that they be convened only for those things which they found in the inheritance of the deceased, but that their own goods not be disquieted by hereditary creditors: the sense of which has been reduced by us into one of the aforesaid constitutions. For the most sacred legislator considered that soldiers know arms rather than laws.
Ex omnibus itaque istis unam legem colligere nobis apparuit esse humanum et non solum milites adiuvare huiusmodi beneficio, sed etiam ad omnes hoc extendere, non tantum si improvisum emerserit debitum, sed etiam si onerosam quis inveniat esse quam adierit hereditatem. ita enim nec satis necessarium deliberationis erit auxilium, nisi hominibus formidolosis, qui et ea timent, quae nulla digna sunt suspicione. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
From all these matters, therefore, it appeared to us a humane course to gather them into one law, and not only to assist soldiers by a benefit of this kind, but also to extend this to all persons—not only if an unforeseen debt should emerge, but even if someone finds the inheritance which he has entered upon to be burdensome. For thus the aid of deliberation will not be sufficiently necessary, except for timorous people, who fear even those things which are worthy of no suspicion. <a 531, day 5 before the Kalends of December. After the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Cum igitur hereditas ad quendam sive ex testamento sive ab intestato fuerit delata, sive ex asse sive ex parte, si quidem recta via adire maluerit hereditatem et spe certissima hoc fecerit vel sese immiscuerit, ut non postea eam repudiet, nullo indiget inventario, cum omnibus creditoribus suppositus est, utpote hereditate ei ex sua voluntate infixa. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Therefore, when an inheritance has been transmitted to someone either from a testament or ab intestato, whether for the whole (as) or for a part, if indeed he has preferred to enter upon the inheritance by the straight way and has done this with a most certain hope, or has intermingled himself, so that he does not afterwards repudiate it, he has need of no inventory, since he is subjected to all creditors, inasmuch as the inheritance has been, by his own will, affixed to him. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Similique modo, si non titubante animo respuendam vel abstinendam esse crediderit hereditatem, ei apertissime intra trium mensuum spatium, ex quo ei cognitum fuerit scriptum se esse vel vocatum heredem, renuntiet nullo nec inventario faciendo nec alio circuitu expectando, et sit alienus huiusmodi hereditate, sive onerosa sive lucrosa sit. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
In a like manner, if with an unhesitating mind he has believed that the inheritance is to be rejected or abstained from, let him quite plainly, within the space of three months from the time when it became known to him that he was written in as, or called, heir, renounce it, with no inventory to be made nor any other roundabout procedure awaited, and let him be a stranger to such an inheritance, whether it be burdensome or lucrative. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Sin autem dubius est, utrumne admittenda sit nec ne defuncti hereditas, non putet sibi esse necessariam deliberationem, sed adeat hereditatem vel sese immisceat, omni tamen modo inventarium ab ipso conficiatur, ut intra triginta dies, post apertas tabulas vel postquam nota ei fuerit apertura tabularum vel delatam sibi ab intestato hereditatem cognoverit numerandos, exordium capiat inventarium super his rebus, quas defunctus mortis tempore habebat. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But if he is in doubt whether the inheritance of the deceased ought to be admitted or not, let him not think that deliberation is necessary for himself, but let him enter upon the inheritance or intermeddle; yet in every way an inventory must be compiled by him, so that within 30 days—reckoned after the tablets have been opened, or after the opening of the tablets has become known to him, or after he has learned that an inheritance ab intestato has been delated to him—he shall begin the inventory concerning those things which the deceased had at the time of death. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Subscriptionem tamen supponere heredem necesse est, significantem et quantitatem rerum et quod nulla malignitate circa eas ab eo facta vel facienda res apud eum remanent, vel si ignarus sit litterarum vel scribere praepeditur, speciali tabulario ad hoc solum adhibendo, ut pro eo litteras supponat, venerabili signo antea manu heredis praeposito, testibus videlicet adsumendis, qui heredem cognoscunt et iubenti ei tabularium pro se subscribere interfuerint. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Nevertheless the heir must subjoin a subscription, indicating both the quantity of the things and that, with no malignity concerning them done or to be done by him, the things remain with him; or, if he is ignorant of letters or is hindered from writing, a special clerk is to be employed for this purpose alone, that he may subjoin the letters for him, the venerable sign having previously been set by the hand of the heir, witnesses, namely, being taken who know the heir and were present when, at his bidding, the clerk subscribed on his behalf. <a 531, on the 5th day before the Kalends of December, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sin autem locis, in quibus res hereditariae vel maxima pars earum posita est, heredes abesse contigerit, tunc eis unius anni spatium a morte testatoris numerandum damus ad huiusmodi inventarii consummationem: sufficit enim praefatum tempus, etsi longissimo spatio distant, tamen dare eis facultatem inventarii conscribendi vel per se vel per instructos procuratores in locis ubi res positae sunt mittendos. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But if it happens that in the places where the hereditary assets, or the greater part of them, are situated, the heirs are absent, then we grant to them a space of one year, to be counted from the death of the testator, for the consummation of an inventory of this kind: for the aforesaid time suffices, even if they are at a very great distance, nevertheless to give them the faculty of drawing up the inventory either by themselves or by instructed procurators to be sent to the places where the assets are situated. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Et si praefatam observationem inventarii faciendi solidaverint, et hereditatem sine periculo habeant et legis falcidiae adversus legatarios utantur beneficio, ut in tantum hereditariis creditoribus teneantur, in quantum res substantiae ad eos devolutae valeant. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
And if they have consolidated the aforesaid observance of making an inventory, they both hold the inheritance without danger and use the benefit of the Lex Falcidia against legatees, so that they are bound to hereditary creditors only to the extent that the estate assets devolved upon them avail. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Et eis satisfaciant, qui primi veniant creditores, et, si nihil reliquum est, posteriores venientes repellantur et nihil ex sua substantia penitus heredes amittant, ne, dum lucrum facere sperant, in damnum incidant. sed si legatarii interea venerint, et eis satisfaciant ex hereditate defuncti vel ex ipsis rebus vel ex earum forsitan venditione. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
And let them satisfy those who first come, the creditors, and, if nothing remains, let those coming later be repelled, and let the heirs lose nothing at all from their own substance, lest, while they hope to make lucro, they fall into damnum. But if in the meantime the legatees should come, let them also be satisfied from the inheritance of the deceased, either from the things themselves or perhaps from their sale. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Sin vero creditores, qui ex post emensum patrimonium necdum completi sunt, superveniant, neque ipsum heredem inquietare concedantur neque eos qui ab eo comparaverunt res, quarum pretia in legata vel fideicommissa vel alios creditores processerunt: licentia creditoribus non deneganda adversus legatarios venire et vel hypothecis vel indebiti condictione uti et haec quae acceperint recuperare, cum satis absurdum est creditoribus quidem suum ius persequentibus legitimum auxilium denegari, legatariis vero, qui pro lucro certant, suas partes legem accomodare. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But if, in truth, creditors who, after the patrimony has been purchased, are not yet fully satisfied should supervene, they are not to be allowed either to trouble the heir himself or those who bought from him the things whose prices have gone into legacies or fideicommissa or to other creditors: permission must not be denied to the creditors to proceed against the legatees and to use either hypothecs or the condiction of the undue and to recover what these have received, since it is quite absurd that lawful aid be denied to creditors who are pursuing their right, while the law is accommodated to the side of the legatees, who contend for gain. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Sin vero heredes res hereditarias creditoribus hereditariis pro debito dederint in solutum vel per dationem pecuniarum satis eis fecerint, liceat aliis creditoribus, qui ex anterioribus veniunt hypothecis, adversus eos venire et a posterioribus creditoribus secundum leges eas abstrahere vel per hypothecariam actionem vel per condictionem ex lege, nisi voluerint debitum eis offerre. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But if indeed the heirs have given hereditary things to hereditary creditors in payment (in discharge) of the debt, or have satisfied them by a dation of monies, let it be permitted to the other creditors, who come by prior hypothecs, to proceed against them and, from the later creditors, to withdraw these things according to the laws, either by the hypothecary action or by the condiction from statute, unless they should wish to tender the debt to them. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Sed nec adversus emptores rerum hereditariarum, quas ipse vendidit pro solvendis debitis vel legatis, venire alii concedatur, cum satis anterioribus creditoribus a nobis provisum est vel ad posteriores creditores vel ad legatarios pervenientibus et suum ius persequentibus. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But nor let it be permitted for others to proceed against the purchasers of the hereditary goods, which he himself sold for the paying of debts or legacies, since sufficient provision has been made by us for the prior creditors, and for the subsequent creditors or for the legatees as they receive them and pursue their own right. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
In computatione autem patrimonii damus ei excipere et retinere, quidquid in funus expendit vel in testamenti insinuationem vel inventarii confectionem vel in alias necessarias causas hereditatis approbaverit sese persolvisse. sin vero et ipse aliquas contra defunctum habebat actiones, non eae confundantur, sed similem aliis creditoribus per omnia habeat fortunam, temporum tamen praerogativa inter creditores servanda. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
In the computation of the patrimony, we grant him to except and retain whatever he expended on the funeral, or on the insinuation (registration) of the testament, or on the confection (drawing up) of the inventory, or on other necessary causes of the inheritance, which he shall have approved himself to have paid. But if indeed he himself also had any actions against the deceased, let these not be confounded, but let him in all respects have a fortune similar to the other creditors, the prerogative of times among the creditors, however, being observed. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Licentia danda creditoribus seu legatariis vel fideicommissariis, si maiorem putaverint esse substantiam a defuncto derelictam, quam heres in inventario scripsit, quibus voluerint legitimis modis quod superfluum est approbare, vel per tormenta forsitan servorum hereditariorum secundum anteriorem nostram legem, quae de quaestione servorum loquitur, vel per sacramentum illius, si aliae probationes defecerint, ut undique veritate exquisita neque lucrum neque damnum aliquod heres ex huiusmodi sentiat hereditate: illo videlicet observando, ut, si ex hereditate aliquid heredes subripuerint vel celaverint vel amovendum curaverint, postquam fuerint convicti, in duplum hoc restituere vel hereditatis quantitati computare compellantur. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.C c.>
License is to be given to creditors or legatees or fideicommissaries, if they shall have thought that the substance left by the deceased is greater than the heir wrote in the inventory, to prove by whatever lawful methods they wish what is superfluous—either perhaps through the tortures of the hereditary slaves according to our earlier law, which speaks about the questioning of slaves, or by his oath, if other proofs have failed—so that, with the truth sought out on all sides, the heir may feel neither any profit nor any loss from an inheritance of this sort: with this, namely, being observed, that, if the heirs have filched anything from the inheritance or have concealed it or have taken care to have it removed, after they have been convicted, they are compelled to restore this twofold or to reckon it to the amount of the inheritance. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.C c.>
Donec tamen inventarium conscribitur, vel si res praesto sint, intra tres menses , vel si afuerint, intra annale spatium secundum anteriorem distinctionem, nulla erit licentia neque creditoribus neque legatariis vel fideicommissariis eos inquietare vel ad iudicium vocare vel res hereditarias quasi ex hypothecarum auctoritate vindicare, sed sit hoc spatium ipso iure pro deliberatione heredibus concessum, nullo scilicet ex hoc intervallo creditoribus hereditariis circa temporalem praescriptionem praeiudicio generando. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Until, however, the inventory is drawn up, whether, if they are at hand, within three months , or, if they have been away, within the space of a year according to the earlier distinction, there shall be no license for either creditors or legatees or fideicommissaries to trouble them or to summon them to judgment or to vindicate hereditary things as if by the authority of hypothecs; but let this period by the law itself be granted to the heirs for deliberation, clearly with no prejudice arising for the hereditary creditors from this interval concerning temporal prescription. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Sin vero, postquam adierint vel sese immiscuerint, praesentes vel absentes inventarium facere distulerint, et datum iam a nobis tempus ad inventarii confectionem effluxerit, tunc ex eo ipso, quod inventarium secundum formam praesentis constitutionis non fecerunt, et heredes esse omnimodo intellegantur et debitis hereditariis in solidum teneantur nec legis nostrae beneficio perfruantur, quam contemnendam esse censuerunt. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But if indeed, after they have entered upon it or have intermeddled themselves, whether present or absent they have deferred making an inventory, and the time already granted by us for the making of the inventory has elapsed, then from that very fact, that they did not make the inventory according to the form of the present constitution, they are in every way to be understood to be heirs, and to be held in solidum for the hereditary debts, nor to enjoy the benefit of our law, which they judged should be contemned. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Et haec quidem de his sancimus, qui deliberationem nullam petendam curaverint, quam putamus quidem penitus post hanc legem esse supervacuam et debere ei derogari: cum enim liceat et adire hereditatem et sine damno ab ea discedere ex praesentis legis auctoritate, quis locus deliberationi relinquitur? <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
And indeed we sanction these things concerning those who have taken care to seek no deliberation, which we consider, in fact, to be utterly superfluous after this law and to be derogated by it: for since it is permitted both to enter upon the inheritance and to depart from it without loss by the authority of the present law, what place is left for deliberation? <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Sed quia quidam vel vana formidine vel callida machinatione pro deliberando nobis supplicandum esse necessarium existimant, quatenus eis liceat annale tempus tergiversari et hereditatem inspicere et alias contra eam machinationes excogitare et eandem deliberationem flebilibus adsertionibus repetita prece saepius accipere: ne quis nos putaverit antiquitatis penitus esse contemptores, indulgemus quidem eis petere deliberationem vel a nobis vel a nostris iudicibus, non tamen amplius ab imperiali quidem culmine uno anno, a nostris vero iudicibus novem mensibus, ut neque ex imperiali largitate aliud tempus eis indulgeatur, sed et, si fuerit datum, pro nihilo habeatur: semel enim et non saepius eam peti concedimus. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But because certain persons, either by vain fear or by crafty machination, think it necessary that there must be supplication to us for deliberating, in order that it may be permitted them to tergiversate the annual time and to inspect the inheritance and to devise other machinations against it, and to receive that same deliberation more often, the prayer having been repeated with tearful assertions: lest anyone should think us to be utterly despisers of antiquity, we do indeed indulge them to seek deliberation either from us or from our judges, yet not for longer— from the imperial summit indeed for one year, but from our judges for nine months— so that neither from imperial largess may any other time be indulged to them, and also, if it should be given, it shall be held as nothing: for we grant that it be requested once and not more often. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Sin autem hoc aliquis fecerit et inventarium conscripserit ( necesse enim est omnimodo deliberantes inventarium cum omni subtilitate facere), non liceat ei post tempus praestitutum, si non recusaverit hereditatem, sed adire maluerit, nostrae legis uti beneficio, sed in solidum secundum antiqua iura omnibus creditoribus teneatur. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But if someone should do this and draw up an inventory ( for it is in every way necessary that those deliberating make an inventory with all exactitude), it shall not be permitted to him, after the prescribed time, if he has not refused the inheritance but has preferred to enter upon it, to use the benefit of our law, but he shall be held for the whole, according to the ancient laws, to all creditors. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Cum enim gemini tramites inventi sunt, unus quidem ex anterioribus, qui deliberationem dederunt, alter autem rudis et novus a nostro numine repertus, per quem et adeuntes sine damno conservantur, electionem ei damus vel nostram constitutionem eligere et beneficium eius sentire vel, si eam aspernandam existimaverit et ad deliberationis auxilium convolaverit, eius effectum habere: et si non intra datum tempus recusaverit hereditatem, omnibus in solidum debitis hereditariis teneatur et non secundum modum parimonii, sed etsi exiguus sit census hereditatis , tamen quasi heredem eum in totum obligari, et sibi imputet, qui pro novo bene ficio vetus elegit gravamen. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
For when twin pathways have been found—one indeed from the earlier provisions, which granted deliberation, but the other rough and new, discovered by our Majesty—through which even those who enter upon [the inheritance] are preserved without loss, we give him the choice either to choose our constitution and feel its benefit, or, if he shall have judged it to be spurned and has fled to the aid of deliberation, to have its effect: and if he has not refused the inheritance within the time given, let him be bound for all hereditary debts in solidum and not according to the measure of the patrimony, but even if the valuation of the inheritance is small , nevertheless let him be bound for the whole as though heir, and let him impute it to himself, who chose the old burden in place of the new benefit. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Et ideo et in ipsam deliberationis dationem et divinum rescriptum super hoc promulgandum hoc adici volumus, ut sciant omnes, quod omnimodo post petitam deliberationem, si adierint vel pro herede gesserint vel non recusaverint hereditatem, omnibus in solidum hereditariis oneribus teneantur. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
And therefore we wish to add this both to the very grant of deliberation and to the divine rescript to be promulgated on this matter, so that all may know that in every way, after deliberation has been requested, if they have entered upon it or have acted as heir or have not refused the inheritance, they are held to all hereditary burdens for the whole (in solidum). <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Si quis autem temerario proposito deliberationem quidem petierit, inventarium autem minime conscripserit et vel adierit hereditatem vel minime eam repudiaverit , non solum creditoribus in solidum teneatur, sed etiam legis falcidiae beneficio minime utatur. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
If, however, anyone with a temerarious purpose shall indeed have requested deliberation, but shall not at all have drawn up an inventory, and either shall have entered upon the inheritance or shall not at all have repudiated it , he shall be held liable to the creditors in solidum, and shall not at all make use of the benefit of the Lex Falcidia. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Quod si post deliberandum recusaverit inventario minime conscripto, tunc res hereditatis creditoribus vel his qui ad hereditatem vocantur legibus reddere compelletur, quantitate earum sacramento res accipientium manifestanda, cum taxatione tamen ab iudice statuenda. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
But if, after deliberating, he shall have refused with no inventory drawn up, then he shall be compelled to render the property of the inheritance to the creditors or to those who are called to the inheritance by the laws, the quantity thereof to be made manifest by the oath of those receiving the things, however with an assessment to be set by the judge. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Notissimum autem est ex hac constitutione, quae omnes casus continet, nostris constitutionibus iam pro eisdem capitulis promulgatis esse derogatum, quarum alteri et gordianae constitutionis sensus continebatur. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Moreover, it is most well known from this constitution, which contains all cases, that derogation has been made by our constitutions already promulgated for the same chapters, in one of which even the sense of the Gordian constitution was contained. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Cum enim ampliore tractatu habito melior exitus inventus est et tribus constitutionibus in unum congregatis unus apparet et in milites et in alios omnes iuris probabilis articulus, quapropter ex anterioribus inquietari nostro subiectos imperio patimur? scilicet ut milites, etsi propter simplicitatem praesentis legis subtilitatem non observaverint, in tantum tamen teneantur, quantum in hereditate invenerint. quam patres conscripti, in huiusmodi casibus in posterum obtinere sancimus.
For since, after a more ample tractation has been held, a better outcome has been found, and with three constitutions congregated into one, there appears a single probable article of law, applicable both for soldiers and for all others, why therefore do we permit those subject to our empire to be disquieted by the earlier enactments? Namely, that soldiers, even if by reason of simplicity they have not observed the subtlety of the present law, are nevertheless held liable only to the extent that they have found in the inheritance. Which, Conscript Fathers, we sanction to prevail in such cases for the future.
Si paterna hereditate te abstinuisse constiterit et non ut heredem in domo, sed ut inquilinum vel custodem vel ex alia iusta ratione habitasse liquido fuerit probatum, ex persona patris conveniri te procurator meus prohibebit. * ant. a. muciano.
If it is established that you have abstained from the paternal inheritance and it has been clearly proven that you lived in the house not as an heir, but as a tenant or a custodian or on some other just ground, my procurator will forbid you to be sued on your father's account. * antoninus augustus to mucianus.
Suus heres exceptione pacti, qui testamentum iniustum adseverans postea nihil se de paterna successione petiturum non ex causa donationis, sed transigendi animo in iure professus est, cum respuere quaesitam nequiret hereditatem et transactio nullo dato vel retento seu promisso minime procedat, submoveri non potest. * diocl. et maxim.
The suus heir cannot be removed by the exception of a pact, who, asserting the testament to be unjust, later professed in court, not by reason of a donation but with the intention of transacting, that he would seek nothing from the paternal succession; since he could not refuse an inheritance once acquired, and a transaction does not at all proceed when nothing has been given or retained or promised. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Sicut maior quinque et viginti annis, antequam adeat, delatam repudians successionem post quaerere non potest, ita quaesitam renuntiando nihil agit, sed ius quod habuit retinet nec, quod confessos pro iudicatis habere placuit, ad vocem repudiantis hereditatem, sed ad certam quantitatem deberi confitentem pertinet. * diocl. et maxim.
Just as one older than twenty-five years, who, before he enters upon it, repudiates a succession that has been offered, cannot afterward seek it, so by renouncing one that has been sought he effects nothing, but retains the right which he had; nor does the rule—that those who confess are to be held as judged—attach to the statement of one repudiating an inheritance, but to one confessing that a certain amount is owed. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Si quis suus recusaverit paternam hereditatem, deinde maluerit eam adire, cum fuerat indistincte ei permissum, donec res paternae in eodem statu manent, hoc facere et post multum tempus licebat ei ad eandem hereditatem redire, hoc corrigentes sancimus, si quidem res iam venumdatae sint, ut nullus aditus ei ad hereditatem reservetur: quod et antiquitas observabat. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 532 d. xv k. nov.
If anyone, being a suus, has refused the paternal inheritance, and then has preferred to enter upon it, since it had been indiscriminately permitted to him, so long as the paternal property remains in the same status, to do this even after much time and to return to the same inheritance, correcting this we sanction that, if indeed the things have already been sold, no access to the inheritance be reserved for him: which antiquity also observed. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 532 Oct. 18.
Sin autem res alienatae non sint, si quidem maior annis constitutus est et tempora restitutionis nulla ei supersint, intra trium annorum spatium tantummodo huiusmodi ei detur licentia. <a 532 d. xv k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc. anno secundo.>
But if, however, the things have not been alienated, if indeed he has been constituted of full years and no times of restitution remain to him, within a period of three years only let a license of this kind be given to him. <a in the year 532, on the 15th day before the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, in the second year.>
Sin autem vel minor est vel in utili tempore constitutus, tunc post completum quadriennium, quod spatium pro utili anno qui restitutionibus dabatur praestitum est, aliud triennium ei indulgeri, intra quod potest rebus in suo statu manentibus adire hereditatem et suam abdicationem revocare. <a 532 d. xv k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc. anno secundo.>
But if he is either a minor or constituted in the useful time, then, after the completion of the four-year period—which period was afforded in lieu of the useful year which used to be given for restitutions—another three-year period is to be indulged to him, within which, the things remaining in their own state, he can accede to the inheritance and revoke his abdication. <a 532, on the 15th day before the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, in the second year.>
Quo tempore transacto nullus aditus penitus ad paternam hereditatem ei reservetur, nisi forte adhuc in minore aetate eo constituto res venditae sunt. tunc etenim per in integrum restitutionem non denegatur ei adire hereditatem et res recuperare et creditoribus paternis satisfacere. <a 532 d. xv k. nov.
When that period has elapsed, no access whatsoever to the paternal inheritance is reserved to him, unless perhaps, while he was still in minority, the assets were sold with him in that status. then indeed, by restitution in integrum, it is not denied him to enter upon the inheritance and to recover the property and to satisfy the paternal creditors. <a 532, on the 15th day before the Kalends of November.
Testamenti tabulas ad hoc tibi a patre datas, ut in patria proferantur, adfirmans potes illic proferre, ut secundum leges moresque locorum insinuentur, ita scilicet, ut testibus non praesentibus adire prius vel pro tribunali vel per libellum rectorem provinciae procures ac permittente eo honestos viros adesse facias , quibus praesentibus aperiantur et ab his rursum obsignentur. * valer. et gallien.
Affirming that the testamentary tablets were given to you by your father for this purpose, that they be produced in the fatherland, you can produce them there, so that, according to the laws and customs of the places, they may be insinuated, namely thus: with the witnesses not present, first procure to approach the governor of the province either before the tribunal or by petition, and, with his permitting it, have honorable men be present , in whose presence let them be opened and by these again sealed. * valerian and gallienus.
Eius, quod ad causam novissimi patris vestri iudicii pertinet, de calumnia tibi iuranti praeter partem, quam aperiri defunctus vetuit vel ad ignominiam alicuius pertinere dicitur, inspiciendi ac describendi praeter diem et consulem tibi rector provinciae facultatem fieri iubebit. * diocl. et maxim.
As to that which pertains to the case of your father’s last judgment, you swearing the oath against calumny, except for the part which the deceased forbade to be opened or is said to pertain to someone’s ignominy, the governor of the province will order that permission be granted to you to inspect and to transcribe beyond the day and the consul. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Quamvis quis se filium defuncti praeteritum esse adleget aut falsum vel inofficiosum testamentum seu alio vitio subiectum vel servus defunctus esse dicatur, tamen scriptus heres in possessionem mitti solet. * alex. a. eutacto.
Although someone alleges that he, as the son of the deceased, has been passed over, or that the testament is false or undutiful, or subject to some other vice, or that the deceased is said to have been a slave, nevertheless the instituted heir is accustomed to be put into possession. * alexander augustus to eutactus.
Edicto divi hadriani, quod sub occasione vicesimae hereditatum introductum est, cum multis ambagibus et difficultatibus et indiscretis narrationibus penitus quiescente, quia et vicesima hereditatis a nostra recessit re publica, antiquatis nihilo minus et aliis omnibus, quae circa repletionem vel interpretationem eiusdem edicti promulgata sunt, sancimus, ut, si quis ex asse vel ex parte competenti iudici testamentum ostenderit non cancellatum neque abolitum neque ex quacumque suae formae parte vitiatum, sed quod prima figura sine omni vituperatione appareat et depositionibus testium legitimi numeri vallatum sit, mittatur quidem in possessionem earum rerum, quae testatoris mortis tempore fuerunt, non autem legitimo modo ab alio detinentur, et eam cum testificatione publicarum personarum accipiat. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a a. 531 d. xii k. april.
With the edict of the deified Hadrian, which was introduced on the occasion of the “twentieth” of inheritances, being utterly laid to rest, with its many circumlocutions, difficulties, and indiscriminate narrations, since the twentieth on inheritances has also departed from our commonwealth, and all other provisions likewise have been antiquated which were promulgated concerning the supplementation or interpretation of the same edict, we ordain that, if anyone, as to the whole or as to a part, shall present to the competent judge a will not canceled, nor abolished, nor vitiated in any part of its form, but one which appears in its original figure without any censure and is fortified by the depositions of a lawful number of witnesses, he shall indeed be put into possession of those things which existed at the time of the testator’s death and are not held by another in a lawful manner, and he shall receive that possession with the attestation of public persons. * Justinian Augustus to Julianus, Praetorian Prefect. * <a year 531, on the 12th day before the Kalends of April.
Sin autem aliquis contradictor extiterit, tunc in iudicio competenti causae in possessionem missionis et subsecutae contradictionis ventilentur et ei possessio adquiratur, qui potiora ex legitimis modis iura ostenderit, sive qui missus est qui antea detinens contradicendum putavit. <a a. 531 d. xii k. april. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if some contradictor should arise, then in the court competent for the case let the matters of entry into possession and of the subsequent contradiction be aired, and let possession be acquired by him who shall have shown the stronger rights from legitimate modes, whether it be the one who was put in, or the one who previously, being the detainer, thought that objection should be made. <a a. 531 d. 12 k. April. Constantinople after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Nullis angustiis temporum huiusmodi missione coartanda, sed sive tardius sive praemature aliquis missus est, legis tantummodo arbitrium requiratur et causa, unde vel missio vel contradictio exoritur. <a a. 531 d. xii k. april. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
By no constraints of times is a mission of this sort to be confined, but whether someone has been sent later or prematurely, let only the judgment of the law be required, and the cause, whence either the mission or the contradiction arises. <a year 531 d. 12 k. april. at constantinople after the consulate of lampadius and orestes vv. cc.>
Sive enim post annale tempus sive post maioris aeui curricula aliquis fuerit missus, si tantum ex legitime formato testamento missio procedat, nullum ei temporis obiciatur obstaculum, nisi tantum temporis effluxerit, quod possit vel possessori plenissime securitatem et super dominio praestare, vel ipsi qui missus est omnem intentionem excludere. <a a. 531 d. xii k. april. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Whether after a yearly period or after the courses of a longer age someone has been manumitted, if only the manumission proceeds from a lawfully framed testament, let no obstacle of time be objected to him, unless only so much time has elapsed as can either afford to the possessor the fullest security even concerning title, or exclude every claim of the very one who has been manumitted. <a a. 531 d. xii k. april. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Si enim vel ex una parte vel ex utroque latere temporis prolixitas occurrit, manifestissimum est non solum missionem, sed etiam ipsam principalem causam esse sopitam. <a a. 531 d. xii k. april. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
For if a prolixity of time occurs either on one side or on both sides, it is most manifest that not only the entry into possession, but even the principal cause itself, is extinguished. <Given in the year 531, on the 12th day before the Kalends of April, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sed si pupilli nomine falsum dicere vis testamentum, de quo per pollam transactum est, potes experiri, dum memineris, si in causa non obtinueris, et portionem, quam ex eo testamento pupillus habet, te ei salvam facturum, quam adimi pupillo necesse erit secundum iuris formam, et de calumnia tua praesidem deliberaturum, quamvis pupilli nomine agere videaris, cum retractas ea quae finita sunt per coheredem. <a 208 pp.Vii k.Mai.Antonino a.Iii et geta iii conss.>
But if, in the name of the ward, you wish to declare false a testament about which a settlement was made per pollam, you may make trial of it—provided you remember that, if you do not prevail in the case, you will also make good to him the portion which the ward has from that testament, which, according to the form of law, will have to be taken away from the ward; and that the governor will deliberate concerning your calumny, although you seem to act in the ward’s name, since you are reopening things that have been concluded by a coheir. <a 208 pp.7 k.Mai.Antonino a.3 et geta 3 conss.>
Si ea quaestio infertur filiis eius, quam consobrinam tuam dicis, quod tabulae testamenti patris eorum, qui a familia interfectus dicebatur, priusquam quaestio de servis haberetur, apertae et recitatae sunt, propter amplissimi ordinis consultum hereditas a fisco vindicatur et ideo agi causa apud procuratorem meum debet, quia non eo tempore pupilli fuerunt. * alex. a. antiochiano.
If that inquest is brought against the sons of the woman whom you call your cousin, because the tablets of the testament of their father, who was said to have been killed by the household, were opened and read before an inquest concerning the slaves was held, then on account of the decree of the most distinguished order (the Senate) the inheritance is claimed by the fisc (imperial treasury), and therefore the cause ought to be proceeded with before my procurator, because they were not wards at that time. * alexander augustus to antiochianus.
Hereditas in testamento data per epistulam vel codicillos adimi non potuit. quia tamen testatrix voluntatem suam non mereri unum ex heredibus declaraverat, merito eius portio non iure ad alium translata fisco vindicata est. libertates autem in eadem epistula datae peti poterunt.
An inheritance given in a testament could not be taken away by epistle or codicils. Yet since the testatrix had declared that one of the heirs did not merit her will, rightly his portion, not lawfully transferred to another, was vindicated by the fisc. But the manumissions granted in the same epistle can be sought.
Cum autem vos etiam accusationem pertulisse et quosdam ex reis punitos proponatis, licet is qui mandasse caedem dicitur provocaverit, vereri non debetis, ne quam hereditatis paternae a fisco meo quaestionem patiamini. convenit enim pietati vestrae respondere causam appellationis reddenti. <a 229 pp.Xv k.Iul.Alexandro a. iii et dione conss.>
Since moreover you propound that you have even brought an accusation and that certain of the defendants have been punished, although the one who is said to have ordered the killing has appealed, you ought not to fear that you will suffer any inquiry by my fisc concerning the paternal inheritance. For it befits your piety to respond to one stating the cause of his appeal. <a year 229, 15 days before the Kalends of July, under Alexander Augustus for the 3rd time and Dion, consuls.>
Alia causa est eius, qui falsi instituta accusatione ad finem usque quod insimulabat perduxit et contrariam sententiam meruit, alia eius, qui inchoatam accusationem non pertulit, cum in illius quidem partem succedat fiscus, hic autem, qui contrariam iudicis sententiam non sustinuit, suae partis non perdat persecutionem. * gord. a. tatiae.
Another is the case of him who, an accusation of falsity having been instituted, carried through to the end what he was charging and deserved a contrary sentence, and another is that of him who did not carry through an inchoate accusation; since in the former’s part the Fiscus succeeds, but this man, who did not sustain a contrary sentence of the judge, is not to lose the prosecution of his own share. * gordian augustus to tatia.
Cum fratrem tuum veneno peremptum esse adseveras, ut effectus successionis eius tibi non auferatur, mortem eius ulcisci te necesse est. licet enim hereditatem eorum, qui clandestinis insidiis perimuntur, hi qui iure vocantur adire non vetantur, tamen, si interitum non fuerint ulti, successionem obtinere non possunt. * diocl.
Since you assert that your brother was killed by poison, in order that the effect of his succession may not be taken from you, it is necessary that you avenge his death. For although those who are called by law are not forbidden to enter upon the inheritance of those who are slain by clandestine plots, nevertheless, if they shall not have avenged the demise, they cannot obtain the succession. * diocl.
Cum silanianum senatus consultum et a nobis tam laudandum quam corroborandum est nec non divi marci oratio, quae circa id facta est, invenimus autem in ea nullam mentionem libertatis factam et veteres movit quaedam de libertatibus relictis in testamento necati testatoris quaestio, necessarium nobis visum est etiam haec dirimere. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. ii k. mai.
Since the senatus consultum Silanianum is both to be praised by us and to be corroborated, and likewise the oration of the deified Marcus which was made concerning it; however, we find in it no mention made of liberty, and an ancient question has been stirred concerning manumissions left in the testament of a murdered testator, it has seemed necessary to us to resolve these matters also. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 d. ii k. mai.
Ii enim, qui libertate fuerant in hoc testamento donati et si eam accepissent, lucrum, quod eis in medio accidit, poterant sibi adquirere, interea autem procrastinatione propter necis vindictam habita hoc minime ad eos pervenit et postea in libertatem deducti periclitabantur. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
For those who had been granted liberty in this testament—even if they had received it—the profit which befell them in the meantime they could acquire for themselves; however, meanwhile, a postponement having been had on account of vengeance for the killing, this by no means came to them, and afterwards, when led into liberty, they were in peril. <April 30, 531, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Ne medium tempus fuerit eis damnosum, et maxime si ancillae in medio pepererint et postea hereditas adita sit, bellissimum nobis videtur divi marci prudentissimi principis orationem et in libertatibus producere, ne princeps philosophiae plenus aliquid videatur imperfectum sanxisse: sed ita in hereditatibus et in legatis et in fideicommissis et maxime in libertatibus, quas semper philosophia amplectitur, extendatur eius oratio, ut et lucrum quod in medio accidit eis post libertatem acceptam restituatur et partus liber et ingenuus esse intellegatur nullaque machinatione huiusmodi praepeditio damnum aliquod inrogare concedatur et libera eorum posteritas, si in medio fuerint ab hac luce subtracti, suorum gen itorum commodum consequatur. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Lest the intermediate time be damaging to them, and especially if handmaids have borne children in the meantime and afterwards the inheritance has been entered upon, it seems most excellent to us to bring forward the oration of the deified Marcus, a most prudent princeps, and to apply it also in matters of liberties, lest the prince, full of philosophy, seem to have sanctioned something imperfect: but thus let his oration be extended in inheritances and in legacies and in fideicommissa and especially in liberties, which philosophy always embraces, so that both the profit which occurred in the interval be restored to them after liberty has been received, and the offspring be understood to be free and ingenuous (freeborn), and that by no machination of this kind shall any hindrance be allowed to inflict loss, and that their free posterity, if in the meantime they have been taken away from this light, may obtain the advantage of their own begetters. <a 531 on the 2nd day before the Kalends of May at Constantinople after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Merito enim nobis sanctissimi marci per omnia constitutionem replere placuit: nihil etenim actum esse credimus, dum aliquid addendum superest. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
For deserved reason it has pleased us to fill up in all respects the constitution of the most holy Marcus: for we believe that nothing has been done, so long as something remains to be added. <a 531 on the 2 Kalends of May, at constantinople, after the consulship of lampadius and orestes, most distinguished men.>
Talis de antiquo iure dubietas nostrae serenitati suggesta est propter senatus consultum silanianum et servos, qui supplicio adficiuntur sub eodem tecto commorantes et non suum auxilium domino per insidias occiso praebentes. veteres enim certum non faciunt, qui intellectus de verbis " sub eodem tecto" significatur, sive in eodem cubiculo sive in triclinio vel porticu vel in aula haec appellatio accipi debeat, adicientes, si dominus in via vel in agro fuerit interfectus, eos servos puniri, qui praesto erant et non auxilium ad prohibendum periculum praebuerunt, nulla distinctione super qualitate praesentiae utentes. * iust.
Such a doubt concerning the ancient ius has been suggested to our Serenity on account of the senatus consultum Silanianum and the slaves who are subjected to punishment, dwelling under the same roof and not providing their own help when their master has been slain by treachery. for the ancients do not make certain what understanding is signified by the words " sub eodem tecto," whether this appellation ought to be taken as in the same bedchamber or in the dining-room or in the portico or in the hall, adding that, if the master has been killed on the road or in the field, those slaves are punished who were at hand and did not provide help to avert the danger, making no distinction concerning the quality of the presence. * iust.
Nos igitur omnem eis occasionem ad declinanda supplicia super neglegentia salutis domini sui amputantes sancimus omnes servos, ex quocumque loco sive in domo sive in via sive in agro possint clamorem exaudire vel insidias sentire et non auxilium tulerint, supplicio senatus consulti subiacere. oportet enim eos, ubicumque senserint dominum periclitantem, ad prohibendas insidias concurrere. <a 532 d. xv k. nov.
We therefore, cutting off from them every occasion for avoiding punishments on account of negligence of their master’s safety, decree that all slaves, from whatever place—whether in the house or on the road or in the field—who can hear the outcry or sense an ambush and do not bring help, are subject to the punishment of the senatorial decree. For it is fitting that they, wherever they perceive their master in peril, run together to prevent the ambushes. <a 532 d. 15 kal. nov.
Sed cum post ruptum testamentum patrem pupillorum vestrorum litteras emisisse proponatis, quibus praecedens iudicium confirmavit, praetor nihil contra ius fecit, si novissimam eius voluntatem secutus relictum testamento rei publicae fideicommissum ut ex codicillis relictum praestandum esse pronuntiavit. <a 233 pp. iii k. iul. maximo et paterno conss.>
But since you propose that, after the testament was broken, the father of your wards sent letters by which he confirmed the preceding judgment, the praetor did nothing contrary to law if, following his most recent will, he pronounced that the fideicommissum left to the Republic by the testament had to be rendered as though left by codicils. <a 233 pp. 3 k. jul. Maximus and Paternus consuls.>
Cum proponatis pupillorum vestrorum matrem diversis temporibus ac dissonis voluntatibus duos codicillos ordinasse, in dubium non venit id, quod priori codicillo inscripserat, per eum in quem postea secreta voluntatis suae contulerat, si a prioris tenore discrepat et contrariam voluntatem continet, revocatum esse. * diocl. et maxim.
Since you set forth that the mother of your wards at different times and with dissonant intentions drew up two codicils, no doubt arises that what she had inscribed in the earlier codicil is revoked by the one to whom she later entrusted the secrets of her will, if it departs from the tenor of the former and contains a contrary intention. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Nec codicillos quidem furentem posse facere certissimi iuris est. si igitur scriptura velut codicillorum patris tui fuit prolata, ut aliquid ex hac peti possit , adseverationi tuae mentis eum compotem fuisse negantis fidem adesse probari convenit. * diocl.
Nor is it even possible for a madman to make codicils; this is most certain in law. If therefore a writing as if of your father’s codicils was produced, so that something may be sought from it , it ought to be proved that credence attaches to your assertion denying that he was of sound mind. * Diocletian.
Si idem codicilli quod testamenta possent, cur diversum his instrumentis vocabulum mandaretur, quae vis ac potestas una sociasset? igitur specialiter codicillis instituendi ac substituendi potestas iuris auctoritate data non est. * constant.
If codicils could do the same as testaments, why would a different vocable be assigned to these instruments, which one and the same force and power would have associated? Therefore, specifically, to codicils the power of instituting and of substituting has not been given by the authority of law. * Constantine.
Si quis agere ex testamento quolibet modo sive scripto sive sine scriptura confecto de hereditate voluerit, ad fideicommissi persecutionem adspirare cupiens, minime permittatur. * theodos. a. asclepiodoto pp. * <a 424 d. x k. mart.
If anyone should wish to bring an action from a testament, in whatever manner, whether prepared in writing or without writing, concerning an inheritance, desiring to aspire to the prosecution of a fideicommiss, let it by no means be permitted. * Theodosius Augustus to Asclepiodotus, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 424, given on the 10th day before the Kalends of March.
Tantum enim abest, ut aditum cuiquam pro suo migrandi desiderio concedamus, ut etiam illud sanciamus, ut, si testator faciens testamentum in eodem pro codicillis etiam id valere complexus sit, qui hereditatem petit, ab ipsis intentionis exordiis utrum velit eligendi habeat potestatem, sciens se unius electione alterius sibi aditum praeclusisse: ita ut, sive bonorum possessionem secundum tabulas aut secundum nuncupationem ceterasque similes postulaverit, aut certe mitti se ad possessionem ex more petierit, statim inter ipsa huius iuris auspicia propositum suae intentionis explanet. <a 424 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli victore vc. cons.>
For we are so far from granting access to anyone for his own desire of shifting, that we even sanction this: if a testator, in making a testament, has included that this shall also be valid for codicils, the one who seeks the inheritance shall have the power, from the very commencements of his statement of intention, to choose which he wishes, knowing that by the election of the one he has shut off access to the other: so that, whether he has demanded possession of the goods according to the tablets or according to nuncupation and other similar forms, or indeed has petitioned, according to custom, that he be sent into possession, at once, amid these very auspices of this law, he must make clear the purpose of his intention. <a 424, on the 10th day before the Kalends of March, at Constantinople, with Victor, V.C., as consul.>
Illud quoque pari ratione servandum est, ut testator, qui decreverit facere testamentum, si id implere nequiverit, intestatus videatur esse defunctus nec traducere liceat ad fideicommissi interpretationem velut ex codicillis ultimam voluntatem, nisi id ille complexus sit, ut vim etiam codicillorum scriptura debeat obtinere: illo iure electionis videlicet perdurante, ut, qui ex testamento agere voluerit, ad fideicommissum migrare non possit. <a 424 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli victore vc. cons.>
That also must be observed by a like rationale: that a testator who has resolved to make a testament, if he has not been able to fulfill it, is to be regarded as having died intestate, nor is it permitted to translate the last will to an interpretation of a fideicommissum as though from codicils, unless he has included this—that the writing ought to obtain the force of codicils as well; with that right of election, namely, continuing, so that he who has wished to proceed under the testament cannot migrate to the fideicommissum. <a 424 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli victore vc. cons.>
Si quis vero ex parentibus utriusque sexus ac liberis usque ad gradum quartum agnationis vinculis adligatus vel cognationis nexu constrictus ad tertium scriptus heres fuerit vel nuncupatus, in eo videlicet testamento, quod testator vicem quoque codicillorum voluit obtinere, licebit ei, si de hereditate ex testamento secundum mortui voluntatem agens fuerit forte superatus vel certe ipse sponte voluerit, ad fideicommissi subsidium convolare. non enim par eademque ratio videtur amittere debita et lucra non capere. <a 424 d. x k. mart.
If anyone, indeed, from among parents of either sex and children up to the fourth degree, bound by the bonds of agnation or constrained by the nexus of cognation, has been written as heir to a third or named as such—in that testament, namely, which the testator wished also to obtain the place of codicils—it shall be permitted to him, if, acting concerning the inheritance from the testament according to the will of the deceased, he should perchance be overcome, or certainly if he himself should of his own accord wish, to fly for relief to the aid of the fideicommissum. For it does not seem an equal and identical rationale to lose what is owed and not to take the gains. <a 424 d. x k. mart.
In omni autem ultima voluntate excepto testamento quinque testes vel rogati vel qui fortuitu venerint in uno eodemque tempore debent adhiberi, sive in scriptis sive in sine scriptis voluntas conficiatur. testibus videlicet, quando scriptura voluntas componitur, subnotationem suam accommodantibus. <a 424 d. x k. mart.
In every last will, except a testament, five witnesses, either invited or who have come by chance, must be employed at one and the same time, whether the will is executed in writing or without writing. the witnesses, namely, when the will is composed in writing, accommodating their own subscription. <a 424, given on the 10th day before the Kalends of March.
Quamvis verbis his:" ut quoad cum claudio iusto morati essetis", alimenta vobis et vestiarium legatum sit, tamen hanc fuisse defuncti cogitationem interpretor, ut et post mortem iusti eadem vobis praestari voluerit. * ant. a. pius libertis sextiae basiliae.* <a sine die et consule >
Although by these words: " that so long as you were staying with Claudius Iustus", alimenta and a clothing allowance have been bequeathed to you, nevertheless I interpret that this was the intention of the deceased, that he also wished the same to be provided to you after the death of Iustus. * Antoninus Pius to the freedmen of Sextia Basilia.* <a without day and consul >
Qui post testamentum factum praedia quae legavit pignori vel hypothecae dedit, mutasse voluntatem circa legatariorum personam non videtur: et ideo, etiam si in personam actio electa est, recte placuit ab herede praedia liberari. * sev. et ant.
He who, after a testament has been made, gave in pledge or hypothecated the estates which he had bequeathed does not seem to have changed his intention concerning the person of the legatees; and therefore, even if an action in personam has been chosen, it has been rightly decided that the estates be freed by the heir. * Severus and Antoninus.
Ab administratione tutelae religio sacramenti Marcellum, quem vobis a patre tutorem datum testamento proponitis, eripit. quae res, quominus legatum consequatur , non impedit: nec enim iuste ab ea petitione repellitur, cum, etiam si vellet, tutelam administrare prohibeatur. * ant.
From the administration of the tutelage the religious obligation of the oath removes Marcellus, whom you set forth as having been appointed to you by your father as tutor in his testament. This circumstance does not impede him from obtaining the legacy : for he is not justly repelled from that petition, since, even if he wished, he is prohibited from administering the tutelage. * ant.
Si in fraudem eorum quae testamento relicta sunt admissus est accusator, qui testamentum falsum diceret, praeses provinciae secundum iurisdictionis formam solvi legata iubebit, interposita cautione, si evicta fuerit hereditas, ea restituturum, quamvis alias cautioni tunc locus sit, cum sine controversia legata solvantur. * alex. a. antiocho.
If, to the prejudice of the things bequeathed by the testament, an accuser was admitted who said the testament was false, the president of the province shall, according to the form of his jurisdiction, order the legacies to be paid, with a surety interposed that, if the inheritance should be evicted, he will restore them, although otherwise there is room for a surety at that time when legacies are paid without controversy. * Alexander Augustus to Antiochus.
Cum alienam rem quis reliquerit, si quidem sciens, tam ex legato quam ex fideicommisso ab eo qui legatum seu fideicommissum meruit peti potest. quod si suam esse putavit, non aliter valet relictum, nisi proximae personae vel uxori vel alii tali personae datum sit, cui legaturus esset, et si scisset rem alienam esse. * alex.
When someone has bequeathed another’s property, if indeed knowingly, it may be claimed both under a legacy and under a fideicommiss by the person who has merited the legacy or fideicommiss. But if he supposed it to be his own, the bequest is not otherwise valid, unless it has been given to a nearest person or to a wife or to some other such person to whom he would have been going to bequeath it even if he had known the thing was another’s. * alex.
Cum responso viri prudentissimi papiniani, quod precibus insertum est, praeceptionis legatum et omissa parte hereditatis vindicari posse declaratur, intellegis desiderio tuo iuxta iuris formam esse consultum. * alex. a. muciano.
Since by the response of the most prudent man Papinian, which has been inserted in the petition, it is declared that a legacy by preemption and an omitted share of the inheritance can be vindicated, you understand that your desire has been provided for according to the form of law. * alexander the augustus to mucianus.
Verba vero responsi haec sunt: filiae mater praedium ita legavit: " praecipito sumito extra partem hereditatis": cum hereditati matris filia renuntiasset, nihilo minus eam recte legatum vindicare visum est. <a 240 pp.Constitutio v id.Iul.Sabino ii et venusto conss.>
The words of the response are these: the mother bequeathed the praedium (estate) to her daughter in this way: " take in priority; take it outside the share of the inheritance": when the daughter had renounced her mother’s inheritance, nonetheless it was deemed that she could rightly vindicate the legacy. <a 240 pp. Constitution 5 Id. Jul., Sabinus for the 2nd time and Venustus, consuls.>
Quod si deducto debito in relictis bonis superfluum est, libertates impediri iuris ratio non permittit, quando etiam legata nec non fideicommissa salva lege falcidia praestanda sunt. <a 290 pp.Iii k.Oct.Ipsis iiii et iii aa.Conss.>
But if, with the debt deducted, there is a surplus in the goods left, the reason of law does not permit manumissions to be impeded, since even legacies and likewise fideicommissa must be provided, with the Lex Falcidia preserved. <a 290 on the 3rd day before the Kalends of October, the same emperors consuls for the 4th and 3rd time.>
the augusti and the caesars to nicon. * 294 on the 5th day before the ides of december, at nicomedia, the caesars being consuls.
In annalibus legatis vel fideicommissis, quae testator non solum certae personae , sed etiam eius heredibus praestari voluit, eorum exactionem omnibus heredibus et heredum heredibus conservari pro voluntate testatoris praecipimus. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 d. iii id. dec.
In annual legacies or fideicommissa, which the testator wished to be furnished not only to a certain person , but also to his heirs, we order the exaction of them to be preserved for all the heirs and the heirs of the heirs, according to the will of the testator. * Justinian Augustus to Mena, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 528 given on the 3rd day before the Ides of December.
Cum quaestio talis de significatione verborum animos veterum movit, si quis cuidam agrum puta cornelianum vel alium quendam in solidum legaverit, deinde alii partem eius dimidiam, quantam portionem primus, quantam secundus legatarius consequitur ( simili dubitatione et in hereditate et in fideicommissis habita) , cumque computationes multae introducebantur et multis ratiocinatoribus dignae: nos huiusmodi computationes quasi superfluas et contrarias voluntati testatorum omnes esse sopiendas censemus. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 530 d. xv k. dec.
Since such a question about the signification of words moved the minds of the ancients—if someone should bequeath to a certain person a field, say the Cornelian, or some other, as a whole, then to another a half of it—what portion does the first legatee, what the second, obtain ( with a similar doubt also held in inheritance and in fideicommissa ), and since many computations were being introduced and worthy of many ratiocinators: we judge that such computations, as superfluous and contrary to the will of testators, must all be put to rest. * Just. Aug. to Julian, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 530, on the fifteenth day before the Kalends of December.
Cum enim manifestissimum est eum, qui ab initio duodecim uncias rei cuidam reliquit, alii autem postea sex, recessisse quidem a priore voluntate, voluisse autem minui eam sex unciis, cum alii eas obtulit, et praesens casus exitum apertissimum inveniet. <a 530 d. xv k. dec. lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
Since it is most manifest that he who from the beginning bequeathed twelve ounces of a certain thing to one person, but afterwards six to another, indeed has withdrawn from his prior will, and wished that it be reduced by six ounces, since he has given those to another, the present case will find a most obvious outcome. <in the year 530, on the 15th day before the Kalends of December, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Et si primo re tota relicta tertiam partem secundo reliquerit, secundum praedictum modum octo quidem uncias vel agri vel hereditatis apud primum remanere, tertiam autem partem vel quattuor uncias ad secundum migrare. <a 530 d. xv k. dec. lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
And if, the whole thing having been left to the first, he should leave a third part to the second, then, according to the aforesaid mode, indeed eight ounces either of the field or of the inheritance remain with the first, but the third part, or four ounces, migrates to the second. <a 530 d. xv k. dec. lampadio et oreste vv. cc. conss.>
( 1) sed et aliam disceptationem iuris antiqui non absimilem constitutam decidere nobis humanum esse apparuit. agitabatur enim, si quis agrum cornelianum vel forte alium vel quandam rem cuidam legaverit et postea iterum vel saepius ei eandem rem per legatum vel fideicommissum dederit, post talia autem verba testamenti sempronio eundem agrum vel aliam rem legaverit, ut saepius quidem titii fuisset mentio, semel autem sempronii, quid statuendum est, et quid iuris sit, si coniunctim an separatim eis relinquatur, sive in legato hoc consistat sive in hereditate? <a 530 d. xv k. dec.
( 1) but it has seemed fitting to us to decide also another controversy of the ancient law, not dissimilar, that had been set in motion. For it was being canvassed: if someone has bequeathed the Cornelian field, or perhaps another, or a certain thing, to someone, and afterwards again or repeatedly has given to him the same thing by legacy or by fideicommiss, but after such words of the testament has bequeathed to Sempronius the same field or another thing—so that there was more frequent mention of Titius, but once only of Sempronius—what is to be determined? and what is the law, if it is left to them jointly or separately, whether this consists in a legacy or in an inheritance? <a 530 d. 15 k. dec.
Huiusmodi igitur decidentes antiquam controversiam sancimus, cuicumque fuerit vel hereditas vel ager in memoratis casibus sive coniunctim sive soli sive saepius eidem relictus, aequa lance et hereditatem et agrum et aliam quamcumque rem dividi et ad dimidiam partem unumquemque vocari, nisi specialiter expresserit et dixerit testator tantas quidem partes velle unum, tantas autem alterum habere. in omnibus etenim testatoris voluntatem, quae legitima est, dominari censemus. <a 530 d. xv k. dec.
Accordingly, bringing to a conclusion an ancient controversy of this kind, we sanction that, to whomever either an inheritance or a field in the aforesaid cases, whether conjointly or alone or more than once, has been left to the same person, both the inheritance and the field and any other thing whatsoever are to be divided with an even balance, and each one is to be called to a half share, unless the testator has expressly stated and said that he wishes one to have so many parts and the other so many. For in all things we deem the testator’s will, which is lawful, to prevail. <in the year 530, on the 15th day before the Kalends of December.
Cum quidam suum filium familias impuberem exheredatum fecit aliis heredibus scriptis, eidem autem pupillo alium substitutum reliquit, maximam scilicet ostendens ad filium suum adfectionem, cui nihil quidem emolumenti reliquit, sed post exheredationis iniuriam etiam substitutionem ei addidit et a substituto legatum reliquit, quaerebatur, si huiusmodi legatum vel fideicommissum potest valere. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. ii k. mai.
When a certain man disinherited his son in his power (filius familias), under age, with other heirs appointed, but for the same pupil he left another as substitute heir, clearly showing the greatest affection toward his own son, to whom indeed he left no emolument, but, after the injury of disinheritance, he even added a substitution to him and from the substitute left a legacy to him, the question was asked whether a legacy or a fideicommissum of this kind can be valid. * Justinian Augustus to John, praetorian prefect. * <a 531 on the 2nd day before the Kalends of May.
Sed et si legatum eidem exheredato filio pater reliquerit et substituerit ei exheredato facto aliquem extraneum, iterum certabatur, si saltem per eundem modum fideicommissum potest relinquere. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But also, if a father has left a legacy to the same disinherited son and has substituted, the son having been disinherited, some outsider in his place, it was again disputed whether at least by the same method he can leave a fideicommissum. <in the year 531, on the 2nd day before the Kalends of May, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Cum igitur antiquitas quidem haec diverse tractare maluit, nobis autem huiusmodi iurgia supervacua esse videntur, sancimus nullo legato nullo fideicommisso huiusmodi substitutum qui exheredato pupillo datus est praegravari, nec si ipsam rem quam pupillo legavit a substituto eius vel legare vel fideicommittere voluit. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Since therefore antiquity preferred to treat these matters in diverse ways, but to us quarrels of this kind seem superfluous, we sanction that the substitute of this sort who is given to a disinherited pupil is not to be burdened by any legacy or any fideicommissum, not even if he wished to bequeath or to fideicommit from his substitute the very thing which he bequeathed to the pupil. <a 531 d. ii k. mai. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Quod omnimodo inhibendum esse censemus, ut non accipiat fructum suae calliditatis, qui heredem voluit hereditate defraudare: sed huiusmodi legatum illi quidem auferatur, maneat autem quasi pro non scripto apud heredem, ut, qui alii nocendum esse existimavit, ipse suam sentiat iacturam, quemadmodum, si legatarius, cui propter tutelam gerendam aliquid derelictum sit, non subierit tutelam, ei quidem legatum aufertur, pupillo autem adsignatur, cui ille utilis esse noluit. <a 531 d. k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
We judge that it must by all means be inhibited, so that he who wished to defraud the heir of the inheritance may not receive the fruit of his cleverness; but such a legacy is indeed to be taken away from him, while as regards the heir let it remain as if not written, so that he who considered that harm should be done to another may feel his own loss—just as, if a legatee, to whom something was left on account of a tutela to be undertaken, does not undergo the tutela, the legacy is taken from him, but is assigned to the pupil, to whom he was unwilling to be of use. <a in 531, on the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Illud, quod de legatis vel fideicommissis temporalibus utpote irritis a legum conditoribus definitum est, emendare prospeximus sancientes et talem legatorum vel fideicommissorum speciem valere et firmitatem habere. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 532 d. xv k. nov.
That, which concerning temporal legacies or fideicommissa, as being null, was defined by the lawgivers, we have provided to amend, sanctioning that even such a species of legacies or fideicommissary trusts be valid and have firmness. * Justinian, Augustus, to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 532 on the 15th day before the Kalends of November
Cum enim iam constitutum est fieri posse temporales donationes et contractus, consequens est etiam legata vel fideicommissa, quae ad tempus relicta sunt, ad eandem similitudinem confirmari: post completum videlicet tempus ad heredem isdem legatis vel fideicommissis remeantibus, necessitatem habente legatario vel fideicommissario cautionem in personam heredis exponere, ut post transactum tempus res non culpa eius deterior facta restituatur. <a 532 d. xv k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc. anno secundo.>
Since indeed it has now been established that temporal donations and contracts can be made, it follows that legacies or fideicommissa which have been left for a time are likewise to be confirmed in the same manner: namely, once the period has been completed, the same legacies or fideicommissa revert to the heir, with the legatee or fideicommissary being under a necessity to furnish a security in personam to the heir, so that, after the time has elapsed, the thing may be restored not made worse through his fault. <a 532 on the fifteenth day before the Kalends of November at Constantinople after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, in the second year.>
Praediis instructis legatis, quamvis ex fructibus oleum et vinum in eodem fundo habuerit, tamen si id venale fuit, item ea, quae ad tempus propter incursionem latronum tutelae causa in praedium translata sunt, legato non cedere iuris auctoribus placuit. * ant. a. antipatrae.
In the case of estates bequeathed as “equipped,” although there was on the same farm oil and wine from the fruits, nevertheless, if that was for sale, and likewise those things which for a time were transferred onto the estate for the sake of protection on account of an incursion of bandits, it has pleased the authorities of the law that they do not pass under the legacy. * Antoninus Augustus at Antipatrae.
Fundo " sicut instructus est" legato sive per fideicommissum relicto vilicum hominesque et omnia, quae vel, ut ipse pater familias, cum ibi ageret, vel fundus esset instructus, non temporis causa habuit in eo, relicta esse iuris auctoritate definitum est: ea etiam, quae tam fructuum colligendorum quam servandorum. * diocl. et maxim.
When a farm, “as it is equipped,” is left by legacy or by fideicommissum, it has been determined by the authority of the law that the bailiff (vilicus), the people, and all things which either, as the paterfamilias himself, when he was residing there, had in it so that the farm might be equipped, or with which the farm was equipped, provided he did not have them there for a temporary purpose, are included as left; and also those things which are for both the gathering and the preserving of the fruits. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Sancimus cautionis nomine vel asphaleias non esse fideiussoris dationem interpretandam, nisi hoc specialiter vel in graecis vel in latinis verbis scriptum fuerit: nisi enim vel generaliter de satisdatione vel de fideiussione specialiter sit nominatum, cautione vel cautela vel asphaleia minime fideiussionem, sed nudam promissionem significari. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 531 d. k. mart.
We ordain that, under the name of “caution” or “asphaleia,” the giving of a surety is not to be interpreted, unless this has been written specifically either in Greek or in Latin words: for unless either, in general, “satisdatio” or, in particular, “fideiussio” has been named, by “cautio” or “cautela” or “asphaleia” a suretyship is in no way signified, but a bare promise. * Justinian Augustus to Julianus, Praetorian Prefect. * <in 531, on the Kalends of March.
Cum quidam sic vel institutionem vel legatum vel fideicommissum vel libertatem vel tutelam scripsisset: " ille vel ille heres mihi esto" vel " illi aut illi do lego" vel " dari volo", vel " illum aut illum liberum" vel " tutorem esse volo" vel " iubeo", dubitabatur, utrumne inutilis sit huiusmodi institutio et legatum et fideicommissum et libertas et tutoris datio, an occupantis melior condicio sit, an ambo in huiusmodi lucra vel munia vocentur et an secundum aliquem ordinem admittantur, an uterque omnimodo, cum alii primum in institutionibus quasi institutum admitti, secundum quasi substitutum, alii in fideicommissis posteriorem solum accepturum fideicommissum existimaverunt, quasi recentiore voluntate testatoris utentem. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. prid.
When someone had thus written either an institution or a legacy or a fideicommissum or a liberty or a tutelage: " this man or that man be my heir" or " to this man or to that man I give, I bequeath" or " I wish it to be given," or " this man or that man free" or " I will a tutor to be" or " I order," it was doubted whether an institution and a legacy and a fideicommissum and a liberty and an appointment of a tutor of this sort are void, or whether the condition of the occupier is better, or whether both are called to such gains or duties and whether they are admitted according to some order, or whether each is admitted in every way; since some judged that, first, in institutions the first be admitted as instituted, the second as substituted, while others thought that in fideicommissa only the later would receive the fideicommissum, as using the more recent will of the testator. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 d. prid.
Et si quis eorum altercationes singillatim exponere maluerit, nihil prohibet non leve libri volumen extendere, ut sic explicari possit tanta auctorum varietas, cum non solum iuris auctores, sed etiam ipsae principales constitutiones, quas ipsi auctores rettulerunt, inter se variasse videntur. <a 531 d. prid. k. mai.
And if anyone should prefer to set out their altercations individually, nothing hinders the volume of the book from being extended to no slight size, so that in this way so great a variety of authors might be unfolded, since not only the authors of law, but even the very principal constitutions themselves, which the authors themselves have reported, seem to have varied among themselves. <a in the year 531, on the day before the Kalends of May.
Melius itaque nobis visum est omni huiusmodi verbositate explosa coniunctionem " aut" " pro" " et" accipi, ut videatur copulativo modo esse prolata et magis sit paradiazeuxis, ut et primam personam inducat et secundam non repellat. <a 531 d. prid. k. mai.
Therefore it has seemed better to us, with all verbosity of this sort banished, to take the conjunction " aut" " for" " and", so that it may appear to have been put forth in a copulative manner and be more a paradiazeuxis, so that it both introduces the first person and does not repel the second. <a 531 d. the day before the Kalends of May.
Quemadmodum enim verbi gratia in interdicto quod vi aut clam " aut" coniunctio pro " et" apertissime posita est, ita et in omnibus huiusmodi casibus sive institutionum sive legatorum sive fideicommissorum vel libertatum seu tutelarum hoc esse intellegendum, et ambo veniant aequa lance ad hereditatem, ambo legata similiter accipiant, fideicommissum in utrumque dividatur, libertas utrumque capiat , tutoris ambo fungantur officio. <a 531 d. prid. k. mai.
For just as, for example, in the interdict “quod vi aut clam” the conjunction “or” is most plainly set in place of “and,” so too in all cases of this kind—whether of institutions, or of legacies, or of fideicommissa, or of liberties (manumissions), or of tutelages—this is to be understood: that both come to the inheritance with an equal scale, both similarly receive the legacies, the fideicommissum is divided between both, liberty accrues to each , both discharge the office of tutor. <a 531, on the day before the Kalends of May.
Sic nemo defraudetur a commodo testatoris, sic maior providentia pupillis inferatur, ne, dum dubitatur, apud quem debet esse tutela, in medio res pupillorum depereant. sed haec quidem sancimus, cum in personas huiusmodi proferatur scriptura. <a 531 d. prid.
Thus let no one be defrauded of the testator’s benefit, thus greater providence be brought to the wards, lest, while it is in doubt with whom the guardianship ought to be, the assets of the wards perish in the meantime. But indeed we sanction these things, when a writing is brought forward concerning persons of this kind. <a 531 d. prid.
Sin autem una quidem est persona, res autem ita derelictae: " illam aut illam rem illi do lego", vel " per fideicommissum relinquo", tunc secundum veteres regulas et antiquas definitiones vetustatis iura maneant incorrupta, nulla innovatione eis ex hac constitutione introducenda. <a 531 d. prid. k. mai.
But if indeed there is a single person, but the things have been left thus: " I give or bequeath this or that thing to that person," or " I leave it by fideicommissum," then, according to the old rules and the ancient definitions of antiquity, let the rights remain uncorrupted, with no innovation to be introduced to them from this constitution. <a 531 d. the day before the Kalends of May.
Suggestioni illyricianae advocationis respondentes decernimus familiae nomen talem habere vigorem: parentes et liberos omnesque propinquos et substantiam, libertos etiam et patronos nec non servos per hanc appellationem significari. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 532 d. xv k. nov.
Responding to the suggestion of the Illyrician advocacy, we decree the name “family” to have such force: that parents and children and all kin and the estate, also freedmen and patrons, and likewise slaves, are signified by this appellation. * Justinian Augustus to John, praetorian prefect. * <a 532, day 15 before the Kalends of November.
Et si quis per suum elogium fideicommissum familiae suae reliquerit, nulla speciali adiectione super quibusdam certis personis facta, non solum propinquos, sed etiam his deficientibus generum et nurum. et hos enim nobis humanum esse videtur ad fideicommissum vocari, ita videlicet, si matrimonium morte filii vel filiae fuerit dissolutum. nullo etenim modo possint gener vel nurus filiis viventibus ad tale fideicommissum vocari, cum hi procul dubio eos antecedant: et hoc videlicet gradatim fieri, ut post eos liberti veniant.
And if anyone, by his own elogium, has left a fideicommissum to his family, with no special addition made concerning certain definite persons, not only the kinsfolk, but, these failing, even the son-in-law and the daughter-in-law are to be called. For it seems to us humane that these also be called to the fideicommissum, namely, if the marriage has been dissolved by the death of the son or daughter. For in no way can the son-in-law or daughter-in-law be called to such a fideicommissum while the children are alive, since they without doubt take precedence over them; and this, namely, is to be done stepwise, so that after them the freedmen come.
Hoc eodem valente, et si quis rem immobilem cuidam legaverit vel fideicommiserit eamque alienari prohibuerit adiciens, ut, si hoc fideicommissarius praeterierit , familiae suae res adquiratur. <a 532 d. xv k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc. anno secundo.>
This same remaining in force, even if someone has bequeathed or left in trust (by fideicommissum) an immovable thing to a person and has prohibited it from being alienated, adding that, if the fideicommissary should transgress this , the property is to be acquired by his own family. <a in the year 532, on the 15th day before the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, in the second year.>
In aliis autem casibus nomen familiae pro substantia oportet intellegi, quia et servi et aliae res in patrimonio uniuscuiusque esse putantur. <a 532 d. xv k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc. anno secundo.>
In other cases, however, the name “family” ought to be understood as “substance,” since both slaves and other things are considered to be in each person’s patrimony. <a 532, on the 15th day before the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, in the second year.>
Si in fraudem legatorum transmissam hereditatem ad substitutum probatura es, utilis actio adversus eum, cum quo fraudis consilium participatum est, competit. plane si pecunia accepta omisit aditionem, legata et fideicommissa praestare cogitur. * sev.
If you are going to prove that the inheritance was transmitted to the substitute in fraud of the legatees, a useful action lies against the one with whom the plan of fraud was shared. Clearly, if, having received money, he omitted the acceptance (aditio) of the inheritance, he is compelled to render the legacies and the fideicommissa. * sev.
Quod si, cum neque adiri ex testamento hereditas neque bonorum possessio peti possit, iudicium defuncti non usurpabitur, sed ad irritum iuris ratione vocatum est, petitio relictorum nullo iure procedit. <a 245 pp. k. ian. philippo a. et titiano conss.>
But if, when neither the inheritance from a testament can be entered upon nor bonorum possessio can be sought, the action of the deceased is not to be usurped but has, by the reasoning of the law, been called to nullity, the petition for legacies proceeds with no right. <in the year 245, the day before the Kalends of January, under the consuls Philippus the Augustus and Titianus.>
Si proculina patri vestro, cuius estis heredes, testamento quid reliquit et scripti iure secundum eius iudicium vel omissa causa testamenti successerunt ab intestato, aditus competens iudex, quatenus legis falcidiae modus patitur, vobis relicta restitui iubebit. * diocl. et maxim.
If Proculina left anything by testament to your father, whose heirs you are, and, the title of the written heir failing in accordance with its judgment, or the ground of the testament being omitted, another has succeeded to the inheritance ab intestato, the competent judge, when approached, will order that what was left be restored to you, insofar as the measure of the Lex Falcidia allows. * diocletian and maximian.
Ambiguitates legis iuliae miscellae generali lege tollentes nullum concedimus fieri iuramentum secundum praedictam legem, sed penitus ea cum muciana cautione super hac causa quiescente licere mulieribus, etiam maritorum suorum interminatione spreta, quae viduitatem eis indicit, et non dato sacramento procreandae subolis gratia, tamen ad secundas migrare nuptias, poena huiusmodi cessante, sive habeat liberos, sive non, et percipere ea, quae maritus dereliquit ( quorum omnium manifestissimum est dominium minime eas liberis existentibus habere usu fructu tantummodo apud eas manente et ad liberos prioris tori proprietate eorum deferenda secundum ea, quae de secundis nuptiis lucrisque ex his mulieribus statuta sunt), ne ex necessitate legis et sacramento colorato periurium committatur. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 531 d. x k. mart.
Removing by a general law the ambiguities of the Julian “Mixed” Law, we grant that no oath be made according to the aforesaid law, but that it be entirely at rest, together with the Mucian cautio (stipulation), in this matter; and that it be permitted to women—even spurning the intermination of their husbands, which imposes widowhood on them—and, without giving an oath for the sake of procreating offspring, nevertheless to migrate to second nuptials, the penalty of this kind ceasing, whether she have children or not, and to receive those things which the husband left (of all which it is most manifest that they by no means have ownership, if children exist, the usufruct only remaining with them, and the property being conveyed to the children of the former bed, according to the provisions that have been established concerning second nuptials and the gains from these women), lest, from the necessity of the law and a colorable oath, perjury be committed. * Justinian Augustus to Julian, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 d. 10 k. mart.
Cum enim mulieres ad hoc natura progenuit, ut partus ederent, et maxima eis cupiditas in hoc constituta est, quare scientes prudentesque periurium committi patimur ? <a 531 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Since nature has engendered women for this purpose, that they might bring forth offspring, and the greatest desire has been established in them for this, why do we, knowing and prudent, allow perjury to be committed? <in the year 531, on the 10th day before the Kalends of March, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men>
Tale igitur iuramentum conquiescat et lex iulia miscella cedat cum muciana cautione super hoc introducta, a re publica separata. augeri etenim magis nostram rem publicam et multis hominibus progenitis frequentari quam impiis periuriis adfici volumus, cum satis esse inhumanum videtur per leges, quae periuria puniunt, viam periuriis aperiri. <a 531 d. x k. mart.
Therefore let such an oath be set aside, and let the Julian Miscellany Law give way along with the Mucian caution introduced on this matter, removed from the commonwealth. For we wish rather that our commonwealth be augmented and thronged with many people begotten than afflicted by impious perjuries, since it seems sufficiently inhuman that, through laws which punish perjuries, a way should be opened to perjuries. <a 531 d. 10 Kalends of March.
Legem iuliam miscellam quemadmodum in feminis sustulimus, ita et in masculis esse sublatam pertinere quidem ad sensum nostrae legis, quam super hoc promulgavimus, non est incertum. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. k. nov.
Just as we have abolished the Julian Miscellany law in the case of women, so too that it is abolished in the case of men pertains to the sense of our law, which we have promulgated on this matter, and is not uncertain. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 531, on the Kalends of November.
Ne tamen quaedam ambiguitas simplices animos moveat, etiam expressim sancimus legem iuliam miscellam et senatus consulta, quae circa eam facta sunt, nec non mucianam cautionem, quae super talibus nuptiis introducta est, non solum in feminis, sed etiam in masculis cessare. <a 531 d. k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Lest, however, a certain ambiguity should move simple minds, we also expressly sanction that the Julian Miscellany Law and the senatus consults which were made concerning it, and likewise the Mucian stipulation, which was introduced concerning such marriages, cease not only in females but also in males. <a 531 on the Kalends of November, at constantinople, after the consulship of lampadius and orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sed quia apud ulpianum in libris sabinianis invenimus quaedam verba, quae effugiunt legis miscellae observationem, ne quis et ea sublata esse putaverit, sancimus, cum huiusmodi verbis mulieribus aliquid relinquatur: " si vidua erit" vel " cum vidua erit" vel " quotiens vidua erit", vel e contrario maribus: " si amiserint uxores" vel " quando ad caelibatum pervenerint", non vetari ea vindicare vel legitimo modo sumere, quae eis derelicta sunt. neque enim ut permaneant vel feminae in viduitate vel masculi in caelibatu relictum esse videtur, ut locum vel ante nostram legem habeat lex iulia miscella, quae iam perempta est: sed cum primum hoc evenerit, ilico competat talibus personis eius quod relictum est persecutio, quia sub condicione relictum esse videtur, sive semel sive in annos si ngulos haec liberalitas fuerit conscripta, quasi pro solacio suae tristitiae. <a 531 d. k. nov.
But because with Ulpian in the Sabinian books we have found certain words that escape the observation of the Miscellaneous Julian law, lest anyone think that these too have been abolished, we sanction that, when with words of this kind something is left to women: " si vidua erit" or " cum vidua erit" or " quotiens vidua erit", or conversely to males: " si amiserint uxores" or " quando ad caelibatum pervenerint", they are not forbidden to claim or to take by a legitimate mode the things that have been left to them. For it does not seem to have been left on condition that women remain in widowhood or men in celibacy, so that the Miscellaneous Julian law, which is now done away with, should have place even before our law: but as soon as this has occurred, there immediately accrues to such persons an action for what has been left, because it seems to have been left under a condition, whether this liberality has been written once or in each year, as a solace for their sadness. <a 531 d. k. nov.
Supervacuam observationem veterum legum, per quam voluntates testatorum ad effectum duci impediebantur, amputamus praecipientes nullum valere, dicendo poenae nomine quaedam esse relicta vel adempta in supremis testantium voluntatibus, ea infirmare, sed licere testanti pro implenda sua voluntate vel pecunias dari praecipere vel aliam pecuniariam poenam inferre quibus voluerit, tam in adimendis hereditatibus vel legatis vel fideicommissis vel libertatibus, quam in praecipiendo ad alias personas ea transferri ab eo, cui relicta ab initio sunt, vel aliquid aliis ab eo dari, si minus dispositionibus suis heres vel legatarius vel libertate donatus paruerit. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 d. k. ian.
We cut off the superfluous observance of the ancient laws, by which the wills of testators were impeded from being brought to effect, prescribing that it shall be of no force to weaken them by saying that certain things have been left or taken away under the name of a penalty in the final wills of testators; but that it is permitted to the testator, for the fulfillment of his will, either to direct money to be given or to inflict some other pecuniary penalty upon whom he wishes, both in taking away inheritances or legacies or fideicommissa or liberties, and in ordering that these be transferred to other persons from him to whom they were left from the beginning, or that something be given by him to others, if the heir or legatee or the one endowed with liberty has less than complied with his dispositions. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 d. k. ian.
Quod si aliquid facere vel legibus interdictum vel alias probrosum vel etiam impossibile iussus aliquis eorum fuerit, tunc sine ullo damno etiam neglecto testatoris praecepto servabitur. <a 528 d. k. ian. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. ii cons.>
But if any one of them has been ordered to do something either interdicted by the laws or otherwise opprobrious, or even impossible, then, without any loss, even with the testator’s precept neglected, such a person shall be safeguarded. <a 528 on the Kalends of January, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, ever Augustus, in his 2nd consulship.>
Si probaveris demetrium petisse de matre heredeque sua, ut tibi alimenta menstrua et vestiarium annuum praestaret, eamque secutam voluntatem filii sui per multum temporis, id est non minus in tali causa triennio, ea praestitisse: ut in futurum quoque ea praestentur et, si qua in praeteritum praestita non sunt, exsolvantur, impetrabis. * ant. a. demetrio.
If you prove that Demetrius petitioned from his mother, who was also his heir, that she should furnish you with monthly aliment and an annual wardrobe allowance, and that she, having followed her son’s will for a long time—that is, in a case of this kind not less than three years—did furnish these things: you will obtain that they be furnished for the future as well, and that, if any have not been furnished for the past, they be paid. * antoninus augustus to demetrius.
Etsi inutiliter fideicommissum relictum est, tamen si heredes comperta voluntate defuncti praedia ex causa fideicommissi avo tuo praestiterunt, frustra ab heredibus de ea re quaestio tibi movetur, cum non ex ea sola scriptura, sed ex conscientia relicti fideicommissi satis defuncti voluntati factum esse videatur. * ant. a. eupatrio.
Even if the fideicommissum was left ineffectually, nevertheless, if the heirs, having discovered the will of the deceased, provided the estates to your grandfather by reason of the fideicommissum, it is in vain that a question on that matter is raised against you by the heirs, since it appears that satisfaction has been rendered to the will of the deceased not from that writing alone, but from the conscious acknowledgment of the fideicommissum that was left. * antoninus augustus to eupatrius.
Cum secundum voluntatem defunctae chrysidem puellam ab heredibus manumissam eamque, priusquam ei restitueretur hereditas, intestatam vita functam proponas, ad manumissores eius successio pertinet. qui si adierint eius hereditatem, confusis actionibus fideicommisso sunt liberati. * ant.
Since, according to the will of the deceased, you state that the girl Chrysis was manumitted by the heirs, and that, before the inheritance was restored to her, she departed life intestate, the succession pertains to her manumittors. Who, if they enter upon her inheritance, with the actions merged, are released from the fideicommissum. * Antoninus.
Si frater tuus, posteaquam patri heres extitit, pubes iam sine liberis decessit, ex pupillari substitutione tibi hereditas eius delata non est. sed si verbis fideicommissi aliqua parte testamenti confirmata est, fideicommissum ab heredibus petere non prohiberis. * alex.
If your brother, after he became heir to his father, being now of full age, died without children, his inheritance has not been conveyed to you from a pupillary substitution. But if the words of a fideicommissum have been confirmed in some part of the testament, you are not prohibited from seeking the fideicommissum from the heirs. * alex.
Post mortem suam rogatam restituere hereditatem defuncti iudicio et antequam fati munus impleat posse satisfacere ( id est restituere hereditatem) quarta parte vel retenta vel omissa, si voluerit, explorati iuris est. * philipp. a. et philipp.
It is settled law that a person who has been asked, by the decision of the deceased, to restore the inheritance after her own death can, even before she fulfills the office of fate, make satisfaction ( that is, to restore the inheritance) with a fourth part either retained or omitted, if she wishes. * Philippus the Augustus and Philippus.
Ea, quam frater tuus instituerat, sive quaesita sive non quaesita hereditate decesserit, cum tamen simpliciter, antequam duodecimum annum aetatis implesset, verbis precativis testamento facto nonnullos ei voluerit substitutos, nihil prohibet fideicommissum peti vel ab ipsius heredibus, qui bona intestati tenent. * valer. et gallien.
She whom your brother had instituted, whether she died with the inheritance acquired or not acquired, since, however, he simply, before she completed the twelfth year of age, by a testament made with precatory words wished several to be substituted to her, nothing prevents the fideicommissum from being sought even by her own heirs, who hold the assets of an intestate. * Valerian and Gallienus.
Tunc enim locum habet, quod regulariter traditur ea quae in testamento relinquuntur, si ex testamento non adeatur hereditas, non valere, cum verbis relicta directis adiri potuit hereditas, non cum illa ipsa sic data est, ut esset etiam ab intestato successoribus postulanda. <a 255 pp. xiiii k. sept. valeriano iii et gallieno ii aa. c onss.>
For then there applies what is regularly handed down: that the things which are left in a testament, if the inheritance is not entered upon under the testament, are not valid, since by direct words the inheritance could be entered upon, not when that very grant was so given that it must also be demanded by successors from intestacy. <a 255 pp. 14th day before the Kalends of September (August 19), under Valerian 3 and Gallienus 2, emperors, consuls.>
Quamvis simpliciter te ac fratrem tuum aliquis instituerit heredes eiusque hereditatis commodum pater ex tua fratrisque persona pro portionibus vestris potestatis ratione quaesierit, tamen quia inferioribus verbis testamenti vos sui iuris facere testator curavit, intellegi potest restituendi hereditatis commodi fideicommisso patrem obstrictum esse. * valer. et gallien.
Although someone has simply instituted you and your brother as heirs, and your father, by reason of his power, has sought from your and your brother’s person, in proportion to your shares, the benefit of that inheritance, nevertheless, because by the subsequent words of the testament the testator took care to make you sui iuris, it can be understood that the father is bound by a fideicommissum to restore the benefit of the inheritance. * Valerian and Gallienus.
Cum virum prudentissimum papinianum respondisse non ignoramus etiam legata huiusmodi fideicommisso contineri, id est ubi heres rogatus fuerat, quidquid ex hereditate pervenerit, post mortem restituere, animadvertis etiam praeceptionis compendium testatoris verbis comprehensum esse. * carus carinus et numer. aaa.
Since we are not unaware that the most prudent man Papinian answered that even legacies of this kind are contained under a fideicommissum—that is, where the heir had been asked to restore after death whatever should come to him from the inheritance—you observe also that the compendium of praeceptio is encompassed in the testator’s words. * Carus, Carinus, and Numerian, Augusti.
Sane quoniam in fideicommissis voluntas magis quam verba plerumque intuenda sunt , si quas pro rei veritate praeterea probationes habes ad commendandam hanc patris voluntatem, quam fuisse adseveras, apud praesidem experiri non vetaris. <a 283 pp. prid. id. nov.
Indeed, since in fideicommissa the intention rather than the words is for the most part to be considered , if you have any further proofs for the truth of the matter to commend this will of your father, which you assert to have existed, you are not forbidden to try the matter before the praeses. <a 283 pp. the day before the Ides of November.
Si in persona patris tui, cui te successisse proponis, fideicommissi dies utiliter cessit, licet tempore quo fuerat datum necdum te natum probetur, uxorem patrui, quem contendis patri tuo rogatum, si sine liberis decesserit, ab avo relicta restituere, si ei successit, de fideicommisso convenire debes. nam si patrui etiam hereditas tibi quaesita est, non de fideicommisso quaerendum, sed hereditas ab ea vindicanda est. * diocl.
If, in the person of your father, whom you propose that you have succeeded, the day for the fideicommissum has validly fallen due, although at the time when it was given you are proven not yet to have been born, you ought to proceed on the fideicommissum against the wife of your paternal uncle—whom you contend to have been charged for your father—to restore what was left by your grandfather, if he should die without children, if she has succeeded to him. For if even the inheritance of the paternal uncle has been acquired for you, inquiry is not to be made about the fideicommissum, but the inheritance is to be vindicated from her. * diocl.
Instrumenta praediorum per fideicommissum relictorum, quae ad probationem originis eorum pertinent, heredes praestare necesse non habent: tamen cautionem praestare debent, quod, si opus fuerit legatario seu fideicommissario, ipsa, si habent, proferant. * diocl. et maxim.
The instruments/documents of estates left by fideicommissum, which pertain to the proof of their origin, the heirs are not required to furnish; nevertheless they must furnish a caution (security), that, if it shall be necessary for the legatee or fideicommissary, they will produce the same, if they have them. * diocl. and maxim.
Ex repudiatione fideicommissi doli mali exceptio iusta causa intercedente tunc opponitur, quando ipse, cui fideicommissum relictum est, repudiatione usus fuerit. unde cum hoc non te, sed patrem fecisse adseveras, qui tibi nocere non potuit, nihil tibi obesse potest. * diocl.
From the repudiation of a fideicommissum, the exceptio doli mali, a just cause intervening, is then pleaded when the very person to whom the fideicommissum was left has made use of repudiation. Hence, since you assert that this was done not by you but by your father, who could not harm you, nothing can be to your prejudice. * Diocletian.
Cum acutissimi ingenii vir et merito ante alios excellens papinianus in suis statuit responsis, si quis filium suum heredem instituit et restitutionis post mortem oneri subegit, non aliter hoc videri disposuisse, nisi cum filius eius sine subole vitam reliquerit: nos huiusmodi sensum merito mirati plenissimum ei donamus eventum, ut, si quis haec disposuerit, non tantum filium heredem instituens , sed etiam filiam, vel ab initio nepotem vel neptem, pronepotem vel proneptem vel aliam deinceps posteritatem, et eam restitutionis post obitum gravamini subiugaverit, non aliter hoc sensisse videatur, nisi hi qui restitutione onerati s unt sine filiis vel filiabus vel nepotibus vel pronepotibus fuerint defuncti, ne videatur testator alienas successiones propriis anteponere. * iust. a. demostheni pp. * <a 529 recitata septimo in novo consistorio palatii iustiniani.D.Iii k.Nov.Decio vc.Cons.>
Since Papinian, a man of the sharpest intellect and deservedly excelling before others, determined in his Responsa that, if someone appointed his son as heir and subjected him to the burden of restitution after death, he is not to be seen to have so disposed otherwise than when his son has left life without issue: we, having rightly admired such a sense, grant to it the fullest effect, that, if anyone has so disposed, not only appointing a son as heir , but also a daughter, or from the outset a grandson or granddaughter, great‑grandson or great‑granddaughter, or other posterity thereafter, and has subjected them to the encumbrance of restitution after decease, he shall be seen to have intended this in no other way, unless those burdened with restitution have died without sons or daughters or grandsons or great‑grandsons, lest the testator seem to prefer alien successions to his own. * Justinian Augustus to Demosthenes, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 529 read for the seventh time in the new consistory of the Palace of Justinian. On the 3rd day before the Kalends of November. Decius, a most distinguished man, consul.>
Quidam filium suum a sacris paternis remisit et postea testamento condito eum praeteriit nullo ei penitus relicto, aliis heredibus derelictis, ipsum autem, quem neque heredem neque exheredatum fecit, fideicommisso praegravavit. quaerebatur, si utile est huiusmodi fideicommissum. * iust.
A certain man released his son from the paternal sacra, and afterward, a testament having been made, he passed him over, leaving him nothing at all, other heirs having been left; but the very one whom he made neither heir nor expressly disinherited, he burdened with a fideicommissum. it was asked whether a fideicommissum of this kind is valid. * iust.
Tota igitur antiqua dubietate super hoc explosa nobis in hoc casu placuit, ut emancipatus utpote iniuria a patre adflictus non compellatur fideicommissum a sua persona relictum praestare. <a 531 d.Prid.K.Mart.Constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Therefore, with all the ancient dubiety on this matter exploded by us, it has pleased us in this case that an emancipated son, as one wrongfully afflicted by his father, not be compelled to render a fideicommissum left upon his person. <in the year 531 on the day before the Kalends of March at Constantinople, after the consulship of the most distinguished men Lampadius and Orestes.>
Quaestionem ex facto emergentem resecantes et voluntati defunctorum prospicientes sancimus, si sine scriptura et praesentia testium fideicommisso derelicto fideicommissarius elegerit iuramentum heredis vel forsitan legatarii vel fideicommissarii, quotiens ab eo relictum est fideicommissum, sive universitatis sive speciale, necesse habere heredem vel legatarium vel fideicommissarium prius iureiurando de calumnia praestito vel sacramentum subire et omni inquietudine sese relaxare vel, si recusandum existimaverit sacramentum aut certam quantitatem manifestare fideicommissario derelictam noluerit, si forsitan maiorem fideicommissarius expetat, omnimodo exactioni fideicommissi subiacere et eum ad satisfacti onem compelli, cum ipse sibi iudex et testis invenitur, cuius religio et fides a fideicommissario electa est, nullis testibus nullisque aliis adventiciis probationibus requisitis, sed sive quinque sint testes vel minores vel nemo, causam per illius sacramentum vel dandum vel recusandum suam habere tam firmitatem quam exactionem, sive pater sit, qui fideicommissum dederit, sive extraneus, ut aequitatis ratio communiter in omnes procedat. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis.
Cutting off the question arising from the fact and looking out for the will of testators, we sanction that, if without writing and the presence of witnesses a fideicommiss has been left, and the fideicommissary has chosen the oath of the heir or perhaps of the legatee or of a fideicommissary, as often as a fideicommiss has been left by him, whether universal or special, it is necessary for the heir or the legatee or the fideicommissary, first with the oath against calumny having been provided, either to undergo the sacrament (oath) and release himself from all disquiet, or, if he judges that the oath should be refused or is unwilling to disclose the definite amount left to the fideicommissary (if perhaps the fideicommissary demands a greater), in every way to be subject to the exaction of the fideicommiss and to be compelled to satisfaction, since he is found to be judge and witness for himself—his conscience and good faith having been chosen by the fideicommissary—no witnesses and no other extrinsic proofs being required; but whether there are five witnesses or fewer or none, his case is to have both its firmness and its enforcement through that oath, whether to be given or to be refused, whether it be a father who has given the fideicommiss or a stranger, so that the principle of equity may proceed commonly unto all. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 531, on the 5th day before the Kalends of December, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes.>
Cum enim res per testium sollemnitatem ostenditur, tunc et numerus testium et nimia subtilitas requirenda est. lex etenim, ne quid falsitatis incurrat per duos forte testes compositum, maiorem numerum testium expostulat, ut per ampliores homines perfectissima veritas reveletur. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis.
Since indeed a matter is shown through the solemnity of witnesses, then both the number of witnesses and the utmost subtlety are to be required. For the law, lest anything of falsity should occur through a case perhaps contrived by two witnesses, demands a greater number of witnesses, so that through more persons the most perfected truth may be revealed. <a 531 on the 5th day before the Kalends of December, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes.
Cum autem is, qui quid ex voluntate defuncti lucratur, et maxime ipse heres, cui summa auctoritas totius causae commissa est, dicere compellitur veritatem per sacramenti religionem, qualis locus testibus relinquatur vel quemadmodum ad extraneam fidem decurratur, propria et indubitata relicta? cum et in leges respeximus, quae iustis dispositionibus testatorum omnimodo heredes oboedire compellunt et sic strictius causam exigunt, ut etiam amittere lucrum hereditatis sanciant eos, qui testatoribus suis minime paruerunt. <a 531 d.V k.Dec.Constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis.
But since he who profits anything from the will of the deceased, and especially the heir himself, to whom the highest authority of the whole case has been committed, is compelled to speak the truth by the religion of an oath, what place is left for witnesses, or how should one resort to extraneous proof, when one’s own and indubitable means remain? since we have also had regard to the laws, which in every way compel heirs to obey the just dispositions of testators and thus exact the matter more strictly, to the point of decreeing that those who did not obey their testators even lose the profit of the inheritance. <a 531 on the 5th day before the Kalends of December at Constantinople after the consulship of lampadius and orestes.
Cum ii, qui legatis vel fideicommissis honorati sunt, personalem plerumque actionem habere noscuntur, quis vel vindicationis vel sinendi modo aliorumque generum legatorum subtilitatem prono animo admittet, quam posteritas optimis rationibus usa nec facile suscepit nec inextricabiles circuitus laudavit? quis in rem missionis scrupulosis utatur ambagibus? * iust.
Since those who have been honored with legacies or fideicommissa are for the most part known to have a personal action, who will with a ready mind admit the subtlety of legacies of vindication or by the allowing‑mode (sinendi modus) and of other kinds, which posterity, employing the best reasons, neither easily accepted nor praised for their inextricable circuits? Who will make use of the scrupulous circumlocutions of in rem missio? * iust.
Rectius igitur esse censemus in rem quidem missionem penitus aboleri, omnibus vero tam legatariis quam fideicommissariis unam naturam imponere et non solum personalem actionem praestare, sed etiam in rem, quatenus eis liceat easdem res, vel per quodcumque genus legati vel per fideicommissum fuerint derelictae, vindicare in rem actione instituenda, et insuper utilem servianam ( id est hypothecariam) super his quae fuerint derelicta in res mortui praestare. <a 529 d.Xv k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
Therefore we judge it more correct that the missio in rem be utterly abolished, and that one single nature be imposed upon all, both legatees and fideicommissaries, and that not only a personal action be provided, but also an in rem one, in so far as it is permitted for them to vindicate the same things—whether they were left by whatever kind of legacy or by fideicommissum—by instituting an in rem action; and, in addition, to provide the useful Servian ( id est hypothecary) [action] over those things which were left among the goods of the deceased. <a 529 d.Xv k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
Cum enim hoc iam iure nostro increbuit licere testatori hypothecam rerum suarum in testamento quibus voluerit dare, et iterum novellae constitutiones in multis casibus et tacitas hypothecas induxerunt, non ab re est etiam nos in praesenti casu hypothecariam donare, quae et nullo verbo praecedente possit ab ipsa lege induci. <a 529 d.Xv k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
Since indeed under our law it has now become widespread that it is permitted to a testator to give a hypothec of his goods in his testament to whom he wishes, and again the Novellae constitutions in many cases have introduced even tacit hypothecs, it is not out of place that we too in the present case grant a hypothecary security, which also, with no word preceding, can be induced by the law itself. <a 529 d.15 k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
Si enim testator ideo legata vel fidecommissa dereliquit, ut omnimodo personae ab eo honoratae ea percipiant, apparet ex eius voluntate etiam praefatas actiones contra res testatoris esse instituendas, ut omnibus modis voluntati eius satisfiat, et praecipue cum talia sint legata vel fidecommissa, quae piis actibus sunt deputata. <a 529 d.Xv k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
If indeed the testator for this reason left legacies or fideicommissa, namely that the persons honored by him should in every way receive them, it appears from his will that the aforesaid actions also are to be instituted against the goods of the testator, so that in all ways his intention may be satisfied, and especially since such are the legacies or fideicommissa as are assigned to pious acts. <a 529 d.Xv k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
Et haec disponimus, non tantum si ab herede fuerit legatum derelictum vel fideicommissum, sed et si a legatario vel fideicommissario vel alia persona, quam gravare fideicommisso possumus, fideicommissum cuidam relinquatur. cum enim non aliter valeat, nisi aliquid lucri offerat ei a quo derelictum est, nihil est grave etiam adversus eum non tantum personalem, sed etiam in rem et hypothecariam extendere actionem in rebus, quas a testatore consecutus est. <a 529 d.Xv k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
And we dispose these things, not only if a legacy or a fideicommissum has been left by the heir, but also if a fideicommissum is left to someone by the legatee or the fideicommissary, or by another person whom we can burden with a fideicommissum. For since it is not otherwise valid unless it offers some profit to the one by whom it is left, there is nothing burdensome in extending against him not only a personal action, but also an in rem and hypothecary action, over the things which he has obtained from the testator. <a 529 d.15 k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
In omnibus autem huiusmodi casibus in tantum et hypothecaria unumquemque conveniri volumus, in quantum personalis actio adversus eum competit, et hypothecam esse non ipsius heredis vel alterius personae quae gravata est fideicommisso rerum, sed tantummodo earum, quae a testatore ad eum pervenerint. <a 529 d.Xv k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
And in all cases of this kind, we will that each person be proceeded against also by hypothecary action only to the extent that a personal action lies against him, and that the hypothec be not of the heir himself or of another person who is burdened with a fideicommissum of the things, but only of those which have come to him from the testator. <a 529 d.Xv k.Oct.Chalcedone decio vc.Cons.>
Omne verbum significans testatoris legitimum sensum legare vel fideicommittere volentis utile atque validum est, sive directis verbis, quale est " iubeo" forte , sive precariis utetur testator, quale est " rogo" " volo" " mando" " fideicommitto", sive iuramentum posuerit, cum et hoc nobis audientibus ventilatum est, testatore quidem dicente " enorkw", partibus autem huiusmodi verbum huc atque illuc lacerantibus. * iust. a. iuliano pp. * <a 531 d. x k. mart.
Every expression that signifies the testator’s legitimate intent, of one wishing to bequeath or to fideicommit, is useful and valid, whether by direct words, such as " I order" perhaps , or the testator should use precatory words, such as " I ask" " I wish" " I command" " I fideicommit", or even if he has set an oath, since this too has been ventilated in our hearing, the testator indeed saying " enorkw", but the parties tearing such a word this way and that. * Justinian Augustus to Julian, Praetorian Prefect. *
Sit igitur secundum quod diximus ex omni parte verborum non inefficax voluntas secundum verba legantis vel fideicommittentis et omnia, quae naturaliter insunt legatis, ea et fideicommissis inhaerere intellegantur et e contrario, quidquid fideicommittitur, hoc intellegatur esse legatum, et si quid tale est, quod non habet natura legatorum, hoc ei ex fideicommissis accommodetur, et sit omnibus perfectus eventus, ex omnibus nascantur in rem actiones, ex omnibus hypothecariae , ex omnibus personales. <a 531 d. x k. mart. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Let, therefore, as we have said, the intention be not ineffective in any part of the wording, in accordance with the words of the legator or fideicommitter; and let all things which are naturally inherent in legacies be understood to inhere also in fideicommissa; and conversely, whatever is entrusted by fideicommissum is to be understood to be a legacy; and if there is anything of such a kind which the nature of legacies does not have, let this be accommodated to it from fideicommissa; and let there be a perfected outcome for all: from all let actions in rem arise, from all hypothecary , from all personal. <a 531 on the tenth day before the Kalends of March, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Et nemo moriens putet suam legitimam voluntatem reprobari, sed nostro semper utetur adiutorio, et quemadmodum viventibus providimus, ita et morientibus prospiciatur: et si specialiter legati tantummodo faciat testator mentionem, hoc et legatum et fideicommissum intellegatur, et si fidei heredis vel legatarii aliquid committatur, hoc et legatum esse videatur. nos enim non verbis, sed ipsis rebus leges imponimus. <a 531 d. x k. mart.
And let no one, when dying, think his lawful will to be disapproved, but he shall always make use of our aid; and just as we have provided for the living, so let provision be made for the dying: and if the testator makes mention specifically of legacies only, let this be understood both as a legacy and a fideicommissum; and if something is committed to the good faith of the heir or of the legatee, let this also be seen to be a legacy. For we impose laws not upon words, but upon the things themselves. <a 531 d. x k. mart.
Si duobus vel tribus hominibus vel pluribus forte optio servi vel alterius rei relicta fuerit, vel si uni quidem legatario optio servi vel alterius rei relicta est, ipse autem moriens plures sibi reliquerit heredes, dubitabatur inter veteres, si inter legatarios vel heredes legatarii fuerit certatum et alter alterum servum vel aliam rem eligere velit, quid sit statuendum. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. k. sept.
If to two or three persons or to more the option of a slave or of another thing should by chance have been left, or if indeed the option of a slave or of another thing has been left to one legatee, but he himself, when dying, has left several heirs, it was doubted among the ancients, if there has been litigation among the legatees or the heirs of the legatee, and the one should wish to choose one slave and the other a different slave or another thing, what is to be determined. * Justinian Augustus to John, praetorian prefect. * <a 531, on the day before the Kalends of September.
Sancimus itaque in omnibus huiusmodi casibus rei iudicem fortunam esse, sortem etenim inter altercantes adhibendam, ut, quem sors praetulerit, is quidem habeat potestatem eligendi, ceteris autem aestimationem praestet contingentium eis partium: id est in servis quidem et ancillis maioribus decem annis, si sine arte sint, viginti solidis aestimandis, minoribus videlicet decem annis non amplius quam decem solidis computandis: sin autem artifices sunt, usque ad triginta solidos aestimatione eorum procedente, sive masculi sive feminae sunt, exceptis notariis et medicis utriusque sexus, cum notarios quinquaginta solidis aestimari volumus, medicos autem et obstetrices sexaginta: eunuchis minoribus quidem decem annis usque ad triginta solidos valentibus, maioribus vero usque ad quinquagin ta, sin autem artifices sint, usque ad septuaginta. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Thus we sanction that in all such cases Fortune be the judge of the matter, for the lot is to be employed among the disputants, so that the one whom the lot shall have preferred shall indeed have the power of choosing, but shall provide to the others the valuation of the shares falling to them: that is, in the case of male slaves and maidservants older than ten years, if they are without art (skill), to be assessed at twenty solids; those under ten years, not more than ten solids to be computed; but if they are artisans, up to thirty solids as their valuation proceeds, whether they are male or female, notaries and physicians of either sex being excepted, since we wish notaries to be valued at fifty solids, but physicians and midwives at sixty; eunuchs under ten years being worth up to thirty solids, those older up to fifty, but if they are artisans, up to seventy. <a 531 on the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sed et si quis optionem servi vel alterius rei reliquerit non ipsi legatario, sed quem titius forte elegerit, titius autem vel noluerit eligere vel morte fuerit praeventus, et in hac specie dubitabatur apud veteres, quid statuendum sit, utrumne legatum expirat, an aliquid inducitur ei adiutorium, ut viri boni arbitratu procedat electio. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But also, if someone has left the option of a slave or of some other thing not to the legatee himself, but to whomever titius may perhaps choose, and titius either was unwilling to choose or was forestalled by death, then in this case it was doubted among the ancients what should be decreed: whether the legacy expires, or some aid is introduced for him, so that the election may proceed by the arbitrament of a good man. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Censemus itaque, si intra annale tempus ille qui eligere iussus est hoc facere supersederit vel minime potuerit vel quandocumque decesserit, ipsi legatario videri esse datam electionem, ita tamen, ut non optimum ex servis vel aliis rebus quicquam eligat, sed mediae aestimationis, ne dum legatarium satis esse fovendum existimamus, heredis commoda defraudentur. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
We therefore decree that, if within the annual term the one who was ordered to choose has refrained from doing this, or has by no means been able to do it, or at whatever time he has died, the choice is to be considered given to the legatee himself; yet in such a way that he not choose anything of the best among the slaves or other things, but of moderate valuation, lest, while we judge the legatee ought to be sufficiently favored, the heir’s interests be defrauded. <a 531 on the day before the Kalends of September at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most illustrious men.>
Sed quia nostra maiestas per multos casus legatariis et fideicommissariis prospexit et actiones tam personales quam in rem et hypothecarias dedimus et in rem missionis tenebrosissimus error abolitus est, et ad hanc legem pervenimus. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But since our Majesty, through many contingencies, has provided for legatees and fideicommissaries, and we have granted actions both personal and real (in rem) and hypothecary, and the most obscure error concerning missio in rem has been abolished, we have come to this law. <a 531, on the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Nemo itaque ea, quae per legatum vel pure vel sub certo die relicta sunt vel quae restitui aliis disposita sunt vel substitutione posita, secundum veterem dispositionem putet esse in posterum alienanda vel pignoris vel hypothecae titulo adsignanda vel mancipia manumittenda, sed sciat, quod hoc quod alienum est non ei liceat utpote sui patrimonii existens alieno iuri applicare, quia satis absurdum est et inrationabile rem, quam in suis bonis pure non possidet, eam ad alios posse transferre vel hypothecae pignorisve nomine obligare vel manumittere et alienam spem decipere. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
No one, therefore, should think, according to the ancient disposition, that those things which through a legacy have been left either purely (unconditionally) or under a certain day, or which have been arranged to be restored to others, or which have been set by substitution, are in future to be alienated, or to be assigned under the title of pledge or hypothec, or that slaves are to be manumitted; but let him know that that which is alien it is not permitted for him to apply to another’s right, as if existing of his own patrimony, because it is quite absurd and irrational that a thing which he does not purely possess among his goods he can transfer to others, or bind under the name of hypothec or pledge, or manumit, and thus disappoint another’s expectation. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Sin autem sub condicione vel sub incerta die fuerit relictum legatum vel fideicommissum universitatis vel speciale vel substitutione vel restitutione, melius quidem faciat, et si in his casibus caveat ab omni venditione vel hypotheca, ne se gravioribus oneribus evictionis nomine supponat. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if, however, the legacy or fideicommissum—whether universal or special, or by substitution or restitution—has been left under a condition or under an uncertain day, he indeed acts better if in these cases he guards against all sale or hypothec, lest he subject himself to heavier burdens under the name of eviction. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Sin autem avaritiae cupidine propter spem condicionis minime implendae ad venditionem vel hypothecam prosiluerit, sciat, quod condicione impleta ab initio causa in irritum devocetur et sic intellegenda est, quasi nec scripta nec penitus fuerat celebrata, ut nec usucapio nec longi temporis praescriptio contra legatarium vel fideicommissarium procedat. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if, by the cupidity of avarice, because of the hope that the condition will by no means be fulfilled, he has rushed to vendition or hypothec, let him know that, the condition having been fulfilled, the matter is called back into nullity from the beginning and is thus to be understood as if it had neither been written nor at all concluded, so that neither usucapion nor prescription of long time may proceed against the legatee or the fideicommissary. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Quod similiter censemus in huiusmodi legatis, quae sive pure sive sub die certo sive sub condicione sive sub incerta die relicta sint: sed in his omnibus casibus legatario quidem vel fideicommissario omnis licentia pateat rem vindicare et sibi adsignare, nullo obstaculo ei a detentatoribus opponendo. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
We likewise decree the same in bequests of this kind, which whether purely, or under a fixed day, or under a condition, or under an uncertain day, have been left: but in all these cases let every license be open to the legatee or fideicommissary to vindicate the thing and to assign it to himself, with no obstacle being opposed to him by the detainers. <a 531, the day before the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Emptor autem sciens rei gravamen adversus venditorem actionem habeat tantummodo ad restitutionem pretii, neque dupli stipulatione neque melioratione locum habente, cum sufficiat ei saltem pro pretio, quod sciens dedit pro aliena re, sibi satisfieri: creditori nihilo minus pigneraticia contraria actione adversus debitorem competente, ut ex omni parte omnique studio id, quod semper properamus, ad effectum perducatur, ut ultima elogia defunctorum legitimum finem sortiantur : bonae fidei procul dubio emptoribus integra iura et nullo modo ex hac constitutione deminuta contra venditores habentibus. <a 531 d. k. sept. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Moreover, let a buyer who knows of the thing’s encumbrance have an action against the seller only for restitution of the price, with neither the stipulation of the double nor betterment having place, since it suffices for him at least to be satisfied as to the price which, knowing, he gave for another’s thing: the creditor nonetheless having the pignoratitious contrary action against the debtor, so that from every side and with every zeal that which we always hasten toward may be brought to effect, namely that the final elogia of the deceased may obtain a lawful end : buyers in good faith, without doubt, retaining entire rights against the sellers and in no way diminished by this constitution. <at Constantinople on the Kalends of September in the year 531, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Verba testamenti, quae inseruisti, aut solutam pecuniam debitam testatori declarant aut voluntatem eius liberare volentis debitorem manifeste ostendunt. et ideo aut peti quod solutum est non potest aut ex causa fideicommissi, ut debitor liberaretur, agendum est, nisi liquido probari possit eum non liberari debitorem voluisse, sed errore lapsum solutam sibi pecuniam existimasse. * ant.
The words of the testament, which you have inserted, either declare that the money owed to the testator has been paid, or manifestly show his will as one wishing to release the debtor. And therefore either what has been paid cannot be demanded, or one must proceed on the ground of a fideicommissum, in order that the debtor be released, unless it can be clearly proved that he did not wish the debtor to be released, but, having slipped by error, supposed that the money had been paid to him. * ant.
Si dotem, ut proponis, defuncta in matrimonio uxore tua patri eius reddidisti, vel etiam ea non reddita testamenti verbis, ut adseveras, munitus es, quibus recepisse dotem universam quondam socer tuus significavit, ne hoc nomine conveniaris, sollicite agere non debes, cum aut soluta dote nulla supersit actio aut non reddita adversus petentem iuxta defuncti voluntatem parata sit exceptio. * gord. a. alexandro.
If, as you set forth, with your wife having died during the marriage, you returned the dowry to her father, or even, the dowry not having been returned, you are fortified by the words of the testament, as you aver, by which your former father-in-law signified that he had received the entire dowry, you ought not to act anxiously about being sued on this ground, since either, the dowry having been paid, no action remains, or, it not having been returned, an exception is prepared against the claimant according to the will of the deceased. * gord. a. alexandro.
Refert largiter, dotem reddi maritus tibi, an quae instrumento dotali conscripta sunt, legati seu precariis verbis statuit, quippe superiore quidem casu datum probanti repeti tantum, posteriore vero nihil nocente falsa demonstratione significatum instrumento postulari possit. * diocl. et maxim.
It makes a considerable difference whether the husband returns the dowry to you, or whether he has determined, by legacy or by precatory words, the things written in the dotal instrument; for in the former case, it can only be sought back by one who proves it was given, whereas in the latter, the false demonstration doing no harm, what is signified by the instrument may be demanded. * diocl. et maxim.
In legatis quidem et fideicommissis etiam modus adscriptus pro condicione observatur. sed si per te non stat, quominus voluntati testatoris pareas, sed per eum , cui nubere iussa es, quominus id quod tibi relictum est retineas, non oberit. * ant.
In legacies and fideicommissa, a mode appended is likewise observed according to the condition. But if it does not lie with you, so that you should obey the testator’s will, but with him , whom you were ordered to marry, that you cannot retain what was left to you, it will not be to your prejudice. * ant.
Ex his verbis: " titio decem millia vel insulam relinquo, ita ut quinque millia ex his vel eandem insulam mevio restituat", licet antea neque legati neque fideicommissi petitio nascebatur, tamen in libertate a divo severo hoc admissum est. * gord. a. ammonio.
From these words: "I bequeath to titius ten thousand or a tenement, on condition that he restore five thousand of these or the same tenement to mevius", although previously neither a claim of a legacy nor of a fideicommissum arose, nevertheless in a matter of freedom this was admitted by the deified Severus. * gordian a. to ammonius.
Sed in pecuniariis causis voluntatis tuendae gratia non immerito recipiendum est , ut etiam ex huiusmodi verbis, sive ad condicionem sive ad modum respiciunt, sive ad dandum vel faciendum aliquid, fideicommissi actio omnifariam nascatur, videlicet in condicionibus post exitum earum. <a 240 pp. vi id. aug. sabino ii et venusto conss.>
But in pecuniary causes, for the sake of safeguarding intention, it is not without merit to be accepted , that even from words of this sort—whether they have regard to a condition or to a mode, or to the giving or the doing of something—the action on a fideicommissum arises in every way, namely, in the case of conditions, after their outcome. <a 240, posted on the sixth day before the Ides of August, with Sabinus 2 and Venustus as consuls.>
Sin vero legato aut fideicommisso relicto testator legatarium seu fideicommissarium prohibuerit heredem suum vel alium quendam debitum exigere, habet debitor adversus legatarium seu fideicommissarium agentem usque ad quantitatem relicti fideicommissi sive legati exceptionem. <a 240 pp. vi id. aug. sabino ii et venusto conss.>
But if, a legacy or fideicommissum having been left, the testator has prohibited the legatee or fideicommissary from exacting a debt from his heir or from some other person, the debtor has an exception against the legatee or fideicommissary suing, up to the amount of the fideicommissum or legacy left. <a 240 pp. vi id. aug. sabino ii et venusto conss.>
Cum testatorem fideicommissum trallianis ab eo, quem pro parte heredem instituerat, ita reliquisse proponas, si sine liberis institutus diem obisset, isque nepotem, quem ex filia susceperat, heredem instituerat, condicionem adscriptam fideicommisso defecisse manifestum est, nisi alia defuncti voluntas evidenter probabitur. * sev. et ant.
Since you propose that the testator left a fideicommissum to the Trallians, to be delivered by him whom he had appointed as heir for a share, in this way: that, if the instituted [heir] should meet his day without children, and he had instituted as heir the grandson whom he had from his daughter, it is manifest that the condition appended to the fideicommissum has failed, unless a different intention of the deceased shall be clearly proved. * Severus and Antoninus.
Cum patrem familias fideicommissi nomine, quod in diem certam reliquit, ita cavere praecepisse proponas, si a marito non divertisset, iurisdictionis originem perinde servari aequum est, ac si nihil super ea re scriptum fuisset. * sev. et ant.
When you allege that the paterfamilias, under the name of a fideicommissum which he left for a certain day, gave instructions to make provision thus, if she had not separated from her husband, it is equitable that the origin of jurisdiction be preserved just as if nothing had been written concerning that matter. * Severus and Antoninus
Nec exemplum legati vel hereditatis, in quibus condicio divortii nonnumquam remitti solet, huic rei comparandum est, cum absurdum sit ideo perpetui edicti neglegi formam, quia patris sui voluntati non obtemperatur. <a 205 pp. antiochiae xi k. aug. antonino a. ii et geta ii conss.>
Nor is the exemplar of a legacy or of an inheritance, in which the condition of divorce is sometimes wont to be remitted, to be compared to this matter, since it is absurd that for this reason the form of the Perpetual Edict be neglected, because his father’s will is not obeyed. <a year 205 pp. at Antioch, on the 11th day before the Kalends of August, in the consulship of Antoninus Augustus for the 2nd time and Geta for the 2nd time.>
Si ea condicione auluzanus legata testamento praestari voluit, si cum focaria sua matreque eius moraretur, et per eum stetit, quominus voluntati testatoris pareret, cum sponte scripturae testamenti non obtemperaverit, ad petitionem non admittitur. * ant. a. aurelio mil.
If on that condition Auluzanus wished the legacies to be rendered by the testament—namely, if he should reside with his concubine and her mother—and it depended on him that he did not comply with the will of the testator, since of his own accord he did not obey the writing of the testament, he is not admitted to the petition. * Antoninus Augustus to Aurelius, soldier.
Quod si a patre ante nuptias emancipata fuerit ac postea decesserit, superstite patre et marito ac liberis actionem fideicommissi sibi competentem ad heredes suos transmisit. <a 294 s. vi k. febr. sirmi cc. conss.>
But if she has been emancipated by her father before marriage and afterwards has died, with her father and her husband and children surviving, she has transmitted to her own heirs the action of the fideicommissum that was competent to her. <a 294 on the 6th day before the Kalends of February, at Sirmium, with the Caesars as consuls.>
Cum quidam testamento condito libertatem suo servo dereliquit sub condicione, si suo heredi certum numerum solidorum praestet vel aliam quandam speciem vel vicarium servum, ille autem servus non in eodem loco constitutus, ubi etiam heres fuerat, herili testamento cognito properabat ad heredem cum ipso, quod iussus erat dare heredi, sed in medio latronum vel hostium incursione peremptum est quod portabat: quaerebatur inter antiquos, si praepeditur libertas, quia hoc dare servus non potest propter memoratum fortuitum casum. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 532 d. prid.
When someone, a testament having been drawn up, left liberty to his slave under the condition that he should render to his heir a certain number of solidi or some other kind of thing or a vicariant (substitute) slave, but that slave, not being situated in the same place where the heir likewise was, once the master’s testament became known, was hastening to the heir with the very thing that he had been ordered to give to the heir, but in the meantime, by an incursion of robbers or enemies, that which he was carrying was destroyed: it was inquired among the ancients whether the liberty is impeded, because the slave cannot give this on account of the aforesaid fortuitous case. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 532 d. prid.
Ex quacumque igitur causa impediatur, sive per heredem sive per eum, cui dare aliquid iussus est, sive per fortuitos casus, in libertatem quidem ipse omnimodo perveniat, nisi ipse servus noluit adimplere condicionem: obnoxius tamen constituatur post libertatem heredi vel ei cui dare iussus est, nisi et ipse oblatas pecunias non suscepit ( quod enim semel repudiatum est ab eo, redintegrari minime concedimus), quatenus hoc quod dare iussus est omnimodo adimplere compellatur vel in ipso mancipio, si extat, vel in aestimatione eius non amplius quam in quindecim solidos imputanda, vel in alia re, si et ipsa appareat, vel si non existat, vera eius aestimatione praestanda. <a 532 d. prid. k. mai.
From whatever cause therefore it is impeded, whether by the heir or by him to whom he has been ordered to give something, or by fortuitous events, he himself shall in every way attain liberty, unless the slave himself was unwilling to fulfill the condition; nevertheless, after liberty, let him be constituted liable to the heir or to him to whom he was ordered to give, unless he too did not accept the proffered moneys (for what has once been repudiated by him, we by no means permit to be reinstated), to the extent that he shall in every way be compelled to fulfill that which he was ordered to give, either in the very slave, if he exists, or in its valuation to be reckoned at not more than fifteen solidi, or in another thing, if that likewise appears, or, if it does not exist, to be furnished at its true valuation. <a 532 d. the day before the Kalends of May.
Videtur autem nobis unumquemque necessitatem habere condicionem implere et pro portione sibi contingente accipere, quidquid ex hoc commodum est, ut hi quidem, qui compleverint iussa, ad lucrum vocentur, qui autem neglexerint, sibi imputent , si ab huiusmodi commodo repellentur. <a 531 d. iii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
It seems to us, moreover, that each person has the necessity to fulfill the condition and to receive, in proportion to the share falling to him, whatever advantage there is from this, so that those indeed who have completed the commands may be called to profit, but those who have neglected should impute it to themselves, if they are repelled from such a benefit. <a 531 on the 3rd day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Si igitur proposita stipulatione cavere cum satisdatione potestis vos restituturos, quanto amplius quam per eam legem licet acceperitis, iudex qui fideicommissis ius dicit solida vobis legata praestari iubebit. <a 212 pp. xvi k. iun. duobus aspris conss.>
If therefore, upon the proposed stipulation, you can give security with satisdation that you will restore whatever you have received more than is permitted by that law, the judge who declares the law in matters of fideicommissa will order the legacies to be paid to you in full. <a A.D. 212 pp. 16 Kal. June, in the consulship of the two Aspri.>
Quod si satisdationem implere non poteritis, arbitro dato diem vobis praefiniet, intra quem altera parte cessante partibus suis fungetur. et si constiterit legi falcidiae locum non esse, et usuras et fructus post litem contestatam percipietis. <a 212 pp. xvi k. iun.
But if you are not able to fulfill the surety, with an arbiter appointed he will set you a day, within which, the other party being in default, he will perform their part. and if it is established that there is no place for the Lex Falcidia, you will take both interest and fruits after the suit has been joined. <a 212 pp. xvi k. iun.
Non iustam te gerere sollicitudinem per fideicommissum relictae portionis hereditatis perspicimus verentem, ne fructum amittas relicti fideicommissi, quoniam avia testatoris ex parte scripta heres et tibi rogata restituere calliditate ac fraude repudiavit, ut ad alium nepotem eundemque coheredem devolvatur portio, a quo tibi nominatim non fuerat fideicommissum relictum, et coacta suspectam hereditatem adire, priusquam pro herede gereret, rebus sit humanis exempta: cum divo antonino parenti nostro deberi etiam a substitutis fideicommissum contemplatione iudicii testatoris quasi tacite ab his repetitum iam dudum placuerit. neque enim quartae retentionem, quam illa quae repudiaverit hereditatem, adire coacta suspectam retinere non potuit, timere debes. * diocl.
We perceive that you are not entertaining an unjust anxiety concerning the fideicommissum of the portion of the inheritance left, fearing lest you lose the fruit of the fideicommissum left, since the testator’s grandmother, written as heir in part and asked to restore it to you, by cunning and fraud repudiated, in order that the portion might devolve to another grandson and likewise coheir, by whom no fideicommissum had been left to you by name; and she, having been compelled to enter a suspect inheritance, before she acted as heir, was removed from human affairs: since under the deified Antoninus, our father, it has long since been approved that a fideicommissum is owed even by substitutes, in contemplation of the testator’s judgment, as though tacitly demanded back from them. Nor ought you fear the retention of the fourth, which she who repudiated the inheritance, having been compelled to enter a suspect inheritance, could not retain. * Diocletian.
Igitur si te uxor tua et privignum suum in discrimine mortis constituta designavit velle successionem obtinere, usque ad dodrantem eius voluntatem ratam servari convenit, cum intestato ei succedentes de restituendo fideicommisso conventos ultra quartam ( aere alieno deducto), quam penes eos sententia senatus consulti relinqui praecepit, tantum obtinere posse praestiterit. <a 294 s.V k.Mai.Sirmi cc. conss.>
Therefore, if your wife, when placed in the peril of death, designated that you and her stepson should obtain the succession, it is fitting that her will be ratified and observed up to three-quarters, since those succeeding to her intestate, when sued for the restitution of the fideicommissum, have been shown to be able to retain only the fourth (with indebtedness deducted), which the decision of the senatus consultum ordered to be left in their possession. <a 294 s.V k.Mai.Sirmi cc. conss.>
Iubemus, quotiens pater vel mater, filio seu filiis, filia seu filiabus ex aequis partibus vel inaequis heredibus institutis, invicem seu simpliciter quosdam ex his aut quendam rogaverit, qui prior sine liberis decesserit, portionem hereditatis suae superstiti seu superstitibus restituere, ut modis omnibus retenta quarta pro auctoritate trebelliano senatus consulti, non per imputationem redituum, licet hoc testator rogaverit vel iusserit, sed in ipsis rebus hereditariis, dodrans restituatur. * zeno a. dioscure pp. * <a 489 pp.K.Sept.Constantinopoli eusebio cons.>
We order that, whenever a father or mother, with a son or sons, a daughter or daughters appointed as heirs in equal or unequal shares, has requested, either reciprocally or simply, certain ones among them or one of them, that whoever first has died without children restore the portion of his inheritance to the survivor or survivors, then in every way, with the quarter retained by the authority of the Trebellianic senatus consultum, not by an imputation of the revenues (even if the testator has requested or ordered this), but in the very hereditary assets, the three-quarters be restored. * zeno augustus to dioscorus, praetorian prefect. * <a 489 the day before the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, with Eusebius as consul.>
Idemque in retinenda legis flacidiae portione obtinere iubemus, et si pater vel mater filio seu filia institutis ( sicut supra dictum est) heredibus rogaverit eos easve nepotibus vel neptibus, pronepotibus vel proneptibus suis ac deinceps restituere hereditatem. <a 489 pp.K.Sept.Constantinopoli eusebio cons.>
And likewise we order that the same shall prevail in retaining the Falcidian portion of the law, and that, if a father or mother, with a son or a daughter appointed as heirs (as said above), has requested those heirs, male or female, to restore the inheritance to their own grandsons or granddaughters, great-grandsons or great-granddaughters, and further descendants. <a 489 pp.K.Sept.Constantinopoli eusebio cons.>
In supra dictis autem casibus fideicommissorum servandorum satisdationem cessare iubemus, si non specialiter eandem satisdationem testator exigi disposuerit et cum pater vel mater secundis existimant nuptiis non abstinendum: in his etenim duobus casibus, id est cum testator specialiter satisdari voluerit vel cum secundis se pater vel mater matrimoniis iunxerint, necesse est, ut eadem satisdatio pro legum ordine praebeatur. <a 489 pp.K.Sept.Constantinopoli eusebio cons.>
Moreover, in the above-mentioned cases we order the satisdation (security) for the observance of fideicommissa to cease, unless the testator has specifically arranged that the same satisdation be demanded, and when a father or mother judge that there should be no abstaining from second nuptials: for in these two cases, that is, when the testator has expressly wished that satisdation be given, or when the father or mother have joined themselves in second marriages, it is necessary that the same satisdation be furnished according to the order of the laws. <a 489 the day before the Kalends of September, at Constantinople, Eusebius consul.>
Sin autem is, qui fideicommissaria restitutione gravatus est, uno filio superstite vel nepote ex filio seu ex filia nato, vel pronepote vel postumo relicto decesserit, non videtur extitisse condicio et ideo deficit fideicommissi petitio. <a 489 pp.K.Sept.Constantinopoli eusebio cons.>
But if the person who is burdened with the fideicommissary restitution has died with one son surviving, or with a grandson born from a son or from a daughter, or with a great-grandson, or a posthumous child left, the condition is not deemed to have arisen, and therefore the claim of the fideicommissum fails. <a 489 pp.K.Sept.Constantinopoli eusebio cons.>
Illud etiam admonemus ea, quae de falcidiae portione non per reditus, sed per ipsas res hereditarias retinenda et de satisdatione fideicommissorum ( sicut supra dictum est) concedenda diximus, non ulterius quam in his personis et casibus, quorum superius mentio facta est, oportere produci. <a 489 pp.K.Sept.Constantinopoli eusebio cons.>
We also admonish this: that the things which we said concerning the Falcidian portion to be retained not through revenues, but through the hereditary things themselves, and concerning the satisdation of fideicommissa (as said above) to be granted, ought not to be extended further than in those persons and cases of which mention was made above. <a 489 pp.K.Sept.Constantinopoli eusebio cons.>
Sancimus licentiam esse etiam soli tutori recte fieri fideicommissi nomine universitatis restitutionem, quod pupillo relictum est, et sine onere fideiussionis, ubi tamen pupillus fari non possit vel abesse noscitur, ne, dum nimia subtilitate circa res utimur pupillares, ipsa subtilitas ad perniciem eorum revertatur. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 530 d.X k.Nov.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
We sanction that there be license that even to the sole guardian there be rightly made, under the name of a fideicommissum, a restitution of the universality of what has been left to the ward, and without the burden of fideiussion, where, however, the ward cannot speak or is known to be absent, lest, while we employ excessive subtlety concerning wardly matters, that very subtlety turn back to their ruin. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 530 d.10 k.Nov.Constantinople lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Idemque iuris esse oportet, et si furioso fideicommissaria debeatur hereditas, ut restitutio curatori eius soli, nomine scilicet furiosi, celebretur. quis enim sensus, quae vox certa furioso esse intellegitur, cum in utroque casu restituentes plenissimam consequantur ex nostra lege securitatem? <a 530 d.X k.Nov.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
And the same rule of law ought to obtain even if a fideicommissary inheritance is owed to an insane person, namely that the restitution be effected to his curator alone, in the name of the insane person. For what sense, what definite utterance can be understood to belong to an insane person, since in either case those making the restitution obtain the fullest security from our law? <a 530 d.X k.Nov.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Cum autem aliquis hereditatem restituere iussus est et dolo malo vel post litem contestatam vel antea sese contumaciter celaverit, vel si suppositus fideicommissariae restitutioni, antequam restitueret hereditatem, ab hac luce subtractus est nullo herede vel successore existente, vel si fideicommissarius, cui restituta est ex trebelliano hereditas, alii per fideicommissum restituere iussus fuerit res hereditarias: quemadmodum actionum translatio celebretur in tribus istis casibus, apud veteres dubitabatur: et domitius ulpianus constituendum esse super his putavit. <a 530 d.X k.Nov.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
However, when someone has been ordered to restore an inheritance and, with dolus malus, either after the suit has been joined or earlier, has contumaciously concealed himself; or if, being subjected to fideicommissary restitution, before he restored the inheritance he was withdrawn from this light, with no heir or successor existing; or if the fideicommissary, to whom the inheritance was restored under the Trebellianic measure, has been ordered, by a fideicommissum, to restore the hereditary things to another: how the transfer of actions should be effected in these three cases was a matter of doubt among the ancients; and Domitius Ulpianus thought that a determination ought to be established on these points. <a 530 on the 10th day before the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
Sancimus itaque, ut, sive per contumaciam afuerit is, cui restitutio imposita est, sive morte praeventus nullo relicto successore fuerit, sive a primo fideicommissario in secundum translatio celebrari iussa est, ipso iure utiles actiones transferantur. <a 530 d.X k.Nov.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
We therefore sanction that, whether through contumacy the one upon whom restitution has been imposed has been absent, or has been forestalled by death with no successor left, or the transfer from the first fideicommissary to the second has been ordered to be carried out, by the law itself the useful actions are to be transferred. <a 530 d.X k.Nov.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Quidam testamento condito iussit heredem omnem hereditatem quam ei dereliquit alii restituere, speciale autem fideicommissum alteri adscripsit. et quaerebatur, specialis fideicommissarius id quod ei derelictum est a quo consequi debeat, utrumne ab herede, ut post retentionem eius alias res universitatis fideicommissarius accipiat, an una cum aliis rebus oporteat et hoc generali fideicommissario adgregari, ut ipse speciali fideicommissario hoc tradat, sive in rebus sive in pecuniis sit fideicommissum. * iust.
Someone, having made a testament, ordered the heir to restore to another all the inheritance which he had left to him, but he assigned a special fideicommiss to another. And the question was raised, from whom the special fideicommissary ought to obtain that which was left to him: whether from the heir, so that, after that has been retained, the fideicommissary of the universality may receive the other things; or whether this too ought, together with the other things, to be aggregated to the general fideicommissary, so that he himself deliver this to the special fideicommissary, whether the fideicommiss be in things or in money. * iust.
Sancimus itaque totam quidem substantiam secundum senatus consulti trebelliani auctoritatem restitui generali fideicommissario, illum autem speciali fideicommissario id quod ei derelictum est dependere. <a 532 d.Xv k.Nov.Constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.Anno secundo.>
We accordingly sanction that the whole substance be restored, in accordance with the authority of the senatus consultum Trebellianum, to the general fideicommissary, but that the special fideicommissary pay out what was left to him. <a 532 on the 15th day before the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, after the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, in the second year.>
Etiamsi tacitum fideicommissum heredem administrasse apparuerit, legata tamen seu fideicommissa, quae testamento relicta sunt, praestanda esse ambigi non oportet, ad eum videlicet modum, quem lex falcidia patiatur, cum quartam, quae aufertur heredi, qui contra legem fidem suam obtulit, legatariis proficere non placuit. * alex. a. hermagorae.
Even if it has appeared that the heir has administered a tacit fideicommissum, nevertheless there ought to be no doubt that the legacies or fideicommissa which were left by testament must be provided, namely to the extent which the Falcidian law allows, since it has not been approved that the fourth which is taken from the heir who proffered his good faith contrary to the law should accrue to the legatees. * alexander the augustus to hermagoras.
In testamento quidem militis ius legis falcidiae cessat. sed ea, quae ad vos pertinentia defunctus tenuit, bonorum eius videri minime possunt et ideo recte rationem eorum ut aeris alieni haberi desiderabitis. * alex.
Indeed, in the testament of a soldier the right of the Lex Falcidia ceases. But those things which the deceased held as pertaining to you can by no means be considered part of his goods, and therefore you will rightly desire that their account be held as that of another’s money, that is, as a debt. * alex.
Sed licet te heredem scripserit, in ponenda tamen legatorum ratione, quibus te oneratum esse suggeris, fideicommissum debitum aeris alieni loco deduci oportet insuperque in residuo legis falcidiae beneficium vindicabis. <a 223 pp.Id.Sept.Maximo ii et paterno conss.>
But although he has written you as heir, yet, in setting the account of the legacies, with which you suggest you have been burdened, the fideicommissum owed must be deducted as in the place of a debt; and moreover, in the residue you will claim the benefit of the Lex Falcidia. <a 223 the day before the Ides of September, in the consulship of Maximus 2 and Paternus, consuls.>
Quamquam pater tuus fratrem tuum rogaverit, ut, si sine liberis diem suum fungeretur, portionem hereditatis tibi restitueret, tamen intestato eodem diem suum functo id, quod beneficio legis falcidiae habere potuit, ad successorem intestati pertinere ideoque non immerito sororem tuam, quae simul tecum ab intestato ei successit, emolumenti quod retineri potuit portionem sibi vindicare manifestum est. * gord. a. diogenio.
Although your father asked your brother that, if he should finish his day without children, he restore to you a portion of the inheritance, nevertheless, with the same man having died intestate, that which, by the benefit of the Lex Falcidia, he could have held pertains to the successor of the intestate; and therefore it is clear that your sister, who together with you succeeded to him as heir by intestacy (ab intestato), not undeservedly claims for herself the portion of the emolument that could be retained. * gord. a. diogenio.
Si, ut adlegas, pater tuus eam portionem , ex qua te fecit heredem, fratribus tuis restituere iussit certisque speciebus pro falcidia praecepit esse contentam, auxilium legis falcidiae, quod imploras, apud suum iudicem non prohiberis flagitare. * gord. a. maximae.
If, as you allege, your father ordered that portion , from which he made you heir, to be restored to your brothers, and directed that it be content with certain specified items in place of the Falcidian, you are not prohibited from demanding the aid of the Lex Falcidia, which you implore, before its proper judge. * Gordian Augustus to Maxima.
Licet adieris patris hereditatem et confusione pro parte qua eidem successeris extinguatur actio, quam tibi competere eo, quod ex administratione tutelae multa eum debuisse contendis, pro residuis tamen partibus coheredes convenire non prohiberis et fundum a te relictum eatenus, quod deducta quarta residui substantia patitur, praestare necesse habes. * diocl. et maxim.
Although you have entered upon your father’s inheritance and, by confusion, for the share in which you have succeeded to him, the action—which you assert to be competent to you on the ground that from the administration of the tutelage he owed many things—is extinguished, nevertheless you are not forbidden to sue the coheirs for the remaining shares; and you are obliged to provide the landed property left by you to the extent to which, a fourth being deducted, the remaining substance permits. * diocletian and maximian.
Si praediorum dotis apud te iure remanentis instrumenta verbis precariis vel testamento vel codicillis uxor tibi dari mandavit, eius iudicium successores implere compellentur, cum instrumentis praediorum domino relictis falcidiae nulla potest intervenire quaestio. * diocl. et maxim.
If the instruments of the dowry estates, rightfully remaining with you, the wife has directed by precatory words or by testament or by codicils to be given to you, her decision the successors will be compelled to fulfill, since, with the instruments of the estates left to the owner, no question of the Falcidian portion can intervene. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Si quis quadringentorum forte solidorum habens substantiam iusserit heredem non aliter adire hereditatem, nisi prius trecentos octuaginta solidos cuidam persolvat vel aliam quantitatem, quae diminuere falcidiae rationem potest, sancimus heredem, si adierit, legis falcidiae beneficio sustentatum repleri quidem quod ad falcidiam deest, et prius eo dato vel retento ( sive una datio est, quae celebrari disposita fuerit, sive in multas dividitur personas) praefatae legis immutilatum habere beneficium. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d.K.Nov.Constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
If anyone who has a substance of 400 solidi should order that the heir not otherwise enter upon the inheritance unless first he pay 380 solidi to someone, or some other amount which can diminish the reckoning of the Falcidia, we sanction that the heir, if he shall enter, supported by the benefit of the law of the Falcidia, be replenished indeed in what is lacking to the Falcidia; and, with that given or retained beforehand (whether it is a single payment which has been arranged to be carried out, or is divided among many persons), to have the benefit of the aforesaid law unimpaired. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 on the Kalends of Nov., at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Si enim, cum mortis causa donatio procedat et haec modum legis falcidiae excedat , heres post aditionem repetit eam pecuniam, quae ultra modum falcidiae corporaliter quidem data est, lege autem in patrimonio testatoris permansit, quare non in praesenti casu et viventibus et morientibus providemus, et eorum ultima elogia conservantes et commodum hereditarium non minuentes? <a 531 d.K.Nov.Constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
For if, when a donation made on account of death proceeds and it exceeds the measure of the Lex Falcidia , the heir, after entry, reclaims that money which, beyond the measure of the Falcidia, was indeed given corporeally, but by law remained in the testator’s patrimony, why do we not in the present case likewise provide both for the living and for the dying, preserving their final elogia and not diminishing the hereditary advantage? <a 531 d.K.Nov.Constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv.Cc.>
Cum certum sit heredem, qui plenam fidem testatori exhibet, in solidum legata dependentem non posse postea rationem legis praetendentem falcidiae repetitione uti, quia videtur voluntatem testatoris sequi, iubemus hoc simili modo firmum haberi, et si cautionem super integra legatorum solutione fecerit: quod veteribus legibus in ambiguitatem deductum est. in utroque etenim casu, id est sive solverit sive super hoc cautionem fecerit, aequitatis ratio similia suadere videtur. * iust.
Since it is certain that an heir who exhibits full faith to the testator, paying the legacies in solidum, cannot thereafter make use of repetition by alleging the rationale of the Lex Falcidia, because he appears to follow the will of the testator, we order that this be held firm in a similar way even if he has given a cautio concerning the entire payment of the legacies: which under the ancient laws was brought into ambiguity. For in either case, that is, whether he has paid or has given a cautio concerning this, the reason of equity seems to recommend like treatment. * Just.
Et nomen et materiam caducorum ex bellis ortam et auctam civilibus, quae in se populus romanus movebat, necessarium duximus, patres conscripti, in pacificis nostri imperii temporibus ab orbe romano recludere, ut, quod belli calamitas introduxit, hoc pacis lenitas sopiret. * iust. a. senatui urb.
Both the name and the caducary matter, sprung from wars and augmented by civil wars which the Roman people stirred up against itself, we have deemed it necessary, Conscript Fathers, in the peaceful times of our empire to exclude from the Roman world, so that what the calamity of war introduced, the mildness of peace might lull. * justinian augustus to the senate of the city.
Et quemadmodum in multis capitulis lex papia ab anterioribus principibus emendata fuit et per desuetudinem abolita, ita et a nobis circa caducorum observationem invidiosum suum amittat vigorem, qui et ipsis prudentissimis viris displicuit , multas invenientibus vias, per quas caducum ne fieret. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
And just as in many chapters the Papian law had been emended by earlier princes and abolished through desuetude, so also by us, concerning the observance of caduca, let it lose its odious vigor—which displeased even the most prudent men themselves, who found many ways by which a caducum might not arise. <a 534 on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, consul for the 4th time, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Sed et ipsis testamentorum conditoribus sic gravissima caducorum observatio visa est, ut et substitutiones introducerent, ne fiant caduca et, si facta sint, apud certas personas recurrere disponerent, vias recludentes, quas lex papia posuit in caducis: quod et nos fieri concedimus. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But even to the very framers of testaments the most weighty observation of caduca seemed such that they introduced substitutions, lest things become caduca, and, if they have become such, they arranged that they revert to certain persons, opening up the paths which the lex papia established in matters of caduca: which we also allow to be done. <a 534 on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, under our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, year 4, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Et cum lex papia ius antiquum, quod ante eam in omnibus simpliciter versabatur, suis machinationibus et angustiis circumcludens solis parentibus et liberis testatoris usque ad tertium gradum, si scripti fuerant heredes, suum imponere iugum erubuit antiquum intactum eis conservans, nos omnibus nostris subiectis sine differentia personarum concedimus. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
And whereas the Papian law, circumcluding the ancient right, which before it was simply in force in all matters, by its own machinations and straits, blushed to impose its yoke upon only the parents and offspring of the testator up to the third degree, if they had been written as heirs, preserving the ancient right untouched for them, we grant this to all our subjects without distinction of persons. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Cum igitur materiam et exordium caducorum lex papia ab aditionibus, quae circa defunctorum hereditates procedebant, sumpsit et ideo non a morte testatoris, sed ab apertura tabularum dies cedere legatorum senatus consulta, quae circa legem papiam introducta sunt, concesserunt, ut, quod in medio deficiat, hoc caducum fiat, primum hoc corrigentes et antiquum statum revocantes sancimus omnes habere licentiam a morte testatoris adire hereditates similique modo legatorum vel fideicommissorum pure vel in diem relictorum diem a morte testatoris cedere. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Since therefore the Lex Papia took the material and inception of caducals from the aditions which proceeded around the inheritances of the deceased, and therefore the senatus consulta introduced concerning the Lex Papia granted that the day for legacies should run not from the death of the testator but from the opening of the tablets, so that what fails in the interim should become caducal; correcting this first and recalling the ancient status, we ordain that all have license to enter upon inheritances from the death of the testator, and in like manner that the day for legacies or fideicommissa, left purely or to a day, accrues from the death of the testator. <a 534 at Constantinople on the Kalends of June: our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, and for the 4th time, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Et cum triplici modo ea, quae in ultimis elogiis relinquuntur, contingebat deficere, consentaneum est et tempora eorum et nomina manifeste exponere, ut, quod vel tollitur vel reformatur, non sit incognitum. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
And since in threefold fashion the things which are left in the last elogia used to happen to fail, it is consonant to set forth both their times and their names manifestly, so that what either is removed or is reformed may not be unknown. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Ea enim vel his relinquebantur, qui in rerum natura tunc temporis, cum condebantur extrema elogia, non fuerant, forte hoc ignorantibus testatoribus, et ea pro non scripto esse leges existimabant: vel vivo testatore is, qui aliquid ex testamento habuit, post testamentum ab hac luce subtrahebatur, vel ipsum relictum expirabat, forte quadam condicione, sub qua relictum erat, deficiente, quod veteres appellabant in causa caduci: vel mortuo iam testatore hoc quod relictum est deficiebat, quod aperta voce caducum nuncupabatur. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
For indeed these things were either being left to those who at that time, when the final elogia were composed, were not in the nature of things—perhaps the testators being ignorant of this—and the laws considered them as unwritten; or, with the testator alive, the person who had something from the testament was withdrawn from this light after the testament (i.e., died), or the very relict expired, perhaps with a certain condition, under which it had been left, failing—which the ancients called “in the case of caducum”; or, the testator now dead, that which was left failed, which in plain speech was called a caducum. <a 534 on the Kalends of June at Constantinople, under our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, consul for the 4th time, and Paulinus, a most illustrious man, consuls.>
In primo itaque ordine, ubi pro non scriptis efficiebantur ea, quae personis iam ante testamentum mortuis testator donasset, statutum fuerat, ut ea omnia maneant apud eos, a quibus fuerant derelicta, nisi vacuatis vel substitutus suppositus vel coniunctus fuerat adgregatus: tunc enim non deficiebant, sed ad illos perveniebant: nullo gravamine nisi perraro in hoc pro non scripto superveniente. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
In the first order, therefore, where those things were made to be as though not written which the testator had donated to persons already dead before the testament, it had been statuted that all those things remain with those by whom they had been left, unless, upon their becoming vacant, either a substitute had been put in place or a conjoined person had been aggregated: for then they did not lapse, but came to those persons, with no encumbrance supervening in this as-if-not-written matter, save very rarely. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Pro secundo vero ordine, in quo ea vertuntur, quae in causa caduci fieri contingebat, vetus ius corrigentes sancimus ea, quae ita evenerint, simili quidem modo manere apud eos, a quibus sunt derelicta, heredes forte vel legatarios vel alios, qui fideicommisso gravari possunt, nisi et in hunc casum vel substitutus vel coniunctus eos antecedat: sed omnes personas, quibus lucrum per hunc ordinem defertur, eas etiam gravamen quod ab initio fuerat complexum omnimodo sentire, sive in dando sit constitutum sive in quibusdam faciendis vel in modo vel condicionis implendae gratia vel alia quacumque via excogitatum. neque enim ferendus est is, qui lucrum quidem amplectitur, onus autem ei adnexum contemnit. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
For the second order, in which those matters are involved that were wont to occur in a caducary cause, correcting the old law we sanction that the things which have thus happened are to remain in like manner with those by whom they were left—heirs, to be sure, or legatees, or others who can be burdened by a fideicommissum—unless in this case as well either a substitute or a kinsman has precedence over them: but all persons upon whom gain is conferred through this order must also in every way feel the gravamen which from the beginning was encompassed, whether it is established in giving, or in certain things to be done, or in a manner, or for the sake of fulfilling a condition, or devised by any other way whatsoever. For he is not to be borne who indeed embraces the profit but despises the burden annexed to it. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
In novissimo autem articulo, ubi proprie caduca fiebant, secundum quod praediximus, et clausis tabulis tam existere heredes quam posse adire, sive ex parte sint sive ex asse instituti, censemus et dies legatorum et fideicommissorum secundum quod praediximus a morte defuncti cedere: hereditatem etenim, nisi fuerit adita, transmitti nec veteres concedebant nec nos patimur, exceptis videlicet liberorum personis, de quibus theodosiana lex super huiusmodi causis inducta loquitur: his nihilo minus, quae super his, qui deliberantes ab hac luce migrant, a nobis constituta sunt, in suo robore mansuris. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
In the very last article, however, where things properly became caducary, according to what we have said before, and with the tablets sealed, both that heirs exist and that they are able to enter upon it, whether they have been instituted for a share or for the whole (the as), we decree that also the due date of legacies and fideicommissa, according to what we have said before, falls from the death of the defunct: for an inheritance, unless it has been entered upon, neither did the ancients allow to be transmitted nor do we permit it, the persons of children, to be sure, being excepted, about whom the Theodosian law introduced concerning causes of this sort speaks: nonetheless, those provisions which have been established by us concerning those who, while deliberating, depart from this light, shall remain in their own force. <a 534 on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, consul for the fourth time, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Libertatibus procul dubio et post praesentem sanctionem propter sui naturam, quae aditionem heredis expectat, ab adita hereditate una cum aliis, quae servis in testamento manumissis vel aliis legatis relicta sunt, competentibus. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Manumissions, without doubt, even after the present sanction, on account of their nature, which awaits the adition of the heir, become due from the inheritance once entered upon, together with the other things which have been left to slaves manumitted in the testament or by other legacies. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>>
Excepto etiam usu fructu, qui sui natura ad heredes legatarii transmitti non patitur et neque a morte testatoris neque ab adita hereditate, quantum ad transmissionem, dies eius cedit. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Except for the usufruct as well, which by its nature does not permit itself to be transmitted to the heirs of the legatee, and, so far as transmission is concerned, its day does not accrue either from the death of the testator or from the acceptance of the inheritance. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Sed haec quidem omnia in his observari sancimus secundum praefatam dispositionem , quae pure vel in diem certum relicta fuerint. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But we decree that indeed all these things are to be observed, in these cases, according to the aforesaid disposition , which shall have been left purely or for a certain day. <a 534 on the day of the Kalends of June at Constantinople, under our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, in year 4, and Paulinus, a most illustrious man, as consuls.>
Sin autem aliquid sub condicione relinquatur vel casuali vel potestativa vel mixta, quarum eventus ex fortuna vel ex honoratae personae voluntate vel ex utroque pendeat, vel sub incerta die, expectare oportet condicionis eventum, sub qua fuerit derelictum, vel diem, ut tunc cedat, cum vel condicio impleatur vel dies incertus extiterit. quod si in medio is, qui ex testamento lucrum sortitus est, decedat vel eo superstite condicio defecerit, hoc, quod ideo non praevaluit, manere disponimus simili modo apud eos, a quibus relictum est, nisi et hic vel substitutus relictum accipiat vel coniunctus sive heres sive legatarius hoc sibi adquirat, cum certi iuris sit et in institutionibus et legatis et fideicommissis et mortis causa donationibus posse substitui. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But if something is left under a condition, whether casual, potestative, or mixed—whose outcome depends on fortune, or on the will of an honored person, or on both—or under an uncertain day, one must await the event of the condition under which it was left, or the day, so that it then accrues when either the condition is fulfilled or the uncertain day has arisen. But if in the meantime the one who has obtained profit from the testament dies, or while he survives the condition fails, we ordain that this, which for that reason has not prevailed, is to remain in like manner with those by whom it was left, unless here too either a substitute receives what was left, or a kinsman—whether heir or legatee—acquires this for himself, since it is settled law that in institutions, and in legacies, and in fideicommissa, and in donations mortis causa, substitution can be made. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Sed ut manifestetur, pro qua parte manere oportet hoc, quod fuerit defectum, apud eos, ex quibus sit derelictum, sancimus, si quidem ad heredes lucrum perveniat, pro parte hereditaria fieri eius distributionem, cum et ab ipsis simili modo , si valuisset, praestaretur, nisi nominatim ab uno vel ex certis heredibus fuerat relictum: tunc enim, quemadmodum solus vel soli praestabant, ita et lucrum sentiant. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But, so that it may be made manifest for what share that which has lapsed ought to remain with those by whom it was bequeathed, we enact: if indeed the gain comes to the heirs, its distribution is to be made according to the hereditary share, since also by them in a similar way , if it had been valid, it would have been provided, unless it had been left by name by one or by certain heirs: for then, just as he alone or they alone would have provided, so too let the gain accrue to them. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>>
Sin autem legatarii vel fideicommissarii sint vel mortis causa donatione honorati vel alia forte persona, quae fideicommisso praegravari potest, et hoc evanescat, manere hoc apud enumeratas personas sancimus pro virili omnimodo portione, id est pro numero personarum. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But if they are legatees or fideicommissaries, or honored by a donatio mortis causa, or perhaps some other person who can be burdened by a fideicommissum, and this should fail, we decree that it remain with the enumerated persons by a virile portion in every way, that is, according to the number of persons. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Ne autem hoc, quod non ineleganter summi ingenii vir ulpianus in hac parte cum omni subtilitate disposuit, praetereatur, nostra sanctione hoc apertius inducimus. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Lest, however, that which the man of highest genius Ulpian not inelegantly arranged in this part with all subtlety be passed over, by our sanction we introduce this more openly. <a 534 on the Kalends of June at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, consul for the 4th time, and Paulinus, a most illustrious man, consuls.>
Cum enim iam statuimus haec cum suis oneribus ad eum qui lucretur pervenire, sancimus, si quidem condicio vel aliud gravamen in dando sit constitutum, hoc omnimodo lucrantes pro modo lucri agnoscere. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
For since we have already determined that these things, together with their own burdens, should pass to him who profits, we enact that, if indeed a condition or some other encumbrance has been established in the granting, those who profit must in every way acknowledge this in proportion to the measure of the profit. <a 534 on the Kalends of June at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, for the 4th time, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Sin autem in faciendo aliquid impositum est, si quidem hoc et per alium impleri possit, simili modo et a lucrante agnosci, puta si honorata persona iubeatur insulam vel monumentum vel aliud tale suis sumptibus facere vel heredi vel legatario vel alii forte, quem testator voluerit, vel rem ab herede testatoris emere vel locationem vel fideiussionem subire, et si quid huiusmodi facti simile sit: nihil etenim refert, sive per eum, de quo testator locutus est, sive per alium eiusdem lucri successorem adimpleatur. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But if, however, something has been imposed in the doing, if indeed this can also be fulfilled through another, it is likewise to be acknowledged by the one who profits; for instance, if an honored person is ordered to make at his own expense a tenement (insula) or a monument or some other such thing for the heir or the legatee or perhaps another whom the testator shall have wished, or to buy a thing from the heir of the testator, or to undergo a lease or a suretyship, and if there be anything similar of such a doing: for it makes no difference whether it is fulfilled by the one of whom the testator spoke, or by another successor to the same profit. <a 534, on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual emperor, A. 4, and Paulinus, most distinguished man, consuls.>
Sin vero talis est verborum conceptio et facti natura, ut quod relictum est ab alio adimpleri non possit, tunc, etsi lucrum ad aliquem pervenerit, non tamen et gravamen sequi, quia hoc neque ipsa natura concedit neque testator voluerit. quid enim, si iusserit eum in locum certum abire vel liberalibus studiis imbui vel domum suis manibus extruere vel pingere vel uxorem ducere? quae omnia testatoris voluntas in ipsius solius persona intellegitur conclusisse, cui et suam munificentiam relinquebat.
But if indeed the conception of the words and the nature of the act are such that what has been left cannot be fulfilled by another, then, even if the gain has come to someone, nevertheless the burden is not to follow, because neither does nature itself concede this nor would the testator have wished it. For what if he has ordered him to go to a certain place, or to be imbued with liberal studies, or to build a house with his own hands, or to paint, or to take a wife? All these things the testator’s will is understood to have concluded within that person alone, to whom he was also leaving his munificence.
In omnibus videlicet hoc obtinente, ut pro simili parte et lucrum sentiant et gravamen, ubi hoc possit procedere, subeant. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
In all matters, namely with this prevailing, that in a like share they sense both profit and gravamen; where this can proceed, let them undergo it. <in the year 534, on June 1, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, consul for the 4th time, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Et hoc locum habere omni quidem modo in his, quae in causa caduci vel caduca secundum quod supra dictum est fiebant: in pro non scriptis autem non omnibus, sed quibusdam, quia eorum quaedam, etsi talia sunt, tamen cum suo onere veniebant, quae et nos in novi iuris compositione specialiter enumerari iussimus, ne quis veteris iuris prolixitatem quasi rebus necessariam vel pro eorum revolvat scientia. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
And let this have place indeed in every way in those matters which were occurring in the case of caducum or caduca, according to what was said above; but as to things treated pro non scriptis, not in all, but in certain ones, because some of them, although they are such, nevertheless came with their own onus, which we too have ordered to be specially enumerated in the composition of the new law, lest anyone unroll the prolixity of the old law as if necessary to the matters, or for the sake of knowledge of them. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.4 et paulino vc.Conss.>
His ita definitis, cum in superiore parte nostrae sanctionis in plurimis locis coniuncti fecimus mentionem, necessarium esse duximus omnem inspectionem huiusmodi articuli latius et cum subtiliore tractatu dirimere, ut sit omnibus et hoc apertissime constitutum. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
With these matters thus defined, since in the upper part of our sanction we made mention together in very many places, we have deemed it necessary to resolve the whole inspection of an article of this kind more broadly and with a more subtle treatment, so that this too may be most clearly established for all. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Non enim tantum coniunctivo modo quaedam relinquuntur, sed etiam disiunctivo. in his itaque, si quidem coheredes sunt omnes coniunctim vel omnes disiunctim et vel instituti vel substituti, hoc, quod fuerit quoquo modo vacuatum, si in parte hereditatis vel partibus consistat, aliis coheredibus cum suo gravamine pro hereditaria parte, etiamsi iam defuncti sunt, adquiratur. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
For not only are certain things left in the conjunctive manner, but also in the disjunctive. In these cases, therefore, if indeed all the coheirs are either all jointly or all severally appointed or substituted, that which has been vacated in any way, if it consists in a part or parts of the inheritance, is to be acquired by the other coheirs, together with its own encumbrance, in proportion to their hereditary share, even if they have already died. <a 534 at Constantinople on the Kalends of June, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, year 4, and Paulinus, most distinguished man, consuls.>
Et hoc et nolentibus ipso iure adcrescat, si suas portiones iam agnoverint, cum sit absurdum eiusdem hereditatis partem quidem agnoscere, partem vero respuere, secundum quod et in divinis nostri numinis decisionibus statutum est. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
And this too shall accrue by the law itself even to those unwilling, if they have already acknowledged their shares, since it is absurd to acknowledge indeed a part of the same inheritance but to reject a part, according to what has also been established in the divine decisions of our numen. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Sin vero quidam ex heredibus institutis vel substitutis permixti sunt et alii coniunctim alii disiunctim nuncupati sunt, si quidem ex coniunctis aliquis deficiat, hoc omnimodo ad solos coniunctos cum suo veniat onere, id est pro parte hereditatis, quae ad eos pervenit. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But if indeed certain of the instituted or substituted heirs are intermixed and some are named jointly and others severally, then if one of the joint ones should fail, this shall in every way come to the joint ones alone together with its own burden, that is, in proportion to the share of the inheritance which has come to them. <a 534, on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, year 4, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Sin autem ex his, qui disiunctim scripti sunt, aliquis evanescat, hoc non ad solos disiunctos, sed ad omnes tam coniunctos quam disiunctos similiter cum suo onere pro portione hereditatis perveniat. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But if, however, of those who are written disjunctly, someone should vanish, this shall come not to the disjuncts alone, but to all, both conjunct and disjunct, likewise with its own burden, in proportion to the inheritance. <a 534 on the Kalends of June at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, consul for the 4th time, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Haec ita tam varie, quia coniuncti quidem propter unitatem sermonis quasi in unum corpus redacti sunt et partem coniunctorum sibi heredum quasi suam praeoccupant, disiuncti vero ab ipso testatoris sermone apertissime sunt discreti et suum quidem habent, alienum autem non soli appetunt, sed cum oneribus suis coheredibus accipiunt. et haec in heredibus tantummodo statuenda sunt. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
These matters stand thus, in so varied a way, because those named jointly, on account of the unity of the wording, are as it were reduced into one body and pre-occupy for themselves, as their own, the share of the joint heirs; whereas those named disjointly are most plainly set apart by the testator’s very wording, and indeed have what is their own, but they do not seek another’s share alone; rather, they receive it together with their coheirs, along with its burdens. And these points are to be established only in the case of heirs. <a 534 on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, in his 4th, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Sin vero pars quaedam ex his deficiat, eam omnibus, si habere maluerint, pro virili portione cum omni suo onere adcrescere vel, si omnes noluerint, tunc apud eos remanere, a quibus derelictum est: cum vero quidam voluerint, quidam noluerint, volentibus solummodo id totum accedere. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But if indeed some portion of these should fail, let it accrue to all, if they prefer to have it, in proportion to their shares, with all its own burden; or, if all should be unwilling, then let it remain with those by whom it was left: but when some shall be willing and some unwilling, let the whole of it pass only to those willing. <a in the year 534, on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, under our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, and Paulinus, most illustrious man, consuls.>
Sin autem disiunctim fuerit relictum, si quidem omnes hoc accipere et potuerint et maluerint, suam quisque partem pro virili portione accipiat et non sibi blandiantur, ut unus quidem rem, alii autem singuli solidam eius rei aestimationem accipere desiderent, cum huiusmodi legatariorum avaritiam antiquitas varia mente suscepit, in uno tantummodo genere legati eam accipiens, in aliis respuendam esse existimans, nos autem omnimodo repellimus, unam omnibus naturam legatis et fideicommissis imponentes et antiquam dissonantiam in unam trahentes concordiam. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But if it has been left separately, if indeed all both are able and have preferred to accept this, let each receive his own part according to his pro rata portion, and let them not flatter themselves so that the one should desire to receive the thing itself, but the others each the full valuation of that thing; since antiquity received such avarice of legatees with a various mind, accepting it in only one kind of legacy, judging it to be rejected in others. We, however, in every way repel it, imposing one and the same nature upon legacies and fideicommissa, and drawing the ancient dissonance into a single concord. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Sin vero non omnes legatarii, quibus separatim res relicta sit, in eius adquisitionem concurrant, sed unus forte eam accipiat, haec solida eius sit, quia sermo testatoris omnibus prima facie solidum adsignare videtur, aliis supervenientibus partem a priore abstrahentibus, ut ex aliorum quidem concursu prioris legatum minuatur, sin vero nemo alius veniat vel venire potuerit, tunc non vacuatur pars quae defecit nec alii adcrescit, ut eius qui primus accepit legatum augere videatur, sed apud ipsum qui habet solida res maneat nullius concursu deminuta. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But if not all the legatees, to whom a thing has been left separately, should concur in its acquisition, but one perhaps receives it, let this be solidly his; because the testator’s wording seems prima facie to assign the solid to all, others supervening taking away a part from the prior, so that by the concurrence of the others the prior’s legacy is diminished. But if no one else comes or could have come, then the portion which has failed is not vacated nor does it accrue to another, so that the legacy of him who first received might seem to be augmented; rather, with the very person who has it the thing remains solid, diminished by no one’s concurrence. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Et varietatis non in occulto sit ratio, cum ideo videtur testator disiunctim haec reliquisse, ut unusquisque suum onus, non alienum agnoscat. nam si contrarium volebat, nulla erat difficultas coniunctim ea disponere. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
And let the rationale of the variety not be hidden, since for this reason the testator seems to have left these things disjunctly, so that each may recognize his own burden, not another’s. For if he wished the contrary, there was no difficulty in disposing them conjunctly. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Cum autem in superiore parte legis non aditam hereditatem minime quibusdam personis ad heredes transmitti disposuimus, necesse est, si quis solidam hereditatem non adierit, hanc, si quidem habeat substitutum, ad eum, si voluerit et potuerit, pervenire. quod si hoc non sit, vel ab intestato successores eam accipiant vel, si nulli sint vel accipere nolunt vel aliquo modo non capiant, tunc ad nostrum aerarium devolvatur. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
But whereas in the foregoing part of the law we have determined that, for certain persons, an un-entered inheritance is by no means to be transmitted to their heirs, it is necessary that, if anyone has not entered upon the entire inheritance, this—if indeed he has a substitute—come to him, if he is willing and able. But if this is not so, either let the successors ab intestato receive it, or, if there are none, or they are unwilling to accept, or in any way do not take, then let it devolve to our treasury. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Haec autem omnia locum habere censemus tam in testamentis sive scriptis sive sine scriptis habitis quam in codicillis et omni ultimo elogio vel si quid ab intestato fuerit derelictum nec non in mortis causa donationibus. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
We judge, moreover, that all these provisions have place both in testaments, whether made in writing or without writings, and in codicils and every final elogium, and, if anything shall have been left ab intestato, as well as in donations mortis causa. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
Tantum etenim nobis superest clementiae, quod scientes etiam fiscum nostrum ultimum ad caducorum vindicationem vocari, tamen nec illi pepercimus nec augustum privilegium exercemus, sed quod communiter omnibus prodest, hoc rei privatae nostrae utilitati praeferendum esse censemus, nostrum esse proprium subiectorum commodum imperialiter existimantes. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
For so much clemency remains to us that, though we know that even our fisc is called last to the vindication of caduca, nevertheless we have neither spared it nor do we exercise the august privilege; but we judge that what is commonly beneficial to all must be preferred to the utility of our private estate, estimating imperially that the benefit of our subjects is our own proper good. <a 534 on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, the perpetual Augustus, consul for the 4th time, and Paulinus, a most illustrious man, consuls.>
Haec omnia ad vos, patres conscripti, duximus esse sancienda, ut nemini maneat incognitus nostrae benivolentiae labor, sed edictis ex sollemnitate a nostris magistratibus propositis omnibus innotescat. <a 534 d.K.Iun.Constantinopoli dn.Iustiniano pp.A.Iiii et paulino vc.Conss.>
All these things we have judged should be sanctioned for you, Conscript Fathers, so that the labor of our benevolence may remain unknown to no one, but may become known to all through edicts, set forth with solemnity by our magistrates. <a 534 on the Kalends of June at Constantinople, our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, in year 4, and Paulinus, most illustrious man, consuls.>
Per hanc iubemus sanctionem in posterum filios seu filias, nepotes aut neptes, pronepotes aut proneptes a patre vel a matre, avo vel avia, proavo vel proavia scriptos heredes, licet non sint invicem substituti, seu cum extraneis seu soli sint instituti et ante apertas tabulas defuncti, sive se noverint scriptos heredes sive ignoraverint, in liberos suos, cuiuscumque sint sexus vel gradus, derelictam sibi hereditariam portionem posse transmittere memoratasque personas, si tamen hereditatem non recusant, nulla huiusmodi praescriptione obstante sibi tamquam debitam vindicare: quod scilicet etiam super legatis seu fideicommissis a patre vel matre, avo vel avia, proavo vel proavia derelictis locum habet: si quidem perindignum est fortuitas ob causas vel casus humanos nepotes aut neptes, pronepotes aut proneptes avita vel proavita successione fraudari aliosque adversus avitum vel proavitum desiderium vel institutum insperato legati commodo vel hereditatis gaudere. habeant vero solacium tristitiae suae, quibus est merito consulendum. * theodos.
By this sanction we order that henceforth sons or daughters, grandsons or granddaughters, great-grandsons or great-granddaughters who have been written as heirs by a father or a mother, a grandfather or grandmother, a great-grandfather or great-grandmother, although they are not substituted for one another, whether instituted with outsiders or alone, and who died before the tablets were opened, whether they knew themselves to be written as heirs or were ignorant of it, may be able to transmit to their own children, of whatever sex or degree they may be, the hereditary portion left to them; and that the aforesaid persons, provided they do not refuse the inheritance, with no prescription of this kind standing in the way, may claim it for themselves as owed: which, of course, also holds with respect to legacies or fideicommissa left by a father or mother, grandfather or grandmother, great-grandfather or great-grandmother: since it is most unworthy that, on account of fortuitous causes or human chances, grandsons or granddaughters, great-grandsons or great-granddaughters be defrauded of avital or proavital succession, and that others, against the wish or institution of the grandfather or great-grandfather, should, beyond expectation, enjoy the benefit of a legacy or an inheritance. Let those have, in truth, a solace for their sadness, for whom it is right to have care. * Theodosius.
Ex his verbis: " do lego aeliae severinae filiae et secundae decem, quae legata accipere debebit, cum ad legitimum statum pervenerit", non condicio fideicommisso vel legato inserta, sed petitio in tempus legitimae aetatis dilata videtur. * alex. a. maximo.
From these words: " I give and bequeath to Aelia Severina, the daughter, and to Secunda ten, who ought to receive the legacies when she has attained lawful status", it seems not that a condition has been inserted in the fideicommiss or the legacy, but that the petition is deferred to the time of legal age. * Alexander Augustus to Maximus.
Et ideo si aelia severina filia testatoris, cui legatum relictum est die legati cedente vita functa est, ad heredem suum actionem transmisit, scilicet ut eo tempore solutio fiat, quo severina, si rebus humanis subtracta non fuisset, vicesimum quintum annum aetatis impleret. <a 226 pp. xiii k. ian. alexandro a. ii et Marcello conss.>
And therefore, if aelia severina, the daughter of the testator, to whom a legacy was left, died on the day the legacy vested, she transmitted the action to her heir, namely that payment be made at that time at which severina, if she had not been withdrawn from human affairs, would have completed the twenty-fifth year of her age.
Si fideicommissum ab intestato fuerit sorori tuae relictum codicillis et, posteaquam dies fideicommissi cessit, ignorans fideicommissum decessit, actionem huiusmodi adquiri potuisse dissimulare non potueris, salva scilicet ab intestato succedenti quarta portione. * diocl. et maxim.
If a fideicommissum from an intestate was left to your sister by codicils, and, after the day for the fideicommissum fell due, she died ignorant of the fideicommissum, you cannot dissemble that an action of this sort could have been acquired, the fourth portion, namely, being saved to the successor ab intestato. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Quoniam nihil actor amplius postulat, quam ut fideicommissi nomine satisdetur, non debet is qui iuri dicendo praeest subtiliter cognoscere, debetur nec ne fideicommissum, sed tantum decernere, ut satisdetur. * divus pius salvio. * < sine die et consule.>
Since the plaintiff demands nothing more than that security be given in the name of the fideicommissum, the one who presides over the pronouncing of law ought not to examine minutely whether the fideicommissum is owed or not, but only to decree that security be given. * The deified Pius to Salvius. * < without day and consul.>
Ipsis rerum experimentis cognovimus ad publicam utilitatem pertinere, ut satisdationes, quae voluntatis defunctorum tuendae gratia in legatis, item fideicommissis inductae sunt, eorundem voluntate remitti possint. quocumque enim indicio voluntatis cautio legati seu fideicommissi remitti potest. * divus marcus stratonicae.
From the very experience of affairs we have learned that it pertains to the public utility that the sureties which were introduced in legacies and likewise in fideicommissa for the sake of safeguarding the intention of the deceased can be remitted by the will of those same persons. for by whatever indication of intention the security of a legacy or of a fideicommissum can be remitted. * the deified Marcus to Stratonice.
Certa est forma iurisdictionis, qua fideicommissi servandi causa in possessionem rerum, quae in causa hereditaria sunt aut dolo malo esse desierint, is, cui legati vel fideicommissi nomine satis non datur, mittitur vel in proprias res heredis, si fideicommisso satis non fit post sex menses, quam peti coeperit, secundum divi antonini patris mei constitutionem. * alex. a. donato.
Fixed is the form of jurisdiction, by which, for the sake of preserving the fideicommissum, the person to whom surety is not given under the name of a legacy or fideicommissum is sent into possession of the things which are in the hereditary cause, or which through dolus malus have ceased to be, or into the heir’s own goods, if the fideicommissum is not satisfied after six months from when he began to demand it, according to the constitution of the deified Antoninus, my father. * alexander augustus to donatus.
Scire debetis fideicommissi quidem et legati satisdationem remitti posse divum marcum et divum commodum constituisse: ut autem boni viri arbitratu is, cui usus fructus relictus est, utatur fruatur, minime satisdationem remitti testamento posse. * alex. a. proculiano.
You ought to know that the deified Marcus and the deified Commodus established that the surety for a fideicommissum and for a legacy can be remitted: but that, as for the one to whom a usufruct has been left, in order that he may use and enjoy it at the arbitration of a good man, the surety cannot by any means be remitted by testament. * alex. a. proculiano.
Contra eos sive successores eorum, qui rem publicam administrantes per officii necessitatem civitati sub condicione relicti fideicommissi satis accipere debuerunt, quanti rei publicae interest satis acceptum non esse, dirigendam certum est actionem. * alex. aa. et cc. iulio et zenodoro.
Against those, or their successors, who, while administering the commonwealth, by the necessity of office ought to have taken surety for a fideicommissum left to the city under a condition, it is certain that an action is to be directed, assessed at how much it is in the republic’s interest that surety was not taken. * Alexander, the Augustuses and the Caesars, to Julius and Zenodorus.
Si defunctus cuiuscumque sexus aut numeri reliquerit filios et ex filia diem functa cuiuscumque sexus aut numeri nepotes, eius partis, quam defuncta filia superstes patri inter fratres suos fuisset habitura, duas partes consequantur nepotes ex eadem filia, tertia pars fratribus sororibusve eius quae defuncta est, id est filiis filiabusque eius, de cuius bonis agitur, avunculis scilicet sive materteris eorum, quorum commodo legem sancimus, adcrescat. * valentin. theodos.
If a deceased person, of whatever sex or number, shall have left children and, from a daughter who has departed this life, grandchildren of whatever sex or number, then of that share which the deceased daughter, had she survived her father, would have been going to have among her brothers, let the grandchildren from that same daughter obtain two parts; let the third part accrue to the brothers or sisters of her who has died—that is, to the sons and daughters of him whose goods are in question—namely the maternal uncles or aunts of those for whose benefit we sanction the law. * valentin. theodos.
Haec eadem, quae de avi materni bonis constituimus, de aviae maternae sive etiam paternae simili aequitate sancimus: nisi forte avi ad elogia inurenda impiis nepotibus iusta se motos ratione dixerint et hoc fuerit legibus approbatum. <a 389 d.V k.Mart.Mediolani timasio et promoto conss.>
We sanction with similar equity the same things which we have established concerning the goods of the maternal grandfather, with respect to the maternal grandmother or even the paternal grandmother: unless perhaps the grandfathers should declare that they were moved by just reason to have elogia branded upon undutiful grandchildren, and this has been approved by the laws. <in the year 389, on the 5th day before the Kalends of March, at Milan, in the consulship of Timasius and Promotus.>
Non solum autem si intestatus avus aviave defecerit, haec nepotibus quae sancimus iura servamus, sed et si avus vel avia, quibus huiusmodi nepotes erunt, testati obierint et praeterierint nepotes aut exheredaverint, easdem et de iniusto avorum testamento et si quae filiae poterant vel de re vel de lite competere actiones nepotibus deferimus secundum iustum nostrae legis modum, quae de parentum inofficiosis testamentis competunt filiis. <a 389 d.V k.Mart.Mediolani timasio et promoto conss.>
Not only, moreover, if a grandfather or grandmother has died intestate, do we preserve for the grandchildren these rights which we sanction, but also if the grandfather or grandmother, who shall have grandchildren of this kind, has died testate and has omitted the grandchildren or has disinherited them, we confer upon the grandchildren the same actions both concerning the unjust testament of the grandparents and any actions which daughters could have either concerning the thing or concerning the lawsuit, according to the just measure of our law, which belong to children in respect of the inofficious wills of their parents. <a 389 d.V k.Mart.Mediolani timasio et promoto conss.>
Ubi aviarum successio morte interveniente discutitur, capitis deminutio materna quaerenda non est. tunc enim in huiusmodi hereditatibus filiorum status aut persona spectatur, quotiens de eius bonis, qui potestatem familiae potuit habere, tractatur. * honor.
Where the succession of grandmothers is examined upon the intervention of death, a maternal capitis deminutio is not to be inquired into. For then, in inheritances of this sort, the status or the persona of the children is considered, whenever there is dealing with the goods of one who could have had power over the household. * honor.
Quotiens aliquis vel aliqua intestatus vel intestata mortuus vel mortua fuerit nepotibus vel pronepotibus cuiuscumque sexus vel deinceps aliis descendentibus derelictis, quibus unde liberi bonorum possessio minime competit, et insuper ex latere quibuscumque agnatis, minime possint idem agnati quartam partem hereditatis mortuae personae sibi vindicare, sed soli descendentes ad mortui successionem vocentur. quod tantum in futuris, non etiam praeteritis negotiis servari decernimus. * iust.
Whenever any man or any woman shall have died intestate, with grandchildren or great‑grandchildren of whatever sex, or thereafter other descendants, left behind—who, however, are by no means entitled to the bonorum possessio “unde liberi”—and, in addition, with collateral agnates of whatever sort, the same agnates shall by no means be able to vindicate for themselves the fourth part of the deceased person’s inheritance, but only the descendants shall be called to the succession of the deceased. We decree that this be observed only in future, not also in past matters. * iust.
Sin autem ei filii erunt seu filiae et impetraverit indulgentiam, infamiae abolitionem permittimus et ceterarum poenarum antiquationem, si facultatum omnium, quae fuerint tempore nuptiarum, medietatem filio filiaeve, filiis seu filiabus donaverit, quos habebat ex viro priore susceptos, pure scilicet et omni donationis sollemnitate completa nec retento quidem usu fructu. <a 380 pp. xv k. ian. gratiano v et theodosio aa. conss.>
But if, however, she shall have sons or daughters and shall have obtained an indulgence, we permit the abolition of infamy and the antiquation of the other penalties, if she shall have donated a moiety of all her assets which existed at the time of the marriage to a son or daughter, to the sons or daughters whom she had begotten from her prior husband—purely, that is, with every solemnity of donation completed, and with not even the usufruct retained. <a 380, 15 days before the Kalends of January, under Gratian 5 and Theodosius, the Augusti, consuls.>
Sin autem universae vel universi intestati diem obierint durae fortunae ad matrem solacia ex integro revertantur, ita scilicet, ut hunc semissem, quem filiis seu filiabus donaverat, intestato diem filiis seu filiabus obeuntibus rursus ipsa separatim ab ultimi filii vel filiae hereditate praesumat. <a 380 pp. xv k. ian. gratiano v et theodosio aa. conss.>
But if, however, all the daughters or all the sons have died intestate, the consolations of harsh fortune shall revert in full to the mother—namely, so that this half-share, which she had donated to the sons or to the daughters, with the sons or daughters dying intestate, she herself shall again claim separately, apart from the inheritance of the last son or daughter. <a 380 pp. 15 k. Jan. Gratian 5 and Theodosius, the Augusti, consuls.>
Sin vero alterius elegerit coniugium mariti, extrinsecus quidem quaesita filio filiaeve simili firmitate possideat, rerum vero paternarum defuncti solo usu fructu humanitatis contemplatione potiatur, proprietatem sorori et fratribus transmissura defuncti. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
But if indeed she has chosen the marriage of another husband, let her possess with similar firmness the things obtained from outside for a son or daughter, but let her, out of consideration of humanity, enjoy only the usufruct of the deceased’s paternal goods, with the ownership to be transmitted to the deceased’s sister and brothers. <a 426 on the eighth day before the Ides of November at Ravenna, Theodosius 12 and Valentinian 2, emperors, consuls.>
Omnem matri sive ab intestato sive iure substitutionis, si filius impubes moritur, denegandam volumus successionem, si ea legitima liberorum tutela suscepta ad secundas contra sacramentum praestitum adspiraverit nuptias, antequam ei tutorem alium fecerit ordinari eique quod debetur ex ratione tutelae gestae persolverit. * theodos. et valentin.
We order that all succession be denied to the mother, whether ab intestate or by the right of substitution, if an underage son dies, if she, having undertaken the legitimate guardianship of the children, has aspired to second nuptials contrary to the oath sworn, before she has caused another guardian to be appointed for him and has paid to him what is owed from the account of the guardianship conducted. * theodosius and valentinian.
Si quis vel si qua matre superstite et fratre vel legitimo vel sola cognationis iura habente intestatus vel intestata decesserit, non excludi a filii successione matrem, sed una cum fratre mortui vel mortuae, si superstes vel filius vel privignus ipsius sit, ad eam pervenire ad similitudinem sororum mortui vel mortuae: ita tamen, ut, si quidem solae sorores agnatae vel cognatae et mater defuncti vel defunctae supersint, pro veterum legum tenore dimidiam quidem mater, alteram vero dimidiam partem omnes sorores habeant: sin vero matre superstite et fratre vel fratribus solis vel etiam cum sororibus intestatus quis vel intestata moriatur, in capita distribuatur eius hereditas nec liceat matri occasione soro rum mortui vel mortuae ampliorem partem sibi vindicare, quam rata portio capitum exigit: patruo scilicet mortui vel mortuae eius filio vel nepote nullum ius ad eius hereditatem matre herede existente habentibus nec ex veteribus legibus vel ex constitutionibus partem matris minui. * iust. a. menae pp. * <a 528 d. k. iun.
If any man or woman, with the mother surviving and with a brother either legitimate or holding only the rights of cognation, should die intestate, the mother is not to be excluded from the child’s succession, but together with the brother of the deceased man or woman—if there survives either his son or his stepson—let it come to her, after the likeness of the sisters of the deceased man or woman: provided, however, that, if indeed only sisters, whether agnate or cognate, and the mother of the deceased man or woman survive, in accordance with the tenor of the ancient laws the mother shall have one half, and all the sisters the other half; but if, with the mother surviving, and with a brother or brothers alone or even together with sisters, someone male or female should die intestate, the inheritance shall be distributed per capita, nor shall it be permitted to the mother, on the pretext of the sisters of the deceased man or woman, to claim for herself a larger share than the fixed per‑head portion requires: namely, the paternal uncle of the deceased man or woman, his son or grandson, have no right to his inheritance when the mother is heir, nor shall the mother’s share be diminished by the ancient laws or by constitutions. * Justinian Augustus to Menas, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 528 on the Kalends of June.
Sin autem defuncta persona non solum matrem et fratres et sorores superstites habeat, sed etiam patrem, si quidem sui iuris decessit, quia patris persona interveniens matris iura superare videtur, omnibus pio animo providentes sancimus fratres quidem et sorores mortuae personae ad successionem proprietatis solos pro virili parte vocari, patri autem et matri usus fructus totius successionis bessem competere aequa lance inter patrem et matrem dividendum, reliqua parte usus fructus apud fratres et sorores remanente. <a 528 d. k. iun. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. ii cons.>
But if the deceased person not only has a surviving mother and brothers and sisters, but also a father, if indeed she died sui iuris, since the person of the father, intervening, seems to surpass the rights of the mother, providing for all with pious mind we decree that the brothers and sisters of the deceased person alone be called to the succession of ownership, each by virile share (pro virili parte); but that to the father and mother there belong the usufruct of two-thirds (bessis) of the whole succession, to be divided on an equal scale between father and mother, the remaining part of the usufruct staying with the brothers and sisters. <a 528 on the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, under our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, consul for the 2nd time.>
Sin vero defuncta persona in sacris patris constituta decesserit, pater quidem usum fructum, quem et vivente filio habebat, detineat donec vivat incorruptum, mater autem, quia hunc usum fructum habere vivente patre non potest totum apud patrem constitutum, una cum fratribus defunctae personae ad proprietatem vocetur , scilicet cum sororibus sola in dimidiam, cum fratribus vel promiscui generis secundum supra scriptam distributionem in virilem portionem. <a 528 d. k. iun. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. ii cons.>
But if indeed the deceased person died established in her father’s sacra, let the father retain the usufruct, which he also had while the child was alive, untouched so long as he lives; but the mother, since she cannot have this usufruct while the father lives, it being wholly established with the father, is to be called, together with the brothers of the deceased person, to the ownership, that is, with sisters alone to one-half, with brothers or of mixed sex, according to the distribution written above, to the virile portion . <a in the year 528, the day before the Kalends of June, at Constantinople, our lord Justinian Augustus, perpetual, in his 2nd consulship.>
Quapropter si mater vestra te et uno fratre emancipatis, duobus autem aliis in patria positis potestate superstitibus diem functa est et hi, qui in potestate patris fuerant, priusquam maternam hereditatem sibi quaererent, rebus humanis exempti sunt, inter duos tantum viriles non ambigitur factas portiones. <a 293 s.Vii k.April.Sirmi aa. conss.>
Wherefore, if your mother, you and one brother having been emancipated, but two others left in the paternal power surviving, has died; and those who were in the father’s power, before they sought the maternal inheritance for themselves, were removed from human affairs, it is not in doubt that the portions were made into only two virile shares. <a 293 s.7 k.April.Sirmi aa. conss.>
Quotiens de emancipati filii filiaeve successione tractatur, filiis ex his genitis deferatur intacta pro solido successio neque ulla defunctae patri matrique concedatur intestatae successionis hereditas. * grat. valentin.
As often as the succession of an emancipated son or daughter is under discussion, let an undiminished succession for the whole (pro solido) be conferred upon the children born from them, and let no inheritance of intestate succession be granted to the deceased’s father or mother. * gratian, valentinian.
Si qua illustris mulier filium ex iustis nuptiis procreaverit et alterum spurium habuerit, cui pater incertus sit, quemadmodum res maternae ad eos perveniant, sive tantummodo ad liberos iustos sive ad spurios, dubitabatur. * iust. a. demostheni pp. * <a 529 d. xv k. oct.
If any illustrious woman has begotten a son from lawful nuptials and has another spurious child, whose father is uncertain, it was doubted how the maternal property should come to them, whether only to the legitimate children or to the spurious. * Justinian Augustus to Demosthenes, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 529, on the 15th day before the Kalends of October.
Sancimus itaque, ut neque ex testamento neque ab intestato neque a liberalitate inter vivos habita iustis liberis existentibus aliquid penitus ab illustribus matribus ad spurios perveniat, cum in mulieribus ingenuis et illustribus, quibus castitatis observatio praecipuum debitum est, et nominari spurios satis iniuriosum, satis acerbum et nostris temporibus indignum esse iudicamus et hanc legem ipsi pudicitiae, quam semper colendam censemus, merito dedicamus. <a 529 d. xv k. oct. chalcedone decio vc. cons.>
We ordain therefore that neither from a testament nor ab intestato nor from a liberality made inter vivos, while legitimate children exist, shall anything at all from illustrious mothers reach spurious children; since in freeborn and illustrious women, for whom the observance of chastity is a chief duty, we judge that even to name “spurious” is quite injurious, quite bitter, and unworthy of our times; and we deservedly dedicate this law to Pudicity itself, which we deem must always be cultivated. <a 529 on the 15th day before the Kalends of October, at Chalcedon, when Decius, a most distinguished man, was consul.>
Sin autem concubina liberae condicionis constituta filium vel filiam ex licita consuetudine ad hominem liberum habita procreaverit, eos etiam cum legitimis liberis ad materna venire bona, quae ea iure legitimo et in suo patrimonio possidet, nulla invidia est. <a 529 d. xv k. oct. chalcedone decio vc. cons.>
But if a concubine of free status has, from a lawful cohabitation had with a free man, procreated a son or a daughter, there is no objection that they also, together with legitimate children, should come to the maternal goods which she possesses by legitimate right and in her own patrimony. <a 529 d. xv k. oct. chalcedone decio vc. cons.>
Quidam ancillae suae per fideicommissum libertatem reliquit, eo autem, a quo libertas relicta est, moram in libertate praestanda faciente peperit ancilla. et esse quidem ingenuum puerum vel puellam, qui post moram nati sunt, omnes veteris iuris auctores consentiunt, dubitabatur autem inter eos, si matri morienti potest succedere. * iust.
Someone left freedom to his handmaid by a fideicommiss; but while the person by whom the freedom had been left was causing delay in furnishing the freedom, the handmaid gave birth. And that a boy or a girl, born after the delay, is indeed freeborn, all the authors of the old law agree; however, it was doubted among them whether he can succeed to his mother at her death. * iust.
Huiusmodi itaque dubitationem eorum decidentes ulterius eam procedere non patimur, sed sancimus eandem matris progeniem heredem ab intestato posse ei existere, salvo iure legitimo ex auctoritate senatus consulti orfitiani proli servando et tam matre ex senatus consulto tertulliano quam prole ex orfitiano senatus consulto invicem ad suas hereditates venientibus. <a 530 d.K.Oct.Constantinopoli lampadio et oreste vv.Cc.Conss.>
Accordingly, cutting off their doubt of this kind, we do not allow it to proceed further, but we enact that the same progeny of the mother can become her heir ab intestate, with the legitimate right to be preserved for the offspring by the authority of the senatus consultum Orfitianum, and both the mother by the senatus consultum Tertullianum and the offspring by the senatus consultum Orfitianum shall, mutually, come to their respective inheritances. <in 530, on the Kalends of October, at Constantinople, Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, consuls.>
In successione titulo consanguinitatis vel in bonorum possessione, quae proximitatis nomine competit, tam fratres quam sorores pari iure esse, licet non eadem matre susceptae sunt, ius certum est. nec huic derogatur, quod amitas vestras ab avo vestro dotatas fuisse proponitis. * alex.
In succession by the title of consanguinity, or in the possession of goods which belongs under the name of proximity, both brothers and sisters are in equal right, although they were not borne from the same mother; this is a settled law. Nor is this derogated by your alleging that your paternal aunts were dowered by your grandfather. * alex.
Si eius, quae vos heredes instituit, patri non quaesistis hereditatem posteaque mortuo patre ac repudiata eius hereditate defunctae successionem agnovistis, ea, quae bonorum sunt defunctae, ab his separari, quae patris vestri fuerunt, praeses provinciae non ignorabit. * alex. a. tatianae et aliis.
If, in the case of her who instituted you as heirs, you did not seek the inheritance for your father, and afterwards, when your father had died and his inheritance had been repudiated, you acknowledged the succession of the deceased, the provincial governor will not be unaware that the things which are of the goods of the deceased are to be separated from those which were your father's. * Alexander Augustus to Tatiana and others.
Proinde cum fratris tui intestato mortui ad te consanguinitatis iure hereditas pertineat, nulla ratione alterius fratris tui filii ad eandem successionem adspirare desiderant: nam et cessante iure agnationis in persona omnium praetorii iuris beneficio ad te potius, quae secundum gradum obtines, hereditas pertinet quam ad fratris tui filios, qui tertio gradu constituti sunt. <a 250 pp. ii non. dec.
Accordingly, since the inheritance of your brother who died intestate pertains to you by the right of consanguinity, by no means should the sons of your other brother aspire to the same succession: for, with the right of agnation being in abeyance for all, by the benefice of praetorian law the inheritance pertains rather to you, who occupy the second degree, than to your brother’s sons, who are placed in the third degree. <a 250 pp. ii non. dec.
Si aut nullum testamentum nepos patrui tui ordinavit aut intra quattuordecim annos constitutus fecit et agnationis iure successio eius tibi delata est, etiam citra bonorum possessionis subsidium legitimo iure subnixus es. * diocl. et maxim. aa. caecilio.
If either the grandson of your paternal uncle made no testament, or, being under fourteen years of age, made one, and the succession to him has been conveyed to you by the right of agnation, you are supported by legitimate right even without the aid of the bonorum possessio. * Diocletian and Maximian, the Augusti, to Caecilius.
Si his, de quorum successione agitur, apud hostes defunctis secundum legis corneliae beneficium iure agnationis adita hereditate vel petita bonorum possessione successisti, substantiam eorum vindicare non prohiberis. * diocl. et maxim.
If, those whose succession is at issue having died among the enemy, in accordance with the benefit of the lex Cornelia you have succeeded by the right of agnation—having entered upon the inheritance or sought bonorum possessio—you are not prohibited from vindicating their substance. * diocl. et maxim.
Sciant, qui ad successionem vocantur pupilli mortui, si defuncto eius patre tutorem ei secundum leges non petierint intra annum, omnem eis sive ab intestato sive iure substitutionis successionem eius, si impubes moritur, denegandam. * theodos. et valentin.
Let those who are called to the succession of a deceased ward know that, if, with his father deceased, they do not request for him a tutor according to the laws within a year, all succession to him—whether ab intestato or by the right of substitution—is to be denied to them, if he dies under age. * Theodosius and Valentinian.
Si ab eo, qui ex sacro rescripto secundum nostram constitutionem fieri postulaverit emancipationem liberorum, petitum sit, quatenus ei, qui emancipandus emancipandave est, minime legitima iura per emancipationem extinguantur, eadem iura tam emancipato vel emancipatae contra personas alias hoc modo sibi coniunctas quam aliis itidem contra eum vel eam in hereditatibus vel successionibus et tutelis nec non ceteris serventur intacta. * anastas. a. constantino pp. * <a 502 d. xv k. aug.
If it be requested by one who, on the basis of a sacred rescript, has petitioned that the emancipation of children be effected according to our constitution, that, to the extent that the legitimate rights of the one who is to be emancipated—male or female—should by no means be extinguished by emancipation, the same rights remain intact, both to the emancipated man or woman against other persons connected to him or her in this way and likewise to others against him or her, in inheritances or successions and tutelages as well as in other matters. * anastasius augustus to constantine, praetorian prefect. * <in the year 502, day 15 before the Kalends of August.>
Si maior quinquagenaria partum ediderit, si debet huiusmodi suboles suo patri sua constitui et hereditatem eius nancisci, a caesariana advocatione interrogati sumus. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 532 d. iix k. nov.
If a woman older than fifty should bring forth a child, whether offspring of this sort ought to be constituted as its father’s own and acquire his inheritance, we have been asked by the Caesarian advocacy. * Justinian Augustus to John, praetorian prefect. * <a 532 on the 8th day before the Kalends of November.
Et sancimus, licet mirabilis huiusmodi partus invenitur et raro contingit, nihil tamen eorum, quae probabiliter a natura noscuntur esse producta, respui, sed omne ius, quod ex quacumque lege liberis praestitum est, hoc merum atque immutilatum huiusmodi filiis vel filiabus servari in omnibus successionibus sive ex testamento sive ab intestato. <a 532 d. iix k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc. anno secundo.>
And we ordain that, although a birth of this kind is found marvelous and occurs rarely, nevertheless none of those things which are known to have been produced by nature in a reasonable manner are to be rejected; rather, every right which by whatever law has been afforded to children shall be kept, pure and unimpaired, for such sons or daughters in all successions, whether by testament or ab intestate. <a 532 on the day 8 before the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men, in the second year.>
Et summatim non absimiles aliis fiant, quos similes natura effecit, maxime cum et anteriore nostra lege huiusmodi nuptias permisimus, impares eas videri minime concedentes. <a 532 d. iix k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc. anno secundo.>
And, in sum, let them not be made unlike others, to whom nature has made them similar, especially since by our earlier law we have permitted marriages of this sort, by no means allowing them to be considered unequal. <a 532 d. iix k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc. anno secundo.>
De emancipatis filiis, qui sacro rescripto patribus impertito hoc a suis genitoribus meruerunt, dubitatum est. cum enim anastasiana lex iura fratribus legitima noscitur servare, si quis ex his sine testamento et liberis decesserit, utrumne ad fratrem vel sororem eius successio devolvatur an ad superstitem patrem, dubitabatur. * iust.
Concerning emancipated sons, who, by a sacred rescript granted to their fathers, obtained this from their own begetters, there was a doubt. For since the Anastasian law is known to preserve the legitimate rights for brothers, if any of these should die without a testament and without children, it was doubted whether the succession devolves to his brother or sister, or to the surviving father. * iust.
Huiusmodi dubitationem compendioso responso duximus esse finiendam ideoque sancimus ad similitudinem maternarum rerum aliarumque, de quibus a nobis iam lex posita est, et huiusmodi hereditatem iure quidem dominii ad fratres vel sorores pervenire in totum, usum fructum autem eius patri totum, sive torum priorem servaverit sive ad secundas migraverit nuptias, adquiri, sive per sacrum oraculum emancipatio procedat sive alio legitimo modo a sacris paternis fuerint absoluti. <a 531 d. k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
We have judged that a doubt of this kind must be ended by a compendious response; and therefore we sanction, by analogy with maternal goods and other matters about which a law has already been set by us, that an inheritance of this kind, in the right of ownership, shall in its entirety come to the brothers or sisters, but that the usufruct thereof shall wholly be acquired by the father—whether he has kept the former marriage-bed or has migrated to second nuptials—whether emancipation proceeds by sacred oracle or they have been released from the paternal sacra by some other lawful mode. <a 531 on the Kalends of November at Constantinople, after the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Cum enim et pater utitur usu fructu et votum eius est ad alios filios suas res pervenire, quapropter, cum ex lege anastasiana in alium articulum fratribus prospectum est, non a nobis in hac specie plenius eis subvenitur, ut pater habeat usum fructum, fratres autem vel sorores dominium rerum relictarum? <a 531 d. k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Since indeed the father also enjoys the usufruct and his wish is that his own property should come to his other sons, wherefore, since under the Anastasian law provision has been made for the brothers in another article, are they not more fully succored by us in this instance, so that the father has the usufruct, but the brothers or sisters the dominion (ownership) of the things left? <a 531 d. k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Exceptis maternis rebus, in quibus, si ex eadem matre fratres vel sorores sunt, eos solos vocari oportet: sin autem non supersint, tunc ad similitudinem aliarum rerum in totam fraternitatem dominium earum cedere, ut sit apertissimus in omnibus tractatus et non per differentiam personarum vel rerum vacillare noscatur. <a 531 d. k. nov. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Maternal things excepted, in which, if brothers or sisters are from the same mother, those alone ought to be called: but if, however, none survive, then, in similitude with other things, the dominion of them shall cede to the whole fraternity, so that the treatment may be most evident in all respects and be known not to vacillate by a difference of persons or of things. <a 531 on the day of the Kalends of November, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Lege duodecim tabularum bene romano generi prospectum est, quae unam consonantiam tam in maribus quam in feminis legitimis et in eorum successionibus nec non libertis observandam esse existimavit, nullo discrimine in successionibus habito , cum natura utrumque corpus edidit, ut maneat suis vicibus immortale et alterum alterius auxilio egeat, ut uno semoto et alterum corrumpatur. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. v k. dec.
By the Law of the Twelve Tables provision was well made for the Roman stock, which judged that one consonance was to be observed both in legitimate males and in females and in their successions, and likewise for freedmen, with no discrimination held in successions , since nature has brought forth both bodies, so that it may remain immortal in its turns and the one may need the aid of the other, such that, the one being removed, the other also is corrupted. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 531 on the fifth day before the Kalends of December
Sed posteritas, dum nimia utitur subtilitate, non piam induxit differentiam, sicut iulius paulus in ipso principio libri singularis, quem ad senatus consultum tertullianum fecit, apertissime docuit. <a 531 d. v k. dec. post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But posterity, while using excessive subtlety, has introduced an impious distinction, as Julius Paulus taught most plainly right at the beginning of the single book which he composed on the senatus-consultum Tertullianum. <a 531, on the 5 Kalends of December, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Qui enim ferendum est ab intestato successionibus suas quidem filias ad similitudinem masculae subolis in parentis vocari successionem et iterum germanas iure consanguinitatis eandem sibi vindicare praerogativam, deinceps autem legitimas feminarum personas, si iura consanguinitatis non possident, a successione legitima repelli, cum maribus eadem successio pateat? <a 531 d. v k. dec. post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
For who could endure, in intestate successions, that their own daughters be called into the parent’s succession in the likeness of male offspring, and in turn that full sisters, by the right of consanguinity, vindicate for themselves the same prerogative, but thereafter that legitimate female persons, if they do not possess the rights of consanguinity, be repelled from the legitimate succession, while the same succession lies open to males? <a 531 d. v k. dec. post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Quare enim patris soror non ad successionem filii fratris sui una cum masculis vocatur, sed aliud ius in amita, aliud in patruis observatur? vel qua ratione fratris filius ad successionem patrui vocatur, germana autem eius ab eadem successione recluditur? <a 531 d. v k. dec.
Why indeed is the father’s sister not called to the succession of her brother’s son together with the males, but one rule is observed in the case of the amita and another in the case of the paternal uncles? or by what rationale is the brother’s son called to the succession of his paternal uncle, while his full sister is excluded from the same succession? <a 531 d. v k. dec.
Huiusmodi itaque legis antiquae reverentiam et nos anteponi novitati legis censemus et sancimus omnes legitimas personas, id est per virilem sexum descendentes , sive masculini sive feminini generis sint, simili modo ad iura successionis legitimae ad successionem intestatorum vocari secundum gradus sui praerogativam non ideo excludendas, quia consanguinitatis iura secundum germanae observationem non habent. <a 531 d. v k. dec. post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Therefore, we too deem that reverence for an ancient law of this kind should be preferred to the novelty of a law, and we sanction that all legitimate persons—that is, those descending through the male sex , whether they be of the male or of the female gender—are in like manner to be called to the rights of legitimate succession, to the succession of intestates, according to the prerogative of their degree, not on that account to be excluded because they do not have rights of consanguinity according to the observance of full-blood kinship. <in the year 531, on the 5th day before the Kalends of December, after the consulship of lampadius and orestes, most distinguished men.>
Cum enim unius sanguinis iura remanent per virilem sexum incorrupta, quare naturae offendimus et legitimo iuri derogamus? cum et aliam maximam iniuriam res in se continet plerisque quasi vulnus intestinum incognitum. cum enim ad earum mulierum successionem masculi iure agnationis vocantur, quis patiatur earum quidem hereditatem ad eos legitimo iure deferri, ipsas vero neque invicem sibi neque masculis posse eodem iure succedere, sed propter hoc solum puniri, quod feminae natae sunt, et paterno vitio ( si hoc vitium est) prolem innocentem gravari?
Since indeed the rights of a single blood remain incorrupt through the male sex, why do we offend nature and derogate from legitimate law? since the matter also contains in itself another very great injury, unknown to most as though an internal wound. For since to the succession of those women the males are called by the right of agnation, who would allow that their inheritance indeed be conveyed to them by legitimate right, but that the women themselves can neither succeed to one another nor to males by the same right, but be punished for this alone, that they were born female, and that by a paternal fault (if this is a fault) the innocent offspring be burdened?
( 1) in his igitur casibus legem duodecim tabularum sequentes et novum ius novissimo iure corrigentes etiam unum gradum pietatis intuitu transferri ab iure cognationis in legitimam volumus successionem, ut non solum fratris filius et filia secundum quod iam definivimus ad successionem patrui sui vocentur, sed etiam germanae consanguineae vel sororis uterinae filius et filia soli et non deinceps personae una cum his ad iura avunculi sui perveniant, et mortuo eo, qui patruus quidem est fratris sui filiis, avunculus autem sororis suae suboli, simili modo ab utroque latere succedatur, tamquam si omnes legitimo iure veniant, scilicet ubi frater et soror superstites non sunt. his etenim personis praecedentibus et hereditatem admittentibus ceteri gradus remanent penitus semoti. <a 531 d. v k. dec.
( 1) Therefore, in these cases, following the Law of the Twelve Tables and correcting the new law with the newest law, we will that even one degree, by regard for pietas, be transferred from the law of cognation into legitimate succession: so that not only the brother’s son and daughter, as we have already defined, are called to the succession of their patrui (paternal uncle), but also the son and daughter of a full sister by blood (germana) or of a uterine sister shall alone—and not persons further down together with them—reach the rights of their avunculus (maternal uncle); and, upon his death, he who is patruus indeed to his brother’s children but avunculus to his sister’s offspring, let succession from both sides take place in a like manner, as if all came by legitimate right—namely, where brother and sister are not surviving. For with these persons taking precedence and being admitted to the inheritance, the other degrees remain wholly removed. <a 531 d. v k. dec.
Illo procul dubio observando, ut successio non ad stirpes, sed in capita dividatur et is gradus in ordinem legitimum transferatur: ceteris omnibus successionibus secundum ius usque ad praesens tempus observatum in suo statu manentibus. <a 531 d. v k. dec. post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
With this, beyond doubt, being observed: that succession is divided not by stocks, but by heads, and that that degree is transferred into the legitimate order; all other successions, according to the law observed up to the present time, remaining in their own status. <in the year 531, on the 5th day before the Kalends of December (27 November), after the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Meminimus antea divinam promulgasse constitutionem, per quam ad vestigia legis duodecim tabularum totam progeniem ex legitima subole descendentem sive masculinam sive femininam legitimo iure hereditatem adipisci sanximus, ut, quemadmodum ipsis a legitimis succeditur, ita et ipsae legitimarum personarum amplectantur successionem. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 534 d. id. oct.
We remember that previously we promulgated a divine constitution, by which, in the footsteps of the law of the Twelve Tables, we sanctioned that the whole progeny descending from legitimate stock, whether male or female, should acquire the inheritance by legitimate right, so that, just as succession goes to them from legitimate persons, so they likewise may embrace the succession of legitimate persons. * Justinian Augustus to John, praetorian prefect. * <a 534 on the Ides of Oct.
In qua constitutione unum gradum ex cognatis in ius legitimum reduximus, id est germanae filios et filias et sororis uterinae filios ac filias: quam constitutionem in suo robore permanere censemus, cum et in nostris institutionibus tenor eius a nobis relatus est. <a 534 d. id. oct. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. iiii et paulino vc. conss.>
In which constitution we have restored one degree from the cognates into the legitimate right, that is, the sons and daughters of a full sister and the sons and daughters of a uterine sister: which constitution we judge to remain in its own force, since even in our Institutes its tenor has been set forth by us. <a 534 on the Ides of October, at Constantinople, under our lord Justinian, perpetual Augustus, in his 4th consulship, and Paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Sed subtiliore tractatu habito necessarium duximus, et si quid ex praetoria iurisdictione frugi inventum est, et hoc cum perfectissima definitione posito nostras leges ampliari. <a 534 d. id. oct. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. iiii et paulino vc. conss.>
But, after a more subtle tractation has been undertaken, we have deemed it necessary that, if anything useful has been found from the praetorian jurisdiction, this too, with a most perfect definition set down, our laws be enlarged. <a 534 on the Ides of oct., at Constantinople, our lord Justinian Augustus, perpetual, for the 4th time, and Paulinus, most distinguished man, consuls.>
Cum igitur praetor filium emancipatum, licet subtili iure capite fuerat deminutus, attamen in patris successione sine ulla deminutione vocare manifestissimus est, non eodem autem iure ad fratrum suorum successionem ab eo vocabatur, sed nec filii eius iure legitimo suis patruis succedebant, necessarium duximus hoc primum corrigere et legem anastasianam iusto incremento perfectam ostendere, ut emancipatus filius et filia non solum in paternis bonis ad suorum similitudinem succedant, sed etiam in fratrum vel sororum suarum successione, sive omnes emancipati sint sive permixti sui cum emancipatis, aequo iure invicem sibi succedant et non secundum legem anastasianam parte aliqua deminuta. et haec quidem de fi liis emancipatis sancire bellissimum nobis visum est. <a 534 d. id. oct.
Since therefore the praetor is most manifest in calling an emancipated son—although by a subtle law he had suffered a diminution of status—yet to the father’s succession without any diminution; but he was not by the same law called by him to the succession of his brothers, nor did his sons, by legitimate right, succeed to their paternal uncles, we have deemed it necessary first to correct this and to show the Anastasian law perfected by a just increment: that an emancipated son and daughter not only succeed to the paternal goods in the likeness of their “sui,” but also in the succession of their brothers or sisters, whether all are emancipated or there is a mixture of “sui” with emancipated, they shall succeed to one another by equal right, and not, according to the Anastasian law, with any share diminished. And this indeed concerning emancipated children we have judged most excellent to sanction. <a 534 d. id. oct.
Sed nec fratrem vel sororem uterinos concedimus in cognationis loco relinqui. cum enim tam proximo gradu sunt, merito eos sine ulla differentia, tamquam si consanguinei fuerant, cum legitimis fratribus et sororibus vocandos esse sancimus, ut secundo gradu constituti et legitima successione digni reperti aliis omnibus , qui sunt ulterioris gradus, licet legitimi sint, praecellant. et haec quidem de secundi gradus successione satis abundeque nobis cum summa utilitate disposita sunt.
But neither do we permit a uterine brother or sister to be left out of the place of cognation. For since they are in so near a degree, we sanction that, without any distinction, as if they had been consanguine, they are to be called together with legitimate brothers and sisters, so that, being placed in the second degree and found worthy of legitimate succession, they surpass all others , who are of a more remote degree, although they are legitimate. And these matters concerning the succession of the second degree have been arranged by us sufficiently and abundantly, with the highest utility.
Cum autem tertio gradui ex transversa linea fuerit locus, ubi patruis et filiis fratrum et sororum locum antiquitas dedicavit, una cum illis tam emancipati fratris quam emancipatae sororis filium tantummodo et filiam, sive emancipatos sive suos patribus constitutos, et neminem alium ulterius, nec non fratris uterini et sororis germanae vel uterinae filium et filiam tantummodo ex legitima linea invicem vocari censemus, sicut iam sanximus, ut omnes, qui vel ab antiquo iure vel a nostra liberalitate in legitimorum quidem positi sunt praerogativa, eodem autem tertio gradu sunt, simili iure vocentur. <a 534 d. id. oct. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. iiii et paulino vc. conss.>
But since there is a place for the third degree from the collateral line, where antiquity assigned a place to paternal uncles and to the sons and daughters of brothers and sisters, together with them we judge that only the son and daughter of an emancipated brother and of an emancipated sister—whether themselves emancipated or constituted under their fathers’ power—and no one else further, as well as only the son and daughter of a uterine brother and of a sister either full or uterine, from the legitimate line, are to be called reciprocally, just as we have already sanctioned, so that all who, either by the ancient law or by our liberality, have been placed in the prerogative of legitimate persons, and who are likewise in the same third degree, be summoned by a like right. <a 534, on the ides of oct., at constantinople, our lord justinian augustus, for the 4th time, and paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Successionis videlicet iure et in hac parte servando, ut, si qui ex secundo gradu vocati renuntiaverint hereditati et noluerint eam adire nullusque alius sit in secundo gradu, qui succedere et potest et vult, tunc hi, quos praesenti lege enumeravimus ex tertio gradu, in locum recusantium succedant. <a 534 d. id. oct. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. iiii et paulino vc. conss.>
Namely, with the right of succession being observed also in this part, that, if any of those called from the second degree have renounced the inheritance and are unwilling to enter upon it, and there is no other in the second degree who both can and wills to succeed, then those whom by the present law we have enumerated from the third degree shall succeed in the place of the refusers. <a 534 d. id. oct. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. iiii et paulino vc. conss.>
Illo etiam observando, ut successio non ad stirpes, sed in capita dividatur: ceteris omnibus successionibus secundum ius usque ad praesens tempus observatum procedentibus et nullo ex cognatis supra memoratos gradus ad iuris agnaticii formam redigendo, sed suum ordinem suamque proximitatem tenente incorruptam. <a 534 d. id. oct. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. iiii et paulino vc. conss.>
Also with this being observed, that succession be divided not per stirpes but per capita: with all the other successions proceeding according to the law observed up to the present time, and with none of the cognates, beyond the degrees above-mentioned, being reduced to the form of agnatic law, but with each holding his own order and his own proximity unimpaired. <a 534 on the ides of oct., at constantinople, our lord justinian augustus, perpetual, in his 4, and paulinus, a most distinguished man, consuls.>
Quas autem personas ex iure cognationis in legitimas successiones transveximus, eas et tutelae gravamini vicissim supponimus, scilicet si et masculi sint et perfectae aetatis secundum nostrae constitutionis tenorem, ut non solum lucrum sentiant, sed etiam gravamini subiugentur. <a 534 d. id. oct. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. iiii et paulino vc. conss.>
But the persons whom we have conveyed from the law of cognation into legitimate successions, we in turn also subject to the burden of tutelage—namely, if they are males and of full age according to the tenor of our constitution—so that they may not only sense the profit, but also be yoked to the burden. <a 534 d. id. oct. constantinopoli dn. iustiniano a. pp. iiii et paulino vc. conss.>
Si pater tuus propiori sobrino tuo agnato constituto et intestato defuncto iure civili adita hereditate, vel hoc ab initio non interveniente sive capitis deminutione perempto sollemniter bonorum possessione admissa successit ac tibi patris tui quaesita hereditas est, adire praesidem provinciae debes ac tutorem eius de tutela convenire. * diocl. et maxim.
If your father, with your nearer cousin—your agnate—having been established, and the intestate having died, entered upon the inheritance by civil law, or, this not intervening from the beginning or having been taken away by capitis deminution, having been solemnly admitted to bonorum possessio, succeeded; and your father’s inheritance has been acquired for you, you ought to approach the governor of the province and bring an action against his tutor concerning the tutela. * Diocletian and Maximian.
Sed quoniam hos etiam intestatos diem functos adseveras, si quidem hi, quos privignos eiusdem amitae dicis, eorum consanguinei fuerint fratres, tam agnationis quam cognationis iure secundo gradu constitutos tibi praeferri non ambigitur. nam si amitini tui alio etiam patre nati numquam eorum matri privigni sunt, admisisse te bonorum possessionem probans eorum vindica successionem. <a 294 s. xii k. mart.
But since you assert that these men too departed this life intestate, if indeed those whom you call the stepchildren of that same paternal aunt were their consanguine brothers, it is not doubted that, both by the law of agnation and of cognation, being placed in the second degree, they are to be preferred to you. For if your amitini (cousins through a paternal aunt), even though born from another father, are never stepchildren to their mother, then, proving that you have been admitted to the possession of the goods, claim their succession. <a 294 s. 12 k. mart.
Antequam scriptus cuiuscumque portionis capax repudiet hereditatem vel alia ratione quaerendae facultatem amittat, ei qui testamentum reliquit intestato nemo succedit. igitur perspicis, quod testamentariae successionis spe durante intestati bona defuncti non recte vindicentur. * diocl.
Before the instituted heir, capable of any portion, repudiates the inheritance or otherwise loses the capacity of seeking it, no one succeeds by intestacy to him who has left a testament. Therefore you perceive that, while the hope of testamentary succession endures, the goods of the deceased by way of intestacy are not rightly claimed. * diocl.
Sancimus, quemadmodum de his rebus, quae liberis in sacris constitutis ex occasione maritali adquisitae sunt, certus ordo destinatus est, ut, si quis ex his ab hac luce fuerit subtractus, pars eius, quam lucratus est, ad eius liberos vel nepotes vel pronepotes concedat, quibus non extantibus ad fratres suos ex eodem matrimonio progenitos vel, si etiam non supersint, ad fratres ex aliis nuptiis procreatos, cumque nemo eorum fuerit relictus, tunc ad patrem perveniat: ita et de his, quae materna linea per quascumque occasiones vel inter vivos vel per ultimas dispositiones vel ab intestato descendunt, similis ordo servetur, primo in filii vel filiae successione posteritate eius vocanda eaque non inventa frater no consortio eiusdem vel alieni matrimonii secundum praedictum ordinem arcessito , tunc ad ultimum locum pater a legibus conclametur et sui filii non gratam hereditatem relictam, sed triste lucrum sibi lugeat adquisitum. * iust. a. demostheni pp. * <a 529 d. xv k. oct.
We enact that, just as concerning those things which have been acquired for children established in holy orders on a marital occasion a fixed order has been designated, namely that, if any one of these shall have been removed from this light, the share which he has gained shall pass to his children or grandchildren or great‑grandchildren; if these are not extant, to his brothers begotten from the same marriage; or, if they also do not survive, to brothers procreated from other marriages; and when none of them has been left, then let it come to the father: so also, concerning those things which descend through the maternal line on whatever occasions, whether between the living or by last dispositions or ab intestato, a similar order shall be observed—first, in the succession of a son or daughter, the issue thereof being called; and that not being found, a brother from the fellowship of the same or of a different marriage being summoned according to the aforesaid order; then, in the last place, let the father be proclaimed by the laws, and let him mourn that not a welcome inheritance of his son has been left, but a sad profit has been acquired to himself. * Justinian Augustus to Demosthenes, Praetorian Prefect. * <year 529 d. 15 Kalends of October.
In omnibus videlicet casibus, in superstite subole liberorum et fratribus adhuc viventibus, qui ad hereditatem defuncti patrem antecedunt, usu fructu rerum, quarum dominium ad eos pervenit, apud parentes remansuro. <a 529 d. xv k. oct. chalcedone decio vc. cons.>
In all cases, namely, where the offspring of children survives and brothers are still living—who precede the father to the inheritance of the deceased—the usufruct of the things, whose dominion has come to them, shall remain with the parents. <in the year 529, on the 15th day before the Kalends of October, at Chalcedon, under the consulate of Decius, a most distinguished man.>
Parentes autem, penes quos maternarum rerum utendi fruendique tantum potestas est, omnem debent tuendae rei diligentiam adhibere et quod iure filiis debetur in examine per se vel per procuratorem poscere et sumptus ex fructibus impigre facere et litem inferentibus resistere atque ita omnia agere, tamquam solidum perfectumque dominium et personam gerant legitimam, ita ut, si quando rem alienare voluerint, emptor vel is cui res donatur observet, ne quam partem earum rerum, quas alienari prohibitum est, sciens accipiat vel ignorans. <a 319 d. xv k. aug. aquileia.
Parents, in whose hands there is only the authority of using and enjoying the maternal property, ought to apply every diligence to the safeguarding of the property, and to demand at an examination, either by themselves or through a procurator, what is by right owed to the children, and to make expenditures industriously from the fruits, and to resist those bringing suit, and so to do all things as though they bore solid and perfect dominion and acted in a legitimate capacity, such that, if ever they should wish to alienate a thing, the purchaser or the one to whom the thing is donated must take heed not to receive any part of those things which it is forbidden to alienate, whether knowingly or unknowingly. <a 319 on the 15th day before the Kalends of August, Aquileia.
Docere enim pater debet proprii iuris eam rem esse, quam donat aut distrahit: et emptori, si velit, fideiussorem licebit accipere, quia nullam poterit praescriptionem opponere filiis quandoque rem suam vindicantibus. <a 319 d. xv k. aug. aquileia.
For the father ought to demonstrate that the thing which he gives or alienates is of his own right; and it will be permitted for the buyer, if he wishes, to take a surety (fideiussor), because he will be able to oppose no prescription to the sons when at some time they vindicate their property. <in 319, on the 15th day before the Kalends of August, Aquileia.
Quidquid avus avia, proavus proavia ex materna linea venientes nepoti nepti pronepoti pronepti testamento fideicommisso legato donatione vel alio quolibet titulo largitionis vel etiam intestati successione contulerint, pater filio filiaeve integra illibataque custodiat, ut vendere donare relinquere alteri obligare, sicut nec materna bona, non possit usu fructu dumtaxat ad eum pertinente, ita ut , quemadmodum ipse super his licentiam totius potestatis amittit, defuncto eo filio filiaeve praecipua computentur nec ab illis, qui ex patre sunt coheredes, vindicentur. * arcad. et honor.
Whatever a grandfather grandmother, great-grandfather great-grandmother coming from the maternal line shall have conferred upon a grandson granddaughter great-grandson great-granddaughter by testament, fideicommissum, legacy, donation, or any other title of largess, or even by intestate succession, the father shall keep intact and unblemished for the son or daughter, so that he may not be able to sell, donate, bequeath to another, or encumber it, just as he cannot the maternal goods, the usufruct only pertaining to him; so that , just as he himself loses the license of full power over these, upon his death they are reckoned as praecipua and are not claimed by those who are coheirs from the father's side. * Arcadius and Honorius.
Si vero mulier moriens alios ex filiis emancipatos a patre, alios in patria potestate dimiserit, in casu dispari utitur maritus defunctae beneficio, quod casui utrique praescripsimus, id est circa eorum quidem portionem, quos adhuc in sacris retinet, usum fructum ex legum auctoritate retinebit et praemium delatae, cum volet, emancipationis accipiet, in eorum vero parte, quos exisse de potestate viva matre constiterit, usum fructum virilis inter eos portinnis secundum praescripta percipiet. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
If, however, a woman at her death has left some of her sons emancipated by the father and others in paternal power, in this unequal case the husband of the deceased enjoys the benefit which we have prescribed for each case; that is, as to the portion of those whom he still retains in the household sacra, he shall retain the usufruct by authority of the laws and shall, when he wishes, take the premium of emancipation; but as to the share of those who are established to have gone out of power while their mother was alive, he shall receive the usufruct in a virile portion among them according to the prescriptions. <a in the year 426, on the 8th day before the Ides of November, at Ravenna, Theodosius 12 and Valentinian 2, Augusti, consuls.>
In nepotibus etiam vel neptibus hoc observandum esse censemus, ut maritus, qui uxore mortua, non extantibus filiis, cum solis nepotibus vel neptibus ex hac lege ad emolumentum vocandus est, si unus vel una pluresve nepotes ex filio uno vel pluribus, qui in potestate defecerunt, procreati sunt, hoc iure utatur, quod de filiis constitutum est. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
We judge that this too must be observed in the case of grandsons or granddaughters: that the husband, his wife having died, there being no sons existing, when by this law he is to be called to the emolument with only grandsons or granddaughters, if one or more grandchildren have been procreated from one son or from several who have passed out of paternal power (potestas), he shall use that right which has been constituted concerning sons. <a 426 Nov. 6, at Ravenna, Theodosius 12 and Valentinian 2, Augusti, consuls.>
Habeat igitur avus veniens cum nepotibus in potestate durantibus usum fructum bonorum omnium, quae ex defunctae aviae successione delata sunt. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
Therefore let the grandfather, coming with the grandchildren into potestas while they remain under power, have the usufruct of all the goods which have been devolved from the succession of the deceased grandmother. <a 426, on the 8th day before the Ides of November, at Ravenna, Theodosius 12 and Valentinian 2, the Augusti, consuls.>
Cum vero his quoque libertatem emancipatione largitur, similiter et ab ipsis, sicut de filiis constitutum est, praemium manumissionis accipiat, vel si ex pluribus alteros manumittit alteros retinet, ex parte manumissorum legitimum praemium, ex parte vero in potestate manentium retineat usum fructum. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
When, moreover, he also bestows liberty upon these by emancipation, let him likewise receive from them, as has been established concerning sons, the premium of manumission; or, if out of several he manumits some and retains others, from the share of those manumitted let him receive the lawful premium, but from the share of those remaining in his power let him retain the usufruct. <a 426 on the eighth day before the Ides of November at Ravenna, Theodosius 12 and Valentinian 2, Augusti, consuls.>
Quod si nepotes sint neptesve aut ex emancipato filio aut ex filia procreati aut ab ipso avia vivente sacris dimissis idem avus virilis cum ipsis portionis habeat usum fructum. si vero ex nepotibus neptibusve tempore, quo in aviae successionem vocantur, alii in avi sunt potestate, id est mariti defunctae, alii sui iuris sint, circa personam quidem eorum, qui in potestate consistunt, et in usu fructu consequendo et in emancipationis praemio conquirendo ratio supra dicta servetur: in his vero, qui sui iuris sunt, facultas capiendi usus fructus virilis inter eos portionis habeatur. <a 426 d. viii id. nov.
But if there are grandsons or granddaughters either begotten from an emancipated son or from a daughter, or who, by the grandfather himself, while the grandmother is living, have been released from the sacra, the same male grandfather shall have with them the usufruct of a virile share. But if, from among the grandsons or granddaughters at the time when they are called to the grandmother’s succession, some are in the power of the grandfather—that is, of the deceased woman’s husband—and others are sui iuris, then, with respect to the persons of those who are under power, both in obtaining the usufruct and in acquiring the emancipation premium, the rule stated above shall be observed; but as to those who are sui iuris, the capacity of taking the usufruct of a virile share shall be held among them. <a 426 d. viii id. nov.
Eadem autem et de pronepotibus sexus utriusque sancimus, manente definitione, quae de singulis sancita est, si filii sint pariter ac nepotes. <a 426 d. viii id. nov. ravennae theodosio xii et valentiniano ii aa. conss.>
Moreover, we sanction the same concerning great-grandchildren of either sex, with the definition remaining in force which has been established concerning individuals, if there are sons as well as grandsons. <a 426, on the 8th day before the Ides of November, at Ravenna, Theodosius 12 and Valentinian 2, Augusti, consuls.>
Omnem ambiguitatis confusionem amputantes hac liquida et compendiosa lege sancimus circa usum fructum maternarum rerum nullam esse differentiam, sive in priore matrimonio pater, ex quo filios habuit, permanere voluerit sive novercam filiis superduxerit: legibus, quae de maternis bonis latae sunt, suam habentibus firmitatem. * leo a. callicrati pp. per illyricum. * <a 468 d. k. sept.
cutting off every confusion of ambiguity, by this clear and compendious law we sanction that, concerning the usufruct of maternal property, there is no difference, whether the father has wished to remain in the prior marriage, from which he had children, or has brought a stepmother over the sons: the laws which have been enacted concerning maternal goods retaining their own force. * Leo Augustus to Callicratus, Praetorian Prefect for Illyricum. * <a in the year 468, on the Kalends of September.
Patres igitur usum fructum maternarum rerum, etiamsi ad secundas migraverint nuptias, sine dubio habere debebunt: nec ullam filiis vel quibuslibet ex persona eorum contra patres improbam vocem accusationemque posse competere. <a 468 d. k. sept. anthemio a. ii cons.>
Therefore fathers shall without doubt have the usufruct of the mother’s goods, even if they have migrated to second marriages; nor can any wrongful claim or accusation, on the part of the sons or of anyone acting in their person, be brought against the fathers. <a year 468, day before the Kalends of Sept., under Anthemius, Augustus, in his 2nd consulship.>
Cum venerandae leges vetuerint patribus iure potestatis adquiri, quidquid eorum filiis avus avia proavus proavia a linea materna venientes quocumque titulo contulissent, hoc quoque convenit observari, ut, quidquid vel uxor marito non emancipato vel maritus uxori in potestate positae quocumque titulo vel iure contulerit seu transmiserit, hoc patri nullatenus adquiratur: atque ideo in eius tantum , cui delatum est, iure durabit. * theodos. et valentin.
Since the venerable laws have forbidden that fathers, by right of potestas, acquire whatever the maternal grandfather, grandmother, great‑grandfather, or great‑grandmother, coming from the maternal line, may have bestowed upon their sons under whatever title, it is also agreed to be observed that whatever either a wife has conferred or transmitted to a husband not emancipated, or a husband to a wife placed in potestas, under whatever title or law, this shall by no means be acquired by the father: and therefore it will endure in the right of that person only , to whom it has been conveyed. * theodosius and valentinian.
Constitutionis novae capitulum clariore interpretatione sancimus, ut, quae per filios nepotes pronepotes itemque filias neptes proneptes, quamvis in potestate sint, minime adquiri decrevimus a marito vel uxore quocumque titulo collata sive ultima voluntate transmissa, nullus ad id quoque pertinere existimet, quod ab ipso parente datum vel ante nuptias donationis causa pro una ex memoratis personis praestitum fuerat, ut minime ad eum, si casus tulerit, revertatur ( prospiciendum est enim, ne hac iniecta formidine parentum circa liberos munificentia retardetur) : sed ut his potestatis iure ad parentes reversis cetera, quae ex substantia speciali coniugis ad superstitem devenerunt, quamvis idem in sacris sit , fructu tamen solo atque usu parentibus deputato, dominium ei qui a coniuge vel quae meruit reservetur, parente pro emancipationis etiam beneficio, si voluerit , sicut in maternis rebus vel quae per eanden lineam veniunt, praemium habituro. * theodos. et valentin.
We sanction by a clearer interpretation the chapter of the New Constitution, that the things which through sons, grandsons, great‑grandsons, and likewise daughters, granddaughters, great‑granddaughters, although they are in power, we have decreed are by no means to be acquired by a husband or a wife, whether conferred under whatever title or transmitted by last will; let no one think that this also pertains to what had been given by the parent himself or, before the nuptials, furnished by way of a donation for one of the aforesaid persons, so that it may in no way revert to him, if the case should arise (for provision must be made lest, with this fear injected, the munificence of parents toward their children be retarded): but that, when these have returned to the parents by right of power, the rest, which from the special substance of the spouse have devolved upon the survivor, although the same person be in holy orders, with the usufruct alone and the use assigned to the parents, ownership shall be reserved to him who or to her who merited it from the spouse; the parent will have, also for the benefit of emancipation, if he wishes, a reward, just as in maternal goods or those which come through the same line. * theodos. et valentin.
Quod scitis prioribus continetur nec a filia quae in potestate est donationem ante nuptias patri nec a filio dotem adquiri, eo addito confirmamus, ut, defunctis his adhuc in potestate patris, si liberis extantibus moriantur, ad liberos eorum eaedem res iure hereditatis, non ad patres iure peculii transmittantur nec per nepotes avo videlicet adquirendae. * theodos. et valentin.
What you know is contained in earlier enactments, that neither is an ante-nuptial donation acquired by the father from a daughter who is in his power, nor a dowry from a son; we confirm this with the addition that, if they die while still under the father’s power and with children surviving, the same things are to be transmitted to their children by the law of inheritance, not to the fathers by the law of peculium, nor are they to be acquired, through the grandchildren, for the grandfather. * theodosius and valentinian.
Sin autem idem nepos superstitibus tam patre quam avo paterno diem suum sine liberis obierit, eorum dominium, quae ad ipsum ex matre vel ab eius linea pervenerunt, non ad avum, sed ad patrem eius perveniat: usu fructu videlicet et in huiusmodi casibus avo, dum supererit, servando. <a 439 d. vii id. sept. constantinopoli theodosio a. xvii et festo conss.
But if, however, that same grandson, with both his father and his paternal grandfather surviving, has met his day without children, the dominion of those things which have come to him from his mother or from her line shall pass not to the grandfather, but to his father: the usufruct, namely, in cases of this kind being preserved to the grandfather, while he survives. <a 439, on the 7th day before the Ides of September, at Constantinople, Theodosius, Augustus, for the 17th time, and Festus, consuls.
Quaecumque res ad filium vel filiam, nepotes sive pronepotes utriusque sexus in potestate constitutos ex priore vel secundo aut tertio seu coniugio numerosiore pervenerint ex dote vel quacumque donatione seu hereditate legato vel fideicommisso, earum usque in diem vitae suae pater vel avus vel proavus usum fructum habeant: easdem res quocumque modo alienandi vel pignoris seu hypothecae iure obligandi facultate eis penitus interdicta, dominio videlicet earum ad filios et nepotes sive pronepotes utriusque sexus permanente, etiamsi ex eodem matrimonio procreati non sint, ex quo eaedem res ad parentes eorum, qui quaeve in potestate sunt, fuerint devolutae. * leo et anthem. aa. erythrio pp. * <a 472 d. v k. mart.
Whatever things shall have come, from a dowry or any donation or inheritance, legacy or fideicommissum, to a son or daughter, grandchildren or great‑grandchildren of either sex established under power, from a prior or second or third or even more numerous marriage, the father or grandfather or great‑grandfather shall have the usufruct of them up to the day of his life: with the faculty of alienating those same things in any way, or of binding them by right of pledge or hypothec, being wholly interdicted to them, the ownership of them, namely, remaining with the sons and grandsons or great‑grandsons of either sex, even if they were not begotten from the same marriage from which those same things were devolved to their parents, whose power they are under. * Leo and Anthemius, the Augusti, to Erythrius, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 472 on the 5th day before the Kalends of March.
Eo videlicet observando, ut morientium fratrum sororumve portiones, qui quaeve ex eodem matrimonio progeniti vel progenitae sunt, primo quidem ad liberos eorum , ut dictum est, si tamen fuerint, deinde his non extantibus ad superstites tantummodo fratres vel sorores eorum perveniant aut ad superstitem, si ex isdem fratribus sive sororibus unus unave remanserit. <a 472 d. v k. mart. marciano cons.>
This, namely, to be observed: that the portions of brothers or sisters dying, who have been begotten from the same matrimony, shall first indeed pass to their children, as has been said, if, however, there are any; then, these not existing, they shall come to their surviving brothers or sisters only, or to the survivor, if from those same brothers or sisters only one has remained. <in the year 472, on the 5th day before the Kalends of March, in the consulship of Marcianus.>
Omnibus autem, qui ex eodem coniugio fuerint procreati, defunctis tunc demum ad eos, qui ex alio matrimonio sunt editi, easdem res pro virili parte venire statuimus: nullo autem ex memoratis personis existente parentes eorum eas percipere. <a 472 d. v k. mart. marciano cons.>
However, with all who have been procreated from the same conjugal union deceased, then at last we decree that the same things shall come, in a virile portion, to those who have been issued from another matrimony; but if none of the aforesaid persons exists, their parents shall receive them. <a 472 d. v k. mart. marciano cons.>
Parentibus vero, quorum sub potestate sunt, usum fructum dumtaxat habituris memoratas res iure potestatis alienandi vel obligandi licentiam denegamus, non prohibendis isdem liberis, quandoque sui iuris fuerint, nulla temporali praescriptione obsistente easdem res omnibus modis vindicare, nisi forte, postquam potestate parentium eos contigerit liberari, tantum temporis effluxerit, ut ex continua et inconcussa tenentis possessione eorum excludatur intentio. <a 472 d. v k. mart. marciano cons.>
To the parents, under whose power they are, who will have only the usufruct, we deny the license, by right of power, to alienate or to obligate the aforesaid things, not preventing the same children, whenever they shall be sui iuris, with no temporal prescription standing in the way, from vindicating the same things by all means, unless perhaps, after it has befallen that they are freed from the parents’ power, so much time has elapsed that, from the continuous and unshaken possession of the holder, their claim is excluded. <a 472 d. v k. mart. marciano cons.>
Non sine ratione de negotio, quod inter matrem familias, cuius vestra suggestio meminit, et germanum eius vertitur, magnitudo tua diversis legibus ex utraque parte prolatis nostram credidit consulendam esse clementiam, cum mulier diversis iuris lectionibus idem intellegi maritum et sponsum niteretur probare, germanus mariti nomen illi soli, qui nuptias contraxerit, recitatione constitutionis divorum retro principum theodosii et valentiniani, qua cavetur, quidquid maritus vel uxor in potestate constituti invicem sibi reliquerint, non patri adquiri, sed ad eorum ius pertinere, imponere. * leo et anthem. aa. nepoti mag.
Not without reason, concerning the business which is in dispute between the mother of a family, whom your suggestion mentions, and her full brother, your Magnitude, with different laws produced on either side, judged that our clemency ought to be consulted, since the woman, by various readings of the law, was striving to prove that the same thing is understood by “husband” and “betrothed,” while the brother, by the recitation of the constitution of the deified former princes Theodosius and Valentinian, in which it is provided that whatever a husband or wife, being under power, have left to one another is not acquired to the father but pertains to their right, sought to impose the name “husband” upon him alone who has contracted nuptials. * leo and anthemius, emperors, to nepos, master.
Quamvis ergo significatione nominis maritus vel uxor post coeptum matrimonium intellegatur, ex quo videlicet inducta est dubietas, attamen, quia consequens est ambiguas atque legum diversis interpretationibus titubantes causas benigne atque naturalis iuris moderamine temperare, non piget nos in praesenti quoque negotio, de quo sublimitas tua suggessit, aequitati convenientem iuliani tantae existimationis viri atque disertissimi iuris periti opinionem sequi. qui cum de dotali praedio tractatu proposito idem ius tam de uxore quam de sponsa observare arbitratus sit, licet lex iulia de uxore tantum loquatur: qua ratione tam spons aliciam donationem quam hereditatem, quam memoratus sponsus suam sponsam lucrari voluit, non adquiri patri, sed ad eam pervenire benignum esse perspeximus. <a 473 d.K.Iun.Leone a.V.Cons.>
Although therefore by the signification of the name “husband” or “wife” one is understood only after the marriage has been undertaken, whence indeed doubt has been introduced, nevertheless, because it is consequent to temper with a benign and natural-law moderamen those causes that are ambiguous and falter under diverse interpretations of the laws, we are not loath even in the present business, which Your Sublimity has suggested, to follow the opinion consonant with equity of Julian, a man of such great estimation and a most eloquent expert in law. Who, when a tractatus had been proposed concerning a dotal estate, judged that the same ius ought to be observed concerning a fiancée as concerning a wife, although the Julian Law speaks only about a wife: by which reasoning we have perceived it to be benign that both any donation to the betrothed and the inheritance which the aforesaid fiancé wished his betrothed to gain should not be acquired by her father, but should come through to her. <a 473 d.K.Iun.Leone a.5.Cons.>
Cum oportet similem providentiam tam patribus quam liberis deferri, invenimus autem in veteris iuris observatione multas esse res, quae extrinsecus ad filios familias veniunt et minime patribus adquiruntur, quemadmodum in maternis bonis vel quae ex maritali lucro ad eos perveniunt, ita et in his, quae ex aliis causis filiis familias adquiruntur, certam introducimus definitionem. * iust. a. demostheni pp. * <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani.
Since a like providence ought to be extended both to fathers and to children, and we find in the observation of the ancient law that there are many things which come from outside to sons of the household and are by no means acquired to the fathers—just as in maternal goods or in those which come to them from marital profit—so also in those things which are acquired to sons of the household from other causes, we introduce a fixed definition. * Justinian Augustus to Demosthenes, praetorian prefect. *
Si quis itaque filius familias vel patris sui vel avi vel proavi in potestate constitutus aliquid sibi adquisierit non ex eius substantia, cuius in potestate sit, sed ab aliis quibuscumque causis, quae ex liberalitate fortunae vel laboribus suis ad eum perveniant, ea suis parentibus non in plenum, sicut antea erat sancitum, sed usque ad solum usum fructum adquirat, et eorum usus fructus quidem apud patrem vel avum vel proavum, quorum in sacris sit constitutus, permaneat, dominium autem filiis familias inhaereat ad exemplum tam maternarum quam ex nuptialibus causis filiis familias adquisitarum rerum. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
If therefore a son of the household, established in the power of his father or grandfather or great-grandfather, should acquire something for himself not from the substance of him in whose power he is, but from whatever other causes, which come to him by the liberality of fortune or by his own labors, let him acquire these for his parents not in full, as was formerly sanctioned, but only up to the bare usufruct; and let their usufruct indeed remain with the father or grandfather or great-grandfather, under whose power he is established, but let the ownership adhere to the sons of the household, after the example of things acquired by sons of the household both from maternal causes and from nuptial causes. <a 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian. d.3 k. nov.
Sic etenim et parenti nihil derogabitur usum fructum rerum possidenti et filii non lugebunt, quae ex suis laboribus sibi possessa sunt, ad alios transferenda adspicientes vel extraneos vel ad fratres suos, quod etiam gravius multis esse videtur. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
Thus indeed nothing will be taken from the parent possessing the usufruct of the things, and the sons will not have to lament, seeing what has been possessed by themselves through their own labors being transferred to others, either to outsiders or to their brothers, which even seems more grievous to many. <a 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian. on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November.
Exceptis castrensibus peculiis, quorum nec usum fructum patrem vel avum vel proavum habere veteres leges concedunt: in his enim nihil novamus, sed vetera iura intacta servamus. eodem observando etiam in his peculiis, quae quasi castrensia peculia ad instar castrensis peculii accesserunt. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani.
Except for the military peculia, of which the old laws do not grant the father or grandfather or great-grandfather to have the usufruct: for in these we innovate nothing, but preserve the ancient rights untouched. The same is to be observed also in those peculia which, as quasi-military peculia, have accrued in the likeness of a military peculium. <a 529 read out at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian.
Sub hac tamen definitione hunc legis articulum inducimus, ut in successione quidem earum rerum, quae extrinsecus filiis familias adquiruntur, iura eadem observentur, quae in maternis et nuptialibus rebus statuta sunt. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
Under this definition, however, we introduce this article of law: that, in the succession of those things which are acquired from outside for sons under paternal power, the same rights be observed as have been established in maternal and nuptial matters. <a 529 recited at the 7th milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian. on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November.
Non autem hypothecam filii familias adversus res patris viventis adhuc seu iam mortui sperare audeant nec ratiocinia eis super administratione inferre, sed tantummodo alienatione vel hypotheca suo nomine patribus denegata rerum, habeat parens plenissimam potestatem uti fruique his rebus, quae per filios familias secundum praedictum modum adquiruntur. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
Nor let them dare to hope for a hypothec of a filiusfamilias against the property of a father, whether still living or already dead, nor to impose reckonings upon them concerning the administration; but only, alienation or hypothec in their own name of the things being denied to fathers, let the parent have the fullest power to use and enjoy those things which are acquired through sons in power according to the aforesaid manner. <a in the year 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistorium of the palace of our lord Justinian. given on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November.
Et gubernatio earum sit penitus impunita et nullo modo audeat filius familias vel filia vel deinceps personae vetare eum, cuius in potestate sunt, easdem res tenere aut quomodo voluerit gubernare, vel si hoc fecerint, patria potestas in eos exercenda est: sed habeat pater vel aliae personae, quae superius enumeratae sunt, plenissimam potestatem uti frui gubernareque res praedicto modo adquisitas. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
And the governance of them shall be entirely without penalty, and in no way let a son-in-power or a daughter or any persons thereafter dare to forbid him, in whose power they are, to hold those same things or to govern them however he will; and if they do this, patria potestas is to be exercised against them: but let the father, or the other persons who are enumerated above, have the fullest power to use, enjoy, and govern the things acquired in the aforesaid manner. <a 529 read out at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian. day 3 before the Kalends of November.
Et si quid ex usu earum pater avus vel proavus collegerit, habeat licentiam quemadmodum cupit hoc disponere et in alios heredes transmittere, vel si ex earum rerum fructibus res mobiles vel immobiles vel se moventes comparaverit, eas etiam quomodo voluerit habeat et transmittat et in alios transferat sive extraneos sive liberos suos seu quamlibet personam. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
And if the father, grandfather, or great‑grandfather shall have collected anything from their use, let him have license to dispose of this as he desires and to transmit it to other heirs; or if from the fruits of those things he shall have purchased things movable or immovable or self‑moving, let him likewise have them as he wishes and transmit and transfer them to others, whether strangers or his own children, or any person whatsoever. <a 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian. d. 3 Kal. Nov.
Sin autem res sibi memorato modo adquisitas parens noluerit tenere, sed apud filium vel filiam vel deinceps personas reliquerit, nullam post obitum eius licentiam habeant heredes alii patris avi vel proavi eundem usum vel quod ex hoc ad filios familias pervenit utpote patri debitum sibi vindicare, sed quasi diurna donatione in filium celebranda, qui usum fructum detinuit, quem patrem habere oportuerat, ita causa intellegatur et eundem usum fructum post obitum patris ipse lucretur, parente ius exactionis quasi sibi debitae a filio, qui usum fructum consensu eius possidebat, suae posteritati vel successioni minime transmittente, quatenus in omni pace inter se successio eius permaneat nec altercationis cuiu sdam maxime inter fratres oriatur occasio. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
But if the parent should not wish to hold the things acquired for himself in the aforesaid manner, but should leave them with the son or daughter or thereafter with other persons, then after his death let no other heirs of the father, grandfather, or great-grandfather have any license to claim for themselves the same usufruct, or that which from this has come to children under paternal power, as though owed to the father; rather, let the case be understood as if by a diurnal donation to the son to be effected—the one who detained the usufruct which the father ought to have had—and let he himself, after the father’s death, profit by the same usufruct, the parent by no means transmitting to his posterity or succession the right of exaction as if of a debt to himself from the son who possessed the usufruct with his consent, to the extent that his succession may in all peace remain among themselves and that no occasion of any altercation, especially among brothers, may arise. <a 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian. d. 3 Kalends of November.
Cum autem constantiniana lege cautum erat, si filii familias ab his, qui eos in potestate habent, nexu paterno per emancipationem liberentur, debere patrem tertiam partem bonorum, quae adquiri non solent, quasi remunerationis gratia a filio accipere vel retinere, et ex hac causa iterum pars non minima substantiae liberorum adimebatur, sancimus huiusmodi casu interveniente et emancipatione liberis imposita non tertiam partem dominii rerum minime adquisitarum, sed dimidiam usus fructus apud maiores qui emancipationem donant residere: exceptis et in hoc casu castrensibus et quasi castrensibus tantummodo peculiis, quibus nihil nec ex hac causa diminuitur. sic enim nec liberis cuiuscumque sexus aliquid dominii auferetur et patribus amplioris patrimonii usus fructus adsignabitur. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani.
But whereas by the Constantinian law it had been provided that, if sons-in-power were freed from the paternal bond by emancipation by those who have them in potestas, the father ought, as a kind of remuneration, to receive or retain from the son a third part of the goods which are not wont to be acquired, and from this cause again no small part of the children’s substance was taken away, we ordain that, when such a case intervenes and emancipation is imposed upon the children, not a third part of the dominium of things not at all acquired, but a half of the usus fructus shall remain with the elders who grant emancipation: with the castrense and quasi‑castrense peculia excepted even in this case, of which nothing is diminished even on this account. Thus nothing of dominium will be taken from children of whatever sex, and to fathers a usus fructus of a larger patrimony will be assigned. <a 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistorium of the palace of our lord Justinian.
Hoc obtinente et si in emancipatione sibi parentes hoc minime servaverint: sed nisi specialiter vel in emancipatione huic praemio renuntiaverint vel donatione facta sese et ab huiusmodi beneficio alienaverint et in liberos hoc transtulerint, manere ad eos etiam tacentes ius et beneficium usus fructus retinendi, ut post obitum eorum et usus fructus in omnibus memoratis causis ad eos perveniat, quorum dominium est, scilicet secundum, quod iam diximus, in successionibus eorum omnibus servandis, quae de maternis et nuptialibus bonis consultissimis legibus definita sunt. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
This remaining in force, even if at emancipation the parents have by no means reserved this for themselves; yet unless they have specifically either in the emancipation renounced this perquisite, or, a donation having been made, have alienated themselves from a benefit of this kind and transferred it to the children, the right and benefit of retaining the usufruct remains with them even if they are silent, so that after their death the usufruct also, in all the aforesaid cases, may come to those in whom the ownership resides, namely, as we have already said, with all their rules of succession being observed, which have been defined by the most well‑advised laws concerning maternal and nuptial goods. <a 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian. on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November.
Sed cum tacitas hypothecas tam veteres leges in quibusdam certis casibus introduxerunt quam nos in maternis ceterisque, quas servare necesse est, et dubitabatur, ex quo hypothecas competere oportet, utrumne ab initio an ex eo tempore, ex quo male aliquid gestum est, compendiosa narratione interpretamur initium gerendae vel deserendae administrationis vel observationis esse spectandum et non tempus, ex quo male aliquid fuerit gestum. <a 529 recitata septimo miliario in novo consistorio palatii dn.Iustiniani. d.Iii k. nov.
But since both the ancient laws introduced silent hypothecs in certain specific cases, and we in maternal and other [cases], which it is necessary to observe, and it was doubted from what point hypothecs ought to attach—whether from the beginning, or from that time from which something has been ill-conducted—we, by a compendious statement, interpret that the inception of the administration to be undertaken or to be abandoned, or of the oversight, is the point to be regarded, and not the time from which something has been ill-conducted. <a 529 recited at the seventh milestone in the new consistory of the palace of our lord Justinian. on the 3rd day before the Kalends of November.
Si quis igitur a serenissimo principe vel a piissima augusta sive masculus sive femina donationem sit consecutus vel consecuta sive mobilium sive immobilium seu se moventium rerum, in filiis familias tamen constitutus vel constituta, habeat huiusmodi res omni adquisitione absolutas et nemini eas adquirat neque earum usum fructum pater vel avus vel proavus sibi vindicet, sed ad similitudinem castrensis peculii omnem facultatem in eas filii vel filiae familias habeant. <a 530 d. proposit. xii k. april.
If, therefore, anyone should have obtained from the most serene prince or from the most pious Augusta, whether male or female, a donation either of movables or of immovables or of things that move of themselves, even though he or she is established as a son or daughter in the family (under paternal power), let him or her have such things freed from any acquisition, and let him or her acquire them for no one; nor may the father or grandfather or great‑grandfather claim their usufruct for himself, but, in the likeness of the castrense peculium, sons or daughters in the family shall have full authority over them. <a 530 d. proposit. 12 k. april.
Cum non solum in maternis rebus, quae filiis familias deferuntur, sed etiam de aliis omnibus, quae adquisitionem effugiunt, et maxime post novellam nostri numinis legem, quae omnia, quae extrinsecus ad filios familias perveniunt et non ex paterna substantia, non esse adquirenda patribus statuit nisi tantummodo ad usum fructum, variae altercationes exortae sunt et varios eventus variosque continent tractatus et semper in iudiciis versantur, necesse est utiliter et apertissime omnia dirimere. * iust. a. iohanni pp. * <a 531 d. iiii k. aug.
Since not only in maternal matters which are conferred upon sons in paternal power, but also concerning all other things which escape acquisition, and especially after the novel law of our divine majesty, which determined that all things which reach sons in paternal power from outside and not from the paternal substance are not to be acquired by fathers except only for the usufruct, various altercations have arisen and comprise various outcomes and various discussions and are always being aired in the courts; it is necessary usefully and most plainly to settle everything. * Justinian Augustus to John, Praetorian Prefect. * <in the year 531, on the 4th day before the Kalends of August.>
Sancimus itaque in omnibus rebus, quae fugiunt quidem dominii adquisitionem, sed usus fructus tantummodo patri offertur vel aliis parentibus a filio familias cuiuscumque gradus vel sexus, sive pater adire filium familias integrae aetatis compellit et ille reclamandum existimat, sive filius familias adire cupit et pater in contrarium inclinat, liberam habere licentiam et patrem ipsum sibi adire hereditatem recusante filio et omne sive damnum sive lucrum in suam habere fortunam, nullo ex hoc praeiudicio filio generando: sive e contrario patre recusante filius adire hereditatem voluerit, nullam adquisitionem nec usum fructum patri offerri, sed ipsum filium sibi imputare, si quid ex hoc contigerit: nulla actione neque contra patrem danda, ubi adversus eius voluntatem filius hereditatem vel legatum vel fideicommissum vel aliud quidquid ex quocumque titulo sive donat ionis sive contractus sibi adquirere maluerit, neque adversus filium simili modo actione extendenda, ubi recusante eo pater sua auctoritate haec sibi vindicet, huiusmodi aditionis tramite ex praesenti lege patri competente. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
We ordain therefore, in all matters which indeed flee the acquisition of dominium, but a usufruct only is offered to the father or to other parents by a filiusfamilias of whatever degree or sex, whether the father compels a filiusfamilias of full age to enter upon the inheritance and he thinks he should object, or the filiusfamilias wishes to enter and the father inclines the other way, that there be free license: and that the father himself, the son refusing, may enter upon the inheritance for himself and have every loss or gain in his own fortune, generating no prejudice from this to the son; or conversely, if with the father refusing the son should wish to enter upon the inheritance, no acquisition nor usufruct is to be offered to the father, but the son himself is to impute to himself whatever should result from this: no action is to be granted against the father where, against his will, the son has preferred to acquire for himself an inheritance or legacy or fideicommissum or anything else from whatever title, whether of donation or of contract; nor is an action to be extended against the son in like manner where, with him refusing, the father by his own authority vindicates these things for himself, by the pathway of such an adit competent to the father from the present law. <a 531 d. 4 k. aug. at Constantinople after the consulate of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sed habeat et pater omnem licentiam et actiones movere et ab aliis pulsari, ubi ad eum totum commodum pervenit, et filius simili modo in agendo et pulsando solus habeat et detrimentum et commodum, necessitate per officium patri imponenda tantummodo filio consentire vel agenti vel fugienti, ne iudicium sine patria voluntate videatur consistere. et haec quidem, si plenae aetatis filius est, qui paternam voluntatem sequi non patitur. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug.
But let the father also have full license both to bring actions and to be sued by others, where the whole benefit has come to him, and let the son in like manner, in acting and in being sued, alone have both the detriment and the benefit, with the necessity being imposed through official duty upon the father only to consent to the son, whether prosecuting or defending, lest the proceeding seem to stand without the father’s will. And this indeed, if the son is of full age, who does not allow himself to follow the paternal will. <a 531 d. 4 k. aug.
Sin autem in secunda aetate adhuc filius est et hereditate ei delata pater consentire adeunti hereditatem noluerit vel patre volente ipse reclamaverit, si quidem recusaverit filius, licentiam damus patri simili modo hereditatem adire et eam pleno iure habere, his omnibus quae superius diximus locum habentibus. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if, however, he is still a son in the second age and an inheritance has been tendered to him, and the father is unwilling to consent to his entering upon the inheritance, or, the father being willing, he himself has objected—if indeed the son has refused—we grant the father license in like manner to enter upon the inheritance and to hold it with full right, all the matters which we said above having place. <a 531 on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sin autem patre recusante filius adire maluerit, damus quidem licentiam ei hoc facere, patre autem nolente res filii gubernare propter causae necessitatem habeat facultatem filius adire competentem iudicem et ex eo petere curatorem hereditati dari, per quem gubernatio rerum in eum delatarum procedat: in utroque casu in integrum restitutionis auxilio minime ei denegando. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if, with the father refusing, the son should prefer to enter upon the inheritance, we indeed grant him license to do this; and since the father is unwilling to govern the son’s affairs, because of the necessity of the case let the son have the faculty to approach the competent judge and from him to request that a curator be given to the inheritance, through whom the governance of the things devolved upon him may proceed: in either case by no means denying to him the aid of in-integrum restitution. <a 531 on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Similique modo et in milite filio familias, qui recusaverit aditionem hereditatis, quae ei ex castrensibus occasionibus perveniat, patri danda licentia adire hereditatem, ut ad ipsum perveniat pleno iure tam per usum fructum quam per dominium eandem hereditatem possessurum, quasi ipse pater ab initio fuisset heres institutus: eo videlicet subiacente omnibus oneribus hereditariis et omnia commoda habituro et ad filium nullo periculo redundante, et haec quidem in his casibus observanda sunt, quibus discordia inter patrem et filium vertitur. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
In a similar way also in the case of a soldier who is a son under paternal power (filius familias), who has refused acceptance of an inheritance which comes to him from military (camp) occasions, license is to be given to the father to enter upon the inheritance, so that it may come to him with full right, to possess the same inheritance both by usufruct and by dominion, as if the father himself had been instituted heir from the beginning: he being, namely, subject to all hereditary burdens and to have all advantages, and with no peril rebounding upon the son; and these things indeed are to be observed in those cases in which discord arises between father and son. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
Ubi autem in unum voluntas eorum concurrit, et pater usum fructum et filius habeat proprietatem, et in agentibus et in fugientibus pater quidem suscipiat actiones et moveat, cuiuscumque aetatis filius inveniatur, adhibeatur autem etiam filiorum consensus, nisi adhuc in prima sunt aetate constituti vel longe absunt, sumptibus videlicet a patre propter rerum incrementa faciendis. cum enim nuda proprietas apud filium invenitur, ex qua substantia possibile est eum sumptus litis dependere? <a 531 d. iiii k. aug.
Where, however, their will converges into one, and the father holds the usufruct and the son has the proprietorship, then both in suing and in being sued the father shall undertake and bring the actions, whatever the son’s age may be found to be; yet let the sons’ consent also be employed, unless they are still set in their first age or are far away, the expenditures, namely, being made by the father on account of the increase of the assets. For when bare proprietorship is found with the son, out of what substance is it possible for him to disburse the costs of the suit? <a 531, 4 days before the Kalends of August.
Sin autem aes alienum ex defuncti persona descendit, cum etiam apud veteres haec esse substantia intellegitur, quae post detractum aes alienum supersederit, habeat pater licentiam ex rebus hereditariis primum quidem mobilibus, sin autem non sufficiunt, et immobilibus sufficientem partem filii nomine venumdare, ut ilico reddatur aes alienum et non usurarum onere praegravetur. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if the debt descends from the person of the deceased—since even among the ancients “substance” is understood to be that which remains after the debt has been subtracted—let the father have license, from the hereditary goods, first indeed the movables, but if these do not suffice, then also the immovables, to sell a sufficient part in the son’s name, so that the debt may be paid forthwith and not be overburdened by the weight of interest. <a 531, on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Quod si pater hoc facere supersederit, ipse usuras vel ex reditibus vel ex sua substantia omnimodo dare compelletur. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if the father has refrained from doing this, he himself shall be compelled in any case to pay the interest either from the revenues or from his own estate. <a 531 on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sin autem legata vel fideicommissa sive annalia sive semel relicta imminent huiusmodi personis, si quidem tales reditus sunt, qui sufficiunt ad annalia legata, pater ex huiusmodi reditibus haec dependere compelletur. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if legacies or fideicommissa, whether annual or left once-for-all, are incumbent upon persons of this kind, if indeed there are such revenues as suffice for the annual legacies, the father shall be compelled to disburse these from such revenues. <a in the year 531, on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Sin autem non habet substantia sufficientem reditum ad legatorum vel fideicommissorum praestationem vel minime reditus vel alias accessiones contineat, sint tamen res mobiles vel immobiles, steriles quidem, non tamen inutiles, veluti domus in provinciis pretiosae vel ubicumque posita suburbana, ex quibus huiusmodi legata possunt explicari, licentia dabitur patri sufficientem partem eorum similiter filii nomine vendere et satisfacere legatis. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if the substance does not have sufficient revenue for the prestation of legacies or fideicommissa, or contains minimal revenues or other accessions, yet there are movable or immovable things—sterile indeed, yet not useless—such as costly houses in the provinces, or suburban estates wherever situated, from which such legacies can be worked out, license shall be given to the father to sell, likewise in the son’s name, a sufficient part of them and to satisfy the legacies. <given in 531, on July 29, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most illustrious men.>
Hoc procul dubio observando, ut et mancipia ipse usufructuarius aleret et omnia circa usum fructum faceret, quae nullo modo proprietatem possint deteriorem facere, paterna reverentia eum excusante et a ratiociniis et a cautionibus et ab aliis omnibus, quae usufructuarii extranei a legibus exiguntur, secundum nostrae constitutionis tenorem, quam iam super huiusmodi casibus tulimus. ipsum autem filium vel filios vel filias et deinceps alere patri necesse est non propter hereditates, sed propter ipsam naturam et leges, quae et parentibus alendos esse liberos imperaverunt et ipsis liberis parentes, si inopia ex utraque parte vertitur. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug.
This is to be observed beyond doubt: that the usufructuary himself should maintain the slaves and do everything concerning the usufruct which can in no way make the ownership worse, paternal reverence excusing him—and excusing him from accountings and from sureties and from all other things which the laws exact from stranger usufructuaries—according to the tenor of our constitution, which we have already issued concerning cases of this kind. But it is necessary for the father to support his son or sons or daughters, and thereafter, not on account of inheritances, but on account of nature itself and the laws, which have commanded both that children are to be supported by parents and, likewise, that parents are to be supported by the children themselves, if want arises on either side. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug.
Sed pater quidem in praedictis tantummodo causis habeat licentiam recte res filiorum familias vendere filii nomine vel, si emptorem non invenerit, supponere, nullo modo licentia concedanda filiis easdem venditiones vel hypothecas retractare: non item licentia parentibus danda extra memoratas causas res, quarum dominium apud eorum posteritatem est, alienare vel pignori vel hypothecae titulo dare, sed si hoc fecerint, scituris, quod necesse est eos in legum laqueos incidere, quibus huiusmodi venditiones vel hypothecae sunt interdictae, exceptis videlicet rebus mobilibus vel immobilibus illis, quae onerosae hereditati sunt vel quocumque modo damnosae, quas sine periculo vendere patri cum paterna pietate licet, ut pretium earum vel in res et causas hereditarias procedat vel filio servetur. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But let the father have license only in the aforesaid causes to properly sell, in the son’s name, the property of sons under paternal power, or, if he shall not have found a buyer, to put it up (as security); in no way is license to be granted to the sons to retract the same sales or hypothecs. Nor is license to be given to parents, outside the causes already mentioned, to alienate, or to give under the title of pledge or hypothec, those things whose ownership is with their posterity; but if they shall do this, let them know that it is necessary that they fall into the toils of the laws by which sales or hypothecs of this kind are interdicted—except, namely, those movables or immovables which are burdensome to the inheritance or in any way damaging, which it is permitted for the father, with paternal piety, to sell without danger, so that their price either be applied to the properties and causes of the inheritance or be reserved for the son. <in the year 531, on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
Filiis autem familias in his dumtaxat casibus, in quibus usus fructus apud parentes constitutus est, donec parentes vivunt, nec testari de isdem rebus permittimus, nec citra voluntatem eorum, quorum in potestatae sunt, ulla licentia concedenda dominium rei ad eos pertinentis alienare vel hypothecae titulo dare vel pignori adsignare. melius enim est coartare iuveniles calores, ne cupidini dediti tristem exitum sentiant, qui eos post dispersum expectat patrimonium. cum enim, sicut dictum est, parentes alere eos secundum leges compelluntur, quare ad venditionem rerum suarum prosilire desiderant?
But for sons under paternal power (filii familias), only in those cases in which a usufruct has been constituted in the parents, so long as the parents live, we permit neither that they make a will concerning those same things, nor, without the will of those in whose power they are, is any license to be granted to alienate the ownership of a thing pertaining to them, or to give it under the title of hypothec, or to assign it in pledge. For it is better to constrain juvenile ardors, lest those given over to cupidity experience the sad outcome which awaits them after the patrimony has been scattered. Since, as has been said, the parents are compelled by the laws to support them, why do they desire to leap forth to the sale of their goods?
Ubi autem puerilis aetas patri licentiam praestat etiam sine consensu filii hereditatem nomine eius adire, si hoc fecerit, damus quidem filio in integrum restitutionem, postquam patria fuerit potestate liberatus vel adoleverit, patrem autem oneribus hereditariis, licet nomine filii adiit, modis omnibus illigamus: quare enim talem hereditatem adiit, qualem nec ipse nunc nec filius idoneam sibi esse existimat? <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But where the boyish age grants to the father a license to enter upon an inheritance in the son’s name even without the son’s consent, if he has done this, we grant indeed to the son restitution in integrum after he has been freed from paternal power or has grown up; but we bind the father in every way to the hereditary burdens, although he entered in the son’s name: for why did he enter upon such an inheritance as neither he himself now nor the son considers suitable to himself? <in the year 531, day 4 before the kalends of august, at constantinople, after the consulship of lampadius and orestes, most distinguished men.>
Non autem filio damus licentiam, si in integrum restitutionem petat respuendam esse credens hereditatem, adhuc minoribus curriculis instantibus iterum per aliam restitutionem adire praefatam hereditatem, ne ludibrio leges ei fiant saepius eandem et amplecti et respuere cupienti. si enim quod pater fecit ratum non habuit et propter hoc restitutus est, quomodo ferendus videatur iterum iudicium amplectens, quod et post patris voluntatem contraria adfectione aspernandum esse existimavit? <a 531 d. iiii k. aug.
Nor, however, do we grant the son license, if he seeks an in-integrum restitution, believing the inheritance ought to be repudiated, while the courses of minority are still ongoing, to approach the aforesaid inheritance again through another restitution, lest the laws become a mockery to one who wishes repeatedly both to embrace and to reject the same thing. For if he did not ratify what the father did and on that account was restored, how can he seem tolerable, embracing again a judgment which, even subsequent to his father’s will, he judged, with a contrary disposition, ought to be spurned? <a 531 d. 4 k. aug.
Sin vero pater quidem hereditatem repudiaverit infante filio constituto, ipse autem filius postea vel adhuc in sacris constitutus vel patria potestate liberatus adeundam esse crediderit eandem hereditatem, licentiam damus ei vel, si sui iuris efficiatur, tutoribus vel curatoribus eius hereditatem adire, nullo praeiudicio ex recusatione paterna ei generando: simili modo et in hac parte nulla ei vel tutoribus eius vel curatoribus licentia concedenda contra priorem suam voluntatem in integrum restitutionem petere. <a 531 d. iiii k. aug. constantinopoli post consulatum lampadii et orestis vv. cc.>
But if the father has indeed repudiated the inheritance, the son being constituted an infant, and the son himself later—whether still established in sacred orders or freed from paternal power—has believed that the same inheritance ought to be entered upon, we grant license either to him or, if he becomes sui iuris, to his tutors or curators to enter upon the inheritance, generating no prejudice to him from the paternal refusal: in like manner also, in this respect, no license is to be granted to him or to his tutors or curators to seek restitution in integrum contrary to his prior will. <in the year 531, on the 4th day before the Kalends of August, at Constantinople, after the consulship of Lampadius and Orestes, most distinguished men.>
In servis autem, qui filiis familias donantur, sive in constante matrimonio sive ab extraneis sub ea condicione, ut statim eos in libertatem producant, nullum impedimentum paterna faciat auctoritas. qualis enim usus fructus potest ei adquiri, qui momentarius esse ostenditur? si enim in ipso momento necesse habet eum et possidere et libertate donare, in talem hominem qualis usus fructus patri potest adquiri?
But as to slaves who are donated to sons under paternal power (filii familias), whether in a subsisting marriage or by outsiders under the condition that they immediately bring them into freedom, paternal authority is to create no impediment. For what sort of usufruct can be acquired for him that is shown to be momentary? For if in that very moment he must both possess him and grant him freedom (manumit), what sort of usufruct in such a man can be acquired for the father?
Universis tam legionibus quam vexillationibus comitatensibus seu cuneis insinuare debebis, ut cognoscant, cum aliquis fuerit rebus humanis exemptus atque intestatus sine legitimo herede decesserit, ad vexillationem, in qua militaverit, res eiusdem necessario pervenire. * constantius a. bonoso mag. equitum.
To all, both the legions and the comitatensian vexillations or cunei (squadrons), you must make it known, so that they may know, that when someone has been removed from human affairs and has died intestate without a legitimate heir, his property must necessarily pass to the vexillation in which he served. * constantius the augustus, to bonosus, master of horse.
Si quis cohortali condicione gravatus sine testamento vel quolibet successore ultimum diem obierit, successionem eius non ad fiscum, sed ad ceteros cohortales eiusdem provinciae pertinere iubemus. * constantius a. rufino pp. * <a 349 d. v k. ian. limenio et catulino conss.>
If anyone burdened with the cohortal condition dies his last day without a will or any successor, we order that his succession pertain not to the fisc, but to the other cohortals of the same province. * Constantius Augustus to Rufinus, Praetorian Prefect. * <a 349 on the 5th day before the Kalends of January, in the consulship of Limenius and Catulinus.>
Si quis fabricensis sine liberis vel legitimo herede decesserit non condito testamento, eius bona, cuiuscumque summae sint, ad eos pertinere, qui velut creatores decendentium attinentur, qui fisco pro intercepto respondere coguntur. * theodos. et valentin.
If any fabricensis dies without children or a legitimate heir, no will having been made, his goods, of whatever sums they are, are to pertain to those who are regarded, as it were, as the creators of the deceased, who are compelled to answer to the fisc for what has been intercepted. * theodos. et valentin.