Appendix Additions and Amendments

[The words embodied in the text are distinguished from the conjectural readings by italics]

Some conjectural readings, principally by Krueger and Studemund and by Huschke, too uncertain for admission into the text, but followed more or less closely in the translation, are here appended.

1 § 43. Neque plures quam D servos habentis mentio in ea lege habetur.

1 § 56. Itaque liberos suos in potestate habent cives Romani, si, &c., &c.

1 § 73. Cujus aetatis filius sit, nisi forte eorum aliquis, qui e lege Aelia Sentia matrimonium se contrahere putarint, erroris causam probare velit; ab hoc enim, &c., &c. . . . quod ad erroris quoque causam probandam attinet, anniculus filius esse debeat, sed non semper videri debet generale jus inductum cum imperator epistulam ad quendam dedit.

1 § 78. Quod autem diximus inter civem Romanam peregrinumque contracto matrimonio eum qui nascitur peregrinum esse, lege Minicia cavetur, qua lege effectum est, ut si matrimonium inter cives Romanas peregrinosque non interveniente conubio contrahatur eum qui nascitur peregrini parentis condicionem sequatur.

1 § 79. Adeo autem hoc ita est, ut ex cive Romano et Latina qui nascitur Latinus nascatur, quamquam ad eos, qui hodie Latini nominantur, lex Minicia non pertinet; nam comprehenduntur quidem peregrinorum appellatione in ea lege non, &c., &c.

1 § 115 b. Si tamen mulier fiduciae causa, &c, &c. . . .

1 § 118. nam feminae a coemptionatoribus eodem modo possunt mancipari quo liberi a parente mancipantur; adeo quidem, ut quamvis ea sola apud coemptionatorem filiae loco sit, quae ei nupta sit, tamen nihilo minus, &c.

1 § 122. Namque veluti asses librales crant, et dupundii bilibres, &c., &c.; . . . quamobrem qui dabat olim, &c., &c.

1 § 132. At the end, cf. Epit. 1, 6, 3. Tamen cum tertio mancipatus fuerit filius a patre naturali fiduciario patri, hoc agere debet naturalis pater, ut ei a fiduciario patre remancipetur et a naturali patre manumittatur, ut si filius ille mortuus fuerit, ei in hereditate naturalis pater, non fiduciarius, succedat.

1 § 132 a. Ei, qui liberum caput e causa mancipii manumittit, eadem jura in ejus bonis competere, quae patrono in bonis liberti competunt; for the remainder of the § cf. Epit. 1, 6 § 3 Feminae vel nepotes masculi ex filio una emancipatione de patris vel avi exeunt potestate et sui juris efficiuntur. Et hi ipsi quamlibet una mancipatione de patris vel avi potestate exeant, nisi a patre fiduciario remancipati fuerint et a naturali patre manumissi, succedere eis naturalis pater non potest, nisi fiduciarius, a quo manumissi sunt; nam si remancipatum eum sibi naturalis pater vel avus manumiserit, ipse ei in hereditate succedit.’

1 § 134. Praeterea parentes, liberis in adoptionem datis, in potestate eos habere desinunt: et in filio quidem, si in adoptionem datur, tres mancipationes et duae, &c.

1 § 135 a. Eadem scilicet dicemus de eo qui ex nepote semel mancipato necdum manumisso conceptus fuerit. Nam ut supra, &c., &c.

1 § 136. Praeterea mulieres quae in manum conveniunt, in patris potestate esse desinunt, sed in confarreatis nuptiis de flaminica Diali senatusconsulto ex relatione Maximi, &c. And six lines further; Coemptione autem facta mulieres omni modo potestate parentis liberantur.

1 § 137. Sicut igitur filiae familias una mancipatione de potestate patris exeunt, ita eae quae in manu sunt una mancipatione desinunt in manu esse.

1 § 137 a. Inter eam vero quae cum extraneo, et eam quae cum viro suo coemptionem fecerit, hoc interest, quod illa quidem cogere coemptionatorem potest, ut se remancipet, cui ipsa velit, haec autem virum suum nihilo magis, &c., &c.

2 § 14. After rusticorum; cf. Epit. 2, 1, 3; Dig. 1, 8, 1, 1; Inst. 2, 2, 3. Praediorum urbanorum jura sunt velut jus altius tollendi aedes, et officiendi luminibus vicini aedium, aut non extollendi, ne luminibus vicini officiatur, item fluminum et stilicidiorum jus, id est ut vicinus flumen vel stillicidium in aream vel in aedes suas recipiat; item cloacae immittendae et luminum immittendorum. Praediorum rusticorum jura sunt velut via, iter, actus, item pecoris ad aquam adpulsus, item jus aquae ducendae. Haec jura tam rusticorum quam urbanorum praediorum servitutes vocantur.

2 § 14 a. Est etiam alia rerum divisio: nam aut mancipi sunt aut nec mancipi. Mancipi sunt velut fundus in Italico solo, item aedes in Italico solo item servi et ea animalia quae collo dorsove domari solent, velut boves equi muli asini; item servitutes praediorum rusticorum. Nam servitutes praediorum urbanorum nec mancipi sunt. (Cf. Dig. 1, 8, 1, 1. Inst. 2, 2, 3.)

2 § 15. sed quod diximus ea animalia quae domari solent, mancipi esse, quomodo intellegendum sit, quaeritur, quia non statim ut nata sunt, domantur. Et nostrae quidem scholae auctores statim ut nata sunt, &c.

2 § 66. etiam si occupando ideo res adquisierimus.

2 § 67. piscem ceperimus, quidquid ita captum fuerit, id statim nostrum fit, et eo usque, &c., &c.

2 § 82. accipientis sine tutoris auctoritate . . . id est eos petere suos ex jure Quiritium esse; mulier vero minime hoc modo repetere potest, sed ita: dari sibi oportere. Unde de pupillo quidem quaeritur, an si nummi, quos mutuos dedit, ab eo qui accepit, consumpti sunt, aliqua actione eos persequi possit, quoniam obligationem etiam sine tutoris auctoritate adquirere sibi potest.

2 § 111. quos lex Papia plus quam dimidias partes hereditatis legatorumque capere vetat, ex militis testamento solidum capiunt. Cf. Inst. 2, 12. Ulp. 20, 10. Epit. 2, 2, 1, &c., &c.

2 § 112. Sed ex auctoritate, &c., &c.

2 § 129. After pronepotes; nominatim exheredari jubet, feminini vero inter ceteros; qui nisi fuerint ita exheredati, promittit eis contra tabulas bonorum possessionem.

2 § 149 a. After non sit; cum si agnati petant hereditatem exceptione doli mali ex constitutione imperatoris Antonini removeri possint.

2 § 150. Sane lege Julia scriptis non aufertur hereditas, si bonorum possessores ex edicto constituti sint; nam ita demum ea lege bona caduca fiunt et ad populum deferri jubentur si defuncto nemo heres vel bonorum possessor existat.

2 § 151 a. After hereditatem; per exceptionem doli mali repelletur, si vero nemo ab intestato bonorum possessionem petierit, fiscus scripti heredi quasi indigno auferet hereditatem, ne ullo modo ad eum quem testator heredem habere noluit perveniat hereditas.

2 § 235. At the end, multas similes species circumspicere possumus.

2 § 237. ideoque etsi secundum mentem testatoris is qui tutor datur, poenae nomine, &c., or ideoque quando etiam poenae nomine tutor datus fuerit, &c., &c.

3 § 43. itaque sive auctor ad testamentum faciendum factus erat, aut sibi imputare debebat, quod heres ab ea relictus non erat, aut ipsum ex testamento, si heres ab ea factus erat, sequebatur hereditas: . . . nec enim ullus olim ab intestato heres vel bonorum possessor erat, qui possit patronum a bonis libertae invitum repellere.

3 § 44. ergo ex bonis ejus quae centum milia sestertiorum plurisve reliquerit patrimonium, si testamentum fecerit, dimidia pars debeatur, si vero intestata liberta decessit tota hereditas ad patronum pertinet. But no suitable rendering has been suggested which agrees with the words of the MS.

3 § 46. Olim quidem eo jure (utebantur), quod lege xii tabularum patrono datum est, praetor autem non nisi virilis sexus patronorum liberos vocat; filia vero ut contra tabulas testamenti, &c.

3 § 69. patronus heredes instituerit, ex isdem partibus bona Latini, si patri heredes existant, ad eos pertinere, &c., &c.

3 § 80. veluti si peregrinus sit bonorum emptor.

3 § 81. Item quae debita sunt ei cujus fuerunt bona, aut ipse, &c. . . . debentur, et ideo de omnibus rebus utilibus actionibus et experiuntur et conveniuntur, quas in sequenti, &c.

3 § 95. Si quis interroganti Dari Spondes? respondeat Promitto vel Dabo, an recte obligetur; aut si quis interroganti Promittis? respondeat Ὁμολογω̂ an recte obligetur.

3 § 95 a. Cf. Epit. 2, 9, 3. Sunt et aliae obligationes quae nulla praecedente interrogatione contrahi possunt.

3 § 103 a. Alia causa est, si ita stipulatus sim mihi aut Titio Dari Spondes? quo casu constat mihi solidum deberi et me solum ex ea stipulatione agere posse, quamquam etiam Titio solvendo liberaris.

3 § 117. quia enim nobis ut post mortem nostram detur stipulando, &c., &c.

4 § 1. Superest ut de actionibus loquamur. Et si quaeramus quot genera, &c.

4 § 15. See Huschke’s attempted reconstruction of what seems to be an account of the actio sacramenti in personam.

4 § 17 a. A leaf of the MS. is missing.

4 § 40. pars formulae quae ideo inseritur ut, &c., &c.

4 § 61. Inst. 4, 6, 30. In bonae fidei autem judiciis libera potestas permitti videtur judici ex bono et aequo aestimandi quantum actori restitui debeat quo et illud continetur, &c.

4 § 66. Krueger and Studemund suggest the following—itaque si frumentum aut vinum petat bonorum emptor et invicem defraudatoris nomine pecuniam is debeat, quanto amplius ea pecunia id frumentum aut vinum erit, in condemnatione ponitur; si vero, &c., &c.

4 § 111. aliquando tamen et perpetuo eas dat, velut quibus imitatur, &c., &c.

4 § 114. absolutoria esse. diversae scholae auctoribus de strictis judiciis contra placuisse.

4 § 131. Et quae ante tempus obligationis in judicium deducuntur, ea neque in condemnationem veniunt neque rursus de iis agere potest.

4 § 131 a. tradi, vel tradita ea de evictione nobis caveri, iterum ex empto agere possimus, alioquin si praescribere (obliti) sumus, totius, &c.

4 § 133. per unius rei petitionem universae hereditati praejudicium fieri.

4 § 134. et siquidem ex contractu servorum agatur, intentione formulae determinatum [Polenaar, designatum] est, cui dari oporteat.

4 § 165. nisi ei res exhibeatur aut restituatur, quanti ea res erit, adversarius ei condemnetur.

4 § 166. et qui superaverit fructus licitando. . . .

de eo inter se certant, utri fructuum perceptio interim committenda est. Postea alter, &c.

Ad. Schmidt would read at the end—vel si unus tantum sponsione provocavit alterum, una inter eos sponsio.

4 § 166 a. Deinde ab utroque editis formulis sponsionum et restipulationum judex, &c., &c.

4 § 170. Itaque etsi alias potuerit interdicto Uti Possidetis vincere, tamen si cetera ex interdicto facere noluerit, per interdictum secundarium possessio in adversarium transfertur.

4 § 171. Nunc admonendi sumus ne facile homines ad litigandum procedant, temeritatem tam agentium quam eorum cum quibus agitur coerceri modo pecuniaria poena modo jurisjurandi religione modo metu infamiae.

4 § 172. simplo tenus obligati sint.

Oxford: Printed at the Clarendon Press, by Horace Hart, M.A.

This thesis has been vigorously maintained by Lambert in his work La fonction du droit civil comparé (1903).

See p. xix.

The Latins possessed commercium and some of them conubium. Full citizenship would also be possessed by a considerable class in Latin towns, i. e. by all who, through holding a magistracy, had become Roman citizens.

Pais, in his Storia di Roma, has stated the view that the Decemviral Legislation has been antedated by about a century and a half. He brings it down to the close of the fourth century b c He believes that Appius Claudius, the Decemvir, is a duplicate of Appius Claudius, the censor of 312 b c., and that the story of a publication by the Decemvirs is a duplicate of the story of the revelation of the forms of Law by Cn. Flavius in 304 b. c. Lambert has gone still further in a view expressed in three works (La question de l’authenticite des XII Tables et les Annales Maximi; La fonction du droit civil compare; L’histoire traditionnelle des XII Tables). He thinks that the Twelve Tables, as a code, originated with Sextus Aelius Paetus, consul in 198 b. c., whom tradition regards as their earliest commentator, although he admits that there may have been successive partial compilations before this date.

Mitteis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht.

Cic. Top. 6. 29 ‘Gentiles sunt inter se, qui eodem nomine sunt.’

[Cic.] ad Her. i. 13. 23; Cic. pro Domo, 13 35; Gaius, i. 157, ii. 47.

Ulpian in Collatio, 16. 4 2; cf Gaius, iii. 17.

Mommsen, Staatsr. iii, p 23 foll

Cic. de Rep ii. 20. 35; Liv. i. 35.

See Daily News, Sept 5, 1901 (‘The Genius of Rome’).

See Danz, ‘Das Sacramentum und die lex Papiria,’ in Zeitschr. f. R. G. vi (1867), p. 339 foll.; Der sacrale Schutz, p. 151 foll.

This must have been the original meaning of the consecratio capitis, the penalty of the leges sacratae. See Liv. iii. 55; Festus, p. 318; Bouché-Leclercq, Les pontifes de l’ancienne Rome, p. 196.

The extant Leges Regiae are to be found in Bruns, Fontes juris Romani antiqui, I. 1.

Dionys. iii. 36; Pompon. in Dig. 1. 2. 2 36.

Liv. vi. 1.

Paulus in Dig. 50. 16 144; Censorinus, De Die Nat. iii 2.

Clark, Practical Jurisprudence, p. 17 Nettleship (Contributions to Latin Lexicography, p. 497) enumerates the following senses of jus in Latin literature:—(1) a law court (e. g. in the phrases ‘In jus ducere,’ ‘Res est in jure’), (2) a bond or tie (e g in the phrases ‘Jus amicitiae,’ ‘Jura necessitudinis’), (3) power, authority, (4) right to do a thing, (5) law, or a system of law, (6) what is right and fair, (7) the plural jura means either (a) rights or (b) rules of law, ordinances, decisions, and so authority.

See note 4, p. xv.

On this branch of Public Law see Mommsen, Staatsr. i, p. 172.

This procedure is illustrated by the Lex Bantina (Bruns, Fontes, iii. 9). It is there ordained ‘Eam pequniam quei volet magistratus exsigito. Sei postulabit quei petet, pi (aetor) recuperatores . . dato . . . facitoque joudicetur.’

This procedure is illustrated by the Lex Bantina (Bruns, Fontes, iii. 9). It is there ordained ‘Eam pequniam quei volet magistratus exsigito. Sei postulabit quei petet, pi (aetor) recuperatores . . dato . . . facitoque joudicetur.’

Compare the procedure ordained by the Lex agraria of 111 b. c. (Bruns, Fontes, iii. 11), ll. 36-39.

Gaius, iv 11.

Cic. de Rep. v. 2, 3.

Savigny, System des röm. Rechts, vi. p. 287; Bernhöft, Staat und Recht dei Konigszeit, p. 230.

Compare Ridgeway, The early age of Greece, p. 257. ‘We may conclude that the two main elements in the population of early Rome were the aboriginal Ligurians, who formed the Plebs, and the Umbrian Sabines, who formed the aristocracy’ The evidence is perhaps not sufficient to warrant so definite a conclusion; but the more that I have dwelt on the lack of homogeneity in early Roman life, the more definite has become my conviction that we have to deal with racial, not merely with social, differences.

‘Gentiles sunt . . . quorum majorum nemo servitutem servivit’ (Cic Top. 6. 29).

Cf Savigny, Recht des Besitzes (seventh edition), p. 202

If we believe that the Servian census was intended to create liability to service for Plebeians. Cf. p. xxv.

This seems shown by the continuance of the use of the word assidui for the members of the Servian Classes.

Cic. pro Flacco, 32. 80.

Liv. iii. 57.

See Pais, Storia di Roma, i. 1, p 584 He describes the law of the Tables as the result of a fusion of the rude national law with the more civilized dispositions of Greek culture.

Cf Voigt, XII Tafeln, 1, p. 14.

Cf. Diod. xii. 26 ἡ δὲ γραϕεɩ̂σα νομοθεσία, βραχέως καὶ ἀπερίττως συγκειμένη, διέμεινε θαυμαζομένη μέχρι τω̂ν καθ’ ἡμα̂ς καιρω̂ν.

Cic. de Rep 11. 37, 63.

Liv. iii. 34.

Gaius, i. 111.

Gaius, i. 132.

Ulpian, Reg. ii 4.

Cic. de Inv ii. 50 148; [Cic.] ad Her. i. 13 23; Gaius, ii 224.

Ulpian in Collatio, 16. 4. 2.

Gell. xv. 13 11; xx. 1 45.

Tac Ann. vi. 16.

Cato, de Re Rust. praef.

Bruns, Fontes, i. 2, Tab. i.

Cic. de Or. i. 41 185; ad Att vi. 1 8; Liv. ix 46 5

Cic ad Att. l. c; pro Mur. 11. 25; Liv. l. c.; Plin. H. N xxxiii 1. 17.

Macrob. i. 13. 21.

Liv. vi. 1, Cic. ad Att. l. c.

Gell xx. 1. 12-14

Plin H. N. xviii. 3 12.

Cic. de Rep. iv. 10. 12.

Marcian in Dig 48. 4 3.

Cic. de Rep. ii 31. 54.

Cic de Leg. iii 4. 11.

Cic de Leg l. c

Decl in Catil 19

Gaius in Dig 47. 22. 4.

‘Ut quodcumque postremum populus jussisset, id jus ratumque esset’ (Liv. vii. 17).

The scheme was as follows:—

The Cavalby.

18 centuries, chosen from the richer classes (Dionys. iv. 18), but probably with no fixed property qualification.

The Infantry.

Cf. Liv. i. 43. He describes the new organization as existing ‘post expletas quinque et triginta tribus.’ Yet he does not say that it began its existence at that date. Mommsen (Staatsrecht, iii, p. 270) conjecturally assigns the change to the censorship of C Flaminius (220 b. c).

This system was first suggested by Pantagathus, who died in 1657.

Mommsen’s system (Staatsr. iii, p 275) is different, and is based on the view that the description given by Cicero (de Rep. ii. 22, 39, 40) refers, not to the older arrangement, but to the reformed Comitia. Mommsen allows the 70 votes for the 70 centuries of the first class, but thinks that the 280 centuries of the other classes were combined so as to form only 100 votes. The total votes in the Comitia would thus be 70 + 100 + 5 (Fabri, &c) + 18 (Knights); i. e. 193 in all, as in the earlier arrangement.

App. Bell. Civ. i. 59.

This Comitia seems still to have met for formal business as late as the third century a d. At least Dio Cassius (Consul 219 or 220 a. d) describes the flying of the flag from the Janiculum as a custom still surviving in his day (xxxvii. 28).

P. xxix.

This was the view taken by Mommsen (Staatsr. iii, pp. 182, 184) He held (ii, p. 403) that Appius Claudius, the censor of 312 b. c, first included the landless citizens in the tribes (cf. Girard, Manuel. p. 31); but our authorities (Diod. xx 46, Liv ix 46) only represent Appius Claudius as allowing citizens to be registered where they pleased, and as spreading the lower classes (humiles) over all the tribes. The definition which we possess of the Comitia Tributa (Laelius Felix ap. Gell xv. 27) speaks of it only as an assembly at which the votes are given ‘ex regionibus et locis.’

Liv ii. 56. Previously it had probably met by Curiae. Hence the tradition that the early tribunes were elected in the Comitia Curiata (Liv. l. c., Cic. ap. Ascon. in Cornelian. p. 76).

When the Tables enacted ‘De capite civis nisi per maximum comitiatum . . . ne ferunto’ (Cic de Leg iii 4 11), this mention of the ‘greatest Comitia’ (i. e. the Comitia Centuriata) seems to imply the existence of a lesser Comitia with judicial powers; and the latter could scarcely have been the Comitia Curiata of the period.

Liv vii. 16

For the application of the lex curiata to the minor magistracies, as well as to those with Imperium, see Messala ap. Gell. xiii. 15 4 ‘Minoribus creatis magistratibus tributis comitiis magistratus, sed justus curiata datur lege.’

Cic. de Leg. Agr. ii. 12. 31

Gaius, ii. 101; Gell. xv. 27.

Gell. l. c

P. xxi.

Laelius Felix ap. Gell. xv. 27 ‘Is qui non [ut] universum populum, sed partem aliquam adesse jubet, non “comitia,” sed “concilium” edicere debet.’ See Mommsen, Staatsr. iii, p 149.

Strachan-Davidson, starting from the view that Plebiscita were originally sent as petitions to the consuls and senate (cf. Dionys. x. 31), suggests that the Valerio Horatian law may have ‘laid down that the consul must so consult the senate, or it may even have forbidden him arbitrarily to disregard a recommendation of the senate (should such be obtained) that he should put the question to the populus’; and that the Publilian law ‘may have struck out the intervening consultation of the senate, and may have required the consul to bring the petition of the plebs at once before the populus’ (Smith, Dict. of Antiq. ii, p. 439).

Gaius, i. 3; Pompon. in Dig. 1. 2. 2. 8.

We know, at least, that some of Sulla’s legislation was effected through the Comitia Centuriata (Cic pro Dom. 30 79).

Thus, Cicero was exiled by a Plebiscitum, but restored by a Lex Centuriata.

App. Bell. Civ. i. 59.

Cic. ad Att. v. 21. 13.

Ascon in Cornelian. p. 58.

Cic. pro Domo, 16. 41; Ascon. in Cornelian. p. 68.

Hence the saving clause in enactments, ‘Si quid sacri sancti est quod non jure sit rogatum, ejus hac lege nihil rogatur’ (Probus). Cf. Cic. pro Caec. 33. 95.

P. xl.

Liv. vi. 42.

Liv. Ep. 19. The date is not quite certain. Lydus (de Mag. i. 38) places the event in 247 b. c. See Mommsen, Staatsr. ii, p. 196.

See Wlassak, Edict und Klageform.

P. xl.

‘Adjuvandi vel supplendi vel corrigendi juris civilis gratia propter utilitatem publicam’ (Papin. in Dig. 1. 1 7. 1).

It has sometimes been thought that Peregrini were wholly excluded from the use of the Legis Actio. See Girard, Manuel, p. 110.

Dig. 21. 1; Cic. de Off. iii. 17. 71; Gell. iv. 2.

Cic. in Verr. i. 45. 117.

Cic. ad Fam. iii. 8. 4.

Cicero thus sketches the contents of the whole edict which he published as governor of Cilicia (ad Att. vi. 1. 15):—‘Unum (genus) est provinciale, in quo est de rationibus civitatum, de aere alieno, de usura, de syngraphis; in eodem omnia de publicanis. Alterum, quod sine edicto satis commode transigi non potest, de hereditatum possessionibus, de bonis possidendis vendendis, magistris faciendis: quae ex edicto et postulari et fieri solent Tertium, de reliquo jure dicundo ἄγραϕον reliqui. Dixi me de eo genere mea decreta ad edicta urbana accommodaturum.’

Clark, Practical Jurisprudence, p. 354. On the content of the Jus Gentium see Nettleship, Contributions to Latin Lexicography, p. 503; Mommsen, Staatsr. iii, p. 604.

Festus, p. 274: ‘Reciperatio est, ut ait Gallus Aelius, cum inter populum et reges nationesque et civitates peregrinas lex convenit quomodo per reciperatores reddantur res reciperenturque, resque privatas inter se persequantur.’

P. xxxi.

Arist Rhet. i. 13.

Arist. Eth. v. 7.

‘Cum jure naturali omnes liberi nascerentur’ (Ulpian in Dig. 1. 1 4).

See Muirhead, Historical Introduction to the Private Law of Rome, p. 281. ‘While the jus civile studied the interests only of citizens, and the jus gentium those of freemen irrespective of nationality, the law of nature had theoretically a wider range and took all mankind within its purview.’ Compare Carlyle, Mediaeval Political Theory in the West, ch. 3 (‘The Theory of the Law of Nature’).

Ulpian in Dig. 44. 7. 14: ‘Servi . . . ex contractibus . . . civiliter . . . non obligantur; sed naturaliter et obligantur et obligant.’

‘Melior condicio nostra per servos fieri potest, deterior fieri non potest’ (Gaius in Dig. 50. 17. 133).

Gaius, iv. 69-74; Justin. Inst. iv. 7.

Pompon. in Dig. 1. 2. 2. 38.

Pompon. l c.; cf Cic. de Leg. ii. 23. 59; de Or. i. 56. 240; Brut. 20. 78; de Rep. i. 18. 30.

Cic. de Leg. ii. 23 59; de Amic. 2. 6. He is called Atilius by Pomponius (l. c.). See Schöll, Legis duodecim tabularum reliquiae, p. 25.

Teuffel-Schwabe, Geschichte der romischen Litteratur, § 125; Schöll, op. cit. p. 26.

Schöll, op. cit. pp. 11, 15.

Sometimes written ‘Manius.’

See Roby, Introduction to the Study of Justinian’s Digest, pp. 95-124

On the characteristics of the study of law during this period see Kruger, Geschichte der Quellen und Litteratur des römischen Rechts, pp. 48 foll.

Cic. de Or. i. 45 199-200, ‘Quid est enim praeclarius, quam honoribus et rei publicae muneribus perfunctum senem posse suo jure dicere idem, quod apud Ennium dicat ille Pythius Apollo, se esse eum, unde sibi si non populi et reges, at omnes sui cives consilium expetant . . . Est enim sine dubio domus jurisconsulti totius oraculum civitatis.’

These three functions are summed up by Cicero in the words agere, cavere, respondere See Cic. de Or. i. 48 212: ‘Sin autem quaereretur, quisnam jurisconsultus vere nominaretur, eum dicerem, qui legum et consuetudinis ejus, qua privati in civitate uterentur, et ad respondendum et ad agendum et ad cavendum peritus esset.’ Cf Kruger, op. cit. p. 49.

Cic. de Or. iii. 33. 133.

Cic. pro Mur. 9 19. Cicero here describes the ‘urbanam militiam respondendi, scribendi, cavendi’ The interpretation that I have given to scribere is that of Kruger, op. cit. p. 50. Cf. Cic. Top. i. 1. 4.

Cic. Orator, 41. 142, 42. 143.

Cic. Top. 14. 56.

Kruger, op. cit. p. 51.

Cic. de Or. i. 38. 173; 57. 241, 242; pro Mur. 12 27; 13 28.

Pompon in Dig. 1. 2. 2. 44: ‘De jurisdictione idem (Ofilius) edictum praetoris primus diligenter composuit.’

Suet. Jul. 44. Ofilius’ intimacy with Caesar is noticed by Pomponius (Dig l. c).

The civil procedure of the judicia ordinaria survived the Principate. When the criminal procedure of the quaestiones perpetuae disappeared is unknown. Their disappearance has been placed as early as the close of the first century a. d. (Geib, Criminalprocess, pp. 392-397). But it has been thought that Dio Cassius (lii 20, 21) implies their existence in his own time, at the beginning of the third century a. d.

Gaius, iv. 30; Gell. xvi. 10. 8. The date of the law is unknown, but is not likely to be earlier than 150 b. c. Girard (Manuel, p. 987) finds indications for placing it between 149 and 126 b. c.

Liv. xliii. 2.

Cic. Brut. 27. 106; de Off. ii. 21. 75.

Yet it is to be observed that Gaius, in his statement of the sources of law (i. 2), puts those which were antiquated in his time (Lex and Plebiscitum) on the same level as those which were living. The statement is juristically correct, in so far as the body of Roman law in his time had sprung from all these sources; but the method of statement is likely to convey a false historical implication. Cf pp. xlv-xlviii

We may instance the view of Caligula on the jus respondendi of the jurisconsults. Suetonius says (Calig. 34) ‘De juris quoque consultis, quasi scientiae eorum omnem usum aboliturus, saepe jactavit “se mehercule effecturum ne quid respondere possint praeter eum.” ’ This was a desire that found no fulfilment during the Principate.

The document is to be found in the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, vi. n. 930, and in Bruns, Fontes Juris Romani Antiqui, v. 19. It describes itself as a law (l. 34 ‘Si quis hujusce legis ergo,’ &c.), and is generally known as the Lex de imperio Vespasiani. But its wording bears more analogy to that of a Senatusconsultum. It seems to be a decree of the Senate which is intended to be submitted to the People for their formal assent. See Mommsen, Staatsr. ii, p. 878.

Gaius, i. 5; Ulpian in Dig. 1. 4. 1: ‘Quod principi placuit, legis habet vigorem; utpote cum lege regia, quae de imperio ejus lata est, populus ei et in eum omne suum imperium et potestatem conferat.’ It has been questioned whether the expression lex regia was in vogue even in the time of Ulpian, and it may be an interpolation. The expression is found in Justinian (Cod. 1. 17. 1. 7). See Mommsen, Staatsr. ii, pp. 876, 877.

Lex de Imp. Vesp. l. 17.

Dig. 47 21. 3. 1.

Thus the S. C. Velleianum beings: ‘Quod Marcus Silanus et Velleus Tutor consules verba fecerunt . . . quid de ea re fieri oportet, de ea re ita censuere.’ See Kruger, op. cit. p. 82.

Gaius, i. 4. Cf. Ulpian in Dig. 1. 3 9 ‘Non ambigitur senatum jus facere posse’ Papinian (Dig 1 1. 7) recognizes senatusconsulta as a source of jus.

Lex de Imp. Vesp l. 17 ‘Utique quaecunque ex usu rei publicae [Editor: illegible character] censebit, ei agere facere jus potestasque sit.’

P. xl.

Victor, Caes. 19 ‘Primus edictum quod varie inconditeque a praetoribus promebatur in ordinem composuit.’ Eutrop. viii. 17 ‘Perpetuum conposuit edictum’

Cod. 1. 17. 2. 18; Constitution Δέδωκεν (prefixed to Digest), 18

We hear of the Edictum Aedilium in the Constitutions ‘Omnem’ (4) and Δέδωκεν (5) prefixed to the Digest.

It is possible that the common elements in the provincial edicts were reduced to a system at this time. Cf. p xxxiii.

Paulus (Dig. 28. 2. 26) uses the expression ‘Jam sublato edicto divi Augusti,’ a phrase which suggests something more than mere neglect.

Gaius, i. 5 Cf Ulpian in Dig. 1. 4 1 1 ‘Quodcumque . . . imperator per epistulam et subscriptionem statuit vel cognoscens decrevit . . . vel edicto praecepit, legem esse constat. Haec sunt quas vulgo constitutiones appellamus.’

Thus the soldier’s testament was created by a series of mandates (Dig. 29. 1. 1).

Such a delegate might be given by the consuls when exercising extraordinary jurisdiction (Gell. xii 13. 1 ‘Cum Romae a consulibus judex extra ordinem datus pronuntiare . . . jussus essem’). Such a judex represented the magistrate more fully than the judex of ordinary jurisdiction. He was not tied down within the limits of a formula.

This was done by the fiction of In integrum restitutio. Cf. Suet. Claud. 14 ‘(Claudius) iis, qui apud privatos judices plus petendo formula excidissent, restituit actiones.’

The Emperor Gordian is spoken of as παλινδικίαν διδοὺς τοɩ̂ς ἀδίκως κατακριθεɩ̂σι (Herodian, vii. 6. 4).

Ulpian in Dig. 49. 2 1. 2 ‘Sciendum est appellari a senatu non posse principem, idque oratione divi Hadriani effectum.’ There can be little doubt that the principle was confirmed, not created, by Hadrian.

Nero at the beginning of his reign in 54 a. d professed a desire to restore the original principle (Tac. Ann. xiii. 4 ‘Teneret antiqua munia senatus, consulum tribunalibus Italia et publicae provinciae adsisterent’).

Pomponius in the Digest (1. 2. 48-50) says ‘Massurius Sabinus (of the time of Tiberius) in equestri ordine fuit et publice primus respondit’; but he also adds: ‘Primus divus Augustus, ut major juris auctoritas haberetur, constituit, ut ex auctoritate ejus responderent’ To make the statements square with one another, Mommsen would strike out the words ‘fuit et’ in the first paragraph, as being the addition of an interpolator. The statement would then be that Sabinus was the first patented jurisconsult of equestrian rank.

This seems shown by the story told by Pomponius in Dig. 1 2. 2. 49.

Yet the response was not regarded as a delegation of the power of the Princeps to issue Rescripts It may, however, have formed the model for the judicial Rescript. See Krüger, op. cit. p. 110, note 5

Not merely to the Judex privatus, but to the Judex extra ordinem datus, and even to the magistrate who was judging

Justin. Inst. i. 2. 8.

Krüger, op. cit. p. 110.

Gaius, i. 7.

For a detailed description of this literature see Roby, Introduction to the Study of Justinian’s Digest, pp. 124-174.

P. xlvii.

These passages in inverted commas are taken from Mr Poste’s preface to the third edition of his work.

It is a curious fact that Gaios (Γάιος) is found as the name of an Asiatic (Gaios, son of Hermaeus, one of the σύντροϕοι of Mithridates Eupator, King of Pontus. See Delian inscription in Th. Reinach, Mithridate Eupator, roi du Pont, p. 52, and Plut. Pomp. 42). Yet, if Gaius the jurist was a Roman citizen, we should have expected him to bear a Roman, or Romanised, name.

Cf p. xxxiii and p. xlvii, note 2.

Cod. Theod. 1. 4. 8.