- Source
- Digesta Iustiniani Augusti. Mommsen, Theodor & Krueger, Paul, editors. Berlin: Weidmann, 1870.
- Translation
- AI-generated (gemini-3.5-flash) — machine translation; may contain errors
- Languages
- 日本語 · English · 简体中文 · 한국어
- CTS URN
- urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:1.14.3.pr
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-10-24
Ulpian discusses the case of the runaway slave Barbarius Philippus, who was designated praetor, and argues that for the benefit of litigants and on the grounds of humanity, all his official acts should be held valid.
[ULPIANUS libro trigensimo octauo ad Sabinum.]
[ULPIAN, in his thirty-eighth book On Sabinus.]
Barbarius Philippus cum seruus fugitiuus esset, Romae praeturam petiit et praetor designatus est. sed nihil ei seruitutem obstetisse ait Pomponius, quasi praetor non fuerit:1 atquin uerum est praetura eum functum. et tamen uideamus: si seruus quamdiu latuit, dignitate praetoria functus sit, quid dicemus? quae edixit, quae decreuit, nullius fore2 momenti? an fore propter utilitatem eorum, qui apud eum egerunt uel lege uel quo alio iure? et uerum puto nihil eorum reprobari: hoc enim humanius est: cum etiam potuit populus Romanus seruo decernere hanc potestatem, sed et si scisset seruum esse, liberum effecisset.3 quod ius multo magis in inperatore obseruandum est.
While Barbarius Philippus was a runaway slave, he sought the praetorship at Rome and was designated praetor. But Pomponius says that his slavery was no obstacle to him, as if he had not been praetor; yet it is true that he performed the duties of the praetorship. And yet let us see: if a slave, as long as he concealed his status, performed the praetorian office, what shall we say? Will what he edicted and what he decreed be of no force? Or will they be of force for the benefit of those who brought actions before him, whether under a statute or any other law? And I think it true that none of these acts is rejected; for this is more humane, since the Roman people could have granted this power even to a slave, and indeed, if they had known he was a slave, they would have made him free. This rule of law is much more to be observed in the case of the emperor.
- 1.14.3.prquasi praetor non fuerit
The subordinate clause quasi praetor non fuerit ("as if he had not been praetor") presents a hypothetical condition contrary to Pomponius' view, implying: "[we should not act] as if he had not been praetor," because his slavery did not stand in his way.
- 1.14.3.prnullius fore momenti? an fore...
fore is the future infinitive (futurum esse). It depends on an implied verb of saying/thinking introduced by quid dicemus? ("what shall we say?"), forming an indirect question/disjunctive statement: "[shall we say] that they will be of no force, or that they will be [of force]...?"
- 1.14.3.prcum etiam potuit populus Romanus seruo decernere hanc potestatem, sed et si scisset seruum esse, liberum effecisset
Inside the causal cum clause, the indicative perfect potuit asserts the objective historical/legal power of the Roman people ("could have decreed"), while the subjunctive pluperfect si scisset... effecisset expresses a contrary-to-fact conditional ("if they had known... they would have made...").