- 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-lat1:1.9.7.pr-1.9.7.2
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-10-23
Ulpian discusses the status of sons and grandsons of senators, addressing how their eligibility is affected by emancipation, the father's death, or his expulsion from the senate relative to the time of conception and birth.
[ULPIANUS libro primo ad legem Iuliam et Papiam.]
[ULPIANUS, On the Lex Julia et Papia, book 1]
Emancipatum a patre senatore quasi senatoris filium haberi placet.1
It is accepted that a person emancipated by a father who is a senator is regarded as the son of a senator.
Item Labeo scribit etiam eum, qui post mortem patris senatoris natus sit, quasi senatoris filium esse. sed eum, qui posteaquam pater eius de senatu motus est, concipitur et nascitur, Proculus et Pegasus opinantur non esse quasi senatoris filium, quorum sententia uera est: nec enim proprie senatoris filius dicetur is, cuius pater senatu motus est antequam iste nasceretur. si quis conceptus quidem sit, antequam pater eius senatu moueatur, natus autem post patris amissam dignitatem,2 magis est ut3 quasi senatoris filius intellegatur: tempus enim conceptionis spectandum plerisque placuit.
Likewise, Labeo writes that even he who is born after the death of a father who was a senator is regarded as the son of a senator. But as for him who is conceived and born after his father has been removed from the senate, Proculus and Pegasus are of the opinion that he is not the son of a senator, and their opinion is correct; for indeed, he whose father was removed from the senate before he was born will not properly be called the son of a senator. If, however, anyone was conceived before his father was removed from the senate, but born after his father had lost his dignity, it is more reasonable that he should be understood as the son of a senator; for it has pleased the majority that the time of conception should be regarded.
Si quis et patrem et auum habuerit senatorem, et quasi filius et quasi nepos senatoris intellegitur. sed si pater amiserit dignitatem ante conceptionem huius, quaeri poterit an, quamuis quasi senatoris filius non intellegatur, quasi nepos tamen intellegi debeat: et magis est ut debeat, ut aui potius ei dignitas prosit, quam obsit casus patris.
If anyone has had both a father and a grandfather who were senators, he is understood both as the son and as the grandson of a senator. But if the father lost his dignity before the conception of this person, it may be asked whether, although he is not understood as the son of a senator, he ought nevertheless to be understood as a grandson; and it is more reasonable that he ought to be, so that the dignity of the grandfather may rather benefit him than the misfortune of the father injure him.
- 1.9.7.prEmancipatum a patre senatore quasi senatoris filium haberi placet
An accusative-with-infinitive construction. The clause consisting of the subject accusative Emancipatum and the passive infinitive haberi serves as the subject of the impersonal verb placet (it is accepted, it is the rule). While the preceding fragment (1.9.6.pr) stated that an emancipated person loses the name of a son, here it is specified that they are still treated 'as' (quasi) the son of a senator for the purposes of the Lex Julia et Papia.
- 1.9.7.1post patris amissam dignitatem
A so-called 'ab urbe condita' construction, where the perfect participle amissam functions dominantly over the noun dignitatem after the preposition post. It is translated as 'after the loss of the father's dignity' rather than 'after his lost dignity.'
- 1.9.7.1magis est ut
An impersonal expression introducing an ut clause with the subjunctive (intellegatur here). It means 'it is more reasonable that...' or 'it should rather be understood that...', indicating the preferred option among competing legal interpretations.