- 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-lat1:3.4.6.pr-3.4.6.3
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-05
Paulus discusses the validity of votes by those under the same power, and the appointment procedure, powers, and similarities to a general representative of a corporate litigation agent in municipalities.
[PAULUS libro nono ad edictum.]
[PAULUS, in the ninth book on the Edict.]
item eorum,1 qui in eiusdem potestate sunt: quasi decurio enim hoc dedit, non quasi domestica persona. quod et in honorum petitione erit seruandum, nisi lex municipii uel perpetua consuetudo prohibeat.
Likewise, [the vote] of those who are under the same power [will benefit them]; for he gave this as a decurion, not as a domestic person. This must also be observed in petitioning for offices, unless the law of the municipality or perpetual custom forbids it.
Si decuriones decreuerunt actionem per eum mouendam quem duumuiri elegerint, is uidetur ab ordine electus et ideo experiri potest: parui enim refert, ipse ordo elegerit an is cui ordo negotium dedit. sed si ita decreuerint, ut quaecumque incidisset controuersia, eius petendae negotium Titius haberet, ipso iure id decretum nullius momenti esse,2 quia non possit uideri de ea re, quae adhuc in controuersia non sit, decreto datam persecutionem. sed hodie haec omnia per syndicos solent secundum locorum consuetudinem explicari.
If the decurions have decreed that an action is to be brought by the person whom the duumviri have chosen, that person is deemed to have been chosen by the order, and therefore he can sue; for it matters little whether the order itself chose him or the person to whom the order delegated the business. But if they have decreed in such a way that, whatever controversy might arise, Titius should have the business of prosecuting it, by operation of law that decree is of no effect, because it cannot be deemed that the right of action was granted by decree concerning a matter which is not yet in controversy. But today all these matters are usually settled through syndics according to local custom.
Quid si actor datus postea decreto decurionum prohibitus sit, an excepto3 ei noceat? et puto sic hoc accipiendum, ut ei permissa uideatur, cui et permissa durat.
What if the appointed agent is afterwards forbidden by a decree of the decurions [to sue]? Does the exception bar him? And I think that this should be understood in such a way that [the action] is deemed permitted to him for whom the permission also continues to exist.
Actor uniuersitatis si agat, compellitur etiam defendere, non autem compellitur cauere de rato. sed interdum si de decreto dubitetur, puto interponendam et de rato cautionem. actor itaque iste procuratoris partibus fungitur et iudicati actio ei ex edicto non datur nisi in rem suam datus sit. et constitui ei potest.4 ex isdem causis mutandi actoris potestas erit, ex quibus etiam procuratoris. actor etiam filius familias dari potest.
If the agent of a corporation sues, he is also compelled to defend, but he is not compelled to give security for ratification. But sometimes, if there is doubt about the decree, I think that security for ratification should also be interposed. Therefore, this agent performs the functions of a procurator, and the action on the judgment is not granted to him under the edict unless he has been appointed for his own benefit. And a representative can be appointed for him. The power of changing the agent will exist for the same reasons for which a procurator also [is changed]. A son in power can also be appointed as an agent.
- 3.4.6.pritem eorum
The noun suffragium (vote) and verb proderit (will benefit) from the preceding sentence must be supplied, meaning 'likewise, [the vote] of those who are under the same power [will benefit them]'.
- 3.4.6.1nullius momenti esse
An accusative with infinitive construction in indirect discourse (oratio obliqua), where the governing verb of thinking or declaring (such as putat) is omitted. It functions as the apodosis to the conditional clause si ita decreuerint.
- 3.4.6.2excepto
This is considered a scribal error or textual variant for the nominative noun exceptio (exception/plea), which is adopted in most modern editions. The phrase exceptio ei noceat means 'does the exception bar him?'.
- 3.4.6.3constitui ei potest
The noun procuratorem (a representative/agent) is understood as the subject of the passive infinitive constitui. This fits the context explaining the similarity between an actor and a procurator, meaning that a representative can be appointed for him (the actor).