- 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-lat1:4.4.20.pr
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-08
Ulpianus reviews Papinianus' opinion on extending the time for restitution for a returned exile, pointing out its omissions and incorrect reasoning, and notes the legal effect of abandoning a lawsuit commenced within the time limit.
[IDEM libro undecimo ad edictum.]
[THE SAME in the eleventh book on the Edict.]
Papinianus libro secundo responsorum ait exuli reuerso non debere prorogari tempus in integrum restitutionis statutum, quia afuit, cum potuerit adire praetorem per procuratorem, nec dixit, uel praesidem ubi erat.1 sed quod idem dicit et indignum esse propter irrogatam poenam, non recte:2 quid enim commune habet delictum cum uenia aetatis? Si quis tamen maior uiginti quinque annis3 intra tempus restitutionis statutum contestatus postea destiterit, nihil ei proficit ad in integrum restitutionem contestatio, ut est saepissime rescriptum.
Papinianus, in the second book of his Opinions, says that the time prescribed for restitution in integrum ought not to be extended for a returned exile on the ground that he was absent, because he could have applied to the praetor through a procurator; and he did not add, “or to the governor of the province where he was.” But when the same author says that he is also unworthy of it on account of the punishment imposed upon him, he is not correct; for what has an offense in common with the indulgence granted to age? However, if anyone over twenty-five years of age, having contested his case within the prescribed time for restitution, should afterwards abandon it, the contesting of the suit is of no benefit to him for restitution in integrum, as has very frequently been stated in rescripts.
- 4.4.20.prnec dixit, uel praesidem ubi erat
The verb adire (to apply to / to go to) from the preceding clause is understood to be supplied. Ulpianus points out that Papinianus omitted the alternative option that the exile could also have applied directly to the governor (praesidem) of the province where he was residing.
- 4.4.20.prsed quod idem dicit ... non recte
The clause introduced by quod functions as a noun clause serving as the subject of the sentence, with dicit or est understood after non recte ("but what the same author says... is not correct").
- 4.4.20.prmaior uiginti quinque annis
The ablative annis is used as an ablative of comparison with the comparative adjective maior (older), meaning "older than twenty-five years."