- 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-lat1:4.5.7.pr-4.5.7.3
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-08
Paulus discusses the impact of capitis minutio on tutelages and delictual obligations, and explains the limits of restitution when liberty or citizenship is lost.
[PAULUS libro undecimo ad edictum.]
[PAULUS libro undecimo ad edictum.]
Tutelas etiam non amittit capitis minutio exceptis his, quae in iure alieno personis positis1 deferuntur. igitur testamento dati uel ex lege uel ex senatus consulto erunt nihilo minus tutores: sed legitimae tutelae ex duodecim tabulis interuertuntur eadem ratione, qua et hereditates exinde legitimae, quia adgnatis deferuntur, qui desinunt esse familia mutati.2 ex nouis autem legibus et hereditates et tutelae plerumque sic deferuntur, ut personae naturaliter designentur: ut ecce deferunt hereditatem senatus consulta matri et filio.
Capitis minutio does not lose tutelages either, except those which are conferred on persons placed under another’s power. Therefore, those appointed by will, or by virtue of a law or a senatusconsult, will none the less be tutors: but statutory tutelages under the Twelve Tables are lost for the same reason as statutory inheritances resulting therefrom, because they are conferred on agnates, who cease to be such by a change of family. But under newer laws, both inheritances and tutelages are for the most part so conferred that the persons are designated by natural relationship: as, for example, senatusconsults confer inheritance upon a mother and a son.
Iniuriarum et actionum ex delicto uenientium obligationes cum capite ambulant.
Obligations arising from injuries and actions proceeding from delict follow the person.
Si libertate adempta capitis deminutio subsecuta sit, nulli restitutioni aduersus seruum locus est, quia nec praetoria iurisdictione ita seruus obligatur, ut cum eo actio sit: sed utilis actio aduersus dominum danda est, ut Iulianus scribit, et nisi in solidum defendatur, permittendum mihi est in bona quae habuit mitti.3
If capitis deminutio has followed upon deprivation of liberty, there is no room for any restitution against a slave, because a slave is not so obligated even under praetorian jurisdiction that an action can be brought against him: but a useful action must be granted against his master, as Julian writes, and unless he is defended for the whole amount, I must be permitted to be put into possession of the property which he had.
Item cum ciuitas amissa est, nulla restitutionis aequitas est aduersus eum, qui amissis bonis et ciuitate relicta nudus exulat.
Likewise, when citizenship is lost, there is no equity of restitution against one who, having lost his property and left his state, is in exile in destitution.
- 4.5.7.prpersonis positis
personis is a dative governed by the verb deferuntur. The participle positis (perfect passive participle of pono) modifies personis, and in iure alieno depends on positis, meaning "persons placed under another's power."
- 4.5.7.prfamilia mutati
mutati is a perfect passive participle agreeing with the subject qui (nominative plural, referring to agnates). familia is an ablative of specification (or cause/instrument), meaning "having been changed with respect to family."
- 4.5.7.2in bona quae habuit mitti
mitti is the present passive infinitive of mittere, deriving from the praetorian remedy mittere in bona (to put into possession of property). It serves as the subject of the impersonal gerundive construction permittendum est. The subject of habuit is the debtor who became a slave.