- 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-lat1:4.9.1.pr-4.9.1.8
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-10
Ulpian discusses the praetor's edict regarding shipowners, innkeepers, and stablekeepers, explaining its great utility and reasonableness, while defining the scope of liable parties, covered goods, and the establishment of custody.
[ULPIANUS libro quarto decimo ad edictum.]
[ULPIAN in his fourteenth book on the Edict.]
Ait praetor: 'Nautae caupones stabularii quod cuiusque saluum fore receperint1 nisi restituent, in eos iudicium dabo'.
The praetor says: “If shipowners, innkeepers, and stablekeepers do not restore what they have received of anyone’s property on the undertaking that it would be safe, I will grant an action against them.”
Maxima utilitas est huius edicti, quia necesse est plerumque eorum fidem sequi et res custodiae eorum committere. ne quisquam putet2 grauiter hoc aduersus eos constitutum: nam est in ipsorum arbitrio, ne quem recipiant, et nisi hoc esset statutum, materia daretur cum furibus aduersus eos quos recipiunt coeundi, cum ne nunc quidem abstineant huiusmodi fraudibus.
The utility of this edict is greatest, because it is generally necessary to rely on their honesty and to commit things to their custody. Let no one think that this has been established too harshly against them; for it is in their own power not to receive anyone, and unless this had been established, an opportunity would be given to conspire with thieves against those whom they receive, seeing that even now they do not refrain from frauds of this kind.
Qui sunt igitur, qui teneantur, uidendum est. ait praetor 'nautae'. nautam accipere debemus eum qui nauem exercet: quamuis nautae appellantur omnes, qui nauis nauigandae causa in naue sint: sed de exercitore solummodo praetor sentit. nec enim debet, inquit Pomponius, per remigem aut mesonautam obligari, sed per se uel per nauis magistrum: quamquam si ipse alicui e nautis committi iussit, sine dubio debeat obligari.
We must therefore see who they are that are held liable. The praetor says “shipowners” (nautae). We ought to understand by “shipowner” (nauta) the person who runs the ship; although all those who are on board for the purpose of navigating the ship are called “nautae”, yet the praetor refers only to the ship’s operator (exercitor). For he ought not, says Pomponius, to be bound through a rower or a subordinate sailor, but through himself or through the master of the ship; although, if he himself ordered a deposit to be made with any of the sailors, he should without doubt be bound.
Et sunt quidam in nauibus, qui custodiae gratia nauibus praeponuntur, ut ναυφύλακες et diaetarii. si quis igitur ex his receperit, puto in exercitorem dandam actionem, quia is, qui eos huiusmodi officio praeponit, committi eis permittit, quamquam ipse nauicularius uel magister id faciat, quod χειρέμβολον appellant. sed et si hoc non exercet, tamen de recepto nauicularius tenebitur.
And there are certain persons on board who are set over the ships for the sake of custody, such as ship-guards (nauphylakes) and cabin-stewards. If, therefore, any of these has received property, I think an action should be granted against the ship-operator, because he who places them in an office of this kind permits property to be committed to them, although the shipowner himself or the master may issue what they call a receipt (cheirembolon). But even if he does not practice this, the shipowner will nevertheless be liable for what has been received.
De exercitoribus ratium, item lyntrariis nihil cauetur: sed idem constitui oportere Labeo scribit, et hoc iure utimur.
Nothing is provided regarding operators of rafts, or boatmen; but Labeo writes that the same rules ought to be established, and this is the law we follow.
Caupones autem et stabularios aeque eos accipiemus, qui cauponam uel stabulum exercent, institoresue eorum. ceterum si qui opera mediastini fungitur, non continetur, ut puta atriarii et focarii et his similes.
Moreover, we shall likewise understand by innkeepers and stablekeepers those who run an inn or a stable, or their managers. But if anyone performs the duties of a common servant, he is not included, such as hall-porters, hearth-keepers, and the like.
Ait praetor: 'quod cuiusque saluum fore receperint’: hoc est quamcumque rem siue mercem receperint. inde apud Uiuianum relatum est ad eas quoque res hoc edictum pertinere, quae mercibus accederent, ueluti uestimenta quibus in nauibus uterentur et cetera quae ad cottidianum usum habemus.
The praetor says: “what they have received of anyone’s property on the undertaking that it would be safe”; this means whatever thing or merchandise they have received. Hence it is reported in Vivianus that this edict also applies to those things which accompanied the merchandise, such as clothes which they used on board, and other things which we have for daily use.
Item Pomponius libro trigensimo quarto scribit parui referre, res nostras an alienas intulerimus, si tamen nostra intersit3 saluas esse: etenim nobis magis, quam quorum sunt, debent solui. et ideo si pignori merces accepero ob pecuniam nauticam, mihi magis quam debitori nauta tenebitur, si ante eas suscepit.
Likewise Pomponius writes in his thirty-fourth book that it matters little whether we have brought in our own property or another’s, provided that it is in our interest that they should be safe; for payment ought to be made to us rather than to those to whom they belong. And therefore if I have received merchandise in pledge for maritime loan, the shipowner will be liable to me rather than to the debtor, if he received them beforehand.
Recipit autem saluum fore utrum si4 in nauem res missae ei adsignatae sunt: an et si non sint adsignatae, hoc tamen ipso, quod in nauem missae sunt, receptae uidentur? et puto omnium eum recipere custodiam, quae in nauem illatae sunt, et factum non solum nautarum praestare debere, sed et uectorum,
But does he receive them on the undertaking that they will be safe only if the things sent on board have been formally assigned to him? Or even if they have not been assigned, are they deemed to be received by the very fact that they have been sent on board? I think that he undertakes the custody of all things that are brought on board, and that he must answer not only for the acts of the sailors, but also for those of the passengers.
- 4.9.1.prsaluum fore receperint
An accusative with infinitive clause serving as the object of receperint (with the relative pronoun quod acting as the subject of the infinitive). fore is the future infinitive (futurum esse), translating literally to "undertook that it would be safe."
- 4.9.1.1ne quisquam putet
A present subjunctive in an independent clause used with the negative particle ne to express a negative command or exhortation ("let no one think") directed at the reader, or acting as a parenthetical clause of purpose.
- 4.9.1.7intersit
The present subjunctive of the impersonal verb interest. Although placed within the conditional clause introduced by si, the subjunctive is used because the entire sentence is in indirect speech governed by Pomponius scribit.
- 4.9.1.8utrum si... an et si...
A double alternative question syntax using utrum... an..., contrasting two conditional clauses (si... and et si...). It functions to question the range of circumstances under which the custody (recipit) is deemed to be established.
Translated by Gemini 3.5 Flash (published 2026-07-12) · Revision history (2, latest 2026-09-22)
- 2026-09-22 AI review — source 2