- 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-lat1:5.2.22.pr-5.2.22.3
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-11
The author discusses cases where a person who prosecutes a complaint of an inofficious testament on behalf of another (such as a son, a deceased predecessor, or an arrogated son) does not lose their own legacy even if they fail in the lawsuit.
[TRYPHONINUS libro septimo decimo disputationum.]
[TRYPHONINUS in his Seventeenth Book of Disputations.]
Filius non impeditur, quo minus inofficiosum testamentum matris accusaret,1 si pater eius legatum ex testamento matris accipiet uel adisset hereditatem, quamquam in eius esset potestate: nec prohiberi patrem dixi iure filii accusare: nam indignatio filii est.
A son is not prevented from accusing the testament of his mother as inofficious, even if his father accepts a legacy under the mother’s testament or has entered upon her inheritance, although the son was in the father’s power; nor did I say that the father is prohibited from accusing by right of the son, for the resentment is the son’s.
Et quaerebatur, si non optinuisset in accusando, an quod patri datum est publicaretur? quoniam alii commodum uictoriae parat et in hac causa nihil ex officio patris, sed totum de meritis filii agitur. et inclinandum est non perdere patrem sibi datum,2 si secundum testamentum pronuntiatum fuisset.
And it was asked: if he did not succeed in the accusation, would what was given to the father be confiscated? Since the father is preparing the advantage of victory for another, and in this case nothing is done out of the father’s own duty, but everything depends on the merits of the son. And we should incline to the view that the father does not lose what was given to him, if judgment was pronounced in favor of the testament.
Multo magis si mihi legatum testator dedit, cuius de inofficioso testamento filius agens decessit3 me herede relicto, egoque hereditariam causam peregi et uictus sum: id quod mihi eo testamento relictum est, non perdam: utique si iam defunctus agere coeperat.
Much more so, if a testator gave a legacy to me, and his son, while contesting his testament as inofficious, died leaving me as his heir, and I prosecuted the inheritance case and was defeated: I shall not lose what was left to me by that testament, at any rate if the deceased had already begun to contest it.
Item si adrogaui eum, qui instituerat litem de inofficioso testamento eius qui mihi legatum dedit, litemque peregero nomine filii nec optinuero: perdere me legatum non oportet, quia non sum indignus, ut auferatur mihi a fisco id quod derelictum est:4 cum non proprio nomine, sed iure cuiusdam successionis egi.
Likewise, if I have arrogated a person who had instituted a lawsuit concerning the inofficious testament of one who gave me a legacy, and I have prosecuted the lawsuit in the name of the son and did not succeed: I ought not to lose my legacy, because I am not unworthy so that what was left to me should be taken away by the fiscus; since I did not sue in my own name, but by right of a certain succession.
- 5.2.22.prquo minus inofficiosum testamentum matris accusaret
The subjunctive clause with quo minus (accusaret) depending on the verb of prevention non impeditur. The imperfect tense is used here under the influence of the general past context or the following dixi.
- 5.2.22.1non perdere patrem sibi datum
An accusative with infinitive clause depending on the impersonal inclinandum est. patrem is the subject accusative of the infinitive perdere, and sibi datum ('what was given to him') acts as the direct object with an omitted antecedent.
- 5.2.22.2cuius de inofficioso testamento filius agens decessit
The genitive relative pronoun cuius (whose antecedent is testator) modifies testamento, with the prepositional phrase de inofficioso placed between them. The entire phrase represents a hyperbaton: 'the son of the testator, acting against the inofficious testament of the testator.'
- 5.2.22.3quia non sum indignus, ut auferatur mihi a fisco id quod derelictum est
The clause ut + subjunctive (auferatur) following the adjective indignus to express result or characteristic ('not so unworthy that what was left should be taken away by the treasury').