- 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-lat1:5.3.22.pr
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-11
When a bona fide possessor sells inheritance property and later buys it back, holding both the thing and the price, the passage discusses what must be returned to the claimant, concluding from the address of the divine Hadrian that both the thing and the profit from the sale must be restored.
[PAULUS libro uicensimo ad edictum.]
[PAULUS in the twentieth book on the Edict.]
Si et rem et pretium habeat bonae fidei possessor, puta1 quod eandem redemerit: an audiendus sit, si uelit rem dare, non pretium? in praedone dicimus electionem esse debere actoris: an hic magis possessor audiendus sit, si uelit rem tradere licet deteriorem factam, non petitor,2 si pretium desideret, quod inuerecundum sit tale desiderium: an uero, quia ex re hereditaria locupletior sit, et id quod amplius habet ex pretio restituere debeat, uidendum.3 nam et in oratione diui Hadriani ita est: 'Dispicite, patres conscripti, numquid sit aequius4 possessorem non facere lucrum et pretium, quod ex aliena re perceperit, reddere, quia potest existimari in locum hereditariae rei uenditae pretium eius successisse et quodammodo ipsum hereditarium factum.' oportet igitur possessorem et rem restituere petitori et quod ex uenditione eius rei lucratus est.
If a bona fide possessor should have both the thing and the price, for example because he has bought back the same thing: should he be heard if he wishes to give the thing and not the price? In the case of a robber we say that the choice ought to belong to the plaintiff; but should the possessor rather be heard here, if he wishes to deliver the thing even though it has deteriorated, and not the claimant, if he should desire the price, on the ground that such a desire is shameless? Or indeed, since he has become richer from the inheritance property, must we see whether he ought to restore also that which he has in excess from the price? For in the address of the divine Hadrian it is stated as follows: ‘Consider, Conscript Fathers, whether it is not more equitable that the possessor should not make a profit and should return the price which he received from another’s property, because it can be deemed that its price has succeeded into the place of the sold inheritance property and has in a way itself become part of the inheritance.’ Therefore, the possessor must restore to the claimant both the thing and what he has gained from the sale of that thing.
- 5.3.22.prputa
The second-person singular imperative of the verb putare (to think/suppose), used parenthetically or adverbially to mean 'for instance' or 'suppose'.
- 5.3.22.prnon petitor
In contrast to the preceding clause 'an hic magis possessor audiendus sit', the predicate 'audiendus sit' is omitted after 'non petitor' (hence, 'and not the claimant [should be heard]').
- 5.3.22.pruidendum
An impersonal use of the gerundive of uidere with the omission of the copula 'est' (uidendum est). It means 'it must be considered' or 'we must see', governing the preceding indirect question introduced by 'an uero'.
- 5.3.22.prnumquid sit aequius
The subjunctive present 'sit' is used in an indirect question introduced by 'numquid' (whether). The comparative adjective 'aequius' (more equitable) takes the accusative and infinitive clauses 'possessorem non facere... et... reddere' as its subject.