- 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-lat1:9.2.45.pr-9.2.45.5
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-15
Paulus discusses the interpretation of "knowledge" under the Lex Aquilia, the right of action after a slave's recovery, accidental collisions, the requirements and limits of self-defense, and the liability for removing a sound wall.
[PAULUS libro decimo ad Sabinum.]
[PAULUS, in the tenth book on Sabinus.]
Scientiam hic pro patientia accipimus, ut qui prohibere potuit teneatur, si non fecerit.
Here we take “knowledge” to mean “toleration,” so that he who was able to prevent it is held liable if he did not do so.
Lege Aquilia agi potest et sanato uulnerato seruo.1
An action can be brought under the Lex Aquilia even if the wounded slave has healed.
Si meum seruum, cum liberum putares, occideris, lege Aquilia teneberis.
If you kill my slave, thinking him to be a free man, you will be held liable under the Lex Aquilia.
Cum stramenta ardentia transilirent duo, concurrerunt amboque ceciderunt et alter flamma consumptus est: nihil eo nomine potest agi, si non intellegitur, uter ab utro2 euersus sit.
When two persons were jumping over burning straw, they collided and both fell, and one was consumed by the flame: no action can be brought on that account, if it is not understood which of them was knocked down by the other.
Qui, cum aliter tueri se non possent, damni culpam dederint, innoxii sunt: uim enim ui defendere omnes leges omniaque iura permittunt. sed si defendendi mei causa lapidem in aduersarium misero, sed non eum, sed praetereuntem percussero, tenebor lege Aquilia: illum enim solum qui uim infert ferire conceditur, et hoc, si tuendi dumtaxat, non etiam ulciscendi causa3 factum sit.
Those who, since they could not otherwise protect themselves, have caused damage through fault, are guiltless: for all laws and all rights permit the repelling of force by force. But if, for the purpose of defending myself, I throw a stone at my adversary, but strike not him, but a passerby, I shall be held liable under the Lex Aquilia: for it is permitted to strike only him who applies force, and this only if it is done for the sake of defense and not of vengeance.
Qui idoneum parietem sustulit, damni iniuria domino eius tenetur.
He who has pulled down a sound wall is liable to its owner for wrongful damage.
- 9.2.45.1et sanato uulnerato seruo
The phrase sanato uulnerato seruo is an ablative absolute construction consisting of the noun seruus and two participles (uulnerato, sanato), expressing a concessive meaning ('even though the wounded slave has healed'). The conjunction et functions adverbially to mean 'even'.
- 9.2.45.3uter ab utro
An expression using a double interrogative pronoun. The nominative uter ('which of the two') and the ablative ab utro ('by which of the two') are combined to form the core of the indirect question uter ab utro euersus sit ('which of the two was knocked down by the other').
- 9.2.45.4tuendi dumtaxat, non etiam ulciscendi causa
The ablative noun causa ('for the sake of') governs the genitive gerunds tuendi ('of defending') and ulciscendi ('of avenging'). The adverb dumtaxat limits the former to mean 'only/merely'.