Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §15.1.6.pr

Application of the Definition of Peculium to Sub-Slaves

Passage 2265 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Celsus argues, contrary to Labeo's view, that Tubero's definition of peculium must also apply to the peculium of sub-slaves.

[CELSUS libro sexto digestorum. ] §15.1.6.prDefinitio peculii quam Tubero exposuit, ut Labeo ait, ad uicariorum peculia non pertinet, quod falsum est: nam eo ipso, quod dominus seruo peculium constituit, etiam uicario constituisse existimandus est.
[CELSUS libro sexto digestorum.] The definition of peculium which Tubero set forth, as Labeo says, does not apply to the peculium of sub-slaves; which is false, because by the very fact that a master has established a peculium for a slave, he must be deemed to have established it for the sub-slave as well.

Notes

  1. §15.1.6.prquod falsum est — This is a continuative use of the relative pronoun (connecting relative) taking the entire preceding statement of Labeo (that Tubero's definition does not apply to the peculium of sub-slaves) as its antecedent.
  2. §15.1.6.preo ipso, quod — Meaning 'by the very fact that...'. The `quod` clause stands in apposition to explain the details of the ablative demonstrative `eo ipso`.
  3. §15.1.6.prconstituisse existimandus est — This is a personal construction using the gerundive `existimandus`, where the master (dominus, the subject of the sentence) is understood as the subject who is deemed to have performed the action of the perfect infinitive `constituisse` (to have established a peculium for the sub-slave as well).

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §15.1.6.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:15.1.6.pr

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.