Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §15.3.9.pr

Absence of Intention for Dowry and Denial of Benefit

Passage 2329 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

Explains that if a father had no prior intention of providing a dowry, a slave's payment of it is not considered to have been turned to the father's benefit.

[IAUOLENUS libro duodecimo ex Cassio. ] §15.3.9.prSi uero pater dotem daturus non fuit, in rem patris uersum esse non uidetur.
[JAVOLENUS, from Cassius, book 12] But if the father had no intention of giving a dowry, it is not considered to have been turned to the father's benefit.

Notes

  1. §15.3.9.prdaturus non fuit — An active periphrastic conjugation consisting of the future participle `daturus` and `fuit` (perfect indicative of `esse`), expressing the subject's past intention ("had no intention of giving" or "was not going to give").
  2. §15.3.9.prin rem patris uersum esse — "to have been turned to the father's benefit" (literally, "turned into the property of the father"). `in rem uerti` is a legal technical expression denoting that an enrichment from a subordinate's transaction has entered the master's or father's estate. The subject of the passive infinitive `uersum esse` is the borrowed money applied as a dowry, implied from the preceding context.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §15.3.9.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:15.3.9.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.