[ULPIANUS libro octauo ad Sabinum. ] §29.2.30.prCum quidam legationis causa absens filium heredem institutum non potuisset iubere adire in prouincia agentem, diuus Pius rescripsit consulibus subuenire ei oportere mortuo filio, eo quod rei publicae causa aberat. §29.2.30.1Quod dicitur: 'proximus a filio postumo heres, dum mulier praegnas est aut putatur esse, adire hereditatem non potest: sed si scit non esse praegnatem, potest' accipe proximus a uentre, qui suum heredem pariturus est.
[ULPIANUS in the eighth book on Sabinus.]\n\nWhen a certain person, being absent on an embassy, had not been able to order his son, who had been appointed heir and was staying in a province, to accept the inheritance, and the son died, the Divine Pius wrote in a rescript to the consuls that he ought to be relieved, because he was absent on public business.\n\nWhat is said: 'The heir next after a posthumous child cannot accept the inheritance as long as the woman is pregnant or believed to be so; but if he knows she is not pregnant, he can,' you should understand as the one next to the womb which is about to bring forth a self-successor.
et non solum ad testatos haec uerba, uerum ad intestatos quoque pertinent.
And these words apply not only to testate but also to intestate successions.
et in eo uentre idem accipias, qui legitimum uel consanguineum pariturus est, quoniam mortis tempore qui in utero est, quantum ad moram faciendam inferioribus et sibi locum faciendum si fuerit editus, pro iam nato habetur.
And with respect to that womb, you should understand the same of one which is about to bring forth a statutory or consanguineous heir, since he who is in the womb at the time of death is regarded as already born, so far as concerns delaying those of a lower degree and making a place for himself if he should be born.
idemque et per bonorum possessionem edictalem denique praetor uentrem mittit in possessionem. §29.2.30.2Siue igitur putem praegnatem siue sit re uera praegnas, quae eum paritura est qui suus heres futurus est, adire hereditatem non possum, quoniam in eo est, ut rumpatur testamentum, nisi si proponas uentrem institutum uel exheredatum. §29.2.30.3Quod dicitur 'si putetur esse praegnas', sic accipiendum est, si dicat se praegnatem.
And the same is true under the edictal possession of goods; in short, the praetor sends the womb into possession.\n\nTherefore, whether I think her pregnant or she is in fact pregnant, who is about to bring forth one who will be a self-successor, I cannot accept the inheritance, since it is in a state where the will may be broken, unless you suppose the womb was appointed heir or disinherited.\n\nWhat is said: 'if she is believed to be pregnant,' is to be understood in this way: if she herself says that she is pregnant.
quid ergo, si ipsa non dicat, sed neget, alii dicant praegnatem esse? adhuc adiri hereditas non potest: finge obstetrices dicere.
What then, if she herself does not say so, but denies it, while others say she is pregnant? Even then, the inheritance cannot be accepted; suppose mid-wives say so.
quid si ipse putat solus? si iusta ratione ductus, non potest adire: si secundum multorum opinionem, potest. §29.2.30.4Quid ergo si praegnas fuit, cum putaret heres non esse praegnatem et adiit, mox abortum factum est? procul dubio nihil egerit.
What if he alone thinks so? If led by a just reason, he cannot accept; if according to the opinion of many, he can.\n\nWhat then, if she was pregnant, when the heir thought she was not pregnant and accepted, and soon after a miscarriage occurred? Without doubt he has accomplished nothing.
totiens igitur ei sua praesumptio proficit, quotiens concurrit cum ueritate. §29.2.30.5Sed et si ipsa mulier heres instituta sit, quae se praegnatem fingit, adeundo adquiret hereditatem: per contrarium non adquiret, si se putet praegnatem, cum non sit. §29.2.30.6Suum heredem certum est ex asse heredem esse, etsi putat esse praegnatem mulierem, quae non est praegnas.
Therefore, his own presumption benefits him only so often as it concurs with the truth.\n\nBut also if the woman herself, who feigns that she is pregnant, has been appointed heir, she will acquire the inheritance by accepting it; on the contrary, she will not acquire it if she thinks she is pregnant when she is not.\n\nIt is certain that a self-successor is heir to the whole estate, even if he thinks the woman is pregnant who is not pregnant.
quid si unum in utero habeat, an ex parte dimidia sit heres, siue institutum postumum proponas siue intestatum patrem decessisse? quod et Sextum Pomponium opinatum Tertullianus libro quarto quaestionum refert: putasse enim, sicuti cum uacuo utero suus ex asse heres est, ita et cum unum gerit nec per naturam humanae condicionis alium partum formare potest (quod quidem post certum tempus conceptionis eueniet), ex parte dimidia et ignorantem fore heredem, non ex quarta, ut Iulianus putat.
What if she has one child in her womb? Is he heir to a half share, whether you suppose a posthumous child was appointed heir, or that the father died intestate? And Tertullianus, in the fourth book of his Questions, reports that Sextus Pomponius also held this opinion: for he thought that, just as when the womb is empty, the self-successor is heir to the whole, so too when she carries one child and cannot by the nature of human condition form another birth (which indeed will happen after a certain time of conception), he will be heir to a half share, even if ignorant of the fact, and not to a quarter share, as Iulianus thinks.\n\nBut if a son-in-power or a slave has been appointed heir, is their own knowledge or opinion to be considered, or that of the master or father?
§29.2.30.7Scientia autem uel opinio, si filius familias uel seruus instituti sunt, utrum ipsorum an domini uel patris accipienda sit? finge patrem putasse praegnatem, filium certum esse fingere et sic adire, an adquirat hereditatem? puto adquirere: sed contra non adquirere. §29.2.30.8Si certus sum non esse falsum testamentum uel irritum uel ruptum, licet dicatur esse, possum adire hereditatem.
Suppose that the father thought she was pregnant, but the son was certain that she was feigning it and accepted accordingly: does he acquire the inheritance? I think he acquires it; but in the opposite case, he does not acquire it.\n\nIf I am certain that the will is not forged, or ineffectual, or broken, although it is said to be so, I can accept the inheritance.