Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §30.1.6.pr

Legacy Conditioned on Ownership at Death

Passage 4602 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

With regard to the legacy of a slave who 'shall be mine when I die', Julianus explains that this is a condition rather than an identification, meaning that the legacy is valid only to the extent of the share owned by the testator at the time of death.

[IULIANUS libro trigesimo tertio digestorum. ] §30.1.6.pr'Stichum, qui meus erit cum moriar, heres meus dato': magis condicionem legato iniecisse quam demonstrare uoluisse patrem familias apparet eo quod, si demonstrandi causa haec oratio poneretur, ita concepta esset 'Stichus qui meus est', non 'qui meus erit'.
[JULIANUS, Book 33 on the Digest.] With regard to the legacy, 'Stichus, who shall be mine when I die, let my heir give him': it appears that the paterfamilias wished to impose a condition on the legacy rather than to identify the object, because, if this wording had been set down for the purpose of identification, it would have been drafted 'Stichus who is mine', and not 'who shall be mine'.
sed condicio talis accipi debet 'quatenus meus erit', ut, si totum alienauerit, legatum exstinguatur, si partem, pro ea parte debeatur, quae testatoris mortis tempore fuerit.
However, such a condition must be understood as 'to the extent that he shall be mine', so that if the testator has alienated the whole, the legacy is extinguished, and if a part, it is due in proportion to that part which existed at the time of the testator's death.

Notes

  1. 30.1.6.prapparet — The infinitive clauses with accusative subject (patrem familias ... iniecisse ... uoluisse) function as the subject of the impersonal verb apparet. It is translated as 'it appears that the paterfamilias had... rather than wished...'.
  2. 30.1.6.prconcepta esset — The subjunctive imperfect forms poneretur and concepta esset form a contrary-to-fact conditional clause in present time. It implies: 'if it had been set down..., it would have been drafted... (but it was not)'.
  3. 30.1.6.prquatenus meus erit — This indicates that the original expression with a relative clause, qui meus erit ('who shall be mine'), should be reinterpreted as a quantitative limitation quatenus meus erit ('to the extent that he shall be mine'). This explains why the legacy is reduced to the co-owned share in the event of partial alienation.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §30.1.6.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:30.1.6.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.