[ULPIANUS libro uicensimo ad Sabinum. ] §34.2.19.10Sed cui uasa sint legata, non solum ea continentur, quae aliquid in se recipiant edendi bibendique causa paratum, sed et quae aliquid sustineant: et ideo scutellas uel promulsidaria contineri.
[ULPIANUS, in his twentieth book on Sabinus.] But to whomsoever vessels are bequeathed, not only those are included which are designed to receive something prepared for eating or drinking, but also those which support something; and therefore small dishes or appetizer-platters are included.
repositoria quoque continebuntur: nam uasorum appellatio generalis est, dicimus uasa uinaria et naualia.
Table-stands will also be included; for the term 'vessels' is general, as we speak of wine-vessels and ship-tackle.
§34.2.19.11Infecti autem argenti appellatio rudem materiam continet, id est non factam.
Moreover, the term 'unwrought silver' includes the raw material, that is, what is unfashioned.
quid ergo si coeptum sit argentum fabricari? nondum perfectum utrum facti an infecti appellatione contineatur, dubitari potest: sed puto magis facti.
What if silver has begun to be fashioned? It can be doubted whether what is not yet completed is included under the term of wrought or unwrought silver; but I think rather of wrought.
certe si iam erat factum, sed caelabatur, facti appellatione continebitur.
Certainly, if it was already fashioned but was being engraved, it will be included under the term of wrought silver.
an et caelati continebitur, quod caelari coepit? et puto contineri, si cui forte caelatum sit argentum legatum.
Will it also be included under 'engraved silver' because it has begun to be engraved? And I think it is included, if by chance engraved silver has been bequeathed to anyone.
§34.2.19.12Si cui escarium argentum legatum sit, id solum debebitur, quod ad epulandum in ministerio habuit, id est ad esum et potum.
If table-silver is bequeathed to anyone, only that will be owed which he had in service for banqueting, that is, for eating and drinking.
unde de aquiminario dubitatum est: et puto contineri, nam et hoc propter escam paratur.
Hence there was doubt about the water-basin; and I think it is included, for this too is prepared for the sake of food.
certe si caccabos argenteos habebat uel miliarium argenteum uel sartaginem uel aliud uas ad coquendum, dubitari poterit an escario contineatur.
Certainly, if he had silver pots, or a silver water-heater, or a frying-pan, or any other vessel for cooking, it can be doubted whether it is included under table-silver.
et haec magis cocinatorii instrumenti sunt.
And these belong rather to cooking implements.
§34.2.19.13Perueniamus et ad gemmas inclusas argento auroque.
Let us proceed also to gems set in silver and gold.
et ait Sabinus auro argentoue cedere: ei enim cedit, cuius maior est species.
And Sabinus says that they yield to the gold or silver; for it yields to that whose appearance is greater.
quod recte expressit: semper enim cum quaerimus, quid cui cedat, illud spectamus, quid cuius rei ornandae causa adhibetur, ut accessio cedat principali.
Which he expressed correctly; for always when we ask what yields to what, we look to this: what is employed for the purpose of decorating which thing, so that the accessory yields to the principal.
cedent igitur gemmae, fialis uel lancibus inclusae, auro argentoue.
Therefore, gems set in bowls or platters will yield to the gold or silver.
§34.2.19.14Sed et in coronis mensarum gemmae coronis cedent et hae mensis.
But also in the rims of tables, the gems will yield to the rims, and these to the tables.
§34.2.19.15In margaritis quoque et auro idem est: nam si margaritae auri ornandi gratia adhibitae sunt, auro cedunt, si contra, aurum margaritis cedet.
In the case of pearls and gold, it is the same; for if pearls are employed for the sake of decorating gold, they yield to the gold; if the contrary, the gold will yield to the pearls.
§34.2.19.16Idem et in gemmis anulis inclusis.
The same also in the case of gems set in rings.
§34.2.19.17Gemmae autem sunt perlucidae materiae, quas, ut refert Sabinus libris ad Uitellium, Seruius a lapillis eo distinguebat, quod gemmae essent perlucidae materiae, uelut smaragdi chrysolithi amethysti, lapilli autem contrariae superioribus naturae, ut obsidiani, ueientani.
Now, gems are of translucent material, which, as Sabinus reports in his books to Vitellius, Servius distinguished from small stones by this fact: that gems are of translucent material, such as emeralds, chrysolites, amethysts, while small stones are of a nature contrary to the former, such as obsidian or Veientan stones.
§34.2.19.18Margaritas autem nec gemmis nec lapillis contineri satis constitisse ibidem Sabinus ait, quia concha apud rubrum mare et crescit et coalescit.
Moreover, Sabinus says in the same place that it is well established that pearls are included neither under gems nor under small stones, because they both grow and coalesce inside a shell in the Red Sea.
§34.2.19.19Murrina autem uasa in gemmis non esse Cassius scribit.
But Cassius writes that murrhine vessels are not among gems.
§34.2.19.20Auro legato uasa aurea continentur et gemmis gemmea uasa.
When gold is bequeathed, golden vessels are included, and when gems are bequeathed, vessels of gem.
secundum haec siue gemmae sint in aureis uasis siue in argenteis, auro argentoue cedent, quoniam hoc spectamus, quae res cuius rei ornandae causa fuerit adhibita, non quae sit pretiosior.
According to this, whether gems are in golden or silver vessels, they will yield to the gold or silver, since we look to this: which thing was employed for the purpose of decorating which thing, not which is more precious.