[PAULUS libro secundo ad Uitellium. ] §34.2.32.prPediculis argenteis adiuncta sigilla aenea ceteraque omnia, quae ad eandem similitudinem redigi possunt, argento facto cedunt.
[PAULUS, in the second book of his commentary on Vitellius.] Bronze figurines attached to silver pedestals, and everything else that can be reduced to the same analogy, yield to the wrought silver.
§34.2.32.1Auro facto adnumerantur gemmae anulis inclusae, quippe anulorum sunt, cymbia argentea crustis aureis illigata.
Gems enclosed in rings are counted as wrought gold, since they belong to the rings; so too are silver cups overlaid with gold plates.
margaritae, quae ita ornamentis muliebribus contextae sunt, ut in his aspectus auri potentior sit, auro facto adnumerantur.
Pearls which are so woven into women's ornaments that the appearance of gold is more dominant in them, are counted as wrought gold.
aurea emblemata, quae in lapidibus apsidibus argenteis essent et replumbari possent, deberi Gallus ait: sed Labeo improbat.
Gallus says that golden ornaments (emblemata) which are on stones set in silver arches and can be refastened with lead, are due under the legacy; but Labeo disapproves of this.
Tubero autem, quod testator auri numero habuisset, legatum deberi ait: alioquin aurata et inclusa uasa alterius materiae auri numero non habenda.
Tubero, however, says that what the testator had held in the category of gold is due under the legacy; otherwise, gilded vessels or those made of another material with gold inlays are not to be held in the category of gold.
§34.2.32.2Argento potorio uel escario legato in his, quae dubium est cuius generis sint, consuetudinem patris familias spectandam, non etiam in his, quae certum est eius generis non esse.
When drinking or eating silver is bequeathed, in those things where it is doubtful to which category they belong, the custom of the father of the family must be regarded, but not also in those things which it is certain do not belong to that category.
§34.2.32.3Quidam primipilaris uxori suae argentum escarium legauerat: quaesitum est, cum pater familias in argento suo uasa habuerat, quibus et potabat et edebat, an legato haec quoque uasa continerentur.
A certain centurion of the first cohort (primipilaris) had bequeathed eating silver to his wife. The question arose, since the father of the family had among his silver some vessels with which he both drank and ate, whether these vessels also were contained in the legacy.
Scaeuola respondit contineri.
Scaevola answered that they were contained.
§34.2.32.4Idem, cum quaereretur de tali legato: 'hoc amplius filia mea dulcissima e medio sumito tibique habeto ornamentum omne meum muliebre cum auro et si qua alia muliebria apparuerint', cum testatrix negotiatrix fuerit, an non solum argentum, quod in domo uel intra horreum usibus eius fuit, legato cedit, sed etiam quod in basilica fuit muliebre: respondit, si testatrix habuit proprium argentum ad usum suum paratum, non uideri id legatum, quod negotiandi causa uenale proponi soleret, nisi de eo quoque sensisse is qui petat probet.
The same jurist, when a question was asked concerning such a legacy: 'Furthermore, let my sweetest daughter take from the estate and have for herself all my women's ornaments with gold, and whatever other women's articles shall appear,' since the testatrix had been a merchant, whether not only the silver which was in her house or in her storehouse for her own use yields to the legacy, but also the women's silver which was in the public market (basilica): he answered that if the testatrix had her own silver prepared for her own use, that which was accustomed to be offered for sale for the purpose of trade is not deemed to be bequeathed, unless the claimant proves that she had intended that as well.
§34.2.32.5Neratius Proculum refert ita respondisse uasis electrinis legatis nihil interesse, quantum ea uasa, de quibus quaeritur, argenti aut electri habebant, sed utrum argentum electro an electrum argento cedat? id ex aspectu uasorum facilius intellegi posse: quod si in obscuro sit, inspiciendum est, in utro numero ea uasa is, qui testamentum fecit, habuerit.
Neratius reports that Proculus answered thus: when electrum vessels are bequeathed, it makes no difference how much silver or electrum those vessels in question contained, but whether the silver yields to the electrum, or the electrum to the silver; this can be more easily understood from the appearance of the vessels; but if it is unclear, it must be inspected in which category the person who made the will had held those vessels.
§34.2.32.6Labeo testamento suo Neratiae uxori suae nominatim legauit 'uestem mundum muliebrem omnem ornamentaque muliebria omnia lanam linum purpuram uersicoloria facta infectaque omnia' et cetera.
Labeo in his will specifically bequeathed to his wife Neratia: 'all women's clothing, all women's toilet articles, all women's ornaments, wool, flax, purple, all multicolored things, both wrought and unwrought,' and so forth.
sed non mutat substantiam rerum non necessaria uerborum multiplicatio, quia Labeo testamento lanam ac deinde uersicoloria scripsit, quasi desit lana tincta lana esse, detractoque uerbo 'uersicolorio' nihilo minus etiam uersicoloria debebuntur, si non appareat aliam defuncti uoluntatem fuisse.
But the unnecessary multiplication of words does not change the substance of things, for Labeo wrote in his will wool and then multicolored things, as if dyed wool ceased to be wool; and even if the word 'multicolored' were removed, multicolored things will nonetheless be due, if it does not appear that the deceased had a different intention.
§34.2.32.7Titia mundum muliebrem Septiciae legauit: ea putabat sibi legata et ornamenta et monilia, in quibus gemmae et margaritae insunt, et anulos et uestem tam coloriam: quaesitum est, an haec omnia mundo continentur.
Titia bequeathed women's toilet articles (mundus muliebris) to Septicia. The latter thought that ornaments, necklaces containing gems and pearls, rings, and also multicolored clothing were bequeathed to her. The question arose whether all these are contained in the toilet articles.
Scaeuola respondit ex his quae proponerentur dumtaxat argentum balneare mundo muliebri contineri.
Scaevola answered that of the things proposed, only the bath silver was contained in the women's toilet articles.
§34.2.32.8Item cum inaures, in quibus duae margaritae elenchi et smaragdi duo, legasset et postea elenchos eisdem detraxisset et quaereretur, an nihilo minus detractis elenchis inaures deberentur: respondit deberi, si maneant inaures, quamuis margarita eis detracta sint.
Likewise, when a person had bequeathed earrings in which were two pear-shaped pearls (elenchi) and two emeralds, and afterwards had removed the pearls from them, and it was asked whether the earrings were nonetheless due although the pearls had been removed: he answered that they were due if the earrings remained, although the pearls had been removed from them.
§34.2.32.9De alio idem respondit, cum quaedam ornamentum mamillatum ex cylindris triginta quattuor et tympanis margaritis triginta quattuor legasset et postea quattuor ex cylindris, etiam sex de margaritis detraxisset.
He gave the same answer concerning another case, where a woman had bequeathed a breast ornament consisting of thirty-four cylindrical gems and thirty-four drum-shaped pearls, and afterwards had removed four of the cylindrical gems and also six of the pearls.