[ULPIANUS libro trigensimo nono ad edictum. ] §37.11.1.prTabulas testamenti accipere debemus omnem materiae figuram: siue igitur tabulae sint ligneae siue cuiuscumque alterius materiae, siue chartae siue membranae sint uel si corio alicuius animalis, tabulae recte dicentur. §37.11.1.1Non autem omnes tabulas praetor sequitur hac parte edicti, sed supremas, hoc est cas, quae nouissimae ita factae sunt, post quas nullae factae sunt: supremae enim hac sunt non quae sub ipso mortis tempore factae sunt, sed post quas nullae factae sunt, licet hae ueteres sint.
[ULPIANUS libro trigensimo nono ad edictum.] By "tablets of a will" we ought to understand every shape of material; therefore, whether the tablets be of wood, or of any other material, whether of paper, or of parchment, or if of the skin of some animal, they will correctly be called "tablets." The praetor, however, does not follow all tablets in this part of the edict, but the last ones, that is, those which were so made most recently, after which none were made; for "the last" in this context are not those which were made at the very time of death, but those after which none were made, even though these may be old.
§37.11.1.2Sufficit autem extare tabulas, etsi non proferantur, si certum sit eas exstare.
It is sufficient, moreover, that the tablets exist, even if they are not produced, provided it is certain that they exist.
igitur etsi apud furem sint uel apud eum, apud quem depositae sunt, dubitari non oportet admitti posse bonorum possessionem: nec enim opus est aperire eas, ut bonorum possessio secundum tabulas agnoscatur.
Therefore, even if they are in the possession of a thief, or of the person with whom they were deposited, there should be no doubt that the possession of goods can be granted; for there is no need to open them in order for the possession of goods according to the tablets to be acknowledged.
§37.11.1.3Semel autem exstitisse tabulas mortuo testatore desideratur, tametsi exstare desierint: quare et si postea interciderunt, bonorum possessio peti poterit.
But it is required that the tablets existed at least once when the testator died, even if they have ceased to exist; therefore, even if they have subsequently perished, the possession of goods can be petitioned for.
§37.11.1.4Scientiam tamen exigemus, ut sciat heres extare tabulas certusque sit delatam sibi bonorum possessionem.
However, we require knowledge, so that the heir knows that the tablets exist and is certain that the possession of goods has been offered to him.
§37.11.1.5Si quis in duobus exemplaribus fecerit testamentum et aliud exstet, aliud non exstet, tabulae extare uidentur petique potest bonorum possessio.
If anyone has made a will in two copies, and one exists while the other does not, the tablets are deemed to exist, and the possession of goods can be petitioned for.
§37.11.1.6Sed et si in duobus codicibus simul signatis alios atque alios heredes scripserit et utrumque extet, ex utroque quasi ex uno competit bonorum possessio, quia pro unis tabulis habendum est et supremum utrumque accipiemus.
But also, if in two codices sealed at the same time he has written different heirs, and both exist, the possession of goods is competent from both as if from one, because they must be regarded as a single set of tablets, and we shall accept both as the last.
§37.11.1.7Sed si unum fecerit testator quasi testamentum, aliud quasi exemplum, si quidem id extat quod uoluit esse testamentum, bonorum possessio petetur, si uero id quod exemplum erat, bonorum possessio peti non poterit, ut Pomponius scripsit.
But if the testator made one as the will, and the other as a copy, if indeed that exists which he wished to be the will, the possession of goods will be petitioned for; but if only that which was the copy exists, the possession of goods cannot be petitioned for, as Pomponius wrote.
§37.11.1.8Exigit praetor, ut is, cuius bonorum possessio datur, utroque tempore ius testamenti faciendi habuerit, et cum facit testamentum et cum moritur.
The praetor requires that he whose possession of goods is given had the right to make a will at both times, both when he made the will and when he died.
proinde si impubes uel furiosus uel quis alius ex his qui testamentum facere non possunt testamentum fecerit, deinde habens testamenti factionem decesserit, peti bonorum possessio non poterit.
Accordingly, if a person below the age of puberty, or a madman, or anyone else of those who cannot make a will, has made a will, and then died having the capacity to make a will, the possession of goods cannot be petitioned for.
sed et si filius familias putans se patrem familias testamentum fecerit, deinde mortis tempore pater familias inueniatur, non potest bonorum possessio secundum tabulas peti.
But also, if a son-in-power, thinking himself to be a head of a family, has made a will, and then at the time of death is found to be a head of a family, the possession of goods according to the tablets cannot be petitioned for.
sed si filius familias ueteranus de castrensi faciat, deinde emancipatus uel alias pater familias factus decedat, potest eius bonorum possessio peti.
But if a veteran son-in-power makes a will concerning his military peculium, and then dies having been emancipated or otherwise made a head of a family, the possession of goods of his estate can be petitioned for.
sed si quis utroque tempore testamenti factionem habuerit, medio tempore non habuerit, bonorum possessio secundum tabulas peti poterit.
But if anyone had the capacity to make a will at both times, but did not have it in the intervening time, the possession of goods according to the tablets can be petitioned for.
§37.11.1.9Si quis autem testamentum fecerit, deinde amiserit testamenti factionem uel furore uel quod ei bonis interdictum est, potest eius peti bonorum possessio, quia iure testamentum eius ualet: et hoc generaliter de omnibus huiusmodi dicitur, qui amittant mortis tempore testamenti factionem, sed ante factum eorum testamentum ualet.
If anyone, however, has made a will, and then lost the capacity to make a will, either through madness or because he was interdicted from his goods, the possession of goods of his estate can be petitioned for, because by law his will is valid; and this is said generally of all such persons who lose the capacity to make a will at the time of death, but whose will made before then is valid.
§37.11.1.10Si linum, quo ligatae sunt tabulae, incisum sit, si quidem alius contra uoluntatem testatoris inciderit, bonorum possessio peti potest: quod si ipse testator id fecerit, non uidentur signatae et ideo bonorum possessio peti non potest.
If the thread with which the tablets were bound has been cut, if indeed another person cut it against the will of the testator, the possession of goods can be petitioned for; but if the testator himself did this, they are not deemed to be sealed, and therefore the possession of goods cannot be petitioned for.
§37.11.1.11Si rosae sint a muribus tabulae uel linum aliter ruptum uel uetustate putrefactum uel situ uel casu, et sic uidentur tabulae signatae, maxime si proponas uel unum linum tenere.
If the tablets have been gnawed by mice, or the thread otherwise broken or rotted by age, or by dampness, or by accident, even so the tablets are deemed to be sealed, especially if you suppose that even a single thread holds them.
si ter forte uel quater linum esset circumductum, dicendum est signatas tabulas eius extare, quamuis uel incisa uel rosa sit pars uni.
If the thread happened to be wound around three or four times, it must be said that his sealed tablets exist, even though a part of one thread has been cut or gnawed.