Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §41.9.3.pr

Usucapion of Common Slaves Given as Dowry

Passage 6846 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

In a case where common slaves were given as dowries and an action for dividing the family estate was later initiated, the question is raised whether the husbands, who possessed the slaves in good faith for years believing they belonged to the givers, acquired them by usucapion; Scaevola replies that there is no reason why they should not have.

[SCAEUOLA libro uicensimo quinto digestorum. ] §41.9.3.prDuae filiae intestato patri heredes exstiterunt et mancipia communia singulae in dotem dederunt et post aliquot annos morte patris familiae herciscundae iudicium inter eas dictatum est.
[SCAEVOLA, from his twenty-fifth book of Digests.] Two daughters became heirs to their intestate father, and each of them gave common slaves as a dowry; and some years after the death of the father, an action for the division of the family estate was initiated between them.
quaesitum est, cum mariti bona fide mancipia in dotem accepta ut dotalia multis annis possederunt, an usucepisse uideantur, si qui accipiebant, dantis credidissent esse.
The question was asked, since the husbands had possessed in good faith for many years as dotal property the slaves received as a dowry, whether they should be deemed to have acquired them by usucapion, if those who received them believed they belonged to the giver.
respondit nihil proponi, cur non usucepissent.
He answered that nothing was put forward why they should not have acquired them by usucapion.

Notes

  1. §41.9.3.prmorte patris — A phrase consisting of the ablative `morte` and the genitive `patris`. Connected with `post aliquot annos` (after some years), it functions as an ablative of starting point to express the temporal lapse of "some years after the death of the father".
  2. §41.9.3.prdantis credidissent esse — `dantis` is the genitive singular of the present participle `dans` (the giver, i.e., the co-heiress daughter who provided the dowry). It functions as a predicate genitive of possession with `esse` ("to belong to"), forming the predicate of an indirect statement (with an omitted subject accusative) governed by `credidissent` ("if they had believed").
  3. §41.9.3.prnihil proponi, cur non usucepissent — Consists of the main clause of the indirect statement `nihil proponi` ("that nothing was put forward") depending on `respondit`, and the subordinate indirect question `cur non usucepissent` ("why they had not acquired by usucapion"). In the context of past indirect speech, the verb in the indirect question is put in the pluperfect subjunctive `usucepissent` due to the sequence of tenses.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §41.9.3.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:41.9.3.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.