Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §47.18.1.pr-47.18.1.2

Punishments for Prison Breakers and Aggravated Thieves

Passage 8087 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

The rescripts of emperors and opinions of jurists are presented regarding the punishment of escaped prisoners and various types of thieves, such as pillagers and housebreakers, in accordance with their social status.

[ULPIANUS libro octauo de officio proconsulis. ] §47.18.1.prDe his, qui carcere effracto euaserunt, sumendum supplicium diui fratres Aemilio Tironi rescripserunt.
[ULPIAN, on the office of proconsul, book 8.] Regarding those who escaped after breaking out of prison, the divine brothers replied by rescript to Aemilius Tiro that punishment must be inflicted.
Saturninus etiam probat in eos, qui de carcere eruperunt siue effractis foribus siue conspiratione cum ceteris, qui in eadem custodia erant, capite puniendos: quod si per neglegentiam custodum euaserunt, leuius puniendos.
Saturninus also approves that those who have broken out of prison, whether by breaking the doors or by conspiracy with others who were in the same custody, are to be punished with death; but if they escaped through the negligence of the guards, they are to be punished more lightly.
§47.18.1.1Expilatores, qui sunt atrociores fures (hoc enim est expilatores), in opus publicum uel perpetuum uel temporarium dari solent, honestiores autem ordine ad tempus moueri uel fines patriae iuberi excedere.
Pillagers, who are more atrocious thieves (for this is what pillagers are), are customarily sentenced to public labor, either perpetual or temporary, whereas those of higher status are temporarily removed from their rank or ordered to depart from the boundaries of their native land.
quibus nulla specialis poena rescriptis principalibus inposita est: idcirco causa cognita liberum erit arbitrium statuendi ei qui cognoscit.
No specific punishment has been imposed on them by imperial rescripts; therefore, after the case is examined, the decision of determining the penalty will be free for the one who judges.
§47.18.1.2Simili modo et sacculari et derectarii erunt puniendi, item effractores.
In like manner, both cutpurses and house-thieves are to be punished, and likewise housebreakers.
sed enim diuus Marcus effractorem equitem Romanum, qui effracto perforatoque pariete pecuniam abstulerat, quinquennio abstinere iussit prouincia Africa, unde erat, et urbe et Italia.
But indeed, the divine Marcus ordered a Roman knight who was a housebreaker, who had stolen money after breaking and boring through a wall, to keep away for five years from the province of Africa, from which he came, and from the City and Italy.
oportebit autem aeque et in effractores et in ceteros supra scriptos causa cognita statui, prout admissum suggerit, dummodo ne quis in plebeio operis publici poenam uel in honestiore relegationis excedat.
However, it will be necessary, in like manner, both in the case of housebreakers and the others written above, that a determination be made after examining the case, according as the crime committed suggests, provided that the judge does not exceed, in the case of a plebeian, the punishment of public labor, or in the case of a person of higher status, the punishment of relegation.

Notes

  1. §47.18.1.prsumendum supplicium — The gerundive sumendum modifies supplicium (accusative neuter singular), forming an accusative and infinitive construction with esse omitted, which functions as the object in indirect discourse dependent on rescripserunt. The phrase sumere supplicium de aliquo is an idiom meaning to inflict punishment on someone.
  2. §47.18.1.prprobant in eos — The verb probat (approves) is construed with in followed by the accusative (in eos, in the case of those...), which is modified by the gerundive clause capite puniendos [esse] (should be punished capitally). Here, puniendos (accusative masculine plural) agrees with eos, creating a construction meaning he approves, in the case of those..., that they are to be punished with death.
  3. §47.18.1.1causa cognita — An ablative absolute consisting of the noun causa and cognita, the perfect passive participle of cognoscere. In legal contexts, it refers to after the case has been heard or after due trial, indicating the formal execution of a judicial investigation.
  4. §47.18.1.2quinquennio — An ablative of time expressing duration, here meaning for a period of five years. The use of the ablative rather than the accusative to express duration of time is a usage increasingly found from the classical period onward.
  5. §47.18.1.2dummodo ne quis — A proviso clause introduced by the conjunction dummodo (provided that) with the negative particle ne and the indefinite pronoun quis (anyone, here referring to the judging magistrate). It takes the present subjunctive excedat (exceeds), meaning provided that no one [i.e., no judge] exceeds [the specified limits of punishment].

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §47.18.1.pr-47.18.1.2. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:47.18.1.pr-47.18.1.2

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.