Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §48.10.10.pr-48.10.10.1

Legacies Written for Superiors or Equals under Power

Passage 8276 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

The passage discusses whether a violation of the Cornelian Law occurs when a writer of a will inserts a legacy for their own master, father, or someone under the same power, and clarifies that the senate's decrees do not apply if a legacy was written for a stranger who only later came under their power.

[MACER libro primo publicorum. ] §48.10.10.prDe eo, qui ei in cuius potestate est eique qui in eadem potestate est adscripserit, nihil senatus consultis cauetur: sed hoc quoque casu committitur in legem, quia huius rei emolumentum ad patrem dominumue pertinet, ad quem pertineret, si filius seruusue sibi adscripsissent.
[MACER, On Public Prosecutions, Book I] Concerning him who has written a provision in a will in favor of the person in whose power he is, or in favor of a person who is under the same power, nothing is provided by the decrees of the senate; but in this case also, a violation of the law is committed, because the benefit of this matter accrues to the father or master, to whom it would accrue if the son or slave had written it in favor of himself.
§48.10.10.1Illud constat, si extraneo quis adscripserit legatum, licet postea uiuo testatore in potestate eum habere coeperit, senatus consultis locum non esse.
It is well established that if anyone has written a legacy in favor of a stranger, although he may afterwards, during the lifetime of the testator, have begun to have him in his power, there is no room for the application of the decrees of the senate.

Notes

  1. §48.10.10.prcommittitur in legem — The verb committere with in + accusative is a legal idiom meaning "to commit an offense against" or "to violate (a law)." Here it is used in an impersonal passive construction, meaning "a violation of the law is committed."
  2. §48.10.10.prad quem pertineret, si filius seruusue sibi adscripsissent — A mixed conditional structure. The protasis (si clause) uses the pluperfect subjunctive adscripsissent to express a past contrary-to-fact condition ("if the son or slave had written in favor of himself"), whereas the apodosis (within the relative clause) uses the imperfect subjunctive pertineret to express a present contrary-to-fact result ("to whom it would accrue").
  3. §48.10.10.1Illud constat... senatus consultis locum non esse — The accusative with infinitive (AcI) clause senatus consultis locum non esse ("that there is no room for the decrees of the senate") serves as the subject of the impersonal verb constat ("it is established"). The demonstrative pronoun Illud at the beginning acts as a proleptic subject pointing forward to this AcI clause.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §48.10.10.pr-48.10.10.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:48.10.10.pr-48.10.10.1

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.