Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §9.2.49.pr-9.2.49.1

Harm to Bees and Demolishing a House to Stop Fire

Passage 1566 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This text discusses how driving away bees with smoke is treated as an indirect cause of death subject to an action on the case, and that 'damage unlawfully caused' under the Lex Aquilia excludes emergency actions like demolishing a neighbor's house to prevent a fire.

[ULPIANUS libro nono disputationum. ] §9.2.49.prSi quis fumo facto apes alienas fugauerit uel etiam necauerit, magis causam mortis praestitisse uidetur quam occidisse, et ideo in factum actione tenebitur.
[ULPIANUS, in the ninth book of Disputations.] If anyone, by making smoke, has chased away or even killed someone else's bees, he is considered rather to have furnished the cause of death than to have killed them, and therefore he will be held liable under an action on the case (in factum).
§9.2.49.1Quod dicitur damnum iniuria datum Aquilia persequi, sic erit accipiendum, ut uideatur damnum iniuria datum, quod cum damno iniuriam attulerit: nisi magna ui cogente fuerit factum, ut Celsus scribit circa eum, qui incendii arcendi gratia uicinas aedes intercidit: nam hic scribit cessare legis Aquiliae actionem: iusto enim metu ductus, ne ad se ignis perueniret, uicinas aedes intercidit: et siue peruenit ignis siue ante extinctus est, existimat legis Aquiliae actionem cessare.
When it is said that the Lex Aquilia pursues damage unlawfully caused, it must be understood in this way: that damage is considered to be unlawfully caused which has brought unlawfulness along with the damage; unless it was done under the compulsion of a great force, as Celsus writes concerning him who pulled down a neighboring house for the sake of averting a fire. For he writes here that the action of the Lex Aquilia does not lie; for, led by a well-founded fear lest the fire should reach him, he pulled down the neighboring house. And whether the fire reached it or was extinguished beforehand, he estimates that the action of the Lex Aquilia does not lie.

Notes

  1. §9.2.49.prmagis causam mortis praestitisse uidetur quam occidisse — The verb uidetur (third-person singular present of uideri, 'to seem, be deemed') is used in a personal construction, agreeing with the subject (quis, 'anyone'), meaning 'he is deemed to...'. The infinitives causam mortis praestitisse ('to have furnished the cause of death') and occidisse ('to have killed') contrast direct physical killing (occidere) with the indirect provision of a cause (causam praestare).
  2. §9.2.49.1Quod dicitur damnum iniuria datum Aquilia persequi — Quod is the neuter singular nominative relative pronoun introducing a noun clause that serves as the subject of the main clause. The subject of the passive verb dicitur is the accusative and infinitive construction, in which Aquilia (referring to the lex Aquilia) is the subject of the infinitive persequi, and damnum iniuria datum ('damage unlawfully caused') is its object. Thus, it translates as: 'As for the fact that the Lex Aquilia is said to pursue damage unlawfully caused...'
  3. §9.2.49.1iusto enim metu ductus, ne ad se ignis perueniret — iusto metu is an ablative of cause/motive ('by a well-founded fear'). The clause introduced by ne ('lest, that... might') functions as a complement explaining the content of the fear represented by the noun metu ('fear that...'). It translates as 'led by a well-founded fear that the fire might reach him'.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §9.2.49.pr-9.2.49.1. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:9.2.49.pr-9.2.49.1

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.