Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts

Digesta Iustiniani Augusti

Recognovit Mommsen (1870) et retractavit Krüger (1928)
Convertit in Anglica lingua Scott (1932)
Marcell.l. Iul. Pap.
Ad legem Iuliam et Papiam lib.Marcelli Ad legem Iuliam et Papiam libri

Ad legem Iuliam et Papiam libri

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

Ex libro I

Dig. 23,2,32Mar­cel­lus li­bro pri­mo ad le­gem Iu­liam et Pa­piam. Scien­dum est li­ber­ti­num, qui se in­ge­nuo de­dit ad­ro­gan­dum, quam­vis in eius fa­mi­lia in­ge­nui iu­ra sit con­se­cu­tus, ut li­ber­ti­num ta­men a se­na­to­riis nup­tiis re­pel­len­dum es­se.

Marcellus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book I. It should be noted that where a freedman gives himself to be adopted by a man who is born free, although he obtains the rights of a freeborn person in the adoptive family, being a freedman, still, he will not be permitted to contract marriage with the daughter of a Senator.

Dig. 23,2,49Mar­cel­lus li­bro pri­mo ad le­gem Iu­liam et Pa­piam. Ob­ser­van­dum est, ut in­fe­rio­ris gra­dus ho­mi­nes du­cant uxo­res eas, quas hi qui al­tio­ris dig­ni­ta­tis sunt du­ce­re le­gi­bus prop­ter dig­ni­ta­tem pro­hi­ben­tur: at con­tra an­te­ce­den­tis gra­dus ho­mi­nes non pos­sunt eas du­ce­re, quas his qui in­fe­rio­ris dig­ni­ta­tis sunt du­ce­re non li­cet.

Marcellus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book III. It should be observed that men of inferior station can marry women with whom others of higher rank are forbidden by law to contract matrimony, on account of their superior dignity. On the other hand, men of exalted rank cannot take as wives women whom it is not lawful for those who are of inferior station to marry.

Dig. 25,3,8Mar­cel­lus li­bro pri­mo ad le­gem Iu­liam et Pa­piam. Non quem­ad­mo­dum mas­cu­lo­rum li­be­ro­rum nos­tro­rum li­be­ri ad onus nos­trum per­ti­nent, ita et in fe­mi­nis est: nam ma­ni­fes­tum est id quod fi­lia pa­rit non avo, sed pa­tri suo es­se one­ri, ni­si pa­ter aut non sit su­per­stes aut egens est.

Ad Dig. 25,3,8Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. II, § 475, Note 5.Marcellus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book I. The children of our male children are under our care, but this is not the case with those descended from females; for it is evident that a child whom a daughter brings forth is under the care of her father, and not of her grandfather, unless the father is not living, or is in want.

Dig. 39,6,38Mar­cel­lus li­bro pri­mo ad le­gem Iu­liam et Pa­piam. In­ter mor­tis cau­sa do­na­tio­nem et om­nia, quae mor­tis cau­sa quis ce­pe­rit, est ea­rum re­rum dif­fe­ren­tia: nam mor­tis cau­sa do­na­tur quod prae­sens prae­sen­ti dat, mor­tis cau­sa ca­pi in­tel­le­gi­tur et quod non ca­dit in spe­ciem do­na­tio­nis. et­enim cum tes­ta­men­to quis suo Pam­phi­lum ser­vum suum li­be­rum es­se ius­sit, si mi­hi de­cem de­de­rit, ni­hil mi­hi do­nas­se vi­de­bi­tur, et ta­men, si ac­ce­pe­ro a ser­vo de­cem, mor­tis cau­sa ac­ce­pis­se me con­ve­nit. idem ac­ci­dit, quod quis sit he­res in­sti­tu­tus, si mi­hi de­cem de­de­rit: nam ac­ci­pien­do ab eo, qui he­res in­sti­tu­tus est, con­di­cio­nis ex­plen­dae eius cau­sa, mor­tis cau­sa ca­pio.

Marcellus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book I. The following difference exists between a donation mortis causa and other ways by which anyone acquires property by reason of death. A donation mortis causa is made when both parties are present, and anything not included in this kind of a donation, it is understood, may be obtained on account of death. For when a testator, by his will, directs his slave Pamphilus to be free under the condition that he pays me ten aurei, he is not considered to have made me a donation; and nevertheless, if I accept the ten aurei from the slave, it is established that I accept them mortis causa. The same thing happens where an heir is appointed on condition that he pay me ten aurei; as, by accepting the money from him who is appointed heir, I acquire it mortis causa, for the purpose of complying with the condition.

Ex libro III

Dig. 23,2,33Idem li­bro ter­tio ad le­gem Iu­liam et Pa­piam. Ple­ri­que opi­nan­tur, cum ea­dem mu­lier ad eun­dem vi­rum re­ver­ta­tur, id ma­tri­mo­nium idem es­se: qui­bus ad­sen­tior, si non mul­to tem­po­re in­ter­po­si­to rec­on­ci­lia­ti fue­rint nec in­ter mo­ras aut il­la alii nup­se­rit aut hic aliam du­xe­rit, ma­xi­me si nec do­tem vir red­di­de­rit.

The Same, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book III. Many authorities hold that when a woman, after separation, returns to her husband, this is the same marriage. I assent to this opinion, provided they are reconciled before a long time has elapsed, and neither of them has married anyone in the meantime, and especially if the husband has not returned the dowry.

Dig. 23,2,50Idem li­bro ter­tio ad le­gem Iu­liam et Pa­piam. Pro­xi­me con­sti­tu­tum di­ci­tur, ut, cum quis li­ber­tam suam du­xe­rit uxo­rem, quam ex fi­dei­com­mis­si cau­sa ma­nu­mi­se­rit, li­ceat li­ber­tae in­vi­to eo nup­tias con­tra­he­re: pu­to, quia non erat fe­ren­dus is qui ex ne­ces­si­ta­te ma­nu­mi­sit, non suo ar­bi­trio: ma­gis enim de­bi­tam li­ber­ta­tem prae­sti­tit quam ul­lum be­ne­fi­cium in mu­lie­rem con­tu­lit.

The Same, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book III. It is said to have been recently decided that where a man marries his freedwoman whom he manumitted in compliance with the terms of a trust, she can contract matrimony with another without his consent; and I think this is correct, because he should not enjoy the privilege of a patron who was obliged to manumit the woman and did not do so voluntarily, as he rather gave her the freedom to which she was entitled, than conferred any benefit upon her.