De suppellectile legata
(Concerning bequests of household goods.)
1 Pomponius libro sexto ad Sabinum. Supellex est domesticum patris familiae instrumentum, quod neque argento aurove facto vel vesti adnumeretur.
1 Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book VI. Furniture, or any domestic utensils belonging to the head of a family, but not including articles of silver or gold, or clothing,
2 Florentinus libro undecimo institutionum. Id est res moventes non animales.
2 Florentinus, Institutes, Book XI. That is to say, movable property, but not animals, is classed under this head.
3 Paulus libro quarto ad Sabinum. Suppellectili legata haec continentur: mensae, trapezophora, delficae, subsellia, scamna, lecti etiam inargentati, culcitae, toralia, imperia, vasa aquaria, pelves, aquiminalia, candelabra, lucernae, trulla, 1Item vasa aenea vulgaria, id est quae non proprie essent loco adtributa: 2Praeterea capsae, armaria. sed sunt qui recte putant capsas et armaria, si librorum aut vestium aut armamentorum gratia parata sint, non esse in suppellectili, quia ne hae quidem ipsae res, quibus adtributae essent, suppellectilis instrumento cederent. 3Vitrea escaria et potoria in supellectili sunt sic ut fictilia, nec solum vulgaria, sed etiam quae in pretio magno sunt: nam et pelves argenteas et aquiminalia argentea et mensas et lectos inargentatos vel inauratos atque gemmatos in supellectili esse non dubitatur, usque adeo, ut idem iuris sit et si tota argentea vel aurea sint. 4De murrinis et crystallinis dubitari potest an debeant adnumerari supellectili propter eximium usum et pretium: sed et de his idem dicendum est, 5Nec interest, cuius materiae sunt res, quae sunt in suppellectili. sed craterem argenteum non esse in supellectili nec ullum vas argenteum secundum saeculi severitatem nondum admittentis supellectilem argenteam hodie, propter usum imperitorum si in argento relatum sit candelabrum argenteum, argenti esse videtur, et error ius facit.
3 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book IV. The following are embraced in bequests of household goods, namely: cupboards, benches, bedsteads, beds, even such as are inlaid with silver, mattresses, coverlets, pillows, vases for water, basins, candelabra, lamps, and ladles. 1Ordinarily, brazen vessels, for example, those which are not fastened to any certain place, are included. 2In addition to these are strong boxes and coffers. Some authorities very properly hold that wardrobes and chests of drawers, if intended for the storage of clothes or books, should not be classed as household goods, because the articles for which they are designed are not included in that category. 3Glass vessels for the table, used both for eating and drinking, are included among household goods, as well as earthenware vessels, not only common ones, but also such as are of great value. For there is no doubt that silver basins and bowls, tables and bedsteads inlaid with gold or silver and set with jewels, are included in the term household goods, even to the extent that the same rule applies where they are entirely made of these precious metals. 4There is some doubt with reference to vases of iridescent glass, and of crystal, whether they form part of the household goods on account of their rarity and value, but the same rule must be said to also apply to them. 5Nor does it make any difference of what material the articles composing the household goods are made, but neither silver cups, nor silver vases are included, on account of the severity of the age, which does not admit of silver furniture. At present, however, if a silver candlestick is placed among silver-ware, on account of a misconception of ignorant persons, it will be considered to form part of it, and the error will establish the right.
4 Idem libro singulari de instrumenti significatione. Redae et sedularia suppellectili adnumerari solent.
4 The Same, Concerning the Meaning of Equipment. A four-wheeled chariot and its cushions are included in the term household goods.
5 Idem libro quarto ad Sabinum. De tapetis quaeri potest, subsellia cathedraria quibus insterni solent utrum in veste sint, sicut stragula, an in suppellectili, sicut toralia, quae propria stragulorum non sunt. et hoc magis placuit ea supellectili contineri. 1De tapetis autem vel linteis, quibus insternuntur vehicula, dubitari potest, an sint in suppellectili. sed dicendum est potius instrumenti viatorii ea esse, sicut pelles, quibus involvuntur vestimenta, lora quoque, quibus hae pelles constringi solent.
5 The Same, On Sabinus, Book IV. With reference to tapestry, and the other coverings of seats and chairs, it may be asked whether they are included under the head of clothing, as coverlets, or under that of household goods, as pillows, which, properly speaking, are not coverlets. I think that the better opinion is that they should be classed as household goods. 1So far as cloths or linen coverings which are placed over vehicles are concerned, is there any doubt whether they should be included among household goods? It must be said that they ought rather to be classed as baggage for a journey, just as skins in which clothing is wrapped up and with the straps with which the said skins are usually fastened.
6 Alfenus libro tertio digestorum a Paulo epitomatorum. Supellectilis eas esse res puto, quae ad usum communem patris familias paratae essent, quae nomen sui generis separatim non haberent: quare quae ad artificii genus aliquod pertinerent neque ad communem usum patris familias accommodatae essent, supellectilis non esse. 1Sed nec pugillares et codices in supellectili sunt.
6 Alfenus, Epitomes of the Digest by Paulus, Book III. I think that such things as are intended for the ordinary use of the head of the family should be included among household goods, where they have no distinct name peculiar to them. Therefore, articles which are employed in some trade, and are not adapted to the ordinary use of the head of the family, are not embraced in the term household goods. 1Small writing tablets and memorandum books are not classed as household goods.
7 Celsus libro nono decimo digestorum. Labeo ait originem fuisse supellectilis, quod olim his, qui in legationem proficiscerentur, locari solerent, quae sub pellibus usui forent. 1Tubero hoc modo demonstrare supellectilem temptat: instrumentum quoddam patris familiae rerum ad cottidianum usum paratarum, quod in aliam speciem non caderet, ut verbi gratia penum argentum vestem ornamenta instrumenta agri aut domus. nec mirum est moribus civitatis et usu rerum appellationem eius mutatam esse: nam fictili aut lignea aut vitrea aut aerea denique supellectili utebantur, nunc ex ebore atque testudine et argento, iam ex auro etiam atque gemmis supellectili utuntur. quare speciem potius rerum, quam materiam intueri oportet, suppellectilis potius an argenti, an vestis sint. 2Servius fatetur sententiam eius qui legaverit aspici oportere, in quam rationem ea solitus sit referre: verum si ea, de quibus non ambigeretur, quin in alieno genere essent, ut puta escarium argentum aut paenulas et togas, supellectili quis adscribere solitus sit, non idcirco existimari oportere supellectili legata ea quoque contineri: non enim ex opinionibus singulorum, sed ex communi usu nomina exaudiri debere. id Tubero parum sibi liquere ait: nam quorsum nomina, inquit, nisi ut demonstrarent voluntatem dicentis? equidem non arbitror quemquam dicere, quod non sentiret, ut maxime nomine usus sit, quo id appellari solet: nam vocis ministerio utimur: ceterum nemo existimandus est dixisse, quod non mente agitaverit. sed etsi magnopere me Tuberonis et ratio et auctoritas movet, non tamen a Servio dissentio non videri quemquam dixisse, cuius non suo nomine usus sit. nam etsi prior atque potentior est quam vox mens dicentis, tamen nemo sine voce dixisse existimatur: nisi forte et eos, qui loqui non possunt, conato ipso et sono quodam καὶ τῇ ἀνάρθρῳ φωνῇ dicere existimamus.
7 Celsus, Digest, Book XIX. Labeo says that the term “supellex” is derived from the custom of persons who, when about to start on a journey, were accustomed to place in skins such articles as would be of use to them. 1Tubero attempts to explain the term household goods as utensils destined for the daily use of the head of the family, which do not come under some other designation, as, for example, provisions, silver plate, clothing, ornaments, implements intended for farming or for a house. It is not strange that the name has changed with the manners of the citizens, and their use of different articles; for, in former times, household goods were composed of earthenware, wood, glass, or copper, and afterwards they were made of ivory, tortoise-shell, and silver, and, at present, gold and even jewels are employed as material for such things. Hence, it is necessary to consider the nature of the articles, rather than the material of which they are composed, in order to determine whether they should be classed as household goods, silver plate, or clothing. 2Servius admits that it is necessary to ascertain the intention of the person who made the bequest, and the category in which he was in the habit of placing the articles bequeathed. If, however, anyone is accustomed to designate as household goods things which there is no doubt should be classed otherwise (as, for instance, silver plate for the table, cloaks, and togas), it should not, for that reason, be held that the articles which he left are also included among his household goods; for the names should not be derived from the opinions of individuals, but from the custom of people in general. Tubero says that this does not seem to be clear to him, for he asks of what value are names unless to show the intention of the person who uses them. And, indeed, I do not think that anyone would say something which he did not intend, especially if he used the term by which the article was commonly designated; for we make use of speech, and no one should be presumed to have said what he did not have in his mind. However, although the judgment and the authority of Tubero has great weight with me, still, I do not dissent from the opinion of Servius, that a man should not be considered to have said anything because he did not make use of the name by which it is indicated. For although the intention of the person speaking is preferable, and more important than his words, still, no one is held to have said anything without speech, unless indeed, those who cannot talk, and by their gestures and the utterance of certain sounds, that is to say, by inarticulate expressions, are considered to have spoken.
8 Modestinus libro nono responsorum. Cum quidam uxori suae legaverat domum cum iure suo omni et instrumento et supellectili, quaerebatur, an videretur et argentum escale et potorium legato contineri. respondit, si quid in supellectili argentum est, deberi, escale autem vel potorium argentum non deberi, nisi hoc quoque testatorem sensisse legatarius doceat.
8 Modestinus, Opinions, Book IX. A husband having devised to his wife a house with all its appurtenances, its utensils, and its furniture, the question was asked whether the silver table service, both for eating and drinking, was included in the legacy. The answer was that if anything made of silver was found among the furniture, it would be included, but that the silver for table service would not be, unless the legatee could prove that the testator had the intention of bequeathing it also.
9 Papinianus libro septimo responsorum. Legata supellectili cum species ex abundanti per imperitiam enumerentur, generali legato non derogatur: si tamen species certi numeri demonstratae fuerint, modus generi datus in his speciebus intellegitur. idem servabitur instructo praedio legato, si quaedam species numerum certum acceperint. 1Supellectilis mensas esse cuiuscumque materiae, scilicet vel argenteas vel argento inclusas placet: nam et argenteos lectos, item argentea candelabra supellectili cedere posterior aetas recepit: cum et Ulixem ex auro et argento lectum viventis arboris truncis aedificatum ornasse, quem Penelopa recognoscendi viri signum accepit, ut voluit Homerus. 2Supellectili sua omni legata acceptum argentum pignori non continebitur, quia supellectilem suam legavit, utique si non in usu creditoris id argentum voluntate debitoris fuit, sed propositum propter contractus fidem ac restituendae rei vinculum.
9 Papinianus, Opinions, Book VII. Where a bequest of household goods is made, and the description of the articles is, through ignorance, set forth with unnecessary minuteness, it does not affect the general legacy. If, however, the number of the articles specified is stated, the amount is understood to have been reduced with reference to the kind of household goods referred to. The same rule shall be observed where land with all its equipment is devised, and a certain number of different kinds of implements are mentioned. 1It is well established that tables of every kind of material (for instance, those of silver or inlaid with silver) are included in household goods. The custom of the present age classes silver bedsteads and silver candelabra among household goods; for, as Homer says, Ulysses ornamented with gold and silver a bedstead made of the trunk of a green tree, by which Penelope recognized her husband. 2Where a testator bequeathed all of his household goods, certain silver plate which had been received by way of pledge was not held to be included, because he only bequeathed his own effects, especially as the said silver plate had not been used by the creditor, with the debtor’s consent, but he had put it aside as security for the payment of the obligation, to be returned when the latter was discharged.
10 Iavolenus libro tertio ex posterioribus Labeonis. Qui vestem omnem et res plurium generum supellectilis expenso ferre solitus erat, is uxori supellectilem legaverat. recte negabant vestem legato cessuram Labeo Ofilius Cascellius, quia non posset videri vestis appellatione supellectilis contineri.
10 Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book III. A certain man who was accustomed to set down in his expense account all his clothing, as well as articles of different kinds, as “furniture,” bequeathed his household goods to his wife. Labeo, Ofilius, and Cascellius very properly deny that the clothing was embraced in the legacy, because it cannot be said that clothing is classed as furniture.
11 Idem libro decimo ex posterioribus Labeonis. Vasa aenea salientis aquae posita, item si quid aliud magis deliciarum quam usus causa paratum esset, non esse supellectilis Labeo Trebatius putant. murrea autem vasa et vitrea, quae ad usum, edendi et bibendi causa, parata essent, in supellectili dicuntur esse.
11 The Same, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book X. Labeo and Trebatus think that brass vases placed under jets of water, and also other articles designed for pleasure rather than for use, are not included among household goods. Vessels of iridescent glass and of crystal, which are to be used for drinking purposes, it is said, should be classed as household goods.
12 Labeo libro quarto pithanon a Paulo epitomatorum. Quemadmodum urbanus servus et rusticus distinguitur non loco, sed genere usus, ita urbana penus et supellex ad usum urbanum, non ad locum urbanum aut peregrinum dirigenda est, multumque interest, penus et supellex ea quae in urbe sit an urbana legetur vel promittatur.
12 Labeo, Epitomes of Probabilities by Paulus, Book IV. Just as urban and rustic slaves are distinguished, not by the place in which they are, but by the nature of their employment, so, likewise, urban provisions and household goods should be classified according to their use in a city, and not from the mere fact of their being situated there, or elsewhere; and it makes a great deal of difference whether provisions and household goods which are in the city are bequeathed, or where they are bequeathed as belonging to the city.
13 Modestinus libro nono responsorum. Respondit: numquam ex eo, quod supellectilem legavit maritus testamento, habitationem, in qua supellex fuit, legasse videtur. quare contra defuncti voluntatem habitationem sibi mulierem vindicare procul dubio est.
13 Modestinus, Opinions, Book IX. He gives it as his opinion that where a husband bequeaths his household goods to his wife by will, he should never be considered to have devised to her the residence in which the said household goods were situated; and therefore there is no doubt whatever, if the woman should claim the residence for herself, that this would be contrary to the intention of the deceased.
14 Callistratus libro tertio de cognitionibus. Fundo legato instrumentum eius non aliter legato cedit, nisi specialiter id expressum sit: nam et domo legata neque instrumentum eius neque supellex aliter legato cedit, quam si id ipsum nominatim expressum a testatore fuerit.
14 Callistratus, On Judicial Inquiries, Book III. When a tract of land is devised, its equipment will not be embraced in the legacy, unless this was expressly mentioned; for where a house is devised, neither its utensils nor its furniture are included, unless this was explicitly stated by the testator.