Tryphoninus, Disputations, Book XX. A son who was appointed an heir by his father while under control of the latter, dependent upon a certain condition with which he had nothing to do, and who was disinherited when the condition was not fulfilled, died while the condition of his appointment, as well as of his disinheritance, was still pending. I held that the son, when he died, was the heir of his intestate father, since during his lifetime he was neither the heir under his will, nor was he disinherited. Where a son is appointed heir to a certain share of an estate, his co-heir can be appointed after the death of the son. 1A son under paternal control, who was in the military service, made a will disposing of his peculium castrense, having at the same time a son under his control. After he left the service, and his father, who was also a grandfather, died; the question arose whether his will was broken. He did not, in fact, adopt anyone, nor had any son recently been born to him, nor was his nearest heir removed from his control, so that the next in order might take his place; still, he began to have under his control a person not previously in that position, and at the same time he became the head of a family and his own son became subject to his authority. Therefore, his will is broken. If, however, his said son had been either appointed or disinherited by his will, it would not be broken; for the reason that he obtained power not by any innovation on his part, but in the natural course of affairs. 2Where a party appoints an heir to be born of a certain wife of his he runs the risk of breaking his will if children are born to him by some other woman. 3If a testator appoints as heir a child to be born from a certain woman who at that time could not be his wife, and he afterwards was legally able to marry her; the question arises whether a child born under such circumstances can be an heir under the will. For example, if to-day you appoint as an heir a child born to yourself and Titia, and Titia at the time is a female slave, or a minor under twenty-five years of age, or because your father administered her guardianship, or you yourself administered it, and Titia afterwards should become your legal wife, either because she obtained her freedom, or reached the age of twenty-five years, her legal majority, or your accounts as guardian had been rendered; would your child born of her be your heir? Certainly, no one will doubt that such a child born after you married her would be your heir, even though on account of her age she could not be legally married at the time that the will was executed. And, generally speaking, whenever an heir appointed by a will is born after it is made, he has a right to enter upon the estate, no matter in what condition the woman who subsequently married the testator may have been in at the time of the execution of the will. 4But what if the testator had appointed the son and daughter to be born after his will his heirs, the son for two-thirds, and the daughter for one-third of his estate, without appointing any co-heir, or substituting one for the other? The child that was born would be the sole heir under the will.