Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts

Digesta Iustiniani Augusti

Recognovit Mommsen (1870) et retractavit Krüger (1968)
Convertit in Anglica lingua Scott (1932)
Ulp.l. Ael. Sent.
Ulp. Ad legem Aeliam Sentiam lib.Ulpiani Ad legem Aeliam Sentiam libri

Ad legem Aeliam Sentiam 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. 50,16,216Ulpianus libro primo ad legem Aeliam Sentiam. Verum est eum, qui in carcere clusus est, non videri neque ‘vinctum’ neque ‘in vinculis’ esse, nisi corpori eius vincula sint adhibita.

Ulpianus, On the Lex Ælia Sentia, Book I. It is true that when anyone is imprisoned, he is not held to be either chained or placed in chains unless they are attached to his body.

Ex libro II

Dig. 40,2,12Idem libro secundo ad legem Aeliam Sentiam. Vel si sanguine eum contingit (habetur enim ratio cognationis):

The Same, On the Lex Ælia Sentia, Book II. Or if they are related to him by blood (for such relationship is taken into consideration).

Dig. 40,2,16Ulpianus libro secundo ad legem Aeliam Sentiam. Illud in causis probandis meminisse iudices oportet, ut non ex luxuria, sed ex affectu descendentes causas probent: neque enim deliciis, sed iustis affectionibus dedisse iustam libertatem legem Aeliam Sentiam credendum. 1Si quis minori viginti annis hac lege servum dederit aut pretio accepto vel donationis causa, ut eum liberum faciat, potest ille causam manumissionis istius probare, hoc ipsum allegans legem datam, et perducere ad libertatem: ergo hic debet ostendere hoc inter ipsos actum, ut proinde vel ex lege donationis vel ex affectione eius qui dedit res aestimetur.

Ulpianus, On the Lex Ælia Sentia, Book II. The judges, when hearing the reasons for manumissions, must remember that these must be based, not on dissoluteness, but on affection; for the Lex Ælia Sentia is understood to grant lawful freedom, not for the purpose of pleasure, but on account of sincere attachment. 1If anyone should transfer a slave to a minor of twenty-one years of age, either in consideration of a price paid, or as a donation, under the condition that he shall liberate him, he can offer this as a just reason for manumission, stating the condition which had been imposed, and can then grant the slave his freedom. He, however, will be required to show that this was the agreement between the parties, so that the matter may be decided in accordance with the condition of the donation, or with the affection of the person who gave the slave to be manumitted.

Ex libro IV

Dig. 40,9,30Ulpianus libro quarto ad legem Aeliam Sentiam. Si quis hac lege servum emerit, ut manumittat, et non manumittente eo servus ad libertatem pervenerit ex constitutione divi marci, an possit ut ingratum accusare, videamus. et dici potest, cum non sit manumissor, hoc ius eum non habere. 1Si filius meus ex voluntate mea manumiserit, an ut ingratum eum accusandi ius habeam, dubitari poterit idcirco, quia non manumisi: sed pro eo habendus sum, ac si manumississem. 2Sed si castrensem servum filius meus manumittat, dubio procul hoc ius non habebo, quia non ipse manumisi: ipse plane filius accusare poterit. 3Tamdiu autem accusare quis poterit, quamdiu perseverat patronus. 4Quotiens autem patroni libertum volunt accusare, utrum omnium consensus necessarius sit an vero et unus possit, videamus. et est verius, si saltem in unum hoc commiserit, eum ut ingratum accusari, sed omnium consensum necessarium, si sint eiusdem gradus. 5Si pater libertum uni ex filiis adsignaverit, solum eum accusare posse Iulianus scripsit: solum enim patronum esse.

Ulpianus, On the Lex Ælia Sentia, Book IV. If anyone should purchase a slave under the condition of manumitting him, and, not having done so, the slave obtains his freedom under the Constitution of the Divine Marcus, let us see whether he can be accused of ingratitude. It may be said that, as the purchaser did not manumit him, he is not entitled to this right of action. 1If my son should manumit my slave with my consent, it may be doubted whether I have the right to accuse him of ingratitude for the reason that I did not manumit him. I should, however, be considered as having manumitted him. 2But if my son manumits a slave forming part of his castrense peculium, there is no doubt that I will not have this right, because I, myself, did not manumit him. It is clear that my son himself can accuse him. 3Anyone can accuse a freedman of ingratitude as long as he remains his patron. 4If, however, several patrons desire to accuse their freedman of ingratitude, let us see whether the consent of all of them will be necessary, or whether only one can do so. The better opinion is that, if the freedman displayed ingratitude against only one of his patrons, he can accuse him; but the consent of all of them will be necessary, if they are all in the same degree. 5If a father should assign a freedman to one of his children, Julianus says he alone can accuse him of ingratitude, for he alone is his patron.