Application, Adaptation and Rejection

List of Abbreviations XIII

Introduction 1
II Research topic & question 3
III Timeframe 4
IV The responsa practice of the second century AD 5
V Strategies of the Roman jurists 6
VI Imperial rescripts excluded from the corpus 8
VII The dissertation divided into five chapters 10
VIII Embedding in the existing scholarly research context 11
IX The authors of legal questions 14
X Legal proceedings 15
XI The issue of applied law 16
XII Rationale for asking for legal advice from the Roman west 18
XIII The use of Greek 19
XIV Categorising greek in the justinianic digest 20
XV Two treatises in Greek in the Justinianic Digest 22
XVI Two cases of application of attic law as a basis for Roman law 24
XVII Greek common law as a basis for an imperial decision 26
XVIII A conclusion on the use of Greek in the Justinianic Digest 27
XIX The jurists who gave legal advice examined in this research 28
XX The responsa researched in relation to the jurists and their works 29
XXI Differences between the three jurists 34
XXII The twenty-six texts of the corpus examined 36
XXIII The corpus in relation to other primary sources 37
XXIV The Justinianic Digest 37
XXV The edition of the Justinianic Digest used in the research 38
XXVI Papyrological sources 39
Bibliography 39

I The Law of Obligations: Consensual Contracts 41
I Introduction 41
II Mandatum 42
II.1 Mandatum in Roman law 42
II.1.1 The development and use of mandatum in Roman law 43
II.2 Mandatum in Hellenistic legal culture 45
II.3 Dig. 17.1.60.4 (Scaev. 1 Resp.): A procuratio omnium bonorum 47
II.3.1 Contextualising the Greek epistolary contract from Dig. 17.1.60.4 48
II.3.2 The contract from Dig. 17.1.60.4 in the light of three papyri 50
II.3.3 Examining the question and the reply from Dig. 17.1.60.4 57
II.3.4 Two Hellenistic legal formulae in the contract from Dig. 17.1.60.4 62
II.4 Dig. 44.7.61pr (Scaev. 28 Dig.): A contract of procuratio 64
II.5 Conclusion on the bilingual contracts of mandatum in Dig. 17.1.60.4 and Dig. 44.7.61pr 68
III Hypotheca 69
III.1 Hypotheca in a Roman and Greek-Hellenistic context 70
III.2 Dig. 20.1.34 (Scaev. 27 Dig.): A taberna placed under hypothec 71
III.2.1 A description of the Greek contract of Dig. 20.1.34.1 74
III.2.2 Examining the legal question and corresponding reply in Dig. 20.1.34.1 80
III.2.3 Conclusion concerning Scaevola’s reply in Dig. 20.1.34.1 83
III.3 Dig. 32.101pr (Scaev. 16 Dig.): Hypothecated lands in Roman Syria 83
III.3.1 Examining Greek elements in Dig. 32.101pr 84
III.3.2 The legal question and reply from Dig. 32.101pr 88
III.3.3 Conclusion based on Dig. 32.101pr 92
IV Conclusion based of bilingual consensual contracts in the Digest 93
II The law of obligations real contracts 95
I Introduction 95
II Depositum 97
II.1 Dig. 32.37.5 (Scaev. 18 Dig.): A legacy of deposited money 99
II.2 Roman and Hellenistic law on depositum and parakatatheke with regard to Dig. 32.37.5 101
II.2.1 Roman law on depositum 103
II.2.2 Hellenistic law on depositum / parakatatheke 107
II.2.3 Dig. 32.37.5 in light of Roman and Hellenistic law on depositum / parakatatheke 112
II.3 Iusiurandum and the legal question in Dig. 32.37.5 113
II.4 A kyria-clause in a Roman codicil 114
II.5 Dig. 16.3.26.1 (Paul. 4 Resp.): A case of depositum irregulare 115
II.6 A conclusion on depositum irregulare in light of Dig. 32.37.5 and Dig. 16.3.26.1 118
III Two responsa on parakatatheke 119
III.1 Dig. 40.5.41.4 (Scaev. 4 Resp.): Two slaves entrusted into your care 119
III.2 An interpretation of ἐν παρακατατίθεμαι ἔχειν in Dig. 40.5.41.4 121
III.3 The legal question and the reply in Dig. 40.5.41.4 122
III.4 Dig. 31.34.7 (Mod. 10 Resp.): A case from Syria coele 124
III.5 Παρακατατίθεμαι in Dig. 31.34.7 126
III.6 The fideicommissum of Dig. 31.34.7 126
III.7 The law of dowries and Dig. 31.34.7 129
III.8 The legal question and reply by Modestin in Dig. 31.34.7 132
III.9 Conclusion on parakatatheke in Dig. 40.5.41.4 and Dig. 31.34.7 133
IV Mutuum 134
IV.1 Dig. 31.88.15 (Scaev. 3 Resp.): Ownership without the power of alienation or hypothecation 135
IV.2 The legal question concerning the loan in Dig. 31.88.15 136
IV.3 The fideicommissum in Dig. 31.88.15 138
IV.4 Conclusion based on mutuum in Dig. 31.88.15 143
IV.5 Dig. 50.12.10 (Mod. 1 Resp.): Euergetism and pseudo-mutuum 144
IV.6 The promise of Dig. 50.12.10 in the light of three inscriptions 147
IV.7 Financing the games of Dig. 50.12.10 149
IV.8 Conclusion based on Dig. 50.12.10 151
V Conclusion on bilingual responsa concerning real contracts 152
III The law of inheritance I cases without a slave context 155
I Introduction 155
I.1 An introduction to the law of inheritance 156
I.2 An example from the Digest of Greek in the Roman testamentary practice 161
II The bilingual texts in the Digest on the law of inheritance by Scaevola 165
II.1 Dig. 33.4.14 (Scaev. 15 Dig.): A dowry for Crispina 165
II.2 Dig. 32.37.6 (Scaev. 18 Dig.): Callimachus the incapax 171
II.3 Dig. 26.7.47pr (Scaev. 2 Resp.): Titius and Maevius tutors with inequal powers 174
II.4 Conclusion based on the three bilingual responsa by Scaevola 179
III The bilingual texts in the digest on the law of inheritance by the jurist Paul 179
III.1 Dig. 36.1.76 (74) pr (Paul. 2 Decr.): An imperial decision on the libertas testamenti faciendi 180
III.2 Dig. 28.1.29pr-1 (Paul. 14 Resp.): A Greek validation clause in writing 189
III.3 Conclusion 193
IV A bilingual text in the digest on the law of inheritance by the jurist Modestin 193
V Conclusion on bilingual responses regarding the law of inheritance without a slave context 203

Appendix: Dig. 8.3.37 (Paul. 3 Resp.): The use of water cannot be inherited 204
IV The law of inheritance II freedmen and freedwomen 213
I Introduction 213
I.1 Regulations regarding slaves and freedmen in the Greco-Roman world 213
II Freedmen in bilingual replies by Scaevola 216
II.1 Dig. 33.8.23.2-3 (Scaev. 15 Dig.): An implicit bequest of a slave patrimony and other assets 217
II.2 Dig. 34.1.16.1 (Scaev. 18 Dig.): A freedman of my father’s freedman 222
II.3 Dig. 34.4.30.1: A testatrix who changed her will 225
II.4 Dig. 34.4.30.3: A testator who changed his will 232
II.5 Dig. 40.4.60: A false demonstration? 237
II.6 Conclusion based on the responsa from Scaevola’s Digesta 240
III One bilingual responsum by Paul on testamentary manumission 241
III.1 Dig. 40.5.39.1 (Paul. 13 Resp.): Showing gratitude towards a slave 241
III.2 Conclusion 244
IV One bilingual responsum by Modestin on testamentary provisions regarding freedmen 244
IV.1 Dig. 34.1.4pr (Mod. 10 Resp.): Usufruct or dominium 244
V Conclusion based on the bilingual replies of Scaevola, Paul and Modestin on freedmen 248
V Hellenistic municipal law 251
I Introduction 251
II The text of Dig. 50.9.6 (Scaev. 1 Dig.) 251
II Description of the case 252
III The origin of Dig. 50.9.6 (Scaev. 1 Dig.) 253
IV A rationale behind the regulation in Dig. 50.9.6 (Scaev. 1 Dig.) 253
V Decrees from the east comparable to Dig. 50.9.6 (Scaev. 1 Dig.) 254
VI The authenticity of Dig. 50.9.6 (Scaev. 1 Dig.) 255
VII Ignorantia iuris in Dig. 50.9.6 (Scaev. 1 Dig.) 256
VIII Conclusion 259

Conclusion 261
I Introduction 261
II Interactions between East and West 261
III Controversies from the East colliding and not colliding with Roman law 262
IV Strategies of the jurists: Scaevola (II AD) 264
V Strategies of the jurists: Paul (II – III AD) 265
VI Strategies of the jurists: Modestin (III AD) 265
VII Conclusion based on the differences between the three jurists 266

Bibliography 267
Register 273