No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
A Collection of Roman Legal Maxims on Papyrus
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 September 2012
Extract
More than ten years ago—in vol. iii of the Studi in onore di Pietro Bonfante (Milan, 1930)—Angelo Segrè published four pages of a papyrus-codex of the fifth or sixth century A.D. which are of considerable importance for all scholars interested in the study of Roman Law during the fifth century. As far as I can see, however, no one has dealt with the text during the last ten years. The reason for this lack of interest probably lies in the somewhat unattractive form of the editio princeps. Segrè's edition is obviously of a temporary nature. It contains an apographum of the much mutilated text and a few explanatory notes. Segrè neither gave a transcription of the text, nor did he attempt to fill in the gaps. He believed—wrongly, as we shall see—the missing part of the text columns to be very much greater than that in our possession, and therefore thought it wise to refrain from any reconstruction. In fact his edition gives us not a single complete line of the text. It is also regrettable that Segrè did not include a photograph of at least a small part of the papyrus. In the following brief notes I wish to make some suggestions to a future editor; for a new and revised edition is indispensable. Further, I wish to show that even the text of the present edition deserves the attention of students of Roman Law, who should not postpone its study till the publication of a better edition.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Fritz Schulz 1941. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies
References
2 There is a copy in the Bodleian Library.
3 To facilitate printing I have used a full stop instead of the various signs of abbreviation.
4 This shows σημένεται = σημαίνεται.
5 See e.g. the ‘compromissum’ of the sixth century in Greek Papyri in the Brit. Mus. 3 (1907), 253Google Scholar: πρò δίκησ καὶ ϕιλονικίασ ἔδοξεν ἡμῑν κοινῇ γνὠμῃ ἀπαντῆσαι εἰσ δίαιταν Cf. P. Oxy. 157 (sixth century): ἐπειδὴ ϕιλονικία γἐγονε μεταξὺ … Greek Pap. in the Brit. Mus. 5 (1917), 183, 1. 7.Google Scholar
6 See e.g. Gaius, Institutiones 4, 184: ‘Cum autem in ius vocatus fuerit adversarius neque eo die finiri potuerit negotium. …’ See also 4, 84 and 141. For further passages see the Vocabularium Iurisprudentiae Rom. 4, 93, 9 ff.
7 See Lenel, , Palingenesia I, 955Google Scholar.
8 D. (4, 6) 8; see Lenel l.c.
9 D. (17, 1) 8, 8: ‘scientes et prudentes auxilium appellationis omiserunt’; D. (49, 4) 2, 2: ‘victus appellare omiserit.’
10 See Lenel, Palingenesia 2, 791.
11 See Liddell and Scott, Lexicon s.v. ἔγγονοσ.
12 See Mitteis, Chrestomathie no. 163.
13 See Liddell and Scott s.v. ἐκγράϕω.
14 See Lenel, Palingenesia 2, 381.
15 D. (45, 1) 91pr.: ‘an culpa … in faciendo accipienda sit, non in non faciendo?’
16 See Lenel, Palingenesia 1, 813.
17 We know that Paulus in the second book of his quaestiones dealt with the ‘querella inofficiosi testamenti’ in connexion with the edictal title ‘quibus causis praeiudicium fieri non oportet’ (see Lenel, Edictum perpetuum § 52, 3rd ed., 141). This title immediately followed the title ‘de satisdando’. It is probable that Paulus dealt with the title ‘de satisdando’ in the preceding (first) book. See Lenel, Palingenesia 1, 1182 and 1183.
18 The papyrus has το, not τω; but ο instead of ω (and vice-versa) is not unusual in the papyri. See below n. 20.
19 See Lenel, Palingenesia 2, 1177.
20 The papyrus has τευον instead of τευων. See above n. 18.
21 See Lenel, Palingenesia 2, 1178.
22 If Segrè's apographum is correct, ὄτι must have been written with ἔκθεσισ as in 1. 33; cf. also Schol. Sin. 15, 41.
23 See further (1) Suidas Lexicon, e.g. s.v. ἀρετὴ, πάθοσ, πομπήιοσ; (2) the Demosthenes Scholiast of the Anonymus Argentinensis: Wilcken, , Hermes xlii (1907) 414Google Scholar; Laqueur, , Hermes xliii (1908) 220Google Scholar. (3) Olympiodori philosophi in Platonis Phaedonem commentaria ed. Norvin, W. (Teubner 1913), e.g. pp. 84 ffGoogle Scholar.
24 Aelius Gallus, De significatione verborum quae ad ius civile pertinent libri: Bremer, , Jurisprudentiae antehadrianae quae supersunt I, 246Google Scholar.
25 Verrius Flaccus, De verborum significatu, epitomised by Festus (ed. Lindsay).
26 1. 129. Ulp(ianus) β(ιβγίῳ) μθ ad Sab(inum) ἐν τἐλι = Ulpianus libro XLIX ad Sabinum in fine.
27 See D. (45, 1) 38, 17: Ulpianus libro xlix ad Sabinum (Lenel, Palingenesia 2, 1194): ‘alteri stipulari nemo potest.…’
28 See e.g. Scholia Sinaitica xiii, 35: ἐν τῷ παρόντι ιθκ εϕαλαίω διδάσκει…