In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Appendixes 1. D.41.1.7.7–8: Gaius, libro secundo Rerum cottidianarum siue aureorum 7. Cum quis ex aliena materia speciem aliquam suo nomine fecerit: Nerva et Proculus putant hunc dominum esse qui fecerit: quia quod factum est, antea nullius fuerit. Sabinus et Cassius magis naturalem putant rationem efficere: ut qui materiae dominus fuerat, idem eius quoque quod ex eadem materia factum sit: dominus esset: quia sine materia nulla species effici posset : veluti si ex auro vel argento vel aere tuo aliqua fecero vasa: vel ex tabulis tuis navem aut armarium aut subsellia fecero: vel ex lana tua vestimentum: vel ex vino et melle tuo mulsum: vel ex medicamentis tuis emplastrum, aut collyrium: vel ex uvis tuis aut olivis aut ex spicis tuis vinum vel oleum vel frumentum. Est tamen etiam media sententia recte existimantium: si species ad eandem materiam reuerti possit: verius esse quod et Sabinus et Cassius senserunt: quod si non possit reuerti, verius esse quod Nerua et Proculo placuit: vt ecce vas conflatum, ad rudem massam auri vel argenti vel aeris reuerti potest: ac nec mulsum quidem ad mel et vinum, vel emplastrum, aut collyria ad medicamenta reuerti possunt. Videntur tamen mihi recte quidem dixisse, non debere dubitari: quin ex alienis spicis excussum frumentum eius sit, cuius et spicae fuerint. Cum enim grana quae spicis continentur perfectam habent suam speciem: qui excussit spicas, non novam speciem facit, sed eam quae est detegit. 8.Voluntas duorum dominorum miscentium materias,commune totum corpus efficit: siue eiusdem generis sint materiae: veluti vina miscuerunt, vel argentum conflauerunt: siue diuersae: veluti si alius vinum contulerit: alius mel: vel alius aurum, alius argentum: quamuis mulsi, vel electri noui corporis sit species. . [7. A man who has produced a species for himself from a substance not belonging to him is regarded as its owner by Nerva and Proculus, because, they say, the product previously belonged to no one. According to Sabinus and 104 Appendixes Cassius, natural reason rather commands that the owner of the substance also be the owner of what is produced from it, because without matter, no species can be produced thus in cases where with your gold, silver, or bronze I make vases; with your planks, a boat, a wardrobe, or benches; with your wool, a garment; with your wine and honey, honey wine; with your medicines, a plaster or a collyrium; with your grapes, olives, or seeds, wine, oil, or wheat. Nevertheless, there also exists an intermediate position: some consider with reason that if the species can revert to the same substance, the fairer judgment is that of Sabinus and Cassius; if it is impossible, the better counsel is that of Nerva and Proculus: thus, if melted, a vase may revert to a shapeless mass of gold, silver, or bronze. By contrast, wine, oil, or wheat cannot revert to grapes, olives, or seeds; and honey wine cannot revert to honey and wine, nor the plaster or the collyrium to medicines. In my opinion, however, one is right to affirm that, without a doubt, wheat extracted by threshing the harvest of another belongs to the owner of the harvest. Indeed, when the grains from the harvest have their final species, he who threshes the harvest does not produce a new species, but only brings to light one that already existed. 8. Two owners who decide to mix materials make a whole body owned by both in common, be it with materials of the same type—for example if they mixed wines or melted silver—or of a different type—for example if one brought wine and the other honey, or one brought gold and the other silver— and whatever the species of the new body, honey wine or electrum.] 2. D.32.52 Ulpianus, libro vicesimoquarto ad Sabinum Pr. Librorum appellatione continentur omnia volumina, siue in charta, siue in membrana sint: siue in quauis alia materia. Sed et si in philyra: aut in tilia ut nonnulli conficiunt: aut in quo alio corio idem erit dicendum. Quod si in codicibus sint membraneis: vel chartaceis vel etiam eboreis: vel alterius materiae vel inceratis codicillis an debeantur, videamus. Et Gaius Cassius scribit, deberi et membranas libris legatis. Consequenter igitur caetera quoque debebuntur si non aduersetur voluntas testatoris. [. . .] 4. Quod tamen Cassius de membranis puris scriptis verum est: nam nec chartae purae debentur, libris legatis nec chartis legatis libri debebuntur: nisi forte ad hoc nos vrserit voluntas: ut puta si quis forte chartas sic reliquerit, Chartas meas universas qui nihil aliud quam libros habebat...

Share