A rescript dating back to 197 AD (C. 5, 18, 1) establishes a different discipline from what is normally provided regard to the definitive attribution to the husband of partus ancillarum dotalium in case of aestimatio (FV. 114; D. 23, 3, 18; D. 24, 3, 66, 3; C. 5, 13, 1, 9a). In response to Gemina, the emperors infact order that, despite the aestimatio dotis, the slaves with their births, having dissolved the marriage, would have to return to his wife. Is this a real contrast or only an apparent antinomy? A possible solution of the question just proposed could be glimpsed by reflecting both on the object of the estimate and, above all, on the different content of the agreement concluded between the parties in the individual cases described by the sources mentioned.
Il rescritto dei Severi a Gemina (C. 5, 18, 1): una risposta apparentemente dissonante
MARIA TERESA CARBONE
2020-01-01
Abstract
A rescript dating back to 197 AD (C. 5, 18, 1) establishes a different discipline from what is normally provided regard to the definitive attribution to the husband of partus ancillarum dotalium in case of aestimatio (FV. 114; D. 23, 3, 18; D. 24, 3, 66, 3; C. 5, 13, 1, 9a). In response to Gemina, the emperors infact order that, despite the aestimatio dotis, the slaves with their births, having dissolved the marriage, would have to return to his wife. Is this a real contrast or only an apparent antinomy? A possible solution of the question just proposed could be glimpsed by reflecting both on the object of the estimate and, above all, on the different content of the agreement concluded between the parties in the individual cases described by the sources mentioned.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
