61 Interdiction on Possession of Christian Slaves by Jews, Pagans, and Heretics

Justinian

534

This law was addressed by Justinian to Johannes, Praefectus Prae­torio of the East.

The law dealt with two subjects:

(A) Privileges to Christians turning to monastic or clerical life, mainly in regard to the division of family properties and to their inheritance rights.

(B)  Reissue of previous interdictions (see above, No. 59) on the possession of Christian slaves by Jews, pagans, and heretics, and enlargement of its scope to include also catechumens and slaves freed on these grounds whose Jewish masters later converted to Christianity.

Church-Protectors, bishops and the Imperial administration were charged with the execution of these laws.

Codex Justinianus, 1:3:54 (56), ed. Kruger, pp. 37-38

IDEM A. IOHANNI PP.

Deo nobis auxilium praebente omnia, quae pro honore sanctae catholicae ecclesiae ad dei placitum fieri properamus, legibus constituere et operibus adimplere desideramus. Et iam quidem multa cum eius aux- 5 ilio statuimus, quae ecclesiasticae doctrinae statui conveniunt, in praesenti autem hoc pia deliberatione duximus corrigendum, quod hactenus contra dei timorem fiebat. Cognitum etenim nobis est, quod, si quis sponsus vel sponsa post datas aut acceptas arras voluisset se divino deputare servitio et a saeculari conversatione recedere ac sanc­io timonialem vitam vivere atque in dei timore permanere, compellebatur vir quidem ea quae arrarum nomine dederat amittere, sponsa vero duplum id quod acceperat reddere, quod nostrae mansuetudini satis religioni esse contrarium visum est. Unde per praesentem legem in perpetuum valituram iubemus, ut, si quis sponsus vel sponsa 15 desideraverit saeculi istius vitam contemnens in sanctimonialium

conversatione vivere, sponsus quidem omnia, quae arrarum nomine futuri causa coniugii dedisset, sine ulla imminutione recipiat, sponsa autem non duplum,* sicut hactenus, sed hoc tantum sponso restituat, quod arrarum acceperat nomine, et nihil amplius reddere compellatur, 20 nisi quod probata fuerit accepisse. Nam et maritis et uxoribus qui saeculo renuntiant iam anteriore lege* a nobis provisum est, ut, sive maritus sive uxor religionis causa a coniugio recesserit et solitariam vitam elegerit, unusquisque eorum res suas recipiat, quas vel pro dote vel ante nuptias donatione praestiterat, et hoc tantummodo lucri nomine 25 consequatur ab eo qui solitariam vitam elegerit, quod debuit legitime vel ex pacto per casum mortis exigere.* Hoc etiam cognitum nobis correc­tione nostra dignum esse indicamus, ut, si quis in parentium potestate constitutus vel constituta vel forsitan huiusmodi iure absolutus vel ab­soluta elegerit se vel monasterio vel clero sociare et reliquum vitae suae 30 tempus sanctimonialiter degere voluerit, non liceat parentibus vel easdem personas quocumque modo abstrahere vel propter hanc tantum­modo causam quasi ingratum a sua hereditate vel successione* repel­lere, sed necesse sit eis omnimodo, cum ultimam voluntatem suam sive per scripturam sive alio legitimo modo conficiant, quartam quidem por- 35 tionem secundum leges nostras eis relinquere; sin autem amplius voluerit largiri, hoc eius voluntati concedimus.

clesiae sociati fuerint, in libertatem modis omnibus ex praesenti lege 55 eripiantur: et eos tam indices provinciarum quam sacrosanctae ecclesiae defensores* nec non beatissimi episcopi defendant, nihil pro eorum pretio penitus accipientibus dominis. Quod si forte posthac etiam ipsi domini eorum ad orthodoxam fidem conversi fuerint, non liceat eis ad servitutem reducere illos, qui eos ad fidem orthodoxam praecesserunt: 60 sed si quis talia usurpaverit, poenis gravissimis subiacebit Haec igitur omnia, quae pietatis intuitu nostra sanxit aeternitas, omnes indices et religiosissimi antistites sive Africanae dioeceseos, in qua maxime huiusmodi vitia frequentari cognovimus, sive aliarum provinciarum naviter et studiosissime observare procurent.

THE SAME AUGUSTUS TO JOHANNES, PRAEFECTUS PRAETORIO

With God’s help we desire to establish in laws and execute in deeds all those things which we hasten to have accomplished in honour of the saint Catholic Church and to the will of God. Al­though we have already enacted with his help many matters which accord with the position of the ecclesiastical doctrine, at present, however, we have considered in a pious deliberation to reform what has been done until now against the fear of God. For it is known to us, that if an affianced man or woman after the giving or receiving of pledges, want to devote themselves to the divine ser­vice, retire from the world’s way of life, live monastic life and persist in the fear of God, while the man is forced to lose what he gave as pledge, the woman is bound to repay twice what she had received, which our Mansuetude fully regards as contrary to reli­gion. We order therefore in this present law, which is to remain valid forever, that if an affianced man or woman shall want, out of contempt of the life of the world, to live a monastic life, the affianced man shall receive back without any diminution all that he had given as pledge for his future marriage, while the affianced woman shall repay only what she had been given as pledge and not double that amount,¹ as it has been done till now, and she shall not be obliged to pay more than she shall be shown to have re­ceived. For it has already been provided by us in a previous law² for husbands and wives who renounce this world, that whether the husband or the wife shall withdraw from marriage for the sake of religion and choose solitary life, each of them shall receive back the property he or she had given as dowry or prenuptial gift, and derive as gain from the partner who shall choose solitary life only what he was bound to demand by law or under agreement³ in case of death.

NOTES

1.      Double that amount: In 472 Leo reduced the amount parents or the women themselves had to reimburse from four times the value of the dowry to only twice (CJ 1:5:5). This law was therefore in force until the promulgation of the present law. See Kaser, RPR, II, p. 161.

2.      Previous law: CJ 1:3:52:15 from 531.

3.      Agreement: the legislator enumerated the various legal possibilities of full or partial reimbursement of dowries and prenuptial gifts following the death of either the husband or the wife. See ‘De pactis conventis tarn super dote quam super donatione ante nuptias et paraphernis’, “on agreements concerning dowry, prenup­tial gift and paraphernis” (CJ 5:14). See also Kaser, RPR, II, pp. 188—193.

size=1 color=black face="Times New Roman">4.      Succession and inheritance: the legislator employed two terms, ‘hereditas’ and ‘succession According to a Digest quotation Gaius defined ‘hereditas* as fol­lows: ‘Nihi est aliud “hereditas” quam successio in universum ius quod defunctus habuit’. “ ‘Hereditas* is nothing else than the succession to the entire ‘ius* of the defunct** (Dig. 50:16:24). ‘Successio* signified the replacing of a person by his heir. Justinian’s legislation broadened the scope of this term to signify also cases of only partial replacement. This change in the meaning of the term caused the interpola­tions in Gaius* text as quoted in the Digest: ‘Addicitur in hac stipultione et heredum nomen [vel successorum] eorumque, ad quos ea res pertinet. [Successores autem non solum hi qui in universa bona succedunt, set et hi, qui in rei tantum dominium successerint, his verbis continentur]’. “To this stipulation is added also the name of the heirs [or successors] and of those to whom this property belongs. [For succes­sors are not only those who succeeded to the entire estate, but also those who succeeded to its ownership only]” (Dig. 39:2:24:1a). The editors’ tendency to use both terms is obvious in the Digest as well as in the present law.

5.      Repeated law: ownership of Christian slaves by Jews was prohibited in a law given between 527 and 534 (see above, No. 59); Ownership of Christian slaves by Montanists was prohibited in a law from 530 (CJ 1:5:20:6).

6.      Protectors of the Church were secular functionaries of the churches, who acted as their representatives before the courts and handled their secular affairs, such as the administration of their properties. See Hartmann, PW, 1:8, 1901, s.v. Defensor Ecclesiae, Col. 2372.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

P. Krüger, “Uber die Zeitfolge im Justinianischen Codex enthaltenen Con­stitutionen Justinians,” ZRG, XI (1873), p. 186; Juster, II, p. 76 n. 4; Browe, p.

128; Seyberlich, p. 73; Kaser, RPR, II, p. 161; A. Μ. Honord, “Some Constitutions Composed by Justinian,” JRS, LXV (1975), p. 119; Avi-Yonah, p. 248; C. Dupont, “Peine et relations pecuniaires entre fiances et conjoints dans les constitutions rendues de 312 ä 565 aprds Jesus-Christ,” RIDA, XXIII (1976), pp. 124-125; Honord, p. 116.