Roman law has been known since antiquity. The Romans were exceptional lawyers whose teachings survived their own civilization for dozens of centuries. Almost all the constitutions of European countries are built on the basis of their legislative system. Particularly specific are property rights in Roman law. Many concepts from this area are still used to one degree or another.
What was meant by things?
The Romans invested a much broader meaning in the very concept of “things” than we did. So, it included the definition of not only material objects, but even civil rights and relations. The thing is indicated by the term "Res". All property rights in Roman law do not just perceive civil relations and laws in the material sense: such a teaching was widely distributed among Roman philosophers, who were most often the most prominent legislators (bodily and incorporeal property).
Classification of things
However, one should not assume that this concept included everything in the world. It was fairly clearly divided so that there was no confusion. So, what did the concept of property law include?
First, all subjects of divine law. This included all objects of worship, including those of particular value, both materially and spiritually. The “things” of each temple included all the lands that belonged to it, all tombs and statues dedicated to the Roman gods.
Secondly, “human”, human things. They fall into two broad categories:
- Public property that belonged to all categories of citizens of the state. These are theaters and stadiums, public markets, riverbanks, lakes, seas. Is not it true that property rights in Roman law suspiciously resemble the generally accepted land use order?
- The property is private, which belonged to specific citizens. They were divided into smaller categories, but this is not so significant.
What types of Roman law were responsible for this area? Of course, customary law and laws, since the plebiscites did not have such authority.
Extended things classification
So, you clearly realized for yourself that the Romans had bodily and incorporeal things (they were written about above). But in reality, the unit was much wider and much more complicated:
- Staying in circulation and withdrawn from it.
- Maniculated and non-mansivated (a rather complicated concept, we will reveal it below).
- Complex and simple.
- Servants for consumption and unused.
- Things that could be shared, as well as inseparable.
- Side, main.
- Transmitted by birth and in private.
- Movable and immovable property.
- And again, bodily and incorporeal things.
Now let’s clarify some of these concepts, having dealt with them in more detail. This must be done, since the history of Rome is very closely interconnected with all this.
Staying in circulation and withdrawn from it
Those withdrawn from circulation (res extra commercium) included all those items that served the needs of the people, and therefore could not be privatized. These are all the same temples, roads and embankments, sites for burial of the ashes of the dead (columbaria), as well as general physical objects (air, seas, rivers). Accordingly, property rights in Roman law in relation to property not withdrawn from circulation (res in commercio) included a huge number of a wide variety of things.
Manicable and non-mansible
Manifested objects (res mancipi) were called directly Italian lands, slaves attached to them, some categories of buildings and livestock. All this could be transmitted solely through mansion. All these lands actually belonged only to the state. Thus, property rights are (in this case) only opportunities for the transfer of "their" land by inheritance.
Regardless of the nobility and origin of the citizens to whom they were leased, these categories of land could be withdrawn from them at any time. These sites included:
- Ager vectigalis. Earth "obrochnoy" type. Rented to citizens. The initial term is five years, but in fact the lease was unlimited. Could be inherited without special legal incidents and obstacles.
- Ager privates vestigalisque. This is the land that the state or community could sell to individuals. The specificity was that the buyer did not become the owner of the land itself, but only had the right to use it (but could transfer it by inheritance). In addition, the owner was obliged to pay a certain rent for the use of his allotment. This form of land use is interesting in that it can be considered as a transitional stage between communal land use and truly private property.
What other land categories did the concept of property law include? Now we will consider each category separately.
Ager quaestorius
In general, this type of land ownership was completely similar to the previous one: the buyer received the right to own land, had to pay rent for it. Its peculiarity is that the state could at any time, without explanation of reasons, terminate the transaction and demand the return of the plot granted for temporary use. All these relations were regulated by easements in Roman law (property law when using someone else's property).
Ager occupatorius
These are state land plots clearly limited by natural borders (river, forest, mountains). A feature of this category was that the land was not cultivated until the moment when they were not transferred to a private landowner. Only patricians could get these allotments, and often they simply occupied them. This category, theoretically, could be awarded to senior officials for the period of their tenure, but in fact the seizure of land was often unlimited.
In any case, the history of Rome knows many facts of seizure, after which the land could return to the actual ownership of the state only after the death of both the official himself and all his heirs.
Adsignatio
Absolutely identical square plots of land were sometimes transferred to private ownership. This is a kind of "six hundred parts" for the Roman plebs. Distribution of sites was massive, carried out in a particularly solemn atmosphere. The property of Ager colonicus was somewhat similar. It is also an Italian land, but located outside of Italy. Issued to the colonists with the right to inherit. As a rule, rent for them was charged in a limited amount, after a certain period of ownership.
Ager locatus ex lege censoria
These "improved planning" land plots were distributed exclusively on a competitive basis. Simply put, the person who made the most advantageous offer received them, having contributed the largest sum of money to the state treasury.
Important! The procedure of mansion itself was an extremely complicated legal practice, and for its implementation five witnesses were required (this was regulated by easements in Roman law). If at least one mistake was made in the process, even in the spoken word, the whole transaction was automatically recognized as invalid. The category of non-psychiatric belonged to all other things.
How did the things that were man-made and non-man-made differ?
The main difference between them was the way they were alienated. Unmanipulated things were transmitted through a very simple procedure - traditio. Managing the second category was extremely difficult (which we just talked about). It is not worth considering this an empty whim of the Roman legislators, since important production facilities belonged to mannered things. Thus, the concept of Roman law in this area was unambiguous.
The state was extremely interested in maintaining the rights to them in all available ways. A complex ceremony was introduced precisely to prevent random persons from falling into the category of their land users. It should be borne in mind that perception as such persisted only until Rome was a republic. The transition to empire quickly eliminated these remnants of community-based land management. At that time, possession in Roman law became a much simpler concept.
Simple and complex things
According to Pomponius, simple things were defined as a single, indivisible concept. These could include stone, log, slave. All complex property objects were divided into two large categories:
- All composite objects that were composed of many smaller things that are interconnected. These could include a ship or a house.
- Property, which consisted of many things not connected with each other, but united by a common goal. These objects of property rights could be represented as cattle herds.
Movable and immovable property
Movable property included everything that could change its position in space. These objects could move independently (cattle, slaves), and by moving them in space by some other force (utensils, clothes).
Accordingly, everything that could not change its position in space without preserving its holistic structure belonged to real estate. In this category, possession in Roman law included land, subsoil, all buildings. Unlike modern legislation, at that time almost the same normative and legislative acts were applied to both of these categories, so all this division was of a practical nature, being intended for ease of use.
In addition, in Rome, all things that the tenant created on land owned by the landlord were automatically equated with the real estate category. All this property became an integral part of the site and was equated to it by legal status.
Attitude to real estate
Nevertheless, real estate was considered a more complex category. The Romans were very cautious about changes in the legal status of such property. So, taking possession of movable property was allowed after one year, for real estate this period was doubled. It should be noted that already in the era of principle a separate system of Roman law stood out, which precisely regulated relations in this area.
Generic and individually defined things
All property that could belong exclusively to the family, did not have its own individuality, belonged to generic things. Of course, there was some ambiguity in this category, and therefore Roman lawyers quickly deduced a simple rule: if a measure (volume, weight) could be used with respect to a thing, then it belonged to a generic one. In the event of the loss of such property, it could always be replaced by a similar one.
Accordingly, the exact opposite was individually defined things. This property, which was recognized as unique in nature, could not be replaced with something similar. In addition, such a thing could be easily distinguished from the number of similar ones (separate vase). If the individually determined property was destroyed, then the contract of ownership on it was automatically terminated, since the debtor could still not provide something similar.
To better understand the essence of this phenomenon, one can call such things interchangeable and irreplaceable. This concept was of great importance, since the system of Roman law on its basis built binding relationships.
Consumable and unused property
The consumable category included all things that were lost by the owner when they were transferred to another person. This category includes food and money. As for the latter, the owner who pays them loses his funds.
Accordingly, unused items did not wear out or lose immediately, but after some time.
Side and main property
The main property is recognized as such property that has other things in legal subordination. Accordingly, independent property was recognized as collateral, which to one degree or another depended on the main thing. Collateral property was divided into categories:
- Part of the property.
- Some kind of separate affiliation.
- Fetus.
Those parts of a thing that could not be separated from it without loss of functionality were not recognized as objects of property by the laws of Roman law. Otherwise, it could be considered in such an aspect (roofing material retained its functionality when separated from the house). Due to the somewhat complicated nature of this area of law, the Romans singled out special conditions for the accession of a certain part to the whole object.
Consequences of joining a part to the whole object
So, if upon joining a part became useless, or acquired new properties, or became inseparable from another object, the subject lost the ownership right to it. But if both things after the merger remained unchanged, and the annexed part could be distinguished from other property, then it could be withdrawn and completely restored to its legal status. In any case, the methods of protecting property rights in this case included a simple appeal to the court.
Supplies and fruits
Affiliation is also called an incidental thing, but associated with the main property not legally, but economically. It could well exist completely independently, be considered a self-sufficient object of law. However, only with the joint use of accessories and the main thing could the desired result be achieved. As a rule, all legal rights that extended to the main property were also valid in relation to all belonging to it.
The fruit was an object obtained from the property that could produce it (leather, wool, fruit). Accordingly, the income that a person received from their sale was equated with fruits. As in the case of affiliation, they were subject to all legal rights adopted in respect of the main thing. From here, by the way, the saying went: "The fate of belonging depends on a thing."
What are fruiting things, the division of fruits into types
All fruit-bearing property (res fructiferae) was characterized by the fact that it could bear some fruit both as a result of its own organic activity, and as a result of the application of human labor to them. The concept of “property” and other property rights that governed the processes of their circulation could be applied to them. As we have already noticed, all the things that were received on the land of the landlord were automatically considered his real estate and gave him the right to demand his share of their sale.
The fruits themselves, which were obtained as a result of all these processes, were divided into two large types.
The fruits of civil law (fructus civiles) . It was about them that we just talked about: they appeared as a result of various kinds of property transactions. In the modern sense, these are incomes received from the exploitation of the same land. Such a profit could be both constant, but seasonal (harvesting and its subsequent sale), and short-term, which arose during the one-time sale of fruit-bearing things.
Natural fruits (fructus naturales) . They were obtained through a combination of people's work and some contributing factors. Also subdivided into types:
- Fruits that were connected to the thing from which they came from (fructus pendentes).
- Property that has already been separated from it (fructus separati).
- Privatized by someone fruits (fructus percepti).
- Property that has already been processed (fructus consumpti).
- Those fruits that are already fully prepared, but which must be collected (fructus perci piendi).
If the owner, for some reason, demanded that he return the fruiting thing, all the fruits should have been returned with it. However, this did not apply to those cases when the property was already used in one way or another.
Non-circulating items and property
Objects in circulation (res in commercio) - this is such property that could participate in various transactions between people (exchange, purchase and sale). Accordingly, all things that, due to their natural properties, cannot participate in this process, are recognized as property that is not subject to exchange. Such items could not participate in exchange transactions, but were recognized as objects of law.
, , , . :
Finally
, , . - , . .