things were res mancipi in (iaius's time are explained hv liim in (/.2.i4a-i7: 14^1. I lioro is also another di\ ision o( things: tor tlic\' are cither ns mancipi or ns nfc nuincipi. Rts »umcipi are land and houses on Italic soil, likewise sla- \es and those animals that are usualK broken to draft or burden, such as cattle, horses, mules, and asses: likewise rustic praedial servitudes, for urban praedial ser\ irudes are mr maucipi. Sec nunuipi are also sripendiar\- or tributarv lands, 15. question is raised as to the meaning ot our statement that those animals that are usualK' broken in are res »un/cipi, because the\’ are nor broken in at the time ot birth. .\nd the leaders ot our school think the\ are ns maucipi as stion as thev are born. Bur Ner\ a and Proculus and other leaders ot the other school hold that the\ do not become res maucipi unless thev are broken in and it, because ot too much wildness, they cannot be broken in then the\' come to be ns maucipi when rhe\' reach the age at which they usualh' are broken in. 16. l.ikewise wild beasts are res ucc maucipr such as bears, lions, likewise these animals which are almost in the caregor\- of wild animals, such as elephants and camels; and it does not matter that these animals too are broken in to draft or burden, for their \erv names did not e.xist in the time when it was settled which things were ns maueijn and ns ucc maudpi. 17. .Mso, ucc maucipi are almost all incorporeal things, with the e.xceprion ot rustic praedial servitudes, which, it is settled, are maucipi although the\’ are in the categor\' ot incorporeal things. rhrcc peculiarities in the list may help to establish the original list of res muueipi and explain the elassifieation. First is the dispute hetween the Sahinians and the Proeulians oxer cattle, horses, mules, and asses, the Sahinians including all such, the Proeulians otdx' those broken in or of the age at which thex’ xvere usually broken in. Second is the inclusion of land, xvhich is thought not to fit particidarlx xvell into the ceremonx, xvhich inxolx es a grasping hx’ the hand.' Third is the inclusion of rustic praedial serx itudes, xxhich xvere incorporeal rights and did not involx e (in classical laxx at least) the legal right of oxvnership. A fourth peculiaritx’-much discussed hx’ scholars-is less ohx ious at first sight; the inclusion of horses max' he odd, since unli1 See, e.g., Jolowicz and Nicholas, Historical Introduction, p. 38. 65
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=