authority of hor tutor for \ arious acts. But if she wished a more complaisant tutor, she could, as (iaius tells us gi\e herself in cofniprio with the C(jnsent of her tutor, not for the purpose of marriage. The recipient would remancipate her to the person of her choice, whereupon, after being manumitted vindicUi hy him, she would come hv matter of law under his tutelage. Until the time of I ladrian, this procedure had a particular ad\ antage, since a woman who had not undergone mpiris dcniiuntio, or change of ci\ il status, could not make a will. (/'.I.lira; Fornierh, too, flciticiar\' coemptio wa.»; u.sed for the piirpo.se of making a will. For at that time women, with certain exceptions, did not hate the riglit of making wdls, unless thet had made coouptio aiul had been remaneipated and manumitted, but the senate on the authoritf of the deified 1 ladrian remitted the need of making a coanptio. The uses made of nuDicipatio represent a splendid success story for legal opportunism. Fnmi being a formal, immediate contevance of certain kinds of things, became a wa\’ to create and transfer easements, to form a real securit\', to put a wife into the marital power {maims) of her husband, to adopt, to free a person frompaternal power, to make a w ill under which e\ en a tutor could he appointed, and enable a woman to change her status, with the effect, inter alia, that she could make a will. But such iuristic ingenuit\' needed official acceptance to he successful. Indeed, for some of the situations in\()1\ ed-notablv adoption, emancipation, and the change of a woman's status-acti\ e state participation was required. Opportunismhy jurists can go a considerable wav at times toward alle\dating defects in official lawmaking. But it also pinpoints a failure h\' the state authorities to create the law that is wanted. 22 See, e.g., 6.1.115; 2.112; Cicero, Topica, 4.18; Alan Watson, The Law of Persons in the Later Roman Republic, (Oxford, 1967), pp. 152!. 74
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=