oa Fundamina : A Journal of Legal History - Justinian's Digest : lost in the translations?
|Article Title||Justinian's Digest : lost in the translations?|
|© Publisher:||UNISA Press|
|Journal||Fundamina : A Journal of Legal History|
|Affiliations||1 University of Exeter, UK|
|Publication Date||Jan 2011|
|Pages||115 - 126|
In D 1 3 there are thirty-two inscriptions with a Roman numeral and nine with a Latin word for a number. The distinction is not apparent in modern translations, but even a non-Latinist can see it in Mommsen's Latin text. But the use of numerals was forbidden by Deo Auctore 13 and heavily punished by Omnem 8 and Tanta 22. Presumably these fragments were excerpted before Deo Auctore was promulgated and were left unchanged by oversight. The word "codex" frequently refers to the Digest, not the first Code of 529, at least seven and probably eight times out of twelve in Deo Auctore. In Deo Auctore 3, the modern translations are wrong. "Our codex" means the Digest and the documents are Deo Auctore 4 and following, and the collection of fragments with a Roman numeral in D 1 3. It appears that this was a proposal by Tribonian to Justinian and Theodora, supported by draft instructions to the compilers and a specimen title of fragments. There is a complete new translation of Deo Auctore at the end of this article.
Article metrics loading...