The penal conceptions of the emperor Marcus Aurelius in respect of lunatics: Reflections on D. 1, 18, 14

International Journal of Law and Psychiatry

Volumn 21, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 315-333

  Spruit, J E ^a  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ITALY; LAW; MENTAL DISEASE; OFFENDER; PRISON; REVIEW;

EID: 0032172067     PISSN: 01602527     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0160-2527(98)00030-2     Document Type: Article

References (122)

1. 1 O. Lenel, Palingenesia iuris civilis I, Leipzig 1889, col. 570
2. 2 Prosopographia imperii Romani sec I-II-III, edd. P. de Rhoden et H. Dessau III, Berlin 1898, p. 180 (nrs. 190 and 192)
3. 3 Idem (nt. 2) nr. 193; cf. W. Liebenam, Fasti consulares imperii romani von 30 v. Chr. bis 565 n. Chr. mit Kaiserliste und Anhang, Bonn 1909, ad a. 195
4. 3 Idem (nt. 2) nr. 193; cf. W. Liebenam, Fasti consulares imperii romani von 30 v. Chr. bis 565 n. Chr. mit Kaiserliste und Anhang, Bonn 1909, ad a. 195
5. 4 Cf. Th. Mommsen, Das römische Strafrecht, Leipzig 1899, p. 643-646
6. 5 For sources and literature see P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: Diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, p. 643-660; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278
7. 5 For sources and literature see P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: Diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, p. 643-660; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278
8. 6 Th. Mommsen, Das römische Strafrecht, Leipzig 1899, p. 645
9. 7 Suet., Augustus 33
10. 8 Modest. D. 48, 9, 9, pr.; Venul. Sat. D. 48, 19, 15; Pauli Sententiae 5, 24
11. 8 Modest. D. 48, 9, 9, pr.; Venul. Sat. D. 48, 19, 15; Pauli Sententiae 5, 24
12. 8 Modest. D. 48, 9, 9, pr.; Venul. Sat. D. 48, 19, 15; Pauli Sententiae 5, 24
13. 9 Codex Theodosianus 9, 15, 1 = Codex 9, 17, 1; cf. Institutiones 4, 18, 6
14. 10 Institutiones 4, 18, 6; cf. C. Ferrini, Diritto penale romano. Esposizione storica e dottrinale, Milan 1902, p. 147-148
15. 11 Cicero, De inventione II, 50, 149; Auct. ad. Herennium I, 13, 23
16. 11 Cicero, De inventione II, 50, 149; Auct. ad. Herennium I, 13, 23
17. 12 The sources do not contain a uniform terminology to describe a lunatic and distinct syndromes. One comes across qui compos mentis non est (e.g., Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1; D. 28, 1, 20, 4), mente captus (e.g., Cod. 5, 70, 2), and frequently furiosus (e.g., Macer D. 1, 18, 14). As a description of mental illness one comes across dementiae (e.g., Marc. D. 5, 2, 2), insanus (e.g., Mod. D. 48, 4, 7), alienatio mentis (e.g., Macer D. 1, 18, 14) and frequently furor (e.g., D. 1, 18, 14); for the terminology and the different forms of insanity possibly designated by these terms, cf. A. Lebigre, Quelques aspects de la responsabilité pénale en droit romain classique, Paris 1967, p. 33-36; E. Renier, Observations sur la terminologie de l'aliénation mentale, Revue intern. de droits de l'antiquité V (1950), p.429-455; for an observation from a medical point of view, cf. F. M. Havermans, Furiosus, demens, mente capus, Folia psychiatrica neurologica et neurochirurgica neerlandica 54 (1951), p. 124-129; idem, Krankzinnigenrecht bij de Romeinen, Nederl. tijdschrift voor geneeskunde 86 (1942), p. 2484-2485
18. 12 The sources do not contain a uniform terminology to describe a lunatic and distinct syndromes. One comes across qui compos mentis non est (e.g., Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1; D. 28, 1, 20, 4), mente captus (e.g., Cod. 5, 70, 2), and frequently furiosus (e.g., Macer D. 1, 18, 14). As a description of mental illness one comes across dementiae (e.g., Marc. D. 5, 2, 2), insanus (e.g., Mod. D. 48, 4, 7), alienatio mentis (e.g., Macer D. 1, 18, 14) and frequently furor (e.g., D. 1, 18, 14); for the terminology and the different forms of insanity possibly designated by these terms, cf. A. Lebigre, Quelques aspects de la responsabilité pénale en droit romain classique, Paris 1967, p. 33-36; E. Renier, Observations sur la terminologie de l'aliénation mentale, Revue intern. de droits de l'antiquité V (1950), p.429-455; for an observation from a medical point of view, cf. F. M. Havermans, Furiosus, demens, mente capus, Folia psychiatrica neurologica et neurochirurgica neerlandica 54 (1951), p. 124-129; idem, Krankzinnigenrecht bij de Romeinen, Nederl. tijdschrift voor geneeskunde 86 (1942), p. 2484-2485
19. 12 The sources do not contain a uniform terminology to describe a lunatic and distinct syndromes. One comes across qui compos mentis non est (e.g., Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1; D. 28, 1, 20, 4), mente captus (e.g., Cod. 5, 70, 2), and frequently furiosus (e.g., Macer D. 1, 18, 14). As a description of mental illness one comes across dementiae (e.g., Marc. D. 5, 2, 2), insanus (e.g., Mod. D. 48, 4, 7), alienatio mentis (e.g., Macer D. 1, 18, 14) and frequently furor (e.g., D. 1, 18, 14); for the terminology and the different forms of insanity possibly designated by these terms, cf. A. Lebigre, Quelques aspects de la responsabilité pénale en droit romain classique, Paris 1967, p. 33-36; E. Renier, Observations sur la terminologie de l'aliénation mentale, Revue intern. de droits de l'antiquité V (1950), p.429-455; for an observation from a medical point of view, cf. F. M. Havermans, Furiosus, demens, mente capus, Folia psychiatrica neurologica et neurochirurgica neerlandica 54 (1951), p. 124-129; idem, Krankzinnigenrecht bij de Romeinen, Nederl. tijdschrift voor geneeskunde 86 (1942), p. 2484-2485
20. 12 The sources do not contain a uniform terminology to describe a lunatic and distinct syndromes. One comes across qui compos mentis non est (e.g., Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1; D. 28, 1, 20, 4), mente captus (e.g., Cod. 5, 70, 2), and frequently furiosus (e.g., Macer D. 1, 18, 14). As a description of mental illness one comes across dementiae (e.g., Marc. D. 5, 2, 2), insanus (e.g., Mod. D. 48, 4, 7), alienatio mentis (e.g., Macer D. 1, 18, 14) and frequently furor (e.g., D. 1, 18, 14); for the terminology and the different forms of insanity possibly designated by these terms, cf. A. Lebigre, Quelques aspects de la responsabilité pénale en droit romain classique, Paris 1967, p. 33-36; E. Renier, Observations sur la terminologie de l'aliénation mentale, Revue intern. de droits de l'antiquité V (1950), p.429-455; for an observation from a medical point of view, cf. F. M. Havermans, Furiosus, demens, mente capus, Folia psychiatrica neurologica et neurochirurgica neerlandica 54 (1951), p. 124-129; idem, Krankzinnigenrecht bij de Romeinen, Nederl. tijdschrift voor geneeskunde 86 (1942), p. 2484-2485
21. 13 Aretaeus III, 6 (ed. Hude, p. 41 = I, 7 ed. Kühn p. 79); Cael. Aurel., De morbis chronicis 1, 5, 151; cf. O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 230-232
22. 13 Aretaeus III, 6 (ed. Hude, p. 41 = I, 7 ed. Kühn p. 79); Cael. Aurel., De morbis chronicis 1, 5, 151; cf. O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 230-232
23. 13 Aretaeus III, 6 (ed. Hude, p. 41 = I, 7 ed. Kühn p. 79); Cael. Aurel., De morbis chronicis 1, 5, 151; cf. O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 230-232
24. 14 Quint., Declam. 295: filius optabit ut pater sanus sit. Dicet id genus furoris fuisse, ut intermissionem haberet.
25. 15 Cf., e.g., Ulp. D. 28, 1, 20, 4; Paul. D. 5, 1, 12, 2; Inst. 2,12, 1
26. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
27. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
28. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
29. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
30. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
31. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
32. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
33. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
34. 16 S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch. giur. 89 (1923), p. 80-93 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 545-556; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 227-239; against his opinion S. Solazzi, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924), p. 10-40 = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 624-655; F. Schulz, Classical Roman Law, Oxford 1951, p. 198-199; P. Bonfante, Corso di diritto romano I: diritto di famiglia, Milan 1963, 2nd impression, p. 647-649; M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht I, Munich 1971, 2nd impression, p. 278 nt. 52; also cf. his Gaius und die Klassiker, ZSS 70 (1953), p. 171 nt. 157 (Kaser sympathizes with Lenel).
35. 17 For the critical textual aspects of D. 1, 18, 14, cf. G. Beseler, Textkritische Studien, ZSS 52 (1932), p. 56; idem, Unklassische Wörter, ZSS 56 (1936), p. 93; P.E. Huschke, Weitere Beiträge zur Pandektenkritik, ZSS 9 (1888), p. 340-341; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 237-239; S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch.giur. 89 (1923) = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 551-552; idem, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924) = Scritti di dir.rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 627.
36. 17 For the critical textual aspects of D. 1, 18, 14, cf. G. Beseler, Textkritische Studien, ZSS 52 (1932), p. 56; idem, Unklassische Wörter, ZSS 56 (1936), p. 93; P.E. Huschke, Weitere Beiträge zur Pandektenkritik, ZSS 9 (1888), p. 340-341; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 237-239; S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch.giur. 89 (1923) = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 551-552; idem, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924) = Scritti di dir.rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 627.
37. 17 For the critical textual aspects of D. 1, 18, 14, cf. G. Beseler, Textkritische Studien, ZSS 52 (1932), p. 56; idem, Unklassische Wörter, ZSS 56 (1936), p. 93; P.E. Huschke, Weitere Beiträge zur Pandektenkritik, ZSS 9 (1888), p. 340-341; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 237-239; S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch.giur. 89 (1923) = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 551-552; idem, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924) = Scritti di dir.rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 627.
38. 17 For the critical textual aspects of D. 1, 18, 14, cf. G. Beseler, Textkritische Studien, ZSS 52 (1932), p. 56; idem, Unklassische Wörter, ZSS 56 (1936), p. 93; P.E. Huschke, Weitere Beiträge zur Pandektenkritik, ZSS 9 (1888), p. 340-341; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 237-239; S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch.giur. 89 (1923) = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 551-552; idem, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924) = Scritti di dir.rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 627.
39. 17 For the critical textual aspects of D. 1, 18, 14, cf. G. Beseler, Textkritische Studien, ZSS 52 (1932), p. 56; idem, Unklassische Wörter, ZSS 56 (1936), p. 93; P.E. Huschke, Weitere Beiträge zur Pandektenkritik, ZSS 9 (1888), p. 340-341; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 237-239; S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch.giur. 89 (1923) = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 551-552; idem, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924) = Scritti di dir.rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 627.
40. 17 For the critical textual aspects of D. 1, 18, 14, cf. G. Beseler, Textkritische Studien, ZSS 52 (1932), p. 56; idem, Unklassische Wörter, ZSS 56 (1936), p. 93; P.E. Huschke, Weitere Beiträge zur Pandektenkritik, ZSS 9 (1888), p. 340-341; O. Lenel, Intervalla insaniae, BIDR 33 (1923), p. 237-239; S. Solazzi, I lucidi intervalli del furioso, Arch.giur. 89 (1923) = Scritti di dir. rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 551-552; idem, Furor vel dementia, Mouseion II (1924) = Scritti di dir.rom. II, Naples 1957, p. 627.
41. 18 Dutch Supreme Court Nov. 10th. 1924, Nederlandse Jurisprudentie 1925, 169; W. 11302; cf. W. Pompe, Handboek van het Nederlandse strafrecht, Zwolle 1959, p. 102; 191-192.
42. 18 Dutch Supreme Court Nov. 10th. 1924, Nederlandse Jurisprudentie 1925, 169; W. 11302; cf. W. Pompe, Handboek van het Nederlandse strafrecht, Zwolle 1959, p. 102; 191-192.
43. 19 Thus P. Garnsey, Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire, Oxford 1970, p. 123 nt. 3 and 4 in fine.
44. 20 The insanity of Ajax is considered a punishment by the gods, cf. Sophocles, Aiax 51; 59; 450-452; 767-777; cf. Cicero, In Pison. 20,46; Horat, Sat. 2,133; 147.
45. 20 The insanity of Ajax is considered a punishment by the gods, cf. Sophocles, Aiax 51; 59; 450-452; 767-777; cf. Cicero, In Pison. 20,46; Horat, Sat. 2,133; 147.
46. 20 The insanity of Ajax is considered a punishment by the gods, cf. Sophocles, Aiax 51; 59; 450-452; 767-777; cf. Cicero, In Pison. 20,46; Horat, Sat. 2,133; 147.
47. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
48. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
49. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
50. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
51. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
52. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
53. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
54. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
55. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
56. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
57. 21 Ulp. D. 1, 18, 13, 1 (see p. 4). 22 Mod. D. 48, 9, 9, 2 (see p. 3). The shackling of prisoners constituted a general practice: Paul. D. 48, 3, 8; Callistr. D. 48, 3, 13; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 9 (see p. 10); Paul. D. 49, 14, 45, 1; Seneca, Dial, 5, 32, 2; De benef. 6, 30, 1; Manilius, Astr. 5, 630; Iuven., Sat. 14, 23 ff.; Apuleius, Metam, 9, 17; Florus, Epit. 1, 24, 3; 3, 21, 10; Augustinus, De civ. Dei, 22, 22; Orosius, Adv. pag. 5, 1, 9; also, cf. H. Niemax, Antike Humanität im Kampfe mit römischen Gefängniselend, Neubrandenburg 1932, p. 3-22.
58. 23 Italics added. Cf. Call. D. 48, 3, 13; Call 48, 19, 27, 2; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 7; Ulp. D. 49, 4, 1, pr. Also see Th. Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht, Leipzig 1899, p. 48, 49; U. Brasiello, La repressione penale in diritto romano, Naples 1937, p. 405-415; cf. L. Wenger, Vinctus, ZSS 61 (1941) p. 364.
59. 23 Italics added. Cf. Call. D. 48, 3, 13; Call 48, 19, 27, 2; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 7; Ulp. D. 49, 4, 1, pr. Also see Th. Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht, Leipzig 1899, p. 48, 49; U. Brasiello, La repressione penale in diritto romano, Naples 1937, p. 405-415; cf. L. Wenger, Vinctus, ZSS 61 (1941) p. 364.
60. 23 Italics added. Cf. Call. D. 48, 3, 13; Call 48, 19, 27, 2; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 7; Ulp. D. 49, 4, 1, pr. Also see Th. Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht, Leipzig 1899, p. 48, 49; U. Brasiello, La repressione penale in diritto romano, Naples 1937, p. 405-415; cf. L. Wenger, Vinctus, ZSS 61 (1941) p. 364.
61. 23 Italics added. Cf. Call. D. 48, 3, 13; Call 48, 19, 27, 2; Ulp. D. 48, 19, 8, 7; Ulp. D. 49, 4, 1, pr. Also see Th. Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht, Leipzig 1899, p. 48, 49; U. Brasiello, La repressione penale in diritto romano, Naples 1937, p. 405-415; cf. L. Wenger, Vinctus, ZSS 61 (1941) p. 364.
62. 24 Ulp. D. 27, 10, 4; Cod. 5, 70, 7, 1.
63. 25 P. Garnsey, Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire, Oxford 1970, p. 228.
64. 26 W. Windelband, Geschichte der antiken Philosophie, Munich 1912, 2nd impression, p. 272.
65. 27 Seneca, Epist. 47; cf. Epist. 13, 2-5; the juridical texts are to be found in Ulp. D. 1, 1, 3, 4; Florent.D. 1, 5, 4 = Inst. 1, 3, 2; Marc.D. 40, 11, 2; Ulp. D. 50, 17, 32 Cf. E. J. H. Schrage, Libertas est facultas naturalis. Menselijke vrijheid in een tekst van de Romeinse jurist Florentinus, Leiden 1975, p. 32-36.
66. 27 Seneca, Epist. 47; cf. Epist. 13, 2-5; the juridical texts are to be found in Ulp. D. 1, 1, 3, 4; Florent.D. 1, 5, 4 = Inst. 1, 3, 2; Marc.D. 40, 11, 2; Ulp. D. 50, 17, 32 Cf. E. J. H. Schrage, Libertas est facultas naturalis. Menselijke vrijheid in een tekst van de Romeinse jurist Florentinus, Leiden 1975, p. 32-36.
67. 28 A survey of the legislative production under the emperor Marcus Aurelius is to be found in G. Gualandi, Legislazione imperiale e giurisprudenza I, Milan 1963, p. 103-155; the connection with the Stoic philosophy of life has been set out in two contributions by P. Noyen, which both have a similar purport: Divus Marcus, princeps prudentissimus et iuris religiosissimus RIDA 1 (1954), p. 349-371, and Marcus Aurelius the greatest practician of Stoicism, Antiquité classique 24 (1955), p. 372-383. Cf. also E. Renan, Marc Aurèle et la fin du monde antique, Paris 1882, p. 18-32; P. Noyon, Marc. Aurèle et le problème de l'irresponsabilité, La nouvelle Clio (1954), p. 278-282
68. 28 A survey of the legislative production under the emperor Marcus Aurelius is to be found in G. Gualandi, Legislazione imperiale e giurisprudenza I, Milan 1963, p. 103-155; the connection with the Stoic philosophy of life has been set out in two contributions by P. Noyen, which both have a similar purport: Divus Marcus, princeps prudentissimus et iuris religiosissimus RIDA 1 (1954), p. 349-371, and Marcus Aurelius the greatest practician of Stoicism, Antiquité classique 24 (1955), p. 372-383. Cf. also E. Renan, Marc Aurèle et la fin du monde antique, Paris 1882, p. 18-32; P. Noyon, Marc. Aurèle et le problème de l'irresponsabilité, La nouvelle Clio (1954), p. 278-282
69. 28 A survey of the legislative production under the emperor Marcus Aurelius is to be found in G. Gualandi, Legislazione imperiale e giurisprudenza I, Milan 1963, p. 103-155; the connection with the Stoic philosophy of life has been set out in two contributions by P. Noyen, which both have a similar purport: Divus Marcus, princeps prudentissimus et iuris religiosissimus RIDA 1 (1954), p. 349-371, and Marcus Aurelius the greatest practician of Stoicism, Antiquité classique 24 (1955), p. 372-383. Cf. also E. Renan, Marc Aurèle et la fin du monde antique, Paris 1882, p. 18-32; P. Noyon, Marc. Aurèle et le problème de l'irresponsabilité, La nouvelle Clio (1954), p. 278-282
70. 28 A survey of the legislative production under the emperor Marcus Aurelius is to be found in G. Gualandi, Legislazione imperiale e giurisprudenza I, Milan 1963, p. 103-155; the connection with the Stoic philosophy of life has been set out in two contributions by P. Noyen, which both have a similar purport: Divus Marcus, princeps prudentissimus et iuris religiosissimus RIDA 1 (1954), p. 349-371, and Marcus Aurelius the greatest practician of Stoicism, Antiquité classique 24 (1955), p. 372-383. Cf. also E. Renan, Marc Aurèle et la fin du monde antique, Paris 1882, p. 18-32; P. Noyon, Marc. Aurèle et le problème de l'irresponsabilité, La nouvelle Clio (1954), p. 278-282
71. 28 A survey of the legislative production under the emperor Marcus Aurelius is to be found in G. Gualandi, Legislazione imperiale e giurisprudenza I, Milan 1963, p. 103-155; the connection with the Stoic philosophy of life has been set out in two contributions by P. Noyen, which both have a similar purport: Divus Marcus, princeps prudentissimus et iuris religiosissimus RIDA 1 (1954), p. 349-371, and Marcus Aurelius the greatest practician of Stoicism, Antiquité classique 24 (1955), p. 372-383. Cf. also E. Renan, Marc Aurèle et la fin du monde antique, Paris 1882, p. 18-32; P. Noyon, Marc. Aurèle et le problème de l'irresponsabilité, La nouvelle Clio (1954), p. 278-282
72. 29 Marc. Aurel., Ad se ipsum XII, 16
73. 30 Marc. Aurel., Ad se ipsum II, 1; VII, 22; VII, 63; X, 30; XI, 18.
74. 30 Marc. Aurel., Ad se ipsum II, 1; VII, 22; VII, 63; X, 30; XI, 18.
75. 30 Marc. Aurel., Ad se ipsum II, 1; VII, 22; VII, 63; X, 30; XI, 18.
76. 30 Marc. Aurel., Ad se ipsum II, 1; VII, 22; VII, 63; X, 30; XI, 18.
77. 30 Marc. Aurel., Ad se ipsum II, 1; VII, 22; VII, 63; X, 30; XI, 18.
78. 31 Marc. Aurel., Ad se ipsum, VII, 65.
79. 32 The opening words of the rescript addressed to Voconius Saxa, Ulp. D. 48, 18, 1, 27 are quite illustrative: 'Prudenter et egregia ratione humanitatis, Saxa carissime' . . . etc; in this connection, cf. F. Schulz, Prinzipien des römischen Rechts, Munich 1934; for the ethical conceptions of the late Stoa, cf. A. Bodson, La morale sociale des derniers Stoïciens, Sénèque, Epictète et Marc-Aurèle, Paris 1967.
80. 32 The opening words of the rescript addressed to Voconius Saxa, Ulp. D. 48, 18, 1, 27 are quite illustrative: 'Prudenter et egregia ratione humanitatis, Saxa carissime' . . . etc; in this connection, cf. F. Schulz, Prinzipien des römischen Rechts, Munich 1934; for the ethical conceptions of the late Stoa, cf. A. Bodson, La morale sociale des derniers Stoïciens, Sénèque, Epictète et Marc-Aurèle, Paris 1967.
81. 32 The opening words of the rescript addressed to Voconius Saxa, Ulp. D. 48, 18, 1, 27 are quite illustrative: 'Prudenter et egregia ratione humanitatis, Saxa carissime' . . . etc; in this connection, cf. F. Schulz, Prinzipien des römischen Rechts, Munich 1934; for the ethical conceptions of the late Stoa, cf. A. Bodson, La morale sociale des derniers Stoïciens, Sénèque, Epictète et Marc-Aurèle, Paris 1967.
82. 33 Plat, Leges XI, 934 C-D. Custody of lunatics is one of the public duties of their relatives, cf. W. G. Becker, Platons Gesetze und das griechische Familienrecht, Munich 1932, p. 183 nt. 3. In general about Plato's reformative penology I. J. Saunders, Plato's Penal Code, Tradition, Controversy and Reform in Greek Penology, Oxford 1991.
83. 33 Plat, Leges XI, 934 C-D. Custody of lunatics is one of the public duties of their relatives, cf. W. G. Becker, Platons Gesetze und das griechische Familienrecht, Munich 1932, p. 183 nt. 3. In general about Plato's reformative penology I. J. Saunders, Plato's Penal Code, Tradition, Controversy and Reform in Greek Penology, Oxford 1991.
84. 34 Exodus 21, 23-25; cf. also Leviticus 24, 17-22; Deuteronomy 19, 21; cf. D. Daube, Studies in Biblical Law, Cambridge 1947, p. 102-153; cf. also the contributions in Um das Prinzip der Vergeltung in Religion und Recht des alten Testaments, herausgegeben von K. Koch, Darmstadt 1972.
85. 34 Exodus 21, 23-25; cf. also Leviticus 24, 17-22; Deuteronomy 19, 21; cf. D. Daube, Studies in Biblical Law, Cambridge 1947, p. 102-153; cf. also the contributions in Um das Prinzip der Vergeltung in Religion und Recht des alten Testaments, herausgegeben von K. Koch, Darmstadt 1972.
86. 34 Exodus 21, 23-25; cf. also Leviticus 24, 17-22; Deuteronomy 19, 21; cf. D. Daube, Studies in Biblical Law, Cambridge 1947, p. 102-153; cf. also the contributions in Um das Prinzip der Vergeltung in Religion und Recht des alten Testaments, herausgegeben von K. Koch, Darmstadt 1972.
87. 35 I Kings 20, 39; for a similar personal security, cf. Genesis 43, 9.
88. 36 II Kings 10, 24. It may be doubted whether it should be even suggested that there exists a similarity between both texts; we are confronted rather with an occasional decree provided with a sanction which was unilaterally issued by a high authority. Both texts are put in a contractual context by Ze'ev W. Falk, Hebrew Law in Biblical Times, Jerusalem 1964, p. 102.
89. 36 II Kings 10, 24. It may be doubted whether it should be even suggested that there exists a similarity between both texts; we are confronted rather with an occasional decree provided with a sanction which was unilaterally issued by a high authority. Both texts are put in a contractual context by Ze'ev W. Falk, Hebrew Law in Biblical Times, Jerusalem 1964, p. 102.
90. 37 D. Daube, Studies in Biblical Law, Cambridge 1947, p. 116-117.
91. 38 For a survey, cf. W. E. Wilda, Das Strafrecht der Germanen, Halle 1842, p. 644-648.
92. 39 B. J. L. de Geer van Jutphaas, De Saksenspiegel in Nederland II, the Hague 1888, p. 136-137.
93. 40 Het oude landrecht van Westerwolde van het jaar 1470, cap. XV, 15; cf. Landtrecht van Wedde en Westerwoldingelandt (anno 1566) Art. 254 (both sources were published in the Verhandelingen ter nasporing van de wetten en gesteldheid onzes vaderlands . . . door een Genootschap . . . Pro excolendo iure patrio IV,1), Groningen 1746. Also in the Middle Ages custody in chains of a lunatic was not exceptional, even in the case of prominent people. For example, Duke Karel van Gelre ordered Heer Hendrik van Homoet, at the request of the latter's relatives, to be put in custody since he was "tot groiter dwalingen ind verbijsteringe sijnre sijnnen gekomen." The relatives were allowed to 'haeffschelick bynden' him, if it was necessary; for the document, cf. I. A. Nijhoff, Gedenkwaardigheden van de geschiedenis van Gelderland VI, 1, Arnhem 1859, p. 123-124 (nr. 166).
94. 40 Het oude landrecht van Westerwolde van het jaar 1470, cap. XV, 15; cf. Landtrecht van Wedde en Westerwoldingelandt (anno 1566) Art. 254 (both sources were published in the Verhandelingen ter nasporing van de wetten en gesteldheid onzes vaderlands . . . door een Genootschap . . . Pro excolendo iure patrio IV,1), Groningen 1746. Also in the Middle Ages custody in chains of a lunatic was not exceptional, even in the case of prominent people. For example, Duke Karel van Gelre ordered Heer Hendrik van Homoet, at the request of the latter's relatives, to be put in custody since he was "tot groiter dwalingen ind verbijsteringe sijnre sijnnen gekomen." The relatives were allowed to 'haeffschelick bynden' him, if it was necessary; for the document, cf. I. A. Nijhoff, Gedenkwaardigheden van de geschiedenis van Gelderland VI, 1, Arnhem 1859, p. 123-124 (nr. 166).
95. 40 Het oude landrecht van Westerwolde van het jaar 1470, cap. XV, 15; cf. Landtrecht van Wedde en Westerwoldingelandt (anno 1566) Art. 254 (both sources were published in the Verhandelingen ter nasporing van de wetten en gesteldheid onzes vaderlands . . . door een Genootschap . . . Pro excolendo iure patrio IV,1), Groningen 1746. Also in the Middle Ages custody in chains of a lunatic was not exceptional, even in the case of prominent people. For example, Duke Karel van Gelre ordered Heer Hendrik van Homoet, at the request of the latter's relatives, to be put in custody since he was "tot groiter dwalingen ind verbijsteringe sijnre sijnnen gekomen." The relatives were allowed to 'haeffschelick bynden' him, if it was necessary; for the document, cf. I. A. Nijhoff, Gedenkwaardigheden van de geschiedenis van Gelderland VI, 1, Arnhem 1859, p. 123-124 (nr. 166).
96. 41 L. Th. Maes, Vijf eeuwen stedelijk strafrecht, Antwerp-The Hague 1947, p. 485-486.
97. 42 Thus a. o. J. Moorman-J. v. Hasselt, Verhandelinge over de misdaden en derselver straffen, Arnhem 1770, p. 13-17; B. Carpzow, Practica nova rerum criminalium imperialis Saxonica in tres partes divisa, Basle 1751, pars III, p. 322; A. Gaill, Practicum observationum, tam ad processum ordinarium . . . quam causarum decisiones pertinentium libri II, Antwerp 1653, p. 506 (lib. II, observ. 110, nr. 21-22); cf. a merely literal translation by A. van Nispen, Andr. Gails Observantien van de kaiserlyke practyke etc., Amsterdam 1656, p. 584; A. Mattheus, Commentarius ad lib. XLVII et XLVIII. Dig. de criminibus, Geneva 1760, 5th impression, p. 20; D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling der lijfstraffelijke misdaden en haare berechting II, Rotterdam 1752. p. 1482; Joh. Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas II, The Hague 1723, 4th impression, p. 1099.
98. 42 Thus a. o. J. Moorman-J. v. Hasselt, Verhandelinge over de misdaden en derselver straffen, Arnhem 1770, p. 13-17; B. Carpzow, Practica nova rerum criminalium imperialis Saxonica in tres partes divisa, Basle 1751, pars III, p. 322; A. Gaill, Practicum observationum, tam ad processum ordinarium . . . quam causarum decisiones pertinentium libri II, Antwerp 1653, p. 506 (lib. II, observ. 110, nr. 21-22); cf. a merely literal translation by A. van Nispen, Andr. Gails Observantien van de kaiserlyke practyke etc., Amsterdam 1656, p. 584; A. Mattheus, Commentarius ad lib. XLVII et XLVIII. Dig. de criminibus, Geneva 1760, 5th impression, p. 20; D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling der lijfstraffelijke misdaden en haare berechting II, Rotterdam 1752. p. 1482; Joh. Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas II, The Hague 1723, 4th impression, p. 1099.
99. 42 Thus a. o. J. Moorman-J. v. Hasselt, Verhandelinge over de misdaden en derselver straffen, Arnhem 1770, p. 13-17; B. Carpzow, Practica nova rerum criminalium imperialis Saxonica in tres partes divisa, Basle 1751, pars III, p. 322; A. Gaill, Practicum observationum, tam ad processum ordinarium . . . quam causarum decisiones pertinentium libri II, Antwerp 1653, p. 506 (lib. II, observ. 110, nr. 21-22); cf. a merely literal translation by A. van Nispen, Andr. Gails Observantien van de kaiserlyke practyke etc., Amsterdam 1656, p. 584; A. Mattheus, Commentarius ad lib. XLVII et XLVIII. Dig. de criminibus, Geneva 1760, 5th impression, p. 20; D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling der lijfstraffelijke misdaden en haare berechting II, Rotterdam 1752. p. 1482; Joh. Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas II, The Hague 1723, 4th impression, p. 1099.
100. 42 Thus a. o. J. Moorman-J. v. Hasselt, Verhandelinge over de misdaden en derselver straffen, Arnhem 1770, p. 13-17; B. Carpzow, Practica nova rerum criminalium imperialis Saxonica in tres partes divisa, Basle 1751, pars III, p. 322; A. Gaill, Practicum observationum, tam ad processum ordinarium . . . quam causarum decisiones pertinentium libri II, Antwerp 1653, p. 506 (lib. II, observ. 110, nr. 21-22); cf. a merely literal translation by A. van Nispen, Andr. Gails Observantien van de kaiserlyke practyke etc., Amsterdam 1656, p. 584; A. Mattheus, Commentarius ad lib. XLVII et XLVIII. Dig. de criminibus, Geneva 1760, 5th impression, p. 20; D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling der lijfstraffelijke misdaden en haare berechting II, Rotterdam 1752. p. 1482; Joh. Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas II, The Hague 1723, 4th impression, p. 1099.
101. 42 Thus a. o. J. Moorman-J. v. Hasselt, Verhandelinge over de misdaden en derselver straffen, Arnhem 1770, p. 13-17; B. Carpzow, Practica nova rerum criminalium imperialis Saxonica in tres partes divisa, Basle 1751, pars III, p. 322; A. Gaill, Practicum observationum, tam ad processum ordinarium . . . quam causarum decisiones pertinentium libri II, Antwerp 1653, p. 506 (lib. II, observ. 110, nr. 21-22); cf. a merely literal translation by A. van Nispen, Andr. Gails Observantien van de kaiserlyke practyke etc., Amsterdam 1656, p. 584; A. Mattheus, Commentarius ad lib. XLVII et XLVIII. Dig. de criminibus, Geneva 1760, 5th impression, p. 20; D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling der lijfstraffelijke misdaden en haare berechting II, Rotterdam 1752. p. 1482; Joh. Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas II, The Hague 1723, 4th impression, p. 1099.
102. 42 Thus a. o. J. Moorman-J. v. Hasselt, Verhandelinge over de misdaden en derselver straffen, Arnhem 1770, p. 13-17; B. Carpzow, Practica nova rerum criminalium imperialis Saxonica in tres partes divisa, Basle 1751, pars III, p. 322; A. Gaill, Practicum observationum, tam ad processum ordinarium . . . quam causarum decisiones pertinentium libri II, Antwerp 1653, p. 506 (lib. II, observ. 110, nr. 21-22); cf. a merely literal translation by A. van Nispen, Andr. Gails Observantien van de kaiserlyke practyke etc., Amsterdam 1656, p. 584; A. Mattheus, Commentarius ad lib. XLVII et XLVIII. Dig. de criminibus, Geneva 1760, 5th impression, p. 20; D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling der lijfstraffelijke misdaden en haare berechting II, Rotterdam 1752. p. 1482; Joh. Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas II, The Hague 1723, 4th impression, p. 1099.
103. 42 Thus a. o. J. Moorman-J. v. Hasselt, Verhandelinge over de misdaden en derselver straffen, Arnhem 1770, p. 13-17; B. Carpzow, Practica nova rerum criminalium imperialis Saxonica in tres partes divisa, Basle 1751, pars III, p. 322; A. Gaill, Practicum observationum, tam ad processum ordinarium . . . quam causarum decisiones pertinentium libri II, Antwerp 1653, p. 506 (lib. II, observ. 110, nr. 21-22); cf. a merely literal translation by A. van Nispen, Andr. Gails Observantien van de kaiserlyke practyke etc., Amsterdam 1656, p. 584; A. Mattheus, Commentarius ad lib. XLVII et XLVIII. Dig. de criminibus, Geneva 1760, 5th impression, p. 20; D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling der lijfstraffelijke misdaden en haare berechting II, Rotterdam 1752. p. 1482; Joh. Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas II, The Hague 1723, 4th impression, p. 1099.
104. 42 Thus a. o. J. Moorman-J. v. Hasselt, Verhandelinge over de misdaden en derselver straffen, Arnhem 1770, p. 13-17; B. Carpzow, Practica nova rerum criminalium imperialis Saxonica in tres partes divisa, Basle 1751, pars III, p. 322; A. Gaill, Practicum observationum, tam ad processum ordinarium . . . quam causarum decisiones pertinentium libri II, Antwerp 1653, p. 506 (lib. II, observ. 110, nr. 21-22); cf. a merely literal translation by A. van Nispen, Andr. Gails Observantien van de kaiserlyke practyke etc., Amsterdam 1656, p. 584; A. Mattheus, Commentarius ad lib. XLVII et XLVIII. Dig. de criminibus, Geneva 1760, 5th impression, p. 20; D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling der lijfstraffelijke misdaden en haare berechting II, Rotterdam 1752. p. 1482; Joh. Voet, Commentarius ad Pandectas II, The Hague 1723, 4th impression, p. 1099.
105. 43 D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling (nt. 42), 1482. Van Hogendorp founds his views on Marcus Aurelius's rescript, Mac. D. 1, 18, 14 and its summary by Modestinus D. 48, 9, 9, 2.
106. 44 F. Wieacker, Privatrechtsgeschichte der Neuzeit, Göttingen 1967, 2nd impression, p. 218.
107. 45 B. Carpzov, Practica nova (see nt. 42), p. 325: Ubi et hoc notandum, quod si custodes fuerint negligentes in custodiendo, et hac negligentia furiosus deliquerit, pro modo culpae et negligentiae puniri debeant.
108. 46 Cf. Angelus Aretinus, De maleficiis, Lyon 1551, fol. 280 (sub 16); the responsibility of guards is treated in detail by Prosp. Farinacius, Praxis et theoreticae criminalis libri II, Frankfurt 1606, 477 ff. (lib. I, titulus IV, questio 31).
109. 46 Cf. Angelus Aretinus, De maleficiis, Lyon 1551, fol. 280 (sub 16); the responsibility of guards is treated in detail by Prosp. Farinacius, Praxis et theoreticae criminalis libri II, Frankfurt 1606, 477 ff. (lib. I, titulus IV, questio 31).
110. 47 Ant. Mattheus, De criminibus (nt. 42), p. 23.
111. 48 D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling (nt. 42), p. 1482. An advice for the same punishment as the prisoner, of the guard who was on duty, but helped to escape for a sum of money, was given against Jan Quint in Utrecht in 1650; here the guard was evindently not only "in supina neglegentia" but also "in dolo." See J. Barels, Crimineele advyzen door verscheide voornaeme Nederlandsche rechtsgeleerden over gewichtige gevallen, Amsterdam 1778, p. 267-269.
112. 48 D. van Hogendorp, Verhandeling (nt. 42), p. 1482. An advice for the same punishment as the prisoner, of the guard who was on duty, but helped to escape for a sum of money, was given against Jan Quint in Utrecht in 1650; here the guard was evindently not only "in supina neglegentia" but also "in dolo." See J. Barels, Crimineele advyzen door verscheide voornaeme Nederlandsche rechtsgeleerden over gewichtige gevallen, Amsterdam 1778, p. 267-269.
113. 49 Joh. Voet, Commentarius and pandectas II, The Hague 1723, p. 1099-1100.
114. 50 The opinion, that 'nihil esse indignus quam eum qui culpa careat supplicio non carere' can be found already earlier in Cicero, De inv. II, 33, 101. However, his pronouncement does not specifically concern lunatics who have commited an offence.
115. 51 For the recent history of Art. 37 ff. of the Dutch Penal Code cf. W. Pompe - G. Th. Kempe, Ontstaan en toepassing derpsychopathenwetten, Klinisch-psychiatrisch onderzoek van delinquenten, Assen 1962, p. 9-51.
116. 52 Although the wording of the rescript is not perfectly clear, Marcus Aurelius apparently has in mind a compensatory penal responsibility of the guards. Thus also B. Cassinelli, Il rescritto di Marco Aurelio e il concetto di malattia mentale, Rassegna di studi penitenziari 9 (1959), p. 843-845:l'atto doloso dell'infermo di mente può essere imputato penalmente ai custodi in osservanti dei loro doveri a titulo in colpa: concetto giusto ed esatto. However, the author's opinion at the end of the quoted passage should be considered with great caution!
117. 53 Thus the Dutch Supreme Court Jan. 28th 1859, W. 2031; Dec. 10th 1909, W. 8944; For the responsibility for actions of lunatics in the Netherlands, cf. C.J. Goudsmit, Aansprakelijkheid van en voor geestelijk gestoorden, (Verhandeling, uitgeg. door het) Psychiatrisch-juridisch gezelschap, Amsterdam 1958, p. 11-15; J. P. Windhausen, Het vraagstuk van de civielrechtelijke bescherming tegen handelingen van geestelijk gestoorden, Hoorn 1962, p. 30-32 (Dutch law); p. 65 (French law); p. 77 (Swiss law; the analogy with the notions of Plato and Marcus Aurelius concerning the responsibility for actions of lunatics is quite striking); p. 81 (Italian law). It is communis opinio that in the Netherlands the legal basis of this responsibility can only be found in article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code, as article 6:169-172 of the same Code provides us with a limitative enumeration of persons who are to be considered responsible for (the acts of) third persons.
118. 53 Thus the Dutch Supreme Court Jan. 28th 1859, W. 2031; Dec. 10th 1909, W. 8944; For the responsibility for actions of lunatics in the Netherlands, cf. C.J. Goudsmit, Aansprakelijkheid van en voor geestelijk gestoorden, (Verhandeling, uitgeg. door het) Psychiatrisch-juridisch gezelschap, Amsterdam 1958, p. 11-15; J. P. Windhausen, Het vraagstuk van de civielrechtelijke bescherming tegen handelingen van geestelijk gestoorden, Hoorn 1962, p. 30-32 (Dutch law); p. 65 (French law); p. 77 (Swiss law; the analogy with the notions of Plato and Marcus Aurelius concerning the responsibility for actions of lunatics is quite striking); p. 81 (Italian law). It is communis opinio that in the Netherlands the legal basis of this responsibility can only be found in article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code, as article 6:169-172 of the same Code provides us with a limitative enumeration of persons who are to be considered responsible for (the acts of) third persons.
119. 53 Thus the Dutch Supreme Court Jan. 28th 1859, W. 2031; Dec. 10th 1909, W. 8944; For the responsibility for actions of lunatics in the Netherlands, cf. C.J. Goudsmit, Aansprakelijkheid van en voor geestelijk gestoorden, (Verhandeling, uitgeg. door het) Psychiatrisch-juridisch gezelschap, Amsterdam 1958, p. 11-15; J. P. Windhausen, Het vraagstuk van de civielrechtelijke bescherming tegen handelingen van geestelijk gestoorden, Hoorn 1962, p. 30-32 (Dutch law); p. 65 (French law); p. 77 (Swiss law; the analogy with the notions of Plato and Marcus Aurelius concerning the responsibility for actions of lunatics is quite striking); p. 81 (Italian law). It is communis opinio that in the Netherlands the legal basis of this responsibility can only be found in article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code, as article 6:169-172 of the same Code provides us with a limitative enumeration of persons who are to be considered responsible for (the acts of) third persons.
120. 53 Thus the Dutch Supreme Court Jan. 28th 1859, W. 2031; Dec. 10th 1909, W. 8944; For the responsibility for actions of lunatics in the Netherlands, cf. C.J. Goudsmit, Aansprakelijkheid van en voor geestelijk gestoorden, (Verhandeling, uitgeg. door het) Psychiatrisch-juridisch gezelschap, Amsterdam 1958, p. 11-15; J. P. Windhausen, Het vraagstuk van de civielrechtelijke bescherming tegen handelingen van geestelijk gestoorden, Hoorn 1962, p. 30-32 (Dutch law); p. 65 (French law); p. 77 (Swiss law; the analogy with the notions of Plato and Marcus Aurelius concerning the responsibility for actions of lunatics is quite striking); p. 81 (Italian law). It is communis opinio that in the Netherlands the legal basis of this responsibility can only be found in article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code, as article 6:169-172 of the same Code provides us with a limitative enumeration of persons who are to be considered responsible for (the acts of) third persons.
121. 53 Thus the Dutch Supreme Court Jan. 28th 1859, W. 2031; Dec. 10th 1909, W. 8944; For the responsibility for actions of lunatics in the Netherlands, cf. C.J. Goudsmit, Aansprakelijkheid van en voor geestelijk gestoorden, (Verhandeling, uitgeg. door het) Psychiatrisch-juridisch gezelschap, Amsterdam 1958, p. 11-15; J. P. Windhausen, Het vraagstuk van de civielrechtelijke bescherming tegen handelingen van geestelijk gestoorden, Hoorn 1962, p. 30-32 (Dutch law); p. 65 (French law); p. 77 (Swiss law; the analogy with the notions of Plato and Marcus Aurelius concerning the responsibility for actions of lunatics is quite striking); p. 81 (Italian law). It is communis opinio that in the Netherlands the legal basis of this responsibility can only be found in article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code, as article 6:169-172 of the same Code provides us with a limitative enumeration of persons who are to be considered responsible for (the acts of) third persons.
122. 53 Thus the Dutch Supreme Court Jan. 28th 1859, W. 2031; Dec. 10th 1909, W. 8944; For the responsibility for actions of lunatics in the Netherlands, cf. C.J. Goudsmit, Aansprakelijkheid van en voor geestelijk gestoorden, (Verhandeling, uitgeg. door het) Psychiatrisch-juridisch gezelschap, Amsterdam 1958, p. 11-15; J. P. Windhausen, Het vraagstuk van de civielrechtelijke bescherming tegen handelingen van geestelijk gestoorden, Hoorn 1962, p. 30-32 (Dutch law); p. 65 (French law); p. 77 (Swiss law; the analogy with the notions of Plato and Marcus Aurelius concerning the responsibility for actions of lunatics is quite striking); p. 81 (Italian law). It is communis opinio that in the Netherlands the legal basis of this responsibility can only be found in article 6:162 of the Dutch Civil Code, as article 6:169-172 of the same Code provides us with a limitative enumeration of persons who are to be considered responsible for (the acts of) third persons.