DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.51387#0043
TREASURE-TROVE 41
completed in the reign of the same Leo from whose Novellae
we have just cited; and from the Basilica excerpts were made
in the tenth century Synopsis and other law-books.1 How
these excerpts were apt to be bungled may be illustrated by
a passage concerning the present subject. Delation must
have been common at all times, though it rarely finds a
mention in the legislation.2 In the Epitome Legum3 (compiled
a.d. 920) we read that ‘he who denounces a treasure must
give surety of not less than five pounds of gold until written
sentence be given on the things denounced’. But what the
Basilica really say4 is: ‘Neither the comes rerumprivatarum nor
any other magistrate in Constantinople or in the provinces
shall admit any person who denounces treasure; but if his
denunciation concerns anything else, he shall be subjected
to a surety’, &c.
How long the comparatively humane legislation of Leo
remained effective, we do not know. In the East it would
appear that the fiscal regime eventually took its place.5 In
the West in the Middle Ages we usually find a modified
regality in force, for instance, under Frederic I in the middle
of the twelfth century. But this cannot be dealt with here.
IV
In none of the Roman legislation, or in the ancient
sources, is to be found any reasoned statement of the origin
of the right to a treasure enjoyed by any of the parties
concerned—finder, emperor, landowner (to which those
who do not limit treasure to things found in immovable
property, would add the owner of the movable). As to the
finder,6 it is certain that Roman legislation did not recognize
1 Zachariae v. Lingenthal, Gesch. des griechisch-romischen Rechts3,
Berlin, 1892, p. 216.
2 e.g. Cod. Theod. 10, 18 (above, p. 32).
3 Ed. Zachariae v. Lingenthal, Jus Graeco-Romanum, vii, p. 178,
tit. 43, 64: 6 Kcrraprivucov 6r|actvpdv ttevte AiTpa$ ypuaiou syyuarai eco; ore
Ta TTpoaayyeASEVTa aypa<pco$ AtctKpiSrj. (The corresponding passage in the
Basilica shows that this last phrase has the meaning given in the text.)
4 Basil, vi. 1. 109. 5 Schwach, p. 128, note 38. 6 See above, p. 18.
xix F
completed in the reign of the same Leo from whose Novellae
we have just cited; and from the Basilica excerpts were made
in the tenth century Synopsis and other law-books.1 How
these excerpts were apt to be bungled may be illustrated by
a passage concerning the present subject. Delation must
have been common at all times, though it rarely finds a
mention in the legislation.2 In the Epitome Legum3 (compiled
a.d. 920) we read that ‘he who denounces a treasure must
give surety of not less than five pounds of gold until written
sentence be given on the things denounced’. But what the
Basilica really say4 is: ‘Neither the comes rerumprivatarum nor
any other magistrate in Constantinople or in the provinces
shall admit any person who denounces treasure; but if his
denunciation concerns anything else, he shall be subjected
to a surety’, &c.
How long the comparatively humane legislation of Leo
remained effective, we do not know. In the East it would
appear that the fiscal regime eventually took its place.5 In
the West in the Middle Ages we usually find a modified
regality in force, for instance, under Frederic I in the middle
of the twelfth century. But this cannot be dealt with here.
IV
In none of the Roman legislation, or in the ancient
sources, is to be found any reasoned statement of the origin
of the right to a treasure enjoyed by any of the parties
concerned—finder, emperor, landowner (to which those
who do not limit treasure to things found in immovable
property, would add the owner of the movable). As to the
finder,6 it is certain that Roman legislation did not recognize
1 Zachariae v. Lingenthal, Gesch. des griechisch-romischen Rechts3,
Berlin, 1892, p. 216.
2 e.g. Cod. Theod. 10, 18 (above, p. 32).
3 Ed. Zachariae v. Lingenthal, Jus Graeco-Romanum, vii, p. 178,
tit. 43, 64: 6 Kcrraprivucov 6r|actvpdv ttevte AiTpa$ ypuaiou syyuarai eco; ore
Ta TTpoaayyeASEVTa aypa<pco$ AtctKpiSrj. (The corresponding passage in the
Basilica shows that this last phrase has the meaning given in the text.)
4 Basil, vi. 1. 109. 5 Schwach, p. 128, note 38. 6 See above, p. 18.
xix F