DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.51387#0065
Note: This is an additional scan to display the colour reference chart and scalebar.
0.5
1 cm
TREASURE-TROVE
39
metals.1 This is not satisfactorily explained by the theory
that the discovery of mines is of public, that of treasure of
private utility, unless we reject the view that the finder of
treasure earns his reward because he restores to circulation
what was buried and useless.
The next regulation of antiquity that has survived relating
to treasure-trove does not strictly belong to the Roman
sphere, for it was drafted by Theodoric the Goth, or rather
by his secretary Cassiodorus.2 We have already seen that
the king’s practice was to seize treasure-trove for his own
coffers. The formula for the comes privatarum largitionum?
reads: Money also that is hidden,4 and has lost its proper
owner by long lapse of time, you shall investigate and hand
over to our treasury, they whom we allow to possess their
own being bound willingly to hand over to us what is not
their own. For a finder suffers no loss when he loses his find,
since he loses what did not belong to him.
It is likely that this order i e~
of despotic rulers amongst t e n
that we may regard it not a =~
scheme of antiquity, but rat ="
the regality-system of the M E~
We pass accordingly to the =■_
subject from antiquity, viz. E~
No. 51. This long-winded ="o
necessary to deal with treasu =~
the selfish rich who not on =~
mercy to those m want, but -
1 Cod. lust. 11, 7 (6), note y of -
2 Therefore between about 507. E
and 526, when Theodoric died. E“
earlier than the quaestorship 01 E~^
treasure-trove. E-
4 ‘Depositivae [v.l. repositivae] — <0
5 Imp. Leonis Augusti Novellae Con E_
Corpus Jur. Civil., Pars III, Leip: E
886 to 911. Zachariae v. Linge E
pp. 143-4. E"
— ro
39
metals.1 This is not satisfactorily explained by the theory
that the discovery of mines is of public, that of treasure of
private utility, unless we reject the view that the finder of
treasure earns his reward because he restores to circulation
what was buried and useless.
The next regulation of antiquity that has survived relating
to treasure-trove does not strictly belong to the Roman
sphere, for it was drafted by Theodoric the Goth, or rather
by his secretary Cassiodorus.2 We have already seen that
the king’s practice was to seize treasure-trove for his own
coffers. The formula for the comes privatarum largitionum?
reads: Money also that is hidden,4 and has lost its proper
owner by long lapse of time, you shall investigate and hand
over to our treasury, they whom we allow to possess their
own being bound willingly to hand over to us what is not
their own. For a finder suffers no loss when he loses his find,
since he loses what did not belong to him.
It is likely that this order i e~
of despotic rulers amongst t e n
that we may regard it not a =~
scheme of antiquity, but rat ="
the regality-system of the M E~
We pass accordingly to the =■_
subject from antiquity, viz. E~
No. 51. This long-winded ="o
necessary to deal with treasu =~
the selfish rich who not on =~
mercy to those m want, but -
1 Cod. lust. 11, 7 (6), note y of -
2 Therefore between about 507. E
and 526, when Theodoric died. E“
earlier than the quaestorship 01 E~^
treasure-trove. E-
4 ‘Depositivae [v.l. repositivae] — <0
5 Imp. Leonis Augusti Novellae Con E_
Corpus Jur. Civil., Pars III, Leip: E
886 to 911. Zachariae v. Linge E
pp. 143-4. E"
— ro