Scanned text contains errors.
LIBERTUS. LIBERO'RUM JUS. [lex julia et papia
LIBERTUS (a7reA.ev0epos), a freedman. 1. greek. It was not imfrequent for a master at Athens to restore a slave to freedom. A private person, it appears, might liberate his slave without any particular formality ; sometimes the state would emancipate a slave, but then the purchase mone}'- had to be restored to his master. (Plat. de Leg. xi. p. 914.) The state into which a slave thus entered was called aTreAeuflepia, and he was said to be /ca0' &avr6v. (Demosth. pro Phorm. p. 945.) It is not quite certain whether those persons who are termed ol x<0pLs oiKovmes (Demosth. Philip. i. p. 50) were likewise freedmen, as the grammarians assert, or '^nether they were persons yet in slavery, but living separated from their masters'" household ; but in Demosthenes (e. Euerg. et Mnesib. p. 1161) the expression x^P^ $K€l is evi~ dently used as synonymous with " he has been emancipated." A slave when manumitted entered into the status of a jueroiKo's [metoecus,], and as such he had not only to pay the /xeToLnoz/, but a triobolon in addition to it. This triobolon was probably the tax which slave-holders had to pay to the republic for each slave they kept, so that the triobolon paid by freedmen was intended to indemnify the state, which would otherwise have lost by every manumission of a slave. (Bockh, Putt. *Econ. of Athens, p. 331, &c., 2d edit.) The connection of a freedman with his former master was however not broken off entirely on his manumission, for he had throughout his life to regard him as his patron (Trpoffrdr^s)^ and to fulfil certain duties towards him. In what these duties consisted beyond the obligation of showing gratitude and respect towards his deliverer, and of taking him for his patron in all his affairs, is uncertain, though they seem to have been fixed by the laws of Athens. (Meier and Schom. Ait. Proc. p. 473, &c. ; Petit. Leg. Ait. ii. 6. p. 261 ; compare Plato, de Leg.yi\. p. 915.) Whether the relation existing between a person and his freedman descended to the children of the latter, is likewise unknown. That a master, in case his freedman died, had some claims to his property, is clear from Isaeus (de Nicoatrat. hered. c. 9 ; Rhetor, ad Alex. i. 16 ; compare Bunsen, De Jur. hered. Aifi. p. 51). The neglect of any of the duties which a freedman had towards his former master, was prosecuted by the cLTTocrraffiov Si/a;. [AposTASiou dike.]
The Spartans likewise restored their slaves some times to freedom, but in what degree such freed men partook of the civic franchise is not known. That they could never receive the full Spartan franchise is expressly stated by Dion Chrysosto- mus (Orat. xxxvi. p. 448, b), but Miiller (Dor. iii. 3. § 5) entertains the opinion that Spartan freedmen, after passing through several stages, might in the end obtain the full franchise ; this opinion however is more than doubtful. Spartan freedmen were frequently used in the armies and in the fleet, and were, according to Myro (ap. A then. vi. p. 271), designated by the names of a$6Ta(, oSeViroToi, epu/c-njpes, SecrTroo'tovavTai, and yeoSajUcoSezs'. [L. S.]
2. roman. Freemen (liberi} were either Ingenui [iNGENUi] or Libertini. Libertini were those persons who had been released from legal servitude (qui ex justct servitutc inanumissi stint, Gams, i. 11). A manumitted slave was Libertus
(that is, liberates) with reference to his master ; with reference to the class to which he belonged after manumission, lie was Libertinus. According to Suetonius, libertinus was the son of a libertus in the time of the censor Appius Claudius, and for some time after (Claud, c. 24) ; but this is not the meaning of the word in the extant Roman writers.
There were three modes of Legitima manumis-sio, the vin dicta, the census, and the testamentum : if the manumitted slave was above thirty years of age, if he was the Quiritarian property of his master, and if he was manumitted in proper form (legitime, justa et ler/itima mimumissione) he became a Civis Romanus : if any of these conditions were wanting, he became a Latinus ; and in some cases only a Dediticius. [manumjssio.] Thus there were, as Ulpian observes, three kinds of Liberti : Gives Romani, Latini Jimiani, and Dediticii.
The Status of a Civis Romanus and that of a Dediticius, have been already described. [CiviTAS; DEDiTicn.] As to the political condition of Libertini under the republic, who were Gives Romani, see manumissio.
Originally slaves who were so manumitted as not to become Gives Romani, were still slaves ; but the Praetor took them under his protection, and maintained their freedom, though he could not make them Gives Romani. The Lex Junia gave them a certain status, which was expressed by the phrase Latini Juniani : they were called Latini, sa}Ts Gaius (i. 22, iii. 56), because they were put on the same footing aa the Latini Coloniarii, and Juniani because the Junia Lex gave them freedom, whereas before they were by strict law (ex Jure Quiritiiem) slaves. Gaius (iii. 56) says that the Lex Junia declared such manumitted persons to he as free as if they had been Roman citizens by birth (cires Romani ingenui), who had gone out from Rome to join a Latin colony, and thereby had become Latini Coloniarii : this passage, which is not free from difficulty, is remarked on by Savigny (Zeitschrift, ix.. p. 320).
A Latinus could attain the Civitas in several ways. (Gains, i. 28, &c. ; Ulp. Frag. tit. 3 ; la-tinitas.) As the patria potestas was a Jus peculiar to Roman citizens,it followed that a Latinus had not the (Roman) patria potestas over his children. If, however, he had married either a Latina and had begotten a child, who would of course be a Latinus, or had married a Roman civis, and had begotten a child, which, by a senatusconsultum of Hadrian, would be a Romanus Givis, he might, by complying with the provisions of the Lex Aelia Sentia, in the former case obtain the ci vitas for himself, his wife, and child, and in both cases acquire the patria potestas over his child just as if the child had been born in justae nuptiae. (Gaius, i. 30. 66.)
In considering the legal condition of Libertini, it is necessary to remember that even those who were Gives Romani were not Ingenui, and that their patroni had still certain rights with respect to them. The Latini Juniani were under some special incapacities ; for the Lex Junia which determined their status, neither gave them the power of making a will, nor of taking property under a will, nor of "being named Tutores in a will. They could not therefore take either as heredes or lega-tarii, but they could take by way of fidei-com-missum. (Gaius, i. 24.) The sons of libertini were ingenui, but they could not have gentile rightsj