Scanned text contains errors.
79.) These were no doubt put on in a variety of elegant ways, resembling those which are in use among the females of Italy, Greece, and Asia Minor, at the present day.
MANTIKE (>c«/T//d?,) [divinatio.]
MANUM, CONVENT10 IN. [matri-
MANUMFSSIO was the form by which slaves and persons In Mancipii causa were released from those conditions respectively.
There were three modes of effecting a Justa et Legitima Manumissio, namely, Vindicta, Census, and Testamentum, which are enumerated both by Gains and Ulpian (Frag. i.) as existing in their time. (Compare Cic. Top. 2, and Plautus, Cas. ii. 8. 68.) Of these the Manumissio by Vindicta is probably the oldest, and perhaps was once the only mode of manumission. It is mentioned by Livy as in use at an early period (ii. 5), and indeed he states that some persons refer the origin of the Vindicta to the event there related, and derive its name from Vindicius ; the latter part, at least, of the supposition is of no value.
The ceremony of the Manumissio by the Vindicta was as follows:—The master brought his slave before the magistratus, and stated the grounds (causa) of the intended manumission. The lictor of the magistratus laid a rod (festuca} on the head of the slave, accompanied with certain formal words, in which he declared that he was a free man ex Jure Quiritium, that is, " vindicavit in libertatem." The master in the meantime held the slave, and after he had pronounced the words " hunc ho-minem liberum volo," he turned him round (mo-mento turbinis exit Marcus Dama, Persius, Sat. v. 78) and let him go (emisit e manu^ or misit manu, Plaut. Capt. ii. 3. 48), whence the general name of the act of manumission. The magistratus then declared him to-be free, in reference to which Cicero (ad Ait. vii. 2) seems to use the word "addicere." The word Vindicta itself, which is properly the res vindicate^ is used for festuca by Horace (Sat ii. 7. 76). Plautus (Mil. Glor. iv. 1. 15) uses festuca.
It seems highly probable that this form of Manumissio was framed after the analogy of the In jure vindicationes (Gains, iv. 16) ; and that the lictor in the case of manumission represented the opposite claimant in the vindicatio. (Unterholzner, Von den formen der Manumissio per Vindictam und Emancipatio^ Zeitsclirift^ vol. ii. p. 139.)
The Manumissio by the Census is thus briefly described by Ulpian : " Slaves were formerly manumitted by census, when at the lustral census •(lustrali censu) at Rome they gave in their census (some read nomen instead of census) at the bidding of their masters." Persons In mancipio might also obtain their manumission in this way. (Gaius, i. 140.) The slave must of course have had a sufficient Peculium, or the master must have given him property.
In the absence of decisive testimony as to the origin of these two modes of manumissio, modern writers indulge themselves in a variety of conjectures. It may be true that originally the manumission by Vindicta only gave libertas and not civitas ; but this opinion is not probable. It may easily be allowed that in the earliest period the
civitas could only be conferred by the sovereign power, and that therefore there could be no effectual manumission except by the same power. But the form of the Vindicta itself supposes, not that the person manumitted was a slave, but that he was a free person, against whose freedom his master made a claim. The proceeding before the magistratus was in form an assertion of the slave's freedom (inanu asserere liberali causa. Plant. Poen. iv. 2. 83, &c.), to which the owner made no defence, but he let him go as a free man. The proceeding then resembles the In Jure Cessio, and was in fact a fictitious suit in which freedom (libertas) was the matter in issue. It followed as a consequence of the fiction, that when the magistratus pronounced in favour of freedom Ex jure Quiritium, there could be no dispute about the Civitas.
In the case of the Census the slave was registered as a citizen with his master's consent. The assumption that the Vindicta must have originally preceded the Census, for which there is no evidence at all, is inconsistent with the nature of the proceeding, which was a registration of the slave, with his master's consent, as a citizen. A question might arise whether he should be considered free immediately on being entered on the censor's roll, or not until the lustrum was celebrated (Cic. de Or. i. 40) ; and this was a matter of some importance, for his acquisitions were only his own from the time when he became a free man.
The law of the Twelve Tables confirmed freedom which was given by will (testamentum). Freedom (libertas) might be given either directo, that is, as a legacy, or by way of fideiconimissmn. The slave who was made free directo, was called orcinus libertus (or horcinus, as in Ulp. Frag.}, for the same reason perhaps that certain senators wero called Orcini. (Sueton. Octav. 35.) He who received his libertas by way of fideicommissum, was not the libertus of the testator, but of the person who was requested to manumit him (manumissor): if the heres, who was requested to manumit, refused, he might be compelled to manumit on application being made to the proper authority. Libertas might be given by fideicommissum to a slave of the testator, of his heres, or of his legatee, and also to the slave of any other person (extraneus). In case of libertas being thus given to the slave of any other person, the gift of libertas was extinguished, if the owner would not sell the slave at a fair price. A slave who was made conditionally free by testament, was called Statu liber, and he was the slave of the heres until the condition vras fulfilled. If a Statu liber was sold by the heres, or if the ownership of him was acquired by usu-capion, he had still the benefit of the condition: this provision was contained in the Law of the Twelve Tables. If a slave was made free and heres by the testator's will, on the death of the testator he became both free and heres, whether he wished it or not. (Gaius, ii. 153 ; Ulp. Frag. xxii. 11.) [heres.]
A manumission by adoption is spoken of, but nothing is known of it. (Gell. v. 19 j Inst. 1. tit. 11. s. 12.)
The Lex Aelia Sentia laid various restrictions on manumission [lex aelia sentiaJ, particularly as to slaves under thirty years of age. The ceremony of manumitting slaves above thirty years of age had become very simple in the time of Gains (i. 20) ; it