The Ancient Library
 

Scanned text contains errors.

On this page: Publiciana in Rem Actio – Publicum – Publicum – Puer – Pugilatus

074 PUBLICIANA IN REM ACTIO.

way in which these inferior officers sometimes be­ haved towards travellers and merchants, see Plant. Menaecli. i. 2. 5, &c. ; Cic. ad Q.uint. Fr. i. 1 ; Pint, de Curiosit. p. 518, e. (Compare Burmann, de Vectig. c. 9.) [L. S.]

PUBLICIANA IN REM ACTIO, was given to him who had obtained possession of a thing ex justa causa, and had lost the Possession before he had acquired the ownership by Usucapion. This was a Praetorian action, so called from a Praetor Piiblicius ; and the fiction by which the Possessor was enabled to sue, was that he had obtained the ownership by Usucapion. (Gains, iv. 36, where the intentio is given.) This actio was an incident to every kind of possessio which was susceptible of Usucapion (the thirty years' excepted). In the old Roman Law, this Actio resembled the Vindicatio, and in the newer Roman Law it was still more closely assimilated to it, and consequently in this actio, mere Possession was not the only thing considered, but the matter was likened to the case where ownership and Possession were ac­quired at the same time by Occupatio or Traditio. Accordingly Possessio for the purposes of Usuca­pion may be viewed in two ways: viewed with respect to the ownership of which it is the founda­tion, it is an object of jurisprudence as bare Pos­session ; viewed with reference to the Publiciana Actio, which is incident to it, it is viewed as ownership. The owner of a thing might avail himself of this action, if he had any difficulty in proving his ownership.

This action was introduced for the protection of those who had a civilis possessio, but that only, and consequently could not recover a thing by the Rei vindicatio, an action which a man could only have, when he had the Quiritarian ownership of a tiling. According to the definition a man could have this actio both for a thing which he had in bonis and for a thing of which he had a civilis possessio, without having it in bonis. When he had the thing in bonis his action was good against the Quiritarian owner, for if such owner pleaded his ownership, the plaintiff might reply that .the thing had been sold and delivered and therefore was his in bonis. The Publiciana actio of the plaintiff who had a civilis possessio, without having the thing in bonis, was not good against the owner, who had the right of ownership, in fact, while the plaintiff had it only in fiction ; nor was it valid against another who had a Civilis possessio as good as his own. His action was good against a Possessor who had not a civilis possessio. In this action the plaintiff had to prove that he possessed civiliter, before the time when he lost the pos­session. [possessio.]

The object of the action was the recovery of the thing and all that belonged to it (cum omni causa). In the legislation of Justinian, the distinction be­tween Res Mancipi and Nee Mancipi was abolished, and ownership could in all cases be transferred by tradition. The Publiciana actio therefore became useless for any other purpose than a case of bonae fidei possessio, and this seems to explain why the words " non a domino " appear in the Edict as cited in the Digest (6. tit. 2. s. 1), while they do not appear in Gaius (iv. 36).

The Publiciana actio applied also to Servitutes, the right to which had not been transferred by Mancipatio or In jure cessio, but which had been enjoyed with the consent of the owner of the

PUG1LATUS.

land. As the legislation of Justinian rendered the old forms of transfer of servitutes unnecessary, the Publiciana actio could then only apply to a case of Possessio.

(Dig. 6. tit. 2 ; Inst. 4. tit. 6 ; Savigny, Das Reclit des Besitzes, p. 13, 5th ed. ; Puchta, Inst. ii. § 233 ; Mackeldey, Lehrbuch, 12th ed. § 270, and the notes). [G. L.]

PUBLICUM. [aerarium, p. 23, b.]

PUBLICUM, PRIVATUM JUS. [Jus, p. 657, b.]

PU'BLICUS AGER.

PUER. [servus.]

PUGILATUS (ttvj-, ffvvri), boxing. The fist (pugnus., Tru|) being the simplest and most natural weapon, it may be taken for granted that boxing was one of the earliest athletic games among the Greeks. Hence even gods and several of the earliest heroes are described either as victors in the TruyyUT;, or as dis­tinguished boxers, such as .Apollo, Heracles, Ty-deus, Polydeuces, &c. (Paus. v. 7. § 4 ; Theocrit. xxiv. 113; Apollod. iii. 6. § 4 ; Paus. v. 8. § 2.) The Scholiast on Pindar (Nem. v. 89) says that Theseus was believed to have invented the art of boxing. The Homeric heroes are well acquainted with it. (Horn. II. xxiii. 691, &c. ; compare Od. viii. 103, &c.) The contest in boxing was one of the hardest and most dangerous, whence Homer gives it the attribute aXeyewf]. (II. xxiii. 653.) Boxing for men was introduced at the Olympic games in 01. 23, and for boys in 01. 37. (Paus. v. 8. § 3.) Contests in boxing for boys are also mentioned in the Nemea and Isthmia. (Paus. vi. 4. §6.)

In the earliest times boxers (pugiles, Tru/rrou) fought naked, with the exception of a ^w/xa round their loins (Horn. //. xxiii. 683 ; Virg. Acn. v. 421) ; but this was not used when boxing was in­troduced at Olympia, as the contests in wrestling and racing had been carried on here by persons entirely naked ever since 01. 15. Respecting the leathern thongs with which pugilists surrounded their fists, see cestus, \vhere its various forms are illustrated by wood-cuts.

The boxing of the ancients appears to have re­sembled the practice of modern times. Some par­ticulars, however, deserve to be mentioned. A peculiar method, which required great skill, was not to attack the antagonist, but to remain on the defensive, and thus to wear out the opponent, until he was obliged to acknowledge himself to be conquered. (Bio Chrysost. Melanc. ii. orat. 29 ; Eustath. ad II. p.. 1322. 29.) It was considered a sign of the greatest skill in a boxer to conquer without receiving any wounds, so that the two great points in this game were to inflict blows, and at the same time not to expose oneself to any danger (7^77777 K.a\ (pvhaKTi, J. Chrysost. Serm. vii. 1 ; Plut. Sympos. ii. 5 ; compare Pans, vi. 12. § 3). A pugilist used his right arm chiefly for fighting, and the left as a protection for his head, for all regular blows were directed against the upper parts of the body, and the wounds in­flicted upon the head were often very severe and fatal. In some ancient representations of boxers the blood is seen streaming from their noses, and their teeth were frequently knocked out. (Apol-Ion. Rhod. ii. 785 ; Theocrit. ii. 126 ; Virg. Aen. v. 469 ; Aelian. V. H. x. 1.9.) The ears especially were exposed to great danger, and

Pages
About | First | English Index | Classified Index | Latin Index | Greek Index

973

974

975
letter/word  
page #  
Search this site
Google


ancientlibrary.com
WWW
All non-public domain material, including introductions, markup, and OCR © 2005 Tim Spalding.
Ancient Library was developed and hosted by Tim Spalding of Isidore-of-Seville.com.