Dictionary of Greek and Roman antiquities. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

630 IMPUBES. IMP UBES.
specially conferred by a Lex Curiata, and was not bent), and not to those who were infantes or Infanti.
incident to any office; (3) a power without which proximi, though inll the case of the infanti proximi
no military operation could be considered as done a liberal interpretation was given to the rule of law
in the name and on the behalf of the state. Of this (benignior juris interpretatio), by virtue of which a
a notable example is recorded in Livy (xxvi. 2), pupillus, who was infanti proximus, was placed
where the senate refused to recognise a Roman as on the same footing as one who was pubertati
a commander because he had not received the proximus, but this was done for their benefit only
Imperium in due form. (proprte' utilitatem eorum7), and therefore could not
In respect of his Imperium, he who received it apply to a case where the plupillus might be a loser
was styled imperator (abTeocpdrwp): he might be a (Compare Inst. iii. tit. 19. s. 10 with Gaius, iii. 108.)
consul or a proconsul. It was an ancient practice, An impubes who was in the power of his father,
observes Tacitus.(Ann. iii. 74), for the soldiers of could not bind himself even with the auctoritas of
a victorious general to salute him by the title of his father; for in the ca:e of a pupillus, the aucimperator; but in the instance referred to by toritas of the tutor was only allowed, in respect of
Tacitus, the Emperor Tiberius allowed the soldiers the pupillus having property of his own, which a
to confer the title on an individual who had it not son in the power of his father could not have.
already, while under the republic the title as a In the case of obligattiones ex delicto, the notion
matter of course was given with the Imlperium; of the auctoritas of a tutor was of course excluded,
and every general who received the Imperium was as such auctoritas was only requisite for the purentitled to the name of imperator. After a victory pose of giving effect to rightful acts. If the imit was usual for the soldiers to salute their com- pubes was of sufficient capacity to understand the
mander as imperator, but this salutation neither nature of his delict, he was bound by it; othergave nor confirmed the title. Under the republic, wise, he was not. In the ease of a person who
observes Tacitus, there were several imperatores was Pubertati proximus, there was a legal preat a time: Augustus granted the title to some; sumption of such capacity; but still this presumpbut the last instance, he adds, of the title being tion did not exclude a consideration of the degree
conferred was in the case of Blaesus., under of understanding of the impubes and the nature of
Tiberius. There were, however, later instances. the act, for the act might be such as either to be
The assumption of the praenomen of imperator by perfectly intelligible, as theft, or it might be an
Julius Caesar (Suet. Caes. c. 76) was a usurpation; act which an impubes imperfectly understood. as
or it may have been conferred by the senate (Dion when he was made the instrument of fraud. These
Cassius, xliii. 44). Under the republic the title principles were applicable to cases of furtum, damcame properly after the name; thus Cicero% when num injuria datum, injuria, and others; and also
he was proconsul in Cilicia, could properly style to crimes, in which the nature of the act mainly
himself M. Tullius Cicero Imperator, for the term determined whether or not guilt should be im.
merely expressed that he had the Imperium.. Ti- puted.
berins and Claudius refused to assume the prae- An impubes could enter into a contract by which
nomen of Imperator, but the use of it as a prae- he was released from a debt, but he could not renomen became established among their successors, lease a debt without the auctoritas of his tutor.
as we see from the imperial Coins, Tlhe title Im- Re could not pay money without his tutor; nor
perator sometimes appears' on the imperial medals, could he receive money without his tutor, at least
followed by a numeral (VI, for instance), whifch it was not a valid payment, because such payment
indicates that it was specially assumed by them on was, as a. consequence, followed by a release to the
the occasion of some great victory; for though the debtor. But since the rule as to the incapacity of
victory might be gained by their generals, it was an impubes was made only to save him from loss,
considered to be gained under the auspices of the he could not retain both the money and the claim.
Imperator. An impubes could not be a plaintiff or a defendThe term Imperium was applied in the republi- ant in a suit without his tutor. He could acquire
can period to express the sovereignty of the Ro- the ownership of property alone, but he could not
man state, Thus Gaul is said by Cicero (Pro alienate it without the consent of his tutor, nor
Font. 1) to have come under the Imperium and could he manumit a slave without such consent.
Ditio of the Populus Romanus; and the notion of He could contract sponsalia alone, because the
the Majestas Populi Romani is said to be " in auctoritas of the tutor has reference only to proImperii atque in nominis populi Romani dignitate." perty: if he was in his father's power, he was of
(Cie. Or. Part. 30.) Compare the use of Impe- course entirely under his father's control.
rium in Horace, Od. i. 37, iii. 5. [G. L.] An impubes could acquire an hereditas with the
IMPLU'VIUM. [Dosvus, p. 427, b.] consent of his tutor, which consent was necessary;
IMPU'BES. An infans [INFANS] was in- because an hereditas was accompanied with obligacapable of doing any legal act. An impubes, who tions. But as the act of cretion was an act that must
had passed the limits of infantia, could do any be done by the heres himself, neither his tutor nor
legal act with the auctoritas of his tutor; without a slave could take the hereditas for a pupillus, and
such auctoritas he could only do those acts which he was in consequence of his age incapable of taking
were for his benefit. Accordingly such an im- it himself. This difficulty was got over by the
pubes could stipulate (stipulari), but not promise doctrine of pro herede gestio: the tutor might per(promitte'e); in other words, as Gaius (iii. 107) mit the pupillus to. act as heres, which had the
expresses it, a pupillus could only be bound by the effect of cretion: and this doctrine would apply
auctoritas of his tutor, but he could bind another even in the case of infantes, for no expression of
without such auctoritas. [INFANS] words was necessary in order to the pro herede
But this remark as to pupilli only applies to gestio. In the case of the bonorum possessio, the
those who had understanding enough to know what father could apply for it on behalf of his child, and
they were doing (qui jan aliquern intellectumL ha- the tutor on behalf of his pupillus, without any act