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

796 INEX UlM. NEXUM.
rity: accordingly in one sense Nexum included an object of sale; and this object of sale might be a
Mancipium, as explained in MANCIPIUI; in an- thing or a person. We need not assume that "per
other sense, Mancipiuml and Nexum are opposed aes et libramn se obligare," and for a man to make
in the same way in which Sale and Mortgage or himself Nexus are the same. In the case of Nexum
Pledge are opposed. The formal part of both aes, it is more consistent to consider the aes as the
transactions consisted in a transfer per aes et object of the obligatio per aes et libram, and in the
libram. This explanation is consistent with the case when a man made himself Nexus to consider
definitions of the jurists, and the uses of these two the man as the object. It does not follow then
words. that an obligatio per aes et libram always made a
The person who became Nexus by the effect of man Nexus; but there is no difficulty in asa Nexum or Nexus (for this form of the word also suming that a man only became Nexus with referis used) was said Nexum inire. (Liv. vii. 19.) ence to an obligatio per aes et libram, so that a
The phrases Nexi datio, Nexi liberatio respectively man could contract an obligatio per aes et libram,
express the contracting and the release from the and at the same time coulld make himself Nexus. A
obligation. free man could not properly be the object of a sale,
The Roman law as to the payment of borrowed but it requires only a slight acquaintance with Romoney (pecunia certa credita; see Lex Gall. Cisalp. man law to perceive that this difficulty could be
21, 22) was very strict. A curious passage of got over by a fiction. As in the case of Manu.
Gellius (xx. 1) gives us the ancient mode of legal mission Per Vindictam there was a fiction that the
procedure in the case of debt, as fixed by the slave was free; so there might here be a fiction
Twelve Tables. If the debtor admitted the debt, that the freeman was a slave. And if this is not
or had been condemned in the amount of the debt admitted as a probable solution, it cannot be denied
by a judex, he had thirty days allowed him for that there is as much difficulty in understanding
payment. At the expiration of this time, he was the co-emtio of a female, who was sui juris, which
liable to the Manus Injectio [MANUS INJECTIO], as a legal fact is quite certain, as the formal sale of
and ultimately to be assigned over to the creditor a freeman with his consent. The notion of a free(addiclus) by the sentence of the praetor. The man giving himself into the power of another, so
creditor was required to keep him for sixty days far from being foreign to the notions of Roman
in chains, during which time he publicly exposed law, as some writers have asserted, is perfectly
the debtor one three nundinae, and proclaimed the consistent with them, as we see in the instance of
amount of' his debt. If no person released the adrogation. The Nexum then being in the form
prisoner by paying the debt, the creditor might of a sale, the Nexus was in a servile condition
sell him as a slave or put him to death. If there as a necessary consequence of the Nexum, and the
were several creditors, the letter of the law al- opinion that there must be an addictio to give
lowed them to cut the debtor in pieces, and to take effect to the Nexum, is inconsistent with the notheir share of his body in proportion to their debt. tion of the Nexum. According to this view, a
Gellius says that there was no instance of a credi- Nexus, as soon as the contract of Nexum was
tor ever having adopted this extreme mode of satis- made, was in the condition of an Addictus, and
fying his debt. But the creditor might treat the both were treated as slaves. But it has been
debtor, who was addictus, as a slave, and compel urged, that "one cannot discover any reason for
him to work out his debt; and the treatment was this self-pledging (nexzum), since every insolvent,
often very severe. even when there was no nexum, must become his
In this passage Gellius does not speak of Nexi, creditor's slave (addictus), and how can we underbut only of Addicti; which is sometimes alleged stand that the abolition of the nexum was such an
as evidence of the identity of nexus and addictus, advantage gained by the Plebeians (Liv. viii. 28),
but it proves no such identity. Ifa Nexus is what if the addictio still remained, which might be ohhe is here supposed to be, the Law of the Twelve tained when there was no nexum; and it cannot
Tables could not apply; for when a man had once be denied that it did remain? " The advantage
become Nexus with respect to one creditor, he could consists precisely in the difference between a connot become Nexus to another; and if he became tract which cannot be enforced against a person
Nexus to several at once, in this case the creditors without the forms of legal proceeding, and a conmust abide by their contract in taking a joint se- tract which at once gives a man a power over
curity. This Law of the Twelve Tables onlyapplied his debtor without any application to a court of
to the case of a debtor being assigned over by a justice. The effect of the abolition of the Nexui,
judicial sentence to several debtors, and it provided in this its special sense, while the Addictio still
for the settlement of their conflicting claims. The existed, may be illustrated by the supposed case of
distinction between a nexum and a res judicata a landlord's remedy for the recovery of his rent by
is obvious enough, though some writers have distress being abolished, while his other remedies
missed it. under the contract for letting and hiring remained.
The precise condition of a Nexus has however It is remarked by Goettling (Geschichde der
been a subject of much discussion among scholars, RWim. Staatsverfass2ung) that " the comparison of
and it is not easy to reconcile all the passages in the Adrogatio and the Adoptio gives the clearest
-which the term occurs so as to deduce from them proof of the correctness of Savigny's view, who rea consistent view of the matter. Sometimes indeed jects the notion of a freeman pledging himself. In
Nexus appears to be used in the same sense as the case of the Adrogatio of a Roman, who is sni
Addictus, which cannot cause any difficulty if we juris, there was no mancipatio which such person
consider that the effect of being Nexus mind Ad- could effect as to himself: but in the case of adopdictus was the same, as will presently be made tion, a mancipatio occurs, and it is effected by the
probable. living father and the son together. In the case of
As a Nexum was effected per aes et libram, it coemtio it certainly appears, as if the woman of
was in the form of a sale, and of course there was herself effected a self-mancipation; shle, however,