3 This was obviously because of the formal nature of certain transactions. 2 Agency was not to be found in any part of ancient Roman law, for example in the formal modes of conveying property. Roman law did not have a general concept of agency. In this article, the following will be discussed: why the Romans did not know agency the position of slaves and children in the paterfamilias' power who acted as "agents" the praetorian actions that made commerce possible institores and exercitores who acted as independent "agents" and the peculium. This, then, was the normal state of affairs in Rome, since Roman law never developed the idea of direct representation. 1 Messenio, a slave, tells himself that a good slave takes care of his master's business, organises it, thinks about it, and in his master's absence attends to his affairs as diligently as if he were present, or even more so. The title of this article derives from Plautus' Menaechmi. Factors that contributed to this, were firstly the considerable use of slaves and sons subject to power, and secondly the de facto agency exercised by institores and exercitores. Although Roman law never really developed an institution of direct representation, it gradually adapted to the increasing commercial needs and approached recognition of agency in contracts. ![]() ![]() Various relevant matters are discussed, such as the position of slaves and children in the paterfamilias's power, the praetorian actions that made commerce possible despite the lack of an institution such as agency, and the peculium. This article deals mainly with the question why the Romans did not know agency and how they successfully managed to cope without it. ![]() Professor, Department of Jurisprudence, University of South Africa
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |