Letter 2016: You, with your usual watchfulness on my behalf, advise me that the codicils of Acilianus, who left me heir to half...
Pliny the Younger→Annianus|c. 100 AD|Pliny the Younger
barbarian invasionproperty economics
To Annianus. *
You, with your usual watchfulness on my behalf, advise me that the codicils of Acilianus, who left me heir to half his estate, may be treated as though they were non-existent, because they are not confirmed by the will. I was quite aware of the law on the subject, for even those who know nothing else know as much as that. But I have made a law of my own for such cases, which leads me to treat as valid the wishes of a dead man, even though they are not legally binding upon me. It is beyond question that the codicils in question were drawn up by Acilianus in his own hand. So, even though they are not confirmed by the will, I will carefully carry out their intentions as though they were, especially as there is no loophole for an informer to meddle in the matter. For if there were any reason to be afraid of the money I have given being confiscated, I ought to act with perhaps greater hesitation and caution; but since an heir is at perfect liberty to give away what has reverted to him under an inheritance, there is no reason why I should not abide by my own law, which does not clash with the regulations of the State. Farewell.
[Note: This letter requires explanation. Acilianus had made a regular will, leaving Pliny heir to half his property. He had subsequently written certain codicils - not, as some suppose, directing Pliny to pay his legacy, or a part of it, to others, for it seems that such codicils would have been valid, even without a will - but in which other specific legacies had been made ; and to make these valid, a will was necessary. These legacies would have diminished Pliny's share or reduced it to nothing. Annianus accordingly tells him that he may treat the codicils as so much waste paper. Pliny replies that he will carry out the testator's wishes, and that there is no law to prevent him. For the codicils being legally void, his whole half share reverts to him (subsedit), and of course he can do with it he likes, i.e. pay the above-named legacies out of it. There is clearly no ground, he adds, for any information being laid against me on this account.]
L To Annianus. *
You, with your usual watchfulness on my behalf, advise me that the codicils of Acilianus, who left me heir to half his estate, may be treated as though they were non-existent, because they are not confirmed by the will. I was quite aware of the law on the subject, for even those who know nothing else know as much as that. But I have made a law of my own for such cases, which leads me to treat as valid the wishes of a dead man, even though they are not legally binding upon me. It is beyond question that the codicils in question were drawn up by Acilianus in his own hand. So, even though they are not confirmed by the will, I shall carefully carry out their intentions as though they were, especially as there is no loophole for an informer to meddle in the matter. For if there were any reason to be afraid of the money I have given being confiscated, I ought to act with perhaps greater hesitation and caution; but since an heir is at perfect liberty to give away what has reverted to him under an inheritance, there is no reason why I should not abide by my own law, which does not clash with the regulations of the State. Farewell.
(*) This letter requires explanation. Acilianus had made a regular will, leaving Pliny heir to half his property. He had subsequently written certain codicils - not, as some suppose, directing Pliny to pay his legacy, or a part of it, to others, for it seems that such codicils would have been valid, even without a will - but in which other specific legacies had been made ; and to make these valid, a will was necessary. These legacies would have diminished Pliny's share or reduced it to nothing. Annianus accordingly tells him that he may treat the codicils as so much waste paper. Pliny replies that he shall carry out the testator's wishes, and that there is no law to prevent him. For the codicils being legally void, his whole half share reverts to him (subsedit), and of course he can do with it he likes, i.e. pay the above-named legacies out of it. There is clearly no ground, he adds, for any information being laid against me on this account.
◆
To Annianus. *
You, with your usual watchfulness on my behalf, advise me that the codicils of Acilianus, who left me heir to half his estate, may be treated as though they were non-existent, because they are not confirmed by the will. I was quite aware of the law on the subject, for even those who know nothing else know as much as that. But I have made a law of my own for such cases, which leads me to treat as valid the wishes of a dead man, even though they are not legally binding upon me. It is beyond question that the codicils in question were drawn up by Acilianus in his own hand. So, even though they are not confirmed by the will, I will carefully carry out their intentions as though they were, especially as there is no loophole for an informer to meddle in the matter. For if there were any reason to be afraid of the money I have given being confiscated, I ought to act with perhaps greater hesitation and caution; but since an heir is at perfect liberty to give away what has reverted to him under an inheritance, there is no reason why I should not abide by my own law, which does not clash with the regulations of the State. Farewell.
[Note: This letter requires explanation. Acilianus had made a regular will, leaving Pliny heir to half his property. He had subsequently written certain codicils - not, as some suppose, directing Pliny to pay his legacy, or a part of it, to others, for it seems that such codicils would have been valid, even without a will - but in which other specific legacies had been made ; and to make these valid, a will was necessary. These legacies would have diminished Pliny's share or reduced it to nothing. Annianus accordingly tells him that he may treat the codicils as so much waste paper. Pliny replies that he will carry out the testator's wishes, and that there is no law to prevent him. For the codicils being legally void, his whole half share reverts to him (subsedit), and of course he can do with it he likes, i.e. pay the above-named legacies out of it. There is clearly no ground, he adds, for any information being laid against me on this account.]
Modern English rendering for readability. See the 19th-century translation or original Latin/Greek for scholarly use.