The edictum de feris in Roman law

(a) Wild animals in Rome

But what about wild animals? Large numbers of lions and bears, of cheetahs and elephants, of tigers and rhinoceroses, of crocodiles and hippopotamuses^[5755] ^{^[5756] were needed for circuses and training schools.^[5757] ^{^[5758] Ever more sensational venationes⁵⁴ were put up for the amusement of the populace.}}

As early as 169 b.c did the aediles curules P. Cornelius Scipio Nasica and P. Lentulus display, amongst others, 63 "African beasts"^[5759] and 40 bears at a show in the Circus Maximus.^[5760] No less a personage than Quintus Mucius Scaevola (pontifex) is credited by Pliny with having arranged the first fight "of a number of lions together" during his aedilship.^[5761] In 58 b.c. 150 large spotted cats (predominantly leopards) were let loose together in the arena.^[5762] Augustus records that 3 500 Africanae bestiae were killed in his 26 venationes;^[5763] and during the games with which Titus inaugurated the Colosseum in 80 A.D., 5 000 beasts were killed in one single day.^[5764] These animals had to be imported from all parts of the Empire,^[5765] displayed for sale, shoved from their travelling dens into stockyards^[5766] or cages and transported through the Roman streets before, ultimately, ending up in the carnage of the amphitheatres. There was an obvious risk that they, in turn, might find an opportunity to cause a bloodbath. The famous sculptor Praxiteles, for example, very nearly became one of their victims; while working at the docks in Ostia on the figure of a lion which had just arrived from overseas, he was attacked by a leopard that had managed to escape from another cage nearby.^[5767] But then there were also people who earned their money as snake charmers^[5768] or who displayed tame lions in a cage.^[5769] Rich Romans fancied exotic animals as household pets^[5770] or they kept big game in special hunting parks close to their country villae.^[5771] Nero even had a multitude of all kinds of "pecudes et ferae" in his famous domus aurea at Rome.^[5772] Again, the presence of these animals—whether tame or otherwise—in a densely populated city must have been somewhat more hazardous than the rural coexistence of man with sheep or mules or horses; and if it was thought necessary to make the owner strictly liable for injuries inflicted by a cow, the rules of the lex Aquilia can hardly have been regarded as having provided sufficient protection against the dangers emanating from ferocious panthers.

(b) The intervention of the praetor

In this instance it was, however, not the ins civile that took up the issi.It did not matter whether they were tied up or allowed to run around,^[5780] nor whether they escaped or merely mauled a passer-by.⁹² The person in charge of the animal—who did not have to be its owner⁹³—was liable, irrespective of whether he could have prevented the incident or not.

The basis of his liability was thus not fault but the mere fact that by having a dangerous animal "qua vulgo iter fiet", he had created a risk to others. For the death of a freeman the edict provided a penalty of 200 solidi,⁹⁴ in cases of non-fatal injuries to freemen the judge was instructed to award "quanti bonum aequum... videbitur", and in cases of damage to property "duplum" was recoverable?⁸ None of these consequences could be averted by way of noxal surrender. Provocation of the animal by the victim of the injury did perhaps exclude liability.^[5781] ^{^[5782] According to Inst. IV, 9, 1 the actio de pauperie and the aedilitian action could be brought concurrently; but this can have applied only in the case of dogs and, possibly, boars.^[5783] 4.}

<< | >>

↑

Source: Zimmermann R.. The Law of Obligations. Roman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition. Juta & Co, Ltd,1992. — 1241 p.. 1992

The edictum de feris in Roman law

More on the topic The edictum de feris in Roman law: