Posts: 111
Threads: 43
Joined: Aug 2010
Reputation:
0
I know from previous discussions that soldiers who were wounded and could no longer serve could be given the same grant of money/land as that of a soldier who completed his service obligation. Was there a similar benefit for the survivors of a soldier who was killed in battle or died in service? I've read elsewhere on this site that property would revert to the soldier's father if still living. Was there any provision made for the families of such soldiers? I would think that since these, for the most part, would not be citizens that would be unlikely. Do we know how such benefits were administered? Did the legion or the office of the provincial governor decide and pay these or were they the responsibility of a centralized office in Rome?
Jeff wrote:
I know from previous discussions that soldiers who were wounded and could no longer serve could be given the same grant of money/land as that of a soldier who completed his service obligation. Was there a similar benefit for the survivors of a soldier who was killed in battle or died in service? I've read elsewhere on this site that property would revert to the soldier's father if still living. Was there any provision made for the families of such soldiers?
I found this written by Gaius (1 129) about a soldier being taken prisoner, but it doesn’t answer your question.
“But where a parent has been taken prisoner by the enemy, though he becomes the slave of the enemy, his children’s status is nevertheless in suspense owing to the ius postliminii, whereby those captured by the enemy, if they come back, recover all their anterior rights. Thus, if the parent returns, he will save his children in potestas, if, however, he dies in captivity, the children will be sui iuris, though whether as from the time of his death or from that of his capture is a doubtful point. Also, if a son or grandson is himself captured by the enemy, his parent’s potestas must similarly in virtue of the ius postliminii be said to be in suspense.”
Steven
Posts: 712
Threads: 13
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
46
Richard Alston in his book Soldier & Society in Roman Egypt covers some legal issues & problems arising from peregrine families having no legal status to inherit because technically they weren't legally recognised as Roman citizens until the soldier completed his service to the army.
Quote:There were complicated rules as to who could inherit what and what proportion of the estate could be given to whom. There was also a general principle limiting inheritance to those of the same citizenship status as the testator. All these rules were waived. The first such privileges we know of were granted by Julius Caesar who allowed all the bequests of his soldiers to stand. The procedure was probably followed by generals both before and after Caesar but Trajan felt it necessary to reinforce the ruling.Gaius states that soldiers were also permitted to institute peregrini, foreigners, as heirs, and the privilege was extended by Hadrian in AD 119 so that a soldier was not only able to bequeath his property to a peregrinus but also a peregrine child could establish a legal claim to the property of the soldier-father even if the father had died intestate.The kin of the soldier were also able to claim his property. The Gnomon of the Idios Logos, a series of administrative and legal rules from Egypt collected as a reminder of procedures, contains clauses to do with the military will. In our earliest version, dating from the mid-first century AD, Clause 34 appears to allow intestate succession to relatives and children, provided they were of the same group, and if there were no claimants, the property would revert to the camp.
Hope this helps
Regards
Michael Kerr
Michael Kerr
"You can conquer an empire from the back of a horse but you can't rule it from one"
