Scanned text contains errors.
URNA.
and from the thirteenth century, most commonly Studium ; and if it was a distinguished school, it was called Studium Generale. The first occasion on which the term Universitas was applied to a great school is said to be in a Decretal of Innocent ill., of the beginning of the thirteenth century, addressed Scholaribus Parisiensibus.
(Savigny, System des Heutigen Rom. Rechts, i. 378, ii. 235, iii. 8 ; Savigny, Geschichte des Rom. Rechts im Mittelalter, vol. iii. 318, 380 ; Puchta, Inst. ii. § 222.) [G. L.]
VOCATIO IN JUS. [AcTio, p. 10. b.]
VOLONES is synonymous with Voluntarii (from volo)) and might hence be applied to all those who volunteered to serve in the Roman armies without there being any obligation to do so. But it was applied more especially to slaves, when in times of need they offered or were allowed to fight in the Roman armies. Thus when during the second Punic war after the battle of Cannae there was not a sufficient number of freemen to complete the army, about 8000 young and able- bodied slaves offered to serve. Their proposal was accepted ; they received armour at the public ex pense, and as they distinguished themselves they were honoured with the franchise. (Liv. xxii. 57, xxiii. 35 ; Macrob. Sat. i.- 11 ; Fest. s.v. Volones.} In after times the name volones was retained when ever slaves, chose or were allowed to take up arms in defence of their masters, which they were the more willing to do, as they were generally re warded with the franchise. (Liv. xxiv. 11, 14, &c., xxvii. 38, xxviii. 46 ; J. Capitolin. M. Anto- nin.PUlos. 21.) [L. S.J VOLU/MEN. [liber.]
VOLUNTARII. [volones.]
VOMITORIA. [amphitheatrum, p. 84.]
URAGUS. [exercitus, p. 506, a.]
URBANAE COHORTES. [exercitus, p. 510, a.]
URCEUS, a pitcher, or water-pot, generally made of earthenware. (Dig. 33. tit. 7. s. 18 ; Hor. Ar. Poet. 22.) It was used by the priests at Rome in the sacrifices, and thus appears with other sacrificial emblems on the coins of some of the Roman gentes. The annexed coin of the Pompeia gens ha’s on the obverse a lituus before the head of Pompeius, the triumvir, and an urceus behind it.
URNA, an urn, a Roman measure of capacity for fluids, equal to1 half an amthora. (Hor. Sat. i. 1. 54.) This use of the term was probably founded upon its more general application to denote a vessel for holding water, or any other: substance, either fluid or solid. (Plaut. Pseud, i. 2. 24 ; Hor. Sat. i. 5. 91, ii. 6. 10 ; Ovid. Met. iii. 172.)
An urn was used to receive the names of the judges (Judices) in order that the praetor might draw out of it a sufficient number to determine causes (Hor. Carm. iii. 1.16; Virg. Aen. vi. 432;
1217
USUCAPIO.
Plin. Epist. x. 3 ; Juv. xiii. 4) : also to receive the ashes of the1 dead. [funus, p. 560, a.] For this purpose urns were made of marble, porphyry, baked clay, bronze, or glass, of all forms and size’s, some quite simple, and others sculptured in bas- relief, or ornamented in an endless variety of ways. [J. Y.]
URPEX. [irpex.]
USTRINA, USTRI’NUM. [funus, p. 559, b.]
USUCAPIO. The history of Usucapio is an important fact in the history of Roman Jurisprudence. Usucapio is the acquisition of Quiri-tarian ownership by continuous possession ; consequently, it is not possible in the case of a Pere-grinits nor is it applicable to provincial land.
Gaius (ii. 40—42) states that there was originally in Rome only one kind of ownership : a person was either owner of a thing Ex jure Quiritium., or he was not owner at all. But afterwards ownership was divided, so that one man might be owner Ex jure Quiritium, and another might have the same thing In bonis, that is, have the right to the exclusive enjoyment of it. He then, goes on to give an instance of the mode in which the divided ownership might arise by reference to the transfer of a Res Mancipi: if such a thing was transferred by bare tradition, and there was neither Mancipatio nor In jure cessio, the new owner only acquired the natural ownership, as some would call it, or only had it In bonis, and the original owner retained the Quiritarian ownership until the purchaser acquired the Quiritarian ownership by Usucapio ( possidendo usucapiat) ; for when the Usucapio was-completed, the effect was the same as if the thing had been originally mancipated or transferred by the In jure cessio. Gaius adds, <fc in: the case of moveable things .the Usucapio is completed in a year, but in the case of a fundus or- aedes two years are required ; and so it is> provided by the Twelve Tables."
In this passage he is^vidently speaking of Res Mancipi only, and of the’m only when transferred to the purchaser by the owner without the forms of Mancipatio or in Jure Cessio. From this then it might be safely concluded that the Twelve Tables provided a" remedy for defective modes of conveyance of Res Mancipi from the owner ; and this is all that could be concluded from this passage. But a passage which immediately follows shovs that this was all that the Twelve Tables did; for Gains (ii. 43) proceeds to say, " But {Ceterum} there may be Usucapio even in the case of those things which have come to us by tradition from a person who was not the owner, whether they are Res Mancipi or not, provided we have received them bona fide, believing that he who delivered (qui tradiderit) them to us was the owner. And this rule of law seems to have been established, in: order that the ownership of things might not be long in uncertainty, seeing that one or two years would be quite sufficient for the owner to look after his property, that being the time al-lowe’d to the Possessor for Usucapio."
The reason for limiting the owner to one or two years has little force in it and possibly no historical truth ; but it is clear from this passage that this application of the rule of Usucapio was formed from analogy to the rule of the Twelve Tables, and that it was not contained in them. The limitation of the time of Usucapio is clearly due to
41
