Manciple and mancipation and res mancipi and emancipation and jawbone of an ass

A helpful distinction that is generally made in Roman property law is between res mancipi and res nec mancipi. Literally, a res mancipi is a thing "taken by the hand," and the term emphasizes the "manual" nature of transference of ownership in ancient Rome. The Roman jurists of the first four centuries C.E., Ulpian for example, envisioned a ceremony in which a portion of the thing to be conveyed was brought in the presence of five witnesses, weighed in a copper balance, and then, with the recitation of certain words, the ownership would be lodged in the buyer. This right of ownership was known as a "quiritian" or "quiritarian" right.* Conveyance of property could also happen in a court

[*I love the sentence from the famous 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica--when Britain still ruled the seven seas and King Edward was comfortably ensconced on the throne, before Britain's Titanic ship and hopes of Empire were rapidly or gradually sunk, and when the editors of that edition acted as if an encyclopedia was really experts writing for other experts on all topics-- in which the author used a form of the word "quiritian." I introduce it here because it also adumbrates other concepts we will have to cover. "Any citizen occupying immovables or holding movables as his own, provided they were usucaptible--don't worry, help is on the way-- and he had not taken them theftuously--have you ever seen it so written?--, acquired a quiritary right in two years or one as the case might be, simply on the strength of his possession." The notion that usucaption of movable property is completed within a year and that of lands and houses within two years, is provided as early as the 5th century B.C.E. Twelve Tables, and is referenced in the second century C.E. imperial lawyer Gaius' Institutiones (2.42).]

proceeding, where one gave up the right to something. Things transferable by these methods were mostly what we would consider real property today, though slaves and "rustic" incorporealities were also so transferred. As Gaius says, "Things are either susceptible, or not susceptible of mancipation by sale. Those susceptible of sale by mancipation are lands and houses in Italy, slaves, domestic animals and rustic servitudes; but servitudes attached to urban estates are not thus subject to sale (2.14(a)). Let's not get into servitudes now, if ever.

More on Mancipation

Before going further on things sold or not sold by mancipation, I think we need to pause on the word for a while. We all know of Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation, issued after the draw at Antietam (which Lincoln took as a victory and a divine sign of approval for his action), which would free the slaves in states in rebellion to the Union on 1/1/1863. The prefix "e," which is really "ex," means "away from," and so the "emancipation" proclamation, takes someone out of the situation of being "taken by hand." And, indeed, mancipation is attested in English as "the action of enslaving; the state of being enslaved."

Once the concept of bondage is in view, you know you have just given the theologians a word with which they can play. So, the 17th century Puritan Jeremy Taylor talks about those "who fall away..into a contradictory state of sinne and mancipation," and a contemporary of his can say, using mancipation in a positive way: "The consecration and mancipation of him to the holy Ministry." After all, if we are "bondslaves" of Christ, as St. Paul repeatedly stresses, why not look at our service to God as a kind of joyful mancipation? Yet Paul himself will use contradictory terms. "For freedom Christ has set us free; do not submit again to the yoke of slavery (Gal. 5:1)." Oh well. In one context, stressing his dedication and loyalty to Christ, Paul draws on the language of mancipation while, when he speaks of the new life in Christ, he rests on emancipation.

Manciple

I guess we are getting off track a bit (if the "track" are terms from Roman property law), but I coudn't resist. We have the word manciple in English to denote "An officer or servant who purchases provisions for a college, an inn of court, a monastery, etc" (in addition to meaning a "bondslave"). The OED explains that in classical Rome a mancipium meant "acquisition by purchase," or, concretely, a slave. In medieval Latin it meant the office of such a person. A manceps was a purchaser in stores or the manager of a public bakery. Thus, the term enters Middle English in Chaucer and others to mean the purchasing department or, in this case, the person who does the purchasing of provisions for a medieval institution. Armed with this insight, modern college fraternities, who are always desirous of cleaning up their act, might decide to appoint one of their members as the "Frat manciple." No one will know what that means, but at least it doesn't sound like the guy only exists to buy and drink beer.

And, while you are at it, be sure to distinguish a manciple from a mandible. The latter is the "jaw or jawbone, esp. the lower jaw of mammals and fishes." I suppose, however, that if you drunk too much of the gifts of the manciple, you might start wielding mandibles at the party and threatening to strike anyone who comes within range. Then, you too, like Samson of old, could make up a song, "With the jawbone (i.e., mandible) of an ass I have slain 1000 men."

Conclusion

Thus, so far, we haven't learned much. We know the basic distinction at Roman law between a res mancipi and res nec mancipi (the latter was everything that was not in the former), and we have learned that a quiritary right is the highest level of ownership rights in something. But we need one more mini-essay to bring us to prescription, which is what started this whole process.

[Next]