Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Biuletyn Stowarzyszenia Absolwentów i Przyjaciół Wydziału Prawa Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego

Online First

Articles

Fiscal Boundaries of the Family in Roman Law: The Case of the vicesima hereditatum

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32084/bsawp.11188  [Google Scholar]
Published: 2026-10-06

Abstract

The article reconstructs the circle of persons treated as family for the purposes of the Roman inheritance tax known as the vicesima hereditatum. The regulations governing this tax did not provide a general definition of family, but the scope of tax exemptions makes it possible to identify the relationships regarded as sufficiently close to exclude a mortis causa acquisition from taxation. The principal sources are Cassius Dio and Pliny the Younger, especially chapters 37–39 of the Panegyricus Traiani. The surviving evidence indicates that the original exemption covered the closest family circle, although it remains disputed to what extent this group should be identified with the civil-law category of sui heredes. The reforms of Nerva and Trajan increased the significance of cognatic kinship and reduced the relevance of certain formal requirements, particularly patria potestas. The cognationis iura were also important, since natural kinship did not in every case suffice for the application of the exemption. The privileged group consisted primarily of parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, and siblings, and resembled the catalogue of the decem personae without being identical to it. The analysis shows that the rules governing the vicesima hereditatum delineated a specific and functional family circle for fiscal purposes, shaped both by natural kinship and by its legal recognition.

References

  1. Czajkowski, Kimberley. 2019a. „Senatus Consultum Orfitianum.” W Oxford Classical Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.013.8276 [Google Scholar]
  2. Czajkowski, Kimberley. 2019b. „Senatus Consultum Tertullianum.” W Oxford Classical Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/ 9780199381135.013.8275 [Google Scholar]
  3. Frier, Bruce W., i Thomas A.J. McGinn. 2004. A Casebook on Roman Family Law. Oxford–New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  4. Gardner, Jane F. 1998. Family and Familia in Roman Law and Life. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [Google Scholar]
  5. Gardner, Jane F. 2001a. „Death, Taxes and Status in Pliny’s Panegyricus.” W Critical Studies in Ancient Law, Comparative Law and Legal History. Essays in Honour of Alan Watson, red. John W. Cairns i Olivia F. Robinson, 51-60. Oxford–Portland: Hart Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  6. Gardner, Jane F. 2001b. „Nearest and Dearest: Liability to Inheritance Tax in Roman Families.” W Childhood, Class and Kin in the Roman World, red. Suzanne Dixon, 205-20. London–New York: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  7. Gilliam, James F. 1952. „The Minimum Subject to the Vicesima Hereditatium.” The American Journal of Philology 73, nr 4:397-405. https://doi.org/10.2307/291742 [Google Scholar]
  8. Günther, Sven. 2016. „Taxation in the Greco-Roman World: The Roman Principate.” W Oxford Handbook Topics in Classical Studies, red. Oxford Handbooks Editorial Board. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935390.013.38 [Google Scholar]
  9. Kuryłowicz, Marek. 2005. „Vicesima hereditatum. Z historii podatku od spadków.” W W kręgu prawa podatkowego i finansów publicznych. Księga dedykowana Profesorowi Cezaremu Kosikowskiemu w 40-lecie pracy naukowej, red. Henryk Dzwonkowski, Jan Głuchowski, Alicja Pomorska, i in., 217-23. Lublin: Wydawnictwo UMCS. [Google Scholar]
  10. Manolaraki, Eleni. 2015. „Death and Taxes: The Vicesima Hereditatum in Pliny’s Panegyricus.” W Autour de Pline le Jeune. En hommage à Nicole Méthy, red. Olivier Devillers, 245-58. Bordeaux: Ausonius Éditions. [Google Scholar]
  11. Marotta, Valerio. 2021. „Ideali universalistici o fiscalismo imperiale? Decima hereditatium e Constitutio Antoniniana de civitate.” Specula Iuris 1, nr 1:111-31. [Google Scholar]
  12. Pikulska-Radomska, Anna. 2013. Fiscus non erubescit. O niektórych italskich podatkach rzymskiego pryncypatu. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego. https://doi.org/10.18778/7525-887-5 [Google Scholar]
  13. Pogorzelec-Miziołek, Kamila. 2025. „Political Aspects of Vicesima Hereditatum.” Studia Prawnicze KUL nr 4:169-80. https://doi.org/10.31743/sp18785 [Google Scholar]
  14. Saller, Richard P. 1984. „‘Familia, Domus,’ and the Roman Conception of the Family.” Phoenix 38, nr 4:336-55. [Google Scholar]
  15. Saller, Richard P. 1994. Patriarchy, Property and Death in the Roman Family. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  16. Schermaier, Martin. 2022. „Familia and Dependency in Roman Law Texts.” W Slavery and Other Forms of Strong Asymmetrical Dependencies: Semantics and Lexical Fields, red. Jeannine Bischoff i Stephan Conermann, 127-50. Berlin–Boston: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110786989-005 [Google Scholar]
  17. Świrgoń-Skok, Renata. 2019. „Wpływ wojen na rzymskie ustawodawstwo odnośnie do vicesima hereditatis i caducum.” Studia Iuridica Lublinensia 28, nr 3:101-16. https://doi.org/10.17951/sil.2019.28.3.101-116 [Google Scholar]
  18. Wesener, Gunter. 1958. „Vicesima hereditatium.” W Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, t. VIIIA, red. Konrat Ziegler, 2471-476. Stuttgart: Alfred Druckenmüller Verlag. [Google Scholar]

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.