Roman Law and the Legal World of the Romans

Delict

another’s property for a bankruptcy sale, or harassed them in mourning clothes (a traditional protest of unfair treatment), or if a man accosted a woman too familiarly in a public place. Finally, iniuria could involve preventing a person from exercis ing legal rights, even when this did not involve damage to per son or reputation – for instance, if you prevent me from fishing in public waters or walking on public land. Once the focus of iniuria shifted from physical injury to insult, it opened up the possibility of iniuria being done to one person by way of an action directed at another. So, for instance, iniuria to a woman was also an insult to her husband, and ini uria to a child in power was also an insult to his or her father. In all these cases, all the actions could be available simultane ously. So, for instance, if a man harasses a woman in a way that calls her chastity into question, she can sue for iniuria . But the same man has simultaneously called into question the honor of her husband and father (if any), and so they can sue as well, and damages can be awarded independently in all three cases. Moreover, it was possible to commit iniuria against some one through a slave. A certain amount of rough treatment of slaves (anyone’s slaves) was taken for granted, but “too much” such treatment showed disrespect for the owner. The slave had no action of his own, but the owner could sue. It was even pos sible for an heir to sue over outrage to the corpse of the person from whom she had inherited (and whom she was therefore charged to honor). Some of the cases just mentioned also illustrate another important feature of iniuria law. Because the basic idea is so

193