Acceso usuarios
The purpose of finding traces in the Roman experience of protection of juridical prerogatives pertaining to every man as such has led to the examination of Ulpian’s (D. 7.1.68.pr., 17 ad Sab.) and Gaius’ (D. 22.1.28, 2 r. cott.) texts about partus ancillae where it would tell that the latter is up to the owner and not to the usufructuary because ‘neque enim in fructu hominis homo esse potest ’ and ‘omnes fructus rerum natura hominum gratia comparaverit ’, letting presume an extimation of partus’ human nature whose destiny was discussed. From the rereading, however, at the level of ius positum, no relevant elements emerged which have a true value for the benefit of servus’ status and his juridical treatment, but rather discrepancies and contra- dictions were highlighted with respect to the starting statements. Therefore, the consideration of slave’s human nature remains confined to the area of an ideal suction.
