English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Contumelia , which for the jurists was the definition of the delict  iniuria , has been poorly understood by most modern scholarship. The term does not mean ‘contempt’ or any other attitude of the mind; instead, examination of all instances of the word  contumelia  predating 300 CE demonstrates that, in both lay and legal literature, it meant a kind of degradation or insult which, when judged against Roman rubrics of status and hierarchy, derogated from the honour of a free citizen. In juristic writings on  iniuria, contumelia  had an objective function, describing the typical fact-patterns proscribed by the praetorian edicts and rationalising those edicts’ piecemeal approach under one convenient lay concept.  Contumelia  was not iniuria’s mental requirement and, since it did not mean contempt, the delict was simply uninterested in whether a defendant had demonstrated a contemptuous or belittling attitude towards his victim.

IV. Nascitur ex contumelia: What did contumelia in the actio iniuriarum really mean?