Latinská sexuální terminologie

Výběr termínů:

Membrum virile, masculina membra – penis

Mentula – pták, v sexuálním kontextu penis

Mentula languida – zvadlý pták (ve významu penis neschopný soulože)

Mentula rigida – trčící pták (ve významu penis schopný soulože, ale také nadržený)

Testiculus – varle

Cunnus – kunda

Landica – klitoris

Futuo, -ere – souložit 

Emungere – smrkat, v sexuálním kontextu udělat se, ejakulovat 

Muccus – semeno

Fello, - are – sát, cucat

Fellator – označení pro sexuální aktivitu, při které muž umístí svůj penis do úst jiné osoby (orální sex)

Fellatrix – označení pro ženu, která muži poskytuje orální sex

Cunnum linguere – lízat klín

Annum linguere – lízat řiť

Criso, -are – pohyb ženy při souloži

Ceveo, -ere - pohyb muže při souloži – hýbat zadkem

Výrazy pro masturbaci:

• Masturbor, -ari – man-stuprare – ruka + prznit

• Manus fututrix – „šukavá ruka“ – označení pro ruku, kterou se muži ukájí

• Frico,- are – třít

• Sollicito, -are – rozhýbat

• Tango, -ere – dotýkat se, ohmatávat, osahávat

• Tracto, -are – držet v ruce, zacházet s něčím, dotýkat se, ohmatávat, osahávat

Otroci jako objekty sexuálních zločinů

Dig. 48.5.6pr. Papinianus libro I. de Adulteriis: Inter liberas tantum personas adulterium stuprumve passas lex Iulia locum habet. quod autem ad servas pertinet, et legis aquiliae actio facile tenebit et iniuriarum quoque competit nec erit deneganda praetoria quoque actio de servo corrupto: nec propter plures actiones parcendum erit in huiusmodi crimine reo.

Překlad: Papinián v první knize O cizoložství: Juliův zákon se uplatní pouze na svobodné osoby, jež byly obětí zločinu cizoložství nebo zneuctění [stuprum – sexuální styk s neprovdanou ženou z vyšší společnosti]. Za východisko u otrokyň snadno poslouží žaloba dle Akviliova zákona [o náhradě škody], žaloba z injurie, a praetor rovněž neodmítne žalobu za [mravní] zkažení otroka. Pachatel tohoto zločinu tedy neunikne díky vícerým žalobám.

Sexuální delikty spáchané na otrocích a PLS

PLS 25 De adulteris ancillarum

• Když svobodný souloží [moechatus] s otrokyní jiného je povinen jako pokutu zaplatit 600 denárů (15 solidů).

• Když někdo souloží s královskou otrokyní je povinen jako pokutu zaplatit 2200 denárů (30 solidů).

• Když se svobodný veřejně spojí (ožení/zasnoubí) s cizí otrokyní stane se také otrokem.

• Když se svobodná spojí s cizím otrokem, stane se také otrokyní. 

• Pokud souloží cizí otrok s otrokyní jiného bude otrokyně potrestána smrtí. Pánovi otrokyně pán otroka zaplatí 240 denárů (3 solidy) jako zadostiučinění. 

• Pokud se otrok spojí s cizí otrokyní proti vůli jejího pána je povinen jako pokutu zaplatit 120 denárů (3 solidy).

Adulterium

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Adulterium.html

William Smith, D.C.L., LL.D.:
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, John Murray, London, 1875.

ADULTER′IUM, adultery.

[. . .]

p17 2. Roman. Adulterium properly signifies, in the Roman law, the offence committed by a man, married or unmarried, having sexual intercourse with another man's wife. Stuprum (called by the Greeks φθορά) signifies the commerce with a widow or a virgin.º It was the condition of the female which determined the legal character of adultery; there was no adultery unless the female was married. It is stated, however (Dig.48 tit. 5 s13), that a woman might commit adultery whether she was "justa uxor sive injusta," the meaning of which is not quite certain; but probably it means whether she was living in a marriage recognised as a marriage by the Roman law or merely by the jus gentium. The male who committed adultery was adulter, the female was adultera. The Latin writers were puzzled about the etymology of the word adulterium; but if we look to its various significations besides that of illegal sexual commerce, we may safely refer it to the same root as that which appears in adultus. The notion is that of "growing to," "fixing," or "fastening to," one thing on another and extraneous thing: hence, among other meanings, the Romans used adulterium and adulteratio as we use the word "adulteration," to express the corrupting of a thing by mixing something with it of less value.

In the time of Augustus a lex was enacted (probably B.C. 17), intitled Lex Julia de Adulteriis coërcendis, the first chapter of which repealed some prior enactments on the same subject, with the provisions of which prior enactments we are, however, unacquainted. Horace (Carm. IV.5.21) alludes to the Julian law. In this law, the terms adulterium and stuprum are used indifferently; but, strictly speaking, these two terms differed as above stated. The chief provisions of this law may be collected from the Digest (Dig. 48.5), from Paulus (Sentent. Recept. II. tit. 26 ed. Schulting), and Brissonius (Ad Legem Juliam De Adulteriis, Lib. Sing.).

It seems not unlikely that the enactments repealed by the Julian law continued special penal provisions against adultery; and it is also not improbable that, by the old law or custom, if the adulterer was caught in the fact, he was at the mercy of the injured husband, and that the husband might punish with death his adulterous wife (Dionys. II.25; Suet. Tib. 35). It seems, also, that originally the act of adultery might be prosecuted by any person, as being a public offence; but under the emperors the right of prosecution was limited to the husband, father, brother, patruus, and avunculus of the adulteress.

By the Julian law, if a husband kept his wife after an act of adultery was known to him, and let the adulterer off, he was guilty of the offence of lenocinium. The husband or father in whose power the adulteress was, had sixty days allowed for commencing proceedings against the wife, after which time any other person might prosecute (Tacit. Ann. II.85). A woman convicted of adultery was mulcted in half of her dos and the third part of her property (bona), and banished (relegata) to some miserable island, such as Seriphos, for instance. The adulterer was mulcted in half his property, and banished in like manner, but not to the same island as the woman. The adulterer and adulteress were subjected also to civil incapacities; but this law did not inflict the punishment of death on either party; and in those instances under the emperors in which death was inflicted, it must be considered as an extraordinary punishment, and beyond the provisions of the Julian law (Tacit. Ann. II.50, Ann. III.24; J. Lips., Excurs. ad Tacit. Ann. IV.42; Noodt, Op. Omn. I.286, &c.). But by a constitution of Constantine (Cod. IX.30, if it is genuine), the offence in the adulterer was made capital. By the legislation of Justinian (Nov. 134 c10), the law of Constantine was probably only confirmed; but the adulteress was put into a convent, after being first whipped. If her husband did not take her out in two years, she was compelled to assume the habit, and to spend the rest of her life in the convent.

The Julian law permitted the father (both adoptive and natural) to kill the adulterer and adulteress in certain cases, as to which there were several nice distinctions established by the law. If the father killed only one of the parties, he brought himself within the penalties of the Cornelian law De Sicariis. The husband might kill persons of a certain class, described in the law, whom he caught in the act of adultery with his wife; but he could not kill his wife. The husband, by the fifth chapter of the Julian law, could detain for twenty hours the adulterer whom he had caught in the act, for the purpose of calling in witnesses to prove the adultery. If the wife was divorced for adultery, the husband was intitled to retain part of the dos (Ulp. Frag. VI.12). The authorities for the Lex Julia de Adulteriis, but ancient and modern, are collected by Rein, Das Criminalrecht der Römer, 1844.

Incestum

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Incestum.html

William Smith, D.C.L., LL.D.:
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, John Murray, London, 1875.

INCESTUM or INCESTUS. Incestum is non castum, and signifies generally all immoral and irreligious acts. In a narrower sense it denotes the unchastity of a Vestal, and sexual intercourse of persons within certain degrees of consanguinity. If a man married a woman whom it was forbidden for him to marry by positive morality (moribus), he was said to commit incestum (Dig. 23 tit. 2 s39). Such a marriage was in fact no marriage, for the necessary connubium between the parties was wanting. Accordingly, incestum is the sexual connection of a male and a female, whether under the form of marriage or not, if such persons cannot marry by reason of consanguinity.

There was no connubium between persons related by blood in the direct line, as parents and children. If such persons contracted a marriage it was Nefariae et Incestae nuptiae. There was no connubium between persons who stood in the relation of parent and child by adoption, not even after the adopted child was emancipated. There were also restrictions as to connubium between collateral kinsfolk (ex transverso gradu cognationis): there was no connubium between brothers and sisters, either of the whole or of the half blood; nor between children of the blood and children by adoption, so long as the adoption continued, or so long as the children of the blood remained in the power of the father. There was connubium between an uncle and his brother's daughter, after the emperor Claudius had set the example by marrying Agrippina; but there was none between an uncle and a sister's daughter. There was no connubium between a man and his amita or matertera [Cognati]; nor between a man and his socrus, nurus, privigna or noverca. In all such cases when there was no connubium, the children had a mother, but no legal father.

Incest between persons in the direct line was punishable in both parties; in other cases only in the man. The punishment was Relegatio, as in the case of adultery. Concubinage between near kinsfolk was put on the same footing as marriage (Dig. 23 tit. 2 s56). In the case of adulterium and stuprum between persons who had no connubium, there was a double offence: the man was punished with deportatio, and the woman was subject to the penalties of the Lex Julia (Dig. 48 tit. 18 s5). Among slaves there was no incestum, but after they became free their marriages were regulated according to the analogy of connubium among free persons. It was incestum to have knowledge of a vestal virgin, and both parties were punished with death.

That which was stuprum, was considered incestum when the connection was between parties who had no connubium. Incestum, therefore, was stuprum, aggravated by the circumstance of real or legal consanguinity, and, in some cases, affinity. It was not the form of marriage between such persons that constituted the incestum; for the nuptiae were incestae, and therefore no marriage, and the incestuous act was the sexual connection of the parties. Sometimes incestum is said to be contra fas, that is, an act in violation of religion. The rules as to Incestum were founded partly on the Jus Gentium and partly on the Jus Civile; but the distinction did not exist in the early periods, and the rules as to Incestum were only such as were recognized by the Jus Gentium. Though the rules as to Incestum were afterwards more exactly determined by the Jus Civile, there does not seem to have been any complete lex on the matter. The Lex Julia de adulteriis only treated Incestum incidentally, or so far as it was also adultery: but the jurists connected all the imperial legislation on this matter and their own interpretation with the Lex Julia. (Rein, Das Criminalrecht der Römer, p869, &c.)

 

Leno, Lenocinium

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/secondary/SMIGRA*/Leno.html

William Smith, D.C.L., LL.D.:
A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, John Murray, London, 1875.

LENO, LENOCI′NIUM. Lenocinium is defined by Ulpian (Dig. 3 tit. 2 s4) to be the keeping of female slaves for prostitution and the profits of it; and it was also lenocinium if gain was made in the like way by means of free women. Some lenones kept brothels (lupanaria) or open houses for prostitution. This trade was not forbidden, but the praetor's edict attached infamia to such persons [Infamia]. In the time of Caligula (Sueton. Cal. 40, and the notes in Burmann's ed.), a tax was laid on lenones. Theodosius and Valentinian endeavoured to prevent parents from prostituting their children and masters their female salves by severe penalties; and they forbad the practice of lenocinium under pain of corporal punishment, and banishment from the city, and so forth. Justinian (Nov. 14) also attempted to put down all lenocinium by banishing lenones from the city, and by making the owners of houses, who allowed prostitution to be carried on in them, liable to forfeit the houses and to pay ten pounds of gold; those who by trickery or force got girls into their possession and gave them up to prostitution were punished with the "extreme penalties;" but it is not said what these extreme penalties were. This Novella contains curious matter.

The Lex Julia de Adulteriis defined the lenocinium which that lex prohibited (Dig. 48 tit. 5 p681s2 § 2). It was lenocinium, if a husband allowed his wife to commit adultery in order to share the gain. The legislation of Justinian (Nov. 117 c9 § 3) allowed a wife a divorce, if her husband had attempted to make her prostitute herself; and the woman could recover the dos and the donatio propter nuptias. It was lenocinium in the husband if he kept or took back (cf. Sueton. Domit. 8) a wife whom he had detected in an act of adultery; or if he let the adulterer who was detected in the act, escape; or if he did not prosecute him.

With respect to other persons than the husband, it was lenocinium by the lex Julia, if a man married a woman who was condemned for adultery; if a person who had detected others in adultery, held his peace for a sum of money; if a man commenced a prosecution for adultery and discontinued it; and if a person lent his house or chamber for adulterium or stuprum. In all these cases, the penalty of the lex Julia was the same as for adulterium and stuprum. The lex in this as in other like instances of leges, was the groundwork of all subsequent legislation on lenocinium. Probably no part of the lex Julia de adulteriis was formally repealed, but it received additions, and the penalties were increased (Rein Criminalrecht der Römer, p883). As to the uses of the words Leno, Lenocinium, in the classical writers, see the passages cited in Facciolati, Lex.