La acción reivindicatoria es la acción real que corresponde al propietario en una cosa contra el que la posee o detenta, con objeto de hacer reconocer su derecho de propiedad y lograr la restitución de aquella. “

Recovery of possession. Act by which ownership is claimed. It can be exercised by the person who has full ownership, and the one who has the right of enjoyment, and upon asserting, ownership should not be claimed, since this word includes not only the direct ownership which includes the property and its enjoyment to be claimed by anybody who asserts it. The action for the recovery of possession is the action over the property corresponding to the owner of a thing against the person who possesses or holds it, with the purpose of enforcing his ownership right and to obtain the restitution of the same.

La existencia de la provocatio aparece ya en la primera época de Roma, pues Horacio, condenado por los duumviri perduellionis a la pena de muerte, apeló al pueblo, quien se la conmutó por otros castigos. Se discute si se daba la provocatio contra las d

La provocación al pueblo que primeramente debió existir como costumbre (mores majorum) fue consagrada por la Ley Valeria hecha inmediatamente después de la expulsión de los reyes (año 245 de Roma), y por otras posteriores. Fue favorecida con la creac

Roman public law institution which represented the citizens’s right to appeal to the community assembled in an election against the magistrates’ sentences considered abusive or unfair, especially against those which ordered capital punishment.The existence of the provocatio appears in the first period of Rome, as Horace, condemned to death by the duumviri perduellionis, appealed to the community, which commuted it for other punishments. It is discussed if the provocatio was applied against the king’s unfair decisions. There are three opinions. The first one confirms it, based on a text by Cicero that reads as follows: Provocationem autem etiam a regibus fuisse declarant pontificii libri (On the Republic II) noting that Cicero, affirms somewhere else to have read himself those books, and Seneca (Letter 108) reproduced Cicero’s assertion with no restrictions. The opposite opinion is founded on a text by Titus Livius (II, 29) in which Appius Claudius appears indicating the appeal to the community as the basis for the rebellious spirit of the masses, adding that in order to prevent it, at that moment a dictator who was not subject to this appeal was named. Thus, from this it is deducted that being the dictator’s power the same as the kings’, the latter were not subject to this appeal. An intermediate opinion speculates that the appeal to the community only took place when it was convened by the king itself to decide on those matters related to competence between the latter and popular Courts, pursuant to the division of unlawful acts into those that were heard by the king and the common ones. Disregarding this opinion, which is unfounded and not satisfying, the first one seems to be the one that should be taken, as on the one hand, the Roman system’s nature is favorable during the first years of the provocatio and, on the other hand, the power that substituted the one exercised by the kings was but that of the dictator, nor that of the consuls and it was against the latter’s decisions that the appeal was given to the community. On the other hand, Titus Livius (59 b.C. .-17 a.C.) book only proves that the right of provocation had been granted to the plebeians, a right that they did not have originally, and even Sexto Pompeyo Festo’s opinion (who considered that the dictator was not subject to the community’s appeal) must be taken with some reserves, since it may be interpreted that this exemption of the dictator was only valid when the elections had been held. There is a case of appeal to the community in case of a death sentence that dictator Lucius Papirius Cursor rendered against Fabius Maximus Rulianus, his magister equitum, in which case the death sentence was revoked. The provocation to the community that should have existed customarily in the first place (mores majorum) was established by the Valeria Law, which was created immediately after the removal of the kings (year 245 in Rome), and by subsequent ones. It was benefited by the creation of the tribunes to the pleb. All higher magistrates were subject to them, with the sole historical exception of the decemviros legibus Seribundis and the discussed exception granted to the dictator. By virtue of this appeal, the community was convened in a maximum election in the presence of which the appealed decision was discussed, and who then voted if the decision had to be revoked or not. Revocation disappeared with the Republican regime.

Las grandes familias aristocráticas poseían en general acerca de su atrium (pórtico delantero) una sala especialmente destinada a guardar sus tabletas, o sea los documentos relativos a sus negocios, títulos de nobleza, etc. llamada tablinum. No pocos

Lo que es indudable es que este depósito, instalado en la dependencia del Senado, debe ser considerado como la primera cuna de los archivos de Roma. Su importancia fue acrecentándose de siglo en siglo durante toda la existencia de la República, hasta q

Los romanos tomaron medidas muy rigurosas para preservar de toda alteración y deterioro los documentos depositados en sus archivos, sobre todo los del Estado. En medio de las luchas políticas que tuvieron como consecuencia la caída de la República, lo

Public archive. Deposit of archives where the documents written on tables, papyres, scrolls, etc, were kept. At the beginning of Rome big tables made of stone, wood or metal used to publish the documents, that is the tabulae publicae, were shown at the places where they were fixed and therefore in different places of the city formed