Legal Definitions - infantiae proximus

infantiae proximus is a Latin term originating from Roman law, which literally translates to "next to infancy." It referred to a child who had just passed the stage of infancy, specifically one who was slightly older than seven years of age. In Roman legal thought, this age marked a significant transition point. A child deemed `infantiae proximus` was considered to have a developing, but still limited, capacity for understanding and decision-making, distinguishing them from both younger infants (who had virtually no legal capacity) and older children or adults.

Here are some examples illustrating the concept of `infantiae proximus`:

• Imagine a Roman child named Marcus, who is seven years and three months old. His wealthy uncle gifts him a small plot of land. While Marcus is no longer considered an "infant" in the eyes of Roman law, his status as `infantiae proximus` would mean he likely would not possess the full legal capacity to independently manage, sell, or enter into complex contracts regarding the land. A designated guardian would still be necessary to handle significant legal actions on his behalf, even if Marcus could understand the basic concept of ownership.

  This example illustrates that even though Marcus is past infancy, his `infantiae proximus` status implies he still lacks full legal capacity for complex transactions, requiring adult oversight due to his developing understanding.

• Consider a young Roman girl, Livia, who is eight years old. She is accused of taking a valuable item from a neighbor's stall. Because Livia is `infantiae proximus`, Roman legal authorities would not automatically treat her with the same level of criminal intent or responsibility as an adult. Instead, they would carefully assess whether she had the developing understanding to know her actions were wrong, rather than simply acting out of childish impulse or ignorance, potentially leading to a less severe judgment or a focus on rehabilitation rather than punishment.

  This scenario demonstrates how `infantiae proximus` would influence the assessment of a child's culpability, requiring consideration of their limited understanding compared to an adult's.

• Suppose a Roman family is involved in a dispute over property boundaries, and a key event related to the dispute was witnessed by a child, Gaius, who was seven and a half at the time. While Gaius is `infantiae proximus` and could potentially recount what he saw, Roman courts would likely treat his testimony with caution. They would acknowledge his ability to perceive events but might question his full comprehension of their legal significance or his capacity to articulate them without undue influence, requiring corroboration or careful evaluation before relying solely on his account.

  This example shows that while a child `infantiae proximus` might be able to observe and recall events, their legal testimony would be viewed differently than an adult's due to their developing cognitive abilities and potential susceptibility to suggestion.