518 JOURNAL OF JURISTIC PAPYROLOGY
He indicates t h a t the proceedings concerning t h e acquisition of p r o p e r t y (the apographe of real estate) given there is quite par-ticular f r o m t h e p o i n t of view of the R o m a n law. Since t h e real estate sold here is solum provinciale n a m e l y tribularium (Gai I I , 21) and a res пес mancipi, the acquisition of p r o p e r t y should t a k e place ipsa traditione (Gai I I , 19) w h a t was still emphasized b y Diocel-t i a n in С I, I I , 3, 20 (TradiDiocel-tionibus [mancipaDiocel-tionibus] eDiocel-t usucapio-nibus dominia rerum, non nudis pactis transferuntur [293 A. D.]). I n t h e second p a r t of his s t u d y t h e a u t h o r opposes the idea of t h e editor t h a t v . 11 concerns a κατοχή on behalf of children un-der age a n d tries to explain the assertions in these lines f r o m t h e p o i n t of view of the modified R o m a n law as it was in force in E g y p t .
E . S c h ö n b a u e r , Attische Rechtseinrichtungen in sinnvoller Einheit (Πραγματεία-, της 'Ακαδημίας 'Αθηνών 18 (1) [1953]).
I n his showily w r i t t e n s t u d y t h e a u t h o r investigates (p. 38—9) the s.c. δίκη έξούλης consisting in the a s s u m p t i o n of a controlled land p r o p e r t y in Attic law which h a d b u t gradually been appeased b u t never quite ceased to exist. A controlled land p r o p e r t y appears also in the Ptolemaic period and particularly w i t h reference to cleruchic and catoecic land. W h e n these parcels changed h a n d s , it was n o t only necessary t h e usual cooperation of the registry of real properties b u t also a special permission of the catoecic autho-rities. The authorities h a d f i r s t to accept a new holder. Characte-ristic is t h a t in t h i s case the t e r m παραχώρησις for t r a n s f e r of pro-p e r t y is used. T h e holder is w i t h - d r a w n and a new holder enters his place w i t h t h e consent of authorities. We f i n d here the same idea, which is to be f o u n d in the controlled land in Attica, n a m e l y t h a t the single holder is not entitled to transfer his p r o p e r t y t o another p r i v a t e person b u t only t o w i t h d r a w f r o m the lot in order to make w a y t o another person who according the principles go-verning the landed p r o p e r t y , now as a new holder steps on his place.
J . H e r r m a n n , Zum Begriff der γ η έν άφέσει (Chronique ďEgypte X X X , No. 59 [1955] 95—106).
H a v i n g d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e most i m p o r t a n t efforts of interpre-t a interpre-t i o n of interpre-this nointerpre-tion and having referred interpre-to interpre-t h e objecinterpre-tions
