Digest, 1, 14.3: Ulpian, from On Sabinus, book 38
Barbarius philippus cum servus fugitivus esset, romae praeturam petiit et praetor designatus est. sed nihil ei servitutem obstetisse ait pomponius, quasi praetor non fuerit: atquin verum est praetura eum functum. et tamen videamus: si servus quamdiu latuit, dignitate praetoria functus sit, quid dicemus? quae edixit, quae decrevit, nullius fore momenti? an fore propter utilitatem eorum, qui apud eum egerunt vel lege vel quo alio iure? et verum puto nihil eorum reprobari: hoc enim humanius est: cum etiam potuit populus romanus servo decernere hanc potestatem, sed et si scisset servum esse, liberum effecisset. quod ius multo magis in imperatore observandum est.
There was a runaway slave named Barbarius Philippus who was elected as praetor, praetor designatus est. He became praetor, regardless of his legal status as a slave and held office.
Ulpian poses a question: Et tamen videamus: si servus quamdiu latuit, dignitate praetoria functus sit, quid dicemus? How do we look at the political actions and decisions he made while reflecting on his status? Do we disregard his accomplishments and decisions? Or do we accept them to honor the statues and laws?
Ulpian expresses his personal opinion that Barbarius Philippus’s decisions should remain because if the people had elected him as praetor and given those powers to a slave, “it could have made him a free man” (Wiedeman). He concludes, “Quod ius multo magis in imperatore observandum est.”
Philippus is an example of the multitude of capabilities of a slave. Ulpian poses real questions about how to distinguish between different parts of one's identity. One's status cannot be removed for one's identity and seen as unique from one's accomplishments. But it seems that when one is given the opportunity to remove status markers, they are able to soar to new limits and redefine the capabilities designated to one's status.