Inprimis igitur sciendum est opus esse, ut aliquis heres recto iure instituatur eiusque fidei committatur, ut eam hereditatem alii restituat; alioquin inutile est testamentum in quo nemo recto iure heres instituitur.
Verba autem [utilia] fideicommissorum haec [recte] maxime in usu esse uidentur peto, rogo, volo, fidei committo; quae proinde firma singula sunt, atque si omnia in unum congesta sint.
[2] It functioned thus: the testator nominated an heir to act as fiduciarius, entrusted with devising the inheritance to a beneficiary denominated the "fideicommisarius".
[4] Therefore, certain legal institutions were simply premised on bona fides, e.g. the tutela, societas, and depositum, which did not decrease but rather reinforced their security.
Breach of a fiduciary agreement led inevitably to being infamis, which meant lifetime incapacity of making any commercial actions.
The great success of the fideicommissum as a clever fraus legi fracta is proved by reference to its long use; redefined by Justinian I, it may have by his reign existed for 700 years.
There was no need for a certain formula, any word describing the beneficiaries, such as rogo, peto, or volo, employed with the term "fidei tuae committo" sufficiently instituted a fideicommissum.
[11] But the fideicommissum enabled a prosperous pater familias to appoint his amicus as an heir, who would then be trusted with transferring the inherited property to the unmarried filia.
[12] Unlike legates, which only allowed passing estate on to a heres, and usufructus, which required a determinate person, the fideicommissum could be granted to incertae personae.
[13] Using a fideicommissary substitution (making one fideicommissum subject to another, enabling the preservation of property within a family for generations through successive trusts) the grantor could therefore direct his filius to transfer the estate on to his son at death and so on in perpetuity.