Corporeality and Fungibility in Roman Property Law: Reflections in Light of Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs)

Öz

This article reconsiders the concepts of corporeality and fungibility within Roman property law and assesses their continuing relevance for the classification of digital assets, with particular reference to non-fungible tokens (NFTs). While NFTs provide the stimulus for this inquiry, the central analysis focuses on Roman law’s distinction between res fungibiles (fungible things) and res nec fungibiles (non-fungible things), as well as the broader implications of corporeality and identification in property classification. Drawing on classical Latin legal sources, this study examines how Roman jurists conceptualised materiality and interchangeability and how these notions shaped doctrines of possession, ownership, and contractual obligations. The discussion highlights that Roman distinctions between fungible and non-fungible goods, as well as between corporeal and incorporeal property, were not merely technical but carried significant legal consequences, insights that remain pertinent as modern legal systems grapple with the status of digital property. By situating NFTs within this historical framework, the article argues that Roman legal principles continue to provide a coherent theoretical foundation for addressing questions of ownership, transferability, and legal recognition in the digital age. Rather than offering definitive answers about digital ownership, the study proposes that the Roman concepts of fungibility and corporeality can enrich contemporary debates and guide the development of more consistent frameworks for emerging forms of property.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Roman Law
• Property Law
• Fungibility
• Corporeality
• Identification
• Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs)

Kaynakça

1. Aksoy Dursun, Sanem, Eşya Kavramı (Oniki Levha Yayınevi 2012). google scholar
2. Allen, Jason G., ‘Property in Digital Coins’ (2019) 8(1) European Property Law Journal 64. google scholar
3. Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna, ‘Famous People and Students, Accursius (Accursio)’ (2024) [https://www.unibo.it/en/](https://www.unibo.it/en/) university/who-we-are/our-history/famous-people-and-students/Accursius accessed 4 February 2025. google scholar
4. Artz, Markus, ‘Viel Neues im BGB-Verträge über digitale Produkte und neues Kaufrecht’ (2022) Zeitschrift für das Juristische Studium [http://www.zjs-online.com](http://www.zjs-online.com) accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
5. Astuti, Guido, ‘Cosa (storia)’ (1962) XI Enciclopedia del Diritto 11. google scholar
6. Baldus, Christian, ‘Res Incorporales im Römischen Recht’ in Leible, Stefan, Lehmann, Matthias and Zech, Herbert (eds), Unkörperliche Güter im Zivilrecht (Mohr Siebeck 2011) 7-31. google scholar
7. Becker, Christoph, Die “res” bei Gaius – Vorstufe einer Systembildung in der Kodifikation? Zum Begriff des Gegenstandes im Zivilrecht (Heymanns 1999). google scholar
8. Beeple, Everydays: The First 5000 Days, Christie’s (2021) [https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/beeple-first-5000-days/beeple-b-1981-1/](https://onlineonly.christies.com/s/beeple-first-5000-days/beeple-b-1981-1/) 112924 accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar

9. Behrends, Okko, Knutel, Rolf, Kupisch, Berthold and Seiler, Hans Hermann, Corpus Iuris Civilis, Teil 1: Institutionen (4th edn, CF Müller 1997). google scholar
10. Benke, Nikolaus and Meissel, Franz-Stefan, Übungsbuch zum Römischen Sachenrecht (12th edn, Manz Verlag 1990). google scholar
11. Biondi Biondo, ‘I Beni’ in Vasalli, Filippo (ed), Trattato di Diritto Civile Italiano, vol IV (1) (Unione Tipografico-Editrice Torinese 1954) 48. google scholar
12. Biondi, Biondo, ‘Cosa fungibile e non fungibile’ (1968) IV Novissimo Digesto Italiano 1019-1021. google scholar
13. Birks, Peter and McLeod, Grant, Justinian’s Institutes (Cornell University Press 2001). google scholar
14. Bonfante, Pietro, Corso di Diritto Romano, La Propriete, vol II (Giuffrè Editore 1966). google scholar
15. Brutti, Massimo, Il Diritto Privato Nell’Antica Roma (3rd edn, Giappichelli 1941). google scholar
16. Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch (German Civil Code, promulgated 24 August 1896) [https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch\_bgb/](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_bgb/) accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
17. Calasso, Francesco (ed), Cosa (Storia) in Enciclopedia Del Diritto, XI-Cosa-Delib (Giuffrè Editore 1962). google scholar
18. David, Martin G and Nelson, Hein Leopold Wilhelmus, Gai Institutionum Commentarii IV mit Philologischem Kommentar Herausgegeben (Brill, 1960). google scholar
19. De Martino, Federico, ‘Infungibilità del Motore di Aereomobile’ (1949) X(2) Rivista del Diritto Delle Navigazione 250. google scholar
20. De Mattei, Shanti Escalante, ‘Has Been the Year of the NFT. But What Exactly Is an NFT?’ (2019) [https://www.artnews.com/art-news/](https://www.artnews.com/art-news/) news/nft-guide-1234614447/ accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
21. De Zulueta, Francis, The Institutes of Gaius, Part II Commentary (Clarendon Press 1953). google scholar
22. Der Bundesrat, Bericht des Bundesrates: Rechtliche Grundlagen für Distributed Ledger-Technologie und Blockchain in der Schweiz (2023) [https://www.newsd.admin.ch/newsd/message/attachments/55150.pdf](https://www.newsd.admin.ch/newsd/message/attachments/55150.pdf) accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
23. Dernburg, Heinrich, Pandekten, vol 1 (6th edn, H W Müller 1903) google scholar
24. Domingo, Rafael, ‘The Law of Property in Ancient Roman Law’ (2017) SSRN Electronic Journal 1. google scholar
25. Dowling, Michael, ‘Fertile LAND: Pricing Non-Fungible Tokens’ (2022) 44 Finance Research Letters 1. google scholar
26. Ercan, Cannur and Ünlen, Gökhan ‘Dijital Ürünlerin Eşya Niteliğine Disiplinlerarası Bir Bakış’ (2024) 73(2) Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1159. google scholar
27. Erdoğmuş, Belgin, Roma Eşya Hukuku (Der Yayınları 2018). google scholar
28. Fairfield, Joshua A.T., ‘Tokenized: The Law of Non-Fungible Tokens and Unique Digital Property’ (2022) 97(4) Indiana Law Journal 1261. google scholar
29. Filorinali, Kardelen, Fikir ve Sanat Eserleri Hukuku Açısından NFT’ler (Seçkin Yayınevi 2023). google scholar
30. Galasso, Antonio, ‘Il comodato’ in Cicu, Antonio, Messineo, Francesco, Mengoni, Luigi and Schlesinger, Piero (eds), Trattato di Diritto Civile e Commerciale (Giuffrè 2004) 1. google scholar
31. Gambaro, Antonio, ‘I beni’ in Cicu, Antonio, Messineo, Francesco, Mengoni, Luigi and Schlesinger, Piero (eds), Trattato di Diritto Civile e Commerciale (Giuffrè 2012) 1. google scholar
32. Garbers-von Boehm, Katharina, Haag, Helena and Gruber, Katharina, Intellectual Property Rights and Distributed Ledger Technology with a Focus on Art NFTs and Tokenized Physical Artworks, The European Parliament’s Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Committee on Civil Legal Affairs (JURI), (European Union 2022). google scholar
33. Garcia, Rosa M. and Simón-Moreno, Hector, ‘The Digital Tokenization of Property Rights: A Comparative Perspective’ (2021) 41 Computer Law & Security Review 1. google scholar
34. Genzmer, Erich, ‘Pondere, Numero, Mensura’ (1952) 1 Archives d’Histoire du Droit Oriental et la Revue Internationale des Droits de l’Antiquité 469. google scholar
35. Ghiretti, Paolo, ‘Genericità e Fungibilità nell’Obbligazione’ (1974) 1 Rivista del Diritto Commerciale e del Diritto Generale delle Obbligazioni 257. google scholar
36. Goppert, Heinrich Robert, ‘Der Ursprung der Eintheilung der corpora in I. 30. D. de usurp. 41, 3’ in Goppert, Heinrich Robert (ed), Über Einheitliche, Zusammengesetzte und Gesammt-Sachen Nach Römischen Recht (Studia Juridica 1970) 8-19. google scholar
37. Gordon, William M, and Robinson, Olivia F., The Institutes of Gaius (Cornell University Press 2001). google scholar
38. Grunberger, Michael, ‘Verträge über digitale Güter’ (2018) 218(2) Archiv für die civilistische Praxis 213. google scholar
39. Heumann, Hermann and Seckel, Gottlieb, Handlexikon zu den Quellen des Römischen Rechts (Gustav Fisher 1971). google scholar
40. Hoop, Gerold, Kodifikationsgeschichtliche Zusammenhänge des Abtretungsverbots (Duncker & Humblot, 2022). google scholar
41. Howcroft, Elizabeth, ‘Twitter Boss Jack Dorsey’s First Tweet Sold for $2.9 Million as an NFT’ (2019) [https://www.reuters.com/article/us-twitter-dorsey-nft-idUSKBN2BE2KJ](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-twitter-dorsey-nft-idUSKBN2BE2KJ) accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
42. Huchthausen, Liselotte, ‘Gaius Institutionen’ in Huchthausen, Liselotte and Gottfried, Herder (eds), Römisches Recht (Aufbau Verlag, 1991). google scholar
43. Idelberger, Florian and Mezei, Peter, ‘Non-Fungible Tokens’ (2022) 11(2) Internet Policy Review 1. google scholar
44. Kaser, Max, ‘V. Gaius und die Klassiker’ (1953) 70(1) Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Romanistische Abteilung 127. google scholar
45. Kaulartz, Marcus and Schmid, Alexander, ‘Rechtliche Aspekte sogenannter Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs)’ Compliance-Berater 8 (Druck und Verlag 2021) 298-302. google scholar
46. Koch, Philipp, ‘Die “Tokenisierung” von Rechtspositionen als digitale Verbriefung’ (2018) 30(6) Zeitschrift für Bankrecht und Bankwirtschaft (ZBB/JBB) 359. google scholar
47. Kreller, Hans, ‘Res als Zentralbegriff des Institutionensystems’ (1948) 66(1) Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: Roman- istische Abteilung 572. google scholar
48. Kreller, Hans, Römisches Recht. II. Grundlehren des Gemeinen Rechts. Romanistische Einführung in das Geltende Privatrecht (Springer 1950). google scholar
49. Kulakova, Olga S, ‘Digital Art in Light of NFT: Market Power and Legal Uncertainty’ (2022) 3(2) Digital Law Journal 36. google scholar
50. Kumar, Medhansh, ‘Million Dollar Meme: Non-Fungible Tokens and Their Regulation’ (2022) [https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/](https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/) 2022/01/12/non-fungible-tokens-and-their-regulation/ accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
51. Lammeyer, Joseph, Die Institutionen des Gaius (Ferdinand Schöningh, 1929). google scholar
52. Lehmann, Matthias and Krysa, Felix, ‘Blockchain, Smart Contracts and Token aus der Sicht des (Internationale) Privatrechts’ (2019) 2 Bonner Rechts Journal 90. google scholar
53. Maddalena, Paolo, ‘Genus (Diritto Romano)’ (1957) VII Novissimo Digesto Italiano 796-798. google scholar
54. Majello, Ugo, ‘L’individuazione nella Vendita di Genere’ (1957) Rivista di Diritto Civile 181. google scholar
55. Marinotti, Joao, ‘Tangibility as Technology’ (2021) 37(3) Georgia State University Law Review 671. google scholar
56. Merrill, Thomas W., ‘Ownership and Possession’ in Chang, Yun Chien (ed), Law and Economics of Possession (Cambridge University Press 2015) 9-39. google scholar
57. Messineo, Francesco, Manuale di Diritto Civile e Commerciale, Introduzione, Dottrine Generali, vol 1 (Giuffrè 1957). google scholar
58. Oertmann, Paul, Die Volkswirtschaftslehre des Corpus Juris Civilis (Kessinger Publishing 1891). google scholar
59. Özkan Taş, Rabia, Dijital Varlıklar Üzerindeki Hakkın Hukuki Niteliği (Oniki Levha Yayınevi 2025). google scholar
60. Öztürk, Sevgi Ayşe, ‘Yeni Bir Dijital Varlık Olarak NFT: Pazarlama Dünyasındaki Yeri Üzerine Değerlendirmeler’ (2022) 22(4) Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 1151. google scholar
61. Pfluger, Heinrich Hackfeld, ‘Über Körperliche und Unkörperliche Sachen’ (1947) 65(1) Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechts- geschichte: Romanistische Abteilung 339. google scholar
62. Pichonnaz, Pascal, ‘Le Concept de Maîtrise Exclusive des Données Numériques: Quelques Réflexions Discursives’ (2021) 140(4) Revue de droit suisse 427. google scholar
63. Poste, Edward, Gai Institutiones or Institutes of Roman Law, Book II, ‘Equal Rights (De Rebus)’ (Oxford, 1904) [https://droitromain.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/Anglica/gai2\_Poste.htm\#10](https://droitromain.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/Anglica/gai2_Poste.htm#10) accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
64. Pugliatti, Salvatore, Beni e Cose in Senso Giuridico (Giuffrè 1962). google scholar
65. Restivo, Carmelo ‘La Fungibilità dell’Oggetto Del Mutuo’ (2012) 10 Rivista di Diritto dell’Economia, dei Trasporti e dell’Ambiente 391. google scholar
66. Salehian, Armin, ‘Digitale Produkte als Hybride Rechtsobjekte’ in Weber, Beatrix (ed), Hofer Akademische Schriften zum Recht in Nachhaltigkeit, Compliance und IT, vol 1 (Druck und Verlag 2023) 1-80. google scholar
67. Schmidt-Kessel, Martin, ‘Verträge über digitale Inhalte – Einordnung und Verbraucherschutz’ (2014) (7-8) Kommunikation & Recht 475. google scholar
68. Schulz, Fritz, Principles of Roman Law (Clarendon Press 1956). google scholar
69. Scott, Samuel P., The Enactments of Justinian. The Digest or Pandects in The Civil Law, Cincinnati (1932) [https://droitromain.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/Anglica/D41\_Scott.htm\#III](https://droitromain.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/Anglica/D41_Scott.htm#III) accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
70. Swiss Civil Code (Switzerland, adopted 10 December 1907, status as of 23 January 2023) [https://fedlex.data.admin.ch/filestore/fedlex](https://fedlex.data.admin.ch/filestore/fedlex). data.admin.ch/eli/cc/24/233\_245\_233/20230123/en/pdf-a/fedlex-data-admin-ch-eli-cc-24-233\_245\_233-20230123-en-pdf-a-2.pdf accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
71. Tekelioğlu, Numan, ‘Eşya Kavramını Yeniden Düşünmek: NFT’lerin Eşya Niteliği ve Eşya Hukuku Bakımından Geleceği Üzerine Bir İnceleme’ (2022) 34 (1) Selçuk Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 1301. google scholar
72. The Economist, ‘Why We Are Selling Our Cover as an NFT: How We Set It Up And Decided It Was Worth Doing’ (2021) https://www. [economist.com/the-economist-explains/2021/10/21/why-we-are-selling-our-cover-as-an-nft](https://www.google.com/search?q=https://economist.com/the-economist-explains/2021/10/21/why-we-are-selling-our-cover-as-an-nft) accessed 3 February 2025. google scholar
73. Toygar, Alp, Taiper, Rohm Jr. C.E. and Zhu, Jake, ‘A New Asset Type: Digital Assets’ (2013) 22(4) Journal of International Technology and Information Management 113. google scholar
74. Treiblmaier, Horst, ‘The Token Economy as a Key Driver for Tourism: Entering the Next Phase of Blockchain Research’ (2021) 91 Annals of Tourism Research 1. google scholar
75. Vasalli, Filippo, ‘Individuazione e Fungibilità delle Cose’ (1960) III(2) Studi Giuridici 640. google scholar
76. Vicente, Dário Moura, ‘Unkörperliche Güter im Romanischen Rechtskreis’ in Leible, Stefan, google scholar
77. Lehmann, Matthias and Zech, Herbert (eds), Unkörperliche Güter im Zivilrecht (Mohr Siebeck, 2011) 75-93. google scholar
78. Von Jhering, Rudolph, Geist des Römischen Rechts auf den Verschiedenen Stufen Seiner Entwicklung (Breitkopf und Härtel 1865). google scholar
79. Von Savigny Friedrich Carl, System des Heutigen Römischen Rechts, vol 1 (Veit 1840). google scholar
80. Von Savigny, Friedrich Karl, von Savigny’s Treatise on Possession: Or the Jus Possessionis of the Civil Law (6th edn., Hyperion Press 1979). google scholar
81. Watson, Alan, The Law of Property in the Later Roman Republic (Clarendon Press 1984). google scholar
82. Wendland, Matthias, ‘Sonderprivatrecht für digitale Güter’ (2019) 118 Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft 191. google scholar
83. Wilson, Kathleen Bridget, Karg, Adam and Ghaderi, Hadi, ‘Prospecting Non-Fungible Tokens in the Digital Economy: Stakeholders and Ecosystem, Risk and Opportunity’ (2022) 65(5) Business Horizons 657. google scholar
84. Windscheid, Bernhard, Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts (Verlag von Ebner & Seubert 1879). google scholar
85. Zarelli, Antonio, Fungibilità ed Infungibilità nell’Obbligazione (Jovene 1969). google scholar
86. Zasius, Ulrich, In Titulum Institutionum De Actionibus Enarratio (Vincentius 1571). google scholar