gotten in the event of intestacy and there was no reason why they had been excluded. The heirs would have to demonstrate that they had always behaved in a dutiful manner towards the deceased. If they won the case, they got the full share that they would have received in case of intestacy. This was based on the legal fiction that the testator could not have been of sound mind when that part of the will was written. The claim only voided the specific section of the will dealing with the claimant, not the whole will. The law mostly did not specify what were valid reasons for disinheriting someone. Thus, it was generally determined by the social expectations of the jury. Fourth-century laws mention "immorality" and becoming a gladiator as reasons and Justinian provided a full list in AD 542. Even when a disinheritance was totally legal, there was strong social pressure against disinheriting children and direct descendants. Fideicommissum The fideicommissum ("trust") was an alternative method for leaving legacies instead of the will. It could consist of a specific object or property or of the whole estate. Originally, it was a gift of some property to an individual who was requested to use it for a specific purpose, but was not legally bound to do so. Under Augustus, some fideicommissa became legally binding, being enforced by the consuls. Claudius created two praetores fideicommissarii who were specifically responsible for enforcing fideicommissa (later they were reduced to one). Fideicommissa differed from legacies in several ways. Firstly, the trustee could be anyone who received something from the estate, not just the heir. Secondly, the fideicommissum could benefit someone who was not a valid heir. This loophole was closed over time. For example, the Senatus consultum Pegasianum of AD 73 prevented fideicommissa for unmarried and childless individuals. Thirdly, whereas legacies failed if there was no heir or the will was invalid, fideicommissa still functioned, as long as the trustee benefitted from the estate - even in the case of intestacy. Fourthly, whereas wills had to use specific phrases in order to be valid, fideicommissa did not; they were much more flexible. Thus, when wills proved to be invalid, jurists and judges would often try to fulfill the terms of the invalid will under the legal fiction that the testator had intended to create a fideicommissum. The fideicommissum could be given to the trustee to