Definition
An actio honoraria (plural: actiones honorariae) is a class of legal action in Roman civil law created and administered by the praetor — a magistrate with judicial authority — rather than derived from the traditional written body of Roman law (the ius civile). Also called a praetorian action, it was a flexible remedy the praetor could fashion when the strict rules of the ius civile produced no action, produced an unjust result, or needed expansion to meet new social or commercial circumstances.
The praetor's power to create these actions arose from his imperium — his executive authority — and was exercised through the Edict, a public declaration issued at the start of each praetor's term of office announcing the forms of relief he would grant. Because the Edict was renewed and expanded by successive praetors, the actiones honorariae became the primary engine of Roman legal development over several centuries, eventually hardening into settled law once the Edict was codified under Hadrian around 130 CE.
Common Confusion
Actio honoraria is regularly contrasted with actio civilis. The distinction matters: an actio civilis was grounded in the ius civile — the ancient, formal body of Roman law derived from statutes, the Twelve Tables, and authoritative legal interpretation. An actio honoraria was a praetorian creation, justified by the praetor's equity jurisdiction rather than by any written rule. In Roman sources and later civilian scholarship, the two categories are treated as coordinate pillars of the Roman action system. Conflating them obscures both the source of the remedy and its standing in the Roman legal hierarchy. Burrill's cross-reference to actio civilis makes this pairing explicit and is the correct starting point for understanding either term.
Why It Matters in Research
This term is almost exclusively encountered in Roman law scholarship, civil law treatises, and the historical foundations of continental legal systems. Researchers working in those areas should note several navigational points.
First, the term appears in the Digest (Digesta Iustiniani), the great sixth-century compilation of Roman juristic writing, and the passage most frequently cited — Dig. 44.7.25.35 — is the anchor reference in Black's, Bouvier's, and Burrill's alike. Any serious research into the term should return to that primary source rather than relying solely on dictionary glosses.
Second, the concept has ongoing relevance in comparative law and civilian legal history. The praetorian action system is the historical ancestor of equity jurisdiction in the common law tradition. When tracing equity's roots, scholars regularly pass through the actio honoraria and its relationship to praetorian good faith (bona fides) remedies. Researchers building that bridge should note that common law sources often translate or adapt the concept loosely, and that the Roman original had a more formal, category-specific structure than the equity-versus-law divide suggests.
Third, the term surfaces in treatises on the history of procedure — particularly when authors discuss the formulary system, under which both actiones civiles and actiones honorariae were pleaded by written formula. After Justinian's procedural reforms abolished the formulary system, the formal distinction between the two categories collapsed at the procedural level, though it persisted as a doctrinal classification.
Fourth, researchers should be aware that Hunter's Roman Law, cited by Bouvier, is a secondary synthesis, not a primary source. It is useful for orientation but should be confirmed against the Digest for any substantive claim about how the term was used.
Historical Dictionary Support
All three source dictionaries agree on the core definition: an actio honoraria is an honorary or praetorian action in Roman civil law. The entries are brief to the point of being skeletal, which is itself informative — by the time these dictionaries were compiled, the term had passed entirely into legal history and required only identification, not substantive development.
Black's and Burrill's are nearly identical, both citing Dig. 44.7.25.35, suggesting a shared source. Bouvier's varies slightly in phrasing — "an honorary action" without the qualifier "praetorian" — and cites Hunter's Roman Law rather than the Digest directly. This minor divergence is harmless but illustrates Bouvier's tendency toward secondary citations. None of the three dictionaries explains the praetorian Edict system, the formulary procedure, or the distinction from actio civilis in any depth, leaving significant context for the researcher to supply from Roman law scholarship.
What the historical dictionaries miss: the significance of the Hadrianic codification of the Edict, the relationship between actiones honorariae and bona fides obligations, and the broader role of praetorian actions in Roman legal development. For those dimensions, the Digest itself, Gaius's Institutes, and modern treatments such as Kaser's Roman Private Law provide what the dictionary entries do not.
Jurisdictional Note
Actio honoraria is a Roman law term with no direct modern domestic equivalent in common law jurisdictions. It remains in active scholarly use in civil law countries — particularly in academic treatments of Roman foundations — and in comparative law. Researchers in Louisiana, Quebec, South Africa, or Scotland may encounter it in doctrinal genealogies connecting modern civilian remedies to Roman antecedents.