Definition
A Latin term meaning "mine" or "that which belongs to me." In legal usage, *meum* appears almost exclusively as one half of the phrase *meum et tuum* — "mine and thine" — which functions as a shorthand for the legal and moral distinction between one person's property and another's. The phrase captures the foundational concept underlying property law: that legal systems exist in large part to identify, protect, and enforce the boundaries between what belongs to each party.
As a standalone term, *meum* rarely appears in modern legal writing. Its significance lies almost entirely in its paired form.
Common Language
Modern common usage (Wiktionary): In modern general English, "meum" is most often encountered as a botanical term — the common name for *Meum athamanticum*, a flowering plant also called spignel or baldmoney.
Historical common usage (Webster's 1913): Webster's treats *meum* primarily through the phrase *meum et tuum*, defining it as "mine; that which is mine," and glossing the combined phrase as a test of honesty — to confound *meum* and *tuum* was to fail to distinguish one's own property from another's, i.e., to steal or deceive.
The legal and common meanings diverge sharply here. A researcher encountering "meum" in a modern source may well be reading about an herb; a researcher encountering it in a historical legal text is almost certainly reading about the concept of ownership and property distinction. The botanical usage has entirely displaced the legal usage in everyday English, making context essential.
Common Confusion
*Meum* is sometimes encountered in older texts without its paired term *tuum*, which can cause confusion about whether the author intends a general statement about property ownership or something more specific. Readers should also note that Burrill's entry conflates *meum* with the adjacent Law French term *meyn* (hand, oath) — these are unrelated terms that appear in close proximity in the digest tradition and have no connection in meaning.
Why It Matters in Research
Researchers working in historical legal sources — particularly treatises, pleadings, and legal philosophy from the sixteenth through nineteenth centuries — will encounter *meum et tuum* frequently as a conceptual anchor for discussions of property, theft, contract, and natural law. The phrase was a standard shorthand in both common law and civilian traditions, and understanding it is necessary to parse arguments about ownership, trespass, and the foundations of property rights.
Burrill's entry is notably sparse and risks misleading researchers: the entry as written slides immediately into the Law French term *meyn* (meaning "hand" or "oath") without clearly separating it from the Latin *meum*. These are distinct terms with no etymological or legal relationship. A researcher following Burrill's entry sequentially may incorrectly assume a connection.
In natural law and early jurisprudential writing — Grotius, Pufendorf, Blackstone — *meum et tuum* carries significant theoretical weight as the boundary that property law exists to enforce. Blackstone's *Commentaries* treat the security of *meum et tuum* as a primary object of civil society. Researchers tracing the philosophical foundations of Anglo-American property law will find the phrase appearing repeatedly in this context.
The phrase also appears in older criminal law discussions, particularly of theft, where "confounding meum and tuum" served as a colloquial description of dishonest taking.
Historical Dictionary Support
Burrill's Law Dictionary provides only a minimal entry: "Lat. Mine. Dig. 50. 16. 91." — a citation to the Digest of Justinian, which uses the term in discussions of property. The entry's brevity reflects the fact that *meum* as a standalone term was less important to common law practitioners than its appearance within the fixed phrase *meum et tuum*. Burrill does not develop the conceptual significance of the term, and the entry's placement immediately before the Law French *meyn* is a structural artifact of alphabetical ordering rather than any substantive connection.
Webster's 1913 is more useful here than Burrill for understanding how educated readers of the period understood the term, precisely because Webster's captures the phrase-level meaning that gave *meum* its legal resonance.
No other source dictionaries in this entry's corpus address the term. Researchers requiring fuller treatment should consult civilian and natural law dictionaries, where *meum et tuum* receives more sustained attention.
Jurisdictional Note
The concept expressed by *meum et tuum* is universal across common law and civil law jurisdictions, though the Latin phrase itself is more commonly encountered in historical texts from jurisdictions with strong civilian influence (Scotland, Louisiana, Quebec, South Africa). In purely common law sources, the underlying concept is addressed through the vocabulary of property and ownership rather than through the Latin phrase.
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
See: PROPERTY — for the legal framework that *meum et tuum* describes.
See: OWNERSHIP — for the distinction between possession and title that the phrase presupposes.