ABSTRACT
This contribution explores the conceptual absence of a juridical category of ‘non-will’ in both Roman and modern legal thought. It reconstructs the Roman semantic field of volens, invitus and nolens as a model of interpretive elasticity, contrasting it with the rigid dichotomies of modern dogmatics, where voluntas is reduced to an abstract, binary construct. The chapter argues that Roman jurisprudence tolerated and operationalised imperfect voluntas, offering a hermeneutical sensitivity to constrained agency that modern legal categories fail to capture. It concludes by suggesting that a recovery of this Roman elasticity can enrich contemporary debates on consent, vulnerability and juridical agency.
