The cultural perspective undergirding the jurist’s decision is the peculiarly Roman concept that substantive justice depends on “piety.” “Piety” for the Romans, of course, did not mean a personal, spiritual relationship to God, as Christians later came to reinterpret the word. For the Romans, it implied a strict adherence to recognized rituals and ceremonies in all situations, both public and private. Consequently, the Roman “religion” was not about personal salvation; nor did it encompass an abstract theological investigation of man’s relationship to God. Rather, it was a very practical system of state-sponsored public and private rites that disciplined, ordered, and governed Roman life in the most transparent and predictable way possible. In the case of the freed slave’s peculium, “impious,” unpredictable, subjective sentiments of fairness or equity as between poor slaves versus rich slave owners played no role in the decision. Instead, the “pious” act of transferring an account receivable to income earned ensured both procedural and substantive justice decided on solid, objective, and, hence, uncontroversial grounds. Law ruled, not men.