How did Roman law distinguish intentional damage from unintentional damage?

In Roman law, the legal system distinguished between intentional and unintentional damage to determine liability and the nature of the resulting obligation. This distinction was fundamental to the law of delict, which governed private wrongs.1

• Intentional Damage (dolus): This referred to deceit, fraud, or willful and wanton misconduct. It involved the deliberate use of a trick, stratagem, or artifice to deceive or harm another, contrary to good conscience.2
• Unintentional Damage (culpa): This category covered negligence or fault, representing a failure to meet a required standard of behavior.1

Liability for property damage was specifically regulated by the Lex Aquilia, which required that the loss be caused by a wrong or a negligent act. By applying these behavioral standards, Roman jurists could assess whether a party was responsible for damages, ensuring that the law functioned as a mechanism for compensation rather than mere private vengeance.314