Page:Philological Museum v2.djvu/134

124 124 On the Roman Coloni. was extended to them : two exceptions however were made to it, in case of an arbitrary raising of their rent (super ewactio), and if they wanted to accuse their master of a crime^^ What is still more remarkable, even the principle that a runaway slave was regarded as a thief of his own person was applied at one time to them^^: which application certainly seems to be at variance with the recognition that they were ingenui, but can be defended by analogical cases in the old Roman law^^ The relation borne by the lord of the estate to the coloni was designated, in the want of a peculiar technical term, by the name patronus^^. The relation of the colonus to the soil consisted mainly in his being indissolubly attacht to it, so that he could not be separated from it either by his own act or by his master^^. Consequently if a colonus quitted an estate, the master of it might lay claim to him. This claim might be maintained against any other landholder, should the colonus have settled on his estate ^^; and the landholder, if he was aware that he was detaining his neighbour"'s colonus^ had to pay a consider- able fine'^^. Or it might be maintained against the colonus himself, if he was living as a free man. No rank, no 38 L. 2. C. J. in quib. causis coloni (xi. 49). They were allowed indeed — as appears from L. un. C. Theod. utrumvi (iv. 23), L. 20. 22. C. J. de agric. (xi. 47)— to bring an action on the question whether they were coloni^ and whether, what was connected with that question, the estate was their property or the master's : but this was no pecu- liar privilege, inasmuch as the slaves also had always had the liberale judicium open to them. 39 L. 23. pr. C. J. de agric. (xi. 47) : Secundum exemplum servi fugitivi sese diu- tinis insidiis furari intelligatur. 40 Gaius Lib. iii. § 199. § 9. I. de obi. quae ex del. (iv. 1.) 41 L. un. C. Theod. ne colonus (v. 11). The names dominus and possessor indeed 9,re also found : these denote however not his personal relation to the colonus^ but his ownership of the estate, on which, it is true, that relation was dependent. 42 L. un. C. J. de col. Thrac. (xi. 51) : servi — terrae ipsius. L. 15. C. J. de agric. (xi. 47) : glebis inhaerere praecipimus. One must not however take this indissoluble attachment too literally. Its purpose was only to prevent a permanent change of abode and employment : mere interruptions, even for a considerable period, were permitted, at least if the master did not object to them. Thus for instance Gregory the Great (Lib. VIII. Ep. 32) speaks of a colonus who had been working for three years in building a church at Catanea ; and his absence from the estate is assumed to be per- fectly allowable. 43 L. 1. C. Tlieod. de fugit. col. (v. 9). L. un. C. Theod. de inquilinis (v. 10). L. 6. L. 23. § 2. C. J. de agric. (xi. 47). 44 L. 2. C. Theod. de fugit. col. (v. 9). L. 12. C. J. de agric. (xi. 47). L. un. C. J. de col. Thrac. (xi. 51). L. 1. C. J. de col. Illyr. (xi. 52). L. 2. C. J. de fugit.