This page needs to be proofread.
132
HEADERTEXT.
132

132 On the Roman Coloni. examination however will convince us that these expressions are not to be taken literally. In fact the coloiii were capable of holding property; and they were only prohibited from alienating their property without the consent of their land- lord ' it being unquestionably more advantageous both for the estate itself and for its master to have a wealthy colonics than a poor one. This incapacity of alienating pro- perty is all that is meant by the abovementioned inaccurate expressions; so that the difference between the colonics and the slave in this point was very great. For a slave actually had nothing of his own; and, as the most important conse- quence of this principle, his master could take away everything that he possest : a colonics had property of his own, which could not be taken away from him, and he was only de- barred from alienating it at discretion. That this was really the state of things is set beyond a doubt by the following instances. If a colonics was a Donatist, he was to lose a third part of his peculium as a punishment for his heresy ^^, a penalty which evidently assumes that he had property of his own. Moreover it was a general rule that^ if a priest or monk died without a will, and left no heirs, his property went to his church or convent. To this rule how- ever there were three exceptions : if the deceast was a freed- man, or a colonics^ or a member of a curia^ his property was to go to his patron, or landlord, or curia^^. The object of this rule, as well as the mention of the colonus alongside of the freedman and the curialis^ shews that the coloni must have had heritable property of their own. This limited power in disposing of their property was all indeed that the colonic generally speaking, possest : but there were two exceptions to this, which have already been mentioned above. For such coloni as had become so by prescription were to have a perfectly free command of their property ^'^ : and so were those who sprang from the marriage of a colonus with a fi'ee woman ^ One may therefore assume, with reference ^* L. un. C. Theod. ne colonus (v. 11). L. 2. C J. in quib. cans, coloni (xi. 49). ^2 L. 54. C. Theod. de haereticis (xvi. 5). ^3 L. un. C. Theod. de bonis clericovum (v. 3). L. 20. C. J. de episcopis (i. 3). s** L. 18. L. 23. § 1. C. J. de agric. (xi. 47). 6ee a.bovc p. 121, ^' Nov. 162. C. 2. See above p. 120.