The colonate in Justinian's reign

Journal of Roman Studies

Volumn 98, Issue , 2008, Pages 120-143

  Sirks, A J B ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 61249142524     PISSN: 00754358     EISSN: 1753528X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3815/007543508786238987     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. See R. Westbrook, 'The nature and origin of the XII Tables', ZSS-rA 105 (1988), 74ff., who strongly argues that various sanctions in Hammurabi's Code must be read as theoretical discursions. But a lot of European medieval town statutes are indeed mere compilations of enforceable social rules without much or any coherence.
2. This was certainly not meant as a mere aspiration. Between A.D. 529 and 534 Justinian took the so-called 'Quinquaginta Decisiones' to resolve long-standing questions. In the Digest there are indeed still differences of opinion, but these served to deepen legal discussion and doctrine; the Code was primarily meant for practice. As regards the similarities and contrarities mentioned in c. Cordi 3, see A. J. B. Sirks, 'From the Theodosian to the Justinian Code', in Atti dell'Accadcmia Romanistica Costantiniana 6 (1983 (1986]), 299-300,
3. On the Thcodosian Code, see J. Matthews, Laying Down the Law (2000);
4. F. Millar, A Greek Roman Empire: Power and Belief under Tbeodosins II (408-450) (2006);
5. A. J. B. Sirks, The Theodosian Code. A Study (2007).
6. I have dealt with the colonate in, particularly, A. J. B. Sirks, 'Reconsidering the Roman colonate', ZSS-rA 110 (1993), 331-69,
7. but it appears from C. Grey, 'Contextualizing colonatus: the origo of the Late Roman Empire', JRS 97 (1007), 155-75 a stimulating contribution, that it is necessary to deal with the question in a methodologically different way; where necessary I shall re-examine my position. More research will have to be done on, for example, the autopragia and the estate management.
8. For more detail on the colonate, also referring to the continued existence of free labour, see C. Whittaker and P. Garnsey in Cambridge Ancient History (CAH), Vol. XIII (1998), 287-94.
9. Some of the many works on this question: A. H. M. Jones, 'The Roman colonate', in A. H. M. Jones, The Roman Economy, ed. P. A. Brunt (1974), 293-307;
10. A. Marcone, 'II lavoro nelle campagne', in Storia di Roma, Vol. 3.1 (1993), 823-43;
11. G. Giliberti, 'Il colonato tardo-antico', in Storia delta società italiana, Vol. 4, Restaurazione e destrutturazione nella tarda antichità (1998), 24-30;
12. A. Demandt, Die Spätantike (2007), 398-401.
13. Against the concept as such and other aspects sound arguments have been raised since 1981 by Carrié: see J.-M. Carrié, '"Colonato del Basso Impero": La resistenza del mito', in E. Lo Cascio (ed.), Terre, proprietari e contadini dell'impero romano (1997), 75-150 (resuming his thesis with responses to criticism);
14. further scepticism with P. Sarris, Economy and Society in the Age of Justinian (2006), 150-4, and n. 85 regarding the idea of the great domains as semi-public institutions.
15. See P. J. Zepos, 'Servi e paroeci nel diritto bizantino e postbizantino', RAL 35 (1980), 421, 424;
16. The reading of the text is, however, very difficult, see P. Van Minnen, 'Patronage in fourth-century Egypt. A note on P.Ross.Georg. III.8', JJP 27 (1997), 67-73, and conclusions are actually not possible.
17. M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht, 1. Teil (1975), 279.
18. See on this further A. J. B. Sirks, 'Did the Late Roman government try to tie people to their status or profession?', Tyche 8 (1993), 165-6, where the significance of the origo for public duties is set out, next to other criteria important in this respect,
19. Also A. J. B. Sirks, 'Der Zweck des Senatus Consultum Claudianum Von 52 n.Chr.', ZSS Rom. Abt. 122 (2005), 138, where it is set out how this senatusconsultum effected a deviation from the international private law rule on status as regarded unions between free women and slaves.
20. Ch. Saumagne, 'Du rôle De l'origo et du "census" dans La formation du colonat', Byzantion 12 (1937), 506 sees the land as the dominus and the colonus as its servus. Legally this is nonsense, as is Saumagne's assertion that the land is the subject of a right to the colonus. D. Vera, 'Schiavitù rurale e colonato neIl'Italia imperiale', Scienze dell'Antichità 6-7 (1992-1993), 317 states that the colonus was not tied to the estate owner, but to the taxation, and that the origo was a fiscal category. But he does not specify what such a tie to the taxation meant.
21. See on this J.-M. Carrié, 'Dioclétien et La fiscalité', Antiquité Tardive 2 (1994), 33-64.
22. In previous publications I was still uncertain about the role of the origo in this context and the function of the application of the SC Claudianum, and only recently have I come to this interpretation. I have to withdraw any previous explanation I may have made. J. L. Murga, 'Una extraña aplicacion del senadoconsulto Claudiano en el Codigo De Teodosio', Studi in onore di Cesare Sanfilippo, Vol. I (1982), 417-42, merely accepts the application without explanation. It is furthermore an argument against the theoretical possibility that the estate owner exercised his rights as representative of the town as origo and as such in a public or semi-public function.
23. See M. Bianchini, 'Sul regime delle unione fra libere e adscripticii nella legislazione giustinianea', Studi in onore di Cesare Sanfilippo, Vol. V (1984), 61-107.
24. Bianchini does not enter deeply into the question how the adscripticiatc was precisely imposed and does not make the connection with the origo. Further W. Schmitz, 'Appendix 1 Der justinianischen Novellen-Eine Wende Der Politik Justinians gegcnüber adscripticii und coloni?', Historia 35 (1986), 381-6.
25. M. Mirković, The Later Roman Colonate (1997), 65, 69-70.
26. The phrase must have been interpolated. P. Rosafio, 'Dalla locazione al colonato', Annali Dipartiniento di Studi del Mondo classice del Mediterraneo antico 13 (1991), 264 thinks it concerns tenants and the tributum soli, since it would be absurd to pay the capitatio for an unregistered colomis.
27. I. F. Fikhman, 'Coloni adscripticii - in den Papyri', in I. F. Fikhman, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft im spätantiken Ägypten. Kleine Scbriften (2006), 190-250.
28. B. Palme, Form und Funktion Der byzantiniscbcn Gestellungsbü rgschaften (forthcoming).
29. J.-M. Carrié, 'Figures du "colonat" dans les papyrus d'Égypte: lexique, contextes', in XVII Congr. intern. di Papirologia (1984), 945, observes this remarkable restriction. As I shall explain, this might not be so remarkable.
30. In P.Oxy. LXIII.4398: (see Section XII), in P.Oxy. 1.133 (a loan) (translated by the editor as 'tax payable by us'), in P.Oxy. XXVII.2478 (a deed of surety) (translated by the editor as 'the tax due on it', scil. the land). But this tax cannot concern the plot of land in his charge; it must refer to the poll tax and be translated as 'with payment of my tax'. J. Banaji, Agrarian Change in Late Antiquity. Gold, Labour and Aristocratic Dominance (2001), 97 considers that in P.Oxy. XXVII.2478 this refers to the rent.
31. but the constitution says that this could be excluded in the contract, and that indeed happened, see J. Beaucamp, 'Byzantine Egypt and imperial law', in R. S. Bagnall (ed.), Egypt and the Byzantine World 300-700 (2007), 283.
32. See now for this system, D. Rathbone, Economic Rationalism and Rural Society in Third-Century AD Egypt: the Heroninos Archive and the Appianus Estate (1991);
33. See A. J. B. Sirks, 'Continuità nel colonato?', in E. Lo Cascio (ed.), Terre, proprietari e contadini deil'impero romano. Dall'affitto agrario al colonto tardoantico (1997), 183-4;
34. A. J. B. Sirks, 'Obnoxietas', in Questions De responsabiiité, XLVènie Session De La SIHDA (1993), 325-31.
35. This would mean that he could recover the amount as comprised in the order. Normally we see the quod iussu applied to slaves and sons in potestate, but ratification (ratishabitio) was possible anyway. By this the represented dominus would become liable for the dealings of his procurator. This would work also for a colonus who functioned as actor. The variation of action quod iussti - which restricted the liability of the dominus to the range of the iussum - would make sense if this was done. See for the ratishabitio and iussum, A. Kacprzak, 'Ratihabitio' nel diritto romano classico (2002), 91-113.
36. For the latter, see M. Kaser and K. Hackl, Das römische Zivilprozessrecht (1996), 387-8.
37. It was possible to grant the libera administratio to a slave: he could then alienate things out of it without the prior permission of his owner, who was also the owner of the assets in the slave's peculium. Although in the Later Roman Empire filii familias got a libera administratio, Justinian went back to the old system (M. Kaser, Das römische Privatrecht ll (1971), 215).
38. J. Gascon, Les grands domaines, La cité et l'état en Égypte byzantine, Travaux et Mémoires 9 (1985), 21-3.
39. Following Gascou: M. Kaplan, Les hommes et La terre à Byzance du Vle an Xle Stècle (1991), 161.
40. For a summary of the increased reservations, see B. Palme, 'The imperial presence: government and army', in Bagnall, op. cit. (n. 65), 263-4. See also n. 31 and Section VII.