PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, Etc.
disadvantages[1]. The coloni were thereby relieved from all the municipal charges which in the later period weighed so heavily on the civitates. The evil side of their political situation lay in the fact that they formed a special social class, in a territory of well marked limits, under officials with large powers whose sympathies lay with their masters, the conductores. Their only recourse was to the emperor, and appeal to him was difficult and dangerous. As the controle of the central government over the outlying regions became weaker, the coloni were more and more at the mercy of the conductores[2].
As we have noticed in another connection[3], the debasement of the coinage and the pressing need of food for the Roman rabble and for the armies, forced Diocletian to make contributions in kind a fixed part of the tribute from the provinces. This heavy demand, coming as it did at a time when the amount of cultivated land was decreasing, and the productivity of the soil declining, called for higher rentals than tenants were willing to pay. Their only recourse was to abandon their holdings, but this would have made matters still worse. It must be prevented at all hazards, and Constantine made it illegal for tenants to leave their farms. But probably his edict only gave legal recognition to a situation which already existed. In earlier times tenants had been inclined to retain their holdings, the renewal of leases was probably taken for granted, and tenancies descended from father to son. As for the conductor also, some time after the third century, he ceased to take a saltus for a fixed period, but settled on it for life, became its practical owner, and bequeathed it to his heir[4]. It was ruinous for him to have frequent changes in his tenants, or to have his land pass out of cultivation, and this he prevented. When this point had been reached, the colonus had become a serf.
[ 20 ]
