118 On the Roman Coloni. causes of which neglect will be stated further on: and even what is found about it in commentators is exceedingly meagre. The writings of the Glossatores are of no service on this topic ; for they confuse the whole question by the arbitrary and unfounded assumption that there were several kinds of coloni"^. Cujacius has seized the main point correctly, but has not followed out his view in detail, and has mixt it up with several errours ^ Jacob Gothofredus, who is usually referred to as the principal writer on this subject, has merely amast a quantity of materials, without doing the least to arrange them : the utter groundlessness of his historical views on this point will be spoken of lower down^ But far more unsatisfactory still is the dissertation of Heraldus, who formed an entirely erroneous notion concerning the condition of the coloni ; and thus even his interpretations of particular passages are mostly wrong ^. That condition however has recently been repre- sented by Winspeare more correctly than by any previous author ^. The names used to designate this class of society are the following : colonic rustici^ originarii^ adscriptitii^ inquilini^ trihutariiy censiti. No precise definition of these terms can be given till a further stage in the enquiry. I will begin by describing the social condition of the class, as it is set forth in our works on jurisprudence, and then tack on some historical investig-ations. For the former purpose there are three points to be treated of: the origin of this condition with reference to particular individuals, the rights and obligations connected with it, and finally the manner in which it might be shaken off.
- See Pillius, Summa in tres libros (the continuation of the Summa of Placentinus),
— Azo in his Summa, and his Commentary on the Codex, — and the Glosses,— all on the abovecited titles from the eleventh book of Justinian's Codex. 5 The chief passage occurs in his Commentary on the last three books of the Codex, Lib. XI. Tit. 47 (with him 48), de agricolis^ especially in the introduction to this title. To this add his Observationes, iv. 28, and Comm. in L. 112 pr. D. de leg. 1. (0pp. V. 1077- ed. Neap.) ^ Ad. Cod. Theodos. Lib. v. Tit. 9, 10, 11, especially paratit. on v. 9. Amaduzzi ad Papianum Tit. 48, p. 289, sq. is of no value. ■^ Quaestiones quotidianae i. 8, 9. s Storia degli abusi feudali T. i. pp. 105 — 111. This writer's historical views will be spoken of hereafter.
