362 The Digest as a source of evidence 



disputed point. But the normal product of discussion is the opinion of 

 this or that eminent jurist as to what is sound law in a particular 

 question. The different opinions of different authorities are often 

 quoted side by side. If this were all, we might congratulate ourselves 

 on having simply a collection of authentic extracts from named 

 authors, conveying their views in their own words. And no doubt 

 many of the extracts are of this character. 



But the position is not in fact so simple as this. Tribonian and his 

 fellow-commissioners were set to work at the end of the year 530. 

 Their task was completed and the Digesta published with imperial 

 confirmation at the end of 533. Now the juristic literature in ex- 

 istence, of which the Digest was to be an epitome superseding its own 

 sources, was of such prodigious bulk that three years cannot have 

 been sufficient for the work. To read, abstract, classify, and so far as 

 possible to harmonize, this mass of complicated material, was a duty 

 surely needing a much longer time for its satisfactory performance. 

 Moreover, as this official Corpus of jurisprudence was designed for 

 reference and citation as an authority in the courts, it had to be 1 

 brought up to date. That this necessity greatly increased the com- 

 missioners' burden is obvious: nor less so, that it was a duty peculiarly 

 difficult to discharge in haste, and liable, if hurried, to result in 

 obscurities inconsistencies and oversights. That much of the Digest 

 has suffered from overhaste in its production is now generally ad- 

 mitted. Its evidence is therefore to be used with caution. But on the 

 subject of coloni the main points of interest are attested by witnesses 

 of high authority, such as Ulpian, in cited passages not reasonably 

 suspected of interpolation. And it is not necessary to follow up a host 

 of details. We have only to reconstruct from the law-sources the 

 characteristic features of agriculture and rustic tenancy as it existed 

 before the time of Diocletian ; and these features are on the whole 

 significant and clear. Fortunately we are not entirely dependent on 

 collection and comparison of scattered references from all parts of the 

 great compilation. One title (XIX 2 locati conductiY furnishes us with 

 a quantity of relevant matter classified under one head by the editors 

 themselves. 



First and foremost it stands out quite clear that the colonus is a 

 free man, who enters into a legal contract as lessee with lessor, and 

 that landlord and tenant are equally bound by the terms of the lease. 

 If any clause requires interpretation owing to special circumstances 

 having arisen, the jurist endeavours to lay down the principles by 

 which the court should be guided to an equitable decision. For in- 



1 In fact, as we say, edited. 



* Of this Title there is a useful little edition by the late C H Monro. 



