368 actor. Slave labour 



or quasi colonus 1 occupying a farm. The financial and general super- 

 vision of the estate is in the hands of the actor\ who collects all dues, 

 including rents of coloni, and is held to full account 3 for all these 

 receipts as well as for the contents of the store-rooms. He is a slave, 

 but a valuable and trusted man : it is significant that the manumis- 

 sion 4 of adores is not seldom mentioned. Evidently the qualities 

 looked for in such an agent were observed to develope most readily 

 under a prospect of freedom. But, so long as he remained actor of an 

 estate, he could be regarded as part of it: in a bequest the testator 

 could include him as a part 5 , and often did so: and indeed his peculiar 

 knowledge of local detail must often have been an important element 

 in its value. To employ such a person in the management of an estate, 

 with powerful inducements to good conduct, may have solved many a 

 difficult problem. We may perhaps guess that it made the employ- 

 ment of a qualified legal agent (procurator) less often necessary, at 

 least if the actor contrived to avoid friction with his master's free 

 tenants. 



Whether an estate was farmed for the owner by his manager, or 

 let to tenants, or partly on one system partly on the other, it is clear 

 that slave-labour is assumed as the normal basis of working. For the 

 colonus takes over slaves supplied by the dominus as an item of the 

 instrumentum. And there was nothing to prevent him from adding 

 slaves of his own, if he could afford it and thought it worth his while 

 to employ a larger staff. Whether such additions were often or ever 

 made, we must not expect the lawyers to tell us; but we do now and 

 then hear 6 of a slave who is the tenant's own. Such a slave might as 

 part of the tenant's goods be pledged to the landlord as security for 

 his rent, but he would not be a part of the estate of which the landlord 

 could dispose by sale or bequest. In such a case the slaves might be 

 regarded 7 as accessories of thefundus, if it were so agreed. This raised 

 questions as to the degree of connexion that should be treated as 

 qualifying a slave to be considered an appurtenance of a farm. The 

 answer was in effect that he must be a member of the regular staff. 

 Mere temporary employment on the place did not so attach him, mere 

 temporary absence on duty elsewhere did not detach him. A further 

 question was whether all slaves in any sort of employment on the 

 place were included, or only such as were actually engaged in farm 

 work proper, cultivation of the soil, not those employed in various 



1 xv 3 16, xxxin 7 i2 3 , 8 23 s . 2 servus actor, his rationes, XL 7 40^' **. 



3 His reliqua, xxxii 91*', 97. 4 xxxiv i i8 3 , 3 12, XL 7 40 passim. 



5 xxxii 4i 2 , 9i pr , xxxiii 7 I2 38 , 20 3 . 4 , 22 1 . These refer to legata, in which par- 

 ticular intention could be expressed, cf xxxii 91*. 



6 IX 2 27. u , XIX 2 30*. 



7 xxi i 32, xxvni 5 35 3 , xxxii 6o 3 , 68 3 , xxxin 7 20. 



