Dictionary of Greek and Roman antiquities. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

COLLE IUM'. COLONATUS. 311whicll might be any regulations that the members When a new member was taken into a colleagreed upon, provided they were not contrary to gium, he was said co-optari, and the old members
law: this provision, as Gaius conjectures (Dig. were said with respect to him, recipeore in collegyiun.
47. tit. 22), was derived from a law of Solon, The mode of filling up vacancies would vary in difwhich he quotes. The collegium still subsisted, ferent collegia.
though all the original members were changed. Civitates and res publicae (civil communities)
Collegia of all kinds may be viewed under two and municipia (in the later sense of the term)
aspects,- as having some object of administration were viewed as fictitious persons.
either public or not public, which object is often According to Pliny (Ep. v. 7; Ulp. FPr. tit. 22.
the main purpose for which they exist, or as being s. 5) res publicae and municipia could not take
capable of holding property and contracting and as heres; and the reason givefi is, that they were a
owing obligations. As having some object of ad- coorpus incertum, and so could not cerneere zereditaministration, they are viewed as units (magistratus te7n; that is, do those acts which a heres himself
municipales curn unum magistratum administrent, must do in order to show that he consents to be a
etiam unius hominis vicem sustinent (Dig, 50. tit. 1. heres, for the heres could not in this matter act
s. 25). As having a capacity to hold property, they by a representative. A res publica, therefore, as
are purely fictitious or artificial personages, and, being a fictitious person, could not do the necessary
consequently, thus conceived, it is not all the mem- act. Municipia, lire other fictitious persons,
hers who are supposed to compose this artificial could, however, acquire property in other ways,
person, but the members are the living persons by and by means of other persons, whether bond or
whose agency this artificial p:rson does the acts firee (Dig. 41. tit. 2. s. 1. ~ 22): and they could
which are necessary for the acquisition and admi- take fideicommissa under the senatusconsultum
nistration of its property. Itisonly with reference Apronianum which was passed in the time of
to the purposes of ownership and contracts, that an Hadrian, and extended to licita collegia in the
artificial person has an existence as a person. There time of M. Aurelius. (Dig. 34. tit. 5. s. 21.) By
are some further remarks under UNIVERSITAS. another senatusconsul'tum, the liberti of municipia
A lawfully constituted collegium was legiti- might make the municipestheir heredes. The gods
mum. Associations of individuals, which affected could not be made heredes, except such deities as
to act as collegia, but were forbidden by law, were possessed this capacity by special senatusconcalled illicita. sulta or imperial constitutions, such as Jupiter
It does not appear how collegia were formed, Tarpeius, &c. (Uip. Fr. tit. 22. s. 6.) By a conexcept that some were specially established by legal stitution of Leo (Cod. vi. tit. 24. s. 12) civitates
authority. (Liv. v. 50, 52; Suet. Caes. 42, Auy. obtained the capacity to take property as heredes.
32; Dig. 3. tit. 4. s. 1.) Other collegia were As early as the time of Nerva and Hadrian, civiprobably formed by voluntary associations of indi- tates could take legacies.
viduals under the provisions of some general legal Though civitates within the Roman empire
authority. This slpposition would account for the could not originally receive gifts by will, yet ilfact of a great number of collegia being formed in dependent states could receive gifts in that way
the course of time, and many of them being occa- (Tacit. Ann. iv. 43), a case which furnishes no
sionally suppressed as not legitima. objections to the statement above made by Pliny
Some of these corporate bodies resembled our and Ulpian. In the same way the Roman state
companies or guilds; such were the fabrornm, pis- accepted the inheritance of Attalus, king of Pertorum, &c. collegia. (Lampridius, Alex. Severus, gamus, a gift which came to them from a foreigner.
33.) Others were of a religious character; such The Roman lawyers considered such a gift to be
as the pontificum, augurum, fratrun arvalium accepted by the jus gentium. (Dig. 3. tit. 4; 47.
collegia. Others were bodies concerned about tit. 22; Savigny, System, &c. vol. ii. p. 235. &c.)
government and administration; as tribunorum [UNIVERSITAS.] [G. L.]
plebis (Liv. xlii. 32), quaestorum, decurionum COLONA'TUS, COLO'NI. The Coloni *of
collegia. The titles of numerous other collegia the later Imperial period formed a:class of agrimay be collected from the Roman writers, and culturists, whose condition has been the subject of
from inscriptions. elaborate investigation.
According to the definition of a collegium, the These Coloni were designated by the various
consuls being only two in number were not a col- names of Coloni, Rustici, Orig-narii, Adscriptitii,
legiune, though each was called collega with re- Inquilini, Tributarii, Censiti. A person might bespect to the other, and thbir union in office was come a Colonus by birth, with reference to which
called collegium. The Romans never called the the term Originarius was used. When both the
individual who, for the time, filled an office of parents were Coloni and belonged to the same
perpetual continuance, a universitas or collegium, master, the children were Colon.i. If the father
for that would have been a contradiction in terms, was a Colonus and the mother a slave, or conwhich it has been reserved for modern times to versely, the children followed the condition of the
introduce, under the name of a corporation sole. mother. If the father e as free and the mother a
But the notion of one person succeeding to all the Colona, the children were Coloni and belonged to
rights of a predecessor was familiar to the Romans the master of the mother. If the father was a
in the case of a single heres, and the same notion Colonus and the mother free, the children before
must have existed with respect to individuals who the time of Justinian followed the condition of the:held any office in perpetual succession. father: afterwards Justinian declared such chilb
According to Ulpian, a universitas, though re- dren to be free, but finally he reduced them to the
duced to a single member, was still considered a condition of Coloni. If both parents were Coloni
universitas; for the individual possessed all the and belonged to different masters, it was finally
rights of the universitas, and used the name by settled that the masters should divide the children
which it was distinguished. (Dig. 3. tit. 4. s. 7.) between them, and if there was an odd one, it
x4