[193] “De hoc capitulo judicaverunt ut nullus villam aut res alterius migrandi gratia per annos tenere possit, sed in quacumque die invasor illarum rerum interpellatus fuerit, aut easdem res quærenti reddat aut eas si potest juxta legem se defendendo sibi vindicet.” [194] _Lex Salica_, xxvii. 18, ed. Behrend: _Si quis ligna aliena in silva aliena furaverit, solidos 3 culpabilis judicetur_. This is the reading of the Paris MS. 4404. MS. 9653 runs: _Si quis ligna in silva aliena furaverit, solidos 45 culpabilis judicetur_. MS. 4627 runs: _in silva alterius_. [195] _In silva alterius_, MSS. Paris 4627, Montpellier 136, Saint-Gall 731, Paris 4626, etc. [196] _Lex salica_, xxii. The Munich MS. has _in mulino alieno_. Further on, _molinarius_ is replaced in the Wolfenbüttel MS. by _is cui molinus est_. [197] See the _Formulæ of Marculfus_ I. 35; II. 8; _Andegavenses_, 36 (37); Rozière, No. 252; _Turonenses_, 17. II. _M. Viollet’s theory as to community of land amongst the Greeks._ M. Viollet is a disciple of Maurer who copies and exaggerates his master. The system that Maurer was able with some show of probability to build up in relation to the Germanic peoples, M. Viollet supposes he can extend to all nations ancient or modern. What is quite fresh in his writings and exclusively his own, is, that he attributes to the ancient Greeks a system of community in land which the most profound students of Greek history had, up to this time, failed to discover. We must not suppose that in laying down such a proposition, he is speaking of some primitive age when the Greeks may be supposed to have been ignorant of agriculture, and consequently of landed property. He is speaking of the times when the Greeks were agriculturists, when they lived in organised societies; he is speaking of Greek cities; and he declares that the soil was for a long time cultivated by the city in common, without its occurring to the family or the individual to appropriate it. All the land, according to him, for a long time belonged not to the individual, not to the family, but to the city.[198] He states that “his theory is supported by authorities of considerable weight” (p. 463); and he refers to eleven passages taken from Plato, Virgil, Justin, Tibullus, Diodorus on the Lipari Isles, Diogenes Laertius on Pythagoras, Aristotle on the town of Tarentum, Athenæus on Spartan meals, Diodorus on the “klêrouchia,” and lastly, Theophrastus on the sale of real property. Let us look at the originals. Let us see at any rate whether M. Viollet’s references are altogether exact.