Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 2.djvu/161

Rh FEROX. qtiamvis Scaevola apud Marcellum duhitans notat, and Marcellus lib. xiii. Dig. scribit^ ubi Scaevola notat? These difficulties have induced some legal bio- graphers (Manage, Amoen. Jur. c. 43 ; Otto, Thes. Jur. Rom. 1614-5 ; Guil. Grotius, De Vitis Jurisc. ii. 4. § 4) to suppose that the word apud is used inconstantly, sometimes governing the name of the commentator, and sometimes the name of the writer who is the subject of commentary. In the present case, we believe that Urseius Ferox was junior to Cassius and Proculus, and that he commented upon them in independent works of his own, which were not considered as tJieir works with his commentaries. We tliink it unlikely that Cassius, his senior, cited Ferox, and therefore are disposed to adopt the altered reading of Dig. 44. ^it. 5. 8. 1. § 10, which we have already mentioned, and which was first suggested by Guil. Grotius, although we do not regard the alteration as abso- lutely necessary. The only general conclusion we are able to arrive at, from a comparison of the pas- sages we have cited, is, that from such an expres- sion as apud Ferocem Proculus ait., it is impossible to draw any certain inference as to the relative date of Ferox and Proculus. We think, neverthe- less, that the word apud in such connection is used constantly in the same sense, — that the writer whose name it governs is in conception tlie priii- cipal, and the other the subordinate. Thus Procu- lus apud Ferocem ait means that the saying of Pro- culus was contained in the work of Ferox ; — whether the saying were contained in the text or in the notes ; — if in the text, — whether it were in the original text, or in the received text as altered by some subsequent editor ; — if contained in the notes, — whether those notes were expressly written upon the text, or were composed of illustrative ex- tracts from prior or subsequent authors appended to the text. In general, apud seems to govern the name of a writer whose work has been illustrated by notes. In the majority of cases, as in the case of Aristo apud Cassium, the notes seem to have been expressly written iipon the work of the author whose name is governed by a^md ; but sometimes, as in the case of Servius apud Melam, it seems that extracts from the writings of a pre- ceding author are either contained in the original text, or have been appended as notes by a subse- quent editor. While, then, Servius apud Melam means Servius in Mela, in like manner, Aristo apud Cassium is a citation of Aristo from a work, which, though it contain matter in addition to the text of Cassius, would, upon the whole, be thought of as the work of Cassius. Our supposition that apzid governs the name of the author who is in conception the principal, is confirmed by an instance where it may be doubted which author is the principal, and where, accordingly, a variety of expressions occurs. Julianus composed a treatise which was compiled from certain books of Minicius, with observations of his own, as we learn from the inscription of the extract in Dig. 6. tit. 1. s. 59, which is headed Julianus, b'b. 6. ex Minicio. This may be com- pared with the fuller expression of Gains (ii. 188), in his libris, quos ex Q. Mudo fecimus. The work so compiled might easily be thought of, either as the work of Julianus, or as the work of Minicius. In the first case it might be cited, as in Dig. 2. tit. 14. 8. 56, where we read Julianus lib. 6 ad Minicium ; in the second case. Julianus might FESTUS. 117. be eited as from Minicius, as in Dig. IQ. tit. 1, s. 11. $ 15, where we find Julianus lib. 10 apud Minicium ait. The foregoing explanation, which is believed to be new, appears to remove some difficulties which have hitherto perplexed legal biographers. [ J. T. G.] FESTI'VUS, AURELIA'NUS,a frecdman of the emperor Aurelian, wrote a history of the em- peror Firmus, in which he detailed at great length all the silly and extravagant doings of the latter. (Vopisc. Firm. 6.) FESTUS, a favourite freedman and remem- brancer {rrjs ^acriXeias [JLvriix7}s TrpaaTcos) of Ca- racalla, by whom he was buried in the Troad, with all the ceremonies observed at the obsequies of Patroclus. According to Herodian, a report was current that he had been poisoned by the Emperor, who, being seized with the fancy of imitating Achilles, and being at a loss for a dead friend whose fate he might mourn, after the fashion of the hero, had recourse to this method of supplying the deficiencj'. Festus, the chamberlain of Caracalla, must have been a different personage, since he is represented by Dion Cassius as alive under Macri- nus, and as taking an active part in the proceedings for setting up Elagabalus. (Herodian, iv. 14 ; Dion Cass. Ixxviii. 33.) [W. R.] FESTUS, ANI'CIUS, was entrusted by Ma- crinus with the command of Asia, after the disgrace of Asper. Festus had been, on foftner occasions, passed over by Severus in the allotment of pro- vinces. (Dion Cass. Ixxxviii. 22.) [W. R.] FESTUS, PESCE'NNIUS, a senator, put to death without trial by the emperor Severus, a. d. 196 — 7, after his victory over Albinus. (Spartian. Severus., 13 ; comp. Dion Cass. Ixxv. 8 ; Herodian. iii. p. 115.) An historian of this name is men- tioned by Lactantius (Instit. i. 21), in speaking of the human sacrifices practised at Carthage. Lac- tantius calls the history of Festus Satura, i. e. a miscellany. [W. B. D.] FESTUS, SEXT. POMPEIUS, a lexicogra- pher of uncertain date. He certainly lived after Martial, whom he quoted (s. v. Fespae), and before Macrobius, who refers to him more than once (Sat. iii. 3, 5, comp. 8.). From his remarks upon the word supparus we conclude that he must have be- longed to an epoch when the ceremonies of the Christian religion were familiar to ordinary readers, but Saxe has no authority for fixing him down to the close of the fourth century (Onomast. a.d. 398). The name of Festus is attached to a dictionary or glossary of remarkable Latin words and phrases, which is divided into twenty books, and commonly bears the title Sej^ti Pompeii Festi de Verbontm Significatione. This is a compilation of the highest value, containing a rich treasure of learning upon many obscure points, connected with antiquities, mythology, and grammar ; but before we can make use of it with safety it is necessary that we should understand the history of the work, and be" made acquainted with the various constituents of which it is composed. M. Verrius Flaccus, a celebrated grammarian, in the reign of Augustus [Flaccus Verrius], was the author of a very voluminous treatise, De Signift- catu Verhbrum. This was compressed into a much smaller compass by Festus, who made a few altera- tions ( e. g. s. V. monstrum) and criticisms (e. g. Pictor Zeuxis) of his own, inserted numerous extracts from other writings of Verrius, such as the De Obscvris L 2