Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (1870) - Volume 2.djvu/213

Rh GAIUS. " Imperator Antoninus " mentioned in ii. 126 is n )t Caracalla, although the same rescript is erro- neously cited by Justinian (Cod. 6. tit. 28. s. 4) as one of " Magmis Antoninm, which is the peculiar designation of Caracalla. In Nov. 78. c. 5, Jus- tinian falls into an opposite error, in ascribing to Antoninus Pius an act of legislation which be- longs to Caracalla. (Dion Cass. Ixxvii. 9.) It is not until after the middle of the second book of the Institutes of Gains that Antoninus Pius is called Divns — Hodie &r Divi Pit constitutione, ii. 195. It appears to us that the inference founded on these mifiutiae, though probable, is not free from doubt. In i. 7, and i. 30, Hadrian is called Divus Hadrianus. In i. 47, we have Hadrianus without the Divus. Again in i. 55, we have Divus Hadria- nus, and the same epithet is applied to Hadrian in every other subsequent passage where his name occurs, except in ii. 57. The mention of Antoni- nus without the epithet Divus in six passages may possibly have no deeper meaning than the similar mention of Hadrianus in i. 47 and ii. 57. It would be rash to assert that we possess the Insti- tutes of Gaius precisely as they proceeded from his hand in the first edition. The very passage in i. 53, where Antoninus appears to be spoken of as a living emperor with the epithet sacratissimus is cited in the Digest (Dig. 1. tit. 6. s. 1), and there we read '' ex constitutione Divi Antonini. A compa- rison of this fragment, as it appears m the Digest, with the same passage as it stands in the text of Gaius, aifords an instructive example of those slight interpolations (emblemata) and alterations, in which the compilers employed by Justinian in- dulged, and by means of which serious obstacles are opposed to the discovery of historical truth by means of minute verbal criticism. The hypothesis that the Institutes of Gaius, up to ii. 151 (where we have for the last time Imperator Antoninus, without Divus), were written in the lifetime of the emperor Pius, is at variance with the probable con- jecture of Goschen, who thinks that Gaius, in the Licuna preceding i. 197, treated of a constitution of Marcus. There are other indications from which the age of Gaius may be closely inferred. The latest jurist whom he cites is Salvius Julianus, the com- poser of the Edictum Perpetuum under Hadrian ; and though there are no fewer than 535 extracts from his works in the Digest, he refers only to thirteen constitutions of emperors, and none of the constitutions he refers to can be proved to be later than Antoninus Pius. It would appear from the inscriptions of the fragments s. 8 and s. 9, in Dig. 38. tit. 17, that he wrote a liber singularis ad senatus consultum Tertullianum^ and another ad S. G. Orphitianum. This would bring his life to the last years of M. Aurelius ; but as there is no mention of these treatises in the Florentine Index, and as treatises on the same subject were written by Paulus, it is not at all unlikely that, in the in- scriptions we have mentioned, the name Gaius is put by mistake for Paulus. The Divus Antoninus mentioned by Gaius in the fragments Dig. 35. tit. 1. s. 90, Dig. 32. s. 9Q, Dig. 36. tit. 1. s. 63. § 5, and Dig. 31. s. 56, is, undoubtedly, not Ca- racalla, but Antoninus Pius. There is not a single pjissage in which it can be proved that Gaius refers to Caracalla. From a comparison of Dig. 24. tit. 1. s. 42 with Dig. 24. tit. 1. s. 32. pr., an attempt indeed has been made to identify the GAIUS. Princeps Antoninus mentioned by Gaius in the former passage, with the Antoninus Augustus, Divi Severi filiue, mentioned by Ulpian in the latter ; but though Caracalla, who is referred to by Ulpian, mitigated the law against donations between hus- band and wife, it does not follow that Antoninus Pius may not previously have introduced the partial relaxation of which Gaius treats. In the time of Ulpian, there were already several consti- tutions upon the subject. (Ulpian. Fragm. vii. 1.) We have said that Gaius was a devoted adhe- rent of the school of Sabinus and Cassius. This is now clear beyond dispute from a great number of passages in his Institutes (i. 196, ii. 15, 37, 79, 123, 195, 200, 217, 219—223, 231, 244, iii. 87, 98, 103, 141, 167, 168, 177, 178, iv. 78,79, 114). It had formerly been supposed by some that he belonged to the opposite school of Proculus — a mistake occasioned chiefly by an erroneous inter- pretation of Dig. 40. tit. 4. s. 57. Mascovius and others were induced to rank him among the Herciscundi [Capito], on account of the phrase " sententia media recte eadstimaniium " (Dig. 41. tit. 1. s. 7. § 7), coupled with a few passages in the Digest (Dig. 17. tit. 1. s. 4, Dig. 22. tit. 1. s. 19), where, notwithstanding his general leaning to Cas- sius, he seems to follow the opinion of Proculus, or to quote Proculus with approbation. Gaius was the author of numerous works. The following list is given in the Florentine Index : — 1. Ad Edictum Provindale, fiiSAla A^ [libri 32]. Number of extracts from this work in the Digest, 340. It appears to have been completed in the lifetime of Antoninus Pius. (Dig. 24. tit. 1. 8. 42, Dig. 2. tit. 1. s. 11.) 2. Ad Leges [Juliam et Papiam Poppaeam], )3t§Aia deKairevTf. (The names added between brackets are the names as they appear in inscrip- tions of fragments in the Digest.) Number of ex- tracts, 28. Gaius refers to this work in his Insti- tutes (iii. 54). It seems to have been published after the death of Antoninus Pius, (Dig. 31. s. 56.) ^. Ad Edictum Urhicum [praetoris urbani], rd. ix6va evpedeura fii§ia Se/ca. Extracts, 47. The Edicti Interpretation which may have designated the work on the Provincial Edict, together with the work on the City Edict, is mentioned by Gaius in his Institutes (i. 188), and was probably written in the reign of Antoninus Pius (Dig. 30. s. 73. § 1). The work on the City Edict was divided into tituli, and the subjects of the books and tituli are occasionally cited in the inscriptions of frag- ments. Some of the tituli seem to have formed books by themselves (compare the inscriptions of Dig. 7. tit. 7. 8. 4, Dig. 10. tit. 4. s. 13, Dig. 38. tit. 2. s. 30) ; others seem to have comprehended several books. There were at least two books De Testamentiii, and three De Legatis (Dig. 28. tit. 5» 8. 32 and s. 33, Dig. 30. s. 65, Dig. 30. s. Q% Dig. 30. 8. 73). 4. Aureon [Aureorum seu Rerum Quotidianarum], fiiSkia cTTTa. Extracts, 26. This work, treating of legal doctrines of general application and utility in everj'-day life, seems to have formed a compen- dium of practical law. The name Aurea was pro- bably a subsequent title, not proceeding from the author, but given to the work on account of its value. Though, according to the Index Floren- tinus, it consisted of seven books, only three are cited in the Digest, whence some have conjectured that the last four books are identical with the la-