Scanned text contains errors.
single book.' The Digesta, like other works o£ other jurists bearing the same title, appears to have been a system of Roman law, following the arrangement of the Edict, and compiled from the commentators on the text of the Edict. In Julian's Digest, the actual words of the Edict seem to have been inserted and interpreted. The work cited in Dig. 3. tit. 2. s. 1, as Julianus, libro 1° ad Edictum, is perhaps no other than the Digesta of Julianus, but the reading of the Florentine MS. is doubtful, and it is very likely that Ulpianus ought to be substituted for Julianus. In Dig. 1. tit. 3. s. 32, the 94th book of the Digesta is cited, but here there is undoubtedly an error in the reading of Ixxxxiiii. in place of Ixxxiiii. Indeed, L. T. Gronovius asserts that the fourth x in the Florentine manuscript is not from the first hand. The Digesta was annotated by the Proculeian Ulpius Marcellus, one of the very few jurists who seem more disposed, whenever it is practicable, to censure than to praise Julianus ; hence Cujas remarks (Obs. xiii. 35) that there can scarcely be a stronger proof of the correctness of an opinion than the agreement of Marcellus and Julianus. Another critic was found in Mauricianus (Dig. 2. tit. 14. s. 7. § 2, and Dig. 7. tit. 1. s.^25. § 1). Cervidius Scaevola (Dig. 2. tit. 14. s. 54, Dig. 18. tit. 6. s. 10) was a less unfavourable annotator. The fragment in Dig. 4. tit. 2. s. II, is inscribed " Paulus lib. iv. Juliani Digest-orum notat," and there is a similar inscription in Dig. 18. tit. 5. s. 4, but there is no mention in the Florentine Index of any special work of Paulus upon Julianus. There are 376 extracts from the Digesta of Julianus in the Digest of Justinian. In modern times, the celebrated Cujas wrote lectures on the Digesta of Julianus. (Jac. Cujaeii Recitati-ones solemnes ad Salvii Juliani libros Digestorum, Opera, vol. i.)
2. Ad Minicium, or Ex Minicio, or Apud Mini-cium Libri VI. In these various ways is this work named in the Florentine Index and the inscriptions of the Fragments. [fbrox.] This was a commentary upon some work of Minicius Natalis, who lived under Vespasian and Trajan. It appears to follow the arrangement not of the Edict, but of the Libri Juris Civiiis of Sabinus. Of the forty fragments in the Digest, those from the first and second book relate to testaments, bonorum possessiones, legacies, and fidei-commissa; those from the third, to the patria potestas and the power of the do-minus ; those from the fourth, to loans and contracts ; those from the fifth, to marriage, tutela, acquiring pessession, &c.; those from the sixth, to interdicts and procedure. In Dig. 19. tit. 1. s. 11. § 15, Ulpian appears to cite the tenth book, but the reading ought probably to be altered from x to v.
4. De Ambiguitatibus Liber Singularis. From this work there are four extracts in the Digest. It explained the legal sense of ambiguous words, and the rules of interpretation to be applied to obscure expressions in wills and contracts.
Fragmenta Vaticana, §'88. Bertrandus, from a misunderstanding of the expression "tractatu pro-posito " in Cod. 6. tit. 60. s. 5, imagined that he wrote a special treatise, De Dotali Praedio.
(Manage, Amoen. Juris, 24 ; Guil. Grotius, de Vit. Ictorum, ii. 6. § 1 ; Strauchius, Vitae aliquot Ictorum, Num. 1 ; Neuber, Die juristiscfien Klas- siker, pp. 183—208. Above all, Heineccius, de Salvio Juliano, Ictorum sua aetate Coryphaeo, Op. vol. ii. pp. 798—818 ; Historia Edictorum Edicti- que perpetui, ii. 3, Op. vol. vii. sect. 2, pp. 196— 261.) ^ [J. T. G.]
JULIUS, was ordained bishop of Rome, as the successor of Mark, on the 6th • of February, a. d. 337, a short time before the period when the persecution against Athanasius was most fiercely revived in consequence of the permission accorded to him by Constantinus, Constantius, and Constans to quit Treves, where he had been living in exile, and return to Alexandria. Julius, who desired to be considered the arbiter of the dispute, invited both parties to appear before a council summoned to meet at Rome in the month of June, 341, a proposal gladly accepted by Athanasius, but evaded by his opponents. The cause of the former having been fully investigated before this assembly, he and his adherents were declared guiltless of all the crimes with which they had been charged, and were restored to the full exercise of all their rights,—a decision confirmed by the synod of Sar-dica, held a. D. 347, by permission of Constantius at the solicitation of Constans, in the proceedings of which the Arian dignitaries refused to take any share, because the bishops whom they had condemned were not excluded. Throughout the struggle, the prelates of the Western churches, in their eagerness for victory, made many most important admissions with regard to the authority of the Roman see, admissions which were carefully noted, and at a subsequent period turned to the best account. Julius died on the 12th of April, a. D. 352, after having occupied the papal chair for upwards of fifteen years.
Many epistles of this pope connected with the Athanasian controversy have perished ; but two, unquestionably genuine, are still extant, written in Greek, one addressed to the inhabitants of Antioch in 342, the other to the Alexandrians in 349, both preserved in the Apologia contra Arianos of Athanasius. They will be found also in the Epistolae Pontificum Romanorum of Coustant (fol. Par. 1721), p. 350, p. 399, and Append, p. 69, with notes and illustrative pieces ; and in the Bibliotlieca Patrum of Galland, vol. v. (fol. Venet. 1769), p. 3.
The letters Ad Dionysium Alexandrinum ; Ad Docum; Ad jCyrillum Alexandrinum, on topics connected with the Incarnation ; fragments of a Sermo de Homousio, several Decreta, and various other tracts collected in the compilation of Constant, Append, p. 69, all of which have at different periods been ascribed to Julius, are now universally admitted to be the work of other hands, many of them being forgeries by the Eutychians.
(See Du Pin, Ecclesiastical History of the Fourth Century; Schonemann, Biblioth. Patrum Lot. vol. i. cap. 4. § 3 ; Bahr, Gescldcht. der Rom. Littered, Suppl. Band. Ilte Abtheil. § 61.) [W. R.]