Scanned text contains errors.
Praefecti ur"bi ; de Officio Curatoris Reipublicae ; de Officio Praetoris Tutelaris. All these works were probably written in the time of Caracalla. The work of which we still possess a fragment, under the title " Domitii Ulpiani Fragmenta," was, perhaps, written under Caracalla (xvii. 2) ; and it is generally supposed to be taken from the liber singularis Regularum. There are also excerpts from Regularum Libri septein, which some suppose to have been a second edition of the Regularum liber singularis ; but it may have been a work on a different plan.
Ulpian wrote also libri duo Responsorum ; libri singulares de Sponsalibus ; de Omcio Praefecti Vigilum, de Officio Quaestoris ; and libri sex Opinionum. The time when these worka were written is uncertain.
The Index mentions HavSeKTov $j£A/a Se'/ra, but there is no excerpt from the work in the Digest ; yet there are two excerpts (12. tit. 1. s. 24 ; 40. tit. 12. § 34), from a liber singularis Pandectarum. Accordingly the emendation of Grotius, ej/ for sckcc, in the title in the Florentine Index may be accepted.
The Florentine Index omits the libri duo ad Edictum Aedilium Curulium, the libri ad legem Aeliam Sentiam, of which there were at least four, and the libri singulares de Officio Consularium and Excusationum; and also the notae ad Marcellum (Dig. 9. tit. 2. s. 41) and ad Papinianum (Dig. 3. tit. 5. s. 31. § 2) from which there are no excerpts. We learn from the Vaticana Fragmenta (§90 — 93) that he also wrote a work De Interdictis in four books at least, and a liber singularis de Officio Praetoris Tutelaris ( Vat. Fr. § 232).
Ulpian's style is perspicuous, and presents fewer difficulties than that of many of the Roman jurists who are excerpted in the Digest. Compared with his contemporary, Paulus, he is somewhat diffuse, but this is rather an advantage for us, who have to read the Roman jurists in fragments. The easy expression of Ulpian, and the length of many of the extracts from his works, render the study of his fragments a much easier task than that of such a writer as Papinian. The great legal knowledge, the good sense, and the industry of Ulpian place him among the first of the Roman jurists ; and he has exercised a great influence on the jurisprudence of modern Europe, through the copious extracts from his writings which have been preserved by the compilers of Justinian's Digest.
The fragments entitled " Domitii Ulpiani Fragmenta," or as they are entitled in the Vatican MS. " Tituli ex corpore Ulpiani,1' consist of twenty-nine titles, and are a valuable source for the history of the Roman law. They were first published by Jo. Tilius (du Tillet) Paris, 1549, 8vo. ; and they are printed in the Jurisprudent, &c. of Schulting. The edition of Hugo, Berlin, 1834, 8vo., contains a fac-simile of the Vatican MS. The edition of the Fragmenta, by E. Becking, Bonn, 1836, 12mo. contains also the fragments of the first book of the Institutions of Ulpian, which were discovered by Endlicher in 1835 in the Imperial Library at Vienna ; but they are too meagre to enable us to determine the plan of this Institutional work.
There occurs in Ulpian (Dig. 1. tit. 1. s. 1. § 2, 3, 4. s. 4. s. 6) and in Tryphoninus and Hennoge-nianus a threefold division of law, viewed with respect to its origin —Jus Naturale, Gentium, Civile. In Gaius and other writers there is only a two-
fold division, for Jus Naturale and Jus Gentium in Gaius and those other writers are equivalent. Sa-vigny (System, &c. vol. i. Beylage i.) has explained the meaning of Ulpian's threefold division. The authors of the Institutiones of Justinian have introduced great confusion by first giving Ulpian's threefold division, which they apply to the case of slavery, and then taking the passages of Gaius, Marcianus and Florentimls, in which the twofold division is either expressed or clearly implied. (Inst. 1. tit. 1. § 4; tit. 2. pr. ; tit. 5. pr.) The confusion is completed by their taking a passage of Gaius in which the twofold division occurs, and by the addition of the remark that the Jus Naturale (sicut diximus) is the same as the Jus Gentium. (Inst. 2. tit. 1. § 11.)
It is generally assumed that Ulpian the Tyrian, who is named in the argument to the Deipnoso-phistae of Athenaeus., is the jurist, because he is called the Tyrian ; but the jurist was not a Tyrian. Athenaeus (p. 686, ed. Casaub.) speaks of the happy death of his Ulpian ; but the jurist died a wretched death ; he was murdered by infuriated soldiers. Athenaeus does not call his Ulpian a jurist, and it is clear that he did not consider him one. This assumption leads to a great dea! of confusion, and is totally unfounded. See the article Athenaeus^ " Biographical Dictionary of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge."
Some attempt has been made to prove both that Ulpian and Paulus were very hostile to the Christians. The charge is founded on a passage of Lactantius (Div. Inst. v. 11) ; but it is not certain that the Domitius whom he mentions is Domitius Ulpianus. And if the passage refers to Ulpian, it proves nothing against him. If among the imperial rescripts directed to proconsuls, there were some which imposed penalties on the Christians, a writer de Officio Proconsulis could not omit a part of the law which regulated a proconsul's office, even if the law was severe and cruel. A collection of the statute law of England on religion would not have been complete a few years ago, if it omitted those statutes which contained severe penalties against certain classes of religious persons.
(Puchta, Instit. i. p. 457 ; Zimmern, GesohicJite des Rom,. Privatrechts, i. p. 370 ; Grotius, Vitae Ju~ risconsultorum.} [G. L.]
ULPIANUS (Ov\-inav6s\ the name of three persons mentioned by Suidas.
1. Of gaza, the brother of Isidorus of Pelu-sium, was celebrated for his knowledge of mathematics which he taught at Athens. He lived at the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian aera. Suidas does not mention any works as written by this Ulpianus.
2. Of emesa, a sophist, wrote several works, of which an Art of Rhetoric was one.
3. Of antioch, a sophist, lived in the time of Constantine the Great, and wrote several rhetorical works which are enumerated by Suidas.
The name of Ulpianus is prefixed to extant Commentaries in Greek, on eighteen of the orations of Demosthenes ; and it is usually stated that they were written by Ulpianus of Antioch. But Suidas does not mention these Commentaries at all ; and it is evident that in their present form they are of much later origin. The Commentaries may originally have been written by one of the sophists of the name, either of Emesa or Antioch, but they have received numerous additions