Scanned text contains errors.
Quaestionum." The titles of the first three of these works require some explanation.
1. The treatise "de Cognitionibus" relates to those causes which were heard, investigated, and decided by the emperor, the governor of a province, or other magistrate, without the intervention of judices. This departure from the ordinary course of the civil law took place, even before Diocletian's general abolition of the ordojudiciorum, sometimes by virtue of the imperial prerogative, and in some cases was regularly practised for the purpose of affording equitable relief where the strict civil law gave no remedy, instead of resorting to the more tortuous system of legal fictions and equitable actions. (Herm. Cannegieter, Observ. Jur.Rom. lib. i. c. 9.)
2. What is meant by " Edictum Monitorium" is by no .means clear. Haubold (de Edictis Moni-toriis ac Brevibus, Lips. 1804), thinks, that monitory edicts are not special writs of notice or summons directed to the parties in the course of a cause, but those general clauses of the edictum perpetuum which relate to the law of procedure, giving actions and other remedies on certain conditions, and therefore, tacitly at least, containing warnings as to the consequences of irregularity or nonfulfilment of the prescribed conditions. The fragments of Callistratus certainly afford much support to this view. Haubold distinguishes the edictum monitorium from the edictum breve, upon which Paulus wrote a treatise. The latter he supposes to consist of those new clauses, which, in process of time, were added as an appendage to the edictum perpetuum, after the main body of it had acquired a constant form.
3. The phrase "de Jure Fisci et Populi™ appears anomalous, but it occurs elsewhere. (See Paulus. Recept. Sent. v. 12.) Lampridius also (Aleoc. Sev. 15) writes, that Alexander Severus "leges de jure populi et fisci moderatas et infmitas (?) sanxit." Probably under the phrase "jus populi" must here be understood the law relating to the aerarium, or to the area publica (which latter, practically as well as theoretically, was at the disposal of the senate) as distinguished from the fiscus, which was the emperor's own, not as res privata, but as property attached to the imperial dignity. (Vopisc. Aurelian. 20.),
The principal commentator on Callistratus is Edm. Merillius, whose Commentarius ad Libros duo Quaestionum Callistrati is inserted in Otto's "Thesaurus," iii. 613-634. A dissertation by And. W. Cramer, de Juvenibus apud Callistratmn JCtum^ appeared at Kiel, 8vo. 1814.
Cujas (in his preface to his Latin translation of the 60th book of the Basilica, reprinted at the beginning of the 7th volume of Fabrot's edition) mentions among the commentators on the Basilica a jurist named Callistratus. Fabricius also supposes the Callistratus of the Basilica to have been different from the Callistratus of the Digest. Sua-rez naturally expresses strong doubts as to the existence of a later Callistratus ; for there are many other asserted duplicate names, as Modestinus, Theophilus, Thalelaeus, Stephanus, Dorotheus, Cyrillus, Theodoras, Isidorus ; but Reiz has shewn, in several instances, that the asserted later commentator, bearing the name of a prior jurist, is a fictitious entity. The name of the prior jurist has perhaps been sometimes attributed to the scholiast who cites him; but we believe it would appear, upon examination^ that the existence of two sets
of jurists of the same names but different dates has gained credit partly from the mendacious inventions and supposititious citations of Nic. Com-nenus Papaclopoli, and partly from a very general misunderstanding of the mode in which the scholia on the Basilica were formed. These scholia were really formed thus : extracts from ancient jurists and antecedent commentators on the collections of Justinian were appended to certain passages of the text of the Basilica which they served to elucidate. These extracts were sometimes interpolated or otherwise altered, and were mingled with glosses posterior to the Basilica. Thus, they were confounded with the latter, and were not unnaturally supposed to be posterior in date to the work which they explained. The determination of the question as to the existence of a duplicate Callistratus may be helped by the following list of the passages in the Basilica (ed. Fabrot), where the name is mentioned. It is taken from Fabr. Bibl. Grace. xii. p. 440, and the parentheses ( ) denote a reference not to the text, but to a Greek scholiast.
"Callistratus JCtus, i. 257, ii. 36,315,512, iii. 206, iv. (263), 292, 358, 507, (568,) 810, 833, v. 10, 734, 778, 788, vi. (158), 436, 468, 490, 677, 680, 702, 703, vii. 439, 515, 537, 564, 585, 628, 687, 710, 715, 783, 803, 827, 833, 836, 837, 869, 871, 888." On reference to these passages, we find nothing to indicate a Graeco-Roman jurist Callistratus.
(Bertrandus, de JurisperitiSj i. c. 27; Aug. Je-nichen, Ep. Singular, de Cattistrato JCto, 4to. Lips. 1742 ; Zimmern. R. R. G. i. § 101; Suarez, Notitia Basilicorum,cd.Po}il. Lips. 1804,§§ 34,41.)[J.T.G.]
CALLISTRATUS, a statuary, of uncertain country, who lived about B. c. 160, at which time the arts revived after a period of decay. (Plin. xxxiv. 8. s. 19.) [W. L]
CALLISTRATUS, DOMI'TIUS (Ao^Vios KaAAurrparos), is mentioned seven times by Ste- phanus of Byzantium, as the author of a work on Heracleia (irepl 'Hpa/cAetas), which consisted of at least seven books. (Steph. Byz. s. v. 'OAi^iTn;.) If, as it appears, he is the same as the one men tioned by Athenaeus (vi. p. 263), he was a disci ple of Aristophanes of Byzantium. (Comp. Schol. ad Aeschyl. Pers. 941, ad Apollon. Rhod. i. 1125, ii. 780 ; Suid. s. v. QiAo^vos.) [L. S.]
CALLISTUS (KaAAto-ros). 1. A contemporary of the emperor Julian, who accompanied his sovereign on his expeditions, and afterwards celebrated his exploits in an epic poem, from which a statement is quoted by Nicephorus. (Hist, Eccles. vi. 34.)
2. Surnamed Syropulus, a Christian author who wrote a learned disputation against the Palamites, which was dedicated to the patriarch Euthymius. (Nic. Commenus, Praenot. Mystag. p. 158.)
3. A monk of mount Athos. During the war between Palaeologus and Cantacuzenus he was sent by the monks to Constantinople to endeavour to restore peace ; but he was ill-treated there by the empress Anna and the patriarch Joannes. About the year a. d. 1354, the emperor Cantacuzenus made Callistus patriarch of Constantinople. The year after, when he was requested by the same emperor to crown his son Matthaeus, Callistus refused to comply with the request and withdrew to a monastery. As he refused to perform his duties as patriarch, Philotheus was appointed in