Scanned text contains errors.
age. Three works of Charisius are cited in the Digest. Four extracts (Dig. 22. tit. 5. s. 1 ; Dig. 22. tit. 5. s. 21; Dig. 22. tit. 5. s. 25 ; Dig. 48. tit. 18. s. 10) are made from his Liber singularis de Testibus ; one (Dig. 50. tit. 4. s. 18) from his Liber singularis de Muneribus civilibus; and one (Dig. 1. tit. 1. s. un.) from his Liber, singularis de Officio Praefecti praetorio. In the inscription prefixed to the latter passage (Dig. 1. tit. 11. s. un.), he is styled magister libellorum, and Cujas (Obss. vii. 2), probably suspecting that he held office under Constantine, conjectures that he was a Christian. For this conjecture, however, there is no sufficient ground, for, as Hitter has remarked (ad Heineccii Historiam Jur. Rom. § 358), even under Valentinianus the younger, Rome was still for the most part pagan, and men, the most addicted to paganism, held the highest dignities even in the imperial household.
Both the matter and the language of the extracts from Charisius in the Digest mark the declining age of jurisprudence and Latinit3r. The matter betrays the mere compiler. The language is dis figured by barbarisms, e. g. participates, regimen- tum^ incunctabile, munus camelasiae. (Jac. Godefroi, ad Cod. Th&odos. 11. tit. 30. s. 16; Guil. Grot. Vitae Jurisc. ii. 11 ; Chr. Rau, de Aur. Arc. Cha- risio. Vet. Jurisc., 4 to, Lips. 1773; Zimmern, R. R. G.\. § 104.) [J. T. G.]
CHARISIUS, FLA'VIUS SOSI'PATER, a Latin grammarian, author of a treatise in five books, drawn up for the use of his son, entitled Institutiones Grammaticae, which has come down to us in a very imperfect state, a considerable portion of the first and fifth books being entirely wanting, as we at once discover by comparing the table of contents presented in the prooemium with what actually remains. It is a careful compilation from preceding writers upon the same subject, such as Flavius Caper, Velius Longus, Terentius Scau-rus, and above all Comminianus and Julius Ro-manus, from whom whole chapters are cited, and is particularly valuable on account of the number of quotations, apparently very accurate, from lost works. We can detect a close correspondence with many passages in the Ars Grammatica of Diomedes, but Charisius is so scrupulous in referring to his authorities, that we are led to conclude, since he makes no mention of Diomedes, that the latter was the borrower. Comminianus is known to have flourished after Donatus and before Servius [comminianus], therefore Charisius, being mentioned by Priscian, must belong to some period between the middle of the fourth and the end of the fifth centuries. Osann, who has investigated this question with great care, decides that he ought to be placed about the year a. d. 400, in which case he probably enjoyed the advantage of consulting the great libraries of the metropolis, before they were pillaged by the Goths. We gather from his own words that he was a native of Campania, in religion a Christian, by profession a grammarian, following his occupation at Rome. The Editio Princeps of Charisius was published by J. Pierius Cyminius, a pupil of Janus Parrha-sius, who first discovered the work, at Naples, fol. 1532; the second, superintended by G, Fabricius Chemnicensis, was printed by Frobenius at Basle, 8vo., 1551, and contains many corrections and improvements, but likewise many interpolations, since the editor was not assisted by any MS.;
the third, included in the " Grammaticae Latin Auctores Antiqui," of Putschius, Hanov. 4to. 1605, professes to be far more complete and accurate than the preceding, in consequence of the additional matter and various readings obtained from an ex cellent codex, the property of Janus Douza, of which, however, no detailed account is given, and of which no trace now remains. Niebuhr had paved the way for a new edition by collating and making extracts from the Neapolitan MS. origin ally employed by Cyminius, which affords means for greatly purifying and enlarging the text. These materials were promised by Niebuhr to Linde- mann, who, however, in consequence of the death of his friend and the destruction of a portion of his papers by fire, succeeded in obtaining only a copy of Putschius with the various readings of the Neapolitan MS. marked on the margin. These are given in the edition of Charisius, which forms the first part of the fourth volume of the " Corpus Grammaticorum Latinorum Veterum," Lips. 4to. 1840. (Funccius, De inerti ac decrepita Linguae Latinae Senectute^c, iv. § 11; Osann, Beitraye zur Griech. und Rom. Litteraturgesch. vol. ii. p. 319 ; Lersch, Die Sprackphilosophie der Alien, vol. i. p. 163.) [W. R.]
CIIARITON (XapVco*/) of Aphrodisias, a town of Caria, is the name by which one of the Greek erotic prose writers calls himself; but the name is probably feigned (from x®Pls an^ 'A^/ooS/rT]), as the time and position of the author certainly are. He represents himself as the secretary (yiroypafyzvs) of the orator Athenagoras, evidently referring to the Syracusan orator mentioned by Thucydides (vi. 35, 36) as the political opponent of Hermo-crates. The daughter of Hermocrates is the heroine of Chariton's work, which is a romance, in eight books, on the Loves of Chaereas and Callir-rhoe, under the following title, Xapirowos 3A<ppodi-t&v Trept Xcupecw /ca/ KaXXippo-fjV eoamKcoy j' \6yoi tj. The work begins with the marriage of the heroine, which is presently followed by her burial. She comes to life again in the tomb, and is carried off by robbers. After various adventures, she is restored to Chaereas. The incidents are natural and pleasing, and the style simple ; but the work as a whole is reckoned inferior to those of Achilles Tatius, Heliodorus, Longus, and Xenophon of Ephesus. Nothing is known respecting the real life or the time of the author. The critics place him variously between the fifth and ninth centuries after Christ. The general opinion is, that he was the latest of the erotic prose writers, except perhaps Xenophon of Ephesus.
There is only one known MS. of the work, from which it was printed by James Philip D'Orville, with a Latin version and notes by Reiske, in 3 vols. 4to. Amst. 1750. The commentary of D'Orville is esteemed one of the best on any ancient author. It was reprinted, with additional notes by Beck, 1 vol. 8vo. Lips. 1783. A very beautiful edition of the text was printed at Venice, 1812, 4to.
The book has been translated into German by Heyne, Leipz. 1753, and Schneider, Leipz. 1807; into French by Larcher, Par. 1763 (reprinted in the Bibliotheque des Romans Grecs, Par. 1797). and Fallet, 1775 and 1784 ; into Italian by M. A. Giacomelli, Rom. 1752, and others; into English by Becket and de Hondt, 1764. [P. S.]