Scanned text contains errors.
5. The edition of Ant. Augustinus, 8vo. Ilerdae, 1567, at the end of Augustini Constitutionum Grae-carum Codicis Collectio. This edition is reprinted, with additions, in Augustini Opera, vol. ii. pp. 255 —406, fol. Lucae, 1766.
6. Imp. Justiniani Novellae Constitutions, per Julianum, antecessorem Constantinopolitanum, de Cfraeco trandatae. Ex Bibliofheca Petri Pithoei, fol. Basil. 1576.
The last-mentioned editions, 6 and 7, are the best known and the most complete. They contain two short works, called the Dictatum pro Consili-ariis and the Collectio de Tutoribus. These had been previously printed in Pithou's first edition of the Collatio Legum Mosaicarum et Romanarum (entitled Fragmenta quaedam Papiniani, &c. 4to. Paris, 1573). In several manuscripts they are attributed to Julianus ; but Biener, in his Historia Authenticarum Codici Insertarum, 4to. Lips. 1807, has adduced strong arguments to show that Julianus was not the author of them. Their Latinity is far less pure than that of the Epitome. It is not unlikely, however, that these works, as well as the ancient scholia upon the Epitome of Julianus, were written in Grecian Italy during the lifetime of Justinian, who in the Dictatum is twice styled princeps nosier, and in the scholia (ed. Miraei, p. 177) imperator noster. (Savigny, Geschichte, &c., vol. ii. pp. 195—197 ; Biener, in Savigny's Zeit-schrift, vol. v. pp. 338—357.)
A German translation of the Epitome, by D. Justin Gobler, was published anonymously, fol. Frank. 1566.
Zachariae (Anecdota, p. 202, &c.) endeavours to identify Julianus with the author of a much shorter Greek Epitome of the Novells, who is cited in the sources of Graeco-Roman law as Anonymus. Anonymus, like Julianus, seems to have been a professor at Constantinople. Anonymus cites the Novells of Justinian in an order which does not very considerably differ from that of Julianus. Anonymus seems to have been skilled in Latin as well as Greek, and was perhaps the author of an ancient Latin version of the Greek fragments of Modestinus which occur in the Digest. Further, there is strong reason to identify the anonymous with Enantiophanes; and Enantiophanes, like Julianus, was a disciple of Stephanus. [enantio-fHANES.] When Italy, after the invasion of the Lombards in a. d. 568, was rent from the Roman empire, Julianus may have turned to writing in Greek. Mortreueil (Histoire de Droit Byzantin, vol. i. pp. 293—300), who agrees with Zachariae in these conjectures, thinks that Julianus was probably not an authorised expositor of the law, and that none but jurists specially authorised could, without a breach of rule, be cited by name. The conjecture that Julianus and Anonymus were identical is controverted by G. E. Heimbach, in Rich-ter's Kritische Jalirbiiclier for 1839, p. 970.
(Winckler, Opuscula, vol. i. p. 418 ; Biener, Geschichte der Novellen, pp. 70—84.) [J. T. G.]
JULIANUS (*lov\iavos), a physician of Alexandria, a contemporary of Galen, in the second century after Christ. (Gal. Adv. Julian, c. 1. vol. xviii. pt. i. p. 248.) He was a pupil of Apollonius of Cyprus (Gal. De Meth. Med. i. 7, vol. x. p. 5 4),
and belonged to the sect of the Methodici, and was said to have composed forty-eight books against the "Aphorisms" of Hippocrates (Adv. Julian. I. c.). The second of these was directed against the second Aphorism of the first section, and is confuted in a short essay written by Galen with excessive and unjustifiable rudeness and asperity. None of his writings (which were numerous) are still extant. From Galen's mentioning that it was more than twenty years since he had met Julianus at Alex andria (De Meth. Med. p. 53), and that he was then still alive, it will appear that Julianus was living as late as about the year 180 after Christ. (See Littr£'s Hippocrates, vol. i. pp. 103, 114.) [W. A. G.]
JULIANUS, SA'LVIUS, an eminent Roman jurist, who flourished under Hadrian and the An-tonines. Of his private history little is known, and diiferent opinions have been held as to the place of his birth. Many of his biographers (as Rivallius, Val. Forsterus,v Pancirolus, Rutilius, Bertrandus, Guil. Grotius) make him a native of Milan (Insu-ber Mediolanensis), while the majority of more modern writers say that he was born at Hadrume-tum, a Phoenician colony on the coast of Africa. These opposite opinions are both grounded on a passage of Spartianus (Did. Julian, c. 1), where it is asserted that the paternal grandfather of the emperor who ascended the throne after Per-tinax came from Mediolanum, and the maternal grandfather from Hadrumetum. It is well ascertained that Salvius Julianus the jurist was a ma" ternal ancestor of the emperor Didius Julianus, and it is probable that, according to the express testimony of Spartianus (L c.), the jurist was the great-grandfather (proavus) of the emperor, not, as Politianus asserts (Epist. ad Jac. Modestum], the uncle, nor, as Paulus Diaconus (Hist. Misc. x. 20) would make him, the grandfather. Eutropius (viii. 9) hesitates. "Salvius Julianus," says he, "nepos vel, secundum Lampridium, pronepos Salvii Juliani, qui sub Hadriano perpetuum composuit edictum." Zimmern (R. R. G. vol. i. § 91) agrees with Paulus Diaconus. Many mistakes have been committed, from the confusion of the jurist with others of the same name and family. For example, Au-relius Victor, if his text be not interpolated (De Goes* 19), confounds the jurist with the emperor, who, like his ancestor, was distinguished on account of his legal acquirements. And this mistake of Aurelius Victor misled the celebrated Hugo Grotius (Florum Sparsio, p. 78, ed. Arast. 1643). It is therefore historically important to establish correctly the genealogy of the family.
This investigation was undertaken by Casaubon (ad Spartiani Did. Julian. 1, in Historiae Augustae Scriptores), and was subsequently pursued, with the aid of two inscriptions, by Reinesius ( Var. Led. iii. 2, p. 344 ; Gruter. Jnsc. p. xviii. 2, 10, p. 459), who was followed by Christ, ad. Ruperti (Animad. in Enchirid. Pomponii, p. 473, inserted in the useful collection of Uhlus, entitled Opuscula ad Historiam Juris pertinentia, p. 215). The labours of former inquirers were reviewed by Heineccius, whose elaborate researches have explored every source of information concerning the jurist Julianus. We subjoin tables of the genealogy of the family, so far as may be useful to illustrate the relationships of persons with whom the jurist has been confounded. These tables are constructed according to the view which, upcsj