A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

526 CAECILIANUS.
the Dioscuri (Cic. pro Scaur. 2. ~~ 45, 46, with
the commentary of Asconius), which point to L.
Dalmaticus as her father. She was first married
to M. Aemilius Scaurus, consul in 115, by whom
she had three children, the eldest of whom was
the M. Scaurus defended by Cicero (Cic. 1. c. pro
Sest. 47; Plut. Sull. 33, Pomp. 9; Plin. H. N.
xxxvi. 15. s. 24. ~ 8), and afterwards to the dictator
Sulla, who always treated her with the greatest
respect. When she fled from Cinna and Carbo in
Italy to her husband's camp before Athens, she
was insulted from the walls of the city by Aristion
and the Athenians, for which they paid dearly at
the capture of the city. She fell ill in 81, during
the celebration of Sulla's triumphal feast; and as
her recovery was hopeless, Sulla for religious
reasons sent her a bill of divorce, and had her removed from his house, but honoured her memory
by a splendid funeral. (Plut. Sull. 6, 13, 22, 35.)
She purchased a great deal of the property confiscated in the proscriptions. (Plin. 1. c.)
6. The wife of P. Lentulus Spinther the younger,
whose father was consul in B. c. 57. She was a woman of loose character, and intrigued with Dolabella,
Cicero's son-in-law (Cic. ad Att. xi. 23), and also,
as it appears, with Aesopus, the son of the actor.
(Hor. Serm. ii. 3. 239.) She was divorced by her
husband in 45. (Cic. ad Alt. xii. 52, xiii. 7.) Her
father is not known.
CAECI'LIA GENS, plebeian; for the name of
T. Caecilius in Livy (iv. 7, comp. 6), the patrician
consular tribune in B. c. 444, is a false reading for
T. Cloelius. A member of this gens is mentioned
in history as early as the fifth century B. c.; but
the first of the Caecilii who obtained the consulship
was L. Caecilius Metellus Denter, in 284. The
family of the Metelli became from this time one of
the most distinguished in the state. Like other
Roman families in the later times of the republic,
they traced their origin to a mythical personage,
and pretended that they were descended from Caeculus, the founder of Praeneste [CAECULUS], or
Caecas, the companion of Aeneas. (Festus, s. v.
Caeculus.) The cognomens of this gens under the
republic are BAssus, DENTER, METELLUS, NIGER,
PINNA, RUFUS, of which the Metelli are the best
known: for those whose cognomen is not mentioned, see CAECILIUS.
CAECILIA'NUS, a senator, punished in A. D.
32 for falsely accusing Cotta. (Tac. Ann. vi. 7.)
CAECILIA'NUS, a deacon of the church at
Carthage, -was chosen bishop of the see in A. D.
311, upon the death of the African primate, Mensurius. The validity of this appointment was impugned by Donatus, stimulated, it is said, by the
malicious intrigues of a woman named Lucilla, upon three grounds: 1. That the election had been
irregular. 2. That the ordination was null and
void, having been performed by Felix, bishop of
Apthunga, a traditor, that is, one of those who, in
obedience to the edicts of Diocletian, had yielded
to the civil power, and delivered up the sacred vessels used in places of worship, and even the Holy
Scriptures. 3. That Caecilian had displayed marked hostility towards the victims of the late persecution. These charges were brought under the consideration of an assembly of seventy Numidian
bishops, who declared the see vacant, and, proceeding to a new election, made choice of Majorinus.
Both parties called upon the praefect Anulinus to
interfere, but were referred by him to the emperor,

CAECILIUS.
and accordingly the rival prelates repaired to Rome,
each attended by ten leading ecclesiastics of his
own faction. The cause was judged by a council
composed of three Gallic and fifteen Italian bishops,
who met on the 2nd of October, 313, and gave
their decree in favour of Caecilian and Felix. An
appeal was lodged with Constantine, who agreed
to summon a second and more numerous council,
which was held at Arles on the 1st of August, 314,
when the decision of the council of Rome was confirmed. The struggle was, however, obstinately
prolonged by fresh complaints on the part of the
Donatists, who, after having been defeated before
various tribunals and commissions to which the
determination of the dispute was delegated by the
supreme government, at length openly refused to
submit, or to acknowledge any authority whatever,
if hostile to their claims. The formidable schism
which was the result of these proceedings is spoken
of more fully under DONATUS. (Optatus, i. 19,
&c.) [W. R.]
CAECILIA'NUS, DOMI'TIUS, an intimate
friend of Thrasea, who informed him of his condemnation by the senate in A. D. 67. (Tac. Ann.
xvi. 34.)
CAECILIA'NUS, MA'GIUS, praetor, falsely
accused of treason in A. D. 21, was acquitted, and
his accusers punished. (Tac. Ainn. iii. 37.)
CAECI'LIUS. 1. Q. CAECILIUS, tribune of
the plebs, B. c. 439. (Liv. iv. 16.)
2. Q. CAECILIUS, a Roman knight, the husband
of Catiline's sister, who had taken no part in public
affairs, was killed by Catiline himself in the time
of Sulla. (Q. Cic. de Petit. Cons. 2; Ascon. in Tog.
Cand. p. 84, ed. Orelli.) This is perhaps the same
Q. Caecilius who is mentioned in connexion with
the trial of P. Gabinius, who was praetor in 89.
(Cic. Divinat. 20.) Zumpt remarks, that he can
hardly have belonged to the noble family of the
Metelli, as Cicero says that he was overborne by
the influence and rank of Piso.
3. Q. CAECILIUS, a Roman knight, a friend of L.
Lucullus, and the uncle of Atticus, acquired a large
fortune by lending money on interest. The old
usurer was of such a crabbed temper, that no one
could put up with him except his nephew Atticus,
who was in consequence adopted by him in his
will, and obtained from him a fortune of ten millions of sesterces. He died in B. c. 57. (Nepos,
Att. 5; Cic. ad Att. i. 1, 12, ii. 19, 20, iii. 20.)
4. T. CAECILIUS, a centurion of the first rank
(primi pili) in the army of Afranius, was killed at
the battle of Ilerda, B. c. 49. (Caes. B. C. i. i. 46.)
L. CAECI'LIUS. We generally find included
among the writings of Lactantius a book divided
into fifty-two chapters, entitled De M1iortibus Persecutorum, containing an outline of the career of
those emperors who displayed active hostility towards
the church, an account of the death of each, together with a sketch of the different persecutions
from Nero to Diocletian. The object of the narrative is to point out that the signal vengeance of
God in every case overtook the enemies of the
faith, and to deduce from this circumstance, from
the preservation of the new religion amidst all the
dangers by which it was surrounded, and all the
attacks by which it was assailed, and from its final
triumph over its foes, an irresistible argument in
favour of its heavenly origin. The work appears
from internal evidence to have been composed after
the victory of Constantine over Maxentius, and