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

CAECILIUS.
before his quarrel with Licinius, that is to say, between A. D. 312 and 315. The text is corrupt and
mutilated, and the statements which it contains
must be received with a certain degree of caution
in consequence of the declamatory tone in which
they are delivered, and the high colouring and
trimming employed throughout to suit the particular design proposed. But notwithstanding
these drawbacks, the treatise is extremely valuable
on account of the light which it sheds on many
obscure passages of ecclesiastical and civil history,
and is peculiarly famous as containing a contemporary record of the alleged vision of Constantine
before the battle of the Milvian bridge, in consequence of which he ordered the soldiers to engrave
upon their shields the well-known monogram representing the cross together with the initial letters of the name of Christ (c. 44).
This piece is altogether wanting in the earlier
editions of Lactantius, and was first brought to
light by Stephen Baluze, who printed it at Paris
in his Miscellanea (vol. ii., 1679) from a very ancient MS. in the Bibliotheca Colbertina, bearing
simply the inscription LucII CECILII INCIPIT LIBER
AD DONATUM CONFESSOREM DE MORTIBUS PERSECUTORUM. Baluze entertained no doubt that
he had discovered the tract of Lactantius quoted
by Hieronymus as De Persecutione Librum Unum,
an opinion corroborated by the name prefixed
[LACTANTIUS], by the date, by the dedication to
Donatus, apparently the same person with the Donatus addressed in the discourse De Irc Dei, and
by the general resemblance in style and expression,
a series of considerations no one of which would
be in itself conclusive, but which when combined
form a strong chain of circumstantial evidence.
Le Nourry, however, sought to prove that the production in question must be assigned to some
unknown L. Caecilius altogether different from
Lactantius, and published it at Paris in 1710 as
"1 Lucii Cecilii Liber ad Donatum Confessorem
de Mortibus Persecutorum hactenus Lucio Caecilio
Firmiano Lactantio adscriptus, ad Colbertinum
codicem denuo emendatus," to which is prefixed
an elaborate dissertation. His ideas have been
adopted to a certain extent by Pfaff, Walch, Le
Clerc, Lardner, and Gibbon, and controverted by
Heumann and others. Although the question cannot be considered as settled, and indeed does not
admit of being absolutely determined, the best
modern critics seem upon the whole disposed to
acquiesce in the original hypothesis of Baluze.
The most complete edition of the De Mortibus Persecutorum in a separate form, is that
published at Utrecht in 1693, under the inspection
of Bauldri, with a very copious collection of notes,
forming one of the series of Variorum Classics in
8vo. Other editions are enumerated in the account
given of the works of LACTANTIUS. [W. R.]
SEX. CAECILIUS. A Roman jurist of this
name is occasionally cited in the Corpus Juris, and
is suspected by some authors to be distinct from
and earlier than Africanus. [AFRICANus, SEX.
CAECIL1US.] In support of this opinion, not to
mention the corrupt passage of Lampridius (Alec.
Sev. 68), they urge that there is no proof, that the
Sex. Caecilius Africanus to whom Julianus returned
an answer upon a legal question (Dig. 35. tit. 3.
s. 3. ~ 4) was identical with Africanus. He may
have been a private person, and distinct from the
jurists Sex. Caecilius and Africanus. This incon

CAECILIUS. 527
clusive passage is the only connecting link between
Africanus and Sex. Caecilius, for elsewhere in the
Digest the name Africanus always appears alone.
Africanus was probably rather later (say they)
than Julianus, whom he occasionally cites (e. g.
Dig. 12. tit. 6. s. 38; Dig. 19. tit. 1. s. 45, pr.).
On the other hand, Caecilius (they proceed) appears to be anterior to Africanus, for he is cited
by Javolenus (Dig. 24. tit. 1. s. 64), who was the
master of Julianus. (Dig. 40. tit. 2. s. 5.) Again,
Sex. Caecilius is represented by Gellius as conversing with Favorinus, and is spoken of in the
Noctes Atticae as a person deceased. " Sextus
Caecilius, in disciplina juris atque legibus populi
Romani noscendis interpretandisque scientia, usu,
auctoritateque illustri fuit." (Gell. xx. 1, pr.)
Now Favorinus is known to have flourished in the
reign of Hadrian, and Gellius to have completed
the Noctes Atticae before the death of Antoninus
Pius. (A. D. 161.) The passage in Gellius which
would make the conversation take place nearly
700 years after the laws of the Twelve Tables
were enacted, must be, if not a false reading, an
error or exaggeration; for at most little more than
600 years could have elapsed from A. U. c. 300 in
the lifetime of Gellius. If 600 be read for 700,
the scene would be brought at furthest to a period
not far from the commencement (A. D. 138) of the
reign of Antoninus Pius.
These arguments are not sufficient to destroy
the probability arising from Dig. 35. tit. 3. s. 3.
~ 4, that Sex. Caecilius and Africanus are one
person. In Dig. 24. tit. 1. s. 64, some have proposed to read Caelius instead of Caecilius, and thus
get rid of the passage which is the principal ground
for assigning an earlier date to Sex. Caecilius; but
this mode of cutting the knot, though it is assisted
by fair critical analogies, is unnecessary, for Javolenus, as we learn from Capitolinus (Anton. Pius,
12), was living in the reign of Antoninus Pius,
and a contemporary of Javolenus and Julianus
might easily cite the younger, and be cited by the
elder of the two. The pupil in the master's lifetime may have acquired greater authority than the
master.
To assist the inquirer in investigating this question-one of the most difficult and celebrated in
the biography of Roman jurists-we subjoin a list
of the passages in the Corpus Juris where Caecilius
or Caecilius Sextus is cited:--Caecilius: Dig. 15.
tit. 2. s. 1. ~ 7; 21. tit. 1. s. 14. ~ 3 (al. Caelius);
21. tit. 1. s. 14. ~ 10; 24. tit. 1. s. 64; 35. tit. 2.
s. 36. ~ 4; 48. tit. 5. s. 2. ~ 5; Cod. 7. tit. 7. s. 1,
pr. Sex. Caecilius: Dig. 24. tit. 1. s. 2; 33. tit.
9. s. 3. ~ 9 (qu. Sex. Aelius; compare Gell. iv. 1);
35. tit. 1. s. 71, pr.; 40. tit. 9. s. 12. ~ 2; 40.
tit. 9. 12. ~ 6; 48. tit. 5. s. 13. ~ 1.
A jurist of the name Sextus is thrice quoted by
Ulpian in the Digest (29. tit. 5. s. 1. ~ 27; 30.
tit. un. s. 32, pr.; 42. tit. 4. s. 7. ~ 17). Whether
this Sextus be identical with Sex. Caecilius must
be a matter of doubt. There may have been a
Sextus, known, like Gaius, by a single name.
There are, moreover, several jurists with the pTaenomen Sextus named in the Digest, e. g. Sex,
Aelius, Sex. Pedius, Sex. Pomponius. That there
were two jurists named Pomponius has been inferred from Dig. 28. tit. 5. s. 41, where Pomponius
appears to quote Sex. Pomponius. From this and
from the other passages where Sex. Pomponius
is named in full (Dig. 24. tit. 3. s. 44; 29. tit. 2.