'Locke King's Act,' &c.) than a statute edited by Papirius. The ambiguous word publicatam adds to the difficuly. Its most proper meaning is divulged, of something before kept secret. Now it is worth remark that Pomponius makes Publius Papirius the instructor in law of Appius Claudius the Decemvir, proceeding directly afterwards to mention Appius Claudius the great reformer, who made public the Potitian rites[1], and, through his depedent Flavius, the grand pontifical secret of the fasti[2]. May it have been possible that the so-called Papirian law was the work either directly of indirectly of the latter of these two early Claudii, whose true political character is conclusively shewn by Mommsen[3]? If there should be any truth in this suggestion, it is quite conceivable that even the aspiring Gn. Flavius, who dared to let the newer legis actiones come forth under his own name, might yet think it wise to seek an ancient title for the more revered though less important relics of royal times[4]. Zumpt argues from the term lex that there were several subdivisions of the ius Papirianum, to one only of which Servius here refers[5]. Mackeldey considers lex to be used for ius, and the whole work to have been confined to religious matters[6].
The supposition of the former author is very probable, that the Papirian collection, whatever its antecedents or contents, was mainly known to our authorities by the edition of Granius Flaccus, who wrote under Caesar's dictatorship[7]. To this source we should refer the fragment cited by Macrobius as part of the ius Papirianum[8]; and from this rather than from any remains of the original pontifical books, is most probably derived all that we know of regal legislation.
- ↑ Livy, 9. 29.
- ↑ id. 9. 46.
- ↑ See the masterly Appendix to Vol. 1 of his History.
- ↑ Livy, 9. 46. Digest. 1. 2. 2. § 7. Cicero de Orat. 22. i. 41. 186.
- ↑ Zumpt, Criminal-recht, Absch. 1. c. 3 and Anmerkk.
- ↑ Lehrbuch des Römischen Rechts, § 21 Anmerk. f.
- ↑ Paulus in Digest. 50. 16. 144.
- ↑ Macrob. Saturnn. 3. 11. See too Heineccius Antiqq. Prooem. 2. not. e. I scarcely understand Schöll's condemnation of Wesseling, Dirksen and Schwegler, who, he says, attribute this fragment to Granius Flaccus 'without any sufficient reason.' All that can be meant by them is that the passage in question (beginning 'ut in templo' inquit 'Iunonis Populoniae augusta mensa est' is no original document, but the illustration of a comparatively recent writer, who is perhaps more like to have been Granius Flaccus than any one else. See, however, Schöll. Legis XII Tabb. Reliqq. p. 5. n. 3.
A 2
