672 JUSTINIANUS- Novum. The Digestum Vettis and Digestum Novum are each again divided into two parts ; the second part of the former beginning with the r2th book ; the second part of the latter with the 45th. The In/ortiatum is divided into three parts, of which the second begins with the 30th book, and the third (strangely enough) with the words ires partes occurring in the middle of a sentence, in Dig. 35, tit. 2. s. 82. The third part of the Infortiatum is hence called Tres Partes. The glossators often use the name Infortiatum for the first two parts of fhe second volume, e. g. Infortiatum cum Tribus Partihus ; and sometimes the Tres Partes are attached to the Digestum Novum. In order to ex- plain these peculiarities, many conjectures have been hazarded. It is most probable that the division owes its origin partly to accident ; that the Di- gestum Vetus first came to the knowledge of the earliest glossators ; that they were next furnished with the Digestum Novum ; then with the '/'res Partes, which they added to the Digestum Novum; and that then they got the Infortiatum., so called, perhaps, from its being forced in between the others ; and that finally, in order to equalize the size of the volumes, they attached the Tres Partes to the Infortiatum. The common opinion is that the Infortiatum derived its name from having been reinforced by the Tres Partes. The editions of the Digest, with reference to the character of their text, may be divided into three classes, the Florentine, the vulgate, and the mixed. Politianus and Bologninus had both care- fully collated the Florentine manuscript, but no edition represented the Florentine text before the year A. d. 1553, when the beautiful and celebrated edition of Laelius Taureliius (who, out of paternal affection, allowed his son Franciscus to name him- self as the editor) was published at Florence. This edition is the basis of that given by Gebauer and Spangenberg in their Corpus Juris Civilis, and these editors had the advantage of referring to the later collation of Brenkmann. The vulgate editions have no existing standard text to refer to. The ideal standard is the text formed by the glossators, as revised by Accursius. Their number is immense. The first known edition ^ the Digestum Fetus was printed by Henricus Ck rn (fol. Perusiae, 1476), although Montfaucon (Bibl. MSS. p. 157) mentions the existence of an edition of 1473, of the first and second parts of the Digest. The first edition of the Infortiatum is that of Piicher (fol. Rom. 1475), and the first Digestum Novum was printed by Piicher (fol. Rom. 1476"). In the early vulgate editions the Greek passages of. the original are given for the most part in an old Latin translation, and the inscriptions prefixed to the extracts, and referring to the work and the author, are either im- perfect or wanting. Of the mixed editions, the earliest is that which was edited by Baublommius (Paris, 1523, 1524), with the aid of the collation of Politianus, but the most celebrated is that of Haloander (4to, Nuremb. 1529), published with- out the gloss. Haloander was, himself, a daring and adventurous critic, and made much use of the conjectural emendations of Budaeus and Alciatus. The commentators upon the Digest and upon separate portions of it are extremely numerous. Among the most useful are Duarenus (Opera, Luc. J 765), Cujacius, Ant. Faber {Rationalia in Pan- dectas, Lugd. 1659—1663), Donellus, Ant. Mat- thaeus {De Criminibus, Commeniixrius ad Lib. 47 et JUSTINIANUS. 48 Dig.), Bynkershoek, Noodt. The commentariea of Voet and Pothier are well known in this country. The voluminous Meditationes in Pandectas of Ley- serus, and the still more voluminous German Er- Vduterungen of Gllick, with the continuations of Miihlenbruch and Reichardt, are interesting, as showing the construction put upon the law of the Digest, in cases that occur in modern practice. One of the most valuable works upon the Digest is Ant. Schulting's Notae ad Digesta^ cum animad- versionibus Nic. SmaUenberg., 7 vol. 8vo. Lug. Bat. 1804 — 1835. Here the reader will find ample references to the work where the difficulties of the text are best explained. The Pandectenrecht of Thibaut and the Doctnna Pandectarum of Miih- lenbruch are not commentaries on the Digest, but are systematic expositions of the civil law, as it exists in Germany at this day. In Brenkmann's Historia Pandectarum will be found a full account of the early state of the con- troversy relating to the history of the Florentine manuscript. The writings of Augustinus, Grandi, Tanucci, Guadagni, Schwartz, and others, who have signalised themselves in this field, are referred to in Walch's note on Eckhard's Enneiieutica Juris, § 74 ; and the researches of Savigny on the same subject will be found in the second and third volumes of his " History of the Roman Law in the Middle Ages." For detailed information as to editions of the Digest and Commentaries on that work, Spangenberg's Einleitung, and Beck's Pro- dromus, may be consulted with advantage. The earliest manuscript containing a portion of the Constitutionum Codex is a palimpsest in the Chapter House at Verona, and two of the 10th century have been lately discovered by Blume at Pistoia and Monte Casino. In the early editions the first nine books are separated from the other three, which, relating principally to the public law of the Roman empire, were often inapplicable in practice under a different government. Hence, by the glossators, the name Codex is given exclusively to the first nine books ; while the remainder are designated by the name Tres Libri. At first the inscriptiones and subscriptiones of the constitutions were almost always omitted, and the Greek con- stitutions were wanting. Haloander considerably improved the text, and was followed by Russardus. Cujas, Augustinus, and Contius, were of service in restoring to their places the omitted constitutions (leges resiitutae). Leunclavius (1575), Charondas (1575), Pacius (1580), Dionysius Gothofredus (1583), Petrus and Franciscus Pithoeus {Obs. ad Cod. Par. fol. 1689), all contributed to the criticism and restoration of the text ; and in more modem times, Biener, Witte, and the brothers Heimbach, have similarly distinguished themselves. The first edition of the first nine books was printed by P. SchoyfFer (fol, Mogunt. 1475) ; and the Tres Libri first appeared (along with the No- vells and the Libri Feudorum) at Rome (fol. 1476). The first edition of the twelve books was given by Haloander (fol. Noremb. 1530). Cujas and Wissenbach are among the best com- mentators on the Code. The commentaries of the latter comprise the first seven books (in lib. iv. prior. 4to. Franeq. 1660 ; in lib. v. et vi. ib. 1664 { in lib. mi. ib. 1664). For further particulars as to the other editions and commentators, reference may be made to Span- genberg's Eirdeituny, Beck's Prodroinus, Bieiier's I
