3. C. LIVIUS M. AEMILIANI F. M. N. DRUSUS, was consul in B. C. 147 with P. Cornelius Scipio Africanus. Of his father nothing is known, but it may be inferred with much probability that M. Drusus Aemilianus belonged to the Aemilia gens, and was adopted by some M. Livius Drusus.
It is possible, however, that M. Livius Drusus, the grandfather, had by different wives two sons named Marcus, and that one of them was the son of Aemilia, and was called, from his mother, Aemilianus. (Dict. of Ant.
p. 641, s. v. Nomen.
There was a Roman jurist, named C. Livius Drusus, who has, by many writers, been identified with the subject of the present article. Cicero (Tusc. Qu.
5.38) mentions Drusus the jurist before mentioning Cn. Aufidius, and speaks of Drusus as from tradition (accepimus
), whereas he remembered having seen Aufidius.
The jurist Drusus, in his old age, when deprived of sight, continued to give advice to the crowds who used to throng his house for the purpose of consulting him. Hence it has been rather hastily inferred, that Drusus the jurist was anterior to Aufidius, and was never seen by Cicero, and could not have been the son of the Drusus who was consul in B. C. 147. Others are disposed to identify the jurist with the son, No. 5, and there is certainly no absurdity in supposing the son of one who was consul in B. C. 147 to have died at an advanced age before Cicero (born B. C. 106) happened to meet him, or was old enough to remember him. Seeing, however, that Cicero was an active and inquisitive student at 16, and considering the inferences as to age that may be collected from the years when No. 4 and No. 6, the brother and nephew of No. 5, held offices, the argument founded upon Tusc. Qu.
5.38 seems to be rather in favour of identifying the jurist with our present No. 3; but, in truth, there are not sufficient data to decide the question. (Rutilius, Vitae JCtorum
19; Guil. Grotius, de Vit. JCtorum,
The jurist, whether father or son, composed works of great use to students of law (V. Max. 8.7
), although his name is not mentioned by Pomponius in the fragment de Origine Juris.
There is a passage in the Digest (19
. tit. 1. s. 37.1), where Celsus cites and approves an opinion, in which Sex. Aelius and Drusus coincide, to the effect that the seller might bring an equitable action for damages (arbitrium
) against the buyer, to recover the expenses of the keep of a slave, whom the buyer, without due cause, had refused to accept. (Maiansius, ad XXX JCtos.
ii. p. 35.)
Priscian (Ars Gram.
lib. viii. p. 127, ed. Colon. 1528) attributes to Livius
the sentence, " Impubes libripens esse non potest, neque antestari.
" It is probable that the jurist Livius Drusus is here meant, not only from the legal character of the fragment, but because Priscian, whenever he quotes Livius Andronicus or the historian Livy, gives a circumstantial reference to the particular work. (Dirksen, Bruchstücke aus den Schriften der Römischen Juristen,