Theodosian Code, Volume 2

ζ) XLVIII. XLVIIII = Valent. 11 — 22.
η) L = Maiorian. 9.
Aᶜ) I—XII = Brev. Valent. 14 — 18 — 19 — 21 — 23 — 25 — 1, 3 — 27 — 31 — 32 — 33 — 35.

There are, therefore, ᵃ) and ᵇ) ɑ. γ. ε Theodosian, and ᵇ) β. δ. ζ and ᶜ) Valentinian. Hence it appears that the organizer correctly separated the Theodosian and Valentinian [laws] in the novels of the Breviary, and attributed the rest placed outside the Breviary, along with the ninth Majorian [novel], all to Theodosius.

With these things explained, the arrangement of the Oxford book O is clearly understood. For William of Malmesbury, who copied the book, as he intended to attribute his constitutions mixed together in the collection to both emperors, orders those series indicated above as follows:

Brev. Theod.: two letters and I—VIIII = Aᵃ).
Extra Brev. Theod.
X—XVI = Aᵇ) ɑ.
XVII = Valent. 8, incorrectly placed among the Theodosians.
XVIII—XXIII = Aᵇ) γ.
XXIIII. XXV = Aᵇ) ε.
Extra Brev. Valent.
I = Valent. 26, 'On the confirmation of the laws of the divine Theod. Aug.', placed before the other Valentinians (see Aᵇ) d).
II—VIIII = Aᵇ) β (Valent. 9 — 12 — 17 — 16 — 20 — 24 — 10 — 13).
X—XVIII (number XVI repeated) = Aᵇ) δ (Valent. 2, 2 — 30 [missing in lat.] — 28 — 29 — 3 — 34 — 4 — 5 — 6 — 7).
XVIIII. XX = Aᵇ) ζ.
Brev. Valent.
XXI—XXXII = Aᶜ).
XXXIII = Valent. 36, placed at the end, as in the first collection.

Since this is the case, the novels of Theodosius II, which exist in the codex of the Majorian corpus I, with the exception of nov. 17, 2, are all read in the third collection in the preserved order, except that those received into the Breviary are separated from the rest, and novels 4—17, 1 are placed at the end.

The novels of Valentinian III in the third collection are found to be increased by four constitutions, numbered in our edition 2, 2 — 6, 3 — 16 (an epitome of which, derived from some codex of the first collection, is offered by Phillipps. 1735) — 34: they descend without doubt from a fuller codex of the first collection than I. Conversely, nov. 1, 1, which I preserved in its entirety, and 1, 2, the first part of which exists in the same codex, are absent from the third collection; furthermore, 2, 3, which the Cujacian editions exhibit, and 2, 4, of which Cujas preserved the first part and I the last, are missing; nov. 15 is not held except in the Cujacian editions. The Breviary preserved novel 1, 3. Novel 1, 2 (the final part) and 2, 1 (the whole) are missing in all books.

Of the novels of Majorian, the ninth is found only in the manuscripts of the third collection—the Fulda, the lost Pithou with A, and O—but it bears the number 'L' [50] because it is placed among the Theodosians. It is likely, therefore, that in the archetype of this collection, the novel was prescribed as 'L. On adulteries of the divine Majorian'. While the Fulda book scarcely changes this rubric ('l. adulteries [sic] of the divine Majorian'), in the Pithou manuscript, the letter 'l' was wrongly understood, and it is written 'll. [= laws] novels on adulteries of the divine Majorian' (sic). From this, Peter Pithou the younger incorrectly gathered that there were several Majorian novels 'on adulteries' (in the Pithou edition of 1571, p. 43), a claim which Haenelius (nov. constitutions p. 327/28) already refuted. That the first six Majorian novels existed not only in the mutilated archetype of codex I, but also in the mutilated book itself from which all manuscripts of the third collection depend, is shown by both the books of Σ and the truncated manuscripts Berlin lat. quart. 150 (which we call θ) and Warsaw n. 480 (which we call ψ).