REFERENCE DEPARTMENT eee 


ACCESSION 


Q@v13.32 Ee98¢e 190019 


NOT TO BE TAKEN FROM THE LIBRARY 


FORM NO. 37 5M-9-22 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
In 2022 with funding from 
Kahle/Austin Foundation 


httos://archive.org/details/oxyrhynchuspapyr0015gren 


THE 
OPV IRITY NCH US  PAPYRI 
PART XV 


GRENFELL AND HUNT 


EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY 


hier: 


Ory RAY NCHWS, PAPY RI 


PART XV 


EDITED WITH TRANSLATIONS AND NOTES 


BY 


BERNARD P. GRENEELL, D.Litt. 


PROFESSOR OF PAPYROLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, AND FELLOW OF QUEEN’S COLLEGE 
FELLOW OF THE BRITISH ACADEMY 


AND ete 


ARTUR SUNT Die 
PROFESSOR OF PAPYROLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, AND FELLOW OF QUEEN’S COLLEGE 
FELLOW OF THE BRITISH ACADEMY 


WITH FIVE PLATES 


LONDON 
SOLD AT 
THE OFFICES OF THE EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY, 13 TavisrocKk SQUARE, W.C. 1 
AND 503 TREMONT TEMPLE, Boston, Mass., U.S.A. 


BERNARD QUARITCH, 11 GRArron STREET, NEw BOND STREET, W. I 
HUMPHREY MILFORD, AMEN CorNER, E.C. 4, AND 29 WEST 32ND STREET, NEW York, U.S.A. 
C. F. CLAY, FETTER LANE, E.C. 4 
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., 68-74 CaRTER LANE, E.C. 4 
GEORGE SALBY, 65 GREAT RUSSELL STREET, W.C. 1 


1922 


All rights reserved 


PRINTED IN ENGLAND 
AT THE OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 
BY FREDERICK HALL 


49 O\3,32 
} & 2% = 
190049 


1d a oe nv Ow) 


Owinc to the large compass of the Byzantine documents intended 
for this volume, it was found advisable to reserve them for a separate 
Part (XVI), which will probably be issued in the course of 1922; the 
present instalment therefore, like Parts XI and XIII, consists of 
literary texts alone. The more extensive of these, including 1787-90, 
1792, 1788, 1800, 1805-6, 1808, 1810, belong mainly to the second large 
literary find of 1905-6; others proceed from the work of different 
seasons, and a few, of which the most important are 1786 and 1793, were 
acquired by purchase on the site of Oxyrhynchus by Professor Grenfell 
during his visit to Egypt in the winter of 1919—20. 

That unfortunately remains my colleague’s chief contribution to 
the following pages: a few of the minor texts were originally copied by 
him, and he was able to revise my copies of a few others; the rest of 
the work involved in the preparation of this book has fallen to myself— 
a fact which accounts for some delay in its appearance and for many 
defects in its execution. 

I am again indebted to Mr. E. Lobel for much assistance with the 
new classical texts, and especially the fragments of Lesbian poetry. 
Valuable suggestions at an early stage were received from Professor 
Gilbert Murray, and Professor A. E. Housman kindly sent notes on 
a few passages in the poetical pieces. My thanks are also due to 
Professor H. Stuart Jones for a transcript in modern form of the 
musical notation of the early Christian hymn, No. 1786, and to some 
other scholars for help on special points, which is acknowledged: in 
connexion with the texts concerned. 


A Ras ose EE UIN Te 


QUEEN’s COLLEGE, OxrorD, 
DECEMBER, 1921. 


PREFACE 


GON ens lS 


List or Prates 
TasBLe or Papyri : : ; f 
Note on tHe Metuop oF De orn AND bere OF re ans 


088 


TEXTS 


THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS . 

New CrassicaL FRAGMENTS 

FRAGMENTS OF ExTANT CLASSICAL ee 
Minor Lirezrary FRAGMENTS . 


INDICES 


1787-9 (SappHo and ALCAEUs) 
OruEer New Texts. 
Passaces Discussep 


Ss Oe AGES 


1778 Fols. 1, 2, recto, 1786, 1818 recto 

1767 Fis. 1,2; 9, 1788 Fr. 15 

1780LF Tr, 1, Colwi, brs. 2s 3017 90) irs. le Col. il, 1791 
1806 Col. iv, 1808 Cols. i-iii, 1810 PAv?. i, Fr. 15 

1814 verso . 


| 


. 7 at the end. 


231 
235 
249 


1778. 
1779. 


1780. 


1781. 
1782. 
1783. 


1784. 


1785. 


1786. 


1787. 


1788. 
1789. 
1790. 


1791. 


1792. 
1793. 
1794. 


1795. 
1796. 


1797. 
1798. 
1799. 
1800. 


1801. 


1802. 
1803. 
1804. 
1805. 
1806. 
1807. 
1808. 
1809. 


1810. 


TABLE OF (PAP aa) 


Aristides, Apology ae i}; 
Psalm i 

St. John’s Can viii . 

St. John’s Gospel xvi . 
Didache i-iii ; 
Hermas, Paséor, Mand. ix 
Constantinopolitan Creed 
Homilies? . 


Christian Hymn with Musical Wemon (Plate Gok 


Sappho, Book iv (Plate IT) . 

Alcaeus ? (Plate IT) 

Alcaeus (Plate ITI) 

Ibycus (Plate III) 

Pindar, Paean (Plate HI) 

Pindar, Paean? . ; 

Callimachus, Soszdz eee 

Poem in Hexameters . 

Acrostic Epigrams : 
Hexameter Poem on Egyptian Botany 
Antiphon Sophistes, Wepi AAnOeias, i? . 
Anonymous work on Alexander the Great 
Oratorical Fragment . 

Miscellaneous Biographies . 

Glossary 

Glossary 

Glossary 

Ac€ets “Pyroptkat 2 

Sophocles, Zrachiniae . 

Theocritus, Zdyl/ xxii (Plate IV). 
Aratus, Atoonpeta F 

Plato, Republic viii (Plate Iv ) 

Plato, Phaedo 


Demosthenes, Olyn/h. i-iii, Philii, De PaalPiae 1V) 


CENTURY 
4th 

4th 

4th 

3rd 

Late 4th 
Early 4th 
5th 

5th 

Late 3rd 
3rd ; 
Late 2nd 
Ist 

ESt Bac, 
1st 

end  . 
Late 1st 
Late 2nd 
Ist 

end 
Early 3rd 
Late 2nd 
end 


Late 2nd or early 3r 


Ist 


Late 2nd or early 3 


6th 

3rd 

Late 2nd 
Late 1st 
2nd. =e 
Late 2nd 
Early 2nd 
Early 2nd 


IIo 
TEER 
116 
11g 
122 
135 
137 
150 
155 
163 
166 
172 
180 
184 
186 
1gt 
194 


1811. 
1812. 
1813. 


1814. 


1815. 
1816. 
1817. 


1818. 
1819. 
1820. 
1821. 
1822. 
1823. 
1824. 
1825. 
1826. 
1827. 
1828. 


Demosthenes, C. Zimocratem 

Isocrates, Ad Demonicum 

Codex Theodosianus vii (Plate 1) : 
Index to Codex Iustinianus, First Edition (Plate v) 


Homer, /izad i 


Homer, Ziad xv. 

Homer, Jad xvii, xviii 

Homer, /iad xxii, xxiii 

Homer, Odyssey x—xii. 

Homer, Odyssey xviii . 
Hexameters or Elegiacs ; 
Hexameter Poem on Astronomy . 
Fragment of a Tragedy 
Fragment of a Comedy 
Fragment of a Comedy 


Romance ?. 


Oratorical Fragment . 
Ethical Treatise . 


TABLE Of PAPYRI 


CENTURY 
3rd 
5th or 6th 
Early 6th 
A.D. §29-535 
3rd 
3rd 
6th 
5th or 6th 
2nd 
6th or 7th 
3rd 
2nd 
1SC B.C. 
grd 
5th 
Late 3rd or 4th 
3rd 
3rd 


NOTE ON THE METHOD OF PUBLICATION AND 
LIST OF “ABBREVIADIONS 


THE general method followed in this volume is the same as in preceding 
Parts. 1787-90 and 1792-4 are printed in dual form, a literal transcript being 
accompanied by a reconstruction in modern style. In the remaining texts the 
originals are reproduced except for separation of words, capital initials in proper 
names, some expansions of abbreviations, and supplements of lacunae. Additions 
or corrections by the hand of the body of the text are in small thin type, those 
by a different hand in thick type. Square brackets [ ] indicate a lacuna, round 
brackets ( ) the resolution of a symbol or abbreviation, angular brackets ¢ ) 
a departure from the text of the original, braces { } a superfluous letter or letters, 
double square brackets [] ]] a deletion in the original. Dots within brackets 
represent the approximate number of letters lost or deleted ; dots outside brackets 
indicate mutilated or otherwise illegible letters. Letters with dots underneath 
them are to be regarded as doubtful. Heavy Arabic numerals refer to the 
texts of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri in this volume and Parts I-XIV; ordinary 
numerals to lines, small Roman numerals to columns. The terms recto and verso 
when used of vellum fragments refer to the upper and under sides of the leaf, 
where these are determinable. 


P. Amh. = The Amherst Papyri, Vols. I-II, by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 

P. Grenf. = Greek Papyri, Series I-II, by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 

P. Halle = Dikaiomata, &c., von der Graeca Halensis. 

P. Oxy. = The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts I-XIV, by B. P. Grenfell and 
root unit. 

P. Rylands = Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the Rylands Library, Vol. I, by 
HA Sk Unt; 


P.S.1. = Papiri della Societa italiana, Vols. I-VI, by G. Vitelli and others. 


I. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 


1778. ARISTIDES, Afology. 


12X14:6 cm. Fourth century. Plate I 
(Fols. 1-2, recto). 


THE following small but vatuable fragment of the Apology of Aristides in the 
original Greek is contained on the upper part of a leaf from a papyrus book, 
adjoined by a narrow strip from the other leaf of the sheet. How the sheet was 
folded, i.e. what was the relative order of the two leaves, and what was the 
position of the sheet in the quire cannot be determined; since, however, the 
strip from the second leaf is inscribed with but a single word, these questions are 
of slight importance. The handwriting is a handsome well-formed uncial, which 
though somewhat smaller and more compact has a decided general resemblance 
to that of 847, a leaf from a vellum MS. of St. John’s Gospel, and like that 
specimen may be assigned with probability to the fourth century. No punctua- 
tion occurs. eds is contracted in the usual way, but av@pwmos and apparently 
ovpavds were written out in full (Il. 32, 37). Some inaccuracies may be detected 
inthe text, which seems to have been of mediocre quality ; cf. nn. on ll. 26 sqq. 
and 33. 

The Afology is a recent addition to early Christian literature. The first step 
towards its recovery was made in 1878 with the publication of an Armenian 
translation of the first few chapters from two MSS. in the Lazarist monastery at 
Venice. This was followed eleven years later by Dr. Rendel Harris’s find 
at Sinai of a complete version in Syriac; and shortly afterwards Dr. Armitage 
Robinson, who had seen: Dr. Harris’s work in proof, recognized that the Apology 
was actually already extant in Greek, having been embedded in the early 
mediaeval romance, the History of Barlaam and Fosaphat. The outcome of 
these fortunate discoveries was the joint edition by the two scholars of the 
Apology of Aristides in Texts and Studies, I. i. (1891), containing the Syriac 

B 


ep 


2 THE OXYRAYNCHUS PAPYERE 


text with an English translation, Latin and English versions of the Armenian 
fragment, and the Greek text from Barlaam and Fosaphat. 

The question then presented itself, how far the Greek of Barlaam and 
Fosaphat could be regarded as representing the zpsissima verba of Aristides. 
That certain modifications had been introduced by the author of the romance was 
evident, e.g. a passage near the end in which the Christians were defended from 
certain charges made against them by early enemies was naturally discarded as 
out of date. But there remained considerable divergences which could not 
be easily accounted for. The Syriac has a number of repetitions and details 
not found in the Greek, the difference in total length approximating to the ratio 
of 3 to 2. Was this the result of expansion or compression? Had the Syriac 
translator amplified the original or the redactor of the Greek cut it down? The 
latter explanation, as Dr. Armitage Robinson observed in discussing this 
problem (of. czt. pp. 71 sqq.), seemed @ priorz the more probable, but careful 
consideration of the opening passage in which the testimony of the Armenian 
fragment was also available showed that the faults were by no means all on one 
side. While in the Greek there could here be traced one serious modification with 
a consequent displacement, one considerable abbreviation, and an added phrase 
in a Christological passage, the Syriac was found to be often loose and inaccurate, 
dropping some phrases and inserting others, sometimes with a distorting effect. 
Dr. Robinson’s general conclusion was ‘ that the Greek will, as a rule, give us the 
actual words of Aristides, except in the very few places in which modification 
was obviously needed. Where the Syriac presents us with matter which has no 
counterpart whatever in the Greek, we shall hesitate to pronounce that the Greek 
is defective, unless we are able to suggest a good reason for the omission, or 
to authenticate the Syriac from some external source.’ Harnack agreed that the 
Greek was the truer witness, but proposed to account for the variations of the 
Syriac and Armenian by postulating as the basis of these a later Greek 
‘Uberarbeitung ’, which they in turn had still further transformed (Gesch. der 
alichristiichen Litt. i. 1. 97)—a needlessly complicated hypothesis. Again, 
R. Raabe, in his commentary in Texte und Untersuchungen, ix. 1, has no high 


. opinion of the accuracy of the Syriac translator. On the other hand, Dr. Rendel 


Harris in a recent essay seeks to show that Celsus, in replying to Aristides, used 
a text of the Apology which was in close agreement with the Syriac (Bulletin 
of the Fohn Rylands Library, vi, pp. 163 sqq.). 

With the welcome discovery of what is undoubtedly a fragment of the 
original text, the problem now reaches a new phase. The relation of the Greek 
of the fragment (P) to that of Barlaam and Fosaphat (BJ) and to the Syriac 
version is discussed in detail in the notes below on ll. 8 sqq- and 26 sqq. In 


1778. + THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 3 


general it may be said that P, as might be expected, holds an intermediate 
position. Though open to criticism especially for its verbosity, to which much 
of its comparative length is due, the Syriac has at any rate some of the 
advantages claimed for it by Dr. Rendel Harris, in places reproducing the 
original more faithfully than BJ and retaining words and phrases which the 
Greek redactor discarded. The latter often preserves the language of Aristides 
with much fidelity, but he treats the original with some freedom, making such 
short cuts and readjustments as seemed suitable for his purpose, and not con- 
fining himself to ‘necessary modifications’, On the whole then the present 
discovery appears to place the Syriac version, if not in the flattering position 
suggested by Dr. Harris, yet ina more favourable light than that accorded to it 
by Dr. Armitage Robinson and by Raabe (of. ciz., pp. 37-8). If the prudent 
critic must still ‘hesitate to pronounce that the Greek is defective’, he should 
exercise a corresponding caution in condemning matter peculiar to the Syriac. 
With P as guide, the task of sifting the wheat from the chaff may now be 
undertaken with a better chance of success. 


Fol. 1, recto. Plate I. 


6 lines lost 


7 ] ptarpots 
Fol. 2, recto. Plate I. Fol. 2, verso. 
(ovres THhv Taly] ave v. [onlujeltov ets onpecoy Vi. 
pov mvony Oy eva Kad nuepav pepope 
10 [mAavolvrar gavepa voy OuvvovTa TE Kat 
[y]ap €o7ly npiy ort avaTtedXovTa Tov 
[SoluAever eTEpw TrOTE 30 Oeppawe ta Bra 
[uev yap] a[vlgee mozle de _oTa Kal Ta huTa els 
Anyel ovKovy avay THY XpnoLv Tov av 
15 [kalfera vrro Tivos Opwrev ene Kar[| pe 
ale hes Silene cee plopous exlovTa ple 
erenare ova... [.Je 35 Ta Tov Aolirwv acre 
= lege winavee JA..-[]-- pov kat ¢[AaTTovla 
4 lines lost ovTa Tou [ovpavov 
fee ate cos SEN sexe! mo|Av avg[ec de Kar 
fe pe TOM “TOY pecouTat [kar exAupis 


4 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Bi ake ae POU TIA 4o €xel Kat plndepiay 
avTokpa|Teray €XoV 


Ta dto ov rievopicras 
[roy nAvoy [ecvae Oy 


4. piapos is apparently a misspelling for prapos, This word does not occur in the 
extant Greek, and to what context it should be referred is not clear. There are several 
references to pollution in ch, iv and the preceding part of ch, v in connexion with I and 
Bop, — pupoperny, aipwaor povevopevov puatverat, pratverar kat POeiperat, aipaot povvdpevoy kai eis 
rdvrev tov dxabdprov mriow ayduevov. The original form of one of these phrases may have 
included the adjective piapos, though there is nothing in the Syriac suggesting this. 
Possibly, again, the word was used later in reference to the Greek gods or their 
human imitators; cf. viii e’s (Ga perapophoupévous émt movnpais kat aloxpais mpageow, and 
ros pi) Svtas mpocayopevovres Oeots, Kata Tas emOupias ait@y Tas movnpas, iva Tovrous ourmydpous 
eyovres THs Kakias poryevoow, dprafaow, povevwor kal Ta Tdvdewa ToL@ow. As mentioned in the 
introd., the relative positions of Fol. 1 and Fol. 2 are indeterminate. 

8 sqq. The extant Greek of this passage is as follows: of S€ vouigovres thy Tay avepwv 
mony eivar Oedv mravavra, avepov yap ot ort Sovdever érépw, Kal xdpiv TGV avOparav KatTecKEva- 
rat id Tod Ocod mpos petaywyiy mroiwy Kal cvyxopidas Tv owTiKaY, Kal ets owas avToy xpetas* 
avéer Te Kal Ayes Kat’ emitayny Beov. 0 ov vevdputoTat THY TY dvesay VOY etvat Beav, GA’ épyov 
Geov. 

The Syriac is: ‘ And again those who have thought concerning the blasts of winds that 
it is God, these also have erred: and this is evident to us, that these winds are subject 
to another, since sometimes their blast is increased and sometimes it is diminished and 
ceases, according to the commandment of him who subjects them. Since for the sake of 
man they were created by God, in order that they might fulfil the needs of trees and fruits 
and seeds, and that they might transport ships upon the sea; those ships which bring 
to men their necessary things from a place where they are found to a place where they are 
not found ; and furnish the different parts of the world. Since then this wind is sometimes 
increased and sometimes diminished, there is one place in which it does good and another 
where it does harm, according to the nod of him who rules it; and even men are able by 
means of well-known instruments to catch and coerce it that it may fulfil for them the 
necessities which they demand of it; and over itself it has no power at all; wherefore it is 
not possible that winds should be called gods, but a work of God.’ 

In ll, 8-12 the agreement with the extant Greek is close, the only discrepancies being 
O(cd)v etvae for eivar Gear, avepd for davepdy, and the addition of jy after éorw. In the 
Syriac the simple directness of the original is obscured by unnecessary verbiage: ‘ con- 
cerning the blast of winds, that it... these also...and this is evident... that these 
winds...’ On the other hand ‘to us’, which the extant Greek has dropped after ‘ evident ’, 
is correctly retained ; and the following clause ‘ Since sometimes their blast is increased and 
sometimes it is diminished and ceases’ apart from the redundancy of ‘their blast’ and ‘and 
ceases’, corresponds faithfully to the original, whereas the extant Greek parts company, 
omitting the dependent clause ‘and passing on to the next sentence. At this point, how- 
ever, the Syriac too becomes faulty. After ‘and ceases’ it proceeds ‘according to the 
commandment of him who subjects them’ (cf. kar’ érayjy Oeod in the extant Greek) ; 
whereas the original has an inferential sentence, apparently ‘ therefore it is under some com- 
pulsion...’. Further detailed comparison is precluded by the unfortunate mutilation of the 


1778. THEOLOGICAL. FRAGMENTS 5 


lower part of this page; but the scanty remains appear to support the fuller version of 
the Syriac as against the much shorter extant Greek, though no definite correspondence can 
be made out. 


g. 6(e0)v: so also the Syriac, ‘that it is God’. The extant Greek has 6edy both here 
and elsewhere where the subject is feminine. 

13- a[v](c: the identification of the exiguous traces is confirmed by the collocation 
avger re kal Anyes farther on in BJ. Whether that is to be regarded as a transposition 
of more pev ... Anye is doubtful, for the Syriac repeats ‘ Since then this wind is sometimes 
increased and sometimes diminished’ at the corresponding point, and it is therefore quite 
possible that there was a similar repetition in the original. In that case BJ omitted zoré 
ev... Ayyet here, and did not merely transfer it to a later position. 

14. avay{kalferac: cf. the references in BJ to dvéykn in connexion with other elements, 
&C., €. . IV Kuvetrar S€ otpavds Kar’ dvdyknv, Vi 6p@pev yap abroy (SC. rév AALov) Kivovpevoy Kar’ 
dvdyxnv, and the application of the same phrase to the moon and to man. To read avay[«n] 
eota. is less suitable, since of the doubtful letters before ra: the second is the taller of the 
two, whereas if they are eo the reverse would be expected. The top of the supposed 
¢is not unlike that of (ovres in 1. 8. 

16. The very scanty remains are not inconsistent with avée again, though the repetition 
of this word seems unlikely. Of the three letters printed the « is the most probable; 
the other two are very uncertain. 

17. The first » is very doubtful. The next letter is apparently , «, or , which 
is followed by »v or x. 

18. The doubtful A may be pz. 

26 sqq. The opening sentence of this section may safely be restored from BJ on the 
analogy of Il. 8-10 o1 dS vopigovres Tov ndtov O{€o)v eva thavevtrat, BY continues: dpapmev yap 
avrov Kuvovpevoy Kata avdykny kat tpemdpevov Kai petaBaivovta dd onpelov eis onpuetov, Svvovta 
kal avatéAXovra, Tov Geppaivery Ta hurd Kai Bracra eis xphow trav avOpwrer, err S€ Kal peprrpov 
exovra peta Tov AowmGy dotépwy, Kal eAdrtova dvta Tod ovpavod ToXU, Kal ekAElmovTa TOD Partds, 
kai pndepiay adtoxpdrevav Exovra. 1d od verdpiorar Tov HALov eivat Oedv, AAN Epyov Oeod. 

The Syriac is: ‘So too those have erred who have thought concerning the sun that he 
is God. For lo! we see him, that by the necessity of another he is moved and turned and 
runs his course ; and he proceeds from degree to degree, rising and setting every day, 
in order that he may warm the shoots of plants and shrubs and may bring forth in the air 
which is mingled with him every herb which is on the earth. And in calculation the sun 
has a part with the rest of the stars in his course, and although he is one in his nature he is 
mixed with many parts, according to the advantage of the needs of men: and that not 
according to his own will, but:according to the will of Him that ruleth him. Wherefore it 
is not possible that the sun should be God but a work of God.’ 

Here the Greek of BJ is close to that of the papyrus throughout, especially when one 
or two necessary corrections have been made. qepopevoy of |. 2 has disappeared and is more 
likely to have been simply dropped than to be represented by peraBaivovra, since the Syriac 
has an equivalent for this as well as for hepopevoy. «a0 nuepav, which the Syriac connects, 
probably rightly, with dvvorvra re kat avareddovra, has also been discarded. The article has 
been omitted with Bdacrad and xpjow (confirmed against the v.1. xpeiav), and Bdaora and 
urd are transposed; which was the correct order may be questioned, but the papyrus 
seems on the whole to be supported by the Syriac. pepsopous (1. 33) was read by Boissonade, 
with some MSS. (pepirpdv W, divistonem Lat.; cf. Syr.). In Il. 38-40 avég[ec be. Kar] pecourae 
[kau exAupers (?)] exer is represented by kai exdeirovta Tov dewréds, and this or something like it 
is probably to be regarded as the correct text, since the indicatives avge, &c., interrupt the 
participial construction, which is carried on in I], 40-1 by kat p[ndeucar] avroxpa[recay exor|ra ; 


6 THE OXYRHYNCAUS PAPYRI 


and though waxing and waning might be interpreted as referring to varying degrees of heat 
they are not terms ordinarily associated with the sun. It is then likely, as Dr. Rendel 
Harris suggests, that avée, xrd., has been brought in here from the succeeding paragraph 
concerning the moon, where BJ has avfavopevny re kai pecouperny kal ekdeles Eyoucay. 

The Syriac has preserved Pepopevoy and xa npepay, but in other respects does not com- 
pare favourably with BJ. ‘Shoots of plants and shrubs’ is a pointless change, and ‘ may 
bring forth ... earth’ and ‘in his course ... parts’ are gratuitous amplifications. é 
is omitted, and the insertion of ‘in calculation’ is anything but a gain in clearness. 
‘According to the advantage of the needs of men’ is displaced, and is besides a clumsy 
translation of es thy xpnow tev avOpwrev, though less verbose than ‘and that not according 
to his own will’, &c., as an equivalent of xac pndepiav avroxparecay exovra, The reference to 
eclipse has disappeared. Raabe, /.c., was rightly critical of this passage. 

33- emer is Obviously an error for ere (arising not improbably out of an intermediate 
misspelling eres), and BJ’s addition of 8€ may well be also right. There would be room for 
one letter between xa and the following », but none seems admissible and perhaps there was 


a flaw in the papyrus. 
38-40. Cf n. on Il. 26 sqq.. exdeupers is assured by the parallel there quoted from BJ 


and would not overload the lacuna if exdupes or exAcyus were written, as is quite possible. 


1779. PSALM i. 
11-5 X 7-7 cm. Fourth century. 


A complete leaf from a papyrus codex, containing three verses of the first 
Psalm. The informal hand, which may be assigned to the fourth century, 
is rather large, and disproportionate to the size of the leaf, so that only 17 lines 
are got into the two pages. Stops in the high position are used, and a rough 
breathing occurs in 1. 4. There is no stichometric division of the verses, as there 
was e.g. in 1226, a fragment from a still earlier book. A variant known from an 
eleventh-century cursive receives support ; cf. 1226, &c. 


Recto. Verso. 
ovx’ ovrals] ies 10 [o]rycovra a 
o aceBets oeBers ev 
ovxX oUTws Kpioets ovde a 
add n ws yxvous HapT@Aot ev 
5 oly] expurrec BovAn Sdixatwv 
0 avepos 15 OTL yiv@oKeEl 6 
ato mpoowrou KS odov Sixat 


Ts yns: Ova @v Kat odos 


TOUTO OVK ava 


on 


4. @s xvous: SO the cursive 281 (Laur. v. 18, r1th cent.) ; 0 xvovs other MSS. 
10. aveBas: so 8’AR4 and many cursives, including 281. o1 aveBes others. 


1780. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 7 


1780. ST. JOHN’S GOSPEL viii. 


25°6X 8 cm. Fourth century. 


A leaf from a papyrus codex, complete at the top and bottom, but torn 
vertically, so that about half of the lines are missing on both pages. The hand- 
writing, a handsome specimen of the ‘biblical’ type, large and upright, is unlikely 
to be later than the fourthcentury. A pause is sometimes marked by an increase 
of the interval before the following letter, otherwise punctuation is absent. The 
contractions usual in theological texts occur. A pagination figure, 74, has been 
entered (by the original scribe, apparently) in the left-hand corner of the recto ; 
a comparison of the capacity of this leaf with the amount of the preceding part of 
the Gospel shows that the number refers to the page, not to the leaf, and it will 
follow either that the pages were numbered alternately in the series 2, 4, 6, &c., 
or that they were numbered consecutively at the top left corner. Here then may 
well be another example of the system of alternate pagination which appeared 
probable in 1011 ; cf. Part VIII, pp. 18-19. The text, like that of 847, shows a 
general agreement with the Codex Vaticanus. 


Verso. *_= Recto; 
08 
[kat eumrev] avTots viii. 14 Kat plaptuper Tepe 
[kay eyo plaptupe enov [o meuwas pe 
[wept euavlrov n pap 7p _—-€[Aeyov_ ovr 19 
[rupia pov] adrnOns avtm [mov eoTw o 
5 [eortv ort olida mo 30 Wp oly amekpiOn 
[ev rAOolv Kat mov Ins ou[re ene oda 
[uray viues de Te ou7[€ Tov pa pov 
[ove otdatle moder ec ene [ndetTe Kat 
[epxopuat] 1 mov uma Tov mpla fov av 
10 [ym vpes|] Kata TH 15 35 Serre tTlavra Ta pn 20 
[capka Kpl|ivere eyo pata edalAnoev ev 
[ov Kptvjw ovdeva To yafol puraktw 
[kat eav x]pivw de 16 ddackely ev Tw 
[eyo 7 Kpliows n enn iepo Kale ovdes 
15 [aAdnOivn eloviv o _ 40 «emlacely avTov o 


[rt povos] ovx e Tt oum[w eAnrAvOer 


8 | THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


[mt aA ey]@ Kai oO n wpa alvTouv ecmev 21 
[weprpas] we mp ouvv ma\Aty autos 
[kat ev Tw] vopw 17 ey@ uT[ayo kat (7 
20 [de Tw vpleTepw 45 THoETE ple Kal Ev 
[yeypamrjae o7t dv T™ GpapT[la vywv 
[0 ava@v n) paprupt atrobavlecbe o 
[a adnOns] cori € 18 Tov eyw |vTayo 
[yo expt] o paptu vpets ov [duvvacbe 
25 [pwv amept| e“avTov 50 eAOey = e{Aeyor_ ovr 22 


3-5. 7 pap[rupia pou] adnOns [eorw: this is the order of B. adnOns eorw n paprupta pov 
W(estcott)-H(ort) and T(extus)-R(eceptus) with most MSS. 

7. de: so BD, W-H, T-R; om. ®. 

g. 7: so BD, W-H; xa &, T-R, 

13. It is clear that the papyrus did not read «ay with & for kav eav. 

15. Considerations of space are indecisive between ady6wn (BD, W-H) and adnéys (&, 
T-R), but in view of the general agreement of the papyrus with B, ady@uy is the more 
probable reading. 

16. There would be no room for eyo after poves (D). 

18. n(ar)yp: so NCB, T-R; om. N*D. W-H print rarjp in brackets. 

21. [yeyparr|a : so BD, T-R, W-H 5 yeypappevor cot &. 

31. In(cov)s: so BD, W-H; o I(no0v)s &, T-R. SD further add xa ecmev (eur. 
avTous Dy: 

34. The omission of pou with & would make the line unduly short. 

av nbecre: So B, W-H; ndecre av 8, T-R. 

36. The line is sufficiently filled without the addition of o I(ya0v)s, which is read after 
eXaknoev by some of the later uncials and T-R ; cf. 1. 43, n. 

42. eumev: S& edeyev, which, though unlikely, can hardly be excluded; cf. 1. 15, n. 

43. The papyrus evidently agreed with the best MSS, in omitting o I(nco0v)s which is 
added after avros by T-R with inferior authority. 

47. o|rov: the variant xac omov is possible though not probable. 


1781. ST. JOHN’S GOSPEL xvi. 


24-5 X 6-8 cm. ; Third century. 


The following leaf from a papyrus codex evidently belonged to the same MS. 
from which 208 (now Brit. Mus. 782), a sheet containing portions of chaps. i and 
xx of St. John’s Gospel, was derived. The character of the hand (both in the 
main text, which is written in an upright rather heavy script of semi-literary type, 
and in the corrections), length of lines and columns, method of punctuation 
by short blank spaces, occasional use of the rough breathing, and internal textual 
evidence, all combine in proving an identical origin. 208 was assigned to the 


1781. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 9 


period between A.D. 200 and 300 (Part II, p. 2), and there is no reason to ques- 
tion that attribution, though the codex is perhaps more likely to date from the 
second half of the century than the first. With regard to the corrections and 
additions, which are in a small but very similar hand, the further specimens now 
available rather suggest that these are due to a diorthotes rather than to the 
original scribe, though they must in any case be practically contemporary. 

In consideration of the interesting character of the text of 208, the recovery 
of a further fragment of this ancient book, the earliest copy so far known of 
the Gospel, is very fortunate. In 208 a tendency was noted to agreement with 
the Codex Sinaiticus, but this is not apparent in 1781, so far as variants peculiar to 
that MS. are concerned, though where § is supported by one or more of the other 
chief uncials the papyrus is usually in harmony. Coincidences with 8A are found 
in ll. 47, 48, with 8D in 1. 12, with SBD in ll. 13, 20, with SBC n 1l. 34-5. There 
is one agreement with B against the other main authorities (1. 13, omission of the 
article with “Incots ; cf. 1. 12, n.), one with BD (1. 31) and BCD (1. 34). An 
omission of eyw in 1. 47 is peculiar to the papyrus, and in |. 44 there was 
apparently another omission which has hitherto depended on slight authority. 
The tendency to brevity, especially in omitting unnecessary pronouns, con- 
junctions, &c., is an outstanding feature of both 208 and 1781; cf. 208 Fol. 1 
verso. 5,10, 11, recto, 12, 22, Fol. 2 recto. 19, verso. 2, 5$qq., 12, 14-15, 17,1781. 6, 
12, 13, 20, 26, 38, 44, 47, 50-1, and nn. 


Recto. 
[ore ek Tov e“ov Anuwerlar Kat avay [ xvi. 14 
[yeAce viv mavTa oola Exel O Tp € 15 


[ma eorty Ova TovTo eLmoly ott ek Tov 


[euov AapBavea kal avialyyeAce ve 


5 [meckpov Kal ovKETL Bewpetre Be Kat 16 
[wadw pecpov kjat oeobe [we ecrraly : 17 
[ovv... €k Tay plabnT@y avrov 


an adAndous Tt] €oTLy TovTO Oo XE 
[yee nervy petkpov Kau ov} Oewpeifr]e pe 
to [kat madty petkpoy Kat owlerGe pe Kae for] 
[urayw mpos Tov] m™pa €deyor ouv 18 
[Te €oTLy TovTo| petkpov ovK oda 
[mev TL Aadet elyv@ Ins ort nOedov 19 


[aurov epwrav| Kat elev auz[olts 


10 


15 


20 


25 


3° 


35 


40 


45 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


[wept Tovrov (nrlerte pet adAndroly 
[ore eurov peixpjov Kat ov Oewpei(re 


[me Kat Tadiy pekpo\ Kae overe pe [. 


[apnv apnv rAcy]o Uyew ore K|Aalv 
[cere kat Opnynolere ters 0 de 
[koopos yapnoer]at wpe Allollurnby 
[cecOe adda n AvT]|n Upov eis Xapay 


Uv 
[yevnoetat n yuv|n oTay TiKTn dot 


[ny exet ore ndAOev] 7 wpa avTns 
foray de yevynon To m\atdiov ovke 
[Te pynpovever Tys OAjeuple|ws oc 
[a Tnv xapay ort eyevy|nOn avOpe 
[ 


ToS €l§ Tov Kogpoyv] Kat UpeLs ovy 


Verso. 


vuy pev [AuTNY exETE Tad d€ 
opouat vplas Kat xapnoeTat vpwy 

n Kapdta [kat THY xapav vuwy ov 
des apet [ap] v[u@v Kat ev exewvy 
™ npepla] «(ple [ovK epwrncere 

ovdev apnv alunv Aeyo vuew 

av tt attn[alnre [tov Tpa doce vue 
ev Tw ovlo|ua7[t pou aireiTe Kat 
Anpweobe ifva n xapa vpov 7 
memAnpol[u|ev]n jravta ev mapor 
pais AEALa]Anka [vue EpxeTas 

w@pa OTe ovKET[L Ev Tapotmiais ra 
Anow Upev adlAa mappnota rept 
Tov 7p$ amay' yeAw vpev ev € 

Kelvyn Tn npepa [ev T@ ovomaTi 

pov atitnoecde [kat ov Acy@ vpew 
[o]rt eyw epwrnolw tov mpa avTos 
[ylap o mp giree vylas ore vmets. ene 
TrepiAnkate Kat [wemioTEevKaTE 


20 


2I 


22 


23 


24 


25 


26 


1781. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS II 


ort mapa Ou e€ndO[ov e€nAOov 28 
Tapa Tov mps Kat eAnAvOa es Tov 
Koo Lov Tahki aldinut Tov Koopov 
5O Kal Topevopat mpo[s Tov mpa rE 29 
auTw 


youvow ot plaOnrat avrov We voy ev 

Tappnota AladrEls Kat Trapoipiay ov 

Oeuiay Aleyers vey odaper 30 
ort otdas malvTa Kat ov xpeltay exeLs 


€v Tw Ovopart [pov ews apTL OUk nTHOATE OVdEV Ev 23-4 
t[® ovopart pou atretTe Kat 


3. etroly: to read evrov vu|y with &¢ and others would overload the lacuna. 

4. Whether AapBaver (BDI>, W-H) or An(u)Wera: (SCA, T-R) was written cannot be 
determined. 

5. On the basis of the preceding and following lines, ovcere (RBDetIb, W-H) suits the 
length of the lacuna better than ov (A, T-R). 

6. T-R with Alb and others adds or: eyw vmayw mpos tov matepa after oerbe pe. 

7. The lacuna is of the same length as that at the beginning of |. 6 and shorter by only 
one letter than that inl. 8. Perhaps there was some deletion, e. g. the scribe might have 
begun to write mpos adAndous after ovy, which is the order of K. There is no authority for 
the insertion of reves before ex. 

9. Oewper |e : owerbe D. 

10. The reading after op|eode is very uncertain ; there was perhaps a correction. 

11. The lacuna would not admit of eyo vrayo (D, T-R).  edeyov ovv is omitted in D*. 

12. tovro] so N*D*; for rovro o Aeyes (NCABD?I>, W-H, T-R) there is clearly no room. 
That ro was omitted before ] pepo (so B, W-H) is probable but hardly certain. 

13. Either re Aadec or o Aeyet (D*) is required in the lacuna; om. B. 

elyro: so SBD, W-H; eyrw ow A, T-R, eyvw de and kat eyvw being other variants. 

In(cov)s: so B, W-H; o K(naov)s RAD, T-R. 

nOehov : nueAdov &. 

14. D’s reading erepwrnoa rept tovrov is obviously excluded. A omits avrois. 

20. ves: SONBD, W-H: wpyers de A, T-R. v of Avan has been converted from an 
t, i,€. AowrnOn was first written. The correction is perhaps due to the original scribe. 
Cite 22: 

21. Whether adda or add was written cannot be ascertained. 

22. The corrector has substituted v for o. without cancelling the original spelling, for 
which cf, ]. 20. 

23. wpa. nuepa D. 

25. Adrjelejos: Aumns D. 

26. avOpa|mos: 0 avOpwros N*. 

27. ovv: &* places this after vuv pev. 

28. vuy pev [Aumny : so NBC*D, W-H ; Avanv pew vv ACS, T-R. 

31. ape: so BD*, W-H ; atpec NACD’, T-R. 

33. ors may have been added at the end of the line as in ND? (T-R). 

34- av Te is the reading of BCD; W-H; oO av , oO Tt av A, oga (e)av some later MSS., 


12 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


34-5. Sworn... ofo|uar[t pov: sO NBC*, W-H; ev Tw ovop, pov, doce yaw ACD, 


35. The first sentence of verse 24, ews apri... ovopart pov, Was originally omitted 
owing to homoeoteleuton. This mistake has been corrected at the foot of the page, where 
l. 35 has been rewritten in a smaller and probably different hand with the missing words in- 
corporated. A symbol calling attention to the correction was presumably entered in the 
right-hand margin. 

38. The line is sufficiently filled without adda (AC*D*) before epxerar, especially as 
a short blank space may well have been left after vpew. 

39. ore: omov N*, 

. 41. anayyeAo: so NABC*D, W-H ; avayyero Corl ahe 

42-3. alt, €v T@ OVO". LOU R. . , ; 

44. The lacuna here is of practically the same length as in the immediately preceding 
and following lines, and it seems clear that either roy x(are)pa Or mept yp Was omitted, and 
for the latter omission there is some authority (the cursive 36, //ala MSS. bee, Cyril Acta 49, 
Aug. De 7rin.). D adds pou after marepa, and this may have been written, though not 
required. ’ 

45. Whether eye (ABCD) or pe ($8) was written cannot be decided. 

47. OTL: ore eyo MSS. 

A(co)v: SO N*A ; Tov Geov C* and others, T-R; rov marpos BC*D, W-H. 

48. mapa: so NAC’, T-R; «x BC*, W-H. D omits efndéov . . . marpos. 

e[AnAvda: nAdov D. 

50-1. de]youow, the original reading, is that of &BC*D*, W-H; avr, which has been 
inserted above the line, is added by AC*D?, T-R. 

51. ev may have been omitted, with A. 


1782. DIDACHE i-iii. 


Fol. 1 5:8x5,Fol.2 5:7x4:8. Late fourth century. 


Two vellum leaves, containing a few verses from the first three chapters of 
the A.daxi) TOv 86d5exa atooTCAwY, Supposed by some to be of Egyptian origin and 
now making its appearance for the first time in an Egyptian manuscript. The 
leaves, which are a good deal worn and discoloured, are detached, but originally 
may well have formed a single sheet, since the two interior edges follow roughly 
the same contour. In that case the quire included five sheets at least, eight 
leaves being required for the matter intervening between Fol. 1 verso and Fol. 2 
recto, and would be more likely to have consisted of the unusual number of eight 
sheets, for the 33 verses lost before Fol. 1 recto would occupy only three more 
leaves. | This latter inference would of course be invalidated if the Didache was 
preceded by some other treatise, but the supposition of a large total number of 
leaves does not well accord with their proportions, which are remarkably small— 
smaller even than in 840. The book to which they belonged was one of the 
miniature volumes which seem to have been often preferred for theological works, 
“though not limited to that class of literature (cf. e.g. P. Rylands I. 28). It may 


1782. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 13 


perhaps date from the fourth century rather than the fifth. The hand is a 
medium-sized informal uncial, at its best somewhat similar to that e.g. of 1618 
and the Cairo Menander; on Fol. 1 recto it is markedly larger.and more irregular 
than on the other three pages. That the writer was a person of no great culture 
is clear also from his spelling and division of words (e.g. ertOvpermy, vulers). vv at 
the end of a line is commonly represented by a horizontal stroke above the pre- 
ceding vowel, and the usual abbreviation of mvedua occurs. There is no punctua- 
tion, but the end of a chapter is marked by a row of wedge-shaped signs followed 
by horizontal dashes. The apparent absence of pagination may be due to the 
poor state of preservation of the upper margins. 

The Didache has been preserved in a single MS. (M) of the middle of 
the eleventh century, discovered at Constantinople by Bryennios and edited 
by him in 1883. It is supposed by Harnack to have taken its present shape 
about the middle of the second century (Lehre der zwolf Apostel, pp. 159 sqq.), 
but to have an older text, based ultimately on Jewish elements, behind it 
(cf. Gesch. d. altchristl. Litt, 1. i. 86-7); and he finds indications of an earlier 
recension in the Kavoves éxxAnotaotikol Tév ayiwy amocrdédwy, a treatise called 
by Bickell, its first editor, the ‘ Apostolische Kirchenordnung’ and by Hilgenfeld 
(NV. T. extra Canonem) ‘ Duae Viae vel Iudicium Petri’, as well as in an old Latin 
translation of Didache i-vi (the ‘Two Ways’) edited in 1900 by J. Schlecht, in 
both of which Did. i. 3-ii. 1 is omitted, though that omission may be otherwise 
explained (Gebhardt, af. Harnack, Lehre d. zwilf Apost., p. 281). But that 
in the fourth century at any rate the Didache stood practically as found in M was 
sufficiently indicated by the Apostolic Constitutions, a compilation generally 
supposed to have originated in Syria or Palestine between about A. D. 340 and 380, 
in the seventh book of which the Dzdache has been largely drawn upon. 

In the existing paucity of evidence for the text, any addition is welcome, and 
a comparison of these early Oxyrhynchus fragments with M and with the 
corresponding passages of the Afostolic Constitutions is an interesting study. 
Separated as they are in date by some eight centuries, it is hardly surprising 
to find several variations between M and 1782, which offers one or two 
remarkable new readings. Of these the most striking is the insertion between 
the third and fourth verses of chap. i of the words dxove ti ce det ToLodvTa Scat 
cov Td Tvebpa. mpatov mdvTwv, which form a transition to the abrupt anéyou of the 
accepted text. Other noteworthy variants are the omission of kal cwpyariKdy (Kal 
coopixav Const. Apost.) in i.4,and of amd mavtds in iii. 1, the insertion of tpdyparos 
in iii. 1, and the substitution of émeidi ddyyet for ddnyet yap in iii. 2. How should 
these novelties be appraised? The two last are not very convincing, and 
anrdoyov for améxov in i. 4 certainly does not inspire confidence. On the other 


* 


14 THE “OXYRAYNCHUS PARYRI 


hand the omission of a second adjective in i. 4 renders. more intelligible the 
strange variation there between M and Const. Apost., and dxove,.. mavtwv does 
not look like an interpolation. Perhaps, then, Harnack’s statement (of. cit. 
p. 172) that there is not the slightest trace of any alteration in the Dzdache during 
the two centuries which elapsed between its composition and embodiment in the 
Apostolic Constitutions may now need some qualification, With regard to the 
relation of M to Const. Apost., though in cases of divergence the former has 
generally the support of 1782, there are two unexpected agreements with the 
latter in i. 3, rotro for 76 adrd and guAcire for ayanare. Similarly, one coincidence 
occurs with Kav. éxxAno. (Hilgenfeld’s Duae Viae) against M and Const. Apost., 
év 6€ for d€ dv, which may be correct; a reading which Hilgenfeld ventured 
to adopt from that source is not, however, confirmed. 5 

In the appended collation the texts as given by Harnack, of. cz¢., have been 
utilized, together with H. Lietzmann’s convenient edition of the Didache (K leine 
Texte 6), in which a reprint of Schlecht’s Latin version is added to the apparatus. 


Boke. 

Recto. Verso. 
ovxt Kal TH € ee Opov axov Reed 
Ovn Tovro € Tt-o€ O€t Trot 
Tolovely vp 10 ovvTa gwcat 
es de gitar gov To 7va tiple 

5 € Tous ploouv TOY TAavT@ 

Tas vas Kal amocxov Tw 
ovx efeTE €X capke[t|k@v € 


15 mlOvpewr 


Folk, 

Recto, Verso. 
edey§ers MEPL @ il, 7. [amo] mavros 
de mpocevger ous T Pay LaTos 
de ayamnoets 25 Wovnpov Kat 
viep Thv Wux7 opoLov avTou 

20 GOV >>>>>>>>>>>> bn yewwou opyet ili, 2 

SS dos emetdn ody 
TEKVOV Lou ill, I yet 1 Opyn mpos 


pevye azo 3° Tov ovoy 


1782. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 15 


2. tovro: 7d a’té M3; cf. Matt. v. 47 odx) Kal of €Ouixol 1d airs movotaw ; On the other 
hand Const. Apost. (vii. 1) have xai yap of Oxo rodro mototvaw, and so Justin, Aol. i. 15 (with 
mépvot instead of é@vol). 

4. ptreire: So Const. Apost.; dyanare M, and so also Matt. v. 44, Luke vi. 27, Gospel 
according to the Egyptians, and Justin, Afol. i. 15. 

7. ovx «fere exOpor is also the order of M. ¢x@. ovy &&. Const. Apost. 

8-12 akove . , .mavrw(v): there is nothing corresponding to these words in M or Const. 
Apost., which pass abruptly to dmwéyou rév capkuxov xtdX. For cwoa ro mr{evj.)a cf. e.'g. 
1 Cor. v. 5 va 76 mvedpa cwO ev tH Hepa Tod Kupiov. 

13. anocyov: dméxov M, Const. Apost. The present tense is expected. 

14. cape e|kov ertOvpetov : capxik@v Kai coparikav enO, M, cape. kat Koopixdv ém6. Const, 
Apost. koopixdv was adopted by Bryennios and preferred by Harnack (pp. 5, 172) who 
however hesitated to accept it in his text; cf. Titus ii. 12 dpynoduevor ... ras Koopixds 
emOupias, 2 Clem, xvii. 3 pu) dvrimapeAk@peda amd tay Koopixav émO, The variation in M and 
Const. Apost. as to the second epithet may perhaps be regarded as an argument for its omis- 
sion with 1782, which has also in its favour the analogy of 1 Pet. ii. 11 dyamnroi, mapakaho. . . 
améxecOat Tav capKikav em, 

16. edey€es: soM. The &, though little of it remains, is practically certain, and ods dé 
erenoets, Which Hilgenfeld inserted after edeyers from Kay, “ékxd., is therefore excluded. 
Const, Apost. (vii. 5), like M, make no reference to éAcos, but are here rather compressed. 

16-17. o(v) de: SO Kav, éxxd.: 6€ dv M. Both M and Kay», exer. have mpocevén. 

23. amo was inadvertently repeated in turning over the page. There seem to be traces 
of a bracket after the o and of a horizontal dash underneath the three superfluous letters, but 
this corner is so much discoloured and rubbed that it is difficult to be sure whether or how 
they were cancelled. 

24. mpaypatos: om. M, Const. Apost., Kav. ékkd. mpayparos may have been inserted 
to obviate the ambiguity in gender of zovnpou (cf. the opposite rendering of the Latin ad 
homine malo), but on the other hand the homoeoteleuton would make the loss easy. 

25. movnpov: so M, Kay. ékkd.; kaxov Const. Apost. 

26. opocov: dd wavros duotov M, Const. Apost., Kav, éxkr, 

avrov: so M, Kay. éxkd.; ad’re Const. Apost. 

28, emetdn odnyee: SO Lat. guza... ducit; ddnyet yap M, Kav, éxxrd. ; Const. Apost. omit 
the epexegetic clause. ézesd1) ddyyet OCcurs three times in verses 4—6 of this chapter. 


1788. HERMAS, Pastor, Mand ix. 
6 X 9:3 cm. Early fourth century. 


This fragment, the fourth from the Shepherd to be obtained from Oxy- 
rhynchus (cf. 404, 1172, 1599), consists of the lower portion of a vellum leaf 
containing a few verses from Mand ix. Seven lines are missing at the top 
of the verso, and on the assumption that the upper margin was of the same 
depth as the lower the height of the leaf when complete may be estimated 
at 13 cm, The hand is a round upright uncial of medium size and rather 
graceful appearance, which may be referred to the earlier part of the fourth 
century. There is no trace of ruling, One instance occurs of a stop in |. 4. deds 
and kvpios are contracted as usual, but not GvOpw7os (1. 5). 


16 THE OXYRHYNCAUS PAPYRI 


The leaf is a palimpsest, but the original text, which ran in the reverse 
direction, is so much obliterated that its identity has not yet been established. 
It was prose, written apparently in lines of much the same length as those of 
the Shepherd, and in a hand which looks very little earlier in date. Among 
the few words which have been recognized with the aid of a reagent are 

. Tov mepterxia|(On, ov povoy Tw, Kat TANPY. 

This fragment is approximately contemporary with 1172 and 1599, and 
shows a text of a somewhat similar type. It is not free from errors (e.g. 
ll. 5, 6), but in several places it is superior to the Codex Athous, here the 
only continuous Greek authority, and supports corrections which editors have 
adopted from other sources. For the passage covered by 1788, the testimony 
of the Athous (ca) and the Latin and Aethiopic versions is supplemented by 
a fragment printed from an early MS. by J. E. Grabe, Spiczl. ss. Patrum, i, 
p. 303 (ed. 2), and extracts found in Ps.-Athanasius and Antiochus. In the 
collation below the transcript of the Codex Athous given by K. Lake in Facs. of 
the Athos fragments of the Shepherd of Hermas has been utilized, besides the 
editions of Gebhardt-Harnack and Hilgenfeld. 


Verso. 
Recto. 

: : TAvT@y Tov aliTnuateoy cov Mand. 
modvaTNalyxviay avrou ort Mand. 13 avvotepnros eon eav adiota 1X 4 
ov pn oe [elvearaderer adda To IX: 2 KT@S aiTnon Tapa Tov [klv eay 
alTnna THS uxns gov mAnpo de Sicracns ev TH Kapdia cov 
popnae ovk eotiv o Os ws ox ov pn AaBes Tov aitnpatoy 

5 avOpwrot pynoikaxouyTes gov ot yap dtoragovtes es Tov 
GAA avTosS apvnoiKaknTos e€oTLVy 20 Oy ovrot tow ot Suuxot Kas 


I. rv] modvorA|alyyyay : so recent edd. with Grabe’s fragment; rv odd} evordayyviay 
ca, Ant(iochus), Athan(asius) Cod. Guelf. (rv rodvevond. Cod. Paris.). 

2. [elveatadenper: so Athan. Cod. Guelf., &c.  éyxaradimn ca (éycaradeirn ~Grabe’s 
fragment). 

4. ext 0 Oco)s : Err yap ca, omitting 6 beds, which Hilgenfeld and Gebhardt-Harnack 
add from Grabe’s fragment, Ant., Athan., both Latin versions, and the Aethiopic. 

5: 1. of pymotx. with ca and Grabe’s fragment; the omission of of (due no doubt 
to the termination of d@pwmo) is found also in Ant. and Athan. Grabe’s fragment adds 
(els) GAAHAous after prnotk. 

6. aprnotkakntos : duynoixaxos Ca, &C. dpvnowxdxnros occurs elsewhere only in Polyb. xl. 
12. 5 in a passive sense. 


15. avvorepyros: so ca, Hilgenfeld, Gebhardt-Harnack ; dorépyros Athan. Cod. Paris. 


1788. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 1 


eav: So Gebhardt-Harnack with Athan. Cod. Paris., the older Latin, and the Aethiopic ; 
dca dv ca, Hilgenfeld. 

16. atrnon: aitnons ca, Athan. Cod. Paris. 

17. de: so edd, with Athan. Cod. Paris., the Palatine Latin, and Aethiopic; om. ca. 

18, ov py AaBes: ovdey ov pr) ANWy ca, Athan. Cod. Paris. 

20. of: so ca, Ant.; ws Athan. Cod. Paris., om. Cod. Guelf. 


1784. CONSTANTINOPOLITAN CREED. 
6-5 X 19-8 cm. Fifth century. 


This copy of the so-called Constantinopolitan Creed, which as being an 
enlargement of the Nicene Creed has commonly passed under the latter name, is 
still older than that of the Nicene Creed published in P. Rylands I.6. It is 
written in an upright semicursive hand which may be referred to the second half 
of the fifth century. In 1. 3 v of rov is written as a semicircle above the o and a 
common abbreviation of xa: is used in 1. 6. Oeds, kdpios, "Incots, and Xpuotds are 
contracted, but not zarnp, vids, or dvOpwm0s. o and w, as often happens in docu- 
ments of this period (cf. e. g. 1180, which is approximately contemporary), are 
repeatedly interchanged. 

The origins of this Creed are obscure. According to Nicephorus (Azst. Eccles. 
xii. 13) it was framed by Gregory of Nyssa, but the Acts of the Council of 381, to 
which it is attributed, are not extant, and its first authoritative appearance is in 
the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451), by which ‘the Creed of the 
150 holy Fathers assembled at Constantinople’ was reaffirmed. That the present 
copy was made not very long after that event would be a natural supposition. 
Apart from misspellings it agrees so far as it goes with the ordinary text ; 
unfortunately it breaks off before the eighth article, in which the ‘ Filioque’ 
was inserted at an uncertain date, is reached, though that addition is not likely to 
have been incorporated here. 


£ muorevopev el[s] eva Ov matepa mavtokpatopa || ropa]] mounrny [oluvov 
Kal YNS opaTov Te TavT@y Kal awpatwy Kai eilfel|s eva Kv Iv Xv 
Tov viov Tov Ov Tey povoyeyny Tov ek Tov Tatpos yevynber[ra mplo 
TavTov Tov atwvov dws ek poTos Ov adnOdvoly ex bv [adn Oivov 

5 yevynbevta ov moinbevta wpoovo.oy Tw [mlatpt dt ov [ra mavTa eyeve 
To [Tov] dt nyas rovs avOpalmolvs x, dia tHyv nyeT[eplav caltypiay 

3. povoyeyny: this form of the acc. is a vulgarism common from the Roman period. 


4. Oeo)v: the » has been written over an original s, which being in darker ink looks at 
first sight like the later letter, but that this appearance is deceptive is shown by adn@[vo]». 


Cc 


18 THE OXYRHYNCAHUS. PAPYRI 


1785. HOMILIES ? 


Frs.2+3 6-6 13-8 cm. Fifth century. 


A fragmentary papyrus leaf, apparently from a collection of discourses which 
at present remain anonymous. The style of Frs. 2-4 recto, concerning con- 
cupiscence, of which a series of Biblical instances is cited, recalls that of 1608, 
now identified as (Pseudo-)Chrysostom /x decollationem Precursoris (dédy. 98), but 
efforts to trace 1785 among the works of that voluminous author have so far not 
been successful. Other fragments of homilies cast in a somewhat similar mould 
are 1601-2. That the several fragments, of which a few are too insignificant 
to be worth printing, are all from the same leaf is likely though not certain. 
Frs. 1-5 recto and Fr. 1 verso. 1-6 are written in fairly regular slightly sloping 
uncials of medium size; at Fr. 1 verso. 7 the hand changes, and from this point 
onwards approximates to cursive. Apparently ll. 5-6 are remains of a heading, 
and ll. 7 sqq., where the second hand begins, are a fresh discourse, which 
is of a hortatory description and relates to reverence and godly fear. A fifth- 
century date seems to be indicated, more especially by the second hand. The 
ink throughout is of the brown colour characteristic of the Byzantine period. 
A mark like an enlarged comma is employed with some freedom to divide 
words, and two or three instances of the rough breathing occur on the recto, 
where also a high stop is once found (Fr. 1 recto. 7). 


Fr. 1 recto. 


Ojavaros kat [ 
Javrwv amo dixatol 
dtk]atwv evtorwy bv af 
5 ras abeos ety, dr[e 
] Kareppovnoaly 
2? 6ldou . [ee kat a. [ 
] bs kal 
Vloxnol 
10 ojt opO[arpor ? 


1785. ZTHEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 
Frs. 2-4 recto. 


[ 16 letters evekev cuvolval| acyl ou 
[klareWer[cavro o: mpecButepot] Kata Yovcayr [ 
[vjas éveev [auvjov[ctacpou n yvlyn tov aplxe 
[z]avetpov Kalrleyrevdopapz[vpnoev tov Iw 
5 [olnd evexev [olvvovctacpov [amwdAolvz[o moX 
[Ao] aro THs Plvdn|s Bevrapery [olrcy[o dle eo[w]Oy 
[oaly evexev [clv[volvotacpov” ot Yodoperrar 
[evlexev cuvovatacpov ot amo rou Ka 
Beet Jul. -] evexev ouvovotacpouv o. ev TH 
[... €]vexev ouvovotacplolv, n yuvn [rolv 
eect es anew Jo .[.] €-Sovorager av[rns ?] avnp 
ee a gee ee 2 2 umjo rou totov |. ....|. ovis. 
[ 18 letters Jogi. 2 2 oY oKvO[pw 
(7 2. ass Jvav xol 
[ Dy a (ees anes 


Blacsal 
Joo| 
lupnl 


Fr. I verso. 


pe 
Joow €€ evar[ri 
Ja enfely o Os kau Sia. [ 
Jat tou7].....--+--~]] [ 
5 Katja Tovde vovy oyos, oyols 
i 


Lon) 


19 


20 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


and hand ].. ov of. . .joa[ 
jerreperr| 


| 


Frs. 2—4 verso. 


e€ apxns oo{ 17 letters jov yap way. . 
Je meptBol...++-++--Jo+[.]. es amaloaly evraBelav .. 
Me ERM AL Ke sheatig: v4 anp evaBns kK, plo|Boupevos. .[.. 
5 -]-[--] [J.-L] evraBns aro y.J..7T. 2 eOvous [... 
.}6a avtwy umo tov ovvoy al....J}. a poPoupevos 
€.| i tov kv, 7» de goBw tov Ov exkdgeLolas Kat 
avapragas amo K[akoly py tobe ppolynlular ....--. 
(Gale: . Te goBov de Tov Kv Kat ev KGAL.....- + ees 
TO ofailes: €Clem's's KOU TOTeL AO [ore nal M, 
. klaxos, eg[...] ev Aes. [| 
-] yeveois [| 


+ J plolBe] - [ 


e e 


Fr. 1 recto. That this fragment is to be placed above Fr. 2 is shown by the change of 
hand on the verso. 

4. The first letter must be a, 6, or A, and if, as seems probable, the vestiges above the 
line represent a rough breathing, 6500 or ddov is indicated, the word following perhaps being 
gov; Otherwise dovdlo]v could well be read, 

8. O(eo)s is doubtful, the cross-bar of 6 being rather indistinct, and the form of the sign 
of abbreviation unusual. Possibly the oblique stroke might be taken as meant for a mark 
of division between |v and xa, but it is rather farther away from the v than would be expected, 
and with the stop above the line would also be superfluous; cf. however Frs. 2-4 verso. 7, 
where a somewhat similar stroke occurs apparently as a mark of punctuation. 


Frs. 2-4 recto. The position of Fr. 2, giving the ends of ll. 1-3 is certain, but that of 
Fr. 4, which contains the ends of Il, 12-15, with a vestige supposed to belong to the 
a of avmp in |. 11, is less clear. 

2. Either [klareyev| carro or [kJareyjev| Souaprupnoay (cf, 1. 4) is probable and the former must 
be preferred if o: mpeoBurepox is right. oveavva is the spelling of BAQ; Zacava B rescr. 

3. aplxtu|ayespov: so the LXX in Gen. xxxix. 3. 


1785. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 21 


5-6. The incident referred to is related in Judges xix-xx. At the end of |. 5 


or ar mod|ko. is very conjectural, especially as there is barely room for [Ao] before 
aro in |. 6, 


7. ot Sodouerrar (Gen, xix) and the following nominatives lack a verb, e.g. duepOapnoay, 
and the angular symbol preceding o may be interpreted as referring to this loss, which was 
perhaps supplied in the margin. 

8. Dr. Bartlet suggests that Ka... may be Kamepvaovdp, referring to Matt. xi. 23, but 
this can only be restored on the assumption of a misspelling. 

11. The explanation of the dash between the e and & of efovorafer is not evident. 
There is a hole in the papyrus immediately below it. v of av[rys may be A, e. g. ad[Aa o}, 


Fr. 5. 3. A combination with Frs, 2-4. |. 2 [«]areweu[Sonapr}upz[oay is possible, though 
unconvincing. 


Fr. 1 verso. 4. The latter part of this line has apparently been washed out. 
6. Whether part of an oblique stroke immediately after the lacuna belongs to a letter, 
e.g. v, Or some other sign is doubtful. 


Frs. 2-4 verso. 1-2. The margin being lost both here and in ll. 7-9, the point at 
which the lines began, though fixed with probability, is not quite certain. 

7. 0 of rov has been corrected, perhaps from ». 

8. dpolmm|efar .. .: or possibly ppo[ve|u[wdns, a form found in some MSS. of Philostratus 
705, which would suit the space rather better than dpo[vn|p{. 

10-13. The letters | . eg[, xJaxos ed| in Il. ro—r1, and I]. r2-13 are on Fr. 4 which is 
doubtfully placed; cf. note on Frs. 2-4 recto. In 1. ro the signs resembling inverted 
commas above ao (or »?) may perhaps be regarded as marks of cancellation. 


1786. CHRISTIAN HYMN WITH MUSICAL NOTATION. 


29:6 X5 cm. Late third century. Plate I. 


This interesting fragment of what is by far the most ancient piece of Church 
music extant, and may be placed among the earliest written relics of Christianity, 
is contained on the verso of a strip from an account of corn, mentioning several 
Oxyrhynchite villages and dating apparently from the first half of the third 
century, though later than the Constitutio Antoniniana, since some of the persons 
named are Aurelii. The text on the verso is written in long lines parallel with 
the fibres in a clear upright hand which approximates to the literary type but 
includes some cursive forms, e.g. the ¢ of [mlarepa in 1. 4. Above each line of 
text the corresponding vocal notes have been added in a more cursive lettering, 
whether by the same hand or another is not easy to determine. The character 
of both scripts appears to point to a date in the latter part of the third century 
rather than the early decades of the fourth. This hymn was accordingly written 
before either P. Amh. 2 or Berl. Klassikertexte VI. vi. 8, which are both assigned 


22 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


to the fourth century. Unfortunately only its conclusion is preserved, and that 
very imperfectly, four lines out of the five being disfigured by large initial 
lacunae. Nevertheless the general purport of what remains is fairly clear. 
Creation at large is called upon to join in a chorus of praise to Father, Son, and 
Holy Spirit, and the concluding passage is the usual ascription of power and 
glory to thé ‘only giver of all good gifts’, The original extent of the hymn 
cannot be gauged from the recto, for though the strip evidently came from the 
latter part of the column of accounts, the breadth of this is unknown, and a second 
column, or more, may of course have followed. 

The early date indicated by the character of the handwriting is reflected in 
the metre, which is purely quantitative and uninfluenced by accent. Owing to 
the mutilation of the fragment the metrical scheme cannot be closely followed, 
but the rhythm was apparently anapaestic and may be analysed as a series of 
dimeters, either acatalectic, catalectic, or brachycatalectic. A short syllable is 
allowed to replace a long at the end of a colon, and the first syllable of aunp is 
lengthened metri gratia. It is noticeable that the metre of both P. Amh. 2 and 
Berl. Klass. V1. vi. 8 is analogous, and the anapaestic measure thus seems to have 
been a favourite one with early Christian hymnologists in Egypt. Perhaps, as 
in the Berlin hymn, pairs of cola formed a system. 

The musical notation is generally similar to that found in the rather earlier 
papyrus published by Schubart in Sz¢zungsber. preuss. Akad. 1918, pp. 763 sqq., 
the text of which has been revised and discussed by Th. Reinach in Revue 
Archéologique, 1919, pp. 11-27, and has been arranged in modern style by Prof. 
A. Thierfelder.1 The notes which can be recognized with certainty are eight, 
Rg@oo€uc¢e. These all occur in the Diatonic Hypolydian key of Alypius, 
to which Reinach assigns also the Paean of the Berlin papyrus; that, however, is 
more probably to be regarded as in the Iastian key. As for the mode, there can 
be little doubt that it is the Hypophrygian or Iastian, asin the Epitaph of Seikilos 
and the Hymn to Nemesis of Mesomedes; cf. Gevaert, La mélopée antique, pp. 48 sqq. 
With regard to the character of the syllables and the corresponding notes, 
Reinach has observed that in the Berlin Paean a barytone syllable is always sung 
ona lower note than the succeeding accented final syllable, and that a circumflexed 
syllable has two notes at least. Neither of these observations holds in the case 
of 1786, and the former indeed can hardly be maintained of the Paean either. 
On the other hand, two notes are assigned to a short syllable in one instance at 
least (I. 4). 

In addition to the notes five signs are used, all of which are found also in 
the Berlin papyrus. (1) A horizontal stroke is placed above notes attached to 


1 Paean and Tekmessa (Leipzig), reviewed with severity by Schroder, Berl. Phil. Woch. xl. 351. 


1786. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 23 


syllables which are long. or scanned as such (for.a possible exception see |. 2, n.). 
(2) A curved stroke or hyphen, as in modern notation, is written below notes that 
are to be regarded as egato. (3) A symbol like a half-circle, written in the same 
line with the musical notes, is to be explained with Reinach as a form of Nis 
a sign given by Bellermann’s Anonymus 102 and signifying a ypdvos Kevds or rest. 
According to the same ancient authority the duration of the pause was increased 
by the addition of various marks of length, and in 1786 a, i.e. a double xpovos, 
is regularly used, whereas in the Berlin text the bare symbol only occurs. There 
are three instances of it (Il. 2, 3, 4) corresponding with the metrical divisions ; 
a fourth which is expected at the end of 1. 4 possibly stood at the beginning of 
1. 5. The purpose of (4) the colon (:), which is sometimes placed in front of a note 
or group of notes, is not very clear. Reinach (p. 14) says that this is peculiar to 
the instrumental portions of the Berlin papyrus, and regards it as a diastolé or 
sign of division between two cola. But the same sign is to be recognized more 
than once among the vocal notes of the Paean also, and in 1786 it has evidently 
nothing to do with the separation of cola. According to Thierfelder, 2 c., it 
means two beats; at any rate, it probably affects the time in some way. (5) A 
single dot is frequently placed above the notes, and according to the anonymous 
authority cited above this means arsis: 4 pév ody O€ots onpuatverat, Grav amAGs 7d 
onpetov Gortixtoy 7}...% 8 dpows, Srav éortypévov (3, 85). Some critics have con- 
sidered that in that passage the terms O¢o1s and dpows have become transposed, 
others, e.g. Blass, Bacchylides, p. 1 (so too Reinach, p. 6, n.), maintain its 
correctness. As Professor Stuart Jones observes, the fact that here, as in the 
Berlin papyrus, the symbol for the xpévos Keds is dotted, looks like a confirmation 
of the latter view. Apart from this however, if the metre of 1786 is rightly 
regarded as anapaestic, the use of the dots seems for the most part to favour the 
hypothesis that they denote thesis, and they were so interpreted, plausibly 
enough, by Wessely in the Orestes fragment at Vienna (WZzttheil. Pap. Erz. 
Rainer, v. 65 sqq.). The dot associated with the ypdvos xevds might possibly 
then be accounted for by catalexis. Unfortunately the Berlin papyrus throws 
little light on the problem, a consistent interpretation of the dots there having 
yet to be found. Schréder, Berl, Phil. Woch. xl. 352, thinks that in the 
second of the fragments arsis is plainly meant. Both he and Thierfelder, who 
takes them to denote ictus, profess to distinguish two kinds of dot, a heavy and 
a light, but the distinction is probably imaginary. 

A transcription in modern notation has been kindly supplied by Professor 
H. Stuart Jones. 


24 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


° . . . ° . . ° « 


| 31 letters ] opov mara Te Oeov Aoyipor 


Hits ceiN eens ne See ene 
eEeobad ibe OF fe Ft 
2 [ 28 letters Pmpluravnw atyaro pnd aotpa 
bop. Vee 
pacopopa rletme a Sieh A a en 
Eis:le 00 Ad =f 
3 [olOwy [.]. Act. [ool eee eee et ees | motapev pobiay macat vuvouv- 
o of R 
Tov & npov 
l¢@ gor :42 $8 LITA He FEF cob we o Sih 
4 [wlatepa x’ vlov xX ayloy mrevpa macat duvapers emipwvouvvTwy apny 
ho E(]e(] Eo 
anv KpaTos atvos 
].:Ge Ferd ¢ cE Rio EF KH E o bah FokEE oH oS 
i [bested Wyo ow ean ] S[e@r]n[pe] povw mavTav ayaboy aunv apunv 


- e¢ - dd-pa Afermé-[c]Oov... mo- ta - pov po- G@ - wy Ta 


a 


o Op = vow - oy 7) - poy Ta-Té€ = pa xu - 
— ak 
Bs ae + 
(Creare a oe es = << +4 i 
ae eae ee seca ae ee a 
- op xd - ye - ov med = pa Ta = =o du - vd - pes 
3 


1786. THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS 25 


3 


as 
3 
—— — ee gag ee =e zi — 
2 ae a ee 
gest 6m - tT - pe po 


b> vo 
aie ee - 2 
2 ae ees 
oe Se eee a 
may - Tov a - ya - O06» aq - [TD oe a - ny. 


1. Only slight vestiges of the musical notation are visible above this line. 

2. mplvraynw : the word is somewhat unexpected and the mark of length on the second 
syllable is a difficulty, but this may possibly be connected with the fact that the n has been 
corrected from », The occurrence of » for « is common. To suppose that no = é# and 
that ray = rnv or -tnv is much more difficult. 

gaeopopa: the surface above the note ¢ is damaged, and a dot has probably dis- 
appeared. 

Aleur|e[o]6av is very doubtful ; the initial letter may be » or x, and 6 may be £, of which 
no other example occurs in the papyrus. nd’... daeopopa can be constructed with ovyara, 
and another p{7d]e might stand at the end of the line; or if. .. «[o]6«v is rightly taken as an 
imperative, this may belong to what follows. 

3. Perhaps kat] worayav (sc. myai, or something similar), with a preceding mention of 
the sea, but-the uncertainties are too many for a conyincing restoration. Ae (or xe?) is 
followed by a vertical stroke suggesting y or r, and the doubtful p may be ¢ or f.  podtwy 
1s Over an expunction. 

4. A dot is probably to be restored above the notes on mvev, the papyrus having been 
rubbed here. The dots on the notes from x’ voy to mvevya are carried on in regular 
succession to those of the preceding words, as if there were no pause at [mJarepa. Another 
dot is most probably lost above the second syllable of the first ayy. A dot above the a of 
kparos (a little below the » of rey in 1. 3) is ignored in the transcription, since it is more 
to the right of the note é than usual and would also interrupt the sequence. The note 
& above a of duvapes is very uncertain. durdues is used of heavenly bodies (e. g. Maitt. 
xxiv. 29 ai 8, réy odpavéy: cf. also n. on]. 5) and sometimes of angels, but may here be quite 
general. 

5. In the line of notes the second group :o is very doubtfully deciphered ; the upper 
dot of the supposed colon must be supposed to have disappeared, and the lower one is rather 
large. The vestiges might be regarded as a single letter, but they then suggest nothing but 
a rather unsatisfactory a, which does not occur elsewhere in the piece and would be 
extraneous to the mode. A dot may be lost above the mark of length and others above 
gor and the « over the second syllable of S[or}[pe]; the surface is a good deal rubbed 
hereabouts. 

With regard to the text of ]. 5, the scanty vestiges well suit pove, but S{or}y[p] is highly 
doubtful, though some such word is demanded by the sense, In the preceding lacuna the 
musical notes indicate a loss of seven syllables, of which the last three were an anapaest. One 
more syllable at least, however, seems necessary for the metre, and it is perhaps just possible 
that a note is missing between :o and o, where there is a rather broad space and the surface 
is not well preserved. Something like viv keis alévas (or dééay viv Kael) didoper is wanted ; 
cf. e.g, the eleventh prayer in the Greek morning service (EdxoAdytov 76 péya) Stu ce aivoton 
mdca ai Avvdpes tov otpavdv Kat cot thy ddfav dvarépropev TO Tarpt cai T@ Yi@ kai TO dyio 
Tlvetpare viv Kai del kai els trols aidvas Téy aiover. ’Aunv. The double ayjy at the end of the 
line appears to be extra melrum. 


26 THE ,OXYRH YNGHUSSPAPYEL 


II. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


1787. SAPPHO, BOOK iv. 


Fr. t 15-9 X 9-4 cm. Third century. Plate II 
(Frs. 1+ 2, 9). 


The authorship of the following fragments, being (with P.S.I. 123) the sixth 
distinct papyrus of Sappho so far obtained from Oxyrhynchus, is established by 
one certain and two other probable coincidences with lines previously extant ; 
some isolated words attributed by Grammarians to Sappho also occur. To which 
of the available books among the nine of her lyrics they belonged is uncertain, 
but they may be assigned with some probability to the fourth. The metre is 
apparently the same throughout, a two-line strophe consisting of a repetition of 
the. verse Y—-Uu——uu——uv—v-—¥, which Hephaestion 64 describes as 
an Ionic a maiore tetrameter acatalectic, adding that it was called AloAckdy 
from its frequent use by Sappho, from whom he cites Frs. 76-7 as examples. 
Similar two-line strophes are described by Hephaest. 113, 116-17, according to 
whom Sappho’s second and third books consisted entirely of such systems, 
Book ii containing poems in the Samgukdv Teco apeckatdexaovAAaBov (Y¥4¥—UU—ve 
—vvu—v™”: cf. Hephaest. 42), Book iii of the éxxadexacvAdaBor (¥Y¥—YyU—-—UuU— 
—vv—v*: Hephaest. 60). Since the fifth book was of a different character, 
consisting partly, at any rate, if the Berlin fragments belonged to it, of poems in 
strophes of three lines, it seems that the only book to which the two-line strophes 
of 1787, which are entirely analogous to those of Books ii and iii, can be logically 
referred is Book iv. Perhaps this further resembled the two preceding books in 
the homogeneity of its contents; that supposition is not excluded by the fact 
that Hephaestion does not refer to Book iv in connexion with two-line strophes, 
and on the other hand accords both with his statement about the Aeolic tetra- 
meter that Sappho 7oAAG air expjoaro and with the not inconsiderable remains 
of the present papyrus. But it is of course quite possible that poems in similar 
metres (cf. e.g. Sapph. 60, 62) were also included. 

Like most of the papyri from this find, 1787 has suffered severely, having 
been torn into quite small pieces, which have not fitted together very well. The 
difficulty of the task of reconstruction, in which Mr. Lobel has rendered valuable 
assistance, is much increased by the fact that the remains of this roll were found 


1787. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 27 


together with a quantity of other lyric fragments in an identical hand. There is 
a number of smaller pieces which cannot be assigned to one MS. or the other 
with any approach to security, and in these circumstances it seemed advisable to 
print here only such fragments as were shown by dialect or some other special 
indication to belong to the Sappho. A revised text of P. Halle 2, the source of 
which now becomes evident, is included for the sake of convenient reference. 
That fragment was no doubt abstracted and sold by a dishonest workman; 
script, metre, and date of acquisition all point to this conclusion. 

The hand is a rapidly formed uncial of medium size and with a decided 
slope; that of 1788 is in many respects very similar. Stops in the high 
position occur, and accents, breathings, and marks of elision, quantity, and diaeresis 
have been freely added, as usual in papyri of lyric poets. Acute accents are 
sometimes so horizontal as to be barely distinguishable from marks of length. 
Two rarer symbols are a mark similar in form and position to a comma, to divide 
words (Fr. 8. 2), and the converse of this, a curved ligature below the line, which 
connects the parts of a compound word in Fr. 9.4. Paragraphi are employed to 
mark off strophic couplets (cf. 1283. 1. ii) and a coronis to indicate the conclusion 
of a poem. The few interlineations occurring seem all to proceed from the 
original scribe, who may also be credited with at any rate many of the 
diacritical signs. 

Remains of eight poems at least can be distinguished, and the number 
represented is no doubt considerably larger than this. It is noticeable that three 
out of the four poems of which the initial letter has survived begin with E, but 
the fact that in Fr. 3. ii E is succeeded by O, while not definitely excluding 
an alphabetical arrangement, is certainly not in favour of it. Of the individual 
pieces there is not much to be said, since their severe mutilation, except in one 
or two cases, prevents the line of thought from being followed with precision, and 
restoration cannot be attempted with any real chance of success. Fr. 1 gives the 
ends of lines of a poem of.some length in which Sappho dwells on the advance 
of age and the inevitable approach of death, passing on to a declaration, in two 
verses cited by Athenaeus, that to be desirable life must for her have the accom- 
paniments of delicacy (48poovvn), splendour (76 Aaumpév), and beauty (76 KaAdv). 
The second column of Fr. 3 included two complete poems, of six and five 
couplets respectively, in the former of which several persons, perhaps the poet’s 
companions, were addressed, the other being an invocation, tantalizingly mutilated, 
to sleep. In Fr. 4 Sappho ‘herself is addressed by name, as in Sapph. 1 and 59 
and Berl. Klassikertexte, V. xiii. 2. Fr. 6 is notable for a political reference, rare 
in Sappho as common in Alcaeus. Apparently some one is reproached for 
having chosen ‘friendship with the daughters of the house of Penthilus’, with 


28 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PATA 


which the sweet song, the melody of birds, and the dewy leaves, spoken of in the 
following lines, are contrasted. The offender had perhaps been a member of the 
poet’s circle, and is warned that she would no longer be welcome (1. 2,n.). Fr. 6 


Fr, 2 (a). Frs, 142. Plate 11, 
eooal da 
}. mépel ] 
]. eke. [ va 
lord. . .] 
5 day Onv 
dA No theoe neta ons jorav 
NOTIN Oars a Jewwa 


lévarar[. . . .\dvupdve. 
wtOnraLo7[. ual. |rpdxowi 
10 |rovkddadwparrader 
|pr dodovrAryipavyedbvvav 
raxpoayjpacndn 
vTorpiyeoekpedawvay 
ryovad|.upepoce 
15 \noPicaveBpiocww 
Aatixevrroénv 
Jovduvarovyever Oat 
\Bpodéraxuvdver 
|xatayao peporcal 
Jovipwooeuape 


léravdkoirw 


20 


|. wévavvomicde 
Jatoorracdo 
J 


TOUTOKALpOL 
Bo aLOAG| nova[. Joyxe 
eri Visiscve cal 
pire . [ : F 


katr[ 


1787. NWEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 29 


mentions Andromeda, a rival who is alluded to in several already extant fragments. 
In the small Frs. 33 and 34 further coincidences with previously known verses 
are probably to be recognized. 


Fr. 2 (a). Prs.-1/-+; 2; Plate ti: 
lAcooa{ eo af 
}. mépe [ 
]- etxe . [ va 
O\éyoural.] 
5 ed dx Onv 
NCAT, oactoxes eters aloray 
TRON cence Jetoa 
Jéva trav [....Jav vpo.. 


|e Ojrae o7[v\ualor] mpdxoww 
10, |rov Kdéda bapa mraides 
@| pid’, dovdov ALybpay xEdbvvav 
md\vra xpoa yipas Hon 


Aedkal 7 éyévolTo Tpixes Ex pedaivay 
jw: ydva 8 [ov Péporor 
15 ] 700° ica veBpiowow 


a\\Ad th Kev ToEiny ; 

] od ddvatov yéver Oat 

] Bpodéraxuy ato 

] kara yas pépoiwa 

20 Jov vuws epapyey 
]érav a&kotiy 

POlipévavy vopioder 


Jats mac dot 


[2ym 6& Pidnw aBpoctvay...... |] Todro Kat pot 

25 TO Ad[umpoy pws dediw Kal Td Kd)Aov AA ]oyxe 
emer, 23 letters ]-[- v6. [ 
pire . [ 


kal vl 


30 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


(Coals st 


ee cs Ce 
e 
ce 


npoo" 


| fe) 


20 


reo 
Col. ii. 


éye v7[ 


ts 4 
£ ovyapk[ 


 enrag are 


dapvacéral 
mavdadzor| 
HKIV OVENS 
KalTaiotpeval 
dddiropocar[....J..[ 
uvytodemor ecoatov-ekX{ 
piyadayararacur[, 
réavr|. yoevive pl 
[.JxeoO ayaval 

x épOare kadar 

Etat euparaxal 

3 ovotpepeatval 
G[\:raicérar imvool 
yAukuo - €oordety' oviac pl 
(ax @picéxnuravdvvapl 
‘edmrio dé exetpnmedéxn| 
pn devpaxapoven[ 


ovydpkéovovTal. ¢ 
abuppatakaarl 
yevorrodepor 


6 
=TolomavTe| 
Sor 


3 


1 ee 
[. Jovpa| 
[.]acrodr’emke « [ 
[.Jatuovordsg| 


1787. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


Brg: 
Coke i: Col. ii. 
] eyev7(o 
] ov ydp xe 
] 
] "Enrdgaze [ 
] ddgvas dra [ 
\ns 5 may 0 ddrov [ 
] 7 Kfjvov €dol 
‘Bers kal Taior pev af 
} ddotmopos ay... .)..[ 
] pvyis O€ mor’ elodiov: exX[ 
] 10 wixa 8 dyamrdta ovr{’ 
] téaut(a) dé viv eupl 


[t]xeo@” ayaval 
epOare: Kdédav [ 


4 ne 4 
Ta T eupatra Kal 


15 “Ovotpe pedratval 


tes tes os Yt oY 
° 


dlolfrais dra zr’ varvos [ 

] yrtkus Oéos: 7 dev’ dvias pl 
(& x@pis éxnv trav dbvapl 

] emis O€ pw exe pH medexniv 

] 20 pndey paxdpwv éd[ 

] ov yap kK’ éov ovrw [.° 

|npos: abvppata Karl 

yévoito O€ pot [ 


A 4 
Tols mavTal 


Frc, Fr, 5. 
omc ]. oral [. -Jov pa[ 
fecmreeree DOLE! [kJat rodr’ érike . [ 


bitin, JoeAaol [Slaipwr ddrodg[ dros ? 


32 THE OXYRHYNCHCS PAPYRI 


[po . qvvepel 
5 Wardowegid[ 

kémpauipl.JofArl . 

KdiToipey ad] 

[ Jococpacbor| 

TavTaLKAEOO| 


10 Kdicevvayep| 


brs 6: 
]oepixa 
(ONG pore jéo' eywuKeaow 
WPrd7[. . .]HAEorevO.AHar| 
Joaka[. . .jrporeappal 
5 peal. -JreyAvKepor . [ 
Japedrtyogor| 
JOeu-Avyupad &n[ 
pool. jeroa| 


Fr. 8. 
jadaval 
lepa,oe| 
lor [ 
Jedorour[ 

5 Ja@ecer[ 
Jaryevn| 
vax] 


oupavedpirnol 

5 vuvd evveKal 
rod dirtovour| 
ovdevTrorr. Je - [ 
(8A 


Pres 
|eyépp amvtao[ 

— Yyood’| 
‘YicavOeoow [ 
Jacavadirpal 

5 ]Opopedar{.] . [ 
ra... Kal 
|porroval 
Jopovovkatio| 
|ruvdaptdat 

19 |xapievr'a . [ 
\nkérovr| 
-B- “KN 


Uae et 2 


Freon Plateti- 
Jodépxeverr@pooo| 
véreravraidadel 


18pl. JravkavyéepplO[ 
— 


5 


1787. 


[.|po . nvvepel 

5 Wdrga, cé pir[ 
Kirpo Bilaloir[ 
kairo. péya of 
d|ocos Pakbwy | 
mwévT@ Kdéos [ 

Io Kat o° évy Ayéplovros 


Fr.6: 
| ce Mika 
JeAal. . G@AA|E o& eyo'vK édow 
yp perdz[a7’] HAeo ITevOirAjav 
]éa Ka[Kd|rpom’: dppals 
] péeAfos] te yAvKEpor . [ 
Ja pedAtxdgor[os 
dei \de- Alyvpar & a&nfdox 
| dpoa[dlecoal 


Fr. 3. 
] @Oavalr 
lépa oe 
JAov 
jédororv [ 
5 jadacer[ 
Javyevn| 
var 


NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 33 


od pay eépirno| 

5 viv & e&vexa [ 
TO 8 aittoy ovz| 
ovdéy modu [. le. [ 


[oyd? af 


Hr: 


4 


2 Kall yép po amd ras [| 
Ujpos d° [ 
| toav Oéoiow 
] doav adirpal 
5 Av\6popédar [.] . [ 
\ra ... kal 
T\porrov aj 
Jopov ov Katiolx 
] Tuvdapidais 
10 ] xapiev7’ a. | 
H\nKére ovr| 
B kn 


]- @[.. .Jal 


Fr. 9. 
lodépkev errdpoco| 
\ ere rav maida dé | 


2 a\Bplolrav Kav xepr6| 


34 


Fr, ro, 
]. ovav[ 
|nvovde[ 
Inotpep| 
jradépyal 
5 | + avOoo{ 
|Hepor[ 
lerepaf 


Bro15; 


Jemarnrf 
vapl 
wend 
Jpoouer| 
5 JAK’ viral 
J+. LIBof 
|oyaperavf 
aveanvyve 
lappoviac Bf 
10 Janvxopor-aal 
[Serlynar[ 
Jarévodgif 
|ravrecoi 


Jen[.] . [ 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYR1 


Fr. 11. 


Javagpodi[ 
Jvroyod' pf 
i Joadror 
ligexorra. [ 
] . evadaaof 
JarAr\e | 
Jaceepoaol 


Kreg 


Japp 
jexaugf 
|rotcai| 
|kAen dor 
5 |. mAokap[ 
leoddpal 
lav Opedrf 
vpauy . [ 

lrexaun{ 


aad 
JBpodo[ 


Jer 
Jpop 


Fr. 12; 


Japa 


A€vever| 


1787. . NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


Ine, Teh, Brrr. 


Lt Ro ie 
|. ovav[ See iter et ok (steed ae Oe 
Inv ob6e, VBL loge [ joun[ 

lns ipeplo a lAéceey [ 
|ra ddpal jav "Adpodi[ra lin Acad 
5 |]. dvOos- [ d\dvAoyor 8 Eplwres ? Je OA of 
T\uepor f 5 |s Aro 5 | &xnv [ 
jevepr alis éxo.oa iC ga. [ 
|. eva Oadalo ] @iklecor 
]@drAee 


ee 
jas ێpoas 


Frows. Festa: Fr. 15. 
japarr|[ Japp ]ros €o[ 
ep ye kal [ | mavral 
we? ew é& |ros ail |. 0 drépal 
pcopeér| ] KAendor| m)Aokal 
5 “ck” dma 5 |. mAokapl M41 
Pe ales) Jes & dpa 
|s yap éravl | dv Opar| 
yay Kamvyvel ] Avpawy . [ Frory, 
] eppovias Bi ]re kai af : 
10 éOnv xépov' dal oMer | SUR Dae ] 
] 6 Afynar [ ea | 
Jarév ode [ Br 10:  aiocxpl 
] madvrecor [| Pe J 
lem[-] - [ | Bpodo| 5 japor 
ne cone jev jre za 
Jparpl 


a 


36 


5 Jaudl 
]. eo . | 


Jépoo . [ 


Loe, Oi 


£ al 
5 orl 
a 
gal 
on| 
ArL 
7 


Fr. 26. 


Jou] 
: |oeral 
Jypauy « [ 
Jerexa{. Joo) 
rs dlddcof 
Sevapeol 
Jocovyal 
]aAoval 


}darl 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Pero: 

}.-- 4 
]- (7 0%paxf 
ie oly adden 


[dered 
5  jromaéAnvéul 
ld 
Fr. 22 Praz2: 
a oul 
7 en 
oul aed) 
«| 7a 
Berea : 
Fr. 27. 
J. 
Junre 
Olacoa [ 
JegraXAf 
5 \ppal 


Fr. 20. 
Col. i. Col ii: 
| 
| 
£ 
+1 
| 3 
lonv 
Fr. 24 Fr. 25. 
be | 
paul Kal 
rey rarl 
Z: Tal 
Fr. 28 Fr, 29 
Ja pou ice 
Jappa ]. addi 
|vrre| lAal 
nv iav{ 
Jre€ . [ 5 vel 
\yovar} Jewed . [ 
luo |uaore 


5 


(a1 
~ OO 
3 


Fr. 26. 


jae 
Joeral 
Jupaw. | 
Jé re yxalelpol 
le dedoéo[ 
loev dpeo[ 
jos av yal 
JaAov af 


dad 


Br-10; 


|. [-] Q@Wpar [ 


]. ot xadren[ 


] dé Kv[ ] 
5 | 76 wdéAnv oi| ] 
[ lel 
Fr. 22 Pr23. Fr, 24, 
al ovf 
a eu kaz| 
ou ae of BH pl 
k[ ral 66 . [ 
eaeraoalt : See 
By ya7s Fr, 28 
Tell Japol 
| entre ] pupal 
? peldiaca |yrrel 
less GALA ny [ 
5 Ippal 5 jreée. [ 
wove 


\I 


NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


Fr. 20, 
Colas 


Gol. ti; 


38 


Fr. 30. 
Jeptyval 
lyw | 


J. Kol 
Jac | 


Fr, 34. 


KaLT e| 
pnder, 
vovd al 
KnBorrc 
5 [- -Juopgol 


Fr. 37. 


Jove. .] . [ 


| Tovéveo[ 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Le ae 2 


Col. i. Col. ii. 


Big) 


Jarddeo Gf 
]xeoraAl 
}< leet 
JepOeo[ 

5 JI. -Jarof 


Pro. 
Col. i. Col. ii. 
a tl 
| 65 
] Lai. [ 
y Fal 
} 5 6a 
J x € 
Fr. 38. Frs-30. 
|rdpeval ] . ovrdv . [ 
|r éororénn] |reroKal 


Fr 32. 


JeA . [] . eval 
JacaXirpal 


ree | 
ler av 


en30; 


}. der{ 
A’ avOiue 
oped’ of 
\ondr'emiz[ 
5 jévrn dex 
J@yapexd[ 


Jer 


1787. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 39 


Fr. 30. inet, Ft 42. 
Coktrur: Col. ii. 
Hlepipval oOnv Jed. [.] - evap 
\ynv Ioge mee Jas adirpal 
lee Kol ] ¢al ] & atf 
ja ] pct Sinton aia’ eae We 
Fr. 33: 


] ardbecO[ar 

jxtora Xl 

aca 

[od de orepdvos, @ Aika, mlepOéc[P epdras pbBarow 


5 [dpmaxas avitw (?) ovvaépplaio’ [dmddaoe yx€épouv 


Fr. 34. Fr. 35- Fro36. 
Gol. Col. ii. 
Kai 7 é a ae oe ait], 
penoer| ] ai W adOe pel 
vov 6 af ] 66} WwopeB” of 
pr) PRddAA«Elo v Cie ] Snir emer 
5 [ev|uoppolrépa KA. ? ] 5 je 7 nde Ki 
PS ae ok ae ] "EX Ja yap exdj 


Fr. 37. Fr, 38. Br. 30. Fr. 40. 


Jov «i. .],[ me\1a pevale ]. oc wav. [ l- 4 
]rov dveo[ |r dor’ 6 TéAnjos ? ]reToKal dvolA Bov 


40 THESOXYRHYNCHUS, PAPYRI 


|éBpocemtx al joAkave . [ jun’ al jaxovnv 

Javaprepil ; , : : ‘ : ]auray 

WaBAl 
Fr. 41. Fr, 42. Fr. 43, 
ere ]kAal [Jo . [ 
Jqexen| yoo . | ToABL 

\val Jeol 
oo] 
5 jonl 


| 


Fr. 44 = P. Halle 2 (Dzkaiomata, pp. 182 sqq.). 
|rvxoroa 
OEM évramdic ay 
]- ecovvonpyal 
jeT@vKaAn mL 
5  |redadvpovaial 
JoarvynvbeAnon| 
|peuotpayxer bal 
lAcddvarribecal 
\vovdedyaporcba 
10 JérerratAre ‘ 


JeAao| 


Fr. 45. 


earl 
“#4 


Frs. 1+2. 8. The end of this line is difficult. Either |d or a@ may be read, and the 
letter following év has a rounded base which, if the line is to scan, seems consistent only 


1787. .NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 41 


] @Bpows émyal ] Okave . | ] bm a ] a@kobny 
Jav Aprepil eae Ree ee 5. Sm A ws he ] avray 


5 war 


Bg. 94 1. EY Ae, Pr. 43. 
[Aao[ |xAal — [.]éo . [ 
? ybvjake mf oo . [ TOA pl 
lol jéo| 
\doce 
5 Jon{ 


] 


Pre 44cm stalled. 


| t0xoca 
] O€—N ov 7 adtraicay 
TélAecov vonupa 
jev@v Kady 
5 ] wedd Oipov aia 
dojoa tvxnv OEeArjon|(s) 
Jo uot pdxeoOa{e 
xAvddva ribeacal 
je ot & & yap olcba 
10) jéree Ta tAAe.. 
JeAao| 


Fr. 45. 
San| pods 
pefrAov O? 


with o or 6. The division ? |arundy o is thus suggested, but neither ce nor co{c] is satisfactory, 
though perhaps there has been some alteration. 


42 THE OX YVRHYNCHCS APY RI 


9. o7[vJua[re] or o7[v]ua{or] appears inevitable ; the latter suits the size of the lacuna the 
better of the two. mpéxoyis as a synonym of mpoxor) has not occurred previously. Ci. 
Alea35; 72, 

He xedvvvay is gen. plur. ; cf.1231.14.8,n. For xeAtwva cf. Orion 28. 15 (Sapph. 169) 
Gs mapa Sampoi xedovn xedvvn, where xeAvwva should now be restored. The doubled » is 
perhaps to be recognized also in Babrius 115. 4. PRG, oF 
12. The words xpdéa yjpas #5n occurred at the end of a Sapphic line in 1281. TO. 0/5 
cf. l. 17, where there is a similar doublet of 1281. 1. i. 33, and Fr. 7. 3. . Either Sappho 
was rather forgetful, or she did not mind repeating herself. 

13. Cf. Soph. Ams/. 1092 Acvkny eyd ryvd ex pehaivns aupiBaddopar tpixa. 

14. yova: cf. Alc. 39. 7 yova Zeipuos afer. 

17. Cf. note on |. 12 above. With regard to the accent of yéverOa, the remark of 
Wilamowitz, Sappho und Simonides, p.gg, is mistaken, the original edition of 7. 6 being correct, 
and the appearance in the facsimile of an accent on the second syllable being due, as 
stated by Mr. Lobel, who has recollated the original, to a displaced fibre. There is therefore 
no conflict with 1288. 8. 4 Ad@eoé]a, and the note on 12381. 1. i. 33-4 is to be amended 
accordingly. ke 

18-19. The idea here may well be that old age follows youth as inevitably as night 
the dawn (? é] xara yas pépoca: the participial clause might be applied to w& as 
symbolizing death). a of depowa was probably the final letter of the line, but the surface 
of the papyrus is damaged. oa 

21. Perhaps ép|drav, or a superlative, e.g. xedvurldray. But the reference remains in 
doubt. 

24-5. These two verses are quoted by Athen. xv. 687 A (=Sapph. 79) kairo Sarda, 
yur peév mpos ddnGerav vdaa Kai moutpia, Spws nd€aOn Td Kaddv THs ABpdrnros apedev A€youca Bde 
eyo d€ Pidnup’ aBpoatvav cai por 7d Aapmpov Epos (Vv. |. Epis) deAiw Kat Td Kadov eAoyxev, Pavepdv 
rowica macw ws H Tod Chy emOupia Td Naynpoy Kat TO Kaddv elxev (? EiAnXer) ait]. Tadra 8 €orv 
oikeia tis dperjs. Various attempts at restoration have been made, but, as is now seen, Blass 
alone was right in marking a lacuna after ¢8poctvay and in taking rd Adpmpoy . . . AeAoyxev 
as a complete verse, in which the only alteration needed is épws deAiw (so Blass: cf. Fr. 11. 
4 a|dvroyor & eplwres (?)) or Epos 7 dediw. In the preceding verse there are five syllables to 
be supplied after é8poovvay, of which the two last are rotro. How the lacuna remaining, 
a dactyl of about 6 letters, should be filled is not obvious. If rodre = 76 d8pdv, this was 
perhaps preceded by an adverb qualifying Pidnu, e. g. €€oxa, 8: pada, rOAX’ Ere, OF a predicate 
of rovro, as dbv ye. The papyrus may of course have agreed with Athen. in the spelling 
Pirnpp’, but «édnme is written in Fr. 44. 4. 

That the small fragment containing the beginnings of ll. 25-9 is rightly placed can 


hardly be doubted. The fact that 1. 28 is the last of a column helps to confirm the 
coincidence of the letters roda[ in ]. 25. 


Fr. 2(a). This fragment has been included on account of its similarity on both sides 
to the upper part of Fr. 1; but that it belongs here is not certain. 


Fr. 3. ii. 4. dapvas: or Addvas ? 
6. A dot in front of the line seems meaningless and may be accidental. 
11. It does not seem possible to read réavra, as demanded by the metre. For the 


spelling with «, which seems to be the regular form in the papyri when the first syllable 
is short, cf. 1281. 14. 4, 1283. 2. ii. 5, &c. 


13. For the small marginal cross cf. Fr. 35. ii. 6 and 841, introd. 
15. €& 2g. peAaivals 61a vixros OF HeAaival is mrepvyerow,. 


1787. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 43 


16. €. g. /Karaxety Brehdpowst XaOav OF [Brépap’ appv kara 67 Karvy. 

18. ¢a x@pis €xnv: the tmesis is indicated in the papyrus by the accentuation. 

20. » or x{ may be read in place of Af. 

21. ov is more suitable than ev or a. The accent on ydp points to «’ gov, not Kéov. 


Fr. 4. 2. Possibly ’Avd]poue[da, whose name recurs again in Fr. 7. 5; as Lobel 
observes, Aristid. ii. 508 ofuac 8€ ce kal Samos dxnkoévar.. . Aeyovons, ws adTiy ai Modoa ta 
évre OdBiav Te Kat Cnoriy eroincay, Kai ds od’ dnobavovans érra: d}On might perhaps be brought 
into connexion with ll. 5 sqq. 

4. The vestiges of the fourth letter are consistent with ¢, &, or r, but no satisfactory 
restoration suggests itself. 

6. Below the remains of the initial « there is a spot of ink which might well be the 
extremity of a paragraphus, but this would be out of place unless indeed these lines were in 
a different metre. A paragraphus may have disappeared below 1. 7, as there is little left 
of the « at the beginning of the line. 

9. The supposed acute accent on the first a is particularly badly formed, the right- 
hand extremity being turned downwards ; but it is difficult to see what else can be meant. 

10, For the doubled » of éy cf. e.g. 1283. 2. ii. 8, 1860. 1. 10. peddbpoow,. . . 
dduorow Or Some synonym may be supplied. 


Fr. 5. 3. ddod[aos, which must be scanned as a quadrisyllable, is suggested as 
accounting more naturally for the correction of the accent than e.g. any part of ddopudvds. 
7. €.[: perhaps ¢. 


Fr. 6. 1. Mixa seems best taken as a proper name, especially as oyixpos or pixpos is well 
attested for the Lesbian poets (Sapph. 34, 1238. 24. 2, 1284. 6. 8). Mixa is given by the 
Ravennas in Aristoph. Zhesm. 760, and Mixca is not infrequent. It is tempting to regard 
Mixa as the name of the person addressed, but the accent is against this, since Mixa would 
be expected on the analogy of Sapph. 1. 1 ’Adpddira, 78. 1 Atka (cf. Choerob. J Heph. c. 14). 
To disregard the accent in a passage so defective is unjustifiable, and Mixa may be the name 
of a third party: ‘ Mica wishes to bring you here, but I will not receive you’. oe can hardly 
be Sappho herself, with a different second person in the next line. 

2. eyovk is analogous to e.g.1281. 1. i. 23 euvdo6’ af\da], 1284. 1. 11 mdcdov. The 
practice of making the written text represent the number of spoken syllables may be 
mistaken, but it is not ‘modern’ (Wilamowitz, Sappho und Simonides, p. 82). 

3. The mark of length on the a indicates that Mev@:Anjav is fem. gen. plur., in agreement 
with some such word as maidov; cf. Frs. 1+2. 11 n., and for the adj. MevdiAnos, 
1234. 6. Io. 

4. ka[xé|rpor’ seems probable, though the letters ako must have been rather spread out 
to fill the lacuna. A or x might be read in place of a. 

6. Cf. Aristaenetus i. 10 (Sapph. 129) ai povork@repae rOv mapbévev Kai perdrixdpovor 
(I. peddx.), todo di} Samgois 16 Fdorrov POéypa. The form pedripwvos ascribed to Sappho in 
the similar passage Philostr. /7. ii. 1 should now disappear until otherwise attested. 

Whe din[ Sor : cf. Schol. Soph. Ay: 628 7 andw dé kara MitvAnvaious. The form ander is given 


in Sapph. 39. 

Fr. 7.3. Cf. Sapph. 2. 1 tcos déoow. 

4. adtrpa: a very small speck on the edge of the papyrus after the second a, if it is ink, 
may be a medial stop, or, possibly, a vestige of e.g.a final», The fem. dd:rpy occurs in 


Semonides 7. 7, and cf. Fr. 32. 2 below. 
5. For ’Av]|8poueday cf. Sapph. 41, 58. 


ae THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


6. There are perhaps only two letters, e. g. a or va, between ra and xa, 

8. Not in lepov. ; 

12. Probably |a or Wa. The overwritten letters enclosed between dots are variants 
added by the original hand. 


Fr. 8. 3. The supposed mark of length may be an acute accent. 


Fr. 9. This fragment is composed of two pieces, the combination of which seems 
certain, although |. 1 is difficult and ]. 3 must be emended in order to scan. The points 
of junction aie, i, i elz, Is 2 nla, I, 8 kalv. as , 

I. lodépxev is puzzling. p is more probable than y, which is the only alternative and 
also difficult to interpret. If eww is right, the » was rather smaller than usual, but eyo is 
not more attractive. 

3. a|8p[6]rap : or dpde|8p| d}rav. 


Fr.10. 5. The high stop is not certain, being on the edge of the papyrus; it might be 
the vestige of a letter. 


Fr. 11. 4. lores: cf. Frs, 14+2. 24-5, n., and Himerius i. 4 cfs wphetov aye 
(sc. Zampa) kai ’Adpodirny (cf. 1. 3) ep’ Gppare Xapitrwv Kai xopdv "Epdtov cvpraicropa. éplacrat or 
€p[avres are Other possibilities. 


Fr. 12. 6. The remains of the first letter suit ¢ better than anything else, but #6 would 
be expected, and y or « is perhaps admissible. In the following word it is not clear whether 
the vestige above a represents a mark of short or of long quantity. 


Fr. 13. 4. The first letter may be o or @ instead of p. 
8. The letter before the lacuna was apparently either e or o, not a. 
10. aaj: aé| seems to be excluded. 


Fr. 14. 4. If edenSo[ is one word, the fragment must be from near the ends of lines ; 
but the division «Aéy Sor{ (8” d2{ ?) is possible. 
5. €. g. lt, p. 


Fr. 15. 1. 1, p, v may be read in place of r. 


3- arepos for érepos had already occurred in 424. 9. The interlinear insertion may be 
by the original scribe. 


Fr. 18. 2. d before the lacuna is only one of several possibilities, e. g. 5, v. 
4. An acute has been substituted for a circumflex accent; cf.e.g. Frs. 5. 3, 19. 3. 

Fr. 19. 2. The mark like a sign of elision is possibly a diastolé, which is sometimes 
(e. g. 1789), though not elsewhere in 1787, placed above the line. 


4. Though the papyrus is partially preserved after xv, all trace of writing has 
disappeared. 


Fr. 21. The width of the space above 1. 1 suggests that this fragment, like 22 and 23, 


came from the top of a column, but is hardly sufficient to prove it. 


Fr. 23. 4. The right-hand tip of the paragraphus is expected to be visible below this 


line, but the paragraphi are sometimes rather short. 


Fr. 26. 3. « or p can be read in place of uv; v also is very uncertain. 


1787. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 45 


_ 5+ For the alteration of accent cf. e.g. Fr. 18. 4. The second acute could be read as 
a circumflex. 


: 7. The supposed mark of length is placed low and may be the tip of the cross-bar 
Ol a T. 


Fr. 27. 3. There is a short blank space after a, which perhaps ended the line. 
6. The accent is very doubtful. 


Fr. 29. 4. |iav is a gen. plur.; cf. Frs. 1+2. 11, n. 
Fr. 32. 1. The letters of this line are distinctly smaller than those of ll. 2-3. 


Frs. 33-43. This group of fragments is distinguished by being more discoloured and 
rubbed than the rest. Frs. 41-3 have been included on account of their resemblance to 
the larger pieces. 


Fr. 33. 4-5. The identification of these two verses with Sapph. 78. 1-2, though 
probable, is in consequence of the damaged condition of 1. 5 hardly certain; however, the 
remains suit Jao[ quite well, and the preceding acute accent is just in the right place if 
éppaio’ was written. 


Fr. 34. 1. xair’: or xair’(or). 

5, if rightly read, probably = Sapph. 76, from Hephaest. 64, Etpopporépa Mvacidika 
ris drddas Tupivyws. Unfortunately the letters are broken, the first and fifth especially being 
doubtful ; the latter might well be ¢, o in this hand being generally, though not always, 
smaller. Since the margin is lost it remains possible that, as maintained by Bergk, the line 
was the first of a poem (it is perhaps worth noting that the initial letter is again E; cf. int., 
p. 27). There is also a possibility, so far as the papyrus is concerned, that P. Halle 2.1, 
which may = Sapph. 77, immediately succeeded. 


Fr. 36. 4. It is not clear whether the accent on dyur’ is circumflex or acute, but the 
former is in accordance with 1281. 15. 3. 

5. For 7d¢ cf. 1288. 4. 2; this in conjunction with the accented « makes 7(e) likely. 

6. exa[ : or exaf. 


Fr. 38. 2. méAnlos is possibly for méAevos, ‘dark’; cf. méAeca. 
Fr. 839. 1. A very small vestige after v is consistent with v. 


Fr. 40. 1. The doubtful « was perhaps the final letter of the line. 
2. A compound is indicated by the grave accent, and dvo]ASov by the metre. 
4. avrav or tlavray, 


Fr. 41. 5. There is no trace of ink below this line, which was perhaps the last of 
a column. 


Fr. 44 = P. Halle 2. The revised text printed is based on the facsimile (Tafel 8) 
accompanying the original edition, but photographs are apt to be deceptive, and a satisfactory 
revision can only be made by means of the actual papyrus. The reprint in Diehl, 
Supplementum lyricum, p. 43, adds nothing material. ‘That the interlinear signs are, of course, 
the ordinary accents, marks of quantity, &c., and have nothing to do with musical notation 
has been pointed out by Hunt, Vear’s Work, 1913, p- 78,and Wessely, Wochenschr. f. Rlass. 
Phil. 30. 669. 

1. This line, which is the first of a column, may possibly, as the edd. say, = Sapph. 77, 
but apart from the doubt as to the reading there, rvxoua is hardly enough for an identifica- 


46 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 
tion; cf. n. on Frs. 1+2. 12 above. Moreover, ll. 2-6 rather suggest an invocation to 
a deity. 

2, eravramacay, |bhov ra marcav edd. ; but the facsimile shows clearly an acute accent 
on « and suggests an elision mark after A. én’ thus seems assured, and ovr can hardly be 
interpreted otherwise than as dv 7’, the retracted accent replacing the circumflex, as 
elsewhere in papyri (cf. e.g. 228. int.). Hence the last word will be either dravay or 
draicay, according as the accent or the mark of quantity on the final a is accepted ; dmaicav 


acc. fem. would conflict with other evidence. 
3. |ecov edd. If, however, the facsimile may be trusted, a vestige of the letter preceding 


e is visible, indicating 8 or A. For ré|Aecor cf. Sapph. 1. 26-7 dcca d€ por red€ooa Bipos 


iuépper téXecov, 7. 3-4, Alc. 77 Zeds teA€on vonpa. 
6. gc|va: cf. e.g. Sapph. 1. 26 quoted in the preceding note; ca edd. 
7. Jp (y4lp?): J . edd., who note that p is possible. 
8. mibeoa: Cf. 1238. 2. ii. 20 midei[s. "miBetoa edd. 
g. |. avdevmeporba, od 8° ed népourba edd., suggesting that méroifa was meant. The 


facsimile indicates the expected circumflex over ev, and hardly justifies 7p, the letters being 


too small and crowded. Apparently yap ow6a is quite possible, as well as Je in front of ov. 

10. ra. Ade. edd., but a obviously cannot be correct, and the facsimile shows that the 
interlinear mark stood over the next letter and suggests a diaeresis rather than a circumflex. 
If the diaeresis is right, idd (i. e. FAX) seems necessary, but the termination remains in doubt ; 
to judge from the facsimile, Ae was followed by two letters or a letter and a high stop, or 
perhaps by a broad » 


Fr, 45. That this fragment of a title, which was found in the immediate vicinity of 
1787, belonged to the same roll is not certain ; the hand is not identical, though similar 
in type. 


1788. ALCAEUS? 


Fr. 4 18-6 x 5-8 cm. Late second century. 
Plate II (Fr. 15). 


The following lyric fragments in Aeolic dialect proceed from the same find 
as 1787, and are ina script which, though smaller, is very similar in type; the 
formation of some letters, however, notably p, is different, and the two MSS. 
cannot be taken for the work of a single scribe. <A further distinguishing feature 
is the presence in 1788 of marginalia in a small cursive, attributable to the later 
decades of the second century, and presumably contemporary with the poetical 
text. In one of these notes reference is made to the grammarian Didymus 
(Fr. 15, i. 10). Accents, breathings, &c., resemble those in 1787, but a stop in 
the low position is here used in addition to the two other kinds. To what 
extent these adjuncts are original or secondary is not clear. By an inconvenient 
coincidence the present text, like the Sappho, was accompanied by other lyric 
but not Aecolic fragments in an apparently identical hand, and a correct ascription 
of the many smaller pieces is hardly attainable. Accordingly the procedure 
adopted with 1787 is followed in this case also, and only those fragments which 


1788. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 47 


are guaranteed by the dialect have as a rule been printed. The non-Aeolic 
pieces probably come from the same roll as 1604, and are reserved for a future 
volume ; they are much broken and of no great extent. 

No coincidence has been discovered in 1788 with the extant remains either 
of Sappho or Alcaeus, and other clear proofs of authorship are absent. The 
metrical evidence, however, favours Alcaeus, and style, so far as an opinion can 
be formed from fragments so badly mutilated, points also in his direction. The 
best piece is Fr. 15, containing in the second column the first five stanzas of an 
Alcaic poem which are sufficiently well preserved to be more or less intelligible 
and include a few complete or easily completed lines. This poem, addressed to 
a person whose name does not occur, is apparently of a hortatory character, and 
contains an elaborate metaphor from a vine which promised a bountiful crop but 
might yet yield sour grapes. An appeal in the last stanza to past example is 
rather in the manner of Alcaeus; cf. 1284. 2. ii. 12, 1789. 1. ii. 7-8. Frs. 1 
and 3 are in Asclepiads, a metre evidently used by Alcaeus with some frequency. 
Fr: 1 gives a description of a natural scene (cf. Alc. 84,1283. 3. 8 sqq.)—a pleasant 
picture of cool water running down from the hills to the vineyards and of green 
reeds rustling in the breezes of spring. Fr. 2 may for the most part be in the 
same metre, but 1. 10 ends like a hexameter (cf. e. g. Alc. 45-6), and the beginning 
of a new poem is perhaps to be marked at that point ; the metre of Fr. 2. Io sqq. 
may well recur in Fr. 7. Fr. 4, a long strip containing parts of as many as 
40 consecutive lines, is in places rubbed and difficult to decipher. The metre of 
much of this was apparently again Asclepiad, but the lower portion shows 
rhythms of a different character. Asclepiads are also likely in Frs, 11 and 14 
and possible in some others. Fr. 12. ii, from the end of a poem, seems to have 
consisted of 4-line stanzas which were neither Alcaic nor Sapphic. 


48 THE (OXYRAYNCHUS FPAPYRI 
Bre. 


.« AcEdvOdoourn| 
|. Oeco’amudipvacmon, 


. -Javexxoptpavormobeve| 


vee ee JavKadaporyrGp| 
Suarerceenellevalee lAdédeconpivov,ov . | 
eho ay ea InAepavnv-Kadd . [ 


[ 
[ 
[ 
[ .|jdvcav pix povidwpapmenr 
[ 
[ 
[ 
[ 18 letters ii 


Pir. fire: 

Jworor| Ixe¢ 
‘\irare . [ ]. evero Faces 
] Ja evBerwaSev[ 
|rvévrrn| Joerau 

5 jadardpl 5 AevOepato tl 
Jav-atdex[ Jyevac: 
‘Tr-ope.] . . . [ad Jywvatkene[. Joo[ 


g 
|re@yal[ ella . orpdupe 
JuvtoyevnovpeAavepl 
10 |uuptamavTa avrnamotov. [ 
]. [-JeAttao 
JOABar dp} 
Jo[-] . » 


]r/«al 


Brig: 
.,€7u[ 


|racenn|[ 
}ueprovopn| 


1788. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 49 
Prot, 


.. PrlregdvOidos imal 
dpibeco’ amd Xipvas Tor{ 
Kpjav €x Koptghay dmmddev é 


yAlatcay Wiyxpoy vdwp dyuredf 


aos ee 
Rs 


el ember ‘. .Jav kédAapos xd@plos 
eer Bacay kel|Addets Hpwvov dv . [ 
Rarer T\nrepdvnv: Kadd . [ 
[ 18 letters yl 
Pre: Brea, 
we orf ixe 
‘V Ta TEs [ ] Md eveTw@ id Tol 
] Ja év 8 7G ddeav [ 
a\rvetmrn|, loeTat 
5 jadavdpl 5 élAevdépas of 
jav. ai 6€ kf |yevat: , 
oe @ pel. | onal [Aad ] yuvarke(s) ére[t] oo[ 
| 7@ yds (?) dporpdppel ; 


viiv 7d yévnov péday Ep[pevau 
10 «| pupta mdvta airy amd 00. [ 
]. [-Je Aivos 
joABov Sof 
lol.].v 
|t( ) (€ort 2) kal 


ir. 4; 
]. érol 

jras én 

| tpeprov spf 


50 


-THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Joupad uring, 
5 Val. .- -leor[ Baran! 
fee atoKoANoKUvTaiouTral 


‘lore a [. Jeol. . -Jeoamanl 
Won. --- vt -- JO unt 
Javapa .- | 
FOr le odyaboa'ra i! 
Sdparraf.| . [ 
|. vp. -].n--[ 
Jez[ 
Provaepl 
5 ] . woxepp| 
Jyapl‘lof-Jacce . | 
]- o.Jeverra| 
erro 
lovaaron| 
20 ]. uv. acd’ -ovyapéyo) 
|révnocacKkaral 
] - exkaurod\Aaxapiol 
ac.rocd vice] 
|rau-af.Jouvad ox . [ 
25 |roAdlackup’adl.|oe . « [ 
] . eorou7’ ovKordev. €vorr{ 
JarorvopudAretradenv Ol 
Javro . [-Joxpiparog| 
\kd. - -|r ddoper| 
30 ‘|rov-rev . del 
|kKakwverxat| Fr. 5- 
Pnyoyavakar| | ; 5 = . 
vad’ ouf.Jeoo . | 
]- d'dddool. . . Jed} | 
35 Jepat.yal nae f Yat 
Woxel-ll joa. [pe lod 
ever.) - [ , Oadl, -Jrodox{ 


5 


15 


20 


25 


35 


1788. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


Kjovpa 8 vrinoliv 
Joaf. .. .Jes mlat}das adn 
] +. ats KodokbvTais Ural 
“loracd|. Jeo. . alts amrardl 
[on CE Bes ea ah 
javapa. . [ 
|as aya0os- ra’. | 
dpa me [.]. [ 
lev ane |e) 2.2 ><) f 
le [ 
roy aiul 
|. vio Keppl 
1 yap (Jol. Jace . [ 
]. of.jer ds 7’ af 
]. 74]. xX--[ 
‘ |s vada mronlo 
].v. acd” od yap tyw 
élrévnoas Kara [ 
]. us Kat wédAAa Xapiol 
Joos, tols 8’ drriow | 
Jrav aftjodve 8 ox. [ 
] modlas kip adrlols €.. [ 
]- es Todr’ odk older, Evoin 
Jatow dpidrAgc Ta d€qy O 
] atrw .[.Jo xphuaros [ 
kd... Jr @Aopér{ 
‘|rov: tev . def 
] Kéxov éoyxar[ 
An Woxav axaz[ 
Ww: @ 8 ovfk] éoo « [ 
]. & dAdos [. . .Jedf 
jepat, yal 
} Woxelo [ 
rer] - [ 


[ 


52 


Jauf.JA€ . [ 
Ivo} 
Jacecdl 
Jefe Jal 
10 |rrtadey[ 
] - peckup| 
\xewpéov7[ 
|repatoudol 
|rayl 
15 \eév 


Frio, 


Jouer[ 
lyre 
vearan| 
\rourope . [ 
5 |ropayvl 
Jauxadde[ 


léoar[ | 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Jarovf. Jl J]. vaéppar| 
}. Azd[ 5 leparOuf. . .J8a . [ 
40 |. eAkeal mone: Jif... Jnvyl 

Fr, 6.05 Bee Fr. 8 

nd ef Jf 
Jon Leahey Joa . [ 
evo. Jud |ruroge - jaryeBof 

|i ooxal |karaype.| “TeAor[ 

5 “rodAa@v . [ 5 | + povamrval |ou-r[ 


‘parprf Ipeéel 
] . Brageo Bod} 


jovcas Japeel 
Jv Jora[ 
10 J.°[ Jrox{ 
Fr. 9 
]xOara[ 
Jrédto[ 
Joh 
Bivrr Fr. 12 
ae eer Col. i. Col. ii. 
Yuevor [ eee 
re -[ [-- J. . woe 
Ivéxe oar 5 km ele [. .JrerauBl 
lapeva . [ }. ayedr pe af 
|reodal ]. tae alraxny “| 
5 “|Anu: [ 5 Taodevd. [ 
l0nv ele’ 
(| Hndko . | 


> 
TouT Eyal 


1788. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 53 


Jarov{.Ja] ].v aéppar 
|. eAedl 5 lepa: Of. . .Jda . | 
40 J. Axea [ ] ‘H{€pp 2)ny yj 
Fr. 6. 1 oy Pane Fr. 8, 
“le. ke - f Jie] 
Jor (ess Ales coal Joca . [ 
Joevol.Judl a\nd Togo |] aly Bo 
alicyos Kal. ] Kardypee] ‘jirov f[ 
5 “| moAAav . [ 5 J+ pov amvol 5 adv: a 


Jai.]. AE. [ ‘pa teu lpeEel 
wal |. Big | B88 


] afer of jov oat Japeef 
(tercslad Joni, JoAr| 
10 d|rrs O€ y[ 10 1--[ 10 Jrox| 
]- pee Kupl 
xp’ €ov7{ 
\rep Siovdol Fr. 9. 
|rap{ ek Paral 
15 \e6r{ | wédcoly 
] moAv[ 
Fr. 10. Fr. 11. Bente: 
otter Pe as, he's Poe eink ig Col. i. Col. ii. 
jouer |uevor “ - 
7a reve aE ae le eae 
p Karan ot aL age ieee K .|re iE dat 
] tobro pe. [ Japeva . [ ]. is ea BH al 
5 |r opdyv{pe |res dal ]. tas al Ta he 7 
Jae Kad dé [ 5 \Anv: -[ 5 ies Me 4) 
doar JOnv elmé pe | 
Pel pntk 6. [ 
ee Toor ey | 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Bruta: 7 6AXak| 
Oa Mah ped Arey ERs 10) TOAAD pL 
Jloc . [ Jooerat Rt Fat pEN Neat 
Yuroval |raroo ee 
“Woval |. wdéOnv 
Jérror’ af jaiooper| 


}-[ 


Fr. 15. Col. i. Plate II. 


J 
| 


] 
] 
] 
ee 


Jeoovvovcrafovres 
Juvoverafovrer cote 
Jepeavavyew 
lvauvter 
‘Jayopa 
Joyvy? 
TAev 
|veferv 
Jovd8Y 


| 
| 


je ye@n .€ . eAwoerrav® 


15 = javterovtoutovamXKet 


J 
] 
lv aYecvotepol.] 


J 


20 joa 


Jrwo[ 


1788. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


Fr. 13. Fr, 14. moda K{ 
; s 10 6A’ vp 
Jf « [ Ejooerat jf eee 
|ucoval |raros 
 |voval |. waOnv 
lé mor al Jaioopev [ 


ee] 


] 
| 
| 
eee? 
Jes suvovorafovtes 
a luvovortalovtTés oor €- 
tortlepedv dv yew- 
5 ] vatv Eeo- 
| dyopa(v) 
] byvyior ) 
‘JA@v 
‘|vikew 


ime) | ot(tw) AiSu(pos). 


| 
] 


].vew( ) kK. €. eAws érdve, 


ie 


15 | dvti tovrou tod otix(ov) Keup(ev ). 


] 
] 
| 


py av(tt rod) eis torepolv. | 


20 joa 


56 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Fr.15 Col. ii. - Plate I. 


5 abe ma | 
Tavaiol 
bprrav| 

£ yf]kal 


ties 


ga 
= TOT @Troy| 


% 


10 ~— €frn{ 
Traperke 8 Oo} 
Odipov avaitiol 
devovtocovden|. .. + |pavort| 
racoacey|. .\vo|-jol...--- Oevord, 
15 mavoarkdKor|. gh de Jovrol 
dit Obvalkareyx|. - ++. - Jo" 
corper|.|aprl. .| - mepBEBai.Jarxpo| 
ai... 
Peat tieg namnenis ea 
Kadovyal 
TokAGppad’ edrdpal] radaor| |} 
20 = [. JukoA[‘Jyarcoraguaratoevérkn| 
ae \W[.rovavracyapamapre| 
ete Ris urraco Bese oeue hola eOngrerlagy 
[- -Jo. mu. . ndpo. [. .Jowsdutaol 
[. . -laxacw@porépaicedioato- | 
25 = [. . |rovyaporramrpoo berov 7 yl 
[. .Jeok[.|vrovde . [. .|r. [. . . v7] 
[esas (QRE*KO PTC a [as acersen. lS 
[. . .|aoravmapeye| 


Fr, 1. 1. The length of the initial lacuna in this and the following lines is determined 


by lL. 4, where [yA]av«av is evidently to be restored. Neither mreédvOns nor dekdvOns (or -6s) 
occurs elsewhere. 


1788. “NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 57 


Pee ee Olo: 


Tavatol 
oy 
opTrau|€ 


y{|kal 


Tis 7, © Tro 
_ 10 €laraly 
mapecked” of 


Saipov’ avairioly 


Sevovros ovde mi... .. |pavorr| 
TOS “COS —€y|, 0.0) lolas «5 dev od [ 
4 4 , 
15 Wavoa. Kakov [....... lovTaly 
y UA 
ai re Obva KaTey[...... Jo: 


got peév [y]ap 4d] drepBéBalrjar yxpd[vos, 
[klat Képmos dcalols ns cuvalyéploer|az (?), 
TO kKAGupa 8 éAmdpa, Kdédov yap, 

20 [olux dA[f]yars orapdras eveikn[y. 
[.-. é][t,] rovatras yap dm apuméro 
ex cea RS Beiter ccs Ae em ttre 
[. Jo. ne. py Opdmialow avras 

[Oudlakas dporépas eoicais. 

[ov] Tor yap of ra mpdc@ errovypulevor 

[. .Jeox[oly ovdé . [. Jr. [. . .]v7/ 

ere RED KO PTE 0 [tic cols ciate aera 
[OirA]aciav mapexe, 


25 


2. The first o, though rubbed, is practically certain. 
3- [@xp]av is perhaps not too much for the lacuna, p being a narrow letter., . 
4. |yAlavear is gen, plur. fem., as shown by the mark of length on ay; /. .Jav in 1. 5 was 


58 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


another word of the same kind. The language here is close to that of Sapph. 4 appl de 
(Sep) Woxpov Keddder (cf. 1. 6) 8° Vodav pariver, but the present passage can hardly have been 
the source of that fragment. 

6. The vestige of the letter after ov suggests e.g. A, X- ; ; 

7. thkehdvny : it is unlucky that the initial letter is missing, asin 1281. 1.1.27 [77 re (?), 
1238. 4. 10 [r}jAodev. mjAw rests on the evidence of grammarians. 


Fr. 2. 7. Not & MeAdwan’ (cf. 1288. 1. ii. 8). 

8. The correction of yap to yas may be by the original hand. How the letters should 
be interpreted is open to doubt, but yas is in keeping with dporpoppl, and jrayas is unknown. 

9. 1 Of yernov is not very satisfactory, but an alternative that will suit the context is not 
easy to find. 


ro. A new poem with a change of metre apparently begins here. 


Fr. 8. This fragment is very similar in appearance to Fr. 2, and at first sight a com- 
bination of 1. 6 with Fr. 2.1. 9 is attractive, but this would create difficulties both in the 
scansion of l. 8 (if yas is right) and in the marginal note in 1. 10, where yuvatxo(s) is a more 


probable reading than owvaxo(Avvd ), The two fragments may, however, well have belonged 
to the same column. 


Fr. 4. 3. e.g. dpy[y’, dpy[v. 

6. The second o of xodoxyyras has apparently been converted from v. 

7. The supposed interlinear 8 might possibly be a rather large circumflex, but the 
preceding vestige would remain unaccounted for. 

8. To the right of the cancelled 8 on the edge of a hole in the papyrus is a spot of ink 
which may be a vestige of an interlinear letter, or of an apostrophe. 

17. A vestige above wis doubtfully interpreted as a circumflex. 

1g. |s: Jeis rather suggested by the remains, but seems excluded by the metre. 

20. ov tda8’, 6vpacd are possibilities, neither very satisfactory. 

22. Three consecutive long syllables are plainly shown here by the papyrus, as 
apparently also in ll. 30 and 32-3; cf. the next note. 

25-8. The letters mod, . worov, aaw and part of o, av at the beginnings of these lines 
are on a small fragment which fits here so well that the combination is almost assured. 
A sequence of four long syllables results in 1. 26, but in view of Il. 22, 30, and 32-3 that 
cannot be regarded as a fatal objection. 

26. The stop (?) after oev is well below the line. 

27. nv6[: ywe[ is hardly possible. 

28. A mark on the edge of a hole above the doubtful o is unexplained ; possibly it was 
a grave accent, or there may have been some correction. 

38. Some vestiges above the line point to a correction. 


Fr. 5. The appearance of this fragment suggests that it is from the bottom of the 
column to which Fr. 4 belonged. 
_ 4. »[ is followed by four centimetres of papyrus on which nothing is visible, but 
owing to the rubbed condition of the fragment it is not clear that the line ended here. 
6. Cf. Fr. 4. 22, n.; but iu{épp|yv hardly fills the lacuna. 


Fr. 6. 3. The accent on a is doubtful ; it might be e. g. a mark of length. 
4. io: or fio. 


13. Siougo| : cf. 1288. 1. ii. 12. 


1788. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 59 


Fr. 7. 4. xardype recurs at the end of a line in 1288. 11. 9; cf. Sapph. 43. 
8. v is a correction from If v is right, oa is presumably the possessive pronoun. 


Fr. 9. That this fragment is Aeolic is shown by the accent in 1. 2. 


__ Fr. 11. This fragment, at the right-hand side of which there is a junction between the 
seltdes, may come from Fr, 15. i, but does not join on immediately, at any rate. 


Fr. 12. ii, 3. There is no paragraphus below this line. 
_I1. The supposed coronis is uncertain, being represented only by part of a thin 
vertical stroke immediately in front of ]. 10. 


Fr. 13 is included here on account of its similarity to Fr. 14, which is apparently 
Aeolic. 


Pr. 15. i. 4. |epeav: or perhaps lepe[elav. 

10. Didymus is known to have written a book sept Aupixdv ronrev, but this seems to 
have been of a historico-literary nature rather than a critical iméuynua of the kind indicated 
by the present passage. It is, however, likely enough that his voluminous commentaries 
included a treatise on the Lesbian poets, as well as on Pindar and Bacchylides. 

ii. 3. Either dudr| or dpa6[ can be read. 

g. As in 1787. 34. 1, 7 may represent either re or roe. 

II. mapéoxe6’ here provides a parallel for Powell’s admissible suggestion mepaxéOowa in 
1281. 1.1. 18. 

13. er: Ore’. i 

14. ey[: oren|. The letter following |v may well be o. 

16. The accent on a might be taken for a mark of short quantity. | is possible in 
place of x{. 

18. For the (Doric) form js for jv cf. 1860. 1.9, where js is better taken as 3rd person, 
and 1281. 55. 4, where 7s is probably to be recognized; #v, which is read in Sapph. 106, 
may now well be emended. The following word as originally written was apparently 
guvatper|ar (-ayp- is possible), which was amended in some way, perhaps by the substitution 
of a[ep| or alyep| for a, but there has been no deletion. 

1g. For the doubled p in kaya cf. e.g. Sapph. 1. 16 xdAnpyt, 14. 1 and the Halle 
fragment vénupa, 1281. 13. 4 é|rénuper. xadov yap is evidently parenthetical. madaov which 
was first written = mddaov (adv.), mddaos being the Aeolic form according to Eust. 28. 33. 
Whether the correction is due to the original hand or to a dzortholes is not evident. 

21. Vestiges above the line suggest y rather than 7, and e.g. é]y{:] well suits the 
conditions; but 7 is possible, if some interlinear addition is supposed. What has been 
taken for a high stop in front of rovavras may be part of the preceding letter. 

22. The letter after jv has been corrected, but what was intended is hardly determinable 
as the line stands. Apparently o was first written, and through this there is a vertical stroke 
(«?), with a vestige of ink close by on the edge of a hole in front of o. Perhaps |vos was 
altered to |wos, Further on, if o and e are rightly read, the intervening letter, which had 
a vertical stroke, was presumably y or r. 

23. For the interpretation of this line much depends on the identity of the letter printed 
as n before 5p. The first stroke of the 7 has the form of a narrow oval, and it is therefore 
questionable whether & should be read instead of n. But the oval is considerably narrower, 
and the cross-stroke longer, than in a normal 6, and & is, moreover, intractable metrically. 
Perhaps then the scribe began to write « and converted this to yn. If n is right, -nye py 
would be suitable enough. The first visible letter must be either 8, o, p, or ¢, and next 
to this the slight remains suit the upper part of a 8 better than anything else.  [rd]p8nuu 


60 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


would sufficiently satisfy the conditions, if that word were likely. For dpé . |. jou, dpda[orjouw 
naturally suggests itself but is difficult in the context. Possibly Spén[olow or dpdnlorlow may 
be restored on the analogy of 1284. 2. i. 9 tpémny, ii. 7 dvérpore. The high stop after this 
word seems superfluous in any case. ae 

25. érovnulevor: cf. 1789. 1. i. 5 (v.1. erovdp., probably correct) and Alc. 46 éndvaow 
Zuou yeyérnoOat, which has been gratuitously altered to én’ dvaow. There is more to be said 
for the correction eorye yéver Oat. 

26. |r: or y or. 


27. e.g. kapred, kaprep|. : 
28. [8umAJaciay is perhaps not too much for the lacuna when allowance is made for the 


slope of the column. 


1789. ALCAEUS. 


Pror 0 41°75c15"2 Cm. First century. Plate II 
(Frs. 1-3, Col. i). 


The authorship of these fragments, consisting of parts of two columns and 
a number of disconnected pieces, would have been sufficiently clear even without 
the occurrence in them of Alcaeus 19, part of an Alcaic stanza cited by 
Heraclides Ponticus, whereby their source is definitely proved. This coincidence 
is found in Fr. 1, i. 15-18, and it becomes plain that the lines quoted by 
Heraclides were the beginning of a poem, of which we now recover the con- 
tinuation in the following column, where Alcaeus’ favourite metaphor of a storm- 
tossed ship is carried on for a further two lines. Since the height of the column 
is unknown, the extent of the lacuna between Col. i. 19 and Col. ii. 1 cannot be 
determined, but it may be only one line and is hardly likely to have exceeded 
five lines, which would give three stanzas for the development of the metaphor. 
Six more stanzas at least followed, of which however only one and a half are 
sufficiently well preserved to be intelligible and capable of restoration. In these 
the poet passes from allegory to precept, and urges his fellow-citizens to courage 
and endurance and to emulation of their ancestors. The subject of the preceding 
poem, the conclusion of which survives in a mutilated form in the upper portion 
of Col. i, is obscure. It presumably belonged, like the other, to the class of 
Sracwwtixd ; there are references to marriage (ll. 7, 14), but whether these have 
anything to do with the marriage of Pittacus, to which allusion is made in 
1234, 2. i. 6, remains doubtful. As the text stands its chief point of interest lies 
in the metrical scheme, which seems clearly to be a stanza of four lines, the 
first three being lesser Asclepiads and the fourth a Glyconic. This stanza was 
used repeatedly by Horace (i. 6, 15, 24, 33, li. 12, iii. 10, 16, iv. 5, 12) who has 
commonly been credited with its invention, but his debt now becomes evident. 
That the similar stanza with a Pherecratic for the third verse (e.g. Horace i. 5, 


1789. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 61 


14, &c.) was borrowed from Alcaeus had already been suspected on the ground 
of Alc. 43 ; another (previously unknown) form of Asclepiad stanza is exemplified 
in 1234. 2.i. From the remaining fragments not much can be extracted. In 
Fr. 6, which is in Alcaics, a mention of the Pelasgi is noticeable, and there seem 
to be other. historical references. The character of Fr. 12, in the same metre, 
is indicated by the occurrence of the word povapyia as well as by a reference to 
Myrsilus in a marginal note. Alcaics are perhaps also to be recognized in 
Frs. 24 and 25. Fr. 13 may be in the Sapphic stanza, and Fr. 29 possibly in 
Asclepiads. 

The round upright script of this text is rather smaller and less ornate, but 
otherwise very similar to that of 1861 (Bacchylides, Scoiia, Part XI, Plate 3), the 
characteristic letters e, 0, and € being formed in just the same way with a dot in 
the centre disconnected from the other strokes. Of ¢ which in the Bacchylides 
has a vertical bar joining the horizontal strokes in the centre, there is here no 
example, but a similar archaic formation is presumable. 1861 was referred to 
the first century, a date which finds some confirmatory evidence in the cursive 
annotations of the present papyrus, which are not likely to be far removed in 
time from the main text. Apparently two secondary hands are to be dis- 
tinguished, and the interlinear alternative readings, which are not infrequent, 
may be due sometimes to one and sometimes the other. Stops in two positions 
are used (a double dot, of uncertain meaning, is found in Fr. 1. i. 11), and marks 
of elision and quantity are fairly plentiful. The dzasto/é employed to divide 
words, more usually (cf. e.g. 1787-8) inserted at the base of the letters, is 
in this text placed like the sign of elision (e.g. Fr. 1. i. 6, 17), which it also 
resembles in shape. <A ligature below the line occurs once (Fr. 17). These 
additions seem to be largely secondary; the paragraphi, however, are most 
probably original. 


62 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Fra, -Col.j. Plate IIE. 
[eae a ersacr ns eit Warsrareadl [ 


uerenetes (49 ].. patoexne: tr 2 letters ]7.. py 

(Ro seo . . .|edpockakal Jvev? 

teen ints a2 Worl. .|roo[.\Oa . ook . | ] 
Bake bane was Jevérwpnde’ mov ypel. jot .| 

[- sees v "aétKea: fapevovrov lee 

eee Se |re[. |Kexp|. |uevoryaper 

(Seater ce |keEvotogo. ‘|uel.. . ] 

[eters ans Jrak’duravyAvKewo|. . | -ravral. aur 
LOn[plewooas loikevoexny. Fr. 2. 

(aterdtore Jexa:76AXaol. |r rf apn. al. .| rape 

een \wevnv-al. .Jpe | worroral 

haksiseesanes \oer’drmoraa | Yue. . vf 

(eestayens ]. nrydpor| | Fria. Colo 
TBO ets Genes |rexvpaton|.jorel. 2. 2 ] 

He 

(rok ens lrapeserdalac cs sce atau JoAur 

foiierisa sists ve beixe valent teas os ] 

Ceicocae irae JopeBe ] 


Broz Cols ii: 
papgopel wooxior| 
eo 0 éxupovdipevad pol 
“CLs 
KQLUNTLVOKYOO LOAOT 
Aaxn-mpodnrovyappey| 


es 
5 pvacOnreTarrapobapl 


vurtiadynpdokiwooye| 


1789. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


[ Soro OU Bab | ++ pals exn oil 12 letters ileevens. (p27) 
[eke dsen etsy © | & mpobs Kaka [ Jvevo( 
(abet tress or [. .Jroco[.]Oa . os k . [ 
tn Baten: lever pnd érrovrue[ voc 
[¢apevovrolv aelkea. fapevovrov fapeverwoay. 
[eh eseraststaat « |refs] Kekp[f|uevos yape 
aeeeegeee | kev €vorodgo| py |ue[vos 
[ihe eed « ra kK adrav yduKéws |... .] Tav tal. .Jooe( ). 
to [.... Baloirevs Exnv. Fr. 2. 
einai lexa mOAAaS Ta. apn.al.. Tapel 
eS ope: |e wévny: afi yad]p Eo réra 
[tears seston ¢ yéwour’ dmmora N.lue.. v 
leaserele ].n yapov. 
Pt.) (Cola 


15 [TS Snore Kdpa TO miploré pw ‘vépo| 
[orefyer] mapé~er S A[ppe movov m]ddvv 


[avrAnv, émed Ke vajos euBa 


Freie. Golcti. 


papkdped’ ds Skio7[a —¥ 
eis 0 Exupov Aiveva Spd[pwper. 
Kal ph tev’ OKvos podOlakos dupéwv ? 
AGB, mpddnrov yap peyla ovppépov" ? 
5 prdoOnte TO ma poida ployer? 


viv tis dvnp Sdxipos yelvérw. 


63 


64 
Io 
15 
Fr3.. Col; ii. 
20 


[ ie 
=| 


THE OXYRAYNCHUS< TAL YR 


KaLULNnKaTaLaxvv@per| 
éodooToKNnacy GovT al 
[. Jravdl 

TavTrol 

éovre Fr. 4. 
ToVEO| 

eotKel ] 
Tail 
ard . [ 


al Jope| 

a le tOpeta . [ 

. atray| 
] . Katpan’éoval 

5 |vdv7’adpoorodl 
|reAdoywvatodl 


fea cee | 
vagyAagvpal 
Jekipoane . [ 
10 Inacotr| 


Jp par| 


leworT .. 


Jere 


Fe. 
Jradewo- 
lv -ravBa. [ 
~~ Bapyatpova| 
|vov. 


atroAch ep | 
pevov 


i. 
| 


Jets, toe 


anf 


ludée . [.|v 


lvvexer 


10 


20 


1789. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


‘ ‘\ 7 ’ , 3) 
Kal pay KaTaoxvvopev [avavdpia ; 
a 4 a d/ 7 
€sAors TOKNAS yas Uma kl[ElMevo's, 
[ol ?] radvdle? 


Tay modu - 
éovTe s Fr. 4. Bik: 
Tav ofl 
elouke | ] Jered, 
Tails joel 
ddA. [ jor} 


nt Fr. 6. Fr. 7. 
nt Mw con wt ae Soe 2 émjradéus. 
vel ] 3 gfa | 
df ja idpeta . [ \ Bak alee 
[ ea ieslicune cayerayt -pe|vov. 
a ]. Kal pan tov af aos : 


5 |vdvr’ d&idpos médlr 
] Ileddoyov Aiodr{id ] 
] mor’ é€ ’Emeiwv ? 


a\vak yrAadpipal 


Oo 
— 


je Kipoa no. [ Pr. 8. 
10 Jnacow | 
Jor oparl le wor... anj 


Judde . [.]v 


66 . THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Fro, Bye; ‘ Ee pare 
wderan[ |. paar ] 
eae iBnv’ef ao 
japeooer’al aeal |oxdxkor{ 
|. ocoude 
Barer: Fi 3: Fr. 14, Peau. 
he Jopor{ 
appl. rf | |. ogf Jovy[ 
Joopever| ]. vuvpal Sight 
Jovapytavde lpm piv bal 
5 |ndedexop[ jdéunv Fr. 16. Lane 
] + cOnugol 
]. octr’dro . [ javaz[ Joze 
Javeov-ex[ Jorace, [ ] 
‘ 
]. [-Jpuporou 
be) J...e6.. vl] .8e.. a Pr 19. Fr. Ti{8)- 
oGios ee. © sx . : 
lee xsl ]. vdedor 
lavz[ |réivarrpog| 
Pr 20, Pr 21, Pr; Fras; 
Maral paxagl Irapuer[ Jevuoe el 
\Wexar \rapeyar{ or “Wovr’ ail 
] le faioroy\), \roradya| q 
on 
| 
JOckoos [ 


1789. ‘NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 
Fr, 9. Fr. 10. rad, 
y & 78 | |. phar| 
ow sronol jénv of Acao| 
ylap éooer af ]. pn ls kako [ 
]. os ovdef oo er 
Fr, 12: Prue Fr. 14 Broa}. 
Je jopor| 
jov 


] 

\O dunfely [ ] Tks 
jos pever{ ] ; 

Hjovapxiay dé [ ] 
5 wlnde dexdpled 
]- Lonugol 
] + oct 7’ dro . [ ] 
Jaivey: é€x[ ] 

| 
]. [-] Mupotaou 

se) W665 is ciel] otis acl 


Ilna. ey. 


Fr. 20. Rie OP, 


€)AA fray 


We kai 
] 


| mapper| 
| téra OH nfo 


| 
5 Pev|dixws: [ 


\s 


Be. 19. 
j.v d& pol 
| tia mpod| 
Fr. 23. 
|x ake vs 


“Wor all 


ta 


67 


a 


68 
A ayy 
ravrade val 
JamroAduT any 


] . Taemol 


ref 


Fr, 28. 


THEN OSYRHYNCHUS FAPYRI 


Fr, 25. 


Joa 
|urroval 


Joegeraud| 


ie 
]. . omdio[ 
]dopovol 
Jetwopocaiar| 
is Jocovtaror| 


\Bpopocevol 


]vewdy 
Jacvoper| 


Fr.296. 
}.[ 
}. er[ 


Fr. 26. Bir 27. 
Ippo Jerr . [ 
Jorae- | Jar 
Japereo} Jee, 
\iparrec . [ os 
5 Jenél 
Fre3c, Pr. 41, 
Jad, kaxool 
Jév dpi Je- 
Inne ]rorrov| 
lyapayn| 


].- eyor[ 
5 Jel 


Pigs 
Javad . [ 
Japzn: . [ Fy..34. 
eeu 
Jotkaro| 

Fr. 37. Fras. 
Kp Ja 

Yee Jueya. a, 

Prat 


1789, 


Prova, 


wv mdvra d€ val 


|] arédAvTar rf 


]. Tae Tol 


ref 


Fr. 28. 


Frs735. 

Jor 

Jepot vf 
Kr 50, 


]- 


5 


NEW CLASSICAL . FRAGMENTS 


Pr 25. 


1 
Jowar [ 
|errove| 


| dé€erar Of 


5 ra Ka{[ 
y af 
Bro20. 


|. Ka7[ 


].. 8 maio[av ? 


| ddpuov of 
Jet popos atoz[ 
v|écov taro [ 
\Bpopos ev of 
pa |viody 
Lacy operfov 


Fr. 26. 


\pool 
jarat. [ 
JapeTteo[ 
| 


tpa me. 


5 le pe 


Benak: 


] Kadkos [ 
je Tézrov [. 
] yap dyn 
].. eyor[ 
Babe Bel 


70 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


i ly’ gio] i o 
a |ucy 6u[ i 
- 
jwveor| ] « nrepurpol ] 
5 |e ae Syyy JordAAgl 
yy 5 ] dav. 


Fr. 1. i. 1 sqq. The length of the initial lacunae is estimated from ll. 15-17; in one 
or two lines the resulting number of letters is rather scanty, e.g. 1. ro, but could be slightly 
increased if one or two narrow letters such as a, 1, A, p be supposed to have occurred. 

1. The two first and two last letters, of which only the bases remain, were round. 

2, ]xvpais, €. g., would be consistent with the very slight vestiges preceding p. In the 
note opposite this line the horizontal dash possibly distinguishes a syllable separately 
mentioned. The note may have been continued in a second line. 

3. Jvev 6 (Ole perhaps vey, : 

4. The letter after 6 may be either a or A, the papyrus being damaged where the 
cross-bar of the a would be. The following vertical stroke is so close to o that the choice 
seems limited to or p. A small slightly curved stroke starting from near the base of this 
letter on the right-hand side is not easily accounted for and was possibly unintentional. 
[\Japos could be read but is unconvincing in so doubtful a context, especially as a broader 
letter than « would be expected. After x, « or p is perhaps most likely. 

5» plevero, ab|evéra, otlevéro? For emovnpe|y jot of. E7SS. 6a... 25, n.- “fet them 
not return evil for good’; the das/olé was wrongly placed. The interlinear variant 
érovdpelv|oe Supports the form emdvacw in Alc. 46. 

6. v after the lacuna is due to the hand which wrote (auevoyroy in the margin; the 
a following also shows signs of alteration. To judge from ll. 15-17, something rather 
shorter than ¢apevovroy originally stood in the text. 

8. évoropo[py|ue[vos : the verb was apparently not previously attested. 

g. yAuxews: if the first letter is y, which looks probable, the second must be either a or 
A, and v« are consistent with the very scanty vestiges in the third and fourth place. The 
question of the reading here is complicated by the marginal annotation, which is no doubt 
a variant, the letters rav and wo corresponding with the text ; but there seems to have been 
a considerable divergence otherwise, since yA{ cannot be read. 

11-13. Fr. 2, which was found with Fr. 1, has been assigned to the ends of these lines 
with considerable hesitation. Its external appearance is favourable to the combination, and 
the resulting reading in ll. 12-13 a yalp é“ou TOTa... yé|vour’ émmota runs well, but the ends 
of ll. 11 and 13, especially the former, are difficult. In |. 11 a letter is desirable, though 
perhaps not absolutely essential, between o and z, after which either a or A can be read. 
Earlier in the line the small colon before 7é\A\ao is possibly a stop, such double dots 
being sometimes used for punctuation, even in company with single dots (cf. e. g. 1809-10) ; 
or it may be connected with the marginal adscript. In Fr, 2 the letter before ay is 
represented by a mere speck, which is capable of many interpretations; that before the 
final a was y, «, p,orr. In the marginal note opposite it is not clear whether the mark 
above the last letter denotes an abbreviation. In |. 13 on the edge of the papyrus above the 
left-hand upright of » there is a small semicircular mark which might be e. g. the remains of a 
dot enclosing an over-written letter. In ]. 12 ad6]: pévqy may be suggested (cf. 1787. 36. 2). 


1789. .NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 7 


Wy’ egéol 1A 
ee v by buf are, 
y+ | 
3 a éor| ] «1 Trepurpol ] 
) 5 ]...w[ Jo 76AXal 
5) 84u 


14. €|xne or \alyye would suit the vestiges. The first letter may be a, x, A, or x, the second, 
1) H,¥,73; and yépor, -ot Or -e are equally possible. 

15-18 = Alc. 19, from Heraclid. Adleg. Homer. 5 dpoiws 8€ ta ind robvrou (sc. Mupaidov) 
aimtrépevos érépaOi mov déyet* Td «tA. How the end of 1. 15 should be restored is still 
uncertain. The MSS. of Heraclides give 76 TpoTeép@ veouw OT (AB) T® Tpotepw veww, for 
which rév T pot €pov Ope has been conjectured by Seidler, TOV T. OVH by Bergk, TO 7. veov by 
Hermann, 76 7. ’véym by Gaisford, and 76 7. ’véuw by Blass. Of these the last alone is 
consistent with the papyrus, though ’éu is not of course necessarily right. Fr. 37, which 
possibly belongs here, does not help. 

16. The v. 1. mapefqe is abnormal. 

17. «uPaiver Heraclid., eu8a Seidler, €u8a vi(ara), i.e. vetara, Bergk, who also suggests 
euBailvy Kita, terpaéduxtos Gua, a restoration which is now put out of court by the papyrus, 
though the true version of the fourth line of the stanza is not yet within reach. 

19. jo: € is equally possible. That a dot further on above the line represents a stop 
is quite uncertain. 


ii. 1. Perhaps dxor[a roixous, as Murray suggests, but the object may have stood in the 
preceding line and this one have ended with e. g. vaos (Lobel). 

2. es: cf. 1. 13, 1284. Fr. 1. ro (Part XI, p. 56), and Sapph. 1. 19, where the MSS. 
give es. is is normal for Aeolic, though és is hardly to be avoided in 1282. Fr. 2. 3. 

3. For pddéaxos, which seems to be novel, cf. 1238. i. 2. 10 xd@apov, &c.; the super- 
scribed variant would eliminate the Aeolism, as in 1. 5 below and Fr. 22. 2.  dkvos 
pdrGaxos is comparable to e. g. xAwpdv déos. Asan alternative to dupéwr or dupéwy a participle 
like cioBadov or eureowy may be suggested. 

4. The v. 1]. AaBy seems preferable to Aaxn. oupdepov is highly conjectural; the clause 
may alternatively be regarded as giving the reason for the warning, e. g. méy.a xeiy’ dpnv, as 
Lobel suggests. 

5. mdpoiba is analogous to e.g. imoOa, At the end of the verse p[@~o seems to suit the 
contrast between 7® mdpo.da and the emphatic viv at the beginning of the next line better 
than e.g. p[éy4o or p[vAo ; the v.]. r@v is however perhaps rather in favour of one of the 
latter words. 

8. godors téKnas: Cf. 1284. 2.11. 12 éodAwy Covres ex ToKHov. 

13. lowe: or eioixe(r’? Cfn.on |. 2. But es may be the termination of a divided word. 

23. The position of the visible remains suits a stichometrical figure (a? 6?) rather than 
an initial letter, for though the scribe has, as usual, a tendency to edge towards the left as 
he proceeds with the column, the movement is elsewhere only gradual; moreover, the 
horizontal stroke projects considerably too far for his usual paragraphus. On the other 
hand the supposed figure is closer to the column than would be expected, 


Frs. 4-5. These two small fragments were found, like Fr. 2, with the bulk of Fr. 1. 


G2 THE OXYRHYNCHUS FPARYERE 


somewhat apart from the rest, but it does not of course necessarily follow that they belong 
to that column. 


Fr. 6. 2. Either ja’ (dastolé) or ¥ (elision) can be read, At the end of the line a was 
perhaps followed by a round letter (o ?) the ink of which has run slightly. 

5. a&Spos occurs in Jon 34, and cf. Etym. Magn. didpootvn, Pindar, Wem. 1. 63 
auSpodixas, 

7. The occurrence of the Doric moka here is strange, ora, as in the v. 1., being well 
attested for Aeolic. 

9. The remains of this line are difficult. According to the Etym. Magn. Kipoa was 
another form of Kippa, the Phocian coastal town, and a geographical name is not out of 
keeping with the rest of this fragment, especially if yAapvpal in 1. 8 be taken to imply vijes. 
But the following letters are awkward, There are slight vestiges round a small hole in the 
papyrus above the a, so that a letter may have been added, but the traces suggest nothing 
suitable. 


Fr, 7. This fragment and the next both show a junction between two selzdes and 
almost certainly belong to the same column, Fr. 7 being from the top of it; but there seems 
to be a lacuna between them, There is a similar junction in Fr. 11, but that that fragment 
came from the same column as Frs. 7 and 8 is doubtful. 

1. ém|radéws, like tav ba- in 1. 3, is a v.]., as is indicated by the enclosing dots. 

5. dmodedeu[pevov is a gloss probably referring to the last word of the verse, the 
termination of which corresponds. The question arises whether pevov in the second line of 
the scholium is part of the word azo\eAetupevov or of a second explanatory participle; it is 
much more cursively written, and on the whole is best regarded as distinct and the writer 
as the author of the more cursive annotations in Fr. 1. i. 


Fr. 8. 2. « is followed by a vertical stroke consistent with e. g. yw, », 7, p. 
4. 3 |uvexet, ov |yvéxer ? 

5» @.g. avl@vupoy, ét@vupoy, The corrector wished to double the »v. 

6. The variant here seems to be by the original hand. 

8. Some vestiges opposite this line are very doubtfully deciphered. 


Fr. 9. 1. » is preceded and followed by the bases of vertical strokes which can be 
variously read. 

3- ylap éocer’: or mlapéooer’? A small curved mark above the 7 appears to be part of 
a sign of elision. 


Fr. 12. 4. ¢« is very doubtful: o or @ is equally possible. 
6. of: or «|. 
7. tro .[: or tn’ d.[. As the last letter p, », or m is probable. 


8. This was no doubt the last verse of the column. 
1o-I1. The ink here is much effaced. 


Fr. 18. This fragment may well be from the top of a column. 
3- Perhaps ‘Jatm», with éalvar . . in the previous line; but |aynv is possible. 


Fr. 17. The ligature below the line shows that the letters belong to a compound word. 


Fr. 19. That this fragment belongs to 1789 is not certain. 


Fr. 22. 2. For the v,], removing the Aeolic form cf, Fr. 1. ii. 3,n. The last letter may 
be y instead of 7. 


1789. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS. 73 


Fr. 23. 3. If the dot was a high stop, this line was separated from the preceding one 
by an unusually broad space. 

Fr. 25. 6. The mark after y may signify either elision or division of words. 

Fr, 26. 2. The supposed stop is uncertain and is perhaps the vestige of another 
letter (o?). 


Fr. 28. This fragment from the bottom of a.column does not come from Fr. 1. ii, and 
the appearance of Fr, 32 is also different. 


Fr. 29. 4. Possibly dor[os or -ov, as in Aesch. Zum. 565. m= may be read instead of 
t, but not « or another vowel, apparently. as cannot be Acc. Plur, Fem. unless the accent 
was mistaken. 

7» paluody is a gloss on pJauoper[ov. 


Fr. 31. 2. The interlinear « is part of a variant. 
Fr. 32. 3. & rd[Aas? 


Fr. 33. 2. The dot after pu» (?) is raised a little above the line, and might possibly 
belong to an interlinear v.1., instead of being a stop. 


Fr. 40. This fragment is probably from the bottom of a column, but is apparently not 
to be connected with Fr. r2, in spite of the similarly placed scholia. 

2. The significance, if any, of the dot on the left of the accent is not evident. 
A corresponding dot on the right cancelling the accent should be visible if written. The 
occurrence of the accent is rather against the supposition that the « was to be deleted. 


Fr. 41. 1. JA- is an interlinear v.1. 
5. The variant djvu implies davre in the text. 


1790. IBYCUS. 


Height 20 cm. First century .c. Plate III 
(Frs. 2 + 3, Col. ii). 

Remains of three consecutive columns from the end of a roll containing lyric 
poetry in Doric dialect, with a few smaller pieces from a preceding column or 
columns. The good-sized and ornate but rather crabbed uncials are of a decidedly 
early type, and seem to belong to the middle or latter half of the first century 
b.C. Stops in two positions (high and middle), marks of diaeresis and quantity, 
breathings and accents have been inserted not infrequently, and many of these 
have the appearance of being subsequent additions, due perhaps to the writer of 
the cursive note at the foot of the third column, whose hand suggests the first 
century A.D. 

The short third column, besides having a blank space below it, is 
succeeded by a complete width of 13 centimetres of papyrus, but unfortunately 
this contains no title and the identification of the poet is left to conjecture. 
Internal evidence, however, so narrows the choice that only one name seems 


74 THE OXVYRHYNCHUS FAPYEI 


practically possible,*that of Ibycus of Rhegium. In the penultimate line the 
author addresses Polycrates, to whom he ascribes imperishable fame. This can 
hardly be other than the well-known tyrant of Samos, who became a patron of 
the arts, and to whose court went Anacreon and, according to the common accepta- 
tion of a rather confused note in Suidas, also Ibycus.| Anacreon is excluded 
at once by the dialect, which however is entirely suitable to Ibycus. A further 
argument in favour of the identification is provided by the metre, in which 
among some less expected features the dactylic sequences frequent in the extant 
fragments of both Ibycus and Stesichorus are prominent. 

The previously known fragments of the poet, apart from isolated words and 
references, number a bare thirty, and the longest of them consists of but eleven 
lines, so that a consecutive piece of about four times that length, assuming that 
it is his, must be reckoned a very substantial gain. It relates to the story of 
Troy, to which several of the extant fragments also refer (Ibyc. 9, 11-13, 
34-8, Bergk). After speaking of the destruction brought down on the city of 
Priam by the beauty of Helen the poet disclaims any intention of celebrating 
the various actors in that great drama, a theme better suited to the art of the 
Muses than to mere human skill. By this negative method he contrives to 
glance at the chief figures and several incidents of the story. The style is simple 
and flowing, and there are repeated Homeric reminiscences in the phraseology. 
While the general effect is pleasing enough, what remains of this poem can 
hardly be said to justify the somewhat arrogant claim of the closing passage, in 
which the author implies that his poetic fame will rival that of his patron in 
other fields. But the recovery of a considerable specimen of his heroic manner, 
of which the present may presumably be taken as a sufficiently representative 
sample, is none the less welcome. 

Metrically the piece is of much interest. Though, as in 1861, the copyist 
contrary to the usual practice has not indicated the main divisions by paragraphi, 
the strophic responsion is evident. A short strophe and antistrophe of four lines 
is followed by an epode of five lines, the scheme being as follows :— 


Strophe. 


YU VY 
— Yeu 


SY UU 
: u Suidas, s.v. “IBuxos, says... yéver ‘Pyyivos* evOévie eis Sapov HAGE, Ste abrijs Hpxe MoAuxparns, 6 rod 
rupavvov maThp.  xpovos 5é oftos 6 émt Kpoicov, ’OAvpmds v5’. Maas (Pauly-Wissowa, Realencycl.) regards 
this visit to Polycrates as uncertain, on account of the confused dating—an inadequate reason, since the 
main fact would no doubt be attested by the poems themselves while the dates would be added by the 


commentators. 6 700 Tupdvvov maryp is a riddle. Schneidewin’s suggested solution 6 rod rupavyvixod or Tay 
; z : ies 
Tupavvwy mparos, is unconvincing. 


1790. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS iS 


Epode. 
HIRI) SY) ET) OF 
SU VY KU 
CO Se 


ON pee a Na Beet oN, oe EN ene 


5 ORC ener Ome) 


It was maintained by Schneidewin (/dyci Religu. p. 78) that Ibycus like 
Stesichorus used lengthy strophes similar in compass to those of Pindar. We 
now see that this is not true of all his poems at any rate, if indeed of any ; and 
the more cautious judgement of Maas (Pauly-Wissowa, /ealencycl.) is well 
justified. Of the individual verses employed several have parallels in the existing 
fragments, scanty as they are. The dactylic dimeter of the strophe occurs 
repeatedly ; see Ibyc. 1. 5-6, 5.1-2, 16. 4, and cf. Stesichorus 2. For Strophe ]. 3, 
cf. Ibyc. 1. 8, 9. 2, for Epode 1-2, Ibyc. 15,18, 27, Stesich. 10, 48, and for Ep. 3, 
ibyc. 26. 1, Stesich.-48. 

A purer dialect is shown by these fragments than by the extant remains of 
Ibycus and Stesichorus, where the mixture of forms is partly no doubt due to 
copyists. fewandras (1. 10) and [ovAvkpdrns (1. 47, TloA. Pap.) are metrical 
Ionisms which appear also in Pindar. éo@dds is apparently written, and 
édevoayv (1. 18) is noteworthy. Whether éyjvaro in 1. 41 is more than a 
vagary of the papyrus is not clear. No example occurs of the oxjjpa ‘[Svxetor. 
In its accentuation the papyrus follows the Doric system (e.g. 1 2 nvdpov, 
18 rodvydupor, 23 pdioai, 24 euBdiev, 47 €€ets) found also in 8, the Paris Alcman, 
and the Berlin fragments of Corinna (Berl. Klasstkertexte, V. xiv). The additional 
accents supplied in the reconstructed text follow the same system so far as 
possible, but the present state of our knowledge does not enable this to be carried 
out with much confidence. 


76 


Io 


15 


20 


25 


30 


THE OXYRAYNCHRUS FARCE. 


Fre, tea, (Colst: 


lJadapdavidam piaporope 
\rumepixrdeeooABovnvapor| | 
jobevopyupevot 
|voopeyadotoBovaaio 
WwOdoedrcvacrrepterdet 
|pevrodvupvove |. yTET 
[Newovkaradak pl. elevra{ ] 
jyapovdave.jaradareipio[ \ra 
‘Jooebeipavd|.Jaxumpidax 
|vdepobutegevardravn| |v 
JerOvpovouteravi. .|up| | 
\iveacoavopav 
Japovorerraidacaddov[ 

J 
] 


JowvapeTav 


tacOurypimvAooadwal|. . «|. [ 


x 
apavevupov-ovdet| 


JepadavovovoreKdidal 
|rodAvydugoedێvoal 
|atkaxovnpwacer 6 


|. evkperovayape| 


Firs. 24-3) “Colek 


[TpxemAcoO[. . .\SacBacir[. .Joayoravdpear 


atpeooeo|....|. aloexn.. .|o- 
KaiTape. . . .|udurarcecog). .|€var 
eDeAtK@vid. JeuBdievroyl. 5 
Ovatoadouk|.|vavnp 

dtepof.. . 2. |rackaoTaetrrot 


yaar [ie wes jeAaocarravaAisor 


atyatovel. . .|yrovarapyeoo 


NAVOE,. c.ceueeae 1 


[.|amorpopo..... jepoteo 
[-]aAkaon[..... jecayatoy 


Io 


20 


30 


1790. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


aN 


al 


Hirsi. 2COld: 

[ot klat Aapdavida IIpidpoto pé- 
y daolrv mepixdcés bABiov Hvdpov 
[Apy]oev dpvupévor 
[Zn|vos peydro.o Bovadais 
[EalvOads “EXévas trepi cider 

Jpty troAdvupvoy €x[olvres 
[mo]Acuor Kata daxplvolevra, 
[ITép}yapov 8 ave Bla radrareipiol[y d]ra 
[xpu]ooéGerpay [ela Kumpida. 
[vi d€ por ovre fe.vardray II [dépilv 


€ lod 


[jv] émOdpiov ovte Tavilodlplor] 
[ouynv Kaococdydpay 


[II pilapord te maidas ddXov{[s 
[Tpolias 8 dirbro10 dAwoi[y, d}y’ 
[ovK] dp avdvupov: ovd? émlavépxopar ? 
[7plowv apetay 

[Umlepdgavov ovate Koidale 

[vdes] modvybpgoe edetoaly 

[Tpoile kaxdv fpwas eaO[Aovs: 

[ray] wey Kpeiov Ayapé vor 


Frs. 2-3. Col. 1. 
[Aloxe Idec O[evildas Baoirled|s dyos avdpay 
Arpéos éo[OAod] mais Ex mlaTpdls. 
kai Ta pay av] Moloa cecogiticplévac 
ev ‘EXixovidles] éuBalev frby(o] 
Ovaros 5° o& klely avijp 
depo[s] TX Exaara €imrot 
vaav, als Mevlédaos adn’ Avdidos 
Aiyatov dia mélvtov an’ "Apyeos 
Aude | Aapdavialy 
[{|jrmorpogolv, as dle pores 
[x]laAxdon[ides, uljes Axalcjov. 


GVTLOTP. 
> 

€Tr. 

OTp. 

d 
QUTLOTP. 
eT. 

OTp. 

’ 
QUTLOTp. 

, 
€T. 


78 


40 


45 


THE: OXVRHYNCHUS PAPXEI 


[. Jovpev7 pl. Jepertarocal. |x par, 
.] . modl. . .|kutaxiAreve 


Pere 


ts iesieuse's yao. . . .JovoaaAki 
[enouetats Ae Oia eeesehetes lyupoo- 

[Sen wie eR oncaeeemencnane, jooamapy cool 
[Patines ccente & mcomreteusie JoeotALov 


BR stg nian, ae Jaxpucocrpod 
Frs. 2-3, Coli. Plate IHL 


VAAL Ey HVATOT@LO|. |pPAaTPwLAoV 


+ 
@oELY pUTOV OPEL 


xXarAKkaitprodrrepOol.]7dn 


Tpwecd|.|vaci7’epd[.|ocav 


pop 


pavuddeloKovopolov: 


Tolo pevTréOakaddEoo atev- 


KaLoUTOAUKpaTETKACOTAaPOiTovEgEta 


sey 
p 
Iposoe jipaxooevtwrteptteukpoudyoi/ta[... ..- lv # 
emeeenetchs lyrouxAaBirmovcovopetatoy.[......]oXxa 
To etic |. TouTnvyeveotvtev . .. ayamemrA[..... Javoo 
[.....]OattraA ... rovAaopel. |yroope,..... . Jeotpa 
fertommaliutae seal oss dlhoci cea 5 
Fr. 2. 
Goins Fi. 5. 
oof dace| 
al Revel 
ea [.|xvea[ 
vuooor| a106ca[ 
5 aomal 5 aTedul 
ToLdabdy al Tal 


35 


40 


45 


50 


1790. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 79 


\ 


2 [tlov pev mploplepéoraros ali|xua 


3 [Batv|ec} médias alxds Ayidreds 

4 [kat pélyas Tledapldvios aAxi[pos Alas 

Bellarine wytye [eteine: . . epiyupos. 

Tl 15 letters Jos dm “Apyeos OTp. 

2 [ TOn eas Js es “IXcov 

au Soe: | 

4 | 1533 \.[]. 

call ie aE ] & xpucedcrpodfos AVTLOTP. 


Frs. 2.433. Colo ii, 
2 ‘TANS éyjvato, T@ 8’ [dpa Tpwirov 
3 woe Xpvady dpel- 
4 X&AK@ Tpls arepOo[v] dn 
1 Tpdes Alalvaot 7 Epdfeloocay eT. 
x ao Dee ° 
2 poppav parX etoKoy opotoy. 
3 Tols pev méda KddAcos alév: 
4 kal ot, Ilo(v)AvKpates, KrX€os aPOiToOv E€eis, 


5 ws Kat’ [d]joddy Kai euov kdéos. 


?KadAlipayos év TO mept Tevkpov prot mal...... v 
pax > ep pou $y 
(Sivomse Jv tod K ara)AaBleiv) tous ots peta Tov. [...... joyxa- 
[....]. Tov tH yéveow Tevkp .. dvarewA[npo . .jar ds 
..../8ar tr GA... tod AaopélSolvtos pe’... ..] €otpa- 

] m pel p 


xe VNS So [eallnG ollals v6.0 6 


Ere 4 
Coleat. Fr. 5. Fr 6. 
col dace Jou 
al Jeol 
e[ [iyrea | a 
vuoo oy, ai? oiel tot 
5 aoridal 5 aire Av 5. \ké 
tol 8 av yal ral vn 


80 THE-OXYRHYNCHUS TAREE 


Joo. TUTT| ppao, - voral 
] ey/ va.o, ]pal 
efam a 
10 [.jaTal 
[-]-[ 
Pe Fr. 8, Fro Fr. 10 
| ye Jo'apel Wel 
|xtv Jour a cae ]o7[ 
warnprya| food . [ Jeni 
eompe JAgl Fr. 11. J.-[ 
5 Jevyl ig 
Jou - 
peal 
Fr. 12. Ld hp Pri. Sp gee Bs Fr. 16 
|yoot kat ] Joof }xAey 
J. | ] | J | 
al Jordi na 
[>] Jn-[ Jo 
Bellas 5 Jool 
}.[ lexi 


‘, .. who destroyed the famed great and wealthy town of Priam son of Dardanus, setting 
out from Argos by decree of mighty Zeus and ensuing an oft-sung strife for fair-haired 
Helen’s form, in tear-stained war; and vengeance overtook miserable Pergamon because 
of golden-tressed Cypris. But it is not now my desire to sing of cheating Paris or slender- 
ankled Cassandra and the rest of the children of Priam or the capture of lofty-gated Troy, 
which is no unfamed theme; nor do I tell again of the supreme prowess of the heroes whom 
the hollow well-nailed ships brought, a freight of noble heroes fatal to Troy; whose captain 
was lord Agamemnon of the race of Pleisthenes, king and leader of men, the son of noble 
Atreus. Such things might the Muses of Helicon, versed in wisdom, well essay, but 
a living mortal man could not tell all the tale of the ships, how that Menelaus went from 


1790... NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 8r 
jots, TUTT| ov ppad| Jvora, 
| ey) vauol \pa/ 
éEan| ; 
10 [.Jaza[ 
[I] +f 
Br; Pres Fr. 9 Brio 


: : | 
|«Tv- Jow ay Jo7[ 
2 kuBep\ynrape yal nos 6. [ |rai 
lAts ape ]Aol Bed Set! 
} dp] Stee 
Jou{ 
pearl 
Mri: Pr: 13% Breas Fri. Proi6. 
wool Val | of Xda yi 
ve 
val Joro na 
ay In [ Jo: : 
Bre 5 ool 
Not lext 


Aulis over the Aegean sea from Argos to Dardania rich in horses, and with him the men of 
brazen shields, sons of the Achaeans. Foremost of them in battle came swift-footed 
Achilles, and great Aias doughty son of Telamon...and he whom gold-girt Hyllis bare, 
to whom Trojans and Danai likened Troilus in loveliness of form, even as thrice-refined 
gold to copper. Beauty imperishable is theirs; and thou too, Polycrates, shall have 
undying glory, such as is my glory in song.’ 

1, [ot «jai (Murray) is a likely restoration. For Upiipou péy dolru cf. e.g, 
Homer B 332 dorv péya Mpedpou. Other Homeric phrases are |, 7 [76|\enov Saxp|vdlevta 
(E 737), 14 [Tpollas imupvrouo (II 698), 20 kpetor ’Ayapel uyor (A 130 &C.), 21 ctyos dvdpav (A 519 

G 


82 THE OXVYRAYNCHUS| FAPYAL 


&c.), 33 das @ \kis "AAs, 3.4 HE yas Tl Aap |oros aidxi[pos Atas (cf. e.g. M 362, 364), 47 Kdéos 
apbOirov (I 413). 

4. [Zn|vds . . . Bovdais: cf. Homer A 5 Atos & éredeiero BovAn. 

5. The diaeresis on ede is evidently mistaken ; cf. ll. 18, 31, 44. 

8. The letters |ra,]. ro |, and the vestige at the end of 1. 14 are in Fr. 2. i, which is 
separated from Fr. 1 by a short lacuna. 

10. The term éevardrns is applied to Paris in Eurip. Zroad. 866. 

11-12. ravijopluplov]: so e.g. Bacchyl. iii. 60, v.69. Cassandra occurs also in Ibyc. 9. 

14-15. d}/ seems to be the easiest connecting link between these two lines, and the 
vestige, though very small and ambiguous, is consistent with y. [od y|dp in 1. 15 is excluded 
by the difficulty of completing the preceding verse ; the plural é\éo{as| is not at all probable, 
especially with dvdvypov following. At the end of 1. 15 y is an alternative to 7; a new verb 
seems wanted here in any case. : 

18. rodvyoupos is an epithet of vies in Hesiod, Op. 658. For édetoaly cf. erehedfo in 
Cretan inscriptions, e. g. Collitz-Bechtel, Dialektinschr. 4998. 1. 9-10 ai de. . . pip evedevoes 
TO TETVAKOS, 

19. éa6[Aovs, which was suggested by Lobel, and makes an effective contrast to [Tpoilg 
xakdv, is a doubtful but quite possible reading, the papyrus at the top of the ¢ being defective 
so that there is an appearance of two strokes. The form ¢cédés is indicated also in ]. 22 
and recurs in Ibyc. 19. pdos is read by Ludwich and others in Homer ¢ 303. 

21, MWeedlevilas: cf. Stesichorus 42 Baowels WreOevidas. It would follow from the 
present passage, if Murray’s z[arpd|s in 1. 22 is right, that Ibycus regarded Agamemnon as 
the son of Atreus (cf. e.g. Eurip. Hed. 390-2) and Pleisthenes as a more remote ancestor 
grandfather ?). According to Apollodorus iii. 2. 2 Pleisthenes was the father of 
Agamemnon, and it would be possible to make our poet an exponent of that view by 
reading é« y[évou]ls, which is palaeographically admissible, in place of e« marpé|s. That, 
however, would be questiomable on metrical grounds, since the corresponding syllable, as 
Housman observes, is short wherever preserved (Il. 9, 35, 45). The statement of Tzetzes zz 
1. p. 68 that the sons of Pleisthenes, who died young, were brought up by Atreus represents 
an endeavour to harmonize the conflicting genealogies. 

24. The end of this verse seems to be corrupt, since two short syllables are necessary 
for the metre, and a heteroclite form \éya is incredible. «or can be read in place of y, 
but these do not help. Murray proposes to emend to wéda, but the pleonasm is not 
attractive in a metaphorical passage. ¢yaivew is commonly used with the dative or 
a preposition, but Euripides has ¢u8aivovoa xédevdov in Suppl. 989. 

25. o¥ «(ey is more euphonious than ov« [av, with dvjp following. 

26. For dcepd{s| after Ovards ... dvnp cf. e.g. Homer ¢ 201 dip diepds Bpords : the vestige 
of the o is slight but suitable. Unless there was a flaw in the papyrus, something else besides 
dvepos must have been originally written, but sense and metre are complete as the verse stands. 
calra for xa\6’ would not nearly fill the space. 

27. A slight vestige afier vadv suits a round letter and is inconsistent with a, so that ais 
is excluded. 

29: If jAvbe is right, [AapSavialy (Murray) is the natural restoration, but the accent on 
7Avée must apparently be corrected (cf. Apollon. De Syn. iii. 7. 33 (p. 213 Bekker) and 
Corinna i. 18 (Berl. Klassthertexte, V. ii, p. 20) cnedwev), and e. g. nAvGo|v és Tpotaly might be 
read; the plural, however, is less natural. 

30. [ilmmorpdgoly (cf. the Homeric "Ikwv e&rodov &c.) suits the space better than 
[i|mmorpdqof. 

31. [xladkdon[uSes, véles Housman. 

33+ [Bairle[e] or [xwp|e[é] is unconvincing, though palaeographically possible ; [fev seems 


1790. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 83 


objectionable on account of the hiatus, unless this could be excused by the original 
digamma; cf. 1]. 5. 

36. Perhaps Tvdéos vilos, as Lobel suggests. ‘There should be a mention hereabouts 
of Teucer, to whom the note at the foot of the column refers. Line 35 would be the natural 
place for him, but ap|yupos is a difficulty. 

40-1, The reference in this passage mentioning some hero conspicuous for beauty but 
nevertheless surpassed by Troilus as much as copper by gold, remains obscure. Hyllis is 
unknown, except as a name of the nymph ’Apyeéa according to Steph. Byz. s. v. ‘YAneis. 
Nireus, whose parentage is stated by Homer B 672, can hardly be meant, nor is e.g. 
Eurypylus (cf. \ 522) suitable. In 1. 40 xpvoos was originally written, and was amended 
by the insertion, possibly by the first hand, of an « over the line; a cursive a seems to have 
been subsequently added rather above the level of the e by some one who took ypucéos rpopds 
as separate words,—which is indeed possible, though less likely. p of tpof{ was converted 
from, probably, a partially formed o In ]. 41 the spelling of the papyrus in ¢ynvaro 
has been retained, though whether this is a genuine form is open to doubt. 

42. dpeiyadxos was mentioned by Stesichorus according to Schol. Apoll. Rhod. iv. 973 
dp. eiSos xadkov . . . pynpoveter kal Stnotyopos kai Baxyvdidns. Ibycus and Stesichorus were 
sometimes confused by grammarians (cf. Schneidewin, /oyc, Religu. p. 41 sqq.), but it would 
be rash to assume that the present passage is the one which the scholiast had in mind. 

44. Cf. Theognis 449 drepbov xpvady. 

46-8. In this passage much depends on the punctuation. A logical sentence would 
result from the removal of the stop after aiev, with weSd as the preposition (the accent in the 
papyrus need not imply equivalence to péreors, but may be accounted for by the anastrophe, 
in spite of the intervening wey). On this view the xdddos of Polycrates would be the quality 
which the poet desired to commemorate, and his identity with the tyrant would become 
questionable. On the’ whole, however, it seems preferable to follow the clear punctuation 
of the original, which gives a satisfactory sense and accords better with the attribution, on 
other grounds plausible, to Ibycus. ois pév . . . alév is then poetic language for ‘they will 
always be remembered for their beauty’. 

To(v)Avcpares is necessary if the metre is to correspond; cf. Pindar, Wem. vi. 70 
TlovAvuripiday. 

498qq. This note relating apparently to Teucer and the horses of Laomedon pre- 
sumably was intended to explain something in ll. 35-40, but at present remains itself 
obscure, though restoration should not be difficult if the right clue were found, In 1. 49 
[Ka\A]izaxos appears the most likely name, and the [epi Tevxpov may have been included 
among his trouynpara but is not otherwise known. The dash between two dots at the end 
of this line seems too large and too far from the rest of the note to be intended as an 
abbreviation of éoré, and is therefore regarded as a symbol corresponding to another in the 
margin of the line to which the note was attached. What has been taken for a dash after 
gnot may possibly be the top of an «. 

50. k(ara)daB(eiv) is very uncertain, especially as other abbreviations do not occur in 
this note, but is not unsuited to the remains, and an infinitive is apparently wanted. Perhaps 
xapt|y preceded rod. 

51. Tedkpos in some form seems inevitable, but the termination is very doubtful. 

52. Possibly a\dd, but a longer word would account better for the vestiges. 


Fr. 4. ii. 6. adya{ is possible. 
8. ey[: or en|. 


Fr. 5. This fragment and Fr. 7 differ rather from the rest in appearance, Fr. 5 being 
dirty and rubbed, and Fr. 7 very dark-colourgd. That Fr. 5 contains the beginnings of 
G 2 


84 THE OXY REYNCH Use lagi 


lines is not certain, since the margin is lost, but if a letter had preceded > in 1. 7 some 
portion of it should be visible. In I. 2, if e was the second letter in the line, the first was 
a narrow one. 

4-5. dO... are apparently correspond, whether ai or ai is written. dm can be read 
iol 1b ae 


IOS lo 5 Krol ay OLICTU wa ere 


Pr '8.°9. oe supposed grave accent is possibly the second half of a circumflex. 


1791. PINDAR, Paean. 
9:9 X 4:1 cm. First century. Plate III. 


This small but interesting fragment gives the context of two well-known 
lines cited from Pindar by Pausanias (Fr. 53 Schréder), the text of which is now 
finally established. The passage refers to the second and third temples at 
Delphi, and the Delphian story (Pausan. x. 5. 9) that the former of these temples 
was sent to the Hyperboreans is reflected in ll. 1-2, while the latter is described 
at greater length in Il. 3-9. Built by Hephaestus, ‘of bronze stood the walls 
and even so of bronze the pillars, and six golden Charmers sang above the 
gable’. Its destruction by a thunderbolt was related in the broken lines 10-12. 
A strophic division is marked at this point and the subject apparently changes, 
but the lower part of the papyrus is much damaged and only isolated words are 
recognizable. No responsion can be traced between ll. 1-12 and 13-20, and one 
or other of these sections presumably belonged to the epode. The metrical 
scheme, so far as it can be followed, is fairly simple; in ll. 1-12 short lines seem 
to preponderate, and several glyconic verses are included. That Fr. 53 came 
from the Paeans is stated by Galen, who also quotes it. 

The text, which is from the top of a column, is in small upright uncials of 
somewhat informal type to which approximations are found among the better- 
written Oxyrhynchite contracts of the late first and early second centuries ; cf. 
eg. 270 (Part II, Plate 8), which, however, is probably rather later than 1791. 
No stops, accents, or other signs occur except the paragraphus below line 12. 
Decipherment is difficult in places owing to the loss of the upper fibres of the 
papyrus. A junction between two selides runs down the middle of the 
fragment. 


vaov tov pev TrrepBopleots ? Kepauve xOova vol 
Av... TE. . pevpnoemigl exp. .v.. [.Javral 
@ poroat Toy de mavTex[vos yAukelat Aros ayda 


Agpaotov Tadrapas Kat Aalvas ? omt evo. & . vvor| 


1791. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 85 


5 TLS 0 puOuos edaivero 15 areplev ve. . arf 
XaAKEoL fev ToLxor xaAk[leat de - ro... TE pev Of 
OUT@ KLloves eaTao[av povava . Knuvar{ 
xpuceat 0 €€ uTep aeTov AvotuBporov a 


aedov Knarndorles [alknpatwv dadalr 


10 adda viv npoy ern. [ 20 “a5 gs JEAl, 


. . . . 


1-2. Cf. Pausan. x. 5: 9 devrepa dé Néyovow ot Achooi yeverbar bro ENT TOV vady, aT 
TOU TE KnpOvD TGV pektooGy Kai ex Trepav’ TeupOnvar O€ es ‘YrrepBopéous gaol avroy tro rod ’Ard)- 
Aovos. In |. 1 the papyrus strongly suggests rou, but the » is not impossible and seems 
essential for the construction. In 1. 2 Giucans ewté| or eCapevnoe jué[ could be read, but the 
vestiges between ¢ and » are extremely slight ; evyevns, however, appears unsuitable. The 
first letter of the line i is either a, 6, or A, and the third may well be p; the fifth looks at first 
sight like «, but this is not convincing, and a crossed out « might have a similar effect. 
¥mepBop[eorow ev-| Aupallells eapernoe prélas would be consistent with the remains. The subject 
in any case is presumably Apollo. 

3. Tov is clear, but rov depending on pvdyos would be easier. Perhaps rov and rov here 
and in ]. 1 were transposed by an oversight ; cf. n. on Il, 1-2. 

4sqq. Cf. Pausan. x. 5: II-12 ra de es tov tplrov Tay vady, dru eyévero €k Xador, Oadpa 
obey... Ta perros adda pe ovk erreev 6 Adbyos, 7 7) ‘H¢atorov TOY vady TéxVHY Elvat, 7} TA és TAS dors 
ras xpuoas, & dS) UivdSapos yoev en exeivp TO vad, xpvoea xh, (Il. 8-9, Pindar Fr. 53). The 
two verses are also quoted by Galen on Hippocr. De artic. 18. 1, p. 519 Kiihn. Scholars 
have successfully treated the corruptions found in Pausanias and Galen, and the fragment 
as printed by Schréder corresponds with the text here, except that he has mistakenly 
preferred Bergk’ s e€umep? to Schneidewin’s ¢& imép, which the papyrus now confirms. pv@pos 
in ]. 5 = oxjpa; the word does not occur elsewhere in Pindar. 

1o-12. Cf. Pausan. x. 5. 12 08 pay odd rpdmov dvrwa apanobjva cvvérece 7H vad Kata 
TavTa elpnpéeva evpioKov’ kal yap és Xdopa ys éxmeceiy aitov Kal bro mupds Taknvar héyovow. 
Pindar’s version does not seem to agree closely with either of these, but the reading is 
uncertain in several places. In]. 10 the letter before p looks more like » than anything 
else, though the space is rather narrow. is hardly possible. o could be read in place of 
« before tm. In]. 11 we may divide x@oy av of or xGova vol, and the last letter may be either 
o or w. In 1. 12 the space is indecisive between exp[:]y and exp[v|y, and the termination 
can be -avy or -ev. The following vestiges are ambiguous, but those of the second letter 
rather suggest 7 or 7, and with the former there need be no letter before the doubtful a, e. g 
dmdvra|s is possible; adavro[ is clearly excluded. 

13. The slight vestiges are consistent with Avs, after which either aya[ or ay\{ may be 
read. The latter seems the more likely here, whether written with a capital or not. For 
Ayhaia cf, Ol. xiv. 19 mérv’ 7A, pidnoipodrré 7 Evppootva and Fr. 199 Moioa kai’A, ; but dyA\a- 
may of course be another adjective, e. g. dyA[adOpovor (xépar?), for which cf. OZ. xiii. 96 
Moicats dyaodpédvors. 

14, € is very doubtful; the first letter is possibly 6. There may be two letters 
between o and ¢, but if so the first of them is probably +, which might indeed be sufficient 
by itself. The remains after suggest «. ¢ vpvov is inadmissible. 

15. teav ar[ or rexvar| looks likely. 

16. What has been taken for the upper part of a ¢ is possibly the base of a letter 


86 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


following »v at the end. of the preceding line, in which case o (reuevo[us?) would be probable 
in place of . 

17. This is another rather puzzling line. Either pov or. wy is possible, and if any 
letter stood between a and x, it is likely-to be +; there seems hardly room for o or y, and 
avaykn would of course be a false form. At the end of the line pay appears inevitable, pvap 
being unsuitable. 

18. For AvowPporos, which occurs only here, cf. drecipBporos, POoinSpores, &c.; In 
Tryphiod. 437 Avonvep is an epithet of oivos. 

19. Cf. Pyth. v. 32 axnpdrovs dvias. 

Saida[r : or 6 Adda? 


1792, PINDAR, Pacan?. 
Prov 16-9 X' 13-7 cm. Second century. 


The following fragments, of which only one, itself built up from several 
smaller pieces, is at all substantial, are written in a good-sized, rather heavy, 
semicursive hand which may be referred to the first half of the second century. 
Stops in two positions are used, and (besides the diaeresis) breathings, accents, and 
marks of elision and quantity have been supplied here and there. Many of these 
have the appearance of being by the original hand, which was no doubt also 
responsible for the occasional dzplae in the margin and the interlinear asterisk in 
Fr. 47; but some, e.g. the elision-sign in Fr. 1. 14, are in a lighter ink and may 
well proceed from the corrector who altered the termination of the verb in the 
same line and is evidently to be distinguished. 


- + Jorowevvel 
\aradaprepid..... Jovac| 
|xooapgemof..... Jarod| 


ft 
[. 
[. 
[. |vuvnotoodpen|. -Japade gl 
[fs 
[. 
[i 


on 


. E00 evAtrrapotpopavOvar, 
Aoryapiteroipydav 
.]/OcovTapaxpnpvover bal 
KeratvepeapytBpevTavr ey of 
1ce) (nvakabe Copevor 
Kopupacowumepbepurag|. . . .Jovo . { 


L 
? 
avlik ayavoppwv 


1792. wEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 87 


That the author is Pindar is not definitely ascertained, but style and 
vocabulary seem sufficiently characteristic to justify that ascription. im}rooda 
Ov[yatnp in Fr. 51 is a remarkable coincidence with a Pindaric collocation, and 
other linguistic parallels are pointed out in the notes; the reference to the 
Boeotian Ir@ov in Fr. 47 is also not without significance. The class of poem 
represented is still less certain; the passage in Fr. 1 describing the birth of the 
twin offspring of Zeus and Leto would be appropriate in a Paean for the Delians, 
but other categories are by no means excluded. As for the metre, whether the 
verses in Fr. 1 belong to one or more systems is not clear ; a paragraphus occurs 
in Fr. 35, but no strophic division is marked in Fr. 1 among the few lines of which 
the beginnings are preserved. 

The scheme of Il. 2-20 is as follows :— 


[..4.J-v—“[... RO ROO 
[..J¥¥—-ve| gee as ORC One n ena 
felu-vul[-..|¥¥[- ey Ue ee eu 
§ —--vu-v[-j}yuuuly... Ip —-veu Hue Uv 
Sie Ane ee oe Be SOUS 
[-]-vu-uU-- th OO il ORO el Oh 
j-})u-u uur vu-u....| 
verve 4 -|- [. J---vu--v-| 
TO —~UuU—UVU— 20 [(-Juu-v—-vl].../ 


[... Jouow ev vel 
[. Jara 8 Apréudl..... Jovac 
[A€]xos auperdAe . .Je Tovalvr 

5 [-luuvjovos dpén[. .] dua d& dlep 
[Nd]fodev Arrapotpipav Ovoilas 
[un\ov Xapirecot piydav 
[Kv]vOcov mapa Kpnuvov &v0a 
Kedawwéde apytBpevtav A€yolvar 

10 Zhva KabeCopevov 
kopupatow wrrepbe pudrdgfar xplovov 


avik’ ayavodpov 


88 THE OXYRAYNCHCS PAPY RI 
KoLovOvyaTn pAVETOT EpTVaT 


> Dpicegceka ite Sienna teen 
15 aydAaoverhaociovrecdidvpor 
matdertrodvypoG|.] . “ecavamoaropl 
[.AecOutarekatra[.JectoTeA€{. |acdoAl 
[. .]reAapBavor .[.. .] 
[. -JepbeyEavrodeyxaprau 


20 = [. .|Aaonacavepke|.].. . [ 
liparacawe ee ast |royapak..w. arou 
[execs etter cn ceeeeslee pe yovar| 
€ 
ee CRCRN rth ner arr Inpacop . [ 


Bie2 E Gene: Fre: 


(pad ie 


lavev . ed aisle roAAakio[ 
JoAocal }épat ] 
ie ] i 
ee y tes |r 
ie 
Fr. 5 Frs6, Bie. Fr. 8 
= pl Ue a Kou yAl 
Traol bal eA End 
> €x[ Tol ; nrvéo[ 
ocer| 
Fr. 0: yaa ey Et piels Breaz. Bras. 
|mev | ] } + xural wal 


1792. *NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


Koiov O6vydtnp dveTo TEpmvas 
adivos: hapa & dediov déuas érd[r 

15 a@yAadv és ddos lovtes didvpo 
Taloes, Trohdy poOloly teoay amd oropldTwv 
~PEV\ciOud re kai Ad[yleois: Tére{uJar 8 OAL 
[kalreAdpBavoy .[.. «| 
[. .| €pOéyéavro 8 éeyywprat 

20 [dy]Aads as adv’ épxel.].. . [ 


[eager eer et as ro yap ak..uw. aroif 
Bakes Brera ces J]. Peo yova7| 
IS Renta ogee eee |npas (v.1. -es) op . [ 


Bye: ee LS eet 


Joa ] ] 


javev . ed alah | moddAakis { 
jodocal \epal ] 
xt | | 
|ruv 


Bio Fr. 6 Bie Fr. 8 
2 Bh, ited | Kou[ yl 
ToL bal ae | BH Of 
€x[ Tol : HAvoolv 
ds e7| 
Fr. 9. Hra ce: Bec. Prot2. Bris. 


ie (de xual wa 


89 


go 


lAecavoru| 


\vapioror . 


Jarodap| 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


JoeBul Jreou[ 
Jor ave 
Jo Joppag| 
] Jwevorl 

Fr. 15 Hf. 716: 


Fr. 20. Bran. 
] J 
|Kat Jvof 
Jrouxy| vol 
eal 
Hr 25 Fr. 26 
J kad 
J Jpuoro| 
|povev Jot . [ 


J 
] 


Fr. 27. 


Jovel 
vot 


Jworoupl 


Jrod| 


Braga: 


ea 


Jearoe| 


Fr. 24. 


| 


YAecav ‘Odv[ par 


 apiozvor . [ 


Jaro dap 


1792. 


Joey 
Jor 
]o 

J 
Bes. 


: 
Nay) 


i. \ fo t . 


]Kac 
Js otxy| 
lex 


i reas 


jres ul 
f 
it 


lave, moe 
] 
] Acomol 


JeWaror| 


NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


| 
J 


| 


Fr. 27. 


jovel 
|voe 
Yuaucip| 
}-[ 


QI! 


g2 


Lees 


jo7of 


Jecvorore| 


\mpoaodo . 


|rexopol, 


5 |xapurrl 
leprec-Al 


jovral 


Fr. 42. 


lyapl 


THE OXYRAYNCAUS PAPYRE 


5 |rarpocex| 


] 
] 
JaxédXevod 
[ 


Pres: 


\edol 
JeAvar . [ 
|repevee'7[ 


|. apevai[ 


5 Jravorep| 


|ravoure . [ 
yreagel 
Juperc| 
Jetpavex . [ 


7 


J 
Jovdof 


5 |vepl 


Pr. 36; 


paul 

eAmrel 
<ger| 
ada 


5 youl 


Fre 39. 


Jetxep| 
Jooevx oul 
Jame pidec[ 


voiz| 


Pr 44, 
|varowey 
Jevppovyap| 
JeBoape . . [ 
Fran, 


lo7[ 


-[ 


1792, 


Jozro| 
Jew 6 row TH 
] mpocodo . | 
|re xopol 

] xdpw AL 
méuret XL 


Jovra 


Her eae 


Ja. 
] Kai 7600 yf 
’Evivandiou 
5 ] marpos éx[ 


|oika dao 
Ja KéXevarl 
[ J 
eal 


Fr: 38. 


er dof 
JeAuvav . | 
] Tepéver z[ 
]. apevarl 
5 rats Tepl 
] maot re. [ 
ria def 
Jepere| 
letpaver . | 


Bey clio eullalrecaaly 


NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 93 
] jo a 
Jovdcol Jaro. 

5 |vapl 5 — jopor[ 
aye Javol 
Jne - [ 
i736; |revdl 
; » wf 
pal 
eAmre, 
efeu| 
ada [ 
5 youl 
Pro39: Fr. 40. 
Jeveep Jovi 
Jooevxyoul ] xpvol 
Ja IItepideo[ |vol 
vo “al ]. aol 
5 |peal 
Pe 
ator viv. [ 
] eppov yap | 
] «Boa pe..[ 
Fr. 44. Fr. 45. 
Jo . tof Jor| 


94 THE OXYRAYNCAHUS PAPYRI 


\eay . [ 
lool 


weal 


Fr. 46: Bree: 
eal |peacval 
JopPurroxpl leva Taol 
Jooopery| mi 
JeOvocacdf la Ot 
on 


Hexpl: -] « 


]- eof. IB .c. 


Iypor| yusperorerl 
|ooado[ \rocda6ul 
lyyor[ 
Fras Fr. 55. 
Jaregl Joel 
ova aval 
Fra 50: Fr.-60: 
|vevOal vad 


lvireg| Tol 


Fr. 64. 


ea “Bal 


(acl 


lrepraz[ 


Joex[ 


Fr. 48. 


|evacol 


Fr. 56. Ey; wes 
Jara javal 
Jrede[ lu 

Iie, Git, Erm 62. 


Fr. 66. 


|oer[ 


Jew 


Fr. 49. 


]. erayf 
|vavaArd[ 
eval 


ve. [ 


1792: 


? 


Jop& vmoxpl 
jooonev yf 


BA 


| €Ovos acd 
wexel: -] - € 


NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


]oay . { U\reptaz| jel 
Ypool joer fel 
Bra7. Fr. 48 Fr, 49. 
2?’ Opaor|pratval |wato| ]. erar[ 
] év IIrdo [ jap 7 Wy Avri 
[or a wer al 
] 


lev cog| 


LeMay Be Fr. 52 Fr53: 
]. pe oS are eller tea jot et 
jupor[ a\uduTronei| |. apavz| lyeav [ 
? ralroahol imjrocéa Oulydrnp of jun. [ 
pbolyyov [ ie: 
Fr. 54. Fr. 55. itso. Brs5 7: Fr. 58. 
jared Jounl yeaa java wf 
jovapl Jav af jrede lel Joo . 
Fr. 59. Fr. 60. FreOr, PrO2: Peso. 
vevOal \vaul Jpor |vor| \e 
 medl ol neo ° Aa 
Fr. 64. Fr. 65. Fr. 66. Try G7. 
joe6l i8ol jee a 


95 


96 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Jogo Jars. Joo Fr, 68. Jore « [ 
Jovar{. ler] Jabavar| Reso Liou Kai 
|uevave . | Jord yov| |xevduy| |recror[ 
5 karal 5 Teepe Weperal 5 srr 
|rpom|, Le ean! _ kare ]xe7|, 
J---[ cov} 


ibe, Wh Pia Gd vel : evve|a, évve| 7 aa 
3. Perhaps [dm]add, but a single broad letter, e. g. k, p, might fill the initial lacuna. 


4-5. If the subject is singular, dupemd[Aer . . . Spén[ov] or -n[ova"] seems likely; cf. Wem. 
vili. 10 A€xrpov . . . duderdAnoav, But the verb in |. 4 may be dudérev, which is combined 
with dpemew in O1. i. 19-20 apheme oKamrov . . ., Spérwv pev xopudas. Whether the word 


preceding Spen| is an adjective (Tupvnovos, mpupynovos) Or a Substantive (dprnors, youn (?), 
pvjows) is not clear. The remains of the first letter are slight, and « or a is also possible. 


5-17. ‘... and also brought from Naxos sacrifices of fat sheep for all the Graces to 
the Cynthian cliff where they say the cloud-wrapped wielder of the glancing thunder-bolts, 
Zeus, sitting on the peaks watched for the time when the gentle daughter of Coeus was 
delivered of her sweet travail; and when her twin children came forth to the light of day 
shining like the sun, Eileithyia and Lachesis sent from their throats a great clamour.’ 


5. What has been taken for the tail of a ¢ might be an acute accent on the « of vail, 
which, however, is less likely on account of the infrequency of accents in the papyrus. 

g. dpy8pevrav: the word is novel, but cf. O2. viii. 3 Avds apycepavvov, A further con- 
firmation is here provided of the form dva&Spévras in Bacchyl. xvi (xvii). 66; cf. the n. 
ad loc. on 1091. 

12. dyavdppar, like xedawedns in ]. 9, is Homeric (Y 467). 

13. Koiov Ovydrnp at the beginning of a line occurs also in 841, 19. 22 (meaning 
Asteria). For reprvas adivos cf. OL. vi. 43 @divos éparas. 

14. The v. 1, (reprvas) divas does not commend itself. €Aauwav .. . drdre is a rather 
awkward inversion and the corruption éAawWe is hardly surprising, though it leaves diSvpor 
naides Without a verb. 

15. Cfe.g. O21. vi. 43-4 HAGE 8 brs omrdyxvor . . . és have, Nem. i. 35-6 omddyyvev 
Umo .. . Ganray és atyhav ... poder. ; 

16. ‘ Raised cries of joy’ is evidently the sense, and if pod is right wordy 6dOov teoav 
becomes inevitable, though it is difficult to reconcile the traces after po6[o] with a vy. There 
are also, rather to the right of these, some vestiges above the line which are not very 
satisfactorily regarded as a rough breathing on« For pdéloly cf. 841. vi. 128 dodar da. 
Opéov, which might be thought a more natural word here, cannot be read. 

17-18. Either réde[eJac or réAeas is possible, presumably referring to the two deities (cf. 
e.g. Ol. xill, 115 Zed rede’, Wem. x. 18 "HBa redeia mapa parépe), but Ofeat| is inadmissible in 
|, 18, where the slight remains would be consistent with e. g. an a followed by a letter with 
a vertical first stroke. 

19. Perhaps [dv]epé. 


1792. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 97 


? c]dfol Jari. Jopi Fr. 68. lore 
jovar[.ler| ] aavar| Pa ee (es) 
Juevare . [ jordyov[r ] Kevdvr{ |reoror| 

5 ] Kara 5 |repal ] vepéral 5 ra 
\rpon{ ie toer ee ] + Karel ]ker7| 


lee Jor 


21. Possibly axra:, but the « is joined by a ligature which is too low for the normal a 
of this hand, and suggests rather 6, «, or x. The preceding letter might well be » or v, 
besides r. 

22, yov or roy is certain, and if the p is right either pay or pur is likely. | auqu is 
unsuitable. Ink is visible above the remains of the first letter, but whether it represents 
a diacritical mark or a correction is quite uncertain. 

23. op was followed by some round letter. 


Frs, 2-4. That these three small pieces are from the bottom of Fr. 1 is strongly 
suggested by their similar appearance, and this position is practically assured for Fr. 4 by 
the junction of two selzdes in the syllable xs of moAXaxs corresponding with a similar 
junction through the w of omof in Fr. 1. 14; but Fr. 4 does not seem to join on 
immediately. 


Fr. 5, 1. The d~/é is probable but not certain. 
_ Fr. 6. 1. vp[, vA{ would be suitable. 
Fr, 10. 2-3. Line 3 apparently ended at , and ov may be the end of I. 2. 


Fr, 16, Cf. 841. vi. 134-6 [é|n’ ’Av[o|mou . . . d[valpéyaro rapbévov. In 1. 2 here the 
doubtful r can be z, but of course this may be quite fortuitous and e.g. é6p|éaro is an 
obvious alternative. 

Fr, 24. 2. dpioromo[y .. (cf. O2. vii. 51) would be suitable, 

Fr. 30. This fragment and Frs. 34-5 are alike in being of a rather dark colour, 
Frs. 31-2 and 36 have a more worn appearance. Cf, Frs. 67-8. In Frs. 31 and 34 there 
are junctions of se/zdes, but the pieces cannot be directly combined. 


Fr. 31. 4. Perhaps Jov Ads; but the letters can be variously interpreted. 

Fr. 82. 8. The fourth letter may also be ¢ or o. 

Fr, 35. 3. A strophic division is denoted by the paragraphus below this line. 
Fr. 36, 3. The overwritten « may be due to the first hand. 

Fr. 38. This fragment is a good deal rubbed, as are also Frs. 39, 41, 43. 

8. €|uperel, An |upere| ? 

Fr. 41. 1. e.g. add|varor, |va roe. 


Fr. 46, A junction between two selides occurs in this fragment and also in Fr. 47, 


which is otherwise similar in appearance. 
2. 6 may be the particle and toxp| may of course be divided td «pj. 


H 


98 THE OXVYRAYNGHOUS PAPEL 


Fr. 47. 2. Cf. Pindar Fr. 51 b, d rpixdpavov Ilrwiov xevduova, There was a shrine of 
Dionysus here, and a temple of Apollo close by (Pausan. ix. 23. 6). The large asterisk 
below this line apparently takes the place of or supplements a marginal coronis in marking 
the commencement of a new poem. 


Fr. 50. 1. at|ep{ or acpi] could be read. : 

3. malocado[ is rather suggested by olyyov in the following line; cf. Ol. i. 17 ard 
péppryya nacoddov AdpuBar’, 1861. i. 1-2 & Bapfire, pinkere magoaov purdo| car] émtatovoyv Avyupay 
xdmmave yapwv ; but Ge]ocadol is of course possible. 

51. 3. The coincidence with Ol. iii, 26 Aarods immooda vy. was observed by Lobel. 

Fr. 52. 2. The first letter is probably 6, A, or p. 


Fr. 55. 2. The supposed mark of quantity is very doubtful, and may equally well be 
a breathing or a vestige of an interlinear letter. The second a may be 6. 


Fr. 67. Either there is a junction of sedzdes in this fragment, which in appearance 
resembles Frs, 32 and 36, or the papyrus has been strengthened by a strip gummed on the 
‘back. Fr. 68 is rather similar, though less worn. 

3. It is not clear that any trace of writing is to be recognized in this line. 


1798. CALLIMACHUS, Soszbz Victoria. 


Height 10 cm. Late first century. 


Callimachus after a long period of neglect has latterly been much in evidence 
in the papyri (cf. 1362 int.),) and a further considerable addition is made by 
the present papyrus, which introduces us to a poem of which but three words 
were known (see vi. 7, n.), though one or two lines, cited without specification of 
their source and now shown to belong to it, were in fact already extant. This, as 
first perceived by Mr. Lobel, who has contributed much to the elucidation of the 
text, is the elegiac poem in honour of the victory of Sosibius alluded to in Athen. iv, 
P- 144 € Oedppacros ev ro Tpds Kadcavidpov Tept Baorrelas (ei yrnorov 7d obyypappas 
TohAol yap adTé hacw elvar Swoulov, eis dv KadAluaxos 6 rownrijs emuwikvov eAeyeraxdy 
evolnoe), Tods Tepoey pyot Bactarets xrA. and called in Schol. Lycophr. Alex. 522 (ed. 
Scheer) Zwou8tov vikn. The identification seems sufficiently established by the 
occurrence of the name Sosibius in v. 1, and the general tenor of the piece, which 
is full of references to games, prizes, victories, and dedications; see vi. 1-3, 
vii. 2, 7, Vili. JI-5, ix. 4-7, x. 1. Who Sosibius was is not agreed. He has 
commonly been thought to be the same as the Lacedaemonian grammarian 
designated Avrixds or émAvrixos (Athen. xi. 493 c, Suid. s. v.), who was attached to 
the Alexandrian Museum under Philadelphus and wrote treatises on Spartan 
rites, on chronology, the poet Alcman, &c. (so e.g. Hecker, Com. Call. p. 66). 


1 A convenient edition of the new fragments is now available in Lietzmann’s Aveine Ti exte, 145. 


1798. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 99 


Schneider (ii, p. 220) questions this view partly on the ground of the a priori 
improbability that such a man would figure as an athletic victor, partly because 
the reference in Athen. iv. 144 to the Sosibius ‘to whom Callimachus wrote an 
epinician elegiac poem’ seemed to difterentiate that Sosibius from his homonym 
whom Athenaeus elsewhere (iii. 78 c, xi. 493 e) speaks of as 6 Aurixds or 6 Adkwr. 
For these reasons, which are plausible enough (though with regard to the second it 
may be noted in xv. 690e Athenaeus mentions probably the same grammarian 
with no descriptive epithet), Schneider preferred to regard Sosibius as some 
wealthy Alexandrian, perhaps an ancestor of the well-known minister of 
Philopator. He appears to have overlooked a very suitable person, Sosibius of 
Tarentum, who is mentioned by Josephus, Azz, xii. 2. 2, as one of the captains 
of the bodyguard of Philadelphus and a courtier of some influence. Whether any 
relationship subsisted between that Sosibius and the wWevdemitpozos of Philopator 
is quite problematical; it has been suggested that they were father and son, 
but the father of the Wevdenitpomos was more probably Dioscurides (Foucart, 
B.C. #1. iv, pp. 97-8). In any case, if, as would naturally be supposed, Col. x. 1-5 
of the papyrus refer to the man in whose honour the poem was composed, the 
Laconian is practically put out of court. The wealthy and powerful personage 
there described can scarcely be the grammarian who accepted the royal alimony 
(Athen. xi. 493.c); Josephus’ captain of the bodyguard has better claims to 
consideration, though the attribution to him of the treatise pods Kacavdpov would 
hardly be expected. Sosibius’ success seems to have consisted in a double victory 
at the Isthmian and the Nemean games; cf. vii. 1-4 and nn., and the reference 
to Corinth in vi.4—6. Hecker’s conjecture that Callim. Fr. 193 Znvi re xal Newer 7 
xaplovoy €dvov dpe(Aw was the exordium of this poem is thus consistent with the 
new evidence, but remains very uncertain. 

As now reconstituted the papyrus consists of the tops of ten columns, of 
which the last eight, and perhaps all ten, were consecutive, the tenth being also 
the last of the roll. A few small fragments, also from the tops of columns, 
are unplaced ; they presumably belonged to the much broken first two, or to 
an intermediate column, if there was one, between Cols. ii and ili. The roll 
has evidently been subjected to severe pressure, causing the layers sometimes 
to adhere tightly and the ink to leave more or less legible impressions on the 
back of adjacent portions; by this means the order of some fragments, which 
could otherwise not have been certainly placed, has been fixed, and some 
missing letters have been supplied. With regard to the original compass of the 
roll, and the length of the poem on Sosibius, these are problems which depend 
on the view taken as to the number of poems represented in the present 
remnants. Col. iii happens to include (1. 2) the half line mpiv adorépi7@ Beperixns 

H 2 


100 THE OXYRAYNGHUS PARPYVARI 


cited from Callimachus by Achilles Statius and assigned by Schneider and others 
to the poem on the Lock of Berenice which was translated by Catullus. That 
attribution, however, is by no means certain; it was rejected by Valckenaer, 
who first drew attention to the fragment, on the ground that the version of 
Catullus shows no corresponding phrase. Schneider evaded the objection by 
the argument that dorépi Bepevixns was a periphrasis for éuof and was simplified 
by Catullus to mhz |(l. 83; cf. n. on iii. 2, where the passage is quoted). 
Unfortunately Col. iii is badly mutilated, and what remains of the context of 
l. 2 is indecisive ; it is, however, noteworthy that the preceding verse ends with 
a feminine plural participle -dwevar, which might well correspond to xudantes 
in Catullus (1. 81), and that if cAé& ... in 1. 3 is KAtvy, that too, though not 
translated literally, could be interpreted in a sense conforming to the Latin. 
A mention of the dorip Bepevixys in an epinician poem to Sosibius is, at the 
least, unexpected ; moreover, there is a second reference to Berenice in v. 6, 
and another to her father, Magas, king of Cyrene, in v. 2. Perhaps, then, 
Col. iii contained the conclusion of the Bepevixns wAdxayos, and the poem on 
Sosibius did not begin till after v. 6, being separated from the mddxapos 
by a shorter elegiac piece. On the other hand, it may be argued that the 
praises of Sosibius may easily have been coupled with those of more important 
personages, and that if the poem addressed to him included a passage referring 
to the king (viii. 5 sqq.) it may equally have included others relating to the 


Col. i: 
le on Eur 
Ip cose eal 
]-CJr 

Col. ti 
jompwavag.. [.. |. savar .-..[ 


Col. iii. 
Jon ee KG 6 Osos [eared S « boleneven 
)ia 6 MORNE cep ieee -JotBepevikno| 


].... @aBorf.]. wi af. Je. Bicl2 
]- ++ []re o@. es [2s]. Ojoeny 


1798. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS IOI 


queen and her father. Such irrelevances are natural in a court poet. On that 
hypothesis the roll may have been confined to this particular poem, which would 
have extended to some two hundred lines or more.,: 

The text is written in medium-sized upright uncials, somewhat ornate and 
laborious, but not regular or well-formed. The scribe was evidently a bad 
copyist (see below) and possibly also had difficulties with his ‘atchetype.;-that 
this was considerably older is rather suggested by an apparent tendency Sei 


archaism, for example, the linking of H to A in viii. 2 and the varying formation oe: 


of 2 which in ix. 1 is written as two strokes with a dot between them. On 
the whole the hand gives an impression of artificiality, and is likely to be of 
a later date than the forms of some letters might suggest; it may, however, 
fall within the first century. Stops are rarely used (iii. 3, vi. 1), but accents 
breathings, &c., are fairly frequent in the earlier columns; rarer signs are 
a comma to divide words (vi. 4), and a ligature to connect the parts: of 
a compound (ibid.). These additions, which cease after Col. vi, may come from 
the original scribe, who seems to be also responsible for corrections, including 
the insertion in cursive of an omitted line in Col. v. He has, however, left the 
text in a very imperfect state; its inaccuracy is demonstrated by the cor- 
ruptions in lines previously extant (cf. viii. 1, ix. 7). This textual inferiority 
combined with the disjointed character of the fragments adds materially to the 
difficulty of interpretation. 


Colm 


Col. il. 
jn mply dvag.[...]..war..| 


[fhoee Jee cece mot 


Col. iu: 
]..-na..0...€.[....]..- [-Jepevat 
.. pls KAeL... mply adore pe T}@ Bepevixns 
].-.. a Borf.J. ws af. je. [.. 
Vacs [e\Taes) ahntaee' [pais (|e EON O'ELY 


102 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Colmive 


2 
\sdcovrodvmadtovuTrep . ad| . aovyapoonT... 


1. ryixaopnvev... 0... erpere|ae 


“jd. pnBaowdnage .. 0's (ls ORRPON. one eyes eee 
e[ 
].. mavrovra).|jrareAevorar| 
5 Jouper[. .]. vov.. [ \xeorov 
Col. v 
2 rogcapayayBagiknat ..evh...... Be Polbets.a if 
ilree7: av© 
r [. .Jupapevard|.|. avtar...f... .jea 
]-ue.- 
[-\eoeroverpn o[.|%, Teu; [2s see © Juvvavere 
pokacwvpexplokepevnl...... lwadrtuvdpor 
5 [s . .JpirexnmadAal........ Japl. -Jepsd 
[sdeve IO CELMAVAOLET « hacks, suciet ah ote |Bepevixn: 


Fra. tonn62 


Jeary 


Col. vi. 
agovoragBue . alli llourm . cévavdoveyer: 
onuepivovBidcermepl.|uovmép.xeirooal]y ore 
TobT emoandeinihex Oeverrayyeduye 
daipov Joauporepaberal. Jovoroxabyrax 
5 [.|réveorapyasoucop . |. . 4 . L.upidaic 
[- Jr. Ll. . [-lyou[. Jeomedomn]. -Jyeepovee Ouor 


1798. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 103 


Col. iv. 
\iStov modUradtov bréip. ad. acov ydpuos nr. . 
].7ykaopnv ev... 0... expitiat 
| un PagiNvahoes. mp a. 26 “depo. 25 2 ae. em ] 
].. mdvt@v md[v|ra tedetérare. 
Jov pez[. .]. vou. .[ |xeorov 


Col. v, with Fr. 1. 


los 
[. Jupa pev ad]. avta w...[... .jtal 
Tocca Médyav Barwa 7... av r...... lsearedteieem 
Wo fie 3 
[noload: ror ey sini s-|.|  Tevie le = ake ders Juvvay ér, 


Poxaéov péxpis Ke pévn [péyas €]iv adi pvdpos, 
5  [méx]oc réxn Iaddals xy ydpos] Ap[rléucdr, 


[....|s del mavdpior[a pelvely al... .] Bepevixn 


Col. vi. 

déovos "AaBiartns tmmos Evavdov Exel. 

onpeptvov & awoei mep [2 €ludv mepl yethos diooe 
Toor émos Hdeln AexOev Ew ayyeNin: 

Aaipov, ds audorépwbey a[Ar(ldvoro KdéOn(o)ac 

5 [olretveos, dpyatos dpe 2 |olvpidacs, 

[Sv] re [y]eo[p]yod[yr]es IIedomm[ioly fepov ioOpov 

[tn pev Kpopvilrny ty [de..--]--[ 


104 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Col. vii. 
oppaxecwotBovticaregavdpourenvdnrat 
TNVETLKALY ALOVKLVUGLOLA TEPER 
auporepwmrapanadekacryy NTWLTEAEAP KOU 
KatTopupwalovTalyadabnoopeva 


OnduTaTovKalvEerA@T@verLavalovudwp 


wdern[.jkardapor . [. . .\reoererod. . . «| 

OT aoe Bre Wapmat|. s< 2 er ns yy .JacOAa 

[eeebancnen ater etage |prov7[ 18 letters ] 
Col. viti. 


kadmOecoukog LovavpPorovadrAaTraTne 
avdpacotovdecavrecedmkapevnduBonoat 
VNOVETLYAAUKNT K@POVAYOVTLX OPaL 
apxtAox ovvlK aovedupvovekdedtavdou 
Aayednmapacoimpwrovacbrogpopery 


ethapedamroreyl. .Jerenim[. .|pnvexedreyy|. -] 
Perate ETUC ENOL) ee cet an aerate jovkovine 


Calvix, 
appotepwvogervocetnBodocouKeTLyupLVvac 
TALOATEVN PALWLOTNTOLEVEUPUYOUNT 
wa papevordocetticavn popoppovoraodny 
TOUTOMEVEEAAAWVEKAVOVLEPOVEY@ 
KElvoyeunvlOovavTocomapmroo.Kat OeTovetAou 
vElTaLT@LKacLovELoeMiKopooaha 
kum pobevedove.o|. .|exatnyayevevOadeyal. jor 
[os SDERKRE 5 he Sire ee tee jooaliv]|O . oy 
[ 23 letters lpr 


1798. «NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 105 


Col. vii. 
dppa Ke SwoiBioy tis “AreEdvdpou te wUONTaL 
(y)iv emt kat vaioy Kivvgu dtorepéa 
dupotépm mapa raid((), Kaoryyit@ te Aedpxov 
kai 76 Mupivaioy 76 ydda Ono(a)pévo, 
5 OndrdraTov Kai Nevrotav éviadciov tdwp 


@Y ein[n] Kaddpous (?) [. . .JriveTeoe[. . . «] 


WED seats OU VAP. Oe T oun gle me Ue Vf... .] &eOra 
EL ograr atacponete \pieov 7[ 18 letters ] 


\ ? > 
{kat map’ AO@nvaios yap émi aréyos lepoy jvrat] 


Col. viii. 

KdAmioes, 08 Koapouv avuBodrov GAAA Ta(A)ns: 
avdpas 67 ov detoavtes eOdxapev 00 Bojoa 

vnov éme Lravxns K@pov ayovTt xop@ 
‘ApxtdAdxou vikatoy edpvpuviovr ex dé dtadAov, 

Aayetén, mapz col mp&tov deOdopopety 
eiAdueOa, IIrodeplaile, ren, mlarelp, jrvir’ édeyy[. -] 

Uicsen WE oTES MENGOT| caer, uric yes jou kovin 


Col. ix. 

audorépwor 6 Eeivos émnBodos: ovKéTe yupvas 
maidas ev ‘Hpalo orjoomey Evpuvouns. 

as dapévo ddcoer Tis avyp dpop(wvolv ?) dordhv. 
roiro pev é€ dAdwv Exdvov ipdy eyo, 

keivd ye piv iSov adtos d map modi KdrOero Neidou 
vetrat TS Kaotov tes émixwpos ada: 

Kirpobe (Siddvid[s ple xarhyayev evOdde yalbA}os 
Net eg tD SEK UKE smtnc io. es doses Jooa bev 


[ 23 letters lpr 


106 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Col. x. 


Kairovepouvixaroivacdopera pO piady oot 
o 
€ SoTaouKET LEK pwvouKEeTrirnbapevor 


mavpiorovrokevavdpimapapri@rtatdorro 
@riviunk pe. |oT@VNTIVOTTEUTUX INT 
5 ovrerovawwnowrocovag|.JovovTeabopat 
SidiayapdndnpovyAwscaveranporepoe 
BK. [. Jomerard[.Jrnow{.] . ovder|. .JoOdrove . fer 


pl. - |W] . Oneal. .]. Kam[... 2-2. ee. ] 
[ 35 letters \v 
Fragments. 
2. 3. 4. e 
[ Jovoax . [ o Jopeve .. .[ 


Tal Jyerol }- eyv-[ 


{ eee eter ee 


Col. i. This is a puzzling fragment. In]. 1 € and the circumflex are clear, and the 
letters vw, which are faint, are assured by an impression on the back of Col. ii, to which 
Col. i was adhering. The relative order of these two pieces is therefore certain. There is 
no sign of any letter after gd» either in Col. i itself or in the impression. Lines 2 and 3 
are in a smaller hand and, if gdv is the end of a verse, may be a marginal entry. No traces 
are visible after + in |. 3, but the papyrus is rather rubbed, and it is not impossible that 
further letters followed. 


Col. iii. The position of this is shown by a partial impression on the verso of Col. iv. 
The fragment itself has an impression on the back which provides a few letters from the 
earlier portion of the lines. 

2. The end of this line coincides with Callim. Fr. 35 d from Achill. Stat. Zsag. tx 
Arat. Phaen. p. 134 Srav (sic) pévrar 6 KadXinayos Up dorépt r@ Bepevixns éxl rod moxduov 
gnoiv, bs €& Era xaraharay ovyxerrar, (judpryra?); cf int. p. 100. The passage in Catullus 
to which Schneider supposes the fragment to correspond is (Ixvi. 79-83) 

nunc, vos oplato guom tunxit lumine taeda, 
non prius unanimts corpora contugrdus 

tradtie, nudantes retecia veste papillas, 
guam tucunda mtht munera libet onyx, 

vester onyx, casto colitis quae tura cubilt. 


prius quam mthi is regarded as a translation of mply dorepe r@ BL If that is correct, it seems 


1798. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 107 


Col. x. 
kai tov ép ob vikaow deldoper, dpOmia Shuo 
elddta (Kai) pixp@v ovK émAnOdopevor. 
Travpiatov 76 Kev avdpi map apved tis idoito 
Orit pr Kpellrowy 7 <vdos) edtuyins. 
5 ovTE Tov alvnow técov a£[Jov obre AdOwpan, 
deidia yap Sipov ydooav én’ apudorépois, 
Bh [r]d per BS [et |rnow, ["O]6’ oddém[or’ elaOAdv erckev 


BP er Wielwon Sale| S KOM ails cere soos ] 
35 letters 
Fragments. 
2. o 4. 5. 
Jovoa x .[ ].. Boes &vr[ Jopeve.. .[ 
i lyérral \3. pal dseyves |, 


strange that piv was included in the citation, in which, as it stands, the natural sense of mpiv 
is rather guondam. 
4. The doubtful @ may be o or «, hardly p. 


Col. iv. The suggested combination of two pieces in Il. 1 and 2 (the point of junction 
is indicated by vertical lines) remains uncertain in the absence of a satisfactory restoration 
of the word after imép. If the combination is incorrect, Col. v will become Col. vi and 
| . avov ydpos nr... &c. will become Col. v, with a possible lacuna between it and Col. iv. 
The small fragment |x:orov assigned to |. 5 was adhering to the back of Col. v, opposite 
mavaptor|, and its position is thus indicated with probability. 

I. moAvmadros is a novel compound; the epithet would suit e. g. [évar]iSiov. 

2. Perhaps |r yxa(o)uny or xalryxa(o)uny, as Housman suggests, but with the context 
in its present state emendation is not hopeful. Further on rcould be read in place of «p and 
» or » in place of ae. 

4. teAedrare; the vocative has been substituted for some other case (accus. ?). 


Col. v. This column, like the two preceding, is partly deciphered from impressions on 
the verso. 

2. The original omission of this line, the place of which is marked by the ayo at the 
end of ]. 1, was evidently due to the circumstance that ll. 2 and 3 began with the same word. 
The loss was supplied by the original scribe in letters of reduced size which become smaller 
and more cursive as he proceeds, and the latter part, of which there only remains an 
impression, is difficult to decipher. rov ev, which is suggested by 1. 3, seems unobtainable. 


108 THE. OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Magas, whose enmity to Philadelphus terminated with the betrothal of his daughter to the 
Egyptian crown prince, is commonly supposed to have died in or about B.c. 258. : 

3. |vvay, to which the insertion above the line apparently refers, remains obscure. ert 
may be sound, though érn would give a suitable substantive for the repeated tégga. 

4 =Callim. Fr. 209, from Schol. Soph. Autig. 264. Valckenaer’s correction of 
Dexelov to boxaéov is confirmed. The various conjectures as to the source of the verse 
prove to have been worthless. 

5. yduos seems more likely than éo1s on account of the space. 

6. Fr. 1, containing the letters |vetva[ (a very uncertain : 8, A, H, X are equally possible), 
was adhering to the lower part of the verso of a fragment which higher up has impressions 
of the middles of ll. 1 and 3-4. It will not combine readily with 1. 5 and so has been 
assigned to |. 6, where it seems suitable. 


Col. vi. 1. The ’AcBicra belonged to the Cyrenaica (cf. Callim. Hymn. Apoll. 76 
’AgBvorid: . . . yain), but the word may be loosely used as an equivalent of AiBus, as in Fr. 13 
Tpiravos ef’ vdacw "AoBiorao. Libyan horses were noted for their speed (Ael. Was. An. 
iii. 2, xiv. ro), and according to Hdt. iv. 189 réocepas immous cvlevyvivar mapa AcBtov oi 
"EdAnves pepabiyxacr: cf. e.g. Soph. Z7. 702,727. évavdov éyer is capable of two interpreta- 
tions, either ‘is in its stall’, doves depending on some phrase equivalent to AvOeis amd, or 
‘has fresh in its ears’, sc. the sound of the wheels. ‘The letters o¢ are derived from an 
impression which also gives the doubtful » in ]. 2, and the rough breathing (also doubtful) 
onainl. 4, 

2. At the end of the line ayore: seems to have been corrected to aiooe, the y (or 7?) 
being cancelled by a dot above and below it. The letters or are fairly clear in an impression 
on the back of the next column, which also makes the overwritten oe: certain. Of the two 
accents on ep: the acute is slightly the darker and larger. [é]uév looks probable, but is not 
satisfactory after @oei wep (?); nor can [6|udv be regarded as an improvement. 

3. The 7Scia dyyeAtn is presumably the news of the victory of Sosibius. 

4. Saipov: i.e. Poseidon; cf. n. on ll. 6-7. 

5. « Of opx{se is not very satisfactory ; the vertical stroke must be supposed to have 
become entirely obliterated, and to have been written close to the p. Stwudidas was 
suggested, no doubt rightly, by both Murray and Lobel. 

6-7. [y]eo[p]yoi[vr]es is very doubtful, but the letter before ov, if not y, can only be € or 
t, So that e.g. oikodvres is excluded. [rH pev Kpopr(e)i|rnv (sc. kadodor or sim.) may be suitably 
restored from Schol. Lycophr. Alex. 522 (Scheer) Kp@pra. . . MadAayovias dds ev 7 Mocedavos 
iepdv €otiv, €or S€ kai KopivOov romos, ws Kai KadXipayos €v SworBlov vikn, TH ev Kp. 

8. A dot slightly above the second « (?), unless accidental, is more likely to represent 
a diaeresis than a high stop. 


Col. vii. 1-2. This couplet is rendered intelligible by the slight alteration suggested 
by Housman of r to y at the beginning of |. 2: ‘ that even one dwelling on the Cinyps may 
learn that Sosibius and Alexandria have won a double crown’. For yf instead of dds cf. 
e.g. Eurip. Zro. 868 yi Sopi mecodca, and for the order in]. 2 Callim. Fr. 530 emi rpiya S'etyev 
€d@57. 

3-4. For dudorépo rad(i) cf. e.g. Callim. 2. Del. 168 dudorepn peodyeca. Probably 
‘the brother of Learchus’ means Melicertes, in whose honour the Isthmian games are 
said to have been founded (cf. Pausan. i. 44. 8, Plutarch, Zhesews 25, &c.), and the other 
child ‘who was suckled on Myrina’s milk’ is Opheltes-Archemorus, who was commemorated 
by the games of Nemea and was the foster-child of Hypsipyle, daughter of Myrina after 
whom the Lemnian town Myrina was supposed to be named. 

5+ For Ondtraroy cf, Eustath. ad Hom. 6 p. 1599. 25 OiAus eépon, 7 Tod edkapmeiy Kal 


1798. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 109 


monupoper aitia, ev kai KadXipayos 6yAvratoy mediov Néyet, TO ToAVYovoy (Fr. 296). éviadcrov of 
course refers to the annual inundation. What has been regarded as the top of the r in 
vetAwtov may belong to the w, which is sometimes written in this hand with a little hook at 
the top of the first stroke. 

6. A vestige of the letter after o would suit e.g. o, and possibly [da|ris (é eioe . . .?) 
followed, though a rather longer supplement is desirable. Or was the Nile personified ? 

g. This line is given by Callim. Fr. 122; cf. the next note. The traditional order of 
map and ydp, which are transposed by Schneider following Meineke, is retained (? 1. Mavaé.). 


Col. viii. 1 = Callim, Fr. 122, from Schol. Pindar, Vem. x. 64 dia rovrov onpaiver rods 
ta Tlava@nvaca verexnxdras riBevrar yap év ’AOnvats év emaOdov taker bdSpiac wAnpets eAaiov, Sud Kal 
KadXivaxos, kat map’ ’A@nvaios «rd., With dddd wddns, instead of which the papyrus mistakenly 
gives dAN dmarns, at the end of the second line. Schneider proposed to assign this 
fragment to Aes. 1.6; Bergk was no happier in suggesting that the source was the “Apyous 
oikio pol. 

3. TAadkns: i.e. probably the daughter of Creon and wife of Jason, from whom was 
named a spring near Corinth on the road to Sicyon: above it was rd Kadovpevoy @deiov ; cf. 
Pausan. ii. 3. 6. 

4. ’Apxr6xov vicaiov epiprviov: i.e. tHveAAa Kaddivixe, the conventional salutation of 
a victor in the games; cf. Archil. Fr, 106 ryveAda, & xaddinxe yaipe «td., Schol. Pindar, 
Ol. ix. 1. There is a somewhat similar allusion to qpoipuoy ’Apxrdxov in Callim. Fr. 223. 
éx d:avAov is perhaps metaphorical, ‘ we have retraced our steps,’ as e. g. in Aesch. Ag. 344 
kdpryat StavdAov Odrepov Kado, 

5. deOdofope: the verb occurs only here. 

6. n|drelp was suggested by Lobel: a| is much more probable than ro. 

7. edatn does not scan, and the right emendation is not obvious. 

8. Jo: Jo. or Jax are possible alternatives. 


Col. ix. 1-2. The maides Edpuvduns are no doubt the Graces, who are commonly called 
her children by Zeus; cf. Callim. Fr. 471 of & vex’ Evpuvdun Ternmas eimov érixre (Sc. ras 
Xdpiras), and for yupvds Callim. Fr, 266 doradéav Xapitwv Adhov. ai Xdpires yupvai became 
a proverbial expression, as in Aristaen. il. 21 ai yap xdpirés cou... dAnOas Kata THY Tapoipiay 
yupvai; cf. Suidas s, v. kal mapoupia ai xdpires yupvai, iro dre Sei apes Kal havepds xapiter bat, 
i) bre ai xdpites Toy avy kdcpov adrypyvra. .. xdpitas yupvas ioropovor, dite Swpeay Set xdpiras 
rigeo6a.: but the point in the present passage is not very clear. The ‘Hpaiov may be that 
near Mycenae, which had ancient statues of the Xdpures in its mpdvaos (Pausan. ii. 17. 4) and 
was not far from Nemea. 

3. opodpovos is evidently an error for éudpevos or -ov; Lobel’s suggested correction of 
dodny to duoByv is also plausible, though for doce .. . dowdjv cf. Callim. Fr. 310 ddddaypa 
vopavov Sovvat, 

5. kdtOero: sc. probably Sosibius, who made commemorative dedications both in 
Greece and in Egypt; the former were only known to the poet by hearsay (e& adAwv Exdvoy, 
1. 4), the latter he had seen. The 2 of vethov seems to have been corrected from o, the base 
of which gives the letter the appearance of a 6. 

6. This verse, in which apparently the rovs NeiAov was more closely defined, is obscured 
by corruption, «s is open to suspicion on account of the hiatus. The Kdotoy dpos was 
near Pelusium and the Serbonian Lake, zap’ jv 8: 7d K. dpos reiver és Oddacoav (Hat. iii. 5), 
and there was a temple of Zeus there. xaovovers might conceal Kadowos Zevs, but the rest of 
the line is incongruous. veira + Kaoia vais would give a possible sense, but is far 
from being convincing. With regard to the concluding words, a similar collocation is 
noticeable in Callim. Fr. 373 (Tzetz. ad Lycophr. 139) €Oos etxov oi mudaoi, bs kai KadXipaxos 


110 THECOXYRAYNGEAUS VPAPY RI 


ioropel, pera xtOapas mepi rods Gras iévar kai avupveiv kai éykopiateww. As Schneider remarks, 
ioropet does not exclude a poem, but that the present passage is the source of the citation is 
unlikely. 

7 = Callim. Fr. 217, the various guesses as to the source of which were, as usual in 
the absence of a substantial clue, futile. This line is intelligible as the first verse of the 
dedicatory inscription of Sosibius. 

8. The letter before the first » was probably y, 7, or r, and the doubtful « after « may 
equally well be o, At the end of the line @éwy is not excluded. 


Col. x. 2. ov« em after edora, probably an inadvertent anticipation of ov émAnOdpevor 
is clearly corrupt, and xai, which was suggested by both Murray and Lobel, or rév, is an 
easy alteration. 

7. The restoration suggested gives a suitable sense, [r]o pev referring to the first 
alternative, i.e. éay alvjow: but uy [w’] or pnd] 6 wév would also serve, At the end of the 
line the very slight remains are consistent with either ¢Aefev or épefev. A vestige in front 
of the base of o of ovd is quite in keeping with a 6. 

8. W[elvdys or alyfelvdys accords with the context, but is very doubtfully read, the y being 
represented only by the top of a stroke above the line equally consistent with ¢; 2 is 
possible in place of 6. The next word is perhaps a[vr]ixa, as Lobel suggests; the first 
a may be 6. 


Fr. 3, 2. The grave accent on e has apparently been cancelled. . 


Fr, 4. 1. The supposed 8 is strangely formed, rather like a figure 8. It is preceded 
by what looks like 7 or. y. . 


1794. POEM IN HEXAMETERS. 
19 X 12-9 cm. Late second century. 


This papyrus contains on the recto the ends and beginnings of lines of two 
partially effaced columns from an annotated list of property-holders, drawn up 
perhaps early in the second century. The Oxyrhynchite village Kepxe(dpa) 


pndeoaccor[...... |xooreko|. .| . ceeolKe 
Oevopevort .[..... jrocovmap|. .|adaveec Oat 
TMOLOVXELPO[.|eEf. .. . - Japxee|. Jou[.Jenevavdn 
OU he GVic Tomle|e0.s see Sloe ]yo. [|]... tL Jxedouno 

Ru Touoey el, era, lege toa ] . opevOavevocpivedy . [.v 
EVMEVOLTEV I Aloe oe ot np pat fovodever 
aurndov .[.]u[.Jo[...... leATT@patdeaynoay 
neeTEpnoBuord]. . . .Jovdepororkocaiires 


adhoreyaparrd|.|oorG|.JurAaxoray Opwmoioty 

10 olyToimeoowodiKnrol. .|\ndexaroABov 
meoo|.|oaperBopevoo|.JoreuerTo|. . -|AAoTeT oo U.] 
evoayadovmen|. |karagveovaipari. Once 


1794. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS TEL 


is mentioned. On the verso is a nearly complete column of 21 lines from 
a hexameter poem, written in a medium-sized semicursive hand which dates 
probably from the latter part of the same century. The column has a slant to 
the right owing to the writer’s tendency to advance to the left the commencement 
of the lines. A circumflex accent is once written (1. 8), but apart from this no 
other diacritical marks occur except the diaeresis on 1 and v. The poem and its 
author remain unidentified. The column is occupied by a speech of an elderly 
woman to a youth, whom she addresses as réxos. She dilates on the fickleness 
of fortune and explains that though now poor she had formerly been prosperous 
and had often entertained guests. This situation resembles that of the Hecale of 
Callimachus, who, moreover, puts into the mouth of Hecale the same adjective, 
Aimepv7tis, Which is used of herself by the speaker here; cf. 1]. 17, n. But ll. 2-6, 
so far as they can be made out, do not seem to suit the Hecaiz, still less ll. 20-1, in 
which the woman describes herself as a needy vagrant in a city, whereas Hecale 
when visited by Theseus was living in the country near Marathon. An identifica- 
tion must, therefore, be sought elsewhere, and some less polished poet of the 
Alexandrian school is more likely to be the author than Callimachus. The 
mention in 1. 20 of #8’ 6don BovBpworts as the cause of the speaker’s misfortunes 
recalls the story of Erysichthon as told by Callimachus in H. Dem. 31 sqq.; in 
]. 102 there the ravenous hunger of Erysichthon is described as xaxad BovSpworis, 
and some further resemblance may be found between the following lines 105-6 
Xfjpar pev pavdpar, keveal d€ jor avtAres 7/5 TeTpaTddwy and ll. 18-19 of the papyrus: 
but this may be a coincidence. 


lon iy ~ r y+ 
pA 6€ of daaor [iotca, Télkos, Téxo\s, o]¥ oe EoLKE 


Sevdpevoyv T.[...-. | récov mapla& maida véeoOat, 
TG ov xelp d[plyery ? otr’] apxée[e] odfd]e pev avdi) 
Byers C1 arnl dia poeaee «»-o.[.].-. t[f] xe dois 

5 Tov Oe oye leno [ieviien ou }.6 pev Odvev bs pv Edvoje]y 
ev pevoitev .[....- av\jp mpwvov ddedwv- 
GUTH 0 OU ise lu Wln * atone ,| eAmwpal 8’ édynoay 
hperépns Biorils, adlov dé po otkos aiirel. 


&drore yap aArAoli|s dABloly Adxos avOpéroow- 
10 ofn Tot mecooio Sikn, To[ijjde Kat dABou 
megold|s dpesBouevos [more pév Tolis, a]\Aore rotor] 


eis dyabdy minire] Kal dpvedy ala 7lOnor 


T12 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYEI 


mpoo bevavorBetovreun peveorT|. Savor Bor 
Tolocdevwrnoimep|. . .|pepeTaim7Epuyerov 
15 [.|ABooeravOpwrovol. .JAovdegar|. .JuopedAer 
ndav{.|\nmoAceootn|. . .JyKacoertovopega 
THVOpaatoemouTiALT|. .|ynTioTapogna 
exkedenoivetor Babval. liorerkeval. lone 
ToAAaOEpoluNrETKE|. |apevOraTravTaKEedacceEv 
20 ndodronBovBpwortceywdakopioTol. .\AnTio 


[.]. eroOimAnBoveavavantonve. . . .|pTrat 


1-21. ‘She went up to him and said “‘ My son, my son, being so much in want of... 
you should not go to a child, whose hand cannot proffer food, nor his voice .. . I myself am not 
. .., but the hopes of my life are broken, and my house gives a dry sound. Sometimes 
to one man, sometimes to another falls the lot of wealth, The way of wealth is as the way 
of a die, which in turn brings a lucky throw now to one now to another, suddenly making 
rich the man who was before poor, and making poor the man who was enriched. Even so 
on wheeling wings goes wealth up and down among men, prospering first one, and then 
another. I whom you see have given drink and food to many, for formerly I‘ was no 
outcast, nay, I had fields where the crops stood deep, I had a threshing-floor, and sheep 
in plenty; but they were all made havoc of by this baneful famine (?), and I, an uncared for 


72 


wanderer, creep thus about the crowded city”. 


> 


1. Of the letter before oe there is only a very small vestige, and e.g. 7 could equally 
well be read, but od seems required by the sense. 

3. The restoration of d[p|[yew oir’], for which cf. l. 16, was suggested by Housman. 

4. kes or perhaps ce. 

5. Tov is possible in place of ro», 

6. If or is rightly read there must be some error. our is an alternative, perhaps also 
on though the latter is less suitable. 

7. There may have been only one letter (v?) between ov andy; at any rate there is 
no room for ov« [et]w’. «, ¢, or ¥ may be read in place of the following doubtful p. 

8. adjov . . . diret; the Homeric phrase, which is used of metallic sounds, has here 
a rather different but quite intelligible sense. There is not room for xeve|dv, 

9. yap might be altered to rap’, but the a is perhaps lengthened as e. g. in Homer B 39 
Onoew yap ér’ gueddev, H. Dem. 57 porns yap fovea, Cf. 1. 12, where kai dpvedy, as Housman 
observes, also has Homeric analogy (e.g. @ 641, H. Dem. 424), though the loss of re after 
ninree WOuld be easy. 

13. dvodPeiv and ednpevety are apparently unattested. The latter can of course be 
eliminated by writing einpeve’ dvz[a}. 

14. dewwrnoe must be corrected to dunrijox or Sujecor. The w is broken, but 7 cannot 
be read. 

17. Cf Callim. Fr. 66 e od ydp por mevin marpauos, od8 dard mammon eipt Numepyites. 

19. The verb presumably refers to the substantives of the preceding line as well as to 
una, to which it is more strictly suitable. Cf. Soph. Aniig. 287, where Jebb's assertion that 
dvacxedav ‘ could not possibly be joined with yy’ is unconvincing. 


1794. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 18 


, 
mpoabev avodrPelovt, edndevéovz[a] & dvodBov- 
Tolos div(n)T Hot mepliaT|péeherae mrEpbyecouy 
15 [d|ABos én’ dvOpdmous, [dA]Aov 8° é &NAoly opéAXe. 
4) 0 ad[r}) modgecor moro Kai otroy dpega 
THY Opdas, émel ott AimeplvATis mdpos Ax, 
exe J€ por velds Babvdljlos, éoxev a[Alor, 
TOAAG O€ por WAN Eoke, [7]& pv Ode mdvra Kédaccev 
20 40° ddon BovBpworis, éyd 8 dxbpucrols alAnrIs 
[o)Sé mobs mAAOovcay avi mrddw g... Elona 


1795. ACROSTIC EPIGRAMS. 
Col. ital 22-3"x 17-5. Cm, First century. 


Three fragments from two columns, one of which is practically complete, 
containing epigrams of precisely the same kind as those in 15, and perhaps 
belonging to the same collection. Each epigram consists of four hexameters in 
which the final foot is an iambus instead of a spondee or trochee (€€dperpor jeloupor), 
and, as also in 15, each is followed by the words avA(e). wor.! Another feature 
common to the two papyri escaped notice when 15 was edited, and seems not 
to have been observed since. The initial letters of the successive quatrains are 
in alphabetical order, Col. ii including the letters [0] to 2, while 15. ii includes 
X, ¥, Q, and so terminates the series. Whether the two papyri preserve different 
portions of the same collection is an open question. The absence of any 
coincidence in 15. i with 1795. ii is no argument against identity, since 35 lines 
would intervene between 1795. ii. 27 and 15. ii. I, so that, unless the column in 
15 exceeded 40 lines, no overlapping would occur. But of course the number of 
such collections current at Oxyrhynchus need not be limited to one. The 
epigrams, which are well turned and include some memorable lines, are on a 
variety of topics without logical sequence. Some have a hedonistic tendency, 
others contain moral reflections or maxims of conduct. Similar subjects occurred 
in the specimen previously discovered; cf. ii, 12-15 with 15. i. 7-10, ii. 1-4 
(music), ii. 24-7 with 15. ii. 6-9 (instability of wealth). 

The two minor fragments, of which one certainly, and probably the other 
also, is from the top of a column, are regarded as preceding rather than following 
the main piece on account of the handwriting, which in the upper part of Fr. 1 is 
distinctly smaller and neater than towards the end, where it begins to approximate 

1 That avAepor in 15 is probably to be regarded as two words, not one, was pointed out by Wilamowitz, 


Gott. gel, Anz. 1898, p. 695. 
I 


II4 THE OXVYRHYNGHUS, FAPY RI 


to the larger and more irregular formation of Col. ii. If this indication is not 
deceptive, the three stanzas of Fr. 1 began respectively with the letters A, B, T. 
The script is an upright informal uncial of an early type, with some tendency to 
cursive forms, notably in « ; it may be assigned to the first century. One rather 
doubtful instance of a mark of elision occurs in ii. 3. The first line of each 
quatrain is made to protrude by a couple of letters into the left margin. On the 
verso is a partially obliterated account in second-century cursive. There is also 
an illegible half line in cursive, which apparently has nothing to do with the 
literary text, on the recto above Col. ii. 


Colm? 
ees ity Eieae: 
| Kepadn atepaval 7 
jy pera tov pedarfos ] 
jk@ kat krovia [ |vo 
Jo pera pov dvo xi lus avadt pofe 
5 lows @avepw yap e. [ 5 jo... .Jov 
]. ot Kat croate Tal nlenscquece ] 
lIkov avepwv t.[ lJecas 
ls mepe daxtvdov [ Ins avrAr pole 
ml|Aokapous evkKjous 
Lo | Oavew ort tral 
Je youvara v. [ 
Joo o6e| 


).[ 


Col. ii. 

Hd adtxiv (nter pnd av adi[kn mplocepions 

pevye povovs Kar gevye paxas gltloar Sradpove[ily | 

es 6° odtyov movers Kat SevTEpoy ov peTapedn  av[AL plot 
[eJol[eJles ap yetpwva Oepos ravr ett diodov 

3 ndwos autos [edu] kat vg Ta TeTaypeEv amexeL 

Pn Koma (nrewv tobev nALos ny obey] vduvp 

adda mlolOev z[0] pupov Kat Tovs otedavor[s] ayopacns avr Holt] 
Kpnvas avropultolus pedlitjos tpis nbedov exer 


1795. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS I15 


Z 
mev7|[n || yadaxropurous oivov dexa lwde]ka pupov 
10 = kat Ovo TnyaLwy vdaTwy Kal TpLS xtovel] y Joy 
mada KaTa Konynv Kat mapOevov nOedov exeLy  avAL po[L 
Avédios avdos ewor ta de Avdta watypata dvpas 
ka{t] Dpvy[iols kadrapos ta de Travpea Tuumava Trove 
TAaUTA Gov agal T €pouat Kat oTav amobavw 
15 avAov umep Kehadns Gere por mapa moa(a)t de dupyiy avrL pot 
HeTpa Tijs| av mAovTov mad avevpato peTpa Trevias 
n Tts ev avOpwrois xpucov madi evpato peTpov 
vuy yap 0 xpynpaT exwv ert TALlova ypnuata BeAr 
mAovatos wv 6 ° raras Bacano[dlerat womep o Tmevns avaAlt pot 
20 vexpov eav 108 tdns Kat pynpara Koda mapayns 
kowwov egomTpoy opa<s) o Oavwy ovrws mpoaedoKxa 
0 xpolvlos ects davos ro nv mixpos ec 0 davicas 
Kav ToT amaitnoat oe Bern Kdatwy [almodidors avdrr por 
Bepéns nv Baoireluls 0 Aeyor Ai’ mavra pepioat 
25 o® dvaity mndarlcjo[tls povos exxioe Anuviov vdwp 
orABi(o)s nv o Midas zpis 6 odBtos ny o [K\vuplals 
adda Tis eg Alda oBodrov mdreov nAvbev exwov avAL por 


Fr. 1. 4. |. per euod. 
6. €. g. Aor, wor. 
g. This quatrain evidently deals with old age and the approach of death ; cf. il, 20-3. 


Fr. 2. As stated in the introduction, this fragment, like Fr. 1, is probably from the top 
of the column, since otherwise, unless the line preceding ]. 1 was abnormally short, some 
part of avs po should be visible. The spacing of the lines is also suitable. 


Col. ii. 

‘Try not to injure, and if you are injured, do not retaliate ; shun murder, shun strife, 
avoid discord, and you will have little trouble and moreover will not repent. Pzpe me 
a tune. 

‘You see spring, winter, summer: these are general. The sun himself sets and night 
takes her appointed place. Toil not to seek whence comes the sun or whence the water, but 
where you may buy perfume and garlands. Pzpe me a tune. 

‘I should like three welling founts of honey, five of milk, ten of wine, twelve of 
perfume, and two of spring water and three of snow ; I should like at each fount a boy and 
a maid. Pzpe me a tune. 

‘A Lydian flute serves me, and Lydian strains of the lyre, and Phrygian pipe, and 
drum of oxhide. While I live I long for these to play, and when I die, put a flute above 
my head and at my feet a lyre. Pzpe me a tune. 

I 2 


116 THE OXYRBAHYNCHUS FARYRI 


‘Who’has found the limits of wealth, who the limits of poverty, or who has found the 
limit of gold among men? For now he who has money wishes for still more money, and 
the rich man, poor wretch, is tormented like the poor. Pzpe me a tune. 

‘Tf ever you see a corpse or pass a silent tomb, you are looking at a common mirror ; 
the dead man’s expectation was as yours. Life is a loan: the lender of life is stern, and 
when he wants to demand it back, in sorrow you will repay. Pzpe me a tune. 

‘ Xerxes was a king who said that he shared the sovereignty of Zeus, and he sailed 
over the water of Lemnos with but two boats. Rich was Midas, trebly-rich was Cinyras, 
but who went down to Hades with more than an obol? Pupe me a lune. 


I. mplocepions : the remains of the termination are scanty, but seem too much for -ca, 

2. For diadppoveey cf. Hesych, diappovéwrs Scavootvpevos. kai 6 év diaopa tun yeyoves. 
The reading, however, is far from certain, a being especially doubtful; the letter after 6 may 
well be v. 

3. perapeAy as an irregular future form would balance ovéces better than perapeAy. 

6. 1. vdwp. 

7. The first o of crepavov|s| is a correction, perhaps from a partially formed r. Cf. 1. 15, 
where there is an unnoticed lipography. 

13. tavpeia is a drum or something of the kind in Geof. xv. 25. 3. 

14. Cov provides a good antithesis, but the (is not altogether satisfactory and the other 
remains are very scanty. 1. épayau. 

15. |. Avpay: the correct form was written in ]. 12. 

16. 1. ris for madt, which has come in from the next line. For the tmesis cf. e.g. 
Eurip. 2. /. 1055-6 done? modu, and d€ matépa. 

18. Cf. Eurip. Suppl. 238-9 of pev OABioL. . . TAELOVOY T ép@o’ aet. 

19. l. Bacavifera. Perhaps Bacano{Clerat was written. 

20. |. wor’. deity is one of the words often wrongly aspirated, being influenced no 
doubt by épav, e. g. Philipp. ii. 23 éws av aide ; cf. Mayser, Grammatik, p. 201. 

22. Cf. Anth. Pal. App. 252 mvedpa aBav Sdvos ovpavdbev TeXecas xpdvoyv ayrarédaxa, and 
for damcoas e.g, Anth. Pal. xi. 309 fewrdpevos dSavicas. 

23. |. kav mor’, The (Lonic) forms dots, dud00 occur e.g. in the LXX, Ps. xxxvi. 21, 
Job xxxiv. 11, 

26. s of odAfis was converted from o. -1s for -tos is a common vulgarism. 

27. ts seems inevitable here, but the remains suggest « rather than s. This may be 
deceptive, but possibly « was written twice by mistake instead of ce. 


1796. HEXAMETER POEM ON EGYPTIAN BOTANY. 
21X35 cm. Second century. 


The recto of this papyrus contains remains of three columns, the second of 
which is nearly complete, from a list of abstracts of contracts or other transactions 
concerning property, drawn up in the first half of the second century. The verso 
is inscribed with two columns of a hexameter poem dealing with Egyptian plants 
or trees. Col. i, besides lacking the beginnings of lines, is in bad condition, and 
does not seem worth reproduction ; the second column, which is in much better 
case, is printed, and will probably be found a sufficient sample. Apparently the 
upper half of the column relates to the cyclamen, which was also the subject of 


1796. WEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 117 


at any rate the greater part of the preceding column (zodAvyAayéwv kux\Aa peivwv 
1. 9, kukAd]wewvos 1. 12; the form Oé€puera in 1. Ig deserves to be noticed). At 1. 12 
of Col. ii the writer turns to the persea tree, to which the rest of the column is 
devoted. The style is diffuse, and the poem must have been of considerable 
length if many subjects were treated ona similar scale. Its author is hardly 
likely to be identified, nor need the loss of his name be regretted ; his work 
seems to have been of small merit, whether from the literary or scientific point 
of view. 

The text is written in a heavy upright semicursive with no diacritical marks 
other than the diaeresis. A short oblique dash is once used apparently for 
punctuation at the end of a line in Col. i, and paragraphi were also employed. 
Corrections in the body of the text are frequent, and there are also some 
marginalia in a closely similar if not identical hand: 1822, which was found at 
the same time as this papyrus, presents some analogous features. 


[es 
ecOaveralt] morapou yap emndvolty nv 0 amoderne 
pi(nolw peyadnow ate ppoveovte oyliopar 
AK € 
TAcLov vdMp [vc llouca moduTAnOt TOTE KapTTM 


oO 
aX ovk eo ore Kaprrov epedpevover AaPecOat 


5 avOpwmo: xaovies ¢lujrpapewy KuKAapELY@Y 


G 
modkAn yap NeiAowo yvois modAAy 6 emt olTw er{ 
apOovin TeTavvcrat evoecy Oe yehoou 


evOeviny ov Kapwos emt xOova Tmacav OO€VEL 


Baal, 
@YVYLOS VOMOS OUTOS aT apXalwv ET aVAKT@Y 
a 
10 OecOat devdpea Keva Trap adAndAotor KoAwvais 
Uv ol 
patos ev{la||dp|lullo medny adktnpa TE AElpou evu 
Xofl alae nv adKTnp be ne 
Wt Tey 
mepoin 5 akpntos vo xAoepol|vy]| meTnAos 
xAvepota[i 


\ at 
eupopeot Kapm@ mepikadr€l pnde trem] €¢ ||voe 


pexpts emavOnolfoulloe kradoe mporepor {Oe} mepe Kaprrov 
o 
15 meimro. pnd apa vuktos of evyvbev opyvutar Udwp 


118 THE: OXYBAYNGCHUS. FALTERS 


TEpolns amo KapTros atep Papunyeos aupns rel 
cupeperat pouvn yap abwmevtar de yeynbev repin[ 
adpooin Kapmoy yap um adpooinot mema.vet es 
oO 
ona Kat nmepins everdel].||s eyyus {€}iderbae 
20 Netdov mAnpvpovtos vdwp veoy evTe TLovaeu 
“Kaprrov amt opadpoo velar svvavnkato BacTw Si 


l 


nepos akploino mpoo . pe. [.le 6 emt KnTraL 


1. There is not enough to show whether the initial e written by a common confusion 
in eo Oavera{t| was deleted. The subject of amodeurne is 6 rorapés. 

2. In the margin in front of this line is a 6 or a having the third stroke protracted 
downwards; the meaning of this is obscure. 

5. xXaovres iS perhaps for xaréovtes. 

6. cetw, if that is right word, is for oirov. en|(?) in the margin looks like 
a correction of or variant on eze cero. 

7. |. eroincev? ev. might be read instead of ex, but seems no easier. 

g. wyvytov was apparently written originally. To what éad{ in the margin refers is not 
clear; the letters are slightly above |. 9, but nearer to it than to |. 8. 

10. derSpea is unexpected, since the subject under discussion both here and in the 
previous column appears to be the xvkdduiwos; cf. int. Perhaps, however, this was 
a digression; Dioscorides describes one variety of kukAduivos as growing in shady places, 
padiota b€ td ra dS€vdpa, and another as having xavdovs mayeis, yovarwdes, wepiecAcacopevous 
Tois mapaxeipéevors Sévdpeow €dixoerdas (ii. 193-4). The cyclamen then may have been brought 
in here in connexion with some tree, to which 6dévdpea xetva goes back. The tree, as 
Housman remarks, might be the d«avéa, which is planted on modern embankments because 
the roots bind the soil. 

12. mepo(eym: cf. e.g. Nicander, AZ. 99 mepoeins xapva, 58. 7. The persea, which was 
an exclusively Egyptian tree (Strabo xvii, p. 823, includes it among the i&d¢ovra of the 
country), is described at length by Theophrastus, 7. P. iv. 2-5, who says that it xaprov héper 
mohvv Kal Tacav dpay’ TeptkatadapBaver yap 6 véos dei tov &vov: this illustrates the epithet 
dkunros here, It seems to have become a rarity by the fourth century (58; cf. Wilcken, 
Archiv i, p. 127) and was protected by an edict of Arcadius (Cod. lust. xi. 77). 

The interlinear insertion is difficult both to decipher and to explain; yAoepowt, as 
written in the margin, must in any case be read. The first o of the marginal lection has 
been corrected. 

13-14. According to Theophrastus, l.c., the fruit mérret id rods érnoudis. 1. mpdrepov? 

15. l. &yyvéev. o was written over v by mistake for y. 

17. Both this and the preceding marginal note are obscure. aéwzevror = ‘harsh’, as 
in Anth. Pal. vi, 168. 

19. nHEepins = quepdryros, ‘Culture, resulting in continual fruitfulness, of which a wild 
tree would not be capable (Housman) : this substantive does not occur elsewhere. 

21. The interpretation of the abbreviation in the margin is doubtful. 

22. akpiomot = ‘fluctuations’? The next word is puzzling. If @ is right, the letter 


between this and o was quite narrow (?c). The penultimate letter seems to have been 
corrected, and ¢ is very uncertain. 


1797. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS ao 


1797. ANTIPHON SOPHISTES, [epi ’AAnOefas, i? 
22-4 X 16-3 cm. Early third century. 


These two columns of a philosophical work belonged to the same find as 
. 1364, the fragments of the sophist Antiphon [lept ’AAndefas, but owing to obvious 
differences both in handwriting and in the length and width of their columns, the 
two papyri were not supposed to be connected. Further investigation, however, 
now suggests that they represent the same author, if not actually related them- 
selves. The subject of this new piece is the ethics of legal evidence, the justice 
of which is controverted in opposition to the current view. If justice consists in 
not wronging others when not wronged oneself, then, it is contended, to give 
adverse evidence, even when the evidence is true, is essentially unjust. A person 
so convicted is injured, and his resentment may result in further injury to the 
giver of the evidence. Legal procedure in general, which benefits one man at 
the expense of another, is vitiated by similar injustice. This sophistical argument 
is quite in the manner of 1864, where Antiphon, starting from another definition 
of justice as the observance of law, maintains that this isa matter of expediency 
and that, so long as the breach is unobserved, the law may be broken with 
advantage; cf. Part XI, pp. 92sqq. In style also the present text recalls 1364 ; 
see op. cit., p. 95, where the literary estimate of Antiphon found in Hermogenes, 
De idets, ii. 11. 17, and the stylistic analysis in E. Jacoby’s De Antiph. Soph. 
Tep) “Opovoias, pp. 48 sqq., are considered in relation to that papyrus. Among 
special characteristics the sophist’s tendency to poetic rhythm is exemplified in 
ll, 10-11, 16-18, 47-9, and 51-3 below, and his partiality for synonyms in ll. 64-5. 
It may be worth noting that the expression év tovrm, which seems to have been 
rather favoured by the author of 1797, is found also in 1364. 272. No instance 
occurs of iv or ctv; the spelling rr, used in 1864, appears once in 1. 44. The 
ascription to Antiphon thus seems sufficiently likely on internal evidence, and 
some external marks of relationship between the two papyri, in addition to the 
fact that they were found in close proximity, are also forthcoming. Though the 
hands are not identical they are of the same type and are certainly very close in 
date. The column in 1797 isabout 3 cm. longer and 1 cm. broader than in 1364, 
but the height of the papyrus is approximately identical. Breathings, accents, 
and marks of quantity, which are rare in prose texts, have been occasionally 
inserted in both papyri, apparently by a second hand, to which may be also due 
the punctuation by means of high or medial dots (in 1864 one instance occurred 
of a low dot). The possibility is suggested that the same hand made these 
additions in both texts ; in that case 1797 might actually be a later section of the 


120 1HE OXYRHYNCHUS PARYRI 


same roll as 1864, which is shown by a stichometrical figure to have belonged 
to the earlier portion of the book ; or alternatively 1797 may be supposed to be 
from another treatise of Antiphon, the [loAurixds or the Tepi ‘Opovolas, this copy 
being more or less uniform with that of the ITep) ’AAnOefas (1864) and belonging 
to the same owner. 


Coli, Col. fi. 

Power a | tov dikatov An On paprup[y 
[o7roud|acouv Sokovv 40 Gas? Kat ov povloy 
[Tos To] paprupev Tot ploe adda k[ae 
[ev ad]Androls TadnOn o7t det avTov Toly 

5 [Ockatoly vouigerat diova mavTa gu 
[euvar] Kat xpnotpov AaTrrecOat TovTo[y 
foudev| nrrov eus 45 60 KaTepaptup(n 
[ra Tov] avOporev cev? ws vUmTapxelt 
[emiT|ndevpara: y avTot €xOpos To.o[v 

10 [Touro] Towuy ov ot Tos olos Kat Aeyey [ 
[katos] eoTat oO Trotwr. kat dpav ec te duviae 
[kat yalo To wy adixery 50 70 Kakov avuTov: Ka[e 
[endleva pn ade ToL TavTa paiverat 
[Kou]evoy auTov OU OMIKpa ovTa T 

15 [dtklaov eri avay Ouknuara: ouvre 
[kn| yap Tov paptu & autos adixetat: 
[povly7a Kav adn 55 OUTE @ adie ov yap 


t Aowv TE TaVTA TE OL 
[On plaptupy. opws 


KLM €LVAL KQL TO 
[adAov] ws aolKeély" ai 
dlev adixery pny 
20 [etkos de ?| autor a [ 
ss de] avrov adikerc Oar: 
[dr]xeco Oat [ers vote 


[polv: evelare ye 
[ely wr dta tla um exer n| Ta €TEPA avTwY 


[vjov papzlupnbev 
2ROTe adwox{e|rae Oo Ka 


[ 
[ 
60 [a@A]A avayKn eotiy 
[ 
{ 


Olikala eval: n ap 
poTepa adika: har 


TALULA ae VETAL O€ KQL TO Oka 
p vpoupevos: 
KQL amoAAu 5 Geer Kal TO Kplvelv 

alv n 
Kal TO Oratav OTT@S 


Wie, NEW “CLASSICAL 


XpnfaTa » avtoy 
[dla trovroy ov ovder 


30 [a]dcxer- ev pev ovy 
TOUT@L TOY KATA 70 
LL |aptupovpevov 
a|diker oT ovK acr 


koluvTa €avTov a 


FRAGMENTS 


av TEPALYNTAL OV 
[Olikara ovTa: To yap 
[a|AAous wherovy ar 
[Aolus BAamre ev de 
[rov|7@t ot prev wedou 
[wevolt ovK adckouly | 


[rat ot] de Bramropevor 


2 


[adixolwwrali... +. 
Tat v\jro Tov KaTapap Teo a\saeicte SGP aah at ns oes 
TupnOlevtos ore pu [ees Seer eA Son 2 ge 


[ 
[ 
[ 
35 [dc]kee avros 8 adixes 
[ 
[ 
[ 


celta] UT avTou Ta [a 


lene. 
Tovs voplous 
B 


. oo * . 


‘, . . justice is regarded as virtuous and at the same time to testify to the truth 
concerning one another is considered just and equally useful for human pursuits. The man 
who does so however is not just. For it is just to wrong no one when one is not oneself 
wronged ; and he who gives testimony, even if it is true, cannot help to some extent doing 
a wrong ; and there is a probability that he may himself subsequently be wronged: this is 
at any rate possible, in so far as the man against whom he testifies is convicted in conse- 
quence of his testimony, and loses either money or life owing to a person whom he is in no 
way wronging. Herein therefore he wrongs the man against whom testimony is given, that 
he wrongs some one who is not wronging him ; and he is himself wronged by such a person, 
because he is hated by him although he testified to the truth, and wronged not by his hatred 
only but also because he must always be on his guard against this man against whom he 
testified, regarding him as an enemy prepared to do what damage he can, either in word or 
deed. These wrongs do not seem inconsiderable, either those received or those inflicted. 
For it is not possible that these acts should be just and that not to do or receive a wrong 
should also be just, but either one of them must be just or both must be unjust. Con- 
demnation, judgement, and arbitration, whatever their upshot, are therefore seen not to be 
just ; for what benefits some injures others; and in this those who are benefitted are not 
wronged, but those who are injured...’ 


2. [omovd|aov : ais rather more probable than y, but e. g. [agterar|vov, which is suggested 
by Murray, is not impossible. 

20-4. The restoration proposed, if not altogether convincing, is fairly satisfactory. 
It is not quite certain that a line is not lost between ll. 20 and 21, the lower half of the 
column being detached, nor is it quite clear that in], 22 a small dot after the first » was 
intended as a stop. _av|rlov instead of exe:|vJov would hardly fill the space in 1. 24. 

28. atréy dmoAdtva is an intelligible expression, but with xpynyara preceding it seems 
more likely than not that atrov (rév Biov) should be read. 


122 THE OXVYRHYNCHUS PAPV RI 


34. eavroy appears to have been written, not adi{xo|vvra{[s] avroy. ; 

56. ravra: i.e, ravra, but raira is wanted; cf. 1864. 194, where the same accent is 
given, though there perhaps correctly. Whether the marginal symbol, for which cf. e.g. 
16. ii. 3, &c., has anything to do with the accentuation is doubtful. 


Fr. That this scrap belongs to the same text as the preceding piece seems likely, but 
is not certain. 


1798. ANONYMOUS WORK ON ALEXANDER THE GREAT. 


Fr. 44 14:3 X 34:3 cm. Late second century. 


These fragments from a historical work dealing with Alexander the Great 
are written in a medium-sized informal hand, probably of the middle or latter 
part of the second century ; on the verso is 1802, an alphabetical lexicon of rare 
words, also in a semicursive but smaller script. The copyist, as often happened, 
tended gradually to advance the commencement of the lines to the left as he 
proceeded, so giving the columns a slant to the right. Paragraphi are sparingly 
used, but there are no stops, or other signs except the diaeresis. Two small 
corrections occur (Frs. 10 and 14), one clearly, and probably both, by a second 
hand. A stichometrical figure jp, i.e. 2,300, in the margin of Frs. 5-6. ii, is due to 
the original scribe. Unfortunately the height of the column is unknown, but in 
consideration of the size of the handwriting it is not at all likely to have 
exceeded 50 lines and may well have been shorter. On the supposition that the 
column did not extend beyond that limit, Frs. 5-6. ii was preceded by at least 
46 columns which would occupy some 13 feet. Since the fragment concerned 
apparently relates to the period of the battle of the Granicus, it is evident that 
the scale of the work was very considerable. 

The text on the verso proceeds in the opposite direction to that on the recto, 
and did not extend over the whole of the roll, many of the smaller pieces 
(Frs. 1-43) having the verso blank. Since some of these clearly refer to a period 
prior to that covered by the fragments of which the verso is inscribed, they have 
all been placed in a group before the latter. Presumably the lexicon, which was 
of no small compass, was not completed. Of this group only two or three pieces 
are sufficiently well preserved to afford a clear clue to their subject. Fr. 1 
apparently describes the circumstances of the death of Philip, of which an account 
is given differing somewhat from what is found in other sources; cf. the 
commentary. In Fr. 2 some hexameter lines are quoted evidently in connexion 
with the destruction of Thebes, which was ‘left without a habitation among men’. 
Frs. 5-6 mention Spithridates, who was one of the Persian satraps opposed to 
Alexander in the battle of the Granicus. 


1798. - NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 123 


The main fragment is No. 44, in which are preserved the upper parts of five 
successive columns, the fifth, however, represented by the beginnings of the 
lines only; on the verso of this fragment are two columns of the lexicon, 
containing words beginning with M (1802. 3). Col. i repeats the well-known 
story of the physician Philip who, after having undertaken to prescribe for 
Alexander when suffering from fever at Tarsus in the summer of B.C. 333, was 
accused by Parmenion in a letter to the king of being in the pay of Darius. 
Cols. ii-iv are concerned with the battle of Issus, which took place in the autumn 
of the same year. A large lacuna intervenes between this and Fr. 45, which 
mentions Alexander’s passage of the Euphrates preparatory to the battle of 
Arbela in September, 331 B.C. In the interval occurred the capture of 
Damascus, the sieges of Tyre and Gaza, and the expedition into Egypt, to the 
last three of which twelve chapters were given by Diodorus ; an allowance of as 
many columns in the papyrus would certainly not be disproportionately large. 
The remaining fragments are insignificant. 

To the identity of the writer a clue remains to be found. Since these 
fragments, so far as their contents are recognizable, are all directly concerned 
with Alexander, it,is a natural assumption that they come from one of the many 
chronicles, historical or romantic, devoted to the career of that striking personality 
rather than from a history of wider scope. The main Greek authorities for 
Alexander are of course Diodorus, Arrian, and Plutarch, and on the battle of 
Issus, with which the principal fragment of the papyrus is mostly concerned, we 
have also the statements of Callisthenes which are criticized by Polybius xii. 
17 sqq.; but with none of these are any marks of affinity discoverable. On the 
other hand, there are two clear coincidences with the Roman Quintus Curtius 
Rufus, an obscure personality whose monograph on Alexander is commonly 
attributed to the first century A.D. The papyrus agrees precisely with Curtius 
against Arrian and Plutarch as to the terms of the bribe said to have been offered 
to the physician Philip by Darius, and, what is more interesting, reaffirms more 
circumstantially the statement that Alexander on the eve of the battle of Issus 
was overcome by an attack of nerves (see nn. on Fr. 44. i. 8—Io, ii. 6 sqq., 15). 
A reason given in Fr. 44. iii. 18-19 for abandoning the pursuit of Darius 
but not elsewhere recorded, may also be glanced at by Curtius; cf. n. ad loc. 
These coincidences imply either that our author was known to Curtius or 
that they had a common source; the supposition that the papyrus drew on 
Curtius is too improbable to need consideration. Curtius’ sources have been 
discussed at length by J. Kaerst in Beztr. 2. Quellenkritik des Q. Curtius Rufus 
and Forschungen z. Gesch. Alexanders, and more recently by E. Schwartz in 
Pauly-Wissowa, Realencycl. iv. 1871 sqq., and Ruegg, Beitr. 2. Erforschung der 


124 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Ouellenverhiltnisse in ad. Alexandergesch. des Curtius. The authority on whom 
Curtius principally depended, according to the current view, was Clitarchus, but 
since the same authority was closely followed by Diodorus, with whom no 
connexion is traceable in 1798, this clearly cannot be the connecting link between 
1798 and Curtius. It is, however, recognized that Curtius employed other 
sources, which as distinguished from those of Arrian and Plutarch are considered 
to be secondary and comparatively late (cf. Schwartz, of. ci¢. 1876); but what 
precisely they were is not known. 

Curtius, then, is not rated as high-class company, and agreement with him 
against others will not establish a prejudice in favour of such statements as are 
peculiar to the papyrus. Of these the most significant is the estimate given of 
the numbers slain in the battle of Issus; this more than doubles the highest total 
found elsewhere for the Macedonian and approximately halves that for the 
Persian side; cf. n. on Fr. 44. iv. 9 sqq. Whatever may be thought of the 
historical value of these figures, they serve, like the description of Alexander’s 
state of mind before the battle, to throw some light on the author’s standpoint: 
the tendency to depreciate Alexander is less definitely affirmable than of Curtius, 
but evidently the aim was not glorification. Their claim to attention, however, 
is increased by the fact that the papyrus, alone among ancient authorities, 
estimates separately the loss of the mercenaries in the Persian service. It has 
been suggested by Kaerst (Gesch. des Hellenismus, i, p. 522), in agreement with 
Ranke, that the sources of Diodorus included information derived from Darius’ 
Greek mercenaries. That theory now finds in 1798, which might here have the 
same source behind it, a certain support. Other points elsewhere unrecorded 
in connexion with the battle are the ‘preliminary prayers and sacrifices to 
Poseidon, Thetis, Nereus, and the Nereids (Fr. 44. ii; see n. on ll. g-11), and 
the anecdote about the slice of bread with which the conqueror had to satisfy his 
hunger next day (ibid. iv), The story of Philip the physician follows familiar 
lines, but no other account attributes to the incriminating letter of Parmenion 
the unworthy motive of private hostility, a statement pointing to an anti- 
Parmenion bias, which is traceable also in Diodorus and Curtius and goes back 
not improbably to Clitarchus. The fragment (1) referring apparently to the death 
of Philip of Macedon shows a marked divergence from the ordinary version 
of that episode, and it is highly unfortunate that more of the narrative is not 
preserved. 

In form this writer is clear and straightforward, if somewhat monotonous. 
6€ is his favourite connecting particle, and there is but one instance of the genitive 
absolute ; a certain partiality to the historic present is noticeable (Fr. 44. i. 5, 16, 
Fr. 45. 6). To hiatus he is indifferent. Some eccentricities like the poetical 


spelling amorunavigew may be due to copyists, but the form dveAci (Fr. 44. i. 12) 
is not without significance, suggesting that the date of composition, though 
it may well be posterior to the Augustan age, was at any rate little in 


1795; 


advance of it. 


Fee 
(tei esneee (ROUSE leer | >. 
Br sentohe Gleat{plor Kal. . 


Jovs ame... 
Piicwans Je wept Opov| ov 
[eam ates ler rows lo. 
eee eke TlapedwKe | 

| amreruray|e 
[cay avroly 70 de copia 
[rou Pirlmmov Oepa [ 


[mover Barbjac TapEdwk) € 


boule ae mlept Thy [.. 
Fee Sonera ae |oKr/ 
ign 
voup| 
ecouy [ ? On 
Batov | 


Golan. 


WEW VCLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


Lee 
tae Nl Doce dk eee a 
prec Wy RON Sree es eee 
Pe O@K DUC chun 9 ats 


IL 


[ 
[ 
LO" | 
[ 


Frs. 5-6. 


(0 


[Gale novel geno a 


5 [tojoovro Kaxov dij. . 


JexvAcoe[v] OnBalis 
kjac 6n OnBlak ev av { 


plomoow aotxoc | 
. |\Ockov T apvas TE 
. .jolu oapous TE Ae 


Fey ae eile cOn, b 


Iie 


]- {Jal 
Jounv re 
] dnpool 
jrovpyo| 

5 ]zor[ 
] dal 


Colait. 
Kata Thy { 
ns €Baalireve ? 
ov Kat aj 


o7[ 


emos €[umreiy ? 


Bray. 


efedum[e 


Tov in[7ov ? 


Tpwrol 


5 9 auto 


ie 


Ir[ 


THE OXYRHYNCHOS PAPYRI 


Jan 
} peyal 
Jat xvar[ 
? adn)Oivoul 


5 [rl 


10 


Te kat Smibalpadar . 
BapBapo kal 
[e]vorrAot tpl 


[rT|yv tov cwplaros.. 


he yap pov 


FOV LY OV ss ote eK? 
TTC | eae techs 7™n 
os 7 
Trapet| 
ovTe| 
TPG KL Ole, oes wis « a? 
v yovas ex 
Makedor{ 
Feo; Fr 16, 
|r PA 
|. aK ] meptol 
|poup[ m€|TT@k[ 
].£ mapar[ |rae arf 
\vT@y of 5  jrepov a 
poral : 
les yAu«[ 
IR saa Ge 
Cole: Cok si: 
Dov ne 
| payns mrapbey 
77 nN €Kaj 


le ado 


1798. 


1 ITepot{[ . 
| pete 
ToA|Aakls [ 
5 Dare yale 
J. are 
2 ducasos [ 


] emer xl 
At 

10 jyou Kel 
] 


Jopeval 
] . edrac[ 


}. pev7l 


Fr. 23: 


Jopel 
Joo =| 
|. To ye 
Joon] 


NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 127 
Eyrs. Br. 30. Bren: 
1 pal ees }. vral 
pe lyarr| jel oKelva cel 
Anrelfardpj jyery[ juns de 
Japaj jrad[ . vy €darTe 
Pr 20: 


[op ov 


ou 
a | 
oo 
a 


Er, 1. Fr. 22. 
Jevor{ Jee onl 
Jede{ jyerof 
net Vvareol 
rw af 
Pras. Pre 206. 
lyos ¢. [ | no 
jue jrao[ 
Gof Sou 


128 THE OXYRHAYNCHUS FAPYERI 


Fr. 27. Fr, 28. Fr, 20: Fr, 30. Pro3t. 
dem| \nol Jess | Jaco] Joa! 
Top ]- val je €o7| juer| ]. etd] 
[-]n4l Wve | Jez] Wé . | Jrad[ 

i 32) Fs; 33. Pip oa. Fi 35- Fx 26, 

joul lott Jov 7, van, ? rlavoa 
je. [ Jevn| Jan. [ \rpea Jovos 
mf jr 

Pr. 37 Bergs Fr.o39 Fr. 40 Fr. 41 

jov wot joa 16, ey ] 
|. Koh jev7| Jex[ Bel Ja Bou 
Fr. 42 Fre 
lel Jee 
Beta 
Fr. 44. 

Colst Col; ai, 
[Pemxerp|noewv avtov pap : exxye tous Maxedovas 
[wa]kwr peddAovTos J e€nkovTa yap tov Bap 
[avrjov didovac ITappe Bapwv pupiades] noav 
[vijov diapopos wy Tw ot Ode ITepoat tov Mae 

5 [PrlAurmra ypape: mpos 5 dovev Kateppovouy 

[Arlefavdpov KeAevav AnreEavdpos de Anat 


gpudragacbar Tovroy a Ov Opwv THY KpLoly 


Kovely yap xélALa Ta ev aywvi(al) ny Kot Tpos 


AavTa Aapewov avrTwe evxas etpamn Ocziy 


1798. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 129 


10 didovat Kat Tnv ader 
gnv yvuvaika eh wt av 
Tov avere. Ade~av 
dpos de AaBwv tyv e 
TioTOAnv Kat ovdert 

15 mpoomotnoaple|vos 
MEWIELNE cus ake, os i 
Teal 


Col. iii. 
cay ot Ilepoat eita To 
Aowrov tov BapBapov 
mAnOos peO ovs ot £evor 
ot de mept Tov Ade~av 
5 Spov tmmes prev cmmev 
atv mefot de mefols 
emnkodovbovy Kat TO 
medtoy mANpES HV veE 
Kpwy moAv de pepos 
10 Toy Maxedovay emt 
Tas oxnvas tov BapBa 
[plov wpunoev eis dt 
|alpmaynv Tov ev avTals 
[wlAnpes 0 noay stroke 
15 [Alnus ya¢ns Adefavdpos 
[3] emOvpov AaBev 
[Maplecov ediwxey pe 
[ra Splopov mubope 
ee de dn alvrov af.].[ ] 


Io 


15 


5 


| Ze) 


15 


kat Nnpnidas kat Nnpea 
Kat IIocedwva emia 
AOvpEVOS WL Kal TETPW 
pov appa exedevoey 

els To TeAayos avalya 
yovtas penpar ecdlayra 
Gero de Kat vue k{. 


Col. iv. 
exovT. ur abepanfelu 
otas THe e€ns mpoo[n] 
VEYKE TLS Tov vTacn(t] 
atov AaBov Tapa [Bou] 
KoAov aptov tpudos [o] 
de dia thy evdleraly 
payov acpevws may 
TES apa eimev avOpw 
Tot (wow noews a 
meOavoy de Twy pev 
Makecdovev tego 
xeltAror Kat emmes Oia 
kooto. Tov de BapBa 
pov meCol fev OUK € 
AaTTous TEvTE pupLa 
dey immets d€ Tpioxe 


Arolt Tov de Elevov ze 


[Pb ciara oe) aaa chee Je. n 
15 pa Kae [ 

kod.Je « | 

er 


TEE OKAY Rad YVCHUS. 


PAPYRI 


‘Kat [ ev il 
5 dol Boal 
emi[ 20 Trato| 
5 lines lost Ked| 
a.[ addXol 
vab[ erre| 
ceca a tral 
Fr. 45. Fr. 46. 
(Spec seer lphecienetate ars jor 
le tayo’. Perce Tals paula 2s joopl 
Avoas amavtas af... € juror 
Bawev emt Aapetov \vrod 
5 diaBas tov Evdplarny aa 
KaL payny avTo[t ouv ]- Ku 
ante. Oevrepay [..... leral 
(abe eiers Wie tlC ae eee aoe er . [ 
; : |poor| 
104 atts : 
Fr. 47. Fr, 48. Fr. 49. 
ra lunOn re af J. [ 
| loav [klara . pl Jar[ 
pal Tlo cwpa | juoal 
Kal off \v addq@ oT ? AdeEar|dpou [| 
5 vos Ki 5 \Oev adf 5 lus Tol 
rep Baroy | jee 
Thy | jaz mvOo[ per Let 
pel juror [ 
Kaee Js ore 4 


1798. -NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 131 


ir. 50. Pr, 51% Fr. 59. Eee: Fr, 54. 
ee iva of ius Jeol 
EA jada ai. joun{ |Kol |. av |rrol 
| mary ¢ tle yf los 


Fr. 1. The mention of a theatre in 1. 2, in conjunction with the burial of .Jurmov in 
ll. 8-10, leaves little room for doubt that this fragment refers to the death of Philip, but the 
details are unfamiliar. Philip’s assassin was Pausanias (Diodor. xvi. 94, Justin ix. 6), for 
whose name there seems to be here no place; moreover, according to Diodorus he was 
pursued and killed forthwith by of epi tov Mepdikeay who cuykevtncavres dvetdor, Apparently, 
then, the object of azerumar[irav is some other person, whose identityis obscure; cf. Justin xi. 2. 1 
Prima ili cura paternarum exsequiarum fuit ; in quibus ante omnia caedis conscios ad 
tumulum patris occrdi tussit. 


1 sqq. The length of the lacunae is estimated on the basis of ll. 8-10, which can be 
restored with probability. In ll. 1-4 rovs ple|y | [ev TOL OJear| p]ax xa|| Onpev lous arre[Av|| oe Tous 
(or rows) de may be suggested. 

lw: Jey is not possible, and Jay is unlikely. The doubtful » may be A. 

6. Both this line and 1. 9 look as if they were complete at the end, but there is not 
margin enough to be certain. If 1. 6 ended with -xe, it was rather shorter than its 
neighbours. 

7. The spelling doruavifw seems to be novel ; timavoy is a poetic form. 


Fr. 2. This fragment, like the preceding, has lost both margins, but the point of 
division of the lines is fixed by ll. 7-8, where the restoration is certain, and on that basis 
the other lacunae have been estimated. Most of the fragment, if not all of it, is occupied 
by a quotation in hexameters referring to Thebes, brought in no doubt in connexion with 
Alexander’s destruction of the city. Owing to the aorist in ]. 6 it is not likely to be 
oracular; «vAve[¢] would not fill the lacuna. 

3. The vestige after o is indecisive ; « or « would be suitable, but other vowels are not 
excluded. 

4. B is preceded by a vertical stroke consistent with », , v, and is followed by the base 
of another short vertical stroke ; ©]n8y| would be quite suitable. 

6. Cf. Homer P 688 mijya cds Auvaoion kvdivder, C, I. G. 6280 A 35 orvyepny Se kvkwdjoee 
kakorynTa, 

g. The first letter is more probably 6 than 8. + apvas is recommended by the apparent 
repetition of re, but whether apvas or Apvas should be written is not clear; cf. Homer B 507 
(Tapynv ap. Strabo 413). 

10. No compound -ooapos (ec g. kvdotudapos ) is known, 

11. The first letter was 7, «, or », and dpn was preceded by one of the same three 
letters. 


Fr. 3. 3. If Bawy is right, @n|Saov is the natural restoration, but @a wy is possible. 
This fragment differs in appearance from Fr, 2, but is very similar to Fr. 4. 


Frs. 5-6. These fragments were combined after the text was in type, and the 
numeration was therefore retained. 


K 2 


132 THE: OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


ii. 6. SmOa{padar ..: this is evidently the son-in-law of Darius and satrap of 
Lydia (or Ionia) whose name is spelled 2miOpo8dérns by Diodor. xvii. 19, 20, 2aOpedarns by 
Arrian i. 15, 16 and Plutarch, A/ex. 16. 

g. w[ is represented by a very slight vestige which, however, well suits that letter. 

17. v = 2,300; cf. 852.25 n. For other instances of stichometry in prose papyri 
cf. e.g. 1864. 188, P. Grenf. II. 11. ii. 4. 


Fr, 7. 3. rov n{rov: perhaps a reference to Bucephalas, but the fragment is too small 
to be understood. 


Fr. 10. 6. If the reading is correct, es has been amended to es, but es is by no means 
clear, nor is it certain that the « is by another hand. 


Fr. 12. 4. adn|Owov is suggested by xva[ in the preceding line, but AcJ@vov would also 
be suitable. 


Fr. 17. 4. Some case of eAaridvos presumably. 


Fr. 18. There was a junction between two se/des near the right-hand edge of this 
strip, the surface of which is worn, as also is that of Frs. 19, 20, and 22. 
6. Ade Eavdp . . is one of many possibilities. 


Fr. 21. Like Fr. 18, this piece shows a junction between se/zdes along the right-hand 
edge, but the appearance of the two fragments is otherwise not very similar. 


Fr, 22. 3. This was apparently the last line of a column. 

Fr. 24. 3. Perhaps Odv[umada, either as the mother of Alexander or a date. 
Fr... 25,+ 4.0 0 a round letter like ¢ or o is probable after i. 

Fr. 36. 1. mlavoa: or possibly Tavoa|mas ; Ghalron eb rente 


Fr. 44. i. 1-16. ‘(Philip was induced ?) to try a medicine. When he was about to 
give it, Parmenion, who had a quarrel with Philip, wrote to Alexander bidding him beware 
of Philip to whom he heard Darius was offering a thousand talents and his own sister in 
marriage as the price of the king’s destruction. Alexander received the letter, and suppressing 
it drank the medicine...’ 

1 sqq. Cf. Plutarch, A/ex. 19, Arrian ii. 4. 12, Curtius iii. 6, Justin xi. 8; Diodorus 
xvii. 31 is more concise and does not mention the letter of Parmenion. For [em-xetp|noew cf. 
Plutarch, 7. c. émexeipnoe pappaxeia, but avroy may mean Alexander (cf. Arrian, /.c. xaOjpae 
eOedew *AdéEavdpov apudkw), in which case another infinitive may have preceded, e.g. 
emnyyetharo Oeparevoa emexerp|noew, OF |\yoew may be differently restored, e. g. oped}joeu. 

4. Siahopos wv: this detail is not given by the other authorities. 

7. pvdragacba is the word used also by Plutarch and Arrian, Z/. cc. 

8-10. xeta tadavra , . . Kae THv adeAPyv: so Curt. mile talentis ... et spe nupliarum 
sororts etus. Plutarch says Swpeais peyddas kal ydue Ovyarpds, Arrian xpyyacw only. 

12. The form é@ occurs in Aristoph. £7. 290 (mepeA@), but otherwise belongs to 
a much later period, e.g. D. Hal. xi. 18. 

14-15. ovdex seems to be an error for ovdev, the meaning being similar to e.g. that in 
Polyb. v. 25. 7 capds cidas . . ., od mpoomomnbeis dé. A use of rpooroetoda with the dative in 
the sense of xowwveiy does not occur. 


ii. 1-16. ‘... The Macedonians were seized by dismay, for there were 600,000 of the 
barbarians, while the Persians held the Macedonians in contempt. When he saw that 
the decision was imminent Alexander was in a torment of suspense and had recourse 


1798. “NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 133 


to prayer, calling on Thetis and the Nereids and Nereus and Poseidon, for the last of whom 


he ordered that a four-horse chariot should be brought and cast into the sea; and he offered 
sacrifices by night...’ 


I. etxe: SC. PdB8os Or Some synonym. For the confidence of the Persians cf. Arrian 
li. 6. 8 xaramarnoew re TH inm@ Tév Makeddvev tiv orpatiav dAXos ciAdobev avr@ (SC. Aapeiw) émaiporres 
deyov, Plutarch, Alex. 20 dmoxpwapévou 8€ Aapetov Sdedtévar py pOdowow adrov dmodpdytes of 
modéutot, Diodor. xvii. 32 describes the effect of the disparity in numbers on the local 
population, ris pev tov Maxed, OAtyétnros Katappovncartes, To S€ mAROOS THs TOY Tlepo. otparias 
katamemhnypevot, Panic is not, however, attributed to the Macedonians in other Greek 
sources; as Kaerst remarks (Gesch. des Hellenismus, p. 364°), it cannot be inferred from 
Arrian ii, 7. 5 mapexadei Gappeiv, though it may be hinted at by Diodor. xvii. 33. 1 rav de 
KatacKkimerv drayyeddvrov ... Tov Aapeiov ... 77 Suvaper mpoorévat KaramAnktixos : Cf. Justin xi. 9. 3 
periculostus differre bellum ratus, ne desperatio suts cresceret. 

2-3. efnkovra . .. prpiade(s]: so Arrian ii. 8,9, Plutarch, Ax. 18. Diodor, xvii. 31. 2 
puts the Persian infantry at over 400,000, the cavalry at 100,000 at least, and Justin gives 
similar figures at this point (xi. g. 1), though he had shortly before (6. 11) stated the number 
of the Persian army as 600,000, 

4-5. See n. onl. 1 above. 

6 sqq. Cf. Curt. iii. 8. 20 Celerum, ut solet fiert cum ultimi discriminis tempus adventat, 
in sollicttudinem versa fiducia est. Illam ipsam fortunam, qua adspirante res tam prospere 
gesserat, verebaiur ... ipse in tugum editd montis escendrt multesque conlucentibus facibus patrio 
more sacrifictum dis praesidibus loct fectt. Kaerst, 2. c., pronounces the statement of Curtius 
to be worthless, and that of Diodor. xvii. 33. 1 that Alexander regarded the approach of the 
enemy as a heaven-sent opportunity to be ‘an sich angemessener’; cf. Plutarch, Alex. 20. 
But the one does not necessarily exclude the other, and some anxiety on the eve of this 
critical battle would be only natural. Justin goes further in speaking of actual fear (mefum 
xi. 9. 3), which is not involved in sollzcefudo nor dywvia, the latter being attributed to 
Alexander on several occasions by Diodorus ; cf. xvii. 31. 4, 56. 3, 116. 4 (we owe these 
references to Mr. W. W. Tarn). 

g-11. Cf. e.g. Plutarch, Alex. 33 mapexdde rods Oeovs, as KadhicGevns noir, éemevydpevos 

. . dpivat. The choice of deities on the present occasion is somewhat surprising, even when 
allowance is made for the proximity of the sea (cf. Curt. Zc. dis praesidibus loc’) and the 
legendary descent of Alexander from Thetis and Nereus. As Mr. Tarn observes, this story 
looks like an adaptation from another occasion when the invocation of marine gods is 
recorded in a more appropriate setting; cf. Nearchus af. Arrian, /md. 18. 11, where when 
starting down the Hydaspes Alexander sacrifices to Poseidon, Amphitrite, the Nereids, &c. 
(this no doubt is a genuine instance), and Azad, i. 11. 10, where he is said to have made 
libations to Poseidon and the Nereids when crossing the Hellespont. 

15. eoplayialfero de xa vere: cf. the passage of Curtius cited in the n. on ll. 6 sqq. 
Sacrifice is repeatedly mentioned by the historians of Alexander, and according to Arrian 
vii. 25. 2 it was his daily habit. 


iii. 1-19. ‘... (first) the Persians took to flight, then the rest of the barbarian host 
and after them the mercenaries. The cavalry were pursued by Alexander’s cavalry and the 
infantry by his infantry, and the plain was filled with corpses. A large number of the 
Macedonians fell on the barbarian camp, which was full of treasure of all kinds, in order to 
plunder the contents. But Alexander desiring to capture Darius pursued him at full speed ; 
when he learned, however, that he...’ 


1-3. l. e.g. es puyyy wppy|oar, which happens to be the phrase of Diodorus at this 


134 THEMOLYRE YNCHUSAPAPT AL 


point (xvii. 34. 7). The statement here is in substantial agreement with the account of 
Arrian ii. 10-11, who says that Darius fled as soon as he saw: his left wing giving way, but 
that the Greek mercenaries in the centre stood their ground and fought well until attacked 
on their exposed left flank. 

7-8. Cf. Diodor. xvii. 34. 9 mas 6 cuvexns téros vexpdv émAnpoOy, but this was a con- 
ventional phrase which reappears e. g. Xvii. 61. 2. 

g-15. Cf. Diodor. xvii. 35. 1-2 of d€ Makeddves mavodpevor rod Owypod mpds apmaynv 
&ppnoav Kat pddurra mepi tas Baoidixas oxnvas dia Td mAHOos THs moduTEAclas HoXOAOUYTO, KTA., 
Plutarch, Alex. 20 xaréAaBe rovs Maxeddvas tov pev GdAov mAovTov ek Tov BapBapixod otparorédov 
épovras kai yovras bmepBdddovra wANGe, Curtius iii. 11, 20. 

18. Splouov: the vestiges do not suggest o, but are not inconsistent with the irregular 
formation of that letter as sometimes found in this text. pe|xpe .] . MAov could be read. 

18-19. According to Diodor. xvii. 35. 1, Arrian ii. rz. 8, Curtius ili. 12. 5 the pursuit 
was cut short by nightfall. Apparently another or a further reason was here stated, e. g. 
that Darius was beyond reach ; cf. Curtius, Z.¢., postguam et nox adpetebat et consequendi spes 
non erat, At the end of I. 19 the broken letter might be ¢, 0, p, ¢, and this may well have 
ended the line. 


iv. 1-17. ‘On the next day when he was suffering from want of attention one of the 
Guards brought him a piece of bread which he had taken from a herdsman. In his hunger 
he ate it readily, remarking ‘“‘ Every one likes to live”. There were killed of the Macedonians 
1,000 infantry and 200 cavalry, and of the barbarians not less than 50,000 infantry and 
3,000 cavalry, and about . .. of the mercenaries.’ 


1-9. This somewhat insignificant anecdote has not been traced in other authorities. 
Bapews is to be supplied before exorre. 

5. tpupos: the straightness of base in the final letter suggests vy rather than s, but the 
masculine form is unknown. 

g sqq. The numbers of the slain in this battle as reported by other authorities are: 
Diodor. xvii. 36. 6, Persians: infantry, 100,000; cavalry. 10,000. Macedonians : infantry, 
300; cavalry, 150. Arrian ii. 11.11, Persians: as Diodor. Plutarch, A/ex. 20, Persians : 
10,000, Curtius ii. 11. 27, Persians: as Diodor. Macedonians: infantry, 32 (?); 
cavalry, 150. Justin xi, 9. 10, Persians: infantry, 61,000 ; cavalry, 10,000. Macedonians: 
infantry, 130; cavalry, 150. Compared with these estimates, our author largely reduces 
the Persian and increases the Macedonian loss, and he also stands alone, if the restoration 
in]. 17 is right, in giving-a separate figure for the mercenaries in the Persian service. Of 
these 30,000 took part in the battle (Callisthenes, af. Polyb. xii. 18. 2, Arrian ii. 8. 9), and 
8,000 are said to have escaped with Amyntas (Arrian ii. 13. 2; 4,000 according to Diodor. 
xvii, 48, 2), 8,000 to have been subsequently got together by Agis (Diodor. xvii. 48. 1), and 
a few others to have been included in the 4,000 fugitives collected by Darius (Arrian 
ii, 13. 1) The number slain can hardly have exceeded a few thousand. At the end of 
1, 18 e&n|kovra is not impossible, though not very satisfactory. 


v. The remains of this column are insufficient to afford a clear clue to its subject. In 
l. 19 ev I|oow seems not unlikely. 


Fr. 45. Cf. Arrian iii. 7. 1-6, where the crossing of the Euphrates is described in more 
detail. According to Curtius iv. 9. 12 the march from Phoenicia had occupied eleven days. 
On the verso of this fragment are words beginning with A (1802. 2). 

3. Perhaps a[ve. 


Fr. 46. Since the verso of this fragment contains words beginning with « (1802 ’ 
came later in the roll than Fr, 45. 8 5 « ( . 1) it 


1798. -—NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 135 


Frs. 47-54 = 1802. 4-11. The character of the writing on the verso suggests that 
Fr. 50 came from the neighbourhood of Fr. 48, and Fr. 53 from that of Fr. 49. 


Fr. 49. 5. o of ro has apparently been converted from e. 
Fr. 54. That this small piece belongs to 1798 is hardly certain. 


‘ 1799. ORATORICAL FRAGMENT. 


9-9 X9 cm. Second century. 


This fragment, containing remains of two columns of an unidentified speech, 
is written in a small sloping hand which is on the border line between literary 
and cursive, some of the forms, e. g. the ligature of «., being of a thoroughly cursive 
character ; the MS. may fall within the second century. v at the end of a line 
is once written as a stroke above the preceding vowel. No stops or other signs 
occur. ; 
Of the first column only a few letters from the ends of the lines remain, but 
the second includes a continuous passage of 25 nearly complete lines in which 
apparently the policy of Demosthenes is vindicated. The declaration that 
disaster would have been avoided by a thorough acceptance of that policy points 
to a period subsequent to the battle of Chaeronea, but the occasion of the speech 
is not made clear. There seems to bea defect in the text in ll. 20-1, besides 
minor errors. 


Col. i. Col. ii. 


WAL ah satigiees | Epics Peace 
tages tone) ke: J. ya[-ee eee 
[eth epitcics ops Arte ake pe ge te eo ake 
: eeoas e tet A Pies eine tenes 
] Beers seas hs Yue VaCE nn) «ars 
| een JpeT@® TOT[.. +... 
va ey wes [Seen nto tpi yt 
jac [ie wr e|ie « €LS) OEP) TO] 9's). ~ 
y [AnplooOerns te dec xlad exa 
5 Je 10 oTov AEeyely Tov ye... .. 
la | Tpoecpnpevov 1. [..... 
? amjag TeToApnpevav [eredn ? 
Jee Ta pev map a(v)rov AlexOev 


lea: Ta adnOn Kat ovplpepovra 


136 Vinh WOXYVRAYNCHUS TARY RL 


10 jrov 15 Ova Tedous gatvie|riac TH 
| eet moet kav et Ka exaloTov 
Jeepe . auT@ pov@ MporETXoHE 
jo. -] mTavtT av eowfero et 6 ava 
(eos TeTpopo{v}TEs amavTa Kal 
15 0 20 AeAvpacper[or ynT]e Cavactios ?» 
v ouz[ojor ov yap..[...] marw 
\ra [Ac|rmos ovd at roAfpa\t Make 
es dovev ovd avdpayabia 
1 T@V EKELYOU OTpAaTNHYwV OU 
20 le 25 0 n Tov nETEpwY oALyYwpL 
jro a ovd ws n duvapis n Tov 
] exetvou Oavpaotn Tis 7 
17 de Tns mrodews acbevns 
] avTn yap cot n kat tov Ilep 
: 30 onv efeAecaca Bacthea 


yns kat Oadatrns add et da 
[ro alAnO[es} ecrev to may z[ov 
[7 elyev[er]o dn povoyv r.[.. 
[. lye. [.- Jaxl. +e lee eee 
[ 


sa he ak 


g-10. «[a exaloroy is very uncertain, but seems to suit the construction. »[ might 
belle: g- r[ cov. 

11. Not n z[oy nor, apparently,  «[a.. 

20-1. A blank space sufficient for four or five letters has been left at the end of 1. 20, 
and the sentence is apparently incomplete. If ovr[olo: ov yap is right, the apodosis may be 
completed in some such way as suggested in the text; but there is barely room for the 
second o of our[olon, which, however, is sometimes written very small in this hand. At the 
end of |. 21 q« is not satisfactory, since more of the vertical stroke of ¢ would be expected 
to be visible, though the surface of the papyrus is damaged here; moreover, \« can barely 
be got into the lacuna at the beginning of the following Tine (the division i aeros would be 
contrary to rule). But execvov in ll.'24 and 27 clearly point to a mention of the Macedonian 
king earlier in the context. With regard to the word after yap, the ink in the first letter has 
run somewhat and the aSAOHG F is doubtful ; m»[ is perhaps more suitable than vp{ but neither 
is convincing. 

24. 7 at the end of the line has been corrected from ov, whether by the original or 
a subsequent hand is difficult to say. 


1800. “NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 137 


1800. MISCELLANEOUS BIOGRAPHIES. 


Fr.i3° 291 X'16*4 cm. Late second or early third 
century. 


The handwriting of the following fragments, from a roll containing various 
biographies, is a fine specimen of the common oval type, and may be referred to 
the latter part of the second century more probably perhaps than the beginning 
of the third. The columns as usual are inclined slightly to the right. One 
apparent instance of a*high stop, probably a later insertion, occurs in Fr. 1. 40. 
Short lines are filled up by means of the angular sign commonly used for 
that purpose. Whether the few small corrections are by the original or 
a later hand is doubtful. A small coronis marks the conclusion of sections. 
The titles prefixed to the biographies are sometimes enclosed by the short slightly 
curved strokes often employed in the colophons of literary papyri. 

As at present reconstituted the papyrus consists of 30 fragments, of which 
a few are fairly substantial, but their relative position, except in a few instances, 
is uncertain. If, as is possible, the top of Fr. 3. i is concerned with Thucydides 
(cf. note ad loc.), that fragment must have followed Fr. 2, and there is no doubt 
about the order of Frs. 4—7 ; but otherwise the arrangement adopted is often more 
or less arbitrary. The biographies which can be identified are of Sappho 
(Fr. 1.i, ii), Simonides (Fr. 1. ii), Aesop (Fr. 2. i, ii), Thucydides (Fr. 2. ii, Fr. 3. i?), 
Demosthenes (Fr. 3. i, ii), Aeschines (Fr. 3. ii), Thrasybulus (Frs. 4-7), Hyperides 
(Fr. 8. ii), Leucocomas (Fr. 8. ii), and Abderus(Fr.11). This is a strange medley, 
and no intelligible principle seems to have guided the compiler either in the choice 
of his characters or their grouping. They are mainly literary, but the soldier- 
politician Thrasybulus does not come under that category, and Leucocomas and 
Abderus are entirely mythical. The inclusion of the former, whose name will 
not be familiar to many, is singular ; Abderus was at least the eponymous hero 
of a considerable town. As for the disposition of the Lives, like sometimes 
consorts with like: two lyric poets, both beginning with the same letter, figure 
in Fr. 1, and in Fr. 3 Aeschines is appropriately placed next to Demosthenes. 
But a reason why Thucydides should have been sandwiched between Demosthenes 
and Aesop, or Leucocomas should rub shoulders with Hyperides, is not easy to 
imagine. Nor are the biographies themselves, so far as they go, of much 
moment. Concerning Sappho there is nothing new beyond a variant of her 
father’s name, and the statement that Charaxus was her eldest brother. The 
aspersion on her character, mentioned also, among Greek authorities, by Suidas, 
reappears here at a much earlier date. Reference is made in this section to the 
Grammarian Chameleon, the only citation in 1800 of a definite authority ; 


138 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


elsewhere the compiler contents himself with the vague ‘some say’ or the like. 
A mutilated passage referring to Simonides’ reputed innovation in the alphabet 
apparently has the negative merit of differing from the statement in Suidas 
(cf. A. Kirchoff, Gesch. des Griech. Alphabets, p. 1). Of the death of Aesop, who 
was a favourite subject for biography (fragments of three Lives of Aesop have 
already been found in papyri, of the 4th—7th centuries ; cf. Collart, Rev. de Philol. 
xliii, pp. 38 sqq.), there is a circumstantial account, including some new but not 
very valuable details. The Lives of Thucydides and of Hyperides are too frag- 
mentary to be informative; of Demosthenes little that is fresh could be expected, and 
the only novelty is a blunder, on a par with the statement that Aeschines was the 
eldest of his father’s sons, which Aeschines himself refutes. An anecdote, found 
also in Plutarch, about the generosity of Demosthenes to his defeated rival is 
given with greater elaboration in the account of the latter. One would gladly 
have had more of the section concerning Thrasybulus, which included some 
details not otherwise known, although errors like those just noticed do not give 
a good impression of the accuracy of the writer,—regarding whose identity we 
are entirely in the dark. 


Peon 
Colt. Coli 
Noreleoe TE pLT| 13 letters wo ? 
mept Samdjovs wep Xapatreoly.... 2.0 
[Sampo to pev yevos| nv Ae 30 TLos emAavnO[y!......-. 
[oBia mrodews de Muirlvdnvns am avrov reye [. . . Atorrd ? 
5 [matpos d¢ Skapjavdpov ka Otadekto@r Kexp[n...-- ye 
[ra Oe tTivas SKaluavdpavu ypahev de BuBdia evvea pev 
[wou adedgous 3] exxe Tpes Aupika .edeyela[y de Kat addAwv ? 
[Ep\i[yuiov Kat Aalptyov mpe 35 ev 
aBui[rarov de Xaplagov os mdev = 


10 cas eis Atyurrov] Awpixae TH Tept Yip wvidov 


16 


vt mpooo[piAnt|ns Kareda 

TAaYNoEV ELS TAaUTNVY TAEL 

ota Tov de Aaptyxov (veov) ovta pad 
Aov nyannoey bvyatepa 6 e€ 

axe Krew opwvupoy tnt € 

auTns pntpe K[alrnyopnrat 


Xipovidns to pev [yevos nv 
Kewos rrorews Se Lov{Acdos 
matpos Oe Aeomperolus yeyo 


40 vey de giapyupos: rt[tves 


8 avtot thy Tov pr[npo 
vikwv evpecty mpoo[TiOea 


1800. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 139 


8 um ev{tja[v] ws ataxtos ov ow Kat avtos de mov [Touro 
[oa] Tov Tpomov Kat yuvatke gave. dia Toy emly|pap 
[pac|rpia tnv de popdny 45 paltlov mpoceupely de ha 
20 [ev|katadpovntos Soke ye ow [avjrov tives kat O.[... 
[yovlevale Kale ducedeorarn[[y]] Kel. . .Jooroy Tov xd ani. . 
[rTlnv pev yap ow gatwdns T.[.-]-. ev. [.|noag[.jer. - 


[v|rnpxev To de peyebos > 
petKpa Tavredkws To 6 avTo 

25 [ov sate Kal TEpl TOY 
[.... |v eAarro [. .] yeyova 
15 letters |. nv 


Fr. 2. 
Col. i. Coleit: Col. iii. 
ae BO Nlaee cel TOM AEN Gavin: . 
Rete ] evovun .[.....]- 
[eor|v 0 atta TotalvTn|{e} et 
|> plnlwevn {i} emav [ecoe|AOn 
y[ tes] Ter Pew Ovotacjwv o\ Aer 
jov | 35 lok mepltjlearykact Tov Po 
]. ov poly up €avTols paxalpas 
5 iV kKlo|ucgovtes ohaylaca 75 «| 
jvee > pevov Oe Tov lepevov Kat gl 
|pev OeipavTos TO lepelov Kat 
lvpov 40 Ta omAayxva Teplegedro 
|yev fevov ol TEplegT@TES € 
19 Javo KaoTos nv av woxvont 
€levan potpav amoreuvopuevos 
|pov amelolvy ws ToAAaKLS Tor , 
|peros 45 O@voltacavTa avTov apot 
] . Ae ploly am(e)var tovro ovy Ar 
15 Jovov [clon[ols AcAgovs ovid|e|fov 


jus Aap emeckowey ep ots Stopys 


140 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


lurots 
jov pu 
J 


20 Aloyor 
? amroKpl “ato 

| €av 

[7 |pwevoe 


a loge 


voas d€ 


aOevtes ot mrodAo ALbots 
50 avtov BaddAovtes kata 
Kpnpvov €woayv fLeT ov 
modu d€ Aowptkov trabos 
emeckne THt ToAEL XpN. 
oTnpiagopevors 6 avtos 


55 0 Oeos aveimev ov mporte > 


pov [Angle Se voo[ov pe 
xpis [av Aliowmoy e~ijAao 
[kovTlat ot de mepirer | > 
[xeclavres tov Torroy {ev 

60 [at klaterecey Bopoly 6 ¢ 
O[pucaluevoe AuTyp[Llo[us 
TNS vorov ws nper O[voras 
T pola |nveyKav 


ee 


mept Oovkvdi dov 
65 Oovkudidns To pwev yelvos 
nv A€nvatos tat[s & Ojdo 
pov duaBadAovor Se Tov ma 
Tepa avtov Opaika ovta 
eis AOnvas peroxicbn 


70 vat duvatos de ev Royos a 


° 
vnp ylevlapmevos aveypa 
Wev Tolv| yevouevov Abn 
vatos [kat] ITedorovyn > 
[otors 7roA€ ov 


Ln RE A 


80 


Cola: Col. ii. 
[ ] 25. |yelvoapevos tov dlappa 
[klov ovvTouws e€e[rvev 
[oe] pexpt redAlolus to rns [e 


1800. 


Ee i lapte ote oarre JOO. oie a’ eeieca len anes 
lame shone he NERO TNS Eines vas 


[AOn|varoe Kevoragliov corn 
cav Onpooia ev A..[.... 


ot tov Snuov 


Pen 

10 mept Anpocber[olr{s] 
Anpoocbevns o pntwp Abn 
vatos pev nv TO YEVOS | 
mas de Anpocbevor[s ITat 


avievs O€ Tov Snpov 
15 Kopldn d€ vnttos vio> 
Tov matpos amederpOn v 
mo emttpom[ots] Ovnropt 
kat AgoBo. yer[opuev)os 
& ef nrtkias ere de|[E]az[o] 
20 THv ev Aoyols SevoTnTa 
Kpiwvals Tov|s emtpom|ous 
ev ¢vorgic|avTo xpnpa | 
tov favrov eis de to Bn [ 
pa [rapeddwr] aptotia 


NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


3° 


35 


= 


40 


45 


141 


[Aelvdepias [ag|ropa S[ea 
[plvAagas AO[n\ato de ma [ 
[Auly Tyv edevOepiav a 
VOKTNOGPEVOL ETLLN 

gay avrTov eikova xadknly 
avaotnoavres ev Kepa [ 
pik@l emiypappa Te [ev 
oTNAnL EeveKoAaav Tot 
ovde elmep ioav yvopalt 
popov Anpocbeves eayes 
ovrot av EXAnvav np> 
fev Apns Maxedwv 


mept Atoyivou 
A.icywns 0 pytwp To pev ye 
vos nv [AO|nvatos mats de 
Arpopnrov Kat pnTpos 
Tvavkobeas mpeoButaros 
tov adehpov Pirdoyapous 
kat AaopolBlov kat apxas de 
ETPITAywVLoTEL TPaywLdols 
Umokplyomevos eupuns 
& ev doyos yevopevos 


5° avTl THS OKNYNS TO TY 


55 


60 


AOnvatwy Bnpa diede 
gato ypagopevos de Krn 
olpovTa Tapavopwy 
ort pn SeovTas ecteda 
vooe Anpoobevn ypu 
gol oTepavat Katvols 
Tpaywidois ov peTada 
Bov Se to mepumrov pe 
pos tov Whdov dvyas 
efnet tov AOnver 
Anpoobevns de ov pyn 


142 THE OX YRHYNCHUS PAP EL 


OLKAKNOAS EM TOLS EYE 
vnpevois To O€ aaTatov 
Ts Tuxns evrdaBnOes «€ 
podov avTa: apyuptov 


5 | 
[raA]avrov mpocemeprpev 
[o de] ov de~apevos eda 
[ 


Kpujoev uv Oavopevou 


[de Thos emt reve Sakpvoe 
70 [ermle oTL ToLlavTns modEews 
[amalAAaTTopat ev nL Kal 
[exOpok cvvrabe[cjrepor 
[pirw|y evptox[ovTals yevo 
[wevos de ev] Plodawt] cxodrnv 
Ga hes. ax aw tase co, els Pe | Artikov 
[dieuyonbeersaeet kce oie | Podsos 
Frs. 44 5. Frs. 6+. 
Col. i. Col. ii. 
vasoul ‘ : ; : ‘ ; 
pn7[ [lecewerpen ane a Sis ssi peel eifeke = 
de 7 [...? ouly avrw amo Pudns 
KTO[ [PKarayolvor Tov Snpov ws 
5 Ae [de karel|AvOncav o TpLa 
omed.....]. af 5 [KovTa| eypaper Wngiopa 


[wept] OpacuB[ovAov OpacuvB\ovros peradidovs 


[ 
OplacvBolwros mais pev nv Avxov [autos ?] 7s TodiTeas a 


[ro de ylerfols AOn[vaios Sre * [mpoBou)revrou de rou Wy 
10 [ptevs] de trav O[nuoy...... [promaros) yevapevov ov 
eae ] «Ae mar 10 [kK eTuxov? rns TLuns 0 de Tay 
enpree eee 2, |. vas ayamrn 
[oals eAnl.. lev Tos Sixa> | 
[or|nptolis . .|s Kivdvvev al 
BPA iclert a arene ] ws & exwdu 
Thal Oye bara weenie kvl 


1800. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 143 


Peo 
Col. i. Col. ii. 
\yene 20 abews [ 
\nde Evyevelal eet O€ ? 
\oOera n A@nvaiwv orparera ? Tepe 
jowouy Aapiav rns |Oeooadas 
5 | amo cuvnTvxnolev ws cuveEp 
jorya. 25 yos Tar Anpolabever wy 
|rous Uno Avztimat|pov ev Tols 
lomep av dexa pntopot [nTnOn Kat Trav? 
to\y Adnvai TOV ATVXNO|AS....-. 
10 [wy ] avaxOeels autos ev Mak{edovia a 
|tav mpoo 30 mwdeto AOni[vaio de ma 
| pera Tov [Al tv edevblepiav avako 
O\avarov PUGOMEVOUTKO) .. Chet oles au 
am |oXea[. «| [rlov avdpiaciy ¢[Tiunoav 
15 \poo ee. [wep.| Aeukok|opa 
\y 35 Aevkloxopjas To yelvos pev 
\ra nv Kpr{s| models de Kvo 
re gov piplakia|kos [de wy ev 
]> ™ peTrn| S 
Krao: Er. 10; 
rip <Nakene chs Aloyos av... her tae 
[Rey se oeesueteg ] modtTevola \edsdov 
techn EE Juot kat tdi[w javov Tn 
[rwv ov|deve rns eder[Ge |s Oaver 
5 [ptas....la7n ws de store ; 5 ]s mapa 


[ 
[ java jus Vins fe 
[ |> eRe tee 


144 


or 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Bryiz: 
[J val 
(rept ABSnpov 
A\B8n{ pos ev Opa? 
Kn 7 
5 ev Lofvia 

Kap. | 

aval 

Tpeg| 

yns af 

Fr. 12. Fr. 13. ii oe Bs 
[. .Jof |oevcal \voral 
yeveo(Gale an Joraro[ Jpner{ 
exovTay mpal € Jnrne - [ 
pwTnow avros | Jo de rnv [ 
Waplelvol Fr. 15. 5 ]- €cor [ 
mey[.| . [ bn RLY nee zal 
To. [.Jabev [ jute, OS eee 
Tpoltls Xeno y }ral 
paptey cel Jou | aa Ae 
[ylap Oceacaplev lyerof is 
[.|\y mpoBarof 5 japr.[ eu. 
[elugapevo| € Jvotaol Jopy 
[x]@pov Kani Aor jouevo . [ 
Tat fn carl ere v.[ 
- ura \xou of 5 nel 
ovel ae, pyre 
on ]. noas of 
Brew. Bris, Fre 19. Fr. 20. 


[J]. -[ aholies ~ . (Tay| Jeol 
mvAl : cavt| ov Kat pl lyevol 


1800... NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 145 


yeto| par vos Tova) o \yepopat| 
eyAl Tov ol Oave To af Joee ras def 
5 Ouxl 5 [-\noar [| 5 lev To ev, 
Fr. 21. Fr. 22. Pris. 
erie: Hiatt |c mapade 
Juevoas [ eas Ola rai, ja Kat troct 
eyleveTo Kat avn] el€vpynoe |otol. .|ro}. 
\AaBov gu |rev| 
Prod Fr, 25 Fr, 26 Pre27 Fr. 28. 
YP. | xo JoAel meal lea 
pyal |nrex| eral leapt }. wf 
jave| a.\v Ope Ked| ]pa| leEal 
jer is irao| Irep| jeor| 
5 lu 5 Jol 5 |ooul 5 \eal 
dirace Eire20 Ewes 
Jedal |xou |recy . [ 
Al ley Jee eav[r 


Fr. 1. 2-26. ‘Concerning Sappho. Sappho was a Lesbian by birth, of the city of 
Mitylene, and daughter of Scamandrus, or, as some say, of Scamandronymus. She had 
three brothers, Erigyius, Larichus, and Charaxus, the eldest, who sailed to Egypt and 
associating with one Doricha expended Jarge sums on her; but Sappho preferred Larichus, 
who was younger. She had a daughter Cleis, so named after her own mother. She has 
been accused by some of immorality and of being a lover of women. In appearance she 
seems to have been insignificant and ugly, being of dark complexion and of very small 
stature ; and the same happens to be true also of ..., who was undersized . . .’ 


4. MerlvAnvns: cf, Hdt. ii. 135, who calls her brother Charaxus a Mitylenean, Strap. xiii. 


617, &c. According to Suidas and others her birthplace was Eresus. 
5-6. Skaulavdpov: this is known as a Lesbian name (cf. Dion. Hal. ix. 18, Lebas, 


L 


146 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Inscr. Gr. 191) but is not attributed to Sappho’s father elsewhere. Charaxus is called the 
son of Scamandronymus by Hat. Z. c., and this is one of the several alternatives in Suidas 
to Simon, which he considered correct. 

8. [Ep}[ywov: in Suidas s.v. Sampo, where alone this brother is mentioned, the name 
is spelled Edpéyws, and [£]v[p. could equally well be read here, but cf. Arrian inl. 6. 8 
’Epiywos 6 Aapixov, Diod. xvii. 81, 83; moreover in Suidas, Zc. the name of Sappho’s 
father was according to some authorities "Hepiywos, which is no doubt a corruption 
of ’Epiy. 

Aalpiyov : cf. Suidas, 2. ¢., Athen. x. 424 f. 

8-9. That Charaxus was the eldest is not elsewhere stated; Suidas puts the sons in 
the order Larichus, Charaxus, Erigyius. 

10. Avyurrov suits the space better than Navxparw (Strab. xvii. 808, Athen. 596 b). 
Awpiya occurs in 1281. 1. 11; cf. Strab, Zc. 7Hs éraipas . . . fv Sarpa pev . . , Kadet Awpixay 
. drow & dvopatovar ‘Poddmw (ddror include Hdt. ii. 135; cf. Athen. 596 c). ; 

II. mpooo[u(e)Anojas, which would be expected, cannot be read, the letter preceding s 
having a vertical stroke consistent with 7 or «, but neither mpogo[wAnr|ys nor zpos of pwrralis is 
satisfactory with the dative Awpixa. Possibly a verb has dropped out, or rpocopiAnons May 
have been written in error. 

13. An adjective is evidently missing ; the loss of veov would be easy between Aapixov 
and opra, 

15. Kaew: cf. Suid. 2 ¢, who also gives KA. as the name of Sappho’s mother, 
Sapph. 85. . 

16-18. Cf. Suid. 2. c. éraipar 8€ adris cai pita yeydvact y’ .. ., mpds as Kai SiaBodnv eoxev 
aicypas piAlas. 

19-24. Cf. Max. Tyr. 24. 10 Samo... Kairou puxpay Kal wédawar. 

26. Perhaps [A\xao|y, which would give some point to the coincidence, but shortness 
of stature does not seem to be attributed to Alcaeus elsewhere. 

yeyova is probably for yeyovora, since there is not room for edatre[y yap] yeyor(e). Perhaps 
re stood in the lacuna. 

24. n is preceded by the top ofa vertical stroke, which would suit « or v; A« may be 
read in place of » at the end of the line. 

28-35. Probably Sappho is still the subject, for though the columns are long her 
biography would naturally occupy a considerable space and there would hardly have been 
room for another; moreover, the mention of Chamaeleon, whose treatise on Sappho is 
known from Athen. 599 c, suits the view that she is concerned here. 

29-30. Perhaps Iov|rios, since Chamaeleon was a native of Heraclea, but Tovrixds 
would rather be expected, as e. g. Athen. 273 ¢ Xau. 6 Hovrixds. The doubtful @ in 1. 30 
may equally well be o. 

33-5: Cf. Suid. s.v. Samar eypae S€ pedo@v Avpixoy BiBrtia O . . . Kal émvypdppara Kai 
eeyeia kai lduBous kat pov@dias. The suggested restoration assumes what is quite uncertain, 
that the non-lyrical poems were included in a single book. @ of edeyeww[y is very doubtful, 
only a very small vestige remaining which would also suit a, but eAeyeta[xov de would not fill 
the line, and the epigrams &c. ought not to have been ignored. 


_ IL 36-46. ‘Concerning Simonides. Simonides was a Ceian by birth, of the city of 
Iulis, and son of Leoprepes. He was an avaricious man. Some ascribe to him the invention 
of mnemonics ; and he himself declares this in an epigram. Some say that he further 
invented... 

39. If Aeomp. 


40. Prtapyvpos: cf. Pindar, Lsthm. ii. 6 & Moica yap ov piroxepdys xrA,, and Schol. viv, 


1800. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 147 


yo, po O00 ovyrdrrover rors émunikious mpdrov Sipeovidov mpokxatapfapevou. .. evOev kai KadXipayos. 
ov yap épydrw tpépe tv Movaay, os 6 Keios ‘YAALxou vérovs. Aéyer O€ (SC. HMivdapos) radra mpos 
Zip... @s Prrdpyupov Siacdpey rov dvdpa, Athen. 656 d dvtws Au ds adnOds KipBré 6 Sup. kal aig-ypo- 
KepOns, ws Xaparéov dyoiv, Schol. Aristoph, Pax 691, Suid. s.v. Su. &c. 

40-5. Cf. Marm. Par. 54 Su... . 6 rd pynpoudy ebpav, Suid. s. v. Su., Kal Thy pynpovikiy 
d€ réxvnv edpev odros, Pliny, A. WV. vii. 24, &c., and Simonid. Fr. 146 penny 8 otrwa nye 
Ziovidyn icopapifew dydaxovraére, madi Aewmpémeos, which is presumably the epigram 
referred to. . 

45 8qq. From the number 24 in |. 47 it is evident that this passage describes an 
invention concerning the alphabet, which is also attributed to Simonides by Suidas, 2. c. 
mpooeeipe d€ kal Ta pakpd Tay orotxeioy kai dud, but the statement in the papyrus does not 
coincide and a suitable restoration remains to be found. At the beginning of |. 47 either 
ke| or xe may be read, and arou|xe( ea suggests itself, but di[rha oroulxeca would be too long 
and does not well accord with the rest of the line. The letter before ot is either o or a, 
and an| may be ay|. 

48. ev: or ov}; ovo[t|noas is possible. 


Fr. 2. 1-29. That the remains of these lines relate, like ll. 30sqq., to Aesop is 
uncertain, but is suggested by 1. 18 pu[O. . . (?) ; amoxpt|uarwy has been restored in |. 21 on 
this hypothesis. 

| 31. evevyp .. 1S apparently meant, in spite of the unusual diaeresis; the letter after p 
may be either o or , and the vestige at the end of the line is consistent with « or ». 


32-63. ‘The cause is said to be this: whenever a man comes to offer sacrifice to the 
god the Delphians bringing their knives with them stand round the altar, and when the priest 
has slaughtered and flayed the victim and taken the inwards each of the bystanders cuts off 
whatever portion he can and goes away with it, so that the man who offers the sacrifice 
often goes off with nothing at all. Aesop taunted and mocked at the Delphians for this, 
which enraged the populace and they pelted him with stones and threw him over a cliff. 
Not long after a plague fell upon the city, and when they consulted the oracle the god told 
them that the pestilence would not cease until they propitiated Aesop. So they inclosed 
the place where he fell and set up an altar, and brought sacrifices to him as ifhe were a hero 
to avert the pestilence.’ 


33 sqq. Cf. Schol. Aristoph. Vesp. 1446 dv hacw edOdvra more cis rous Aekods amocKawat 
avrovs, dtu pn exorev yiv ad’ js epyatopevor Statpépowro adda Trepipevorey ard Tov Oeod Ovpcapatov 
duaChy. 

38. 1. vepews : vepecov has come in from the next line. 

48-9. According to Aristoph. Vesp. 1446-7 Aesop was accused of haying stolen 
a cup, which the Schol. adds they concealed among his belongings, a story also found in 
Heraclid. Pont. Respud. Magn. 2. Plutarch in De sera numinis vind. 556 has a different 
version which represents Aesop as coming to Delphi with offerings from Croesus and brings 
in Iadmon, as in Hdt. il. 134. 

51. Kpnuvov: the wérpa ‘Ydpureca according to Plutarch, 2. ¢. 

56. Whether the interlinear insertion here and in |. 71 is by a different hand is 
uncertain. 


64-74. ‘Concerning Thucydides. Thucydides was by birth an Athenian, and the 
son of Olorus; his father is maligned as being a Thracian who migrated to Athens. 
Having literary skill he wrote the history of the war between the Athenians and Pelopon- 
nesians.’ 

L2 


148 THE QOXVYRAYNCHUSEAPY Ri 


67-9. Cf. the anonymous Life 1 Opaxioy be aire rd yevos* Kai yap 6 marnp ait@® “Odopos ek 
Opakns elye rovvoua. 
73. About 7 lines are missing at the foot of the column, 


Fr. 3. 1-9.-If these lines relate to Thucydides, Fr. 3. i may be supposed to follow 
immediately Fr. 2. iii. Those two columns cannot be combined into one on account of the 
vestiges in Fr. 2. 75-6, which do not suit the beginnings of Fr. 3. 8-9. Whether the 
historian died abroad or at Athens was disputed. For the tradition of a cenotaph cf. 
Marcellinus, Vita Thue. aut Ukptov yap emt Tov Taouv KeiaGa, Tov cevorapiov 6€ TovTO yvepiopa 
«vac. But according to the same authority, 17 (cf. 32 and 55), the tomb was among the 
Kipoua prnuata mpos tats Meduriot miAas ev Koihy, which does not suit the deme-name in 
ll. 8-9, and the reference of this passage to Thucydides is therefore very questionable. The 
letter after a in 1. 8 seems to be » or A, pointing to ‘Auafavredox, “AAaedor OF “ANwrexedor : 
AXtpourte (Thucydides’ deme) can certainly not be read. lig IE avto|v emt TNS Art[uxns 
suggests itself, and Arz[cxns is not inconsistent with the scanty remains. In 1. 7 av or Avo is 
more suitable than vou. 


10-39. ‘Concerning Demosthenes. Demosthenes the orator was an Athenian by 
birth, the son of Demosthenes, and of the Paeaniean deme. When quite a child he was 
left by his father under the guardianship of Onetor and Aphobus; and when he came of age 
he displayed his skill in speaking by bringing his guardians to trial on account of the money 
belonging to him which they had appropriated. Coming forward to the tribune (he 
acquitted himself) excellently . . . and when he had taken some of the poison- he im- 
mediately breathed his last, having maintained to the end the claim to freedom. The 
Athenians, when they regained their liberty, honoured him by setting up a bronze statue of 
him in the Ceramicus, and carved on a tablet the following epigram. ‘‘ Had your strength 
been equal to your will, Demosthenes, the arms of Macedon would never have ruled 
Greece™,” 

17. Ovnropt: this is an error. The guardians were Aphobus, Demophon, and 
Therippides (Zz Aphod. 4); Onetor was a brother-in-law of Aphobus and acted in collusion 
with him against Demosthenes (cf. the C. One?.). 

22. elvorgro|avro: cf. Plutarch, Dem. 4 ra pev vorpiwapévar, 7a 8” duednodvror. 

24. mapedOor suits the space better than avacras. 

25-6. Cf. Plutarch, X Orat. Vit. 847 a droavety 8 aitdy iddxopos pév hnot pdppaxoy 
mdvta, Sdrupos 8 6 avyypadeds Tov Kédapov mepapudySa .. . ov yevotduevoy avobavelv, "Epatoabévns 
dé... mepi 7 Bpaxiow kpixov mepuxcioOar mepappaypevov, . . . of 8 etrov Tod Kata Thy oppayida 
appakov yevoapevov (sc. arrobaveiv), 

+ 32-23. Cf. Plutarch, Dem. 30 6 Tay °AO. Sijos . . . elkdva Te xadkyy aveatnae. According 
to Plutarch, X Orad. Vit. 847 a, the statue was mAnaioy rot repitrxowicpatos Kai Tod Bwpod Tav 
dadexa GeHv: Suidas says ev adyopa. avrov rather than avrov is expected. 

34-9. The epigram is quoted also by Plutarch, //. cc., and Suidas, who rightly give ton» 
popnv yroun. Plutarch, Dem. 30, and Suidas say that it was on the base of the statue. 


40-74. ‘Concerning Aeschines. Aeschines the orator was an Athenian by birth, the 
son of Atrometus and Glaucothea, and the eldest of the family, his brothers being 
Philochares and Laophobus.. At first he was a tragic actor in minor parts, but being 
a naturally clever speaker exchanged the stage for the tribune at Athens. He indicted 
Ctesiphon for unconstitutional action in wrongly crowning Demosthenes with a gold crown 
when the new tragedies were brought out, but failing to get a fifth part of the votes he left 
Athens as an exile. Demosthenes, however, bearing no malice for what had taken place 
and taking heed of the fickleness of fortune sent him a talent of silver for the expenses of 


1800. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 149 


his journey ; but he refused it and wept. When he was asked why he wept he said 
‘ Because I am leaving a city where even enemies are found more sympathetic than friends ”. 
He went to Rhodes and kept a school .. .’ 


44-5. Aeschines, Fads. Leg. 149, says that Philochares was the eldest. 

46. Aaogo| B Jou : 1, ApoBnrov ; cf. Aeschin. Zc. 

56-7. Kawois tpaywdos : i.e. at the Dionysia, 

61-73. This story. is not mentioned in the biographies of Aeschines, but is given by 
Plutarch, X Orat. Vit. 845 e, though apart from the amount the details are quite different. 
The passage is :—qetvyovros & Aloxivov pera tiv karadixny, inm@ Kxatedioker adtdy (sc. Annoaberns)* 
tov 8 oinb€vros abtov ovAdauBaverOat Kai mpooTeddrtvs Kal avyxadvapevov, avacrncas aitoy mapepu- 
@nvaro Kal Tadavrov €Owkev apyupiov. 

72-3. [ex@po|: and [pardo|y Murray. 

74. Cf. Plutarch, X Orat. Vit. 840d dndpas eis riv “Pédov evravia CXoOAnY KaTUCTHOApEVOS 
edidaokev .. . cxohny 7 eket mpookaréduTe TO “Podsakdy SiSucKkadeioy Kdnbev. 

76. “Podiows: the story of the reading of the speech against Ctesiphon may well have 
followed here ; cf. e.g. Plutarch, 2. c. 


Frs.6+7. Whether these pieces are from the same column as Frs. 4+5 or 
a succeeding one is doubtful; the dissimilarity of the versos rather favours the latter 
alternative. 

1. Possibly Weelpa{e . ., but the doubtful p may be any long letter—v, ¢, . 

2. ovly: the doubtful » may equally be «. 

5 sqq. Cf. Aristotle, Ath. Pol. 40. 2 «ai Soxei rodrd re moAttevoatOar Kadas ’Apxivos Kai pera 
TavTa ypaapuevos To Whpispa TO OpacrBovdrov Tmapavdpor, ev @ peredidov THs Toditelas TacL ToIs ek 
Iletpar€ws ovykateOovor, v érvor havepos noav SovAn. A comparison of that passage suggests 
that dodAc. were mentioned in the lacuna preceding |. 2 avtex azo SuAys, and that avrows or 
saow should be restored in ]. 7; but ll, 11-15 are more difficult. 

10. There is not room in the lacuna for perecxoy: a slightly shorter supplement than 
that suggested would be preferable. 

Ii. vas is preceded by the base of a vertical stroke (7 or +). 

12-14. The position of the small detached fragment containing the letters |s «Ay| and 
|npeol with vestiges of a third line is made practically certain by the similarity of the fibres of 
the papyrus. In]. 12 the n is quite uncertain, and e.g. edey[ev] would be possible. In 
}, 14 the vestige of the first letter suits « and the following have rounded tops like oo, 
TOOT E. 


Fr. 8. ii. 20-33. The references in this passage indicate that the subject is 
Hyperides, who took an active part in the Lamian war (1. 23; cf. Plutarch, X Oras. Vit. 
849 f, Phocton 23), was one of the orators whose surrender was demanded by Antipater 
after the battle of Crannon (J. 26), and according to some accounts was put to death in 
Macedonia (J. 29; cf. Plutarch, X Orat. Vit. 849 b "Eppenmos S€ hnow adtov yAwrroropyOnvat eis 
Makedoviav €dOdvra), 

22-3. For the loose reference to Lamia cf. e.g. Pausan. vil. 10, 4 éemel d€ ro &v Aauia 
Traiopa eyeveTo. 

26-7. That the surrender of as many as ten orators was demanded by Antipater is 
apparently novel ; that was the number, according to some authorities, asked for ten years 
before by Alexander (cf. Plutarch, Demosth. 23, Diod. xvii. 15), and possibly the two 
occasions are here confused. 

30-3. Cf. Fr. 3. 29-31. Perhaps ka[Adcoros in |. 32. 


150 THE OXVRAYNCHUS: FAP? Kf 


34-8. ‘Concerning Leucocomas. Leucocomas was a Cretan by birth, of the city of 
Cnosos. Being a comely youth (he was beloved by Promachus .. .).’ 


348qq. The story of Leucocomas and Promachus is known only from Conon 16. 
The passage is: ra mept Hpopaxou kal Aevkoxspa trav Tvaoiov .. . dieEetcow" ws Apa Tpdpaxos 
veaviov Kadod Tod Aevkoxdpa’ ws GOAa adt@ peydda mpovreive kal KWdUVOY peaTa” ws TavTa UTETTH 
Ipéduayos édrids rod ruxeiv' ws d€ ody obrw ruyxdvet, Kal dvTiAuTet AevkoKdpay TO TeheUTALoY TOY 
dOdov (kpdvos 8 iv repiBdnrov) ev érépo Kad@ veavia Opovros mepiels Tou AevkoKdpa’ Kal @s ovK 
eveykay thy Cpotumiay Eider Eavrov dcexpyoaro. 

Fr. 9. This fragment resembles in appearance Frs. 6-8, and the contents are 
somewhat analogous; Fr. ro is also rather similar. 


Fr. 11. 3 sqq. No other name than A]éy[pos seems at all likely, especially as it is clear 
from Fr. 8. ii. 34 sqq. that this collection of biographies included mythical persons. For 
Abderus cf. Steph. Byz. s. v.”APdnpa, Apollodor. ii. 5.8, 841. II. 1-2,n. He is said to have 
been loved by Heracles, who founded Abdera in his honour after he had been killed by the 
horses of the Thracian king Diomedes. 

4. Ket Or Ant, but Spalkn suits the context. 

5. For le[ma cf. 841. II. 1-3 [Naidlos Opovias "ABOnpe . . « [oeOlev “Ido révd_e had [rar|ava 
[dcjofo and the Schol. dro:xoe yap eiow of ABOnpirat [Tniwv, Téws] 8 €or ris Iwvias dri. 


Fr. 18. This small piece possibly formed part of a third column of Fr. 3, the point of 
junction being opposite ll. 37-9 ; but the combination is unconvincing. 


Fr. 20. 4. Se: the « has been converted from a straight stroke (« or 7). 


Fr. 21. 2. ? 8y|uevoas was probably the end of the line, as is indicated by the diminution 
in size of the three last letters, as well as by a short blank space after gv in |. 4. 


Fr-80.020 |v seems to have ended the line. 


1801. GLOSSARY. 
13 x 10-6 cm. First century. 


This and the three following texts form a group of fragments of glossaries, 
still something of a novelty in papyri, and are an interesting sample of the work of 
early lexicographers. 1801 is the most ancient of the group, being written in 
a small semicursive hand which is rather similar to that of 1087 (Part VIII, 
Plate 4) ascribed to the latter part of the first century B.c. One of the early 
characteristics shared by 1801 with 1087 is a tendency to link letters at the top, 
e.g. 7 and the uncial form of «; in 1801 € is similarly linked, which is unusual. 
On the other hand the y-shaped 7, commonly regarded as characteristic of the 
Roman period, occurs in an abbreviation in |. 46, while the general aspect of the 
~ hand is less archaic than that of 1087; a date about the middle of the first 
century A.D. seems, on the whole, most likely. Paragraphi are used to mark off 
the various notes, and the words to be explained project slightly into the left 


1801. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS I51 


margin, and are also followed by short blank spaces; similar spaces are used to 
indicate a pause in the body of the note, and in one instance (1. 21) an oblique 
dash fuifils the same purpose. 

Parts of two columns are preserved, broken at the top and bottom, as well 
as down the outside of each. An index to the original length of the lines is, 
however, afforded by ll. 21-2, on the basis of which the extent of the initial 
lacunae in Col. i has been roughly estimated in the printed text. As for Col. ii, 
the break from 1. 32 to 1. 58 is nearly vertical, and if the length of lines is taken 
at about 3o letters, the loss in the central part of the column will be about 
10 letters, the number slightly increasing above and diminishing below on account 
of the slope of the column to the right ; but the loss cannot be accurately gauged, 
since in texts of this kind no great care was taken to keep the ends of lines even, 
and Col. i shows that 1801 was no exception in this regard. 

Both columns relate to rarer words beginning with the letter B, and the 
alphabetical arrangement may have been strictly observed up to the second 
letter, but certainly did not extend to the third, e.g. BeBuopevov follows Bédos. 
All the words, so far as identified, appear in Hesychius, except one, which is in 
Suidas. But the treatment is fuller than in Hesychius, especially in the wealth 
of citation, to which there is more approximation in the Etymologicum Magnum 
(cf. ll. 21-7 n.), a feature which would have made this glossary, had much of it 
been preserved, peculiarly valuable. Most of the citations are from Comedy or 
Satyric drama, the authors quoted including Eupolis, Cratinus, Hermippus, 
Aristophanes, Alexis, and Sophocles. The only prose writer whose name occurs 
is the historian Phylarchus (1. 44). This glossary thus seems to have followed 
lines similar to those of the Svvaywyy of Artemidorus (cf. Schol. Aristoph. Vesp- 
1169, &c.), though whether it was confined to the Comedians and Satyric 
dramatists can hardly be determined from the present specimen. That this is 
actually a fragment of the work of Artemidorus is hardly likely ; the makers of 
Lexica were many (cf. Susemihl, Alex. Lit-Gesch. ii, pp. 185 sqq.), and very 
little is known about them. 

On the verso of the papyrus are remains of two columns, written in a small 
upright hand dating perhaps from about the end of the first century or the 
beginning of the second, from a treatise on grammar. In Col. ii, after referring 
to the declension [A]paxwvos Apaxwri (cf. Choerob. Zz Theod. Can. p. 79, Gaisf.), 
a new section begins ™Tleps d¢ tov aornp Bartnp [ar Tw opor wy emAayBaverat 
Ki Gngien ane ste ¢ 14 Neywr pn eotavat [tov tovrwy apd ™ pov pnde SvvacOat 7[.......... 
16 rns (y corr.) avadoyias EAAnr[iopov ? ovk op \ Ows eevdy Ta omoia ovita.......0 


18 wowws oXnmariCerat [ovtw yap av Y Aeyorto Tpwrov pev OTL... 


152 THE OXVYRAYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Cola 
[eg aac theeastste cet eee pe - [ 
Lane Sabre Age etal en ote Jav é 
Perce eet jutov Al 
Ve sca se ae ae Wh Bynes |) Teme pale. and 
a eee acai |. worBap .« [.JKev7[.] 
[ | 
(Beteo Kegn eit stake tlepaxes ae yAaukes) rapa 
[ois ae ath ten eae autora ei Jets Kat oTpatoy ai.J]. «| 
ionag, Ripigenm eerie Sogpoxjdns de ev Farl(pjo[ver] 
ince dete SheaNeL cena, Saban corre |. mpoctacipov Ts 
Ha row atch nines, & cosh ass | ovpr....v -al.| 
[Sui eed Aarne reg eg oe [fe lelow to, a.le sok he 
[ | 
Pe Soca ngnnebe aaa arta tee | kat Evuzods ev 
Aer forte Cola Glen ced ateotes \uas ouTt mov 7roX 
RACER OOP ACN OPERA. di | «y Satvpors add oray 
IetanineRespea Levwucs a mctnaten ls cap wore Kat codots 
Atay ables cele ame dha wee |. €kavoy apoemovoy 
BOs ON eaceincntt "ogee. het taut ate) Jae 


[Berexos Apiorogavn)|s ev IToAvidwn 7 kar 


[r@v Bedexwv  Deyler de wept avTwv 
rea eae ae < ? Noyor'] TouTov €OTLY 
Po dee een yete die Augaea.[ eleS FONE, CrOLS ata 

2 Gig Wy einen) Satan ].[. @a]rep o micos Kat ra 
[Ovpos omoios?..... \t Kptwm@r To peye 
[Bos 15 letters Bere]kov Kadovawy 


[ Wate 


Cole: 


35 


10) 


4 


50 


55 


60 


180). NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


Peo |. yedol 


Se Ok nee Jac kar tov Kparivovy ev Opa:trats 
Te cnet airs Nee MOLNGYX OV MULOM ain tn) eieus means @ uaku 


fenitcks UTE Gee ace loes une Gl Ceara ee ae 
Ais ee OUP TOCT] Oke OPLUKG raall precletre Saat is sic P= 


rh aie rete OCU TEMA aR CL ULI) ohoe oe tua eS aets fe 
Dien ris SRO MSENTLO TE MT CVOTE OW. onus ows os 
BiewBee | meporplolpn — Aplioropavns? . . 

lege \Oery EVDOLL\ OC OY HUM wae Me latee eveyone 
Ber\Bwja kon tins Aalxovr[ixns...... 
eet Ores OK PIO OC (Dilber al sus se syn ais a 


KOTGDUNGPNOS AEVT HL OF oo «sco a sess 


5 [Blepecxetoe = avonro[t] wem[Aaora map Apictodg(avet) 


Benos Apistopavn(s) ev Ayaplvevot..... 
av 


MAPNVACYELY? €YKOS Ol o |, oe a cee 2 
BeBuoplevov TEN OEST © NTI] MA Roe Pane te can 
yn BeBuvopern  Aptorodlavns ev.. 
Bepyauos  Ade€is ev Hovorne “ES 
EOTLIKGL KOMMOCPATE ..). 4 0 6s a ow 
Bepyatov amodagew vOddv....... 
auto. oKoTeiTe vuy eyo Of... ...-- 
YOS YAP “@S°WEMALKEV. EIS To ais sss 
eotiv & n Bepyn tys Opalixns 
Beddepov. = tov BeAdepodov7|[nv...... 
BepBurov Eppinmes ev S[tpatiwrats ? 


@y tas AnkvOovs Kati. .....+. 


2 
Bypnkes  Apiotopar(n(s)| [ev...-.--- 


lorsastaeets | Bnpn[k .| pupalpara......- 


osama: ros. eels. Taye yVQIUOP ks = iw ala 3 9 
Eyoxceres ree TO ek LEV OV ol SEN ORT eat cust a, a reine bire, <> 


154 THE OXVRAYVNCHUS PAPVEI 


Fr. 


4. There seems to have been no other letter in front of the doubtful «, which might 
also be a dash like that in |. 21. 

7. Cf. Hesych. Beipaxes’ igpaxes. It is not possible to read 7 or xa before yhavke(s), 
though one of those words should perhaps be restored. o could well be read in place of a 
but would be unintelligible. The similar gloss of Hesychius Bdpag: tgpaé mapa AiBuax 
suggests that A/Bva. may be the name in the lacuna after mapa ; but the name may also have 
been that of the author who used the form. 

10, Sad{uo[rec] is consistent with the remains, which do not suit Sarupous (cf. I. 17). 

Il. mpooracipoy is apparently novel. 

13. ov: perhaps ao. 

16, |uas ovre: or |uagou tt. 

1g. The first letter may be e. g. 8, 6, p. Neither apoe for apoa nor ap ce is attractive 
in this context. 

21-7. Cf. Etym. Magn. Bedéxkou' dompia’ Kai Tov Bedexkor, "Apioropdrns, Hesych. BéXexos: 
dompidy te eubepes Aabdp@ péyebos epeBivDov ¢xov. The papyrus, besides giving the name of 
the play of Aristophanes, confirms the view of-earlier editors that «cai réy was part of the 
citation; Kock prints Bedéxkoy only (Fr. 755). Lines 23 sqq. are an excerpt from a prose 
writer who described the Bédekos. kptwmds from «piss (vetch) is unattested. 

34 sqq. Cf. Hesych. s, v. diAoyxor, tiv Bevdiv ovrw Kpativos ev Oparrats exadecer, Hrot Ste dvo 
Tas eKAnpavato, ovpaviay te Kal yOoviav .. . i dre SVo Adyyas eper krA. From this it is plain 
that ll. 34-5 at any rate are part of a note on Bevdis, of whom Hesych. says s. v., 9 "Aprepes. 
Opaxoti mapa dé “A@nvaios Eopt) Bevdideca, How many of the preceding lines were included 
in the note (to which the small fragment, ll. 61-3, perhaps belongs) is, however, uncertain, 
nor is it clear whether Il. 36-9 are all part of the same excerpt from Cratinus.  |uunv in 
1. 36 is possibly r]uny (cf. Hesych. d%0 tyzds). In 1. 37 xopexal is apparently not to be 
read, unless » was here written differently from those elsewhere. In 1. 38 rwao| a let is 
not impossible. 

40. Cf. Hesych. BeBe . . . dim. If, however, ap[ is Ap|toropdyns, as is natural to 
suppose, the name of the play seems to have been omitted, contrary to the compiler’s usual 
practice. BeuBuces eyly[ever bar (Vesp. 1530) suggests itself, and might not be too long if 
Apiorop(avns) were written ; ze|p|e opr |Oov (Av. 1461) is a not very satisfactory alternative. 

42. Cf. Hesych. BeABiva’ Kopyn Aakovn, 

43-4. This seems to be a separate gloss, but it rerhains obscure. Phylarchus was the 
author of a history of Pyrrhus and other works. 

45. 1. [BleperxeOo. Cf. Schol. Aristoph. £7. 635 B. 8€ of dvdytou mérAacra 8 7 AeExs, 
and the similar note in Suidas. 

40-7. Ach. 345. 

48-9. Cf. Hesych. BeBvopevovy mdjpes. Suidas cites Aristoph. Ach, 463, but yn (rvyn ?) 
BeBuopérn is from a non-extant play. 


1801. -NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 155 


50-5. Antiphanes of Berga was a byword for his mendacity, and hence Bepyaios 
acquired a similar connotation ; cf. e.g. Strabo ii. 100 rd be Bepyaiov Sujynua tovto €v rictews 
peper riBeis. Steph. Byz. says that a verb Bepyaitew was also coined. 

55+ Bepyy: so Strabo vii. 331, Steph. Byz.; Bépya Ptol. iii. 13, &c. 

56. Cf. Eustath. 632. 8 év de pyTopRG Aektkd evpyrar Kal BeAdepos Aeyduevos, Hesych, 

BeANepos* bd BeAdepopdvrov kravOeis. 4 5 BeAXepoporrns. 
i 57-8. Cf. Hesych. BepBina’ dda xabnopéva, e& dy tas AnkiOous expépwv. The Srpariara 
is the only known play of Hermippus beginning with 3. As to the following words, the 
restoration depends on whether they are taken as a quotation (e. g. SepSwilav ras d. karr|-yayor) 
or as explanatory (e.g. évda e€ | wy, on the lines of Hesych.). 

59-60. Cf. Hesych. Bnpnkess pacar dpbai. of S€ dmdas patas. addou patas cvobev Képata 
exovoas, and Bdpa& ... Kai pipapa otpoyythov ad’ ob ai pata, Eustath. 1414. 29. 

ae 62. Possibly Bev|ido[s, in which case the fragment would come from the neighbourhood 
of Il. 34-5. 


1802. GLOSSARY. 


Peg el lasso 4-avom: Late second or early 
third century. 

The following fragments of an alphabetical glossary are on the verso 
of 1798, a historical work on Alexander the Great. They are written for the 
most part in an irregular but clear simicursive of medium size, but in two or 
three fragments the hand is markedly smaller (cf. n. on Fr. 6) and in a couple of 
others (Frs. 7—8) it becomes more cursive. v at the end of a line is sometimes 
. written as a horizontal stroke above the preceding vowel, but otherwise there is 
no abbreviation. As in 1801, the several glosses project into the left margin by 
the width of three or four ‘letters, and are also followed by a blank space; but no 
points or paragraphi are used. The text on the recto is assigned to the middle 
or latter part of the second century, and that on the verso may date from the end 
of the same century or the beginning of the third. Some rather unintelligent 
mistakes, which have been left uncorrected, are noticeable (Il. 49, 61, 63). 

As explained in the introd. to 1798, the two texts proceed in opposite 
directions and the glossary did not occupy the entire roll, many of the minor 
fragments of 1798 being blank on the verso. Since those fragments, so far 
as their contents are recognizable, are not separated from the rest by any wide 
interval, and the remains of the lexicon, which was ona considerable scale, include 
words beginning with x to p, the copy of this seems not to have been finished. 
Fr, 3 is the only substantial piece, containing the upper portions of three con- 
secutive columns, the two latter of which are sufficiently well preserved.to give 
some idea of the scope and method of the compiler, at whose identity it is hardly 
worth while to guess. His alphabetical arrangement is more strict than that of 
1801 or of ancient lexica generally, and is indeed remarkably correct, so far as 
it can be followed. He confines himself to uncommon words, or words used in 


156 THE OXYREAYNCHUS: PAPI RI 


an uncommon sense. Besides Greek local peculiarities, several terms from 
non-Hellenic speech are included—Persian (Fr. 3. 45, 64, Fr. 6. 13), Lydian 
(Fr. 3. 46), Chaldaean (Fr. 3. 63, 67, 72, Fr. 6. 6), Albanian (Fr. 3. 65); in the 
last instance the authority quoted is a work in two or more books on Zévy wvn, 
by a certain Heraclides. The writer’s interest in foreign countries is further 
shown by references to e.g. writers on Scythia (Fr. 3. 1), Asia (Fr. 3. 10, 17), and 
Babylon (Fr. 3. 67, 72), to Glaucus on the region West of the Euxine (Fr. 3. 36), 
to Andron on ‘ the war with the barbarians’ (Fr. 3. 46). In contrast with 1801, 
most at any rate of the authorities cited are prose works, and are often com- 
paratively obscure. Sometimes a considerable excerpt is given (Fr. 3. 29-35 
37-42), but more commonly only a brief mention is made of author and work. 
How far these references can be trusted is somewhat problematical; in the two 
that occur to an extant book, it is incorrectly cited (Fr. 3. 50, 57). In one place 
epigraphic evidence is appealed to (Fr. 3. 54-6). 

Of the words and uses reported in this papyrus about one half are not found 
in the existing lexica, but a large proportion of the novelties are non-Hellenic. 
Several terms are otherwise known only from Hesychius, whose evidence is 
generally less explicit; it is noticeable that in one instance where both cite 
an authority, this is not the same (Fr. 3. 58-9, n.). A striking coincidence of 
phraseology between the papyrus and the Etymologicum Magnum and Zonaras 
occurs in Fr. 3. 40-1, ard no doubt the passage there cited is their common 
ultimate source. The parallel with Photius noted in Fr, 3. 61, n. is hardly less 
close ; evidently such glosses often underwent little variation in their descent 
from one compiler to another. 


1h wi FY, 
Coler Coli 
K{ rel oe 
[ ? pelAomovial. . . ae 
K| ) Aal 
al €\y modeTELa [ 
kK 5 los AvTnvwp ral 
Ki ] 15 [ 
[ | Aal 
k[ ev TH OerrTladoy TmodreTeE® Aal 


rot Jaen 


1802. 


fe) 


Mapytavor? ev) y Sku OcKJov 
|vov apxnf. .] . np. 

Je mowovytes €\Oovora 
map eTlepois Mapdor x\a\Aovrrat 
\eAot Avrexdre{cdn]s 
AckAlnmadns ev [.] emylpla 
J 


Jockovoty Hpak|dedn]s 


ka|ta Aowayv a 


| 


ev v|mouynpact 


te) 


| 0 Irukatos 


] 


Col. 
] au tns Anpnz(pos tepecjae n avtn AtrodAoria ?] ev Tn A Em ayou | 


[M\e[Atooar 
30 


NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 


/ 


a 


] ev To wept Tov Kata Act 
av 


| ovopaciav 


KN TOAELTELA 


il. 


cay 6€ Tov Kkaraboyv tars Nuvdais cvy Tw taTw Kat ToLs Epyors Ts Ilep 


cepovns & pev TrapayeverOar eis Ilapov Kar €eviotercav Tapa 


to Baothe Medtoow yapicacba tais tovtov Ovyatpaci ovoas e€y 


kovTa tov tTns Pepoehovns totov Kat mpwrTais avTats avadovyat 


Ta Tept avtTny maby TE Kat puoTnpla obey Kat peALTCOasS EKTOTE 


35 
peAvytov 


KAnOnvat tas Oecpopopiagovoas {KAnOnvatt yvvaikas 


Topatiov tT. XKutikov I'Aavkos ev & eEnynoews Tommy Tay Kei [| 


pevov em aptotepa tov IIovrov pepn ovvKkatrabepulelvov de Twv era 


Twv eduoe TOY avAAOyoY Kat amohuOevTes EkaoTOs] emt Ta idia Tap 


eoKxevagoy To peAvytov TovTo de 70 Tropa peOvoKer padrdov Tov 


40 


olvov yeiverat de exyosevov tov pedrrtos peO Udatos Kat Bora 


vnf[s| Tevos euBadrdromervns epel yap avtwv n ywpa modu 7o pe 


158 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Nt eve Oe Kat TO CvTOS O ToLovaLW EK TNS KEyXpoU 


perAwdLa n Tpaywdia To madatov edeyeTo ws KadAtpakos ev vio 
py npaciy 
45 pevenave To vdwp mapa tos Ilepoais Zewov ¢lv..... |. ov 


peppvadat ot Tplopxor mapa Avdois Avdpwv ey. tov IToXe 


pov Tov mpos tous BapBapous 


Hepotres ot adpoves vio EvBoewy Atovvaotos ev [.....---- 
JLepou eLOoS opvEeou omEp avTEKTpEpEL TOUS Kl... . ee ees 
50 ApiororeXns Ev 7H TWEPL TwY EV TOLS CwoLs poplialy 
HecoTeheoTov To nuiteheotov Aitwdous .[.... 1. ee eee 
[hee ek ts |paow 
[eeeives araagrle awe) anni leka[.. Jul .Jxorra . [ 


Col. iil. 
> 


[M)n[ris ] n A@nva kat ev tw vaw tys Xadk{toaxov Aaxkedatporr : 


55 wv eott peckpov AOnvadioy Kat emtye[ypapOa dacw avTw ? 
thy Mnrww 
untpar erdos peAcoowv Apicroredrns ev 7 TELL T@Y Ev ToLS CwOLS LopL® 
pntpat ev Tapow kat odo tas deArovs ev ais avlaypagovar ? tas 
olKLasS LnTpas mporayopeverOar a.. Kat Onul..... Aptotore 
60 Ans ev TN Yorewy odrecTera 
HieoTnp 0 eLdws eavToy pn Kabapov aipatols Kat eXOov wa pn 
det Kat pratv@y AvrokAedns ev Tw Emvypalupare ? 
pidopy  ‘yevos Tt apxovias mapa Xaddaors wep... ....-.-.- 
MiOpas oo II popnbevs cata 8 addovus o nAtos mapa Ilepolais......... 
65 plAny —-yevetov Uo ANBaviwy Tey opopovyTelvy........ 
| ws Hpakdedns ev & Revns horns 
puvodordcecoa = apiOuwy ovvtagis mapa Naddaiois.... ev > Tov 
kata BaBviova 
Muvat ov povoy Opxoueviot adda kar ot Mayvaires.. . ev te me 
70 pt TroTapoy 
puv@des — apiredot TLvEs ovT@ eyorTat mapa Podliais cA 
wigat =o mapa Xaddatois n Tov peddovT@Y Tpoyvedi[s.... 7 


Tov kata BaBvdAwva 


Murvdynvaioe —kamndat anf... ..]. ws Hynoavdpos [ev vrouynpaci ? 


1802. , NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 159 


50 Wen online: | piel 22 letters WetOPICKic tae Alou 


Fr, 4. ; Hr6. Fr. 7. 
eh ee: | tov Pactrews [ rane aa 
] AloytKov (hea) 
jecye . [ |] ev ta Tporko [= Af 
]ron[ ]opos o Avrioxevs [ \decof 
les ouz| 5 | ]. adu7[ 
Ipege, | Brepalpa] rapa XafA 5 Jevaio . [ 
5 meptat| JavO.o[. . . .|yarAl. ] eouxey [ 
TEP TOL Praia to S aL OlV eter neler lous Peal 
loety =. #7 ne Juv Kad 
| pntpol MO) AKGTO yy Yc nse ee Jos Al 
2 Pe HEY OUT Orono, castrate o ley | 
10 [ned Jos je 
mlaoa ITep[cas... 
| 
Fr. 5 : Fr. 8 
eet |. ral 
Ipl- lel Lag ae) |repl 
lex 
Lehane FyoLt 
]+ ¢Bel ea 
? Bevolpav ev a.[ . 


?roLlyous TeOuplwpevous ? 


}. Me - [ 


Fr, 2. 5. Antenor may be the historian of Crete referred to e. g. by Plutarch, JZa/. 


Herod. 22. 
8. Apicroredns ev? Cf. Fr. 3. 59. Aristotle’s treatise on the Thessalian constitution is 
cited by Harpocration s. v. rerpapxia as 7 kown Oerr. word. ; Athen. xi. 499 b omits Kocvy. 


160 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


10. The doubtful 7 is preceded by a horizontal stroke above the line like those above 


numerals, 

Fr. 8. 1-4. These lines seem to form a connected note on the Mapyavoi ; ef 
Strabo xi. 510-1, where the "Apapdo:, Mapy:avoi, and 2xvOa are mentioned in close connexion ; 
possibly Mapyialvov is to be restored in I. 2. evOovaral|fovar(?) in 1. 3 suggests that the name 
may have been connected with pdpyos; cf. Hesych. papya’ papyaiver, vBpicer, évOovora, paiverat. 
Several writers of S«vé«dé are known, e.g. Agathon of Samos (Plutarch, //wv. iv. 5) and 


Ctesippus (0p. czt. v. 2). tae 
5. There is perhaps just room for Avreddtdn]s, 1. €., presumably, the Athenian historian ; 


the preceding word was possibly 6]7Ao. ; 

6. Which of the various writers named Asclepiades is meant is not clear. A relative 
perhaps followed «v; a numeral and exvypa|uparey is less likely. 

8. Hpax|Aedy|s: perhaps the author of the Zé paovy mentioned in |. 66, or e.g. 
Heraclides Lembus, who was probably the compiler of a work on Hodrreiac (cf. Fr. 2. 4, 8, 
Fr. 3. 21) among other treatises (cf. 1867 int.). 

To. kalra Acuav: cf. 1. 19/3 but the division | ta Aguava is Of course possible. 

13. Possibly Atovvavos| o Irvukaos, the writer of a ‘Pr¢orouekad who is mentioned by 
Steph. Byz. s. v. “Irvky. 
1g. ovouwacwwy may well be part of the title of some treatise. 

27. Walpdo more probably than olpéa, perhaps. 


‘ 


29-35. ‘péduooa: the priestesses of Demeter. The same Apollonia(?) in the first 
book (says): “ When bringing to the Nymphs the basket together with the loom and the 
work of Persephone she first went to Paros, and having been entertained in the palace of 
the king Melissus she presented to his daughters, who were 60 in number, the loom of 
Persephone, and delivered first to them her sufferings and mysteries ; whence the women 
who took part in the Thesmophoria were thereafter called Melissae ”.’ 


1, 29. A spot of ink in the margin is very doubtfully identified as ¢, but its position 
points to a projecting word, so that a new paragraph is indicated. Cf. Hesych. pedwoar ai 
ths Anpuntpos poorides, Porphyr. De anir. Nymph. 18 ras Anyntpos tepeias ws ths xOovias beds 
pvoridas pedlcoas of madaol ékddouv, Schol. Pind. Pysh. iv. 106. Though the letters at the 
beginning of the line are mostly broken, the remains well suit the reading adopted, with 
which AvoA[ ova] or AroAN us] seems unavoidable. 

30. For the xddaOos cf. e.g. Callim. A. Cer. rsqq., 121 sqq., and Schol. A. Cer. 1 
6 BirddeAgos Trodepaios kata pipnow rdv ’A@nvaiov €6n twa Wpvoev ev *AdeEavdpeia, ev ois Kai rip 
rod Kaddbov mpdodov. eos yap nv ev AOnvais ev propery tmepa emt dxnuatos péeperOar Kddabov és 
rep ths Anpntpos. The «cddados worn on the head is a common emblem both of Demeter 
and Persephone. References to the iorés of the latter do not seem to occur. 

tas Nuvpas: cf. Schol. Pindar, Py/h. iv. 106 dre dé Kat ras Tept Ta iepa vidas pediocas 
édeyov Mvacéas 6 Iatapeds adnyeirat Néyov .. . dvev yap Nupdor otre Anuntpos tepov Tyarar . . . 
ovre ydpos ovdeis dvev Nupparv ovyredetrar. 

31-2. G@ = mparov: |. Eemabcicav. Melissus king of Paros and his 60 daughters are 
apparently not elsewhere mentioned. Paros, however, was prominent in the worship of 
Demeter; cf. e.g. Homer, 4. Demet. 491, where Paros is mentioned next to Eleusis, 
Nicanor, ap. Steph. Byz. s.v. Hdpos, who says that the name Anpnrpias was applied to the 
island, and the statement in Schol. Aristoph. Av. 1764 that Archilochus wrote a hymn to 
Demeter at Paros. According to Pausan. x. 28. 3 the dpyia rijs Anuntpos were said to have 
been brought to Thasos from Paros; other references are collected in Pauly-Wissowa, 
Realencycl. iv. 2722-3. 


1802. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 161 


34-5. Cf. Pindar, Pyth. iv. 106 pedicoas Aedpidos, of the prophetess, and Callim. H. A poll. 
110 Anot & ovk dxd mavros Ddwp popéovor péAtooa, KAnOnvar has been inadvertently repeated. 


36-42. ‘Medvyov: a Scythian beverage. Glaucus in the rst book of the description 
of places lying towards the left of the Black Sea (says) “when the drivers agreed, he 
dismissed the assembly and dispersing each to his home they prepared the pedvyov. This 
drink is more intoxicating than wine and is made of honey boiled with water, with the 
addition of a certain herb; for their country produces much honey and also beer, which 
they make out of millet ”.’ 


Cf. Etym. Magn, peddyesov' ropdriov SkvOixdv, ywopevov ex pdvov pédcros pb’ bdaros, Bordyns 
Twos euBadrdopevns (similarly Zonar. peAtyvov' mépa te Sk. xth.), Hesych. pediriov mépa re 
SkvOiKov péderos Eyrouévou adv Udart kai méa Twi. The Etym. Magn. is especially close to the 
papyrus, and the spelling pedvy(e)ov is confirmed as well as opariov, which Dindorf 
wished to emend to aéyua r from Hesych.; a more probable alteration would be to write 
éyouevov for ex pdovov. In ]. 36 1. Exvéudv. The treatise of Glaucus is unknown and his 
identity doubtful. Of the recorded writers of that name, the author of a work on Arabia 
often referred to by Steph. Byz. appears the most suitable. éAarns (1. 37) = éAarqp in Eurip. 
Fr. 773. 28 moipvas éarar; ’EXar(é)ov is hardly likely in this context. 

43-4. This is a new piece of information, apparently. The term peA@dia may have 
been applied to tragedy in its germinal dithyrambic stage. 

45. 1. Znvov, i.e. not improbably the grammarian of Myndus, who is cited e.g. in 
Etym. Magn. 590. 44 8. v. popiav. The vestiges before wv are consistent with e.g. 4, A, p, 
but Aegleov is unsuitable. As for peveuan, Mr. R. Levy tells us that maya, the Aramaic word 
for water, was used in Pehlevi, and a reduplicated form of this might produce something 
sufficiently close to the papyrus. Dr. Sayce notes the similarity of ammzs. 

46. Cf. Hesych. peépprns* tpiopyos. The family name of Gyges was Meppydda according 
to Herodotus i. 7. 14. Avdpev is perhaps more likely to be the historian from Halicarnassus 
than the Alexandrian who wrote Xpovcxa (Athen. iv. 184 b), though a work by him with the 
title here given is not elsewhere cited. To read Av8pam{xos for Avdpoyv. is possible but not 
attractive. 

48. This sense of pépomes is not otherwise attested. Among the many writers named 
Dionysius the most suitable in this context seems to be, if not the prolific Avoydcws 6 Opaé, 
Awovicwos 6 Tpvpavos, whose extensive treatise wept dvoyarewy is cited by Athenaeus, Harpocra- 
tion, and Steph. Byz. 

49-50. |. pepo. € Of omep has been corrected from a oro. The word beginning with 
« should mean ‘parents’ or something analogous; x[ndepovas is hardly satisfactory. The 
pepoy is mentioned by Aristotle in An. A7s/. ix. 13, p. 615b 25 gaci O€ Tues rovs pw... 
dvrextpéperOa ims trav exydvov: cf. Hesych. pépomes*. . . kal dpved twa, os "Apiororedns. It is 
strange that the reference given in |. 50 is mistaken both as to the treatise and the number 
of the book (there is no eighth book of the De part. anim.) ; cf. 1. 57, n. 

51. peooredeocrov: co is doubtfully read and the o may be p: also the space between 
the supposed o and 7 is rather wide and another letter may have intervened ; but a compound 
of pépos does not seem very likely. For peoo- = ju cf. Hesych, peosnpov" jpignpor. A few 
Aetolian forms are given in Hesych., e. g. xi88a, depia, Gaydves. - 

54. Xadx{vocxov was restored by Lobel, no doubt rightly. The identification of Mjris 
and Athena is apparently novel; Apollodor. i. 3. 6 puts them in the relation of mother and 
daughter. Cf. Hesych. Mirus ctveois’ .. . kai 7 Oeds. 

54. rot was originally written after ev, i.e. the writer began to write row owing to the 
repetition of ev. irpar oyxav and dvOpnvév are described by Aristotle in Az. PTisT aX ATs 

M 


162 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


pp. 627 b-628 a (cf. Am. Gen, iii. 10, p. 761 a 6) so that there is the same mistake in the 
citation here as in]. 50. Cf. Hesych. pyrpa’ «idos ainxds. 

58-60. Cf. Hesych. parpa’ ... Kal é kdijpos bd Zodrewy, ws KNeirapxos. In 1. 58 anloypapover 
would also be possible, or the letter after a might well be. In |. 59 neither as ka nor aus 
kat suits the remains; perhaps there was a correction and ac ca was intended. That dro 
was included among Aristotle’s collection of constitutions was unknown, 

61. pseornp is presumably a copyist’s error for piacrwp; cf. Photius pudorap* drav ris 
abrov pi) Kabapdy eidds mapépxnrat iva py dei, pepraopévos, whence the supplement in the latter 
part of the line has been derived. The identity of AvroxAeidys is doubtful; he is not likely 
to be the writer of éénynruxéd mentioned by Plutarch, /Vic. 23. 

63. 1. apponas. Hesych. gives several Chaldaean words, but peGopy is not one of them. 
It is conjectured by Sayce to be the opening of a Sumerian hymn, possibly =me fa-ra-ga, 
from some Tammuz dirge, as Prof. Langdon suggests. 

64..The equation of Mithras to Prometheus, though not unnatural, is apparently 
unusual. For the latter part of the line cf. Hesych. pidpas’ 6 fdvos mapa Mépoas, and the 
similar but longer notes in Suidas and Photius. 

65-6. At the end of the line e. g. rous I8npor or Appertors would be suitable ; cf. Strabo xi, 
p. 501. The work on Zé gw is apparently not mentioned elsewhere, and with which, 
if any, of the known grammarians named Heraclides the author is to be identified is 
doubiful. 

66-7. Cf. Hesych. puwdaddecoas’ apiOuds. kat ra rept otpdua civrakis. BaBvdAwmot. In 
consideration of this compiler’s fondness for giving authority it is preferable to treat xara 
BaBvAwva as part of a title rather than to read e. g. Xaddaiolis rows ovat; cf. Il. 72-3, where tov 
xara Baf. is most easily explained in the same sense and as a citation of the same treatise. 
The writer’s name must be as short as possible. 

69. Cf. Hesych. Muvat of Opxopeno, kal Mayvntes. As in |. 67, the name of the author 
cited should be quite short, since the line would really be sufficiently filled with no further 
addition, especially if, as is quite possible, ey rows stood in the title. There were many 
writers of works on rivers, besides Callimachus; cf. Schneider, Calimachea, ii, p. 326. 

41. Cf. Hesych. pivga’ cidos dumédov, 

72. Either o before mapa is superfluous or something has dropped out. For the citation 
cf. n. on ll, 66-7. juoa according to Sayce = Sumerian me-gu, ‘to divine’. 

74. The lexica throw no light on this entry, which seems to have no connexion with 
Hesych, purriavds* drémdnxros, the latter word being too long for an[..... ]+, as well as 
otherwise incongruous. Hyyoavdpos is presumably Hegesandrus of Delphi, the author of 
a collection of anecdotes called ‘Ymouvjpara, in several books, cited by Hesych. s. v, drépapors 
and Suidas s. v. dAxvovides as well as by Athenaeus. 


Fr. 4. The blank spaces in ll. 7 and 9g indicate that the preceding words were 
yAéoou, and ll. 5—6 are no doubt complete at the beginning. The fragment may be from 
the top of a column. 


Fr. 6. The writing in this fragment containing the ends of lines from the top of 
a column, is considerably smaller than in Frs. 2 and 3; that of Fr. g is similar and so is 
that of Fr. 1 so far as it goes. 


I. Bacikews: OF Bacw ws? Bacidcrkor OF -kov is less suitable. 
6, mapa XalA|Sacors : Cf ErauGay 72: 


Frs. 7-8. These two fragments are more cursively written than the rest. 


nb 9. Cf.n.on Fr, 6. In 1, 1 a narrow letter may be lost between the supposed 
B and p. 


Fr. 11. Either the beginning of a line or of the explanation of a word. 


1808. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 163 


1803. GLOSSARY. 
16 X 29-7 cm. Sixth century. 


This sheet from a papyrus book was probably the uppermost of a quire, 
since the space between the two pages of the recto, down which the binding string 
passed, has an ornamental band of light purple colour, and the string itself, some 
of which still adheres to the sheet, showing the knot, is partially coated with the 
same colour. The style of the rather heavy sloping uncials points to a date in 
the sixth century perhaps rather than the fifth; the ink is of the brown shade 
characteristic of the Byzantine period. As usual, the words of the glossary, which 
all begin with o, are made to protrude slightly into the margin; and the 
conclusion of the notes is marked by paragraphi, accompanied here and there by 
stops in the high or medial position. Quotations are sometimes indicated by the 
angular signs commonly employed for that purpose, but they are often omitted. 
Marks of elision are used, and there is one instance of a rough breathing (1. 42); 
all these additions are due to the original scribe, who was apparently a person of 
small intelligence, though he need not of course be the originator of all the 
slips that. occur. 

1803 is of a less interesting character than 1801—2 and the purpose suggested 
is rather scholastic than scientific ; citations, however, are commendably frequent 
and from these the papyrus largely derives its value. They are taken either 
from prose (Demosthenes, Thucydides, Xenophon) or Comedy, both Old and 
New, and additions are thus made to the extant fragments of Eupolis Xpucody 
Tévos, Aristophanes Tjpas, Menander Svvapictéca, "Eyxerpidiov, Piiddedgor, and 
Pavlov; the poet’s name is omitted in the case of the last three of these, but 
there can be little doubt that Menander is meant. The alphabetical arrangement, 
apart from the initial letter, is very negligent. 


Fol. 1 verso. Foll 1 recto. 
aTippov o ot moAXoL aTpidyo ToAAGKELS- 
[>] ws Apioropavns I'npat Kar 20 guvayayelv To ouvabpor 


t - oat Kat avdd\eEar Se TO avTo 
>] pn vroorpli[|pvov ce rH 


Touro ws ev Pidadedrdois 
> govny exes kat Meva 


xopidiov mpta ovva 


@oaAls wo 
5 > Opos ev Jvvapicrwoars yayov mavé’ ova exes 


> [[z]lee oreppas eoopevas 


25 Tod eyw daow axodry 
[>] Kae veas TAAAVTATOS 


eee fot avddEeye 
Sapam dia tou & ws ev Ey 7s 


164 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


> xupidiar ws cepvos 0 Sapa 
10 = >-s ms. Oeose 
cvyytyverbat AeyeTat KaT € 
mevOeoiy Tov T Kal yryvo 
oxew padriflovllora o: madat 
ot agiovowy de Kat xwpls 
“5 auTov 
onpuiov ynv adpayida Kat 
onpnvacbar To ofppayioat 
os . [ 


Fol. 2 recto. 


@py@l ws axXoAn Tropev 
€TaL OUTOCL 


iTov Kau THv Tpopynv atrrAws 
ws Hevopoy ev B Ava 

40 Bacews to de orparev 
pa emopi¢eTo otTov ows 
e].JJovvaro ex tov vb 
Tofuylwv KOMTOVTES 
Bouvs Kat ovovs kat Tov 

45 Kaptrov opotwws ws An 
poobevns ev Tw KaTa 
Atovucodwpovr mahi 
KamnAevav Kal ovVL 
aras [Tlas tipals] tov oirov 

5O Kal TOV apToy avTov atToO 
Kahovotv ws Kevopeov 
EVETH AV GIP GaN ale uae 


cuppopav ov povov THY 
dvatuxiay addAa Kat THY 
OUYTUXLAVY WOTE Kat @ 
30 6yabwv cupgpopav deyet 

ws ev Inmevow emt ovup 
gopas ayabaio evony 
yeApevals evayyedrea 
Over 


35 ouvebigecOar dia Tov ~ Kat 


Fol. 2 verso. 
Tov EMITNOLOY WS TAXL 
ata Bovdopevous dvakw 
55 Ouvevety 
caBurrovs Kouvpas eLdos Tt 
Euros ev Xpvow Fever 
Kal Kapa.. ns ws pg nrdes 
e€[[€|lupnpevos caBurrous 
60 oLomnoo pat QvTL TOU GL@ 
THT® Kal TlwmTNTEL KaL 
TLWTNTETAL WS EV TW TE 


pl Tov aoTepavov Kayw aTeEp 
@ 
€o Kat owwrnolloljuar Kat 


65 Mevavdpos ev Paviat 
clomnol madi ev TM PE 
pet kata Tlalvra de kar a 
KOVTOMaL KAL akoUTEL Kat 
akovoeTat Kat mndnoopat 


1. Cf. Moeris, p. 342 orippdv ’Arrixds' orpupvdy “EdAnves, 0 after oripov, if 


COMECi==10: 


2-4. The line from the Ijpas cannot be correct as quoted, but is easily emended, e. g. 


1808. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 165 


kat Baily) indorippoy ov... OF imdarippdv oe... exew. In place of vmoarippor (dra, eipny.), 
which is obviously to be read, the copyist lapsed into the non-Attic vmoorpipvov, but after 
noticing the error unintelligently made only a partial correction; there is no form 
orippves. 

5-7. 1. oruppas. If the a at the beginning of ]. 6 has been correctly cancelled by the 
copyist, something has dropped out either before or after orippas. The final s of ecopevas 
was converted from «. 

8. Instances of the shortening of the second a in 3dpams are found only in Latin 
{e. g. Prudent. Adv. Symm. ii. 531). The ’Eyxepidiov is no doubt that of Menander, who 
was the last author to be mentioned. 

11-15. Cf. e.g. Heraclid. af. Eustath. 1722. 55 of pév madaoi év dvci ydppa eyparro, 
ylyvopat héyorres. 

12. |. y for r: the converse error occurs in I. 16. 

13. « Of padcora is written through A, i.e. paddoy was first written. 

16-18. 1. rv. Cf. Photius onpeiovs rv odpayida’ kai onuaivecOar 1d odpayiterbat, 
Hesych. onpeiov’ répas. #} oppayis, and onunvacbar' oppayicacba, Harpocrat. onpeia’ otro Aeyovar 
tas oppayidas. Anpoobévns ev tO pds Paimmov. In |. 18 as is followed by what seems to be 
the top of a vertical stroke, so that neither Alpicrogayns (cf. £7. 952) nor Alnuocbens is 
probable. 

Ig. moAXaxets: «« has been converted from wo. 

22. idradehpors : of Menander presumably. 

23-6. Two iambic verses apparently, but the first « of xwpidiov should be short and ré 
is likely to have preceded. 

27-9. Cf. Suidas suppopa’ rav pécw ori. . . Ondot Sé 1 aupdopa Kai TO Kaddv Kal Td KaKdY, 
Sd Ayer ew ovpHopaiow dyabais (Aristoph. Ly. 655; cf. ll. 31-2), Eustath. 647. 28, Hesych. 
cuppopa’ ovvtvxia, cvprrara, arvyia, In]. 29 1. ayabny. 

31-4 = Ly. 655-6. The papyrus supports the usual reading eionyyeAuévais. R omits 
es, whence Cobet proposed dya@aior rais jyyedu. 

35- Perhaps xa | x@pes avrov, asin ll.14-15. 6sa rov t presumably refers to the spelling 
elditew, which is used mefr? grata, e.g. in Pythag. Carm. aur. 35, but there seems to be 
no instance of ovveé. apart from augmented forms. 

36-7. This is no doubt part of a note on oxodA7 in the sense of Apadéws or otdapas. 
Cf. Suidas cyoAy y’ dv dvri rod 008’ ddws, Bpadéws, ovdapas, 1. Te|@pyar, i.e. most probably the 
play of Menander; cf. ll. 8, 22, nn. 

38 sqq. Cf. Harpocrat., and Suid. otros’ mas 6 curixds Kapmds, ovx 6 mupds pdvoy" Kat ai’ra 
ra otria, Hesych. otros* rpopy. The references in ll. 39 and 45-7 are to Xen. Azad. ii. 1. 6 
and Dem. /n Dionysod. 7. In |. 41 the papyrus correctly agrees with the ‘ deteriores” 
against CBAE in omitting «ai mérov after ovrov. In 1. 52 the reference may be to 
Anab. v. 4. 29 and o[tra can be read ; but A»{a]8acv is not very satisfactory, though t, which 
seems to be right, points to that work or the Cyrop., which is irreconcilable with the remains, 
rn avtn being also unsuitable. 

53-5 = Thucyd. vil. 60 Sia thy Toy emitndei@y ordviy @s TaxLoTA KTA., cited no doubt in 
illustration of the word omdmus. Cf. Photius and Suidas ondus: évdea. Either omavw 
preceded ray emir. in the papyrus, or it was omitted. 

56-9. Cf. Hesych. odBurros* eidos Evpnoews eis KaANwmto pdr" mOrepov b€ Tov Teywvos 7. THs 
kearis, ddndov* wes 5 7d yuvaxeiov. Photius gives the latter meaning only to odfvrros and 
spells the equivalent of évpyoews eidos, caBvrrys, but Hesych. is confirmed by the papyrus. 
ll. 58-9 look like a pair of trochaic acatalectic dimeters (cf. e. g. Aristoph. Av. 1478-80), 
but if so, there is apparently some corruption in ]. 58, where, though it would be easy 
to write ws («)y’, the preceding word remains a difficulty, The doubtful « after xa can be 


166 THE OXYRHYNCHUS FART 


x or ¢} no is probable, but’ws very uncertain. There is a reference to a xovpeds in an already 
extant fragment of the Xp. év. (Kock 278). 

61. otwmnoe: € has been converted from «. 

62-4. De Cor. 112. 1. cvwnnoopat, as originally. written. 

65. avec: the papyrus confirms the spelling of this title, as to which there has been 
some doubt. 

66. ev rw is very uncertain, but consistent with the meagre vestiges. 


1804. Aces ‘Pyropixal. 
Fr. 4 16-6 13-4 cm. Third century. 


Fragments of a roll containing an alphabetical series of oratorical terms with 
notes thereon, the pieces preserved dealing with words which begin with the 
letters 1, P, =. They are written in well-formed sloping uncials of medium size, 
in style recalling P. Rylands 57 (Vol. i, Plate 10), though perhaps of a somewhat 
later date. An angular sign, the angle pointing to the left instead of, as usual, 
to the right, is used to fill up short lines. As in 1801-2, the terms to be 
explained are given prominence by a slight protrusion into the margin and by the 
short blank spaces which follow them. A second hand, using ink of a different 
shade, has introduced one or two alterations. 

Many of the words included in this glossary occur also in Harpocration, but 
its relations to that standard authority are less close than to the Aéfers ‘PyntopiKxat 
Seguerianae edited by Bekker in Axecd. i, pp. 197-318. This affinity is evident 
not only in the substance of the glosses but also in their order, e.g. the four 
terms in Frs. 1+2. i [Iv@aids (?), tpootpdmatos, mepiotato. and wopelov follow the 
same sequence in Axecd. pp. 295-6, though separated there by a few 
additional words; similarly in Avecd. pp. 299, 300, pytopixy ypady, pOmos, puTHp, 
and cxewpadeta, ovppopia, cvpmopirns, ovp~Bodrov are successive, corresponding to 
Frs. 3 and 4 of 1804 with one additional word in each fragment (Fr. 3. 5-8 [ ? ], 
Fr. 4. 4-6 otparnyot). Material similarities are pointed out in the commentary, 
and though such matter is often common to e.g. Photius and the Etymologicum 
Magnum, the verbal correspondence is generally greatest with the Seguerian 
Aégeis ; see for instance Fr. 4. 14, n. (on the other hand, for a coincidence with 
Photius, Frs. 1+2. 9-13, n.). Points of difference between the Aéfes of the 
papyrus and the Cod. Seg. are the omission in the latter, with a single exception, 
of the series of proper names in Frs. 1+ 2. ii, most of which, on the other hand, 
figure in Harpocration, and the disappearance of citations of authorities, to which 
1804 occasionally refers (Demosthenes Fr. 4. 16, Aeschines Frs. 1+2. 9, 
Hyperides Fr. 4. 5, Dinarchus Fr. 3. 7). The relationship is nevertheless 


1804. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 167 


distinct enough, and if the papyrus Aéfeus were not among the more or less im- 
mediate sources of the Seguerian, the two compilations must have had a common 
ancestor. 


Frs.14+2. Col. i. 


. . . . . 


(LHv6a0s? ovopa eopirys Adnuy 
low ayopevyns tov AlmoA\Ajalvos.... 


License Mee ie ere gas ev Tos es ia. | 
ee eee Pe eee | ont TIv6aes An 
5 vs a (rae eee \t apparos aotpa< 
[arfrovrog [oo.4' + vee ? Kolptgovras [vba 
Te! pc Pa ee ee inpll elev Kadovow 
eGo No 6 hie a 050 | 
mpoatponm|aos  Atlsyiys ev ToL TE 


10 = pt: THS TalpamperBeas Oatpoy Tis € 
mt Tov alditnpiov ? w\vopacOncay de 
or peta To [oTaOnvat Tpomatov| modepe 
ovs AaBov7\es mpoorpoTrasot| 

(mlepiotara [| oa meptBdremTo\e 
15 [wopieov [ro GrOopevov role mpeaBv 


(ratls wlomep epodiov.....\.[.--- 


Frs.1+2. Col. ii. 


a | Tt 

le] - | 

TlapPloradar aypos 7ys EpexOntdos ? 
Tlasjyéat ? énpos tus Aeovridos ? 


20 = [I awwives ? 
Il add[qvets énpos tns Avtioxtdos ? 
Tlepyaion Enpos 7Hs EpexOntdos ? 
Tletpajsevs ? Aipny AOnvncw ? 
(Mlepffordar Snpos rns Ownidos? 


Pa | | 
25 Ce ee | 


168 THE OXVRAVNGHUS FAPYRI 


Fr. 3. 
[pos mpagavros Te n ypawarvTios n €|L 
[movtos te gavdov n nv] nylwlyegor | 
[To of pyTopes..... eypla arto < 
[ 


Be | Deane aan ue Ponpatver| pev Tov THs Tra 
eee ee rt he las onpatves 
(OS, itm Wale oe «Wey xls lemme |xov Aevapxos 
[ev tor kata IIoAvevkrlov [d]wpodoxias 

[pwmros 0 mavrodamos dlopros Anpo< 

10 6[oOevns ev Tat mpos Tyly Poppiwvos 

[mapaypagny 
[puTnp 0 tuas Kupiws dle ae nviar 


Frew 


oKelpadiov oknua TL? Ku\Bev7iKoy rapla 

tepov AOnvas ceEw modelos evOa ox 

kuBelutar ermargov — | 

orpat{nyo] + nioaly nplyluevor pudlns 
5 exao(tlns & Prepedns ev To Kalra 

AvtokXeous 

cuvpopiat auvpopiat noav KS & [ 

avOpwy e€ wy noav ot Tpinpalp}yae 

gvuppopertns dé 0 THS GTUmpopLas K{[oL 
10 vevos Kat gudrerns Kat Snporns [noav 

d€ TOvT@Y KaL NYEMOVES OL Tap avTaly 

Ta avarw“aTa motovpevor vaoTEpoy [de 


Tapa Tov aUT@Y KOM Com“evol 
au 


oupBorta = onpllac]vec Kae tov Aoyor Tov 
15 Ola THs dyuns yevopmevoy emtonpar 
vel kat Ta oupPBorata Anpooberr[s ev 


1804, NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS 169 


Pitirmixov ¢ cvpBoraiov dle ecde 
Kos ypaupareov zt o chap Pavey [Tov 


dikagTov exagTos totaly] es lo dilKkaorypiov 


Fr. 5. Fr. 6. Fr. 7. Fr. 8. 


] }. al lyf Wal 


JAovro| J. ea dvagl \erep| Irl 
mAuvOors [ ]s oc de ryv. [ Jor « | 
]. Weopl Jevs ane [ ] 
|BaddrAojy Ke QT OKT ie «a 5 |-7.[ 
RD ee Ae des cr, tence ee 
Joxed 


Frs. 1+ 2. i. 1-8. Apparently a note on Iv6aca or an analogous form. Cf. Bekker, 
Anecd. i, p. 295 UvOaios* dvopa éoptis *"AOqvyow ayouévns rod ’ArdAX@vos, ard Tod Tldwvos, Etym. 
Magn. 696. 22 TWvOea kai IvOatos’ dvopa éoprijs ayouévns tS ’Awdd\dou. Harpocrat. gives 
a reference for Iv6aéa to Hyperides mpés Ameddaiov. In 1. 1 0 of e]op[rns is very insecure 
and the initial supplement a little short, otherwise the restoration suggested suits well 
enough, and in view of other correspondences with this Azecd. is not improbable. In l. 5, 
if the word before apparos was em, part of the 7 should be visible. In ]. 7 the « is blotted 
and seems to have been cancelled. The first letter of |. 8 was either « or x. 

9-13. Cf. Harpocrat. mpoorpémaov? Aioyims mept ris mpeoBeias xrr., Photius mpoorpdmatos* 
Saipwy tis én tov évayav (so too Bekker, Axecd. i, p. 296, and Etym. Magn. 700. 10), emei oi 
pera TO otabnvar dn TO Tpdmatov {oi} dvatpodvrés Tia TOY TOeLlwy mpdaTpoTor Kal evayeis eioiv. 
The reference in l. g is to Aesch, Fals. Leg. 158. In]. 11 a after ry is clear, so that 
évayav must be replaced by some synonym like ddurnpiov or dkabdprov. In 1]. 13 mpoorpomatoc 
seems preferable to the mpdéorporo: of Photius, which is perhaps an error. The verbal 
correspondence in 1. 12 with Photius makes it preferable to omit oi before dvaipodvres rather 
than to emend émei of to émecdy with Naber. 

14. Cf. Bekker, Anecd. i, p. 296 mepioraros’ of mepiBrerro, ef ois ay tis orain Bovddpevos 
Gcéo6a and the similar gloss in Etym. Magn. 665. 13. Harpocrat. s. v. refers to Isocrates 
mepi avrd. 269 with the explanation dyti rod mept ds KvKA@ toravrar of Oeapevor. 

15-16. Cf. Bekker, Azecd. i, p. 296, and Etym. Magn, 684. 8 mopetov rd didduevor rois 
mpeaBevtais bmp (wept Etym. Magn.) rod mopevOijvar cis tiv mpecBelav dSomep épddiov. The 
papyrus apparently had practically the same note, but the vestige of a letter or two at the 
end of the line is too slight to indicate what stood after epodioy. 

18. Cf. Harpocrat. HapBorddys* Anpoobévns ev tS mpds Nexdorparoy. UWapBwrada tHs 
’EpexOnidos Sjpos. Either Snyos rns Epex. or dnp. ray A@nvarwr will suitably fill the line. 

19. Cf. Harpocrat. Maaneis cai Taovidary . . . duafépovor S€ obroe (Sc. of Mataneis) rav 
Haondédy, &s “Iotpos €v ’Atdkt@ tmoonpaiver, pvnuovevovor b€ Kal TovTwr of pyropes, Somep Kal 
Acivapxos . . « Sjpos S€ €or ovtos Ths Aeovridos .. . 


170 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


20, maovicas occurs in Dem. De Cor. 287, but in this series of proper names, a mis- 
spelling of Iaioves is perhaps more likely than a derivative of Hao», The form Hatoow 
occurs in Hesych. s. v. Avanos. 

21. Cf. Harpocrat. Haddnveds* ‘Yrepeidns év ry tmép Xatpepidov amodoyia. TadAqvy Snpos 
ris ’Avrioyidos, 1d dé ék rémou émippnua Aclvapxos €v TH Kata Srepdvov WarAjmbev pyow, 6 de 
Onporns TadAnvevs. 

22. Cf. Harpocrat. Mepyaonder® "Ioatos €v T@ kata Oovtipov. Tepyacn drpos tis ’EpexOnidos* 
rov pévrot Snudrny SixGs NéyeoOai Ghaot, Mepyacéa re kai HepyaonGev. 

23. Teepateds* Xiyuqv ’AOnvnow is a gloss in Bekker, Axecd. i, p. 288. 

24. Cf. Harpocrat. Mepioidau* Anpoobévns ev 76 mpds Tlodvkhéa, dipds éore rips Oivnidos. 


Fr. 8. 1-4. These lines are evidently part of a note on pnropixy ypapy, beginning 
probably in the last line of the preceding column ([pnropixyn ypapy 4 kata pnto|) for which 
cf. e.g. Harpocrat., who after referring to Isaeus’ speech against Euclides says: ose 
pyropixn ypai Kareioba Kata pytopos ypaavrds tu i eimdvros i) mpdéavros wapdvopov ... taws de 
kai... Ore kata Siaddpovs vopous ai kata Tov pytépev ypadai eladyovra, ws ’Avripay . . . broan- 
paivet, Photius ‘Pyt. ypadn’ hy nyevi{ovro of pyropes* ov yap macas nywriforro tas Oikas TO mradavov 
of pyropes, GN’ éviast GAXot dé pyropixiy ypapyy eiva Aé€yovar Ty KaTa PHTopos yevouerny, ypavraytés 
tt i) eimdvros i) mpdéavros mapdvopov, Bekker, Anecd.i, p. 299 “Pyr. ypapyy cal pyroptxny ypayyduevos* 
iy of pyropes nywviCovto ypapdpevor pryropas ( \ elrovoi tt i) mpa£aor paddov. The papyrus 
was evidently close to Photius and Bekker, Azecd., but put the alternative explanations in 
the reverse order. 

5-8. This gloss, for the form of which cf. Fr. 4. 14-15, remains unidentified. The 
speech of Dinarchus kara Todvevkrov dwpodoxias is cited e.g. by Harpocrat. s.v. depev ypapy. 
It is identified with the xara Il. expuAdodopnbévros evderéis. 

g. Cf. Bekker, Anecd. i, p. 299 pamos’ 6 wavtodamés dpros, Photius pamos* piywata .. . 
ties O€ kal tov ravrodardy pédprov p&rov eipjxacw, Etym. Magn. 377. 30 S.V. éppwrifoper, pazos 
yap 6 motkiros kal Aemrds édpros (morxidos also Ael. Dionys. af. Eustath. 927, but this would not 
fill the lacuna so well), For ll. ro—11 cf. e. g. Harpocrat. s. v. émOérous éopras, Any. év TO Umép 
Xpvoinmov pds thy ® m.; the reference is to the C. Phorm. g. 

12. Cf. Bekker, Amecd. i, p. 299 purnp ri éorw’ 6 ipds. xuplws dS€ 7a Avia KtA., Photius 
puTnp* amas pev 6 inds, kupios dé nvia krA, The supplement printed hardly fills the lacuna, 
but there is not room for amAws pev: perhaps purnpes ot yuavres Was written. 


Fr. 4. 1-3. Cf. Bekker, Axecd.i, p. 300 oxewpadeia’ cxeipadeia eore Ta KuBeta, Aroe evel 
okeipagos tis €or dpyavoy KuBeuTikdy, . . . 7) OTe Ev TO THS TKetpddos "AOnvas iep@ of KvBevrai erarfov, 
e£o Ths médews dvr. Photius and Etym. Magn, 717. 27 have similar notes but omit @o... 
évrt. Harpocrat. citing Dinarchus, Jz Proxen. says oxpdapia edeyov ta KvBevtnpia, ered) 
duérpPov €v Skipw of KuBevovres, os Oedmoumos év th v’ txoonuaiver, The gloss in the papyrus 
seems to have lost in clearness owing to compression. 

4-6. Cf. Harpocrat. orparnyot . . . of kad’ éxacrov eravtdv xetporovotpevor otpatnyol U Fear, 
ws pabely eorw ek te Tav ‘Ymepeidou kat’ Avdrokdéous.. . The vestiges in the middle of 1. 4 are 
very scanty but so far as they go suit the letters suggested. 

7-13. Cf. Harpocrat. ovppopia’ . . . 6 yotv AnpooOerns év r@ mepi tay ovppopidy yor, mept 
TOV xiNiov Kai diaxogiov avdpdv Aéywr Tov TAovoLwTdTer, “ex TovT@Y ToiveY oipat deiv ToLRoaL 
Tuppopias Kk’, domep viv eici, odpata & éxdoryny exovoav”. ‘Yrepeidns dé ev To mpds TWodveverdy 
gyow “cio yap é€v tr ouppopia éxdory ce’ dvdpes” . . . cuppopirar dé ciow of Tis adtas abtois 
HETEXOVTES TUupopias, ws ev TS alto Ady@ “Yrepeidys Seixyvor, Bekker, Anecd. i, p. 300 ouppopia ti 
€or Ta ovvtdypata t&v Trovoiav Tov emitndelwv mpds tptnpapxias, lot dé xtdtor Svaxdcror. 
cuppopitns* onpaiver ( \. The wyepov ovppopias (Il. 11-13) is treated separately by 
Harpocrat. and defined as 6 zpoéyev TO TAovTE Kal did TodTO Tov GANwv ipyepovevew emetAnppEévos, 


1804. NEW CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS I7I 


ws Umopaiver ‘Yrepetdns év 7G kata Uodvevxrov. The financial responsibility described by the 
papyrus is apparently not elsewhere stated. At the end of 1]. 7 «5, which is clear, is an 
error for « (cf. e.g. Dem. De Symm. 17), perhaps arising from the ambiguity of an original 
evxoot e£ e€nxovra, where e£ should have been read as ¢é not é. The is very uncertain, 
but the scanty remains are sufficiently suitable. In], 11 map avrwy may be interpreted zap’ 
avrév, but more probably map is a mistake for imép, or imép by a common misspelling 
became ourep and then oz map. 

14. Cf. Bekker, Axecd. i, p. 300 cipBodrov' onpaiver pév ta onpeta, onpatver 8€ Kal ra 
ovpBdraia Kat ra ypappareia, eldixds dé 7d cipBodov Sydot ypappareidy Tt, 0 eAdpBave Trav Stkactav 
Exaotos cloudy eis rd Stxaornpiov, 6 ete mevdxvov. Photius, Etym. Magn., and Suidas give the 
second sentence in the form cvpBorov 6 éAdpBavov oi Sixacral eis 7d Sixacrnpiov elordvres, tra 
tovro Odvres ro SixacriKoy ekoui¢ovro. Harpocration agrees with the papyrus in referring to the 
seventh Phzlippic but is otherwise dissimilar. 


Fr. 5. 7|\vOos in |. 2 suggests that this may be part of a note on mhw6eiov, a word 
which occurs a little above Uvéaéds (cf. Frs. 142. i. 1-8 n.) in Bekker, Axecd. i, p. 295 
mrwbetov* +d mrAWOoupyeiov, dmov TIVO yivovrar; cf. Harpocrat. mivOetov’ 6 rémos ev & TrivOos 
mAatrerat* Avoias €y t@ xata AvoiGeov. If so, the fragment would probably belong to the 
upper part of Frs. 14 2. i. 


Fr. 6. 4. There is an appearance of a colon just in front of e of azye, but this may be 
due to a correction, e. g. perhaps the scribe began to write azn\(ée). 

5. At the end of this line the second hand has made an alteration, and it is not clear 
what was originally written or what was intended to stand. 


Fr. 7. That this fragment comes from the ends of lines is indicated both by 1. 6, where 
there is a narrow margin after the remains of the final letter, and in ]. 8 by the lengthening 
of the cross-bar of the supposed «, which might also be read as the dash used for filling 
a short line. , 

6. Probably pox or pos (pos ?). 


172 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


IIL” EXTANT: CLASSICAL“ AUTHORS: 


1805. SOPHOCLES, 7rachiniae. 
Fr.15 10X9-6 cm. Late second century. 


These scattered fragments from a roll of the 7rachinzae are in a medium- 
sized hand of the common sloping type, of which it is a fair specimen, though 
less regular than e.g. 1800. Some annotations in cursive point to a date in the 
latter part of the second century rather than the beginning of the third. Stops 
in all three positions occur, and accents, breathings, and marks of elision and 
quantity have been introduced not infrequently, some at any rate of these being 
no doubt subsequent additions, due probably to the corrector whose hand is to 
be distinguished here and there. 

Textually these fragments are, in the main, conservative. A few new 
readings occur, including one or two which are definite improvements, e. g. 
l, 1136, where a generally accepted correction is confirmed. For one of the 
unknown variants the authority of, probably, Aristophanes of Byzantium is 
cited. On the other hand, the papyrus apparently agrees with the MSS. in 
a passage requiring alteration on metrical grounds, and occasionally offers 
evidence which is inferior to theirs. In supplementing lacunae, Jebb’s text has 
been followed, of course with no implication that the papyrus necessarily agreed 
with it. 

Possibly further additions may eventually be made to the remains of 
this MS., the script of which is with difficulty distinguished from that of numerous 
other fragments which accompanied them. 


1h, ite 


[Opakwy ehixtos addoT avdpew Tu\n[@ 
[Bouxpavos ex de dacxiov yevecadjos 
[Kpouvor dveppatvovto Kpynvatov mo|rou 
15 [Tord eyo pynornpa mpordedeyp|evy 
(dvornvos ae KarOavecy emevxopi|qv [ 


1800,, SEXATANT, CLASSICAL“ AUTHORS 


[mpty rnode Koirns epurredacOnyjai more 
xpovw de ev voTepw pev acpevy] de plo 
o KAewos nAOe Znvos Adkpnlvns ze mais 


[ 
[ 

20 [os els aywva tode cupmecwov playns [ 
[exAveTat we Kal TpoTOy pev av Tlovely 


Fr, 2. 


37 [evjralvda dn pariora tapBynoac exo 
[e€ oly yap ¢€[k7a Ketvos Igirov Bray 
[nels plev ev Tpayiun 77d avaoraro 


Er". 


275 [0 Tov amavtov Zevs matnp Odv]ume- or: 
[wparov vw e€erepre|v: ovd nvecyertio 
[oAovvek avtov povvoy] avOpwrwv dolAw 
[exrewev ea yap eudavo[s] nuvvaro 
[Zevs trav ovveyvw vv] din xetplolupévm [| 

280 [vBpw yap ov aotepyouo.y ovde dlaipovels 
[kecvor 3 umepxAcovtes ek [y]Awoons KalKns 
[avrot pev Ardov mavres] elo okntopes 


[modus de SovAn racde 8 aozrelp eicopals 


lee, Ah 


[ppover viv ws n§ovta tovto| yap Ado[yjou 
290 [moAAov Kadws AEXOevTos yOto|rov KAvEy 
avacoa vuy co. Tepis eupay|ns Kupelt] 


[ 
[Tov pev mapovtav ta de mlemvoplevn Aoyw 


173 


174 


THE OXYRHYNCAHUS PAPYRI 
Fr. 5. 


301 [ae mpty pely noaly e€ ehevOepwy tows 
[avdpwy talviv de Sovdov toxovaw Prov 


[o Zev tpomate] plnmor erotdorme oe > 


Frs. 6-10. 
ayo|pa cuvet[nKovov 
Ae}pove taut[a 
ayo|pat vonoat [Se To emt Aletpwvos [abporcpa ? 

369 [rylv mada [dovvat] Kpudiov ws exole AEeXxos 
[ey]kAnpa [pexpov] atiav 6’ erolipacas 
[emtlotpare(ver marpidla tnv tav[tns ev 7 
[roy Evpuro[y rovd eure] Seorogiew Opovev 
[KTE jeer] 7 [avaxra matep|a tTnadle Kat mod 

365 [emelooe: Klar vuy ws opas nKet JSopous 

5 lines lost 


370 [decay & rovdie Tuyxavm pabov Tapa 
[kat Tavlra modAloe mpos pean Tpaxivioy 
[ayopa] ovvegn{kovjov woalutTws epot 
[wor egfjedeyxeuy [ec dle pn Acy[w gira 
[ovy nolouat- to 6 [opOlov e€e(tpnyx opws 

375 [otpoe TlaAava [rol mor eeule mpayparos 
[Tv evo Oedeypale m|npovniy vmoareyov 
[AaOpaliovy @ Sularnvos alp alywvupos 
[regulkev wonlep ovrayle[y diwpvuTo 
[n kapt|ja Aapmpla Kat Kat ovopa Kat duow 

380 [matpols pev ovoaw [yeveoty Evputov more 
[ToAn kalAetto: THs exewvios ovdapa 
[BrAacras] epover dnOev [ovdey toTopwr 
[oAowTo] py TL TavTEs OL Kakot Ta de 
[(AaOpac ols &oxele pln mpen[ovO avtw Kaka 

385 [Te xpn moely y[vatxes ols eyw Aoyous 


1805. EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 


[ros vuv mlal[povolw exmierAnypevn Kupw 
[mevbov porovca ralydpos ws tax av cadn 


IRM; GRE, 


532 [Tals atxpadrea|ros [matow ws em efodw 
[rnpos Ovpaijos nd[Oov ws vuas rAaOpa 
[Ta pev hpagolvoa y[epow atexvnoapny 

535 [Ta 6 ola macy|o [ovvKarouxtiovpevn 


Bass 12; 12: 


576 [rns Hpakreas wore plnriy efor 
[orepger yuvarka Ketlvos av[7t cov mdeov 


[rovr evvonoac w idja{e dopors yap ny 


l 
[ketvou Oavovros eyKe|kAnpuevov Karas 
580 [xiTwva Ttovd «Baya mlpooBadlove oca 
[(@v Kewvos ee Kat] memetplavtar tade 


Fr 04. 


602 omws gepni[s por Tovde Tavavpn memdAov 
dépnu ex[etv@ tavdpt THs E“ns XEpos 
didovs de tlovde Ppag omws pyders Bpotor 

605 Kelvou maploiev apgidvoerar xpot 
penlole ol erar viv pynte peyyos ndtov 


Pretg, Colt 


175 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRL 


t) 


Tos eras @ Tat Tov Tap avOpwrav] [[rapov avdpwmov) 
744 | f i [ p [[Ap(terodavas ?) ]] 


Iie, 16 


763 [kat mpwra] pev [detAaros ew ppeve 
a 
[Koopw Te] xallpwry Kat oTOAN KaTHVYXETO 


Breet §. Cobat 
[kloun de AlevKoy pvedov eEkpaiver pecov 


[k]p&ros diacmapevros [atparos @ omov 
8 
amas avevpnunoey oltwyn ews 


Tov mev vooovytos: Tolv de dtatempaypevov 
785 Kovdels eToAua Tavd|pos avTioy pode 

[ec]raro yap medovdle] kale peraporos 

[Bolov wav: aude [0 e]xz[vrovv merpat 

Aoxpwy opeot mpalvjes E[uBotas + axpat 

eme. 0 ametme mod\da pe[v Taras Pov 
790 pimTa@v eavtov: TrodAa 6 [otpwyry Bowr 

To Odvamdpevvov dexTpov [evdaToupeEvos 


gov THs Tadaivns. Kat Tov [Owwews yapov 
a Ll 
olov KaTaoTnoaito AvulavTny Biov 


767’ ek mpocedpov Aryvvos S{tactpopoy 

795 opOarpoyv apas «idé p’ ev [7OAXM OTpATH 
daxpupoovvra: Kat pe mplooBrAeas Kade 
@® mat mpooedrOe|’ un hvynls Tovpoy KaKkoy 


1805... ZATANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 
Piety. 
851 [woipa mpolpaive: dodrav 
kat peyalAay [arav 


[ 
[eppwyer] maya [daxpuymy Kexurar? 
[vooos ?| w Trom[ol olov avapo.wy 
[ 


ovr@ aya)kA€ Tov 


Jee, 1k 


ie 3 w@ yEepata kjavolmonbev eyes 
[BeBnxe Antlaverpla thy mavvctarny 
875 [odwy amacaly e€ ax[wntov todos 
[ov dn 108 ws Oalvorlca 
[wavT aknKkoas| 
[ 


reGynkev n Taldaiva 


PEL: 


[@ mat yevou pot rats eT|nTu[ pos yeyos 

1065 [kat pn To pnTpos ovolua mpei(aBevons mAeov 
[Gos pot xepow cay avjros e€ ofikov AaBov 
[es xelpa thy Texovoaly ws cldw [cada 
[ee Tovpoy adyes paddAoly n Kelivns oper 
[A@Bynrov eos ev dikn] Kaxkoulpevov 

1070 [18 @ Texvov ToApnooy olk]ret|pov TE pE 
[roAAotow olKTpov oatils wore [mrapHevos 
[BeBpvya kAawwyv Kat 70d ov|d av [eis mote 


[rovd avdpa dain mpocO i\dcuv dedpaxora 


Frs. 20, 21. 


[mpos Tov Tepas To dia Kakwly eOeon{icas 
N 


177 


178 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


[avty mpos avTns ovdelvos mpos exTo[7ou 

[oruor mpivy ws xpnv of el€ euns Oaveuv yxepos 

[kav cov otpapen Ovpos Peles ro Tay pablus 
1135 [devov Aoyou Karnp£als: ere 0 n voeus 

[amav To xpyne neapTe| XpnoTa poulevy 

[xpnoT @ kKakioTe mraTep|a cov KTElvacla dpa 

[orepynua yap Sokovoa mlpocBadrev cel Oev 

[arnpmrdax ws mpoce|de tovs evdlov yapmous 
1140 [ka 71s TogouTos dlapuakeus Tpaywilov 


€ 
Neooos madat Kevjrauplols [. £erencé viv 


[ 

[Totwde piATpw Tov gov eEkpunvat TroGor] 

[tov tov dvatnvos otxoua TalAas. 

[oAwWA oAwAG Heyyos ouKET Elo7TL pole 
1145 [oupor dpovw bn cvpdopas] wv’ ecralpev 

[6 w rexvoy matnp yap ov|kéir eort cot 
[ 


KaAel TO Tay pol oTeppa clwy [opatnovey 


Fr. 22. 


[Taxelav w mat mpoobes ws lp Eulrecey 

[c7apaypov n Tw otaTpov els mdpaly ue Ons 
1255 [ay eykoveit alpecbe mravda Tor kak[@v 

[avtn TehevTn Tovde Tavdpos| varalrn 

[ 


adA ovdev eEipyer got TEArELoVTO]ar Tal[de 


Fr.@9, 


[tT tyvd arny viexov]re 
1275 [Aetmou pnde ov] mapOey ex oikov 


[MeyaAous pev idoluca [veouvs BOavarous 


1805. EXTANT CLASSICAL. AUTHORS 179 


Fr. 24. 
¥ od[oxAcovs 
[Tay trial] 


12. Unfortunately it is not clear whether the papyrus agreed with the MSS, in having 
rura(t) Bovuxpavos, OF supported Strabo’s kre Bovmpepos, which is generally preferred. On 
the whole rv|[o seems a more satisfactory reading than v[ree. 

17. Bergk wished to reject this line. : 

275+ Apparently OdAvpmey was originally written, but a dot between « and » and 
a vestige of ink above the line point to the insertion of -os as an alternative. The genitive 
would spoil the line. 

278. nuvvaro: so L &c. 3 mudvvero B. 

281. x of elk is directly above the first « of ect in 1. 282, so that with umepyAuovtes 
(L first hand and lemma of Schol.) the number of letters in the respective lacunae coincides. 
But vmepxAdovres (L corr. 1 A &c.) cannot be excluded. 

292. Since the initial lacuna is of the same length as in the three preceding lines, 
it is likely enough that the papyrus agreed with LA in reading rov de. 


Frs. 6-10. The cursive note at the top of this column refers to 1. 372, and evidently 
explains the apparent inconsistency of dyopa here with év Bovepet Nepwdu in 1. 188, the 
inconsistency vanishing if dyopa is taken in the sense of assembly or gathering; cf. Schol. 
ayopa* afpoicpart, The reading suggested in the latter part of the third line is, however, 
highly doubtful, the ». being rather cramped and the s very insecure. Awy or tov is 
possible. ‘ 

360. exole: so edd. with A; yn (from ye) L. 

362-4. These verses have been much suspected, some critics bracketing ll. 362-3, 
others 1. 362 riv ravrns—l. 364 rarépa. 

364. The superfluous » (due to the preceding infin. no doubt) has been crossed through, 
perhaps by a later hand. 

370. a: 6 MSS., which is required by the preceding 70 zap, 

372. Cf. n. on Frs. 6-10 above. 

379. Whether the papyrus had kapra or cat ta cannot be determined. 

534. So far as considerations of space are concerned, there is nothing to choose between 
gpagovea (L) and dpacovea (A). 

570. p\yrw: Suits the remains, which are inconsistent with ov. 

579. eyke|kAnimelvov: a better spelling than that of L (-Aeu-) or A (-«devou-), and already 
restored by Dindorf. The « was probably added by a corrector, but the colour of the ink 
is indistinguishable. 

602. Opposite this line on the edge of the papyrus, at a distance of 6 cm., are the tips 
of two horizontal strokes, one 3 cm. above the other. They may either come from 
a marginal note referring to the previous column, or perhaps be the remains of a 
stichometrical figure, i.e. ¢ standing for 600; such figures are not always quite accurately 
placed. 

744. mapov, Which was inadvertently written originally, has been amended to paéev by 
the second hand, which also inserted in the margin the (unknown) v. 1. avéperov, attributing 
it to Ap( ), who is more probably Aristophanes than Aristarchus ; cf. 1174. vi. 5, where 
Ap( _) seems to be used side by side with Apw( ) as an abbreviation of ‘Apioropduns. 
Subsequently the pen was drawn through this marginal note and also, rather unaccountably, 

N 2 


® 


180 THE -OXVYRHYNCHUS, PAPI 


through the final word of the line. Possibly av@pomav was similarly cancelled and avéperov 
pabov rewritten above. oth 

764. Why awas written again above the line is not evident, the original letter being 
sufficiently well formed. 

781. [xloun: xdpns MSS., a reading retained by Jebb but often suspected. képons, 
kdyyxns, kon, BoA have been conjectured in its place. xéyy is unacceptable, but the papyrus 
reading might be used as an argument in favour of a dative like Hense’s kory. 

783. avevpnunoev: this reading had been restored by Brunck from Hesych. s. v. 
dvevpynpnoes and is also in Schol. Eurip. Tro. 573. dvev povis ev L, aveuparncey OF avepavnoey 
other MSS. 

788. Jebb following Porson accepts 7’ after Avxpav from Diog. Laert. x. 137, where 
ll. 787-8 are quoted with several other variations from the MSS. reading, which the papyrus 
supports. 

790. pimrav: cf. 1. 7803 pimrov MSS. 

793. The alternative reading oy implies the corresponding v.]. Avyavrw later in the 
verse ; oiov ... Avuavrny only MSS. 

796. Saxpupoovvra: analogous spellings are not infrequent in the papyri. 

852-4. Unfortunately the papyrus brings no light here. In 1. 854 the MSS. reading 
ovmw ayakhevrov suits the space. What stood in the lacuna at the beginning of |. 853 is more 
doubtful. xexurar vogos, if that was read, must have been divided between Il. 852-3, and 
kexutac would fill the space better than voons, but there is no evidence for that order. 

1071, wore: L mistakenly has darts. 

1134. to is preceded by something that looks like o surmounted by a rather thick dot; 
perhaps es was inadvertently written and the superfluous s subsequently cancelled; or the 
dot might be explained asa high stop after @vpo]s, « being omitted. 

1135. A spot of ink on the edge of a hole above 7 may represent a rough breathing or 
circumflex accent, but since there are other ink-marks above vo, they are all best regarded 
as accidental. 

1136. poplevn confirms the correction of Heath, which according to Subkoff was the 
reading of L?; propéern LA &c. 

1138. The stop after w]pooBarew shows that oééev was constructed with dazjyumdake 
instead of with orépynpa. 

1141. Some other letter than ¢ was originally written before €; that the alteration was 
made by the first hand is possible, but uncertain. 

1254. mdpa[v: the accent is a probable indication that peéys was regarded as one word, 
as in L, since otherwise an acute on the a would be the normal accent. It is however 
possible that both accents were inserted, that on the a being lost. 


| 


Fr. 24. It is by no means certain that this small fragment of a title belongs to 1805. 


1806. THEOCRITUS, /a@yll xxii. 


Height 29 cm. Late first century. Plate IV 
(Col. iv). 
Remains of four consecutive columns, of which the first two are represented 
by tiny scraps, with a small unplaced fragment. This was a handsome MS., the 
_ tall columns being carefully written in rather large uncials, round and upright, of 
an ornamental type exemplified in several Homeric papyri; cf. also e. g. 844 and 


I80G. EXTANT “CEASSICAE AUTHORS 181 


1375. The cross-bar of « and 6 is placed rather high, as in P. Brit. Mus. 271 
(cf. Kenyon, Palaecography, Plate 15). On the whole a date rather before than 
after the close of the first century seems appropriate. One stop occurs in the 
middle position (1. 68), and there is also a doubtful rough breathing in the same 
line, and a circumflex accent in the unidentified fragment. A few corrections are 
from a second hand. An unusual feature in this roll is that the upper and 
lower margins are strongly tinged on the recto with yellow, probably due to 
cedar oil, which was used as a preservative against insects and gave a yellow 
time (Vitcov. Weg. 19)-Ovid, J 77s7.:1ll. 1.13). 

The Hymn to the Dioscuri is not well represented in the MSS. of Theo- 
critus, and fresh evidence of so early a date is welcome. In 1. 40 an obvious 
correction of Stephanus is confirmed. But the papyrus, in spite of its early date, 
is less enlightening than 1618; it solves no crux, and its distinguishing feature 
is the presence of several unknown variants of rather neutral character, |. 45 
TeOpavpéevos for reddAacpévos, 1. 60 arédOors for ikdvors, 1. 77 Kdyxov for KdyAov; 
cf. 694. 34, where ogw zalpéxeiro replaces ydp ogiw é€xerro. The text shows 
a mixture of dialects similar to that found in the MSS., e.g. amévOos (so 
originally ; dméA@ous the corrector) and av«ras side by side with Mayvjoons 
ams vnés. 

In the transcript below, the supplements follow the edition of Wilamowitz 
in the absence of any indication that the papyrus read otherwise ; the collation 


appended is derived from the same source, supplemented by the edition of 
Ahrens. 


Col: t: 
8 [ynov @ at duvovTa Kat ovpavoy etolaniolyTa 
Cola 


38 [vdate wemdAnOuiav ak|nplatw ae d vmevepbev 


[AuAAae KpuoTadrdrw 7]8 aplyvpe wdaddovTo 


Col. iii. 
40 [ex BvOov] vinrali] de meduxecav ayxobe mevkat 
[Aevkat ze] mAa[ralyfole. kat alkpokopot kumapiocot 


[avOea + evwdn Aaciats Pidrja epya peAlooals 
[oag eapos Anyovtos emPlpver av Aetpova 


182 


45 


50 


60 


65 


THE OXYRAYNCHUS FARIA 


a 
[eva 8 avyp vmepomdos €lynpevos evdlacKkev 


[Secvos we okAnpnot TelOpavpevos ovata muypats 
[ornbea 8 expaipwro meAlwpia Kat mAaTY volToY 
[capke otdnpernt apupyndato|s oa Kodhocaos 

[ev de pues orepeotot Bpaxtolowy akpov vm wpoy | 
[erracav nuTe meTpol odoLTpO|xoL oVTTE KvALy del wv 
[xeluappovs morapos peyahals mreplecere dwlales 
[avTap vimep vwToLo Kal avxeEvos| NnwpetTo 

[axpov Sepua Aeovros apnupe|vov ex Todea|vav 
[rov mporepos mpoceetev acOdlopopos ITodvdlevkns 
[ 
[ 


[Oapoer pnt adtxovs pnt €& adixwy plabe delvocew 
[ 


xaipe Ee ors eat Twes Bpota wly ode xolpos 


Xap mas oTe T avdpas opw Tous pln Tp oToT\a 


Oapoew KouvK ek gev pe OldacKkerOlar rod [eorKev 
[a@yplos € mpos mavTa madtyKoTols nid umEepom7ns 
[ 


Towocd oLov opas THs ons ye pev] ovK e{miBave 


[eAOors Kar ~eriwy xe Tvxov madi] oxad arel[y ||Oas 


[unte ov pe €evife Ta 6 €& Emev ovk] Ev ETOLLw 
[Sarovt ovd av tovde metv vdatols avye dons 

: oO 
[yywoeat ec cev diryos avetmleva yee TEpoE: 


[apyvpos n Tis o pucOos epets w Klev oe TiOoLper 
[els eve YXElpas aeLpoy evayvTLos avdpl| KaTaoTas 
[muypaxos n Kat tooo. Oevwy oKedrjos oumpata 6 opboat 
[mug dtatewapevos oderepns pn peldeo texvns 

[Tis yap oTw yxElpas Kat emous cuvepetc|@ {i\uavTas. 


eyyus opas ou yuvvis ewy(?) KekAnoe]O o muKTasS 


Golhiv= Plate IV. 


7o 4 Kal aleOlAov eroliyov eb w Onpiooped apdo 


gos pev eyw ov 6 [enos KEeKAnoEat ar KE KpaTnow 
opvidev oiwik[oAopwy rovoide Kudotpor 


eT ovy opyiOea|oww EoLKoTES E:TE AEOVTL 


1300 A TANT “CLASSICAL AUTHORS 183 


€ 
yivoued ovk adrdrw [Ke paxeroaimerO ex acbrw 


75 1 p Apvkos xat KoxA[ov €Awy puKNnoato KotAny 


ol[v]] de Ooms cuvayepb[ev uo ckiepas mraTavicrous 
Kovxov gdvonber[ros aac BeBpuxes Kopowvtes 
ws 8 avTws npwas taly exadecoato mavTas 
Mayvnoons amo vos [umeipoxos ev da: Kaotwp 

80 ot 6 em ovv o7retpato[iy exaptvvavto Boeas 


XElpas Kal es, yula [pwakpovs edLEav tmavras 


[es peooo|py eee govoy addAnAoict mveovTes 
[evOa modv(s)] ogeor polxOos emeryopevoiowy etvyOn 
[ommotepos| kata [vara AaBor haos yeAtoL10 


Unidentified Fragment. 


Jopzul 


lod a 
|kpe « | 
}-[ 


8. The fact that this small fragment is from the bottom of a column makes its 
identification with 1. 8 probable; Col. ii will then have been one line longer than 
Col. iii. 

39. That the papyrus had Ruhnken’s Aad in place of the ada of the MSS. is of 
course quite uncertain, but there would apparently be plenty cf room for it. 

40. mepuxeoay: SO Stephanus; mepixacw MTr. 

41. mAaravot te is required, but cannot be read. The supposed « (which is not o) is 
followed by another vertical stroke, after which there is a blank space of about two letters’ 
width. It looks as if the scribe had begun to write xa: immediately after mAaravoe and then 
changed his mind and left a space for the missing syllable. The loss of re may have been 
caused by a misunderstanding of Aedxa:, which was taken for Aevxai. 

43. Aeyova: ejpavas MSS. 

45- Te|Opavpevos : rebNacpevos (ebay. M) MSS. 

49. xvdwde[ov: xudivdov MSS. 

60. amedOos (H? from azevOois) : ixavors MSS. 

62. domms, as originally written, is correct. 

63. «i cov... tepoee MSS, ; the occurrence of repoet with v. 1. -cor at the end of the line 
points to «4 gov OF ev preceding. evTE OE... TEpont Wilamowitz. 


184 THE OA£VRAYNCAHOS, PARI 


64. € Of moev was converted from a vertical stroke. 

66. Oevov . . . opbor: Oday . . . dpOds M, dévov . . .-dp6a Tr. opOor for dp6és is no 
improvement, but is consistent with devwr, which also suits the space better than a shorter 
reading, the lacuna being of the same length as in the next four lines. Oéva okédos ; 
opba WM. 

68. There is something above the line, though whether it was intended for a rough 
breathing is rather doubtful. : 

69. It is unfortunate that this line is not better preserved, though o wukras, which 
Wilamowitz obelizes, is at any rate something. od od pe duds Tr., od yivs (yivs M) 
edv MD, od yivus éxdv Meineke, od yivms duds Haupt. The spelling mveras is that of D 
(a corr.). 

70. A short oblique dash in front of this verse has no evident significance. Cf. 
694. 21. 

77. Kovxov: kdxdov MSS. 

82. ovvayov is the spelling of the MSS., as originally written here. Whether the 
termination is rightly read as -yo[v is not clear; the penultimate letter looks more like +r 
than y, but the writer is apt to make the horizontal stroke project to the left, and this may 
be an extreme instance; moreover there is a suggestion of « in the remains of the supposed 
o. &uvare{ would however be meaningless. 

83. Consistency with the ordinary reading seems only to be obtained by the 
supposition of an original lipography of s, which may of course have been supplied 
subsequently. 


Unidentified fragment. This small piece is apparently in the same hand as the other 
fragments, though there is no instance in them of an accent (I. 2). 


1807. ARATUS, Atoonpeta. 
17*3 X 18-6 cm. Second century. 


This fragment contains the lower part of a column, preceded by a broad 
margin in which some cursive notes, both textual and explanatory, referring to 
the preceding column are entered. The notes on Il. 895 and gor are in smaller 
and more lightly formed lettering than the v. 1. on 1. 897, but whether they really 
proceeded from a different writer the evidence is hardly sufficient to determine. 
The text of the Aratus is well written in a rather large hand, round and upright, 
somewhat similar to that of B. Berl. 6845 (Schubart, Pag. Gr., Plate 19, c), though 
less heavy ; it may be assigned with probability, like the Berlin papyrus, to the 
first half of the second century. Paragraphi were employed, and there are two 
instances of a high stop, inserted well above the line. The latter, and the 
occasional accents, are unlikely to be original and are due perhaps to the 
corrector, who may also be the author of the marginalia. 

So far as it goes the papyrus shows a good text, which is in substantial 
agreement with the Marcianus(M), the oldest and best of the manuscripts. Readings 
found in later MSS. have, however, twice been subsequently incorporated, in one 


1807 \EATANE CLASSICAL AUTHORS 185 


place as a marginal variant (1. 897), in another asa correction (I. 930). A de- 
parture from accepted tradition in |. 927 is supported by Joh. Philoponus and 
also by another early Aratus papyrus at Berlin (Berl. Klassikertexte, v. 1. iii. 1) 
in which a few letters from the last 14 lines of Col. ii are preserved. The 
papyrus reading is condemned very positively by the Berlin editors, but the 
coincidence of ancient testimony is worth notice ; it is of course possible that the 
alternative lection was given in 1807 as av. l. 
For the accompanying collation the edition of E. Maass has been utilized. 


Cole i: 
895 1 pa}rvns 
} 
897 vo|ta 8 em«ecArrar 
j 
| 
j 
J 
gor ] eyyus aAAnAwv daiv[o |y[ rat | 
| | 
| 
Colait. 


[eE ados] eplyntar dovne mepioAda AeANK@S 
915 [Kekwupelvou Ke] Oadraol[cay vaep hopeoit avepoto 
Kal more k[at Ke\rpot omo[r evdior moTE(wyvTat 
avTia pedAovTjoy aveulwy eAnda epovTat 


moddake O [aypiadles vnooale n evadsdivae 


oO 
avduiat yepolara T\wvacal] w||y7at TT|€pvyecotv 
920  vedeAn opelos] pnkuvetar ev Koplupnow 
non Kat wapmot AevKns yrpecov ax[avOns 


s 
on eyevovt avenov kewpnl|m]| ados olwmote modXou 
akpov emtmAw@wor Ta pev tapos ad[Aa 6 omiccw 
kat Ocpeos Bpovrat Te Kat aotpamac [e[Gev (€)worv 


925 evOev emepxoule|volo meptoKomelely avEepoto 


186 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Kat Ola vUKTa pedalvay OT aOTE[pES aLTTWOL 
tappea* Tor & omBev pupot emt|AcvKaivovTat 
dedexOat KeLvors avTnv odov [pxopevolo 


mvevpatos: iv de Kev addot Evay|Tloy alcowov 


5’ 
930 adAcu|s]] €€ adAwy pepewy ToTE din mepudago 
TAVTOLOY AVELOY Ol T AKpLTOL ELoL pahioTa 

axpita O¢ mveovow em avdpalor TeKunpacbat 


avTap or e€ evpolo Kal €K voTov [aoTpamTnoLY 


895. Perhaps rns palreys was added in explanation of eyyis, or the word may be part 
of a longer note on a previous line; cf, Schol. 892 «loi 5é€ Kai map’ éxdtepa rhs parvns dvo 
dotépes, kta. But e.g. Javns or Jeons is also possible. 

897. The marginal v. 1. vojra 8 emixexdurar, is the reading of A and Maass (cf. 1. 486) ; 
presumably emepyerac stood in the text, as in CM, 

go1. A paraphrase of ddAndov .. . ivdaddovrat. Cf. Schol. .. . 6 8€ vots, éav, pyciy, of pev 
dorépes eyyis GANov Haivovrar, apavns dé) paryy, THKadTa Bpaxdy Xetudva tmpooddka . . 

Qt5. [klewope|vov : KLVOUM, INC; 

g2t. |. manna. 

923. emumdowor: so Maass with several later MSS. (cf. Homer « 284); -éoo. AM, 
-€l@ou (Gy 

924. re: om. C. 

927. ro 5: so ACM and (M) Schol.; rots & Philoponus, zz Arzstot. Meteor., p. 100 
(ll. 926-31), rots Maass. 

omley : OmitGev A Philop. 

emt Nevkawortat : so P. Berl. 7503-4 and Philop. todevaivovrat (or -wvrat) MSS., Maass 
(cf. Homer E 502). 

928. xeiuns A. 

929. jv: so CM (jv): ei Maass with A Philop. 

xev: SO CM Philop., Maass; «a A. 

930. addois, as Originally written here, is read by Maass with C &c., and Avienus ; 
adhor 6’, the corrector’s reading, is that of AM and Schol. 


1808. PLATO, Republic viii. 


Width of column 4:5—5 cm. Late second century. 
Plate IV (Cols. i-iii). 


Remains of the upper parts of five narrow columns which are successive but 
for the loss of one column between the third and fourth; the original length of 
the columns was approximately double the amount preserved. The text is well 
written in good-sized uncials of the sloping oval type, in which the smallness of 
¢, 8,0, o is in marked contrast to the breadth of the square letters , yw, v, 7; their 


ISOS eee ANT SCLASSIG“E AULHORS 187 


date is more probably second century than third. Single points in the high and 
middle position are used as stops, as well as a colon, which serves both for 
punctuation (iv. 5) and to mark a change of speaker, in combination with 
paragraphi (v. 13); a short blank space is sometimes employed instead for 
the same purposes (iii. 10, v. 14). One instance occurs of a rough breathing, due 
very likely to the corrector whose hand is in evidence here and there and who 
may also have been the author of at any rate most of the marginalia, which are 
the interesting feature of this papyrus. Cols. i-ii covered the famous passage 
546 b-c describing the Platonic Number, and the margins contain a quantity of 
explanatory annotations, for the most part well preserved, but rendered 
difficult by the frequent use of tachygraphic symbols, the interpretation of which 
is not always clear. The writer is strangely inconsistent and seems sometimes to 
have dropped into short-hand almost unawares, e. g. in Col. i, marg. 8 it is not 
easy to see what was gained by atachygraphic y in t\ornow. In the existing 
scarcity of material for the study of early Greek tachygraphy this well-dated 
specimen, exiguous though it is, has a value. The two columns have been 
printed, so far as exigencies of type permit, as they stand, and a reconstruction 
is attempted in the commentary; the exact forms of the symbols can be better 
followed in the accompanying facsimile (Plate IV). With regard to the matter 
of the notes, to the elucidation of which Prof. A. E. Taylor has kindly contributed, 
there is a noteworthy coincidence with Dercylides, the earliest writer whose view 
about the numbers reached is given by Proclus in his commentary on the 
Republic; see Col. ii, marg. 12-13, n. The annotator’s interpretation of the 
mathematics would therefore appear to be based, directly or indirectly, upon 
Dercylides, and thus gains considerably in interest; cf. Col. i, marg. g-Io, n., 
where a further small point of contact with of rept AepxvdAtdnv is observed. 

In its testimony for the text of Plato the papyrus is undistinguished ; some 
inaccuracies have been corrected by the second hand, which has introduced 


a novel variant in Col. ii. 8. 


Colsin £elate IN Colaite inte iV: 
Wott ion 3% J sll I 
JnBe[.]. [...JoAqrec# po[vabd«? 2 


]-.(J)- [LJ]. exe tetpayov? apibpos[ 3 
|. € ov To oxnparc ~) Mevove Je (me 


to SimAactov ato S'pe™ y* ae 5 
yev|yn 540 b [enkn pely Tne 546 c 
[covor matdals mplounkn] dle 


[more ov deov elo exaz[ov pely apt 


10 [mpwrwr avEnoecs 


188 


L 


5 [yevynr@e rept 


[Ovvapevar Te Kau | 


[ 
[ 
[ 
[ 


[odos nv apiOuos ia 
[weptrapBaver 
[reAetos avOpw 


[rerwe O€ ev wt 


THE. OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


[re Oe Cera pelv 


| Koop .[.. | 
lp’ ava en[.|v a 


Wb 


G0. 

| HpakAeut ety p 

| teAqX o7' €' | 

jo kt tp o 8 wp 
| ott o’ 9 mAavyTas 
Jot/ow 

| Suvapev4 4 vUmo 
J} Tevovcas 


An 


H 
ow ont 


4 add\4 tAcvp4 11 


duvacrevopeval: — opeqv \ Baow 12 
TPES amoatacets| he op° y amoota 13 
oes €XOvGL 9 Ov 14 
TeTTapas de oplovs § «-oves 7° 15 
[o} 16 
15 [AaBovcat opoto °F Sl al 2 
Coli. ePlates) V.< 


[Ale [pvdAakes ov 


Tes map €daTTov 


546d 


tov defovtos nyn 


capevoll Ta jou 


5 olKns dlevTEpoy 


|e) 


5 


de Ta yuluvaore 


Kns ofev [apou 


Ll 
corepoll v]| u[puv ‘ye 
vnoov[Tat ol vE 


ol ex [de TovTwy ap 

Golmivez 
mover] ¢]} Tas pu 
Xas emt THY ape 


T 


Xnv Kat THY ap 
KaTa 
Xalav amoora 


ow nyernv: Bu 


10 


Oav a{7ro dla py? apie o tAev 


peTpav [pn|r@v pay ex” 
Tepmrad|os| deo 


Aeur® pova 
pevey [evo|s EKA § ~ mdeup! FH 


ou appn” o vou 


ae Tlov eo 
OT@V pent ] 78.93 Kl y! pe? 
de dvewy [exalrov “Zo (* —> y” 


Tpt |ados° 
de kuBolv | gvp 
tas] de oulrjos 6 ape 
Ouos ylelwperpe 
Ll 
KOS ToVoUTOU KU 


plos [apevovav 


TE K[al yxElpovav 


xov[tes ov mavu 
pualaktkoe Ka 
Tact|noovTat 


mpos to dokima 


1x ¢ewv [ra Haiodou 


Te Kalt Tap vpiv 
yevn [xpvoovy Te 
Kat [apyupouvy Kat 


xar[Kouy Kar otdn 


Col. v. 
vu pev oluy: pe 
raBnoerale pev 
dn ovtws [wera 


Baca de mas [oe 


5 knoe n parle 


pov ott Ta plev 


1808. EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 189 


agopevay de ppnoetae 7 nV 


KQL QVTITELVOY TpoTepav moXL P 
Tov adAndAols Eis Tetav Ta de (nv 547d 
fLecov wpodroyn 10 oAtyapxtavy [a 
IO gay’ ynv pev T €V petal ovta 
Kat oiKlias Kata to Oe Tt [kat aurns 
[ple e€ex [edcjov: ov [ 


veluavous tor 
e TOS edn] ¢]} ovKo| vy 


Bar é 
OSES EN eae sate Terme ey eae Tee 


[mrptly dudaz[ro 


15 [wevolus vm [av 


Col. i, marg. 1. Perhaps cooper, the word in any case being explanatory of Geax 
yevenrwt, The two following lines, at the beginnings of which, to judge from the notes 
below, two or three letters may be lost, are obscure. p’, if right, should = pév or -pev, and 
the next word may be a form of avrdés, perhaps aitéy: tachygraphic +r becomes a vertical 
stroke, and \ = ov, and the combination of these might produce something like the symbol 
in the text, though different from that e.g. in Wessely, Lv” System der altgr. Tachygraphie, 
Plate IL. 9. 5. Further on, » is surmounted by.a small semicircle (perhaps incomplete), 
which may represent o or @. 

4. The collocation of figures after ery is peculiar. If ; = pupids, since the @ is written 
above and connected with @ by enclosing dots, it would seem natural to suppose that the 
number meant is 1,800 x 10,000, On the other hand a ought to mean 1, not 1,000, and 
seeing that, as Prof. Taylor observes, the value 10,800 is assigned by some writers to the 
‘great year’ of Heraclitus (cf. Censorinus 18. 11), there is a probability that # should have 
been written. 

5-8. These four lines, which appear to be in a different hand from that of the rest of 
the marginalia, are an explanation of réAevos dpvOuds, but are not easy to interpret. Perhaps 
réd(ev)(os) ér(t) ev) [adr |@ ka(ra) rp(omnv) 6 O(ed)s dpi(kev) dre o(tv)r(avras) mravnras [droK(a)i- 
atnow May approximate to the sense, though there are several points here which are 
unsatisfactory. At the end of |. 5 a short vertical stroke, which might be read as ., remains 
unaccounted for. Can ¢(»){avr]6 be meant? But the order is not in favour of this. In 
1. 7 o’ is a recognized abbreviation of ovv, and o(vv)r(avras) would be unobjectionable but 
for the occurrence in |. 14 of a similar curved symbol which remains unexplained. In]. 8 
droxabiornow is the compound expected, but this will presuppose considerable irregularity 
at the beginnings of the lines. Taylor suggests that or’ «’ may stand for 6 r(édeos) 
é(mavrés), followed by e(v) 6: such drastic abbreviation, however, seems hardly possible, 
especially as the word ¢mavrds does not actually occur in the text. 

g-10. duvaper(as) (ras) vrorewovoas?: a similar sign represents as in Wessely, of. c7?. 
Plates I. 2. ii. 2, Il. 10. 1. That the same symbol should stand for both -as and ras is 
not a serious objection, since there are analogies for this in tachygraphy, and the alternative 
Suvdper(ar) (ai) not only necessitates the alteration of vmorewoucas but also involves a similar 
incongruity in ll. 11-12, where the same sign occurs in conjunction with accusatives. Why, 
however, that case was used in these two places remains obscure. For the substance of the 


190 THE OXVYRAYNCHOUS) PAP RI 


note cf. Alex. Aphrod. Zz Arist. Met. A 8. 9904 23 of the Pythagorean triangle éet roivuy 
4 broretvovoa toov Svvara duporepas dua, dud todro 7 pev Suvauévn Kadetrai, ai de duvacrevdpevat, 
and Dercylides ap. Proclus, Jn Remp. ii, p. 25 (Kroll) rav pév meptexovoay tov mparoy év 
ovupavia Adyov exoveay (i. €. 4:3), THs & trorewovans f (sic: exspectas dimddovov, Kroll; but 
what is expected is surely toov) duvapeévns apooiv. 

*11-12. (ras) dAA(as) wAevp(ds), referring to duvacrevdépeva ; cf. the passage from Alex. 

Aphrod. quoted in the preceding note. In the next line the ddAa wAevpai are more closely 
defined as the 6p67 and the Bdows, the perpendicular and the base*of the triangle. For the 
symbol interpreted as as or ras cf. n. on Il. g-10 above. The sign \ ordinarily means eivac, 
and also represents ov, but these would be out of place here, where «ad is desirable. Cf. ii, 
marg. 4. : ¥. 
13-16. 8 dpo(c) ¥ dmoordces exovor . . . 8 K(el)oves 7d épelo(v)| éenepép(ovor?), For the 
high dot at the end of the first word of the note cf. Col. ii, marg. 8, where a similar mark 
occurs above Aein(e). Possibly there was a corresponding mark in the text. The latter 
part of the note is obscure. In]. 14 the symbol before ov is like that in ]. 7 above, which 
may represent 7. oy seems to be a termination rather than the relative, which would lack 
an antecedent, and also a governing verb, if 76 épio(v)] is the object of emipéep(ovar). With 
regard to this verb, the plural termination is demanded by xioves, and the symbol at the 
end has a smaller and more rounded top than that standing for e«. The introduction of 
kioves, AS A Synonym apparently of dpa, is hardly helpful. 


Col. ii. 3. exar[ov : so A?M Proclus; ékaorov AFD. 

7. The v. 1. exaorov superscribed by a second hand is unrecorded. 

g. dvev: so AD; dvoiy with others Burnet. 

1. o after ov[rlos has been cancelled by a dot placed above ; oéros dpiéuds MSS. 

13. v, which was originally written in place of +, was presumably cancelled, but only 
the top is preserved ; the correction may be by the original hand or the corrector. ; 


Col. ii, marg. 1-5. This mutilated note refers to ll. 4-8 of the text, the value of 
apOpav ard Svaperpov pytav meumddos being explained by the aid of diagrams. The ‘rational 
diameter of 5’ means the rational number nearest to the diameter of a square, the side 


of which is g. This diameter is 50 (Lucid i. 47), to which the nearest rational number 
is 7. The number 48 in ll. r and g marg. is of course arrived at by subtracting 1 
(Seopever evds ll. 6-1, Aeim(er) povdds Marg. 8) from the square of 7 (apOudv ad dtapérpav 
ll. 3-4). In marg. 2 perhaps spoyix|y d¢ should be restored, and r]p before A()reo6(ar) : 
for polyid. cf, marg. 8. In marg. 4 something like os ev 7@ Mévor seems required, and the 
symbol before Mev, which recurs in marg. 12-13, no doubt represents 74 ; cf. e. g. Wessely, 
op. cut, Plate II. 7, 2, where the sign for rw is analogous, though the straight stroke is 
diagonal instead of being horizontal. Whether the preceding curved sign, which resembles 
a sigma (cf. ii, marg. 10), could represent év is doubtful; at any rate the previous group is 
not in the least like the tachygraphic symbol for s. The passage of the Jeno referred to 
is 85 b amo ris Suaperpou . . . yiyvowr’ dv 7d SimAdowov xwpiov. In]. 5 1. ard 8(ta)uér(pov) yi(vera). 
Of the following diagram only a small part is preserved, and its nature is not clear: there 
seems to have been more than a square with a diagonal. ; 

6-7. It would be natural to expand this note pyr(os) dpu(ds) 6 mevpav éxo(v), but 
as this is an obviously incorrect definition of a finite number, Taylor suggests that 
pnr(av) dprOu(ss) «rd. is meant, ‘the square of a “rational diameter” is a square number - 
which is less tautologous in Greek than in English, but might have been more clearly 
expressed as dp:Oyds dd pyrav 6 mdevpdav gyov, Cf. marg. 10-11. : 

8-9. Aelm(er) povdds, «? mAevp(a) an. These words seem intelligible only if mAevp(d) here 


1808. EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS IgI 


is taken as referring to the side of the oblong ; ‘it is less by a unit, if the side = 48 ( x 100)’. 
This is certainly not very satisfactory, and there is something to be said for Taylor’s 
proposal to insert é before py: ‘it is less by a unit; i.e. if the side is 5, the number will be 
(49—1 =) 48’. But emendation of this kind is better avoided, if possible. Cf. marg. 1-2, 
where there was a somewhat similar note. 

IO-II. dppnr( av ?) (6¢ r): pv, ov (otk) eict mA(evpat). It seems simplest on the whole to 
regard the first two words of this note as a lemma from the Platonic text; cf. pyr(av?) in 
marg. 6. The curved symbol is rather like that in marg. 4, but some part may be lost in 
a hole in the papyrus, and at any rate the head differs in having a downward bend. With 
regard to (ovx), the usual tachygraphic equivalent of ov is an upward curve, but this sometimes 
degenerates into a straight stroke, as e.g. in Wessely, of. cz/. Plate III. ro. 1. 

12-13. (ro) Ke yi(vovrar) Hpép(ar) "Zp, dx(odovdws?) (r@) yur(acxeiw). In this note the 
number 27 appears to have been connected with the female pynmatov. For the symbol for 
to Cf. marg. 4 above and n, ad Joc.; if that is right, the group next to the figures in l. 13 
must govern the dative, and hence dk(odovdws) is suggested. In the number ’Z¢ the first 
figure might be taken for ’A, but is no doubt ’Z, since, as Taylor points out, 7,500 is 
given as the value of one of the dppoviac by Dercylides ap. Proclus, J Remp. ii. 25 (Kroll) 
6 pev eat dpodryrt pidros, 6 p, 6 S€ dvopodrntt, 6 o€, Kal 6 pev (yerva) ToLovTuy GAXov Tov pupia, 6 dE 
avéuotov per’ ékeivov rov Zp. Proclus obtains the number o¢ by the addition of «¢ and pi 
(ii. 36 sqq.), but whether he is here following Dercylides he does not say. 


Col. iii. 8. ufuw yelynoor[rar: the vestige before the lacuna and the arrangement of the 
lines makes the reading practically certain ; yevnrovra tpiv (FDM, Burnet) or yuiv MSS. 
10. ek: or perhaps ey. 


Col. iv. 2. apxny was first written (no doubt owing to the following apxay) the 
« having been inserted at the same time as the r over x, which has not been deleted. 

4. xatagraow, as amended, is the ordinary reading. 

12. To which hand the insertion of the missing syllable is due is uncertain. 


Col. v. 1. pelraSnoera: so AM; peraBnOnoera D, peradnoerat We 


14. The superfluous « adscript has been crossed through and a dot was also placed 
above it. 


15. [rw: so A, Burnet; 76 FD. The vestige of the « is very slight, but the reading 
is confirmed by the spacing. 


1809. PLATO, Phaedo. 


II-3 X 11-7 cm. Early second century. 


This fragment contains parts of three columns, of which the second, so far as 
it goes, is in fair preservation, but rather more than half the lines are missing at 
“the foot. The hand is a small upright uncial of neat appearance, suggestive of 
the Trajan-Hadrian period. Vertical strokes are often finished at the base 
with a small hook or flourish which sometimes curves back to the perpendicular, 
e.g. in 1. 13 the r of evaytiwy has the peculiar form g. Besides stops in the high 
and middle positions a colon, as in 1808, is used for punctuation, this latter and 
perhaps the others also being apparently by the original hand. Paragraphi 


192 THE OXVYREYNCHUS) FAPYRE 


denote alternations in the dialogue ; whether they were accompanied by a colon, 
as usual, does not appear. Accents and breathings have been inserted here and 
there, more probably than not after the text was written; they may be due to 
the hand which has added some notes in a small second-century cursive in the 
upper margin. Though the general purport of these annotations is clear they 
are obscured by mutilation, and it is a matter of doubt.to which lines precisely 
they referred. Possibly the symbols in the margin of Col. iii were intended to 
mark the place of other notes which have been lost. 

The text is a good and interesting one, of the eclectic type frequently met 
with in papyri. Of the four readings in which the papyrus agrees with TW against 
B, three are accepted by Burnet (whose edition is the basis of the collation given 
below) and the fourth (iii. 13 egy, ® K€Bns for ® Ké8ns, én) may beright ; on the 
other hand, in ii. 14 it agrees with B? in cairo. ovr: against the inferior cal rovodrd 
tt of BTW, and in ii. 12 has the preferable ovd€ of BT against otre of B?W. 


I Jevl Ja ek tev evavt[twv 

2 |e 

3 ]-- [pleyeO? pydl...... jw adda 

Tiga I eg OFS akdka ta....[..a]AA? ra ek 8 @os avrov ews av p.[..]... 


5 ]..vwv peoos rs evi: t.[.]... pelwv Q ely pLKpov 
Jau pucpov tou te/ = 
6 |. Tout] To ev avTwL pemov Kat pLKpov 


- 


s 
7 |rynTa ptxpol/v]] av em kar mad peye 


Coloi; Cola 
lbeser aToAWAEVAL: UVITOopEvoY dE 1o2e 
oe kat defapevoy Thy opLLKpo 
hex TNTa: ovK eOeeww ELvat ETE 
Je> pov 7 omep nv: waomep eyo de 
i ies 5 €apevos Kat vropevas thy 
1. Grr OpiKpoTynTa> Kat ETL Gy dom [Ep] 
Ja €lfLL OUTOS 0 aUTOS* TLLK pos 
i eu. eketvo O€ ov TETOAL|N 
Ja Kev peya Ov opuikpoy eat 
10 | 10 ws 3 avTws Kat TO opiKpoy [To 
dears ev npivs ovk €eder more ple 
] ya yeyverOar ovde evar ov[d 


1809. EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 193 


aXX ovdevy Tov evavTioy eEr(u 

év omep ny- apa Tovvayrifoy 

‘ 15 ylyvecOa Te Kat evar: addr 7 [ 103 
Tot amepxeTale n amroAduvTat [ 

ev TovTw Tot TaOnpuar[e 

[ravram|acw epn o KeBins 

[ovrws galiverar ploe Kae 


ee ed et 
. 


20 [Tis eure Toy mapolyTey a 


[kovaas oort]s 0 nv [ov ca 


Colt iit. 
[Twv exovTwy Ta evavTia «| 
Ac[youev errovopagovres 
auTa Tr[t EKELVOY ETr@VUpL 
ats vu[y O€ mepl exEelvoy avTov 
5 ov [evovT@y exe THY Ew 
vupla[y Ta ovopagoueva av 103 ¢ 
ta 6 exeliva ovk avy tore hapev 
eOeAnolat yeveoty adAndov 
deEarOalt kar apa Breas mpos 
Io 6’. «= Tov KeBnira eirev apa pn mov 
eon w KeBns klat oe tte TovTwy 
eTapagev [wy ode emev ov 
vu 8 aw epn o KeB[ns ovtws exo 
Katto. dure [Aley[@ ws ov moda 


15 ple Taparre. cvvwporoyy 


isl 


N kolpev 


Marginal note. 1. The letters |ev{ are on a small detached fragment which seems to 
belong to this line, though whether it precedes or follows Jat ek rw» evavz[iov is doubtful. 

4. It is not clear whether the interlinear 7 signifies an abbreviation (dAA7(A . .)?) or was 
added by way of correction; possibly there is a second letter (s ?) ; and perhaps a double dot 
should be recognized between the JAA (or Aa) and 7, as apparently also in I. 5. 

5. evalriay is possible, though the vertical stroke before « is rather long for r and 


O 


194 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


would better suit e. g.p; but «x | [roy evalyriwy is unlikely, since ll. 6—7 indicate a longer line. 
«:: r cannot be em apparently. ; 

6. . rourt is crossed through and Ja: puxpoy rou te / inserted above it, probably by the 
same hand. A very unintelligible collocation is left. 


Col. i. This column would be expected to begin about 102 b 5, but the scanty remains 
are not easy to identify. The best point of departure is ]. 6 ] . os, followed by Ja (or JA) in 
bom baido|vos [de eXatT@ eyeis taut |a (T for rér(€)) could here be read, but the vestiges of 
ll. 1-4 do not seem to bear out this identification. b 6 peye|Oos and b 8 7] 6 os are unsuitable, 
and though c 4 mlpos is possible, } alAn@) would give too short a line. The double dot in 
1, rz is not of much assistance, since this may represent either a stop or a change of 
speaker ; cf. int. 


ii. 6. oonlep|: domep W. 

8. exevo: So BTW 3 eéxeivos B, 

ov: so B*TW > om. B. 

10. acavros T. 

12. yeveoOa W. 

ovde: SO BT ; ovre BPW. 

13. er[« | ov: so TW; airov B, and W 2.2. 

14. aya: the » has been altered, whether by the original or a later hand is not clear ; 
aha was apparently first written. 

19. The first « of @alwvera: is under ¢ of [ravrar|acw in the line above and r of ra in 


]. 17, so that [ovr ga] is hardly enough for the lacuna, which may, however, be sufficiently 
filled by writing ovrws or ovr. 


iii. 9. Whether the papyrus had zpos or es is of course not determinable; the same 
remark applies to ov/S or o | 6 in 1. 12. 


10. The meaning of the marginal symbol, consisting of three heavy dots in the form 
pyramid, is unknown; it may refer to a lost marginal note. 
II. ep w KeBns: so TW & KéBns ey B, Burnet. 


13. In the margin opposite this line there is a small circular mark like the sign for 
short quantity. 


14. katrot ovtt: SO B?; kai rowdrd re BTW. 


16. The marginal sign is on the broken edge of the papyrus and may be incomplete ; 
here, too, the meaning is obscure. 


1810. DEMOSTHENES, Olynth, i-iii, Phil. i, De Pace. 


Width of column 6-6-5 cm, Early secondcentury. Plate IV 
(Phil. i, Fr. 18). 

These fragments, covering the first five speeches of Demosthenes, are written 
in a graceful round hand similar in type to that of the British Museum Hyperides 
(cf. also e. g. 220), though more ornate and regular; it may go back to the end of 
the first century, but more probably is to be assigned, like the Hyperides, to the 
earlier decades of the second. None of the columns is complete, but they 
consisted of about 33 lines apiece, with a broad margin both at the top and bottom, 


ISLS LA TANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 195 


and the height of the roll must have approximated to 30 cm. Short lines are 
filled by the common angular sign. Paragraphi are used for purposes of 
punctuation, and the letter following the pause is sometimes slightly postponed ; 
points in the high and medial position are also employed, though some of these 
look like later additions. A later hand is also responsible for one or two small 
corrections, for the coronis at Olynth. iii. Fr. 5. ii. 10 and the mark of elision in 
LULA P61: 

The text is on the whole a good one, of the usual ‘eclectic’ kind. Peculiar 
variants (Olynth. ii. Frs, 14-18. 19, 22, Olynth. iii. 7. 2-3, Phil. 17. 4-6, 21. 3-5) 
are unimportant, and there is no tendency to depart from the tradition of the 
MSS. Of these S, by common consent the best, is often supported, in several 
places against all other testimony (Olynth. ii. Frs. 9-11. i. 3, Frs. 12-13. 5, 12, 
Phil. 4. 1, 27. 2, De Pace 2. i. 6, 22); in Phil. 11-13. ii. 5 a vulgate spelling has 
apparently been converted later to that of S. On the other hand agreements 
with the readings of other MSS. against S are not uncommon (Olynth. ii. 
Frs, 2-3. 11 (= YOF), 9-11. i. 2, 14-18. 1, Olynth. iii. 5. ii..19 (= A), Phil. 4. 2 
(= 5-025 (= 1B), 19-13, 1-10, lia 4, £,.10,,18-20. 10 (= YO). 

In the transcription given below, lines in minor pieces have been completed 
for the sake of convenience in reading, but in such cases the division of lines 
adopted is often quite hypothetical. In consequence of the fragments being so 
widely scattered over five speeches identification of small scraps is difficult, and 
a number of these have not been printed. 


Olynth, i. 
\eY ep Fr. 2 
[Bovrov eyw| 6 ovk ayr[ow § 16 
[7T]e tlovrwy ev. Tat TpwTat § 9 [uev @ avdpes| AOnvato[. TovTo 
Tplobvpws Kat ws mporn [ove mroAAakts] vpets ov [ous 
kov [eBonOnoapev autor pat [a:ttovs adda Tous| v[oTaTous 
ov[t Kat modu TameELvoTEpwL 
5 vuy [av expwpeba tot Pirur 
Frs. 3-4. [xovcay kat Tyy oltkelaly Tav 
[Aurmoy AapBalvew: ex de Tolv 10 [7nv adews Kap\rouper{ot 
7 lines lost (ay 8 exewva Pirslrros AalBne 
[uous ndiov av Kat edev]Oe § 23 Tis auvTov KwAvoer devp[o Badk 
10 [povs 9 dovdous evar Kat] yap feulv|> OnBalor py] AElav me § 26 


O 2 


196 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


[anbes Katakovey Tivjos Kpov [et}mely ne Kat] cuvelo 
: : ; ‘ ; : 15 Barovow [eroimws ajdArAa Sao 
Kels ol TH[v olKELaVv OVX] oLOL 

Frs. 5-7. re ovte[s pudatrew aly pn 

: : : ; ; : [Bo\nOnlonO vues n addAos 
vator uln|oe rov[O vuas AavOa § 25 Tis aA @ [Trav ovxe Bovdrnce 


VET@ OTL VUY alplegiS EOTLY 20 Tal Tov alToTwTaTMV [EV 
vp to[Tjep vpas ¢[Ket Xpy Tav etn ec [a vuy avotay ofdre 
Torepe iv] n Tap vpliv EKeL aKkavev [opws elkiAarer Tav 
5 [voy]: ea[y plev yap alvtexne ra duvn[Ojels pn] mpalger ar 
[ra tov OrvlyOiwv vipers Exel Aa priv] nruK[a elorw [ra dia 
[woAeunoeTe| KaL THV [EKELVOU 25 gopa evOa[d n] exer modepyew 
[Kakws molnoeTe THY vTap] ovde Aoyou m[polodeuv nyov 
irae 
] mod § 28 


[Amy wy Kadws Troovy)res 


Fr. 1. The identification of this fragment is made with hesitation, since the reading 
mpoojxoy in place of mpoojxey, though intelligible, is unattested, and it is not clear that any 
letter preceded ¢ in 1, 1; on the other hand, the fact that 1. 5 is apparently the last of 
a column affords some confirmation, since the end of a column is expected at about this 
point, and no other suitable position for the fragment has been found in these five 
speeches. 


Frs. 3-4. 11. ]o is only a shade to the right of |y and ]@ in the preceding lines, and 
the omission of rou before xataxovew (so Bl(ass) with Liban.) seems probable. 


Frs. 5-7. 12. Rad|fe[v]: so MSS., Liban. ; Badifovra BI. with Rh. Gr. ii. 679 &c. 

13-14. The papyrus seems to have had the ordinary reading. Dindorf read ot (so 
Baiter) «i (so two MSS.) yy, omitting 7 with Rh. Gr. ii, 679 &c. Bl. similarly omits 3, 
inserting a sign of interrogation after etmeiy, 

15. Bl. brackets éroiuws following Rh. Gr. v. 36, vii. 941. 

17. ovres is bracketed by Bl. following Rh. Gr. iv. 739. 

24. y seems to have been omitted after ndcxa, as in u (Coisl. 324). 


Fr, 8. The length of |. 2 appears to suit this passage better than § 15 wod|hau pavOpev 
€ppatbupunkd |res, but the identification is not certain. 


15 


1810. 


EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 


Olynth. ii. 


Trad. 
[emt] moAdAwy pley av Tis ie § 1 
[m avd]pes [AOnvaror 


[ravt «beAn]o[nO] ws mlpoonKe 
[kar dn mepatvley ov plovoy 
[w avdpes AO\nvaio tla 


Frs. 5-6. 
oKeaut ov xadera|s on dle § 17 


[ 
[on mept avtov ovrels gevor 
[kar meferat|po[t] dogav pev 
[exovoty ws] €[t]ow Oavpaorior 
[kat olvy[Kex|pot[n]ufe|vioe ra 
[rou] Troe pov" ws 6 eyo Taly 
[ev] avrne THe xopar yeyern [ 
[wevav tivo|s nKovoly av 

4 lines lost 
Aeplou Kat aywvov Tovtovs § 18 
pev [pirAoTipial TavTas amrw 
Bev [avrtov edn Bovdope 
voy [mav0 avrov doxety 
vat Talpya mpos yap av Tos 


adros [kat Thy PtAoTimiayv 


BIS.07 536 
[kamto|pkovy7[a Kat wevdo 
[wevov] Ouvaluiv BeBacav 

7 lines lost 

10 [Kat mAollov Kalt Tov addov 
[Tov Tollovrwy [Ta KaTwbev io 
[xupore]oa ew[ae dec ovr 
[kat twv] mpaglewr tas apyxas 
[kat Tas v|robeloas 


Frs, 7-8. 

[avumepBAnriov evilae e 

[de Tis owpplov n diKatos 

[a\Aws tyv KalO nyepay akxpa 

[ovav tov Birov kat pleOnv Kat 
5 [Kopdakiopouls ov dvvape 

[vos depery mlapewoOar Kat 

[ev ovdevos evar pepec 

[roy tovovro|y Aoxrrous dn 

[wept avtov etlvat Aniotas> 
10 [Kat KoA@Kas Ka\t ToLovTOUS 

avOpwrovs o.olvs pebvabev 


Tas opxetcOat TollavTa ola> 


[ 
[ 
[eyo vuv okv|m mpos vuas 
[ovouacat SnAlov 6 ott tav 
15 [tT €oT.v adnOn| Kat yap ous 
[evOevde mravtes am|ndav 
7 lines lost 
Trovoulaiy eveka Tov yedacOn 


25 vat To[vTous 


597 


§ 10 


§ 19 


198 


Frs. g-I1. Golav 


Tolls TouaoW 


[nHov Tewls pev av Eppa [Le 
[vos ne tts] ovdev erraia 0a 


§ 21 


[vera emaly 0 appwoTnpa 

5 [te oupBye mlavta KewverTal 
[kav pnypa klav otTpeupa [Kav 
[adAo TL Tov vmlapxovTav > 
[cabpwy nt ovjrw Kat Tov To 
[Aewy Kat Tov] Tupavvev 

10 [ews pev av e€w] rode“ > 

7 lines lost 

vopliger w@ppovos pev 
avO[pwmov Aoyio|uar xpy 

20 Tat pleyadn yap polrn par 
Aov [5 odov n TUX] Tapa Tay 


§ 22 


tT eoT. Ta Tov avOplorov 
Frs, 12-13. 


[ec pndes vpwly w alvdpes A § 25 
[Onvasol] Svvarat Aol yioacbau 
[mocov mloAcuete xplovov Pe 
[Aumm@|e Kat TL TovolyyT@y 

5 [vpov] o xpovos dte[AnAvOev ov 
[ros walre yap Snro[y tovd ore 
[meAAo|yT@v vywy [eTEpous 
[rivas] edmtCovtj@v mpage 
[arti@p|evwv ad[Andous 

10 [kpltvovTwy madi €Amigor| 
[Tov oxedov tavd amep| vurie 
[motovvTwy amas o x|povos 
[dceAnAvOer «16 ovTwls ayvw § 26 
[moves exer @ avdpels AOn 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS 


PAPYRI 


Petr Ola 


Olikal@y avTnpate Kat Tox 


A (drae 


§ 24 


Frs. 14-18. 
[yeyovlev dlta tev avtwy Tov 
[Tov eAlmigjete moagewy 
[ex havdlwy [avta ypnoTa ye 
[ynoe|oOat- add ov[r evdroyor 
5 ou[t €xoly ect [pvatv TouTo 
ye: m[oAv yap] paliov exovTas 
gvda|trev n KtTncacbat Trav 
Ta mepuxey vuv 6 o TL per 
puiragouley ovdey errs 
[vo] tov moAeuo[y dovmov 
Twy mpotepoy K7[noacbat 
de det avTwy ov[y nuwv ep 
yov Tour non pnue dn dew 
eLopepeiv xpneata avTous 
3 lines lost 


190 


§ 27 


1810... EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 199 


15 [vator wore dt wy eK xplnoTev [kavra] de ar av7[ov tov ep 
[pavrda ta mpaypara Tns] modcws [yoy Kpllvovtas tous [perv 

20 [agsous elmaivov tipay Touls 
[d adtxovy}ras Kodagev tals 
_[tpopacelis agedey kat 7a 
[kad upas] eAdetuparar ov yap 
[elo7e milkplws eferacai tt me 

25 [mpalkrat [to]s addols av pen [ra 
[P vpov avta|y mpwroy v[mrap 
ie ta deov|ra: zcJvfos yap e 


. 


Fr. 19. 
[unde] ottovy [ovprrovery ov § 30 
xt yevy]oerale toy deovTwr | 
[nuev] ovdley ev Katpwr To yap 
[ndcx]nuevlov aer pepos eA 
5 [Aecwe}e 8 viper 


Frs. 2-3. 11. wxvpore|pa: so YOF corr.; icxupérara other MSS., BI., Butcher. 
Fr. 4. This fragment is not very certainly identified. 


Frs. 5-6. 1. A stop may be lost before ou. 

2. ovre|s: om. Bl. with Hermog. p. 50, Rh. Gr. vii. 607. 

Frs. 7-8. 1. rdavdpés, which is omitted by Bl. and Butcher with SFB, was clearly not 
in the papyrus. 

6. mlapewrOa: so SAFBY: mapewpacda vulg. 

16. In estimating the number of lines lost below this one it has been assumed that the 
papyrus had kai rocovrovs dvépwrous, which Bl. brackets. 

Frs. 9-11. i. 2. nuwv: so FOPQ; om. SY, BI., Butcher. 

3. The papyrus agrees with S! (so Bl., Butcher) in omitting rév xu@ &kacra cabpav 
which is commonly added after émaw@dverat. 

8. Whether the papyrus had caépor (S' &c., BI.) or saépoy (vulg., Butcher) is 


indeterminable. 
21. Judged by the preceding and following lines there should be eleven letters in the 


lacuna, and the omission of ro before odov with S and Dion. Hal. 1089 is therefore probable. 
Bl. follows S, Butcher the vulg. 


Fr. 11. ii. The identification is doubtful ; «j8{ca . . . wodlAa[xes is another possibility. 


200 THE OXYRAYNVCHUS, FAY Ra 


Frs., 12-18. 5. ypovos: so S, Bl., Butcher; xpévos dmas vulg. 
7. vpov: so S; ad’réy other MSS., Butcher, om. Bl. with Schaefer and Cobet. 
12. amas o x|povos; so S, Bl., Butcher ; 6 xpévos das vulg. 


Frs, 14-18. 1. rov avrwy . . . mpafewy: so most MSS.; rovrwv eAmifere trav avrav 
mpdfewr S, Butcher, and Bl. with [mpdéewy} Cobet bracketed rév airay mpdfeov, Gebauer 
mpakewr Only, 

12. A high stop may be lost after de. 

19. xptvorras : kpivavras MSS. 

22. mpopace|s : mpopdces & MSS. If 6 were similarly omitted after rous (1. 20), which 
is quite possible, the asyndeton would balance those earlier in the sentence. 


Olynth. iii. 
Prous Frs. 2-3. 


Tip wpn $1 [oat iene [nyovpat aA § 3 


[cacOat Pirsr|rov opw ytyvo [ex]e[e]y amopw zilva ypn Tpo 
[mevous ta de] mpaypara ets [mov w alvdpes AOnvaltor mpos 
[rovro mponkjovta: wolrle [ [vpals mept avtwy ene 

5 [omws pn metoloueO avto mp0 5 [meme|lopat yap e€ wy [mapev 
[repov kakws alkeracOar dle [kat alkjoluwy ovvoid[a Ta AE 
[ov ovdev ovy addo] por Sdo{Kov 5 lines lost 
[ow ot Ta ToLavTa| AeyovTes 7 [Ao]yous viropevew tTovto Ge 
[tnv viobeoww mep| ns Bov [ [wplour[tas ec TadnOn Ae 

[yo] Kae difa rovro wa ta Ao 


15 [wa BelAriw [ 


e . : vy 


Bria: 


[pos avtov BolnOev ort yap 
[es TovTo mleptoTrnceTat Ta alpa 
[ypaTa eav ta] mapovTa mpow 
[weOa oyedfov ijopev aay 

5 [res d]nzrov: ad[A ojre perv On dex § 10 
[BonOlev extras THs ‘av TayTes 
[eyroxapley Kat [BolnOnooplev 
[ro 8 omws rov|ro Aeyes pn 
[rowvy w avdpe|ls AOnvator 

10 [Oavpaonte av m\apadoforv 


5 


10 


15 


20 


1810. 


Fr, 5. 


Coles: 

3 lines lost § 11 
ab jor 
[ovs KaOioraci eiTa Kai Tlous 

[ra Seovra aovetly Bovdope> 

[vous a€vplorepous motovoty 
[eredaly de tavta rAvONTE Kat 
[Tnv tov tT]a BeAtTtaTa Aeyety odov 


[wapacy|nte acgadrn THvikav 
€ 
T2 Tov ypapovTa a mavras toTE 
Te. 
OTL cupeper (nTev mpi 


de ravra m[pjagar pn oKomete 


wig 


Tis etmaly| ta BedTloTa vrep v 
ov vd [v]uwv amodrccOa > 
BovdAnoerat ov yap ev[p|noere 
addws TE Kat TOVTOV povoU 
mepiytyvecOat pedXovTos > 

tov madew adikws [Te Ka\Kov 


[Tov Tavta et|movta Kat ypawav 


ip eRLOE 
[Oets wAnv puxplev [es ara  — § 35 
[gtav avedwy es] Tagliv nya 
[yov Tyhv mod T\nv aluTny 
[AaBely [rlov orpareveo|Oat Tov 
[Oixagjev> tov moe: z[ovd o 
[rt Ka@ nlAtkiayv exaorols exor 
[kat oTov] kaipos etn Tag[ty ToL 
[noas ov|k cor omov plndev 


EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 


10 avrov euPadrew [ov pny ov 


201 


Col. ii. 
mpalgaimev Tar voy Ta BedATiota § 13 
elmovTt (nua. yeverOar mow 
de Tavr ev[tpemica: pndapws 
w avdpes AlOnvatoe pndeva 
agvouTe pin T[nALKovToY et 
val Tap vu wolTe Tovs vopous 
Tovrovs mapaPalyTa pn Sovvat 
Oiknv pnde ov[rws avonrov 
@OTE ELS TpouT7[oY KaKOV 
§ 14 
Ss 
6 exewvo y vpas aylvoew de 
wo avdpes AOnvaltor ore nde 
opla] ovdevos ag(tov eri 
av pn mpooyevn[Tat To mot 
ew €Oedetv ta doglavTa mpo 
Ovpws vas: et yap alvTapKn 
Ta Wydiopata nv n [vpas avay 
Kafe a Tpoonket mparrev 


n Teépl ov av ypag[nt cvampa 


Fr7; 
olre [kat § 36 
[7mt mode Kat] amaciw vplty 


[ouvotwery| pedAcL* 


] 


Fr. 1. 5. Either meio oped or meio |oped could be read. 


Frs. 2-3. 4-5. Bl. brackets epi airay and inserts xai before rapav with Isidor. x, 126. 


202 THE OXSRAVYNCHUS* PALE 


Fr. 5. i, 11-12. The interlineated readings are those of the ordinary text. 

19. rov: so MSS. except S, Isidor.; om. B]., Butcher with S. 

ii. 5. un has been cancelled by dots placed above. 

12. Bl. brackets & dvdpes ’A@nvaior. 

I5. Ta: Ta ye MSS. 

16. vpas is bracketed by Bl]. and Butcher with Cobet. 

19. av ypag[ne: so A suppl.; ypapein corr. to ypapy S, with av ypady in a late hand, 
ypape vulg. ypadein BI., Butcher. 


Fr. 6. 1. Either pexpjov (S corr. h. 1 B corr. AO, Butcher), or pxpjov S'B* can be 
read ; puxpd Bl. with Dionys. 
4. Bl. brackets rag moijoas. 


Fr. 7. 2-3. anaow vplw cvvowew: arace ovvoicev ipiv MSS. 


PHI. 
ES Bie ‘ eee 


] kaxws tla] mpalypara § 2 [dpes AOnrvla{ion cae ves § 7 

eml THS Tolavtr[s ebeAnonTeE 
Br,-2. yeverOat yvopuns vuve ere 
Sie eee [onmep ov mpore]pov Kau [ 

[cxomwy To Te] wANOos t[ns vTap § 4 

[xovens avrjo duvapews [ 

[kat To Ta xolpla mavTa azo [| Fr 2: 

[AwAevar Tye trode opOas] per [ 
OoxlovvT@y oKelws exelv § 8 
kat mlav0 oca mep Kav addas 


Tio [avOpwrros eve 


Frs. 5-6. Fro. Cola: Pr-7. 
é c 5 ; : : : ; , : Col. ii. 
TooolvTov emeay amavT a §t4  [yntov eotw w n dia thov go § 18 : 
Kovont[€ kKplvaTe pn mpoTepov [Bov «dws evtpere|s vuas Ah 
mpodrapl|Bavere pnd av e€ ap [ecoeTae yap axpiBws] evoww + || 
[xn]s dox[o rut Kany mapa [yap elo o mavt e€jayyed> o[ 
5 lines lost 5 [AovTes exewor map nplo[v] af 
ro peva ryt v[uve BonOecar [avT@y mAELous Tov S]eovros: ipwets Fy 
korvoat Sulynbernuev ad § 15 [novxiay exnt n mapidjev trav ‘ 


1810. LXTANT 


A og av deléne Tis ropiobe 

oa wapaloKeun Kat toon Kat 

moO[ev Siapevar Suvnoera 
15 Tews [av n dltadvolwyeba me 

abevres Tov mo[deyov n me 

pryevopeba taly exOpov 

OvT® yap ouxet[t Tov ox 


CLASSICAL. AUTHORS 


[rT agvdaktos AnPOn]e pynde 
[vos ovtos epmoda|ly mre 

to [eme THY exevou ywplay uuu 
[av evdwr Kaipoy taluta pev 
[eoriy a mac dedoyOalk dnc 


e 


Fr, 8. Fr. 9. 
[Haxpov tovroy add] ocov § 21 
[av done Kadrws ex]ew ex Sta Tr avTerals 
[Soxns adAAndows Tos 8 ar [Tamewny] eva dee modttals 
[Aous fevous etvar KelAevm 
5 [Kat peta rovray imnejas dua 
[Koovovs Kat TouTwy mlevTn Fr. ro, 
[xovra AOnvatovs rov]Aaxilo 
: [valued [exer agixecbar de 
[rlowyy [ 
Frs. 11-13. 
Col. i. Col. ii. 
epTroplov atopaciy patdt Bovra xpovoy es Anpriov 
ws [elorac a pev ovy y[pnoe § 33 Kat IpBpov euB[adrov aixpa 


[rae Kale more tHe dvvaluer ma 


[pa Toly Katpoy,o Tovtwy [Ku 
[pols Katacras ud vploly Bou 


[rar]Aa mapacKevacalyte]s Tous 
[olrpatiwras tas Tpinpets Tovr[s] 


p 
Aelvoerat: a 6 vrapgfar djee ma 
[pe vluov [Talur eotiv a eyw ye [ 
ypalpa> av [rlavr w avd[ples A 
[On|vatoe mropto[y|re [ra yxpl|nua 
10 [Ta mplworov a AEeyar [erTla Kar 


AwTous TodtTas [vpEeTEpous 


@LXET EX@V Kal Tpos Tat | 


203 


- § 32 


§ 34 


5 Lepal[i]jote ta mAlora ovdAdAaBov 


apvOnra xpnipatra e£edrege 
Ta TedevTalla eis Mapabova 
ameBn kat [Tnv Lepay amo 
TNS X@[pas wlxET EX@Y TPL 
10 npn uulers O ovre tavta du 
vaobe kalAvey ovT els 


Tovs xpo[vous ovs av mmpo 


204 


15 


20 


30 


10 


THE OXVYRHYNCHUS, PAPYRI 


[urmleas evTeAn Tacay THY 
[Suvva|uw voper KataxdELon 
[re em Tat modEepalt] pevery 


[rev] wey xpnpata[y] avto.> 
[T]apeae Kat mopiota[e yeryvope > 


[ 
[ 


[res mavoecbe aer rept] 
[ 


vjow tev de mpagiewv mapa Tov 


atpatnyou Tov Ajolyoy ¢nTovy 


tov alut[@v BovdAevopevot 

7 lines lost 
Halxov ayov Kat hepwoy Tous 
mreor[tas Thv Oadartav «€ 


[wlecra 7[t mpos TovT@t Tov 


Fr. 14; 
[araxta alopiora: aldiopOw § 36 
[7a amavTla Tolyapouly apa 
[axnkoapev| TL Kat Tpilnpap 
[xovs KaOiorape|y> Kat TolvTos 
[av7idocets movov|ueO[a Kat 
[wept xpnpatwr| mopov oko 
[wovpey Kat pelTa TavTa ep 
[Rave tous pleTorkovs 
[edoge Kat Tous yx|wpis orkouy 
[Tas elt avTous mad avTeu 


§ 37 


[BiBagew eit ev oom tav[ra 


Fr. 16. 


J.-[ § 40 
[yns exeTal Kav ¢[repwoe mata 
[én Tus] exeoe evoly ae yer 


5 


Io 


15 


Onabe Bon[Oew Kaito tr On § 35 
mote w avdl[pes AOnvator vo 
pifere tThv [wev tov Ilav 
aOnvawov eloprny Kat THY 
tov Alovval@v ae Tov KaOn 
KovTos xployiov yryverOat 
av Te delvor Aaxwow ay TE 
idi@7| ae 

3 lines lost 
[or ovd els eva [T@v amocTo 


[Awy Kat] TocouT[ov 


Plate IV. 
eAndAvdev wo 


Fr. 15. 
[rov8 vB]pews 
[7 emiotleAAcy EvBoevow 
[ndn Tollavtas emtorodas > 
[emioroAns alvayvwors 
[rovr@y w avdpes| AOnvatot § 38 
[Tov aveyvwopevol adrnOn 
[mev €o7l Ta TOAAG ws ovK ede olv 
[env aA tows ox ndea aklou 
[ery GAA ec pev] ooa av TIS U> 
[mepBne Tar Aoylwr wa py AvV> 
[Tyont Kat Ta Tplaypata vTEp 
[Bnoerat] dec mpos ndovny 
[Snunlyopev: ec d 4 Twv ro 
[yo|y xapis av nL pn mpoonkou 
[oa epyw.| (nua yryverale 
[aioxpov elore devaxifery [eau 
[Tovs kat] amavt’ avaBaddrlo 
[mevouvs a] av y ducylepn may 
[Tov vorepilfev Talv epyor 


1310.. 2XTANT. CLASSICAL AUTHORS 205 


[pes] mpoBarrec Balt de 4 Bre 3 lines lost § 39 
[we evjavtioly ovr oder [Aovbew Tors mpaypaclwv [ar] 
5 [our eOeAe] Kale [A aurovs eumpocber] eat 


25 [Tov mpaypatov Kat Tlov av 


[Tov Tpotov wamep Tlov aTpa 
[revpatwoy agtwoet|e Tis av 


Bit. Frs. 18-20. 


[ders voy pnt elyOv[perrae § 43 


[wept] Tov moAle“ov ovde mpo § 41 [ent opytgerat oplwy w aly 
[rToly mpaypatlwy mpoopate [dpes AOnvatoe T]nv pev alp 
[oludev mpiy [av n yeyevn 3 lines lost 
[plevov te n y[eyvopevov [cav dn virep Tov pn miabev 
5 [wvOnlobe [rlavra 8 [ucws mpo [kakws vio Pidimmolvy adda 
[repoly pev nv. vuly 0 ew av [env ote y ov otnoeralt dndov 
[rqv n\kee] tay] axulny 10 [ec pn Tes avtjov [KkwAvaler [era 
: ; [rovr avaluevolupey Kal TPL 


[npets Klevas k[at Tas mapa Tov 
[ 


devos elAmidals av amooreAn 


Brean; Fr. 22. 
[xoe TleOvacr [rwe dee Tous § 45 m\pagn[e mpos vas § 46 
[rotolvrous almocroAovs ov [Wevdope|vor pardfiws 


[yap elo olvk cot @ ay 
[Opes A]Onv[ator ev avdpa dv 
5 [ynOnlvale wore ravd vue 


Fr. 23. Fr. 24. 


ypar aclxujyns wore Tov oTpa § 47 [Tov mpornKovTos| Kako[vpyou § 47 
tThnyev e|kaocto[s dis Kat TpLS [uev yap eort kpllOevra alrro 


[ 
[ 
[kpive|rat map v[ply Tept ba [Oavety otparnlyov de plaxo 
[varou| mpos de [rous ex Opous [wevov Tots moA]eptols [ 

[ 


5 [ovders] ovd amalg avToy a 


206 THE: OXYRHYNCRUS PAPYRI 


[yovicac Oar meplt Oavarou 
[ToApat] adAa Tov 7[wv avdpamro 
[ucTwr] Kat Awmo[dvtov Oa 


[varov pad]Aov [apovyTat 
Fr. 25. Fr, 26. 
[Reus memoupely ws Bacirle § 48 [mpay|uevov [kat trodAa Tot § 49 


[a o de ev IdAdv|ptors mores [avra ove|tpom[oAew ev TnL 
[yropn|e tv | 


Fr, 27. 
: ; : : : Fr. 28. 
[ouvre|s aA[A av adevtes § 50 [oOat Aeyerly atpovpar r{e § 51 
TavT ekelly elOwpev OTL [korn O o7t major pedArAe o[vy 
exOpos av[Opwmos Kat Ta 7 [ovreny ] 
peTepa nplas amocrepet 
5 Kal xpovoly TOAUY uBpike Kata | ®idcmTo0v 


J @ 


Fr. 4. 1. The addition of avre: after «yew would make the line too long; om. S, BI., 
Butcher. 


2. mlav0: so Y; dav others, Bl., Butcher. 


Frs. 5-6. 11. Bl. and Butcher write duvydetpev. 
15. teas: SO FB Prooem. 21, Bl.; éws S, vulg., Butcher. 


Fr. 7. ii. Since no letter can be read with certainty, an identification of these lines is 
too doubtful to be of any value. 


Fr. 8. 1. There is no trace of writing above this line, but the surface of the papyrus 
is rather damaged. 


3. Bl. brackets d\Andos, which is omitted by Dionys. and Liban. 


Fr. 10. A spot of ink on the edge of the papyrus is doubtfully identified as a para- 
graphus, which would however be quite in place. Whether -va:]ue@ or -vo]ied was written 
cannot in any case be determined. 


Frs. 11-13. i. 1-2. The papyrus seems to have had the ordinary reading, which 
is retained by Bl. Butcher obelises padiws €orar, for which Dindorf reads padieos cicerbe 
with Wolf. 

10. a Aeyw: so vulg., Butcher; om. a S, BI. 

li. 4. exov: so SAY, Butcher; dy vulg., Bl. 


1810. EXTANT CLASSICAL: AUTHORS 207 


kat: SO MSS. except S, which omits cai: om. BI. Butcher. 
_ 5 The deletion of the first « of Tepawra: seems to have been intended. There 
is a dot just above and slightly to the left of the «, and on the line between a and something 
ee 2 comma, both marks being in rather lighter ink. Iepaor@ SBO, Bl.; Tepaor@ vulg., 
utcher. 


12. Either mpo|@n0e (SFB, Bl., Butcher) or mpoo|@nc4e (A) might have been written ; 
mpoeAnade vulg, 


Fr. 14. 1. alopiora a[SiopOwra: so vulg.; ddipbwra dépic6’ SAY, BI., Butcher, 
10, avrey|BBagew: so vulg. efr’ dvten8. S Vind. 1, Bl., Butcher. 


Fr, 15. 18. a]: so S; other MSS. have ova, but for this there is not room unless 
avaBahX|opevous was differently divided, which is improbable. 


1g. vor|cp|ev (S, Bl., Butcher) is possible as a reading, but considerations of space 
favour voreps|Cev. 


247. ts av: so SY, BI., Butcher; ay rus others. 
Fr. 16. 2-3. maral&q tus: or malragms, with S. 


Fr. 17. 3-4. yeyernp |evov TU) yeyropevor : yey: i) yyy. te most MSS., Bl., Butcher ; 
Y transposes yey. and yy»., and the same order is equally possible in the papyrus, to which 
the position given to rm is apparently peculiar. 


6. nv: evav SA, BI., Butcher, évqv wotety YO, jv rovety FB. The loss of the syllable ev- 
would be very easy after pev, 


Frs. 18-20. 2. Either opygerac (SAY) or AoyGerae (vulg.) is possible. 
10, aurjov [kodvo]ec: so YO; adrov cadion F, codton S, xoddoer BI, Butcher. 


Fr. 21. 1. rovs, which Bl. omits with Schol. Aristid. p. 196, was evidently in the 
papyrus. 
3-5. There is apparently no authority for the insertion of & dvdpes AG. after Zorw here, 
but this seems the easiest explanation of the clear |va[ in 1. 5, which cannot be deiva unless 
there was a considerable omission ; moreover if [8vvn]|@n»[ae be read in |. 4, the supplement 
at the end of 1. 3 becomes rather long. Cf. O/. 2. 10, where & avd. Ad. follows ov yap eorw, 
ovk €orev. The similarity of dvdpa duvnOjvac and avdpes ’AOnvaioe. might help to account for 
either the dropping or insertion of & avd. °A8. 


Fr. 24. 1. This line was probably the first of a new column, which is expected about 
this point. The margin above it, like that below Fr. 23. 9, is broken, but that the two 
fragments belonged to different columns is indicated by their dissimilar appearance. 

Fr. 28. 2. major: so S (naow), Bl., Butcher; saow tpiv other MSS. 


De Pace. 
Fr. 1. 


oly our § 16 


[emtotparevety ovder]epots: 


, 


208 TEBE OXV RA YNCHUSGE Arya 


Fr. 2. 
Coli. Col. ii. 
mept [Tov wiwy ekacTos op § 19 
yigope[vos Kotvov eh nas 
i - A : : , ayayalo|: [Tov moke“ov Ta Tov 
[wavres av BovdowO evlexa § 17 Apgik[rvovey doypara mpo 
[avrwy’ Kpatnoavrals de Tous € 5 oTn[oapevoe eiTa emtora 
[repovs deozrora|s umaply ev cOwoltv exaoTot mEepa Tov 
[avtwy ovde eis] TL ovy nyov cupgplepovTos eavrors nw 
5 [wat poBepoy Kat] Te puvdaga ToAC pnTal womEp Kal TeEpL 
[cOat dev nyuas] pn Kowny Pox[eas tate yap Onmov Tov § 20 
[wpopaciv Kat Kolivov ey 10 @ ort [yuy OnBator Kae DirUr 
[kKAnua o pedAwyv] ToAELos tos kat Oerrado. ovxye TavTa 
[mpos amavras dalBne «a yap § 18 ekaoT[ol padiota eomovdaKko 
10 [Apyeot pev kat Meloonrifole TES Tav[Ta mavTes empatav 
[kat Meyadomoditlar Kat tives otov O[nBaroe tov pev Piri 
[rwv Aowrv ITe\\oTor[ vn 15 mov ma[peAOev Kat \aBeuw 
[otwy ogo TavTa TolvTos Ppo Tas mapoidovs ovK eduvavro 
[vovor dia thy mplos Aakle kwdu[oat ovde ye Tay avtois 
15 [Oatpoviovs nuiy emex|npu Ten[ovnkev@v voTaTov 
[Keay exOpws oxnoovc. Kat] eNOofv7a thy dogav exe 
[ro doce evdexjecOar [re 20 yuri yiap OnBatos mpos pev § ar 
[Tov EKElvols TETpaypLEVor| To [TnY xwpay Kekopmicbat 
[OnBaor de exolvor pely ws mlEempakTat TL mpos de Tiny 
20 [Aeyovoty arrex|O[ws k[at dogav airyicra a yap pun 


mlapnrAOe Pidurmos ovdev av 
25 alvTos edoket evar Tavra 


6 [ove eBovdovro addX\a ToL 


Fr. 1. 2, emorparevew (O) suits the length of the line better than -cew, but remains of 
course uncertain. 
Fr. 2. i. 2. Either avreyv or eavrwy can be read. 


6. dew nuas: so S, Bl. Butcher ; pyc deiv ids (Su.) Sos, for which there is evidently 
not room, vulg. | 


i, 7-8. yyw] mode[uyoa: so MSS.; Bl. and Butcher bracket, following the indications 
of Schol. p. 164. 


22. mlempaxta tr: SOS Bl., Butcher; «édXora mémpaxrat Other MSS., Isidor. 


ISEIWEATANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 209 


1811. DEMOSTHENES, C. Timocratem. 
16 X 23 cm. Third century. 


Parts of three consecutive columns, written with a rather coarse pen in well 
formed medium-sized uncials of the sloping oval type, for which an approximate 
terminus ante quem is provided by remains of three columns of an account 
inscribed on the verso in cursive of about the middle or latter half of the third 
century. The hand of the recto, which does not suggest a date before A. D. 200, 
may therefore be appropriately referred to the first half of the century. 
Cols. i-ii consisted of 39 lines each, and the height of the roll, if the margin at 
the bottom was of similar depth to that at the top, was about 27 cm., while the 
width of the column was about 6cm. Another hand, using a thinner pen and 
lighter coloured ink, has inserted a marginal adscript at Col. ii. 5 and supplied an 
omission in Col. iii. 22, and this hand may well be responsible for both the dots 
of punctuation (in all three positions) and a few rough breathings, which are no 
doubt secondary. 

Though, as usual, inconsistent in its support, 1811 shows some affinity with 
F (Marcianus 416), with which it agrees four times against the other MSS. 
Coincidences with A (iii. 13-16) and SAY (ii. 7) are also noticeable. 


Cok. Col. ii. 
Tov Tl@|\y Em EKELVOLS 
otabevtmy To KadAoS po 
muAaa TavTa o Tapfevwr 


OTOAL’ YEWTOLKOL+ OVK apo 


: : : ; : : 5 plaka Ovo ovde xpuaides aA (ar) 
] onplee § 183 TETTAPES N TPELS ayovTa «€ 
ov diadrat d€ kat Ta Toalv KaoTn pvav ov yap eautous § 185 
Ta MovToU Kat o[tepalvos perv SexaTevovTes ovde & Ka 
amas Kav puKpos n Thy [t Tapacawrt av ol €x@po. zo 
5 onv didotyuayv exer Tor ple 10 ouvtes OurAas mpartoy 
yaro. extmopata de n Ov TES Tas ELapopas TavTa «a 
plaTnplia n Ta ToLavTa K|T|n veBecav oud oloiomep ou 
para: eav pev vrepBar Xpepevot ogupPovras e7o 
An Twe wAnOEr mAovTOU Tt AiTevovTo* ara Tous Ex Opovris 
10 va dofav mpoceTpiato 15 KpatouvTes Kat & tas [TLS 
Tols KeKTnmevolss eav O € [aly ev gppovwy evgaitio 


210 THE OXVYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


mL plKplols Tis] cepvuyn [T]nv moALv €ls opovolav 
[Tar TooovT amexel Tolv Tins ayovres aBavarov av[t|ov 
[Tivos Ota TavTa Tvy |e kAeos A€AOUTacLW Tous] ETL 
15 [lor [azeipoxados mplos €00 20 TnOevovTas ola cor BeBiw 
gev €[ivat ovtos To.|yuy Tal TNS ayopas eLpyovTeEs’ 
aveAlwy ta] tr[s Sog]ns xn upets Oe els TovTO w avdpes § 186 
[uara tov mAjovto[u] meron AOnvaior mponxOnre ev 


[rat pikpa Klat ovx vpoy a nOtas Kat patOvpias wore 
-20 [f1a add oud] exeluy eden § 184 25 [op{de 
[ore mpos pev xpnpalrwy : 


Col-iit. 
val TolovT@y emitn[dev w 0 auTov ws eKTETLOT| aL 
fatwyv ola TovTwr Bel Bio ta x[p\nuara Avdporiimu 
Tal’ Kal TEpl pev TouT|ov 16 487. “F5 [at] TAavkern car Merdalvo 
Kata oxodnv: a de Tiploxpa Tat Aeyevs Kat oT [delw[o 
5 Tel ouvEpel TOAAG Deylely € talTa] av malo mavtj@ly aly 
TL Mpos TovTOLS Exov m[avooO Opwrev et memot|nKoTa|v 
parr oda 8 o7t ws pev [ovK exelv@y Ta OlKaLAa UTEP 
acuppopos vu ec8 o rio 20 wv auTos aitiay exer Deft 
pos Kat nlalpa mavtas tious vat Tov vopov. pnoev x{T 
10 vopuous eccevn[vleypevios ' res 


Tov aXdwcKolTo: eyo de Toy 
Kal KaTa TavTa adikws [Ee 


Aoyov nyovpa: TouTov 


[oly[de 


xov ovy eer Aeyery [akou 


i. 7. Bl(ass) brackets i). . . xrjara, which words are absent in c. Andro. 75. 
12, tis | cepvurn| tac: so F and c. Androi. 755 Cepvvynral tis BL, Butcher. 


18. The papyrus apparently agreed with the MSS. in omitting ra which is read by edd. 
before rov with ¢. Androt. 75. 


1g. ovk vuoy al&ia: so F and c. Androl. 75. 
20, edev: so Bl. and Butcher with SLFYO; oidev vulg. 
ii. 6. ayovoa: ayovca F. 


, 7. After pvav most MSS. insert ds, drav oot Soxy, médw ypdders Katayovevew, Which is read 
in c. Androt. 76 (ypapes) ; om. SAY'; BI. brackets. 
8-9. a katapacawr av: So MSS.; dv xatapdoawé Bl., Butcher with c. Androl. Wyk 


I8ll. “EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 21k 


12. owonep: so MSS,, Butcher ; cidcmep Reiske with c. Androt. 77, Bl. 
, 18-19. av[rlov kreos: so F; xdéos airay other MSS., edd.; AYO have dyayévres for 
ayovTes, 

emitnOevovras : -cavras F corr., c. Androt. 77, Dl. 

22. rovro: so F and c. Androt. 78; rogovro(v) other MSS. and v. 1. F, Bl., Butcher. 

23. mponxOnre : so vulg. and c. Androt. 78; mpdnybe S, mponyde Weil, Bl., Butcher. 


iii. 3. Whether the papyrus had rourov (S) or rovrey is of course quite uncertain. 
4-5. Typ[oxpa}rec avveper: SO MSS.; Tiwoxpdrns viv épet Dobree, Butcher. 

13-16. avrov.., Meda[ vo fro Aeye; SO A; other MSS. place Aeyew after avrov. 
19. eketwwr: rovtev F, 

20. Bl. and Butcher bracket avros, following Rh. Gr. v. 581. 16. 

23. rovrov jyodpa F. 


1812. ISOCRATES, Ad Demonicum. 
19°7 X 13-7 cm. Fifth or sixth century. 


This practically complete leaf from a papyrus codex is inscribed in a sloping 
uncial hand, similar in character to that of P. Rylands 58 (Plate 3), though rather 
more careful and regular, and is no doubt of about the same period. The ink, 
at the bottom of the verso partially obliterated, is of the characteristic reddish- 
brown shade. Stops in the middle position only are used. Whether a second 
hand can be distinguished is doubtful. The few alterations and insertions which 
occur are similar in style of writing and colour of ink to the body of the text, and 
must at any rate be practically contemporary. 

The pages are numbered 17 and 18 respectively, the numbers being placed 
as in a modern book in the top outside corners. In the corner opposite to that 
containing the figure 18 is a 6, which seems to be a stichometrical figure marking 
the 400th line. With about 25 lines to the page, if the outer page at the 
beginning of the book was left blank (cf. e.g. P. Rylands 58), the first line of the 
18th page would be approximately 1. goo. Survivals of the application of 
stichometry to the speeches of Isocrates are to be found in the Codex Urbinas 
(I), but the unit there is rather larger than that indicated by 1812. As Drerup 
observes in his edition, p. 1xxxii, the hundreds of, I correspond to about 93 lines 
of the Teubner text, but page 18 in the papyrus is preceded by only 316 such 
lines, or more than 50 short of what would on that proportion be expected. On 
the other hand, the length of the stichometrical line on the system of T is 
calculated by Drerup at 37 letters, which is precisely the length of line in 1812. 
The inconsistency is due to his estimating the Teubner line at 40 letters, whereas 
in the [pds Anudvixov, at any rate, that number is usually exceeded. 

The fact that the [pds Aynpcvixov stood at the beginning of the codex 
suggests at the outset an affinity with the so-called vulgate (AI), but the textual 

P2 


212 THE OXYRHYNCHUS FPAPYRI 


position of the papyrus as between that family and I is a neutral one, the agree- 
ments and disagreements being fairly equally balanced. In one place a vulgate 
reading has been inserted as an alternative (1. 41). No support is given to the 
peculiar readings of SY. Besides the mediaeval MSS. there are available for 
comparison the eccentric second-century Berlin papyrus No. 8935, with which, 
among many natural discrepancies, two agreements on minor points are 
noticeable (ll. 36, 42), and also for a few lines another papyrus fragment, of the 
third century, at Strasbourg, with which 1812 differs twice (ll. 42, 48). Readings 
not otherwise attested are found in ll. 2 and 40, but they are unimportant. 


Verso. 
i 

HaTl Telp® TO pevy Twpa Eltvat tdomTrovos 

Thv de Wuyny ewat piocopos wa Tw ev 

emiteAciy Ouvn ta Sofavta tn Oe mpoopay 

ETESTN TA oULPEpovTa Trav o TL av pedAANS § 41 
5 €pely TpOTEpOY ETLaKOTEL TH Yr@puNn TOAAOLS 

yap n yAwtTa mpotpexer TNs Stavolas vot 

fe pndev evar tov avOpwomivev BeBacov ovrws 

yup ouvTe evTvx@y eon Teptxapns ovre dvaotu 

Xv meptduros dvo totov Katpous Tou Aeyedv| § 42 


IO n mept wv o1cba cados yn Tepl wy avayKatoy exmrety 
ts 
€v TOUTOLS yap Hovol| v]| 0 Aoyos TNS clwmNS KpELT 


Tov. ev O€ Trois adAois apmewov ovyay n eye 
XAipe pey emt ToLs cupBawovotv Tav ayabor 
kal AvTOV METPIMS ETL TOlS yryvopue|vols| Toy 
15 Kaxoy yivov de tors addois pnde ev ereEpo.s 
wv Katadndos atomoy ylap nv pev ovc.ay 
€v TOLS OlKElals amoKpunTely Thy Se Stavoltay 
pavepav exovTa mepimatew paddrov evAaBou [ § 43 
Woyov n kiwduvoy da yap evar poBepav ros bey 
20 gavros tyv tov Biov TedevTyy Tos de orovdale 
os Thy ev Tw nv adogiay pariota pev TEL P| @ 
(nv Kara Thy achareav eav de more cot oup Bn 


kivOuvevety (nteL Thy EK TOU [woA]|e“ou carn 


Sit, CE ATANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 213 


play peta kadns do€ns adda ply pelr atoyxpl[as] 
25 onuns To pev TeAevTyoa Tar|Tw|y yn [wleTpH 


Recto, 
in 6 
evn KaTekpwev 70 de Kadws atoba 
vew+ tdtov Tols omovdaios n puis amever 
evs kat pn Oavpacns et TodkAa Tov ELpy § 44 
HEv@Ys OV TpETEL TOL TpOS THY VUY Trapou 
30 cay nALKlav. ovde yap ese TouTo diehaber 
adda mpoetdouny dia THS avTNS Tmpaypa 


Tlas apa tov Te TapovTos Biov cupBovdrALav 


50 |(to ae a .|| kat tov peddAovtos xpovov 
TAapayyeApa KaTaArELTELY THY pEY yap ToU 

35 ToOY xXpElay paderws eLOnoels Tov de peT EU 
volas ouuPovrevoovTa KXadETTOS EVPNTELS- OTTwS 
ovy pn Tap ETEpou Ta AoiTa (nTNS- AAA EV 
Tevbev wlomep ek Tapletlov mpohepns wnOnv dev 
pnoey Twapademety aly] av exw gor cvpBovadevey 


dev 


40 ToAAnY O aly] Tos Geos yalpty cyxonv et pn OLrapap § 45 


Tout THS Oo€ns me [ex]ov mepe cov Tvyxavel[y]] 
Tov yap adAwy Tous mAELaTOUS EVpNnaopeEV 
WOTEP TOV GITWwY ToS NotoToLs paddov n ToLS 
[v]ytaivoraTrols xalpovtas ovtTw Kat Tov dpirwv 
45 [Tos ovveapaptavover mAnotagovtas add ov 
Tos vov[Olez[ovor] ce de vopi|(w] TovvavTioy Tov 
Tov eyvalKevat TleKunpl® ypwpevos TH TeEpt THIV 


adAnv cou ma\iav pidomovia Tov yap avTw 


1.4, 76 pev copa: So P. Berl. AUSY; 16 copari pev TO, Dr(erup). 
2. th de Wuxnv: so I1SY (om. P. Berl.) ; 77 d€ Wvx7 others, Dis 
eva: om. MSS. 

4. 1. éxiorn : SY have emoryon. 

5. epew: Aeyew P, Berl, An. 

8. eon: so P. Berl. and most MSS. ; éoe: Tr pr., Dr. 


214 THE OXVRHVNCHUS FPALPY RI 


11. povov as originally written here is also in P. Berl., but this is probably a chance 


coincidence. 

14. kat AvTov: SO A}; Avmod dé others, Dr. rs 

26. A rather tall hooked top makes the 4 in the margin above the end of this line look 
something like the symbol for 4,000, but that figure can hardly be meant here. 

27. n puow: so MSY; om. I, Dr. 

29. vuy: OM. Pebenlysy. 

32. apa: om. ZY, which have oupBovAnp. . 

34. 1. karakirew. The spelling of the papyrus 1s no doubt merely an instance of the 


common confusion of sand «; cf. e. g. 1. 35 padevws. oa.) 

36. ovupBovdrevaovta: SO Bs Berl., though placing this word before PET Evvolas, which is 
also the order of Al. SY insert oo. before cupf. 1. xaheras. 

37. Ta A. pn map er. P. Berl. (erepwr) AQ, 

39. mapadremew : sO P, Berl., but cf. n. onl. 34. av is added also in AIISY. 

40. All read r@ bed. 

yn, V.1. pndev: py, as first written, is the reading of the MSS. 

41. The superscribed reading yy is that of ATI. 

42. yap: so P. Berl.; pev ydp others, including P. Arg., Dr. 


45. e&apapr. SY. 
48. oolv: so AMSY ; om. P. Berl. P Areal cor 


1818. CODEX THEODOSIANUS vii. 


18-1 Xg-I cm. Early sixth. century. 
Plate I (recto). 


The hand of this fragment from a vellum book is a fine specimen of Latin 
uncial writing, the letters, which are of medium size, being executed with much 
precision, and distinguished by both breadth and delicacy. If it belongs to the 
sixth century rather than the fifth, it is to be placed not later than the first third 
of the century, not only on the evidence of the hand but also because of the 
unlikelihood that after its supersession by Justinian’s Codex of 529, the Codex 
of Theodosius would remain in demand. The fragment is thus approximately 
a contemporary of Paris. 9643 (R), on which the text of Book vii, the part of 
the Codex here concerned, principally depends. Eight lines are lost at the 
bottom of the recto, and if the margin below these corresponded to the deep 
margin at the top, the height of the page was approximately 29 cm. ; its breadth, 
on the supposition that the lateral margins were half as liberal as the upper one, 
would be something like 22-5 cm., a little broader than in 1097, from a papyrus 
codex of Cicero, which in height practically coincided. Beginnings and ends of 
the lines are missing throughout, and the precise point of division is obscured 
by the uncertainty whether or how much the first lines of paragraphs protruded 
into the left margin; in the transcription below a protrusion of not more than 
one or two letters has been assumed. Double dots mark off the addresses and 


1818.. EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 215 


dates of the rescripts from their texts. Abbreviations and numerals are usually 
accompanied by a medial dot ; p(raefectus) p(raetorz)o, in the one place where it 
occurs, is written with a horizontal line above, and a similar stroke was placed 
above numerals. There is no instance of punctuation, but the evidence is 
insufficient to infer that this was neglected. 

The text of 1818 is close to that of R. In vii. 8. 11 the name Eutychianum, 
over which R blunders, is correctly given, but some other misspellings are 
common to both; in vii. 8.12 they agree on veda, where Jel/a is restored from 
Cod. Iust., and at the end of vii. 8. 10 in the insertion of covss. 


Recto. Plate I. 
[seri|mus guingue librarum auri co\ndemnatione propost Vii. 8. 9 
ita pracdia quae ex Gildonis bonis ad nostrum acrarium de 
[Jata| sunt ab hospitibus excusart n\unc etiam praecipimus 
[at olmnes domus ex eodem ture viententes in guibuslibet 
5 etvi|tatibus sunt constitutae ab |hospitibus excusentur quo 
[poss\ent conductores facil\ius inveniri si quis igitur con 
(tra nostr\am fecerit tuss\ionem multa pridem ferietur im 
[flicta : pp K\arthag. vii id. Aug. Hionorio viii et Theodosto ut. aa: conss: , 
(zdem aa: Ioha\nnt pplo\: devotum plossessorem ab omni ingue 8. 10 
10  [etudine| liberamus primo igitur omnium ad niullum 
[predium| per Africam vel publicjum vel privatum domus nos 
[trae| vel cuiuscumgquae iur(is nullus metator (?) accedat st 
(a qujoquam fuerit destinatuls licentiam enim domino acto 
[v2 ip\siquae plebi serenitas nostra conmisit ut eum qui prac 
[para\jndi graiija ad possessionem venerit multandi expel 
(lendi| habeat facultatem n\ec crimen aliquod pertime 
[scat clam s\bt arbit\rinm ultionis suae sciat esse conces 
[sum rec\tequae sacrildgium prior arceat qui primus imvene 
[rit ad|ministrantem ver\o eiusque offictt proceres quo 
20 [rum priaccepto inhibitam [personam ad agrum aliquem de 
|stinarit| in tempore proscribi debere censemus solam sane 
[hospitalitateymn sub h\ac observatione concedimus ut ni 
[hel ab hospite quod viel hominum vel animalium pastur ne 


15 


. . ° . . . . . . 


Verso. 
vel sponte contra priaeceptum nostrum probati fulerint 
jobtulisse : dat: prid. id. I\un. Rave\n\nae post conss: Hon\ort viii 
[et Theodostt v. aa: con|ss- 


216 THE OXAVRAYNCHUS PAPI Rs 


(idem aa Probo c-s-l- post| alia: de hospitalitate iudicum e¢ om 8, 11 
5 [nium personarum quid si\bt etiam ipse possessor pr\ae 
[sumere debeat quare censura| omnia quae ad su\i dispendium 
[ pertinebunt submota sint ta\m missa super h\ac re auctoritas 
(declaravit: praelata litt\eris ad Eutychianum p: urbi 
[die ati. td. Tan. Constantio et Clonstante comss. 
10 (7dem aa: Hadriano ppo: Afric. hoc plrospectum est ut infausta hospi 8. 12 
(talitatis pracbitio tolleretiur nec privatum quis\que a 
(domino aedium postulet et cet\era: dat. v- non. Mart. Rav ennae 
[Constantio et Constante co\nss- 
[¢dem aa. Eustathio ppo: devotissi mos milites ex procinc\tu 8. 13 
[vedeuntes vel proficiscentes\| ad vela muri novi sacr\atis 
[stmae urbis singulae turres in| pedeplanis suis sus\cipiant 
[zec aliguis possessorum graviter fe\rat quast \ill\a dts 
[ posttione quae super publicts aedific\iis processerat \vio 
(lata cum privatae guoque domus tertiam partem talis ret 
20 ©[gratia soleant exhibere: dat. v-\| non- Mart. Constant inop- 
(Honorto xiit- et Theod: x. aa. conss:| 
(empp- Theodosius et Valentinianus| aa- Haeliont patricio et 8 
(magistro offictorum : universe cud \usli\bet 


~ 
or 


saa 


Recto 11. predium is written for the sake of shortening the supplement, which still 
seems a trifle long, though dwm alone would be insufficient. 

14. l. cplsegue; cf. 1. 18, where guae is again written for gue. 

18. The omission of przor, which is absent in R but appears here in Cod. lust., would 
make the line rather short. 


Verso 2. conss-: this is also the spelling of R. 

3. con|ss: so R; om. Mommsen-Meyer. 

8. elychiarum praef. R. Some reduction in the number of letters is required and is 
most easily obtained by writing Z. for prac/. 

9. Constante vv cc R. 

10. Hadriano proc. Afric(ae) R, Hadriano pp. Cod. Iust., and cf. vi. 29. 11, vii. 4. 33. 


What 1813 had here remains of course uncertain ; R’s abbreviation of Africae is adopted 
as suitable to the space. 


15. vela: so R; bella Cod. Iust. 
20. Constantino)p(olt) R. 
22. ffaelioni is also the spelling of R (1. Hel.) 


isi4. EXTANT CLASSICAL, AUTHORS 217 


1814. INDEX TO CODEX IUSTINIANUS, FIRST EDITION. 
34°3X 22-4 cm. A.D. 529-535. Plate V (verso). 


This mutilated leaf from a papyrus book proves to be both from the juristic 
and the palaeographical point of view exceptionally interesting. It contains 
part of an index of rubrics and inscriptions of Justinian’s Codex, not, however, 
of the extant second edition, but as originally issued in the year 529. This 
explanation, for which we are indebted to Professor de Zulueta, of the divergences 
of the index from the Codex as we have it, accounts so completely for the 
facts that no reasonable doubt can be entertained of its correctness. 

Of the relation of the two editions of the Codex a good account is given by 
Rotondi in Bull, dell Istituto di diritto romano, 1918, pp. 1538qq. The second 
edition, which was five years later than the first, was a thorough revision designed, 
as stated in the prefatory constitution of Dec. 534 De emendatione codicis, 
to embody and co-ordinate the many new decisions and constitutions issued in 
the interval. It is precisely the absence of later matter of this kind that 
distinguishes our index. The most significant passage is ll. 42-6. Here the 
ordinary text of the Cod. Iust. i. 17 gives two constitutions of the years 530 and 533 
under the rubric De veteri ture enucleando et auctoritate iuris prudentium qui in 
digestis veferuntury, In 1814 the rubric is much simpler, approximating to the 
corresponding one of Cod. Theod. i. 4, and the two new constitutions of 530 and 
533 are replaced by two others, of which one emanated from Justinian but the 
other is Cod. Theod. i. 4. 3, of A.D. 426. This evidence, which of itself would 
be sufficiently conclusive, is supported by analogous indications elsewhere. Thus 
the papyrus omits i. 14.12, of Nov. 529, and the anti-Manichaean i. 11, 10, the 
exact date of which is unknown but which, as Krier states, is probably posterior 
to i, 5. 18, being connected in substance with i. 5. 19-21 of 529-31. Its 
absence in the first edition of the Codex would therefore be expected. Again, 
the papyrus index passes directly from Cod. Iust. i. 11 to i. 14, omitting the two 
titles 12 and 13, which are both concerned with the Church. It is clear from 
the numbering of the rubrics preserved on the verso of the leaf that in this 
edition, as in the second, the principle of beginning with the ecclesiastical titles, 
which in the Codex Theodosianus had been placed at the end (Cod. lust. i. 1-11 = 
Cod. Theod. xvi. 1-10), had already been adopted. That principle was only 
carried out with more completeness in the second edition by the insertion after 
i. 11 of two other titles connected with ecclesiastical matters from other parts of 
the Codex. In this procedure the revisors were acting quite in accordance with their 
powers as laid down by the constitution De emendatione codicis § 3 st quae 


218 THE OXYRHYNCHUS. PAPYRI 


(constitutiones) similes vel contrariae inventrentur, circumducere eta priorts codicis 
congregatione separare. 

Though primarily valuable as a relic of the original edition, the papyrus 
makes some contributions also to the text of the extant Codex. While agreeing 
with the MSS. in the omission of Sep¢cmio in |. 20, it inserts the name Sert¢(zo) 
in 1. 49 (with Cod. Theod.), Zu/éo in 1. 48, and apparently M(arco) before Palladio 
in 1. 13; it adds vw prov(inciarum) (again with Cod. Theod.) after véc(arzo) in |. 8, 
but omits e¢ consuli designato in 1, 27 and nobilissimi in 1. 52. Evidently in the 
inscriptions of the constitutions little reliance can be placed upon the evidence of 
the MSS. on such matters ; the tendency to abbreviate was not to be resisted, 
and Kriiger’s rule (cf. ed. mai. pp. xv, xxiii sqq.) of supplying a full inscription 
from any available source is justified. Thus he had already adopted Sevrdzo in 
i. 18. 2, and at any rate /zdio can now be added in 18. 1 :_consistency would 
suggest the acceptance also of guinque provinciarum in i. 11. 3. There is further 
some useful evidence on individual points of detail. Lines 16-17 show that 
Cod. i. 11. 9, the inscription of which was missing, is to be attributed to 
Anastasius, and ll. 31-2 confirm the attribution of i. 14. 10 to Leo and 
Anthemius ; the name of the addressee is in both cases lost. After l. 41 there is 
nothing corresponding to the supposed Greek constitution to which a place 
is assigned by Kruger at i. 16. 2, and the existence of that constitution, though 
not disproved, becomes more questionable. 

Palaeographically the fragment is of importance, since there are few 
examples of early Latin uncials that can be so precisely dated with equal security. 
It is highly improbable that the first edition of the Codex would continue to be 
copied in Egypt after being superseded by the second, especially in view of the 
express prohibition in the constitution De emendatione codicis § 5 ex prima Lustiniani 
codicis editione aliquid recitare. The date of this manuscript may therefore be 
placed with small risk of error in the six years following April 529. The letters, 
written in brown ink, are of medium size and well formed, but the pen was 
rather coarse and the papyrus not of the best quality, so that, especially on the 
verso, the effect is not elegant. In rounded letters the separate strokes are not 
always closely joined. As in 1818, abbreviations are commonly followed by 
a medial dot often accompanied, in the case of aa, cc, pp, &c., by a horizontal 
stroke over the letters; but the scribe is inconsistent, omitting sometimes the 
dot and sometimes the stroke ; he writes both zmpg. and zmp-p- but the latter is 
probably due to inadvertence. 9 = -dus in 1. 18. When rubrics or inscriptions 
extend to a second line or more, these are considerably indented. Rubrics are 
marked off by horizontal dashes above and below them and the letter Ris placed 
both in front and at the end of each, as in the Verona fragments, whose practice 


SIZ BALANIY CLASSICAL AUTHORS 219 


is followed by Kriger in his large edition. The prefixed R is accompanied by 
the number of the rubric, in Greek figures; constitutions, with one exception 
(l. 37), are not numbered. The first rubric on the recto is written in enlarged 
uncial letters. Apparent remains of pagination are visible in the top right-hand 
corner of the verso, probably [ |ke or{ |x@, which are higher figures than would 
be expected unless the index was preceded by other matter. 


Recto. 
" BR [a] die plagana(s| sacrifictis } Codsiiistete ns: 
[ef] temples 2B 
[zmp- Const. ? Dilodoto 
[zp- Constalntin. a. ad Taurum pp r 
5 [2mpp- Gratian-| Valentin. et Theod: 2 
[aaa Cynelgio pp: 
iimpp- Arcadius et H\onorius aa. Ma 3 
(clvovto |et Prjochan-. vic. v prov: 
iad: aa Apollodo|ro priocons. Africae 4 


10 ©tmp-p- Honor|: et Theodosius aa 
populo |Cartalgen{ie|\ns¢ 


id: aa Asclepi\odoto p\p 6 
impp- Valentin. et Marcian. aa| M 7 
Pallad\io pp | 
15 tmpp. Leo et An{them- aa Dioscoro pp- 8 
avTokp(aTwp) Avagraloiuos @ ......... 9 
eTapyx(@) Tp(aTwplwr) | 
R [18] de legibo et ‘con|stited tiontbus 14. 
principum et \edictis 
20 [2mp- Co\ustan{tc\e- [a| Basso pu I 
[2mpp- T \heoldosius et\ Valentinitan. aa 2 


fald se natum 
[2d> aa ad senatum 
(7d: aa ad Volusian\um pp: 
25 [ed aa Florentio p\p- 
id: aa Florentio pp) 
(id: aa Cyro pp) 
[ed- aa ad senatum| 
zmpp- Valentinian. et| Marchian|: aa ad Pal 
30 (ladium pp| 


WO OO SE ON on sho 


220 


60) 


40 


“5 


50 


3. This constitution is absent in Cod. lust. 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


Verso. Plate V. 


Avroxparopes Aclov k\au Av@jeuios aa .. 


ewapy() 

impp: Leo et Zyno aa 

R vy de mandatis pirincipum R 

imp-p- Gratian Valen\tinian. et Theodo 
sius aa ad Ensignium pp 


{ we 


«| « ih oe 


n Ova tov tov deam|otou Tovottvov kat Love 


Tivlavov [aa 
Re wd de senjat. con\sultis R 
impp: Vial ent- T\heod osius et Arcad: 
@ ad s\enatum| 


R te (de auctoritate] iuris 
| prudentiumn| R 
(zmpp Theodosius et Valent. a ad se 
lad se\natu\m 
(tmp. Iustin\anus (Mlenae pp 


[Rus de muyis et facti tgnorian\tia| B 
[émp- Antion- a Iulio Max: mil: 

(7d a Slesxt Lurie nlali\ 

[2mep- P hilip\ poles (a Jul. ? Marcell. | 
(2mpp\. Diocl. et M\aximian- aa Iulianae 


(7d aa\ et ce Martiali 

[id aal et cc Taur- et Piolliont 

[7d aa\ et ¢c\| Zoe 

(2d: aa| et cc Dionysiae 

(7d: aa et ce Gato et [Anthemto 

(2d: aal et cc Amphiiae 

[2aep- Con'stantin- a \Vale\riaino vie- 


Cod. Theod. i. 4. 


Gods lustvicer: 


Io 


I! 


3 


Since a pagan emperor is excluded by the 


subject, and the first constitution should be older than the second, the choice of the emperor 
is limited to Constantine or Constantius, and the name in either case must have been 
considerably abbreviated. As the scribe uses the form Constantin. (ll. 4, 20, 58), it 
is perhaps better to suppose that Comsf/- here = Constantius; cf. 1.5, where Theodosius is 
shortened to Zheod. Dz\odoto is preferred to The|odo/o as the shorter. 


4. Constantin(us) : 1. Constantius. 


The same error is found in SCR. 


1814. EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS 221 


7. 1. Malclrodio. 


8. v prov(inciarum): so Cod. Theod. xvi. 10. 15 guenque provinciarum; om 
Cod. lust. 

11. |. Carthagin|ens?; that the 4 was omitted (so SCRM) is hardly certain. 

13. 4, representing the praenomen of Palladius, is a more suitable reading than ]-o 
both in itself and because the lacuna is sufficiently filled without further addition. Om. 
Cod. Lust. 

16-17. Om. Cod. Iust., where the constitution is given without the name of the 
emperor or addressee. The papyrus omits the anti-pagan Const. 10. 

18. Titles 12 De his gui ad ecclesias confugiunt vel tb¢ exclamant, and 13 De hi's quit in 
ecclesits manumittuntur, are here omitted, 

20. Basso: so MSS. and S(umma Per.) ; the nomen Sep/imio is supplied from Cod. 
Tae In the abbreviation of praefecto urbi the horizontal stroke passes through the 
etters. 

27. Cyro pp. et consult designato Cod, lust. There would not be room for ef. . . design. 
even if shortened to e¢ cons. d. 

29. 1. Marcian. 

31-2. Om. Cod. Iust., but the names of the emperors could be restored from the date. 
The name of the addressee must have been very short, unless it was abbreviated: the 
remains do not suggest Jo. 

33. The Greek y in Znmo was an oversight. Const. 12 is omitted. 

36.. pp. Cod. Lust., proconsulem Africae Cod. Theod.; what stood in the papyrus is of 
course uncertain. 

37-8. The inscription of this constitution is deficient in the MSS. of Cod. Iust., but 
is restored from Vou. 124. 4 aS Atroxpdropes "Iovorivos kai "lovorumavos aa. The reading of 
the papyrus is unintelligible and it is not clear what was intended. 8 which is placed in 
the margin and has a horizontal stroke above is evidently a numeral, though there seems 
to be no reason why this. particular constitution should have been numbered when others 
are not. Possibly éa is the survival of Saragis, and 8. tév Seomoray rd. should be restored. 

41. Below this constitution Kriiger marks the place of a lost second one, following 
indications in MSS. of P. Pithou. If it had any existence, that constitution was presumably 
issued by Justinian between the dates of the first and second codices. 

42-3. Cod. Iust. here has De veterd ture enucleando et auctoritate turis prudentium qui 
in digestis referuniur, with two constitutions of a.p. 530 and 533. In Cod. Theod. i. 4 the 
rubric is De responsis prudentum, under which there are three constitutions, the first two of 
which are of Cénstantine, one placing a ban upon the commentaries (wofas) of Ulpian 
and Paulus on Papinianus, the other upholding the authority of Paulus, while the third 
corresponds to Il. 44-5 here. It is possible that responszs, not auctoritafe, stood in the 
lacuna of |. 42, but in any case the rubric is not the same as in Cod. Theod. and is much 
shorter than that of Cod. Iust., occupying in fact an intermediate position. That the first two 
constitutions of Cod. Theod.i. 4 are dropped is an anticipation of Cod. lust. i. 17. 1 § 6 ea, 
quae antea in notts Aemilit Papiniant ex Ulpiano et Paulo nec non Marciano adscripia sunt... 
non statim respuere, &c. On the other hand Cod. Theod. 1. 4. 3, the law of citations, 
is retained pending the enucleation of the zus vefus in the Digest. Cod. Theod. i. 4. 2, 
which is virtually repeated in 3, may well have been regarded as superfluous. 

44-5. Impp. Theod. et Valentin. aa. ad senatum urbis Rom. Cod. Theod. In |. 44 the 
scribe wrote Valenti and then inserted the dot between / and 7, a@ was written for aa, 
probably owing to confusion with the @ of ad, and there was apparently a dittography 
of ad se. 

46. This constitution is unknown, but the name of Menas, to whom the constitution 


222 TBE -OLYRAYNCHUS PAL veel 


of a.p. 529 De codice confirmando, prefixed no doubt to the first edition, was addressed, may 
be restored with great probability. § 3 of that constitution relates to former codices and to 
veleres turts tnterpretatores, but it is unlikely that that section, still less the entire constitution, 
stood in this position, where some other rescript to Menas, superseded subsequently, like 
Cod. Theod. i. 4. 3, by Cod. Iust. i. 17. 1-2, would be more appropriate. 

48. Lulio: om, Cod. Lust. 

49. 1. Sevd(zo); this name, which is absent in the MSS., had been rightly restored from 
Cod. Greg. 

50. That the superfluous 0 was cancelled is not certair. A difficulty arises at the end 
of the line, where with the reading JZarcellae the letters /ae are expected, in place of which 
there is something that may be read as ]. Z.[ or perhaps as |. This constitution is 
apparently to be connected with iii. 44. 8, issued on the same date and addressed to Lulzae, 
and some variation here in the name of the addressee is therefore not surprising ; but 
whether the insertion of Zw/. is correct remains very doubtful. 

52. ef cc (= Caesares): so PLM; ef centum S, om. C, et Maximianus nobiles cesares R, 
et Constantius et Maximianus nobilissimt CC. Kriiger. 


HOMERIC FRAGMENTS 


(The collations are with Ludwich’s text.) 


1815. 14:5xIg-Icm. Parts of two columns, written in an informal sloping 
hand on the verso of a fragment of a second-century taxing-account. Col. i 
contains A 33-50, Col. ii. A 59-75. 44 wo Of xwoumevos corr. from o. 
45 exev added above the line. qaperpns 65 ov was written for o y, but the 
third stroke of the y is blurred and o y’ may be intended. 67 avticas 
71 vyneo nyaoar. Third century. 

1816. 25-7x7-7 cm. Fragment containing ends of O 332-70 (complete 
column) and 386-409 (end of col., the upper part of Col. ii being lost), in 


nearly upright somewhat irregular uncials of about the middle of the third 
ede 
century. A mark of elisionin 1. 340. 338 om. 340 8 dros = 3.4.4 €lpittpn- 


Eavres 345 Texeos 3.48 vewy eMedAovra 386 In place of this line va{ stands 
in the papyrus, 1. 389, which is omitted in its proper place, apparently 
having been inserted here. The papyrus is broken above va[. 389 om.; 
cf. 1. 386. On the verso a late third-century account. ; 
1817. Fragments of three leaves, written with brown ink in a good-sized 
sloping and fairly regular hand in which light and heavy strokes are strongly 
contrasted, Probably sixth century. Accents, breathings, and marks of 
elision are frequent, and apparently all due to the original scribe. Stops in 


HOMERIC FRAGMENTS 223 


the high and middle position are used. These fragments were found with 
1818, and possibly belonged to the same codex or corpus, but the scripts, 
though they may be contemporary, are quite distinct. 

Fol.1 4:1x2-5 cm. Verso ends of P 379-84, recto beginnings of 


418~24, 
Foi.2 1I-5x2cm. Verso a few letters from 3 412-14, recto do. from 
455-6. 
Fol.3 144x13:8cm. Verso = 564-81 (end of col.). 571 opalprn 
L t 
574 te[rev]xero 576 podayov 577 xpl¥ceot 579 [d)v'[[w]], corr. H1? Recto 
Kad]nv 5 ; 
603-17 (end of col.). 604 dvo 612 Ja:[dad\éyv. The scribe perhaps 


began 1. 614, being misled by the homoioarchon of 611 and 613.  en[[e]|t 
615 AxtAd‘l[]jos. 617 Below this line isa row of angular marks, followed by 
the title IAvad[o|s un} enclosed in ornamental flourishes. 

1818. Parts of five leaves of a papyrus book, written with brown ink in an ugly 
sloping hand of the fifth or sixth century, rather similar in type to that of 
1618. Accents, breathings, and marks of elision have been freely inserted. 
partly by the original writer, but many being due to a second hand which 
has also added some of the stops (high and middle position) and made 
corrections in the text. The method of accentuation hardly differs from 
modern practice, except with regard to the retracted accent. e€ has 
frequently been written for a: or vice versa, and many such misspellings 
have been corrected both by the first and second hands ; these variations, 
and the common confusion of. and e«, are generally not noticed in the 
following collation. A few scraps have not been identified. 

Fol.t 16-8x14:7 cm. Verso X Yrog-37 (ends of lines). 111 xata/- 


aL 
O{clonel] »]] omTAd TE TavTa 113 ajwdvovos 114 xtypat 115 7 Of wnvoly 
x €e€ 
converted frome I16 vixos 118 ocd re 121 wasincluded. 125 xa{[¢]] 


a 
ano, corr. H®, apparently neglecting todelete the a, 128 AdAnAotot 129 Opa 
rdxioTa ©6134. avTf. Recto 153-77 (beginnings). 154 [kjowAatveot 163 Tpw- 


t 


v L t 

xGou corr. to tpexoto. by H? 164 tpitos 171 Kopupjot 172 akpotaTn 
5 u 
174 red 176 IInAeton. 

Fol. 2 Recto X 190-202, 283-93, 203(?). Lines 283-93 are each 
followed by a small comma-shaped mark by the first hand, implying that 
the verses, which were rewritten in the proper place (cf. Fol. 3), were to be 
cancelled. The dislocation may have been due to a defective archetype, or 


224 


THE OXYVYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


, 
a 


the scribe’s having turned over two leaves in mistake. 194 Aapdavidov 


T 
195 evyrrovs 196 addd’kovev: Bedéero v]] 200 o0vd 0 283 « of agers 
» T 
‘ ‘ / 
converted from 7» 290 ovde. Verso 216-43. 220 moda 222 apvve 


€e€ , 
224 épar 226 Aimy] 228 iarapevy mrlepoevt? 233 Anidos [<]] 238 mpoo- 
€ A 

cime 239 Todd. 


s 
Fol. 3 Verso X 255-78. 260 AywddAcv 264 adAnAowct 265 oure 
oe dardipos E[ktwp 
270 6€ tar «272 Oviwr- 274 nAcvato [[ xaAKxeor éyxos | 275 petAuvov 
Trotmeva Aawy : 
éyxos 277 E’xropa duov. Recto 291-314. 298 éywy|[a]] 304 wav 


7 
acrovel| el], Cortmaia? 205 [[uada]| peya 307 AaTvrapys 310 af] wJlaany 
312 AywAl[A]le[vs, corr. H?. 

Fol.4 Recto X 336-57. 347 [el] éopyas 353 avril]. Verso 376-97. 

ov Vv t 
380 épdecxev ba [lal] 383 xatadretpworr) 391 [vy 392 yAagupijar. 
a € i 
Fol. 5 Verso © 345-70. 348 érpepov 350 nipar’|| a] éeumer 351 wrdcad,’ 
S 
a corr. 353 KAjpo 354 tovd'|[e|] eAaxe, a converted from «. 355 dovpikAvros, 
5 vaTatos autre € 
but a straight stroke was begun after A. 356 edAavvepyev immovs 359 eloav 
t 
363 opolkAjoay Tes |] exéeror 365 xorty]| ¢]] . 367 avroulns. Recto 383-406. 
t 

388 eNadnpdperfos 392 ake...015€ 39300 0v 395 ayxdvas 5€ 396 OpvdxOn 


T 


l 
397 daxpydpiy 401 Arpedns (e from te?) dovpi K[AvTos —- 405 tmotor, 


1819. Fragments of a roll containing x, A, mw, well written in small upright 


uncials which may be assigned to the second century. Two marks of length 
and many accents (acute-angled), breathings, marks of elision, diaereses, and 
stops in the high position have been inserted by a later hand, probably 
that of the corrector who has made a few alterations in the text. The 
columns had a marked slope to the right, the last line of Fr. 2. ii beginning 
about 6 letters in advance of the first line. A facsimile of that fragment 
with a transcript of the text was given in the New Palaeographical Society’s 
Series IT, Plate 76. 

Fr.t 4:1X2-2 cm., « 3-12, Fr. 2 26.4% 14-2 cm., Col. i ends of 
A 244-83, Col. ii 284-323. 259 Apvéaovla 7’ 285 Bacrreve'l|r |], Corr. bic 


HOMERIC FRAGMENTS 225 


287 p of IInpé retouched by H? 292 car|] €|| 297 Oechar anavt’ 298 xa 
lw 
for kat. Tuvddpew 301 apdw ovs 302 malp| Znvois 303 In the margin 


é 
opposite this line is y (= 300). 306 Tlocwdalwu 308 Grov 309 Opéer 
311 evvél] o llwporf corr. H?? 314 rodvdl] €llixos, COLh dA) 516 T1jal}e[]uov, 

° 
corr. H?. Frs. 3-5 beginnings of \ 414-26, 428-32. 418 xeulva 429 kja- 
ken. Fr. 6 2-2x1-5 cm.,a fewletters from » 1-4. Some small fragments 
remain unidentified. 

1820. 17-8x38-5cm. Lower portion of a sheet, which was the uppermost of 
a quire, from a papyrus codex. The hand is a good example of the formal 
upright type commonly designated ‘Coptic’, resembling e.g. P. Grenf. II. 
112, and is of the sixth or seventh century. Stops in two positions (high 
and medial), accents, breathings, and marks of elision and quantity are fairly 
frequent ; a few of these are evidently original, but the majority, which are 
more lightly written, are later additions, due probably to one of the correctors, 
of whom two, one using cursive forms, seem to be distinguishable. Besides 
these. common signs a comma to separate words, and its converse, the 
sub-linear hyphen, occur among the subsequent insertions. The dimensions 
of the complete page may be estimated at about 34 x 19 cm. 

Fol.1 Verso o 55-80. 63 mArcoveroily 64 Bactdnes. In marg. awovrior 
H2 65 Evpupayos te «lar Avtilyoos. Marg. xaraepo| H? 67 marg. | mepe 


e.[ ?r...[ H? 70 mAdave 73 enlonaroy. Marg. agfe. H? 78 eha ex 7’ 


a[fe $9 
ovdpy|ve 80 In left marg. a diagonal dash. Recto 95-121. 96 Tpol] » |] 
101 €iAke 102 aiOodcons 105 In the left marg.a flourished sign 7. 107 On 
w of ewy an acute substituted for a grave accent. 109 On 7 of aoprnp an 


acute substituted for a grave accent. 110 [ajy’ dap’ rt edffe||txavdwr7’, 
the « cancelled by a dot placed above it (H??). 1117 om. 118 em 
yaorépa. 

Fol. 2 Recto o 137-63. 142 marg. ere x{a|Aa[s (not KalAov or -Aa 
apparently) | ere xax[ws H* 146 Against this line and ll. 148-51 there are 
oblique dashes in the left margin. 149 draxpiverdat 152 6 of dé€zas corr. 


153 Kata doula 163 In the margin below this line pndevos tpoKeyevov’ H. 
Verso 178-205. 185~7 Oblique dashes in the left margin against these 


if + 
lines, and a coronis between ll, 186-7. 185 ypus 190 marg. To [T\ny- 


ka(vjra H*. 


226 THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI 


IV. MINOR LITERARY FRAGMENTS 


1821. 68x4cm. Beginnings of 9 verses, hexameters or elegiacs, from the 
bottom of a column, written in a rather small, informal, upright hand of the 
third century. Marks of elision are used. 


: . : : Kat Togw pvnl 
vooro. TE. [ mavta © emiortalpev 
evOa Kapov mm. | envy atpekews [ 
pny yoopevol ws oe Tadw pf 


poxOnoas & ated. [ 


[ 


5 aotractal. .je.. [ 


1822. 35-3x17cm. On the recto remains of two columns of an account. On 
the verso ends and beginnings of lines of two columns from a hexameter 
poem, apparently relating to astronomy,e. g. i. 17 ajxpoOu vuxtos 3° |evderar evdos* 
19 Wa dnuréavro’ 2! | weya yea 7 Jov avypov *8 |. evravtw: 7° \vor kounta- * | ceAnvn’ 


S: 
(marginal adscript purynor) 33 wv nrvol|r]] eA6n ii. 8 acrara yap ororxele * Zeus 
Kpovos Epplecas. Most of the lines of Col. i have a high or medial stop at the 
end. The last line of Col. ii is opposite i. 30, but the column begins at a 
higher point than Col. i and the lines are rather closer together, so that the 
number of the lines was probably the same in both. This papyrus was 
found with 1796, and is in much the same condition ; the texts on the verso 
are apparently in the same hand, and the marginalia, too, are similar. But 
the height of 1822 is quite different from that of 1796, and there is no 
connexion in subject; the hands and contents of the rectos also differ, so 
that it is clear that two distinct rolls are represented. Second century. 
1823. 20°8 x 6-6cm. Strip from a column containing parts of 28 lines ofa tragedy, 
ll. 7-15 at least being stichomuthic. Resolution is frequent. The upright 


well-formed uncial hand is evidently early, and may go back to the beginning 
of the first century B.C. 


: cr nee. ee -leTepx[ 15 ss [-] « wlelAaewne AL 
[-- +. ++ .|7o Aum Tatepa ghovevoas Tore [ 
[.- 2.4 .Jous maf [ese ken jav vmo pyrnf 
[seeterecsis oie [OG], [.... .Juara nov e.[ 


MINOR LITERARY FRAGMENTS 227 


5 [ fare ates? Jevors av... [ 
ets goBov az . [ emi Beate ov n.f[ 
Kal OvK eyyekpvyal (?) [eves ease Yop. rise. | 
ws TOL ye pedaAey ppev . | Vara Seta St | + cautnol 
TeOvnKEe TOY cov o7Trep| wa leapeiassifaete te leTovral 

10 oljot mpos adAwy Kat ToO| [reroute je cere Cous. | 
ouTes EXEL TaVTa ws TI BBG |e each Sy spt ahs |ratc . [ 
morepov de mapedvo n 7 ee Aare (se an! 
n mapOevos Dees tai ule |. pov ce.[ 
® TAnov dep i [pee Jatpos o ye. [ 


1824. 99x6-1 cm. Fragment of a (Menandrian?) comedy, from the top of 
acolumn. Alternations of the dialogue are indicated by double dots, and 
the names of speakers in abbreviated form have been entered above the line 
in cursive, as e.g. in 211. The speakers are Adyns and Mié( ), a name 
which does not occur in comedy but may stand e.g. for Mi€/énuos, Miéias, 
Migwy, or Mi€wvidns, and one of them is betrothing a girl called Pamphile (?) 
to the other. The text is written across the fibres of the verso (the recto 
being blank) in medium-sized sloping uncials, probably of the third century. 
Besides the double dots a high stop is used ; a mark of elision (H” ?) occurs 
in]. 10, Several lines are evidently nearly complete at the ends. 

Aay 

? Baltvers es pe: epor deol 

elym de cot Aayns: ovk eor[ 
Mit! 
lv oda Snrovdev: yevr| 
Je wn oT emNs wopni[y 
Aax 
5 elmidacey ; obey dalBwv ? 
].. opodroyw cou Aap[Bavev ? 

] apu mavé e€e . [ 

Js: dude@pe TTap[pirny ? 


Tao er apoTo yyvnotw[y 


To) ] apeota [rav|ra ofole [ 
y 
AaluBarl. « Ixop - [ 
NE cals eee 1 


228 THE OXVYRAYNCHUS, PAPI. 


In 1. 3 there is a small mark after Mcé’ on the edge of the papyrus, but it 
does not suggest any letter. For 1. 9 cf. e. g. 211. 38-9; it may be inferred 
with some probability that the fragment is from the conclusion of the play. 
In 1. 11 the small interlinear dash probably belongs to an abbreviation of 
one of the speakers’ names. 

1825. 11-9x13:1 cm. Fragment from the top of a leaf of a papyrus codex, 
containing on the recto ends of 8 lines, and on the verso beginnings of 
10 lines, from a comedy. The hand isa round upright uncial of medium 
size, dating perhaps from the fifth century. Accents, &c., which are fairly 
frequent, may be by the original scribe, but a corrector’s hand is apparently 
to be distinguished in verso 2. Brown ink, rather faded and effaced 
in places. 


Recto. 
].v movous yap: adda trou TUXN: 
? djec Se meipay AapBdvey 
] mapaxodovOav efopat 
Wome 
5 |r cAovpar mpoaTorAe Tavrny eyo 
tat |prBn yiwerat pov tos ydpos 


J. f+ Ao wt ws 


.@V yap uo Tavrns eyo 


WOTEOV TLV ON Ele ss TIS 


Verso 2. év |a|pavet? 


Verso. 
€y@ modu paddov eveos [| 


TL ouv alae: Ta To Tp.[ 
ovk av duvaito gyotv . [ 
av7n adda mopicate . [.]. . [ 
5 parakes exel[s|| yap a..[ 
Kat trapehOotc’ éyeTo e€w . [ 
eee 


Topiaw matdio 


got KaT. on aive.e.[ 
TiOGas m@.. re. [ 
Goo TEs val TE alates 


10 ¢ 


But the correction is unexplained. 6. Trochaic 


tetrameters begin here, but 1. 8, where 1. rir@as, is irregular. 


1826. 9%X7-3cm. Fragment, in places rubbed and faded, of a leaf of a papyrus 
codex containing a romantic prose narrative concerning King Sesonchosis. 
The hand is a medium-sized upright uncial of late third—fourth century type 


Recto. 


Verso. 
a Bowen | Seoloyx@ots . [ 
] mepcxparn . [ ] Kat Tvyxavov[ 
] tov mada rfolur . [ ]. wavtas add exoulor 


] Secoyxwors avnre [ ] omep erex\woay Toul 


MINOR LITERARY FRAGMENTS 229 


5 |- ta Aomov pera Toly 5 | pH BovdAopevos ta 7. [ 
] urmopayov Kat omdoplayor lew oTav exeva ade . [ 
e@|Oora Baoievow ene tins | rote autos emipave . [ 
ev\vopou nALKLas yev[opevots [pt de eva Tov pop. [ 
To] marp. etmrev Ki | avOpwrous 1... [ 
190 =| vT0 Ter TaTpwoly 10 evjdatpoviay thy dal 
Ke]xag[iJoOau mv o.{ ] tov Oeov BonOor . [ 
]. Al. .]< o.] andws . [ Selooyxalarls .. xo. [ 
[Joo . [. .JOv. [ |ptav eo ye ohov Sh 
TelActovc bar of WT E00, Ny ITOU5.cis | 
15 les. 7. 


The length of line seems to have been greater than that suggested by 
recto 7-8 ; in ll. 6-7, where the lacuna is approximately the same, some- 
thing like xata ra e.w|@ora is required. In verso 1o the final v of evdaiporiav 
is corrected. 

1827. Fr. 1 10-7x5:6cm. Upper part of a narrow column, with a small 
detached fragment, containing a few nearly complete lines of prose, perhaps 
an oration, mentioning Phormio. Third century, written in medium-sized 
sloping uncials ; a high stop in]. 11. 


Bier: [. Ja ore AOnr[ar.. 
[. . .Jepo[.] Tovrois [. «kee PtAdf. . 
pev ev[k|rov ov ev DAP [eenleOS €lvou |e aie vate wed 
[Tor TnSs TodEws a {Aude OG OOls tatesmisie ene 
[El@pate Kat ayo le eeaRYP] «nda wesetes 
5 vigecOar Kat Kn pono uid fae on rome: 
[plwrrecOar TH de 
[wloXec Tov TovTay 
[orlepavoy ov do Bry 2: 
[Elns yeyovora an aN 
to [A] atoyuyns atte vol 
[ov] apa y eknpuT wal.} - [ 


[re]ro Dopyioy .. ; lel. 


In |. 2 there seems to be barely room for [x], but evrovoy is not attractive, 


still less evyovor. 


230 THEY OXYRAYNCHUS “PALYRI 


1828. 49x2-9 cm. Fragment ofa vellum leaf, inscribed in well-formed rather 
small sloping uncials of, probably, the third century. The contents are of 
an ethical character. Apparently the lines were of no great length, but their 
point of division is not fixed. The vellum is thin and rather discoloured. 


Recto or flesh side. 
] Kau yap ofvxorjfols . [ 
] 0 tkavoy motwy tpudi ne 
kalt 0 peOvoos Kat o KatadalAos 


Kat o wWelvorns Kat o mdeovexTns [Kat 
t 
5 0 amootelpntns Kat o ToLovTos Ta [mapa 


mwAnola 2] movwy [r]ne Afalvo[ear] rov{ 


WM Zoe een 1 


lupeov emAavOavera [ 
] mpagiv n yap tpuvdyn xa. [ 
] mwas ov[x] exee dia thy a.[ 
5 Pn evdedura y de retplwpra ? 


\tol. o]rav modX@ . [.]. Tol 


NG Dai. 


(1700 zs to be supplied before 18-99,1800 before 0-28, such figures referring to 
papyri; figures in small raised type refer to fragments, Roman figures to 
columns ; sch. = scholium.) 


I. 1787-9 (SappHo and ALcAaEus). 


dal 87.1% ro, 

aBpors 8'7. °7 2. 

a\8pérav (?) 87.° 3. 

dyabos 88.* 10. 

dyava| 87.° ii, 12. 

dyandra 87.° ii. 10. 

dye 88.17 ii. 3. ayy 89.°1 3. 

ayopav 88. 15 3. 6 sch. 

dew 88.° 3 sch. 

a\dv 88.85. ddr 87. ii. 5. 

ddvroyor 87. 11 4, 

die|Sex S724, 

deixea 89.11. 6. 

déppar| 88.° 3. 

a7[do. 87. © 9. 

a8avar| 87.21. 

advppata 87.°* ii, 22. 

ai 88.7 6,27 11, 4, 1.163 
89.1 i, 12 (?). 

aii 89. 7% 2. 

aiyiB6| S8i° >: 

&dpos 89.° 5. 

ater 88.°8. 

aidell 88. 1° ii. 5. 

Kae A eastski yo Ok 

aipovo[ 89.73 sch. 

aicxos 88. ° 4. 

aioxp| 87.1" 3. 

airvov 87. ° 6. 

aiva 87.** 5. 

dxar| $8,732: 

dxowrwy 87.14? 21, 


dkouny 87.*° 3. 
[dxp]av B65: 
anix eco. 87, 12 7, 
aXirpal 87. 4,°" 2. 
Gia 87.17716, 2, 2% 4. 
@ddos 88.434. Gddor 87.116, 
add| 89.1 ii, 15. 
dos 88.* 25- 
dpeo|, 87-76: 
dumeh{ 88.1 4. 
15a, 2 7. 
apop| B77." 5. 
av 88.) i. 4 sch. 
dvairtov 88.) ii. 12. 
dvaé 89.°8. 
*Avdpopeday 87.7 5. 
dvépo 89.11. 15 (?). 
dump 89.! ii. 6. 
dvOos 87.19 5, 
avOpan| 87.147. 
dv|odBov 87. *° 2, 
dvri 88.1 i. 15 sch. 
88.15 i. 18 sch. 
codov 87. F271. 
draicav 87. ** 2. 
dran| SS.575 
and 88.7 10 sch. 
Tie OSes OSs 
Be ile e Ls 
dro\eerupevoy 89.7 3 sch. 
drdédduta 89. 74 2. 
arvyve (?) 87. 13 8, 


aureiw 88. 


audi 89.77 3. 


> \ - 
av(ri Tov) 


art 87.7 
av 88. 


| dmrveirn| 88.74. 

anvéeoba 87. °° 1, 

dppovias 87. 13 Q. 

apotpopp 88.28, 

"Aprepu| 87.3" 4. 

ds 88.% ii. 4. 

| doav 87.7 4, 

dotlos? 89. 29 4, 

dras 89,16 2 sch. 

arépal 87. a 

avar[aoe g9.i%r. 

adée 87. °° 2. 

avrav 87.172 6, 94; 89.11. 
g. ary 88.* 10 sch. atro 
88.428. airas 88.1 ii. 
23. 

| avov 87.12 18, 

| "Adpodi ra SS: 

"Axéplovros 87. * Lo. 

dyOnv 87.142 5. 


Bépn 89.73 sch. 

| Bacitevs 89.1 i. IO. 
87.46. 

Budgw 88.77. 

BoAXco 87. *4 4. 

3pdd) 88.87. Bpodof 87.181. 

Bpodéraxvy 87. 14278, 

|Bpopos 89. 96, 


Baown| 


| yaper 89.1i, 7: 


232 

yapov 89.11. 14, yap 89. 
32-2 Sch, 

Wad Sie Wee, ed, Lyn ys 
86.6; 34 o> 88.* 10, 20, + 
lig 7s LOMST, 2s OO, Ui. 
TRG), ak ay 232), 222, 

yoeS7.48 2 ag5 =88, “0 (7), 
yi 88.°% 2 sch. 

yever Oa 87. 1t2 lve éyévo|vro 
87.142 19. éyevro 87. ii. 
I. yeverdo 89.1 ii. 16. 
yéevoro 87. ° ii. 23; 89. 
Se Me 

yevnov 88.7 9. 

yo! 88529 1, 4 sch: 

ynpas 87.142 12, 

yAdatvxay 88.14, 

yrapipal 89.° 8. 

ydvKepov 87.° 5. 

yroxus 87.217. 
ih, Gy; 

yova 87, 1*2 r4, 

yuvakds 88.° 7 sch. 
axe 87, 41 2, 


yucéws 89. 


? yov]- 


dal 89.7 3. 
daipov 87.° 3. 
eam By 

[Satire] 89. 41 5, v.1. Sire. 

dagvas (or Addvas ?) 87.9 ii. 4. 

denv 88.4 27. 

Seiva 87.° ii. 17. 

dexapeba 89.12 5. dé£era 89. 
25 4. 


daipova 88. 


devovros 88.) ii. 3. 

on 88. 14 11.3 2°89, 722. 

dnire 87.°8 4; 89.11. 15, 41 
5 (v. 1. Satre). 

d8oio[ 87. 7° 5. 

Aidupos 88.1 i. to sch. 

[Sud jaciay 88.) ii. 28, 

dual 88.15 ii. 3. 

Sox] 88.° 3° 

ddKywos 89.1 ii. 6. 

Sdpov 8Q. 29 3. 

Spépapev 89.1 ii. 2. 

dpénfolow 88.1 ii, 23, 

dpoodecoal 87.°8 


INDICES 


diva 88.) ii. 16. 
Svvap| 87. ° ii. 18. 
dvvaroy 87.142 17, 
bo 87. 24 3. 

ddpa 87. 1*2 To, 


edcw 87.8 2, 
éyo 87.52; 88.420, ii. 8, 
PEST HAI NO ge We betes 


S6s* 12,880 5.6.2 spo 
BY, Aad i, 235 apse 
87.447; 89.lit2. du 
pas 872° 4,282. 0). tape 


péwy [89. ies rae appv) 
89.11. 16, 122. 

cépcas 87.11 g, 

etme 88. 12 ii, 6, 
Esa Vun teh 

els 88.15 i, 18 sch.; 89. 2 ii. 
2 (és Pap.). 

cicduoy 87. ° ii, Q. 

cioeke| 89.1 ii, 13? (eo Pap.). 

LIS = TN ah Cea Y: BME tts ye 
89.6 7. 

éxd| 87. °° 6. 

ehevdepars 88. ° 5. 

Any, treo 87. © 3. 

é\xea 88. * 40, 

ed]Airoly 89. 29 1, 

édmis 87.172 10, 

ehropa 88.) ii. 19, 

[€u84] 89.21. 17, 

enpl Sis nurs 


elrn|y 88. 


eulwevae 88.2 9g. (cori) 88. 
214 sch. (?). gov 877. 3 ii, 
21. joda 87.142 15. fs 
88.) ii. 18. fcoera 88. 


1ST. 89.8 3. 
éovr| 88.6 12, 
eh | 
24. 

ev 88.23 sch.; 89. 296. Kady 
87.9 34, ey. 87. * xo; 

? ép|Sikws 89, 20 5, 

éveixny 88.) ii, 20. 

éwexa 87.° 5. 

évour|, 88.4 26. 

e&io| 89. 4° 2, 

éndve 88.) i. 13 sch. 

éemei 88.3 7 sch.; 89.) i. 17. 


éov 89. ° 4. 
govtes 89. 
€oiaats 88. 1° ii, 


teva, cfu 87.19 3, 


"Ereilov? 89.° 7. 

eruaps| 88. 15 ii. 22. 

erruxe| Si.2 2: 

énu| 87. 14226. 

ént|rabéws 89.7 I. 

erovapevot 88. 1° ii, 25 (€mo- 
mp.); 89.1 i. 5. 

erapoco| is As ke 

éplores? 87.11 4, 

éohoas 89.1 ii. 8. 

eco 88. * 33. 

écxa7[ 88.4 31. 

ért. 87, 2, 

«87.449; 89.1i. 3. 

evpophorepa 87, *4 5. 

exp 87.142 718, 12 2. gg, 1i, 
10. exo 88s. 11 2. exet 
87.°ii. 19. e%n 89.1 i. 2. 
éxotca 87.11 6, 

éxupov 89.1 ii. 2. 


GS Nas. 

(ol 87.21 ii. x, 

Capevdvrov 89.11. 6 and sch. 
(apevérooay 89.11. 6 sch. 


4 Si.° i. Gan: 

noé 87. 36 5. 

On 87. 1*2 12; 88.15 ii, 14. 
jpwov 88.16, 


ado|o Sarno Pete, 

Baral 88. 2 I. 

Gal var ..? 89,182, 

Oére 87.44 2. Oéhoo| cy ene 
Oedjon|, ST 6: 

Geos 87.2 11, 17. Georow 87.7 3. 

6|tyoura SYA. 

Opié, tplyes 87, 142 13. 

Oipoy 87. 44 5, 

Gvpay 87, 19 2, 


tarov 89, 29 5, 

? la]inv BO.29 5: 

idpeia 89.52. 

iu[ev (?) 
SS ela. 

kero? 87.3 ii, 12. 

ide... 87. 44 To. 


uf 


SAPPHO AND ALCAEUS 


ipep[o 87. 10 3, tlpepov 87. kof 87.19 4. 


10 6. 
inl pp jn» 88.°6? 
ipeprov 88.4 3 
inn 88.11, 
icav 87.7 3. 
ix Ou, $9.75, 


toa 87, 142 15. 


Kove Sie eh aon © iat 
EOn eee el At aera OS 
$8.22 01a; 18.2°80.7 ii, 
Beosen Sy ae hae KGL 
¢ 87.241, xKanvyupee 87. 
13 3) 

kairo. 87. + 7. 

caxos 89.°1 1. xdkov 89.11 2. 
kdxa 89.11, 3. xdkov 88. 
POT wa TORAI 15. KCK, 89. 
25 

kal x6 |rpome Simcoe 

xddapos 88.15. 

kddav 87.° ii, 13.  xddov 87. 
Te oR OG. Ih 10. Kaka 
Sen 16, KON ST. i 22, 

Kadeiv, kdAnu 87. 4, 

kap| 89.7 1, 

xapros 88.) ii. 18. 

Kapre| $8) Pine. 

Kara O7, 0" 1O5 8S. ° 2 \sch., 
421, «dd 88.10 6, xadd| 
Sosa 7, 

karayper 88.7 4. 

karan| 36.25. 

kaTaisxvrwpey 89.1 ii, 7. 

Karie|y =. 87. 78. 

FAD) Sint 1Oe <M. 2,720. 
SO io. 0 1%, 


k[equevors 89.1 ii, 8. Keipev.. 
88. 151. 16 sch. 

cedddes 8816. 

cepp| 88.1 15. 

knvov 87.° ii. 6. knr| Ss. 


li. 4. 
Kipoa(?) 89. ° 9. 
kaupa 88. 1° ii. 19. 
kAerSor| Sods 
kréos 87.4 9. 
kodokivras 88. * 6. 
klovpa 88. * 4. 
kpivew, kexpipevos 89.11, 7. 


Koa 88; 425 89, 4.1, 185. 
kup| 88.6 11. 
Kimp» 87.4 6. 


Aayydvew, Adyn 89. hii. 4, v. 1. 
AdBn. dédAoyxe 87.142 25. 

AapBavew, AGBn 89. 1i1. 4, v. 1. 
Aayn. 

Adumpoy 87.142 25, 

AavOavewv, Aera[ 6? Sie: 

Aedxae 87. 142 13, 

Aynay 87. 11, 

Avyvpay 87. 12 y1, 
Si.° 7. 

Neva 89.1 ii. 2. 

Aipvas 88.1 2. 

Niros 88.2 11. 

Avpaur| 87.148, 

Avp[ 87. 79 5. 


Atyupat 


patvopevor 89.79 4, 

pax, 87. ° 1. 

paxdpev 8'7,° 20. 

para 89.° 4. 

padr[axoy 89, 1 ii, 3, v. 1. pord. 
pav 87.° 4. 

panodn 89. *9 7 sch. 
padprrew, euapyev 87.14? 20, 
paxerOa 87. 4 7, 

pel 89.76 5. 


peyad{ 89.71 2, 
pe Slaoa 87. 77 3, 
pedatval 87.° il. 15. 
STA 13e 
perrrxdhorlos 87. ° 6. 
pédos 87.55. pedav 87.4 2 
(title). 
peeSiy iy Is, SS iN. 17. 
pemy 89.11. 12. pever| 89. 
12 3, 


peXaivay 


peptpval Sie. 

py Si. i. 10,.-* 2, °° 45 88. 
dee Tae i 29 Oy A 
3, 7: 

pnde SO. 7 1.5, 12 5. 

pndev 87.° il. 20. 
34 2. 


pn der[ 87. 


pnxere 87.711. 


235 


pnre| Siacie. 

Mixa 87. ° 1, 

pupyyokerOa, pvacOnre 89. 1 
ie: 

porOlaxov 89.1 ii, 3 (v1. 
pard.). 

povapxtav 89, 12 4. 

popos 89, 29 4. 

poyes 87. il. 9. 

pupta 88.7 Io. 

Mupcidov 89.17 9 sch. 

plopo ? 89. } ii. 5. 


val 89. % 1. 
vaa 88.419. vary 88.1 i, 
5 sch. vaos 89.1 i. 17. 


veBpingw 87.142 15, 

vical 88.) ii, 8. 

v6 88. 1? ii. 5. 

vonppa 87. 44 3. 

vopiode 87.142 22, 

v|bcov SO. 5. 

Sits Wy Reece | Ih oh Ae Abo eas ea 
88,76; 89.4416, * 1. 


feo[ 88.15 i. 5 sch. 
Evoropopnpevos 89.1 i. 8. 


65,6. (art., deni tel.) 67a =" 
8,882, d 88.*33. 7d 
S7 tt gns’ 6. Bie 88.2 
9; Pll. 19.. Tada Ue 
LOM 2 OOM sll eOumeTO 
S82".6 298004 a5 6 a5. 
Ta) 88.1% 2. ras 87.71; 
88.)°si, t4. ro BOL 1: 
<a 66.11 ti, 2. oteseat 
Ne 2h. FO. 87s vie Ae 
To 88.70. oe. 4 ey 

rois 87.3 ii, 243 
88.4 23. rév 89.1? ii. 12. 
trav 89. 7 3. Talis, Taice 
87.° il. ys 89.7 il. 14: 

dde, rdvd[e? SY.ii.g. taade 
SS aes, 

ddolmopos 87.2 lie 8. 

odey 88.4 26. oicba 87. * 9g. 

ox S8.* 24. 

dxvos 89. } ii. 3. 

JBov 88.2 12. 


BA oye 
ll, 25. 


234 


ddrtyas 88.15 ii. 20. 

oAxa(v) 87. °8 3. 

dAog| dios ? 87.° 3. 

paul p me 88.0.8: 

opr 88. * 27. 

opmave 88. 15 ii. 7. 

[Oud |axas 88.) ii. 24. 

ov 88.1 6. 

dveo| 87. 87 2. 

dvias 87.° ii. 17. 

? dlyvexer 89.°% 4. 

dvoipe 87. ° ii. 15. 

dndcda 87. 1t2 23, 

érmobev 88.1 3. 

énmora 89.1 i, 13. 

dpn| 88. * 3. 

dp|videror 88.12. 

ds [1789.1 ii. g]. ds re, ds re 
88.417. dv te 87. ** 2. 

gooos 87.48; 88.15 ii. 18. 
da|oa 87. ** 6. 

dra 87.7 ii, 4. bra re 87. 3 ii. 
16. 

érris 88. Io. 

OUNOUKRNS Te» deal 7 Viens 
21 4S S88, 7.20, 20; 
33, ii, 20, 25 (?). eyo'uc 
87.°2. pnix 88.12 ii. 7, 

? ov |Sdpa (or pn |Sapa) 88.411. 

ovbe 87." 38, 1 '2(?), 2? n,(7)5 
$8.7 i. 13,20. 

ovdév 87.° 7. 

ovros, toiro 87.142 24, 5 2; 
88426, 19 4, 1211.8. rov- 
rov 88.15j. 15 sch. tadra 
$721 25 $8. 2'sch. 

o’ro 87. ii, 21. otro 88. 
15:1. £Osch, 

dl (?) 88.15 ii, 27. 


ndOnv 88.14 3, 

maida 87.92. aides 87, 1t2 
Io. m{at|das 88.4 5: 

madnv 87,19 5, 

mav 87.° il. 5. mal 89. © 3. 
maiojav? 89.79 2, wdvra 


87.5 7112\(0)s SB." to; 


89. 24 1. mavra| Siienite 
24,15 2. mdvrecor 87, 18 
13. 


INDICES 


maura 87.49. 
mapénpevat, ? mlapeooera 89. M 


mapeokxede 88." ii. 11. 

mapexe, 88.15 ii. 28. 
89.11. 16. 

mapper, 89. 22 1. 

mapoda 89. li. 5. 

macacOau, me \rapevar 87. 2 1 

mavoa 88.) ii. 15. 

medad 87. ** 5, 

medéxnv 87. ii. 19. 

médiov 88. ° 2. 

met] 89.25 4, 

[eAdoyov 89. ° 6. 

méXros S72. 

TlevOiAnav 87. ° 3. 

mepbecba 87. °° 4. 

midecal 87. * 8, 

movva 88.* 24. 

? mlAcEavOdos 88.1 1. 

mAnou 87.18 4. 

moxap| 87.14 5, 15 4. 

mr 87. 3° 1, 

mrono| 88.419. mono] 89.° 2. 
moeiny 87. 1*2 16, 

mon 88h 2: 

mrodias 88. * 25. 

mo[dw 89. } ii. To. 

modvy 89.11.16. wédAv 87. 
54, mddr{ 88.93. mdddav 
88.°5. médrdras 89. 1 i. 
II. médd\a 88.422, 12 ii, 
9, 10. ddd] 89.°5. 

mov, 88.) ii. g. 

moveiv, endvnoas 88.* 21. 

meta (S7a° lls 03. .88u-) 4) 
89." 7 (vel. TOoKd). 

mply 89. 18 2, 

mpddnrov 89.1 ii. 4. 

mpdkoyrv 87.142 g, 

mpds 89.11. 3. 

mpbca 88.1 ii. 25. 

mporépo 89.1 i, 15. 

mpop| S97223; 

moe, entagate 87, ° ii, 3. 

mo 88.411. 


mapeeet 


Sangods 87.45 1 (title). 
Siovgol 88. ° 13: 


ads, os 88. ii, 14. o@ OF 
cai 88.78. 

oradtaAas 88. 1° ii. 20. 

or |epedv $6.75 is: 

ariyov 88.1° i. 15 sch. 

or{v|ualor] 8'7.1*7 9. 

ov 87.76 7, 49; 88. 15 ii. 14. 
ge BY.45 5, 10, 1; 2542" 
88. ii, 2. ‘cot 88.1 i. 
%Sch:,.M. 17 

ouval yép|perac 88. ii. 18. 

? cvvaépp|aca 87. °° 5. 

2? culexer 89. * 4. 

auvovordtovres 88.1 i. 2, 3 
sch 

of[ 89.1 ii. 12. 

opar| 89.° IT. 

opt 87.1% 12, 


16 B7.° 214, 56)" 4s 
ig GB. 5%, - aie (et) 
réavra 87.° ii. 11. Cf. rovatras. 

ré|Necov 87. +4 Se 

TEpTrety, Jerepr| 87.104. 

T |prepdvnv 88.17. 

tidévat, Onrat 87.1F? g. 

ris 88.15 ii, 9. ri 87.142 7, 
16, 

us 87..° 5-89. li. 6. |r{s] 
89.1i1.7. 788. ii. 16. 
rua 89.1 it. ey 19 9. 

Te.66.? iver CL eit 
88.) ii. 9. 

troavtas 88.) ii. 21. Cf. 
Téavta, 

roxnas 89. lii. 8., 

réAp| 87. 48 2. 

T6€m 88.7 3. 

térov 89. °1 2, 

téra 89.11. 12, 22 2, 

t|pérrov Ev oR 

tpr| 88.7 6. - 

Tuvdapidas 87.7 9. 


tuynv 87. ** 6. 


Tvxo.ca 87 
cp 


vdep 88.14, 
tpl 88. }2 ji. 10. 
duo. . 87.1428. 


d; 


Tpws Ser 20,5. 4.(0)) 
ind 87.°93; 89.1 ii. 8. 
drepBeBara 88. } ji, Lz. 
tmino|e 88. + 4. 

inicw 88. * 23. 

invos 87.° ii, 16. 
vorepov 88. 1° i. 18 sch. 


bacbwv 87.48, 

epal 87. 1? 6. 

papéopeba 89. 1 ii. 1. 

heporoe 87.142 14, 
Siero. 

Pave, &pOare 87. Fii, 13. 

PO|tpevay 87, 142 22, 

prea 87.142 27, . atl 87. 
Og, ? ddl 87.4 5 


péepova 


II. 


a8. 5. = cis 4) *s - 8. is sch: 


zs 

"ABSdnpos O. 1 Eas 3. 

dya6os 86. 5; 94.12; 8. 29. 

*Ayapepvov QO. 20. 

ayavédpov 92.1 12, 

dyarav O.1 14, °F 11, 

dyycdin 93. vi. 3. 

dyew 92. © 4; 93. viii. 3 ; [4. 
pt4 2; 20s 73. Shin 

dywos 86. 4. 

dyads 92.1355, 20. 
91. 13. 

ayy{ 27. 17. 

dyviva 94. 7. 

ayopafew 95, ii. 7. 

ayos 90. 21. 

dyov 98. °~* ii. 162 

dywvia 98. * ii. 8. 

ayoviver Oar 4,32 8 RY/s ae 

adew 95. ii. 14. 

ddedgn 98. *i. To. 

adeddés O. es hse 45. 

adixeiy 95. ll. 1; 97. 
saep. 

adixnua 97. 52. 

adixos 97. 63. 

adpoain 96. 18. 


dyn [ 


T20CE 


SAPPHO AND ALCAEUS 


piros, pie 87.142 11, pir 
89.°1. ?@idf 87.45. 

iddrara 87. ° 3. 

gol 89.39 1. 

goiras 87, ° ii. 16. 


Xaupol 87.4; 
xa@ren{ 87.19 3. 
xapierr’ 87.7 10. 
xapto[ 88.4 22. 
xéAupvay ol ue oe 
x<pG 87. ° 3 C -pp- Pap.). 
xddava 87, *4 
xA@plos 88. 1 5 
xéporv 87.}° 10. 
xphparos 88.4 28. 
xpéa 87.142 2, 


235 
xpdvos 88.) ii. 17. 
xopis 87. 7 ii, 18. 
Vargo. 87.4 5. 
Wiya 87.711. 10. wWuxav 88. 


a"2. 
Wixpov 88.14, * 36. 


& 88.27, 15 ii. g; 89.° 1. 
& 88. 82 3. 

wyvywos 88.151, 7 sch. 
ékora 89. hii. I. 

@doper| 88.4 29. 

eporépas 88.) ii. 24. 
Jovupey 89.5 (v.1. Jovvup.). 
ws 89.1 ii. 1. 

dore 87.35 2, 


OTHER] NEWI-TEXTS: 


deOdov 98. Vil. 7. 

deOdogopeiy 93. Vili. 15. 

dei 93. V. 6. 

deidery 91. 9; 93. xX. I. 

dé\tos 92.1 74. 

derdés 91, 8. 

andés 26. recto 12. 

adavatos 92. © 3 

dOeos 85.1 recto 5. 
820. 

dbepanevoia 98. ** iv. I. 

’AOnva 2.° 543 [4. 42]. ’A@dva 
91. 4. 

*AOnvadioy 2. ? 55. 

AOjva O.2 69,260; 4. 14? 1. 

’AOnvaios O. 2 66, 72, 2 7, IT, 
BO, 4 oes ioe ak. Osis; 
CIE Co hier” Baa 66d 8 [ee 
fos SRE Te 

dporpa [5. 372 sch. ?]. 

dbamrevros 96. 17. 

Atas [90. 34]. 

Alyatos 90. 28. 

Alyurros [O. : 10]. 

*Aldns 95. ii. 27. 

aigv 90. 46. 

aiva 2.° 61. 

aivety 93. x. 5; 20. 64 sch. 


abéws O. 


aivos 86. 4. 

Alodis [0.1 31]. 

aipew 91. Io, 

aipew 4, * 4. aipcioba 98. 
viii. 6 (¢iAdueba). 

aigOavecOa 96. I. 

diccew 938. vi. 2. 

Aloxims O.* 40, 41; 

alcxim 27. 10. 

Aicwros O. 2 46, 57. 

aire 90. ° 4, 5. 

airety [O. 2 ay |. 

airia 0.732. * 

aittos 27. 10. 

Aitodds 2. ° 51. 

aixua 90. 32. 

aiva 94, 12. 

aioy 97. 43. 

axnpatos 91. 19. 

akpntros 96. 12. 

dxodovws 8. il. sch. 13? 

axduiotos 94. 20. 

axovev 82.8; 98.441. 7; 3. 
67-9. 

akpis 1. 43. 

axpioin 9B. 21. 

axpot 22. 1. 17. 

axpe| 98. iv. 3. 


4.142 9, 


236 


"ANBarios 2. ° 65. 

’AAEEavdpos 9B. Vii. 1; 98.0 
Be a, NCO es wile’ 0) 
Wrtohye Vacate ae 

"Ande&is 1. 50. 

adnOns 97. 4, 17, 383 99. ii 
TA oes 

dArnOwss 98.12 4? 

aAnris 94, 20. 

GXi~@vos 9B. Vi. 4. 

dNioxer Oat 97. 25. 

adurnptos 4,14? 5 ? 

aAkuyos 9O. 34. 

adktnp 96. II. 

d\\a O91. 10; 98. Vili. 1; 
95) 11.4, 247.5 96. 4/5097: 
41, 60; 98.484; 99. ii. 
21; 2.269 38.23.59. sch. 
33) 25. TeCtO: 1, Verso) 4); 
26. verso 3; 27.9. 

aAnrov 96. 10; 97. 4; 7. 
got sch. 

@dos 90. 13; 98. ix. 4; 
94. 9,15; 97. [19], 69; 
OSs eating vaa(r) a O. 
[a ya OS 
Sch) 11089.) scha 4523; 
10. 

adore 94. 9, II. 

ds 92. °° 4; 98. v. 4, ix. 6. 

don 94. 18. 

ddoows OO. T4. 

dua 92.15; 24.7; 27. 11. 

dpapravew O. 12 8, 

apetBecOa 94, 11. 

‘auny 86. 4, 5. 

dpowpos O. 2 45. 

dpmedos 2.3 71. 

auduroreivy 92.1 4, °} 2. 

appédtepos 98. Vii. 3, iX. I, X. 
OS CHL OAs 

dpporepwbev 98, Vi. 4. 

dy [90. 23]; 97. 67; 99. 
li, 18:30! 2425/5 '71|,983 
Ler47 5 OsCDe. Fan On aoe 
verso 3. 

av (cs eav) 95. ii. I, 23; 97. 
17. 

ava 92.120; 94.21; 95. ii. 
16 (av). 


INDICES 


avaBaive 9O. 8. 

’AvaBaots 8. 39, 52. 

dvayew 98. #4 ii. 14; O.% 10. 

dvaykxagew 78, 14. 

avaykn 97. 15, 16. 

dvaypdpew 0.2.71; 2.258? 

avadiddvat 2. ° 33. 

dvapey 98. ** i, 12 (dveder). 

dvairws [ 99. il. 20? |. 

dvaxduutecOa O.* 31. 

avaxtacba O. ° 30. 

avaXoyia 1. int. 

avadopa 4. * 12. 

ava 96. 9. 

avaé| 93. il. I. 

dvamhnpovy 90. 51 sch. 

dvapracew 85. 2~* verso 8. 

avaréAdey 78. 29. 

avatperew QQ. il. 18. 

avdpayabia 99. li. 23. 

avdpias O.® 33. 

“Avdpav OA, e 46. 

averety O.7 55. 

dveyos 78.8; 95. i. 7. 

avepyerGar 26. recto 4. 

avevpiokew 95. li, 16. 

ap 85.2-*recto 11, verso 
45/90; 21, 25. 93. vik 
Bios, Be OA GS On 
nos, 4% 8. 

avOpwros '78. 32; 94. 9, 15, 
OSs lou OGu 5 Ode ors 
O81 iy ey. oe Ones 
26. verso 9. 

amorava O. * 33. 

dvénros 1. 45. 

avohBew 94. 13. 

avodBos 94, 13. 

avrextpopeiv 2.° 49. 

"Avrnvap 2.25. 

avti 0.3 50. dvri rod 8. 60. 

"Avtixdeldns 2.3 5. 

"Avtuoxet’s 2. % 4. 

"Avrioxis [4.142 ar ?]. 

’Avrimarpos O. § 26. 

dvapupos 9O. 15. 

dévos 98. X. 5. 

agwovv 8. 14. 

d&iopa O.° 28; 27. 4. 

a€ov 98. Vi. I. 


dowdy 90. 48; 93, ix. 3. 

dovxos 98.7 8. 

dnarew 95. ll. 23. 

aradddrrecba O.? 71. 

draé 99.1.7? 

dras 85.2-* verso 3; 98.* 
3; 99. ii. 19. 

amdrn (1. mdAn) 98. vill. 1. 

anepOos 9O. 43. 

dméxew 95. il. 5. 

dmévat 0.2 44, 46; 4.° 4. 

amhas 8. 38. 

ané 85.1 recto 3, 2~* recto 6, 
8, verso 5, 8; 90. 27, 28, 
36; 92.116; 96. 9, 16, 
of O.t aT? Sacra. a 
sch. 5. 

drodeckviva 1. 52. 

drodiddvat 95. il. 23. 

dnobynokxew 95. il. 
eg easy 

droxabiordva 8. i. sch. 8? 

dzroxpipa O.7 21 ? 

drovcinev 96. 1; O.° 16. 

aroAdvva 85. 2-4 recto 5; 97- 
a O.6 14 (0) 26. 

amodvew 2.° 38. 

’"Aréd\Nov 4, 1t2 2, 

*AroAd ovia ?| 2/20. 

aréoracts 8. i. sch. 13. 

avoorepntys 28. recto 5. 

droréuvew 0.7 43. 

amoruravifew 98. 2 vi 

dmpoBovrevros O, °*7 7, 


14; 98. 


dpa 90. 15, 41; 96. 15; 
98. * iv. 8. 

apyBpevras 92.1 g. 

“Apyos 90. 28, 36. [’Apy|édev 


90. 3. 
apyupioy O.* 65. 
lépyvpos 90. 35. 
dpe, 90. °. 
dpeotos 24, 10. 
apetn 90. 16. 
"Apns O.° 39. 
apOucos 98. X. I. 
dpOuds 1, int. (?) a ONES: 

it seh,.356. 
dptorepds 2.3 37. 
apioton| 92, 24 2. 


Jk 


dpiotos 0.3 24. 

*"AptororéAns 2.° 50, 57, 59. 

"Aptotoddyys 1, 21, 40(?), 
[45] 46, 49, 59; 3. 2; 
5. 744 sch.? 

dpkeiy 94, 3. 

appa O8.°* ie 13 34,42 B: 

appovia 2.° 63. 

apves 98.2 9? 

aporos 24. 9. 

appyros 8. li. sch. 10. 

"Aprems 92.13; 93. v. 8. 

apros 98.44 iv. 5; 8. 50. 

apxatos 96. 9. 

apxew 90. 21; 0.° 38. 

apxn 85.24 verso 2; 0. ° 46; 
PE es 

’Apxidoxos 98. viii. 4. 

apxipdyetpos 85. 2~4 recto 3. 

*AaBvotns 93. Vi. I. 

‘aoberns OY. il. 28. 

*Agia 2.° 10, 17. 

*AokAnmiadns 2.” 6. 

dopevws 98.44 iv. 7. 

aomacos 21, 5. 

donis 90, * ii. 5. 

dooov 94. I. 

dortaros 0.2 63; 22. il. 30. 

domp 78. 35; 98. ill. 2; 
1. int. 

dorpdanrew 4,142 5, 

dotpov 86. 2. 

dotv 90. 2. 

’Aconds 92.16 1, 

draxros 0.117. 

Gre 96. 2. 

aren| Al. 4. 

arep 96. 16. 

drepOey QO). 15. 

azn 90. 8. 

arpexéws 21. 8, 

"Arpevs OO. 22. 

"Arpounros Q.% 43. 

’Arrexds O.° 75. 

aruxew O.°® 28. 

ad 90. * ii. 6. 

avédn 94. 3. 

avAciv 95. 1. 4 ef Saep. 

AbXis 90.27 > 02. *? 2. 

avAds 95. lil. 12, 15. 


OTMTERMNEW. TEXTS 


ave 78. 13, 38. 

atvos 94. 8? 

dure 94. 8. 

avpa 96. 16. 

AdrokAcidns 2. ° 62. 

AuroxAjs 4. * 6. 

avrokparea 78. 41. 

avropuros 95. il. 8. 

airés 88. *~4 recto 11 (?), ver- 
SO Oe (Sh ibe Ho ee 
TO3 95. leh Ode LAs 
Saepes OB. 1.80) Wa (e) Ae 
PACT Ayr Oy ULpeilal35, IO, 
40-048 OO. ie 17 Ouag x, 
41, 43, 46, 7 45, 50, 54, 
68.7 ae eauO Reet 3a, 
Tie), 29, (32% 4s Ls 
22, 53; 2. ° 20, 33, 34, 
41,[55]; 8.15, 50; 4.4 
id 58d. Sel 72(h) Oe), 
9. sch. 6, 8; 25. verso 4; 
26. verso 7. 6 adtds O. 4 
eV. a i, Outs LS 

avypuds 22. i. 22. 

dpOiros 90. 47. 

apbovia 96. 7. 

apveds 93. X. 3. adveds 94. 
52; 

"APSByros (AadpoBos Pap.) O. 
3 46 


“AdoBos O.° 18. 
dapper 2. 3 48. 
*Ayatol 9O. 31. 
"Axapveis 1. 46. 
AyiAdevs 90. 33. 


B 3. 39. 

BaBvaay 2. ° 68, 73. 

Babvrnos 94. 18. 

Baivew 90. 33 (?)3 98.3.5 5 
24.1? 

Badrrew 98.426; 0.250; 4. 
BdpBapos 98. °° ii. re eel. 
UL T ive ts et aa 

Bapunxns 96. 16. 
Bacavitew 95. ll. 19. 
Baoirevew 98. °° 2. 


Baowevs 9O. 21; 93. IV. 3; 


Vance 9 Omlinn 2d 

BOs as oor (eG 

recto 7. Buod/ 
93. viii. 8. 

Baows 8.1. sch. 12. 

Barnp 1, int, 

Beipakes Es rae 

BeABiva 1. 42. 

Bérexos [1. 21, 22, 27]. 

BedXepos 1. 56. 

BeAXepoorrns 1. 56. 

Beédos 1, 46. 

BeAreoros 1. 39. 

BepBrE al 40 ? 

BepBina 1. 57. 

Bepyatos 1. 50, 52. 

Bepyn 1. 55. 

Bepevikn 98. ill. 2, Vv. 6. 

Bepeoyedor 1. 45. 

Bawa O.? 23, 51. 

BnpyKes 1. 59, 60. 

Bi BXlov (BuBA.) oO. 1 33. 

Born 94. 8. 

Brarrew 97. 70, 73. 

Braordv 78. 30; 96. 21. 

Bredapoyv 2. OO. 

Boav 92.413; 98. viii. 2. 

BonOos 26. verso II. 

Boravn 2.° 40. 

Boul 93. ill. 3. 

BovBpwotis 94. 20. 

Bouxddos 98. * iv. 4. 

BovrAcoGa 26. verso 5. 

Bovdn 9O. 4. 

Bovs 98. ° I. 

Bvew 1. 48, 49. 

Bopds 0.2 35, 60. 


y oe TS. 8.41 sch erg: 

yata 98.4 iii, 15. 

yadakréputos 95. il. g. 

yapos 93. iv. 1; 25. recto 7. 

vie 18. 11.) 03 0 86..2 4 
verso 25 92.4 27, 41 2. 
$216" 98..Vil. 9, Xe 6 * 95. 
A rReiily £0 ser OGe 1. Ohek ys 
LO hs Oem ee LOSE nin nO Ore 
98. ii. 6, 854i. 8 ii. 
25° 09711. 21,29; 0.422, 
TaerO s Teint le ha sac 


238 


Ai PPA Byes Bh Hey 
25. recto 1, 4, 6, verso 5; 
28. recto I, verso 3. 

yaddos 93. Ibs She 

ye 08. ix. 5; 97. [227], 47; 
23, 8; 26. verso 13(?); 
PM WI 

yeiverOa 9O. 4I. 

yedav 96. 7. 

yéverov 2.° 65. 

yéveois 85. 7~* verso 12 ; 
Bt Sell. 

yévos O. (13, 37], 7 65, * 12, 

B20 235 a 03, 

Xpuoory T. 3. 57. 


90. 


yewpyev 93. vi. 6? 

Tewpyds 3. 36. 

yn 98. vil. 2 3 
0.11 9 (?); 

ynGew 98: iS 

Typas 3. 2. 

yiyvecOar 99. ii. 33; 0.1 20 
26, 39,771, 72, ° 18, 49, 

ae oy 12 9. as; 

SUB Sills sen. 
ig 102 25. recto 7; 26. 
RECLORG HA enO): 

ylyvookey 3. 12. 

yr O25 a, 

Prav«n 98. viil. 3. 

Travxobéa 0. ? 44. 

TAavcos 2.° 36. 

yravé 1. 7. 

yaukis 91. 13; 98,196, 

yAoooa 93. X. 6. 

yud| Bos 1s BYe%. 

yunovos 24. 9. 

youn O.° 36. 

you, 92.38 5, 

yoru 92.122; 95.1. 11. 

ypappateiov 4,4 18, 


BAe Hs Bans 


ypapew 98. eeh es t 32, 
A a ri. ypader Oa 
Rena a S. 


yupvos 93. 1x. 

yuvatketos 8, in Sch. 55°? 

yuvatkepaarpia O.1 18, 

yur 85. 24 recto 3,10; 
cds bas © hoa es 


98. 


INDICES. 


O1445 Boi Sch, £3, 15 
Oadad ... 91. IQ. 

daivav 98. vi. 4; 4.14? 10: 
daxpvey O.° 67, 69. 
Saxpuders 90. 7. - 

dakpvo| 98. 3. 

daxrudros 95. 1. 8. 

dap 92. 24 3. 

Aavaol 90. 44. 

davicew 95, il. 22. 

ddvos 95. il. 22. 

Aapdavia [90. 29]. 
Aapdavidas 90. I. 

Aapeios 98. 441. 9, iii. 17, 7° 4 
dao] 92. °4 6, 

dace 90.°1 

dedi€vae 9B. Vill. 2, X. 6. 


dey 82. 9; 97. 42; oe a 


ZAC) OO. A; 0,3 ae | 


25452 oy 2° Scat ie 20: 
recto 2 (?). Sedvras 0.3 54. 
Aeivapxos 4. ° 7. 
dewdrns O.° 20. 
déxa 95. ii. g; O.§ 27; 4.4 4 (i). 
déaAtos 2.2 58, 
Aedpoi O.? 30, 34, 47. 
d€uas 92.1 I4. 
dévdpeov 96. Io. 
deéws 92. 4 1, 
dépew O. 2 39. 
dever Oa 94, 2. 
déxerOar O.° 67. 
devrepos 98. sake 8. 39 (8). 
Sevrepov 95. ll. 3. 
07 98.27 OO. aT, 33: 
dnl 2. ° 59. 


Anpyrnp 2.3 39. 

Snuos 98. x. I, a: OAT 
445 10, Ot 3; [4.142 98 > 
sacp.]. 


Snpool 08723: 

Anuoaberns 99. ll. 9; O.2 10 
TI, 13, 37, 55, 61, ® 26 ; 
3.45.3 4:2 0, #26. 

dnpooia O.° 8, 

Snudtns 4.4 10. 

dijmovbev 24, 3. 

[Sn Jus 90. 6. 

dui 90. 9, 28; 97. 23, 29; 
98. 44 iv, 6; cot Dose Vege 


Oar © merce ever hers ay eh 

15; 28. verso 4. 
diaBaivery 98. *° 5. 
dvaBadrew O. 2 we 
diadéyerlar O.° 5 
diarrav 97. 66. 
dtaxedavvivac 94. 19. 
diaxdovot 98. *4 iv. 12. 
duddexros O.} 32. 
didperpos 8. ii. sch. 5. 
Ovavora 28. recto 6, 
dtaprayn 98. * iii. 12. 
dcarpiBn 25. recto 7. 
diavdos 93. Vill. 4. 
didopos 98. * i. 4. 
diahpovety O5. ii. 2 


dtapvAdooeyv O.* 28. 


d:ddvac 98. viii. 2, ix. 3; 94. 
4°35 98.7*1.3; 1050.2" 3- 
8.26 7 [4S 22s hee. 

didvpos 92.115. 

duepos QO. 26. 

Ouxafew 97. 64. 


| Sixawos 85.1 recto 3(?), 4; 


97. I, 5, 10, 15, 56, 62, 
68. dikaiws 98.15 7? 

dccaornpioy O. °*7 12; 
19 |. 

ducaorys 4.* 19. 

dikn 94, Lo. 

dAoyyxos 1. 35. 

duntds 94. 14 [-wros Pap. |. 

Oo 78. 42. 


[4. 4 


| Owrov 95. ii. 4 


Atovicwos 2.° 48. 


| Atovvaddwpos 8. 47. 


dcopyifew O. 2 48. 

SutAdouos 8. ii. sch. 5. 

diorepns 98. vii. 2. 

doxew 98. * iii. 17. 

doxely 97. 2; O.1 20. 

ddfa 27. 8. 

Sovdevew 78. 12. 

Apaxeyv 1. int. 

Spav 97. 49. ’ 

Sperew 92.1 5, 

Spdpos 98, 44 iii. 18 ? 

dvvauis 86. 4; 99. ie 26. 

divacdau 97. 49; 1. int.; 8. 
i, sch. 9; 25. verso 3. 


LH, 


Suvarés O. 2 70. 

dtvev 78. 28; [95. li. Bile 
dvo0 95. 1. 4, ii. 10, 25. 
dvoewdéoraros O.1 21, 
dvorvyia 3. 28. 

dof 92.°8 1, 

daddexa 95. il. 9. 

Awpixa 0.1 10. 

dwpodokia 4, ° 8, 

Swrnp 86. 5? 


€ 8. ii. sch. 4. 

edv 95, ll. 20. 

Eap 95. il. 4. 

éavtod 97. SAO se = 22 (?), 
80,0) 2 2a On, 

€Bdopos (8) 4.4 We 

eyyobev 96. 15. 

eyyvs 96. 19; 7. gor sch. 

eykoNdnrew O. 3 35. 

eyr| 0. 17 4. 

“Ey yetpidcov 3. 8. 

eyxos 1. 47. 

eyx@ptos 92.1 19, 

eyo 90. 10; 93. ix. 4, 73 
94. 8, 18-20. 95.1. 4 é 
SLED 5305) Se 2520, 
Borat Les 20. TCCLO 
4, 5,7, VersO I. pets 78. 


Hits {sXo}, BS PART ies Byeh 
verso 4. 

eGew 26. recto 7. 

Per ob Sta, Ce 
GéXew, 


vos 85. 2-* verso 5; 92. 4% 4. 

97.40): 99.11. £0, £8, 32 5 
8. il. sch. 9. 

eidevar 93. X. 23 
61; 24. 3. 

JewSeo Gar 22 Los 

cidicas 4, * ey7ar 

eioos. 90. (5s 2508 “40, 1575 
BE ROR ZR IG Ue 

eixd(ey 98. iv. 2? 

eixew 94.1; 2.76. etkds (97. 
20 |. 

eixoat (k) 4. * 7. 

eixav O. ° 32. 

eivai 78.) 6;, 11; 37, [43]; 


laisse 


wd 0.1 4%. 


| 


OTHERVNEW TEXTS 


85.1! recto 5, 2-* verso 8 ; 
90. 11 5 ae xX. 43 94. 
17 (ja), Ig (écke) ; 
95. li. 4, as 22m Ase Ons 
06.4; 987. | 6) 11; 97. 
15, 52, 57, 60, 62, 68; 
D85072, == Merl egy On ils 
8, 145000.11, 26.9 0,23, 
13,17, [37], 711, 32; 06, 
Gon 12s [+r 8], 8 [25], 
36, [37]; 1 23, 5% 553 
* 32,553 8.6; 4.44, 

e Sy noi) se8%i- sch. LS 
SSCs Om aloe 
24, 2; 27. 2 

eireww 85.1 verso 3; 90. 26; 
98. vil. 6,x.7; 98.71 () 
444N. 8,5 09% i.732'5 oe 
32,[% 70]; 4.51(?); 
43; 26. recto 9. 

elrep O.° 36. 

eis 78.20, 31 5 O00. 53 Sch. ; 
93. ix. 6(?); 94.12; 95. 
i, 33 97. 7; 98.19 6 
(Perr: fromies), ** ii. 14, 
Hi 12k. tO, be, 


24,1. &€s 90.37; 92.15; 
95. li. 27. 

eis. ne 4.2 ea): 8. 
sch. 4 (@); 26. verso 8. 

[eto |épxeo Oat On2'39. 

eioxeww 9O. 45. 

eira 98. * iii. 1. 

etre 20. 142 sch. 

ex, e€ 85.1 verso 2, 2~* verso 
2; 90. 22; 98. viii. 4, ix. 
4, 7 e604 Th 25 4ee 4, 
MRIS CY, ety ay Zk 

éxal 98. }9 ii, 3. 

éxaotos 9O. 26; 99. li. 9 (?), 
LOmOn gta Ae See An 
5s 19. A 

exeivos 97. 23; 99.11. 24, 27; 
26. verso 6. 

éxkrelew 85. 24 verso 7. 

éxreiney 98. * 2. 

ecAderyis [78. 30): 

éxmrnéis 98.° Fil. IT? 


239 


exrrvevey O. 2 26, 

éxtote 2. 3 34. 

tédain| 93. vill. Wf 

eddrns 2. ° 37. 

edatwos 98.1" 4, 

éAdtrov 78. 36; 98.44 iv. 14; 
0.1 26. 

eeyeiov O. 1 34. 

édeyx| 938. vill. 6. 

’Eadeidvia 92.4 if 

‘Edén 90. 5. 

eevdew 9O. 18. 

ehevOepia O.? 27, 30, § 31, 94 

“Edikovides 9O. 24. 

éAkewv 96. By 

“EAAds 98. °° 2. 


"EdAnves O. ° 38. 


“EdAnvtcuds 1. int. ? 

Am 92. 36 2, 

eArwpn 94. 7. 

epBaivew 9O. 24. 

euBdadrey 2. ? 4I. 

ends 90. 48; 98. Vi. 2? 

ev 85.74 recto 9; 90. 49 
Sch: (92/402 1293." v5.9; 
4 (civ), 1k. 2eeObr is 17; 
97..| 4), 23,30, 705,98." 
Gat We Opis | eo i. 13, V,05'5 
0.7[59], 79, ° 8, 33, [34] 
49, 71, (74, 826], 29,2 
(Paley Lato efscepa 2." 
AWOL SED my CU SUCD a 
A. tte Net Sacp. 3, 8s 1. SCD: 
Bi(t); te Sch. A(t) 9: 
ChiOpm Alen2 

evaipe QO. 2. 

evartios 85.1} verso 2(?); 9. 
sch, I. 

évavaos 98. Vi. I. 

évdaca 98. 44 iv. 6. 

evdvecGar 28. verso 5. 

eveivar 97. 22; 4.4 19. 

évexev 85. 2-4 recto [1 | ef saep. 

éveds 25. verso I. 

évOa 92.18; 4.42: 

evOade 98. ix. 7. 

evOovoral Be 

evtavotos 98. Vil. 5. 

evautos 22. i, 28. 


21, 2. 


| Mot Ope Sk ving 


240 


evvea [O. ea 

évvonos 26. recto 8. 

évomos 98. °~ ii. 8. 

évroAn 85.1 recto 4. 

’EvudAtos 92. °4 4. 

e& 91. 8. 

eke, 92, 26 3, 

e€eAavvew OQ. il. 30. 

eEnynows 2.° 36. 

é€jxovra 98. ** ii, 2; 2.° 32; 
4.* 4 (é). 

éfns 98." iv, 2. 

e&évar O.° 60. 

é€Ndoxer Oat O. 2 57. 

efovordtew 85. 2+ recto II. 

e€upvelv OQ. *2 3. 

ééo [4.4 2]; 25. verso 6; 
26, verso 13. 

endyew 2.° 29? 

éxaxodovbeiv 98. *4 iii. 7. 

erav O. 2 33. 

én[avépxerOar? 90. 5. 

erravOecty 96, 14. 

émei 78. 33; 94.17; 98.15 
899.1173. [0..2:21,7}. 

ereton 82. 28; 1. int. 

erevOecis 3. II. 

emnBodros 98. IX. I. 

emnAvots 96. I. 

eri 98. Vi. 3, Vil. 2, Vili. 3, X. 
1,6; 94.15; 96. 8, 21; 
98-7) tr, din to; oe 4: 
0. 7°48; °.6,, 16, 62,00 3 
253m 2e8. AA ee 7O.. 
372 sch.?]; 24.9; 26. 
recto 7. 

envypa| 2.° 6. 

emiypanya O.1 44, ° 34; 2.° 
62. 

envypapew 2.° 55. 

eneuxvivar QO. * 1g. 

emduddvar 24, 5. 

erOupeiy 98. * iii, 16. 

emiOvpios 9O, II. 

emtxanew 98, 14 ii. 9. 

emtxhoGew 26, verso 4. 

érikopos 98. ix. 6. 

emtAauBdverv 1. int. 

emtAavOaverOar 28. verso 2. 

emAnbcoGar 98. X. 2. 


“Eppimmos 1. 57. 


INDICES 


émuonpaive 4,415. 
emurkynnrew O.7 53. 
émurkanre O. 2 48. 
enioracba 21. 7. 
émiatoAn 98. ** i, 13. 
emtravuew 96. 6. 
emitnoeupa 97. 9. 
éritporos O.2 17, 21. 
errupave| 26. verso 7. 
emepew 8. 1. sch, 16. 
enpaverv 86. 4. 
emixeipery 98. 441. 1? 
éros 98. Vi. 3; 98.71. 
épavda 95. ll. 14. 
épyov 2.° 20. 

"EpexOnis [4.172 18, 22]. 
ép{ 92. °° r. 

*Eptywos 0.1 8. 

Epke| 92.1 20. 

‘Epp elas PAE}, it, BBE 


é€pdets 9O. 44. 

éprew 94, 21, 

épyecdae 90. 29; 92. ® 3; 
Ob. i oye (S6nhy ae | 
5S; 28. 1 33: | 

eparnars O. 1? 3. 

eaOdds 90. 19, 22; 93. X. 7. | 

écontpov 95. 11. 21. 

érepos 78.12; 97.61; 2.° 4. 

ért 98. Vv. 3, vii. 6(?); 95. ii. 
18} 96.-0s.2.5 42. 

éros 91. 10(?); 8. i. sch. 4. 

ed 85. 7~4 verso 9,11; 90. 24. 

ev[ 93. iv. 2. 

EvBoeis 2. ° 48. 

evyeveva 0.# 21. 

evdatpovia 26. verso 10. 

evens 96. 1g. 

einpevety 94. 13. 

ev6[ 92. °° 2, 

evoevia 96. 8. 

evkatappdrvytos O.+ 20. 

evatos 27, 2? 

evAdBea 85, 24 verso 3. 

evAaBetcbar O.° 64. 

evAaBys 85.24 verso 4, 5. 

Etmokis 1. 15 3 8. 57. 

eimpenns O. 8 37. 


evpeots O.1 42, 


etpioxey 95. ii. 17; 0.3 73. 

Evpuvopn 93. 1X. 2. 

evpuxywpia 2. * 23. 

evre 96, 20. 

evtpapns 96. 5. 

evtvxin 93. xX. 4. 

ei'vOpos 96. IT. 

evpope 96. 13. 

Evdparns 98. * 5. 

cU¥ppov 92. *1 2, 

evpuns O. ? 48. 

evyerOa 92.292; 0.12 12? 

evyn 98. ** ii. 9. 

evo@vupos O. 7 31. 

ededpevew 96. 4. 

epddiov 0.364 ; [4.177 16]. 

eptpuov 98. viil. 4. 

éx| 92. * 5. 

exew 78. 34, 40, 41; 90. 6, 
47 OSs Viv Leno dienes 
Ei, 18,275 .OS,2.° Uae, 
$e ti T i 1 eae eae 
37,733 1.335 8.4, 24; 
8. i. sch. 14, il. sch. 3 ; 28. 
EL 5 (2427 5 25a 7ectous: 
versO 5; 26. verso 3; 28. 
verso 4. 

exOpds 97. 473; O. le 72\, = 
12. 

ee 2.° 40. 

€ws 9. sch. 8. 

(4.414; 8. ii. scho 12. “Z 
B.il.ischi 13. 

Capevetv (Capevis ?) 91. 2? 

Zevs 90. 4; 91. 13; 92.1 10; 
96. il. 245 2A. 33: 

Gv 95. li. 14, 225 98. ** iv. 


9. 
Znvev 2.° 45. 
Cnreiv 95. il. 6. 
(dros 2.° 42. 
(adov 2. 3 59, ievals 


7 8. il, sch. 1, 9. 
7 96.011. 0, 075 O7.. 27 eo: 


yyenov 4.411. 


fl, 


“Hyjoavdpos 2.274. 

#0y 90. 43; (98. * iii. ro]. 

7Ovs 98. Vi. 3, viii. 2. 
98. iv. 9. 

prikia O.° 19; 26. recto 8. 

Hrws 78. 43; 95. ii. 5, 63 
Beso OAn 22, 32. 

jucpa '78. 273 8. ii. sch. 12. 

npepin BG. 19. 

nuetepos 94. 8; OQ. ii. 25. 

npiredcotos 2.° 51. 

nv 96. I. 

nia 4° 12. 

jvika 92.1 12 (dv.); 98. vill. 
6 


1dews 


np GB. 22. 

“Hpaiov BE IbS, 
“Hpaxneidns PAS (?), 66. 
“Hpakdectos 8.1. Sch. 4 
jpws 90. 16, 19; 0.7 62. 
“Howry 1. 50. 

qrroyv 97. 7. 

“Hdacros (‘Ad.) 91. 4. 


Oddarra OQ. il. 31. 

Odvaros 85.1 recto 2; 

Oarrev 98.110? 

Garba. 98. Vil. 4. 

Oavpaotés OQ. il. 27. 

dea Oar O. 1? ro. 

déarpov 98.12. 

Oedew 95. il. 
eGedew, 

ew 23. 4. 

eds 78. 9, [43]; 85. } recto 
408; Verso.3; 2 * verso 7 5 
SGi 1 O30 ik. 7 70. 734, 
Be els ses 1Oy corel: 
sch. 6; 26. verso 11. 

Ocparov 98. eG. 

Ocppaivew 78. 30. 

Oéppev 96. int. 

Ocpos 95. il. 4. 

Cerpopopuite 2. ° 35. 

Ocooaxia [O. : 23). 

Céris 98. 411, 9. 

Oerradol 2. 28. 

e7Ba 98.7 6, 7. 

OnBaia 98.° 2? 

Ondvraros 98. Vil. 5. 


07°13. 


18, Git, 


eS 


| totes 2. 


OTHER 


Oyyoxew 94. 5; 95. i. IO, il. 
BT On 425i Oo. 

Ounrés (Ovar.) 9O. 25. 

Covkvdtdns O. 2 64, 65. 

Opakn O, 11 Be (iy Eats 5. 

epaé 0. ? 

Se 0. BU OES Abra! 0: 

Oparrat (1. 34 |. 


| Opdv0s 98.1 4 


Guyarnp O22 13, PaO, 1 
145) 2° ae 

Oupoiy 2, 19 

Guoia 92 } be O; BOyA- 

Ovaouigew O. 2 34, 45; 


t 3. 35. 
idety OB. ix. 5, X. 33 95.11. 4, 
20 (idns); 96. 19. 
iStos 85. 2*4 recto 12; 2.° 
idc<al rns Ors: 
idpvew O.? 60. 
iévaa 92.115. 
iévaa 92.116; 
iépaé 1. 7. 
[ i€pec Ja 220. 
icpetov O. 2 39. 
iepevs O. 7 38 (iepetov Pap.). 
iepds 93. vi. 6. ipds 95. 1x, 
4. lepdv 4.4 2. 
ixards 28. recto 2. 


38. 


[94. 1]. 


"Thiov 9O. Mile 


inds [4. 22 ie 

wa [2.° Or]. 

LovAls O.1 38. 

immevs 98. * iii. 5, iv. 12, 16. 
‘Inneis 3. 31. 

immopaxos 26. recto 6. 

inmos 90.50 Sch.; 98. vi. 1; 
98.73? 

inmooda 92. °} 3. 

inmotpépos 9O. 30. 


| icOpds 98. vi. 6. 


ioournkns 8. li, sch. I. 

toos O.* 36. 

Lor] 93. vil. 7. 

ioravau Ole ys Goi 26 0: 
»° 745.1. int.; nae ea ob Wak 

30, 33- 


| loxvew O.7 42. 
| “Irukatos 2.° 13. 


R 


NEV LIEX LS. 241 


ixveoy 90.° 3 
‘Ievia O, }! 5 
Ioonp 85. a recto 4. 


KS. 1 Sch.et 2: 

Ki Taint: 

Kens «85. “<* recto 8. 

Kddpos 98.7 4. 

xabapés 2.° 61. 

xabéCecOa 92.1 50. 

kabnoOa 98. Vi. 4. 

cavds O. ° 56. 

Kat, kay 95. Ni, 23°97. 17. 
kav ef 99. il. 16. y viovy’ 
adyov 86. 4. 

kairo. 97. 50. 

cards 85.24 verso 8(?), 1 
90. 19; 97. 50; 98.25 
kax@s 20. 142 Sch. 

kdhabus 2.° 30. 

kdhapos 98. vil. 6; 95. ii. 13. 

cadens 1. 20: 2 4 ai es 
Ghee 4, 1+2 5c 

Kadnipayos 90. 49 sch. )is 
2.° 43. 

Kaddos 9O. 46. 

Kadms 98, vill. T. 

Kaas 20. 142 sch. 

kauver Ql, 2, 

Kamnaos 2. ° 74. 

kdpa 3. 55? 

kaprrés 96. 3 ef Saep.; 3. 45. 

Kaolyyntos 98. Vil. 3. 

Kdouos 93. 1x. 6. 

Kagoavdpa 9O. 12. 

kara 78. 27; 85.74 recto 2, 
1verso 5; 90. 7, 48; 92. 


Sa?) s O06. tk) TEs BS 
parr i, 99. 9 GP), 26 5 
Ose On. 2.3 10, 


17s ve 68, a ‘6 TOGEES: 

Eb, 46 A eS | Soh ced 

sch. 6? 
kardyew 93. 1X. 7 } 


karadamavay O.1 11, 


O. 6+7 a 


kataeipe 20. 65 sch. 

karadados 28. recto 3. 

katadapBavew 90.50 sch. GH 
92.178. 


| katadvew QO. O+7 4. 


242 


katapaptupew 85, * 4 recto 4; 
97. 25, 32, 36, 45; 

karaninrew O. 2 60. 

katatiOéevat 98. 1X. 5. 

Karappovew 85. 1 recto 6; 
98.*ii 5. 

carawevderOa 85. 24 recto 2? 

Katnyopew O. 116. 

ke(v) 90. 253; 93. V. 4, Vii. I, 
X. 33 94. 4. 

Keyxpos Jae 42. 

keivos 98. 1X. 5; 96. 10. 

Keios O. 1 38. 

ketoOa 2.° 36. 

keraweprys 92.1 9. 

cerevey 98. “41, 6, ll. 13. 

Kehevor (oyay, OES ae 

cevoradiov O.° 7. 

Kepapetkés O. ? 34. 

kepavvos 91. 11, 

kebadn 95.1. I 3 il. 15. 

Kndnddoves G1. Q. 

knmos 9G. 21. 

knpotrew 27. 5, II. 

kuouveve QO. °F7 13, 
92. 8 1, 

Kuipas 95, il. 26. 

Kivu 98. vil. 2. 

kioy 91. 7; 8. i. sch. 15. 

khados 96. 14. 

cdalew 95, il, 23. 

Krell 93. iil. 2. 

Kreis O. 15. 

khéos 90. 47, 48. 

kdvew 98. 1X. 4. 

kNoriov 95. 1. 3. 

Kvoads 0.8 30. 

Koll 92.7 1, 

koihos 9O. 17. 

kowods O95 il. 21. 

kowavds 4, * 9, 

Kotos 92.1 13. 

kodwvds 96. 10. 

Kountys 22. i. 29. 

Kop.on oO. ° 15. 

copie 0.737; 4.3426, 413, 

kopmacpa 1. 51. 

kovin 98. Vill. 7. 

xomiav 95. il. 6. 

copupy 92.1 11, 


cwdvr| 


INDICES: 


kéopos 93. Vill. 1; 8.1. sch. 1. 

koupd 3. 56. 

Kparivos 1. 34. 

kKparos 86. 4. 

Kpelaoowy O38. X. 4. 

kpeiwav YO. 20. 

kpnpvos 92.18; 0.7 51. 

kpnvn 95. il. 3, 11. 

Kpns 0. * 36. 

kpivew' 97. 65; O.° 21. 

kpiots 98. 4 ii, 7. 

kpiomds 1. 26. 

Kpédvos 22. ii. 33. 

Kpumrew O1, 12 (es Zoe 

Kpapvirns 93. Vi. 7. 

Kryoipev O.° 52. 

|ere|r 2 90. G27 

cvay| 98. 2 By 

kuBep\ynrnp 9OF 37 

xuBeutns 4. * 3. 

KuBeutixés 4.4 1, 

KukAduwos 96. int, 5. 

kvrivdey 98.26, 

KivOws 92.18. 

Kurpis 90. 9. 

Kumpdée 98. 1x. 7. 

kupuos 85.24 verso 7, 9. 
kupias [4,3 12 |, 

korvew O. °F7 14, 

coun 1. 42. 

k@pos 98. Vill. 3. 

kopds 95. li. 20. 


Aayeidns 98. Vill. 5. 

Adupos 1. 25. 

Aakedatpsvet 2. ° 54 ? 

Aakovky 1, 42. 

NapBavery 96. 4; 98. 441, 135 
Iti eG LV One ema 
Iter g. ES AAA. Si (r) 
6 (?), 113 25. recto 2. 

Aapia O.* 23. 

Adprevv 92.1 14, 

AavOaverOa 9S. X. 5. 

Aaopedov 9O. 52 Sch. 

AadpoBos O.° 46 CADsBnros 
Pap.). 

Adpixos O.' 8, 13. 

Adyeors 92.1 17. 

Aaxns 24. 1, 2, 5. 


Acinéds 78. 35; 98. * iii. 2; 


Naxos 94. 9. 
A€apxos 93. Vil. 3. 


| Aéyew 92.19; 98. vi. 3, X. 7; 


Ob. i. 226 (O70 4s 99: 
ic 56,03 50, Let am 
(07s), (22 lc4ys 2 ae as 
3. tas 20. 

heypov 5. 372-3 sch. 

Nelrewy 86. 2; 8.11. sch. 2, 8. 

Aeoptis [4. eT ?|. 

AéaBas O, 1 oe 


| Aevkoxduas O. 5 34, 35- 


Nevkds 95. 1. 9. 

Aéxos 92.1 4. 

Acamperns O.! 39. 

Anye 78. 14; 0.756. 

AynkuOos 1. 58. 

Anumos 95. ll. 25. 

hidos O. 7 49. 

hipny 4, 142 93, 

Aids OE. IT. 

Aurapétpopos 92.1 6. 

Airepyntis 94, 17. 

d Joyexds Das 

Adymos SG. I. 

Aoyiopos OB. 2. 

Adyos 85. 1 verso 5; 90. 
24(?)3; O.% 20, %o,* 20, 
BO L.5| de epee as 

Aouuxds O.7 52. 


3 


26. recto 5. 


| Auf 90.° 5. 


Avdwos 95, il. 12. 

Avdol 2. 3 46. 

Avew 92.1 13; 
2.° 38. 

Avkos 0. 4*5 8, 

Aupaivew QQ, li, 20. 

Ava 23. 2. 

Avpa 9B. ii. 12, I5. 

Aupikos O. 1 34. 

AvoiuBpotos 91. 18, 

Aurnpros O.? 61. 


cP ews 


fi 8. vis Schy Garg: 
Mayas 98. Vv. 2. 
Mayrntes 2. ° 69. 
pau 92. 251, 
Maxedovia 0.8 29. 


Li, 


Makedov 98. 5~6 ii. 18, *4 ii. 1, 

ARMS TOMI. TAs OOG Ii. 
Br TOSe Do, 

pada 9O. 45. paddov 0.1 13 ; 


2.339; 25.verso 1. pddiora | 


3. 13. 

parakés 25. Verso 5. 

Mapy.avoi [ 2. 2 r |. 

Mdpda 2.° 4. 

paprupew 97. 3, 16, 18, 24, 
39: 

payapa O. 2 36. 

payn 95.ii. 2; 98. 183i. 2,456, 

péyas 90. I, 4, 343 98. v.43 
06.42 2008)022,0° 25. 22, 
1.2%. 

péeyebos O.1 23; 1. 26; 9. 
Sehi.a4.. 7; 

pedvoxew 2.° 39. 

pebvoos 28. recto 3. 

peiCov 9. sch. 5. 

evovv 78. 30. 

petpaxioxos O.® 37. 

peAus 95. i. 25 23. 15. 

pede 95. ii. 8; 2.2 40, 41. 

peduooa 2.° 29, 34, 57- 

Méduccos 2, ° 32. 

pedrAew 98, 4 i. 2; 
23. 8. 

pervytov 2.° 36, 39. 

perodia 2.° 43. 

pev|'78.13]; 90. 20, 23, 32, 
46; 91.1, 6,16; 93. v. 
1, Vie 7,0 1x. 437.94, 9, 
5, Il, 19; 97. 30, 71; 
O8a2- Millis 5, Ivano, 14); 
SO 13); Onts|3)|,022, 


tgs? 37, 205, > 42, 41, 
Sar ilise Lavilit, oa. 3 1s 
Be Re RT. 2. 
MeévavSpos 8. 4, 65. 
pevey 93. V. 4, 6. 
Mevédaos 90. 27. 
pevepavi 2.° 45. 
Mévey 8. il. sch. 4. 
pepicew 95. ii. 24. 
peptopos 78. 33 
peppvadns 2. 3 46. 
péepos 98. * iil. g; O.° 
2.° 37; 3. 66. 


Qe 


ARON Ly 
58 ; 


OTHER NEW. TEXTS 


pepo 2.° 48, 40. 

pécos 9. sch. By 6. 
peooréheoros 24, Pali. 

pera iS Be 90. 50 sch.; 
98. 4 iii. 


95. » 4; 3, 
A. Ger ORG O I 
40; 4, 1+2 12; 26. recto 5. 


petradsOdvar O. 7 6, 

peradapBave O.° 57. 

peraperecOa 95. ii. 3 (uera- 
ped7 ?). 

perouice O.? 69. 

péerpov 95, il. 10, 17. 

péxpu(s) 92.48 5 (?); 98. v. 4, 


5; 96. ae 0. ? 56 (?), * 
27, ae 
py 85. 2 m4 verso Sue Oa as 


93. x. 4, 7; 95. Bike: 97. 
foes OLR 4, 24 Tae 


NS PROCES VY No OYE 
verso 5. 
pnde 86. 2; 95. ll. 1; 96. 


TO eho Ov hore Leite 
pndeis 78. 40; 97.13, 573 
20. 163 sch. 
prov 92.17; 94. 19. 


pv 98.ix. 5; 8.3 (? wy Pap.). - 


phs 21. 3 
pnenp O.1 16,243; 2.48? 
Miris 2.3 54, 56. 
pnrpa 2. ° 57-9. 
puaivew 2.° 62. 
fucapds 78. 7. 
pudorap 2.° Or, 
plydav 92.1 7. 
puyvova QI. 2. 
Midas 95. il. 26. 
pebdpy 2.° 63. 
Mi€pas a. 64) 
puxpds 98. x. 2; 98.183; 0. 
Weyl ON. 55; 9. sch. 6, 
7) 9- 
purny 2. ° 65. 
pu 94. 5. 
puvodorAdecoa 2.? 67. 
Muva 2. ° 69. 
pivodes 2.° 71. 
Mi&(_ ) 24. 3. 
pucai 2.° 72. 
pioyew 22, i. 32 sch. 
R 2 


243 
pce 97. 37. 


| pioos 97. 41. 


MirvAnvaion 2.° 74. 

MitvAnvn 0.1 4. 

punpa 95. il. 20. 

punpovixds O.1 41. 

punotxaxety O. ° 61. 

poipa O.* 43. 

Motoa 90. 23; Q1. 3. 

potx[ 2. 6 8. 

povas 8. ii. sch. 2, 8. 

pdvos 86.5; 91. 17 (?); 
i. 2 Geet 7 (podv.) : 


OOns 17 LO (?). povov 
83. int.; 97.40; 99. 11. 
22s 2 OO reS. 27, perl 
98. ~ ji, 20, 

pSpiov 2.9 50, [57] 


hoppy 90. 45; 0.119. 

poxdeiv 21. 4. 

pudpos 93, V. 4. 

pu[ 55 Oss ini 

pupias 98. * ii. 3, iv. 15; 8. 
LeeSChae4s 

Mupwaios 98. Vil. 4. 

pvpoy 95. il. 7, 9 

puotnpiov 2.° 34. 


v 8. li. sch. ro. 

vate 90.°8; 98. vil. 2 

vads 91. 1; 98. vill. 2 (vnds) ; 
225A 

Naf&ddev 92. 16. 

vais 90. 18, 27. 

véeaOar 98. ix. 6 ats 94. 2. 

NeiAns 98. 1x. 5; 96. 6, 20. 

NewWarns 98. Vil. 5. 

veids 94. 18. 

vexpds 95. ii. 20; 98.* iii. 8. 

véos 96, 20; (0.1 13); 8. 7. 

vepedn 92. °8 2. 


j ms 
vnmuos O.? 15. 


| Nypevs 98. ut Hk; 1E@}s 


Nnpnis 98. 4 ii, Lo. 
vikaios 98. Vill. 4. 


| vikn 93. X. I 


vv 91. 10; 92.41. 
vopitew 78. 423 97. 5. 
vopos 96.9; 97. 77. 
vooos 0.7 56, 62. 


244 


vooros 21. I. 

voopitev O.° 22. 

vods 85.1 verso 5; (93. x. 4); 
26. recto 3. 

Nuppa: 2. ° 30. 

vov 90, 10; 95. i. 


caer 
vE 95.11. 5; 96. 
dB bae CO” PBS ty A 
voooey 90.4 il. 4. 


E4a.4y 

EavOds 90. 5 

feuwardras 9O. 10. 

éevifew 2.° 31. 

Eévos 91. 14(?); 93. vill. 1 
(Sciv.);; 08. 44 1, 3,.1V. 17's 
2.° 66. 

Zevdpav 2.9 2 (ry 3. 39, 51. 

Hépéns 95. ll, 24. 

Evpetv 8. 59. 


6 (dem.) 93. x. 1, 3,5; 94. 11. 
6 pev 9O. 20, 23, 32, 46; 
93) X72) (oupev! a, 0) Oe 
91. 1-2; 93. vl. 7. 6 pev 
... 6€ 94.5. 6 d€ 90. 41, 
evils 6 (roi dé); 94. 53 0.2 
58, [967], °F ro 

6 (Tel’). 94.3, 17.10. 

dapos 98.7 to? 

oBords 95. il. 27. 

dydoos (7) 2.3 50, 57. 

de 85.1 verso 5; 93. x. 7 (?); 
94. 20; 3. 25. 

ddevew 94. 6; 96. 8. 

606s 85.1 recto 4. 

dbev 2.3 34. 

oterOa 24. 4. 

louxeiy Py, 3 3. 

olka [4. e ap 

oixia 2.° 50. 

oikos 94. 8. 

oiwor 23. 10. 

Oivnis [ 4. ee 24 |. 

owos 95. il. g; 2.3 40. 

oios 90.5 4; 94.10; 97. 48. 
oids re 97. 56. 

olxerOar 25. verso 6. 

oixvety 92, 29 2, 


igeie alt 


15; 98. 


INDICES 


| 92.117. 

ddBios 9O. 2; 95. il. 26. 
d\Bos 94. Q, 10, 15. 

dAlyos 85.24 recto 6 ; 95, ii. 


3. 
odiywpia 99. il. 25. 
oAdvvar 25. recto 5 
ddods 94, 20. 


”OAopos O. 2 66. 


ddos 26. verso 13? 

dru[ 98. *4 3. 

Oulu a ODI E, 

dpocos 90. 45; 1. int., [26]. 
dpoios 1, int.; 8. 45. 

oporoyew 24. 6. 

omopety 2. 3 65. 

ouov 86. I. 

Oudpeovos 98. 1X. 3. 

dpavupos O, 1 15. 

dpos 97. 18. 

overdigew O.7 47. ” 

Ovnrwp O.* 17. 

dvopa [4. 142 77], 

ovopatew 4,142 71, 

évonacia 2. ° 19. 

d&vxodos 28. recto I. 

omAopayos 26. recto 6. 

omére 92.1 14, 

orws 97. 66. 

op| 92123, 

opav 94, 17; 95.11. 21 ; 98. 
ee 072 

opéyew 94, 3 (?), 16 

dpelxyadkos 9O. 42. 

opOés 8. i, sch. 12. 
int, 

dpigev 8. 1. sch. 6 

éptoy 8. i. sch. 16. 

dpxwos 98. Vi. 5? 

oppav 98. “4 ili, 1 (?), Pe 

dpveov 2° 49. 

opvvc@a 90. 3; 96. 15. 

‘Opsor|piawa 92. 47 1, 

Opxopeveoe 258 69. 

és 90. [1], 50 sae ; 92.120, 
B45 2s OG IViea ieee, 
re) 108 94. aes "OB. iin 
97.29, 45,54,55; 98.° © 
2(?), il 12, tl. 4 0. oo. 
42, 48, [60], 8: Zo Ns eee 


ép|Oas 1, 


PU cheers Mid AAG Ira’: Sues 
8. ii. sch. 4, 10 ; 28. verso 


5 (?). ev o 97. 23. ep’ @ 
95.25 Ti. 

drye 90. 14? 

dovs 8. 24. 


domep 99. lil. 8; 2.249; 26. 
verso 4. 

Gore 9O. 17. 

dotts 98. X. 4. 

ora” 95> tin a4 It 2G: 
verso 6; 28. verso 6. 

dre 93. Vili. 2; 96.15. 0 
ore 96. 4. 

or 18) 105 86.4 recto sg: 
91.14; 95.110; 97. 33) 


37, 423 98. 93 0.° 54, 
70; Lint; 4.734 47.8. 
i. sch. 5 (?), 7; a7-43 


ou(« ) 718. 425-838. nb 90: 
[15], 25; 98. vii. 7 (ov. 
wo), Vili, I, 2, X. 25 94, 
15.33 O52 8.35) 96725 
97. 10, 33, 40, 52, 55; 
64,725 98. ** iv. 145-90: 
li, 21; 0.751, 55, °57, 
61, 67, cae [isis FS 

E 2 eS.iteschs 

ae 7; 24,2; 25. 
verso 0 33 27. 8; 28. verso 4. 

ot 96. 8 


ov, of 94. I. 

ovdé 90. 15; 94. 3; 99. ii. 
22—4, 26. 

ovdeis [97. 7], 29; 98. 441. 
14 BO. ae 

ovdérore 98. X. 7. 

ovKert OS. 1X. I. 

ovxody 78. 14. 

cup OF. 20s) O42 464 25s 


verso 2. 

ovrore O.° 38. 

ovpavds 78. 37; 85.74 verso 
6. 


ovre 90. 10, II 
97. 53, 55: 

ovr, 94.173 1. 16. 

otros 85. 1 verso 4; 98. vi. 3. 
ix. 43 95.11. 4,14; 96. 9; 
97. [10], 29,31, 44,51; 56, 


RIBS Pei 2 


Tf. 


Wi >) 98; 1.45 D9. ii..20, 
R27 Onatz, Wasi 46. 
Ae Wty |e ears Seay 30:5 
BOAT Tipe 3 72 GSO DOs 
L1G 6 24 Ole 2OeTeClOn4, 
5; 27.17. ovrocgi 99. il. 
21; 8. 37. ovra(s) 91.7; 
96. ih 2h | tints 2° 
7s PAB Tate 

operrew 94. 15. 

dpOaruds 85.4 recto 10 (?); 
96. li. 21. 

dppa 98. vii. I. 

dys 0.1 22. 


muboe!Ouo has 2B. <4 

Tlacanevs O.° 13. 

tatypa 95, li. 12. 

trawWiov 25. verso 8. 

maicew 1. 5435 [ 4. . a 

Taioves 4, 142 20? 

Tawo| vidns 4. 142 19? 

mac. GO. 13522. 02; + 16, 
386+ 938. vil. 3, ix.2; 94. 
2O5. il 14 +.0.7160,° 13; 
Wee Be 24 os 2B. 
recto 3. 

madas 2.° 433 8. 13. 

makayn 91. 4. 

mddn 98. vill. 1 (amarn Pap.). 

made {95. ii. 16}. madi 95. 
Iie bY 5 (O8.°° 3° 99. u. 
257/04 120,-" 207) Sy 00); 
9. sch. 73 21. 9. 

Tladdas 93. V. 5. 

TlaAnvevs 4, 14% ar, 

MapBorddns 4.147 18, 

Tlap| pidn 24. 8? 

mavapioros 93. V. 6. 

mavrehas O.! 24. 

mavrexvos 91. 3. 

mavrobands [ 4. ° 9 |. 

rapa 92.18; 98. vii. 3, viii. 
5» ix. 5 (dp), x. 35 94. 2; 
95. ii. 15; 96. 10; 98. 
Ae eA DOr itt on Latgina| 
24,[45];2.°[4], 31, 45-6, 
63,67, 71-2, °6, 13; 4 : I, 
11 (1. inép?), 13. 

mapayew 95, il, 20, 


| Ilarnp 86. 4. 


OTMETANEW TEXTS 


mapaylyver Oar 2. ? els 

mapaypapn 4. ° 11. 

mrapadiddvat 98.1 6, 10. 

mapakoAovlety 25. recto 3. 

mapadvew 28, 12. 

mapdvopos O.° 53. 

mapamAnovos | 28. recto 5 ? |. 

mapanpeaBeia 4. 1*2 To, 

mapackevafew 2.° 38. 

mapeivat 1. 47. 

mapedoev |O. ° 242]; 
verso 6. 

mapbévos 95. ii. 113 98. }° ii. 
PAC) 4s Mio es 

Td |poe 2. e276 

Ildpis 90. Io. 

Tlappevioy 98. 44 i. 3. 

Ildpos 2, ° 31. 

mapos 94. 17. 

mas 82. 12; 85. 2* verso 
2(?); 86. 1, 3-5; 98.iv. 
Ae OL MLO moO Ou lea: 
96. 8; 97.43; 98. *iv. 
G MOOG ley 32 sh Onc: 
LOU) oO 271) 8.0245 An. ys 
24. 7. navrws 26. verso 3. 

ma |roados 927°2 2° 

matnp 90. 22 ; 
O24 5-03. Ville 67) 5 
O75 1539,2-07, ° 165 28. 
16 ; 26. recto 9. 

matp@os 26. recto 10, 


25. 


- mavptatos 98. X. 3. 


t Javora[ 98. 36 7, 

méda (= péreote?) 90. 46. 
mébn 96. IT. 

nediov 98. * ill. 8. 

meCos 98. ** lil. 6, iv. II, 14. 
melOev 1. 39 (meworéor). 
treipa 25. recto 2. 
Tetpalte’s A295. 
médayos 98, ** ii. 14. 
Ilehorjuos 98. vi. 6. 
LleAomovrjoroe O. 2 72. 


| méumey 85. verso 8; 92.°7 6. 


néumtos O.° 58. 

mevys 95. ll. 19. 

mevia 95. il. 16. 

névre 95.1.9; 98. *iv. 15. 
neraivew 96. 13, 18. 


245 


mep 98. Vi. 2. 

mepaivey 97, 67. 

Tlépyapoy 90. 8. 

Ilepyaon 4. [+2 20, 

mept 90. 5, 49 Sch. ; 98. vi. 2; 
95.1.8; 96.14; 98.14, 
D0 Weg Ive 173 Os? 2. 
25,30; "84°16, 40, [22° 
W222; 24; he 5) LPant,. 
22 s~ BP 07, BA FOe GN 
OGcnOn 62 9 42g 90, 
647 sch. 

mepiPrentus [4. 1+2 14. 

mepreEaipeio bat O. 2 40. 

TlepiOotdns 4. 172 24. 

mepuotdava O.? 35, 41. 

meptkadrAns 96. 13. 

mepixrens 90. 2. 

mepexpatn| 26. recto 2. 

repioratos 4, 1t2 74, 

Trepiotpeper bar 94, 14. 

meptotpopn 1. 40. 

mepioxi¢ew 88. int. 

mepireryiCe O.2 58. 

mepoein 96. 12, 16. 

Iepoeporn 2. ° 30. 
3 

Heépons 98. ** ii. 4, iii. 1; 99. 
0120 Gass AG, Oda To, 

Ilepockds 98. 18 9. 

meooos 94. IO, IT. 

metTnrov 96. 12. 

myatos 95. il. 10. 

mndadwov 95. il. 25. 

mnoav 8. 68. 

Muepides 92, °° 3. 

muxpos 95. ll. 22. 

nivev 96. 20; 98. *4i. 16. 

ninrew 94,12; 96.15; 98. 
10 

3- 

migos 1, 25. 

mravacba 78. 10; 0.1! 30. 

mAavntns 8. i. Sch. 7. 

mAdooew 1. 45. 

mhreivy 0.1 g. 

TlAeroOevidas 9O. 21. 


Pepo. 2. 


mreiov 95. li. 18; 96. 3. 
mréov 95. il. 27. mAeiotos 
0.1 12. 


mdeoverrns 28. recto 4. 


246 


meupa 8.1. Sch. 11, ii. sch. 6, 
G) 1%: 

mAnGew 94, 21. 

mrjdos 98. 6 ii. 12, “iii. 3. 

mAnpipe OG. 20, 

adnpys 98. ** iii. 8,14; 1. 48. 

mAnpovy 88. int. 

mAnoiov 98. * ii. 6. 

mrivOos 4. ° 2. 

mdxapos 95. 1. 9. 

mAovotos 95. ll. 19. 

mAodros 95. li, 16. 

mvetpaS2.11. ayov Il». 86. 4. 

mvon 78. 9. 

modnpns 1. 37. 

mdOev 95, il. 6, 7 5 25. recto 1. 

moli 94, 21. 

mou 82. 9; 96. 7 (?); 97. 
rr Oe aoe are 
28. recto 2, 6. 

moukidos 98, * ili, 14. 

monéuuos 4, 1t2 y2, 

modepos GO. 7 5 [0. 2 Wale 
2.246. 

mods 99, ii. 16, 28; O.1[ 4], 
38, 753, 2 70,%36; 4.4 
2(?); 27.3, 7. mrddus 94. 
21. 

mortreia O. 8*7 4; 2. 3 21, 60. 

rrodurevec Ou O.9 2. 

modddkis 92.41; 98.18 4; 
OF 444% 3.510. 

modvyAayns 96. int. 

modvyoupos 9O. 18. 

Tlodvevktos 4.°% 8. 

TloAwdos 1, 21. 

modvradros 98. IV. I. 

TmoduTAnOns 96. 3. 

modvs 78. 38; 92.116; 94. 
16 (modéecar), 19; 96. 6; 
98: ilio> Ov7/40, Rok 
ILO tho ar lou k 25. 
verso 1; 28. verso 6. 

modvupvos 9O. 6. 

ropa 2, ° 39. 

Topatiov 2. ° 36. 

moveiy 95. li. 3, 13. 

novos 25. recto I. 

mévtos 90. 28. 

IIdvros 2. ° 37. 


INDICES 


mopetov 4. sas =o 

mopeverOa 3. 36. 

mopi¢ev 25. verso 4, 8. 

Moceddv 98.44 ii. TI. 

moranos 86. Bi hed l 2:4 70. 

more 78. 12, 15; 94. IL; 
95. ii. 20, 23 (tore, Pap.). 

morepoy 23. 12. 

motov 94, 10. 

nov 0.143; 1.16; 25. recto 
i (mod i) 

Ilovdukparns 9O. 47. 

movs 90. 33; 93. 1x. 5; 95. 
ie, TDs% 

mpaypa 82. 24. 

mpaéis 28. verso 3. 

mpacoen [4,° x |. 

mpeoBurns 4.142 15. mpeo- 
Birepos [85. *~* recto 2]. 
mpeaBvraros O.1 8, ° 44. 

piaywos 9O. I, 13. 

mptacda 8. 23. 

amply OS mileet 

mpoarohhvvar 25. recto 5. 

mpoBarov O. 12 yy, 

mpoyvaois 2.° 72. 

mpoeurew OQ. 11. IT. 

mpoxeia fac 20. 163 sch. 

IIpopndevs 2.° 64. 

apés 98. ** i. 5, ii. 8; 2.34%; 
[4.2 10]; 28. ro. 

mpooayopeve 2.° 59, 

mpoodoxay 95. li. 21. 

mpooepiCew 95, li. I. 

mpooeupioxew O.1 45. 

mpooéxew OQ. il. 17. 

mpdabev 94, 13. 

mpdaodos 92. °7 3, 

mpoooudntys O.1 11? 

mpooméeurew O.° 66. 

mpooroeiaba 98. * i. 15. 

mpoordowov 1. 11. 

mpoarbéva 0.1 42? 

9, [13]. 

mpoopepev 98, 44 iv, 2; 0.2 
63. 

mporepos 96. 14. 
* 55 

mpohepeararos 90. 32. 

mputaveiov 86. 2? 


mpootporaos 4, 12 


mpdotepov O, 


mpartdv 94. 6. 
mpatos 2.733. a 2.3 29, 36, 
66, 92. mpdrov 82. 11; 


93. vil. Re loam ae 25? 
anu Tparo, 98.7 4. 

mrepué 94, 14. a 

Iro\euaios 98. vill. 6. 

IIrdov 92, 47 2, 

mulyn 1. 49? 

Uvéaets 4, 1+2 A, Os 

IIv@atos [4. 142 me 

mal On ioe 

nuvéaverOa 98. vii. 1; 98. *4 
is (1S, 7 sO Oe: 

mo 938. vii. 7. mol 92.5 2. 

mas 97. 19. 


pnrés 8. ii. sch. 6; 28. 17. 

pyrop O.% 11, 41, 827; [4.3 
Kab 

pita 96, 2. 

pirrew 98. * ii. 15 

“Pédios O.? 76; 2.2 (fs 

“Pdédos O.? 74. 

pdb.os 86. 3. 

pd0ws 92.116. 

pvOuds 91. 5. 

putnp [4.° 12]. 

popun O.* 37. 

pwmos 4,° 9, 


adBurros 8. 56, 59. 
Sadpaovevs 1. Io. 
Sampo O.1 2, 3. 
Zapamis 8. 8, 9. 
Zarvpo 1. 17. 

odda 1. 18, 

ociew 95. 1. 6. 
gehnn 22. i. 32. 
cepvos 8. Q. 


Zecoyxoow 26. recto 4, verso . 


z, 12: 

onjpa 96. IQ. 

onpaivey 8. 173 4,3 [si 6 
4474, 

onpewov 78. 263; 8. 16. 

onpepwds 98. V1. 2. 

ovyay 86. 2. 

Siddvios 93. ix. 7. 

Siovidns O.1 36-7. 


HE 


Stovpidys 98. Vi. 5. 

otros 94. [3], 1S XG}, 8 BE 
3, 50. | 

otonav 3. 060-2, 66. 

Skdpavdpos O.1 5. 

Skapavdpovupyos O.1 6. 

okeipadiov 4,4 1, 

oxevacew 98, 17 2, 

Sky 98. ** iii. 11; 0.8 50. 

oxorrety 1, 53. 

SkvOixds 2.° 1, 36. 

axvOper| 85, 2~* recto 13. 


opixpds 97. 52. 

Sodopeirns 85.24 recto 7. 

Zorevs 2.° 60. 

SdrAou 2.2 58, 

ods 23. 9. 

Sovadvva 85.2~4 recto 2. 

cop| 92.47 4. 

sop, 0.7 24. 

codife 9O. 23. 

SodoxdAyjs 1. 10; 5. 24 1. 

copes 1, 18. — 

oréppa 23. 9. 

SmOpaddrns 98.°° il, 6. 

omddyyxva O. 2 40. 

(orovd jaios 97. 2. 

areivos 98. Vi. 5. 

Sreepters O. 44 g, 

orépavos 95. i. I, ii. 73 0. 
BOR 8, ORS Bre, Be 

otepavodv 0.3? 54. 

orn O.° 35. 

otippos 8. 1, 6. 

oroye 22. ii. 30? 

orépa 92.116, 

oTpareia [O. 822 ali 

otparevery 9O. 52 Sch. 

atpatnyés 99. li. 243 4.4 4. 

Srpari@ra 1. 57. 

atpatés 1. 9g. 

otpipves 3. I. 

ov 82. 9, 11; 90. 47; 93. 
iv. 3, Vili, 5; 94. 1; 95. 
ies sido) Shor Oy aay 0s 
6, 10; 25. verso 7. 

ovyyiyvec Oa 3. 11. 

ovyxaratidecOa 2. ° 37. 

ovArdcyew 3. 21, 26. 

gvaAdoyos 2, ° 38, 


OTHER NEW TEXTS 


ovpBaivew O.1 25. 

oupBdraov 4.416, 17. 

atpBorov 98. vill. 1; 4.4 14. 

cuppopia 4.4147, g. 

avppopitns 4.* 9, 

oupmabeorepos O.° 72. 

oupras 8.1. sch. 7? 

ouphepery 96. 17; 99. il. 14. 

ouppopa 0.79 33 8. 27, 30. 

au O, Te (Pn? 308 

guvayew 8. 20, 23. 

cvvabpoife 3. 20. 

ovvaviecbar 9B. 21. 

cuv|anreww 98. * 6. 

ZuvapioTt@oat 3. 5. 

ouvartuxely 0.® 24. 

cuvebiverOar 8. 35. 

auvepyos 0.8 24? 

cuvovaiarpes 85. 2~4 recto I e/ 
SQCp. 

ovvragis 2.° 67. 

cuvrépos O. ° 26, 

ovytuxia 3. 29. 

ohpayiutecda 98.**ii. 15; O. 
2 37- 

oppayifev 3. 17. 

appayis 3, 10. 

oxjpa 8. il. sch. 4. 
yr. 

oynpari¢ew 1, int. 

oxifew 95. ii, 25. 

axo\n 0.274. ocyody 8. 25, 
38. 

cater 82. 10; 85.24 recto 
OPO wa ()5 99.11. 18. 

copa 98.18, °~ ii. 9; ChE. 

SoaiB.os 98. Vil, I. 


oxnpl 


Td. 02, 
rddavroy 98. **i. 8; 0.° 66. 
tadareipios 9O. 8. 
rddas 95. il. 19. 
SH yc 
traviopupos 9O. II. 
Tapods 2.° 58. 
racoew 95. il. 5. 
ravpeos 95. il. 13. 
cae PRS Reve tke ep Oh ieee 
14, 44; 92.1173 98. vii. 
f, 3; 90a tf; 960115 


/ 
Ta\ayratos 


247 


975-565, 98.2.9; 10's 0: 
IP6ote s45n2.2 44, 

toxos 94, I. 

Tehapovios 9O. 34. 

réteos 92.1147; 8. i. sch. 5. 
tedetdtaros 98. lV. 4. 

teevovry 26. recto 14. 

rédos 99. ii. 15; 0.327. 

répevos 92. 38 3, 

reds 98. Vili. 6. 

teptrvds 92. oie, 

TETUPTOS (8) 1. 44. 

tetpayevos 8. il. sch. 3. 

tétpapos 98, * ii. 12. 

rérrapes 1. 43 ‘8. i. Sch. 13, 
15 (6). 

Tedkpos 90. 49, 51 Sch.° 

TH 98. Vi. 7. 

tyuikadra 20, 190 sch. 

ridévar 93. lll. 4 (in 94. 12; 
95. ll. 153 96. lo. 

tikrew 93. V. 5. 

riysav O.° 31, ie 33 |. 

ripn O. & ro, 

Tip| wpia 28. verso 5? 

tis! B21 03" Olek OO. ail 
16, 17,275 99.11. 93 0. 
369; 25. recto 6, verso 2. 

ms 78. 15 3 90.52 sch.; 93. 
Vil, 1,647), Valo p; 1X. Syke 
3; 94. 4; 97. 49; 98. 
Se AV AES Tes OO nelle 

0.5/6, 16, 401"); 
46, 734, 69; 2,° 26, 41 
63, 715 8.563. 4.1" 10, 
FP a52); “fr? £8 3.0.cech. 
53 25. recto 6. 

tit0n 25. verso 8. 

TAnpov 23, 14. 

760 92. *4 3. 

rot 92. 87 23 94, Io. 

tolvuy 97. 10. 

tows 94. 14. 

rouse 94. 10; O.° 35. 

rowodros 92.14; 97.47; O.? 
30, °4o$ 28. recto 5. 

roixos 91.6; 2.19 3? 

roApay OQ, il. 12. 

ToApn OY. ll. 22. 

roéov 21. 6, 


248 


ténos 0.259; 2.° 36. 

tég0s 98. V. 2, 3 (ré00.), x. 
5; 94.2. 

rocovtos 98.2 5. 

rére 96.35 0.95; 28.16(?); 
26. verso 7. 

tpay@dia 2.3 43. 

tpayodds 0.3 47, 57. 

Tpaxwiat [5. 24 2|. 

mais uOd. iS, . £05102". 7 5 
8. i. sch. 13 (7). 

tperev 98. * ii. Q. 

Tpéepew Oh Sse 

tpudxovra O. FT 4, 

tpinpapxos 4. * 8. 

tplopyos 2.3 46. 

rpis 90. 433 95. il. 26. 

tpioxiduoe 98. 44 iv. 16. 

tTpitayomorev O.° 47. 

tpitos 2,31 (7). 

Tpoia 90. 14, 19. 

tpomauov 4,142 yo, 

tpomn 8. i. sch. 6 ? 

tpomos 92. © 6(?); O.1 18. 

tpopy 3. 38. 

tpvgy 28. recto 2, Verso 3. 

tpugpos 98. ** iv. 5. 

Tpatkos 2.% 3. 

Tpwtdos 90. 41. 

Tpa@es 90. 44. 

tuyxavew QO, OFT 10(?) ; 26. 
verso 2. 

TvpBos 23. 24, 

Tipmavov 95, il. 13. 

tuntew 9O.* ii. 7. 

Tvxn O.° 64; 25. recto 1. 


vdap 98. vii. 3; 95. 11.6, 10, 25; 
96. 3,15, 20; 2.3.40, 45. 

vOdos 1. 52. 

Yios 86. 4. vies 90. 31. 

"YAXis 9O. 41. 

tuvey 8B. 3; 9O. 12. 

indpxew 97. 46; 0.1 23. 

traomorys 98. **iv. 3. 

inép 91.8; 98. iv.1; 95. ii. 
15; 4.411 (? 0 wap Pap.). 

‘YrepBdpeot Q1. I. 

‘Yrepeidns 4. * 5. 

imepnpavos 90. 17. 


INDICES 


drepbe 92.1 11. 

imépraros 92. *4 2. 

ind 78. 153 85. 2* recto 
12 (?), verso 6; 97. 18, 
iat 26, 305.085 sivals 
0. 114,236,315, 16, ® 26; 
2.248) .G5 28.2487 Ob; 
recto 4; 26. recto Io. 

irroxp[| 92, 4° 2. 

imoxpive O. 3 48, 

imopynua 2.7 12, 43, [74 ? |. 

imdatuppos 8. 3. 

imoreivew 8. 1. Sch. g. 

vorepov (97. 2172]; 4. 412. 

bWirodos 9O. 14. 


} 8. ii. sch. 13. 

payeiv 98. ** iv. 7. 

pacopopos 86. 2. 

paivev 0.144. dqaivecbau 91. 
BeOS Ty OCP MOO Mim rat 
7. gor sch. 

paimdns O. | 22. 

ava 90. 49 sch.; 98. ix. 3; 
942.05 Ona eG 2 Ree 
25. verso 3. 

davepos 78. 10; 95.1. 5. 

®aviov 3. 65. 

gdos 92.1 15. 

ddppaxov 98.441. 1; 0.9% 25. 

parvn 7. 895 sch.? 

cbavXos [4. 8 23 

peiSecba 95. ii. 2. 

pepe 78. 27; 
PR  & 

Depoeporn 2.3 33. II. 2.° 30. 

pevyew 95. il. 2. 

pnpn 4.415. 

gnpiteoOa 22. i. 19. 

pbeyyerOa 92.! 19. 

46 }yyos 92. °° 4. 

prl 2.7 7. 

DrdeaAgoa 3. 22. 

prdpyvpos O.! 40, 

Dirirmeikd 4.417. 

Pilurmos 98.19, 441.5; 99. 
1 2. 

purorovia 2.” 2. 

piros 85.7 recto 6; [0.3 
73] 3 27. 14? 


92." 5 (?); 


prog p.. 0.7 25. 

Piroxdpys O.* 45. 

oBe 85.24 verso 13. 

poPeicba 85. 2~4 verso 4, 6. 

poBos 85. 2~4 verso 7,9; 23.6. 

hovevey 23. 16. 

povos 95. il. 2. 

Poppiov 4.° 10; 27. 12. 

pdptos 4.° 9. 

a 90. ° 7. 

pac] 92.11 3. 

ppnv 28. 8? 

povety 96. 2. 

ppornpa 85. 2~* verso 8. 

Ppvyws OB. il. 13. 

gvyas 0.3 59. 

piew 94. 5. 

Pidapyos 1. 44. 

prrdcoev 92.111; 97. 43; 
98,741.27; 

gudrérns 4.* To. 

SvA7n O, §*7 2. 

pudy 4. 4 4. 

piipapua 1. 60. 

gurdyv 78. 31. 

Doxaeis 93. V. 4. 

horn 2.° 66; 8. 4. 

pos 90. 30. 


xal 90. tii. 6. 

Xaddaior 2. ° 63, 

xAkaoris 9O. 31. 

xarkeos 91.6; O.° 32. 

Xadkiouxos 2.° 54. 

xakés 9O. 43. 

Xaparéov O.1 29. 

Xdpagéos 0.1 9. 

xapiCecba 2. ° SO e 2AGaereere 
1 i 

xdpis 92.87 5, 

Xdpites 92.17. 

xatew 96. 5? 

xetdos 98. Vi. 2. 

xequa 22. i, 21. 

xXeov 95. ll. 4. 

xelp 94. 3. 

x9ov 91. 11; 96. 8. 

xc 98, * i, 8, iv. 12. 

xidveos 95.1. Io. 

XAoepos 9B. 12, 


Tse, Oc 


Ws 


xopss 92.87 4; 98. vil. 3 

Xpnpa 95. ll. 18; 97. 28; 
O:2.22, 

xpnoOa O.1 32, 128. 

xpnowos 97. 6. 

xpnow 78. 32. 

xpnornpidgecOa O. ? 53. 

xpévos 92.411; 95. ii. 22. 

Xpvol 92. 4° 2, 


OTHER NEW TEXTS 


xocobu 21. 3. 
xXopa 96. II. 
X@pa 2. 3 41. 
xoptovov 3. 23. 
xopis 3. 14. 


v 98.56 ii, 17. 
]Wevdis 93. x. 8. 


Welvorns 28. recto 4. 


249 


oyvywos 96. 9. 

&de 93. vil. 6, Xx. 73 94. 21. 

adis 92.1 T4. 

obeiv 0.2 51, 

ads 90. 33. 

os 90. 27, [30], 48, 51 sch.; 
93. ix. 3 Z 97. 46; 99. ii. 
205100 Td A éore), 
62, oT 3, 14 [24] 8; 


xpvoeos 91.8; 0.2 55. Xpv- vng[ 0. 87 15. L547 2°48 00) Fac 
govv Tevos 8. 57. Wipupa O. 7 5, 8. 2 ae saép.; 21. 9; 238. . 
Xpvaesarpopos 9O. 40. Whpos O.? 59. (Prep. ) 3. 58. 
xpvoo, 92. 26 2. Wvyx7 85.1 recto g. aret co. 42; 93. Wie BE Bh it 
xpvooeBeupa 90. 9. dorep 95. ii. 193 O.} 28 (2); 
Xpuods 90. 42; 95. il. 17. L256 | eet 16 | By 
xvows 96. 6. ® 8.1. sch. 4. aore 3. 29. 
|xvra| 92. 12 1. @ Ol 38 1) 305 23./14. opedeiv 97. 69, 71. 
2 
LU NooaG Hh Su SGUSS ED: 
(2) AUTHORS. 
PAGE PAGE 
Alcaeus Fr. 19 . : ‘ : . 71 | Hesych. s. v. odBurros : 2 165 
46. ; ; eGo i losephus, An xu.202 9. : - 99 
Avonymus ed. Bellermann 3, 85 ee Saleen Gstratucwe 7-aan 0 : : > megs 
Aristides i. 508 : ° ; ‘ 43 Photius s. v. TpooTpomatos ae LOO 
Aristophanes, £9. 655 ; . 165 hag se ; : ; 86K 
Thesm. 760 . ; oe 4 SuLeindarth ress . 84-5 
Fr. 755 : : 154 1) Proclus, 77 Rempub. ' il, p. 25 (Krol . 190 
Athenaeus xv. 6874. , ; o 0 af2 Sappho Fr. 39 P ; eres 
Babrius 115. 4. é : 2 Ome F : : ete 
Bacchylides xvi (xvii). 66. : . +96 7 ‘ : ene? t; 
Bekker, Anecd. i, p. 299 . avh7O 78. 1-2 45 
Callimachus Fr. 35d Non 100, 106—7 79. 2 
22 : . 109 106 . 59 
193 : : 00 B2Gs. : : ; = ge 
209 : ; -, 108 169. : ‘ : 5 ai 
2147 5 . 110 | Sophocles, Az. 287. : : ele 2 
Catullus Ixvi. 79-83 . . 100, 106-7 | Suidas s.v."IBukos . : : H gis 
Curtius i, 8. 20 : ; : 5 Way Sampo. é F ~ 146 
12.1 : 123, 134 | Thucyd. vii. 60 ; ‘ F 106 
Diodorus xvii. 33. 1 . : ‘ . 93°) Petes, 777. p..68.. : : ES 
Etym. Magn. s. v. peAvyecov : . 161 | Xenophon, Anadé. ii. 1.6 . : cer 


250 


P. Berl. 6870 Scvzungsb. Preuss. Akad. 
TOPE, GORY F . 


P. Halle 2 , : ‘ Lie 


Be Oxy bey 0% 
15 


INDICES 


(0) PAPYRI. 


PAGE 
PeOxyail: 
. 22-3 VII. 
45-6 XI. 
42 
Irs 


208 

IOI! 
1360. I. 9 
1364 


PLaTE I| 


1770) Hols. 1) 2, recto 


No. 1788, Fr. 15 


Fr. 


No, 1787 


; ’ : : ; ) sn 


Pirate II] 


ROWE “srk 


193 


| de 


= “ spees Bie : ER 5 4 Prk he ee S nee ee. —- 2 = 2 a4 
c; 5 : = bon z ae _ ry : : % Se 
4 ; we ay are |) a 7 4 


> 


~ = 


PLaTEeE IV 


SS. 


s 2d WYO i Lye 


Eo 


; NIDIZOWONINE 


St aq T ‘Yq ‘orgi ‘on TI-I “S[OD “gogr ‘on 
/ rte Aco 


leat. 
aN ui 
Wot 
mya 
Looets 
t _BHDoiarrertrome wh 1 m4 ae, 
OVNI TMOIOe Boe : by aint hie la f 


Al "JOD ‘gogI ‘ON 


te ae path eel ci Chine Ms 5 
Benois oS te A, ER, aaa re? 


VOILE FY oe SAA Pes 90M Orly avo 
Si ef 3bLo3 Id<pae Lis ' Er 


kc % OF 3d es ae » A 7 teas 
fit eo re eae ee 13 @°¢ J F-4 >t, Tae & Deine g) Vectra eee e's SHO. EN 
atc ; Messy . gaye OS EES ad re 
SOHNE ci Legh tse pa BBA ans ie 
ey Lt € Ww 3 rol rh it, a J tthe ; ome ne 
V. : Seve ™ 7 Ad Mi 
gets. 2) 88,5 € a Wie 


ee ETF pe a 


ete he 


uewerr. 
lonNS 


= 


DIOMNITN s 


re | 


PLATE V 
any Th er 


ae 


iy 
may 
y 


are a 


PO ites 


ener 


an hee 


No. 1814, verso 


. oo dh Sie OP is me sgn lela deur eee, 
a rv 


ae 
¥ 


q ey 
ma he - Sag a4 
ys 9 ¥ 3 
3 é - 
af . 
ry 
» 
‘ 
‘ 
. 
‘ 
i 
\ 
’ 
‘ B 
t t 
k 
- 
. 
' 
‘ 
; a 
a T,.. 
| 
¥ ‘ 
» > ~ 
7 I 
Wi 1 
$ 
. . 
‘ P 
. 
/ 
° 
: i 
1 — 
, 
' 
is 
ee ; 
+ 
' - : 
fi « 
* i 
‘ 
« re 
o¢ =. 
< . 
‘ - : 
; o 
' 
‘ + e 
H 
w ‘ 
> 
i 
7 
~<« 
‘ 
~ Z 
1 
‘ 


The Egypt Exploration Society 


GRAECO-ROMAN MEMOIRS. 


THE EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY, as recently reconstituled and renamed, 

proposes to continue with but slight modifications the work of the Egypt Exploration Fund, 
which was founded in 1882 to conduct archaeological researches in Egypt. In 1897 a special 
department, called the Graeco-Roman Branch, was initiated for the discovery and publication 
of remains of classical antiquity and early Christianity in Egypt. The volumes published by 
the Graeco-Roman Branch are io be continued under the name of Graeco-Roman Memoirs. It 
as intended that they shall appear annually, as heretofore, under the editorship of Prors. GRENFELL 
and Hunt. Lach will consist of 250 quarto pages or more, with facsimile plates of the more 
important papyre. 

All persons interested in the promotion of the Society's objects are eligible for election as 
Members. An entrance fee of £1 1s. 7s payable on election, and an annual subscription of 
£2 25. 2s due annually on January 1. Members have the right of atlendance and voting ai all 
meetings, and may introduce friends to the Lectures and Exhibitions of the Society, and have 
access to the Library now in course of formation at the Society's Rooms. 

The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology or, of preferred, a Graeco-Roman Memoir is 
presented gratis to all Members, and other publications may be purchased by them at a substan- 
tial discount, Full particulars may be obtained from the Secretary, 13 Tavistock Square, 
London, W.C. t, or from the Secretary of the American Branch, 503 Tremont Temple, Boston, 
THES OLE cI 


PUBLICATIONS OF THE EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY. 


oe 


EXCAVATION MEMOIRS. 
i coe SPORE CllyY OF Pil HOM AND THE ROUTE. OF THE EXODUS: 


By Epovarp NAviLLEe. Thirteen Plates and Plans. (fourth and Revised Edition, 
1888.) 25s. 

IJ. TANIS, Part I. By W. M. Frinpers Petriz. Seventeen Plates and two Plans. 
(Second Edition, 1889.) 25s. 

III. NAUKRATIS, Part I. By W. M. Frinpers Perriz. With Chapters by Crecrz 
SmiTH, Ernest A. GARDNER, and BARCLAY V.HEAD. Forty-four Plates and Plans. (Second 
Edition, 1888.) 255. 

IV. GOSHEN AND THE SHRINE OF SAFT-EL-HENNEH. By Enovarp 
NAVILLE. Eleven Plates and Plans. (Second Edition, 1888.) 255. 

V. TANIS, Part Il; including TELL DEFENNEH (The Biblical ‘ Tahpanhes ’) 
and TELL NEBESHEH. By W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE, F. LL. GRIFFITH, and A. S. 
Murray. Fifty-one Plates and Plans. 1888. (Oud of prznt.) 

VI. NAUKRATIS, Part Il. By Ernest A. Garpnerand F. Li. Grirrira. Twenty- 
four Plates and Plans. 1888. (Out of print.) 

Vil epee CLEY OF ONIAS. AND THE MOUND: OF THE JEW.- The 
Antiquities of Tell-el-Yahfidtyeh. By Epovarp NAvVILIE erd F. Li. GRIFFITH. Twenty- 
six Plates and Plans. 1890. 255. 


VOL. XV 


VII. 


> HG 
210 B ls 
XIV. 
XVe 
XVI. 
De VALT 
XVIII. 
XIX. 
XX. 
XXI. 
XXII. 
XXIII. 


XXIV. 
XXYV. 


XXVI. 
XXVILI. 
XXVIII. 
XXIX. 
DOG 
XXXI. 
XXXII. 
XXXIII. 


XXXIV. 
XXXV. 


XXXVI. 


».O,0,4' 08 


« 


BUBASTIS. ByEpovarp Navitte. Fifty-four Plates. (Second Edition, 1891.) 258. 


TWO HIEROGLYPHIC PAPYRI FROM TANIS. Containing THE SIGN 
PAPYRUS (a Syllabary). By F. Ly. GRIFFITH. THE.GEOGRAPHICAL PAPYRUS 
(an Almanack), By W. M. FLINDERS PETRIE. With Remarks by HEINRICH BRUGSCH. 
1889. (Out of print.) 

THE FESTIVAL HALL OF OSORKON II (BUBASTIS). By EDouARD 


NAVILLE. Thirty-nine Plates. 1892. 255. 


_ AHNAS EL MEDINEH. By Enpovarp Navitre. Eighteen Plates. And 


THE TOMB OF PAHERI AT EL KAB. By J. J. TyLor and F. Li. GRIFFITH 
Ten Plates. 1894. 2655. 


DEIR EL BAHARI, Introductory. By Epovarp NavILte. Fifteen Plates 
and Plans. 1894. 255. 

DEIR EL BAHARI, Part I. By Epovarp Navitte. Plates I-XXIV (three 
coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 1895. 305. 

DEIR EL BAHARI, Part II. By Epovarp Navirrz. Plates XXV—LV (two 
coloured) with Description. Royal folio, 1897. 305. 

DESHASHEH. By W. M. Frinprrs Petrie. Photogravure and thirty-seven 
Plates. 1898. 255. 

DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IJ. By Epovarp Naviriz. Plates LVI-LXXXVI 
(two coloured) with Description, Royal folio. 1898. 305. 

DENDEREH. By W. M. Frinvers Perriz. Thirty-eight Plates. 1900. 
25s. (Forty extra Plates of Inscriptions. Ios.) 

THE ROYAL TOMBS OF THE FIRST DYNASTY. By W. M. Fiinpers 
PETRIE, Sixty-eight Plates. 1900. 25s. 

DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IV. By Epovarp Navitte. Plates LXXXVII- 
CXVIII (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. IgoI. 30s. 

DIOSPOLIS PARVA. By W. M. Fuinpers Perri. Forty-nine Plates. 
tgo1. (Out of print.) : 

THE ROYAL TOMBS OF THE EARLIEST DYNASTIES, Part IL. 


By W. M. FLInpDERS PETRIE. Sixty-three Plates. 1901. 255. (Thirty-five extra 
Plates. 10s.) 


ABYDOS. Parte. By W. Mon. PETRIE. Eighty-one Plates. 1902. 255. 

EL AMRAH AND ABYDOS. By D. Ranpart-Maclver, A. C. Macs, and 
F, Li. GRIFFITH. Sixty Plates. 1902. 25s. 

ABYDOS, Part II. By W. M. F. Perrie. Sixty-four Plates. 1903. 25s. 

ABYDOS, Part -IIl.. By GT. Ctremuy, Ey B.7Averoy, and Aot2 0. 
WEIGALL, &c. Sixty-one Plates. 1904. 255. 

EHNASYA. By W. M. Frinpers Perrir. Forty-three Plates. 1905. 258. 
(ROMAN EHNASYA. Thirty-two extra Plates. Ios.) 


DEIR EL BAHARI, Part V. By Epovarp Navitte. Plates CXIX-CL with 
Description. Royal folio. 1906. 30s. 


THE ELEVENTH DYNASTY TEMPLE AT DEIR EL BAHARI, Part I. 
By EpovaRp NAVILLE and H. R. Hate. Thirty-one Plates. 1907. (Out of print.) 

DEIR EL BAHARI, Part VI. By Epovarp Navittr. Plates CLI-CLXXIV 
(one coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 1908. 30s. 

THE ELEVENTH DYNASTY TEMPLE AT DEIR EL BAHARI, Part II. 
By EpouARD NAVILLE and SOMERS CLARKE. ‘Twenty-four Plates. 1910. © 255. 

PRE-DYNASTIC CEMETERY AT EL MAHASNA. By E. R. Ayrton 
ENOU Min ILASh IKON uate OS, 

THE ELEVENTH DYNASTY TEMPLE AT DEIR EL BAHARI, Part III. 

By Epouvarp NAVILLE, H.R. Haut, and C. T. CuRRELLY. Thirty-six Plates. 1913. 255. 

CEMETERIES OF ABYDOS, Part I. By Epovarp Navitte, T. E. Pret, 
H.R. HALL and K. HAppon. 1974. 255. i 

CEMETERIES OF ABYDOS, Part Il. By T, E. Pert. 1014, 255. 


CEMETERIES OF ABYDOS, Part Il]. By T. E. Perr and W. L. S. 
LOAT., 1913. 255. 

THE INSCRIPTIONS OF SINAI, Part I. By A. H. Garprver and T. E. Pret. 
Kighty-six Plates and Plans. Royal folio. 1917. 355. 


BALABISH. By G, A. Wainwricut. Twenty-five Plates. 1920. 425. 


ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY. 
Edited by F. Li. GRIFFITH. 


I. BENI HASAN, Part I. By Percy E. Newserry. With Plans by G. W. 
FRASER. Forty-nine Plates (four coloured). 1893. (Ozd#t of print.) 


II. BENI HASAN, Part II. By Percy E. Newperry. With Appendix, Plans, and 


Measurements by G. W. FRASER. Thirty-seven Plates (two coloured). 1894. 25s. 


III. EL BERSHEH, Part I. By Percy E. Newperry. Thirty-four Plates (two 


coloured). 1894. 255. 


IV. EL BERSHEH, Part Il. By F. Lr. GrirrirH and Percy E. Newserry. 


With Appendix by G. W. FRASER. Twenty-three Plates (two coloured), 1895. 255. 


V. BENI HASAN, Part HI. By F. Li. Grirrira. (Hieroglyphs, and manufacture, 


&c., of Flint Knives.) Ten coloured Plates. 1896. 255. 


Vip tik ROGLY Pos FROM SLE COLLECTIONS OF? THE EGYPT 


EXPLORATION FUND. By F. Lu. Grirriru. Nine coloured Plates. 1898. 255. 


VII. BENI HASAN, Part IV. By F. Ly. Grirriru. (Illustrating beasts and birds, | 


arts, crafts, 6c.) Twenty-seven Plates (twenty-one coloured), I900. 2655. 


Vill Hea MASTABAW ORS PrAHHETEP: AND sAKHETHETEP AT 


SAQQAREH, Part I. By NorMAN DE G. Davies and F. Li, GrirFirH. Thirty-one 
Plates (three coloured). Ig00. 255. 


IX. THE MASTABA OF PTAHHETEP AND AKHETHETEP, Part II. 


By N. bE G. Davigs and F. LL. GrirrirH. Thirty-five Plates. 1901. 255. 


X. THE ROCK TOMBS OF SHEIKH SAID. By N. pz G. Davies. Thirty- 


five Plates. 1901. 255. 


XI. THE ROCK TOMBS OF DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part I. By N. ve G. 


Davies. Twenty-seven Plates (two coloured). 1902. 255. 


XI. DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part II. By N. vr G. Davirs. Thirty Plates (two 


coloured). 1902. 2655. 


XIII. THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part I. By N. pg G. Daviss. 


Forty-one Plates. 1903. 255. 


XIV. EL AMARNA, Part II. By N. pe G. Davirs. Forty-seven Plates. 1905. 255. 


XV. EL AMARNA, Part III. By N. pe G. Davies. Forty Plates. 1905. 255. 


XVI. EL AMARNA, Part IV. By N. pe G. Davies. Forty-five Plates. 1906. 25s. 
XVII. EL AMARNA, Part V. By N. pe G. Davies. Forty-four Plates. 1908. 25s. 
XVII. EL AMARNA, Part VI. By N. pe G. Davirs. Forty-four Plates. 1908. 25s. 
XIX. THE ISLAND OF MEROE. By J. W. Crowroor, and MEROITIC 


INSCRIPTIONS, Part I. By F. Lu. Grrrriru. Thirty-five Plates. 1911. 25s. 


XX. MEROITIC INSCRIPTIONS, Part II. By F. Li. Grirritu. Forty-eight 


Plates. 1912. 255. 


XXI. FIVE THEBAN TOMBS. By N.peG. Davies. Forty-three Plates. 1913. 258. 
XXII. THE ROCK TOMBS OF MEIR, Part I. By A. M. Bracxman. Thirty- 


three Plates. Ig14. 255. 


XXIII. MEIR, Part II. By A.M. Bracxman. Thirty-five Plates. 1915. 255. 
XXIV. MEIR, Part IJ. By A. M. Bracxman. Thirty-nine Plates. 1915. 255. 


GRAECO-ROMAN MEMOIRS. 


THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part I. By B. P. Grenrerr and A. S. Hunt. 
Eight Collotype Plates. 1898. (Out of print.) 

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part II. By B. P. Grenrert and A. S. Hunt, 
Eight Collotype Plates. 1899. 255. 


. FAYUM TOWNS AND THEIR PAPYRI. By B. P. Grenrext, A. S. Hunt, 


and D. G. HocartH. Eighteen Plates. 1900. 2655. 


._ THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI. By B. P. Grenrett, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. Smycy. 


Nine Collotype Plates. 1902. (Vot for sale.) 
THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part II. By B. P. Grenrecr and A. S. Hunt. 
Six Collotype Plates. 1903. 255. 


VI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part 1V. By B. P. Grenrerx and A. S. Hunt, 
: Eight Collotype Plates. 1904. 255. : 
VU. THE HIBEH PAPYRI, Part I. By B. P. Grenrert and A. S. Hunt. Ten 
Collotype Plates. 1906. 455. 
VU. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part V. By B. P. Grenrecr and A. S. Hunt. 
Seven Collotype Plates. 1908. 25s. 
IX. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part VI. By B. P. Grenrerr and A.S. Hunt. 
Six Collotype Plates. 1908. 255. 
X. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI,-Part VII. By A.S. Hunt. Six Collotype 
Plates. I9gI0o. 2655. 
XI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part VIII. By A. S. Hunr.- Seven Collo- 
type Plates. Ig1I. 255. 
XII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part IX. By A. S. Hunt. Six Collotype 
Plates) 1002.) 25S: 
XIII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part X. By B. P. Grenfecy and A. S. Hun. 
Six Collotype Plates. 1914. 2655. 
XIV. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XI. By B. P. Grenrerrand A. S. Hunt. 
Seven Collotype Plates. 1915. 25/5. 
XV. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XII. By B. P. Grenrett and A. S. Hunt. 
Two Collotype Plates. 1916. 255. 
XVI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part X01. By B. P. Grenrerxn and A. 3S. 
Hunt. Six Collotype Plates. 1919. 255. 
XVII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XIV. By B. P. Grenrert and A. S, 
Hunt. Three Collotype Plates. 1920. 42s. 
XVIII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Par: XV. By B. P. Grenrext and A. S. Hunt. 
Five Collotype Plates. 1922. 425. 
XIX, THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part XVI. By B..P. Grenrett, A. S. Hunt, 
and H. IJ. BELL. (lz preparation.) 


ANNUAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORTS. Edited by F. Lu. Grirrrru. 1892-1912. 


2s. 6@. each. General Index, 4s. net. 


JOURNAL OF EGYPTIAN ARCHAEOLOGY (commencing 1914). Vols. i-y, 


quarterly parts 6s. Vol. vi, quarterly parts 12s. 6¢.; Vol. vii, two double parts, 255. each. 


SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS. 
AOVIA IHZOY: ‘Sayings of Our Lord,’ from an Early Greek Papyrus. By B. P. Grenrery 
and A.S. Hunt. 1897. (Out of print.) . 
NEW SAYINGS OF JESUS AND FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL, with the text 
of the ‘ Logia’ discovered in 1897. By B. P. GRENFELL and A. S. Hunv. 1904. Is. net. 


FRAGMENT OF AN UNCANONICAL GOSPEL. By B. P. Grenrett and A. S 


Hunt. 1908. 1s. net, 
COPTIC OSTRACA. By W. E. Crum. 1902. 10S. 6d. net. 
THE THEBAN TOMB SERIES, Vol. I. THE TOMB OF AMENEMHET (No. 82). 


By Nina br G. Davigs and A. H. GARDINER. 1915. 355. Vol. Il. THE TOMB OF ANTEFO. 
KER. 1920. 42s. 


& S 
THE MAYER PAPYRI A and B. By T. E. Perr. Twenty-seven Plates. 1920. 50S. 


Offices of the Egypt Exploration Society: 


13: TAVISTOCK SQUARE, LONDON, W.C. I, AND 
503 TREMONT TEMPLE, BOSTON, MASS., U.S.A. 


Agents: 


BERNARD QUARITCH, 11 GRAFTON STREET, NEW BOND STREET, W. 1 
HUMPHREY MILFORD, OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, AMEN CORNER, E.C. 4 AND 
29 WEST 32np STREET, NEW YORK, U.S.A. 
C. F. CLAY, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS, FETTER LANE, E.C. 4 
KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & Co., 68-74 CARTER LANE, E.C. 4 
GEORGE SALBY, 65 GREAT RUSSELL STREET, W.C. 1 


Tey ay 
a _— 
“a 
a, —* 


; Wa fe ee : - 
-_ 

_ lie Seal Me, 
; ¢ ~SFqle=--o- 


a rr Zs 
geet = | 
Sete - a a 8 
OS = i 


es — —— Ee 


-~ te = ee — ‘ 


gt gg A wn S at “~. - 


CC 
\ A \\ AY \\\ AY \ RY \ \ \N . 
AQ AW AX 


\ 
\\ 


AQ 


NY 
SS 
IN tf 
RS 


MO