You are on page 1of 346

LIBRARY

Brigham Young Univi

THE

OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI
PART
IV
GRENFELL AND HUNT

>

EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND


GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH

THE

OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI
PART
BY

IV

EDITED WITH TRANSLATIONS AND NOTES

BERNARD
HON. LITT.D. DUBLIN
;

P.

GRENFELL,
;

'

D.Litt.,

M.A.

HON. PH.D. KOENIGSBERG

FELLOW OF QUEEN's COLLEGE, OXFORD

AND

ARTHUR

S.

HUNT,

D.Litt., M.A.

HON. PH.D. KOENIGSBERG;

FELLOW OF LINCOLN COLLEGE, OXFORD

WITH EIGHT PLATES

196531
LONDON
SOLD AT

The Offices of the EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND,


AND
8

37

Great Russell

St.,

W.C.

KEG AN BERNARD

Beacon Street, Boston, Mass., U.S.A. PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., Paternoster House, Charing Cross Road, W.C. QUARITCH, 15 Piccadilly, W. ASHER & CO., 13 Bedford St., Covent Garden, W.C. and HENRY FROWDE, Amen Corner, E.C.
;

1904

OXFORD
HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

TABLE OF PAPYRI
A. D.

PAGE
I

664.

New

.
657.

65.

Sayings of Jesus (Plate I) Fragment of a Lost Gospel (Plate II)


.

3rd cent.
.

3rd cent.

22

Genesis (Plate II)


Epistle to the
Certificate

658.
659.
660.

Pindar

Paean

^
(Plate
?

Hebrews of Pagan Sacrifice

....

Late 2nd or early 3rd cent.


Early 4th cent.

28

250
Late
I

...
cent, b.c.
.

36
.

and Ode (Plates III and IV)

St

49 50
6i

Late

I St

or early 2nd cent.

661.
662. 663.

Epodes

V)

Late 2nd cent.

62

Epigrams Argument

of Cratinus' ^lowaaKe^avbpos

664. 665.

Philosophical Dialogue

History of Sicily (Plate I)


Aristotle, nporpenriKOs

666.
667.

.... ....
.

About A.D, I Late 2nd or early 3rd


3rd cent.

64
cent.

69
72

2nd 2nd

cent.
cent.

80
82

Aristoxenus

3rd cent.
xlviii-lv (Latin)

86

668.

Epitome of Livy xxxvii-xl and


(Plate

VI)

3rd cent.

90
116
121
.

669.

IMetrological

Work

670-678.

Poetical Fragments

679-684.
685.

Prose Fragments

.... ....
and
xi (Plate

Early 4th cent.


ist-3rd cent.
I St

cent. B.c.-3rd cent.

127
132 133

686-688.
689.

Homer Iliad xvii Homer Ilmd

ii,

iii,

VII)

Hesiod Scufum 690-691. Apollonius Rhodius Argonautica 692. Apollonius Rhodius Argonautica iv
693.
Sophocles Electra
Theocritus Idyl
xiii
.

iii

2nd cent. About A.D. I Late 2nd cent. 3rd-2nd cent. 2nd
cent.
cent-

135 136
137 138
139

Early 3rd

694.
695.

2nd

cent.

Herodotus

3rd cent,
iv
.

140
141

696. 697.

Thucydides

ist cent.
i

698.
699.

Xenophon Cyropaedia Xenophon Cyropaedia

Early 3rd cent.


Early 3rd cent.

146
154

Theophrastus Characters

Early 3rd cent.

155

PREFACE
All
the theological and most of the classical and the non-literary

papyri in this volume were discovered in our second excavations at

Oxyrhynchus

in

1903, described in the Archaeological Report of the


pp. 5-9,

Egypt Exploration Fund, 1902-3,

and more

briefly in

the

Archiv fiir Papyrusforschiing, III. pp. 139-40. the original Oxyrhynchus find of 1897. Owing
in

The

rest

came from

to the comparatively

small space here available for non-literary documents and the discovery

1903 of a group of papyri, mostly of the early Augustan period,


is

which

rarely represented,

we have published

all

these together with

a selection of documents belonging to the next three centuries, instead


of limiting the documents to the third century, as foreshadowed in the
preface to Part III.

In editing the classical pieces,


largely of the
to

we

have, as usual, availed ourselves


Blass,

most generous and valuable assistance of Professor

whom

is

due much

of the reconstruction and interpretation of the

new

classical

fragments and the identification of several of those from

extant authors.

The
is

help which

we have
in

received on particular points

from other scholars


papyri.

acknowledged

connexion with the individual


of addenda and corrigenda to

In the Appendices
the

we

give a
Part

list

Oxyrhynchus Papyri,

II,

and

Fayum

Tow?ts

and

their

III, no. 405, which has been identified and a list of all the Oxyrhynchus and as a fragment of Irenaeus, Fayum papyri which have already been distributed among different

Papyri, a revised text of Part

museums and

libraries.

BERNARD

P. S.

ARTHUR
Oxford,
April, 1904.

GRENFELL. HUNT.

a 3

CONTENTS
PAGE

Preface

List of Plates

.............
. . .

vii
viii

Table of Papyri Note on the Method of Publication and List of Abbreviations

xi

TEXTS
L
11.

New

Theological Fragments (654-658) Classical Fragments (659-684)

....
:

50
132 162

in.
IV.

Fragments of Extant Classical Authors (685-704) Documents chiefly of the Roman Period
;

(a)

Official (705-712)
Petitions (717-720)

{) Applications to Officials (713-716)


(c)

180
189
197

{d)
(i)

Contracts (721-731)
Receipts (732-734)

224 227
241

V.
VI.

(/) Accounts (735-741) {g) Private Correspondence (742-747) Collations of Homeric Fragments (748-783) Descriptions of Miscellaneous Documents (784-839)
.

248
253

APPENDICES
I.

II.

III.

Addenda and Corrigenda to Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part Towns and their Papyri A Revised Text of Part III, no. 405 (Irenaeus, Contra List of Oxyrhynchus and FayOm Papyri distributed
.

II,

and Fayum
.
.

.260
iii.

....
Haereses,
9)

264
265

INDICES
I.

New

II.

Literary Fragments Kings and Emperors


.

272 282
283 284 288

III.

IV.

Months and Days Personal Names


Geographical

V.

TABLE OF PAPYRI

IX

TABLE OF PAPYRI
A.D.

739.

Private

Account

740.
741.

Account of Corn
List of Articles
.

742. 743.
744. 745. 746.
747.

Letter of Antas

Letter to a Friend
Letter of Ilarion Letter to Gaius Rustius
Letter of

Recommendation
.

Invitation to a Feast

748-783. 784-839.

Homeric Fragments Miscellaneous Documents

NOTE ON THE METHOD OF PUBLICATION AND


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
The same
volumes.
general method
is

followed in the following pages as in preceding

As

before, a few of the

new

literary texts are printed in a dual form,


literal transcript.

a reconstruction in modern style accompanying a

In other cases,

and

the fragments of extant authors, the originals are reproduced except for division of words, addition of capital initials to proper names, expansion of
in

abbreviations, and supplements, so far as possible, of lacunae.


is

In 669, how-

on a rather different level from the other literary pieces, accentuaever, which tion and punctuation have been introduced as well as in 658, which strictly does not belong to the literary section at all. Additions or corrections by the same

hand

as the

body of the text

are in small thin type, those

by a

different

in thick type.

Non-literary documents are given in modern style only.


;

hand Abbre-

viations

porated

and symbols are resolved additions and corrections are usually incorin the text and their occurrence is recorded in the critical notes, where also faults of orthography, &c., are corrected wherever any diiificulty could arise. Iota adscript is printed when so written, otherwise iota subscript is used. Square brackets [ ] indicate a lacuna, round brackets ( ) the resolution of a symbol or
abbreviation, angular brackets ( ) a mistaken omission in the original ; double square brackets [[ J] mean that the letters within them have been deleted in

the original, braces

that the letters so enclosed, though actually written,

should be omitted.

Dots placed within brackets represent the approximate


or

number

of letters lost

deleted

dots outside brackets indicate mutilated


refer to the texts of the
;

or otherwise illegible letters.


sidered doubtful.

Letters with dots underneath them are to be con-

Heavy Arabic numerals

Oxyrhynchus

papyri published in this volume and in Parts I-III


small

ordinary numerals to lines;

Roman

numerals to columns.

xii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
The
abbreviations used in referring to papyrological publications are prac-

tically the
P.

same as those adopted by Wilcken


I

in

Archiv

I.

i.

pp. 25-28, viz.:


I

Anih.

and

11

= The

Amherst Papyri

(Greek), Vols.

and

II,

by

B.

P.

Grenfell and A. S. Hunt.

Archiv Archiv fur Papyrusforschung. B. G. U. = Aeg. Urkunden aus den Konigl. Museen zu Berlin, Griech. Urkunden. P. Brit. Mus. I and II = Catalogue of Greek Papyri in the British Museum, Vols. I and II, by F. G. Kenyon. C. P. R. = Corpus Papyrorum Raineri, Vol. I, by C. Wessely. P. Cairo = Greek Papyri in the Cairo Museum, Catalogue by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. P. Catt. = Papyrus Cattaoui {Archiv iii. ^^ sqq.). P. Fay. Towns = Fay urn Towns and their Papyri, by B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and D. G. Hogarth. P. Gen. = Les Papyrus de Geneve, by J. Nicole. P. Goodsp. = Greek Papyri, by E. J. Goodspeed {Decennial Publications of the
P. Grenf. I

University of Chicago, Vol. V). and II = Greek Papyri, Series

I,

by

B. P. Grenfell; Series II,

by

B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt.


P.

Oxy.

I,

Grenfell
P. Par.

=
2),

and III = The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts I, and A. S. Hunt. Les Papyrus Grecs du Musee du Louvre {Notices by W. Brunet de Presle et E. Egger.
II

II

and

III,

by
t.

B. P.

et Extraits,

xviii.

P. Petrie

Rev. Laws

Flinders Petrie Papyri, by the Rev. J. P. Mahafify. Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus, by B. P. Grenfell, with Introduction by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy. P. Tebt. I = The Tebtunis Papyri, Part I, by B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. Smyly. Wilcken, Ost. = Griechische Ostraka, by U. Wilcken.

The

'

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

654.

New

Sayings of Jesus.
X
7'8 cm.

24-4

Plate

I.

By

were, like the

a curious stroke of good fortune our second excavations at Oxyrhynchus first, signalized by the discovery of a fragment of a collection of

This consists of forty-two incomplete lines on the verso of a survey-list of various pieces of land, thus affording another example of the not uncommon practice of using the back of ephemeral documents for literary texts. The survey-list, which is in a cursive hand of the end of the second or early part of the third century, provides a terminus a quo for the writing on the other
Sayings of Jesus.
This, which is an upright informal uncial of medium size, we should assign to the middle or end of the third century a later date than A.D. 300 is most The present text is therefore nearly contemporary with the ' Logia unlikely.
side.
;

papyrus discovered in 1897, which also belongs to the third century, though probably to an earlier decade. In its general style and arrangement the present Here, as in the series of Sayings offers great resemblance to its predecessor. the individual Sayings are introduced by the formula Jesus saith,' earlier Logia,' and there is the same mingling of new and familiar elements but the second series of Sayings is remarkable for the presence of the introduction to the whole collection (11. 1-5), and another novelty is the fact that one of the Sayings of which is reported (11. "ijS sqq.) is an answer to a question, the substance It is also noticeable that while in the first series the Sayings had little (11. '^%-^).
* ' ;

if

any connexion of thought with each other,

in the

second series the

first

four

at

any

rate are all concerned with the

Kingdom

of Heaven.

That the present

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


'
;

text represents the beginning of a collection which later on included the original

Logia is very probable this and the other general questions concerning the papyrus are discussed on pp. 10-23. Excluding the introduction, there are parts of five separate Sayings, marked In three cases (11. 5, 9, and '^6) a coronis off from each other by paragraph!. indicates the end of a sentence, which in the two first cases is also the end of the Saying, but in the third is the end of the question to which the Saying is
*

the answer.

In

all

three instances the words Aeyet

after the coronis.

In

1.

27, however, there

is

immediately end of the Saying, no coronis at the

'\5 followed
is

but there
in his

is

one

after the succeeding Aeyet


this sign,

;?.

The scribe

thus inconsistent

and would seem to have misplaced it in 1. 27, unless, indeed, his normal practice was to place a coronis both before and after in 1. 27 is a mere omission. and the absence of a coronis after Aeyet It is noteworthy that in 1. 27 a blank space is left where the coronis was to be expected. The single column of writing is complete at the top, but broken at the bottom and also vertically, causing the loss of the ends of lines throughout. From 11. 7-8, 15, 25, and 30, which can be restored with certainty from extant parallel passages, it appears that the lacunae at the ends of lines range from twelve to sixteen or at most eighteen letters, so that of each line, as far as 1. '^'^, approximately only half is preserved. The introduction and the first and fourth Sayings admit of an almost complete reconstruction which is nearly or quite conclusive, but in the second, third, and fifth, which are for the most part entirely new, even the general sense is often obscure, and restorations are, except in a few lines, rather hazardous. The difficulties caused by the lacunae are enhanced by the carelessness of the scribe himself. The opening words ol toIol 6i Aoyot are in 1. 20 and intolerable, even in third century Greek, and

employment of

?,

in

1.

29 are forms that require correction

at and e in 1. 23 change of letters occur, e. g. ei and 7/ in 1. 8 ad /oc), and ^ in 1. 31 (cf note and probably in 1. 18 In two cases (11. 19 and 25) in 1. 10 (cf. note ad loc). and and perhaps words which the scribe had at first omitted are added by him over the line. in 1. 19 and ovpavos The only contraction which appears is Itjs for in 11. 1 1-2 are written out, as usually happens in the earliest theological papyri. We proceed now to the text in the accompanying translation supplements which are not practically certain are enclosed in round brackets.

<
in

^,

while several instances of the inter-

[ ,

(^-^

^?

For valuable assistance


tion,

and

illustration

of 654,

we

connexion with the reconstruction, interpretaare indebted to Profs. Blass and Harnack,

Dr. Bartlet, and Mr. F. P. Badham, but for the general remarks on pp. lo-aa we are alone responsible.

654.
01 TOIOI 01

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
01
[

AHOKNHCei

AHceN

ilHC

K[
[

[ [

[
[
'

^
5

revcHTAi

^ [
(

=5

^ "^-^' CO'-"' W
^
01

^^'

ecxATOi

eVPH BHeeiC BACIAeYCH


HceTAi

^
f^^ ''"

:^

Aerei [

^^^ ,, "<= ^^C COY ^^


'"''

'

iToTeAKONTec hmac
BACIAeiA

tin

-^
[.

60
]
]'
. .

?!
0[
0[
[

01
15

Tec YMAC

ewTOC TAYTHN
eAYTOYC YMeic
20

]
THC

0[
eCT[
35

.]0
.]rOYCIN
.

[. [ [
[.

[
Aerei

[
[.jcti

BAC[
[

nAPATHPHC[

] ^^

[
[
[.
.

]
*
"

.JHC AAHOeiAC

hatpoc
YMeic ecTe

[
[
Introduction.
[

40

[
|-

][.
'

]
.

[ [
mc
.]
.'

'
|-'

. *

"

.jjnf

11.

1-5.

^ ()
{|
5
*

} [[' ^.
einev
eii

^^

^ ?

oarts

These are the (wonderful ?) words which Jesus the Thomas, and he said unto (them), Every one that hearkens
of death.'

living (lord) spake to

and

to these

words

shall

never taste

The
certain.

general sense of the introduction

In

genitive in

, ((

vi. 4 Matt, xvi,

is clear, and most of the restorations are fairly is necessary after an adjective such as For with the [. the sense of hearken to ' as distinguished from merely hearing cf. e. g. Luke airovs. \oy<uv For cf. \oyov 28, Mark ix. i, Luke ix. 27, and especially John viii. 52 tav ns
1.

'

^ \ ^,

simply means 'die' in the

literal

In these passages of the SynoptistS sense; but here no doubt, as in the passage in

4
St.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

John, the phrase has the deeper and metaphorical meaning that those who obey Christ's The attain to the kingdom, reach a state unaffected by the death of the body. being extremely ugly. beginning of 1. i requires some correction, oi roioi oi is not very likely, though cf. Luke xxiv. 44 flnev 8e into oi The corruption of

words and

avTovs, ovToi ol
late

The of this the simplest course is to omit the initial oi. prose writers for The restoration of ot being in a cracl< is not clear in the photograph, but is quite certain. followed by e. g. is very doubtful 1. 2 presents the chief difficulty. is equally likely, and several of the possible supplements at the end of the line require is necessary, and three dative before to precede. a longer word than or (or (i) a proper name, in which case alternatives suggest themselves: Apocryphal Gospels are most likely in the light of the following words assigned to Thomas, Philip, and Matthias are known, and in Fish's Sophia 70-1 Philip, Thomas, and Matthias (so Zahn with much probability in place of Matthew found in

)
\

,([
ovs

en

S)V

But since

To'ios is

found in

.
;
;

the text) are associated as the recipients of a special revelation or Litierat. I. p. 14 ; (2) a phrase such as tois ()

John

XX. 26

compares suggested by Prof. Lake, The in the Ac/s 0/ Thomas. 6


;

who

(3) the frequent occurrence of the double name uncertainty attaching to the restoration is the

'

)
1

cf.

Harnack,

Altchrist.
1.

(so Bartlet, cf

]\

32 and

, 8
more

If we adopt the first hypothesis, Thomas has only unfortunate, since much depends on it. but on either of the other two he occupies the chief position, and this a secondary place fact would obviously be of great importance in deciding the origin of the Sayings; On the question whether the introduction implies a post-resurrectional cf. pp. 18 sqq.

point of view see pp. 13-4. ... There is a considerable resemblance between the scheme of 11. 1-3, oi . (, and the formulae employed in introducing several of the . .
earliest citations

of our Lord's Sayings, especially I Clem.


. .
.

ActS XX. 35 Rendel Harris had already {Conlemp. Rev. 1897, pp. 346-8) suggested that those formulae were derived from the introduction of a primitive collection of Sayings known to St. Paul, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp, and this theory gains some support from the parallel afforded by the introduction in 654.
elntv,

(.
\

^ ((

First Saying.
5
[

II.

5-9.

9
'

^^ .
evpD
evprj

[ ?[
Xeyi

{)9'

[1

he

shall

cease until he finds, and when he finds Jesus saith. Let not him who seeks be astonished; astonished he shall reach the kingdom, and having reached the
. . .

kingdom he

shall rest.'

The conclusion of this Saying is quoted from the Gospel according Clement of Alexandria {Sirom. ii. 9. 45) jj

&

(
to the

Hebrews by

654.
6

Zahn

\(
:

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

first

called

attention,

a fuller and obviously more but without stating his source


8e

be another participle is parallel to Matt, vii. 7 depending on or an adverb. evpr]afTf. The supplements in IL 7-8 are already rather long (=Luke xi. 9) in comparison with the length of lines required in 11. 15, 25, and 30, so that it is improbable is to be supplied or that that occurred in the papyrus before (cf. the first quotation from Clement). 6 8e in place of is of course and is more likely also possible in 1. 7, but since the papyrus has and not be in 1. 8 The occurrence of in 11. 7-8, confirms Zahn's acute not in 1. 7. was the original word; but we suggestion {Gesch. d. NT. Kan, ii. p. 657) that should not accept his ingenious explanation of it as a mistranslation of a Hebrew or and his view that (cf. Aramaic verb which could also mean Luke iv. 18) would have been the right term. The attractiveness of this kind of conjecture is, as we have recently had occasion to remark (403 introd.), only equalled by its uncertainty. Now that the Saying is known in its completer form, and if we disregard the particular object (to show that the beginning of philosophy is wonder) to which Clement in the first of his two quotations turns it, this description of the successive stages in the attainment of the kingdom of Heaven seems to us decidedly striking, and by no means so far removed from the 'Anschauungen des echten Urchristenthums ' as Resch {Agrapha, pp. 378-9) hk considers. To the probable reference to it in II Clem. v. 5 (cf. the next note)
the object of
?
;

(,

(
.

.
ov

Gesch. d. NT. Kan. ii. p. 657) he quotes the Saying in accurate form which agrees almost exactly with the papyrus,
6
fvpt},

.
is

In Sirom.

V. 14

9^ (a passage tO which

The word

after

too long), but it This part of the saying

in

,
1.

is

very likely

may

^,

, ^ ^,
\
e/cet

enayyikia

(\

quoted by Resch (ed. Bonnet, p. 243)

{I.e.),

: 5
Mr.

/;?

Badham adds

a remarkable one in the Acfs of Thomas

As

^!
cf.

to attain to the

Dr. Bartlet aptly remarks, the idea of the necessity for strenuous effort in order kingdom has much in common, not only with the 3rd Saying ..., but with the 5th Logion ('Raise the stone and there thou shalt find me');

pp. 12-3.

Second Saying.
Xeyet

II.

9-21.
rtVey
e/

10

01

}/

kv

\ [
[ety

[{'
kariv
;

* Since this volume was put into type, Harnack has expressed his views of this Agraphon in He there shows in opposition to Zahn that astonishment Sitzungsber. d. Berl. Akad. 1904, pp. 175-9. is to be interpreted here as a sign of joy, not of fear, and strongly repels the unfavourable criticisms of Resch upon the Saying, of which Harnack in fact maintains the substantial genuineness. Incidentally, as he also remarks, the close parallelism between the language of the papyrus and Clement is important, for from whatever source this Saying found its way into the present collection, it cannot have come through Clement. There is, therefore, good reason to think that the Gospel according to the Hebrews (or at least a part of it) was known in Egypt in a Greek version at an early period, a view which has been

disputed by Zahn.

6
Ti

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

15

^^

ivTos

\[ , [\ [
kaT\iv
rfjs

knl
oi

[1]

iavTOvs

() [

.*
. .

[
[
v[

is

Jesus saith, (Ye ask ? who are those) that draw us (to the kingdom, if) the kingdom Heaven ? ... the fowls of the air, and all beasts that are under the earth or upon the earth, and the fishes of the sea, (these are they which draw) you, and the kingdom of Heaven (Strive therefore ?) to know is within you ; and whoever shall know himself shall find it. Father ; (and ?) ye shall yourselves, and ye shall be aware that ye are the sons of the and ye are know yourselves
'

in

The reconstruction
difficult.

Beyond

the supplements in

of this, the longest and most important of the Sayings, is extremely 1. 15 which are based on the parallel in Luke xvii. 21

which St. Matthew's phrase, for St. Luke's with the substitution of is too short for the lacuna, and those in 11. 12-3, 16, and 18, the general accuracy of which is guaranteed by the context, it is impossible to proceed without venturing into There seems to be no direct parallel to or trace of this the region of pure conjecture. Saying among the other non-canonical Sayings ascribed to our Lord, and the materials are ol the kingdom of Heaven and the fowls of the air provided by 11. 10-12
so disparate that the recovery of the connexion between them may seem a hopeless task. But though no restoration of 11. 9-14 can hope to be very convincing, and by adopting different supplements from those which we have suggested, quite another meaning can no doubt be obtained (see below), we think that a fairly good case can be made out in favour of our general interpretation. The basis of it is the close parallelism and, which we have supposed to exist between 1. 15 rts
at first sight

,
\

whereby we iv followed in 1. 11 by 17 If this be granted 11. 9-16 divide themselves naturally restore oi at the end of 1. 14. into two parallel halves at the lacuna in 1. 11, 11. 9-10 corresponding to 11. 12-5, and 1. 11 How is this correspondence to be explained? The simplest solution is to to 11. 15-6. suppose that 11. 9-n are a question to which 11. 12-6 form the answer ; hence we supply difficulty then arises Tivts in 1. 9 ; cf. the 5th Saying, which is an answer to a question. This may be a mere in 11. 14-5. that we have in 1. 10 but

on the other hand,

1.

10

[( \,
A

''"

accident due to the common confusion of vpfn and ^/lels in papyri of this period, and in 1. 10 can be defended in two ways, But perhaps should be read in both cases. by supposing either that Jesus here lays stress rather on His human than on His divine nature, and associates Himself with the disciples, or that the question is put into the mouth There remains, however, of the disciples, i. e. the word before nWr was or the like. the greatest crux of all, the meaning of fXKovrts. In the two passages in which this word

'^^ :

654.
occurs in the
is

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
it

New

Testament
with
:

has an unfavourable sense


in

but here a favourable meaning


. .

much more

likely, as

6 Kvpios rots Se wild beasts of sinners) Karahf^pevov {dtd. v. 12 ^ fVTos eavrov (. . phrase such as eU though even with this is required to explain addition the use of that word in such a context must be admitted to be difficult. The idea in 11. 12-6 seems to be that the divine element in the world begins in the lower stages of animal creation, and rises to a higher stage in man, who has within him the kingdom of Heaven ; cf. Clement's discussion {S/rom. v. 13) of Xenocrates' view that even possibly liad some ewoia, and the curious sanctity of certain animals in the various Apocryphal Acts, e. g. Thecla's baptized lioness, Thomas's ass, Philip's leopard and kid buried at the door of the church. It is possible that there is some connexion between this Saying and the use of Luke xvii. 21 by the Naassenes; cf. p. 18. The transition from the inward character of the kingdom to the necessity for self-knowledge (11. 16-21) is natural. Since the kingdom is not an external manifestation but an inward principle, men must know themselves in order to attain to its realization. The old Greek proverb aeavTov is thus given a fresh significance. Mr. Badham well compares Clem. Paedag. tav lii. eotKC I r\v Spa 0f6v eiafTat. in 1. 17 is the For the restoration of 1. 16, cf. 1. 18. ovv, if we are right in correcting This line may have ended with something like Avhich is required For to (cf. the similar confusion in 1. 23). by the context in 1. 18, cf. e.g. Luke xx. 36. [ in 1. 19 {[ is equally possible) is perhaps How the beginning of an adjective, but e.g., might also be read. in I. 20 is to be emended is uncertain; we suggest but the corruption may ti{ is perhaps eV[TOs in 1. 21 is very obscure ; the letter go deeper.
.
.

6 John vi. 44 f'av Mr. Badham compares Clem. Alex. Strom,

^( \

and
vi.

xii.

32

,
'

6 tovs ph yap (i.e. opeya ave^Kfi, and

from Barnabas and Clement perhaps give this restoration alone without an explanatory phrase is not some advantage over ours, but a satisfactory word for persecute,' and the transition from the promise of the kingdom of Heaven to the fowls of the air is very abrupt and almost inconsequent, while it is difficult to find the connexion between the fowls of the air and the second mention of the kingdom This, the chief problem in the 2nd Saying, seems more easily explained by of Heaven. and the resulting parallelism between the two the hypothesis of a repetition of halves of 11. 9-16 which we have suggested.
note,
loc).

]\ 8 [, ," ' ,, ' ,


{}[,

is the article, nor if 7;7[ is one word, does any can hardly be a participle, for if occurred, as would be expected, at the end of the line, there is room for only about four in 1. 20, with more letters in the lacuna. It is tempting to read avSpa Mark vi. 20 as Blass suggests, comparing for the omission of Another and quite different restoration of the early part of this Saying is suggested by Dr. Bartlet, who would read [^()

following r

may be

f,

or

but neither

[ , [ (), .
if

.
{)

suitable restoration suggest

itself.

7[

.
. .

'[

'

[ , ]
;

\]

.,

comparing the idea

in Epistle

of Barnabas,

vi.

12 and 18

ovv 6

vvv

'

].
I St

and

II Clem.

v.

ftTrcv

,
eVri
cf.

...

(a passage resembling the

Saying;

ad

The

parallels

'

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

ovK

25

[ ^
[

Third Saying.

11.

21-7.
Xeyet

()'

[ 7[
[

.
'

Jesus saith,

A man
know)

shall not hesitate ... to

ask

kingdom.

Ye

shall

that

many

that are

first

shall

concerning his place (in the be last and the last first and

(they shall have eternal

followed by a word meaning 'know' or but the double in 11. 23 and 24 is very puzzling, and in the absence of a clear parallel we forbear to restore the earlier part of the Saying. Dr. Bartlet suggests a connexion %vith the Apocalypse
well have continued
(?

Line 24

may

8<,

or

life?).'

Or

[ \(
yvaaerai
eiVt

for

),
(1.

,
of Peter,
cf.

e. g.

taking
V. 21,

' , :
%!^

navres

eoTiv 6

tO

be equivalent to

Matt.

Lines 25-6

\\
oi is is

33

BC
is

and many MSS.

Matt. xix. 30
in
1.

rather longer,

in Mark x. 31 ; and other ]\ISS. omit there, and in generally omitted, though found in C and some others. Luke xiii. 30
elalv

.
. .

To'is

and Luke
follow

ix. 8, 19.

in Heb. xi. 2, or to ; But the problem was an old one.

,:
{)
eia\v

ev

Bartlet)

Mark

X.

31 (=Matt. xix. 30)


before

In the insertion of

the papyrus agrees with

^D

27

no doubt the termination of a verb

xix. 29)
V. 24,

and
is

('

\]

are tOO long, but

e|ou]atv (cf.

&c.)

possible.

].
John
iu. 1 6,

36,

(Matt.

^
3
'

[ ^^ {)[ . [ [ .
Xeyet

Fourth Saying.

11.

27-31.

()'

fairly certain.

Jesus

saith,

Everything that
to thee.
shall

is

be revealed nor buried which


shall

For there not be raised.'

not before thy face and that which is hidden from thee is nothing hidden which shall not be made manifest,

The

sense of this Saying

is clear,

and the supplements are

Lines 29-30

,.
Luke
cf.
'.

654.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

are parallel to Matt. X. 26 ovbev yap ianv

In general arrangement the papyrus agrees with Matthew and Luke perhaps more than with Mark ; but the language of the first half of the sentence is instead of the more much closer to that of Mark (whose expression eau suggests the hand of an editor), while that of the second half pointed than makes a more forcible contrast to diverges from all three, Instead of the corresponding word in the Synoptists, which is merely a synonym. iyepBrjaeTat a more general word such as yvaaSrfaeTai can be supplied ; but this detracts from the picturesqueness of what is in any case a striking variation of a well-known Saying.
els

^
Mark
iv.
[

2 ovSev 8e 22

<(\
iav

yap

iyevero

Fifth Saying.

[^]7^'/

35

[]' ? ] ? ]
[.
.

]
jijs

]; Xiyu

^
y
.

^ [
11.

33-42.

()9'
7rotiT[e

[][
[

40

][69]
] [
How
.

His disciples question him and say, and what (commandment) shall we keep
*
.

shall

we

fast

and how
.

shall
.
.

we

(pray ?)
is

Jesus saith, ... do not

blessed

he

.'
. .

Though this Saying is broken beyond hope of recovery, its general drift may be caught. It clearly differed from the other Sayings, both in this papyrus and the first series of Logia, in having a preliminary paragraph giving the occasion, which seems in reference to them For to be a question put by the disciples; cf. p. 15. eariv. et', etSoris cf. John Xxi. 12 oiteh Be is required, and in 1. is not very satisfactory, but something more than The question clearly cf. 655. 17-8. is not likely in the light of what follows. and so far or consisted of a number of short sentences, each beginning with as can be judged, they were concerned with the outward forms of religion, fasting, prayer How far, it is probably asked, are existing Jewish ?), and almsgiving. ordinances to be kept? The answer of Jesus appears to have been a series of short commandments insisting on the inner side of religion as the pursuit of virtue and truth, and

-'
'

{poeo]fa

very likely concluding in 1. 40 with the promise Blessed is he who doeth these things.' If this explanation is on the right lines, there is a general parallelism between this Saying and

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


and Matt. xix. 16-22 and Luke xviii. 18-22, but the occurrence of (?) Line 39, as Prof. Lake suggests that the language was more Johannine in character. The []6 remarks, could be restored on the basis of Rev. ii. 17 reference to fasting in 1. 33 suggests a connexion with the 2nd Logion (' Except ye fast to the world '), which may well have been an answer to a similar question by the disciples.

[][ ([.

do not propose to enter upon a detailed examination of the numerous and complicated problems involving the Canonical and Apocryphal Gospels and the 'Logia' of 1897, which are reopened by the discovery of the new Sayings. But we may be permitted to indicate the broader issues at stake, and in the light of the wide discussion of the Logia of 1897 to point out some effects of the new elements now introduced into the controversy. start therefore with a comparison of the two series of Sayings (which we shall henceforth call 1 and 654). Both were found on the same site and the papyri are of approximately the same date, which is not later than about the middle of the third century, so that both collections must go back at least to the second century. The outward appearance of the two papyri is indeed different, 1 being a leaf from a handsomely-written book, which may well have been a valuable trade-copy, while 654 is in roll form and was The practice of writing imporwritten on the verso of a comparatively trivial document. tant literary texts on such material was, however, extremely common, and the form of 654 lends no support to the hypothesis that the papyrus is a collection of notes made by the writer himself. In the uncial character of the handwriting, the absence of abbreviations and contractions other than those usually found in early theological MSS., and the careful punctuation by the use of the paragraphus and coronis, 654 shares the characteristics of an

We

We

ordinary literary text such as 1. Since 1 is the nth page of a book, it must have formed part of a large collection of Sayings, while 654 comes from the beginning of a manuscript and provides no direct evidence of the length of the roll. But the document on the recto is not a letter or contract which would be likely to be short, but an official land-survey The list, and these tend to be of very great length, e.g. P. Brit. Mus. 267, P. Tebt. I. 84-5. recently published Leipzig papyrus of the Psalms (Heinrici, Beiir. z. Gesch. d. NT. iv), though incomplete at the beginning and end, contains as many as thirty-six columns written in cursive on the verso. So far therefore as can be judged from externals, 654 like 1

probably belongs to an extensive collection of Sayings which


several hundreds.

may

well have

numbered

Turning next to the contents of the two papyri, no one can fail to be struck with their Postponing for the moment the introduction of 654 (11. 1-5), which, formal resemblance. since it necessarily presupposes the existence of the Sayings introduced and may have been added later, stands on a different footing from the Sayings and requires separate treatment, the five Sayings partly recorded in 654 begin like those in 1 with the simple formula Xeyei 'ijjCToCr ; and both fragments contain Sayings which to a greater or less degree have parallel In 1 the style passages in the Synoptic Gospels side by side with Sayings which are new. was simple and direct, and the setting, with the constant balancing of the words and sentences and the absence of connecting particles, highly archaic ; the same features, though obscured
unfortunately by the incompleteness of the papyrus, are also distinctly traceable in 654. There is, however, one difference in the two papyri in point of form. To the 5th Saying in 654 (11. 36 sqq.) is prefixed (11. 32-6) a brief account of the question to which it was the answer. This may prove to be of great importance in deciding the origin of these Sayings, but for our present purpose it is sufficient to point out that even in 654 the occurrence of the context is the exception, not the rule, and the fact that the Sayings in 1 agree with the

654.
first

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
A

ii

no

four Sayings in 654 in omitting the context rather than with the 5th obviously produces serious conflict between the two documents. city proceed to a closer examination of the two series. In 1 the 7th Logion (* prophet is not built on a hill ') is connected with St. Matthew's Gospel alone ; the 6th ('

We

acceptable ') has a noticeable point of contact with St. Luke in the use of the word beKTOs, and the ist also agrees with St. Luke. The 5th ('Wherever there are') starts with a parallel Nowhere in 1 can the influence of to St. Matthew, but extends into a region far beyond. St. Mark be traced, nor was there any direct parallel with St. John's Gospel ; but the new Sayings, both in thought and expression, tended to have a mystical and Johannine character. In 654 we have one Saying (the 2nd) of which the central idea is parallel to a passage found in St. Luke alone, but of which the developments are new ; the conclusion of the 3rd Saying connects with St. Matthew and St. Mark rather than with St. Luke, while the 4th is a different version of a Saying found in all three Synoptists, and is on the whole nearer to The ist Saying and, so far as we can judge, St. Mark than to the other two Evangelists. As in 1, so in 654 the 5th have little, if any, point of contact with the Canonical Gospels. the new elements tend to have a Johannine colouring, especially in the 2nd Saying; but some caution must be observed in tracing connexions with St. John's theology. The ist Saying, if the papyrus had been the sole authority for it, might well have seemed nearer in style to St. John than to the Synoptists ; yet as a matter of fact it occurred in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, a very early work which is generally admitted to have been originally written in Hebrew and to have been independent of the Canonical Gospels, most of all St. John's. On the other hand, while the Sayings in 654 contain nothing so markedly .' in 1. 1 1 sqq., the introduction stood in the midst of the world Johannine in style as e.g.
. .

This at first sight may perhaps seem to imply contains a clear parallel to John viii. 52. a knowledge of St. John's Gospel on the part of the author of the introduction, but it must be remembered (i) that St. John may well not have been the sole authority for the attribution of that Saying to our Lord, and if so, that the author of the introduction may have obtained it from another source, (2) that a knowledge of St. John's Gospel on the part of the author of the introduction does not necessarily imply a corresponding debt to that Gospel in the following Sayings, which, as footing from the introduction.

we have

said,

stand on a somewhat different

In our original edition of 1 we maintained {a) that the Sayings had no traceable thread of connexion with each other beyond the fact of their being ascribed to the same speaker, were not in (<5) that none of them implied a post-resurrectional point of view, {c) that they themselves heretical, and that though the asceticism of Log. 2 and the mystic character of Log. 5 were obviously capable of development in Encratite and Gnostic directions, the Sayings as a whole were much nearer in style to the New Testament than to the apocryphal If these positions have been literature of the middle and end of the second century. vigorously assailed, they have also been stoutly defended, and about the second and third no general agreement has been reached ; with regard to the first the balance of opinion has been in favour of our view, and the various attempts to trace a connexion of ideas running through the Sayings have met with little acceptance. What answer is to be returned to
the corresponding problems in 654 ? will take the third question
first. Is there anything in 654 to show that the We Sayings originated in or circulated among a particular sect ? We should answer this in There is nothing heretical in the introduction, the ist, 3rd, and 4th Sayings, the negative. The Encratite leanings which have been ascribed to or, so far as can be judged, the 5th. the 2nd Logion are conspicuously absent in 654; the remains of the 5th Saying in fact rather suggest an anti-Jewish point of view, from which however the 2nd Logion itself

12
was not widely

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

distant, if, as we strongly hold, and are to be taken metaphorically. The absence of any Jewish-Christian element in 654 is the more remarkable seeing that the ist Saying also occurs in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. The only Saying that is at all suspicious is the 2nd, which like Log. 5 is sure to be called in some quarters ' Gnostic' That the profoundly mystical but, as it seems to us, obviously genuine Saying of our Lord recorded in Luke xvii. 21 'The kingdom of God is within you' should have given rise to much speculation was to be expected, and from Hippolytus Refut. V. 7 it is known that this Saying occupied an important place in the doctrines of the Naassenes, one of the most pronounced Gnostic sects of the second or early third century.

a connexion between the Sayings and the Naassenes through the Gospel of and this point will be discussed later (pp. 1 8-9) but to import Naassene tenets into the 2nd Saying in 654 is not only gratuitous but a Ccrrepov Moreover, though the other ideas in the Saying connected with the parallel from St. Luke, the development of the kingdom of Heaven through brute creation up to man (if that be aeavrov the meaning of 11. 9-16), and the Christian turn given to the proverbial (11. 16-21), may point to a later stage of thought than that found in the Canonical Gospels, the 2nd Saying as a whole, if 'Gnostic,' presents a very primitive kind of Gnosticism, and is widely separated from the fully-developed theosophy of e. g. the Pisiis Sophia. In any case the Gnosticism of 654 is on much the same level as that of 1. Do any of the Sayings (apart from the introduction) imply a post-resurrectional point of view ? This too we should answer in the negative. There is not only nothing in them to indicate that they were spoken after the resurrection, but substantial evidence for the opposite view. The familiar Sayings in the Canonical Gospels which are parallel to those found in 654 are there assigned to our Lord's lifetime, including even John viii. 52. The Gospel according to the Hebrews with which the ist Saying is connected covered the same ground as the Synoptists, and there is no reason to suppose that this Saying occurred there as a post-resurrectional utterance. But the best argument is provided by the 5th Saying, especially its context which is fortunately given. The questions there addressed to Jesus clearly belong to a class of problems which are known to have been raised by our Lord's disciples and others in his lifetime, and, if is in any case a somewhat stronger term than would be expected, seeing that the disciples seem to be the subject (though cf. John xxi. 12), it is most unlikely that this word would have been used with reference to the risen Christ. In fact none of the five Sayings in 654 suggests a postresurrectional point of view so much as the 3rd Logion (* I stood in the midst of the world'); cf. pp. 13-4. Can a definite principle or train of ideas be traced through the Sayings ? The first four are certainly linked together by the connecting idea of the kingdom of Heaven, which is the subject to a greater or less degree of all of them. But between the 4th and 5th Sayings the chain is certainly much weaker and threatens to snap altogether. It is very difficult to believe that if 654 was part of a large collection of similar Sayings a connexion of thought could have been maintained throughout, and the Sayings in the later columns of 654 may well have been as disconnected as those in 1. Even in the five which are partly preserved in 654 there is a constant change in the persons addressed, the ist and 3rd being couched in the third singular, the 2nd and almost certainly the 5th in the second plural, and
there
is
is

That

Thomas

quite possible

^.

'

'

the 4th in the second singular. Moreover the real link is, we think, supplied by the introduction, the consideration of which can no longer be delayed. Only before proceeding further we would state our conviction that in all essential points, the date of the papyrus, the form of the Sayings, their relation to the Canonical Gospels, and the general character of the new elements in them, to say nothing of the parallelism of thought between the ist and

654.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

13

3rd Sayings and the 5th Logion (cf. p. 5), the resemblances between 654 and 1 so far outweigh the differences that for practical purposes they may be treated as parts of the same collection. Even if it ever should be proved that the first page of 1 did not coincide with 654, the two fragments so clearly reflect the same surroundings and mental conditions that we cannot regard as satisfactory any explanation of the one which is incompatible with
the other.

and Thomas, and he said Such is the of death." remarkable opening prefixed to the collection of Sayings in 654 by its unknown editor. The first point to be noticed is that the name given to the collection is, as was acutely divined by Dr. Lock {Two Lectures on the Sayings of Jesus, p. 16), \6yQi not \oyi.a, and all questions concerning the meaning of the latter term may therefore be left out of account in
'

These are the

unto them "

words which Jesus the living spake Every one that hearkens to these words shall never
. .
.

to

taste

'

dealing with the present series of Sayings.

The

converse of

this,

however, in our opinion

by no means holds good, and as we have pointed out (p. 4), the analogy of the present document has a considerable bearing upon the problems concerning an early collection of
Secondly, the collection is represented as being spoken either to St. Thomas alone or to St. Thomas and another disciple or, less probably, other disciples. Does the compiler mean that the Sayings were the subject of a special revelation to St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple, from Avhich the rest were excluded ? In other words is this introduction parallel to that passage in the Pistis Sophia 70-1 in which mention is made of a special revelation to SS. Philip, Thomas, and Matthias (or Matthew ; cf. p. 4) ? The case in favour of an afiirmative answer to this query would be greatly strengthened if the introduction provided any indication that the editor assigned his collection of Sayings to the period after But no such evidence is forthcoming. the Resurrection do not wish to lay stress on in 1. 2 owing to the uncertainty attaching to the word that follows ; but the phrase certainly does not point to the post-resurrection period. In the Canonical Gospels 6 St. Thomas is made prominent only in connexion with that period (John xx. 24 sqq.), but this circumstance, which is probably the strongest argument in favour of a post-resurrectional point of view, is discounted by the fact that the Gospel of Thomas, so far as can be judged, was not of the nature of a post-resurrectional Gospel but rather a Gospel of the childhood (cf. pp. 18-9), and, secondly, seems to be outweighed by the indications in the Sayings themselves (cf. p. 12) that some of them at any rate were assigned to Jesus' The force of the second argument can indeed be turned by supposing, as lifetime. Dr. Bartlet suggests, that the standpoint of the collection, both in 1 and 654, is that of a post-resurrection interview in which the old teaching of Christ's lifetime is declared again in relation to the larger needs of Christian experience. But such a view necessarily implies that 11. 1-3 define a particular occasion (e. g. that contemplated in John xx. 26) on which the Sayings were spoken in their present order, and to this hypothesis there are grave and e'Tre' in 654. 2-3 does not prove that one The use of the aorists objections. The repetition of Xtyu before each of the Sayings seems occasion only was meant. The difliculty of tracing very unnecessary if they are part of a continuous discourse. a connexion of ideas throughout 654, and still more throughout 1, and the frequent changes in the persons addressed provide fresh obstacles to such an interpretation ; and the in connexion with the risen Christ has already been inappropriateness of the word To suppose that 654. 3-31 is a speech in itself, that 11. 32-6 revert alluded to (p. 12). to the original narrative broken off at 1. 3 and that 1 is part of a later discourse appears to us a very strained interpretation. are not therefore disposed to consider that the introduction to the Sayings, any more than the Sayings by themselves, implies a post-resurrectional point of view on the part

We

We

14

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

of the compiler, still less that the background of the Sayings is at all the same as that contemplated in the Pislis Sophia, which belongs to a later stage of thought than the Sayings. Hence we are not prepared to accept an analogy derived from that or any other similar treatise as an argument for thinking that the editor by his introduction meant to imply that St. Thomas or St. Thomas and some one else were the sole hearers of the Sayings. What we think he did mean to imply was that the ultimate authority for the record of these Sayings was in his opinion St. Thomas or St. Thomas and another disciple. This hypothesis provides a satisfactory, in fact we think the only satisfactory, explanation of the frequent changes of persons and abrupt transitions of subject which characterize the Sayings as a whole. Thirdly, the editor enforces the momentous claim which he has made for the authoritative character of the Sayings by quoting a sentence which, with several variations of language, but not of thought, occurs in John viii. 52, and which in the present context forms a highly appropriate prelude. Does this imply that the editor adapted the verse in On this point, since we are not prepared to maintain that that St. John to his own purposes ? passage in St. John is essentially unhistorical, we cannot give a decided opinion ; and in any case the probable relation of 654 to St. John's Gospel must be considered from the point of view of the collection of Sayings as a whole and of the conclusions adopted as to the editor's claim, rather than made a starting-point for an investigation of that claim and For as we have said (p. 10), the introduction necessarily stands the source of the Sayings. on a somewhat different footing from the Sayings, and even if knowledge and use of the Canonical Gospels by the author of the introduction was certain, this would not prove a corresponding dependence of the Sayings themselves upon the Canonical Gospels. All that can at present safely be inferred from the parallelism between the introduction and St. John is that the editor of the collection lived in an atmosphere of thought influenced by those speculative ideas in early Christianity which found their highest expression in the Fourth Gospel. What value, if any, is to be attached to this far-reaching claim that the collection of Sayings derives its authority, not from the tradidonal sources of any of the four Canonical The custom of invoking the Gospels, but from St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple ? authority of a great and familiar name for an anonymous and later work is so common in early Christian, as in other, writings, that the mere statement of the editor carries no weight by itself, and is not worth considering unless the internal evidence of the Sayings themselves can be shown to point in the same direction or at any rate to be not inconsistent with his claim. We pass therefore to the problem of the general nature and origin of the Sayings in 654 and 1, and as a convenient method of inquiry start from an examination of the various theories already put forward in explanation of 1. Not that we wish to hold any of our critics to their previous opinions on the subject. The discovery of 654, with the introduction containing the mention of Thomas and a close parallel to St. John's Gospel, with one Saying coinciding with a citation from the Gospel to the Hebrews and another having the context prefixed to it, introduces several novel and highly important factors into the controversy; and, being convinced of the close connexion between 1 and 654, we consider that all questions concerning 1 must be studied de novo. But since most of the chief New Testament scholars have expressed their views on 1, and an immense variety of opinion is represented, it is not likely that we shall require to go far outside the range of solutions which have already been suggested. A convenient bibliography and resum^ of the controversy will be found in Profs. Lock and Sanday's Two Lectures on the Sayings 0/Jesus. In our original edition of 1 we proposed a.d. 140 as the latest date to which the composition of the Sayings could be referred. This terminus ad quern has generally been

654.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
;

15

conservative of our critics and accepted even by Dr. Sanday, who is amongst the most would make the Sayings as notable exception is, so far as we know, Zahn, who the only has met with little favour, and, as we shall show, But his explanation of 1 late as 160-70. Accordingly, we should propose a.d. 140 for the is now rendered still less probable. 897. 654 with greater confidence than we felt about 1 iermtnus ad quern in reference to with our The chief dividing line in the controversy lies between those who agreed such, and those who considered suggestion that 1 belonged to a collection of Sayings as numerous extra-canonical gospels 1 to be a series of extracts from one or more of the Does 654 help century. which are known to have circulated in Egypt in the second One argument which has been widely used to decide the question in either direction ? of extracts, viz. that the Sayings had in support of the view that 1 was really a series the appearance of a Saying which has a context. somewhat damaged by

mi

no contexts, is But we are not disposed

to lay

stress

on

this

contradictory instance, which

is

clearly

deprecating beforehand the use of the exceptional, though we may be pardoned for proves the Sayings to be extracts. converse argument that the occurrence of a context (and probably seem to gain some support from the use This argument may would and it will very likely be pointed out that such a passage as 655. 17-23 in 654. ^2 in form exactly resembhng insertion of 'ir/o-oOs after \iy^L make a context and Saying by the causes no ambiguity where it is found in one of a series But the use of sqq. 654 a formula which itself recurs later on in the same Sayino-s each beginning of from the analogy of 655. 17-23 is open to the obvious retort context and the argument transferred from a collection of Saymgs that such a passage may equally well have been The fact is that the formal presence or absence like 654. with occasional contexts, with equal plausibihty to prove or of contexts in a series of Sayings can be employed therefore seem a very view that the series consisted of extracts, and would the

/ ^^,

disprove

unsound argument

The matter of the context of the to introduce into the discussion. bearing than the form upon the Saying, however, has perhaps a more important t;th there follows two historic presents, Xeyet The phrase question of extracts. if Xiyct and is therefore presumably itself a historic present ; and and This context case, it should be so throughout 654 and 1^ is a historic present in one Are we to in 1 suggested by Zahn. therefore confirms the explanation of Xey has been taken oyer without next inference that the formula follow him in his therefore presumably a Gospel narrative? alteration by the editor from his source, which was As Dr. Lock remarks {Two Lectures, should answer by a decided negative. To this we have occurred uniformly in a narrative a cnticism 1 8) 'it is not likely that Xey should three more instances of Xey which is strengthened by the recurrence in 654 of at least comparison of 654. 32 sqq. and 655. 17-23, which suggests (11 9, 27, and 36), and by the Gospel like that to which the latter belonged, that if th; former had been taken directly from a the formula It is, we think, much more probable that omitted. would have been to his sources, whatever they were. ^ And 'CoCi is due to the editor of the collection than interpreting the tense of Xeyet as though there is now no longer any particular reason for meaning is not excluded, and niay be present in more than a historic present, a secondary should be inclined other instances where there is no context. 1. 36 just as much as in the the This is one of those Xdyot of Jesus to which I referred as to paraphrase Xoyo, it as marking off ^e several repetition of introduction,' and to explain the uniform The f^^^ ^h^tthe editor the whole from each other, and giving greater impressiveness to in his introduction suggests that by his used the aorist and not the historic present he intended to produce employment of the present tense Xeye^ throughout the Sayings would have been caused by tXey^v or ^<.mv. uut a slightly different effect from that which

'.,

. ,
m

,^/ ,,

/ ^.

We

'

l6

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

does not bring with it any new reason for this new light shed upon the formula Xeyft regarding the Sayings as extracts from a narrative Gospel. A much more important factor in deciding whether the Sayings are extracts or not is the introduction, which though it may be a later addition, and though the reference to St. Thomas may be merely a bold invention of the editor, is there, and its presence has So far from stating that the Sayings are extracts from any work, the to be accounted for. editor asserts that they are a collection of Xoyot, a circumstance which seems to provide an adequate explanation not only of the disconnected character of the Sayings in part of before each one. It is now the collection, but of the repetition of the formula Xe'yei clear that 654 was meant by the editor to be regarded as an independent literary work, complete in itself; and though it is not necessary to accept it as such, those who wish to maintain that the collection is something quite different from what it purports to be must be prepared to explain how the introduction comes to be there. Hence we think that no theory of the origin of the Sayings as a whole is to be considered satisfactory unless it at the same time provides a reasonable explanation of the fact that some one not later than the middle of the second century published the Sayings as specially connected with St. Thomas (and perhaps another disciple), and that the collection attained suflBicient importance for it to be read, and presumably accepted as genuine, in the chief towns of

'$

This contention, if it be generally acknowledged, in the century following. be an important criterion in discussing the merits of the different theories. We begin therefore with a brief enumeration of the different Gospels to which 1 has been referred, premising that all theories in favour of extracts have now to face at the outset a difficult, and to some of them, we think, an insurmountable obstacle in the shape of the Of these the most generally accepted is probably that maintained introduction in 654.

Upper Egypt
will

with all his usual brilliant powers of analysis by Harnack (^Die jiingst entdeckten Spriiche The Jesu), that 1 consisted of extracts from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. question was, however, complicated by the extremely divergent views held concerning that

At Gospel, to which only one passage of any length can be assigned with certainty. one extreme stands Harnack's view that this with the Gospel according to the Hebrews was the Gospel first used in Egypt, that it was not really heretical, and that it is the source of the non-canonical Sayings found in the Second Epistle of Clement. At the other extreme is the view of Resch [Agrapha, pp. 316-9), that the Gospel according to the Egyptians was not used by the author of the Second Epistle of Clement, and that it was thoroughly Gnostic and Encratite, as Origen and Epiphanius declared; the view of Zahn {Gesch. d. NT. Kan. ii. pp. 628 sqq.), which seems to us the most reasonable, stands midway between, assigning to this Gospel neither the importance given to it by Harnack nor the heretical character ascribed to it by Resch, with whom, however, Zahn Disagreeing is in accord in considering that it was not used by the author of II Clem. as we do with Harnack's view of the Gospel according to the Egyptians, we have never been able to regard his explanation of 1 as satisfactory, and the insecurity of his hypothesis is illustrated by the attempt of Mr. Badham {Athenaeum, Aug. 7, 1897), from a point of view The evidence of 654 provides not far from that of Resch, to reach the same conclusion. There is no direct point of contact between 654 and fresh objections to the theory. the Gospel according to the Egyptians, and where one of the uncanonical Sayings happens There is, to be known, it occurs not in this Gospel but in that according to the Hebrews. indeed, more to be said for regarding 654 as extracts from the latter Gospel, as was suggested in the case of 1 by Batiffol {Revue Biblique, 1897, p. 515) and Davidson {Internal. Journ. of Ethics, Oct. 1897), than from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. In their divergence from the Canonical Gospels, the striking character of much of the

654.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

matter, the Hebraic parallelisms of expression, the Sayings are quite in keeping with the style of the most venerable and important of all the uncanonical Gospels, which now generally is is known to have been written originally in Hebrew, and which regarded as independent of the four Canonical Gospels. To these points of connexion has now to be added the far more solid piece of evidence afforded by the ist Saying in 654. There remain indeed the objections (cf. Sayings of our Lord, p. 17) that the

new

to the Hebrews would be expected to show greater resemblance to Matthew than we find in 1 and 654, which is even further away from St. Matthew's Gospel than 1, and secondly that the Johannine colouring traceable in the new Sayings is foreign to the extant fragments of the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which seems But on the other hand, if Harnack is right to have been quite parallel to the Synoptists.

Gospel according
St.

Gospel ii. pp. 646-8) in supposing that the resemblance of this was not much less marked than its resemblance to St. Matthew's, the points of contact between the Sayings and St. Luke, which are at least as strong as these with And it is quite possible that the Gospel St. Matthew, constitute no great difficulty. according to the Hebrews had a mystical side which is revealed to us occasionally (as mother, the Holy Ghost,' and in e. g. in the curious passage in which Jesus speaks of his the Saying found also in 654), but which owing to the paucity of references has hitherto been underestimated. A far graver and in fact almost fatal objection, however, to regarding the Sayings as extracts culled from either the Gospel according to the Hebrews or the
{Gesch.
d. Altchrisi. Lit.

to St. Luke's

'

tion of 654.

is the irreconcilability of such a view with the introducvery difiicult to believe that an editor would have had the boldness to issue extracts from such widely known works as an independent collection of Sayings Even if we supply claiming the authority of Thomas and perhaps another disciple. at the end of 654. 2 and suppose that the mention of Thomas is of quite secondary importance, it is very hard to supply a reasonable motive for issuing a series of extracts from the Gospel according to the Hebrews with such a preface as ve find in 654, and to account for the popularity of these supposed extracts in the century are therefore on the whole opposed to the view, following their publication. attractive though it undoubtedly is, that the Sayings are all directly derived from the Gospel

Gospel according to the Egyptians


It is

We

But that there is a connexion between them is certain, Clement of Alexandria, in which work Mayor {ap. Rendel Harris, Contemp. Rev. 1897, pp. 344-5) has with much probability detected references to the 2nd Logion (cf. the parallels adduced on p. 7), are also the source of the quotation from the Gospel according to the Hebrews which is closely parallel to the It is not at all unlikely that the 2nd Logion (' Except ye fast ') also presented I St Saying. a strong similarity to a passage in the same Gospel. The obstacle which prevents us from accepting the Gospel according to the Hebrews
according to the Hebrews.

and

it

is

significant that the Stromateis of

as the source of all the Sayings, in spite of the evidence in favour of such a view, applies vith equal force to Zahn's hypothesis that they were derived from the Gospel of the Ebionites or Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, which is open to grave objections on other The instances adduced by Zahn to show the use of collections of extracts grounds. in the second century, (i) a series of e/cXoyai from the Old Testament composed by Melito of Sardis, and (2) a list of heretical passages from the Gospel of Peter appended to a letter by Serapion, were singularly inapt even as regards 1 (cf. Sanday, Two Lectures, p. 45,
note),

and still less bear any relation to 654. Even admitting for the sake of argument Zahn's theory of the relation of the Gospel of the Ebionites to the Gospel according to the Hebrews (on which Harnack throws doubts, op. cit. ii. p. 626), and his proposed date for and for the Gospel 1, about A.D. 170 (which has generally been regarded as too late),

i8

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

/3>/

(( , .^ 8 ' 8 ((
\
\
Xeyovres

of the Ebionites (which if we follow Harnack, op. cit. ii. p. 631, is too early), the character of the extant fragments of this thoroughly Gnostic Jewish-Christian Gospel is very different from that of 1 and 654, to say nothing of the other arguments against Zahn's theory brought by Dr. Sanday in Two Lectures, p. 46. The views which we have discussed so far have, whether satisfactory or not on other Let us now grounds, all been confronted by the initial difficulty of the introduction. examine those Gospels ascribed to disciples whose names either occur or may with reasonable It is obvious that the introduction probability be supposed to have occurred in 11. 2-3. would suit a series of extracts from e. g. the Gospel of Thomas much better than one from the Gospel according to the Hebrews. The Gospel of Thomas is known to have existed in more than one form, namely as an account of Jesus' childhood which is extant in several late recensions of varying length, and as an earlier Gospel condemned by ' HippolytUS in the following passage {Refut. v. 7) ov (sc. the Naassenes)

tjs

eiprjafi

(- \
evros

7'

yap

iv

Here we have two remarkable points of


coupled with
the
ivTos

contact with 654, the (cf. the 2nd Saying).

mention of

Thomas

The parallels between 1 and one of the later forms of the Thomas Gospel have been worked out with great ingenuity and elaboration by Dr. Taylor on pp. 908 of T^ Oxyrhynchus Logia and the Apocryphal Gospels. There is much to be said for his vicAV that the extant Gospel of Thomas contains some traces of 1, and the probability would be increased if 1, which Dr. Taylor was inclined to regard as extracts from the Gospel according to the Egyptians, be supposed to be derived from the earlier Gospel of Thomas. 654 does not seem to contain any clear points of connexion with the later Gospel of Thomas, but this is compensated for by the remarkable parallel from Hippolytus quoted above. It is moreover noteworthy, as Mr. Badham remarks, that the Acts of Thomas, which may well have been partly built upon the Gospel, exhibit a knowledge of that Saying which occurs both in the Gospel according to the Hebrews and in 654, and that, as Prof. Lake informs us, an Athos MS. [Studia Bihlica, v. 2, p. 173) asserts that the of Christ and the woman taken in adultery (which has found its way from the Gospel according to the Hebrews into St. John's Gospel) occurred in the Gospel of Thomas. But there are serious objections to regarding 1 and 654 as extracts from that Gospel. In the first place though it is possible that Thomas is the only disciple mentioned in the introduction, it is equally possible that he stood second, and in that case the Gospel from which the Sayings may have been extracted is more likely to have been one which went under the name of the person who stood first though indeed, if there were two disciples mentioned in the introduction, it is not very satisfactory to derive the Sayings from any Gospel which went under the name of only one. A much greater difficulty arises from the divergence of the Sayings from what little is known about the earlier Gospel of Thomas. The saying quoted by Hippolytus is widely removed in character from those in 1 and 654, and it is significant that, though the doctrine of aeons seems to be known to the author of the Gospel of Thomas, 654 employs in 1. 24 the neutral word in a passage in which !/, as is shown by the parallel from the Apocalypse of Peter, would have been highly appropriate, if the composer of the Sayings had known of or been influenced by that doctrine. The Gospel of Thomas, which Harnack thinks was known to Irenaeus, is indeed placed before a. d. 180, but from

654.
tibe

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
od

19

qnotatkn in Hq^f^jtns coapled iridi the : scanl^ evidence finam odier sooicesy it has bee rate a Gospd of the diOdiood and <rf^ an ac are to be derived firom it, the cnnent view c: dai^ed; and it is veiy doobtM wfaeifaer tL t-nnske-nre^ of an o(^;inal Thomas Gospd bdi:: pore conjecr would lead as into a at anj rale nntil odio' less hazudons roads

in hter times and the lave been mainly at any If the Sayii^ :.-2cter.
:~:is must be eotirely f- ^- postnbling the
:

-'

r^^ ^

:pobrtn& This ""~r to enter.


;.:

there
'

is

a connexion between the

bat this than bj the l^podiests that the Go^d b the sc liie Gospel ctf FUlp, vfaidi is ass^^ centmy, by Haniack to the secraid centmy c occniied in 54>. 2. were certain that The extract qooted fimn it by Ei^phsuiiiis stc Gnostic toidencies than can be ftmnd in i. and The Mity other Apociyphal Gospds whi: wUdi dier works c(nected wtfh Matthias, few extracts firom whidi are dted by Clan a to MaHhias moitioned by Origoi, and (3) Basilidians which are thus described by^

Goqiel ci can be btfter e^pbined bj soppoan^


eaifier

.:^f
~

;7;

'

likely,

Gospel
..le

second
rn
if
it

nu

*IflfaMii

nr* aKar

(.

natore of these thre are verr uncertain. Zahn considers all thre cu/l p. 18) was disposed to accept the i S- P 597) rewrts to the Tiew that tlese two that the npmSoims of Matthias might be the {Comiemp. Rev. Aug. 1897), only to be ir dissimilarity of form between 1 and the extar.
to ha^e been a

^^.

...

onrrotr

The

ck,

who

at fiist

cquently {o^dL The ^oggesticm -.act. oat by Dr. James ground oi the r
V

woik of a mainly honuktic

c:

which seem -altogether

exdnded from the likdy sources of the Savi 'V*' side an extract from them, Ai^f' according to the Hebrews which is parallel tc

C ement quotes
".

e
f^

:rom the
el

Gospd
is

accordmg
it

to Matthias practically nothing is known exc; source (^ the Sayings is therefore incapa' f

it
,

the

-sed

on pure

i6) that the eien. ;r. r: :: . conjecture has nothing to oppose to t;.T There ranain they profess to be. Sayings are something quite different i::: suggests >e occurrence of the vrord Xiyoi m^ticmed by Hippol} the Xoyoc The easily be earned much ftirther. a connexion with the Sayings, but this cannot wber^ if Matthias were, according to Hippolytus, reirealed to Matthias ir* conjunction with Thomas. The particular was occurred at aU in the introduction, it these were found Gnostic ontokical speculations which according to Hippolytus the plane of thought from that found in the baymgs ; but awaunMbot bdong to another untrustworthy character of Hippolytus question is compUcated by the confused and suspiaous passages. And ewn discussion of the BasiBdians, vii. 20 being among the most of Matthias and the bajnngs, Xay if there were a connexion between these from a narrative would bring us no nearer to a proof that the Sayings were extracts this Sayings as such. There is moreover another objecuon Gospd rather than a coUection of under the name of Matthias, because to connecting the Sayings with any work profiessedly
,

,,

^.

20

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

such a view would necessarily entail the supposition that the Sayings are post-resurrectional ; and this for the reasons given on pp. 1 2-3 we do not think justifiable. Our conclusion, therefore, is that no one of the known uncanonical Gospels is Shall we regard them as a series of extracts a suitable source for the Sayings as a whole. from several of these Gospels, as was suggested with respect to 1 by Dr. James ? So long as the discussion was confined to 1, such an explanation from its vagueness was almost beyond the reach of criticism. The recovery of 654 alters the situation. On the one hand the occurrence of a Saying, which is known to have been also found in the Gospel according to the Hebrews, side by side with other Sayings which it is difficult to ascribe to the same source, rather favours the theory of an eclectic series derived from different But the introduction connecting the Sayings with particular disciples is not Gospels. very suitable for such a collection which ex hypoihesi is of an altogether miscellaneous character and it would be difficult for any one to maintain that the Sayings are derived from several Apocryphal Gospels and at the same time in face of the mention of Thomas But the inclusion to deny that one of the chief elements was the Gospel of Thomas. of the Gospel of Thomas among the sources of the Sayings to a large extent involves the hypothesis of extracts from several Gospels in the difficulties which are discussed
;

on pp. 18-9.

The result of an examination in the light of 654 of the various theories that the immediate source of 1 was one or more of the known non-canonical Gospels confirms us in the view that the solution does not lie in that direction, and that the Sayings are much more likely to be a source utiUzed in one or more of the uncanonical Gospels, than vice versa. The probability of the general explanation of 1 which we suggested in 1897 and which has been supported, amongst others, by Drs. Swete, Rendel Harris, Sanday, Lock, and Heinrici, that it was part of a collection of Sayings as such, is largely increased by the discovery of 654, with its introduction to the whole collection stating that it was a collection of Xoyoi, which was obviously intended to stand as an independent literary work. In fact we doubt if theories of extracts are any longer justifiable; and in any case such explanations will henceforth be placed at the initial disadvantage of starting It is with an assumption which is distinctly contradicted by the introduction of 654. of course possible to explain away this introduction, but unless very strong reasons can
be adduced for doing
that 654, to which, as
so, the simpler

and

far safer course is to accept the editor's statement

of \oyoi opinions of those critics who agreed with our general explanation of 1 as against the various theories of extracts may be divided into two classes: (i) those who regarded 1 as a collection of Sayings independent of the Gospels and belonging to the first century, and who therefore were disposed to admit to a greater or less extent and with much varying degrees of confidence the presence of genuine elements in the new matter (Drs. Swete, Rendel Harris, Lock, and Heinrici) ; (2) those who, like Dr. Sanday, regarded the new Sayings in 1 as the product of the early second century, not direcdy dependent on the Canonical Gospels, but having their origin under conditions of thought which these Gospels had created' (Sanday, op. cit. p. 41), a view which necessarily carries with it
said, 1 is closely allied, is a collection

we have

The

'

It remains to ask how far 654 helps to decide the points the rejection of the new matter. at issue in favour of either side. With regard to the relation of 654 to the Canonical Gospels, the proportion of new and old matter is about the same as in 1, and the parallels to the Canonical Gospels in 654 exhibit the same freedom of treatment, which can be explained either as implying independence of the Canonical Gospels, or as the liberties taken by an early redactor.

The

introduction in

654

contains a clearer parallel to

St.

John's Gospel than anything

654,
to be found in 1
;

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

21

but even if it be conceded (and there is good reason for not con11) that the introduction implied a knowledge of St. John's Gospel, and was therefore probably composed in the second century, the Sayings themselves can (and, as we shall show, do) contain at any rate some elements which are not derived from the Canonical Gospels, and go back to the first century. So far as the evidence of 654 goes, there is nothing to cause any one to renounce opinions which he may have formed concerning the relation of 1 to the Canonical Gospels. No one who feels certain on this point with regard to the one, is likely to be convinced of the incorrectness of his

ceding

it;

cf.

p.

view by the other.


Secondly, with regard to the new matter in 654, the uncertainties attaching to the and meaning of most of the 2nd, the earlier part of the 3rd, and all the 5th Saying, unfortunately prevent them from being of much use for purposes of critical analysis. Unless by the aid of new parallels the satisfactory restoration of these three Sayings can be carried beyond the point which we have been able to reach, their remains hardly provide a firm basis for estimating their individual value, still less that of the collection as a whole, each Saying of which has a right to consideration on its own merits. Only with regard to the ist Saying are we on sure ground. Concerning Resch, a usually this striking Agraphon the most diverse opinions have been held. indulgent critic of the uncanonical Sayings ascribed to our Lord, rejects it as spurious; Ropes on the other hand, though far more exacting, is inclined to accept it as genuine, but on account of the absence of widely attested authority for it does not put it in his highest class of genuine Sayings which includes It is more blessed to give than to receive.' The judgement of Ropes upon Agrapha has generally been regarded as far sounder than that of Resch ; and much of Resch's unfavourable criticism of this Saying is beside cf. p. 5), while the occurrence of the Saying the mark (Harnack now regards it as primary But whatever view be taken of its authenticity, in 654 is a new argument for its authority. and however the connexion between 654 and the Gospel according to the Hebrews is Dr. Sanday may be to be explained, the ist Saying in 654 establishes one important fact. right in regarding a.d. 100 as the terminus a quo for the composition of 1, and the same terminus a quo can of course be assigned to 654 in the sense that the Sayings were not put together and the introduction not written before that date. But, if we may accept the agreement of the leading theologians that the Gospel of the Hebrews Avas written in the first century, it is impossible any longer to deny that 654 and therefore, as we maintain, 1, contain some non-canonical elements which directly or indirectly go back to the first and the existence of first century elements in one case certainly increases the century In this respect, therefore, 654 provides a remarkprobability of their presence in others. able confirmation of the views of those critics who were prepared to allow a first century
restoration
'

date for

1.

cations, to regard the

654 Dr. Sanday's view of 1 with the fewest possible modifiwhole collection as a free compilation in the early part of the second century, by an Alexandrian Jewish-Christian, of Sayings ultimately derived from the Canonical Gospels, and very likely the Gospels according to the Hebrews and Thomas, and perhaps others as well ; and shall we dismiss the new elements, except the ist Saying in 654, as the spurious accretions of an age of philosophic speculation, and surroundings Even so the two papyri are of great interest as revealing a of dubious orthodoxy ? hitherto unknown development of primitive belief upon the nature of Christ's teaching, and supplying new and valuable evidence for determining the relationship of the uncanonical Gospels to the main current of orthodox Christianity. Or are we rather to consider 1 and 654 to be fragments of an early collection of our Lord's Sayings in a form which has
Are we
then, adapting to

22

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

been influenced to some extent by the thought and literature of the apostolic and postapostolic age, and which may well itself have influenced the Gospel of Thomas and perhaps others of the heretical Gospels, but which is ultimately connected in a large measure with Some such view has a first-hand source other than that of any of the Canonical Gospels ? been maintained by scholars of eminence, e.g. Heinrici and Rendel Harris, Avith regard to 1; and if the claim made by the editor of the collection in his introduction, that his source was St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple, amounts to but little more, the internal evidence of 654 provides no obvious reason why we should concede him much less; while the occurrence of one uncanonical Saying, which is already known to be of extreme antiquity and has been accepted as substantially genuine by several critics, lends considerable support to the others which rest on the evidence of 654 and 1 alone. That is as far as we are prepared to go for a really weighty and perfectly unbiassed estimate of the ultimate value of any new discovery, resort must be made to some other We conclude by pointing out that, if the view with regard quarter than the discoverers. to 1 and 654 which we have just indicated is on the right lines, the analogy of this collection has an obvious bearing on the question of the sources of the S}Tioptic Gospels, and that the mystical and speculative element in the early records of Christ's Sayings which found its highest and most widely accepted expression in St. John's Gospel^ may well have been much more general and less peculiarly Johannine than has hitherto been taken
;

for granted.

655.

Fragment of a Lost Gospel.


Fr. {b) 8-2

8-3 cm.

Plate

II.

the largest

Eight fragments of a papyrus in roll form containing an uncanonical Gospel, None {b) comprising parts of the middles of two narrow^ columns. of the other fragments actually joins {b), but it is practically certain that the relation to it of Frs. [a) and {c), which come from the tops of columns, is as Frs. {d) and {e), both of which have a margin below the indicated in the Plate. writing, probably belong to the bottom of the same two columns which are partly preserved in {b) but how much is lost in the interval is uncertain. Since
;

admits of a sure restoration of the majority of the but the remains of the second lacunae, the first 23 lines are nearly complete column are for the most part too slight for the sense to be recovered. The
the upper portion of Col.
i
;

handwriting
(P.

is

a small uncial of the

common
among

sloping oval type, which in most

cases belongs to the third century,

securely dated examples being 23

(P. Oxy. II. Plate i), 420 (P. Oxy. III. Plate vi), But this kind of hand is found in the second century, e. g. 26 (P. Oxy. I. Plate vii), 447 (P. Oxy. III. Plate vi), and continued in the fourth for late third or fourth century examples see P. Amh. I. 3 {b) (Part II. 655 is a well-written specimen, Plate xxv) and 404 (P. Oxy. III. Plate iv).

Oxy.

I.

Plate

vi),

223

P.

Amh.
;

II.

12 (Plate

iii).

655.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

23

period during which suggesting, on the whole, the earlier rather than the later assign it to the second century, this hand was in vogue, and though we should not give Lines 1-16 later than A.D. 250. it is not likely to have been written speech of Jesus which is parallel to several sentences in the the conclusion of a put to Sermon on the Mount. Then follows (11. 17-23) an account of a question the answer. This, the most important part of the Him by the disciples and of but bears an interesting resemblance to a known quotation from

5>

is new, the Gospel according to the Egyptians

papyrus,

cf.

note

ad

loc.

A passage

in

Col

ii

concerning the seems to be parallel to Luke xi. 53. On the general questions belonged see pp. 27-8. nature and origin of the Gospel to which the fragment indicated by double In 11. 7-1 1 of the text the division between Frs. () and {b) is No stops, breathings, or accents are used, but a wedge-shaped vertical lines
||.

in a cursive hand in sign for filling up short lines occurs in 1. 27 and a correction in 1. 14, and 1. 13 An interchange of et and ?; causes the form 1. 25.

requires

some
11.

The key
that to

correction. to the general restoration of


Bartlet.

11.

1-3 was supplied by Mr. Badham,

41-6 by Dr.
Col.

i.

Col.
{c)

{a)

[. [.

.]rro
.

6[

.]

[.

.]

]
]
]
.
.

ecn[
[.

[
.

[
[

CT[.

{b)

[.

.]||[.
.

.
.

[.
KPej[.
[.

[.

.]ec

|[.
.

.]

15

NGI

06

|1[.

.][.
.

||[. .]]
.

[.

||[.
.

.][.

.] Tj [. YMeiC TIC AN
.

NHC

[. .]
AerOYCIN AY

eiAiKiAN

01

24

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


eKAYCHcee
AlCXYNQHTe
50 PA[

id)

25

]
]0
]H

w
K0[

]T!N

]CTIN

(/)
]1<A[

{h)

]K.

][

[.

ajTTo irpcoi

[ 7] -

[].

[]
["^ ^^]
[Xfj

'

[9 oye
15

9 '
;

{^)
-

ian[epas

[rfj

] [7] [[].
TV

[-

10 vei ovSe
v

[\ [] [][]

[
iv[.

, '' 2
;

kirl

[9 8]

vr]S

[.

)(^ovT\^es
.

'][.

^ ,

Xeyci*

.]

41

eX[ye

['
45

[^? [,
^^
k-

[? -

....

,.

'

655.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

25

1-23. '(Take no thought) from morning until even nor from evening until morning, your food what ye shall eat or for your raiment what ye shall put on. Ye are far better than the lilies which grow but spin not. Having one garment, what do ye (lack ?) Who could add to your stature ? He himself will give you your garment. His . disciples say unto him, When wilt thou be manifest to us, and when shall we see thee ? He saith. When ye shall be stripped and not be ashamed 41-6. '. . He said. The key of knowledge ye hid; ye entered not in yourselves and to them that were entering in ye opened not.'
either for
. . . . .
.

. 8
1-7. Cf. Matt.
differs (i)

vi.

25

/ii7

( !
\
[

(8(,
.
. .

8,,
yap

8
Luke

. 22-3

The papyrus probably had at the beginning of the sentence but by the addition of (2) by the use of a different word for and probably for though it is possible that or preceded in }. I, (3) by the omission of the second half of the Saying as recorded in the Gospels. In 11. 1-2 there is not room for in 11. 5-6 is not quite the word that would be expected, being used in the New Testament for grand robes rather than a plain garment, but if the division is correct cannot be avoided, and with the reading t[ it is difficult to find any suitable word cf. also e. g. 839

?,

. (
.
.

Tjj

6[|

]. [\
;

'

'

. '
If

713 Cf. Matt.

.., and
only

,
i

vi.

28

nep\

oi8e

Luke

.
26

27

Matt.

vi.

much

shorter, but varies considerably,

'

be

oibe

'

iv

(sc.

The corresponding
11.

though to what extent


10-2.

to the uncertainty attaching to the restoration of in the particular relation to Fr.

passage in the papyrus is not is not quite clear owing Our reasons for placing Fr. {a)

'
;

Luke

24

on Plate II are the facts (i) that Fr. (a) is from the top of a column vhich is presumably, judging by the general appearance and lacunae in Fr. (a), Col. of Fr. () (2) that though there is nothing in the external appearance of Fr. {a) to show that it contains any actual ends of lines, the connexion of 11. 8-9 and 9-10 which results from our proposed combination of the two fragments, and is so suitable to the context that it is unlikely to be fortuitous. The connexion of 11. lo-i and 1 1-2 is, however, more difficult. With the readings and punctuation which we have adopted in 1. 12 suggests nothing but e^Seire], which does not suit W, and there are many points of uncertainty. At the end of 1. 10 the letter before is more like , C, or than ['^^ (cf. Luke xii. 27) is not very satisfactory. MATION can be read in 1. 12, e, so that and would in the context be expected to be the termination of a word meaning garment' but with the reading it is hard to explain the vestiges of the two letters on 1. 1 1 of Fr. (), which suit respectively a straight letter such as H, I, and or or, less probably, A or . a rare word not found in the N. T., but not inappropriate here, is

()

indicated

[\

]\,

but Iv is Unlikely. It is also possible to connect instead of with the preceding WOrds, but this does not help towards making the restoration of 11. 10-2 easier. These difficulties could be avoided by supposing that Fr. {a) is
possible
;

with

,[

[^

'

][''^ []

to be placed
direct
for

much higher up in relation to Fr. {), but this involves the sacrifice of any connexion between Frs. (a) and (), and 11. 8-9 and 9-10 afford very strong grounds our proposed combination of the two fragments.
135 Cf. Matt.
vi.

27

26
eva

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


and Luke
this
xii.

25

ris de
is

e'l

em
shorter, omitting

The papyrus
which where

version

somewhat

and

Saying is found in the papyrus is also slightly different from that in the Gospels, In 1. 1 3 immediately precedes instead of following the verse about the it there does not seem to be room for ({) could be read in place of Xeyovres 15-6. Cf. Matt. vi. 313

',

{()
\

oldev

aeav
is

^^^(6
:

poeea

nearly identical and proceeds 7^17

has the corresponding idea but expressed with extreme raises a difficulty, for we should is an error for unless avT6[s conciseness. or eeos in the column prerefers back to Apparently Seas. or expect ceding, or the author of the Gospel may have here incorporated from some source a Saying (cf. 654. 32). without its context which would have explained

.
pe'

. ,
.

.
6

The

position in

^
he

[]. -

and Luke

The papyrus

]e,

:
Xiv.

evbev

29-31? which

be

17-23. For the question


ey<u

cf.

John
;

in a passage of Jesus bears a striking resemblance to the the Gospel according to the Egyptians which is referred to several times by Clement of Alexandria, and which is reconstructed by Harnack {Chronol. i. p. 13) thus:

]
,
\
this

/xeiy

.
.... Xey
. .
.

19 sqq.

rt
.

olKeTi

epe

es
6

yeyovev

pe

The answer ascribed in answer made to a similar question

the papyrUS tO

, \

., \

' 7' , '^' . . '


6
;

Both express the Same idea, a mystical reference and to Gen. iii. 7, 'And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and they were not ashamed,' the meaning in either case being that Christ's kingdom on earth would not be manifested until man had returned to the state of innocence which existed before the Fall, and in which sexual ideas and relations had no place. The chief differences between the two passages are (i) the setting, the questioner being in the Gospel according to the Egyptians Salome, and in the papyrus the disciples, (2) the simpler language of the papyrus as contrasted with the more literary and elaborated phrase
found in the earlier part (3) the absence in the papyrus of the Encratite tendency On the relation between of the quotation from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. with something Whether the papyrus continued after the two see p. 27. ..., is of course uncertain, but Fr. {d), which probably like belongs to the bottom of this column, is concerned with something different. Perhaps is commoner than the Corrector's spelling 25.

' .

Cf. II

Clem. 12. 2

,\

in

,
left,

]:

passage was parallel to Matt.


in

,
vi.
its

any case have differed largely

rj 6 22-3 (Sermon on the Mount) ... ; cf. Luke xi. 34-6. But the papyruS muSt in 1. 26 suggests a Johannine language, and

]{})

colouring. of [ projects somewhat, but since the whole column trends to the 30. The probably no importance is to be attached to the circumstance; cf. the initial in 1. 47. 42-6. With the remains of these lines Bartlet well compares Luke xi. 52 oiai

Avhich our restorations are based. If they are in the right direction, the papyrus agreed with D in having in place of but with the other uncials against D in having a participle of elaepxeaOai not of while D's reading Koi is too long for 1. 43. But the papyrus certainly differed from all the MSS. in 1. 46 and probably in 1. 42, where e makes a line of only 11 letters, which is a little too short, so that perhaps either a different word from ?) or a compound of is to be supplied. 51. Below K0[ is what seems to be an accidental spot of ink rather than part of

,
,
a
letter.

655.

() and some MSS.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
(D and SOme MSS.
avrotj

(
>

()

^ () , (,
27
(D

/)

'

(D

{\(

was closely similar in point of form to the narrator speaks in the third person, not in the first, and the portion preserved consists mainly of discourses which are to a large extent parallel to passages in Matthew and Luke, especially the latter Gospel, which alone seems to be connected with 11. 41 sqq.
to belong to a Gospel which

655 seems

Synoptists.

The

where

version is, as a rule, shorter than the corresponding passages in the Gospels ; longer (11. 1-3) the expansion does not alter the meaning in any Avay. The chief interest lies in the question of the disciples and its answer, both of which so closely correspond to a passage in the Gospel according to the Egyptians and the uncanonical Gospel or collection of Sayings used by the author of the Second Epistle of Clement, that the Gospel of which 655 is a fragment clearly belongs to the same sphere of thought. Does it actually belong to either of those works, which, though Harnack regards them as one and the same, are, we think, more probably to be considered distinct? In the Gospel according to the Egyptians Salome was the questioner who occasioned the erSv/xa remarkable Saying beginning and it is much more likely that 655 presents a different version of the same incident in another Gospel, than a repetition of the Salome question in a slightly different form in another part of the Gospel according to the Egyptians. Nor is 655 likely to be the actual Gospel Avhich the author of II Clem, was quoting. It is unfortunate that owing to the papyrus breaking yemjTai there is no security that ev, or at any rate something very off at similar, did not follow, and the omission in the Clement passage of a phrase corresponding But the fact that the question in II Clem, is worded to 11. 22-3 may be a mere accident. somewhat differently and is put into the mouth of tis instead of the disciples, as in 655, is a good reason for rejecting the hypothesis that the two works
it

The papyrus
is

),

were

identical.

evidence of 655 as to its origin being thus largely of a negative character, we do not propose to discuss in detail whether it is likely to belong to any of the other known Apocryphal Gospels. There are several to which it might be assigned, but direct evidence If the Gospel according to the Hebrews were thought of, it would be necessary is wanting. to suppose that the resemblances in 655 to Matthew and Luke did not imply dependence upon them. In its relation to the Canonical Gospels 655 somewhat resembles 654, and the view that 655 was, though no doubt at least secondary, dependent not on Matthew and Luke, but upon some other document, whether behind the Synoptists or merely parallel to them, is tenable, but is less likely to commend itself to the majority of critics than the opposite hypothesis that 655. 1-16 is ultimately an abridgement of Matthew and Luke with considerable alterations. In either case the freedom with which the author of this Gospel handles the material grouped by St. Matthew and St. Luke under the Sermon

The

28

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

on the Mount is remarkable. The Gospel from which 655 comes is likely to have been composed in Egypt before a.d. 150, and to have stood in intimate relation to the Gospel according to the Egyptians and the uncanonical source used by the author of II Clem. Whether it was earlier or later than these is not clear. The answer to the question put by the disciples in 655 is couched in much simpler and clearer language than that of the corresponding sentence in the answer to Salome recorded in the Gospel according to the Egyptians, the point of which is liable to be missed, while the meaning of
But the greater directness of the allusion to Gen. iii. 7 655. 22-3 is unmistakable. 655 can be explained either by supposing that the version in the Gospel according to the Egyptians is an Encratite amplification of that in 655, or, almost but not quite as well, in our opinion, by the view that the expression in 655 is a toning down of the more As for the priority of 655 to the striking phrase source of the uncanonical quotations in II Clem., the evidence is not sufficient to form any
in

8.

conclusion.

There remains the question of the likelihood of a genuine element in the story of which we now have three versions, though how far these are independent of each As is usual with Agrapha (cf p. 21), the most diverse opinions have other is uncertain. Zahn {Gesch. d. NT. Kan. ii. been held about the two previously known passages. p. 635) defends the version in the Gospel according to the Egyptians from the charge Resch on the other hand of Encratitism, and is inclined to admit its genuineness. {Agrapha, p. 386), while accepting the version of Clement, vehemendy attacks the other. Ropes again takes a different view, and though he thinks {Die Spruche Jesu, p. 131) that is too ascetic for Jesus, is disposed to believe in a kernel of The criticisms of both Zahn and Ropes, however, are now genuineness in the story. somewhat discounted by the circumstance that they took the phrase corresponding to 655. 22-3 to mean 'when you put off the body,' i.e. 'die,' whereas the evidence of the parallel in the papyrus gives the words a slightly different turn, and brings them more nearly ev, ... But Zahn would, into line with the following sentences nevertheless, seem in the light of the new parallel to be right in maintaining that the passage in the Gospel according to the Egyptians does not go much further in an Encratite The occurrence of another direction than, e.g. Matt. xxii. 30 and Luke xx. 34-6. version of the story is an important additional piece of evidence in defence of the view that contains at least some elements of genuineness, and a special interest attaches both it to the form of the Saying in 655. 22-3 on account of the clearness of its language, and to its context, in which other matter closely related to the Canonical Gospels is found in immediate proximity. All this lends fresh value to what is, on account of the farreaching problems connected with it, one of the most important and remarkable, and, since the discovery of 655, one of the belter attested, of the early Agrapha.
.
. .

656.

Genesis.
Plate
II {c verso).

Height 24-4 cm.

Parts of four leaves from a papyrus codex of the book of Genesis in the

Septuagint version.
of

good

size

The MS. was carefully written in round upright uncials and decidedly early appearance, having in some respects more

19653:
656,
affinity

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
To
in all

29
the latter^

with types of the second century than of the third.


is

however, the hand


inclined to place
it

any case this may ments of St. Matthew's and St. John's Gospels (2, 208) as one of the most ancient Greek theological books so far known, and it has some claim to be considered the oldest of the group. Another mark of age is perhaps to be
recognized in the absence of the usual contractions for
^eo's,

probabihty to be assigned, though we should be in in the earlier rather than the later part of the century rank with the original Oxyrhynchus Logia (l) and the frag;

Kvpios, &c.,

but this

may

of course be
is

no more
line.
:

than an individual peculiarity.


v,

The only abbreviation

that occurs

the horizontal stroke instead of

employed to save space at

the end of a long

Both high and middle (11. 13, 19) stops are found, but are sparingly used more often a pause is marked by a slight blank space. few alterations and additions have been made by a second hand, which seems also to be responsible for the numeration in the centre of the upper margin of

each page.

The evidence

of so early a text

is

of particular value for the book of Genesis,

The only first-class where the uncial MSS. are most weakly represented. MS. available for comparison practically throughout the parts covered by the papyrus, namely, xiv. 31-3, xv. 5-9, xix. 32-xx. 11, xxiv. 28-47, xxvii. 33-3, 40-1, is the Codex Alexandrinus (A). The Vatican and Ambrosian codices do
not begin
till

later in the book, the Sinaiticus (N)

is

defective except for occa-

sional verses in the twenty- fourth chapter, the readings of D, the Cottonian

MS.,

which for the most part survives only in a collation { = D), are unascertainable in XX. 4-1 1 and xxiv. 38-30, and the Bodleian Genesis (E) fails us in xxiv. The result of a collation, where possible, with these MSS., is to show that the papyrus, while seldom supporting E, does not side continuously with either N, A, remains for a satisfactory comparison. As or D, though, of course, too little of
a general rule the readings favoured by the new witness are the shorter ones
cf.
;

e.g. notes
11.

on
1,

11.

16, 37,

47-8,

5%

^3, 6^, 74, 139, 138-9, 154, 183, 185, 188, as

against

43, 8

144, 163.

Not infrequently variants occur otherwise


is

attested only

by mixed
anic

cursive

MSS., though here too no consistent agreement can be


further emphasized.
it

traced,

and the
is

character of the cursive texts

The papyrus

certainly pre-Lucianic, but

has two readings characteristic of Lagarde's Luci108,


118), yivov^ for
in xxiv. 38. in xix.

group

omission of
XX. XX.

^^

= Holmes

19,

(with the

Hebrew)
kK^vrj for

yhovs in xix. 38 and the Readings common to this


^'^,

group and other cursives are


8.

and

avhpts for

On

the other hand, the papyrus opposes the Lucianic group in the
in xix. $5,

addition of
3, in

and the omission of

the one case against, in the other with, the Hebrew.

in

in

The number

of

30

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


is

variants which are altogether new, considering the scope of the fragments,

conis

siderable

see

11.

48, S5, 5^, 81, 114, I54, i55, 160, 163, 181.

the tendency to omit the word

no fewer than four passages (11. 17, 122, 155, 166), in three of which (11. 17, 1%%, A blank space was 166) the omission has been made good by the second hand. In the version of Aquila the in 1. 17. originally left where the word occurred Tetragrammaton was written in Hebrew letters, and this pecuHarity reappears in a few Hexaplaric MSS. of the Septuagint. The papyrus offers the first example of a similar tendency to avoid the sacred name in a text otherwise independent of the Aquila tradition. The collation with the chief uncial codices given below is based on the edition of Swete, while the occasional references to the cursives are derived from Holmes for some additional information we are indebted to Mr. N. McLean.
;

peculiar feature
;

when

applied to the Deity

this occurs in

(a)

] [] [ [] [ [
Se
[L7rv

Verso

xiv. 21-3.

Recto XV. 5-9.

tovs

[9
[]
15

[7] []
is

[ [] ^ [
enrev
6(09
irpos

irpos

]^^^
6eov

npos

[ \^ \^\
'\

Verso xix. 32-xx.


2.

OS eK]TLaeu

[ []\'

20

[\
[
[^6

[ [] [
[einev

[9

e^a

^
Tpie

].

[
Fepa

inev

()

Recto XX. 2-1 1.

25

[]

[ [

[ [9
V

65

[ 7

[^ ] [ [,
Beos]

(]]9 [ ^^ ]
ev

" ?

pa

06 [
v

35

[0] [ 8] [9 7]] ] 9 8 [] [ ^[][][ ] [ [ [ ][ [ ]] [ [ 8 ] [? ] [\ 670[] [ [ ][ ]


65
75
v

[]

[]
8
e/c

[ [
ey[ei/6T0

656.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
[pi

70

5e

]? [^ [
[

31
[

9
8e

yvvaiKos]

eXa/3ey

av8p[i

[ 7

8e]

of^

Kvpie]

]9
i7r]v

[9

e^ava

8 ]\
6eos
VKev]

e[v

1'7'[]

ev

80

Tpos

9 [ ^ [
e[v

[iaeX6ov]<ra

rj

[ve

45

[]
[]
6[6]

[][]

[
[
8

[] [

[ [
[ [9

i]y

][
85

]
5o]y

90

[]?
5
9
TKev 8e

Tos

55

''"^

[ []
[\ [^
wo?

[] [

[ ^
7[][
[][]

e/c

^9] [
8?
is

[ [ [^
[

^^

]9 ]

Se

7/)

] ]
]

\][^
<5e

[?]

9[] [] ][] ] [] [] ]9
[]
v

[][

95

] ] 9

Se

] 9
emev

]9 [] [
a]v8ps

[\

e/ca[Xe](re[i/

[]8

] 69

[]

[]

8[]?

Fe

100

[ [
([
e

60 [papoijs 76/ 8e

nepi

[]

32

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

[^ []
{c)

[]9 \\ [7]/
05

[eJTTOiT/aay
[eiJTra

enrev Se

[]
e/xe

^eoofe/Seia
r[e

[
aire

[e]v

[\
[],

iveKev

y\yvai

Recto xxiv. 28-37.


150

Verso xxiv. 38-47.

19

OLKOV

\[
Se

9
155
Kat

[]
[]

[a]5eX[0^s

^
yei/er[o]

115

? ^? ? [] [] [] [] [] 6 [] ? []? ? []? [] ? ?? ? [] [? [\ ^?
[[e]]

120

? ? ?? ?? ?( [
i8ev

? ??

'^^^ iirrev

, ?^
ei?

[]

[] [\
Oeo?

[\]

evavTiov

aev

^ ?
?

[7]?

em

[]
]?

eav

165 [?]

ine[v

[]

naeXOe

[5

[] [ ]

[]

\?

[][]?

125

KaijSjiX\oL?

]? ? [? [ ^]
[]?
ei?

[] []

[?

130

[]? ] [] [[? [4] [ ][

^[ 170 [ ] [] )([ []?


[]
[]

] [] [][] ? []? [? []
[? ?] [ [ ?
eyu
/xe

^? [ ? [ [?

[] [ []
ei

[]

0[

175 [(*>] ^[]

3 lines lost

[ ?

'35 {trai^
[

3
140

145

? [ ] [ [9 [ [][]9 [] [] [^] [ ^^] [ [ ] [ ][ [ ] [ [ [ [ ][ [ \ ] [ [ ]


Kvpiou

]]
[
[

656.
eyo)

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

[ [ []
ov[ov9

^[

[ ] [] [ ]9

[ ] 6[ [ ]
[

33

]
7[

eX[oy

ey^v^TO v

[?]

][]

[] )([]

185

[ [

['/]
[]
[]

] [

ev] ois [e

2 lines lost

190

[]

[]9

[] [
id)

[[^
Verso

^ [
]
[/

Recto xxvii. 32-3

xxvii. 40-1.

195

\]

] [
.
4.

][
bos]

][
][
[5e
is

]^[
200

]
first

][
elinev

supplement rather long.

[
The

somewhat short
t

for the

lacuna, but to add

rrpos

would make the

deletion of

SO most cursives; altered from some other letter. SO A; \. 16. blank space, sufficient for four 17.
13.

and

, (\
A
and
25.
27.

[]:
in this
:

may be due

to either the

AD.

The

AD. or second hand ; e of c^d) seems to have been

t(v

.
letters,

was

left

by

the original scribe between

was

so a

number
is

inserted by the second hand; cf. 11. 122, 155, of cursives, including the ' Lucianic group ;
'

and 166.

ADE.

which

read after

by

ADE

seems to have been omitted by the

34

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


it.

is

papyrus, the line being quite long enough without omitted in I).
28.

On
;

the other hand


in

has been altered from a. of 36. sk rov . SO AD; 378. i/c 39-43 The position of the small fragment at the ends of these lines is made practically certain by the recto (cf note on 1. 81); but the scanty vestiges in 1. 42 do Moreover above not suit particularly well and the reading adopted is very problematical. and ; is a curved mark Avhich does not suggest any the line between the supposed vearepa, but there One cursive (108) has likely letter and remains unexplained. is no ground for attributing this to the papyrus. The papyrus reading is found in the cursives (][: om. 42.
.
.

32.

(8

the

same
\

spelling for

8(

recurs in

1.

43

both places.
veaTepav

tt;

Codex Caesareus and several cursives; has been added at the end of the line by the second hand.
vi^repa

SO the

( .

[]:

56 (margin), 74, 106, 130, 134, 135.


43.
:

[ (

cf.

1.

28, note.

47.

There would be room

478.

[6]

lacuna for the usual

:
:

was certainly omitted by the papyrus by 48. Xeyova-a which is read after (so Jerome), the passage being thus quite parallel with the explanation of the name
in the following verse.

,
at
1.

.
still
'

for

two or three more

fKokfaev

..
.
;

letters in this line.

There

is

not sufficient

room

in the

less for

ADE

.
a

53. vios y[efoui 55

SO the 'Lucianic

??
\fv'^ev

new

chapter

commencing
be
: :

'

cursives

vios

A,

vios

. D,
was
left

ADE.

The

rest of the line

blank,

56.

56. 57. 62.


taTiv the
TTore

and E. but on is omitted, as in the papyrus, by has eOTfif {on) papyrus omits the second half of the verse
at

SO before

AD

,
;

\.
AZ)E.

avbpis

(
1.

After
(first

(ADE), aS do the

CUrsiveS

hand), 82, 106, 107, 135. 64. A/iet/3eXex or A/xtjSeXex

,
ADE.
67.

is

the regular spelling of the

name

in this text.

There is evidently not room in the lacuna for A's reading is more probable (so DE and many and the omission of
inserts

einev

cursives) than that

of

(om. E).

74.
79.

80. 8r.

[1 fa[y]V
:

on before
:

points out,

may have been merely repeated supported by the Hebrew and may well letters on this fragment (11. 80-5) suit so exactly that that it is rightly placed here, although there is also
it is

^{)
:

((
SO

A;

8(\ here and . A, .

in

75.

here from 1. 79, but, as Mr. McLean The other be a genuine reading. there can be no reasonable doubt a slight difficulty with regard to

the verso.
86.

, ]
93. 104.

the reading of the

]8(:
[:

so A ; so a number of cursives; so A ; bt E.

(.

first

hand,

is

that of

AE.
AE.

^
656.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

105. The reading of the interlinear insertion is very uncertain, but the alteration apparently concerns the termination of the verb, and it seems more probable that was corrected to than vice versa, AE; occurs the cursive 72; cf 1. 165, note. The reading of A here is exactly parallel to that of the papyrus, 109. after havmg been originally omitted and supplied by an early corrector. fc^DE are

^^
to

35

deficient.

112. 113. 114. 122.

Tijs

m)ys:
A. A, iv Tais has been added
idev

.
at the

The

genitive

seems

next verse.

have come in from the

SO ^Z>; A. SO i*iD ; A. 129. The papyrus agrees with in omitting viylraadai which t^D add after 135-6. The reading of the papyrus here cannot be determined; t^A have 8e [<ct Kvpios 8e OV makes the end of 1. 1 35 a little long, but a blank space may have been originally left for Kvpios as in 11. 122 and 126 or Se may have been omitted. 138-9. The papyrus here omits several words and its exact reading is not quite clear.
123. 126.

[ ^ []:
/:
:

TTfpi

a number of the cursives. end of the line by the second hand: ks Afr^D.

7|[;:

(^^

8.

\(, D
has

]6/.

(\( \8(

transposes and and inserts before It is just possible that the papyrus agreed with in reading but Tr[ai8as can evidently not be got into 1. 139, and more probably both and were Omitted and was written with each substantive. The words originally missing were probably supplied by the second hand at the bottom of the page, for opposite 1. 139 is the semicircular sign commonly used to mark an omission

:. ,

leaves out the

after

:,

apyvpiav

ovovs,

cf. e.g.

16.

iii.

3.

141-2.
as in

D.
143.

144. The length of the lacuna indicates that the text agreed with and the second corrector of i^ in adding before the simple of l^A. 152. After b^AD add The papyrus here supports the 'Lucianic' cursives 19 and 108.

It is

quite possible that the lines were divided

and

that eva

was omitted

OV

(^D).

154.
[yjvvij

^'.
:

(.

SO a

number of

cursives;

A,

^D.

155. Om. \^. 156. tvavTiov: SO and the second corrector of ti; : SO i^D ; A. 160. 17: MSS. 162. soi^D; CK A. 163. AZ>.

(:

Ai^D,

AD

of the cursives; AD. omitted by D, 165. SO the cursive 72 (cf. note on 1. 105); V^AD. 166. (so AZ>) is again due to the second hand; cf. 1. 17, note. 168. 7 {]: there is not room in the lacuna for more than two letters, so {^AD) is inadmissible. 3 is found also in the cursives 75 and 106.

164.

( [] .
[(

(^
;

^.

SO

.
order in

is

this is the

many

before

[]

36

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


169.

( (which ! [^
170. 171. 172.
is
[at S]e:

\\'.
'.

\^kD;
SO
;

there

is

an erasure before

in A,

and apparently

also occurs in several cursives)

(([

SO

D
:

i^D km ai
j

i^A.

SO

AD;

(^.

was the

original reading.

The papyrus seems

to

have had

which

found in some of the cursives;

vbpevaaaOai,

the better supported reading,

is

too long.

was added by

174. [fa]v: the papyrus follows the vulgar spelling. the second hand.

cy was originally omitted, and

is also the spelling of ^i. 175-6. The reading printed is that of A, which on the whole seems to suit the space may have been written at the end of 1. 175, and the variant of t^ me or best but me is quite possible. of 178. ^epanovTi {^) seems more likely than e[ao depanovTi {KD), for though the may equally well be e the line is already rather long and the lacuna in 1. 179 is supposed
;

sufficiently filled with


181.

ev

',
:

[
;

\.
D. D.
hiavoia

t^ A,

183.

[Staj/ota]
:

so t^
:

).
eas

ev[eus]

SO ^^A

of is not quite certain and still less the a of ]a[e, the 185. Though the papyrus clearly agreed with AJD in omitting which is read after by t^. 188. A here has em emev, while Omit The papyrus reading was still shorter, since not more than about 1 5 letters should stand in the lacuna, and there can be little doubt that was left out, as in some of the cursives.

^D

189. ne[ie 1. me. 192. This line may have been the last of the column, but the recto has one line more.
:

657.

Epistle to the Hebrews.


Height 26-3 cm.

This considerable fragment of the Epistle to the Hebrews is written on the back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy (668). The text is in broad columns, of which eleven are represented, corresponding to Ch. ii. 14-v. 5, X. 8-xi. 13, and xi. 28-xii. 17, or about one-third of the whole. The columns are numbered at the top, those preserved being according to this numeration it is thus evident that the Epistle to the Hebrews was 47~5) ^3-5, ^7~9 preceded in this MS. by something else, probably some other part of the New Testament. The hand is a sloping uncial of the oval type, but somewhat coarse and irregular, and apparently in the transitional stage between the Roman and Byzantine variety. It is very similar in appearance to the hand of 404, a fragment of the Shepherd of Hermes, of which a facsimile is given in
')

657.
P.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

37

and we should attribute it to the first half of the fourth may well go back to the first quarter. As stated in the introd. to 668, the papyri with which this was found were predominantly of the third century, and it is not likely to have been separated from them by any wide interval. The fact that the strips of cursive documents which were used to patch and strengthen the papyrus before the verso was used are of the third and not the fourth century points to the same conclusion. There is no sign anywhere of a second hand, and such corrections as occur are due to the original scribe, who is responsible for occasional lection signs and the punctuation by means of a double point inserted somewhat freely and not always accurately (cf. e.g. 1. 19); a single point is occasionally substituted. This system of punctuation is remarkable, for it seems to correspond to an earlier division into longer than those in extant MSS. and frequently coinciding with the arrangement in the edition of Blass (Halle^ 1903). The contractions
Ill, Plate iv
it
;

Oxy.

century, while

usual in theological
is
t

MSS. are found, IC being written for Orthography not a strong point, instances of the confusion common at this period between and et, e and at, and ot, being especially frequent but apart from minor
;

inaccuracies the text


is

is

a good and interesting one.

Its

chief characteristic

a tendency in Chs. ii-v to agree with B, the Codex Vaticanus, in the omission of unessential words or phrases cf. notes on 11. 15, 24, and 60. This gives the papyrus a peculiar value in the later chapters, where is deficient for here too
; ;

similar omissions are not infrequent

(cf.

notes on

11.

118, 135, 151, 153, 161, 234),

and it is highly probable that they were also found in B, particularly when, as is sometimes the case, D (the Claromontanus, of the sixth century) is on the same side. Of the other MSS. the papyrus is nearest to D (cf. notes on 11. 60, 135, 145, 152, 154, 178, 333, 334-6), but the two sometimes part company (cf. notes on 11. 139, 163, 180); only in one doubtful case (note on 1. 168) does it
support
against the consensus of the other

MSS.
to,

Variants peculiar to the


are noted at
11.

papyrus, apart from the omissions already referred


io6, 115, 156, 163, 337, 339.

33, $y,

We

give a collation with the Textus Receptus

and the text of Westcott and Hort, adding particulars concerning the readings
of the principal authorities.

[ ]/
[roi/y

[] ]
}/]
:

Col.

i.

KpuTOS

14

{^5

[] ]
[ ? [6 ? ]9 ?
:

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

[7] aWa <9

[?
[9

TTKTTos

\6ev

15

? [ ]? ? [ ] ?? [ [] ? ? ()? ^ []? '


:

9 ?
?

em

?
:

ev

yap

)(]

apxiepea

\]?

[ ^?
[?

] [ [
[
[?

?]??
]?
:

?
:

?
fv

e^ei

[]
:

[ ? ]?

25

^ []
[]
[]

]
[?]
:

? ? ??
:

{)
.

[
[?

Col.

?]? ^^]

[]['

[ [
[
:

?
[

35

] [][]? [] (^^\

[ ?

[[
[

657.
[pa\v

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

39

] 4 [] [ ^
[]6[
TIS

[]
Seias

[]

45

^^[/9

[]
:

9 ? ^^ ? [
[]
:

[]
[]9
:

eavnep

ev

TeXovs

?[
ti[vS

[[ [
[
t[ois

ev

7[9

c|]

[\

Be

50

[]
[]

[]iy

55

[]? ? [[ ^ [ []
:

[] []
:

^
et

? [
cv
e[i9

[
7[

tis

Col.

60

65

[^ ] ? ? [ ]] [ [] [] [] [] [ [] [\] [] [
: :

iii.

iv.

iy

ev

[v

[ ]] (^^ [
[

[] []

7[^]

40

70 [ev

[] []
[i

\?
75

[ ]? ]
eXajXi

\ \\ ? [ ? ^
]8 < (
:

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


eav

]? ?

[] [? \]\<]

80

[ [ [

\ ? ] [
]?

[
Col.

? ? [/ ^? \] []?
7r[e/)i
:

yjpovov [<a]^[<]y

aTr[oXc

[ettr

ai{rou]

\]?

^ ? [\? ^ ? [][]?
v
:
:

[\ ^
:

[][]

?
a^^pu
85

go

? [ [ ? ? ? [? [
: :

? [ )^?^^ [?
[6\?
)(^[?
ap\iepa

[
.
v

pea

95

? ^^ [ [\? [? [? ?
?
[]
eXeoy

[?

?? ? ^ ^
?

100

? ? [ [] [ ? ^? [? ? [ ^? ? [ ?

[]

[][ ]? [

05

9 ^ [9 [ ^ ^ [ [ [6 ^ ^ ^
nep[LKCiTai aaOev^iav
St

657.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
nepL

41

tis

VOS

Xy

[ [
[?
[?
115

9
^
.

8
:

13 columns
Col. V.

lost.

? ^ [ [ ? [?] [] ?
ev

] [[][ [ ] ] ] [] [ [ ? ^ ]? [] ?
:

avaipei

[] [
[
[?

120

[
125

[ []?
[
[?
['^**

[ ]
7
'"^'^

[
130

]^ [ ]? ? ?? ] ??? ^ [] ] []
v

]]^? ]
:

aiTive?

? [ [?
ei?

()([?

rereXeico/cei/

{\[
[
[?

]
]?

Aeyei

? [?

[[]]

[]

[?[? []
ev

[]
[]
[]

^? ^ ?? ^^
?

lepea

//era

42

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

[ [^ []
[]
135

? [? ? [

40

[? [
7][?
:

[ ?
?
v

? ^
Col. vi
v

[?

(?

?
Col.

?
?

?
?

29

[]
145

[] []? [] ( ? [] [] []?
:
: :

[]

[]?
50

[] [] ?
[]
:

[]

[]
155

[]? []?
[?]

\^ ? ^ ^? []\] ?
:

? ? . ?? ^^ ?
^

? [] ?
iS
:

^'^

[]

[]

? []((
[]?

[]

? {\?

^ ^ []
:

[]

&J

ev

(V

?
:

^[[eJji'O/iei'Cui/

657.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
em 019

43
8[c

[]
i'Seiv

Kaeiv

165

-^ [ [ ^
[
:

St

eivai

/irT^[t/]

I'jo

[[ ^ [
5e

[ [
[

^^

ev

Col.

viii.

.^

\[
^^

[]

175

[ [^
[
:

'

[^( ^ [6[
:

[ ^ ^^ ^ ^ [ ^ [
cyevcTO

[\

')([

85

[ [(
[

[e]7rayyeXta[s

[]'

[] [

^
column

^ (
lost.

44

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

190

195

200

[ 9 ] ^ ^^ [ ] ?? ^] ^ ] [] ? ^?
Col. ix.

]/ 8 ]9 ? ?
;

iC

. a8

[jTTLOt

CTTi

]?

;
:

'^[s']

[? \?
[
[ay

[^^

Tots

tovs

/xer

205

[^ [ [ [? [^

[ [? ? ?? [] ? [ ? 6]? ? ? ?

? ?? ] ?? [ [ [
:

^'^

] ? ] [] ? ]
:

? ^^
.]

^'
[:]

-^

[:]

e/x

e/cXet

[.

e^

eTepoi

][]
?]

] ][]
ev

ei/

ev

[
[

215

[ ' ]

]?

6]6[]/

]?

\?
Col.

^?

^[]

.
:

]? {] [ (] [

[(]

220

pas

[^ )
657.
Se^ia

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

[]

2 25

'^owy

VOL

[]
[]
:

? .
9
09
is

45

^
ev

[]

230

[]
:
:

[] ] [^[ ]

[ [
:

235

^^
:

240

[
{)

[ [
245

Col. xi.

[ [

250

[ [ [

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


T

[
[
:

/xereTretra

^
AC,

(
have come

14in

{):

15. v 16.

from verse

:
ai>
:

so t^ABCD, &C., ev SO ;

W-H.;
t^ACDE,
&c.,

T-R.,

EKL, &C., T-R. W-H. may


T-R.
of

5.

ovTos
:

19. nauTu 23. 24.

so KLM, &c., T-R. ; ovtos so ^5ABCDKIVI, &c., W-H.;


:

t^ABCDE,

EL,

&c.,

so

t^BDE,

&c.,

W-H.;
SO

tavnep

apparently from

.
:

;
;

W-H.
in here

The

phrase
1.

.(
the
strip

&c.,

T-R.

TeXovs

TeXous

recurs in verse 14 and

[ .
&c.,

W-H.
has been altered
&C., T-R.,

i^ACDE,

may have come

from that passage.


:

31
32.
v

has been altered from


]\ISS.

36-40. The position of the narrow


uncertain, but
it

suits very well here.

The

placed near the beginning of these lines is recto being blank does not help to decide the

question.
37. 38.

another otherwise unattested reading: MSS. Other MSS., T-R., W-H. Tis BDE, &C. 1. SO t^AC, &C., T-R., W-H. 39. Tis ] 42. A double point may be lost after 51. MSS. The form occurs e.g. in Matt. xvii. 16 (B), Mark vii. 24 (NB). The first e of etfff[Xl^et' is written over a double point. SO ABCD, &C., W-H. in text ; 58. t^, W-H. mg.,
is

[\( []:

:
so

.
all

(.
is

T-R.
59. yap 60.
:

SO

BDE,

&c.

ow

i>5AC.

and

is

was certainly omitted before read by W-H. and T-R.

6^.
64.

]
W-H.
;

as in

BD

found

in other

MSS.

yap

T-R.,
yap.
is

W-H.

with

MSS. except

io9lat.

which agrees with the

papyrus in omitting

a mistake for Ka^^re\avafv. and some cursives; ei eiafXfvaovrai other MSS., T-R., W-H. SO 70-1 vestiges of [''['^ are very slight, but are a sufficient indication that the papyrus read with i^ACDE, &c., W-H., rather than (correctors of DE, KL, T-R.), since the division does not account for the traces of ink at the end of 1. 70.
66.

[](5

(([] The
(,:
is

80.
81.

85.

almost certain that the papyrus read since without this word the line stands alone in omitting it. (om. and an early corrector of 99. The line is sufiiciently long without re after D), and in view of the tendency of the papyrus the omission is probable. 106. ... the I\ISS. here have (t^ABD) or (om. cat CD) ..., but there is evidently not room for all this in the papyrus. The only
96. It

^
of

( (
:

was converted from

r.

SO

t^ACDE,

is

for

^.
:

&C.,

T-R.,

vapy

B.

/,

would be unaccountably short

,,

( ^

657.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS

other authority for any omission here is K, which leaves out To omit without these words the Hne would remain rather too long. suits the space better and does not damage the sense. (DE) for 112. The papyrus may of course have read

(AC)

for tepeuf

(t^DEKL).
:

] ^ ] ]!
or
v.

47
but even

and

apxiepevs

115. 116.
V also

a/iaprtac

MSS.
be
v,

The second

seems

118.

preceding
124

(: 8.
The
:

to have

(
is

v, if it

in npoaevevKas

was converted from


in

The
slip

previous

been

altered.

MSS.

The

Superfluous

8[
may

was a

due to the

scribe apparently

began
its

to write avrovs before


partial effacement

meant to be deleted
125. 127. 139.

\'.
D.
Se(r[pot]s:

not certain and


'.

1256.

44

^
: :

D \^(^
SO

and some cursives;


1.

^^
SO

MSS.
:

[^.
;

but that the be accidental. T-R., W-H., with other


a.

(-^^,

was

MSS.

The second

has been altered from


J

AD, W-H.

be sure that the papyrus did not have and is much in favour of
147. avrovy: so ^5A,

8 . ,
SO T-R.,

W-H., with mOSt MSS.

ik,

t^EHKL,

&c.,

T-R.
is

We

cannot of course

but the absence of


&c., fV

the important thing

W-H.

DE,

SO $^A,

ev SO l^AD, W-H. ; &C., T-R. 151. There is an apparently accidental diagonal dash passing from the top of the through the t. supposed
er[t]

W-H.

DE,

&C.,

T-R. With a few minuscules. T-R.

fTi

MSS.
W-H.;
AE,
&c.,

152. xpoviaei: SO ^iD,

152-3.

t^A

after

153. 54 156. 157.

. (
MW
is
:

T-R.
&c., in omitting

The papyrus
'.

certainly agreed with

DE,

[] [^
:

[] W-H., D. so DE; .
(1.

which

is

found in

7[])
;

usually connected with


TO

159-60.
161.

tv SO two cursives (47, 115) SO i^ADE, W-H.;

[]((
'.

.
.
D;

T-R.

T-R., W-H., with other


is

MSS.
all

the reverse Order to that of

the

MSS.;

Other MSS., T-H,,

W-H.
T-R.

162.

[):

i^AD,

^k, W-H., T-R. ; DE, &C. t^ADE, W-H. SO KL, &C., T-R.; 164. AKL, W-H., T-R. l[ SO ^^DE ; 165. written this line was somewhat longer than those preceding. 168. {(): so t^; the papyrus may of course have had ^() like T-R., W-H.), but in view of its tendency to shortness this is less probable. Only; Other MSS., T-R., W-H. SO 169. the USUal reading ; i^. 175,
163. l^aXei: SO
:

(: {[]
is
|

7(( ^
:

KL,
was

&C.,

MSS.
Originally written but

was

altered to

EK.L, &C., T-R.,

\\

W-H.

.
ADE,
&c. (so

fpefva was correctly

[: \^ .
appa

other

178.
1

also the spelling of


is

80-1.
or

for
is

which

other MSS., T-R., W-H. The papyrus agreed with found after or (or after

MSS.

',

&c., in omitting
in

fXajSev)

and

48
182. It 185. 186.
is

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


practically certain that the

and other MSS.

(DE,

&c.,

187.

papyrus did not read after with omitted in h?AD, W-H. SO all the best MSS. T-R. with a few minuscules. Considerations of space make {^, &c., W-H.) preferable to T-R.). The papyrus evidently omitted neiaeevres which is found in some minuscules
(so T-R.).
It is

EKL

and read
as P.

in the

T-R.
is

188. This line

192.

193. 194. 196. yap 197.


the
is

;
and

\/:
:

rather long, and the papyrus

may have had


&c.,

for

SO

b^ADE, W-H.

SO t^AD, en SO

W-H
&C.,

6 EKL, T-R.
t^AD,

Om.

y KL,

,
is

T-R.

^.

The papyrus
as far as

, , ]5:
201.
:

names

attested as a variant

inconsistent

203. (t^AD) or 208. t^D, &c.,

8 8 [
.
The of (T-R.) Other MSS. SO i^AD, W-H.;
by D.
;

EKL,

T-R.;

W-H.

agrees with t^A (so

\.\

W-H.) in the omission of conjunctions between . T-R. with other MSS. The spelling was originally omitted i^D, W-H.,
;

Other MSS.,

T-R.

But the papyrus

and has in 1. 208. i^AD, W-H.


size of the
i.e.

EKL,

&C.,

T-R.

The

: . : :
W-H.
cf.
1.

[],
SO
:

lacuna

is

inconclusive as to whether the papyrus read


&C., T-R.,

][]

(EKL,
:

W-H.).
order of

this is also the

AE,

&C.,

and T-R.

..

[]

20I, note.
t^

211.
2
1

A, W-H.;

DE,

&c.,

T-R.

6.

222.

MSS. and by T-R., W-H.


225. 226.
SO a corrector of t^; ; SO

::
227. 229. 231. 232. 233-4.

223. 224.

[]: The
SO

: ^
:

SO D; om. SO the uncials, papyrus agrees with

Other MSS., T-R.,

W-H.
is

W-H.;

T-R. with some minuscules.


Avhich

in omitting

read before

in other

t^DE, W-H.,
other MSS., T-R.,

A,

KL, T-R.

W-H.

D;
:

Other MSS., T-R.,

W-H.

MSS.
et

"

?; MSS.
T-R. with a few minuscules. DE, &C., T-R. is also the Order of t^AD, W-H. . . VI. KL, &c., T-R. 8 is also attested as a variant by D and was added by the third t^AD, W-H., KL, &c., T-R.
a graphical error for

:
e

SO most MSS., W-H.; SO biA, W-H.;

235. corrector of t^;

8:

239.

is

T-R

i^,

&C.,

W-H.

is

the reading of

AKL,

&c.,

241.

The

of

from or ot, which perhaps have been a mere slip.

reflects the variant 81

has apparently been corrected and the of was altered recorded in ; but it may well

658.

THEOLOGICAL FRAGMENTS
Certificate of Pagan Sacrifice.
15-5

49

658.

7 <:m.

An
A. D.

interesting survival of the Decian persecution of the


is

Christians

in

an example of the libelli or declarations which suspects were compelled to make that they had sacrificed to the pagan gods. Two only of these libelli have hitherto been published, one at Berlin (B. G. U. 387 Krebs, Sitzungsb. Bert. Akad. 1893 Harnack, Theol Literaturz. 1894, p. 38), the other at Vienna (Wessely, Sitzungsb. Wien. Akad. 1894; Harnack, Theol. Literaturz. 1894, p. 163). Both of those documents were from the Fayum ; the present specimen, though from another nome, has the same characteristic phrases, which were evidently a stereotyped formula, and confirms in all respects the emendations and deductions proposed by Harnack in connexion with the Berlin papyrus. Like them also it is addressed to a commission which was specially appointed to conduct the inquisition against
is
:

350

preserved in this papyrus, which

the Christians.
hfi

Trap

98[
7[0)$

Upcov

A[

15

9 [8][(

iepcov

.
{9)

Tfj

Tfj[9

del

,
[] .
[

\\^
e]Tt

[][
\1
in
1.

[^]
[

[9 ]\
)

.
the
line.

Pap.; so

12.

12.

19. ydiov Pap.

20.

Pap. Pap.

16.

Pap.

of

vTTo

above

* To the superintendents of offerings and sacrifices at the city from Aurelius . thion son of Theodorus and Pantonymis, of the said city. It has ever been my custom to make sacrifices and libations to the gods, and now also I have in your presence in accordance with the command poured libations and sacrificed and tasted the offerings together with my son Aurelius Dioscorus and my daughter Aurelia Lais. I therefore
. .

50
request you to certify

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


my
statement.

The

ist

year of the Emperor Caesar Gaius Messius


20.'

Quintus Trajanus Decius Pius Felix Augustus, Pauni


1-2.
ifpcov.

The

Berlin and Vienna

libelli

are addressed

eVi

],

omitting

is written in the original rather below the line and there are traces of ink SO there seems to have been some correction. women were clearly included in the Decian Edict ; cf. the Vienna 13-4. rfi libellus, which is from two men with their wives, and the 5th Edict of Maximin (Euseb. de Mart, Pol. ix. 2), quoted by Harnack, avSpas yvvai^l

6. del
aei,

over

8(\

avTois

anevdeiu,

..,
only part of a long paragraphus below

signature begins at this line, though whether it is that of the sender of the 23declaration or of an official is doubtful. The stroke above the supposed which we have

taken to represent an abbreviation


the date.

may be

II.

NEW
659.

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
Pindar, IlapeiveLov and Ode.
12-8

X 49

cm.

Plates

III,

IV.

Fragments of a

roll

containing parts of at least five columns of lyric poetry

in Pindaric dialect, written in good-sized


latter half of the first

round

uncials,

which we assign to the

century B.C.

Occasional accents, breathings, and stops

(high and middle point) have been added

by the

original scribe,

who has

also

made

a few corrections of his work

perfect condition,

the text, however, was not left in a very and several alterations are necessary on metrical and other
;

grounds.
Col.

The

first

three columns, but for the loss of a few lines at the beginning
;

of each, are in good condition


V,

the fourth becomes more fragmentary, while which probably succeeded immediately and to which the majority of the small unplaced pieces appear to belong, is hopelessly broken. The position of these is to some extent fixed by the fact that the verso of Cols, i-iii was utilized for a collection of epigrams (662) for since the verso of most of the scraps is blank, they must be placed later than the upper half of the third column.
;

Although the Pindaric authorship of these new poems is not definitely by the coincidence of any part of them with already extant fragments, their style and diction leave little room for doubt as to the identity of the poet. It is therefore a piece of great good fortune that the second at
established

659.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

51

any

rate of the two odes comprised by the papyrus (11. 31 sqq.) belongs to a class hitherto practically unrepresented in what survives of Pindar's works.

This poem was composed in honour of Aeoladas (1. 29) the father of the Pagondas (1. 30) who commanded the Thebans at the battle of Delium (Thucyd. iv. 91-6), and his praises are put in the mouth of a maiden (II. 26,
46, &c.)

circumstance which at

first

led us to suppose that the writer

a woman.
choruses for

But
is

Blass, to

whom we

are especially indebted in connexion with

this papyrus,

clearly right in regarding the piece as one of the

girls,

which

figure in the lists of Pindar's works,

in a few meagre quotations (among which is 6- 1 a). Can the poem be characterized still more closely?

the

4
It
is

there stood a series


laurel.

singers

bore branches of

known as The catalogue

by Suidas distinguishes the Ila/a^eVeia from the in the Codex Ambrosianus, which is usually recognized
does not mention the latter
cf.
TTLTTTei.

, ,
poem
; ;

and are exemplified perhaps to be reckoned 221. vii.


In near relation to
so called because the

,
list

was
or

of Pindar's works as given

while the
in the

given

as the superior authority,


it
;

class,

Proclus, Chrest. ap. Phot., Bibl. 239 Y\apQ.

and apparently includes oU

ciy

yivos

37-8, y^), in one of which the speaker actually describes herself as carrying a laurel branch, may possess a special significance. On the other hand there is here no sign of the religious character which seems to have
allusions to
(11.

bv

then quite possible that in the present

the rather prominent

(cf. Proclus, ibid.) Pindar is indeed said in the Vita Amhrosiana to have dedicated one of these poems to his son Daiphantus, but the circumstances are unknown. For the present, therefore, it is sufficient

belonged to the

to call attention to these references, and to assign the ode provisionally to the

1
but, as is

more comprehensive
mentioned

class of the XiapQkvua, or possibly to the

obscurity of the latter category might have the advantage of covering the other poem partially preserved in the papyrus, which was also in honour of Aeoladas (1. 12),
list

in the

Ambrosian

and elsewhere.

The

shown by the occurrence of a masculine participle (1. 11), was not designed for a female chorus. No doubt if both pieces were the difference of sex would cause no difficulty but in the absence of further
allusions to such an assumption has little to commend it. Perhaps this ode was an or simply Epinician in character, and the juxtaposition of the two pieces was merely due to their identity of subject. The metre of the IlapOivuov is distinguished, like its language, by an ease and simplicity which fully bear out the reputation of this class of Pindar's

bv

odes;

cf. Dionys. Halicarn. Demosth. 39, where after citing the poetry of Aeschylus and Pindar as an example of want of connexion, abruptness, and

52

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


critic

unexpected changes of construction, the


L

TLva TovTOLs

euyeVeia

^' .? 6
proceeds

YlapOiveia
tovtols

bLaava

hi

ns

Strophes and epodes

consist

alike
is

of

five
:

verses having

prevailing

choriambic element.

The

scheme

as follows

StropJies.

Epodes.

___^^_V^
^ ^ ^ v^v^ v^ _^v^
y_^

ji:^

V^

\J \J\^ \J v^^^ <u <u \J \J ^


I

Lines

and 3

in the strophe, i, (2)


;

and 4

in the

epode stand
syncope

in

synaphia with

the lines succeeding


is

and

a single long syllable before or after a choriambus

probably to be regarded as lengthened by

additional short syllable, e.g.

L-\J\.^-J,or-^-\J\J '^-, The commencement of each new strophe is marked in the original by an elaborate coronis, and the antistrophes and epodes are commonly denoted in The the same way by paragraphi, which are, however, sometimes omitted. metrical scheme shows that the number of lines missing at the tops of Cols,
^
<j
ill

'

'

to the extent of an

and
loss

iv

must be

either 8 or 2^

larger

figure

is

out of the question.

of 8 lines would give a

roll

of the likely enough height of about

Each column 30 cm., and is a satisfactory supposition in other respects. lines, and a lacuna of about 8 or 9 would accordingly consist of from 28-29 lines may therefore be postulated at the beginning of the first two columns. On this view the remains of the second poem extend to the second verse of the numeration the eighth strophe, or the 107th line from the commencement given in the text below refers only to the lines actually preserved in the papyrus. The length of the strophe of the first poem (Col. i and the lost portion of Col. ii) is also five verses the epode was longer, how much longer depends upon the number of lines lost at the top of Col. ii. If it be assumed that no
;
;

space was

left between the end of this ode and the commencement of the next, analogy of the Bacchylides papyrus and 408 would indicate, the epode as the extended to the rather unexpected length of 14 verses if on the other hand the division was marked by a blank space, this number would be lowered by different figure would of course result from the adoption two or three lines.
;

of the hypothesis that the loss in Cols, iii-iv

amounts to 23
to a

verses,

which would

bring

down

the epode of the previous

poem

maximum

of 9 lines.

659.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
:

53

We

append the scheme of the metre


Strophes.

Epodes.

KJ \J ^J \J \J ~ \j ^ \j \j \^
\j \j

v-

v-i

V-

\U \J KJ \J \j vy \J \J ^ \J \J \J v^ \U
'

v-(

\J KJ

- ^ - ^
synaphia.

(=

1.

5)

Lines 4-5 in the strophe and 1-3 and 4-5 in the epode are connected by

Col.

i.

21 letters

(p[.]
]

]0C[.
[.

.]0eiAICP

J,

![.]
lePAnOAOC TIMAI

]|

15

>

. ]

APeTAC

"
[.]

?
\

ep-

? 6[]
^
inl

UpanoKos'

aperds, 6

15

'

^^ ^ . ,
kn
yivcL

\ '

' .
.

.
-

8\

.
7.

'

KVOS

},
[]

6-

2 6,

-\[
oikos

'54
Col.
ii.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

A
25

30

35 vL
-8-

.
[

]xpYCorr[
I

\j

\j

)(^[\ ^ _ ^

_
kj

[.

.][.

.]/\eCHCT[.
.]IAC

.]

[_
e]t

[.][.][.]
25

[.

.][.

[][]0)[/]
C

CAMe

.
kv

;?
re

yj

[Ao^jias

.
kir.

|[]

8a<pvas oyioLaa

6
\

nvoas
re

35
09

9,

40

[.
Col.
[
[

9, -9 4 [\ ^^

.'

Bopeas

iii.

[.

[.][
. .

.][.][

][.][

][

061/
(^

^ ^

45

45 Zei)9

[] []9 \

^
[]

^^ ^ . ^ ^
^ )^

.
.

y'

re

^.

(fypoveiu

ey-

659.

[.]
5o

MAPTYCHAYOONeCXOPON
ecAoicieroNeYciN

55

vL

AICNAIONeCCINOrXH[
.

[.

TAUAAAITANYN
[

'
Col.

.
NEW
.]

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
-

'

{)
h

/i[e]

XaOeiu aoiSav

.
55
7.

\opov

kaXoTs re yovevaiv

55 "

AC

]A

6o

[
iv.

6
]

9, 5 [ ]9 ^
^
\-\
ais V
8e

^,

re

^KJ

<-'

6s

.][ " ![
[.

|[

vL

[. .] 7 ;\[.] ...[..
[.]
.

[. | [.]!
.

65

.jNMePJMNAC

'

\\ [.
\J KJ \j

re

evfJKv

e7reir[a

eVe[/ce]i'

epiv

[.]
75

.] [.]

* [ [
[.
.]ACA[
.]
.
.

^ -[]
^ ^

9 6]9 .
[] '^

[]rs' (?)
70

077[]'.

0[.]|[.]
]
.]

75

[.
]

[.

,
a
ft
-

' [\ ^^ ^\\ ^
[,]

.
.

[]

[
U
<J . .

^
ts

]ic

^ ^

[ 8[
56

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


]

^[
80

[.
OIXeCXON

JNACGMAC

\
e

86

.
awb Kpajvas

5'

^^_ ^- ^ -

nap

.}>

Col.

.
J
.

85

659.
{k)

NEW
{I)

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
(m)
{n)
(0)

57

l[

][
.
'

125 [.]OIA[
.

[ [
.
.

] ]

]OMAj
]"

CHPA[

]ANAH[ ]NA [
.

...
w

...
]

I30 T[.]

(p)

]
.

[
.

]KP

] ]
.

MNNAC

I3S]M0[
. .

4][

][

1-4 At the top of this column considerable difficulties arise with regard to the place of the two fragments (a) and (3), which appear in this position in Plate III. Fr. {) especially looks as if it should be put here, for the tops of the letters TIC in the fifth line exactly suit But the letters on the verso cannot be made to fit in as they should with the last lines of the extant epigram of Antipater; cf. note on 662. 18-20. The two fragments cannot well be placed higher up, since the column on the verso appears to are therefore reduced to the alternatives either of supposing that the be complete. papyrus had new readings in the last three lines of the epigram or that the fragments come from a previous column ; they do not belong to a later column because the colour of the papyrus and the size of the letters on the verso is inconsistent with Col. ii, and the verso of the rest is blank at the top. Neither of these alternatives is satisfactory, but the latter is the safer. The question, however, is not of great importance, for the first few lines of the column would in any case hardly be capable of restoration without the assistance of the metre.

We

11. 5-20. ' I will fulfil like a prophet-priest. The honours of mortals are diverse, but every man has to bear envy of excellence, while the head of him who has nought is hidden in black silence. And in friendly mood would I pray to the children of Cronus that prosperity of unbroken duration be decreed for Aeoladas and his race ; the days of mortals are deathless, but the body dies. But he whose house is not reft of offspring .' and utterly overthrown, stricken by a violent fate, lives escaping sad distress ; for before
.
.
.

7.

4'.

12.

cf. Nem. vi. 3 At the end of this line

' be
is

TT

with a dot or small

^.
The
letters

between the two upright


is

strokes, like the abbreviation of noKvs or noXis.

surface of the papyrus

damaged

immediately

after the TT

and one or two more

may

have followed.

It is difficult

58

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

to see what can have been meant, for neither sense nor metre requires any word between and /cat'; cf. 1. 6 1, note. 13. The di pie-shaped marginal sign which appears in the facsimile opposite this line
1. 17; the small fragment containing it was wrongly placed when the photograph was taken. For another case of the use of an Aristarchean symbol in a non-Homeric papyrus cf. 442. 52. 14-5. The meaning is that, though the individual dies, the race is perpetuated. creating rather the 17, There are spots of superfluous ink about the letters was perhaps corrected. Another appearance of an interlinear insertion in a smaller hand in 1. 19. blot occurs above 21-4. A fresh ode begins at 1. 21, the change being marked in the margin by The name of the a symbol of which vestiges appear opposite this line and the next. person to whom the poem was dedicated and its occasion may have been added, The small fragment placed at the top of this column as in the Bacchylides papyrus. and containing parts of 11. 22-4 is suitable both with regard to the recto and the verso (cf. 662. 39-40, note), but its position can hardly be accepted as certain. None of the remaining fragments can be inserted here, their verso being blank. For [][]/?['], vvv re reXel a favourite word of Pindar, cf. e. g. Pyih. v. 1 1 7 Oebs 8e ol

really belongs to

11. 23-40. 'For Loxias ... of his favour pouring upon Thebes everlasting glory. But quickly girding up my robe and bearing in my soft hands a splendid laurel-branch I will celebrate the all-glorious dwelling of Aeoladas and his son Pagondas, my maidenly head bright with garlands, and to the tune of lotus pipe will imitate in song a siren sound of praise, such as hushes the sudden blasts of Zephyrus and, when chilling Boreas .' speeds on in stormy might, calms the ocean's swift rush
.
.

30. After

an
to a blot
.
,

may be merely due


33, afiprjva be

cf.

\0

Seip^j/as)

34

give so

.
(.
good a
of

bs

8f

, )
seems
note

to have
1.

been smeared
cf.

out, but the

appearance of

on

17.

...

ivrddev 'Yiaiohos

AAICKCON

is

The

apparently a mistake for ; initial could equally well be

'
:

Schol.

On Homer, Od.
rovs

. 1 6 8 OeKynv avras
nor does

(SC.

{
I

cf.

01.

iv.

2 ^pai

but hardly

N,

sense.

has been altered from N. zi. Pyth. iv. 8 1 which a scholiast explains noiovvras. eiTICTTePXHC is a mistake for eTTICnePXHI ; cf. for the word Od. e. 304 ' aeWai. transpose and on aCCOUnt ^v^ of the metre though this change does not effect an absolute correspondence, taking the place of \j\j ^. occurs in 0pp. Hal. 2. 535. of the for the 40. The sense seems to require the substitution of papyrus; cf. Fr. 133 (probably Pindar) of the Adespoia in Bergk, Poet. Lyr.
37.

( ,
38-9.
T

Bopeas

We

would be easy
11.

in such a context

The

cf.

the passage

displacement of ipaXa^ev by from Od. e quoted in the note on

^^
I

belongs to the next line. reading of this line is difficult. There is a stroke passing through the middle of were to and another above the K, and perhaps this letter or both and to be cancelled. The facsimile rather suggests that was first written in place of IK, but that is deceptive. The doubtful may be The dot which appears above the first is very likely the tip of a letter like from the line above. or

38-9.
42.

The

659.
*

NEW
;

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

59

Many are the deeds of old that might be adorned with verse, but the 43-61. knowledge of them is with Zeus and for me maidenly thoughts and choice of speech are meet. Yet for no man nor woman to whose offspring I am devoted must I forget a fitting song, and as a faithful witness have I come to the dance in honour of Agasicles and his noble parents, who for their public friendships were held in honour in time past, as now, by their neighbours, and for the renowned victories of swift-footed steeds, victories which decked their locks with crowns at the banks of famed Onchestus or by Itonia's glorious shrine and at Pisa
.

.'

44. Cf. Pindar, Nem. xi. 18 altered apparently from 0.

467.
49 50.

...

re

cf. e. g.
:

Agasicles was

Who this is necessary for the metre. to who obscure perhaps he was the nais according to the account of Proclus ap. Photius Biil. 239, or he may merely have been some member of the family of Aeoladas. The rather abrupt way in which his name is introduced and the context in which it occurs might suggest that a third poem commenced in Col. iii, a supposidon which would be strengthened if the loss at the tops of the columns were extended by another fifteen lines (cf. introd.). But the hypothesis of two consecutive odes in the same metre would require to be justified by stronger evidence than that cf. Pyfh. i. 88, and xii. 27 For supplied by the passage before us.
The
alteration of
is
;

01. vi.

(8
889

aoibais.

The A
.

of

TA was

the phrase recurs in

'

Nem.

ix. 7.

^opevTOLV

justified

TIMAGGNTAC the papyrus, and the accusative may possibly have been or by the sequel but as the passage stands seems an improvement, though the accumulation of datives is not elegant. In any case the For the language cf. Is^h. iii. division of the lines is wrong, as in 11. 40-1 and 66-7. Xeyovrai It is noticeable that the papyrUS 256 which was restored to the text of Pindar by Boeckh in has the spelling
53.
:

,
]
.

place of the
58.
,of

MSS.
is

reading

by no means the crossbar should be visible.

. ^.
certain.

The

letter

before

AC

is

possibly T, but

more

59. vaop is a necessary correction of the papyrus reading NAOT. and probably the fines were wrongly divided again 61. The metre is complete at unless indeed the same addition was made as at the end of 1. 12.

^-,

Then jealous wrath at so just an to [Thebes] of the seven gates. 64-76. ', ambition of these men provoked a bitter unrelenting strife, but making full amends was changed to friendship. Son of Damaena, come, lead on now with [propitious ?] foot gladly upon thy way she first shall follow thee stepping with her sandals nigh upon the perfected with counsel thick-leaved laurel, the daughter whom Daesistrota and
. .
.

64.

Another disturbance
as the
first

in the

metre has occurred in

this line,

which

with
like

word.

and eTTTATTYAOICQHBAIC, e.g. may have been written for and to suppose that the missing syllable But it is just possible to read at the beginning of the line was transposed to 1. 63. but the writing becomes smaller and of is rather cramped 65. The first more compressed in this column. in For 66. The transference of to this line is necessary meirt gratia.

e or

[,

The

vestiges before the lacuna suggest a

will

.
.'
. .

not scan
letter

round

6
Tfatai

the sense of ambition for distinction in the

8
P.

'lepwv

67. papyri.

opposite this line marks the 300th verse; cf. 448. 302 and other Homeric With an average column of 28-9 lines (cf. introd.) this would be the eleventh
roll.

.
letters

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


games
cf.

e.g. 01.

i.

109-11

debs imrponos

column of the

The
the
cf.

reading

A and
69.

epiu is fairly satisfactory,

though

to

hardly

fills

the space between

With
1.

7[]5 the

ICT must be supposed

have been very close together

note on

65.

a
this
is

There is no sign of the second leg of TT in TTA[.] and 70. Here again is a difficulty. would in some respects be more satisfactory, but on the other hand the space between letter and A is more consistent with a TT. The name has no authority, but
to

same relation to as Aeaiva to Aeau or addressed may be Aeoladas or Pagondas, but his identity is of course quite obscure. With regard to the mutilated adjective agreeing with immediately following the first lacuna is a vertical stroke (not very clear in the facsimile) with an angular base, which might be the second half of a or the lower half of a letter like in the latter case two letters might be lost in the lacuna. or The vertical stroke is not long enough for p, so The next letter could be an A or A, is excluded. but the traces on the papyrus are very indistinct, and there may have been a correction. If is right the succeeding word must begin with a short vowel, unless indeed is read as a disyllable has been conjectured in 01. ii. 84. iXevOepci is unsuitable
in itself unobjectionable, standing in the

.
;

The person

[]

\]

[]

might do.

and again deceptive, transforming the X into is and N, but letters between is not very satisfactory. is another name for which no authority can be cited, but it is quite 75. a possible form, being the Boeotian for Whether the reference is to a goddess or a woman is doubtful. A second name must have followed in 1. 76 cf 11. 80-2, note. For the anaphora of the relative cf. the reading of some MSS. in Pindar, Fr. 75. 10 ov (v. I. KaXfopev. op {v. I. The A of the second AN is more like A. is a Pindaric word cf, Nem. ix. 10
73. into C.
:

[.]

the facsimile

There might be room hardly to be avoided, though

?
right,
;

is

for

two narrow

6[]'

.
;

6[]/

,
80-2.

6)

)
is

and
'

Fr.

1 94. 4.

Do

vertical stroke rather suggesting

,.
salt stream.'

01.

vii.

7~9

ffl*

persons addressed are presumably the two the masculine form of the dual being used of a feminine subject as

[ ^The

not

when
seems

in

sight of the nectar

though the

, however,

8,

(
from
is

my

spring go thirsty
letter.

not very satisfactory, the length of the

an irregular

,
Cf
e.

away

to

for the

metaphor

named
g. in

in 11. 75-6, Soph. O. C.

1 1 13, 1676. In 1. 81 the original reading S(\^ai'r(e) seems preferable to the correction or variant since there is no certain instance in Pindar of the latter elision ; but of course the question cannot be decided without the following words di^S>vT{t) e. g., would give a good sense. It is noticeable that in the next line, though the substitution for the second X is necessary, the X has not been crossed out. of Frs. (a) and (). On the position of these two fragments see note on 11. 1-4. Fr. () 128. CHPA[ is very intractable, leading only to in some form; or but the first letter is plainly C and not Fr. (r) 140. Above to the right is a mark like a grave accent.
:

^)

660.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

6i

660.

Paean.
X9
cm.

Fr. (a) 13-1

Two
The
lines

fragments, each from the top of a column, which


is

is

probably though

not certainly one and the same, containing part of what

evidently a Paean.

seem

to be rather long,

and

it

is

hardly possible to

make out
is

the

sense or to discern in whose honour the paean was composed.

Neither

there

much
(1.

clue to the identity of the author

8) indicates

lyric poet, the

or Bacchylides.

but Blass points out that, while form vias for vaas is decisive against Pindar Perhaps the piece may be attributed to Simonides, but a
;

later date is not impossible.

The text is written in a good-sized, but not very regular, round uncial hand, which we should place near the end of the first or early in the second century. A high stop is used, and breathings, accents, and marks of quantity are added not infrequently, all being due to the original scribe.
Fr. {a)

[..].[..
ias'

/ 8[ [ 8 [
.][.
.]v

8()

[ ()
[
fi[

] [
]

Fr.

(6)

][
[ .

veis

][
][
.

6eaneaLas S

/fiy

[]
[][]/
[.

5*

veos

[ [
. .
.

[]( /
.

[
[

[.

[.

15

[] 7[]'
[.

[^\
.]as
[.

^^ .]
.]os'

[
.

.]

[
.

[.][
[

.]

[.

.]![

62

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


20
.]
.

.]

.][
.]os

[ [
ova[
re[7rai770l'

\[

25

1-6.

The

small fragment does not seem to join on directly to the larger, for though
in

that position

works well

the

first

three lines

remainder. In 1. 4 is possible, but not, we think, the ; letter before is probably , , or , but not a. In 1. 5 the doubtful might possibly be v, but could not be got into the space if there was no gap in 11. 1-2, nor could (cf. Homer, H. xxi. 363) be read in 1. 6. On the other hand it is not easy to reconstruct 11. 1-2 on the hypothesis of a loss between the two fragments of only one or two letters. In 1. 2 there appears to be something above the of besides the accent and it is perhaps intended for a smooth breathing, but the effect is rather that of a sign of short quantity. in 1. 6 may be a[ or [. [ or 'J. [? 1 1 sqq. There is some uncertainty with regard to the number of letters lost at the beginnings of the lines. In 1. lo two letters are required before 7raiaa[i]v, and since there are three other instances of lenaiav or in the fragment can hardly be avoided. In 1. ii there is rather less room, but something must have stood before and if the column leaned slightly to the right there would not be much difficulty in getting [le] into the space. in 1. 16 also looks very probable and if that be right, there must be two letters missing at the commencement of the preceding and following lines. II. Possibly or avxeva[.'\ov. cf. Hesiod, Theog. 269 13. (of the Harpies), where is explained as equivalent to
difficulties arise in the

/[]//[

[]
[
:

\^ {)\,

[\

[]
.

[]
;

.
X

661.
14-1

Epodes.
16-4 cm.

Plate V.

This fragment contains the beginnings and ends of lines from two columns of Epodes in the Doric dialect. Iambic trimeters alternate with

own length. Archilochus, the father of this style of poetry, cannot of course be the author on account of the dialect; and Blass considers that the piece may be attributed to Callimachus, who appears to have
trochaic verses of half their

661.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
and employed

63

tried almost every variety of poetic composition

different dialects.

Unfortunately the longer lines are so incomplete that to


drift is impossible.

make out

the general

Palaeographically this fragment


in

is

of considerable interest.

It is

written

handsome round uncials, of a type not infrequent in papyri (cf. 25, 224, 678, 686, 701), and also exemplified in the great Biblical codices. On the verso of the papyrus are parts of two columns in a cursive hand which is not later than the beginning of the third century, and is quite as likely to fall within the The text on the recto then can be assigned with little chance of error second. Accents, &c.; have been added by two to the latter half of the second century. different hands, some being very small and neat, others larger and in lighter ink. To the smaller hand may be attributed also the occasional corrections and the punctuation, but whether this hand can be identified with that of the body of the text is doubtful. The document in cursive seems to be a series of medical prescriptions or directions it is too fragmentary to give any connected sense,
;

but the occurrence of the words

may be

noted.
Col.
i.

,
20

and apparently xipaXios

Col.

ii.

Til/

7
\pos

at

/zlfoy.

9^
'
Tais

lepa?

8
y

[
.

^' [
[

7ryXe7r[
[

Ka\t

SiKTVoLS

ov

\9

[9 9
[.

.]/[

^\^6[9
[

15

]/

25 ^'^[[]]

[^

[[]][[/]]'

[.]/[[]]/
e[/cl

e^ aXo[s

64

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

/xfi/os to aypiai but the is not 3. The corrector apparently wished to alter pevos, and notes that in Afi/L Pal. xii. 162. i Blass suggests crossed through. apios the same corruption or the same word occurs.

9.

The

16. noras 17.


letter

but the vcstigcs of the ? cannot be said to be impossible,

! [, ,
'
plural
is

]5

means
e.

sea-gods.
ras.

for

i.

letter

following
. .

gives

do not suggest no sense.

a,

though that

vox nihili: the letters are all quite clear. as the punctuation shows; but the apparent use of the singular form with a plural subject is -peculiar. The deleted letters are crossed through and besides have dots but that is less likely. above might be read as over them, high is a small circular mark which seems to be accidental. of 26. Above the
19. 7rvX7r[ is a

2\.

point might be recognized after


2*1 .

-[ may

be

and

it is

the vestiges of the or

[]

difficult to find
first

but then the preceding word should be a noun, above the deleted is almost certain, and anything suitable. The which leaves us with letter of the line strongly suggest

= [(.

[\

662.
28

Epigrams.
49 cm.

These epigrams, some of which are extant, others nevi^, are written in three columns on the verso of the papyrus containing the new Pindar fragments, 659. The first column, of which only the ends of lines are preserved, comprises two epitaphs of Leonidas (of Tarentum) and Antipater of Sidon, which already These are succeeded in exist in the Anthology {=Anth. Pal. vii. 163, 164). ascribed to Amyntas, one upon the same Samian woman Col. ii by two poems Prexo who is the subject of the first two epigrams and of another in the same style by Antipater or Archias [Anth. Pal. vii. 165), the second upon the capture of Sparta by Philopoemen in B.C. 188. Of Amyntas nothing whatever is known apart from this papyrus the historical allusions of the second poem and the identity in subject of the first with the similar epitaphs of Leonidas and Antipater warrant the conclusion that he also flourished in the second century The third column contains two new dedicatory epigrams composed for B.C. a certain Glenis by Leonidas and Antipater respectively, with the first two words of another which was left unfinished, apparently again by Leonidas. The copyist, who wrote an irregular uncial hand, was a careless and unintelligent person, and there are frequent mistakes and corruptions, while
;

a dislocation of the lines has apparently occurred at the top of Col. date of this text seems to be not
it

ii.

The

much

later than that

falls

within the reign of Augustus like

and probably the majority of the papyri with which

on the

recto,

662.
it

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
;

65

was found. Accents and stops are of rare occurrence a double point is once used in a dialogue (1. 11). The negligence of the writer and the discolouration of the papyrus render decipherment a matter of some difficulty.

Col.

i.

[
[

[riy

TLvos

(8\
yvvai

KaXXiT\ev9

[tis

[e^cSoaai/

[
[

[ [ [

[
^iv

Keivos ye

[ 9 [9
5e

]/

] ] ]
S

]7

/cjctoj'a

[]

QeoKp]iTOS
tlvos]

]/
ey

[]

V *^ 7 cctckvo?

i\ou
lkolto

Tv)(\ri

15

Oaves

9 [ [ [
[ ?

[69 ?

^iv

] ]
ev]
]

]9
S

^9
5

ev

][ ]
^
.
Col.
.

vri[7ria\ov]

/?

[.]

[.^(

[.]^

"^[,]

25 '7[[.]] 6avS

KV

9 ^
F

[.]^ []

9^

66

KaWiTeXevs
Tis Se

avSpL

CTrraeri?

9
35

/ ^ ^^ 9 ?
eOavov

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

8(

avvevvov

evos

areKvos

79
[]7
40
[.

^ []
.

ras

/cepa

)^]>

.]9

[ .[
e[.

.]09

.][.]

][
.

[.] Xoer/JOiS
.

.]

Col. Hi.

[]
re

[
podiovs

45

]}} \^
50

[ [ 8[

]
]s

^ ]]
]
.

[]9
]

[.]/

vov

9 []
[.]5

-^

aypas

662.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

67

Fragments.

{a)

{b)

60

JaTT

][

\^^

4 yy oiVfs (or Teyaves) IS for yor^er.

12.

SO

I.

26

to merit
(11.

much

attention.

MSS. But the spelling of the papyrus Thus we have in a single epigram
howcver tends to predominate

is

too inconsistent

and
a vowel or
in

and (11. 25, 29); the epigrams of Amyntas, a elsewhere.


22, 25), iroias
14,
1 7.

after

napS^fviav:

\.

OT -:.
line is clear

enough, and the letter below is apparently t and not yap is of course the right reading. 18-20. The question of the position of the two fragments (a) and (3) at the bottom of this column has already had to be considered in connexion with the text on the recto ; cf. note on 659. 1-4. They might well be put here so far as the appearance of the papyrus and of the writing is concerned ; but the letters will certainly not coincide with any known version of 11. 18-20. The scribe is far from being reliable no doubt, and something has evidently gone wrong in 1. 18, which should be Before en however there is a clear perhaps en e or en-e for en was written, and being in their right places it is scarcely admissible to postulate a divergence from the ordinary reading in the intervening words. Combining the two fragments, w^ would give an intelligible variant ; but apart from the difficulty of reading with which the first line of Fr. () is inconand ^ov this also upsets sistent, and does not account for the space between r/3tx[o] and moreover on turning to the recto the resulting readings [.]\[, aei8fopoa[, [,] (cf. 659 Frs. {a), (d)) are, to say the least, unattractive. therefore prefer to suppose that these fragments came earlier in the papyrus they do not seem to belong to the lost half of this column. 22-3. These two very puzzling lines do not combine at all easily with what follows and may be displaced ; perhaps, as Blass suggests, they belong to the next epigram, which is apparently defective at the beginning; cf. note on 11. 33-4. The construction would indeed be improved by a verb for in 1. 24 to depend upon (as in the first line of fvaa Leonidas' epigram but the word is the natural commencement (cf. 1. 11 and An/k. Pal. vii. 165. i tint, yuvai, and the participle is not unintelligible. With regard to the reading, in 1. 22 the letter after vo may be y, and there are traces of ink above which may indicate a correction ; before ov is the end of a high cross stroke which would suit y, or . is just possible though not satisfactory, and would of course leave the line a syllable short. In 1. 23 could be read for and the following word is perhaps some form of but there is hardly space for might a letter between the (very doubtful) and the a (which may be another o). The be e^j/es and this may well be right, but was certainly Blass suggests not written.

The

above the

p.

[\

'
;

.
\

We

),

(),

[(]

3[

24-31. '"Say, lady, who you are and who your what grievous sickness you died." " My name, sir,

father,
is

and tell your country and of Praxo of Samos, and I was the

F 3

'

68
daughter of

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


Calliteles, but I

Theocritus, to

died in childbirth." " Who set up the tomb ? " " My husband, " Thrice " And what age did you reach ? " they gave me to wife." " And were you childless ? " "I left in my home a boy seven and one year old was I." of three years, Calliteles."

whom

and the letters ivo have also been corrected. being seems to have been originally written, the added above the line. Whether the initial v, and another subsequently converted into of which only a slight vestige remains, was at the same time altered is doubtful owing to a hole in the papyrus.
24.
e

of

e/c

Avas converted

from

25.

1.

Koi

Waves,

26.

Kfp is a
1.

mistake for

28.

.
11.

Cf.

5-6 above and An/h. Pal.


is

(Tvvevvov rfyfTO,
.

at the beginning of the line 3 1 The superfluous 1. previous epigrams: cf. 11. 7 and 17.
' .

.
.

vii.

165. 3-4

due to the analogy of the two

Sparta, of old the dauntless, at whose single-handed might Ares in war 33-8 was many a time and oft terror-struck, is now cast headlong and defenceless by thrice ten thousand foes, beneath unconquered Philopoemen and the spears of the Achaeans; and the birds looking upon the smoking plain mourn
. .

33-4.
doubtful
;

1.

base

is left.

iv The last WOrd is however very and may be e, while of the supposed e only a slight vestige of the A couplet has fallen out either or Blass would retain av and read
.

may

be

before or after

above,

Perhaps, as suggested 11. 33-4, since there is nothing to govern 22-3 should come in here, though they do not seem particularly appropriate. 35 * should perhaps be inserted after vw.
11.

. .
.'
.

36.
37 38.

1.

8.

(^
.

The

letters in the latter part

()
][
.

or f, may be perhaps be substituted. are on a detached fragment, the appearance of 39-40. The letters ]fpe?[ and which decidedly points to the position here assigned to it. The contents of the recto in some form fits the context in 1. 40 create no difficulty (cf. 659. 21-4 note) and moreover above of ]epfn[ is the end of a long stroke descending from the Une very well The cumulative effect of these or after the lacuna in 1. 38. above, which just suits the considerations is undeniably strong.
well be
. ;

has been corrected. could equally of the line are much damaged ; the which is not satisfactory, t should and for the supposed

nymphs were dedicated as hunting-spoils by 42-7. * To Pan of Acroria and the Pan and ye Nymphs, neighbour Glenis this head and hide and these swift feet. prosper the doughty hunter Glenis
. . . .
.

.'

is given by and mutilated word before was probably some adjective ending in -tcrt (cf. 1. 49), but the space is very short for bi:^ (^ ^ as required by the metre, and a corruption may be suspected. as in 11. 47 and 53. cf. Anth. Pal. vi. 183. 2 ; For 43. 1. (vi. 34. 4) could also be read. of has been corrected, and to make the result clearer another 44. The first was added above the line.

42.

was the name of a mountain peak


of Dionysus.

in Sicyon,

Steph. Byz.

as a local epithet

The

[]

663.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

69
might of COUrse be

read for

45. Cf. Anth, Pal. vi. 34. 2 here, but the meaning
1.
1.

46.

followed by something like aUv but the remains of the ; letter after me suggest , , or . Cf. An/k. Pal. vi. 158. 3-4 av|ere '
47

. ]
vi.

mUSt be

and

34

5~^

^^^'

^ ^"^

(
for

?,
affected.
;

would not be

perhaps

'

[ ^.

els

evaypov

e7os vUa

49-54

'

the cave-dwelling mates of the Sileni

and

to

horned Pan of Acroria

their

chief these trophies, a scathless head

and new boar's

hide, that not even steel

may

rend,

were hung up to view as a thank offering for a goodly quarry by Glenis the son of noble
Onasiphanes.'
49. 50. 51.
strictly
1.
1.

.,
for

analogy of
52.

be interpreted in the sense of 'uninjured' or 'permanent' on the in An/h. Pal. ix. 526 or may be regarded as an epithet which applies only to the living animal (cf. Soph. Antig. 353 ovpewv

may

es
for

).
is

is

',

cf.

in

1.

46.

The

top of the

missing,

but

seems excluded.
54.
1.
1.

va{^ve\^s ?
or

56.

The

rest

of the epigram was never added.

663.

Argument of Cratinus' AIONYCAAEZANAPOZ.

98 i2'3 cm.
Of all
the lost Greek classics there are few of which the recovery would be
of greater importance than the plays of Cratinus or Eupolis, and though the present fragment does not give any actual portion of Cratinus' works it never-

some interesting and much wished for light upon the plots of his comedies, about which almost nothing was known previously. It consists of the argument of the ovaavbpoSy one of Cratinus* most famous plays,
theless throws

written in a small uncial


third.

hand

in the late
fj

second century or the

first

half of the

The
it

title

(i.

e.

the 8th drama) Kpareivov occurs, not

where
is

would be expected

at the end, but at the top of the last column,

and

written in
'

much

larger uncials.

What

is

meant by
is

this

comedy being

called

the

8th

'

is

uncertain.
e. g.

Similar numbers are assigned to extant Greek plays in

their arguments,

the Antigone of Sophocles

the
'

32nd,' the Alcestis of

Euripides the
refer

'

lyth,^ the

Birds of Aristophanes the


is
;

35th.'

to

the chronological order

barely possible in the

That the numbers first two of these

instances and impossible in the third


also
it is

and in the case of the Dionysalexandrus very improbable that the arrangement according to which that play was

70

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

K5rte would make it an alphabetical arrangement. As frequently happens in scholia, there are numerous abbreviations in the text In most cases the last letter written of an abbreviated word of the argument.
the 8th was chronological.

above the line and q in 11. 11 and ai.


is

The high
of the

ruptions occurring in two lines


these and the

may be judged Alexander the Great, from the fact and therefore wished to assign the play to the younger Cratinus. Kock on the other hand inferred from the common occurrence of well-known mythical personages in the titles of comedies that Alexander was the Trojan Paris, and
title of

^ 8,
;
.

{)
for

in

1.

5 and

']6{)
in
1.

in

takes various forms,

6,

$
'

occurs in

11.

and
11.

38,

and
is

40 are written ep/x' in 11. 9, 17, ^^, and 43, for ^ in 11. ^3 and 40.
1.

stop

is

occasionally employed.
;

The MS.
8

not very accurate, cor-

cf.

notes on

and

la.

apart from single words,

the play served to indicate

that Meineke considered

^^

number
its

The extant fragments nine, and how little

contents

to be

favoured the authorship of Cratinus the elder. The acute hypothesis of Kock is now verified by the papyrus, which shows that ^Aavbpos in the title is indeed
the Trojan, and that the plot turned upon an amusing perversion of the story of the Trojan war, in which Dionysus played the part assigned in the legend
to Paris.

That the play was the work of the elder Cratinus is moreover proved by the note appended at the end, stating that Pericles was attacked The date of its performance is thus for having been the cause of the war. or 439. fixed to the year B.C. 430 The earlier part of the argument, contained in the upper portion of Col. i and probably in a preceding column, is lost, and where the papyrus becomes
intelligible
it

is

describing the

upon Dionysus (cf. 1. 42 and 1. 6, note), and is The the action took place for the most part on Mount Ida. followed (11. 9-12) by a scene between the chorus and Dionysus, in which they
consisted of satyrs in attendance

/
(11.

(11.

6-9).

The chorus apparently

mock

at him, very likely

on account of the guise

Possibly Cratin. Fr, inc. 381


incident.

Then comes

(11.

12-9) a parody of the judgement of Paris.

in

which he presents himself.


refers to this

al-noXos

-^

Aphrodite,

who promises to Dionysus that he shall be the most beautiful and most beloved person in the world, naturally is victorious. Dionysus next goes to Sparta and
brings back Helen to

Mount Ida

30-3).

Upon

the approach of the Achaeans

they both take refuge in the house of the real Alexander, Dionysus turning himself into a ram and hiding Helen in a basket (11. 23-33) It is easy to understand the boisterous fun to which this scene must have given rise.
glimpse of

A
b*

it is

afforded

by the

familiar quotation from the Dionysalexandrtis 6

alL, which no doubt

refers to

Dionysus'

663.

NEW
;

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

71

in the character of a sheep. Alexander himself now comes on the and detects the lovers the denouement is that Helen remains with him as his wife, while Dionysus is sent off in disgrace to be delivered to the Achaeans, but accompanied by the faithful satyrs (11. 33-44). The papyrus concludes with the scholiast's remark already mentioned, showing that the play was directed against Pericles, who may well have been

appearance

stage,

satirized in the principal character as Dionysus.

Imperfect as

it is,

the argu-

ment

well illustrates the perversion of familiar legends which seems to have

been a favourite resource of the older comic poets, and of Cratinus in particular. We are indebted to Prof. A. Korte for several suggestions on this
papyrus.

Col.

i.

[
]

]
M-j'O-ii'

,
Col.

]Crir{

[
[

{^)
)

yrai

{)

^)

/3(?) tovs

SiaXcyovTui

{ {)

{) 5
9
?

[() {) [
eis

{)

[)

()()9
peXXov
pivos
35
(/cat)
<^tty

AXe^av8[po9)


15

)({)

:{)
(5(e)

\
{<)[)

;;(?) ()[)

{) () {) 9
re
Kpivei

[]

[Hpas] Tvpavvi8o{s)
40

()
46

rey re

9 () ? ? {9) )( ( 7() () () 6{) ^) {)


ray
T01S A-^aiot{9)

()

^
()
coy

()

oiKTeipas

fisy

5(e)

() ()

{)

nXevaas

^ ?
eis

9
ev

ile

72
i^ayayoav

25

[\]
6 sqq.
'

^ ?? {)
anepx]fTai,

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


5(e)

7{)

0[ei/y(i)

9 ? ?
tois

^^
on behalf of
(?)

These

(the satyrs) address the spectators

the poet,

and when

Dionysus appears mock and jeer at him. Dionysus, being offered by Hera indestructible power, by Athena success in war, and by Aphrodite the prospect of becoming the most Afterwards he sails beautiful and most beloved of all, adjudges the victory to Aphrodite. Hearing soon after that the to Lacedaemon, carries away Helen, and returns to Ida. Achaeans are ravaging the country, he takes refuge with Alexander, and hiding Helen in Alexander a basket like a (cheese?) and turning himself into a ram awaits the event. appears and detects them both, and orders them to be led away to the ships intending to hand them over to the Achaeans but w^hen Helen objects he takes pity on her and keeps Dionysus is accompanied her to be his wife, but sends off Dionysus to be handed o\'er. by the satyrs who encourage him and declare that they will not desert him. In the play Pericles is satirized with great plausibility by innuendo for having brought the war
;

upon

the Athenians.'
6.

thinks.

sc. the satyrs (cf. 1. 42), as Blass as Korte suggests, of course this is not a satyric play, there seems no reason why a chorus should not be composed of satyrs, especially in a comedy in which Dionysus is the chief The verbs in 11. 11-2 are very appropriate too to the satyrs, who occur in 1. 42 character. as if they had been mentioned before. which makes good sense Blass suggests vnep 8. ) is corrupt. Korte prefers n[fpt) cf. however the next note. but is a rather drastic change which is nearer to the text of the papyrus. Korte seems to be a mistake for some word like 12.

Perhaps

Though

(),
suggests
30.

-\.
Perhaps
cf.

'

[),
558-60

. ,
or

or
ye

also possible;

Crat. J^r. inc.

being the technical word in Athenaeus p. 122 for a bird-basket.

^) ! ,, ?
;

,.

cf.

Ar. Ran.

toIs ToXapois

280

yapov.

IS

Korte prefers

opviv

664.

Philosophical Dialogue.
Height 29 cm.

Part of a philosophical dialogue on the subject, apparently, of government, one of the characters in which is no less a person than Pisistratus the tyrant of Athens. There remain in all portions of four columns, contained in two main fragments which do not join and of which the relative position has to be In Fr. (a), the first column of which is determined by internal evidence.

complete, some one

who speaks

in

the

first

person gives an account of his

664.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
He
;

73

movements

at the time of the usurpation of Pisistratus.

had

left

Athens

after that event

took place and joined Solon in Ionia

subsequently at the

instance of his friends, including Pisistratus himself, and on the advice of Solon, he returned to Athens and was there invited to the house of Hagnotheus, a relative of his own and grandfather of Thrasybulus son of Philomelus, a young man whose guardian he himself was. Of the second column we have no more

than the

first

iew

letters of the lines


(1.

but in the lower part of


8i

evidently intervened

68

']
is
11.

[,

1.

[).

it

other speakers

Fr.

(d),

containing another

nearly complete column,


besides the narrator

also

in

dialogue form.

(^,

7, I2), Pisistratus,
is

Here the persons are, Ariphron, and Adimantus, and the

principal subject of conversation


in

the career of the tyrant Periander of Corinth,

whose company Ariphron professes that he and Adimantus had recently been, and whose misfortunes he proceeds to describe. Most probably Fr. (a) comes from near the beginning of the work, and the narrative portion of Col. i How much, if anything, is lost between is introductory to the whole dialogue. ii and Col. iii (Fr. (d)) is of course quite uncertain, but it is improbable Col. The anonymous narrator in Col. i will that there is any considerable gap. accordingly be the same person as the speaker in Col. iii. 11. 93-102 but the identity of this intimate friend (1. 13) of Pisistratus and sharer in the exile of Solon remains a puzzle. Ariphron is perhaps to be recognized as the grandfather of Pericles and Thrasybulus, son of Philomelus, of whom it is here remarked (1. 29) that he was popularly supposed to be in love with the tyrant's younger daughter, is evidently the Thrasybulus of whom Plutarch tells the story {Apophth. Reg. et Imp., p. 189 c, de Ira Cohib., p. 457 f, cf. Val. Max. v. i. 2) that he kissed the daughter of Pisistratus at a chance meeting, and that the latter instead of being angry gave him her hand in marriage. Polyaenus, who adds an episode of the abduction of the girl by her lover [Strategem. 5. 14), substitutes Thrasymedes for Thrasybulus, but agrees with our author as to the
;

name

of his father, Philomelus.


?

But who was the author of this dialogue


Attic (except
it

It is written in

remarkably good
concerned

et?

for et?

{])

in

1.

40),

and so

far as the style is

it might be attributed to Aristotle, with whom Pisistratus was a favourite figure. In support of such a view appeal could be made to certain resemblances in language between this fragment and the assuming the

may

be a product of the Aristotelian age.

Blass, indeed, suggests that

actually

authenticity of that

work

compare

rvpavvibt

yap

eTTftj^ei', 11.

8-9

nobav

ivTivOev

( ^
e. g.
11.

^-6

'
A t^.

{)

avrovs

bwaros with Atk. Pol.


Tvpav[vibt]
.

14. 2

eTret

be
1

with.

Pol. II. I, 13.

^robav

74

(,
37. 2

^ ;
'[7?]

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


11.

33-4
(cf.
1.

^TfJav
25-6 ovbeh
e7reSe5cu/<et irpbs

rrjs TioXiTeias, 11.

with Ath. Pol. 43. I with Aik. Pol.


;

Trpos

But and Arist. Fr. 44 ^ and on the other hand these fragments do not conform to the normal type of Aristotelian dialogue, in which, as we know both from the allusions of Cicero {ad Ait. iv. 16, xiii. 19) and his imitations, the leading part was taken by It will be safer then to leave the writer anonymous, the philosopher himself.
such coincidences are not very conclusive
;

'.
II2)

k-nihoaav

cf.

also

1.

15

^/

though he

well be as early as the third or even fourth century B. C. have been observed, this papyrus reopens some important questions As of history and chronology, upon which some remarks are made in the commentary If Solon went to Asia when Pisistratus became (notes on 11. i-io, 106-9).
will

may

famous meeting with Croesus may have occurred then, and the The synchronism of the tyrannies beautiful myth be after all a sober fact. of Pisistratus and Periander is another very interesting point, which with the testimony of Herodotus partly on the same side should not be dismissed too It is no doubt a question how far the setting of an imaginary dialogue lightly. but a comparison with such a can supply a basis for historical conclusions work as Plutarch's Symposium is hardly fair to the present fragments, which may probably be regarded as an index to the average opinion of the day, and
tyrant, his
' '

as such deserving of consideration, in spite of the conflict with the so-called systems of chronology, the contradictions of which a thousand correctors have
'

not yet succeeded

in harmonizing.'
is

written in tall columns measuring 32 X 7 cm., in a round uncial hand rather resembling that of 412 (P. Oxy. Ill, Plate v), which dates approximately from the year 245 A. D. the present example is more regular

The papyrus

second hand no doubt belongs to about the same period. has made one or two small corrections, and seems also to have added some Of the latter all three kinds are found at least of the paragraphi and stops.

and

graceful, but

153 low at 1. 18) but they are not used with much The double points, which as usual mark a change of speaker, discrimination. The occasional diaereses, also look more like the second hand than the first. angular signs sometimes employed however, and marks of elision, as well as the
(middle at
11.

36, 38, 105,

for filling

up a short

line,

are with

little

doubt by the original

scribe.

{a)

^ ^^
Col.
i.

Col.

ii.

[^
1TL
[

8
5

SvvaTOS'

15

^ 8 [^ ^^ ? ' ^? ^
\
avrovs
eyoo

664.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

75

Se

[
55

TOS

vtv6v

\
^^[

ev

Se

\ \^
^
[
)[ eo^

6 \^

, []
9

65

\
.

25

^ ?
v[ais]
X[e]t

\^
7

Tayei\^

? ^?

[]

75

Ayvo6eos

^^

[ [ [

7^
35 iTvy^aviv

45
(^)

(
SoK^i]

' ^
yap
Col. ill

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

[
^5

^
[
.

go

[ [

[
Col.
iv.

[
[

95
ovOevi

]'
[]

(
[e

05

[]
UO

[]

[]

[] [^
[yjeiS-

[] [ [] []
:

- ([]

yap

[] [\ []

, []
[

^
>7[/3]/
:

^]
:]

Ae

[
[
^[
eye

[]

\^

n\ev

'
]7[*']^
.

664.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

[]
TIepLav8p[ov Trjare

[
anc[

77

yjr]\ou

pa]

"5

7 ] [] ]' []9 ]
o[t
t[

^
]
.

] []
)^[

^\

([
145

'[

]
.]_/
.

[] [
^^
.

[
[$

[ [

I20

19

.]'[.

.] [

]^['

]<^^.
.

.]
.]
0L

[.

.]vTe?
.

[
5eo[
.

125

]^
.

\]
.]

[ ]8[ .] \ .][.
7[.]

.]

[7]?;^['
.]

uVep
tls

lie
. . .

[]
.

[.
.

130

.]viv

[.

.][. .]\' .[....


[.
.
. .

.]

.]
.

[.

.][.
.]

[,

[.

.]7/[
.]
.

'[
evTo[

135

.]

(^)

50

][

]
]

][
][

][
155

[
OS

7[ 7[
[

][ ][

][

vpoy[

78

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

'(Solon) before Pisistratus seized the government went abroad; for his warnings to the Athenians that Pisistratus w-as aiming at a tyranny failed to convince them. I however stayed on but when the tyranny of Pisistratus was already established I left the country and Uved in Ionia with Solon, After some time my friends were anxious for my return, and particularly Pisistratus, on account of our intimacy ; so as Solon urged it I went back to I found Athens. Now I had left there a boy named Thrasybulus, the son of Philomelus. him grown into a very handsome and virtuous young man, far superior in looks and manners to the others of his age for in the general debasement due to the political situaHe surpassed them all in horsetion no one had advanced to any nobility of character. breeding and the chase and other such expensive pursuits ; and it was said against him in the city that he was in love with the younger daughter of Pisistratus, whom he had seen His grandfather Hagnotheus in whose house it happened carrying the vessels of Athene. that Thrasybulus, who had been bereft of both father and mother, was being brought up, being, I think, a little annoyed with him, invited me to his house as I was their kinsman and had been left guardian by Philomelus. I was very ready to go, for Hagnotheus'
; ;

company was

a pleasure to

me

.'

i-io. This statement that just before the establishment of the tyranny of Pisistratus Solon left Athens and went to Ionia is not only new but conflicts with the account of Plutarch {Sol. 30-1), who represents Solon as refusing to fly and as living on at Athens in UoXireia (14. 2) does not suggest that The friendly relations with the usurper. Solon retired from Athens, though on the other hand there is nothing there inconsistent with such a view; it is simply stated that Solon's warnings and opposition proved fruitless. Diogenes Laertius indeed asserts (i. 51, 62) that Solon died in Cyprus, and this statement may now have to be treated with more respect than heretofore. A new light is thus turned upon the much discussed question of the meeting between Solon and Croesus as king of Lydia. The usurpation of Pisistratus and the accession of Croesus to sole sovereignty are placed in the same year, b.c 560, and there will be no chronological objection to the With regard to the interview described by Herodotus, if it is transferred to this period. in 1. 10 here is too vague to build any argument upon; date of Solon's death, according to Heraclides Ponticus he survived the overthrow of the constitution according to Phanias of Ephesus less than two years (both ap. Plutarch, Sol. 32).
5.
1.

'

II.

This construction of

avros eX^el/. Pol. 38. 4 15. KareXmov is probably for

With 29-32. This is the first mention of a second daughter of Pisistratus. cf. PolyaenUS, Sirategem. 5. 14 Apparently the author of OUr dialogue either did not know of or did not accept this more romantic version, for with the and can hardly refer to different occasions. For Snep tivai, but the construction is infin. cf. Hdn. 2. 6. 10
unusual.
:

20.

1.

((\^.

(,
.
hand
;

,
-

with the infinitive

is

common

in Aristotle, e.g. Aik.

'

8.^
over the line

1. 37. 82. All that remains of the supposed

is

a rather coarse horizontal

stroke, immediately above a break in the papyrus.

88.

The

letters
first

probably by the

have each had a short horizontal stroke drawn through then), the doubtful was perhaps also deleted.

'

664.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

79

91-114. '"This accordingly seems probable. If then," said I, "this be true, it would be of no more advantage to Periander to rule than be ruled by another nor to any other bad ruler. For I suppose," I said, " that he will reap the reward of his misdeeds among For what is dearer to a sensible man than his country and his those dearest to him. " Yes, by Zeus," struck in Ariphron, " you speak truly, and I and blood-relations ? " Adimantus here wish to bear you out, having just been with Periander when his cruelty plunged him into a terrible disaster." " What disaster ? " said Pisistratus. " I will tell "Before Cypselus, the father of Periander, obtained the supremacy, the you," he said. When he became supreme great clan of the Bacchiadae, as they are called, ruled the city. ." the majority of them fled ... a few however remained.
. .

98. expression, though

\\
was

ras
cf.

in the Sense of
ras

Arist. Eih. Nic. ix. 7

Unless the present conversation is to be supposed to have occurred while still a private person, which is eminently improbable, this passage plainly implies that Periander of Corinth was not yet dead when the tyranny of Pisistratus was The ordinary chronology places the accession of Periander in established at Athens. B.C. 625 and his death in 585, thus leaving a very considerable interval before the first tyranny of Pisistratus, which no one desires to put earlier than b.c. 560. According to one passage of Herodotus, however, Periander and Pisistratus were contemporaries; for he makes the former arbiter in a war between Athens and Mytilene which followed upon the The usual method of avoiding this difficulty is capture of Sigeum by Pisistratus (v. 94-5). to suppose that there were two wars with Mytilene, and that the arbitration of Periander occurred in the first. But for this there is no kind of evidence, and, as Beloch has pointed out [Rhei'm'sches Museum, vol. xlv. p. 466 sqq.), the difficulties involved in this explanation He himself suggests that the mistake are hardly less than those which it attempts to solve. of Herodotus consists in referring an arbitration by Periander in a dispute between Tenedos and Sigeum (Arist. Rhei. i. 15. 13) to the period of the war against Mytilene; at the same time Beloch considers that the chronology of Periander is quite insecure, and that he might with advantage be put several decades later. But other references in Herodotus clearly point to the earlier date, for the tyranny of Periander at Corinth synchronized with that of Thrasybulus at Miletus (Hdt. i. 20, v. 92), which was established at the beginning of the reign of Alyattes king of Lydia (i. 18-22) ; while the eclipse of the sun which ended the war between Alyattes and Cyaxares of Media (i. 74) provides a securely fixed point of Herodotus' chronology is probably past mending. departure (approximately b.c 585). As the Bacchiadae were 108. to what this refers is not clear. in some way involved, the misfortune is apparently not one of those ordinarily ascribed by
106-9.
Pisistratus

.
eK

is

a CUriouS

tradition to the private

115 Cf. Hdt.

spelling of the name lacuna for [abai].

. ,
:

life

of Periander.
evepov

V.

92

'

iSlSoaav

doubtful whether the mistake of the original hand in the for t but there is barely room in the was anything more than
It is
;

ow. The the third letter is quite uncertain; perhaps 119. question of the reading here is complicated by the doubt concerning the position of the fragment containing the first part of 11. 120 sqq. Lines 125-6 and 127-8 will suit the arrangement adopted in the text, which moreover brings out a column of exactly the required length. (which In 1. 120 this fragment contains the doubtful et and part of the the rest of the Another break apart from the fragment could be read as ) is on the upper piece. The latter parts of occurs between 11. 133-4, but here the junction is almost certain.
\

[:

[( (]([]
;

8
11.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

are also on a detached fragment the position of which, though ... 132 128 ] probable from the appearance of the papyrus, is by no means secure. 150-63. This fragment from the bottom of a column very likely belongs to Col. iv; it does not appear possible to find a place for it in Col. iii.

( ([

]\[

665.
Fr. (a)

History of
4-6,

Sicily.
4-6 cm.

105 X

Fr. {b) 10-3

Plate

I.

These fragments, which belong evidently to the same column, of which they formed the upper and lower portions respectively, are notwithstanding They contain an abstract their small size of no slight interest and importance. or summary of events in Sicily, the different items, which are stated in the concisest manner, being marked off by paragraph! and further distinguished from each other by the protrusion of the first lines into the left margin. The papyrus was a regular literary roll, written in a fine uncial hand, which bears a very strong resemblance to that of the Oxyrhynchus papyrus of the (facsimile in P. Oxy. I, p. 54), and also to that of the Bacchylides papyrus, to which it presents a still closer parallel than was provided by the Demosthenes MS. We should assign it, like the Demosthenes, to the second Probably this is part century A.D. an earlier date is not at all likely. of an epitome of a continuous history of Sicily, and it may well be that, as Blass thinks, the work epitomized was the lost History of Timaeus. The period to which the fragments refer seems to be that immediately following the general overthrow of the tyrannies in the Sicilian cities which
;

by the

took place about the year 465 B.C. (Diod. xi. 68. 5). This period is indicated frequent mentions of conflicts with the ^4vol, by whom are meant the mercenaries settled in the cities by the tyrants as a support of their rule.

Diodorus,

who

is

the sole authority for the history of this time, narrates the

course of the hostilities at Syracuse between these


citizens (xi. 72, 76)
;

new comers and

the older
:

and implies that Syracuse was with one consent came to terms with 'Almost all the cities,' he says (76. 5), *. settled there.' The papyrus fills in some of the intermediate the strangers from We hear of an expedition of details passed over by the historian. Enna and Cacyrum against Gela, which received aid from Syracuse. This was apparently followed by overtures from the $ivoL to the Syracusans (cf. note on ineffectual, for the next event is a battle between 1. 5), which, however, proved Shortly afterwards the mercenaries settled at Minoa were defeated them.
not peculiar in this respect
. .

{^

665.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

8i

by the combined forces of Syracuse and Agrigentum. The activity displayed by Syracuse warrants the inference that she had herself already got the upper hand of her own who, as Diodorus relates, were finally defeated in a
pitched battle.
this

The campaign
is

of the Syracusans against Catana mentioned at

part of the same anti-foreign movement. But (76. 3) have extended beyond the opposing sections of the various The fragments also supply information of an expedition of city states. Agrigentum against Crastus, and an engagement subsequently occurred at the latter place between the Agrigentines and forces from Himera and Gela, which may be supposed to have come to the assistance of Crastus. These new facts may not be very weighty, but they convey a more adequate idea than
hostilities

time by Diodorus

seem

to

was before possible of the period of


general peace.

unrest,

the

intervened between the overthrow of the tyrannies and the establishment of

^ ,
and

which

[]

[FjeXav

[] ^[][
5

[ [
[

^'[ em
15

[]

\
[]
7re[
'.

^?[
.

[.

?
2

[ [ 7 [[ 9 ^
9

^^ ^
.
. .
.

.
2.

nominatur^ and the spurious line in Callim.

[] [ .
[

[.

][

][
.

^[

em
4-48 Hennensium nemore, qui locus H. in Cer. 6. 15 rpis ' eVl
is
;
.

at the
it

modern

cf.

Cic. Verr.

umbilicus Siciliae

8(!

the site of this town, which

village of Cassaro,

near Palazzolo

mentioned by Ptolemy, has been placed the present passage seems to indicate that

is

should be looked for further west, and the position given in Kiepert's Topogr. Hist. Atlas probably not far from the truth. 5. All that remains of the letter at the end of the line is a straight stroke which

82
suggests
10.
e,

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


,
not impossible, but there is no trace of the tail, and we therefore which is otherwise attractive, into the text. is evidently a personal name, but nothing is known of this bearer of it. gap between the two fragments probably extends to about lo lines, but
t.

hesitate to introduce

[,

IS

it

11. The may be larger.


13. Crastus

is

described by Steph. Byz. as

rroKis
it

of Philistus. gentum.

Its position is

unknown

no doubt

was

in the

citing the SiKekiKU

neighbourhood of Agri-

do not suggest , but can hardly be said to be 22. The vestiges of the letter after If the shape inconsistent with that letter, since there is no other example of a ^ in the text. vas tall and narrow, as in the Bacchylides papyrus, the effect of mutilation of the
might be that actually presented
remains.
23.
in the fragment.

Of

the supposed

only a small speck

fresh entry probably


letters before

be one or even two

]^[

commences
.

at this line,
.,

e.g.

or

'\^.

and

in that case there

would

666.

Aristotle, npoTpenriKOs.
27-2

9'8 cm.

A
lines

sheet containing two practically entire columns, preceded


third, the

from a

text of which includes a lengthy passage quoted

by the ends of by

Stobaeus (Flor. 3. 54) from Aristotle, and now generally assigned to the Aristotelian dialogue UporpeTTTLKOs or Exhortation to Philosophy (Rose, Fr. 57)
a sentence omitted
Besides additions at the beginning and end of the excerpt the papyrus supplies by Stobaeus in the middle of his quotation. The evidence

of these supplementary passages, though bringing no direct proof of the identity of the treatise of which they formed part, tend to support the attribution to the
in particular
11.

worthlessness of external goods as such results in a recommendation of philo-

,
sophy
(cf.

161 sqq., where the foregoing argument on the

note on
text
is

1.

170).

The
middle or

written in narrow columns (width

cm.), placed

very close

together, in rather small

informal uncials, which

we should

date

about the

latter part of the

second century.
used to

No

breathings or accents occur,

by paragraph! only. Parts of the initial up short lines. letters of the first few lines of a fourth column remain, but all that is recogopposite 1. 120. The papyrus nizable is a doubtful e opposite 1. 118 and an and rubbed in places. is dirty The appended collation is derived from Hense's edition of Stobaeus, iii.
and stops are
also absent, the sentences being divided off
is
fill

The common

angular sign

666.
3. 25.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
Mendozae

83

The MSS. referred

to are the Escurialensis

(M), Parisinus (A),

and Marcianus as embodied in the edition of Trincavelli (Tr.). Other authorities are Maximus Monachus, Gnomohgium, c. 17 (= Max.), where the earlier part of the quotation in Stobaeus is given with some slight textual variations, and the Florilegium Laurentianum (Laur.), where the extract of Maximus reappears (Meineke, Stobaeus, iv. 225, 25). The papyrus sometimes supports one, sometimes another, of these witnesses, and occasionally corrects them all. It is, however, itself far from being impeccable, and in one or two places where it is the sole authority emendation is necessary.
Col.
i.

Col.

ii.

Col.

iii.

re

]^^

\
]0/

^^
Sio

15
1

9 ]^

et

]
10
JTrXe

\
]g)i/

] \
75
lost.

20

019

125 "^^

15

]/

]
43

].'?.

^
9

?
130

^ [[
9
(?

TovTOvs

23 lines

45

]
'\

]0

[] [ 8 as
G
2

[]

[\ 9 [
[]
135 y

Kopos

[ [^

84

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

\\
50

] ]
]
.

VL

140

? [
vrepi

to[is

\
]
.

yap

85

"

^[e]


145

yrjv

)(9
"^^^

55

^
]

95

^ [ ?? 9
irep

? [
7[

TOLS

^
^

09

[]

cuv

)]

\9 >
TIVOS
[[rti/oy

155

[ [
019

{^)

ai/[ei;

05

^"^
eav
(rji)

[[ [
^[
eij

[eori

anavTCS

165

9
VOS

T01S

[]

17

? ?[
[

[ ^ [
Tas

(/cat)

666.
.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

85.

nor prevent them when purposing to do a right action. We ought to 58-170. '. be warned by the spectacle of their plight to avoid it ourselves (?), and should regard happiness not as dependent upon the acquisition of wealth rather than upon a particular Bodily blessings would not be held to consist in adornment with state of the soul. magnificent apparel, but in the possession of health and in sound condition, even in the absence of the other advantages which I have mentioned. In the same way happiness is to be attributed to the disciplined soul and to a man of such a character, not to the man who is magnificently supplied with externals and is in himself worthless. We do not consider a bad horse to be of any value if it has gold chains and costly trappings ; we Besides what we have said, too, rather give our praise to one that is in sound condition. worthless persons, when they obtain wealth and value their possessions more than the goods of the soul, are in the worst case of all. For just as a man who was inferior to his own domestics would be ridiculous, so those who come to find their property of more value than their own nature ought to be held miserable. And this is the truth of the matter, " as the proverb says, and want of discipline combined with for " satiety breeds insolence power breeds folly. In a bad state of the soul neither wealth nor strength nor beauty are good things, but the greater the abundance of these qualities, the more do they injure " Do not give a child a knife," their possessor, if they are unaccompanied by reason. Now reason, as all would is as much as to say, " Do not entrust bad men with power." admit, exists for the acquisition of knowledge, and seeks ends the means to which are contained in philosophy ; why then should philosophy not be pursued without hesitation
.

referred to some 61-4. This sentence might be correct if, as Diels suggests, alptais. But more probably some correction preceding substantive such as with the or to the simplest perhaps is to emend is required for Other expedients would be to read sense given in our translation. which pays after the wretched state of mind which neglects this,' or to insert great consideration to any of these external things,' but the latter interpretation of
; ' '

8
del

,, ,
8e

is

hardly so natural.
65.

The

extracts of Stobaeus

and Maximus Mon. begin


Laur.

after

A,
69.

Tr.,

68. yivfadai

Above the of Tr., Max., Laur. there are in the papyrus some faint vestiges, which if not accidental might perhaps represent a cursively written eu ; but we have considered this too doubtful for insertion in has not been cancelled, and if the intention was to indicate In any case the text. the eu should have been written further to the left. a reading ev
70-2.
fv

Max., SO Max., Laur. {()


8e

:
:

, ^ '\ .
;

MA,

Tr.

Max., Laur.,

eV

Tr.

Tr. Max., Laur.,* SO A^ tis Tr. Max., Laur.; SO 78. Considerations of space made it more probable that vyiav or Laur.) was written than (). is found. SO MSS. exccpt Max., where 82. A. so M, Tr., Max., Laur.; 85. nen. Tr. Tr., Max., Laur. ; eveoTiv SO 86. tav Toioxkov is omitted in Max. 88. rat Laur. substitutes els.
73.

76,

Ttf

MA^
:

(A, Tr., Max.,

..
:

92. Tois
eKTos
:

so MA, Laur. ; tis Tr., Max. so MA, Max., Laur. ; i<

Tr.

86
93.
95 avTos
96.
:
'.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


SO
:

MA^, Max., Laur.

MSS.
Se.

(^^A^
;

Tr.

Laur., putting

Max, and Laur. add


so
A'^
'.

after

(^.
which

iav 97. fav i^aKia places 98-9.

(and conjecturally Meineke) ; MA, Max., Laur. ;

IOC.
is

The papyrus does

before not support Meineke's insertion of

PJ and the other Tr.

MSS.

before

adopted by Rose.

av and adds MSS. except Laur., which has before 105. fav: io6. The insertion of ; (so MSS.) is necessary. 109-19. The excerpts of Stobaeus and Maximus omit this passage, and unfortunately Appareridy its meaning and construction are obscured by a corruption, conand we may either add (cf. 11. 125-7) ^^'^ place ceals something like when the sense will be as in the translation above, or connecting a comma after with insert Or (sO Diels) before It sometimes happens that worthless persons have both external and mental gifts, and value the former above the latter, which is the most disgraceful thing of all,' Corruptio optimi

pessima. 122. 126, 128, 130. 131,

The

, , ; ~ :
latter
is

. / ,
8
On
cf.

'

remedy produces an easier construction and a more pointed sentence. omitted in the MSS,

MSS,

M.SS.

ftva[i:

The excet

SO MSS. except A, which transposes the words, of Maximus ends here,


:

150 I.

^[]

which is the conclusion of his 153-5 Stobaeus here has quotation. In 1, 153 we have supposed that the repetition of av led to the loss of eav. To read {e)av would make the line too long, 155-60. Cf. lamblichus, Protrepticus, 2

connexion of part of the treatise of lamblichus with the Aristotelian dialogue Journal 0/ Philology, ii, 55 sqq. after 164. There would hardly be room for the necessary homOioteleuton may easily have caused its omission; cf. note on 153-5.
169. of lamblichus

, ^ 8
which looks
like
:

[
cf,

an imitation of the passage before

, ,
\
Tr.,

,
us.

By water
but

the close in the

was the key-note of the


Bywater,
ibid.,

pp. 68-9.

(,
?
i-zw.

-^^^

as of the similarly

named work

667.

Aristoxenus
18x8

Parts of two columns, the former of which comprises thirty complete


containing an analysis of certain musical scales.

lines,

To

the authorship of the


first

fragment we have no real clue.

It is natural in

such a case to think

of

; ;

667.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

name among the ancient writers upon musical theory and there is no reason why the piece should not come from his or some similar work. But on the other hand there is no particular reason why it should, for any treatise on the same subject might include some such discussion as that found here. The papyrus probably falls within the third century. It is written in a clear semi-uncial hand, without stops or other lection marks
Aristoxenus, the greatest

'

87

a short space, which


several sentences.

is

indicated in the transcript below,

is

used to divide the

highly technical language employed in the fragment can hardly be understood or discussed without some preliminary explanation of the composi-

The

tion of the

Greek

scale.

to Mr. H. S. Macran, to

We must here acknowledge our great indebtedness whose excellent edition of the Harmonics of Aristoxenus

the reader

is

referred for further information.

unit which was the basis of the Greek scale in all its developments was the tetrachord, typically consisting of two dieses^ i.e. semitones or smaller intervals, and a complement, or the interval remaining when the dieses were subtracted from the concord of the fourth. The magnitude of the three intervals determined the genus of the tetrachord as enharmonic or chromatic, the enharmonic variety containing two quarter-tones and a ditone,

The fundamental

later

and the chromatic other divisions, e.g. two semitones and a tone and a half. The more familiar diatonic tetrachord, composed of a semitone and two tones, was distinguished by having only one diesis. Larger scales were effected by of such tetrachords in two ways, (a) the arrangement or combination

by
the

conjunction

(), when
;

()

the last note of one tetrachord coincided with

or () by disjunction (aioCevfis), when the tetrachords first note of the next were separated from each other by a tone. The combination of a pair of tetrachords in these two methods produced respectively the heptachord and Further octachord scales of the seven-stringed and eight-stringed lyres. perfect scale, which took the additions resulted in what was known as the

following form

(/

tone,

diesis,

and

complement)

88
or in

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


modern notation
:

()
^
this

rj

It will

be observed that

conjunct and a disjunct scheme, the heptachord scale being the basis of the one (the lesser complete system ') and the octachord that of the other (the
'

'

greater complete system


as the

known

To come now
locating different
scale of the

.
').

{^^^

")

system diverges at a certain point into a

The

additional note at the bottom

was technically

to the passage before us.

The
for

scales,

and has proposed

examining and consideration a heptachord


writer
is

a a c a c would be enharmonic or chromatic (11. 1-2) and also a conjunctive Such conjunction would occur in three places in the (11. 2 sqq.). see the scheme above), i. e. in the tetrachords (11, 10 sqq. and and on the other hand, is only found in the case of the tetrachords {bLv4vv). To the given scheme is then (11. 19 sqq.) added
;

form

y~

'

j'

scale of this type

arrangement
perfect scale

(),

{^^)

^.
loc.

and
and

^,

Disjunction,
at the lower

extremity a tone, corresponding to the


resulting eight-note system

(see above),

and the

is said to occur in the same three combinations as before (11. 22 sqq.). Here, however, a difficulty arises, for as will be seen on reference to the perfect scale such a scheme occurs in it not thrice but twice

only,

i.

e.
is

in the

two halves of the

'

greater complete system.'


;

The

simplest

remedy

to suppose a defect in the text

cf.

note ad

Col.

i.

Col.

iL

fiiv

5
pet

^
eiT

[ [
35
''[

Sia

|j;y

^ ^9 ^ ^
667.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
p[
[
^

89

act

/[

Se

^[

/[
e[

'
/cat
iftti

20

? 9 ?^ ^ 9
v
[[e]]
77

5[

[
45
.

em

erri

i'[[a]]?7ray

[
7[
[

<
^

[
.

[ [
[
55
f^^i

25

[]7

30

9
eyefero
ev

_/^[
TotJ^

^V^[

Kt

place

1-30. '[Such a scale is in the first place] enharmonic or chromatic, in the second it is a conjunctive system, whether its melodic succession be complete or partial, and " mainly consecutive or broken. For disjunction was shown always to occur in the " lower " middle " tetrachords, while conjunction was found to enter into three scales, so that and it did (not) immediately signify the region in which it lay, i.e. whether it applied to the "upper" and "middle" tetrachords or the "lower" and "middle" or the "lower" and "extreme." Now let a note be added to these at the bass extremity; then this scheme of the octachord will be common to (two of) the three scales already mentioned,
as was proved in the foregoing argument
2-7.

when a

scale
ev

was propounded

.'
. .

is

to

be taken with

' and

as well as with 8ia

and

go

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

((.
generally

Scales might be curtailed either by diminishing their compass, i.e. dropping cf. Aristox. Harm. notes at the extremities {ev ((), or by omitting inner notes ; eVrt p. 17. 30 (Meibom). and Aristid. Quint, pp. 156
in 1. 6 seems otiose. 15 sqq. If the words 13 sqq. The construction and sense of this passage are not very clear. must be understood with but are to be left as they stand, something like belv the change of subject is ver}' awkward, and we prefer to suppose with Mr. Macran that was dropped out before The similarity of the following syllable would help to account for the loss. sc. or according as is accented 15. v Tivt or Tivi. means technically region or direction of the scale. 22 sqq. This sentence is the crux of the fragment, for, as already explained in the introduction, the series of notes apparently indicated only occurs twice in the perfect scale, not three times as here stated by the author. The easiest way out of the difficulty is to adopt Mr. Macran's suggestion that has fallen out of the text before
cf.

'

(,

Aristox.

Harm.

p. 58.

,
,

[) ,
For

and

. :

(.
viii).

668.

Epitome of Livv,

XXXVII-XL
Height 26 cm.

and

XLVIII-LV.
Plate VI
(Col.

Egypt which are now numbered by hundreds have and Latin literature has been Greek been represented only by a small piece of Vergil and a few unimportant historical or juristic fragments. The discovery of an important literary text in Latin is therefore a welcome novelty. This consists of parts of eight columns of an epitome of a history of Rome, the events being grouped together in strict
Literary papyri from
hitherto, with a few trifling exceptions,
;

chronological order under the different consular years, and the division of the
several books being noted.

That the author of the history

in

question was

Livy, though not stated,


Livy's work.

is

obvious from a comparison of the arrangement of

the books as numbered in the papyrus with that of the corresponding books in

The epitome
Epistle to the

is

written on the recto


(657).

on the verso

is

the text of part of the

Hebrews

The

presence of the latter enables us to decide

the relative position of the different fragments of the Livy with the exception

of a few small pieces, two of which had been


recto in order to strengthen the
off
roll,
it

gummed

over places of the


to

have been cut is a mediumsized upright uncial, with some admixture of minuscule forms {b, d), and belongs to the same class as the Vergil fragment (P. Oxy. I, Plate viii) and
from a much
later portion of
(11.

and one of which seems


218-25).

The handwriting

668.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

gi

ii. Plate 130), but an earlier example of the mixed style than has hitherto been known. The papyrus was found with cursive documents varying from the second to the fourth century (chiefly third), and the text of the Epistle to the Hebrews is certainly not later than the fourth century (cf. introd. to 657). The Livy epitome must therefore have been written not later than the beginning of the fourth century, and it more probably belongs to the third. Abbreviations are commonly employed in praenomina, in official titles such as cos.^pr., trib. pl.y and liber in the headings is written Hb. Other abbreviations are rare but

the Bodleian Chronicles of Eusebius (Palaeographical Soc.


is

middle point is placed after abbreviations, but there are no stops. Each column consists of 27-28 lines which are broad and contain on an average 37 letters, but the ends are very uneven although the scribe has no objection to dividing a word between two lines. The lines which mention the consuls for the year project by about three letters into the left margin. In spite of the handsome appearance of the MS., which has a broad margin above and below the calligraphic writing and is certainly not the work of a schoolboy, the text is extraordinarily corrupt.
cf.
11.

15 pass{a), 132 Masiniss{ae), 207 omnib{us).

Mistakes

in

proper names, the occasional omissions of


(e. g.

letters,
1.

and easy palaeo-

27 intergessit) are not g surprising; but forms such as coniurium for connubium (1. 17), fictie grimonibus for fictis criminibus (1. 72), planus for primus (1. 217), and still more pugnamentasi (? Pergamenos missi, 1. iii), trigem reddeterbuit (? ens deterruit^
. .
.

graphical errors such as the confusion of c and

1.

184),

show

that the scribe understood

little

of what he was writing.

It is

strange that having swallowed such monstrosities he should have in a few places taken the trouble to make minor corrections, Chartaginientium e. g. being
1. 22, fodem to fidem in 1. 95, and the super187 being erased. The epitome briefly chronicles events one after the other in the barest manner with no attempt at connexion or literary style, thereby presenting a marked contrast to the extant epitome of

altered to Chartaginiensium in
1.

fluous s of Lussitanorum in

Livy but this bald, strictly chronological arrangement hardly excuses the grammatical errors both of accidence and syntax which are scattered throughout the text. The lack of confidence which the scribe's Latin necessarily
;

inspires,

coupled with the length of the

lines,

renders the task of restoring the

lacunae, which occur in nearly every line, exceptionally difficult, and

we have
Yet
in

generally abstained from conjectures which did not seem fairly certain.
spite of all these drawbacks,

and though

it

is

just

when
is

it

reaches a

new and

therefore specially interesting fact that the papyrus obstacles to interpretation, the historical value of the

apt to present unusual


is

new epitome

considerable,

as will presently be shown.

92

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

The papyrus falls into two main divisions, the first (Cols, i-iii) covering Books 37-40, where Livy's history is extant, the second (Cols, iv-viii) covering Books 48-55, of which only an epitome constructed on quite other lines has
been preserved. The first section, which deals with events between B, C. 190 and 179 and necessarily contains no new information, is chiefly interesting because it enables us to see the principles on which the epitome was composed, and hence to form a better estimate of the value of the second section, where no comparison with the actual work of Livy is possible. When allowances are made for the point of view of the compiler, the impression which he leaves is by no means unfavourable. Being limited to the barest catalogue of actual events, he naturally ignores Livy's discussions of origins and causes as well as speeches, but he does not omit any of the more important occurrences. With regard to
the less striking incidents his choice
is

capricious
(11.

he tends to insert notices of


14-7), the tents in the
;

picturesque stories, e.g. that of Ortiagon's wife


(11.

60-3),

Theoxena

(11.

70-1), even

when
is

rather trivial

forum and the amount of


its

space which he devotes to an event


portance.
chapters,

often in inverse proportion to

im-

The account

of the war in Ambracia, to

is for instance dismissed in two words (1. 13). more interested in home affairs than the author of the extant epitome, who in Books 37-40 mentions fewer events though entering into more details about them. The language of the papyrus is in the main borrowed from Livy, from whom whole phrases and even clauses are reproduced (e. g. in 11, 78-80), but the epitomizer frequently summarizes Livy in his own words (e.g. 11. 8-10) process which sometimes leads to apparent errors (cf. 1. 3, note). Twice he seems to have distorted Livy's chronology through combining two separate notices (cf. notes on 11. 7 and 17), but in other respects the chronology of the

which Livy gives nine It is noticeable that he

is

papyrus faithfully represents that of Livy. After Col. iii a good many columns are
of

which contained the epitome and important section of the epitome, giving a few lines from the end of Book 48 and most of Books 49-55, Col. iv-vi and vii-viii are continuous, but between Cols, vi and vii one column is lost, as is proved by the lacuna in the Epistle to the Hebrews at the corresponding point. Books 50, 54, and ^^ are the best preserved, then come 49 and Of Book 53 we have only the beginnings of lines, and Book ^"^, which was 51. treated at exceptional length, is spoilt by the loss of a whole column. The period with which the papyrus deals, B.C. 150-137, is one of great interest. Abroad there were the Third Punic, Fourth Macedonian (against Pseudophilippus), Achaean, and Spanish Wars, and at home events were leading up to the Gracchan revolution. The existing authorities are far from satisfactory. For
lost

Books 41-7.

With

Col. iv begins the second

668.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
first

93

foreign affairs the only sources of the

rank are the fragments of Polybius

and the extant epitome of Livy. Where these fail we are dependent mainly upon Appian, supplemented occasionally by such writers as Valerius Maximus, Of the internal history almost nothing is known Florus, Eutropius, and Orosius. is to be gleaned from the epitome of Livy and some references in except what Cicero. Thus wherever the papyrus supplements the existing epitome, the information is extremely welcome, and fortunately they differ from each other The extant epitome (henceforth called Epit.) is in two important respects. a connected narrative, and though the sequence of events is chronological to
the same extent as the original history, the epitomizer has not thought
while to
it worth which year every event recorded belongs. The papyrus on the other hand being arranged on strict chronological principles, not only do we learn the precise year to which each event mentioned in it was assigned by Livy, but the dates for the parallel portions of Epit. can now be exactly determined, a proceeding which entails several changes in the chronology which Epit. has hitherto been supposed to prove. Secondly, though Epit. is as a rule much longer than the papyrus because it often describes events in greater detail, the brief summary in the latter frequently includes events which

make

clear to

are passed over in Epit.


1 1 1-5,

Some

of these are naturally trivial (e.g.

11.

84-5,

and 164-6), but others are quite important. The proportion allotted Thus Book 49 in Epit. to the different books in Epit. is very uneven. occupies a good deal of space, the epitomizer entering into some detail both with regard to the Third Punic War and the rise of the pretender in Macedonia. Beside this the account of Book 49 in the papyrus (11. 87-105) is very meagre, though even so it mentions at least one event which does not occur in Epit. On the other hand Book 53 of Epit. is dismissed in a few lines, the author apparently attaching little importance to the events of B. C. 143-1, and Book 54 Here the papyrus is considerably (b. C. 141-139) does not occupy much space. fuller than Epit., the proportion assigned to each book being more equal. Which of the two epitomes was constructed first is uncertain. The extant one is now generally considered to have been composed not earlier than the second century, and Zangemeister {Festschr. d. xxxvi philol. Versamml. 1882, pp. 86 sqq.) would assign it to the fourth, while the author of the compilation in the papyrus no doubt lived in the second or third century, when chronological epitomes were much in vogue in Egypt cf. 12, 665, and the Strassburg fragment edited by The numerous errors in the text show that we have to deal with a copy Keil. some degrees removed from the original composition but the interval of time need not be long, as is shown by the Oxyrhynchus fragment of Julius Africanus' (412), which though written within about fifty years of the composition of
;

94
that

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


work
is

already quite corrupt.


far to

The

discovery of an epitome of Livy in

which the names of each year goes

of the consuls in the ablative case are prefixed to the events

confirm an acute conjecture of

Mommsen

{Abh. d. k.

Sachs. Ges. viii. p. 552), who inferred from and Orosius that an epitome of such a character, rather than Livy's complete work, lay at the basis of those authors' compilations the papyrus is, however, much less elaborate than the epitome of which the existence was postulated by Mommsen, and which Zangemeister {ibid.) even regards as the basis of the the internal evidence of Cassiodorus
;

extant epitome of Livy.

We append
the

a brief

summary of the

chief historical results to

be gained from
view.

new

find.

In foreign affairs the papyrus gives no

new information about

the Third Punic and

Achaean Wars and confirms the generally received


;

The

chronology of the Macedonian war against Pseudophilippus, which was

previously

somewhat uncertain, is now fixed more precisely 126-7, note. The names of the ambassadors to Bithynia in
11.

given in

112-3, enable us to
;

emend a

corruption in

and which are the name of one of them


cf. 11.

loi, 106,

B. c. 149,

and a hitherto unknown defeat of the Romans in B. c. 141 But much more valuable are the references to in Illyria is recorded in 1. 175. the Spanish war, especially the campaigns against Viriathus. Not only does the papyrus supply new facts of importance, a victory (apparently) in B. c. 147 and the delay of Q. Caepio (1. 136), the defeat of L. Metellus in B. c. 14a (1. 167),
as found in Polybius
(11.

182-4)

but

it

is

now

for the first

time possible to construct the right

chronology of the governors of Southern Spain in B. C. i45-39> and the chief Hitherto the few references to the Spanish war events connected with them.
in Epit.

were

insufficient to correct the unsatisfactory

account in Appian, whose

detailed examination of the changes introduced text is in parts defective. into the received chronology of this war and of the new light thrown upon Appian is given in the note on 1. 167. More interesting, however, than defeats

and

victories are the references in the

papyrus to

home
is

affairs.

With regard
is

to

events previously

known

the most striking novelty

the date of the famous

accusation of L. Aurelius Cotta

by Scipio Africanus, which

placed by the

papyrus

B.C. 138 in place of B.C. 133-29, a change which brings about Lines 115-6 probably fix the hitherto conflict between Livy and Cicero. a date of the Lex Scantinia. Among details which are new are the uncertain
in

important military reform introduced by Appius Claudius in

B. c.

140

(11.

177-8),

the dispute between the consul and the tribunes in the same year (11. 183-4), and the statement about the ancestry of A. Gabinius, author of the Lex Gabinia It is also a matter of interest that we can now connect with Livy (1. 193). several statements of later writers, e.g. Dio Cassius (11. 195-6, note), Valerius

668.

NEW
11.

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

95

Maximus
Obsequens

(notes on
(11.

127-9, note).
list

161-3, 164-6, and 192), Frontinus (11. 188-90, note), and Though the sadly imperfect condition of the text
serve only to accentuate the sense of loss,

prevents this
the papyrus

from being much longer, and the numerous fragmentary-

references to hitherto
is

unknown events

nevertheless a very serviceable addition to the authorities for the

period from B.

C. 150-139, and is a welcome violation of the monopoly hitherto enjoyed by Greek philology in the recovery of classical literature from Egypt.

For many suggestions and references

in the

commentary on
first

this

papyrus
also

we

are indebted to Mr.

W. Warde

Fowler.

The

proofs of our publication

were submitted to
contributed

Profs.

Kornemann, Reid, and Wissowa, who have

much

to the elucidation of several problems.

Col.
[in

i.

Hispa\nia

Romani

caesi.
cos.

Book 37

(B.C. 190).

\M. Fulvio] Cn. Manlio


]j

B.C. 189.

pax itertim data est. P. Lepidinus {maximus^ [ \pontif\ex maximus Q. Fabium pr{aetorem) quod flamen
5

[Qiiirin\alem erat proficisci in


[

Sardiniam
data.

\qnt.

Ant[i]ocho regi

pax

Lusitani

[vastati.]

Rhodonia

desoli deducta.

[Glabrio c^enstiram petens minantes


[accusd\tionem compellitoribus composito
10
\desiiti\t.

lib{er)

xxxviii

Book

38.

\Ambra\cia capta.
\Gallog\raecis in
[

Pamphylia proelio vastatis


Origiacontis captian nobilis

\a liberata.

15

[centuri]onem cuius
\t
]

vim pass{a) erat aurum admit

posceniem occidit caputque eius ad virum


itdit.]

[secum ?

Campanis coniurium. datum.


Lacedaemonios cruenta

[inter Achae]os et

[pr\oelia.

20

[M. Valeria L\ulio Calinatore cos. p]raeda ex Gallograecia per Cra .[.... [ [ducta. L. M\inucius Myrtilus et L. Man[i}liu[s
s

B.C. 188.

[per legat]os Chartaginien\t\ium qui


[pulsi eran\t (^avectify.

[M. Aemilio

C.

F[\aminio

cos.

B.C. 187.

96
25

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


[P. Scipio] Africanus
[dicta in

a Qumtis Metellis die{s}[


L. Cornelius

Li\tratum abi{t)t^ qui ne revocaretur

[Gracchus ffib{tinus) pl{ebis) intergessit.


3.
1.

Licinius for Lepidinus, 5. 1. \quirin\alis. 7. 1. Bononia for Rhodonia ; cf. 8. \. minantibus. 14. 1. Oriiagoniis capiiva. 9. \. competitoribus proposito. 20. 1. per Thrd\cia7n. 19. 1. Lyvio Salinatore. 17. 1. connubium for coniurium. 25. 1. Petilliis for Metellis. 26. 1. Li\terninum. 27. 1. intercessit.
p. 102.

Col.
Scipio dain[nattis ....]. ^?.

ii.

[lib{er) xxxv\iiii

Book

39.

30

/^A'

(7.

Flaini[nium et
y[iae
[

M.

Aem.iliu\in cos. Ligures


e]t

perdomiti.

Flaminia

Aetniliana mufiita[e.

Latinorum
ab

]inum coacta

Roma

re[dire.

Manlius

.]m de Gallo\an[.

graecis in f\riumpho
35

petunia
B.C. 186.

quae trans\lata erat


Sp. Postum{i)o [Q. Marcio

^is p\eY\5'\oluta.
co\s.

Hispala Fd\cenia meretri\ce et pupillo Aebutio qii\ein T. Sempronius] Rutilius


40

Duronia ciycumscribserant indicium re[ferentibus Ba]ccha{n)alia subla[ta His]pan[{\


tutor et viewer
subacti. at\Jiletarum cer]tamina

primum a
45

Fu[lvio Nobilior]e edita.

Galli(^sy in Ital\iam transgressis

MaVcelhim
L. Cornelius

[p]ersuasit [ut trans Alpes redirect.

Scipio pos[t be Hum Antioch{\ ludos voti-

vos con[lata pecunia

feci\t.
B, c. 185.

50

App\pp Clau[dio M. Semproni\o cos. Ligures fu[gati \llis accepta P. Claudio Ptdchr\o L. Porcio Li]cinio cos. homifii ccd 00 [a Naevio priaetore) ven]efici{i) damnati. L. Quintius Fla[niininus Gallia .] quod Philippg [Poeno scorto] suo deside. . .

B.C. 184,

rante gladidytorium specta]culum


37.
1

Fi\cenia.

39.

1.

ci]rcumscrtpserani.
?

40.

1.

indicium.

44.

1.

Ma]rcellus.

51.1. hominum circa d{uo) {millia)

668.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
Col.
iii.

97

fs

siia

manu Bomi[m

nobilem occiderat

a lanatone

cen[sore senatu

motus

est.

vastaita Porcia [facta.

M.
60

Claudia Marcello [Q. Fabio Labeone P. Licini Crassi po[ntificis maximi


ludis fune(b^ribus
[

cos.

B.C. 183.

in foro

tabernaculis po\sitis evenit id quod


nate[s c\ecin\e^fat \tabernacida

in foro futura.
difd^
65

f[

16 letters

...].. m.
\uh^\

Hanjiibal
l[ib{er)

12 letters

^
[ [

19 letters

xxxx
id letters

Book

40.

L. A[emilio C]n. Berio


]

\cos.

B.C. 183.

belliim /[

]ellitesitt[
]

16
15

j,

70

Theoxen[a
.

in

mare w[

\igien\

Demetrius

grimonibus [accusatus per patrem coactti^s 14 letters P. Lentulo M. Paebio {cos.


ficiie
75

B.C. 181.

in agro L. Nerylli sc[ribae libri

Numae

inventi.

A. Postumio

C.

(^Calpurnio^

\cos.

B.C. 180.

cum Liguribus Hisj{ani


L. Livius trib{unus)
80
est.

subacti.

pl{ebis) quod [annos nati quemque magistratum peie[rent rogatio lata

Q. Fidvio

M. Manlio
M.
1.

c\os.

B.C. 179.

M.
55.
62.
1.
1.

Lepidi et Fulvii No[bilioris


Catone for lanatone. Baebio for Berio. Lentulo and Baebio for Paebio.
56.
1.

1.

Boiujn.

57.
72.
75.
\.

1.

basilica for vastaiia.

1.

vate[s\ for nate[s].

67.

fictis criminibus.

74. 78.

Cornelio (or Cethego) for

1.

Peiillii for Nerylli.

a L.

Villio for

Z. Livius and quot

for quod.

Col.

iv.

adversus Cka[r]taginienses.
C. Corneliu[s
. .

Lusitani vd\stati.
su\

Book 48

(b. c. 150)

.]ecus

quod P. Decim

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


85

ictam ingeni^am stupraverat damnatus.


li[b{er)]

L. Marcio Censorino M. Man{i)lio helium Pwticum tertium exortum.


90
\b\enigne locant auxiliate.
[Vj

\
'^s

^
Book
49
B C. 149

cos.

Utic[enses

Char tag in[i]e[nses

[d\edicionem vemrunt, iussi

gmnj^

[sua

in alium locum trqnsferr^ mg[


redierunt.

Roman[os
Scipid^
i

pepulerunt.

21 letters

95

Aemiliani

fpjdem

p[

Aemi-

liani virtute exer\citus qui obsessus a Poenis erat liber\atus. 16 letters


h
.

per Caridemum poe[


tanis reus product[
100
fill
tii

Ser. Galba a Lusi-

20 letters quos flens com[plexus est. Andrisco se Philippi philtu[m ferente Macedonia
.

fer
re[s]

arma

occupata.
et

20

letters

Man{i)lio
105

Marc{i)o

cos. quarti ludi saecula-

factos quos opo[rtuit Diti ex Sibyllinis


lib{er) I

car minibus [Ter'^piji facti sunt.

Book

50.

per

socios

popuji
d\^

Romani Pseudophilippus
24
17
letters

in ultimam

/[.

..]/[..

cf. p.

Prusiasl
104.
loi. \.fih'u[m.

90.

\.

auxiliati ;

Col. V.

no

[rex BithyYiae positus est.


[
[.
.

ad Attalum regem Marco ] .podd\gricus A. Hostilius Mancinus capite \a quondam L. Manilius Volso stolidus
in pugnamentasi sunt legati
]

115

ligationem dixerunt M. Cato respondit M. Sca[n]ti{ni)us [nee caput] nee pedes nee cor habere {nt}. {de) in stupro deprehensi{s). ]am tulit [

[Sp. Albino

L. Piso\ne

cos.

148.

668.

NEW
\s

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

99

[Masinis{sa) uli\imae senectutis liberos


[

reliquit decedens, cuius re-

120

[gnum natu max]imis filis per miliaannum [Marcellus leg\atus ad Masinissam missus
[obrutus.
[

distributum.

Ha]sdrubal quod adfinis Masiniss{ae) erat


\ta subselli socius est.

Scipio Aemilianus

[consul creai\us.
125

\M\

Manilius] in Africa{m] pr\o\spere dimicatus

\es\t.

[luventii pr{aetoris) {\n Thessalia exercitus caesus.

[Pkilippus a] Metello captus.


\.
. .
.

sacrarium
incendio

et laur]us soci
]

maximo

[inviolaia.
130
[

lib{er)

It]

Book

51.

[P.
[

Cornelia C. Livio] cos.

B. c. 147.

Cartha\ginein Appius crudelissime


\ne obsideniiis

Romanes non

Cartkag]ineni crebris proeli^is"^.

135

{per Achaeor]um pr{aetorem) Corinthi legati


[pidsati.

Romano

Lu]sitani subalti.

III. \.in PergamenosiJ) missi for pugnameniasi (cf. p. 105) and M{arcus) .... for 114. 1. legationem. 120. 1. Aemilianum for miliaannuvi. 123. 1. occisus for socius. 125. 1. dimicavit for dimicatus \es^. 133. 1. obsidentes. 135. 1. Romani. 136. 1. subacti\ cf. p. 107.

Marco.

Col.

vi.

Cn. Corne[lio L.
\p\er Scipion[em
[d]irepta.
140
qti[

Mummio
Carthago

cos.

B.C. 146.

visset

uxo[rem
fil[is
[

duobus

pofestate

Aemilia qu[
[

lib(er)

Hi

Book

53.

145

L. Mtimanus C[orinthum
Mxore
i?[

dim it.
a Lusitanis clades

peruriam[
accepta.
[

loo
Q. Fabio
150

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


Maximo
L. Hostilio
cos.

B.C. i45

M. Petronj
adversu[s

Viriathum
cos.

Ser. Galba L. [Coifa

B.C. 144.

L. Metell{us sulatum [
155

con-

qui invis[us plebi


fetitur z{

Syria va[stata
(^on]tent[
[

lib[er) liii
cos.

Book

^'i,.

160

Q. Metello [Appio Claudio Rethog\en


liberOS t
.[

B. C. 143.

proposito

[
145
1.

Mummius.
lost.

One column
Col.
vii.

165

occidit, a Tyresio quern devicij gladiu\m dono accepit sagidoque remi[sso am]ici-

[^ dextram
[MYtellus
COS.

dedit.

a Lusitanis vex\atus.

\s\igna statu(^a)s tabulas

CorintUias L.

\ummiiis
B.C. 141.
]

distribuit circa oppida et


170
[C}t.

Rom[

]vit.

Caepione Q. Pompeio cos. Q. Fabius Maximus Lusitanis ca[esis

Viriathum fugavit.
lib{er) liiii

Book
d^evictii^^.

54.

Pompeius
175

cos.

a{n] Nu{a}maniinis

in

Scordiscis cladis accepta.


[Q. Cae\pione \C\ Laelio Salqsso o^os. Appius Claudius evicit iie duos [delectus}]

B.C. 140.

annus

haberet.

Uemilius Torquatus D. S[ild\num

180

filium suu[m] de Macedonia dqmn[avit, f\uneri non interfuit, eademque die [in do[mo\ sua
coftstdtafitibus respondit.

668.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
Claudiam Assilium

lOi

\C\aepio cos. indelegem Ti.

tr(J,)b[unu'm) pl{ebis) interpellantem, profectionem

[s]uam l\i\ctores trigem reddeterhuit.


185

\Q\ Fabius Maximus a Viriatk{i]o devictus de\f\)rmem, cum, hostibus pacem fecit. Q. Occius
[

2] insidiis
.

Lu^s^itanorum fortissime
aqua

[pugnavit.

.]inae

devota est aqua An{n\io.

190
176. Asellum.
1.

[Marcia in Capi\tolium contra Sibyllae carmina [perdue ta. ]


Sapiente for Salasso. 178. 1. 7. Manlius for Uemilius. 184. 1. . . ens deierruii; cf. p. 112.
.

182.

1.

Claudium

Col.

viii.

Cn. Pisone C. Polh\o

cos.

B.C. 139.
letters

Chaldaei urbe

til[

ao

A. Cabinius verna[e
195

rogationem

tulit

suffragium per ta[bellam ferri.


Servilius Caepio d\b equiiibus quos periculo
obiecerat clavo [ictus

15 letters
17

Audax Minurus

{D)ita[lco

Viriathum iugula[verunt.
lib{er) [Iv

Book
praemium Nasicam et
et Curiatius

^^.

200

P. Sc[i]pione D. lunio
interfectores

[cos.

B.C. 138.

Viri\athi

negatum. c[um Scipi]on[em decemviru[m co]s. Licini[us

trib{uni) pl{ebis) in car({er]em [c\plI[ocarent,


205

precibus populi mul\fa r^missa


trib[unus) pl{ebis) pro

commodis
co[
.

pop[uli
de-

omnib[us) lucti expiravit.


singulis venierunt.
210

]^?2[

sertores in comitio virgis cae[si sestertiis

P. Africanus cum L. Cottam


.

[accu]sar[et

ca^ magnitudinem nonijnis Lusitani vastati. a{n] N[uman]tijt[is clades Diodotus Tryphon An[tioc]hum [regem occi.]
.

accepta.

dit Suriague potitus

e[st.

2.
ai5

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


M. Aemilio
Oblivionis
C. Hostilio

M[a]ncino

[cos.

B.C. 137.

Decimiis Brutus in Hispania re b\ene gesta

flumen planus

trand\ivit.

1.

191. 1. Gabinius.

207. 1. planus.

Popilb\o for C. Polh[o. 192. 1. urbe et Iiaf[ia\ cf. p. 113. 193. 201. 1. inier/ecioribus. 203. 1. Decimum Brutum for decemviri^. {ab) omntb{us) luctus. primus for 214. 1. Syriaque. 217. 1. Oblivionem

M.

Fr.

(4

Fr.

{b).

Fr.

{c).

Fr.

{d).

668.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

103

14-17. For the story of Ortiagon's wife see 38. 24. captian must be capiiva, but Possibly an nobilis is due to is much wanted and nobilis is probably corrupt. a reminiscence of the words Ancyram nobilem which occur at the beginning of the chapter. promised,' while admii also seems to be a corruption of a word meaning pensaniem, the word used by Livy. poscentem is 17. On the right of intermarriage granted to the Campanians see Livy 38. 36, where the event is placed in b.c. 188, and is the consequence of the census ordered to be taken The papyrus records the event mentioned in in B.C. 189 which is mentioned in ch. 28. Cf. note on 11. 44-5. ch. 36, but puts it in the place corresponding to ch. 28.

uxor

18. Cf. 38. 30.

19. Cf. 38. 35. 20. Cf. 38, 40-1.

21-3 Cf 38- 42. 24. Cf. 38. 42. 25-7. Cf. 38. 50-3.
very likely 27-8. 30-1. 32-3.
Cf. 38. 55,
Cf. 39. 2. Cf. 39. 3.

Though

die dicta or dicto is necessary for the construction,

it is

that the scribe wrote dies dicia or dictus.

58-60.

33-5 Cf. 39. 6-7.


36. Cf. 39. 6.

37-41. Cf. 39. 9-19. 41-2. His\patiJ] subacti: cf. 39. 21, referring to the victory of C. Atinius. 42-3. Cf. 39. 22. 44-5. Cf 39. 22, where the incursion of the Gauls is described. But the apparent mention of Marcellus refers to ch. 54, where it is stated that in b.c. 183 they retired to The epitomizer seems their own country, Marcellus being then consul (cf. also ch. 45). therefore to have made the same kind of mistake as in connexion with the concession to
the

Campanians;
.
.

cf.

1.

17, note.
.

45-7. Cf. 39. 22 L. Scipio ludos ad id pecunia .fecit.


48. Cf. 39. 23. 49. The defeat of the Ligurians What event related is the elections.

guos

bello

Aniiochi vovtsse sese dicehat ex collata

by the two consuls occurs


\llis

in 39. 32,
clear.

and the next

accepta refers to

mfllia capta was meant (cf. 39. 32 multa millia hominum part of cladis, and in or a Hispanis may be supplied (cf.

Possibly multa in iis cepit); or ]//?> may represent and 212), the reference 11. 174-5
is

not

being to

the

defeat

mention of

this

This however was soon remedied, and a mentioned in ch. 30. campaign would have been expected to precede instead of following

the allusion to the Ligurian war.


50. Cf. 39. 33. 51. Cf. 39. 41. 52-6. Cf. 39. 42.

If

.]

Gallia

is

not corrupt

it is

out of place, and ought to follow

quod.

57. Cf. 39. 44. 58. Cf. 39. 45. 59-63. Cf. 39. 46. reference to the capture 63-4.

and death of Philopoemen


39. 49-50.
;

at the

hands of the

Messenians probably occurred here

cf.

64. Han\nibal'. a reference to his death

cf.

39. 51.

I04

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


67 Cf. 39. 56. 68. Perhaps \Hispant] should be restored before helium;
cf.

40. i.

70-1. Cf. 40. 4. Prof. Reid suggests in mare[m] [f^ugienis se dedit (or iecii). Livy's phrase is in mare sese deiecil. It is not clear whether /^r patrem coactu\ in 1. 73 also refers to the 72. Cf. 40. 6-16. accusation against Demetrius or to his death by poisoning, which is described in 40. 24. coaciu[s does not seem to be right on either hypothesis.
74. Cf. 40. 18. 75. Cf. 40. 29.

The

restoration is

however rather long

for the lacuna.

76. Cf. 40. 35. 77. Cf. 40. 39-41.

78-80. Cf. 40. 44 ^(? anno rogatio primicm lata annos nati qnemque magistratum peierent caperentque.
81. Cf. 40. 45. 82. Cf. 40. 45-6.

est

ah L.

Villio tribuno plebis

quot

After this several columns composita inimiciiia may be supplied. corresponding to the break between 657. iv and v. cf. Epit. 48 ad fin. i.e. the war with Masinissa; 83. adversus Chd\r\taginienses Carthaginienses cum adversus /oedus bellum Masinissae intulissent Lusitani va\stati; cf. 1. 212. The reference is to the treacherous attack of Sulpicius Galba (cf. 1. 98), on which see Appian, Iber. 59-60, Orosius, iv. 21. 10, Val. Max. ix. 62, and Sueton. Galba 3. Epit. 48 has Ser. Sulpicius Galba praetor male adversus Lusitanos But, pugnavit, which has generally been interpreted as implying a defeat of the Romans. but unsuccessfully as Kornemann remarks, it is now clear that male means not
are
lost,
\

'

'

'

dishonourably.'

The 84. Probably Ceth^cus, i.e. Cethegus] cf. 1. 14 Origiacontis for Ortiagontis. incident is not recorded elsewhere, nor is any C. Cornelius Cethegus known at this period. L. Cornelius Cethegus was one of the accusers of Galba (Epit. 49) and M. Cornelius
Cethegus was consul in b. c. 160. Decim seems to be corrupt for Decimi or Decii, and [ is very likely the beginning of a cognomen. What a ictam (or auctam) in 1. 85 means is obscure ; Reid suggests ingenu[uyfi, comparing Val. Max. vi. i. 10 ancillam. Kornemann prefers Deci{u)m quod cum ingenuo adulescentulo stupri commercium haJ>uissei. The doubtful u after d c can be i. The Consulship of L. Marcius Censorinus and M'. Manilius. 87-93. 'Book 49. Third Punic War began. The inhabitants of Utica willingly assisted (the Romans). The Carthaginians surrendered; being ordered to transfer all their possessions to another site
. . .
.

they returned
90.
(?

.'
.
.

conceals the object is for auxiliaii (so. sunt\ and locant perhaps Romanis). locant auxilium, though in itself a possible phrase, is unlikely, for the verbs in the papyrus are uniformly in the perfect tense and generclly come at the end of the
auxiliate

sentence.

91-3. Cf. Epit. 49 tunc cum ex auctoritate patrum inherent (sc. consults) ut in alium locum dum a mari decem milia passuum ne minus remotum oppidum facerent, indignitate rei ad rebellandum Carthaginienses compulerunt. ox facerent Gronovius had conjectured transThe embassy of the ferreni, which seems to have been the verb employed in 1. 92. Carthaginians mentioned in 11. 90-1 came to Rome (cf, Epit. legati triginta Romam venerunt per quos se Carthaginienses dederuni); but the demand to evacuate Carthage was made by the consuls after reaching Africa, and if redierunt refers to the return of the

ambassadors to Carthage, the statement of the papyrus

is

inaccurate.

It is

more

likely that

668.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
1.

105

redierunt refers to the renewal of the war,


in.

m after trdjisferfe may well be a mistake for The whole phrase would then be an antithesis to in dedicionem venerunt in 91, pepiderunt must be the Carthaginians, since the siege began 93-5. The subject
;

with the repulse of the Romans. Lines 94-5 refer to the distinction gained by Scipio Aemilianus in the early engagements cf. Epit. 49 and Appian, Pun. 98-9. 95-7 This refers to the occasion on which Scipio saved the Roman army at Nepheris; cf. Epit. and Appian, Pun. 102-3. 97-8. Who this Charidemus was is unknown. poS^ is possibly poejam. 98-100. Cf. Epit., vhere the prosecution of Galba is described more fully. In 1. 99 uUiQT producf^us agreeing with Galba, producfj agreeing with//?' may be read. 1 01. Unless Philippi is an error for Persei, Reid is probably right in correcting se Philippi to Persei se Philippum ; cf Epit. Persei se filium ferens et muiato nomine Philippus vocatus .... ioiam Macedoniam aut voluntate incolentium aut armis occupavit. 103-5. The Epitome of Book 49 ends with the description of the revolt of Macedonia, but carminibus in 1. 105 strongly suggests that this passage refers to the celebration of the games of Dis at Terentum in accordance with the Sibylline books, a fact which is mentioned near the beginning of Epit. 49 Dili pairi ludi ad Terentum ex praecepto librorum Sibyllinorum facti, qui ante annum ceniesimum primo Punico bello quingentesimo ei altera anno ab urbe condita facti erant. This is confirmed by a passage in Censorinus, De die natali 17, 8, to which our attention was called by Komemann and Wissowa, de quartorum ludorum anno triplex sententia est. Antias enim et Varro et Livius relates esse prodiderunt L. Marcio Censorino, M. Manilio consulibus post Romam conditam anno sexcentesimo quinto. at Piso Censorius et Cn. Gellius sed et Cassius Hemina qui illo tempore vivebat post annum /ados tertium affirmant Cn. Cornelio Lentulo, L. Mummio Achaico consulibus.^ id est anno sexcentesimo octavo, in quindecim virorum autem commentariis notantur sub anno sexcentesimo vicesimo octavo Mam. Aemilio Lepido., L. Aurelio Oreste consulibus. The restorations of 11. 103-4 are due to Wissowa, who {Religion und Kultus der Romer, p. 364) considers that Livy's date for the games (b.c. 149) is wrong, and that Cassius Hemina was right in assigning them to B.C. 146. 107-8. Cf Epit. 50 Thessalia cum et illam invadere armis atque occupare Pseudophilippus vellet per legatos

Romano rum auxiliis Achaeorum defensa est. 109. Possibly the death of Cato was referred to here, this being the only place in the papyrus where a mention of it can be inserted. That event is referred to this year by Cicero {Brut, 15), and cf 1. 56 where Catone is corrupted into lanatone.

no. The death of Prusias is noticed in Epit. If Prusias in 1. 109 is ^\., positus is probably corrupt for some word meaning 'killed' (^ occisus, cf 1. 123); but ide)positus is just possible, for Prusias seems to have been first abandoned by his subjects (Justin depono in the sense of depose is however not classical. Komemann would 34. 4). xi^Ysx positus and supply Nicomedes in 1. 109. 1 10-5. The embassy which gave rise to the jest of Cato is also mentioned in the Epitome immediately after the death of Prusias, though the incident took place in
'
'

Prusias' lifetime.

Line iii is very corrupt, si before sunt must be the termination of a participle such as missi; but what is pugnamenta? Pergamenos is not very satisfactory since the mention of Pergamus seems unnecessary after ad Attalum regem. The names of the ambassadors are given only by Polybius (37. i^) as Marcus Licinius (gouty), Aulus Mancinus (broken head), and Lucius Malleolon (the fool). The last name can now be corrected to Manlius, which is meant by Manilius in the papyrus as is sho\vn by the cognomen Volso (Vulso). The Manlii Vulsones were a distinguished patrician family in

e. . ;

io6

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


1.

the earlier part of the republic, and

members of it were consuls as late as b. c. 189 and 178. Marco in in is probably M{arcus) followed by the first part of another name which was more probably a cognomen (} Archias) than Licinius. The first half of 113 seems to be corrupt, '^a may be the termination of test\a (cf.
Polybius,
/.

c.

if

there were space for it before ies/]a the order of capi'/e .... quondam would be awkward. Should deprehensi be corrected to 1 1 5-6. This event is omitted in the Epitome.

'
'

1.

etf

')

but a participle

is

also required,

and even

and some word like repuls'am be supplied ? A certain tribune C. Scantinius Capitolinus was accused of stuprum by M. Claudius Marcellus, as aedile, in b. c. 222 (Val. INIax. vi. i. 7; cf. Plutarch, Vit. Marc. 2), but the Marcus Scantinius here must be different. As Warde Fowler remarks, it seems very unlikely that there Avere two Scantinii condemned for stuprum, one in b. c. 208, the other in b.c. 149, and that there should also be a Lex Scanhnia on the same offence, of which the date is unknown (Mommsen, Slra/rechi, p. 703). He therefore thinks that the present passage refers to the passing of the Lex Scariiinia, and that ]am is corrupt for the termination of plebisciium, while 171 stupro deprehensi is for de vi stupro deprehensis. 1 18-2 1. Masinissa dying in extreme old age left four children, and his kingdom was divided by Aemilianus among the elder sons.' Cf. Epit. Masinissa Numidiae rex maior no7iaginia annis decessii adeo etiam in settee iam viguil ut post sexium et ociogesimum annum filium genuerit. inter tres liberos eius, maximum naiu Micipsam, Gulussam, Mastanabalem P. Scipio Aemilianus partes administra?idi regni divisit. The fourth legitimate son who received no share of the kingdom was no doubt the one bom when his father was 86 but other writers differ from Livy regarding the number of Masinissa's children. The death of Masinissa is placed by Mommsen at the end of b.c. 149, but according to the papyrus it took place early in b.c. 148. 1 2 1-2. Cf. Epit. ex tribus legatis qui ad Masinissam missifuerant, Claudius Marcellus
deprehensus,
. . .
.

coorta tempestate obruius

est.

Carthagi7iienses Hasdrubalem Masinissae nepotem proditionis suspectum in curia occideru7it. Appian (/*. in) in describing the death of Hasdrubal uses the equivalent of subsellium 5e <7 is very YikiAy /rag7)ienium in some form. Kornemann aptly compares Orosius, iv. 22. 8 Asdrubal .

122-3.

Cf. Epit.

! %.
.
.

subselhOru7}i /ragmentis

occisus

est.
. .
.

123-4. Cf. Epit. P. Scipio Aemilianus cum aedilitaiem peteret


creatus
est.

legibus solutus et consul

125. The Epitome expugnavit.

is

more

explicit:

M'

Manilius aliquot urbes circumpositas Carthagini

126-7. Cf. Epit. Pseudophilippus in Macedonia caeso cum exercitu P. luventio praetor Caecilio victus capiusque est et recepta Macedonia. Mommsen places the defeat of Juventius doubtfully in b.c 149, and the victory of Metellus in B.C. 148. It now appears that both events took place in b. c. 148. 127-9. The burning of the sacrarium is not mentioned in Epit., but is explained,

a Q.

as

Kornemann and Wissowa point out, by Obsequens 19 (78) vasto incendio Romae cum regia quoque ureretur, sacrarium et ex duabus altera laurus ex mediis ignibus inviolata
upon which passage
the restorations of
11.

exstiterunt,

128-9 are based,

soci \5 corrupt,

possibly for Opis.

The blank space between 11. 128 and 131 is barely sufiicient for two intervening and there is the further difiiculty that the letters of the books are elsewhere placed near the middle of the line, so that the termination of the title ought to have been visible here. But since verbs are generally placed at the end of the sentence in the papyrus
130.
lines,

668.
inviolata or

NEIV CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS


is

107

an equivalent

required for

1.

129,

and

and to assign 11. 131-143 'liber arrangement of Books 50-53. between the papyrus and the extant Epitome with regard to the Book 51 was omitted, this was probably a mere accident. If the title therefore of known in connexion with the 132-4. This passage is very corrupt. No Appius is crudelissime suggests that Appius is a mistake for Carthage at this period, operations at Roman and that 11. 132-3 refer to the cruelty of Hasdrubal towards the
Hasdrubal, prisoners described by Appian (P. 118). pulsati sint Lorintm. 135-6. Cf. Epit. quod legati populi Romani ab Achaeis

to the

50th

Book would

to suppose the omission of the title introduce a serious conflict

ine

Achaean praetor
136

referred to

was Critolaus.
,

subadi, but no Appian {Iber. 60-1) passes straight at this period is known. and Plautius (cf. 11. (cf. 11 83 and 98) to the defeats of Vetilius an does not mention Spanish affairs in this book, but gives

The

simplest correction for subalti

is

victory over the Lusitanians

from the treachery of Galba 146-8, note). The Epitome


account of Viriathus earlier

however there was really a victory over the Lusitanians in successes in The reverse sustained by Vetilius recorded c 147 the explanation may be as follows. a preliminary Appian ilber. 61) is represented as the direct and immediate result of by but it is not unlikely that Appian has combined the success obtained by the Romans, that Lusiiani subacti here refers events of two separate campaigns by Vetilius into one and note.^ reverse took place in the next year, b.c. 146; cf. 11. 146-8, to his success, while his The papyrus mentions only one defeat by the Lusitanians. Epitome before the attack upon 138 The destruction of Carthage is mentioned in the strictly chronological system adopted by the the embassy at Corinth, but owing to the author of the papyrus it is here correctly placed in b.c. 146. probably refer to the story of 139-43. These lines, as Kornemann and Reid suggest, children into the flames cf. Epit. 51. the death of Hasdrubal's wife, who first threw her two ie^. Ci.Y.O\\.. Corinihon ex senaius consullo diruii. entry refers to the death of Uiaeus 146. uxore: probably, as Kornemann remarks, this de vir.iU.^o. cf. Pausan. vii. 16. 2-4, Zonaras ix. 86, Auctor his wife by poison after killing the defeats of Vetihus 147-8. a Lusitanis clades] accepta (cf 1. 175) may refer to and C. Plautius mentioned in Epit., or to one of them cf. note on 1. 136. 10 A certain C. Petronius who was an ambassador to Attains and Prusias in but no M. Petronius is known at this period. B. c. 156 is mentioned in Polyb. 32. 26, of the consul Q. Fabius Maximus 151. adversds'. this probably refers to the dispatch

Book

52.

If

Aemilianus against Viriathus;

cf.

cum consulari opus essei et duce et exerciiu, and in 1. 148 (cf. 11. 147-8, note) refers to Vetilius, generally B. c. 145, instead of 146, as has been 153 L. Metellus is perhaps the brother

adversus Epit. 52 taniumque terror is is hostis intulit ul If the reverse mentioned note on 1. 167.
possibly the defeat of Plautius occurred

supposed. of Quintus and the consul in b.c. 142; failures But the mention of consulaium suggests a reference to the two cf. 1. 167, note. consulship before he obtained it for b.c. 143, and of Q. Metellus' candidature for the confusion ot Kornemann is probably right in regarding Z. as a mistake for Q. On the 164-6 and 167. For invis^us plebi cf. Auct. de viris cf. notes on 11.
the two brothers illust. 61 invisus plebi ob
1

6 1-3.

Reid

is

Valerius

Maximus

(v.

actus. severitatem et ideo post duas repulsas consul aegref by doubt right in connecting this passage with the story told no Metellus abandoned i. 5) of Rhoetogenes' children, to save whom Q.

nimiam

the siege of a

r *u refers to the two 164-6. This passage, elucidated by Reid and Wissowa, clearly whose account Val. Max. (iii. 2. 21), exploits of Q. Occius (cf. 1. 186) in Spain recorded by
, ,

town

in Spain.

i<d8

the OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


is
. .

of the second praestantem


.

idem Pyressuvi (v. 1. Pyreswn) nohiliiaie ac viriute Celtiberos omnes succumbere sibi coegit ; nee erubuit flagrantissimi pectoris iuvenis gladium
. .
.

ei

suum el sagulum This corresponds


is

tradere.

ille

veto etiani petiit ut hospiiii iure inter se iuncti essent


;

to

a Tyresio, &c.

occidit in

1.

164 belongs

to

the story of the

first

In Val. Max. coupled with gladium^ but the order of words in 11. 164-5 indicates that saguloque remi[sso is an ablative absolute and saguloque is not to be altered to sagulumque. With regard to the name of the Celtiberian, the form Tyresius found in 1. 164 is supported by Orosius v. 8. i (a reference which we owe to Dr. Greenidge), where a Celticus princeps called Thyresus is mentioned in connexion with the pacification of Spain after the fall Clearly the same name, and very likely the same person are meant, so that of Numantia. the MSS. of Val. Max. are probably wrong in giving the forms Pyressus or Pyresus. There is also a slight divergence between the papyrus and Val. Max. concerning the date of Q. Occius' achievements, which the former assigns to b.c. 142 while Val. Max. Since represents Q. Occius as Q. Metello consult legatus, thus indicating the year b.c. 143. Q. Occius in any case remained in Spain until b.c. 140 (1. 186) and Q. Metellus was there in both B.C. 143 and 142 (1. 167, note) the inconsistency is trifling, but Q. Metello consult may easily be a mistake for Z. Metello consult or Q. Metello proconsuli; cf. notes on
exploit (the killing of a Celtiberian warrior) described in the lost column.

sagulum

153-6 and 167. 167. This fact that L. Metellus, consul in b. c. 142, Avent to Spain and was there defeated by the Lusitanians is neAv, and is the first of a series of references to the war Owing to the extreme brevity against Viriathus which throw much light on its history. of the extant Epitome of Books 53 and 54 the principal authority has hitherto been Appian, whose account of the Spanish war is preserved in a single very corrupt codex. The generally received chronology from b. c. 143-37, e. g. that of Mommsen, is as follows B. c. 143. Q. Caecilius Metellus, governor of Northern Spain, is successful, but the
11.
:

praetor Quinctius, governor of Southern Spain, is defeated by Viriathus. B.C. 142. Q. Metellus as proconsul continues to be successful. Q. Fabius
Servilianus,
[Iber. 67),

Maximus

consul,

who succeeded

Quinctius

in

Southern Spain according to Appian

is compelled to retreat. Q. Fabius Maximus as proconsul is at first victorious, but is afterwards defeated and compelled to conclude a disgraceful peace. Q. Pompeius, consul, the new governor of Northern Spain, is also defeated. B.C. 140. Q. Caepio, consul, the new governor of Southern Spain, invades Lusitania. (The death of Viriathus is placed in this year by e.g. Peter, Zeitta/eln, p. 69.) Q. Pompeius remains as proconsul in Northern Spain. B.C. 139. Viriathus is killed at the instigation of Q. Caepio, who remains in Southern Spain as proconsul. M. Popillius, consul, became governor of Northern Spain. D. Junius Brutus, B.C. 138. M. Popillius, proconsul, is defeated by the Numantines. consul, becomes governor of Southern Spain, and in this year and b.c. 137-6 subdues the

invades Lusitania, but

B.C. 141.

country, and

is

the

first

Roman

to cross the river Oblivio.


after B.C. 143, of

chronology the papyrus has important variations year the account is unfortunately lost.
this

From

which

B.C. 142. Victory of the Lusitanians over the consul L. Metellus,

who must

therefore

have been governor of the Southern province. The success of his brother, Q. Metellus, in the Northern province, which is mentioned in Epit. 53, was no doubt referred to in the lost portion of the account of b.c. 142. Victory of Q. Fabius Maximus over Viriathus (11. 171-2). B.C. 141. Defeat of Q. Pompeius (1. 174).

668.
B.C.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

109

is

Q. Caepio delayed in starting for his province (II. 182-4). Q. Fabius and concludes a disgraceful peace with Viriathus (11. 185-6). Q. Occius distinguishes himself in an engagement with the Lusitanians, in which the Romans fell into an ambush (11. 186-8). B.C. 139. Death of Viriathus (11. 197-8).
140,
defeated,
B.C. 138. Refusal of a reward to the murderers of Viriathus the Lusitanians, and defeat by the Numantines (1. 212). B.C. 137. D. Brutus crosses the river Oblivio (11. 216-7).
(11.

201-2).

Victory over

Comparing the two arrangements, we may note that no conflict arises in connexion The with events in Northern Spain, nor in b. c. 138-7 with those in Southern Spain. death of Viriathus is assigned by the papyrus to b. c. 139, not 140, thus confirming the opinion of Mommsen; and if our conjecture in 1. 147 is correct, the papyrus perhaps But in the years b. c. 142-0 there supports the date assigned to the defeat of Plautius. Beginning are marked differences between the new evidence and the received chronology. at the end, only one campaign (b.c. 139) is obtainable for the governorship of Q. Caepio The governorship of Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus is instead of two (b.c. 140-39). assigned to the years b.c. 41-0 instead of b.c 142-1 ; and while the papyrus agrees with the ordinary chronology in placing his victory in b.c. 141, his defeat and the peace are assigned not to B.C. 141 but to B.C. 140. Lastly in b.c. 142 the papyrus tells us of a hitherto

unknown governor
It will

of Southern Spain, the consul L. Metellus. hardly be disputed that Livy's chronology of the war against Viriathus, now that more detailed information on it is obtained, carries much more weight than that of It remains to investigate how far in the Appian or the other still inferior authorities. light of the new evidence there is a real inconsistency between Livy and the other As to the governorship authorities, and to explain, if possible, the origin of the divergences. of Caepio there is no great difficulty. The events related by Appian {Iber. 70-1) need The fact that Valerius Maximus (ix. 6. 4) and Eutropius occupy no more than one year. (iv. 16) speak of Caepio as consul when Viriathus was assassinated, and therefore assign his
principal campaign in Spain to b.c 140 instead of b.c 139, is of trifling importance in the Moreface of the explanation afforded by the papyrus (11. 182-4) of his delay in starting. over, although the campaign in the summer of b.c 140 was conducted by Fabius Maximus The Servilianus, Caepio may well have arrived in Spain before the end of the year.

why two years have hitherto been assigned to his governorship was that he had occupy the interval between Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus and D. Brutus, and that the former of these had been assigned to b.c 42-1. Nor does the transference of Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus' governorship to b.c 141-0 produce any serious conflict with other statements. That Livy assigned these two years to him rather than b.c 4 2-1 might have been guessed from the extant Epitome, for he was consul in b.c 142, yet Epit. 53 mentions his successes as proconsul, and Epit. 54 (ad fin) his defeat. But these indications that Fabius was already proconsul when he became governor of Southern Spain a fact which is made quite clear by the papyrus were disregarded, partly owing to the statement of Orosius (v. 4) that Fabius in his consulship (i.e. in b.c. 142) fought against Viriathus, partly owing to an inference from Appian, * imovTos erovs 6 ahiK^bs Iber. 67, where the opening words have in connexion with ^epoviKcavos MS.) r/KOfv ini To leave for the moment the the preceding events been supposed to refer to b.c 142. imovTos his account of Fabius Servilianus' question which year Appian meant by achievements accords well enough with that of Livy. It is true that the successes of Fabius in Appian's account seem to belong to the later rather than to the earlier part of his
reason
to

no

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

governorship, but it is not difficult to suppose that Appian omitted to record some trifling successes such as the capture of Baccia mentioned by Orosius (/. c), probably one of Two campaigns the urbes which were expugnaiae according to Epit. 53; cf. 11. 17 1-2. are implied by Appian, as is more clearly stated by Livy; but Appian does not call Where the facts known from Livy conflict seriously with at any rate Servilianus consul. the present text of Appian is in the events which took place between the departure of The Fabius Maximus Aemilianus and the arrival of Fabius Maximus Servihanus. governorship of Aemilianus is expressly stated by Appian to have lasted two years {^Iber. 65). Aemilianus was consul in b.c. 145, and that the years of his governorship were b.c. 145-4 is unquestionable; cf. Epit. 52 tantumque iimoris is hostis intulii ut adversus eum consular The disaster to Plautius which led to sending an experienced opus esset et duce et exercitu. general is, as we have said, very likely alluded to in 1. 147 of the papyrus, and 1. 151 may So far as is known, Aemilianus had both Spains well refer to the dispatch of Aemilianus.

under Spain

command; but who succeeded him on his departure in b.c. 143? Northern any rate seems to have fallen to the consul for b.c. 143 Q. CaeciHus Metellus (cf. Val. Max. iii. 2. 21, ix. 3. 7; Appian, Iber. 76), and that he remained as proconsul in B.C. 142 is attested by Epit. 53; but the question who obtained Southern Spain is very complicated. From Val. Max. ix. 3. 7, where Q. Metellus utramque Hispaniam consul prius, subegisset is the reading of the MSS., it would be inferred that Metellus deinde proconsul was governor of both Spains ; but uiramque has been altered by some editors to provinciam on the ground that Metellus was only governor of Northern Spain, the governorship of Southern Spain in b.c. 143 being generally assigned to Quinctius, who is supposed to have been a praetor and to have been the immediate predecessor of Fabius Servilianus on the evidence of Appian, Iber, 65-7. This passage, which is very corrupt, now requires a fresh examination in the light of the new evidence. After recounting the achievements of Fabius 6 Aemilianus in b.c. 145 and b.c 144, Appian proceeds (ed. Mendelssohn)
his
at
.
. .

' ,. (
()
(

'.
\
MS., now

(2fpovi\iav6s

MS.)

en

'

(:' ^ '^ (
:

es

arrfjpe

MS., omitted by BeWovs


.

{Q. PoTtipeio in a
.

6th century translation of Appian

lost)

confused and corrupt account it has been generally inferred that a praetor Quinctius succeeded Fabius Aemilianus in Southern Spain in b.c 143, was We now defeated in that year and was succeeded in b.c 142 by Q. Fabius Servilianus. know that in Livy's account the governor in B.C. 142 was the consul for that year, Assuming that L. Metellus, and that Fabius Servilianus became governor in b.c 141. Livy is right, the discrepancy may be explained in two ways: either Appian has made several mistakes in his facts or the MS. is still more deeply corrupt than it has appeared to be. On the first hypothesis Quinctius or Quintus, the supposed praetor, may he retained, for owing to the loss of a column between Cols, vi and vii of the papyrus it is uncertain who in Livy's history was the governor of Southern Spain in b. c 143. We must however assume that Appian omitted L. Metellus altogether, thus setting the chronology wrong by a year. But considering the corruptions in the proper names in Appian, Iber, 65-7, it is, we think, far more likely that the story of the defeat of the supposed Quinctius, who appears

.
6

....

MS.)
. .
.

'

From

this

. '
Kolvtov
editors),

'
.

oh
.

MS.)

, {
MS.)

made from another

'

Other editors)

668.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

iii

nowhere else in history, is a distortion of the defeat of L. Metellus mentioned by Livy. With two brothers, Q. Metellus and L. Metellus, governing the two Spains in 142 b. c. it is not at all surprising that mistakes should arise, and if KoiWtos in Iber. 66-7 is a corruption of or KatKiXios, there will be no conflict between Livy and Appian as to the predecessor of Fabius Servilianus. Dismissing therefore the supposed Quinctius, there still remains the governorship of Southern Spain for b. c. 143 to be accounted for. The passage in Appian referring to Aemilianus' successor is obviously quite corrupt. The insertion of before (Schweighauser, followed by Mendelssohn) does little to mend matters. There is no point in the mention of the father's praenomen and there is clearly a confusion in the text between this person and the mentioned in Ider. 76. That Q. Pompeius was consul in b.c. 141 and succeeded Q. Metellus as governor of Northern Spain in the same year (cf. 1. 174). His cognomen was Rufus, so that editors bracket in ch. 76. In any case this Quintus Pompeius cannot be the successor of Aemilianus in b.c. 143, and the best course seems to be to fall back on the statement of Valerius Maximus (ix. 3. 7, v. sup.) that Q. Metellus governed utramque Hispaniam. Seeing that Aemilianus governed both provinces for two years, there is not the least diflBculty in supposing that his successor did the same for one, but that in the second year a separate governor was sent to the Southern province. On this hypothesis we would suggest that ILotvrov in Ider. 65 is Corrupt for and that the following words which are simply omitted by editors, really contained a reference to the brother of Q. Metellus, L. Metellus. The sentence is in that case incomplete and the lacuna may well have supplied some details about the events of b.c. 143-2 which would have made ch. 66 much more intelligible. Our conclusion therefore is that the divergence between Livy and Appian's account of the war against Viriathus is due less to mistakes on the part of Appian than to the extraordinary perversions of the proper names in the MS. of the Iberica, and that Appian's chronology of this war can without much difficulty be made consistent with the newly found

:,

material.

For the sake of clearness we append in parallel columns a list of the governors of Southern Spain from b.c. 145-37 as they are known from the two epitomes of Livy, compared with the list given by Mommsen. Concerning the governors of Northern Spain there is no dispute, Q. Fabius Maximus Aemilianus holding office in b.c. 145-4, Q. Caecilius Metellus in b.c 143-2, Q. Pompeius Rufus in b.c 141-0, and M. Popillius Laenas in
B.C.

139-8:
B.C.

Livy.

Mommsen.
Q. Fab. Max. Aemilianus.
Quinctius praetor. Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus cons. Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus proc.

145-4
143 142 141 140 139 138

Q Fabius Maximus Aemilianus.


(Q. Caecilius Metellus cons. ?) L. Caecilius Metellus cons. Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus proc. Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus proc. (Later Q. Servilius Caepio cons.) Q. Servilius Caepio proc. D. lunius Brutus cons.

Q.

Servilius

Caepio cons.

Q. Servilius Caepio proc. D. Junius Brutus cons.

Mummius at the end of Book 52, Z. Mummius marmoreaque el tabulas pictas in triumpho iulit. Epit. 53 begins with a mention of Appius Claudius, consul in b.c 143; hence the triumph of Mummius has naturally been assigned to b.c 145, the year after the destruction of Corinth.
168-9. Epit. mentions the triumph of
de Achaeis triumphavit, signa aerea

112

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


as so

The distribution of the works of art mentioned by the papyrus is to be connected, Kornemann remarks, not with Mummius' triumph, which can hardly have taken place
late as b.c. 142,

By oppida are meant but with his censorship which occurred in that year. the country towns of Italy, and perhaps of the provinces as well. On the victory of Q. Fabius (Maximus Servilianus) cf. Epit. 53 a Q. Fabio 1 7 1-2. proconsule pars magna Lusitaniae expugnatis aliquot urhibus recepta est, and, for the
1. 167, note. 174. This defeat of Q. Pompeius by the Numantines agrees with the received chronology; cf. Epit. 54 ad init. and 1. 167, note. For d[eviciu\s cf. 1. 185. 175. The defeat of the Romans by the Scordisci, a Pannonian tribe, is a new fact. The Roman commander may have been the other consul, Gn. Caepio. 176. The corruption ol Sapiente into Salasso seems to be due to a reminiscence of the campaign of Appius Claudius against the Salassi in B.C. 143 ; cf. Epit. 53.

chronology,

obviously important measure due to Appius Claudius, one of the ? The papyrus fails us at the most critical point, and in the absence of any other reference to this reform, we are reduced to conjectures. have adopted in 1. 177 duos [delectus], a suggestion of Mr. Warde Fowler based on The old Roman system of a single annual duo s[tipendta] proposed by Dr. Greenidge, levy in which the soldiers swore allegiance to a general for a single campaign could not survive the growth of Rome as a world-city, and though the successive modifications which

177-8.

What was

this

most

striking figures at this period

We

were introduced in the


likely

of the Republic cannot be clearly traced, it is in itself and second centuries b. c. had led to the occasional Such an attempt to or frequent holding of levies twice instead of once in the year. frustrate the constant demands of the generals as we have attributed to Appius Claudius does not seem improbable, and may even be connected with the refusal of the senate a few years later to send Scipio the reinforcements which he asked for at Numantia. 178-81. Cf. Epit. 54, where the incident of the condemnation of Silanus by his father
later period

enough

that the wars of the third

is

related

more

fully.

182-4. These lines are very corrupt, and in the absence of any parallel account of the So much is clear that the consul incident it is difiicult to restore them in entirety. Q. Caepio's departure for Spain was delayed by the interpellation of a tribune, but that It was doubtless owing to this episode that Caepio successfully overcame the obstacle. Caepio arrived in Spain late in the year after the defeat of Fabius Maximus (11. 185-6); cf, Assilium is for Asellum ; cf. Gell. 3. 4, where a tribune called Claudius 1. 167, note. Asellus is mentioned as having accused the younger Scipio Africanus posiquam de Poenis triumphaverat censorque/uerai. Since Scipio was censor in b.c. 142 {Fast. CapiioL), b.c 140 reddeterhuit is probably for deierruit, and is very suitable as the year of Asellus' tribunate, if l[fciores is right irigem probably represents a participle ending in ens, e.g. adhibens. Omitting indelegem, which is hopeless, the passage may be restored thus Quintus Caepio
:

Tiber ium Claudium Asellum iribunum plebis interpellantem profectionem suam What form the interpellation took is not clear. Did the tribune lictores . . ens deterruit. Possibly, as Greenidge veto the Lex Curiata conferring imperium upon the consul.? suggests, he tried to prevent the consul from taking out his troops, as in Sail. Jug. 39 From the mention consul impeditus a tribunis plebis ne quas paraverat copias secum portaret. of the lictors it seems that Caepio actually ventured to retaliate by using force of some kind.
consul
. .
. .

185-6. On the date of Fabius' defeat see 1, 167, note. 186-7. Valerius INIaximus (iii. 2. 21) relates two exploits of Q. Occius; cf. The present incident is one of the reliqua eius opera which Valerius note.
passes over.

11.

164-6,

Maximus

668.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

113

188-90. A verb such as pugnavit is wanted at the beginning of 1. 188, and there is then not room for more than two or three letters before \mae. Probably devota est is to be connected with aqua Anio (cf 11. iii and 116, where the verb does not come at the end of the sentence), and aqua Marcia begins a fresh sentence. On the repair of the aqua Anio and the construction of the aqua Marcia see Frontinus, De Aquaeductibus i. He there states that in b. c. 144 the praetor Marcius Rex was commissioned to 7.^ repair the Appian and Aniensian aqueducts and to construct a new one, his praetorship being extended for a year on that account. Then follows a passage which is much corrupted in the editions of Frontinus, and which we quote from the reproduction of the best MS. in C. Herschell's edition: eo tempore decemviri dum aliis ex causis libros Sibyllinos inspiciunt invenisse dicuntur (space in MS.; supply fas) aquam Martiam seu potius Anienem, de hoc enim constantius traditur, in Capitolium perduci, deque ea re in senatu M. Lepido pro collegio verba faciente actum Appio Claudio Q. Caecilio consulibus (b. c. 143); eandemque post annum tertium a Lucia Lentulo retractatam C. Laelio Q. Servilio consulibus (b. c. 140), sed utroque tempore vicisse gratiam Marcii Regis atque ita in Capitolium esse aquam perductam. Frontinus' statements about the construction of the aqua Marcia are thus in complete accord with Livy, from whose history they were no doubt derived. But what is the meaning of seu potius Anienem, de hoc enim constantius iradiiur, and has this anything to do with the mention of the aqua Anio in 1. 188? That passage in the papyrus is unfortunately extremely obscure. If devota est is correct, it must mean that the Anio aqueduct was consecrated to some deity; but devota does not seem the right word, and it is more likely to be corrupt, possibly for some word like renovata or refecta. The aqua Marcia began not far from Tibur, the water being apparently taken from a tributary of the river Anio from which the aqua Anio was also derived. But the two aqueducts were quite distinct, and seu potius Anienem, de hoc enim constantius iraditur seems, as Reid remarks, to indicate that there were two interpretations of the oracle, one permitting the aqua Anio to be brought to the Capitol, the other the aqua Marcia, but the general opinion was in favour of the former interpretation cf. the statement in 1. 189 that the construction of the aqua Marcia was contra Sibyllae carmifta. Since Frontinus implies that the aqua Anio was not carried up to the Capitol, to read in II. 189-90 aqua Anio {et) aqua Marcia in Capitolium perductae is unsatisfactory, apart from the difficulty of placing a slop after devota est. 192. Probably the scribe wrote urbetilia meaning urbe ei Italia; cf. Val. Max. i. 3. 2 C. Cornelius Hispallus praetor peregrinus M. Popilio Laenate Cn. Calpurnio coss. edicto Chaldaeos intra decimum diem abire ex urbe atque Italia iussit, a passage no doubt based
; .
.
.

upon

Livy.

i93~4 On the Lex Gabinia tabellaria see Cic. Legg. iii. 35. Cicero says that it was lata ab homine ignoto et sordido, which confirms the present reference to Gabinius' base ancestry. What degree of relationship to the verna was alleged by Livy is uncertain. verna[e filius is unlikely, for the son of a slave could not be made tribune, and though two cases at least of the son of a freedman becoming tribune are known (Mommsen, Staatsrecht,\. p. 460), the phrase vernae filius does not suggest the meaning 'son of freedman' or of a freedwoman,' though perhaps not incompatible with it. vernc{e nepos is better, but of course some more indefinite word may have been employed. It has been generally supposed that A. Gabinius the tribune was the son of the Gabinius who held a command in Illyria under L. Anicius in b.c. 167 (Livy 45. 26); but this is quite uncertain. 195-6. As Warde Fowler suggests, it is probable that these two lines refer to the mutiny of Caepio's cavalry mentioned by Dio (Fr. 78 Boissevain), in consequence of his apportioning to them a specially dangerous operation. Caepio had to take refuge from
'

114
their violence in flight,

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


suggested.
'

we have

altered to clava, a

and with this clue the passage may be restored on the lines which Since a nail is not a very effective weapon of attack, clavo may be cudgel or foil.' Reid well compares Oros. v. 9 clavae ictu (of Tiberius
' '

Gracchus' death). 197-8. The names of the murderers of Viriathus are not given in Epit., but occur in Appian, Iber. 74, where they agree with the papyrus, and in Diodorus exc. c. 24, where Nikorones is found instead of Minurus. 201-2. For the refusal of a reward to Viriathus' murderers cf Dio, Fr. 80, and Eutropius, iv. 16. Appian {Iber. 74) mentions the bribe, but not the refusal, re The Epitome doeS not mention either, but has Viriathus a prodiloribus consilio Servilii Caepionis inter/ecius est. From the fact that the refusal took place in the year after Viriathus' death it clearly came from the senate and if there is any truth in the story of Dio and Eutropius about the answer given to the murderers that the Romans did not approve of a general being killed by his own soldiers, this must have been made by the senate, not, as they state, by Caepio. 202-5. Cf Epit. 55 P. Nasica, cui cognomen Serapion/uit ab irridente Curiatio tribuno pubis impositum, et D. lunio Bruto consulibus delectum habentibus in conspectu tironum res saluberrimi exempli facta est : nam C. Matienus accusatus est apud tribunes plebis quod exercitum in Hispania deseruisset, damnatusque sub /urea diu virgis caesus est, et sestertio nummo veniit. tribuni plebis quia non impetrarent ut sibi denos quos vellent milites eximere liceret, consules in carcerem duci iusserunt. The papyrus presents several new details. In the first

(\

place the condemnation of deserters (11. 207-9) comes after the dispute with the tribunes, not before it. Besides the probable mention of Curiatius, to whom Cicero {Legg. iii. 9) assigns the responsibility for throwing the consuls into prison, the papyrus names another
tribune, Licinius, thus justifying the plural tribuni in Epit. From 1. 205 it appears that the imprisonment was unpopular and that the tribunes had to yield. For the use of multa by Livy in the general sense of penalty cf. 24. 16. In 1. 202 Scipi]on[em is very doubtful. There may have been some corruption as in the case of Decimum Brutum in 1. 203. 205-7 kf^) omnibus luctus seems a better correction of omnib. lucii than omnibus luctui, though whether Livy would have used luctus is doubtful; cf. note on 1. 110. These lines refer to the death in b.c. 138 of a popular tribune who having done much for the good of the people expired amid universal regret.' His name was given at the end of I. 205. It would be expected that this individual was important enough to be known to history, and, as Warde Fowler and Reid suggest, there may well be a connexion between II. 205-7 ^^^ a passage in Pliny {H. N, xxi. 10) florum quidem populus Romanus honorem Scipioni tantum habuit. Serapio cognominabatur propter similitudinem suarii cuiusdam negotiatoris. obierat in tribunatu plebei admodum gratus dignusque A/ricanorum familia, nee erat in bonis funeris impensa. asses ergo contulit populus ac/unus elocavit quaque praeterferebatur flores e prospectu omni sparsit. Whether by Serapio Pliny meant Scipio Nasica Corculum, the consul of b.c 162 and 155, or his son, the consul of B.C. 138, in either case the statement that he died as tribune is an extraordinary error. It is very significant that the papyrus also mentions the death of a popular tribune immediately after a mention of Scipio Nasica the younger, and, as Warde Fowler remarks, if something like Nasicae filius or /rater be restored at the end of 1. 205 and Pliny's Serapio be the same person, the difficulties in the Pliny passage would be largely reduced. 207-9. co[]un[ may be the beginning of a short sentence complete in itself If it is connected with 11, 208-9, it probably refers to the part taken by the consuls in the punishment of the deserters. On this cf the passage from Epit, 55 quoted in 11. 202-5, note, where only one individual, C. Matienus, is mentioned. Frontinus, however {Strateg.
'

'

'

668.
iv. I.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

"5

20), agrees with the papyrus, qui exercitum deseruerant damnati, virgis caesi publice venierunt. sestertiis singulis is equivalent to sestertio nummo singuli.

210-1. It is probable that these lines refer to the famous accusation of L. Aurelius Cotta by Scipio Aemilianus. This resulted in the acquittal of the accused because the judges did not wish the influence of Scipio to appear too overwhelming, if we may believe Cicero, Pro Murena 58 saepe hoc viaiores natu dicere audivi hanc accusatoris eximiam dignitatem plurimum L. Cottae pro/uisse. noluerunt sapientissimi homines qui tum rem illam iudicabant ita quemquam cadere in iudicio ut nimis adversarii viribus abiectus videretur (cf. Diyin. in Caec. 21), though Appian {Bell Civ, i. 22) is probably right in saying that bribery was employed, {propter) magnitudinem noni\inis would accord very well with the eximia dignitas of Cicero. The objection to this interpretation is that Cicero (Pro Mur. and Divin. in Caecil. locc. citt) says that Aemilianus had been twice consul when he brought the accusation, and the second consulship of Aemilianus was in b.c. 134 while the event recorded in the papyrus took place in b.c 138, Against the evidence of Cicero, however, must be set the circumstance that in the earliest editions (based on the Codex Sangallensis, now lost) of the commentary of Pseudo-Asconius upon that passage in the Divin. ad Caecil. occurs the remark L. Cottam P. Africanus ante secundum consulatum et censuram dicitur accusasse. Other MSS. of Pseudo-Asconius have post instead of ante, and post has generally been regarded as correct, though the remark is then rather pointless since it simply repeats the statement of Cicero. But the agreement between the papyrus and one version of Pseudo-Asconius is remarkable, though it is difficult to believe that Pseudo-Asconius can be right in placing the trial before Scipio's censorship, which took place in b.c. 142. The question is further complicated by the uncertainty regarding the nature of the accusations made against Cotta and the official standing in which he had rendered himself Uable to them. Was he the consul of b.c 144 or the consul of b.c 119 (so Jahn in his note on Cic. Brut. 81) t If the former, the date which the papyrus suggests for the trial, b.c 138, is more suitable than Cicero's. If the latter, then Cicero's date is the more probable, for the younger Cotta might well have been praetor about b.c 133-29, and his insignificance would suit the peculiar feature of the case which seems to have impressed itself upon the popular imagination. On the whole, in spite of the evidence of Appian who connects the acquittal of Cotta with C. Gracchus' law de iudiciis, and the circumstance that Cicero mentions it {Div. in Caec. I. c.) together with the trial of Aquillius which certainly seems to have taken place after Scipio's return from Numantia, we incline to the view not only that Livy placed the trial of Cotta in b.c 138 but that he was right in so doing. Cicero, in the Pro Murena passage at any rate, had a point to make which would be helped by assigning the trial to the period after Scipio's second consulship, and it is not difficult to suppose him guilty of a chronological error in a speech. Moreover, the commentary of Pseudo-Asconius seems to indicate that there were ancient doubts as to Cicero's correctness on this matter ; and if Livy was right with regard to the date of the trial, L. Cotta was probably the consul of B.C. 144, who, as Valerius Maximlis states (vi. 4. 2), was in that year prevented by Scipio from going to Lusitania, and against whom Scipio may well have continued to bear a grudge. 212. Lusitani vastati: the proceedings of D. Junius Brutus in Southern Spain are meant; cf. Epit. 55 Junius Brutus consul in Hispania iis qui sub Viriaiho militaverant agros et oppidum dedit, quod Valentia vocatum est, Appian, Iber. 71, and notes on 11. 167 and 216-7. a N[umanyin[is clades accepta: for the restoration cf. 1. 175. The allusion is to the defeat of M. Popilius; cf. Epit., which is more detailed, and 1. 167, note.
I

ii6

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

2 1 3-4. Cf. Epit. which is longer in its account of Antiochus' death but mentions it at the end of the book after the successes of Brutus, and omits the detail that Diodotus took The year to which Antiochus' death is referred by the papyrus possession of Syria. (b.c. 138) conflicts with the date (b.c. 143-2) recently proposed by Niese {Gesc/i. d. gr. u. mak. St. iii. p. 283), chiefly on the evidence of coins. 216-7. Cf. Epit. D. lunius Lusitaniam triginia urbium expugnaiionibus usque ad occasum et Oceanum perdomuit ; et cum fluvium Oblivionem transire nollent milites ereptum signiThe account of Book 55 in fero signum ipse transiulii, et sic ut transgrederentur persuasii.

the papyrus probably ended here.


correct,

218-25. This fragment which was gummed on to Col. belonged to a much later book. 226-32. This fragment was gummed on to Col. v.

iv

probably,

if

Sullanis

is

669

Metrological Work.
17-5

X 15-3 ^^

On

the recto of this papyrus are parts of two columns of an account of

= first and third = second years, i. e. of Diocletian and Maximian (a. d. 285-6 and 386-7). On the verso, written in a cursive hand not more than a few years later than the writing on the recto, are parts of two columns of a series of metrological tables concerning measures of length and area. As in the contemporary metrological fragment from Oxyrhynchus (9 verso) the spelling is bad, and from the unsystematic way in which the details are arranged they seem to be private memoranda compiled from a larger treatise. the measure of length usually Lines 1-4 deal with the In 11. 5-8 we employed in land-surveys, of which the square was the aroura. have a general description of cubits arranged according to the three dimensions of space 11. 9-10 treat of the a peculiar kind of cubit which differed from the three previously mentioned, and 11. 11-24 of the measurements and uses of the Col. ii begins with a list of measures of length in which Graeco-Egyptian and Roman names are, as would be expected at this period, mixed (11. 26-30). There follows (11. 30-42) a table of the sizes of these from
corn, mentioning the second

,
,
^,

the

section describing the

middle of which the papyrus breaks off. In both columns the lines are incomplete, and it is impossible in some cases to fill up the lacunae but the papyrus usefully supplements the existing evidence concerning the and oUonebiubs and provides some interesting new used in information about the names and length of different kinds of most of which can be restored with Egypt. The section dealing with the
in the

.
;

or

?,

to the

or perhaps

Then begins another

669.
certainty, not only

NEW
:
,

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

iiy

shows that there were two kinds of which stood to each other in the ratio of 9 8 but provides an important indication of the size of that much discussed measure, the which was probably a cubic cf.
note on
It will

11.

11-20.

,
Col.

is to be hoped that the whole subject of Graeco-Egyptian metrology soon be rehandled by a new writer. The Metrologie of Hultsch is now

antiquated, and the recent articles of the veteran metrologist in the Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung and Abhand. d. kon. Sachs. Ges. d. Wiss. 1903 Die Ptolemdischen Miinz- und Recknungsiuerte, show an inability to appreciate the new
:

evidence of papyri.

^ TO
Se

^\

TO

yCo]/iTyo[tAf]oi'

Sh
6

6]5

Se

]]9 , ,
]:
]
.

10

] ()8 "^

, ]
]

77 ,


i.

<7

8
.

.-

]
]
]
]

15

20

^ ia

]
]
]
]

\
<^,

.
)3,

-.

]f}avo

]
]

ii8

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

8]6
'5

vav-

[-

1.

.
I.

1.

oyboa.
1 9

3.

1.

iTTixiis.

5.
o.

of /3 COIT. from

.
Col.
ii.

8.

1.

9.

tKOJTcStKOf

Pap.

. [ '^,

[ {\ [
earir
8^

['

novs

, ,
nf})(V9

35

[],
4
J7

,, , ,
eiai

[ [)( 6, [
,

^^?
eaTi[u

45

9 , ? [ [
[9

&^
.

9.

^'

\[,

)5

Pap.
35
'''"'

..

.[.].

]
11.

2 7

1.

':
39
'

SO in

Pap.

Pap.

31, 34 42

7" ^.

33

37

<"

1-30. The schoenium used in land-survey has 8 eighths, and the eighth has 1 2 cubits, schoenium has so that the schoenium used in land-survey has 96 cubits, while the
. .
.

669. 100
cubits.
is

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

119

linear cubit is that which is measured by length alone, the plane which is measured by length and breadth; the solid cubit is that which building cubit ccntains The is measured by length and breadth and depth or height. contains 3 cubits, are measured by the ^iXov, the royal 100 plane cubits. and contains 2f cubits, 1 6 while the 18 72 and 36 so that the schoenium used in land-survey contains 32 royal 64 ;

The

cubit

, .
that

an (Eg)'ptian ?) a 4 a public and a carpenter's cubit, 7 which is the distance a cubit, 10 a a Nilometric cubit, 8 4 cubits an Spyvia, which is the of the outstretched feet. 3 cubits make a public cubits make a 6| an distance of the outstretched hands.
31-41. *2

make
.

a
.

',
6
.
.

foot, 5 a cloth-weaver's cubit

Kenyon, P.

which was unknown when Hultsch wrote his Metrologie, see The details of the papyrus p. 130, and P. Tebt. I. p. 386. corresponded to the ancient exactly fit the previous evidence, which was that the nuh of 100 royal cubits, but nevertheless was divided Egyptian measure khei or khet The papyrus now shows that into the series \,\, -^, g^ and so on like the aroura. was sometimes treated as having 96 cubits, probably for in surveying land the The of 100 cubits. the sake of convenient fractions, but that there was also a of 96 and The ratio of these two name of the latter in 1. 4 may be 100 cubits corresponds, as Mr. Smyly rem^arks, to the ratio of 24 25 between tAvo kinds of cubits in Roman times cf. note on 11. 34-5. was supposed by A. Peyron (P. Taur. I. pp. 133-6) 9-10. The oiKojTiStKos His explanation, which has to be a parallelogram measuring 100 cubits by i cubit. been accepted by all editors, is now confirmed by the papyrus, which states that an
1-4.

On

this

Brit.

Mus.

,
;

,, , .' ,
:

II.

(^}6.

'^ , .,
likely

The adjective lost in the lacuna is very contained 100 square cubits. which is found in P. Brit. Mus. 119 and Wilcken, Osf. II. 1301 before But how the abbreviation is to be resolved is uncertam. as a measure of area. seems to us more likely. Wilcken {OsL I. p. 780) suggests 11-20. The restoration of this important passage, though at first sight it may seem

*{
11.

rather hazardous,
figures in

in 1. 11 that the It is clear from is really practically certain. 12-4 are contrasted with those in 11. 15-7, and since those in 11. 12 and 15 of which there were 6 in those in 11. 13 and 16 must refer to refer to of which 4 make (cf. 11. 34-5), and those in 11. 14 and 17 to an ordinary being granted, the figures in 11. 12-7 refer to a measure of length, This a which is known to cannot be and the substantive to be supplied with There is only one measure of length known to have of cubic capacity. be a measure was of 2| (1. 38), and though no and that is the contained 3

,,
[

indicates is called of 3 11. 38-9 the m 1. 11 more than one kind was in use. If then that, as would be expected, 8e some such restoration as means a particular kind of 18-20. becomes necessary, and the correctness of this hypothesis is confirmed by 11. The figure in 1. 20 stands to that in 1. 19 in the same proportion (9 8) as those m

known

previously, the fact that in

11.

i8) has already (1. i) been applied to (1. 15-7. and 1. 19 with the restoration suggested will be the corollary of 1. 3. The the while is in 1. 11 called of 3 only difficulty that arises is that the Roman but in view of the extent to which ; in 1. 38 it is said to be

12-4

./,

to those in

11.

8][^

[
m

I20

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

times supplanted the Ptolemaic term (e. g. in connexion with and yeapyos cf. 500. 13, note), this objection is not serious. The chief interest of this section about the lies in the light which it throws upon the size of the ii). On (1. that obscure cubic measure used in digging operations see P. Tebt. 5. 15, note, and From the fact that the was the particular measure used for calculating P. Petrie III. it is difficult to avoid the inference that a in length, and was a since there is every reason to think that its dimensions were equal, most probably was a cubic and as there were two sizes of a so there were also two kinds of 21-5. The subject of these lines is obscure; but from the occurrence of in 1. 21 it appears that some area was under discussion. It is not unlikely that pev is to be supplied at the beginning of 1. 21 and \6 8e in 1. 22, and that the four-sided figure in question was the square face of a or cube measuring each way. are probably still under discussion in 1. 24. 3 26-30. For this list of measures of length cf. the Tabulae Heronianae, especially I (Hultsch, Script. Metrol. i. pp. 182 sqq.). both forms and are commonly found, but the latter is the more 29. aKtva correct ; cf. Hultsch, op. cif. p. 29. like those in Tabulae Heronianae 30. It is probable that the list ended with III and VII. The only larger measures of length were the and since the following details proceed in an ascending [ may be the beginning of scale, and ought to have begun with the smallest measure. But we should expect ot which is much too long, and the has a section devoted

.,
:

to

it

in

11.

43 sqq.

,
size
(1.
;

31.
(1.

The
37)>

ascribed in the papyrus


39)>

Heronianae and add no new facts. 32. The names given by the ancient metrologists to the ordinary foot of 4 to distinguish it from the or are of 3^

but none of these will suit, is not unlikely ; ihe first letter is certainly or , or / being excluded. might be supplied in 1. 32 instead of t, which would then follow 33. but no cubit smaller than the normal one of 6 was known previously, and it is therefore much more probable that the cloth-weaver's cubit contained 5 than 4. is the common found in the Tabulae 34-5. This cubit of 6 Heronianae, but is there also called A ^;!^ reXetoi and occurs in P. Brit. Mus. 154. 7; for cf. 1. 38 7;]/[]' and 11. 11-20, note. There was another cubit introduced into Egypt in Roman times which stood to the cubit of 6 in the ratio of 25 24 (Hultsch, ap. Wilcken, Osl. I. p. 753), but this does not seem to be mentioned here by the papyrus, though it is perhaps, as Mr. Smyly suggests, implied by the number, 96, of cubits in a in 1. 3. 35-6. The title is new, but that the cubit used in measuring the rise and fall of the Nile contained 7 instead of 6 was known from the inscriptions on the subject at Elephantine; cf. C. I. G. 4863. This cubit of 7 is that normally used in official measurements upon ancient Egyptian monuments, and Mr. Smyly thinks that it was also employed in measuring the mysterious which occur in the Petrie papyri. Its usual title (not found here) was the 'royal' cubit (Hultsch, Introd. to Scrip/. Metrol. p. 25, &c., is wrong on this point).

and

'^
^^^
(1.
'
:

to the (1. (1. 32), 34), 41), agree with the statements of the Tabulae

^yo

'

86\

.,

. ^ , ,, ;
'

(6

670-678.

or 2 feet is frequently mentioned in the Tabulae 36. This cubit of 8 Heronianae, but without any special designation. Since it was apparently introduced into Egypt by the Romans (Hultsch, Script. Meirol. p. 42, Metrol. p. 618), 'Pw/iawcds or is very likely to be supplied in the lacuna. of 10 is the Ordinary one, but of 8 and 12 37. The also occur; cf. Hultsch, Scrip/. Meirol. pp. 194. 3 and 197. 23. except that of 3 cubits was known previously ; on the 38-9. No and the other with which it was contrasted see 11. 11-20, note. which was according to Tabulae Heronianae I an ancient Egyptian 40. The land-measure, is stated in the same table (Hultsch, Script. Metrol. p. 183. 3) to contain This is also the size assigned in the Tabulae 6 cubits or 10 feet of 4 Heronianae to the or cf. 1. 41. Hence Hultsch supposed that here and were convertible terms. But from the position occupied by the between the of 4 of 6|, its size should be not 6 but and the something between 4 and 6 cubits. A which differs apparently from the ordinary occurs in a passage quoted by Hultsch, op. cit. p. 153, but the language seems to be corrupt, and if Hultsch is right in inferring from it a of i^ cubits in length, that cannot be the meant here. There is more reason mentioned by to connect the of the papyrus with the of 27^^ Pediasmus, a Byzantine writer of the fourteenth century (Hultsch, op. cit. i. p. 58 and ii. p. 147) and 4f would satisfy the conditions This would Contain 4f cubits of 6 which, as we have said, the number found in 1. 40 would be expected to fulfil. Assuming that this is correct, the of 4f cubits is much older than has been supposed but there is no particular objection to this, for the information provided by ancient metrologists is extremely defective. 41-2. After the which has the customary 6f cubits, came no doubt a higher in 1. 29. unit of measurement, very likely the (40 cubits), which follows the 01 followed by another unit of measurement may be corrupt for ol (a figure) ftVt (cf. 654. i), 'so omitted. But it is more likely to be something like

<

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS

121

-.

. ; e

,
^'

,
with

]|
43

much

^
Heronianae
III

for cubits.'

being the smallest measure of length 43-5. The meaning is that the with a name, all other measures of length are referred to it as the unit ; cf. Tabulae
I

and

be

and

^,

\ .
^^

Line

^^

probably

to

be restored

[/cat

in

1.

44

^'*

670-678.

Poetical Fragments.
in verse

These nine miscellaneous pieces

do not appear

to be extant, but are

too fragmentary to call for detailed treatment.

670 is a strip from a short column of hexameters, w^ritten in a small sloping uncial hand of the third century. The metre proves that the part preserved is near the beginnings of the lines, but the remains are too scanty to shov^^ the There is a mention of Dionysus in 1. 22, subject or the quality of the poem.

T22

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

and apparently a reference to Hephaestus in 1. ii. Some corrections have been made by a second hand, which also inserted the diaeresis in 1. 26.
from a series of epideictic epigrams, as is made clear by the heading in 1. I Tiras an iXitoi a formula frequent in the Anthology (cf. e. g. A nth. Pal. ix. 126, 449, &c.). Opposite 1. 3, where the epigram commences, is the abbreviation vl{ ) or lv{ ) which may give the name of the poet, e. g.
671
is

[;

Nicarchus, or of the speaker.

is an irregular uncial, dating probably from the latter half of the third century. small fragment from the bottom of a column, containing the latter 672.

The handwriting

parts of nine lines, written in a rather irregular uncial


first

hand

of,
1.

probably, the

9 seems to be no clue to the subject. 673 contains parts of eleven lines from the top of a column, written in wellformed sloping uncials of the common oval type, and dating most probably from the third century. In the margin at the top are the beginnings of three blurred lines of cursive, apparently mere scribblings the writer was perhaps the person responsible for some corrections and accents in the text below. This seems to be of a lyrical character, though the majority of the verses might also be hexameters. 674. written in careful round uncials of about the latter part of the first or the beginning of the second century, is a fragment of a lyric poem, which may The form tapos (1. 6) is indeed not found in the traditional be by Pindar.

century.

Lines 4-8
is

may

be hexameters, but the metre of

different.

There

Pindaric dialect, but

it

has a parallel

in

/^?

{01.

iii.

14, 18).

The

high stops

and the accents which have been occasionally added may be by the original scribe, but there is a question of a second hand in 11. i and 7 cf note ad loc. 675. The upper parts of two columns of a lyrical poem written in rather short lines, and evidently to be classed as a paean (cf 11. i and 12). The mention of Alexandria in 1. 4 is an indication of a comparatively late date, but Blass thinks that the piece may be by Callimachus, who is known to have composed The paragraphus below 1. 2 may mark the commence^k\y] of this description. ment of a fresh strophe, but no metrical correspondence can be followed out between the two columns. The MS. is in a large uncial hand of an early type, and seems to date from about the middle of the first century. 676. This small fragment contains the ends and beginnings of lines from two columns of a tragedy, written in a sloping uncial hand of the third century. High stops occur at 11. 2, 6 and 7, and a middle stop apparently at 1. 3. The correction in 1. 9 and the rough breathing in 1. 14 are no doubt original, and the accents may be so but the addition of the iota adscript in 1. 15 seems to be
;

subsequent.

670-678.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
is

123

677 and 678 are fragments of comedies.


nine lines from the bottom of a column,

677, containing the latter parts of

written in neat round uncials which

be assigned to the latter part of the first century. 678, from the top of a column, is in an upright and rather heavy calligraphic hand similar to 661, and The probably, like that papyrus, of the latter part of the second century.
accents seem to have been added later.

may

670.

jXeiS TL

y
].[..]

]5 ]
]e

coy

]
]/)

[ []
[.

? [8 .]
8 av

156x3
.

(^"^

aWo

avTOS

[
[

];///[.

.W
.

[5

Xltt^v

\
V
?
]
]

act

[ [
[.
.

.\ \[
.]
.

reoy

.
[

Xov(TeiU

[
[

ey'xoy
.
.

[.

.] [
[
TKf

]8
]

{ [
reois
e
.

[.

.]

[
[

][.
)(}9
]?

.]

[]
.

'\[.
6.

.]^^
25.

^
.

[
[

aya&i
25

]
\
Jfcoy

t.

cyft[p

[
7[

[
m
for c; the

of

\
in

18.

The

is corrected apparently by the second hand from mistake corrected was the common one of writing
1.

same thing

has happened

671.

Fr. (a) 9-6

/p

[
[]
[.
5
.

Tivas av einoi

[
[ [

7-3, Fr. (3)

15-5

cm.
y
[

.]

-Je[

.Vei

[.
[

.]8[
]
.

15

] []

]ffVti
]
.

[
[

yn

^iv(^i[

124

T^E.
[

OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI
'^"*

]''^^
^i
.

[.]
[

[.]

^
'^'-

'{

KOVp[o]L<i

/3[
e
.

]^[
6[
in
1.

20

89

[8 ^
.

[
[

1-2.
14.

name, possibly

be read in place of

There

is

(cf. introd.), is to be supplied after ) This may be the top of the column. a break in the papyrus at this point, and four or five

Nt(

.[

may

2.

lines at least

are

lost.

672.

5-5 ^^

673.

]
5

]pov

^ ]^
Xri[

'/[

]/

\
The
is

19

[
(^8iSa^e[
is

[ ]9 ]5 [ ][ ]9
]
.

] [ ][
]

IOX4-7 cm.

[
.

e[

Oeais

10

]ei'[[5]]aj'io/coi;/)[

][
and
is

672. 9

high point

really over the

the point between

and

in the line before.

The double

possibly to be connected with point usually indicates a change


in

of speaker, but

673. 1-2. Perhaps


4.

5.
g.

[ ]
The The
letter
8.

also found as a

mark of punctuation,
and

(] ([

before has been corrected. mutilated letter before the lacuna might be e. g. or i' ; ? or is no doubt part of a compound adjective like The doubtful has been converted from to by a second hand, which also crossed

],

e. g.

657.

as Blass suggests.

[. (! \\\.

out the

670-678.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
5-1x5.2 cm.

125

674.

]'6'[. ..]..[
]ivoi

]e

]ois

]^
Ae\(f)OL

va^

[
lapoLS
[

ayXaoLS'
?*

]\\[.
jay

[
.]
.

][.

.][

][
. The letters of this first line are smaller than those in the lines below and differently formed, and they might be by another hand ; but there is no trace of an erasure, nor can the words be an interlinear addition. between and . 4. t or i<r might be read in place of Sje k.tX, Perhaps cf. Pindar, Pyih. iv. 180 5 as Blass suggests. 7. The letters of tbiois are smaller than usual and have a slight slope, while elsewhere the hand is upright ; they seem to have been written by the original scribe, but may be a marginal note or gloss. enclosed between two dots (cf. e.g. 16. ii. 4) has been 8. Something like an which is probably . The words may be divided written above the letter after

([:

({.

... or

]!/

675.

8
Col.
i.

45

^^'

[] []
TraiavL

[]
5
[.
.

lepau

[<]
.

[
[

^[. [.
[.
.

Col.

ii

.]

\[.

7[
[
.

.]

15
]

126

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

^ /8[

[. .]//[
.

iv

8 [
.
2.

Se

5[]9 [.
](rai/

[.

Se

[.
. .

....
[

][.

probable than
3.
is

:
a.

the vestiges of the last two letters are very slight, but
is

is

much more

There

[a]ev

is

a short blank space between Very uncertain ; the letter after


-Sois /^{.

[]

and the

letter following.

could be almost anything.

[]

quite possible.
9.

Probably

673.

7-4 cm.

Col.

i.

Col.

ii.

[
]qv'

].
]

[[]];

[
[

yKiVTpoiS

^.][
5
e/c

7[

oy
'\ov'

[ [

15

[
[

.
letters
8.

]!,

if

right,

no doubt ended

the

line,

but

there

\^uld be room

for

two

more.

There

is

e. g. Mej{iXaos.

a blank space before ({, which is possibly the name of the speaker, Apparently there was also a slight space between this and the preceding
is

line.

16.
is

a word of the use of which there

that of

and

is

no other example.

The

root

679-684.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
678.

127

677.

8-6

X 39

cm.

11x4
eau

cm.

\
[ [

[
[
:

]
]

TLVL

]/
t]ovs

]pos'

[
';([
[

\[
\^ 8[
^)9[

][
]f[

ee[ovs

two

677. 6. There is a blank space in the papyrus on either side of nw XoKtis. Probably be supplied at the end of the line. 8. is apparently for or The doubtful y might be t, but that gives no word.
feet are to

(
Cf.

>

409. 86, fee. 1-7. It appears on the whole probable that the fragment preserves the beginnings of the lines and that there is no loss on the left side till 1. 7, which must have projected somewhat, owing to the column having, as often happens, a slight slope. But this is not at all certain, and what we have taken to be a paragraphus between 11. 4-5 may be a rough breathing over
9.

678.

8.

The

syllable preceding

had an acute accent.

679-684. The

Prose Fragments.
prose fragments corresponds to the

following group of unidentified

foregoing collection of minor poetical pieces.


consists of the

The first, 679, is historical, and upper parts of two columns, both unfortunately fragmentary,
first

written in neat upright uncials of the

century
II.

B. c.

Military operations are

being described, and there

is

a mention in

2,-4 of

some one dispatched by an

Alexander

in Cilicia, and of a king or kingdom in 1. 42. Perhaps, then, this is a fragment from a history of the campaigns of Alexander the Great, and it may even belong to the lost work on that subject by the first Ptolemy.

128

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


680 seems
also to

come from some

historical work,

but

its

sense

is

not

easy to follow.

Parts of 15 lines from the top of a column are preserved, con-

taining mentions of Cilicians, Attica and the Athenians, and Soli in Cyprus.
is a sloping uncial of the middle or latter part of the third century. low stop apparently occurs in 1. 3. 681 is a piece from the top of a column containing the latter parts of lines from a geographical or historical treatise. A description of some 15 Thracian tribes, among which are the Triballi and Paeonians, is given, but the

The hand

passage

is

too mutilated for satisfactory restoration.

The fragment

is

written in

rather irregular, but not ill-formed, uncials, which

may

date from the second

century

a high stop

is

used.

of them forms the top.

same column, of which one hand seems, like that of 699, to be a rather early example of the oval type, and it may go back to the latter part
682. fragments, both probably from the

Two

The

graceful upright

of the second or the beginning of the third century.


is

The common angular

sign

used for

filling

up a short

line

(1.

12).

The

pieces are part of an oration,

perhaps a

lost

speech of Hyperides.

683 contains the ends of lines of part of a column, with

some
all

traces of the
is

column following,

r[

and

r[,

opposite
;

11.

16 and

19,

being

that

legible.

The fragment
11.

is

not easy to classify

citations of previous writers are

made

in

4 and 12-3, and a Dionysius is mentioned in 1. 9. The piece is written in rath.er small round uncials, which may be assigned to the latter half of the second century. An angular sign is used at the end of short lines. On the verso are parts of two lines in cursive of about the time of Septimius Severus. 684, containing 23 nearly complete lines from the bottom of a column, is much more intelligible. The fragment comes from some ethical treatise, the comparatively late date of which is indicated by the occurrence of the form (11. 6 and 22) as \vell as by the subject, the characteristics of sovereigns and advice for intercourse with them. The piece is written on the verso of the papyrus the recto being blank in sloping oval uncials, probably of the middle or latter half of the third century.

679.
Col.
i.

12-5

6-1 cm.

Col. re

ii.

]
ai

7]
.]v

ey

679-684.

vajrepov .[]. ay
5
]
.

]riv
]
,

(
as

}
NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
25
[

129

....

'^^
]

[.

]tovs
.

,]

8 ]
]
.

15 letters
15

Jri*'?
]

]
]

]]

] ^ ?
[.]
[.]
[

30

[
[*

[
35

[.]

e[i]y

2
letters

]7

[
19

}[
[

[
[.][
45

^
.[
v

38-45. These

lines are written smaller

and

closer together than the rest.

680.
[.
.
.

6-5

X4

cm.

.]

9
[.]
.]
.

19

[.

.]
.].

[.

[]
5
Toi/y

[
ot

[
.

[.],

9 [ 9 [
[
[

5[
] [

[]9
TcOeiaty

/[

? [ .]

15

130
3, Ti is

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


very doubtful
14.

Or

/.

the vestiges representing

might be taken

for a

double point.

eSL

II

cm.
]
]

]\\ ]/
]iy
]
.

/3[. ...]...
[.]?
.

.[.].
. .

70[.
.]

.]

]
]

tois

\\[\

[]

[.

[]

[]
S[.

]?

uXoV

.]
15

] ]
]
]

the

npos
Se

is right not more than six If 1-9 or from seven to eight in the remainder. is very likely 8. The letter between a and which seems to be accidental.

6.

]/

letters

are missing

at

the beginnings

of

11.

Above

of

rotf is

a spot of ink

682.
Fr. {a)

[]^
[]

7[(

[9 (
^
[.]
.

Fr. (a) 8

2-8,

Fr.

{b) 5-1

4-7 cm.

[ [

][
12 letters
,,

[] [
[.]?

ovSe[

12 letters

TOis

Fr.(^)
7

....
[

[ [9

?
]

^^^
[

15

[.]

Se

12 letters

}[.

[
al

[a\v8pS

.
XXI. (V

[rjoic

fit

8-.
15.

Nothing need be missing


Or

[o] dt

. [

was probably preceded by


o<

tv.

Mr. Smyly aptly quotes Hyperides, Euxenip.


al

cal

Kptaeis

rovs

[(!

at the

or [] of

1>[

end of these

lines.

are possible Supplements.

.. .

679-684
683.

NEW

CLASSICAL FRAGMENTS
9-3

i3t

4-4 cm.

^9
5
]

]e? r

Tiyi

mjr

toropunr

]ro

rovf

15 ]affaror

"Kokamuus

)rra vpeofieu

}ra<ray

r
ra we

l^avuM, Siawpa
JBuru^ oi

]| JCM ] Ke/)fa &


]rry
ico/u

jres

]Ae

^
a complete word; c L 18

20 jeowr oowaytaXafieuf

15.

onrar

maj be

684.

12x6-5,

. .

.]rt9oa-is
.]r

. .

>

. >{.]|(fa[.

evos eurir .[

. .

.jffwr

] /[]
]
.

^{] y
^iaj^opa
.

.^f

Se Ttpa

.
atf.
. .

/]
. .

uun[aij^

?fi^

f^

^
;

^?['

.javparmy

15

.] .

wpo9 [o]v^
Kvpuurei

. .

e]c

...[....
Se out
[. .
.

\tl

ie

$v]ji09 ^ao[(JXetf[9]

arc

veuSeveir Tm{s] vpa^afXev

avyoKparmp
Xp}pcros

[] waXrj
eoTip

ao]/upous fiaaiXei
ifer

a^mjJ[arof
[...

2 ?]

.]

^e]
o'^ei w(.]

[ Se
9^
Tji of.
.

10

.];

.w

'

[\
rm
[

^[

peyas

frpos re

Tas KoXaaeis oJceiAvrof

ovr] Tor wpoafXsvaoperctf

a\rt erepcuf Td[CjavTart


Bii]

yiYVi<^e\au wpo9

or ...[...
fiaaiXfa^t

Se KJfu

[ [ ^^}& ^
and another

ray reipa? vpo^eipos

5.

c^pycoT^r]: the
losL

final

scaicelj fiOs the airaDable space,

letter

may be
6.
<Hnitted.
9.

The second
The
traces

of

|^] if written

would be veiy ciamped and maj have been


.

of the sopposed

after ]

are rather doser than thej should be

132
both to the

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

and perhaps do not represent a letter, and on the and to the following and t. other hand a narrow letter may be lost between the doubtful . . Perhaps there is some corruption. might be read, but would make no sense here. would be expected and should no doubt be restored (cf. 1. 16 14. perhaps was written by mistake. 18. There is room for a letter between and a, but 1. or ? the seems clear. of ev is rather spread out and was possibly the last letter of 23. The final the line.

/3[]

'.

);

III.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


685.

Homer, Iliad XVII.


12-5

IO-5 cm.

This fragment, containing the ends of


of a column,
is

11.

725-32 of the

Iliad,

of interest owing to the presence of


1.

some marginal
is

of which, that on

728 mentioning a reading of the Koiy^,

from the top scholia, one with little doubt

by the original scribe, while those below were added subsequently in cursive. The MS. was a fine specimen of Greek calligraphy, being written with great
care in a large, round uncial hand, very similar to that of
is

probably to be assigned, like to the latter half of the second century, a date to which the cursive adscripts opposite 11. 730-1 also point. High and middle stops (11. 728-9) occur, and accents and breathings are used in the first
scholium.

(Plate

v).

It

There

is

a broad margin at the top of the column.

725

]'
eJTTi

77]
]

art

aWoS'

686-688.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


730

133

7]/

\9
]91 OVTt
[

[.

728.

The

namely

orebj},

6(8 Schol. and the disCUSSion of the question in the scholia of Ammonius, 221. i. i-8, where the ordinary accentuation is upheld. For the reference to the Koti^ cf. 445. which it 731. The scholium appears to be an explanation of the word interprets in the sense of 'pointed at both ends'; cf. Apollonius' Lexicon, s.v. rots f$ fKarepov bvvaptvovs. After Something like must be Supplied , Se cf. Schol. A on ?. The note 147 may have been continued in a third shorter line, and there is a faint mark below the of

and implies on A 493

marginal note evidently refers to the Aristarchean method of writing ore 817, that the word had the Aristarchean accent in the text. Cf.

,
which
732.

! :^
suit

88

-,

(if it

be ink) would

8e note below this Hne, which should refer to 1. 733 ov8e is obscure. The Only word here of which an explanation seems at all likely to have been given is which in the Schol. Didymi is glossed Idf'a but the present note was phrased dififerently. The doubtful may be and four or five letters may be lost in front of it since 1. 733 is not a long one. Auan- [

The marginal

an

e.

cannot be read.

686-688. The
three following

Homer, //tad

//, ///,

and

XL

Homeric fragments of which the text is printed below vii, and have a palaeographical value as practically contemporary specimens of the literary hand of the early Augustan period. 686 and 688, from the bottom and top of a column respectively, are very similar in type, 686 being the more regular and ornamental of the two, and both have a decided resemblance to the hand of the new Pindar fragments 687, which is also of some interest (659), which is perhaps slightly older. on account of the presence of two critical signs in the margin of Col. ii, shows a stiffer and more angular style of writing. No stops or other lection signs occur in any of the three pieces. We give a collation with Ludwich's text.
are reproduced in facsimile on Plate
686.

ii,

50

][
735:/.

Plate VII.

134

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

55

[] [ [ \\
8e

[^ ^ [ ] [ [ []
8e

[
/[

[\.

[eiSos re /leyje^oy

53

lacuna

read as do the great majority of the MSS. ; but the Ludwich, with Aristoph. and Aristarch. too large to give a real clue, SM, &C. SO Lud. with AB, &C. ; 54. nv\oiyei{eos so MSS. and Aristarch. ; ^fto Zenod. 56. e]eios

The papyrus probably


:

[,
ye
8i\a
7-9
i.

\-/\^
[

6]eLos

[^
'^m-

is

687.
Col.

4-5

Plate VII.
Col.
ii.

>

iii.

185

^]
]

]9
>
])(^

[
TOv[s

e
2

avTiavi]pai

[( <[ [ [ [
o[t

[9
[
or

215

\ ('
688.

with the note 207 There is a diple against this line in Ven. yap iviore 211. Ven. has a diple periestigmene opposite this line.

((

01

Ti
Xecoi/

as re

[ [

8 45 cm.

Plate VII.

[^ 70[ 7[9

689.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS

xi. 175

/ [9
"^
0)9

Se

135
1

^ ^i

ff'^X'^v

ea|[e

[]

[]
ore

[]
[]^
V

[ [
[

T0V9

179-80. These two lines were athetized by Aristarchus and omitted by Zenodotus;

Ludwich

prints

them

in small type.

689.

Hesiod, Scutum.
X3-6 cm.

Fr. {a) 9-2

Three fragments from the top of a column, containing the concluding the Scutum of Hesiod. The text is written in round, rather heavy uncials of medium size, which appear to date from about the end of the second century. The occasional accents, &c., and the punctuation are probably due to the original scribe, as well as the corrections in 11. 475 and 480. In the collation we have made use of the edition of Rzach (1902) a couple of otherfifteen lines of
;

wise unrecorded variants occur.

470

475

\ ^ []9 >^ [\' ] ^.[ \ ][][ [ ^[ [? [\] [] [][] []9 ] ^ [ ] ? [ ] [][ ] ] [ \ [ ] [ [ ] [


5je

\vios

\\<$
aiy^ra]

IoX[aos

[revj^ea

[\,]

l\kovto

[e^iAcer

tyyvs

y]t'/c7[y]

[] []' []

[]

[ ]{\[

^7]'

136

[^ ^
48
[oy Tis

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

]
o\tl

pa

\^ ]?

[
Other

466.

473.
least scan.

[ : ,
is

for

a case of the

Rzach with E,

common

confusion of

and

p.

MSS.

the papyrus reading will at

474-5. Rzach follows Goetthng in regarding these two papyrus shows that they belong to an ancient tradition.
variant
;

((,

The scribe seems to have imagined that the the ordinary reading. meant or why he made a mark like a sign of what he supposed the verb was ; elision after the overwritten t we are unable to conjecture. There is a break in the papyrus immediately below this line ; the title of the book presumably followed as usual.
480.
is

iytipero or

lines as a later addition.


]rreyfip[fTo in
1.

475

is

The new

MSS.

690, 691.

Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica III.


690 13x5-2
iTOT.,

691

3-3

X 3-3^^

We here group together a couple of fragments from the third book of the ArgonauHca o( Apollonius Rhodius, but derived from two distinct MSS. The larger fragment, 690, v\^hich is from the bottom of a column and comprises
variety of lection signs 737-45, is in a third century semi-uncial hand. of v^'hich the marks of elision are certainly due to the original scribe occur,
11.

the breathings and accents have rather the appearance of being a later addition.
691, containing parts of 11. 908-14, is earlier in date, being written in rather heavy, but not very regular, round uncials, which may be attributed to the second century. The texts are remarkable for the confirmation of two conjectures,

Porson's

correction of

for

the

Laurentianus

and Stephanus' two chief codices, and the Guelferbytanus, are taken from the edition of
for

vuvtul

appearing

in

1.

745,

in

1.

909.

Our

references to the

R. Merkel (1854).

690.

[
[
|

?]

[[ ]

692.
[770)9

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS

73 [

[]
735

[ ] []9
i'^i

^ ]9 [/ . 8[ ^
/ie]

137

[]
re re

[
[

910

[] KUVOLS []7' [] KcvOe *


[7]/
6/9
/f

[
[

aiev

[
[

/7['

738 [<7]/;

74

745

[] [<]\

[]9 [] ^ [9
[]
?
y'

[
[ [

.][\

^ ][
[

] [ ]
7[^6

\<[ [

[]9

[re

eiy

had the ordinary reading, which would quite Merkel, et e Wellauer. SO L; 1. with G, Merkel. 733. 735 ^s: so L {&: as G, Merkel. 738. The papyrus agrees with the other MSS. in omitting the line (739) cited in the scholia of L inep ov robe vt'iKos with for in 1. 738. MSS., Porson, which restores the metre and is adopted 745. by Merkel. should disappear from future editions. 691. 909. so Stephanus, a correction which has generally been accepted in place of the MSS. reading
"'

fill

690. 73 the lacuna ;

:
"

^
[

the papyrus probably

ye

[][

[(:

692.

Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica IV.


1

1-5

8-7 cm.

Two

fragments from the bottom of a column, containing parts of

11.

77-90

of Apollonius Rhodius' Argonautica,


uncial, has a certain

Book

iv.

The

handwriting, a neat upright

and
it

resemblance to that of the Thucydides papyrus (16, 696), apparently a rather later specimen of the same type we should assign to the second century. Occasional accents and stops (high usually, but
is
;

138

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


in
1.

a middle point apparently occurs


insertion of an iota adscript in
1.

89) are used,

and may be due,

like the

8 [\^
[vt]

^] [ [ 7] ^ [
[77/

Se

KpaiTTVovs

\yov\v(i!>v

[]
[f/zejay

85

[\ []
[]
[^]

][ ^^ [ \ [ ]' [
8

[(][
[

[] ^[9
yap

(( ? 9 [^ ^
6ools

90, to the original scribe.

^[

5?

[Se

re

rovay^.

[Se

avTOVS

]9 [
iepoy

[\
[]
so

Se y^pvaeiov

[] Qocav

[ [(
[^

ezri

Se Oeovs [v]i aotcr[iv

[][] []

8, (:
86. 90.

reading ; put in the accents, but whether he

G, Merkel.

L; the letter before the lacuna is certainly not 8. []: T0v8e G (Merkel), The size of the lacuna makes it pretty certain that the papyrus had the right GL, The iota adscript was probably added by the person who
is

to

be identified with the original scribe

is

doubtful.

693.

Sophocles, Electra.
8-6

3*6 cm.

narrow

strip

Sophocles' Electra.
correction in

The * MS., which

from the top of a column, containing 11. 993-1007 of is a good specimen of the oval type
first

of uncials, was probably written in the


1.

half of the third century.

The

looa and the occasional lection signs, with the exception of the rare variant mark of elision in 1. 993, are probably all by the original scribe. occurs in 1. 995. Our collation is derived from the Jahn-Michaelis edition

of i88a.

694.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS

[-^
995
6]

[ ]\ [] [[^^^ [ [ ^ [ [] [ [
]iaopaS'
[a6]veis

[ [ [

139

Opaaos

KaXeis

1005 [Xuet

[ [ ^ [ ]9 ? [ ^ []' ^[
Se

[]

eXuv
Xoyovs

e^vs

[rty

] [] 9-[
S

[]
[

y^o-p

yap

6](y\iv

[
14-2

\
Oavuv

995

^'"*

'/'-:
and

SO the Cod.

Monacensis (Herwerden, Anal.

Crit. p.

12):

'

>/3^ L, &c.

vulg.

editors. 996. (wrXiC?: so all the chief MSS. SO Brunck and vulg.; tkarrov MSS. 998. was originally written. 1002. Perhaps

(:

(?);

,^

694.

Theocritus, Idyl XIII.

84

cm.

A small fr agment from the thirteenth Idyl of Theocritus, written in a

good-

probably the earlier sized upright round uncial hand of the second century, occur, all of half of it. Numerous stops (high point), breathings, accents, &c. line, seem to which, as well as a few corrections or variants inserted above the

be due to the first hand. The text has a new variant in 1. the MSS. Our collation 1. 30, but elsewhere agrees with
of Ziegler.

34,
is

and an error

in

with the edition

I40

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


*LKTo

KQ)

[5
vi'os
[

20

\\(

[
[6
[

arcs Kvavedv ov[^

[]'
aiiTo[s\ [sj

.
25

aos

[\^
3

[ [\ []/ [ [ \
8
viov

^ \
/
Se
[

[^^^
7

[][][]'

19.

20.

21. Against this line are

!
:
:

[]
'.

[
Tra[peKCTO

[]0[]/

MSS.
SO most

MSS.

Z(iegler) foUowing the Ambrosianus. two dashes, of which the meaning, if any, is obscure.

22-4 were rejected by Ahrens. Inl. 23 S[i]e|aetae is corr. to The supposed 25 It is not certain what was written above the initial a. for is possibly an accent and breathing. two points (i.e. eOevTo MSS., Z. is a repetition from the previous line. 30. e/ceiro MSS., Z. yap 34. [][]/ 7ra[pfKiTu

)
:

[^|.

between

695.

Herodotus V.
24-3

7-6 c?n.

Part of chapters 104-5 of Herodotus,

Book V,

written in a good-sized third

Tvio corrections and a breathing have been inserted by a second hand. The text offers no variants from that of Stein. On the verso, in a late third or early fourth century cursive hand, is part of a list of names of persons, with sometimes a statement of the villages
century uncial hand of the broad oval type.
to

which they belonged,

e.

g.

^(), ^>{$)

696.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS

141

? [ ? \[][ ? [ ^{ 7[? ^[
[ras Kv]nf}ioy[s
8rj

15 [y?]?

Afiq[6ov

?[ []

[^][][5]77

[]

[] []
ovSeva

[ 7[ [][]
<rv[vv

9 {\

[? ]7

,
22.

[ \(\(
s

[[ []
[^\ap[8]i[s

^^-^^

y^

j^^^j

[(][]

8e

The second

of

has been corrected from


ov in (by the first

23- Final

which waS altered to was put of

.
35

[]][ ^] .......
8e

^ ^[

[ [] <[
8 [?
euv
^^,

[?

oiTive?

;
later.

i.e.

the

first

hand wrote

hand)

696.

Thucydides IV.
Fr. (c)

15x19

cm.

In view of the peculiar excellence of the Oxyrhynchus Thucydides papyrus originally published in the Egypt Exploration Fund's Archaeological Report fragfor 1896-7, and reprinted as P. Oxy. 16, the discovery of some more pieces comprise The new ments of the same MS. was a welcome surprise.
portions of six

more columns, covering, with considerable lacunae, chapters missing a8 to 35 of the fourth book and at the same time supply some of the beginnings of lines in the first column of the fragment originally found, which
;

succeeded immediately.
possesses the same features which distinguished readers are referred to the description given in that published previously, and see no reason for altering the date (first century A. D.) P. Oxy. I. p. 40.

The

present part of the

MS.

We

there proposed for the papyrus.

We

are,

however, inclined to doubt whether

the final
different

which has been inserted occasionally in the text is after all by a hand from that to which the other numerous corrections and variae lectiones

142

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


is

are apparently due, and which


scribe.

not to be distinguished from that of the original

As
Our

before, the

ordinary text, the most noteworthy being those in


collation
is

papyrus shows a number of small differences from the 11. 4, 13, 16, 38, 6%-^ and 87. with the text of Hude.
i.

Fr. {a)

Col.

2.?>.

4.

[
Col.

ii.

29. 3.

[
[

eTTi^ct

[?
Fr. (b)

T0V9

?
32.

\ ]

\[ ^
Lv[ai

avrovs

[]

V01S

column

lost.

10

[ [] [] [ 9
Col.
ois

]
-erl-

]>^
v6vs

15

] [ ?] [9
Se
[<

v re] rais evvais

([

[] [
9

Tos vavs

9]

^ ] ] ] [ ] ]
[
[res

[Se

Fr. {c)

Col. V.

3^ 4

Col.

34 3

25

)(] [ ] [] [] [][] [] [] []
7r[oX]e
e[K]

[][]9

[]

[]

[]
Se

[]

8
6
([]
ev

696.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


oi[y]

\\
[r

\ [] [
Col.

0ei'yoi'[rey]

^
re
^^. 2.

143

eTTcXOeiv oiou

yap

^
/.

30

35

. ^[ [ ] [] [ \ ? [] ] [] [] []^] [? [^ ]
.
]

65

<5*

\\[ ] [\^ [

''^/

[^

-'

ev

[]

[][ 8]

[rey

]''

[i9]

T0V9

[]

7[]

45

.m

[ []

[\

75

[]/^9

y
8

[][
^

[]

65

[ [

[] ][\[ [
[]

[] ] []

" [] ] [][][

[] [][][] [ [
[]

][ [ ] [ ][ [
[^OJi

[]

85

[ [][

[] ^ [ ] [] [][ []
[

[ ][
]

144

^^^ OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


Col.
viii

(=16. Col.

iii).

^6. 3.

3 lines

lost.

^
95

*
/|[] /|7;9

"t*^

ol\

H^^y
go ^

v\oi

^'?
I*
'
Il-

^
*!

loo

4.

7/;]?
93. 4
: :

e.g.
this

ii.

(}?
:

for the Variant


emTTfaovres.

reading or was replaced by the omission of iota adscript is unusual in this papyrus. 5. av elvai ABF. this is the order of CEGMfj 6. (iv[ai av en was the Original Order, but en was subsequently inserted 10- 1, is the reading of all MSS. en at the end of 1. 10 and cancelled in 1. ir. a modification of Abresch's conjecture Hude prints 12. It is unfortunate that the beginning of this line is lost since editors have suspected The ordinary reading suits the size of the lacuna a corruption in Xa^oi^es
well enough.
essential,

, .
It
;

which

is

may be doubted whether

not otherwise recorded, cf. aureus was retained with

:, .
( (,
MSS. The new

\.

13. ras vavs,

which is added above the line, is found in all MSS. It is not absolutely and may be an explanatory adscript which has become incorporated into
:

the text.

([5
of or
16.

14. [Oos es

editors to

may also well be right. 22. Eleven lines are lost at the top of this column. The papyrus gives so the MSS. 23. -^iCKo^
emendations

:, ,
]

variant

is

supported by other examples in Thucydides

e.g. in this book 1 7. 2, 55. 2, 67. 4. was omitted. is rather long for the lacuna, and possibly the reading of the MSS., has been commonly changed by an alteration which is now sanctioned by the papyrus. The singular

of

^,
35.
1.

no support to the suggested Madvig). Cobet, there would not be room for Hude's conjecture 28. occur in 1. 47, 16. ii. 9, &c. 29. Similar insertions of re may have been caused by the homoioarchon 30. The original omission of but it is noticeable that the words have not been supplied in quite their right

{ \: [].
The
:

(
of

position.

addition of the

on

is

parallel to the insertions of final v;

cf.

note

29.

MSS., Hude.
ineKduv

38. fnextiv

MSS.

entxeiv here

might be supported by such a use as

696.
eVt

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


(viii.

be more
41.

likely to

105.

3),

but

become

fnexeiv than vice versa.

preferable.

is far superscribed reading, is noticeable that the interlinear has a stroke above it instead of, as usual, the letter which was to be replaced. Dobree's 42-3. The MSS. reading in this passage is conjecture for having been generally adopted by subsequent editors. It is nearly certain that the papyrus agreed with the MSS. in having for though there is a hole at the crucial point, the distance between the letters and strongly suggests that another letter had intervened. There is no trace of any correction. It or may then be assumed with little chance of error that the tradition of goes back at least to the first century a.d. ; and this reading is no doubt intelligible, if not very satisfactory. Oapptiv, so far from helping The interhnear variant

The

It is

,
it

145
would

may be

mere graphical error t has been revritten. that of the MSS., but
a

The

^
;

(^

:\,

It may be fresh difficulties, and seems indeed quite impossible. noted that the top of the of has been rewritten (by the first hand), but no importance should be attached to this circumstance ; the same thing has been done again in the case of of in 1. 63. has been again cancelled. 45. The t vritten above ei of

matters, only creates

47.

space at the end of this line has been filled up by two angular marks elsewhere one only is usually employed for this purpose. 60. TO alei is the MSS. reading. has been corrected from e (?). The of 61. elsewhere in the papyrus is written. 62. the first Syllable was added afterwards, most probably by the first
59.
;
:

hand

^ ,
The blank

MSS., H.;

cf.

1.

29.

MSS.
'.

63. 65.

(7
e

MSS.
in be
cf.
1.

For the insertion of an elided

8 MSS.
:
:

80,

and 16.

iii.

Be

MSS.

66.
71. 72.

The

alternative spelling nXeovi

is

that of the

^]
[01

8(
SO
ey

ABFG
;

. with the Other MSS.


MSS.
It
is

MSS.

1.

76,

papyrus had
before
01.

]:
at

MSS.

8avyves, The is
na\ oi

with the

quite certain.

MSS.

just possible,
;

the end of the previous line


e cf.
1.

there

is

not

though unlikely, that the room in 1. 76 for

80. 86.

For the inserted

[(^

scarcely

fills

65, note. the lacuna, in

which three or four more

letters

would be

expected.

87-102. The papyrus here supplies some of the letters missing at the beginnings of lines at the top of the first column of 16. The vertical strokes in the text show the line of fracture. 87-8. maTeCaavres MSS. The reading of the papyrus may be right.

146

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


697.

Xenophon, Cyropaedia
24-4

I.

12-5 cm.
i.

leaf

from a codex of Xenophon's Cyropaedia, containing most of


ii.

6.

3-1 1, and a small piece of another leaf containing a few letters from
written in a neat uncial

i.

30,

probably not much later than A. D. 200. Several corrections or variants have been added above the line, chiefly by a second and more cursive hand. The numerous stops (high, middle and low

hand which

is

most part due to the original scribe. in which the text of the Cyropaedia still remains after centuries of use as a schoolbook is deplorable. Dindorf's Oxford edition, which alone gives a serious critical apparatus, omits several of the most important MSS., and the accuracy of the collations is not to be depended on. Hug's Teubner edition is mainly based on C, a Paris MS., which is one of the best, but since Hug's apparatus is not sufficiently detailed for his silence about the readings of C to be a trustworthy argument, we are unable to infer what they are except where he actually records them. Mr. E. C. Marchant, however, whose forthcoming edition of the Cyropaedia may be expected to reduce the
point) are for the

The

condition

existing chaos to order, has very kindly placed at our disposal for the passage

covered by the papyrus his unpublished collations of two of the chief MSS.,
the Bodleianus (Bib. Canon. 39, which in the Anabasis is generally called D, though different from Dindorf's D), and the Etonensis. which is closely
related to C.

The MSS.
consists of

of the Cyropaedia divide into two

main

families

one group

AG, which
;

are the basis of Dindorf's edition, C, which in the early

part of the Cyropaedia supports

AG and

is

the basis of Hug's edition, and the

D and the Bodand is supported through a large portion of the passage covered by the papyrus by Stobaeus. The character of Dindorf's R and the relation of it to the two main groups is uncertain. The papyrus on the whole supports the group represented by D, Bod. and Stobaeus, with which its readings agree against the AGC, Et, group about twice as often as vice versa, and adds a
Etonensis (Et.)
while the other group consists of Dindorf's
leianus (Bod.),

number of variants peculiar to of the Oxyrhynchus fragment


to represent the archetype

itself.

Though not

of equal importance to that

of the Anabasis (463), the text of which seems

from which the existing MSS. of that work are papyrus is of considerable interest. Our collation is with the edition of Dindorf, supplemented occasionally by that of Hug. But the only MSS. of which^ the accurate collation is guaranteed
descended
in

two main

traditions, the

697.
are the

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


two
for

147

information about which

we

are indebted to Mr. Marchant.

Fortunately these are typical and important representatives of the two main
groups.

yap

7[]
6

Verso.

[]
8

^
.

[].

[]

.
oans

6. 3

ev airopot?

Tore KoXaKevor

7i[p]os

T0V9

^[] [] ^^^ ^ [] 9 9 89 [] [9 ]
8
Se

[]

)(

reu^e

eav

ovvi8vai

[]
15

8
[]

[][]\
[]\]6

^ ([]

^
^e[ot]
Set.

^
To^eveiv

[\

8[\
e8oKi

^ [] [] .
[]' \'\

[[]]

[]'

[]
7

Seiv

[]6 2 [\
[];6'

^ ' 8 ^^ [] [] ^ [ ] ^ \\ ^] [] []
'
e[0]i7

[^]]

valy]

25

[/90i']ra[s]

ye

\\\(
ye

[]

0[;][]/'[]

[ ] []

'' '
e

L 2

148

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

35

[ [ ][
Se]

4 [

45

[ ][
[

[
[

[ ][] ] [ [ [ ] [ ][ ][ [ [ ] [ ^[ ^ ][ ^
]\[ ][][]
[]
[
[rey
Sei

[]9 ^ -^. ^^^ [] \\[ ^?' \[] ? [] [] [] [][] \[] [] [] []][ ]9 ^ [] [] []

iLvai]

\^

8].

[eLKo]?

[
[]7?

ef^o/xeroi/y.

[e

Se

eir]

et

tis

[] [] [] []9 []9 \
]
[] 8[] []
[]9

;0[]([

][

]8[]

]^

])(^[ [)(]

So

re

[ ] [5
]

Bi]ayi[yvovTai

14

lines lost

Recto.

61

65

( ( ' ( ' ' ( (( ( ' ( ( ( ' ( ( ( ( (

^^^
t

avay

(^^

((

697.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS

149

av
70

7[/]///

vo

eeos

en
ei

ev

Xeye*

lo

VOLTO'

tis

[]

iropos

TIVOS 5e

[ei]/fo9

75

^ [])(^ 8 [ [ ] [] [] ? ^' [ ^ ] [ [] []
[[]]
VKa

\^ ^ ^
[)(\
rjs

[]

' [\

^[^:\

^
^

yevcaOai

/
\'\

eOvos

[^

[]

[]

85

6
Tivas
ecoy

go

'
95 l^vly

^ . ^ [ ] [ [ ] [ ^[[ [\[]
^^

[
[
[

e[aei]

[][]

[] ]
]^][

[ [^ ^
[] [][
[[']]
re

11

'

][6)\]
'

[][\[][]

[
ei

^
oui

[] [] []

\']

[] ][ \
[

] [][
5e

50
100

\oLS

\ 8
[

[ ^ [
OLV

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

8]7j

rrfv

Lvai

][][
]

]
]

05

/30]

][

^ [
109
'^^^

Et., Stob.
;

II.

.
2.
3.

4.

ptpvTjTo

Stob.
5.

:
[

07?
:

so

AGR,
(first

Et.,

so

AG
:

Dind. om. D, Bod., Stob. Fior. 48. 68. hand) R, Dind. DG (corr.), Bod.,
;
;

SO

ADGR,
(fifst

Bod., Stob., Dind.


;

Et.
first

SO

ADG, Bod., Et., Dind. KoXaKeveiv R A, CDGR, Bod., Et., Dind.


;

hand.

Stob.

SO

AG

hand, with
first

above the

line in a later

corrected by the

hand

to

Bod.

,,
: :

(with dotS OVer Et., Stob., Dind. DR, Bod. ; Dind. SO MSS. 6. so D, Bod., Stob.; y AG, Dind. ; Sw' Et. so MSS. ; epxei Dind. epxq (first hand) R, Et., Dind. ; ^f our SO 7 marg. in later hand, and with Bod. which adds D. so AGR, Bod., Et., Dind. ; 8. eav: so ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind. ; Et. avveiBevai Stob. SO MSS., Dind. ; ^vveibevai the original reading of the papyrus, agrees with AGR, Et., Dind.; 9. the Correction, with D, Bod., Stob. 10. AGR, Et., Dind. SO D, Bod., Stob. J 6 C, Et., which has 11. AG, Dind. ; 3> SO DR, Bod., Stob. ;

\(\ :
'.

SO

AG

),

hand), Et., Dind.

ADG

(^^

&

'.
'.

above

hand

12. 14.

in

an erasure,

/ :
yap

^ ^ 8^
:

SO D, Bod. SO Bod., Stob.


',

(Kelva
;

AGR,

AG,

Et.,

Dind.
;

Et., Stob.,

Dind.

D, with dots over

\\\(['\
Bod. has
hiayeiv.

^
:

SO MSS., Dind.

hehav
;

Stob.

SO

AG

(second hand), Dind.

awnv D,

Stob.;

Et.

'.

SO

DR,

Stob., Dind.;

((\ \
AG,
Et.

^ ^,
G
(first

by a

later

hand)

For

.,.,
y hv

15 ": so

MSS. and

Stob.; om. Dind. following Stephanus.

697.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


:

151

SO MSS., Dind.

16. avTovs (i.e.

'

ovv TotovTovs iavTOvs Et. 17.

18.

[/]
for

not

room
:

19.

so D, Bod., Stob. ; ^e AGR, Et., Dind. SO D, Bod., Stob. ; om. AGR, Et., Dind. oida SO D, Bod. ; aei ae (second hand in marg.) ;

:(

: [].
:

avTovs):

iavrovs

{nepi) Madvig followed by Hug. om. Stob. invrovs AGR, Dind.; ovu D, Bod., Stob.
; ;

<.
;

SO SO D, Bod.
;

AGR,
;

Et., Stob.,

Dind.

Bod.
Et.,

AR,

Dind.

There

is

certainly

\\^

'.

20. ovTe:

with ovT in
23.

SO DGR, Bod., Et., Stob., Dind. 24. vavv: so Stob.; vavs MSS., Dind.
:

:
1.
:
:

Stob.

AG

corr. to oure

by second hand Bod.;

ovre

hand) R, Et., Dind. Similarly other MSS., Dind.


(first

(
hand),

21.

[]
:

so D, Bod., Stob.; om.

AGR,

Et.,
;

Dind.

'

A.

so Stob. ; ovhi MSS., Dind. (Stob.) is equally possible. SO MSS., Dind. ; (first hand) R, Et. agree (second hand). Bod., Stob. SO 25. avTois (so Dind.). with the original reading of the papyrus in omitting
[ojvre

({\[\

owe
26
27.
28.
Et.,

:
so
;
\

DG

AG

MSS.,

Stob., Dind.

Trap[a

ADR,
SO

Bod., Et., Stob., Dind. ; rrfpl G. SO Bod., Stob., and (with the omission of

[.

') D

[]:
:

AGR,

Et.,

Dind.
(corrected)

AG

LM,

Bod., Stob.;

DEHRG

(first

Dind.
29. Oewv: so
trap

ADG,

Stob., Dind.

R, Et.

so Stob.

MSS., Dind.

8f

Et. SO ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind. ; (first hand) R, Et., Dind. 8e (second band in marg.), Bod. 8' R. so ADG, Bod., Et., Dind.; 31. (sic). After Bod. has 32. av: om. MSS., Dind. AGR, Et., Dind. SO D, Bod. 33. KaXo[s] Ti T /caXo'ff MSS., Dind. om. R. so ADG, Bod., Et., Dind. Dind. SO MSS. here and in 1. 37 ; 34. SO D, Bod. ; om. AGR, Et., Dind. om. G. ; above the line in R. o so AD, Bod., Et., Dind. Et. AGR, Dind. [ojiiTOf SO D, Bod. ; 35. with dots underneath AG, Et., Dind. ; SO DR, Bod.

30.

[
:

so

^
[]
: :

]
:

8
;

AG

{[\(:

^
AGR,

[][
before
36.

papyrus had

[
is

L.
:

SO D, Bod.

Et.,

Dind.

What

reading the

37. 38. TOTe 40.

['

uncertain.
:

: [(
SO
for

MSS., Dind. elvai MSS., Dind.


Bod., Et., Dind.;
is

AGR,
it

had D's reading


]J'e[o]et

AGR, Et., Dind. omitted by R, Et., and Stob., inserted in ADG, Bod. (so Dind.). Considerations of space make it probable that the papyrus read . We have followed the reading boKd the restoration of this is uncertain.

][

41.

[:

rather long for the ovv SO ), Bod., Stob. ;

'

is

ore

D. It is unlikely end of 1. 39.

that

the

papyrus

T52
of Stobaeus the addition of
is

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


boKel,
Sojcei,

which
; ;

suits

the lacuna best,


Et.,

AG,
Which reading

and, with

CR,

Et.

43. uncertain.

[^.
[oioi

so D, Stob. SO

/LieWoiye

AGR,

D. Dind.

the papyrus

44. yiyvovTM

re oWes (second hand in marg.), Dind.; hand), Et., owing to homoioteleuton. avTovs CR, Et. have eivai 46. The restoration is uncertain. eu/ai toiovtois A (so Dind.) flvai toiovtovs with the omission of and so being added over the line by a later hand. Probably (apparently) G, being added and perhaps the papyrus originally had eivai over the line by the corrector. 61. epx7 so MSS. ; epxei Dind. agree with the the corrected reading of the papyrus, agrees with D. Bod., Dind. reading of the first hand eymye Dind. 61-2. 8e he 6 Kvpos CDR, Bod., Et., and in marg. (first hand). by a later hand G, Dind. om. 62. eaTiv. MSS., Dind. the reading of the first hand, is clearly an error, and ought to have been 63. Se, 84 erased by the corrector Avhen he inserted hi AGR, Bod., Et., Dind. maTeCeiv Bod. SO moSt MSS., Dind. CR Et. D, Bod. AG, Dind.; 64. AGR, Et., Dind. D, Bod. exe'ivo AGR, Et., Dind.; eKflvo ov om. Bod. 65.
re]:
;

om,

re

RG
;

is

Omitted by

AG

(first

,' . ]
:

-,

had

CAGR

(:

AG

^ ]
:
:
:

D
R

in

marg. by
66. eav

and with
(with
67.

] ^
:

later

( /;
by the

hand

so

hand

4. ^^ : ((: (^)(.
:
:

^ ^
first

for

'4 Bod. added by a hand) and (with A G, Bod.


;

SO

CDR,

( (
:

^/ (
J
;

]
'.

/cety

Hug

(
D,
Bod.
first

following Madvig.

\()
,

Et., Dind.,

later

CR,
e|ei

Bod., Et.

&

68.

SO AGR, Et., Dind. SO AGR, Et., Dind. SO

AG,
;

hand) G. Et., Dind. perhaps ap) G, Dind.;

and (reading

2>

D, Bod.

)
;

69.

DR,

Bod., Dind.

Et. agree with the reading of the

SO 7 Bod., Stob. Flor. 48. 70


ei

(first

in the margin) R, Et.


71.

[oji/
:

AG
;

(first

hand) R, Dind.

Si

DG
Stob.

(in

marg. second hand).

S>

Et.
; ;

SO
;

DG

(second hand in marg.), Bod.


Et.
;

AG

hand), Dind.
:

SO D, Bod., Stob., Dind.

yevoiTo

:
:

so

ADGR,
AGR,
:

Et., Stob.,

leiJKos

SO D, Stob.;
:

Dind.

CAGR,
;

Et.,
;

((
72.
73
:

so D, Bod., Et,, Stob. so

(Hug) Bod., Dind. om. D.


;

4
AG
Et. places

(first

hand,

being added in

Bod. Dind.; om. Bod., which also omits AGR, Dind.


after

evBevhe
:

[px]'?

SO D, Bod., Et. so MSS.; Dind.


(first

AGR,

Dind.

/.

so

AG

hand) R,

Et.,

Dind.;

' DG

(second hand). Bod.

697.
74. 75.
toKfii
:

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS

153

7
: : :

SO
\

ADGR,
SO

Dind.

77.

Et. Bod., Dind. ; added Wovs hi Dind. with all MSS. except Et., which has be by a second hand in the margin against evtKa AGR, Et., Dind. SO D, Bod. ; 79 AG. To[8]e: SO CDR, Bod., Et., Stob. Flor. 48. 71, Dind.; cf. note on 1. 34. 81. ^ Dind. ; ewi R. so ADG, Bod., Et., Stob., Anon. ap. Boisson, Anecd. i. p. 113, 5re (second hand), Et., Stob., Anon., Dind.; SO 82. (first hand). finropns eimopeh Bod. ; . 0T ; . //c (first hand) (in marg. by second hand), Stob. ; om. SO

::

; (: []
78.
:

AGR, Et., Dind. ; so Bod. ; Et. Bod., Dind. ; SO ADGR, G, Bod., Dind. and (in an erasure) R, Et. ; SO by the MSS. and Dind. this word is placed before

^^
;

Bod., Et.

ADG,

Bod., Dind. (apparently)

om,

ADL
so

AGR,

Et.,

Dind.

^)

(Tvai

Et.

D, Bod.

SO

ADGR,

[8\:
. .
.

::
:

AGR

[\ ^^
. .

. ^
^),

DG

AG

R,

Et.,

Anon., Dind.

and

for the lacuna.

{
83. 84.

[(]

6^:

so D, Anon. (?), Et., Dind.; SO D, Bod., Stob. ;


:

^,; ^ GR,
elvai
;

Bod., Stob.

Dind. AL (first hand) being over an erasure) SO perhaps R (first hand, corr. from i) Bod. G, Et., Stob., Dind. iavTout; 85. TovTov. so ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; Be: so ADR. Bod., Stob., Dind.; .^ G. D, Bod., Stob. so AGR, Er., Dind.; (first hand ?), Et., Stob. so AG (second hand) R, Bod., Dind. 86. Et. so ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind. el AGR, Stob., Dind. v ; so D, Bod., Et. R (first hand apparently). SO ADG, Bod., Et., Stob., Dind. after ^..> SO here AGR, Et., Dind. D, Bod., and Stob. place it exception of ^ SO, with the Beovra ot av 87. D, Bod. ; eove &v for erl, AGR, Et., Dind.
:

[)
:

being added in marg. by a


so D, Stob.
;

later

A, Et., Anon., hand) L, Dind.

[
;

(omittmg
eivai
is

too long

\ % GR, Bod.,
;

Et.,

\'.

e
88.

e
:

; ;

DG

oea

. :
Dind.

^e ipeov
...

eove
Be

Stob.
Tore

vv,e
to

by second hand, D, and, with

eyev

Et.

ie'pov
not
:

papyrus had

^ Bod., Stob., Dind.; Sevep A; _ S>v AGR, Et., Dind. ; e el SO D, Stob. ; in rasuro) Bod. i)v ^ ^ a /^ t? and SO D; 91. rasura) Bod in . and with Dind., and (omitting Et., (with (first hand), ev S>v Bod. ; al viv SO ; "''' A, Et., Uind., hand ; hv uei/ ad viv added in marg. by a later with having ^v. so far agrees with which the reading of the first hand in the papyrus

80. oTavnep

oev

]( \
SO

' Bve ' " .' ve


...
CDR,

Bod.

], \
TOTe

,
;

vr, ve ,/ -it. L>epov


:

SO, With

i a trom corrected r

Stob.;

Be

TOTe \eyeiv

AG

and. With

^^

eev

. ',
. .

It is tolerably
r^ G

Certain that the


-r.

,
(^

COrr.

oovep

ht.

Boe

eev

eev

ee) [^

^^

DR

,.

. ea G m

154
92.
in the lacuna.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


MSS.
:

(except Et.
;

Dind.

,'

but there

is

not

room

for

93.

SO

ay[erat

ADGR, Bod., Dind. avros Et. ayerai SO AGR, Et., Dind.


:
',

followed by
95.

Hug.
eiKOf

For

D
it

by a

later

hand.

and Bod. have There is not room


with

( \
sIkos,

D, Bod.
is

eVoyfrai Cobet,

and

added

in the

margin of

for

in the lacuna, so the papyrus probably

hand) R, Et., Dind. D, Bod.; Et. ADG (second hand) R, Bod., Dind. ; exovn G (first hand) ; The supplement at the end of the line above t) pev Et., omitting after eVrt. (R) for than it should be by three or four letters, but the only variant is ADG (corrected), Dind. so DGR, Bod., Et., Dind.; en A. 97. is bracketed by Hug, following Madvig. e[7r]eiTa DR, Bod., which has SO AG, Et., Dind. {fneir) ;
agreed

.
:

(
: :

in omitting

AG

(first

96. to: so so

AG, Dind.;

(with
is

longer

fof

SO ADG, Dind., agreeing with the 98. agreeing wiih the corrector. Ti R, Et. so ADG, Dind. ;
eivai
:

[^^:
;

first

hand;

R, Bod.,

(D
Et.

fivai

'

(at

'

in

an erasure) Bod.
(ivai

elvai

AG,
;

Dind., and (with

for

in

an erasure)

R
is

99. 100.

[: G
8]: so
:

Et.

SO

ADGR,
in

Bod., Dind.
;

^
Et.,

marg.

om.

ADR,

Dind.

The

reading of the papyrus

uncertain.
1

09. KOI

AD

G, Dind.

698.

Xenophon, Cyropaedia
23-5

I.

7-9 fz.

from the conclusion of the first book of Xenophon's which is written, as usual, below the final column. We assign the small detached piece from 45 to the previous column owing It is remarkable that what according to the to the height of the papyrus. are \) accepted division are the opening words of Book ii, here made the last sentence of Book i. The text does not otherwise differ from
fragments
Cyropaedia, with the
title,
.

Two

?,

that of Dindorf.

money-account in a cursive hand, which apparently is not later than about the middle of the third century. The text on the recto, therefore, which is written in sloping
the verso of the papyrus are parts of

On

two columns

of a

699.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


common
i.

155

oval uncials of the


century.

type,

is

the to be assigned to the earlier part of

Col.

] ]
Col.

rjfi

^ ^

[^]^ /

[] [9 Hep
[

[ov8ey

[ \ [] [
[\\
a(j)[L]KOVTO
5.

[^ ]
.

...
[

[^
"

[9

[][
are rather in favour of

[^

The

vestiges

^...
this

(R), but

.,.

(ADG)

is

not

impossible.

IslSy

obfe?v;d'r*e?r:^orio,

sentence

commences

the next

Book

according to the ordinary division.

699.

Theophrastus, Characters.
7

4-2 cm.

notoriously insecure, Characters of Theophrastus is book might an early papyrus of any part of the offers a problem upon which contains the The present fragment, which be expected to throw some light. disappointing in this of ch. .6, is however end ofch. .5 and the beginning of a comseems to be not less of the nature respect giving a version which mcludes Unfortunately that pendium thaf that of the Codex Monacensis. comparison is not possible. so that an actual onlv the first twenty-one chapters wing th^^^^^^^^^^ papyrus^ therefore, chiefly lies in Ttinlrest of th'e small oval uncials, It is written in rather Characters. of such compendia of the part of the third century. which probably date from the earlier

and

The

text of the

MS

156

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


[

][

[K]qi

^3 letters

[kJos

[a]yTOv

[9
[

^
?

[\
5

\\[]
9
The

[]

[])(^ [
Kivbvvfvaas eva

9[ ^
[
5e

[ []
tolovto^ iSiaJj
ei[s
[iy]

\9
[Xeyei

)(^[ [] /? []
apKae[ij/ eva
tfiXias) in the

the chapter.
5.

. ) (^
If
Xfyeij'

,
1-4.
in
IV,

conclusion of ch. 25 [nepl

'\
is

eicrayeiv

1.

is

right there

no room
1.

for

^.
(*)
fivai'

alternative, suggests nothing.

In

4 after

[v'^^v is

(not which is an a broad blank space marking the end of


fivai

Ch. 26

((\

begins

8((

6 8e

61?

[.

MSS.)

MSS.)
be

has generally been recognized as MSS. disagree, Pal.- Vat. omitting and the others reading The papyrus variant which gives the sense aimed at by for is very likely right, though the word at the end to Fischer's emendation of The first letter, if not i, seems to be , , or . Besides being of 1. 6 remains doubtful. much more compressed the text of the papyrus shows a different order, 11. 12-4 correspondIn 11. 9 sqq. it is not certain ing to what in the MSS. precedes the Homeric quotation. ... are the beginnings of the lines since the papyrus is broken immediately that p(v, before those letters ; but the arrangement proposed is the most probable.
(omitting unsatisfactory and the
definition of

...

( ().

8e'i

(,

The

,,

(,
eVt

(( (>^( (\
ordinary version
is

8 ), (.
8.
MSS.)

(' (.
ev

700.

Demosthenes,
14-5

De

Corona.

4-4 cm.

This fragment
pp. 230-1 of the

is

a strip from the bottom of a column containing parts of

Corona. The lines being incomplete both at beginning and end, it is doubtful how they should be divided the arrangement given below is therefore hypothetical. The hand is a rather irregular upright uncial of medium size, and more probably of the second century than the third. high point is occasionally used, this and the diaeresis being the only lection
;

De

700.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


occur.

157

marks that

Our

collations in this

and the other

oratorical fragments

(701-4) are with the Teubner edition of Blass.

CDS

irpos

][ ? [ [9 7]
eJ/ceiiOi/y

tovs

] [[]] ] ^^ [
yap] eyooye

Tore

[ <

15

]9 [] >$ ]^ [ ]$ [] ^? ^ 7

] ] [[ ]9 ^ [^
Se

\^ [ \[
8i

[
a[vTOis

eive

^ ]9 [ 9

^ ]
]

yap

][]9
[]
'Cct^qjov

]
Tepov
.

[ [
[ [
[

a]v\iv

piOL

epijy

25

] ]\

]75'

[ [ [
)([

[ ]
yap

....

3 vfMs,

4.
5.

which Bl(ass) omits after with SL, may have stood which was first written was a mere slip. The correction is probably by a second hand.

in the papyrus.

158
8.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


The papyrus most
'.

14.
1 8.

\\
The

likely

had
>\.

either rore or

(,
rois

like the other

MSS.

ijare] Bl.

\'.

but some MSS. noticed as a variant also in FQ. It is manifest that none of these readings suits the papyrus, for only six or might be read, seven letters are required between tovto[is and or and oKKois to or we may suppose that the scribe was led by the homoioteleuton of write simply The entry at the bottom of the column (probably by a second hand), where O's variant (cf. e.g. 223. 126), evidently refers to is followed by this passage; but how much, if anything, stood before cannot of course be determined. In 1. 23 1.

22-3.

WiSS, usual reading here is

(including

FYQO)

omit

adding

? \.^^

" . ,\ \
aXKois
fpis,

after

Avhich

is

^^

701.

Demosthenes, Contra Timocj'atem.


15-7

14-6 cm.

Parts of three rather short and narrov^r columns (about 16 5 cm.), covering 720-1 of Demosthenes' speech against Timocrates. Of the first and third pp. columns only a few letters remain, but the lov^er portion of the intervening one
text, which is written in handsome round uncials (cf probably of the end of the second century or of the first half of the third, seems, so far as can be judged, to be a fairly good one.
is

complete.
v),

The

Plate

Col.

i.

[8

is

TO

]
Col.
ii.

[ [
15
^OLV

]
9 oi^y

77

7[[]][

^
TL

^ ? ^^'
vav

703.
I

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS

2
Xe

[
[

159

tis Svo

avSpes

SeSeadat

9
Tovs

[[]]

avTOLS

25

[
ix[v

i[vavTLa

9 [
7][
a[X\ois

^
nveKa
B;

Col.

.
t[os SoKt

35

[ [ [

ep

avSpes

ne

3 a[t5eiay
3-

The

length of the line indicates that (vtos was omitted before


re

],
$,
8,
1.

as in

so

Bl(ass).
7.

Tews: SO Bl. with

(
e

SA.

Cf.

11.

before.
5.

For the deletion of the

of

written.

-(,-

17 and 22, where S has


cf.
11.

re ewr as

17 and 22, and

where

Bl, in all these passages.

is

19. au is similarly omitted before evavrKurepa in

A.

evavriarfp' av Bl., following

a con-

jecture of Weil.

two or three exceptions too a[ and [ in 11. 27-8 are not very satisfactory, more especially the latter, in place of which or would be more suitable. A greater difficulty however arises in 1. 32, where the traces would suit v[ much better than a[. But the division is extremely improbable, especially as 1. 31 is a short one moreover the papyrus is rather rubbed, and a can therefore hardly be absolutely excluded, though very doubtful.
24-33.
vestiges of the initial letters here are with
slight for certain recognition,

The

and

the

arrangement of the

lines is therefore insecure.

702.

Demosthenes, Contra Boeotum.


13-5

X 6-5

small fragment from Demosthenes' oration against Boeotus, pp. 1023-4, written in good-sized uncials which on the whole approximate to the square

i6o

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


become narrow, and which we should and perhaps the earlier part of it. The text has

type, though and C have a tendency to


ascribe to the second century,

no variants of importance.
[rjaira

[]

[ [
[e

[]
[

^\\\ 9 [] [
[ :
: :

15

[9 9 [] [9^^ [ ] [] ;?

[[ 9

[ 9

1024

.
8. 9.

so MSS. ; otros Bl(ass). so Bl. with S, &c. ; vwi FQ. ; Bl. with S, &c. so
:

FQ

10.

so r;

Bl. with S, &c.

703.

Aeschines, In Ctesiphontem.
^>(.()

cm.

This small fragment, containing parts of 94 and 96 of Aeschines' speech against Ctesiphon, belongs to what must have been an exceptionally interesting text, for in spite of its insignificant size it has three new readings, all of which
are or

may be improvements.

usual third century type.


Col.

The handwriting is in oval sloping High stops and a paragraphus occur.


Col.
ii.

uncial of the

i.

10

[];[9]
ovs

[\ ['^\[

]."

15

)( [] [ '
avvTa^ems'
cure

[][ [
/

'

[<

704.

FRAGMENTS OF EXTANT CLASSICAL AUTHORS


ray] e^

[ra^eis

[
8.

[as

^ ]
0] []
1

[;:
to

inserted

(probably
14-5

) .?(
.7[\

the MSS. have before or had cannot be determined,

in place

[ ? [9 [\ .
n[pa^is
erepa[y
civai

i6i

2 lines lost

Whether the papyrus of one of the other three verbs makes a more forcible prelude than

((:
Bl.

\. mth MSS.
is

The papyrus

reading avoids

hiatus.
1 6.

om. MSS.,

The

insertion of

an improvement.

704.

SOCRATES, Contra Sophistas.


7-9

10-3 cm.

(xiii)

Parts of two columns containing portions of 16-18 of Isocrates' oration against the sophists, written in sloping oval uncials of the usual third century type. The text contains no striking variants.

Col.

i.

[
[AjyXay]

\.\ [
eri

Col.

ii.

npos

16

[0]

8e

9 [ ]5 [] [][] [ 9
[]
ev

20

[
)^

[9

\ [ ^ [ [[6 [
5e

rovy

i62

[]9 7
8e

9[]
7/

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

17

25

[9 [

evOvi
?

15

[]9

[]
.

[ )([/
(corr.) in

which

(first hand) follows Plan, and SO ; Cf. the next note. too short to suit the papyrus. Bl. SO 3-4. ; Bl. with vulgo. 23. ;

2.

is

an error
25.
in the

][!

[: [] [:
:

for

MSS., may be

.
:

reading

,
is

and vulgo ; SO in the Antidosis of by itself is not sufficient to fill up this line
inserted.

:
;

The papyrus
Bl.

reading

with

all

the best
is

MSS.

re or n,

which

not found

IV.

DOCUMENTS, CHIEFLY OF THE ROMAN


PERIOD.
(a)

OFFICIAL.

705.

Two

Petitions to the Emperors with Replies.


22 X46
cm.
A.D. 200-2.

A generous
are, as

effort to lighten

unfortunate Egyptians in the


usual, prefixed

Roman

some of the burdens which weighed upon the period is recorded in these copies of two

and Caracalla, to which the Emperors' replies The document, which is written in a rude uncial hand on the verso of 740, contained four columns, but of these the first and last are too incomplete to have any value. mention of the praefect Laetus in 1. 40 fixes the date within the years 200-2. The writer of both petitions is Aurelius Horion, who had held high offices at Alexandria and was a rich landowner in the Oxyrhynchite nome his object
petitions to Septimius Severus

instead of being appended.

705.

OFFICIAL

163

in both cases was to secure the Imperial guarantee that certain benefactions which he proposed to found in that district would be permanently maintained. In the first petition (11. 15-53) it is Oxyrhynchus itself which is to be the recipient of his favour, and the earlier part of the letter, as far as 1. 42, is devoted to an interesting sketch of the claims which that city possessed upon the Imperial consideration. After the lengthy introduction (11. 15-21), which can be restored on the analogy of 11. 65-8, and nine mutilated lines, Aurelius Horion reminds the Emperors (11. 31-5) of the loyalty, fidelity, and friendship towards the Romans which the Oxyrhynchites had displayed both by helping them in the war against the Jews, and continuing up to the present to celebrate the day of victory by an annual festival' This war refers to some Jewish rising in Egypt which perhaps took place not long before the date of the letter, like the Jewish rebellion in the reign of Hadrian mentioned in B. G. U. but it would seem from the use of the word to have been on 889
'

-^

a larger scale than the revolt in

Hadrian's time.

Aurelius

Horion's next

argument when you


first

(11.

36-9) is Moreover, you yourselves honoured the Oxyrhynchites visited the country, by allowing them to enter your judgement-seat
'

importance which Oxyrhynchus was one of the chief towns in Egypt, and Thirdly (11. 39-42), Aurelius Horion appeals to the opinion of the city held by the praefect, Laetus, who will, he says, bear evidence in its favour. After these preliminaries the writer comes to his scheme Owing to the imperfect condition of 11. 42-6 the details are not (11. 42-51). quite clear, but apparently Aurelius Horion proposed to devote, nominally in the form of a loan^ a large sum of money which was to be invested, and of which the interest was to be expended upon maintaining the annual contests of ephebi at Oxyrhynchus upon the same scale of splendour as that of similar contests elsewhere, perhaps at Antinoe (cf 1. 50, note). The petition concludes Emperors will give orders forbidding the (11. 51-3) with the request that the diversion of the benefaction to any other purpose than that intended by its founder. The answer of the Emperors (11. 1-14) is for the most part lost, but that it was of a favourable character is made certain by direct references to
after the Pelusiots.'
illustrates the

This well

had attained by

when already ranked above Memphis.


A. D. 200,

it

it

in their

answer to the second petition (cf


It
is

[ttJi

fruits of

Aurelius Horion's generosity for more than a century


A. D. 323,

^.
we
petition

1.

59

fo^

61

[]
;

?)

pleasing to

know

that

Oxyrhynchus enjoyed the


for in

unmindful of the clash of empires, written in quietly issuing a notice that the gymnastic display by the ephebi will take
find the logistes,

place on the following day.

The second

(11.

65-90)

is

practically complete, so far as


2

it

goes,

and

164

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


by the annual
in the

deals with a plan for benefiting certain villages in the Oxyrhynchite nome, the

inhabitants of which had been so exhausted

form

of contributions to the State and compulsory obligations to act as guards that

Aurelius Horion therefore there was a prospect of the land being deserted. proposed to present each village with a sum of money to be invested in hay, the yearly revenue being devoted to the assistance of the inhabitants on whom
fell. To this the Emperors reply (11. 54-63), signifying their the approval of this scheme as of the former one, and guaranteeing the continuance

of the benefaction.

[ ?^ ']
Aovkios
Xiovrjpo^

Col.

i.

9 ][] []
]

^][][

^('2] ^.
5
13
letters

]
.

/] []
]

6 6
15 15

[ ] ^)(^
]ayTifia

cTreSo-

[.][.]
.]


J,

].".'[.]6....[.][.

15

15

]
]^

6]
2

\]
...
CO

] (\6
]
.

] '[] 6]
]Vi
]
'

]
?
.

... ay

"

[]
TrojAei

]['

[[]
-^-

6[]

yaipeiv.

14 letters 14
13

[^

['^^^

/ [] []
. .

25

15

IpT'Ufriri

]?

i66

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

55

[\^
[9]

'^ 89 ^? . / ? ??
Col.

[6\^

[] []

UepTiva^

^^?

[[^
9

iii.

^]e[ov]ripos

[]

65

^[] . [] ^? ^, , ,
u
kiriSovvai

^^?.
0
17

6[ ]? jfju

[\

9
eis
Trjs

eTcpov

9'

![]

[]9 []9
kv

[] 9

yaipuv.

ah

re

(^)

[6]

re

[][]
ety

75

^y^

[] \6\

[]
55
corr.
line.

)
els

.1.

eTOS

)([opr]ou

[]9
56.
1.

[].
74
1

eh

inserted later, tos being above the line.


57 Final s
70. itoi Pap.

from .

,
(
(86)

of

inserted above the

w^fipavlj).

Col.
(80) lost, (81).
(88)
[,

iv.

(82)

[,

(83)
(90)

r[,

(84)

[,

(85)

.[,

e7r[,

(87)

.[,

[,

(89)

[,

..[

705.
8.

OFFICIAL

20.

The first word The position

cf. 1. 59. probably was or corresponded to ; of xaipeiv after, instead of before, the nominative (cf.

unusual. 42. Perhaps 46. to spend, but ii

would refer to the sum which Aurelius Horion proposed supplied at the end of 1. 45 (it cannot come in 1. 46) the amount is masculine and should be separated from seems enormous. Possibly the benefaction apparently took the form of a loan to the city, but 47. since the interest was devoted to public purposes, it was to all intents a gift ; cf the similar case in II. 76-8. The is very doubtful, though a proper name would be expected. 50. 'Ai'r[t]i'[ois] could V at the end of 1. 50 is fairly certain, the only alternative being yo, but the second
is

167

1.

68), is

8
t.

[.

equally well be

For vw,

can be read.

54-79. 'The Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus and the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Pius Augustus to Aurelius Horion, greeting. We approve of this benefaction also which you request leave to confer upon the villages of the Oxyrhynchite nome, giving The same rule shall be (to different persons) a succession in the enjoyment of it(?). observed in this case also, and, as you wish, no change shall be introduced which would
divert the gift to
'
'

any other purpose.


is

The

request
the

as follows

most gracious Emperors, Severus and Antoninus, the saviours and benefactors of the world, Aurelius Horion, formerly strategus and archidicastes of the most illustrious Certain villages in the Oxyrhynchite nome, most humane city of Alexandria, greeting. Emperors, in which both I and my sons own estates, are utterly exhausted by the burdensome demands of the annual XeiTovpyiai required both for the Treasury and the protection of the districts, and there is a danger of their being ruined as far as the Treasury is concerned and leaving our(?) land uncultivated. Accordingly having before me a both humane and useful object I wish, in order that they may recover, to make a trifling benefaction to each one for the purchase of hay, the revenue of which shall be devoted to the maintenance and support of those who are annually subject to the XuTovpyiai on condition
'

To

that

no doubt refers to something which was explained more fully in and owing to the loss of these the meaning is uncertain. We have supposed the sense to be that the inhabitants Avould enjoy the fruit of the benefaction successively as they were called upon to undertake the els hepov ..: two ideas Seem to be confused, (1) the gift is to 62-3. to spend it on other purposes. be (2) it is forbidden (sc. ^17
61.
11.

80

sqq.,

not very accurate, and Aurelius Horion has mentioned his


is

, ^
74.

()

may be

right, referring to

or

own

but since the scribe is land in 1. 70, the correction


;

more

probable.

The details of the scheme are somewhat cf. 507. 24. obscure, but it is clear that the benefaction would extend over a series of years, and unless the emSoais was an annual present (in which case the necessity for having an Imperial guarantee for its continuance seems pointless), it must have been a capital sum of money
77.
its
:

[]

which produced a yearly revenue cf. the first petition, especially 11. 48-9 Apparently was to be assigned to the different villages, i.e. placed in charge the revenue of the

i68

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

of the chief men, and invested in hay, the profits from the sale of which were to be assigned Why Aurelius Horion who in any year were burdened with selected this particular form for his benefaction we cannot say; but 507 suggests that good profits were to be made out of hay, presumably by buying it cheap and selling it dear.
to the persons

706.

Report of Legal Proceedings.


66 X
IO-8 cm.

About

A.D. 115.

Conclusion of a report of a case tried before M. Rutilius Lupus, praefect


in

A.D.

14-7.

The
;

litigants

were Damarion, apparently a freedman, and his


is

patron Heraclides

but owing to the mutilation of the papyrus the precise


not
clear.

nature of the question at issue

Damarion asserted

that Heraclides

had accepted from him a sum of money in settlement of all claims, but the praefect nevertheless gave an entirely adverse judgement, and threatened to have him beaten if further complaints were made. The most interesting point i. e. is the opposition between the native Egyptian law and the the law of Alexandria, which conferred certain powers upon the patrons of liberated slaves in relation to the slaves so liberated, and upon which the decision of the praefect is based. No doubt Heraclides was an Alexandrian

citizen.

11 letters

Tovs

, ]^ ]9
kv

], ' )(6]
]rjs
]

[9 ,

8\

14 letters
15
10

] (^ [^

12

II

] ]\
\ ]

^'9 ^^^
Se

8 letters

*[]8

'^

ovSev

6\

'HpaKXeiSrj

^^'.

70r.
6.

OFFICIAL
iv.

169
and P. Goodsp. and
29.
iii.

read

That Alexandrians enjoyed certain privileges, especially Alexandria, e.g. 271. 3, 477. 14. with regard to taxation, is well-known, but the present seems to be the first direct reference Lumbroso had indeed already inferred Egitto, p. 65) from the to a peculiar code of law. corporal distinction drawn between citizens of Alexandria and others in the matter of punishment (Philo, in Flac. c. 10) that there were also differences of law and procedure; and this view now finds ample confirmation. Cf. the contrast in the Ptolemaic period (i.e. laws particularly affecting the Greeks, P. Tebt. 1. p. 58) and between the

\(]: ^?. ([' .:


(?)

cf.

e.g. P. Catt.

12, 19,

i,

where

9. To'is

cf.

the

common

use of

to designate citizens of

\8^\
the
1 3.

:\

in P. Taur.
:

I. iv.

and

vii. 9.

ov cf 653 av is to be supplied at the beginning of the entirely at his opponent's mercy.

line,

though

this

Perhaps would place Damarion

8[,

707.

Report of Legal Proceedings.


26x^i-Scm.
About
before
A.D. 136.

What

remains of this account of a


is

trial

some magistratethe
of the dispute was the
for

particular court

not specified

consists

chiefly of the opening speech of the

counsel for the plaintiff Plutarchus.

The prime cause


fulfil

failure of one of the defendants, Philinus, to

the terms of a contract, a copy carry out

of which

is

prefixed (Col.

i),

made by him with a woman named Demetria


Philinus had undertaken to

the lease of a vineyard and orchard. certain improvements, in consideration of which he had received from Demetria The promised improvements, however, were not a sum of 2000 drachmae.

and the obligations of Philinus were subsequently taken over by his brother Antistius. At the expiration of the term of the lease the land seems to have been let to a new tenant, the plaintiff Plutarchus (cf. note on 11. 15-7) but the 'papyrus breaks off before the relation of the latter to the two brothers
effected
;

or the occasion of the present dispute are elucidated. This document is on the verso of the papyrus.

The

recto

is

occupied with
in

three columns of a survey of different pieces of land, written probably early iv ol[s] Mention is made of \}{) the second century.

{)

(,{-

?)

and of

7() UpariKoL
Col. .

]y

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

15

[ ] *[ 2 [] \
[

[ ( ]9 ^^ [ \\ ? [ ^
[

] ? (.
][

]?

Tfj

[] }^ '^ ?
r^y

]9

]\

i^aertav

88\

9 -

]}

[^?) '

({

'4

{8

iaiv

[.

']'

[^^)]

(6$)'

] [] '0^
]
]

Col.

]6[]9.

^ [ ]^ ]
21 letters

kv

\ \

e^

()

[]-

25

[] \\

k^

[]

\-

^^
re

[^) '
[^^) '

^ '
{eTei)

['^^

^ []

.\
-

707.

OFFICIAL
[A]v6eaTL0S

171

yuv^rai
35
TTJs

[][s]
[

[]
.

avTos

[. ...]..

[.

.]

[
.

13 letters

[
Koaia[s

6
16

^?
.

as Se

[.

]9
1

]
]?[
'

5 ?
[

'

3[9 \
1/

tivos ye[

^^[

{iTei)

9.

of

written above
written above

.
. .
.

2 2.

of

dash.
Col.

36. a of
ii.
'

j/.

? of amTfrfajy/if COrr. from 17. 1. vearepos. 27. In the left margin against this line is an obhque

corr.

and

above the

line over a deleted letter.

of ., against Philinus and Antistius, both sons of Plutarchus son of said : My client Plutarchus leased from Oxyrhynchus. Sarapion, advocate for Plutarchus, previously made Demetria a property in the Oxyrhynchite nome following upon (?) a lease younger of our opponents, who rented from her for 6 years with Demetria by Philinus, the the village of from the 14th year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord a vineyard and orchard at with a written agreement, in which it was stated that in the first Seruphis in accordance condition of his planting four years he should be charged no rent but only pay the taxes on he whole of the open space in the vineyard, that for the remaining two years vines over the he should restore on a certain scale the should pay the rent set forth in the lease, that Demetria 2000 drachmae should walls (?) of the vineyard and orchard, and on receiving from baked brick. It appears that having taken the 2000 build on a fixed scale a new wheel of uncompleted drachmae he did not make the wheel according to the stated scale, but left it In these vineyard, not even putting up the walls round it. and entirely neglected the became surety on circumstances in the 19th year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord Antistius himself took over behalf of his brother Philinus for all the obligations of the lease and
.

460 drachmae, was apparently included 8-9. The value of the two pairs of is 2000 drachmae received by Philinus from Demetria (cf. 11. 26-9), and 1. 9 in the Cf. naph probably to be restored might perhaps be read 729. 39 sqq, where jSoe? are a good deal more expensive, the line. being above the ^ is Otherwise known only from Hesychius, cf. 729. 2 2. 10.

4.

cf.

646

\
./ /

,
, .

': ,
,
((}),
the

! {)
.

{8\) .

where commentators have supposed some corruption. of Plutarchus to 15-7. The restoration of these lines, which involve the relations is made the subject of If the brothers, is a doubtful matter. Demetria and
nominatives
6

'!

'

veOTtpo^

^,

are

left

suspended.

We

are

172

therefore inclined to read

\<[\ ...
23.

would be expected. unusual iv here occurs for the first time, throws light upon two passages in the B. G. U. which have hitherto remained unexplained (cf. Wilcken, These are entries in two very closely related taxing-lists from Socnopaei Os/. I. p. 404). and 2 77 ^ 5 NeSUS, B. G. U. lO. 8 v8, the heading in each case being followed by two i\aiS>{vi) The 54 arourae are evidently the same in both documents, and consisted or three names. or or \//)// (cf. P. Tebt. 86. 45 and 522. 4) and of a upon which certain payments had to be made by the persons named. How The word is found in Hesychius, if at all, does not appear. differed from

[
('()

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


connecting
veatTfpos

; !
25.
ot

n]ep\

this

, ' >(
'"')

with

^'^]

(^

^^'' '"1^)

is

,\ !
and suggest
rois

phrase, which

\|/( [)

-)

()

./

yjrfSvos,

ii.

B. G. U. 277. in 1. 35. hardly parallel. here is strange. The use of is of coursc the Latin poviariujn. 26. occurs in several inscriptions from Aphrodisias (e. g. C. I. G. or The word 2824 ; cf. Boeckh's remarks ad loc.) meaning apparently the substructure of a funerary ntpifieseem to be surrounding walls; cf. 1. 32 as monument. Here the
the Verb recurs in the

!, , (\.
fv

8 '
,

same unusual sense

10

is

37. Apparently not

](.

The supposed

of 84

is

more

like a.

708.

Two

Letters to a Strategu.s.
ig-2Xg-'j cm.
a.d. 188.

The
amounts
(tTovs),

recto of this papyrus contains part of an account of corn, very large


in

artabae(e.g. i68, 486 ^

J-g)

which

refers to the reign of

being mentioned, as well as the Commodus more probably than to that

]()

of Caracalla.

On

a high

official

the verso are copies of two letters from Antonius Aelianus, whose rank is not stated, but who was probably epistrategus

or dioecetes, to the strategus of the Diospolite that two ship-loads of wheat from that

nome

Thebaid, stating had on examination proved to


in the

nome

be adulterated with barley and earth, and ordering the strategus to exact the From a mention of a chiliarch in deficiency from the sitologi responsible for it. The first for military purposes. 1. 13 it appears that the corn was required letter, which is practically complete, is dated in the 29th year, probably of the The second follows the same formula, so far as it goes. reign of Commodus.

(]09
[]

)(^5

9 () {) {)
e<

{).

[8
5
[^^

[] []

15

^ []^ \ ^)^ \] [ ]$ , {) () {) ?, -^) ]() {) . { , '? () [) {). () [] .] []? () [ [][]


toxjs
[Xo]/xroi;y

[ra]y

[
[

, ^ {)
.]^
"^[^y
?)

^
708.

OFFICIAL

{) {) *
Se

i73

ray dXXas

{
[^^{^?)

' \1]

[vos]
]

[]???.

[.

[kv

]}

[]

20

' \ {?) \ [] [{?) [] [?] [ ] {) []? {) {) []{) {) {?)


.

[
[.
.

( ? { {) []{) { [ ?
^/

kv

{)
kii{)

?
(6)().
is

2-13- 'Antonius Aelianus to the strategus of the Diospolite nome in the Thebaid, son of Since the cargo dispatched from the nome under you in charge of [.]ausis and his companions, amounting to 2000 artabae of wheat, appeared at the weighirig Sipos amount of barley and earth of the samples to have been adulterated, I ordered that the be under measure by 2 per cent. half an artaba of it should be ascertained, and it proved to risk from the of barley and likewise ^ per cent, of earth. Accordingly exact at your own amount of the corn, 5o| artabae sitologi who shipped the wheat the difference on the whole you have added this total of wheat, and the extra payments and other expenses, and when The 29th year, Phaophi 30.' to the account of the chiliarch let me know.
greeting.

II.

has added on f
13. 14.

()
is

{) '

2^ per

cent,

on 2000 artabae

(1.

4)
is

is

50 artabae, so Antonius Aelianus

art.
:

The meaning

or perhaps of this line

The

might be read instead of


read,

, and

cf. P. Petrie For obscure. there is a horizontal stroke above o.

{) {)
drawn through the

II.

12(1) verso. cannot be

apparently to be supplied after

8C0.

174

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


709.

Tour
14-7

of Inspection.
X
II-5 cm.

About

a.d. 50.

This fragment of a letter gives some important geographical information about Egypt in the first century. It describes a tour of inspection throughout the country about to be taken by a high official, probably the praefect or Starting from a place which is not mentioned (Alexandria ?), he was to go first to Pelusium, thence through the nomes situated along the eastern side of the Delta, the Tanite and Sethroite, Arabia, and another nome, not Next he was to travel previously found in Greek (1. 6, note), to Memphis. direct to the Thebaid, and come back through the Heptanomis, the Arsinoite nome, and the other nomes in the Delta which he had not visited on his upward journey, finally reaching Alexandria. The chief point of interest is the mention Wilcken {Ost. I. pp. 423-7) attributes of the Heptanomis and Arsinoite nome. the creation of the Heptanomis to the period between A. D. 68, when the edict of Tiberius Alexander seems to be ignorant of its existence, and 130, and adopts the view of Schwarz {Rkein. Mus. 1896, p. 637) that the Arsinoite nome originally belonged to the Heptanomis, but was separated from it by Hadrian to make room for the newly-founded Antinoite nome. The papyrus, however, which quite certainly belongs to the first century and yet mentions the Arsinoite nome as distinct from the Heptanomis, disposes of Schwarz's hypothesis altogether, and pushes back the latest possible date of the creation of the Heptanomis far into the first century. The handwriting of the papyrus is by no means of a late first century type, and we should assign it to the reign of Claudius or Nero rather than to that of one of the Flavian emperors. In any

'??.

on the one hand, that the Arsinoite nome was on account Heptanomis, and on the other, that some hitherto unsuspected nome belonged to the Heptanomis before the creation of the The most probable explanation is that Antinoite was a new name given to a previously existing nome, and that Hadrian only did (Rev. Laws, what Ptolemy Philadelphus had done in the case of the
case
it is

now

of

its

isolated position never reckoned in the

.
clear,

p. xlix).

Strabo,

who

is

little

earlier

than the papyrus, does not help

but

his

list

of

nomes has not so


papyri.

far

accorded very well with the evidence of Ptolemaic

and

Roman

]'{i9V

[']

"^^

710.

OFFICIAL

175

[5]/0
[

]/
]

[] [],
[

is

kv

e/s

'.
e/s

^ ,
rfj
[

'

69
[
[
.
.

. \

5e

[].
.[....
[
]

]
14

15

] ]
[

[
.

On

the verso
Second
of

COTT. frotn

6.

of

evfl

COTT.

from

6.

[]

called in hieroglyphics
p. 119), and Arabes Aean

It refers to the district (or possibly [A]tav) was suggested by Mr. Griffith. 'An situated on the Eastern side of the Delta (Brugsch, Bi'ci. Geogr. known to Pliny {H. N.v'x. 2g) a sinu Laeanitico (I. Aelaniiico) alter sinus quem Brugsch considers it to have been part of vacant in quo Heroon oppidum est.

the

Memphite nome.

710.

Order for Payment.


Fr. {a)

7x13-5 cm.

b.c.

hi.

This papyrus, which is one of the few Ptolemaic documents found at Oxyrhynchus, contained an order, probably addressed to a royal bank by an Of these 44 were carrying official, to pay various sums of money to 47 persons. i.e. a precis-writer, and they were accompanied by a documents, who acted as escort, and papyrus, an a title not hitherto found on a

176
a
'

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


this

camel-man/

being one of the rare references to the use of camels in

The 7th year mentioned in 1. 5 must on palaeobelong to the reign of Ptolemy Soter II. In Fr. [b) graphical grounds is probably to be supplied at the beginnings of 11. 7 and 8. or
the Ptolemaic

(a)
[

period.

kv

^/ ? 8
]

{b)

^[\[ ][
, y/

() ....
]

{ {)
)

(erovs)

711.

Census-List.
7
1

8-5 cm.

About

B.C. 14.

poll-tax.

list connected with the census and There are parts of two columns, but the first has only the ends of lines (not printed), and the second is, unfortunately, disfigured by lacunae which deprive it of much of its value, though any fresh items of information may be welcomed on the interesting question of the Egyptian census in the early years of Augustus. The existing evidence on the subject was collected in P. Oxy. II. pp. 307-14, where it was shown that the fourteen years' census-cycle could be traced back with security to A.D. 19-ao, and with probability to A. D. ^-6 and B. c. 10-9, but no further, although censuses and poll-tax are attested still earlier in Augustus' reign, and now appear from the Tebtunis papyri (103, The present document introd.) to go far back into the first century B. C. entered ') on a poll-tax list registered (or mentions certain youths
*

A fragment from an official statement or

(()
.

in this context us (the ?) in the 15th year of Caesar,' probably meaning boys above the age of fourteen, when they became liable to the tax in question. Reference is also made to a wrong entry in a previous list before the 6th year.' This is too vague to be of some persons as having but the 6th year (B. c. 25-4) would seem to be a recognized of much use landmark in the history of the census or the poll-tax, and some important step The in the reorganization of the system may possibly have then been made.

by

^
'

712.

OFFICIAL

177

6th year, however, does not

fall in

with the fourteen years' cycle, being one

year too early.

On
later

the verso of the papyrus are parts of two columns, written not

much

than the recto, of a series of names with some figures opposite, no doubt

a taxing-list of some kind, and not improbably also concerned with the poll-tax.

..[...].[
ray

[
.

{?)

[ [
[.
.
.

,* /
.][.
.

'\(if)[

[.

.]
le

[.

.][.

.].

.]
.

.]

6[] ] 5 y 7[
.]
[.]3
c[

(?)

Kaiaapos

.]

.][.

][.

2. may be the article and connected with the participle following or the termination of a word in the previous line like reXowras. Cf. P. Tebt. 103. 1-3 . and (so Wilcken) in P. Grenf. I. 45. 8. . 4. ][ is quite doubtful, since all that remains of the letter is part of a long vertical stroke projecting above the lacuna, which might equally well represent e.g. the sign for roi. But it does not seem possible to get either another year or a conjunction into the short space available, and we therefore conclude that and are to be taken together, with some qualifying term between them ; eV* might suit. At the end of the line with written above the is difficult ; if oCs was intended the accusative may be governed by ] /xeiOs in 1. 5. g- (Irour) cf. similar instances of the use of 5-6. as in 257. 25, 481. 15.

([]

(
:

the
letters
it.

, ()

[]6]<

[]

712.

Collection of a Debt.
1 1 -5

i0'3 cm.

Late second century.

The
complete

imperfect condition of this papyrus


it

is

much

to be deplored, for

would probably have gone

far to solve the uncertainties attaching


official,

to the functions of that

much

discussed

the lines being throughout incomplete both at the beginnings and ends, and the

if

more
it
is,

As

amount

lost

being shown by

11.

13-3 to exceed 40

the papyrus whets our curiosity without satisfying

between each line, There are two documents,

i-yS

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


first

the

9 sqq.) being an application to the overseers of the of the Athribite nome from a member of the Sosicosmian tribe, stating that he had in A. D. 146-7 lent 300 drachmae at interest to two brothers, called Potamon and Pathermouthis, upon the security of some house-property at

written

(11.

Repayment not having been made at the proper time, a writ Monthmereu. was served upon the brothers (11. 16-7), but since this had no effect, the applicant requests the overseers to foreclose upon the house and exact payment (11. i8-ai).
In the margin above this application is (11. 1-7) a letter from the overseers to the keepers of the record office, apparently requesting them to take possession of the property and collect the debt and interest, as well as the miscellaneous
charges for collection

made by

the State.

The

title,

suggests that the are generally connected with is new, and, since were farmed out, like most profits made by the State from collecting debts other revenues. That this was actually the case is proved by 825, an account

By by one of their rendered to the the second century therefore, at any rate, the functions which in the Ptolemaic period and perhaps still in the first century A. D. seem to have been combined
in the person of the

divided, and we

find side

by

private

with subordinate

they a valuable illustration of the second term in the phrase The explanafirst, in which the main difficulty lies. throw little light upon the which we offered (//. cc.) that it means debts contracted by f eyot, tion of which they properly belonged, i. e. persons living at places outside the district to
still

-.
(of.

^ ,

-^,

^.

P. Tebt. 5. 221, note,

side the parallel bodies of official

and 28), were and But while 712 and 825 are

^ -,

of ^eVo9 in papyri, though it is not clear why e. g. in P. Tebt. ^cVot should be a subject of legislation and not debts in general.
gains
if

remains the only one which rests on the evidence of parallels from the use 5. 321 debts of

Our hypothesis some support from the circumstance^which may be a mere accident, but so is a very remarkable coincidence that both 712 and 825 have to do with

debts from persons


cmrijpT/rai belong to

who were

not living in the Oxyrhynchite nome.

the Athribite nome, but about the property distrained upon the

only fact that

is

certain

and its toparchy, which the officials addressed by the


in
1.

',
is is

that

it

was not

ao, are

writer of the application,

doubtful

in the
cf.

Oxyrhynchite nome both unknown), while the nome to


belonged, as well as that of the
11.

{^

In 712 the

notes on

and

13.

In 825 the

was concerned with the Memphite nome, but that the belonged to the Oxyrhynchite nome has only a general probability resting on the provenance of the document. The date of the papyrus is lost, but it was certainly posterior to the 10th

713.

OFFICIAL
13 (cf. 11. 16-8), and note on 1. 7.

179

year of Antoninus mentioned


beginning of

in
;

1.

may be

as late as the

Commodus'

reign

cf.

^^ ? ()
Kca

{) () 7]{?) [(^)] []{^)


]9

'

[]{
[.]
,

[.][.
.

.]

^] {\)^
]

npbs

8[
aire
.

{9),
(eroi/y)
.

2nd hand

() 8{) [ (9) {9) ] ^^ [ ] [ [ []


oiiojiav
]
.]

{)

UaOep-

//

eJTTi

] 6[
Sia
iv

]
]/

^ ] ?
iv)(vpaaias

^
[

tokovs

[? ,
v]iro
.

6
|

ere[i

[/])[

15

^ ] ] )
? 6]^
npbs

]0[]^[]^^ ?^^!?^[^yy*^^^

? []

[ ^[ \

[]?
V)(y\paaias

[]9

Tjj

][]
iv

]6[]

nXeiovos

[ [ [

[
a

i8o

? ]^
.
7.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


/c[a]i

Te[A]77

^
TOis

aXXa[s

^ip^\]em

occurrence of two dashes after the number of the regnal year and the omission of the Emperor's name point to a date in Commodus' reign, when both these practices became common. The difficulty is that the debt was contracted in a.d. 146-7; cf. 1. 13. The mention of Sulpicius Similis in 1. 22 recalls the praefect of that name in 237. viii. 27, whose date is not certain; cf, p. 262. 13. apj^eiov: the use of this term suggests that Oxyrhynchus was not meant, since probably at are the more usual terms, though an ov there

[][\ The

is

possible at the

end of the

line.

Oxyrhynchus

is

found in 509.

3.

(b)

APPLICATIONS TO OFFICIALS.
713.

Claim of Ownership.
38-5X9f/w.
A.D. 97.

declaration address2d to the keepers of the record office

of his prospective right Leonid es, requesting the formal registration some property at present in the ownership of his mother. The claim to the to property in question depended upon the marriage contract of the writer's on their demise parents, in which their joint possessions were secured his property had been duly divided The father had died, and to their children. between Leonides and his brother and sister. The mother was still living, and had already made over two-thirds of her real estate to this brother and sister upon the marriage of the pair. Leonides, who was probably the younger son,

(^?)

by a

certain

[^)

therefore wished that note should be taken of this division, and that his
title to

own

the remaining third of the property should be placed on record.

It is

The document is dated in Phamenoth of the ist year of Nerva, i.e. A.D. 97. of real property occurred in that year, not known that a general
separated only

while 481 shows that such a registration took place in A. D. 99.

evidence that general

held in A.D. 129 and 131 (75, 715, B. G. U. 420, &c.}, but that these both

by a two

years' interval,

There is were

713.
affected the

APPLICATIONS TO OFFICIALS
is

i8i
It

same nome

not yet ascertained.

Pending further data

will

therefore be best to suppose that the present was a special declaration called forth by the peculiar circumstances of the case.
1st

hand
AioyivH

2nd hand
5

{
{).

'[]
^apaevTos

Tpbs

^ ? ^^ ^^ '^

?.
? -

[-

^apaevs

\\

kv

15

, ^ ,
\
yei^ea
eivai

^^ /
'4 Beov
els

^
k-

25

hvvia

30

[]

{^5}

i82

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


pas
nepl

[]
vcov

da

35

9
^
*

KaToyrjv

kaTiv

40 Xi/roy ?

{)
hand

45

^
register.

,- ^ -[ . []9^
npbs

^, ^ ^ 9^
\

[]

(ist

hand)

[).
Nepova

.
Second
of aapcavs corr.

8.

Inserted

on the

Demetrius and ApoUonius and Diogenes, keepers of the records, from Leonides son of Diodorus son of Diodorus, his mother being Saraeus daughter of Leonides, of Oxyrhynchus. My parents, Diodorus son of Diodorus son of Agathinus, and Saraeus daughter of Leonides son of Alexander, her mother being Isidora daughter of Calas, of the said city, in accordance with the contract of marriage made between them through the
record office of the said city in the month Sebastus of the i2th year of the deified Claudius settled upon their joint issue the whole of their property, in order that after their death it might be the secure and inalienable possession of their children and whereas my father died leaving me and my brother and sister, Diodorus and Thais, his heirs, and his property devolved upon us, and whereas our mother possesses at Nesla 9^ arourae and at Peenno 2^ arourae of the concessional (?) land of Thrasymachus, together making 1 2 arourae, and bestowed upon my brother and sister aforesaid through their marriage contract 4 each of the arourae at Nesla, that is one-third of the aforesaid 12 arourae: I too declare for registration my right to the remaining 4 arourae of my mother ; and the aforesaid contract of my parents remains in force and uncancelled to the present day. The ist year of the Emperor Nerva Caesar Augustus, Pharmenoth 19/ Signature of Demetrius and date.
;

To

I.

and
iv.

(!
Trjs

registration through the

sense e.g. in 237.


rais

38

and

7[7^] {(')
. . .

8.

,
(cf.
1.

35 below) are specially used of the declaration and


of claims to property.

The
viii,

verb has this technical

hia ToiJ

and

Cf. also

34
.

G. U. 73.
^.

\{>)

and 243 9

'^

sqq. iniaTtiKas rots


(Is

^ The editor reads <((), but this makes no sense, and the correction proposed, which is palaeographically very close, seems in the light of the passages quoted above practically secure. The context in the Berlin papyrus further requires a negative like before tceaSai in place of

,
be

ai

[]\-

714.

APPLICATIONS TO OFFICIALS

12. The marriage contract referred to contained also testamentary dispositions; cf. C. P. R. 28. 8 sqq. /iot 20. SC. cf. 481. 1 7~8, &C. 26. as a technical term applied to land seems to be new, and the present passage gives no clue to the meaning ; perhaps * conceded to or abandoned.'
:
',
'.

!
4-2X5,

183

'

'

714.

Selection of Boys
Fr. {a)
Fr.
(<5)

(^.
5 cm.
A.D. 122.

29

An application addressed to a variety of officials by an Oxyrhynchite who enjoyed the privilege of paying a reduced poll-tax of 12 drachmae, requesting that a slave who had been born in his house and had reached the age of
thirteen

This papyrus thus might be placed on the same privileged list. confirms the evidence of 478 and B. G. U. 324, that the liability of slaves in discussion of respect of poll-tax was determined by that of their owners.
the general question of

This papyrus

is

interesting palaeographically, being

is

given in P. Oxy.

II.

pp. 217 sqq.


carefully written in

a semi-uncial hand approximating to the sloping oval type, examples of which


are often too indiscriminately assigned to the third century.

^ ()
[]
[

20

[{\)
25

, ^ {)(^)
{)

{)

[9 '

[-

() ^) '[\

])()
3

[()
[-

[
['
[

-] 6 -]
-]

6[ []

^. ()

neiSos

8ov[X6s

'-

184

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

[9
15

[?
rpj.ju

e/c

^ ^^

^^
.
'

[.

els

'-

(5)
^
^

35

3nd~h^d
>

'

[?),
,

^{)
t

Me-

.
^

//

Xpo(vos)

().
/ \

Sie\6[6pTi
(erei)

^ASpia^jOV

To Philonicus also called Hermodorus, basilico-grammateus, and Dionysius and a second Dionysius, keepers of the archives and officers in charge of the selection, and to Apollonius, ex-exegetes and scribe of the city, from Apollonius ... of the city of
*

Oxyrhynchus,
female slave
.

living in the
.

West Quay

quarter.

My

slave

born

in the

house to

my

has reached the age of 13 years in the past 5th year of Hadrianus Caesar I therefore declare that I am rated at 12 drachmae by a poll-tax list of the 2nd the lord. year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord at the said quarter, and I swear by the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus that I have made no false statement.' Date and docket of
.
,

registration.

and there are traces of ink above the first It is 257. 14) preceded the noteworthy that only two persons in this long list of officials, namely the are should be called iniKplrai (cf. P. Fay. Towns 27. 3, and B. G. U. 562. 15, where recurs read) ; while 478 is addressed to the alone. The in this connexion in 257. 15 and B. G. U. 562. 17. Applications of this class from the Fayom are usually sent to ex-gymnasiarchs owes np6s rjj imKpiaei. 13-4. The supplements hardly fill the available space, but the lines vary a good deal
1-7.
is

The papyrus

incomplete

at the top

line,

so no doubt the strategus

(cf.

6{) . , :

in length.

23.

cf.

478. 223

37-8. A similar docket occurs in 478, and end of I. 49 on the analogy of the present papyrus

(88^)
;

bt

may now be
cf.

supplied there at the

also 786.

715.

Registration of Property.
30-7

II-5 cm.

A.D. 131.

A return
formula
e.g. 75
is

of house-property in the Heracleopolite nome, addressed, as usual,

to the keepers of the archives, in A. D. 131,

when a general

property took place

cf.

practically

420 and 459, and 237. viii. 31, note. The the same as that found in the Oxyrhynchus returns,
B. G. U.
is

and 481.

At

the end

a docket of the

of real

715.

APPLICATIONS TO OFFICIALS

^ ' ^ ,
'npiyivet

() {6.)

'[-

()

185

5?

.
e/y

{)

.\6{)

^-

\)(^6

kv
15

,
)

.[

20

25

30

2nd hand

' { ^][ ' , {) {) ' {) {) ^) ^ () {) . [{) ' [(erei)

^-

{)

{)

evo)(^oi

()

6{)

le

i86
35

{9) <:[]\()
(3rd hand)

[]
1.
1.

18.

17?

of

Ti;y

) ( ^) .
THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

()
?)

Sia

*8(

8{) {). ()
.
12.

()
COIT.

COrr.

from

24.

1.

8.

of

from

Origenes, ex-gymnasiarchs, keepers of the records of real property in and Galestus both sons of Polemon son of Gorgias, their mother being Dionysias daughter of Galestus, from the village of Toemisis. register at our own risk jointly and equally for the present 15th year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord in accordance with the command the property which has devolved upon us from our deceased father Polemon son of Gorgias and Tapontos, from the said Tofe'misis, viz. the third share which fell to him of a house at the said Tofemisis and his share of a piece of open ground, and what previously belonged to his sister Helene daughter of Gorgias and the said Tapontos, in accordance with a will which was opened in the 12th year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord, near the village of Ibion Pachnoubis in the holding of Zoilus and Numenius if arourae of catoecic land, and near Pselemach( ) in the holding of Menippus and Artemidorus ^ aroura of catoecic land. And we swear by the Fortune of the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus and by our ancestral gods that we have honestly and truly presented the foregoing declaration and that we have made no false statement, or

To Heras and

the Heracleopolite nome, from Gorgias

We

liable to the penalties of the oath. The 1 5th year of the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus, 5th intercalary day of the month Caesareus. I, Gorgias the aforesaid, have presented the declaration. I, Heras ex-gymnasiarch, through Hippod( ), scribe, my representative, have entered it on the register jointly at the risk of the declaring parties, no public or private interests being injured. 5th intercalary day.'

may we be

10.

Above

the

of

the scribe has written

, which makes no
in
1.

sense and seems to

be a mere error.
36.

8()

apparently corresponds to

7.

716.

Auction of a Slave.

88
An

1-8 cm.

A.D. 186.

application to a gymnasiarch from the guardians of three minors for

a public auction of their wards' respective shares, amounting to two-thirds in all, of a male slave. The remaining third part of the slave was the property
of the minors' half-brother, but had been emancipated

by him
It is

and

this
f

bination of circumstances led to the present request for an auction


1.

[^

,
com-

1 8),

though the legal point involved

is

not very clear.

as Professor Mitteis remarks, that neither this

however certain, papyrus nor 722, where a partial

716.

APPLICATIONS TO OFFICIALS

187

be brought under Roman law, according ownership of a slave, a manuother owners (Ulpian, Fr. i. 18). There can mitted share simply passed to the and in the absence therefore be only a question of Greek or Egyptian law probable hypotheses. At the of parallels recourse must be had to more or less outset a doubt arises whether or not the partial manumission was the direct

manumission

is

also concerned, can

to which, at this period, in the case of a joint

cause of the public auction.


the liberated

It

is

quite possible that the parties concerned

merely wished to wind up their joint ownership, and that the details respecting an If, however, the manumission was share are accidental.
essential factor, as odev in
1. 18 would rather indicate, the course here followed be supposed to have been prescribed either in the interest of the slave may In a sale by public auction the rights of a partially freed or of the owners. slave could be safeguarded in a manner which would not be practicable in

a private treaty;

and

this

consideration supplies a very likely explanation

Or, on the other hand, as Mitteis suggests, a sale by auction would protect an owner who wished to retain his share of a slave sale of this kind against a partner or partners who desired manumission. would place the larger owner at an advantage against the smaller, since the

of the present proceedings.

former,

if successful, would pay the latter only a fraction of the purchase-money, while the higher the bid of the small owner the greater the sum due from him

to the predominant partner.

8] ^[
[]9
[]^

io

15

9 ^ ?" ^ ^ ^ ^ [ ^
889
\ .[]
Al-

] ? '
[] ['\^ }
8\

6.

[]

i88
d)S

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

()

. 9 ^

ov TO XoLnou

[] ^^

ov

20

aipeaiv

25

^
^

^-

()

.
30

[] .
[]

(3rd hand)

Asclepiades also called Sarapion, gymnasiarch, greeting, from Horion son of Panechotes son of Doras, his mother being Taous, and from Apollonius son of Dorion son of Heras, his mother being Thaesis, and from Abascantus, freedman of Samus son of Heraclides, all three of Oxyrhynchus and guardians of the children of Theon also called Dionysius, namely Eudaemonis, whose mother is Sintheus, and Dionysius and The Thaesis, whose mother is Tauris, being minors and all three of the said city. said minors own, Eudaemonis one-sixth and Dionysius and Thaesis a half, together twothirds, of a slave of their father's named Sarapion, aged about 30 years, the remaining third share of whom, belonging to Diogenes their brother on the father's side, has been set free by him. We therefore present this memorandum requesting that in respect of (?) the aforesaid two-thirds a public auction should be held, and that the property should be handed over to the highest bidder. The 27th year of the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Commodus Antoninus Pius Felix Augustus Armeniacus Medicus Parthicus Signatures of Horion, Apollonius Sarmaticus Germanicus Maximus Britannicus, Thoth.' and Abascantus, that of the last-named being written for him by Diogenes son of Theon.

(4th hand)

] \[ [][9 \.].
(2nd hand)

[^]'[5

[-

19-20. The exact meaning of this passage is uncertain owing to the ambiguity of yeveaOat. In the former or which may be connected with either means because of,' and the request would be for the sale of the whole slave case in the latter signifies 'in respect of (cf. 722. 14), and no more than the two-thirds would be involved, a sense which would have been more clearly expressed by the simple
'

genitive

2 2. aiptaiv hibovTi:
.

. ^

cf.

B. G. U. 656, an advertisement of property to


Tois

let,

epeaeiv

(1.

aipeaiv) 8idovT(S.

717.

PETITIONS

^^9

(c)

PETITIONS.
Petition.
X
20-5
COT.

717.
17.5

Late

ist

century b.c.

some official, with reference to Part of a complaint addressed, no doubt, to between the writer, who seems to have a dispute about the fairness of a measure another person. Owing to the imbeen responsible for a cargo of corn, and a preceding column or columns are perfect condition of the papyrus, of which line is complete, the details are obscure. lost and of which only the first denoting occurs in 11. 5 and probably 12, apparently curious new word. still labourmg that he was some kind of measure. The writer's style suggests under much excitement.

^^ . ^^^ . , ]
Si

,,
^

^^|,o
8k

^^

15

. ] ^ ] ] ]
.

[]

toIs

Se

]
]

npos

^,

],

Trpos

irphs

kv

^,
^'^^^^'
^

els

/^i>i

Tais

12 letters
22,

kv

{)

5*

31 letters
letters

26

28

1
]

28

24

>

''^^

4.

1.

/)3.

6.

1.

/.

'

190
2.
[.
. .

5. is

The meaning and even


it

]^
;

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI For ^pyaa] OX [(\^ WOuld Suit the COntCXt.
the construction of -npos
bikiTov (the

cf.

1.

1 4.

reading of which

and perhaps

!
11.

From 1. 12 it appears that the b'ikiTov was portable, is very obscure. was a species of measure, though whether it was that to which the writer's opponent objected (1. 2) or an official measure of some kind is not clear. Assuming /. with this to be the meaning of bikerov, it is templing to connect Possibly are then very difficult. but the intervening words in 1. 4
quite certain)
TO

to

can by itself hardly mean equal 4-5 and 8-9 seems to be the same ; but irpos would have to be supplied. the biXfTOP and Ai\[ . . i.e. the person referred to in 1. 2, or els \[: probably 8. For the use of bronze in official measures of. P. Tebt. 5. 85-92, and P. Amh.
'
'

is

parallel to

tqIs

in

1.

.
9,

since the general construction of

\[,

43 9-10.

718.

Petition to the Epistrategus.


25-8

17-5 cm.

A.D.

180-192.

from Antistius Primus, who had held the chief priesthood and other offices at Oxyrhynchus, complaining that a payment due to the government upon 4 arourae of Crown land had been demanded from him, although
petition
his property included

The land in question had no land of that character. perhaps been the subject of a perpetual lease, and owing to lapse of time and cf. a similar deficiencies in the survey-lists its identity had become doubtful
;

case in P.

Amh.

68,

5a sqq.

From

latter half of the

the character of the handwriting the papyrus must belong to the second century, and there can be little doubt that the Xenophon

here addressed,

who was

evidently a high

official,

was T. Claudius Xenophon,


(C.
I.

known
8043).

to have been epistrategus in the reign of

Commodus

L. III. 6575,

']^ [
1% letters

\^
]

Trjs]

12 letters
.
.

)(^]

[ [
TIpu^[ov

^ ^^ ^?
[^?

8[

Xevviv
rrpos

[]^

^-

15

25

and hand
[

? ^^ ]. ^, /[\ [] \ ] ^ [ ] ] , ( [ '] [\ , ^ [] , [] , ] ] ] [] [ ] ] [] ', [ [ . ] [


[9] ] [/6
[
8vo
718.

PETITIONS

191

kv

^86\^
fj

Upd]?

[ /6 \
6

.]

e|

'

[}
[ [

eivai

yfj

13 letters
13
,,

], ]

6]

\\

[ \

],

13 letters

][]

[].

][)(,

]
of

2.
*

1.

.
.
.

20.

' ]
?
.

his highness the epistrategus Titus Claudius Xenophon from Antistius Primus also called Lollianus, ., ex -chief-priest ... of the city of Oxyrhynchus with Alexander the land at Sennis belonging to him I bought from Dionysius and his brother ApoUonius the younger, in consequence of the division made with namely 52^ arourae of corn-land and | aroura of building-land, free from obligations in
.
. .
.

Crown land or Imperial estates or temple land, in accordance with the division made by me with the (my ?) brothers, the taxes upon the private land only being paid by me. A very long while afterwards, forty years having elapsed, it somehow happened after
respect of

the death of the seller Dionysius that the komogrammateus of . . ., to whose district Sennis also belongs, in answer to an inquiry concerning the landlord from whom the

192

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

the imposts for 4 arourae of Crown land amounting to 15 artabae of wheat, stated that these 4 arourae of Crown land were included in the ., and that therefore 53 arourae belonging to me which I bought from Dionysius and the imposts ought to be paid by me ... although I have never had Crown land included in mine nor cultivate any and am altogether ignorant of the statements of the komogrammateus, and although the imposts for the said 4 arourae have for years been paid Therefore since I have incurred no small loss and it is in the regular course by others. unjust that I should be asked to pay the imposts on land which does not belong to me and which I do not cultivate, I beg you, if you think fit, to write to the strategus of the nome, in order that in accordance with the decrees he may direct the officials whose the 4 arourae of Crown land declared by the komogrammateus to be duty it is to included in my private land, and may state the owner from whom the demand for the imposts may reasonably be made for I shall retain a claim for the sums with which I was wrongfully charged against the person proved to be responsible for the payment, that Farewell. (Signed) so I may obtain relief. Presented by me, Antistius Primus .' also called Lollianus, through Apollonius
.
. ,

demand should be made of

3. Probably ascending scale; 8.

cf.

\(.^%:

contrast to eV
9.

'^^,
.

Preisigke, Stadtisches Beamtenwesen in rom. Aeg. p. 31. or possibly (cf. 11. 11 and 27), but [aetjrwcos makes a better

-',
if

the

municipal

titles

being usually arranged

on an

[]
:

that be right.

...

cf.

506. 37 note, and 633.


genitive

13.

14.

An
is

\,
. .

.]

is

the

name

of a village or enoUiov.

if right, is

an objective

depending upon

[(;

of.

1.

28.

supplement then awkward.


alternative
:

is

constructed subjectively,

but the relative nap

i. e. the rent, the rate of which upon was usually about 4 artabae the aroura ; in the present case it was 3^ artabae. In 1. 11 on the other hand has its Ordinary meaning of taxes. 16. appears to be a new compound. 18. Perhaps [roC or But it would appear from 1. 12 that there was only one 25- evieu at the end of the line is clearly written, but suggests nothing; some word like is wanted.

-^

'(] [ *']. :.
719.

Registration of a Deed.
19-8

X 66

fOT.

A.D. 193.

A notice addressed
tion received

to the strategus

by a

certain

Didymus

of an authoriza-

by him from the

archidicastes in ansu^er to an application which

he had made

for the registration of a

purchase of some house property.


is

copy

of the application, itself enclosing a copy of the agreement of sale,

appended,

and gives some

interesting information concerning the formalities attending this

process of registration, which

we

think has not hitherto been understood.

Texts

719. of the

PETITIONS

193

same class already published are B. G. U. 455, 578 and 717, to which an important Leipzig papyrus will shortly be added (cf. P. Grenf. II. 71. 6, B. G. U.

(/)
that the

970. %o-2, 983. 10),

The

object in

all

these cases

is

to effect the

of private agreements

made by note of hand

{),
'

publication'

and the

publication consisted in the registration of the agreements at the Library of Hadrian and the Nanaeum at Alexandria (cf. 1. '^^ below, B. G. U. 578. 19, and For such registration of a copy of an agreement the fixed charge of 34).

12 drachmae was payable (11. 30-1), to which a tax proportionate to the value involved

is
;

added

in

the Leipzig papyrus

a declaration had to be

document

registered

was

really written

made by the person by whom it

(11. 33-4, B. G. U. 717. 26, &c.); and a notice of the transaction was served in the ordinary way through the strategus upon the other contracting party, who would of course raise objections if any irregularity

purported to have been issued

had occurred

are unable to find here, with Gradenwitz {Einfiihr(11. 3-4). Mng, pp. 36-7), any question of a comparison of deeds or handwriting. The purpose was rather to obtain for the agreement concerned a validity which, as

a mere
a>s

preparatory to an action at law arising out of the non-fulfilment of the terms of the In the other cases no such purpose is specified, and the step taken is only precautionary. This of is to be distinguished

, (.4 .
We
it
;

did not previously possess, notwithstanding the formula In B. G. U. 578 the (1. 28, &C.). was

/
[

^?

from the simple notification to the archidicastes of contracts without any reference to at the two libraries (cf. 727, introd.). The papyrus bears the date Phaophi of the 2nd year of Pescennius Niger other documents dated shortly before the collapse of his power are 801

and P. Grenf.

II. 60.

2nd hand

[6{.
[
]

[]9 [] {) {). {) {)

6][}[]

() ' ^ ^)[] 8
avTi[ypa{(f)Ov)]

[]?.

[
J]f>^
'

]. []
{

{)
)

}.

)
.]

[]{).

[.

\[]

..[...]

{)

T94

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

^ ^ ^ ^^
?, [\ ^6{).
[/)(0/)]
Upi

[\<

)([]

[ \[]
[]9
[rfj]

f^/i/^lfXiejia

[\9

15

,9 ^^ 2

[
25

35

\] ]^ [ [ [. [ ^ ^[ ^ [ []
" Slpov

^\ $
Trjs

? ? ^
{Se)
//

([] -

^^

yaipuv.
is

7)([][]
kv

[]

[] [

aei yjpovov

kv tois

SevTepas

[]
ev

[ ^

? [] ^ \ ?, ^^ [ ] 9
e^oSos

9 99
Movdios

[\ []9 []9

[]-

,\

[] []
\f]

[]

[]

kv

8^] ()
.

eav

aipfj.

()

2.

[-

^(

[
cf.

Second

of

corr.

from
9.
1.

erasure.

7. lepi

Pap.
11.
/xe;

another hand.
31.

corr.

.
first

\[\
.

half of a

apparently over an
corr.

from

X by another hand.

from y by
1.

14.

correction after

note below.

33.

1.

(,.

'

719.

PETITIONS
is

195

'To
Helene, a

Achilles also
settler

called

Casius, strategus, from

Didymus son of Ammonius and


official

from Heliopolis.

Appended

a copy of the

response received

by me from the record offi.ce. " Vitalius, priest and archidicastes, to the strategus of the Oxyrhynchite nome, greeting. Let a copy of the petition which has been presented be served as folloAvs. Good-bye. The 2nd year of Gains Pescennius Niger Justus Signed by me Written by me, Polemon son of Augustus, Phaophi 28. scribe of the record office. To Vitalius, priest, archidicastes and superintendent of the chrematistae and other courts, from Didymus son of Ammonius and Helene, a settler from Heliopolis. Appended is a copy of the bond issued singly to me. Papontos son of Bithys and Tsenpachous, of Ision Tryphonis in the Oxyrhynchite nome, to Didymus son of Apollonius and Helene, a settler from Heliopolis, greeting. I acknowledge that I have sold and ceded to you from henceforth for ever of my property in the said Ision Tryphonis in the southern part of the village a half share of two houses, one having two storeys, the olher a yard, owned jointly by me and my brother Paous, the boundaries of which are, of the one with the yard, on the south an entrance and exit, on the north the property of the heirs of Diogas, on the east that of the heirs of Horus, on the west a public road, and of the other, on the south the property of Papontos son of Mouthis, on the north that of Heraclides son of Horion, on the east a public road, on the west the property of Miusis son of Melas, at the price agreed upon between us for the cession namely 2000 drachmae of the Imperial silver coinage, which sum I have received immediately ; and I guarantee the houses free from public and private debts from hand to hand and unaffected by persons' property-returns or any other claims, the right resting with This contract, you to cede to others and to manage and dispose of them as you choose. written by me, Papontos, in my own hand without erasure or insertion, is valid as though The ist year of Gains Pescennius Niger Justus Augustus, Pauni 20. publicly registered. Being therefore desirous that the authentic bond should be publicly registered I offer the prescribed 12 drachmae, in order that the regulations concerning publication may not apply to me (?), and that a single copy may be published, and request you to take this authentic bond bearing my attestation that it is the autograph of Papontos and register ." it together with this petition at the Library of Hadrian
. .
.

should also be read instead of 7ra(pa). this no doubt was also the position of Hephaestion The mraXoyehv was presumably at in 485. 8 and Flavius Aurelius in B. G. U. 578. 8. Alexandria. looks like the termination of a place name. 22. (a share of a hoUSe) cf. 577 23-4.
3. eV ToC 6.
:

(^) [
in

485. 3

ex

] ', ! \ ]^^ (\) [


. .

cf. G. U. 666. ^1, 77 ^4> ^^ 278. 31-2. This is an obscure passage, the difficulties being increased by a slight uncertainty concerning the reading of pe, which is followed in the original by something is unsatisfactory because the e does having the appearance of a tall v. To read of not seem to have been touched, and we prefer to suppose that the tail of the in 1. 30, which is immediately above, descended into the line below and supposing was cut oflf by a curved cross-stroke, so producing the effect of a . With does not comprise that were intended, the meaning would be because it (the and the words may be construed in a somewhat similar sense with the my more probable reading pe 'because I do not possess the orders for publication,' the being in either case quite unexplained. On the view adopted reference to the
:

'

'

196
in

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

penalties or disabilities

our translation the hiaaroXai n-epl may be supposed to have prescribed certain if the form of procedure followed by the petitioner was neglected.

720.

Request for a Guardian.


2i'^xg-S cm.
a.d. 247.

Plate VII.

A
which

petition in Latin

addressed to the praefect, Claudius Valerius Firmus,


that he would appoint a particular

by a woman named Aurelia Ammonarion,


is

This measure, supposed to have been passed in B.C. 31, empowered the praefects of provinces to assign guardians to women and minors who were without them. Appended to the document, which is signed in Greek by the petitioner and her

person as her guardian in accordance with the /(? lulia et Titia.

proposed guardian,
desired.

is

the reply of the praefect

The

rarity of accurately-dated

making the appointment as specimens of Latin cursive gives the

papyrus a considerable palaeographical


\0}{audio)

interest.

Valeria Firm[o praef{ecto) Aeg{ypti)

ab Aurelia {e} Amjnc[nario.


rogo domine des mtjii
auctoreni Aurel{ium)
5

Pylutammonem
ii ejt

e lege lulia

dat{um) do{minis) no{stris) Philippo Aug{usto)


Philippo Caesaris c[o{n)s{tdibus).

2nd hand
3rd hand
10

\;\ [\\
[].
quo ne
abeat

4th hand 5th hand,

[ {
.
[

Titia et ....[...

[kinSiSaiKa.
rfj

aU\^

Pl]Utammonem
auctorem
cepi.

e leg{e) Iul{ia) et [Titia

15

do.

(6th hand?)

6.

jfn Pap.

7.

1.

Caesare.

9.

1.

Avpfjkios.

I beg,

Claudius Valerius Firmus, praefect of Egypt, from Aurelia Ammonarion. you will grant me as my guardian Aurelius Plutammon in accordance with the lex Julia Titia . Dated in the consulship of our lords Philippus Augustus
'

To my

lord, that

721.
for the

CONTRACTS

197

the

petition,

2nd time and Philippus Caesar. (Signed) I, Aurelia Ammonarion, have presented , Aurelius Plutammon, assent to the request. The 4th year, Tubi 10.
.
.

In order that (Endorsed) accordance with the lex lulia


I.

may

not be absent, I appoint

Plutammon

as guardian in

et Titia.

Received by me.'

(a.d. 246)

Valerius Firmus is already known as praefect at this time from P. Amh. 72 and 81 (a.d. 247). With regard to the date of P. Amh. 72 Wilcken considers {Archiv, II. p. 127) that the regnal year should be read as $ instead of y, as in our text; but we still hold that y is right and that the facsimile, so far from throwing any doubt

upon our

reading, thoroughly confirms it. datur cf. Gains, Inst. i. 185 si cut nullus omnino tutor sit, ei Titia in provinciis vero a praesidibus provinciarum ex lege in urbe Roma ex lege Atilia In the official signature below (1. 14) the more usual and probably more lulia et Titia. The et has sometimes been regarded as a reason correct form lulia et Titia is used. is by no for supposing that there were two leges, a Julia and a Titia, but the conclusion
5. lege

Mia

means necessary. Of the mutilated word at and the second a, r, m, n, or

the

end of

the line the

first

letter

may

be

a,

e, t, s,

or

/,

{d)

CONTRACTS.

721.

Sale of Crown Land.


15x16-5 cm.
A.D. 13-14

addressed by two persons to Gaius Seppius Rufus, perhaps reverted to the idiologus, for the purchase of 19 arourae of land which had drachmae per aroura. State and was at the time uncultivated, at the price of 12 The document follows, so far as it goes, the same formula as P. Amh. 68. 17-24,

An

offer

which Mitteis is no doubt right in explaining, not as a sale in the strict sense, but as an example of emphyteusis or hereditary lease {Zeitschr. Savigny-St. evidence in Egypt as early 1901, pp. 151 sqq.) a custom for which we now have
as the second century

That this is the true nature of P. Tebt. I. 5. la). is shown both by the the use of the term the transaction, in spite of Amh. 68. 21, 20 drachmae, here only 12 and by lowness of the price in P.
B. C. (cf.

/^^,

which is the provision in the Amherst papyrus for an annual rent. Cf. 835, addressed to the same official as 721, a similar offer for the purchase of land left and P. Amh. 97. The document was never completed, blank spaces being
' '

for

some

of the dates.

198

[
*

[] ') [() '

? ^ 6 , [ ^ , {)[ [) () [) ^^ (),
kv
eitoy

(' /9
(eToyy)

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

^^^ ^[ () [][9

()

6[]

tepas e/y

(?)

^[?]

'['[])([
[,

-^)

^ [ 4 [ ,[
y^

)(^[
\

[)(^)]

^^

e/y

^]
5

(eroi/y)

1.

SO in

1.

Gaius Seppius Rufus from Polemon son of Tryphon and Archelaus son of . wish to purchase in the Oxyrhynchite nome of the Crown land returned as unproductive up to the year of Caesar, from the holdings which were confiscated in the . year of Caesar and became unfruitful and the holdings confiscated up to and including the year of Caesar, exclusive of temple land, for cultivation in the coming 44th year of Caesar namely Polemon at Thosbis and Tepouis in the upper toparchy fifteen arourae, total 15 arourae, and Archelaus at ... in the toparchy of Thmoisepho, four arourae, total 4 arourae, total 1 9 arourae, with the understanding that on these being assigned to us we shall pay into the local State-bank the price ordered for each aroura, 12 drachmae of silver, and shall have for their reclamation and cultivation immunity from taxation for three years .' from the coming 44th year of Caesar
.

We
.

I.

276, which shows that he 4. xmoKoyov

For Seppius Rufus cf. VVessely, Pap. Script. Graec. Specim. no. 8, and P. Brit. Mus. was of higher rank than strategus. vwokoyos and are terms frequently used in the

Tebtunis papyri to describe Crown land out of cultivation

The cf. P. Tebt. I. p. 540. only other example of this use of the word in the Roman period is P. Amh. 68. 4-5. cf. P. Tebt. I. 6 1 {d). 74 &c. and P. Amh. 68. 18, which can now be restored on the analogy of the present passage (perhaps (?)..]... ifoas is apparently to be connected with rather than 7;

',
.
. .

[] >^

^ [.
:

(]( \ (.

723.

CONTRACTS

The
and

saleable land
certain Uph
12.

8^^ ::
Tfjv

is regarded as including both the confiscated ho\6yov which must also have reverted to the government. IS no doubt p6t^els cf. P. Amh. 68. 20, where

\
-

I99

[]

to be read, p. Tebt. 79. i6, &c.


13.
^lovhiov

\]\^ \ {1.
;

^,[^4

cf.

P.

Amh.

68. 20 T^v

[^\]

14-5. lines of P.
ypapparevai

The supplements are Amh. 68 presumably


roi-[r
.

apparently underlies P.

taken from P.
followed.
.

nep\

Amh.

68. 23-4.

] :,

Amh. 68. 21. 835 concludes

Other conditions on the toU VrreiXat? .] and Something of thlS kind


. .

722.

Emancipation of a Slave.
24-3Xioi-w.
A.D. 91 or 107.

female slave, This document, which contains a formal emancipation of a with an acknowledgement of drawn up before the agoranomi and concluding specimen of its class from the ransom, is of great interest as being the first Antonina, and Egypt which is prior to the introduction of the constitutio law on the differences between Graeco-Egyptian and Roman
illustrating the

Of the two previously known parallels, B. G. U. 96, subject of manumission. and the Papyrus which is a mere fragment, belongs to the third century text in Curtius, ; Edmondstone (facsimile in Young's Hieroglyphics, ii, Plate Jahresber. des k. k. Staatsgym. in Herfials, xiiu
Anec. Delph. App.
1,

Wessely,

pp. 47-8) to A. D. 354.

what

inaccessible,

we

Since the publications of the latter papyrus are someappend the text of it on p. 202. Other papyri concerning

but much shorter example the emancipation of slaves are 716, 723, a similar which are letters to the of a second century manumission, 48-9 and 349, The ends of lines are lost authorizing them to liberate slaves.

agoranomi

the context or from throughout 722, but can in part be restored either from specimen of an emancipation, a comparison with another and quite complete found in January, 1904. written in the reign of Commodus, which we opportunely concerned, not The most striking feature of 722 is the circumstance that it is entirely that of a slave, with the emancipation of an individual whose status was third part of a slave who but with a joint manumission by two brothers of the already been made free cf. the parallel case as regards the other two-thirds had
;

in

716 and, as it now appears, in P. owners of the ^ is not stated of the I was a different person from the two It is also noticeable that the directly but is in the light of 716 likely enough.
6.

Edmondstone

That the previous owner

200
ransom
is

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

individual, perhaps her prospective husband,

between the went to the State


"Etovs

[ ^ [ {)
;

paid, not

by the

slave herself or

by a banker, but by a

private

paid to the owner and a small


cf.

and that a distinction is drawn sum in silver which probably

note on

1.

19.

(2nd hand)

[{)

(2nd

{} ()
[{)
[yitjeXr
[.
.

[9 ["
^{9) hand) ^{})
in
[

(1st

hand)
(ist

hand) iu

{) -

Kaiaapciov

]
^

[6 ^[
()
[

/9
.

()
-

][. ^] []

[]
.

15

[] [] ] [][]
[]
J.v,

[ ()
[
[.

()

[ 8[ -[
[
....
. . .

{) () {)
')([

25

\]

[]

[ [^[6
^

[ [[
[

[ [

722.

CONTRACTS

201

30

[]

35 77

9 ? ? -? ? {) {) ?[ . 7 [ ^ [? ? '[?
?
(2nd hand)

' ? [9 ?
7[
[

[
[^9
.

'[?

[? [
{)
1 6.
[

{?)

On

the verso

7 of

corn from

^6.

^.
.

39

1.

''/.
.

Augustus Germanicus, on the 6th loth year of the Emperor Caesar Domitianus which Js the 6th intercalary day of the intercalary day of Hyperberetaeus, dies Augustus, Thebaid, before three agoranomi month Caesarius, dies Augustus, at Oxyrhynchus in the face years, of middle height, fair, having a long TaUed Psammis. AchiUeus! aged about 20 years, of middle about on Ae middle of his forehead, and Sarapas, aged and a scar son ., both sons of on his left height, fair, having a long face and a scar all of Oxyrhynchus, have set Ammonus,'their rfother bdng Sarapous daughter of ..,, Sun (the deed being drawn up in the street) the free under sanction of Zeus, Earth, and who has been freed as regards the other twothird part which they jointly own of the slave a long face and a scar Iged about 26, of middle height, fair having thhds! Apollonous, obols of coined silver and the ransom paid to

'The

drachmae 4 for on the right foot, of TchiUeuslnd Sar'apas by Heraclas son of Tryphon son
. .

his
.

mother
fair,

daughter of

of the said

city,

aged about 31. of middle height,

^^^^^^^
having a long face
.

and\ scar above his right knee, namely 200 drachmae of I^P^^^V'^fT ''''f 'h Hh;; else on his behalf being forbidden 000 drachmae of copper Achilleus or any one from Apo lonous or her assigns or to ransom to make any demand of the aforesaid of the said son of Peteesis, his mother bemg The certifier of the manumission is shin, having a long face and a scar upon his fair, city, aged about 40, of middle height,

Xts

^. ^"'^'r.7c\iiieus;have with my brother Sarapas effected ^Jj^^^f of received the ransom, two hundred drachmae part of the slave Apollonous, and I have

the

emanapat^^"

.'

silver

202

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

I. Since the papyrus must on palaeographical grounds be assigned to the end of the or the early part of the second century, the coincidence of a 6th intercalary day with the loth year of an emperor called Germanicus fixes the reign as that of either Domitian The supplement at the end of 1. i is in any case long compared with the or Trajan. lo letters which are missing in 1. 2, and Domitian is therefore preferable. For Tljiv "Yikiov, cf. 48. 6, &c. 6. Cf. the similar beginning of P. Edmondst. 6 sqq. cf. tv ayvia\ is supplied from the newly found emancipation (cf. introd.) 12. iv We are inclined to think that this formula, which so far is only known in 11. 34-5. at Oxyrhynchus, regularly implies the execution of the document before the agoranomi, who are mentioned much less frequently in Oxyrhynchus contracts than elsewhere. 16-9. The newly found emancipation proceeds straight from the description of the corresponding to 1. 19, and owing to the slave to the mention of the lacunae it is not clear whether the sum mentioned in 1. 17 is the ransom of the whole previously set free. On the whole we think the latter hypothesis is more slave or of the
first
;

likely.

The

talents are in either case

19.

',
(sc.

probably copper. the newly found emancipation has

(the owner) the slave) in 1. 24. the analogy of Avhich we have supplied a distinction was drawn between the payment in the owner, and from 48 and 49 in which the same

. .. 8.

It is clear

from that papyrus that and the ransom paid to

amount of

drachmae, is coupled with different sums expressed in copper, there would seem to have been a normal charge of 10 drachmae in addition to the ransom, in spite of 732. 19-20, The divergence of 722 at this cannot be 10 drachmae. where the amount of point may be due to the fact that it is concerned with the emancipation of only part drachmae were paid is not made clear, but it is probable To whom these of a slave. Nowhere in connexion with these that the State in some form was the recipient. emancipations under Graeco-Egyptian law is there a mention of the vicesima libertatis but if, levied under Roman law, which appears in B, G. U. 96, 8 ; as we are now disposed to think, the status of the persons who Avrote 48-9 was that of and 48-9 stand towards such documents as 722 in the same kind farmers of the of relation as 241-3 towards contracts for sale or mortgage, there must have been a tax upon the emancipation of slaves apart from the 10 drachmae

, ,
teKa

S)V

..

{ \\ ()

et77-ci)(

\\
5

([] 8 (.5 '. : ,


iv

Papyrus Edmondstone.

'.\(\\

. .
\

a.d. 354.

\ () ()

( '

(^

(^

\
\

723.

CONTRACTS
eivoias

^. \ ^^.,, .^ .6

ovv

avff

hv eVeSe/^wa^e

Karh

[6]

,
8C

npoel^ov

\ \

, ^.
.

'

203

?ri

re

\
-

^,.
><

ets

ea.
.%

eWVoi.
L

"

\\ ,^ ^uL ,.,5;:.
\\
airh
roO

(7th hand)

. . ,/. '.<, , . . ^ : ,.
rots
,
,

^ 2

ewi.

8 .\ ,, .
\\^
tJk.iv

.IboKelv yhp

eir. eV. ^,Xe/ots

r.o

ivr.iB.v

^.^'.. ,,. . ^ .. {) , . .. . >\ %. ^ ,.,


eire eVl eVepoti

\ ....

.rtXeyct.

, \
6

.^

airo\

. ^
,

eX.v^.pov.ra ro

^..,..
'

.. ,,.
\

^j;

e^earat h.

.
>\
>

.
'\

.,,
'

'

..4<^

86

(2nd hand)
as npOKeiTm.
inip

, ...^ ^. ,
,n^v ^,^
\
iypa^a

rhs

^>

.. 8^^ \ ^... , ^., \

.^ -'

.. ^. ^,
-

eXevftep.av
'

, .18.

(3rd hand)

\^

. ,
,

. ..
^

,.

rpo.ro.
Kac

eXevdep^av

. ^

. *.
,
'

yumt

'

Tmaae

(4th hand)

{r^thh^nd)

(6th hand)

.-

5.

or perhaps
;

COrr.

from

1.

(^^^.

. ^^^
1.

6.

1.

for

. ^.. ^/^.. ..^.


9.
1.

Final

Of

II.

1.

Ttwv^els can be read for

(.
723.

Emancipation of a Slave.
17.3x21-2 fw.
A.D.

138-161.

emancipation of a female slave, follows This document, recording the formal good deal simpler and more compressed. the same formula as 722, but is unfortunately, the details conof the lines, including, is lost at the beginnings general sense clear but a comparison with 722 renders the cerning the

-,

enough.

Cf. the introd. to that papyrus.

["

?
troKu

'

^e](ist

(2nd hand)

hand) ^u

^-^^

204
2

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


7'

letters

^
]
.
.

^
S5
letters

letters

] ^
Xev6ipav
'

^ ] )([] &
]

ev

[.

(and hand)
Trj
]

?]

(/)

[\ () ()

ev

avrfj

(and hand)

letters

I.

2.

seems to have been omitted before

7.

y^ffpos Taeet

the intervening space 4. The vestiges following ]Se possibly represent the yv of Shorter blank spaces being accounted for by the junction at this point of two selides. In that case Be have been left in the corresponding part of the two preceding lines. particularly well, and there is no should be read ; but the traces do not suit he in 496. 1 6 where a is mentioned at the end of a contract. A description of the were given at the beginning of this line (cf. 722. slave and perhaps the amount of the

.
is

'8

Pap.

{$)
5

(ist

{)

hand)

Pap.

""" Pap.

8.

The name

occurs also

in

]?
96. 2

15 sqq.); but
5.

After

{)

not a possible reading. the papyrus not improbably proceeded eVt


oX(Xots) enl

This restoration would accord very well with our present explanation of the position occupied by the writers of 48 and 49 implies here is uncertain. (cf. 722. 19, note); but what exactly
(corr.

by Wilcken)

{) ^^].

ttjs

cf.

724.

Apprenticeship to a Shorthand- Writer.


I8.3X2I-3
c?n.

a.d. 155.

Contract whereby an ex-cosmetes of Oxyrhynchus apprenticed his slave


to a shorthand -writer for

the teacher receiving 120

unprofessional scribe, and the language

[]9
6)$

[]?

^? ^
7

two years drachmae

to be taught to read
in all.
is

The

and write shorthand, contract was drawn up by an

often confused.

^. (^?
ttjs

?^

68 ^
,
9
nphs
i S>u

724.

CONTRACTS

irovs 'AvT<cvivov

8ekpav
[/.]9

nac8bs kK
{81}

^
kvThl

kkv

15

, ^^ )8?^ ?
kL 8\ kvTh

[] ?^^?>\ [', ^ ^^ ^ 8^9 ^. ^[],[] ? ^ ^[],


'49

\M\os

86

kv

^ 4 89 ^, ^
^

205

81

&\

kv

8-

81

kirl

X6you

kiioat
Thv

8
7

kiSpTOS

8 [] ^ [Tb]v

6[
,

oaas

, ?, {^
.
of
14?

of

(8

3.

of

corr. corr.

from from .

8^:

corr.

from

-?^"

1 2.

v^epas rewritten.

vouwll receiver second

instalment consisting of 40 drachmae

when

the

boy has

learnt

Pius,

Phamenoth
6. xcop.

5.'

eopr--: sc

8.

.[.]^:
is

the (cf. 725. 36-7). though P^f be ,^";^ ?[ P^X^l, seems to^^J^ mtended, though the a Graecized form of commenianum
^^6.ro. ..rX,

^,.

doubtful .

-ore like^2

Mr. (If

725^q-6^ comes

in

of apprenticewhich is regularly found in contracts here after the clause ea. be ^"^ '^-^. somewhat awkwardly

payment of

the second

and

third mstalments.

2o6

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


725.

Apprenticeship to a Weaver.
30-7

XII

cm.

A.D. 183.

contract between Ischyrion and Heraclas, in which the former apprentices

ward of Ischyrion, for five years, Arrangements are made for the provision of wages (after two years and seven months) and clothes for Thonis by Heraclas on an ascending scale, and for the case of Thonis' absence from his work for more than the 20 days allowed for holidays. Cf. 275, a similar contract with a weaver written 120 years previously, upon which the supplements in 11. 1-5
to the latter a
called Thonis, probably the

boy

to be taught the trade of weaving.

are based.

[9 \^9
i[o]if

[^] ? ?
/[9
[]
[.]
.

[yep]5io[y

][[9[]6 ? \[\^ \^]^ , ] [, ] []9 [] ^^


][]
.

^[/

']^ ]\6 ^
]
Trjs

Aiovros

7]/?

8-

i^rjs

iiri

\p6vov

i^i

[]9.

[] \[] ^ [] ]6 ,[ -

[] [6] ' [^]

[
^]

^^,

,9 \ 2
?\
.

kviavTov

-[]

725.

CONTRACTS

25

)(
*'^

kviavT(u

^] [[ , [] [] [, [] {) [] []
\\

{)

, \^
act

,eTi
(^Vei)

207

{)

35

[]
4

45

] ^^ } [ []] [] {] , , -.
'

. -

[] -

[(]

[]

5
[\

-.

55

()

2o8

6
2nd hand

^/
{(^)
.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

{)

{) \ ()
6.
of
rewritten
'

6(5()

[ ().
34 5^
.
.

9 {^).
'''""^

Aioi/TO?

^
the Hne.
63.
s

(
corr.
(?).

corr.

from

from

80.

Pap. 3 52. oyBoov corr

^/
.

\[ above
Pap.

36

of

of Sarapion ., of Oxyrhynchus, and Heraclas son mother being said city, weaver, agree ., of the with each other as follows Ischyrion on the one part that he has apprenticed to Thonis, a minor, to be taught the art of weaving for a period of five years Heraclas starting from the ist of next month, Phaophi, and will produce him to attend the teacher for the stipulated period every day from sunrise to sunset, performing all the orders that may be given to him by the said teacher on the same terms as the other apprentices, and being fed by Ischyrion. For the first 2 years and 7 months of the 3rd year Heraclas shall pay nothing for the boy's wages, but in the remaining 5 months of the said 3rd year Heraclas shall pay for the wages of the said apprentice 12 drachmae a month, and in the 4th year likewise for wages 16 drachmae a month, and in the 5th year likewise 24 drachmae a month; and Heraclas shall furnish for the said apprentice in the present 24th year a tunic worth 16 drachmae, and in the coming 25th year a second tunic worth 20 drachmae, and likewise in the 26th year another tunic worth 24 drachmae, and in the 27th year another tunic worth 28 drachmae, and Hkewise in the 28th year another tunic worth 32 drachmae. The boy shall have 20 holidays in the year on account of festivals without any deduction from his wages after the payment of wages begins but if he exceeds this number of days from idleness or ill-health or disobedience or any other reason, Ischyrion must produce him for the teacher during an equivalent number of days, during which he shall remain and perform all his duties, as aforesaid, without wages, being fed by the said Ischyrion, because the contract has been made on these terms. Heraclas on the other part consents to all these provisions, and agrees to instruct the apprentice in the aforesaid art within the period of 5 years as thoroughly as he knows it himself, and to pay the monthly wages as above, beginning with the 8th month of the 3rd year. Neither party is permitted to violate any of the aforesaid provisions, the penalty for such violation being a fine of 100 drachmae to the party abiding by the contract and to the Treasury an equal sum. This agreement is valid. The 24th year of the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius Commodus Antoninus Augustus Armeniacus Medicus Parthicus Sarmaticus Germanicus Maximus, Thoth 25, I, Heraclas son of Sarapion also called Leon, have made this contract and consent to all the aforesaid provisions. I, Thonis also called Morous, son of Harthonis, wrote for him as he was illiterate.'
Ischyrion son of Heradion and
: .

also called Leon, son of Heraclides, his

726.

CONTRACTS

209

726.

Appointment of a Representative.
20 X 9-2 cm.
A.D. 135.

an agreement by which Apollonius authorizes another person to him in some legal proceedings in which he was concerned, being cf. 97 and 261, which are prevented by illness from attending in person contracts of the same kind. The document is incomplete, the name of the representative and the date not having been filled in.
This
is

appear

"Etovs

^[]
'

8[]- ^, ^^ ^. '
for
;

[\ [\
[\]

kv

iv

^\ [] [6]
[yoju

Aioyi-

'

[]

, , ^ , [] [ ].
2

[
nepl

\6yov

re

[] []
[]

is

[] ' -

,
,

at 'The 19th year of the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus, Tubi Apollonius son of Apollonius son of Diogenes, his Oxyrhynchus in the Thebaid. mother being Tanechotarion also called Euterpe, daughter of Diogenes, of Oxyrhynchus, of the said city (the contract taking place in the street), since acknowledges to he is unable through sickness to make the voyage to the assize of the nome, that he to represent him in the inquiry to be held against him has forthwith appointed before his highness the praefect Petronius Mamertinus or the epistrategus Gellius Bassus or other judges, and to carry out everything concerned with the trial ; for he gives his The agreement is valid.' consent on these terms.
,

O. Bi a[a\6eveiav

cf.

261.

yvvaiKelav

14.

imp

avTov: SO

no doubt
Bassus
is

in 97. 3; the

a patronymic.
19.

. /
word
after

there

perhaps
in

[]-:

mentioned as epistrategus seven years

earlier

237.

vii.

22.

2IO

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


727.

Delegation of the Duties of a Guardian.


33-3x15^^
A.D. 154.

This is a deed drawn up by two brothers, who were Roman citizens and owned property at Oxyrhynchus, authorizing an agent to act in their absence from Egypt for a nephew and niece whose guardians they were. The document,

which

addressed to the archidicastes, whose official cognizance of the transaction was desired. Other instances of private contracts being sent to the archidicastes are 268, B. G. U. 729 and 741, the juristic significance of which is discussed by Gradenwitz, Einfuhrung, pp. 91 -a, and
is

called

<,
350.

is

Mitteis, Archiv,

I.

p.

It is noticeable that,

with the exception of 268, the

persons concerned in all these cases are Roman citizens, and that the documents The procedure here is apparently to be usually take the form of a exemplified in 719 cf introd. to that papyrus. distinguished from that

I[.]/j[.]/i[.

.]i

'Io-_i[5]cuyoof

[]
5
e^^y77[r]oi;
yei'[o]ys

rfj

7[]

?^ ^] ^ >
;

^/^?.

iepeT

yjpr]

[] [] ,

\
6

^0\^\\^

[(\
15

[]

, ^ ^^^
h
kv

'^ ?' ,
^
Se

[]

[]

^
-

727.

20

7r/>oy
fi

ear

^ ,
TTj

avTov

ie?;

/cat

yej/?y

Sio

25

- {?) [\ . [\[).[] 3

? ?'? '
evSoKei

[]6 []
rrjSe

[6]9

kav kniTcXiar]

k^rjv,
Tjj

^
.
. ,

? ,? ?
[]
knir^Xovv8e

8\ ? 9?
CONTRACTS
oi

kav Seov

kiova

'4 -

(.?

and hand

? ? '?
.
.

5
?

1.

.
.

7['1?.
Pap.

6.

of
24.
1

8{[]

COrr.

from

?
.

8.
.

1.

. or

en irekiaovTi.

'

To

son of Isidorus the ex-exegetes,

late strategus of the city, priest, archi-

dicastes

and superintendent of the chrematistae and the other courts, through the deputy archidicastes Demetrius son of Heraclides the ex-exegetes, from Gains Marcius Apion also called Diogenes and Gains Marcius Apolinarius also called Julianus and however we are Gaius Marcius Apion also styled, and from Ophelas son of Ophelas, of Oxyrhynchus. unable called Diogenes and Gaius Marcius Apolinarius also called Julianus, being at present voyage to Egypt, agree that they have appointed the aforesaid Ophelas, to make the who is the agent for their property in the Oxyrhynchite nome, by the terms of the present authorization to act for and take charge of their brother's children Valerius Theodotus and their also called Polion and Valeria Apollonarion also called Nicarete, who are minors wards, and further to collect rents and to make such leases as may be necessary, and authority. to appear against persons and to sell off produce as may be needful on his own Accordingly let those concerned do business with Ophelas in the discharge of all the and he shall forward to the said parties accounts of all his acts every aforesaid duties month, and shall have power to act in all things no less than they themselves would
;

have

Ophelas the appointed representative assents to this authorization; present. bonds of every kind which Apion also called Diogenes and Apolinarius also called We request (your concurrence). The Julianus hold of each other remains in force. 2.' 17th year of the Emperor Caesar Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Mecheir
if

and

all

in the sense of appearing at legal proceedings for and the frequent instances of eVt B. G. U. 613. 14 of. e.g. participles which 21. The construction is here somewhat awkward, the series of future rovs depend upon awearaKevai in 1. 12 being interrupted by the parenthetical sentence eViTeXoCwi, which would better have been kept till the end. . and G. 729. ig where cf. 268. 19 29. |[](/')
19.
: . . :

6 )

[,
2,

.
_

[(],

{)

212

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

WUcken {Archiv, I. p. 176) and Mitteis {ibid. p. 350) both stands by itself, as here. on the strength of 268, is consider that the object to be supplied after This was also tpean the preceding sentence is iv be rois where papyrus but in consideration of the uncertainty concerning our own view whenediting that and the fact that here as well as in B. G. U. 729 the meaning of the word by itself, we retain the doubts expressed in the note upon P. Fay. Towns is found is to be connected with the clause immediately 33. 18-9 as to whether in 268 should therefore prefer to understand some more general term. preceding.

()

,
728.

^, {).

>(

We

Sale of a Crop.
27 X

9 cm.

A contract of a somewhat
tenants

novel character, called a

sell part of their crops standing, the money within a given time direct to the landlord, who has the same rights of execution At the end is an acknowledgement from the landlord as in the case of a loan.

to be paid

A.D. 142.

by which two by the purchaser

of the receipt of the money.

[] ? [] 6-? ^ ^ ^[]/ ^? [][]^ ky [9 Aio\ykviL


Trjs

'ApaLTo[s]

[]

'

[]

irepl

[\ [] []9
[]

e/c

Xapi^eivov

[]

[]
kav

[]
[/]
15

[]
[]

]^

[]

^.
kni

{\{)rpeij

[]

^^
e|

"^ ^
6kav

9
2 /?
e/c

'4,

25

30 ray

35

3rd hand

[e^

20.

1.

[]1

? ? {)? ? ?^ ? ?{), ?? ? . (? ? ? , ? ? ]
[]
[]?

[]

\\? [\?

^? ^?^ ^. ?
rfj

728.
e^

CONTRACTS

213

6-

^?

e/c

ky

?.

eTovs

(and hand)

ApaetTOS

Aioy^v^i

/-

'4
?

vnep

?.

Aioyivci

[]

[(?)

32.

1.

8.

33

34

^'

'^'.

Pathotes and Livius, both styled as having Harseis for their mother, from the village of Thosbis, have sold to Diogenes son of Amois and Abeis, from the said Thosbis, out of the land belonging to Apion son of Horion, of Oxyrhynchus, which they cultivate at Thosbis in the holding of Charixinus, consisting of 20 arourae, the crop of hay upon three arourae as fixed by a survey in the eastern part for 276 drachmae of silver, on condition that Diogenes may cut the crop bought by him and transport it to any place that he may choose, and shall hand over to the aforesaid Apion who is the owner of the land the 276 drachmae of silver before Epeiph 10 of the present 5th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord. If he fails to pay it within the stipulated date he shall forfeit the 276 drachmae of silver increased by one half, with interest at the rate of a drachma a month for each mina, Apion
'

214

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

having the right of execution upon both Diogenes and all his property as if in accordance The 5th year of the Emperor Caesar This sale of a crop is valid. with a legal decision. We, Pathotes and Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Pharmouthi 23. Livius, our mother being Harseis, have sold to Diogenes the crop of 3 arourae of hay as I, Dionysius fixed by a survey for the payment of 276 drachmae of silver, as aforesaid. son of Dionysius, wrote for them as they were illiterate. The same date, Apion son of Horion to Diogenes son of Amois, greeting. I have received from you the 276 drachmae which were agreed upon for the price of the hay and I make no complaint The 5th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, Epeiph 2.' against you, as aforesaid.

729.

Lease of a Vineyard.
21

29-7 cm.

A.D. 137.

who was

contract for the sub-lease of a vineyard for four years from Sarapion, himself a lessee (cf. 1. 14), to Ammonius and PtoUas. The body of

the document
length, of

in lines of exceptional (11. 1-35) is written in a very small hand which the first 35-40 letters on the average are lost, while a few lines at the beginning are also wanting, being represented only by a detached fragment which is illegible and half decayed. No extant lease of the Roman period has been drawn up with such elaboration of detail as the present document, and though P. Tebt. I. 105, of

the second century B. C,

is

equally long

its

formula

is

quite different.

Of the

known

244 is a mere fragment, and P. Brit. Mus. 163 Hence the restoration of the lacunae is incomplete in the most important part. in 729, which was moreover written by a somewhat careless scribe, is far from easy, and the sense of some of the provisions is obscure, though the general
leases of vineyards C. P. R.

construction and meaning are usually intelligible.

The

rent paid for the

perhaps (11. 36-7) half the vine produce in addition to 50 jars of wine and seem to include the rent of a piece a sum of money or corn ; but that does not
of dry land which had once been a vineyard

the extent of which does not appear, was

(5,

1.

30).

This

is

leased

(11. 30-32) for three years, starting from a year after the date of the contract itself, and was to be cultivated as the lessees chose with the usual exceptions of the more exhausting crops, the rent being 60 drachmae and perhaps half

the produce.

and a is subdivided in 1. 22 into a The The former term refers mainly to the vines (though including a rose
the latter apparently to a crop of some kind of reeds
(11.
;

-^

garden,

V. inf.),

but the passages

dealing with the

3-4 and 25-7) are unfortunately very imperfect,

729.

CONTRACTS

215
;

and the connexion between the vines and the is not made clear cf. 1. 3, note. Lines 5-10 deal with the embankments 11. lo-ii with the manuring 1. ii with the watching of the fruit 11. i2-8 with the irrigation, for which the lessees were to receive a loan of both money and cattle, 11. 18-2:2 with the payment of the rent and penalties for failure

{),

{, (),

to carry out the terms of the


in
11.

contract.

which the vineyard was to be delivered up at the end of the lease, while 27-30 are concerned with the apportionment of the various epya. After a section dealing with the lease of the (11. 30-2) follows one concerning the lease concludes with the usual a rose garden in the (11. 32-3), and clause assigning the taxes to the lessor (11. 33-4), and another by which two rooms in a farmhouse are secured to the lessees (1. 34). Lines 35-8 contain the signature of the lessees, written for them in a large uncultivated hand by Ptolemaeus, while in 11. 38-46 is a supplementary agreement in a third hand, drawn up a year after the original contract, and acknowledging firstly (11. 38-44)
the loan of the cattle mentioned in
of which the previous mention
is
1.

^
16,

Lines 23-7 regulate the condition

and secondly

(11.

44-5) another loan

lost.

6y letters
[

ov
]

[5

letters

]
.
. . . .

5e

]
eT0V9

i8 letters
letters
. .

40

[. [
7r^o[y]

[ .]
.

ii letters

eiVi]oi/roy

[
.

]/?[]
]ev

[
[

39

letters

[]
^2,

en

eia15

letters

^]

a\aeiav
letters

]/

TpieTtav edvnep xpeia

eavToh
5
[

^y letters

[]

]ejei

{}
re

29 letters

]6 e[] eoov ^, [] , voeov


ovnep
eTos
8e

[ ^ es [[
eis

[e]Tpoi>

Be

^
](}9

[]

[.]

eiaiovTos]

'jjovs

enl

[rj]u

[]6[]

[]

eh

eh

2i6
7

11

12

13

14

[
[

^ ], () ^, . 8 , () { 8 8 8 8
[
,

[8,
[]
'^y

,9 , 8\ ^ , ^ ^ ^?,' ^ [ ^, ^ ? 9 ? ? 98 ^ ^^
THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI
8e Se
[

"^6

letters

8]^
]

[\\

anh

\9
^2

^y letters

kdvmp
tovs

npos

letters

npb{s\9

6pov9,

eVoy

.letters

8e

elaiovTOS

kirl

Tos

Se

8e

iav

[.

.]

^
-

irph?

8\

'4

3^ letters

[]
e^

kav 8\

88
rj

15

3*^

8 ()
letters

]
)
{)

^^

letters

, []
} ,

17

] []

[] ^,

68 8 ? ^. ^
'^ fXi^

3^ letters

?
'9

20

, [
[

35

letters

viov

]6 ? 8 . []6 \
\
kav

, ]^ 8
729.

CONTRACTS

217
XP^ta

Se

^?
kvTos

[]
kSavTos
kp-

6
5e

iripas

npos

Spa-

kiriTeXd-

29 letters

]
tus
kav

,
kK

[]
d?

21

22

[] ( k , [
'4

eis

iWy
jf,

]kvv
.

kva
k-

23

37

letters

24

34

[]

letters

25

letters

[] \ [] ' ^ ] []
(^)
[
]

[]

.[

k'

[]
[

],

26

4
3^

letters

[
5

tv
27
[

'['][.]

letters
[

]
letters

^[

kvqv
7[.
.]
.
.

. [^
14 letters

]
]

6 letters

][][.

2i8
28

29

3
31

[tos

32

33

34

35

?, ^ , ^ ^] 9 . 69 69 [] [ ? ^ 6 ^ . [ , , ^ "] . ^^ ] [
36

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

[\(^

Se

letters

/ [^
roO
8k

\)(

IScai^

6e

ttjs

669

[\ '4
^^
letters

'?

20

letters

]ouy

'

oh

kav

eroy

^y

letters

ah

kav

kv

ovtos

^6

2g

letters

][]

'i^u

28 letters

kvov

()

kvoo

kv

ko

le.

(2nd hand)

36

[()
[
2

37

letters

38

[,
\

39

[^ ()

^? ] ^. {) ] \ ' ]

^
le.

~
()
Hapa-

(3rd hand)

40

22 letters

9
41
[vfjs

42

31 letters

43

[^^
30

44

...... corn
1.

[ [? , .
.

45

35

, ?^ ? ] ^ ^? - ? \^ [ ]' ]?
729.
>

27 letters

^ Lv ?
Se

?
Se

CONTRACTS
rpeis

kv

^^
kndvayKov

219

dnep

eroy

],

kav

? \

^?
\
6]

aiprj

]t;

koev?

[] ^?,
h

[]

?,
. .

khv

^]?

... [\, khv \ /6


.

kXaa-

[>

^-

letters

.]
.

%.

'4[ ]^
St

[/
]

kv]epo[e]va [.........]

' -

[ ^
letters*

][. ...]..[

[?
<6.pov.
COrr.

]...[][

]^'^^]F

46

from

.
81
..
1.
.

1.

for eVrcu.

corr.

from from .
1.

.
38.

.
^

""^^ ^bove the


1.

line,

of

13. of

.;...
^ of
I8 of
1

corr.

.^'...

1.

ye.,ra.
corr.

. -^. 8.>
23.

14. First r of rpcrov corr from corr. from of i6.

before

before

o.

kL!
42.

;.^.5 ^..

coir.

r5.

ae..
1.

30.

of

^.^.

.
of
. .

from

o.

corr.

24.

8.
corr.

from .. from .
corr.

^
from
2.

of

- of

.
.at
.

17

of

y-j22

corr.

/[
1-

e..re.
corr.

COrr.

from

ea..

3t.

1.

((.

44
that

^"^ of between the a special connexion .^^: '^f^^especially 22 and only from the present document apparent not vine-growing of ^^^o,. cf^C P. R. coupled with the <.), but from other leases wherf the Xa ^US. IbJ. . ,,., . ]. ^., 224. 11-2 ] . .\< ^c ' ?, 120. 141 ,. /?() wnerc 22- Wheri read \ and P. Tebt.
3.

is

22

5,

ic

^'^'^"'^^"i:;;;/;ara;;x^;r On corresponds to an ... where a itself 'as' is shown by B. G. U. 558. 13, which mention B. G. U. 619. ii. 19 and 776 10, Brit Mus iQ^ il II and cf. '^... (P. Brit. Mus. 191 ^^ ?EX?;l'f cLrSeTapparent^^ with as being required In P. Tebt. 5 i99 '^^i"^' ^^ mentioned ArcLv, i. p. 150).
tie Other

^ .. \ .
exists
is

^. /.
.

36. L JM-"'"^ 39 -P

37

-' of

-- -(-)

<..{. above the hne.


cultivation
U.

..

^-are..

.;

o,oMe..ov.
1.

corn

. ^o-

Pap.

(cf.

24,

i<

Brit.

rf,u /

.[Kaarou

'

Land

was sometimes

cultivated

by
ct.

^.
ftor

"

220
embankments

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


;

in 729 is but though this section dealing with (cf. note ad loc.) immediately followed by one dealing with embankments (cf, P. Brit. Mus. 163. 22) the in an would Seem to be a crop of reeds planted between or under the vines. equally with the had to be handed over According to 1. 22 the

^ 4(\
..
5is

to be supplied as the object of etVa|ovcri;

cf.

1.

6.

In the

first

year of the
lessees.

lease the responsibility for the

was shared equally by

the lessor

and

In

the succeeding three years (11. 6-7) the responsibility continues to be equally divided, but a payment of 300 drachmae comes in, the nature of which is obscure. 7-9. Apparently the contract is concerned vith the lease of the newly reclaimed

was leased to some one else, the of 1. 8. The and the embankment which is the subject of 11. 7-8 probably divided the two Sarapion and the other are jointly rearrangement is that for the Sarapion alone. For certain embankments of the sponsible, but for the On the Other hand the lessees were responsible, as well as for the southern embankment' (11. 8-9), Sarapion supplying them with 15 donkeys annually, in return for which they were to pay him in each of the last three years of the lease 100 cheeses worth an and
the adjoining
'

obol apiece (11. 9-10). lo-ii. The necessary amount of pigeon's dung for manuring the vineyard shall be Sarapion shall send any provided half by the lessees and the other half by the lessor. guard whom he chooses in order to protect the fruit at the time of bearing, being himself responsible for the payment of him.' 12. A new waterwheel {sakiyeh) was required, Sarapion paying for the wood, the
'

lessees for the construction.


is to be advanced by Sarapion to the lessees, but be deducted 2000 dr. paid to the persons who supplied the water for the The remaining current year in accordance with Sarapion's lease of the land from them. 1000 dr. were to be paid in three instalments in the earlier half of the year. In 1. 15 only has been omitted after 800 dr. are accounted for, but it is more likely that The whole 3000 dr. were to be than that it is to be supplied at the beginning of 1. 15. repaid to Sarapion without interest at the time of the vintage towards the end of the first The large amount paid for water makes it probable that this came not year of the lease. For e^ev'iav[Ta in from a well but from a newly-made channel. 15 cf. P. Amh. 85. 14, follows The second of these instances, in which 86. II, and P. Par. 25. 12. shows that it must have meant something different ; and the sense annually would not suit the present passage, for it is clear that the loan which is the subject of 11. 13-6 The refers to a single occasion cf 1. 1 7, where it is contrasted with the hepa in all these contexts is 'within (or 'for') the whole year.' most suitable meaning for tos, where too i^ivLavTa was probably In B. G. U. 920. 18 the editor reads iveviavTa

13-6.

loan of 3000 drachmae

from

this is to

/3

1.

((
'

.
'

intended if not the actual reading. 16-7. With this passage cf. 11. 39-44, which refer to the carrying out of this stipulation. The oxen were required for working the waterwheel, and according to 1. 39 were actually supplied a year after the date of the lease by Sarapion, but from the present passage they They were would seem to have been deposited with the persons who supplied the water. to be received at a valuation and an agreement was at the same time to be made about The details of the repayment are the return of this valuation at the expiration of the lease.
' '

11. 41-4. 17-8. The 2000 drachmae for water (1. 14) were probably an annual charge, and For this the lessees paid interest, hence a second loan from the lessor might be required.

specified in

if

we

restore

8^(^

730.
18-24.

CONTRACTS
all

221
the aforesaid duties

'The
. .
.

said lessees are therefore required to perform

undone at the right season, so that no damage may accrue to and they shall pay to the lessor the wine at the vat, new and unadulterated, the vineyard each party providing at the vat a sufficient number of jars, and for every failure to perform work at the proper time... twice the amount of the damage, and for giving up the lease before the end of the period a fine of 500 silver drachmae and to the Treasury an equal sum without affecting the validity of the lease, and the lessor shall have the right of execution both upon the lessees who are each other's sureties for payment, and upon whichever of them he chooses and upon all their property, as if in accordance with a legal decision. And at the end of the period the lessees shall deliver the vine-land and reed-land planted, well cared for, free from rushes, grass and weeds of all kinds, and the plants healthy and palisaded, the embankments of the vineyard firm and watertight, and also any doors the and keys they may have received, and the waterwheel in good repair except and they shall irrigate the vine-land and reed-land every fifth day to the satisfaction of Sarapion, and shall transfer Sarapion's share of the wine from the 28. The is presumably that mentioned in 1. 12, but the technical meaning of is a new word meaning the lower part of the wine here is obscure, receptacle, which was below the ground level. 30. The lacuna at the beginning may be filled up cf. 1. 24. 302. This is distinct from the which is the subject of the main in 1. 30 seems to mean 'enclosed by a mud wall.' ivros contract; cf. introd.
blamelessly, leaving nothing
.
. .

.'

32.

P. Brit. Mus. 163. 17, where for the editor's Suggested the correct reading is

:
The

- (\

this is the first

mention

in a

{) []/,
total

[][] [\8,

papyrus of the cultivation of roses. In Wilcken {Archiv, I. p. 150)


i.e.

40-4.
5.

Here

of calves to be provided according to 1. 16 was 3, and of however the calves were probably 5, for the are 3. The cattle were

number

valued at 2500 dr. altogether, and at the end of the lease Sarapion had the choice of receiving this sum or the animals at a new valuation. If this was less than the former one, the lessees had to make up the difference to Sarapion. If the fresh valuation was higher, apparently Sarapion paid them the difference. If the lessees wished to change or sell the cattle, they might do so with Sarapion's consent. 44-5. These lines clearly refer to something contained in the main contract, but though we should expect a mention here of the (11. 30-2) which was to be leased after one year, the remains of 1. 44 suggest something quite different, which must have occurred in one of the lost provisions.

730.

Lease of Domain Land.


I9-5X7-3
<^^

A.D. 130.

sub-lease of 5 arourae of

domain land

at

Senepta

for

one year, at the

rent of 24

drachmae per
is

aroura, with an extra

payment of 4 drachmae.

The
;

crop specified
e.g. 499.

grass, while the other provisions follow the usual formulae

cf.

222

5 Toy

, ^ }
O^v\pY}yyaiv

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


20

OvaXepis

60)9

'()?
[]
eis

Hepinra
kvea-

[]
ei[y

6[]
15

,,. ' - . ^ ,\ ' ,


to9
eVofy,
e/s

[]
^

-6

25

[-

'
e/c

] [],

[]

te

(2nd hand)

35

[.

['
.

[[] '\[
.
.

[..]..[..]...

On

the verso

2.
1.

() {6) [\
20.

[..]...
21.

^{).
t

\(. {) above
[.
*

of

corr.

from

of Se corr. from

(?).

39

.1

Sarapion son of Herodes, of Oxyrhynchus, has leased to Valerius son of Apollonius, of the village of Senepta, a Persian of the Epigone, for the current 15th year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord, out of the domain land standing in his name 5 arourae in the holding of Damon, to be cultivated with grass for cutting and grazing at a fixed rent of 120 silver drachmae and 4 drachmae for the slaves for a Hbation on account of all the land, the rent being secured against every risk, and the taxes on the land being paid by the lessor, who shall also be the owner of the crop until he receives the rent. If this lease is guaranteed, the lessee shall pay the rent in the month Pauni of the said year, and the lessee shall forfeit any arrears increased by one half; and the lessor shall have the right of execution upon the lessee and upon all his property. This lease is valid. The 15th

731.

CONTRACTS
I,
. .

223
Valerius

year of the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus, Athur 19. (Signed) .' son of Apollonius, have leased the land at a rent of 120 silver drachmae

read for

;. :
8-9.
10.

...

cf.

i.

e.

the land

was part of a confiscated


is

cf.

721. 4-6.

101. II, 280. 12, 15, and


:

409. 15 where

to

be

for the payment on account of in leases cf. 101. 19 13 and 610, and note on 525. 7. In the present case it was for the benefit of the slaves employed in the cultivation of the land. 35. The paragraphus below this line marks the conclusion of the lease, and the signature was intended to begin below it.
. . .

36-7. remaining vestiges of

[] [\^\]
letters.

is

perhaps to be read, but does not very well

suit

the

731.

Engagement of
11-7

Services.
A.D. 8-9.

13-4.

A contract for
which
is lost,

services to

are the festivals of Isis of 13

be rendered on certain specified occasions, among and Hera, at a salary of 40 drachmae a year,
obols.

besides an

drachmae 2

The commencement

of the contract
;

and the nature of the services to be performed is uncertain but it may be conjectured on the analogy of e.g. 475, P. Grenf. II. 6y, and P. Brit. Mus. 331 (cf. Archiv, I. p. 153), that the person engaged was an artiste of some kind, though to judge from the scale of remuneration, not of a very high class. The ^document was drawn up by a careless scribe, who makes a number of mistakes.

? ^ 9
'/[
20

letters

]?/

\'^

0'

ScKarrj

Tois dcTTpois

4[] , ' []

(^)

^/

eTOS

, ( ()() {)
kav

?"? ,
6

(^ [] ^
o[

ro[i;]s

erovs

224

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

8^\^

]9
. .

15

7][.

.]e

6[\]^.

. >() ^ [] {^ ?
1.

{^Tovs)

[ ()
? e[/cr]

{aJTra-

[ ?

^^.
;

that I give

of the 39th year of Caesar to Thoth of the 40th year of Caesar, on condition you my services on the 9th and loth of each month and for two days at the and if you require me festival of Isis and three days at the time of the stars of Hera you shall pay me i drachma 2 obols of silver daily, or a fixed yearly salary of 40 drachmae of silver, and a present of 1 3 drachmae 2 obols of silver ; and for every day This contract of that I am unemployed I will forfeit i drachma 2 obols of silver. .' engagement shall be valid as if publicly registered. The 38th year of Caesar
'
. .

The star of Hera was another 5-6. For the feast of Isis cf. P. Fay. Towns 118. 13. ov for the planet Venus (cf. Arist. de Mundo, p. 392 a 27 6 but why the plural is here ol be "Hpas npoaayoptvovaiv, Pliny, 11. N. 2. 8, &c.) used is not clear. References to the cult of Hera in Egypt are rare ; cf. 483. 3, note. 8-9 The 29 days in the year specified in 11. 4-6 seem to be treated as 30, which at I dr. 2 obols a day make the 40 dr. be e'av would be cxpcctcd, but this was certainly not written. The 1 1-2. e after the lacuna is nearly sure and this may represent b]e but the letter after must be and is certainly neither nor f. if not 14. There is not room for eV
name
;

.
(e)

RECEIPTS.
Tax on Ferry-Boats.
23 cm.

732.

Receipt for the


1

8-2

by two farmers of the at Oxyrhynchus and two persons who apparently were ferrymen at one of these villages, acknowledging the payment first of aoo and subsequently of loo drachmae for Tiop^^eto?, the total, 300 drachmae, being probably the whole sum due from them for a year. This impost, the title of which is new, seems
receipt issued certain villages to

'

A.D. 150.

733.

RECEIPTS
owned
is

225

to be a tax upon the profits of privately

derived from a State monopoly, though the latter interpretation

^/' ?
(eroy)
rfjs

ferry-boats rather than a revenue


also possible.

{^)

\aipeiv.
6

()
.

[][9

,' {) ^]9 ^ [\. 5 ' ' ,


(2nd hand)
tcls
1.

^' ' ^^ [) ' ^ {]


.

[9 ][09]

[.

[]/ 6[
[]
ivearbs

[] '7[]
\\]

Am7[o]s

'

(^) .

?
\],
[]0

(-^) .

(3rd hand) AeovTcis

2.

() 8.
.
g
^

()

(and hand)

[].
Pap.
4
1

[].
1 3

[]

(3rd hand)

[]
[/

COrr.

from

/?.

1.

^, ().
We

'J,

1.

!,
A
. .
. ,

8.

* Heliodorus son of Heliodorus and Leontas son of Pekuris, of Oxyrhynchus, farmers and other (villages) of the contract for the tax on ferry-boats at the city, Ision for the present 13th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, to Achillas son of Thoonis and have received from you on account Apeis son of Apeis, of the said city, greeting. out of the sum which you owe us for the revenue from ferry-boats at Pankulis two hundred drachmae, total 200 dr/ Date and signatures of Heliodorus and Leontas, followed by their further acknowledgements of the remaining hundred drachmae.

733.

Tax-Receipt.
12

9'7 cm.

A.D. 147.

on pigs (cf. 288, introd.) and poll-tax paid by an inhabitant of Oxyrhynchus and his son. The payments are no doubt instalments of the whole amount due for a year.
receipt for the tax

226
I
(erovs:)

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

*/[]
.]

8.
.

[]{)
7(9)
l

[.

(7]9)
5

[] () ()()
.]
.

()
2.

[.

[.

.]?

i'/o(y)

{) [). ^) (9) [)
(erouy)

{) {) {/) ? () () [), / {)
{)
T[ia]a-apas,

(
(]$)
following

(eroyy)

(/?)
corr.

(^) {).
is

of

from .

The

corrected.

'The loth year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, Pachon 4. Amois also called Papontos, street, for the son of Diodorus, has paid to Diogenes, collector of money taxes of his son, pig-tax of the said loth year i drachma 5^ obols, total i dr. 5^ ob. his mother being Tapontos, has paid for the poll-tax of the said loth year 4 drachmae,
.

for the pig-tax

drachma 5^ obols/

734.

Tax- Receipt.
10.4x9-7 cm.
A.D. 165.

receipt for the payment of i drachma 4 obols by Cleon to an agent of the tax-collectors of a subdivision of the middle toparchy. The names of the taxes, which are abbreviated and ~, are uncertain, being probably both new.

()
X^io-TTJ)

3-

in

1.

5, is

{)( {) ) (),^ {) ( { / {) {). (


67() ()
)
)

*>. {) {) {<) {$!) {) {)


e

{
),

(erovy)

[.

.]

The

are

known from 595, but

the addition of

which recurs

new.

735.

ACCOUNTS

227

(/)
735.

ACCOUNTS.

Graeco-Latin Military Account.


12.5

16-4 cm.

A.D. 205.

Plate V.

This is a fragment of a Graeco-Latin register or account, concerning a detachment of troops (cf. 43 recto). Lines 5-1 1 contain a copy of a receipt in Greek from an optio, or adjutant, to an imperial deputy-procurator for 50 artabae of wheat paid to a number of cavalrymen, whose names in Latin
precede.

list

by another
Latin

receipt in

of six footsoldiers follows, which was presumably succeeded Greek recording a payment to them. There are a few

letters

previous column, and what remains of Col.


in Latin.

(apparently belonging to names) from the ends of lines of the iii is occupied with more names One or two of these soldiers' names indicate Hebrew extraction.
is
is

The

receipt

graphical grounds

dated in the 14th year of a joint reign, which on palaeoprobably that of Septimius Severus and Caracalla.
Col. Col.

ii.

iii.

G\Al[

pi

?
\ .
oi

Sqdus Marrhis
Valerius

Comar[
Isidori

M[.

.]i/ai/[o]t;

yaipuv.

(eVoyy)

^
otttlcuv

Ovlkt<o-

lebqel riex
20

Darichius

Sadus
Salmes

Themes
[

Zebidius

Malichus Sd^
25

item pedites vi Belei


Beleus

Psenosirius

ad cognlega Claudius
15

Zabdius Sahinus

Roman[us ?) A\
Cumesiu[s\ et Trufon
lulius
.

H\
[
.

lerraeus

Macchana
Avidus
Malichi
'

Gradius Themes

Etiopius Chu
30

Pacebius P[

228

8.

I.

.
6-7.
1.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


.
. .

.
:

First

( .

from

(?).

names here and in 11. 13-7 are placed rather far apart and look they were independent ; but with one exception either the second name has a genitive termination or the first may be a gentile name, while unless the names The only case in which any difficulty are connected the number vz in 1. 10 is wrong. arises is in 1. 1 3, where Beleus and Zabdius certainly seem to be separate names ; but the Possibly Gradius and distance between them is greater than in any of the other cases. Avidus in 1. 16, where again the space is very wide, should also be separated, thus making
3-4
pairs of
at first sight as if

The

the

number
5.

C.I. G. 4497.

cf. G. U. 1 56. 3 and I02. I, where is 6. and probably to be read between 14. The marginal additions here and in 1. 19 are obscure; cognlega is perhaps college, The first letter may be a but the second does not at all resemble p, nor but what is riex ? would apex be a very likely word here.

: ?, . / ?
6.

In

1. 3 the second hardly

name

is perhaps Comar\ini ; though that name occurs

cf.

1.

6.

in

a Palmyra inscription,

736.

Private Account.
i7'3

X 54-3

cm.

About

a.d. i.

Of

this lengthy account of private

expenses parts of seven columns in


;

all

remain, five on the recto and two on the verso

the

first

column of the

recto,

however, which is separated from those following by a broad blank space, is too fragmentary to be worth reproducing, and the same may be said of a narrow half-effaced column corresponding to this one but written in the reverse direction

on the back. The remainder is in fairly good condition, but the papyrus is broken at the top and bottom, and the short column on the verso is sometimes The various payments are difficult to decipher owing to discolouration. arranged according to the days of the month, and some interesting items and
prices occur.

Col.

ii.

0[
eis
[

15 letters

.[...].

[.]
5

6[]

.[. .]0[.

yd\y]yv\i8oi ds

^ () [
.

()
Sia

8,

.]

[^]

),

{ , {) {?) ^ 6{) ^ {
736.

ACCOUNTS
{669?), km

229
8vo?)

ds

19

TOVS aprovs

els

ds

kXaiov

eh
Mex{eip)

9 9 {) {, { {) (), [] {){). {)
?),

eh

{ { ?
(^)

(^?),

),

{),

{),

(\).

ypa^eiov

[9]
]

20 letters

3-

of

][

rewritten

(?).

Col. Hi.

I.

o\[.

.]ko

[.
25
e/y

.]

y[e]p{ov)

^ {{
.

[.]

Ends

]{)

{^),

irepiaTepas

{) {) ^ ]9 {) . 7[] \[] []{) {) {) (),


kv
TTJ

^
kv

7{) {)

()

aXeaTpa

{^) {6

{, ), {), ), {, (^),
of 3 lines.

),

),

35

[][{)]

{66,

230

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


aanapay(u{y)

[8\ *{^)
)

nepi8[CpTVo{y)

7raLSapi[oL]s

..[.].

{), /( {^), {9) ()


els

yi/a0eo)(y)

Parts of 2

lines.

25.

Second

corr.

from (?).

36. First

of

{)

corr.

from .

Col.

iv.

46

iq:

.
50

[] { ) {/). [ {) [)^ {),


Parts of 4
lines.
e]/[y]

.
.
.
e/y

{). (7{) {),


(/309),
?)

)
[

[) (). ().
()
(
)

55

t9

.
6

{ ^) {), [) (),
yeveaioLS

{5
p6as

/ ((, \{ {
),

[.].[.]..
]

. 6[]
50.
1.

{.
Part of
(cf.
1.

{>) ().
I

(?),

{) {
?)

),

),

line.

81).

54.

of

/(

rewritten.

736.

ACCOUNTS
Col. V.

^31

?
70

Bepov,

^
[.
.

Parts of 4
.

lines.

[A][^vdo{s)

8. dXearpa

{) ^^) 7, {9) <) {8) {?) {),


[

]/<)

[{),

[]

p8os
75

{)
{

{
t

8 {6oos).

8),

,X.<rrpa

{.) '.[] []6[) [. &{)


n^ptarepa^

89'^,^)

(o/3oX6s),

^^^

^){.<),
8),
,

^ ,

- {8^) []8{) [6 ]{ {^^), 8{) [] {^) {),


)

{)

{8)

{
.

{66^),

89

hP^S

{ieXu),

[i>

85

[n]a<TLT[o]s

)
t-

82.

1.

8(.
v.

On

Col. the verso opposite

Parts of 2 lines.

'

\]{) ? LI(L)
^ '' 11.
iSeinuec 6

^ \

8) {^^), 8) ^^^^^.),

.[...] []^ {ooXhs)

[^),

;; ;

232
is

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

95
[[.]]

[\8^
e/y

[....]

''^[]/
100

{ { [ { {^ { {{ [] ().
?).

.[...]....
.]
. .

),
?)

)
.

...
.

e/s

?)

?)

[.

.],

turnips for pickling

... for the cloak of Coraxus, lo drachmae; payment for enamelling 2 ob. ; salt i ob. cost of grinding i artaba of wheat on the i8th 3 ob. ; omelette for the bread 2 ob. ; cost of mending the cloak of Coraxus i^ ob. ; for treating (?) the wife of Gemellus 4 ob. perfume for the dispatch of the mummy of the daughter of Phna 4 ob. The 22nd: a chous of oil 4 dr. 4 ob. ; wax and stilus for the children i ob. ; pure bread for Prima ^ ob. ; for treating Tyche 3 ob. 9th Mecheir ... the loth: ... for the weaver's breakfast for the Sarapeum 2 ob. ; pure bread for the children | ob. ; beer for the 1 ob. ; weaver i ob. ; leeks for the weaver's breakfast i ob. ; a pigeon i ob. ; to Antas 2 dr. 2 ob. ; up at the city for the bread, cost of grinding 2 artabae of wheat, through Isas, The nth: at the camp, through Theodorus, for the bread, cost of grinding I dr. 2 ob. 1 artaba of wheat 4 ob. ; for the weaver's breakfast i ob. ; asparagus for the dinner of Antas when (he went) to the funeral feast of Athe . the fuller ^ ob. ; and to the slaves (?), for a cabbage for dinner i ob. ; to the child i ob. ; ... The 1 6th a relish | ob. ; omelettes for the bread 2^ ob. The 17th: milk for the children | ob. ; pure bread ^ ob. The i8th: to Secundas, a cake for the children i ob. The 19th: barley water for the same -I ob. The 20th sauce i ob. ; pure bread ^ ob. ; for treating Antonia 2 ob. ; and for Taptollous daughter of Caecilius 3 ob. ; on the birthday of Tryphas, for garlands 2 ob. ; on the birthday of for garlands 2 ob. . The 21st: pomegranates for the children i ob. ; playthings and ... for the children i ob. ; beer 3 ob. ; sauce i ob. The 22nd: sauce i ob. ; Thaesis ... for 2 days 5 ob. ; the mother of Ammonas for Taarpaesis for 2 days 5 ob. ; Berous similarly for 10 days 4 dr. i ob. The days . ; 24th: cost of grinding i artaba of wheat 4 ob. ; 2 ... of pickle 2 ob. ; salt i ob. a needle and thread i ob. ; cost of grinding i artaba of wheat, through Theodorus, 4 ob. cost of weaving a cloak i dr. 2 ob. ; pure bread for Ph i dr. ; a pigeon for the children i ob. ; pure bread for the same i ob. ; to Secundus for a cake for the children ^ ob., and for dry meal i ob. ; milk -^ ob. ; perfume for the mummy of the daughter of Pasis I dr. The loth: ... for the women 2 dr. 3 ob. ; relishes for the women on 2 days 2 1 ob. ; cost of tinkering a lamp 2^ ob. ; pulse when was dining here
'11.

-95

The

2ist: ... through


;

Zm

dr. 2 obols

for the kettle,

J ob.
7.

for treating

aXearpa

had already occurred


II.
els

a neuter plural, as should also


cf.
11.

being apparently always a woman. Neither be otherwise attested. of 28. The here and elsewhere

:
:

Laodice 2^
1.

cf.

10

,
in

ob.'

1,

77

[]^,
120

1.

91

P. Tebt.

introd.,

where

,
.

739. 4

it

should be regarded as

.
in

in P. Tebt. 117. 37, &c.


17, 53,

and 92, where the expression


nor
is

recurs, the object

appears to

written above the line (so too

1.

38), but probably the dative singular

letter is similarly overwritten e.g. in

36.

'

els

SC.

\,
:

55
59.

or

ei(T.

84.

96. abbreviation.

(() '. The


:

SC.

the
SC.

word

.
737.
1.

ACCOUNTS

10

and not the genitive plural was intended 1. 56


This
is

, .
hardly space for
[o].

233
;

a final

preferable to reading

TItoWovtos.
en-

is

unknown and
cf.
1.

the reading quite doubtful,

may be

e[i]r

I3.

marks at the beginning of the line look more like a deleted letter than an The day of the month should have been further away to the left.
et?

99. Possibly

[]

but there

is

737.

Latin Account.
2 23

Height

cm.

About ad.

i.

Plate VIII.

Col.

i.

An account of wages paid on different days to weavers,' hired persons,' and a master or foreman.' The wages, which are reckoned in asses, are at the rate of 31 for a weaver, 4 for a hired man,' and 6 for the foreman. We give the text of two columns, which are contained on separate pieces of papyrus but seem to be consecutive there is a large blank space after Col. ii, which was the end of the roll. A few small fragments of some other columns also remain. The account is written in a clear cursive hand which is probably of the reign of Augustus, the papyrus being one of a large find belonging practically entirely
'
'

'

'

'

Points are commonly used after abbreviations (but not with to that period. a for ass^s) and the numerals of the days of the month, and are not infrequently added after words which are not abbreviated.

Col.
[a{nte) d{iem)
.

i.

Nonas

hi\lias

[condu\ctei
\ii

iv
ii

a{sses

textor{es)

conductei
5
i}j,x

ii
ii

Idus

textor{es)

conductei
vii

ii

Idus

texior[es)

ii
ii
ii ii

conductei
vi]
3

Idus

textor{es)

co[n\ductei

234

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


V Idus
textor{es) in
a{sses) a{sses)

X
vi

s{emis)

magister
iv Idus textor{es) Hi

a{sses) a{sses)

X
vi

s{emis)

magister
15

Hi I{dus]

iextor{es)

Hi

a[sses) a[sses)

X
vi

s[emis)

[mYigisier

Col.
]V

ii.

Idus

textor{es)

Hi

a{sses) a{sses)

s{emis)

magister
]i

vi
s{emis)

Idus textor(es) Hi
magister

a{sses)
a[sses)

20

vi

a{nte) d{iem) xiix K{alendas) SextiUas


textor{es)

Hi

a{sses)
a{sses)

s{emis)

magister
21.

vi

of sextilias corr. from /(?).

this abbreviation is common in the Pompeian inscriptions; cf. C. I. L. IV, occurrence of asses in an account of this kind is however very singular. Presumably the money though reckoned in asses was paid in obols, three of which would be the equivalent of 2 asses. 5. iyx: cf. 1. 21, where xiix is written for xviii; for the sums of asses, on the other hand, viii is regularly used. 17-9. If this column immediately follows Col. i, which from the dates seems most probable, there is nothing lost at the beginnings of these lines and / in 1, 19 stands for

2():
The

index.

pridie.

21. Sextilias

is

from another

letter,

a curious form ; the a has been corrected, but was apparently altered not itself deleted. For the numeral xiix cf. note on 1. 5.

738.

Account of Food.
13-5

10-3 cm.

About

A.D. I.

A fragment of
cf.

an account of

articles

of food consumed on different days

108.

The ends

of lines of a preceding column are preserved.

'

739.

ACCOUNTS

^^.
5

8(
.

8 {
,
opi/is

235

TTTipvyes

Sarpea ,

...
.
i

6th 10 oysters, 'For dinner on the 5th a Canopic Uver; for dinner on the from the water, 2 snipe (?). dinner on the 7th 2 small loaves, i bird for

lettuce;

9.

is

new word.

The

nripvyes were probably smaller than the

3pm.

739.

Private Account.
32

x10 m.

About

A.D. I.

and copper account for a month, reckoned in silver drachmae of expenditure Lines i-a mention a receipt, 11. 3-22 give an account obols. written on the verso, the recto bemg blank. for various purposes. The account is

private

.
.

^
{7'
19

'[ " ? {?)

{ () {
)

kXaiov xovs

.
15

{ {) {() {, [
kpyarov
?),

{ {^), '[] {. {) (). { {6) [, { {) [). {) {. {6)


{^)
).'^

[]

{) , {^),
[

),

). /

^[]

{)]

?),

236

? [) [ [
its

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

][]
.

,
]

.
'

[][][]

rc(/i^s)

ekcuov

[{)

S]

{\
^

5-

This

line enclosed in

rotmd brackets.

on account of expenses:
I

Isas has received firom Apollonius, price of . .


i

an inhabitant of paid to Nechtheus 28

,
7.
1.
. .

[]4.
4[.l

dr. 4 ob.,

plates 2 ob., a relish for the builder 7th, a relish for the builder i ob. a choQS rfoil 4 dr. 2 ob. Tot^ 40 dr. 3^ ob. 13th, price of 9fli, for the wrarkman 4 ob., a reHsh for the builder i ob., the carpenter . 22nd, . to Philoutarion oil 4 dr. 3 ob., purple 20 dr., thread for a woman's robe .' Total . price of ofl 4 dr. 2 ob.

for a relish
I ob.,

(for oil 4 dr. 2 ob., erased). 5th, 3 baskets 4^ ob. ob.

On

the 4th, for

Deduct making bread grinding 5 ob., powder (?)


drachmae.
for
dr.,

6th,

2.
(cf.

Kwov,

if

ouiect,

is

the

name

of a village, but the writer


(1.

mean kpm>, L e. Cynopohs. 7), and he 4. vetnmsvSirfmm'. cf. the similar fonns
5.

may

6),

<m73e.7).

,
1.

is

careless about his cases

&c. (736.

and note
i
:

The amount

of

oil

which

is

not stated here and in

21

was no doubt

cf.Lii.

740.

Account of Corn.
21-2

X 46

cm.

About

a.d. 200.

An account of com, arranged according to different villages, apparently from the day-book of a private individual rather tlian an oflficial. Of Col. i only the ends of lines are preser\'ed, but Col. ii is practically complete, and CoL iii has lost onl}- a few letters at the ends of lines. There is also a detached fragment (not printed) belonging to another column. Cols, i and ii are apparently concerned with com paid out, and the sum given in 11. 8-9, added to the 30 artabae accounted for in IL 30-1, is subtracted The firom a previoosly mentioned total, leaving the remainder stated in 1. 32. The papyms provides some deals with receipts from rents. rest of CcA. interesting new information about tlie names and character of different measures

qS.

com, and a curious conversion occurs

in

1.

29.

On

the verso are copies of

740.
petitions to

ACCOUNTS

237

tioned in

1.

14

15

[ [
[u

Septimius Severus and Caracalla (705), and the 9th year men36 of the recto no doubt refers to these emperors.

Col.

i.

Ends of 13

17

8
19

20
21

^ {) ^ ^ {){ [9{) [ () ' {)


Col.

]()
"?)

] {)
lines.

8-

joy

3-

^{)

[.

.]

[.

[^]

/itay

vnep

()
6{)

22

23

24

25

'
67
kv

26
27

^'

28 29 at

() {69) ()] 6() () () ^?) ' (5) () y/


[.]

[) < {) [) 4{) 6(') [] {^ ) () () ^) () [ () (9) (]) [69) 66() [() () {) () () ( ()]


6{)
y

{)

6\()

() ,
,

)((pii^iKs)

30
31

) () [ () (5) () ( ) ] ()
[

{
,
. ,

.
.

()

\(oiviKs)

,
.

]^()

x(otj/i/cey)

]]

()
. .

Xoyou

32

[]

Col.

iii.

33
34

[()

[()
.
.

238
35

0)9
6

36

37

38
39

' ^
h

{ {) {9)
Sia
neSiots

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


^Hparos

{)
[

(erovs)

{)

06cu[.

4
41

)('

? ^{

{)
K.ca

42

43
44

45 46

^ {)

TTju

{) {) {) 9 {) [ ^{) ^ {} \{) \\
)
. .

^{?) [{9)]
'Hp[a]KX[ei]as

^[.]

{{ {
. .

[)

y"

[()
.

{)[{') [.]{ {) [{
( )
[

[]{9)

{) ,

',

6()

{
note,

/ca[i

'^{

.[..]. \[
?)

{9)
{
)

47

{) []{)
[..][](

48 49

/ []9

)]^ )'/6[
[.]y

.The genitive

though perhaps not exclusively.


17. half the artabae

^' \ [:
14
(cf.

{
86.
I

{) {)
]..(

{)

.[.].

{).

){.[
[

823) is restored from 1. 16; cf. the position of occurs in a papyrus found last winter.
cf.

in

11.

20-1.

P.

Amh.

and

and
note.

are meant,

\ ',
note.
:

cf.

1.

18,

and P. Amh. 87. 21-2,

The meaning
11.

the measure analogy of

-(
2
,

were paid on one measure (the name of which is lost in ), which is new and which we have supposed to be
in

83.
Perhaps
It

{)
the

here is that 14-6), half on on the

1 8. ): this measure is also new. used in corn sent by boat to Alexandria.


;

{
1.

{),

i.e. the

measure generally

was no doubt smaller than

cf .

We the point of this remark (cf. 11. 28 and 32) is not quite clear. 20. might suppose that the writer was contrasting the present private payment with other official ones in the same account, but from 1. 28 it appears that all the items in Col. ii concern his private account, and to assume that he failed to keep official and private accounts distinct is not satisfactory. An alternative explanation is to suppose that refers not to the nature of the account but to the character of the corn ; cf. 11. 28-9, where an amount of corn which is apparently is converted into a slightly smaller sum and note ad loc. But since the payment in 1. 19, although is cannot refer to a private measure, and would be a curious expression to imply that the corn in question was not 21. i of 26 artabae is 8 art., a sum which the writer expresses by 8A art. 7 choenices.

, ,
({)

{).

741.

ACCOUNTS

239

is correct, the artaba of 42 choenices, the largest of the Egypt, and in the fourth century called the artaba The fact that it is the artaba (P. Brit. Mus. 125; cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 232-3). is important, for the official artaba in Roman of 42 choenices which is here times has been often supposed to be much smaller, though, as we pointed out (P. Tebt. But it would not be safe to infer from the present passage t'did.), on insufficient grounds. in Roman times always impHed an artaba alone that the mention of of 42 choenices. 223. These charges for donkey transport, with the (a new term, probably and (also new as an impost for meaning a bakhshish for the measuring the corn), all of which are supplementary of the main payment (cf. 11. 19, 25, which occur in the official receipts and 27), are probably included in the of this period; cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 41 1-2. this does not necessarily imply that the payment was for taxation 24. CTtToX(oyois) purposes; cf. P. Oxy. III. p. 251. 28-9. The sum of the foregoing items, 52^ artabae 2 choenices, is here converted whatever that precisely means. The into 49I: art. 8 choen. reduction is probably due to two causes at least, (i) the fact that in the preceding items artabae of different sizes were employed, and that some of them were smaller th^n the artaba meant in 1. 29, which very hkely contained 42 choenices (cf. 1. 21, note); (2) the cf. P. Tebt. I. were partially or even wholly not fact that these artabae ; 92. 9-11. has a horizontal stroke over it and seems to mean ' 3rd '. 30. The doubtful cannot be read. (cf. 1. 14, note) or at least a place name would be expected. 35. Qfw[: 41. Since we do not know which artaba was being employed, it is uncertain how the writer expressed i art. at the end of the line.
if

This implies,

his

arithmetic

different artabae

{)

in use in

)^
,
is
if

^)

{)

in

I.

44. 42.

The

'\(()

right in

1.

43,

is

the

mentioned

741.

List of Articles.
16-5

9*5 cm.

Second century.

A
a

list

of miscellaneous articles, containing, as such lists

commonly

do,

number of rare or unknown words.

6(9)
[po]y

'

EvyeviroTpiKdyvvov

,
,

[.]
ofy

9
apvaKis

5 ^

{)

, , ,

240

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


a,

[]
7
'

{)

{) , <> ({)
,
above the
line.

{
15.
:

7(

,
,

,
20
[[.]]

1 1,

Fap.

Pap.

Account of

articles at order of

Eugenetor in a double sack


i

nuts, 5 other small ones, i wicker crate, 6 pairs of women's ditto, 2 donkey straps

i double basket of sheepskin, i scraper, 8 pairs of men's . (?), i horse's ditto, i three-flagon jar, i bag (?)
. . .
.

of ... , 2 hold-alls containing 3 half-sets of glass, 4 2 bowls, I saucer.'

cups and

4 plates,

meaning a wicker basket. is probably for might be or perhaps aeXia, which however is still more difficult. It is hardly but neither is very suitable. or an adjective from a diminutive of was a late Attic form (cf. for which likely that the word is connected with Du Cange s.v.), though some article of attire is evidently meant. Mr. Smyly suggests a connexion with the Latin soh'ar, may mean 'bands' of some kind, the word being used for a medical 10. bandage by Oribasius. But the reading is extremely doubtful ; the second letter could be e and of the first only the smallest vestiges remain. cf. P. Brit. Mus. 191. 9. 12. For sincc it govcms a genitive plural, looks like a receptacle of some kind, 13. is found in Macarius, Apophth. Pair. 33 a sense in which In the preceding word the vestiges before the lacuna suit only a round letter There are two dots like a diaeresis above the t, such as , , or ; possibly but they are perhaps accidental. are cases or boxes, since they contained glass; but the word is 14.
5.
8.
:

4.

() ([)
t

to omit final

(cf.

1.

should perhaps be read, as the writer seems to have a tendency 15) and five baskets must be meant; but the neuter may refer to

-,

, ,

, .
,
apparently new.
15.
17.
1 8.

[].

19.

Reg. 2062

:.
The cups
:

Mr. Smyly compares Martial iv. 46. 15 septenaria synthesis. are divided into two kinds, but what these are is obscure.
cf.

probably the Latin patella. P. Brit. Mus. 191. 10 and a gloss cited by

Du Cange

from Cod.

742.

PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE

241

{g)

PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE.
742.

Letter of Antas.
26-5

13-7 cm.

B.C. 2.

A
like

letter

from Antas to Faustus, chiefly concerning reeds

many

other letters of this period in vulgar Greek.

'Avrds

[]
[6\
5

6\k\s

[] ^^ ?^ avTas
rfj

[\

. ^

(),

written

e/y

.
k[.
. .

napaSos

[,]
[
1

0[']?

?' ]
Se tlvl

kdv

,^

(^) [].
5
(eroi/y)

. []

39
ifie

Svvtj
.

^ ]9.
.
)

On

the verso

[.....
'

.]eTVV

e/y

.
the reeds
all

Antas

to Faustus,

many

greetings.

Take over from Pothus

together,

and send me word how many bundles you have received, and put them in a safe place Deliver a certain number of them in order that we may take them on the journey up. to one of our friends in order that a friend may deliver them to me safely, and if you can I have bought from (Pothus?) the 1000 bundles for give your attention to it
. .
. . . .

15 drachmae. Don't forget. To Faustus ... at Nekle.'

Good-bye.

The

28th year of Caesar, Pauni

i.

(Addressed)

242

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


743.

Letter to a Friend.
25 X
17-7 cm.
B.C. 2.

A
part
is

letter in

two columns, of which the first is much broken. The greater concerned with the explanation of the writer's reasons for sending
he recommends to his
friend's

Damas,

whom

good

offices.

Col.

i.

Parts of 16
17
]

lines.

8i

yap
ere

avayvovvaL,

Col.
i

ii.

Koi

[]9

20
iyofiiiy)

yap yap
25

vos )(^a\K0V9

^ ^^) ^
eyo)

9 [] . 9
y[e]via6aL

aXAoyy

ef^oj/

iarovs

"EXe-

6\[],
e/y

'AXc^avSpeiav

vpi-

5<5(9).

iyo)
et?

^
nepi

30

kv ois

yeviaOai
35

{)

?
a>s

. .
iv

VTT[ep)

\\{)

^.

744.
8\

\ ^ 4 << ,
\, []{)
20. * of

PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE
yap

,?
^ COrr.

kav diXj]^

8e

yeyovev

{) ^
.
[eTOVs)

243

()[.]
22.
1.

vyiiaivrjs).

)
;

tovs

Kaiaapos
43

^
1

7rai're(s).

?.

23 .

[].

7ravra(r).

wish you and the ... of Caesar to read this (?), for although I (?) have had trouble I am quite upset at with others you must assist him for the sake of our friendship. Helenos' loss of the money ; for when Damas arrived at Alexandria we came to Epaphroditus, and it was discovered that he had neither received nor paid anything. I wish you therefore to know this that I had given him orders to go to Takona for the rents, and now I have dispatched him to collect them all and have entrusted to him Whatever service he may require from you, stand by him, the care of the whole matter. Owing to my worries I was unable as he will agree in everything for you just as for me. Write to me yourself about to meet Apollonius the Libyan in order to inform him of this. anything you want, and I will do it without hesitation for Damas has agreed in everything Take care of with me. It is well for him to come quickly, for he will instruct you. Look after all your household. yourself so that you may remain in good health.
' .
. .

Good-bye.
18.
19.

The

29th year of Caesar, Phaophi


like
first
is

6.'

Some word

probably to be supplied
is difficult

at the

whether

singular or third plural

34.

voo\oy{ofv).

beginning. would be expected.

cf P. Tcbt. 21.

6, P. Par. 42. 7.

744.

Letter of Ilarion.
25

14-7 cm.

3.c. I.

from a man who had gone to Alexandria, addressed to his sister doubt his wife), and to two other women, regarding certain domestic (who was no
letter

matters.

curious injunction occurs in

'\{]

.
peiv

,
8pe(C)a

} ?
kv

{)'

^? . ^{)
exi

11.

9-10.

^-

kv

kav

'-

244

^^^ OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

{)
10

kav

^^ .
kav

9 ;
]^.
2.
1.

]9
kav
Se

kav

9,

'.

knt-

^-

kmXderj^'

kp
(eTOVs)

.
above the
line.

15

On

the verso

many greetings, and to my dear Berous and Apollonarion. even now at Alexandria ; and do not worry if they come back altogether (?), but I remain at Alexandria. I urge and entreat you to be careful of the If (Apollonarion ?) bears child, and if I receive a present soon I will send it up to you. You told Aphrodisias " Don't offspring, if it is a male let it be, if a female expose it. forget me." How can I forget you? I urge you therefore not to worry. The 29th year of Caesar, Pauni 23. (Addressed.) Deliver from Ilarion to Alis.'
*

.
"AXiTL

.
8.
1.

II. Se

Ilarion to Alis his sister,


that I

Know

am

still

If the second person rUr]: is right, this 8-10. eav tkt]s is very obscure. would be most extrapassage must refer to the exposure of a female infant. But we is altered to If ordinary, apart from the difficulty of constructing but might suppose that an animal was the subject and divide (cf. 1. 2) conceals is not a likely name for an animal. Perhaps for the use of the second person cf. e.g. 295. 7.
;

The

. [) ^/ ' ^
About
a.d.
i.

745.

Letter to Gaius Rustius.


ii'i

18.8 cm.

Conclusion of a

letter, chiefly

concerned with

money

matters.

The

writer
;

had evidently been


rather obscure.

in financial dififilculties,

but the loss of the beginning of the letter


addressee has a

and was afraid of their recurrence makes the transactions under discussion
name.

Roman

^ [ []\ ' {^)


]'&
Se

745.

PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE
[7re]uT

]6^

?
5

9. '
On

the verso

, ^() ? ^[] ^^? .'. , ^ ^ . [] '


,
.

e^,

8)([ '
[
.

^
SiJKa
.

245

[]
[.

]
aVco-

']v[.]

[.

.]

-?

ae

'^^

6[].

6.

of

corr.

from .

from my sister 65 jars of wine and 10 drachmae, and you bought the wine at 6 drachmae, for which you drew me up a bond through Artemas that the said Antas would make the repayment because you had ... as you promised through the politarch and we go bankrupt again Theophilus, in order that everything may not be completely You don't know how he treated me at Oxyrhynchus (?), not like without any necessity. I ask you therefore not to do a man who had paid but like a defrauder and a debtor. I do not want to have any but I know that you will do everything well. otherwise Salute all your household, and take care of your dispute with you, as you are my friend. .' health. Good-bye. (Addressed) To Gains Rustius
' . . .
.

: 88
:

are known at Thessalonica from Acts xvii. 6 and C. I. G. 4. 1967, but the title is new in Egyptian papyri. is most likely a perfect participle ; the letter before The mutilated word before

seems
6.

to

be

,,

or

.
a Village
is

ev

knowu

in

the

Fayum

but

not in

the

Oxyrhynchite nome, and it is difficult to believe that the metropolis is not here meant, The sentence oldas . noKis is the normal form. or though may be interrogative.
.

246

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

746.

Letter of Recommendation.
232 X 135
cm.
A.D. 16.

letter

from

Theon

to his

brother Heraclides, a basilicogrammateus,

introducing the bearer, Hermophilus.


of a brother

of 292, a similar letter of recommendation addressed to the dioecetes on behalf

^ ^
named

Theon

is

perhaps the same as the writer

Heraclides.

Cf. also 787.

yaipeiv

()

7[]9

^ .
.]/
.

[^](tt[i]

.[..] [.

0[.]/

[]

[']^,

.
[eu

] ^.
(1>[]

'^

vyiaivrjs.

(eTOVs)

On

the verso

^ {)
letters

. ^

'

. ^
kdv

/^^)

(^) {[).
. .

Theon to Heraclides his brother, many greetings and wishes for good health. Hermophilus the bearer of this letter is (the friend or relative) of erius, and asked me to write to you. Hermophilus declares that he has business at Kerkemounis. Please therefore further him in this matter, as is just. For the rest take care of yourself that you may remain in good health. Good-bye. The 3rd year of Tiberius Caesar Augustus, Phaophi 3. (Addressed) To Heraclides, basilicogrammateus of the Oxyrhynchite and
'

Cynopolite nomes.'

][ are on a separate fragment, the position of which is doubtful. to be an ellipse of after though the fact that a basilicogrammateus should have more than one nome under his jurisdiction is remarkable.
4.

The

13.

There seems

{),

747.

PRIVATE CORRESPONDENCE
747.

247

Invitation to a Feast.
5-1

7-3 c^

Late second or third century.

An

invitation to a feast given

by a cavalry

officer

cf.

110 and 523.

av
Sais

<5

{88){
Kakav-

ds

^evi-

rfj

&p{as)

.
V.

2.

vr of eavTov corr. from

'

The

Calends decurion invites you to his party on the sixth day before the

at eight

o'clock.'

V.
(The

COLLATIONS OF HOMERIC FRAGMENTS


//. i-xii

collations of

and the Odyssey are with the text of Ludwich, those


xiii-xxiv with that of
{a)

of

//.

La

Roche.)

748.

66.6
108

cm.
o]uS[e]

Ends

marks.

good size. iO'3 X 10 cm. Ends of i. 160-176 from the bottom of a column. Second 749. century, written in heavy round uncials. ^ e/xe^je?. d^ eJKcAeue. 750. 8 X 6'3 cm. Parts of ii. 57-73. 62 Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. 19-6 X 9-2 cm. Part of a column containing iii. 30-55, with numerous stops 751. and accents, and several corrections (probably by a second hand). '3, vios. crossed out. 47 ayeipa[s corrected above an 40 ]9. First of corr. from of above the line. 50 from eyeipei[y. 48 ]|09. s of 6? above the line. 54 ^^ o^ 51 ^3 [[ above / crossed out. Late second or third century, written in a neat uncial hand of the oval type. 752. 11x8 cm. Beginnings of iv. 87-96, with numerous stops, breathings and a\v accents. a second hand seems to have 93 The first hand had above corrected and has added Third century, written in sloping
in sloping oval uncials of

.
of

Iliad.

i.

107-116, with occasional stops and elision1

13

\{\\]\<.

Third century, written

\\.

.
64
2-5

17

oval uncials.

753.

192

cm.
is

On

the recto part of a second or third century account.


iv.

On
382

the verso parts of

accents.

369
t6[e

omitted, as in A.

364-398, with numerous stops, breathings and cn[aia. 381 [[.]]^' 378
i]b[e (?).

corr. to

387
7

^/]
e

[.

of

above the

line.

Third

century, written in sloping oval uncials.

754. S'5 X a
^^^
755.

{). ^[.
19 X 6 cm.

cm.

On

the recto ends of

lines of a

document mentioning
iv.

First century.

On

the verso a few letters from

532-^^g.

First century, written in a good-sized irregular uncial hand.

On

the recto part of a

document

in

a cursive hand of the

early part of the third century.

On

the verso a few letters from the ends

V.

COLLATIONS OF HOMERIC FRAGMENTS

249

of

V.

breathings, and

130-173, forming a complete column, with numerous stops, accents, marks of elision and quantity (all probably added later).
t

added by a second hand. of 134 e]^[[e]]ix^i?. 151 e^eva]pL$v. 153 Third century, written in an upright hand of the oval type. 756. 6-8 X 8-2 cm. Fragment of the bottom of a leaf from a book, containing on the recto the ends of v. 324-334, and on the verso parts of 379-390,
with elision-marks.

332 Kvpaveova-ai. 382 rerjAart. 384 388 of v9 added above the line (?). 390 tj of which is crossed through, having been also corrected.
fourth century, written in a semi-uncial hand.
4-3

.
.
. .

^^[
of

corn
a,

above

Late third or

757

X 3 cm.
uncials.

Parts of

v.

578-586.

582 ey .

First century, written in

round

758.

9*6

1 1 -4

cm.
587 cm.

v.

583-596, the lines being nearly complete, from the top

of a column, with stops, breathings, accents and elision-marks.

586

6e

^.
A
few

588

ireaov ev.

583 tAe0[ay]ra. Late second or third

century, written in a neat uncial hand of the oval type.

759.

127 X

2-9

letters

from the ends of

v.

662-682, from the end

of a column, with stops (high and low point) and accents.

[$,

confirming the conjecture of Brandreth.

667 Third century, written

]9
in

a neat upright uncial hand of the oval type. 760. Fr. () 7-3 X 4-9 cm. Two fragments, the first containing a few letters from the beginnings of v. 715-718, the second parts of 720-729. 724 e of above the line. First century, written in round upright uncials. 761. 21 XII cm. On the recto part of an effaced document. On the verso vi. 147 and 148, and, after a lacuna which may have contained 2 lines, parts of 11. 147 and 149 and another line, the whole being a writing
exercise.

148
8-5

^.
On
3

Late

first

century

B.C., written in

a large semi-

uncial hand.

762.
in

19-8

cm.

the recto ends of lines of a

list

of persons, written

a cursive hand in the late second or early third century. the latter parts of vii. 1-35, forming a complete column. 5

bvvTo.

30

].
of

omitted.

Third century, written

in small upright

.
On

the verso

i6

uncials.

763.

24-4 X 10 cm.

latter portions of vii.

with stops, breathings and accents. hand. 73 yj t of

iia Final

(a

. 4
new reading;
cf.

Part of a leaf from a book, containing on the recto the

68-101, and on the verso the earlier portions of 69-134, added by a second 72 y of

added above the line by a second hand. re added above the line by a second hand,
in

Vindob.

61).

113

?.

250
133
t

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


of
oiKvpodii

added above the

line

by a second hand.

Third century,

written in good-sized oval uncials.

A few letters from the beginnings of viii. 109-122, with and accents. Third century, written in oval uncials. 765. 8-1 X 5-4 cm. Ends of ix. 320-333, with stops, breathings and accents (oxytones having a grave accent on the final syllable). 323 First of added above the line. 324 bi re. 325 of tavov above crossed Third century, written in oval uncials. out. few letters from the ends of x. 542-547, from the bottom 5-8 X 5-8 cm. 766. Third century, written in sloping of a column, with occasional accents.
764.
9-6

2-8

cm.

stops, breathings

oval uncials.

6-6x4.3 cm. A few letters from the ends of xi. 555-561, with stops. Second century, written in good-sized round uncials. 768. 14x12-9 cm. Fragment from the top of a column, containing parts of
767.
xi.

736-764.

[a]vTos.

^56

'[(].

739

{].

740

y57

[].

][^^ [.]ya[]b[]v.
'J5^

Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. Two fragments containing a few letters from 769. Fr. (a) 4-5x3-1 cm. xiii. 308-317 and 342-347, with accents. k.[ 316 omitted. 344 written in a neat uncial with V above . Late second or third century, hand of the oval type. few letters from the ends of xiii. 372-377 and the 770. 4-7 X 7-9 cm. beginnings of 405-413, with stops, breathings and accents. 372 referring to the and below it 374 In the margin

?. . .
75 y55 y6o

variants

and
this

between
771.

and

1.

. .
[(
;

cf.

Schol.

[, ^
'

].

Xr]vohoTos

4^0 ^^ the margin

411

is

critical sign

shaped like

e).

Second century,

written in round upright uncials.

14 X 7'8 cm.

On

the recto beginnings of xv. 736-746, with occasional

740 above e and o. 744 t of the end a coronis and the title
early third century, written in
type.

breathings and accents.

[.
added

742
later

at

and

first

of
?).

(by a second hand

in large letters

[?

At

Late second or

handsome good-sized

uncials of the oval

On

the verso 12 nearly complete lines

of a money-account in

third century cursive.

772.

IO-2

361
the
in

363 of atBepL corr. from 371 a rather small uncial hand.


line.

][.

X 5-9 cm.

Ends of

.
xvii.

353-373, with stops, breathings and accents. added above of 369 Final
e.

Second or third century, written

V.

COLLATIONS OF HOMERIC FRAGMENTS


()
Odyssey.

251

773.

roll 24-4 cm. Seven fragments from four columns of a MS. containing a few letters from 304-312, SS9-357 (top of a column), ends of 362-374 (top of a column), and parts of 386-410 (a whole column), with stops (high and middle point) and occasional accents. 341 above

Height of
ii,

of

369 of ovhe corr. 372 (end of the line) 407 omitted. 408 e of Oeivt added above Second century, written in very large heavy uncials (cf. 661), the letters measuring 5 mm. in height. 774. 4-5 X 7-5 cm. Parts of iii. 226-231. 227 ]^?, the e being added by a second hand above crossed through. 228 Oeos [, the s being corrected from (?). Third century, written in good-sized sloping oval uncials.

.lo. 368 401 [ei]5o/>tei;T][[i;]]. the line by a second hand.

eXovJTis is ^,[.

or

];.

][?.

iv. 388-400 from the bottom of a column, with and accents. of above crossed 396 through. 399 omitted. Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. few letters from iv. 520-529 from the bottom of a 776. 6-2 X 2-4 cm. column, with occasional accents. First or early second century, written in round uncials. 777 12-2 X 88 cm. Part of the lower portion of a leaf of a book, containing on the recto the beginnings of v. 7-17 and on the verso the ends of 34-44, with stops, breathings and accents. Fourth century, written in good-sized sloping oval -uncials, in brown ink. 778. 20-6 X 72 cm. On the recto a nearly complete column containing X. 26-50, with stops (high, middle and low point). of 27 Second apalv added above the line similarly final of in 29, and in 32. 31 7/36. 38 ^6 42 34 re. Late second or third century, written in handsome round upright uncials. On the verso parts of the last 7 lines of a letter in a cursive hand

775.

8-4x4 I cm.

Parts of

occasional breathings

^.
;

. / ^.
t

of the late third century.

cm. x. 134-130 from the top of a column, the lines being nearly complete, with breathings and accents. Late second or third century, written in a clear cursive hand. few letters from the ends of xi. 471-493, and the 780. 7785 cm. earlier portions of 523-545, from the bottoms of columns, with stops and

779

6-2

96

with (in a second hand) above above crossed out. 544 545 539 added by a second hand. Second century (?), written in with e above an uncial hand of the oval type and archaic appearance, being formed H.
occasional accents.

533
of

'
;

252
781.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


6x3'8 cm.
Fragment of a
leaf

from a book, containing on the recto

parts of xvi. 243-356, and on the verso the ends of 288-301, with stops,
of /) corr. 293 6e 295 Third century, written in rather small sloping oval uncials. 782. ']$ X ^'^ cm. Fragment of the bottom of a leaf of a book containing on the verso parts of xvii. 137-148, and on the recto ends of 182-193, with stops and accents (in lighter ink). Third century, written in 187

breathings and accents (in Hghter ink).

rather small sloping oval uncials.

783.

11-7x4.4 cm.
century
B.

Ends of

xvii.

410-428, with stops.

417

Late

first

c, written in good-sized irregular uncials.

VI.

DESCRIPTIONS OF MISCELLANEOUS

DOCUMENTS
784.

){
drachmae),

Fourteen fragments of a document containing on both sides several verso columns, the recto consisting for the most part of lists of persons, the (i. e. which mentions of a private account (continued on the recto), copper (i.e.

A conversion of
cf.

First century B. C. ^). undertaking by a surety to produce a certain individual 785. 14-7 X 9 cm. who had been committed to his charge cf. 259. After the first 5 lines, ^the which seem to have contained the address but are much broken,

{'^ , ) {)
P. Tebt.
I.

[]
p.

{-)

Up&v ky Movxecu(s)

{) {)
,

{)

lyQvliov

' ^
,
is

/
6,

and payments^ for

silver into
-rraTpois)

'

copper drachmae occurs, (a ratio of 337^: J, which

{) {) (unusually low;

'-5>.

580

An

papyrus concludes

all.

6{) '[]4
eKTOS U[)0U

'Hpa/cXeous

^s '$.

About

. D.

12 lines in

written by Aristion 786. 43 8'4 cm. Conclusion of a census-return on oath, the and Didymus on Tubi 30 of the third year of Hadrian (A. D. 119),
(cf. 480. 15) portion preserved corresponding to 480. 7 sqq. -npoyey Below the signatures in two different hands is apparently written dy^y.

are

official

Aauyp(a</)ots) and complete except the first. 30 lines, which are of recommendation 787. 19-9 X 13-3 cm. Concluding part of a letter
ai(ro's),

{) {)
dockets

Xaoyp{a(poLs)

'{')

{{9) {.
6
(cf.

()

^{) \{^

The

.
h

first

5 lines are
inep

^ . ( ;
)
9

746).

oh kav

[] ^

&^
16).

[[]]

ds

[]

Troujaeis

Dated

in the

second year of Tiberius,

Pharmouthi 11 (A.D.
1

lines.

discussed by Hnltsch of Ptolemaic copper coinage have recently been the adopt on observe that owmg to\f^^"^-f' Sachs Ges d. Whs., 1903. We regret to betcompelled to the evrdence of he exploded' theoLs based 1>n demotic, and the failure to ^PFeciate RfvilSut's long our App. u to that volume, the I ratio Tebtunis papyri vvith the arguments brought against the 120 us a step backwards rather than forwards. article sems to

The problems

Kmisl

254
788.
1

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


17 X 10 cm.
(a ratio of

On
485
:

account in copper drachmae.

both recto and verso parts of two columns of a private conversion of silver into copper

i) occurs

,
In Col.
i

',

of the recto the

first

^
A
;

among
('

the other items are


[.

anchovy ')

Early

() (

first

century

. C.

8 lines are complete, the rest being imperfect

throughout.

789.

4{) ' () {) ' [)


9-7

X 13 cm.

Part of a

letter.

Lines 2-9

iv
ib

iTTiaroKeibiov

ds

(5)
avrbs

[{\
i

(eTovs)

ae

laas

Aiovv(aios)

The

tenth year probably refers

to Tiberius or Claudius.

11 lines.
official letter

790.

87 X

12-8

cm.

Beginnings of 8 lines of an

from Dionysius
fibres.

to Ptolemaeus enclosing a

copy of another
B. c.

letter,

are mentioned.

Late second century

the verso beginnings of 6

791.

eis

4, (6)
14-7x6 cm.
I.

more lines in Letter from Didymus


TTepl

Written across the a different hand.

On
About
wheat

epiW

Addressed on the verso


lost.

A. D.

Incomplete, the end being

() () ^.
12
lines.

to his brother Apollonius, beginning

792.

8-4

X 27-2 cm.

On

the recto an incomplete account of

payments

of

to various persons, containing 19 lines.

On

the verso another practically

complete account of receipts and payments, mentioning

6(
recto
is

. ,
)

()

'77({)

13 across the fibres, that on the verso along them.


lines.

^ .

perhaps means

XiTo[vj}yo(is)
. .

,
)

eis

The

writing on the

First century B. c.
et? to

793.

24 X 11-5 cm. various persons


21-2 X 15-6 cm.

Acknowledgement of payments

{5}

of wheat

by
seventh

of other persons.

Dated

in the

year of Domitian, Caesarius 16

(a. D. 88).

Nearly complete.

18 lines.
i-^g

794.

Conclusion of a contract for the sale of

catoecic land, with the signatures,

the same formula as 504.


called
(?)

or

land vas

irepl

,
e/c

arourae of

which are nearly complete, and following The seller was Asclepiades, the buyer a woman and the price 500 drachmae of silver. The {sic). Written in the fifth
'^6 lines.

year of Domitian

(a. d. 85-6).

795.

Fr. {a) 4-5

13-3 cm.

Two

fragments of a marriage-contract dated in

the reign of Domitian (a.D. 81-96). wife (?) Sarapous. Line 4 yja/xerV

The husband

5>[

(cf.

496.

6,

note),

and lower down


fibres.

] [\
is

called Heraclides, the

njs

{9

occurs.

Written across the

Parts of 12 lines in

all.

VJ.

DESCRIPTIONS OF MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS

255

796

Parts of 7 lines from the beginning of a marriage-contract 3 X 8'3 cm. written in the reign of Trajan (a. D. 98-117), mentioning iv

//
77(
cf.

^eCyos

(?).

For

Written across the fibres. 797. 5-5 X 10 cm. On the recto an entry concerning the measurement of the
land of Thotsutaios,

'{

{)
The

te

(erovs) irepl

$
is

('bracelet')

cf.

114.

ii.

" ()
. .
.

rrJL

For
from the

Tebt .

2 29

reign

that of Cleopatra III and


2 lines

Ptolemy Alexander (b. c. 103-2). 4 lines. On the verso beginning of a document mentioning Nf^e'pa ttjs 798. 7*8 X 9-2 cm. Conclusion of a letter, ending
Ttpos

{){$).

(
aiiobovvai,

Epiphanes (b. c. 183). 8 lines. 799 30-5 X 25 cm. One complete and one incomplete column of an account L of sums owed and interest upon them, beginning iv Then follows a list of names and xeipo"(? 1. h amounts, e.g. Tavpeivov The second column is also concerned with loans els occurs.

third year probably refers to

)
(

.. . \ {^} . ^ (/) () ? ^ () .
'
iirl

(Itous)

About A. D. I. 34 lines. 800. 18-7 X 12-5 cm. Beginnings of 19


a letter of Valerius Athenodorus.
as
is

^ ^

The twenty-

Written about D. 153 801. 922'3 cm. Fragment of a notification addressed to Euangelius also called Sarapion, strategus, by Diogenes, enclosing an authorization to the strategus from the archidicastes in answer to a petition by Diogenes. Cf. 485 and 719. In the upper margin is a short note from the strategus (cf. B. G. U. 578. i) dated in the second year of Gains Pescennius Niger
(a. D. 193).

( ^ \ , 9^5 ^ *[
indicated

lines of an official document enclosing Lines 4-10 (which begin a new section,

by

the size of the initial letter)


[,

{) (6)/;
[,

[,

^
ci?

(erei)

r[ov

[,
[.

.,

The

letter

Thoth 18 (probably of the same year), ^j lines, of which the ends are lost. 802. 7x7 cm. Parts of 1 1 lines from the beginning of a contract, one of the parties being called Dated in the i[.]th year of Ptolemy
(Alexander the god) Philometor and Berenice,
verso a docket.
i.e.

.
of the

archidicastes

to

the strategus

is

dated

B.C. 101-95.

On

the

803.

15 X 5 cm.

Fragment of an

official letter

or petition, containing 3

com-

256

^
plete

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


lines,

and 3 incomplete

79 []'
[

with traces of a preceding column.


iTOs els

(^) ' :] []

tovs
.

4
Lines 3-5
first

Late

century

. c. On
804.
Width

the verso parts of two columns of an account.


9-9

cm.

Horoscope dated
irepl

gustus, Phaophi 5
in Libra, the

()

in

the twenty-seventh year of


(Oct. 3
(?)

rrjs

4{)
in

A. D. 4).

AuThe sun was

moon

in Pisces, setting,

Saturn

Taurus, Jupiter in Cancer, Mars in

Virgo.

After the astro'? nomical details the papyrus concludes exet Kivbvvovs' "Apeois. Incomplete, being broken in the middle, i^ lines in all.
66

Taurus was

and Aquarius at the nadir.

805.

7'6 cm.

Conclusion of a letter written on Epeiph 30 of the

year of Augustus
TOts

ipovoLs

7[\'?

[] TTVKvOTcpov.

{).
6-8

(^).

Trjs

(b. C. 35).

?( .
Lines 3 sqq.
tovs

()
fifth

'

\ 5

'

tovs

[e]/xoi),

iv 6e

5e

IV

806.

159 ^ 35*4 cm. Account, money for various purposes in

Among
31 lines.

the items are iepivai QorjpLos

^
g lines.
in

two columns, of expenditure of copper

the tenth year (of Augustus,

',

pa^is
official list

, () .
i.

e. B. C.

31-0).
els

Complete.

807
to

2
has

cm.

Fragment of an

of sheep and goats belonging

different
ii

persons at a village.

Col.

Col.
aiyes

,
aiye?

aiy(s)

Trjs , The sheep which were as contrasted with those that were private property seem to have been subject to a special impost payable nominally to Arsinoe (i. e. Arsinoe Philadelphus probably), but really of course to the State cf the in the Revenue

() .

. /

'5 ()

'
i
;

contains

the ends of 5 lines.

/>5 ,&

'
;

{),

Papyrus.

808.
cf.

practically complete,

fragments.

(erei)

{^) ^* 6{) () () ' ^) () {) [) () () '] {) () (() ] [) . ^. 4{) {)


About
A, D.
i.

On

the verso part of an account.

Height ^6 cm. 274 and P. Oxy.

list

of abstracts

of contracts for loan


at the top
p/xe,

p. 176.

One column, numbered

and there are parts of another


entry
is

The

first

[k]v

tto'Acws

is

in

three

separate

"Ap-nakos

''ipy[os

as

iv

, 7'(5) []{)

(Second hand)

(hovs),

(?).

'

VI.

DESCRIPTIONS OF MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS


hand) has
]
.

A marginal note (probably by the second


(Irous).

and follow the same formula with similar


after

(which is once written 77^erta(rai)), is uniformly that in which the contract was drawn up. dios is mentioned, and the papyrus was probably written in the reign of Nero (A. D. 54-68). 43 lines in Col. i, besides the marginal notes. 809. 167 64 cm. Ends of 33 lines from the beginning of a contract drawn

{\

The

other entries refer to loans iv

, {) {)
7(
)

257

or ev T^et,

later additions.

The month

up before the agoranomi for the sale (?) of a female slave called Dated in the reign of Trajan (a.d. 98-117), 810. 14-6 X 10 cm. Proposal addressed to Claudia Ptolema by Dioscorus for the lease of 3 arourae of near Sinaru in the KXijpos of Xenon for the nineteenth year of Hadrian (a.d. 134-5). The land, being L h (1. -), was to be irrigated by the lessee at his own expense and cultivated et?

{4

)
(. .
.,

?.

in

drachmae, the being paid by the lessor. Cf. 730, the formula of which is almost identical. Nearly complete, but broken at the bottom. Title on the verso. 37 lines.
at the total rent of 130

-)
5) Trem-

811.

77 X 9-4 cm.

lines

from the beginning of a

.
812.
[].'

Ant[as

?]

beginning

[\\ ]

letter

from TIeWts to

ds (cf. 787), Address on the verso. About A.D. i. IO-3 X 8-3 cm. Fragment of a letter containing
.
.

et

[]
(1.

(1.

a postscript
line)

[,

(I.

6) piKapis
[.

above the

[>

(1

7)

"^
8 lines.

Dated

in the twenty-fifth

year of Augustus,

Athur
813.

(B.C. 5).

15x117
31-5

cm.

a cargo of barley

Conclusion of a letter in which the writer requests that may be sent to him. About a.d. i. 7 lines.

814.

XI 1-6 cm.
.

Fragment of an account
.

Written in the fourth year (probably of Tiberius, i.e. A.D. 17-8). 15 incomplete lines in Col. ii. 815. 37-9 XI 1-3 cm. Fragment of an account containing names and sums of money arranged under different dates, the beginnings of lines being lost. The proper name (dative) occurs. About a.d. i. 19 lines.
.

[
fifth

entries are
.

^
in

two columns.

Among

the

Eiepye-

816.

Fr. {a) 14-3 13.1 cm. Three fragments of an account containing names and sums of money. ]? /cat occurs. 10 incomplete lines in Fr. {a). On the verso part of another account mentioning the twenty^

'

year (of Augustus,

i.e.

B.C. 6-^).

258
817

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


5 nearly complete lines from the top of a column containing 9*7 X 20 cm. a list of names and sums of money, a larger and a smaller, the second being probably interest, e. g. ] ( ) . The twenty-first year (of Augustus, i.e. B.C. 10-9) is men.

(/)

^49

()
Tiivre,

tioned.

On

the verso part of another account.

818-

6-8

X 9 cm.

Ends

of the

first 7

lines of

a contract dated in the thirty-

fourth year of Augustus (a.d. 4-5), written in a semi-uncial hand.

819.

X IO-6 cm. ending


8-6
KOpt(a?) L

bpa{v)

''{] -^{).
x{oas)

Conclusion of a letter concerning the sale of wine or


ai hi

oil,

ba[s)
lines.

About

A.D.

820.

lo-a

17-9 cm.

End

of a letter containing the date (twenty-seventh year


B.C. 3)

of Augustus, Tubi
directions.

i[.], i.e.

and a postscript of

7 lines,

giving various

821.

1-5
I.

6-2

cm.

Ends

of the

first

9 lines of a letter to a daughter.

About

A.D.

822.

5-4x13 cm.
24x10-3 cm.
Cf.

Beginning of a

letter

from Lysimachus to his brother.

eS TTpaaaetv takes the place

823.

4[?
(b. C. 6).

About A.D. i. 4 lines. Fragment of the conclusion of a lease of land near Dated in the twenty-fifth year of Augustus, Phaophi 277.
of xaipetv.
13 incomplete lines.

Written on the verso, the recto being blank.

824. 4 X 2-5 cm. Fragment containing parts of the first 10 lines of a contract dated in the sole reign of Ptolemy (Alexander the god) Philometor
(b. C.

101-88).

825.

7-8

^<^
7[]

15-9 cm.

Beginning of an account of which the heading


TOis

avTOLS

?
On
first

M[e]ft0[e]trou.
e

^^
[{^^}
.
. .

TrpaKTopeias

7[] \[]
is

a second column are preserved, containing a

list

of entries each

The beginnings of lines of commencing


different

with

see 712. introd.

parts of the

826.

,
official,
.

{).

the importance of this papyrus for the


6 lines of a

Second century. On the verso in a document mentioning the

perhaps the draft of a declaration.

(^ hand
(?)

9'5Xii-9 cm.

XapiT

{)
[

[]
(
)

Fragment of the conclusion of a notice sent apparently an announcement of a death. Lines i sqq.
yeptos

[ ]
?

erois

v]

. ^
(
/3/39 ...
list

to

[)

[]

some

. D. 3

9 unes.
A. d.

On
i.

the verso the

beginning of an account.

827.

135 X

6-8

cm.

Part of a

of names.

About

18 lines.

VI.

DESCRIPTIONS OF MISCELLANEOUS DOCUMENTS


5-8x10 cm.
Early
first

259

828.

Parts of 6 lines of a petition concerning the measurements

of a piece of land.

century

B. C.

On

the verso parts of 6

much

effaced lines of another document.

829.

13-3

9-3

cm.

Part of a letter from

to his sister.

About

A. D. i.

13 lines.

830.

15-3

documents.
i.e.

X 5-6 cm. End of 17 lines of an official letter, enclosing other Phaophi 28 of the twenty-first year (of Philometor probably,
mentioned.

B.C. 155) is

Written across the

fibres.

On

the verso part of

line.

831.
[.

Fr.
. . .

()
iv]

Soter

832.

Ptolemy and the date therefore B.C. i ii-o. 8 lines. 14x21-3 cm. Parts of two columns of a taxing-list of some kind.
sovereign
is

() ^ '[
6

IX 9-2 cm.

Two

fragments of a contract beginning trovs

7ro(Aet) rrjs

II,

Col.

ii

mentioned in Col. i. In the blank space between the columns a second hand has written ZeC and a third the beginning of an acknowledgement of a payment at the Serapeum of Oxyrhynchus. On the verso traces of two other documents. 11-8x16 cm. Beginning of an official report concerning 833.
.

/[.]

. (
)

{,
begins
.

7r(ay?)

The

fifteenth

,
?7/3[().

6] [9
The

.]
,

....

TecSros

year of Augustus

(B.C. 16-5) is

Lines

1-7

834.

cm. Conclusion of a letter dated in the twenty-sixth year of Augustus, Mesore (B.C. 4), mentioning a voyage els 6 lines. 835. 19-8 X 12-8 cm. An offisr to purchase confiscated land at Pela, addressed to Gaius Sep[p]ius Rufus cf. 721, which has the same formula. The purchase price, which was to be paid kv was not less than 100 drachmae. The earlier portion is much mutilated. For the conclusion see 721. 14-5, note. About A.D. 13.
4' 5

$' [
.

.[.

.]

[)' [] ', ()[][()] () ^() { ()


eis
)

Lb\

[\

...

Cf.

Tebt.

pp. 226-7.

About A.D.

9*8

"^.

[:,
14
lines.

() [][ '
(-}_.
I.

8 lines.

836.

^^ ^
[r^s

13-5

12-8 cm.

:-] and
Tas

Loan

(^}

of 32 artabae

from Theoxenus to two


Lines 6 sqq.

a third person.

nohav
qbokov

6e ol

toIs

Ibiois

[]

...

For

S 2

26

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


cf.

740.

17, note,

and
(B.C.

for
I.

the formula

cf.

the late
;

the 66-^) or Augustus (B.C. 15-4). Nearly complete, but broken at the beginning. 30 lines. The papyrus
23.

Ptolemaic loans from Gebelen, e.g. P. Grenf.

First century B.C.

sixteenth year refers to

Neos Dionysus
two

has been

gummed on

to

similar documents, of which parts of a few

lines are preserved.

837.
at

86 X 15-5 cm. Kerkemounis


first

Will of Apollos daughter of Paesis, leaving her property


jointly to

Didymus son

of Dio'genes], probably a son

by her

marriage, and to the offspring of her present marriage with

Apollos son of Ophelas, with provisions for the a daughter and for the guardianship of the children.
year of Hadrian
lines,

and Dated

of
in

the second
fibres.

(a. D.

17-8).

Cf.

489-95.

Written across the

30

of which only the beginnings are preserved.

838.
to

30-5

X 9-5 cm. Lease of land at the two persons, with the signature of the

from Diogenes
lessor.

-.
4
is

of e.g. 499.

The

conclusion

is

r^?

^^

The formula

follows that

Aioyivovs.

Dated

in the twenty-first

year of Hadrian, Thoth (a.d. 136).

52 lines. 839. ^75 X 17-1 cm. Letter from Eutychides to his mother, the earlier part describing an accident to a boat. Lines 6 sqq.

Incomplete.

KeKtvbvvVK(as.

4$

mentioned, apparently as the bearer of the


26
lines.

( .
Early

letter.

first

century A. D.

Incomplete.

APPENDIX

Addenda and Corrigenda to Oxyrhynchus Papyri and Fayum Towns and their Papyri^

Part II

For the literature connected with these volumes see the successive bibliographies of papyri by Wilcken in the Archiv, and by de Ricci in the Revue des e'tudes grecques. After an examination of the articles in question and a comparison with the papyri, we give here a list of those suggestions which both affect our transcriptions of the texts and are satisfactory. Proposed alterations which are unsuitable, or are based upon alternatives mentioned in our notes, or in the case of literary texts are confined to the supplements of lacunae, are generally ignored. Where the source of the correction is not indicated,
it

is

our own.

APPENDIX
Part. II.

261

214. Recto

same
18.

ji/ (Weil) is possible. 211. 34. h\pao\v for a[ The vestige of a letter before a[ is too slight to afford 7. remark applies to the two letters after /xe in 1. 15.

Possibly

Verso II. Possibly o[s n]e\a\y]o[s and the following vestiges suit
12.
t[.
.

\
oi
:

any

clue.

The

(Ludwich).
(Piatt),
e

but

it

is
o.

not certain that a letter

is lost after e\a,

better than

Perhaps

.]f[.]

the doubtful r
is

may

be

but neither

[(][]

](\([ (Boiling).
(Piatt)

nor

[7][^]

(Boiling) seem to suit. the first letter 13. fx . Xoy


14.
1.

[]\
. :

more
at the

like

than

.
line.

215.
216. 218.

i.

28.

[aya]5o[i'
i.

]
is

(Ludwich)

end of the

should very likely be read in place of


(Fraccaroli).

but there

is

not

room

for

2.

a misprint for
ii

The

position in Col.

certain.

Line 26
Ap;)^eX[ao]f

is

pav

;[,
219. II.
17.

28

Tois Cronert).

Fragment

form one

[5

line, i.e.

Kt]aai (i.e.

] )
like

. [][ [85
(b)

conjecturally assigned
(or, as

-,

by us to Fr. {c) may be considered Cronert suggests, [](), 27 vntp [5] (cf. OUr nOte ad loc), 29 perhaps [ev TOis] ntpi {ev probably joins Fr. (a) so that Fr. (a) i. i8 and Fr. {) i Fr. (e) probably belongs to the bottom of Fr. {a) ii.

(Piatt) is possible.

For

fpyio[v]

Wilamowitz suggests

the

newly-found the top of a column, contains the beginnings of two lines and Cf 221 ad fin. [. X. 1 6. The penultimate letter before is /3 or . xi. 20. [ (Leo) is possible, but 8]e 7r[<B]s for the preceding letters is unsuitable. 221. i. I. 1. ore for re (Ludwich). 2. (Ludwich) is not very suitable. 17. To]y before Siappow (Ludwich) is possible. 21. Possibly (Ludwich), but the doubtful letter is more like or t.

220.

[ \ [
first letter is

more

than o. The of fragment, apparently from


e

[].
is

in place of

is

possible, but

certain.

/[

[
(Allen).

ii.

3.
1.

I.

ve]{cpois
[

9.
iii.

2.
e

SteXfo]/, i.e.

3.
6.

1.
1.

23-4.
25.
iv.

[] [
1.

fee
1.

The

(Wilamowitz). traces of a letter before aeXav suit


the

or

better than

v.

The papyrus has

for

first hand wrote dieXov which was corrected to BeeXop (Diels). Mapes (Diels).

n\fio for firkeio (Diels).


fi\a\yT0
is

(Ludwich).

26-7.
18.
II.
vi.

vii. 5.

] ]
The
aavras
like
[

(Ludwich)

possible.

y-^ove]yai

(Ludwich).

vestiges before
yovos

(Ludwich)

are too faint to aiford a clue, is possible.

kvai^pcovTi (Piatt,

Ludwich) cannot be

read,

but

6e

//

is

possible.

15.
ix. 1

1.
1.

for ra^e
.
.

v.

.]ya[. ].''[

9-

[]:
more
1.

for

15.
xii.

lo.

The

[]
than

[]
for

for

[.

.]

[.

.]

[.
is

(Ludwich)
e\[iKo]s

is

just possible, but the letter following

e.

vestiges

on

either side of

26.

might be read instead of

(Wilamowitz). are too slight to give a clue.

202
xiv. 25.
letters.
;

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


at the

end of the hne

is

extremely doubtful.

There are more probably two

26.
xvi.

\\
20-1. ]|
e\v

xvii. 12.

(Cronert) is possible. 2 lines are contained on a new fragment which the recto (cf. 220) aaios (cf. //. xxi. 318-21) seems to show is from near the bottom of a column, while 1. 9 indicates that it belongs to the column lost before Col. xvi.
Fr. {a) 5.

The beginnings

[\
of
.[

(Ludwich) is pOSSible. (Ludwich) is possible, but the (Ludwich) is possible.


1

is

extremely doubtful.

[.]...

OCT

.[.].[

OVTQ>[

>
5

10

[][

[
.1

7[ [

?[
\

aaios

222. 17 230. 32. 282. 2. Insert 237. iv. 8. 1.


17.
I.

21.
26.

1. 1.
1.

30. 33.
V. 7

[5 [] /]
{}
1. 1.

^ \8\ is

{) (^

(Diels) can be read,

a misprint for

after

8\.

(^.
(eVei)

?;7)7 []8 (Grad.). 8 [1[']$ (Grad.).


[]
(Grad.).

(Gradenwitz).

78.
1 6.

\] ^^^
is

(Grad.) is possible. a mistake for os (Grad.). eV


(Blass).

.
,

( [^)

(Grad.).

34

1
1.
\

38.
42.
vi.

8{] \\(,
1.

before

(Grad.).

(Grad.).

18.
1. 1
1 1.

21.

24
25.

^""

31.
23

2 2.
1

. ') . [: ) ' ^
ovTivos (Blass).

? ^'^^
.

for

(Grad.).

(Grad.).
el

...

(.

1.

(i.e.

for

(Wilamowitz).

for

(Wilam.).
(Grad.).

26-7 iveyKavTos
40.
viii.
1.

245.
1.

Tais

2 7

, but

for
cf.

ea .
is

a mistake for iviyKovra (Wilam.).

for

\!\

(Grad.,
Similis

G.).
is

(referring to Trajan's reign)

712.

7,

where a Sulpicius

can be read, as Stein suggested, for mentioned certainly long after Trajan's

time and perhaps in the reign of

Commodus.

255. 16. 265. 39

269. ii. 2. 1. for (Wilam.). 270. 25. A line has dropped out of the text. 1. (Is .,. (Goodspeed).
273.
8.
5

. \
1.
1.

APPENDIX
[.
. .

263

[e]| [ii]ytous for

.]5.

[\ []
following

274. 2 2. 1. for 24-5. [8]\(! (Wessely) 277. 913. 1.


Se Ai[ovvaios

286. 9 1. (i.e. for 287. 7 1 for '(). 289. 3 The abbreviation beginning with cf 574. 298. 42. y is a misprint for P.

() [ [\.\ ] \ \ ) /) 8(

:
. .
\

npoupats

Tats

TO

' [']' [\
letters

...

The

((^)

might be read as
is

(WeSSely).

possible.

\^

[]()\
|

,]

[.]/

^
;

[yeji/^^a^ra^ '[] ras Trep\

\(^\

[^.[(,
(Wilam.).

,
1|

8i a[vTrjs

(1.

,..
probably

[){)

which recurs

in this

papyrus

is

Faytim Towns and their Papyri.


2.
iii.

16.

23. 32.
8.

^''^
1.

\\^{\
[.]
.

for

ere

.\.

.]

[.]

(Weil)

is

possible.

for

(Weil)

is

possible.

for aiyhij^ (Weil).

a misprint for [re]. 10. This fragment has been identified by Plasberg and Ferrini as coming from Ulpian, Lib. 10. 1. mililes xlv. {Dig. xxix. I. i). 3. 1. proferri for prqfessi. 6. 1. er[ga for es^se. 11. \. facid\nt iox enidy. f^estamenta. 11. 22. 1. [] *:[]. exov (Wilcken). The edict is assigned by (de Ricci) for is possible. 20. introd. p. 117. 1. 5. Dessau to Julian instead of Severus Alexander. 6. Tt (Wilamowitz) can be read in place of eut. is corrected by Wilamowitz to eVt. before 8.
10.
[f] is

]
|

\
;

15. e^

23. introd.

.
(
15.
1. 1.

'['
1.

Toe(s)
for
.

for
. .

23(a). 56. 27. 32. 1.

42 ().
46. 3. 48. 3. 50. 5.

1. 1.

67-76.
73.
I.

1.
1.

/(;).
. D.
1. 1.

96. 1. 110. I.
15.

?{) {)', {)^{) (() ((]) [] []'


1.
.

{
'

(Wilamowitz)
)

is

better than our

[|

([].

(Smyly)

cf.

the

modern Tamia.

(Wessely).

for

cf.

P. Tebt.

I.

p. 28.

for

..y{
'

).

8()

wpoyo(fos)

Stepson
for

for

4\{()

(Wilcken). (Wilckcn). (Wilcken).


(Wilcken).
Similarly
in

74.

I.

(-

143 forA. D. 122. BeXAi^wi (Wilamowitz).


for

(WilamOwitz).

264

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI

112. 4. 1. b^o\i,\p}ovs, cf. P. for 116. 3-4. 1.

138.

I.

Kpeiverai

]"1 =

Kpivere

(Wilamowitz). (WilamOwitz).

Amh.

II. 91.

11 note.

244 284

is
is

probably written across the fibres of the recto, not on the verso. dated in the loth year of Antoninus (a. d. 146).

APPENDIX
A
The
by Dr.
revised text of Part III, no.

II
iii.

405

(Irenaeus, Con/ra Haereses,

9).

seven fragments of an early Christian work published as 405 were identified Armitage Robinson as belonging to the lost Greek original of Irenaeus' treatise J. Contra Haereses, which is extant only in a Latin translation, and when fitted together correspond to part of iii. 9. A provisional reconstruction was given by him in Athenceum, Oct. 24, 1903; cf. our note, ibid., Nov. 7, and that of Dr. Rendel Harris, ibid., Nov. 14.

We
in

now

print a revised text of the whole.

The

chief interest of the discovery lies in the

resulting correspondence between the readings of Irenaeus' quotation from Matt.


11.

iii. 16-7 23-9 and those of the Codex Bezae. The Latin translation there has the ordinary reading Hie est {filius mens), whereas the original agrees with D in having (1. 28) e[i in ioTiv, and a variant peculiar to D (<as for before nepiaripav) occurs in 1. 25 place of These two unsuspected coincidences between Irenaeus and D, of which the (Lat. quasi). one is misrepresented, the other inevitably obscured by the Latin translator, indicate that the extent of the agreement between Irenaeus' quotations and the text of the Codex Bezae is even larger than what the imperfect evidence of the Latin translation has led critics to suppose {Athen., Nov. 7).
* '

Col.

i.

Col.

ii.

[]
[ei5

]77^[6]/

[]}[]
5 KoiXias

[ ]
[ev

8 ]]?
ck
7r[a\iv]'

[]

[^ ] \ \ ]
ks
o]f

[][] /
6s

20

][ [ ]9 []9 [
[

25

> > >

OS-

([6 [
eiSev

? [ [
Se

on

[^

tois
'

10 \V

TOS

] ]^

VOS
13
like r or

APPENDIX
>

^ ] [] ]
19

> > >


3

15

more

[] (

]
]

.][]
][
.

[]
[e

? ^

^^ [
[e]v
'''^^^

265
e[is

aWos

a[X\os

[ [
?

is

I[y

would be expected [annuntiaius

Lat.), but the letter before

is

14-5.
virgine
el

16.

The et hums films qui ex fructu ventris David, id esl ex David Emmanuel, cuius et stellam &c. The papyrus version is much shorter. For instead of cf. Rendel Harris, Athen., Nov. 14.

than Latin has

31.

The

more

like

Latin has in lesum, neque alius quidem Christus. The supposed of \v is but it is impossible to read \, and for the omission of in the earliest concf. e. g. 1.

tractions of \r\aovs

APPENDIX
List of Oxyrhynchus and

III
distributed.

Fayum Papyri

We

give here a

list

of the papyri published in Oxyrhyyichus Papyri, Parts I-III,

and

Fayum Towns and

Papyri, which have been presented to different museums and Those papyri which do not appear have for various reasons not yet been dislibraries. Where ascertainable, we have added the tributed and are still at Queen's College, Oxford. present reference numbers in the catalogues of the several institutions to which the papyri
their

now

belong.

The

following abbreviations are employed

Am.
B.

= America.
and

= = Belfast Museum. Bod. = Bodleian Library, Oxford. The references are to the hand-list of MSS, Bolton = Chadwick Museum, Bolton, Lanes. Bradfield = Library of Bradfield College, Berks. Bristol = Bristol Museum.
M.
Belfast

papyri under this heading have only recently been sent to America, not yet forthcoming. British Museum. The numbers refer to the catalogue of papyri.
details of the distribution are

The

266
Brussels

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


= =

Musees Royaux, Brussels, Belgium. Museum of Antiquities, Cairo. The numbers are those of the inventory ; cf. our Cairo Catalogue of Greek Papyri in the Cairo Museum. Camb. Cambridge University Library. The numbers refer to the Additions.' Haskell Museum, University of Chicago, U.S.A. The papyri are all numbered Chicago 'Accession 33.' Clifton Library of Clifton College, Bristol. Columbia Library of Columbia University, New York, U.S.A. Dublin Library of Trinity College, Dublin. Dundee Library of University College, Dundee. Edinburgh Library of Edinburgh University. Eton Library of Eton College, Windsor. Glasgow Library of Glasgow University. Graz Library of Graz University, Austria. Haileybury Library of Haileybury College, Hertford. Hamilton Hamilton College, U.S.A. Harrow Library of Harrow School. Harvard Semitic Museum of Harvard University, Mass., U.S.A. HoUoway Library of Holloway College, Egham. Johns Hopkins Library of Johns Hopkins University, Maryland, U.S.A. Liverpool Liverpool Free Public Museum. Melbourne Library of Melbourne University, Victoria. Owen's Coll. Museum of Owen's College, Manchester. Pennsyl. Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. Princeton Library of Princeton University, N.J., U.S.A. Repton Library of Repton School, Burton-on-Trent. Rugby Library of Rugby School. Smiths. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., U.S.A. St. Andrews Library of St. Andrews University.

= =

'

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

= = = = =

Toronto
Vassar
Vict.

= = Toronto University, Canada. = Library of Vassar College, Poughkeepsie,


Museum

U.S.A.

of Victoria University, Toronto, Canada. Winchester Library of Winchester College. Yale Library of Yale University, U.S.A.

Oxyrhynchus Papyri.
1.

Bod. Gr.

th.

e.

APPENDIX
42.

III

267
186. Bod. Gr. class.
/. 69 (P).

43.

44. 45. Pennsyl. 2750. 46. Harvard 2212.


47.

. . 747. . 748. . . 749 ..

750.

48. Harrow.

49. Dublin Pap.


51. Edinburgh.

..
.

50. Dublin Pap. F.

52. Glasgow.

75 53. 54. Chicago.


55
56.
(3 copies).

..

Camb.

4033-5.

Camb. 4036.

57. Johns Hopkins. 58. B. 59. B.

M. M.

752. 753
i,

60. Dublin Pap. D. 61.

Camb. 4037
class

62. Bod. Gr. d. 61 (P).

63. Cairo 10007. 64. Princeton 0132 692. 64. 65. Pennsyl. 2751. 66.

Camb. 4038.
(2 copies). B.

137. Cairo 10034. 138. Cairo loioo. 89. Cairo 10008. 139. Cairo 10049. 90. B. M. 76r. 140. Cairo 10057. olio way. 91. 141. Cairo 10096. 92. Harvard 2213 142. B. M. 769. 93. B. M. 762. 143. B. M. 770. 94. B. M. 763. 144. Cairo 10071. Holloway. 95. 145. Cairo 10066. 96. Camb. 4041. 146. Cairo 10076. Edinburgh. 97. 147. Cairo 10074. 98. B. M. 764. 148. Cairo 10075. 99. B. M. 765. 149. Cairo 10045. 100. Edinburgh. 150. Cairo 1005 1. 101. Chicago. 151. Cairo 10094. 766.102. B. M. 152. Cairo 10048. 103. B. M. 767. 153. Cairo 10044. Camb. 4042. 104. Cairo 10102. 105. Dublin Pap. C.I. 154. 155. Cairo 10020. Chicago. 106. 156. Cairo 10035. 107. Cairo 10006. 157. Cairo 10042. 108. Pennsyl. 2753. 158. Cairo 10043. 2214. 109. Harvard 159-63. Chicago. 110. Eton. 164. B. M. 771. 111. Clifton. 165. Camb. 4044. 112. Harrow. 166. Bod. Gr. class Cairo looii. 113. c. 47 (P) 114. Eton. 167. Bod. Gr. class 115. Yale.
88. Pennsyl. 2752.
|

187. Melbourne Pap.


2.

188. Bod. Gr. class.


d.

63 (P).

189. B.

M. 773

192. Camb. 4046. 193. B. M. 774 194. Pennsyl. 2756. 195. B. M. 775 197. B. M. 776.

198. B. M. 777 199. B. M. 778. 200. Harvard 2217. 201. B. M. 779. 202. Camb. 4047 204. Edinburgh. 205. B. M. 780. 206. Yale. 207. B. M. 781. 208. B. M. 782. 209. Harvard 2218. 210. Camb. 4048. 211. Am. 212. B. M. 1 180.
-

67

M.

754 68. Owen's Coll. 69. Chicago. 70. Vassar.


71. B. M. 755. 72. Glasgow.

116. Clifton. 117. Chicago. 118. Camb. 4043. 119. Bod. Gr. class

/ 67 (P) , 168. Pennsyl. 2754. 169. Vassar.


170. Harvard 2215. 171. Camb. 4045. 172. Melbourne Pap.
I.

213. 214. 215. 216. 217. 218. 219.

Am. B. M. B. M.
Yale.

181.

1182.

Camb. 4049
B.

M.I 183.

Am.

66 (P).

72 (). Chicago.
73.

120. Haileybury. 121. Chicago. 122. B. M. 768.

Owen's

Coll.

74. Hamilton. 75. Chicago. 76. Camb. 4039.


77. Dublin Pap. D. 2
79. B. M. 756. 80. "Winchester.

81. B.

82. B. 83. Rugby. 83(a). Repton. 84. B. 85. B.


86.

M. M.

757. 758.

M. 759 M. 760. Camb. 4040.

123. Cairo 10014. 124. "Winchester. 125. Cairo 10062. 126. Cairo 10085. 127. Cairo 10084. 128. Cairo 10121. 129. Cairo 10082. 130. Cairo 10072. 131. Cairo 10063. 132. Cairo 10133. 133. Cairo 10056. 134. Cairo 10053. 135. Cairo 10018. 136. Cairo 10103.

173. St. Andrews. 174. Johns Hopkins.

220-1. B. M. 1 184. 222. B.M.I 185. 223. Bod. Gr. class.


a.

175. Bristol. 176. Brussels. 177. Bod. Gr. class. d. 62 (P). 178. Hamilton. 179. B. M. 772. 180. Harvard 2216.
181. Pennsyl. 2755.

224. 225. 226. 227. 228.


d.

8 (P). B. M. 783. B. M. 784.

Columbia.
B.

M.
(P).

785.
class.

Bod. Gr.

64
B.

182. Bod. Gr. class

68

(P).

183. Dublin Pap. F. 2 184. Dublin Pap.E.2 185. Glasgow.

229. 230. 231. 232. 233. 234. 235.

M.

786.

Johns Hopkins.

Camb. 405 B. M. 787.


Pennsyl. 2757.
St.

Andrews.
-

Camb. 4051

268
236. B. M. 788. 237. Bod. Gr. class. a. 8 (P). 238. Dublin Pap.E.3. 239. Pennsyl. 2758. 240. B. M. 789. 241. Princeton 0132. 692. 241. 242. Graz. 243. B. M. 790. 244. B. M. 791. 245. Pennsyl. 2759. 246. Camb. 4052. 247. Glasgow. 248. Camb. 4053. 249. Yale. 250. Am. 251. B. M. 1186. 252. Liverpool. 253. Graz.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


287. Am. 288. B. M. 798. 289. B. M. 799. 290. Pennsyl. 2761. 291. B. M. 800. 292. Camb. 4057. 293-5. Am. 296. Johns Hopkins. 297-8. Am. 299. Bradfield. 300. Bradfield. 301. B. M. 801. 302. Bod. Gr. class.
g- 47 (P).

329. Yale. 330. Columbia.

373. Bod. Gr. class

/ 70 (P).
374. 375. 376. 377. 378. 379.
e.

331. Johns Hopkins. 332. Princeton 0132. 692. 332. 333. Princeton 0132.
692. 333 334. Johns Hopkins. 335. Camb. 4060. 336. Dublin Pap. F. 3. 337. Edinburgh. 338. Glasgow. 339. B. M. 803. 340. St. Andrews. 341. Owen's Coll. 342. Camb. 4061. 343. Dublin Pap.E.4. 344. Pennsyl. 2764. 345. Columbia. 346. Melbourne Pap.
4.

B.

M. 807. Camb. 4066.


M. 808. M. 809.

Edinburgh.
B.
B.

Bod. Gr. class. 83 (P). 380. Camb. 4067.


381. 382. 383. 384. 385.
B. B.

M. 810. M. 811. Camb. 4068. B. M. 812.

303. Bod. Gr. class.


g. 48 (P).

Dublin Pap. F.5. 386. Bod. Gr. class.

304. Camb. 4058. 305. Bod. Gr. class.


c.

/7i(P)
387. Bod. Gr. class.
e.

48

(P).

84

(P).

254-7.

Am.

258. Brussels. 259. Am. 260. Dublin Pap. D.


3

261. B. M. 792. 262. Columbia. 263. Melbourne Pap.


3

306. 307. 308. 309. 310. 311. 312. 313. 314. 315.
d.

Cairo 10003. Cairo 10012. Dublin Pap. B. 2. Edinburgh.

388. Dublin Pap. F. 6. 389. Bod. Gr. class.


e.

Glasgow. St. Andrews.

Owen's Coll. Camb. 4059. Harvard 2220.


class.

264. 265. 266. 267. 269. 270. 272. 273. 274. 275. 276. 277. 278. 279. 280. 281. 282. 283. 284. 285. 286.

Camb. 4054.
Vict.

B.

M. 1187.

Am.
Pennsyl. 2760. B. M. 793.

Bod. Gr. 65 (P). 316. Bod. Gr. .. 78(P). 317. Columbia.

class.

347. 348. 349. 350. 351. 352. 353. 354. 355. 356. 357.

Camb. 4062.
Pennsyl. 2765. Pennsyl. 2766.

85

(P).

390. Bod. Gr. class.


d.

68
B.

(P).

Camb. 4063.
Yale.

Columbia. Johns Hopkins.


B.

M. 804. Camb. 4064.

Dublin Pap. E.5. Princeton 0132.

391. 392. 393. 394. 395. 396. 397.

M.

813.

Am.
Yale.

Camb. 4069.

Am.
B.

M.

814.

Am.
Brussels.

318. B. M. 802. 319. Johns Hopkins. 320. Princeton 0132. 692. 320. 321. Bod. Gr.
class.

Am.
B.

692. 357. 358. Columbia. 359. Glasgow. 360. Bod. Gr. class. e. 81 (P). 361. Bod. Gr. class.
e.

Bod. Gr. class. d. 69 (P). 398. Bod. Gr. class. c. 50 (P). 399. Columbia. 400. Bod. Gr. class. d. 70 (P). 401-2. Am.

M.

794.

d.ee
c.

(P).

Am. B. M.
B.

322. Bod. Gr. class.

1188.

49 (P).

M. 795. Camb. 4055. Camb. 4056.


Hollo way.
Yale.
Bristol.

323. Pennsyl. 2762. 324. Bod. Gr. class.


e.

80

(P).

325. Bod. Gr. class.

67 (P). 326. Bod. Gr.


d.
e.

class.

Harvard 2219.
B. B.

79

(P).

M. M.

796.

797.

327. Pennsyh 2763. 328. Harvard 2221.

362. 363. 364. 365. 366. 367. 368. 369. 370. 371. 372.

82 (P). Harvard 2222. Camb. 4065. Dublin Pap. F. 4. Dublin Pap.E.6. Dublin Pap. E. 7.
B.

M. 1 189. M. 1 190. 446-8. Am.


407. B. 445. B.
449. Brussels. 450. Graz. 451. Vict.

M. 805. Graz. Hamilton. B. M. 806.


Vict.

452-3. Am. 454. Bod. Gr.

class,

54 455-6.

c.

(P).

Am.
Am.

Brussels.

457. Vict.

458-62.

APPENDIX
463. Bod. Gr. class.
a. 1 (P).

III
615-33. Am.

269
614. Owen's Coll. 634. Bod. Gr. class.
d. 73 (P) 635. Bod. Gr. i. 86 (P). 636. Graz. 637. Vict.

469. 476.

Am. Am. 479-80. Am. 482. Am.


484. Brussels. 487. Am. 499. Vict.

502-3.
505. 508. 510. 512.

Am. Am. Am. Am. Am. 516-8. Am.

522-3. Am. 526-7. Am. 529. Am. 531-2. Am. 534-41. Am. 542. Owen's Coll. 543-9. Am. 550. B. M. 1191. 551-3. Am. 554. Graz. 555-7. Am. 558. Belfast.
559. Am. 560. Vict.

573. Brussels. 575. Am. 576. Brussels.

577-8.

580. 581. Dundee.

Am. Am.

class,

582-8. Am. 589. Graz. 590-8. Am.


603. Graz. 604. Bolton.

633-43.

Am.

605-7.

Am.

644. Graz. 645. Am. 647. Graz.

608. Vict.

648-50.

Am.

561-72.

Am.

609-10. Am. 612-3. Am.

651. Belfast. 652. Am.

Fayum
1.

Papyri.
52. Cairo 10778.

2.
3.

4.
5.

Camb. 4070. B. M. 1192. B. M. 815. B. M. 816.


Dr.

25. Yale.
26. Cairo 10767. 27. Brussels. 28. Vassar.

83. Cairo 10784. 84. Cairo 10224.


85. Cairo 10785. 86. 86 (a). Am. 87. B. M. 825.

52(a). Cairo 10779.


53.

Am.

54. Cairo 10780.

W.

C.

Win

29. Pennsyl. 2767.

55. Vict.

slOAV.

6.
7. 8.

Cairo 10764. B. M. 817. Toronto.

30-1. Toronto. 32. Princeton 0132.


340 32
33. Johns Hopkins.
34. Cairo 10768.

Cairo 10781. 57. Cairo 10225.


56.

88. Pennsyl. 2769. 89. B.

M.

826.

9.

Am.

10. Bod. Lat. class. ^.

35. Cairo 10769.


36. Cairo 10770.
37. Cairo 10235. 38. B.

5(P). 11. Cairo 10765.


12. B. 14.

58-60. Am. 61. Cairo 10782. 62. Cairo 10221. 63-5. Am. 66. Cairo 10231.
67. Vict. 68. B. M. 824
70.
71.
(a).

90. Cairo 10786.


91. Cairo 10787.
92.

Harvard 2223.

93. Brussels.

94.

Am.

95. Cairo 10788.

M.

818.

13. Smiths. 217860.

M. 820. 39. Cah-o 10771.


40. Brussels.
41.

96. Cairo 10789.

69. Cairo 10239.

97. Cairo 10790.

Am.

15. Graz. 16. B. M. 819.


17.
c.

Smiths. 217853.

Bod.

Gr.

class.

42. Columbia. 42(a). B. M. 1 195.


43. B. 44. B. 45.

72.

73.
74.

52 (P).

M.

18. B.

M.I 1 93.

18 {a). B. M. 1 194. 18 (3). Brussels. 19-20. Am. 21. Cairo 10766. 22-3. Am. 23(a). Bod. Gr. class,

46.

M. B. M. 823. Owen's Coll.


Cairo 10773,

821. 822.

Cairo 10240. Pennsyl. 2768. Graz. Cairo 10236. Cairo 10237.

98. Cairo 10791.


99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 111.

Cairo 10792. Cairo 10793. Smiths. 2 1 785 1. Cairo 10794.

75. Johns Hopkins. 76. Princeton 0132.

Am.
Cairo 10795. B. M. 1 1 96.

340. 76.

47. Cairo 10772.

76
77.

(a).

B.

M. 824 ).

Am.
Cairo 10796. Cairo 10797. Cairo 10798,

47

(a).

Am.

48. Cairo 10774.


49. Cairo 10775.

78. Smiths.

53 (P) 24. Cairo 10869.


c

50. Cairo 10776.


51. Cairo 10777.

217856. 79. Cairo 10241. 80-1. Am. 82. Cairo 10783.

Am.
Vict.

270
112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118.
Smiths. 217852.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI


Am.
Cairo 10799.
167. B. M. 828(a). 168. Harvard 2225.
169. 170. 171. 172.

Am.
Graz.

Am.
Bristol.

M. 82 8(3). Toronto. Glasgow. B. M. 828(4


B.

119-20.

Am.

173. B. M. 828 (i/). 174. Pennsyl. 2770.


175. Edinburgh.

121. Cairo 10800.

122. Cairo 10801. 123. Cairo 10802. 124. Cairo 10803. 125. Cairo 10804. 126. Cairo 10805. 127. Cairo 10243.

176. Vassar. 177. 178.

Camb. 4071. Camb. 4072.

Cairo 10795. Cairo 10810. Columbia. Cairo 10811. 137-8. Am. 139. Cairo 10812. 140. B. M. 141. Cairo 10217. 142. Cairo 10247. 143. Cairo 10242. 144. Cairo 102 19.
145. Am. 146. Bolton.

128. 129. 130. 131. 132. 133. 134. 135. 136.

Cairo Cairo Cairo Cairo

10806. 10807. 10808. 10809.

M. 828(f). 180. Yale. 181. B. M. 828(/). 182. Owen's Coll.


179. B.

Rugby.

183. 184. 185. 186.


6.

Hamilton.
B.

B.

M. 828 (^). M. 828 ().

Melbourne Pap.

187. B. 188. B.

M. 828(0. M. 828 {k).

189. St. Andrews.

221. 222. 223. 224. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230. 231. 232. 233. 234. 235. 236. 237. 238. 239. 240. 241. 242. 243. 244.

Cairo 10819.

Am.
Cairo 10820. Cairo 10821.

Am.
Smiths. 2 1 7859

Am.
Brussels.

Graz.

Am.
Cairo 10822. 829. 830. 831. 832. 833. 10823. Cairo 10824.
B. M. B. M. B. M. B. M. B. M. Cairo

Am.
Cairo 10825.

Am.
Cairo 10826.

Am.

147-50. Am. 151. B. M. 827. 152. Cairo 10220. 153. Graz.


154. Am. 155. Vict. 156. Am. 157. Harvard 2224.

190-5. Am. 196. Pennsyl. 2771. 197. Harvard 2226. 198. Cairo 10230. 199. Cairo 10227. 200. Cairo 10228. 201. Cairo 10245. 202. Cairo 10246. 203. Cairo 10226. 204. Cairo 10244. 205. Cairo 10222. 206. Cairo 10223. 207. Cairo 10229.
208. 209. 210. 211. 212. 213. 214. 215. 216.
Brussels.

Cairo 10827. 245-7. Am.

248. Liverpool. 249. Brussels.

250-1.

Am.

252. Vict. 253. Am. 254. B. M.

197.
198.

255-8.
259. 260. 261. 262. 263. 264. 265. 266.
B.

Am.
M.
1

Graz.

Am.
Brussels.

Am.
Graz.

158-9. Am. 160. Cairo 102 18. 161. Cairo 10234. 162. Cairo 10232. 163. Cairo 10233. 164. Columbia. 165. Johns Hopkins. 166. Princeton 0132.
340. 166.

Cairo Cairo Yale. Cairo Cairo

10813. 10814.

Am.
Vict.

267-8.

Am.

10815. io8i6. Columbia. Cairo 108 17. Princeton 0132.

269. Brussels. 270. Graz.


278. 279. 280. 281. 282. 283.

340. 216. 217. Brussels.

218-9. Am. 220. Cairo 10818.

271-7. Am. Cairo 10828. Cairo 10829. Cairo 10830. Cairo 10831. Cairo 10832. Cairo 10833.

Cairo 10834. B. M. 1 199. Cairo 10835. Cairo 10836. Cairo 10837. Cairo 10838. Cairo 10839. 291-3. Am. 294. Cairo 10840. 295. Smiths. 217855. 296. Am. 297. Brussels. 298. Smiths.217857. 299. Am. 300. Cairo 1084 1. 301. Cairo 10842. 302. Cairo 10843. 303. Cairo 10844. 304. Am. 305. Cairo 10845. 306. Am. 307. Vict. 308. B. M. 834. 309. Cairo 10846. 310. Pennsyl. 2772. 311. Cairo 10847. 312. Cairo 10848. 313. Bod. Gr. class. d. 71 (P). 314-7. Am. 318. Cairo 10849. 319. Cairo 10850. 320-1. Am. 322. Graz. 323. Cairo 10851. 324. Bod. Gr. class. c. 51 (P). 325. Bod. Gr. class. d. 72 (P). 326. Cairo 10852. 327. Cairo 10853. 328. Cairo 10854. 329. Brussels. 330. Cairo 10855. 331. Am. 332. Cairo 10856. 333. Am. 334. Cairo 10857. 335. Am. 336. Smiths. 217854.
284. 285. 286. 287. 288. 289. 290.

APPENDIX
337. 338. 339. 340. 341. 342. 343. 344.

III
360. 361. 362. 363. 364.

271
Harvard 2228.
Yale.

Cairo 10858.

Am.
Cairo 10859. Cairo 10860. Graz. Cairo 10861.

345. Cairo 10863. 346. Cairo 10864.

354. Princeton 0132.


340 354355. Hamilton. 356. Princeton 0132.

347-8.

Am.

349. Pennsyl. 2773. 350. Harvard 2227.


351. Yale. 352. Columbia. 353. Johns Hopkins.

Harvard 2229. JohnsHopkins.


Princeton 0132.

Am.
Cairo 10862.

340 356 357. Columbia. 358. JohnsHopkins. 359. Pennsyl. 2774.

340. 364. 365. Columbia. 366. Yale.

INDICES
I.

NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS'.


{) Greek.

p. 202.

664. iQ

666. 115;

670. 12. 659. 5 aytcv 663. 35. 659. 93. 659. 27; 674. 'Aypo^iOf 664. 33) 45 662. 53 662. 46 (?).

?
23-

663. 23.

665. 12,

1 6, 20,

^/ (8
679.
3.

662. (?) 662. 42, 5 684. 21. 675. 4 663. 29}

| ?

23(?)

654. 8. 660. 2. 680. 8. 666. 153 ('') 659. 8, 48, 66; 662. 29; 664. 99; 682. 1 6.
662. 2 2. 654. 22
;

34

>

664.

8(

661. 3
;

(?)

664. 105 aet 667. 8 670. 4ae'^eii/ 662. 47 /aros 659. 1 4, 24. 663. 15664. 5 664. 3 663. 48 680. 6; 682. 6, 671. 1 6.
;

654. 38. 664. 92, 660. 659. 26, 68 662. 27 ; 671. 17; 679. 7664. 23, 28, 95; 70.

.
6.

3.
;

659. 1 9. 662. 35 655. 46. 672. 7. 662. 48. 662. 49


667. 28, 662. 112, 6(.?). 684. 7.

8
ateiv

263. atyX^fir 671. 3

/
;

681.

;^$

659. 8 1. 662. 49 670. 5 664. 98.


(?)

659.
666.
1

35.
6 2.

49;

660.

661. 26.

660. 8. 659. 12, 29 665. 2 2 ; 681. 7666. aiVj^vi/fiv 655. 23 666. 48. 659. 37 684. 9 683. 15663. 5 684. 13 ^?? 662. 51.

/ ,
;

^ (

660.

2.
1 7

661.

662. 21, 32. 659. 53. 59 670. 7 659. 55 654. 4 ; 659. 1 1 ; 662. 34 (?) 663. 43 664.93; 666. 1 62; 670. 671.1. 659. 1 8. avaepTUv 662. 53 684. 1 6.
; ;

' ( '
((
7,

660.

654. 29 ; 655. , 2 ; 660. 6. 664. 2. 664. 8, 8. 654. 29 654. 2 2. 654. 39 674. 8 (.?). 663. 4 1 ; 679. 3>
682. 14. 666. 1 68.

Excluding 658 and 669, which are classed with the non-literary documents.

(.

/.

NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS

"Apjjs

5-

660. 15; 670. 678. 6 (?).


662. 25 659. 9 662. 34
661.
3

8, 17.

/
Bope'as

273
671. 21.

apws

^
(?)

664. 04; 684. 3 659. 38. 660. 4 659. 7, 14; 660. 2 1(?). 662. 45

^ 662.

yap 659. 20, 23, 71;


23, 44, 83.

ap^eij^

664. 102. 664. 32. 664. 94) 95) 96


2,

^ApxiXaos p. 261.

(7 664.
.
2

113, ^^7-

02.

662. 37" 670. 9J are 684. 7. ore/ci/os 662. 3 arpfKfS 671. 3 662. 33

201

7 680.

^ ^

666. 63.
661.
2 6.

664. 99; 666. 51^ 156; 667. 23; 670. 18 684. 13, 17 ye 661. 23; 662. 30. ydTmv 677. 2. 665. 3 665. 5, 1 6. yews 659. 13 yeveaOai 654. 5 yn 654. 13; 660. 14 662. 27, yiyveaOai 659. 20 30; 665. 14; 666. 164; 667. 27; 681. 8; 682. g; 684. 12 p. 261.
;

\(
5-

^ (
aipfv

34; 670. 23 682. , 15 (0 663. 46; 664. 13. 23, 666. 115; 687. 36, 07
;

/ /
666.
22.

664. 29. 667. 8. 663. g. 679. II. 664. 664. 21. 684. 8. 672. 6. 655. 15; 659. 68; 675. 15. 662. 29 682. 3

yiyvaiaKfiv 654:. 17,

(aSns) 661. 23.

659. 34 |'6' 655. 9 ai!|eii' 659. 129 660. 12. 684. 670. 3 ai-roy 654. 32; 655. 15, 7. 8; 662. 51, 52; 663. 4> 13, 1 8, 44; 664. ^eisaep.; 666. 5(.?), 117; 670. 2; 680. 7; 681. 2; 682. 1 1. 662. 2 2. 663. 17662. 35 663. 24, 37

665. 662. 43, 47, 53. y\iaxpos 678. 7 673. 3 670. 2 5-

8, 20.

[ /^
661.
7

659. 68.

6.

683.

663. 2 6. 670. 663. II, 4^


;

4 y(ps
/
;

')/ 659. 47
yvapTTTeiv

672.

9-

>|^^/ 659.

8.

660.

8.

}/'

' '
81>

667. 27. yoi/euy 659. 52 J 662. 26. 664. 87. yvi/J7 659.48; 662.24; 663. 39 664. 58.

^
/;
[
bfiv

42.

((
684.

664. 44 659. 74 664. 667. 21. 654. II, 15; 679.

659. 44 659. 75 662. 2 2. 659. 1 8. 659. 7 . 664. 2 8.

'
eoj/

664. 39) 97; 679. 6. 662. 3 660. 3 662. 35 663. 45 662. 56 (0 666. 165. 667. 1 6 678. 6(?). 664. 6.
; ;

677. 9 662. 43
;

659.
671.
2.

28, 73

//
59

67. . 666. 105 654. 1 8, 2; 663.31 eyfipdv 670. 23 eyKelaOai 659. 48 eyxeipiCeiv 666. 160. 7X0? 670. 20.
659. 45, 49)
1'>
;

654.
12,

8.

662. 54 666. 61.


4-

679. 43
666.

661.

7,

2,

24

662. 28

664. 6

671. 4,
7,

14(0)

^;

^\o 674.

659. 17. 665. 4 664. 132.

/
SeVts

662. 40. 662. 52. 679. 15(0

et saep.\ 670. 23. 664. 92. itoeVat 659. 45; 670. 17. 684. 3 654. 13 '^ "<?/' 655.
;

274
8, 2,

INDICES
20, 28;

659. 15; 660.


;

664. 5, 9 ; 662. 24 41, 44, 92; 666. 112, 117, 170; 667. 19, 23; 670. 11; 674. 3(.?); 678. 2; 684. 2, II, 13, 17, 19. it's 663. 20, 23, 30, 31; 664. 40; 666. 163; 672. 9; 679. 18, 41; 680. 9; 683. 6. es 659. 51; 662.
29.

(( , ^
'^/

654. 32. 667. 5 664. 131 (?) 666. 159; 684. 8. 664. 91. inayeiv 663. 47 663. 22; 664.

654.
evri/;,^ia

7,

17;

664.

(
( ^
15^

(h 655.

1 1

(laaYyik'ia

663. 35 672. 8. 655. 2 2. 661. 20 664. 77 662. 39 !/?? 663. 2 1, 38. 654. 679. . f/io'f 659. 80; 671. 21
(KOTepos
;

( (^ (
((

662. 30; 684. 682. 8. 655. 44, 45.


;

2.

!
;

667.

3, 4, 5> 7

661. 28; 662. 24, 26, 36; 676. 12; 677. 2.

682.

?5 .

> (
inirponos

( <(

((

659. 75 664. 2. 659. 65 667. 2. 663. 1 8. 654. 23. 659. 7 eVt 655. 14 659. 8, 12, 57 661. 20; 663. 35; 665. 12 667. 20, 22. 664. 4 eViSiSoVni 664. 25. 663. 39 679. 6. 659. 25. 663. II. 659. 3^.
; ;

659. I3; 663. 16. 659. *]i. 659. II. e'xeti/ 655. II 659. 9 663. 39; 664. 100; 670. 20; 671. 15; 684. 4. 659. 67; 676. 15. fas 655. I 670. 9 (?).
; ;
;

l62.

,'

(vyvvva 659. 79 Ze{)i 659. 45; 664. 103. 659. 36. 654. 2.
Zi/foSoros p. 261.

654. 6 ; 663. 666. 165. 659. 19. 659. 26.

(.?)

654. 27. 655. 9 663. 47 eV 654. 11; 659. 27, 58, 61; 663. 45; 64 9, 29, 44, 667. 2, 4, 97; 665. 15, 28; 675. 6; 679. 2; 680. 682. 3, 2; 683. 12. 667. . 655. 6. 655. II, 1 6. 659. 66. fvepyearepos 684. 5

(
7

? ^

680. 13. 664. 42 659. 44


662. 30. 659. 64.

(
8
/

663. 27. 660. 5; 664. I, 94; 667. I, 17, 18; 684. 5(?), 7. 662. 30. ^yuadai 659. 7 1. 662. 50.
V

8 662.

49.

661. 21.

664. 32. 660. 14.

( 8(
ivUvai

^ (
(' ''

684. 2. epdnav 662. 36. epts 659. 67. 663. 5 659. 51 ; 661. 23, 662. 29. 25 {(,, is 659. 51 662. 29. 655. 4 659. 52.
epyov
;

664. 7, 19. 664. 44 Tjidfos 660. 4. 659. 58 ; 673. 7 lyiiftf 664. 12. 655. 14; 662. 29. 664. 2 2. Tjpe'is 654. 10; 655. 19659. 1 5. 670. 19, 24.
661. 2 4.

659. 65.

(^
Vros

664. 1 6. 664. 8. 654. 16.


663. 2 2. 667. 4

fi 661. 26. f^ayeLv

((.

680.

655. 2. 659. 92. 654. 2 0. en 662. 30. erepos 664. 95; 684. II. (vitpos 675. 14. fvK\(T]t 659. 59 fviav 684. 9. 659. 73

654. 14; 661. 28. 684. 4 659. 3 659. 48 654. 7 654. 3 (960 673. 9 ^eariif 663. 7 659. 3

5 ^

679.

8.

/.

NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS

^ :
672.
8.
^vpt'o''

' 3

^/
ueos

674. 5. 662, 28. 677. 9. 673. I (?). 660. 6 ; 671. 666. 63.
6'59. 2 5.

661. II.

662. 2 5, 2 7 659. 664. 17, 35 659. 72,' 664. 3

675. 15

)(
*.7

684. 17 654. 3
23.
7

665. 5 l-mrtCs 679. 20. 673. 4 659. 5^ 664. 27. 683. 3 659. 59 662. 54 t'x^vs 654. 14. 664. 9

^ (( .
ifpo'r

3.
674.

664. 2 4 675. 3 KfizOs 659. 36. 659. 8 667. 3 675. 12. KfXtCfLv 664:. 14,129; 678. . 676. Kepaia .?) 655. 49 662. 49<ce>os 683. 18.

^ !
659.
663.
1

275

,
6
;

^2.

664.
(.'*).

661. 27

Karapivetv

664. 8. 664. 15, 37> 4^ 664. 6.


5

661.

.
.
2.

662. 33 663. 21. 654. ; 677. 6. Xap^ai/iti 664. , 113, '6; 679. 9 659. 49 Xfyet:/ 654. 3 ^^ 655. ; 17, 21; 659. 47; 661. 22; 662. 24; 664. 103, 110; 666. 109; 687. 25;
!

(8
671.

/^
Acuptor

654. 2 (?); 633. 684. III. 666. 52 (?). 668. 6. 663. 44

S''^'?/'

1(
6.

660.

^/

/
/coti/of

680. 679.

.
3

662. 31 ; 670. 662. 41, 55"

661.

8.

671. 6

(?).

671. 17-

659.

661. 16; 674. 6

();

675.3.
654.
2

659. 58 660. 6. 667. 2 2.


667. 12.

/ 7/!'.

671. 2 2.

/'

KaSanfp 667. 26.

/ /
cQjTi'uf

681. 13-

.\>.
^17-

: !

679. 678. 4 665. 2. 664. 114; 81. 5 662. 2 7, 3 662. 53 664. 19663.

" (<^

659. 19662. 39 662. 5

664. 113 ; 681. 5 663. 2 8. 655. 7 659. 8. /cptVfiv 659. 7 ; 663. 19 655. 8. 663. 3 659. 12. 655. 43 659663. 3 654. 3^ 666. 1 1 8. 684. 4(?) 684. 1 6. 662. 43 664. 27.

' '

684. 2 . 664. 98 683. 659. 33 660. 5 659. 6. 655. 20.


;

19

659. 1 6. 654. , 4 Xoerpoi/ 662. 39 659. 23. 670. 6. 677. 3 XvCTtreXflf 664. 93 659. 34

655. 1 8. 654. 40 663. 46; 664.

662. 54

71. 665. 1 3, 5
;

1 8.

684.13684. 6.

/664. 94;

19,

43;

;'
Pap.).

664. 12. 659. 2 7 659. 4^

>

"

-pos

680.

.
2

666. 1 63. 659. 5 684. 660. 6. 659. 5 666. 156. ;^'/ 665. 8, 17664. 2 5 peyoi 664. 108, 116; 680. 3; 684. 17. 664. 8. MeXar . 201. 659. 680. 9 (?); 683. 33

'

(
660. 4;

4.

276

INDICES

(8
/xeVo?
iiept's

675. 13' 675. 2, II. 667. 6. ^^'659. 43' 46; 660. 8 662. 26; 663. 7, 38; 664. 91 667. , 8; 676. 684. 8, 9; 681. 6, 1 3' ^3 *'' ^^'^ 664. 1 6.

] /
vdv

676. 13. 682. 2, II, 673. 5662. 25, 677. 7 ioCs 664. 100. 662. 42, 46
viv

34; 666. 1 65; 676. 13; 678. 5(?) 664. 89. 654. 1 2 ; 655. g ; 659.
16.

654.
54,

655. 22; 666.

659. 54)
671.

70,

661.

35;

12;

^
/
/

659. 66. 679. 13 (?). 667. 4


;

664. 660. 5
$evos

6.

80; 662. 681. 13.

ov8e

667. 9> ? 1 8. 663. 20, 23 664. 9 663. 32. 660. 3 654. 6, 37; 655. 23; 659. 6, 8; 661. 23; 663. 4; 664. 85; 666. 156, 158; 670. 23; 679. 654. 5 7, 9 ^ 662. 52. /tijjSfis 659. 9; 666. III. /n^Sos 659. 76. 655. 2, 3; 666. 57 664. 37 659. 35; 670.
/ii)j

662. 26; 665.

654. 2 5; 664. 3; 671.8. 655. 10. ovbfls 664. 25; 684. 15 Olivets 664. 96 654. 5 664. 6, 33, 02,

2.

2, 6, 9,

671. 19, 20.

19.

' '

( / /
8(?).
i/atfti'

665. 1 8. 662. 33 681. 661. 1 8. 662. 38. 662. 36. 659. 78


;

2.

659. 5(?). 659. 59 mCs 660. 4 ; 663. 36.


veKpos p. 261.
i/fKrop

"/ /
/

veos

659. 80. 662. 5 1 vearepos 664.

() / //
;

(
W7
yijTi?

30

664. 103. 655. N77p?;t'f 672. 5. 654. 33.

667.

9, 17, 19. 3.

N.(

)(?)671. viKCLv 663. 19. i'tK7 659. 57.

673. 2 (.''). 659. 58. 659. 66 ; 662. 45> 46 (?), 677. . 51 659. 72. 664. 664. 3 665. 9 659. 17; 684. 40. 663. 38. 660. 3 659. 82. 662. 37 OKveiv 663. 37 667. 24. 663. 24; 664. 119. 667. 4 673. 5 (?) 659. 14. 666. 102. 662. 56(?); 675. 6. 665. . 662. 54 662. 26. 683. 3 684. 9 659. 37 667. 29. 5'655. 21 662.37; 664. 670. 21 (.?). 32 659. 27. 664. 37 654. 3, 31 659. 36, 48,58,75; 662. 28; 664.
;

;684.

({

'

'

654. II, 12. 659. 48 664. 93, 95 660. 8 662. 654. 4 44, 5; 663. 6, 19, 2, 38; 664. 92, no, 117; 666. 62, 157 ; 667. 22, 23; 670. 26; 682. 10. 664. 664. 9 5 659. 2 8. 654. 28; 664. ; 684.
;
;

'

6.

'-

-^
naibevfiv

659. 3 675. , 12.

684.
1
;

6. 4.
;

681.

6;

662. 31 664. 659. 666. 156; 670. 26;

6(2

671. 22.

670. 21. 659. 54; 684. 8(?),


661.

676.

7;

9, ^3

659. 67

/^ /

^
6.

659. 7 662. 42, 46, 5 659. 28. 670. 7 664. 664. 33 663. 14, 5; 659. 664. 34663. 12, 33 > 664.

8. 8
;

/.

NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS


679.
u/^epos

277
659. 9
659. 24.

rrapahihovai

663. 36, 40
663. 42 683. 21 654. 35. 663.

napaKCiKfiv

napflvai

6. 660.

663. 16, 48.


5
;

(?).

/ (
112.

670. 1 8. 659. 4^

664. 2 9, 114; 675. 5 682. 5683. 5 660. 7 662. 34 659. ^6.


;

684.

659. 32. 674. 5 659. 43 662. 33 64. 7r5s 659. 8 ; 663. 4 (?) 682. 2. 26; 666. 654. 1 9 ; 664. 36, 5^,
',

655 654. 2; 655.7; 654.


; ;

672.

8;

659. 25 ; 662.34(0; 43; 662. 34(0; 664. 667. 6 674. 8 (?). 675. 7 673. 8. /. . 659. 39; 661. 24-

^ '
'
7

655. , 3 654. 25, 26; 659. 72. 660. 7 (?) 661. 9 660. 7 (?)
661. 9 663. 24

684. 5

654. 33. 34; 666. 68. 666. 7.

671. 262.

. /82. 7
662. 24. 664.
12.

654.

/,

6.

659. 7;
12.

655. 19, 2. 667. 5 661. 1 6.

662.45; 670.
;

^ 6/0 '
nepie'ivai p.

659. 74 662. 38. 677. 4 664. 5 664. neXavos 675. 14 659. 26. wepi 654. 24. UtpiavSpos 664. 93

662. 3 682. 13662. 52 659. 62. 659. 4


661. 2 0.

e/ saep.

[:\{^) 661.

[
*. 684.

664. 24 684. 662. 2 6. 666. 5"


2 7.

, ,
aetpiyi'

662. 45^ 662. 26. 663. 42.


681. 2 5

' .
681.

e/

saep.

262.

662. 37. 663. 45 fpi)^au(v 666. 67 664. 109. ntTfivov 654. 12. 673. I (?). 663. 46; 664. 91-

^ II.

659. 45 683. 1 6. 662. 36. 659. 20. 664. III. 666. 59

663. 43 664. 43 664. 3 659. 53 663. 7 ; 664 25, 39> 681. 12 125; 665.

659. 33 659. 63. 667. 4 ;/[ 659. 12 8. 659. 37 ^"!' 659. 3^ 659. 9

;;[670. 7 /;'^ 660, 3


662. 49
671. 15, 20.

659. 6. 659. 5, 69. 663. 2 . TrXiiW 66. 6(!').


9

12, 20, 21.

684.

6, 2 2.

670.

12.

;(^'

]/ 7/

664. 1 8. 664. 120.


9

673. 659. 30. 654. 37

66'* 9

^67.

677. 5 667. 2 1. 663. 3". 678. 5 655. 3 659. 49 681 664.


;

^'
(0>

663. 8 (?). 662. 25, 29.

662. 44, 5^ 667. 29.

660. 12. 680. 9 4 664. QIQ. 4 662. 23. 675. 8. 664. II. 659. 29. 659. 7 659. 3> 6. 675. 3 662. 2 8. 660. 19. 655. 5 665. 3, ^3

679. 12. 654. 28, 29; 655. 2 1 659. 71 23 (); 664. 04; 671. 22 676. 9 678. 4 662. 43 auyye^em 664. 664. 40 667666.

(8
;

278

INDICES

^
II.

;.
5

Tpapts p. 261. 664. 92.

obe 684.

rotor

654.

I.

2 2.

;
4

( 2
660.

684. II. TOKtTOs 662. 27. 664. 64. Tovialos 667. 20. 654. 24; 667. 664. 38.

^ 7
15.

\[

^'
QQl
.

664.

8.
H

663.
3,

667. 12, 25. 664. 34. rpexfiv 677. 2.

rpt'f

rpeii

! '
5

664. 92, 97) 3' no; 670. 8; 683. 4. 654. 30 663. 44 666. 53 ^) 664. 96; 666. 158. 677. 8 (.?). <j!)evyetv 663. 25 ; 664. 1 18 ; 666. 64. 659. 8.

6/

661. 15

631.

6,

';

664. 45
8, 2 1.

662. 2 8. 665. 4 6, 667. 13, 20,

;('

659. 7 676. 1 6. 659. 73


667. 23.

662. 3 1. 662. 30. 662. 36. rptTa[ 660. 678. 3rpo'rror 664. 20 684. 5-

659. II, 69 664. 17, 42. 662. 35 664. II ; 670. 664. 99 664. 98. 666. 169. 666. 1 66.

6,

15.

677.

/
/
TtXf'iv
rco'f

659. 5 659. 66.


663. 3 664. 2 2.

661. 17; 664. 35! 666. 113; 677. 3; - 261. 664. 7 Tvpavvis 663. 14 664. 4
;

'
/
;^'7;
];^ooj

);

659. 4^ (1 684. 8. 670. 5 659. 1 3. 662. 28 ; 672. 7659. 5

TfXevrap

201.

670. 14, 18. repiTtiv 674. 6. TfXfijeir 670. 1 1 684. 23. tUiv 659. 92. n^eVat 666. i5(?); 680. 7 682. II. TiKTeiv 670. 10. Tt^av 659. 53; 672. 4. 659. 6; 684. 20. 663. 8; 664. 38, 128; 666. 59; 667. 15; 684.4. rt'f 654. 35; 655. 4, 6, 12, 13; 662. 24, 28; 664. 99, no; 670. I ; 671. i; 677. 6; 634. 8,9, 10.

(.!*).

659. 3 660. 9 664. 670. 671. 2. ; vpeis 654. 15 ^^ saep.; 655. 682, 4 4 ^/ ^/>. 659. 3 675. 9 (?) 663. 1 8. 667. 1 6. vTrep 664. 127. 664. 2 6. 667. 7 667. 1 8. 679. 1 8. 654. 13; 659. 9. 34; 662. 22 25,35; 664.42, 665. 670. 24 94 679. 3; 680. 14664. 8 1, 02. 663. 32 680. 12. 679. 4 (?)
;

'20

((!

675. . 662. 24; 664. 1 1 1. 659. 38; 662. 34 659. 46. 666. 664. 663. 34 655. 25.

.6.

;(6 6.
659.
;

;
'

(
;

664. 78 (?). 662. 52. 659. 24. 662. 53 659. 37 659. 27 662. 33 663. 12. 659. 65-

660.

'
[

666. 93 666. 1 3 ;(' 659. 5 659. 49 684. 19, 23. 659. 14; 664. 7(?). 660. 2 2.
671.
1

667.

6. 2 1.

659.
667. . 670. 1 6.

/.

NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS

279

(5 670.
3.
X<upis

1 1

2 5.
I

op.

/
,
75

661. 9, 13; 662. 46. 675. i6.

659. 26.

65.
659.

665. 115

39* 5^.

664. 07. 659. 5; 36, 39. 40, 47; 665. 8. 663. 3 666. 167 ; 667. 3

3.

() Latin (668).
a 25, 43, 56, 97> 174, 85, 212.

64,

Aulus 76, 112, 193.

circa 51

aurum

15.

ab 33 abire 26.
accipere 49, 148, 165, accusatio 9 ad 16, no, 121.

auxiliari 90.

(?), 169. circumscribere 39. clades 175. Claudius, Appius

Claudius

Bacchanalia 40. Baebius, Cn. Baeb. 67. Baeb. 74.


basilica 57.

M.

admittere 15. adversus 83, 151. Aebutius 38. Aemilia 143.

(3)177. M.Claud. Marcellus 58. Ti. Claud. P. Claud. Asellus 182. Pulcher 50.
(a) 48,

bellum 68, 89. benigne 90.


Bithynia Boii 55.

clavus (clava?) 196.

Cnaeus

2,

66, 137, 170, 191.

no.
7.

cogere 32, 73.

Aemiliana via 31. Aemilianus 95, 120, i2^,and


see Scipio.

comitium 208.

Bononia

commodum
competitor
9

206.
9.
(1.

Brutus 203, 216.

Aemilius, L,

Aem.

67.

M.
caedere Caepio,
i,

compositum
126, 171, 208. Cn. Caepio 170.

propositum

?)

215. affinis 12 2. Africa 125. Africanus, P. Cornelius Scipio A. (the elder) 25, (the younger) 210, and see
Scipio.

Aem.

Q.

Servilius

Caep.

176,

conferre 47. See connubium. coniurium.

182, 195.

connubium

17.

Caius 30, 76, 84, 191, 215.

Campani

17.

ager 75.
alius 92.

canere 62. capere 12, 127. Capitolium 189.


12.

consul passim. consulatus'i53. consultare 181. contra 189. cor 115. Corinlhius 168.

Ambracia

amicitia 165.

captiva 14. caput 16, 112.

Anio 188. annus 177.


Antiochus
6,

career 204.

carmen 105, 189.


213.

Carthaginienses 22, 83, 90.

Corinthus 135, 145. Cornelius, C. Corn. 84. Cn. Corn. 137. L.Corn. Scipio P. Corn. Scipio 27, 45.
see Scipio.

Appius (=Hasdrubal ?) 132. Appius Claudius (a) 48,


[b)

Carthago 132, 134. Cato 56, 114.


censor 56. Censorinus 88. censura 8.
centurio 15. certamen 42.

177.

aqua 188. arma 102.


Asellus 182.
athleta 42.

Cotta 210. Crassus 59. creber 134.

crimen 72.
crudelissime 132.

Attalus

no.
197.

Chaldaei 192.

cruentus 18. cum (conjunction) 210.

Audax

Charidemus 98.

cum

(preposition) 77, 186.

28
d (=duo?) 51. damnare 28, 51,
de 33, 179. decedere 119.
86, 179. dare 3, 6, 17, 166.

INDICES
Flamininus 52.
Flaininius 24. flere 100.

iugulare 198. lunius Brutus 200, 203, 216.

flumen 217.
forlissime 187.

Lacedaemonii
Laelius 176. Latini 32.
Fulv.

18.

Decimus 178, 200, 203, 216.


Decius(?) 89.
deditio 91.

forum 63.
fugare 49, 172. Fulvius, Q. Fulv. 81.

deducere 7. deformis 185. deprehendere 116.


deserter 207. desiderare 53.
deterrere
(?)

Nobilior 43, 82. funebris 60.

legatio 114. legatus III, 121, 135. Lentulus. See P. Cornelius

Scipio.
liber 11, 66, 87, 173, 199.

Gabinius 193.

liberare 14, 97.


liberi

Galba 152.
Gallia 52.

118, 162.
P. Licin. Cras-

184.

Licinius 203.

devincere 164, 185. devovere 188. dextra 166.


dicere 114. dies 25, 180.

Gallograecia 20. Gallograeci 13, 33. Gallus 44.


gladiatorius 54.

sus 59.

P. Licin. 3. Porcius Licin. 50.

L.

lictor 184.

Ligures 30, 49, 77. Literninum 26.


Livius 19,

dimicare 125. Diodotus 213. diripere 138.


distribuere 120, 169.

and

see Villius.

habere 115, 178.

Hannibal 64. Hasdrubal 122.


Hispala 37. Hispani 41, 77. Hispania i, 216.

locus 92.

Lucius 21,27,45, 52,67,75, 78,88,113, 145,152,153.


210. ludus 46, 60. lugere (?) 207. Lusitani 6, 83, 98, 136, 167, 171, 187, 212.

Ditalco 197. domus 180.

donum

165.

duo 141, 177.


edere 43.
esse 5, 63, 122. et 18, 21, 37, 38, 82,

homo

51.

Hostilius, A. Host.

Mancinus

112.

C. Host. Mancinus
1

215.
103,
hostis

Macedonia 179.
86.

magistratus 79.

169. evincere 177.

idem 180.
in 5. 34, 63, 71, 75, 91, 92,

magnitude 211. Mancinus 112, 215.


Manilius, M'. Manil. 88, 103. L. Manil. Vulso 113.

ex 20.
exercilus 96, 126. exoriri 89. exspirare 207.

108, III, 116, 125, 126, 174, 180, 187, 204, 208, 216.

Manius

88.
2.

Manlius, Cn. Manl.

L.

Fabius, Q. Fabius 4. Q. Fabius Maximus 149, 171, 185. facere 104, 186.

incendium 128. indicium 40 (?).


ingenuus 85.
insidiae 187.

Manl. 21, M. Manl. 81. T. Manl. Torquatus 178.

manus

55.

Marcellus 44.
Marcell. 58.

M. Claudius

Fecenia 37.
ferre 116.
fides 95.
filius

intercedere 27. interesse 180.


interfector 201.

Marcius Censorinus 88, 103.

Marcus
mare

interpellare 183.

58, 74, 81, 82, iii, 114, 115, 150, 215.


71.

100,

loi,

120,

141,

invisus 155.
Italia 44.

179. fingere 72.

Masinissa 121, 122.

iterum

3.

mater 38.
See indicium.

flamen 4. Flaminia via 30.

iubere 91. iudicium.

maximus Maximus

3, 4.

120, 128.

149, 171, 185.

/.

NEW LITERARY FRAGMENTS


Philippus 10 1.
Phil.

281

Metellus, L. Metell. 167. Q. Metell. 127, i53(?), 160.


millia (siglum) 51.

Poenus

minari

8.

.53 Piso 191. planus. See primus,

regnum 119. relinquere 119. remittere 165. res 216.


respondere 114, 181.

Minucius 21. Minurus 197.


mittere 121.

plebs 27, 78, 183, 204, 206. podagricus 112.

Rethogenes 161.
reus 99. revocare 26.

multa 205.

Poenus 97. Pompeius 170, 174.


pontifex 4. Popilius 191.

Mummius
munire 31.

145, 168.

rex

6,

no.
33, 169.
i,

Roma

Myrtilus 21.

populus 107, 205, 206. Porcia basilica 57.


poscere.

Romanus

93, 133, 135.

Rutilius 38.

ne 26, 177. nee 115. negare 202. Nobilior 82.


nobilis 14.

See pensare.
Sp.

post 46.

Postumius, A. Post. 76.


Post. 36.

sacrarium 127.

sagulum 165.
Sala?sus.

potestas 142.
potiri 214.

See Sapiens.

nomen

211.

Salinator 19.

non 133, 180, 220. Numantini 174, 212.


obicere 196. Oblivio 217. obsidere 133. occidere 16, i23(?), 164. Occius 186. occupare 102

praeda 20.
praetor 4, 135. prex 205.

Sapiens 176.
Sardinia 5. Scantinius 115. Scipio, L. Cornelius Scipio P. Corn. Scipio 27, 45.

primum

43.

primus 217. pro 206, producere 99. proelium 13, 18, 134.
profectio 183.
proficisci 5.

Africanus 25. P. Corn. Scip. Aemilianus 74, 94, P. 120, 123, 138, 210. Corn. Scip. Nasica 200, 202.
Scordisci 175.
84,
scriba 75. se loi.

omnis 91, 207.

oppidum 169.
Ortiagon 14.

proposiium 9

(?),

163.

Pamphylia
pater 73. pati 15.

13.

prospere 125. Publius 3, 50, 59, 74, 200, 219. Pulcher 50.
pupillus 37. Punicus 89.

senectus 118. Sergius 152.


Servilius

Caepio

176,

182,

pax

3, 6,

186.

pecunia 34.
pellere 94.

195 Sibylla 189. signum 168.

-que 16, 165, 180, 214.


22, 26, 35, 38, 100, 104, 119, 155, 164. Quirinalis 5.

Silanus 178.
singuli 209.

pensare (?) 16 per 20, 30, 73, 98, 102, 107,


120, 138, 194. perdomare 31. Pergameni (?) iii.
persolvere 35. persuadere 45. pes 115. petere 8, 79, 156. Petillius, L. Petill.
Petill.

qui

5,

socius 107,

and

see occidere.

Quintius 52. Quintus 4, 25, 81, 149, 160, 170, 171, 186.
53, 84, 122. quondam 113.
4,

spectaculum 54. Spurius 36.


statua 168.
stolidus 113.

quod

stuprare 85. siuprum 116.

quot 78.
75.

Q.
redire 93. referre 40.

25.

Petronius 150.

subigere 42, 136. subsellium 123. suffragium 194. Sullani 218.

282
suus 53, 55, 179, 180, Syria 157, 214.
tabella 194.
li

INDICES
transire 217. tribunus 27, 206.

78,

183,

204,

veneficium 51. venire (veneo) 209.


venire (venio) 91.

Tryphon
tutor 38.

213.

tabernaculum 61.
tabula 168.
tertius 89,

verna 193. vexare 167.


Villius 78.
vir 16.

Tyresius 164.
ultimus 108, 118, urbs 192. Uticenses 89.

Tiberius 182. Titus 178.

virga 208.

Viriathus

172,

185,

198,

Theoxena
tollere 41.

70.

201.
virtus 96.
vis 15.

Tiiessalia 126.

uxor 140, 146.


vastare 13, 83, 157, 212. vates 62.

Torquatus 178.
transferre 35.

votivus 46. Vulso 113.

IL
(Philadelphus?) 807.

KINGS AND EMPERORS.

Ptolemy Alexander
[<5

I.

Koi 'AXe^avBpos debsj

802.

om.

((

824.

Augustus.
711.
3,

6; 721. 4

et saep.;

731.

2,

4,

15; 742. 16; 743. 17, 44; 744.

15; 826.
Tiberius.

!
'.

({

746. 12.

Claudius.

DOMITIAN.

Nerva.

Hadrian.

730. 32.

'Abpiavos

Antoninus

729. 45
Titos

. . ^( (! , ' . 05 .. .. . .
722.
713.

713. 15; 80S.

2.

4>

44

Tpaiavbs 'Adptavos

(.

714. 28, ^2

715. 27, 32," 728. 2; 729. 34j 3^>


8,

707. 19, 33

>

714. I9j 24; 715.

20

730.

6.

Pius.

'.
;

723.

724.

728. 25

732.

6.

om. Tiros 727. 29.


712.
1

'Ahpiavos

729. 39 724. 5; 728. 17, 4^

732. 3

733.

800.

///.

MONTHS AND DAYS


2.
734.
.

283

Marcus Aurelius and Verus.

COMMODUS.

. 8. ^ . ',";

'

AircKp. VLaW. Mip.os

,.
>..

'- ,8.

.
,..

'>3..
719.

Wo,.:.

..S.

,a. ,.,., .op..

Pescennius Niger.

Septimius Severus and Caracalla.


AiroKp.

( ? . . . ^., 2., . :
Ntytp

725. 57

Aomio,

735.

.
IQj 7
ii

705.

:/ . 2
5.

28.

Cf.

801.

ie)

'. .,..
,
54

2.

705.

5>

65

AiiTOKpUTopes

705.

Philippi.

Philippus Augustus

Decius.
AiroKp.

.,:

et Philippus

Caesar cos. 720.

6.

Tpaiavhs Ac/ctos

..
DAYS,

2e,3.

658.

8.

HI.

MONTHS AND
(a)

Months.

!
793.
Sfpavtios
3, 43

lulius 737.

{) {^)
I.

723.

I.

Neparftof

715. 33; 722. 3)

789

()

'7/3$
Days
Kalendae

?" ()
()
713.
Sextilis

{^'') 803.

5
722.
2.

737. 21.

808.

i^tay6(va^

(3)

715.

33

37;

$ 722

Sextiliae

737. 21.

Nonae
722.

luliae 737.

.
6th
intercalary

(Caesarius,
3.

day)

Idus 737. 5 ^^ ^^^/ 747. 2.

284

INDICES
IV.
716.
3.
5,

*
'{
)

PERSONAL NAMES.

/3 728.
^Avbpo,
hikiavos,

29.
2.

'kya&ivos father of

Diodorus 713. 8; 723.

"

son of Ophelas 837. daughter of Paesis 837.


planet 804. father of Thonis also called

736. 3 7.
OioKepios

^,

800. 708. 2, 5

*|/
744.

'AXe^aubpos 718. 6.

father of Leonides 713. 9.


I,

16.

'
///
719. 733.
2

736. 69. 734. 4 791 825. father of Achilleus 722. 11. son of Apollonides 729. 3.^^, 38.
;
;

(or

2, 8, II.

)
36
;

" /
658.
811
(?).

Morous

725. 63. 786. son of Hermon 808. 'Apfffis 728. 2, 29. 745. 2.

father of

Didymus

' ^
717.
15.

715. 24.

121.
6.

194^; 806.
also
i.

Called

Sarapion,

gym-

nasiarch 716.

father of

Diogenes 728.

3,

36.

father of Sarapion 723. 4.

also called Papontos, son of


3.

Diodorus

707. 12, 34.


also Called Lollianus 718.
^2.
Ai/tL 736. 30,
'Avre/jMs

720. 8. Aurclia narion 720. 2. daughter of AureliusL


son of Aurelius

Ammothion
thion

742.

745. 3

658. 13.

, '' '',

,
rete

son of Lucretius 817. 736. 54. 708. 2, 1 5 son of Apeis 732. 3.

son of Theodorus 658. 3. 720. 9, 1 3. Aurelius


4. 7, 18,

Plutammon 720.
Diogenes

ex-archidicastes 705.

58,

also Called

727. 6, 10, 27. son of Horion 728.


Julianus 727.
7, 10, 2.

5, 14, 22, 36.

.
;

also

called

27.

') / ' ' '


744.

Oafpa

also Called Nica-

' (
;^;

[.] SOU of Sipos 708.

67.

4.

Avidus, Gradius Av. 735. 16. son of Thonis 732. 3. son of Ammoniu's 722. 27, 35. also Called Casius, strategus 719.

727. 17.

father of

Ammonius 729.

35.

714. 8 ; 718. 8, 32 739. i ; 791. son of ApoUonius 726. 5. 713. 2. (or father of Didymus

' ,
^
Chu[ 735.

i.

807. 744.

1 1

Barichius 735. 19. . epistrategus 726. 19. Beleus 735. 12, 13. Bepovs 736. 71 ; 744. 2.

719.

2, 8, II.

832.
father of

son of Diogenes 726. 5. father of Dionysius 724. 2. son of Dorion 716-4, 28. Libyan 743. 37.
scribe of the city 714. 6.
father of Valerius

Papontos 719.

10.

29.

730.

2,

35.

722. 15, 28, 39.

Claudius Valerius Firmus praefect 720. i. Claudius Sabinus 735. 14. Comar[inus (?) father of Mariius 735. 3. Cumesius (.?) 735. 27.

IV.
Md'pActos

PERSONAL NAMES
Diogenes
father of Dionysius 728. 33.

285

also

called

son of Polemon 715. 2. TeXXios epistrategus 726. 19. re>fXXoi 724. 2 736. 12. 722. 6. Topyias father of Polemon 715. 3, 12, 17. Topyias son of Polemon 715. 2, 34. Gradius Avidus 735. 16.
;

'' '
727.
6, 9, 27.

ratos

also Called Julianus


II.

son of Dionysius 728. 33. son of Phanias 789.


also called

727.

6, 9, 27.

rotof

745.

721.

835.

Ta\faros 715.

5.

,
716.

Theon

716.

8, 31.

son of Theon also called Dionysius


810.

9, 13.

SOU

of
3.

AureliuS

thion 658, 13. father of Panechotes 716. son of Hcras 716. 4, 28.

:
Aa/iSs clides

706. II. 743. 24, 40. 730. 9. 707. 8 / 825.

^.
713.
2,

( "
"
"
743.
Zeus 722. 6.
Z/x
.

'

712. 1 7 719. 2, II. daughter of Gorgias 715. 17.


2 2.

743.
6.

717.

811. also

Called Philonicus, basilico2.

43 deputy archidicastes, son of

grammateus 714.
746.
3.

Hera-

727. 4. 723. 3

784; 786; 791.


son of

Ammonius
. . .

or Apollonius 719.

father of Harpalus 808. Etiopius(?) 735. 29. also called Sarapion, 801.

strategus

2, 8, II.

son of Charit 826. son of Diogenes (?) 837. 719. 17726. 7 801; 838. son of Amois 728. 3, 23, 29, 36. father of Apollonius 726. 6. 713. 3. also called Diog. 727. 7, 27. father of Didymus 837. 733. 2. son of Sarapion 740. 38. son of Theon also called Dionysius 716. 17, 30. father of Amois also called Papontos 733. 3. father of Agathinus 713. 5, 7 723. 2. son of Diodorus 713. 4, 21. daughter of Galestus 715. 5. 718. 5, 12, I7; 790. son of Apollonius 724. 4. 714. 3, 4.
;

741. I. daughter of Theon also called Dionysius 716. 9, 12. also called Tanechotarion, daughter of Diogenes 726. 7.

839. 794.
Firmus, Claudius Valerius F. praefect 720.
i.

Zabdius 735. 13. Zebidius 735. 23.


. .

736. 715.

4.

2 2.

father of

Ptolemaeus 729. 37.


i.

father of Heliodorus 732.

son of Heliodorus 732.


6.

i e/

saep.

'-{ 800.

722. 6. goddess 731. 725. I.

286

INDICES

! "
17

son of 719. i8. father of Samus 716. 6, 30. 'Hpa/cXei'Si/f father of Sarapion also called Leon 725. 3. father of Theon 723. 2. father of Xenon 785. 'Upas 740. 35.
'Upas 715. I, 35'Upas father of Dorion 716. 5. father of Sarapion 730.

^ !
(8 (!
831.

son of Sarapion also called Leon 725. 3 ef saep. son of Tryphon 722. 21. 740. 42. 70. 2, lo; 740. 42, 43; 795;
basilicogrammateus 746. , 13. ex-exegetes, father of Demetrius

77(

!
727.
KatKiKios

. ,.

son of Isidorus 727. 736. 32; 739. I. daughter of Calas 713. lo.
.

715. 35. archidicastes,


)

816. ex-exegetes,
I.

father

of I

father of Valerius 735. 4.

727.

son of Heradion 725. 720. 5, 14. lulius 735. 28.


lulia Titia lex

i,

15, 46.

i.

736. 99; 740. i7(?).

, !
'

716. 5; 736. 68. daughter of Theon also called Dionysius 716. 10, 14. daughter of Diodorus 713. 22. son of etis and father of Pathermouthis 712. 4. also Called Polion 727.
. . .

! ! !
735.

, . ! ! ,
713.
TiVor
6.

736. 55.
also Called C. 719.
I.

806. 734. 2.
810.

epistrategUS 718.

734. 4 736. 4, son of Ptolemaeus 814.

father of Victor imperial steward

,
L

daughter

of

Aurelius

736. 33, 76.


father of Aurelius

thion 668.4.

836.
politarch 745. 4.

! ,
718.

thion 658. 15. praefect 705. 40.

! !
!
J.

740. 35

(.?)

746.

799.

also called Dionysius 716. 8, 31.

son of Heraclides 723. 2. god 806. son of Horus 797. father of Achillas 732. 3.
713. 2 0.
7.

725.

also called

Morous, son of Hanhonis

725. 63.
lebael 735. i8. lerraeus son of 816.

Macchana 735.
l6.

15.

! !

! ! !,
2,

! ,! !
.

736. 95 son of Pekuris 732. i ei saep. son of monax 831. also Called L., son of Heraclides 725. 3, 61. son of Alexander 713. 5, 9. son of Diodorus 713. 4. son of Theodorus 658. 3. 728. I, 28. father of Anteros 817. 812.
.

also
32.

Called

L.

812.

father of Ptollas

729. 35.

praefect 706. 5.

822.

?,

744.

I,

also Called
7, 10,

727.

28.

Macchana father of lerraeus 735. 15. Malichus son of Sa[ 735. 24. Malichus father of Themes 735. 17

, ,
726.
MiipKtos,

IV.
735.
5.

PERSONAL NAMES
also Called Amois, son of
1 7.

287
Diodorus

Oplio

Vinos

6, 9, 27.

. .

. praefect 726.
also Called

733.

3.

Diogenes
Called

also
9, 27.

Julianus 727. 6,

Marrius son of Comarinus (?) 735. Mi\as father of Miusis 719. 19.

3.

son of Bithys 719. 10, 27, 34. son of Mouthis 719. 1 8. 1Iaavs 740. 20. 736. 85 (?). Uavaipis son of Petsiris 808. TieKvpis father of Leontas 732. i, 9.

/ !
. .

Mfj/OTTTos

715. 24.

UeWis 811.
UfTerjais

son of Melas 719. 19. ) father of Pathotes 740. 40. father of Papontos 719. 18. also called Thonis, son of Harthonis 725. 63. father of Leptines 831.
.

722. 32. father of Pausiris

(9 742.

808. Mafpflvos praefect 726. 707. 14


2.

17.

'/
/jei/xof,

NiOTTToXf/iof father

^, (,

Nex^eis 739. 3. OvaXepia

727. 18.

'/

of ... on 712.

9.

also Called

N.

719. 6. son of Gorgias 715. 4, n. son of Tryphon 721. 2, 9. son of Thanochis 712. 4 ei saep. 'Avuearcos also called Lollianus

t^ovprjv^os

715. 22.
Titos

810. Sfvav son of Heracles 785.


Oveovo0is 815. OvaXfpia

718. 2, 32. /Lta 736. 17. Psenosirius 735. 25.


3. epistrategUS

718

I.

, ^
,
17

810.

790.
father of

Kunos 814.

StrategUS 803.

also called Nicarcte

SOn of ZoiluS 729. 37. son of Lucius 729. 35.


also called P. 727.

727. 16.
OioKepios

OvaXfptos OuaXepiof

imperial steward, son of

800. son of ApoUonius 730.

2, 34. also Called Polion 727. 16.

Comarinus

735.

5.
3, 7.

OmroKios archidicastes 719.

', ',

Romanus 735.

26.
'P.

745. II.
'. 721.
;

835.

Pacebius 735. 30. 837. son of Thanochis 712. 6, 12. 728. I, 27. 740. 40. son of Moimes ch also called Panechotes, ex-cosmetes 724. I. father of nychus 708. 17. 722. 2 2. son of Doras 716. 3, 27. also Called Panares, ex-cosmetes 724. I. 658. 5 Uaovs son of Bithys 719. 15.

^^
.

Sabinus, Claudius S. 735. 14 Sadus 735. 2, 20. Salmes 725. 32. son of Heraclides 716. 6, 30. daughter of Leonides 713. 5, 8. son of Ammonius 722. 8, 21, 37. 707. 1 3 716. 1 5 ; 729. 5 e/ saep.; 806; 825. also Called Asclcpiades, gymnasiarch
,"

716.

I.

father of

Diogenes 740. 38.


strategus

also

Called Euangelius,

801.

son of Heraclides 723.

4.

288
son of Herodes 730.
i.

INDICES
Truphon 735.
Ta-eei

27.

also Called Leon, son of Heraclides 725. 3, 6i.

2(
!,

722. 1 1 736. 50. 736. 8 1.

795.

daughter of 719. 736. 1 8.

Theon 723.

2.

2em(9of 799.

'6;^/) also Called Euterpe,

' :

Taios

'!
,
:

Valerius, Claudius V. Firmus praefect 720. Valerius son of Isidorus 735. 4.

i.

721.

835.
father of Dionysius

802.
praefect (?) 712. 2 2.

789.

716.
(or

742.

I, 1 7.

-) 794.

praefect 800.

father of .jausis 708. 4 praefcCt (?) 712. 2 2.

707. 12,

1 8,

34.

also called

Hermodorus,
i.

basilico-

736. 97
831.

grammateus 714.
739. 20. 736. 14. 792. 724. 3 723. .

829.
736. 70

daughter of
.

, ^^
Tavpeivos
TtVoi

Diogenes 726. 6. daughter of Panesi


4.

722. 22.

Taois 716.

715. 12,

8; 733. 5. daughter of Caecilius 736. 55.


1

799.

716. II.

9
(

728.
)

6.

father of

Didymus 826.
5

agoranomus 722.
695.
introd.

809.
father of

715.

.
5,

Teas 832.

Apion 728.

3^
3, 27.

Themes 735. 21. Themes son of IMalichus 735.


Titia, lex lulia et Tiiia

?(
(a)

father of Heraclides 719. 19.

17.
I.

720.

5, 14.

epistrategus 718.

736. 56. father of Heraclas 722. 21. father of Polemon 721. 2.

^ (

son of Panechotes 716.

719. 17. father of Thotsutaius 797.


father of Apollos 837.

(5

father of Ophelas 727. 8.

son of Ophelas 727.

8, 12, 22, 26.

V.

GEOGRAPHICAL.
709. 9 799. mXis 727. 2. 'ApTivoe'is 705. 50 (?).
'AXe^ai/Speta

Countries, Nomes, Toparchies, Cities.

Aegyptus 720.

i.

40( 706.

712.

I, 8,
I, 7.

'!

\(

743. 24; 744.

3,

5;
68.

705,

20,

727. II.

'
[]1

V.

GEOGRAPHICAL

289

^ /
726. 4

709. 5. 709. 7 705. 46 709. 6. 708.


2, 15.

"/

^
'0>

^/;? .
834.

263.

705.
;

^/?;? (//) 705.


2; 719.4, II 833.

g, 60.

707. 151 710 721.3; 727. 13; 746.13;


;
;

;? ^
;

784. 709.

719. 2, 715.

9, 12.

.
7
;

708. 2,15; 709.


831.

722. 4

723.

^
;

! > ^
! '
//
(for

705. 33

707.

introd.

263.
2.

738. 709.

^ '
TTJs

718. 4 724. . 707. 13 713. 6, 13; 716. 725. 2; 726. 7; 722. 4, 12; 723. 732. 730. 2 728. 5 727. g 3, 8 789; 808; 831; 836. (?) 745. 6.
;

730. 4
4

836.

709.

705. 37

8.

^?) 739.

74. 3

2.

743. 37

, ,
/7
>,

839.

705. 31

^63-

709.
5

709.

! [ ^
[
.

(
825.

721. 9 721. II
/neVij

808.

831.

;;$
.
roVot.

734.

(not Oxyih.) 712. 20.


8.

709. 6 825.

709.

[?)

Villages,

^,

814.

{?)
838.

814.

(9

/35

740. 35 794. 695. introd.; 740. 36 728. 2, 4, 6. 721. 9


;

) ;
Nejtxepa
neVi/r;

740. 43 740. 1 6; 823. 784.


(not Oxyrh.) 712. 20.

" "
(

(Heracleop.) 715. 21. 732. 2. 14 719.

742. 1 7 797.

NeVXa 713. 24, 31


(Dat.?
5

= O^.

tto'Xis)

745.

6.

732.

((5

808. 740. 24.

746.

837.
;

= '?)

740. 4

808.
2.

739.

Ueevvco 713. 26.

740. 20, 21, 37> 38; 835. 734. 3 )

290
'S.eviKtKti)

INDICES
740. 26, 730. 3, 39.
37, 38.

2ei/77Ta
'S.ewis

(([ 740.
803.
Swapu 810.

718. 13.

707. 2o; 740.

\{

734

3, 5.

()
730.
9

^ ;^
794.

! . '
*eXe/iax(
SfVCuvos

'
721. g.

743. 29. 695. introd.

(Fayum)

263.

808.

(Heracleop.) 715. 6, 13, 14 719. 4

(Heracleop.) 715. 24.

715.

2 4

715. 2 2.
713. 20.

(/)

.
I

810.

728.

6.

78.

78.
714.
1
.

(^)

Buildings, &c.
Saparrtfloi/

'ASpiawj /3t^Xto%jj 719. 35

73.

25; 832; 835.

>(((

(/)
(?)

Deme and

Tribe.

712.

g.

VI.

RELIGION.
() Gods.

722.

6.

731.
6.

6,

722.

^fof

722.

6.

58. 8 80.

715. 28.

Cf.

Index

ii.

VII.

OFFICIAL

AND MILITARY TERMS


() Priests.

291

apxiepaTfvaas 718. 3.

lepfvs

!
727.

808.

Up.

719.

2.

(<:)

Miscellaneous.
iepaTiKo\

"Upas 731.

6.

707.
')

introd.
i,

Upov

(' ('

offering') 658.

12

784.

658.
tfpa SC. y^

2.

iepov
7.

temple
5.

785.

721.

"laua 731.

VII.

OFFICIAL

AND MILITARY TERMS.

,
,
727.
714.
4

722. 788.
.

4.

(
.

(. D. 154)727. 2. (. D. 193) 719. 3) 7

^ > .
, 3 \vflo 6 .
712.
4
;

apxibiKaaTeiav

, :8 ,
735.
8.

8
39

712.

8.

710. 4
(c. A.D. 1
(c.
1 1

tepevi

tep.

.
1

;^.

53) 800.

706. 5 (a.D. 135) 726. 17


5)

(.

D. 1

54)

, \
',

712. 2 2. (a.D. 2-2) 705. Claudius Valerius Firmus (a. d. 247)


I.

'.\(8 (a.D.
713. 3
;

1 6)

746.
22)

(a.D.

720.

7
790.
735.
8.

668.

714. 5

715.

.
724.
726.
2

734.

715. , 35 709. 13 715. 35

.
718. 13 20, 20.

yp.

See

>

^35.

719.

6.

;^

( (
18.

714. 716.

786.
839.

747.

714. 6. (of Alexandria) 727. 714. 5) 3^'

,
^,
.
i

735.
5

6.

803.
790.
(a.D. 135) 726.

pedes 735. 12.

{..

180-92) 718.

^/ ^
745. 4 jrpay/iOTiVTijf 825.

735.

736.

6.

831.

292
712. 1,8; 825. 734. 3 733. 2
;

INDICES
833.
712.
21
;

^ .
833.
B. C.)

708.
708.

,
2,

1 7

740. 24, 26; 798;


717.
7>

8;
. .

..
719.
I, 4.

(Of Alexandria)
(a.D. (a.D.

154) 727.

2.

718. 24.
cent.

803. 803.
734.
2.

20-2) 705.

18, 67.
ist

(Of

708. 3
719. 7 710.
3
>

Oxyrhynchus) nroXe^atos 803. 6 Koi

(late

727.

(a.D. 1 93)

VIII.

WEIGHTS, MEASURES, AND COINS,


() Weights and Measures.
669.
;

&
;

669. 29, 41. 669. 29.


718. 8
7,

II, 24.

apovpa 713. 24 et saep.\ 715. 26 ja^;5.; 721. 10, 11, 14; 728.
; ;

^/

669. II, 20,

2 1, 28.

669.

8,

30;

729. 33 730. 8, 39 740. \\ et saep. 708. 4, II, 17, ip ; 718. 15; 735. 788 789 836. 9 736. 8 ei saep.
;

?
/
fitTitoj'

669. 28, 37.


669. 14, 742. 4, 13669. 30.
1 7,

26, 43.

II,

9
669.

,
2.

669. 38.

69.

28, 39

708.

8, g, 20.

669. 1 3, 1 6, 2 7, 3 1) 34 669. 2 f/ Saep. . 669. 34 . 669. 6, . 669. 5 . 669. 33 "" 669. 35 "" 669. 9 7. 669. 7 " 669. 35*

{
<-

669. 2 8, Kfpapiov 729. 36 784.

4
;

669. 29. 669. 2 7, 32


I
;

745.

784.

669.

27, 34

;^ 669.

2 7,

31

669. 27, 3^

669. 29

669. 26; 707. 26, 28, 30; 717. , 2 ; 729. 27. 836. . 740. 8, 20. . 740. 8. 740. 17 /.

^
669. 30

669. 795.

3, 1 8.

{?)

836.

717.

8.

/^ 740. 8

et saep.;

736. 15; 739.

789.
819.

IX.

TAXES
Coins.
/HI'S

293

{b)

706. 3; 712. 6, 15; 724. 6 ; 728. 9 ei saep.; 729. 6, 13, 20, 40; 730. 12, 37 ; 731. 8, 9, 10, 12 ; 784; 788 791 ;

728. 21.

808.
as 737. 2

.
^/

722.
719. 21
;

1 9.

.
;

729.

.
13
;

2f-

/3(5
7 ^/

731.

8, II,

736. , etsaep.; 739.

722. 25

?/.
733.
4>

/>.
6; 736.

68

et

saep.;

707. 8
;

ei saep.;

712.
;

6,

14, 15,

21;

739.

6.

722. 19, 25 724. 6 et saep.; 719. 21, 31 725. 22 et saep.\ 728. 9 et saep.; 729. 6 i/ ^/>, ; 730. 12, 14, 37; 731. 8, g, 11, 12; 732. 5 et saep.; 733. 4, 6; 736. 2 745. i etsaep. 739. 2 et saep. ; 742. 14
; ;

semis (^ as) 737.

1 1 et

saep.

784; 788; 791-2; 799; 803; 808;


817; 819.
712. 14
;

// >
et

728. 20.
1

710. 6-8 722.17,26; 784; 806. 734. 5, 6; 736. 1 2 722. 20 saep. 739. 4, 13 736. 8 / ^/. 739. 1 1, ;
;
; ;

819.
733.
8, 4,

6; 736.

2 et saep.;

739.
722. 26.

II.

743. 23.

IX.
733.
2
;

TAXES.

734.

'!((

734.

4-

263

832.
714. 23
TTopfioiv
;

/
/? (

712. 21.

708.

12.

798. 740. 2 2, 2 7 740. 23, 2 5730. 3 734. 4


;

733.

792.
8; 825.

'

712. 6

788.

^efiKa 712. I,

788.

, '

733.

4, 6.

.
732.

807.
4

294

INDICES

:
ayeiv

. GENERAL
;

INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS.


d/ieXeli/

abire 720. 13.

740. 45 810. 742. 7. 705. 74 717. 3 ] 742. 12


713.
1

/^/
;

745.

839.

3.

/7

;^/

836. 722. 4

798.

! :
dft

/^^ 8

8! ;
a^friffu/

722. 12, 34; 723. 5; 72. g. 744. 4 3 705. 5, 5^ 715. 17; 744. 745. . 727. 1 6. 707. 34; 712. 5, 713. 2 1, 30; ; 716. 17; 717. 6; 718. 8, 719. 15; 725. 6 ; 746. 791.
;

!
!
,
28.

707. 31 ; 742. 14. 724. 729. 1 8. 705. 02. 729. 9 669. 29. 705. 6 1. 707. 23, 3^ ; 729. 8. 707. 19; 729. 33, 35 745. 9 714. 26. Cf. Index V (/). 707. 12; 715. 2; 716.

728.

715. 3 6. 718. 23 717.

729. 19 ; 836. 658. 6; 719. 13

808.

719. 15,

6.

807.
atpfii;

719. 26; 728. 12; 729. 21, 31, 41,


716. 22; 729. 41

43; 787; 800.


aipeatf
atViiv

: ^/
{
)

;
II.

729. 6, 28. 742. 6. 729. 7; 741. 1 3707. 23, 3^ 706. 5; 724.


717.
2, 1 4

743.

1 8.

730. 7 705. 7 6. avaXa^/Sami' 707. 25, 35; 719. 32; 721. 6, 7 ; 724. 8. 740. 28 ; 825 ; 836. 709. 3

5,

202.

745.

'

709. 12. 788. 725. 4 axatm 669. 29, 4 730. 5 706. g 718.

(9

729.

14.

^
710.

713. dvaroXjj 725. 12.

833.
3
;

719.

24.

709.

uKoveiv 812.

'
&(
(sic)

''
6.

794. 736. 8, 31, 34, 72, 76; 739.


729. 43
712. 12,
1 5-

715. 29.

729. 21.
713.
II,

6;

719.

2;

724. 6;

avvfiv

743. 34, 4 705. 1 6, 66; 805. 707. 25. 707. 2 7 743. 39


719. 3, 4, 722. 34 718. 30
9

263.
1 7,

707.

3^

727. 28. 736. 73; 740. 46. 736. 7, 74

805.

(1< 716.

658. 13; 798.


21.

. 26a. 712. 20 ; 721. 19; 736. 31 718. 21 ; 745. 4


725.
2

744.

8.

9-35

.
(iltow

GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS

295

/
''

658. 16; 705. 51, 60; 716. 19; 719. 32; 727. 29; 805; 826. 705. 14, 64. anaiTflv 718. 23, 29; 727. 18; 803. 722. 28. 718. 14 724. 12. 706. 2 716. 6, 29. 706. 8 J 722. 18. anepyaaia 729. 2, 8.

;^

729.

*],

S.

7$.
as 737. 2

712. 13

See Index VII.


718.
3

^ ^
(((5

/ saep.

^^

! /
85

713. 39.

709.

719. 22; 808. ^28. 7 719. 17, ^9 719. 9 715. 6, 36. 713. 34 715. 3; 719. 24; 808.
'>

>

705. 59 718. 8, 2; 728. 705. ; 729. 15, 9> 42, 43; 730. 22; 744. 745. 7 746. 3 ; 798 ; 836. 712. 6; 729. 7; 808.

:
731.

726. 725. 4 745. 9 736. 36 740. 42. 709. 4 706. 9


6.

8; 6;

718. 19auctor 720. 4 719. 30, 33 729. 19

(
^,!

707. 3^ 742. 5, 725. 40 729. 1 6,

718. 12.
719.
2, 9,

706. 3 743. 23 aiTo/xcTpeli' 798. 724. 3 742. 3; 744. 8. 745. 7 736. 3 730. 12. 729. 3 1 730. 20. oavt^v 706. 6. 724. 14 725. 35, 4; 731. 2. 733. 2 734. 3 See Index VIII (). 796. apeaKia 729. 24. api^/xo's 735. 8 ; 742. 8. 723. 5 apiaTfpdf 722. 736. 23, 28, 35

^
*

729. 726. 12.

719. 2 2. 716. 7, 12, 20

725. 7; 727.

6;

740. 44, 45, 47 722. 6; 744. 745. 3


721.
5

707. 37
743. 296.

. !

^a^of 669. 8.

,
721.

736.
4
;

/3.

()

718.
8
;

9,

5>

^6, 19,

730.

810.

.
669.

;
;

. {{) 3 .

/360/

741.

6.

See Index VIII (). dpovpijSdj^ 729. 31 832. 741. 8 744. 9 708. 5, 1 8. See Index VIII (). apTibiov 738. 8.
736. 9
^^
^^'^''

' /^
)-

See Index VII. 739. 9

.
1 1,

27;

741. 1 8. 719. 23; 730. 21. 713. 1 8.

669. 28, 37 803.


716. 1 8. 719. 35

826. 710. 2. 825. See Index VII. 826.

296
729. 20.

INDICES
yovevs 713. 7, 38.
701/17 729. 40. yuvv 722. 24.

oau

( ((
/3otK<5s

717.

9, 12, 13, 14.

734. 4 ; 743. 2. 729. 39 705. 76; 719. 29; 721. 3; 729.

II.

70.
1

6.

.
34

716. 32;

725. 64; 727. 28;

728.

See Index VII.


p. 263.

/35

719.

6,

8;

729.
16.

729. 2 2. /3oCf 707. 9; 729. 705. 77 708. 7, /3$ 708. 8, 2. ^cc/xdf 785.

;3/

nOQ. 3; 716. 31; 718. 24; 719. 6, 27; 724.10; 725.63; 728.33; 729. 37; 743.39; 746.5; 787; 811. 736. 1 6 808.
;

capere 720. 15
collega(?) 735. 14

conducere 737. consul 720. 7.

2 ei saep.

?
ye'i^oy

736. 48, 83.

'() 8 > 8
715. 716.

I.

I.

839.

741. g. 739. 1 8 736. II, 88, 89. 741. 5


;

ya/iiTOf

795.

713. 12, 32.

f^'

8( //

719. 1 6. 713. 1 6.

yeveVia 736. 56, 57.

729. 36. 727. 20; 729. 31. ytpbios 725. 5; 736. 23, 27, 28, 35; 826. 658. 12. 728. 9, 30. 669. I 3, 1 8. yecopyflv 718. 19, 23; 728. 4; 740. 38, 40. 740. 1 6, 21, 33, 35. 7^705.74; 707.23,36; 715.22,25; 718. 24; 730. 8, 17, 36; 810. Cf. and Upas. 722. 6. 705. i8, 67; 707. 34; 709. 6; 712.16; 716. 21; 718. 29; 719.22,30; 721. 6 ; 727. 1,4; 729. 1 7, 18, 30 732. 5, 9; 743. 20, 41; 745. 5; 807; 832. 743. 37; 744. 3. y\v{ ) 734. 4. yva^ftjs 736. 37. 740. 1 4 729. 43. 705. 39; 718. 20 p. 263. 722. 3 1 723. 4. 736. 5 708. 3, 1 6.

795. 669. 14, 17) 26, 43 705. 47 808 ; 836. 799. 705. 63. /7;705. 79; 708.12; 712.6; 729.28; 736. 98; 739. 3dare 720. 3, 6, 15. 720. Seiy^a 708. 5. 8 Se'iv 718. 14, 18, 29; 727. 19, 20; 729. 4, 718. 245, 16; 743. 8. Semveiv 736. 93 736. 36; 738. , 4, 7 '?? 729. 2 2. 747. .
;

/;

8 ( |
)

741. 172 4.

722.

(
'

742.4, 3 705. 6. 707. 21, 3; 708. 13; 714. 2; 716. 19; 725. 7, 1 1, 48; 740. 30; 800. 669. 24; 707. 2, 15; 715. 37 712. 6 719. 28, 30 725. 56 {) 729. 2; 793; 803. {) 707. 22 718.11 etsaep.', 729-33; 730.17; 740. 740. 29. 14; 810. 740. 1 8, 20. 669. 38. 719. 23. 669. 34

.
;

. .

719. 1 7, 13; 835. 719. 32.

. ^) . . .
9

^'?'

712. 12.

"

721.

/
Stai'peats

?>

GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS


719. 3 1.
eav

297

8 /
/
/;/

707. 22; 721. 12; 733. 2; 734. 2; 800; 803.


715. I p. 718. 7, 10.

709. 4. 709. 2 726.


;

12.

' / 8
/ (
, ''
dievTVxelv

727. 24. 743. 2 2. 727. 20. 669. 37) 4 743. 28; 793. 719. 32 718. 2 5
;

720. 5, 14 729. 18. eavnep 729. 4, 8. eyypanros 707. 2 . 707. 33 728. 40. 705. 6 1 712. 728. 15705. 43) 62. ^t/ios 729. 7 705. 37
e
J/

(
(5

715.

825.

(5 .
34
;

9
eltos
(Is,

)8(

658. 8. 669. 3 708. II, 22


715.

797; 833.

' \

718. 12; 725. 64; 729. 37 745. 6, 8. 669. 26 ;"719. 24.


;

263. 716. 32;

728.

718. 2 2.

^ '

'

707. 23725. 14, 43 716. 22; 719.4, 3; 725. 8; 729. 740. 15 et saep.\ 731. 7, 13, 17 789. 742. 11; 743. 26, 28, 32 727. 5 712. 8; 714. 8; 729. 26;

789. 707.

24.

718.

( ( ( (
flaobos

(
22
;

740.

1 7,

8.

729. 5, 6. 736. 97 721. 8 725. 30 729. 705. 39 719. 6. 5,7? 744. 4


;

2,

14, 3

1V7. 12. 717.


2.
; ;

BUmos 717. 10; 746. 9; 787. 705. 3^ '; 728. 2 4.


717. 5j 12. 716. 14, 20.
;

725. 705. 35) 77 711. 729. 8, 29, 37 728. 21 729. 9 713. 31 708. 8, 9, 2 . 708. 7) 19! 729. 36. 744.
; ;

727.

.
;

717.

727. 2 1 826. 719. 20. 729. 20 741. 3. 741. 2. 719. 5 718. 24. dominus 720. 3, 6. 724. 7 714. 15; 722. 14; 723. 3 724. 3716. 15 714. 13 See Index VIII (). 728. 21. 712. 14
;

. '

717. 7; 726.

263.

727. II

742.

743.

724. 12. 725. 47 725. 5 835. 729. 1 8. eKKpoiifiv 725. 37 e/iXoyi7 729. 4 727. 9 707. 4 fKTivfcv725. 55; 728. 19; 731. 12. 729. 2 1. 743. 2 9 eXatoi/ 736. 15; 739. 5, ") 16, 21; 784. 705. 46; 708. 7, 20; 669. 44 729. 42. fXfieepos 705. 40 ; 722. 6.

36; 744. 12. 725. 12.


714.
2 2.

iXfvdepccais

800.

eXtvOfpovp 716. II.

>(?) 740.
p.

722. 3 1
263.

723.

4.

1 8.

298
708.

INDICES
9, 21
;

717.

(
iviavTOs
ivoiKflv
ivo'iKLOv

, 5

( ('
82.
e|aTta

725. 55 (?) 707. introd. 707. ivbeiKvivai 705. 32. eviKa 719. 3

712.

3 lOj 16, 19.

(vexvpovv

729. 44
713. 39

725. 17, 20, 23, 25, 52 724. 4 725. 2 8 713. 4; 715. 7 728. 6; 729. 14; 730, 4; 732. 2; 808;
; ;

. (
inaytiv, fVayo/xfvai

725. 8; 729. 26. 719. 1 6. 706. 8 719. 25. 725. 36. iopriKOs 724. 6.
e'^^s
;

( ( ^
0

( ((
658.

705. 4^ 729. 34 729. 34 705. 7

715. 3 eVroXiifos 741. . eWos 724. II, 13; 728. 15; 729. 20, 30. 717. 1 6.
9

(' ('

( (
((
;

( (^ ( ( ( (^
f'nifiKTjs

705. 59) 7^ 705. 42

263.

729. 2 0. 832.

718. 2 8. 714. 5, 3^

744.
;

12.

719. 7 727. 3 727. 15; 729. 22; 743. 43; 744. 6 745. 746. 9 805. 791.
; ;

fTTtvojav

eVtarfXXfti'

(
(
(-!

722.

3,

707. 4> 5 705. 7 e^itmi 705. 52; 722. 27; 724. 12; 725. 53; 727. 25; 729. 43 729. 15
714. 6. 727. , 5

.
eniTponevfiv
JO/Liot

705. 34 730. 1 ; 810 838. 743. 30 722. 1 9 743. 43 724. 3 725. 50. 803. 790.
; J

718. 25. 746. 4

789.
See Index VII.

725.

3
727.22-4; 729.
18.

iWireXfii/719.26; 726. 20;

712.

,
J

8.

729. 9 epyaaia 742. II.


(3).

eVotKioi/

725. 55 729. 20. 727. 5 743. 32. 716. 7 j 740. 42. 707. 37; 729. 34; 838.

709.

See Index III 705. 49eVa/coXov^eti' 729. 29. 725. 42. 707. 6; 729. 1 8, 40. 707. 7 ; 740. 30. cVet 713. 20; 718. 22 ; 727. 25.

ipyarda 800.

(
'/
eVt

('

epyoi/

(
eViStdomi

('

739. 3 729. 29
736. 92.

718.

1 3

fptov

791

'/^'"'^'"

( 8(

713. 28; 716. 14; 729. 15. 715. 13, 5


4

715. 9) 743. 2 4, 4^ 805; 839. y, /^. ;4, 4 746. 5; 787 13; 745. 7 714. ereoos 70. 63; 712. 10; 714. 4; 718 2 fTtpos 705. 718. 22; 4 719. 25; 725. 30; 726. 19; 729. 3, 4>
j

/.

74-4-. 6 744. 6,

*?

; ;

.<

730.

719. 28.

(8( 705.

810.
36.
;

705. 60; 715. 29, 34

716. 18, 28.

705. 23, 34 ; 718. 2 1 727. ; 729. 3,25, 44; 744. 3. fv 822. (vboKUv 707. 11; 725. 47, 62; 726. 22 727. 26.
;

m 658. 8

II, 26, 29.

( (
(^

GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS


?Sior712. 19;
7

299

705. 17, 66. 729. 2 2. fiSvs 744. evdews 839. 669. 5

( (
fii/ota
eiru;(eli'

:
Upeiis.

719. 27, 34
715. 37

715.6; 729.28; 807; 836. 718. II, 27; 719. 24. 740. 2 , 28, 32.
5

718. 28.

'ifpaTiKOs

705. 5, 65. 705. 31


717.
5>

iepop

707. introd. See Index VI (d). 658. I, 22; 784; 785.


if

743. 25.

Upoi,

pa

(yrj)

721.

800. 805.
811. 711. 4
49

((
Ceiyo?

739. 19. ha 709. 2; 718. 30; 742. 6, 8; 743. 37, 43; 744. 13; 745. 10; 746. 10; 805. 790.
735. 8. 741. II.

?7;)3 705.
792.
710.

729.
731. 715. 7
43, 44
;
;

3
5

' .

707. 9 ; 741. 8, 9. 726. 6; 805. 754. Ciros 736. 27, 60; 784.

722. 13

725. 42, 56
;

729.
9

2,

789. 709. 2,

;
8;
;

725. 46

731.

item 735. 12. 736. 50,

8
727. 24.
718. 9; 729. 22; 738. 740. 29; 836. 836.

800.

See Index VII. 722. 6. 725. 12. i5/iepa 705. 35; 713. 40; 724. 14; 725. 12, 37, 41, 43; 731. 7, 11; 736. 68-71, 90; {d). See Index 804. enayopevai 787.

705. 47 728. 708.

24.
5,

17, 26, 49, 53. 78,

8;

727. 19

705. 62.
725. 44j 5} 5 707. 7 27; 729. 12. 729. 5, II, 9> 29 729. 3, 22, 24~6. 669. 28, 41 729. 4, 25, 26 742. py 729. 4 747. 2. Kalendac 737. 21. 747. . 745. 8. 705. 4; 805. 729. 34 710. 4 721. 7; 729. 32; 730. 19 728. 25 728. , 29.
; ;

.
738.
VTot

708. 6. 728. 2; 730. 27; 833. 729. 36.


741.
3

5
((5).

See Index VIII

2.

736.

.
8.

669.

8.

^e'Xeti/

717. 2; 743. 17, 27, 39; 745.

etos.

740. 21, 26, 29, 33> 49 See Index VI ().


810. 832.

^^ . ^
dtpivos

()

744. 738.

6.

736.
;

9, 47

( ^

729. 2 2. 658. 15 658. 7, II 729. 2 3658. 2.

( ((
741.

3
5

736. 14, 84

' ^
aaoy
787
;

729. 8. 715. 37 708. 3, 1 6. 705. 44, 74; 707. 3; 729. 2.


811.
II,

KaraXoyeiov 719. 3> 6.

669. II. 736.

8,

54, 94

300
713. 23.

INDICES
725.
2 0.

708.

^
9
;

introd.
;

705. 7 707. 23, 25, 3' 5 729. 5 729. 6, 39"4> 43


718. 4 717. 4
Xoyoj

el saep.

705. 78
714. 37

707.
;

715. 36

719. 38; 731.

14; 786; 826.


712. 3; 713.

5
iptos

800. 730. 9

705.
/carot/cKcoi
>faro;(i7

24.

715. 23, 25. 713. 36.

Kvptor('lord')728. 15; 744. 2. Cf. IndexII. (' valid ') 719. 26; 725. 56; 727. 26;

728.25; 729.14,34; 730.31; 731.14;


838. 705. 6o, 69
;

709. 8. Xeueti/ 658. 10; 705. 51; 706. 13; 708.


19; 715. 9; 721. 13. 707. introd. KeWapiov 741. 12. Kfpa/xtoi/ 729. 36 745. 784. 729. 9 736. 77
6,
; ;

and see Index V(3).


1 3,

718.

20, 26.

^ =)
736.
[ 1 6.

808.

8((
730.

736. 99 705. 73 839. 708. 22; 712. 19; 715.

7,

3^

'

6;

804.

796. 729. 2 32 2,

icpdCeiv

:(97 708.

( '

Cf. Index V {. 833. 719. 15; 729. 32; 740. 43 729. 5. 6. 715. 7 736. 9Ij 1 724. 8. Ko/ii'Cfn' 708. 14; 730. 20. Ko'i'toi' 739. 7 729. 3 810. 729. 729. 728. II. 819. 724. . 784. 739. 8.

{
794

xXrjpoiO^os 719. 16, 17

((
/-

707. 20, 29; 724. 41; 743. 26; 744. 8. 705. 1 9, 39, 68. 705. 30. 806.
711. 3.

8,

9; 729. i7,

714. 23; 733.5

786.
5

^715.
;

25; 721.6; 728.7; 730.9;

810.
)

II ; 707. 14; 717. 2; 744. 705. 79 731. 4 705. 7 2. 792. lex lulia et Titia 720. 5, 14. Xijyeii/ 729. 17. 825. 729. 19.

70.

736. 75

'
,
{

669. 33 669. 2 7, 3 719. 17, 9


;

709. , 705. 30 708.13; 724. 725-36; 726. 14; 727. 23; 729. 13; 732. 5; 740. 741. 800 825. 707. 24; 709. 8, 12; 713. 36; 716. 6; 724. II 725.19; 729. 4 ^^ -^^;^ ; 732. 13; 740. 32. 715. 19; 745. 6; 808. 722. 3, 40 784.

.
;

717.

9. II,

3
)

736. 812.

726.

7
6,
;

8, 20.

736. 73
1
;

708.

9
4

magister 737.

2 / saep.

719. 8

727.

726. 20.

724. 3 725. 7 725. 15, 21, 2 7, 48.

GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS


722. 839.
;

301

7> 1 6,

24, 33.

NeiXo/ierpiKOy

669. 36.
; ;

(
/txeyas

705. 22. 669. 44


722.

717. g

729. 43.

7, 9.

/ieV

/^ej/eiv

788. 706. 12. 705. 36. 744. 5.


713. 29.

: /
/",
^ei/ia
;

725. 8. i/eoi 707. 17 718. 8 729. 19; 836. 729. 8. 719. 2 1 722. 2 . . 706. 7 . 706. . 795. g.

:, : :,

:
9

709.
1

729.

/ni'pof

728. II. 729. 34 /txeTpeti/ 669. 6 735. 7 740. 24, 26, 35 See Index VIII (). 722. 8. /xe;ipt 725. 12; 729. 7, 9; 731. 3 /i^Kof 669. 6, 7 725. 5 715. 3, 2, /)}7 658. 4; 713. 5, 9> 23. 3^

( "
;

707. 7; 715. 15, 16; 716. 13-5, 20; 719. 14 722. 13 ; 728. 8 729. 19, 31 740. 46, 47 810. 669. 45 722. 7 et saep.; 729. 28 ; 734. 3. 728. 1 3. 706. 38; 712. i6; 719. 4.
;

719. 14, 1 6, 811.

8.

747.

leviKO:

712. , 8; 825. hpos 736. 82. ^uXa/i5i/ 729. 31 ; 730. 10;


^vKoXoye'ia

715.

.
:
((/

:
8;
2, 3,

716.

3>

5> 9.

719.

2, 8,

722.11,22,32; 723.2; 726.6; 728.


28; 733. 5 736. 69; 740. 44 729. 12, 23, 28.
5

741.

: : / : :
/3.
('14:.

706. 3 729. 33 729. 12. Cf. Index VIII 729. 29.


729. See Index VIII (). 669. , 2.
21
;

(a).

716.

8.

712. 5, 715. 714. 14; 723.

2;

;
3

719.

707. 7 739 735. 6.

12,

: :
/
vavayeiv

669. 3 724. 5; 725. iS ei saep.; 729. 12 731. 8 736. 6. 707. 14, 729. 3 / -^;^ 730.
;

/ / :
o/xoios

669. 9 718. 9

729. 36. 707. 3; 729. 2; 784; 788.


718. 2 3

6,

19, 24,

27; 745.

810. 707 17, 20, 24, 35 729. 14, 20, 34,41; 730. 21, 31,39; 740.34; 838. 729. 8 825. 728. 2 1. 719. 32 /lo'j/os 707. 22; 718. II ; 729. 8, 9 729. 6, 39 /(/ 736. 13, 84
et saep.;
J
;

724. 8; 730. 14; 740. 744. 4 22


;

8.

743.

'
: 5

714. 27; 715. 20. 705. 61; 725. 14 708. 8; 709. 6; 711. 2; 725. 23, 25, 3 1, 34; 729. 9; 736. 5, 7, 8; 740. 33

'

719. 12;

725.

726.4; 785;

803; 808; 831; 833.


725. 57 ^2. 726. 23; 731.
716.
1

839. 669. II, 24. vavkov 792. ne 720. 12.

6.

740.

741. 715.

. .

1 9,

2 2, 2 5-

302
729.
9-

INDICES
744.
4; 785. 798.
711 5
6.
1

741. 20.

717. 6; 729.

6,

23; 742.

2,

^
728.
^

II.
5

735.

707. 2 8. 729. II. 729.


669.
36.

724. 13; 725. 43


II

731.

718. 12.
2 8, 39

705 73713.

6 105. 48;
8,
715.
opvis

.
837
72

707. 28;

719. 31;

728.

796

;^/
25.

705.

opos

738. 5 ore 736. 36, 92 744. 1 717. 2, 13 743. 28 811; 812. 735. 6. 722. 8, 6, 24, 34; 723. 5 706. 6; 707. 32; 743. 35 6([\ 712. 1 1 ; 732. 4.
;
;

'
6

738. 9 729. 7, 9 724. 13 ; 729. 729. 6, 4


719.
2

'
?(
;

719. 12, 25 719 20. 711. 2; 727. II, 25. 736. 33


717. 4! 725.
9,

729. 33
42; 729.
4. 9>

.
745. 8

, ^
785.
TreCo'i

^9;

788.
713.

713. 20 ; 715. 716. 15

2 0.

784.

706.

2,

715. 28.

719. 24

(8 740.
7

pedes 735. 12.


37

/
7(
)

729.

736. 52, 62, >/^' 736. 6 1.

729. II

731.

744.

797. 736. 59 730. 14 736. 38736. 39 > 744. 7 724. 13; 725. 8, 36; 736.
;

,,
1

!. /

e/ saep.

!.
718.

814. See Index VIII (), 742. 9 ; 745. 5


.

' . ^ ^ .
7?
'/

831. 724. ; 729. 1 1. 729. 24 725. 49 See Index VIII 707. 32. 736. 37
719. 3^

((5).

(\9.

^'
TrapaSet|ti

8(

705. 35 727. 2 8. 725. 53> 54 74:3. 23; 798.

72L

12.

712. 2. 716. 2 2 713. 35

729.

2 2,

44

742.

7, 9

705. 53 j 743. 36 736. 29, 79 729. See Index VIII (). ma^eti^ 812. 12; 740. 3 784; 819. 705. 32; 727. 21. 729. 28. 729. 30. 733. 3 707. 26, 32. 669. 7, 8, 669. 29726. II. 742. 744. 746. 2. 705. 3; 712. 8; 725. 39; 833. 721. 7; 729. 2 3

GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS


707. 28. 799 805. nXovs 727. II. nouiv 705. 77 ; 707. 29; 709. 3; 713. 11 718. 10, 14; 722. 28, 36; 725. 13, 441 726. 14; 727. 11; 729. 7, 24, 29, 37; 743. 40 745. 8 ; 787 ; 811. 705. 33. (= Alexandria) 727. 2. (= Oxyrhyn705. 22, 39, 43 714. 7 chus) 658. 2, 6 732. 2 ; 736. 31. Cf. Index V {a).
;

^
Tvpoaehpfvfiv

303

^
(5
TTopfioP
TTore

^(
Trporepos

725. 705. 3 1 787. 708. 12. 705. 78 730. 25. 10Q. 12; 708. 12. 736. 46, 89; 739. 795.

7,

,
1

12, 14-

745. 4792. 732. 4

' '
, |
^//

718. 15,

2 0, 2 8.

705. 48. 746. 6.


741.
1

nporepov 715.

6,

4.
;

732. 2. 719. 2. 739. 1 6. 742. 4

729. 13 800. 729. 7.


712.
6.

7/(5

800.
7

738. 669. 27, 34


717.
1 6.

735.

.
805.
;

9. /
745.
jroTta/iC)f

TTVKVOTepov
;

741. 1 7. . 263.

729. 13, 24. 27, 32, 38; 722. 706. 4', 743. 19 irpaypareia 806. 825. 746. 6. 712. , 8; 825.

6;

723.

'
!

708. 4 ^/^^. 8 ^/ saep.; 740.

718. 15
28,

735. 9

736.

31, 32, 40;

784;

789; 833; 836.


729. 43 707. 19, 20. 744. 1 2 745. 6.
;

7'

quo 720.

12.

712. 21.

733. 2 ; 734. 3 728.22; 729. 2; 730. 27. irp5^f712. 736. 28. 718. 25; 822. 21 708.

' :

^ ! '

718. 12. 718. 5)

807.
713. 29; 715. 34; 727.
7,

736. 75 707. 3 736. 58. 729. 32. rogare 720. 3 719. 17, 9 719. 5; 742. 15; 743. 44; 798; 805. 746. 745.

14; 732.

2;

728.

124:. 12)

786. 728. 8.
;

719. 9 724. 2; 713. 33> 37; 715. 30 725. 44, 51. 54, 62; 727. 22; 728. 32, 4; 729. 8, 37, 42; 732. 8,

(5
semis 737.

735. 8; 740. 23, 25; 819.


716.
2

,*
1 1

741. 736. 82. 833. 724. 724. 3

.
2.

713. 43

719.

6.

ei saep.

.
6.

707.

1 6.

714.

784.
743. 33

738. 9 718. 8 798. 729. 44


;

740.

1 7,

2 2, 27.

See Index VII.

( ^
304

INDICES
740. 23, 25.
4

705. 77

739.

/
'/

708.

II, 22.

729. 28.
741. 741. 8.

785.

'
^/

726. 2 1. 705. 7
741.
3
1

.
7

729. 3^ anevbeiv 658. 7) H 740. 36 833. 669. 27, 32. 730. 12. 746. 8. 669. 29. OTfyaCe' 729. 23. 669. 7 836. 736. 56, 57 739. 1 8. 839. 705. 75 See Index VII. 797. ) 734. 4 707. 35 729. 7

669. , 3) 797. 705. 23. 705. 7, 66.

8.

/ 8

,
,
reXeii/

'7-'.

See Index VIII 705. 72, 73

(/5).

811.

736. 5 122. 20 729. 17. 736. 13, 84. 743. 2 1.


;

re'Ki/oi/

713. 19; 716.


;

8.

TeKToviKOs

669. 35 729. 12. 129. 12; 739. 5 707. 2 2, 24 707. 31 729. 39; 4
;

713.
TfXevTij

.
;

713. 12, 32, 3^ )';^/3'^' 719. 34

!
32

727. 21. 727. 9 727. 14) 2 0.


661. introd.

^'/

743. 3^
717.
4

' /
12,

.;

791. 718. 1 6, 19? 27. 717. 8, II. au^eTTtSiSoiOt 716. 28, 30.

'

705. 33 669. 44 729. 42 743. 33 729. 2 2, 719. 20 724. 5; 728. 37; 729.
;

725. 8, 49 textor 737. 3 ^"^ J^^^/ rt^ei/ai 725. 61 742. 5; 745. 2. TLKTeiv 744. 9. rt/zai- 705. 36. 719. 2o; 728. 38; 739. 3, 16, 21;
Te;^i/>;
;

713. 18, 712. 6, 21 TfXmvHV . 263.

724. 9; 788.

(( .

732. 2. 785. 795. 669. 21.


2 1.

836. See Index VIII

(^).

705. 48; 708.

II,

22; 833.

734; 798.
736. 51. 705. 49; 712. 6, 14, 2; 728. 2o; 799. 734. 3 808. Cf. Index V (a). 833. 105. 73; 707. introd. 715. 16; 721. 12; 734. 3; 742. 5; 833.
;

707. 14
715. 35
5

724.

726. 12; 727.

25; 787.

729. 12. 729. 42 729. 1 6, 17, 40-2. '';('' 743. 37

717.

, , 806.

I.

721.

3;

835.

725. 15, 45

729. 4

'.

GENERAL INDEX OF GREEK AND LATIN WORDS


introd.
4, 5,

305

rpikayvvoi 741. 12.

.
7 715.
vytatVeif

729.

.
(3).

714. I'J. See Index VIII

(
Xat'peti/

807. 707. 3> 21, 24; 727. 8; 728. 31; 729. 31, 32; 730. 2, 2, 23; 732. 4
727. 5 727. 14

800.

705. 78. 707. 7, 27, 29; 729. 32. 729.

803. 729. II ; 803. 705. 47> ^2; 729. 729. 20, 2 2.


;

804.

2 7

vyela 715. 29

743. 43 > ^45. 10; 746. 2; 805. 729. 23; . 263.

vbptvpa

263.

8\
738.

729. 13, 729. 23. 729. 7

6.

705. 7, 20, 58, 68 708. 2, 15 716. 728. 37 ; 732. 4 719. 4, 12 ; 724. 2 742. ; 744. ; 746. 2. 735. 7 736. 6, 722. 26; 743. 23. 717. 8, 705. 63. 743. 29; 804.
;

.
.

741.

5
5

733. 4, 6. 668. 13; 705. 7; 724. 3; 727. 707. 5


712. 5
; 5

669.
)

4.
2.

6(
716. 12 ; 718. 1 6 ; 719. 13 727. 13; 728. 23;
;

734.

799.
719. 33 706. 4, 5 719.
9, 3,

33

745.

2.

729. 30.
3
1 3-

722. 12; 723. 3 729. 21 ; 730. 30.


712.
inobecKvvvai

<(

745. 4 743. 38. 729. 28. viroXeirrtiv 729. 6, 25.

\(
{lif

{7)/ .

263.
1

729.

3.

vjroXoyof 721. 4

719.

4, 35
1 6.

658.
varepov 718. II.

743. 42
669.
8.

264. ^mV/ 708. 5, 18; 718. 30; 746. 8; 811;

826.
736.
4>

77

805.

/)?

837. 705. 21, 69, 75 705. 32; 743. 21. 706. 6 724. 2 ; 742. 740. 19) 22, 25, 27.
;
;

795

725. 29-34; (^) 736. 99 / ^/. 740. 789. 725. 20, 39) 5; 833. 705. 78; 728. 8, 38; 730. 810. (' inound ') 729. 6. (measure). See Index VIII (). xpda 729. 4, 8, 17 731. 7 745. 6. Xpijpa 705. 52. 710. I ; 727. 8; 728. . 719. 3; 835. 712. 719. 7 727. 3 745. 6. 705. 75 712. 1 8 ; 714. 38 718. 1 707. 1 1 719. 13 ; 724. 4, 9. 1 1, ^', 725. 9, 1 1, 38, 49; 728. 35; 729. 17 d saep.; 732. II ; 786. 795.

' / ^
^

740. 46.

)739.

708.

661. introd.

( '

;
;

8,

745.

806. 729. 7, 8, 9, 23 709. 8 795. 705. 40.


;

740. 46

(?).

3o6
705.
31, 34.
yj/eiiBeaeai

INDICES

736. 92.
721. 3

719. 27; 724. 6; 725. 45; 729. 30,

/
3
;

/;

714. 741. 7

732. 2. 784. 747. 3

804.
3
;

710.
715. 16.

707. introd.

729. 31

730.

743. 27.

OXFORD

HORACE HART

PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

...i'rv,

ti"

iV;

;:,.^

plate

M']\'^

^-iT*"-

*>

^__.

^l

A.

>

|f^?*'i'' V!i^T'^-''^iH

'^-^r-.

..

-.,.,.

W*.,

rt^.

NO. 654

'

NO. 66 ^

PLATE

II

r-':<

m^rr
*

^^;

ATc^

-i

ji

te^,^,r^.^^

^*:..

i-lM 'til

i.ivi"'

::,

PLATE

III

I
'

Q ^^

''V

"

'

Vat

.,

.,

.[^Ji

-^

"^5^

^
4^

;\5
.

'>.
"'.:

>

.^^''-''

,.

PLATE
>

IV

s:""]-

'

if

4:.

cs

#1

3<?

^~^,
L-^'sr

"*>

.
.
'"li
...,

*<^1-'

c:

mMMuMi
tj.

0*^

--.

JV
.

5^

'

t-~

,7^/7

r
-4 /

\
.^ --"-

;^^
NO. 735

J^v-

..

NO. 661

PLATE

VI

ill

f |>f;^f^^ra<>i ^rrc

f Afn^lcA|Hui cvimVcoinrAi

in ^Ket

li*:

'

,^

c4^| luf 3r4i

Vf-^at\W|H f\M4^a^^^^

NO. 668, COL.

PLATE

VII

/.

'""t!

-.

fc,

'

NO.

688

'%

^^>.

Ijl:-.^ -^** 'S^^i,

\^^

^n
.
.

'J.

-<

^4^
^:
\

>^>^-:

-*'

.J

NO. 720
NO. 686

PLATE

VIII

:u.i:MI'-/W

I.
.^
t'

r-i-

Ji

r
*^.

mf

^...iii'S,

:;:l*

Jlfi-^*^ i/
NO. 737, COL.
1

EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND.


GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH. EGYPT EXPLORA TION FUND, which has conducted Archaeological research in Egypt continuously since 1883, m 1897 started a special department, called the Graecothe discovery

jr-HE

Roman Branch, for

and

publication

of remains of

classical antiquity

and

early

Christianity in Egypt.

It

is

hoped

to complete in the

nextfew years the systematic excavation

of the site of Oxyrhynchus under the direction ^Drs. B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. The Graeco-Roman Branch issues annual volumes, each of about 300 quarto pages, with facsimile plates of the more important papyri, under the editorship qfOrs. B. P. Grenfell

and A.

S.

Hunt.
One Guinea
to the

subscription of

Branch

entitles

subscribers to the annual volume,

and

also to the

annual Archaeological Report.

donation of

constitutes life membership.


;

for England, Mr. H. A. Grueber may be sent to the Honorary Treasurers andfor America, Mr. Gardiner M. Lane.
Subscriptions

PUBLICATIONS OF THE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND.

MEMOIRS OF THE FUND.


I.

THE STORE CITY OF PITHOM AND THE ROUTE OF THE EXODUS.


For 1883-4.
Edition^

By Edouard Naville.

Thirteen Plates and Plans.

{Fourth and Revised

25J.

II.

TANIS,

Part I. For 1884-5. By and two Plans. {Second Edition, \%%%.)

W. M.
25J.

Flinders Petrie.

Sixteen Plates

III.

NAUKRATIS,

Part

I.

For

1885-6.

By W. M. Flinders
Barclay V.Head.

Petrie.

With

Chapters by Cecil Smith, Ernest A. Gardner, and and Plans. {Second Edition, 1888.) 25J.

Forty-four Plates

IV.

GOSHEN AND THE SHRINE OF SAFT-EL-HENNEH.


By Edouard Naville.
Eleven Plates and Plans.
{Second Edition, 18S8.)

For
25J.

1886-7.

V. TANIS, Part

(The Biblical ' Tahpanhes ') II ; including and TELL NEBESHEH. For 1887-8. By W. M. Flinders Petrie, F. Ll. Griffith, and A. S. Murray. Fifty-one Plates and Plans. 2e,s.
Part
II.

TELL DEFENNEH

VI.
VII.

NAUKRATIS,
Griffith.

For 1888-9.
25J.

By Ernest A. Gardner and

F. Ll.

Twenty-four Plates and Plans.

THE CITY OF ONI AS AND THE MOUND OF THE


Antiquities
of

JEW.

The

Tell-el-Yahudiyeh.

An

Extra

Volume.
25J.

By Edouard Naville and


Fifty-four

F. Ll. Griffith.

Twenty-six Plates and Plans.

VIII.

BUBASTIS.
Hans.
2 6 J.

For 1889-90.

By Edouard Naville.

Plates

and

IX.

TWO HIEROGLYPHIC
Containing
I.

PAPYRI FROM TANIS.

An Extra

Volume.

II.

THE SIGN PAPYRUS (a Syllabary). By F. Ll. Griffith. THE GEOGRAPHICAL PAPYRUS (an Almanack). By W. M. Flinders Petrie.
With Remarks by
Professor

Heinrich Brugsch.
II
25i.

{Out ofprint.)

X.

THE FESTIVAL HALL OF OSORKON


By Edouard Naville.
Plates.

(BUBASTIS).

For 1890-1.
Eighteen
F. Ll.

Thirty-nine Plates.

XL AHNAS EL MEDINEH.
And
Griffith.

For 189 1-2.

By Edouard Naville.
By
J. J.

THE TOMB OF PAHERI AT EL KAB.


Plates.
255.

Tylor and

Ten

XII.
XIII.

DEIR EL BAHARI,
Fifteen Plates and Plans.

Introductory.
25^.

For

1892-3.

By Edouard Naville.
Plates

DEIR EL BAHARI,
I-XXIV

Part
Part

I.

For

1893-4.
Royal

By Edouard Naville.

(three coloured) with Description.


II.

folio.

3.
Naville.
Plates
30J.

XIV.

DEIR EL BAHARI,
XXV-LV

For 1894-5.
Royal

By Edouard
Petrie.

(two coloured) with Description.

folio.

XV. DESHASHEH.
other Plates.
255.

For 1895-6.

By W. M. Flinders

Photogravure and

XVI.
XVII.
XVIII.

DEIR EL BAHARI,
LVI-LXXXVI

Part

III.

For 1896-7.
Royal

By Edouard Naville.
folio.

Plates

(two coloured) with Description.

30J.

DENDEREH.
Plates.
25i.

For

1897-8.

By W. M. Flinders
Forty Plates.
10s.)

Petrie.

Thirty-eight

(Extra Plates of Inscriptions.

ROYAL TOMBS OF THE FIRST DYNASTY.


Flinders Petrie.
Sixty-eight Plates.
25^.

For 1898-9.

By W. M.
Naville.
Petrie.
II.

XIX. DEIR
Plates

EL BAHARI,
LXXXVII-CXVIII
25 j.

Part

IV.

For

1899-1900.

By Edouard
Royal
folio.

(two coloared) with Description.

30J.

XX. DIOSPOLIS PARVA.


Forty-nine Plates.

An Extra
{Out ofprint^

Volume.

By W. M. Flinders

XXI.
XXII.
XXIII.

THE ROYAL TOMBS OF THE EARLIEST


1900-1.

DYNASTIES,

Part

For

By W. M. Flinders Petrie.
Part
I.

Sixty-three Plates. 25J.

(Thirty-five extra Plates, loj.)

ABYDOS,
Plates.

For

901-2.

By W. M. Flinders
Extra Volume.
25J.

Petrie.

Eighty-one

35i.

EL AMRAH AND ABYDOS. An


A. C. Mace, and F. Ll. Griffith.

By D. Randall-MacIver,
Petrie.
Sixty-four

Sixty Plates.

XXIV. ABYDOS,
Plates.

Part

II.

For 1902-3.

By W. M. Flinders

251.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY.
Edited by F. Ll. Griffith.
I.

BENI HASAN,
by G.

Part

I.

For

1 890-1.

By Percy

E. Newberry.

With Plans

W. Eraser.

Forty-nine Plates (four coloured).

255.

.
III.

BENI HASAN,

Part IL
Part

For 189 1-2.

By Percy E. Newberry. With Appendix,


Thirty-seven Plates (two coloured).
251.

Plans, and Measurements by G.

W. ERASER.

EL BERSHEH,

I.

For 1892-3.

By Percy
By
By

E. Newberry.

Thirty-four

Plates (two coloured).

25J.

IV.

EL BERSHEH,
Newberry.

For 1893-4. Part II. With Appendix by G. W. Eraser.


Part III.

F. Ll. Griffith and F. Ll. Griffith.


Plates.
25J.

Percy E.
25^.

Twenty-three Plates (two coloured).

V.

BENI HASAN,

For 1894-5.

(Hieroglyphs,

and manufacture, &c., of Flint Knives.)

Ten coloured

VL HIEROGLYPHS FROM THE COLLECTIONS OF THE EGYPT


EXPLORATION FUND.
VII.
For 1895-6.

By

E. Ll. Griffith.

Nine coloured

Plates.

255.

BENI HASAN,
beasts

Part IV.

For 1896-7.

and

birds, arts, crafts, &c.)

By F. Ll. Griffith. (Illustrating Twenty-seven Plates (twenty-one coloured). 25i.


(Including over 400

Vin.

THE MASTABA OF PTAHHETEP AND AKHETHETEP AT SAQQAREH,


Part

For 1897-8.

By N. de G. Davies and

facsimiles of hieroglyphs.)

F. Ll. Griffith. Thirty-one Plates (three coloured). 25J.

IX.

THE MASTABA OF PTAHHETEP AND AKHETHETEP AT SAQQAREH,


Part II.

For 1898-9.

By N. DE G. Davies and
25^.

F. Ll. Griffith.

Thirty-five Plates.

25^.

X.
XI.
XII.
XIII.

THE ROCK TOMBS OF SHEIKH


Davies.
Thirty-five Plates.

SAID.

For

899-1 900.

By N. de G.
1

THE ROCK TOMBS OF DEIR EL GEBRAWI,


N. de G. Davies.
Twenty-seven Plates (two coloured).

Part
Part

L
II.

For
For

900-1.

By
By

25^.
1

THE ROCK TOMBS OF DEIR EL GEBRAWI,


N. de G. Davies.
Davies.
Thirty Plates (two coloured).
255.

901-2.

THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA,


25i.

Part

I.

For 1902-3.

By N. de G.

GRAECO-ROMAN BRANCH.
I.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS
and A.
S.

PAPYRI,
PAPYRI,

Part
25J,

I.

For 1897-8.

By

B. P.

Grenfell Grenfell

Hunt.
Hunt.
S.

Eight Collotype Plates.


Eight Collotype Plates.

II.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS
and A.
S.

Part II.
25J.

For 1898-9.

By

B. P.

III.

For 1 899-1 900. By B. P. Hunt, and D. G. Hogarth. Eighteen Plates. 25J. IV. THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI. Double Volume for 1900-1 and 1901-2. By B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. Smyly. Nine Collotype Plates. {Not for sale.) V. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part III. For 1902-3. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Six Collotype Plates. 255.
Grenfell, A.

FA YUM TOWNS AND THEIR PAPYRI.

VI.

THE OXYRHYNCHUS
and A.
S.

PAPYRI,

Part IV.
25J.

For 1903-4.

By

B. P.

Grenfell

Hunt.

Eight Collotype Plates.

ANNUAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORTS.


(Yearly Summaries by F. G.

Kenyon, W.

E. Crum, and the Officers of the Society, with Maps.) Edited by F, Ll. Griffith.
1

THE

SEASON'S WORK.
W. Fraser.
2i. 6d.
2s.

For

890-1.

By Ed. Naville, Percy

E.

Newberry, and

G. For 1892-3.

2s. 6d.

1893-4. 1894-5. 1895-6.

1896-7.

6d.

y.6d.
IS. 2i.

1897-8.

2s.

1898-9.

2s.

1899-1900. 1900-1.

1901-2. 1902-3.

2s.

ContainingReport(withPlans)ofD.G. Hogarth's Excavations in Alexandria. With Illustrated Article on the Transport of Obelisks by Ed. Naville. 6d. With Articles on Oxyrhynchus and its Papyri by B. P. Grenfell, and a Thucydides Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus by A. S. Hunt. 6d. With Illustrated Article on Excavations at Hierakonpolis by W. M. Flinders Petrie. 6d. With Article on the Position of Lake Moeris by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 6d. With Article on Knossos in its Egyptian Relations by A. J. Evans.

6d. 6d. 2s. 6d.


2s.

2s.

SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS.
IH20Y:
and A.
'

Sayings of

Our

Lord,' from an Early

Greek Papyrus.

By B.

P.

Grenfell
from
^s. 6d.

S.

Hunt.
By

2s.

(with Collotypes) and 6d. nett.

NEW

SAYINGS OF JESUS AND FRAGMENT OF A LOST GOSPEL,


Oxyrhynchus.

ATLAS OF ANCIENT GUIDE TO TEMPLE OF DEIR EL BAHARI.


COPTIC OSTRACA.
may

Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. is. nett. EGYPT. With Letterpress and Index. {Second Edition:)
B. P.

With Plan.

6d.

By W. E. Crum.
Slides from

10s. 6d. nett.

Fund Photographs

Newton of Co., 3 Fleet Street, E.C. ; and Prints from Mr. R. C. Murray, 37 Dartmouth Park Hill, N.W.
be obtained through Messrs.

Offices of the
37

Egypt Exploration Fund:

GREAT RUSSELL STREET, LONDON, W.C, and 8 BEACON STREET, BOSTON, MASS., U.S. A.
Agents

KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TRUBNER & Co., PATERNOSTER HOUSE, CHARING CROSS ROAD, W.C. BERNARD QUARITCH, 15 PICCADILLY, W. ASHER & Co., 13 BEDFORD STREET, COVENT GARDEN, W.C. HENRY FROWDE, AMEN CORNER, E.C.

BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY

3 1197 22884 0093