PROCEEDINGS OF THE

XIV INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS

OF PAPYROLOGISTS
 PROCEEDINGS OF THE

XIV INTERNATIONAL
CONGRESSOF
PAPYROLOGIST~
OXFORD, 24-31 JULY 1974

Graeco-Roman Memoin, No. 61

PUBLISHED FOR.

THE BRITISH ACADEMY

BY THE
EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY
3 Doughty Mews, London, wc1N 2PO
1 975
 PRINTED IN OllEAT BRITAIN
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS, OXFORD, BY VIVIAN RIDLER
PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
AND PUBLISHED POR.

THE BRITISH ACADEMY

BY THE EGYPT EXPLORATION SOCIETY
3 DOUOH1Y HEWS, LONDON, WCIN 2PO

ALIOIOU>ft
BERNARD QUARITCH, ,-a Low .. JOHN Sn.au, GoU>o Squ;.u, W1V 6A11

(C) EGYPT ltXPLOllATION SOCIETY 1975

 PRIPAC&
'lhe Organizing C:0-ittee of the XIVth lntemational Congreaa of
Papyrologi ■ t• (which .. tin Oxford froa .July 24th to )tat 1974) ha•
pleuure in preaenting the official Proceeding• of the Congr••••

It• ...,era have taken the view that a principal function of

international congreaaea i• to prom,te -•ting■ between acholar• 'Who
ah.are apecialiaed knowledge, to encourage the as.change of infol"lllltion,
eapecially about new di ■coveriea, and to elicit reciprocal critic! ■■ of
new interpretation ■• 'lhe at-,aphere in the Congre•• it■elf and the
exprea■ ion ■ of opinion by delegate ■ verbally and in aub■equent
corre ■pondence pro■pt ■ the■ to believe that the Congre•• functioned in
Oxford with out ■ tanding ■ucce■•• la there roo■ for a peraanent record
of tbe vork of the Congrea ■, and if ao what fora 8hould it tM.e? Now
the official tranaactiona of a congre■■ - that i• to .. y, the papera,
lecture■ and co-m1ication■ by Han■ of which it fulfil• it• public
function - are likely to be ■ore aerviceable to the learned vorld •• a
whole if they are aade available quickly and aold at a price which doea
not prevent acholara fro■ buying their own copi••• Under -,dem
condition ■ apeedy and econo■ical publication can be achieved only by
choice of a fol"II that IWlke ■ the ■ini-- de■anda on editorial intervention,
apecialtaed type co■poai tion, and proof correction. 'l'he photographic
fol'II of inatant reproduction fro■ typeacript deviaed for the ■e Proceeding•
i• an experiaent to te ■ t the validity of the eo-tttee'a view■• It -Y
al ■o aerve u a touchatone of the utility or di .. dvantage of thia ■ode
of publication.

ColllNllicationa given at the Congreaa were -,atly reatricted to

twenty ■inute ■' duration. In theH Proceeding■ contributors have been
reatricted in general to aix page■ of type ■ cript, aent in to the
&cUtorial Co•d ttee not later than October 1974. Thi• typeacript hu
uaually been reproduced without editorial change (aave that it baa
occaaionally pro•ed poa■ ible to eli ■ inate a glaring ■ i ■-■pelling). Por
the correctn••• of reference ■ aa well aa of atateaenta the contributor ■,
not the lditor■, bear reaponaibility. lqually it goea without ■aying
that if contributor■ ha•• not uaed the unifor■ ay•t- of citation• and
reference auggeated to th-, it ha■ not bNn i■poaed on thea by the
&ditora.

Not all of tho•• who read paper• to the Congr••• have felt able
to accept the aelf-denying ordinance of ■pace required by the Co-itt•••
With the full agree■ent of the eo-ittee theae acholara have aought the
hoapitality of a nwaber of learned journal ■ for their paper ■• Where
the place of publication i• known it ia ■ tated in the liat on page ■
ix - six; if no information i• given, none waa available to the
Editor ■• Solle ■ cholera have elected to produce both a abort and a
longer for■ of their paper■•
 It i• a ple-ure to thank the Jowett Copyright Tru•tee• for
aaking an intereat-free loan of one thouaand pound• toward• the initial
coat of producing thia voluae, and to expr••• gratitude to the Egypt
Exploration Society for accepting it in their Graeco-Roaan Me-,irs
aeries.

P.J.PA.RSONS
J.R.REA
&.G.flJRNU
Editors of Graeco-Roaan Meaoira, and
11eabera of the Congr••• eo-ittee
R.A.COL&S
Secretary of the Congre••
 COMMITIEEOF HONOUR
D.F. Allen, Esq., C.B., F .B.A., F .S.A.
ProfessorA. Andrewes, M.B.E.,M.A., F.B.A.
The Rt. Hon. Lord Annan, O.B.E., M.A.,D.Litt., D.U.
Prof~r P.A.Brunt, M.A.,F .8.A.
The Very Rev. Henry Chadwick,D.D., Mut.B.,D.D., Dr.Teo!.,M.A.,F.B.A.
R.A. Coles,Esq., M.A.,D.Phil.
ProfessorKJ. Dover, M.A.,F.B.A.
1.E.S. Edwards, Esq., C.B.E.,M.A., UttD., F.B.A.
P .M.Fraser, Esq., M.C.,M.A., F .B.A.
HJ. Habakkuk, Esq., M.A.,D.Litt., F .B.A., F.R.ltist.S.
ProfessorN.G.L. Hammond,D.S.O., M.A., F.B.A.
ProfessorA.M.Honore, M.A.,D.C.L.
R.W.Hunt, Esq., M.A.,D.Phil., F.B.A.
8.W.Kay, Esq., M.A.
ProfessorP.HJ. Uoyd~ooes, M.A., D. Humane Letten, F B.A.
Sir D.W.Lopn, M.A.,D.Phil., D.C.L., LLD.
ProfessorSir D.L. Page,M.A.,Litt.D., F .B.A.
ProfessorH.W.Parke,M.A.,UttD.
ProfessorCJ-I.Philips, M.A.,Ph.D., D.Utt., LLD.
D.T. Piper, Esq., C.B.E.,M.A.
F.W.Ratcliffe, Esq., M.A.. Ph.D.
Profeaor B.R. Rees, M.A.,Ph.D.
CJI. Roberts, Esq., C.B.E., M.A.,F .B.A.
ProfessorSir Ronald Syme, M.A.,F .B.A.,D.Litt.
ProfessorJ.A.C. Thomu, M.A.,LL.B.
ProfessorE.G. Turner, M.A.,Dr.Phil. et Lettres, F.B.A.
Sir J.F. Wolfenden,C.B.E.,M.A.

ORGANIZING COMMl1TEE

ProfessorE.G. Turner (Chairman)

C.H. Roberts, Etq. (Vice-Chairman)
PJ. Parsons, Etq. (Treuurer)
Dr. R.A. Coles(Secretary}
Mis.,E.A. Livingstone (Assistant Secretary)
W.S. Bamtt, E,q.
ProfessorE.W.Handley
ProfessorH. Uoyd-Jone1
T .S. Pattie, Eaq.
Dr. J.R. Rea
T.C.Skeat, Eaq.
 LIST OF PARTICIPANTSA.NDPAPERS

Dr.A.Alcoek, Griffith Institute, Aaha>lean Museum, Oxford, England

D.F.Allen Esq., Grenna House, Chilson, Oxon., England; and Mre Allen
Dott.A.Aloni, Via Volta 7, Milano, Italy; and Signora Aloni
Prof.Z.Aly, 1) lbrahi ■ Naguib, Cairo, A.R.E.
"New data fro■ the Zenon Papyri" (read by Prof.L.Koenen) 1
Prof.M.Aaelotti, Univer ■ ita di Genova, Italy; and Signorina Aaelotti
"Presentazione di PUG I e annuncio dei PUG Ilu (S~ry) 10
(with dott.L.Migliardi Zingale)
Prof.w.G.Arnott, Thie Univeraity, Leeda, England
Dott.F.Auricchio, Piazza Donn' Anna 9, Napoli, Italy1 and Signor
Auricchio
Dr.R.S.Bagnall, Florida State University, u.s.A.1 and Mrs Bagnall
and Alexander Bagnall
"Greek papyri and oatraka in the Florida State Univer■ ity
Library" (SUllallry) 10
Dott.C.Balconi, Univeraita Cattolica, Milano, Italy
Sig.A.Barbieri, Univeraita degli Studi, Milano, Italy
t The Rev.Prot.J.V.B.Barns
"Alexandria and Mellphia, II" (read by Dr.E.A.E.Reymond)
M.J.-N.Barrandona ••• under Irigoin
v.s.Barrett Eeq., Keble College, Oxford, England
Prof.A.Bartoletti Colombo, )8 Viale Michelangiolo, Firenze, Italy;
and Angelo Bartoletti, Stella Bartoletti and Paolo Bartoletti
Dott.G.Bastianini, Iatituto Vitelli, Firenze, Italy
a,v.Pere P.Benott, 0.P., Ecole Biblique, Jerueale■, Israel
Prof.L.Berkowitz, University of CAiifornia, Irvine, Calif., u.s.A.
M■e I.Biezunaka-Malowiat, Brzozowa 10/4, Warsaw, Poland
"La traite d'eaclavea en Egypte" 11
Prof.J.Bingen, Universit, Libre, Bruxellea, Belgiu■; and Mlle Bingen
(Repreaentative of the Univerait, Libre, and of the Fondation
&gyptologique Reine Eli ■abeth)
"Le milieu urbain dans la chora ptol,matque" J67
Dr.A.Blanchard, 2J av. Jeanne d 1 Arc, Antony, France; and Mine
Blanchard and Didier Blanchard
"Sur quelques interpretations de XMI'" 19
Signorina M.Bocchi, Uni~eraita degli Studt, Milano, Italy
Dr.R.Bogaert, Koning Albertlaan J8, Gent, Belgiua; and Mme Bogaert
tllte D.Bonneau, 17 rue Dantan, St.Cloud, France
"Recherchea autour de P.Oxy.2847"
Dr.Z.Borkowaki, Krakowekie Przedmi,acie 26/28, Warsaw, Poland
"A new doctatent concerning repreaentation in aucceaaion,
circa 1J)-1J7 A.D.: an analogy to BGU 19"
(A full edition in preparation1 publication poeaibly in~)
Dott.F.Boasi, Univeraita degli Studi, Bologna, Italy
Dr.&.Boawinkel, 2 Platanenlaan, Bloeaendaal, Holland
"SchulUbW1gen auf 5 Leidener Wachstlfelchen" 25
X

Dr.A.K.Bowman, 'lbe Univereity, Mancheeter, England

"Roman military records from Yindolanda"
(For a list of publication• on the Vindolanda tablet•, eee
the aunnary of R.P.Wright below on pp.J55-6)
Dr.W.Braahear, Schloea-atr.70, Berlin, w.Geraany
11A preview of BGUXIII"
Herr G.Braunecker, Anzengrllber■ tr.)0/4, Klagenfurt, Auatria
P.G.McC.Brown Eaq., Trinity College, Oxford, England
P.R.L.Brown Esq., All Soule College, Oxford, England
Dr.G.H.Browne, Department of Cla ■ aica, 4<>72Foreign Languages Building,
Univeraity of Illinoi ■, Urbana, 111.61801, u.s.A. (New addreaa)
11A panegyriat from Panopolia" 29
Prof.T.F.Brunner, University of California, Irvine, Calif., U.S.A.
"'lbe 'Ibeaaurus Linguae Graecae: papyrological consideration•"
(1bia paper i ■ not being published)
Herr E.Bruna, Univer ■ itlt, Heidelberg, W.Geraany1 and Frau Bruna
A.BUlow-Jacobaen £sq., Lund ■ gaade 5iv, Copenhagen, Den11111rk
Mlle H.Cadell, 53 rue St.Laurent, Lagny-eur-Marne, France
11Documenta fi ■ caux et recherchea aeantiquea" J5
Signorina A.Calabi, 1 via del Caravaggio, Milano, Italy
Dott.G.Calvani Mariotti, Univer ■ ita di Piaa, Italy
Prof.A.Cameron, 81 Harrow View, Harrow, Hiddx., England
Mra c.caraviaa, 51 Agiou Polycarpou St., Athens, Greece, and Stelio ■
Caravias
Dott.A.Carlini, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy
(Repreaentative of the Scuola Nor.ale Superiore di Pisa)
11
su alcuni papiri 'platonici' 11
41
M.J.-M.Carrie, Palazzo Fameae, Roma, Italy
H.P.Cauderlier, 48 rue Pierre-Bro ■eolette, Neuilly-aur-Mame,
France1 and the Wacquet-Cauderlier
Dott.G.Cavallo, Univer■ ita, Roma, Italy
Propo ■ te aetodologiche
11
per m,,a nuova raccolta di facsi ■ ili
di manoecritti greei letterarl" (With Pror.M.Manfredi) 47
Sig.S.Ceraauolo, Villa Vittoria, Arco Felice, Italy
'lbe Very Rev.Dr.ff.Chadwick, Christ Church, Oxford, England
"1be Penitence or Janne• and Jambre ■ 1 the origin• of the
Fauet legend"
Sig.K.Cingano, Via Conservatorio 15, Milano, Italy
Dr.F.H.Coate ■, Ashenmeade, Minater-in-Thanet, Kent, England
Dr.W.Cockle, University College, London, England
"'Ibe odes of Epagathus the choral flauti ■ t: aome dociaentary
evidence for dramatic representation in Roman Egypt" 59
Prot.G.M.Cohen, University of Cincinnati, Ohio, u.s.A.1 and Mr•
Cohen
Dr.R.A.Colea, Papyrology Rooms, AahMOlean Muaewn, Oxford, England;
and Hra Coles
Signorina A.Concolino, Scuola Normale Superior•, Piaa, Italy; and
Signorina B.Concolino
Prof.C.Coppola, Univeraita degli Studi, Salerno, Italy
 xi
Dr.D.Cravford, Girton College, CUlbridge, England
(Repre ■entative of the University of ea.bridge)
Prof.J.Cvetler, Botaniek' 29, 60200 Brno, Czecho ■ lovakia (Nev address)
"Soae re-rks on notaries in the light of Byzantine aourcea"
(Publication in fil)
Dr.S.Darcus, Departaent of Cla■■ ic■, Univer■ ity of Briti ■h Columbia,
Vancouver 8, Canada (New addreaa)
Prof.S.Daris, Piazza San ■ovino 2/1, Trieste, Italy; and Signora
Dari ■ and Luca Daria
(Repre ■entative of the Univeraita degli Studi di Trieste)
"Nuove rifleeeioni eul papiro milane ■e dell' Athenana
Bncomiua" 67
Prot.A.Oaviee, Soaerville College, Oxford, England
v.O.vie ■ Eeq., Departaent of EgYPtian Antiquities, Briti ■h Muaeum,
London WC1BJOO (New address)
Prof.C.Dedouaai, Univeraity of Ioannina, Greece
11
1'he New Co.edy prologue of Pap. Argentor. Gr. 5J: ita
interpretation and authorship" 73
Prof .D.Del Como, Univeraita degli Studt, Milano, Italy1 and
Signora Del Como
"La letteratura popolare nei papiri" 79
Dott.L.Del Francia, Universita di Ro.a, Italy
Signora A.Dell' Acqua, Universita Cattolica, Milano, Italy; and
Sig.Angelo Dell' Acqua and Sig.Enrico Dell' Acqua
Mlle S.Deaougin, 104 rue du 'lbeitre, Paris, France
Prof.V.Den Boer, De Laat de Kanteretraat 158, Leiden, Holland
11
Trajan'a Deification" 85
Dott.G.Derenzini Maccagni, Universita degli Studi, Pisa, Italy;
and Signor Maccagni
M.J.-D.Duboia, 58 rue Madame, Paria, France
"Coptic fragment ■ on NOY2" J57
( Suasary) 28
Mlle F.Dupont, Le Manoir, Yvetot-Bocage, Valognee, France
Dr.l.E.S.Edward ■, Britiah Mueeua. London, England
Prof.M.A.H.el Abbadi, 27 Abdel Haaid Badawi St., Alexandria, A.R.E.
"P.Flor.50 reconsidered" 91
Mlle M.H.Eliaaaen, Univeraitetet, Oslo, Norway
Mr■ A.El-Rouby, Wolfaon Court, Clarkaon Road, Callbridge, England
Dr.A.M.Baaett, Macquarie University, Au■ tralia; and Mr 8-ett and
Laurence Ennett
"A fourth-century h,-, to the Virgin Mary? Psal ■us
reaponeoriu■: P.Barc.t49b - 153" 97
Prof.J.A.S.Evana, University of Briti ■h Coluabia, Vancouver, Canada
(Repreaentat!ve of the University or British Coluabia)
Herr M.Faekelmann, Oaterreichiachen Nationalbibliothek, Wien, Austria
Mlle M.Falletti, 51bi ■ rue H,non, Lyon, France
Signorina M.Favini, Universita degli Studi, Milano, Italyt and
Signorina P.Favini
Profea ■or R.O.Pink: see under Woodall
Mr B.Fo ■ ae, Wiers Jenasenavei JJc, Landaaa, Norway; and Mrs Foaae
xii
Profe ■■or W.H.C.Frend, University of Glasgow, Scotland
"Some Greek and Latin papyri of the period 50 B.C. - 50 A.D.
from Q'aar Ibri111 in Nubia" 103
Dr.J.Frti ■fn, Porthania, Helsinki 10, Finland
Dr.R.Fllhrer, Schleiaaheimeratr.186, MUnchen, W.Gennany
Prof.I.Gallo, Corso Garibaldi 148, Salerno, Italy
Herr E.Gamillacheg, Univeraitlt Vien, Austria
M.J.Gaacou, I.F.A.O., Cairo, A.R.E.
(Representative of the Inatitut Franfaia d'Archeologie
Orientale in Cairo)
11
Grandea proprietea et ad•iniatration municipale a
1 'epoque byzantine" (Publication in !:!f.)
Dr.A.Geiaaen, Univeraitlt zu Koln, Germany
Prof.G.Geraci,) via De Brocchi, Imola, Italy; and Signora Geraci,
Luca Geraci and Claudia Geraci
"Nuovi docUMenti dell' Egitto tolemaico e romano a Bologna" 11J
Prof.G.Giangrande, Birkbeck College, London, England
11
Hypaipyle'e children: Eur •.!:!IE!,.fr.64.9) Bond"
(Publication in Museum Philologum Londinien ■e)
Prof.M.Gigante, Via Mezzocannone 16, Napoli, Italy
(Representative of the Acea.demi• di Archeologia, Lettere e
Belle Arti di Napoli)
"Philoeophia medican ■ in Filodemo 11 121
Prof.J.F.Gilliam, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, N.J.,
u.s.A. (Repre ■ entative of Coliabia University)
Dr.K.Godecken, D-2000.Haaburg 64, 10 Updeworth, w.Germany
Sr.A.Gonz,lez Perez, Bravo Murillo 18, Madrid, Spain
"Le le:z:ique de ■ papyrue dana le Dictionnaire Gree-Espagnol"
Signorina B.Griletto, Viale Campania 29, Milano, Italy
Prof.S.Groll, Department of Egyptology, fl1e Hebrew University,
Jerusalem, Israel
Prof.H.-G.Gundel, Univeraitlt Gieaaen, W.Gennany
(Repre ■entative of the Juetu.e-Liebig-Univereit&t zu Gieaaen)
Dr.D.Hagedom, Univeraitlt zu K3ln, Germany
Dr.U.Hagedorn, Univer ■ itlt zu Koln, Gennany
"Beobachtungen zum Gebrauch makedoniacher Monatsnamen in
riS ■ i ■ cher 7.eit'' 127
Prof.E.W.Handley, Univeraity College, London, England
"Some new fragmenf:a of Greek Comedyu tJJ
Mrs A.E.Hanson, 176 'lbe Western Way, Princeton, N.J., u.s.A.
"Poll tax in Philadelphia and P.Mich.inv.88?" 149
Prot.B.F.Harris, Macquarie University, Auetralia
(Representative of Macquarie University)
"Biblical echoes and reminiscences in Christian papyri" 155
Dr.M.Haalam, University College, London, England
"Phoenician Women decapitated" 161
Prof.H.Heinen, Univeraitlt, Trier, W.Genaany
Dr.J.Hengatl, Univeraitlt, Marburg, W.Gennany
Dr.H.Hofmann, Kavallerie ■ tr.26, Bielefeld, Gennany
"A new interpretation of certain aapects in Menander'•
Samia" 167
 xiii

Mr.P.Hohti, Kangaspellontie 5B, Helsinki, Finland

Dr.L.Holford-Strevens, 115 Kingston Road, Oxford, England
Herr R.HUbner, Univeraitlt zu Koln, Germany
Dr.W.Huas, Geachw.-Scholl-Pl.t, Milnchen, Germany
Mlle G.Huason, 1 rue Gerson, Mont St.Aignan, France; and M.Eaaa.nuel
Husson
"Un ■ena ..Sconnu de 9up,c; et de teneatra" 177
Prof.J.Irigoin, 1)2 av. Victor Hugo, Paris, France
"Nouvelle■ technique ■ applicables a 1 1 ,tude du livre
de papyrus" (With J.-N.Barrandon and G.Schiffmacher)
(Read by Prof.J.Scherer) 7
Dr.s.F.Johanson, University of Richmond, Va.2J17J, u.s.A.
"A note on the Roman attitude tovarda the bureaucracy" 18)
Mr.D.Jonea, flle Queen'• College, Oxford, England
Dr.J. and Dr.M.Kaimio, Suvikuja 4C 47, Tapiola, Finland
Mlle S.Kaabitaia, 15 rue J.-J.Rouaaeau, Paris, France
"Lea papyrus carboni•'• de flla:,uia conaerv,a a Paris"
(SU11nary) 78
Mr.Y.Kanazava, Kita III-10-J, Chishiro-Dai, 280 Chiba City, Japan
B.W.Kay Eaq., Department of Education and Science, 256 Banbury
Road, Oxford, England
Dr.J.G.Xeenan, Loyola University, Chicago, Ill., u.s.A.
"'lhe provincial ad■ iniatration of Egyptian Arcadia" 189
Mra E.C.Keula, Univer■ ity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn., u.s.A.
"Ethos in Menander" 195
Prof.E.Xiesaling, Univeraitlt, Marburg, Gennany
"Eine Pachturkunde byzantini ■ cher Zei t''
(Publication in.:!:!?.)
Miss C.E.King, Somerville College, Oxford, England
Prot.K.Kleve, Univeraitetet, Oslo, Norway; and Mr ■ Kleve
(Representative of the University of Oslo)
"New aethode in the study of Greek papyri from Herculaneum" 201
Prot.L.Koenen, Univer■ ity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich., u.s.A.1
and Frau Koenen and Marcu■ Koenen
Prot.M.Kokolakis, Erechtheiou 25, Athena, Greece
Mi•• E.Kondo
Frau B.Kramer-Krebber, Universitlt zu K6ln, Germany; and Herr
kraaer
Dr.O.Kre ■ten, UniveraitKt Wien, Austria
"Der Wiener Xonzilspapyrus P.Vind.G.J - Problematelltmg
und Forachungsaufgaben"
Publication in: VerlSffentlichungen der Ko-iaeion fUr
Schrift- und Buchve■en der Mittelaltera (Osterreichiache
Akade■ ie der Wi ■ senschaften, Denkachriften phil.-hiat.
Klasse). Wien 1975 (voraussichtlich); Titel: Otto
Kreaten - Rudolf Riedinger, Der Wiener Konzilspapyrus
P.Vind.G.J.
Prot.H.Xupiazewaki, 9 m.17 Wiejaka, Warsaw, Poland
Dott.A.Lamedica Nardi, Universita degli Studi, Pisa, Italy; and
Signor Nardi
xiv

Dott.G.Lanata, Univerata di Genova, Italy

HNote al Papiro Bodaer XX" 205
Prof.J.Lanovaki, Univeraity of Vroclaw, Poland
"Le Bouclier de Ml6nandre co ... une coHClie paradoxale"
(Publication in fil_)
Prof.H.Leclercq, Lentelaan 1, ltorbeek-Lo, Belgiua
Father P.Levi, S.J., Caapion Hall, Oxford, England
"flle proae style of the magical papyri" 211
D.Levia Eaq,., Otriat Church, Oxford, England
Prof.E.Livrea, Via Cerretti 4), I-00167 Ro.a, Italy
Dr.H.Loebenstein, 0.terreichiache Nationalbibliothek, Vien,
Au.stria (Representative of the 6.terreichiache National-
bibliothek.)
Dr.V.Luppe 1 Univeraitlt Halle, Geraany (DOil)
Ma L.S.B.MacCoull, Catholic Univeraity of America, Vaahington,
o.c., u.s.A.
"Coptic papyri in the Reinecke Collection at Yale
Univeraity'' 217
Mra I.Ncllwaine, Univeraity College, London, ltngland
Dr.H.Ma.ehler, Agyptiachea Mu■ela, Berlin, W.Genuany; and Frau
Maehler
"Der Metiochoa - Parthenope Roaan"
(Publication in 2PE 1975)
Dr.E.Naher, Ripon Hall,~ford, England
Dr.B.G.Mandilaraa, 10 Ioanninou St., Athena, Greece
"The De Pace speech of laocratea froa the Brit. Mu ■•
pap. 1)2 91
Signora D.Manetti Ristori, Scuola Noraale Superior•, Piaa, Italyi
and Signor Ri ■ tori
Prof.M.Manfredi, Iatituto Vitelli, Firenze, ItalyJ and Signorina
Lucia Manfredi
(Repreaentative of the Univeraita degli Studi di Firenze)
Paper: He under dott.G.Cavallo
Dr.G.T.Nartin: •e• entry under 11Saqqara Papyri"
Sig.C.Mazzucchi, Univeraita Cattolica, Milano, Italy
Dr.B.Menu, 56 Bd. de la R,publique, Veraaillea, France
"ta prt ou lea origin•• du bordereau d'enaeaenceaent en
~ Egypte" (Read by Mlle D.Bonneau)
Prof.R.Merkelbach, Univeraitlt zu K6ln, Geraany
Prof.P.Mertena, )7 Bd. Frere-Orban, Liege, Belgiua1 and
Mate Mertens
"RtSaultata d'une enqulte aur la aurvivance et l'acceaai-
bilit, dea papyrua litt,rairee r,pertori,a dane Pack2° 221
Mlle B.Meyer, 16 rue St.Maur, Paria, France
Dr.H.Meyer-Laurin, Danemannatr.10, Freiburg, Genuny
Dott.L.Migliardi Zingale, Salita S.Barnaba 24, Genova, ItalyJ
and Signor Zingale
Paper: aee under prof. M• .Amelotti
Dr.F.Millar, 'l'he Queen•• College, Oxford, England
Sig.F.Montanari, Via Daglio 7, Sannazzaro di Burgonoli, Italy
Prof.O.Montevecchi, Univer ■ ita Cattolica, Mil'110, Italy
(Representative ot the .._,iversita Cattolica del Sacro
Cuore)
"L'epikri•i• dei Greco-Egizi" 227
Dr.L.Mooren, Minnezang 2, B-)202 Linden, Belgiua (New addresa)
"Die angebliche Vervandtachatt zwiachen den ptolemlli ■ chen
und pharaoniscben Hofrangtiteln" 2JJ
Dr.C.D.G.Mllller, Bergheimeretr.25, Heidelberg, Genuny
Dr.W.MUller, Staatliche Nu■een, Berlin, Germany (DDR)
"Der Dioiket in ptol..ai ■ cher Zeit, seine Stellung und
Lautbahn"
Prof.G.Nachtergael, av. de l'Expo ■ ition 460, Bruxellee, Belgiua
Mr• A.Nibbi, 1) Lovelace Road, Oxford, lngland
Dr.J.F.Oate■, Duke University, Durhaa, N.c., u.s.A.
"Ptole .. ta luergetie and the City ot the Ar■ inoite■"
Prof.C.Oeyen, Univer■ itlt Bonn, v.Geraanyi and Frau Oeyen
"Die neu entzifferten ■ubachai ■iechen Pragaente der
koptiach ...gnoatiachen 'Schrift ohne Titel'"
(Publication in: &aaaya on the Hao H--.di Te:a:ta in honour
of Pahor Labib, edited by Martin Krau••1 ~ Nag 8-di
Studi•• wol.VI, Leiden 1975)
Mr s.011ar, &gyptian MIIMua of Antiquiti••• Cairo, A.R.&.
Prof.T.Orlandi, Yicolo dell• Caapana 22, Ro.. , Italy
"I papiri copti di Torino, Vienna e Dublino"
(Publication in Le Mu ■'°n)
Signorina C.Paneroni, UnivereitA Cattolica, Milano, Italy
Dott.L.Papini, 29 via dell• Robbia, Firenze, Italy
P.J.Par■on ■ &■q., Chri ■ t Church, Oxford, England
T.S.Pattie &aq., 'lbe Briti ■h Library, London, England
Prof.O.M.Pearl, )200 Overridge Drive, Ann Arbor, Mich., u.s.A.
(Joint repre•entative of the Univer•ity of Michigan)
"flle klerouchy ■yst .. - aid to land-aanageaent and
book-keeping"
Dott.M.Perego, Via A.Volta J5, I-20052 Monza, Italy
Oott.S.Pemigotti, 21 via Cardinale Matti, Pi ■a, Italy
Dr.P.C.Philip■, Jr., Vanderbilt Univer■ ity, Naahville, Tenn.,
u.s.A.
Prof.R.H.Pierce, Univereitetet i Bergen, Norway
(Repreeentative of the Univer■ ity of Bergen)
See al ■o under "Saqqara Papyri"
Dott.R.Pintaudi, 70/A via Palazzo dei Diavoli, Firenze, Italy
Mi•• E.J.&.Pirie, City Mu.eua, Leeds, England
Prot.C.Pnaux, 109 rue de l'Abbaye, Bruzelle ■, Belgiua
(Repre ■entative of the Acadnie Royale de Beleique)
"Grandeur et li ■ itea de la ■cience alezandrine''
(Publication in: "Le a,nde grec hell,nistique", Collection
Clio (Paria, probably 1976). Abridged ver■ ion in the Bull.
de la Cla■■e de■ Lettre ■ de l'Acad. Royale de Belgique)
Dott.P.Pnmeti, I ■tituto Vitelli, Firenze, Italy
xvi

Dr.M.G.Raa:chke, Harvard Univer ■ ity, Ca.bridge, Na■■ ., u.s.A.

"Papyrological evidence for Ptoleaaic and Roaan trade
with India" 241
Dr.J.D.Ray: eee entry under "Saqqara Papyri"
Dr.J.R.Rea, Papyrology Roo■■, Aalwolean Muaeua, Oxford, Bngland1
and Mr• Rea
T.T.Renner Kaq., Roekford College, Rockford, 111., u.s.A.1 and
Mr ■ Renner
"A new fragment on Ptol•-ic history" (Suaaary) 176
Dr.E.A.E.Reya,nd, 62 Woodstock Close, Oxford, England
"Alexandria and Hemphia, I"
Signorina G.M.Riapoli, Piazza dell• Boraa 22, Nap:,li, Italy
C.H.Roberta Eaq., St.John'• College, Oxford, England
(Representative ot the Britiah Acad911Y)
Prot.J.M.Robin110n, Clareaont Graduate School, Clare110nt, Cali£.,
u.s.A., and Mra Robin.on
"'lhe manufacture of the Nag Haaaadi codice•"
(Publication in: Eaaaya on the Nag ..._di Text ■ in honour
of Pahor Labib, edited by Martin Krau■e1 • Nag Haa.adi
Studie■ vol.YI, Leiden 1975)
Prof.A.Roca-Puig, Conaejo de Ciento )81, Barcelona, Spain
"Nev literary Latin text ■ in the Papyri Barcelonenae ■
Collection: hexaaetera on Alce ■ ti•" (Suaaary) 111
Signorina A.Roaelli, Scuola Noraale Superiore, Pi••• Italy
Prof.ff.A.Rupprecht, Univeraitlt Marburg, v.Geraany
Dr.R.P.Salomona, lvertaenlaan 12, Yelp, Holland
Prof.L.Sandler, New York Univer■ ity (Waahington Square and
Univeraity College), New York, u.s.A.
(Repre-ntativ• of New York Univer■ ity)
Saqqara Papyri 247
I. Dr.G.T.Martinz
"The Egypt ls.ploration Society excavation ■ in
the Sacred Ani-1 Necropoli ■ at North Saqqara
and the discovery ot the papyri" 2le8
II. Prof.E.G.Tumer:
"'lbe Greek papyri fro ■ Saqqara" 250
III. Prof.J.B.Segal:
"'lhe Araaaic papyri" 252
IV. Prot.H.S.Smith:
"'lbe Deac,tic papyri: introduction" 256
V. Prof.H.S.S.ith:
"Demotic literary papyri and letter• 11 257
VI. Prot.R.H.Pierces
"Demotic legal in ■ triaenta and protocol ■" 260
VII. Dr.w.J.Tait:
"The phyaical characteristic• of the papyri" 262
VIII. Dr.J.D.Ray:
"The archive of J;.ior" 265
 xvii
Prof.F.Sbordone, Via Mezzocannone t6, Napoli, Italy
"Sguardo d'in ■ ieae ai papiri dell• Retoriea di Filodeao"
(Publication in: Rendiconti 197A dell• Aecad.. ia di
Archeologia, Letter• e Belle Arti di Napoli)
Prof.J.Scberer, Jn ■ titut de Papyrologie, 17 rue de la Sorbonne,
Pari ■, France
G.Schiffaacher: ■ee under Irigoin
Signorina N.Scopello, Via S.Ottavio 20, Torino, Italy
Dr.D.Sedley, Balliol College, Oxford, .lngland
ttJpieuru■, On Nature, Book XI (P.Herc. 10'a2), fr.,! col. III.
An •r~nt against ltudozan aatronoay" 269
Prof • .J.B.Segals ■ee entry under "Saqqara Papyri"
Prof.R.Seider, Univeraitlt zu Heidelberg, Geraany, and Frau Seider
"ZUr Pallographie der frUhen lateiniachen Papyri" 277
Dr • .J.C.Slaelton, Inat. f. Klaaai ■cbe Altertuaakunde der Univeraitlt
Kiel, Neue UniYer■ itat, Olahau■en ■ tr., D-23 Kiel, Ger.any
(New addre ■ a)
"Gr .... r and death" (Smaar:r) 20't
A.F.Shore Eeq., Britiah Mu■eim, London, England
(RepreaentatiYe of the British Muaeua)
"Why Horu■ ■on of Nechut•• waa fined three talent•
in 107 B.C."
Dr.P.J.Sijpeeteijn, Wilhel■inalaan 2, Baanl, Holland
(Repreaentative of the Univeraity of Allat•rd-)
Dott.M.P.Silvi ■ Giangeri, Univeraita degli Studi, Pisa, Italy
Signorina L.Si ■onini, Via Aoaaetti 9, Milano, Italy
T.C.Skeat Eaq., 6:J Aahbourne Road, Baling, London, lngland
A.H.K.Slater &aq., Departaent of Trade and Induatry, London,
England
Prof.H.S.S.ith: aee entry wider "Saqqara Papyri"
Dr.S.A.Stephena, 1031 Sp~ingfield Drive, San Carlos,. C&lif., u.s.A.
Dr.J.-A.Straua, rue de■ Loupe 4, Baa-l»la, Belgiua; and Mlle Straua-
Godet
Dr.R.Sullivan, Univer■ ity of Saakatchewan, Canada
"I■portant laatern Dyoaata in the papyri" 285
Prof .P.R.Svarney, York Univeraity, Toronto/. Canada
"'nle deaignationa n't0Aq&.a1.cu(;
and AA.ctav6pcut; in
Ptoleaaic Egypt"
Prof.A.Sviderek, ul. Mochnackiego 4 a/4, var-w, Poland
"Un• nouvelle copie de P.Mich.IX 529.25-38" 29)
Dr.W.J.Tait, Chriat' ■ College, Caabridge, llngland
t•A fragaent of a table of conaula fro■ Tebtunia" 299
See alao under "5aqqara Papyri"
Prof.M.Tal~ea, )t via Marco Aurelio, Ro■a, Italy; and
Signora Tal-■-nca Foti
Prof.J'.A.C.flM>aaa, Univeraity College, London, England
Dr.J.D.Thoaaa, Univereity of Durb-, England
(RepreMntative of the Univeraity of Durhaa)
"'lh• diHppearance of the dekaprotoi in Sgypt" (Suwry) 66
xviii

Dr.K.Tho■p90n, University of Sxeter, England

"'lbe biology and ecology of papyrua"
Sig.G.Tibiletti, Univer ■ ita Cattolica, Milano, Italy
Dr.K.Treu, W6rther ■ tr.J8, Berlin, Geraany (DIJR)
"So■e Chri ■ tian papyri of the Berlin Collection"
(Read by Mr.C.H.Robert ■) J05
Prof.B.G.Tumer, Univer ■ ity College, London, England1 and
Mr■ Turner
(Representative of the Univer ■ ity of London and of
Univer ■ ity College, London)
"Early papyrua codicea of large aize" J09
See al90 under "S&qqara Papyri"
Dr.F.Uebel, Johann-Friedrichatr.t, Jena, Geraany (DIJR)
"Die drei Jahre ■ zlhlweiaen in den Zenonpapyri" )lJ
Dr.R.Yan Benneko■, Fae. de Letteren, Atd. ltlaaaiek• Talen,
Free Univeraity, De Boelalaan 1105, Allaterdut-ltOt,
Holland (Nev addre ■ a)
"A re-exaaination of P.Oxy.2288 (Sappho 1 LP)" )25
Prof.ff.Van den Brink, Hillseatraat 24, 4<>J8 Babylonilnbroek,
Holland (new addre ■ a) I and Mr ■ Van den Brink S.it
Prof.C.Vanderaleyen, 19 rue Fond 'lbirion, Waterloo, BelgiWII
and Mae Vander■ leyen Gaillet
(Repre ■entative of the Univeraitl Catholique de Louvain)
Dott.M.Yandoni, Univeraita degli Studi, Milano, ltaly1 and
Signora Vandoni
"Dall' archivio del teaaitore Trifone" J)l
Abb6 J.Van Haelat, J pl. St.Genuin-dea-Pr,a, Parla, France
"Origine et provenance dee aanu ■crita pali ■paeate ■
(gr6co-syriaque ■) de Deir Suriani" (S.....ary) 204
Dr.V.Van Rengen, 54 Solleveldatraat, Bruaael, Belgiua
"Une renaiaaance de l'hellfni ... pendant le troi ■ ieae
quart du Ille ■ iecle"
Prof.I.Van
Dr.C.Wehrli,
Dr.M.Weinatein,
't Dack, De Grunnelaan 4, B-JOJO Heverlee, Belgiua
)4 St.-Jean, CH-120J Geneva, Switzerland
Union 1heological Seainary, Nev York, u.s.A.
•
Dr.f.Wendelbo, Univeraity ot Bergen, Norway
"Extraction of papyri fro■ geaao cartonnages • new
.. thod baaed on an enzyaatic approach" JJ7
Prof.M.L.Weat, UniYeraity College, Oxford, England
"'111•■etrical placing of ... 11 papyrua frag111ent ■" Jltt
Dr.S.Weat, Hertford College, Oxford, &ngland
"Satyrua I Peripatetic or Alexandrian?t•
(Publication in~ xv (1974), 279 ff.)
Prof.W.H.Villia, Duke Univer■ ity, Durha■, N.C., u.s.A.1 and
Mr• Willia and Mia• a.Willi ■
"Fourth-century docu■enta fro■ Panopoli• at Duke
Univer■ ity"
N.Vil90n laq., Lincoln College, Oxford, England
Prof.H.J.Wolff, J5 Schulhaua ■ tr., Kirchzarten, Geraanyf and
Frau Wolff
"1be ao-called Private Protocol" 349
 xis
Dr.N.J.Woodall, 8) We ■ t Avenue, Fairport, N.Y., u.s.A.
"A Latin record of the opening of a Ro.an will" (SU111a&ry) )4
(With Prot.R.O.Fink)
(Publication planned for Fe ■ t ■ chrift Youtie; a
ver ■ ion -y al ■o appear in .:!:!?,)
Dr.K.A.Vorp, Kieftendellaan 20, Santpoort-Hord, Holland
R.P.Wright Eaq., Univer ■ ity of Durhaa, lngland
"Latin curaive docmtent ■ fro■ Vindolanda, aouth of
Hadrian' a Wall" ( S1a111ary) .) 55
Prof.H.C.Youtie, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.,
u.s.A., and Mra Youtie
(Joint representative of the University of Michigan)
"'A7la.topcc;s Law ver■u■ Custom in Roman Egypt"
(Publication in Fe ■ t ■ chrift Pr,aW(.)
Dr.N.Zagagi, )69 Banbury Road, Oxford, England
Prof.G.Zalateo, 22 via Carlo Collbi, Trie ■ te, Italy; and
Signora Zalateo
Sig.G.Zecchini, Univeraita Cattolica, Milano, Italy
Prof.H.Zilliacua, 9B Parkgatan, Helaingfora, Finland
 NEW DATA FROM THE ZENON PAPYRI+
Plates I-VI
It is a well-known fact that the famous archive of the Zenon papyri is a mine of in-
formation that is _continually contributing a lot towards our knowledge of the econo-
mic system, the bureaucratic and sociological status of Ptolemaic Egypt during the
best part of the IIlrd century BC. For .more than the last fifty years this archive has
been shedding variant light upon certain aspech of the utmost importance pertaining
to Greco-Egyptian life under Ptolemaic rule.
However new information continues to crop up. Just in time for this congress a new
volume of Zenon papyri kept in the British Mlseum appeared (P.Lond. VII). Here I
may bring to your attention that some fragmenh belonging to the Zenon archive
are deposited in Cairo at the disposal of the Egyptian Papyrological Society an~
await their publication. Some do convey. casual ref•ences to places, names of per-
sons, minor evenh, dealings and various activities or recommendations; but they are
in a fragmentary state. I shal I present some examples in order to show you the kind
of scrapswe are dealing with. There is still the hope that fragments cm, be combined
and put together, and since this archive is dispe11ed over the whole world, one
should publish even smal I fragmenh in order to enable scholars to put fragments
together which are kept at different places. For example,it is most likely that the
fragment I shall present as nr .2 is part of the same letter as P.Columbia 48 kept at
New York.
In the Cairo fragments of our society we are sometimes fortunate to come across
names of eminent persons and officials known to us. To quote some instances, we
come across Telestes, Metrodoros, Promethion the banker of Mendes, Pythonthe
banker of Crocidolopol is, I Epharmosto~ the younger brother of Zenon occuring
together with Styrax the paidagogos, further Agenor the strategos, Hellenocrates,
Theophil01 the sitologos, Semphtheus the pig breeder, Parmenion, Euphranor who
exchanged letten with Zenon, Theodoros who -submitted Cl hypomnema to Zenon and
expressed his urgent need of money, further Posis the dekotarchos Cl'\dstone- cutter,
and so on. Some of the fragments belong to letten of recommendation and display
the normal phraseology of such letters; othen are fragments of enteuxeis with
references to the court of the chremotistoe.

Such are the types of instances that need to be published in the near future under
our auspices. It ta high time to deal with these tit-bits, irrespective of the fact
that they are so fragmentary. It suffices to say that we are more than compensated
by the fresh data furnished by them. They do amplify or help in the restoration of
hazy pictures.or topics pertaining to these busybody Greeks going to and from Phila-
delphia to the different parts of the Delta and Alexandria on some public or private
occasions.
But let us tum to the five examples I have chosen.

+ In the absence of Prof.Zaki Aly his paper was read by Prof.L.Koenen, who
reported that Prof .Zaki Aly has invited a group of scholars to study the Zenon papyri
at hi I disposal •

I
 Text Nr. 1
A Hypomnema to Zenon
8, 2 x 8 cm colour: dark brown

recto 2 cSoµEVOV Ta Cfl.T0p1.0V

TO ,rapa TWV).[a]To-
4 µwv. lT01.1Jovyap
lanv.

verso 6 ]u

This text deals with some corn-allowance in connection with a group of stone-cut-
ters stationed mo5t likely somewhere round Philadelphia and arranged as usual in
dekatorchia (P.C.Z. 59745). One expects that through one of their dekatarchs they
demand payment of their food allowance, as agreed upon. The Zenon papyri furnish
us with abundant evidence concerning the recurrent delay in supplying workers with
their allotted payments whether in kind or in money. The usual cry was that these
paymentswere always in arrean. Hence it followed that they asked (yr ~pply of
such requirements in due course or rather punctually ( Elrr6KTW~ ) •
But Td C1LT6p1.ov Td wopd Ti:iv ).[oh'olJWV is on awkward formulation and does not
express this sense.:. It rather sounds as if the corn-allowance or a smal I ammount of
corn had to be provided by the stone-cutten. Perhapsthey had cuked Zenon to
store some amrnount of wheat on their behalf in order to be delivered -~-~ment to
somebody they hired. In this case the writer of this letter tells Zenon that the wheat
is ready to be delivered.
At the beginning dUIJfJC.TP'l8ri[o61Jevov]
or ctuvT0<1[o6µevov)or a similar participle
is to be expected.

Text Nr.2
A Doted Letter Referring to an Assignment of Land among
Cleruchs
Nov. 20, 253 BC 18 x 12 cm colour: Iightbrown
The following fragment is the end of a letter; I take it to be the end of the letter
of which the beginning wcu published as P.Col.Zen.49; the lines have the same length;
the date of the new fragment is the same which appears on the back of the Colum-
bia fragment: Nov .20, 253 BC; both fragments df:01 with the Assignement of lqnd
to a cleruch. But I was not able to get a photograph of P.Col. Zen.49 in due time,
1) cf. for example- P.Col.Zen. 3i,4; also PSI 423,33

2
so that for the time being the identification remains a working hypothesis.
recto:
(P.Col.) o
1 'Acn,).1jff 1.661")" wpd" TijL t>ia-
Ulfl'- y£v6µevo" TflL KOTd
Mti,,cpwZ~vw1. xatpeLv.
4 'ApTeµi:&.,po(0 01ro6L60(11; OOL
TrlvA..-1.0TOAfivtdT1.v ~fJW
cpt>,o"
KaC wo>.tT'l". 61r£OTC&A-
.,atvo" 6t .,and' TwvAOL TWV
8 faTpcn L]WTw id' Td yf}L61.a

9 [ Ker~ dv oJv woLf)OaL"]

(P. Cairo awou66aa"wapca,hou

Fuad)
1r~ Toit" KaTaµeTpoUVTa"•

12 Nov.20,253 BC
verso:
(P.Col • ) 13 {HTou") Xy 80"8 "~ • 'Amt).11- Nov. 20, 253 BC
,r1.6611-
wepC 'ApTat,1L-
6'tpou.

This letter is an introduction by which Asklepiades, an official formerly connected

with oil stores, asks Zenon to help a soldier, the bearer of this letter, regarding the
people charged with the task of measuring out allohnents Qf.l,;aQdto the cleruchs;
voL. ~
in other papyri the c:leruchs are called ol HaTatJe.,aaTprn.1.t
The assignment of land in allotments YriTOL" OTpo-
to cleruchs ( ~ KaTaµeµeTP'f'ltJlVr')
TLWTaL") was a very big business in the Fayum and elsewhere. Hence a word of
recommendation may have been very helpful.

Text Nr.3
A letter Mentioning the Festival of Isis
l olvTa, ,re;p(' 6t
]~ ~ypaq,ov Trlv tffL0-

2) see P.C.Z. 59'297, 26 f.; cf.P.Lond.VII, 2027,2, also P.C.Z. 59245,2

3
 wp]bT1pov ivtTux1v
4 hdt,i wap' ~..:,V816rp1.~ov
]1")VOWT£Tptq,8a1.
] 'l , ~ '-... T
OUTWI. IW"(OY I I, VO I,

]T~"L l'va t,arliµoi:-

8 l .exu 1.ov a
I1..,eat
l • 1 l, Td Elate 1.a e:3-ruxta 'l" y
] TWV; TOK66wv
&ep.:"ToCITwfv]~ lxw1,1avcppbvT1.oov

This letter deals with several subiects. In 1.2 the writer comes back to a letter~
wrote before. In I. 8 he mentions Sernphtheus who is known as a keeperof pigs. )
4
So the ToH6:61, mentioned in I. 10 are sows as normally in the Zenon archive.
Here we come to the main inter•t of this papyrus; it refers to the f•tival of Isis.
The festival of Isis celebrated from the 17th to the 20th of Hathyr is menrioned in
P.C.Z.59154, and Artemidoros,an Agent of Apollonios at Memphis, asked Zenon
to send him pigs which obviously were to be offered to Isis on this festival in the
year 255 BC (P.C.Z. 59191). One needs not to be astonished that the Greeks
offered pigs to the goddess according to their custom, though the Egyptians regarded
pigs as unclean. Even the Egyptians offered pigs to Selene and Dionysos, that is
to say to Isis and Osiris, on fudrnoon celebrations (Herod. II, 4n, by that performing
the victory over Seth.
In the new papyrus the sows are needed for a festival of Isis too, and it is a fair
guess t~t they were to be offered on the f•tival of the month Hathyr. In this case
'l" may be read as ~" : 11on which third day", that is to say on the third day
of the festival. If so, a supplement may be expected like ~" (TptT111.J~dav
l~av] TW (dvTa) ToH66wv. But it seems to be difficult to connect this phrase
with the phrase in front. So one may think of an other construction: I1..,eat I
yp6fQV,8.wl~ 1l, Td Elatua aln-uxta ~ .., (Tpat,) I J TWV{artvTa)
c?nrooT~'t>.a1.
ToK66wv. But this is far from being satisfactory.
The last lin"sjs basically certain • In the Zenon archive l'va follows tppl,vnoov
quite often.
The lower margin is preserved. All around this papyrus, especially on the lower
margin, traces of ink are to be seen. Probably a former text hos been washed away.

3) P.C.Z.59346, 12; P.Edg.Mich.79.

4) P.C.Z.59274,5; 59292,305;59152, Jf.;. 59312,7; 59334,4.17.24; 59346,7
59362 v.S; 59389,5; 595iH, 142; 59819, 2 and 7; P.Lond.Zen. 2186 (,selection),
5) P.C.Z.59016,4 f.; 59063,6; 59192,6; 59259,3 f.; P.Col.Zen.100, 10.For
fva lxwt,aav cf.P.Lond.Zen. 19-41,12.

4
 Text Nr.4
A Report of Dekatarchoi on the Flight of Workers
9 ,5 x 22 cm colour: light brown
This papyrus is only the right half of an official letter written by dekatarchoi, as
it seems. In oddition the papyrvs is badly damaged on the right edge. Upper and
lower margins are preserved.

1lErw,6atv1. - - - - - lcp1. ol 6uatn-~e(xo1.

Avct,1,J).a6a~,pda1.TWYwap6 aou ..
T]Uyx{JvOUCJL&vaK!XWP'l-

J. NGAwco3v,ro1.ftoa1.1.
4 l'K6Tac- - - - - ..._

. .. . . .
lTT[]au-w[

w]apaxp~.,a MaC~~

.
] ac ~•T' ~tac
8 aplyttp1.ov olnt lr.-o61.6 lol~-
[T- - - - - - - - - -leeuc T&lidv~tp[
.
] .o/-LOC
[ (ITouc) ~
1Talx-&,vc
••
The dekatarchoi report to somebody that some people, probably some of their
work.en, left and resorted to a place of refuge (1.3). The receiver of the letter
is supposed to take some steps, obviously on behalf of these workers and in connection
with securities and money not paid, and that immediately. Nay-be the workeri are
supposed to come back to their workafter these actions, and probably this was inten-
ded by the writen of our letter.
6
The phrase ~•T'aacpaXatac (1.7) occun also in P.C.Z.59015,5. ) In I. 6one
may reachw1. or Tot££ , and in I. 7 one may guess &.ocnd]NJc.
• t • • Ill

A lot oft~ worken on the dorea of Apollonios were rather diuotisfled with their
situation. The &vax"Prt<'LCwas their last resource by which they forced the
officials to act in their favour. In P. Lond.Zen. 2011 some goatherds took to
flight, and it ,r
suggested that the reason for that was the extortionate rent char-
ged by Zenon.

6) cf. P. C. Z. 59361, '36; 59422, 16; PSI 570, 6.

7)cf. especially P. Lond.Zen.1954 and 1955.
8) CI.PrkaJx, Chron.d' Eg. 11, 1936, 558and cf. T.C.Skeat's introduction.

5
 Text Nr. 5

A Dated letter from Metrcdoros

257 BC 6,5 x 18 cm

This papyrus wm folded nine times. The writing is in a large hand, rather similar
to the hands of the clerical staff of Apollonios and Zenon. Upper and left margin
are preserved.

recto Mrr~e[b&.,p~Zf)vwv1.( ?) x.otpuv .]

&,r[

a1rtp.,afa
4 c1cppay[1.a--
KOJJ"~
[

8 TOU (

verso 9

The docket on the veno is endoned at a place which corresponds to the fint Iine
">
on recto. Metrodoros was an agent of Apollonios and wel I - known from other
papyri. Sometimes he was a rather unscrupulous men.
In the new fragment written in the year 257 Metrodoros work is connected with
seed, which probably shall be brought to some place. We cannot say m.,ch more,
but may hope to find the right side of this fragment.

These five fragmenh are enough to show what we have to expect from the fragments
kept at the Papyrological Society in Coiro: puzzling riddles and a few new pieces
of informations. But I think, these pieces of scattered informations are worthwhile
to be cared for.

Cairo Zaki Aly

9) PSI 340. For his activities see for example P.C.Z. 59063 (ct.59065); 59337;
59634; P. lond. Zen. 2042; cf. P .C. Z. 59361, 41.

6
(Read by J.Scherer)

NOUVELLES
TECHNIQUES
APPLICABLES
A L'ETUDE DU LIVRE DE PAPYRUS
Plates VII-X
Communication présentée par
Jean-Nofl Barrandon, Laboratoire Pierre sue, Saclay
Jean Irigoin, Université de Paris-Sorbonne
Gérard Schiffmacher, Laboratoire des Terres Rares, Bellevue

Sur la fabrication de la feuille et du rouleau de papyrus

nous disposons seulement, comme source antique, du passage bien connu
du livre XIII (chap.74-82) de 1 1 Histoire naturelle de Pline, dont le
meilleur commentaire est celui que N.Lewis a donné dans sa thèse de
Paris, L'lndustrie du Pa us dans l'E te Gréco-Romaine (1934), en
ai~endant le volume annoncé par le même auteur Papyrus in Classical
Antiqui ty).
La moUlle de papyrus est découpée en longues bandes qui
sont disposées parallèlement de façon à se joindre, et recouvertes
d'une seconde couche placée pe.rpendiculairement à la première. La
feuille ainsi obtenue se présente come un rectangle plus haut que
large : au recto, les bandes sont horizontales; au verso, elles sont
verticales. Assemblées par leur hauteur, les feuilles, au nombre de
vingt en principe, constituent un rouleau.
Sur un certain nombre de points, la description donnée par
Pline est peu claire ou même lacuneuse. Quel est, par exemple, le r6le
de la colle dont il est question au chap.82: sert-elle seulement à
l'assemblage des feuilles? ou rempla.ce-t-elle l'eau du Nil 11dont le
limon fait l'effet de collett (turbidus li~uor uim glutinis praebet),
mentionn,e au chap.77 pour la confection de la feuille? Les bandes
découpées dans la moWlle ont-elles deux faces identiques ou non? Et
si les faces sont différentes, l'ouvrier en tient-il compte dans la
fabrication? Ces deux dernières questions, Pline ne se les pose pas.
Son exposé laisse de c8té bien des détails et manque de précision sur
les tours-de-main. La. technologie de la fabrication de la feuille et
du rouleau de papyrus reste à écrire.
Notre communication se propose seulement de montrer comment
de nouvelles techniques de laboratoire peuvent servir à détérminer
quelques aspects de cette technologie. L'une est l'analyse par acti-
vation, l'autre, la microscopie électronique à balayage.

1. Ltanalyse par activation

Cette méthode permet de doser beaucoup d'impuretés sans ef-
fectuer d'a11a.lyse chimique, par simple spectrométrie gamma. On irradie
un échantillon de papyrus d'un ou deux centimètres carrés dans les neu-
trons thermiques d'un réacteur nucléaire; les réactions nucléaires sur
l'oxygène, le carbone et l'hydrogène, constituants majeurs du papyrus,
produisent des radioisotopes dont la radioactivité dispara!t très

7
rapidement ou n'est pas gênante, et seule subsiste la radioactivité pro-
venant des impuretés. La spectrométrie gaoma est faite en utilisant un
détecteur en Germa.nium compensé au Lithium et un analyseur d'impulsions.
Le détecteur possède une résolution telle que deux raies gamma d'éner-
gies très voisines sont si bien séparées, que peu d'erreurs sont à crain-
dre quant à l'attribution des raies gamma observées. Ainsi, en une seule
mesure, beaucoup de radioisotopes différents peuvent Atre identifiés et
leur radioactivité mesurée quantitativement.
Nos premiers essais ont porté sur quatre échantillons de pa-
pyrus pris au hasard dans ,un lot mis à notre disposition par le Prof.
Jean Scherer, directeur de l'Institti;de Papyrologie de la Sorbonne.

Eléments Echantillons
(paili!lo~î 1 2 3 4
Sodium (Na) 21400 21700 30100 38200
Scandium (Sc) o, 18 o, 18 0,20 o, 21
Chrome (Cr) 2,3 2 1,4 1 ,2
Fer (P'e) 820 916 885 773
Cobalt (Co) 0,74 0,61 0,71 o, 71
Brome (Br) 40 19,3 33,4 32
Lanthane (La) 0,32 0,23 0,24 0, 31
Baryum (Ba) 38 40 43 30
Or (Au) 0,047 0,021 0,37 0,38
Mercure (Hg) 1,8 3 3,5 2,7

Ce qui frappe d'abord dans ce tableau, c'est la concordance

des résultats pour la plupart des impuretés. Seul l'or présente des do-
sages variés, deux faibles et deux forts, la proportion étant en gros
de 1 à 8. On a là une indication qui méritera d'être étudiée.
En second lieu, il a paru intéressant de comparer le papyrus,
matière végétale, à un autre produit de même origine, le papier. On a
donc analysé des échantillons de papiers chinois anciens (Ve-Xe siècle)
et un papier arabe du XIIIe siècle, d'une part, des papiers italiens du
XVe siècle (dont la technique de fabrication est plus élaborée) d'autre
part. Le papyrus est beaucoup plus près des papiers orientaux et extrê-
me-orientaux, mais il a, par rapport à eux, une forte teneur en sodium
(Na), cinq à dix fois plus, qui pourrait s'expliquer par l'usage d'eau
de mer, de saumure ou de sel marin. On remarque aussi dans le papyrus
une forte teneur en fer (Pe), pr~s de un pour mille.
Ces essais, faits sur un tout petit nombre d'échantillons, ne
prétendent pas donner des résultats. Ils visent seulement à montrer que

8
l'ana.lyse par activation, déjà utilisée pour les papiers, peut ltre ap-
piiquée aux pe.pyrua, suivant une suggestion faite par le Prof.E.G.Turner
au colloque international sur Les techni ues de laboratoire dans l'étude
des manuscrits, qui s'est tenu à Paris en septembre 1972 voir les Actes
cu colloque, p.115). Pour étendre cea recherches, il faudrait disposer
d'un nombre assez grand de bribes de papyrus non écrites, mais datles
(fragment d'un document) ou datables (d'après les conditions de la trou-
vaille), et localisées. Quelques fragmenta d'Herculanum et de Ravenne
seraient les bienvenus.

2. La microscopie électronique à balayage

c•est un moyen récent d 1 ltude de la morphologie des surfaces.
Un mince pinceau d'électrons foc~lisé sur l'échantillon à examiner, en
balaye la surface. A chaque point d'impact, les électrons peuvent Atre
en partie absorbés (ou transmis si 1'6chantillon est très mince), en par-
tie réfléchis (électrons r-étrodiffusés), ou bien exciter l'émission d'é-
lectrons secondaires. Pour chaque point de balayage, ces différentes sor-
tes d'électrons peuvent ltre recueillis et le courant produit peut Otre
mesuré. On obtient ainsi une image de la surface exaai.née avec un gran-
dissement qui va de quelques dizaines de fois à quelqùes dizaines de
milliers de fois. Le papyrus étant non-conducteur, l'accumulation des
charges électrosiatiquea au cours de l'examen déformerai~ l'image; il
est donc nécessaire de métalliser la surface pour assu~er l'écoulement
des chargea: une couche d'or de 200 angstroems (un angstroem=un dix-
milliardième de mètre) est déposée par évaporation. Les fragments de
papyrus ont été examinés aux grandissements 40x,100x,2oox,400x,1000x et
2000x. Parmi ces grandissements, nous en avons choisi trois (40x,200x et
1000x) qui nous ont paru les plus significatifs et auxquels appartiennent
les photographies reproduites ci-après.
Les figures 1 à 7 présentent les deux faces d'un même fragment
de papyrus. Les figures 8 et 9 montrent un autre fragment vu en quelque
sorte de l'intérieur, sur la face interne d'une des deux couches de ban-
des disposées perpendiculairement.
De ces observations, résumées dans la légende des figures, il
ressort que, pour les deux échantillons examinés, les deux faces sont
différentes : l'une semble couverte d'un enduit, l'autre présente une
structure végétale très nette; le maintien des deux couches de bandes
- les verticales et les horizontales - paratt assuré par une matière
étrangère, probablement une colle de p4te. Les petits blocs anguleux
visibles sur une face, les perles minuscules q~i apparaissent sur l'au-
tre, correspondraient les premiers au produit servant au collage (assem-
blage, au moyen d'une colle, des deux couches de fibres; cf.fig.8) et à
l'encollage (enduit passé sur l'une des deux faces, qui a toute chance
d'Atre le recto; cf.fig.5, face encollée, et fig.6, face non encollée),
les dernières à la condensation de la sève. L'emploi des verbes "sem-
bler" et "paraitre" montre que nous n'en sommes qu•au début d'une

9
recherche, mais les premiers résultats et, plus encore, la beauté des
images, nous ont incités à les présenter sans plus attendre. Nous sou-
naiterions que ceux qui sont intéressés par ces problèmes techniques
nous fassent part de leurs questions et de leurs suggestions.

N.B. Les auteurs de la co111nunication remercient M.Jean-Claude Martin,

qui a réalisé la prise des vues au micoscope électronique à balayage.

Summaries:

M.Amelotti and L.Zingale Migli&rdi:

uPresentazione dei PUG I e annuncio dei PUG II 11

Il. prof. Amelotti presenta 11 primo volume dei Papiri dell' Università di
Genova, appena uscito, e dl lettura della Premessa con cui 11 volume si apre.
In tale Premessa si dl notizia anzitutto della formazione della raccolta
genovese di papiri, nonchi della scelta dei cinquanta testi che constituiscono 11
primo vollllle. Dopo un accenno ai criteri editoriali, si passa ad una rapida
descrizione dei papiri piQ interessanti.
Prende quindi la parola la dott. Zingale Migliardi, che fornisce qualche
informazione prel:lminare sugli altri papiri in corso di studio, in vista del
preparazione del aecondo volume, ed è a dispoaizione per maggiori chiaramenti
sul primo volume testê presentato.

R. S. Bagnall :
11
Greek papyri and ostraka in the Florida State University Library"
The Strozier Library of Florida State University in Tallahassee acquired
late in 1973 a collection of Greek papyri and Greek and Latin oatraka from Egypt,
all of which were aaid to have been in a private European collection since early
in thia century.
The 25 papyri are all ordera for payment or fragmenta thereof addreaaed to
a banker Protarchos; they date to the 30th through 32nd years of either Ptolemy VI
Philometor or Ptolemy VIII Euergetee II. They are all emall rectangles of varying
size, found •• 1DW11111.y-cartonnage at Abusir el-Melek. Their very considerable degree
of atandardization in formulais of interest as auggesting something cloeer to
'IDOderncheck• than i• often admitted to have existed.
The 32 ostraka, all but 3 fragments in Greek, come from a Roman military
camp, probably in the Eastern desert, with the finda from. which they have a close
resemblance in handwriting, foraat and subject matter. Moat of them are letters,
aome on official bu ■ iness from one officer to another, others between aoldiers and
member1 of their families on private business.

ro
 La traite d'esclaves en Egypte
I.Biezur~exa-Malowiet

Les probl~ea concernant le commerce d'esclaves dans l'Egypte

ptol&aaique et romaine furent trait,a dans un grand nombre d'ouvrages,

d'articles et maints coaaentaires aux textes. Il suffit de mentionner

ici l'analyse des actes de vente et d'achat faite par Orsolina

1
Montevecchi dans ses Ricerche di Sociologia nei document! dell

Bgitt~reco-romano, les travaux de Raphael Taubenachlag

2
li,s aux droit d'esclavage, les chapitres concernant l'Egypte dans

le livre de Priogsheim~ les discussions sur

4
l'anacrisis dont derni~rement les articles du professeur Wolff, et

plusieurs articles de notre jeune coll~gue Jean Straus. 5 Il n'y a

donc pas besoin de pr6senter ici encore une fois les documenta publi,a,

aaintes fois analys,s et bien connus de tous ceux qui sont ici prGsents.

Il est vrai que depuis l'analyae faite par Mlle Monteveccbi et depuis

la publication des travaux de Taubenschlag nos sources se sont enrichis,

même la derniire liste des actes de vente et d'achat d'esclaves faite

par M. Straus dans son article de -la "Chronique d'Egypte" en 1971 doit

ltre com.plet€e par quelques nouveaux documenta publifs dans les

6
Oxyrynchos Papyri [2951 1 3050, 3054}, P.Col.512,
P.Med.Inv.7306 7 publi' dernilrement par M. Geraci, et autant que je sache
11 y en a encore trois au cours de publication et plusieurs ventes sont

mentionn€s dans le P. Thmouis qui va ltre publi' par Mme Sophie ICambitsia.

Ces nouveaux documents ne changent quand lllême pas d'une façon importante

lea conclusions des auteurs que je viens de citer.

11
 Vu le programme trla charg, de notre congrla, je voudrais limiter

mon intervention l la pr,sentation de quelque• question• qui me s•blent

non r,soluu.

Or Westermann dans son livre sur l'esclavage dans l'Egypte

8
ptol'-aique avait nif l'ezietence d'un esclavage developp' dans ce pays
en sou.lignant qu'il n'y avait pas en Egypte une traite d'esclaves, c'est

1 dire un coaierce d'esclaves a:a:arc6 par des marchanda apeciali•'••

puisque on ne rencontre dans dea papyrus aucun terme d,aignant un tel

marchand. La alllle obaervation eat valable pour la p6riode romaiQe. Cet

argument ccmae toua les argumenta a silentio n'a paa de valeur decisive.

J'ai donc esaayf de v,rifier, ai l'on peut dans les docaent ■ decouvrir
l'eziatence de marchanda d'uclavea dana l'Egypte romaine. Pour la
p6riode ptol61aique noua aanquona de documenta exception faite des
Archives de Zenon et de docuaenta normatifs. La correspondance de
Zenon fournit quelques infoz:matiou aur la traite d'esclaves hors
d'Egypte, sur l'importation en Egypte dea esclave■ de Syrie et de

Paleatine. 9 Lea archive• de Zenon ne ■e pretent paa 1 tirer dea conclusion.a

valable• pour l'Egypte enti~re.

Les documenta de la p6riode romaine dont noua pouvou tirer quelques

informations sur le aarch, d'esclaves ne aont pas noabreux - ce ■ont

surtout lu actes d'achat et de venta et quelques lettre■ priv,ea. Ces

documenta ne d,pasaent pa~ une •oizantaine pour les quatre ailclea de

l'Bllpire et de nouveau toute■ lea concluaion■ gh6ralea tir'•• d'une

documentation ai reatreinte ne sont que de hypothisea.

Roua aavona d'jl par lu travauz ant,rieura, et demilrment la

documentation ccapl~te l ce sujet ,tait fournie par l'article d6jl cit,

12
de K. Straus, que les esclaves Gtrangers
fi
importes en Egypte Gtaient rares.

Par un pur hasard les documenta nouveaux augmentent un peu le chiffre de

ces esclaves - P.Oxy 2951 - parle d'une esclave d'Arabie, 3053 d'un

esclave d'Osaroene [Keaopotam.ie); 3054 - d'un esclave de Bostra [Arabie],

dans un papyrus in6dit - d'Oxyrynchos, il appara1t une esclave phrygienne;

dans un autre une esclave pahlagonienne Cependant les mentions des

esclaves €trangers dans l'Egypte romaine sont rares. Le fait par lui

mime semble prouver que l'Egypte ,tait a 1 1 ,cart de la traite "interna-

tionale" [entre parenth~sea] d'esclaves. C'est qui s'accorde d'ailleurs

bien avec ce que nous savons de l'interdiction d'exporter des esclaves

10
oik.ogeneis de l'Egypte. Les trouvailles dans diff6rentes localit,s
de la xfupo. €gyptienne des actes d'achat d'esclaves redig6s hors

Egypte sont en g€n,ral apliqu€es par le fait que ces esclaves sont

arriv€s en Egypte accompagnant leurs propri,taires qui s'y sont €tablis.

Cette explication semble probable surtout pour les actes d'achat ,tablis

entre lea soldats de l'arm,e romaine stationnant hors d'Egypte ou cœae

c'est le cas du papyrus d'Oxyrynchos 2951 en Egypte mime. Mais - il me

semble - que mb.e dans quelques uns de ces documents on peut d€celer

l'activit€ de marchands d'esclaves. Dans l'acte d'achat BGU937

d'H6racleopolis la Grande les deux partis sont de la même localit,, mais

l'esclave est d'origine pontique. le papyrus d'Oxyrynch•J3053 contient

un enregistement 1 Oxyrynchos d'un achat fait~ Aurelia Tripolei en

Ph€nicie d'une esclave d'0ssro€ne, le vendeur €tait aussi un 0ssroenien

mentionne même le bateau. Le P.Oxy 3054 presente le mime ph€nomlne -

l'enregistrement d'un acte d'achat fait 1 Bostra - mais cette fois ci la

13
propri,taire est elle mime de Bostra tandis que dans le papyrus prGcedant

c',tait un citoyen d'Alexandrie. Mais l'esclave n'a que deux ana et il

avait dGjl chang, quatre fois de propri,taire l Boatra - c'est ce qui

indique plutôt qu'il y &tait entre les mains de marchanda d'eaclavea. Le

P.Mich. 546 [207 ADJcontient aemble-t-il une demande d'anakrisis, d'un

esclave qui avait ,t, achet, en Paphlagonne deux mois et demi avant cette

demande. Il est probable d'apria le verso qu'un acheteur nouveau depoae

cette demande. Dewc autres documents mentionnant la vente des esclaves

indiquent, il me semble, d'une façon plus convaincante l'u:istence en

Egypte d'une traite d'esclaves liEe l celle qui &iate hors d'Egypte.

L'un est un document trouvf l Oxyrynchoa - nr 2771 de l'ann,e 323 - une

femme de l'tle de Cos avait autoris€ son mari l vendre hentuellement

l'esclave qui elle poasMait. Le document avait ,tE probablement ,tabli

l Cos - il est donc arrivf juaqu 1 l Oxyrynchos en accompagnant l'esclave

et celui qui l'a achet,e. Un acte d'achat ftabli l Rhodes publi' par

M. Oates en 1969 11 [Journal of Egyptian Archaeology] fut trou~ l

Oxyrynch~e. Un Aureliue Epimachos habitant de Ceear,e vend une fille

de Maur,tanie l quelqu'un dont la provenance n'est pas meltimn,e dans la

partie conserv,e du document. L'fditeur est plutat d'avis que le document

est venu en Egypte avec le propri,taire, maie n'exclut pas la posaibilitf

que l'acheteur ftait un marchand d'esclaves, d'autant plus que dans la

seconde colonne du document tr~s abim,e se trouvait peut-être un autre

acte d'achat d'esclave.

Le nombre de documenta concernant les esclaves d'origine etrang~re

en Egypte est trop restreint pour qu'on puisse resoudre le problatme de

savoir ei nous avons affaire aux esclaves achet€s par des habitants de

14
l'Egypte pendant leur a,jour l l'itranger ou aux esclaves import,s en

Egypte par les marchands d'esclaves. Je voudrais quand m@meattirer

votre attention sur l'acte beaucoup plus tardif [VIes.] publi' autrefois
12
par Preisigke en Archiv. f. Pap.III, qui donne une preuve assez

convaincante de l'activit' de marchands d'esclaves.

L'analyse des contrats d'achat et de vente de l'Egypte même qui

prend en consid,ration la localit' oa a lieu la transaction et les lieux

de provenance des parties contractant l'achat ajoute 11 ae semble,

quelques arguments i la th,ae qu'il existait en Egypte un trafic d'esclaves

specialis,. Il est vrai que la majorit' d'actes d'achat et de vente

d'esclaves, la on la provenance de parties concluant la transaction est

mentionn,e concerne des gens de la même localit' o~ on a ,tabli le

document. Lao~ la provenance de l'acheteur et du vendeur n'est pas

mentionn,e on peut. je crois, supposer qu'ils habitent le meme lieu.

Il y a quand mime quelques documents oa les deux parties ne sont

pas de la mbe localit' et aussi des documenta ou on mentionne des ventes

ant,rieures du mb.e esclave. Je vewc citer quelques uns de ces textes à

titre d'exemple.

Dans le P.s.I.1228 a. 188 la vendeuse vient d'un village M~

l'acheteuse•à'Apq~Ddisios de la Petite Oasis,

Dans la demande .d'anakrisis P.Oxy 1463 - a 215 - la vendeuse

vient d'un villagede ra,racleopolites [Choinothia], l'acheteuse

d'Oxyrynchos [l'esclave est d'origine asiatique]. Dans le P.Oxy 2582

[a.49) le vendeur vient d'un village Taamechia, toparchie Koia, nome

Heracl,opolite. l'acheteur est d'Oxyrynchoa.

Dana l'acte de vente P.Oxy 95 - a.129 - l'esclave vendue par un

15
Agathodemon ~ un citoyen romain Julius [C.Julius Germanue fila de

C. Julius Domethianus] avait ,t, achet,e par son propri,taire actuel l

un citoyen d'Alexandrie. L'acte BGU192 [a.136] est Etabli l Ptolemais

Euergetis. la vendeuse Segathis est probablement de la mime localit€,

l'acheteuse est une aet,, eon mari et kyrioe est citoyen d'Alexandrie,

l'esclave a 8 ane.

Le Pap.Boswinkel 7 d'HeraclEopolite a.225 contient un acte d'achat

d'une esclave dont la propri,taire est Aurelia Talbais du village de

Nar11uthis de l'Arainoite. L'acheteuse est d'Antinoupolia. La aime

esclave avait ,t, achet,e l'annGe pr,cedente lune citoyenne d'Antinoupolis

les deux actes étant ,tablis par le même notaire du nom Beracl,opolite.

On y mentionne encore dewr. ventes antirieures. L',diteur suppose que

l'acte fut établi dans ce notariat parce que l'esclave avait €tG alienGe

auparavant par l'inte~iaire de ces agoranomes. Ce serait l'unique

exemple d'un tel procedE, d'habitude le vendeur transmet les titres de

propriet, de l'esclave a l'acheteur sans tenir ccmpte de l'endroit o~

ces titres EtE ,tablis. Dana les Papyri Lipsiae 4 et 5 le vendeur est

d'Antinoupolia 11 vend l'esclave crEtoise StephanE qu'il avait lui mime

acheti d'un Alexandrin.

Tous ces cas o~ l'achat d'un esclave a lieu entre les parties de

diff,rentes localit,a ainsi que les cas~ on mentionne deux, trois ou

mime quatre ventes du mime esclave parfois dans un laps de temps tr~e

court me font supposer qu'il y avait ici une entremise de marchands

professionnels. Deux faits encore me semblent corroborer cette hypoth,se.

Dans les documents analya,ea noua rencontrons un pourcentage assez grand

d 1 Alexandrins comme vendeurs et acheteurs d'esclaves. On rencontre aussi

16
des enfants esclaves ou des esclaves tr~s jeunes qui changent plusieurs

fois de propriftaire. P.Col. 512 publi' par M. Gilliam dans le JJP

troud l Oxyrynchos, mentionne un esclave, n, l !'Alexandrie et le

vendeur est citoyen d'Alexandrie, d 1 aprls PSI 1254 [l'ann,e 237] un

esclave de 8 ans pendant une ann6e a chang€ deux fois de propri,taire.

Il est possible que ces citoyens d'Alexandrie aient r€sid' dans la

et, ,tant des gens plutet aisGs, apparaissent souvent comme parties dans

les actes d'achat et de vente. Mais d'autre part nous savons, que

justement l Alexandrie l'esclavage 6tait plus developp€ qu'ailleurs en

11 11
Egypte, qu'il y existait de grandes familiae serviles et un grand

pourcentage de contrats de nourrices conserv,s dans notre docU11entation

et concernant l'allaitement de petits esclaves [recueilli sur le fumier

et d'autres] provient d'Alexandrie. J'ai rassembl' la doclDD.entation

dans un article "L'esclavage 1 Alexandrie" qui sera publi€e dans le

volume des Actes du collo9ue de Besançon de 1973. Noua rencontrons des

documents comme le P.Fayoum 346 de l'ann,e 171 p un contrat o~ une

propri€taire de Ptolemais Eurgetis autorise un certain Dioscorus ~

vendre son esclave l Alexandrie. On pourrait donc peut-être supposer,

que justement l Alexandrie il y avait un march, d'esclaves assez important,

que c'Etaient surtout des Alexandrins qui s'occupaient de la traite

d'esclaves, et peut-être même que c',tait le centre d'approvisionnement

du marcb, par l'accroissement naturel des esclaves.

Dans l'histoire de l'esclavage nous trouvons des analogies - dans

la Ire moiti€ du XIXe siècle la Virginie approvisionnait en esclaves

les territoires du Sud plus ,loign,s, Lisbonne au XVI-XVII si~cle jouait

un rOle semblable. U ou nous avons aff•ire aux esclaves enfants changeant

souvent de mattre - nous pouvons aussi supposer qu'ils ftaient entre les

17
 mains de marchands d'esclaves ou bien qu'on speculait sur leur prix,

mais cela aussi indiqu~rait l'existence d'un march, d'esclaves.

Note1.0

l.O.Montevecchi,Ricere!:ie di Sociologi.A nei docwnenti dell 1 &titt.o greco-romano. I contratti

di c0111pre.vendita.Aeg 191 19)5 p.11-5).
2.R.Taubenschlag,Das Sklavenrecht 1m Rechte der Papyri,Z.s.s.50,l9JO,p.l40-169{a()pera Mino-
ra II Varsovie 1959 p. 223-257), The Law of graeco-roman Egypt in the Light or the Papyri
2•d Varsovie 1955.
J.Fr.Pringsheinl, Th.e Greek Law of Sale,Weimar 1950.
4.H.J.Wolff,Neue Juristische Urkunden,I~I Beaufsichtigung des Sklavenhandela 1JII rilmiachen
AegypteniDie Ana.krisis z.s.s.96,1966 p.JL0-347.
5.JJ..Straus,Le paYll d 1orig1ne des esclaves de 1 9Egypte roM.ine,Chr.d•F.g.L6,1971,p.J6)-J66.
le prix des esclaves dans les papyNe d•époque roMine trouves en Egypte,Z.P.E.11,197),
p.2!39-295.
6.J.F.Gllliam,The Sa.le of a Slave through a Greek Diplo111a,J.J.P. XVI- XVII 1971 p.6)-70.
7.Papyri docUl'lentari dell 1Univereit.l Cattolica di Milano.Milan 1974.
8.W.L.Westermann,Upon Slavery in Ptolemaic Egypt;New York 1929 p.58,cf The Slave S)'!ltema
of GreF.!k and Roman Antiquity,Philadelphia 1955.
9.Iza Biezunaka Ma.lowist,L•eeclAvage dans 1 1 F.gypte greco-?'Ollllline, I L•F.gypte ?toleu1que
Varsovie 1974 ch.I.
lo. Le GnOlllOn de l•Idiologue p.67,cf.I.Biezunaka- Halovist,Recherchea aur l'esclavage dans
1 1 F.gypte roma:l.ne.COflltes Rend.de l 1Acad.dee Inecr.et Belles lettres 102(1959) p. 20)-
2&>.
11. J.F.Oatea,A Rhoclian Aucti.on Sale or a Slave Girl J.E.A. 55,1969 p.191- 210.
12. Fr.Preieiglœ,Ein Sklavenkaut dea 6 Jahrhunderta tP.gr.Str.Inv.Nr.l.Lo4)A.P.F. III 1906
p.415~24.

18
 SUR gtJELgtJES
I:NTEBPIŒTilIONSDE Dr

Alain Blanchard

PLA.NCD XI (1)

L•• obaerTat.iena qui auiTeat. a•aat. d'aat.re b1R qae cle ••rrir
de c011pl'•••t. l l' iaport.aat. article 411• J .-o. Tjider a conaaar,
•• aigle Xl'l, il y a ll&int.enant quatre ana, dana la re'Ylle Eranea
(a). Depui■ plu d'un aiècl•, 1•• docua.enta q11i portent. XPT ••
••nt acc•al6a, lea int.erpr,t.at.i••• da aigle•• aoat. ■ult.ipliée■
(3). J.-0. Tjider a e11 le 8'rit.e de t.eat.er aa Tigearem: effort. cl•
clarificat.ioa. C'••t. cet effort. q111 il •'• paru po■ aible cle poar-
■ uiTI"e ■ 111" cert.aiu point.■ (4).

Un problè■• préliainair• reate encor• en aupena1 o•eat. ce-

lui de la fonae •'-• du aigle. En 193'·, daaa une aote de c-••-
t.aire que •ent.ionne acoe■■ eir-eat. Tjider (6), ■aia qui jouit aa-
prla dea papyrologue■ cl' une grande re•-'• ( 6), Genaat.aa Roull.ard
indiquait. que daaa t.roia papyru de la colleot.ien Weill on ponait.
lire Xl'Y•••• XP~•• et. x"••TfJ, le aeul ,1,aeat per■aaent ,t.ant.
tiaal-••t x, (T}. Dfjà en 1924, elle &Tait. aipal6 dea: de oe■
paJJ7rll.l •• lea attriba&11t. ourieu••at. à une collection de l'Eco-
le de■ Haute ■ Etude■ à Pa.ri ■ (8). L•• t.roi ■ doc1aent.■ ••atienn,a
aont con■ erT, ■ à l'Iut.it.ut. de Pap;rrolo1i• de la Sorboaae où il ■
oat. l•• na.4roa d 1 inTent.aire 2291, 2386 et. 2386. Il ■ datent de la
pr-iire aoitié cla VIe•• On t.roUTera daaa la planche la repro-
duct.ion phot.ographiqae dea torwe ■ litigieua•••
Dana l' inT. 8291, il eat. ,Tideat. qa' il faut lire XflT41 '1••
99 • 4~~v) et. nen paa X"T•••• &ouillarcl l'a reooua dan• 'IID.elet-
tre de 1937 (9). En 1960, l•• éclit.eura de■ p&JJ1T11,■ lit.'Wrair•• de
lf•a ■ ana ont. de lelll" c8t.é ret.rolff4 d' inatinot. la bonae leot.ve (lo).
La lecture XP~•• (inT. 2388) r,ai ■te aieuz. K&ia il n•eat paa
ia.poaaibl• de Toir•dana 1 1 & un 4 dont let.rait. Tert.ioal •• aerai•
infléchi pour per■e'itre la li1at.ure aTeo le t aaiTant. On peut.
ésalMlent adaet.tre qa• 1•~ eat. •• fait 11D y rat.6, aTec un pra.ier
trait. exceaait, le aecond trait, en ligature &Tee leq, ét.ant
fcrit c-e cet.te let.t.re de façon t.ràa caraiTe. Je propoae doao
de lire an• foia encore X~Tt••
En ce qui concerne l'inT. 2386, toujour ■ dau aa let.tre de
193T, llouillarcl a corrigé aa preaiàre lecture XJ••Y'' en XJt(Yf~.
La correct.ion a'iapoae en effet.. Je•• aai ■ c-ent interpr,ter
l'iaol-ent da y, aépar4 du p par let• Un t.el i ■ ol-eni n 1 eat.

19
 .&L&IMBLAMCll&JlD

,-. aana •x•ple c-• •n t,aoipe prfciaélleat, le prêt. de 1raia

de 49'1 ap. J .-c. (SB 7768) c-e11:W par Rouilla.rel et qui
••• d4'bat. (t'eir la plaacàe) la tonae xply (xp./T Roaillard • De
r.n• à

••• •• peat. •• pr,aeat.er de façon inhabituelle c ... e dana le P.

Load. V 1714 de 670 (Yoir la plan.che) où le■ deux lettre■ ■uper­
poaéea (let •ur let) enoadreat. 1• trait horiaont.al da T (11).
Maia on peut inYoquer plu ■ iapl•ent la pr,cipit.ation da acrlp-
tev qui, ■ ur la lanofe da tl, a trac6 la forae &J'llêtrique du 9.
On retroUTe ane précipitation ■ -blabla, ■ inen plu grande, dan■
1• trao, du ■ igue final que Bouillard int.erprlt.e c-• 1m JS,aai■
qai ••t. aan■ doute ua chri ■ae rat.é. L'eueabl• ooaplet. •• lit, en
effet lx11,v•f • L' encadreaant. de XP.T par dem: c.bri•••• e■t tout à
fait ner■al •-• l• proaYea-t,..par ex•ple, en 616 le P. Caire
Maap. II 125 et en 636 le P. Ca1ro Mup. III 217.
Si••• lecture ■ ■ ont exacte■, il n'exi■ t.e plu d 1 ex .. ple où
la fonae da aigle ••it. T4rit.abl•ent. r•i■ e en que ■ t.ion.

Mai• il peut, arriTer que le ■ igl• ■ eit. plu oa aoiu déTelop-

p6 • .&. jute t.it.re, !jicler a aocord, la plu grande attention am:
ditr,rent.■ dec1aeat.a où ae pr6aeat.ent. de■ eu de ce genre. Sana
doute e ■ t.-oe la rai ■ oa pour laquelle il a reaauoit.f la Yieille
int.erpr,t.at.ioa, illali■,e par We■■ el7 ea 1881 et. depai■ lora usez
unuta .. eat. reJet4e, qlli tait de xµy l 1 abr,Tiatioa de XE~p~~ pov
y9a,~ (11). Il n•a paa T•ul•, en effet., n,gliger la fonae XPYP
iadique par •••••17 queiqu •a.na •x-ple T,ritabl-•nt. acce■ ai­
ble. Cert.•• il a'adllet pu qae X&Lp'ç pov yp••~ aoit le ■ e- ori-
1t ■el de ll'l qai pour lai eat. &Tant.:t.od 11a ■ iale c1ar,t.ien1 cette
aignitieatioa ne Taud.rait qae pour la fin de l'antiquit., et da.na
dea ou ia•l'•• Oa a•,tenne cepeaclut qu'un tel chang-•nt de••••
(et. pour quel ■ eu t) ai" pa. •• produire dau le eu d'u aigle ai
r,,.... et de T&leur ai aarq••• O■ pourrait. auai •• deaander ai
la fonaa.le x••Pis pov yp .. ~ n'a paa ,t, cré•• pour lee beaoiu de
la oaue. liai• il Taat, aieu::a: •• placer Ùll!Ndiat•ent av le ter-
rai• at.rict-ent pa1,egraphiqu. Oa t.rouTera dan■ la planche ane
reproduction de ■ foraea rencontrê•• dan■ lea P. Sorb. inT. 2366 et
1382, teu 4elllt de 1 1 erlrè■e fin du Ve•• et inédit.a. Dan• lea
dem;; ou, lep e■t direct•••t ligat.ur, •• T• Le trait qui le cou-
pe (et, l'eni,ov• preaque c011plèt.N1ent dan• le aeoond eu) paraît
étonnant en tut que barre d 1 abr,Yiat.ion. La aolutioa eat appor-
t,e par le P. Caire llup. I 107 (pl • .llXII), aalheureue■eat. ••-
tllé où le y•" lep ■ e oroiaeat.. Il faut. lire da.na tou lea ou
xp,y':/(x11y et. le ohri•••) et. ••• XP'YJ,-L'interprétation xc•p'ç pov
YP•t~ parat" bien ■aaquer de t.eut ■apport.
Uae feia oe preblè■e r6&lé, lea fenaea où le aigle X~l e■ t.
plu•• 110iu déTelopp6, ainon entilr-•n' réaolu, pré ■ eatent,

20
 sœ glJBLgUBSINTERPBETATIONSDB XIII'

•-• 1 •a aou.lip' ljider (13), -• rlllll&l"qaable con••r1•••• et.

erie■tent. Tera 1 1 iat.erprét.at.io■ lp~•1Jv kpta yevvi. Il e■t. bea
•• le rappeler aYUt. d'allerder 1111alllr• t.ype d 1 int.erpr6tat,ioa qui
fait,•• x,T • chiffre - 843 - et. aaltne l rechercher quelle ••t.
la fona•le gr••••• dent. l ■• let.t.rea add1t.ionn6ea a1Mut.ia ■ eat, l ••
t.et.al (i•opa6phie). tJUer a fert 11:1.en aoatrl lea raiaona da ••-
càa reacontr, par oe t,ype d 1 esplioat.ion aapria dea aed.erne■ (14).
Il a fort, bien ■ent.r6 61al•••t. que l'ezplicat.ion iaopa4phiqu,
t.oat. ea ,t.ant. poaaible, ,t.ait, loi■ d'lt.re déaont.rée et. reatait. •
•-e da dlill&i•• de l'illaginaire. Je Toadrai• cepead.aat. pr,ciaer
eacere ••point.•• prenant.•--- •s-ple 1 1 4quiT&lenoe de Xl'T et.
de te.as Jl•t>f'f• TJid.er eat.ille qu c•eat. la aeilleure (16). Je l'ai
.. 1...... jadi• d6f••·· (18).
J'aTaia, en effet., ,t., ••••1ble A une idée for11ul6e par Sey-
.. ar de B.ioci -• pr•ilre fola •• 1911 (1T), ane ••••nd• rei■ n
1914 (18), -i• qu t.ou paraiaaaieat. aToir igner,e. Elle a•eat.
paa •ana iat.tlrlt.. S•JIIOV de llieoi reolaerohait le aeu as.et. da
aigle fJ re■cont.r, ■ ar troia in■ criptiona juiTe■ de P,.lè ■ t.i■e et.
d I Fc;Tpt.e - pour nou CLJ 964 et. CIJ /CBJ 1436 et. 1431 • Ce qui lai
a tait. prét,rer la r6ael11tio■ tels Jo~a,,, c'eat. pr6oia6•••t.
l'lqaiTalence a1aNrique entre oet.te fonaule et Xl&T• Le• Juif•
au-aient,•• ■ -e Yeulu ae d'-arquer de■ ohrétieu ches qu le l
de Xl&T• 648 • la:Af ,So11ttis-deTait 6fflquer ■,oeaaair•ent. le Chrait-.
Le probl•• n'in.t.ér••••,.. ••ul•e■1, 1•• ,pigraphi ■ te■, aai• 4g..
l•••t. 1•• paPJ"l'Ol•g•••, c-e •• le aigaalait. Roger Maond.on en
1988. Le P. Beni. &e•• 14 ooaport.e •• effet, ■ ana doute an ez•ple
de t,S. Mai■ il apparatt. a• ■ i qae 1 1 id'• de SeJIIIOur de llioci, tria
a6dui•ant.e 4âna la ■eave où l'•• cout.at.e 1111para11,1ia■e oert.ai•
d ... 1•-ploi ••x,, et. de tJ, •• aaurai1, abaolaaent conTainore.
Elle a• a pu ooDT&inou 1•• 6dit.eara d.ea CIJ et. CBJ qui pour tP ont.
adopi.4 la r,aelut.ioa ♦ (ci) J(e11tov•~~)• La T&lear iaopa6phique de
XIIT •'••t. paa daTut.ac• uavle. On ••rait aa.e oenfort.6 , ...
1 1 id6e de faire de lui 1111eauit.e d 1 init.ial•••
En.fait., pour d•••ntrer la T&leur iaopa6phique de X~Y,il fau-
drait, coaae je l'ai t.ent., par la auit.e, d'un• part. aontrer que la
f•naule à laquelle ea peu• eziat.e bien réell•••t. et. &Tee une c ...
t.aiae fr6quenc• d'•ploi1 d'autre part, établir un. lien aut.hent.iqu
entre la fonavle et. le aigle. 8&is ••~•'s ••t. l'équival••c• la
plu a6rieue parce que ce alogan •• t.roln'e inacrit. aur une tuile
roaaine et X~Taur pluieur■ autre• ••blablea. Maia, co-• le
reaarqu Tjid.er (19}, un tel lien en.t.re le ■ logan et le aigle pa-
ratt. aaaea faible. L'on regret.te ,gai•ent. de•• paa t.rolffer d 1 au-
t.rea ezeapl•• du alogan.. Il pourrait. avoir une origine biblique.
L1 id,e qu'il ezprille eat. fr6quente dana 1•• Paa•••, ■ai• alora,
tc,s ••t ordinair•ent. pr4c6d~ de l'article et. ~o~ ♦,s d'un coaplé-
•••t.1 d'autre part xtp~oî reaplace rr,qa-ent. •~~s,Yoir en par-
21
 AL&IN BUJICIUBD

tioalier PII 117 6 qa'Be 13 6 a pui ■■ --•nt ooatribu à diffuer.

On ne trouve Jaai■, à 11& cen.naia ■ 11,11oe, le ■ logan tcis POlll'f
d11,11■ lea in■ criptioaa, en part.ioalier lea inacript.ioa.a ■yriennea
et fg;rpt,ienn•• où ■ e renoont.rent par ailleura lea plu •-brea
ex•ple■ de XPYJ tout, aa plu l'exprea■ ioa c?, tcaf &po~&•fq•i
ae conTieat puf •acore le participe po~lwve■ t-il plu eollll'all
que 1 1 ad.jec~ir l'•TJt's• La tortmae de oet adjectif eat oepend.aat.
ooafinMe, da ■oiu.pov l'époque de C•natantia, par Eulbe, Vie
de Conatantin, 1, IT et aurtout. IV 20; ■ai■ ee■ terle■ ne penaet.-
teat pas de retroUTer &Teo exactitade la fenae da ■ loau. Il tau:t,
enfin aignaler, pour être acaplet, que la caaparaiaon d 1 in■ crip-.
tiona parallàlea - ■07en habita.el pour décolffrir le ■ eu d'ma
aigle - ne peraet d'atteindre, daa.a ce ■ cond.itioaa, aueuae certi-
tude. Demc in■ criptiou ■ ;rriennea pa.rai ■ aent réTélatrioeas
1. Jalabert-Moatenle (20), IV, 1814 B, iaaari~ioa 41.e g-..r el-
~~~~• .
• tzl'l'•~vft1., . tl-&6'~pww<&> tt(f>,k
• XP.T.
1. Jalabert.Meat.ente, IV, 1441, inacript,ion de lt8kaha1
'.l~p•vo\1111,pc••-,;., 1 tE'f• ~o~♦6s.
Mai■ , ooaae oa le Toit, XPl •• reooUTre en fait que Po~f61.

Est-il poaaible de oonolve av de ■ r911&1'q••• ■oin■ n,gatiTea?

Conaid4rona déaonaaia non plu le aigle XPT lni .... fae, aaia le
texte panrol:.ogique qai le pr•ier a penaia d'établir 1 1 int.erpr4-
tat.ion Xpi,o"'-v Jllapt& y&vvi I le P. Great. II Cilla qui ••t. ooa■ •rT'
tout pria d'ici, à-la Bodleienne (21). On t.roUTera daa.a la plan-
che une reproduction pl:loio1raphiqae OOllpllt.e de ce pet.it. aorceaa
de pu-ch-in.
En fait, ae doc1aent. pr4 ■ ent• d'abord une difficalt, que Tji-
der n'a peut-lt.re paa réaolae de façon aatiafaiaante. Ir porte••
effet. troi■ •:foi ■ la ••nt.ion iif (• Xp1,a-c,sl p.apu~ ycvv&, "ii' 6tant,
dana le second caa, intercal4 eat.re ~•p•& et 1cvva(82). ETid-ent.
îf,i eurprend. Tjider a •••a74.de 'Y0ir dan• le• an• 11&rqae d'abré-
T1atioa (23). Cela n'e ■ t paa poaaible. Un• pareille aarqae aurait
été conatit.ûe par un trait droit oblique ou bien aurait affect.6
le t.rac6 aiauaofdal que l'on constate à pluieur ■ repriaea, 1. 1,
a, 6 et 8, pour l'abré'Yiation de -&1,. D'autre part, en raiaon de la
barre horizontale qui le aUl'llloate, 1cf ne peut être conaidér6 que
c•-• noaen ■ acr1a, il faut•• accepter toutea l•• conaéqaencea.
Je •e rallierai donc plat.St à l'interprétation de■ pr .. ier■ édi-
teur• qui oon■ idérent aana éqv.iToqae, dua leur note à la 1. 1,
que x• e■ t une faut.a pour ii• D'une fa9on ,,nérale,
parch-in e ■ t t.r~• fautif - aoiu,
ne le oon■ onanti ■■e qu'en ce qaictnoerne
à Trai dire, en ce ,ai
le texte da

le Tocaliaae (24) - et
concer-

il ne faut pe.a trop héaiter l le oorri1er •

.A.atre diffiaalt.61 le P. Grenfell eat. ma doa ... nt tardif1 ■ e■

22
 DE Dr
SURgUELgtJmINTER.PBf:l'ATIONS
prellier■ éditeva le datent, •ana ltre trop affil'lll&tifa, du VIIe
•• Dan■ c•• condition■, la foraule XpLa1~v Mapt• ycvvi peut-elle
ltre aut.re oho ■ e qu'une ■ iaple r,interpr,tation du aigle X~Y?
En fait, ■ elon Tjider, l'idée qu'elle espriae ■ e retrouverait
daaa plu■ ieura paa■ 1,1e■ d 1 lgnaoe d'A.Dtioohe qui &DDOncent aur ce
point le S,-bole de■ Ap8tre■ (16). Teu■ ce■ terlea oea■ti•ue■t
ae répon■ e am: pre■ière■ tendance■ h,térodose■ qui•• ■anife■-
taieat alor■ et diaaooiaient en Jl ■ ua I'ho.ae de chair et le
Chriet. lia réatfil'llent la r4alit4 de la naiaaance du Chriat. A
nai dire, daaa l•• lettre ■ d'Ignace et dan■ le s,-bole, le Terbe
ycv~,w e■ t au pe.a ■ it et il a le Chriat c._e ■ ajets da.na la for-
111111e-duP. Grenfell, il e ■ t à l'actif et l'accent e ■t ai.a ■ ur Ma-
rie. tout. ■ e r,■ -e peut.-itre dau l'iapreaaion que produit av
nom cet actif. Ou bien il paratt es:priaer la Tigueur d'an ■ logaa
Jailli dan■ le ■ début■ du chri ■ tianiaae et dan■ ce ca■ la for■ule
X~~a1~v Nap\a lC~vi pewt, tri ■ bien repré■ enter le ••na de X~Y• Ou
bien il apparaît. co-• un• -ladre••• es:plicable ••ul-•nt par le
rapproch•ent tardif du s,-bole des A.pôtrea et d'un ■ i&le 6tran-
ger. Dau ce ou, le••- de x,T ■ erait encore à troUYer.

NOTES
(1) Je r•ercie K. Jean Saherar, Directeur de l'Inatitut de
Papyrologie de la Sorbonne, qui•'• 1racieuaeaent COllllhlDiqw\, ou-
tre la photographie du SB 7768, celle• dea P. Sorb. inv. 2291,
2366, 2382, 238:s et 2386, tou inédit■, et ■ 'a autoriaé à en re-
produire iei la partie qui ■ 'intérea ■ ait. Le P. Lond. V 1714, 1. 1,
e■ t reproduit &Tee l'autorisation du Département des Kanuacrita
de la Briti ■h Libr&r7 et d'apràa un cliché de cette biblioth~que.
Le P. Grenfell CXIIa e ■ t reproduit d'aprèa un cliché UniTeraity
Pr••• d'Os:ford. Toua ce ■ doc\aenta sont reproduits grandeur nature.
(8) J.-0. Tjicler, Chri ■ t 1 Our Lord, Born of the Virgin Mary
(DU'and VDN), Er-a.Do■ , LXVIII, 19TO, p. 148-190.
(3) Voir, par es:•ple, le tableau dreaaé par K. ATi-Yonah,
~bbreTiationa in Greek Inacri tio- The Near Eut 200 B.C. -
.D. 1100, Jérualea-Londrea, 1940, p. Ill.
4 Dan• aon article, Tjider ne ae borne pu à puser en re-
n.e lee différente■ interprétation■ de X~T et à dégager la ■eil­
leure. Il ■et égale■ent en relation le aigle grec et le aigle
latin,!!! qu'il interprète co-• UDe abréviation des ■ota Virgin•
Do■inu natu. Ceci e ■ t évid ... ent un autre problème et je laiaae
am latiniate ■ le aoin d'en diacuter.
(5) Tjider, loc.' oit., n. 12, p. 185.

23
 AL.A.INBLANCHARD

(6) Cf. en dernier lieu la aention qu'en fait O. KonteTecchi

dan• aon récent manuel, La P,!Rirologia, Turia, 1973, p. 290.
(7) G. Bouillard, Prêt de grain 1 ~.D. 497, Mél. Mupére, Le
Caire, II, 1934, p. 181-182.
(8) Kêl. Schl1aberger, Paria, 1914, p. 88, •• 8.
(9) cr. H. c. Youtie, C. Donner, Twe Cur■ e Tablet■ frOII Dei-
.!!:!., TAHIA, LrVIII, 1831, p. 15.
(10) P. Colt II, p. 146-146.
(11) La barre oblique d'abréTiation qu'indiquent le■ prN1ier■
6diteura eat en fait le trait Terlical du 1•
(18) Tjad.er, loa. oit., p. 166 et 168.
(13) Tjicler, loc. oit., p. 169-160.
141 Tjider, loo. cit., p. 168-169.
15 Tjlder, loa. oit., p. 168.
1 18 Cf. CE, XLIV, 1888, p. 161 (aTeo une coquille qa.i a
tranaforlllll le aingulier •n pluriel)J Po ■ ition■ de thiaea de troi-
ai~•• cycle ■ outenuea devant la Facult-é en 19~9, Publ. de la Fac.
de• Lettre■ et Science■ 81Mainea de Paria-Sorbenne, Série "Becher-
,oh•••, t. 82, Pari ■ , 1970, p. 310.
lTI BSil, XI, 1911, p. 326.
18 BEG, ll'YII, 1914, p. 161. .
19 Tjid.er, loc. cit., n. 48, p. 181.
20) L. Jalabert, a. Kouterde, Iaacript,ion• greogu•• et lati-
ne ■ de la S ie, IV, Pari ■ , 1965.
i 21 MS. Gr. th. g. 6 (P).
(22 Une oroix pr4oàd• 1•en■ eable dea troia Mntiona. La
croix dont les preaiera éditeur• ont fait précéder la dea:a:iè■e
••ntion appartient en fait à la ligne précédente.
(13) Tjid.er, loc. oit., p. 160-161.
(24) En ce qui concerne le cou■ onantiaM, on note ■ eul .. ent la
confuioa de~ et 61 6elrtoievç (pour 6~ct,6evf), 1. 31 u~•~wv
(pour 66,~W'f),L.3-4.L. 2, là où l•• pre■ier■ éditeur■ ont 1u,or
(pour If), le texte porte aiapl .. ent •f·•
(2s) Tjlcler, loa. oit., p. 168 et n. 94, p. 189.

24
 ~m:11 AW .5.Lli:IllllllEII VjCIIS'l'D'JilLCBJill

von

B. BOSWINXE.L

Seit Vier Jahren beaitzt daa Leidener Papyrologiache In.stitut 5 •uaammen-

nh"6rend.e WachstVelohen, welche in der Sohule verwendet wurden. Di•
Tl.f'elchen Bind 13 cm hoCh und. 18 em breit; die Seiten, welobe •um Sobreiben
beetimt waren, haben einen Rand von 1 bia 11·0111;die Waohsaohicbt iat
dann, wie Ublich, in einer Vertiefung angebraoht word.en. Im oberen Jland,
(in einu 'l'lf'elohen im unteren Rand), bat man zveimal 2 IiOoher, welohe
1¼ cm voneinander stehen, gebohrt; in den meieten IZohern sieht man nooh
Spuren von l3ind.faden. Wir k'6nnen wohl annebmen, dass die 5 T'Uelchen zu
einem Pentapt;ychon zu.sammengeschnUrt llaren.
])as 1. ftf'elchen zeigt an der J.nsaeneeite nur unbeaohriebenee Hol•
ohne Vertief'ung; die Wachsschioht· UDddarauf die Beachriftung befindet
eich nur auf der Innenseite. De.a 2. 1 3. und 4. 'l'ILfelchen hat man aut beiden
Seiten beschrieben1 das 5. Tl.f'elohen wieder nur aut' der Innenseite; die
.A.u..:,senseite 1st glatt, ohm, Vertief'ung,-aber in der Xitte sieht man eine
sich aehr unregelmbsig ausbreitende Vaohssobioht, velohe etva zwei
Drittel der Oberfll.che bedeokt.
Der Pundort der ~elohen ist nioht bekannt und der Inhalt gibt darttber
keine Auslcunf't. Die Datierung mu.as jedenfalla naoh 212 n. Chr. tallen auf
llrund des :Namensdes Sohreibers: .A.urelioa .lntonios. Eine genauere Datierung
kann man nur au.a der Schrif't herleiten und das iat aehr •ohwierig bei
diesen mUhaam, mit vieler Sorgf'alt ei:ngravierten Buchstaben. Am vahraohein-
licbsten ist m.E. eine Datierung auf das 3. Jahrhundert n. Cbr •• D:Lekha-
achicht, und dpd. t auoh die BeschriftW18 iat, das 1. T'Af'elchen tt,uagen01men,
Uberall sehr gut erhalten mit stellenweiee lcleinen I&hern oder .A.bbl'Att...
rungen • .im 4. "T'll:relchen befindet sioh auf einer Seite in der Mitte ein
kleiner Waobaklumpen, vohl herstaamend von einem Loch in der Waohsschioht
in der Kitte des 5. 'nt'elohen. Die Buobstaben wurd.en au.f dieaen 4 'l'lf'elohen
mit grosser Sorgfalt geachrieben.
Das 1• 'l"M'elchen hJl'egen hat eine schlecht konservi erte Wachsacbicht,
welche ~fters zerbrochen ist; nichst manohen kleinen t:6chern hat d.ieaea
TUelchen auch sehr viele .llJbl'n.tterungen. Die Sohrift ist info}&edessen
sehr schlecht leserlioh; ea ist m~glich, dass d.iesea eine 'l'lltelchen von
einer a.ndren Rand geschrieben vurde; ea will mir soheinen, dass aioh hi.er,
im Vergleich zu der Sohriftart der Buchstaben au! den andren Tl.f'elchen, lclet-
ne Untereohiede vortun.
Wie ioh schon erw'lhnt babe, wurd.en diese Tlfelohen in der Sohule benutu.
trber diese Sohul11b,uigen iat uns schon manches bekannt; ich nenne bier nur
C. Weaseq 1 Stud. Pal. II, O. Gueraud - P. JOU&"19t, Un livre d' eoolier und.
P. Collart, P. Bour. 1.
 In den Leidener Wachst'M"elchen finden wir siebenmal denaelben Spruch al■
SehreibUbung und daZu noch, nur auf' eine Seite eine■ T'4f'elohena, eine Silben-

k:-
·
,n,ung und eine Rechenaufgabe. Uber dem Spruch steht in allen Plllen der
des Scbreibers AtpnA1.ot; 'Av"wv1,ocll£~~oCwvoc.. d.1,ser Name wurde
r mi t kleineren Buclis.taben ale der Spruon· flelb~r gea'c\u-ieben. Die Buohlltaben
sind au.eh hier Majuskeln, aber man spltrt doch eine gewisee Tend.enz zu einor
mehr kursiven Schrift. ~ wurde iamer auf Linien geechrieben. Bur am 1., 'l'ltelohen
eteht naoh dem Spruch aufa Neue der Name dea Sobrei bers; ea f'olgt noch µ1)'1 p6c
oder ~a.xp6c und d.ann Spuren, au.eh au:f' der naohsten Zeile, velohe ich vqen
des sohlechten Zu.etandn der Waehsschicht Dicht entziffern konnte.
Der Spr11ch, den der Schreiber siebenmal gesohrieben hat, lautet1
ot µlv yap "ouc 9tAovc sap6v1<lC µ6vov "~~ma1.v, ot 61 xut µ<lxp!v
b.sOV"CClt; &_y41tCJa1.,v~ese ehren"ibre Freunde nur wenn Bie anveaend aind,
jene lieben eie auch wenn eie weit entfernt eind!
Ich sagte schon, dasa der Scb!-ei ber immer mi t der gr"6eaten: ..Sorgfal t paohrie-
ben hat; er ha.t aber nicht jedeemal seine Buchstaben genau ao groaa ge ■obrieben,
so dass die Zahl der Buohstaben pro Zeile abweicht. Er scheut sioh nioht seine Z..,
len mitten in einem Wort abzubreohen 1 wobei er keinen Imoksioht au.I die Silbentren-
nung nimmt. Wir finden z.B. einmal ft.t~oui;, einmal ftAAOU~ , d.reimal. tCA OU(·
und zweimal tCAO uc • Er scbreibt.eogar das Wriolum 61 aut 2 Zeilen •. Ba geh:t
deutlich hervor, daas der Schreiber von einer Vorschrift &baohreibt, dezm au1'
2 T'4f'elchen schreibt er, jedeama;I. auf' nur einezr Seite Xp \I ■tatt x«t 1,1axp&.v.
~es ist aber der einzige Pehler, den er begangen hat.
Nach dem letzten Wort des Spruohe• hat der Schreiber tunf'mal einen 110hrlcen
DoPPeiBtrioh gezogen. In vier Pl.llen aber war da.a 'l'ltelohen dann nooh nicht
v"6llig beschrieben; auf dem ersten 'l'Uelchen wurde d.ann, wie ioh sohon erldliat
babe, der Name des Sobreibers wiederholt. 11:mal hat der Soh1Uer, aut einer
neuen Zeile,den Spruoh wieder ~f'angen, einmal hat er auf' der letzten Zeile
nach dem l>oppelstrich, nooh ot µi"11nsugetWgt und einmal hat er nach dem Do;
peletrich einen Preiraum gelassen.
Dass .&.urelios Antonios Nemesionoa der ?lame de■ Sohttlers 1st und nioht der
des Lehrers,- was m~glich sein ...urd.e-1 ■oheint lllir deutlioh S.W:· der Sohrift
hervorzugehen. Der Name wurde zwar immer kleiner ala der Spru.oh gesohrieben
aber die .Buchstaben sind der Sobrii't dea Spruchea v'cSlllg lhnlioh. l>a.BSder'
SohUler s .-inen Nam.envor dem Pen.sum echrieb, find.en wi.r auoh in Ziebarth
Aus der Antiken Schule, Nr. 17 b, wo der Schul.er ausi'IDu-licher ale in d~
Leidener Text geschrieben hats J.lipf)A1.oc 8£664.Jpoc'A.voupCwvocfypci+«
1f -i' ~~£Pi ~Atov tr.aitac •A4utCov Xwvo"AviCouxat Ob«).e~••v
kt1.~1.uvoa Xa1.a&pwv1Ch, ls&pxwv.
Wenn das 1. Tl.f'elohen tats11chlich von einer and.eren Hand geschrieben wurde,
erith'Ut es die Vorsohrift dee Lehrere; der hat d.ann auch obenan den Bamen des
Sch\llere geschrieben. FUr eine Vorschrift des Lehrera und :f'lr,die mehrfaohe

26
 Wiederholung dee Pensums vom SchUler finden wir Beiepiele bei Ziebarth,
o.o. •Hr. 11-1).
Ea ist mir nicht gelungen den Spruch zu bestimmen; die Worle. Je&men niaht
metrisch geordnet warden, ea muse also Prosa sein. J.ber ein solchea Prosa-
Bitat iet mir nicht bekannt. Es ka.nn selbstverstantlich ein vom Lehrer
ersonnener Spruoh sein• vielleicht in Zusammenb.a.n&
mit einer Begebenheit
1.m.Ereie der SchUler.
Vir kennen dagesen manohe Spr11che, welshe hervorheben, d.aes die :ft.he
der Freund.a fUr die n.uter und :n1r die Stl.rke de[ Pr9tllld,soha:f'i wesentlich ist.
So kennen wire 1iT)AoU 9tA01, va.Cov.,:ccoL• c. ai.v · cp1.Ao1.. ( .&.thenaeus,
f~pnosophist&i v 187 J.} und. •oAAl, ol ,p1i,A(ac lxpocn,yppta: 61.€l.uoc."
iri•t. 1B VIII 6). So auoh det._ lateini ache Spruohs Bon aunt amioi qui
degunt prooul ( Servi li us, S. 19 · } •
Betraohten wir jetzt die Ubungen auf der einen Seite de• 4. 'l'lrelchen.
Der Tm lautet fol.ge.ndermaasenz
lfI AAJ4 MWf µaµ µ('aµ
a.µµ <µaµ
D Ill
ill
-~ ..
lfOY n
!O
NO )(IJ:
nt
Pit
µiJ•
13µ• µn!'°"
µYPX111J1iX
Yl'P• 'Jj.L1'.k
...♦,:(
µ6p~·•·""'
II XO KARZ 6µptp~
t,lCO I, V tJ
llE li Q 1:1,10
••.• na.xw"1,6
Wir tinden bier also zwei Spalten; in der linken Spa.lte stehen 6 Bigennamen
untereinander, mi t dazwischen, als Fr~6rper, daa Sustanti v 'V6au,011« •
ille ta;acen mi t lf an, aber sonst sind sie nioht alphabetiaoh geordnet. Vir
·..iasen as vielen Beiepielen (u.a. P. B011r. 1, Ziebarth, Nr. l"'\md V.Clarij•-
•• -•• Vou.ters, ~ Schoolboy's Exercise, .Anc. Soc. 1 (1970), s. 201 - 235),
d,ass bei den Sohulttbungen oft Ei.-gennamen, manehmal mit deeaelben Bu:cbs'\aben
antangend, gesohrieben wurden. Der Name Nikokles begegnet auoh in der
Sohreibttbulg in P. Bour. 1 (z. 88); der Name Nunechioe var una aus den
Papyri noeh Dicht bekannt; er kollll'lt aber vor in Prgm. 16 des Petrw, Purioiua
(D:1.ndort,Bist.Oraeo.min. I, s. 425). Za P'!llt au.t d.ass Neilamm,on mit I. ata'\t
mi t £ 1,,geschrieben wurde und daES lfaneohis und Bestori ■ fflr N,meohioa und Heste-
rioe atehen {so auoh Nou~fl-vi.c bei Clarijeae - Vou.ters, l.o., I. 156).
In der 2. Spalte tolgt dann eine Kultiplikaticm in 2 l:olWD11en, ~ swm-
die Vierzigerreihe VQR EJ:UDaleina. Solohe llultipllkttionen eind. uns aoh aua
andren SohulUbwJcen bakannt, a.B. s. B. III 6219 V"",P. Soo. VIII 958 und
Un livre d'6oolier, z. 216-225. Im Leidener 'l'Uelohen wird. die Xultiplikation
ia:-.ier dc,ppelt gegeben ( 1 Jt 40 • 40 UDd 40 Al • 40 u.a.v.). Dieae Jlethode iet
~-·bu:aant aua w. B.' Crum - H. I. Bell, Wadi larga, Br. 23, wo das liebenmal•

27
 sieben teilweiee erhalten ist. J.u.f'fallend im Leidener ftfelchen 1st, d.a~s
die Ziffern nicht voneinanier getrennt eind, wie das bei den Ubrigen
Multiplikationen fast immer vorkom:it •
.bi Jl.de steht h BCQI'aggescbrieben, das Datum: wahracheinlich erst das
Jahr und dann CIXWV LO.
(A:nmerlcung: Zunacbst hatte ich die Multiplika~ion als eine sehr ra.ffinierl
aufgesetzte SilbenUbung betrac::.tet, aber Professor l.. )Ianfredi hat mich
darauf au:f'merksam gemqcht, da.s es sioh wn eine Xultipli-kation han:lelt).

Summary:

J .-D .'Ouboi ■:
"Coptic fragments of a homily"
This paper intend.1 to examine some of the problems of unpublished British
Museum document• which belong to a collection of "Paovrus Framents 11 under the
catalogue identification number Or. 6808. The Coptic fragments which concern us
have been put together with some 1light mistake, and cla ■ 1ified a1 ,.Two fragments
of homily?" (Or. 6808, S) •
The poor condition of these fragments prevents us from producing a full trans-
cription of the re.ins of the text. However a large part of the text, especially
the recto, can be deciphered and reconstructed in order to identify some of the
biblical quotations and allusions in theae few lines. The recto alludes for example
to the story of Jeremiah the prophet pulled out of the pit by Ebed Helech, the
Ethiopian (Jeremiah XXXVIII), or to the measuring of the city of Jerusalem with a
measuring line as recorded in the book of Zachariah (It.lff.). The rest of the text
evokes other biblical pa1sagea and particularly the wiadom literature of Solomon.
The text above linguistic peculiaritiea and above all, a looking for the word
~oY3rope or cord, al10 used in land measurement (cf.ax.01v{ov). What is left of this
sheet of papyrus conaista of a collection of pasaagea which contain this word NOY2.
It seems aa if it were part of a homily baaed on the explanation of this term.

28
 A PADGD.IST PROMPANOPOLIS
GERALDM. BROWNE
1
Papyri fl'OII Panopoli■, the -,dern Acbaia, u■ ed to be scarce. But
thi■ situation no longer obtains, and we now have a cooaiderable nuaber
of Panopolite tuta, especially froa the early Byzantine period. Moat
are documentary; one thinka :f-•diately of the tvo long rolla frOlll the
collection of Sir Cheater Beatty, which T.C.Skeat publiahed in 1964
{P.Beatty Panop.), and of the 31 tezta recently edited by Profeaaor and
Hra. B.C.toutie and DT. D.Bagedorn (P.dln Panop.: ZPE 7, 1971, 1-40; 8,
1971, 207-234; 10, 1973, 101-170): moat of the latter are from the Cologne
collection, aoae from the veraoa of the Beatty papyri which Skeat did
not publiah. Literary papyri are also tnovn fro11 Panopolia: beaidea
Byperides' In Athenogenem, ve have fragaenta of Demoathenea, Euripid ...
Beaiod., and the Palantin• Anthology, and Professor E.G.Turner baa aade
a atroug cue for Panopolite origin of the BoclmerCodex of Menander.2
The Univeraity of Cologne poaaeaaea another collection of Paao-
polite papyri, which I hope to publish in the near future. Tbeae texts
are docuaentary; the earlieat vaa written 1D 281 AD, the lateat in 348.
They fall into two groups, one of which centera around Aurelia Senpaaia
and her huaband Aureliua Petear,eachilli■; it it mainly concerned with
property belongiDg to Senpaaia. The other group deala with Petearbe-
achinia' two aona, Aur. Alaon and Aur. Barpocration. The papyri of
thia aecond group are of aore than uaual interest,•• I hope to show.
Theae tezta, four in nuaber, docuaent an inheritance caae involving
the ~laves of Barpocration, the deceued brother of AsnMl. The latter
ducribea hiuelf •• a acholuticua from. Panopolta,4 and he 1■ reapona-
ible for c0111p0aingall four of the texta. The firat of thue (KHln
inv.4533r) ia a draft of a petition to the hitherto-unatteated catho-
licua, nanua Sisinniua; it waa_drawn up on 10 Deceaber 348. The
aecond vu written on the-• sheet aa the first and ia an u:tenaive
reworking of the aaae petition, with a large aaount of new -terial.
The third tu:t {1Dv.4532v) ia yet another draft, bearing cloae rea--
blance to the second but differing froa it in several placea. It vaa
coapoaed on the verso of the fourth text, a contract which alao concerns
the alavea of Barpocration.
It ia the aecond of theae docmNDta, the draft petition., which pro-
vides ua with the greateat aount of detail, but because of excesaive
abrasion and u:tenaive lacunae, ve can obtain only a general idea of ita
content. I here provide a brief a111111ary.
AIIIIOn ill trying to obtain legal poaae■aion of aoae alavea foraerly
belonging to Barpocration. The latter baa died intestate, and a certain
Eugeniua froa Alexandria baa claimed that they belong to hia. Eugeniua
la atteapting to defraud AlaoD and compel■ hill to aail froa Panopolia to
Aluandria. Aaaon expreaaea the hope of putting a quick end to the af-
fair in a court of law, but his hopes are thwarted by delaying tactics

29
on the part of lugeniua. The papyri offer no clue u to bov the affair
vae resolved.
Detail• of the cue vill be diacuaaed in the illtroductiona and coa-
mentaries to the individual docuaenta. I shall here concentrate on one
particular passage in the second tezt and on aoae of the probl ... which
it generate■ •
Harpocration, ao Awn vritea, leavu his alavu in ilaandria and
then proceeds to a sojourn abroad. Thi• trip -'-ion deacribea as follova
(inv.4533v.23-27):
••• tv yap -rl'J1, dfto6f11tar tx£t~ yr.v6µ(r.voc;) lUXL dnc!>x&Pac; r.tc;
x£1:>(av) t1C4at'O't'( r.) µ£'ta~). (cov)
dnc!tT9')c;'O.'A.46(oc;) e;lc; 'Pcf,µTlVlUXL dn.c!t'Pqa.,ic; r.lc; "6>vata.v-r1.v61to>.1.v
. lC4 t 4n' 4>..>. T)C; r.lc; 41>.TJV -ro. nir. i:O"t"a
c,xr.6(ov) -ri')c; ~ nr.p1.,>.8(1»V)µ.!p,r' -dov xa.l>.1.vCw.i.w 6e;Ofl6-ttovfp.iv -me;
vtxa.c; xa.t >-.64t0oc;·~a1.>.1.xo1"; na.V'tUx(~)
••••• [.] ••••••••••••••••••••• -rci ,.1p tv utc; tn~a(fp:)1.c;) n6l(r.a1.)
Ti\(; • Ell.a6 (oc; ) ,eat tn 1.:rp(on £6t.w) xa.t >.0,-1,ah:dxov ) lrtpa.t( e;v>,
a
1C4t 6 .. 'ta.6't-(ac;)
'tcic; dc,opµ(cic;) tnt no>.(h) 't1.va. xp6v(ov) ""1V4no6(Tµ(av> tti't(r.1.vr.v).
" ••• Por when the latter (i.e. Barpocration) was abroad and aovecl,
011 each occasion, froa place to place, from Greece to Rome and fro-. llome
to Constantinople and froa one city to another, having gone around practi-
cally the greatest nuaber of diatricta on earth ••• 6 everywhere the victo-
riea of our victorioua •ster■ and panegyrica7 ••• Por he managed the af-
fairs in the illuatrioua citiea of Greece both aa procurator and as cura-
tor civitatie, and becauae of these occaaiona he protracted hia stay for
quite soae t:lae."
Aalon nut deacribu his own illpatience while waiting for his bro-
ther to return, but his further reaarka need not concern ua here; hie
account of Barpocration'a travel deaervea close atudy.
We do not bow precisely when Barpocration left Egypt, but the re-
ference to 't&v xa).).1,.v(lCC.t.W61.an6-m>v fp1v 'M~ vt1U1~ shows that it vas aoae-
t:ble after 337, when, at the death of Conatantine the Great, Conatans,
Conetantiu■, and Conatantine II succeeded to the throne. The petition,
of which the aforeaentioned three draft ■ are pre■ ened in the Cologne
collection, vaa drawn up on 10 December 348 and provide ■ a terainua ante
qua. for Harpocration'a dff06T)J.ta. If his sojourn took place after 340,
the year in which Couatana defeated ud killed Constantine II, then it 1a
likely that, like Libaniua in Oration 59 1 Barpocration spoke of Conatan-
tine the Great as having only two aucceaaors, Conatana and Conatantiua. 8
If the reference to 'tac; vtxa~ ia uot simply proforma, we may have
an alluaion to the nmNroua battle• vith the Peraiana, in a continuation
of the war inherited frDll Constantine t. 9 our aourcea for the period in
question are not very detailed, but ve know of a war vith the Pranci,
defeated in 342 by Conatana. Depending on the date of his travel■, Harpo-
cration -Y have referred to thia var in his panegyric ■, and alao to Con-
atana' victory over Con■ tantiua in 340. The illportant battle of Singara

30
was fought in the summer of 348, and the alleged vietory of the imperial
house is duly praised by Libanius in Oration 59. Since the Cologne papy-
ri were not WTitten until December of that year, ~a~ vtxa~ may include
the battle of Singara as well.
Huch of what I have said is speculative, since Ammonis vague about
precisely what his brother did. The value of the Cologne documents as
sources for military history is, therefore, practically nonuistent.
But there are other kinds of hiatory, and what makes Amman's papers espe-
cially interesting is the fact that they provide first-hand docU11entation
of a literary movement which until recently baa received little attention
from scholars. I refer to the activities of the so-called scholar-poets
of the early Byzantine period, most of whom, like Harpocration, came from
Egypt. Claudi8D and Nonnua are of course well-known literary figures,
but now, thanks to the important article of Alan Cameron, ''Wandering
Poets: A Literary Movement in Byzantine Egypt," Biatoria 14, 1965, 470-
509, we know that these writers were part of a large group of profeaai-
onala, who journeyed from one part of the Empire to another, seeking
patronage through panegyrics and often -- if successful - obtaining the
rewards of high public office.
Panopolis was especially famous as a center of Hellenic culture in
this period, and it was the home of such poets as Nonnus, Cyrus, Triphi-
odorus and Pamprepius. Ammon,the writer of the Cologne papyri, came
from. Panopolis, and so also, in all probability, did his deceased brother
Harpocration. In the begianing of the second text Ammonrefers to the
clasa to which he belongs as ol tv ~LAOCJO(pti xat A6"fOL,dvT}"(µ&VOL (inv.
4533v.9), 10 and we learn from this same draft petition that be in fact
numbered amongst his relations the otherwise-unattested poet Apollo (inv.
4533v.56f).
Ammonand Harpocration were probably both pagans, as were most of the
educated elite of Panopolis in this period, including, in all likelihood,
NoDDuaand Triphiodorus. 11 That a pagan should deliver eulogies on
Christian emperors ia certainly not surprising: we have similar composi-
tions froa Libaniua and Themiatius, the staunchest pagans of their age.
Ammon mentions that his brother travelled to Rome. Does this mean
that, like Claudian of Alexandria, he wrote panegyrics in Latin? Ca:meron
speculates that luaebius, fJOther Egyptian who sojourned in Rome, may have
composed encomia in Latin. Of course, we cannot be certain in cases in
which we lack the literary remains, but the widespread Latinization of
Egypt after Diocletian's reforms and the efflorescence of Roman studies
there certainly favor the hypothesis that Harpocration had acquired ade-
quate skill to write in Latin.
The words lnL~p(one-.w) xal AOyLo(~&\Jt'.&)\I) in line 26, if correctly
resolved, indicate that Harpocration held high public office: he was
one of the various types of procurator and also held the position of
curator civitatia.1 3 It was common for exceptionally talented writers,
who were successful in flattering the mighty, to be rewarded with posi-
tions in the civil service and the government. To restrict myself to

31
Panopolites: Cyrue reached the coneulahip in 441 1 thanb largely to hie
catching the favor of the eapreaa-poet ludocia; and P-prepiu■ vu for-
tunate enough to vin the fawr of the dictator Illua and thereby vu
rewarded vith fle quaeatorahip of the Sacred Palace and bec•e honorary
consul in 479. It would ae• that Harpocration vaa lik.eviae talented
enough to rise to the poaition■ of procuator and curator civitatia,
tb•uu 1 in large aeuure 1 to the aucceaa of bia panegyric ■ on the royal
bouae.
We have no other uplicit references to the Barpocration of the
Cologne papyri. Al••• he cannot be identified vith hi• naaeaake who
appears in the Epiatulae of Libaniua (Noa. 364, 3681 818). Tbe latter
vu atill alive in 358 to 363, the date of the correspondence., while
our man died aoaetiae before 10 Deceaber 348. The nae ia of course
extreaely coaDOn, and there ia no evidence to connect him vitb any of the
other Harpocratiou.15
But deapite the fact that he cannot be further identified, and de-
apite the IIUlJ problmu concerning hi.a which cannot be aolYeel, the Barpo-
cration of the Cologne papyri clearly eaergea aa one of the typical liter-
ary figures of his day; "wandering froa city to city throughout the lllpire
in search of fame and fortune 1 11l6 he provides ua vith a unique opportunity
of viewing an fllportant literary aoveaent froa the per,pective of docu-
aenta. The Cologne papyri thua bring together the all-too-often separate
worlds of docuaentary and literary papyrology, and I hope that their edit-
ing and publication will proceed aviftly.

1 Bot• the list in D.Bagedorn 1 "Papyri aua Panopolia in der dlner

S81111ung 1
11
Proceeding• of the Tvelfth International Congreaa of Papyro-
logy (Toronto 1970) 208 n.4.
2 Greek. Papyri (Oxford 1968) Sl-53.
3 Duke Univeraity posaesaea other papers froa this••• archive, u
I learned froa Professor William. Willia during the 14th Congrua at Oxford.
4 Be is not mentioned by A.Claua in hia Cologne diaaertation, '0 lx<>-
MJ.OTI. x6c; (1965 ) •
S For help in deciphering the first part of this line I am grateful
to Dra. D.Bagedorn and J.Rea.
6 In the lacuna at the beginning of line 26 there preauaably stood a
verb of sufficiently general nature to include both -rdc; vCxac;and lO,OtX;
~a1.A1.M06c;•• ita objects. Perhaps Aaaon wrote t~l8t't0 ("he expounded",
'he set fourth").
7 For ~a1.11.« X6yo<; in this sense cf. Menander Rhetor (Spengel III
368.3) 6 f3aa1.l1.m<;16yoc; t~1.6v tcn-1. f3aa1.l~.
8 H.F.Clinton, Faati roll&Di (Oz.ford 1845) I 415; the title of the
oration is j3a.a1.l1.JUXttc; t<'l&)vcmiY't'1.0v
xat t<&vcnav-ra(Foerster IV p.208).
9 For the wars and battle■ •ntioned in this paragraph aee Clinton
(above 1 n.8) I 396-414.
10 For the phrase cf. A.D.Nock, Sallustiua (C•bridge 1926) xxvi.

32
 11 Caaeron 476.
12 Ibid. 496.
13 J.Lalleaand, L'adainiatration civile de l'fgypte, Mem.Acad.
Roy.Belgique, aer.2, 57, 2, 1964, 90-92, 107-114.
14 Cameron 497-499.
15 RB VII 2, 2410-2417.
16 Cameron 471.
H.B. All expanded veraion of thia paper will appear in Illinois
Claaaical Studies 2, 1975.

33
 A LATIN RECORD OF THE OPENING OF A .ROM.AN
WILL (Swnmaryl

British Museum Inv. 2506 24.0 x 22.7 cm. June 3, A.D. 211
This papyrus records the opening of the will of Lucius
Ignatius Rufinus of the village of Philadelphia, the Arsinoite
nome. At best, the provisions of this will are unclear. Two
factors contribute to this: the poor Latin syntax of the scribe
and the inability of the editors to read certain critical words.
Among the syntactical problems are the following: 1.6, in infirmi-
tatem; 1.8, partem dimidiam domum~ gui; 1. 9, secundum antonium

• • • veterani.
Rufinus names his brother heir .filf ~, but then proceeds to
leave specific legacies to others--a parcel of land and a half-
interest in a house to a certain Lucretia Octavia who may or may
not be his wife. R~finus• wife is later mentioned(~), but
she is not named.
Other problems are created by the inaccuracies of the scribe.
In 1.15 the numeral of the regnal year should be xviii, not xviiii;
in 1.19 an unknown guintiano is found instead of gentiano, the
otherwise attested consul of A.D. 211.
The biggest and most confusing puzzle concerning this papyrus
is its purpose. There is at the top of the document letters which
read exempl test •• { _·_\ But what purpose does this copy of the
will serve? It is perhaps possible that several copies were made
at the same time and distributed among the witnesses and legatees
with the hope of discouraging forgeries.

R. O. Fink
State University of New York
at Albany
Natalie J. Woodall
Fairport High School

34
 Docu ■ ent ■ tiacauz et rechercbea a, ■ antiquea

L'ftude du aena dee mots et ·de leurs rapports. prfalable

A toute iQterpretation historique d'un document, se tonde
n,cessaire ■ ent aur le contexte. Le papyrologue dispose A
cet egard de sources privil,gieea pour troia raisona: cer-
tain•• orrrent un contexte intern• ,clairant; d'autres,
moina explicit••• entrant dans des categories dont le rap-
prochement auacite un type de contexte different, de nature
diplomatique; d'autrea enfin constituent des archiTes offi-
ciellea ou priveea, notarialea ou administratives. Et par
le jeu de cea facteura d'analyse, a•,tablit un rfaeau com-
plex• de relations qui fait appara!tre la signification
precise de~ mote avec leur nuance.
Bn confrontant des registres cadaatraux, dee comptea
agricolea et le dossier relatit au bordereau d'enaemence-
ment, 1 on dec~le parmi lea qualiticatifa du sol au IIIe
et au IIe ai,clea avant notre ,re la distinction
entre lea derives
~ ~
en -L,lf et lee co ■ poa4a en -,o,,.,.
,d'emploiLea
premiers designent ce dont la terre se trouve ettective-

,t,
ment porteuse,
annex, ■ ou forges
ce que la terre
tandis que lea seconds,
par l'adminietratioa
doit virtuellement
plus nombreux,

produire
pour d,tinir
en fonction
ont

de plans theoriquea.
Maia de eerieusee difficult, ■ d'utiliaatton sont aoule-
vee& par lea documents fiscaux propre ■ ent dits, ceux oui,
k l'exclusion de toute correspondance explicatiTe, concer-
nent le seul recouvrement de l'imp&t: Quittances aur papy-
rus ou aur ostraca, ordres de verse ■ ent. re9us d'octroi,
registres de perception, livrea de eitologuea, etc. Leur
aechereaae de presentation ne laisae souvent place qu'k
l'indispeneable: noma du percepteur et du contribuable,
date, lieu, imp8tt montant. Cea donnees aont inestimables,
en particulier pour lea etudes ,conomiquea. Mais lea autrea
termea, uauela ou techniques, prennent l'aapect de notions
abstraitea, depourvuea de vie et d'expreasion.

35
 Que repreaentent exactement lea yulld Arvx• mentionnea
dana deux re9ua de douane?2 Ou encore le meriamoa ~~l,Y
de O.Tait II 546? Quant au compoa, zr~9lxvpo~,~ interprete
par "melange d'orge et de paille",4 il taut en demander le
sena au P,Flor.III 377: le mot y recouvre d'une part dea
aodii d'orge, d'autre part dea centenaria de paille, ce qui
en tait
miniatration
un aubstitut
annonaire.5
de Xf~·~ x~t ixvro~
k l'usage de l'ad-

Ilse pose done un probl~me de method• que l'on peut

ainai formuler: leur absence de qualit, contextuelle doit-
elle exclure lea documents purement fiacaux de recbercbea
concernant toute terminologie qui ne aerait paa atricte ■ ent
tiacale?
Parmi lea teraea techniques auxQuela ila font ~enerale-
ment appel figurent lea categories de terrea, trappeea par
l'implt toncier ou par l'imp8t eur lea recoltea; lee pro-
duita, vegetaux, animaux, objeta de fabrication artiaanale,
qui aont preleTee, taxea OU requiaitionn4a; lea m,tiera,
par le biais dea taxes profesaionnellea ou de l'identite
d'un contribuable.
Lea exemplea auivanta scbematiaent dea enauatea a,man-
tiquea qui portent quelquetoia aur pluaieura centainee
d'atteatationa.
11 eat inatructit d'etudier la tamille constituee aur
~~~£Aot, terme generique de la vigne.6 Par une a,tonymie
courante, le mot peut prendre le aena de vignoble, "li•u
plante de vigne•. Mais 11 a eurtout pr8t, k une trinle
d,rivation grAce k troia auftixea extramement productita
en grec 1 , ,
1) le auttixe -cuv, pro pre aux noma de lieux • .,A,..n,AOlV. aui
appartient k la langue clasaioue et hell,niatiaue. eat de
loin le plua treque ■ aent employ, dana dea textea hautement
ofticiela comae lea Rroatagmata royaux ou lea Revenue Lawe
auaai bien que dana lea archive• de Zenon ou lea P.Petrie.
Ila lui-mlme fourni UD diminutif, ~rn,Aw¥{iLov.7
2) le auffixe -t~L( dont une dee fonctiona conaiate A ia-
•iquer l'eap~ce que produit un~ terre.
,) le suffix• - L~O(, l t ad jec,if «rrt•~Lxo'r et ant le plue
8 0 UV 9 D t 11 e k X 't l'J,...., e t l XW pL ov •
Vie~nent ~ensuite lea composes
. , ,
~~"tAOfopoc, «~nt~o,opt~Ot
\ ,
et oCt'-ff&~O<f \l'tOf. 8
Les elements de cette terainologie ne aont paa interchan-
geablea, et ila illuatrent tr~• claireaent la notion•••• de
•champ •'•antique• qui i ■ plioue une parentf entre lea mote
aan ■ qu'ile •• contondent ou ou'il y ait ,quivalenee abaolue.
l<'t~,Ulll,
,
puia '\
a ,
partir du IVe ai~ele yo,p(o~
I\
,9 accompagn,a ou
non d'urni~ixov, •• rencontrent dana lea actea de partage,
plainte ■, bauz, quittance• de lo7er, contrate de travail,
co ■ ptea agricolea. Maia cea ezpreaaion ■ reatent abaoluaent
,trang~rea aux bureaux et aux for ■ ulairee fiacauz. Ll, ••
re•aache, ee desainent tr~• t&t deux aplcialisationa d'e•-
ploiz yij &~nt~L~L( et &rn~~o,opor dane lee regietrea cadae-
trau%,10 &rnlA~Vdana lea textea relatifa l la perceptioa.11
Puie, par euit• d'abandona de la culture viticole pour une
reoonTeraioa a la culture c4r4ali~r•, yij «~"l~l~lt d,aigne
la •terre a Tigne enae ■ enc4e en graia•,12 tandia qu'&fne~wv
reate le •ignoble exploit4 comme tel et productif, aou ■ i ■
a l'iap&t toncier et a l'i ■ p8t eur lea r,colte ■ .l'
L'exaaen de n«f~s~Lvor n'est paa ■ oina iatereaaant. Ce
ter ■ e, qui adaptait au greo un no ■ &Teatique et n'y d4a1-
(D&it que le •paradia perae•,14 a pria au IIIe ai,cle ••
Egypte un aena diff4rent ■ aia tout auaai precia. 11 aigni-
fie •verger de rapport", ua terrain dt ■ ent cl•• et irrigu,,
ob l'on cultive en ■ aaae pal ■ iera, tiguiera, oliviera,
grenadiers, etc.15 Il taiaait l'objet de diTera prel•••-
■ enta, entre autree celui du ••izi~•• de ■ r,coltea•. Et ei
l'i ■ pulaion donn,e par Pto14 ■ ee II l l'arbericulture trui-
ti~re a oonnu dee d,clina, ell• n'en a paa ■ oina partielle-
■ ent aurv,cu, co ■■• en temoignent tant de textea d'epoque
ro ■ainel6 oh ff•p~S~taor repr,aente la cat,gori• fiscal• de
la te~re exploit'• en Terger et prend valeur de generique.17
Bien plua, au Ile ai~cle de notre •r• a'introduit le latia
pe ■ ariu ■ /nw~&ploV qui, dana un context• social nette ■ ent
plua aia,,le receuvre l peu pr,a la ■ t ■ e r,alite agricole19
et devait ltre aaaujetti aur ••••• i ■ poaitioa ■• ~ai ■ lea
regiatrea ignorent reaoluaent le second au profit du pre ■ ier.
Le ■ ot «xpbifv«. avant tout claaaique et litteraire,20
d4aigne ches lea agrono ■ ea anciene et dana lea papyrus une
cat,gorie d'arbrea fruitier• que l'on pourrait qualifier
d'arbrea de luxe.21 Sea attestations ~apyrologiquea, •••••
peu noabreuaea, noua viennent en majoritt ~ •• re9ua tiacauz
par le biaia de l' i ■ p3t appel, "
EX't') •
crxpo T
pv(l,),. ou «xp, 6c:
opv•,
inatitue aoua Ptolemee Philadelphe et conaerv4 dana la
tiacalite du Haut-E ■ pire.22
La neceaeit, de garantir la parfait• aualit, du grain,
qu'il soit dd 1 livr,, prlt, ou re ■ boura,, a auacit, une
clause traditionnelle dana lee contrata oui comport• une
a4rie d'adjectifa prlcia.2, Maia lea reou ■, lea liatea et

37
 ,
lea liTrea de aitologuea n'utiliaent que x«9«poc, aui i ■ pli­
que teua lea autrea, ou aon antony ■ e ~un«pot24 aui, &Tant
d'entrer dana la ter ■ inologie m•n,taire, a appartenu d~a
l'epoque lagide au TOcabulaire fiscal des rentreea en nature.
Cette situation a peraiat,, •••e
,,,... loraaue
~ , a'eat developp'
au VIe ai~cle l'usage de x~ Ot et d'tu-paa~o~ dana lea con-
trata priT68.25
Au niTeau des , preatationa, 11 eat habituelle ■ ent fait
appel au aeul xopTo,, qui a peurtaat fourni un DO ■ bre consi-
derable de co ■ pes4 ■ connu ■ par lea papyrus.
Le no ■ de l'orge enfia reate inchange du IIIe ai~cle
&Tant au VIIIe ai~cle apr~a J.-C., et le deriv, xp~8JpLoY,
bien que 114 ~ l'eap~ce T4g4tale, repreaentait une quantit4
de grain depeaee ••n• une reaaerre ou un grenier.26 Pour-
tant tardiTe ■ ent, k leaaana comae k 0%yrhynchoa, noua aayona
que ee ■ et a deaigne l'orge27 (grec ■ oderne xpt8•pL). Maia
•• n•en trouTe pa ■ trace dana lea reoua et lea ordrea de
r4quiaitioa du Vle au VIII• at,cle, qui a'en tiennent l la
tor ■• ■ illenaire de XfL9~.
Raaae ■ blon• nea obaerTatioaas
- Ea depit des change ■ ent ■, dea e ■ prunta ou de ■ evolutions
que ■ ontrent d'autrea type ■ de source ■, la diplo ■ atique
tiacal• reate attach'• auz ■ et ■ techniques traditionnela.
- Elle a'abatieat le plua aouTent de recourir aux coapoa,a.
- Par aouci de pr,Qiaion, elle a d~a l'origine rejete la
eynony ■ ie et Yolontiera adopte le ter ■ e le plus claaaique.
- Certain• aota entia, l cause de leur ap,cialieation •••••
ae ■ bleat tigea, r,aerYea au jargon de• percepteura.28
Cea re ■ arque• ne e'appliauent eTide ■ ment ea aucun caa
au vocabulaire de •1 adainiatration
1 tiacale" qui, par con-
traate, 4Tolue en tonction dea ■ odificationa aucceaaivea
du syat, ■ e d'i ■ poaition, et qui ■ eriterait de ce point de
TUe une ,tude d'enae ■ ble.
Peut-ltre conTient-il de faire la part d',ventuellea
divergence• aelon le atyle propre dea bureaux, et aurtout,
de v,ritier l'analyae ea dehora du secteur agricole. Maia
aotona que, Toulant ,1ucider lea probl~••• de l'inatitu- ,
tion pagarchique, M.Gaacou a refua, d'attribuer a ~EfOt
le aena inaolite de •diatri•t• pro~oa, par Germaine Rouil-
lard, et qu'il a retenu l'acceptioa ancienne de "part" ou
•quote-part• .28, Ou ' encore , la BURA'BBtion de Mae Vipasycka
l propoa de la XOK~ ~f~xo~, i ■ p3t aur le feutre,o {fabri-
que &Tee du poil ani ■ al dont le no ■ bien claaaioue eat
ert,), va dana le aena des r,tlexiona auaciteea par lea
ter ■ ea agricolea.
 Ce conservatiame, ou cette tendance archarsante dea •ocu-
ments fiscaux en ■ ati~re de terminologie technique, n• aaurait
nous ,tonner puiaqu'ils n•,taient pas sentia co••• des ina-
tru ■ enta de co ■ municatioa et ne aervaient paa de vehicule k
l a 1 an gu e • '.5l .
Encore faut-11 en ltre conacient. 0a doit, et aouvent &Tee
profit, a'adreaser k cea textes ditticilea parce qu'ila peu~
Tent jouer en quelque aorte le r&le de •t,moina• et de repe-
rea 4ana la singuli~re aventure que constitue l'hiatoire dea
■ ota.

!!• Cette oo ■ munication, doat lea lignea directrices

aont ici pr,aenteea, para!tra aoua une forme plus d,veloppee
dana le J.J.P.
1. Par ex. P.Rich.Zen. 31, P.Col.Zen. II 78 et aur-
tout SB I 4369, conserv, k la Biblioth~que Bodl,enne, et
republi' par P.Vidal-Naquet dana Le bordereau d'enae ■ eace­
ment dana l'lg7pte ptol4marque (Bruxellea, 1967), pp.25-,6.
2. P.Berl.InY.13305 (publil dana J.J.P. XVI-XVII,
1971, p.1,4) et!! IV 7365 (. P.Wiac. 16}.
3. Voir P.Her ■ .Reea ,9 et 79.
4. VB I, a.Y.; P.Ber ■ .Reea p.79.
5. Co••· ~lTOXpt8or et o,~oxptoV; voir B.Cadell. Le
reneuTellement du vocabulaire au IVe siecle de netre ere
(dana !kten XIII Intern.Pap.Kongr., MUnchea, 1974}, p.65.
6. Il peut s'accompagner d'un adjectif •'•graphique
ou d'ua adjectit fer ■, aur le no ■ de la Tigne gri ■ ,ante.
7. P.Caire Zen. III 59309 et P.S.I. IV 375.
e. Lea deux dernier~ aoat tr~• tardita (Vie S.).
9. P.Straab. IV 555, de 289P, en donne dana ce aena
une des pre ■ ieres attestations dateea.
10. P.Tebt. I 82, 8~ etc.
11. P.ReT. coll.36-37; P.Cairo Zen. III 59366, etc.
12. P.Ryl. II 202; P.S.I. XIV 1407, et en g~n,ral
S.L.Vallace, Taxatio• in Egypt fro ■ Auguatua to Diocletian,
p.14.
1,. P.S.I. I 82; P.Tebt. II 357; B.G.U. IX 1896, etc.
14. cr.x,nophoa, Anab. I,2,7-8; 4,10; II,4,14; Hell.
IV,1,14, etc.
15. Voir par ex. P.Cairo Zen. I 59033; B.G.U. VII
150,; P.Mich. III 182, 19,.
16. Tela que ceux dea B.G.U. IX eu des P.Cel. V.
17. Oa note l'abaence dea aubatantifa co ■ poa,a dana
leaquela 11 entre co ■ me second ter ■ e et qui aoua aont con-
naa par lea contrata.

39
 18. Ct. SB YI 9105; P.S.I. XIII 1328.
19. P.Ox7. IV 707; P.Plor. I 50; P.Ha ■ b. I 23. t•,qui-
yaleace des deux ter ■•• eat en outre contir ■ 4e par le Corpua
glesaarioru ■ latinoru ■ (II,153,6; '94,321 III,27,1,; ,00,3).
20. Voir lea references daaa le dictionnair• de
Lidiell-Scett-Joae ■•
21. Theophraate, Biat.Plaat. II,5,7; P.Oxy. XIV 1631;
P.Iaad. VII 142.
22. Vair c.Preauz, Chr. d'lg. XlVIII. 1953, p.117,
et S.L.Vallace, Taxation, p.375. ,
2,. Veir en dernier lieu Chr. d'lg. XLVIII, 197,, p.

24. P.Rrl. II 72 (99/98).

25 • .4.Q.u• XVI 2017; P.Baab. I 68; P.Roaa.-Geerg. V
,1, ll YI 9051, etc.
26. Par ex. B.G.U. I 48.
27. P,Ctl~ III 89; P,Pll• IVI 1862.
28. et. nVA? pour la douaae ·ou ~Lr~pour l'adaeratio.
29. B7sa ■ tioa lLII, 1972, p.64.
,o. J.3.P. XVI-iVII, 1971, p.122.
31. A propes dea oatraca, Yoir lea re ■ arquea de Mlle
c.Preaux dana aoa artiole Du •Liaeaire B• creto-ayceniea
auz ostraca grecs d'Eg7pte (daaa £hr. d 1 ig. XXXIV, 1959,
pp.79-85), p.e,.

40
 SU ALCUNIPAPIRI "PLATONICI"
Antonio Carlini, Pisa
Il titolo di questa comunicazione richiede almeno due precisazioni: 'pa-
piri platonici' non sta per 'papiri di Platone', ma per 'papiri in rela-
zione con Platone'; ancora, l'attributo 'platonici' va chiuso fra virgolet-
te, perché per uno dei papiri che saranno 'qui esaminati è già stata posta
in discussione, per un altro può essere posta in discussione una relazio-
ne primaria con Platone.
Nel 1901, il Wilcken pubblicava il testo di tre frammenti papiracei, at-
tualmente conservati nella Handschriftenabteilung della Staatsbibliothek
di Monaco (Inv.93; Pack 2 2560), attribuibili per ragioni paleografiche al-
la :11a. metà del sec.III a.e. (l) L'aspetto esteriore del frammento maggiore·
(a) ha suggerito al Wilcken la congettura che questo papiro fosse stato(~J
tilizzato, con altri pezzi incollati insieme, come suola di un calzare.
La scrittura non è affatto svanita; il testo non ha sofferto perché è sta-
to "calpestato 11
1 ma perché è stato tagliato a misura del piede. Non proble-
mi di lettura quindi, ma di interpretazione del contenuto, legati allo sta-
to frammentario.
Nell I impiego ripetuto , degli aggettivi 0.VWÀE&poc; e a&a-Ja'tO<; chiara-
mente riferiti a q,ox~ 1 nella formulazione stessa delle argomentazioni
(fr.a col.I,rr.7-9: 'li q,uxfll.1tEl.6T) j [a.&a.vqÌ(O'J EO'tl. xaì. ~[vwÀ.t&]pfp]v
mlE~~). il Wilcken ha visto un riferimento al Fedone (106 b,c 1 e). A giudi-
zio dello studioso tedesco, il papiro di Monaco c9nserva resti di un'opera
autonoma, nata in ambiente accademico (piuttosto antico-accademico che me-
dio-accademico), la quale "im engen Anschluss an Platon Gedank:en aus dem
Phaidon breit behandeltn. Che la struttura di quest'opera fosse dialogica
1
sembra risultare da molti indizi concorrenti: l'imperativo ~ 6'E ( fr.a col.
I, r.4), le paragraphoi ravvicinate (fr.a col.II, rr.5 e 6), gli spazi
bianchi che indicano forte pausa (fr.a col.I, r.4) o isolano apparentemen-
te una battuta (fr.a col.I, rr.9 e 11), la formula interrogativa ~pa y[E
(fr.a col.I, r.11).
Per G.Coppola, non ci sarebbero ostacoli decisivi ad intendere P.Mon.93
come resto di un Commentario al Fedone 1 anzi 1 pi~ precisamente di un Com-
mentario scritto nella xw~ egizia, testimonianza preziosa del metodo e-
segetico degli Alessandrini • Anche se si trascura la difficoltà cronolo-
gica (Diogene Laerzio ci informa di un interesse di Aristofane di Bisanzio
per il testo di Platone 1 ma controversa è la t~timonianza.relativa ad una
sua EKOOa1.c;dei dialoghi divisa in trilogie ) 1 se si trascura la diffi-
coltà contenutistica (si tratterebbe, se mai, di commento filosofico. non
grammaticale), resta la difficoltà della struttura dialogica. Alla fine del
r.4 della col.I del fr.a non c'è alcuna traccia dell' a che dovrebbe secon-

41
do il Coppola trasformare t6È in t6Éa. { t6Éa '°'f1çCwijç come in Pla-
tone, Phaed.106d 'tijç Cwijç tl6oç ); inoltre, la concorrenza dei vari
indizi già menzionati, i quaè,j- sono trascurati dal Coppola nelle integra-
zioni e nell'interpretazione , obbliga I io credo, ad attestarci sulle po-
sizioni del Wilcken.
Ogni tentativo di identificazione dell'opera può dunque (e deve!) tener
conto di questi quattro dati certi: 1) alta cronologia del papiro; 2) dif-
fusione del testo filosofico nella regione del Fayy{ùn nella IIL metà del
sec.III a.C.; 3) struttura dialogica; 4) richiamo a Platone nell'argomen-
tazione sull'immortalità dell'anima. Sul fondamento di questi quattro da-
ti è possibile proporre una identificazione del testo del papiro di Mona-
co con l'Eudemo di Aristotele? Diciamo subito che, dato lo stato frammen-
tario dell'Eudemo da un lato, e l'esiguità della. porzione di testo , resti-
to.itaci dal papiro.dall'altro, si può avere di mira solo il n1.ia,\IO\I; co-
me gli scettici della Media Accademia, converrà dunque in utramque partem
dicere, già paghi se si riuscirà a mostrare che l'attribuzione all'Eudemo
non è manifestamente infondata.
Nei suoi Prolegomena ad una nuova edizione dei frammenti dell'Eudemo
(1960), il Gigon, persuaso che l'influenza esercitata sugli autori poste-
riori da quest'opera aristotelica sia maggiore di quel che non appaia dal-
l'index fontium delle edizioni del Walzer e del Ross, suggerisce nuove(4i-
rettrici di ricerca per il recupero di altri frammenti e testimonianze •
Alcuni primi risultati del lavoro di scavo del Gigon sono, io credo, ac-
quisiti, ma resta sempre oscura l'articolazione interna dell'opera, resta
difficile da ricostruire lo svolgimento della dimostrazione (o delle dimo-
strazioni) sull'immortalità dell'anima, resta problematica la definizione
del rapporto fra Eudemo e Fedone, cioè in ultima analisi la definizione
{e i limiti) del "platonismo" dell'Aristotele giovanile.
Sappiamo con sicurezza da vari ·testimorti che neM'Eudemo come nel Fedo-
~ era confutata la dottrina dell '"anima armonia" • Si sarebbe tentati 1 1n
via ipotetica, di porre in relazione con questa confutazione la porzione
di testo conservata nel papiro di Monaco. Ma la sezione corrispondente del
Fedone non offre alcun preciso parallelo; i passi 106 b,c,e, già richiama-
ti, di questo dialogo, che hanno indotto il Wilcken a collegare il testo
del papiro con Platone si trovano in altro contesto (argomento dei contra-
ri). Secondo me, per aprire una via verso l'Aristotele delle opere dialo-
giche si può cercare anche altrove in Platone. La famosa dimostrazione
dell'immortalità dell'anima contenuta nel Fedro (245 c ss.) offre qualèhe
spunto di confronto. Questa dimostrazione, come è noto, è fondata sul pe-
renne movimento dell'anima ( aEI.K,\IT)'tOç ) che ha in se stessa e non fuo-
ridi sé la fonte e il principio di tale movimento vitale ( nT)y~ KQ.L, '
cip-
I

' XlVT)OEwç
XTI , ) ; se infatti l'anima avesse ,
naOÀa.v XI.VT)OEW<; avrebbe

42
-na.vÀa.\l l;wf)ç. Ha un principio non è generato ( a.y'É"TJ"O" ) e se è inge-
nerato deve essere anche incorruttibile (a.6Laq,&opo\l), perché ove il
principio si distruggesse, né esso rinascerebbe da altra cosa né sarebbe
esso all'origine di altra cosa. L'anima che muove se stessa da sé sarà
dunque ciyÉ\11}1'0v e ci&a.va.1'ov.Nel nostro papiro, in un luogo (fr.a col.I,
rr.3-4) l'anima è indicata, secondo la restituzione congetturale proposta
I
dal Wilclcen, come 1} (a.px,il tT)c; /;WT)ç o T) litTJYTÙ I 'tT)ç CWTJ<;.Costrui-
re su un testo integrato congetturalmente è sempre rischioso, ma qui le
possibilità di scelta non sono molte: si_richiede una perifrasi indican~
l'anima e sono conservati l'articolo femminile e il genitivo ""fjç CwfJç •
Senza problemi di ricostruzione invece 1' a.v~E-&po\l e 1' a.-&a.·vatov come
predicati dell'anima (fr.a col.I, rr.J, 10). Il richiamo al Fedro (ma la
stessa concezione dell'anima che muove se stessa ritroviamo in Leggi 896
a ss.) può essere significativo in rapporto alla dottrina dell'Aristotele
giovanile dell'anima lv6EÀÉXELa. (cioè dell'anima come perenne movimen-
to), conosciuta~oprattutto da brani famosi del I libro delle Tusculane a
lungo fraintesi • Le testimonianze di Cicerone sof1o~dagli editori di Ari-
0
stotele rif'erite di solito al IlcpÌ. cp1.Àoaoq,La.ç , ma è interessaf,t,,
notare che il Hariotti con buoni argomenti le rivendicava all'Eudemo i
anche il Gigon si chiede se non debba essere riferito all'Eudemo in parti-
colare ciò che Cicerone dice in Tusc.I 66 (ma aveva già scritto negli stes-
si termin~ ,»ella Consolatio) sull'anima perennemente viva (guod vivit guod
1
viget ••• )\ q. Un influsso diretto dell'Eudemo (il cui carattere consolato-
rio è riconosciuto dagli interpreti) sulla Consolatio e sul I libro delle
Tusculane difficilmente può essere messo in dubbio(i3).
La struttura dialogica nel frammento di Monaco, con battute brevi e in-
calzanti, sembra di stampo platonico. Le testimonianze antiche concordano
nel· dire che Aristotele ha trasf'ormato il dialogo platonico, abbandonando
la caratterizzazione dei personaggi, l'interrogazione mai~utica, la scher-
ma drammatica; Aristotele hafatto nascere un dialogo che era discussione
scientifica f'ra vari if,~rlocutori impegnati a dibattere da posizioni di-
verse determinati temi • Ha questa trasformazione quando è avvenuta? Sen-
za prendere qui posizione sull'interpretazione evoluzionistica di Aristote-
le, ci si può riferire all'unico frammento dell'Eudemo che è riferito let-
teralmente (f'r.6 WR: Ps.Pttt,j•• Cons.ad Apoll.115b)05h chiunque sia il per-
1
sonaggio qui apostrofato 1 nello svolgimento della discussione si sorpren-
de ancora la tecnica socratica della domanda e risposta.
Richiamo alla dimostrazione del Fedro e struttura dialogica sono dunque
indizi (tenui) a favore dell'Aristotele essoterico. Le altre ipotesi di i-
dentificazione del papiro che si possono fare nell'ambito dell'Antica Acca-
demia incontrano dif'ficoltà •
obiettive o silenzio nella tradizione. Sappiamo
che Senocrate definiva l'anima a.pL-&µÒç av1'av >u.vGi\l la considerava
I

43
.
1mmorta l e e 1ncorrutt1
. . b 1· 1 e (17), ma 1 a tra d.1z i ~~ non attr1 'b u1sce
. esp 1.1c1. ta-
mente a Senocrate la produzione di dialoghi e le tre st~ opere che pre-
sentano un titolo simile a quello dei dialoghi platonici sembrano aver
avuto un contenuto diverso. Un'ampia produzione dialogica è assicurata in-
vece per il predecessore di Senocrate Speusippo, assertore anch'egli del-
l'immortalità dell'anima (fr.55 Lang), autore fra l'altro di un 7'cp1. cl,,u-
x~ç (D.L. IV 4-5). Sul contenuto preciso di questo scritto, sul rapporto
con Platone e sulla sua fortuna in età ellenistica la tradizione è muta.
Certo.proprio questo silenzio deve indurre alla cautela,se non all' lnOX'fl•
In relazione con il Fedone si trova un altro papiro del sec.III a.e. il
cui testo è stato presentato da Fr.BiW,el in occasione del V Congresso
0

di Papirologia 2
di Oxford (Pack 2561) • In questo frammento di cartonna-
i! proveniente da Hibeh è contenuta una discussione critica della dottrina
dell 10
anima armonia". All'alta cronologia del papiro si unisce dunque come
secondo elemento qualificante la discussione dottrinale dì un tema che è
specificamente assicurato all'Eudemo. La mancanza di indizi dialogici non
sarebbe decisiva, perché potremmo trovarci all'interno di una ~ija~ç; im-
barazza invece una citazione del Fedone (92e-93a) introdotta da ~~a~v. A-
ristotele nelle opere del corpus cita più volte Platone; Platone stesso
nei suoi dialoghi drammatici cita Omero e i poeti, ma anche i filosofi del-
l'età precedente e li chiosa; nel nostro papiro però, la citazione del _E!-
done, inquadrata in una esegesi puntuale del testo platonico, è di tal na-
tura da far pensare piuttosto a un Commentario perpetuo al Fedone che non
a un •.opera originale che elabori autonomamente o sottoponga ad analisi cri-
tica il pensiero filosofico di altri. Anche il Bilabel del resto, senza
porsi il problema dell'Eudemo, aveva caratterizzato l'opera come Commento
filosofico al Fedone. Nell'Antica Accademia più che nell'Accademia di mez-
zo si potrà cercare l'ambiente d'origine di questa esegesi platonica.
Problemi particolari pone P.Berol.9766 (Pack 2 1425), attribuito dagli e-
ditori ·al sec.I(/}C., ma che va postdatato, come ora tutti sono d'a~cordo,
1
al sec.III d.C. • vi è contenuto un riassunto di Leggi 832c-83?c. E' sta-
ta avanzata da F.Della Corte l'ipotesi che questo papiro conservi parte del-
l'opera aristotelica
' 1. , ,
perduta Ta 1:;.X""'WVNoµwv IIÀQ.""'wvoç a. 8
,,,
y, di cui
abbiamo notizia da Diogene Laerzio (V 22) e da altri testimoni ~. A giudi-
zio dello studioso italiano, il riassunto contenuto in P.Berol.9766 che non
tiene conto "n~ del costrutto platonico né dell'ordine progressivo dei ca-
pitoli" non può essere stato fatto sul testo delle Leggi a noi noto dalla
tradizione medievale e che si fa risalire a Filippo d'Opunte, ma su un te-
sto anteriore o in ogni caso indipendente da quello. Se cosl fosse, certa-
mente sarebbe considerevole l'importanza del papiro anche per la storia più
él?ltica del testo platonico. Il mio parere su questo frammento è diverso: la

44
fitta trama di corrispondenze con il testo di Platone conosciuto dai codi-
ci medievali e l assenza di vere varianti
1
che non si spieghino con lavo-
lontà di condensare e di semplificare la dimostrazione rende scettici sul-
la possibilità di recuperare attraverso P.Berol.9766 una diversa 'redazio-
ne' delle Leggi che sarebbe stata epitomata da Aristotele. , Anche il tipo
di riassunto rende ,perplessi: al r.5 leggiamo ÀEYEL,al r.9 'JtOL.EL, al . r.
12 q>T)a1.,al r.18 pouÀt'ta.L;il soggetto sottjnteso è chiaramente Platone. O-
ra, è difficile immaginare Aristotele che procede per tre , libri in questo
modo, puntellando continuamente il suo discorso con ÀtYE~ <pT)O~Può trat-
tarsi allora di un riassunto di un numero limitato di capitoli delle Leggi,
nato nella scuola o per la scuola? Sarebbe facile dar colpa delle omissio-
ni, delle semplificazioni e di un certo disordine espositivo a uno scolaro
poco diligente, ma la scrittura è una libraria accurata, senza incertezze •.
Se il testo era destinato ad un pubblico di lettori, dobbiamo chinarci di
fronte alle insondabili motivazioni che hanno indotto un epitomatore (stu-
dioso o maestro di scuola) a registrare in un determinato ordine certe co-
se e non altre. E male per i lettori che non potevano o non volevano leg-
gere il testo integrale di Platone. Già Quintiliano, del resto, deplorava
C!!!!!~.2!.•II 15,24) che molti si tf.§ontentassero di leggere estratti del ,
Gorgia invece del dialogo intero • E' dubbia l'identificazione delllLxpu-
ÀO~Jl cui nome compare v~~icalmente lungo la colonna con l'autore di que-
sto riassunto delle Leggi ; è da escludere invece, mi pare, l'identifica-
zione della mano che ha vergato P.Berol.9766 con quella che ha vergato l•
2
Q!:I•ll (Pac~ ~1424: contiene Leggi 862d-863c nel testo a noi noto dalla
tradizione) .Le due scritture sono indubbiamente simili, ma non si rico-
nosce la stessa mano: alcune lettere come p u hanno un ductus diverso e an-
che l'impostazione della colonna presenta differenze.
Questi tre papiri sono stati da me esaminati in margine ad una ricerca
sulla tradizione antica del Fedone; solo in un secondo tempo ho considera-
to la possibilità di muovere alla ricerca dell'Aristotele perduto nei papi-
ri. I risultati sono magri, ma forse valeva la pena, seguendo le orme del
Gigon, affrontare il problema; altri potrà riprenderlo, con maggiore abili-
tà e fortuna.

1
( )U.Wilcken, "APF" 1 (1901), 475 ss.
~ Il Wilcken richiama Herod. II 37, 3 ( ùno6~µa.'ta. '3vPÀ 1.va.).
~ "Aegyptus 11 5 ( 1924), 221 ss.
Cfr. A.Carlini, Studi sulla tradizione antica e medievale del Fe-
done, Roma 1973, 17 ss.
(5)Nell'ipotesi di ricostruzione del Coppola, p.es. non si giustifi-
cherebbe lo spazio bianco fra l;wT)c; e L.6e:(gJ (fr.a, col.I,r.4). né quello
dopo a.v t \. T) ( fr. a, col. I, r. 9).
45
 (~O.Gigon, Prolegomena to !!!. Edition .2f .!h!! Eudemus, in Aristotle
and Flato in the Mid-fourth Century, Gateborg 1960, 19 ss.
~fr. H.B.Gottschalk, "Phronesis" 16 (1971), 179 ss.
Un'integrazione 1l j fi.6EaJ 'tTl<; l;WT}c;sarebbe conciliabile con la
tesi i~5erpretativa qui espressa. ·
Cfr. E.Bignone, L'Aristotele perduto.! la formazione filosofica di
Epicuro, I, Firenze 1936 {rist.1973), 195 s. Bibliografia aggiornata su
questo(.p~oblema in A.H. Chroust, "New Scholasticism''42(196EQ,'.364 ss.
Esame critico di questi franvnenti in M.Untersteiner, Aristotele.
Della filosofia, Roma 1963, 54 s. e 265 ss.
(11)"RFIC" 68 ( 1940), 179 ss.
(12)Prolegomena cit., 23. Cfr. anche D.A.Rees, Theories .2f ~ ~
..!!!.!È!:. early Aristotle, in Aristotle ~ Plato in the Mid-Fourth Century,
G6teborr1J}1960, 194.
~1 O.Gigon,"Herm.es" 87 (1959), 154.
1
~Cfr.R.Hirzel, ~ Dialog. fil!! literarhistorischer Versuch, I, Leip-
zig 1895, 285 ss.; W.Jaeger, Aristoteles, Berlin 19552,. 27 ss.; I.Dtlring, A-
ristotr~s, Heidelberg 1966, 554 ss.
Si può respingere la testimonianza di Ps.Plutarco ( '3ÉÀ"'LO\I 6 'aù-
' ' ... , , ,
"'a.e; "'a.e; "'ou qn,Àoaoq,ov Àt~tL<; xapa,th:a&a.L )solo dubitando della sua
buona tF~e.
(l7,Cfr.O.Gigon, Prolegomena cit., 25 s.
Frr.60; 74-75 Heinze.
(1~ . , ' ., ' ,
(1 ~D-L. IV 11 parla dl ouyypa.µµa."'a. >lO.L E.1tT) XQ.L na.pa.L\IEO'El.c;.
~Cfr.H.Derrie, Xenokrates, PW RE IX A2, col.1515.
~ Fr.Bilabel, ~ literarische Funde in der Heidelberger Papyrus-
sammlung, Actes du ye Congrès lnternational de Papyrologie - Oxford 30 AoQt-
3 Septembre 1937, Bruxelles 1938, 78 s.
(2 ÙEditio princeps: Diels-~chubart, BIT II, 53 s. Cfr.Seider, Pallo-
graphi~ Abb.33, Taf.XVI. .
;~
11
RFIC 64 (1936), 404 ss. (• Opuscula I, Genova 1971, 214 ss.).
11

'2,4)Cfr. A. Car 1 ini , Studi ci t. , 7 3.

Cfr.Fr.Blass, "APF11 3 (1906), 496. I primi editori pensavano a una
nota d~chivio.
Questa identificazione, proposta dal Della Corte {!!,!•.s!!•,404) su
indicazione dello Schubart, è stata ripresa dal Seider.
 Proposte metodologiche per una nuova raccolta
di facsimili di manoscritti greci letterari
di
Guglielmo Cavallo e Manfredo Manfredi Platea XII-XIV
La raccolta di facsimili di manoscritti greci letterari
(secoli IV a.e. - VII d.C.), che l'Istituto 'G.Vitelli' sta
curando, si propone innanzi tutto di fornire uno strumento di
esercizio per la valutazione tecnico-libraria e critico-testua
le dei manoscritti stessi, ma non soltanto questo: l'esame di
ciascun manufatto scritto, invero, ha altresi l'intento di ri-
costruire, per quanto possibile, l'ambiente dal quale un certo
testo è stato prodotto e la funzione cne vi ha svolto. Ed è an
che con tale intento quindi che il materiale è stato esaminato
sotto ogni aspetto, paleografico, papirologico, filologicqne1-
la convinzione che i diversi piani di indagine sono tutti e
nella stessa misura necessari quando si debba affrontare qual-
siasi studio di un prodotto scritto dell'antichità. Ad esempli
ficazione del metodo seguito si presenta uno specimen: il PSI
I 10 (Pack2 833), frammenti di un codice di papiro recanti ver
si da Iliade 8, A, Me N. Tale scelta è dovuta a molteplici mo
tivi: ~) l'interesse paleografico rilevante del pezzo; b) il -
trattarsi di un codice papiraceo dell'Iliade d'età bizantina;
c) l'avere un recente seminario dell'Istituto 'G.Vitelli' mes-
so in luce vari spunti di 'papirologia omerica•.
I primi dati di PSI 10 da rilevare e trattare sono quelli
grafici; ed a tal proposito v'è da fare una premessa di carat-
tere più generale: ci sembra cne finora negli studi di paleogra
fia greca non sia stato preso in considerazione abbastanza il
fatto, fondamentale, cne ogni scrittura (come del resto ognipro
dotto scritto) è in un preciso rapporto di funzione con l'ambien
te sociale che ne ha determinato l'insorgere e detenuto l'uso 1 .-
In questa prospettiva gli aspetti tecnici di ciascun fenomeno
scrittorio costituiscono soltanto il punto di partenza ai fini
di un'indagine più ampia, potendo le stesse risultanze dell'e-
same tecnico essere interpretate alla luce del r~olo e della
funzione che un certo ambiente attribuisce alla scrittura in ge
nerale o ad un determinato tipo grafico in particolare.
Il PSI 10 (tav.X1I) forse più di altri pezzi tradisce nelle
forme graficne lo stretto rapporto con l'ambiente che l'na pro-
dotto. La scrittura del papiro omerico, infatti, è una scrittura
greco-latina, e più latina che greca; se si cercano confronti,

47
 essi possono trovarsi - non a caso - nella scrittura di testi
giuridici, greci e soprattutto latini: ed invero nell'Oriente
greco, al pari della lingua latina ch'è lingua del diritto, di
stato, del potere (a detta di Temistio e Libanio 2 ), anche la
scrittura latina, dall'epoca del basso impero, è scrittura del
diritto, di stato, del potere. In Oriente dunque, a partire
dalla fine del IV secolo, nell'àmbito della produzione di li-
bri giuridici, insorge una xoLvn scrittoria greco-latina: poi
ché il libro di diritto è sostanzialmente libro latino, anche
i testi giuridici scritti in greco acquistano movenze e forme
grafiche latine. E' merito di Elias Avery Love l'aver indi-
viduato una onciale latina tutta particolare (quella che lo
stesso Love chiama •onciale B-R•3), riservata pressoché escl~
sivamente ai testi giuridici (ecne perciò puO forse indicarsi
anche con il nome di •onciale giuridica•) e caratterizzata da
certe influenze greche; ma il Love, in quanto meno interessato
alle seri tture greche, ha tralasciato poi di notare quanto cer
ta maiuscola greca di testi di diritto è stata a sua volta i~
fluenzata dalla •onciale giuridica•, nonché, pure, dalla minu
scola latina, anch'essa adoperata per scriver testi giurispr~
denziali (esempio classico puO essere considerato il frammento
di Leida delle Sententiae di Paolo, CLA X 1577, Pack 2 2956).
Ad uso dei testi giuridici, quindi, venne a formarsi una
' >tOLV~ seri ttoria greco-latina. E di tale XOL vn è espressione
la scrittura di PSI 10 dell'Iliade: l'andamento generale del-
le forme, la caratteristica delle aste incurvantisi in basso
verso destra, soprattutto il chiaroscuro, sono quelli della
onciale latina •giuridica'; e meramente latifte risultano sin-
gole lettere, quali beta formato da una b minuscola con l'ag-
giunta di un apice fungente da tratto ricurvo superiore, del-
ta costituito da una d semionciale, .e!. a forma di n minuscola.
un pezzo di utile confronto paleografico per il papiro omeri-
2
co è il PSI XIII 1348 (Pack 2982) recante una raccolta di de
finizioni e massime giuridiche in greco (ma qualche volta il
raccoglitore ha riportato anche il testo latino): si possono
osservare (tav.XIU) le aste incurvantisi in basso verso destra.
il chiaroscuro obliquo, le forme latine adoperate per il trac
ciato di beta e di delta. La stessa scrittura si ritrova in
PSI inv. CNR 132 (inedito) e in P.Berol. inv. 11866 AB (Pack 2
2277) recanti l'uno e l'altro il commento in greco a passi di
diritto romano. Sia i papiri giuridici di Firenze sia quello
 di Berlino furono prodotti con ogni probabilità alla fine del V
secolo o all'inizio del VI. Ed ancora un altro confronto, il più
autorevole, viene in considerazione: il codice Laurenziano del-
le Pandette (CLA III 295): nelle parti scritte in greco (tav.X&v)
s'incontra lo stesso chiaroscuro delle parti latine (e della
scrittura del nostro pezzo omerico), la stessa incurvatura del
le aste in basso verso destra, ed inoltre il beta costituito
dal segno di b minuscola con l'aggiunta di un apice e il E.i di
forma simile ad una~; quanto al delta, almeno negli indici si
presenta in veste latina, d, ma risulta di forma greca nel te-
sto. Ed anche sotto il profilo codicologico il nostro papiro
trova confronto in certi manoscritti giuridici (pur se non sol
tanto in questi): il formato di PSI 10, cm 25 di larghezza per
33,5/34 di altezza con campo di scrittura di cm 19/20 per 23ca.
4
(gruppo 2 Turner ), è pressoché lo stesso di codici quali il
già citato PSI 1348 recante massime giuridiche o il latino P.
2
Ryl. III 479 (CLA Suppl. 1723, Pack 2967) del Digesto scritto
in 'onciale giuridica'. Analogie con tali pezzi si possono in-
dicare anche nel rapporto tra altezza della scrittura e dista~
za tra le righe nonché nel numero delle righe stesse per cia-
scun foglio (una trentina nel papiro omerico, circa altrettan-
te in PSI 1348 e P.Ryl. 479 stando alla ricostruzione che ne è
stata fatta trattandosi di materiale frammentario).
Tutti tali confronti mostrano la prima metà del VI secolo
quale datazione più probabile del nostro codice dell'Iliade.
Quanto alla provenienza del manufatto la questione è più com-
plessa: il Love ha localizzato a Costantinopoli il gruppo omo-
geneo di testi la~ini o greco-latini in 'onciale giuridica',
tra i quali le stesse Pandette fiorentine, le cui caratteristi
che graficne sono strettamente analoghe a quelle del papiro o-
merico in esame; è dunque da porre la produzione di quest' ul-
timo a Costantinopoli? In mancanza di dati oggettivi, non si
può dare una risposta di qualche plausibilità, ta11,to più che la
stessa tesi del Lowe è stata messa in discussione ed è forse
da ridimensionare. In ogni caso i confronti grafici e codicolo
gici istituibili ed istituiti con testi giuridici mostrano che
è negli ambienti di studio e di esercizio del diritto che l'o-
merico PSI 10 è stato prodotto; ed infatti le espressioni del-
la xoLv~ scrittoria e libraria greco-latina si presentano di
regola limitate ai soli testi giuridici, almeno nell àmbitodei
1

testi greci. Il fatto di incontrarne il manifestarsi in un co-

49
dice dell'Iliade mi pare significante.
Si sa che con il IV secolo in Oriente si ha sempre più bi
sogno di funzionari, ma la formazione tradizionale, quella re-
torico-letteraria è di contro sempre meno adatta: all'avvocato
retore, educato secondo la scuola greca, si sostituisce l'avvo
cato giurista, educato al diritto e al latino, attratto dalla
carriera amministrativa, trasformato via via in officialis su-
periore a disposizione di un qualche governante o funzionario
al vertice, destinato a sua volta alle più alte cariche. come
è stato scritto 11
nous sommes au plus haut point de la crise, au
moment où coexistent deux systèmes l'un grec 1•autre latin,
qui s•offrent au choix des élites"i. Questo tuttavia è vero nel
IV secolo, all'epoca di Libanio che si fa interprete della dic~
tomia tra quei due sistemi di formazione aventi a loro simbolo
le due lingue (e le due scritture), la greca e la latina7; ma
nel VI secolo, in età giustinianea, l'opposizione tra l'uomo e-
ducato al greco, alla tradizione retorico-letteraria, e quello
educato al latino e al diritto è divenuta ormai sfumata e gfug-
gente: da una parte il latino si eleva a lingua di cultura,
dall'altra il greco si avvia ad assurgere a lingua distato.L 1 u2
mo d'élite bizantino di quest'epoca è istruito negli studi di
diritto non meno che in quelli retorico-letterari. Nel VI seco
lo la scrittura del diritto, di stato, del potere, la xoLv~ -
scrittoria è diventata strumento di questa nuova cultura; essa
nelle sue espressioni greche e latine ha il còmpito di dare r~
alt~ grafica, oltre cne ai testi giuridici, anche ad un libro
omerico, il nostro PSI 10, e, da parte latina, ad un codice qua
le il Giovenale di Antinoe {CLA Suppl. 1710, Pack 2 2925), verga
to in •onciale giuridica• nella stessa epoca. Alla xoLv~ scrit
toria greco-latina era assegnata dunque la funzione di esprime-
re gli interessi non più soltanto giuridici ma anche letterari
della classe dirigente, la quale ne deteneva l'uso.
* * *
Operando sia al recupero fisico del materiale papiraceo
sullo scavo, sia al restauro, sia alle altre pratiche prelimi-
nari allo studio, ci si rende conto di quanto peso abbia la
possibilità di riconoscere analiticamente nei componenti e di
valutare poi globalmente e sinteticamente i brandelli d'infor
mazione che raccogliamo in ciascuna delle singole fasi. Se i
codici medievali, anche per i testi a più larga tradizione, si
collocano quasi senza eccezione su un livello di formale equi-

50
valenza che non contraddice a ogni particolare valutazione ai
fini della recensio e delle altre operazioni filologiche, il
materiale manoscritto letterario proveniente da scavo non può
essere uniforme, in quanto è una raccolta non selezionata di
ciò cne fu abbandonato per un'infinita varietà di motividuré!!l
te i secoli. Ne consegue che il papirologo deve.rendere dispo
nibili le informazioni significative per una più precisa valu
tazione del manufatto scrittorio. Nel 1912, quando Teresa Lodi 9 ,
una delle più intelligenti e preparate discepole del Vitelli,
pubblicava questi frammenti omerici non era in dovere né in
potere di sviluppare le notizie essenziali sulla provenienza
del papiro e sulla congetturale datazione paleografica del libro.
I frammenti di PSI I 10 sono stati nuovamente restaurati,
riletti e controllati particolareggiatamente come è possibile
fare con un testo quale Omero. Per la precisione, i restauri-
sono stati due: il primo, effettuato qualche anno fa nella Bi-
blioteca Medicea Laurenziana (dove è conservato il papiro) dal
prof. Filippo Di Benedetto, ha condotto al recupero di alcuni
•particolari' rimasti a suo tempo inediti; l'altro, realizzato
poi nell'Istituto 'Vitelli', ha mirato principalmente a una s!
stemazione dei frammenti capace di rispecchiare - per quanto è
ancora possibile - l'effettivo stato di ciò che resta delle p~
gine del codice papiraceo. Tra l'altro, si sono cosi potute d~
terminare con maggior precisione le dimensioni della pagina o-
riginale (vedi sopra). Il materiale è di qualità piuttosto fi
ne, soprattutto se si tien conto dell'epoca tarda cui siamo i~
dotti ad ascriverlo: la lavorazione è buona, anche se non perfe!
ta, e - agli effetti grafici - in pratica mal si distinguono
recto e verso. La provenienza indicata nell'ed.princ., Hermu-
polis, molto probabilmente significa che il reperto fu ricupe-
rato nello scavo di E.Breccia ad Ashmunein del 1908: informa-
zione preziosa, anche questa, per un testo letterario.
PSI 10 contiene parti di versi da vart libri dell'Iliade.
Tenendo conto delle rettificne da apportare ai dati dell'ed.
princ., oggi il quadro è il seguente: Fr.· 1r 8 450-456, 1v 9
485-491; Fr. 2r A 578-581, 2v A 607-610; Fr. 3v A 611-614,
616-619, 4V A 626?-641 (mancava A 639, aggiunto poi nell'
interlinea) (+ 645-647 ripetuti nel margine inferiore). 3r
A 642-645. 647-650 (+ 648-649 ripetuti nel margine superiore),
4r A 659-672; Fr. sv M 3-16 (+ 28 ripetuto nel margine su-
periore), 6v M 23-33 (mancava M 27, aggiunto poi nell'in-

51
terlinea), 5r M 34-47, 6r M 53-63; Fr. 6bis r M 68-73,
6 bis v M 100-105: Fr. 7v M 135-140, _7r M 165-170; Fr. 8v
N 751-780, Sr N 786-813 (manca N 800).
Dallo stato di conservazione, cne in qualcne grado corri
sponde allo stato di reperimento, si ricava che ad Ashmunein
fu ritrovato (e forse fu a suo tempo •gettato') un gruppo di
fogli ormai squinternati che, piegati diagonalmente su sestes
si, perdettero le parti più esposte superiormente e inferior-
mente e lungo i margini liberi. Sicché oggi PSI 10 presenta,
ad eccezione di un foglio (che sarà stato quello più interno
e protetto), grosse lacune in settori sovrapponibili dei fo-
gli, in alto o in basso a seconda della posizione relativa.
In base all'indicazione del numero di pagina in Fr. 3v, Jr,
5v, abbiamo presumibilmente resti delle pagine 115-116, 179-
180, 181-182, 189-190, 191-192, 193-194 e 229-230. Questo si-
gnificacne forse, sullo scavo, sono stati trascurati pezzi
minori provenienti in parte da pagine intermedie 10 •
Come informava già l'ed.erinc., esiste dunque una nume-
razione delle pagine apposta nel margine superiore di Fr. 3v,
3r, e 5v, ove sono leggibili rispettivamente i numeri Pff«,
pn~, pnt.Teresa Lodi aveva, di conseguenza, calcolato che il
codice contenesse i libri III e seguenti dell'Iliade: la stes
11
sa cosa ripete Ohly , senza notizia di un fatto importante,-
cne cioè la numerazione non solo è chiaramente tracciata con
altro inchiostro, ma è di una mano (m2) molto meno accurata
e calligrafica di quella che ha scritto il testo. Sono gros-
se lettere chiuse sopra e sotto tr.a linee cne (in due casi)
sono state tracciate in due tempi, come se la prima parte de!
la cifra fosse stata scritta un momento prima delle 'unità•.
L inchiostro
1
è grigiastro, e non rossiccio come in tutto il
testo. Riprenderemo l'argomento tra poco, dopo aver discusso
di altri segni (o cifre) che compaiono nel margine inferiore
di alcune pagine (non di Fr. 8v e r), e cne nanno attirato 11
attenzione di [urt Ohly. Anche per il nostro seminario, come
per Only, era stato ovvio saggiare la possibilità di una lettu
ra diversa da quella insoddisfacente data dall'ed.princ., e
precisamente controllare se non fosse lambda il segno letto
come delta dalla Lodi in Fr. 2r, 4v, 4r (ma seguito apparen-
temente da altri segni): diciamo subito che i risultati non
sono stati risolutivi. L'analisi di Only aveva certamente
tentato la via più ragionevole, e malvolentieri ce ne dobbia

52
mo discostare. Egli infatti intendeva tali •segni' come cifre
sticometriche, indicanti quanti versi comparivano in ciascuna
pagina. Ha le sue considerazioni sulla numerazione delle pag!
ne sono viziate da un'informazione imperfetta: Only non pot~
va sapere cne le cifre sono state tracciate tutte in unamanie
ra molto inadatta alla solenne apparenza complessiva del codi
ce; e questo è per noi indizio di intervento seriore. D'altra
parte, i segni nel margine superiore'e quelli nel margine in
feriore sono stati tracciati più o meno nello stesso tempo,
con lo stesso inchiostro e, direi, dalla stessa mano (cneperò
è stata molto più accurata nel margine superiore e nel tracci
are la lettera I sul margine inferiore di Fr. 2v, che non nel
resto). Only non poteva sapere cne la numerazione delle pagi-
ne che ora si legge è una seconda numerazione, mentre quella
originale risulta cancellata, dilavata. La prima numerazione
si trovava, come spesso in questa epoca, sul margine superio-
re verso l'esterno della pagina; la nuov~ numerazione è inve-
ce collocata più o meno al centro del margine. Se ne deduce
che il nostro codice, al tempo della seconda numerazione, era
uno spezzone di uno splendido libro che, col passare degli an
ni, e con l'uso, aveva perduto alcuni quaderni iniziali, men-
tre qualche altro foglio sarà stato danneggiato; sicché chi
si preoccupò di recuperarlo lo fece allo scopo di evitare una
grossa spesa, utilizzando un codice bellissimo ma •scompleto•
dedicandogli qualche cura per riassestarlo alla meglio. Ne
consegue cne non si può adesso concordare con l'Ohly circa
l'interpretazione più importante, quella storico-culturale,
per cui egli scorgeva nel codice svariate tracce di un 11 li-
terarisch gebildeter Emendator": si tratta invece di tracce
di un più tardo lettore. solo limitatamente "literarisch ge-
bildet". La nuova numerazione fu apposta per comodo. I segni
sul margine inferiore (che quasi in ogni caso risultano ritoc
cati in modo da essere trasformati in disegnini, diciamo cosi,
esornativi), non costantemente presenti, non rispondono neppu
re All'interpretazione dell'Only. Il I di Fr. 2v non può es-
sere integrato in K8, come Ohly suggeriva, perché il papiro
è qui ben conservato né reca tracce di altra lettera (e nepp~
re delle linee sopra e sotto l'eventuale cifra ora caduta, che
sono invece un uso coerente del nostro postillatore). Era cer
to una serie di segni meno importanti, che non rispettano ne-
anche uniformità di modulo, se il I ha dimensioni assai supe-

53
riori alle altre lettere, A o A che siano. Anzi, se è A il
segno di Fr. 4V, non ci sembra che lo sia (o meglio che lo fos
se originariamente) quello di Fr. 4r. Si era pensato anche -
con la Lodi - a 'segnature• di quaderni; ma neppure questa iP2
tesi è, ora come ora, verosimile ed accettabile12.
Quanto alla struttura del codice (e alla disposizione re-
ciproca dei recto e dei verso~, ci pare che dalla successione
delle pagine 179/180-181/182 1 uguale a r/v-v/r, e ancor più da
quella delle pagine 189/190-191/192-193/194 uguale a v/r-r/v-
v/r, sia possibile dedurre che il codice era costituito da qua-
ternioni in cui i fogli erano disposti in modo da avere il ver-
so all'esterno e da presentare, a libro aperto, recto-recto, o
rispettivamente verso-verso, nelle due pagine affiancate. In
questo caso, il codice, rimasto mutilo, probabilmente si apri-
va con un quaternione (o con un bifolio) e non con una •carta',
e l'incipit del III libro dell'Iliade poteva anche non corri-
spondere perfettamente con la prima pagina superstite. Ad es.
la pagina 181 ( pna) sarebbe stata duviue la pagina di centro,
sulla destra, del quaternione 177-184 •
E' caso abbastanza frequente che il testo dei poemi omeri
ci sia suddiviso in diversi tomi: ed è relativamente inconsue-
ta la presenza di resti di pagine originarie da un unico tomo
comprendente sia i primi canti dell'Iliade, sia il XIII. Spes-
so si può accertare che i tomi erano stati almeno 2 (cfr. PSI
1298 15 ) o 3 (cfr. PMorgan, con i canti cosi distribuiti: I-X,
1
XI-XVI, XVII-XXIV 6) o 4 (lo stesso PMorgan, con i canti cosi
distribuiti: I-V, VI-X, XI-XVI, XVII-XXIV 17 ). Nel nostro caso
c'è una qualche possibilità che l'ultimo foglio superstite pro
venga in realtà da un II tomo.
Altro fatto da porre in rilievo è che i versi ripetuti nei
margini non sono stati scritti né dalla prima mano né dalla ma
no cne ha apposto la numerazione. Molto diversa risulta cosi
l'incidenza di questo elemento sulla storia del nostro codice.
e - non sembri troppo strano - in generale sulla storia della
cultura tarda in Egitto. Possiamo ora dire che chi ha utilizza
to il codice ricomposto (il vero 'lettore•) si è compiaciuto
non solo di inserire versi tralasciati dallo scriba originale,
ma ancne di ricopiare sui margini versi già presenti nel libro,
e questo senza introdurre varianti per noi palesi. Riassumendo,
direi dunque che il libraio •antiquario' ha provveduto a rinu-
merare le pagine, ha fatto altri segni sui margini inferiori di

54
alcuni fogli, forse allo scopo di riordinare quaderni sfascico
lati, e na rifatto la legatura. Il successivo proprietario-'le!
tore' 10 ha poi utilizzato ai propri fini: non si può escludere
cne lo scopo della ricopiatura di alcuni versi nei margini fos-
se quello di disporre con maggiore immediatezza di un passo in-
teressante, o quello di meglio fissarlo nella memoria. L'in-
chiostro del 'lettore• (m3) è nuovamente di colore rossiccio 18 ,
e la scrittura ha caratteri veramente tardi (fine VI sec.-ini-
zio VII) 19 •
Per la costituzione del testo omerico, PSI 10 è un testi-
mone di scarso rilievo nel quadro generale della tradizione; ma,
nell'àmbito dell'analisi che stiamo conducendo, val la pena di
soffermarci su una selezione della casistica dei dati filologi-
ci che ne ricaviamo.
Il tipo di scrittura adottato, la forma e le dimensioni
stesse del codice ci suggeriscono un libro non destinato in o-
rigine alla lettura critica, bensi inteso ad una presentazione
elegante, creato (o dobbiamo dire importato?) per quell'ambien
te di amministratori e di giuristi che è ben noto per la zona
di Hermupolis e di Antinoupolis in epoca bizantina.
Abbiamo detto sopra di tre versi omessi dall'amanuense:
resta da precisare che non si tratta di luoghi sospetti nella
tradizione, sicché le maggiori probabilità sono per l'omissio
ne involontaria 20 : tuttavia dagli scholia risulta che accanto
a A 639 doveva trovarsi un segno diacritico che p~ò aver
tratto in inganno qualche copista facendo pensare ad un'atete
si, davvero poco ragionevole. Dei tre versi, solo N 800 non
risulta reintegrato successivamente nel testo, e sembra esser
caduto per omeoteleuto.
Non mancano, sparsi qua e là, errori di grafia di varia
origine: segnaliamo solo, a titolo di conferma dell'impressio
ne generale sopra espressa, la lettura ]KTHTI(per alx~~L a-
Fr. 5v {M 8) che difficilmente nasconde una variante, più o
meno banale; EnLc]XEIO a Fr. 4r (A668) che è dovuta al man-
cato completamento della lettera P; p]POOAOiro a Fr. 8r ( N
802) con omissione del T. Di diverso interesse sono forse il
IlPYMNH!YCIN a Fr. 8v (N 762) dove l' <if è statoJnserito per
influsso delvT)VCLv cne precede nel verso; l'Al1AAM2N e il
8EI:rfl a Fr. 6v (~ 24 e 26), errori davvero banali corretti da
m3; o l' ANOAE8PY a Fr. Bv (N 761) ove l' o sovrapposto non
è stato sufficiente a recuperare il corretto avOÀÉ&pov~ .L'er

55
rare più curioso e significativo è forse ~p]EAAICTOC a Fr. 1v
(8 488): hapax che l'amanuense non si dà cura di comprendere
nella sua formazione (nonostante gli omerici !-ÀÀLC~oc , noÀv-
ÀÀLc~oc ), non ignoto peraltro al suo contemporaneo Macedonie
(AP V 270) che ne ricava un avverbio. Gli scholia vetera (II
380 Erbse) non commentano la forma, cne sembra ovvia, ma solo
il significato; mentre Aristonico (p. 150 Friedl&nder) spiega
la diplè al verso o~L ~à ~pCa Ént nX~tovc.
Ci sono poi delle •varianti' che tradiscono ancora la ba
nalizzazione: ci limitiamo a tre esempi. Fr. 4v (A 629) xua]NQ
nEZON per xuav61tE/;av , è presente anche in due codici del Lud
wich (uno è il Paris. 2766 (yb) col quale il pap. na altri pun
ti di contatto) e in AP V 59 (Rufino), dove il Palat. 23 ha pe
rò la forma -ntl;a • Cfr. anche xaXxt6ntCoc in AP IX 140 -
(Claudiano), dove il Palat. 23 ha ancora -ntCa! Inetà bizanti
na dunque l'aggettivo è di regola sentito a due terminazioni?
A Fr. 4r (A672)'30T)Àac1.]HC : per il '30T)ÀacLT}di alcuni codi-
ci, che è aristarcheo. Hapax omerico, in AP VII 626 la parola
ritorna (al plurale) con significato parzialmente modificato.
D'altro canto, in Omero è normale aµ,C col dativo (Chantraine,
Synt., p. 87); è eccezionale (n 825) aµ,C col genitivo. Quindi
'30T}À«CLT)c, che da ciµ,C è retto, viene scritto in molti codi
ci come dativo plurale { '30T)ÀacC~c). Da notare che gli scholia
vetera (III 256 Erbse) sottolineano espressamente l'adozione
del singolare ( ÉvLx~c) da parte di Aristarco. Infine, in Fr.
7v (M ·139)IAAMENON è int~odotto per scambio (contro la metrica)
col nome del figlio di Ares che compare due volte, assieme al
fratello Askalaphos, in precedenti libri dell'Iliade.
Vere varianti, di secondaria importanza, ricorrono in Fr.
1r ( 8 454), dove sembra di capire che due lezioni erano regi-
strate nel testo una accanto all'altra (non possiamo escludere
che la prima fosse stata espunta con segni posti al di sotto
delle lettere e ormai scomparsi in una lacuna del papiro): in
Fr. 2v ( A 608) con TQMQ ( inteso in crasi, non essendo segnato
l'apostrofo come nei codd. QYZ del Ludwich), e due versi sotto
{A 610) con ANEKTQC(se è una vera variante, come è probabile,
attestata solamente dal Laur. 32,15): in Fr. 5v (M 4) dove CXH
CEIN risulta da correzione (m3 ?), senza che sia possibile diri
quale fosse la lezione precedente; in Fr. 6v (M 31) e Fr. 8r
(N 813).
Un vezzo che PSI 10 condivide con altri papiri dell'epoca
è quello dell'uso improprio dell'apostrofo, che viene a separ!
re sillabe omografe di voèaboli, come in EN8'A6(E), o a segna-
lare un'elisione là dove questa non esiste, come in fine di
AYTAP. Più interessanti, in que~to àmbito, sono i segni margi
nali cne compaiono a fianco di A 612 (Fr. 3v), A643 (Fr.3r!
A 663 {Fr. 4r) e N 799 (Fr. 8r). Nel primo caso abbiamo la te
stimonianza di Aristonico (p. 199) che spiegava la presenza di
una diplè con l'uso di un termine ge?erico per lo specifico.
Nel secondo e terzo, sul margine di PSI 10 c'è un segno diver-
so da quello precedente: nell'uno e nell'altro caso potrebbe in
tal modo venie segnalata la ripresa di un'espressione formula-
re ricorrente all'interno dello stesso libro. Per N 799 non è
più accertabile se si trattasse di un segno identico agli ulti
mi, o di una breve paragraphos {nel verso ricorre un hapax).
Genericamente, l'uso di questi segni, più che a interessi cri-
tici, sembra riferibile a interessi retorici.
Non mancherebbero altri argomenti filologici, ma ci sem-
bra di aver già protratto questa analisi esemplificativa. Col
risul~ato, speriamo, di presentare un saggio dell'impostazione
che riteniamo opportuno dare alla nostra raccolta di tavole P!
leografiche: ora attendiamo l'opinione e la collaborazione dei
colleghi.

1 11 concetto di 'funzione' della scrittura è stato posto

da A.Petrucci, Scrittura e libro nell'Italia altomedievale, in
Studi medievali, 3a ser., 10 ,1969), pp. 157-159.
2Them., Orat. VI, 71c; Lib., ~- 668.
3E.A.Lowe, Greek Symptoms in a Sixth-Century Manuscript
of St.Augustine andina Group of Latin Legal Manuscripts, in
Didascaliae: Studies in Honor of Anselm H.Albareda, ed. by s.
Prete, New York 1961, pp. 279-289 (rist. in E.A.Love, Palaeo-
grapnical Papers 1907-1965, II, Oxford 1972, pp. 466-474).
4E.G.Turner, Some çuestions about the Typology of theCo-
dex, in Akten des XIII. Internationalen Papyrologenkongresses
hrsg. v. E.Iiessling und H.A.Rupprecht, HUnchen 1974, p. 429.
5s.Hernmerdinger, Les lettres latines à constantinople
jusqu'à Justinien, in Byzantinische Forschungen, 1 (1966), p.
177 s.

57
 6
sui rapporti tra cultura greca e cultura latina nell'O
riente della prima età bizantina si veda l'ottimo lavoro di G.
Dagron, Aux origines d~ la civilisation byzantine: langue de
culture et langue d'Etat, in Revue historigue, 241 (1969), pp.
23-56 ( arole citate precisamente p. 40).
7 Le testimonianze di Libanio sono raccolte e discusse da
A.-J.Festugière, Antioche paienne et chrétienne. Libanius, Chry-
sostome et les moines de Syrie, Paris 1959, p. 92.
BA.Momigliano, Gli Anicii e la storiografia latina del
VI sec. d.C., in A.Momigliano, secondo contributo alla storia
degli studi classici, Roma 1960, pp. 240-242.
9Morta nel 1971. Vedi M.Manfredi, in Atene e Roma, 5a
ser~, 17 (1972), pp. 47-48.
10La nuova trascrizione di tutto il papiro, ormai neces-
saria indipendentemente dalle presenti considerazioni, sarà
pubblicata in Museum Philologum Londiniense corredata di note
critiche complementari.
11stichometrische Untersuchungen, Leipzig 1928, p. 42.
12cavallo aveva avanzato l'ipotesi che si potesse even-
tualmente trattare di indicazioni di segnature di tipo •occi-
dentale'.
13che potrebbero aver fatto parte dello stesso foglio.
14ouesto sistema di composizione dei fascicoli corri-
sponde bene all'eleganza formale della scrittura. Può avere
qualche significato in merito alla questione della provenie~
za costantinopolitana?
15Nonostante W.Lameere, Aperçus de paléographie homéri-
gue, Paris-Bruxelles 1960, p. 17Q s.
16Ed. Wilamowitz-Plaumann, in Sitzb.Ak.Wiss.Berlin, 53
(1912), pp. 1198-1219.
17secondo una proposta di W.Lameere, op.cit., p. 171.
18Alcune lettere di M 28 (Fr. 5v) sono state ripassate.
probabilmente con lo stesso inchiostro nero con cui è stato
tracciato anche un accento su una parola di quel verso.
19che i versi siano stati scritti dopo la numerazione
è evidente dal modo in cui si interrompono nei punti del mar-
gine in cui compaiono le cifre (in inchiostro grigiastro).
20cfr. G.M.Bolling, The Latest Expansions of the Iliad,
in AJP 37 (1916), pp. 21-22.
 THEODISOP BPAGATHUS
THI QIORALFLAUTIST:
SOIIBDOCUIENTARY
BVIDINCIFORDRAMATIC
llPRESENTATION
IN ROIIAN
EGYPT
tb;yrhynchua inv. }1.4B1 J/H(4-5 )a 15.0 x 16.8 om Pirat/Seoond Century

by W. B. H. Cookle
Plate XV
The text bare preaented ia an unpublished document f'rom Oxyreynchua,
belonging to the Egypt Bxploration Society. It auppliea ev1da1.oe for
some type of dramatic performance, whether ot tragedy, comedy, mime or
ditl\}'ramb, of worlca whose title■ are f•iliar from the Claaaioal period.
Thia text ia written in two columns in a cursive hand over a palimpaeated
document ot the first or second omtury A.D. The washing and aorapin&-
oft ot the original wr1 ting waa vary badly done, and the p113111ent to
Antoniua in the lower lett hand of the papynaa ia a aurv ival t'rom the
first text. Ite traoea atill appear all over the aurfaoe and provide
an additional hasard in reading, espeoia"3 in the aeoond column, 11hich
ia singularly ill-written. Thie text appears by permiaaion of the Egypt
bploration Society. It will be re-published in &le course in The
OxYrb.YnohuaPafX!1:. -

Column I
1 4 na.yu.eov,;ovxo) ~ µ
&c.6(a.t) 'hatya.6ou 'fOU xop(Bv)>..(ou)
2 6POf.JM<Ol,Is' 6pat-tQ'ION )
3 Uft.,tUAT)C ) 1
}lC.,tU)..T)C ?
4- ~f
6T),· c)
6TJ\004,&&Co.(
0

5 a.v6pc,-p •.b6payu»{ou)
6 Xuex-cE Av~(pcuv)~B~,;op(oc)
7 µT}f>e
C.TjC ITj6£LT)C
8 0.\1"U O'dJ 'All 'f C.OltT)C

9 /'CO.U'fOU -
o.&.t.
µ

5 'b6poyvv(ov) vel 'AY6poyv1,1(w.,)

59
Column II
1 CM!>At
f[. let~(
2 J ( J [
3 a,6a., )l
~WKOU •6a.t l:q.~ov )[
4 ca&.,6~01>'tpl[ &p(~'t,xa.L) &,6(~,) 'tOI 'tpa.(yw,)6(ou)(
C0\00.L
5 y [ 'i [
[ ) [

6 ••••• ~0~\! 'tOU'tp8.[

0 ••••• vo~~~-'tou 'tpa.("tW,)6(oU)[
7 ___ ,[§] [ _......, (

8 (bKffi'rOoXOpa.l~ lkl(~)yuX(ou)'tol xopa.uX(ov)~

• •
9 t .t .ll[ ]ClMObl[i[
6
4,•• [ ]cw c:»,6a.,(
10 l [ -------9 (
3 ~co,wv tortaaae in .q.~v- 4 6p(~'t,xa.i) artioula•it 0.1. Pearl
oorreotum diapexit
Cll'ltOV
E.G. Turner
6 ~\f1diapexit I.G. Turner
8 ~ • aoriptura inferiont
~~ 1 ••• n~c~,,,~(ov)
41apexit B.G. Turner

Col.I 'Oclea ot Bpagathua the ohoral-tlautiat, 4.0; from playa 6 1 troa

Hypaipyle 6 1 troa Deidalleia, fro■ the Hermaphrodite, trom the
Ransoming ot Hector, tro■ Kedea, tr011 Antiope; --- equala
odea ot hia own (or "the aaater'a") 40.'

Col.TI 'Odea••••••• 2; - Odea of Cuopua 2; - Dramatic odea, Odea

ot the tragic aotor - 3; - •••••••••• of the tragio actor -
total 10 (altered t'roa •14•); - ot Pa(a)phyl(ua) the choral
tl.autiat 6; ••·••••••• odea (4]. 4 -.'

Col.I 1 2 • •6(a.i) ia guaranteed by 1.9 below and ia written in full

in col.II 11.1,3 and 4.

60
 xo): A part O'f xopa,vA't( aeema to be the only way to resolTe
the oontraotion. The detini tion of Liddell and Soott is
'one who aoooapaniea the ohorua on the flute•. The word 11
written more extenaiveq in col.II 1.8. Choraulai are
attested in I.G. VII 1773 1.27 troa Theapiae in the 2nd century
A.D.and in c.r,G, 1719 (11.2,~ and 5), and 1720 (11.12,13 and
15) tro11 Boiotian Thebes.
Their tunotion ia br1ef'l¥ diaouaaed by G.M. Sitakia,
Studies in the History at Hellenistic Dr- PP• 78 and 121, who
tentatively uaociatea the• with the performance at the dithy-
raab, but 6~cw (1.2 intra) auggeata aome fona ot dramatic
pertormanoe. Dr. B.J. Jory ot the Univerai ty at Weatern
Australia haa pointed out to• that 1n the Roman.period the
oboraulia gradually aaauaea a dramatic role. The clearest
evidence ot thia 1a in Dioaedea: Ara Grammtica III §1+911.29ft.
in wlume I ot Jteil: Gr .... tici Latini, where it aaya that ill
ooaedy 'Quando enim oborua oanebat,ahorioia tibiis, id eat
ohoraulicia, ,rtitex oonoinebat, in oantico aut• pyth&ulicia
reaponaabat. '\ 1 J

2 6~ t' The aix titlea follow, listed in the genitive,

dependent on ~6(a.i.) in 1.1.

~ Preau-.bly
3 ut"11:0A11c 6 odea.

7 µT}6eu1c The hyper-Ionic fora is somewhat unusual in a doou-

11ent ~ thia period. It ia perhaps 1ntluenced by epic or ia
the title ot an epio rem. tation. The Attic fol"ll lh]6c,a.
al terna tea w1th the Ionic ITj6ch'P' in Cteaiaa ot Cnidoa, quoted
troa Cephallon, a oont•porary ot Hadrit,9' in the Chrono:5x:aphia
ot Georgiua Syncellua §316,14 - §317,2.~~ Herodotus uaea the
Ionio foma throuahout. The alternation at the Ionio and
Attic fOl'lla ia diacuaaed in A. Meineke: Analecta Alexandrina
p.46, and C.A. Lebeck: Patbologl.ae Graeci Semonis neaenta II
p.14..

Col.II 1 f[. ]q~ A peraonal naae in the genitiTe, perhaps written

with contraction ie probably expected here on the model ot
col.I 1.1, and of 1.3 below. or phi theN ia an upper left
hand cUMe and paz-t of the Tertical, but the vertical could be
a cancelling atroke. Iota ie the lower halt of a Tertioal.
The lower halt of a aeoond vertical tollowa. Possibly both
IIM\Y'be combined aa the ic.er halt ot a pi. I have not found
a aatiafaotory name or word to tit here.
} 'Xq,'!CIJJtOUll'ollowin& the parallel of 'kayo&ov in col.I 1.1,
xq.~ou here ia probably a peraonal name rather than the town
15 mi lea to the eaat of Alexandria, now called Abouldr, which

6I
 had a t&110ua Serapeum. It atana. at the Canopio ■outb of the
Nile and waa reputedly named &tter the ateeraaan ot Kenelaua,
who waa killed there by the bi ta of a an.aka. Strabo XVII 1 , 17
doaa however refer to the orowd of people trom Alexandria who
come down by oanal to the public feativala. -dca. ya.p 1JJ,£pa.
mi
mca. YU( AAT)8uu ._ [.,.iv] ~v 'l'Ol C ,u.o,QpLOH 'XCL'(O.UAoHfvcw 'XCLL
xo.-ioPXou~vw µe-ra.
'tfic ,cxcifl)c 4.xoAa.da.c, xa.i. c!v6piw ml yu"a.,-
xiw. Nor doea it aee ■ to be the star Canopue, which is
a. Carinae, the second brightest atar 1n the aky.

4 &Comparecol.I 1.1.
'fov'fp8[ Aa no Greek ,rord ia round beginnin& 'fpa.6(), thia must,
I think, be resolved aa 'l'p<l.("'((l)t.)6(oi). The meaning ia probably
'tragic actor' (L.s.J. a.v. II), the uaual aenae in the Roun
period. Thia fora ~ oontraoti.on by auape1U1ion is unc011111on,
but reoura in 1.6 below. Prom the ~th century B.C., 'tpa,yw,66c
haa the meaning of 'tr~io actCll"' and is usually diatinguiahed
aa the protagonist in old flaya, whereas the protagonist in a
new plq ia alwaya called tntoxpuT)C (Pickard-Cambridge: Peativala 2
p.129). By the 2nd oen'lury A.D. the supporting aotora to a
'l'f)O-l"IM,6oc were called fntoxpt.'tO.L.
or XCIIIJU>'6oC

6 •••• .''0~\9. The tirat tive letters aurrl.Ye only aa damaged

feet. In the damq:ed 9tq.the tirat three letters are very
oddly famed. They appear to have the upper parta inclined
to the left. The readinga are thoae of Protesaor Turner. The
lett aide of § ia vertioal and !-9!ia a poaa1ble reading. Por
a long time I took the upper half ot ~ to be a auperlinear delta
with ita apex going through the bar between 11..5 and 6. The
duotua lltterarWI ia not against thia.
GL
9 to6[&D The delta and auperacript a., are written over the araaed
4elta. The later 1a perhaps a numeral, which waa re-written
1n the line below.

We h&Ye then 1n Column I an entry for 4,0 odes of lpagathua the choral-
flute player from 6 playa. The firet, 'ytt.1tUAT)C
111 the title of a tra-
ged3 by Euripidea, Aeaohylua and Cleaenetua (Snell: Tra5. Graec. Fry. &..
T4). Hypaipyle ia the dauahter of Kina Thoas of Lemnoa and grand-daughter
of Dionyaua. After the slaughter at their huabanda by the Lemnian women,
ahe became queen and married Jaaon when the Argonauts called on the way to
Colohia, aa related in Apolloniua Rhodiua: Argonautioa I 607-914. Her
aubaequent adventures in exile at Nemea in the Argolid in servitude as the
nurae ot Archemorua, the baby-aon of the priest-king Lyourgua, are the
subject ot lu.ripidea' play. Lucian: De Saltatione §r+.5,duacuesing the
tbeaea of pantomime, aaya XO.L 'tQ. '" Ncµia.L Q ~ 'Y'tL1tUAT1 xa.t , Apxcµopoc,
ff!L l,PXTl("'JL l'"Tf.lOV£Uµa.'(Q.
6."a."l"'X4LO'l'Q."CQ .

62
 The 1eoond title, Aftr~Ca.(c), ref'era to the daughter or Lyoomedea,
llng or Soyros, and mother of' Neoptolemua ~.7 Achilles. This ia not the
title at a known traged3 or oo•dy, but Deidameia ia probably a apealcill8
part in :Buripidea • Soytioi and poad. bly in Sophoolea • Scyrioi.

Howner, 1n 1955, Proteaaora Bitrem and Amundsen publlahed in

Szmbolae Oaloeneea m pp.1-87 Oslo papyrus im .14-1}A, wr1 tten in a acript
dating o. A. D. 80- A. D. 120. Thie ia an anapaeatio narrative monologue,
supplied with a musical score. It ia prob'ably of Hellenietio date, and
perhaps tram an anthology ot dramatic scores. In it, a peraon of lower
aooi&l standing deaoribes to Deidueia an a.»o6oc of Achilles rising fro■
the realm ot Hadea to fru.atrate a murderous attempt on the part of the
TroJan wom111.

On pp.26-30 of their article, Proteeaore litre■ and Allundaen oite

eTidenoe tor the Dionyaiao Artiata of the lloaan period g1vin& eele oted
atar-tuma troa famous pla,ya. These are oalled c~t6elte,c or &xpoa.cc,c.
They alao quote an inaaription from the Isthmus of the 2nd cmtury A.D.,
where the llilesiana honour G&iua Aeliua Thelliaon, who haa hiuelt aet to
■uaio, (t,LCA.01t0L11CO.»"m
ia the word(ujd), trqeclies by Buripidea and
Sophoolea and noraoi by Timotheua. 3

Thie, perhapa, ia the kind of interpretation to be giTen to ct,oo.,

in the present text. Though auaical aoores oompoaed for the lyrio
paaaagea ot each play seem alao poaeible.

1
The title in 1.5 1e cw6poyl • 'A»6poyu»(ou) or 'Avbpoyv»(cw).
AY6poyu»oc ia the name of' a New Comedyplay by Menander, alternatively
known aa the Kp,ic. 'A»opoyih,a., ia an Old Comedy play by lupolla, other-
wise known aa the 'Ac'tpa.'tcv'to,.

Line 6 baa A6~) wlx'top(oc). The 'ranaoming of Hector' from

Book XXIV of the Iliad provides the alternative title to Aeachylua'
3rl.'giana. A(l "Bx-iopocA.u'tpa. ia alao atteated tor Dionyaius in J68 B.C.
• P• 794) • (4-J
'Medea' ia a tragic title for Euripides Biotue (If.
p.828),
2
Carcinua (N • p. 798), Dicaeogenea (ff2. P• n5tDiogenes of Sinope (N2 •
f-807), Neophron (N2. p.729), Buripidea minor (Suidaa) and Theodoridee
{Snell: Trag. Graec. Prag. 78A ). It ia the title of' an Old Comedy by
Cantherua, Deinolochua and lpicharmua; lliddle Co11ediea by Euboulua and
Strattia, and a NewComedy by Antipha.nea. Lucian at Suoaata alao givea
the story of Kedea aa a theme for pantomime in the De Saltatione §i.,o.
In 1.8 oomea the laat title 'A»-i1.07t11c. Antiope, daughter of Nyoteua,
waa raped by Zeua diagu.iaed aa a satyr, and waa then married to Bpopeua
of Sioyon. Her uncle Lyous killed Epopeua and carried her into captivity.
On the way back to Thebes she gave birth to twine at Eleutherae, who were
expoaed,but found by a neatherd, He named the.m Zetheua and Amphion.

63
Subsequently the sona revenged their ■other by ldll.iq Lyoue and D1roe,
who bad imprisGDed ~er. The ~b provides the subject tor the Parneae
Bull, now in the Naplee lluaeua.t5J Buripidee wrote a trapc5¥ of thia
title, and a Kiddle Comed,y by Ruboulua ia also ao naed.

The genre ot the odee and the nature ot the perfor.anoe are unaer-
tain. I augeated in diaousaing the Oalo papyrua w1th a9 fD&paeatic
monologue addreaa1J18 Deidameia, which haa a 11Uaioal acore~6J, that atar-
turna by the Dionysiao Artlata, known aa &1u6el~uc, oould be inTolTed.
A. aillilar aonody with ■uaioal score la Oxyrhynchua Papyrus xx.vn2.lt-36.

Profeaaor Turner baa augeated( 7 ) that the alphabetic notation tor

actors in Ox;yrbynchua Papyrua XXVII 2.lt-58ot lluripidea' CNaphontea, wbioh
••• copied in thl 3rd century A. D. , may be an acting copy w1th exoerpta
far the atage. If the t1.tlea are taken to be thoae cl five tr-agedlea
and one ccmed_y, a number ot between aix and aeven choral paaaagea per
play to make the total ot forty wculd be reaaonable. But it the genre
ia dithyramb or pantomime, ao• entirely different interpretation ia
poasl.ble.

In the late traged,y teatur:lng Priaa, Caaaandra and De1phobua r,ib-

liahed by Dr. R..A. Colee aa Oxyrh.ynohua Papyrws XXXVI27Jt.6, aeven (lj),6a.£
are ■ariced in the text in the apace ot }3 linea in a aingle oolumn.
They would have to be Yery abort, like the modern •roll of druaa oN'-etage'
tor the aenae ot the text not to be loet in performance.

The persona mentioned in thia text, lpacathua the choraulia, Canopua,

the tragic actor whoae name la dam&ged, and Paaphylua the ohoraulia,
oannot, I thillk, be identified with 81JY certainty. If we oonaider thia
to be a list of r6lea plqed or a liat of muaical aoorea, perhaps from a
library, the artiste may belo~ to a period betore thia dooument waa
penned.

The onl3r Epagathua, whom.I have found, who haa at.age connectiona, ie
Claudius lpagathua, who waa a member of an embaaey ot Dionyeiac Artiata
to the E:aparor Claudiua in A.D. 4,2. The grant of favours to the guild
by Augustus, oonti:rmed by Claudius, 1a a1 ted in a document of admisaion
of Herminua, a boxer fro ■ Heraopolia, P.Bercl. IV 1074,. Herminue waa
ad.mitted to
in A..D. 275.
Nn ,uild ot Athletea and DiOl\)'aiac Artiata at Olcyrhynchua

I have found no peraon called Canopua ri th atage oomeotiona 1n

O'Connor's ty~aopographia Hiatrionum Graecor'lm, nor in Iride Parenti'•
supplement.

A Paaphilua ia comic poet and Yiotor at the Lenaia circa 2}5 B. c.

in .Lia. ll 9n d" col.iii 1.6.
 The naM in oal.II 1.1 and the tragic actor in col.II 1.6 re•in
unaolTed.

Such, then, ia thia aoat tantaliain& text, which ra:1.••• aany que ■-
tion.e. Perhapa the DOat certain reaul t ia to connect the pla,y1.a.g ot
the ohoraulia wl th Of)Of,&Q-W.•

NOTIS
(1) Di011edea: Ara Graamatioa §4.92 ll.10-12 (Keil)• Suetoniua: De
Poetie rr.3 §12 ll.6..a (Reifteraoheid). -

(2) Corpua So.riptorum Hiatoriae Byzantinae: Georgiua Synoellua et

Nioephorua C.P. ex reoenaione Guiliebd. Dindortil. Vol.I.
Bonnae IIDCCCXXIX; • Cephalion: llovco., apud Jacoby: Pr.Gr.Hist.
Vol.2A.9}.P.p.4,4.0, col.II l.22N".; s JIUller: Pr.Hiat.Graeo.
Vol.III p.626; • Cteaiaa: Peraioa Pr.13 {Gilmore).
(3) Art. oit. p.27; s.B.G1 XI 52C; O.Bronneer: Reaperia 22 (1953)
p.192; JC.Latte: lranoa 52 (1954) p.125aqq.
(4-) er. w.Bahler: z.P.11 11 (1973) pp.69-79
(5) Naples lluaeua inv.6002.
(6) P.Oalo inv.14,1} A.
(7) L'Antiguite Claaaigue IXXIl (1963) pp.120-128.
(8) Cf'. the commentary of P.Viereolr: (the editor ot the eclitio
prinoepa. AktenatUoke •• grieohiaohltn-rcaiadlen Vereimreaen.
-
lClio 8 (1908) pp.413-426.

(9) J.B.O'Connor, Chapters in the history of actora and acting in

Ancient Greece, together with a proaopographia hiatrionua
Graeooroa. diaa. Chicago. 1908; !ride Parenti: Per una nuova
edidone della 'ProaoP9M!ph1a Hiatrionum Graeoor,a', Dionieo
XXXV(1961) pp.5-29.
 The disappearance
I
of the dekaprotoi 1n Egypt

SU1111.A.BY

It used to be believed that the toparcb;y gave w9.7 to the pagus

and the dekaprotoi to the praepositi pagi in the period
A.D.30?-10. Subsequently it has been shown that there is strong
evidence pointing to 302 as the year in which dekaprotoi
disappeared. However, the question has been reopened recently
with the suggestion that dekaprotoi survived until at least 304
or 306.
A re-examination of the relevant evidence, in particular
P.Amh. 83, P.Lips. 84, 0.Mich. 908, PSI 18? and 0.Tait 2089,
shows conclusively that dekaprotoi ceased to exist in F,gypt
in 302. The evidence of SB 9098 narrows down the date even
further to between early May and early July 302.
~ should the disappearance be in this year and at this
point in the year? Is there any connection with the fact that
at a later period the indiction year in Egypt is kn.own to have
begun at precisely this time du.ring the year? Note too that the
fifteen-year indiction-cycle, which began in 312, was preceded
by several five-year indiction- or epigraphe-cycles. If we
suppose that these began at a date between late Hay and early
July, we are able to re-date the epigraphe-cycle in such a way
that the disappearance of the dekaprotoi coincides with the end
of one of these cycles and the five-year cycles dovetail exactly
with the later fifteen-year cycles.
J. David Thomas.

[A version of this paper will appear in the Bulletin of the

American Society of Papyrologists.)

66
■uov• rifiea ■ ioni au1 papiro ailan••• dell' .ltheD&l'UIIBnoolliua.
Sergio Daria
tra 1 frm.enti 41 papiri letterari dell' OniTeraitk Cattolica 41
Jlilano,pUbblicat1 di recent• (l),1111 pare che occupi un po ■ to di
rilievo lo acritto anoniao preaentato oon 11 titolo di Athenarwa
lm.ooaiua (2), titolo 11UBPrito dai tratt1 ••••naial.i del oontenu.-
to.L'iDtena ■ -•nto al teato • g::luatifioato dalla riooa problema-
t1oa che •••o propon• • che trova 11 auo nawrale oentro nella i-
dmtif1oasione dell'autore dell'opera.In oooaaione dell'editio
princ•p• 4•1 fraaaenti ritenni neoeaaario aettere in eTidensa le
oonaiderasioni eh• potevano aooo■pagnan 11 teato •t•••o oon og-
pttiva cenessa e oo■ ti'Wire,nel oonteapo,la ■tru.ttura portent•
41 ogni dieoorao auoceeaiTo,al qu.ale qu••t• pa.gin• llirano ponare
1111 oontributo. Ron• queeta la ••4• per riohia■are,nei partioola-
ri,le caratterietiohe ••t•ni• dello aoritto,per le qua].i riaandia-
■o al.la prima etision•1•ara opponuno invece ribadire eh• 11 te-
ato • diatribuito au 6 traamenti,41 upetto diverao aa,oon aiou-
reasa, rioonduoibili a4 ,ma ••4••1- opera,nella qua].• reata ~
oena la aede 4a •••i oooupata.
I pu ■ i,41 -pi••• sutt1oiente a peraettere umotasioni 41 oa-
rattere atiliat1oo-leae1o&l.e, sono due,nell'uno (tr. 4) viene af-
ter.a.to 11 eip.ifioato detenaioan,e dell& preaenu 41 tellietoole
nella lota contro i barbari, ■ ottolineato e tangibilaent• ricono-
aaiuto clacli onori a lui oonoeaai dqli Spar1an1 atee ■ i1nel ae-
oondo (tr. 5+6, ool. III•),• oelebrato l'atteggiaaento ■ agnan1•o
4egl1 ~t•nieei,in ooouion• 4ella oonteaporanea ambuceria 41 A-
leaaadro P1lellmo • degl.1 Sp&rtani.In en.tram.bi 1 cu1,appare
ohiara la eapiente anioolasione 4el periodo,ooat,uJ.to a largo
re ■piro1la rioeroa 4ell'etfetto racgiunge lo aoopo oon la collo-
cuione ohiaatioa 4e1 vocaboli • l'anaonia dell& true, accenma-
ta 4&11&tendensa al.la eJ1 ■1nasione dello iato {)).
La aiounssa 41 ■orittura • la padronansa dei ■essi teOllioi 4el
noatro a.tore traapaiono,in ■iau.ra anoora piu probante,dal perao-
nale rip•na-•nto della font• alla qua.le egli atttnge.Il racocm-
to erodoteo (4) ohe gl.1, 41 gu.14&• oh• gl.1 auggeri■o• 1 telli
4ella rifieaaione,ha una ri•~• apeoiale nella nuova pagina,
atrutturata in una 41verea proepettiva.L'epiao41o di !emiatocle
tra gli Spartani volutamente I propo ■ to ed introdotto con la oura
riohieeta da un avvenimento degno dell& -•iaa coneid erasione,
proprio per la au.a eooezionalita,da notasione quaai oroniatioa
41 tatti ooneesu.iti fatalmente al.la guerra,aaawae 1 oontorni 41
Ticeala eaemplare.
Le riapoate atenieei al •••••aero dei Peraiani •4 agl.1 -buo1a-
tori 41 Spana, ■ ono giuatappoate ed affrontate perch, abbiano 1n
maaaillo grado la oapaoita di rievooare,nella 1111& pienesu, un ■o­
mento non faoilm.ente 4i■entioab11• per digrlita moral•• riochessa
apirituale.
L'•••• approfon41to del l1ngu.acgio IIIIDife ■ ta la 11U& 1nt1■a a4._
rensa agl.111111 leaeioali della proea d'art• attioa, 4a tuoidi4e a
Senofonte,4a Platone ag].i oratori.Kolta part• dei vooaboli,eia
oona14erat1 ieolat-•nte (5) aia 1n neaai di aaa.ggioN oo■pleeaitk,
(6) ■ 1 ritroTa,oon la •t••••
prepusa,eol-•nte negl.1 eorittori
attic1 del IV aecolo • .lnohe nei puei dove piu T1T& • la suggestio-
n• della parola erodotea, l'autore non cliaentioa 41 infor■are la
propria 41s1on• al.la a&8 ■ illa oorrettessa formale.Be aono prova
alouni atteggiamen1i1 cha ertdensiano lo ■ oru.polo per una ooerenaa
stilistioa (7),la felice proprieta 41 illpiego 41 vooaboli oapaci
41 riu81lllere,oon breTitll affioaoe,fraei erodot•• lunpe ed opa-
ohe (8),la jreoi■ a collooasione nella propria atera panioolare
41 peraone (9) • fatti.
La conclu•ione che diaoende dalla aom 41 tali rilievi non pub
••••re ohe una eola11•autore 4el te ■ to eu papiro au.'tua 11 proprio
l1ngu.acgio • la propria educas1one ■ tili ■ tica dalla crultura atti-
ca del IV aecolo a. c. , cha egli mo■ tra 41 rt vere nella .u p1enes-
sa (10).
Stn1itiaa1mo • 11 rapporl:o tra 11 noatro au.tore •4 Brodoto.
Queata.relasione I aooeriabile nei due fr&a111en1ii aaatori,oio,
oWDque 11 teato aia leggibile oon una qualohe oontinuita.
Bel framraento 4 11 brano telliatocleo,pur nel taglio cha r1•pon4e
a4 una nuova legioa narrat1va,tra4iao• la propria 41pen4ensa clal-
la font• (ll),41pendensa oh• dirtene &4.ennte tedeltk al ■odello
nel framaento 5+6.Bello •pasio ooapreao 4alle quattro oolonne,au-
peratiti in Tari& mi ■ura, ■ i ■viluppa 1111 t•- narrativo oh• trova
le proprie radioi nel paeao VIII,140-IX,9 delle Storie 41 Brodo-
to,piu pnoieamente caello ohe prende l'aVTio dalla aabaeceria
41 ilee ■ an4ro 1ilelleno • giunge sino al.la ■ediasione del tegeate
Chileoe preeeo gl.1 efori.La relasion• tra 1 due brani non, ■ olo
di traaparente eridensa per la rarita degli aTVeni■enti narrati
(12),aa anohe per preoi ■ e conaonanse Terbal.1.0o■i la true erodo-
tea 6µcu.xµ.{'l" auv~.tµc:voL (VIII,140 a 4) n.ggeri ■ ce 11
-c'f)c µc\l {Qv 'E)..).~vwv 6µn x11C
4( &xoa'Cl)V4L ( tr. 5+6 II.
5 agg.) ;l' epreeaione µcy~>.a •potcLvov'CWv ,corretta a
,tpo-ccLvoµ.lvou 6' l>.cu&cpCciv (13);11 ooncetto 41 1n41pen-
4enza nell'uno • nell'altro teato • tecnio-•nt• definito con 11
terain• 41 ci u-covoµC a. ( 14) •

68
A que■1:i ri■ contri,u■ olutuaen1:• oeni,ai poaaono agpunpre al.-
cum.al.1:ri,al.1:aaen1:• prob&l:)111,- oOJU1ert"&tiill ccmclisioni laou--
no•• nella quarta 00101111& (15).
La ll&J'T&&ion•4egl.1 onori 1:ribu1:a1:i ctacli Spa.Mani a !elllia1:ocl•
e 4ella duplice -baaoeria a4 .A.1:ene,ri.ene ripreaa 4a Dio4oro (ll,
27-28),a breTe 41atansa. Il paaao ripropone,nel proprio rino Dlll"-
rat1Yo,conta1:ti aolto intere■ aanti •4 1J1:ponU1.1:icon 11 no ■ tro te-
ato • .&noh• in Diodoro,oo■e 11.el papiro,al diacorao diretto 41 Brod.o-
1:o ~ aoatituita la foraa del 4i ■ corao indiretto,nella panicolare
pro•• piana • oont•nu"a 4ell'&111:ore •1oulo,intereaaa1:o al.lo ■vilu,­
po 4ei tatti.I oon.1:atti l•••ioali non 1111Doano,-,a1 41 lk 4e1 ain-
goli vooaboli (16), • aoprattu1:1:o utile rilevare o•n• aoelt• •1:1-
liatiche - oh• aeabnmo dettate 4al ■odello - co■• nella fraae,11-
Ju■1n,mte a tale propoaito,che oontiene la ohia.ra riapoata degl.1
.A.1:enieai agli Spartlllli (17).In quell& atru.ttura atiliatioa 41viene
chiaro 11 npel"IIMIL1:o 4ella e■preaaione erodotea 4a una pane• la
u.roata conaozum.sa oon la tision• del noatro papiro 4all 'al tra.
Dopo queato pu ■o,aarebbe iml.~11• riceroare IIZUllogie perch• 11 pa-
piro • Diodoro prooe4ono lUD&O■trade 4inrae,attratti 4a altri
apun.1:1 eapoa11:1Ti.
Da un 41.aoorao ooa• queato <• l• oaaenasioni aono state oontenu-
t• nei dati ogpt11vi),riaulta 1Dnegab1le nel noatro autore una
faailiaritk ed un uao 1Dnep.b11• di Bro4o1:o,un.no a ■e1:o4o 41 la-
Toro.Del pari aarebb• 41ffioil• rifiutare,iD ■odo oategorico,la
oonoaoensa 41 ano ■ oritto co• 11 noatro,4a pa.rte 41 Diodoro nel
libro XI dalla 1111& Biblioteca. Due rilirri qua ■ti che inoanalano
le noatn inclagin1 e4 oriantano 1 attensione 1 quaai in una UD.ica
clirettrioe.B' un fatto onaai aooertato •4 univerealJHDte oondiVi-
■ o c1agli atorioi oh• fonte degl.1 argoaen1:t greoi dei libri 1'.I-XVI,
25 41 Diodoro, ■ ia eacl1111ivaaent• Bforo (18) il qual.e,a IIU& volta,
ha atl'lltturato la propria opera IIUl.l• notisia di Brodoto (19).B'
pure un 4ato uaolut-•nt• aiou.ro - ill una bio~ia in gran pan•
eTa11eaoenta - quello che oonferma la foraasion• cul"tur&le • ■tili­
atioa 41 Bforo al.la acuola di Iaoorata - in4ipendentemente 4&11a
minra nella qua.le ai vogl.ia fiaalLN la profondita di queato inne-
gabila lagaae ( 20). !ra elaaa:ti dunqu• cha emergono ,ansi ai impon-
gono con aicuro ri ■ alto,dalla lettura dai fraamanti papiraoei oon
i qu&l.1,ae 1 1po1:e ■ i cogl.ie nel aegno,avre-o
1
recuperato un brano
perd.uto della storia di Bforo,per 41 piu 1D pagine al.le qual.1 non
■ eabra poaaibile negare un non co1111me 4eooro atiliatico (21).
Davanti al.la convargensa 41 eleaenti che °"'1:1:1 ••■brano oondurre
e confermare 1 1 au.1:oritk 4ello etorico 41 Kyae,, doTeroeo eaam1nare
•• • 41 ohe peso aiano le ragloni che po1irebbero farci rifiutare
una ■ iai.l• a1itribus1one.
Il:.. oentro 4al quale ■ 1 aliaen1ia 11 penaiero del 1;ea-to Ill la o11tk
41 .l1iene, ~ ~1u:tcpa -.6AH ,e,protacoDi■ t1 dell• nobili asioni
narrate• depo ■ itari di ogni alta i4eal11ik,aono 1 auoi o11ita41ni,
oelebra1i1 ooae ot ~µ,lupoL 11p.oyo'll01. o oo■e ol ~µcte:po1. 11a.'CtptcI•
un aiaile a'lretto rappono non pub ••••re giW11iitica1io oh• sulle
labbra di un loro d1 ■ cetl.den1ie,un <'o1t1iadino ateni••• qual.e Bforo
DOD tu.coaa oh• apn la ■ 1irada a4 una doppia aerie di ipotea1so
l'autore DOD~ Bforo,o •1 tratta 41 un diaoorao at1iribuito da Bfo-
road un oratore atenieae e prommciato in una oocuione poaterio-
re al.la bat1iagl.1a 41 Platea.Che non lo al debba interpretare come
\ID brano eepoaitivo,Jlli pare ohe non ci eia ragione di dubitare,
ooai •••bra altrettanto rag:Lonevole cbe DOD ci poaaano ••••re e ■i­
tasioDi IIUl.la natura del 41 ■corao,per 11 quale reatano va.lidi i
auggerilllen1i1 avansu1: nell'ed.11iio princepa.L'eaal.1iu1one della
oitta • la lode 4e1 11poyo'lloL ,obe_i11pronta 41 un tono aincera-
aeDte patetioo lo aoritto,ooat11iuiaoono un aomento ••••nziale nel-
lo aoheu del ~oyo( l11LUfLOC .Rel oaso apeoifioo non ai pub ev1-
tare 11 oontron1io 1ira 11 nuoTo paaao ed 11 41aoorao di Lisi& nel
quale (per lillitaroi a1 partioolari piu aooperti) le !eraopili,
Sal em1na,Platea (22) r1pren4ono la loro dimension• 41 aTTeni■enti
determinanti la atoria della oittk.
La preaensa di un diaoorao oelebrativo trova oollooazione natural•
• ooapleta giuatificasione nell'opera di Bforo;ei aa ohe • proprio
Bforo a rioorda:re eaplioi tamente l' introdusione del Aoyoc ln taq,L 01;
in .ltene,dopo la battaglia di Platea,oon una preoiaa norma di legge
oh• n• uaegnava l'inoarioo a4 uno tra gli oratori 41 aaggior
faa (23).
L'interpretazione dei frammenti in proapettiva non eepoaitiva -
clrammatioa potrebbe oreare le eole diffiooltk per una attribusiOR
ne 4•1 frammenti a4 Btoro.R1aulta ain troppo ev14en1ie che gli even-
ti rievocati nel diacorao appartenano ad un te111poaentito come u-
•ai remoto da colui ohe parla • dal popolo oh• lo aaoolta;aono fat-
ti che trovano una eaatta oollocasione nella •fera celebrativa,ove
wtto •tu.a dalla ■ toria alla leggenda oh• pub ••••re util■en1ie
riohiama1ia per la realta del pre ■ ente.Quale appunto a1a l'oooaaio-
ne oh• aolleoita l'oratore a rieYooare 4alla lontanansa dei tempi
queato glorioao pu-to,aent1to come eredita viYa ed inal1enab11•
della oitta 41 Atene,paradipa,in opi o1rcoatansa,41 virtu oivili
non• po ■ eibil• dire.Jiaaare 1n quale pane della sua opera Bforo
abbia 1naer1to 11 diacoreo oelebrativo,appare ooae un interrogati-
vo deatinato a rimanere,alaeno per 11 aomento,aensa ri ■ po ■ ta.
Ila• ohiaro che,al.la luce 4•1 rapporto Bforo-Diodoro,ei deve po-
e'tular• inte?"Y'ento 41 teonica ooapoaitiT&
un opera dello ato-
ad
rioo aiculo;oib non tanto per la diecorctansa 41 qualche partioo-
lare 4•1 raooonto -n•l quale perb Diodoro diaoorda anche 4a Bro-
4oto (24).Al■eno per 11 cuo in queetione,bieopa attribuire a
Dio4oro (sempre che a1 ritenp 41 riaentire,anohe in queato ouo,
l'eco dell• parole di Bforo) la trupoa1&1one,in4ubbiamente oo~
rente,per la qual• eleaenti narrativi dieperai nella atoria di
Bforo,vengono rioollooati,nella nuova elaborasion• atorioa,in u-
na natural.a eequensa cronologica (25).
Se non metteaaiao queata operasione 4iodorea ve4nm■o piu f.,,_
oilmente dileguarei 1 rapporti tra Diodoro ed 11 noatro autore
• queato fatto r14u.rrebbe aenaibil ■ente la oredibilita di una at-
tribusione ·4e1 trammenti a4 Bforo.K allora non neterebbe che
ripiegare al.la pri- ipo,eai,pooo aopra proapettata,e negare coD
•••• la paternita eforea del nuoTo teato. ■a,in tale cuo,11 fan-
tu- dello atorioo di K.Jm.• noD ei diaaolve nella 1nconaiatensa
41 uaa ipoteai,aensa laaoiare quasi tracoiaiai profila 4al teeto
dei fraamenti l'oabra di uno aorittore che,oo■e Bforo,ha in Bro-
4oto un aodello,ohe,coae Bforo,non • aoonoaciuto a Diodoro,e
ohe,ooae Bforo,nbieoe 11 conclisioDU.ento ideal.• e etiliatico
4ell'-bient• ieoorateo.
s.DARIS,Papiri letterari
(1) dell'UniveraitA Cattolica
~ llilano in Aeap1ua 52(1972) pp. 67-ll&.
(2) Ibidem, n. 10, pp.99-113.
(3) Anche 11 aegno nel fr. 5+6 III.21 va inteao come eli-
aione;lo iato ai ritrova solo nel fr. 1 I.21 • fr. 5+6 III.7 do-
po 1m& pauaa.
(4) Berodot., VIII,124, cfr. Plut., !!!!,!.,17.
(5) Jr. 4 II.11 ofr. !huo.,III,82,l; v,20,2;Plat.,Phaedr.
257 B, Crit.109 A,L•I• 676 C;fr. 4 II.20 cfr. !huc.I,74,1.
(6) Jr. 4 II.13 cfr. !huo.,IV,78,5, Plat.,Beap~439 O;
fr. 4 II.15 cfr. Demoath., !!. !!!• !!.&. 303;tr. 4 II.23 ofr. P
Plat.,Lt,•• 215 C, Xenoph.,§.m..,VIII,34.
7) Berodo~.,VIII,140 b 3 oorretto alla forma medial• in
fr. 5+6 II.7 egg.
(8) 1r. 5+6 III.11-14 cfr. Herodot.,VIII,144,2.
(9) Jr. 5+6 III.18 egg. .
(10) Ooae ai debba eaatt-•nt• intenclere l'influaao 41
Iaooraie aul. penaiero del auo tempo,• problema ben Chiarito da
S.llZZARDfO,ll, penaiero etorioo olaaaioo, I,Bari,1966,p.391.
(11) Bero4ot.,VIII,124,3.

71
 (12) L'ambaaoeria di ilea ■andro 1ilelleno torna in A.r1-
ato4eao (1 ir_Hiat II,A,n.104, fr. l,2,2;ofr. P.Ozy.2469-Paok
2 137); Chileoa DOD OOIIJJ&NaltroTe.
(13) Vedi nota 7.
(14) Berodot.,VIII,140 a 2, fr. 5+6 III.9 cfr. rv.11.
(15) ille righe 18,21,23,
(16) Diod. XI,28,1.
(17) Diod. n,28,2.
(18) Per Bforo v. JACOBY,!!£!!!!!,, II ~,n.70,pp.37-
109,II O pp. 22-103; CJ.L.JlABBIB,!!!!. historian Bp.b.oru,C-bridp,
1935; cfr. SCHWAll!'Z ill P.W., a.B. VI (1907) coll. 1-16, s.nzZA-
RilfO ,.21.• ill.• , P• 396 ■gg. - -
(19) Su queato rappono v. JACOBY,ll• c11i.9 II C,p. 31 •
■.GIG:AB!B, 1rmenti sul.la Pen1iecontae11a ! altri 1••t1 •1orioi
!! papiri ,1'apol1~t 1970 ,PP• 35-36.
(20) BABBBll,.!!l?.• cit 1 ,pp. 75-83.
(21) La tra4izione papiracea non• ■tata gen.eroaa oon B-
foro,per 11 qual.e v. Pack 2 357-8 - anobe GIGJll!B,9.1..!!!.
(22) Ly■., II, 27-47; Plat.,Menex., 239 D-241 B,De■oath.,
LX,6-11.
(23) Dio4. ll,33,3 ofr. !huc.,II,35.l.
(24) Dio4. n,28,1 - divereaaente 4al noatro • aa lrodoto-
non noaina ileaaandro 11lelleno - parla pnericuente di -bucia
tori.
(25) IDterventi penoD&l.i di Dio4oro aono poa1;ulati al•eno
per le pllZ"ti ■iciliane della aua atoria, cfr. llZZARI110,.2J?•ill.•,
p. 397.

72
 The New Comedy prologue of Pap. Argentor. Gr.53

its interpretation and authorship

by Christina Dedoussi

The Greek Papyrus of the University of Strassburg No 53 was origina-

lly edited by G.Kaibel in 1899.l It consists of a single piece from a
roll, containing on the outside 29 iambic trimeters written in a column•
which is partly preserved. w.eroenert 2 dated it to the end of the 1st
cent. A.D. and this date is accepted by general consent. E.G. Turner ve-
ry kindly gave me his opinion about the date of this papyrus, which was
examined by him in §hotographs of both sides. On the inside of this papy-
rus there is a text , which. according to professor Turner, looks like
a corn register, but it does not yield any sense. The date suggested by
Turner is a later one : near the end of the 2nd cent.
This literary text has been identified as a New Comedy prologue wri-
tten by an unknown poet of a" later" date, the word later being used
vaguely with the meaning later than Henander. The scholars who have stud-
ied and edited4 this comic prologue, have given it an interpretation acc-
ording to which it has been considered vecy important. because it has be-
en used as evidence of the Greek origin of the Terentian prologue. At the
time when this prologue appeared, two special characteristics of Latin
comedy: the personified Prologus and the Prologus which contains litera-
ry criticism and personal attack, were posing the question: are these La-
tin innovations or are they of Greek origin? The Greek origin of the fir-
st characteristic was suggested and discussed; the Greek origin of the
secondwas proposed on the basis of this prologue by R.Reitzenstein, who
combined his interpretation with a theory of the evolution of the comic
prologue.
The examination and study of this comic prologue in comparison with
the other texts of New Comedy and the Latin comedies have given results,
which disagree with the interpretation given to it by editors and schol-
ars so far. My interpretation of this prologue and the study of the voca-
bulary and style of its text suggest some thoughts about its authorship
an:l identification I which I present as possibilities only, based on cert-
ain observations.
The speaker of this prologue must be the god Dionysoss. who introdu-
ces himself to the spectators in v. is. as the prolo~e gods in New Come•
dy always do; e.g. Pan in the Dysk. (lOf) and Tyche in the Aspis (98,

73
147f)
Dionysos says in the first 15 lines: 6 (I am not) a loquacious god,(so
that there is no danger to you) listeners of falling asleep (as happens
with other gods), who use abundant words, in order to give you all the po-
ssible details of the story of the play• what happened, how, and why.And
it thus becomes necessary to them to narrate a long tedious story to peo-
plewho lean on their elbows, expounding everything in detail, while I am
sure I nobody understands a word of what they say. But myself I want you
to be compelled to understand and to tell you something (worthy), by Zeus,
of a god, I mean of a real god, because {you must) trust Dionysos. that
is me.
In the following twelve lines (16"27) Dionysos gives a summary,of ev-
ents relevant to the story of this play: there were once upon a time two
brothers, Sosthenes and Demeas. They married and used to live in (these
two) adjacent houses. To one of the brothers a son was born, to the other
a daughter. Afterwards they went abroad together to Asia, where their li-
ves (were in danger). The one was sent to jail unjustly. The other tried
to rescue him. Then the first escaped, but the second was accused of smu-
ggling him out (and he was punished) for that. Their absence lasted six-
teen years. Someone will now ask: why were both the brothers away from
their home for so many years? What was the necessity? Here the text breaks
of.
By general consent it is believed that this prologue is preserved al-
most in its entire form and that only a very brief answer to the questions
is missing. Kaibe1 7 supposed an answer like" Plautus noluit,"because the
poet liked them to do so". But the "Plautus noluit" is found in the prol-
ogue of the Casina (65), which has clear signs of later composition, and
anyway in the case of the Casina there is a personified Prologus. who do-
es not finish his speech with the "Plautus noluit". On the contrary the
Prologus goes to say (67f) : sunt hie, inter se quos nunc credo dicere:
"quaeso hercle, quid istuc est? serviles nuptiae? "These questions can be
taken as a parallel case to Dionysos• questions in our prologue. In the
Casina the Prologus explains that marriages between slaves are possible in
some countries. makes a joke(75-78) and returns to the narration of the s-
tory• Reitzenstein8 supposed that the questions in the last lines of
our prologue were followed by an ending like "you will hear the answers
from the play itself". He refers to the following two of the three exist-
ing typical endings of Latin prologues: Terence Adelphi {22-24) : dehinc
ne expectetis argumentum fabulae 1 senes qui primi venient i partem aperi-
ent, in agendo partem ostendent. And Plautus Vidul.(lOf) : credo argumen-
tum velle vos pernoscere, intellegetis potius quid agant quando agant.
The third case of this typical ending is found in the TrinUJJ1Dus(16f):sed
de argumento ne ex$pectetis fabulae; senes qui hue venient, ei rem vobis
aperient. I think that this typical ending could not have place at this
point of our prologue, because the information given so far by Dionysos is
insufficient. It is rather improbable to accept that the god informed the
audience about the two brothers only and said nothing about their wifes

74
and children, who live in the houses represented on the stage, the more so
because they must be important persons in this comedy, especially· their
children. The sixteen years of their absence is indicative of one love
story, at least, with the one brother's daughter involved. It is also al-
most impossible to suppose that anything else happened than that the two
brothers on their return home met with family problems and difficulties•
It is to be expected also that the prologue god will himself be involved
in some way in the story of the comedy, at least this is always the case
in the existing prologues and there is no reason to suppose, that the sa-
me does not apply to our prologue as well. Therefore one can not consider
this prologue as almost complete; our text is a part only of a prologue,
the important part of the introduction to the plot is missing.
It is notable that Dionysos needs 15 lines to say only that he hims-
elf is going to be brief, unlike the other inferior gods, who deliver len-
gthy introductory speeches. Evidently he is meant by the poet of this pro-
logue to be funny by being himself talkative in desCI1ibing what the infe-
rior gods do. There is here the comic invention of a superior god making
fun of the inferior gods. And the criticism against them can not be taken
as the poet 1 s serious opinion about how a good prologue must be ccmposed,
as it is connnonly accepted. This conclusion is based on the following ob-
servations.
This prologue is similar to the other survi'ilg prologues Greek and La-
tin. The long prologue exists together with the comic exploitation of lo-
quacity. In Henander's Fr.152 (Epikleros) the speaker of the prologue sa-
ys that sleeplessness is the most garrulous thing, because it has sent
him out of his house to narrate his whole life. Evidently this is an int-
roduction to a very long narrative. In the long prologue of the Mercator
Charinus criticizes the other lovers in comedies and asks the spectators
to endure patiently his loquacity (v.37). In the Menaechmi the act of del-
ivering a prologue is compared to the distribution of corn. so that a long
prologue means a friendly attitude towards the audience and plenty of
corn. On the contrary in the Dyskolos Pan ends the narrative by saying
that he has given the xc,dAa~a only of the story and that the spectators
will learn the details from the play itself (45f). This is a kind of for-
mula9, because the same lines are repeated at the end of the prologue of
the Sikyonioi (23f). The last cases show the need of the speaker to be
clear and brief. The identical endings of Latin prologues, which have
already been mentioned ( Trinummus, Vidularia, Adelphi) are a similar
formula for cutting short and ending a prologue. In the Trinummus the go-
ddess Luxuria after having given elementary information about the plot
(v.4-6) ends her prologue well with this formula, which includes the ann-
ouncement of the persons, who enter the stage, But in the case of the Pro-
logus in the Adelphi the existence of this formula is surprising and out
of place, because none of Terence's Prologi contains any argumentum.
It has been shown that the long prologue exists combining loquacity
and its comic exploitation; there is also the tendency 11to give in the pro-
loguesonly the indispensable information. The poet of our prologue folio-

75
wing the second line begins with a clever comic device~ the derision of
the garrulous gods in a garrulous way - which is combined with the capta-
tio benevolentiae, because this god spares the spectators the tedium of a
long speech. The poet's main concern here is the success of this particu-
lar play in the theatre and the prologue is a crucial point for making a
good impression on the spectators. The success depended to a great extent
on the comic invention and originality shown by the dramatist. One has to
remember the surprises brought to us with every new text of Menander. 10
Therefore the criticism against long prologues is not to be taken as the
poet's serious opinion about the length of the comic prologue, and much
less as an attack on other poets, who wrote long prologues. On the other
hand it is rather absurd to suppose a poet restricting himself to only
one form of prologue and renouncing the possibility of a choice from vari-
ous forms and lengths, according to the needs of each particular play.Hy
interpretation is supported by other cases of criticism found in comic
texts. Similarly the criticism of the lovers in comedies, which is put in
the mouth of the lover Charinus, in the prologue of the Mercator, is not
a literary one. The poet does not give her.e his opinion about how lovers
must expound their problems, and to whom. The criticism in the prologue
of the Captivi (55-58) is a more striking case. The Prologus here says
that the play they are going to perform is unusual, because there is no
filthy language in it and the characters are respectable persons. This is
not, of course, a literary opinion about the art of comedy, namely that~
nly respectable characters must be represented on the comic stage. The po-
et here wants to ensure the success of this particular comedy by advertis-
ing it, and so exciting the interest of the spectators.
Our comic prologue does not in fact contain anything comparable to
Terentian literary criticism and quarrels and it can not be taken as evi-
dence of the Greek origin of the Terentian prologue. On the other hand no
theory about the evolution of the prologue in New Comedy can be supported
by the existing evidence, and consequently there is no way of arrangi~the
existing types of prologue _;in chronological order. Rei tzenstein 's theory
(loc. cit.) was that the long prologue spoken by a god comes first, the
short one-was invented later and was spoken by an actor in the name of the
poet, and that in the final stage there was nothing in the prologue about
the plot - the prologue became literary and personal, as it is in Terence.
This is perhaps ingenious but without foW1dation.And since our fragmenta-
ry prologue is similar to the other existing prologues, its date of compo-
sition could well be the same, that is the time of Menander and his conte-
mporary poets of New Comedy. Furthermore the examination of the vocabula-
ry~and style of this text gives results not only indicating this date,but
also a possible Menandrean authorship.
The possibility of the Menandrean authorship was mentioned by the
first editor (op. cit. p.55ij) of this prologue and was suggested by Demi-
aiiczuJcll, but it has been rejected by all the other editors of this text,
because they have accepted Reitzenstein's interpretation. Now the possibi-
lity of the Menandrean authorship is valid and supported by some relations
and similarities concerning the vocabulary and style between this comic
prologue and Menander's texts. Moreover the story in this prologue con-
tains an indication for specifying it. Two persons seem to play an impor-
tant part in this story: the two children, who are now a young man and a
young woman. These two cousins may be a clue for the identification of
this comedy with Menanders's Anepsioi (The cousinsl~ As far as we know on-
ly Menander wrote a comedy with the title Anepsioi • There are five fra-
gments from the Anepsioi; three gnomic quotations in Stobaios (Fr.53 • 54,
57, Koerte II) and two quoted by Athenaios (Fr.55,56)13. Fragment 54 sho-
ws a relation to the story of our prologue: some one says in it, that a
sensible son means happiness to his father; on the contrary a daughter is
anyway a troublesome possession to her father. If the fathers on their ar-
rival found themselves in trouble, the the trouble was most likely caused
by their children, the boy and the girl, to whom these gnomic verses can
apply. The other two gnomic quotations can fit well in the story of our
prologue, but they have a rather general application: in Fr. 53 we read
that love is by nature deaf to advice and, that it is not easy to beat at
the same time youth and the god of love by using reason. And in Fr.57 we
read that the fields which feed men badly make them brave 14 •

1. Ein Komodienprolog, NGG(1899) 549-555.

2. APF I (1901) 515.
3. Kaibel did not say anything about it.
4. See C.Austin's last edition (CGF in papyris reperta n.252 p.
271.
5. The name is conjectured from ]uow ( v. 15 ) , but i_t is strongly
supported by the relative cases in other comic prologues.
6. I put in parentheses the minimum of the necessary additions
to the existing fragmentary text.
7. Loe. cit. p.554.
a. Hermes 35 (1900) 625f.
9. See Sandbach A Comment. to Menander p.1~3 (on Dysk,46).
10. The existing obscure information about the prologues of Menan-
der's Thais and Messenia (Fr,185 and 268• KoePte II) indicates
that these prologues were unusual.
11. Suppl,Com. p.17,
12. The comedy Anepsioi is mentioned in the catalogue of Menander•s
selected plays of the Pap. Brit. Mus. 2562 (Koerte I p.150} ,
and in the catalogue of Menander's plays in alphabetical order
of the Pap.Oxy. 2462 (Austin CGFn.104). The title Anepsioi is
found without any poet's name in the IG2 2323 (c.215-210 B.C.).
13. They are unimportant.
14. The full form of this parer will be published in the Greek Ro-
man and Byzantine Studies.

University of Ioannina

77
Summary:

S • .Kaabit ■ ia:
"Le ■ papyrus carbonieea de Thmouia conaervea l Pari ■"

11 •'•git de cent seize fragaenta coll•• aur dea carton ■ numerotea. qui
appartiennent a l'lnatitut de Papyrologie de la Sorbonne (P.Reinach inv.2062.
cartons 1 l 4J), l l'Acadeaie de ■ Inscription■ et Belles-Lettrea (Objet 200,
carton■ 1 a 48) et a la Bibliotheque Nationale de Paris {Suppl. Gr. 1)74. caltDns
44 • sol.
Cea papyrua proviennent de ■ archive ■ de Thlloui ■ et datent de la aeconde
moitie du lie ■ iecle aprea J.-C. De caractere fiscal, ila portent aur le
degrevement et aur la auapenaion de paiement de divers i ■pot ■ et taxea. D'apres
l'ecriture et le contenu, on peut le■ repartir en troia rouleaux, dont l'un eat 1

en grande partie reconatitue.

Cea documents enrichiaaent, et rendent ■ouvent plus preciaea, noa
connai ■aance ■ ■ur l'ono.■.atique, aur la geographie et ■ ur l'ad■ iniatration du
nome mendeaien, - en meme tempa qu'ila revelent certainea de ■ cauaea du
depeuplement et de la ■ i ■ere qui ont aevi dana cette region aoua Marc-Aurele
et Verua.
 LJ. LE'I"l'E.BATORA
POPOLARE
NEI PAPIBI
Dario Del Como

Iella linearitl della narrazione, nell 1 assenza di motivazioni psi-

oologiohe, nella piattezH atiliatioa dei fraament~ delle 'Storlie
teni.oi.e' di Lolliano, .Albert Jlenr:Lchs ha individuato L-tratti di una
'Tlh.terhaltungaliteratur' della qualitA piu corrente. Si ha :t.'imprea-
aiJme che ::Ll.romanzo non. eetgesae dal let;tore alouna parteoipa.zume
intellettuale, offrendoglL- di oontro gl:1. stimoli epidermioi di una
oamioita el•entare e di una triviale aenaualita (1)1 tanto. che ai.
puo imputare il. sua modesto 11.vellcr>artisti.ca., oli.tre che alla po.chez-
za dell'autore, anohe alla destinazione atessa dell 1operas al tipa,
di truizione e al.la richieata del pu.bblioo, oui easa rispcmdeva.
Qu.e a'ta oonsiderazmne i.nduoe a ohiedersi. fi.Do a che pun to sia po a-
aibile rioonoacere nell'an:tiohitl olaasioa l'esistenza di una lette-
ratura 'di oonsumo' o 'di. evasiane', ohe meno anaoronistioamente po-
tremJDOdetinire anche 'popolare' • S:h.tra tta di un te:rrii.toriQ d.a:li li-
mi..tt.. atuggentit. e malcertii.; e in. questa sohem.atioa raasegna tenteremo
di rioonoacerne alcuni aspetti in. una aerie di teati. papiraoei.
Per una tale indagine, in et:f etti,;, queati testi:. oftrono una condi-
zione privilegiata. B' vero ohe i papiri di. solito. tramand.ano lette-
ratura d' arte o di cul tu.ra; e in tale OaBQ.. la loro desttnazione va
identi:f'ioata nell•uao della ecuola, a vari. livelli, oppure in 1111
gusto e :m un'erwiizione gia speoializzatit anche se non sempre pro.-
teasionali. Ka appunto opera come le 'Storie fenicie' d.imostrano
pure l' abi tudine a una lettura al. d1- tuori di finali ta cul tu.rali piu
o meno speO.ifiche. Ora, aoritti ohe nasoono da una tale richiesta
bsnno in genere un'esisten.za oondizionata d.a un gusto e da una mod.a
caratteristicamente legati all 1 attualita, ohe con il loro venire me-
no 11 oondannano a rapid.a soomparsa~ Sara quindi affatto oooasionale
la sopravvivenza di questa letteratura nella tradizione medievale,
filtrata attravereo una aelezione che di tutt'altri valori teneva
con ta. J.d ogni vaglio che non sia quello dell& tortui ta dei ri trov.a-
menti stuggono inveoe i teati papiraoeiJ e ritrovand.o in eaai qu.aai
una dimensione di ooa.temporaneitl possiamo intravvedere quali lettu.-
re • popolari • ciroolassero nell.'Bgi tto dell' epooa, senz' al tra prete-

79
 aa ohe di dilettare o di iDtereaaare entro. un U1bi to apazio-tempora-
le, di ou:L. la loro ateasa natura i.Jlpedii.va a quaste opera di. varoare
1a.liai ti..
JA un esaae del genera oc.aDrre perb praettere qualche conaide:ra-
zione generale. In primo luogo, DOD e poaaibile una oataloga.sioDe
delle opera ohe ri.entrano in queata letteraturaa per ragicmi ~ spa-
ao, (2), e aoprattutto perch6 l'attribuzione ad easa oomporta un mar-
gine di tluttuazione, in quanto DODpub tondarai cha parzialm.8llte
su oriteri di tipo obiettivo, come quelli tormali. Cil, introduce an-
ohe ad una piu preoiaa definizione dell'oggetto della noatra rioeroa,
in quanto 11 ooncetto di 1 lettera'tu.ra popolare' e eaposto a un'aabi-
gui ta. Kaeo pub indicare tanto utta lettera:tura nata dal popolo, quan-
to quella desti.Data a una di:tf'usione popolare, in rappo.rto. alla cara.,..
teriatiohe di oonaum.atori non in poaaeaso di una ou.ltura apeoialisza-
taa ad entrambe queate accezioni taremo riferimento, tenendo peraltro
soprattutto di vista la aeconda ..(3).
Anoora, dobbiamo motivare l'eacluaione di carte categorie di sorit-
ti pure indubbiamente contigui al noatro t--.1 ooei i teatii. aatrolo-
gioi e magici, il cui steeso numero atteata \Dl intereaae di massa1
un eateeo aettore di teati oristiani, evidantemente deatinati a un•..-
pia propagandaJ tutta una aerie di prontuari a carattere divulgativo,
come grammatiche elemantari, tavole matematiche, leasioi teonici, ma-
nuali di culinaria, di sport e ooai via (4). Cirooscriveremo dunqua
tu:tto queato materiale che verrl tralasciato., preoisando ohe es110.
rispondffa a una finalitl non primariamente letteraria.
Un ulteriore rilievo di carattere generale riguarda infine l'ino:h-
denza quantitativa di questi test!., ohe risulta innegabilmente aoaraa
rispetto ai papiri che tramandano letteratura •colta•. Queato tatta,
- come a•e detto - non si pub impu.tare a una selettivita della trasmis-
aione, a denunoia dunque una situazione complessiva, di cui posaiaao
tentare varie spiegazionia ad esempio, ohe la lettura di avago foase
un fenomeno ancora ciroosoritto e non corrispondease ai moduli secan-
do cui eaao ricorre a1 nostri tempi1 inoltre ohe vi rientraase pure
la grande letteratura, almeno limitatamente ad alcuni autori - oio
che induce a ribadire la conaapevolezza dei limiti d'approaaimazione,
entro cui si mu.ova la nostra riceroa.
Un primo aspetto da considerare nella letteratura popolare conael."V'a-
ta d.ai papiri riguarda le oocaaioni, i modi, i fini secondo oui il
pubblioo ne faceva uso. Il filone centrale ~ rappresentato da·letture

80
 ohe aVV'inoevano narr1111do caai mozionanti e riochi di immediate attrat-
tive. Di queata produzione 11 romanzo di fantasia, ampiamente rappre-
aantato nei pa.piri, e l'e ■ponente tipioo - a preaoindere dai dialiYel-
li qualitativi delle ainBOle opere. Con eaao hanno una aostanziale
a:t'finitl di dastinazione • di form.a 1ma aerie di acritti cha rappre-
aentavano eventi e peraonaggi atorici, o ritenuti tali, in una volga-
rizaasione ro■ansata. Jleasandro ed Baopo aono i t•i predilett:fi di
questa letteratura nella tradimione papiracea, ohe oon:terma pure 1•1n-
flua110 :tondalllentale aTllto dall'Bgitto in tale evoluzione delle loro
■torie. Oaoaaionalaente desti.nati a una lettura di ffaBO (aebbena qui
giocaau una parte p.repondarante l 'uao aoolaatioo) poaaiamo wpporre
ohe toaaero anohe taati variamente af'tini, come oompend.1 volgarissa-
ti di trattazioni atoriohe e ■itiohe, veraioni $a 1IJ.'!ll• di opera poe-
tioha o ~•atrali, raoaolte di anaddoti e di tavole.
A 1111 tempo aimile a diveraa era l'oooaaione di oonsumo dei o&IUW'aooi
per 11 taatro, che ai oonviene di d.etinire mi.mi. Il loro oarattera
popolare, aia per la tunzione cha per la torma, lt ffidante1 ■a eeai
venivano diftu.ai in via mediata, attraverso la reoitazione. In queata,
oomwique, largo apasio veniva laaciato all'improvri.aasione1 a cio
coati tuiva un pm:to d' inoontro oon il ■omen to orale, cha • proprio
di ogni letteratura d'origine popolare.
Paasiamo coai a 1111 ~ppo di opera, per cui l'oocaaione dell 1 '118Q;
popolare I piu stX?attaaente legata all& loro ateaaa origin8, oaratte-
rizzate come eono antrambe da un rifleaao iamediato dell'eaistenza
quotidiana. Il laTOro (oom.e nei oanti lll&rlnareaohi 1927 e 1929 P.),
11 ri trovo di aooietl (ad •••pio, nelle raoool te di akolia 1924 •
1.617 P.) (5), le BOlennitA p,ibbliohe (ooae nella 1 l)Z'aeluaio mim.ii'
1748 o nell'oatrakon l.934 P.) o private (l'epitalamio 1829 P.), la
Ti.ta dell& aouola (1945 P. ), il oulto religioao riprodotto in :lind.
e preg)ii.ere OG.stituJ.aoono insise l'oooaaione di origin• e di oonSUIIO
di oompoaizioni poetiohe, che per entrambi gli aapetti si devono oon-
eid.arare popolari, auohe ae si svolgevano in un ambito oircosorit"to.
Inf'ine, in \JD al tro settore tipioo di questa lettera tura la tinali ta
del oonBWDO non ai esauriva nel diletto dell& lettura. Il popolo Yi
trovava rifleaaa la sua doppia atruttura oultu.rale, egizia e greoa.
Coal, l'invooazione a Isis (2477 P.) e l'encomio di Imouthea-.uiolepiD
(2479 P. ), la storia di Jleotanebo (2476 P.) (6) • la leggenda di;_ hf-
nut (2618 P.) (7) diventano testimonio di tedeltl alle radioi autca.-
otone della stirpe, e di resistenza etnioa al prevalere della oultura
greoa. La medesima tendenza, che imp:,onta pure le gia citate rielabo-

81
 razioni egizie delle atorie di Alessandro e di Bsopo, in anoora piu
eaplioita maniera iapira il ooaiddetw 'Oracolo del Taeaio' (2486/7 P.)
(8 ), e gli aaaicura diftusione e aopravvivensa. In tutti queati scrl t-
ti all'intenzione letteraria si aeaooia un contenuto ldeologioo, ohe
11 oollega agli ambienti piu attaooati alle genuine ragioni nazionali,
meno oontaminati dalla cul tura uf':tioiale di ataapo greoo. Ad ul terioi-
aente preoiaa.re 11 tipo di popolari U.. di queste opere Tale pure il :tatto
ohe aloune sono tradu.zioni1 oio presuppone, allora oo■e ai nostri gior-
ni, un certo livello di divulgasione, la quale per di piu avveniva in
una sf'era ohe, aebbene aperta a tali eaiganse, aTeva perao 11 oontatto
diretto con la lingua indigena, riserrata a oerchie privilegiate.
lJD altro aapetto rilevante di questa letteratura popolare e rappre-
sentato d.alla lineua e dallo stile. Trattandoai di opere di genere tanto
diverao, oooorre invero guardarai dal generalissare, ed 1 g1A ricordati
caratteri formali delle 'Storie tenioie' eaoludono, ad esempio, un
parallelo con la rioercatezza espreseiva di altri romanzi. Ka, aebbene
per queat'epooa non ei possa parlare di due distinti strati 1~
stici, come ad ea•pio si mani:f'eateranno nella letteratura bizantina,
buona parte di queati testi paleaa un teasuto linguistioo ohe non ai
puo oerto imputare a letterati di p:roteseione1 i suoi tratti distinti-
vi sembrano easere la limitatecza del lessioo e l'approasimazione del-
le strutture sintattiche, oltre cha di quelle metriohe nelle compoai-
zioni in verai (9). Jltrettanto evidente e, 1D genere, la carenza di
elaborazione etilietioa1 sono i tatti e 1 contenuti che oontano e che
trovano in s4 la loro ragione d'eaaere, senza biaogno di deoorazione
tormale, al ohe l'espressione tende a esaere la piu diretta possibile.
E' questo un carattere co:mune alla lotteratura popolare, e ohe d'al-
tronde smentisce una oostante delle letterature claaaioheJ ed e iapor-
'tante notarlo non solo per detinire 11 livello cul turale degli autori,
quanto anche le richieate del pu.bblioo, ben diverso da quello che ai
rivolgeva alla letteratu.ra colta.
Pure collegati con le preferenze del pubblioo aono alouni grandi
motivi di fondo, ohe rioorrono in questi testi al di lA dei oondizio-
namenti impoati da1 singoli generi. Per grandi linee, essi si posaono
individuare nelle due tendenze contrapposte di un realiamo spinto an-
che alle eatreme conaeguenze, e di un fantastico tinto di toni magioi
e soprannaturali (10). Eooo ooal oomparire nell'uno o nell'altro di
questi aorittL l'amore nei suoi toni piu oamali e nei piu oeeessivi
invasementi, 11 deli tto, l 1orgia, il lazzo oaoeno, insieme alla mi.:-
nuziosa descrizione di eventi (udienze regali, cerimonie religiose,

82
 11 lawro,, :L ~ il deao.reo. di una malattia), e di luoghi, dii. edi-
tioi, di oggettt. • d'altra pa.rte aogni ammonitori o guaritori, appa-
risioni di aorti, esoureioni in un orr:lno ol tretomba - come Della Ca-
-\abaai 1923 P ., cha per oerte partioolari U formali si. pab tare rbm-
tr&lt9 in questa letteratura -1 1.utto, L'arm1111entario eoprannaturale dii..
una na.rrati-w;a popolare qua.le aotto al tre lati tuclini 'rive, ad eaempi11,
nella fiaba. Bntraabi questi aapetti oorrispondono all.a esigenze d:i
un pubblioo, ohe aaava trovare nelle aue 1etture la riproduzioDe delle
proprie quotidian• eaperia:nza, • para anohe lo apunto per un'evaaicme
da quest& ateaaa realtl, 1i:L cui tro:raaaero vooe le oredenme rad.ioata
:zutll'aniaa popolare. B ••pre, o quad., aullo afondo ~ l'Bgitto, aon1
il auo pasaaio e la noatalgioa ■emoria di grandi personaggi, 1 su.oi
dtii, :U suo paaaa&gio ubimtala • 'Lllla:DO, le di:f'ficol 'ta a le tru.atra-
zioml. del presentea dall..e quali. naaoe lDL1 al.'tra linea pclrtante ctL que-
st& letteratu.ra, il ri:tugio. nella fade religioaa, e soprattutto l'a►
teaa di un tuwro migliore, ohe ai eaprime nelle grandi vi ■ionii. pra,-
tetiob.e, 11a pure - ill una proapettiva piu aodeata a oronologioamente
piu illlledia ta - negli enoomi ohe aalutano 1 • aTVen to, di un.. nuovo iape-
Jt&tore, o anohe di un nuovo tunsionario locale.
Connludiu111> queato elli 'ttioo e proTTiaorio panorama, chiedendooi
qUale aia pe2' noi. 11 signifioa to di questa produzione letteraria. La
illla rid.ot:ta :i.noidansa quan.tttativa non umette ohe la ai oonaiu:l!i:.
oaae un ten.oaeno rilevante nella cul tw-a dell 'Bgi tto peo,a,-roaano-1
questa riaane oa:ra:tterizzata eo.prattu.tto d.alla difi'usione della gran-
de letteratura di Greoia. Xa a im.portante aooertare come gil si manit-
teataaae la diootoaia, gravid.a .di OClllllefJU8D••, u-a la letteratura
d 1 arte e di pensiero, e quella di ffa(CO o 'di 0011SU110' 1 qualooaa d'ill-
penaabile, ad ea•pio, pell'.A.tane del. V' aecoDo. B, per quanta apora-
iloa aia la au.a apparizione, qu.esta letteratura 1.D:to.na aul popolo
tra cuiL. aorae • a ou4. ai rivolae. Basa allarga le nostre informazioni
wlla cultura obe vi ai eaprimeva, nelle JDaDifestazioni e nelle richie-
ate1, aen• giung_er.e fino all& massa, torse DOD sutf'ioientemente alfa-
betiszata per usuf'ruirne in Tia diretta (aa di OUJl, 'tuttavia, per oer-
ti aapet.ti pote ritlettere le ten.dense), esaa oi. conduce alm.811Cl Ter.80l
quellie aone di oultura medi.a, ohe nelle oiviltl antiche aono coal dit-
tioili da. individuare. Ino1.tre il suo realiEIDO otf.ze prezioae aperture
sulla rt ta quotiidtana della gente oomunef ed al trettanto Tii trovi.11110
eapreaae le BUe aspirazioni, le sue paure, le sue oaseaaioni. qtieata
1.etteratura viv.e della partioolare condizione di un popolo, ohe d.a1
teat:L. della Qrecia non poteva trarre
90.1111:li. piano appagamentoJ nell•

83
me inganue aaDif'eaiuiami. uovava una gfl1'tW1& aftuaaaion• nazioaale
quel. aingolare co■posi to a1:nioo ohe d.a preme ■ se atoricbe • cul tural.i
tan-to di:tterenti ai era vem:rdaotom&Ddo in Bg1 tto.
Inf'in.e, pub dara::b. che uno studioao aia ••pre parziale vereo 1 ..,:1,.
argo■ entia ma Iii parrebbe iDgenel."Oao oonoludere acaa ,m aooenno anobe
a1 preg:L artiatioi, ohe talvolta riluoono in queati teati... La lo1"CI)
lizl&ua, non a 11 :tulgido greoo di un .iriatofane o di un Platonea eaaa
a d.ieado:rna • talora sco:nnena, il 101'0- a tile a incondi to quendo DOD
rozso - ma nei a•pli:01 oanti dei battelli.eri del Iilo, Delle v:taion1
cli. un. teuo ol treto■ba, Della vo.Cle ardente del aenai, nelw.'aapett&ldx>-
ne di un • et& dell 'oro, magari. nella f\lgao.a appariziona di. una tanoiiul.1a
inoantnole ohe distoglie dall'inoarioo un. artefioe abiliaaimo, ma
dedito a Ba.coo ed eri.dant•ente anche ad .Af:rodite (ll), balena un:. ragg.lo
dell'elemen.tare, intensa poeaia che il popolo af'ili.da all• au.a oreestiom..

l) A. Henri.ohs, D1.e Phf.1n;lk1ka dee L<Ll-lianoa, .Bomr.1972, 71

oio natu.ralaente a preaoindere clagli atraord1nari aotivi d'in-
ter•-, ohe per al "tri. Terai offre 11 ro■ an.lSQ.
2) Per la.. steaao aot:Lvo, a1i.. lia:L:te.ro a aontra.-9Bl'ar-» :ii. teati
ad.datt:ii. a •••Pio, con gl:t.. e ■ tr•~ del oatalogo Paalc, che Tala
anche co■ e eaaen£iale rimando bi.bliograf'ico.
3) lliaaLta quindi amarginata la produ.zione dilettantesoa ( 'pro-
v.inoiale' 1 otr. J.. Calderini, J.egyptua 2, 1921:r. lll egg.), ti..
oui. •••~ t:llpioo e il bw>n. D!iosooro d'J,;troditopo~ rh:alJ..ta
a cerohie riatrett.e d'eatim.atori (e di protettori) ..
4) In alouni di queet1 oasi 1.:1 rapporto fra uao. acolastioo. e
divulgazione pc2polare It evidentemente ditficile da ata'btJdire.
5), Ctr .. C.JE. Roberta, JU£ 10,: 1953, 275 as,
6) C:rr. :B. Perry-, i'.Uh.l 911,:l.1966~327-33).
71) c:er.. s. Vest, JEA 55, :L969, l&lr-183.
8) Ctr. L. Koenen, ZPE 2, 1968, 178-209 e 3, l.968, 137. ag.;
Id .., Proc. nI Con.gr. Pap., Toronto 1970, 249-254•
9) Per gli aspetti antioipatori di alcune tra queste, cfr.
J.. Dible, lleniea 82, 1954, 182 egg.
10) Cfr. J.W.:B. Barna, Jkt. VIII Kangr. Pap., Vien 1955, )f.
ll) Alla tine del frammento della atoria di lfeotanebo - e la
conclusione dell'avventura ci rimane celata.
 Trajan's Deification
W.den Boer
Only one piece of evidence for Trajan's deification will
be discussed in this paper: P.Giss.3; this text deals with the
consecration of the deceased emperor and the accession of his
successor. These important facts are mentioned in connection
with a celebration at Heptakomia, the metropolis of the Egyp-
tian nome Apollonites 1 • My aim in this paper is to show that
triumph and consecration were separated both for political and
religious reasons.
For clarity's sake the first part of the text follows here
in the translation of P.J.Alexander. The god Phoebus speaks:
"Having just mounted aloft with Trajan in my chariot of white
horses, I come to you, oh people, I, Phoebus, by no means an
unknown god, to proclaim the new ruler Hadrian, whom all
things serve on account of his virtue and the genius of his
divine father 2 ".
Here two 'facts' are mentioned, the ascension of Trajan,
his consecration or deification on the one hand, the accession
to the throne of Hadrian on the other.
In the political situation, just after the death of Trajan,
this text contains a piece of imperial propaganda on three con-
troversial points. Trajan and Hadrian are closely linked togeth-
er. The same god took the deceased in his chariot and came back
to proclaim the new emperor as the legitimate successor. The a-
doption of Hadrian, the legitimacy of the succession, and the
deification of Trajan are, as it were, p~opagated and sanctioned.
The last point, the divinisation of Trajan, was perhaps the least
controversial. We have to bear i~ mind, however, that Trajan's
consecration took place at Rome, approximately a year after his
death. The text of the papyrus seems to date from 117, and anti-
cipates the consecration. Why? The answer does not seem diffi-
cult: To strengthen the position of Hadrian. If one accepted the
adoption, he was now son of a Divus, and the succession was cer-
tain, both from a religious and from a political point of view.
As I stated elsewhere twenty years ago:"If we remember that Had-
rian's accession did not proceed without repercussions, necessi-
tating the execution of four consulares, we can understand hOW'
welcome was the support of divus Traianus - not to mention the
God Phoebus (Apollo)". 1
It is selfevident that the posthumous triumph, which had to
take place in Rome, had to wait till after the return of Hadrian
to the capital. But the divinisation, apparently, could be men-
tioned, and celebrated in an official song at an official festi-
val, in Egypt (and, if there, then also elsewhere) without any
difficulty. Nevertheless the official ceremony of the apotheosis
had to be performed at Rome. And there is evidence that this oc-
curred. The controversial point is: Was this ceremony combined
with the posthumous triumph? I doubt whether this is true.
We can safely assume that Trajan's posthumous triumph is an
historical fact. Apart from the literary evidence, which will
demand our attention later, the coin legends with Divus Traia-
nus Parthicus are there to prove that the deceased received
the title Parthicus~. The numismatic evidence is not sufficient,
however, to prove that a triumph was held. One could imagine
that on a general (or an emperor) a title was bestowed without
any ceremony of a triumph. The fact that the general or emperor
was dead could have prevented the authorities to decide in fa-
vour of a triumph in which the participation of the triumpha-
tor as a living person, was essential, because of the ceremo-
nial duties he had to perform. That a triumph was necessary to
give to the deceased emperor the title Parthicus is a conclu-
sion, not attested (as far as I know) by any analogy from hon-
orary titles awarded during the Republic or the Empire 5 • That
in practice the honorary title was mentioned for the first
time during the ceremony of the triumphus is plausible, but
it does not affect my argument. All I wish to convey is that a
definite custom or rule did not exist for the exceptional case
that the general or emperor had been killed in battle or died
before the ceremony could take place. And if the aurei with
the legend PART(H) were issued in 117, as some scholars as-
sume, the connection with the posthumous triumph which took
place in 118 is also impossible from a chronological point of
view 6 •
So, in my opinion, we have to separate the title Parthi-
cus from the triumph over the Parthians,in the same way as we
have to separate the deification of the emperor (in our papyrus
proclaimed by Apollo} from the official rite of the apotheosis
at Rome. This analogy gives the papyrus more than local impor-
tance.
I do not doubt for a moment that the posthumous triumph
really took place. We find it in one of the two literary
sources which ask our attention for two reasonsi firstly, they
prove, in my opinion, that the separation of honours, as main-
tained in this paper, finds support in the literary evidence~
secondly, they illustrate - from an official point of view -
what we saw in our papyrus 7 •
SHA I 6.3 reads:"When the senate offered him the triumph which
was to have been Trajan's, he (Hadrian) refused it for himself
and caused the effigy of the dead emperor to be carried in a
triumphal chariot, in order that the best of emverors might not
lose even after death the honour of a triumph". It is these
words that may be combined with the coins conunemorating the
triumph and bearing the legend Divo Traiano Parthico, and on
the reverse a four-horse chariot driven by the emperor who

86
 9
holds a laurel-branch • There is no trace, however, to lead us
to suppose that this chariot is identical with that mentioned
in our papyrus, viz. the chariot in which Phoebus mounted aloft
with Trajan. It is highly speculative to combine this passage
from the Life of Hadrian with Epit.de Caes.13,11:"The ashes of
his (Trajan's) burnt body were transferred to Rome and buried
in the Forum of Trajan under his Column, and an effigy that
was put on top, was carried into the city on a chariot, just as
is done with triumphators; the senate and the army opened the
10
procession" •
The crucial words are here et imago superposita(in my trans-
lation:and an effigy that was put on top). On top of what?
Some scholars say: on top of the Column. This is impossible
because the statue of the emperor was there already in 113, and
one has to assume that at this occasion it should have been
taken down in order to ~epresent the dead emperor in effigie
- which is rather far-fetched. In my opinion the emperor's im-
age was put on top of the couch; the parallel for that pro-
cedure is to be found in Augustus' funeral:"There was a couch
made of ivory and gold and adorned with coverings of purple
and gold. In it his body was hidden, in a coffin down below;
11
but a wax image of him in triumphal garb was visible" • The
last words tv tnL~Lxl~ OTOAij lf£~alv£TO may explain the com-
parison in the Epit.: sicut triumphantes solent. This compar-
ison, however, does not lead to the conclusion that the epi-
tomist, unconsciously and misunderstanding his source, gives
support to the idea that the two ceremonies (funeral and tri-
umph) were combined into one. It is only natural that at the
funeral all the decorations of the deceased are shown in the
procession. At Augustus' funeral, apart from the wax image
mentioned, there is a second image, of gold, upon a triumphal
chariot (~Ttpa a~ 041' lipJJ,O.TOCnoµnLxoO ~YE~o). But here also,
nobody would see the funeral as a sort of triumph. I do not
believe that the allusions to the triumphs of the past (al-
lusions which were undoubtedly the reason why these images
were carried in the procession of Augustus' funeral) can sup-
port the hypothesis of the so-called contaminatio in the case
of Trajan. Here also the triumph as a ceremony has to be sep-
arated from the funeral procession.
As to the words imago superposita ("an effigy was put on
top") I leave open the possibility that the epitomist, who
presumably had not the slightest idea about the date of Tra-
jan's Column and its statue, may have had this mistaken idea.
On the other hand, if one combines (leaving out a comma after
the first three words) et imago superposita sicut triumphan-
tes solent, one has a close parallel of Augustus' funeral ac-
cording to Cassius Dio (56,34,1) TO µlv awµa xa~w ... etxwv 6~
6n TLC QUTOOxnpCvn tv tnLVLKL~ OTOAij ff£(Po.LV£T0 12 •
 It is curious to see that a sort of associative reasoning
has received the approval of many scholars: The fact that the
triumphator's garb was visible at the funeral procession led
to the mistaken conclusion that funeral and triumph of Trajan
were combined. The same sort of reasoning has influenced this
conclusion where the chariot with white horses was introduced.
In the papyrus we see that Trajan ascended to heaven on Phoe-
bus' chariot. At the funeral of Augustus and other emperors
the body or the ashes were carried on a chariot with white
horses. This parallel, consciously or inconsciously, has influ-
enced the historians, but here also the parallel is one of the
historian's fallicies.
The imperial propaganda illustrated the adventus of Hadri-
an as an emperor by his being proclaimed as such not by man
but by divine revelation. This makes the papyrus so interesting
as a piece of propaganda for the new emperor, even before his
official accession to the throne.
Here, I think, we have•a more striking parallel with the
triumph. The adventus ceremony, so it has been proved recently,
"was developed against the background of the triwnphw 1 '. In
Heptokomia, at the time of the official feast mentioned in the
papyrus, the situation was not yet cleared up. The adventus of
Hadrian was still an open question. The adventus of Phoebus,
however, was certain, and a good omen for the future of the man
who claimed to be Trajan's successor.
Here also one has to be careful to attribute the adventus
ceremony to one part of the Empire from which it was· sa·id to
be borrowed by the Romans. Here also in modern works the Greeks
are the first and foremost candidates for the function of teach-
ers of the Romans. The biblical accounts, from the Old Testa-
ment (Ps.24) and from the Gospels (Mat.21,1-11; Mark 11,1-10;
Luke 19,28-40; John 12,12-19) are there to prove that the phe-
nomenon was well-known. R.Bultmann's references to Hellenistic
sources are limited to St.John, and even that is doubtful in
my opinion. However that may be, it is not strange that "Ju-
dean adventus coins of the emperor Hadrian also show the prov-
ince of Judea, accomfanied by children with palm branches wel-
coming the emperor" 1 • If that was possible quite early in Ha-
drian's reign in one of the most difficult and politically un-
stable provinces of the Empire, the new emperor could be full
of hope about a quiet reign. That this hope was not realized,
as the future would show, could not be foreseen at the moment
these coins were struck and the song of the Pap.Giss.3 was
sung.

88
 1) The text has been published many times. See Wilcken,
Chrest.No.491; M.oavid and a.A.van Groningen, Papyrological
Primer (1952 3 )No.2: E.M.Smallwood, Documents illustrating the
principates of Nerva, Trajan and Hadrian (1966)No.519. Very
many allusions to this text are to be found in modern litera-
ture; we are mainly concerned here with studies- centred round
the religious implications. Among these are W.Michaelis in
ThWNT 4(1942) 247-256, s.v. A£ux6c, in particular 256, note
65; W.den Boer, Religionand Literature in Hadrian's Policy,
Mnem.8 (1953) 123-144, espec. 131-132; S.Weinstock, Divus
Julius, Oxford 1971, 68 ff.; 71, note 11.
2) P.J.Alexander, Letters and Speeches of the Emperor
Hadrian, HSCP, 49 (1938), 141-177; for the translation,~-
143-144.
3} W.den Boer, o.c. 132.
4) The date, however, is uncertain, see P.Veyne, Une hypo-
th~se sur l'arc de B~nivent, MEFR, 72 (1960), 191-217, and the
appendix 217-219.
5) The title was given because of the victory, but not
necessarily connected with the triumph. See e.g. on Q.Fabius
Maximus Allobrogicus: Vell.2,10,3; Fabio Pauli nepoti ex Vic-
toria cognomen Allobrogicum inditum. Very instructive in this
respect Q.Caecilius Metellus Baliaricus (RE III 1207, No.82),
Q.Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus (ibid. 1214 No.94), Q.Caeci-
lius Metellus Creticus (ibid. No.s?T:-see further i.a. Bloch-
Carcopino, Histoire roma~II 1,288. -
One has to bear in mind that during the Republic many titles
had become hereditary. It has been recorded as one of the
great merits of Scipio Aemilianus that he was the new Africa-
nus who won this title personally. Vell.1,13,2; Eutr.IV,12,4.
His triumph, on the other hand, was a different affair; see
E.Pais, Fasti triumphales I (1920) 183; cp. Liv.Periocha 52.
6) See also Veyne's observations in the publication men-
tioned in note 4.
7) I owe much to the article of J-C.Richard, "Les fun~-
railles de Trajan et le triomphe sur les Parthes", REL 44
(1966) 351-362, although I do not accept his conclusion on the
"contaminatio du triomphe et de l'apoth~ose". I also believe
that Bickermann was right in separating the cremation of the
corpse from the ceremony of the apotheosis in those cases in
which the- emperor had died far from Rome, where the official
ceremony took place later. (ARW27 (1929) 1-34). See also
Bickermann, Entretiens sur l'antiquit~ classique XIX (Van-
doeuvres-Gen~ve 1973) 20. For a different view see R-C.Richard,
"Incin~ration et inhumation aux fun6railles imp~riales•, La-
tomus 25 (1966) 784-804; on Trajan, ibid., 786 and 792. ILS
322, mentioned by Bickermann in this publication, does not
give any information concerning Trajan. The inscription dates
from Antoninus Pius. The only relation mentioned is that Hadri-
an is the (adopted) son of Trajan. It may also be noted that
according to the inscription Hadrian was not (yet) divus.
8) SHA I,6,3: Cum triumphum ei senatus, qui Traiano dehitus
erat, detulisset, recusavit ipse atque imaginem Traiani curru
triumphali vexit, ut optimus imperator ne post mortem quidem
triumph! amitteret dignitatem.
9) See D.Magie in the Loeb-edition of SHA ad loc.
10) Epit.de Caes.13,11: huius exusti corporis cineres rela-
ti Romam humatique Traiano foro sub eius ·co\umna, et imago
superposita - sicut triumphantes solent - in urbem invecta
(sc.est), senatu praeeunte et exercitu.
11) Cass.Dio 56,34,1 in the translation by E.Cary (Cassius
Dio in Loeb-series VII,75).
12) A quite different interpretation by Richard, REL, in
article mentioned, with the conclusion:"C'est done sa victoire
qui devait faire de Trajan un divus" (o.c.357). There does
not exist any proof for this view for the imperial period.
Neither does it find any support in the relations between
triumph and funus in republican times, as has been pointed out
by H.S.Versnel, Triwnphus (thesis Leiden 1970), 115-129, in a
searching analysis of both triumphal and funeral rites, their
similarities and differences.
13) S.MacCormack, Change and Continuity in Late Antiquity.
The Ceremony of Adventus, Historia 21 (1972), 721-752, quota-
tion on p.725. How self-evident the adventus on a white horse
is, even in modern times, was brought home to me by the amus-
ing story in G.Durrell, My Family and other animals, 111:"Well,
it was in the first world war, you know, and the commander of
my battallion was determined that we should marsh into Smyrna
in a .•• triumphal column, led, if possible by a man on a
white horse".
14) Historia 1972, 724, and note 19; also R.Bultmann, Das
Evangelium des Johannes (1941), 319. ff.Mattingly, Roman Impe-
rial Coinage II, pl.16,322. Id. Coins of ~he ·Roman Empire in
the British Museum III (repr.1966) 221-225.
 P.Flor.50: Reconsidered

By

M.A.H.el Abbadi

The proYenance of thi ■ papyrua ia Hermopoli ■ Magna and it la dated• ,

10th Dec. 268 A.D. It is a long deed of diviaion of inherited property
between three brothers and a si ■ ter,Claudlu• Eudaemon,(a boul.eutea of
Alexandria)Cl. Isidorianua, Cl. Theon and Claudia Ti110thea. (ll.118 ft).
The document seems to be the renovation ot a diviaion of property ot a
fifth deceased brother,Maecenaa who waa still indebted to the treaaury.
In spite ot its conaiderable length (121 long lines), it i• eati-ted
that at least 50 lines are ■ issing at the beginning. The entire eh.are of
Eudaimon and part of that of lsidorianus are thus lost. The aurviving
text contains half the ■hare of I ■ idorianua aa well •• the aha.re ■ of Theon.
and Ti110thea, followed by a description of the property which remained
coanonly owned by the heirs and a declaration of their bed.ng collectively
responsible for the payment of Maecenaa' duea to the treasury. Finally,
we have the aignaturea.

In apite of its preaent condition, which is far fro■ complete, this

dociment ia of 1110rethan uaual interest in ao tar as it illuatratea the
chang,og oonditiona in third century Roman Egypt, both economically and
aocially.

The Property
From an economic point of view, it ia perhaps the only eurviving
third century papyrua which contains auch a detailed description of the
formation of a decidedly private large land-ownership. On this a■ aumption
I ahall venture here a general asse ■ -ent of the size of the original
inheritance and a diacussion of ■o111e aspects of it• formation.
Becauae of the ■ ieaing part at the beginning and the lacunae which
pervade the surviving text, it is practically i■poaaible to•••••• the
exact size of the whole property. A.a there are .any lacunae in Theon'a
Bhare, I Bhall depend in my calculation• on Timothea'a inheritance which
ia -,re complete•• it fall• in the better preserved latter part of the
document. Thus, in ■y att•pt to calculate the eharea of 'l'heon and
Timothea I have reached the foUowing, rather perplexing result ■:

Theon Tiamthea
127 ar.; 8 plots
of land ·27) ar.
(size unknown or broken)
1 ¼vineyards,¼ piece· of_ retid-lllnd ½plot with farm buildings

J½houses 1½ house ■

½canal
5 slaves 6 slavea

91
 In addition to their variou• re•pective ahare,,eleven other entries
are held in common ownership by the three brother• and their aiater,
-inly buildings of coiaon uae such aa, store-houaea, a faraatead, a
drying place, ox-stalls, a canal, a dovecote, -.ne-preaae ■, a flour-■ ill,
potter'• wheel ■ •••• etc. (11. 96-104)
Aa the beat preserved ahare ia that of the ■ i ■ ter Tiaothea, the
question arises, on what basis vaa the property divided amng the three
brothers and their sister? We know that the ppyri haYe preserved
example ■ of equal diviaion of legacy between male and feaale (e.g. P.Bour 2,
A.D. )50) •• well a■ other■ in which apecial bequest■ were aade to one ot
the ■ons (aa in P.Oxy.907, A.D.276). In case ■ of inteatacy however, the
Greeks in &gypt followed the general Greek tradition of dividing the
inheritance into equal aharea a.>ng aona and daughter■• (1) With regard
to the deed of diviaion under diacusaion, certain conaiderationa ■ay help
our decision:

•• In apite of the fact that what survive ■ in the text of Theon'a

share i• far leas than hia aiater'a, it ia perhapa a safe
assumption that had the text been COIIJ>lete, hi ■ share would
have been either equal to, or more than Timothe•'••

b. The fact that the three brother• and their siater retain part
of the patria>ny •• their col!IBOn property, implies equal
division.

c. In aeveral caeea in the division, the property vaa either

divided into four equal parts (each having tctaptov µcpoa) (2)
or into halves, indifferently between male and feaale, ()) or
even though leas frequently, by third.· (4)

d. The four heira declare their collective responsibility for any

pereonal or civic dues owed by their deceased brother, Maecen-,
to the treaaury. (5)

In the light of these conaiderationa, I - inclined to auggeat that, in

our caae, the property waa divided into tour equal ■hares. If this vaa
the caae, then the share of Timothe• would represent the near approzi ■ation
of a quarter of the original inheritance. Thu• ve would have at
Henmpolia an eatate of 11e>re than 1092 arourae of landed property in
addition to a complex of buildings and other atructurea. The occurence of
thia large land-ownership at Heraopolia fits in with the known developaent
of landed property in third century Egypt. These developaenta cul ■ inated
in the re--ergence of the ooota type of the firat century (6). Nov••
before, leading Alexandrian• appeared pro■inantly in thia revival. We
know the caeee of Am. Maron (7), Aur. Heracleidee (8), and Aur. Appianue (9).
but, whereas the position of these ■en in relation to their land ia not

92
clearly defined (10), our ea .. deals with a definitely private property.
flle heira atate that they have abaolute.right of ownership over their
respective property according to thi• declaration and what is stated in
it, furtherw,re that each ia re ■ponsible for the payaent of the atate
due■ and taxe■ for hi• own property (11).
'ftle detailed deecription given in the docuaent of the variou■
Abare• ah.ow• clearly how theae large estates were co■posed of various
-11 or large piecea ot land of different categoriea: vineyards, garden-
land, clerouchic land, private land and ■ tate land, both P<IO'LALK~ yfl and
61'11,1.oaCa yfl • 1be inclusion of ■ tate land in an inherited private
property ia ■ igniticant becau- it helps to illustrate, at leaat in part,
the foraation of large e■ tatea in the third century. It i ■ obvious fro■
line 75-6, &Krb] (o.poupav, 6 auv ~, CVCAKoµ.cv~• ~aLrALK~• yfl ■ l npOUPfl•
'tC'tO:P'tlf.\) 'tO ~ fllLau µ,cpoa a.poupaa boo, that the ~O'LhLH¾ yfl here, waa
1
i11JJO•ed upon the landowner. But •r• intereating is the reference to a
large piece ot PaOLALK~ yfl where there appear■ to be an element of
peraonal choice or wiah by the landlord him■elf, (1.9)) CK ~'t@v) EcuSou

PAP It Xo (i.e. 112 ¼ *.

KaL Op[wvoa Hat Pui.iT1ba$dKA~pwv ai,v a~poOV'tL Pa.aLALKfl•
a >
Alao in line 58 we find 8 ar. of 6Tjµoa[a yfl • 'lbere ia another
&~o fapoup@v)

third
century exaaple, in which the landlord, Heracleidee, leased land
designated y~ Pa.aL).1, K~. ( 12). 'ftlis kind ot yfl Pa.at.Ai.k, 1 ,..y have been of
the category already known in the ■econd ca,tury •• •royal land registered
under the category of private land~ (1J}. Die ■e exa11plea prove beyond
any rea■onable doubt that crown land was already pa ■aing into private
ownerahip ••early•• the ■ iddle of the third century, a phenomenon llhich
wa• once thought to have or 1 y started in the fourth century after the
refonu ~ Diocletian (14).

flle Family
Fro■ a ■octal point of view the civic ■ tatua ot the f-ily of our
tour heir■ ia not without interest. It tiae been, ao far, considered•
Heraopolite family, but judging fro ■ the evidence provided by their
signature■, we can detect two indication• of their Alexandrian origin.
Firat, the fact that they all bear the Roman name Claudii and not
Aurelii, ■ay auggeat that they belong to a t .. ily ttat had acquired
Roman citizenship before the Conatitutio Antoniniana, when only
Alexandrian ■ in Egypt were entitled to become Romana. Second, and -,re
decisive, is that only one of the brothers atyled hi-■ elf an Alexandrian
senator, K).fau6Los) ltcppobcCaLOSA xat Eu6a.£µwv ~ou),.fcu't~s) b.ctav6pc[aa.
Aa he signed hie name first, we may aasuae that he aay have been the
eldest of the brothers or at least, the -,at important. (1.118) It is
therefore very probable that the parents of these brothers and their
sister were Alexandrian• who had settled in the Herw:>polite where they
had a larg• property, and that only Eudaimon maintained hi ■ right and
interest in his Alexandrian citizenship while the others neglected that
right and tended to identify themselves with the.locality of their property.
This latter tendency aeema to have been, in fact, another iaportant
aocial developaant in third centufy Egypt and there are several caaea which

93
 confirm thia auggeation.
1. A member of a dietinguiahed Alexandrian family identifies
himself with Acoria in the Delta,Aup. A~ooxopoa o xat
tMob~LOS]
1 rcJnLHA~V dpta• r13o1uACUT~•
lxO>PCLt~• t~• Aaµn.
rM7c~av6pctoa. It ia worthy of note that hia ai ■ ter vaa a
'matrona ltolata•, a title carried only by -,men of aristocratic
families in Alexandria. Their father had the distinguished
career Qf 'eutheniarch, C08111etee exegetes, hypoa,omatographoa,
bouleutes of Alexandria~. (15)
2. M.Aur. Saras stylea himself 'gya,aaiarch, bouleutea of Oxy-
rhynchua• without any reference to hi• connection with Alexandria
except the .. ntion of hie father, M.Aur. Diogene ■ alia■ Helio-
dorua who had been a former eutheniarch and bouleutea of Alex-
andria. Gradually that mention alao disappear■ and the local
identity stands alone.
J. The grandson of a eutheniarch of Alexandria styles himself si■ply
Aur. Serapion aliaa Apollonio ■, gyanaaiarch, bouleute ■ of Olcy-
rhynchoa. (17)
4. Serapion, ex-agoranoa>s, waa nominated, together with hie brother
Philoxena• ae 'decaprotoi' in Mende•, but their grandfather, a
former exegete• and bouleutea of Alexandria, clai .. that they
are under age for that office. (18)
The explanation for this phenomenon liea in the drastic adlliniatrative
and political changes which initiated the third century: fir■ t, the
eetabliahment by Sept. Seven.a■ of the boulae in Alexandria and the .. tro-
polei• in 199-200 A.D .. ; second, the announceaent ot the Conatitutio
Antoniniana in 212 A.D. The ianediate result of these t-, law■ waa the
abolition of local distinctions. (19) Consequently, Rouna and Alex-
andrian• resident in the metropolei ■ became equally liable to meaberahip
of the boul6 and sustaining civic magistracies like the aetrof)olitee.
Not only were those who adopted the metropoleis aa their origo eubjected
to this rule, but also pereons who resided in the ■etropolis and owned
aufficient nopoa; Romana and Alexandrian• were no longer privileged cl-•e•
and had to auatain their share of local obligations. fllia point of serving
the magistracies in either one'• origo or domicile waa clearly atated in
the law quoted in the Digeat: "aed eodem tempore non aunt honorea in
duabu ■ civitatibue ab eodem gerendi: cwa aillflll igitur utrabique deferuntur,
pW.ior eat originia cauaa." (20) That ia, the 'honorea' should not be
served by the aame peraon in two cities at the same time, but when they
thus occur, the 'origo' has a better claim on the service• of it• citizen.
In other words, a citizen can serve magistracies in two places, .. aely hi ■
origo and hia domicile, at different times. (21) Thi ■ proved too exacting
and consequently many Romana and Alexandrian ■ gradually neglected their
attachment to Alexandria and identified themaelves with the locality where
they had property. Their children eventually adopted that locality••
both origo and domicile.
In conclusion, the great wave of change and transformation which

94
avept over the Roman Empire in the third century, covered alao Egypt.
There, one can describe the change•• the victory of the metropoleia
over the capital. It vu characterized by two inter-related phenomena:
one econo■ic, the other aocial. The first, vaa the growth of private
land-ownership to an unprecedented deg~ee. Property waa the only guarantee
of survival for the upper classes. The second, vaa a type of civic
a:>bility which took the fonn of wealthy Romana and Alexandrian• increasingly
tending to reside and finally adopt the locality where they happen to ovn
land. fllis latter phenomenon is extremely important, al.nee, in the present
atate of our knowledge, it is the only convincing explanation for the
extraordinary situation which exiated in the following period, when large
estates becaae the baai ■ of the new way of life and Alexandrian• scarcely
figure aaong its land-owners. (22~

For the■e reaaona, P.Flor. 50 ia, to my ■ind, of 1DOre than usual

as it adequately
intere ■ t illuatrates the above ■entioned two phenomena
which Egypt witnessed in the third century.

(1) et. Taubenachlag, Law in Greco-Roaan Egypt, 2nd ed. 1955,

p. 140 r.
(2) e.g. lines 1,)),77i 9,821 aleo line ■ )5-6,)6,44-5,54-5,55,
8),92,9).
()) Lines 27-8,29,35,6),68,71,74,74-5,86-91,91,93.
(4) Linea S6-7,64,66t82,84-5.
(5) Linea 11J-114t CL TL bi: cav bq,[LA]t O XOLV08 ~µmv &6cXcpo•
K).(a~6L08) MaLfk~va1•t&v tr6L/w]tLK@V xat noXLtLK@vt~
11
tcpw't'ci't'fll 't'Cl'}lCL~ llCXPL OUVHACLoµoO TOO 61.CAS()\IT08 0 fctou•)
KOL (XV't'OO d'fctoua) ...••••. cl• TU~L ~'fctoue) 't'OO~o ano60S~VOL
t • •
ex T,18 XOLVO't'~TOB.
(6) c.f. Roatovtzeff,SEHRE. pp 489 ft.
(7) P.Lond. III. 852 1 pp. lt8 ff., Fayum, A.D. 216-219.
(8) SB. IV. 7474, Fayum, A.D. 2541 P.Princ. II. 37, Fayum, A.D. 255-6.
(9) P.Flor. II. Introd. ; SB. nos. 1492-1517; P.Flor. I.70,Fayum,
A;D. 2J1-2
(10) Rostovtzeff, loc.cit.
(II) Lines 114-116 : Ck(X(1tOV bi: ~µ(i)v KPO't'CCv MOL HUp1.f culCLv lv
cXaxcv we npOKCLTaLkOL xpdoSoL xa~ olxovoµcCv )((XL 6LOLHCLV ncpt
avt@v &a lov·o~p~TO~ &v~µn6~~0TW8ouv tots nap·
- 1. ~ :, ._, ' ,~ .,,
avtoO
\.
µctanap!,.V\.~µ;oµcvo1.e cn1. tov anavta xpovov tc~oOvta xat I ctoe
,,
ta'
un[i:]p t(i)v apoupQv NOL t~• &µncXou 6~µ601.a navta MOLtnL-
µcp1.crµove &no toO CVCOT~T08 f°fctou ■) oµoLWBcnt tov onavto
XPOVOV.
(12) SB.7474, A.D. 2541 TA.PA, 56 (1925) 21) ff. t P.Princ. II. J7,
introd.
(1J) Wilcken, Chrest. J41: y~ ~aa1.XILx~) lv tu~cL lb1.oxt~tou
&vaypoft.p0µcv11).
(14) Johnson and West, Byz. Egypt. p. 40.
(15) S.B. 178, Acoria (Delta) A.D. III century.

95
(16) P.Oxy. 1114, A.D. 2J7; alao 1115.
(17) P.s.r. 1249, Oxy, A.D. 255.
(18) P.S.I. JOJ, Mendes (Delta) A.D. III century.
(19) A.H.M. Jones, J.R.S. 26 (1936) pp. 2231 alao Studiea in Rom.
Gov. and Lav, (1960} pp. 129 ff.
(20) Dig. L. 1.17.4.
(21) Such caaes are found in : P.Oalo, III. 85 (A.D. 27)) , B.G.U.
1072 (A.D. 274) ; 1074 (A.D. 275) I P.Oxy. 1412 (A.D. 284) I
55 (A.D. 28J) ; 59 (A.D. 292) ; P.S. I. 705 (A.D. III) ; P.~.
2108 (A.D. 259).
(22) In a ■ urvey which I made of Alexandrian ■ owning land in the
chora in Roman Egypt, I noticed that the papyri yielded the
(olloving figures :
•• First century 5J cases
b. Second century 70 cases
c. Third century 45 case•
d. Fourth century 10 case■
In the fifth and sixth centuries, we practically never hear
of Alexandrian landowners outside Alexandria itself. These
figures are no doubt conditioned by the state of extant
papyri, but they do serve as an indication of the changing
conditions. For full tables see ay unpubli ■hed Ph.D. dissert-
ation 'The Alexandrian• from the fomdation of the City to the
Arab Conquest•, Cambridge, 1960.

96
 A FOURTHCENTURYHYMNTO THE VIRGIN ?IARY?
PSALWS RESPONSORIUS:P.BARC. I49b-I53.
Alanna Emmett Macquarie University

The text to which the title refers is part of a

papyrus codex of varied oontent.(I) It has been edited in a·
thorough and beautifully presented edition by Professor Ramon
Roca-Puig(2) who dates the codex to the first helf of the fourth
century(3) and gives to the pealmua reeponsoriua the title
'Hirnne a la Verge Maria'.
The text of the poem consists of five leaves, one of
which is fragmentary. After the title, pealmus ree£onsorius,
and a brief introduction, there are twelve more orees complete
strophes, in abecedarius form, starting with the letters A to~.
The fragmentary leaf contains the first few letters of the N ad
0 strophes on the verso, while the recto -preserves the last few
letters of ten lines.(4) The scribe h0s indicated the strophe
divisions by indenting the first letter, or in some cases two
letters, of each strophe into the margin. Line divisions
within the strophes have been made by Roca-Puig on the basis of
rhythm end assonance.
In this paper I wish to examine a different interpretation
from that given by Roca-Puig of the word responsorius, and to
consider its relation to the nature and subject of the poem.
Roca-Puig interprets restoneorius with reference to the
rhythmical structure of 1ie poem.(5) The elements of the
reeponsion are listed as the use of a Ciceronian type of
cursus(6) of assonance or end rhyme (7) and of word distribution.
f8) Ill are part of the poet's individual technique. However
C.•H. Roberts points out ( 9) that responsorius in such a contest
would usually suggest that there was an element in the Esalmue
which could be said or sung antiphonally.(IO) It has furtner
been suggested (II) thAt the first four lines of the poem,
which come in our copy between the title and the A-strophe,
would form a suitable response, either as a refrain after each
strophe or as an opening section matched at the end by a
closing one. (I2) These four line.a:
Pater, qui omn.ia regis,
preco (I3) Christi nos ecias heredes.
Christus, verbo natua,
per quern populus est liber~tus.

97
 There remains to consider the appropriateness of
the proposed refrain to the indiVi.dual strophes (not all
of which can be examined here in detail).
The opening lines of the first three strophes
.Audiamus, fratree, ma.gnalia dei.
Beneiictus et potens est ipse pater.
Claritas dei demonatrabatur
refer to the attributes or works of the Pather and are in
accord with the first line of the proposed refrain. (23)
The first strophe begins with the exhortation, and then the
poet introduce ■ his subject - Christ's lineage {David) and
the prophecies concerning Him. In other words, the hymn 1a
to be concerned with Christ as Son of God and Messiah. The
opening line shows these ma~alia are the work of God the
Pather. The refrain would 7i suitable as underlining the
omnipotence of God (lines I,5) and ae indicating the purpose
of Christ's coming {lines 4,II).
In the second strophe the poet bepi.ns his narrative,
which follows closely the Protev~ium of James.(24)
The subject is the conception or {her childhood comes
in the third strophe), but throughout it is anparent that the
author has selected the material to give a simple narrative
which does not exalt the human participants b.tt demonstratee
the miraculous works of God. (25)
The narrative of Mary's birth, childhood, betrothal
and the conception of her child leads in the seventh (and
longest) strophe to the birth of Christ. Then the author
devotee four strophes to the coming of the wise men and
Herod's reaction. The next strophe, the last complete {or
nearly complete) one describes Jesus' first miraole,according
to the Gospel of John. It depicts Jesus conducting His
ministry. His disciples have been chosen and His reputation
as a worker of miracles is established. (26) Mary•s role is
not emphasized.(27)
It is impossible to be certain about the contents of
the fragmentary strophes. (28) About the original extent of
the psalmus too, there bes been debate. Though this copy may
be defective, it seems unlikely thAt an abecedarius writer
would finish at O or P. (29)
Taking the hyrrn as a whole, it may be seen that tl'B
power of God the Pather is introduced at the outset (lines I,
5,I2,2I). Though Mary is very much concerned in the events
narrated, the emphasis is not on Mery herself but on the way
must therefore be examined closely in relation to the subject
of the psalmus, before a conclusion can be reached atout the
likelihood of their conatituting the reeponsorial element.
If these four lines were the original refrain, they
would have to be suited, metrically end in aubjeot matter,
for repetition, and be related in such a way to the content
that they could appropriately be repeated after each strophe.
In other words, they should reflect the central concerns of
the whole piece. We need not be deterred by the fact that the
papyrus copy fails to indicate the reeponsorial element, for
this copy could hardly have been designed for liturgical or
even public uee.(I4)
Rhythmically, these opening lines stand out from the
rest of the poem. The rhythmical structure he.a been explained
by Roca-Puig who sees the Esalmus as exhibiting some features
of classical quantitative metre,(I5) but also as having a
partial affinity with the accentual rhythms used by Augustine
and hie imitators.(16) Despite the variations in the number
of syllables to a line, the majority of lines have four
stresses. (I7) Occasionally there are three or five stresses
to a line, but these variations do not form a regular ~attern.
There is, however, a pattern in the o~ening four lines where
we find three stresses in the first line, four in the second,
three in the third and four in the fourth. It might be
coincidence (since only one h~r..1red complete or nearly comp.ete
lines survive), but it is noteworthy that there are only two
other lines with fewer than four stresses, and in each case
there is a definite breek in the sense between what has
preceded and what follows. (I8) In this res'98ct, therefore,
the four opening lines have a repetitive quality which is
absent from the rest of the poem.
In form, the introductory lines exhibit a parallelism
and balance which makes them suited to repetition. The first
line begins with an address to the Pather, followed by a
descriptive relative clause (the equivalent of the e~ithet
omniiotens or trot~rcKpA7WP. ) • (I9) The first line is balanced
oy re third line, where the name of Christ is followed by a
description (verbo natu§. (20) Lines two and four are concerned
with two aspects of the redemntive work of Christ. Line two
refers to the Father's response, while line four brings out the
effect of the redemption. (2I) Thus the four lines in
question lave unity and BJ1Dffie"tryin their references to Pather
and Son.· The Holy Spirit is not mentioned, (22) nor is the
Virgin Mary.

99
the miraculous workings of God ere shown and Christ co1D9s into
the world. There is no indication that the hymn is addressed
to Mary or is specifioally in her honour. (30)
If this interpretation is accepted, we may conclude
that the opening four lines are relevant to the rest of the
hymn as they emphasize the theme of the hand of God seen
through events and the ultimate purpose of those events. It
seems likely that the introductory lines could have furnished
a responsum, as envisaged by the title. Though this theory
cannot be proved on the basis of the papyrus copy of the
salmus! the opening lines can in any case be shown to
1oresha ow the subject of the piece.

:POOTNOTES
*I wish to the.nk Professor E.A. Judge,
Professor B.P. Harris and Mr.S.Pickering
of Macqu8r1e University for their help.
I am grateful for suggestions received
when an earlier version of this paper was
read at a Seminar at ~elbourne University
organised by Professor G.w. ClArke.

I. The codex also conteine parts of Cicero, In Catilinam

I and II and some G~eek 11 turgical items. See
Roca-Puig, •catilinaries: P.Sarc. inv.no.137 a b'
Ae~ptue xlix (1969), pp.92-104; id.,'Pr~eee "extra
Texum•en P.Berc. 1nv.I54b-I57', l5roc.nI Int.Cop.g.Pap.
(Toronto, I970)pp.437-442.
2. R. Roca-Puig, Himne a la Verfe Maria.
'Psalmus Reafgneoriue•.
2na edition Barcelona, I
tG~)r
iiAti del eegle IYt
• Henceforth cited as
Roca-Puig, Himne).
3. Roca-Puig, Himnef p~. 48-52. C.H. Roberts, JThS
n.e. :xv111 (I961, P• 492 prefers to widen the dating
to cover the whole century. E.A. Lowe, Codices LatiQ:i
Antiguiores, Su~~l. (Oxford, 1971), no. 1782 assigns
lt to the second half of the fourth century.
4. The verso precedes the recto in eech case. See
Roca-Puig, Himne, p.3.
5. Roca-Puig, HJ.mne
pp.76, 156.

100
 6. With some origina1 variations. Roca-Puig,
Himne~ pp.76-96. See however, comments by S.Bartina,
s!ud.Pap. viii (1969) p.I3I.
7. e.g. lines 40-I diligebet, dicebat. Roce-Puig,
Himne, pn. 96-99.
8. Roca-Puig, Himne, p~.IOO-IOI.
9. JThS:n.s. xviii (1967), pp. 493-494.
JO. A Souter, A Glossary of Later Latin (Oxford, 1949)
s.v. responsor!ue. See examples in w. Speyer,
JblO x (I967), p. 215.
II. G. Lazzati, Aegyptue xlvi (1966), p. I22; ~. Naldini,
RSLR iv (I968), p. 160. A later example is
lugustine•s Psalmue contra partem Donati whiilh has a
refra,in which comes at the "6eginning and iA repeated
after each stEmze.. Here the refrain serves a
polemioel purpose.
12. For a later example, see Pul.gentius of Ruepe•s
Pselmus Abecedarius. Roca-Puig, Himne, p.IOO
envisages an epilogue matching the introduction.
13 • .E!£Q. P.Barc.; Roca-Puig emends to peto, end Barigazzi,
xcvi
_RPre.....,... (I968), p.2?3 to preco.
14. Not least bec~use of the carelessness with which the
scribe wrote (in haste?). See the unfinished word im
(line I6) ud the extraordinary umemac (line 27). -
The scribe may have been more f~mliiar with Greek than
Latin. See Lowe, CLA su~pl.,
15. Himne, pp. 75-96. Cf. Bartina,
- p. 32.
Stud.Pap.viii (1969),
p.tjt.
I6. P.J.E. Raby, A Hietort of Christian-Latin Poetry
(Oxford, 1953) pp. ~ , 42.
17. Roberta, JThS n.e. rtiil(l967), p.492.
18. lines 44, 77.
19. Roca-Puig Himne, p. 157.
20. Cf. lines 19,43. At line 45 Christie Himself the verbum.
21. See Rocs.-Puig's det@iled line by line ■ ource -
commentary for Biblicel echoes. It might be suggested,
however, that Christi heredes is not a N.T. concept

IOI
 as the parallels quoted (p.I58) s-pe~k of heirs 2!_ God,
or co-heirs with Christ.
22. Unless verbo (line 3) is a reference to the Holy Spirit.
It would seem unlikely. On the inter-pretation of line
3, see·I. Rodriguez, Helmantica xviii (1967), p.292.
23. fratres lines 2,4,; magnelia dei 4. Lazzeti, Aeqptus
xlvi (I966), p.I23. -
24. Det8iled resemblances end divergences ere indicated by
Roca-Puig's commentRrJ.
25. e.g. the frequent presence of angela (lines 17,27,30);
her destiny (lines 33-34, 39-41); et.line 48.
26. The scene of Jesus at twelve years old in the temple is
omitted - perhaps because of the similarity with the
fourth strophe.
27. In fact, because of the elliptical style of the tselmue
she is not given as much importance as in Jn. ii, 7ie
source. The pealmus has the impersonal tune ei dicitur,
· while in the gospel account it is Mary who spie.ke.
Roca-Puig's emendation mater for t'vu(f (line IOO) has
been challenged by Naldinl 1 RSLR v 968), p.159 and
Barigazzi, RPIC xcvi (19681,p.226.
28. See Roca-Puig, Himne pp. I98-20t with suggestions by
Roberts, JThS n.e. !viii (1967), p.493. L.M.P&retto,
Marian.um xxlx (1967), p.261 offers no evidence for this
suggestion that the poem treated Mary beneath the Cross.
29. especie.117 when severa.1 'easy• letters follow. some
abecedarius writers such as Augustine avoided X y and z
but others, like Commodianus and Pulgentius even managed
these (with the aid of Greek). Greek abecedarius
writers could use the whole a.lphabet (e.g. P. Amh.1.2).
Por different views of the length of the original see
Roca-Puig, Himne, p.100 9 and Lazzati, Ae tue xlvi (1966),
.123 (21 +strophes); Naldini, RSLR iv ,p.158
r 23 strophes);
23-4 strophes);
(21-2 strophes).
Roberts, JThS n.s. xvi11 1967, p.493
Barigazzr;-RFIC xovi (!968), p.222
The view that the original poem finished
where the papyrus co~y ends is accepted by other reviewers,
e.g. M. Hombert, Q! xlviii (1968) p.I90.
30. The absence of suoh indications contrasts with the later
hymns to the Virgin, particularly after the controversy.
See, e.g. K. Treu Archiv xxii-iii (1974),p.385; P.Ryl,
111. 4 70; o.Tait iiV"'II7-8".
NOTE: A fuller version of this paper is to be published in the
Special Papyrological Number of the Museum Philolop
Londiniense.

102
 SOMEGREEKAND LATIN PAPYRI OF TID.:PERIOD 50 BC to 50 AD
FROMQ'ASRIBRIMIN NUBIA
by Professor W H C Frend (Glasgow)

The Cathedral fortress of Q'asr !brim in Egyptian Nubia, some 55 miles

north of Abu Simbel has produced an astonishing variety of important

ecclesiastica"i and historical documents written in Greek, Old Nubian and

1
Coptic from the eighth to fifteenth century AD. The existence, however,

of Greek and La.tin papyri datine to roughly 50 BC to 50 AD was wholly

unexpected and it is a privilege to announce these discoveries to this

congress.

In March 1974 during the final phase of the Egypt Exploration Society's

expedition for that year under the direction of Rev Professor J H Plumley,

I was given the task of testing and clearing a wide strip outside the south

wall of the fortress with the object of discovering something of the date

and construction of this part of the fortifications. After the discovery

of what would appear to be a blocked up entrance to a temple of Phara.onic

2
date situated some 15 metres from the iieroitic gateway discovered in 1969 ,

I moved to the area of the south ~-•eo.ttower. This is a massive square

tower some 10 metres internal meaf:'t..r,:ment built carefully of roughly shaped

1 Thus, J H Plumley '<.i.'asr Ibrim 1963-4'. .l!_~ 50, 1964, p 3, and

H H C Frend, "Greek, Coptic and Nubiur ..-,1 'usr

t ._~ :ibrirn", Eyzantino-

Slavica, xxxiii, 1972, p 224-230.

2 JM Plumley, ''•t'asr !brim 1969'. JF.A 56, 1970. i"l xxiv, 1-3.

103
but closely fitted grey dry-stone blocks and was for centuries the

principal military feature at Q1 asr !brim. It projects at an angle beyond

the line of the wall and originally stood about 8 metres high. In later,

probably Nubian times, it had been heightened by another two metres so as

to give the defenders a yet wider view across the Nile for signs of

marauding bedouin from the desert. The steep slope down to the level of

the river 250 feet below enhanced the tactical strength of the position

(Sketch 1).

A considerable amount of debris had piled up along the length of the

fortification wall, and particularly near its angle with the tower. It

was during trenching in this area that the papyri which will be roughly

described, were found. We uncovered four main levels of archaeological

deposit (Sketch 2).

(a) A mixed etoney rubble containing some fragments of Old Nubian and

Arabic paper and late-Nubian pottery.

The lack of very late post-Nubian remains may be explained partly

by the steepness of the slope towards the Nile. lfost of the latest

rubbish would roll down to the bottom.

(b) Below (a) a light loamy deposit containing however a eood deal of burnt

vegetable matter.

(c) Below (b) and concentrated at the west or tower end of the trench

a deposit of limestone chippings.

(d) Below (b) and sealed by it,a very dry layer consisting of soft

wind-blown sand and palm frond.

It was in (d) that the papyri were found. The layer was about 0.50 m

thick, and about 1.10 m - 1.60 m from the surface. It was the lowest

level on this part of the site, resting on a broad ledge of limestone

104
 ~~ti)
Q,'ASR.XISJM ,97~ - 1:0\JCR. SIT[

'!l.~L~
.4. t Q!l..1

I
T ROCK FOU~D1'TION
r T .-.,- ' ,r-
y
T •
1'.P.Q.l!JM
'
.,TREN(;H X
y, ·L 0
x.1 )(
..
~ I
. w l< • le x
I
1~J 1iT1• ...~ ..o.._,-
,!1 .' \.A'T1W Tl.llT.
c~•1..t.••IJS)
~ :.11n, ------- - -- -- - - - · ---'-•.,
~
...
0
'-jr.,;-:;;-:;-.--.-'----------------------------------._J.&~
VI

,~~
tt• ~4~
,.

~~~3~~:
~A(.~ ""lA~~trt
1e,"' b&lo.,;;
A,.i-1to11C.. ~ ► ..,!!!P•·
,c._ie ~- l ~ ,co
~,9
l"I O I Z
t ..... S~ETCHPLAN: SnO\rJll"\9 0.P-~.,..O)Ll,-,o.t-a ~O~Lt10l"'\6

....r,. (rn~, x)
~~ ~ltfC-~.1 f.!..9!'3""'a
j Coriro1.1,..1 o.t-t. of,c:110" • "'6~•Dl\l~. j /'If
..?.:, +.
~

I ..I
r I I
g
11 ':)

0
0
I i
t -
0

• ~
Qi.I ll
I;1 ; 'l
--
".,
.)I
~"
~ ti
t/) ot l j 1

~
'4 ..
:..,,

'3;
I, • C

,, .,.. '
)"
0

.,
II
,.
..•
,
c-
s
~
..J

~
• l
,_
.:
~

... ]$
"' "!
Iii'
2 c
,i·
li
a ..
.
II
u
-3"
cC

~
. J
':)
f,.

~,
_,

"'
I-
-
I)
. -
'
11: "
"l
l
•,
I
tJ
!J
% I1 ~

~ t ,, ' .. •..
~
d
l
1
;z
-
0

'3
I I
3 D
a t-

'' '.,
I-
0 I 1

,,
~
I- "'
i
::> ~ ,,.
:z :I
.,. 11
•
;\'
1
i

;1 •a• j' a•
a

~ I
I I
0
fl
iii l

....
-
\ II
i
0
.. "
• • J 1
i

j ...
tl
)
6
\ I
I 14'
10,
0
-i
0
w)

t
i
•

1
)-
If
... 1t

•
0 I: a Ul 0
t- I
• 0

!
0
I-

t <> an
<lt
__.
0
~ <>
V,
0

3
0 E) @) @ (i) -
l,Q
•• A
.cl
b
...... ~-~
.,...:
0

.1

106
 I

107
which projected outwards from the line of the fortress wall at this

point.

The papyri were scattered about in this layer and in a fragmentary

condition. The majority of pieces turned out to be blank, perhaps the

end of rolls, but so far, sufficient written material has been found to

indicate parts of thirteen separate documents in handwriting, Professor

Turner informs me, dating to between 50 BC and 50 AD.

The largest group of fragments consist of 18 pieces of a text of the OciyseeY

taken from the Second and Fifth books. They were first identified by a

colleague on the expedition, Madame Elisabeth Trapman-Labouchere who picked

out the words Ott.YCCEYC on one fragment and 8EOI aD d APl'EM[iC

on a second. The papyrus had been written in two different hands but each

using fine clear capitals in two columns. As it was,the centre portion that

had survived in most cases, the surviving text consisted of the final words

of each line written in the left hand column, but occasionally traces of

the first words of the right hand column. Twelve fragments come from

Odyssey Book ii, lines 72-125, lines 76-100 being the most complete in the

whole series. The story here concerns the suitors that came from all parts

of Ith.aka to seek the hand of Penelone on the presumption of Odysseus' death

in the Trojan war. We have a portion of Telemachus' speech denouncing the

suitors {lines 72-79) and a longer fragment of Antinoos reply in their defence

(lines 85-100). There are six smaller fragments from Book v, lines 122-171,

where Odysseus is on Calypso's island and liemes, the messenger of Zeus,

tells Calypso to send Odysseus on his way, Calypso protests against the decision

of the hard-hearted gods.

108
Both texts are clear and contain some interesting variations from the

Oxford text of llomer, published in 1919. Thus in Book v, line 124, where
Artemis is described as 11
of the golden throne in Ortygia" (Chrysothronos)

the new manuscript has quite clearly the word Chrysorhoos, ie "golden

flowing" (in Ortygia). The form Chry.sorhoos is, so far as I lmow, unique,

though is known as the description of the lUle in

1
the Egyptian hymn to Isis (Su'P'P Epigr, 8.549;17) • Then, on line 77 of

Book ii, the Oxford text has the word 1'0H1nuaaoCµcee1 "clinging close

to" or, in Lattimore's translation, "going throll6h" the settlement

) "with claims made public 0

, but the ~•asr !brim

text has a present middle tense instead of an optative and a form nearer the
• 2
more usual form of ,cpoO'n:'tVO'OOll,Cll.• There are a number of other, smaller

variants, such as in line 96 of Odyssey ii, Odysseus is described as 6c1,o~

instead of 6to~ , and cua1.01, on line 87 replaces «l't&.oC , referring

to the Achaean suitors. At present one cannot say how important these

variations are, but they at least provide some new information about texts

of Homer circulating in Egypt at the turn of the first century AD or a little

earlier.

After Uomer the largest group of papyri are a series of Latin texts also in

a very fragmentary state. Some of these appear to be of a military nature.

On one fragment, apparently a letter, the word legio

11 11
occurs, and on

another, perhaps a list, there is reference to "beneficiarius 0

• T!1ere is also

a name, "Olympius 11 •

1 is used by Hedylus ( cf il.thenaeum 8. 345a) in third

century BC. for Zeus descending in gold (ed. Kaibel, p.257).

2
n:pot1, 1nuaoµce«.

109
Finally, there is a fragment of a document which I was lucky enough to

come upon myself while clearing the trench on the final day of the

excavation, a strip of papyrus slightly singed some 10 cm x 3 cm,

containing the opening lines of a letter of Latin, from Varius to his

11

friend Valerius" (Variue Valerio suo). The writing in black ink is in

fine bold capitals, indicative of the first century AD. Some other

fragments belonging to a number of different documents seem also to be

remains of letters. Associated with the papyrus fragments were remains of

at least two large bulbous amphorae made of hard brick-red ware, lying broken

on their sides on the limestone shelf at the bottom of the deposit. No

parallel to these wares has yet been found at !brim.

It is, of course, too early to comment on the significance of these discoveries.

Their main interest lies in their date, fifty years either side of the

beginning of the Christian era, and their discovery so far south of the

frontier of the &lpire. To find Homer at Ibrim is like finding Tacitus at

Fort William. The first impression of a military list, if confirmed, would

corroborate Strabo's account of the occupation of !brim by the troops of the

Prefect of Egypt Petronius after his defeat of the Candyce in BC 23. They

could be part of some Roman officer's library and records. But caution

interposes. Documents like this could, as Professor Plumley has discussed

with me, simply be lost, bro\J.8ht to Ibrim by its X-Group inhabitants at some much

later date - though if this were the explanation, how did the Roman amphorae

and other non X-Group Sherds associated with the finds come to be there?

One must leave the matter open for future seasons' work. There is almost

certainly more papyrus to be found in this deposit. Meantime, I am grateful

110
 to the Egypt Exploration Society and particularly my colleague Professor

Plumley for permission to report this to you, to MmeTrapman-Labouchere

for devoted detective work in tracking down the lines of the Odyssey for me,

and we shall look forward to Professor Turner's editio princeps in the next

volume of JEA..

UNIVERSITY 0}, GLASGOW PROFESSOR\I H C FREND

S....ary:

R. Roca-Puig:
''Rev literary Latin tat■ in the Papyri Barcelonenais Collection:
BIIAMETIRS OR ALCISTIS"
The four papyri folio■ P.Barc. Inv. Roa. 1S8-161 written in latin
formed part of the aa:me aiscellaneoua codice which contained Cicero I
and II in Catilinam and the Paalmla reaponaoriua.
The diatribution of the handvriting and the aize of the aelia ie
very aimilar to that of the Catilinari.ana.
The f irat au page a are entirely handvrit-ten, the eeventh baa only
four line■, the eighth ia blank. The grafia follon the .... canon of
lettering and joininga we have c01111entecton in the Peal.mu.a. '1'be atate
of pre ■ervation ia good and the reading offers no difficulty with the
aception of aoM letters which are aomevbat tapreciae in their shape.
In ■pita of it being ,,.,,,..,._tera, the writer doea not distribute
tbea one per each line. Letters follow one another without aeparation
of vorda nor of verse■ a■ ve have aeen in Pealmua, which i ■ alao a
capoaition in verse. The bexnetera add up to aome 120. We have not
succeeded in determining their exact n1mber ■ ince some of th• are not
complete and otbera have more worda than required. Purtberaore the
tut include■ ■oae marginal auotationa. The ■etric rulea are rigorou■ ly
obaerved ·1n a large number of hexameters. Tho ■e which do not subject
to the ''aetrica" are frequently obscure and ·at tillea inc011prebenaible
a■ to their ■enae and give the illpreaaion of being jmctapoaed word■•
A clo ■er inveetigation, however, often result ■ in discovering the
original auning. although the COlll)lete reconstruction, if realizable,
-, require t.aginatiou and an effort •. Wemention all thia in the
auppoaition that the author carried out au acceptable coapoaition.

I II
 According to this hypotheaia the present defect ■ would be
attributable to the tranemi ■ aion and would not only be illlputable to
the copy we poaaeaa but alao to the copiea which succeeded one after
another since the beginning.
Limiting ourselves to our Codex the numerous erratas of the
Catilinarians ■how that the person who copied P.Barc. had only a
superficial knowledge of latin and that he made use of a manuscript
full of errors and in addition torn or mutilated.
What has been said up to the present is only a hypothesis.
There ia a further possible hypothesis which would originate from an
entirely opposite ■ tarting point.
Disregarding the important part of errors accumulated in the
transmission of the text, the more serious defects would originate
from the author himself. It would constitute an opus imperfectum of
a simple unfinished school exercise. The incoherent passages might
be due to the sorting out of available materials and subsequently not
utilised. For some reason or other the poetical composition was
abandoned before its termination. Admitting this hypotheaia in its
entirety, the efforts required to reconstruct the original would be
similar to those required, for example, on an old painting of low
artistic value, in which the skilled reataurator manages to produce
a more perfect work than originally came out from the hands of its
author.
We will divulge the text in its integrity and hope that the
latinist experts will find a plausible explanation to this and other
serious queationa originating from the Hexameter on Alcestes.
By reason of its argument P.Barc. coincides in general lines
with the legend which forms the background to Euripides tragedy and of
Alcesta and the Antologia Latina.
The poem atarta with an invocation, difficult to recompose,
owing to the condition of the text of the first lines. Admeto asks the
God Apolo about hia death decreed by the Parcaa 1 Sororea. Apolo confirms
the fatal ending which can only be averted if Admeto can find someone
willing to die in his place. The unfortunate larem post dicta getit;
Once back in his home hia father enquires of him the reason for auch
deep grief, but when knowing of the decision of the gods refuses to die
in lieu of Admeto. The latter appeals to his mother who not only
rejects his son's supplication but renders him the object of severe
invictivea.
Very difterent is the attitude of Alcestis, who having overheard
everything. offers herself willingly to die so that her husband Admeto
may continue to live. She explains the reason for her way of acting
demanding 1 however, that after her death Admeto may refrain from giving
a step-mother to her children.
She herself prepares the funeral pyre on which her body will be
burned. The sober description of Alceatis' death ends up the composition.
Virgil's influence is evident from the very start and first
phrases, both in the atructure of the hexameter ·as well as in the lexico.
Once more it is evident that the author of the Eneida was the most read
and appreciated of all the authors of the latin language.

112
 •l'fllovi dOO'Wll8Dt1dell' P.gttto tolemaioo e romano a Bologna•

G'I09AJUI[ GERACI

hma della preeente oomunioazione earl una pr:l.:ma, rapida preeen•

tasione 41 aloun:1 doownenti inedi ti, da tempo oonservat1 nelle rao•
ool te bologneei, ma solo ora r1 eooperti, nell I amb11o del rinnovato
impuleo ohe lo studio della Pap1rolog1a, inteaa oome dieoiplina eo•
prattutto atorioa • dooumentaria, ha avuto a Bologna. Tale evento
ei , verif'icato in etretta dipendenza e oonnesaione con 1 • iati tu•
sione, nella Pacoltl di Lettere dell' Ateneo bolognese, del Corso 41
Laurea 111 Storia, indirizzo Antioo, in oui la materia trova,_ final•
mente, una partioolare, eminente collocasiona, oome insegnamento fon::s
damentala di tale indiri zzo.
Tutti 1 dooumenti ohe paase~ qui in raseegna ai trovano tuttora
eottopoeti a vaglio e ad attento e appro~ondito studio e saranno da
me editi, oon adeguato oonmento, nel pita breve tempo poesibile. Bon
ho, pertanto, la pretesa di presentare, per eesi, letture definiti=
Te. B' mio propoeito, aoltanto, segnalare, per mesgo loro, alla oor•
teae e benevola attenziona degli Illustri Collegh:111 risveglio aema
pre pita. oonaiatente della tradizione papirologioa dell' Ateneo bolo=r
gneae_... da tempo eopita, 1 rieultati da eaaa oonseguiti, le BUe ape•
ranBe per 11 :futu.ro.
Il primo dooumento ohe desidero illustrare non fa parte della no•
ta raooolta dei Papyri Bononienaee, attualmente oonservata nella Sa•
la Manoaori tti della B:lblioteoa Uni verei taria di Bologna. Easo, tra•
eteri to dall' Egitto a Bologna mol to tempo ta, in oiroostanze e per
tramiti non anoora ben noti, oonflui ivi in patrimonio privato. Pro•
prio in vir'ttl dell' interesee 8U8oi tato, negli ambienti col ti bolo•
gnesi, da11' indirizzo Anti co del Coreo di Laurea in Storts e dalla
d1so1p11na papirologioa, da me insegnata, 11 dooumento, di ou1 e1 i•
gnorava oomplete..mente 1' esistenza, lt- stato eegnalato e, eu.cceaeiva•
mente, donato all• Ieti tu.to di Storia Antioa, al. quale l' insegnamen=
to ta capo. Se.rll, peroib, oi tato oon la sigla P, B>n, r.u., 1 (nella
quale ISA,, appun-to, abbreviazione di Ietituto di Storia An1ioa1_!
al. tinedi distinguere la raooolta dell' Ietituto da quella dei lz.
lbn., in preoedenza rioordata~
---i1 papiro, di oolore giallo chiaro, ~ al to om.. 25,4 e largo am.
10,7 ed lt soritto SU entrambe le facce. Ignota ~ la BUB provenienBa.
La faooia perfibrale, Bulla quale mi soffermerb, oontiene due oolon=
ne di ecrittura, vergate, oon oalamo di media groesezza e con inoh:lo=
atro nero aesai opaco, in una oorsiva con qualche legatura, da perao=
na avvezza a maneggiare la penna con eiouremza e disinvoltura. I ti=

113
pie le forme grafiohe aembrano 8Ugg8r1.re una datuione a1la fine
del ll aeoolo d.C. o, pifl probabilmente, alla prima metl del Ill
aeoolo 4.c.
Della prima oolonna aono aaeai apesao oonservate solo le lettere
finali delle parole. B', invece,. quasi totalmente 'riaibile la prima.
lines di easa, nella quale ~ regiatrato 1 1 argomento della NB10ll9
a noi rimaata1[wo)1:?oi p,£r1S't'Ot, • ffel papiro 1 in effett1 1 Bi OOD•
ta la memion:e di ban oinquantamve oorei d' aoqua, anohe ae 1 no•
mi di mol111 di eaai aono, purtroppo, irrimediabilmente mutili, ed.
sltri quasi oompletamente naniti • peroib illeggl.bili, almeno aen•
Ba 11 rlooreo a memzi teonioi, quali la :totogra:fia ai ragg1. intra•
roasi o ultraviolett1.
ileum dei nomi ohe mi ~ atato poaai bile deoi:trare e looaliszare
"toJ>Ogre.fioamente BODDI nella pr1• ,oolonna, ~"S ,p-rttJe•.:.Li,
[Atv]o'V e-.::;l
nel'.le. aeoonda oolonna,
.£C.1,r'O(..,s; ,"\'iett-r."j per -Ytttit .-"J,T~ft'h
l:.i J.t1te1.o;
■ SA&.ffo1., 'AxiA;os '-,,-,..,..tJ 'er,_,,,.J,.,A_t.'ff'~~~' ·,). .... :,s'
~, ,.,.t, P,G""'" x·,p~babilmente per •P4'v l•J' He ..(•--.,. • .s] ' ~ c.. -
E"ilt,V=-
~t&.
.,....r:,".sJ,
retv.,te•J•~"~-itt''.S tone per ~"Si""eo.s, •1..,ro; ,.Tev'.,w,.•
.:t'o.s. Si 1ane4istamente ohe l' orizzonte
pub notare geografioo del•
lo aorivente, oome epeaeo ai veritioa nella cul tura greoa d' Eg:l tw,,
~ eoatanzialmente non egiziano, ma eembra piuttoeto orientato ver•
ao una proapettiva greoo-aeiatioa. L' elenoo non pere, 1ru.ttavia, ri•
apondere ad aloun ordine preoieo, n,
a quello altabetioo
lo topogra:fioo, benohf all' interno di eaao, su tale baae, qualohe
nl a quel•
raggruppam.ento o aaeooiasione mentale poaaono easere postulati.
L' esame della aorittura, di persona non alle prime and., aem=
bra eaoludere, per 11 dooumento, 11 oarattere di eseroi tazione
aoolaatioa di eduoasione primaria e riferirlo, inveoe, ad ua· livel•
lo di culture. superiore (1). n 11UO contenuto, oomunque, pare rap•
preaentativo, pifl ohe dell' orizzonte peraonale di chi lo redaeae,
di quel bagaglio di oognizioni geogratiche, giA topiohe e atereo=
tipe, aia in ae steeae, sia al fine di intendere 1 testi lettera•
r1 (2), proprie dell' ambient• aooio-culturale elleniszato di oui
egli tsoeva parte. La lista ohe qui compare, tuttavia, ae11bra riw•
lare, in prevalenza, un intereese geografioo vero e proprio. I nomi
dei oorsi d' aoqua, in esea raooolti, rioorrono, 1ntatt1, aesai ra•
ram.ante nell' epioa e nella m1tog:rafia e sono, inveoe, trequentt
nelle opere degli atorioi e dei geograf'i.
Non risulta ohe lo studio della geografia tosse partioolarmente
ooltivato nelle acuole greohe 4 1 Egitto, pur 88 la manoanza di da=
ti in questo seneo pub eaeere oondizionata dal tatto ohe eaao avve•
ni va oralmente e non per iaori t.to ( 3). Tale oeaervasione, d • al U"O
oanto, ben ai aooorda con lo soarao numero di eor1. tti geografioi
giunti fino a noi per via papiraoea, quale traepare dalle tavole re•
datte dal prof. Willie e dalla prot. Monteveoohi (4), anohe 88 va
temito preaente 1 1 eatremo per1.oolo a cui oi si eapone~ quando 111

I 14
wgliano general1ZB8J"9 dati. obe poeaono dipendere solo dalla oaprio•
oioai tl. e sporadio1 tl dei ri tro'T&JD8nti e, eoprattutto, ohe in neseun
oaeo pub eaeere impunwnte appl1oato l' argum.entum ex eilentio.
Le due sole liste di fiumi, d1 epooa anteriore alla noetra, trova•
te ne1 pe.piri e finora edi te, riealgono all' etl to~eilaicm. la eeoon•
4a in ordine di tempo, quella ohe compare nei Laterou.11 Ale:m.ndrini,
del II-I aeoo1o a.c., rappresenta un: prodotto provinoializzato e adat•
ta.to ad ueo eoolaetioo di quello ~orBO di oanonizzazione, di olaasii=
fiouione e di oerni ta del patrimon:lo di oonosoenze dell' epooa olaa•
■ioa, operate, dall' erudimione aleaeandrina (5). lion va dimentioato,
a queato proposi to, ohe tale impegno di oatalogazione, ohe ai pub :far
r.laalire a Callimaoo e alla au.a sou.ola, traepan-e anche in opere di
oontenuto dotto, tutta una aerie delle quali aveva per oggetto i fiu•
mi, eia con pro■pettive geogra:tiohe eia paradosaogra:tiohe (6), 11 ou:l
rioordo ~ anoora Ti.v.o 111 P. Oq., D, 1802 (7), del II-IIr eeoolo d;.C.
La lista, 11 ou1 argomento ~ ;,reoisato in modo analogo a quello
4el nostro pe.piro, in.T.t_,...o'.. .t ,., , )' L•T""', segue un ordinamento geogra•
fioo e.bbaatansa etretto, ohe va d.a oacidente ad oriente, lungo tutto
1
1 aroo del baoino del .llediterraneo. Tuttana, dei oorei a• aoqua
ohe in eeaa tigurano, solo poohieeim:1 rioorrono. anohe nel nostro do•
cwnento.
Da una tradizio• foree meno erudita, ma ampiamente imbevuta di
oognisioni geografiche proprie della prima eta ellenistioa, nelle
quali 11 rioordo della spedisione 41 ileeaandro va«r,o pare traspari •
re, an:cor "t1vo nelle memorie, eembra dipendere, inveoe, 1• elenoo
ohe figura nel papiro eoolastioo (o, meglio, nel manual.a del maestro)
G1utraud-Jouguet ( 8), della fine del III aeoolo a.c. I fiumi in eaeo
meDBionati sono quasi tutti aituat1 in Traoia, in Macedonia e in A•
aia • eono elenoati aensa aloun ordine, n, alfabetico nl topografi•
oo (9). In rapporto ai Lateroul.1 ilexandrim., la lista eembra, dun=
que, riaaswnere 1 nidimenti geografioi propri della culture. oonnme
dei Greoi d' Egitto. E' interessante nots.re ohe la quasi totalita
dei oorei d' acqua in eesa regi.etrati, oompaiono anche nel noetro
pepiro.
U.na simile conaervativi ta, a diatamsa di tanti secoli, non deve
stupire. A chi oonsideri la culture. de1 Greoi d' Egitto, in etll ro•
mana, appare netto 11 quadro di uno soibile oristalliz1:ato e ripie•
gato eu ee eteseo, anoorato, nel timore di eesere aommerao dal con=
tatto col mondo indigeno, a un patrimonio oanonizzato e ormai inamo•
vibile, nella sue. deoantata fiaai tl. L' appoggio dato dai Romani al•
l' elemento greoo o greoizzato favorl ul'teriormente la divisione tra
le due culture (10) • L' elleniamo trovb le sue roocaforti e le sue
arm! di difesa, 8Ul piano culture.le, nel gi.nnasio e nella ecuola.
L' uno, rimaeto, a1meno in linea 'di diritto, ohiuso agli indigeni (11),
non fu mat autentioo veioolo di ditf'usione e di propagazione della
greoi tl in ambiente egi.zio, ma piuttosto elemen1Jo di oonservativi ta
e di separazione. L' altra, col suo metodo di e.pprendimento sempre

II5
identioo, con l' immutabilitl degli autori etudiati (12), aaeolee,
ben piu oapillarmente, 11 oompito di oonservare in1atto un patrimo•
nio cultural• e di trasmetterlo, aenza notevoli variaBioni, per lun.•
go tempo.
Ognuno dei nomi dei oorei d' aoqua, ohe compaiono nella aeoonda
oolonna del noetro papiro, ~ preoeduto da un simbolo gra:fico, apeaao
assai oompleaeo e oompoato di piu elementi. Al.O'W'li di eaei, anche se
non tutti, paiono r:loordare caratteri demotici. TuttaTia, come mi
bBnno confermato 1 oolleghi demotisti, ohe qui rt.ngrazio, non ai pub
parlare, a loro propoeito-, di parole demotiohe, ma, tutt• al pib., di
simboli ohe poaeono riohiamare une remota ispirazione demotioa. E' da
eoartare, qu.indi, 1' eventualiia di una traacrizione demotica dei no=
mi dei corsi d' aoqua. On' ipoteei del ganere, d' altro canto, aareb=
be parea aorprendente a chi consideri la limitatiaeima diffusione del
bilinguiamo graf'ioo greco-demotioo, anohe se una pib am.pia estensione
~, forse, da poatulare per quanto ooncerne i oaei 41 b111rl8Uiemo par•
lato {1]).
Altre. eolumione b ohe ei abbia a ohe fa.re oon aimboli numerioi,
del tipo di quelli ohe oompaiono in PS%,III, 250, del III-IT aeoolo
a.c. L' ipoteei mi pare, tuttavia, non aoddisfaoente e soaraemeate
probabile, aoprattutto perch, non ai ravvieano notevoli eom1gl1anBe
tra tali aegn.1 e quelli ohe r1oorrono nel nost:ro papiro.
Credo si poaaa anohe eao1udere, per 1 1 eoceaaiva oompleasitl dei
aimboli, ohe ai tratti di aegr:d oritici, uaati per eegnalare, diver•
aificandoli, 1 vari oorsi d' aoqua e per raooordare oiaeCUDO di eesi,
mediante un eimbolo, ad un altro teato, vergato eu un diverso foglio
di pap1ro·e oontenente oommentt o spiegazioni part1oolar1 BU1 singe•
11 f1um1 (14).
L' 1poteei pi~ oonvinoente ~, allora, ohe ai abbia a ohe tare con
ai■boli taohigratioi (15). Saremmo, in queato oaeo, al oospetto di WI
aillabario1 di wm parte di esso, tuttavia, non a livello elementare,
benal oorriapondente a W1 gra.do di ietnizione molto avanzato, quasi
di un vero e proprio lessioo taohigra:fioo. Per quan'lo paia strano ohe
ai avvertisse l' eeigensa di abbreviare 1 nomi dei fiumi, 11 oui Ul!IO
doveva esaere non mol to frequente, 11 fenomeno non ~ privo di attests•
zioni, ae alouni oorsi d' aoqua, qualcnm:o dei quali ri oorre anohe nel
no•tro papiro, oompaiono nel oommentario, ordinate a eiatema tetradi=-
oo, ed11o nei Greek Shorthand Manual.a 4el Jft.lne, ad eaempio a1 nn.
304, )64, 439, 511, 605, 607, 794.
Il dooumento b, allora, oon ogni probabilitl, una eseroitazione
di ietruzione personale, a livello superiore, di uno stenograto or•
mai provetto o di un maestro di taohigra:fia, addastratoai ad abbrevia•
re i nomi dei oorai d' aoqua, dopo averne oompoeto un elenoo, apul. •
oiando e oompuleando leeeici geografioi o altre liete oonsimili (16).
Non et put, eaoludere, neppure, ohe ai tratti di un tentatiTO di orea•
re, per a,
borata ex now.
o per 11 proprio inaegnamento, una aerie di simboli, elaa

116
 La aeoonda aerie di dooumenti bolognesi, easa pure inedita, eve•
nu.ta alla luoe nel oorso dei lavori di restauro e di oompleto rior•
dinamento della ra.oool ta dei Papyri Jbnoniemee. E • noto ohe la ool •
lesione preae corpo nell' aeosto del 1930 e fu inventariata, nel dia
cembre dello eteseo anno, aotto la direzione della prof. Medea Norea.
Var1e diffiooltA ed ostaooli innumerevoli preoedettero la sua pu.bblis
caaioneJ 1;uttav:t.a, nel 1946-47, l' impresa fu, in:fine, patrooinata da
Giovan BQttiata P1ghi, allora ordinario di Letteratura Latina a Bolo=
gna. Egli affidb la pubbl1oa•1one alla prof. Monteveochi ohe, nel
1953, dava 1' opera alle stampe. Nello atesso anno ella teneva, nel=
1 1 Ateneo bolognese, un oorso libero di Papirologia, 1' unioo 1v1 ma1
oondotto prima dell' attuala ripresa.
Dopo 1 • edizione, la raooolta oadde nell' oblio pU1 profondo e nel=
la pih penoaa trasouratezza. I papiri :furono aooatastati, alla rifuaa,
8111 r1p1an1 dei banooni laterali della Sala Manoaoritti dell& Blblio=
teoa Universitaria. Coal, inoonaultabili, pieni di polvere, 001 vetri
apeaso infranti, rimaaero fino al 1970, quando furono rirtsti dalla
prof. Monteveoohi e da me. la quell• anno, intatt1, potemmo finalmen•
te ottenere 1 • autoriznzione a 0011.pierne 11 reetauro. Esauri to tale
intervento, tu mia ours prooedere ad UDB nuova, dignitosa eietemazio=
ne del materiale in uno aoaffale a oassettin:1 am.ovibill, appoaitamen=
te progettato per riapondere alle partioolari eeigenze presentate dal•
la oolles1one, con un· ordinamento numerioo ohe eeguiaee quello dell'•=
dizione della prof. Monteveoc!ti., ponendo ooei fine alle lunghe e fa=
atidioae oonfue1oni create dalla connaasione oon 11 medeaimo pap1ro
41 tre divers! riferimenti mimerici, cdol quello di ingreaso nella
Biblioteoa, quello dell' inventario fatto dalla Norea nel 1930 • quel=
lo, infine, del oatalogo definitivo della raooolta. Ho 1naiati1o, i•
nol tre, perch, 1ruttt i teati fossero totogra:tati, operazione che non
era ma1 etata esegui ta. Si it oniato, coal, ad una omieaiona purtrop•
po grave, perch,, nel frattempo, alcune parti di qualohe documen1o
era.no svani te. D' al tro canto, dal restauro e da11a pu11 tura dei pa=-
piri ~ emersa la posaibilitA di oorreggere e migliorare aloune let=
ture inoerte e di reouperare qualohe frammento non vieto. E 1 mia ape=
ranBa ohe poaea presto presentarai 1 1 opportunitl, soprattutto finan=
ziaria, ohe permetta di porre a dieposizione degli studioai un faaoi=
ooletto che raooolga, inaieme alle riprodusioni fotografiohe dei te•
ati, le oorrezioni per essi giA proposte, nonoh, le nuove oaservazio=r
ni.,_ ohe 11 reatauro ha ooneenti to di oompiere.
Il riaultato pib notevole, oonn.easo al riordinamento della raoool=
ta, it stato, tuttB.via, 11 rinvenimento di un vetro, gil perduto, e
■ egnalato, nel prim1t1vo inventario della Norea, oon 11 n. 29. Tale
vetro, ohe la Monteveoohi non riusoi a trovare {17), oontiene tutta
una eerie di dooumenti a.mm1nietrat1v1 e fiscali, di epooa tolemaioa,
1 quali si oonnettono strettamente, eia per quanto conoerne la sorit=
tu.re., sia peril oontenuto, ai P,ll>p., 11 e 12. Anche di essi sarl
data, al pib presto, una edizione.

117
 Conoludo questo panol".8,IDBdelle attivi tl bolognesi con la notisia
dell' 1.aoarioo, a1"1''1datom1, di curare la pu.bblioasione della raocol •
ta di epigrafi greohe a latine, di epooa romana a di provenienza egi•
zia, oonservata nel llliseo Civioo di Bologna. Ad eeaa ei raooorda la
oontemporanea edizione della rioca oollezione di antiohita egiziane,
pure cuatodi ta nel .Museo. Il m10vo C'ataloao di queata, patrocinato
dell' Iet11uto Storioo Bolognese, Bi artioolera, secondo le prertaios
n1, in dieoi volumi e earl curato dalla prof'. Breaoiani e dai suoi
allievi, tra i quali 11 prof'. Pernigotti, ora t1 tolare dell' ineegna•
mento di Egi ttologia a Bologna, e la dott. Giangeri. La pubblicazione
congiunta del :materiale egiziano e di quello greoo-romano ooeti-tuiaoe
un interessante tentative di impoatare piu atretti rapporti di coll•=
borazione e raooordo tra discipline. Anche se, dai eingoli oommenti,
emergeri. 11 quadro di due oiviltll sostanzialmente diverse, ohe solo
a tra tti e fuggevolmente ai inoontrano in oampi limi ta ti , nella ri oo a
atruzione dells geneei dei var1 nuclei della racoolta earl poeaibile
oogliere, da angolazioni diverse, • in reciprooa conneaaione, 11 mul.=-
tiforme panorama del oollezioniemo, delle oonoaoenze, del gusto e de•
gli interese1 colti per 11 mondo egisio nel ooreo del aeoolo nx.
La ra.ocolta greco-romana, oomposta in buona parte di ieorisioni
funerar1e, offre, inol tre, 1 1 opportuni tl di studiare 11 materiale
epigrafioo in rapporto a quello papiraoeo. Unioa, la sooieta in ou1
le due do-aumentazioni ei inseriecono, identioi. i problem! di lingua
e di formulario 001 quali ai oo:rmettono, analoghi gl.1 apporti ohe ea=-
ae offrono, soprattu~to alle ricerche proeopogra:fiohe ed onomasticbe.
Simile ~, infine, l' ori.1:v.onte eori ttorio e grafioo che ease presen•
tano, anche se non identiche ne sono le realizza1:ioni pratiohe, oon=
disionate dal aupporto materiale au ou1 le lettere 110:no traooiate (18).
Queete, per oemd., le nuove iniziatin intrapreae a Bologna. Ci
auguriamo ohe i riaultati, dopo tanti ann:l. di ailenzio, non mancheran•
no. La aolidarietlt., la comprensione e la oollabors1:ione degli lllu•
atr:l Collegh.1, che qui aperiamo di aver aolleoi ta to, ae.ranno di ■ ti •
molo per 1 molti gio"l'BDi aerii e appaeaionatt che gill pereeguono,
aotto la mia guida, queeti atudi e che, nonoatante tutto, paiono tar
preeagire un &TVenire migliore in tempi che, 8Ul. piano ou1 turale e
degl.1 etudi olaasioi, aem.brano, apeaso, aemsa eperansa •

.!2!!
(1) er., per questo problema, OOJU!l8Bao ooi testi scolastioi, G.
Z.AlaAfiDt Papiri scolaetici, •Aegyptus•, XLI (196l)t pp. 16)-165; Bg
-I. MARBOU,m..stoire de 1 1 ,auoatioa dana 1 1 antiglli. t~, Paris 1965 •
PP• 229 aa.
(2) E' l' opinione '!,1-MARROtJI,Htat. de 1 1 t§ducatio~ oit., pp. 251-
254; at., anchet o. GUERA.tJD- P. JOUG'UET, tin livre d' ,0011er da III 8
ai~ole aTant 1.-c,t Le Caire 1938, p. 10.
(3) et. P. COLLART, A 1' ~oole aveo lea petite greca d' Egypte,.

118
 , ,
•miron. d' lg.•, n (1936), p. 504s GUERATJD- JatJGUE'f, Livre d 1 400•
liar, ai~~, p. 10.
(4) er-. w. II. 'lf.DtLIS,. A aensuao-r tiae t,iteran: Papyri :from EQpt,
•Gr. Rom. _... st.•, II (1968), P• 23lf o. 11)1'!E'l'EOOR[, :ta Papirolo=
Q.!, Torino 1.973, P• 363.
(5) er. B. mns, Laterouli Alexandrini, Allll. IZIDig].. Preuss. Alcad.
'11111111.,Berlin 1904r COLL.ART, A 1 ~oole, oi t., PP• 504-505• al• PAcz.2.•
1

•• 2066. e:r•• anohe, introduzione a P. OXf•• X, 1241. (PAC.I2,. n. 2069)

e a 1>. Teln., DI, 695 (PAcx2,. n. 2071.)·.
(6) at. W. SCIIMID - O. S~N - W. 101'1 C!HIST 1 S, Geechich.te der
grieohieohen Li teratur,. n,. 1,. Wnclwn 19206·,l'P• 126-128, 237-244J
A. LESU,. Storia della letteratura greae.,. II:t, Milano 1962, PP• fn7-
879J, E. G. TURNER, L' .Srudition alexandri:ne et lea pkpYI•, •Chro:n.
d 1 Eg.•, XllvII (1962), PP• 135-152; E. A. PARSONS, 1.'he Alexandrian
Library. Glor,: o~ t1!le Hellenic World, New York 19613, PP• 204-228; G.
BDXLEY, Iallimaohoa the Ae an River and the Btea ot Demeter, •Gr.
Rom. Bys. st.•, nr 1971 ,pp. 211-215.
(7) Pr. 3, ool. llI 1 11. 69-70 e nota relativa (PACx2, n. 2127).
(8) Ll. 48-66 (PACI:~, n. 2642). Yedi C. B. ROBERffl, Literature and
Society in the Papyri, •MuaeUDI Helveticum•,. X (1953), PP• 265-266f
MARll)U, 81st. de 1 1 ~ducation, cit., P• 235.
(9) er. GrifR.AUD- ~OGtJEfJ'.', Livre d' tScolier, oit., pp. DI e 10'.
(10) ~. H:>BER!S, Literature and Sooietz, cit., pp. 264-279; B. A.
VAR GROII.?GER, Population et administration, •Ma.tseumHelveticum•, J:
(1953), PP• 184-190; E. G!. TURNER, Seri bee and Soholare o~ 0~1!1i:i'Dohue,
Mitt:. Pap. Ers. Rainer, 1'.S. 'I', Wien 1956, PP• 141-142; Cl. P iii,
Pa~logie e't lociolope, •Arm.Univ. Serav., Philoa. Pak.•, ftll
(1959, PP• 13-15; ID., Le• oontimrl tea dam, l' EQ:Pte greco-romaine,
Aotee :P CoDBS, Int. Pap., Wroolaw 1964, PP• 241-2461 IDN.l'E'IECCBI, La
:Pa 1rologia, ci t., P• 366 • . -
7 11) Cf. ROBERTS,Literature
SCIRARTZ, Pa lo e et histoire
an4 Societz,
cul turelle
oi!•• PP• 272 ee.; J.
ue romaina , •Ann.
Un1T. Sare.v., Philoe. Yale.•, YIII 1959 , PP• 81-84; J. LINOOAY, ~
l;r Life in Roman Egypt,,London 1963, pp. 59 as.
(12) e:r. P. OOLLART,A ro s de uel uee exeroioes acolairee, •m=
PAO•, XXX(1931), (M4la.ngea Loret, PP• 421-423; MARROV, Rist. de 1 1 4•
duoation, oit., P• 234; •• CLARYSSE- A. a>UTERS, A Sohoolboz'e Exer•
ciee in the Chester Beatty Librarz, •Ancient Society•, I (1970), PP•
201-202 e bibliogre.:fia ivi citata, 232-233.
(13) Sul.la limitate diffusione del bilinguismo grafioo, ai veda w.
PEREMANS,1h>er die Zweiepraohigiceit im ptolemlliechen lgypten,. Pest=
sohritt
, Oertel, Bonn 1964, PP• 49-60. , Of. anche, tra 1 1 altro, Cl.
ftBAOX, Lettree riveea cues d 1 te relatives al' lducation~
•Revue belge de phil. et d' hist.•, VIIl 1929 , PP• 767-7(12; 7. Bia
LABEL, Neue literartsohe Punde in der Heidelber er Panv,~1 •samml
Actea ,,: Congr. Int. ., Pap., Bnu::ellea 1938, PP• 79-80 PAC ,
Cl.. PREAUX,Lea Egyptiens dans le civilisation hellenistique

119
pte, •chron. d • :fg. •, DII (1943), pp. 148-160; ID., Paprologie et
Sociologie, oit~, pp. 13-15J ID, Lee oontinuit4e, cit., PP• 231-248;
R. REM)NDON,
... Probl~mee du bili ame daru, 1' te ·de, "Chron •
d' Eg.•, XXXIX 1964, pp. 126-146.
(14) Cf. TURNER,L' erudition alexandrine, cit., pp. 147-152; ID.,
Greek Pa • An Introduction, Oxford 1968, pp. 112 ss.
15 Perl' insegnamento della taohigrafia, of. P. Oq., IY, 7'24
(155 d.C.) J H. ~. M. MILNE, Greek Shorthand Manuals. Sillabary and
Commentarz, London 1934. Vedi anehe L. PAPINI, P'rammento di un manua•
le di tachigrafia, •st. Ital.. di Pilol. Ola.as.•, XLill (197.l), PP•
169-170.
(16) O:f. MILNE, Greek Shorthe nd Manual e, oi t., p • -4•
(17) Of. P. Bbn., I, 11-12, Introduzione, P• 35. ,
(18) Cf., tra gli altri, J-. MALLON, Paleographie dee papn-ua d' E•
fflte et des inscriptions du monde ro:main, "Mu.aeumHelvetioum•, X
1953), PP• 141-160.

120
 PHl:LOSOPlnA .MSDICANS IN PILOD&MO

di MARCBLLO
GIG.\NTE

Per l'epicUl'ei ■■o 11 rapporto ■eUciaa-t1lo ■ ofia • pooo noto • certaaente po-
00 ■ tu•iato. j un.a ricerca che ieve ••••re fonuta •peoialaente ■ ui teeti tilo-
le■ei, - non pub pre ■ cifiere .. Epicuro, a ou.1 11 Bignone attribui 11 ruolo ii
'iirettore U ooecienze• • 11 Rabbow riconobbe U ••••r• 11 •pri■o europeo ohe
ha niluppato la peicagogia attraveno aeto•ici atti U preea ii co ■ ci•~ ul-
l'•••roizio t•i ■parare a ■e■oria • l'ha e ■ eroitata nella ■ ua co■~ta•. Di Epi-
ouro ■eiico f•ll'ani■a ba re ■ o tuiliare 1•1-gine 11 Peetugi,re ... • ■erito
U w. Sobaii aver trattato la filoeofia etica ti Epiouro c011• •gut .. iell'ani-
-~ realizzata ulla &tpcrncCci • ull' llaxT)cn.cr •
Bin queeta pro ■pettiva eh• ■i aocingo a iniicare 11 ryolo tell• ■eUcina nel­
l'epicureiuo. Bpicuro &Ten, cer-to, pre ■ ente De■ocrito. qu.anio atferaava1 6 •va-
na, la parola ii quel tilo■ofo che non aura le paeeioni i■ ll'uo■o, perch, co■•
non ii utile l'arte ■etica ee non cura le ■alattie bi corpi, 001! neppu.re la fi-
loeotia • utile ■ e non ecaccia l 1affezione ,.11•an1-. !ale rapporto fraf~Xoao~Cci
• tm~p~x,1 Uvent~ in Bpiouro anoora piu ■ peaifico ■eoonio la te ■ tiaonian&&
ti Diogene U hr■ o1 le f.pnaC ■ 1 ■s•lgono per ooneeguire la "i6ov,1, co■e l'ar-
te ■eiica per con■ eguire la byCt ~ci • •
Bpiouro, che tu autor• ii wi•opera Sulle -1attie • la ■orte, 9 Pf5c1-va che
1• ■•lute· ••1 col"pY1~ 11 rieu.l.tato ti W1& tieta ■ e■plice • tragale • che una
~ffAav~a &EwpCa tei teei«eri •• riportare ogni ecelta • ogni riliutotwi ~~v
~~o~ a4aa~o! 2 byCc~av xal~~" ~~a ca,vx~a&~cipa~Cav , eh•~ &ppu.nto il~lAoa tel
YiTitr beato. Z
L'aaai■ilazione ■etatorica iella ter■ inologia ■eiica i preeente
etici ti Epicu.ros all'inizio iella Bpietola a ••necegi
1 • in una llaaai.■a, io-
in •ue lfaghi
Te 11 ~er■ine ta~pcCa
tele. 1 .. in wi'altra
~ atoperato nell• •••••1• aocezione traelata ta Arieto-
llaaeiaa 16 ~yLa{vtL••nza la apeciticazione ti cliv,t.,,ai
riteriece alla ■alute iell'ani•.
Kell'opera ti Piloie■o poaeiuo abbaeta.nza puntualaente ■orprentere il rappor-
to blla tiloeotia con la ■ eUcina. 'fale rapporto, eviiente, epecialaente, in
opere co■• i. libertl 11 :parola o L1 1ra. Non~ un caeo perb - pen■ iuo eoprat-
tutto al Gorgia - ohe nei libri Della retoric1i7l• ter■inologia Ii aeoen«en.1a
•••tea Ti ■ 1 ■oetri aeeorbita ~on nat1J,.T&lezza e, •o~rattu~to,_ahe•alla_.etioina
ei taccia riferi ■ento in W1& l1nea - Uciuo 1ppocra11ca - cne n~o ffo pero■«-
tua-ra i.alla ■ cuole ii Platone e ti Ari•totele.
Nell•opera Sulla libertA ti parola - ohe ~ anterior• all'opera Sulltira - la
■■ tioina - nella ter■ inolog1a e nella twizione - concorre a creare •• a oonfi-
gurare in ■oio ooerente la Ti ■ ione etico-peugogica iella libertA U parola,
quale tecnica Tolta alla franc• inUYituazione tegli ~ap~~µa~a o lei.....,
•• alla loro terapia. Soatanzialaente 11 tiloeoto ••ucatore epicureo chieie a.n-
ohe alla aeticina wi aoio ii realizzare 1•f~voLa Teno 1 gioT&lli. Nella vi ■ ion•

121
etioope•agogioa, quale Pilo•eao rriluppa nell'opera Sulla 11berta •1 parola Del-
l'oraa telle ledoni U Zenona 11itonio, DODri ■ ono errori o oolpe U oui DOD■ i
poe ■a gu.arire •• • po ■ eibile conaeguire 11Iijrogreeao eul ton...,.ento tel reoipro-
co e benevolo •i~~o: l'allieTo 11 00~3••• •• 11 •• ■ tro non le ■ina 11 ■uo 21
CJ1JV«La&dvca&aL la 1u.a avvtC6~a&.a •• w,prattutto, la au.a <TUµnd&tLa •
Nella iottrina • nella eoua.l.a ep10urea non e ■ietono &:1tpdi3a.""0Loo■e non e ■ ieto­
no &&q:,dntu""~ , perch, non2 J'• error• o pa■eione che po■aa iapeUre la ria al-
la eapienu.. Co■e nell 'l!:! troviaao gli hpdj3cno&. , nella Liberta U paro-
2
la trovia■o gli&&tpdncu""o" t alouni gioT&ni non eono ■ottopoeti a Tieita o
e ■a■ e oppure ■ 1 preeentano non ewtcettivi U oura, 6&tpd'.ntu"'oL appunto, alaeno
tinohf Don ■ ia aYVenuta u.m. progno1i che eia WJ& plauaibile inti.viiuazione tel
•l•. 5 Nel tr. 39 leggiaao ehe l'aoql.li ■ to ~~ beni tipen._• .. ll'&ffiurai a1

Di•, 21 oo,n la cura ._el oorpo non~ poadbile ottenerla k •' ••nza ricorrere
••■ t , q11&11i .. 1 gettar■ i Delle loro ■ani, e co-•ttere loro la cura tell'a-
ai aeUci. L& terapia rappreeentata
gica. Eeaa attu.a la noraa ippoorati~&
2~ Pilo._eao • iuplices,
• poeeia■o einteUzzarla
■etica o ohirur-
nella to~
euripU.ea 'toµcil ~ 1'o~?i!pcfpµa,cci o platonic& q,dpµa,ca ,ca\ tci'tpL,c~ gpyava.
oppure ~dpµcixd 'tt M«L 'tOµaC •.32 In priao luogo riene 11 aetoto purgative. Pi-
loieao aeoenna alla xd&apoLa nel fr. 461 ••••, la puritioazione tegli errori hl
giovane non ■eno tel -• ■ tro1 11 ■ae ■ tro non pub otiare chi co-•tte errori non
tiaperaU, peroh6 egli ea che non, pertetto - anoh! egli pub aver biaogno ti
xd&apaLa - e riooria ohe tutti aon aoliti err&re. 3 Il eapiente epicureo, ohJ
, puro (xa3apt~ ) 1 aaa,, ■ uperiore e •• oarare (y\. .. b'" &tpauduv ). 4
La eua tiagno ■ i non pub eon■ iierare1 ieeolutaaente eie.u-a, in quanto,
• plauaibili 3 Jin bue a tali 1 HfPU.1 eali !Jtppone
tonu-
ta ■ 11 ■intoai non certi,
(boAaf!c:r.. ) eh• 11 paziente abbia bieogno U Wl& purga ( xlv~ ); qualora
la iiagnoei eia errata, un'altra volt& non rinwizia a purprlo, pur oppreeeo
ta altra ■alattia. In u.n altro oaeo, nella •••••~ •lattia lo eTiota■ento ••l
oorpo, ■e non, ottenuto &-,l •••ico col clietere,
4 teve ••••r• U nuovo eperi-
■entato con un purgante.
la nell 1 opera Sulla liberta ti ~ola ri •ono altri raraaci, oltre 1 pu.r-
ganti. In priao luogo, l'aaeenzio~ 11 sapient• ifuoatore U •olito non eoherni-
■ ce n6 ineulta, non~ ■ tizzoeo n6 a■pro n6 uaro. la ri eono oirooatanse in olli.
11 eapiente tollera, •~~ •lgrato, l'atteggiaaento oontrario i■prontato ai aaa-
resza ooae l'a■ eenzio. Arietone •1 Ch1~ ■ tabili WIii' ■ iaiglianza tra l'aepr••-
za ••ll'aeeenzio • la liberta ii parola. 4 Si ~b -•ttere un oarattere topioo
••l oontronto
pae ■ i !iloteaei
et~ ritorna nell'opera Sllll'ira. Lucrezio tone oono11ceva que•ti
quanto traeponeva nell'a■aro intuao tell'••,•nzio la iottrina
epicurea, evoean•o, egli poeta ■asico non •no ohe paioagogo • paiooterapeu-ta, 48
1 ■eiioi eh• coeparf~n•o ii ■oll• • bion•o aiele gl1 orli iella tazza ingannano
1 gion.ni pazient1.
Un altro taraaco altrettanto aaaro qua.nto l'ueenzio, rioortato ta Piloteao
nella S!eberta U parola,, l'~lleboro ti a■ oen•enza ippocratioa, •••ti• o pur-
gante I 'I\ cv;'Caa t :U.lf30*v • 52
D'altra parte, co■e in Platone i ■eiioi oeroano ti ure agli • ■■•la,i 11 nu-

122
tri■ento utile con cibi • beva.n••
nutri■ento ianno■ o, co■{ in Pilo•••o
•0~
1 • ~anno eentire U egratito
3
lega:iuo:
••pore 11
•sputa tuori o giova.ne, i■per­
turbabilllente oo■• cibo tallo ■ trano ••pore (tutto cib che • e ■ traneo all• no-
■ tra •ottrina) • •
·11ell• Libertl •1 parola appare a.nche 11 ■etico-ohirurgo che eoati tui ■ ce a1
taraac1 il bieturi. La ■ it11azione rappre ■ entat& ta Pilo .. ao nella col. XVIIa a
•• pare poeea ••••r• queet&1 t&lyolta i gionni ■ i pungono ecoeeeiva■ente nel-
l'•••roizio51t•••o ••ll& libertl U »arola e 11 loro atteggia■ento ei riTela a
loro ate ■ ai erroneo. Allora •1nanzi ai loro occhi ei attua ana aortace liber-
tl •1 parola • preeu■ono che non oouetteranno pi' error1 o non ■ 1 aocorgeran-
no U co-etterne pur aven•o errata aolte volte: a tale punto cr1tico •••i cb1a-
aano il ■apiente etucatore peroh4 aamoni ■ ca a non aor••r• e recita gli ecce ■ ei,
ooae quan•o chi-.no bravi ■etioi per un•operazione chirurgica, peroh, oon W1
colpo ti biaturi guarieoano gli &llfllati. L'ecceeao •1 parrheeia • ooa• un bub-
bone o un tu.aore • 11 vouet~ttv • oo■e una tiesezione. Di aoli!g la aoru-
oitl • un requ.i ■ ito tell& varia teen.tea parreaiaatica ••l aapiente, • qu.1 •
eeeroitata ui gioT&Di • tiventa una ■alattia ~i ■ ognoaa ti u.n 1nter,rento.traat1-
oos b>."fiiv ~~" 6Ldf~n,~ a.u#J~ljip-iw,.~-, lm.~l1f-xn{4t,cvov-ia.L:>ca\ bfi&dncp)i,d>ta
~o
ta~pota tnL 6La.CpdJLVna.paxa.AoUv~tag~a.vf6t!iaL ,~,).Lov voltt;,L .. ,oftwa ~~av~
~«;>!-(J)-iol6'!JXUX~Viv &µ11u1.y4,T)-ia.i.~~a na.ppT)oCa.oxa\l-.,oµCt;ouaLY o6&t'\I &µcfpnfia.
ffOL~atLV,~ ~~ato&a.L ~~i,~o~>.dx1.o nµa.p1T)x6-ia.a,rapaxaXoU01. '\IOU~f"tttv.

Il logo• •ell'••ucatore • ai■ile •• un faru.co 57 o •• WlO atru■ento ohirurgi-

oo. L'••ucatore epicureo, che proprio in quanto, un aaaonitore fi§!cio•o, ai
auo•• nell'oru. tei fonutori •ella •ott~ obb•••n•o •• Bpicuro, non 1aita
perb aolo • lUD&U•nt• i ■u.o1 pre•eceeeori, 9 - 1 ■etici che curano anche co-
lui ohe 1g 0baa• • probabili intiai, riten~to non poter eeeere liberato tall•
■alattia. Anohe nell 1 Ira Piloieao ;I parago~• 1• -iattie ••l corpo a quell•
iell'ani-: poich' non mpre 1 -11 aono noti a«l1 ... alati che percib l1 tra-
acurangt il ■etioo li pone tinanz1 &1 loro ocohi • 11 ren•e aolleciti all• te-
rapia; oo■ ! anohe i -11 conne ■ai con le ■alattie ••ll 1 t.n1ag aono epeeeo igno-
2
r&ti et anche 1 filo■ oti, co■• i •••ioi, ••Yono r1■pro•erare. Ila co■• eolo co-
loro che eanno ■ oocorrere aulla baae ii plawsibili in•izi po■ aono allontanare 1
aali fiaici, ooe{ anche ■olo i filoeg 1 ■a.a.no liberare l'ani.JI& fall• attezioni,
co■• 1 1 1ra, foTUte a tale• opinioni. 3 Rella oonoezion.e epicurea il giovane atti-
u la terap1a iegli errori all'arloniaento ••l .. piente eoneepito quale au.tenti-
co '•f!vatore', u.nico guaritore. Il ■apiente epicureo libera l'aniu talle pae-
aion166 • tale b 11 valore fel •g~•11o aetico che 11 aapiente epioureo &cpa.ntdci.,
, yLvwaxtL &tpa~c~tLV • 11 aapiente epic'1l'eo ■e•bgft Teraaente inter-
pretare 11 ru.olo ••l libero aetioo rappreaentato fa Platone coae ouratore 6 f
uo■ini liberi: ob,c ta-ipt6CL 1Av voaoOv~a,A>.>.aoxt6~'1 fta1.6tdc1.. •

123
1. rtuto • la toraazione tilo■ofioa ti B ouro (1936),
l (Pirenz,, 1973 , p. 123 •••• II, p. 236 ••• et. anch• a. MOffDOLPO, La co■-·
;2renaione tel eogetto uaano nella antichitk claeeioa (Bueno• lire■ 1955),
Pirenze 1958, pp. 503-512, •P• p. 506.
2. P. BABBOW, Seelenttlhrung. Kethoilk ter B:z:erzitien inter Antike (Unohen
1954), p. 130.
3. A.J. PBS1'0GlBRB,Bpicuro • i euoi ••i
(1946), tr. it. (Breeoia 1952) •P• p.
77 n. 44, p. 84 •••
4. W. SCHIIID, Epikur, .!!.£ V (1961), PP• 740-746.
5. Deaocr. tr. 68 D.-I.
2
6. Epic. fr. 121 US.• 2 DIANO• 247 AR.RlGHB!TI (• Po~., A• llarc. 31);
cf. SCHllID, art. cit. 716.
7. Su ooetui T. ABRIM,!! VI (1903), 776 ••
8. Epic. tr. 504 US.• p. 31 AR.RIGHBTTI 2 (• D.L. X 138).
9. Epic. tr. 18 ARRIGHBttI2 •
IO. Epic. b. ■en. 1311 -i~ cruvt&C~tLv o~v lv ~ato &n>.ato xa~ o~ ffOXu"'tXlo~
\ \
6LaC-iaLo xaL byltCco lcrtL auµAA~p&anLx6v
•••
II. Il lUBBOW,Seelenttlhruy p. 337 pone iuieae a tale locuione 6La~a1.1~4vtLv, ,
xa~avottv,a,o6pC'lo,xa"'ayanfv I tali teraini tesignaao l'iaparare a
aeaoria.
12. Bpio. !P, aen. 128.
I). Bpio. EJI•■en. 122.
u .. Epic. ll 64.
15. Ariet. E1' 1152b 32:la"'pt4ma (vcxtv • Riferito alffL&uµCa Polit. 1267a 7,
a &µap-iCa 1bit. I272b 2. et. anohe Plut., «• prrulitate 510 c, •• oohib.
!!';! 453 c ( 6Ct~&H11.1tv &iaittp la~p£Cav nv}i a£au-io0 ) •
16. Epic. ll 54 (fr. 220 u,.).
17. Philo••• Voluaina Elhetorica ••• SUDBAUS 1 Ip. 261 1 264, 293, 307, 329, 345;
II p. 9, 31, 150. Bae■pi ti lingu.aggio aetioo traapoato in tilo ■ofico non
aanoano in altre opere ti Pilo•••o: of. De lib, tic. lll b I0 (xa-iavapxla&aL
of. Bpio. SV IIvapxth ) ; De ■ue. p. 69 J:DUCX:; i ap.,voL non guriaoono ul
iolore (ohMv la~p£6l~v -i.,a ~6•~a ), etc.
\
18. '!uttaTia la tntu.zione tel •oKDOLPO,La co■pren■ ione cit. p. 506, U ITtp~
napp~aCaa Su.lla con:t'eaeione, ■•taetorioa.

19. Philo•., De lib. tic. tr. i:

20. Philot., De lib. tic. fr. 67.
21. Philo•., De lib. tic. 43 • 79, 9-U ( &u}i (Jl)+a~J ,@.a
&1,!a~~aa ~fftaµ~dvuv.

22. Epic. fr. 587 us.• D.L. X II7: obx &vt1.1~06(oa~ npAa ~~v ao,ca~.
23. Philo••• De ira nx 12 ••• WlID.
24. L'aggettivo ei rinviene con 0 X~ ~¥ in De tie I 15,26 DIELS {le beetie

124
 non banno Wl ri■etio per l 1 1nquietadJ.r:WI· al■e.no fin quanio non poeeono au-
tare la loro natura beatiale) ••
25. De 11b 1 tic. 84, 8 ••• OL.
fr.
26. Alla 1. 4 a. e foree ta au.pplire [la.u'to~~/citJo\l lnl.(ftpt'ntLv , non oon
l'Olivieri[i! lau't&.)~t>v lna.4:tPlff'ttLv , cf. PRILIPPSON, •Berl. Philol.
Wooh.• 191«>, 684. Per f•acoez1one traelata - oatile ti f •Lpp(nw , et.
Ae ■ c.byl. , l£25• 737 •.
27. Cf. Plat., E£il. 313 a b.
28. L. 12 •• µ"'t~ ta'tp&;v lv ;aaLv xpc,av • Cf. Plat., Rep. 373tt
la'tpQv l'J xrrCaLa ladµt4a.
29. Hippocr., De nctu I, c. 15.
30. Burip. fr. 403,6 ~ V. anche fr. 1072.
31. Plat., Polit. 298 c: XP~ 'tota 1apµ~x0La ~µaa xa~ 'tota ta'tpLxoto 6,,dvoLa
nooa 'tOOa xdµvov'taa XP~a3aL.
32. Plat., Rep. 407t: ,apµdxoLa 'tt xa~ 'toµata 't~ vom',ua'ta fx~d~~ov'ta ab't'CN,
4?6 ii 'tlx'twv ulv,fiv 0•~1w,,rtf~\ltlV
AE:Lot 1tapa. 'tOD ta'tpOD '4~11xo-.·.111.:wlttµlaaL
'to 'Jdo~µa,~ xd'tw xa'tap&tLa ~ xadatL ~ 'tOµ~ xpncrdµtvoa &ntAXdx&aL.

33. L. 10 a. nd v'!tO' Ai1 afl'tdvuv d~acn.v • Ricorio 11010 Kenantro fr. 432 JC.-T.:
a~.CI
pun 0<1 t," ~P:11~''°": ob &aVtJ aa-r{ov.
)4. De lib 9 tic. fr. 44, 6 ••• OL.
)5. Pr. 63, 8 OL. Il eignificato ■etico ti <1T)µt(waLa , a■ aicu..rato u Galen.
19. 394.
36. Pr. 63, 5 ~L~ OTJutlwv cb)..6ywv I per 11 aignificato ■etico ti OTJµtto'J ,

37. Pr.
-
et. Hipp., Morb. 3.6.15, Galen.
63, 6 • .xp.Qa-rocta&aL ~O\l'tovt, n
I 313, 18(2). 306.
\lal
)(£ v~a'too Il tendne )({\IW!Ja - che nel
De eiplia XXXVI1 ( -rA6La l(tvwµa'twv ) Yale 1 11pazio TUoto• - qui eignifica
'parga' (Dioaoor., l>e -t, •••• 5,llJ Plut., !!2!:• )81 •>•
38. Pr. 63,9xcvtxro.L : per tale verbo - contrario lt ffAT)poth, - of. Hipp.,
Aph. 2, 51; Galen. 4. 709.
39. et. Galen. 10. 358. , , \ dlJ
40. De lib, tic. fr. 64,5 a■ .1 HaL yap la-rpoa '9'.f 't~a a~'t~a 'Jdaou 6Ld x~uf'fr,oa
oboi\l ~tpdvaa ndl~ Krhiot.
41. Per l'aaaenzlo,·bf. 'llippoor., ■orb. 3.11; Kill. 1.14.
42. Philo•., De lib. tio. II a. - -
43. Pb.ilot., De lib. iic. II b 3-7.
.... -
44. Ariato ChiWI fr. 383 (SV1' I, i,. 88): lx 't&h,•Ap(cnwvoa"Oµo1.W1,1d'twv.•0µ0Lov
&tou 'to' 6pLµu' xaL\ )._,,ou n~opT)a{a" lHx6wL.
45. Philo•., De ira XLlV l5-2i.
6.c~Lv=

125
46. Oltre ai aver preaente Plat., li&• 659 •• come auggeriace A. ERNOUT,wcr~ce.
De la zw.ture, t. I (Parie 1946'), p. 64, n. 1 ... for■ e billogna auppo'rri"°-ai-
l'origine J.• ••••eiaa tonte U pa.-Plut., De lib'd ••• 11 f: »'!llln,~~nrp 0 i.
tn:-.:,..
d ,n xpll 'tWV 111crp11dx1,.N 'foto y>.uxlr1L xv~ot6 dtdU [y<J v'tto 't,1\v ~~~"vt •ft ·
'f~ l1Uµ,lpov ndpn6ov c~pov,o~ hcf~'tou~ ~tt'tlpaa 'f~V 'ft'N.lffL'fiµ~µi'tbl'II &Ko'top(av
'ftl Jl(ltt6'tTJ'f ~ p ~ yv\1vaL• , •
47. Sulla tunzione paicagogica iel poeaa ot. ora P.H. SCHRIJVBRS,Horror ac •1-
vina volu tae ituiea eur la 4ti ue et la
1970, au oui v. O.R. BLOCH,•Gno■on• 1972, pp. 27-34,
'•1••• Lu r~c• {Aaater4.aa

48. Luer •. III 1053 - 1089: et. Lukrez, Ueber tie Seele unt den Tod.lat. und
deutach in proea uel:>ertragen v.G.SPRANDBL(Oarmatadt 1963).pp.98-lOl.
49 ■Luer,, Der, n, I 936-938 • IV 11-13. Sono verei citati u-Quintiliano, !!!!! ■
or. III 1,5. Ila va tenuto preeente tutto 11 oonteeto fove ritorna l'aeaensio
'f;. 940 •• •interea perpotet a■aru■ / abeinthi latice■'). Per 11 v. I 934,
of. J.M. SNYDER,The Mea.ui.n,s:of Xuaaeo contiP4ena 9uncta lepore, •c1aae.
Worlt• 1973, pp. 330-334, Per 11 .!2J?:2.!
aeeenzio aiele, et. Coaparatio ••-
nanui et Philietionia I 228; II 104; III 34 (ei. S. JABXEL, Lipaiae 1964).
50. et. Hippocr., De victu I 35, Bpit. VII 45.
51. Philoi., De lib. tic. p. 68 OL. ~. Plut., Quo■, a,u1, ab aaico internoeca-
.!E. 55b, De oohib. ira 45.3 • e: 06 y~p wb lU{l3or,ov,ol,,a.1.,6ct &tpantdmxna.
cn.,vex,lrta&a.1. '(, vo~µa'tL 'f~V A,,o,i&~A'lµµlvov'f« '(' ~ux, avvfxtLV 'fao 1<pCnt1.o
xal cpuXdootL..,.
V. anche Hor., aat. II 3, 82; epiat. II 2, 137 col co-. ti KIESSLING-HEINZE
(et. ti E. BOB0X:-Berlin 1957).
52.Plat., !§. 659• - 660..
53. Philof., De lib. tic. fr. 18, 1-3. .
54. Alla 1. 2 ecrivo afr{.ft , non ati-#, con l 1 0livier1.
55. Per 11 ruolo fell& vou3l"fnoto nella concezione epicure& lella pu:rbeeia,
ot. •• GIGANTE,Ricerohe Piloteaee, pp. 55-57.
56. et. De lib. Ho. fr. 16,2 •·• VIII b 11 • XXLI a 7. Per l>'lM'tLMdv, or. an-
che De ira XXXVIII 7. et. Plut., guo■oio aiulator ab a■ ioo internoacatur
55 b (~ 6yoa Mi1t"f"IO' )•
57. Per 1 f&t'11&c1iraetici o forti e far■aci ••boli, of. Galen., co■poe, aeticu.
2, p. 590 Idhm.
58. De lib. tic. tr. 45.
59. De lib 1 Ho.Va 7-10.
60. De lib. Uc. fr. 69, 4 ••• 0L.
61. Philoi., De ira IV, et. WILKE.
62. Philof., Deir• v.
63. Philoi., De ira VI. Per 11 1ieaa 'cura fell'ira 1 nell'antichitk riaan•o a H.
RINGELTAUBE, Quaeetioiae ■ at veteru■ philoeophoru■ •• af'fectibue tootrina■
pertinentea, Diee. Gottin&,1913; P. RABBOW, Antike Schriften aber Seelenhei-
]Wg u.nf Seelenleitung aut ihre Quellen u.ntereucht 1 I. Die 'l'herapie ••• Zorna
(Berlin 1914); H.G. INGENXAICP, Plutarche Schriften Gber iie HeilWMt fer 8eele
· (Hypo■neaa ta, 34), GGttingen 1971.
64. Philot., De lib 1 tic. tr. 40. Ct. ancbe SCHIIID, l.o. 746-750.
65. Philo•., De lib.tic, fr. 66.
66. De lib. fie. fr. 23, 5 ••I fr. 40, 79, XXI b 2.
67. De lib, tic. fr. 44, 8-9.
68. Plat.,~- 857 ••
69. La re .. zione co•pleta lella preeente co■ unicazione apparira in •CErc• 5 (1975).

126
 BEOBACHTUNGEN ZUM GEBRAUCH MAKEDONISCHER MONATSNAMEN
IN RÖMISCHER ZEIT

Ursula Hagedorn

Als die mokedonischen Eroberer die Hernchaft in Ägypten ubernahmen, fuhr-

ten sie mit dem Griechischen als neuer Amtssprache auch ihren heimischen Ka-
lender ein, der allerdings den Hgyptischen niemals ersetzen sollte, sondern nur
als konkurrierendes System neben ihm bestand. Da sich das Hgyptische Sonnenjahr
als erheblich praktischer und Uberschauborer erwies als das mokedonische Mond-
jahr mit seinen jahreszeitlichen Verschiebungen, geriet letzteres im laufe des
zweiten Jahrhunderts v. Chr. al lmtthlich ganz ausser Gebrauch. Offenbar bestand
aber ein Interesse daran, nicht mit dem makedonischen Jahreskalender auch die
makedonischen Monatsnomen in Vergessenheit geraten zu lassen; so entschloss man
sich, die mokedonischen Monate in eine feste Beziehung zu den Hgyptischen zu
setzen. Alan E. Samuel hat den Vorgons:1 in seiner 11Ptolemaic Chronology" ous-
fuhrlich behandelt. Ein enter Versuch zur Harmonisierung wurde danach vermut-
lich schon vor 200 begonnen; er hielt sich Uber siebzig Jahre lang, bis er zwi-
schen 130 und 118 v.Chr. von einem anderen System abgelöst wurde. Im Gegen-
satz zu dem ersten Versuch ging man bei dem zweiten vom jeweiligen Jahresan-
fang aus, setzte den Dios, den ersten ltlonat des makedonischen Jahres, dem
Thoth gleich, den Apellaios dem Phoophi usf. Dieses zweite Harmonisierungssy-
stem hat sich anscheinend schnell und vollstttndig durchgesetzt. Bereits im ersten
.Jahrhundert v.Chr. finden wir keine Spur des alten Kalenders mehr, noch auch
des fruheren Ansatzes zur Harmonisierung.
Auf diese Weise hoben sich die makedonischen tv'onatsnamen nicht nur bis ans
Ende der PtolemHerzeit erhalten, sondern merkwurdigerweise weit darOber hinaus,
nHmlich bis ins vierte nochchristl iche Jahrhundert. Sie haben damit sogar die tv'o-
natsnamen Uberdouert, die zu verschiedenen Zeiten zu Ehren gewisser römischer
Kaiser oder ihrer Angehörigen eingefuhrt worden waren, und das, obwohl wir
einige von diesen, z. 8. den Sebastos, den Kaisareios oder den Hadrianos, zeit-
weilig viel hHufiger vorfinden als die makedonischen Namen selbst in ihrer Ge-
samtheit. Dieser Tatbestand wirft verschiedene Fragen auf: Warum werden auch
nach dem Untergang der ptoleml:Sischen Dynastie makedonische Monatsnamen ver-
wendet, von wem und wie? ltlsst sich eine historische Entwicklung ausmachen,
oder bleibt der Gebrauch wtthrend der Kaiserzeit konstant?
Um die letzte Frage gleich vorweg zu beantworten: Eine Entwicklung lttsst
sich nur bezuglich der HHufigkeit des Auftretens erkennen. Um diese zu berech-
nen, habe ich die schöne Übersicht benutzt, die Paul Bureth in "Les Titulatures
imperiales", BrUssel 1964, anhangsweise unter dem Titel 11Repartition chronolo-
gique11 zusammengestellt hat. Wenn man auf dieser Basis jeweils die Zeugnisse
aus funfzig Jahren zueinander in Beziehung setzt, gelangt man zu folgendem Er-

127
gebnis: Zu Beginn der Kaiserzeit finden wir in mehr als zweieinhalb Prozent der
datierten Urkunden makedonische Nonatsbezeichnungen; dieser Anteil sinkt konti-
nuierlich auf weniger als ein Prozent in der zweiten HHlfte des zweiten Jahrhun-
derts, steigt schl iessl ich noch einmal auf nahezu zwei Prozent wt:thrend des drit-
ten Jahrhunderts; allerdings ist in dieser Zeit bei solchen Kalkulationen schon
grosse Vorsicht geboten: Angesichts der geringen Zahl der aus dem dritten Jahr-
hundert Uberhaupt erhaltenen datierten Urkunden muss man damit rechnen, dass
das Ergebnis zuföll ig ist und nicht dem tatsttchlichen Anteil entspricht. Aus dem
vierten Jahrhundert gibt es dann nur noch vereinzelte Belege, den letzten siche-
ren, P. Theadelphia Nr. 1, von 306. Damit hört die Verwendung mokedonischer
M:lnatsbezeichnungen in Ägypten auf. Aus all diesen Berechnungen erkennt man
vor allem eines: Eigentl ich zahlreich waren die Urkunden wöhrend der Kaiserzeit
nie, in denen die alten Monatsnamen gebrauch wurden. Heute sind uns noch
insgesamt etwa 180 Belegstellen erhalten. Daraus ergibt sich als nttchstes die Fra-
ge: Was fur Texte sind das? Haben sie vielleicht in irgendeiner Hinsicht etwas
Gemeinsames? Die Antwort ist verbluffend schnell gefunden: Es sind ausschliess-
1ich sogenainte Stoatsnotariatsurkunden, wie sie Paul Meyer in den II Juristischen
Papyri 11 1920 beschriepen hat, das heisst: Privatvertrttge, die in einer staatlichen
Kanzlei ausgefertigt und beglaubigt worden sind. Kein privater Brief, keine offi-
zielle Korrespondenz findet sich darunter, keine Petition, kein Beamtenbericht,
aber auch keine Privaturkunde, die in einer anderen Form abgefosst wHre. Die
Hussere Gestalt dieser Vertröge und ihre Variationsmöglichkeiten hat Mrs. Hussel-
man im 2. Kapitel der Einleitung zu Bd. V der Michigan Papyri ausfuhrlich und
Ubersichtl ich dargestellt; unter die von ihr gefundenen Regeln lassen sich sHmtli-
che mir bekannten Urkunden subsumieren, welche mithilfe makedonischer Monate
datiert sind. Andererseits bietet naturlich nur ein Bruchteil dieser Urkundengruppe
makedonische Monatsnamen, viele verwenden römische Birennamen, viele begnU-
gen sich auch mit den einfachen Hgyptischen. Die allgemeine Gestalt dieser Ur-
kunden ist folgende: Sie beginnen mit Datum und Ort, gefolgt zuweilen von der
Angabe der ausstellenden Notariatskanzlei. Dann schliesst sich der eigentliche
Vertragstext an in Form einer Homologie oder eines Protokolls. In manchen Ur-
kunden fehlt dieser Teil, es ist dann normalerweise ein Spatium for seine even-
tual le sptttere Eintragung freigelassen. Es folgen diesem Hauptteil die Subskriptio-
nen einer oder beider vertragschliessenden Parteien, die mehr oder minder aus-
fuhr! ich den in der dritten Person gehaltenen Vertragstext in der ersten Person
wiederholen. Da man, wenn man den eigentlichen Vertragstext erst sptiter einfu-
gen wollte, die Subskription recht ausfUhrlich halten musste, um aus ihr alle
notwendigen Angaben entnehmen zu können, entsteht in diesem Fal I bisweilen
leicht der Eindruck einer subjektiv stilisierten Urkunde. Der gewöhnlich geson-
dert datierte Registrationsvermerk der Kanzlei findet sich entweder vor der Sub-
skription oder am Kopf oder Ende des Blattes; hHu_flgfehlt er auch gljnzlich.
Was nun den Gebrauch makedonischer Monatsnamen in diesen Urkunden angeht,
so ist zweierlei zu bemerken: Erstens finden sie sich ausschl iessl ich in der feier-

128
liehen Dotierung am Kopf des Vertrages, nicht mehr im weiteren Verlauf des Ver-
tragstextes und auch niemals im Registrationsvermerk. Zweitens folgt dem make-
donischen M>natsnamen stets ein Äquivalent, entweder in Gestalt des entspre-
chenden Hgyptischen M>natsnamens oder in der eines römischen Ehrennamens (auf
den Unterschied zwischen beiden Nisglichkeiten werde ich noch zu sprechen kom-
men}. Das bedeutet: Der makedonische Monatsname hat nur noch eine dekorative
Funktion, der eigentlichen Datierung dient das Äquivalent. Angesichts dieser
Tatsache Uberroscht es, wie selten Fehler in der richtigen Einordnung auftreten;
die wenigen Fttlle weroen wir gleich noch betrachten. - Von diesen beiden Re-
geln, dass nHmlich makedonischtt 1-/onatsnamen erstent nur im Kopf der Urkunde l ..-,
vorkommen und dass sie ferner stets ein Äquivalent nach sich fohren, gibt es
ebenso wie von der, dass es sich um StaatsnotoriatsvertrtSge handelt, keine Aus-
nahme. Wo es dennoch so scheint, muss man einen Lese- , Ergttnzungs- oder In-
terpretationsfehler suchen.
Verbluffenderweise sind ubrigens dio einzelnen Monate zahlenrnt:1ssig sehr un-
gleich bezeugt; die Skala reicht von je drei 8e 1egen fur die Monate Dios und
Ponemos bis zu dreissig fUr den Apellaios. E:ine pla·Jsible Erklörung fUr diesen
Umstand habe ich ausser Beliebtheit nicht finden können, denn ober die reine
Zahl hinaus ergab die Betrachtung der einzelnen f.ltonate keine bemerkenswerten
Unterschiede, ausgenommen vielleicht den Hyperberetaios.
Als sinnvoller hingegen erwies es sich, die Urkunden nach den Gauen zu
ordnen, aus denen sie stammen: 135 Belegstellen Iiefert der Arsinoites, nur 38
kommen aus dem gesamten ubrigen Ägypten, genatJ geo111agt - wenn man von zwei
Einzelfttllen absieht - aus den drei benachbarten Gauen Herakleopolites, Oxy-
rhynchites und Hermopol ites, so geordnet nach der Menge der Belege; doch sind
die Zahlen fur jeden dieser drei Gaue so gering, dass der Zufall eine betröcht-
liche Rolle spielen mag. Trotzdem reicht das Material aus, um zu erkennen,
dass zwischen den Gauen Unterschiede im Gebrauch makedonischer f.ltonatsnamen
bestehen, die sich keineswegs auf die pure Htlufigkeit beschrt:tnken. Augenföllig
tritt dies bei einem Vergleich der Belege aus dem Arsinoites und dem Oxyrhyn-
chites zutage: Ymhrend im Arsinoites dem makedonischen f.ltonatsnamen stets das
Wort fJl'JVa~vorausgeht, etwa 1,,1rivo~i1U<trpou WEfJTTIJ
TiJßL 1riµnn 1 wird es im
Oxyrhynchites stets weggelassen, also l1u<trpou wit,.1,;,_TJ
Tüfh 1reµ,;,.r;i(ohne µF]V6~).
Vmhrend die Vertragstexte im Arsinoites ublicherweise mit AµoXoyet bzw. bµo-
Xoyoüchv eingeleitet werden, haben die Vertrfjge aus dem Oxyrhynchites durch-
weg die Form des Protokolls; und das, obwohl die Vertragsform der Homologie
grundstttzl ich auch im Oxyrhynchites beliebt war. Vor ollem aber finden wir im
Arsinoites Abmachungen aller Art mit makedonischen .Monatsnamen dekoriert,
hauptsHchlich Miet-, Kauf- und DarlehensvertrtSge, dazu Bestt:ltigungen Uber
Schuldentilgung, Urkunden, die wohl auch die Masse der Notariatsurkunden
schlechthin ausmachen; daneben aber auch Heiratsvertrt:tge, letztwillige VerfUgun-
gen und anderes. Vertrogsgegensttlnde sind hier Ht!user, Grundstucke, Saatgut,
Geld und was sonst infrage kommt. Im Oxyrhynchites hingegen handelt es sich

129
fast ausschliesslich um Sklaven. Zehn von insgesamt dreizehn oxyrhynchitischen
Urkunden mit makedonischen Monatsnamen regeln den Kauf oder die Freilassung
von Sklaven, bei einer weiteren ist das wahrscheinlich, und nur zwei betreffen
mit Sicherheit anderes. Von den elf Urkunden, die sicher oder wahrscheinlich das
Schicksal von Sklaven angehen, sind ubrigens bemerkenswerterweise funf im letz-
ten Monat des Jahres, dem Hyperberetaios, ausgestellt, und davon wiederum drei
in den Epagomenoi. Ebenso ouffüllig ist, dass in allen diesen Texten der Hyper-
beretaios nicht dem ögyptischen Mesore gleichgesetzt wird, sondern dem rtSmi-
schen Ehrenmonat Kaisareios, etwas was im Arsinoites undenkbar wUre. Im Oxy-
rhynchites aber finden wir zu diesen Fttllen tatsHchlich noch eine Parallele in
P. Oxy 1 99 aus dem Jahr 55. Zwar wird hier unpassenderweise der Audnaios
nicht dem zu erwartenden Neos Sebostos = Hothyr gleichgestellt, sondern dem
Sebostos, welcher ein Äquival~nt fur Thoth ist (- Gleichartige Fehler finden wir .
in P.I.F.A.O. 1 1, wo Loios und Phaophi gepaart sind, statt Apellaios und Pha-
ophi, und vielleicht auch in CPR 84; allerdings vermute ich, dass in diesem sehr
schlecht erhol tenen Papyrus µrivd~ & Cou E>w8 statt µl')Vd~ h.»"~ou ewe zu le-
sen ist -), doch haben wir in diesem Oxyrhynchospapyrus auf jeden Fal I einen
Ehrennamen vor uns. Das legt eine Vermutung nahe, fur deren Beweis wir zwar
löngst nicht genug Material haben, aber es spricht bei nHherer Betrachtung der
Zeugnisse auch nichts gegen die Annahme, dass dem makedonischen Namen im
Oxyrhynchites stets ein römischer Ehrenname beigegeben wurde, wenn dies mög-
lich war; denn nicht fur alle Monate war ja jederzeit ein solcher Ehrenname ver-
fugbar. Wir haben neben den schon erwHhnten fUnf Urkunden vom Hyperberetaios
und dem P .Oxy 1 99 noch sieben weitere Urkunden aus dem Oxyrhynchites, da-
von funf aus den /ilonaten Dystros, Xandikos, Loios und Artemisios, fur die in
der Zeit zwi sehen 98 und 291, aus der sie stammen, keine Ehrennamen 9,ebrHuch-
1ich waren; eine Urkunde, P .Oxy XIV 1706, nennt den Dios, aber das Aquiva-
lent, potentiell der Sebastos, steht in der locke. Ein weiterer Vertrag, PSI II
182, nennt den Ponemos; auch hier steht das Äquivalent in der Lucke, doch
weist die noch erhaltene Bezeichnung µl')Vo, auf einen Ehrennamen hin; .denn er-
stens findet man vor diesen den Zusatz Oberhaupt ungleich htiufiger als vor den
einfachen ögyptischen .V.Onatsnomen, und zweitens weisen eben die hier betrach-
teten Doppeldatierungen in den paar Ftil len aus dem Oxyrhynchites, wo es sich
beim zweiten Bestandteil um einen Ehrennamen handelt, stets diesen Zusatz auf,
nicht aber die erwtshnten funf, fur die nur ein tsgyptisches Äquivalent infrage
kommt. Auch im Arsinoites finden wir in den Doppeldatierungen niemals IJ'lva,
vor dem tsgyptischen filonatsnamen. Der Ehrenname, der in PSI 182 infrage
körne, wHre der Germanikeios, und zuföllig haben wir aus eben dem Jahr, aus
dem diese Urkunde stammt, nt!mlich 234, den letzten sicheren Beleg fur ihn.
Es scheint also durchaus so zu sein, dass dies im Oxyrhynchites nicht nur erlaubt,
sondern die Regel war: Als Äquivalent fur eine mokedonische .Monatsbezeichnung
wird noch Mtsglichkeit ein Ehrenname eingesetzt.
Wir können als &gebnis festhalten: Zwischen Arsinoites und Oxyrhynchites be-

130
 stehen erhebliche Unterschiede im Gebrauch der makedonischen Monatsnamen,
und zwar sowohl formal im Arrangement der Datierung, also z.B. tJflVO~ 'Ywep-
ßEpeTaCou Meaop~ im Aninoites, hingegen 'YwspßepsTaCou µriva~ Kal.OOpe(ou
im Oxyrhynchites, wie auch, was den Inhalt der solchermassen datierten Vertrö-
ge angeht. Die Einschrttnkung auf Sklavenangelegenheiten im Oxyrhynchites
könnte auch die relative Seltenheit des Vorkommens mokedonischer Monatsnomen
in diesem Gau erklören; denn ebensowenig wie im Aninoites alle Notariatsur-
kunden schlechthin sind im Oxyrhynchites alle Notariatsurkunden, die sich mit
Sklaven befassen, mit makedonischen Monatsnamen ausgestattet. Woher aber
Uberhaupt die Spezialisierung im Oxyrhynchites rUhren mag, dofor habe ich nicht
die geringste Vermutung. Zwar ist der Typ der Staatsnotariatsurkunde im Oxy-
rhynchites Oberhaupt viel seltener als im Arsinoites, insgesamt gibt es nicht viel
mehr als 80 Belege; trotzdem ist der Themenkreis der Notariatsurkunden in die-
sem Gau weit grösser als die Belege fur makedonische Nonatsnamen erkennen
lassen: Abgesehen von Pachtvertrögen, die es im Oxyrhynchites als Notariatsur-
kunde nicht gibt, finden wir fast das gleiche Sortiment wie im Arsinoites.
Gemeinsam ist allen Belegen aus römischer Zeit, aus Arsinoites und Oxyrhyn-
chites sowohl wie aus Herakleopolites und Herrnopolites, dass sich mokedonische
Monatsnamen ausschliesslich in der feierlichen Datierung am Kopf von Staotsno-
toriotsurkunden finden und dass sie dort stets ein al !gemein verstöndli ches oder
amtlich anerkanntes Äquivalent neben sich haben. So ist es nur noch eine schma-
le Sparte in der Gesamtmenge der öffentlichen und privaten Urkunden Ägyptens,
die ein Fort- oder besser Nachleben des alten makedonischen Kalenders ermög-
licht, diese 'allerdings fur lange Zeit, nz:!mlich mehr als drei volle Jahrhunderte
nach dem Zusammenbruch der PtolemHerherrschaft.
Zum Abschluss, sozusagen anhangsweise, wil I ich noch auf ein Phttnomen zu
sprechen kommen, das gor nicht ins bisher entworfene Bild passt; und wie sich zeigen
wird, es gehört auch gar nicht hinein. In P. lond. III 1164, einer Rolle Bankdiagra-
phai aus Antinoopolis, die olle demselben Monat angehören, lesen wir unter ver-
schiedenen Tagesdaten insgesamt achtmal tJflVa~ TTov~ou 4>apµoiJ8", wo wir doch
nach unsrer Kenntnis des mokedonischen Kalenders tJ'lVa~ TTavft.aouTTaxwverwarten
wurden, und auch das keinesfalls in der Eintragung eines Bankbeamten, wie es hier
der Fall ist. Die &klttrung ist schon lang, aber nicht allgemein bekannt. Man
findet sie in einer. rtlumlich sehr bescheidenen Untersuchung von Mary Dicker, j
Archiv Bd. 9, S. 2tt,-7: Es handelt sich hier uberhoupt nicht um den mokedoni- .t
sehen, sondern um einen der ursprUngl ich milesischen lv'onotsnamen, die vermut-
lich bei der GrUndung von Antinoopolis mitsamt der Verfassung von Naukrotis
ubernommen worden waren. Sie finden sich infolge dieses Zusammenhangs auch
nicht nur in Privaturkunden, sondern ebenso in amtlichen Texten, und der Pa-
nemos entspricht hier einem anderen Hgyptischen Äquivalent als der gleichlau-
tende makedonische Name. Anzumerken ist, dass aufgrund dieser Tatsache in
derselben Rolle, Abschnitt k, Zeile 9, in der Lucke nicht 'Aws~).a(ou, sondern

131
der entsprechende milesische l\.bnatsname J\'lVaLwvo~ zu ergönzen ist, und dass
in Nr.38 der von Schwartz herausgegebenen P.I.F.A.O. vermutlich vor der
Lucke in der ersten Zeile nicht 'ApTEJJLCSCou,sondern 'ApTefJLCSLwvo~ zu lesen
ist, falls die Urkunde, wie Schwartz wegen der Namen der Amphodo vermutet,
tatsöchlich aus Antinoopolis stammt. Dies wtlre dann meines Wissens der einzige
Beleg, der seit 1930 zu den von /thJry Dicker verzeichneten Stellen hinzugekom-
men ist.

132
 Stae new traps nta of Greek Come~

E.W.Handley

Plates XVI-XIX
The tragmenta that I abould like to diaouas present two exercises
1n anal.yaia and oompariaOll - one palaeographical and the other
11terary. Rovel ty apart, they aeem to me to raise a number of
question ■ under both beada which are open and interesting to pur-
sue, and it ia for that reaaon, rather than from a comiotion of
certainty 1n the conclusions I have reached, that thia presentation
ia oftere4. It 1a pleasant at tha outset to thank the Egypt Explor-
ation Sooiety for tha opportunity to at~ iv subject, a set of
1
fragments f'roll 11110ngthe hitherto unedited papyri from Oxyrh,yn.ohua •

A prel1 ■1Mry deaoription -v be uaetul. After some fitting

together, and with ao• pieoea atill left unplaoed, we have to do
with the Nm&ina ot three 22-11.ne oolwma from a roll containing
a play of Jfew Comedy. i'he aoript ia the fcrmal round hand lmown
a ■ biblical maJuaoule; the fcrmat ia generous, with broad upper and
lower margin.a; punotuation and oooaaianal aooenta and other leotional
signs haft been added with care; there are marginal notes in a minute
semi-cursive. In mort, theae are tha remains of a scholar' a text
of a high oalligraphio order, a book ot the type well described by
B.G.Turner in hia Greek PapYl"i at pp.92ff. We wonder whether the
copyist of thia remarkable roll ia one we know fran elsewhere; and
we wonder what waa the play.

Biblical majuacule ia the subject ot a recent very fu.lq illustr-

ated aonograpb by Guglielmo Cavallo, from whom I take that particular
name for thl acript, and 111.uilelae in what follows beaidea 2 • Our

true to type.
I have verticals
r,
new speai.men, if not a.l•ya mechanically elegant,
ia strictly bilinear:
is praotiaed
that ia to aay only I and
which go acroaa, both above and below, the notional
and

two lines whiah contain the script; P and Y descend very slightly
below the line. The letters, excluding I P I I and co, are intended
to oompoae within a square. 'lhe ourrea are regular; there is a
careful balance of weight between horizontals, verticals, and dia-
gonal.a. So much, and more that could be added in a11plitioation,
is generally and widely true of manuaoripta in this atyle. Ther-e
ia however one interesting book, surviving aa a aingle fragment,
which aeema to have a quite particular likeneaa to our a.

133
 I baYe in ll1D4 a trepeDt 1D the Johll J1¥lan4a 1mi:nra1 ty
Library in llanoheater which waa tirat published aa Pl.ylanda
1.16 by A.S.Hunt in 1911". Tbia 1a a piece out troa a roll
which, like oura, contained a play ot 1'ew Comedy. It •• uaed
on ita Terao ■ 14• fer a letter from one Syroa to Heroninoa,
ff>O"'ncTfic or tarm-bailitt ot 'l'beadelpbia in the Payyum,part
ot whoae archive it forma. The date ot the letter talla in
the third year ot c:&lliaua, 1n A.D.256. Row 11Uoh earlier than
that the copy of the play waa wr1 tten ia a .. tter ot atrild.ng
disagreement. Hunt considered that '• manuaoript ao elaborate
would probably not be qu1ok:ly deatroyed': hia top date •a 215,
al.lowing forty yeara ot uae; but 'the text may well belong ••• '
(be went on to aay} 'to the latter part ot the aeoond century•.
Turner, writing ·in 19;,.., noted that correapondenta in the Heron-
inoa archive bad uaed acrap documents over a century old and
proposed a aeeond century date tor the literary pieces: tor
thia one, around A.D.150 ,._ C.H.Jloberta, in Greek Literary
Randa, p.22, thinks ot a date 'not very distant from A.D.200'.
Theae are a selection ot opinions. Cavallo' a date, on atyl-
iatic grouncla, ia remarkable in being both high and specific:
1 t ia 220-225, which for hi■ ia a oardinal point in the form-
ation ot 1:bia graphic style.

W-111$
,,,_ 110.
(U liM•) (IO U.a)

A diagram (fig.1) ray aerve to abow bow similar in format the two
roll.a were. Compariaon ot the script ia a rather more delicate
matter: we have to remmber that the two specimens are baaioa lly

134
alike (aa two Carolingian bi'blea lligbt be) purely aa members ot
tm ••• formal genre ot writing: one oould uagaarate their re-
aeablanoe. One oould alao underrate it: it, by a general im-
preaaion, the bud at POz;y aee ■a leaa precisely controlled and
treer in minor variants of letter-fcrma than that ot Plcy'l, "
need to allow firstly that the aUl"face ot POxy 1a 1n -.rkeclly
worse oondi tion, and otten atte oted by warping, oraoka and minor
abraaiona; secondly, that PB.yl is a specimen of very limited
extent, from one oolumn only, and. with tewer examples rl aome
letters than one would ideally have.

To come to details: there are perh&pa aix letter a in POxy

whoae formation calla tcr comm.ent hare. Delta ahowa (at leaat)
four vll"ianta: (i) a practically straight-sided triangle; (11)
the left aide bowa in slightly or out slightly; (iii) the right
aide can extend .-rkedly beyond the peak;(iv) the right-hand stroke
can lap OTC" the lett 1n a near-vertical formation. In~.
and in other vertioala, a simple upright &1t.-nata a with an up-
right having a alight initial glide of the pen t.rom lett to right;
there can alao be a little right-left 110V•mt at the end of the
stroke aa preaaure o•aea. XapJ!: (1) baa thin upper arm, slightly
thicker lower arm, neat junction with upright; (11) tbe contrast
ia leaa ironounoed, and there ia a gap between tha upright and
the Junction ot the anaa. In !!!:!_, a fractional shift of the pen
aa the oroaa stroke begina and end.I can give a lightly aerifed
etteot to one aide or to both. Upsilon is noticeably variable;
often narrow and with abort a.rma Joining high; the right arm and
the upright a.re ao•tlmea aade virtually in one movemmt. Omicron,
finally, may be noted tor ita tendency to flatten and become oval
with the weight of tha tcrlling a1rolcea~

PB3l, though to Jq,V eye -Yery closely aiailar, ia in fact a

11 ttle more lightly and delicately wr1 tten than POxy ( though 1n
tr.D ot ~ there ia almost nothing to ohooae). Ot delta, there
ia only one apaoi•n, perhaps not significantly dirtm-ent fro ■
the variety in POxy; there are two kappaa, both neat and neither
with the gap between anaa and upright found in POxy on occasion;
.!2!!, !!!! and upsilon seem to 1H comparable ( though the ap ecimena
of the last in PRyl genara.lly nm to a broader-looking top); there
ia a leas noticeable trend tar omicron to flatten. Leotional sign.a
are added in both copie a in the aw • tiouloua way; the •rg:I nal
annotation ot PR.yl ia not, I think, in the same writing as those in
POxy (but of oourae the same book can have notes by more than one
hand).
Similarity is one thing, identity anoth8l". There ia almost
certainly no point in arguing that we are dealing with parts of

135
thl
the
•m•roll, eYen it one were convinoed tbat the handwr11:1ng ia
aame; for the fragments aNlt to have bad a ditt.-ent history.
The Oxyrhynobua pieces ha"fe traoea ot • preaenative with which
they were treated; not ao the Ryland.a fragment, ao far aa I can
tell. 'l'he ~land.a fragment ended up in an archive at Theadelphia;
the others, discarded and not reuaed, in the Oxyrhynobus rubbish-
heap from which they nre dug. I aay this beoauae the fcrmat ia,
after all, very similar; and considering the variation in linea
per column in such calligraphic papyri aa the Baoohylidea and the
Herod.as rolla in the British Museum, it ia not ruled out from the
atart that a book in this style should tave ooluma both of 22
linea and of 20 )•

The concluaion is then that we are dealine with bo distinct

but very similar roll a, produced to the same design in bandwri ting
which ia oloaely alike, if not after all that rl the same person 6 ,
and then (apparently by different people) meticulously punctuated
and equipped with aarginal notea. Were they, one wonders, two of
a aet of the aame comic poet? Doea the production of copies of
comedy to a standard patt..rn imply production in the same place?
What waa the place? These are all queationa eaaier aaked than
answered. It baa been thought of the Rylanda fragment that be-
cause ot the special quality cl the book, the play muat be by the
specially esteemed writer cl Nn Comed_y, llenander. One might feel
the u.me about our n• pieoea; and poaaibly the two prejudioea gi"fe
acme support to each other. With that feeling, while recognizing
that it ia not evidence, we should move on to consider the comic
text itaelt. One tinal r..,rk on the dating: I do not venture
to gueaa ,mat effect on future diaouaaion of the Rylanda piece
will be produced by the accesaion of what ia, on &DJ' account, a
pretty close relative from Oxyrbynohus. I will •rely add that
if one were looking far a suitable early context in Oxyreynchua
tor the acquiai tion ot such a book, 1 t could well co• from that
letter about books which was published by I&- Roberta as POxy 18.2192,
and is diacuaaed by Professor Turner in Greek Pap.yri (pp.87tr)
and Greek MSS of the ancient world (No.68). The date assigned ia
about A.D.170, from aora of thl people named, and aome will say
that this, for our purpoaea, ia too early. Here however are the
worda of someone attemptina to acquire scholarly books for his
library, someone moreover with more than a paaaing interest in Greek
drama, even if, on thia occasion, he ia not actually collecting
New Comed_y. I quote: "Make and send me copies of books 6 and 7
ot Hypaikrates, Komodoumenoi. Harpocration aaya they sre among
Polion'a books. But it is likely that othlllra too have got them.
He also baa prose epitomea of Thersagoraa' work on the myths
of '!'raged¥."
• • •

136
 ,.
l'l'-'•..,.,1t,T.f4-~~Ye[ l'l"' 11t1t,u:xr.o* l•:1.1,o(cr.11-
2 l1i,rup1oi,ova1ce...,.'c.[ ]'lllpy~p,ou u 'ly{w
nic~
} jou1:~1:'ouxi,11~,xo1:i,[ ]o, th'ol. ~ 61n6ff)[c
lo J.011c11c1vo•µ~.u1tp.( ),011 l•d•u• ...~ v.11119-(
5 ]~It' I L~VllACµl,IO'I{ )bov• cl µiv •llwo ,[,
(. h,po6,...0111c,~Yoc.
{ 6c ]~po b,i µo L• •-m.woc \ ( Cl
7 -- ', ]upi,u .. 'q_Oll'lGI .. '},( 1 ]lpt)H 1•'how-. ( ) l"l. [
,i. ]'wOU''IO"Y'1-LULVOU(
'I r-
)1vou• 1:oi -pp ,C .. tw ou(
}cl~L11pa.11G[ l•poto,,a.,( Ju • 1,1np&-[ l] !Ulfl6t~1cn
'
10 )f,OX~MO'ouyo;i••~fJ-t ••• ( f,..t 'l<W 'I ]p&x011 Mt' o~oc &11i~ "'• • J. 10
11 ]xou-c,•,16wc-ul'Jl>.cyc1uµo1 • ]xow,:'• 16'< u l''l >.lyu c lt.ioi

,,
,2 }a.1:1,.i-ou1:'uo1t<cu::"'}f,,e1
I •
]c"JGtt;o/.-HfllY • ''"'•P""-'lwtC u; [
]a:uc- 1:o'h'&cok.GC, ( ) ~ Ma.
}na., .,&l.,c-to y'. ;.., •P""•,C u
u. ),uulllt) • jY't'a.i,;oypc1t"'""uxuq[ sa.l .,fa 6L]11AlllC,ca.Jv1'lxoyp&t,.i-.Gl 110-0['tv

,,
15 ],&v&ov(:.]ca.xcxP')~Cu'llc,v[
)cu:vt,i.,{.J.o...--&fM),6ow.,[
,.,&c'l t ,, },i&,&o,,, l • .;]co. ••XF1JU1t.1lv
•u uw
]~ c-.,1'( • Jyo-.,ic", • 4aoi 6o-t [ t
17 l•c~•·1c. pl""l"'1'09"0..-falic:L Ju•~• 9(') l,l<l'r'J"1"f 1'oha. ti,t

,,
18
.
]1:~
...
](011 '; ( ~f'9-'IL'lalll'llpoOf"l'Oll'llOUV
]n • O.D'I' • a.11a.rac,L
01t6' H-C
1'cw.
}'fii l~)iv
~ u WII "'f'OlpYO•-udw
1
,a.1T " &»cyxa.to., 6'Ic11e
20 - -- }('rOUY'IG''rOll'l'cc-uv>.eyu{ )<'folv,o. 10IT"lcuv llyc,(11
21 ] , •,._o,:cpo.t!WU'lv.'t)..cuG' l. .,.,h. pcL C 911'111:~Va.

22 ]wc•~vo.•pil'wc•.l.lClt'G.( J.,c· tt&e.w !w.p1f!,loc:ci(c ]~h

&2 J • tool ot • w.rtioal , ftlll "'11 al"tlwlaU•, •••• c]olJ IM&t.ii 1,,tt.r,t.
per,011 or 1Mri, Mt la the 1114 -flll c or --na{• ,
3 IDII _,._. , ill lffao4 plaoe ■ N-- to Ill otl'Ht,
~ •· •· i-li•uea.l d"oc, 1,1'1u•p&l mu • h n" .r
aot aa aoceatJ a.... ii ■on ril U. .-n7. Th• W,IWpcl&M((1)
u-\loulatiaa h _ _.ta1a1 h rl" or dee (1)) , er. klpo 6ft-'61(.s at f!Dk.,i.i. ~h~ a, ....
'f ]old -r', 1:0 1:0\ )oh6 1' ■uat be oouidered i,odc H ··•· At.da, Told1u1 2)0 l
7 111pt t.N.oe1 on poOr .urtam 1 .... U •~t- 7 It
(H ~.
I }1("11~ or --.,tllllllC
!PIlJ.r-}
elH
rill
.,.._,...
111 ezpan.4
- - I"! ( u -
d ~ 1114
1'\al .,_, rou-, 1111
10-20 !he INCS.llllinc•ot 10, , ..... 15 NA 111-
10 .u tht 1114, tnt or l.t1■ r, ooly1 they aicc••t Jeoti.re4 with r,1r ~Utty. M4 MIM"' toptll■r

tt
""'°'
' ~I)( OI' u. like
01.h•wi•• 1t-1oy{, \Nt 1 .. , llul7 10
\hat ti.r. 11 • loH ril ••• lut•• tl'O ■ tlile
.. .,117. ftth1a thH• U.alta •IV' poHlllllltlH
n1tont.tten oaa 111, ... 1... ,4, • 11901•• roll.Oita,
tar
11.••
1) the p.1Mt..Uoa y'••u •ll ■ ror t.111trl.nal
oor"ott• or llw to a. 111or4ff to Ho14 •
(A.) ••• hi "'°''OHO(""~
'fW 1:]p&,,011 -,.h [i..,'• - 10
'■plt.t wpau ■ t• I ... Pt.. 910f ,;I ..... .,,,.!f
I\
4u.'ci ~••Jxo..,'.t6- 1:1 l'fi U,-H fllol
p.&.. ..a.r (,) oa Jze,,176, 2~. 'f'unot.uatioa
I (1,)
u& Cl 1111,1)a.uC-1'01•"&•ofo:w: "'I t.Ccr.
atwr yw -14 hn, ,s.... a 19rtpt10 Rlfllf, H
n,-uCc )na.& ~'"' y', Li •ph- d cc
(appu-•t.1,1) la 17 HlO. aa.l 1,1~6,Jw• ,ct)H'&.o,.plt. w -.l['lv
• llap1■ 4 \o
16 c....C•}yol.-v
tb, ,paoe lllu
11 ill.l&MlJ'
<llatlpohioi111v
better
,..,,•a,,l) 1P6o•, l..&Jca. •~IIOfl•"' "'''"• ,s
(A.} al 'lG'1: ~ c11atl•Jyo-.,.cv,• fl,loi 6o-tlt,
17 titMr 111a. or tlla llreu:, Ula i.rt-ball4 are
Tt6116'&y'.,]ic• 1,1'• 9('} t.G'"P',.,. -'h• kt
... tlll ''" of , rCMDd.ln ter, 11 o or I,
c1,1'l~11:4Jtovt'I.- "' u ttpofpyo• •octu .
.,.. ao,t U..t1'11' ot - leU■ r aot two, l11t lo.l&WC] , .. [1,1Ji• tcik'. IWG't"llolOW
,., CIIC
NFPha ot tbtl •iA ,...,_.,.-that oon-Ht -]c1'olw-ra.1'0IT'lc11v ~l"IL(w• 20
eltc--t llan la DOI 1ln11 l17 that ril 8•1lJ
U 1■ 4at.er■llltl4 .. .,,._,..ki, aail "ther 1111
po■itlY1l.7 lty tM 1lllpe ot the llNak u4 lly t.111
.,_.uoal t1br11
18 (), blah 1.nk, tNM ril I laU.r rather than •
;to,J..-••i.,, 11oth1 .. lo,t .rter lt1 '"'°"f
ru, "' .-, lie .,.r1tu4

137
 I
J.'i"l1l.}M;y&t 1,\1'1( ) lira.
2 l. ,1-1va.1oc:it0· l. t ""a.r61-.
} ] , OIIIIOHlbcll ).oh o,~h ,;
,.. focuo't'6'01:1 )1)( s; oi6'Sn
5 ],:[•1.+oucqc, l-clp191'0•t
hu 5
6 ]uu .... Pllll~,[
7 ]cp..caollonq111c[ lspac ( ) AAA
'oh lxc&e
8 ]11op111f1a.r ] lopn•0111.
9 l~•u>.1u ] •nl>.,u
10 ) 'I¥! vc11110f"1" )'dtLc _,. 10
11 J-r,o, •• L. l. .. (

,,
12 )n t • • lWf.lln
]91cwo.mpa
}lu- fyw6l -ri
}o,ow oh &p,,
u.
15
)ov-ccc,:>.ric
}i,ovn 6paau1ft
'°" ]~'tee uricCw
]wown, a,-l•, ,,
16 )po,m , &r,).o.6,i )o.own I ( )6~
17 l. (G.HOll(lOA'II lt ca..Hw ex~
18 1¥1~ni•·cxw· ( ] 'JIii'm>,>..a.~I' .. [ J.. - 1tplin.t' • ,,.
19 J.( . h«..dov• Jt[a.] .....
20 ],n,n,~ur ll'}~l wnl .-xat1 20
21 ].~ ).~
22 )U'IOKO"llGI ~Plt ... l I[ ]le w'ho· -1
IUl"'Tr C1t,,111ck

11 ft,e lei._. _... .. ••• par•p• 111 1"1 NII a lofll•tCa. (t-.,~.) or 1opC.t.• (an1:.,1. )t
1M peHN liul Do\ w.-ltl..t 12 'I( t.atan-o,. er lllhf •' I,- 6' 'ICI INlll14 N
2 [a Noon4 phoa, 1_. pu'I ot a ffrUoal a ..,,:Let• -tau, INt la U. ••-- of
' l11alrl WM ,ueotuaU• -. ••- I , ......... U (1•1•)
6 n. ...,.,....
of a 111.p
ta ,uU,1 nrt.pp.a -,.
OUl"H
or •••••
llaton.
., P.ra,.11u tol 6l .&..et.,.,,..,
I lc•1•J
t11e NO-,
Ula ft.NI la • Idell 4o1i or 111111, 1Sf' ]t'Offl,,,)po•n IIIIIHla ••Nl IW,.U.ll•, ...
••- att-ob iilopba or INr'Tiq lat\ to rlaht, (lt ao) a rill .. ...U.--1 .,.. f ....... ta ....
INal .... ooul4 M Ja"*or - larp ..-,_ a ••tat 11 1111N ltkal,J lo • • tana fl •••
lett. J -· ld4II Dlill"H, \op fJil • .. C. ... u.a to .... '·" 11.ra1 •-• or •.......,.,, fl,
-rpn, ti.apm.la, tc,p flt• or l• fttl,,- !ll1l '91!1,i.:.,>5 n• ....... ,., ._.
-,111 11a m,aala...t, 1JMuata 111a 1noe, ao an
_,,..,. .... .,[, tlr.t. ,...., or • -uoa1, .. 20 et, !tee?"'• t)f ltaol1,11111t,
.._,, ul Ila
M a4da4 Uooloa (') I Nocal, l•tl al .. ot • t • ? IPP!toa 62 fflll ...... ~' {-r]C"''
11 ••• [., ], ... r11.a1, •• 1w ..,,.,, 1n .. or 22 EAJ•➔-- .. lb, lbh ll• .t.UI ml at •trN-
top U( teol aa fil I Ill' C
11.tlll,....... , ...
•4, •• •' llll·'°'
17 ]., 11.lp .. 1°" lair UlllMtal I OI' C
11 lef'on ,- theN 11 a oraalr, wt 11 ii an
olNr lhat 1111th1111U 1011, u4 Iba •II
at H b1gla1 Sa tile •-- t. ,u....-
'ftle
-- or the •o• h ( to •) 'lllllolly UMllu-
22 Mrpa hd'"I y{a.,) htb htr- n TlleN
11 .,,....•tl.7
ftl'J' 111111 lla•p to II• 1ltt1n,
llut J: llaH Doi otltdaet • OOlfflaoilll rea4iftl cir
a ,_.. lllat of ttw .. ,..

138
 C: D C

'
2
l.~o{
].,•-•.(
2
l¼cy.1
),ocll(
J.,c,okou[
'
i. ]p:ok'4fnju
.,,
lo 1.-
),ow
H
s )\,,._. c• '"'°'. )1t~( ], .. .I
''
Jr•I ,l•~t
'
7
" r---.--
1'1,~(
7
J,..,oa.l.
i.,,,'::,[
e l.••1L.
J.i:il.l
.. c
8 1.• ~II
,o ' 1'1.\.•
I
'
10
]p111111u
l .. -C
11 JG••
,,
12 h,(
] _r1~---
.~ -·- ---
.. I
I [..-&J,a]
u,. )"5-.( ],.[
tS --- l .• u•C 2 )yc1•J
J.•>.rrcl
l .. l
),., ..•
16 --.[
' Jt,fll.(
4
17

,,
18
]tof[
lf•pl -
20
J,o-C
),(.J.C
,
21 ),[
2
22 htl

C1 Put of 11,)9~o(c, ot Ula 4erhat1H Y..-tl, or

ot th• Jl!"OP_. ,._.. C•toh h not 110 tar blown 11,
C-.,,)
Jt J•, UpPff an4 1-r part.. flt • NrUM.1. 111 O~O(,
an anplar ll....,W.fts ha• 1Mleaa44e4 iaboYe an4 h•
-... tlle t.o .,._i.
ot the Uph\'-tc, 3Wlar17
I la tllh
e\rolru
oontrut
pteoe the pea-point
- ........
P'ri10ulu17 D aa4 P
la l•u
, bol.4w thaa la·- tbe anathe
pllMII

~,- .,.. th• ,1rauar1 .. •o••h lA 101,;' ot ,:ok'

t,''I' (.i.) and 016'(111.)i 1A tt1111aec..,-1 uptaUiana '"' ot t.o ourH4 lettera, poHl'l,q ft
')I tll• aoaeat 11illnb our \he N.ra\ uprtgh\ ot 'I•
~ lnk ntirean t.lle t1JOleUtrs (not All or U ' Morhont.al wt t'h thlclk •4 eugeab TI p&l'Mpa
look111& ltb ott .. t) WIP•t• th,t t t •u rtrat tlvlNtGN i.iJr, ~
wrlttea t.Mre aa4 1rH&d, Partw.pa anl7 11 ain,;1111
low polJit 11t the ••4
r ni. ,...,.1.,....,.._...a Ui• UN'llc'- ot u.
' 01' "'°" wt.th the lOltel' polat 'b~en ... , aor1pt
•~•
1t.1U9at. Uwlt U.. ,i--.,
nau At9rt, 'vt t.t tloe• aot •-
ha••... trca
to ,)o1a
6 It ,, the o.rou-1trok1 ,11u unu-lly thtok •t tha
left, Ht •lta""'\ln•
Pll'hlll)I .1. ~,}¥111[G]wtdo.8w'(or
<••••
_,r} "" not ,oo4.
-ah}: et. 119 ,. "· t TheH aiftute ..... ,. dtlll. t• trsoe, ot lftlr
parhiop1 be\C'ftl .S.th tJle Ht ot pl-• ,ut top\her
HC
7-12 The 3o1a h •4• rroa &11...-nt.a" llorhontal
tl'lwH, an4 ha1 • eh■ent of 4!1oubt 'bae• ..•• tlletr
ooncl1U1111t.. 10 poor; t.he ... tter lllaht 'b• l'lr •-nt
lt " po.. 1'bh Um: •lth Aft( \her ull't .. re ob""'•4

I ). 'trglJ[ ,
u,. A tenuoua but hia'hly prolt1tblc Jotn, tbe top1 ,,r .,,.
beinc rh• b:, -. •b-11.nd or \hC' Jo,,11r rr •1t-"' Mileti
bra Into pl.aoe, .[, -..ruc .. 1, u for J""'P9\'l

D Jt hteapUng to ~• Uat U.." ..,.. ltna-enh

fro■ theool- NpNMAW by C, bv\ I haw no\
rOWIII "ooar~ble pho•
M ror tti..
Ai11, _...,...
1-2 Poeai'bt,
(? )Jys],c \.~) •n4!1 1, b7 •lrd'.~1 er. 5 b•l""

• lru'w ...u..
' It l'P""g~(. ot. ?!$-•OS loe/nS :l
8 ],, ~eel tnot, •• 11., \., t. The 11'\r"giM-l 11-,u
•1 ll&Ye .__ It l'Hil rt. 112l'"J.t U•o

1 39
 Fragments of Greek Co•dy on papyrua have been auooeaatully
identified in a variety of waya. On rare ocoaaiona, usually when
the end of a copy aurvivea, we have a title, aa with the Sikyonioi
of Jlenamer in the Paris papyrus 7• Sometimes (and this might be
called the best kind of recognition) a previously known quotation
or a previously identified copy proves to Oftrlap with the new text:
one need only think of the astonishingly denaely a tt eated beginning
1 8
of Menander a tiaoumenos • Sometimes a particular proper name, or
better still a collooation of proper namea, will do the trick, aa
with a small unpubliah!d piece or Menander•a JColax from Oxyrhynchua,
1'hich givea us the well-known namea o~ the charaotera Strouthiaa And
Biaa, and praoU.cal ly nothing elae at all, exhausting 1 tself in the
process of self-identification 9. It may be that the vocabulary
of a piece auggeata an identity, and a good example i a a fragment
with a verbal form which 1a attested only for llem.nder (namely,
,w.p<1c'ta.)and references to the llother ot the Goda am to a girl
pone aaed by her : it waa ascribed, w1th di rtering degrees of con-
fidence, to Menander • s The ophoroumene and had to wait a quarter ot
a century for confirmation with the publication of an illustration
of the scene in queation, complete with play-title and characters'
names, among the aet of moaaice in the Maison du Kenandre at Chorapha,
Mytilene 10 • One can multiply examplea, and it is not uninstructive
to do ao; but all that needs to be said at thia point is that we do
not have (or rather, that I have not yet found) any such direct clue
to the identity of our piece. So unless aeyone else has a clue, we
shall have to be content, for the present, with guesswork.

Interpretation can beat begin from lines 12-15 of fr.A, where

the piece Joining on the left gives extra text. Taking no more
than appears from the first tranaoript, we have "Yea, by Zeus
( •••• ] very much ao" followed by "if I conceal anything from you";
in 14, &1toypa.tw (hOtfever we parse it) baa the speaker refen-ing
to hia •ldng a liat or inventory; in 15 there are ''the things inside"
and "we have lent to people".

In a context of listin.8, the antitheaia between things inside

and things lent to people is plain enough; 'JtOCO. ratb .. than aca. or
anything elae in the middle of the line ia warranted by the space
available; the beginning of 1he line equally eaa ily a ugge at a 1 tself,
but will need to be checked for length. That check is well given
by" 1 O, where an idiomatic expression can be recognized and rea tored
with confidence: "Here ' a a man who waa once racked on the wheel".
a.
tt[ ]v'fa. in the middle '4 14, is, I think• unshake'able , granted the space
available and the foot of a vertical for ,t. Given thia and an
ad't'erb preceding, xa.e'lv at the end can validly be predicted from xa.8[.
I am making this first set of moves very deliberately, because it

140
i·■ abaolutely critical to what follows; and we shall want to be aa
clear aa posaible, when we come to parallels, that they really are
parallels to a text that atanda by i ta own internal logic• and not
parallels which exist only becauH we have oanstructed our text to
make them so. Seven letters, it seems, are lost in this area. Al-
'
though I cannot p:ove that a.1toypa,-+u • need.a to be negatived and coupled
rather than taken aa future and independently,
with xp1nt."(c.> it does
ao happen that copula{ negative and the completion of 01xa.Cwc ( wbioh
I am unable to reaiatJ will satisfy the demnda of aenae 1 syntax and
apace.

So someone promises to make a full and fair inventory• conceal-

ing nothing. What kind of a person ia thia'? A ala'V'e with a new
master (w!'Uld one think?) or a prospective new llll:Ster taking over the
house - a literate and responsible slave, it ao; but no doubt also
a trioky one: nobody, I should suppose, would mice a !)l'"Omise of thia
kind in a oomec:13'if it waa not in aome way bogua. We think at Daos
in llena.nder' s Aapia, at this ex-pedagogue's talent for managing hie
young aster's affairs, at the way Smikrinea calla on him for an
account, an a22p:aphe, at tb9 valuables brought home from campaign in
Lycia which it ia hia aim to acquire by mZTying the nieoe to whom
they have paaaed with the auppoaed death of the owner in battle,
her brother and guardian. With the 'property' motif of the Aapis
recurring aa it doea, we are not aurpriaed at the start to rind
aome verbal parallels for our new piece ( the reader wi 11 find refer-
ences in the notea to the tranacripta). Here, though, to illustrate
the kinahip of 1heme with the Aapia, 18 Daoa himaelt apeak1ng ( 197):
"Agre•enta he made with people while away - these things I oan ex-
plain, if someone tells me to, and mow what waa done in detail,
where, how and with what wi tneaaea the arrangement waa mde; but
in the • tter of a will' Smikrinea, or marrying an heireaa ••• " -
that (he goea on to aay J ia quite another story.

Can we, 1n spite of the lack of continuous Greek, give aome

provisional account of the content of our fragmmta, ao that, with
all caution, thia kind of them.tic comparison can be pursued? I
should like to try; and I shall propo ae to tallow up three theme a
or strands of motif which we have already aeen woven together.
They are: first, the theme of the Angry Enquirer. the man I am
calling A, tha mn who elloi ta the promise of a full an4 tilr
inventory which waa our first move in reconstruction. Secondly,
we shall look for things to do with the mater-slave relationship,
particularly tor the aake of the person I call B, and take to be
a alave who ia present on stage; and thirdly. like both the people
in the play, we shall be interested in money and p:operty. It
will be useful to see fir at what can be done with fragment A.

141
 Money and property: A1, talk of a aeoret sale; in line 2, aome-
b~ {I ahall aay the Angry Bnquirer) says "if it oo•a to my notice
that the money••• "; another probable reference to a aale in 4, am.to
a theft or thefts in 5; add thia to tbe talk of listing household
goods and things lent l'lhioh baa already been noted trom 1,4.t.

It will be Ula AfJ&rYEnquirer who aaya in 6 "Came beret" and

(if we so restore) "D'you understand?" f>eupo~, with or without
accompanying pronoun and verb, can be aaid in Greek, like 'Come here•
in English, in a range ot mood.a from aeduotiveneaa to fury; this ia
more like the 'fury' end ot the aoale, and recall.a Noschion in the
Perikeiromene {quoted above ad loo.) say1Jl8 l>cupo 6T)~lu,°" to a
Daoa who would much rather melt away.

In 7 "You find that I have" and "Don't" - both utteranoea in-

furiatingly incomplete - give ua the change at dialogue trom A to
B {or per:taps the reverse: there 1a no certain aign which ia which).
Poaaibly in 9 A ia aayins aoathing 11.ka "I shall overlook ■inor
matters". Line 10 {not depand.1J18 on my conJecture at tl:8 end) may
well be a key point in the piece. It could be taken aa nidenoe
of a third party intervening w1th a commant: "Here ' a a alaTe who' a
been on the wheel in hia time!", that ia to aay, one who has been
tortured in an attempt to make sure ha ia b911.ing the tnith 11 • We
ahall not :ruah, though, to make a r&le for another peraon htre unleaa
there ia other evidence. Both in real life and - more relevantly -
on the ancient stage, remarks of this kind are made in 'talldng at•
people: they are made aa if into thin air, but with tbe intention
of being overheard, with the idea of being more frightening or in-
sulting than if one apoke face-to-face. Mercury in Plautus, Aaphi-
!D!E,, about to begin a considerable routine of 'tallc1ng at' Soaia,
kindly takaa time out, in a thoroughly Plautine taahion, to make
matters clear to the audience (300) 12 :

olare aduoraum tabulabor, auaoultet hie quae loquar;

igitur magi' modum maiorem in aeae concipiet metUD1.
Be that as it ma.y, the threat s eema to l'a ft be en real enough. In
"'° '"'°
11-12, w1th [ 1'0.'t Ja.-i£C or [ 1ta.p]a.'te available, the irobable aenae
ia "If you knOW' [x) and don't tell me [shan't] I torture [you] when
I get to hear of it?" Speaker B aaaenta to thia, 12f. In 16, it
my be A who saya "We are agreed", rather than B assenting again.
It ia A in any caae, I would Judge, 'flilo aaya 06 µa.'TT)Yya.p"I'm not
wasting my time", and thinks he oan do two things at once 1>. If we
ao restore 16, he wants to be taken indoors in order to do whatever
goes with his business. He reminds ne mommtsrily~or the old man
in the Dia Bxa~ton, about to be reunited w1th his money, and re-
marking {6})l;(ol) 6i ~a~'t(W ~ov1~~poGpYLO.L~epo~- The chlnge to
a tone of reflection auggeata that the sequence of diRlogue, and
ri th it a aoene at the play, ia coming to an md. The Angry En-
q.uirer has aOCE rem.ark which he feels reluctantly obliged to make
{19-20); 21, it •Y be that ha suapecta things are ranGed against
him; 22, he wants to know for certain, 1t08£Y ~xpL~wc£~[c]oµ~[L;
He has all our sympathy.

Aa to the slave: we have seen him in 12-15 agreeing to suffer

if be conceals things; he baa (line 6) been called on to JBY attent-
ion, and it ia no doubt at him primarily that -the talk of fraud or
theft ia a.1.mad. We should know more if line 3 were leaa tantaliz-
ingly ambiguous. It makes a useful warning of what we do not know.
-
Among other things, we do not know how far apart the other sur-
viving pieces of t hie roll were, or in wh&t order they came. But
we can aak how far th~ ah.are the three themes we lave been follow-
ing. Money am Foperty: fr.B, line 2, •ten minaa"; in 9, he or
she "left behind", or "left by legacy" - a doubtful entry, but an
interesting one. Also doubtful, who or what was described aa
"Corinthian" in 8'? (If it were Latin, remrked a colleague of mine,
it would be bronzes). In fr.D, line 8, doubtful again, pLrt of
a marginal note 'flhioh may be, but need not be, completed to give
"six minaa".

The presence of the Angry Rn~irer and the Slave in fr.B ia

neatly indicated by the single wo 6pa.u~~ at 15 (see ad loc.).
"Of course", OT)).a.6rJ,ccaea twice, and suggests the aoft answer
tuming away wrath. In 20 11Quarreling with ae no,,, are you?" ,
and, in the firat lines at the oolumn "Tell me", "You don't know"
and "I know very well" will auit a dialogue between the pair. In
the minor fragmen ta , whare ao 11ttle oan be made out, there are
more expressions for "aay" and for "find out" (aee on D1-2, E3;
part of' 1tn'fCJt.la"8a.vwat B19 a,nd poaaibly C6). Thia scene, in
other worda, aeema to hava occupied at least two columns (there
ia no reason 1'hy B should not oome imEdiately bet'ore A), aDi may
Vffl'Y well have taken more. It waa then at least 44 lines, and
ahowa nery aign of having been considerably longer, aa one would
also infer from the pace am scale of the dialogue in fr.A; it
waa an incident of a certain •gni tude in 1 ta play. One more
very wioertain and inttreating point at detail DJst be mentioned:
the appearance of ).oA.&µa.pxo[, part of ,toAaµa.pxoc or the deriva-
tive verb, or of the proper mme Polemarohoa ( C1 ) • If this play
i11Yolvea a caae to do with money or property, an:!. if the polem-
e.rohoa is the Athenian official of that name, a resident alien
ia likely to be involved: Aristotle, Constitution of Athena,
58.}, says inter alia that his concern with these foreigners
includes caaea on will a and heireseea 14 •
• • •

143
 Perhaps we have now gone tar enough. The piece ia expected
to be Menander from the nat\re of the copy; it ia, ao far aa I can
Judge. quite conaiatent with his atyle; there are aigna 1hat it
may be from a play like the Aapia, in 11hioh a mn 1a oonoerne d w1.th
an inheritance. These points noted, it could, with prudence, be
left to wait among the adespota nouae comoediae until acaethiD8 more
definite tuma up. But I should like to and by testing, if need be
to deatruotion, the idea tl'at the piece ia frca the loat part of
the Aap1a itself.

The necessary facts can be recalled bM efly. The Aapia, like

several known playa by llenander and others, turna on the Attic law
ot inheritance relati11B to haireaaea: twice over, in fact, and twice
over on the reversal of f'brtune which oomea when the person whoae
auppoaed death leavea someone an heireaa turn• out af"ter all to be
alive. The two principal.a are Smikrinea, who aeeu ao far to be
_quite the naatieat man in llenander, in wha:n I shall try to find
our An.gry Enquirer; and Daoa - pedagogue, batman, shipping agent,
tamily slave am intriguer - in whom I shall look tar our Slave.
The length of the play, aa beat calculated, waa about 870 linea' 5 ;
the poaaible place for auch a sequence or action as we have in mind
ia in the gap after line 469 ~ the modern numbering, a gap which
included tm end at Act Ill and the early part cl Act IV, and runa
to about 200 lines.

Portune, as prologue speaker, saya thia at Smikrinea ( 116ff'):

"He ia tm moat outrageously unacrupuloua mn alive: be has no time
for trienda or relations; he thinka nothing of what is ordinarily
diagraoeful: hie one aim in life 1a to own eve-rything {ixec.v !1t0,v"(a.)".
Thia passion begins to ahow i taelf in the opening aoene aa he
liatena to Daoa' atory of th, Lycian oampaign, of plundering, and
of his maater'a death in battle. 82ff: "You aay you brought aix
hundred gold pieces?" "Yea" "And oupa ••• ?" "A load of about
40 minaa, no more, Mr Legatee" "What? You don't think that's
why I'm aaking, do you. Goad Heavens ! And the reat •• • was taken
from you?" He Juat ma to know: the inaistent queationa, relflrdleaa
of the i:roprietiea of the situation, are typical cl him; typical
ia the wretchedly thin veil of conventional feeling which he tries
to draw over tm motives hia queationa haw exposed 16 • Ia thia not
ao•thing like the man in our fragment A, when, after talking of
torture ( 10ft), he ia apparently ready to moralize over aomethirJB
he doesn't quite like to aay but feela he muat (19f)?

Let us hear Sllikrinea from the Aapia again ( 149ff): "So that
no-one can aay that I am over-struck on money, I didn't enquire
into the amount of gold he's brought or h.ow many silver cupa; I

144
didn't get a total for anything, but willingly let him take it in -
the family are always S9ttil18 at •. The truth will out, of oourae,
ao long aa the bea.rera are al.ave a." The veil ia !!!:l. thin. He let
Daoa go "without enquiring ( o&x !tE'fa.ca.c)" did he? Well, perhaps,
if he inaiata: he Just plain aaked, and we haw just quoted the linea
where he doea (82ff above). "The tnath will out (~o ya.p~xp,~c e6pE•
8i}ce'fa.l) so long aa tm bearers are alavea". We have noted the Angry
Enquirer'a f&aaion for accurate knowledge-before (A22 ~o8ev &xp,~wc
E{lc]oµa.[,;J, but the point here ia different from the reoun-ence at
a common idiom, aignificant though auoh things may be 17 • 'Servants',
aaya Sandbach in his note, 'would have no interest in concealing any
attempt by their m.stera to cheat by misrepresenting the total to be
aha.red.' 'nlia may well be: but who ia thinking of sharing? Not
Smikrinea. He wants it all, and he does not want any of it sold or
stolen before he can get hia hand.a on 1 t. The hired butler alao
ha.a a realiatio view of the situation when he calls Daoa a lunatic
for bringing the plunder back at all and not going off as a runaway
(239ff). Sraikrinea "didn't get a total"; but, we my feel, he will
know, like our Angry Enquirer, the w,q to get the truth out of slaves.

Smikrinea' firat move towards t)-.e wealth he covets ia tD propose,

aB he legally could, to a&ITy the niece •ho was left heiress. It ia
in reacting to thia that Daoa makes tha reaark we have quoted (196ft),
that he can answer for contracts, but wills and heireaaea are another
matter. Saikrinea announces hia decision to the family - to the girl' a
other WlCle, in whose household ahe grew up, and to the adopted a on of
the house whom ahe was about to marry: thia at the beginning of Act n.
By now (274) he haa hia eye atill closer on the ball: "Send !>aoa to ••
ao that he can give me a list (&.,wy~) of what he brought". We haw
jua t oonaidered two appearance a of the ' 11 at' motif'; this ia now a
third, and we wonder what elae 1a to be done with it. At the start
of Aot III (391), enter Smikrinea: "He waa quick to come w1th the liat
of gooda, Daoa waa - very thoughtful (Idon't think). So Daoa is
on their aida. Good, splendid: I'm glad of the exouae not to a:ake
1JYenquiries considerately, but to make them aa auita me. The hidden
aaaeta muat be double, I know that runawa •a tricks." The Greek:
.,
~a. "I
ya.p 1
ou q,a.~£pa"#•I bT)7tou8£~£c~, 6110..ac,a.·
• 'I'
yw16cl. •
~ou~ou .,
~ac •
~£x~ac ~oo
6pa.u-tou. Sllikrinea ia becoming like the Angry Enquirer more and
more.

Meanwhile, Daoa baa been plotting. They will fool and distract
the old man by pls.,ying on hia major weakneaa, greed for money. They
will take his brother's death, and so give him another heiress niece
to narry, and a much richC" one, worth perhaps aixty talents instead
of four (350f). He will then let the first girl go to the first man
who aaks him (and that will be her previous fiance, of course); he
will propose to mrry the richer one. 356: "There he'll be, putting

145
the whole household to righta, going round with keya, aealing the
doora, a 11 in a dream of wealth". 'lb.ere a.re two aapecta to this
intrigue. The firat, setting up the fake death, oooupiea the
firat 90-odd lines of Aot III, with Smikrinea, the m lodramatic
Daoa, and the bogus Sicilian doctor with hia talk r.:I fatal illness.
There ia to oome, we gather, wailing and beating ot breaata, with
a dummy lying in state in aide, which. Smikrines wi 11 aee but not
be allowed to inspect too cloaely (343ft, 359fT). The second
aspect we know much leaa well. What Portune aaya in tte prologue
speech is thia: "He will give him.self plenty of toil and trouble
to no purpose, and will make it all the more obvioua to everyone
what aort of ma.n he ia before he goea back to where he atart.ed
from." (14Jff) 18 • What Daoa and hia friend■ anticipate is known
very imperfectly from a passage which 1a lroken (362ft), and give ■
ua mere anatohea: •we can teat how••• " " ••• how he came to the
houae" "who there ia in debt" and "he 1a to" (or "you are to")
"recover double (6,1tAGct.011 etc1tpa.Ttc,)". The idea may be, as
Lloyd-Jonea baa augpated, that once the brother proves to be alive
after all, Sllikrinea will be prosecuted for theft o~ the property
he haa earmarked fer himself, and will pay the apiropriate penalty , 9
But 1n aey oaae, after all the build-up of the 'list' motif - a
liat, let it be clear, relatine; to the estate which goea with the
firat heireaa - it would be very odd if the wbole idea of listing
and checking were dropped; and it would be perfectly appropriate
if, whon 1 t doe a oome, an undertaking to make a list should be
made 1n relation to quite another property~ 0 • There ia room. in
the Aapia, after our preaent text atopa in Act III, for SmUcrinea
to quiz Daoa about the new and larger property. Do the new frag-
ments give us parta of the a oene in m.ioh he doe 1? The Angry
Enquirer haa ah.own aigna of being, like SmUcrinea, an unpleaaant
man. We thought of him in fragment A aa aaking to be taken inside,
thinking that be ia not waating hia time, and reflecting that hi
can kill two birda with one atone (he wanta 5µo. ·n -icinl1lpouprov
1toet°11);there waa something he muat aay, however :reluctantly. If
he 1a Smikrinea, he is about to go into the house where, to the
beat of hia belief, hia brother la lying dead. Vay he not be
Smikrinea?

How about the polemaroh? I have left him on duty to remind

us that we are supposed to be aoholara not playwrights. Are there
no foreigners in the Aapia"! Only just. There ia a quotation in
which Stephan of Byzantium takes1
from our play the feminine of
Iberian, BDd gives the worda EAATJl'LC,o~x 'I~~pCc (73 Koe/2 S).
Prom thia, or otherwise, we could invent something to account for
the polemarcb: but we haw invented more than enough. I hope it
ia fair to aay thlt the Aapia illuminates the new fragments; I
ahould be pleased if their atudy doea anything to illuminate the
Aapis; I suggest, but do not cl.aim, that they come from tl'at play.
101'.IS

1 POxy iDT. 16 2852/l(a) + A 2Blt.S/(a), to 'be republiabed 1n due coure•

1D a TOlume ot Ox;xrhynchus PapYrj., in. accordance with the Society•a
practice. The text or fragments A and B, with attendant notes, waa
oiroulated at the Congreu; for completeneaa' aake, I now add the
leaser pieoea C-J.

2 Guglielao CaTallo, Ricerohe sul.la maiusoola biblioa, F'1renze 1967;

• :rerlew diaouasion by J.Irigoi.n, Scriptoriwa 24 {1970) 67-74.
2
PJ,yl 1.16 • Paok: 1688 • C.Auatin, Comicorum raecorum fra
'
enta in
papYris reperta 248. Palaeograilhioal dbcu:ssion: Cavallo quoted
n.2 above) 4-5ff and index (p.146) with referencu. The plate in
•4.pr. ia of special value, ain.ce it Bhowa the lhole fragment and
ia Mticul.oualy accurate in acale. t am gratetul to the John Bylanda
Unlveraity Library for faoilitiea to atud,y thl two papyri which I
aa oauparing aide-by-side and to have them photographed together.
Dr Frank Taylor and Mr A.Smith were moat helpful; and the plates
whioh illuatrate this paper wen ude fr011 ao11e ot Iii- Sm.th'a
photog-apha.

I.G.TurnC", 'Recto and verso', JRA 40 (195,4.) 102-106 at p.106 n.}.

Then ia a uaeful abort note am bibliography on tm Her0Din.oe
arobive in Oraolina Montevecchi, LAP"-piroloe;ia, Torino 197', p.256
under no.57. The letter on the verao of P'l.yl 1.16 was publiahed
•• PIJ,l 2.236; PLips inv.12 (• PFlor 2.246•) and PFlor 2.21+7 are
tro■ the eame to the same a few daya earlier and later reapectively.
2
Baoch,ylidea: B.u.,pap.inv.737 c P~ck 175, published in facsimile,
London 1897; commonly J4/}5 lines to a column, but u.p to 36 and
clown to 32. Herodaa, B.M., pap.inv.135 = Pack:2485, published 1n
f'aoeimile, London 1892; cola i-xiv 15/16 lines to a column, later
normlly 18/19, but don to 17.
6 Tbe nonial assumption, if we accept that two apecillena of ecript are
ditterent, h that two people are involved and not one person
drreloping his calligraphy; it 1~ likewise normally asaumed that
two apecimena very alike 1n atyle will be very oloae in date:
but theae etill are aeewaptiona.

7 PSorb in• .2272e: A.Blanohard-A.Bataille, Reoherchee de Papyrologie

J (1964) 10}-76; recent bibliography on the play (ani the fara of
ite title) is in Auetin {quoted n.}) under noa 187 and. 188, and in
H• ...J.-Mette, 'Menander 1966-7}' Lu.strum. 16 (1971-2(1974]) 5-80 under
110.24.
8 See Austin under no.147 (with text), Mette under no.20, and
eapeoblly Eric G.Turner, The at.pyroloc1bt at work; GRBSaono-
gr-aph 6, 197}, pp.15-21 and 48-50.

9 Liated by Jlette under no.18 (o,).

147
10 PSI 12.12So (first published by Vitelli ar.d Norsa, A:an.souol.norm.
di Pisa 4 (1935) 1ff) = Pack 2 1}09; Austin 144; ~ette 14 (b); cf.
BICS 16 (1969) at pp.90-95 with p.100 n.14.
11 At Aristophanes. Frogs 6~8ft', there is a list of ordeals 'b:> which
al.aves might be put to test their truthfulness, including twisting
on the wheel (c'tpt~~oUv) as referred to here: aee the corrmcntatora
on the passage, and A.R.W.Hu-ribon, L&wof Athens ii (1971) 147ft.
12 Text from Lindsay: the point I am maiting is not affected by its
minor uncertainties.

13 No punctuation after 06 ~Gfll~ ya.p,unleas it is lost by abrasion;

but I do not see the phrase going easily with aia.ii'ta. 6£i'. ·,-,'hat ia
to be understood fror.1 the context may be the general idea of a
verb of motion (at Dysk.255 we have ob µn"fT]vya.p~XC¥£V, as Dr
Aua ttn reminds me), or s oir:ething more sped. fi c to the previ ou a
remark: 'Not a •aste of time (to go inside)'.

14 See further Harrison (quoted n.11), 9-11 and 20-21.

15 See a recent note on the topic by J.C.B.Lowe, BICS 20 (1973) at p.94£

16 Note the way in whioh Menand.er build.a up to 1h18 effect from earlier
in. this aoene: 19f "But how did he aoae to be killed, in what W9¥?";
68f "Yo11 saw him fallen among the dead?"; 72 "Then how do you know?".
:u 94-ff, S. goes off'. "to. think over what ·dll be the gentlest wq
to handle them" (nsmely, hia bereaved relationa); 'the choice of that
word. "gentleat",rellllU'k:a Lloyd...Jonea) reminda one of Uriah Heep':
'Jlenander' a Asp is' , GRBS 12 ( 1971 ) 175-95 at p. 178.

17 Cf. P.H. Sandbach '!!enander' a n:ani'{>Ulation of lMguage for dramatic

purpoaea' in Entretiens Hardt 16 (1970), esp. at pp.121ff.

18 ~&fl)I,' bi ~pa.yµa.e•~~~WL I ~oXXouc1t0.p:i.cxcw... I oannot

x~i ~OIIOUC
reaiat reminding the reader of t~ Angry Enquirer' a ot ~a:n111yap
at tr.A.17, and the poaaibilitiea of irony.
19 Lloyd-Jones: quoted by Austin in his volume or aubsidia tnterpretationta,
p.JS under 366s.
20 The audience, in other words, ehould get not quite wt&t it expect.a:
cf. Entretiena Hardt (quoted n.17) }ff.
 Poll Tax 1n Pb1ladelph1a &Del P, .Mioh, 1nv. 887
Ann Bl.lia Hanaon
Publiahed papyri which deal with the collection of the poll tax
1n the raym. village of Philadelphia under the Jul.1o-CJ>ud1aue are
conatantl1 1ncreae1ng 1n nuabc-. Aa th••new texta are published,
they often aup.ent and ol.arlty the tax noorda theuelvee and the
pet1tione of the poll tax collectors which have al.ready been publlabed.
-principall:, in P, Cornell, P. Prine. I and P. Gram: 1, 2, and 3
(SB 7461, 7462, 746)), P, lyl. IV 595, and P, M1ch, X 594,
Proa these Ph1ladelph1& doouaenta baa ocae ■uoh of our apeo1f1o
knovlqe of the decline 1n econoa1c proe~ty in Bgypt which grw
particula.rly aevere under Claudius and Naro. Both the ooaplainta
of the collectors and also the leee rhetorical record.a of tax col-
lectiona and aocounta ot arrears ehow that between 45 and 57 .l,D. a
oonaidcable proportion of the tan.ble ■ale population ot Philadupb1&
- not paying their tu:• u npected., The editora of P, Prine, I 8,
an utenaive regiater of tax payaente, now to be dated. on proaopo-
graphical gro\mda to attar 40741 A.D.,2 noted.a "The proportion of
delinquents 1a Yflr1 bigh,, •• In Yin of the etf1o1ency of the gov«n1-
aent in the collection of tax•,•• are inclined to believe that
th1a record ia abnoraal, and that tb.e high proportion of delinquenta
1a due to looa.l conditiona which ad• it 1.■poaaibl.e for the nativ•
to discharge their obliptiona to the etate• {pp. 24-25),
A:rtar the publioation of P, Mich. X 594 our conception of a
criah in the reign of Cla:udiua and the a.ttect of th&t cr1s1a on
Pblladelpbia becu.• aore precise. That tut waa drawn up early 1n
51 A.D., no doubt at the looal tax ottice, It aeta forth tu:
ar.rea.ra troa fiye of the prmoua a1x years, The tax•• which ha.Ye
been ooaputed separately, are the oap1t&t1on tax, aaa•aed accordi.ng
to the editor at 44 cir, 1 ob,, the p~ tax, aa■ eeaed at 1 dr. 1 ob.,
and the dike tu, ucM■ed at 6 dr. 4 ob. For both the years 45/46
and 50/51A,D. the aaom1t of arreara - between 2500 and )000 dr.
But the years 46/47 and 47/48 A,D. are conapicuoua for the large
aaounta at111 owing the tax ott1ce1 the editor of the text connected.
the large det1c1ta with exoeea1Ye Nile tlooda a.nd h1gb pr1c• ot grain
known to have exiated early in the reign of Claudiua,3 Tbe largMt
arrea.ra figuree tor the poll ta.x, those for 46/47 A.D., totalled.
4 t&lenta 4046 dr, Such a figure auggNtad to the editor that appx:oz-
iaatel:, 635 aen b&cl not 1et tul.tllled their tax obl1gat1one for 46/47
an.r a lapse of tour 7-.ra. AltbolJib the arr-.ra for 50/51 .l.D.
ee• -11 when oo■pared to thoee for 46/47, P, Byl, IV 595, an
account of arrears tro■ 51 A,D. which includes a 11st of 105 defaulting
tax payere, t•t1f1• to the faot that, u tar u Philadelphia ir9
oonoerned, the fiscal d1tticult1ee continued into Hero'• reign.
· An unpubl1ahed M1ch1ga.npapyrus, P. Micb. 1nv. 887 f'1"oa )4 A.D.
(eH tut below), giYee an 1nd1cat1on of the tax potent1&1 ot Phil&•

149
delpb1& a011etift.Nn 1-.ra -.rlic. 0ur text. 1a a yearl.7 tax report
which apparently contained. the synopsis ot the Ml• between 14 and.
62 whose 1d1&..,. Philadelphia in)) A.n.,S and. a liat of tbe aaowrte
received~ collectors between the third aontb of the 19th year ot
Tiberiua (33 A.D.) and the end of the second aontb. of the 20th yar
(:34 A.D.).6 The top of the tirat preserved. coluan--ooluu II--
to be the oonclnd1ng section of the •J'DOpeia, which took oogniMJlOe
ot the nuaber ot aen in each tu: categoxy and the total aaount the
aen 1n that category were expected. to p&J. The accounting baa reaobed.
the point whare it 1a dealing with aen who do not pay the etand•T"\
aaaeuaent. Sixteen ■en with aetropolitan c1t1senabip are noted 1D
lin• 7-111 two of tb• a.re apected to pay nothing, wblle the raz 1n-
1ng fourteen pay an u••-ent ot 22 dr, 4 ob, each, Thie --•t
1a half the usual one of 45 dr, 2 ob. paid b., Phlla4elphi&na at 'th1a
tiae, tor often the poll tax and the pig tax were coaputed togethar,?
In linee 13-14 the •tiaa.te ot poll tax to be paid. that year ("o na'." }
1a 6 talents 1918 dr, 4 ob. A:ttar th1a Ntiaate aub-total.■ of
collectiona are recorded aonth by aonth1 the tirat group of payaenta
are fro.a the rlllagera to the local bank through the obe1riatee (11.D•
16-27), the second group of payaenta are to cheiriat&i by Philadel•
ph1ana currently reeident 1n other vlllag• in the Hera.kl.aid• and
Pol•on D1via1ons (28-114). The colleotiona f'roa villagers 1n the
Herakl.eidea D1Yia1on-but not 1n Philadelphia-are 11ated by Yill&S••
The Pol•on D1n.aion ia tr•ted a.a a aingl.e collection unit. The over-
whelaing 1111.jorityof the pay.enta are recorded. through the cbelriat•
at the bank 1n PhUadelphiaa 4 talents 271) dr. :, ob. were handled at
the local bank, while only 1688 dr. ca.ae troa cheiriata.1. 1n other
rlllagea. Froa the 1nfOD1&t1oncontained in our docuaent, about anenty-
five percent of the aaount projected. 1n lln• 13-14 ba4 bND collected.
by the t1ae this report was written, e011e the after tbe oloae ot the
second ■onth ot the 20th year of Tiberius,
ThrN aapecta of th1a nn tut and 1te relation to otber Pblla-
delph.1& u.ter1al w1ll be m1dnlld. briefly bere. Piret of all, a tax
Ntiaate of 6 tal. 1918 dr, 4 ob. 1ap11• a taxable ale population
ot no leea than 8)6, wu-1:ng that •eh pa.14 the nonal aaaeaaaent of
45 dr. 2 ob. But fro• col. II, lln• 2-1:,, it 1a clear that not all
were required. to pay the full figure of 45 dr, 2 ob. Hence the n111B-'
of taxable lllll• at J'h.1l&delpb1& 1n )4 A.D, oe:rt.a.1nl.y exceeded 8)6,
Second, the collectiou for the 19th year of Tiberius, when COIi.pa.red.
with the ..u-ted. tu: 1noaae, ahov that about three-quarters of the
projected figure had been collected when th1a account Ra coaplled,
The aaount collected m- )4 A.D., 4 talents 4401 dr, ) ob,, 111approxi•
•tely the saae a.a the aaount of arrea.ra atlll '"'1ng tor the a1.ngl•
y-.r 46/47 A.D. four years l&ter 1n 51 A.D., aa set forth in P. Hieb. X
S94. The consternation wh1ch such a loaa ot rnenue occuionecl 1n tbe
Philadelphia tax oftioe auat ha.Yebeen ooneid.erable, ainoe the tax
collector hiaaelt "•••- reepouible with person and. property for tbe

150
 due collection of all NTenu• wbich fell ri.tbin b1a apber• O't coa-
petence. •9 r1na11y41 the overwbel•1ng aajorit7 of collections llated.
, 1D P. M1ch. 887 are recorded. aa barlng been made through the Phlladel.-
pb1a bank. Little aore than f1Te per cent of the total. na collected
by obe1riata1111 other Y1.llagee of the Herakl.eidee and Pol•on D1Tie-
1ona. In ccapariaon with other Phil&delDbia tu:te, th1e: proportion
oollected oata1de Ph1ladelpb1& •- 1ow:1o In pe.rt1cular 1 P. PriD.o. I
14 1a a pa.rt1&1.ly pnecv«l llat of Phlladelpb,1an• currently resident
oatalde the rtll-«•• red&ted on proaopograpl'l.ica.l ffidenoe to be\we•
38 and. 48 A.D. I bell••
tbat when coaplete, P. Prine. I 14 contained.
the Dllll• of 325 Pb1J~el.phia.na 1 all O't whoa wee r•1d1ng 1n that year
away troa the riJJag,-. 1 In the preec,-ed aeotione of th1a tat 64
Pb1ladal"1•n• are reeid•t 1D AltmUldr1&1 another 64 are reoord.ed. u
being npoc; [><]WµT)'\I. Allotbar unpabllsbed poll tax 11at to be dated
attar 51 A.D. 1 P. Micha 1nv. 81?1 abowe 'tlr..-\7 :Pb1ladelphia.na rNident
1n the •etropoli■ (11n• 34-55).1.2 Perhaps a worsening eoonoaic situ-
ation forced aore Phllad.elpb1ana to look for 11Tel1hood. 1n 001111unit1•
at 1Dareu1.ngl.7 greater cl1at&llo•• Such abeencee f'roa on•'•
1d1a ea
are docuaented 1n the texta ~ the decad.• of the 40'• and So'• A.D.
•7 ha.Te been prolonged and tbe;r oarta1nl.y would ba.ve affected the
rllla«are' abU1 ti• to retarn auual.l.y to their hoaN. A oorrNpond-
ing cb&nge took place 1n their tax-paying t.b1taa both reoorda of
pa:,aenta to cbe1riata1 outeide J>b1Jadelph1&and ta.x 11ata of non-
resident Pbiladelptdana 1ncr-.ae during the reign of Claudius,
Although abeencr h'aa the 'rll]Ag• waa not Deceuar11.y' ayDOJ11IIOUII with
tax defaulting, 3 the two pbenoaena were connected. 1n the a1nd ot tb•
collector of poll tax 1n thoae ditticult 7-.r■ when OTm:all tax cllt1c1ta
.... ~-both when be 0011pla1ned 1n 45 A.D. that Phlladelpbi•na lln.ng
1n the Harakleopollte noae ware 1n default tor their poll tax (SB
7461) and later when he joined five neighboring oollectora petit1on1Dg
tor a poetpon•ent ot their payaent, since depopulation of their
ri]]agN pNYented th• froa oarrying out tbeir dut1• (SB 7462).
See e.g. the proalnent position played by papyri troa
1.
PbUed,elpb1a 1n the evidence gathered by H. I. Bell, JBS 28 (19:,8)
1-8, by G. Cbalon, L.'~ .!l!_ T1ber1.µa Julius ilmnder 57-61 and
the 1ntrod.uct1on to P. Mich. X 594.
2. For the revision of the da.111 aee ay publication of P. IU.cb.
inY. 8791 fortbcoaing 1n ZPI,
:,. Introd.UO'tion to'P. Nich. X ·594,pp, 66-67,
4. Cf, P. Cornell 24, 56 A.D., a llat of 44 detaultara, the
•Jor1ty ot whoa recur in the firat section of P. R7l. IV 595, wrltten
a year later.
S, Por the ayaope1a, aN Diaoo•eri.!I 1n the ~•9n Dee.rt 2t
Jordan II 117.2 and COllllentary, p. 257, P. M1cii.Ts P. Miah..sand
XI 60:,.9-1onote.
6. et. P. Col. II, p. :38and P. Prillc. II 5) for the-·
twel•e--ac,nth period of collectiona.

151
 Ilaµcpt'AOU&v~(p) a ((y,vE'ta1,)J
(yCv£-ia~ !v6 (pEc;) ~
AOCKOL !vo(ptc;) 1.6 (op.) -i1.t=
12. y '" (c'taL) (op.) xotf
yCvt'ta&. 'fOna\t tp.)]
apyupt'ou (:a>.J c; 'A7't-T)f
'tov-iwv -i-pdntl;a. 61.~ nano(v'tGhoc;) x(c1.p1.a'toO)
16. µT}\Jcic;Nlou EtPaa'to(u) (op.) -rto !A"-«(y(bp:) µ
Xo1.dx XWµT}('tw\J) • A'fO<;
Tu~t 1,

MEXt Cp 'Axvc;
20. ~aµtvt.1& (op.) 'A7)t
~apµou&(1.) {op.) 'A 't
naxc.a1v (6p.) • A cp
nauv1, (op.) 'A q>
24. 'Ent Ccp (6p.) 'E u
Mtaop"1 (op.) ·r
'
i,&T)YL l:tftacncii X (t 'tOU<;)(op.) 'AatT)r
tnt~p 1,& (f.'touc;) (op.) '6"'µ&
ColUIIDllI
28. xal -roC'c;xa-i'a K[ta1lµT)tv)x1.p1.a-i{at'c;)
µT) (vbc;) Nl (ou) Et(:la (a"tou)
'A ltOAAW~pou (bp.) KO
(yCvt'tat-) (op.) x6
• 32. xo1...dx
.Etfh: VVV'tOd
Ktpxtao6xwv

152
 7. ror the b&l.t --•t of aetropolitan
ll&llaoe, Tuation 126-281 tor the coabined aa••••t
c1t1sena, aee
of 45 dr. 2
ob., et. P. Prine. I 14.
8. 8)6 x 45 dr. 2 ob. • 6 tale 1908 cir. 4 ob. Although it
111d.1tt1oult to aove troa aaounta of aon97 to •that• of the taxable
ll&le population or total popul.&t1on when the fi&Ures involved are not
coaplete, it 1a an acceptable procedure, et. Josephus, BJ II :,85,
where the population of Bgypt except tor Aluandria 1a g1Yen aa ,
7,.500,000-~<; fv£a1'LV. f,i "'ijc:. ttocpopac;.Ttf9i-')~0"9.c.,.
Ka.&' t.xcfo"'T)" x£q,a.>i.-1Jv
The editor. of P. Cornell 21 Ntia&ted that the naber of Ml• in
Phlladelphia 1n 2,5 A..D. - between 920 and 12)0. Th•• f1pree ware
accepted by A.I.R. Bou:, H1,:tma 4 (1955) 160-61, but
rejected bJ the editors of P. Prine. I 9, pp. 46-47. et. alao Bn.unerrt,
BlmllllW&Dderupg 1.50.
9. Tbe pbrue 1e Bell 'a, .J!§. 28 (19:,8) ).
10. P. Prine. I 9, an alphabetical regieter of )1 A.D. witb
SS entr1•, aent1ona no obe1r1ata.1, and in.atallaente a.re recorded. u
paid at the looal bank. In contrast P. Prine. I 8, an ~enaiYe regi•ter
now to be dated a.tter 40/41 A.D. (above, note 2), ahon tb&t :,6 ot the
122 entriee aa.de pa.yaenta to cheirieta.11n v11lag• of tbe Ara1no1te
n011e, at. Braunert, Binnenwanderuy: 154.
11. ror tb••revisions 1n P, Prine. I 14, aee rq publl•t1on
of P, Miob, 1nv. 879, above note 2,
12. Otbar uaapl• of 11.ata of non-r•id.at Pb1Jad"1.pb1au are
P. M1oh, 1nv. 879 and P, Cornell in..-. I 16, Ct. alao P. Prine, I 1J,
written on the verso of P, Prine, I 8 (et, above, note 2), &Del Bn.unart,
Bimlenwnderuy; 151-52,
13, et. lraunert, Bigpen!MS\F:!N 154 on P. Prlllc. 1 8.
28.5 X 48 ea, attar October, )4 A.D.
Colan I - Tracee of a preceding ooluan a.re visible at several pointa
along the lett aarg1n
Col1.11111
II ,

'.........
[•••••••• (yCvc"'a1.) (opaxµa&.)] 'A«?ll<?-•
]
[•.....•....• J x (.] •~{) llv6 (ptt;) E-

4. "to6"'~(v) C ) llv6(ptc;)'3-
~aµ£v~(a) !v6(pcc;) TJ (op.) CN

yCvt't(Cl&.) (op.) "'t=

OLacpdpou µT)TponoA.(1.'twv) !vo (pc.t;)&.C:.
8. &q,' a'.JvEa>topv 'AOU liv,1 (p) <l

153
 'A1t0AAW6ll1pou
36. (yCvc-ca4 (6p.) o~
The reet of oolmn m &Dd oolmna IV, V and. VI .r tb• GrMk
text show the xa'fa. >C41TJV
account tbrougb Pbaopb1 of tbe 20tb 7-.r1
for the ama wbiob aw-r tbe:re, aN tbe lngJ1eh version below,
Total tax •tiaate &ocording
to the eynopeia 6 taJ.. 1918 dr, 4 ob. (11.n• 1)-14)
Payaente to the cbeirlst• at
the buk in Pb1l.adelpb1& ::,64,dr. (line 16, Neoe Seb&etoe
of the 19tb year)
(l.1.De 161., OOEreotion for
Choiak)
(line 11, Choiak)
(11.De 18, the •• for
Tybi ... caitted.}

~
16,56 dr. line 19, Mecbelr)
1960 dr. line 20, Pbaaenotb)
1:,00 dr. line 21, Pharaoutb.1}
1.500dr. (line 22 1 Pacbon)
1.500dr. line 2), Pauni)
5400dr. line 24, lpe1ph
:,000 dr. line 2.5, Meeore~
4268 dr, 3 ob, ~line 26, Sebutoa ot
the 20th yr. tor the 19th)
4349dr. (line 27, Pbaopb.1? of
the 20th yr, tor the 19th)
2671) dr, :, ob,
P&J'llenta to the che1riata1
•n J J &g't bJ v1,J,) age" (llne 31, H8011Sebutoe
of the 19th y-.r)
72 dr. line 36, Cbo1ak)
104 dr. line 4) 1 Tybi)
196 dr. line SO, Meabeir)
128 dr. llne 59, Pbaaenotb)
160 dr. line 67, Pha.raoutbi)
200 dr. line 77, Pacbon)
204 dr. line 86, Pauni)
2671) dr, 3 ob, 40 dr. lllle 91, mpeipb)
1688 dr. 212 dr, line 98, Meson)
1)2 dr. line 105, Sebaatoa ot
28401 dr • 3 ob, • the 20th yr. for the 19th)
4 tal, 4401 dr,) ob,
216 dr. (line 114, Phaoph1 of the
20th yr. tor the 19th)
1688dr.

1 54
 1
BIBLICALECHOESANDREMINISCENCES
IN CHRISTIANPAPYRI
B.F. HARRIS

Our knowledge of the early history of Christianity in Egypt is

still relatively alight. While we may reflect that this is not very
different from the position in other provinces (if we exclude evidence
internal to the movement) it might still have been hoped that more would
come to light amid the wealth of information about Roman Egypt from the
papyri. 2
It bas been frequently pointed out that the biblical papyri them-
selves provide the strongest evidence for the second and third centuries. 3
To this period belong the Chester Beatty papyri p 45 - 7 and p 52 , covering
the four Gospels, Acts, nine Epistles of Paul, Hebrews and Revelation:
amongst the Bodmer collection P66 , 72 • 75 are codices oi Luke, John, Jude
and the two Epistles of Peter. 4 Their great importance for the history of
the New Testament text is matched by the evidence they afford of the
circulation of the Scriptures. In Middle Egypt we know thereby of several
places where the Bible was being read in the second century, and as C.H.
Roberts has remarked, it is safe to infer that other coumunities then
existed in Lower Egypt and also further up the Nile. 5
A perusal of Kurt Treu's Refe~at for the years 1940-67 6 shows that,
although they are inevitably fewer than for the later period, LXXand
N.T. fragments for the second to the fourth century continue to accumulate.
Reference to the canonical scriptures must of course not lead to the neglect
of apocryphal and gnostic texts, but it may be noted that these are far
outweighed by the biblical. We need not subscribe to the view that the
Church was mainly gnostic from the beginning (strong though that influence
was) and that for this reason its early hiatory_was largely suppressed in
the ecclesiastical tradition. 7
The literary evidence, though slender, at least supports the picture
of a spread of biblical knowledge in Egypt. Clement of Alexandria in
describing Christianity there at the beginning of the third century says
that 'the word (loyo~) of our Teacher was converting both Greeks and
barbarians through village and city and nation' (Sti-om.vi.18.)67); he is
no doubt thinking of the written scriptures as well as the living faith.
Eusebius (H.E.vi.2) relates the early education of Origen in Alexandria as
starting with the Christian texts and then proceeding to the usual Greek
-paideia. Later, having cited Dionysius' Letter to Fabius which contains
indications of the spread of Christianity by the mid-third century, he
refers to the bishop's work in refuting Nepos (vii.24.5). This lesser
bishop is praised for his biblical learning but countered in his
interpretation of the Old Testament promises. Dionysius made a tour of
churches in the Arsinoite district, met the presbyters and teachers and
admired their intelligence and openness in biblical debate. His contrast
between the Greek of the Gospels and Epistles and that of Revelation also
assumes a literary sensitivity in the Christian comnunities.
Further evidence of the 'official' use of the Scriptures comes later
in the third century from documents of a semi-literary type, especially
the 'Epistle against the Manichees' (P.Ryl. III.469). Roberts has suggested

1 55
that this epistle emanated from another Alexandrian bishop, Theonas. 8 It
is notable for its varied use of both LXX and N.T. texts; there are direct
citations, sunmaries, free translations, and skilful adaptations - eight
or nine biblical references in all. Even if its circulation was limited to
the district of Alexandria, the continual appeal to the text of Scripture
is impressive.
Official use of the Bible by Alexandrian bishops (not to speak of the
renowned Catechetical School) is one thing; what of the knowledge and use
of these documents by rank-and-file Christians elsewhere in Egypt? Here
the private letters from the late second to the fourth century give us
some clues. The total with some claim to 'biblical' expressions is not
large, but there are issues of identification and interpretation which
make a review worthwhile, because amongst the criteria for Christian
attribution the use of the Bible ranks high - next, in my view, to
specifically Christian titles and symbols. 9 I have attempted a
classification into citations, verbal echoes, and lesser verbal
reminiscences, taking Naldini's selection 10 as a starting point.
'Citations' are very few, and Naldini is perhaps right to avoid the
word. Only in one case, P.Lond. 111.981 (• Naldini 51), do we have an
introductory clause: Ka6ws ytypaxTaL cv T~ ypru,~ OTL µaxdpLoC £tOLV ot
EXOVTES axtpµa &VELWV,Ta vov nµets eaµiv, ••• (lines 4-7). Here the
original, Is. 31.9b, is quoted freely, and the LXXis itself almost an
adaptation of the Hebrew: Td6e A£Y£LxupLos, MaxdpLOSos EXELiv tLwV
axlpµa xat otxeCous ev IepouaaAnµ (cf. RSV: 'Thus says the Lord, whose
fire is in Zion and whose furnace is in Jerusalem'). The other example is
put forward tentatively, P.Heid. I.6 (• N.41): tva o~v µ~ •OAAaypa,w xat
,Avpapnaw, £V yap [•oJAAn AQAL~oux £Xf£Utovt[aL] n aµapTCii, •apaxaAw•• :·
(7~10). Cf. Prov. 10.19: £k XOAUAoyCas OUk £kf£Ut~ aµaptCav,/ fEL60µ£VOS
6i XELAlwvvonµwv lan. The Greek is fairly close to the LXX, and yltp is
used as if to draw attention to the saying. Naldini prefers the corrected
reading at aµaptLOL, but I suggest ex,eutOVTOL should be taken as Middle,
with an indefinite subject, and that we read Deissmann's tnv aµapT(av,
which is closer to the LXX.
In the second category ~f verbal echoes some examples seem relatively
clear. In P.Oxy. XII.1592 (which I add to Naldini's list) two distinctive
verbs are combined: ••• xat KQVU&µ&yaAuvenvxat nyaAAELaaa !t£L TOtoOTOS
µou K(at)~p T~V µvnµnv XOL£ttaL (3-6); cf. Lk. 1.46-7: Kat £tK£V MapLdµ,/
M£yaAUV£L O ~uxn µou tbv X1X)LOV,/xat nyaAAL00£VTO xvcOµd µou &Kt T~ &€~
T~ awtnpC µou ••• P.Heid. I.6 (• N.41) has the very distinctive phrase
'citizenship in heaven': ••• xLatcuoµcv yap T~v XOALtCa[va]ou iv{v} oopav~
(3-4); cf. Phil. 3.20: nµwv yap Tb XOALTeuµa£V oupavots UXQpXEL,£t oi
xat awt~pa aKex6exdµ£6a ••• P. Herm. Rees 8 (• N.83) contains the common LXX
expression 'man of God' which recurs in the N.T.: AOLxoy, 9,axoTa, aAn&ws
&£00 &v6pwK£,xatatCwoov t[v] µvnµaLi £X£LVnµas (17-20); cf. I Tim. 6.1):
t~ 6l, i &v&pwK£&coo, TaOta f£0ye. In P.Oxy. VIII. 1161 (• N.60) the nearest
parallel for 'beloved Son' is probably Mk J.JI rather than Naldini's Eph.
1.6: ••• xat l~ aya&[i nµw]v awtnPL xat T~ OL[t]~ autoO T~ oya•nµlv~···
(1-4); cf. Hk 1. 11: t~ Et o utds µou o &yaxntos, £V aot £u6oxnaa; ·and Eph.
1.6: ••• tns xdpLTOSautoO ~, £XQPLTWO'£V nµas £VT~ nyaxnµlv~··· The same

156
letter in the succeeding lines has the familiar trichotomy at the
conclusion of the opening prayer: ••• !1w5 O~TOL1dvt£& S[o]n6nawaLV nµwv
0

T~ a~µatL, T~ ~UX~t T~ [[fy(cuµat)~]] iv(cuµaT)L (4-7); cf. l These. 5.23:

••• xat OAOXAnpovuµQv Ta 1vcOµa xat O~ux~ xat ta a@µa aµlµITW5 £VT~
1apouaC~ TOO xupCou nµwv 'InooO Xt>LOTOO TnPn6cCn.
P.Harr. 107 (• N.5. third century) is another private letter with
impressive language. which has the same trichotomy but with a different
word-order. A debate has centred around two passages in lines 4-12 which
have been claimed as gnostic rather than Christian; first, the alleged
lack of a trinitarian formula: cuxwµaL TQ xatpt 6twL T~& &An6cCa&xat ti
,apaxAntf 1vcuµatL (4-7; cf. Jn 14.26: o'6t 1apdxAnT0&, Tb IV£0µa t3
!yLov ••• ; and Jn 14. 17: T~ ,vcOµa T"& &An6cCa,, ••• ); secondly, the
elaborate 'soul, body, spirit' expression: o& at 6La,uAd(waLv xaLtd TC
~ux~v xa<t> aQµa xat IVtOµa• ti µtv owµatL 0Ly(av, T~ 6t ,vcuµatL c&euµCa,
t~ 6t ~ux" tw~v atwvLOV (7-12; cf. I These. 5.23 supN, and 3 Jn 2:
'Aya1ntl, ICPL 1dvtwv cuxoµaC 0£ cuo6oOaeaL xat uyLaCvcLv, xa6w5 cvo6o0taC
aou n ~uxn. Henri Crouzel has recently argued that both expressions in
this papyrus (from Besas to his mother) are Christian and can be explained
in terms of the theology of Origen, but baa been adequately answered by
J. O'Callaghan. 11 The writer, Besas. need not have been a student of
Origen or familiar with his works; it is also unlikely that he is the
martyr soldier of Euaebius H.E.vi.41.
This leaves in the category of 'verbal echoes' only SB V.7872 (• N.75)
where the text. though fragmentary, suggests the use of the Onesiphorua
passage in 2 Tim.: ••• 6La tQv cuxwv aou [ J,dpw oCx~ OTL 10AAdXLS[
(11-12); cf. 2 Tim. 1.16: o~n lAcos o xupLo& T~ 'OvnaL,dpou otx~, !TL
•oAABXL5µc &vl~utcv ••• The difficulty about a citation here would seem to
be the space available for such a direct use, but we lack the context prior
to this; the elegant hand in which this script is written certainly increases
the possibility that it was more than a private letter and thus more likely
to have quoted Scripture. 12
With biblical 'reminiscences' we are naturally more in the realms of
conjecture. The following coincide with Naldini's liat (Introd., pp.54-5).
P.Gron. 17 (• N.24): ~, 6l cylvcto, &(ea), µcTa aoo (14-15); cf. Rom. 15.33:
o 6t &c~s T"S ctpnvns µcTa ,dvTWV uµwv· ••• ; and Lk. 1.28: ••• xatpc,
X£XC&PLtwµlvn,o xupLo& µcta aoO. P.Oxy. XXXI.2603 (• N.47): ••• xat cC TL
QUTOt&IOL£L5 cµo[t] c1ofnoa5 (28-9); cf. Mt. 25.40: e,' ooov CIOLnoatc cvt
tOUTWVtQv &6cA,wv µou TQv CAOXLOTWV, cµot EIOLnaatc. The reminiscence in
P.Lond. 111.981 (• N.51), from the deacon John to his bishop, presupposes
familiarity with Rom. I: 0 y&p cu,nµCa oou, 1dT£P, 1£PL£XUXAWO'£V tbv
x[da]µov OAOVws aya&bv 1atlpa (8-11); cf. Rom. 1.8: ••• 1CatL5 uµwv n
xaTayyEAA£TOLcv OA~ T9 xdaµ~. P.Iand. II. 14 (• N.59) is in my opinion a
aecure example, because whereas u~LOTO&&eds is fagan as well as Christian,
CV u~COtf (-oLs) is surely Hebraic and biblical: 3 [cu]xoµaL Ti CV u~Ca1~
&c~ 1cpt (tij5] oAoxAnpCa&aou (3-4); cf. Lk._ 2.14: ~d(a cv u~CaTOLS&c~/
xat tit Y"S ctpnvn ••• ; and Job 16.19: xat vOv t6ou £V oupavots o µdpTUS
µou,/ o 6t ovvCatwp µou cv u~CotOLS• Near the beginning of the eloquent
letter of Demetrius to Flavianus. P.Oxy. VI.939 (• N.61), comea the
expression ... n •Pa& al [TOO 6ca1d]tov .
. ecoO yviiJoL&&vc,dvn a1aOLV nµtv •••

157
 (3-4); cf. Tit. 2. 11: "Eic,avn yap n X«PLS TOOeEo0 awTnPLOS.aaLV
&vepwioL~••• ; and Tit. 3.4: OTE 6t n XPnaTdTns;xat n 'LAavepw•(a
t•c,dvn TOOOWT"pos;nµQv ecoo ••• In the case of SB V.7872 again(• N.75)
although we lack the context, we may perhaps assume that the phrase ••• 6La
[T~]v TOOX(pLaTo)O &VTOA~[v] ••• (9) reflects Jn 13.34: tVTOA~VxaLv~v
6(6wµL oµtv, LVQaya.aTc aAAnAous•-·· With P.Herm. Rees 9 (• N.84) •
••• ~a•dtoµaL ~ous;~aya•nTOUS xat TOUS,LA~OvTas Tbv Ad1ov TOOecoO TOO
)CoeL[o]u µ91;1 CV HOTH··· (16-20), cf. Tit. 3.15: ••• Aa•aaaL TOUs;
,LAoOvTas; nµ&s tv x(aTEL.,,; and Lk. 11.28: McvoOvµaxdpLOL ot axovovTts;
Tav Aoyov TOOecoO kat fUAdaaovTts;.
To this list I suggest three other reminiscences may be added. First
P.Heid. I.6 (• N.41): ••• fva 6uvn-&Glµcvµ{pos; Tav <aµ>apTL@Vxaeap(acws;
(12-14); cf. Heb. 1.3: ••• xaeQPLaµav T@VaµQPTLQv•oLnodµcvos; ••• ; and
2 Pet. 1.9: ••• Anenv AaS~v TOOxaeapLaµoO TiV xdAaL QUTOOaµapTL@v. Then
in P.Oxy. XII. 14941 the letter of Boethus has the phraae b6bs cuecta -
~d[[A]]At~OTQ µiv 6£~0!L )CQ~uµas; E~XE06<1L •~P£t n~@v, E~v· OUT~i
c•axo~ap o 6aLbs; TQv cux@v uµ@v xat ylvnTaL nµctv o6~s; cuecta (4-9). In a
letter notable for its Christian aentiment (Dionysodora and her slave
Achillis are greeted as 'sweetest brethren') this is the more likely to
reflect the biblical parallels: Hos. 14.10: ••• 6LdTL cuectaL at o6ot TOO
xup(ou, kat 6(xaLOL •op&~OOVT<IL &V QUT<lts; ••• ; Mt. 3.3: ••• £U6£LOSIOL£LT£
TBs; Tp(Sous; QUToO;Ac. 13.10: ••• oo xauop 6LaaTpl,wv Tas 060~, [TOO]
xup(ou TBS cv&cCas; P.Ross.-Georg. III.10 (• N.90) contains a rare
adjective, n[pa] µiv [1a]vTbs t[~]xoµ£ T~ IOVEAtnµovL 6£~ ••• (4), which may
broadly represent the language of Paul in 2 Cor. 1.3-4: ••• b •aT~P TQv
olxTLpµQv xat ecos 1dans •apaxAnaews •••
Finally, I draw attention to three examples cited by Naldini which
are to be regarded as improbable. In the first. P.Mich. VIll.482 (• N.I)
of A.D. 133, the judgment is crucial to a Christian attribution: cav 6[t
0
elAn]s &Aetv xat AOSLS[µ£] PET £000 f[P]xou, xat 0100 cav [Ad]Sns µOL
QXOAOUeoaw OOL xat [w]s 'ELA@OOL o ecbs cµt ,cLAOOL (14-17). Appeal is
made to two passages: Ruth l.16: ••• ~TL au OIOU cav •opeue"'· 1opeJaoµaL1
xat 0~ cav aUALae~s, QUALaenaoµaL• b AOOSaou Aads µou, xat O 6tds aou
ec&s; µou; and Jn 16.27: auTas yap o •aT~P fLAEt oµas;, OTL oµcts cµt
•ttLAnxaTc ••• But the Ruth passage is forcibly expressed and marked by
considerable verbal repetition. whereas our letter is surely a much more
general sentiment; nor does Jn 16.27 really help. Similarly, in the
well-known B.G.U. 1.27 (• N.2} of II/III date, the biblical parallels for
the 'will of God' are weak, and the expression is also pagan. T6•os in
this context is most unlikely to refer to a church community 14 : avnSnv 6t
£LS 'Pwµnv T" X£ TOOQUTOOµnvbs xat •GPt6ltaTO nµ5s; 0 T61os, ws O ecas;
necAtv, ••• (8-1 I}.
This leaves the most interesting case of the undoubtedly Christian
letter P.Oxy. XXXI.2603. 15 Part only of the elaborate 'mirror' passage
can be cited here: TmL lao•Tpov xTnoaµlvwL ~ &AAoTL TOLoOTotv XELPt
•
EXOVTL •
EV T
OLS Ta 1poaw•a
.I l •
~VOITPLt£TQL '
OU XP£La•• •r '
COTLV TOQ ~~YOVTOS
,.1.
n,.
µapTUPOUVTOS •£pt TOOaut@L £1LX£Lµlvou xapaxT~pos;••• (3-6). This has a
general similarity only with Jas 1.23: !n cC ns; axpoaTtis Adyou taT·tv xat
ov •oLnTos;, o~tos loLxtv av6pt xaTavooOvTL Tb 1pdawxov T"S ycvlacws auToO
cv tadxtp~. In I Cor. 13.12 Paul uses the figure for incomplete knowledge:

r58
6Ai•oµEv yelp cli>TL6L• ta&1Tpou cv atvCyµaTL, ••• ; but in our letter the
1
whole description is very curiously applied: xat yap ws 6L ea[d]•Tpou
xat<t>focs t~v 1pb, al µou l[µ]7utov atopy~v xat ayd•nv .~v &ft vlav
(17-19). Naldini has cited some discussions of mirror language in
Hellenistic thought, and Raoul Mortley in a forthcoming article shows that,
whereas in Paul's use we have a co111D0nplaceof the period, Christian
theologians made use of his phrase for much more sophisticated purposes.
Clement of Alexandria in particular interprets it so as to reflect his own
epistemology, which combines Platonist and Christian views of the mystic
vision of God by way of the contemplation of Christ. 16

The letters cited include a range of writers, from those whose Greek
is very imperfect but who exhibit true Christian feeling to those who are
not only ecclesiastics (where we might expect a sprinkling of biblical
language) but in some cases other Christians of culture whose familiarity
with Scripture is impressive, e.g. P.Heid. I.6, P.Oxy. VI.939 and XXXI.
2603. 17 The sum of such evidence is thus far small, but it does usefully
supplement our picture of the biblical literacy of Christians in Egypt
in this early period.

I. In the discussion of this topic I wish to thank particularly my

colleagues at Macquarie University Prof. E.A. Judge, Dr. A.M.
Emmett and Mr. S.R. Pickering.
2. P.O. Scott-Moncrieff, Paganism and Christianity in Egypt (1913)
is still valuable: more important are H.I. Bell, 'Evidences of
Christianity in Egypt during the Roman Period', HThRXXXVII,
1944, 185-208; id. , Cut ta and Creeds in Graeoo-RomanEgypt
(1953); H. Metzger, 'Die frilhchristliche Welt im Lichte der
Papyri', Sch:tJeiaer Beitrllge aur aZtgemeinen Geschichte X, 1952,
199-208.
3. e.g. Bell, art. cit., l99ff.; C.H. Roberts, 'Early Christianity
in Egypt: Three Notes',, JEA XL, 1954, 92-3.
4. See B.M. Metzger, The Text of the NBLJTestament, pp.36-42.
5. ca-t. cit., 93. I would be less cautious than J. van Haelst
(Proo. XII Intern. Congr. of Papyr., p.503) in this regard and
expect that the movement had spread well beyond Alexandria by the
end of the first century: cf. also L.W. Barnard, 'The Date of the
Epistle of Barnabas', JEA XLIV, 1958, tolff.
6. 'Christliche Papyri 1940-1967', Archiv f. Pap. XIX, 1969, 174-
186: to this should be added Aegyptus LI, 1971, Testi nos. 12606-
12616.
7. See Roberts, art. cit., 93-5 and nn., particularly on P.Oxy. III.
405, the fragment of Irenaeus, Adv. Haer.
8. P.Ryl. Ill, p.39.
9. See the recent full discussion of criteria in M. Naldini, IZ
Cristianesimo in Egitto (Florence, 1968), Introd. pp.7-32.
10. op. cit., lntrod. pp.54-5.
11. R.P.H. Crouzel, 'La lettre du P.Harr. 107 et la theologie

159
 d'Origene'• Aegyptus XLIX, 1969. 138-43; J. O'Callaghan,
'Sobre la interpretacion de P.Harr. 107', id. LII, 1972, 152-7.
For earlier bibliography of the debate, see Naldini, op. cit. 1
p. 76.
12. See S. de Ricci, AIPhO fasc. 2, 1934, 'Melanges Bidez', 857.
13. Cf. C.P.J. II.xii, lntrod. (where this distinction is not
noted); C.H. Roberts et al., BThR XXIX, 1936, 65.
14. I accept it as equivalent to aoZ.Z.egium navicul.ariorum (U.
Wilcken, Chrest. 3 524n.; Bell, art. ait. 1 196}.
15. First published by J.H. Harrop in JEA XLVIII, 1962, 132-40.
16. R. Mortley, 'The Mirror: I Cor. 13.12 in the Epistemology of
Clement of Alexandria', to be published. See also J. Dupont,
Gnosis. La aonnaissance reUgieuse dana Z.es epttres de S. Paul
(J 949); N. Hugede, La metaphors du rrri:roir dans Z.es sptt?tes de
S. Paul aw: Corinthiens (1957); R. Mortley, Connaissance
reZ.igieuse et herm4neutique ohea Clement d'A'Lem:ndrie (1974).
17. J. van Haelst (art. ait. 1 502) thus speak.a of the church
presbyters, readers and deacons as coming largely from the
social elite, i.e. the bourgeoisie of Egyptian city and
country.

160
 PHOIMCIAN
l«>MENDJX:APITATED
by M. W. Haslam
The Phoeniasae, if the number of papyri is anything to go by, was
read more than any other play in Roman Egypt. Its popularity continued:
it vae not only one of the 'select' plays, it vae up in front with the
Hecuba and the Orestes as a member of the favoured 'triad'. It acquired
more echolia than any other single play; it also acquired more than its
fair share of accretions. It ia one sue~ accretion that I vieh to treat
of in this paper - not the ending, which has long been suspect, but the
very beginning of the play.
The text of our modern printed editions ie the text, a few insigni-
ficant variants ape.rt, of the united medieval manuecripta. It is as
follows: ~2 ~~y EVac~eoLC cupavou ~&µvwv o6ov
xat xpucoxo\An~OLCLVtµ~E~WC6Lff'C!LC
vm.Le, 8oatc ,~~OLCLV ElA,ccwv ~Aoyu,
weOUC~UYTI ~O.LCL ~ ~6e' ruew
a
)
Q.X'tl,\>
..
-

i:.'
J 1"',I
Ervr)XO.C,
, ~
'J:. I •
Kii.uµoc T)V&.X .,,,.. t
.. , . ,
,-..,.

a'
,,,v
..A°t-

~~Vv J £XAL,wn.t toLVLCCUV £Vo.A.Lav X ova·

Nov to the ancient evidence. First, two texte which directly
attest the beginning of the play: two papyri. One is a fragment of a
roll of the Phoenieeae, to be dated in the late firat or early second
century; it wae edited by David Hughes in hie University of London
doctoral thesis, and I am very grateful to him and to the Egypt Explora-
tion Society for allowing me to mention it here. It haa the upper part
of two aucceaaive colwana. The papyrus clearly haa the top of both col-
umn.a, and the first line of the first colwm, equally clearly, ia the
verse which we know as verse 3. Of veraea 1-2 there ia no aign. If
there was a preceding column, it ia lost, but I .know of no instance of a
play text beginning two lines from the bottom ot a column, and the pre-
sumption is that the text preeented by the papyrus comencea at verae }.
~ithout pausing to consider the possibility of thia text's being
aome peculiar aberration, let us go on immediately to the second direct
attestation. Thie is provided by the collection of hypotheses to
Dlripides' plays that was discussed by Professor Turner at the Ninth
International Congress and published as P.Oxy. XXVII2455. The order is
alphabetical according to the first letter of the play title, and for
each play the first verse is quoted, presumably as a check on identi-
fication, before the hypothesis ie given. The Phoenissae follows the
second Phrixua, on fr. 1? col. xx. Only a few traces of the quoted first
line remain. They are reported as:
ll> (o ,] I' • t;: c a , [<•JI.I 1.1p]X'J&
1(. ]r c(. ]. . [ ]t/>[

This is not Phoeniseae 1: so much is clear. What it is ia Phoeniaeae 3.

When I had auggeated that this vaa the caae, Dr. Walter Cockle immedi-
ately had a look at the neighbouring fragment numbers and observed that

161
fr. 19 , the first two lines ot which are given as
) WI' ap[xy,,

might in fact slot into fr. 17. Professor Turner, Dr. Cockle and myself
have since be,m able to inspect the papyrus and confirm the acceptability
both of the original suggestion and of the placing of fr. 19, and the
reading as it now stande ia
l{oliYi~CU\ eotit a.pxt1L
~[Al1• [eo]~[Lc L'DOLcL]v s1A1c~[aw] ,[Aoy]~
Now theae hypothaaea do not have the didaacalio and other erud:I.te
information provided by the hypotheses of Aristophanes of Byzantium, but
the 'incipit' form that they follow, aa Frcfaaaor Pfeiffer haa noted,
goes back to the pinakes ot Callimachus, and it would be hard to deny
that the quoted first verse ho.a scholgrly authority of some kind behind
it.
We have in thia case, I believe, an unusual opportunity to get
back beyon,:i Alexandria tc Athena in the early fourth century. Commen-
tators on the Phoeniss~e have frequently 'oomptU"ed' some verses of
Theodectes, a younger contemporary of Aristotle, which aoparently come
from the beginning of one of his tragediee (fr.10 Sn.-N2):
·~ XaAALfEY'(T) ACllJit0.6'
£lAlccwv iXoyoc
"f£\L£, xo8£LYOY~aCLV ~vOoc.imoLc C£Aac,
•s..
£Lv£C - ~LV • ilAAOY
,,,. 'JUl11tO~
- • £LC\ ou~w
., µeyo.v
-
' a·OY~' a.ywvn
&A • - XOL' 6UCEX~EUX~OV
' '
xpLciv; x~)..
An apostrophe to the Swi - and modelled, surely, on Phoen. 3 : Xa.µ?tO.O'
elAt ccwv cp),.oyocmimics elXl CC<-W cp).oyo.. The reminiscence makes more
sense if tha Euripidean verse waa known as the first line of the play
than if it was known as 1he third; in fact I would almost go ao tar as
to aay that it makes aenae only on that condition.
Euripides' pl93 was utili&ed in a more thorough-going manner by
Acoius at Rome. Aociua' Phoenissae began, like Euripides', w1th an
apostrophe to the Sun by Jocaata:
Sol, qui mioantem Candido ourru atque aquis
tlammam oitatia fervido ardore explicae,
quianam tam adverse augurio et inimico omine
Thebie radiatum lumen ostentum tuuu1 ••• ?
Take, if you will, the first two lines aa an expanded version solely
of verse 3,o! the original: v~LE-.§.21,,800.tc r'Jt'7t01.CLY
.. equis •••
oitatis, £L\LccuW- 9ui ••• explicaa, ,~oyo.- flammam. This is not ao
much adaptation as word-for-word translation. What ia there left over?
micantem, candido curru atgue, and fervido ardore. It might be unfair
to call this mere padding, but 1t adds nothing to the substence. The
only thing that rni6ht make for any doubt at all ia candi.do curru. But
is not 'with bright chariot' atrsngely anaemic as a rendering of
'mounted on gold-welded chariot'? and why does Accius' sun not carve
his way among the st11rs? I suggest that just as micantem amplifies
flammam, without 4ualifying it in any meaningful -:-.ay, so does candido
ourru atgue amplify e9uis citatia; and miC!i.NtemCANdido is achieved.
It is not a matter for great surprise if two indepaident expansions of
'Sun, rolling fla~e with swift horses• ahouli each introauce a chariot.
I submit that when asked to consider ~hether Accius' opening is more
pleusibly regarded as a version or Eurip. P'hoen.1-3 or of 3 alone, no-
one ffill feel obliged to vacillate. If anyone shoul~, let him look at
the first word.
The implication, then, is that Aocl.us, like Theodectes before him,
knew the first verse of Euripides' Phoenissae as •HA,e 8oatc r~~oLc,v
etAcc cu>v,xoya..
On an oetrakon discovered at Edfou in 1938-9 is written a strange
and unaoph!stisated little song which goes (C. Edfou 326.2-6):
e7t0C 6' £fW\'~C£V ~ooe·
COV ~OXp<!,~OC, ~Q.CLA£U1
cov ~oxpa.~oc, LE~,
U.1'.L£eoaLc
•tn - •L1t7t0~CLY&L~L(C(.1)\1
' , ,
fAC?"(O-,
·m.,e eoarc r~?U>LCLV £LALCCUJY ~16ya..
It is assigned a date towards the end of the Ftolemaic era. 7lhatever
we make of the purpose of this farrago, the closing .refrain is more
readily explicable if the verse waa lmown as the first line of the
tragedy'than if it was known as the third.
That, eo far as I have discovered, ia the extent of the docur:i.entary
evidence down to the seoond century A.D. It comprises five items,
variously from Athens, from Rome and from Egypt, and all unanimous, if
my arguments are sound, in testifying as the opening verse of the
Phoenissae what our manuscripts offer as ve~se 3.
There are more citations of v.3 in later antiquity. We cane across
it in 1lacrobius' Saturnalia, and in a couple of late metrical works.
But since these afford only arguable evidence of the actual initium, I
do not propose to spmd time on them. Of verses 1-2 in antiquity I find
no trace.
With the ground thus prepared, we could now turn our critical
attention to the text itself. But first I must mention a soholium .which
r.e rind on the first two verses.
we
'.1ta>.aLa.~L c cpepe-ra., 00~0. Cocpox).-ijcµiv
E'.1tL-rLµ~ceievE~pi,tt&g o-r, µ~ ,tpoc-r~E -rou-rouc
~ouc ouo c-rCxouc, o oe Ebpi,t(6~c~-r, ij~
~f'OE't~EY ev , ID.tx't~ o Cocpox°Af'ic'tO ' 2 'tot>
c-rpa.-r11Y11cw-roctv Tpoli '.1tO't£ 1 {Soph.!];.1).
'There is an ancient tradition that Sophocles criticised Euripides for
not prefixing these two lines, and that Euripides in turn criticised
Sophocles for not prefixing, in ttie Electra,~ -rou c-rpa.-rmcav-roc tv
Tpo!g. '.1tO'te:.' This has an obvious anecdotal sound to it, and it has been
customary to dismiss it as so much nonsense. We aee now that it
de8erved to be taken more seriously. For the premise of the story is
that the Phoenissae was originally without verses 1-2 and that Sophocles'
Electra was originally without ve~ae 1.

163
 To Sophocles' llectra we shall come back; meanwhile, tl'e Phoeniaaae.
It ia not a very oomtortable reflection that the first two verses have
had to await the accession ot the papyrus material in order to get their
oo~e-uppanoe. For even without Theodeotea and Aociua, they betray them-
selves as apurioua. Let ua indulge 1n a little post eventum wisdom.
First ot all, the sun haa no business cleaving his way amon~ stars. But
they are the oonstellationa of the sodiac, we are told - but we are not
told it by Euripide$; only by people who assert that ~c~po~ must mean a
constellation, not a atar - which is not true. The normal r&lation or
the aun to star a i a a simple one: the sun pu ta the stars to flight •
Docummtation of the motif would exhaust rJY time and your patience. The
virtual reversal of it entailed in the zodiacal interpretation is ineptly
paradoxical iil Jocaata' s conventional and unclever prologue. Then, the
prefatory linea are not quite perfectly wel~ad on: the join shows. l.e
have three participles, ~iµ~wv, s~£~c and £tALccwi,,, distributed either
aide jf the vocative "HA.u:. A vocative can be preceded by a participle
w1th w or it can be followed by a participle. With the expanded
Phoeniaaae text, it is both at once: "HAL£haa to straddle both parti-
cipial phraaes, Md this aeema to me atyliatlcally horrid. Again, the
thr.!e participles are all 1n the same position in the line. Is this
impressive or dull? I teal it is dull. But tha main and decisive objec-
tion to the three-line invocation is that it is grossly disproportionate.
The apostrophe is a device for getting the play off the ground. 'It
was a bad day for Thebes when Cadmus came here from Phoen1.cia' gets
closer to its intellectual content. With the single-line apostrophe
"m,t eoatc r1t1tOLCL~ tl\iccwv (fA<>yU the tone ie ~lready pitched fairly
high: in emotive force it rivals Medea'a £L6' W<p£~• 'Apyouc µ~
6u1.1t'to.c6c1Lcx~c. T.i th two omamental lines piled on top - which say
substantially nothing that is not said by verae 3 - it becomes bombastic
and somewhat absurd.
It ffiight be inferred, on the baaia of the oopioua and unilateral
ancient evidence, that the verses are an interpo18tion belonging either
to late antiquity or to the early ByzMtine era. But in view both of
the quality of the verses themsel vee and of the total success of' their
invasion or the text, neither alternative is very attractive. Beaidea1
there ia the scholium to oontend with; this will hardly perm.it the
verses to have a late origin 1 for not only is it one of the ancient
soholia, the 6~a. it reoounts was already 1ta.AaLawhen it waa first
written. 'Rhat about the verses themselves? They are good verses, whioh
oould not be aaid t.o lack ~cw EopL1t,6e1.ov xa.pa.x-ri;pa.. We have t.o ask
not only when they could have been compoaed,but whenJ why Md by whom
they could have been put e.t tle head of the play. And the most obvicua
set of answers, to which I see no reasonable altemative, is early, to
make a more impressive declame.t<ry opening, and by the actor playing
Jooasta. Such an audacious and stylietically competent addition one
will be inclined to attribute to the fourth or third century B. c., and
certainly not to any time later than the second century A. D. So we
must explain, it we oan, how it is that they reraained submerged until
their eventual triumphant resurrection in the middle ages. In fact .it
is not too difficult to envisage a plausible proceaa of transnission.
Aristophanes of Byzantium bad reaaon to believe the verses interpolated.
He may merely have had variant texts {among them the off1.cial Athenian
one w1thout the verses?)• he may have known too of the anecdote of our
aoholium. Aooordingly he obelized the lines in hia master-text. A nice
problem: which verse should be quoted as the initium, the obelized one
or the authentic one? We may approve the choice. Ordinary texts sub-
sequently oomnenoed at the true initium, and that verse, if it waa not
already so. became well-kno\ffl. But in the •scholarly tradition the f&lae
opening lived on, condemned but not allowed to perish. And if it was 10
kept alive, it was deatined 1 almost inevitably, to lose its stigmata and
be accepted for what it pretended to be.
There ia here one very clear implication for the constitution of
the text of Euripidea. In the case of the opening of the Phoenisaae we
have the mont solid evidence one could hope for of interpolation in the
medieval manuscripts. The text that we.a current throughout antiquity
commenced at what we have always known aa verse J. The evidence on thia
point is remarkably voluminous. Yet the medieval manuscripts are united
in prefacing two extra verses, and the doubt oast on those verses by the
scholia is so equivocal th~t no-one in modern times aeeaa ever to have
considered them anything other than authentic. Where we ,42. have express
testimony of interpolation, we shall do well to heed it. And ~e can be
Wlhappily sure that there exist interpolations which have lost all
external indication of' their alien origin.
Soph.Jl..1 does not quite f11ll into this last category, tor the
Phoeniasae acholium puts it on the sa..oe footing as Phoen. 1-2. However,
until we know the genesis of the palaia doxa, we are perhaps not bound
to accept this 1.nterdependenoe. The opening lines of the Electra. 1 aa
transmitted, ar~ aa follows:
•2 ~oo,~patnr,r1cov~oc ev
TpoCi~o~e ·
'AYCf,&iµvovoc~or, vuv exetv' &~EC~L (Ol
•
~apov~, •
AIUCCELV, • ~P<?
WV ·a uµoc ~~ca' o..e:,.
· •
YGf
~o ~OAa,oY ·Aeroc
obxo8£,c ~06£,
a).coc 'Iya.xoo xoPT'lc·
-me o c'tpO?tATJYOC
"
OU~~ 6' ' ~
'0 PEC~~. ...
~Ot> -
~t>XOX~OVOU 8£OU-
&.yopa.Auxt, oc ·
In the first draft of this paper Thad outlinea various stylistic
arguments attempting to objeotify ao far as possible my oonviotion that
ao stilted and so feeble a verse aa the traaitional v.1 was unacceptable
as the opening line and should be thrown out to allow n. 2 to take i ta
place at the head of' the play. Tho!e arguments I can ~ Jt:ttison,
because they are superfluous. Professor Handley has reminded me of a
piece of pornography which r gladly aubetitute for myleas entertaining
disputation. Mania. an At~enian prostitute, had an affair, er at least
a sexual encounter• with Demetrius Poliorcetes, King of J.~acedonia.
According to Machon, to ~hem we owe much of our disreputable informs.tion
about the fa:oous, she agreed to do Demetrius a favour if he would do her
one {226-30 Gow). Demetrius' aide of the bargain fulfilled 1 Mania
turned round and invited him to avail himself of the reciprocal favour
with these words: Aya+JeµYoYoc7tO.t., YUYe;x.ttv
, - - N l - • £~ec'tt
wt •
cot.. Gow oall8 the
story unedifying, and ao in itself of course it is, but we O!lll ID8k:eit
serve a more respectable end than Mania's. Such an innocuous verae: not,
one Y10Uldhave thought, a verse to attract such a scurrilous application
- not, that is, w,.less it had that especial claim to m6lnorability auto-
matically enjoyed by a tragedy's opening line.
The jest was not Mania's own. Onita first oooasion it waa more
genuinely wltty. One of the most celebrated tragic aotora or the fourth
century was Theodorus. Betore a competition in which he was to perform,
so Plutaroh in:f'orms us (Mor. 737ab), he and his wife refrained from aexual
intercourse. 7i'e a.re notactually told that the play was Sophocles'
Electra, but who will doubt 1 t, when the words w1th which his wife greeted
him on his victorious return were t , AYQf.L&µvovoc m
-xa.i:'' lx£t\1' l~EC'tl
CO&. ' ?

It is hoped that a fuller version of thia pa.per will appear in Greek,

Roman and Byzantine Studies 16, 1975. It includee later thoughts and
later evidence: the latter in the form of a second or third century papyrus
codex with a text of the Phoenissae commencing at v. 3.

166
 A NEW INTERPRETATION OF CERTAIN ASPECTS IN MENANDER'S SAMIA
Heinz Hofmann
Since the publication of the Bodmer Papyrus XXV we know that
the action of the Samia developed in a rather different way
than Sudhaus, Wilamowitz and many other acholara had believed,
but the crucial point oflhether Chryais baa born a baby or
not, baa not found a definite answer in the new parts either.
Therefore it may be legitimate to raise the question again
'lilhetherone could explain the action without an alleged baby
by Chrysis and Demeas, andlhether, without that asaumption,
action and plot would appear even more subtle and more deli-
berately composed. In the light of the new evidence it may be
possible to establish a certain probability in favour of this
theaia and to surpass the arguments of other scholara which
were put forward before the recent discoveries. Only Chriatim
Dedouasi (and, recently, convinced by her arguments, the late
T.B.L. Webster in AJP 94, 197), 206f.) did not believe in a
baby born by Chrysia and defended her opinion already in her
commentary on the Cairo fragments in 1965 and, after the
recent diacoveriea, during the "Entretiens aur l'Antiquite
classique" in Vandoeuvre ■ -Geneve in 1969. I agree :Cully with
her and hope to be able to confirm her interpretation by
several new arguments from different aapecta.

In the following I shall take as a starting-point that Chrysis

did not give birth to a child, and, consistently, show how
this fact harmonizes with the rest of the play aa preserved
in the Bodmer Papyrus. I shall elaborate this hypothesis step by
step, closely following the development of the action.

The place where a possible birth by Chrysis was supposed to

have been mentioned, was in the last part of Moschion'•
prologue where in 1. 56 several scholars tried to restore a
form of 't'>tt£1..V • But neither lt1..Jetc]v nor tftoxt]'! nor
lttxt]v 0
· turned out as possible and s~tisfying supplement•
of the beginning of this line. I think that all attempts to
reconstruct a sentence like "Quite by chance Chryaia gave
birth" must remain unsuccessful. At least I cannot see what
~at µ&Aa/:t1..xtc]v should mean and why the stress was
laid upon the fact that Chrysis 1
confinement came off very
well: On the contrary, it was not so because those who try to
de:fend this or a similar reading, are compelled to suppose
that Chrysis 1
baby was either still-born or died shortly
afterwards. But we .. ;must not argue BO subtly: The papyrus
clearly reads xa1.. µaAa , and it 7 is methodically very deli-
cate to change µ&Aa in µdA • tu without knowing
exactly what was the first word in 1. 56, or to restore the
gap at the beginning of 1. 56 by imputing an error to the
copyist just in order to save one's own conjecture. I think
we must leave the text as it is transmitted ~bat leads to the
necessary conclusion that .:in L 55£. there waa no place for any
mention of an alleged birth by Chrysia. But I can inform you
of the proposal made by Dr. H.-D. Blume in hia just published
interpretation of the Samia: He understands £CAn,' in
1. 55 not as tf).n,(l but as £~A.Of£ the subject of'
which is nXpuaCs • So he reads:
TO K]al.6~ov ycv&µcvov £~An,' o~ 1dl.al.
....... n XpuaCs
and in paranthesis: - &10) Tautoµ~Tou o; ~uµSl8~xE xa~ µdAa
ls xal.pd']y -

Apart f'romlhether ls xal.po]y is right or not, it seems an

extremely sound proposal. Its main virtue is that we can
leave the text aa it stands without any alteration, and
ls xa~p&]v is, even exempli gratia, better than the
restorations mentioned before. The new sense resulting from
this reading would be that after the baby (of Plangon and
Moachion) was born, Chrysis took it into her house. This
happened quite by chance and just in time because - we have
to assume - the return of Demeas and Nikeratos was expected
every day, and one has agreed to make Demeas believe that it
was his and Chrysis' child. This is, of course) the intrigue
which is the starting-point of the whole action and which
generates the errors and misunderstandings of the play.
Now, it strikes one that the intrigue ia put forward in
1. 77ff. just in passing without a longer debate to follow.
This may give way to the suggestion that this plan has already
been discussed or mentioned in one way or another in the
lacuna after 1. 56, either in the prologue or in the first
scene of the first act. An indication can be found in the
remark in 1. 78 o~Tw~ twµcv ~s txt~ • If they can
leave the matter like that, they must have discussed it
before; lllether on stage or off stage (and then reported to
the audience in Moschion's prologue), does not matter. The
aecond point is: Chrysis must TPtft~v the baby and pre-
tend to be its mother. Now, in TP£ftl.v most scholars
see the explicit proof that Chrysia must have borne a baby,
too, otherwise she would be unable to nourish it. But what
C,oes TP£1p£l.V actually mean? "To feed or suckle an infant"
is only a very ■ mall subsection; at first and above all it
means "cause to grow" or "increase, bring up, rear" in a
broadest aenae: children, slaves, dogs, cattle, parts of the
body and ao on; then generally "maintain, support, bring up,
re14r, educate". Therefore also males can say that they
Tpl1poua~v a baby or a child, as for instance Daos in the
Epitrepontes 75 and perhaps Mqschion about Demeas in Samia
10, and even if it is said of women it does not necessarily

168
 involve the actual feeding or suckling of the baby, but the
stress usually lays on the upbringing, rearing and educating:
so in Sikyonioi fr. 371 Koerte = fr. 1 Kassel, Pseudherakles
fr. 453 Koerte, Perikeiromene 365, and even in the Samia
there are some instances where doubtless this meaning pre-
vails: In l; 135 Demeaa says ~AA•~ µJc ~]p;~tLV l~6ov 6~v
•poa6o•!~ vooov1 and again 279 µoO tP!tcLv axovto,.
There remain four.instances where the scholars thought to see
a reference to Chrysia' alleged ability of nursing Plangon'•
baby: Apart from 1. 78 in 1. 316 ff. , otL oL• lxctvov
a6tb vOv a~tn tplf£L • 1. 410 f. ~xouaa ~a6tbs tpv yovaLK~v,
otL tplfcL, &vcAoµlvn •aLoapLov. 1. 523 o6xL Kpoals
fotL µ~tnp o~ tplftL vnv waLo[ou.

I should like to affirm that in these passages, too, the only

fact which Parmeno, Demeas, Nikeratos, and Moschion have in
mind, is that Chrysis took the baby into Demeas' house and
reared it.\nether she also was ableto nourish it, does not
matter here. This may be most obvious in the last example
with Moschion's words, but it is also meant by Nikeratos and
Demeas in their respective utterances: Chrysis dares to keep
the child and to bring it up - that makes Demeas furious,
not the nursing which is, in this case, of secondary impor-
tance for he knew already that she was rearing a Ad~pLos utos.

On the other hand I am fully prepared to agree that there is

a certain ambiguity left in the use of tpt,cLv in 11. 78,
J18, and 410, and I am inclined to interpret this as an
intentional ambiguity by Menander which corresponds to some
other ambiguous expressions which will play an important role
in the further development of the action. I shall return to
this point later, but we should try to understand Parmeno's
words in 1. 77ff. in the sense just explained.

In the second scene of the second act (1. 12? ££.) where
Demeaa, after his return, meets Moachion, we hear that Demeas
already knows that there ia a baby in his house and has been
told that he himself and Chryais are its parents. He does not
bluntly reject the child or demand its removal, but he is not
happy either about this Xdep~os ut&s • Anyway his compara-
tively mild reaction is in a sharp contrast to the reaction
which was ascribed to him by those scholars who believed that
Chrysis had to get rid of her and Demeaa' (supposed) child in
order to prevent an angry outburst of the old man.Therefore
we may explain the reason for the intrigue aa follows: Plangon
and Moachion were expecting the arrival of their fathers by
any day. If Plangon had kept t)'le baby in her house on the day
of the arrival, she would have risked a terrible outburst of
her father Nikeratos and an incalculable action which could
have led to bloodshed or, at least, to the cancellation of her
marriage to Moschion (she could, of course, not know that
Nikeratos and Demeas had already agreed upon the marriage of
their children). If the baby, however, could be brought up in
Demeas' house it was easy to declare it Chrysis' and Demeas'
child. The idea must have been that Demeas, being the educated
and humanely thinking man whom Moschion depicted in the
prologue, would at least tolerate its existence until Moschion
and Plangon would be married and the identity of the child
could be revealed. In addition, Demeas' house was much bigger
and had got quite a number of rooms where it would be easy and
not dangeroua for Plangon, the true mother, to nourish her
child secretely whereas in Nikeratos' small house the truth
would have come out very soon. Later in the fourth act this
speculation proves right.

The situation changes completely.when during the-preparations

for the wedding Demeas by chance hears the truth about the
child's father and discovers that he was iritentionally deceived
by the members of his household. The climax is reached when he,
according to his own words in 1. 265f., sees the Samia
61.600oav TC.T-&lov- · - literally "giving the child her breast"
This is proof enough for him .that Chrysis is the baby's mother
and Moschion its father. In fact, this passage seems to be so
obvious that any doubts about Chrysis' confinement should be
outruled. If, however, we are determined to exclude this, we
must try to overcome this difficulty by a careful interpre-
tation. For there is indeed the possibility that Demeas was
in a certain way mistaken and fell victim to a misunder-
standing. I think we must understand the words 6~6o0oav
T~Te~ov not in their literal sense: Chrysis was actually
not feeding the baby but just taking it to her breast in order
to stop it crying and calm it down. Such a behaviour may be
easily understood when considering the circumstances under
which it happened: Everybody in Demeas' house is busy with
the preparations for the wedding, there is a permanent coming
and going upstairs downstairs - no wonder that the baby, left
alone in a corner, starts crying. One tries to put it away,
at least out of Demeas' sight whose attitude towards this
v.&-&os;: is still rather reserved. Chrysis, in spite of her
position the very mistress of the house, has got no sparetime
for the child, and so the old nurse tries to calm it. Her
incautious way of speaking to it is stopped by the young ser-
vant-girl, and ~bile she rushes away - so we have to imagine,
for Demeas does not tell all particulars - Chrysis comes and
tries to soothe the child again. She does this in a very
intimate way by which her sincere affection towards Plangon's
baby and also a main trait in her character is depicted in a
very positive and charming way: She takes it tenderly to her
 . .
breast as if she were the mother so that the baby may calm
down and feel comfortable again. We must remember that all
the time before, the child was brought up by Chrysia in
Demeas 1 house and was therefore used to Chrysis, though Plan-
gon, its real mother, visited it very often and also had to
feed it. There was an excellent and friendly relation between
the women of the two houses, in spite of Chryais being just
an betaira. This can be seen from Moschion'a words in l. J5ff.:
,J1.'A.av&p~•~, 6£ 'lpb~,tnv too,,a!po,/taµtJ~v ~~lNt~e· n t~t H&pn,
µ,h~P, ta t£/'l'A.£i.]qt ifv 'lap auta·t, ~6£, )CQI, l<ht.v IOt£/ao-r]qi.,
lap nµCv.

Therefore Chrysis' behaviour is not so strange as it may seem

at first, and Menander could have used such an action to serve
his purpose of creating misunderstanding and confusion which
he chose as motivating powers in the development of the plot.
On the very day now of Demeas' and Nikeratos' return when
also the wedding between Moschion and Plangon should take
place it was rather difficult to find a proper time and place
for Plangon to feed the baby. For,Moschion and Plangon had to
wait with the revelation of their parentage until after the
wedding. Whether Chrysis knew of Demeas' presence in the pantry
or not, does not matter. In any case her behaviour fitted to
the plan according to which she had to play the r6le of the
baby's mother. When Demeas saw her "nursing" the child it was
not an unexpected surprise neither for him nor for Chrysis,
but rather a welcome demonstration that she and Demeas were
really the parents (Chrysis, of course, did not know at this
very moment that Demeas had witnessed the old nurse's talk
and was informed about the true father of the child she pre-
tended to be her'a). We must remember, as I said before, that
Demeas after his return was made believe that Chrysis had
borne a baby. Theref'ore the "nuraing 11-scene was not necessary
at all from the point of information: It had only the emo-
tional function of convincing Demeaa to the uttermost and to
spread the twilight of ambiguity again over the scene. -
of an ambiguity which we saw already in tpl,£~v ~n 1. 78.
If we are prepared to accept Demeas' discovery of the "nurs-
ing" Chrysis as an error which under these circumstances,
however, was quite excusable, this error is the most crucial
one in a series of other errors and misunderstandings which
are basis and motor of the whole action. Demeas now turns out
to be a man who sees and does not see (cp. !pi in 1. 265).
He sees part 0£ the truth - Chrysis "nursing" the baby-, but
not the whole truth: that she is not actually feeding-it.
His remark in l. 21J 066' E ~ 8Ali:w, µ& t riv • A611vliv • oi6[a vOv /
x«li& lt' ... becomes true in an ominous and quite dif'fer-
ent way than he means. op~ 0£ 1. 265 has the same value as
Depe~s' later allegations that
he knows everything (1. 466
•avT ot6a 1. 477 o!6;oxnxoa ) but in fact he knows and
does not know, he sees and does not see, he hears and does
not hear.

Yet another scene shows how masterly Menander has built up

his comedy and the change of the mutual misunderstandings:
When the confusion has reached its peak in 1. 520 and Nikera-
tos has disappeared into his house, things start to go round
the other way: Moschion confesses to Demeas that he and Plan-
gon are the baby's parents. Before he can explain the whole
intrigue, the explanation comes from Nikeratoa' aide who in
his turn has to make a discovery analogous to Demeaa: 1. 5J2£f.
TnY euyatep' <Spt~> t~Y lµnv T@ •a~6~~
t~teCov 6~6o0aav lv6ov xaTlAaaov.
But in this case - and that is the irony which proves Menan-
der'a art - the observation is true: Plangon, the mother of
the baby, "gives it her breast" and nurses it. Let us shortly
remember the reasons why the child was brought up in Demeas
house and compare them with the present situation: If Chryais
had also borne a child which either died or was exposed, and
iC she really had been able to nurse Plangon's baby in Demeas'
house: If this had been done because everybody was afraid of
Nikeratos' reaction when he would see Plangon nursing the baby:
Why, so I ask, did Plangon now nurse the child in her father's
house and risk a dangerous outburst with unforeseable conse-
quences, although Chryaia was in Nikeratos' house, too, and it
would have been the simplest and moat reasonable thing to let
Chrysis go on nursing the baby? Why, therefore, risk every-
thing shortly before the wedding whereas there was far better
reason to go on with the intrigue under the present circum-
stances than to abandon it? When Nikeratos took Chrysis and
her baby into his house, he and Demeas were still of the
opinion the baby was Chrysis' own child. Nothing, therefore,
could have raised Nikeratos' suspicion when he saw her feeding
the child; she could have done this even in his presence with-
out fearing to disclose their plan. But why, for heaven's sake,
did Chry'sis now, in the most delicate situation, not play her
rSle as the baby's alleged mother, why did the women not fur-
ther stick to their intrigue where there was no reason to
abolish it, but every reason to maintain it? The only possible
answer can be: Because Chrysis had not borne and was, therefore,
not able to feed Plangon's child. It is also important that
Plangon began nursing the baby only when Nikeratos had left
the house and was supposed to spend some time outside with
Demeas in order to speak with him about Chrysis. This was the
best and only opportunity to feed the baby - the bigger was
the surprise when he returned shortly afterwards and caught
Plangon, so to say, in flagranti.
Nikeratos' outburst is the most stringent and obvious proof
for the fact that Demeas was mistaken when he saw Chrysis taking
the crying child to her breast: In fact she just tried to soothe
the baby, but did not and could not feed it. Demeas' interpre-
tation of his discovery is the main cause for the misunder-
standings and confusions which arise in the following scenes.
The irony and the very point, however, is that this observa-
tion was itself a misunderstanding, all the excitements, all
the trouble, were groundless - "much ado about nothing". Don't
we recognize in this irony Menander's spirit and genius more
truly than in that other interpretation?

Suddenly now the r81es change: Nikeratos ge~s furious and rages
as Demeas did before when he had seen Chrysis giving the baby
her breast: He calls himself lµµavns in 1. 5J4 which cor-
responds to Demeas' fury uttered several times before:
1. 216f. a111l4'ao-&E'IChEpof-·v E~ ,poviil//i' µaCvoµ' •••
says Demeas of himself;
1. J61 µa~v&µtvos tla6t6paµnxcv Efaw T~S ylpwv
the cook comments on Demeas' behaviour;
1. 363 vn TOV noat~6w,
(spoken by jhe
µai:vt-&'
cook, too)
ws lµot 6oxct
1. 416 ~nµlas XOA~ Nikeratos comforts Chrysis after she
was expelled from Demeas' house;
1. 447 XOTQll,,~V tnv XOA~V Demeas sa,-s and confesses
to Moschion in 1. 703 /iyv&no', nµaptov, lµovnv
But there is also another parallel between the two men: Demeas
saw Chrysis giving the baby her breast:
---r. 265c. ttav IaµCav l,p&/ ••• 61,,600oav Tt,,t-&Cov
and Nikeratos, too, saw Plangon giving the b~by her breast:
1. 5JJ cla1,,6~v , T:'"""'"536 Tt,,T-&~ov 61,,600oav cvoov xaTlAaBov
and repeating his discovery in almost the same words in 1. 540f.:
61,,600aav Tt,,T-&~ov T~ Ka~6,~
&pttws lvoov xaTlAa8ov TOVlµauToO tuyat€pa,
cp. 1. 546 &:U.a µn[v] tt6ov • We have a highly elaborated
reflecting of events: Twice the same event, but the first time
~nreal, the second time real.

Moschion's confession towards his father is strengthened by

Nikeratos' words, and so is his fury which seem to Moschion
proof enough that he and Plangon are the baby's parents. De-
~eas ~ow also knows the truth: 1. 537 o~b£V &61,,xtt,, Moaxtwv
ty~ 6~ al /oKovowv to~auta. At once he sees through every-
thing: It was indeed Chrysis who was 11 joking" when giving
the baby her breast. Now he has completely mastered the situa-
tion and is even able to joke himself and to tease poor Nike-
ratos. What he, Demeas, knows of Chrysis, i.e. that she hasn't

1 73
got a baby, he tries to talk into Nikeratos: that he was mis-
tak:E\,_n e_nd did not see properly: l. 542 't'u;x'av /'lat.r;cv , 1. 54J
't'UXO" LOW~ l6otl [oot., , 1. 545 &tt.otov &pay~a pot. 6oxcts
1lyct.[v, 1. 546 xoputes • And another reflecting of events:
1. 427 Nikeratos said of Demeas: oxa't'ofay&t, now Demeas calls
Nikeratos axa~o,dyos in 1. 550.Everything goes the other way
round, also for Chrysis: In l. 568ff. she is again expelled
from the house, but this time by Nikeratos and taken back by
Demeas into his house. The scene corresponds to the famous scene
in act III which is represented on the Mytilene mosaic.

The Bodmer Papyrus gave us evidence that at least from the

third act onwards there is no mention of the alleged baby of
Chrysis. If she had borne a child it should have been mentioned
in one way or another in the fourth act. It is true, this is
an argumentum e silentio. But it is strengthened by the drema-
tical development of the action itself as I already pointed
out: Demeas' observation has a parallel in Nikeratos' observa-
tion which proves that Demeas was mistaken. The audience was
already informed about the intrigue and knew that Plangon and
Moschion were the baby's parents. Nikeratos' discovery in
1. 5J5ff. was no surprise to them. So Menander left it up to
the audience to recognize Chrysis 1
"nursing" as an error by
Demeas; they were helped by the deliberate composition of the
plot with parallelisms and reflections. The audience, there-
fore, did not need an explicit statement about the very nature
of Chrysis' nursing. For the characters in the play, explana-
tion, · if necessary at all, can be assumed off-stage between
act IV and V. Here Chrysis may have explained to Demeas her
alleged nursing and how the whole intrigue was planned and had
worked.
There is still a last instance in act V which may show that
Chrysis did not give birth to a baby. In 1. 645ff. Parmeno the
slave recapitulates the events which happened before the begin-
ning of the comedy and which were necessary for the understanding
of the action: Moschion's &µapTCa towards a free-born girl
(Plangon); Plangon•s pregnancy; the reception of the baby into
Dvmeas' house where Moschion himself brought it to Chrysis;
the Samia's offer to declare it as her own child. Nowhere he
speaks of a baby of Chrysis herself which might have died or
been exposed, but only that she agreed to pretend that Plan-
gon's baby was hers. If something like this had happened, it
should have been mentioned by Parmeno, because Chrysis' way
of acting and the whole intrigue, then, would have appeared
in a different light. The fact, however, that there is no
mention of it in Parmeno's monologue, may also weigh in favour
of my interpretation.

174
If we ask, finally, what we do gain by this interpretation in
comparison with the traditional one, we can say that the con-
struction of the plot turns out more ingenious and of higher
artistic and aesthetic qualities. The interaction between the
characters becomes more subtle, the intrigue itself more in-
spired, Chrysis' unselfish offer to cooperate shows. her posi-
tive, 11
unhairetical 11
character in a still more sympathetic
light. The whole action seems more refined, and the poet's
true genius is better reflected if Demeas' observation was due
to a deception, to a misunderstanding which became the source of
all the following misunderstandings in the play.

175
Timothy T. Renner:
"A new fragment on Ptol-ic history" (Su.....ry)
P. Mich. Inv. 6648. dating from the fir ■t century B.C. (or perhapa
the early first A.D.). contain• part ■ of at least two colmm.a of proee
literary narrative dealing with military operation■• Ship ■, land force ■,
march••• encampment ■, and a city are mentioned in close proximity 1n
the text. Of the two opposing sides, the one is probably the force• of
the Ptolem.ies. That the other i ■ a foreign ~r i ■ poaaible
1
but it
should be tioted that the text talk■ about 'tOU(.'tu.T\\IClC: and A&. }yU11,-to&.c;,
which ■uggeata that the conflict may be with rebellious Egyptian native■•
An operation again■ t insurgents would fit well into what ve bow of the
internal affair• of Egypt during the early ncond century. However, the
fragmentary state ~f the tat allOVII for 11&11y doubt ■•• to uactly vbo
ia on vho■e aide.
A no~UKpo.'t~c;- perhaps to be identified with the general of
Philopator and of Epiphanea mentioned by Polybiu■ (e ■p. 5.64.4-6• 22.17)
and by inscription.al evidence - ia mentioned ■everal tiaea. A fi'toA.c)iicitoc;
alao occurs. 'nle only place name 1■ 'tov Bcpcv[LK~c;?••• n]o'tcqa.ov.
 Un sens meconnu de eup!c et de fenestra (l),

G. Husson, Rouen.

Mon propoa eat de montrer que le mot grec euplc et son corres-
pond.ant latin fenestra, dont le sens le plus courant est fenitre, ont ete
em:ployes en Egypte pour designer auasi une_niche murale (2).

Je commencerai par des constatations archeologiques : les rap-

ports de fouilles signalent coame un trait constant de !'architecture des
habitations egyptiennes lea cavites menagees dans l'epaisseur des murs. Ces
renfoncements etaient ou bien des sortes de sanctuaires domestiques - cer-
tain, etaient decores de peintures - ou bien, et c'est le cas le plus fre-
quent, ils avaient une fonction utilitaire, c'est-l-dire qu'ils servaient
de placards. La presence de niches dans les maisons greco-romainee a ete
constatee par exemple a Apollinopolis Magna (3) et dans la plupart des vil-
lages du Fayoum (4). L'usage en est toujours atteste dans l'Egypte byzan-
tine, car on trouve des niches murales dans la plupart des etablissements
monastiques (5).

Ce recours a l'architecture monastique n'est pas fortuit, car ce

sent des textes relatifs aux moines d 1 Egypte qui contiennent l'argumenta-
tion la plus solide en f aveur du sens de "niche murale" donne au mot &up f c;.
Le passage le plus explicite est une traduction latine de la R~gle de Saint
Pachome due a Saint Jerome (Migne, Patrologia latina 23, 5 100) : "codices
qui in fenestra, id est in risco parietis reponuntur, ad vespenim erunt sub
manu secundi qui numerabit ~os et ex more concludet". "Lea livres qui aont
deposes dans la fenestra, c'est-a-dire dans un coffre du mur, seront vera
le soir entre lea mains de l'adjoint qui lea comptera et les enfermera se-
lon l'habitude." L'expression "in fenestra, id eat in risco parietis" mon-
tre clairem.ent que fenestra est un placard decoupe dana l'epaiaseur d'un
mur.
L'uaage de placer lea livres dans une feneetra est encore atteste
au f 82 de Re,le de Saint Pachome; il est question de la pauvrete du moine
qui ne doit r1en p01Beder peraonnellement : "Que personne ne garde pour soi
de petite pince pour enlever lea epines sur lesquelles on aurait mis le pied,
excepte le responsable de la maison et l'adjoint ; et que la pince soit ac-
crochee dans la niche ou lea livres sont places 11 (pendeatque in fenestra
in qua codices collocantur).
A cote de ces preceptes connus par la traduction latine de Jerome,
nous disposons de plusieurs textes de la litterature hagiographique grecque
qui attestent la meme coutume, a savoir le rangement des livres dans une &uptc;
ou son diminutif &up f61.ov.

177
 D'abord, pour en finir avec Pachome, la Vita Prima Sancti Pacho-
mu donne cette indication au S 59 : xat Tc\ f3Lf3XCa., fv Su,n6C<I)KE C\.1.E-
va, Onb T~V q,povTt6a. ndJ.Lv T~V 660 ~aa.v. "Et lea livres, places
dans la petite auptc , etaient A nouveau sous la surveillance dea deux "
(c'est-A-dire le responsable de la maison et l'adjoint).
Lea Apophte,:ata Patrum ont conserve plusieurs rEcita on l'on voit
des livrea ainsi ranges. Citons le texte ou Abba Ammoes invite sea compa-
gnons a se detacher des biena terreatrea ; devant leura hesitations il leur
cite une attitude exemplaire : "En verite j'ai vu certaina hamaea a'enfuir
et laisser les niches ( &upC6La ) blanchies a la chaux avec des livres ;
et ils ne fermerent mme pas les &upl6a.c maia a'en alUrent en lea lais-
sant ouvertes" (Migne, Patrologia Craeca 65, 128 B) (6).

Un argument de plus a l'appui de cet emploi de &uptc est fourni

par le copte. En effet le mot ~o~~T, dont le correspondant grec eat tou-
jours &uplc, designe dans plusieurs cas une niche murale. Le Coptic
Dictionary de W.A. Crum indique ce aens de "niche, alcove". Un texte du
Catalo e of the Co tic Manuscri ts in John R lands Libra (n• 94 p. 47)
ment1onne une 1cone en or du ehrut dana une niche ljO~ 't ) creusee dans
un aair (7).

Si &uplr; a bien ete employee en Egypte pour designer une niche

murale, il conviendrait, me semble-t-il, de lui donner ce sens dana pluaieurs
papyrus au lieu de recourir a la traduction habituelle qui eat "fenitre" ou
"rebord de fenetre". Un ostracon d'Elephantine, le SB V. 7574, que 1 1 on date
du IIe siecle av. notre ere, eat un billet adrease par uncertain Stratonicos
A aa feame. On lit aux lignea 5-7 : "donne-leur le re~u q_ui ae trouve dans
la 8uptc du vestibule" ( tx 'tfi, &upC6or; TfiC npOO"td8oc). Dana une
lettre ecrite a aa famille au Ille aiecle de notre ere, P. Rosa. Geor5. III.I,
un medecin de l'armee donne, entre autres, cette consigne : "et ainsi que je
te l'ecria dans chaque lettre, secoue me ■ traites de medecine et enlfve-les
de la &uplr;, ( t5cov aO't& 6.nl, TfiC &upl6oc), ceux que j 'ai laiaae1 en
partant" (lignea 17-18).
Dana lea deux cas,qu'il s'agisse du re~u ou des livrea de medecine,
ce sont des documents precieux que l'on devait ranger soigneusement et pour
lesquels l'appui de fenetre conatituait, me semble-t-il, un abri precaire.
De plus la traduction de auplc par rebord de fenetre" s'accorde mat avec
11

les donnees de l'archeologie. D'une part lea fenetres des maiaons egyptiennes
etaient generalement placeea haut dans les mura, souvent i.mnediatement au-des-
sous du plafond; elles etaient done peu acceaaiblea. D'autre part leurs
appuis etaient frequemment en pente, ce qui ne permettait guere d'y deposer
des objets (8). Les niches au contraire etaient placees habituellement a
hauteur d'appui, leur bord inferieur l Im. ou I m.10 du sol (9).

Ma demonstration ne serait complete que si nous connaissions la de-

couverte in situ, dana lea niches murales, de papyrus ou d'ostraca. Or en
consultant les rapports de fouilles, j'ai trouve deux exemples auxquels je
me refere. Le premier est emprunte l l'ouvrage de B.P. Grenfell. A.S. Hunt
et D.G. Hoggartht Fayum Towne and their r•pyri : lea auteurs indiquent p.52
que aix oetraca du Ille si~cle de notre re, qui eont toua des re~• au
nom d'un certain Sodikes, Etaient "resting on a niche in the wall". La mai-
aon ou cea oatraca furent trouvfa Etait aitufe l Harit, l'antique ThEadel-
phie. La seconde decouverte eat due awe archeologuea allemande F. Zucker
et w. Schubart. Le journal des f-ouilles qu'ila effectuerent en 1909 et 1910
a ete publie dana l'Archiv fur Papyrusforachui,; 21 de 1971. Je lie p. 38 que,
lore de la fouille d 1une maison de Dimi, 11anc1enne Socnopaiou Neaoa, ila
trouverent "in einer Nische desaelben Raumea••. ein fast vollig zermurbte
und zerfaaerte griechische Rolle".

Ce sena de niche nurale donne a 3upCc devrait, me aemble-t-il,

Eclairer une expression du P. Oxy. XVI. 2058 qui date du Vle aiecle de notre
ere; c'eat la liate des objeta qui ont Ete pri ■ dana la maison d'un pretre
et notable du village de Spania dana l'Oxyrhynchite. La ligne 24 porte :
ot6nPQ -rwv &up1.6Cwv 1J. vo(µfcrua:ta.) 6. G. Rouillard, dans la Vie rurale
dana l 'Empire blzantin,traduit (p. 56) 0C6T1PO. "tc'.iSv8up1.6l<a>v par "ferru-
res de f enitres • Or E t6npci n' est pas attest«! en ce sens et le contexte
montre qu'il ne peut s'agir d'installations fixes : lea &upt61.a. ne sont
done pas des fenetres. Le met pourrait designer des niches muralea; en ce
cas lea ol6npa. seraient des objets en fer, sans doute des outils agricoles,
qui s'y trouveraient deposes (10). La construction avec le genitif &up1.-
6twv indiquant que lea objets 1ont placEa dans lea niches a un parallele
a la ligne 25 avec une -rpd.neCa. -roO 6.xxoufhx(ou).ou?), c'est-i.-d.ire
la table qui est dans la cham.bre i. coucher. Le sens d'outila en fer donne
A ot6np<1 a'accorderait avec la ligne 16 oil est mentionnee "une autre pe-
tite corbeille (?) ayant 8 faucilles, l sou". A la ligne 24 lea 40 inatru-
ments en fer representent une valeur de 4 sous, ce qui est coherent avec la
ligne 16.

Pour terminer je m'aventurerai hors de l'Egypte en signalant que

dans la comedie de Plaute intitulee Casina ae trouve un emploi de fenestra
pour lequel le sens d'armoire murale conv1ent beaucoup mieux que celui de
fenetre. Un esclave menace un de sea com.pagnona de "l'enfermer solidement
dans une feneatra" (concludere in fenestram firmiter, vera 132). (11). 11
ajoute que sa victime pourra, de cette prison, tout entendre ce qui se dit l
l'intErieur de la pifce - il n'est pas question de voir - et qu'elle ae de-
menera c011111.eune souria dans un 1m1r (quasi mus in medic parieti vorsabere).
Le Totiua Latinitatia Lexicon de Forcellini s.u. fenestra propose le aens
de 11armoire creusie dana un mur" pour ce pasuge. Le Glouarium mediae
et infimae Latinitatis de Du Gange donne des exemplea de "fenestra 11 et de
"fenestre" employes au sens de "ciborium seu armariobumN(J 2). Dana le
Dictionnaire de la La e Fran aiae du seizihle ai~cle d'Edmond Huguet je
trouve enestre au sens e case,casier, placard" (13).

Cea exemplea permettent de comprendre, me semble-t-il, cOlllllent le

gliasement de sens s'est opere naturellement de fenetre a niche murale •

179
Il est probable que 8uplc et fenestra ont deaigne, a l'origine, un trou
ou une ouverture quelconque (14) et que le mot s'eat specialise ensuite dana
le sena d'ouverture pour donner l'air et la lumilre. Les rapports de fouil-
les effectuees en Egypte montrent que, trls souvent, lea niches et lea fene-
tres aont construites les unea au-deaaus des autres, la fenetre prolongeant
en quelque sorte la niche. Et l'on avait recoure aux memes techniques pour
encadrer lea fenetres et lea niches de poutree de bois, pour etayer lemur
rendu plus fragile aux endroits de ces ouvertures (15). Ainai la niche
apparaissait comne une sorte de fenetre aveugle. Il arrivait souvent que des
fenetres fussent obstruees et transformees en niches (16). L'emploi d'un me-
me mot pour designer les deux realites constituait evidenment un inconvenient
peut-etre faut-il voir dans la creation de <P(AlTo8UPLC ou <P(AlTa.8up1.c que
l'on trouve dans quelques papyrus une tentative pour remedier a cette ambi-
guite (17).

Pour conclure je m1 arreterai a deux sortes de remarques : la cons-

truction et l'usage des niches nurales dans !'architecture monastique se
rattachent a une tradition egyptienne ancienne. 11 en va de meme pour un
element du mobilier du moine, l'tlJ.8pl~1.ov, le coussinet de papyrus qui sert
a la fois de siege et d'appuie-tete. Ce mot rare se trouve deja dans lea de-
penses faites pour le bureau du comogranmate Petaus a la fin du Ile siecle de
notre ere (18). Nous avons li pour lea realia deux cas precis d'une continuite
qui a ete bien mise en evidence dans d'autres doms.ines (19).
Ensuite, du point de we de la mf:thode, lea emplois de 8uplc dans
le grec d'Egypte me semblent etre un bon exemple de la maniere dont lea di-
verses disciplines se completent: sans le secours de l'archeologie et des
textes chretiens, il aurait ete difficile de montrer que, outre son sena ha-
bitual de fenetre, 8uplc pourrait avoir dans lupapyrus celui de niche nm-
rale.

(I) Cette etude a beneficie des remarques de M. Jean Scherer qui m'ont
ete precieuses ; je 1 1 en remercie •inc~rement. Je donne ici l'essen-
tiel de ma c0111DUnicationpresentee a Oxford; un article plus deve-
loppe sur le meme sujet aera publie dans le Journal of Juristic
Papyrology.

(2) Cette interpretation a deja ete proposee, a titre d'hypoth~se, par

E.G. Turner dana son livre Greek Pap)f,i.An Introduction. Apr~• avoir
traduit p. 79 l 'expreuion &.no ·dk upl6oc; du P. Roes. Geor,. III.
) par '_'fr.£!.l~,u:.'~,dow". il~fi~u~ t.d'ffiB._Jll)tnet.f,-1,QS•iJlm:.l~I)
: "The
term m1ght.~orrte\>on~ lo""l" cup""boar3or arch1.ve c~es8".
(3) Voir M. Alliot, Rapport sur lea Fouilles de Tell Edfou (1932),p.9.

180
(4) Voir entre autres A.E.R. Boak and E.E. Peterson, Karanis,
Topographical and Architectural Report of Excavations during
the sea1ons 1924 - 1928, pp. 18, 50, 60, 61.

(5) Voir par exemple Kellia I, Kom 29 - Fouilles ex.ecutees en 1964

et 1965 sous la direction de F. Dawna&et A. Guillaumont, pp. 5
et 6, 21 et 22. Les auteur& indiquent que ces niches correspondent
aux 8upl6La. ou 8u,:,l6£C oii les moines des Apophtegmata Patrum
rangent leura livrea.

(6) Autres A~ophtegmata montrant des 8up l6&s; remplies de livres:

Migne, 41 C; J. Cl. Guy, Recherches sur lea Apophtegmata Patrum
X 147 et 191. Je dois cea deux derni~res rEfErencea i M. Guy que
je remercie de aon concoura.

(7) Texte cite dans le rapport de F. Daumas et A. Guillaumont, Kellia

!, p. 22.
(8) Voir Karania .... pp. 16, 18, 49, 60, 62.

(9) Ibid.,p. 29.

(10) On peut rapprocher1 'emploi de "tc:\[aL] 6~,:,c.a. qui sent des ou-
tils en fer dana une lettre du Ille aiecle ap. J.C., P. Oxy.VII.
J066, 20.

(II) A. Ernout, dans la Collection des Universites de France traduit

"On t'enfermera aolidement dana 1 1 embrasure de la fenitre d'oil tu
pourras entendre a loisir ••• ". Citons aussi la traduction de P. Gri-
mal dana la Collecti>n f.a Pleiade : "On t'enfermera aolidement der-
riere lea volets de la fenitre, a un endroit ou tu pourraa enten-
dre ••• 0

(12) La "fenetre" est l 'endroit oil "le Corps du Christ" est place.

(13) "Il lea mena a son logia et fist ouvrir une petite fenetre, oil
d'une bourse qui dedana estoit tira cent escuz". Le Loyal Servi-
~• Histoire de Bayart, eh. 7.
2
(14) Voir A. Mau, P.W. VI 2180.

(15) Karanis •••• ,p. 29.

(16) Ibid.
(17) C.P.R. I. 103,6 - P. Lond. III. 1179 p. 144, 62 - P. Mil. Vo-
gl1ano II. 99,12.

181

•
(18) P. Petaus 33,7.

(I 9) Voir par exem.ple J. Vergote, "L 'Egypte berceau du monachisme

chretien", Chronique d'Egypte 34 (1942), pp. 329 - 345.

182

•
 A NOTE ON THE RCMANATTITUDE TOWARDSTHE BUREAUCRACY

s. Frederic Johanson

It is my intention to use an unusual point of Greek grannar to

illustrate how the Roman government looked upon the Oriental provinces,
taking Egypt as my example. I realize, however, that the evidence is
ambiguous, that most of my argument is speculative, and that other
explanations are equally possible, two of which I will mention in the
final portion of this study.I

The point of granmar is the use of the dative absolute. The use
of this construction is so limited and its origin so transparent that
nearly all handbooks of Greek granmar ignore it, just as we pass over it
in reading with scarcely a nod. With t~e exception of five possible
occurrences in Appian claimed by Hering, (a point of potential importance),
its confirmed use is restricted to dating monuments and documents by
consular pairs.3 As Jannaris explained it in his Historical Greek
Graamar, 4 (the only modern authority, incidentally, who discusses the
construction in a granmatical handbook), "•••the place of the genitive
absolute is occasionally taken by the dative absolute ••• this
however is nothing but a mistranslation into the Greek of the Latin
ablative absolute. • • cf. Josephus, AJ XIV, 10, 13, AE.UK L~ ii£.V'tA~
raC(f) 1la.pxlAA.., lnta'tot.c; ·••" Whether in fact this was ardis to
be interpreted as a temporal dative or a dative of association without
a preposition is difficult.to say. But the use and distribution of
the construction clearly indicates, I believe, that it was developed
and used by those whose native language was other than Latin.

The construction is found nearly everywhere the Greek language

was used. There seems to be no pattern for its distribution either
chronologically or geographically, except for Egypt, but perhaps such a
pattern will emerge when I complete my survey of the epigraphical
material. If one considers only the Monumentum Ancyranum, which is the
document, I should imagine, where most scholars first meet a dative
absolute, one would be tempted to attribute its development to
Augustus, who, we are told by Suetonius (D. A. 89), was no Greek
scholar, and who could have set a precedent for its usage. However,
the first epigraphic use that I have located is the SC de Panamareis,
dated 39 B.c., a good half century before the Res Gestae. And the
SC de Panamareis 1 or at least the surviving copy set up in Panamara,
may have been a local translation, made by a local official whose
competence in Latin did not extend to an understanding of the
abbreviation coss. ■ consulibus as an ablative absolute, which was to
be properly t~lated with a genitive absolute using the verb
ti1ta't'E.VW or with the standard formula lnl plus the genitive of the
magistracy, 1 '
in this case f;7tlr ' ,
v1ta'tw\l • This lack of understanding of
a basic Latin formula is repeated throughout the Greek-speaking world
 on epigraphic monuments, both public and private, with no apparent
pattern. As an example of this lack of pattern, I c~te IatR III, ,
146 and 147, two letters of Antoninus Pius to the au vo ~ E;.UO't l. >r.T)
~~v nEpt ~~v 'HpaxXi~ &3J...ni;~v LEpovEt.x~v o'tE,avEL't~v.
inscribed in Rome in 143 and 154 respectively. The first is dated with
l " • ,
a dative absolute while the second uses the formula Ent. Urtct't'W\I
A similar lack of uniformity can be seen within a single monument in
ICJUl Ill, 1012, a monument which a boxer set uo in Laodicaea of
- •
Syria in the year 221, U7W.'tWV , ' ,
f'IVE't"'Ll,OU ~
fpt•'COll ){(it,
' ' 'I'\'
0111,·r.f.AJ\l..('IIJ
Zr.A.FV)'(-ll., but which shows,
... only
, six' lines ,above,,, the record of a
victory at Nemea in 214 .,1£0'0"UAq xat. E«PEt.Vi_l vrto.,;01,c.:.

Further examples of this lack of uniformity can be seen in ten

private documents drawn up in various places from 124 to 263 A.D. but
preserved in either Egypt or the Judaean desert. Of these, three from
Judaea (.§! 10288, 1, 2; SB 10304) and one each from Naples (P. Lond.

(¥ .
- 1' . ,
1178) and Bostra (P. Oxx, 3054) are dated E7tt. u1ta'tW\I ; one from
Judaea 10305) uses , the genitive absolute; one from Myra in Lycia
(BGU 913 uses una-i;~ t.cl<; plus the genitive; and three, from Side
(BGU 887), Cyzicus (P. Cairo, 10433), and Pompeiopolis (.§! 7563) use
the dative absolute.

This review of the epigraphical monuments and the non-Egyptian

papyri leads to the conclusion that there was no set formula in the
Greek East or even in Rome for translating the dating by consuls into
Greek. This is in accord with what else we know of Roman administration
of the East during the Principate: the Romans had a laissez-faire
attitude toward local administration, letting each COIIIIIUnitygo its own
way, which included local standards for translation, as long as it kept
the peace.

In Egypt, however, we find a great deal of uniformity in this

practice. This phenomenon of consular dating of Greek documents to my
knowledge has rarely been investigated. Stein, writing in 1915, did
state some general principles about consular dating and oouble dating
(that is by consuls and by regnal years), but he did not turn his
attention to the use of the dative itself. 5 Of the eighteen examples
of consular dating from the second and third centuries, before the
introduction gf the formula U7ta'tE lac; plus the genitive in the time
of Diocletian, fifteen use the dative absolute, two are granmatically
garb led, and one uses the formula U7tat' e:.lac; plus the genitive. The
following complete list notes the date of the document, the type, the
possible place of origin, and an occasional marginal note. All contain
a dative absolute unless otherwise noted.

1.
-
BGU 140, 119 A.D., a private or semi-official
of a letter of Hadrian to, the erefect,
year followed by nounJ...1,ov t,
translation
''dated bv"'tthePovo,;1,xt,v
J_ ALOU 'tO y xc t,
regnal ....,,v·,·t•.~1.01,<;.
,
The consuls names have perhaps been attracted into the genitive
by being placed next to the name of the emperor.
 2-4. SB 9228, BGU 1032, and BGU7362, etikriseis of veterans
dated 154, m,
and 177 A-:0. respect vely, the first of which
was drawn up at Syene.

s.
-
BGU326, 187 A.D.,
Karanis and called
the will of
a translation.
c. Longinus Castor drawn up in

P1 0xY• 3019, 200 A.D., a decision of Severus drawn up in

Alexandria.

Pr Giss. 40, 212 A.D., the Constitutio Antoniniana, probably

from Alexandria.

s. P1 Flor. 382, 216 A.D., an exemption from a liturgy, with a

mistake in the identity of one of the consuls, drawn up in
Alexandria.

9. P. Oxy. 35, 223 A.D., a proclamation from Alexandria.

10. P1 Oxy. 2348, 224 A.D., the opening of a will, drawn up

in 0xyrhynchus, stated to be a translation and a copy.

11. P 1 Teb. 285, 239 A.D., a copy of a rescript originally from

Alexandria ••

12. P1 Oxy. 1466, 245 A.D., a bilingual request for a guardian

drawn up in Oxyrhynchus.

13. §A 9298, 249 A.D., an agnitio bonorum possessionis stated

to be a translation and a copy, probably drawn up in 0xyrhynchus.

P. gxy. 1201, 258 A.D., a bilingual petition drawn up in

0xyrhynchus.
16. !f!!. 1074, 275 A.D., a rescript dated by the regnal year but
containing a rescript of 43 dated by a dative absolute.
t ,
17. P. Ham. 39 #63, 173 A.o., a military payroll, dated v, .l''!L-t•.c:,
1

plus the genitive

and finally a fragmentary document marked by linguistic confusion

18.
-SB 7366c, 200 A.D., an apophasis
,
xaL 10.ap~ ' ,
una~£La~.
of Severus,

Leaving aside number 17, which uses a standard graD1Datical form

...,.,
dated (_,c,,Xu.1\Jl,

and so does not belong in the same category as the others, we are left
with a group of seventeen documents of an official nature. Of these,
six (7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18) are public documents issued by the government
bureaux in Alexandria for general.distribution. Five others (6, 8, 12,
13, 15) are private documents either to or from the government.
185
Three (2, 3, 4) are epikriseis of veterans. And One (1) is perhaps an
official or semi-official copy of a public document. As for their
places of origin and thus where the dates were entered, ten and perhaps
eleven came from the government bureaux in Alexandria. The two wills
and the agnitio were drawn up in local government offices, as were the
three epikriseis, though the dates on at least two epikriseis were
taken from the veterans• diplomata, which accounts for the use of the
suffecti on§! 9228, the only appearance of suffecti in Egypt.

Now that at least sixteen and perhaps all seventeen documents

have been firmly placed in government offices, the problem is to explain
the constant use in those offices of the dative absolute when dating
documents by consular pairs. The solution is perhaps best approached
through some general statements. First, according to the principles
set forth by Stein, the working language of all government offices
from the strategos on down was Greek, and all documents going to those
offices or through those offices to individuals or to higher ranks
of officialdom would be drawn up or translated into Greek. This is
especially true for the six documents (7, 9, 11, 14, 16, 18) that
presumably were originally drafted in Rome, and which naturally would
include the consuls as part of the date. Second, Egypt was never
subjected to Roman penetration on the scale of the other provinces.
The number of Latin speaking officials was small and soldiers speaking
Latin as their first language may have been in a-minority as early as
the time of Augustus. But though their numbers may have been few and
their Latinity erratic, there was probably a great deal of pride7 (as
well as privilege) involved in being a civis Romanus, exemplified by
the feeling "though in Egypt, do like the Romans." And the Romans
dated by consular pairs. This urge to do things the Roman way,
whether by inclination or by statute, is especially noticeable in
P1 Oxy, 2348, as Roberts points out in his coamentary.

To these two general statements DDJStbe added the absolute fact

that Egypt was burdened with an all-pervasive bureaucracy. Now it is
a general law of bureaucracies that whether the government machinery
runs smoothly or creaks and clanks, it runs by the book, which requires
that all!!!!,! and £h!.!.must be crossed, the proper number of copies be
signed by the right officials, and the proper forms be used. One
example of correct bureaucratic procedure is Wilcken, Chrest. #52, a
letter from an acting strategos to his basilikos grammateus, informing
him of some government decision. This particular case is an example
not only of bureaucratic paper shuffling down the chain of c01DD&nd,but
also of an individual in one capacity officially COtllllllnicating to
himself in another capacity.

It is this spirit that accounts for the uniformity in the use of

the dative absolute in Egypt. As for its origins, we may suppose that
the first scribe, archivist, or whatever, who translated a Latin
document with a consular date into Greek was not fluent enough in Latin
to recognize an ablative absolute for what it was, and instead used the

186
classically improper or substandard dative absolute which was so conmon
elsewhere in the Greek world. The action of this scribe then became
enshrined or fossilized in some sort of scribe's handbook under the
heading of "form to be used for translating consulibus." From
Alexandria, it probably passed to the countryside by way of an official
style manual (which must have existed, though no trace has ever been
found), or by way of memoranda listing the official number of the year
and changes in imperial nomenclature (again a necessary hypothesis,
though the closest parallel is Pz Oxy. 21Q5, a prefect's edict giving
the dati and other particulars for the upcoming triennial Festival of
Livia.)

That the use of the dative absolute may have become standardized
in Alexandria in some such way may have some confirmation in the historian
Appian. As is well known, Appian began and ended his government career
in the bureaux of Alexandria reaching the rank of procurator Augusti.
As mentioned earlier, Hering claimed that at five different places,
Appian replaced a standard genitive absolute with a substandard dative
absolute. That may be true, and if so, it could be the result of
Appian•s career as an Alexandrine bureaucrat. It is more likely that
they are examples of Appian's normal lack of classical, Hellenistic,
or any other sort of elegance.

If this reconstruction is valid, it is in accord with the

standard modern view of the Roman attitude towards the bureaucracy.
It 100st be remembered that the extensive government machinery that the
Romans had adopted and adapted from the Ptolemies was, in theory,
directly under the Prefect, a high ranking, direct appointee, answerable
only to the emperor. One would expect, then, that the bureaucratic
''book" would have been dictated in Rome, and that the dative absolute
would never have become standard. Instead, in this instance, and
perhaps in others, we find the "book" being drawn up within the
bureaux in Alexandria, quite possibly by a low-ranking official. When
he did so, he was within the broad bureaucratic guidelines necessitated
by the transfer of power from the Ptolemies to the Caesars, so his
innovation was allowed to stand. Since his gramoatical infelicity ma.de
no impact on the tranquility of Egypt, only slightly affecting the
paperwork of the province for at least one and perhaps as many as three
centuries, the Roman ruling class paid no attention. It was a matter
beneath their notice, and their contempt. It is another example of
Rome's laissez-faire attitude toward the bureaucracy and the provinces.

It is possible that the solution suggested above is not correct,

and that the Romans themselves were responsible for the introduction
of the dative absolute.9 It is possible that the bureaucratic "book"
was drawn up by Romans either in Alexandria or in what was to become the
office of the ab epistulis Graecis in Rome. But it is difficult to
explain why the Romans chose the substandard or aberrant dative absolute
to translate the consular pair into Greek. If there was a Republican
precedent for their decision, it is not preserved in the surviving
evidence. 10
 Finally, it is possible that the formula was neither substandard
nor aberrant. It may be that the Romans conceived of the formula as
being "the year with the consuls being ••• 11 instead of being "the year
when the consuls were ••• " However, the only evidence that would support
this suggestion is the Greek documents discussed above, so this
possibility must remain in abeyance.

1. An earlier version of this paper was read at the XIVth

Congress of the A.I.P., July 30, 1974, at Oxford. I would
like to thank all those colleagues who later discussed
various points with me. Especial thanks are due to Dr. J. R.
Rea of Oxford, Dr. J. D. Thomas of Durham, and Dr. w. J. Tait
of Cambridge for their valuable comments and suggestions.
However, I accept sole responsibility for all positions,
erroneous and other, taken in this paper.

2. J. Hering, Lateinisches bei Appian, Diss. Leipzig, 1935, PP•

42-43.

3. I D1Jst thank Dr. J. D. Thomas for drawing my attention to a

papyrus he published in.!!!£§. 19, 1972. £!• his comnents on
line 11, PP• 105-106, 110-111. To his complete discussion,
I would only add that David Magie heavily underscored the
sentence from Viereck, Senno Graecus, P• 62, quoted by
Thomas,in his own copy of the text. However, he did not add
further comment in his own Dissertation, De Romanorum juris
publici sacrigue vocabulis sollemnibus in Graecum sermanem
conversis 1 Halle 1 1904.

4. PP• 499-500, #'ll44 b.

s. A. Stein, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte und Verwaltung lgyptens

unter Romischer Herrschaft, PP• 90-91, 158-159, 161, 163

6. Yet£!• the early 4th century documents from Panopolis

describedI.. ..by t Dr., w. H. Willis at the Congress which are
dated t: n l, UTiu. 'tWV.

7. Which may have included officially sponsored racial discrimina-

tion£!.• the contributions of Barns and Youtie to the Congress.

8. Unfortunately, the list of consuls comm.inicated to the Congress

by Dr. w. J. Tait is not such a memorandum.

9. Several colleagues at Oxford made this suggestion.

10. Cf. Sherk, Roman Documents from the Greek East, Baltimore,
1969, PP• 13-19.
188
 The Provincial Administration of Egyptian Arcadia*)
James G. Keenan

The Egyptian province of Arcadia was established, at

the earliest,in the year 386, its territory being roughly
equivalent to that of the old Heptanomia. From the time of
its creation to its reorganization along with the other
provinces of the Egyptian diocese by Justinian, Arcadia was
ruled by a civil governor, a praeses, directly subordinate
to the praefectus Augustalis Aegypti. The Notitia Dig-
nitatum testifies to this, as do other sub-literary sources
and a reasonable number of fifth-century documentary papyri.
As a result, Arcadia's administrative structure in the fifth
century is sufficiently well documented as to leave no doubt
about its general scheme. Problems arise later on, however,
with Justinian's reform of Egypt's administration in 539,
the details of which are set forth in his Edict XIII. As is
well known, the text of the Edict is incomplete. The chap-
ters dealing with the two provinces of Aegyptus, with Libya
and the Thebaid have survived intact; but that which deals
with Augustamnica is defective, and the chapter on Arcadia
is entirely lost. Consequently, scholars have been unable
to reach a definitive conclusion on the way in which
Justinian restructured Arcadia's administration. Nonethe-
less, the documentary papyri have yielded some clues,
however slight, and these have quite naturally been intro-
duced in attempts to fill in the outlines of the missing
chapter.
The first to make the attempt was Gelzer in his Leipzig
dissertation of 1909, Studien zur byzantinischen Verwaltung
Aetyptens. But Gelzer's conclusions were quickly and
ef actively controverted by Jean Maspero in his monograph of
1912, Organisation militaire de l'Egypte byzantine. On his
own part, Maspero, although aamitting the possibility that
Arcadia, inasmuch as it was not a frontier province, could
well have remained solely under the jurisdiction of a civil
governor after Edict XIII, favored instead the hypothesis
that by Edict XIII's terms Arcadia was reorganized along the
lines on which Libya had been reformed: that is, it was
left territorially intact, not subdivided as were the
Thebaid and Augustamnica; and it was subject to a duke with
both military and overall civil powers, who had as his
assistant a praeses with civil authority alone. In support
of his thesis, Maspero adduced three arguments coupled with
a single, independent piece of evidence. The arguments, in
his order of presentation, are as follows:
1) an argument based upon military competence. That
is, praesides were purely civil officials without military
competence; dukes were primarily military officers, only sec-
ondarily civil officials. There is abundant evidence for
the presence of military units in Arcadia after Edict XIII.
These must have had an overall military commander. He must
have been a duke.
2) the presence of dukes of Arcadia in Egypt after the
Arab conquest. These are evidenced both in the Ethiopic
translation of the Chronicle of John, Bishop of Nikiu, and
in several documentary papyri. It is unlikely, Maspero
argued, that Arcadia was reorganized as a duchy by the Arabs.
More probably, it was instituted as such by the Byzantines.
3) the factor of analogy. That is, Arcadia was proba-
bly reorganized along one of two basic patterns evident in
Edict XIII: it was either subdivided and placed under the
general control of a dux, assisted in one or both sub-
divisions by a praese~or it was left intact and governed
by a dux with a single praeses as his assistant in civil
matter's:- Since there is no evidence that Arcadia was in any
way subdivided, it must have been reorganized according to
the second pattern.
Finally, Maspero cited B.G.U. I 323, a document which will
be mentioned again and discussed below, as probable evidence
for a Byzantine duke of Arcadia.
The foregoing paragraph constitutes, ~ trust, a fair
synopsis of Maspero's ideas and arguments on the question of
Arcadia's government after the issuance of Edict XIII. His
hypothesis was subsequently adopted as "very likely" by
Germaine Rouillard, though she conceded that the evidence
at hand could not support a definitive solution. What was
needed, of course, as Maspero himself realized, was new,
relevant papyrus evidence to resolve the point; but,
contrary to what might have been expected, none has appeared.
Consequently, Maspero's view has remained generally accepted
down to the present day. Still, although no positive,
direct evidence has been forthcoming, we have had the bene-
fit since Maspero's day of a number of pieces of what may
be called "indirect evidence." These, together with the
continued silence of the papyri on the key issue -- an

190
incontestable reference to a duke of Arcadia in the century
or so between Edict XIII's promulgation and the Arab occu-
pation -- suggest that this might be an appropriate time to
pause to reconsider and re-evaluate Maspero's hypothesis.
To do this, a closer look must be taken at his arguments
and, then, at the significance of B.G.U. 323.
First, the argument from military competence. This
rests upon a denial of all military responsibility to a
praeses; but this denial in turn appears to rest on an
assumption that is too schematic. To cite one example,
P.Oxy. XVI 1888 of A.O. 488 indicates that a praeses could
have independent command over a military detachment.
Whether this command was specially delegated, limited or
temporary is not known, but the situation indicated by
P.Oxy. 1888 need not have been extraordinary. For although
it is agreed that a praeses was fundamentally a civil
governor, not a military authority, this does not mean that
he could not have soldiers under his orders to assist, for
example, in tax-collecting or, when necessary, in enforcing
justice or preserving general order. In fact, in Edict XIII
itself, Justinian permits the praeses of Libya to appoint a
suitable man to be his representative in Mareotis and
Menelais. To help this representative in his assignment,
twenty officials are to be detached from the officium of the
praeses along with fifty soldiers from military units sta-
tioned in Libya proper. Accordingly, this section of Edict
XIII establishes not only that a praeses could have a modest
number of troops at his disposal -- so also could his legally
designated representative.
Still other problems in connection with military compe-
tence, but more directly related to the province whose
administration is being considered here, are raised by
P.Oxy. XVI 1920 and 2046, both of the year 563 and both
concerned with disbursements made to troops of the duke of
the Thebaid who had come from there to cities of the province
of Arcadia. Maspero and Rouillard had held that Edict XIII
had made the provinces of Egypt separate, distinct and --
for military and administrative purposes -- virtually iso-
lated units; but the accounts just mentioned, as discussed
by the late Professor Rtmtondon in an important article in
the first volume of Recherches de Papyrologie, suggest that
the duke of the Thebaid, in time of crisis, if not generally,
had military competence that extended beyond the boundaries
of his own province into Arcadia. Indeed, in one of his
notorious poems, Dioscorus of Aphrodite had hailed
Athanasius, duke of the Thebaid, in his battles against the
desert nomads, as commander-in-chief of the Thebaid and
Arcadia -- poetic hyperbole according to Maspero (P.Eairo
Masp. I 67097 verso, note on line 18), but in Remondon's
view an accurate reflection of fact. And if the latter is
right, then Maspero's argument from military competence
loses its force.
As his second argument, Maspero had set forth the
documentary and literary evidence for dukes of Arcadia in
the Arab period as potential evidence for dukes of that
province in the Byzantine period. As far as I have been able
to determine, the evidence has not increased since the time
of Maspero's book; but for two of his references, previously
known from brief extract or from description, full editions
are now available and their texts have been reproduced in
the Sammelbuch. One of these, SB VIII 9749, is particularly
crucial: it is dated between 25January and 24 February of
A.O. 642, and gives evidence for the existence of a duke of
Arcadia -- under Arab administration but so early as to
precede the Byzantine evacuation of Alexandria. Furthermore,
the duke there mentioned, Philoxenus by name, is apparently
the same as the "prefect" Philoxenus mentioned in the
Chronicle of John, Bishop of Nikiu. Likewise, B.G.U. III
750 gives indisputable testimony to the existence of a
duke of Arcadia in the Arab period; but it is regrettably
without date. On the other hand, neither P.Grenf. II 100
of 683 nor another reference given by Wessely in Wiener
Studien 24 (1902), p. 127, cited by Maspero and now
accessible as SB VI 9460 of 699, is relevant to the discus-
sion, the former for the same reason that will be advanced
shortly in connection with B.G.U. 323, the latter because
the duke it mentions, Flavius Titus, was duke, not only of
Arcadia, but of the Thebaid as well. In point of fact, the
evidence for dukes of early Arab Egypt, collected and
analyzed by Remondon in his edition of the Greek papyri of
Apoll6nos Ano, indicates that at the end of the seventh and
beginning of the eighth centuries Arcadia and the Thebaid
were for administrative purposes more often than not united
under the authority of a single duke. It is tempting but
perhaps hazardous to cite another piece of evidence in this
connection -- the puzzling allusion in a Coptic document of
A.D. 646, discussed by Professor Schiller on a number of
occasions including the tenth session of the Papyrologists'
Congress, to "justice and law and the form of writing of the
scribes of Thebais, particularly those of Arcadia." At

192
least two interpretations of the latter part of this phrase
appear possible. One is that the word "Thebais" is here
used in a broad geographical sense, not in a technical
administrative sense. On the other hand, it may well be
possible to adopt this allusion as evidence for the
administrative unification of the Thebaid and Arcadia earlier
than previously thought.
Thirdly, toward the end of his discussion, Maspero men-
tioned the factor of analogy, that the province of Arcadia
ought to have been given "a government similar to that of
its neighbors. 11
This is a point that Maspero raised only
briefly in support of his other arguments. In response,
it can only be said that seen within the context of the old
Egyptian diocese broken up by Justinian's reforms, the
citation of analogy may seem relevant; nonetheless, viewed
in the larger context of Justinian's dispositions through-
out the Empire, its validity becomes subject to doubt. If
anything, Justinian'sreforms are marked, not by uniformity,
but by its lack, presumably because they were meant to
satisfy, as far as possible, local needs. Possibly, as a
consequence of its own peculiar political geography, Arcadia
was given an administrative structure different from, rather
than similar to, those imposed on the other provinces of the
Egyptian diocese.
I come at last to the one potential piece of evidence,
already mentioned, for the existence of a duke of Arcadia in
the Byzantine period: B.G.U. 323, a document assigned by
Wilcken generally to that period, but likely in Maspero's
view (with which I concur) to be sixth-century in date. Its
provenance is Arsinoit~n polis, one of the cities of the
province of Arcadia, and it mentions a duke. In Maspero's
opinion, which I quote: "The mention of a duke in the city
of Arsinoe can only refer to a duke of Arcadia." Neverthe-
less, we are robbed of absolute certitude, an indisputable
indication of the duke's province, by a lacuna at the end of
the second line; and despite Maspero the circumstantial
indications to which he refers are not sufficient to prove
that the duke in question was Arcadia's governor. It is
enough to recall that in P.Ox~. I 130 Flavius Apion II of
the famous Oxyrhynchusfamily is shown to have held the
post of duke of the Thebaid.
In short, there is no positive, direct evidence for the
existence of a duke of Arcadia in the century or so between
Edict XIII and the Arab takeover. This is surprising, if

193
indeed a duke of Arcadia existed, partly because of the
abundance of evidence from sixth- and early seventh-century
Oxyrhynchus. Not only do we lack reference to a duke of
Arcadia, but -- even more striking -- there are no
references to a ducal officium. To this silence we may
contrast the relatively frequent references to members of
the officium of the praeses of Arcadia in the same time
span. I am of course aware of the dangers inherent in
arguments from silence and the difficulties of substantiating
what is essentially a negative argument. In the present
case, one clear reference to a duke of Arcadia in the period
between Edict XIII and the Arab occupation or a reference
to his officium would settle the issue once and for all.
The crucial shred of evidence may even lie in a box of as
yet unpublished papyri in the Ashmolean Museum nearby.
Still, the long silence of our published papyrus-documents
is odd, and it now becomes a question of how that silence is
to be construed. Can it be attributed to the spottiness and
incompleteness of our evidence? Or is the simplest explana-
tion the right one? We do not hear of a duke of Arcadia
because there was none. At present the strongest argument
for the existence of Byzantine dukes of Arcadia is the
evidence for Arab dukes of the same province, and becaqse
of its early date, the strongest and most important piece
of evidence for these is SB VIII 9749. Still, even granting
the existence of a duke ofArcadia at the beginning of Arab
domination, it may well be that the Arab propensity for
administrative reform has been underestimated. Or, Arcadia
may have been set up as a duchy, not in the (for Egypt, at
any rate) relatively peaceful Justinianean period, but in
the more turbulent years of the early seventh century, in
the reigns of Phocas or Heraclius, perhaps during or in
response to the Persian invasion.
In conclusion, there exists an outside possibility that
Maspero's suggestion that Arcadia may have remained solely
under the jurisdiction of a praeses by the terms of Edict
XIII, raised only to be rejected in favor of a more complex,
yet more logical and systematic solution, should be given
further consideration. Doubts still prevail; but, for the
time being at least, this alternative perhaps deserves to be
weighed equally with what has been for more than sixty years
the predominating view.

*) A longer
version of this paper, with full document-
ation, is scheduled to appear in the Special Papyrological
Number of Museum Philologum Londiniense.

194
 BTHOS
IN MlttANDBR
In antiquity the plays of Menander ■ erved aa the model,
in tact the very byword tor etboa, a term in 1the contezt of
drama often translated•• •characterizatiorr. The purpose of
thia paper is to re-e:xamine thia critical concept in literary
theory and as manifested in the now extant plays themaelvea.
It will be argued that the quality of ..t.1b2.I, in drama, a pre-
ftlent critical notion in Menander•a tliii'";-waa not characterisat-
ion in our static aenae of in-depth portraiture, but that it
entailed the variation of pereonal expression according to
the action. Menander wa■ a banal and cliche-prone author and
hie coneciou■ attempts to achieve the prized quality ot ethoa
are palpable in hia dialogue, or, at least, ao I will argue.
Aleo, I hope to ■how that recognition of this artiatic goal
in the playa can be helptul in dealing with the distribut-
ion of parta.
Much of the contusion concemlng the ezact meaning ot
dramatic .tirut1_ 1tem1 troa the literature of the Greco-Ro-.n
age, in wtilchliterary and rhetorical theory are closely
intertwined. In the Hellenic age, howeve~ this wae not the
ea••• The doctrine of dramatic~. in the Classical Greek
era, waa not directly linked witlltlie art of rhetoric, but
with that of painting, a curious association, which left
lta traces until the end ot the RolDI.JlEllp1re. The first in-
dication ot such a doctrine ia found in Xenophon'a Memora-
~. in the account ot Socratae• vl•it to the workehop
ol'tiie painter Parrhasiua (3,10 1 1-5), but ita aignlficanca
1• here obscured by the author's casual and colloquial approach.
The--controveray begins with Aristotle'• P*ftice.Among the
criteria ot draaa here di ■cua■ ed by the p loaopher, the
aoat laportant compositional feature• are m.ythoaand ..Hb.U.
(6,8). The term IIYthoale unambiguou■, it mean■ the p~
or ■tory line.
Doe ■ ..t:tb.o..l.
really
mean •obaracter portrayal••• held
by moat lntirpretere? The aialle adduced by Aristotle ahowa
that thie cannot be the case. The author likens ~oe to the
outline of a painting and itloa
to ita colora (6, , in a
atateaent which baa myatif • generations ot art hi■ toriana,
he proclaim• that the painter Polygnotua waa the 'lhosrnpbos
par excellence, whereae the art of _Zeux1a was laok ng n
ttb91 (6.15). Yet, for the art of Polygnotua, this much la

1. See aoat recently J.J. Pollitt, Art

ln Claaaioal Greece, London-New York 97,
'J8P.PfJl•~t
, •

1 95
clear, it was esaentlally outline drawing, akin to the vaae
painting of hia time, and it cannot, therefore, have given
scope to detailed character portrayal. The issue is further
confounded by Pliny the Elder, who reports that Zeuxis had
created a Penelope •in which he seemed to have painted the
veey soul of good character• (in¥~f1!i1s''
)5,63). How can that be square wr~to
moresvidttur,
•'• commen that
the art of Zeuxia had no etho•?
Poat-Aristotelian literary theory also belies the assumpt-
ion that ethos means characterization. Here we find the term
routinely coupled with ~thoa {emotion)s both are frequently
used in the plural as we 1. Words meaning •characterization•
and •emotior,i priffi facie make an unlikely pair, aa they de-
■ ignate 1ncompat7i1e notions. When, however, we find .t.1b9.I.
defined as a weaker form or pathos. and in intelligentauthora,
such as Quintilian (6,2,9) and Pa,-Longinua (9,151 et. 29,2)
at that, it becoaea clear that a more intricate conception
lay behind the Greek term.
The aolution to this puzzle becomes apparent when we con-
aider that Greek critical thought about the art1 emanated from
dynamic notions of movement, action or enactment, unlike our
own which focuses on permanent values captured by art, (I shall
elsewhere argue this fundamental difference in direction be-
tween Greek aesthetic thought and ours with regards to the con-
cept ot mimesis.) In Ariatotle'a Poet~h• term ethog meana
characterization in the dramatic and ic aenae, ~ ia
the manifestation ot individuality in a specific act~It
provides a fleeting glimpse of the personality rather than a
portrait, hence the frequent usage ot the term in the plura!.
Hence, also, Pliny'a explicit translation ot .l.1bl. in painting
as 1en1ua. literally aenaations or experience-.-U5,98).
In thi• eenae it ia quite conceivable tor the technically
primitive art of Polygnotua to have excelled in .llb21., In fact,
archaeology has recently uncovered a sample of paliiting from
Polygnotus• time which constitutes a unique demonstration of
just this form of ..t..1b21,. It i! that on the North wall of the
Tomb of the Diver i't""'Pi'estum.1 the pottery found in the tomb
allows us to date it closely at 480 B.C. Like its counterpart
on the opposite wall, it ahows five carouser■ reclining on
couches, but this ■cane has dramatic implications thus tar
unique in ancient painting. Of the three tigurea in the group
on the left, two are engaged in a kottaboa game. The figure on
the tar left, in the characteristic kottabos pose, with hi• in-
dex in the handle ot the cup and his hand curved upwards, has
a look ot anxious expectation. The second figure la shown in
the act of ninging hie cup, he ia intently taking aim. The
third Jcottabo ■ player 1 ■ awaiting hi ■ turn, cup in hand. He
ia not, however, looking at hi■ fellow players, but ga£1ng over
his left shoulder at the pair on the right with a look of startled
indignation, he hae juet discovered that he la missing out on
the better entertainment. Per the pair on the right are lovers.
The left figure ot the two la a beardless ephebe, with sensuous
red lip■ and a meretrlcioua smile. He is adroitly beguiling
his companion with music and car••••• at the same time. '!'he
bearded adult on the right is responding to the seduction
with an expression of rapacious luet and drawing the ephebe'a
head towards him.
In tact, what I have juat done for the banquet scene fro■
Paeatua ia exactly what Qulntillan aaid the paintings of Poly-
gnotua were good tor, naaely intellegere, a Latin technical
term meaning "to interpret" or rather "to tell the story ot".
Qulntillan (12,10,)) reports that in his opinion the paintings
ot Polygnotua were too archaic to merit much attention, but
that they were much in vogue in hi• time ambitu 1ntell1gend1,
•out of the snobbery ot interpretation .. )
Clearly the paintings of Polygnotu ■, like thoae of his
Paeetum contemporary, had stories to tell. The dramatic fiair
ot the painters transferred to the medium of comedy of manners,
would produce, not colortul characterigation of ordinary
persona aa we find in the mimes ot Herondas, but comic charac-
ters constantly changing, albeit within the framework ot their
inherent traits and habits, under the impact of the dramatic
developments. Thla, I maintain, wae an effect Menander aimed
at and, within the li■ ita ot hie modest talent, achieved.
As an obiter dipffl
preoccupation withntrcate
I might perhaps point out that the
reactions to events probably gave
birth to a cliche prevalent in the tine arts and literature
of the Hellenistic and Greco-Roman ages, namely that of con-
flicting emotions. Among extant monuments, the outstanding
exponent of U\1 ■ notion ia the figure ot Medea, found in
Pompei! in iseveral variants probably going back to one Helle-
nistic prototype. Medea la represented, as in the tragedies by
Euripides and Seneca, as torn between her love for her children
and her lult tor vengeance. In the moat representative of the
paintings, the expression in her eyes la kindly and melancholy,
but her mouth ls drawn into a hard-bitten nirk. Thia painted
Medea comtitutea, aa it were, a pictorial µt'IJ-6£- clause.
ie used in this sense in Cic. F n. 2121,
a,
74,

4. A. Rumpf, ~lerei
lib., Munic 195)
{MWZele~
VI,
der 1i•t•i1chen
Plate 5 nr. •
An-

197
An anatomically even leaa likely application of the motit ot con-
tlicting emotions la proffered by Achilles Tatiua. Deecrlbing
a painting of Prometheus shackled to his rock, Achilles observes
that one eye of the hero gazes in terror at the eagle carping
at his liver, while the other eye joyfully welcomes the rescuer
Heracles, who is just putting the arrow to his bow (3,8). No
croaaeyed Prometheua has thus tar been unearthed.
Interestingly, a acholion to Sophocles, AJax)40, uaea
the tena ~ in reference to just such a ea•• of conflicting
impulaea.Thescholiast here notes, correctly it aupe~luoua-
ly, that Tekmesaa •is ambivalent in
■he laments, on the other ahe calla
t,hoa, on the one hand
e child•.
The dynamic aspects of the~ notion have, in the main,
been overlooked by scholars. Rutliir?ord, for instance, in hia
admirable discussion of the term aa it occurs in the 1cholia
on drama, does observe that it often applies to manifestly
transient mooda.5 He also notes the expression tv ~&t~, a
frequent comment added aa a kind of stage direction by the
acholiasts, this idiom can fit ao many forms of expression that
it can only be rendered by a vague phrase such a• "with dramatic
expression•. Yet ultimately Rutherford renders the term ,llh2I.
by a static formula, • ••• the complex product of sex, atatlon""In
lite 1 acquired habits, state of mind, national temperament.•
(142J A nineteenth-century attempt to express the kinetic
•••ociationa of the t•~ ls rarely recalled. In 1850 Otto Jahn
defined the term, as it la used in Aristotle'• Poet}ca,aa
follows, •Ea bezeichnet den zuatand der Seel• lnaoern er die
Grundlage der Handlung iat.• 6
If Jahn and myself are correct in our a ■ eeaament of the
nature of~ as rooted primarily in dramatic action, how
does this quallty of drama manifest itself in the comedy of
Menander and how are we re-evaluate a frequently cited achollon
on Sophocles (tj8J JS4) to the effect that •in the changes of
apeakera one• ou d determine and distribute the parts on
the basis of ethos"? Characterization in the static aen■ e, i.e.
portrayal ot personality by means of characteristic speech
pattern.a and vocabulary, has been observed in the plays by
several scholars notably by F.H, Sandbach, whose commentary
shows great sensitivity towards the color of the dialogue. So,
aa this scholar haa brought out, the slave Onesimoa in the
E~itrffontes shows a predilection for abstract nouna in -mos,
tea ly and pretentious old man Niceratoa in the Syia tends
5. William G. Rutherford, AC~ptir 1n fhe HijtorYot
Annotat4Sn (Scholia Aristopan ea Vo. III London
1905, 1 •
6. Berichte Leipzig. Ph11,-H11t, Klaeae2 (1850) 108.
to speak in clipped and rambling phraaee.7 What has not been
observed 1• the circumatance that a quick change of tone or mood,
often within a line, la manifested often enough and obviously
enough to establish it ae an aspect ot drama cultivated, probably
consciously, by Menander.
The tragments of the Sic
eye witness report ot a quarre.
change cites literal
1on~y•• for instance, include an
nee the reporter of the ex-
wording, we have,•• it were, a second-
hand distribution problem. Th• soldier, Stratophanea, has just
prevailed on the crowd to tum the damsel in distress over to
the priest••• ot Eleua1a for safety as the effeminate Moschion
comes on. The latter, as is the wont of the Moachiona of New
Comedy, la bent on seducing the virgin. If we interpret the
following lines with MetteB, Stratophanea in one breath ex-
horts the crowd to kill Moschion, hurl• an obscene insult (rare
in Menander) at hi• rival, apologises to the crowd for hla
coarse language and comforts the girl. It la, of course,
possible to aaaign the lines differently, but Mette•• reading·
makes good aenae (the ethoa-factor la, in fact, an argument in
ita favor).
A ruminating ■oliloquy containing a sharp change of 1100d
represents another manifestation ot ~. Prom Terence's
Menander adaptations we might cite tnelong speech of Getae
1n the Ade½phoe (299-319). Thia character la a devoted slave,
who suppor ed his widowed mistress and her daughter. When it
appears that the daughter has been seduced and abandoned,
Getaa laments their misery, but then, in a sudden switch of
expreaaion, he turns to a sadistic phantasy of revenge, including
eye-gouging and the extermination of the culprit'• entire family.
An even more varied study in moods is indicated by Arrlan•a
paraphrase of a acene from the 'iaoumef'!
which the jilted lover Thraaoni es vac
(Pr. 2 Sandbach), in
ates between deapair
and hope.
Amongthe characters who ■•~ an especially developed,
Davua, the slave of Kleoatratoa ~he A.n.1..1.,la noteworthy.
The slave goea through an almost operatlcga111.1t of feelings, as
his fortunes tall and riae in the course of the action.
Th••• shimmering mood changes are characteristic of the
drama of Mena.nder. One might cite an occasional parallel from
classical tragedy, eapecially Sophoclea whomAristotle probably
had in mind when diacusaing the ethoe-notion in the Poetics.
7. Entretlen1 Hardt 16 (1970) 1)4t 120-121.
8. Lgtrg 10 (1965) 177 (coJ111Dente
on line• 264-267).

199
 Nowhere, however, do we find this dramatic effect cultivated
ae frequently and•• achooliahly aa in Menander. How can the under-
standing of this aspect ot Menander'a technique be applied to the
edition of the texts? The principal net result of the recognition
of the ethos-factor le to counsel restraint in going against the
authority ol the manuscript in assigning speech••• There are
several inatanoee in the Menander plays where many or most of the
editors insert a change of speaker, partially because of a pro-
nounced switch in tone, whereas, with the .!lhll-factor in mind,
the new •ood might might be an argument in ta.vor of continuous
speech by the same character.
In all of the ■ e the speaker identification naturally in-
volve• other factors aa well. In each case the total argument
would be too complex to present here. I might, however,r
~t~•• cite from the DYacolos one possible example of e oa
we could affect the assignment of lines. At the beg nn ng
of Act III the scribe surely nodded, because, of entering
characters, only the grouch Cnemo la identified by name and
omissions of essential dicola are frequent. Cnemo emerge ■ from
hie house and stands aside. Qn co••• a party of aacrificera
headed for the shrine of Pan. I aide with Sandbach and the
greater nW1.berof editors, who hold that the group is led by
the mother of the young lover, even though her name is not listed
in the cast of characters. The personality of the mother haa
been established as that of a reaolute matron, who apenda her
time organizing eztracurricular rituals, independently other
easygoing husband (259-2631 406-408). She is a pietistic
equivalent of the modern. clubwoman. It ahe ia, indeed! preaent
in this ■cene, it must be ahe who orders the preparat ona tor the
sacrifice. Then follows an uncouth exhortation to an unidentified
person, •What are you gaping at, you dope-head?• ( lµ~p6v~~~E
ad",11,o), the latter an insult of Ariatophanic coarseness (cf.
1£2!. 79)). No change of speaker is indicated, but moat editors
glvi. the words to a helper in the preparations, be he Getaa the
slave or Sico the cook. The principal reason for this departure
from the manuscript is presumably the incompatibility of the
wording with the dignity of the matron. The re-assignment of
the line, however, causes problems. Whomle Getas or Sico
addressing? An isolated address of a ~eraona muta la dramatically
unaatiatying. I:t we presume that the elper has just discovered
Cnemo and is addreasing him, we vitiate the hum.or of the next
scene, in which he tries to borrow a pot from Cnemo and ex-
periences hie grumpy character. It, on the other hand, with
Bingen and Blake, we give the rude words to the mother, asBWD-
ing that she addresses the sluggish servant, we have a typical
instance of ethos.
In no passage of which I am aware can recognition of the
~-factor by itself lead to a reliable identification of a
jpiilcer. However, among the many conaiderationa which are brought
to bear on the vexed and esaential problem of distribution of
parts in New Comedy, it does merit a place.

Eva Keula, The University of Minnesota

200
 NEWMETHODS
IN THE STUDY
OF GREEKPAPYRI FROMHERCULANEUM

BY
KNUTKLEVE

In connection with my work on Papyrus Hercu-

lanensis 26, which contains the Epicurean philosopher Phi~
lodemus' work "On the Gods", Book I, I am developing two
methods of restoring lacunae, the one presupposing the use
of a microscope, the other a computer.
Through a microscope it is possible to de-
tect remnants of letters invisible to the eye. Then it is
quite obviously necessary to learn the hand of the papyrus
in enlarged size so that it will be possible to identify
the traces and so perhaps fill in the lacunae.
A useful way of learning the letters is to
draw them. Drawing through a microscope can usually be
done by attaching a drawing aid to it, i.e. a device which
projects the picture of the pencil with which one is draw-
ing onto the image which one sees under the microscope.
Such a device cannot, however, be used to draw the letters
in the papyri from Herculaneum. The contrast between the
carbonized papyrus and the white drawing paper is too sharp,
and it is impossible to see both the letters and the pencil
at the same time.
The letters can, however, be drawn when one
first has photographs taken of them through the microscope.
It is necessary to use colour film in order to have the
letters sufficiently distinguished from other marks on the
papyrus. By using the drawing device together with attach-
ed lamps which illuminate the film from below it is then
possible to trace the letters on drawing paper. To do this
drawing is laborious and time consuming, and it demands a
high degree of accuracy to put the various photographs,
which only cover small fractions of the text, together to
whole lines and the lines together to columns.
On the basis of these drawings of the en-
larged handwriting I make new drawings. Using a graph
paper I trace every letter together with the two letters
which follow it. The use of graph paper helps among other
things to make a quick estimation of the dimensions of the
letters. I have confined myself to three letters because
201
to my lmowledge a connected writing never extends over more
than three letters in the hand of the papyrus. The drawings
are arranged in a file so that I have easy access to every
detail of the material.
The other method, which presupposes the use
of a computer, will come to its full value when I have
established what really is preserved of the papyrus text by
means of the microscope method and otherwise. It also pre-
supposes a rather abundant material of machine readable
texts, and by now all the lmown texts of Epicurus and his
followers are stored in the computer.
The computer can write its own Greek texts
and make concordances. Within the year 1974 the machine
will have ready a full concordance to Philodemus. On the
basis of this I shall make a new Lexicon Philodemeum which
I hope can replace the old lexicon by Vooys. In the follow-
ing years I plan concordances and lexica also to Epicurus
and to other Epicureans, for example Diogenes of Oenoanda
and Demetrius Lakon.
Concordances and lexica I regard, however,
only as "spin-off". Computer programmes for my further
work are in preparation, and I expect the results to be of
great value for the restoration of lacunae. From the stock
of texts the machine can, whenever desired, conjure up any
detail of the material and present it to us in the arrange-
ment we choose. We are always, then, able to get the in-
formation we desire. If we, for instance, have identified
the letters before and the letters after a lacuna, and also
have established approximately how many letters there have
been in the lacuna, the computer will be able to give us a
list of those words and combinations of words in the text
material which contain exactly those letters at the requir-
ed distance from each other. The computer can also give
us information about terms occuring together, frequencies
of words etc. One day the computer may also be able to
identify partly preserved letters (presumably by recoeniz-
ing p~ints covered by the various letters). Within minutes
and hours the computer can give us information which we
would have used months and years to get at with traditional
methods or perhaps had not been able to get at at all.
With such information at hand it will perhaps be possible
to find the right reading for the lacunae.
I want to stress that I do not in the least
expect that some time the scholars shall be replaced by
machines. On the contrary, as far as I can see, what now

202
happens is that the scholar gets access to new aids and has
been freed from many unnecessary burdens. He has, one
could say, got a sort of magic lexicon in addition to the
traditional lexica, indices, reverse word-lists etc. In
this new magic lexicon there are endless possibilities of
sorting and arranging text material in a minimum of time.
But no other than the scholar is able to use that lexicon.
Wilhelm CrBnert once emphasized that there'are three cardi-
nal virtues for the papyrologist: Sehkraft, Sprachgefiihl,
Sachkunde. These virtues are today as relevant as ever
they were, and can never be replaced by any machine.

203
Summaries:

John Shelton:
"Grammar and Death"
Transcripts and discussion of two short papyri: an early fragment
of grammar, relevant to the textual history of Dionysius Thrax; and an
astrological prediction of disturbances in Egypt.

J. Van Haelat:
"Origine et provenance des manuscrits palimpsestes (greco-
ayriaquea) de Deir Suriani"
Dana le probleme difficile de l'origine (lieu de copie) et de la
provenance (lieu de trouvaille) des manuscrits, 11 importe d'avoir
const8Dlllent a l'esprit que les manuscrits comme lea pierres peuvent
voyager. Un exemple interessent est celui fourni par certains manuscrits
palimpsestea (greco-syriaques) de Deir Suriani, dans le desert de Nitrie,
qui, aelon toutea lea apparencea, ont ete copies en Mesopotamie, puis
transportes en Egypte, ou ils ont ete trouves au siecle dernier. S'il
en est ainsi, il conviendrait de presenter autrement l'hypothese proposee
par G.Cavallo (Richerche sulla maiuscola biblica, p.84-105) sur lee
quatre types d'ecriture au Ve-VIe siicle.

204
 Bote al Papiro Bodlller XI
di
&iuliana Lanata

N.B. lJha vere1one pi~ ampia e 4ocumentata di questa oomu-

nicazion.e, 1nolusin. 41 due paragra.f'i au n •dossier• di Pilea
e ;I temi della antioriatiana
polndoa nel P .Boa, lX eark pub-
blioata nel •1'wlero Speciale Papirologioo• del lllleeu Philolo-
19! Londinienae.

I. 8-9. Il primo editore leggeva e integrava >..~[yi.wJIva_

p(wv, ma l'ultiaa lettera ohiaramente leggibile prima della 1a-
cuna della r. 8 ~ indubbiamente a, • le tracoe della noceaai-
Ta fan.no pensare all' aata di un v o, m.eglio, di. un ,c I O.B'.Ro-
berta (J.lb..S 1 1967, 437-8) ha propoato d~[vwJlvap(wv, 11 ool-
lep llario Kald1n:1 dell'Iat1tuto Papirologioo Titelli mi augge-
risce 4~(~1,w]Jvap(wv , aolto ao4diataoente dal punto di vista
paleogrdico. Ila n,
per gli a.nnonar11, n, pr gli aot1onar11
le fonti attestano una funzione militare o paramilitare ooaa
quella richieata qu1. Il problema reeta, per me, aprto.

I. 12-13. Martin euggeriTa, e.xempli gratia,ntpl.tAJ~[v ><at

JtOAAa naa ]~v • A mio avviao alla r. 13 prima di v si legge
Q ; inoltre, ntpi.t>..-&<S[v] richied.e un oomplemento, che potrebbe
essere un nome geografico, o ad esempio una espreeaione oomefo~
>..~~A6]~v , confor11e allo stile patetioo 4el paaao ( yvµvot'c;
~Q[t'c; noal v lv 6E ]aµot'c;, 11-12 )-.

205
 V. 7-8. aC['fT)µc!]l'tw\l llartin.: at[a&,iµd'Jl-iw\l llu.surillo. En.-
tram.be le integrazioni - aoprattu.tto la second& - mi ae■brano
nettamente esorbitantt. E' Tero ohe, 0011enota ancbe ~•r
(!IA 1966, 199), alla :fine delle righe le letteN talvol't;a so-
no piu f'itte • minute; ma queato non a811lbta 11 oaao nel duotu.■
di quanto resta di T. 7. A r1gore, non ai pub eeoluclere nean-
che un.•abbrertazione (cfr. VI. 11 fL~f I VII. 9t oµy[u ). ~
mio avvieo perb un'altra aoluzione ai pub oeroare nel aignili-
oato che Aoy1.xd'<; aesuae nel greoo neoteataaentario, in paaai
come I Petr_, 2, 21 ~c; <lp·nyl\lVT}'t(l~plfri 'ta A o y L x a \I !_
6oXoY yd'"- a t~~no&~aa'tt • As,y1.x6c; , •ap1r1tua1e•, ~ inol-
tre molto frequent• 1D. taati patriet1c1 in oui connota 11 ou1-
to cristiano in contrappoaizione alle offerte aateriali dei pa-
ganiz la &uat'a ! \I a L. µ o ea e "- o y 1. x ,1' per eooel-
lenza ~ l'eucarestia ( ED.a. dem1 ev 1 r,
10, laud 1 0onat 1 16). 111
chiedo perlanto •• non ai poaaa integrare XoyLxMYaf[µd'),'fwY,
cha implicherebbe ,ma contrappoeizione :fra l•o:fferta puraaente
•apirituale• del aangu.e, e quella reale del sangue delle vitti-
me pa.sane.

v. 8 •• Che ai tratti qui della rioompenaa che attende nel-

l'al di lA chi ha agito rettamente, oerto anche per la oorri-
spondenza con le rr. 16-17. Al.la r. 9 ai legge, credo, qyou
(com.e aveva viato llartin), • non qyoy (Schwart ■, llu.surillo).
Si pub forse postulare I ~~] 4Y6ij[t\la) , •1e o-
lpya 6LxqLoa[~ ....
pere di giustizia, ae vengono riapettate, oaservate• (con un ai-
gnifioato di !yt1.v Tioino a quello atteatato, in queeta atea-
aa pagina, alla r. 4s 'fa~~pT}axt(a~ !yov~tc; )come aoggetto del

206
Terbo 1a cui tina1e, conaerrata al.la r .. 11, e cha, coD Martin,
penso aia da integrare 1n [dno>..,fllcJ..c'taL(&µ01.l3a~).

VI. 8~9. a.µap'tw>..[ l da oollegare COD una forma non d1 dµaP...

"w).(a. (Jlartin), ohe seabra es1;raneo a1 greco oristiano, ma di
dµap-;w1'.6c; , che Ti rioorre trequentemente 1n unione oon x8Aaa1.(;:
.
cfr. ad••• Ql•••
ep. 10, U 2, 45 Bs d µ a. p "w >..o t ••••
&nopp~-;ou Ko>.. cf at w c 'tt~~wv"a.1. 't~V atQva; Ath. Tirg.17,
p. 52, 18 von Goltz • U 2_8, 272 Di "tcl<; l3aacfvou(: -;ac; a.twv(ovc, lv
a.re ot dµap-;w>..o?xp(vov"aL. La resti'tuzione del paaso reata
comunque probleaatioa.

VI. 13. illa·tine della r., anzicht§ &[O'aov] (lfartin), Ta

integrato, credo, &[wv] , eh• in.staura un paralleliamo inver-
ao oon le rr. 14-16 ( 12-131 cpcracn ••• &[tfwv] ; 14-161 cp[t1.

ga oostrusione
-
66]µtvoc (llartin; an cp[tLacf]µtvo~?)••• o~ &&u. Per un•analo-
partio1pia1e ctr. xv. 16 - XVI. 11 cptLa4jµcvoi::
••• &ffaov.

IX. 3-4. Dopo 4q[n(]l;t-ia1, , lfartin proponeTa xq[t xo>..a.cp(_

l';t I-;aL]
, baaandoai probab1lmente n. lfatth. XXVI, 671 -t6'tt •••
lxo>..cf~Laa.va.~'t&v, ot 6l lppd'n1.aa.v. A oonteraa 11 pub rioor.-
dare cbe ~cfnLaµa. • xo>..cf~~aµa (in queat'ordine) ai troT&JUt~re-
quentemente unit1 nelle deacr1zion1 dells passione1 o~r. laid.
P-e1. Bp1st 1 I, 54, lJ! 78, 217 lµn-i~aµa~a, ~an(aµa~a, xo>..~
~1
,(aµa~a.; a~aup6~; Jo. •on. Jrtem,paaa. 38, U 96, 1286 Ds
x&xcrvoc (Cristo) Xa.'tttcfvi~ 'tare µcfa-;LtL, x!xc(vou 'ta np~awnov
~an(aµa'ta xa~col~a~o xat xoAa~(aµa~a.

207
 x. 12. xa"td' aignitioa qui, come ha oh1ar1to turner (,I,!h.S.
1966, 405), •all'altezza di•, •on a leTel with•. A oonteraa
si pub addurre un paeao di G1u11a:no, aignifioatiTo 1n quanto
proViene da una disputa dello stesao tipo, in ou1 ~ inataurato
un paragone fra la ci v11 th pagana e quella ebraioa s cl ol "taO'"ta
4A~&nf«µtv, lva µoL x a "ta 'AAltav6pov 6t(ta~t a"tpa"t~y&v, l.
va ><a~ a Ka(oapa napa "tor~ 'E~pa(oL~ ( Jul. contra Christ,
218 B, p. 202 Neumann).

X. 15. All'inizio della traooe aono r:l.oonoiliabi-

r. a1cune
11 con .q~ • La vera.lat. ha o u n o t 1 • prudentior1 lfar-
tin ha proposto una libera ricoatruzione come nXd'"twvaxat "to~~
!XXou~ TLXoa&~ou~nd'v"ta~.

XI. 13-16. L'inserzione del tr. 1,4 nella ~a.rte oentral.e di

queste rr-., operata 4a Schwarts (Oh. 1 B1 1965, 439), ha peraesee
di riguadagnare alcnme lettere che aasicurano, per queata ••-
zione, una puntua1e corrispondenza fra 11 testo greoo e la Ter-
sione 1at1na. SU questa baae Schwanz ha proposto una brillan-
te ricostruzione che, credo, pub easer• ancora migliorata 1D
al.cuni punti. Per chiarezsa, riproduco innanzitutto la Teraio-
ne latina e 11 teato r:l.coetruite 4a Sohwartss
a.) dioit enim eaora et divina aoripturas D111ps
pominum De\UI tuum gm. te tecit'. CUJ.cianus di-
nt I Quam.Deum? Phileas repond1 t

b) "ta Atyt~ ya]p ~ [&t~a] ypaf~

ay[an~atL~] ~ov &[v oou ••••••

208
 15 x[ ••••••• xo]uAxL[avo]c EL(ncv)
~Lva &cov] ~LA/EaC cnapac
~wartz deSW1e le 1nizial1 delle rr. 14-15 dal tr. 3, 1, dove
perb ai leggono sol tanto a [ • ><[ : troppo poco per ten tare un
inaerimento. Inoltre, le integrazioni propoete per le rr. 13 e
16 reatano un po• al di sotto del numero d1 lettere riohieeto,
soprattutto se ai tien.e conto del fatto ohe al.J.a r. 16, oome
altrove, doveTa figurare &v e non &Eov • Propongo quindi d1 mo-
difioare 11 teato 41 Schwartz coslr

[~a· AlyEL ya]p ~ [lcpa &(co)O'] ypacpt1'•

[&yan,1atLC]~~v ~[(t8)v aou ~8v at]
15 [noLt1'aav~a. Ko]ukxL(av~Jc ct(ncv)•
[T(va oiv &(t&)v;] ~L~jlac ~~pac
In queato modo s1 reetitui ■ cono
delle righe di 21/22 lettere,
come 1D genere le a1tre, e si etti.en.e una migliore corrispon-
4enza con la version.a latina. Si noti 1n particolares
r. 13, [ l £ pcl &t 00'] ypacp,1 (varian te riapetto a l £ pa xa t
&ct'a l'Pacp,1 di VII. 10) ?t piu Ticino a ■acra et divina eor1ptu-
.E!. di quanto [ -&tt'a J ypacp,1'd1 llartin-Schwartz J
non lo sia
rr. 14-15: [~8v at j noL~aav~a]: qu.1 te tecit Tera. lat.;
cfr. alla r. 18 della stessa pagina, ~~" n[oL]~aa[vJl~[a] s
~ui te fecit Tera. lav.;
r. 161 [""(va o3v -&t&'v;] : quem deum Tera. lat. o3'v oom-
pleta 11 nwaero d1 let"tere richieste, • trova corrispondenza
:torraale in -c(vwv o i " f[uaLS\,; Y. 5; o/J6l Jtn]o-u: o 3 v I
µoq[ac;] TII. 13.

209
 XI. 18. il1'1.n.1z1o, anz1ch, [cl(ncv)J , troppo brn-e, Mar-
tin integra (<l,u:xp(~] , che llwn1rillo giudioa 'troppo l1JD80 (ma
si Tedano le abbrertazioni ancKp/ o 4ncxpc( 1 R.A.Cole ■, I!,:
ports of Proceedings in Paprn. Braxellea 1966, p. 45, n. 3).
SUggerirei [lcpTJatv], aul.l.a baae d1 XVI. 2-3: o~ 6Lxo>.6yo1, •••
lcp11aav • La variazione rispette a1 aoliti cl,u:v ••• clncv ai
spiega perch~ in entraabi 1 pasai 11 redattore ai acoata 4al.lo
stile protocol1are delle altre aezioni, come~ proTato qui an-
che dall'inserz1one ~1,pac r [-ra, xc]rQ;C ctc 't!v o~pav&v, 16-lT.

XII. 4 ( Sul. :tac- 111Jlile, 11 fraaaento con w-rov la tuori po-

sto e Ta spostato una r. pi~ in a1to). Martin proponeva 4[µt't4n't]
w-iov ; penso si debba integrare 4[ va>.>.o(}AJ'tov , epiteto oo-
-
stanteaente aaeociato ad <lc1pa'toc e ad !'tptn-ioc per connotare
l'eseenza del dio dei criatiani, a pariire 4al aecondo aeoolo.
( Ct'r. Lampe, Patristic Greek Lexicon, alle rispettiTe voc1).
L'integrazione se11bra 1Ul po• troppo bre-re1 ai pub fora• penaare
a un errore dello soriba, ad eaempio una dittograf'ia ( ofr. D.
10: lQV'tO\J(; ; X. 101 61.cc~[tY}:'to).

GenoTa, luglio 1974.

210
Father Peter Levi, S.J.

The prose style of the Magical Papyri

Written language easily loses the special rhythms of popular speech, and
even in a 110dem spoken language, the old characteristic patterns of rhythm
and structure aurvive in aome kinda of social context and not in others. Old
popular language clings to old popular activitiea. Magic is an excellent
exlllllple. Out of the language of curses, the curses on a grave-stone 1 or the
curses recited annually by a priest against pirates,2 or the curses on a jockey
and his horse,J out of the characteristic structure and rhythm of that language
canae the developed language of all-inclusive law.4 The language of ritual
instructions in the Greek magical papyri is also to be found in Theophraatoa
de plantis. 5 That is not very surprising but it is of considerable interest
that these pattern• of rhytha and structure nowhere occur in medical or surgical
treatises. One might have thougit the language of magic would have influenced
that of the emerging sciences. But the one non-magical human activity I C8!'
6
diacover where the pattern of ritual instructions does occur is that of cooking.

Of course ac>st papyri are Egyptian, and the language of the magical
papyri is as ■ ixed as the 1Ugic. 1bere are prayers with aolemn Neoplatonic
overtones,7 and one aplendid Jewish document, the Eighth Book of Hosea, which
deserves a high rank on the same shelf aa the Book of Revelationa. But the
typical structure of ritual language in the papyri is clear enough, and earlier
examples of it exist. Sentences consiat of imperative verbs strung together
in apposition, and a certain number of participles. 11
Tak.e a hawk'• head and
as the aW'I rises greet it shaking the head and performing this sacred prayer 8
offering unground incenee and eprinkling rose-water; offer it in a clay burner ••• 11

'Ibe good results of prayer• or sacrifices, and aleo the omens that imply such
a good result, are introduced by 'and', and expressed in the •i•ple future.
Do l!l0-and-ao, doing ao-and-l!l0 1 do thia, do that, "and thie shall be your sign •••
a hawk shall appear on the right" ;9 or 1 "and you ahall be charming and attractive
and a wonder to thoae who behold you 11 • 1 0

Of course the formula 'Do so-and-so ••• and ao-and-so shall occur' is
1 ike the 'If you do so • • • then so and so ••• ' fonaula of the Gortyn law-code
and of many penalty clauses in Attic decrees, but it is not the aame. 'Ibe
usage of 'and' is of great intereat. It is not unlike a certain elliptic
usage of 'and' in folk-songs, both in modern Greek and in English. 11 But the
important difference between the two types of atructure, 'Do this••• and•••
and 'If••• then••• ' ia that the first is much 1M>re flexible, it admits of an
indefinite nUlllber of instructions, either participles or imperatives; when
the whole ritual instruction has been given, the result is tacked on like the
tail of a pantomime horae. But 'if' sentences are more logical, they admit
of fewer conditions. 'lbat indeed ia a likely reason why the older legal language
of the Gortyn code and the Book of Deuteronomy, a long aeries of 'if 1 sentence•
with amendment• in the fon of secondary 'if' sentences, was replaced by the
■ore flexible, compreheneive ayntax to be found in the magical language of
curses. A curse, and magical language in general, has to atop every earth,
and cover every possibility. 'Let whoever prevent ■ the bringing in of grain
to the land of Teia by any device or means, by sea or by land ••• • 12 Thi• is

211
the language of a curse on the point of becoming law. flle atructure ■ of curH■
and of ritual in ■ tructions are flexible and very ancimit. The way in which
the language of curses became aleo that of decrees, alliances, the con ■titution ■
and finally the lavs of cities has something to do with the tribal and coimunal
origins of democracy; it is outside the scope of this paper.

The language of a spell, a magical curse, an incantation or a theurgy

is thought to have an automatic result, ~uch like the kind of result prophe ■ ied
in ritual instructions. A prayer ia not quite magical, a ceremony is not quite
a magic ritual, but the structure of their language even where nothing ia thought
to result automatically from it continues to ahov trace• of magic. There ia
not a distinction between periods of time, between a magical age and a non-
magical age, only between levels of behaviour, and between social levels, in
the same age. Many different levels are represented in the magical papyri.
Vocabulary, literacy and intelligence ahov a wide spectrum. But literary
power, the immediate force of languages which moves us today when we read it,
is not confined to any one part of the spectrum, though it eeeme co1111110ner in
the more traditional and si~ply articulate fonulae! Marcus Aurelius was
right to pick on that oddly moving prayer for rain:~J and perhap■ right to
coDDent, if one ought to pray at all, one should do it with thi ■ freedo■ and
simplicity. There i ■ something of the • .,.. directnes ■ about the formula fro ■
a magical text quoted by Gow to throw light on the authenticity of ritual
language in Theokritos. 1~ I ought to say I owe •Y own interest in the magical
papyri and many years of happy musing ■ to Gow'• coimientary on the second Idyll.
At the last line■ he quotes an &noXuoL~,the peaceful di ■mis■ al of the spirit
after he has perforned hia service. Go, go, Master, to your own heavens, to your
own kingdo .. , to your own cour•e. The repeated xwpc~,xuipu is not for literary
effect, it is repeated in order to make sure eoinething happens. The triple
variation of heaven•, kingdoms and cour•e are not a rhetorical elegance, but
typically of magic they are an attempt to define very clearly by mean■ of
alternative•, like giving the many name ■ of a god or the many places where
he livesz the rhetoric of prayer• and .. gic haa a practical baaie. There is
a ■ i ■ ilar formula in the strange singing at the sanctuary of Diktynna in Crete,
at the death of Apollonio ■ of Tyana. 15 Etctxc ytl.(;, atcrxc l~ otpavov, atctxc.
Ckie might compare aleo thfll fonn.1la of urgency at the end of a late ■agical
test discuaaed by Wlln•ch, 16 "that they .. Y not win toa:>rrow in the circu•"•
*& *&
~u~, ~u~. taxu,• taxu.•
The urgent repetition of imperatives i• not bounded by magic; it occurs
in euch a traditional formula u the aeai-reliy!oua ~c, Kvc, 17 but Aristophanes
•hows it is a nonaal device of popular speech. The imperative ■ in ritual
inetructiona addressed to the performer of the ritual are not an urgent aet
of variation• but a long aet of precise coaaanda. Repetitive variation is
more purely aagical, it is all meant to make one thing happen. "I bind you
to the tail of the serpent and the mouth of the crocodile, and by the home
of the ram and the venom of the aap and the hair• of the cat and the membr11111
virile of the god that you be not able to copulate with any other man, nor
be etc., nor do etc., nor etc." 19 If auch a formula ia to be regarded al!i
practical, it ■uet call into play every relevant influence and cover every
relevant eventuality. Thie rhetoric ia genuinely prerhetorical, even though

212
it -y alao be the bone of great poetry, particularly the dr-tic poetry of
c..ulative abuae, the aplendid poetry of oath• and curaea, and the invocation
of god.a. In co■ic poetry, which uiata by paradox of rhythm and diction, the
.... kind of fo.rwula can be stood on ita head to produce aotMthing abaurd.20
If a fol"alla ia well enough known, like that of Sappho •• hyan to .Aphrodite,
it can be played on to produce ao-thing both light and Hrioua, aoaething
subtly touching, a kind of descant of the unexpected. 21 What we have in the
-gical papyri, and in the defixionea, ia the crude .. terial of language againat
which theae great work• define th ... elv••• 'Whatever -y be ••id of the riae
of .. gic at a given period, the rllythaic and ayntactic atructurea of theae
for.ulae an clearly anciaat. Even the inarticulate -acking of the lipa or
clucking, the aighing a,d hia•i~ and the groaning of .. gical ritual• are older
than the writer• of the papyri. That frightening and ine:ir.plicable noiae Jto1ta(
of Aiachylo• auat have had in ita day a well-known context in the language.2)

Egyptian and .Jewiah eleaenta are certainly predo■inant in the •oical

papyri. t1The ■•al that SoloB>n put on the tongue of .J•r-iu and he ■poke"
ia clearly not Greek, 2 but the uaaoe of 'and' i• aurely derived fro■ that
of all ritual inatructiona. It ..... po ■aible to atratify the .. terial'"'
have; the a, ■t elaborate and ac,at co■plicated .. gical texts and ■any bizarre
feature■ are agreed to belong to the ■econd century A.D. or later, and there
baa been a tendency to characterize early .. terial •• "brief, exact and pure 11 •
25
But at lea■ t the basic linguiatic ■ tructurea •- to be laid down by the fourth
century, and ao- of the■ 1111ch earlier: for in•tance the fonaa of prayer• and
curaea, which ■uat be older than the Teian cur■ea and the constitution of
Chio ■• 'ft• decree of Perikle• that vaa like a drinking-aong ia probably another
exaaple, 2 and the clo■ ing acene of the Eu■anid•• turn• a traditional cur••
into a ble••ing.27 'lbe double and triple repetition of word• in• context
of religious ritual i• coaaon enough in claaaical Greek - a convincing nu■ber
of esa■ple ■ were collected by &duard Norden in hi• co■■entary on the aixth
book of the .Aeneid28 - and there ia a ■i■ilar phenoaenon of phra■•• like cpxoµu~
bt MuSa.pGvMu,Uplr., and xarpc .aS~ 1'<> 11:&S,n&-0.,which occur in an Orphic context
and•-- to have a ai■ ilar ba■ i• in the practical need for effective ritua1. 2 9
What 1 ■ reiterated i ■ l!N>INthing iaportant for a practical pu.rpo••• 'lb•••
habits occur alao in the .. gical papyri, but they are not nece•-rily .Jewish
or Gnoatic1 nor even i ■ a phra■e like dcro.v 3pa.v Mat dao.v ,\µ.i:pa.vxo.~ daa.v
vietTa: it has a long history in Greek, it va■ noticed by Plato•• a atyliatic
habit, and it go•• back to preaocratic philoaophy.lO Soae light ■hone on
the antiquity of the the ■es of Greek .. gic and often of i ta Unguietic structure■
in the publictition of Une I■pr4cation Fwl,raire a N'°c,aarff by Paul Moraux
fifteen years ago. He was able to take the traditional wording of public cur•••
in Attica back to the early sixth century B.C. and to find the .... wording
in private uae in the second century A.D. But Moraux llhowed that the 'NOrding
of his Asia Minor inscription waa ao clo ■ e to an inacription of Herodea Atticua
that it ■w1t be an educated i ■itation. That ia clearly not the ■ aae a■ the
popular tradition of -oical foniulae. At the aa■e ti■ e, literature can enter
popular tradition in many way■ and at aany points. Professional aagiciana,
from the 1K>ment we can diatinguiah ■agic •• a ■ecret and automatically effective
ritual, are inevitably charlatans; like all charlatans they need to iapresa,
and it ia obviously true of the writer■ of the papyri that il• prennent leur
bien ou il ■ le trouvent. Even the predominance of oriental and Jewish Mgic

213
-y be a• much a aetropolitan •• a .Jevi ■h taate. &ven Longinue31 thought the
Greek varaion of the .Jeviah acripturea a atriking exaaple of aubliaity of
apeech. Nor vaa it only magician• who were deaparate to i■preaa: there i•
•urely aoaething phoney and falaelr eublime about that faaoua and 1101..-.
docuaent, the Rider of the Rhetra.J2

A certain aaount can be learnt fro■ papyri that are written in two
language•, even though the Greek and the deaotic &gyptian text• are not tran■ lationa
of each other.Jl The ayntu: of ritual inatruction• in Egyptian--• to be
more flexible. "You write on a laurel-leaf ••• you light a 1-P••• you invoke
the laurel ••• Do not look at the 1-p. When you are about to retire to re ■ t
you put the laurel under your head and you pray to Harthout; then he anner•
you in a dre ..... " The "when ••• then ••• " of thia papyrue ia like the uaual
Greek 11and", which in tact occur ■ in Greek in the .... papyrua. The Greek
al110 contain• alternative inatructiona in the fora "but if you want ao-and-.ao
do •o-and-110", which ia like the form of legal aaendment in epecific circua11tance ■
uaed in the Gortyn code and the book of Deuterono.y: the traditional language
of decree•. It may alao be of interest that if the Greek apell• are read with
a atre ■■ accent they aeem to have a regular though rather unintereating clauaular
etructure, aore i ■preaaive aa one would expect in the invocation ■ than it i ■
in the inatructiona. Thez favour the repetition of cheaply i ■pre•aive phraaea
like rvci ~~xv
~c et~ TOV QffQVTO xpovov. Perhaps there i• alway• 80-thing cheap.
and always aomething moving, about love char.a. But whatever one feel• about
the ■ pell• the■•lvea, and personally I often find .yaelf .oved by the■,-••
one ■ ight be by an old popular record, they certainly caet ao .. light on that
love poetry of the Helleniatic age and of the Aoalana which we canonize aa
claaaical.

Campion Hall,
Oxford.

1. Paul Moraux, Une Imprecation Funeraire l Neoceaaree, Paria 1959; er.

I.G. II 2 1J188-1J208, and R. La.tti ■ore, Theaea in Greek and La.tin
&pitapha (1942).
2. The Teian 'dirae', Dittenberger4, )7 and )8.
J. S.&.G. 7, 21); cf. R. WUn•ch, Antike Fluchtafeln, Bonn 1912, p.lJ.
For other private curae■ et. Dittenberger4 117lt-1181.
~. Drakon' ■ law againat homicide (Dittenberger•, 111) i• in the older
form, but the aixth century conatitution or Chio ■ (Tod n.1) i• already
caat in the co■prehen ■ ive language of .odern legialation. For the
cloaenea ■ of an oath to a lav cf. Dittenberger4 526, and for the connection
of .. gic ritual with the promulgation of a law cf. S.E.G. 9,J, the
conatitution of Cyrene, on which cf. al ■o Hiatoria 10, 1961, p.1J9 and
J.H.s. ao, 1960, p.94.
5. For typical ritual in ■ truction ■ er. Athenaeua 9, 78 (410.-b), for
Theophra ■ toa de plantia,9.8, 4 et aeq., on the aandrake in particular.

214
 6. Apiciua uaea the present indicative or the subjunctive, but always with the
second person singular. The atyle of Mr• Beaton ia nearer to that of
-gic rituala. The fora.al inatructiona in Cato, de re ruatica, are rather
Taried; thia .. y reflect• diveraity of aourcea, but it .. y alao be
deliberate. Hia ritual inatructiona (1)2 and 1J4) keep cloee to the
traditional pattern, but it ■ e-• the opening phr-•• of theae inatructiona
(e.g. 141) are outaide the fora. For the atricte ■ t form of instructions,
co■pere also 142-4.
7. Of courae Neoplatoni•• ia an iaportant part of the mixture called
Gnoatici-. There are phra■e• like nponoTwp ••• al~varc alWV(l)(T\VOHpatwp
(P.N.G. 1, 197r.) and TOV CV T~ KCV~ nvcvµ.aT~ 6c~vov aopatov Scov.
There are aleo in the aaae tezta what appear to be Jewiah phrase ■:
CffLKOA.00\&o.Lac KvpLC, KAOS~ µou, A ttYLO~Seo~, &CV dYLOL~&vanaUO)l,CVOt,
i
I
a~ ootaL xapcoT~KOOL 6L~VCKG)c;(P.M.G. 1, 197f.). The laat pa■aage I •
have quoted co .. • juat before the firat two.
8. Berlin 5026; l.60f., et. s. Eitren, Zu den Berliner Zauberpapyri, 19~)
(Kriatiania), p.7.
9. Ibid.
10. P.M.G. 12, )97.
11. In a Euboean ver■ ion of the death of Digenia, noo 00UV
1
cau,Ppc
6Lycv~,
KQ\ ScXcL, va ncSaVCLt; (Laographia 1, p.224). Co■pare 'An it ••11 come
to pa■■' ••• 'An thee aall .. rry' ••• aaong the connective ■ in the last
tvo verae■ of The Great Silki• of Sule Slc.erry (Child, 11)).
12. ~• notp 2 at,pve.
1J. Yoov, U<JOV, w •LAC ZcO, kClTa t~t apoupa, ttbv 'AS~va~wv, HaL tQv Kc6twv.
Marc. Aural. Antonin., 5, 7. E. Norden in hi• Antike Kunatproaa (vol. 1,
pp.45-6) give• ezuplea of ai■ ilar rhythaa in ritual language.
14. Theok. Id. 2, 16)-6, on pp.62-J of the co.aentary (A.S.F. Gow, Theocritua,
1952). The phraae quoted i• P.G.M. ~, 1061.
15. Philoatr, Vita Ap. Ty., 8.Jo, p.172.
16. R. VUnach, Antike Flucht•teln (1912) p.lJ, n.), )1-)). I. Norden ha■
di•cua•ed rit~l and aagical repetition ■ with a wealth of ezaapl•• in hi ■
co-ntary on the ■ ixth book of the Aeneid, on line 46.
17. Recorded in an Attic in ■ cription of early i ■ perial date, B.C.H. 20, p.79,
•• uc KUC uncpxuc. The formula i ■ Eleuainian and the inacription (on a
relief of Men with Pan and the Nymph ■) ia fro■ the Dipylon.
18. Ye■p. J9J, tXc~aov H«L oG)aov, Yeap. lto9-10 (four imperative■) and eo on,
and for the aame imperative four tiaee repeated cf. Ye ■ p. 979.
19. Y. Martin, Une Tablette aagique de la Bibliotheque de <-'neve (Genava 6,
p.56).
20. Euripidee, Cyclops 262f.
21. It ha• long been known that Sapphota .poe■ ia cloae to the real form of
prayer•, and the analogies are in every 110dern coaaentary. But it eeema lately
to have eacaped notice that what Aphrodite says (v.20) about Sappho being
wronged has close parallel in an inscription fro■ Knidoa of a prayer ending
&6tH~µaL yap, bc111t0LvatiaµaTcp. (Dittenberger4 1179).
22. Recently diacuaaed by J.M. Hull, Helleni•tic magic and the synoptic
tradition, 1974, pp.8J-4.
2). Euaenidea 14J.
24. P.G.M. 4.JOJ9.
25. E.g. J.M. Hull, op. cit., p.26.

215
26. Again•t the Megarian• (Ari•tophanea Ach. 5)2-4).
27. Such cur■•• are diacu■ •ed by Paul Moraux in Une I■pr,cation Funeraire a
Neoc,•aree (1959).
28. On line "6.
29. A. Olivieri, Laaellae aureae Orphicae (1915) e.g. p.11 and p.16.
JO. E.R. Dodd• in hie co■-entary on the Gorgiae (p.192) •ugge■t• that the
e■ phatic repetition■ put into the ■outh of Polo ■ are what Plato ■eant by
6Ld.«aLO~OYL«, with which Polo• i• characterized in the Phaidro• (267b-c).
In pre-90cratic philoeophy cf. Philolaoe tr.11, Anazagorae fr.4 and
fr .12. Theae aoleam repeti tiona -- to adhere to particularly aubli-
aubject--tter, for ex-ple everlaeting ti-, or the nature of the eoul.
)1. ncpt ~u~, 9, 9.
)2. Diacuaeed by L.H. Jeffery in Hiatoria 1961, p.146. The phrase~~ lt
f:ipa~ ie particularly at~ge. (cf. Haaaond in J.H.S. 1950, p.4) n.8.)
)). E.g. Bell, Nock and Tho■paon, Magical te:a:t ■ from a bilingual papyrus
in the Briti ■h Mu ■e\a, P.B.A. 17. The papyrus h B.M.Pap. 10588. fixed
by the Greek hand to the third century A.D.

216
 COPTICPAPYRI IH TH.BBEINECICE
COLLECTION
AT YALEUNIVDSIT't

L•alie s.B. MacCoull

Thank• to the ktndn••• of Mr Harman Liebert, former Librarian of the

Beinecke Rare Sook and Kanuacript Library at Yale, and of hia aucceaaor,
Prof•••or Louia Harts, I have been entruated with atudying and publiahing
the Coptic papyri in the Beinecke collection. For the literary and biblical
piec•• I am fortunate to have the collaboration of Profeaaor Paulinua
Ballet of Catholic UniveraityJ and 1 aa indebted alao to the work of the
late Profeaaor Theodore Peteraen, who pre~r•d moat of the H.P. Kraua
catalogue of what becaae the 1964 acquiaition of papyri (and wbo1e Nach-
laaa of acholarly papera I have inherited). Th• collection compriae.--
over two hundred inventory numbera, excluding one forgery and a few clay
aeala. Earlier acquiaitiona were made in 1928 and 1945, and a few
acattered it-■ were given in the 1930 1 15 while the large ■ t amount of
Coptic material cam.a to New Haven in 1964-1965-1966 in three lota. Thi ■
paper will 1iaply pre1at a few highlight• of the collection, while a
catalogue with c._entari•• ta in proc••• of being made.
Firat, the biblical and literary piecea. P. Yale Inv. 1779 ia a roll of
unuaual format (25.5 x 65.5 ea), containing Paal•• 77 and 78, and giving
th• the Hebrev-atyle (not the Saptuagint-atyle) numbering. Th• tut e:nda
half-way down the verao of the roll. There are a few variant•• Pa 7718-9
are oaitted1 occasionally Coptic word• are found where Budge'• p1alter
tut give• Greek vorda1 and there are irregulariti•• in replacing the
aupralinear stroke with E. Unfortunately several frap.ant ■ of the roll
have been aounted in the wrong order, 10 the continuity of text i• confu1ed.
P. 1782 contain ■ on the varao th• text of Joahua 711-2, the only other
papyru1 portion of Joshua except for the Che•ter Beatty/Bodm.ar codex. lta
tut agrees rather vtth the Thompaon, or later, versions the name 1 Joahua•
( IHCOYC]1• written out in full, not as a nomen sacrum, and given the
patronymic ••on of Nau••• Th• fragment itself meaaurea only 11.3 x 4.8 ems
and, reconstituting the tat of the five lin••• one arrives at a figure of
51 letters par line, about 0.7 ea per letter• 35.7 cm per line, or a page
(or aheet) of •ome 4o+ cm in width. However, the script ia not at all a
•book-hand• in type, and the recto 1• atill largely illegiblea one cannot
•• yet determine from what aort of roll, codex, or other format the piece
of text aay have come. Th• Joahua text may ■ imply hAve been a biblical
quotation copied on to the back of aometbing completely unrelated. P. 1788
aay be from an apocryphal Life of Our Ladya the frapents come from a
bifolio of a codex, with two coluaaas on each leaf, which 11Ust originally
have ■uaured ea. 56.5 ea wide, i.e., with each leaf over 28 cm wide. The
Virginia repruented in the textu aaying, 1 1 bleaa you, 0 ■on, offspring
of all ageas ••• behold, they came together to•• and I vaa in their m.id ■ t
like an olive tree whose fruit retuma to it.• PP. 2095 and 2096 ar• parts
of two leave• of a codex with a narrative about the Forerunner, John the
Baptist, in which God la addressed aa 1 0 Lord of all, O demiurge of all
the earth.• In both of theae portion• of codices the holes for ■ wing the
leavea are clearly visiblea two in the firat case, on• in the aecond.

The documentary papyri form an eapecially rich and interesting group. The
single aost important documentary piece is P. 1804, a thirty-two-leaf

217
bilingual account-book, averaging in dimenaion• 16x14 ea per leaf. Many of
the leavaa are badly diacoloured and difficult to read, broken, or othar-
vi•• in poor condition, but th ■ whole i• a valuable piece of evidence and
will help in th• cla••ification by format of docuaantary codice1 (cf. P.
Lond. IV.1419, from Aphrodito, and BM 1075). The content• are quit• -
u'iortad in natures mo•t leave• areinacribad in Coptic, but •everal are
in Greek or have Greek aubacriptiona. All •ort ■ of band• are repre ■ ented,
fr0111expert rapid curaive to normal Coptic epi ■ tolary alllliuncial to the
wavering block-capital signature• of '3pa6lw~ ypcfq,ov"tE~ • The entri••
take aeveral fonu, ..!:I.!• pagaa with aeveral it-■ each beginning with
the ■ame month-nuae1 copie1 of ~~•~ , Mtc.ll.OCIC. , Oto\oAon• or
other type ■ of contract ■, sometimes with aeveral different 1ub1cription1
or aignature•J copie• of receipt ■ J li ■ t ■ of maa1ure1, of quantitie■ of
coaaoditie ■, or of auma receivedJ liat ■ of naaeaJ and inventories. Tb•
u1u.al a11ortment of religioua office ■ and title ■ turn ■ up, including a
scribe (r•~,~, aa often ■pelt in the MS. colophon• published in van
Lant1choot•1 collection). Folio 8 ver ■o i• a liat of book ■, giving 1ome
eleven itmaa, including a martyrdom. and •the book of the holy Gregory
Tbau(maturgua]• (1. 7)1 10 far a ■ I can find, no work of hi ■ 11 known to
exist in Coptic, and one would a ■ auae that the book-liat would deal with
vorka in the native languaa• of the monks. Folio 11 ver ■o mantiona tha
well-known monastery of Apa Souroua in the Aphrodito area (11. 1-2), and
a aoldier from the Antaeopolite n011e1ve are on home ground here. Folio
29 recto, in a characteristically eighth-century band (aiailar to that of
the Kurrah ibn Sharik correspondence), ia an •account of the boat ■ of the
aonaatery• (unfortunately unapecified), coTering the aontha of Tybi,
Mecheir, Piw.enoth, and Pbarauthis to thia ve aay coapare th• boat service
run by the great monastery of the Katanoia wall into the late period.
There er• aoa• seventy-five lettera, dealing with the uaual varietiea of
aonaatic and personal activitiea and goodas agriculture with ita tool1
and producta, liveatock, bandicraftaJ with re4ue1ta for coaaoditiea, ••r-
vicea, and the like. At leaat one (P. 1835) give ■ ita place of origin aa
Jame ( 1 1 vrote at Jem.e•, aays the writer, vhoae name 1• unfortunately
lo1t), the well-known ait• near Thebea from whiela 10 many of our document ■
coaaa. Similarly, much information can be gathered from the dozen ■ of
accounta and inventorie11 P. 1809 verso ia an inventory of accleaiaatical
it-.. including a censer, three different kind• of knivea, and an iconJ
while P. 1825 li1t1 sheep and goat ■ aa •aealed• (i.e. branded? Ve are not
told if the ownerahip of the animal ■ wa1 aonasticor'lay). P. 18051 an
account with latter appended, aentiona the adainiatrative
1 (financial?)
official 1 (Crum 561a) called the ~•~1oy • (Line 10 mention ■ •a follia
froa all the '9'AIO~ • --- indicating that more than one of theae official•
functioned at one times but the nature of their Job is 1till far froca
clear.) Often Arabic proper name ■ turn up, WTitten in Coptic character ■
( c•e~f) , ~Ml"IOY"N , P. 15171 •v~ ~KT, otherwise unknown, P.
1808). Among the apecifically legal document ■, P. 1862 ia a labour contract
(for 16tC• , wagea), using the phraseology Z.HlfTOO'< ••• t.MTMOOy'
(•(either] on the mountain or in the water'), which ia deacribed by
Satzinger in BltU 111.350.11 (ita only other occurrence) with n. 6 as •nicht
belegt•a hereia a parallel. For matter ■ of lexicography, P. 1807 un-
fortunately doea not further explain the significance of the word ~~~,
given by Crum aa •munina unknown• (150a).· The occurrence of such official ■
as av\lxl>..>..Loc; ( cu&IC.6M ) and &x"tovdpLoc; ( 61lTl.f' ~ alao des•rv••
aeution.
218
There are a couple of do11en aagical papyri, vbich of courae po•• probl-
all their own. One at leaat la coaparatively vell knOlfD (P. 1792)1 it
appear• oa. a greeting-card oa.e may buy at the Library, and gives the birth
of Chriat •• occurriag on 29th Choiak, aa part of a chara againat anake-
bite coaplete vith the faaoua SATOI.AR&PO••• aagic aquare. P. 1800 la a
chara agaiuat periodic feverJ while P. 1791 appear ■ to be a love-chara
reinforced by aaay oath• and invocatioa.a by and of •the king of the daon•.
••• the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ••• doain1ona 1 priacipalitie1 and
povarsJ 6uv&µt 1,~ , charubill and aeraphia ••• prieats of the church •••
Paradiae and .-.eryone in it•. P. 17811 a palillpaeat, baa a -aical cham.
auperimpoaed Upoll a portion of the tat of Daniel not hitherto atteatecl
in Coptic. P. 2004.2, on the other band, appears to be a perfectly legiti-
aate aedical recipe for a randy for boila 1 uaing .aafflover oil.

Sneral dialect ■ are repreaented in the Beinecke papyri1 beaidea the

comaoa Sahidic, we find Fayuaic or Fayuaic influence in PP. 18051 1892.4 1
2021.lJ Bohairic in 2022.1, 2123, 21241 Middle Egyptian in 2016 and 2022.61
and possibly Subadw1 ■1c elaaents in 178S (an apocryphal tut). Further
work r ... iaa to be done on the dialectal peculiaritie1 of PP. 2102 and
2103, let.tare apparatly oriainatiag froa the aonaatic e01R1mity at Bavit.

There ia at.ill a great deal of work awaiting the editor• of th•••

docu-
aenta, eapecially on the atill umaounted fragaent1 of ■ore recent acqui-
aition1 aore often than not a single inventory auaber includes froa half
a dozen to twenty or ac,re loo1e fragaent.1, and all of theae a11t at.ill
be aorted out and, if poaaible, joined with one another on the baaia of
papyrua fabric, fibr••• hands, tats, and ao on. I - grateful for the
patimc• of ay colleague, during the r ... inder of the preparation of the
catalogue of all of the Beinedte Coptic material.

219
 RtSULTATS D'UNE EIQUETE SUR LA SURVIVANCE ET L'ACCESSIBILITE
DES PAPYRUS LITTtRAIRES R'PERTORitS DANS PACK2

Paut MERTENS

En 1961, deja, j'avais emis 1 1 idee de creer un Centre de

Documentation photographique des Papyrus litterairesI, mais
c'est depuis 1968 seulement qu~avec un credit accordE par le
Fonda national belge de la Recherche scientifique (F.B.R.S.}, je
me suis mis en peine de reperer et de retrouver tous lea papyrus
mentionnes dans la aeconde edition du repertoire de R.A. Pack2
pour essayer d'en obtenir des reproductions pbotographiques.

L'enqu8te a laquelle je me suis livre porte done tr~s exac-

tement sur lea papyrus litt6raires grecs et latins recenses dans
Pack, ce qui fait 3079 papyrus3. 11 taut se dire toutefois que
pour la localisation des originaux, cette masse de papyrus pre-
sente plus de 3079 probl~mes, car certains d'entre eux ont ete
divises - par lea vendeurs ou par lea hasards de la fouille - en
deux, trois ou quatre parties, voire davantage, qui se sont
souvent emietteeedans autant de collections ou, en tout cas, de
numeroa d'inventaire differents. De telle sorte que le chitfre
est passe de 3079 A 3210.

Cea 3210 fragmeats se trouvent maintenant repartis entre un

grand nombre d'institutions publiques et quelques bibliotheques
privees : au total, dans 144 endroits, dont 38 aux ttata-Unis,
30 en Grande-Bretagne, 15 pour lea deux Allemagnes, ll pour
1 1 Italie avec le Vatican, 8 en tgypte, 6 en France, 5 en Hollande,
4 en Su~de comme en U.R.S,S., 3 au Canada, en Irlande, en Suisse,
en Autriche et en Belgique, 2 au Danemark et en Australie, 1 en
Pologne, en Rorvege, en Gr~ce et en Bouvelle-Zelande.

L 1 ampleur de ces 144 collections eat evidemment tres varia-

ble,

A. 8 d'entre elles sont tree importantes. Elles detiennent

chacune de 140 a plus de 300 papyrus litteraires. Je les citerai
par ordre croissant : la Bibliotheque Bodleienne, la John Rylands
Library et le Musee du Caire (chaque rois entre 140 et 150 papy-
rus}, la Bibliotheque Nationale de Vienne (+ 200 papyrus) et la
collection florentine, qui en compte pres de 300, si l'on veut
bien jumeler l'Istituto Papirologico G. Vitelli et la Lauren-
tienne; ce chiffre est depasse dans les trois plus grandee collec-
tions : le British Museum, les Musees de Berlin et le fonds de
l'Egypt Exploration Society. Total pour ces huit institutions :
+ 1850.

B. Un second groupe est constitue par 10 bibliotheques qui

221
conservent entre 50 et 68 papyrus litteraires : Aberdeen, la
Sorbonne, l'Ashmolean Museum, Ann Arbor, Berkeley, l'Universite
d'Etat a Milan, Strasbourg, Heidelberg, Hambourg et Birmingham.
Total pour les dix: ± 600.
C. Une troisieme serie est formee de 11 unites, que je ne
prendrai plus la peine d 1 enumerer et qui gardent chacune de 24
a 36 papyrus litteraires, soit, au total,± 320.

D. Enfin, 14 institutions en possedent de 11 a 20, soit

+ 200.

Ce qui fait jusqu'ici 43 institutions pour 2970 fragments,

ou 92.5% des papyrus.

E. 101 collections se partagent done les quelque 240 frag-

ments restants (7.5%).

A l'heure qu'il est, j'ai contacte la majeure partie de

ces institutions. Parmi lea toutea grandee, jusqu'i present,
j'ai laisse de cote, pour diverses raisons, la Bibliotbeque
Bodleienne et le Musee du Caire. Les six autres ont repondu de
faqon extremement encourageante et mime, dans certains cas,
pratiquement exhaustive. Ce qui n'a pas encore ete obtenu eat
en passe de l'etre 4• Les institutions du second groupe ont
tout~s repondu favorablement et m 1 ont fourni tout ce qui pouvait
etre photographie; le deficit est de quelques unites seulement.
Pour le reste, je n'ai pas encore touche tout le monde et le
succes, dans cette zone, ne pouvait plus etre total; toutefois,
un echec n'y entraine qu'une perte relativement mince. Le ta-
bleau qui suit fera clairement ressortir lea resultats de la
recolte.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
refus pas
de "perdus" sans en phot. photogr.
encore micr.
photogr. rep. cours ed. ( "prints")
demandes

3210 48 100 98 282 387 600 558 1137

J 1.5 3 3 9 12 18.5 17.5 35.5

Ce qui ae trouve a gauche (col. l, 2, 3) est la section ne-

gative, tandis que dans la partie droite (col. 6, 7, 8) sont
consignee lea resultats positifs de l'enquete.

222
 Commen;ons par la portion la moins tavorable. On voit que
7.5% des papyrus m 1 ont ,te inaccessibles. Mais il y a plusieurs
degree possibles dans cette inaccesaibilite. J'en ai distingue
trois : on a renonce a pbotographier 48 papyrus, 100 me sem-
blent devoir itre consideres momentanement comme perdus et, pour
98 autres, je n'ai pas obtenu de reponse. Au sein de ces trois
categories, il importe cependant de raire encore des distinc-
tions, car tous lee cas ne sont pas pareils.

1. Pour 7 des 48 papyrus de la premiire colonne, l'auto-

risation de photographier n'a pas ete donnee parce qu'il s'agit
d'inedits dont on desire reserver la primeur a celui ou a ceux
qui en assureront la publication. Au tond, ces papyrus auraient
pu ne pas figurer dans le repertoire de Pack: bien peu, sans
doute, e'en seraient aper~us. 2 autres papyrus de la mime col-
lection ont et, consideres comme trop tragiles pour etre confies
au photograpbe; je n'ai pas a mettre en doute cet avis formule
par lee responsables d'une collection relativement importante
qui, par ailleurs, m•ont donne satisfaction sur tous lee autres
points. On n'a pas pu pbotograpbier l'Iliade Pierpont Morgan
parce que le papyrus est de teinte trop sombre; le bibliotbe-
caire m'a cependant promis de faire un effort pour tenter d'en
tirer quelque chose. Un papyrus du Metropolitan Museum de Rev
York n'a pu etre reproduit a mon intention parce qu'il n'en
existait pas de negatit et que cette institution ne possede pas
le materiel photographique necessaire.

Il reste 37 cas de refus. Ila peuvent etre traites

ensemble; il s'agit de papyrus non montes, non conserves sous
verre : toute la collection de la Johns Hopkins University
Library, de Baltimore (21 numeros), toute celle de Cornell
University (10 fragments) et lee papyrusi de Nessana conserves
a la Bibliotheque Pierpont Morgan.

En conclusion, pour cette eerie de 48 pieces, beaucoup

d'espoirssont encore permis, a condition d'avoir de la patience.
Les 7 papyrus inedits seront publies un jour et lee 37 documents
cites en dernier lieu finiront bien par etre glisses entre deux
verres.

2. Passons a la deuxi~me categorie, ou le dommage est le

plus sensible. Ces 100 papyrus sont "perdus", a moins qu'ils ne
soient seulement introuvables, indisponibles, ou non reperables
(par moi, notamment).

Il taut se resigner, en effet : uncertain nombre de papyrus

(11) ont ete materiellement d,truits ou irremediablement endom-
mages, le plus souvent a cause de la7 guerreB. Plusieurs (32)
sont - momentanement - introuvables • Quelques-uns (3) ont
disparu par suite dlun exc~s de contiance OU de generosite 8.

223
Troia autres semblent reellement indisponibles 9•

Je n'ai pas encore eu l'occasion de m'employer pleinement

a reperer les 12 numeros figurant en noteIO. J'espire pouvoir
un de ces jours localiser 1 1 un ou 1 1 autre d'entre eux, mais
toute aide sera la bienvenue de ce cote. 11 en va de meme,
a fortiori, pour lee problemes suivants :
- 15 papyrus dont les conservateurs supposes a'ont signale la
disparition ou 1 1 absence dans leur collectionII;
- 11 papyrus appartenant, ou ayant appartenu, a d'anciennes
collections priveesIZ.
- lea P. Lit. GoodspeedJ3 se trouvent-ils a Chicago T Le cas
echeant, dans quelle biblioth~que T
- lee P. Hawara revue par Milne en 191314 sont-ils a Londres,
a Dublin, ou ailleurs T
quand j'ecris a la Hibbard Library de ChicagoI5, ma lettre me
revient pour adresse insuftisante. Je serais heureux d'avoir
ce renseignement purement materiel.

3. Au chapitre des "sans reponse", la colonne 3 rev~le

que je me suis heurte au silence en recherchant 98 papyrus.
Une quinzaine de collections sont impliquees. Soucieux de ne
froisser personne, je m 1 abstiendrai d'en donner le detail. Je
dirai seulement que si deux universites mondialement connues
avaient bien voulu donner signe de vie, 44 papyrus auraient
change de colonne. Par ailleurs, il faut signaler que dans
deux ou trois cas, ma lettre n'a peut-etre pas touche le but 16 •

4. Viennent ensuite les papyrus dont je n'ai pas encore eu

le temps ou l'occasion de demander la photographie. Ces 282
nu.meres soot conserves essentiellement, comme je l'ai dit plus
haut, a la Biblioth~que Bodleienne (+ 120) et au Musee du Caire
(66). La centaine restante provient-de collections mineures, le
plus souvent egyptiennes.

5. En colonne 5, on trouve lee papyrus dont la reproduc-

tion m'a ete promise. Je n'oserais pas atfirmer que toutes les
promesses seront tenues ••• Mais on peut raisonnablement
attendre des colonnes 4 et 5 un decbet qui ne devrait pas exce-
der tree fortement celui de tout le reste : sur les 21%, 2.5
iront sans doute du cote gauche et 18.5 du cote droit, ce qui
donnera 10% d'une part et 90 de l'autre. Une telle repartition
me parait fort honorable.

6. Les quelque 600 photographies qui ont ete editees soot

tbeoriquement du moins - accessibles a tous et, pour ces

224
papyrus-la, je n'ai plus recherche lee originaux afin de ne pas
importuner inutilement les conservateurs. Je publierai peut-
etre a l'occasion une liste pure et simple des references de
ces photographies.

7 et 8. Les deux colonnes de droite representent la recol-

te effective : 558 microfilms et 1137 photographies ("prints"),
soit 1695 reproductions sur 2610I?., Je dois ce resul tat pos i-
t if a l'aide soutenue et etticace que m'a apportee mon assistant,
Jean Straus, et, d'autre part, a l'amabilite et au devouement
d'une toule de collegues papyrologues, de bibliothecaires, de
photographes, que j'ai remercies personnellement a chaque occa-
sion, et a qui je me plais encore a rendre bommage, anonymement
mais publiquement, aujourd'hui.

Va
19
I. Voir
-----------------------'---"--'- ................
A • ternational
-
de Pa ues
· - racovie, _,,
ie lit-
te , hron. d

2. The Greek and Latin Literar Texts from Greco-Roman

Egypt, Ann Arbor, 19 5.
3. 3026 + 63 provenant du Supplement (pp. 156-158) •
3089 numeros, dont 10 doivent etre retir~s parce qu'ils sont
apparus comme inutiles ou taisant double emploi (1248, 1260,
1384, 1658, 1991, 2063, 2165, 240S, 2664 et 1320a).
4. Berlin : 107, Eg. Expl. Soc. : 85, Vienne : 55, British
Museum: 50, une douzaine de P.S.I., 2 P. Rylands. Je me plais
a exprimer ici ma vive gratitude A quelques personnes qui se
sent devouees de tagon exceptionnelle pour me donner satisfac-
tion : MM. Turner, Coles, Skeat et Pattie pour les collect ions
anglaises, Mijller et Poethke pour le Musee de Berlin, Manfredi
pour les institutions florentines et Mademoiselle Loebenstein
pour la Biblioth~que de Vienne.

~. Les P. Amherst, de la meme collection, ont ete photo-

graphies pour mo1.

6. Pack 2 57, 435, 884, 1044, 1080, 1515, 1566, 1939,

2157. 2198. 3002.
?. Les voici, rassembles par lieux de conservation :
1982; 1, 244, 1883, 2187. 1875a; 93e, 954, 1036, 1118, 2054;

225
 une partie de 2731; 140, 772, 959, 1596, 1619, 2495, 2955; 105
(reference erronee); 382, 1610, 1882, 2083, 2089; 2008. 2718,
2719, 2723, 2725; 1333 (taux T); 2136.
8. 248, 2093, 2283.
9. 2480 (la
bibliotheque est en train de demenager);
2995 et peut-etre aussi 1030. Pack2 460, signale au Congris
comme "missing for some time", a ete redecouvert depuis par
notre collegue I. Gallo la ou il devait ettectivement se trou-
.• ver, c'est-a-dire a la Bibliotheque de l'Universite St. Andrews,
a Fife. 2 Le papyrus etait accole au verso du P. Oxy. 1248
(• Pack 1397).
10. Ou sont 644 (au Caire T), 755, 1120, 1586, 1841, 1877,
2470, 2615 {a Berlin t) 1 2757, 2730, 2958, 2959 T

II. Ousont 563 et 586 (plus au Metropolitan Museum);

1884, 1885 et 1886 (plu ■ au Museum of the Rev York Historical
Society); 679 et 2521 (plus & la Bibliotbeque Pierpont Morgan);
1113 (plus a Stanford); 1614, 1683, 1860 (plus a Wellesley);
2318 (pas au Field Museum. of Natural History); 1130, 2360 et
2546 (plus a Edimbourg) t
12. 303 (coll. Whitehouse), 606 (coll. Winslow), 1189 et
2274 (coll. von Scherling), 2076 (coll. Wilcken), 1322 (coll.
Wessely), 1988 {coll. Thompson), 2656 (coll. Clermont-Ganneau,
ostracon), 2738 (coll. Blanckertz), 2740 (coll. Deissmann,
oatracon, a Berlin T), 2991 (coll. Arangio-Ruiz).
2
I3. Pack 624, 766, 816, 1256, 1620, 2401.
14. Archiv, 5, pp. 379-380 • Pack 2 642, 1428, 1550, 2912,
2913, 2914. ,
2
15. Le papyrus en cause eat Pack 725.
I6. Il s'agit ici des anciennea collections g6orgiennes
Zereteli (13 pap.) et Maximova (1 pap.), ainsi que de la Societe
Papyrologique d 1 Alexandrie (13 pap.).
I7. 3210 (chiffre de d6part) moins 600 (photographies
editees).

226
 L 1 EPIKRISIS DEI GRECO-EGIZI
Oraolina Montevecchi

Un esame di tutti i documenti,relativi all 1 epikrisia

dei Greco-Egizi, tiei quali ato preparando una riedizione,
mi ha auggerito alcune considerazioni che qui presento, te-
nendo conto di due nuovi documenti della raccolta milane-
ae pubblicati nell 1 opuecolo presentato dalla nostra scuo-.
la a questo XIV Congresso Internazionale di Papirologia
(P Med. inv. 71.44 e 72.16), e di un papiro di Osairinco
inedito gentilmente aegnalatomi da J.R.Rea.
Tali considerazioni aaranno piu ampiamente sviluppa-
te e documentate nell 1 introduzione al volume che raccoglie-
ra i documenti, con la relativa bibliogra~ia.
I termini epikrinein, epikriais gia in eta tolemaica
hanno assunto un aignificato tecnico, pero la loro docu-
mentazione finora e ristretta alle citta greche ( P Rev.
Law, 28,6; P Hibeh, II, 197), riguarda procedimenti giudi-
ziari concernenti case e terreni, e non pare in alcun mo-
do riferirsi a11 1 amministrazione o al sistema fiscale, co-
me sara in eta romana.
Sembra dunque che l'amministrazior.e romana abbia mu-
tuato questi vocaboli dal linguaggio giuridico, per indica-
re un procedimento di verifica e di discriminazione attuato
in Egitto ( e forse in altri paesi di lingua greca), dove
1 1 esiatenza di due o piu strati etnico-culturali (indigeni,
ellenizzati, Greci) creava il presupposto per tale discri-
minazione.
Il termine epikrisie acquista questo significato tecni-
co preciso nel linguaggio amministrativo durante il corso
del I secolo d. er.
In alcuni documenti infatti epikrisis indica il censi-
mento domiciliare: un uso che si giustifica peril fatto
che il censimentQbomprendeva varie operazioni, tra cui lo
spoglio e la verlfica delle denunce eseguita negli uffici,
e la redazione di liste della popolazione distinte secondo
le diverse categorie, fasi per cui e appropriato il nome di
epikrisis, che talora viene esteso a tutto il procedimento
o anche alla prima fase di esso, la denuncia. Cosi avviene
in 25P P Oxy. II 2881 J8/9P o 42/JP O Brussel 8Arlin 14;
90P P Hamb. 60; 160P SB VIII 9869; P Lond. III 915 verso,
pp.26-28; IIP P Oxy.XLI 2981; II-IIJP BGU II J88; 179P P Amh.
II,99 a b J 147P VBP IV 75 b.
Il rapporto tra apographe ed epikrisie nelle opera-

227
zioni di censimento ~ indicata con precisione in un documen-
to d 1 u££icio ( 205/6-211P BGU III 484)1 epikrisis kat 1 oiki-
an apographes, cioe "esame (o verifica) della dichiarazione
domiciliare". L epressione
1 "ek pediakou epikriseos" ( P Oxy.
X 1287; P Ryl. IV 599 = SB V 80J2; PSI V 450 verso col.Ila
tutti del IIIP in.) ha una spiegazione analoga, come gia
vide il Wilcken1 pediakon epikriseos e la descrizione topo-
grafica, casa per casa, degli amphoda cittadini, ricavata
dalle denunce di censimento.
Il siffllificato piu specifico di epikrisis pero si fis-
sa nella seconda meta del I sec. d.Cr., ed e quello, ben no-
to, di esame dei titoli che un individuo afferma di possede-
re per appartenere ad una categoria privilegiata, esame che 1
nel suo svolgimento piu completo, comporta una comparizione
personale dell'individuo stesso, accompagnato da tre garan-
1
ti d identita o gnosteres, davanti ad una cornmissione di fun-
zionari in veste di epikritai.
Non mi occupo qui della epikrisis dei sacerdoti egizia-
ni, che sembra sia stata istituita prima d'ogni altra (er~.
4a BGU IV 1199), ne di quella dei veterani, Romani e Ales•
sandrini e dei loro liberti e ■ chiavi, che ha formalita
proprie, ne della epikrisi~egli efebi 1 che riguarda i cit-
tadini delle citta grcche e gli apo gymnasiou di alcune •me-
tropoli" (ma non coincide con l'epikrisis degli apo}qmna-
siou1 cfr. p.es. 217P P Oxy. IX 1202).
1
Per 1 epikrisis dei Greco-Egizi lo stato delle Conti
e il seguente1
Arsinoes apo tes metropoleos, 17 documenti; katoikoi, 4 do-
cumenti.
0ssirinco: metropolitai dodekadrachmoi, 15 documenti; apo
gymnasiou 1 10 document! (compreso il P Oxy.ined.)
Hermopolis Magnas Jlletropolitai oktadrachmoi - apo gyumasiou,
7 documenti
Heracleopolis Magna1 oktadrachmoi, 1 documento.
Vi sono inltre numerose allusioni in denunce di censi-
mento e in liste della popolazione ( c£r. soprattutto PLond.
260 + PER, in Stud. Pal. IV pp.58 sgg., del 72/3P, per Ar-
sinoe), ma anche in altri document!, ivi compresi lettere
private e inviti a pranzo.
Questa istituzione e una delle testimonianze piu elo-
quenti della politica del governo romano nei riguardi della
popolazione greco-egizia, la cui posizione £u sempre hen
distinta da quella degli Alessandrini, i soli che potesse-
ro pervenire direttamente alla cittadinanza romana, e dei
quali in£atti, come si e detto, l'~pikrisis veniva esegui-
guita insieme con quella dei cittadini romani residenti •n
Egitto, a cura del prefetto o di un suo delegato.
Lo strumento primo e principale di controllo della po-

228
polazione £u sempre il censimento quattordicennale: le di-
chiarazioni di nascita e di morte e le dichiarazioni per
l'epikrisis erano complementari delle denunce di censimen-
to, e, a quanto ci risulta £inora, si aggiunsero in un se-
condo tempo. Per una storia dell'amministrazione romana in
Egitto sarebbe interessante poter stabilire attraverso qua-
li tappe e gradi si arrivb a questa organizzazione di con-
trolli sempre piu specializzati e complessi. Dai document!
pervenutici riguardanti l'~pikrisis risulta quanto segues
1. Augusto dovette regolare in primo luogo la situa-
zione interna di Alessandria, come dimostra 11 ben noto pa-
piro della boule (che io credo di eta augustea). Pur non
concedendo la boule, dovette instaurare un controllo piu ri-
goroso della cittadinanza alessandrina, come e dimostrato,
£ra l'altro, da BGU IV 1140 = Chr.W. 58 = CPJud. II 151,
del 5/4&, minuta di una petizione, in cui, attraverso le
correzioni 1 s'intravedono gli abusi precedenti e la rilut-
tanza ad accettare i1 nuovo state di cose.
2. La distinzione tra gli apo tes metropoleos e gli
~po tou nomou risale all'eta augustea ( OGIS 709, del 1P),
e doveva risultare nelle denunce dei primi censimenti do-
miciliari, di eta augustea, di cui non abbiamo altro docu-
mento se non P Med. 3,e di cui ignoriamo la periodicita.
3. La prima categoria privilegiata per la quale pare
si sia avuta una revisione generale e un riconoscimento
sembra sia quella degli apo gymnasiou di Ossirinco, dei qua-
li fu redatta nel 4/5P una f=aphe a cui si rifanno i discen-
denti fino alla seconda met del IIIP1 una ~pikrieis genera-
le di questa categoria avvenne dopo due generazioni, nel
72/JP, e anche questa e ricordata dai discendenti. Dal pa-
piro di Ossirinco inedito citato all'inizio risulta che nel
56/7 e nel 57/8 ebbe luogo un 1 altra operazione riguardante
questa categoria, probabilmente con l'immissione di persona
i cui ascendenti non erano entrati nella lista del 4/5P:
una menzione di tale operazione riconosciamo ora anche in
P Oxy. X 1266.
4. I primi imperatori, e probabilmente Augusto stesso,
dovettero riconoscere i privilegi di altre categorie, come
risulta dalla lettera di Nerone P Med. 70.01 per i katoko~
dell'Arsinoite. Ma, almeno per questi ultimi, non sembra che
vi siano state epikriseis fino a quella che ebbe luogo nel
primo anno di Nerone, seguita da un'altra nel 61/2, in occa-
sione del censimento.
5. Gli apo gymnasiou di Hermopolis Magna sembra abbia-
no avuto una ~pikrisis generale nel 6J/4P.
6. Meno in£ormati siamo per Heracleopolis Magna e per
l'Eracleopolites sappiamo che nel capoluogo esistevano i
metropolitai oktadrachmoi, mentre nel nomo sono attestati

229
i katoikoir la situazione sembra analoga a quella del vici-
no Arsinoite.
7. Degli ~To ~mnasiou di Memfi rimane solo una menzio-
ne incidentale 15 PP Lond. II 317 r.5 p.209).
Ci furono dunque epikriseis generali straordinarie per
le categorie piu elevate {katoikoi, apo eyrnnasiou), e una
per gli ppo tes metropoleos di Areinoe, nel 90/1P, attesta-
ta da P Med. 71.44 e da P Brux. E 8017 = SB VI 916J. Peri
setropolitai di 0ssirinco non c'e, finora, alcuna testimo-
nianza di una ~pikrisis straordinaria.
La situazione varia da nomo a nomo, come e gia stato
osservato, ma non possiamo affermare che l'iniziativa, se
non le modalita, di questi controlli fosse di competenza
dei singoli strateghi. E' vero che l'epikrisis generale del
72/) (0ssirinco, ~po gynmasiou) e ricordata nei documenti
come avvenuta per opera dello stratego Sutorio Sosibio e del
basilicogrammateo Nicandro, ma e probabile che i funzionari
locali abbiano agito in seguito a direttive del prefetto1
in P Brux. inv.E 8017, citato, per l'epikrisis straordina-
ria del 90/1 ad Arsinoe si fa menzione di un'ordinanza del
prefetto Mettio Rufo. Il 90/1 e l'anno che segue immediata-
mente quello di censimento A nel quale affluiecono le denun-
cer si direbbe che l'epikrisis atraordinaria sia stata ordi-
nata per completare e documentare i dati delle denunce.
L'epikrisis straordinaria degli apo gymnasiou di Hermopolis
del-63/4 segue di due anni il censimento, cioe cade nel mo-
mento in cui, terminate le presentazioni delle denunce, se
ne iniziava lo spoglio e la verifica. L 1 epikrisis straordi-
naria degli apmrnnasiou di 0ssirinco nei 72/3 cade in un
periodo di paricolare rigore fiscale, nei primi anni del
principato di Vespasiano. ·
Le epikriseis generali straordinarie sono analoghe a
quelle apographai di proprieta che per convenzione chiamia-
mo"generali": vi sono anzi alcune vicinanze o coincidenze
cronologiche fra i due tipi di controlloa nel 63 vie un•~-
pograhe generale e 1 epikrisis
1 degli apo gymnasiou di Her-
mopolisJ l'apographe generale del1 1 89f90 precede di un an-
no 1•~~irisis generale degli REO tes metropoleoa di Arsi-
noe, ed , insieme con questa e con l'editto conservatoci
in P Oxy. II 2J7 col.VIII r~~27-4J, documento dell'attivita
del prefetto Mettio Ru~o in questo settore dell 1 &mministra-
zione .•
Ma un'altra costatazione s'imponer Augusto dovette dare
le linee della sistemazione in categorie e operare i primi
control!:', mediante 11 censimento, e, per i Greci di 0ssir_in-
co, mediante la graphe del 4/5. Dopo di lui non pare che al-
tri controlli generali siano stati eseguiti fino a Nerone.
Il principato di Nerone ne conta almeno quattro:, nel 55 e

230
nel 60/1 per i katoikoi ad Arsinoe, l'epikrisis del biennio
56/7-57/8 per gli apo gymnasiou ad Ossirinco, quella del
6J/4 per gli apo gymnasiou di Hermopolis. Sotto Vespasiano
e Domiziano hanno luogo 1•epikrisis del 72/J ad Ossirinco
e quella del 90/1 ad Arsinoe. L'epikrisia regolare a 13/14
anni sembra sia stata istituita nal periodo che va dall 1 ini-
zio del principato neroniano agli ultimi anni di quello di
Domiziano. I primi ad averla pare siano stati i katoikoi
dell 1 Arsinoite, per i quali e documentata dal registro del-
l'am~odarco Eraclide (Stud. Pal. IV pp.58 sgg.). Gli apo tee
metropoleos di Arsinoe sembra non l'abbiano avuta se non a
partire dal 90/11 la piu antica dichiarazione che ci sia
pervenuta e del 96 o del 98 ( P Med. Inv. 71.44). Peri!!!.::
tropolitai di Ossirinco la piu antica testimonianza e P Ryl.
II 278 descr. (72-79P)1 per gli apo gymnasiou della stesaa
citta la piu antica menzione di epikrisis regolare e del
79/80 (citata nella dichiarazione di un discendente, P 0xy.
XVIII 2186, 260P)1 puo darsi che abbia avuto inizio a par-
tire dall'epikrisis etraordinaria del 72/J. Per gli apo gy-
mnasiou di Hermopolis e probabile che abbia avuto inizio a
partire da quella generale del 6J/4. Per gli oktadrachmoi
di Heracleopolis Magna siamo completamente all 1 oscuro.
Sembra dunque che l'ordinamento augusteo, ~ondato uni-
camente sui dati del censimento, abbia :funzionato senza mo-
di£iche o ulterior! aggiunte £ino all'inizio del principato
neroniano, che si distingue per una serie di controlli ope-
rati in vari luoghi ea breve distanza di tempo. Puo darsi
che la criei economica, che gia si delineava sotto Claudio,
abbia in£luito nell'indurre a moltiplicare e perfezionare
tali controlli. Si pensi poi all'ondata di Alessandrini che
pervengono alla prefettura o alla procuratela del £isco du-
rante il principato di Nerone e dei Flavi (forse alessandri-
no era Balbillo, certo lo erano Ti.Giulio Alessandro e Nor-
bano Tolemeo e molto probabilmente Lisimaco)s si pensi alla
tradizionale preoccupasione di questi Greci d Alessandria
1
di evitare che indigeni o Ebrei si introducano tra le loro
£iles e probabile cha la loro presenza nelle piu alte cari-
che dell'Egitto abbia contribuito a determinare, certo anche
sotto la spinta di direttive venute da Roma, questo per€e--
zionamento del controllo della popolazione. Con cio va mes-
sa in relazione anche la riorganizzazione delle tribu ales-
sandrine che si ebbe all'inizio del principato di Nerone:
essa dovette essere prima di tutto, nell'intenzione di chi
la promosse, un mezzo per controllare il corpus dei politai
di Alessandria ed espellerne gli intrusi; anch'essa 1 in so-
stanza, una specie di epikrisis generale straordinaria.
Quando cessa la documentazione dell 1 epikrisis?
Peri katoikoi dell'Arsinoite l'ultima dichiarazione

231
e del 195 (BGU III 971), ma abbiamo notizia di questa cate-
goria £ino al 245 ( SB I 4299).
Per gli apo tes metropoleos di Arsinoe 1 1 ultimo docu-
mento e del 235 (BGU XI 2086).
Per gli apo gymnasiou di Hermopolis Magna il documento
piu tardo e del 215 (P Strasb. 219).
Peri metropolitai di Ossirinco si arriva press•a poco
allo stesso periodo1 gli ultimi due documenti (SB VI 9162 =
P Erlangen 311 SB VI 9161) sono di poco posteriori alla Con-
stitutio Antoniniana, la quale dovette togliere gran parte
del suo valore a questa distinzione di categorie.
La documentazione dura piu a lungo, invece, per gli ~po
~mnasiou di Ossirincor l'ultima dichiarazione e del 276
PSI V 457); abbondanti documenti sull 1 esistenza di epikri-
thentes si trovano nel vol. P Oxy.XLI (268-271); una denun-
cia di nascita di un dodekadrachmos apo gymnasiou e di eta
dioclezianea (287P PSI III 164). --
Questi dati confermano quanto sappiamo sulla decadenza
nel III secolo della borghesia cittadina ellenizzata, in par-
ticolare ad Arsinoe, dove un sintomo di cio si coglie anche
nei dati che ci £orniscono le dichiarazioni per 1 1 epikrisis
degli apo tes metropol.eos~ mentre fino alla meta del IIP si
risale semp~e, mediante le denunce di censimento, £ino ai
nonni del ragazzo eEikrinomenon, dalla meta del s•colo in
poi non si va oltre i genitori: il;che signi:fica che la qua-
lita di apo tes metropoleos puo essere anche molto recente,
e che percio molti originari dei villaggi possono essere su-
bentrati a colmare i vuoti nelle :file dei cittadini. L'elle-
nismo invece ha piu salde radici in Ossirinco. L'importanza
numerica e culturale dei discendenti dei Greci di Ossirinco,
come e dimostrata dalla precocita della graphe del 4/5P,dai
:frequenti rapporti con Alessandria e con gli Alessandrini,
dall'alto livello della sua cultura letteraria, cosi lo e
pure dalla persistenza delle istituzioni greche, che in par-
te resistono fino alle soglie dell'eta bizantina.

232
 DIE ANGEBLICHE VERWANDTSCHAFT
ZWISCHEN DEN PTOLEMAISCHEN UNO PHARAONISCHEN
HOFRANGTITELN

Leon Mooren
Aangesteld Navorser N.F.W.O.

Das Phanomen der ptolemaischen Hoftitulatur 1st wohlbe-

kannt. Seit Anfang des zweiten Jahrhunderts v. Chr. finden
wir in den Papyri und Inschriften eine Reihe von Ehrentiteln,
die von hohen k8niglichen Funktionaren gefUhrt werden. Es
begegnen uns OUYY£V£tC, TtP~TOL ~,AOL, ®XL0WlJ.(lTO~UAO.X£C, ~,-
AOL, 6Ld.ooxoL und owµa.T~UA.a.XEC. Dazu kommen spater die
Klassen der 6"6TLUOL Tote OUYY£VtOLV und der ta6TL'l,10L Tot,
npct)TOLC ~(AOLC ■
Hinsichtlich des Ursprungs dieses Systems sind die Meinun-
gen noch immer geteilt. Ptolemaios V. Epiphanes oder einer
seiner Minister -unseres Erachtens wares Aristomenes van
Akarnanien- hat in den neunziger Jahren des zweiten Jahrhun-
derts eine Titelhierarchie kreiert. Es ist klar, dass er da-
bei teilweise vom Titelwesen des dritten Jahrhunderts inspi-
riert worden ist. Damals gab es die Bezeichnungen ~lAOC TOO
~O.OLAtwc, ®XLOWlJ.O.TO<PUAaf; und awuaTocpuAa!;. Aber woher kamen
die anderen Titel ? Und woher starmnte die Idee einer abge-
stuften Hierarchie ?
Schon Max L. Strack hat in seinem 1900 erschienenen Auf-
satz Griechische Titel im Ptolemaerreich (1) die Frage nach
dem Muster der ptolemS.ischen Ehrentitulatur gestellt und das
Problem gleich in einen gr6sseren Zusammenhang eingeordnet.
"Der Entscheid in dieser Frage", meint Strack, "hat etwas
mehr als blesses Sachinteresse. Er liefert wieder einen Bei-
trag zu der grosseren Frage, ob die Ptolemaer zu Pharaonen
1m Lauf der Zeit geworden sind oder nicht" (2). Die Idee
einer Anlehnung an das agyptische Hofzeremoniell wird be-
sanders attraktiv, wenn man bedenkt, dass Ptolemaios Epi-
phanes 197 v. Chr. in Memphis nach §gyptischem Ritus gekront
warden ist. Strack ist jedoch der Meinung, dass der Pharao-
nenhof filr die Einfilhrung des Titelwesens nicht als Medell
gedient haben kannl weil mit der Zeit auch die Tradition hin-
sichtlich solcher Ausserlichkeiten, wie es Titel sind, ver-
schwunden sein muss. Da der genannte Autor auch den zeitli-
chen Abstand zum Hofe Alexanders des Grossen als zu gross
betrachtet, bleibt filr ihn nur der Seleukidenhof als ur-
sprungsort der Ehrentitulatur Uhrig. Hier sei nur bemerkt,
dass die Stracksche Argumentation in eine Sackgasse filhrt.

233
 Denn sollte man das Vorbild fllr die Seleukiden suchen, bliebe
-angesichts der zeitlichen Entfernung von den Hafen der Per-
ser und der Makedonen- nur der Ptolemaerhof ilbrig.
Maria Trindl hat 1942 in ihrer Dissertation Ehrentitel im
Ptolem8erreich (3) die Frage nach der eventuellen Verwandt--
. schaft zwischen den ptolemaischen und den pharaonischen Hof-
rangtiteln wieder aufgenommen und zu zeigen versucht, dass
Strack die Kraft der agyptischen Tradition unterschatzt hat.
Sie weist darauf hin, dass man in den agyptischen Titeln rb
n~wt (Bekannter od~r Verwandter des K5nigs), smr w'tj (eirF
ziger Freund) und smr (Freund) ein Gegenstilck zu den ptole-
maischen Bezeichnungen auyy&v~c, Twv TtPooTwv ~lAC&>vund T~v
~,A.(a)v findet. Die Regierung, so meint sie, hat mit der Ti-
telverleihung nicht nur die Loyalitat der Reichsbeamten der
Krone geg~nilber, sondern auch die Autoritat dieser Funktio-
nare den Agyptern gegenilber zu steigern versucht. Filr die
Xgypter waren Titel ja keine blosse Ausserlichkeiten und man
konnte annehmen, sie wilrden einem durch seinen Titel mit der
Majestat des Konigs verbundenen Beamten bereitwilliger Gehor-
sam leisten. Trindl halt es deshalb filr durchaus moglich,
dass der Schopfer des Systems direkt an das pharaonische Ti-
telwesen angeknilpft hat (4).
Diese Hypothese 1st auch mehrfach von Xgyptologischer Sei-
te vertreten warden (5). Manche gehen noch einen Schritt wei-
ter und sind der Ansicht, dass der Titel ~CAOC TOO eaaLAfwc
auf den pharaonischen Titel smr zurilckgefilhrt werden kann.
Diese Behauptung milssen wir aber entschieden zurilckweisen.
Es gibt keinen unmittelbaren Zusammenhang zwischen den ptole-
maischen ~lAOL und den agyptischen smrw. Die hellenistischen
Konigsfreunde sind makedonischen Ursprungs. Damit sell nicht
gesagt sein, dass die beiden Gruppen ilberhaupt nichts mitein-
ander zu tun haben. Zwischen diesen und vielen ahnlichen
Gruppen, wie z.B. den persischen Konigsfreunden und den ro-
mischen amici principis, kann ein soziologisches Band nach-
gewiesen wtrden. In allen diesen Fallen handelt es sich um
das Phanomen der Gefolgschaft.
Das Muster fur den spateren Titel Twv ~C.>w>v, mit dem im
zweiten Jahrhundert eine Anzahl von Reichsbeamten geehrt wor-
den 1st, hat man ohne Zweifel in dem alten, gemeinhellenis-
tischen Titel ~lAOC ToO eaaLAfwc zu suchen. Ubrigens sei be-
merkt, dass die einfache Bezeichnung smr fur die Ptolem~er-
zeit wenig oder nicht bezeugt wird. --
Dagegen haben die hieroglyphischen und demotischen Quellen
eine nicht unansehnliche Reihe von Agyptern mit dem Titel ei-
nes smr WCtj oder eines rb n~wt ilberliefert. Aus den in der
Prosopographia Ptolemaicaverzeichneten Fallen (7) geht hervor,
dass die Ptolem§er jedenfalls die Moglichkeit batten, diese
Titel zu kennen. Ob sie diese Titel auch wirklich gekannt
haben, 1st natllrlich eine andere Frage.
Das Problem der eventuellen Verwandtschaft zwischen auyy£-
v~, und T~v ~Twv ~lAC&>veinerseits und ::Q nswt und ~mr w~j

234
andererseits kann nur gel6st werden, wenn wir einen echten
Vergleich zwischen den zwei Gruppen ziehen konnen, d.h. wenn
wir auch die Bedeutung und den hierarchischen Wert der be-
treffenden pharaonischen Titel zu bestimmen verm5gen. Es
gibt bis heute keine umfassende Arbeit Uber das sehr reiche
agyptische Titelwesen, ebensowenig eine Prosopographie der
Mgyptischen Titeltrager oder ein systematisches Verzeichnis
dieser Titel (8). Dennoch befinden wir uns in einer besseren
Lage als seinerzeit Maria Trindl. Die Untersuchungen des
belgischen Forschers J. Pirenne, Histoire des institutions
et du droit priv6 de l'ancienne Egypte, dieaus den dreissi-
ger Jahren stammen (9), sind in der Zwischenzeit fortgesetzt
und erganzt warden durch wichtige neuere Studien, von denen
wir insbesondere nennen: W. Helck, Untersuchungen ~ den
Beamtentiteln des agyptischen Alten Reiches (10); ders., Zur
Verwaltung des Mittleren und Neuen Reichs {11); und K. Baer,
Rank and Title in the Old Kingdom. The Structure of the
Egyptian Administration in~ Fifth and Sixth Dynasties (12).
Zu unserer Verftlgung steht auch eine grosse Anzahl von Auf-
s!tzen und Textkommentaren neueren Datums. FUr eine ausfilhr-
liche Bibliographie dUrfen wir auf unseren 1968 erschienenen
Aufsatz Uber die ptolemaischen Hofrangtitel verweisen (13).
Aus dieser Literatur geht klar hervor, dass die beiden ge-
nannten und viele andere pharaonische Ehrentitel immer noch
Gegenstand der Diskussion sind und es wohl auch bleiben wer-
den. Dennoch lasst sich ein Bild gewinnen, das hinsichtlich
des Verhaltnisses zu den griechischen Ehrentiteln zu ziemlich
sicheren Schlussen filhren kann.
zu,rst die Bezeichnung smr w:tj. Meistens wird angenommen,
dass !!!l!:. "Freund" und ~mr w'tj einziger Freund" bedeutet.
Aber wie wir schon in unserem bereits erw!hnten Aufsatz an-
gedeutet haben, sind diese Ubersetzungen umstritten -beson-
ders die Interpretation des Pradikats wCtj ist mit einem
Fragezeichen zu versehen (14). Weiterhin stellen wir fest,
dass smr wctj in der Ptolemaerzeit bestimmt keine Wiedergabe
des Titels Twv npooToov~lA£i>vsein kann. In der Tat kennen
wir einige Personen, die in ein und demselben Text smr w•tj
und auyy£v~c genannt werden : so die Stra tegen Panas {15) und
Pamenches (16). Ihr Hofrang 1st OUYYEV~C; smr tt~ ist ein
traditioneller agyptischer Titel wie "Erbftrrit, Schatzmeis-
ter des K6nigs" usw. ,
Zweitens die Bezeichnung rh nswt. In diesem Fall scheint
sich ein Bedeutungswandel voTtzogen zu haben. Der Titel soll
ursprilnglich ir~-lb.t nswt, "der zu den Angelegenheiten des
Konigs Geh6rige , gelautet haben und dann 1m Mittleren Reich
als rb, nswt gelesen und als "Bekannter des Konigs" interpre-
tiertworden sein (17). In der Ptolemaerzeit, so glauben E.
Drioton (18) und Marie-Louise Buhl (19), stimmt rb nswt mi t
OUYYEV~C uberein. Diese Gleichsetzung wird vonH. De Meule-
naere (20) mit Recht £Ur unbeweisbar gehalten. Wir konnen
hinzufUgen, dass es nahezu ausgeschlossen 1st, die Personen,
die im dritten Band der Prosopographia Ptolemaica mit dem

235
Titel wparent royal" (meistens mit Fragezeichen) versehen war-
den sind, als ouyy£v£t, zu betrachten. Aber H. De Meulenaere
(21) hat berechtigten Grund anzunehmen, dass der Titel !J2.nswt
in der Ptolemaerzeit nicht langer existiert hat und dass das
Zeichen, hinter dem man die Bezeichnung rh nJwt vermutet hat,
vielmehr als "le pr~tre-sem" interpretieff werden muss. Damit
kommt die Idee einer Verwandtschaft zwischen OUYYEV~C und rb
nswt wohl auf sehr schwankenden Boden zu stehen. -
Ein weiteres Gegenargument liefert das Rangverhliltnis der
Titel smr w'tj und rb nswt. FUr das Alte Reich hat man nach-
weisen 7t'B"nnen, dass~ w«tj der h6here von beiden is (22).
Dies gilt auch fUr die Ptolemaerzeit. Es unterliegt keinem
Zweifel, dass die "einzigen Freunde" eine wichtigere Stellung
als die wBekannten des K6nigsw bzw. die "Priester-sem" ein-
nahmen. Aber in der ptolemaischen Titelhierarchie batten die
ouyy£v£tc den Vorrang vor den now~oL ~lAoL.
Damit entfallt eigentlich jeder Grund zur Annahme einer
Entlehnung des ptolern!ischen Titelwesens aus dem pharaoni-
schen. Die Ahnlichkeit, die man auf den ersten Blick fest-
stellen konnte, hat sich bei genauer Untersuchung als ober-
flachlich erwiesen. DarUber dllrfen wir uns nicht wundern. Es
gibt viele Ahnlichkeiten zwischen vielen Titelsystemen, nicht
nur zwischen dem ptolemaischen und dem pharaonischen.
In diesem Zusammenhang soll noch ein anderer Titel berUck-
sichtigt werden, und zwar sn n~wt bzw. sn n pr-'J , dem wir am
Ende der Ptolemaerzeit ziemlich haufig in den hieroglyphischen
und demoti schen Quel len begegnen {23). Nach G. McSller (24), W.
Spiegelberg (25) und K. Sethe (26), denen Maria Trindl (27), H.
Ranke (28) und zuletzt J. Yoyotte (29) zustimmten, wird diese
Bezeichnung in den agyptischen Texten benUtzt, um den Titel
OUYYEV~C wiederzugeben. Obwohl es sich nicht um genau ent-
sprechende AusdrUcke handelt, kann man doch zugunsten der
Gleichsetzung anfUhren, dass der ouyyev~c vom Konig mit 6.6£A-
~6c angeredet wird (30). Aber der Beweis fehlt. Das heisst
mit anderen Worten, dass wir keinen zweisprachigen Text ha-
ben, der .!!! n~wt (bzw. sn n pr-c;) und auyyevfic zusammenbringt.
Wie schon H. De Meulenaere (31) angedeutet hat, konnen gegen
diese Gleichsetzung auch Bedenken vorgebracht werden. So be-
darf es einer Erklarung, warum in einigen Texten die Titel
ouyy£v~c (snjns) und "Bruder des K6nigs" (sn n pr-•!) nebenein-
ander erwahnt sind (32). Ausserdem scheint der Titel sn n~wt
vorhellenistischen Ursprungs zu sein. Nach J.H. Walker (33)
und H. De Meulenaere (34) 1st er bereits von einem Wesir aus
der XXX. Dynastie gefUhrt warden (35). Dagegen meinen W.M.
Flinders Petrie (36) und H. Ranke (37), dass es sich hier nicht
um eine Rangbezeichnung handelt. Mit Amphiomis, dem Sohn des
Pelaias, liegt ein sicherer Fall vor. Er ist u.a. "Erbfilrst,
einziger Freund, Bruder des Konigs und grosser TruppenfUhrer
im Gau von Mendes" (38). Auf Grund der Gleichsetzung der Be-
zeichnungen .!!! n~wt = auyy£v~c und imj-r m't ~ (grosser Trup-
penfiihrer) = O"tPQTflY6c hat H. Ranke (39) das Denkmal des Amphio-
236
mis in die Zeit nach 120 v. Chr. datiert; in diesem Jahr begeg-
net uns der erste Gaustratege, der den ouyy£v£tc angeh6rt (40).
B. von Bothmer, H. De Meulenaere und H.W. MUller (41) bevorzugen
jedoch die Regierung des Ptolemaios II. Philadelphos und weisen
somit die Statue des Amphiomis einer Zeit zu, in der es den
griechischen ouyy£v~c-Titel noch nicht gab. Schliesslich ha-
ben wir eine demotische Inschrift aus Karnak, die uns bekannt
macht mit einem Lysimachos, "dem Bruder der K6nige und Strate-
gen" (42). Zurn Datum bemerkt W. Spiegelberg, dass die Palao-
graphie zur Datierung des Textes wenig beitragen kann: er
setzt die Inschrift z6gernd an das Ende der Ptolemli.erzeit (43)
und stellt den demotischen Titel gleich mit CJUYYEV~C (44). E.
Seidl denkt ebenfalls an die spate Ptolemaerzeit (45), wahrend
H. Sottas keinen Grund sieht, die fruher vorgeschlagene Datie-
rung in das dritte Jahrhundert zu andern (46).
Damit ergibt sich die M6glichkeit einer neuen Frage. Hat
vielleicht die Bezeichnung sn nswt (bzw. sn n pr- 1 ! ) als Medell
fur den Titel auyyEV~C gedient? Beweisen ltisst sich dies
nicht, und die Wahrscheinlichkeit steht auch bier auf der
anderen Seite. Wenn nur ein einziger Titel, fur den man ein
m6gliches Muster namhaft machen kann, Ubrigbleibt, empfiehlt
es sich, die gesamte ptolem8ische Hofrangordnung als rein
griechisch zu betrachten. Nebenbei sei bemerkt, dass es eben-
so wenig Sinn hat, den ptolemaischen ouyy£v~c-Titel auf den
entsprechenden persischen, von Alexander dem Grossen Ubernom-
menen Hoftitel zuruckzufUhren (47).
So bleibt die Frage, wie die spatptolemMische Titelhierar-
chie zustande gekommen ist, offen. Wir haben versucht, sie
in einer der ptolemaischen Ehrentitulatur gewidmeten Arbeit
zu 16sen, die nachstes Jahr in der L6wener Reihe Studia Helle-
nistica erscheinen wird. Hier dQrfen wir uns auf einige Ge-
danken Uber den Kern der Sache beschranken. Strack hat mit
Recht darauf hingewiesen, dass es sich um mehr als die Insti-
tution der Ehrentitulatur handelt. Im Hintergrund steht die
Frage nach dem Verhaltnis zwischen der griechischen und der
igyptischen Kultur im hellenistischen Agypten. Haben die bei-
den Kulturen sich nebeneinander entwickelt oder sind sie zu
einer Mischkultur geworden? Die zahlreichen Untersuchungen,
die mein Lehrer, Professor w. Peremans, auf diesem Gebiet
durchgefUhrt hat, machen die Annahme einer autonomen Enbdck-
lung zweier Kulturen, auch im spatptolemXischen Agypten, wahr-
scheinlich. Die soeben gezogene Schlussfolgerung, dass.die
ptolem§ische Hofrangordnung eine rein griechische Sch6pfung
gewesen 1st, kann nun diese Auffassung unterstutzen.

237
1) rut-t, 55 (1900), s. 161-190; siehe s. 174-175.
2) a.a.a., s. 174.
3) Erschienen in Milnchen (in Maschinenschrift).
4) Siehe S. 55-58, S. 91, S. 137-138, S. 148-149.
5) Siehe z.B. A.H. GARDINER,Ancient Egyptian Onanastica, Oxford, I (1947),
s. 20* : "'!he old suggestion that this title (scil. s:,le friend) was the
origin of the pc-edicate pretoi i;:hlloi... Fran the Egyptological side the
suggestion is very attractive". Vgl. Marie-IDuise BJHL, 'Ihe late F.gyp-
tian Anthrop:,id Stone SarcoF,hagi, ~vn, 1959, S. 178: "It is also
tsrpting to connect -cwv Q)'N41Jwith the F.gyptian &nr w".t ••• ".
1lPJYtWV
6) Vgl. sch:::>nP. IB P~ RENCXJF,Life-W:>rk, First Series, vol. II, Paris,
1903, S. 350-351 (= Proceedings of the Society of Biblical Archaeology,
12, 1890, s. 355-362).
7) Snr w'tj : siehe u.a. Pros. Ptol. I 293 {cf. w. SP:JEGELBER:;, Die dE!l'IO-
tischen Denkrnaler I, s. 94), II 2125 (= III 5690), III 5563 (cf. H. rE
MEIJIENAERE, Ievue d'Egyptologie, 11, 1957, S. 84), 5665, 5679, 5'795, 5808,
5835, 5839; rh nM: siehe u.a. Pros. Ptol. III 5441, 5442, 5540, 5547,
5557, 5603, $40, 5842, 5857.
8) Vgl. s. Sl\I.JNER:N, L'Egyptologie (Coll. "Que sais-je ?" 1312), Paris,
1968, s. 103.
9) Brussel, I (1932), II (1934), III (1935).
10) Gli.k:kstadt- Hamblrg-New York, 1954 (Agyptologische Fbrschun;Jen 18).
11) Leiden- Koln, 1958 (Problane der Agyp1:ologie 3).
12) Chica<p, 1960.
13) Antidorun w. Perenans (Stu:iia Hellenistica 16), Ieuven, 1968, s.
161-180; siehe S. 166 A. 1.
14} a.a.a., s. 167. Siebe Margaret A. KJRRAY, Annals of Archaeology am.
Anthrop:>logy Issued by the Institute of Archaeology- Liverp:,ol, 1 (1908),
S. 23; M. S'I'RAC>1ANS, CE, 36 (1961), S. 23-25. Vgl. au:::h P. IE PAGERE-
Na.JF, a.a.a., s. 350 : "There is mt a p:ll'ticle of eviderce that sner
ever meant 'frierrl' n. -
15) W. SPIEX,ET,EE'RG,Die denotischen Denkrnaler I, S. 94 (= G. MRESSY, Ree.
Trav., 15, 1893, S. 159-161 Nr. 8 und L. IDIOiARIJI', Statuen un:i Statuet-
ten III, s. 34-35 Nr. 690); cf. K. SEI'HE, z.Ks, 58 (1923), s. 149; H. IE
Mf1'lJU-NAERE,RSO, 34 (1959), S. 7.
16) W. SP~:R3, z)Lg, 57 (1922), S. 88-90 (= G. DARESSV, Ann. Serv.,
18, 1919, s. 186-189) : siehe den hieroglyphischen Text, S. 89.
17) Die Bibliographie in unserem oben (A. 13) zitierten Aufsatz, s. 167.
Vgl. H. GCEOICI<E,MDAI(K), 21 (1966), s. 61-62, der es fi1r wahrschein-
lich h!lt, dass bereits im Alten Reich beide Titelformen bestarrlen; siehe
nun H. BRUNNER,Der Bekannte des K5nigs, Stooien zur altagyptischen Kul-
tur, 1 (1974), s. 55-60.
18) Bulletin de l'Institut d'Egypte, 33 (1950-1951), S. 250.
19) 'Ih:! Late Egyptian Anthrop:>id Stone Sarcophagi, l(d:)enhavn, 1959, s.
174, s. 178, s. 205.
20) Un titre rreup:lite mb:x>nnu, Ml!langes Mariette (IFM, Biblio~ d'
~tu:ies 32), 1961, s. 285-290 (siehe S. 285 A. 5).
21) a.a.a.
22) Siebe w. HEICK, Untersuchmlgen w den Be:nntentiteln des §gyptischen
Al ten Reich (Agyp1:ologische Forschungen 18) , Gli.k:kstadt - Hamburg- New
York, 1954, S. 26-28.
23) Siebe w. SPIEGETBE~, Die dem:>tischen Denkmaler I, s. 10 Nr. 31083,
S. 23 Nr. 31092 und S. 24-25 Nr. 31093; III, S. 14-16 Nr. 50044, S. 17-
18 Nr. 50045; ders., ZAS, 57 (1922), S. 88-90 detDtischer Text(= Die
dem::>tischen Denkmaler III, s. 19-20 Nr. 50047) um 62 (1927), s. 32-34;
G. DARESSY,Ann. Serv., 16 (1916), S. 268-270 und 17 (1917), S. 91-93
(cf. H. DE MEUllNAERE, RSO, 34, 1959, s. 10-11); KAMAL,S~les ptol~
na.Iques et ranaines I, S. 19-20 Nr. 22018 und s. 46 Nr. 22050 (cf.
Pros. Ptol. III 5708; H. DE MEUimAERE, a.a.O., s. 6, s. 16, s. 24;
J. i'OYOITE, in Religions en Egypte helleustique et raraine, Paris, 1969,
s. 134); C.E. SANIER-HANSEN, Die religiosen Texte auf den Sarg der Anch-
nesneferibre (= British Museum 32), s. 4-5 (cf. Pros. Ptol. III 5690 und
W. SP~, Ree. Trav., 26, N.S. 10, 1904, S. 50-51); G. :r-DLIER, Die
beiden Totenpapyrus Rhind, I 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11; II 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 8, 9; H. IE MEUllNAERE, RSO, 34 (1959), S. 12-17 : Statue Detroit
51. 83 (cf. B. VCNBJl'lNER - H. IE MEUllNAERE - H.W. tJtlr..r.ER,Egyptian Sculp-
ture of the late Pericd, Brooklyn, 1960, S. 178-179 Nr. 136; J. YaYOITE,
a.a.a., s. 136 und A. 5).
24) Rhirdglossar, S. 19 Nr. 119 und S. 24 Nr. 156.
25) ZAS,51 (1914), s. 70 und A. 4; 53 (1917), s. 128-129; 57 (1922), s.
89 A. 4; 62 (1927), S. 34.
26) zru;, 58 (1923), s. 149-1so.
27) Ehrentitel 1m Pwlem§.erreich, Diss., Miinchen, 1942, s. 217 (siehe
die Liste s. 204-206).
28) JAOS, 73 (1953), s. 196-197.
29) Religions en Egypte hellmu.stique et rana.ine, Paris, 1969, S. 135.
30) Sie U. WII.CKEN, Archiv, 5 (1913), s. 415-416 z. 17 (Boeth:>s=Pros.Ptol.
I 188); A. BERUiND, Inscr. Philae I 19B z. 13 (Iocros =Pros.Ptol. I 195);
Inscr. Brit. Mus. N 1066 Z. 26 (Ptrmrous =Pros.Ptol. I 202) urrl Z. 36
(Hemdcrates =Pros.Ptol. I 191).
31) RSO, 34 (1959), S. 22 A. 2.
32) Siel'E W. SPIEXiEI.BER3, Die detDtischen Denkmaler I, S. 10 Nr. 31083,
s. 23 Nr. 31092 und s. 24-25 Nr. 31093; III, s. 14-16 Nr. 50044, s. 17-
18 Nr. 50045; ders., ZAS,62 (1927), s. 32-34.
33) In W.M. FLINIERSPETRIE, Memplis I (British Scl"a:,l of Archaeology in
F,gypt 1908), IDn::Jon, 1909, 5. 20-21 Nr. 58.
34) RSO, 34 (1959), S. 22 A. 2.
35) Siel'E W.M. FLINIERSPrn'RIE, Memphis I, s. 13 Nr. 39 um.Pl. XXXI-
XXXII (New York, Metrop:Jlitan Museum 08. 205 .1) •
36) Me'tlp1.is I, S. 13 Nr. 39.
37) JN:JS, 73 (1953), S. 197 A. 20.
38} H. PANKE,'!he Statue of a Prolanaic m'PA'lm"OI:of the Merrlesian Ncme
in the Clevelarrl Museum of Art, JACS, 73 (1953), S. 193-198 (Statue
Clevelan:l 48.141).
39) a.a.a., s. 196-197.
40) Siehe Pros. Prol. I 299.
41) Egyptian Sculpture of the Iate Period (700 B.C. to A.O. 100), Brook-
lyn, 1960, S. 122-125 Nr. 97; vgl. scron H. IE MEUllNAERE, RS:>, 34 (1959),
S. 22 A. 2.
42) W. SP:m:;:ELBERG,
Die derotischen Denkmaler I, S. 53-54 Nr. 31137.
43) a.a.a., Kamen.tar.
44) ZAS,57 (1922), s. 91 Nr. 4.
2 39
45) In w. orro-H. :BEN:n&B, Zur Geschichte des Niederganges, s. 102 ·A. 5.
4 6) In M. HOUEMJX, Eb.des d' tipigrapu.e et d 'histoire grecxpes III, S.
385 A. 1. Zu Lysimachos sehe man weiter H. HE»m, Liste des stra~,
S. 40; H. BENGrSCN, Die Strategie III2, S. 222 Nr. 99 urd A. 2.
47) Arrian VII 11.6-7.
PAPYROLOGICAL EVIDENCE FOR PTOLEMAIC AND ROMANTRADE WITH

INDIA. 1 M.G. Raschke

The importance of the material found in the papyri,

ostraca and inscriptions from Egypt for a survey of Ptolemaic
and Roman trade with the East has been much neglected in studies
of the spice and silk trade from E.H .. Warmington's The Commerce
Between the Roman Empire and India, (1928) to J.I. Miller's
The Spice Trade of the Roman Empire 29 B.C. - A.D. 641, {1961).
This oversight is unfortunat~ since the papyrological evidence
in particular can be made to yield some interesting results.
Objects or persons designated as •rv66c or •rv6Lx6c in
papyri and inscriptions are the most obvious starting point.
Unfortunately the matter is not as straightforward as O. Stein,
who first studied the papyrological occurences of these words
in 1923 assumed 1 • For example, Zenon's faithful hound Ta6pwv,
described as •rv66v in a papyrus copy of the epitaph from his
grave (P.CairoZen. IV.59532), is possibly a locally bred
example of a species which originated from India. Dogs from
India occur both in our literary sources and in works of art;
however, they were already in Herodotus' day to be found in
large numbers as far vest as Babylon (Hdt. I.192.4). The
appellation •1v66c may have no more meaning than the Milesian
or Arabian sheep which occur in some of the Zenon papyri (e.g.
P.CairoZen. II.59142; 59195; III.59405; 59430; 59433). On the
other band, the Kd.A.aµoc "Iv6LK6C of P.Lond. II.191 (A.D. 103-
117) which appears in a list of household articles being sold
by a widow. Tertia Ancharenia, in Karanis seems to be a genuine
import. In the papyri x<U.o.µocusually means a tubular rod or
reed (e.g. B.G.U. II.619; P.Tebt. I.83; P.Flor. III.369);
however, I believe that the 6KTW ~AOYfAALOVxCIAd.µoutcooLKOO
here mentioned are bunches of what Dioscorides calls xcU.o.µoc
b EC>w6nc (I.17), i.e. sweet flag or calamus, one of the best
varieties of which was imported from India.
Of considerably greater significance is P.Lond. II.260
= Stud.Pal. I.p.74~ a fragment of a register relating to the
poll-tax prepared by Heracleides &µc;po6d,pxnc in the town of
Arsinoe in A.D. 72-73. Among the 173 male adults listed in
columns 1 to 5 three are in Italy and one, ralwv b Kat ~L66wpoc,
is tv T~L •1v6LK~L (iii.549;579). This provides valuable
documentary evidence for the sea trade with India, otherwise
known only from literature, in particular the anonymous Periplus
ot the Erythraean Sea, which may now be dated to the 60 1 s of the
first century of our era, and from two inscriptions from
Palmyra 2 • Lucian in the Alezander (44) mentions a young
Paphlagonian student, who, while sailing up the Nile, was
persuaded by his friends to embark on a voyage to India. The
Palmyra inscriptions refer to voyages to Scythia - i.e. North-

241
west India - as a regular business venture. P.Lond. II.260 confirms this
general impression.
Of greater interest, but perhaps of less significance, is the appearance
of men and women bearing the names ·rv66c; or ·rw(Jal. In P.Lond. I.131, an
account from A.D. 78-79 kept by a bailiff Didymus, one finds among a
great many other local names of fields reference to the x.C4nof "Iv6LoC
{i.13). Again in P.O:r:y. II.300 of approximately the same date a woman
·r'V6ll<11,the wife of Longinus, writes to a near relative Thaisous, the
wife of Theon, who is the VD.t.XPlO'tTlCat the gymnasium in Oxyrbynchus.
Stein saw these papyri as proof of the role of India in the life of Roman
Egypt. Corroborative evidence for the presence of Indians in Egypt was
once thought to come from the Ptolem.aic period. Flinders Petrie referred
to a device found on a Ptolemaic tombstone as a "Buddhist prayer wheel" and
the beli~f was given greater currency due to its elaboration by Tarn 3 • The
whole theory has now been thoroughly discredited". The Maurya emperor Asoka
records in his thirteenth Rock Edict that he sent an embassy to Ptolemy II 5 •
What this in fact means is uncertain - the ambassadors may never have set
foot in Egypt - but it was for relifious not commercial reasons, as Fraser
suggests, that the embassy was sent • Indian settlers in Egypt or elsewhere
in the Mediterranean world are a different matter. Not only do such
"Indians" appear in the papyri but also in a number of inscriptions. From the
Paneion at El-Kanais there is a dedication of the Ptolemaic period by~
• Iv66c (SB V. 8648); from Abu Simbel we have the graffito of a El~ "Iv66c
from the same period (SB VIII.10019). Outside of Egypt this name occurs in
Asia Minor. L. Robert cites inscriptions from Apollonis in Lydia which
mention ~oC ~1..>.6E~ •r'Vl56cand IO.au6la.·I\l&'i 7
• There are also two
f'unerary monuments from near Kara tepe in Cilicia, one mentioning
M1.~ "I-v6rouc (SEG XII.505) and another •1vf:lrH;KLMlAOOJ {SEG XII.SO?);
finally from Laertes in Cilicia "Iv&:lu[c] Au::>&~:x:,u(SEG XX.84) and from
Adanda in the same region an unknown mal.e,the son of ·1'Vl56!; (SEG XX.92d).
Several possibilities are open. The least likely explanation is that all
these people are Indians. The sites in Cilicia are sufficiently remote from
major trade routes to make the visit by so many Indian merchants or slaves
highly unlikely. Perhaps a better explanation is that "Ivcq; is a local
proper name. A number of other considerations are to be borne in mind.
Ethiopia and India were frequently confused in the ancient poets, particularly
Vergil and Ovid, and in the geographers and historians'. Moreover, Bernand
in an erroneous interpretation of the Adulis inscription of Ftolemy
Euergetes I (OGIS 1.54) suggests that official Ptolemaic documents also
contain a similar confusion of India and Ethiopia. He believes the
Uf;qxivTEC 'n:XA1'f~LKOt >«Jl.AUhoruKOt of ?tolemy in line 10 of the document
to be the same as the tAEQXivrecIv61.MOtof line 169 • In fact this is not
0

true. The inscription clearly indicates that the form.er are the elephants
which Ptolemy took with him on his campaign while the latter are the famous
Indian elephants of Seleucus. Furthermore, the Ethiopians and their
neighbours, the Troglodutoi, as well as the countries of both peoples, are
frequently referred to in inscriptions and papyri from Egypt {e.g. IG Philae
1.12 bis; II.128; 158; OGIS I.54; P.Col.Zen. I.5). It is doubtful if
many in Egypt confused India and Ethiopia.
A different approach is more fruitful. In Hesychius we find the
following definition: •r~· b t6v Utq;av-m dyCJ.N an' At8umCac.
Elephants also spring to mind in another connection. Polybius several times

242
refers to the •1vooCwho ride the Carthaginian elephants in the First and
Second Punic Wars (I.40.15; III.46.?; XI.1.12). Although some have thought
that this indicates that both the elephants and their riders were Indians,
the Carthaginian coins clearly show, as Gowers and Scullard have pointed out,
that Hannibal's elephants were African - with perhaps one exception - and
that the mahouts were African negroes. In fact, as Gsell long ago
recognized, Polybius uses ·r'V6oC not as an ethnic term but as the Greek for
mahout 10 • Hence we have another meaning for "Iv6X;. As Bernand saw, the
"Iv6oC of Egypt may well have something to do with elephant~hunting or
training 1 1 •
The adjectival form of the names • Iv6,LO(; and • Iv6lxn found in the
papyri may perhaps not be subject to such an explanation. What we know
about the names of slaves, freedmen and free men in the Graeco-Roman world
indicates that ethnic names need not signify a country of origin or even
acy other direct connection with the region. A classic example immediately
suggests itself: Q. Caecilius Epirota, a freedman of Titus Pomponius Atticus.
He was natus TusauU (Suetonius, Gram. 16) and is not known to have had any
connection with Epirus. It is thus impossible to draw any definite
conclusions about the trade with India from the names in either the papyri or
inscriptions from Egypt.
More conclusive, perhaps, are Arabian, Indian and East Asian goods
found in the papyri. Of primary importance are spices; from South-east
Asia these are: 6).6-i, CLyyC~L,, ~ and from India: ~,
MOO cot;, HC\pfailOV, ~ and nbtEpL 1 • Sesame seeds or oil, contrary
to what Miller believes, are Egyptian products whose production decreased
from its peak in the third century B.C. but did not entirely disappear
under the Roman Empire, and hence there is no need to ass\DD.eIndia to be the
only ancient source of sesame. From Arabia and East Africa, which cannot
be separated from China and East Asia in an account ot the spice trade,
came UJ4:;,va,MOOla,Al~ and XL~. Fraser has stated that
frankincense and myrrh were acclimatized and developed at an early stage
in Egypt 13 • Efforts were made by Queen ijatsheput, recorded in the famed
friezes of Deir el-Bahri, 0
and several subsequent pharaohs to transplant
frank.incense or myrrh trees to Egypt from the land of Punt 1 ~. There is no
papyrological evidence that this effort succeeded and botanists have
suggested that such a transplantation may well have been doomed to failure
from the start 15 •
The use of myrrh and frankincense, the primary ingredients of incense,
is well attested in F.gypt from the :ehu.acmic and Persian periods and the
occurrence of these two substances in third century B.C. papyri comes as no
surprise (e.g. P.S.I. IV.328; VI.828; 678; P.CairoZen. II.59176). The
appearance of MOOla. and XL~ as relatively common products is
somewhat unexpected 16 • A partial list of household stores ( P. CairoZen. IV.
59536) from 261 B.C., probably belonging to Apollonios, includes larger
amounts of frank.incense, myrrh, cassia and cinnamon than Seleucus donated
as part of a very generous gift to the temple of Didyma a generation
earlier (OGIS I.214). These spices also appear in other accounts from the
Zenon archive and in an account from the Hibeh papyri of slightly later
date (P.Hib. II.2?1). The immediate source of these spices is also knovn.
They were shipped into Egypt from Arabia overland by way of Palestine. Two
Cairo papyri (P.CairoZen. I.59009; 59011) and P.S.I. VI.628, which all seem
to be part of the same document, have been taken to show that an official

2 43
entitled b btt -cfk; AL~LkfiC with his seat in Gaza supervised the import
ot such aromatics. Apparently the elephant-hunting expeditions of
Philadelphos into Somalia had not yet led to a direct importation of cassia
and cinnamon from there. Somalia was the ancient source of these two spices
as almost all classical authors attest. Miller ha.s suggested that Somalia
was simply a transhipment point for both these spices which he believes
were imported into F.a,st Atrica by intrepid Indonesians in outrigger canoes
since the second millenium B.c.1 '. If this vere the ca.se we would have
Chinese and South-east Asian products in the papyri from the early third
century B.C. onward. However. Miller's theory may be classed with those of
his predecessors: Herrmann believed that the Han Chinese sailed to Ethiopia,
Needham placed the same voyage in the Pacific to America; others have
suggested that migrants t"rom the Indus Valley civilization sailed to Easter
Island or that Indonesians settled in the Congo. The doctrine of cultural
diffusion takes many strange forms. Such radical and bizarre inter:pretat~_:>ns
of ancient m;yths and geographic legends ta.ken out of context and fl,ing in
the f'ace of all that we know of Indian and Chinese history as well as East
African and South-east Asian archaeology may be termed by the economic
historian as the modern equivalents of the Greek myths about the
Hyperboreans who lived beyond the Nortb wind: charming and amusing, perhaps,
but without foundation in :fact. Thus in the case of cassia and cinnamon,
as with frankincense and myrrh, it is not the Indonesians who brought
these from the remote East, but rather we are dealing with spices whose
source is East Africa and Arabia. It is important to remember that what
the Greeks called xm,Ca.and k~~ need not necessarily be the same
plant as modern cassia and cinnamon 8 •
In the second and f'irst centuries B.C. the references to cinnamon and
cassia decrease (P. Tebt. I.190; 250), as do t'he number of papyri discovered
to date.· In the late second century we first begin to bear of voyages
f'rom Egypt to India • The epist:rategoi ot the Thebiad, of whom Callimachos
is the most well attested example, seem to have had among their duties
responsibility tor the satety of navigation in the Red Sea. Due to the
lack of' precision of our sources, we cannot accurately define the bodies
of water subject to the control of the bt1.aq:d:t11Y~ ~ 813al6ocMa! tnt
~C -~'8p1c 'MQ.t Iv61.1dlt ~ (e.g. IG Phil.ae I.62; 53; 66; SB I.2264).
0

The advent of the Romans saw some reorganization of the Fastern trade,
although in F,gypt the trade in and production of' aromatics and perfumes
remained a government monopoly as in Ptolemaic times (e.g. SB IV. '11'16;
VI.9090). In the first century after Christ, as all historians of the
trade agree, the sea-borne commerce with India reached its peak 19 • The
coin finds in India, non-existent for the Ptolemaic period, are most
numerous for the period from Augustus to Nero - possibly for reasons not
yet fully grasped. In F.gypt the inscriptions on the Coptus road to Leukos
Limen, the Coptus ostraca and other inscriptions reveal the same intensity
of Fa.stern commerce. After that, in the second, third and fourth
centuries the trade decreased with the progressive weakness of the Roman
Imperial economy-. A number of spices were imported from India by sea:
~, ~, nbt£p1, and H6crtotare the most important mentioned
in the Periplus (39;48;49;56;63). However, the papyri reveal an interesting
f'act. None ot the spices of' Indian origin appear in Ptolemaic or first
century papyri. A tev occur in second century papyri (P.St:rassb. IV.822;

244
Stud.Pal. XX.27) but the vast majority are from papyri and ostraca of
various sorts, accounts, medical recipes and tax documents, from the third
and fourth centuries (e.g. O.Tait 2153; P.Ant. I.32; II.64; B.G.U. I.93;
III.963; P.Lips. 102; P.O:J:y.VI.921; XII.1429; XXXI.2670; P.Princ. III.155r;
155v; P.S.I. XII.1.1264; P.Strassb. II.102; P.Tebt. II.273). To a certain
extent this may be explained by the fact that most of our papyri also come
from this period. Nevertheless, it is clear from these documents that the
use and diffusion of imported spices was not restricted to such commercial
centres as Alexandria, Antioch and Rome but was to be found in Egyptian
towns such as Oxyrhynchus (P.O:r:y. VI.921), Tebtunis (P.Tebt. II.273),
Antinoopolis (P.Ant. I.32), Heracleopolie Magna (B.G.U. III.963) and the
Anteopolite and Lycopolite names (P.S.I. XII.1.1264) - all this long after
the trade with India was thought to have passed its pea.k.20
The historians of Rome's Ee.stern conmerce have also considered India as
the primary source of cotton materials in antiquity. Pliny's statement that
cotton grew in Upper F.sypt is usually interpreted to be of. little imr;,rtance
1
and to refer to a type of cotton not usable in textile manufacturing •
Again the papyri modify the picture. In the second century cotton was
grown at the Oasis of El-Changa (P.Iand. VIII.142) and two business letters
suggest tbat the local product was in relatively widespread use (SB VI.9026;
9028). No definite references to Indian cotton goods occur in the papyri
and the analysis ot the excavated cotton fabrics from F.sypt yields no
firm resul.t.
Neither Indian nor Chinese silk occurs in the papyri from F.gypt although
silk of some sort has been excavated in :Egypt. There may be a reference to
Coan silk, the Coa vestis of the Augustan poets, in P.S.I. III.36A and
P.Dz.a-a 30 may refer, as the editors suggest, to a silk garment under the term
~lCK[t.a.]; however, this interpretation is rather unlikely 22 •
Thus the papyri contain numerous references to but one group of
imported materials, spices. The papyrological evidence reflects, I believe,
the real picture of Ftolemaic and Roman trade with India. Spices of various
sorts formed the bulk of the goods imported. The exotic products which fill
the pages of Warmington and his successors were with a tew exceptions -
notably silk - of limited economic importance and were chiefly for the
consumption of a small group of wealthy merchants, bureaucrats and landowners
resident in the major cities of the Empire: Rome, Alexandria and Antioch.
It is from the papyri that we learn that spices from Arabia and Fast Africa
were imported in large quantities in the Ptolemaic period but that spices from
India are not available outside of the major cities until the second century
of our era. For the next three centuries spices continued to be imported
in large quantities_ from India and their use was widespread among even the
lover orders of society in Roman Egypt. The frequent occurrence.-of these
imported oriental luxury products indicates the very strong demand for
these goods and also suggests that Professor Preaux was correct in refuting
theories about the economic dee~ of Egypt under Roman rule in the second
and third centuries of our era 2 •
• This paper has been abbreviated to conform with the space requirements
set forth by the editors. l«>st footnotes have been omitted.
1 "Indien in den griechischen Papyri." Indologica. 'Pragensia, I (1929),
34-57.
2
H. Seyrig, "Inscription relative au commerce maritime de Pal.m;yre,"

245
Mdlanges Frana Cumont, Bnu:elles, (1936), 397-402; idem "Inscriptions
Grecques de l'Agora de Pal..myre," Syna 22, (l94l), 259-262.
3
F. Petrie in a letter discussed in W. Sim.peon, "The Buddhist
Praying Wheel," JRAS (1898), 873-875; W.W. Tarn, "ptolt!lllY II," JEA 14,
(1928), 251;,idem Hellenistic Civilisation, 3rd ed. N.Y., {1952), 248.
1t P.Fraser, Ptol.emaic Ale:candria, Oxford (1972), I.181; II.312.
5
R.Thapar, Asoka and the Decline of the Maueyas, Oxl'ord, {1961), 256.
6
P.Fraser, op.cit. I.180-181.
7
L.Robert, Villes d'Asie Mineure, Paris, (1935), 70-71.
8
For f'Ul.l documentation see J.Andre, "Virgile et les Indiens," REL
27, (1949), 157-163. On the contusion in the prose authors see T.K.Joseph,
"'India' a Continuation of F.gypt and Ethiopia," JIB 26, (1948), 201-207,
On the use of Ethiopian as a generic term for black see F.M.Snovden, Blacks
in Antiquity: Ethiopians in the Greco-Roman&:peM.enee, Cambridge Mass. ,
(1970), 4-5. Al.so on the conf'ueion with India see ibid 101.
9
IG Phil.a.e I.52, note on lines 4-5 p. 310.
10
S.Gsell, Histoire ancienne de l 'Afrique du Nord, Paris (1915),
II.408.
11
IG Phil.ae I, pp. 310-311; so al.so F.W.Walbanlt, Conmentai,, on
PoLybiusi Ox.ford, (1957), I.102.
1
On these see J.I.Miller, The Spioe Trade, 34-97. Other Indian
spices rarely occur in the papyri: ~ (P.Cb:y. XII.1429; P.Stm.ssb.
102); aotllLov (P.D:l:y. XXXI.2570); ~ (P.Ozy. XXXI.2570).
13
P.Fraser, op.cit., I.175 cf. A.C. Johnson, RomanEgypt to the
Reign o{ Diooleti.an, (ESAR vol. II), 340.
i+ In general see R.O.Steuer, Nyrrhe und Stakte, Vienna {1933), 31-48.
The most recent reconstruction based on new material is W.S.Smith, "The Land
of Punt," JARCE 1 (1962), 59-61. On the1:1~expeditions see D.M.Dixon, "The
Transplantation of Punt Incense Trees in F.gypt, 11 JEA 55, (1969), 55-65 and
F.B.Hep~r, "Arabian and African Frankincense Trees.'' JEA 55 (1969), 69-70.
5
D.M.Dixon, JEA 55 (1969), 60-61; 63-64; F.N.Hepper, JEA 55 (1969),
71.
16
P.Hib. II.211; P.S.I. V.48~; VI.628; P.Cau-oZen. IV.59536; A.E.
Hanson, "A Ftolemaic List of Aroma.ta and Honey, 11 TAPhA 103 (1972), 161-165.
17
J.I.Miller, The Spioe Trade, 153-172.
18
B.Lauter, Sino-Irani.ea, Chicago, (1919), 542-543.
19
E.H.Warmington, Ccxm,erce, 39-49; 78-83; M.I.Rostovtzeff, The Social
and Economic Histoey of the Roman F>lrpire, Oxford, (1953), I.91; 93; M.P.
Charlesworth, Trade Routes and Corr,nerceof the Roman Empire, Cambridge, (1924),
6f--62; R.E.M.Wb.eeler, Rome Beyond the Imperial Prtontiers, London (1954),130;
J. I.Miller, The Spice Trade, 217-214.
20 cf. J.Schvartz, 11
L'EDpire Romain; 1•:t.gypte et le commerce oriental,"
Annalee (ESC) {1960), 20.
21
E.H.Warmington, Cormrerce, 210-211.
22 On the suggestion that P.S.I. 36A contains a reference to Coan
silk see D.Mal!;ie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor, Princeton, (1950), II.818.
23
G.Milne, "The Ruin of Egfpt by Roman Misgovernment," JRS 17, (1927),
1-13 cf. C.Preaux, "La Stabilite de,l't.gypte aux deux premiers siecles de
notre ere, 11 CE 31, (1956), 311-331.
 XIV INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF PAPYROLOGISTS

(University College London: 29 July 1974)

THE SAQQARAPAPYRI

I. The Egypt Exploration Society excavations in the

Sacred Animal Necropolis at North Saggara and the
discovery of the papyri by G. T. Martin

II. The Greek Papyri by E. G. Turner

III. The Aramaic Papyri by J. B. Segal

IV. The Demotic Papyri: Introductory by H. S. Smith

V. Demotic Literary Papyri and

Letters by H. 5. Smith

VI. Demotic Legal Papyri by R. H. Pierce

VII. The physical characteristics of

the Papyri by W. J. Tait

VIII. The archive of ijor by J. D. Ray

247
 I. The Egypt Exploration Society excavations in
the Sacred Animal Necropolis at North Saqqara and
the discovery of the papyri
by G. T. Martin

It is my very pleasant duty first of all to welcome

the delegates of the XIV International Congress of Papy-
rologists to University College London. The purpose of
this meeting is to give the members of the Congress an
idea of the discoveries of documents made over the past
decade by the Egypt Exploration Society in Egypt.
The site of the discovery of the documents which
will be discussed today is the desert of Saggara, the
necropolis of ancient Memphis, which latter place lies
on the west bank of the Nile, some twenty miles or so
south of modern Cairo. The Sacred Animal Necropolis in
which they were found is the northerly extension of the
great Serapeum complex, which will be familiar to all
papyrologists, classical scholars and historians present,
as the burial place of the Apis Bulls. The area allocated
to the Egypt Exploration Society of London by the Egyptian
Antiquities Department comprises part - and a very rich
part it has turned out to be - of the Animal Necropolis
at Sagqara, and over the past ten years we have virtually
exhausted it from the archaeological point of view. How-
ever, it is certain that the Sacred Animal Necropolis
extends south-westwards from our work tCNards the Sera-
pewn. We read in texts of burials of rams, fragments of
mummies of which we have found in our excavations, and
it is possible that the installations connected with their
burial lie in that area. Immediately to the west of our
work, adjacent to the Serapeum-Abusir highway, there are
certainly burials of bulls, their catacombs being noted
in Richard Lepsius' Denkmaeler aus Aegypten und Aethio-
pien. On the eastern escarpment of the necropolis, over-
looking the Nile Valley and the ruins of ancient Memphis,
there are catacombs of dogs, cats, and more ibises, still
largely unexplored and wirecorded. In that area too,
opposite the pyramid of Teti, lies the Anubieion, some-
times called the 'Greek Serapeum' or the 'Prison of
Joseph', about which very little is known, except that it
must have provided, amongst other things, the ceremonial
approach to the Serapeum from the east. Thus, profitable
future work in the Animal Necropolis seems limitless,
with the possibility of future finds of papyri and ostraca
relating to the animal cults, and, one would like to hope,
mentioning historical events and personages, like the
Archive of Hor from the Ibis Courtyard, about which you
will shortly hear from Mr. Ray.
248
 Between 1964 and 1973 the excavations of the Egypt
Exploration Society in the Animal Necropolis revealed
the catacombs of the Ibises, the Falcons, Osiris the
Baboon, and Isis, Mother of Apis, with the foundation
of their chapels serving their mortuary cults.l In 1966-7
the late Prof. w. B. Emery uncovered a mass of papyrus
fragments from a courtyard dump outside the entrance to
the catacomb of the cow mothers of the Apis. Over 750
fragnents have been relaxed, registered, photographed,
glazed and given preliminary study. Most are in Egyptian
demotic, others in hieratic Egyptian, Aramaic, and Greek.
In the debris of the main Temple terrace further docu-
ments were uncovered, including demotic and Greek, to-
gether with a few Arabic fragments. Between 1971-73 I
directed the excavation of an area south of the main
Temple area, where in two separate rubbish dumps over
250 more papyrus fragments and complete docwnents were
found. In the courtyard of the South Ibis Galleries over
60 ostraca in demotic and Greek were located by the late
w. B. Emery in 1965-6 and by me in 1971-2. These relate
to the career of a certain scribe, Hor of Sebennytos, and
date from the Second century B.C. Other ostraca, not yet
studied, were fotmd over the whole site. Most of the
documents belong to the Sixth-Second centuries B.c., and
the majority appear to date from the Fourth, the probable
date of the foundation of the main Temple complex. A few
Greek, Coptic and Arabic documents belong to the Christian
reoccupation of the site, from about the Fifth century
A.O.

The discovery of papyrus documents and ostraca in

such quantity and of such diverse character is of some
importance, and these are of further interest in that they
come from the northern part of the country. Not being a
papyrologist or demotist, or even an authority on the
classical languages, my only claim to be occupying the
chair on this pleasant occasion is that I was present when
most of the material came out of the ground, I excavated
some of the documents myself, including the early Greek
texts, and much of the Archive of Hor. Most of the
papyri have at least passed through my hands as I relaxed
them under field conditions so that they could be read.
The scheme for publishing these finds - enormous in
quantity and of enormous interest - will emerge during
the course of the discussion and in the papers, to which
we shall now turn.
1. Preliminary Reports appear in J.E.A. 51, 3-9;
52, 3-8; 53, 141-145- SS, 31-35, 56, 5-11;
57, 3-13; 59, 5-15.
249
 II. THEGREEK
PAPYRIFROMSAQQARA
by E. G. Turner

Ex Africa e~r ali9,uid novi. The Greek papyri found at

Sa9~ar• between 197 and 1972 total 33 in number, plus oetraka -
about 38-40items altogether, according to whether you accept
certain joins, and reckon separately drafts of the same letter.
All except one - a piece of a Greek medical book, aa yet unidenti-
fied, or iv/iii B.C. - are documentary in character. They are
either of early or of late date: by 'early' I mean ~th or 3rd
century B.C., by 'late' ~th to 6th century after Christ. One
might well expect the 'early' finds to link with the great terrace
-wall and temple of Nectanebo II, and the 'late' ones to be a
deposit of the heroic Christian pioneers who destroyed that temple,
smashed the demona of that place, and founded a Christian church
on its site. We cannot, of course, insist that the texts were
actually all written at Sa99ara: a large but damaged document of
the middle of the 3rd century B.C. is headed 'Totals for the Salt
Tax (0.A.,x~) for the Cynopolite nome'. This at least was dropped
by a careless visitor.

The very first items of Greek found seemed to me palaeographi-

cally to belong to the 4th century B.C. The letter-fonu are
robustly-made capitals, sometimes ungainly, among which a square form
of E, an epigraphic form of R , and BO■etimea a four-barred. 2: attract
attention. In general they are what an intelligent extrapolation
of Wilcken'e 11aaterly analysis (UP~ I pp.97-8) of the Berlin Timo-
theus roll and the Artemiaia papyrus in Vienna {I 494) would predict
for the 4th century. Moreover, the fact that the dated demotic
and Aramaic papyri found during these years at Sag,;ara are also of
the 5th and 4th centuries B•.c. lends aupport to this early dating.
We note also that the Timotheua wae found on thia very same ridge,
in a cemetery above Abuair; and that Wilcken has made it very probable
that the Artemisia papyrus was found in the Serapeum westwards, just
across the desert valley. The great city of Memphis and ita organ-
ized body of Hellenomemphitea might be more likely than moat places
in Egypt to leave traces of its Greek settlers in these centuries.

One further palaeographical feature supports this date: several

of the Greek texts use as numeral system not the 'Mileaian' notation
(which employs the letters of the Greek alphabet plus stigma (6) and
qoppa (90)), but the acrophonic notation which uees the initial
letters of e.g. X({A~oL) = 1000, H(exa~ov)= 100, ~(ixa) = 10, D(iv~€)
= 5. I know of no othe1· Greek papyri in which this method ls
employed. '~ethod' I call it rather th~n 'aystem', since different
toms are employed for s~all aums and especially for fractions of a

250
c1raobaa. Tbe atucl1M at LR. To4 ■ bow tb&t 1n Greece md the Aegean
partioular toru attaoh to particular looaliti••• Jletentioa ot
ditterent fora 1n lgpt ia perhap ■ a pointer to the origln of those
•ho uae thea.

Th••• texts will 'be publiahlld in a separate TOlUM ot the aeriea

dnoted to the doouw.ta and manta ot Saqfi&ra• One ot ;tbea ia
beiJlg publiabe4 in adTanoe in .TEA.60 (197'e-) 239ft (with plate), and a
tn worda may be aid about it here, tor it oa 'be abown to be the
earlieat aurYin.ng Greek docuamtary pap7,l'U ■• Three line ■ at Greek
h&Te been wr1 tten w1th a rwah ODa large sheet or papyxua, 36 cm. bro ad
x 14-•• high, in large capital.a (1,t.i,t-,.~ are partioularly noteworthy).
The ten Nada:
nnDn'OY
11BIIAPAIIOP!IDJ:8il
KB
ADA IIPII2t 'fO C'JISNI
llcuuc-rou, aa 11111 A. Swideralt pointed out to ■e, 1a u likeq to be
the genitive ot nominative Dsuuc-mc: •• ot Ilsuuc'n')c ( the onq tona in
Raaenbuch or Qo.au.atioon); and Juat the man needed ia to bmd in
Peukeataa IOD ot Jlakartatoa, lett behind 1n 331 B.C. by ilexander the
Great aa Joint ooaaander 1n chief ot Ip-pt (Arriu 3.5.5). The text
'fl&7 therefore be translated '(Order ot) Peukeataa. Jfo-one ia to paaa.
The ohaaber ia a prieat' a' • It 1 ■ 1n taot a notice intended to be
pinned up (no doubt many auoh will have been written on papynia, but
few have aunind). Ita tull fiavour aigbt be given by the tollow1Dg
verai01u 'By order ot the ooeeender-1D-ahiet. Out ot b~nda to troopa.
Sao.red. area' •

251
 III. The Aramaic Papyri
by J. B. Segal

These are not the first Aramaic papyri to have been

foWld at Saqqara; in earticular, we ~ave already the
texts published by Aime-Giron in 1931 and by Dupont-
Sommer in 1948. 2 The present papyri were discovered in
three areas of the site. They number 203 fragments in
all, and 233 texts. Unhappily they are very seriously
mutilated. As many as 130 contain only one or two or
three complete words; only about 45 have more than three
lines of any length. Some papyri with a longer text are
in so bad a condition that the writing is scarcely de-
cipherable. In all, about 30 texts yield a satisfactory
context out of the total of 233.
This is a disappointing harvest. But palaeographers,
like farmers, learn to be philosophical and to make the
most of their meagre resources.
First let me remark on the dating of the papyri.
They are written in a wide range of handwriting. We have
the forms of letters familiar to us from Elephantine,
another hand is somewhat rough or vulgar, a third is well-
roWlded. I have not yet carried out an exact study of the
scripts. But one should be sceptical about the value of
this study as a som1d criterion for the dating of the
texts; it may rather reflect variations of social strata
or geographical or individual idiosyncracies.
Internal evidence is more helpful. If we assume that
numbered years in these texts refer to regnal years, then
the mention of the 37th and 38th years in one very frag-
mentary papyrus should lead us to Artaxerxes I - less
probably to Psammetichus I or Amasis II of the Saite
dynasty. In another docunent we have the phrase (to which
I return later), 'In the 5th year of King Darius •••. '.
It may be concluded, then, that the eight dated texts in
this collection were written between 657 and 418 B.C. At
present I am inclined to favour the period 459-418 B.C. -
from, that is, the reigns of Artaxerxes I to Darius II -
and this appears to receive support from the spelling of
certain words.
Let me turn to the contents. The onomastic data are
of interest. My statistics are provisional, but it is
clear that the great majority of personal names - about
70 - are Egyptian. Only 4 or 5 are obviously Iranian.
About 12-15 are Semitic, mostly compounds of the divine
names Bethel, Nabu and Nanay. The term 'Aramaean' occurs
twice. There are several cases in which the father carries
a Semitic name but the children an Egyptian name - and this
may be a sign of assimilation; but I believe that there is
at least one exanple of the exactly opposite development.
There are several allusions to the administrative
area degel. Among the products that are mentioned in the
texts are nitre, spelt and flour. Twice we have reference
to producers of oil, seeds and cotton - both times in that
order.
There is much preoccupation with slaves. Their names
are either Egyptian or Semitic. We find frequently the
epithet bar bayta, 'born within the household'; and where
a man has this description his father's name is not given.
One text seems to be concerned with the theft of a
Cretan slave named TB~ij§ and his daughter. A search had
been made and the slave had been seen walking abroad. Both
father and daughter were to be produced; he could be
identified because he had been marked with a tattoo sign.
Another document about slaves and their release is in the
form of a petition followed by a counter-petition. A small
horizontal line divides one -statement from the next.
Two brief and obscure papyri deal with inheritance.
others are concerned with financial matters. One evidently
records the payment of interest; another sets out a list
of persons from whom money had been collected, and then
details the headings of the expenditure. In four papyri
the subject is taxation. One reads:
2 •••• the surplus of. money that existed in the
6th year was •••
3 •••• 2 kerashin 3 ballurin inclusive.
4 ••.• the money that was added to the tax of
Pete> 1s-1 son of •••
5 ..•• that was the total of the 6th year, pallurin
. ..
6 •••• tax of the men who will be added in the 7th
year •••
7. • •• son of Petosirt producer of oil, seed
8. four nagde of cotton whose names . ..
2 53
 Another group of papyri deals with legal matters.
At least two are petitions. One reports a case of alleged
wrongful assault - the writer had been struck six times on
the soles of his feet.

Finally, we have a few papyri that have bearing on

historical events. One refers to the transport of food,
and it mentions an Arab or Arabs and 'the region of NBYH'.
This name is interesting; it occurs also in the Bible as
a gentilic proper name and there too it is associated with
Ishmaelites.3 However, the word Crb in this papyrus may
be interpreted in a manner that hasnothing to do with the
ethnic term Arab.

Another text may allude to the residence of King

Darius. The interpretation is uncertain; tentatively we
may read:

1. at TBMWSN/•••

2. caused the judges to take an oath.

3 .••• {NN)Yize(?) the scribe{?) that confirmed

them. Thus it is written:

4. ... the 5th year of King Darius at TijMWSN

V
5. he sent to G~PT the Governor. Thus it is
written... D

The most important document in this category is a text

that extends to 17 lines, unfortunately all of them sadly
mutilated. It is an official letter about Ionians and
Carians in the harbour. Those who had been arrested were
to be guarded, and careful watch was to be kept on the
entrance by well-chosen men. The supply of food to the
ships was to be withheld.

This brief summary has not touched on matters that are

of concern only to specialists. There are, for example, a
few problems of philology. And the papyri contain a number
of obscure technical terms, mostly Iranian and some of them
not found elsewhere, whose interpretation will be of inter-
est to students of this period.

Itremains for me to add that I hope to complete the

initial work of editing these papyri in 1975. They may
then appear in published form in 1976.

254
 ,, , ,,
1. N. Aime-Giron, Textes arameens d'E~te,
Cairo, 19 31.
,
2. A. Dupont-Sonmter,
,
d'epoque saite ., 'Un papvrus
decouvert
arameen
"a Saqqarah', Semi-
tica i, 1948, 43-68.
3. Gen. 25:13, 28:9, 36:3, lChr. 1:29, Is. 60:7 •

2 55
 IV. The Demotic Papyri: Introduction
by H. S. Smith

The demotic papyri are diverse in character and

date. They do not constitute a single archive or part
of a temple library. While they certainly do comprise
groups of documents concerned with, the affairs of indi-
viduals, it cannot be assumed that all the documents
relate to the site or the people living and working
there, though some certainly do. The majority of the
registered documents are relatively small fragirents;
few docwnents are complete.
Temple day-books listing income and expenditure,
accounts, lists, and business documents comprise about
half the total number of papyri, and are yet to be
studied. Legal and administrative documents account for
about a quarter of the papyri (editors: R. H. Pierce
and G. R. Biggs). Letters and pleas to deities in the
form of letters form only about a tenth of the material,
but include many of the best preserved documents because
they were found rolled {editors: H. S. Smith, W. J.
Tait and G. R. Biggs}. Literary texts are few; they
include stories, mythological stories and didactic com-
positions (editors: H. S. Smith and W. J. Tait). Mis-
cellaneous texts include fragments of dream-books,
calendars of lucky and unlucky days, omina and magical
compositions (editor: J. D. Ray) and a medical text
(editor: G. R. Biggs). The late hieratic papyri com-
prise fragments of funerary books {editor: w. J. Tait).
The earliest absolutely dated document from the
main temple precinct is dated to year 11 of Darius
(probably Darius I), the latest to an uncertain year of
Alexander (probably Alexander the Great}, though palaeo-
graphical evidence suggests that a few papyri of slightly
earlier or later date may be present. From the northern
dumps the earliest absolutely dated document belongs to
year l of Tachos, the latest to the reign of an unidenti-
fied Ptolemy, but here again earlier and later documents
may be present. As documents dated by regnal years are
very sparse and the palaeographical dating of Memphite
demotic hands is very unsure, caution is very necessary;
the editors' present impression is that a considerable
proportion of the papyri belong to the fourth century
B.C.
 v. Demotic Literary Papyri and Letters
by H. S. Smith

Fragments of seven pages have been preserved of a

demotic story concerning Harmakhroou, Nanufesokhme, and
the prophet of Horus, Lord of Letopolis. The pages, of
which there were originally at least sixteen, were num-
bered at the foot. The story might be termed a romance;
the girl Nanufesokhme refuses to be separated from her
lover, even when he has to go into hiding on the desert
for several years, because of an evil which has befallen
the prophet of Horus of Letopolis, to whom he is related.
The prophet with all his fellow priests are ordered to be
burnt alive on a brazier at the palace gate by Pharaoh,
like Harsiese and his fellow-conspirators in The Instruc-
tions of 'Onkhsheshongy: but Nanufesokhme and her lover
are discovered and evidently rescued by the agency of
Harmakhroou. In one incident, magic may be used. Two
setme-priests appear in the story: one, named Ptahhotpe,
is evidently dead at the time of the action: another,
unnamed, speaks as a character in the story. The text
could therefore belong to the cycle of stories of Setme
KhaeIRl,fese, the High Priest of Memphis, but may well not
do so. The style and language is similar, though the
hand must be over two centuries earlier.
A second story with nwnbered folios in a similar
hand must originally have comprised a minimum of twelve
pages. The text of the recto appears to concern a child
who is doomed to die, and the efforts of its mother to
rescue it, in the course of which she appeals to Isis,
whose name she has apparently cursed. Various mythical
creatures appear, including a winged beetle, and it is
clear that magic is employed. ·The verso certainly continues
the same tale, but here the story concerns the rescue of
Pharaoh, who has been spirited away to the desert where he
is held captive by the agency of various strange animals
through the ill-will and probably the evil magic of the
steward of his palace. Merib is however advised, probably
in a dream, to mount a certain horse and to ride it with-
out rein; the horse carries him first to the palace,
whence the wicked steward follows him, and then to the
desert where Pharaoh is; by the action of the animal
guardians, the wicked steward is identified as the culprit
and Pharaoh released. If Merib is the same as the son
of Neneferkaptah in the First Story of Setme Kha'emwese,
then this story may also belong to the Kha'emwese cycle:
certainly, its reliance on magic to resolve the plot is
reminiscent of both First and Second Kha'eIIMese.
257
 Fragments of stories include an incident concerning
Tjimoou and the Lord of the East, an incident retailing
the making of a cat and a hawk of wax to spy upon some-
body, a tale about Harudja, a fragment including a ref-
erence to the Pharaoh Chephren, and a fragment of a
narrative including the Persian name Darius, which could
have some relation to the story cycle of Inaros and Petu-
bastis. None of these narratives are hitherto known to
Egyptian literatura. While nugatory in themselves, they
emphasize that native Egyptian literature in the fourth
and following centuries was much more varied and exten-
sive than has been hitherto generally recognized.
Mythological fragments include two, possibly three,
portions of a text which related a part of the cycle of
the Contendings of Horus and Seth, though not that part
which is preserved in the Chester Beatty Papyrus. The
principle incident concerns a judgement of the sun-god,
executed by Thoth, by which Lower Egypt is assigned to
Horus and Upper Egypt to Seth, but when Seth is crowned
he proves unacceptable to Isis, while she recognizes
Horus as the rightful heir. This is to the best of my
knowledge the only example of a demotic text of a liter-
ary work already known to be extant in the New Kingdom.
Didactic texts are represented principally by a composi-
tion in which various birds settle on various bushes the
names of which begin with the same letter of the alpha-
bet; they then fly off to various countries or foreign
places the names of which also start with the same sound.
Parallel jingles for pedagogic purposes of course are
known in many languages: possibly this text may give an
indication of the order in which the Egyptians arranged
the sounds of their alphabet.
A medical text deals with conditions of the rectum;
a fragment of a dream book lists dreams involving copu-
lation; fragments of magical recipes and a book of Lucky
and Unlucky Days are also preserved.
It is not possible to give here an adequate accowit
of the varied interest of the letters from the site.
These include both incoming and outgoing correspondence,
as well as letters probably belonging to Memphite offi-
cials with no direct connection with the Sacred Animal
Necropolis. They include two archives. One comprises
thirteen documents concerned mainly with the business
affairs and income of a man named Pinhor; they give a
fairly vivid picture of the delays and difficulties
involved in dealing with the bureaucracy of the times,
perhaps the late fourth or third century B.C. An archive
of three docwrents belonged to Harhotpe: incoming letters
concern a building project and money affairs, while an
amusing letter from Harhotpe to "his master Pediese"
(who may have been his father) complains that he has not
been able, as exhorted by his correspondent, to write
about the temple, as he has been given no clothing-issue,
and therefore presumably has not been able to enter the
tenple properly garbed. He ends the letter with the
complaint that he is starving: the whole letter is some-
what reminiscent in tone of the letters of Hakanakhte
1600 years earlier. Another fourth century letter from
an agent in the Delta reports the arrest of a man to the
prophet of Osiris in Memphis, and asks, since the prisoner
claims that he would be killed if returned to Menphis,
for permission to release him. Other letters complain of
the financial or legal troubles in which the writers are
enmeshed, and ask for the aid or presence of their corres-
pondents. An early letter concerns the delivery of lances
to an army commander of the First Persian period with a
foreign name. Others deal with money, loans and business
transactions, while by far the largest class seem mainly
to be concerned with eliciting replies assuring the writer
of the health of his family. Certain letters concern
the affairs of the necropolis. One requests a certain
Djeho to look after the mwmnies of the inhabitants of the
Greek quarter in Menphis which are being brought up to the
necropolis. It appears to request that they be put in a
"place", i.e. perhaps a commwtal mortuary chapel, rather
than be buried, claiming that they have the authority of
an oracle of the god Imhotep. Another letter appears to
give the instructions of a dead man, for his burial
through a letter written by a friend of his.
Pleas to deities were written in the form of letters,
and range from a request that the god Osorapis should
cause a woman to be anathematized before all her acquain-
tance, down to a request to the same deity asking advice
whether to sell a female ass and its foal.
This brief sketch perhaps gives some impression of
the light that these fragmentary Saqqara documents, tanta-
lizing as they are, can throw on the social and domestic
life of the Egyptian capital and its environs just before
and just after the arrival of Alexander the Great in
Egypt. They may be of some value for cortparison with
Greek sources of the Ptolemaic period.

259
 VI. Demotic Legal Instrwrents and Protocols
by R. H. Pierce

Of the approximately fifty fragments among the

Saqqara papyri that may with some assurance be classified
as parts of legal instruments many are small indeed, and
few constitute so large a part of a single text as to
enable one with confidence to define the precise nature
of the contracts they record. The majority appear to be
scribe-and-witness instruments of the type commonly
fowid among texts of the Ptolemaic Period, but there are
a few docwrents that may be of a somewhat different format
and that record agreements between private persons and the
representatives of temple institutions. The texts record
undertakings concerned with land, houses, money, and
grain: one is likely to be a "self-dedication", and
several may be leases.
The fragments found between 1964 and 1970 are of
great importance owing to the fact that, as far as one
can tell, they date to the 29th and 30th Dynasties and
therefore represent Egyptian notarial practice in Memphis
during the Fourth Century B.C. prior to the Greek conquest.
Even in their fragmentary condition they provide welcome
new information. For example, one text (SAK.H.5.D.137}
makes it possible to trace the executive phrase n btr lwt!
!!!!!, back into the reign of Nectanebo I. Had these texts
survived in anywhere near a complete condition, they would
have given us an invaluable glimpse into the state of
contracts in the capital during a period which is very
thinly documented. They are at once familiar in their
phraseology and yet difficult to restore in the precise
wording of their formula.ries - a fact that may indicate
a certain difference between notarial practise under the
last native rulers and that of the Ptolemaic Period.
The fragments of instruments found between 1971 and
1973 may be somewhat later in date than those found in
earlier seasons (SAK.1971/2 - D.P.l dates to a Pharaoh
Alexan(der)), though there is nothing in their palaeo-
graphy or contents that requires a date later than the
early Ptolemaic Period. Of particular importance is
SAK.1971/2 - D.P.132, which preserves on its recto and
verso copies of at least seven distinct undertakings by
different private individuals to one and the same temple
agent to assume responsibility for parts of temple endCM-
ments for the span of one year.

260
 The "protocols" belong to the finds made between
1961 and 1970. Some of them are explicitly dated to
the reigns of Hakoris and Nectanebo I, and all seem
to fall within the reigns of the last native Pharaohs.
They consist of a series of concise entries, there being
several on a single papyrus. They open with a date
followed by a statement of the Pharaoh's presence in the
Palace and then continue with an objectively styled
account of the proceedings. The cases considered range
from disputes about inheritance to robbery by persons
unknown. What body sat in judgement does not emerge
from the texts, which merely report that "they" took
cognizance, said, found, decreed, etc. Notwithstanding,
the facts that the texts record the presence of the king,
or in one case, of his son, in the Palace and that one
entry (SAK. S.HS.D.124) refers to twenty-two men (wit-
nesses?) who were to be taken to the Palace suggest the
exercise of royal jurisdiction.
Lastly, SAK. HS.D.296 preserves a recognizable frag-
ment of a legal manual which in style and content closely
resembles the so-called Code of Civil Procedure, published
by Spiegelberg and elucidated by Sethe, and the Hermo-
polis legal text, the contents of which were first made
known by Girgis Mattha.
Unfortunately most of the legal texts are as frag-
mentary as they are interesting, and there remains much
basic philological work to be done before they will be
ready for publication.

261
 VII. The physical characteristics of the Papyri

by W. J. Tait

The study of papyrus as a writing material, and of

the way in which texts are arranged upon it is necess-
arily concerned with a wide range of unconnected details,
and needs to be kept rigorously in perspective if it is
not to become a mere diversion. The aimless compilation
of the precise measurements of papyri might be thought
to serve no useful purpose; but information of this
kind, if collected with a definite end in view, and with
a full awareness of the limitations of the evidence, can
prove valuable in two distinct ways: in assisting the
correct restoration and reading of the texts, and in
adding to our knowledge of the ancient book and scribal
practice.

There is, however, a special reason why the body of

papyrus material found in recent years at North Saqqara
invites and demands study of the physical characteristics
of the papyri. This is simply the scale of the discov-
eries. The number of papyrus fragments now excavated
exceeds one thousand, discounting the large number of the
smallest scraps, and this is a quantity sufficiently
large to permit the drawing of general conclusions, es-
pecially in the case of the demotic papyri that form the
greater part of the collection. Observations, however
interesting, made about the physical ch~racteristics of
a single papyrus or a small group of papyri tend to lead
nowhere; but in the context of a find as large as that
at Saqqara there is a real hope that useful work may be
done.

A second encouragement is provided by the fact that

all the docwrentary material excavated in the last ten
years is at present available for study at the site in
one and the same place: small details may be examined
and the entire collection reviewed in a fashion that is
impossible with the papyri from many other excavations.

The nature of the actual deposits of papyrus mater-

ial discovered has already been mentioned. The kind of
damage that the papyri have suffered strongly supports
the idea that virtually all the material has survived
in rubbish dunps or accumulations of domestic rubbish.
There is no sign of any caches or archives among the
papyri, with the exception of the two groups of well-
preserved letters discussed earlier. Where separate
fragments have been shown to belong to the same papyrus,
they nearly always prove actually to join with one
another, and there are only a handful of cases where
scattered fragments from different parts of the same
text have been identified.
The quality of the papyrus shows very much the
range that is to be expected in this period. Some of
the letters and the more impressive documents that are
thought to cone from the earliest period of the site
are written upon papyrus that is exceptionally even-
textured and translucent. In general the collection
appears to conform to the well-known principle that
the average standard of papyrus manufacture steadily
declines from the New Kingdom on through the Late
Period. But no exact calculations are possible. There
is no sign of the marked difference between the quality
of the recto and the verso sides of papyri, that is
noticeable at some periods, either in the precision
with which the strips of papyrus are laid down or the
standard to which the surfaces are finished. The only
secure means of identifying recto and verso is by the
joins between sheets, when they happen to be preserved.
The hieratic Egyptian papyri are generally written upon
papyrus bf noticeably better quality than the average.
This is not uncommon, but in the present case they seem
to belong to the same range of dates as the bulk of the
papyri.
It is very striking how many of the demotic papyri,
the literary texts as well as the docWTentary, are
written upon rolls or pieces of papyrus from which a
previous text has been washed. The signs of this vary.
In some cases only very faint traces of erased writing
are visible, or the surface of the papyrus has a dist-
inctive grey tinge, which possibly extends only over
a limited area. There are other extraordinary exanples,
where the side of a papyrus that bears a text is of a
dark grey shade, that might almost be described as
black. These too seem to be due to perfunctory attempts
to obliterate an earlier text.
As regards measurements, there is one precise and
useful fact that emerges: throughout the collection,
the width of the sheets of papyrus that.make up the
rolls is remarkably consistent, varying between 14 and
16 cm. This is naturally of great assistance in
attempting to restore texts. Just one single hieratic
text, written upon extremely good papyrus, shows a con-
siderably wider sheet.
The demotic letters, of which over eighty are pre-
served, conform to two chief formats. With nearly all
the letters a long strip has been cut from a roll -
whether from the margins of a discarded document or from
a new roll it is in practice difficult to guess. There
are two ways in which a text can be arranged on such a
strip. The letters that are suspected to be the earlier
ones from the site are written in a few long lines along
the length of the strip: in these cases they do not
tend to be particularly narrow: they are sometimes cut
vertically from the height of the roll, but much more
commonly are cut along its length. The later letters
seem always to be cut from the vertical edge of a roll,
and the strips can be as narrow as 4 cm: the text of
these letters is written in many short lines across the
width of the piece. It would of course be rash to ex-
pect the format of the letters to provide any kind of
secure dating criterion. However, the dating of the
majority of the Saqqara papyri involves a number of
difficult and critical questions, while the palaeo-
graphy of the demotic texts is of great interest. Thus
any kind of clue that might support or test dates that
are suggested by other means is extremely welcome.
 VIII. The archive of ~or
by J. D. Ray

Dr. Martin has already told this Congress the history

of the discovery of the demotic ostraca which we call
The Archive of Hor. In the winter of 1965/6 some thirty
texts were found by Emery in a courtyard in the southern
part of our site; a preliminary report on these discov-
eries appears in J.E.A. 52 (1966), 3-5. Much work was
done on these ostraca by Smith from the time of their
discovery; after 1968 Smith was joined by the present
writer. Four Greek ostraca from the same archive were
promptly edited by Skeat and Turner; this publication
appeared in J.E.A. 54 (1968), 199-208. In February 1972
a further thirty demotic texts were discovered by Martin.
Editorship of the entire archive was entrusted by Smith
to myself, and I should like here to acknowledge his
kindness. The publication is said to be in the press.
What do we know of the central character of this
archive, the scribe tfor? · He was born, perhaps about
200 B.C., possibly later, in the small town of Pi-Thoth
in the name of Sebennytos (central Delta). He was appar-
ently trained as a priest in the nearby Temenesi, the
"'Icc.oc -xo°At.c of the Greek texts. There he learnt Middle
Egyptian, the language of the sacred texts (well), and
Greek (badly) • eventually becoming a pas.tophoros of the
goddess Isis.
In the year 170, war broke out between the Ptolemaic
kingdom and the Seleucid Empire Wlder Antiochus IV
Epiphanes. ~or seems to have served with the army in
some capacity, but we hear nothing of him until the year
of peril, 168. In this year tfor records a dream which
he had seen of Isis, accompanied by the god Thoth, walk-
ing upon the Syrian sea. The goddess announces that
'Alexandria is secure against the enemy•. He interprets
this to mean the release of the city from its fear and,
more strangely, the birth of a son to Pharaoh. He reports
his experience to the important general *Eirenaios, who
is at first sceptical with true Greek rationalism, but
who declares himself convinced when Antiochus, under
pressure from Rome, retreats from Egypt. ijor later
recalls these events in a message to Pharaoh (Text 2 of
the archive) :
 'The dream which was told to me of the salvation
of Alexandria and the retreat of Antiochus, namely
that he would leave Egypt by sail in Year 2, Paoni,
final day (the da~e corresponds to 30 July, 168}; I
reported this to Eirenaios in Year 2, Paoni, day 11
(11 July, 168), when *c1eon the agent of Antiochus
had not yet left Memphis. But the truth was revealed
immediately: *Eirenaios spoke no more of this, but
sent a letter. I gave this letter to the Pharaohs
(Ptolemy VI Philometor, his brother, the later Ptolemy
VIII, and possibly their sister Cleopatra, wife to
Philometor) in Year 2, Epeiph, final day (29 August,
168) in the Great Serapeum which is in Alexandria •••.
I read out the salvation of Alexandria and of every
man who was within it •.••.• There came about the
counsel of Isis, the great goddess, and of Thoth, the
three times great'.

Names of generals in the Ptolemaic army, unknown

from other sources; the journey of the envoy Noumenios
to Rome, as recorded by Polybius and Livy; and strong
evidence indeed that Antiochus declared himself king
of Egypt, are all contained in these demotic ostraca.

After the war with Antiochus ijor journeyed south

to Memphis, where he found employment as a scribe or
secretary in the ibis cult of North Saqqara. Some
eleven texts record his dreams from this period and
later, some even with interpretations. In one, he
dreams that he is on a labour-gang and is befriended
by the overseer, who turns out to be the god Thoth. In
a second dream, he is questioned by a ghost (?) and
asked where he has put the food for sixty thousand
sacred ibises; he replies that he has left it at home.
In another text, a god(?) tells him that the whole
land will be destroyed, except for one place which
~or must name; he chooses his home town, Pi-Thoth.

A third large group of texts records meetings of

the council of the ibis-shrine; a wealth of detail
about the administration_ and finances of the cult,
together with its governing body of twenty-five priests
and the reform of the shrine after years of neglect,
is preserved for us. It seems that ~or of Sebennytos
finally lost his job, and wrote his story on ostraca
as drafts for a petition to Pharaoh; a disaster for
him, but for us a blessing, and a hint not to despise
these texts as ostraca, for they are would-be papyri.

266
 What finally is the importance of our archive?
Firstly, it is not merely historical, in spite of the
references to Antiochus Epiphanes, nor psychological,
with the accounts of dreams, nor even valuable for the
details of the cult administration; the true import-
ance is that beneath all these accounts there lies one
personality, an individual, and we can begin to know
where he exaggerates, why he omits some things rather
than others, even where he twists the truth to suit
his own obsessions. Secondly, one of our ostraca
mentions a pair of twins; perhaps the o,&oµa.£ of
Wileken? Finally, our archive serves to deepen our
knowledge of Ptolemaic Egypt. One scholar, P. M.
Fraser, characterises the Egyptians of Alexandria as
'an almost anthropophagous mob'; another, Mlle. Preaux
in the new Legacy of Egypt denies that the native
element in Hellenistic Egypt added anything of value to
its civilisation. With respect to these two authorities,
I cannot agree. Behind the Greek papyri there lies a
palimpsest: the hand and spirit of the Pharaohs.
 o•
BPICURUS, RA'J."ORE,
il .&RGUNZl'r.r
BOOKXI (P.HERC.1042), PR.I COL.III.
J.GillfST mDOXil AS'l'RO.Olff. - DaTicl Sedl e7
In the fou.rih oentUZ7 B.c. astronomy ■evered it ■ relatioDII with
p~eio ■ and becan to develop a partnership with mathematio11 and the-
oloa. B'lld.o::meand Plato in one generation, followed by Callippue
and Aristotle in the nm, undertook to ■ave the phenomena by red.uo-
inc the apparentl7 irregular motion■ of 111m, moon and planet ■ to
complu combination ■ of regular oiroular motion ■ U'D..._~tbe .vth.
Bpiouru ■ wrote at the encl of the fourth century and the beginning
of the third. While holding that terrestrial p~aioa oould arrive at
certain lcn.ovledge, he 110unded like a thorougbsoing Soeptio when he
ome to attack what he regarded. aa the elavillh dogmatiam of the ast-
ronomer ■• lPor &ft1' oeleriial phenomenon, he argued, a whole range of
phJ'aioal uplanationa vu available, and there was no reliable ori t-
erion for ohoo ■ing between th•. It was enough to grasp that noh
phenomena oould be explained in physical term■, and thua to obviate
the need. to attribute them to dinne agenoy. '!'his is the overriding
tteme of Epicuru ■' 11Umm&17 of astronomical doctrine in his Letter to
Pz:thoole■• The tall account had been given 1n Book■ XI IIZlcl XII of -
hi ■ major vork the tm, Pp.,yaeOs; and b7 good fortune the Herculaneum
libr&17 has supplied ua with two parallel terle ot Book XI. One ■ eo­
tion, consisting ot tive partiall7 preserved colum21a/•> oontaina &
polemic against astronomer• who build mechanical mo4el ■ depioting
the motions of the aun and moon around the earth. !'he•• orrerie ■
(orgi&) almost certainly embodied the "oonoentrio ephe:rea" theory
ot p anetar,r motion deviaed b7 Eu.doxua ana: elaborated by hi ■ 11UCoea-
aora. EpiOUl"U ■ derides noh attempts to veil the irregularities of
the ■• orbit ■• Be atre•••• the extreme nbjeotivit7 of our ob ■ ervat­
iona of celestial p'henomena, and the mistake ot representing them
as objectively valid.
In this paper I shall diaou ■ a ■ome point ■ which have been over-
looked or miaunderatood in the first column ot the argument. The
tut vaa edited by Vogliano in 1941, but with several miareadinga.
I have re-read the papyrus, in the British Jllu1eu11 {15.M.Pap.1521 •
PHero.1042), and I set out the text hoe in what I believe to be
the moat ■atiataotor, W'1' for a Herculaneum papyru ■• Since the buck-
led aurtaoe ot the p&pyl"Ue and the overlapping of layer■ prevent ad-
equate photograpq, I give a diplomatic tran■ oript of the papyrus in
ita present condition; each unoertain t:iraoe ia aipallM·lv a dot,
and ■o tar as poaaible the letters whioh it might repreaent are lie-
ted in a papyl"Ological commentary-. Together with thia are the apogr-
aphe ot the pap7J"Ua, made in the nine-t eenth century when it a oondi t-
ion was better. In thia particular oaae we have a aingle pencilled
apograph, made in 1802, plua the contemporary engraving of it, which
aeema to have benefited trom some correotiona made direotl7 from the
papy.rua. Pinally, there ia the "edited" text, vhioh supplements the
letter• still preaerved in the papyrus 'h-Om those in the apographa.
 Orlord ApoE&Ph Yr II Bngraviy

1 I>-
N >,."T t'!;:· J-.W N )..
-~o N Tf. J CTOMe,~o(n-tC
J).. Tt'I

TT"'-CitC t'"'1<"O'(M. T(~

'
SHMfN TOYT.0 H
5 MtN~T E-No c f
~A.10 <-noM
~fOTf- NTrn ,_
ij~;~~~ :~ Iiff:
10 1'.>-r1 ~-..c \)..
{ft!:lt~
:I;~f r. :Y~
T rt
:::-_-. " C11--
8{,;.:AI(;
;N 8 f r,J.i.
E-·.-:
hCINh·,!.::,
15
?Le
/ .: .......
,~~2:!,
~1 N,A(&AW r-,1,

20 ;
;~(:ijliJ., •.•. ~\'.;t/~'ci~
·.··.:

Papyrua
1 ava'tc.Xwva.vaTcL 2-3] ~a1.t[ Jyaet1\~cv
VOVTCOCLOTOµcpoOT1\0 ±4 )c[0-1jx .JTaaTa!}l..
00 lJ}i C t C
Tt0:011 O'Y1\
±1]1.v[.]t1\ tvScvbc 0

f3T\µCVCKtO\J'tOf1\ !t]a'taO''t«Sµ.1\0Lv11
5 µLv6u.µcvo~~L.]L 15 't1\V&vScv6c1\1'.v
vc 1'a.1.
o ubc1to>..>..
1\v ±2] c[.)0.\v6c1.1tL[2-3
cv1.01't1tavuy11
~c J:) 1.
V)(Cl'tO:. 't [ 2-4

±3]cf3T1xo91.VKaL1-2]. ±4 ]wvavar.J.Aw.
1'0uo.xc.T1.vau1'[.]uo ~5 ]wy WO'tc[!2
to 1tAay1.a.µouoa[.]t1. 20 !5 ]uv'3a.1.vo[s4
)-4 Jx.n.1.01.µ[.t5
Papyrol~ical coftlfflentary. (t) o./A (4) yfC~/'t/v/x/d; (5) c/$/o/o
(8) 1.?p~/4./4 (9) *1: T/v *2: c~/o/o (10) c/a (11) y/c/r,fa~/a/T/u/~
(12) '1/v (t)) 111\1/vf,t (15) 11/,t (16) *1: ~/6/c/9/o/p/o ~: v/x/1.c/1.0
(17) *ti o./A ~= c/'Jj/o/o (18) *1: S/o *2: 11/v (21) *1: S/o *2: c/o

['l'he aun, it we walk towarda the

place from whioh it appeared to u ■]
to rise, directing our oourae up.-
ward.a ,into the region of total land,
appears to us to aet at the plaoe
from which we have come, eometimea
even when we have moved in all
only a ahori distance. And this
time ve cannot blame it on the
lateral deviations. WhT,at'ter
&11, ahollld you make the measure-
ment from here, or the measurement
from here, or the one from here,
or this one, a more reliable meaa-
urement of risinp or settings?
Therefore[ ••••••••••••••••••

10-11) a(t]t1.aoo.0SaL Vo. 11) ~[t] Hayter

1)-14) [11] - kaTaOtaSµflOI.\I secl. Vo. 19); Vo.

Epiourus here attacks the assumption that objectively valid meas-

urement ■ ot celeattal. orbi ta can be taken from a terrestrial view-
point. Linea 1-8 describe an optical illusion produced by the sun.
(That their nbject ia the sun is certain from a reference to thia
argument three columns later,! VI 14-19.) It 7ou travel eastward.a
the 8Wl oan give the illusion ot setting at the place from which
you at aried.
It ia eaaential to the argument that the direction in which the
observer 110vea should be eastwaTda. The main ourioai ty ot the sent-
ence ia the application to-this eastward movement of the phrase
"into the meroa ot total land". This would be a quiie inappropriate
description of a walk across the Attic peninsula to the east of
Athena. Its most natural reference is to Asia, oonoeived aa a tract

271
of land with no ■ ea beyond it. Herodotus (IV 40) had reported that be-
7olld India Asia wa■ uninhabited, and that nothing more wu known about
it. Since then, Alexander' ■ campaigns had opened up vast new areaa of
Asia to the Greek■, and Aristotle' ■ pupil Dicaearohua had drawn up a
revised map of the world. Yet even hie knowledge stopped, it would
aeem, at the Him&llliJ"&a(POK II 251). Be mq, like Ariatotle (of.
llfeteorol.350a 22), have aanmecl the erlatenoe ot a surrounding ocean,
but he certainl.7 did not aasign to Aaia a precise easternmost limit.
Given this atate of knowledget Epiouru.a might well call Asia the
meros of total (or oontiauou ■ J lad.
Some ditficul t7 has been oauaed b7 &.va'td vovTc<; (line 1). Bo att-
ested meaning is appropriate, but I take it to be 8,1'DOnymou ■ with
Xenophon'a phrase TctvcLv ~vw, "to head uphill" (!!_.4.3.21). 'tctvw
like ita Latin counterpart tend.o, combines the transitive aense
1
"stretch" vi th the intranai ti ve "aim", "direct one' a oourae" .< > Oi ven
an Asian context, the pref'ix ava- probably oU'l"iea·the additional
connotation of "up inland into Central Asia", as in Xenophon's An.,_
basia. -
Since the prooeaa of walking eastwards is described in terms appr-
opriate not to Athena but to Asia, it is hard to escape the interest-
ing conclusion that Epiourus waa on the coast of Asia Minor when he
wrote this book. Before aetting up his school at Athena in 306 B.C.
he had lived and taught first at )brtilene and then at Lampaaoua.
Jtb1;ilene is of course not on the mainland; but Lampsaoua lies on the
Asian shorea of the Helleapont and, in Walter Leaf'• deacription$5)
"is pleasaatl7 placed at the foot of gentle slopes which nm east-
wards." Lampaa.ous, then, must surely be the venue for this uperiment.
However, it is improbable that Epicurus wrote Book XI while resid-
ent at Lampsaoua between 310 and 306. We know that he reached Book XV
in 300/299, and that in the following four years he got through anoth-
er thirteen books of the aame work. It would therefore be a somewhat
drastic solution to suppoae that it took him seven or more years to
get fro■ Book XI to Book XV. Nor is this supposition neoeas&r7, since
we know that while settled at Athena he made two or three retut'D vis-
its to My-t;ilene and Lampsaoua, to maintain contacts with the still
thriving Epicurean cirolea in those towns. A shipwreck which he autt-
ered during one of these voyages to Lampaaoua is graphically descr-
ibed in a rt~•ntly discovered fragment of the insorlption·of Diogenea
of Oenoanda.J,. So close was Epicurus• association with Lampsaoua that
Strabo (13.1.19) describes him as 'tponov T~va Aaµp~vo~.
The probabili t7 that Epiouras wrote this book on astronomy during
a visit to Lampsaous has an interesting consequence of its own. Not
far from Lampaacua is the ci t7 of Cyzicua. And Epicurus, we learn from
Diogenes Laertius Bl
(X vu hostile to some people called the C7zio-
enes, vhom he labelled "enemies of Greece". Bignone(u was the first
scholar to see that the word Kul:;1.K'fl\lOU<; here, far from requiring
emendation, was a reference to the followers ot Eudoxue at Cy ■icue.

272
'nl,"clue OBIN from a papyrus fracment ot Philodemua Q!. Epicurus Book
II, llhioh ■ eemed to record a letter ot Epicurus to the EpiO'Urean
circle at Lampaaoue. It is described. a■ "nc)pt Kv~LK~vooTLvo~ aaTpo-
;\oyoy[ c )~c-rpov ", "oonoerning a certain mathematical. astronomer ot
Cysious". Bow Badon.a, although himaelf a oitisen of Cnidoa, taught
tor a period at C7si011s, and produced there such distinguished pupils
as Helioon and Polemarchus. Polemarohua in turn became the teacher of
the celebrated mathematical astronomer 9allippus of Cyzicue, who ia
known to have worked tor a time in the Helleapont area (PtoleJD7 Phaa.
93d), even though he later moved to Athena to work with Aristotl..----
ill this point ■ to an eatablishecl Eudo%an school at Cyzious, vhioh
cotld well have survived into the third century B.c•• Some hrther
fragmentary evideace from Herculaneum papyri also hint ■ at oontao~•
between the Epioureana of Lampaaous and the Eudo%ui■ ot Cyziou.a.P
There ia even a strong, and intriguing, possibility that Epiourus•
own pupil Polyaenua ?,f Lampsaous had originally been an adherent of
the C7sicene •ohool. •>
The follower■ ot Eadoxua are placed b7 Plutarch (!!!•!.!r.!!.•14)
among the first e%ponenta of organiki - the oons-truotion ot meohan-
ieme to illutrate mathematical proofs. Small wonder then that the:,,
in their ■ ohool at Cy-sioua, should have provoked their Epicurean
neichbour■ at Lampaaoua with the mechanical organa 'b7 which they 111-
urirated their mathematical law ■ for the orbits of nn, moon and pl&-
nets.
To return now to the tert, the argument about the impossibilit7 of
oaloulating where the BUD sets ia capped in lines 8-11 by the remark
"And this ti11e it OaDDot be blamed on the plepaamoi". The implicat-
ion ia that ao■e other irregularity previously disouased vaa attrib-
uted by the opponents to tbe ■ e plagiaamoi. To learn more about this
myaterioue term ve muri turn to Simpliciua• aooo~nt (In De caelo P•
493, lltt •) ot the three oonoentrio apherea by which Eudoma explain-
ed the ran'• movements. The outer sphere waa that of the fixed riara,
rotating from east to vest in twent7-four hova. Inside this vaa the
aeoond sphere, carrying the aun backwards through the sodiac. It ia
thia cvavTLa KLv~a~~ vhioh ve find Epioµ.rua deridinc tour column ■
later. The third aphere was introduced to account for entirely im.,..
ina17 deviationa of the aun to north and aoutb of the ecliptic. The
BUD is described aa "deviating .
to the side ■" - napcKtpcnoµcvo~ c~c; '
-ro:JtAayi.o. - and it mu ■t be to these deviationa de; 'ta.1V1.ay1.a that
Epicurus is reterring when he apeaka of the JtAay~aaµol • Thq m~, he
aqa, "Daethie third. aphere to uplain away north-1101.rth deviation ■ in
the eun'a course, but thq oan never use it to erplain east-vest var-
iation• in ita obaerved. position at sunset.
'l'he nert sentence (line ■ 11-19) 8%J)laina the significance of thia
irregularity: there is no aingle "correct" vantage point from which
to mea■ure oeleatial phenomena. The illusion described here ia of
course eaail7 erplained by the curvature of the ettrth. But for Epic-

273
'IU"lla, who believed ill a fiat earth, the aolution was the one which
we know from a aoholion (!E,.~-91) he propounded in this verr same
books that the IIW1 and o't1lerheavenl7 bodiea are about as small aa
they appear to be, but are peouliarl7 e:z:empt from the rule ■ of per-
41
spective ao aa to appear the aame aise at &111'4iatance.'
The extraordinar,y repetitiveneaa of this final aentenoe lead.a me
to end thi a paper 'b7 asking a question about the at7l e of the Peri
PJgaeoa. Although Epiourua• Greek ia otten id.ioaynoratio, hia oih'er
surviving works, and espeoiall7 the Letter 12, Menoeoeu ■, ah.ow a
clear attempt at some sort of literary ■tyle. By contrast, the sur-
viving ~agmenta ot the !!!£! Physeos are utterly devoid of literary
artifice, and the ri7le is beat described as colloquial. I cannot
••• why Epicurus would have repeated himself 110 painatak:ingl7 in a
written works on the other hand, it would be natural enough in an
extemporised lecture where each "lvsi:vf>c" was aooompanied b7 some
gesture. Epiourua himaelt elsewhere calls the Peri Plqaeos an aJcro-
.!!1!,, <••Jand I wonder whether ■ome aort of taohl'graphio - - system migh't
-
not alread7 have been available at this date, b7 vhioh a scribe
could take doVD a lecture during its delivU7, j,Hrt as A.rrian was
later to record the lectures of Epiotetus.
There ia, ot course, Diogenes Laertius' atory (II 48) that Xeno-
phon wrote hie Kemorabilia by noting doVD the words of Sooratea.
The verb used here, uttoCfTlµc1.o00Sa1. , has often been taken -to refer
to a a7atem of taohygrapb;r. But in reply- it has been 0orreotl7 poin-
ted out that, even supposing that this ia what Diogenes means us to
underata.ml., it is refuted 'b7 Xenophon'a own statement in the Memor-
abilia (1.3.1) that he is writing from memory-. 1
And recent vork on
this question, eapeoiall7 that of Boge,'" ia highly sceptical about
the existence ot a Greek a7stem of taoh3'graphy' before the second
oent\lr7 A.D•• Reveriheleaa I wonder how, in the absence of ahort-
hand, the colloquial st7le of Epicurus' !!!!!, Ph,yseos should 'be u-
plained.

llO'l'ES

1) A.Vogliano, I reati dell' XI libro del IlcP-t <9uocwc; di

Epiouro (Le Caire 1940)-;-J;.3"&:'43,! Illl -[L] b III 12
• G.ArriiPetti, Opere_(seoond edition,
Epicuo, Torino
1973), [26] 37.l - 41.21. I have oonnlted the oornentaries
of Vogliano and Arrigbetti; also C.R.Roaini in VB-- II
(1809), and A.Ba.riga~•i, Prolegomena II (1952) 6lff.
2) LSJ, s.v. 'td vw B II, read the sense "hasten" into in-
stancea of this intransitive use, 11Tongl7 in my view.

274
3) V.Leat, Strabo .2.!!.!!.!, T!road (Cambridge 1923) p.93.
4) D.Clq, Sailing!!!, Jepa&e1111, mmB 14 (1973) 49-59•
5) E.Mgnone, L'Ariatotele perduto e la tormasione tilos-
ofioa !!_ !fiouro {Pirense 1936), II-76ff.
6) PBero.1289, tr.6 col.III, Vogliano, Epicuri et ~iou:r-
eorum aoripta (Berlin 1928), p.6o • .lrrighetti !16 , p.523.
7) See L.Spina, Cronaohe Eroolaneai 1 (1971), 69-72.
8) Por Polyaenua• mathematical background, ••• Cicero Aoad.
!z.II 106, !!!,.I 20. 'l'he only specific evidence tor a ooii:'
nenon with Oyzioua ia the fact that he had a Cyzioene mia-
treaa (Plutaroh Contra !l?.•£!.!i•l098b).
9) !2-e,;th.91: '[()be µcycSoc; ~ALOU TC Ka.t d)v AOL7t@V ~O'tPWV
kQ'tQ µcv T6 npo~ ~µde; TT)ALkOOTov COTLV~ALkOV<paLVC'tO.L. [Schol-
11 11
ion: 't'00To Kat CV Tfl Lii flcpt c,puacwc;• d yo:p , 4.P'IO'L , "'to µcycSoc;
f>L0: 'tO b L ClO't 'lµa &.1tolk PA~>u:L ' ltOAA(il a
µBA).o V V '[~ V xpoa VII. ]
illo yap 'tOUTf ovµµcTpO'tcpov 61.aOTT)µaooScv COTL.

~• final
phrase here has ao battled editors of this tert
(von der Jlfuehll 1 a Teubner edition is an u:oeption) that thq
have attaohed it to the acholion rather than let it stand in
Epicurus• text. What they have miaaed is the teohnioal ex-
pression avµµcTpov 61.a.au1µa (or &.11:ooT'lµa) , a "proportionate
diatanoe", hence a "correct distance" for viewing an object
accurately (Sa:tua Empiricua !!1!!,.ffI 188, ct.183; 438;
Ar.tatotla !! II 1213b 7-101 of. Sophocles ~ 84). Our paw-
:rua passage shove Epiourua' point to be that the appareat
■i•• of the setting B\Ul, unlike that of such nonnal terre-
strial objects as mountain ■, ia al~• the same hovevu far
eastwards or westward.a you travel. Benoe "1fo different di111-
tano• gives a better vantage point tor it".
10) l!tl, Ph..yseoa XXVIII, 13 XIII 7-8 sup.; aee D\J" edition,
Cronache Eroolaneai 3 (1973) p.56.
11) H.:Boge, Grieohisch• Taoh.Yqaphie ~ Tironiache Boten
(Berlin 1973), 17 tt.

275
 Platea XX-XXVI
RICHARDSEIDER: Zur Palao~raphie der frUhen lateiniechen
Papyri
Nach einer kleinen Auswahl van frlihen lateiniechen Schriftdenk-
~alern mochte ich einige Beobachtungen zur lateiniechen Urkun-
denschrift und Buchechrift (Geach~fteschrift und Schonschrift)
mitteilen:
FUnf Oetraka aue dem alten Bergwerksplatz el-Fawa.chir liberlie-
fern uns briefliche Nachrichten einee Ruatiua Barbarus an sei-
nen Bruder Pompeiua (Abb. 1). Die Scherben ~urden in der Zeit
dee auagehenden 1. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. beechrieben. Sie zei-
gen eine Schrift, welche auch der Schrift des Papyrus lb der
Wiener Sammlung, eines Briefes an einen Macedo, gleicht (Abb.
2). Dieser Brief an Macedo wurde um 20 v. Chr. geschrieben. Die
Schrift der Ostraka und dee Papyrus ist wiederurn ganz der
scriptura actuaria auf Erz der auegehenden republikanischen
Zeit ehnlich, eine Beobachtung, die fUr Rekonetruktionevereu-
che der lateiniechen Schreibachrift einer weiter zurtickliegen-
den Zeit vielleicht SchlUaee zulaSt. t~it einer abgeschragten
Binee wurde auf Ton und Papyrus ein ahnliches Schriftbild be-
wirkt, wie ea mit dem Griffel oder Stichel auf einer Erz~latte
eingegrabfn werden konnte. Das Fragment der lex ~amilia (?) aus
Falerione zeigt dieae Schrift auf Erz, die in die Mitte des 1.
Jahrhunderte v. Chr. zu datieren 1st (55 v. Chr. ?). Die Schrift
der Oetraka aue el-Fawachir und des Wiener Papyrus lb der
Berliner Papyrus 13956, der Brief dee Phileroe an seine Mitekla-
ven, gehort zu dieeen fri.ihen Schriftdenkmalern - wird man sich
ale Urkundenachrift und als Buchschrift der ausgehenden republi-
kaniechen Zeit voretellen mUasen. Ausgebildete Schriftformen
nach romiechern Stilgeeetz, die une der Wiener Macedobrief la
(Abb. 3), der Gieaener Verrespapyrue (Abb. 4) und die lateini-
ech~n Papyri aue Herculaneum (Abb. 5) zeigen, eind bei den oben
genannten Schriftdenkmhlern noch-nicht erreicht. Romische For-
men eind erst in den Anfangen erkennbar. Ein weeentliches Merk-
mal des lateiniachen Schriftbildes, das Streben nach Dreitei-
lung und Symmetrie, wird in dieser Phase lateiniecher Schrift-
entwicklung allein durch die interpunctio deutlich. Die Wort-
trennung durch Punkte wird bei den lateiniechen Papyri Mit Be-
ginn dee 2. Jahrhunderte n. Ohr. selten. Sie fehlt ganz bei den
Papyrue-Pilite.rurkunden. In der lateinischen Epigraphik lebt
sie aber bis in die epijten Jahrhunderte der Romerzeit fort. Dern
Griechiechen ist die interpunctio immer fremd geblieben.
Am Beis~iel dee datierten Wiener Macedobriefee la, dee GieSe-
ner Verrespapyrus und der lateiniechen Fragrnente aue Hercula-
neum rnochte icb versucnen, die Entwicklung der lateiniechen Ur-
kundenschrift und Buchschrift kurz aufzuzeigen. Dabei wird sich
ale niltzlich erweieen, Grundformen des Schriftbildes dieser
frtihen Papyri und Stilelemcnte gleichzei tiger romiacher 1:alerei

277
zu betrachten und miteinander in Beziehung zu eetzen. Bald nach
der Umwandlung der Stadt Pompeji in eine romiache Kolonie, er-
reichte die pornpejaniache Malerei eine erstaunliche Bltite. In
augusteischer und julisch-claudischer Zeit werden dort in ra-
scher Falge gilltige Formen romischer Kunst gefunden, deren b'nt-
wicklung sich auch in den Stilformen lateinischer Schrift er-
kennen Hil3t.
Zurn Wiener Macedobrief la (Abb. 3): Der Papyrus der Wiener
Samrnlung la, ebenfalls ein Brief an den schon genannten Macedo
aus den Jahren 17 - 14 v. Chr. 'bei Annahme einea Schalt-
jahres 21 - 18 v. Chr. zeigt eine Schrift, die nur mit ge-
spaltenem Schreibrohr moglich ist. Charakterietisch ftir dieee
Schrift ist die Verlangerung der leicht auezufilhrenden Feder-
atriche von oben links nach unten rechts weit Uber die Ober-
und Unterlinie des Schriftkorpers der Zeilen hinaus. Die Ober-
langen sind in der Frtihzeit dieses Stils stark auegebildet
und in strenger Geraden gezogen. Die Unterlangen sind Auslauf-
linien der Buchstaben z.B. van Q, R, I und laeeen daher diesen
strengen Charakter vermissen. Das Wechselspiel von Haar- und
Schattenstrichen oder Druckstrichen, die Ausbildung van sehr
starken Ober- und Unterlangen iet jedenfalls auffallendes Kenn-
zeichen dieses Schriftstils, filr den sich kein epigraphisches
Zeugnis finden la~t, ein lateiniecher Schriftstil, der eich
auch nicht an ein Vorbilu etwa griechischer Schreibschrift an-
lehnen kann. Dieee Form lateinischer Schrift war nicht auf den
Fundort der Papyri, auf lgypten, beechrankt. Beispiele dieses
Schriftstils finden sich auch auf pompejanischen Wanden. Wir
haben es mit einer originalen romiechen Schopfung frUhauguste-
iecher Zeit zu tun.
Um 80 v. Chr. wurde Pompeji romische Kolonie. Der rdmische Ein-
fluB wird jetzt tiberall spilrbar, besonders auffallend in der
Malerai und der Schrift~ Die bemalte griechisch-hellenistische
Quaderwand des 1. Stile~ die Quader sind in Pompeji in
Stuck ausgefilhrt oder werden durch Malerei ersetzt erfahrt
mit Beginn des 2. Stile pompejanischer Malerei eine Umpr~gung
in rornische Formen. Die romische Wand erecheint in horizonta-
ler und vertikaler Dreiteilune. Die Bildrnitte iat stark betont.
Die Verteilung von Licht7.und Schatten verleiht der Bildwand ei-
nen malerischen A.usdruck). Mit der Dreiteilung dee Sch:riftbil-
des der Zeile, einer betonten ~itte, einer oberen unu unteren
Schriftbildzone, zeigt der Wiener. Papyrus la ganz die wesentli-
chen Formen der 2. Phase des 2. Stile romischer Malerei frtihau-
gueteiecner Zeit. Die nreiteilung bleibt kUnftig Stilform ro-
mischer Malerei und lateinischer Schrift, der Urkundenschrift
und der Buchschrift. Auch die ForMen der Malerei cj,es 3. Stile
lassen sich im Schriftbild gleichzeitiger pompejanischer Wund-
inachriften wiederfinden. Mit phantastischeIL zi~rlichen Auf-
bauten erhAlt die obere Bildwand aes 3. pornpejanischen Stile
ein beaonders auffallendes Aussehen. Das Malerische der oberen
Zone der Wandmalerei des 2. Stile ist einem stark zeichneri-
schen Stil gewichen4. Pompejanische Wandinechriften haben die-
se Stilentwicklung mitgemticht. Den unwirklichen Aufbauten der
oberen Bildzone pornpejaniacher Wande dee 3. Stile entsprechen
die zierlichen un~ phantaatischen Oberlangen der dandinschrif-
ten gleicher Zeit. In ihrer Substanzlosigkeit stehen dieae O-
berlangen in atarkem Gegensatz zur festgefilgten Zeilenmitte.
Die romische Dreiteilung des Wandbildes und die Dreiteilung des
Schriftbildea der Zeile, die Syrnmetrie, bleibt erhalten. Dieses
Verlangen nach Symmetrie, nach vertikale~ und horizontaler Drei-
teilung mag dae pornpejanieche Bild "Pan und Nymphen" aus spat-
augusteischer Zeit veranschaulichen 6 : "Das griechische Vorbild
des Gemaldea ••• enthielt, wie Diepolder gezeigt hat, nur den
still in aich ruhenden Zauber eines muaikalischen Wettatreitea
zwiechen dem die Syrinx S}ielenden Pan und der zur Kithara sin-
genden Muse. Der romische Maler ftigte die steifere Madchengrup-
pe links hinzu; um wieder die klassizistische Dreiteilung zu er-
halten, die noch durch die Kulissen des Hintergrundes verdeut-
licht wira. 117. Die Symmetrie des gemalten und dee geschricbenen
Bildes entspricht romiechem Formgefilhl. In einer Zweilinien-
echrift (mit der Tendenz Unterlangen zu bilden) entwickelt eich
im wesentlichen das griechiache Schriftbild. Die Vierlinien-
echrift ist eine romische Schopfung. Das Stilgeeetz der Drei-
teilung des Schriftbildee (Oberlan~en, Zeilenkorper, Unterlan-
gen), dae in der Frtihzeit lateiniecher Schrift noch durch die
interpunctio veretdrkt wurde, iet der lateinischen Urkunden-
achrift immer eigentti.mlich geblieben, wenn auch in manchen Pha-
sen ihrer Entwicklung veranderte Formen eichtbar werden. Der
Stil der Urkundenechrift des Wiener Macedobriefes la 1st in der
Schrift dee alteeten l~teiniechen, literariachen Papyrus noch
lebendig.

ie c ri tana yse er a testen an ec ri t ateinischer Lite-

ratur, des bertihmten Gie0ener Verresfragmente, macht deutlich,
daa dieses Fragment nicht mehr in die frtihauguateische Zeit rnit
ihren etrengen Formen, in die Zeit dee Wiener Macedobriefee la,
gehort. Zu den Druck- und Schattenetrichen, die von oben links
nach unten rechta auagerichtet sind, kommen noch die Zierstri-
che, die nach oben rechte weisen. Die eich kreuzenden Druck-
und Zieratriche diesea Schriftetils ktindigen bereits eine Ei-
gentti.mlichkeit des 4. Stile pompejaniecher Malerei flaviecher
Zeit an: t1Daa System aich kreuzender Tiefenachsen°8. Wenn diese
Stilformen der Malerei eine Hilfe zur Datierung von Handachrif-
ten deeeelben Stils aein konnen, dann wird man die Schrift des
Gie6ener Verrespapyrus in spataugusteische Zeit datieren mtiesen.
Weit aualadende Ober- und Unterlangen dieses Papyrus und ebeneo
die Uberlangen Zieratriche der Buchetaben, besonders beim E und
F, die Uber eine oder gar zwei Zeilen hinweggezogen aind, ma-
chen eine enge Zeilenfti.hrung unmoglich. Es ist einleuchtend,
daa sich eine Schrift rnit solchen Ubergreifenden Forrnen ale

279
Buchechrift nicht aurchsetzen konnte. Dieeer Stil muate seine
tibermaGigen Formen verlieren und in ein ausgewogenes Verhaltnia
gebracht, zu einer gezligelten Zweilinienechrift zurlickgeflihrt
werden, um praktische, brauchbare lateinieche Buchechrift wer-
den zu konnen. Die literariechen lateiniechen Papyri aua Hercu-
laneum eind die frilhesten Zeugen dieeer lateiniechen Buchschrift
der eo 6 • Capitalis rustica.
ri aue Herculaneum Abb. :
Die reitei ung dee c riftbi des des erreepapyrus karn durch 0-
berlangen, Zeilenkorper und Unterlangen zum Auedruck. Die Schrift
des Verreepapyrue ist eine sehr ausladende lateinieche Vierli-
nienechrift, die sich ale Buchschrif~ kaum eignet. Erst mit der
Capitalis rustica gelang die Schopfung einer lateinischen Buch-
schrift, die auch ale Zweilinienschrift romiaches Stilgeeetz der
Dreiteilung, der Symmetrie, berticksichtigt. Die literarischen
lateinischen Papyri aus Herculaneum und zahlreiche pompejanische
Dipinti eind die frUheten Zeugen dieser lateinischen Buchschrift.
Zierstriche, die aich beim Verreapapyrus mit den Oberlangen kreu-
zen, sind bei der Capitalie rustica ganz verschwunden. Auf die
Ausbildung einee festen Zeilen.korpers zwischen zwei gedachten
Linien wird besonderer Wert gelegt. Hat der Zeilenabstand beim
Verresfragment noch etwa 1 cm betragen, so schwankt der Zeilen-
abstand bei den lateiniechen Fragmenten aue Herculaneum zwi-
echen 0,2 und 0,4 cm. Die Oberlangen der echragen Druckstriche
der Capitalis ruetica ragen nur noch wenig Uber die Oberlinie
der Zeilen hinaus oder bleiben innerhalb der Zeilenhohe dadurch
erhalten, daa die Haaretriche der Buchstaben A, Mund ?l z.B. we-
eentlich verktirzt werden. Die eenkrechten Hasten finden an der
oberen Zeilenlinie durch kraftige Querbalken ihren Abschlua. An
die Stelle der Unterltingen tritt bei der Capitalis rustica ein
Buchstabensockel. Der Schriftkorper der Zeile erhalt - wenn
ich mich so ausdrUcken darf Sockel und Geeims, ein Stil,
den die griechische Schrift nicht kennt. Der Hakchenatil grie-
chischer Buchschrift, der bereits im 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr.
eineetzt, iet etwae anderes. Die griechischen Buchstaben die-
sea Stile werden in ihrer plastischen Selbatandigkeit durch die
Zierhtikchen nicht verandert. Die Autonomie griechischer Buch-
staben des Hakchenstile geht nicht verloren. Der EinfluO dee
Stile der romischen Capitalis rustica auf 6ie griechieche Buch-
schrift ist in der Folgezeit zu apilren. Die Schrift des Berli-
ner Hesiodpapyrua und der Iliashandechrift von HawAra, urn nur
zwei bekannte griechische Papyri diesee Stile zu nennen, schei-
nen diesen Einflu6 zu verraten. Man wird den Stil der Schrift
dieeer Papyri ine 1. - 2. Jahrhundert n. Ohr. datieren mliseen.
Ein kurzes Eingehen auf Elementet-~mischer Malerei dee 2. Stile
mag ciazu bei tra.gen, den romischen Charakter der Capi talie rusti-
ca und die Zeit der Entstehung dieses Schriftatile deutlich zu
machen. Ich rnochte ganz kurz den Stil der Capitalie rustica zur
romischen Komposition dee bertihmten Frieees der Villa Visteri

280
in PompeJi, dessen Vorbild im griechiech-hellenistiechen Be-
reich zu sucheH ist, in Beziehun~ eetzen. Die r,riechische
Figuren~auGr ~, tlit uns ein Bild dee 5. Jahrhunderte v. Ohr.
aue der Nekropole von Ruvo zeit?;en kann, wird beim lOies der
?:'.ysteri envilla nach romischem StiL~Ed·ihl urr.geprtiet • Der ro-
mische Fries der Villa !'isteri fUgt sich einer Archi tekturrna-
lerei ein. Die FiJuren verlieren dabei ihre griechische Selb-
standigkeit. Sie sind nur noch ale Teil eines Ganzen zu beS;rei-
fen. Dies~ Ganze ist dr~igeteilt. ~s besteht bei unserer Abbil-
dung aus einer.1 vorsprin,renden Sockel, auf der.; als Bil<lr.ii tte die
Figuren dargestellt sind. Dern Sockel entspricht in symmetri-
echer Anordnunr, eine Abacnlui3zone. Der I.:aler unternimrnt den Ver-
such einer Straffung der Figurenkomposition, die durch die ~e-
malten Pilaster ihre Akzente erhalt. Die Bildmitte wird durch
vertikale und horizontale Dreiteilung stark betont. Die inter-
punctio der Schrift und die gtr.alten Pilaster des Prieses der
Myeterienvilla sind Ausdruck romischen For::igefJ.hls fUr Syrnme·-
trie. Wenn die interpunctio auch noch Lesehilfe war, komrnt bier
etwas vom praktischen romischen Sinn zu~ AusdrucK. Lesehilfe al-
lein war die interpunctio sicher nicht. Es hat seine besonderen
Grtinde, daD die interpunctio noch in der lateinischen Epigraphik
der romischen Spatzeit anzutreffen 1st, wahrend sie auf Papyrus
schon mit Beginn des 2. Jahrhunderts i~mer seltener wira, schlieB-
lich ganz verschwindet und bei Papyrus-f'ili tarurkunden so-
wei t ich eehe nie festzustellen ist.
Man wird die Capitalis rustica als rornische Schopfung auguete-
ischer Zeit aneehen dtirfen. Sic ist die rbrr.ische Buchschrift,
die eine enge, klare Zeilenf1lhrung ermoglicht. Der Schriftepie-
gel kann jetzt zu einer festgeftitjten Mitte eines Kodexblattes
werden. Vielleicht 1st auch der Kodex eine ro~ische Schopfung
augusteischer Zeit. Romische Syrnmetrie, vertikale und horizon-
tale Dreiteilung, wird beim Kodex durch die betonte Mitte dee
Schriftspiegels und durch die Blattrtinder erreicht. Die Capita-
lie rustica war wohl bis zum Ende dee 3. Jahrhunderts lebendi-
ge lateinieche Buchschrift des romiechen Reichee. Abecedarien
des 4. und 5. Jahrhunderte zeigen neben Schriftformen, die eich
an die Capitalis rustica anlehnen, besonders Buchstaben in un-
zialen Formen (P. Ant. 11 P. Oxy. 1315). Die bekannten Vergil-
kodizes des spaten Altertums in Capitalis rustica wird man
nicht als Gegenbeweis anfUhren konnen. Dieee Handschriften sind
in nachkonstantiniecher Zeit geeqhrieben, in einer Zeit, in
welcher der heidnisch gebliebene Adel durch Herstellung und Ver-
breitung von guten Texten romischer Literatur das romische Gei-
steserbe im Kampf gegen das aufbltihende Christentum zu erhalten
euchte. Diese Vergilkodizes, besonders die Prachthandechriften
in Capitalis rustica und Capitalis quadrata, sind ale glanzende
Gegenetiicke zu den kofi:baren Unzial-Purpurha.nd.schriften der
Christen zu begreifen • Die rornische Buchschrift, die Capita-
lie rustica., wurde beim Versuch siner heidnisch-romischen Re-
naiasance geradezu zu.m Politikum. Der Unziale, der vordringen-
den Buchschrift vornehrelich christlicher Literatur, wurde in
der Zeit des ausgehenden Altertums bewuat die altromiache Ca-
pitalis rustica gegenUbergestellt. Eine vermeintliche alte Ca-
pitalis quadrata kam gegen Ende des 4. Ja.t.rhunderts auf, eine
Buchschrift, die den in Stein gehauenen litterae Damasianae des
Filocalus nachgebildet zu eein echeint. Vielleicht wurde von Fi-
localus oder seiner Schule die Capitalis quadrata fur kurze Zeit
ale Buchschrift eingefiihrt. Eine lateinieche Buchechrift in der·
Form des Codex Augueteus und Sangallensis hat ea vor Filocalus
wohl nicht gegeben. Die Capitalis rustica und Capitalie quadra-
ta scheint in der Zeit des 4. - 6. Jahrhunderta in romischen
Skriptorien nur noch ale Kunstschrift Pflege gefunden zu haben.
Lebendige Buchschrift war die Capitalie quadrata wa.~rscheinlich
nie, die Capitalis rustica nicht mehr. In diesem ZusaI:litlenhang
ist es intetessant zu beobachten, da8 Vergilhandachriften der
Zeit des ausgehenden Altertums, deren Schriftheimat nicht Ita-
lien ist, alle in Unziale geachrieben sind. Die beiden Vergil-
fragmente aus lgypten, der Antinoepapyrus Nr. 30 in Capitalie
rustica und der Oxyrhynchuepapyrua Nr. 1098 in Capitalis ~uadra-
ta sind bezeichnenderweiee keine Papyri. Es sind Reate von Per-
gamentkodizes vermutlich italiecher Herkunft.
Die Entwicklung des Schriftstils des Verrespapyrua fti.hrte, wie
ich kurz darzustellen versuchte, zur Capitalie rustica, zu ei-
ner Schrift von GroBbuchstaben, die nach romischem Stilgeeetz
geformt eind. Die lateiniachen Papyri aus Herculaneum und zahl-
reiche pompejanische Wandinschriften aind im Stil lateinischer
Buchschrift, der Capitalis rustica, geschrieben. Auf pompejani-
schen Wanden sind ebenso zahlreiche Inschriften im Stil latei-
niecher Urkundenschrift, einer immer mehr nach Buchstabenver-
bindung atrebenden, schnell ausgeftihrten Schrift mit ausgebil-
deten Ober- und Unterlangen, erhalten. Die Trennung lateinischer
Schrift republikanischer Zeit in eine Buch- und Urkundenscnrift
vollzieht sich in augusteischer 2eit nicht nur in Italien. Ver-
mutlich beginnen aich zu aieaer Zeit beide Stilformen lateini-
scher Schrift im ges8.Illten romischen Reich zu verbreiten. Ein
frtihee tbun~sbeispiel lateinischer Buch- und Urkundenechrift
stellt fUr Agypten der HawArapapyrus Nr. 24 dar.
P. HawAra Nr. 24 (Abb. 6):
Die Capitalis ruatica, deren Gro6buchstaben mit Basis- und Ab-
schluBstrichen unverbunden nebeneinander stehen, tibte der Schrei-
ber mit dem Aeneisvers IV, 174. Von diesem Vere ist ••• iut ve-
locius lUt zu leeen. Der ganze Vera
Fama, malurn qua non aliud velociua ullum
ist nicht ausgeschrieben. Nach velocius ist ein deutliches Spa-
tiuw. festzustellen. Das Versende ullu.m konnte bei der Schreib-
tibung deshalb fehlen, weil die Buchstaben dieses Wortes schon
~ehrmals gelibt warden waren: Der Buchstabe U schon viermal, die
Buchstaben Lund M bereite dreimal.

282
Neben der Capitalie rustica wurde auf derselben Blatteeite die
lateinische Urkundenschrift getibt. Gramma iet deutlich zu le-
aen. Ob man hier den Horazvere Ars Poetica 78
Gra.~matici certant, et adhuc sub iudice lie est erganzen darf,
echeint mir fraglich. Die gut lesbaren Buchetaben dieser lateini-
schen Urkundenschrift sind schon sehr eng aneinandergertickt. Der
Eindruck einer Kursivschrift wird erweckt. Das R mit starker Un-
terlange fallt besonders auf. Oberlangen von Druckstrichen der
Buchstaben A und M lassen sich in verktirzter Form erkennen.
Stark ausgepragt 1st die Oberlange dee aua den Schriftresten
noch erkennbaren letzten Buchstabens, eines A. Betonte Zeilen-
mitte, Ober- und Unterllingen kennzeichnen diesen Stil lateini-
scher Urkundenechrift.
Auf der anderen Seite dee nawe.rapapyrue eteht eine SchreibUbu.ng
mit dem Aeneiavers II, 601, eine Schrift, die r~misches Stilge-
setz nicht voll zwn Ausdruck bringt. Die Zeilenrnitte 1st auch
bier betont. Die Buchstaben B und D haben geachwungene OberHin-
gen. Ee Uberrascht aber, daa Unterlan~en, die man beim R z.B.
erwarten mUSte, offenbar vereieden wurden. Ansatze einer Drei-
teilung der Schrift sind zwar vorhanden, einen durchgebildeten
lateinischen Schriftstil zeigt diese Seite des Haw&rapapyrus a-
ber noch nicht, weder den Stil der Urkundenechrift noch der
Buchschrift.
Beobachtungen zur Palaographie frUher lateinischEr Papyri konn-
ten nur in einer knappen Skizze rnitgeteilt werden. In der Schrift
der Ostraka von el-Fawachir, des Wiener Uacedobriefes lb und dee
.Berliner Briefes des Phileros an seine l:itsklaven 1st der Stil
der scriptura actuari~ rt?ublikanischer Zeit, der ale Urkunden-
schrift und Buchschrift gel ten darf, noch lebendig. Der Schrei-
ber a.ea Wiener ?.~acedobriefes la beherrschte berei te o.ie Formen
einer ausgeprtigten lateinischen Urkundenschrift. Die Schrift
des GieBener Verrespapyrus, ein Versuch latelnischer Buchschrift,
ist noch ganz vom Stil lateinischer Urkundenschrift dee Macedo-
briefee la bestim:r.t. Die ~ntwicklung des Stile des Verrespapyrus
filhrt zur Capitalis rustica, einer Zweilinienachrift von GroG-
buchstaben, die nach romischem Stilgesetz geformt sind. Die
SchBpfung gliltiger For~en ausgepr~gter lateiniecher Schrift iet
eine Leistung augusteischer Zeit.
Anmerkungen:
1 Degrassi, A., Inecriptiones Latinae Liberae Rei Publicae,
Imagines, S. 323, Nr. 401.
2 Curtius, L., Die Wandmalerei Pompejis, Abb. 41, s. 61.
3 Schefold, K., Pompejanische Malerei, Taf. 12.
4 Schefold, K., o. c., Taf. 13.
5 Seider, R., Palaographie der lateinischen Papyri, I,
Taf. IX, Nr. 16.
6 Schefold, K., o. c., Taf. 19.
7 Schefold, K., o. c., S. 102.
8 Schefold, K., o. c., S. 17lf.
9 Maiuri, A. und B., Dae Nationalmueeum in Neapel, s. 74.
10 Schefold, K., o. c., Taf. 3.
11 Turrini, G., Uillennium Scriptorii Veronensia dal IV
ao XV aecolo, Evangeliarium Purpureum (Abb.).
 IMPORTANT
EASTON DYNASTSIN niE PAPYRI*

R.D. Sullivan

Five -n and one..,_.,, ..,tioned in thr.e papyri, one parchment, and a fi ■ tful
of oatraea, coap:tae thi• paper. The firat and l••t lived nearly two centurie• apart;
the other three were cont-p:trariea. All ldlared one aajor diatinction: they belonged
to the dynaatic network tmich once governed Greek•, Iranian•, and S..i tea fro■ Anatolia
to Egypt.
firat the woean, a daughter of Tiwanea the Great. About 1909 "• atone Jar
he..-tically •••led" turned up in a cave near Avroaan in Kurdiatan, which Parthi•
ruled in the firat century B.C. 1 The jar yielded IKI■- leather roll ■• Two are in
Greek, recording vineyard aale•. nie fir ■ t begin•, "In the reign of the King of
King• Araacea, Kuergetea, Dikaioa, Epiphanea, and Philellen, and of the Queen ■,
Si£k:e hi ■ c:ompatemal (c¼io~a,:p(~) aieter and wife, hie wife Aryadte ■urnamed
Auto-', daughter of the Great King Tigrane• (,:fie; ly Pao~).il.lH; µcyOAOV TLypo.\lOU), and
AzJ.t~ hi ■ coapatemal aiater and wife, year 225". Regarding that date, no breathtaking
revelation ■ froa -■• After weaving a circle round it thrice and clo ■ ing my eyes in
holy dread I think Minne rightly aav the Seleucid era here; thua a date of 86 s.c. 2
Thie parchaent confiraa a practice previoualy known fro• literary aourcea:
dynaatic aarriagea between Parthiana and neighboring king ■, eapecially the Graeco-
Iraniana of Atropateae, Anaenia, and eo... gene. We know that Tigranee the Great of
Araenia, the "Great King" of thia docuaent, ■arried two children to Parthian royalty.
Similarly, Orodee II of Parthia aired by• daughter of Antiochu ■ I of Co11111agene aone
with clai ■• on the throne of Parthia.3
Parthi•n• began this long before, even pie.king up the odd Seleucid where they
could. One .. rriage involved a ai ■ ter of Antiochua Grypua, the Seleucid grandfather
of thi• Antiochua of Co-.gene. Another joined, with a clap like thunder,• Parthian
prince•• to 0-.tri~• Nieator. At the ti .. of thie document a Seleucid king,
Deaetriue Eueaeru•, dwelt re•tleealy in the court of Mithradatee, vhoae title•
Euergetea, Dikaioa, and Philellen ■uat have ■ truck an ironic note for Deaetriua while
awaiting relea•e or execution. So now we learn fro■ the AvroCDanecroll of yet another
.. rriage •• Tigrane■ peddle■ hie young to all taker■• Aryauti caae fumiehed with
two n--■• and a pedigree eufficient to rank her with ruling queen ■ even on aale
forwulari•••
Thi ■ accord ■ with the international eituation. Parthiana worried about
conjunction of royal houeee in Pontua and .\r■enia. Coneequent dynaatic manoeuvring
led to blova, to theae marriage•, and to ■ parring about title ■• Parthiana would call
Tigrane ■ 11King of Kinga 11 when they had to, ■ lapping their head• that they'd let hi ■
go after holding him hoetage5 in hi• youth. But at the tiM of thi ■ document,
Tigranee - vhoae Iranian n ..... ana ''Swifty" - haa not yet ■ade the major sweep•
he cont-plated and ■uat be content with "Great King'' when thumbing through the year'•
Parthian vineyard quotation ■•
Within four year• Tigranee moved on eo--gene and Antioch, taking advantage of
the ahaky rule of Orodea I in Parthia and of chaoa in Syria among the dying Seleucida.
He le.ft Co-..gene intact and waa r ■111embered there with enough awe, though not fondnee ■,
to inapire a coinage 110delled on hia own.6
He alao left im>re tangible reminder•, here and elaewhere: deacend&nte who
aupplied A.-.enia with king ■ or pretender• for a century. Glimpses of the proceaa
Naain in the swirl of oncoming Roman clai ■e and increaaing dynaatic intermarriage.
 Strabo shows, for instance, the dynaaty of Atropatene •••ing its way into Parthia
a• it had into Armenia; its princeesee eoon adorned the royal houaea of &neaa,
Co11111agene,and Judaea. Some Greek women at theae courts IDAYhave been hetairai, ••
Plutarch7 thought, but others became full queens, and another parchment of Minna
ehow ■ a Parthian Queen Cl~patra about 20 B.C.
By 47 A.D., our fir■ t pap7n1•8 glimpse■ the rapid intenieshing of dynaeties.
Jt contains a quoted reecript of Claudius to the 11Travelling Athl•t••' Guild" (a
reminder that over-organization ie not an entirely modern phenomenon). Claudius
acknowledges two reeolutiona atte ■ ting their contented participation at gaae ■ given
in hie name by "Gaiua Julius Antiochua, King of eo-agene, and Julius Polemo of
Pontu ■, &v6pa.OL 'fUµLoLi; }&OU Kai l9LA01.i;".
Now, it had been long ■ ince Tigrane ■ the Great. But Antiochua and Poleao
were products of that ■ame zeal to ■ tructure the East dynastically: both could claim
distant connection with Tigranea and both ruled lands once hi ■•
Fir ■ t, Polemo of Pontu ■• When Tigranee the Great married a daughter of
Mithradatea Eupator of Pontua he entered dyna ■ tiee which would still rule Cappadocia
for a hundred years and Pontua/Boaporus for three hundred. Both dynaetie• were to
furni ■ h king• for Armenia too. Our Pole1110 aired one1 Antiochus of eo ... agene waa
related to other■•
The strategy of Tigranea succeeded. Only six of hia direct deacend ... te ruled
Armenia. But it could draw kings from these collateral linea. When the houae of
Artaxiaa ended, a prince•• was in the Galatian house, and Pontua swarmed with
relatives. Yet there euddenly appears an Armenian king galloping out of the sunrise
from Atropatene! Whence thle apparition'? If we return to the time of the Avroman
scrolls, remembering that Atropatene lay just north, we find Tigranea buay there too.
Dio calla ita king ■on-in-law of Tigranes9; Strabo aaya Tigranee finally eubjugated
its monarchy.10 By Strabo'• day11 Atropatene had an independent line with
intenurriage in Armenia, Parthia, and Syria. AMong the Syrian relatives was our
Antiochus of Coanagene.
When the Atropatene line left the Armenian throne about 6 A.D., Auguatue rW11Daged
up a claimant from Judaea, of all places. Thie wae Tigranee IV, to whom we'll return.
Needle•• to aay, I'll try to prove him related to everybody else vho mattered.
There were also brief attempts now by the Parthiana to rule Annenia. Rome
experienced predictable e1DOtion but time would be on the Parthianst aide, after some
pushing and shoving under Nero (who thought it was a war).
12
By 18 A.D. • king fro■ Pontue presented himself in Armenia. Tigranes the Great
had sown the aeeda of thia, ao to ■ peak, as aon-in-law of Mithradates Eupator, who
thus died old. Subsequent kings of Pontua had invoked the relationahip to nibble at
Armenian territory. Polemo I even took Armenia Minor, which later paaaed to
Atropatene.
Hence our Juliua Polemo, a■ icua of Claudius, grandson of PoleBIO I, pos111ible
relative of Mar'ts Antony. 1.3 Polemo •s family ruled '!brace and Armenia Minor. 14 He
hi ■ aelf flourished under Caligula as King of Pontua and Boaporua, but he exchanged
Bosporus for part of Cilieia in 41, some 6 year■ before thia papyrua. 15
Poleao threaded the dyna•tic thicket ■• That meant tran-itting the family genea,
eo he 'got king■ in Cilicia and Annenia - probably by Julia Mamaea of Emeaa. 16
But Polemo ■ tarted poorly. He married the Judaean princess Berenice, 17 sister of
King Agrippa 11. After two -rriagea - one with the Egyptian Marcus Alexander, whom
we• 11 meet aoon - ahe lived with Brother Agrippa on terma people clucked at. But
Polemo didn't care. Through her he gained relatives in the houae of Herod and closer

286
tie• to dyn-t• intenurrled there, including Cappadociane, Co--.genian•, and
---•ene•. Among tbftl were three •r• king• ot A~i• or Cillcia - are- where
Poleao had 110re than ca•ual lntere•t. But Berenice'• third -rriage didrt't work either
and 800n llhe returned to Agrippa, leaving Pol.., to con110le hi ■aelt with geme• tor
Claudiu•• With •i ■ ilar -.tive•, hi• friend Antiochua of eo-agene had tried to get
into the act by betrothing a aon to Agrippa'• daughter, but the lad broke and ran when
the Jew• approached tor pre-nuptial circu■ciaion.
While ahuffling dyn .. t• before hi• Araenian aettleaent ot 66, Nero ■-de heavy
u•e ot Pole110 and friend•• In 54 the king• -obillzed againat a threatened Parthian
inva•ion or Araenia and in 60 th1r7 even partitioned it, with Pole• and Antiochua
aeizing adjacent landa. 18 During Corbulo'• caapaigning, both king• offered their
territory tor acceaa and for aupply, aince Roaan line• were far too long.
Toward the end of a productive life into which we have only gli ■pa••• Poleao
abdicated froa the throne of Pontu• but left hia naae: in 64 it c ... under Roaan
control aa Pontua Polemoniacu•, an ... atill uaed in the tiMe of Juatinlan. 19
Vhat of the other dynaat .. ntloned with Poleao? Antiochua IV wa• the great-
great-grandaon of Antiochu• I, who, like Tigranea, had aarried a daughter into
Parthia. 20 Hi• dyna•ty acquired connection with Atropatene when the grandfather
of Antiochu• IV -rried it• prince•• Iotape, frellh fro11 her betrothal to Marte: Antony'•
eon. The -.ther of Antiochua wu thua a half-Atropatenian prince•• alao called Iotape
and hi• aunt wa• another, ■arried into Bae•a• Antiochue decided thia had c,one far
enough and ■arried hi• own aiater, • "--tll Iotape aptly •urn-ed Philadelphoa.
After deep thought they naaed their daughter Iotape.
Only on thia papyrua doe• Antiochua receive Ro ■an noaenclature; we'd ezpect
Claudiua to uae it. The coinage, in•cription•, and literature alway• .-ploy hi•
dyna•tic naae•, Antiochu• and Epiphane•.
In part of Rough Ci licia Antiochu• and Poleao ■ hared • border - perhapa locating
the•• oa-e• for Claudiu ■, it jointly offered. Thi• area bad belonged to Archelau• of
Cappadocia and would p-• to King Alexander, the Judaean-Cappadocian ■on-in-law ot
Antiochua IY and de ■cendant of Archelau ■ .21 So the region was a 111icroco.. ot the
dyna•tic network. Both Antiochua and Pole110 carried out -bi tioua progr-• of
consolidation, e ■pecially through founding dyn-tic citie ■• The g... • ■entioned in
thi ■ papyrua probably ■ erved the ■a■e urbanizing purpo ■e, beaid•• reaeauring Claudiua.
At lea ■ t one city,,.. naaed Claudiopoli•.
Thi ■ careful ■ocial ■ tructuring carried on beyond Antiochua and Pole■o. Even
after Roman abeorption of the kingdo•• religioua tie• re■ ained, auch a■ the cult at
Doliche in Co-.gene ■ aid to be borrowed fro• Pontua. Aa late a ■ Septimiua Severu■,
Co■■agene wa■ ■ till org.anized a• an entity around four of these citie•.
In a reign that laated from Caligula to Ve•paaian, Antiochu• experienced
everything fro■ high praiae to war at Roaan hand•, an honored tradition •ince Antiochua
I, who had been called tri.-.d by Po■pey and Lucullu• and be■ ieged by Antony and Herod.22
Tiberiua annexed the kingdoa when the father of Antiochua IV died, and he grew up in
Roae, beco■ ing ■o friendly with Caligula that he and Agrippa of Judaea were termed
~upo.vvoO~boouxAoL by alarmist ■ at court.23 When Caligula acceded he restored Antiochu■
and added the maritime Cilician holdinga,24 returning to Antony•• policy of controlling
the East through its native ari ■ tocracy. Antiochus rapidly ro ■ e on the intrinsic
wealth of hie kingdo■ to a po ■ ition described by Tacitua 2 5 a ■ "mighty by reason of
ancient reaource ■ and riche ■ t of the allied king•"•
For so ■e reason, Caligula deposed Antiochua again, b~t Claudiug reatored hi~ in
41, the aa.e year he traded Polemo • part of Cilicia for Boeporua. 2 The full kingdom
of Antiochua ran from weetern Rough Cilicia to the Euphratea, broken by the holding•
of Polemo in Cilicia Campeetri•. He ruled well for thirty-five years, founding some
five cities in Cilicia alone. In older citiea there the coins attest his activity.
So the present papyrus is a random reflection:,t Rome•• extensive reliance on native
dyna•ts to bind and civilize thia rough area. Small wonder Claudiua feel• no
aurpriae at goodwill from the two kings: the situation aided everyone. Rome could uae
these and 11111aller dynaats, without whom no effective policy was yet possible.
In turn, Rome funiiehed a larg,er frutevork for dynastic activity. Ultimately thia
network began to phaae its members into Roman ■ ervice, as we'll see.
Under Vespaaian, Antiochu ■ IV again lost hia kingdom. Games for Claudius
were not enough. After moving from the initial Roaan policy of installing consular
governor• in Cilicia (&1DOngthem Cicero,aupported by Antiochus J of Comma.gene) to
relying inatead on native dynaats, Rome now resumed gradual annexation until ehe
reached the Euphrates.
Antiochus deserved no such fate. He eerved Claudiu• and Nero well. He
floundered a bit after Nero, wondering whom to ■ upport; one of his aons emerged
puzzled and wounded from a battle between follower• of Vitellius and of Otho. But in
the Jewiah War he aided Veepaeian and Titus, winning the praM:e of Josephua for hi•
epectacular contingent ■ and the re ■ource ■ which backed them.
On the other hand, Veapaaian feared a Parthian entente with eo.... gene on the
ancient Euphrate• cro ■ •ing•. Tacitua and Joaephu• record Ro ■an alarm at any auch
proepect: Parthia wae the other "•uperpower" of the day,29 Jo•ephus note• in a
wide-eyed pa•aage that the entire Roman regime would totter if Coanagene tilted
ea•tward, and Vespaaian'• agents nearly fell acros ■ the border straining for a better
view.
Hence a charge against Antioehua of intriguing with Parthia and Romana found
the.eelvea back in the daya of Antony, laying •eige to cities in Comma.gene. The
unkindest cut of all waa aid to Romana by Agrippa, the Judaean friend and relative
of Antiochua. After a skirmish, Antiochua fled toward his holdings in Cilicia and his
eona to Parthia, where their warm reception must have convinced Ro111anathey were
young fry of treachery.)O But it ended with Antiochua and son• finding an h~ed life
in Rome. His daughter remained aa queen in Cilicia; and Julius Antiochus Philopappua,
his loving grandaon, retained the title of King until hi• consulship. Hi•
granddaughter Balbilla would be 1110re than a friend to Hadrian.)1
Now in rapid ■ ucceaeion the remaining papyri and the oatraca. The aecond papyrua
is actually eeveral, naming the renowned Prefect of Egypt, Ti. Juliu ■ Alexander. From
the Hellenized Jewi ■h ariatocracy of Alezandria, he inherited high social po ■ ition.
Hie uncle need ■ no introduction: Philo Judaeu ■• His father, Alexander the Alabarch,
does. He had achieved •uch wealth that King Agrippa borrowed from him, and not from
the petty cash drawer: 200,<X>O drachmae -de a lot of bread.) 2 The family could handle
.ajor transaction• ae far away as Puteoli, and the Alabarch i• called pro-
curator (tu'tpol'ICVOClv"ta) of Antonia, mother of Claudius. He - like Pole110,
Antiochua, and Agrippa - appears among the philoi of Claudiue and may have also helped
in hi ■ acceesion.)3 Graecia capta indeed.
A second ■on of the Alabarch was Harcus Julius Alexander. Thia man chose the
coanercial aide and the o ■ traca were hie. Jn the period )7-44 A.D., the archive of
Nicanor showa him active in the trade paseing through the Red Sea ports at Berenice or
Myo■ Hora::,a from Arabia and Jndia.3 4
Undoubtedly ■011111 of the money involved in these transaction ■ etayed with Marcus.
About 41 he decided to aee if it would intereat Berenice - not the port but the
daughter of Agrippa J, who probably atill owed the Alabarch tha. two hundred thoueand.

288
 Ir Berenice waa collateral, the arrangeaent didn't hold. for ahe aoon pa•aed on
•till clai ■ lng virginity to her uncle, and th., to our Poleao of Pontua, who rared
little better.
But cloae relation• continued between Tiberiua Alesander and the Judaean houae.
About the tiae of hi• brother'• .. rriage he began hie own career, which led to positions
right in the thick or affair• between Roae and Juda••• By no accident, the Jewi ■h War
find• hi ■ Prerect of •onrt• and at leaat one toQa-and-dagger trip took Agrippa II to
... t Alexander in Egypt.
Alexander rurthered the dynaatic network. He had at leaat three children who
attained high poaition or office. Hia per ■onal influence appear ■ high and tvo papyri
ahow deci ■ iona of hi ■ cited aa precedent ■ long arter hi ■ tenure of office, one in
200 A.D.!l5
Alexander al ■o joined Antiochua and PoltlllO in honoring Claudiu ■• But he choee a
local idio■, dedicating• relief with hieroglyphic text and poor Claudiu ■ shown
aupplicating two Egyptian deitiea.J6
One attraction theae people found in the Judaean houae was it ■ pool or prince•
and prince ■•••• High aaong theae were the grandson and gre ■ t-grand ■on of Glaphyra.
Her father Archel ■u• ruled a ■ la ■t king of Cappadocia till 17 A.o.37 Her ■on Tigranes
IY looked good to Augu ■ tu■ when the Araenian line peri ■hed and the Atropatene line
vent ho... So about 6 A.D. Augu ■ tu■ plucked hi ■ fro■ the Judaean house to be inatalled
in Araenia. Glaphyra had pas ■ed on to hi ■ dynastic clai ■• deriving partly fr'OIII
Tigranea the Gr-t over 70 year• before. Joaephu ■ .. ys ■he her ■elf claimed de ■cent
fro■ the Per3ian ■, and Augu ■ tu ■ ■ peak ■ of her ■on Tigrane ■ a■ ex repio penere
Anaeniona.l But he lo■t the faYOur or the Araeniana, and, in )6, of Tiberlu■•
The a■bition ■ o,, Tigranea IV and hi ■ grandrather Archelaua of Cappadocia -Y lie
behind their trouble with Tiberiua. The ■-rriage of Archelaua to the widow of Pole1110
1)9 had joined Pontua and Cappadocia: Anaenia under hi ■ grandeon ■ight have proapted
i ■penaiaaible dre ... of renewed Anatolian grandeur. Al ■o, the high lineage of
Tigrane ■ and hi ■ brother had brought the auggeation that one of th .. might ■ ucceed their
grandfather Herod the Great. So the Judaean hou•e harbored a u■eful but dangerou ■
~-■ ily in th• ■e Cappadocian ■•
The f ... ily IIOOn grew -,re ao. About 60 A.D. it produced a ■econd claimant for
.AnNnia, Tigrane ■ v, vholl the c•paigning or Corbulo and mobilization of the dynut ■
were deaigned to ■aintain. But the effort failed and Araenla vu left at laat to
Ar■acid rule. The ■ole legacy of Tigrane■ Y wa■ one laat king in the Co--genian
dynaaty. Thi ■ waa hi ■ Judaean-Cap~docian ■on King Alexander. In 72, when Veapadan
took over Coaaagene proJ)8'r, he left Alexander aa King in Rough Cilicia, predictably
-rried to the daughter of Antiochua.
King Alexander niled •• an appropriate laat king there before d-,tion to Ro■an
aSlator and con ■ul. Thi ■ region had been ruled by hi• father-in-law Antiochu■ and hie
great-great-grandfather Archelaua, through whom he repre ■ented the Cappadocian line,
which had also drawn royalty fro■ Pontu■• The Armenian clal ■ had lived on in
Alexandar 1 a own father Tigranes V.
What r .... ined open to these poet-royal ari ■ tocrat ■ toward the end of the fir ■ t
century, when few king ■ beaide ■ Agrippa II of Judaea r-■ained ■outh of Boapon.ia and
vest of Armenia, waa ■ imilar re ■ pon ■ ibility eserciaed through local and Ro ■an offices.
The tide or Oriental aenator ■ wa ■ ri ■ ing; the ■e acion ■ of !or11er king ■ for .. d its creat.
A ■ ingle text can illuatrate thia and introduce our laat papyrus. About 118, an
in ■ cription at Ancyra honor ■ the Galatian noble C. Juliu ■ Severua a ■ de ■ cendent of
varioua kings and tetrarcha.40 It list ■ a few of hi ■ relations, calling him kinsman of
■any senator■ and a~c♦ LO~ of four con ■ular■• Ve find a1110ngthese our Judaean King
Alexander of Cilicia and a certain Claudius Severu ■•
 Thi• man, linked by the inscription to King Ale~ander and through hi ■ to the
Judaean-Commagenian-Cappadocian-Annenian aristocracy, i• alao mentioned in our laat
papynis. P. Michigan viii 466, dated 107, is a letter from a aoldier to hi• parents.
The soldier serves in one of Trajan'a legions in Arabia. He hu little taate for
breaking rocks all day in the heat aa the other ■ do and aaka the con ■ ular commanding hie
legion for work aa hia aecretary. The commander i• C. Claudiua Seven.ia, avct~oc ' . of
Julius Severua, relative of King Alexander, and th• firat governor of Arabia. 41
It ia well for this paper to end with him, for Claudius Severua atanda in the aame
relation to Rome•• the related king• of Emeaa did: fro■ him deacended a member of the
Imperial houae of Rome, the Claudius Severua~ 2 who married the daughter of Marcus
Aureliu•. Another ID9llllberot thia r-i1y43 would -arry the eaperor Elagabalua,44
hi-elf a deacendlnt of the dynaaty of Eaaaa - which had been allied by ■arriage to
that of Coaaagene and of Pontua.
A parch■-nt, three papyri, and ao- ostraca. Ala,at t.h• only auch aateriala to
.. ntion Eaateni dynaata, otherwi•• well represented in the literature and inacriptiona.
It'• a long way from Tigranea of A.naenia to Claudiu• Severua of Galatia by way of
Antiochus of Co--.gene, Polemo of Pontus, and t.he Alabarch' • two aona. But the
vitality of the network of Eastem aristocrats i• highlighted by thi• rando■ aurvival of
five "documents" revealing individual• from Egypt to Parthia aeparated by as ■uch as
two centuries yet able to be brought into firm conjunction.
Dr. R.D. Sullivan,
Dept.ot Greek and Roman Studies,
University of Saakatchewan,
Saskatoon, Saak., Canadl.
* My thanks to Dr Revel Cole• for inviting this paper. A larger treataent of
the •ubject will appear in the Special Papyrological Number of Mueeua Phllologum
Londiniense for 1975.
t. E. Minna in JHS 35 (1915) 22-65; cf. NC 6 {1966) 19.
2. The era begiMing 311 seem• preferabl-;-"to the one from 312 Minna used. See
Ro ■ tovtzetf in YCS 2 (19J1) 41!. - • most tendentious bit of argument - and
Simonetta in NC6(1966) 18-20.
). Dio 49.23.)-4-.- 4. Joa. AJ 13.)84-86. 5. Strabo 11.14.15.5)2.
6. R. Sullivan in NC 1) (1973)18-36, with eteminata. 7. Cra ■ a. )2.5.
8. P. Lond. ).1178-; Wilcken, Chrest. 156: Smallwood, Gaius~ 374 (part).
9. Dio )6.14.2. er. RE 6A (t9J6) 976. 10. Strabo 11.14.15.532.
11. Strabo 11.1).1-2.523. 12. Thi ■ was Zeno-Artas:ias, PtR2 A 1168.
13. PIR2 J 472. 14. PIR 2 C 1554 and 1555, J 517. 15.Dio 60.8.2.
16. iN"""tt (1969) 45-47. This aesumes the Julius Polemo of our papyrwt identical
rith M. Antonius Polemo of the coinage, an identification leaa unlikely than
it would seem outside the polyonymoue East. See G. Hill in NC (aer.)) 19
(1899) 181-207. The family signalled its deacent fro■ Antonyby uaiag his
name: PIR2 A 864 (perhapa our Polemo), 882, 900 (hh mother). Antony had
recognized Polemo I for part of Cilicia (App. B.C. 5.75.J19) too. The new
coin's legend - BAII.u:cl: MEI'(aXou) - accord• biller with the former King of
Pontus and Boaporua than with a ■ inor dyna ■ t. Pol81110 II apparently did u•e
H.ANT. in Cilieia, perhap■ only after the Julio-Claudians: Babelon, lnventaire
••• Waddington 248 no.4427 • BMCLyeaonia liv no.2 (Polemo and Galba).
17. PIR2 J 651. 18. Tac. Ann. 14.26.2. 19. Ju•tin., Nov. 31; E. Honigmann,
~Synekdemos d'Hierokle";"7"Bruxellea 19)9) )7 no.702.3:--
20. See the stenaa for his house at NC 1) (1973) )6.
21. PIR 2 A 1023; A 500 = J 1)6. 22. Dio 49.22; Plut. Ant. 34; Joa.~ 14.4)9
'i°iidBJ 1.320-22. Pompey claimed conqueat: App. Mithr:-i'17.
23. Dio 59.24.1. 24. Dio 59.8.2. 25. Tac. Hiat. 2.81.1. 26. Dio 60.8.t,
27. Strabo 14.5.6.671; 12.1-4.5))-5)7. 28. Jo•• BJ 5.460-65; 2.500; ).68.
29. Tac. Hiat. 2.82.); Joa. BJ 7.219-24). )0. Jo'";; BJ 7.2)7.
Jl. PIR 2 ~1 and 650. )2. Jo•. A,J 18.159!. J)-;-Jo•. A.J 19.276; t8.159ff.
)4. J-:-Tait, Greek Oatraca, I (Londont9JO) 116-122 noe.252, 266f., 271, 282.
)5. P. Oxy. vi 899.27; £:!.:!.• ii 418 d-•• Cf. IGLSyr '-<)11. On Alexander••
euppoaed Praetorian Prefecture, ee• E.W. Gray in JHS 92 (1972} 2)5.
J6. OCHS 66). J7. PIR 2 G 176 and A 102). JS. Jo ■• BJ 1.476; Rea Geatae
'if':i.
Boech, rrllen7..
41. JRS 61 1971)
)9. PIR1P8)4
AnkarH
and 405. 40. IGRR Ill 17:,--; OGIS 544 =
(Ankara 1967) 1irn'.
2)5; cf. S~ria 50 (1973) 227 notH
nr.105. ;--
7-8; PIR C 102).
42. PIR 2 C 1024. 4). !,!!!. J 648. 44. !.!.!,1 V 184; cr:-PIR 2 J 649.

291
 SELECTIVE
STEMMA R.D. SULLIVAN

lllTHUMTIS SUP.lTCR
lOllt•, 120-63 B.C•
.a
AIIAIA"CDS II' ~CBS ll ciioifATU !IGIAlilS the QUA!
C&ppadoeia Pontua ~ _ Armenia, 95-55 e.c.
daughter• MC81111 I -~~a• KITHllDATBS II
Parth.ia Parthia; Atropatene
.UCIIIU.IB n oe PITHODCRISairPOlrlMOI - DTIIAKIS
CafP.doc.la. \ PotmlS
I I BlfOD

...,
GUPlllli

.------,I
_
Al u•.La

.......
'1U0ASA
uisTOBOULOS
I DIIO-ARTAIIAS
Armenia
AlfOIU TRI carts
Thrace I
PHILO
JUDUU8
ALU.
1

ALA&.
'° TIC'.P,lfllfSIY AlcXIIDA AGi.IPP£. I lg •
w Armenia Judaea~ ,,

m== D
'l'IGIAIIS
luia
y AGI.IPP£. II
Judaoa
.JULIA JWl.lU ..
....
PQLIMo
~•;
11 a.

Cilicia
11Ui1ca••~
@) ~&t~
&t,IJ& IIDD.

I~AS 1Il - AJ\AAIPP ---------- J. SOD.DB ----------- ~• SKVUIJS

Cilicia Galatia 5
-
OGIS 51'+

1 &. Nlnna, ~ 35 (1915) 22-65; NC b (1966) 19

2 L, Logl. iii 1178 (47 A.D.)
.3 7. Tait, .2LPetr11 252, 266 t., 211, 282 (37-44 A.n. h ~ Oetraca .!!!.the Bodleian (London
4 ~ !2JJ:
VI lff 1 etc.. /910) ;, ,, • .,,.-112
s !t. Bidt:. viii ~ Qo1A-1>~
 .Anna hid erelc
Une nouvelle copie de P.14ich.lX 529.25-,a

Le volume I:X des Michigan Papyri pr&sente, au No 529,un

papyrua int&reasan.t,que aoa &diteur,llae Husselman,intitule1
"Petition to the Prefect,Court proceedingll!' Belon llae Hus-
aelman, 11 a'agit ici de deu docum.eDts 1.nd,pendants&au rec-
to,notamment,d'une requete, adresa6e au pr,tet Maevius Ho-
norati8DU8, qui e:xerc;ai t sea tonctions entre 2'2-2,S AD, et
relative a l'illposition d'une liturgie contrairement au:x l•ia
en vigu.eur. Le verso pr,senterait, au dire de 1',diteur, "a
transcript from. the imperial rescripts ot Severus and Cara-
salla consisting of an e2cerpt from. a court case with a deci-
sion, based on a rescript of those emperors".
Parmi lea papyru conti,s par les Staatliche Museen zu Ber-
lin a l'Institut de PapyrOlogie de l'Universit'
1
de Varso'Yie en
"9'\lede leur publication , se trouve un document, No inv.7216,
qui constitue une autre copie du tate de P.Mich.lX 529 ;y~
11. '25-38, done de la partie, considt.r6e par llae Hussehlan
come un "m:cerpt tr011 a court cue". 2
P.Berol.inv. 7216

]too kup{6u ~µwv EEou~pou

'AvTwvECvou~~uxon~ E~o&PoO~EE~aaToO
•
.,;, Tl~n KOLkC~a toTLv tv T~
vou~ ~v UL08w}~~ tO'TLV,&XX& eapUV£\ Tob,
5
.
Y£WP:'d>ycxa\ T~t aPp6xou xwpa~ :~k
-
uove6EaµC!9t inaC'T£L. 6€ov'taL vOv Ta~[v
~Qv 'tE}wv 6La ''tnt Bou~nu~oµLcjw·
Oaa0aL, Ta *~'Tu Y~ txL8a~~£08aL Ok•t
n6y:pov avepwnoutvbt .[
10 R JOOQ.U'tnt Av'TWV£tvoc[
EtPa.oTo~ J lxL~~ne~otTaL Totvy~

2 93
 'tote nAoy}:11.w'tlpoL~· El 6'ouv 'tOU~ "f)t'tOU~
xa\ 'touc glxpoCxou>ou 8ap~OL ~ tx 'tOU o,C
'tEl,yfto1JA£1J'twv
auµfwv£C~
Le texte soulign' se trouve auesi dans P.Mich.IX 529;
11.1-2::P.Mich.l.25& ~t &:,ij>xp1.µ11'twv
8&li>v teou11pou xf1.
•Av'twvCvou] l,8:P.liich.1 • .31: tra.
6} AOL'1« 't~ Y1\ l1t1,f3«Al.£0'8aL
1.9:P.Mich.1.311 1t6wep6v ta'tLV &v0pwnoutvoC
ll.1}-14--P.Vich.l.36 bitf&e et remplac,e par lea 11.35 et
37 (dans P.Mich.1.36 µ~ ~ap► >·
Du fait que les deu.:x margee manquent au papyrus de Ber-
lin,11 est impossible de fixer le nombre de lettrea,contenues
soit dans la lacune droite,soit dans la lacure gauche. Il est
seulement possible de calculer le nombre de sigDes qu.1 se trou-
vent entre la fin d 'une ligne du tate consen& et le d'but de
la ligne suivante (pour sillpl.1.tier, notre transcription place
g&n,ralement toutes lea reconstitutions du cSt& gauche). Ce
sont surtout les ll. 3-4, 11-12 et 12-13 du 1>.Berol. ,corres-
pondant aux ll.28, 34 et 36 du PJlich. qui donnent un tonde-
ment solid• ace calcul. L'identit& des deu:z textes permet de
pr6ciser que'le papyrus berllnois pr,sente les lacunea suivan-
teaz entre la fin. de la 1.3 et le d&but de la 1.4 - 11 lettres;
entre la fin de la 1.11 et le a,bu.t de la l..12 ainsi qu' entre
la till de la 1.12 et le d6bu.t de la 1.13 - 8 lettrea seul•ent.
Eette constatation perme~ de calculer approxillativement la di-
m.ension des lacunu dana lea autres llgn••• O'est de cette 111-
ae ■aniere qu'il est actuell•ent aussi possible d',valuer •
des lacunes dana le papyrus de Michigan qui, ellea, reriend-
raient a14 lettres entre la till de la 1.2? et le a,but 4e la
1.33, et a
15 lettrea eatre la fin de l.a 1.28 et le d'but de
la 1.29. •
Le document de Kichigan pr&sente UJl e:xtrait des actes of-
ficiels tait a
une date plus tardiTe. Son recto prortent 4ea

294
•■ f• 2,2 - 232 il>, et le Terao aellble 1m. ltre eonteapo-
rai:a., •· pl.ue tardil encore. Cette augg .. 15:it&:.:en appa.-
1'• par la Utul.at;ure 111p,r1aie de la 1..251 8&Glv I:&ou,'jpou
1ta.i. ' Av-rwv Cvou. L" utrai t dee apokriaa'ta est clpnc
sureaa.1. poat,rieur a la aort de Caracalla. Par contra, le
decua.ct berl.iJloia :tut dre••'• i •• qu'il ••ble, du 'l'iTat
de cet eapereur. La titul.atee blp'riale t111Pl.e7•tlaoigne
~ll a'agit ici d'UA docua•1i, r'4ig& aJ)NII l~annN 212,
quad - aprea la wz-t; de Ge"ti-_ Caracalla &tait aeul. ai pao.-
Toir (d.-U. 10-11 • 1.3:, du P.llich., oti. Antoninoa Sebastoa
ti.gure aana co-Nga.t). La date la plus probable sera1t ici
celle de la Ti.sit• de Caraoalla en Bgypte, dom l' autOaDe de
l 'ann&e 215.
La llgne 26 du papyrua d.• llichigan reete &IID8 ,quiTalent
dana le tez'te consen-& du docuaent berlinoia. Sa prndere
partie ( µe8'l-r£pa 'fO dvf11tov µlpo~ )n'y a probable■ent ja-
w•1e tigu.NI. Lea aota cites aon.t au1Tia du fragaent d'ua aoa
propre Ae>i.1.av. I Plus lo~ (ll. 10-11 = l..'4 du P.llich.) le
a• de l'eapereur figure au·noa1oa'tir 1 auivi - cOIB.e 11 ea"
pemill de le pr,auaer - d.u aot £ l,u:v m AA..Eye1, , car lea
paroles qu1. 'ri.eu.eat ensuite coutituen:t, sam &UC\111. doute,
1'bonc& 111:p&riali 81 l'on lieait a la 1.26 du papyrus de
llicbigan ( = 1., du papyrus berlino:!a) 1e llOll de Loliaaoa au
datir, pour donner au document la form.e -t,pique d'apokrillla,
la torm.e nominative du- n011 de l' empereur dmendrait 1n1ntel-
llg1.b1e. s' agirai t-11 done ici d-'un proces verbal d 'audience,
anal.ogu.e au tezte, publi& en 1948 par K.Schwarts 4 ? La pre-
aiere partie du document, juaqu'~ la llgne 10, tarmin&e par
l.e'aot ,-ooau-r11 pr,senterait alors le p1aidoyer d'un car-
tai:A Lo llanos, accuaant UD termi. er qui "non seul.em et pe:r-
901 t de 11.ombrenu i.JllpSts dana le nome, mais, en pl.us, oppri-
11.e les cu1tivateurs et r,clam.e la aonodesmia eur lee. terns
non :Snondltes, bien que certains 1alp6ts doivent gtre donn&s

295
Il est a noter qu'environ vingt ans apres ■a date de iedac-
tion le'texte fut cite sous un ••• en-~ite avec un autre
document qui, lui, constitue un apokrilla'de s,vere et Ca-
racalla, dat, de l'ann6e 200 (P.Mich.IX 529.J9➔S,).
Il est rei;narquable que le texte ••• n'ait subi que
d'infimes modifications 1 bien que la dopi.e~'P•••'Dieu» t&-
moigne d 'un soi.D. plua particuller en ce qui '°onceme le
style du docUlleDt et la formul.ation plus clef'• " de aon. con-
tenu.
llalgr& 1 'opinion contraire de llae Husselman. j e crois
que le verso du P.Mich.ll 529 eat illtiaeaen:t a
11, son
recto. Il s 'ag1 t notamaeu:t; de dela 6nonc,a i11periaU2 au
sujet de deu:x couses a la fois diff&rentes et semblables,
probablem.ent cit,a a t'appui. de la requSte qm. •• trouve
au recto du pap::,rua:

N o t e s

1. Voir A.~widerek, Les BGUde Varsovie, Akten des llII.

Internationalen PapyrologeD.kongressee, Mflnchen.1974,
'9}-}96.
2. Ce document berlinois fut analyse en son temps du point
de 't'\le de la paleographie par M.Cavallo, dans son artic-
le "La scrittura del P.Berol.11532, CQntributa allo sm-
dio dello stile di cancelleria nei papyri greci di eta
romana" 1 Aegyptus 45, 1965, 216-249 ( P. Berol. ? 216 es-6
reproduit a
la planche'.'8). J' en publie le texte c1-des-
sous avec 1'autorisation de K.W.Ktlller, directeur cJa
Aegyptischea Kuseua, Staatliche Kuseen su Berlill, a
qui ;j' exprime ma sine ere reconnaiasance. •
a feme par la boul.e,et d"autr• illpoa&a sur lee terrea".
n •"agit ici proba?tl•ant de aouligner la d1.tt6rence entre
lea i.11.pots direct• (coaae lea 1.11.p&tatonciers ainsi que la
capi tatioa) et lea iapota indirect&, qu1 eont encore donn,s
a :te:me. Selon WallaaeS, la ■onodeaaia &tait d"habitude per-
tue direct•ent, aaia 11 e:ziate au.eai le taoignage du P.-.ay
34, d "aprea lequel elle pouTait par:toie ,tre donn.,e a terae
avec d'autrea iaplu. La de:raiere phrase'de Lollanoa·(e'il
a'agit Yraiaent cleaea propres'parolu) dirait a peu prea1
•eat-ee poaaible qu"ua ••ulho-• puisee ■ e pemettre et,
tellea libert,a?•
La f orm.ulation de l' '1ioac, de l' eapereur manque pour nous
de clart,1 elle ,tait d,ja peu co111prh.enaible pour ceV,J qu" elle
concernait directem.ent, o, dont t,■oigneat lea corrections,
1Atroch11tee dans la copie posterieure. Il e 'agit c ep eDdant
d'une i.DjoRction., contora• al.a politique pn,rale de Caracal-
la qui tend a illlposer lea contribuablu lea plus riches. Il
s•ble 11.&nequa, selon la Yol.ont, e:xpresse de l' empereur, lea
indigents et lea paysana c~ov~
A£~~-u~ x«i Tot~ &ypoC~ou~ 6 )
n• aoient charglta de eertaines radeYancea qu' en Yigueur d'un
arrSt6 unanime (auµ,wv,; CCJ ) de la boule.
·u..Bowaan dans son liYre aur "The 'fon Councils or Rowan
Egypt" constate ce qui suis ".lpart from being an essential
cog in the imperial bureaueracy, it (sc. la boule) waa also
the J1ok between that burencracy and the tax-payer iD the
metropolis and the nome, and hence sustained a dual. role as
an agent of the state and as the protector of the tu-payer
7
against unfair treatment". Le papyrus berlinois illustre
d 'une f'a9on frappante ce rSle de la boule, tout en thaoignant,
ace qu'il semble, que du aoins au d&but•du III 9 siecle, cer--
tains im.pSts 1ndirects &taient encore p~ par lea fermiers~
Un autre probleme, dont la solution rerlent au:z sp&cia-
liste, c'est la qualification juridique du document de Berlin.

297
3. Com.me1411eRussel.man (ad loc.) ltadilet, ll est impossi-
ble de prltciaer, a'11 s'agit ioi d"un avocat, ou bieD
de l'une des deux parties du litige.
4. J.Schwartz et P.Beno!t, "Caracalla et lee troubles
d'Ale:1andrie en 215 apres J.C.", Etudes de Papyrologie 7,
1948, 17 - 33( = SB 921, ) •
.
5. Wallace, Tuation,~72-74f d2 raaia ~, aussi p.289 (P.:,9.7 '4)
6. Ct. "homj.nea ru.stici tenuea" de l'inscript1011 de "ealtus
Buruni tanus", OIL VIll 10570 et 14464, voir II.Rost6vtzeft,
Social and Bconoaic History of the Bren ~ire, ?c:F!J,
n.s.
7• .&..:It.Bowman,
The TownCouncils of Roman Egypt, Toronto 1971,
77; et. also p.122 et l"interprltation .de P.0%y nI 1414
lplD:&la&:.tllQllllk....._.
,
pass.
B. Of. Apokrimata II.
A Fragment of a Table of Conaula ~rom Tebtunia V.J.Tait

The papyrus discussed here is the property of the

Egypt Exploration Society of London. 1 It belongs to a
group of texts that are in the proceaa of being published
by the Society in an edition preP,ared by the present
writer, and this ia to form a volume in the Society's new
documentary aeries. The papyri are a little over fifty
in number, and include texts written in Greek, in demotic
Egyptian, and alao a few in hieratic and in hieroglyphs.

The texts to be published are a selection from a

very considerable parcel of papyrue material housed for
the Egypt Exploration Society in the Aahmolean Mueeum in
Oxford. The provenance of these papyri ia not recorded,
but from internal evidence it can be concluded with con-
fidence that the entire collection comes from Tebtunia.
Although only a handful of the texts are securely dated,
it ia plain that the great majority of them are to be
assigned to the second century A.D. Grenfell and Hunt
excavated the town and the cemeteries of Tebtunis during
the winter of 1899-1900. However, the present parcel
seems to have formed an individual purchase from dealers
made by Grenfell and Hunt in Egypt at some date after
their excavations.

Of the texts to be published, those in demotic

Egyptian are perhaps of the greatest interest. The
parcel contains surprisingly few fragments of demotic
documents. Such as there are do not appear to be of any
particular value, and none of them have at present been
prepared for publication. However, the demotic literary
texts, although fragmentary, provide much new and useful

299
information, and several of them are the tirat of their
kind to have come to light.

The demotic narrative texts include several belong-

ing to the cycle of Inaros-Petubastia texts. Our
ideas of the scope of this cycle are steadily being
modified as more and more texts, housed in a number of
different museums and collectiona 1 are studied and
published. Another fragment preserves a section of a
duplicate version of the well-known Leiden demotic
papyrus containing animal fables, known as 'Kuti•, or as
the 'Mythus vom Sonnenauge', which is notable for being
a demotic Egyptian text of which we poaeeas both the
original, and fragments of a Greek translation, written
2
in the third century A.D. A small fragment seems likely
from its contents to belong to a prophetic text of pre-
cisely the same kind as the Greek 'Potter'• Oracle', which
is generally accepted to be a translation or adaptation
of an Egyptian text. Another papyrus preserves part of
the kind of demotic original from which the Greek
'Invocation of Iaie' wae translated. There are also two
insignificant scraps that have proved to belong to the
same papyrus as a number of more substantial unpublished
fragments belonging to the Carlsberg Foundation and
housed in the Egyptological Institute of the University
of Copenhagen. This text is an extensive and systematic
demotic Egyptian herbal. The existence of Egyptian
herbal texts has long been surmised, but this is the
first example to be found. It is remarkable that the
text is completely without illustrations. Other frag-
ments belong to wisdom texts, dream books, and medical
texts.

300
 A11 the Greek texts in the co1lection are in a very
1'ragmentary condition. There are very tev literary frag-
■enta, and none ot importance. Perhaps to be described
ae literary i• a •••11piece ot an a ■ trological text, and
there are also some fragment• of a Greek herbal with
coloured illustrations, very similar to the Greek herbal
already published fro ■ Tebtunis, and two fragments ot a
■ edical text.

The parcel ot ■aterial as a whole contain• a great

number of fragments of Greek documents. These are
generally too alight to be ot value considered by them-
selves, but some ot them uee:f"u11y supplement texts
.already published: tor example, tvo fragments to be
included in the forthco■ ing TOlu■ e are the openings ot
returns of priest• made for the priesthood of the temple
of Sobek at Tebtunia, and they may be compared with
material published in the section of P.Tebt. ii devoted
to 'The Priests of Soknebtuni•'•

Tbe papynaa to be discussed in more detail is a

fragment trom a table of consula. 3 The contents as such
do not provide any new information. It is presented here
because the precise nature and purpose of the list ia
quite uncertain, and also because further fragments ot
the text may exist elsewhere: tor among the papyri to
be published in the same volume there are several examples
of fragments that either certainly or probably belong to
the same papynaa as texts in other collections.

The fragment preserves the beginnings of the names

of the Roman consuls for the years A.D. 149-159, arranged

301
in a vertical column, and immediately to the left of
this there are traces of a column containing figures
running from 12 to 221 there can be no doubt that thia
column gives the years of the Emperor, although it is
impossible to be certain upon which system they were
reckoned.

The names of the consuls are written in Greek

script and language, and are expressed in the genitive
case. Apart from uncertain traces, only one name ie
preserved in each line. Seven are praenomina, three are
nomina, and one is a cognomen. Clearly the table in some
cases gave two and in others gave three names: it some-
times included and sometimes omitted the praenomen.

It is impossible to judge the original extent of

the table, or whether or not there were further parallel
columns, giving the date in accordance with a different
era, or any kind of annual information. Speculations
as to the purpose of the table fall into two distinct
categories: it may be concerned with the study of chron-
ology, or it may be administrative in nature.

The notable difference between the table and the

considerably later Greek (and Latin) Fasti that survive,
which served the study of chronology and history, lies
in the form 0£ the names: the Fasti employ simply a
cognomen. The various published papyri that might be
called
4 include
chronologica1 no text that sheds any
light on the present table. Chryseros the Nomenclator,
a freedman 0£ the Emperor Verus, is said to have written
a history 0£ Rome to the death 0£ Verus with a full
record oC the Roman magistrates. 3

302
 The tabular form of the list might suggest that it
is of an official or administrative nature. It is not
surprising that in Egypt such a list should be found in
Greek. However, the hand does not support the idea that
this i• an official table. The omission of aome prae-
nomina, the use of the genitive, and the fact, virtually
certain, that only the two eponymous consuls are listed
suggest the li ■ t cannot be a full record, related to the
contemporary consular £asti, but might be a succinct
table, to compare the two methods of dating. Dating of
Greek documents by the consuls is distinctly rare before
the third century A.D.

1 I should like to thank the Society for permission to

diacusa their papyri here, alao to thank Dr J.R.Rea for
his help concerning the table of consuls, and all those
who offered useful comments at the Congress.
2 The new demotic fragment is fully discussed in Acta
Orientalia 36 (1974), 23ff.
3 In this condensed paper any physical description of
the papyrus is omitted, as well any
as justification of
the readings offered in the transcription, and any dis-
cussion of the (apparently unimportant) anomalies in the
table (1521 aT1~A10u ; 156: L. for M.). The hand suggests
that the table was not written later than the end of the
second century.
2
4 See Pack , section 'History and Geography': add P.Oxy.
xxxi.2551.
5 Theophilus of Antioch, Ad Autolycum III.27: this point
is not clear £rom F.Gr.H. II A 96: aee text and translation
by R.M.Grant (1970).

303
 - -
149 p] ctp1!<?[ u SER. CORNELIVS SCIPIO

1.50 l y] cK[u]AAar [ M. GAVIVS SQVILLA GALLICANVS

SEX. QVINTILIVS CONDIA.NVS

1.52 l ] E M1 ACILIVS GLABRIO

153 ] ! C. BRYTI''.IVS PRAESBNS

154 t ] ~ L.AELIVS AVRELIVS COMMODVS

1.55 l ] ~ yaaou [ C. IVLIVS SEVERVS

156 l ] ! M. CEIONIVS SILV ANVS

157 K] M. CEIONIVS CIVICA BARBAR.VS

SEX. SVLPICIVS TERTVLLVS

1.59 K]~ ff [ ).QUTIOU PLA.VTIVS QVINTILLVS

------ -

304
 (Read by c.H.Aobert•>
Some Christian Pap7r1 of the Berlin Colleotion

Kurt Treu, BP~11n

Foi- several years now I have been working on the Cbr1st1an

texts in the Papyrue-Sammlung of the lgypt1eohes Museum, Staat-
liohe Museen ~u Berlin (DDR). The main results were published
in a aeries of artiolea in ".A.rohiv fUr lapyrusforeohung"• "Neue
neuteetamentliohe Fragment•" in vol. 18, 1966, "N•ua Berliner
Septuagintafragmente• 1n vol. 20, 1970, •Neue Berliner 11turg1.-
sohe Papyri" in Tol. 21, 1971. Ind1Tidual texts and amaller
groupe of texta have appeared at different oooaaiona. At the
10th International Conareas of Papyrologiste in Warsaw1961 I
presented a fr&&ment of 01ne11e with a somewhat exoentrio text.
In tbe papers of the Fifth International Conf'erenoe on Patristic
·studies at Oxford 1967 I publ1sha4 three fragments with nomina
aaora, one of whioh was subsequently identified by c. H. Roberts
as belons1ng to the 0oapel of John. The papers of the Foarth
International Congress ·on New Testament Studies at OXford 1969
1nolude a papyrus letter with quotations from St. Paul concern-
ing what appears to be the fatal illness of Abba Petronius,
first auooeeeor of Paohom1ue.
The texts I want to present here will be published in "Arohiv
fllr Papyrusforeohung" vol. 24 under the vague title of •Varia
ob:ristian&"• Biblical texts are a well defined group and nor-
mally easy to identity, even when minor fragments. Patristic
authors known by name are another olear-out group. But, unlike
tba great number of Biblical texts; this group is surprisingly
small. Large finds like the Tura Papyri of 0rigen and Didymus
the Blind are a rare exception. A vast majority among the non-
B1bl1oal Japyr1 are texts by unknown authors, of semi-literary
or •~literary oharaoter. The term 'liturgical' would describe
maey_ of them, if we take it wide enough to 1nolude 'L1turg1ae,
preoea, hymni' (to ~uote the title of the collection by del Gran-
de) and neglect the distinction between offioial and private
worsh1P.- Teohn1oally, suob texts are normally not books (or parts
of books) but individual pieces, whether written on both sides
or on one side only. The hands are usually unexperienoed and
difficult to date, the spelling 1s often enough atrocious.
Another problem 1st the laok of scholarly aids. For Biblical
texts we have f&ll word indexes. For Patristic authors there
is now the Patristic Greek Lexicon by o. w. H. Lampe, OXford
1968, whioh f.i. made it easy for me to identif7 a fragment
from the Shepherd of Hermas. But unlike its elder counterpart,
the Liddell-Scott-Jones, the 'Lampe' does not take aooount of
pap7r1 nor, indeed, of l1turg1oal texts in general unlese they
are incorporated in literary works such as the A.poatolio Con-
stitutions. So it is not easy to find out whether a fragment
belongs to a known work. Moreover, even to oolleot relevant
parallels for language and thought of suoh texts requires ex-
tensive research.
Another problem ie the wider oontext of these Varia. A aorap
from a book, whether roll or codex, usually gives some olues to
the character of the complete original manusript. With non-book
fragments it is usually hard to sa:, how the complete pieoe was
aade up. And even when we have a piece that is oomplete in 1 t-
self, there remains the broader question of pu.rposez what was
it produced for and how was it used?
The five items I want to dieouse here are all from the Byzan-
tine period and all not pa.rt of books, though containing more
or leas literary texts.
The first one is a piece of limestone 1neor1bed on both sides
with the complete 'Great Doxology' followed by an intercalated
Tr1shagion. Th.is is remarkable by the faot that it 1s one of
the earliest acquisitions of the Berlin oolleotion. It was ac-
quired in 1a,9 ~ Dr. Brugeoh ind bas the very low inventory
number P. ,64. So it has been over a century in the museum~
complete and not too difficult .to read - without finding an

306
editor. one of the reasons for this neglect m&3 be the faot
that, being a atone, P. ,64 wae kept separate from the papyri.
I was unaware of i ta existence when I publ1-ahed a fragm.ent&r7
papyrus of the same Doxology in Aroh1v Tol. 21.
Two p~y-rus fragment• belong to that group of Christian texts
where Biblical quotations are the most obvious, and often the
only olear feature. They remind us of the faot that Biblical
language and thought permeate more or less completely all
ancient Christian writings. So it is useful, even after :find-
ing out that a fragment is not Biblical, to oheck up s;ystema-
tioalq on the degree Af its dependence on Biblical phraseol-
ogy.
One p1eoe, P. 27J1, oontains quite a series of Psalms quo-
tations, Pa. 11,, ,.6.9 and 22,1.,. The Psalms are, of course,
by far the most widely represented book of the. Bj_ble. Many of
the Psalms fragments published along with othar'B1bl1oa.l texts
are not part of books but separate p1eoea copied for individual ...
use. Also popular were the other books of Old Testament poetiot.1,
wisdom. A witlleas to this fact is P. 6776 with a quotation of
Proverbs 6,9-10. Both papyri are too tra.genta.17 to allow more
than a guess about the character of the texts. Both are written
on one side onl7. So they can hardly be parts ot extensive coa-
mentaries or even homilies. P. 6776, preserving only up to 1,
letters to a line, seems to bave had lines ot about 55 letters
of considerable size and eo. about ,oom. long. With a codex,
this would make for a still greater height ot the leaf. But
in a separate piece also an oblong format is possible so that
we can sq nothing about the length ot the composition.
I have been in touch with the Strasbourg centre for Patristic
Biblical quotations to !ind. out whether their files could give
me a clue to the origin of these texts. The work is in an early
stage, and so conclusions e eilentio are not possible. But even
so one can have a general idea whether a pe,rticullr quotation
•
belongs to the more popular ones or deserves speoia,J. attention.

307
Also, the context of Patristic quotations might help to form a
clearer idea about the possible context in papyri.
;he next papyrus, P. 16595, is written on both sides but
still not from a codex, it would seem. Here again we bave a
Biblical. base, this time used for a hymnic text. The recto side
deals with the baptism of Jesus and. paraphrases words of the
Baptist according to St. John's Gospel. The verso side para-
phrases and quotes Exodus 15, 20-21. The passing of the Red
Sea is regarded as one of the foreshadowings O! typo1 of Christ-
ian baptism, and so 1 t is probaale tba t both sides belong to
a Theophany hymn. I have taken the central event first and the
Old Testament typos as an additional illustration, but one
cannot be sure that this was i~eeed the ordJ~ intended by the
author. There is one interesting peculiarity -- in this text:
many of the vowels are puplioated, so f.1. the first and the
last one in the name of the Baptist, I~•cwVTJ~, . This is
obviously an indication that the text was to be sung or recit-
ed in an elaborate way with modulations for ma.ey syllables.
After these glimpses of texts to be presented in full else-
where, let me oonolude by quoting in extenso P. 13232. This
is a small but complete papyrus leaf with only three short
lines of writing. It is )receded by a oross and loaks like
a Christian counterpart to the traditional oracular responses.
We might guess that somebody bas experienced a disappointment
that is eating away his soul. Now he 1s comforted: Do not hurt
your soul. What ha.a happened is from God.
+ 111'f3M4,v, ~\1
~vxr,v aov, t~ ~(co)O
y&p ~a ycv~cvov.

308
 EARLY
PAP!RUSCODICES
OF LARGESIZE
by E. G. Turner
I viab to addr ... ~•elf to a lim.ted but important f•ture of
earl.J papyrua codice■ - nam~ the little appreciated fact that they
are frequently fairl.7 large in ai&e. I ay take u starting point
a sentence in the printed Term.ODof~ Marburg paper (Munchener
Beitrye Heft 66, 'Akta d. lllI. int. Papyrologenkongr.•, p.4,S
''CorrectiOD.■") : "I haTe nov u••bled adequate eridence to ahow that
papyrua codicu of early elate oould be of large foraat."

It c- u a aurpriae to IQ'aelf to fi.Ad thi ■ wae ao Cu 1111y be

Htm troa footnote:, to p.429). Like other echol.ar■ of rq genera-
tion I had been brought up on the obeeM'ationa Nt out by w. Schubert
in Du Buch2 : (p.131) ''To bring the •ea.aur•ent■ of codices into
order, one 1111st giye firat place to the upect natural to the codex,
na11ely the proportion of breadth to height. FrOII thia there reaulta
in the fir■t place a group, whoee ....ur•ent• are equal or approxi-
•t•l.J eo ••• a contrast ia proYided by a fol"ll&t in which the breadth
is about half the height ••• (p.1:,:,) Ae far u "1 knowledge goee, thia
firat and second cla.eaee of foru.te ••• to be of fairly considerable
age ••• Fl-011the ■ere fact that the characterietice of early hand-
writing etrikingl.y often coin.cide with approxiaate equality of breadth
and height or with extr•e difference■ betveen theae tvo dimeneiona,
theae two fora.ta ay belong to a period dovn to and including the
fourth centurJ. In thia eaae period, in •pi te of a great di Yerai ty
of foraat•, a preclOlliD&Jlceof 811&11foraata 111 aleo to be obeenecl.
By way of contrast I belie•• I can recognise an incrN.ee in large
formate froa the fifth century on".
Here i ■ a liat of aoae papyrua codices which I should uaign to
the second or third centuriee after Chriat, about which there is e011e
eridence for aisez this eridence ia rarely direct, that ia, coneieting
of di■eneione which can be meaeured in codicee which eurri••
intact
(those are the very rare exurpl.ee without ■quare brackets); ueuall.7
the information ia won by c011bination, by calculating ai&ee froa the
nuaber of lin.ea to a page each can be ahovn to baTe held. In giri.ng
th••• di■enaione B(readth) precedes H(eight).

309
 Jo 1ot linff
~ Referee• Cont•t J>ialll ■iona
to PY•
oea.t.
U. A.D. p .C>,:;J
.1.D.ed. Plato. Repab. [51]
P.Oxy. iT 69? Xeophon, Cyropaedia [60] 12•.5 z [33.1]
P.X:oh Lolliuue, Pbo•ikika [.59+] [2'/20 X leQ/'5]
PSI ii 11t? PiAdar, PaNAS c..~J (22 z:,2]

ii/iii B• .Berol. 1:,236 flmoyd.id.N [fiO] [17 z '2)

(Paak2 1,516) (2 cola. per pap)
P.Ant. 111162 Iliad [51]
iii PSI ri 720 Arietopban•• [,56] [11 z 29]
P.Lit.Loncl. 126 l>taoeth•H [60] [1 .. X :,)]
P.Os;J. Ti 873 Beaiod, Theogc,Q (6,:J [ x36f-J
P.Oxy. xxxii 2~7
P.Lond. 126
Beaio4, 'lh.o~
Iliad ii-iT
.._,..
[,58-61]
1J X 29.5
(Barria lloMI')
P.Mertoa i 3 Iliad [54] 1,.7 X [:,2.S]
PSI xi 1169 Iliad [,59] 1,5 X [29]
P.nor. ii 110 Iliad [6,-65] ( z ,i.)]
PSI 11140
NPl1i 1 IIO.lt
Iliad
Poeb7
[6,:J
(~]•
[15 z 28]
[20 z ,,.5]•
,,
Putonl
P.Aat.ii 85 + tl.i 213 Plutarch [ltOt-] [21 X '6/,5]
P.Oxy.1.D.ed. flmcyd.idea i 99-102 (18/19 X ,i.J
(2 col.Al. per page)
P.0..2 + P.Jql. Thuc7d,idff ii [lt8-50l
iii "'8 (2 col.Al. per pep)
P.Jql. iii 529 Burgioal !'Na.tiff .50 [1_5.6 X 28]
(2 aoi.. per page)

Biblical Pamru codicN

t 111 (IOT) Ch..ter Beatty YI Naber■, DeutffOllOIQ' 31-:,8 [19/18 X :,:,J
(2 cola. per pap)
" " Ch.B. IX-X Daniel, l:atber-, etc. 1t5-57 12.Jt z }4.8
" P.Ant. i 9 ProTerbe [?Jto] [18 X 35 ed.]
P.OJ:;J. :aiT 2:,83 St. Luke [748-,50] [1~12 33]
" X

Parcbaent codicu hold1u: ,:!2liDH

None till Coda Aluandrimaa

• Calculated fro■ the atichoaetric figure 48-9.

310
 Thie liat offers exaapl.ee of 24 papyrus codicee which have
either SO or aore linu to the page, or are at least 28 c ■• high
(1111DYare 1111ch
taller than thie). The eize (height especially)
bu of course uaual.11 been calculated fro■ the nU11berof line• per
page. Often there ia only• alight indication of the height• of
the upper and lower aargine.
The eignificance of thia erldence will be plainer vhen it ie
contraated with three additional eeta of figuree:
(1) The relatively -11 nU11berof 2nd and Jrd century papJTU•
cod.ice■ which are roughly 'aquare', i.e. in which breadth and height
are equal. In rq latest reriev of what in the Marburg Akten I
called 'Group 9' I ha••
a total of 6-9 example■ of thie type and of
tbie date which are on papyrus. The archetypal examples would be
P. Bodaer II of St. John (P.66), 14.28 x 16.2B; the Faria Philo
(Bibl. Nat. Suppl. gr. 1120, NIFAO9, 1893), 16.5 x 17.8; the
Oxyrhynchue Philo (P. O:xy. ix 1173 + xi 1353 + niii 2158 + P. Haun.
i 8 + PSI Jd 1207), 15 x 17.5; the Paris St. Luke fro■ Alali■ (P4,
••• Rewe Biblique 47 (19:,8) 1), 13.5 x 17.

(2) The cOllpl.ete absence until the fourth century at the earliest
ot azq codicea of parchment of the large size show to be COIIIDOn a110ng
early papyrus codices. Of course there are relatively few parchment
codices surYiring which can be aaaigned to the 2nd or 3rd centuries
after Christ. It ie not till the 4th century that parchment manu-
scripts begin to be coanon. I count 19 exuplea which I u willing
to aaaign to the aecond or third centuries. The highest nu■ber of
lines found in any of these 111 '6, namely in the British Huaeum
Deaoathenea (Add. MB. 3"7}(1)), vhich aurrlYe■ intact 11J1dmeasures
no more than 16.5B x 19H. The largest aise found ie that ofz
P. Ant. i 27 Demoathenea 2?-28 linea 17.8 x 22
(2 cole. per page)

Duke Uni v • G.5 Plato, Parmenidea [29 lineal [19 X 24]

(QRBS 12 (1971) 5'9) (2 cola. per page)
(actually I u not ~self willing to date thi• laat MS u early!).
(3) The practically complete absence fro■ the liet■ of papyrus
codices of a format c. 9/10B x 9/12H, 11J1dthe Yery emall number of
lliniature papyrus codicea (10) co■pared vith miniature parchment
codices (36). flle format 9/10B x 9/12H 1 ■ coa.on in parchment MDu-
ecripts fr011 the fourth century onwards. There are absolutely no
papyru• anuacripta of thie eize.

311
 Let me re-state the position that we haTe r•ched. It ia not
that a papyrus codex of earl7 date may not be of a aquarillh toraa.--r;
in abeolute dimenaiona a,q 14 x 16 ea. It ia that it ia aore likely
to be Tery 1111chbigger: not ■erely tor its height to be tvice ita
breadth, but for it to be nearly 3 ti■ea ite breadths and tor the
height to be •ery great indeed.

We can in fact now eee that Schubart'e generaliation "ln the

early period a predoa:i nance of mll formate i• to be obaerTed" vaa
baaed on putting together codices of paP7ru11 and parchllent. It i•
true of c. i• parchment codicea. It will be aalutaey in tuture to
keep papyrus and parch■ent apart in our inYeatigatione, and to realise
that we haYe been llialed into thinking all early codice■ are likely
to be of ameJJ size.
I ahould like to draw two leaeona. The first ia that obaenation
of the abaolute height ■ of papyrus roll• ehould baYe varned ua againat
accepting Schubart'e generalisation. But, alu!, both Schubart and
Kenyon haTe told ua that it ia a wate of time tabulating absolute
formate in papyrus roll■• On the contrary, it ie a priority tuk
awaiting an iDYeatigator. Let ■e offer two examples only of tall
literary rolls with 1111ny lines to the colUIID that look to be good
working copies (u no doubt our codicu were), not luxury te:xta:
(a) P.Oxy. Ti 852, n&ripidu, Bypaipyle, c. A.D. 200, :,6 cm. high,
the colwm often having 60 line• of text.
(b) A roll of Heaiod, Erga, among P.Ozy. ined. to be publiahed
by Dr. M.L. West - 2nd cent., probably :,1-plua c■• high, 56 lines to
the colu•.
The aecond leaaon 111 thia. Innuenced by Schubart, we ha••
tended to think that pe.PJrU• codices of large format are iaitationa
of parchment codices of large fol"llllt. The truth, I euggeat, ia the
other w:s round. Aa I ha•e indicated, there are no parchllent codicea
of large format until the fourth century after Christ. We ha•• found
24 examples on p&P1J"US before the fourth century. It looks u though,
when parchment at last c•• into abundant uee in c. iY, there waa
conacioua imitation of the large papyrus codex. Let ua apply thia
'diecoTery• to the chronological probleme surrounding the Iliaa
Ambroeiana. Since parchment codices of large format are not recorded
before the fourth century, the Iliaa Ambroaiana, the eize of which
baa been calculated by R. Bianchi Bandinelll at c. 29 x 32 c■., ia not
to be dated earlier than the fourth century. Ve wet in conaequence
refuse to accept the results of a,rpbological analyaie of ita acript,
which baa been held to point to a date in the Jrd century. Solle
featurea in ita handlaiting auet ~•refore be due to deliberately
archaic stylization by the scribe. It uy therefore be later than
the fourth century if we can find a period lilben auch archaia vaa
deliberately cultinted.

312
 Die drei Jabreszlhlweiaea in den Z•onpapyri

lrita·Uebel, Ju.a

.lm lo.April des Jabres 257 v.u.z. r1chtete der Griecbe

luaaaios, ein Uatergebeaer des D.ioketen 'Apolloaioe, aa de• daaala
aoah aioht 1■ l&i.J:i11 aaaiissigea Zeaaa, der 1hrea geaiasamea Chet
gerade au.t eiaer Dieutreise begleitete, die Aafrage, aa welche ■
Ort Apalloaioe dea Geburtatag des Koaiga 111 teiera gedaohte u.ad
aa velobaa Tag aaoh Raohxlwlg der Agypter daa hierbei vorgesebaae
Opter statttiadea verde 1 >. -Der Briet 1st au! dea 17.Meobir des
29. Jahres datiertJ ?,ea011.s Buro registrierte den Eillgaag des Schrei-
baa 1a Me~pbis am 20.Dy■!~oa dea 28.Jahres, also erst eiaige Tage
aaoh dem Kclaigageburtatag :J. Zur Ditterea1 der Jabreszahlen 2.8 ud
'19 vird spater aoch etwas 111 sagen sei.D..
Bezeichaead 1st der WUuoh des Nu•aios, gerada das agypti-
ache Datum der Feierlicbkeit su erfahren. Seiae geaamte Z81tei.ll-
teiluag baaierte :1veitelloe aut dera agJJ)tiacheD Weader; aa eiaer
Mitteilwag des makedoaisobea Datull8 war ibm aichta gelegen. zaaoa
dagegea - bzw. Zeaoas Buroschreiber - wrwendete, solaage er sioh
aoch aicht 1a Philadelphia aiedergelaasen hatte, ale Abtasauaga-
daten eigeAer uad als &mptaagsdaten fremder Briere fast aussohlieaa-
llch •kedoaiscbe Kcaatsaamen, er richtete aich au dieser Zeit
durohweg uch dem makedoaiscbea Kaleader. Dass er damit die Gepflo-
genheitea dee alexalldriscbea Hores teilte, bedart keia.er besoa-
clere:a. Begruaduag, uad dass aadererseits Hu.meaios (vie ueberwiegead
die Grieohea der Ohora) vor dea 9ohwierigkeitea des Ge.ages des
makedoaiscbe.ll laleaders kapituliert hatte uad atatt desaen dea
eiatacberell aaptisoheR laleader bevorzugte, llegt ebeafalls aut
der Saad. Das Dioketentilro achliesslich aahm bei der Datieruag sei-
aer Sobreiben Riickeicht sowohl au! Adressaten wie z.enon als auoh
aut solcha vie Numeaioe: Ea gelrauchte liaufig me.kedoaisch-iigypti-
ecbe Ooppeldate:i, d.h. ein Paar uaterschiedlioher Moaatsaamen uad
Tagesdatea, doch aie verbwaden m1t eiaem Paar uaterschiedlioher
Jabreszahlea, aoader immer aur llit eiaer eiazigen Jabreszahl, ua-
1weitelbalt derjea1gen des aakedoaiscbea XoaigsJabres.
UDd doch k01U1te deraelbe Tag in zwei versohiede.lle Jabre
fallen, Je aaohdem maa aacb 118.kedoniscbe11Konigsjahren zahlte, die

bi.a Eade I)y'stros lietera, ..

oder a.a.eh agyptischen -
zu jeaer Zeit - zu.aachst aur allgemein gesagt - von Eade Dy'stros
lonigsJabrea,
gleiehlautead mit dem "ag,yptiachen Ktt.leaderJahr, oder as.eh 11.aauz-
JahreD, die, aicht gaaz prazis £ormuliert 1 apatesteDS TODAataag
Mecbir bis gegen Eade T7bi anzusatzen si.ad.

313
 Diese Arten der Jahreszahluag sollea WlB bier beschattigeA.
Voa dea beiden KategorieR VODDoppeldaten, ill diem• zveckmissi-
gerweise differe1tziert, den Doppel.rno•ats- uad DopP8LJahresdaten,
gebell aur die letztere:o. fur u.aser Problem etvas b.erJJ. Da bei eiaer
Jabreszahl aeben eiaem makedoaischea Mo.ate- UD.dTegesdatllll am
Zugr,Ddeliege• der makedoaiscben KoaigsJahrzabl.Ullgzu zweifel•
kaum A•lass bes~eht u.ad ebellsoveaig am Zugrundeliegea der agypti-
schaa Koaigsjabrzahlwag .-1• aormale:a demotischea Datieruager1., so
lautet, leicht reduziert, die zu beutworteade Frage: Welcher
Jabreszihlweise folgen die Jahresa.Dgaben griechisober Urlamdea
(Urkwlden im weiteeten s1-) llit ·agyptisohem Mollats- uad Tages-
datum? Ulld: Welcbes si•d die J abres zablweise• · ctemotiscber Ooppel-
jahresdatea? Aut die zeit des Philadelphos - geaauer: auf die spi-
teren Jahre diesea Herrscbers - mesen wir uas hierbei deshalb be-
sohraakea, veil aur fur sie die Art des Psrallellautes des m.ake-
doaiscben Wld ·des agyptischen Kaleaaers hialiillglioh bekaut 1st,
aioht zw.etzt daRk theoretisoher U•ter11aueruag vorher empirisol,)
gewouuer Relatioae• durch A.E. Sa1111elePtolemaio Obroaol~ ,
wad in:aerhslb der geaaute• zei t viederum. beeitzt das zeacm.archiv
de.11.
Vorzug beeollderer Aussagekrat~; IIUl" selten wi1'fuber diesee
1.rohiv hiaauszugreiten nia.
Uasere Keutais der Kalenderrelatioaea im ~egebeaea Zeit-
raum betahigt us.a, das agyptisohe K8aigsjahr ebe•so vie das im
agyptisohen Kaleader aagesiedelte, doch m:l.t uderem BeuJahrstag
begilUl8ade FhanzJahr II.it dem mak~ordsohea Koaigsja.br zu s711chro-
aisierea.
... Der Begiu eiaer solohen S,.chrollisaticastabelle sieht
rur die fragliobe Zeit uter bypothetisohem Allpftz d.es 1. Mechir
als tiaaazjahrbegimles aaoh der cmna,nis opiaioJ J Wld des 24. 0,-
l!troe als makedonis che11 leuj ahrstages aow1.e seiae,1 juliaaisohen
Aq.iivaleats aach Saauel SJ tolgendermassen aus:
BegiJ1D dee 26. FiJ1aJLzjahres1
1. Meahir (=18/19.Peritios embolimos) = 26.3.26o 8
f
Zeits_eanAe A
Be,1.u des 26.makadoaisohen Jabres2
(6./7.?bame•oth =) 24.Dystroe = Jo.4.jl.5.26o 8
1-
Zeitapanae B
.l,
Beginn des 26.iigyptisohea Jahres,
8
l.Thoth (= 26./27.Gorpiaios) = Z7.lo.260
-+
Zeitspaue C
.i
Begiu. des 27.Fiaaazjabres !

314
 Begiaa dee 27. ulaldolli■ cben J abre a 1
(25./26.Mechir =) 24 •.D;ystroa = 19./20.4.259&
Begim dee 27:agyptiachea JaJre111
8
l.Thoth (= 7./8.Byperberetaioe) = 27.lo.259
uaw. bis 39.Jahr.

Dieae Tabelle zeigt, dasa eiJle beliebige der spateren Regie-

ruagaJahre ■ zahlen des Philadelphos zuerat vom 11.aanzjahr erreicht
wrde. Ia der kurze11 Zeitspamae bis sum Begiu. des ziftenigleicbell
makedollisobea Koaigajahrea wird diese Jabreszahl allein vom Fi-
aaazjahr getuhrt, wahread die beidea aaderen Reobmiag,-weiaml um
eiae Ebheit dahiater zuriickbleibeD. Diesen Kalenuerbereich Jl&DD.e
ioh 1,eitspaaae i•. In de• daraus stammendea Zeugnissen fur Oop-
11

peljahresdaten illpliaiert, wenn 1a ihaea 1wei verechiede.a.e Jahres-

zahlen begepen, die hobere Jahreszahl mit Sicberheit die FUl&llz-
jahrzahl.UAg. Vo■ makedoaiscbea NeuJahrstag ab laufen mebrere Mcaate
lag, bis zum 5.Epagomeaeatag, die gleioben Jahreszahle.ll fur daa
malcedoaische uad das FiaaazJabr parallel, wogegen das ~tiscbe
Koaigsj abr aoch wa ei.ae Eia.hei t aiedriger 1st. Das 1st meiae • Zei t-
a pa.aae B1I. Ia dea Zeugaiseen. au.a dieaer Zei tapanae 1st beim Vorbaadea-
seia zweier uaterschiedlicher Jabreazahlen die aiedrigere aicber
dieJuige dee 'i,,grptisobea Koaigsjahres. Zwisohea de■ l. Thoth uad
de11 Begin dee aachsten Fiaaazjabrea eadlich, ill der •Zeitapanae c•,
ergebu. alle drei Jahreaz1blweisen d.ieselbe Zahl.
All der Tabelle al.le auesagef'ahigo Belege r aeaaea - eia
Vertahrea, das ach011 1934 HellDIJ.t Fr&Jlk anvaRdte 6 - , das verbietet
die Kurze der Zeit, ea !<all ~ exemplifiziert werdea. Ala Ausgaaga-
Pl,Dlkt eipet 1
eich P .dem. Zea. 3 J, eiae bilique QuJ.ttuag 1a rorm eiaer
griecbisoben Doppelurkuade aebet JUSatzlicher demotischer PaaSUJl&.
Zwei Aageetellte der kOlliglicmea Olmonopolverwaltung bestatigea daria
dem Beauftragten des Dorea-Verwalters Zeaca eia.e Riziauslieterw:ag.
la DemotiaoheD. lautet die Datieru.ag n111 Jahr 33, welcbes daa )4.Jahr
1st, 111 2. Moaat des Viaters (d. i. Meohir) am 22.T age", 111Grie ohisohelL
!ba~Acuov,o~ n,oAcµatov ,oO n,oAcµa~ov Eca,'t~po~fcTov~) fTc,np,ov
KQL ,p~a>tOOToO)µ~vo~ Mcxtp (6cv,cpa~ xat c~xoa,~~).
Wagea der ZUgehorigkeit zur Zeitspanae A kua hier mit dem 34.Jahr 1m
griechisobea UJld demotische• Text aiohts u.derea al.a daa Fillanzjahr
gemeat seia; uater dem 33.Jahr der demotiacben Gleic.buag 1st ZL&turllch
daa agypti ache Kaa1gaj abr zu veratebeD.. R•ser Beia piel zeigt, daas
du FauzJabr - aicht, wie Samel maiate J, dae makedonische K6Diga-
Jahr - in demotiscbea Urk:waden Eiagaag gef'ua:iea bt1t, dasa es aber auoh

315
1a gewissen grieohi~Qhen Urkunden eiae otfizielle Z~weise 1st uad -
WU Sa1111el beatritt I - mit der Formal Ba.ai.A.cuovto«;,Il't'oAcµ.afou TOO
flToXcµ.a£ou verl:unden seia kalm.
Nie11aad wird es wrwad.erlioh fiaden, dase griechiscbe Qw.t-
timlgeD., weu sie vie das aagef'\lhrte Beispiel eiaem Zweig der pto-
l~ll&isobea F1J1Uzverwaltuag eatstammaa, ~oh dem Fiaaasjahr reoh-
at:11. Doch auch eiaige Abre<,bmiagea des Zeaonarchi vs, treilioh kei-
aestalls alle, machea voa dieser Renbmi■gsweisa Gebrauoh, so sioher
die Lohazahluageliate POZ 59296, teraer llit voller Sicberbeit PSI VI
583, POZ 59292 uad 59293 sovie sehr wahrschei.lll.ioh PCZ 59'n2, PSI
IV 386 uad 388, alles abreob■1■g8artige Urkuadea ii.bar Getreidaaus-
lieferuagen, Geldateuern u■.d Zahluagem beso-.:Iers auf dem Geoiet der
Soear-
~
driicklich
0
Ziageapaoht, ahem Gebitl, dess~R GeldposteA teila au.s-
J, tails aur ver1111tlich Betrage der tvvoµi.ov-Steuar
darstellan. Vor allzu rigorosea VerallgemiraeruageR aus diese11
Be.tu.ad awsa ma• sich jedoch tiite:as Der 111 Grieohiechea aicht gaas
talctfeste, al.so wohl agyptisobe Schreiber von PSI IV 368, viederum
ei.aer Abrechnuag uber cvvoµLov-Betr'.ige tur Sobare uad Ziegea, reohDet
sicherlich aicht aach dem Fillaazjabr; ob aach dam makedonisohea oder
- vielleioht eber - aaoh dem "agyptisohe11 loaigsjahr, bl.eibt ortea.
Gelegentlich achlagen sich 1a derselben AbrecbD.uagsliste zwei oder
sogar alle drei Jahreszahlweisen lli.eder, dana aamlich, wenn die
Z"'ahlweisedes Listeaechreibers voa derjeRigea der v0111hm verwertetea
Urkunde~ abmcht, ohae dass er aio~ der lllihe..der Omrecb•uag uater-
zagen hitte • Die makedoaiscbe Koaigsjahrzahluag fiadet sich bier
hauf'ig, dagegen lasat sioh die 'agyptische Koaigsjahrzahlwag 1a Ab-
reobm1agen des Zeaoaarobivs (u.ad ebeuo 1a allen ubt-f§y•
Urku.Ddea-
gattuagen desselbea) kau■ eiamal virklich aachweisea , ausaer
aaturlich iJI dem De1110tioa der Zeaoapapyri.
Griechiscbe Vertragsurkuadea des Archivs werdem - das sei
..
gaaa kurs abgebaDdelt - fast auaaahmsloa aach dem makadoaischea
KoaigsjahrJJ,tiert, var allem da, wo das epoayrae Priesterpaar ge-
RaJUlt wird • Die Datea eiaes Vertrags aua de■ Fiakalbereich der
Steuerpacht hiJlgegen, PSI V 5o9, wo wiederum die cvvoµi.ov-Steuer
i■ Spiel 1st, reobaea hochstwahrscheiDlich aach dam FiaoazJahr, uad
daa trotz Gebrauchs der Priestertormel ill Praskript, die allerdiags
mJ.tder Formulierung tcp' ~cpcwc;'t'OO S°V't'O(;, baw. )(Cl\lT)<pOpou
- -1 - -rflc;
ouCJTlc; au.t die Namensae■..u11g des Epoa;ymeapaares verzichtet 5).
1ur die Jahreszihlweise 1a. Briefdatierw:agen liefert uas die
Schatzgrube des Zeaonarohivs zahlreiche dem gewaschteZweck dieut-
bare Zeugaisse vor allem da, vo zwei Dater. segenseitigera Bezugs,
aeistens das Briefdatum eiaer-, das Bdefeingangsdatum andererseita,
u■.ter Jedeamaliger Jahresangabe u■.terscbiedlicbe Maaatsbezeichauagea
eatbaltea, eiual eiae "agyptiscba, ei.■mal. eine me.kedoaisobe bzw. eia
makedoaisoh-agyptiaches Doppeldatum, galegeatlich auoh in Zeitspanae
B zwei agyptisohe Moaatabeaeic~eD, dereR Folge den Gebrauoh des
."agyptisohen Jahres aussohliesst

316
Gaa1 uberviepad veiee11 ■olobe illdirekte DoppelJabreadatea 111 Z81l011-
arcb1Y aws &ilea drei 1.eitapaaaea jeweila 1veiaal dieeelbe Jahr!''ahl
aut. Rachveisbar ■iad aua der Zeitapanae J. miadestens 11 Falla J,
aua der 1.eitapu.ne B 111.iideateAa 2d FillelS). Hier 1st illaerhalb
der Zeitapanae A 11:lt Sioberbeit daa FiaaazJahr auagesohloesea, iuer-
halb der Zaitapanae B ebeuo siobar daa igyptiscbe Jabr. Im Gaaz•
paebea draagt sioh aahezu ffiagelld der Sohl.use au.t, daae bier auoh
aebo dell agn,tischea Maaata- wad Tagesd&te:a. immar das makedonscba
ICll.igajahr ateht, m-1 weil uater den vielea Korreepoadeatea Ze11e11a,
die so ~ datieren ptlegea - Grieobe11 uad auoh griecbiaobscbrei bead.ea
.iaptera 9 ) -, drei 1a be1dea Zeitsp&IUL8A nrtretea siad. Der Schreiber
d• PCZ I 59132, lo(ra, datierte dieaen Briet, de11 zea011ara l.D;ystroa
= l.Phameaoth dee 29.118.lcedoaiaobaa Jahrea erbielt, aut dea )o.Meohir
dee 29.Jahrea; dieaaa Jahr war ia der 1.eitap&IUla A bestimt ucht
du Fiae.azJahr. I• Brief PCZ II 59147 aber, der bei 1.eaon am 19.
Daiaioa = 19.Pqai dea Jo.makedollisobea Jahrea eiagiag, reobnete 1a
der Zeitapamae B M,a a1t aai•11 Datum •15.Pa,ai des Jo.Jabres" siobar
aioht •eh de11 agypt1scheR Jahr. Er v1rd sioh beide Male deraelbea
Zablweiee bedieat baben, folglicn des mked.onaobe~ loaigsJabrea.
Das Gleiohe gilt f'uer den Aatigraphaus Apolloaides OJ uad tiir liikoa 21 >.
Endlich Ze».011.selbsts \lie aohon gesagt, entnahm. er vor sei.Jlem
atandigea Aufenthalt 1a FaiJwa, d.h. vor dem Eade dee 29.118.kedoaiachea
Jabres, aeiae Jabrea-, M011ata- uad Tagea~ten bis au.t ei.aea aicht
ga11z sicber ihm eelbet :auwaisbaren Fall J ausachliesslioh dem
aakedonisohen Kaleader. Ia dem Masse, wie aioh seiae Verbiaduagea
~ Ohora verstar~en, gi:ag er zum Gebrauch &iYf.tiscber .MonatsAamea
bsv. 118.kedoaisch~agyptiacber Doppelaoaatsdaten uber, welohe utaags
die riohtigea Relatioaea beider Kaleader aufvieae».. R:1.ohtig warea 1a
29.Jabr auch Zenons •direkt equatioas• (vie Samuel die Doppelmou.ta-
daten gleioher Tagesaitter aennt), aber sohoJl 1a den ersten Moaa.te•
dee Jo.Jahres wrden aei:ae Gleiohuagea daduroh, daea er an dieseA
direct equatiou (sovie etvas spater aa eiaer aaderu Tagesgleie1m•gs-
•thode) ilber ihren GeltuagszeitraUII hiaaua aohematisch festhielt,
tehlerbaft und blieben ea aeitdem. Voa den offiziellea Doppelmonata-
daten des Diolmteaburos liess er sich einae Besseren .aicht belehren;
a.B. lautet seiD EingBDgsdatum e1Des a. 16.Looa = l).Mesore dee .)o.
Jabrea geschriebenea Dioketeabrietea 2 JI •14.(1) Looa = 1.4.Masoren.
Zeaon wird sioh aeiaer vachaeDden Uak:e:rmtais bald aelbst bewsat ge-
vorden saint Er wrwendete aac24dem 18.Masore dea )l.Jahres, dea.
er talech mit de11 28.Looa glich J, in Brieteingaagsdatieruagen aur
Roch agy-ptiscba Moaatsllamen uad stud au.a au! der Stu!e des Nu.menioa
1a. wuserem Eiaga11gsbeiapiel. Lediglich 1a seiaea Vertragsdatieruagea
tauchen aucb spa.tar aoeh aeben den agyptisob.eA Moaatsnameil makedon.ische

317
aur25), gewiss aur voll dekorativem wert uad ohae dass ZeAOn au den
wahren Kalenderrelationea zunickgetuaden hatte. Hilfsllittel von der
Art des 7 Jahrzehate jwageren Parapegma P.IQ'l.IV 589 so.beiaea 1h.m
wie au.eh dem Numellios aicht zur Verfugwlg gestanden zu babea.
ZeaOASuchweisbare UllkeJmtaieder Relatioaea seit dem Begima
des )o.Jahres beraubt WlS eiRes sioheren,, Kriteriums iD der Bestimauag
des NeuJahrstagee makedo:aisoher Kolligsjahre des Philadelphos an Hand
der Briete PCZ II 592o2-2a4 voa der Wende dee 31. mm 32. Jahr26J.
An die ear Stelle ware ein Exkura uber den NeuJ abratag auoh
des Fiu:azjahrea angebracht, hier kann Jedoch aur .kurz resu.miert
warden. Dieser Tag lag - zumi.adest gegen Eade der Zeit des Phila-
delphoe laut P.Petr.III lo9 vom )6./Y7.Jahr - mit Sicherbeit zvischen
dem 26.T;ybi a¼,)f'riihestmogllohem wad dem 4.Mechir als spatestmog-
liohen Termill , vielleicht, je nach Jahreszini.lweise ill der Pariser
Holztaf'el UPZ 153, erst aaoh dem 26.Tybi; doch Jeden.falls spreg~n
eiJlige demotische DoppelJahresdaten aus der Zeit Euergetes 1 1.28)
f'ur eiaea Aasatz aoch 1m T;ybi. Weu, vorau.t aohon Fral'l.k 1a seiaea
an. eiaer Stelle fehlerhaf'tea Austiibrungea29J hiawies, etliche Ze•oa-
papyri ale ersten. Monat eiaes aeuea Jabres, welobes aach Lage der
Di:age aur das i'baazjalr sein kaaa, den Meohir erweisen, so apricht
diese uabeetreitbare T ataaohe aicht gegen eiaea leujahratag schoR
ia T7bi. Auch das me.lcedon.ischeKonigajabr lag uater Philadelphoa
sicher in den letzten Tagen des.Jastroa - die Aasatze schwaaken zwi~cben
dem uahaltbarea 24~ ls,o Sa1111el)Jl7J,dem derzeit favorisiertea ~,J].J
Wld dem 27.D;rstros 2 J -, uad trotzdem gilt ill eilligen Urkuadea
als erster MOllat des neuen Je.bres der Iandikoa. Dam:Lt1st eben ledig-
lioh der erete tiir Recb,nuagszweoke :£2!l ze.hleade MOJlat bezeicbaet, ..
ohlle d.a.sa daa den Jahresbegiu schaa im Laufe des Vormoaats aussobloese.
,. ZUrtick zu den Briefdatierwagen ..
des Zeaoaarchiva. zen011 selbst
f'uhrte auch aach sei.aer Flucht in dea agyptisohen Kaleader die make-
do:aiaahe Jahreszahluag welter; das kaan ausaer an seiaen Vertraga-
datieruagen auoh an seinen aur•agyptische MQJt.fte gestelltea Empt&Dga-
daten etlicher mrJc.edoaisch datierter Briete34J ia derselbell Weise
aufgezeigt werden, vie ea vorhin fur M,"sgeschab..
Makedoaisches Kord.gsJahr auoh aeberl agJ"pti&ohea Monats- w::ad
Tagesdatieru.ngen - dieses Gesamtbild der Briefe des Zenon.archive
lJ.llterbrecheD IIUr weaige AusDahmeA,danm.ter der eing8llgs beapro-·
cbene Brier des Numenios. Hier, in der Zeitspai:me A, IJllSS der hoberen
Jahreszahl des Briefdatume die Fi:aaazjahrrechm.uag ~:adellegea.
Numenios mag im Fiaaazwesen, etwa als Gauokouom, tatig geweseD seia.
~ieselbe Recb.mmgswise durrte auch 1a eiaer Brietdftieru.a.g das Gau-
okoaomea HerillolaoeJ'J, ia eiaer s~ohe• dee Iasoa.3bJ UDd.1a zwei
Briefen des TrapeziteA Prometbica• J vorliegen.

318
 lUchta Detiaitiwa kana ab,~r die Jabreaai.hlweiae des Vorgan-
gera ZeDons ia Philadelphia, Pall8.keetors, ausgesagt werden, ausaer,
dasa er Kontraheat der vorh1R ervabllten, au! daa P'ill&D.ajahrgestell-
tea Vertregaurk:uade PSI V 5o9 war uad dass er awar anders, als es
seitweise Zenon tat, am:ag7Ptisobe Moaataaaea aawaadte, aber vie
dieser bestimmt aicbt die agyptisobe KoaiasJabrz·Ahlwig. Das ergibt
sich aua aeiMD Datieruagen von Brieten uad ~ttwigen, daruater
aoch U118dierten Gieseeaer zenoapaP)'l"i.
Gegea Edgar aahle ich ZenODe Eaptangsdatum eiaes von zwei
Brieten des Bootaat"",rll8JD.ea Paris, P .Mich.Zea.6o, aicht uater die
11.aaD.zjahreabelege. Uberbaupt iat su kClllstatieren, daae de:c-1ballz-
Jahrgebrauch ILicht gaaz so bautig war, vie itm Edgar annahmJaJ,
aber doch weseatlioh hiutiger, als Salll181 in aei:aer Ptolemaio Chro-
aology 1lm eiascbitzte. E.dgars Skepsia gegeA die A.-weaduag des
aaptischen KoaigaJahrea duroh griechisohe ZeitgeAoaaea ZeDOD8
teile ioh Jedoch durobaua.
Ia lalendergebrauch der Geaeratioa zeaoas - &D. Zaaon selbet
laaat ea siob vertolgea - koakurrierten aatioaalea TraditioAsgetuhl
der Griechea uad praktiscbe Nutzliohkeit dee eaohorisohea Kale:aders
ad.teiaaader. Dai Zlll" Selbstberub..iglDg der GZieohen als griechisohe
E1arlchtuag geltende 11.DB.Dzjahrwar eine Zeitlaag !!!! Kompromisslosung,
die Kombiaatica agyptischer Manatc.re~hau:ag Iii t makedonisohea Koniga-
Ja.bren var eiae aadere, wad demgegeauber batte die reiD agyptiscbe
Renrurn■ gaweise uater zenoas grieohiacbea Zeitgenoss8Jl, wenigstene imaer-
halb aeines Bekau.te1:1kreises, aoch kaWI Aaruinger. Ob ill Einzelfall
ei:ner Datier.wag ohne Ooppeljahresdatum makedoDi.ccbeK3ni.gaJabr - oder
PilBllzjahrzahluag vorliegt, das zu eatscheidea ·besitzen wir ke.iJLe
Pateatlosung. Von dell bea011deren Probl.emen 1a Abreohntutgen eiusl
.1
abgeeehen, soheiat tur die Wahl eiaer der beiden 1m zeno.aarohiv tavori-
sierten Zllhlweisea der Sachiabalt der Urlamden masegebeDd gewesen zu
eein oder eher aoch die Alltsfunktion des Datiereaden 1 ■ oder ausserhalb
dea Fiskus, die seine dieutliobe uad private Kale■derreobnuiig bee1a-
nusate.
Die ald.zsierte11 Ergeblli.sse aus den aufscblussreiohell Zeaoapa-
pyri eollten auch aueserhalb diesea Archive bei der Umreohmmggrie-
chischer Urkulldendatieruagen mit agyptisohea MoDBtea in Juliaai-
sobe Date• a1cht gaJII. ausser ~cht gelassen werdeA; Skeats prachti-
ge T abelle llefert fur die vorsteheDd behui.del te Zei t :aur ill der ..
1,eitep&LJ2.e C UJleiageschraDkt richtige Wert·e. Aber f):eilich repra-
aentieren die ZeDonpaP7ri aicht notwendig das ga•ze Agypt,en ihrer Zeit.
Seit E.piphaD.ea hat sich die volle Allwelldung des agy~tiscban
Kalendera euechl1essl1oh der agyptischeA Koaigsjahr- uad Priester-

319
 -o-

"
amtajahrzablung bei dell Griechea des Nlllanda durohgesetzt; daa Fi-
.aaazJabr, zuletzt uater Phil.opator uchweisbar, 1st verschWUlldea.
Leider versagt Wls die (.lll8llenlage eiutweilen eiaea as.here• Eia-
plick in (iie E.atv.1.oklWlgder KaleJlderpraxis vahreAd der riir den
Ubergang eatsabeidenden Wlmittelbaren Folgezeit der Zenoapapyri.

Aamerku.Dgeaa

1) P.lq-1.IV 557 = SB 76/+o = P.lb'l.Zell.4 (Bull.Iq-1.Libr.18 (1),

1934, lU t.) = PCZ IV 59541, zusammeageiugt aus eiaem lragDBRt 1a
Ma1aohester, eiaem ia Ka.ire uad eiaem ill florenz (= PSI Ii 314).
2) Eiae 111.ttelagyptisohe Iaschrirl, aus dem 18.Jahr des zwei-
ten Ptolemael,"s, deren Publikation durch L .Koeaen bevorsteht, er-
weist ale Geburtstag des Philadelpbos d8Jl 12. D,yatroa•
.3) Beide Kategorien musseu. aicbt vom Sobrei~r eiaer tJrkwlde
bewast, als direkte Zeugaisse, JIC'tiert seia, sie koanea sioh UIIS ge-
legentliob aua aua der Kombi.uatioa zweier Urkwlden oder zweier
Stellen eiaer Orkunde, soml.t iadirekt, ergeben.
4) Hiinoheaer Beitrage zur Papyrustcrsohuag uad antikea Rechts-
gescbichte, 43.Hert, 1962.
5) Siebe jedoch S. )16 t.
6) Ein Beitrag zur Ptolemaerohroaologie dee III.Jahrh:wlderts
v.Cbr., AP1 11, 1934, 1-56.
7) W.Spiegelberg, Die de1DOtisobea Urlamden des Zeaoa-Archiva,
=
Demot.Stud.Hert 8~ Leipzig 1929. Nr.3A PSI IV 358, 1-10; JB PSI II =
lolo D Nr'.l; )J = PSI IV 358,14 It.; 3D = PSI I.I lolo D Hr-.2.
8) a.0.64; Richtigstellwag durch F.Uebel, Bibliotheoa Orieatalia
21, 1964, .313.
9J a.0.8lt.
lo) PSI IV .386.
11) PSI VI 583; POZ II 59292.
12) Zu POZ III 59327, eiaem typischell Fall dieeer A.rt, a. H.
Praak, a.0.18 t. Vermutlich 1st auoh PCZ II 59176 eiae derartige Urku.Dde.
lJ) Aut ZUgrwldeliegeD. der agyp:·t~ohea Jahreszabluag konate
die eiaer Abreohnu.D.ga agetugte Mo.aatsiiste Thoth bis Meaore ia POZ
IV 59754 deutea. Vgl. auch Freaks Ausf'uhruagea (a.0.19) zu .
PCZ III 59327. Ob Zeitabscbaitte ab Thotb bzv. bis Mesore ia S.B III
6797 vO uad POZ III 59317 auf'. dieaelbe Z~l-weiae sohliessen laeaea.,
1st gua uaaioher. Ia zwei B riefea, POZ III 59299 uad 59.300 (= PSI
IV 433 pd 434), die bei Zeaoa all 6.PachOlls dee )6.J ahres eiagiqem.,
hat aioh Euempolos 111.tder Jahreszahl. •25• auf' Jedan Pall versobrie-
bea; aollta er 1 .35• beabsichtigt habea, so vare damit inaerhal b der
Zeitspanae B daa agyptisobe KoaigsJahr gemeiat. Zu PSI IV 368 a.obea.

320
 l.4) Belep u cbroa->logiaober Pol.get PCZ I SC]ool.J S91)3J P.
Col..7.ea.I 541 PCZ II 591731 59182.• 59248; PSI V 515J PCZ II 59289
(Koaigaeid); P.Cor•ll 2; PSI V 5~; PCZ III 593,40; 1.eit dee Euergetea:
PSI IV 385J P.Ml.ch.1,ea.661 P.Ool.7,en II 85; PSI IV 389.
15) Der ia triihptolemliacher zeit ilbliohe Gruad tiir die .bve•-
dllJII dieaer uageaauea lurzforml, UllkellDtllis der Priestenaaen m
BegiDD Urea Allt.Bjabrea von aeiten dea Sohreibera (e.daJ;u F.Uebel,
restechr.1.lSOjihr.Beeteben des Berliaor Agypt.Mul!l8Wllll, 1974, 448 t.
a.it Belegen, dam aoch ·p~rea.I:n.904 [APF 22-23, 1974, 89-97 aebet
lacbtrag APF 24] anzufugeu aei.D dUrtte), entt&llt 1a der lcurz wr
dem 118.k:edolli.eaheaJahreaeade abgetasaten Urkullde PSI V 5o9. Ioh aweif'-
le aiont, daa a bier al.a eia augularer Grund - siltgular 1st auoh die
Verbiad.Ullg der Prieetertor•l des Praekripts 111.tdem FiJ1SDzjahr -
den Gebrauch der lur1tormel die Fiaan1Jabraahl.Ullg Tera.al.asst bat, weil
dae Fiaa.Dzjabr 1• die Alltezei t aweier Ep01t1a9apaare tiil.lt ( vgl. die
Daten 1• z.4 wad 15 der Ur.k:uDde).
16) PCZ II S9223; P.M:l.oh.zea.43.
17) PCZ I 59a49J PSI V 491; P.Mich.ZM.28; PCZ I 59132; P.Col.
t.ea. I .34; PCZ II 592041 592SlJ PSI V 5141 die tolgemea 3 Belege uater
der VaraUBsetzu.ag, dass Zuoa daa IUk:edJaische Jahr gebrauchte: ~Z
II 59233; 59288; PSI ~-Y 3fi1. Eia witerer Brief, li 1.eitspazme C ge-
echriebeA URd ia Zeitapa.ua A bei 1,enon ei.ngetrotten, weist demzu-
to1.ge zvei Yerachiedeae Jahreazahlea aut, bat aber die gl.eicbe Be-
weiakratta P .Hlch.Zea.l).
18) P.Mi.oh.Zen.161 PSI V 5oo+Sal; So2; P.Col..:t,ea.I 15; PCZ I
59096; 59101; 59~9; PSI IV 345J PCZ II 59147P 59149; P.Lond. VII
1964; P.Hich.Zaa.)9; SB III 7263; R'.:Z II 5922); 59240; P.Hlch.zea.43;
48J P.Loa.d.VII 1998; PSI IV '3'15;die tolgellden 9 Belege uater der
VaraussetZ\mg, daaa 1,ea01l daa aa.kedoaisohe Jahr gel:rauohte's PSI V
512; PCZ II 5927oJ 59271; 592731 PSI IV 'Y72J POZ III 593«>J 59331;
PSI IV 382; V 522; zu P.Petr.II l).{ll) 1.l.
19) Griechiaobacbreibellde lgypter; der Topter Neeeis (PCZ II
S9271), Horoa (PSI IV 172), Petoairis (PCZ III 59306), der Schweiae-
birt P•-• (PCZ III 59331). der Sohitter Paia (PSI IV )82).
2o) P.Mlch.Zen.13; Y.Col.zea.I 1,.
21) PCZ I 59049; P.Mich.Zea.16.
22) P.Petr.II 13(11).
23) P.Iql.IV 56o.
24) PCZ II 59184.
25) PCZ II 59248; P .Coraell 2; POZ III 59340; P .Mich.Zen.66;
P .Col.Zen.II 85; PSI Iv J89.

321
 26) Diese Dioketenbriefe BA Zeaon, alle am 23.Dystroa = Jo.
Phamenoth des 31.Jahres geachrieben uad in ZenoDs Bilro am l.Phar-
muthi mit den Jahreszahlen Jl (59204), Jl und 32 u.bereillaD.der in Kor-
rektur (592o2) UDd 32 (59203) registriert, spielen in der rorschung
bei der Ermittluag des Neujahrstagee in Pluladelphos I makedouischeJ&
KoDigsjahren eiAe grosse Rolle; Samuels these des 24.0,atr~s beruht
111 der Hauptse.che aur ihne:a. Bei der Ar~ntati0n
·• .. wird aber mei-
stens ubersehen, dass zeaons makedOD.iscbesA(1,11Valentdes l.Pharmu-
tbi, auf den er oft'enbar 1m Falla von PCZ 59203 UDd vohl auoh 59202
diesen Neujahrstag ansetzte, uas uabekannt. iet wad durchaus llicht der
24.Dystros gewesen seiA IIUBB, wie sch·.>n die ob16e Auswahl von Fallen
seiaer tehl.erbaften Gleichuagen zeigt. 2',mlgnisse unverdachtiger
Gleichu:agen, die dem A.Dsatz auf den 24.Dystros entgegenstehea, wiegen
m.E. schwerer.
Z7) Der 25 .Tybi 1st termi.a.us post quem laut P .Petr. III lo9( a)
IV 22/3, der 5.Mechir termims ante quem laut P.Petr.III lo9(b)8.
Eiae Diekrepe.nz zwischea diesem Zeugais fur den 25.Tybi als t.p.q.
uad dem dee P.d6m.Lllle 4 ()8.agypt.Jam- = 39. FiaanzJabr des Philadel-
~boa) tii.r dea ~.Tybi als t.a.9-. beseitigte P.W.Pestman, Chrcaologie.
egy?tienne d I apres lea te xtes demotiques, 1967, 1 ~ A.am.8, durch eine
eiJlleuobtende KonJektur im letzteren Papyrus.
28) P.d~m.Lille 35; 42; 47; 53; 54; EIJ;96 + P.Sorb.I J7;
P.d,m.Lll!e 9-llJ 73,; 75; 76; 85. Auch P.Petr.III 72{b) = W.Chr.242
epricht fur einen ABsatz vor dem Jo.Tybi. .,
29) In ll'ranks Aanahme, das Fin.aD.zJabr habe ursprUDglich, d.h.
etwa seit dem AJlfa.ag der zwanziger Jahre des ?hiladelphos, 1a
der zweiten H"'alrte des Tybi begouen, aei aber daDll vereinfachend
au.£ den tolgenden Moaatsersten verlegt worden (a.0.20), steckt der
Widerspruch, dass das {aur vermeintlicbe, s.Aam.27) Zeugllis tur den
itlteren Zustand P.d&m.Lille 4 vom 39.FiaanzJahr. juager ist ale der
von Frank als Zeugnis des jiiageren zustands gewertete P .Petr. III
lo9 vom )6./)7.FinaazJahr.
Jo) Siebe F.Uebel, Bibliotheca OrieRtalia 21, 1964, Jll r.
Jl) ADaatz I.Mayers (APF 2.Beiheft, 1925), von C.1..i.Edgar (.P •
Mioh.Ze•.S.52) nicht ohne Bedealaa ubernommen; vgl. auch F .Uebel,
APF 22-23, 19'74,94 zu P.Ien.ID.v.904. Neue Argumente 3U6UD.Bten dieses
Datums wird die oben Anm.2 geDaDate Iascbrirtpublikation L.K.oeneu
eathalten, die mir duroh die FreUlldlich~eit des A.utors sohoJl vor
dem Druck bekanat wurde; meiae Bewertuag von PCz ll 592o2-2o4
(a.obea Alllll.26) weicht allerdiags von derjenigen Koenene ab. H.
Frank (a.o. 9 t.) :aahm de:a 25. oder 26.Dystros u. Beide Oaten atabe.:ra
ucht im Eillklang ml.t PGZ I 59139 (1!1.Aam.32).

322
 .32) D1eses durch PCZ I 59139 emptohl.eae uad daher voa
O.C.Edgar (P.Kich.Zen.S.52) erwogeae, jedoch wegen PCZ II 59209
von ihm wieder verworfeae Datum glaubte ich bisher {s.Bibl.1otheca
Orieat&lis 21,1964, )llt.) bevorzugen zu sollea, da die uas uabekaute
ia:lividuelle Gleicbuag des Schreibers von PCZ 59209, die Edgar seiAer
Eatscheidt111g zugrunde legte, ebenso teblerhart sein kann, vie es
ZeJlons Gleichwlgen vom Jo.Jahr ab silld, so dass das rein agyptiscbe
Moaats- uad Tageedatum dea PGZ 592o9 f'U:l'. uaser Problem irrelevant
wird. leue Geeichta?',Dkte gegen diesen Aa&atz s.Amn.31.
33) PCZ III 59332 + P.Jalld.Iav.,384 Z.7/8 (a.F.Uebel, Kuraba-
riahte aus dea Giesseaer ?apyrus-Samml.uagen 18,1964,9); 59355,lo-16
u.H.; IV 59562, 26/7. · '
34) Zeitspanae As ?.Col.Zen.I 34; POZ II 59204; 59251; PSI V
514. Zeitapanne B: P.M1.ch.Zen.J9J SBIII 726); PCZ II 59240; P.Mich.Zea.
48; P .Lond. VII 1998; PSI IV 'Y/5.
35) SB V7985.
36) P.Lolld.VII 2oo8. .
'II) PCZ II 59250; V 59~3.
JB) Rec.Ohampollioa,1922,120; PCZ V, 1940,s.20.

323
A REEXAMINATION
OF P.OXY.2288 (SAPPHO1 LP)

R. van Bennekom

In 1951, this scrap of papyrus was published by Mr.

Lobel in vol. XXI of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri. It con-
tains, in a damaged state, the opening syllables of
the first 21 lines of Sappho'e famous Prayer to Aphro-
dite. The papyrus is located in the Ashmolean Museum
in Oxford. Recently, a good enlarged photograph of it
has become available: it is in a small book by Prof.
E.G.Turner, called The Papp:ologist at Work, published
in 1973 as Greek, Roman an Byzantine Monograph no. 6.
Prof. Turner has subjected the papyrus to a careful
reappraisal. His findings constitute a welcome supp-
lement to Lobel's editio princeps, and are likely to
become authoritative for the next decades; neverthe-
less, it seems to me tnat there is room for some
additional remarks, especially with regard to the
much-discussed crux in line 19. I have examined the
papyrus myself under the supervision of Dr. Coles of
the Ashmolean Museum, and had a slide made of it, of
which I hope that it will give as close an idea of the
original as possible.
The first thing to notice about the papyrus is its
scholarly standard of accuracy. Not only does the
scribe get all the difficult vocalizations of Sappho's
vernacular right, he also gives some extra information:
middle stops after xpua,ov (8) and after the sigil!B. in
line 19, recessive accents on &vµov (4) and a~poueo,

~
10), and short signs on bCvvcv"tsc; ( 11) and &y,,v
19), which have not yet been satisfactorily explained
see Turner, op.cit. p.35).
Furthermore, it is important to stress that the
papyrus is in complete agreement, as far as it goes,
with the text as read by Dionysius of Halicarnassus
(De Comp.Verborum ch.23), still our chief authority
for the poem. I~ is true that the poem is rather mis-
handled in the manuscripts of Dionysiua, but the cor-
ruptions never go deep. The mistakes of the scribes
are just the sort of mistakes that are made by someone
who is scrupulously transcribing a piece of text in a
relatively unfamiliar language, without knowing too
well what it is about. A good example is in line 5,
where the mas. offer xa.~• lpw~a., which does not make
sense, but which clearly presupposes an original in
excellent Aeolic.
It is perhaps not too wild to assume that we have
in both the text of Dionysiua and the papyrus the
recension of Aristophanes of Byzantium, who lived only
a century and a half before Dionysius. The punct-
uation after xpva,ov in line 8 may also stem from him,
and there is no a priori reason to assume that he was
right in this. I agree with von Wilamowitz (Sappho
und Simonides 45) that the balance of the sentence
strongly favours taking xpvo,ov with &pµa.
But now for the crux in line 19. As is well known,
the mas. of Dionysius have left ue the choice between
Kcua«Y'lY, µa.,aa.yTtv and l3a.1,acxy11v, whereas the papyrus
just stops short of providing a clear-cut answer: it
has ]a. &yflv,with room for hardly more than two letters
before the sigma and, most interestingly, a curved
trace of ink high above the line of writing, left of
the sigma. On the photograph in Prof.Turner's book
it looks more as if there are two disconnected traces
instead of one continuous curve, but Prof.Turner him-
self would be the first to admit that this appearance
is deceptive: there is a little ridge in the texture
of the papyrus which runs right through the curve, so
that the ink on the ridge has almost completely washed
off. Upon looking through the microscope, there can
be no doubt that there has been one continuous flow
of ink.
Now the only letters which normally begin high
above the line are, and+. Prof.Heitach, in a paper
in Hermes 1967, entertained the idea that we might
have an iota here, and accordingly proposed cta«y~v,
but he clearly had not seen the papyrus. The same
goes for myself: in my ~aper in Mnemosyne 1972, where
I proposed TIEC&wv / •lo ly'lv, I too hoped that an
iota would be possible, but upon _seeing the actual
papyrus I had to abandon that idea: iota's never
start so high. It was therefore natural for Mr.Lobel,
the editor princeps, to propose a+ and to read 4+
o' !y~v. However, it has proved extremely difficult
to make sense of this reading. Recently, Prof.G.M.
Kirkwood (EarlR Greek Monody, 1974, 246 f.) has
defended it; e takes &y'lv as an infinitive of

326
result and translates "whom am I to persuade so as to
bring {her) back for you to your friendship". I find
this extremely harsh; I know of no parallel where
wcC&c•v talces this sort of construction. More in
general, any reading with&+ faces two difficulties:
a) the variance with the mas. of Dionysius becomes
difficult to account for; b) the sigma after &et,has
to be interpreted as ao•. But oo• is not needed for
the sense and indeed b~tter dispensed with; we have
already l(. oa• c,,A.cS-rcx-r«;to have ao• l,; o&v q,,A.6't11-ra
would give the phrase 1an undue stress. Moreover, the
sound-combination 4~ 0 ly~v is definitely harsh. If
Dionysius is right in asserting that euphony is a
major characteristic of the poem ~the reason why he
quotes the poem is that he wants to demonstrate its
smooth diction), such a superfluous sigma here would
be doubly strange.
In view of these circumstances, it would be good
if we could find some other alternative to the notor-
ious +,which limits our choice of interpretation so
severely. Now Prof.Turner has compared a papyrus of
Plato's Phaedo (P.Oxy.1809), which was very probably
written by the same hand, and where the alpha some-
times starts abnormally high above the line. This
has led him to think that in this case also we might
have a tall alpha instead of a et,. I do not want to
deny this possibility, but only repeat what Prof.
Turner himself has said already: that it is hard to
think of a word ending on -aa to fill the bill here.
Therefore it seems preferable to me to promote a
fourth possibility next to,, ♦ and a, which occurred
to me while examining the papyrus: to interpret the
crucial trace as a perispomenon accent. As has been
said, there are two more of these accents in this
papyrus, one on o-rpou&o, in line 1O and one on &uµov
in line 4, and of these especially the one on tuµov
is drawn in a remarkably similar way to the curve in
line 19 ?. If this is right, a whole range of vowels
and diphthongs becomes available to be put under the
accent. It has to be remembered, however, that the
scribe tends to put a perispomenon accent not right
above the first or the last vowel of a diphthong, but

~ Dr.R.A.Coles, whom~ have consulted in this

matter, agreed that a perispomenon accent in line 19
would be quite possible.
in between (cf.o-rpou&o, in line 10), so that the only pos-
sible diphthong here would seem to be one ending on iota: a
wider letter would soon collide with the sigma next to it.
I have no utterly new reading to-propose. K~a• (thither)
is palaeographically possible, but gives a poor sense.
µ«ta', the guess of the 19th century, would also become pos-
sible again, were it not that µato would take just a bit
too much space to be plausible. This is easy to check,
since the previous line does begin with µa,. Assuming a
straight margin, the second µa, would have to fall verti-
cally under the first, which is contrary to the evidence on
the papyrus: the second µa, would have begun about a half-
letter farther left than the first. Therefore I prefer to
maintain my conjecture of 1972 "tCva bTl~"CcIltC-&wv/ a?a' &y,,v
l,; o&•vq,i.Ao-ra."Cci (meaning: "whom will it befall this time to
be led by Peitho to your love?"), even if a, seems in turn
a bit short for the space available. I have to suppose that
the a here had come off somewhat wider than standard.
A definite advantage of the reading IlECtwv/ ata' is that
it saves the general agreement between the papyrus and the
text Dionysius must ha~e had before him. If we suppose that
there was scriptio continua between lines 18 and 19 at some
stage of the transmission of Dionysius' text, it becomes
easy to imagine that the idiomatic v of DtC&wv was swapped
for a~ or x, both of which can look very similar to a v.
There remains the problem of the middle stop after the
sigma on the papyrus. Its normal function is to indicate
where the main syntactic break in a sentence occurs; yet no
such break is defensible here. Could it be that there were
originally two stops, one before and one after ata, in order
to indicate~e syntactically crucial function of a?oa? On
this hypothesis, the space before the sigma would also be
more satisfactorily filled. But of course this remains pure
guesswork. It is worth noting, however, that the scribe of
P.Oxy.1809, who has been identified by Lobel and Turner with
the scribe of our papyrus, is very lavish with high and
middle stops. Cf.11.4-8: woff£P£yw•b£taµ£voa xa, unoµt\vaa ~~v
0µ1,xpo"C~"C«•xa.~£~\ WVooncp £~µ~ OU'tOO &au~oo•oµ,xpoo C\µ~-•~A
(Pl.Phaedo 102E). It is not probable that the middle atop
in ou-,r papyrus served as a mere word-separator: in that
case, as Mr.M.L.West has pointed out to me, a diastole would
be called for (cf.E.G.Turner, GMAW,p.13 n.1).
In conclusion, I should like to say a few words on the
overall interpretation of the poem in connexion with the pro-
posed reading for 1.18-19. It has been felt, a long time ago
already by Buecheler and quite recently by Kirkwood
(,2.R.cit.), that the mention of Peitho would be in-
appropriate here. I suppose that the argument behind
this feeling is that the relation between Sappho and
Aphrodite in this poem is a very intimate one, and
that to introduce Peitho here as a sort of go-between
would infringe on this personal relationship. It
would somehow seem to reintroduce into the world of
Sappho the machinery of gods and messengers, of
personifications and semi-personifications, which,
we may feel, belongs more to the world of the Iliad.
Sappho's theology, we may feel, ought to be as simple
and direct as possible. But I am not sure that this
is a good arguJJ1ent. In the first place, in reply to
it I might hide behind the back of von Wilamowitz,
who in Sap,ho und Simonidee defended the interpre-
tation of eitho here as the daughter or servant of
Aphrodite. He pointed to a cult of Aphrodite Peitho
in Mytilene at that time, and by an overingenious
piece of reasoning inferred that Peitho as the ser-
vant of Aphrodite was also mentioned in another
fragment of Sappho (156 D). The attribution of 156
D to Sappho has been discredited by Prof.Page
(Sappho and Alcaeus 6), but his conjecture about the
connexion between Aphrodite and Peitho has been con-
firmed by the discovery of a fragment of a commentary
on Sappho, P.Oxy.2292 (90 LP), where we xead: "else-
where she (Sappho) calls Peitho the daughter of
Aphrodite", which seems to imply that in at least one
place Peitho was aleo called the servant of Aphro-
dite~- So we need have no qualms about the reality
as a person of Peitho for Sappho. But still this is
only half the answer. What we need above all is a
poetic justification for the appearance of Peitho in
this particular place in this particular poem, and
here von Wilamowitz goes wrong, I think: he presumes
that there can only be ,iAC«, friendship, between
Sappho and the girl she wants, not love, and that
therefore it is meet and right that Peitho should be
the one to bring the girl to Sappho, not Eros or
Aphrodite herself. I prefer a different justifi-

2) In fr. 96, 29 LP it is uncertain whether

wc~&w should be interpreted as the goddess or as
first person singular.

329
cation for the role of Peitho as a servant to Aphro-
dite here: through it, the superiority of Aphrodite
over mortal beings is emphasized. The goddess becomes
one stage further removed from the poor despairing
creature Sappho, and she becomes all the more power-
ful for it. It is true, of course, that the relation
between the god and Sappho is meant to be intimate
and friendly: she smiles to her, µ£\bL«Coa1,aa, and
she talks to her, but her smile is not of this world:
&aavci'l't) npoawn,.,. To Aphrodite• Sappho t s cia111, must
look ephemeral, and she brings this out by saying
that a mere wink to her servant will be enough to
cure them. The reading a?aa (lo'li.)also helps to bring
this out, I feel: throughout the next stanza, it is
presented almost as a law of nature that the lover
will be loved in return, and this idea of a law of
nature is also present in the notion of t1laa or
µo,pa, that which is due to happen to somebody Jj. By
putting these consolatory words into the mouth of
Aphrodite Sappho succeeds in taking distance from
her problems, and it is in part this combination of
intensity of feeling and ironical distance which
makes the Frayer to Aphrodite to such a great poem.

JJcf. Mnemosyne 1972, 115 ff., and cf. espe-

cially Theognis 34~ ff.:
a # .. , • # I' • .I
'lCvVa\~Y o,, £1, µ~ ~· kllkWV aµnauµa µEpLµYEWY
• • llr 1.•1- Jl..,. 1.r
eupo1,µ~v, uO\~V u av'l «Y\WV av1,a(•
a?oa Y~P oG~w( ia'lCv.

330
 DALL'ARCHIVIODEL TESSITORETRIFONE
Mariangela Vandoni

P.Oxy.321: proposta
di ricoetru.zione
Ossirinco, [novembre 36 d.C.]
1 T[pu]cpwv 6LOVu[crCou, ylpoLoc;, rrlpanc; ~ij, tnL-
yovfi<;,
,., , , [ .. ,
EapaEU'tL AnLW VO<;µ£'ta KUPLOU•••••••••••••
•••••
'tOV EapanCw(voc;
, .. 'Ef;€6o'to ·001. +i yv-
x(aCp£Lv).
,,_
vn µou 6T)µTJ'tpouc .o
~µELV t~ aAADAWLv yEyovoc &~AVXOVnaC01.ov, ~
~voµa 8arou- '
5 vLov· npOE'tPE ~EC ol au~ EapaEuc; tn'tvLau-
'tbv fva l6Cw aov ·
yaActK'tL 'tOU'tO 6[uya'tpLOV µlxpL vvv. arp'~, 6t
tav f}µl-
pac anaAA~yw[µEVan'aAADAW\Ityw µEv KctL ~ 6~-
µT}'tpouc;,
a~'o~ µT}VOCtav [µn ano6w OOL f} ~T}µT}'tpouc 'ta
'tporpt!a
nAT}pwcrw, tyw Lµovoc;6 Tpurpwv tx 'tOO l6Cou tx
nAT)povc;
10 'tOV .ou &vya'tpCou Lbntp 'tL&T}v~atwc;~no.ax.ov
v,
µ 1.a-8-0
nupou ~µLOU xoCLvLKO«;
tAaCou
KO'tUAa<;ouo xal.a µ~va· KctL tnuvayxov 6µ0AO-
yw ltno-
6wcr£L\IOOL xlaAKOU opaxµac; •.••• Xct'ta µ~va
tlc; µf1vac
OEKctouo, YctACl[K'tO'tporpouaT}c;
crou 'tO &uya.pLOV
£le; fiAAOV
15 t\lLctU't~\I f.va [ •••••
..
. . ..

331
 6paxµac; 6vo .[
tav 0£ µ~·:::.[
• .. &q, t

o]i µ~voc; lav x.[0L11.avw, txi;Caw OOL 'ta ~Aa~T)

xal 6anav~µai:a
OLTt11.a,i:nc:; npa~[Ewc:; OOL O~OT)~ix 1:E tµou xat
tx. 'tWV
20 bnapxov,:wv µCOL navi:wv xa~an£p lK OLKT)«:;.µ~
11.L no uaY)c;
o]ou tvi:oc:; 6LC£'t£Lac; 't~V ,:poq>£Cav, xopnyouv-
,:oc:; OE
µou fxao(,:ov µfjva ,:bv ,:ou 6£u,:lpou tvLau,:ou
ouv-
ncq>wv[T)µEVOV µ~cr~ov
•••••
l:;£•• T) • • [ ......
6T)~T)-
25 ,:pouv. K[uJpCa [~ auyypaq>~
~£VT) xal. nav,:l.
,:w tnt.q>tLpovi:L.
--Ypuq>wv [
000
Il P.Oxy. 321 fa parte dell'archivio del tes-
sitore Trifone figlio di Dionisio, i cui documen
ti, rinvenuti ad Ossirinco da Grenfell e Hunte-
pubblicati nel I e nel II volume della serie oxo
niense, sono stati riesaminati qualche anno fa
da una giovane studiosa italiana, M.V. Biscotti-
ni ( Aegyptus",
11
1966) ..
Il piu interessante dei docu.menti di questo
archivio ~ certamente il P ..Oxy.267, che ben a~
gione ~ state definite da H.J. Wolff "one of the
most troublesome texts" fra quelli relativi alla
vexata quaestio del cosl detto aypaq>oc; yaµoc;
nei documenti papiracei di et~ romana. Pubblica-
to da Grenfell e Hunt con il titolo di "agree-
ment of marriage", dal Mitteis come "Verm~gens-
rechtliche Abmachungen bei einem B.ypaq>oc:; yaµoc; ",

332
trattato, considerate, interpretato da numerosi
studiosi, 11 P.Oxy.267 non~ collooabile con si-
curezza in una precisa categoria documentale. A
mio parere, proprio il P.Oxy.321 pub aiutarci a
comprendere meglio questo enigmatico testo.
Del P.Oxy.321, per verit~, noi possediamo so-
lo una parte, circa un terzo di ogni linea, e le
poche parole rimaste non sono facilm.ente colle~
bili in un contesto coerente e scevro di dubbi -
gravi.
Il documento ~, indiscutibilmente, un contra!
to di baliatico fra Trifone e una donna, Saraeus
figlia di Apion, che ~ la contropa.rte dello ates
so Trifone anche nel P.Oxy.267 e che in altri do
1
cumenti dell'archivio risulta, dal 4 luglio del-
37 d.C. in poi, seconda moglie di Trifone. Ma a
questo si limitano le notizie certe: manca la da
ta, ed il documente h state collocate da Grenfal
e Hunt (~~QJcx.II p.244) e dalla Biscottini dopo
il P.Ox~~ Inoltre, rispetto agli altri con-
tratti i baliatico dell'Egitto romano, questo
contratto presenta alcune anomalie:
1) il documento ~ annu.llato (K£XLacrµl~o~): in se
guito, dice la Biscottini, al suo adempimento
2) l'affidante, e non la balia, sari. soggetto ad
esecuzione, in caso di inadempienza
3) secondo le interpretazioni finora date dei re
sti della 1.4, Trifone assumerebbe au.a moglie
Saraeus per allattare a pagamento la bambina
nata da loro
4) la separazione cui ai allude nella 1.7 sareb-
be stata per avvenire fra Trifone e Saraeus.
Laterza e la quarta "anomalian sono tanto gra-
vi, che, se non si potesse eliminarle, il teato
rappresenterebbe un assurdo giuridico incompren-
sibile. In realt~, dato lo atato lacunoso del te
sto, ~ gratuito pensare che quell'~µEtv tt ~AA~=
AWV (1.4) debba essere riferito alle due contro-
parti del contratto, ossia "Trifone figlio di

333
Dionisio, tessitore, Persiano della discendenza
(?)" (questa restituzione viene proposta per la
presenza della clausola di esecuzione a 1.19) e
"Saraeue figlia di Apion". Il nome del KupLo~
di Saraeus ~ in lacuna: non~ la stessa persona
che assiste Saraeus in P.Oxy.267, e non poesia-
mo escludere che egli sia il marito della donna.
Tutte le integrazioni qui proposte per le 11-
nee successive si basano sulla constatazione che
le 1.5 (npol~e£[~E~), 8 (a~·oi µ~vo~ thv [) e 9
(nX~pwaw lyw L J si- adattano solamente ad un rin
novo di un contratto gi~ vigente, e non ad un -
contratto nuovo. Noi sappiamo, dal P.Oxy.282,
che Trifone, prima del 37 d.C., era sposato con
una donna di nome Demetrous, e che l'unione con
questa donna ebbe termine in modo tempestoso: o-
re., se noi poniamo il P.Oxy.321 ad una data non
posteriore, ma anteriore al P.Oxy.267, possiamo
riferire quell'~µE!v l~ &XX~Xwva Trifone ed a
Demetrous, ed otteniamo una situazione logica,
ricostruibile con formule che si adattano ai re-
sti delle linee in righ.1 di lunghezza uniforme.
La ricostruzione proposta h la seguente: "Af-
fido ate mia moglie Demetrous la bambina di no-
me Thamounion, nata da noi due; e gi~ prim.a tu,
Saraeus, allattasti con il tuo proprio latte,per
un anno, questa bimba finora. Ma, dal giorno in
cui ci separassimo io e Demetrous, e dal mese in
cui Demetrous non ti versasse gli alimenti, com-
pirh io solo, Trifone, del mio, pienamente, la
mercede pattuita per l'allattamento della bambi-
na". Seguono le varie voci che costituiscono ta-
le mercede, ovviamente non ricostruibili, spe-
cialmente la 1.13, in cui, se veramente x ~ la
iniziale di xaAKou, avremmo eccezionalmente un
pagamento in dram.me di bronze (negli altri con-
tratti di baliatico la mercede ~ pagata in argen
to). Seguono, ancora, le penalit~ nelle quali in
correra Trifone, se verrlL meno ai suoi impegni -

334
contrattuali, ed una frase finale, che nei norma
li contratti di baliatico im.pone alla balia di
presentare periodicamente 11 bambino al control-
lo dell'affidante, ma che forse qui, data la ec-
cezionalit~ del caso, suonava all'incirca "poi-
ch~ ti versero io Trifone mensilmente la mercede
pe.ttuita peril secondo anno, tu Saraeus non a-
vra.i piu l'obbligo di presentare la bimba a Deme
trous", o forse anche, invece di toglierle sem--
plicemente l'obbligo, si faceva alla balia eepli
cito divieto di mostrare la bambina alla madre,
poich~ costei aveva od avrebbe lasciato il tetto
coniugale. Insomma, il contratto mostrerebbe che
Trifone, su.l punto di essere abbandonato da Dem.!
trous, vuol garantire la continuith dell'allatt!!:_
mento alla sua bambina, e rileva percio il con-
tratto pri.ma stipulate fra Saraeus da una parte
e lui etesso e Demetroue dall'altra; e, poich~
non vuole versare in una sola soluzione antici-
pa.ta la mercede peril secondo anno, si impegna
a pa.game puntualmente i mensili: di qui la sua
straordinaria posizione di debitore.
Rimane da spiegare perch~ questo docu.mento
sia atato annullato in un mode tanto ineolito
per un contratto di baliatico. Direi che l 1 an-
nullamento, eseguito con barre incrociate sul t_!
sto stesso del contratto, ~ stato fatto in que-
sta form.a non perch~ il contratto sia giunto a
compimento (alla fine dei 12 mesi citati alla 1.
14), ma proprio perchb, prim.a della eua scaden-
za, ~ stato sostituito con un nuovo e diverse
contratto: precisamente con il P.Oxy.267. Il 22
maggio del 37 d.C. Trifone, abbandonato da Deme-
trous e dopo averla denunciata anche per appro-
priazione indebita (P.O:xy.282), si prende in ca-
sa la balia della sua bambina (situazione ecce-
zionale ma non unica, cfr.P.dem.Cairo 30604, del
233/2 a.C.) e stipula con lei un nuovo contratto,
che ha l'aspetto di un prestito atipico e che

335
nella sostanza assomiglia ad u.na xapaµov~. In ea-
so non sono elencati gli impegni di Saraeus, che
anzi figura ancora una volta come creditrice di
Trifone: non sono piu menzionate le sue funzioni
di balia e non sono neanche accennate le sue al-
tre manaioni, per le quali perb si prospetta la
possibilith che ella rimanga incinta. Trifone, in
vece, le versera alla fine di 5 meei 40 dramme d!
argento (in forma di restituzione di prestito, ma
in realt~ come mercede: e per questo daterei il
P.Oxy.321 al novembre del 36, ossia 7 mesi prima
del P.Oxy.267), le assicura il poeaeeso di certi
gioielli ed oggetti di veatiario elencati; inol-
tre, poich~ i due, come~ eeplicitamente ed ine-
quivocabilmente detto, "sono insieme eenza con-
tratto•, Trifone garantisce a Saraeus certi dirit
ti che spetterebbero naturalmente ad u.na moglie -
in caeo di separazione durante una gravidanza di
lei, ma che non spettano affatto ad u.na donna che
moglie non~, e che quindi debbono esserle assicu
rati da una speciale clausola di queeto anomalo -
contratto.
Le viciesitudini di Trifone non terminano anco
ra a questo punto. In una data ohe sta frail 22-
maggio 37 ed il 4 luglio dello etesso anno, quan-
do Saraeus ~ incinta di lui, Trifone la sposa, au
scitando la violenta reazione di Demetrous e di -
sua madre, le quali aggrediscono entrambi e caus~
no a Saraeus danni tali, che ella perde il suo
bambino.(P.Oxy.315); in questo documento Saraeua
~ detta moglie di Trifone ed ~ probabilmente pro-
prio questo auo nuovo stato la ragione per cui il
pa.gamento promesso dopo 5 mesi nel documento nr.
267 avviene solo dopo 7 anni e senza pa.gamento di
penalith. Solo dopo questo lungo periodo, evidente
temente, i due coniugi si preoccupano di chiedere
la cancellazione di un atto che per loro era gil
etato superato da tempo.

336
Extraction of papyri from gesso cartonnage: A new method
based on an enzymatic approach.

Dr. 0ystein Wendelb~

Plates XXVII-XXIX
Communicated by Dr. 0ystein Wendelbo at Rhodes House, Oxford,
27.7.1974. 1.

Many attempts have been made in the past to free papyri from
gesso cartonnage. Known to the author are extraction
procedures with boiling water, steam, acids (e.g. hydrochloric
acid etc.). None of these methods have given unequivocally
good results. Considering the age of the material, this was
not to be expected either. These methods are all crude and
unspecific, having widespread effects -on different chemical
constituents in the plant material.
In the search for a safer and more specific method, the
enzymatic approach was chosen. The author has for many years
been using enzymes with good results in restoration. 2, 3
The main advantages of using enzymes are speed and specificity.
What can be achieved by chemicals in the course of days or
weeks (with sometimes deleterious effects to the restoration
object in the meantime by chemical or solvent, light, air
etc.) is brought about within minutes. Even more important,
their specificity makes the reaction predictable, and
unknown side effects will not occur.
Gesso is said to be many things,e.g. gypsum (calcium sulphate),
whiting (calcium carbonate) etc. Alfred Lucas 4 made many
chemical analyses of old Egyptian gesso, and he concluded
that it consisted of whiting containing nitrogenous organic
matter. An x-ray diffractometric study of the gesso was
carried out to get additional evidence as to the chemical

337
composition of the mineral compounds in the gesso. This
investigation showed, beyond doubt, that it consisted of
calcium carbonate. 5
As whiting possesses very small adhesive properties, a
binding substance was expectedi for instance glue, as
suggested by Lucas. Earlier experiments 2 , 3 have demonstrated
that glue is easily split by the enzyme trypsin without
harmful effects to the restoration object.
The extraction procedure consists of dissolving Pancreas
Trypsin NOVO (activity 6 Anson units/gr.) in a phosphate buffer
solution, pH=B, temp. +40° c. The papyrus fragment is put
into the solution, and the gesso starts getting dissolved
almost immediately. The text emerges usually within 5-10
minutes. If the papyri are glued together in layers, a
separation occurs after a somewhat longer exposure time;
from 10 to 15 minutes. The enzymatic effect is stopped by
washing out in ordinary tap water.
Crystalline trypsin is very expensive. For reasons of
economy the enzymatic preparation Pancreas Trypsin NOVOhas
been chosen for this new method. The preparation contains
the enzymes trypsin and chymotrypsin. For the experienced
bio-chemist there are no objections to the use of this
preparation as it only contains these two enzymes, both being
proteolytic, i.e. they only attack proteins, The framework
of Cyperus papyrus is almost entirely built of oarbo-hydrates
(cellulose, hemicelluloses, lignin etc.) and it is these that
are of interest, when considering the plant as substance for
writing material. Electron microscopic studies of the old
papyrus material have not revealed detrimental changes 6
after enzyme treatment. The use of enzymes for restoration
purposes is not limited to papyrus only. In all fields of
restoration, for instance restoration of paper, paintings, pottery,

338
furniture etc., the enzymatic approach will be the answer to
many problems presently regarded as insolubile. An example
of this is shown in plate 3 1 which shows pieces of textile
after enzymatic removal from gesso cartonnage. 7

This study has been supported by the Norwegian Research Council

for Science and the Humanities.
Acknowledgement: The expert technical assistance of Archival
Restaurator B. Fosse, State Public Record Office of Bergen,
Bergen, is gratefully acknowledged. The author is indebted
to Professor, dr. philos. A.P.Nygaard and his staff,
Department of Biochemistry, and Professor, dr. med.W. Harkmark
and his staff, Department of Anatomy, University of Bergen,
for their kind permission to use their laboratories and
necessary equipment. The author wants to express his
sincere gratitude to Professor Richard Holton Pierce,
Ph.D. Department of Classics, University of Bergen, for
his initiation and support of this work.

Notes and references:

1. The presentation was dealt with in three parts.

By:
a) showing in a film the procedures of the method.
b) reading a formal paper: 'The removal of gesso
cartonnage with some remarks on glued papyri~
c) giving a practical demonstration of the method
on a piece of the Oxyrhy~hus cartonnage from
the Ashmolean Museum. Texts in clear writing
emerged. Detrimental changes were not seen.
2. ~. Wendelbo & B. Fosse: Protein "surgery".
A restoring procedure applied on paper.
Restaurator. l.• 1970. pp. 245-48.

339
3. ~. Wendelbo: The use of enzymes for restoration
purposes. Archives et Biblioth~ques de Belgique.
Numfro special. 12.1974. PP• 235-241.

4. A.Lucas: Anolent Eggptian matePiate and indMstPi•••

4.rev. and enl.ed. by J.R.Harris.
(Arnold Ltd. London, 1962), p.4.

s. The expert assistance of Amanuensis Hagne Tysseland,

Geological institute, University·of Bergen, is
gratefully acknowledged.

6. The expert assistance of Assistant Professor,

dr. med. Per R. Flood, Department of Anatomy,
University of Bergen, is gratefully acknowledged.

7. A more detailed report,giving more chemical data, will

be published in the journal &!stauPatoP, (Copenhagen).

Authors address:

University of Bergen.
The Preclinical InstituteL
Aratadveien 19.
5000 Bergen.
Norway.

340
 TH~ ?I.ETHICALPLACING 0.tt' SJlALL PAPYRUSlt'RAGII.ENTS
M.L. West
Many papyrus fragments of great poets are so small that
they look useless. No continuous sense, perhaps no com-
plete word: only the existence of larger pieces from the
same roll or codex indicates that they are fragments of
great poets, or indeed that they are verse. But they
deserve caref'ul attention, for one little observation
may lead to a chain of deductions. The moat signifi-
cant advance is often the recognition how the preserved
words or syllables fit into the presumed metrical sche-
ma. At once they take on form. They become part of met-
rical cola, the range of possible supplements becomes
sharply circuniacribed, particular supplements begin to
suggest themselves, and r1nally sense may emerge. Edi-
tors do not always take full advantage of metrical cri-
teria. In this paper I want to illustrate how detailed
knowledge of the rules of versification can sometimes
enable even a very narrow fragment to be placed.
I begin with some exan,plee from F. Oxy. xxii. 2313,
a roll which contained tetrameters of Archilochus. The
first example 18 fairly straightforward. Consider line
1, and where in the tetrameter it might come from. It
might be the beginning. Or aXXa might be the end of
the first metron: - u aXXa ~oL vtoc ~[e or ~[\C. It
cannot be the beginning ot' the second metron, because
veoo would then bridge the caesura. Nor can we have
the caesura between aXXa and the enclitic ~01: there
are parallels for such a caesura in tragedy, but not in
early iambus. The remaining possibility is that the cae-
sura falls before &XXa. This is only possible if veoO't'[
is part of a compound word, because Archilochus avoids
a disyllable such as vtoc before the final iambus of
the line ( the Wilan,ow1 tz - Knox Law). When we look at
line 2, the three possibilities are virtually reduced
to one. xCveL ~axav[ is not the beginning of a tetra-
meter, therefore ~XXa ~01 cannot be. Nor can it follow
the caesura. It 18 conceivable that the caesura falls
before aXXa and after xCveL, with some trisyllabic
case of ~6.>..at; following. But no tribrach f'orm of 't6.Xac
is found in Greek literature before the fifth century,
resolution is rare in Archilochus, and together with a
compound veoo~- this makes three uncommon things that

341
have to be postulated for this metrical diagnosis to
hold. The remaining alternative is much the likeliest:
that there are two syllables lost before 6.XXa., three
before x Cvec..
In the second example we see in line 3, and again
in iines 4 and 7, three consecutive longs. As there is
no word-break after the second long, these must either
represent the runover from the first to the second met-
ron or the runover from the third to the fourth. Against
the latter alternative is the disyllable xeC vou in 4,
which looks likely to offend against the Wilatowitz-
Knox Law. This one case might be saved by following en-
clitics, but in 6 we again have a disyllabic word which
will have to be assigned to the same position in the
verse, and which cannot have been preceded by a pre~osi-
tive monosyllable (as those in 7 and 8 can). So we may
safely say that the fragment comes from the first part
of th~ verse. In most of the lines two or three sylla-
bles are lost at the beginning, in line 3 only one.
In the next example we observe the only obscene word
so far found in Archilochus' tetrameters, 13,\vfwv or
l31.vtw. In his dialect that must be scanned as a spondee.
The preceding xa. looks like a short syllable - probably
the end of yuva.txa. Now short-long-long followed by
word-break can only occur in one place in the line: at
the caesura. So we know that five syllables are lost at
the beginning of line 2; probably the same in line 3;
and either four or six in line 1. ·
In my fourth and last exa11:ple from this papyrua, we
have only two syllables in lines 2-6 and even leas in 1.
In lines 2, 3, and 4 the syllables are v - , and the
same is likely to have been true in 5 and 6. The fact
that these iambi are so well aligned one above the other
sugr,ests that we are near the beginning of the verse.
The fact that the first syllable is short in at least
four of the five lines, and probably all of them, would
suit the hypothesis that only one syllable preceded: if
three had preceded, the position would be ancepe. Thie
reasoning is upset by line 1, if ]y is rightly read,
for that implies two successive longs, which cannot
stand at the very beginning of the verse. However, it is
posvible to take they as}~, giving a sixth line with
an iambus in vertical alignment. It is then ten,pting to
assume that it be~an with ~]Xc.xac., line 2 with ~)µfp~[,
and line 3 with ~J µ' txe6[6epov or the like.

342
 Sometimes articulation and supplementation are a
necessary preliminary to metrical placing. For example,
in P. Oxy. xxx. 2520 fr. 13, from a hexameter poem on
Philip of Macedon, the syllables actually preserved are
insuf.t'icient as a basis for analysia. But it is not dif-
ficult to restore JyaAAe~aL in 10 as dyaAAE~aL or t~a-
ynAAe~aL, and ]fpfyev~( in 11 as eepeLyevt, or some
other case of the same adjective. This is all we know,
and all we need to know. A word of the shape of dyaAA&-
~aL or eepcLyevt, must stand (in any competent versi-
fier; and this poet is competent enough, as the other
fragments show) inmediately after the caesura in the
third foot. !~ay~AAE~aL or xat dyaAAE~aL might also
stand after the arsis or the fourth root; eepeLy&vfo,
or son,e similar five-syllable form might also stand be-
fore the caesura; but only the position after the cae-
sura will suit both lines. We can now assume that the
two shorts in line 9 represent the thesis or the third
or fourth foot. But ]vov must be the end of a- word; and
in the fourth foot this would be a breach of Hermann's
Bridge. So it is practically certain to be the third
foot. The same argument will apply to lines 7 and 15.
The next example (and all the rest from now on) is
again from P. Oxy. xxx. It is rrom a hexameter poen: or
the Hellenistic or early imperial period. It is highlf
probable that Eve.µ.µ in line 5 is part of' tvl.µµ.e:y6.pcx.o{1.).
A phrase of this shape (like 6ep&LyEvfo,) must stand
immediately before or after the caesura. Against its
being before is line 6, where we appear to have a word
ending ]eX~oL or ]eXnoc.v. With tvl. µey~po1.0(1.) before
the caesura, ]eX~oc. would be a word beginning in the
first foot and ending after the trochee of the second.
Wilhelm Meyer made a law against this, and it is in fact
so rare in polished hexameters that we are far more
likely to be right if we put the caesura before eve.µµ
and then after eXno1.v.
A f'ragment from Antimachus' Thebaid, 2518 fr. 7(a-),
presents a rather similar problem. Line 1 must be some
case or d~o~eCµ.evo,, to which the same considerations
will apply as to fvl. µ.ey~poL,. It will stand either
just before or just after the caesura. In line 4 several
articulations are possible, but the most likely is a
case of 1toOwx~,, scanning v - v v. A word of this shape
is almost invariably put after the caesura, with the
dactyl in the fourth foot. With the dactyl in the second

343
foot it would contravene another clause of Meyer's Law;
with the dactyl in the f11'th it would breach Hermann's
Bridge, giving a break after the trochee in the fourth.
So we shall asaunie that in lines 2, 3, and 5 it is parts
of the fourth foot that are represented.
In another fragn,ent from the same papyrus, fr. 20,
there are no more than two syllables preserved in any
line, and in most lines only one. ~here is nothing to
indicate the nature of the context, and the letter com-
binations are too ordinary to eugcest particular supple-
ments. But there is one little fingerhold in line 5. pa
must be the beginning of a word. There is no word which
would begin ~ao- in the epic language. So 1 t is virtu-
ally certain that 1 t 1s the particle ~a. followed by a
word with initial o or elided before initial do-. Now
the form ~a is only used after a monosyllable and fol-
lowing a pause. The nu, therefore, can only belong to a
relative or deffionstrative pronoun: ~v, ~v, ~v, ~6v, ~~v,
~wv. There are three places in the verse where a new
clause can begin with a dactyl: the first foot, these-
cond, and the fifth. Statistically the first is far the
most common and the second the least common. This does
not reRlly help us to decide which it is here, but at
least we have limited the possibilities.
Punctuation may show where a clause begins, and in
this way assist metrical placing. 1-'or exar.iple, in ano-
ther fragment of Antimachus, line 8, the phrase ,cept O'
fit& could in principle stand in three places in the
line, but with punctuation after it only in one, namely
following the caesura. This enables us to locate the
caesura in most of the remaining lines, end to see that
in fact its position in line 8 was further to the left
than usual. For instance, 1 t mut:J t f'all · af'ter 1)0't€ in 3
(probably y ]9-'1·" ~e xa.t 9(-0pa.vo'Di ]9v~a in 4, ]9~c.
in 7, Joupa. in 10.
Again, in 2519 fr. 3(b), the punctuation after a.pyo,
in line 6 shows exactly where in the line that word is,
since it is clearly not the first word, and the only
foot other than the first where punctuation at the tro-
chee is admissible is the third. We can accordingly lo-
ea te the caesura after µ6.).a. ,cao[ a.r. in 7, e,cc.xer.pa. in
8, o ]ui.iia.n9-[, in 9, ]wv in 1 O, f ]1ee~~a. in 11. But
for the punctuation mark, these might have belonged to
the fourth and fifth feet. In line 2 the caesura evi-
dently comes further to the left, before lS~oc..

344
 My last exRn•ple is from the poem on Philip, and 1 t
illustrates how easy it is to make a wrong assumption
about the metrical longitude of a fragment and in con-
sequence to consider supplemeiitB of the wrong metrical
shape. On line 2 Lobel writes, "One might think of e]6p&
6oupb, A(xwx~, but the ink Ly no means suggests a for
the last letter". On line 6 he remarks, "e~e[pyoL, was
not writ ten". r.;'vidently he assumes the surviving words
and syllables to come from the fourth and fifth feet of
the line. They are all compatible with that hypothesis
except for one small point - the point after xpCveoxev
in line 8. That shows that it is the third foot and not
the fifth. It follows that the caesura falls after drteL-
Xwv, xov,~LOL, ~oXtµoLo, --r-frtoLoLv, µ~x~v, ve~twv y~[p.
I hope that these brief remarks may serve to make
editors more aware of what can be done in this direc-
tion. In many cases, 100% certainty is unattainable,
particularly when the poet is unknown and the quality
or his versification uncertain. But I believe that, in
this as in other matters, the 75%probability is worth
following up and building on. It is better in general
to go on thinking about problems than to atop when it
becomes difficult. One is sometimes rewarded by disco-
veries that conr1rm hypothesis and vindicate specula-
tion. "Many people consider it impossible to accomplish
things which could be accomplished if they exerted
themselves" (Mao).

345
1. Oxy. 2313 rr.9 2. 231.I rr. 12 3. 2313 fr. 21
(Archil. 144) (Archil. 145) (Archil. 152)
]6:,\).a."t'or.veoo-:[ ] a.X).:rJ
[ )var.Oe:•'tLO[
•
]x f ve r.'ta.Aa.\l( ] vµr.µv[ ]xa.t3t'V&WV [
•
]Yf1oµev[ ]e var. Oo L wv [ ] pexer.voo[
•
J.'tepx.[ ]w•XELVO'IJ[
J• [ 5 h,·e:vtootor.O[ 4■ 2313 fr. 23
]e \IXO.XT)V [ (Archil. 154)
•
]!JOO.AX110~[ ]yxa.L [
hce
•
L \10 V1t [ ]JfEPTl[
]~evor.O.[ ]µ'eXeu[
]yuva.r.[
• •
5. 2 520 rr. 13 5 ]v61.oo[
] [. 6. 2515 fr. 2 ]1toA.
u[
] [. ]. [ ] f[
]1to[ ]a.p. [
•
].o[ 8. 2518 fr. 20
)~e:wp[ (Antimachus)
5 Joa. • [ ] T)vxa.xo[
• • ]µ. [ l. [
]t.1tpo [ 5 ]oevr.µµ [
]eoey. [
• l. 't£(
]e:~T)Or. ye:~[ ]va.'t[
]op69oa.[ l • A.[ ]T)'tw[
]vove:1t& [
• 5 ]vpa.o(
10 Jra).).e'ta.r.. [ •
7. 2518 fr. 7(a) ]1tpa.[
]epfyeve[
• •
•
]'r1vxeov[ (Ant imachus ) :1~1.u(
• ] • µ£: [
] r.O?tOA u [ ]1tocpe~ ~[
Jave[
]xwµe[ J."t'eµ[
]er. ova.[ 10 v[
]-,;:ri
15 ]oeOuvo[
]obwxe[ ]Cto[
J• L ouOa.[ • ]-,;:poO(
]£AE.µe.[ 5 ] pa.01,[ • •
• • lea.[
),c).w [
• ••
 9. 2516 fr. 12 10. 2519 i'r. 3(b)
(r_ritimachui:;)) f ', .,
\.~-.!,t,-;,... .
.. ··C
,..,.
..1US 't )

Jo•• • • • [ J.ov. [
]o~oµwi. a.[ ]~;'?L7CO.~[
) 0.L!lO't £XO.LO [ ] VX"!)AO L [
• • • • ••
] 9 Y't O.X L ~ • [ ] <pee:[
•• ] €'JI;.[
5 looox u )._a.x [ 5 ]TJOO.Y't E
•
[

]a.1to'tµov [ ) ?}a.pyoo· a.. [

•• •
]ou'ti.xbvh[ ] µa.)..a.,c
a.o [
•••
Jept.6'-f)te, [ ] €?t L XEI. pa.[
•
J.-,cepl._[ Ju~7:a.Y't(}-[
10 ]oupa.xa.[ 10 Jwvxa.i.V7l [
• ••
]XO.La.µ[ ]?CEL'ta. [
• • ••
]. ."JS.'¾>[ )Tl'tOO'f [

~1. 252c fr. 3

). [ .
]opf COl.J p90 • [
]1ttin e:L AWVJt [

]. b'EVJ{0\.1.Tll.01, [

5 ]vTTJ(OAEµot.ob[
...._,,, Lo i. ve:7t [
hnrytc .
]<}-µ~i. µa.xr1vx[
JxpLve:oxe:v•e-,;
• •
[
h:xv e:<;)Ewvy9-[
1 .,; ] 9a.p , Ef •• r ' •[
l L'lt p:.i..'l"'C'O
.I •
[

: v • 't a.Xa.x [
]. µ£ VO L • [

347
 THE SO-CALLEDP.HIVATEPROTOCOL
Hane Julius Wolff

In this brief communication which grew out of my

work on the handbook of the law of the papyri, I pro-
pose to submit a few observations concerning the prac-
tical importance of a method of recording agreements
which during the period of the Principate was in fre-
quent use along with others. Being particularly pop-
ular in Oxyrhynchus where people liked to set forth
in th6sform leases and related contracts, it is famil-
iar to all Papyrologista. It is remarkable, because
documents representing it show in their structure a
curious mixture of features belonging to the notarial
syngraphe, on the one hand, and to the xc Lp6ypaq,ev, on
the other. That ie to say: They resemble the eyngraphe
in that they were drawn up as objectively styled rec-
ords of the transaction, stating its cauea either di-
rectly (e.g. tµta-&waEv) or by means of an homologia.
Thie statement was often, though not always, followed
by clauses laying down the debtor's submission to a
possible wptltL~ and the Kvpta- quality of the dooumen t,
and in the 3rd cent. these were of course joined by the
stipulation clause. But the documents in question also
resembled the xc~p6ypa~ov, inasmuch as their dateline,
instead of forfl'ling the prescrip~as was the case in the
agoranomic and grapheion syngraphe, was relegated to
the end of the document. This was an arrangement from
which draftsmen never deviated before, since late in
the 3rd cent., they sometj_mes put down the date twice,
i.e. at both the beginning and the end, and, fran ab-
out the middle of the century on, even became accust-
omed to havin~ it precede the context without repeating
it at its end,1). It should be noted that both chanees
were again in line with what at that time was becomint
customary in drafting chirographa (2).
I wish to put emphasis on the treatment of the date-
line as. cfescri.bed, because in period of the Principate
its invariable insertion after the context seems to have
been more than just a matter of external style. Assimil-
ating our document to the X£Lp6ypa~ov, the practice
may be considered symptomatic of the fact that the do-
cument, in spite of its being drawn up in an objective.
style, was not a f)'riµ6oLo, XPTH.l<X'tLaµ6,. This conclus-
ion - which is by no means new (3) - is confinned by
ether characteristic features which likewise distinguish
the instrument under discussion from the notarial ayn-
graphe.

349
 One is the fact that the phrase lv &yuL~, typical-
ly and almost without exception occurring in the notar-
ial documents precisely of the city and name of Oxyrh-
ynchus, is conspicuously absent. Another I find in the 'lf1y
expression lELp6ypa,ov which in the 4th cent. was some-
times employed - not quite properly, to be sure, but
none the less suggeRtively - in referring to contracts
drawn up in the manner here under discussion{4). Final-
ly, and most important of all: There is evidence that
the document was one of those that, in order to be fully
effective, had to be submitted to the xa"t«Aoyctov for
6T}µootwoL~ (5). The inference that we are _dealing with
one of the variants of the private document common in
imperial Egypt seems inescapable. This is why I chose
to adopt for it the term "private protocol", which,
very appropriately coined by J.Herrmann (6), at once
indicates both its objective form and private character.
What was the importance of the "private protocol" -
more especially: did it or did it not differ function-
ally from other types of private instruments commonly
used at the same time, in particular the chirograph and
the hypomnema?
The oldest specimen of a private protocol known to
us is a lease written in Oxyrhyncgue in 19 B.C., P.Oxy.
I 2T7. It tewtifies to the existence in that place of
our type of document in the very first years of Roman
rule at the latest. Actually its introduction may have
taken place even earlier. For in view of the fact that
the parties to the contract just mentioned were Macedon-
ian officers, it does not appear unlikely that it should
be dated back into the Ptolemaic era. In any event,, it
must have been popular in Oxyrhynchus as early as the
first decade• of the Roman period. A sufficient number
of sources allow us to state that in the 1st cent.A.D.
it was 8.I!long the types of document regularly employed
in that city. For the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th cent. the evid-
ence is abundant.
It was used here primarily for the purpose of rec-
ording contracts of lease, whether of land,buildings,
rooms, or other objects (7). If the impression conveyed
by the sources is not deceptive, the habit of drawing
up leases in this form was so common in Oxyrhynchus
that for centuries it practically excluded any other
mode. It was only in the 3rd cent. that the hypomnema,
elsewhere long predominant, began penetrating into Oxy-
rhynchua and competing with the private protocol (8).
A second group of contr&t.8 for which Oxyrhynchi tee pre-
ferred the private protocol was apprenticeship agreem-
ents entered into by parents or masters for their sone
or slaves respectively (9). Along with these two types

350
that were outstanding there were also found in Oxyrh-
ynchus a number of other transactions documented in
this manner, such as division of preperty (10), ex-
change of liturgies (11) hiring of artiste (12), and
even marriage contracts i13). For these types, however,
use of the private protocol does not seem to hatte been
so much a matter of course as it was for the two fore-
mentioned ones. A rather striking phenomenon is a pro-
minent, though not exclusive and therefore certainly
not essential, r~le which the mutual homologia {oµo-
XoyovaLv &XX~XoL,) played in the private protocols
of Oxyrhynchus.
I have dwelt at some length on the evidence from
Oxyrhynchua, since under the earlier ,rincipate the
priTate protocol seems to have been a form of documen-
tation that was specifically connected with that city.
There are a few instances from other names, t<i>e sure.
One is a partnership contract drawn up in Mem~1i.isin
A.D.94 (P.Bour.13). A second one, even older (A.D.4),
ie ef unknown proTenance (Stud.Pal.XXII 20). Concern-
ing the purchase of a donkey, it is interesting as an-
ticipating in a certain manner the Fayibn sources of
much later date (see note 18, below), to be discussed
presently. A third example would be P.StraSb.143 (SB.
V 8258), possibly from Alexandria, if G.Hubech (14)
was right in classifying it as a private protocol. But
the text - starting out as an objectively
styled protocol but falling into a subjective style at
the end, and lacking a dateline - seems to be a
mere draft for a contract rather than a ccmplete doc-
ument(15). In view of the wealth of pertinent sources
from Oxyrhynchus, their scarcity outside of that place,
wven in well documented nomea, such as Hermupolis or
Heracleopolis, suggests that in most of the other parts
of Egypt the private protocol must have played a part
only in exceptional cases.
Only the Payfmi did, to our knowledge, make use of a
private protocol as a regular method of documentation.
But in spite of the fact that, with respect to their
formal structure, the samples coming from that region
closely resemble those from Oxyrhynchus, the two groups
should be kept strictly distinct. Not only did the priv-
ate protocol make its appearance in the Fayibn mueh la-
ter than in Oxyrhynchue: apart from some isolated fore-
runners written in the latter part of the 2nd cent.(16),
the bulk of the sources from the Arsinoite nome belong
to the 3rd and 4th eent. In view of the general source
situation in the Faydm it seems hard te hold this to
be accident.,i., ETen more significant ie the wide gulf
eeparatine the Areinoite protocols fr001 their Oxyrhyn-
chite opposites as far as contents and diction are con-
cerned. Land leases,which constitute by fa~ the larg-

351
est single group A.mongthe Oxyrhynchite protocols, do
not occur at all in the Fayftm (17) where the hypomnema
always remained predominant. On the other hand, in the
Fa~ the favorite transactions to be recorded by means
of the private protocol were loans and other agreements
relating to obligations (18), that is to say, contraete
never found in the parallel texts of Oxyrhynchus. A mut-
ual homologia - a charcteristic feature of the Oxyrh-
yncm.1R protocol, as we saw - ia met with only once in
the Arainoite material, and that not before A.D.350 (P.
Gen.11=P.Abinn.62). Besides, its wording (oµ[o]Xoyou-
aLv ~P~~ &xx~Xou,) differs conspicuously from the
one so common in the Oxymynchue protocols (see above).
Other peculiarities occurring in the Fayam several
times but absent in Oxyrh_ynchus are the introductory
formula: auvti£VTO ffP~t aAA~Xou~ (19) and the phrase:
ffpoacq,wv~aEv Kat wµoX6y~aE~ (20). In conclusion, we
may confidently state that the two names developed in-
dependently of one another instruments shaped after the
same general pattern but serving different purposes.
~his is the evidence. The question arises: What
place should we assign to the private protocol within
the system of documentation as a whole as it was in
use in Roman Egypt?
The sources provide no direct answer to the quewt-
ion why the private protocol was favored so much in
Oxyrhynchus for certain transactiens and later in the
Fay&i for other transactions, but, as far as our evid-
ence goes, nowhere else, and normally not for trans-
actions of a different kind. It certainly was not the
nature of the transaction involved nor was it a dif-
ference in social conditions that, for instance, caused
the people of Oxyrhynchue to give leaaee the form of
a private protocol, while elsewhere the hypomnema or
the chirograph were preferred. The reason why in other
names the hypomnema became the regular form of the lease
contract was, as V.A~gio-Ruiz has shown, the deep
social chasm between e rich absentee landowner and
the little farmer who had to apply to the owner for
the favor of being allowed to toil a piece of the far-
mer's land. But the same chasm also separated lessors
and lessees in the nome of Oxyrhynchus (21). Therefore
I think that it was simply a local predilection, the
cause of which we do not know, tWlt had the Oxyrhynch-
ites choose the priTate protocol. A similar reason must
in the 3rd cent. have brought about the popularity of
this form in the Fayftm where it was then in use aide
by side with the chirograph which was indeed by no
means completely replaced by the new method (22).
The result of this survey ia not without imrortance
for the general history of documentation in Egypt. It
proves that the various forms of the private document

352
were freely exchangeable, because none was legally re-
quired in setting up certain transactione. Which form
was to be chosen was merely a question of individual
taste or of local tradition or fashion.

FOOTNOTES
=-::::-====::.=-=-

1) Two datelines in P.Michael.23, P.Osl.III 138

(Oxyrh.t A.ll.296,323 reap.), SB.VIII 9917 (Fay.,
A.D.303J. Dateline as prescript in P.Harrie 82,
P.s.r.vr 707 {Oxyrh., A.D.345,351 reap.), P.
Gen.11=P.Ab1nn.62, SB.VI 9603b {Fay., A.D.350,
372 reap.).
2) er. H.J.Wolff, R.I.D.A.3rd.aer. 8 {1961) p.12or.
3) Cf. P.M.Meyer, Jur.Pap. {Berlin 1920) p.102£.,
A.B.Schwarz, Die offtl.u.priv.Urkunde im rom.
Aeg. (Leipzig 1920) p.58 n.5.
4) See, e.g., SB.VI 9173, 9603b, VIII 9917, P.
Cair.Ieid.90, P.New York Un.22.
5) Cf.P.Oxy.X 1266, lines 17ff.(A.D.98), IV 906,
lines Bf. {2nd to 3rd cent.), B.P.Grenfell and
A.S.Hunt, introd.to P.Oxy.X 1273, Schwarz, l.o.
p.18, 75.
6) Stud.zur Bodenpacht (Munich 1958) p.22.
7) For practically complete lists cf.Herrmann,l.c.
p.2,,rr., also the introd.to P.Yale 69 and 70.
Leases of other objects: P.Oxy.II 278sM.Chrest.
165 (A.D.17), VII 1043 (A.D.143), P.Merton II
76 (A.D.181), P.Wiscons.5 {A.D.186). A sublease
is P.Oxy.XLI 2974 {A.D.162).
8) In the mass of material from Oxyrhynchua there
are only four hypomnemata concerning »rtvat§
law arrangements (leases and one contract for
services) antedating the 3rd cent.: P.Oxy.III
tl.98. IV 810. XA/.III 2676 P.Vratialav.4 (ed.A.
Swiderek, Ret•h.de Papy~ '[19b4] p;ga)11,For the
pre-Liocletian 3rd.cent. see P.Oxy.XIV 1630,1~31,
AVII 2109 and 2137, P.Harrie 80, P.S.I.X 1070,
XIII 1330=SH.V 7991. Later texts listed by Herr-
mann, l.c.; add: P.Oxy.XXXI i585, P.Mich.(Siie'r-=
tonJ 611, P. Vratislav.1 (ed.~widerek, 1.c.p. 100).
*Earlier inetancea - auch •• P.Mea.rnv.71.69 (ed.
G.Caaanova, Aeg.54 1974, 72 ff.) of A.D.108-9 - concern
leaaea froa the governaent.

353
9) The earliest text ie SB.X 10236 of A.D.36. See
furthermore B.G.U.IV 1021, P.Oxy.II 275=W.Chrest.
324, IV 725, nv 1647, XXXI 25R6, XXXVIII 2875,
XLI 2971, 2977, P.Wiacons.4.
10) P.Brux.7918 (ed.van Renrn,Chron.d'~g.48 (1973]
p.314), P.Oxy.X 1278, XV 1637, XXXI 2583.
11) B.G.U.IV 1062=W.Chreet.276, P.Harrie 64, P.Leit.
13, P.Mich.(Shelton) 604, P.Osl.III 135, P.Oxy.
XIV 1626, XXXVI2769.
12)
. P.Oxy.X 1275, XXXIV2721 •
13) See P.Oxy.X 1273, XII 1473, also P.Oxy.IV 906,
lines Bf., X 1266,linea 17ff. Of.Grenfell-Hunt,
introd.to P.Oxy.X 1273, Schwarz, 1.c.p.5 n.2.
14) Die Personalangaben als Identifizierungsvermer-
ke im Recht der grako-agyptiechen Papyri (Ber-
lin, 1968) p.62 n.12.
15 ) Cf. c.H.Youtie, T.A.P.A. 89 (1958) p.376 n.3.
16) P.Grenf.II 59 of A.D.189, Jerhape Stud.Pal.XX
10 of A.D.168.
17) Already observed by Herrmann, l.c.p.23, Hubach,
l.c.p.62.
18) P.Ath.24, P.Flor.I 14, 30, P.Cair.Isid.88,
90=SB.VI 9173, P.Cair.Isid.91, 92, 95, P.Mioh.
(Shelton) 606, P.New York Un.22,24, SB.IV 7385,
VI 9155, 9603b, VIII 9916, Stud.Pal.XX 51•SB.
I 5125, P.Thead.12. See furthermore: P.Cair.
Isid.82 (exchange of liturgies), P.S.I.VIII
873, P.Mich.IX 574 (contracts for services),
P.Cair.Isid.86, P.Gen.48=P.Abinn.60 (sales or
animals).
19) P.Cair.Isid.81,, P.S.I.VIII 873, P.
Mich.IX 574.
20) P.Cair.Isid.86, P.Gen.48=P.Abinn.60; see also
SB.n 9155: ~poa£q,i:,Y~O£V -- lxeLv.
21) See, e.g., P.Princ.III 147=SB.X 10532, P.Oxy.
III 501, VI 910, 911, VII 1036, XIV 1692, XXXVI
2795, SB.IV 7f43. On the general question see
V.Aran~io-Ruiz, Studi in on.di E.Betti III (Mi-
lan 19 2) p.1tr.
22) See, e.g., the chirographe B.G.U.VII 1649, P.
Cair.Isid.80~ 105, SB.IV 7467.

354
 "Latin cursive documents trom Vindolanda, south of Hadrian 's Wall"
by R. P. Wright.

SITUJa'IOR. -the tort of VIBOOLAlfDAlies 2 miles (3.2 km.) SW of the

fort of Housestea.ds on Hadrian' s Wall. The main deposit of wooden tablets
can be dated 1'rom. pottery within A.D. 85-105, when the f'ort protected the
Stanegate, or E.-w. Roman road fiom Corbrid8;e to Carlisle. 'When Rane
vitbdrew .troa. the Lowlands of Scotland.£.· A.D. 100 the frontier was
established probably along the Stanegate.
PLAlf OF PRE-H.ADRIANIC 10RT. Little is known about the Flavian and
Trajani.c occUJ?ations deeply buried on the east by the 3rd and 4th century
forts, and fairly deeply on the vest by the vicue. Work in 1972 located
the early turf' rampart on the south and in 1973 the south gateva.y. ftk)re
evidence is needed to show whether the tort vas in three parts and faced
east.
THE BUILDING. To JfW of the south gate la.y tour superimp:,sed timber
buildings. The second building, or level, contained most of the tablets,
and the third level seven recessed stylus tablets. Other material. included
bones t'rom food, leather goods and offcuts traa its working on the site,
and gear tram tanning. Bracken had repeatedly been laid in great abundance
to cover the noor, and in the moist conditions had acted as a preservative.
As signs of burning can be seen on about one tenth of the tablets it appears
that they were discarded documents only partially destroyed.
SYNOPSIS. 8 tablets were ot the stylus type, recessed to carry wax.
One stylus tablet had ink vri tins. The remaining 77 were thin fiat slices
of wood to take ink writing; of these ~ had no visible ink.
Total: 86 tablets, or portions of tablets.
For ITE>f 62, with 47, 33 see paper by Dr. A. K. Bm,man who deals with
these records ot food and drink disbursed on certain dqs in Jtme.
ITEM ll (see Bowman, Thanas and Wright, Britannia v (1974) forthcoming).
A list of purchases of various meats, spices and cereals tor some group,
perhaps tile officers I mess, at Vindolanda. 'lbe variety- of the meat is
noteworthy.
ITEM 15 ( see Bowman, 'lbomas and Wright ibid. } • A personal letter with
c onf'ronting faces. The writer had sent supplies of three types of clothing .•.
He salutes friends and mess-mates, and ends with a greeting.
ITEM 1. A letter of recamnendation asking the camnanding officer to
back the application of' Karus (?}.
ITEM 31. A letter to a Marcellus who mq tentatively be identified
fran his titles with L.Neratius Marcellus, governor of Britain in A.O. 103

Acknowledgements are due to the Vindolanda Trustees and to Mr. R. E.

Birley; to the British MuseumResearch Laboratory, and to Miss A. Rutherford,
of the University Department ot Photography of Newcastle upon Tyne. I am
indebted to Dr. J. D. Thanas and Dr. A. K. Bowman for the main decipherment.

Alan K. Ba.rman and J. David Thomas, The Vindolanda writing tablets.

1974, (F. Graham, 6 Queen's Terrace, Newcastle upon Tyne. 40p. +
5p, postage).
A. K. Bowman Britannia v (1974), 'Roman military supply recordB
from Vindolenda '

355
A. K. Bovm.an, J. D. Thomas and R. P. Wright 'The Vindolanda writing
tablets' in Britannia v as supplement to 'Ranan Britain in 1973'
Full publication is planned in one of the volumes on the excavations
at Vindolanda

356
 COP!'IC FRAGMENTS
ON WOIIII,

Jean-Daniel Dubois

It was Professor J.W.B. Barns who encouraged me

to work on the fragmentary text which I am about to
present. And I have been fortunate to be able to
discuss some of the issues of my work with him t

before he died last January. It is to him. that I

should like to dedicate this paper.

These Coptic fragments belong to a collection of

various theological documents owned by the British Museum.
By courtesy of the Board of the British Library, I should
like to present a tentative translation of the pieces of
papyrus catalogued under the number Oriental 6808 (5).
This text is identified as "Two fragments of homily?
(Sahidic)". According to the Assitant Keeper of the
Reading Room of Oriental Manuscripts and Printed Books,
Mr. Silver. the handwriting of this identification could
come from W. Crum. Professor Barns, however, did not
recognize Crum's handwriting. !,myself, have not been
able to trace in Crum's work any reference to this text.

357
And Miss L.S.B. MacCoull informed me that Crum always
wrote the word "Sahidic" as "Sa'idic". It seems therefore
unlikely that Crum identified these fragments.

This document consists mainly of three fragments of

the same leaf. The upper part, the better preserved, measures
seven inches wide by five and a half high, and contains
thirteen lines. It is difficult to say how much of the
upper part of the leaf is missing. The recto has the ends
of the lines missing, especially in the upper right hand
corner. About two thirds of the text are preserved, or can
be reconstructed. On the verso the ink has faded and becomes
often illegible, particularly in the centre.

The lower part of the document consists of two fragments.

The smaller one is three inches wide by one and a half high.
It contains the beginnings of four lines of the recto, or
the ends of four lines of the verso. The larger fragment
measuring six inches by three has the ends of seven lines
of the recto, or the be~innings of seven lines of the verso.
These two lower fragments have been wrongly stuck together.
Having compared the breaks in the top fragment and the
bottom two pieces, I should like to move the lower right
hand fragment of the recto two inches to the right. This
bottom fragment should be the bottom part of the leaf. This
leads me to suppose that there are about two inches missing
from the ends of the lines of the top part of the text.

358
Thie would correspond to about two to six missing letters
in the lines seven to thirteen. I have not been able to
determine exactly the number of missing lines between the
upper part and the lower fragments.

As far as the writing is concerned, the general

presentation of these fragments indicates a rather late
date. Some letters appear in several different forms.
The mejs are very wide; the tidas and kappas could have
been written in the seven centuries. I would be inclined
to date this text around the eight century.

Although most of the text seems to be Sahidic, the

spelling of some words indicates Fayumic or Subach.mimic
influences. On the recto, for example:
- 1. 2 : 2,IIJ•I Subacbmimic for z..riJ to be distressed;
- 1. 12 (and 1.3 of the small lower fragment)IIC Fayumic fotCtCt;
1.-112 the form df 1l11T• for the Sahidic (1NI to find;
- 1. 7 of the larger bottom fragment the Fayumic ft;j..■ H
for the Sahidic "j""'fthe desert;
- l. 8 the form ., ... ,. for the Sahidie ,OMNt'three,
if the conjecture is right.
On the verso, the same Fayumic influence can be traced
- 1. 2 lt~TI for the Sahidic ICtMT• to turn;
- l. -4 OVE~ for the Sahidic eyt.( ..,.,,,. to cut;
- 1. 3 of the larger bottom fragment z,oec for the
Sahidic Z.,fl4c.
to cover.

359
 One particular word stands out : ,r~O-C , torn
cloth or rag, appears with two different spellings, unattested
elsewhere, as far as I know. In the lines} and 5 of the
recto, and possibly in the lin~ 4 of the verso, this term
is spelt ,r"~(t ; in the line 1} of the recto it is
spelt 1ll~<H .

As for the content of these two sides, one word seems

to run through the whole text, the word NO'fl rope, cord
or measuring line. It is the Coptic equivalent of the Greek
,
41"',COIYt•V • On the recto it appears as a reference to
the story of the prophet Jeremiah pulled out of the pit by
Ebed Melech, the Ethiopian, with the help of "torn garments
and ropes" (Jer XXXVIII, or LV according to the Bodmer text}.
Then, there is an explicit reference to the second chapter
of the book of the minor prophet Zachariah where someone
measures the city of Jerusalem with a measuring line (Zach
-
II,1ff). The word N0'/1, is used four more times on the
recto, and once on the verso (line 12). But I have not been
able to trace the exact quotations.

The verso starts with a reference to the Proverbs of

Solomon about the dog that returns to its vomit (XXVI,11;
cf. II Pet II,22). It ends also with an introduction to
a quotation from Proverbs. The central part of the upper
fragment refers to entering and coming out of the Temple
and out of the House of God. One biblical passage alludes
to this kind of context; in the New Testament, the merchants
are expelled from the Teple by Jesus who used a kind of

36o
whip, the word .,..,, again (John II,15; cp.· Hk XI,15 and
parallels). But an examination of the text of this passage
is not conclusive. The uncertainties surrounding the readings
of the two lower fragments and of the verso prevent for the
moment any identification of more biblical echoes in this text.

The general character of this text and the existence of

signs indicating new paragraphs in the margins would suggest
that the text consists of .fragments of a homily as the
catalogue of the British l•~useum indicates. This text is
certainly not a series of teetimonia because of its para-
phrastic style; there are not only references to the biblical
text, but also allusions and perhaps references to non-
biblical texts. Professor T. Orlandi kindly suggested to
me that this text has the form of a collection of biblical
references frequently used by preachers when preparing
their sermons. The important use of the word NOVI,
would confirm this suggestion. If so much of this text
can be reconstructed, it remains, however, to determine
a po~sible historical or theological context for such a
text, let alone to identify its author.
 I OR 6808 (5) recto

··----•-.--
c~ "'
·--·
Ct I.I
[t II
(s f
(t ,
 II OR 6808 (5) verso

- .....- ... ·-. ---. -..0 --.. -- -. - . -

(t~ ]&Tt (•\ l ·Z•
( t S •]~•'1..CL-Yl['f•w-Jt~ec.•o~
..,.•pt.
[ t
[ t'
[~• !le
$ tJH Tft.ftM•"'(,t.
J•P•
Jt 8WK
M •• , .. ,,o..
3 l '""•
,1ow1'H11•1•11\
IJ_OYN a'lf,._N • • •• •
C -1'- Jtt ,p.,,·•rze· •-rrl\loyt,(t l)
[ !C. l2,1:ovN· ~!~[•e]e•)M··
( ! .. l N. p • -rr) . • •• N. I •• t y .••
[•" ]~,."'!' .:. ·T••t•P•. p··.
[t It J•ao~2-•pir .. , 1icTiu••':fA"'
( t It J • • ( • • J •'lo) t*,r 1-pll' • Z,f>M ZNZN .,..,C
( \ le ]1fMI iaT,toyTc l.M .,.,__,11oy1,
(t .. l~N NI-~.?."' ..,..,,..,~.,,•Tit~
C 1: a. J t1 •IM •YN NTe sTf • •• •T•,.,
...--.·-·---...---.-...---- ---. ----. . - . --
,
t
.

[• •) ... •(
:
! ] ,. ,~T~
)
.•,;:
• • OVTI •'-•

f>o'f •"-'[ ; j Ep2011c. alMfP

NT• T'6••t.o~[oc, •-···••-- .... -- ---•
T· .. wy •• l.
N• •t•Toy•N • • • • •[
I
~ , P.• • • . le v"",o -. • • • C· · J ·
1 ee
C'T tr't\ I Cw"f.1111 t ~Q)lo • (o.,
 I TRANSLATION

The recto runs as follows

1 ) another
1. 1 : ••• altar (?) ••• word .. .
1. 2: Jeremiah was in distress •••
1. 3: the cloth rags and the ropes •••
1. 4 (Ebed) Melech, the Ethiopian, went (to Jeremiah
and pulled him out of the)
1. 5: mud pit with cloth rags •••
1. 6 yZ) heard about the measure •••
1. 7 (from) the Holy Spirit proclaiming •••
1. 8 ·: through the mouth of the minor prophet
1. 9: whose name is Zachariah, the son of (Iddo 3 ) saying)
1.10: I have been shown the men; measure I •••
1.11~: he went and he measured Jerusalem, the length and
(the width of it)
l.1l: and there was a cord, I found it there; he said
1.13: a rope of rag; I hear •••

The smaller bottom fragment runs as follows

1. 1 . I)saiah
4) •••
1. .
2 • that the ropes •••
1. 3 .• there is other ropes
1. .
4 • • •• the •••

The larger bottom fragment runs as follows:

1. .
1 • • • • which judges
1. .
2 • • • • with ropes
1. 3 .• •••
1. 4 . • •• he did
l. 5 .
• • •• with some ropes; they did
1. 6 .
• •• (saying) Jeremiah in th'e desert 5)
6)
1. 7 •• the Holy Spirit, a big •••

II TRA!\SLATION

The verso is even more incomplete .•

1. 1 . • ••
1. 2 : he used to return to its vomit
l. .
3 • • • • in his fall
l. 4 : • • • I will not be able to cut the garments
1. 5 .
• • • I went into the Temple . . .
1. 6 . ...
1. 7 . ••• out of • • •
1. 8 •••
1. 9 • • • while
you • ••
1.10 • • • out of the Temple • I who said
1.11 .
• ...
out of the Temple with some bands
1.12 . .,...the
• House of God with some ropes
1.13 ••• of Adam and all his sons
1.14 ...
The larger bottom fragment runs as follows

1.1 •••
1.2 .• him
1.3 the devil •••
1.4 •••
1.5: •••
1. 6 : • • •
1.7 With reference to this, listen to (the Proverbs) of
Solomon •••

In the smaller bottom fragment, I read 1.3, He covers •••

+++++++

NOTES

1) Cf. 911,14&~~,.a.,or~t"fllf']f-if.. V•
2) Or "he" •'t ...
3) Zachariah, son of Iddo (Esdr V,1; VI,14; Neh XII,16)
rather than Zachariah son of Barachias (Zach I,1 or Math
XXIII ,35).
4) er. MJt~•·
ffllpO ♦ NTltC. ?
5)
6) Cf.
Cf. «-:t•
e(W
perhaps ff M
?
S, Ai.-.T the third?

366
 J e a n B I NGE N
,
LE MILIBJ URBAINOANS EGYPTIENE
A L'~~ PTOI..EMAYQJE

Le titre que j'ai donnE l la prf1ente coaaunication a ceci de

trompeur, que, dana une commmication d'une vingtaine de minutes, je
ne pourrai dhelopper que quelque1 con1ideration1 mEthodologiquea et
dea concluaiona aommairea. Tout effort pour decrire lea compoaantea
et lea structures aocio-6con011iquea de la population de la chora 1
l'epoque ptolmaique •• heurte 1 une premi~re difficulte aur le plan
dea 1ourcea. Cellea-ci forment des enaemblea di1continu1 dana le
temps et l'eapace, ignorent certainea periodea, certainea regions,
et reflitent inlgalement lea different• groupes de la population de
la chora. Dorothy Crawford (1971) a pu donner une image tres fouil-
lee du village de Kerklosiris pour quelquea decenniea; nous n'en
co1111&i11onapreaque rien pour lea deux aieclea qui precedent, et
noua ignorona dana quelle meaure nous pouvona generaliser le tableau
que l'auteur noua en donne. Maia le mal eat aurtout grave pour lea
mftropolea de name. Pour aucune d~ellea, nous ne diaposona pour une
periode mime breve d'une documentation qui ait quelque conaiatance.
Et ceci nous condamne 1 travailler par echantillonnagea extremement
etroita. .

Etudiant recemment (Bingen 1973) un aspect des structures de la

1ociit6 rurale ptolfmaique, j'avais conatate que, dana la campagne,
dana lea villages, lea Greca, et plus apecialement lea clerouquea,
aont beaucoup moina preaenta que lea sources ne pouvaient le faire
croire, que le Gree eat aouvent un Element de passage, ou bien le
nom d'un abaent, meme aide notNellea installations de clErouques,
de nouvelle• arrivfea d'immigranta tendent l premiere vue i affermir
!'implantation grecque dana la chora. Mais, ai ce Gree eat souvent
ailleura, oil le trouver? 11 aera dana certains caa i Alexandrie;
il peut etre itinErant, ou mobiliae. Maia le Gree apparait sotNent,
e~di• le Ille silcle, fix6 d'une maniere plus ou moina permanente
dana une m6tropole de nome. C'est ce milieu IA qu'il me aem.blait ur-
gent d'6tudier. En fait, l'enquite est doublement decevante: d'a-
bord par la pauvrete des sources, je l'ai dit, maia ausai par le
poida de quelquea ideea qu'on r6pete, et qui aont aurtout dues au
fait que le milieu urbain qu'on a voulu chercher dana t•igypte pto-
lemaique eat celui de 1'6poque imperiale et que nous ne l'y trouvons
pas. Projection toute negative, puisqu'elle a fait conclure par cer-
tain• i la non-existence d'un milieu urbain, du moina organisE "com-
me tel", avant le regne d'Auguate.
 Le milieu urbain de la chora que je voudrais evoquer somnaire-
ment ici, ce n'est pas Naucratis ou Ptol&ulis. Par une sorte de r~gle
du genre, ces cites encombrent automatiquement avec Alexandrie toute
etude du milieu urbain dans lea quelques ouvrages qui, de Jouguet aux
excellentes Bin:nen:IJand~rungfflde Braunert, parlent des villes de l'f-
gypte. Faute de temps, malheureusement, je n'evoquerai pas non plus
Memphis la coamopolite, ou bien Th~bes l'Egyptienne. Nous lea con-
naissons mal pour la haute epoque ptol&laique. Je le regrette, car on
sent que ces deux villes ont ete des co11111.unautea importantea, deux
types different& de milieu urbain oriental, et qu'on y retrouverait
a une grande echelle des caracteristiques de ce que fut au depart,
mais 1 une echelle plus fruste, le chef-lieu de nome que je voudraia
etudier. Or, j'y reviendrai, la metropole au depart prolonge une com-
munaute egyptienne preexiatante d'une certaine ampleur, d'une certai-
ne vitalite. C'eat se tromper de aens de l'hiatoire, d'y chercher le
bourgeon rachitique de la future metropole romaine. Notre documenta-
tion, du moins la documentation grecque, si je ne veux pas aborder
le problime de Memphis ou de la Thebaide, ae fondera presque exclu-
sivement sur lee quelques recoupements qui nous font connaitre Croco-
dilopolis au Ille et au lie ai~cle. Faut-il dire qu'on aimerait ap-
profondir lea faits qui se degagent des cartonnages de Bibeh et qui
semblent donner l'image (negative pour notre propos) d'une campagne
ou lea choses tournent sur place ou se r~glent avec Alexandrie?
Cette documentation manque malheureusement d'une densite auffiaante
pour etre representative.

Mais, pour l'Arainoite, ouvrona ici une parenthiae, pour voir,

pour un aeul ensemble, ce que peut donner la methocle par echantillon-
nage disperse A laquelle nous nous condamnons ai nous nous obatinons
1 etudier la population de la metropole du nome. L'exemple le plus
favorable pour le Ille siecle (et pourtant il eat bien pauvre) eat
constitue par la aerie des Enteu:r:eis reuniea en 1931 par Oscar GuA-
raud. Douze textea aur une centaine font allusion l la metropole,
dent six ou sept vraiment interessants, ce qui eat peu. L'humour gar-
dant toujours aa place dana lea papyrus, !'amateur y trouvera une
histoire de belle de nuit detournee de see devoirs filiaux, et, dana
la petition 49, du kenandre crocodilopolitain, avec un p~re berne at-
taquant la courtiaane Demoqui, avec quelques complicea, a rlusai l
arracber une traite de 1.000 dr. au jeune Sopolia. On y est dana le
milieu urbain et sea blandicea fatales aux fam.illea I 11 y a beau-
coup plus interesaant, et sur deux plans different&. D'une part, il
y a, parmi ces textes du Ille siecle, ceux qui nous montrent des
Grecs domicilies dana le chef-lieu du nome et qui ont des interets
directs dans la campagne, soit qu'il y ait un kleros que le Gree
fait exploiter, aoit qu'il y aoit proprietaire d'i1111teublea. Enauite.
deux autrea textes, sans grande signification au premier examen
nous alertent l un autre point de vue, ce sont lea petitions d'jgyp-
tiena d'un certain niveau social: a) un tPLiu1opos egyptien, mar-

368
chand de laine a11ociE peut-itre 1 un bailleur de fonds grec, est en
conflit avec un Eleveur juif de moutons (P. Ent. 2) ; b) deux pro-
priEtaire1 Egyptien1 de tisaagea de lin deaandent de pouvoir faire
dfa>lir leura ancienne• installation• pour lea remplacer par deux
nouveaux ateliers qui permettront de mieux foumir au roi (P. Ent.
5). Textee banal• ■an• doute, 11ai1 qui nous font regretter de ne pas
mieux connattre le milieu fgyptien des mEtropoles, un milieu certai-
neaent ■ ieux organi16 1 mieux fquipf culturellement et Aconomiquement
que la pay■annerie Egyptienne de l'Arsinoite, 1ouvent dEracinEe, tel-
le que la dfcrivent lea 1ource1 grecquea plua anciennea que lea 'En-
uuzei• (cf., par exemple, Bingen 1970).
It ceci nous ramlne l u remarque d'il y a un inatant: la ml-
tropole ptol&aaique ne doit-elle pa1 itre conaidfrfe coame un fli-
ment de fait, plutot qu'itre nile parce qu'il n'y a pas encore de
geation urbaine de type municipal ou autre? Car on n'a pas ftf
tendre pour la mftropole ptolEmaique. N'eat-ce pas Jones (1937, p.
329) qui fcrit que lea mEtropolea "had been in Ptolemaic times,
Mre village,, that ia mere aggregations of population, di ■ tinguish­
ed frc:n the other villages only in being the seat of goverraent for
the aurrounding region". Les mots "other villages" aont particulil-
rement cruela, mais prenons-lea cum g;rano salis, autant que lea
33.333 ville1 que Theocrite prite l l'fgypte des Ptol&.Eea. Braunert,
qui dan1 sea Bi~e:rungsn nou■ a donne une analyse brlve ma.is
intEreennte de l'fvolution de la mftropole, encore qu'une analyse
axfe aur le probllme de• diplacementa de population, Braunert n'hf-
1ite pa1 l citer Jones et l inaiater sur la similitude du genre de
vie des villages et dea mftropolea, particulilrement dans le Fayoum
(1964, p. 83). Chez eux comne dejl chez Jouguet (19}1), ce qui ca-
ractiri1ait lea mftropolea ptolmaiques, c'est qu'ellea n'ont pas
lea organe• d'autogeation plus ou moina autonomea de1 mltropolea d'f-
poque romaine, et Jones comae Braunert situent le rapide fpanouiase-
aent de1 villea 1ous et i.aa6diatement aprls Auguste dana un phino-
milne d'urbaniaation l l'Echelle de l'lapire, avec un accl1 ghEra-
li ■ f lune autonomie limitie.
En fait, cette thiorie de la mltropole-village de l'fpoque pto-
lmaique et de la naiaaance auguetfenne de la 1Htropole-ville eat
une vue qui n'eat fondfe que aur l'ambiguitf de la notion de ville
ou de ~6A~,. Dana la meaure oil notre ignorance de la 1estion des mf-
tropolea ptolmaiquea nous permet de dfcider quelque chose, cela
n'eat vrai que ai nous decidon1 qu'il n'y a ville quell oil il y a
citE plus ou moina chargEe de son propre destin. N'eat-ce ~•• une
erreur que de prendre ici une "autogeation", si limitEe soit elle,
11
ou une dffinition purement "inatitutionnelle coame un critlre d'e-
xistence ou de non-existence de la ville. Je crains que nous ne ao-
yons ll conditionnEa par cette image fam.iliere de notre Education,
la ville mEdiEvale qui nait de la collation de privilege• d'autono-
mie politique ou 6conomique par le seigneur. Tres souvent, le socio-
6conomique a precede l'organisation institutionnelle qui a donne aux
cites du moyen ige et des temps modernes une certaine image que nous
pretons volontiera aux citia antiques ou aux municipea remains. En
fait 1 ce qui oppo·ae la ville au village, c' eat que la ville eat un
catalyaeur d'6cbangea lconomiquea, culturela ou politiquea, qui de-
paaaent l'environnement i.mmEdiat de la cite et le rayon d'exploita-
tion peraonnelle du sol, catalyaeur d'autant plus actif que la dimen-
sion de la cit6 ou la diversification de son potentiel economique et
culturel aont plus importantea. Or, ici il y a une premiire remarque
1 faire. Lea metropoles de nome n'ont jamaia 6t6 des creations des
Ptolemees, ellea ae aont impoa6ea 1 eux par leur existence mime. Kro-
kodilopolia, Berakleopolia, Oxyrhynchus, Hermopolia, lea JHtropoles
du Delta, lea autrea, out un pasae souvent preatigiemt. On peut dis-
cuter de l'importance du role politique et religieux que cea cites
poaaedaient encore 1 l'arrivee d'Alexandre le Grand, maia elles e-
xistent puisqu'ellea ont ete reprises en bloc coame base de l'orga-
nisation premiire de l'igypte mac&tonienne lorsqu'elle eat pasaee du
regime de l'occupation militaire A celui de l'adminiatration royale.
Ce qui frappe, c'eat qu'il n'y a pas eu d'heaitationa; c'eat que le
choix s'eat fait en fonction non du prealable territorial dea names,
maia bien de l'implantation de la capitale du name, implantation qui
n'est pas due aux haaarda. Il y a un centre religieux qui aemble a-
voir assure une certaine unite au nome. Mais le bourg qui a permia
au centre religieux de proapirer, aon importance n'eat pas 11 par
hasard. Elle eat liee i uncertain nombre de poaaibilites iconomi-
ques et a fait naitre uncertain nom.bre de traditions administrati-
ve ■, de riglea de vie en COIIIIDUll et de modes d'arbitragea entre lea
membrea des groupes qui y aont inatallea. Cea traditions adminiatra-
tives ont du etre importantes, puisque c'eat 11 probablement que les
Ptolemies out trouve la claaae des hauts fonctionnairea egyptiena,
lea baailicogrA111D&te11 lea nomarques,auxquels ila ont reae"e dea
tiches importantes, mime si ce n'6taient que des tiches d'execution.
Le bourg est aouvent d'abord un port, un debarcadlre priviligii. Le
port, le temple, et ajoutez-y la garnison et le tribunal, lea meti-
era ausai, ont crie ce catalyseur qu'est la ville, mime en lethar-
gie, et oil lea campagnea trouvent l'ouverture sur autre chose que
le rythme ferm6 de l'economie du village. Prenona lea "archives" de
Zenon, pourtant toutes tournees vers Alexandrie et Memphis, et si
caractiriatiquea de l'echelle royale de la geation de l'Egypte. Kro-
kodilopolia y apparait coame autre chose que Philadelphie. C'eat li
que la banque ouvre des credits plus grands, c'eat ll que l'autori-
te villageoiae va trouver la force de·police niceasaire pour retrou-
ver des payaana ou des artisans en fuite, c'est li qu'eat entendue
la justice royale, qu'est la prison centrale, qu'est organiaee l'ir-
rigation. C'eat li que le serment royal ou le testament aeront cou-
ches aur papier pour leur donner plus d'autoriti. Au mime moment, le
P. Rev. Lt.Ms, qui diatingue Mw~a~ et ~dA£~~des nomea, marque bien

370
lea troia niveaux de l'fconomie dan1 le commerce de distribution de
l'huile: le village, la ville et Alexandrie (47, 10 - 48, 18). A
cette epoque, il eat vrai, le pouvoir local dilegue par le roi mace-
donien eat dfjl in1tallf. Maia ce qui preciament m'intEresse, c'est
que c'eat ll qu'il ■ 'eat in■ talle, et qu'il a inatalle ■an ■ hesita-
tion••• garni ■on1 et 1e1 ■ cribea dan ■ le chef-lieu egyptien preexis-
tant. Jouguet ne l'ignore pa ■ , mai ■ combien aa reaction est-elle ca-
ractfriatique. Face i Philadelphie la Grecque et sea rues en damier,
(je le cite) "de vieillea ville ■ avec leura entaaaementa d'ftroitea
aaiaon■ en briquea cruea, leurs ruellea ainueusea, leura taa d'or-
dure ■ prl ■ de ■ muraille ■ ou mime au coin de ■ muraillea" (p. 47). Il
eat vrai que Jouguet concide au ■■ itot que Naucrati ■ ne devait pas va-
loir ■ieux. Et Paris, Londre ■ ou Brugea au moyen ige? Maia, con-
tinue-t-il, "de Philadelphie ou de ltrokodilopoli ■, on eat la ville,
oil eat le village?", Philadelphie, con~ue par un urbaniste arpen-
teur, ou Krokodilopolia la malodorante? Ne tom.bona pas avec lui et
avec d'autrea dan■ ce que j'appelle le mirage du gymnaae.
Le a,.ia ■e de village eat un flbent tri1 utilise dan1 l'Etude
dea rapports ville/village dana la choral l'epoque ptolbaique,
uia a tort et dan1 la aeme erreur de perspective. La presence ai-
aultanee de gyamaaea dan1 lea mftropole1 et dana ce qu'on appelle
lea villages pto16maiquea, a ftf eouvent retenue c011111e une preuve
importance de ce que la mitropole n'ftait qu'un village; la diapa-
rition du gymnaaiarque rural au dfbut de l'Empire romain a ftf con-
aidfrAe c01111eune con1fquence de la municipaliaation du chef-lieu.
Certea, nou ■ trouvona dans des villages, l Philadelphie, l Samaria,
l Thfaclelphie par exemple, dea gymnases, une organisation fphfbique,
des associations religieu1e1 grecquea. C'est mime un dea centres
d'intlrit de l'epigraphie ptolmaique du Fayoum. Maia'c'est un cri-
tlre nfgatif que de considfrer l'existence du gymnase de village
COIIDe preuve que la mftropole, avec son gymnase, ne difflre pas du
village. En fait ces gymna ■ es et associations de village se aituent
aur un plan autre que celui, purement thforique de l'opposition vil-
lage/polia, une speculation ftranglre l 1iimplantation des Greca au-
tour de et dana la cuvette du Fayoum. Cea fondationa sui gensns,
inapirfea certes par des modllea urbaina greca, ne aont qu'une des
formes de l'organisation 1ociale d'une des ethnies qui peuplent l'E-
gypte ptolmaique. Ce qui eat aignificatif, c'est que ce qu'il y a-
vait d'inviable dans cea achnaaa implantes artificiellement dans un
pay1age purement agricole, n'a pas rEsiate l l'uaure du temps. La
■ iae l norme des villages a fait disparaitre lea gymna1ea et cer-
tainea organisation ■ de type urbain c011111e l'fphebie. Cela n'a rien
l voir avec la naissance tardive d'un milieu urbain. Tout au plus,
le phfnomlne est-il lif l la concentration progressive d'une bour-
geoisie de detenteurs de terre dans lea metropolea, concentration
qui a accelere la mutation de cellea-ci.

371
 En effet, des le Ille siecle apparaissent les premiers temoi-
gnages directs de l'exploitation du kleros par un paysan au profit
d'un Gree domicilie dans la metropole. Dana le P. Rev. Laws, on pre-
voit un taux privilegie d'&•d~oLpa pour le clerouque absent pour au-
tant qu'il soit en mbe temps l'exploitant, ce qui reconnait impli-
citement !'exploitation possible par un tiers non privilegie. Tree
rapidement, les exemples se multiplient et, au milieu du Ile siecle,
le terme y£wpyo0vT£t peut designer des entrepreneurs agricolea vi-
vant l Krokodilopolis et faisant exploiter des terres publiques par
des paysans generalement egyptiens. On sait, et Madame Pavlovskaya
(1973) vient de le repeter recenment, qu'en Egypte hellenistique,
!'exploitation par des ferm.iers locatairea est pour celui qui dis-
pose de la terre une forme d'exploitation plus rentable que l'ex-
ploitation directe par des esclaves ou par des salaries. Dana lea pa-
pyrus de Tebtynis de la fin du lie siecle, ce type d'exploitation
concurrencie largement !'exploitation directe par le clerouque grec.
Et cette tendance ne pourra que s'accentuer avec l'evolution rapide
de la tenure vers une disposition stable, puis libre de la terre con-
cedee. Elle s'accentuera encore par !'apparition des Alexandrina,
particulierement des associations d'exploitants agricoles alexan-
drins dana la ch8ra au Ier siecle, phen~ne qui apparait l Braunert
comne un des elements de la mutation des rapports ville/village.

Ainsi, dans la seconde moitie de l'epoque ptolemaique, sere-

groupent dans la metropole lea compoaantes de la future metropole ro-
maine et se stabilise l'opposition xwun/•6A~t. Ce serait une erreur
de reduire cette opposition lune opposition paysannerie/gens de
ville, ou a une opposition de Grecs et d'Egyptiens, car rien ne don-
nerait une idee plus fausse de l'evolution des nomes. En effet, c'est
au meme moment qu'on voit naitre simultan6ment, d'une part, une
claaae de petite notables de village, Hench~& des P. Tebt. en eat un
exemple, classe qui remplira lea petites liturgies rurales du Haut-
Empire, et, d'autre part, la classe des notables de la ville dont
aortiront lea archontes et lea strat~ges. Mais lea structures nou-
velle& du nom.e et de la metropole que symboliaent ces magistrate
aont en grande partie acquises avant la vague d'urbanisation de l'E-
poque julienne. Elles s'inscrivent dans ce qui est l la fois une f-
volution et un retour l la norme helleniatique ou mime hellEnique,
telle que l'a degagee Claire Preaux, avec sea composantes tellea que
le droit l la possession de la terre ou la vie en milieu urbain sur
le produit de fermagea. Ce n'eat pas la seule mise l norme qui ait
joue, mais lea autres n'etaient pas contradictoires: le retour de
sites comme Philadelphie au type purement rural qui leur etait natu-
rel, - l'usure des structures royalea de gestion qui conduit lune
plus grande autonom.ie de l'organiaation du nome, - le developpement
inevitable dans cette autonomie d'un certain nombre de schmas poli-
tiques plus ou moins conscients, qui, avec l'aide du pouvoir romain,
prendront la form.e de la mltropole des archontes, d'autant plus vi-

372
able qu'elle ■ ert Rome en protlgeant la minorit6 privilfgile.
A elle ■ ■ eule ■, ce ■ tendance ■ , latente ■ dis le Ille aiicle, ex-
pliquent la profonde holution du phhomine urbain de type oriental
qua le■ Gree, out trouv, , en fgypte au IVe ■ iicle. Rien n'oblige l
voir la mftropole de l'Egypte rou.ine comae un apport extfrieur ou
--.. ccaa.e le fruit d'une mutation incitAe de l'extfrieur. Elle est
l'abouti ■ aeaent de l'fvolution qui a aenl ■oua le ■ Lagides le chef-
lieu du nome, milieu urbain inconte ■ table, de la mitropole des •o~~-
~td~a~a l celle de ■ aranda notables.

TRAVAUX
CITES :

1911. La. vi• rnuni.aipal• dans l''t911Pt.

P. JOUGUET l'GfflaiM (Paris).
o. GUEltAUD1931. ENTEYEEit. Requlus et plainus adress4•• au roi
d'E(/1/puau III• silcl• avant J.-C. (Le Caire).
A.B.M. JOOS 1937. T1uJCitus of thll Easum RomanPzaovino•• (Oxford).
e. BIWJNIRT1964. Du Bi~Mmg. studisn .BW' Soaialgeschichte
Jlgypt4fflB in dsr P'to ltllrilaz- und Xaiss:ztari t (Bonn) •

J. BINGEN 1970. GNce et E(/1/pti.nad'apl'ls PSI 502. P'l"oce«lings of

thll '!wsl~h COngNBB of Pap]P'Ology, pp. 34-40.
J. BINGEN1973. Pl'4smc• gNoqu• •t mi.lieu rumZ. ptoZ.4maf:.qu.B. Pro-
bllme1 de la terre en Grice ancienne (ed. M. I. FINLEY), pp.
215-222.
A. I. PAVLOVSliYA 1973. Tfu, Pl'ofitablBMss of Slave Labour in Hetle-
nistio Egypt. Vestnik l>z-mJnsJ
Istoz-ii n° 126 (1973, 4), pp. 136-
144 (rfaumf en anglaia, p. 144).

373
Bookkeeper·
Ducldificationfor LibrariesandArdllYes

June2008