Skip to main content

Full text of "The Oxyrhynchus papyri"

See other formats

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at jhttp : //books . qooqle . com/ 















ARTHUR S. HUNT, M.A., D.Litt. 





The Offices of the EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND, 37 Great Russell St., W.C. 

and Pierce Building, Copley Square, Boston, Mass., U.S.A. 

KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TROBNER & CO., Dryden House, Gerrard St., W. 

BERNARD QUARITCH, n Grafton St., New Bond St., W. 

ASHER & CO., 13 Bedford St., Covent Garden, W.C, and 56 Unter den Linden, Berlin 

and HENRY FROWDE, Amen Corner, E.C., and 91 and 93 Fifth Avenue, New York, U.S.A. 

All rights reserved 


v. 5 



JAN 6 - 1908 


6J, *6 1 


Of the five texts comprised in this volume, the four long classical 
papyri (nos. 841-4) formed part of a large find of literary fragments 
from about twenty MSS., which was made on Jan. 13, 1906 in 
circumstances described in the Times of May 24, 1906 and the 
Archaeological Report of the Egypt Exploration Fund, 1905-6, p. 10. 
Of the other literary papyri which were discovered at the same time, 
the portions of the Hypsipyle of Euripides and of a new commentary 
upon Thucydides Book II will be published in Part VI, which we 
hope to issue in the summer of 1908. The vellum fragment of 
a lost gospel (no. 840) was unearthed in a different mound in December, 


In editing the two most important classical texts, the Pindar (84i) 
and the new historian (842) we have enjoyed for the last time the 
very great privilege of collaborating with Professor F. Blass, whose 
tragically sudden death occurred shortly after he had completed the 
revision of the earlier proofs of those two texts, to the reconstruction 
of which he had so largely contributed. It is impossible for us 
adequately to acknowledge the debt which our publications of classical 
texts during the last eleven years owe to the generous and unstinted 
assistance of that illustrious scholar, whose brilliance of imagination 
and depth of learning were never more admirably displayed than 
in the congenial occupation of restoring, elucidating, and identifying 
literary papyri. His loss is indeed to us irreparable, and will be felt most 
keenly when we come to deal with the immense number of fragments 
from the Greek lyric poets found during the last two seasons, since in 
that department no less than in that of the Attic orators his pre- 
eminence was conspicuous. 

In the reconstruction and interpretation of the new historian 
we also owe much to the most valuable help of Professors E. Meyer 


and U. von Wilamowitz-Mollendorff, while Professor J. B. Bury has 
contributed a number of suggestions and criticisms upon both that 
papyrus and the Pindar. The assistance which we have received from 
other scholars, particularly Professors E. Schtirer and H. Schone and 
Mr. E. M. Walker, is acknowledged in connexion with the individual 

In the Appendices we give a list of addenda and corrigenda to 
Parts III and IV of the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, and a list of published 
papyri recently distributed among various museums and libraries, in 
continuation of the list in Part IV, pp. 265-71. 

The excavations at Oxyrhynchus were at length concluded last 
winter, the sixth which has been devoted to the exploration of that 
marvellously productive site; the publication of the vast store of 
Greek papyri from it will be the work of many years to come. Owing 
to lack of funds the Graeco- Roman Branch is unable to conduct 
excavations during the coming season, but we hope to resume our work 
in Egypt in the winter of 1908-9, when we look forward to breaking 
fresh ground. 


Queen's College, Oxford, 
October, 1907. 



Preface v 

Note on the Method of Publication viii 

I. Theological : 

840. Fragment of an Uncanonical Gospel i 

II. New Classical Texts: 

841. Pindar, Paeans 1 1 

842. Theopompus (or Cratippus), HtlUnica . . . .no 

III. Extant Classical Texts: 

848. Plato, Symposium 243 

844. Isocrates, Panegyricus 292 


I. Addenda and Corrigenda to Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts III and IV . 313 
II. List of Papyri Distributed 315 


I. 840 320 

II. 841 3«i 

III. 842 33 a 


I. 840 verso, 841 A. Col. xxiii . . 1 

II. 841 A. Cols, iv-v 

III. 841 Frs. 82 and 128 

IV. 842 Cols, v-vi \ at the end. 

V. 842 Cols, xi-xii 

VI. 848 Cols, xxxi-xxxii 

VII. 844 Cols, ix-x 


The same general method is followed in this volume as in its predecessors. 
The three new literary texts are printed in dual form, a reconstruction in modern 
style in the case of 840 following, in that of 841 and 842 facing, a literal 
transcript. In the two texts of extant authors, 848 and 844, the originals are 
reproduced except for division of words, addition of capital initials to proper 
names, and supplements of lacunae. Additions or corrections by the same hand 
as the body of the text are in small thin type, those by a different hand in thick 
type. Square brackets [ ] indicate a lacuna, round brackets ( ) the resolution 
of an abbreviation or contraction, angular brackets ( ) a mistaken omission in 
the original or a correction made by us ; double square brackets [[ ]] mean that 
the letters within them have been deleted in the original, braces { } that the 
letters so enclosed, though actually written, should be omitted. Dots placed 
within brackets represent the approximate number of letters lost or deleted ; 
dots outside brackets indicate mutilated or otherwise illegible letters. Letters 
with dots under them are to be considered doubtful. Heavy Arabic numerals 
refer to the texts of the Oxyrhynchus papyri published in this volume and in 
Parts I-IV ; ordinary numerals to lines ; small Roman numerals to columns. 


840. Fragment of an Uncanonical Gospel. 

8-8 x 7-4 cm. Plate I (verso). 

THIS fragment consists of a single vellum leaf, practically complete except 
at one of the lower corners, and here most of the lacunae admit of a satisfactory 
restoration. The book to which the leaf belonged was of remarkably modest 
dimensions, but though the written surface only slightly exceeds two inches 
square the scribe has succeeded in compressing forty-five lines into the two pages. 
He used a small and not very regular uncial hand, round and upright, of a type 
pointing, we think, to a fourth rather than a fifth century date. A later date than 
the fifth century, to which most of the papyri found with 840 belonged, is out of 
the question. A peculiarity is the employment of red ink to outline and bring 
into greater prominence the dots of punctuation (in the middle position), initial 
letters of sentences, strokes of abbreviation, and even accents, of which two 
examples occur (11. 23 and 36). Longer pauses are marked not only by dots but 
also by short blank spaces, and the following letter, besides being sometimes 
ornamented with red, is rather enlarged. Of the abbreviations usual in theo- 
logical MSS. avos (ivOpwiTos), bb (Aavcto), and atop ((r^rqp) are found, v at the end 
of a line, in order to save space, is sometimes written as a horizontal stroke above 
the preceding vowel ; and there is one apparent instance (1. 9) of the use of the 
common angular sign to complete a line shorter than its neighbours. In three 
cases words originally omitted have been supplied, all these interlineations most 
probably being by the original hand. The scribe apparently was particularly 
liable to omission, and in one or two other places supplements seem to be 
required ; cf. 1. 1 and notes on 11. 3-7 and 40. 

The bulk of the fragment is concerned with a conversation between Jesus 
and a chief priest, which takes place in the Temple at Jerusalem, the episode, 




which is of a dramatic character, being preserved almost complete. It is pre- 
ceded by the conclusion of a speech of Jesus to His disciples, exhorting them to 
avoid the example of certain wrong-doers and warning them of the penalties 
which await the latter both in this world and the next (11. 1-7). What particular 
class is referred to by the word airols in 1. 3 is not clear. Jesus, who throughout 
the fragment is called simply 6 cra>Tifa, then takes His disciples with Him inside the 
Temple to the ayj/evnfaioy, by which term the author of the gospel perhaps meant 
the * court of the men of Israel ', though how far this use of it is legitimate is doubt- 
ful (11. 7-9 ; cf. 1. 8, note). They are there met by a chief priest who is also 
a Pharisee, but whose name is quite uncertain (1. io, note). The chief priest 
reproaches them for having neglected to perform the necessary ceremonies 
of ablution and change of garments before entering the holy place and looking 
upon the sacred vessels (11. 12-21). A short dialogue ensues in which Jesus asks 
the chief priest if he is pure, and the latter answers recounting the different 
purificatory rites which he had himself observed (11. a 1-30). To this Jesus 
delivers an eloquent and crushing reply contrasting outward with inward purity, 
the external bathing prescribed by Jewish ritual with the inward cleansing which 
He and His followers had received in the waters of eternal life (11. 30-45). 
Before the conclusion of the speech is reached the fragment breaks off. 

In its general outline the episode described resembles Matt. xv. 1-20, Mark 
vii. 1-^3, though the scene is there not Jerusalem but near Gennesaret, and the 
other details are of course different. The contrast between outward religious 
observance and inward purity was one of the most salient points in Christ's teach- 
ing, and is illustrated not only by the canonical gospels but by other uncanonical 
utterances ascribed to our Lord, e. g. the two series of Sayings of Jesus (1. 5-1 1 
tap fir) injorctfoTjre k.t.X., 654. 32 sqq. [i£]erd(ov*iv airrov k.t.X.). Even more clearly 
than 655, 840 belongs to a narrative covering the same ground as the canonical 
gospels. That this was composed with a view to advocating the tenets of 
a particular sect is not indicated by anything in our fragment ; for though 11. 41-4 
when separated from their context might conceivably be adduced as an argument 
for denying the necessity of the use of water at baptism, pairrl(*iv is not there 
used in its technical Christian sense (cf. 1. 15, note), and in other respects the 
fragment is quite orthodox. A possible point of connexion with the Gnostics 
may be found in the noticeable fact that our Lord is called not 'Iiprov? or 6 icvpun 
but o (rcoTifo a title which Irenaeus (I. i. 3) reproaches the Valentinian Ptolemaeus 
for using to the exclusion of K\>pio$\ cf. Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, 
i. p. 124. But the use of awrrjp or salvator simply to designate Jesus is of course 
common in other early Christian writers, and though its employment indicates 
that this gospel belongs to a later stage of development than the canonical gospels, 


in which it only occurs in Luke ii. 11 irixOri vylv wnjp, 6s i<mv Xpurrbs Kvpios 
and John iv. 42 otbafMcv on ovtos iariv 6 (rcarrjp rod koV/aov, this is not sufficient to 
establish a Gnostic origin for the fragment It is, however, enough to exclude 
the likelihood that 840 comes from either the gospel according to the Hebrews 
or that according to the Egyptians. For though cra>ri?/> is used in introducing 
quotations from those gospels by Origen (In Ioann. ii. 6 t6 kqB % ' E /3 pa iovs 
cvayy4\tov lv$a airbs 6 auTrjp tprjaiv' ipn l\afi4 /*€ ic.rA.) and Epiphanius {Haer. 
62. 2) h avrf (sc. the gospel according to the Egyptians) y p iroAAa rotavra &s iv 
%apaf$4<TTy fjLvarr)pi(ibu)s i* irpoadirov tov aa)Trjpos ivatpiptrai is avrov brjkovvTos rots 
padrirais k.tX, the evidence of the extant quotations themselves indicates that 
Kvpios was the title commonly employed, as in the Gospel of Peter. In the 
absence of any definite resemblances between 840 and the scanty remains of the 
various uncanonical gospels composed in the second or third century, the frag- 
ment is best classed as belonging to a gospel distinct from any of them. The 
chief point of interest in it lies in the references to Jewish ceremonies of purifica- 
tion in connexion with the Temple-worship, about which the author at first sight 
shows an intimate knowledge. On some points the statements in the fragment 
find support in the extant authorities for the Temple-ritual at the time of Christ. 
Thus Josephus states that no Jew who was unclean had the right to be admitted 
to the inner court of the Temple, i. e. that known as the ' court of the men 
of Israel ' (cf. 1. 8, note), and the statement put into the mouth of the chief priest 
concerning the necessity of ceremonial washing and putting on white garments is 
in accordance with the regulations for priests described in the Mishnah (cf. 11. 25 
and 27, notes). But that an ordinary Jew before visiting the inner court of the 
Temple had to wash and change his clothes as stated in 11. 18-20 is not confirmed 
by any other evidence ; and neither the term &yv€vrrjpiov in 1. 8 nor the Xtpvri rod 
Aavcft in 1. 25 are mentioned elsewhere, while considerable difficulty arises 
in connexion with the * sacred vessels' which are stated to have been visible 
from the court to which Jesus and His disciples had penetrated ; cf. 11. 12-21, 
note. Moreover the two stairways leading down to the * pool of David ' and 
still more the statement that dogs and swine were cast into it (11. 33-4) seem to 
be details invented for the sake of rhetorical effect, for that a high priest washed 
himself in a pool of the character described in the fragment is incredible. So 
great indeed are the divergences between this account and the extant and 
no doubt well informed authorities with regard to the topography and ritual 
of the Temple that it is hardly possible to avoid the conclusion that much of the 
local colour is due to the imagination of the author, who was aiming chiefly at 
dramatic effect, and was not really well acquainted with the Temple. But if the 
inaccuracy of the fragment in this important respect is admitted, the historical 

B 2 


character of the whole episode breaks down, and it is probably to be regarded as 
an apocryphal elaboration of Matt. xv. 1-20 and Mark vii. 1-23. In these 
circumstances the gospel to which the fragment belongs can hardly have been 
composed before the middle of the second century. The use of the term crwnjp 
and the fact that the manuscript itself was written in the fourth or possibly even 
the fifth century may be represented as arguments for a third century date, but 
that seems to us improbable. After the four canonical gospels had come to be 
exclusively used in most churches, a process which was complete by the end of 
the second century (Harnack, Gesch. d. altckr. Lit. ii. p. 699), no new gospel 
covering the same ground could look for more than a very limited acceptance, 
and after about A. D. 180 authors of apocryphal gospels generally avoided com- 
petition with the canonical gospels by placing their supposed revelations in the 
period of the Childhood or after the Resurrection. Moreover, if the author of 840 
wrote in the third century, we should expect him to betray a definitely heretical 
point of view, which, as we have said, is not discernible in the fragment. That it is 
Egyptian in origin is very likely, but it stands much nearer to the gospel according 
to the Egyptians which was composed in the second century, probably before the 
middle of it, than e. g. to the Pistis Sophia which was written in the third. The 
literary quality also of the fragment does not favour a very late date ; the style 
is more ambitious than that of the canonical gospels, and the rhetorical tendency 
of the composer, who uses a number of words not found in the New Testament, 
is somewhat pronounced, but he is more successful in catching something of the 
genuine ring than many of the authors of apocryphal gospels. Hence we prefer 
to regard the work to which 840 belongs as composed before A. D. 200. While 
the story of the dialogue between Christ and the chief priest has no claim to 
be accepted as authentic, and is probably a secondary or even tertiary production, 
the fragment is an interesting and valuable addition to the scanty remnant of the 
numerous uncanonical traditions concerning Christ's teaching which were current 
in many Christian communities, especially in Egypt, during the third and fourth 

We are indebted to Prof. E. Schiirer for several suggestions in the interpre- 
tation of this fragment. 


(crew aWairpo<r€X €T€ l JL W a>a 'Kcu 
vfX€LOTaofjLOiaavTOL<rrraOr]r^ ovyap 


5 aii>oiKaKOvpyotTwa^-a\\cfr.]at 
fiaaavov KaiirapaXafJwavrova 
10 Ocov<f>api<rato<rTi<Tapxicp(V(r\€y[. . .] 
ToovoiiaavvtTvytvavTOKTKai^ . .] . [ 
T<odxofu-Ti<rc7rcTp€\lr€v<roi7raT[. . . . 
TovroToayi>€VTr)pioi'Kau8ai{. . . . 


TaTaayia(TK€vr]fjLr]\ov<ra[.](:i{ ,]g[. . 

15 T€TO)i//iafl?7Tooi/(roirroucnr[ 





20 /xarairarci-ot/foo[. 


. [• . .]oKr/iaOf]Tai[ 



25 /ii]pyapwrt]\ifjLVTiTov$8*ai8i€T€ 
30 <r*€i*<rii» Oa&fmpoo'avTOvairo 
[. . .]d€i<r€nrcv*ovatTv<p\oifir}opa> 
[. . .]wKTo<rKair]pepa<r*KamTlrapc 






. .]iai7ropvaiKaia[.]av\i]Tpt8€<rfJLvpi 
.]oi{. . . .]ai\wov<nvKat<r/jLTixw<n 
. . .]a\\a>7ri{w<riirpo<r€iri0viu 
. .)tovava>vw8o6cv8€CK€i 

.]kicc<T' tyooSeKCUoi 

. .]o-e\dov<ri(iTTO . . [.] 

irp&rtpov npb (rod) dSucrjcai irdvra <ro<j>i- 
(trai. aXXi wpo<rix€T€ prj irm Kal 
if/i€i9 rh S/ioia avrois irdOtjrc* ov yhp 
iv rot? (coot? fiSvois dTToXa/jifidvov- 
5 <riy ol KaKovpyoi r&v dv{dpd>rr)coy d\\h [k]cli 
tcSXao-iv inrofiivov(TLV Kal 7toA[A]t)i/ 
fidaavov. Kal irapa\afia>v avrovs 
€tarjyay€U tfc airrb rb ayveur1\piQV Kal 
ircpitirdrci Iv t$ Up$. Kal irpo<re[\]- 

10 Oa>v Qapiaatis rt? dp^iepei)? Aei^els ?] 
rb Svopa avviruytv airrois Kal c[7w€p] 
r<p at»(r^)p*, rk kirirpvtyiv <roi irai\*iv 
toOto rb &yvtvrr\piov Kal ISetv [rav- 
ra rh &yia aKevrj pjrc \ovac^ji](i{<p] /x[^- 

l 5 T€ l*h v T ® v paOrjr&v <rov rods v\68as j8a- 
irTurdivrcbv ; aXXi pepoXtfjipivos 
i7rdrrj(ras toGto rb Upbv r\birov Su- 
ra Ka6ap6u } hv ovStl* <S[\\os d pi) 
XovcdjjLCvos Kal d\\d{£as rh htiv- 

20 para iraru, 0&8I 6\pav rokp§, raOra 

rh &yia aKethj. Kal a\rhs cv6ia>s 6 <rv(ri))p 
o\pv r]oh pa6tfrai\s dn€Kp(6rj avr<p, 


av ovv kvradOa wv kv tS> /c/>f> KaOa- 

pcvus ; Xkyu avrcp tKtivos, KaOapcvw iXovad- 
25 fflv yap kv rjj Xtpvg rod A{avu)B teal St 9 tri- 

pas K\(/iaKos KaT€\6a>v Si iripas 

d[v]rjX0ov, Kal XcvKa kvBvfiara kvc- 

Svad/irjv Kal KaOapd, Kal t6t€ JjXOov 

Kal 7rpo(T€/9Xei/ra tovWois tois ayfoi? 
30 <TK€Vt<riv. 6 (rafrfyp npbs airrbv diro- 

[Kpi]6ch etirev, oval, rv<fyXol /if) 6p&v- 

T[€]y <ri/ kXovaco ro&rots rote xcopivois 

v\S\aatv kv oh kHv€9 koi yoipoi PcPXrjv- 

[rai] wktos Kal fjpkpas, Kal mjrd/jLC- 
35 [v]os rb cktos Sip/ia io-firjfa, Sir€p 

[Ka]l ai irSpvai Kal a[t] avXrjTpiSa \kvpi- 

\Cpv\aiv K]al Xovovaiv Kal (rpjxovai 

[Kal K)a\Xom , ((ovai npbs kmdvpC- 

\av t)S»p dv{$pom)cov tvtoOcv 8k *ku- 
40 [vai 7rerrX]rjp<Q(i>yTai aKopirimv Kal 

[irdrt]? Ka]Ktas. kya> Sk Kal ot 

[fiaOrjrat fiov] ot? Xkytis /x?) jSe/Ja- 

\tnta6ai fi€pd\/i/i(0a kv vSao-L (a>- 

[fjs ahvhv toT\s kXOovaiv dirb . . [.] 
45 [• 4\]Xa oval [r]oi* [...]. 

'. . . before he does wrong makes all manner of subtle excuse. But give heed lest ye 
also suffer the same things as they ; for the evil-doers among men receive their reward not 
among the living only, but also await punishment and much torment. And he took 
them and brought them into the very place of purification, and was walking in the 
temple. And a certain Pharisee, a chief priest, whose name was Levi, met them and 
said to the Saviour, Who gave thee leave to walk in this place of purification and to 
see these holy vessels, when thou hast not washed nor yet have thy disciples bathed 
their feet ? But defiled thou hast walked in this temple, which is a pure place, wherein 
no other man walks except he has washed himself and changed his garments, neither does 
he venture to see these holy vessels. And the Saviour straightway stood still with his 
disciples and answered him, Art thou then, being here in the temple, clean ? He saith 
unto him, I am clean ; for I washed in the pool of David, and having descended by 
one staircase I ascended by another, and I put on white and clean garments, and then 
I came and looked upon these holy vessels. The Saviour answered and said unto him, 
Woe ye blind, who see not. Thou hast washed in these running waters wherein dogs 


and swine have been cast night and day, and hast cleansed and wiped the outside skin 
which also the harlots and flute-girls anoint and wash and wipe and beautify for the 
lust of men ; but within they are full of scorpions and all wickedness. But I and my 
disciples, who thou sayest have not bathed, have been dipped in the waters of eternal life 
which come from . . . But woe unto the . . •' 

3-7. This sentence is very obscurely worded, and perhaps corrupt. The contrast is, 
we think, between punishment in this life and in the world to come ; hence we prefer 
Ciools 'living' to C<p<w 'animals'. The use of C«*fc, a poetical word employed also by 
Xenophon, is curious, but cV rois ftww seems to yield no sense. The absence of an 
object for dnokap&avovaw (e.g. rhv fua06v) is awkward, even if one could be supplied from 
the sentence preceding 1. 1 ; and after dXXA xal a phrase to balance cV vols £«<>& would be 
expected. Possibly some words have dropped out ; the scribe seems to have been rather 
prone to omission. For Kokwru in reference to the next world cf. Matt. xxv. 46 dircXwromii 
ofau ds K6kaat» ai&wov : ftdtravos is not so used in the N. T., though cf. Matt, xviii. 34. 
vnoptvovaiv may be future, but the present tense makes a better contrast to dnoXap&dvovaw. 

8. AyptvTTjpiov : this term is not found elsewhere in connexion with the Temple, and 
what the author of this gospel exactly meant by it is not clear. The context shows that it 
was within the inner enclosure, and 11. 1 2-3, where frar[r?v] rovro t6 fyvcvrriptov corresponds 
ig ntpundrti iv Upy, suggest that it was a large open court rather than a particular room, 
especially as the term &y v(VT VP i0V & not a suitable description for any of the known rooms in 
Herod's Temple. The ' Chamber of Washers ' (Middoth v. 4) was employed for cleansing 
the inwards of the offerings, not for ceremonial ablutions. If dyvcvrrjpiov implies a place 
where rites of purification were performed, the only part of the Temple to which the name 
would be at all appropriate is the space round the brazen laver, which stood between the 
Temple-porch and the altar, having succeeded to the ' molten sea ' of Solomon's Temple 
(cf. 1. 25, note). But this is not likely to be the meaning of Aynvrfiptap, for the brazen laver 
was in the court of the priests, which could not be entered by lay Israelites except for 
purposes of sacrifice (Kelim, i. 8 quoted in Schttrer, Gesch. d. Jiid. Voikes, ii. p. 273), and 
other indications in the papyrus (cf. 11. 12-21, note) besides the general probabilities of the 
case suggest that Jesus and His disciples had not penetrated further than the ' court of 
the men of Israel ', which was outside the priests' court. If dyvcvrqpiop is legitimately used 
of the ' court of the men of Israel ', the term seems to be applied to it not because it was 
a place where purification was performed but because it could only be entered by Israelites 
who were perfectly pure; cf. Josephus, Bell* Iud. v. 5 dvdpw d* ol pJj KoBanav wifumfo? 

flpyovro rijt ivbov avXrjs Kal t&9 Uptav irdkw ol ftrj KaBaptvorrts ttpyovro, and Contra Apion. 

ii. 8 in tertia (sc. porticu) masculi Iudaeorum mundi exisientes aique purificati (sc. ingredic- 
bantur). But it may be doubted whether the author of this gospel had any clear conception 
of the topography of the Temple, and the employment of the term dynvrripiop may be 
a mere error ; cf. introd. 

10. *api<rai6s rir apxupcvs : by dpxuptu in the N. T. and Josephus are meant primarily 
the high priest actually in office and his predecessors, but also secondly members of the 
families from which the high priests were drawn; cf. Schttrer, op. ciU ii. pp. 221-4. There is 
therefore no necessity for this person to have been the high priest in office at the moment. 
Most of the high priests were Sadducees, and hence are often in the N. T. contrasted with 
the Pharisees, but instances of high priests who were Pharisees occur ; cf. Schttrer, op, at. 
ii. p 201. The combination Qapiuaifc m &pxup*vs is therefore quite legitimate, and such 
a person is particularly appropriate as the champion of external purity ; cf. 11. 24-30. 

Act{f fr] : the reading is extremely doubtful, but neither "Atn[as nor Ka{d<f>as is admissible. 
The first two letters, if not Xr, seem to be a<r, and the third, if not v, to be * or k. 


12-21. From this speech of the Pharisee it appears firstly that entrance to that part of 
the Temple to which Jesus and His disciples had penetrated was permitted only to those 
who had either bathed (1. 19 Xovadfuvos ; cf. 1. 24) or at any rate had washed their feet, and 
had put on fresh clothes, secondly that from this part of the Temple the holy vessels 
were visible. The principal holy vessels, e.g. the table of shewbread and the seven- 
branched candlestick, stood in the hekal or larger room of the sanctuary ; but this was 
only entered by the officiating priests, and the writer of this gospel is not likely to 
have been so ignorant of the facts concerning the Temple-service as to suppose that 
Jesus and His disciples could have wished to enter the sanctuary, much less that they 
could have succeeded in doing so without opposition from the Temple guards and with 
no stronger remonstrance from the high priest than that related here. Other sacred 
vessels were kept in the small chambers (38 in number), which surrounded the sanctuary 
on all sides except that of the porch ; cf. Middolh iv. These chambers were apparently 
entered from the inside of the building, so that in order to reach them it would be necessary 
to pass through the Temple-porch, and their contents can hardly have been visible from the 
priests' court which immediately surrounded the Temple-building, much less from the 
court of the men of Israel which was outside the court of the priests. Since the court of 
the priests was only accessible to lay Israelites for the purpose of sacrificing at the great 
altar, it is almost as difficult to suppose that Jesus and His disciples penetrated to these 
chambers as that they entered the sanctuary. The nature of the remonstrance addressed to 
them by the chief priest, who reproaches them not with being laymen but with being 
unclean, suggests that the scene of the conversation is the court of the men of Israel, 
which, as Josephus says, could only be entered by the mundi atque purificati or *aMma» 
yypfVKflirfr (cf. 1. 8, note). Hence if Syta raw? implies more than the bronze laver, and 
the rings, tables, and other accessories of the sacrifices, all of which objects, being outside 
the Temple-building, would be visible from the court of the men of Israel, the author of 
this gospel has fallen into a somewhat serious error. Moreover, the statement in 11. 18-20 
that bathing and changing of clothes were required from ordinary Israelites when visiting the 
Temple is not confirmed by anything in the authorities, which record the observance of 
these formalities only in the case of the officiating priests ; cf. 11. 25 and 27, notes. Josephus' 
reference to mBairap wm/corcr probably means merely persons who were Levitically pure, 
and does not imply the performance of special rites of purification. Schtirer, therefore, 
seems to be right in supposing that the author of the gospel has by mistake referred to laymen 
the regulations applicable only to priests. 

15. /9a]irrtcr0fiTfl»y : farrri(«9 is used here and in L 42 not in the ordinary technical 
sense of baptizing, but with reference to ceremonial ablution, as in Luke xi. 38 6 W Qapunuos 
id»9 i$aCfuur€P err* 06 np&rov ffianriaBrj irpb rod apiarov, and perhaps in Mark vii. 4 iiuf pi) 
(kmriarnvrw ov« iadiowri, where the reading 18 doubtful ; cf. also Sir. XXXL 25 panritftuvos airo 


20. 1{pa* : <r may be read in place of o. 

25. rg X/pjtp rov A(<n*i)d : ' the pool of David ' is not mentioned elsewhere, and it is not 
clear what the author of the gospel meant by it, or where it was situated. Schtirer thinks 
that it refers to the 'brazen ' or ' molten sea' set up by Solomon between the porch and the 
altar (1 Kings vii. 23, 2 Chron. iv. 2). This was a large laver supported by 12 brazen 
oxen, and containing according to 1 Kings 2000, according to 2 Chron. 3000, baths of 
water. It was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings xxv. 13, 16, Jer. lii. 17, 20), and 
though if Sir. 1. 3 may be trusted the second Temple also had its brazen sea, Herod's Temple 
did not possess one. In its place there was firstly a bronze laver between the porch and 
altar (Middoth iii. 6, &c; cf. Schtirer, op. at. ii. p. 283) in which the officiating priests 
had to wash their hands and feet, and secondly a room fitted up with baths for daily use by 


the officiating priests before entering on their duties; cf. Testam. XII Patriarchy Levi 9 
Ka\ vpo tov tl<T€\$u¥ tls to hyia \ovov, and the authorities from the Mishnah cited by Schttrer, 
/. c. This room, which is called in Middoth i. 9 ' the house of baptism ', was reached by 
a passage from the Temple-building, and was clearly outside the Temple-enclosure. That 
the author of the gospel had in his mind the ' brazen sea ' seems to us improbable, since 
the Xipyi? is called after David, not Solomon, and while the brazen sea stood close to the 
Temple-building itself, the \ipw\ which had two k\Ipok*s leading down to it (11. 25-6) and 
into which dogs and swine are cast (1. 33) is evidently conceived of as being outside the 
Temple (presumably in -the valley below), and thus fulfilling the functions ascribed in the 
Mishnah to the ' house of baptism '. Whether a pool called after David really existed is 
however very doubtful, for the details concerning it are more picturesque than convincing. 
The subtle distinction of the different stairways for the use of the clean and unclean, though 
plausible in itself, is, in the absence of corroboration, more likely to be due to the imagination 
of the author of the gospel than to have a historical basis, and the casting of dogs and 
swine into the pool looks like a rhetorical exaggeration ; cf. note ad loc. 

27. XcvkA Mvitara : on this detail, that the officiating priests put on special garments, 
white in colour, the author of the gospel is correct (cf. Schttrer, op. ciL pp. 281-2), as he is 
with regard to the necessity for their taking a daily bath before entering on their religious 
duties ; cf. 1. 25, note, and introd. 

31. oval, rmpXoi: the dative is more common after ovai, as in 1. 45; but cf. Luke vi, 
25 ovai, ol ytX&mrfr jw, ori ircvdiprfrc, where there is an ellipse of v/uv, and Rev. xviii. 16 oval 
ovai, fj trrfXif 9 fityaXtj. 

33. xoyx*: that swine were not uncommon in Palestine at the time of Christ is proved 
by Matt. vii. 61, viii. 30, and Luke xv. 15. The reference to the dogs and swine is 
introduced to heighten the effect of the contrast with the waters of life in 11. 43-4. The 
author of the gospel may well have had in his mind the stagnant pools which are a common 
feature of Egyptian villages, but the description is incredible when applied to a pool in 
which a chief priest bathed, and as a piece of rhetoric somewhat overshoots the mark ; 
for the real point of the contrast between the two kinds of purification is not that the water 
was in the one case unclean, but that it only cleansed the outward skin, whereas the other 
form of purification was spiritual. 

36. al iropw koL c[l] avAipy>to>r : cf. for this collocation rptU yap bovkovs itc/hcix* TOV P* 9 
Jtora^ayoVra rrj» vnap£ip /jutra rroppwp ko\ avXrjrpibup in the 'EfipaUols x a P aKr ^P ow cfayyfctow quoted 
by Eusebius in his Theophania (Resch, Agrapha, p. 388). 

39. tt&oBtv M k.tX : cf. the denunciations of the Pharisees in Matt. xxiiL 25 oval v/uv, 
ypappaTtts koi Qapurawi vnotcptrai, ori KaBapi{m to 1£&6cv tov rrorrjpiov ko\ ttjs napo^Saot, fatfoVy dc 
yipovow r£ apnayfjs xal a<rpa<rtaf, 33 dtyrir yfmnjftara fxioV&p, Luke xi. 39 to & taoBcv v/i*j> ytfui 
Afmayrjs koi noyrjpias (cf. Kajaap in L 41). 

40. irfirA]7p«»(j>)rai : it would be possible to retain ttcttXJiJ/wtcu by reading cWva in place 
of fairat, but such a use of the neuter plural is unlikely. 

42. /9f/3a|irnV Bai : or /3f/3a[ir]|[ricrtfai ; but cf. 11. 15-6 0a lirrca6Vm»y. 

43. /3f/3rf]up* 6a : a, d, or X could be read in place of tne doubtful p, but not o- or v, 
so that X<Xo]v/m&i and frfranrfyiuBa (which is also too long) are excluded, and fitfidjifuBa is 
practically certain. /9a*T«* is a less technical word than /Sairrlffiv, but there is, we think, 
no real distinction intended between the two terms here, since PamlCti* is not employed in 
its technical sense ; cf. 1. 15, note. 

43-4. (o^rjs : or £«[<n, with another word in place of aloviov. The letter before i\$ov<riv 
may be r or v instead of a, so that Ka)rf\Oowriv is possible, vamp f»v occurs in John iv. 10, 
11, vii. 38, vd»p (mjs in Rev. vii. 17, xxi. 6, xxii. 1 and 17. dn6 f if correct, was no doubt 
followed by some words like t&p ovpaw&r or tov irarpdV. 



841. Pindar, Paeans. 

Height 1 8 cm. Plates Mil (A Cols, iv, v, xxiii, 

Frs. 82 and 128). 

It is a somewhat remarkable circumstance that though several Pindaric 
fragments have been found at Oxyrhynchus (408, 426 (?), and 658 besides 841), 
none of them has contained any part of the Epinician poems. Eustathius tells us 
{Opusc. p. 60. 23) that that section of the poet's works was the most popular 
as being fuller of human interest, less concerned with myth and less obscure 
in expression, — ot Kal vtpiayovrai ndkiora bia rd &y0pa>iriK<£rc/>oi clwu koX SXiyopivBot, 
Kal pi}& vAw iyjtiv a<ra<j><as Kurd ye ra &Kka : but this, so far as the evidence goes, 
hardly seems to have been the general verdict in Egypt during the Roman 
period. Recent discoveries moreover happily enable us to form our own opinion 
as to the character of some of the other categories. 658 provided for the first 
time a specimen of the TlapOtvcia ; and now the following much longer and more 
valuable text presents the material for an adequate estimate of the important 
class of IlcuSm. 

The paean, which is a very ancient form of poetry, was a hymn originally 
sung in honour of Apollo or Artemis, whether in thanksgiving to, or propitiation 
of, the deity. Both of these motives appear in Homer ; the Achaeans are to 
return to their ships singing a paean of victory (X 391), and try to divert the 
wrath of Apollo with a paean at a sacrificial feast (A 472-3). In later times 
paeans were dedicated to other gods than Apollo ; Xenophon, for instance, speaks 
of a paean to Poseidon (Hell. iv. 7. 4) : cf. Proclus, Chrest. ap, Photius, Bibl. 239 
6 bi Ttcudv iariv efto? (fbrjs ds irdira? vvv ypa<f>6p€V0s 0cov?, to hi iraXaibv Ibfos iirtvi- 
/icro T<ji 'AirrfAAawi Kal ry 'AfrcTuftt, M xarairat/crci Aoi/x&z; Kal v6<ra>v $b6pcvos* Kara- 
yj)T\<7TiK<*$ bi Kal ra vpo<r6bia nvis iraiavas Xlyovvw. The sound off?} was especially 
characteristic of the paean ; Athenaeus, xv. pp. 696 e, f (cf. 701 b, c), calls lyvaidv 
the voLaviKdv iirlppufia or imQOcypa, a description which the papyrus well illustrates ; 
cf. also 660. 

The Paeans were comprised in one of the seventeen books attributed to 
Pindar by the Cod. Ambrosianus and Suidas. To that book, apart from single 


words, only two small fragments (52 and 61) could hitherto be certainly referred ; 
a few others, now seen to belong to it, had been wrongly assigned to other 
categories. Of the Paeans of Simonides there are but a line and a half ; of those 
of Bacchylides, previously represented by a couple of fragments, two specimens 
have lately reappeared in the British Museum papyrus. By a similar stroke 
of good fortune the lost book of the Paeans of Pindar is now partially recovered 
through the present MS., which, next to that of Bacchylides, is the largest extant 
papyrus of a lyric poet. The identification admits of not the smallest doubt. That 
the bulk at any rate of the poems are to be classed as paeans is obvious ; and not 
only do they bear unmistakably the Pindaric stamp, but their authorship is con- 
clusively established by several coincidences with already known citations as 
well as by references to Pindar in the scholia which accompany the main text. 

The remains of this admirable manuscript, in elaborateness rivalling the 
Paris Alcman papyrus, were unearthed in deplorable condition ; they consisted 
of some 380 fragments, none of which contained two complete consecutive 
columns, while the great majority were quite small. The process of fitting 
together has largely reduced the total, but many scraps remain unplaced in 
spite of repeated efforts ; some of them no doubt will eventually be assigned by 
future revisions to their proper position, though it does not seem probable that 
there is much to be done in this direction. The task of combination has been 
greatly assisted by the fact that the literary text was written upon the verso 
of a cursive document ; frequently a connexion, which otherwise would have 
remained a matter of conjecture, has been definitely established or excluded by 
the evidence on the other side of the papyrus. As now reconstructed the MS. falls 
into four principal sections. In A, which constitutes the bulk of what survives, 
as many as thirty-five consecutive columns containing parts of seven odes can be 
accounted for, though with large gaps and imperfections. The recto contains an 
elaborate list of persons, written probably in the latter part of the first century, 
with details as to parentage, age, and other personal characteristics. As often, 
the papyrus was cut horizontally before being re-used ; it has also sometimes 
been divided vertically and rejoined, and strengthening strips have been glued on 
in places. Under B, where the hands on either side are the same as in A, are 
included several fragments which are distinguished by their dirty and decayed 
condition. There are remains of three columns which may be consecutive, 
but whether they belong to a single poem or form part of the last ode (VII) of A 
is doubtful ; cf. the commentary ad loc. It is even uncertain whether B precedes 
or follows A. In C the cursive recto is the same as in A and B, but the text of 
the Pindar is in a new hand, which continues through D ; the two groups, each 
including one practically complete column, are marked off from each other by 


the presence of a different document, part of a land-survey list, on the recto of D, 
while the recto of C is the same as in A and B. Two isolated fragments, 26-7, 
where the text on the verso was written by the scribe of A-B, also have a different 
cursive, perhaps the same as in D, on the recto. The changes of hand in the 
verso and recto respectively make the order A-B, C, D the natural one ; but it is 
not impossible that D preceded C or that C-D preceded A-B, for the case 
of Frs. 36-7 indicates that the recto of the roll as made up to receive the literary 
text on the verso was of a somewhat heterogeneous character. There is some 
internal as well as external evidence for distinguishing C-D from A-B, since it is 
doubtful whether the poems represented in C-D ate also to be regarded as 
paeans ; this question will be considered later (p. 23). 

The text of the Pindar is written in short columns of fifteen or sixteen lines 
which occupy about 11-5 cm. in depth, a wide margin being left between the 
columns for the reception of scholia, and the lines placed rather wide apart, 
perhaps with a view to interlinear additions ; the distance from the commence- 
ment of one column to that of the next is from 14 to 15 cm. The occurrence of 
the figure 900 opposite II. 25 proves that some 866 lines or fifty-seven columns 
had preceded the ten verses which survive of Paean I. On the assumption that 
a literary roll did not ordinarily exceed thirty feet in length, this MS. of Pindar's 
Paeans would have consisted of more rolls than one. As already stated the text 
is the work of two scribes ; in A-B the hand is a good-sized uncial, round and 
upright, but irregular and rather heavy. There is a noticeable variation in the 
size of the writing at different points ; and cursive forms have occasionally 
intruded themselves at the end of a verse. On its own evidence this hand 
might be assigned with probability to the earlier decades of the second century, 
a date strongly indicated (1) by the document on the recto, which was written after 
the end of the reign of Titus (who is called 0«o's) but perhaps before the close of the 
first century, and (2) by the cursive scholia, which we think are not later than 
the middle of the second century and are likely to be for the most part practically 
contemporary with the main text. The scribe of C-D was the master of a much 
more practised and ornamental handwriting. This also is of the round upright 
type, but the letters are smaller and lighter, though firm and carefully finished 
(cf. Plate III). A noticeable feature, found also in some other well-written 
literary papyri, is the apices or little hooks with which the extremities of strokes 
are in many cases provided. A cursive c occurs at the end of a line in 
Paean IX. 38. 

Breathings, accents, marks of quantity and elision, and diaereses have been 
pretty freely supplied throughout, but accents are rather more common in C-D. 
Breathings are of the square shape. The system of accentuation shows a general 


resemblance to that found e. g. in the Bacchylides papyrus and 228. In diph- 
thongs, as usual, an acute accent falls on the first of the two vowels, while 
a circumflex generally covers both ; a grave accent is placed by the scribe of A-B 
on the second vowel (III. ia, VI. 130), by the scribe of C-D in two instances on the 
second (Fr. 8a. 25 tcAcis, IX. 39 avariOtls), in one (IX. 39 jx<Wiai?) on the first. 
Unaccented syllables often bear a grave accent, usually one or more of those 
preceding the accented syllable (e. g. I. 8 ^lATjo-urrtyavov, V. 38 0€/>e/iijAow), but 
a following syllable is similarly treated in Fr. 8a. ai o\oai|<rl, IX. 4a ir€K[c. The 
article 6 is written 8 in I. 5. Oxytone disyllables as a rule only have a grave accent 
on the first syllable (IV. 51 vbpov, VI. 14 rpbQov, &c. ; an exception is 604x6, 
Fr. 20. 27), and a similar method is sometimes followed in polysyllabic words, 
e.g. VI. 16 Ociplva, IV. 12 ayaKkca for iycucMa. Syllables preceding enclitics 
are accented (IV. 27 &vuni6s et/uu, &c.) even in the case of paroxytones, 
e. g. V. 44 ivOi /me, VI. 87 6<r*d re. Instances of mistaken accentuation are II. 98 
0aixa for Ohpi or Oapa, IV. 28 MeAd/utrros for Mikafxvos, IV. 36 hs for fc, 37 (kcitov 
for €kqlt6v (or ckotov), similarly IX. 39 apariOtU for avariOtCs, and Fr. 8a. 2,5 reXci? for 
tcXcis. Punctuation is commonly effected by means of a high dot, which is freely 
supplied. At the ends of lines it is placed some little distance away at a level 
varying between the middle and top of the letters. The exact height is apparently 
immaterial, and therefore has been disregarded in our transcript ; e. g. in IV. 34 
the stop after KarafiaLvuv is opposite the middle of p, in 70 after irpovipoiOcv it is 
at the top, the length of the pause being exactly the same in the two cases. 
Stops occurring in the course of lines are placed, as in the Bacchylides papyrus, 
well above the letters ; but there is one genuine case of a dot in the middle 
position, where the pause is represented by the modern comma (VI. 15 ; cf. 18a), 
and one instance of a dot just below the line (IV. 48), at the end of an interrogative 
sentence. A paragraphia is only used in the text to separate the metrical sections 
which are, apparently, always distinguished. Plain paragraphi are employed at 
the end of strophes and antistrophes, but at the commencement of new strophes 
they are accompanied by a conspicuous coronis, as in 659. Paean V, which 
consists only of strophes, accordingly has this coronis at the end of each one. 
The commencement of a fresh poem is denoted by a separate sign (VI. 1). In the 
scholia by the first hand of C-D paragraphi are frequently inserted to mark off 
the notes, and in A-B they appear sporadically for a similar purpose. In some 
other respects an apparent difference of practice in the two main divisions of the 
manuscript is to be noted. In C-D a curved line has in several cases been 
placed below letters or syllables, with no very clear object (cf. note on Fr. 8a. 23) ; 
this does not occur in what remains of A-B. In the latter on the other hand 
there occur before lines certain critical signs, consisting of the ordinary diple } 


which was used for a variety of purposes, or a small cross, which is also found 
in the Paris Alcman and Berl. Klassikertexte V. (2) xvi (Corinna). This was 
not one of the recognized Aristarchean symbols and its precise signification is not 
certain ; it may, as Wilamowitz says {op. ciU % p. 64), be no more than a nota bene. 
Another example of a diple in a Pindar papyrus occurs in 659. 17. In C-D there 
is in four columns no instance of the use of such marginal symbols, which though 
not quite conclusive at any rate establishes a presumption against their employ- 
ment elsewhere in that part of the papyrus. 

How far hands other than the first have contributed towards these many 
lectional aids it is difficult precisely to determine. Unless there are considerable 
differences in the colour of the ink, which is here not the case, responsibility for 
such marks cannot be assigned. To a large extent at least, they appear in the 
present case to be original, and none of them is likely to be much later in date 
than the body of the manuscript. The numeration of the lines by hundreds 
(II. 25, &c.) is undoubtedly by the first hand ; the title at VI. 1 appears to be 
a subsequent insertion. 

The path of the reader has been still further smoothed by the frequent 
notes which accompany the text and which embody both apparatus criticus and 
commentary. A number of variants are recorded between the lines or in the 
margin, sometimes with a statement of the authority to whom they were due. 
Several readings are attributed to Z or Zq (cf. note on IV. 58), who no doubt is 
Zenodotus of Ephesus. Others are coupled with the abbreviations Ap, Ap«r, Av 
and Apv, which are less easily identified, since it is uncertain how many names 
they represent Perhaps Aristarchus for the first pair and Aristophanes for the 
second is the most likely interpretation; cf. note on II. 61. Chrysippus the 
pupil of Zenodotus and instructor of Aristarchus is probably referred to in 
Fr. 84. 13, and Theon, a later grammarian, may be named at II. 37. Other 
lections have the common adjunct yp((tyercu), or more often stand by them- 
selves, usually enclosed between two dots. The explanatory notes, which are 
especially full in II and in C-D, deal with names or allusions, grammatical 
points, and the like, or elucidate the sense — not always very successfully. 

These additions are in several hands which are not always readily distin- 
guished. The textual notes in A-B are mostly in uncial or semi-uncial script, 
and sometimes are certainly due to the first scribe, e. g. the variants at V. 38, 
VI. 55, &c. This scribe was moreover a careful if not an elegant writer, and made 
few slips which he did not himself correct ; an instance occurs at VII. 1. To 
a distinct class belong certain other entries in a more sloping hand (H 2), includ- 
ing II. I fopajtos, 37 icai, 40 Saiois, IV. 4 wro, V. 31 cpiirwus, VI. I title (?), 10 atfw, 
14 kXutw aXaos, 5a interlinear c and m^ci* (?), the note opposite 11. 108-9, VII. % 


€irec{i] (?), Fr. 1 6. 5 KeXa&TjeraO ujiwhis, Fr. 31. J ccrcrrnu. A third more rapid and 
lighter hand (H 3) is responsible for II. 2 iraTpu>u, 27 €X[ (?), V. 45 iwowpou K.rA.,and 
perhaps IV. 62 uio(s) k.t.A. ; while a few more variants, namely II.52 interlinear 1 and 
aet > 75 * ¥ * c i IV. 58 Zi)(ko8oto$) k.t.\., VI. 180 m+afouri vw . [. . .], are in the cursive 
(S 1) of the explanatory scholia. Here again a distinction has to be drawn. Two 
groups of these cursive notes are traceable throughout the papyrus, (a)=S 1, 
in a small and as a rule clear writing, and (b)=S 2, in a more rapid and 
negligent and generally rather larger cursive, the ink of which also is of a lighter 
shade ; e. g. in the scholium opposite II. 43 to vw^a . . . cXiriBos belongs to S 1, the 
rest of the note to S 2. Evidently these two groups were written on different 
occasions, and at first sight would be put down to different persons ; but they are 
of a similar character and at times approximate closely in style, and we hesitate 
to say that they could not proceed from a single hand. It is a question too how 
far the various readings classed under H 2 and H 3 may not be the work of the 
scholiast or scholiasts ; H 2 and S 1, at any rate, are not unlikely to be identical. 
In C-D suph variants as occur and many of the scholia proper are in the hand of 
the text, but S 1 and S 2 are responsible for a number of additions. 

To turn now to the individual poems. Of the first there remain only the last, 
ten verses, in which however the allusion to Thebes and the Theban ba<pvrj<f>opCa 
(cf. 1. 8 note and Frs. 129-31) clearly shows that the paean was written for 
the poet's native city on the occasion of that festival. The metre, which is 
logaoedic, is as follows : — 

. • • . • 

WWW — W — W — W — W — 

— W W — W — W — 

w — wwwww^-ww — 
w w w — w w — 
5 w — w w — w — ww— ^ 

^ — W — w — — w — • ^ 

v^ — — W — WW W W W W 

— v^ — — w w — — WW — — 

10 — WW — WW — WW — 

II. The title of the second paean has disappeared with the margin at 
the commencement, but this loss is made good by the first few lines, which 
practically form a title, and with other internal evidence render it abundantly 
clear that the poem was composed for the people of the Thracian Abdera, 
and dedicated to Apollo. It is unfortunately mutilated, two of the seven and 



a half columns comprising it being wholly lost and another badly damaged ; the 
remainder however, amounting to three-fifths of the whole, which consisted of 
108 verses, is in good condition. Abderus, the mythical comrade of Heracles, 
who is said to have founded the city to perpetuate his memory, is addressed 
in the opening line ; and the subsequent fortunes of the place, the failure of 
a settlement from Clazomenae (11. 55-6, 63-4), its successful colonization from 
Teos (11. 3, 65 sqq.), and its later prosperity (11. 25-7), are appropriately 
commemorated. There are some rather obscure allusions (11. 39-40, 104-7) to 
a war in which the Abderitea were taking part. The date is subsequent to the 
battle of Salamis, since the occupation of Athens by the Persians is referred to in 
11. 28 sqq. Perhaps the poem was written about the time of the formation of the 
confederacy of Delos, when hostilities directed against the Persians were still 
going on in the region of Abdera ; or a struggle with some Thracian neighbour 
may have been in progress. The whole ode is characterized by a distinctly 
warlike note. It consists of three systems, the strophe having eleven and the 
epode fourteen logaoedic cola, and each epode ending with the refrain irfu 
saidy, IrjW vaiav 5* fxijirorc Acfroi. Similar refrains are found in IV and V. 

In the following schemes a comma at the end of a verse indicates synaphia 
as shown by the division of a word between two cola, and a vertical line marks 
hiatus. Syllabae ancipites at the ends of verses will be apparent without special 

— \j — w w — ^ — w — w — — 

www — w w — w , 

*- w w I 

5 — — ww O — ww, 

w^ — w — WW- 
WW W — WW — — 

— — w w — w — 

— w — w w — — 

IO — — WW w — 

w w — w 

(better w w 

— w — w w -) 



— — WW — — WW — 

wwww — w — w - 

— WW w — WW— , 

— W — I — — — — — WW — ' 

(better — ww w — w w — ^ - | 

— — . — — — ^ v^ — — ) 



, ww-ww [|] 

W W W W — W , 

W — WW — WWW — ^ 
WWW — WW — — f 

O" — WW W — 

IO W — WW — W — ^ 

— W — WW — W — , 


WW W — WW- 

W — WW 

III. The third paean is hopelessly mutilated. From the stichometry of 
the papyrus it may be inferred to have consisted of 102 lines (cf. note on 1. 17) 
out of which seventy-five have disappeared altogether, while only one short 
passage of six verses in which Apollo is addressed is intelligible. The occasion 
of the ode and the patrons for whom it was written are not determinable; the 
Graces are named at the commencement. 

IV. A peculiar interest attaches to the fourth paean, which is without doubt 
the ode spoken of at the commencement of the first Isthmian. Pindar there 
apologizes for having postponed the completion of a paean to the Delian Apollo 
to be sung at Ceos in order that he might first celebrate a victory won by 
his compatriot Herodotus at the Isthmian Games. Cf. 11. 6 sqq. 

€l£oi>, 2> 'iroAAcoptci* (sc. Delos)* ap.<f)OT€pav rot xapirav <rw Owls (tvfa WA09, 

ko\ rbv &K€ipcKopav <Polpov \op€va>v 

iv K^<p &fx<f)ipvTq avv now Lois 

&vbpa<TLv, Kal rav akicpnia 'lvOfiov 


and the scholia upon the occasion of the poem : — ol Keuu AijkiaKbv iraxava ijtfovv 
rbv ttoltjt^v ypiyfrai . . . piWovTOS yap Kcloi? yp&faiv vpotrobiaKdv ira&va . . . idea? 
aavimipavTov to cfc Ar}kov voCrjiia ovvt&ttci rp 'Hpobory t6v Mvikov. It is now 
clear that the well-known fragments 87-8 xaip\ 2> OeobpAra k.t.A. which have been 
referred to this Cean paean (Schneider, Pind. Fragm. p. 29 ; so Schroeder) have 
no connexion with it. On the other hand the conjecture of Dissen and Fennell 
that the poem was sung at the temple of Apollo at Carthaea is corroborated by 
the allusion in 1. 13. The central idea is the virtue of contentment with a simple 
life like that of the Ceans in their rocky island, which was nevertheless celebrated 
as the home of athletes and poets. This lesson finds further illustration in the 
stories of Melampus (11. 28 sqq.) and of the local hero Euxantius (11. 35 sqq.), in 


the narrative of which some novel points emerge (see commentary). An interest- 
ing coincidence occurs with a quotation found in a corrupt form in Plutarch 
(11. 50 sqq.). 

The poem consisted of sixty-two verses divided into two systems, the strophe 
containing ten, and the epode, which as in II ends with a refrain, eleven lines. 
Two consecutive columns out of five are well preserved, but the remaining three 
are too severely damaged for continuous restoration. The metre is logaoedic. 


W U- WW — \J \J — w — 

w — — \J \J — w Q I 

vy — — WWW — • — , 

UWW- — WWW — ^ W w I 

5 „_ w ww-vw-wO[|] 

wv ^ — w — — WW — ^*— ■, 

— O — w w — , 

— WW — — WW — , 

IO WW— WW — WW — w — 


^ — WW— WW — w w, 

— — \j — WWW — WW — 

w — • w — w — 

w w - w * (sylL anceps ?) 

5 — — w w f — —J w w — w w — 

ww-ww-ww-w* (sylL anceps ?) 

w — w — w — — ww — ww — w^- 

— www — w— — w — 
w — ^ w w w — — — — 

IO WWW— — WW — w — 
v^ — w — — WW — ^ 

V. To Delos is also dedicated the next paean, the shortest and simplest 
in structure in the collection. Like 01. xiv, Pyth. vi, xii, &c. it consists of 
strophes only ; there were eight short stanzas in dactyloepitritic metre, each 
commencing with the invocation ItjU Aa\i "AttoWop. The first six of these have 
almost entirely disappeared, and no sense can be gleaned until the thirty-sixth 
line is reached, from which point to the end there is no lacuna. The topic here 

c % 


is the spread of the Ionian folk over Euboea, the Sporades, and Delos ; and 
very likely the Ionians were the principal subject throughout. Perhaps the ode 
was written for the Athenians. 

\j — \j \j — o \j — — 

— w — w w — w w — ^ I 

— \J \J — \u \J — — 
5 — \*t \j — \j \j — , 

-w w-u w 

VI. Paean VI is inscribed c For the Delphians, to Pytho,' and was composed 
for performance at the Theoxenia (11. 6i-a), one of the three principal festivals in 
the Delphic calendar. Like its predecessors this long ode has sustained con- 
siderable damage ; three columns have disappeared entirely, two more are 
hopelessly mutilated, and another is very imperfect. Still even with these deduc- 
tions about half of the 183 lines are complete or easily restored. The first 
eighteen, after which there is a gap, belong to an extremely graceful exordium, the 
commencement of which was already familiar in a citation by Aristides, though 
its classification was a matter of doubt ; Schroeder puts it in the Prosodia. The 
body of the paean (11. 74-1 %o) is occupied with a sketch of the fate of Troy and 
the subsequent fortunes of Neoptolemus, including the passage, already partly 
known from a quotation, which offended the susceptibilities of the Aeginetans 
(cf. notes on 11. 11 7-9 and 123), and to which reference is made in the seventh 
Nemean. Pindar there repeats, in language very similar to that used in this 
paean, his version of the story of Neoptolemus' death (cf. 11. 104-20 with Netn. 
vii. 35-43)) and protests that he had no intention of disparaging the Aeacid hero 
(Netn. vii. 64 sqq., 103 sqq.). The date of our paean is therefore prior to 
B.C. 461, the year of the victory which Netn. vii celebrates. From Neoptolemus 
the poet turns with characteristic suddenness to the praises of Aegina and the 
myth of the bride of Zeus whose name the island bore ; and here the thread 
is lost. 

The poem contains three systems, of which the strophe consists of twenty-one 
and the epode of nineteen verses with logaoedic rhythm. 

Strophe Epode 

UW — U — U — U-W — f — \J \J — w — W — \J \J 

WU- W — — --W-WV/-W-- 

— W — \J \J •— , \J \J KJ — WW — — WW — — 


— w — w — w — ^1 — _ _ v^ w — 

5 — w w — w °"~| 5 — w w w — w w — — 

W — ^ .- _ w w — w— — w — ww — — W — WW — w 

WWWWWW — WW— — — W — WW — www 

WWWW— — WW— — WW — WW — WW — WW 

— WW W — WW ^^ Q* — w — w w — 

IO Q- W — WW— w , low — W — WW — 

w — w w — w — ^ w — — W — WW— WW, 

— WWWW — — WW — WW — — , — W— W — WW — WW ^4 — . 

— ww — ww— |ww— , — WW — w — ^ 
^WW — WW— WW, — ^^ — w w — w, 

15 ww — ww— , 15— w — WW 

www w — I W W — W — — W — WW — w ^ 

W — W Q* — w — ww^l — WWWWW — — W — WW — ^ 

wwww— w — w— , w— w — W— WW— — w, 

w — W W W W Q» — w — WW — 

JO — w — w — www 

— ww — w — W " 

VII. Of the seventh paean the commencement is preserved in a mutilated 
condition, but after the eighteenth line the connexion is broken, and it is doubtful, 
as we have said, whether the fragments grouped under B belong to VII or 
to another poem or poems. In Fr. 16, where there are some complete lines 
at the bottom of a column, Pindar speaks of his art and describes himself 
as inspired to walk in the way of his predecessors, among whom he perhaps 
refers especially to Homer. Fr. 19, which may have followed close after, also 
has some well-preserved lines in the lower part of the second column, where the 
myth of Asteria the sister of Leto is related. The rest of A-B consists of small 
scattered fragments. 

VIII. At Fr. 82, the first of C, we again arrive at a connected passage 
of sixteen more or less complete consecutive verses which, whatever the relation 
of C-D to A-B, a question to be considered immediately, no doubt belonged to 
a poem different from any that have preceded. The first column of this fragment 
appears from the remains of the scholia to have contained a reference to the story 
of Erginus, who in revenge for the murder of his father exacted a tribute from 
Thebes and was eventually slain by Heracles. Before the beginning of the next 
column, however, a widely different subject has been reached. Troy is now the 
scene, where Cassandra, on the departure of Paris in quest of Helen, prophesies 


the impending doom presaged by the well-known dream of Hecuba. The scheme 
of the lines is appended : — 

• • • • 

V. — w w w [— w — 

— WW — w w w w — , 

— — — www — — ^ 

— ^ W w w [— W — , 

UW^U V- W — [w W — 

W — W — W — [— 

„„ [ 

-u- w u [— 

w — w w w — [w w 

w — — w w w — [w 

^ v^ — — [w w — I 

— w — — — www [w — 

[ ] — ww — w[w — 
[ ]V W 

• • • • • 

Most of the other fragments of C may well belong to the same poem. 
'Ak4£avb\pos (?) is mentioned in Fr. 96 ; but the only other piece which has 
any complete lines is Fr. 84, which gives the beginning of a speech of a person 
whose identity is unknown. 

IX. D is more valuable, for in one small piece there is a coincidence with 
the well known Pindaric fragment on the occasion of an eclipse of the sun — 
'AktU icktov k.t.X.— and a practically complete column gives most of a subsequent 
strophe and antistrophe from the same ode, thus establishing the metre and 
therewith the text of the extant fragment. In the later section the poet passes 
to the subject of the Theban seer Tenerus, son of Apollo and the nymph Melia ; 
the poem was evidently written for Thebes. The strophe consists of ten logaoedic 
verses ; of the epode there is no clear trace beyond the one line already known. 



w — W— — WW — w^ 

*- — — W^ — WW — WW 


5 W-V/W-V/V.-WV/- I 

Q \J \J — \J \J \J ^ 

w \J \J — w 

10 v-»o — w — 


' — \J • 

Some bf the minor fragments of D are no doubt also to be assigned to IX ; but 
the only pieces of any size, Frs. 139-31, containing parts of two consecutive 
columns, are proved by the metre to belong to a different ode. 

It remains to be considered whether the poems represented in C-D are 
to be ranked, as those in A (with which B is naturally connected) undoubtedly 
are, as paeans. External evidence is inconclusive, for though there i& a change 
of scribe at C the continuity of the sections is in a measure preserved, as has 
been explained above, by the recto and part of the scholia, as well as by the 
similar height of the papyrus and the columns of writing. The contents of 
the fragments must therefore be the main guide ; and here it must be admitted 
that in certain respects C-D appear to be peculiar. There is no sign in these 
sections of Irj or vatdv ; and though the importance of this argument a silentio 
might easily be exaggerated, the fragments are sufficiently extensive to make the 
absence of those characteristic words remarkable. Secondly, it is curious to what 
an extent C-D arc concerned with seers and soothsaying ; see Fr. 82 throughout, 
Fr. 84. 10 sqq., Fr. 128 (Tenerus), Fr. 131. ao-2, and Fr. 139. There is a refer- 
ence to an oracle in II. 73 ; but here such subjects almost monopolize the field. 
If however these poems are not paeans, what are they ? Boeckh assigned the 
fragment on the eclipse of the sun to the 9f tvopyj\\kaja on the strength of the 
passage prefacing the quotation in Dionys. Hal. de Demosth. diet. c. 7 ravra 
(sc certain passages from Plato's Phaedrus) • . . ei X&pot, fUXt) tal jbvOixovs (Sorop ol 
hiOipayLpoi kclI tcl VTropxVf J - aTa y r <"? Tiivbdpov irov/jixairiv ioucivai b6faev hv rols ei? rbv 
tjXlov €lfnjixivois. Hence Boeckh infers that the fragment must either come from 
a dithyramb or a hyporcheme, and that, since there is nothing Dionysiac in it, the 
latter must be the right category — a conclusion accepted by Schroeder. In 
favour of this classification may now be set the consideration that the paeans 
and hyporchemes were closely connected ; cf. Menander Rhet. de Encom. p. 27 
robs pep yap (t(*v ifxvtov) cis 'AirdAAcoi/a iraLapas kclI \mop\rniara voplCo^v, tovs 8c clj 
Aiowjov biOvp&tifiovs k.t.X. On the other hand Boeckh's argument that the men- 


tion by Dionysius of bMpapPoi and vitopyjuuiTa limits the choice to one or other 
of those classes is unconvincing. Since the fragment cannot be included in both 
it need not necessarily belong to either; if Dionysius meant to imply that 
it came from a hyporcheme why did he go out of his way to mention dithyrambs ? 
Boeckh further considers that the metre is well adapted to dancing, and therefore 
favours a hyporcheme ; but this argument is counterbalanced by the apparent 
unsuitability of the predominant themes of C-D to an orchestic accompani- 
ment. There is moreover another class of Pindar's works to which the paeans 
stood in close relation, and whose claims should be considered, namely the 
Trpoa6bia, — witness the passage already cited (p. n)from Proclus: *caraxpT/<mic«s 
hi kclI ra vpoaobia nvh vaiavas ktyov<ru>. It is noticeable that the word irp)o<r6bt[ov 
is not improbably to be restored in a mutilated scholium in Fr. 108, though this 
of course no more justifies the inference that the odes were vpoaMia than the 
occurrence of ba<t>vrf L <t>optic6v in Fr. 107 authorizes us to hold that they were ba<f>vr)- 
<f>optK<L That references to the Theban ba<t>mj<f>opCa should be found in both 
C and D (Frs. 107 and 129-31, notes) is not surprising if VIII as well as IX had 
a Theban setting; there is an allusion to the same festival in I, which is 
doubtless a paean. The ba<t>vJi<t>opuc&, like the mp$4v€ta of which they were 
a subdivision, were designed for a female chorus (cf. 659), of which there is 
no trace in these fragments, while the masculine participle in the gloss on IX. 36 
points in a contrary direction. 

On the whole, though it remains questionable whether a distinction should 
not be drawn between the contents of A-B and C-D, the evidence hardly seems 

A. Col. i (Fr. 1). 

npivoSvvrjpdyrjpaoagl ]o\€iv 

irpivTi<r€vOv/ua laKiafcroo 
voTjfidKOTOvi7r[.]fiiTpai8toi/ WPP"* 


5 [.]t]ir]in)i'07ravTc\r]<rwiairroo' 
[. . . .]iirnovaoTv6r)fia<reirr]\6ov 
[. . . ,]Kwi8aiTa<pl\}iO'loT€<f>avoi'ayovT€<r' 
[• .}r8t\ao)vycvcav8apovtptnTOi 
10 [. typovoaavOtaivtwofiiaa* 


sufficient to justify their definite attribution to different classes, still less for 
determining how the second class should be named. 

Regret for the loss of so much of Pindar's work is undoubtedly intensified by 
the discovery of this papyrus. In spite of their mutilated condition the new 
poems display merit of a very high order, though they may not rank among the 
best efforts of the poet's genius. The long ode to Delphi (VI), in particular, is 
remarkably fine. Its extremely graceful exordium approaches the easier manner 
of the Oxyrhynchus Partheneion (659) ; but in general the style is more akin to 
that of the Epinicia, though, as V shows, the metrical structure of the Paeans 
was sometimes not less simple than that of the Partheneia. Mythical themes 
are frequent, as they no doubt were in all Pindar's poetry, and they would 
of course be prominent in compositions of this class ; but the other points in 
Eustathius' criticism quoted above (p. 11), that in comparison with the 
Epinician poems the rest of the poet's work was inferior in common interest and 
in clearness, are not justified by what is now known of the Partheneia and the 

In the reconstruction and elucidation of this papyrus we owe much to 
Prof. Blass, whose knowledge and ingenuity were perhaps never more con- 
spicuous than in dealing with fragments of lyric poetry. The commentary 
unfortunately could not have the benefit of his revision, but the proof-sheets have 
been submitted to Prof. J. B. Bury, to whom we are indebted for a number 
of valuable criticisms and suggestions. 

I. [8HBAI0IX). 

irpiv dSwrjph yrjpa.09 a[\e8bu /zjoAco' 

itplv T19 tvOvpiq, <TKia{tTa> 

v6t]jjl &kotov €7r[i] fiirpa, ISwy iirrpU*. 

Svvapuv oIk6$€tov. 
5 [t]*i *5i *$ v & 7rayT€\)j9 hiavrbs 

r Ilpa[i] T€ Btptyovot 

[<f>CX\unrov i<rrv Grjfias kirrj\6ov 

[AttSX^covi Satra <f>i\r}<TioT€<f>avov dfyoprc?* 

[rAJf B\ Xa&v yeycAi/ Sapbu kpiirroi 
10 [<r£\<f>popo9 ivOeaw tvvojiias. 


. .]oo-6povia<ra/38T]p€xa\KoOcopa£ fapanoa- [ 

.]ci6avo*T€7ral ^^UwtVx^^»P-^«»«*[ 

•i *V \ a S«nvn|<n«via<nroXiat)[ 

,]prjvoya7r[.]KXa>va7r<ipTa(l>po IJ!^nwLr 

Col. ii (Fr. 2, Col. i). 
Opposite II. 26-7. 



Col. iii (Fr. 2, Col. ii). 

[ 13 letters ]••?[• •] ?w°Y?W 

[. .]ar«>a[ >a&> ' !■'•■• -I • Y • [-M-M 

25 )V< x d[.]SVciayy[. .]ava/in€\c[. .] 


KajiotegomaaxpovoacfnreSoo" «M 

ScfiaTep'ffiaacTCKovcfnrav rYT*«[ 

30 TroXcfAaxirvpnrXdyei cKivravoiaf 

X <rav€i&€Ti<rapK€<ov<l>i\our ^^w^oXr 

• SwatoumaT 

lio\6o<Tr}<ru^iav(f>€pH ««>* 

Katp&iKarafiaivtov 8waTaiopox9o?\[ 

35 ii;t€iroiawiyt6'ii'**a^ 




<rrp. a 1 [NatS\os Opovfas "Aftdtjpt \a\Ko66pa^ Mpoicot [ 

t [IIo<r]ei8dv6s t« irdi, worplov. 

8' 4<rti t+i *I«v(a« ir6An ti[ 


4 [irai]ai^a [&]a£a> 
5 [Jrj]pi]vov 'A-n[(fy\(x>va ndp r 'AQpdfifrcw w * t*woi fr 'A[0SV<*» «*t« «*•*- 

|MVOf [oJlfOV [ 

Lines 6-ao lost = str. 6-1 1, antistr. 1-9. 

Fr. a, Col. i, opposite 11. 26-7. 



n w w — w — w 

OoppoOcrav «[. . . 

[..... ].»7t.].[.x 


s w ariya [rrfyflc] vatm 
25 s 0[/o]aiV/a^ y[aZ]ay apTrtXS^ctydv rt kcu 
4 cAca/Mroy firj poi /xcya? t/m&v 
6 *<f/coi i£<m(<rco yjpSvos ?/iire Jo?. 

• vc(mo\i$ cljic parpb? 
t & parip ip&9 i(jri8)ov tptrav 

30 •no\€fi(<p irvpl irXaya- 

• <rav. el Si T19 ipKWv <f>tkoi$ 

10 i^Opoitri rpaxp? inravrtdfa 

11 p6)($os ^axr^iav <f>ipei 

12 KCLipip KOLTafiatvW. Bvva-nu 6 |&6x6oi 4 

35 is ftjie naidv, tijfiv naiav 

ttJv TacTotoav ir6Xiv . . 
Ilffxrfto *vt[»ca . . . 
{ktioxiv ol ^nhjvalot T4«. 

4dv 4v K«[py . . . 

n(ol) to^s iroX[<pXovt . 
Swarm 6 p[6x0oi • • • 
clt t£v Xo[tirw XP^ V0V • • • 


Col. iv (Fr. 3, Col. i). Plate II. 

[12 letters ]oi 

[. .]vaTvu.t| . [. . .]|Mivi^iXiiat|oavxov<nvi|ToX < i|)fc|Aa 

[ M f| ]aX/C&t^€T€lX<>^a^P«>«' *5* to" OfUKOVTttiiroTf 

r _ pavSuwrt ixo<nn|a u i ovqq k o 

I |i » J?/ XiaurawoTaur 

[ I x »> Iga-fiapyafiaifiay 

40 [ia „ ]'<T* Soiour 

[11 „ ]€tSavi€[. .]tvo<r 

[ „ » \T<»vyapavrop€vwv 

f 10€p€0-0ai Tovot||uiT[.><»w)ivourYOf8ia4>«p«iv 

L w M Jr r 8oicov<nvoiovnnoXoiieaTairoXf|tovTav 

f j 2 1 • (TtXcMT. Ta<mrovcivaYa9a<rvirOTi$CTaivuci|<r 

M tXmBcur ipiimroa-cvOfTfiirpooTVav 

45 III » JrilCV/Hriyi TViraX«viravTo8ain|Vf$o8©voiovtavTi 

T \uGLVl€l 660m iw{«v«<nv€ttVTf|i€©iinrwvirapa 

L >j » Ir ▼ Tvyx av «*<^vTp€i|;o|i€6aovrov<T 

[ 1 


[l8 „ ]aOV<lOTW cu|vPpuraiTOV<rtVTi|iiroXfi 

. . aTa<r^a{ovTao > 8ilC(utroXfcT•[.]ovTaa , 

[ ] iroXXu4iaXXovTOV9fin)Xv8a<rf«iTi9i 

50 [16 „ }orrb8€vPov ***** 

Col. v (Fr. 3, Col. ii). Plate II. 

\iaiT€Kaia[. .]oi 

CyK€l/l€V<{.]a€tO<i\\€llliL\a act 


55 rj8fl<j>0ovo<roi\€TCU oiavovKfrttf. ]o40ovcur&u 

. " A yvovfanrniftf. . . .lofavovroyaXXov 

TtoVTrahaurpoVavovTw s«cai™$pt ]<j*!ky?rofi 

XPv8av8paTOK€V<Tl<l>€fKl9> 8fi j leVrnavBpfUMrtv^Yn^^ 

_JMd4~m*u>- I- ••• ; ; ; JS&jSSEfiS 

roc<n/i^roXe/£aMicri7(j'a/i[. ... ] 

60 x6oyano\u8a)povoX[ ] 

•r V" 
€VKaT*6riKavnzpava[ ] 

iratovonvaiyjiaTai^ ]o* 

£a0€a<rr/x>0o{raAAa[ .] . [.]p[. .TyaO»€KpXi|OfvTw 

w/ _ _ OKVOuco[.JvT[.]ownX0ov 
€W€7T€<r€H0ipa'T\aPT{.]y |*vv©V|*[ ]ucrfK0aXov 

65 8'irr«TaO€ot<rvveT€\c<r<ra[. . . .]. tw*** 

viro|Uivav[ ] 

Oi0fOiTfXo[ ] 









— w — w w — ] <iA<rp & Ttt^or dv8p&v (*A-)«o» <M»(v)^8|»ot«» t$ '*6n> 


[www- w]pa # pdpvapai phv 
[ — ww Sf6\ir 

[ w no<r]etSdvic[u y)evo9 [iTnrcov w ^ 

tS>v yhp dvTOfiiynv 
[w w w — w] <pip€<rdai 

[ ww-] <reXas 

[- w — no]TiKvpafl 

[ w w]r pavUi +0ov«t. 

[w w — w — — 1 

OOV SClCf TfCxOt (fl|ft9T0V l| 



rd v6i)pa tfoWVro- 4v ott y*P Bta^lpiiv 

8onototv ol AvTbraAot icard ir6Af |iov iuO- 

Ta Jmrovftv d/yaftdt farorttfrai v(ict|S 

JAwloat. 41 || tinrot cfifcrtt iroos r(^v) t(Av) Av- 

TVirdXttv iravTo&ain\v fyofov, otov 4dv t« 

irt(fu»a\v 4dv ti |M0* tinrwv irapa- 

TVYxAvwnv Tp«|r6|M0o afroto 

[- w -v-»w-^-w A]ail> aOTCOJ/ ftt| iffipiow. ro\f% 4v rf| «6Xft 

r . . , areurw^ovTOf 84 nal woXiT«fv]ovTo« 

la - * " ^ -J iroAA* ii&XAov tox* 4iH|Avdat 4irvr(fc(a*u) 

[w w w - w w]0l- Ti tf €$0OV- Av * 4tlj "- 


Xta re *ai a[$]or 

€yjc€i7i€fo[i/] a/c2 0<£AAe* paXaKals c[iJ]&a4r] 

/ca2 rd /iii> SiSfrrw 

#€&• [<$ 4]' €x^[p]^ vofoais 

if8rj <f>06vO9 ot%€T<U otov ofcin oTct ft|OL]t +6ov«io4ai 

rw ndXcu irpodavSvrw %\ ^Mpi^ l£™ yZ£ 

Xpi) 8 dvSpa TOK€V<ri{v) <f>ip*iv 

f}a6v8o£ov aTaav. 

toI civ noXipw KTi\<r6.p\f.voi 

\66va noXvSoopov, SX[/3ov 

7 *Ap(l<rrapxot?). 
hKdTiOrjKav nkpav d[yp(a>v] IlaiSv&v 

al^fiarav [t€ Xrpvpovias yajy 

CaQias rpotbov- dfAAa [8 dyoiad rot (?) tjirfflp to]v *a*o infikiflbm 

, , ~ v , r 1 °* tvouco[0]vT[e]t 4irf|X9ov 

€7TeirC(T€ poipa* rXdvi\C^/ <d>|iwo4t[«voi ro^t licpaAov- 

^iroiMivdvFT«0V ] 

ol &ol T»Xo[0<nv. ] 

t(Av) Yovtov ^|i[Ov r(dv) «p]ofov6vruv dAA' ov- 


Set [tovi dT]0A(oii) rf|(i) dv8pc(at 4nfioyf|<rai 
[<rvp.$loo]v<ny irp[d]t ro^(t) piX- 

Xojvra(f) iroMpovt ii yhowro. 



Col. vi (Fr. 3, Coi. Hi). 
€vayopiai<n^y§<p\€yu • 

70 QvWwtrpojrapOlOtP' TOiroo-Mvaffeiipoia' 

ir\ienaiavvt\ivtrauiv ™ -1*?*™*°* 


I [.]K\afiiv7roTafia>i<rxcSovfio\ovTa<pvp<r€i ir . [ 

j fJ<UOl<r<rW€VT€<riV 8vvai»*vp<rtia*OKriv< 

a> / 07\)iutT*po<TaTpaTO<rr'yovii[ 

75 TrbTiiroXworpaTovevSc/iriPotr cv8< 


ayy*Kkt$€<fmviK(m€{a\6 irpoiXrytvT'iuXXt 

^ > , TOurn|MTfpour 


TOVcQtXoPTayWtaQaf aoyi|0€AiVYtvfa$a[ 

80 [tyvSavri.lp/Kviiaxavw 


100 [. . 


10s [. . 


Col. vii lost. 

Col. viii (Fr. 4, Col. i). 
.]iat<nrc[. ,]ai<rvyftij\oua6iLpiLS[. . .)&*> 
•]k<&it . [. ^aiarafieycuxopov 
J]iro8av[. .]0€voixg\ 
•yccXaJ[. . ,}riy\vKvi>av8ai 

•K € M ]'• J?H r% »*V 

J\uk\€o[ ]fX a t , l l,f 

.]qp€Kaur7[. . . ^Ttvoydpfiav 

•]xat7roXc[.]0i>tTcXet{ ] ovTO<nuuo( 

)»Lirpol3i[]a,{oi<r' wMar^m[ 





rtwot ow(TOt) *v 'AfJMjpott 
m * r \]Afi+vXXov. 

• 6 Si kclXSv ti iroprj[o]ais 
a cvayoptaiaiv ^Acyer 

10 kwois 8* bniprarov ij\0€ (piyyo? 
n dfira 8u<rji€via>v MeXap- 
70 is 0uAAot/ irporrdpoiOw. 

it tiyiV iraidv, irjfa naiav M[iX> 

14 $J flTJlTOT* \tl7T0l. 

<rr P* y' 1 [«S]AArf /ay TTorafiQ <r\€8bv poXSvra <f>6p<ru 
*Paioh <ri>v irrvnv ^^^^ 
75 a irorJ 7roAi>i> orparSv tv Si firjvb? 

• npSrrov t6x*v i/iap* 

. oyy«AAe A ^vtK6n ( (a \6yov napOivos ^^^ ^ ^^ ^^ 
« <jJ/*€Kr>y 'EicdTa ■">*» <i^r<p««- 

7 rdf e0eAo>Ta ytviaOai- 4v(tI twO) tv ijfcXtv t*»<H«fi. 


Wwrat +vp<r*. diroKimt [ 
A fyifapaf vrpaTdt «r(dv) yovl[wv 

Lines 81-95 lost = str. 9-11, antistr. 1-11, ep. 1. 

in. y' 


105 1 



[\J\e KoXiovri poXnal 

[IlfoSoy dp €#o8/iov &n<f>i re IIap[ya<ra]iai? 

n({rp]ai9 fcfaXats Qaph J[€\<f>]coy 

[i\i\K&m[8€]s lord/icvai yppbv 

[r<vxy\tro8a i\apfiivoi yak- 

[tc(f] K€\a8[€vv]ri yXvicdv av8a 

[Xcbv cJiJ/cAla [Kpcuvocty \dpiy, 
[*Af}8]Tfp€ 9 Kal <rr[paTbv) hntoy&ppav 
[-]if noXt[p)p reAct/- oOtob koI o[ 

[rat]f npof3t[P\£Cois. fa* r^ vtycj. 

[/174c iraidy, l\fj'fa iraidtv 
[81 fifyroTC Xcflproi. 


[. ] . vay\ao 

[ yatX a P lTf l] 

Fragment of Col. vii (?). 

Fr.5- • • • 



5 l«pa[ 


Col. ix (Fr. 4, Col. ii). 


ICI . [. .}o{[ 

5 ay\cuavr[ 

(3&/JL0V [ 

io X okt<ok[ 
xp^qOw [ 

5 columns lost. 

Col. xv (Fr. 6). 



WvOVTtoV ijavo&oovrrovwwnrw 


Fr.5- • • • 






[ ] . v dyXao- 

[ yai Xdpire\si\ 


l€l . [. .]0([ 

5 dyXaiav t[ 


vahv c[ 

zeal 6v6^yra 

fitojibv [ 
10 &cr& k[ 

inlrMtv [ 

doiSats kv €wrXc[/C€<n <fxx>vf /tcAi- 

yrfpi/t, r[J]^ & XP 1 *^ 

<8pioi> irori yp6vov [ 
15 #€& 0* iXucdpirvrfps HcXdvas, dvUa (?) 

lAa^e^? dv dfifipo7[oy KtXevdov, dp<f>l 81 XdjinuQ) 

<f>a€vvb$ alOrjp. 

Lines 18-99 lost 

]v <r0ivo9 Uphv 
Xa\K]ioir ab\&v &p<f>hv 

] 6v6vTfOV *j dvdSoait to3 icairvofl. 



]. [....].v 
]oAa7f. . .] 
100 ]t/ . tjj;[ ]• 




]aiKG)V€8v<£><r€TCU' ooto a vpvi|<H)[ 

5 ] . 8€V€<ov8vyarm>T€pov 

Col. xvi (Fr. 7, Col. i). 

[ \aK<iTcnra<Tavo8ov 

[ ]crv\iavK€<&i 

[ '•] 

[ ] 

io [ ]a\\€rar 

[ ]v\povoyoppy€i 

[ ]8a\ovayiiK\*a 

[ ])(apt<rrKdpOai wo\[ ]^ri)*irfVTairaX«OTri|ff[. .] 

[ "\xpva>TovoT€vovxOovo<r 

15 [. ]yw{Ja{Jv\<Dvo<rafiCL\jrofiar 

[ ]<EX€iy7T€8uDV 

[ ]ov6e<ov 

[ •] 

[ ]PT 

20 [ tyiyOvaw 

Col. xvii (Fr. 7, Col. 11). 
rjTOtKai€ya>o[. . .ykovvaia>v8id[ 
(Wai>t<m>'yivoixrK{.]/ia[.}$ treat 

15 letters] . . . ova . . iiiptOfofai 

Jftll ~ 



]. [....].» 

]a\ai[. . .] 

IOO ]l/ . TTJ' 



arp. a'i [v> w - w w - w w] *Aprrt\Liv % 

, [ yj v \j]vaojJLai 

a [ w w w]oy avtidv 

4 [w w w w w yVv\xiK&V tivaXTtTai* -otto. Av(tI t©0) tyvi|$f|[<rtTai. 

5 [w - w ] • ^ iircwv 8vvar<&T€pov 

6 [ w w]a Kark iraaav iSbv 

7 [w w - w - ii\<ru\tav Kia> 

I [- w - u u -] 

9 [— WW — — WW— J 

10 [ww-ww-ww /9]aAXcTar 
air. a 1 [\j w - w w — ]i/ \p6vov 6pvv€i 
« [w - w -] JaAoj/ ayagXca 

8 [w — w — ow] Xdpiar KdpOai- ir6X[it afrnj] p(a -rt|t ir«VTOir6Af«t rf|f [K4(«»).] 
« [a /iii> dXa0ca>? cXa]x&'«>Toi> aripvov \0ov6s, 

15 s[j/xa>? y€ //A*' otfroi] i>«> Ba{Jv\&vo$ d/iu^o/iav 

e [ ww — \j](\€IV ire&W' [ 1 . . . owr . . |*VJ T(0«90at 

, ■> * ~ L J* irt8U»v 4irl ffiv Wjf<r]wv 

7 [w w — w w wjOf 0€O>I' [ ] 

• [- - w w -] 

1 [— w w — — w wlpiy 

20 10 [w w - w w - w w]y l^Ovaiv 

iir. a 1 ^ toi jca2 iya> a[K6ir]€Xov vaiwv 8ia- 
s yiyvdxTKOfiat fikv apcra?? diOXoav 
i'EWavfow ytyv<x><rK[o]/ia[i] Si Kal 

D 2 


25 [?]i*am&a[. . .]ovapc[, ,]a<f>€p€i 

Pio8a>povafia\aviaaaKoa' &opr\\ La ™ i P u *' 
(£vi7nr6<r€ifiiKcul3ovi>ofJuao'a8a€OT€poa p n g Q Q \ t j # 

X a\\oy€/i€\dpiro<rovKTi$€\w [ fcv . . [n letters] . t[. ...].[.] . 

% r na r 1 «v 1 t 36 letters ]«&[•• 

Xi7ro)i/7raT/)[.Jtfa^o[. .JgXf[. -] a Py €l [ », „ my*™ 

30 d€/x€^ocro([.]^07roXoi/y€pa<r 
i imiiafeiraf. . . .1 


Kaurvvytvu av8pi<p{ 
OT€p£ai m pcn[. .]a>i/$€[ 
35 > €Ka<r€oira>i''Aoyo[. . .] . KTo<r€v£av[ 
€7rait/€cra[. . . .]a>v/iaiop€v<wo<rava[ 

Col. xviii (Fr. 8, Col. ii). 
awapxuv'wo\ta>v8 cKarbvirtStyti^ 
/JL€poa€{J8o/Jiov7rao'i<f{.]a<rvi k<uv»o{ 
[. .jarrrcpao-o covet 

40 7T€y<T(piy'Tp€(OTOl7roXepLOV 


X x6ovaT6nroT€KaioTpaTova6poov 



45 Ttpa\nrovT*<TKaio\ovoiKov€V€pK€a' 


p€yavaXXo6iK\apoy€\d>XT av 

fJLOt[. . .]<r€/17T€doi'€l 

50 r)K€y€a<Pp7]PKV7Tapia TT)VicpT|TT|V«ir«uroAAaMictt[ 

ft . A „ irapunrofyivovnu 

> aovtaotvdjiovTrtpioaiov 

Col. xix (Fr. 9, Col. 1). 

*2 ]8orcu0a[ 


4 fjioiaay irapi)^[v\ d\iv 

25 b ^ Kat ti diQ)[vv<r]ov dpc[vp]a <f>ip€t 

« fiiSSwpov dpayavtas &kos. 86pi)|ui 1$ £(?. 

7 dvunrS? ci/it teal f&ovvoplas dSaiarcpos' 

a d\\' 8 yc MiXapiros ovk ijOeXw [ >v . . [n letters] . t[ ] . [.] . 

>% r/16 r 1 r<» 1 *j t 26 letters ]«!*[•• 

t aittqdv irarp[i]oa pc[va>]PX*[ 1 *'] Apya [ „ „ ] *Ap«y 

30 10 Otpwos oS\oi\voir6\ov ylpas. 

11 Irj trj <ft Uira[tdv.] 
<rrp. {¥ 1 rb 8k oiKoGt[v\ &<rrv Ka[l dXuces 

s *a2 crvyyivei dvBpl 0[iX' axrrc jcai 

s arip^ar pai\aOpnv S\ [pdicap dvSp&y 
35 4 ixits iSvrw \6yc[v aV]a#cros Ev£clp[tiov 

6 €iralvc<r, <b[\ik]a>i> pcuopivw 8y iva[(v€TO 

% auTapxciv, irokfov S Ikoltqv ir€8i)(€t[p 

7 pipos ifiSopov IIaat<p[<£]as i//[of]- k<uv«mt[ 

. «(„)• Tipas g ihv J- ™ ° [ - • • ] • • [H • [ 

40 9 jriv <r<f>r rpico roi noXepov 

10 Aii$ 'EvvoaiSav T€ Pap[H]fCTV7rov. 
dvr. ft 1 \06va rot irore teal arparbv dOpSov 

s 7r£p\jrav xepavvcp Tpi68ovTt T€ 

s h rbv (&a6i)v Tdprapov, kpdv pa- 
45 * T *P a A*ir&T€S Kal 8\ov oIkov tvtpieia' 

5 <firara ttXovtov irup&v paicdpcov r iiri\dpiov 

e TtOpbv Ti\£\[nrav Iprjpov diraxrdpcvos 

7 piyav &W0O1 Kkapov i\m> . Xiav 

s pot, [7rS]? ipircSov cf- 

50 9 17 JC€I> J 2a 0pV KVirdpia- t*v KpT>n|v iW iroAAal foci [kv 

v o\ \ a ••• iripuraot Y^YvovTOi. 

10 <rov, ta o€ vopov irtpioaiov. 

in. $ 1 [ipol tf IXiyov SiSorat, Odpvos Spv6s- ««]*>™ ^rf™ 
53 t [o# irtvOiw S i\a\ov % oi ara<ria>v. ] k&xo[v 


4 lines lost. 
58 y epi J mStovw* 


6 ]pnmvtavnovm[. . .] . njvMov 

}auri)vav K«Of> .[...] 

Fr. 10 7°(X I UU *° Tl lM!- •] • '•"•'I 

[.]i;ti^ The rest blank. 


Col. xx (Fr. 9, Col. ii). 


10 #c[ 


• • • 
Col. xxi (Fr. ii, Col. i). 

ii lines lost 


35 ]awoafc)vau»v 



Lines 54-7 lost=ep. 3-6. 

t [w — w — -w v>w — ww— ] 9T€/>i Zi|(v68oTot) k«8vov fy»\ 

§[— WWW — W — — W— ] 

60 9 [w — ^ w w w Ttvj]s rflv Eufarriov ira[£8t»]v tV K«ov 


10 [www ww — w — 

n[t]fj Irj [<ft ieircu&v. 

htT<picii<7civ. iff^p . r a 1 

<1>(t< tow?) oTxoamu. irU(i) Ti|X[. .] . o( ) 'Ovtit[ 

V. [ilj JHilOlV]. 

arp. a 1 AJie J[<£A*' "AwoWov 
3 lines lost. 


0T/>. /F 

<jt/>. y' 


arp. y 


[— w w — w w — ] 

(J^— w w — w w — — 

t\ffl€ J<£Xl' i47T0XX0^' 

f[w w — w w — — 

<y[— w — — — WW — WW — — 

k[— ww — ww . 

[— w w — w w — ] 

XT— WW — WW — — 

(jjce Adki "AiroXkov 

t{— w w — w w — — 

([— W — WW — WW — — ]) 

a?r[w w — w w — 
^JaX[w w — ww — 
ow o[w w — w w — — 
(/>$& J[<£X(' ^n-oXXoir 

[— w w — w w — — ] 

[— w ww — ww — — ]y Jpfavait . 

Lines 22-32 = str. 8' 4-6, str. c' 1-6, str. </ 1-2. 

[— w ww — ww — ]a 

[— WW — WW ] 

[— w w — .w w EH- ] aird 'A0T)va(«v 



CoLxxii (Fr. n,Col. ii). 
^ BoiaviXovKcuhaaaav 

3 n r 

J trjieSaXiairoXXov 

Kai<rjTopaoa<r(p%p€firj\ov<r *o\vt*»a*kov<r 
€KTi<rawao-ovo"cpucv8iaT taypv 
40 Sa\ov€7r€io-<piva7ro\\a>i> 


£ aoTtpiao-Sc/UMroiKuv 

J iT)i€8a\ia7ro\\ov 

X XaTOOo-ivOd/jLeiraiSeo' 

-a > a a iravBwpovcpiX 

45 evpcveiocgaarVevocotOepairovTa aucXov 


£. dvoaayaKX^ocrofKpdi' .[..].[.. .]°TH>yyv 

irpoaoXvpmou8io<r<r€Xpi^. .]a 



**H°£ KXvTopavTiirvOot 

Col. xxiii (Fr. 11, Col. iii). Plate I. 



X aot8i/i'0'V7ri€pi8a>y7rpo<paTay 
ipx v8aTiyapemxa\KoirvXm «m8«ixaXK»vX€WT«vxa[ 

1 T TOvtiriTQ0iXaAKoirv\wi[.]8aTi 

op<f>avovav8pa>vxopsv<rio<rriX0ov +o+ov 

10 x CTaiaapaxaviavq[. ]c£a>v <uf«»v 

TC0l<TlV€/iaiOTCTlll[.]l<r Karaicoiy[.>€ f Mu<m^€Xf|€vynv T tm8t| 

TfTopi8€(piXmTraiaraT€naT€piK€8yat XovoncvrHio™ 

Kai0aXiavTpb<poyaXao<ra kXvtovoAowt 

1 5 7ToXX(OVO(T»TO0LXaTot8dv 


e (ioiav sXov Kal ivaavav 
arp. { 1 Irfu AdXi "AiroXXov 

2 KCLI OTTOpdSaS (p€pCfJLrj\0VS wokvp&kovs (-/iqAovs). 

a €KTL<rav vdtrovs ipucvSea r i<r\ov 
40 4 AaXov, €7T€i <r<f>iv 'AirSXXw 

5 8&k€p 6 xpv<roK6pa$ 

• 'AoTtpia? Sipas oIkuv 
arp. rf 1 irjie AdXi "AnoWov 

1 AarSos tvOa pe TraiSes 
45 » *ip*v*l Si£a<r6e »6<p Otpdirovra n™^^?^") 
« vpirtpov KiXaStvva 
a airy ptXiydpvi irai- 

6 aj/oy ayajrXlo? <5//0a. •[..]•[•• ]<rnpovt 

VI. aea*oix eis nren. 

arp. a 1 I7pd? 'OXvpirhv A 169 crc, XP^l "*]* 
s kXvtS/uivti IIvOoT, 
s Xiaa-opat Xapfrccr- 

4 cr^y) T€ /cat <n>i> 'AQpoSira, 

e doiSipav IlupiStov 'trpw^drav. 

1 Man yap ktrl xaXKowuXy ^ M XQ x,cav Xcfcrov X a[<nia- 

. *%>„ *r brrtfar &&$££& ^JST 
9 6p<f>avhv duSp&y \op^6(nos rjX0ov +6+ov. 

10 eraiff dpayaviav <£[A]e£a>j> dl£«v. 

11 T€Or<T(y C//aty T€ Tl/[i[a]ry icaid koiv[o]€ cpais Tt|*(ais). IXc{cv |i4vt(oi) tvo 8ij- 

- «\./v ft / ft~ Xov6«Tl lvTt|iOf W. 

is fjTopi oi <piX<x> wai9 &T€ partpi Ktovp 
is it€i66/jl€vo9 Karifiav vreQdvwv 
14 Kal OaXiav rpo(f>bv dXcro? 'A- kXvt£v dXo-ot. 

15 irSXXcDvoSy t66i AarotSav 


irapa<TKiowTa/i€\iT[.]iicvai[ ] 
7ro5ticpoT€i5[ ]T [ ] 

Col. xxiv lost. 
(Line 30 had a cross in the left margin.) 

Col. xxv (Fr. 1 a, Col. i). 
Opposite 11. 5^-3. Opposite 11. 58-9. Opposite 1. 62. 

]TO<r6ccur ]v 

] , ctguirav ]povwi JnC^ 

]afl«a<mr<x7 ]ayrj 

) " 

Col. xxvi (Fr. 1 % y Col. ii). 
50 KatiroOevaOarf. ]/?£ aT ?[ 

X T<WTaO€OUri[.]€V 


X m0€(J><TO0Ol^.$UI'aTOJ/[.]' m[ 

(3poToi<ri8apaxavc[. . .]p€/t€j' 
55 irayraic^. . .]v€<f>€iovv [?.]*\a[ 
iraTptpvapoa[. .]aiT€ 
rovroi/€<rx€7(. . . .]fjiov 
KXvrivvvipci^ . -]$€/io[.] 

W.*f.[ 1- 

> y\<Waap&lT0GOG0T0Vy\vKVl\ ] aawrov 

60 aya>va\o£iaLKaTa{JavT€vpvi\ 

g > — 

Y dt/CTatya/MtyXaaa^rcpirawX [ ]•[••• •] | r r • w*XXa8a 


60[.]ocr€i/£ aroXt E 3 ' ■ J~H:->«~ 

XaSoaawtSeXtpav [ ". ', '. '. '. ' '. '. '. 1 .' .' gayaoxaifuxpt 

Col. xxvii (Fr. i», Col. ui, with Fr. 13). 

65 povo[ 



i6 Oapivh Atkty&v icSpai x$ov&s 6p<f>a\bv 
it iraph (TKiUvra pc\7i[6]p€vai 
\ur08l Kporic{vTi yav 

Lines 19-49 lost = str. 19-31, antistr. i-ai f ep. 1-7. 

Scholia on Col. xxv. 

] <rdf feds > !>xo 

] . fit anuv 5 ]po*¥ 

Td]t fcdt lirot ]avr) 

50 cm a b Kal noOev &0av\aT - \j \j df]p£aro. 
tTovra deoiat [jifiv 


lomOeiv co<f>oi{9] SvvarSv, m[fctv. 

11 fiporoi(Ti(y) 8 ipdyavd(y cfyipw 

if cEAAA irapOivoi yip foov (y€ y)[€]fio[i]<r«u 
55 i» ir&vra K^\ai]v€<f>€i obv [z>(r43or©f) [*]cA«[iK€^r. 

i« warpi Mvapoo\6v\<t re 

1. kAOtc' W ?pa[™] « MO Z(^3oto0 a^]*, . [ ] . 

17 yXwrcra piXiros Acmov y\vK\)v \jrpo\Uiv eh] **(** T0 *) **»•«• 

6oudy&va Ao£ta{i\ Karafidvr €vpvv 
i» kv 0€&v iwtp. 
orp. (? 1 OvtTcu yip cfcyXaas farip ITapeA- [ ].[... .>jt . -H^v *EXXdfta 

_ ,- - . % , ^ [ 1 **pl <*]tn|p(oi 

f Aaoo? aiT6 J(X0O)V [ ]av At Kai |&lxpi 

*ar 1 *> x [to^ vOv? 1 CKaorfolv frovs 

65 4 pod o[v - W - W 

• €v8[y \j — \j — — w — 

• 0tX^vs — — WW — w — ^ 
7 2JLpjp[i€ wv w - w w- 



70 Toiira\ 




Fr. 13, Col. i. 




75 8€orpa>ia[ 







(Fr. 13, Col. ii). 

80 <ri<oiS€fiaiO€oar' 




85 maroptpKoo'ayai 

<oi> 6 pacreicpoi'mTr eSacr air 
X Saradr cpifcXeuicaXcvcn oopwrrocApi^w 

aici'ayi7rroi/?7paiy[i6i'oo > ai{.]€/)€(5a)i'- 

oa , aT€iro\ia8i m v'poTrova>v atoooa 
90 SiiccpeyaXcDvSapSaviav 

€npaO€V€i/iii<l>v\(io'<r€vaffc{.]\[.]v a 


oKaiKopv<pa[. . .]*a£a>j> 

Col. xxix (Fr. 13, Col. iii). 
95 /jLa'irhpi8vyjnK6pjOi{. .]Xevai 


• rrpvra[vi w \j \j — 

70 9 toi tra\y w — \j \j 

10 XP^frMP 1 — v> v> — w 

11 \Tlv\6(ovS6\iv — \j 

11 Kai wore [\j \j \j \j — \j \j 

is Ildv6ob[$ - Aava&v 8re nat- ]«, 

75 14 tics Tpa>ta[\j \j - \j kj 
15 ^j/€y*C€[vy \j - Aiofirj- 
ie foa Trrfiy [Zrjvd? — w w — w — 
17 &y ifi(3a[\&v ibv iaye pdyas 
is II(£p[£]oy ^[#caj86Xoy {jpoTrj- 

80 19 <r&> $e/tai 0c6r 

lo'IX/ot; & 6fJK€i> &<f>ap 
ti 6-tyiTtpav &Xoo<ru>, 
dvr. ft 1 KvavonrXSicoio iraitia irovrtas kvv{v\ok6iuho. 
9 &irio$ (iiarav 
85 s iriarbv IpKos 'A)(ai- 

4 Sp dpaaei <p6v<p irtSdaraif 

5 <Wa r J?/>l£€ XtVKCoXtVO) ttpurrot to(0) *>£(«>. 
e AKvapTTTOv *Hpa pivot di{T]epei8<oi> 

7 fo-a T€ IloXidSr irpb nSvtov 9 K{pnnoip&)v(rp\) JWa. 
90 s & /C€ peydXcw AapSavlav 

1 iirpaO{o)v, el /it) <p<jXa<r<T€v 'An6[X]H[a>]v' 

10 v(<f^a{a)i $k xpvatoi? 'OXtipiroi- 

11 Kal Kopv<pa[i<ri]i> tfav 

upSpaifj dya[X}j€u Zed? 6 Oc&v <rK<mb? ov roA- 

95 » pa- ncpl 8 infnKSfup [*E]X€va 
U XW V &P* TLipyapov tvpi) [8\i~ 
u (a)oTco<raL aeXa? ai0opivo(v) 

Tirvp6$' €TT€l 8 dXKlfiOV VtKW [ty Ta[(fxp 

4 6 



ioo a\oar€7riKv/ia{iavT€o[.]\ 


105 aX\6vT€fiaT€pcn€iTd[,]c8yav[, . . .] 

€i8€y6vT€7raTpa>l'c[.]a€vapc[ ] 


X axcSovft. . .]fiapovfio\o<r<ri8aya[.]av 

IIO €£lK€T -Ot/J[.]^€/iOV(rc[. T .]«> 

.Vpoi[.] . . V 

3»* ' 

Col. xxx (Fr. 13, Col. iv). 

a{. .]crj[ ]€0<r- 

yc[. . .]i{. ,}rrpiapov 


115 [. . .]6oporra'iiT]fiiviv<f>pov€0'Ot[.]ov 
fi€vfJiov[.]fi<f>iiro\oio , 8€ 

[. . . .]a{0fl€V0VKTaV€lV Ifcravt^y^l ]*r 8iOR<uavi|ipirraii| 

[. . . .]vvvfJL€Tpancur)o -fifa* 

/ Mp* 4 ^ •]^ [']" /Hot™* 01 
>£< [. . .]/xaJcAvray€i'€Grcrida>pt€i 

' /«[.]&oi<ra[. •] Kra) ['] €KTtt * •[••]•• »rf yt*/*Tcu 

125 ^acro<r[.]5lO<r€X upw8to<r«^.]ipfc©t(.]sfai[.]ivi|i^ 


Col. xxxi (Fr. 13, Col. v, with Fr. 14). 



it iroXvar6v<p tiivro HqXcfda, 
100 ia aXbs iirl Kv/ia (3dvrcs [i}]X- 
i» Oov &yy€\c[i] inrlaa 
10 2Kvp60ev N[€]o7rr6\cp[ov 
n €vpv{3tav dyovT€S 9 
iir. ft* 1 ts Siiirepo-cv 'IXiov ir6X[iv 
105 s aXX' afcc parip iirura [K\*8vhv 
s tiStv, otirc 7rarp(otc[t]s iv dpc[vpais 

4 tmrovs Mvp/JLi86va>v 

5 x«X* OKop\^n]hv [jfyuXov iyt[ip*. 

...... .jOXUFttT. .1 . 

>pootj . . v. 

e crx€^ i[J To]fidpov MoXwnrtSa ya[T]av 
no ii£iKcr, oH[' d]vepovs 2[Xa0]ey 

s outfc tJj> [<E]vpv<f>apcTpav itcafioXov 

10 yt[pcuo\v [is] TLptapov 
11 n[p]bs ipKtiov tfvape flcopov i- 
115 it [Treplflop&ra, /*i£ /iii/ kifypov is o\p]ov 
i*[fi]rJT iirl yrjpas /£c- 
i4/i«/ jSioir [a]^0i7r6Xoiy 8k 

le [tflj/Mjafo/CCJ'OJ' *CTd|/(c)|/ Zfarftorot) *rrfw<r> «V 7p(^fT«) [rar]tV. St* Kal dvrjpi^ai fl 

120 17 [(h) rc/cftm d>[X<p yds trap 6ud>aXbv e&pvv. ^ xw*^ * fc-p*****" 
i§ [i»7 (i?7) re] iw /i€rpa iraiiyo- 7p(<tycra<) {9 13 T i. 
19 [*]bw, Irj [tc] j^6o[£.] 7p(a^«r«) [rj| If, re Wm. 
ar/>. y 1 [6vo]fxaK\vra y hcavi Ampul 

2 p[€)pioi<ra [wffyTto Ik rev . [. .] . . «p[ .> ^pfTOi. 

125 s y do-OS, [S\ Albs 'EX- l y* v At *« < E*[XM 0V [«> AI[y]£vii Sirov <rwfM6vTtt 

4 Xaviov <j>atvvbv dorpov. 


d8opirovcvva£op€Vct\\aoi8av Fr. T4, Col. i. 

poOiaStyoLihaKaTepeKr ? * J 

A *" . , irf 18 letters fty 

130 ir66tve\ap*<rvavirpvTaviv a w[ „ „ >nv€<r 

8ai/iovaKaiTav6i/ii£wovapc7[ ' ] J » $££* 



€vpv<{. .ypovovnai<r-v$aTi8[Jpaq[ 11 letters ^^V 
135 ttovij[. . JponpoOvpuvflaQvKoX [ ", JJ > 
TTo^af.] . petyaTonapOtvov 

> aiyivav'TOTCXp^a-eaia 

> €poa-€Kpv^aTayKo/^y€mx<opiop[ 
KaTd<rKiovya>TOvvfi€T€pov < 

140 > iyaX€\€CDy€iraiiPpoT<oif j 

Col. xxxii (Fr. 14, Col. ii). 


145 &o[ 



150 «>[ 



155 M 

Col. xxxiii lost. 

Col. xxxiv (Fr. 15, Col. i)- 
r ]j(o[. . . .]cfoo- »*«»* 

['• 3 

[• 1 



140 i 


ASopnov (vvd£oji€v, d\\' doiSav 




*-r[oi? 16 letters Jijv 
dtr[ 18 „ > ti 

]« TlVtt 

fio&ia S^xojiiva jcarcpcfr 

n60ev tXa/ta vaxrrrpvraviv fof ,8 „ > tw«i 

6 irdvra toi rd T€ kcu tA tc^x^ 1 ' 

crjj/ iyyvdXtgcv 6\fiov 

cipvc{ira] KpSvov irats, ASdT{€<ra)i 8' [€]tt' !4<r[a>- ^ Atywav 8t>TpC0ov- 

irov ii\ot dtyb wpoOvpoov (JaOvicoX- vj^ v * /trpopvpnt 

irov d[va]ptyaro irapOhov 

AXyivav* t&tc xpuacai a- 

ipo9 iKpv^a{ra)v K6p[a]i imy(d>pi4v 

KardaKtov vSrrov vptrepov, t[ 

tva \€\€cdv iir dpfip&rcov 

[O&v Aw€<nrd<raT>. 


> w — w w w w ^ 


«£it. y' i 

M5 < 

> cucr[w — w — w w ^ 

l ftt\y w — w — w 

1 roA[w -w-w-w-w- 

1 8ic{- w - - 

1 7ri[w — w w — 

I 7To[w — w — \J — ^ 

J 7Ta[w w — w w — 

j £?[— w w w — w 

150 1 

JtuTw wwww — ww — 

1 go\y w w — — w w — 

> l>5[w w W - WW W^ 


T/rf^ — w — ww — w — — 


<r6\y — w w — w — ^ 

155 « 

I ^iyfw www — — WW — WW — — 

Lines 156-171 lost = antistr. 13-ai, ep. 1-7. 

€w. y' •[— ww — ww — «-»]x5[ — ]€^oy 

I [— w — w w — ] 
► [w — w — w w — ] 



It I 



'75 [ >y«*? 

[ )itpoyacrap€Ta<r 

[ ] irpooTOKTUcoxr 

[ ]Tpa>iav<f>i 

[. . . ]qXaov 

1 80 [ yOKTinav ort^avovaivtv .[...] 

[ ^TKiaC^T^iioiaav ^&- 

[ 'jproWctKi'iratavSi 

{■ ) 


Twairorwyt . [.] . k*»v 


[. ]^T€0€<TWici>v8<yr[ 

[. ] «h:j 

[ ]oi{. .]XarfiT€<rai/Aaj> [ 9 letters ]oMrrovay . 19 . [ 

Col. xxxv (Fr. 15, Col. ii). 


2 lines lost. 

[. . . .]«0iXo[ 

[. . . .]v8i . . [ 

[ ]**«[ 

10 [ ]?7X £ ?[ 

[. . .]ravXopcu0€p[ 

[ y avKopv<f>av[ 

[. .]y€poyX€yo|<€i{ 

[. . . .]arat/pa>^€i[ 

15 [ ynpofloA 

[ W-lr • M — ]yw[ 

[ ]8rj<rapav6af 

[. .'\aiT&iXpricrTripi.ov 

B. Fr. 16. 

[ fcr 

[. kf 

[ k a " 



1 75 11 \y kj — w w — ]y y€ &- 

1 [- kj - w - ^ air^tpovas dpvrht 

[— w «-» — \j — — ] vpoaroicnicAt. 
4 [- ^^ 7ra]r/x»fav 0i- 

6 [X — w — w]a Xady 

180 it [- w - oT€^rf]yoicri 7rai> <rr«4AvouK vtv . [. . .] 

7 [- ^ w w w \j ]<rKid(€T€- Moia-av * A/»(4ffro$d)i<ip ?) *[ 

• [w — w — v] iroXX<£x(* jratbv 84 

[ ]y T€ dccnrco-tW 8&j[cipai(?) 

[ ] WW 

[ ]oy [dy]Kadu r cy atvX^ [ 9 letten >i t^v av . to . [ 

• [ 

2 lines lost. 
[. . . .]ct <pi\a[ 

[ >«€..[ 

[. >tto[ 

10 [ 1 <*rx4 € 

[. . .)rav\ov aiOcp[ 

[ y dv Kopv<f>av [ 

[<f>cty*phv \€yofjL€p[ 
[. . . .]a raipmv €i[ 

15 [ ]* irpi Pa>ii[ov (?) 

[ I 017 !-] 7 " • M- • • -]wa/t>o[ 

[ JceXi£]&7<rai/ aiSdv 

[tv\avriai yjnr\€n^piov 

Fr. 16. 

[ }u 

[■ >* 

[ jpay 

£ 2 




1f0t;(r iccXaSi|ana0u|Avov<r 

Tprnov . [.] . afia£iTOV 

] . aypiai<raviinroi[.]' 






[«]i/^Aa[. . .]pavSpa>v<pp€Vfa' 

15 /3a6€iai>€\6[. .^covtpet^. .]J[.yxf>iai<roSoy 9 

€flOl8€TOVTc[. .]*€&» 

[. . . .]a0aya7[.]mropov 

Two fragments from Fr. i6(?). 
Fr. 17. . . . Fr. 18. . . 

ofirjpoi^ ] . oia[ 



Fr. 19, Col. i. 


] 84At?v 


5 ]" 

] • • wMm* 

10 ]»r . . e<r0a[.] \«x97«» v T»|y X ox«w 


[ Ix®" 

5 [ 6fi]y<JV9 KcAoMproO' fyivovi. 

[ i]mrov . [.] . dpagirbv 

[ ] . Svptais dv* tmroi\$\ 

[ ir\ravbv ipfia 

[■ K 

10 [ ] 8 Oipavov r €\m(w\<p Ovyarpl 

Mvafjfy]oiJ[i>]qt ic6pa[i\<r( r €i)- 

\iayaviav 8i86/icv. 

[r]u<p\a[l yX]p dvSp&v <f>p(v€S 

[$]otis &vcvtf 'EXiKwvidSav 
15 ftaBcTav k\6\6p\rwv ipcvv[qi <r)o<f>(ais 6S6v 
dvr. or CT. i/iol Si to9t({v Sf]ie8oo- 

[xav] dOdyai[o]v irSvov 

Fr. 17. 

'OfiJjpov [ 

Fr. 19. 


] 8&TOV. 


] «U 7. 

5 ] 


10 ]w . . €<r6a[i] Xfyot *irl r^v X©x«tav. 




] " 

'5 ] 

Fr. 19, Col. ii, with Fr. 20. 

a[ ]vov(T 

[ M 

20 [.]vvaa'Ti7r€i<ropcd[ 

amoT<ifj{.]t8€8c{.]icaKa . [ 

p -a. 



25 pi<p0€i<Tat>€vay€air€Tpav<papr)i'a^ . .]ayay«[ 
7T€<f>opriTo8 err aiyaTovOaiid* 

TaVOKpaTtOTOO- •KagriffTO*. 

30 To£o<f>6povTc\€<raiyovov 

Fr. 21. 



1 • vr 

5 ] 

]•[ 1 

] . vrc\oq[, .]rar a/ia[. 
]vx<u<n{. .] . vov 
10 ]yanoKaiiraTpo<rvfi 


]a>roy iicaip- 











]o wraro [ 

20 [f]way rf n(l<ropa[i . . • 

9 ^if ovjc €0€Ao[i<ra . . . 

Kolov Ovydrrfp ir[ 

iniard fj{o]i 8i8c[fya #ca . [ 

8i fuv iv 7T€\[rf]y€[« . . . 
25 ^Kp0€iaav eitavyia irirpav cpavrjvar [ T vjavtt«y«[ 

Ka\[£)ovTi piv 'OprvyCav vadrai ird\ai. 

TT€<f>6pr)T0 8* in Alyatov 6apd- 

T&9 6 KpdriOTOS K&prt<nvt 

ipdacaro pi\6th 
30 ro£o<f>6pov rt\i<rai ySvov 

Fr. ai. 

] . aw 

5 i 

]•[ i 

] . y ri\os [&r)rar a/ia[ ] foxtrot 

] ircpalyotf 
10 ]y anb Kal narp6s* bp-{v • •) 


Fr. 22. . . . Fr. 23. . . Fr. 24. . . . Fr. 25. . 

1" M ]--.»-r.[ ] 

}rl<rjjtlirt[ W - 1 1 

] . . .... ] 

] ] 

Miscellaneous unplaced fragments. 
Fr. 26 Fr. 27 (to Fr. 26?). . . . 

[ M-]-[ M 

[ ] . |/T€l/€i[ ^ r P?[ 

[*]^ir{oa^i\€a/i(f>f . .[ ] oa 7?[ 



[ ]*<T€7noyi77i>;a[ 

[. . .]oXtt[. -M-M 

[. . . .]fiavTi<ray . [ 

10 [. . . .]'. [. .}wfc[ 

[• M-lwK 

[• l&vi. 

Beginnings of lines. 
Fr. 28 Fr. 29. . . Fr. 30. . . 

• Hsri «[ d 

*pa0y8[ . [ . [ 

iTjierratfi^ . . . 

Fr. 31. . . Fr. 33. . . 

y?[ • • 


• * 


Fr. 22. 





Fr. 36. 

[• MO • [ 

[ ] . VT€V€J[ 

\T)mrio$ cf^ d/it/u . . [ 
ti nap6[£]y<p ai>v woX[ 
X€ . . <.> prjXii' Oi)p £ 
KpS^oy SA/i dy\a<{ 

[ ]ty kn 'Iafiriv(a[ts 

[. . .]oXa[. .]a[.]«r/o[ 
[....] fidvTis av . [ 
[ ] . [. .]v m8*[ 

[ M*]"/^ 

[. . . . <ru]/jL<popo[ 


Fr. 37. 



Fr. a8. 

& 0a$v8[o£(?) 
Ujtt wat /*«[ 
Safiov 'ABcfya 



Ends of lines. 


Fr* 32 

Fr. 34. 

■ rr- o3' 

)a . [, 



]??•??£#• • 




• • 

]?»[•] . toov«//eXaTo[ 


Fr. 35- 


1 • .«"«[•] 

. ?€f[ 




Fr. 38. 

Fr. 36. 

Fr. 37. 












. . . 

Fragments having blank margin above. 

Fr. 39. Fr. 40. Fr. 41. Fr. 42. 

1x3 ] K0V H ]anop[ ]uS) . Xu[ 

]ra.[ ... ... ... 

Fr. 43. Fr. 44. 

M tef • t 

Fragment having blank margin below. 
Fr. 45. . . 



Fr.33. Fr.35. . . . • 

]a . [. .] ] €«€a r[ 

]a<r<r dfifiLptftatcev [ ]v 

] troXiby .... 

]cro[.] . «ay i>€/*€ Aaro[tSa9 (?) 
5 ] <&/*? 


Ft. 46. .... Fr. 47. • • • 

M M 

Fr. 48. • • • Fr. 49. • • • Fr. 50. • • 

] • [ Yfrui M 

]juajcapa>p[ }& £ at { ]? y 4 


]a^opte»{ ... . 

Fr. 51. ... Fr. 53. . . Fr. 53. . . Fr. 54. . . . 
M M M M 

M M lr-1 ^ 

Fr. 55. . . . Fr. 56. . . . Fr. 57. . . Fr. 58. . . 
3 »** f " c M W M 

Fr. 59. . . . Fr. 60. . . Fr. 61. . . Fr. 62. . . 

] ■ «K H > [ M 

Fr. 63. . . Fr. 64. . . . 

H4 1 • *™K 


Fr.46. Fr. 47. • • • 

W M 

a)pPpo<rta{ ] A£ku{ 

w ya l W<» . f 

] dvOi/iw pa[ \\ l 

]o KeXrj? lov . [ 

Fr. 48. ... . Fr. 49. ... . 

] • [ > <f>pao[a 

] iioLK&p&v [ ] 86£av [ 

(?) yiK]a<f>opiau [ .... 




Fr. 65. 

Fr. 66. 

Fr. 67. 

Fr. 68. 









Fr. 69. 



Fr. 70. 


Fr. 71. 

Fr. 72. 



Fr. 73- 


Fr. 74. 


Fr. 75. 



Fr. 76. 

Fr. 77. 

Fr. 78. 





Fr. 79. 


Fr. 80. 



Fr. 81. 




Fr. 65. ... Ft. 66 

] |iam£a[ ] 

]v[. .]i . [ ]w>|tot < ytv[6Juvoi 8uc[ 



Fr.69. ... Fr. 70 Fr. 71. . . . 

o€(TOt ) . [ ] AitoAoy«[i . . ]••*••[ 

vpoa[ ]ov Kal 9 . [ "]puuo[ 

*V|M[ ]wv tov[ ]X«omo[ 

.[ ]•[ >*<Y»[ 

Fr. 73. . . . Fr. 74. . . . 

] >"[ 

] +av«pA« [ 

J 1 


C. Fr. 82, Col. i. Plate III. 


}«)vo8cm.v8ap[. .] 
]utq»io6co<ti)viic[.] . . t 



] • [.]yiraTpooicAv 
] . . . icaioxpn 
IO ]«|fc<rrpaTCv 





15 Jcawpoo - 

Fr. 8a, Col. ii. Plate III. 

[. ]? T0 ['] T0 *Xj?P« J [ 


20 (T7T€i;5o^r-€KXay^€j>T€i€f[ 

25 p[.]o7raKpoyimy'Ti\uaa[ 
[. .Jiror €?&j'i>7rd<r7rAayx[ 
<pipoi<raT6i>8 > ai>€p-e8og[ 

30 T€KtlVTri)p<f)6p0l'Zpi[ 


Fr. 8a, Col. i. 

fxp}i|OTv |iavTfve|iivy 
<]£4jAfct Y [«]*nv 6[. . 
>pr 6 84 n(v8ap[ef] 
Xiyfli Sn fxpi)** TaOra a]6T$ A frit tyi«[a] . . i 
5 lwv«v tAv iron iX«v- 

o£|MVOV (?) l*Oi( ) 


&}*]JTti dvaip«- 
Ofrrot ] . [o]v iraTpit KAv- 

(Uvov fat ncpi^povt(?) ] . . . koI b XP1~ 

IO 9|i3t *povrp]tt|rt aTpatf^- 



] ™» *XPl|l« 

15 l>^T«pOt 

Fr. 8a, Col. ii. 

[rb w6$o]s ro[v]ro wkfjptt [ 

[J*i]rcA{<rfif *W4*n, rots b\l Tpotal rb *Ek&0tjs 
Mwvtov (a)J re Ala>(ff) iwirfAf[<rA}<rfTai. 

20 <nre68oPT 9 6*Xay£6 0* U^&rarov 

iaipSviov Keap 6\oai- 

a (rrovayah &<f>ap f 

teal roiaSe Kopv<f>$ *d- 

paivtv \6ycov <3 7raudn[€ipoy 6iJ- 
25 p[u]ona Kpoviwv, tc\u$ a[d vvv rhv irdXeu 

7r[€]rrpa>pci>av ndOav i- 

vUa AapSaviSai? '£/?<£/?[a <f>pd<jtv i^ivQ) 

\iv\ nor cISw faro airXdy^vois 

<ptpoi<ra t6v$ dvip', (Sofe Si 
30 reject!' irvp<f>6pov 'Epi[vvv 


i « 

KaTep€fyarUlirc8t . [ 
[. . . i .yiiTcpaovnvek 

35 [ ]\&rpoiiaOua 

Frs. 83 and 84. 

• • • 
s «t( 

Xww( 13 letters ]»A[.] . [ 

10 fiey[. . . . » ]av8ciroa ^ T «a«f 

jcA«d€£[.]€5o[ ]o-0tai^ 

/ia\airp&£op[* .\k&wkt 
K\vTOifiavrt[. .]ano\\oovo<r- jyw* 
\JWwucvfhrcpxOovos jniw<*<**r<"**'![ 

f/, r , ^.avav^uBoor«r*Ka[ 

15 [. JW"€pr CD#C€a[. .JV *a»raa*aTC4/>f*«fow[ 

Fr.85. . . Fr. 86. Fr.87. 

'. . ]fCT«rf ]amf a/i[.]i' . [. .] 

WoDXvrf , '"".. , , 

, , . , \ayTtty«pywupdn[ 

5 fat j 


tKCLT&yyjupa 9 

o-icXi;/)^ [« /3r ? 

"I\iov ircur&v 

W* liri w(€&)j/ 


?€11T€ $i . [ 

[ ]f ripas imva[\iov 

otirwr a[ 

35 [ ]^« irpopdOua 

Frs. 83 and 84. 





5 «t[ 





13 letters ]t/X[ 

10 /*cy[. . 


i* &T0? ayr(i rov) *ara[r 

t> dAip«ar (t) 

jrX(0c2[?] fcottpcftraro] afylviv, 


npa£ov [&]/?afa>?. 


/afor^e?] jIit^XXcwo?, l7AXprf*(«nrof7). 

15 [i]irip r a>K€a[vo]v 

vdvrar KartiptjK* rota [ 

Fr. 86. 

Fr. 87 

i]vSpbs Si[€ 


ypv *«i 

] ii>oi£ap{e\i> . 


]oy 01J Xvr[Jr(?) 

ir\tvrmv Ipym 

' /c/cxSr[aroy (?) 

i}jr€prdTqt . [ 

]ra[. .]«ircr 


r «t 


F 2 



Fr. 88. 

Fr. 91. 



5 y*{ 

Fr. 89. 

Fr. 9a. . 

1 [ 

] • av8[ 



Fr. 93. 

Fr. 90. 




Fr. 94. 


5 ] ••[ 

Fr. 95. 


5 ]€KTI<ri^«TO[ 


Fr. 96. 


Fr. 97. 



Fr. 98. 


Fr. 99. 


i [ 

Fr. 100. 

Fr. 101. . 


Fr. io». . 


Fr. .103 

Fr. 104. 

Fr. 105. 

Fr. 106. 



Fr. 88. . . . Fr. 90 

irt/t[w y . . [ 

[.]Sofj[ ] l<r6pv6fios k<f>al{¥*TO (?) 

. . ii\irb k(op[ 

5 ].[ 

Fr. 9a Fr- 93 Fr. 94 

i ]•[ i 

] . duS[p (?) ]ri[ W. • 'Tr~ V»P» 

Wp[ Voir o,<[ M- •] "*'" 

• ■ " • • • - * 5 ] ••[ 

Fr. 95 Fr. 96. . . . 

].« > ra X«fc 

]at Iff /iovra[ ] '4*4*80 

4icoXov0[ ^ TTi^cvat 

5 ] '* TIOI /mto[ 


Fr. 99. 

]a* 7roXXa[ 

1 [ 

Fr. 103 


Fr. 107 Fr. 108. . . . Fr. 109. . . Fr. no. . . 

>mMfa«[.]*»^^*^rf "''* ft *" T ^ 

1* • • • • 


Fr. 1 1 1. . . 



• • • • 




Fr. 114. . . 













• • 


. . 

• • 

Fr. 115. . . Fr. 116. ... Fr. 117. ... Fr. 118. . . . 

]«7»[ \gj[ ]m- tf 

HM ... ] 

Fr. ug. ... Fr. iao Fr. iai. . . . 

. . . Iwt. ..J. I 1 

• • • • I 

Fr. 1%%. ... Fr. 1*3. . . Fr. 104. ... Fr. 135. . . 





] • wU«[ 





• . 




J WBr °[ 

• • 




Fr. 107 Fr. 108. . . . 

] ' ' " 


Fr. ua 



] <ri>v Xapir[€<r<ri ? 

Fr. 116. . . . 

)Y*P [ 
]. . . [ 

Fr. 124 





D Col. i (Fr. 126, Col. i). 

Opposite lines 16-17. 


Col. ii (Fr. 127 and Fr. 126, Col. ii). 

Fr. 127. • • 


Fr. 126, Col. ii. • . - . 

[. •jwoof 







Col. iii (Fr. 128, Col. i). Plate III. 

Opposite 1. 37. Opposite 1L 40-41. 

]•* *\ppowr 



Opposite 1. 44. Between U. 47 and 48. 

Kovoi ]|A|4i[. .] 




orp. d i [AktIs deXiov, rt iroXtfo-icoire firjc€ai, 

i[<3 fi&Ttp dfipdroov; Aarpov xmkprarov v J° a P°( f ) 

%\kv d/iipf KXenrSpevov (J) iOrjicas dpd\avov\ 

4 [loyyv t dvSpdaiv teal aortas 6$6i>,] 
5 [kntaKorov drpairbv icovpira] 
%\k\a6v€iv rt vt&rtpov fj ndpot;] 
t [dXXd o-e irpd? A 169, imro<r6a Bods,] 

• [Ik€T€vo>, diHj/iova] 

• [€&] ^X[/3oy rivh rpdnoio 6q/9at? 9 ] 
10 [a 7r]6r[p£a, irdyicoivov ripas. 

dvT. a 1 HM- ww-ww-ww-w* 

i[— — w — w — — wu — w^] 

s [w]£yo<r[ iroXi/ioio 8i <rapa (pipcis rtvSs, 

4 1j [K]ap7rov <f{0foiv, f\ vuf>trod <r64vo9 
15 » t{7r]€/)0aroy, [i) ardaiy ovXopwav 

• ^ it6kt[ov KtvioNriv (w) A/z iriSov, 
1 1j irayerbv )([$ov6t, 1j vbrtov Oipo? 
t Man (aK&i\(p fiiov 

^ v^rtor 9{4pos) «V [$ rlrof wc*(?) 
4 /tryaAMrlrf [Wan . . • 
4 w^A rd vor*[p6v. 

• $ yaZav jcaraJcX^aio-a 0^<m?] 
20 io[duSp&u vkov c£ dpyas yivov\ 

in. a i[6X<xf>vpopai ovSlv Sri Trdvroov pkra wctvo/icu] 

Lines 33-33 l° st = e P- *-io, str. 1-3. 
Opposite 11. 40-41. 



Two fragments perhaps from this column. 
Fr. 13a. Fr. 133. . . . 

]«**¥*[ ]oj/to[ 

1 ] 

... ]-[ 

Fr. 131, Col. ii. 


10 Katxpu<rc{ 



15 ™*[ 

ru7*c[. . .]pAUw/f[ 
2/ui'#€9ra[.]*&i'O a t[ 
20 fct/x0tf<raff{-]o/9ttf<[ 
t/£oi'lrtt'££[.]£'roi'a . [ 
icXin > o/xai^TC€(rr£iJ[ 

Fr. 134. Fr. 135. . . . 

1 1H 

]<rnrfcMroAA»[ JiTa^d[ 

«•*[ ]roi{ 


Col. ii. 

rip fu[ 

^ravT€9 cu[ 
ircnjjp 8u[ 
10 Kal XP vac { 

itrrolai tc[ 

cfj^r. ? C0Ta[ 
iphv [ 

t\v ii\[v n£\p fuv //*[ € P(?) 
Ifuv Sk ni[p) Kdvoi[s . . . 
%o (€vx$€i<ra 7r[p]o/9a/t['°? • • • 
vlhv fri rcflcji* rJy a . [ 

Fr. 134. 


KJaffrrfAtor # 

bco8[u> (?) 
«]a2 drdpthr i«&[* 
]<r( ) |« 8) Kfi-np <r[ 


5 )poo[ 

5 ][Z*\<poio$*WKaiic[ 


]oir/*iica8ioeapi a . [ 
IO ] 


•. 136, ... Fr. 137. 

• • 



Fr. 138. 




Fr. 139 

]•*•[ 1 

]°mu[. ,]<rroynj<rowXi8o<nro[ 

Fragments which may belong to either C or D. 
Fr. 140. ... Fr. 141. ... Fr. 14a. ... Fr. 143. . 


Fr. 144 

]rivn/iw[.]i [ 
]Wa [.>«r . [ 









] [ 

. . . 


r. 145. . . . 

Fr. 146. . . . 


147- • • 









• • 


5 o]l At A*oi t9*¥ mal k[ 
]f 6fJLtoWflc[ 
]? erj0al<Ht wpo<r[ 


Jot. f tarf&of 'Aplc(rapxos ?) . [ 

10 ] 


Fr. 137 Fr. 138 

1 1 

.... ] 

]t «al 

Fr. 139. 

I-™*. ] 

K ) «ol [«J> ri» r$r AOuSot *ofyty4»(?) 
roft] r$r ACXiSa Karoutowrai imrrtvt\a«ai(}) 

Fr. 144. 

]t« two/t&fay. 
]Ac<ra [.]«<r . [ 



Fr. 148. . . . 

Fr. 149. . . . 




Fr. 151. 


]. 8aa{ 








. • « 


Fr. 15a. . . 

Fr. 153. . . 



Fr. 155- 






• • 

• • 


Fr. 156. ... Fr. 157. ... Fr. 158. . . 

]ai ]av*ii[ ] . a*[ 

] • ?-H ... . . 

Fr. 159. ... Fr. 160. ... Fr. 161. . . 

1 M 1 

Fr. 16a. 

]vTa\iav . [ 
] cr«Nu*4pora[ 
] rovr* *a[ 


I. For the Thsbans. 

i-io. ' Ere the pains of old age draw nigh let a man clothe his mind with cheerfulness 
and be content in due measure, seeing the power that is set in his house. Oh joy! 
Now the consummating year and the Hours, children of Themis, have come to the horse- 


Fr. 15a. . . 

Fr. 159 Fr. 161 

] ] 

] ] 

Fr. 162 

]vra \iav .[ 

] h tctd w6pov o[ 
] tovt( ) *a[ 


loving city of Thebes, bringing Apollo's garlanded feast. May he long crown the 
generations of the citizens with the flowers of sobriety and good government/ 

1. The letter before the lacuna may also be o. For irpiir . . . wplv cf. Pyth. ii. 91-2 
vp6v6t . . . trpiV. 



3. Ma** k.t.\. seems to be epexegetical of M furpa, Le. the more a man has the 
greater should be his thankfulness. oU66trog is a new compound. 

6 Qtfuyovoi : cf. Pind. Fr. 30 &cp& . . . akoxpv Aifc . . . d di rag xpv<rcyMrv«iff aykaotcdpirovs 
TiKTtP akaBias *Qpas 9 

8. daira <f>i\rj(Ti(rrf(f>ayop : i. e. the festival of the Daphnephoria, which was celebrated 
at Thebes in honour of Apollo Ismeni us every ninth year; cf. Frs. 107 and 129-31. 

9. [tA]» d* : or [rii^e, which Prof. Bury would prefer. For ipiwroi cf. Pyth. iv. 240 
arapavouri r< pip irolas Iptmov. 

II. For the Abderitks. 

1-5. • Abderus with breastplate of brass, son of the Naiad Thronia and Poseidon, 
beginning from thee I will pursue this paean for the Ionian folk, hard by the shrine of 
Apollo of Derenus and Aphrodite . . .' . 

1-2. This statement of the parentage of Abderus differs from the common version, 
according to which he was a son of Hermes (Steph. Byz. s. v. 'Afidqpa, Apollodor. Bibl ii. 
5. 8). [Naft]off is due to Bury ; it would be natural to make the paramour of Poseidon 
a Naiad. Some such epithet as rfaXfo* would also be suitable, but that word is too long for 
the space. Abderus is said to have been beloved by Heracles, who founded in his honour 
the city of Abdera after he had been killed by the horses of the Thracian king Diomedes. 
It is noteworthy that, while Apollodorus /. c. calls Abderus Aoxpfa c £ 'Oirovn-or, according 
to the Tabula Farnesiana (C. I. G. 5984, c. 12 sqq.) he was a epopurfo, i. e. a native of the 
Opuntian Thronium. That city was supposed to have been named after the nymph 
Thronia (Schol. 1L B 533), and the statement of the Tab. Farn. evidently reflects the same 
version of the legend as that here followed by Pindar. 

Otfpoitos was no doubt followed by other words, though there is a short blank space 
after it; varpfou was written by a different hand. 

3. [a«^]cy is used as in Nem, i. 4 AoAov tuunyvrfTa, triBtv ddufirqr vpvog Spparai Qiptv atvov, 
the termination -fry having its proper ablatival meaning, did oou tV &PxV Mtor as the 
scholiast rightly remarks, fiiroutoi ydp k.tX explains 'law. For the colonization of 
Abdera by the Teians in the middle of the sixth century B.C. cf. Hdt. i. 168, Strabo 
xiv. p. 644. 

4. [&]££«: cf. Simonides Fr. 29 capirvXoy f»Xor bi&*»v f and Isthm. iii. 21 (iv. 3) aprrhs 
vii*t dtttwcfii'. /it could be read in place of the doubtful <», but [iraijav fyctyifa though 
it might be supported by an appeal e. g. to Isthm. vi. 2 ttwpov Kparrjpa Mouraiw fUkfcv 
tuppafup, is less suitable to [<rc0W 

5. [Arfapor : cf. Pindar Fr. 63 (schol. ad Lycophron Alex. 440 Arjpalrov *iW) Afipaipos' 
t6wos ovt* KaXovfUPoe iv 'A&drjpots, IvQa Arjpaivov 'AirdXXttyor Upop iariv t ol fjwjfiopivci kq\ Mp&apoe 
iv naiaaip. The majority of the MSS. of Lycophron show the spelling ^jjpalvov, one, Par. A, 
having A«ip. A supplement of three letters would suit the papyrus better than one of only 
two, but there is hardly any difference in the space occupied by 7 and «. There was 
perhaps a reference to the temple after [8]*ou [, as in the scholium on Lycophron /. c. 

The papyrus consistently makes this verse end with two short syllables in synaphia 
with the verse following ; the division adopted in the text at the fourth syllable of 1. 6 
has the advantage of placing the syllaba anceps at the end of the verse. An apparently 
mistaken division occurs also in the fourth line of the epode ; cf. note on 1. 25. 

24-36. '. . . I dwell in this vine-bearing fruitful land of Thrace ; may mighty time 
in future days ne'er weary of a stable course for me. Young is my city, yet I have seen 
my mother's mother stricken with foemen's fire. But if a man in succour of his friends 


fiercely withstands the enemy, his efforts coming to the conflict in season bring peace. 
O Paean, to whom we cry, we cry I may Paean never leave us/ 

24. me : the speaker is the personified Abdera. 

25. The marginal 4 marks the 900th line ; cf. introd. and 669. 67. We transpose 
-*6* n teal to this verse in order to avoid the internal hiatus mil f tica/mo*. 

26—7. Cf. OL viii. 28—9 6 ft* imatrfKkMw XP^ pos *©vtt> wpatnrmt frf) icdfioi, and for l/nrcfa, 
Nem. vii. 57 Moipa rikas fpwi&ov &p*£*. 

28-9. tunpis fuxrtp* ipae : i.e. Athens, which took a prominent part in the colonization 
of Teos (Strabo ziv. p. 633, Pausan. vii. 3. 6) which in turn was the parent-city of Abdera 
(cf. schol. on 1. 3 above). The meaningless crweor of the papyrus requires some such 
emendation as that adopted in the text. The mark of length enclosed between two dots 
over the second syllable of fywaw was intended to replace or to be an alternative to the 
quantity mark first written. The a is long in l/iirar, short in #/*ira. Either a long or short 
syllable would be admissible at this point ; cf. 1. 65. For cX[ Bury suggests ix[ntfoi as 

a gloSS On copoi. 

31. dp*€<»* is to be scanned as a disy liable. The marginal note 4&v lv K<u[p<f is a 
paraphrase of the text and may be restored in various ways. 

32. Cf. Pyth. viii. 10-1 rpaxna, dwrpivfav \mavTtd(aura Kparti, The interlinear £, 
signifying a variant v*avrtat*i y is not certainly by the first hand ; the present tense is 
probably sound. In the marginal note opposite this line (and also in that on l. 34) it 
is not clear whether Somrat is used impersonally = ' The sense of the passage is/ as 
apparently in the scholium on l. 36, or whether 6 plxta * 8 the subject, for which cf. I. 73 
fefomu +ifp<rci diroR-rtvci. 

34. For Kara&aiwv here cf. Pyth. viii. 78 fu'rpy Karafiaiv§ip t though whether the verb 
in these two passages means 'to descend into the arena' or has a wider sense 'to 
proceed ' (with seasonableness or moderation), is uncertain. The former meaning is very 
appropriate in the present context 

37-8. The scholium [Sujiwrai . . . Xijfifia apparently refers to aX#c$, though it does 
not seem very apposite. Perhaps ^ should be read for 4 ; of the following letter only the 
barest vestige remains, but this, so far as it goes, suits the base of a r. In the second 
scholium we suppose that koi, which is in a different hand from that of B4v(v) . . . dirrfroif, 
indicates a variant aX«$ for the aknu of the text ; cf. 1. 40 Saioi?, IV. 4 aaro. It is true 
that there is only a very slight remnant of the supposed mark of short quantity above 
axon, but there is certainly a trace of ink which it is not easy to interpret otherwise. The 
remainder of the note cites in comparison another passage of Pindar (Fr. 213), to which 
may be added Isthm. V. 44-5 rmixurrcu dc miXtu nvpyos v^trfXais aprrais ava&aivtur. Why 
the citation is introduced by the word Gct^r) is not clear. Possibly Aw occurred 
in the lacuna before aA«$. To connect Ott^r) with iuu and suppose a crasis of *a\ aWtvv 
is unsatisfactory on account of (1) the difference in the hands, (2) the absence of diaeresis 
over 1, (3) the difficulty of completing the sentence [- w iaWtup], A better hypothesis, 
we think, is to regard Q€<*(v) as a critic who read dX«$ ; cf. the references to Zenodotus 
and others in 11. 61, IV. 58, &c. The grammarian Theon, who flourished about the time 
of Augustus, wrote commentaries on poets, and it has been argued from an allusion in 
Schol. 01. v. 42 that these included a work on Pindar; cf. Susemihl, Gesch.der Griech. 
Lift. ii. pp. 215-7. This view is now corroborated by the papyrus. J+uttok in the citation 
is inferior to the ordinary reading fyiov and is probably due to the occurrence of fyiarop 
in 1. 38, where the superlative is appropriate. At the end of that line ]m is most 
probably the termination of a verb, and urrarjat (Bury) has the advantage of being possible 
with either akxal or <&«$. Other possibilities are ybvr]a* or perhaps farrr ai, though a future 

G 2 


is not so natural; verbs like atptrai or /SoXXcrai would necessarily involve aX*£. The 
supposed at may, however, be p, though that is a less suitable reading. 

39-44. Bury proposes to restore these lines as follows: papvaiuu, pa» [cvrXapoon do»]c?* 

[?pxo? be IIooyida>ao(V y]cvcw trnrav \fUya*] t&p yap avroptvuiv [n6\fftov cbra] <f>tp*cr6ai [itpaiirpov, 
irvpbs co]f oVXar. For dvrofifvcov ir6\*/ior cf. Afaw. i. 67—8 6Vav 6V0I . . . fuix av avrtafacrw, and 
for avrofihw . . . 3i>ra, Isthm. vii. 28 Xotyov aVra <p€pa>v (?) ivavricp orpary. This ingenious 

restoration is attractive, but it is not very close to what the scholiast gives as t6 v6r)pa. In 
1. 44 the vestige before <r«X<v would suit <r, but a supplement of 14 letters is rather long ; 
Kpamvol would be slightly shorter and perhaps clearer. In 1. 41 on the other hand fiiya 
is hardly sufficient. 

40. The marginal Baiois with mark of length above <u drew attention to the disyllabic 
scansion of the word in this passage, as also in Nem. viii. 28. There is no necessity to assume 
that the 1 was wrongly marked with a diaeresis in the text. 

41. Cf. OL v. 21 Uoa-abavtaicrtv ittitoiv imrtpiroyxvov, and the reference to ^ fairos in 
the scholium opposite 11. 43 sqq. At the beginning of the verse Blass suggested ripm &. 
For the metrical arrangement of the lines here cf. 1. 5, note. 

46. +0oi'€i suggests that ]c pavUi not fyav Ui is the right division. pnAtw is not found 
elsewhere in Pindar, but fiavts occurs in Pyth. iv. 159. 

48. The scholium here is difficult and apparently corrupt (cf. 11. 57-8, note), and 
owing to the mutilation of the passage to which it refers emendation is hazardous. The 
termination of the participles in the second line is probably -to« rather than -tcs ; either 
flPpurai or fl0pi<rct may be read, and firmOcplinri is just possible in place of liriTi0c(o6ai) 
&k % but the letters pep would be run together in an abnormal manner. None of these readings, 
however, produces a straightforward sentence, though the general sense is evident, that 
internal sedition gives external enemies their opportunity, oraata'lorras koi iroXiTcuoiras 
might be interpreted in the sense of the revolutionaries and the Government, but it is 
not improbable that some word like duKpopw (Blass) has dropped out after iroXiTcfifjorras. 
To the emendation cmTi0c(<r6ai) &k (ct)v) there is the objection that the object of fWi'pW&ii 
should be in the dative, not the accusative, and that either oracrtnCovaiv bi ml noXirevovaiv 
(8ia<f>6p<us) or <rTacria{6vTa>v hi koI irdXiTivovruv (fiia<f>6pas) would be expected. Another remedy 
would be to alter hi to tc and make to&s . • . cttcuti&Iovt&s (t)c koi iroXiTctforras the subject 
of dPptVai, inserting florc (Bury) before iroXXu. paWo? . . . ^ 6£lw would then mean 
' with more energy, or quickly/ This also, however, is hardly convincing ; perhaps the 
corruption goes deeper, and something like d fj vppis {alp^ti row iv rjj iroXc* araa-. (r)c 
Kal (Jiia<f>6poi>s) woXtr., voXX$ fiaWov tow or. cmriQ. iv (t 1)7 d£ «W was really intended. For the 
omission of &» with citj uPpiW cf. e. g. Schol. ad Soph. 0. T. 175 SKXov eV 5XXy Z&W. A 
dot over the o of u0pi<rat possibly represents a diaeresis. The first a in crraaiatorras 
wad altered from an 1. 

Whichever view of the scholium be preferred, it seems likely that v/3pi* or vftpifrw 
occurred in the text ; cf. the antithesis of rd d* <vPov\ia x.r.X. in 11. 50-2 with the opposition 
in OL xiii. 6-10 oCrfyis to Euvo/ua the daughter of «00ovXor e«/ur. Bury considers that 
6(vs in some form may also be restored, and suggests [m voff vfipts iXoia-a t6p&§ Xlaoi* 
d<rra>v [&v en) pis 6£cas I TroXfpLovs cVayjot. This may well be the sense, and it is hignly 
probable that ]<h in 1. 50 is an optative termination ; but the disparity in the length of the 
supplements proposed for 11. 48 and go is too great. 

50-72. 'But the heart devoted to prudence and modesty ever enjoys gentle peace. 
Such may heaven bestow ; the hostile envy of those who are long since dead has now 
passed away ; and it is right that a man should take to his forbears a lot rich in glory. 
They gained by war a bountiful land and stored up wealth beyond the borders of Strymon, 


the hallowed nurse of wild Paeonian warriors ; but an adverse fate fell on them. Yet they 
endured, and the gods at last joined in accomplishing their desire. He who has wrought 
a good deed is made illustrious with praise ; and to them came surpassing glory against 
the foe before Melamphyllum. O Paean, to whom we cry, we cry I may Paean never 
leave us.' 

50. The letters X* in tv&ovkiai are corrected. 

52. For iyK€tfi€vov cf. 069. 48 (Pindar, Partheneion) &>* &£k€<nriv ry«i/im, and for teXku 
Pyth, xi. 53 fiOKpvrjpy Skfty Tf$aX6ra. aUi is the correct Pindaric form when the first syllable 
is long. 

54-6. The <f>06vot is that of the gods, traceable in the early vicissitudes of the colony ; 
cf. H. 63-5 and Pyth. x. 20 <t>6opcpals «V 6*S>v p*Tarp<mius. The schol. takes r»v ... as equivalent 
to M toU . . ., but the genitive is more naturally explained as simply objective. The 
reading of the third line of the note is far from secure. The second o of vpoBarovrav in 1. 56 
of the text is corrected from «. 

57-8. The meaning is that the descendant of ancestors who had shown such a good 
example should himself carry to them the tribute of a nobly spent life. Cf. Nem. vi. 46 
Itrti cnftiv (sc. the bards) Alaxibai firopov t(o\ov aura* aprrat airodtiKvvpivoi ptyakas, which 
the scholiast explains fVrcidq aureus \oprjyiav nap*xovctP tiraivwv ol Alcuci&ai. The scholium 

on the present passage Set [tois &J6X(ots) k.t.X. gives a practical interpretation which diverges 
rather widely from the general precept of the text, though it is not out of harmony with the spirit 
of the passage. It seems necessary to suppose an omission of the final * of to&s and 
lUXjWJTas ; for other mistakes in the marginalia cf. 1. 64 and note on 1. 48. 

61. httariBfiKav : cf. Theognis 276 xPVt JMTa & eyKaraBjjs. The interlinear insertion 
apparently indicates the not very important fact that a critic whose name began with 
Ar wrote tyKari6rjKap. Which of the commentators on Pindar is meant is however 
not clear ; the name is nowhere written out in full, and several other abbreviations occur, 
which may or may not refer to the same person. In the present passage there is ap with 
an angular mark above p t in Fr. 134. 9 (cf. Frs. 82. 35, 94. 3, and 129-31. i) apt 9 ] elsewhere 
we find a or ap followed by a v having a vertical stroke drawn through the middle : 
for the former cf. II. 75, VI. 89, for the latter VI. 181. o[ in VIII. 35 may also well be 
one or other of these forms. If they all represent a single name, then that of Aristophanes 
of Byzantium is the most probable. But since Aristarchus, Aristodemus, and Aristonicus 
were also Pindaric critics who are quoted in the extant scholia, and four different compendia 
occur in the papyrus, it is not impossible that there may be references to all four scholars. 
At any rate it seems preferable to differentiate the group having a *, and here there is 
the choice between Aristophanes and Aristonicus, a grammarian who flourished under 
Augustus and therefore not too late to be mentioned in this manuscript ; cf. the possible 
allusion in II. 37 to his contemporary Theon. On the whole we are inclined in view of the 
greater importance of Aristarchus and Aristophanes to suppose that ap and apicr stand for 
the former, apv and av' for the latter. Some support for the expansion of apv as Aristophanes 
is to be found in the Paris Alcman papyrus, where in ii. 3 the analogous compendium 
ap* no doubt stands for *Apiarapxog i apurr* in i. 32 probably representing 'ApiOTo^wwjc. 

63. For rpoQov cf. Pyth, ii. 1-2 Svpaicocrai . . . avbpvv "imraiv Tf aitiapoxappav batp6vuu 

rpo^oL and VI. 14 below. The scholium on SKKa k.tX apparently refers to the failure 
of a previous attempt by Timesius of Clazomenae to establish a colony at Abdera, 
recorded in Hdt. i. 168 TtpqcruK mhos ovk an6vrjro oXX* vno QprjU^v c^cXa^cir ...; cf. 
11. 54-6, note. 

65. tcXoTuo'ii' : or tAo[? lftlbt\K*v ? 

67. The final p of ivayopuuinv has been deleted (by the first hand ?) by a cross-stroke 


and a dot placed above, but is necessary for the metre. <t>\«y*ir intr. has a similar sense in 

Nem. vi. 38 traph Kaardkiav re Xaptrw itmipux Sftabp $Xry«i>. 

69. Mt\dfi<f>vXKov is not otherwise known. According to Pliny, H. N. iv. 11. 18, 
Melamphyllus was the name of a Thracian mountain, and possibly this is here 

73-80. l " But they shall put him to confusion when he has come near the river, matched 
with a small array against a great host. 1 ' It fell out on the first day of the month ; and the 
rosy-footed maiden, kindly Hecate, brought tidings of the word which was about to come 
to pass. And with her . . .' 

73-5. The future indicative in $vp<rci seems unintelligible except on the view that these 
three lines give the substance of an ancient oracle, which Blass suggested may have run 
in some such form as oXA' 6n6rav irorapy <rxMv fkBg ty totc <f>vp<rn tvrtvi avv /Scuoioi wdkvp 
vrparov . . . The author or occasion of the prognostication was probably named in the 
lost marginal note opposite I. 73. The second o of pokoyra was corrected from a and 
the final a has also been altered. cV is a Doric form for <6u : cf. e. g. C. I. G. 5774.1 17, &c. 
rprrr, Alcman ap. Eustath. Od. p. 1787. 43 vapivrw. If our reacting is correct, the form 
in the present passage had the sanction of Aristophanes (?), there being also a variant ft, 
of which the meaning is not easy to see. The supposed a is however doubtful, the 
remains being an oblique stroke which might be taken for a grave accent. But a grave 
accent here would be mistaken, and the papyrus is distinctly rubbed, while the analogy of 
VI. 89 is strongly in favour of the reading in the text. 

Bury suggests that the word beginning with o in the scholium here and at 1. 105 may 
be the name of the people with whom Abdera was at war, and proposes to make them 
the Thracian Odomanti ; but the vestige of the letter after o does not well suit ft. 

77. <f>owiK6n<{a is applied to Demeter in 01. vi. 94, where the epithet has been supposed 
by Boeckh and other critics to refer to the red colours of harvest ; but no such allusion can 
be claimed in the case of Hecate, and no doubt in both passages the adjective is used like 
pobovrixus of personal charms simply. 

In the first line of the scholium the letters taken for cXX are blotted and apparently 
corrected ; perhaps p&xny was the word intended. 

79. tfcXovra =s /iAXopth, a use which, though not actually found in Pindar, has good 
classical support, e.g. Hdt. i. 109 *l dcX^o-ct awafi^mu «} rvpawls. The scholiast gives an 
erroneous interpretation. av(r\ nv) (cf. VI. 59, Paris Alcman iii. n) is written m r 
in Fr. 84. 10 and IX. 35. 

81. The object of KoXcbro is probably Apollo, and 6cora-|£4X]r, as Bury suggests, 
is a likely supplement. 

96-108. '. . . the songs invoke (Apollo) on fragrant Pindus, and by the lofty rocks 
of Parnassus the glancing-eyed maidens of Delphi set the fleet-footed dance and sing 
a sweet strain with resonant voice. And for me, O Abderus, accomplishing gracious glory 
of noble deeds, may you prosper the horse-loving host with a final war. O Paean, to whom 
we cry, we cry I may Paean never leave us.' 

97-102. Cf. VI. 15-8. ap<t>i in 1. 97 does not imply more than vicinity, the scene of the 
choruses being of course Delphi. 

98. ti in m/nyXoio- was altered from an a. 

99. [AiVAripf]* (cf. Pyth. vi. 1 Aicornta 'A^po&imar) is a very doubtful restoration. 


The accent" and the * are on the main fragment, the *» being on a smaller detached strip 
which extends from this point as far as 1. 106 ]»t irpo0i[ ; and though metre and sense 
make the place of this strip in Col. viii sufficiently secure, its exact position at 1. 99 is 
not certain. The recto being blank gives no assistance. The objection to the reading 
c«ir is that the accent would be expected to fall more to the right than it actually does ; 
of the letter before the supposed « only a tip remains, and cW would be palaeographically 
rather more satisfactory. The letter after n is represented by the merest speck. It must 
also be noticed that the supplement [<Xi] scarcely fills the lacuna, and [jcaXvjriirioVf (Bury ; 
c£ Homer, H. Dem. 8, &c.) would in this respect be more suitable, though on the other hand 
in 11. 102 and 104 also somewhat short supplements in a similar position seem to be justified 
by the context. 

100. xoX[k/?] can hardly be avoided, for *Xo[, which might be read, gives no possible 
word. Though at first sight a not very appropriate epithet to apply to the song of maidens, 
a good parallel to xoXfitf?] here occurs in Anth. Pal. ix. 505. 15 o*«rrco xaX«o0«ow>r 
tntawfpxowrav aoi&rjp MtXwofUmpf, while the use of xaXfffw of the human voice is as old as 
Homer, e. g. E 785 Srcvropc . . . gaXftro^Aitf, 2 222 Ufa xoXk«oi> aIok&oo. Cf. the name 
Xaknomj, and III. 94, where xoWon-a apparently occurs. 

101. «Aafl(f w]rt : or «fXad[^v]ri ; but the papyrus gives «porcv[m in VI. 18, and cf. 
BacchyL viii. 43 oUtwri. k of ykvxw is over an erasure. 

102-3. The right restoration of this passage is not obvious. If the emendation 
wpofit[0Moi were adopted in 1. 106 (cf. note ad lac) a satisfactory sense would be obtained 
by reading [yap #}wcA/a \rav <ra]r xtyw \ cf. the conjunction of x&fai and orparfo in IV. 42, 
and vfuripav xapw in VIII. 37. But the word at the end of 1. 102, where a bacchius is 
required after tf, would remain a problem. Before the lacuna any round letter may stand, 
c, $, o, <r, <f>, or o», and the letter preceding, if not «, must be <r f next to which is part of 
a vertical stroke suggesting 4 or v; further to the left the top of an acute accent is 
recognizable. The meaning of x<*P LP moreover is quite uncertain, and the word may well 
be taken with «]£kA«i, when it might mean 'gladness,' as in Pindar Fr. 75. 2 for iv x°p&» 
(cf. 1. 99 above), 'OXv/nrtoi, ft™ t* ickvrav wtpirer* x^P^> &<>*» or 'glory/ as in Isthm. ii. 19 

xXtiMtr . . . xapiYfO'fffi', or even ' SOng/ as in 01. X. 78—9 aroawfuav X*P LV • • • wXadgo-oficaVi 

ppovra*, ftc. ; for cv«Xra in connexion with the last sense cf. e. g. Nem. vii. 16 «Xvr«tr inivv 
ioMit. Possibly, indeed, the marginal *r(ty) ^pty" really alludes to x<¥""> though being on 
a level with 1. 10a this gloss is more naturally referred to [popjoy, The reconstruction 
adopted in the text was suggested by Bury; it is close to the data of the papyrus and 
appropriate in itself, though km in 1. 104 seems rather otiose. ifu[l of course is Abdera. 

104. The second * in Unroxtypav seems to have been corrected. 

105. Perhaps [ovpjt?, as Blass suggested, though this produces a mixture of metaphors, 
and barely fills the lacuna (cf., however, note on 1. 99) ; Bury would prefer [of £}>. On the 
allusion in n-oXi/if rcX«{rai]y cf. introd. p, 1 7. 

106. Blass wished to omit the final r of irpoj9c[/9]d(off and so make Apollo the subject 
instead of Abderus. This may be right, but the mutilation of 11. 102-5 renders the 
correction hazardous. Our restoration assumes that the text is sound 

Fr. 5. The fifth line shows that this fragment belongs to the foregoing paean, and it 
may come either from Col. ii or Col. vii. L. g, however, cannot be brought into direct 
connexion with Fr. 2, i. 1 by reading 'A08[^pois. 


4. ]o£[ : there has perhaps been some correction, but o is clear. 
8-9. Qvtfvra . . . j/itapdV: cf. Pindar Fr. 75. 3 Xvtios 6p<f>a\6v Bvbvra. 


12. There is a small mark rather high above the a of aa&cut, but it may be 

13. r[l}>: Apollo is addressed, x/wcrof being an epithet like x/w<n$ro£c or xpv^ok^ui 
or xp^oxaircu There would not be room for a broader letter than 1 between r and p. 

15. 2*\apas : a mention of the moon-goddess seems appropriate in this context. The 
epithet AiKa/*irv£ is applied to Semele in the only other passage where it occurs in Pindar 
(Fr. 75. 20). 

17. This line is the 100th from II. 25, which is marked in the papyrus as the 900th 
line in the roll, and therefore « (= 1000) would be expected to appear in the margin here. 
Presumably it was inserted at the top of following (lost) column. The extent of the gap 
after 1. 17 is accurately determined by the occurrence of p (= 1200) in the margin opposite 
1. 7 of VI. Of the intervening 200 lines, 125 are accounted for in the papyrus ; there are 
therefore (assuming that the p is correctly placed with relation to the 1 at II. 25) 75 lines 
missing, L e. 5 columns of 15 lines each. Since the strophe of III contains at least 
18 lines, it is improbable that the 102 lines which separate II and IV were divided 
among two poems, and it may be safely concluded that the first 10 lines of Col. xv 
belong to III. 

94. xaXit]coir' : cf. note on II. 100. The superscribed variant au\S>p is more probably 
right than av\6v. 

95. Schol. The letter between the supposed X and u seems to have been altered, but 
is probably intended for o ; there is not room for [kt]iXou. ft might replace X, and perhaps 
IftoO should be read. 

99. ]oXot[. . .1 may well be -oi]o Aar[ofr], but a combination with Fr. 28 & paSv{[oi>voi\> 
AoTJoOf] I irjif trtu (cf. Pindar Fr. 89 p<Mfav6p ™ Aar«>) is shown by the recto to be inad- 
missible. Fr. 47 {fiaB]uC»p[oi)n) is also unsuitable. 

101. ]to[r>: orp'^je? 

IV. For the Csans to Delos. 

1-2. Blass suggests the very attractive restoration [t6p diutptKOfiap re mm] "Aprifuv, 
[& AaXc, Aar£ re xo/xjwropai, comparing Isthm. i. 7—8 kq\ t6p dicfiptripav Qoiffop x<>P<wp eV K/g> 
afi<t>ipvT$ <tvv rrovriois dvbpacrtv, which is most probably a reference to the present paean. 
The future x ?*** !* 01 occurs in Aesch. Ag. 31. 

3. W is probably the termination of a participle -6p*p)ot. 

4. The adscript raro indicates a variant iMnraro. It is in a different hand from the 
rest of the note ; cf. p. 15. 

12. The accent on ayaxXca is somewhat doubtful. 

13. The sense of the scholium is plain, though its right restoration is a matter of 
uncertainty. The slight vestiges before ia suit p better than a, and pta is therefore pre- 
ferable to KopOjaia. 

14. ika]xvpwop : or ppafyvpwop (oracle ap. Strabo vi. 262), when some other supple- 
ment than oXa&'awy which is somewhat long for the supposed size of the lacuna, will become 

15. It is noticeable that the letters upotra occur in the same position of the correspond- 
ing verse of the second strophe, 1. 36. 

16. Perhaps irfd]ex<iy: cf. I. 37 where irMx* w stands in a corresponding verse, and 
note on 1. 15. 

20. Zjtdvcw is an allusion to the fishing industry of the Ceans ; cf. the passage from 
Isthm. i quoted in note on 11. 1-2. 


21-53. ' Verily though I live on a rock I am known for prowess in Hellenic contests, 
and known for some display of the Muses 1 art; verily too my acres bear a measure of 
Bacchus' life-giving cure in extremity. I have not horses nor share in the pasturage 
of kine ; but neither would Melampus leave his fatherland to lord it in Argos, nor lay aside 
his gift of divination. Hail, hail, O Paean 1 The city and comrades of a man's home and 
his kinsmen are dear, and bring contentment. In happiness remote from foolish men 
I praise the words of lord Euxantius, who when his fellows were eager refused to rule or 
to take the seventh share of a hundred cities along with the sons of Pasiphae"; and he 
spake to them his prophecy : " I fear war with Zeus, I fear the crashing Shaker of Earth. 
With thunderbolt and trident sent they once the land and its whole host to the depths 
of Tartarus, but left my mother and all her well-fenced house. Then shall I, in pursuit of 
wealth and thrusting aside into utter neglect the decree of the blessed ones for our country, 
have elsewhere a great possession? How would this be quite secure for me? Dwell 
not, my heart, on the cypress-grove, dwell not on the pastures of Ida 1 To me little is 
given, a mere shrub of oak, but I have no lot in trouble or strife." ' 

22-3. For the hypallage of 'EXXaviW which in sense belongs to ai$k»v cf. e.g. 
Pyth. vi. 5 livBUriKos vppup 6ri<ravp4s~ The athletic prowess of the Ceans is emphasized 
in Bacchyl. ii. 6 sqq. wr' iv Kkctwy augcm 'lc$fiov , . . rn<b*i£ayL€P If&opfjKovTa aim <m<f>4*ounr 9 
vi. 5-7 Kco* faura» nor 'OXvpiri? irv£ r« nai <rrddiov Kpar*x{aap] ; their service to the Muses Was 
witnessed by the illustrious names of Simonides and Bacchylides. 

24. The scribe at this point changed or mended his pen ; the writing in the first three 
lines of the column is markedly larger and coarser than those which follow. 

25. Only a tip of the letter before km remains, but 17 is not enough to fill the space, 
and 174 was probably written by mistake, although the smooth breathing shows that there 
was no confusion with jj. The breathing, however, is imperfectly preserved, and might be 
taken for the second half of a superscribed 17, in which case something other than 17 must 
be supposed to have stood before ««. 

&ia{vv<r]ov : we owe this reading to Mr. Nairn, who suggested Aio[iw]ov, comparing 
Bacchyl. vi. 5 apniXorpfyov Ktov. After At any round letter would suit the remains, but 
only o or « will give any likely word. AitfBr* ir]ov is a possible but less attractive alterna- 
tive. Ato[<rd4r]ov would be an unlikely epithet of apaxavias, and Aio\pr]ov, besides being 
unattested, would not fill the lacuna. 

26. fkSdmpw: cf. Soph. Phil. 1162 fiUdapos da. The scholiast's explanation 'given to 
life ' is not happy. 

28-30. This is not the ordinary form of the myth concerning Melampus as given 
e.g. in Hdt. ix. 34, Apollod. i. 9. 12. 8, which represents him as sharing with his brother 
Bias in the sovereignty of Argos. It is, however, noticeable that the later kings of Argos 
traced descent from Bias through Adrastus, not from Melampus. Besides Pyfk. iv. 126 
there is a reference to Melampus in 426. 12 *(*Apy€vs M«Xa/i[irov*, which may be Pindaric. 
MfXd/Airof is accented in the papyrus as if it were McXdpirow. 

29. 7rarp[i]da: SC. PyloS. 

29-30. There is a break in the papyrus after apyfi, but sufficient margin remains after 
the & to indicate pretty clearly that the line is complete. It is therefore inadmissible to read 
[ano\$€fievos ; but though WfarAu in the sense of anoridiaBat is not found elsewhere in Pindar, 
such a use does not seem impossible ; cf. the phrase 0c<rd<u ra ftrXa meaning to lay down 
one's arms, and Aristoph. Lysist. 312 6»pt<r6a ty rA fopriov. Or, as Bury observes, Btptros may 
be taken outside the negative and mean ' having made his own, adopted ' ; cf. natba 
BfoBai, &c. 

34. The letter after & is either c or o. 


35. &v]oktos: cf. e.g. Aim, iii. 33 Urjktvt <ka£, Py/A. iv. 89 'E^ioXra &a£ But the 
reading is very doubtful, and we adopt it without much confidence. The surface of the 
papyrus is damaged, and if k is right, it must be supposed that the lower diagonal stroke 
has entirely disappeared, giving the letter more the appearance of v. The a also is not 
very satisfactory, for rather more than the speck which actually survives would be expected 
to be visible. We had also thought of [& ] aMs, but that is a weak alternative. 

Ev(cu[tIov: some fresh light is thrown in the following passage upon the legend of 
Euxantius, which was treated at length in the unfortunately mutilated first ode of 
Bacchylides. An outline of the story is given in some scholia on the Ibis of Ovid, where 
it is said that Macello (Macedo, Macelo) and the other daughters of Damon had showed 
hospitality to Jupiter, and were therefore spared by him when he destroyed the Telchines, 
of whom Damon was the chief. Subsequently Minos arrived, and became the father of 
Euxantius by Dexithea (Dexione, Dexithone), one of Macello's sisters. The poem of 
Bacchylides (written for a Cean victor) begins to give a connected sense at the point when 
Minos arrives in Ceos and weds Dexithea ; his treatment of the earlier part of the story 
can be only vaguely conjectured from a few scattered fragments. But there is one other 
reference to this legend which has an important bearing upon the present passage of 
Pindar. It o ccurs in Nonnus, Dionys. xviii. 11. 35-8, which in the MSS. run as follows : — 

Zrjpa nil 'AirrfXXem fuj frimro* Ma*cXX<»y 

• * * * * 

mil *Xryvar drc napras avcppifaa* Octkaaajj 
vfjaor oXipr rptAhovri diappT)(as 'Evoo-ix&ov 
afUporipas f(f>v\a(( ko\ ov 7rprjvi(f rptalvjj. 

There is a lacuna between 11. 35 and 36, which contained a substantive agreeing with tuft, 
and the only necessary alteration in the traditional text is the simple correction of MokAXw 
to MfijccXXw. The emendations adopted in A. Kttchly's Teubner edition (1857), rpatriCo for 
MaKfXXw and apifwripovf for apxfxnipas, are put out of court, as Jebb remarks {Bacchylides, 

!>. 444), by the Ibis scholia. But what are the Phlegyae doing in this context ? Jebb suggests 
L c.) that Nonnus here alluded to two distinct legends : (a) the destruction of the Telchines 
by Zeus, (b) that of the Phlegyae by Poseidon (Euphor. Fr. 154 ap. Serviusi4*a. vi. 618 iratus 
Neptunus percussit tridente tarn partem insula* quern Phlegyae tenebant, et omnes obruit). But 
the striking similarity of language in the lines of Nonnus and the present passage of Pindar 
(cf. w}ow Ayr . . . c<£vXa£f with 11. 41-5 below) strongly suggests that if Nonnus was not 
copying Pindar, he was at any rate following the same tradition. The «}<w can hardly be 
other than Ceos, and unless the appearance of the Phlegyae is to be ascribed to a confusion 
on the part of Nonnus,' which would be a rash assumption, it must be concluded that 
one form of the legend brought the Phlegyae and Telchines together at Ceos, and represented 
their destruction by Zeus and Poseidon as simultaneous. 

The introduction of Euxantius into this paean shows that the obscurity of the myth 
is somewhat exaggerated by Jebb {Bacchylides, p. 449). Bacchylides' reference to Ceos as 
Edfurtda rao-op (il 8) might of itself be taken to imply a rather wider currency than Jebb 
admits. Euxantius' refusal to leave Ceos for a share in the kingdom of Minos, as narrated 
here by Pindar, is an entirely novel feature. 

36. Jnaipta: the corresponding word in the antistrophe (1. 46) also begins with the 
syllable Ar- ; ct note on 1. 15. 

37. Uar6v : cf. Iliad B 649 Kpqripr Ararrf/biiroXtj'. 

38. pipos tfidofiow: Pasiphae* is credited with four sons, one of whom, Androgeos, 
predeceased his father Minos (Apollod. iii. 15. 5-7). If Pasiphatfs sons had a double 


portion, a seventh share would remain for Euxantius. But Minos had more children by 
another marriage. 

The transposition of the second syllable of v{<x)jip is required for the correspondence 
with 1. 48. Blass thought that it would be an improvement to place the final syllable -w 
also in this line, and transfer /mm in L 49 to the previous verse. At the end of the second 
line of the scholium no[a]i+4[i) is a possible reading, but the letters are much mutilated. 

39. ripas may be explained as referring to divine interposition described in 11. 42-5, 
and there is no need to emend to y*pas. 

42-4. Cf. note on 1. 35. 

44. partpa: i.e. Dexithea ; cf. note on 1. 35, Bacchyl. i. c. 8, Apollod. iii. 1. a. 

46. vXovtov witp2>v : cf. Ntm. V. 30-I WfixJMias intipa . . . cvvar. 

48. A point has been inserted immediately below the line between « and X, this being 
the only instance in the papyrus of the use of a low stop. If [m»]r (Bury) is rightly restored 
in 1. 49 the neuter Ifarcdov must be taken as referring vaguely to the preceding sentence. 
Blass proposed to read [oS>\ (cf. Pindar Fr. 221) and insert w before Xiar, tya-fdor being 
adverbial as in Pyth. x. 34 L> Bakiais ffim&op . . . 'AinSXA«r x<up#i. The abnormal accentua- 
tion of <x*> might be explained as a survival of the lost negative ; but the punctuation would 
make the synizesis of ?*«»; (ov) particularly awkward, and the sentence (ov) ...«#* 
would be weak. To read [a&]t without (ov) and regard the words as ironical is also 

The quantity of t in \lap may vary, but it is short in the only other Pindaric instance 
(Pyth. i. 90), and is more likely to be the same here. There is a similar ambiguity in 
the corresponding syllable of the strophe L 38 v2[m]- (for the short quantity cf. e.g. 
Ntm. vi. 25 vU»w\ 

49. [nS>]t : the corresponding syllable in l. 39 is short, but there is no great objection 
to a syllaba anceps here, and the difficulty would be still slighter if not were transposed 
to the end of the preceding verse ; cf. note on l. 38. 

50-3 =: Pindar Fr. 154, quoted by Plutarch, De exil. 9. p. 602, where the MS. 
tradition is now shown to be very corrupt. The lines there appear in the following form : 
ikatfrpfo nmapunrop <f>iX*ftP tap ftf vophv Kftyrar mpdkdw «pol A' Skiyop fiip yav dcooroi, o$iv Aopvr, 
wcvBeuw tf avK frago* Mi <ttq<tUp. Hermann altered ircptowW to wfpi&uo*, but that rather 
obvious correction is the only one proposed by modern editors which is confirmed by 
the papyrus, and the passage affords a good illustration of the precariousness of the attempt 
to emend lyrics where the metre is uncertain. The genesis of some of the corruptions 
is now apparent : <f>i\c*ip was added to explain 7a, and the proximity of this infinitive led 
to taw di for ?a 6V. The construction being thus obscured ?a <f>pfip (4>p6») would easily 
become ikafo&p, which fits in with the general sense of the passage \simplices liberalium 
homxnum delt'ctae, says Schroeder) ; and JLpiftat no doubt came in from the margin ; cf. the 
scholium of the papyrus. With regard to the latter part of Plutarch's citation the new 
evidence is somewhat ambiguous, but fortunately just sufficient is preserved to enable, with 
the help of the metre, a satisfactory restoration to be made. At first sight, what remains 
of the two topmost lines of Col. xix appears to belong to the main text, the writing being 
of the normal size; but to this view there are grave objections, jdorcu must represent 
Plutarch's deform, which is required by the metre in the middle of the verse, as also is 
TKaxov in the second line. But in the first place the break down the left side of the papyrus 
follows a practically straight line, and therefore something of lines 54 and 56, containing 
10 and 12 syllables respectively, would be expected to remain; the papyrus, however, 
is blank until 1. 58 is reached, where before jn-epe as many as 13 syllables have to be 
supplied. This disproportion is too great to be accounted for by collocations of vowels 
or variations in the size of the writing (cf. note on 1. 24). Secondly, there is not sufficient 


room in the lacunae to the right of 1L 52-3 for the completion of the verses. We therefore 
prefer to suppose that the remnants of 11. 52-3 are marginal variants added by the first 
hand, in favour of which, moreover, there is the positive consideration that before Xagof 
in 1. 53 is a blank space large enough for i£-2 letters. The size of the writing is no 
doubt something of a difficulty; but analogous cases occur at V. 38, VI. 83, 172, 
Fr. 20. 28, where marginalia have been written by the original scribe in letters not 
appreciably smaller than those of the accompanying text. 

To turn to the reconstruction of these two lines, modern criticism has rightly been 
suspicious of o0*v Ztyvs, which produced no tolerable sense, and is now shown not to 
scan ; but attempts at emendation have been wide of the mark. After Mfionu the papyrus 
has a clear 6 followed by a curved stroke, which pretty certainly represents either a or », 

and given the metrical conditions ( w ^) Blass's dd/tro* &pv6s seems convincing ; this 

involves the ejection of the superfluous piv yfir, which was no doubt added as an explana- 
tion of okiyov. To alter 6\iyop to Skiyos is unnecessary, and the suitability of the epithet 
might be called in question. A certain species of oak is still the characteristic tree 
of Ceos, and the acorns are the chief commercial product of the island. The metre of 
the last verse may be restored by means of a few simple alterations. What stood in the 
original text in place of dc'dora 6d/m» remains a riddle which is not likely to be solved. 
The above x of Xaxo[» is also difficult. There is a dot to the left of it (to the right is 
a lacuna) indicating an alternative reading ; for a similar variant on a variant cf. V. 38. 
(ffkaBo* would not give a sense. As for X^o^, the writer may merely have wished to 
emphasize the possibility of the division to Xdxop as against d* Aa^or, and it is therefore 
unnecessary to suppose that a different verb figured in the text. 

In connexion with tamapuraop and the remark of the scholiast it may be noted that, as 
Bury reminds us, the Cretan pfaatipop at Delphi mentioned in Pyth. v. 39 sqq. is described 
as KVfrapurcivor. 

58. Zt)(^Sotos) : cf. VI. 55, &c, and note on II. 61. The reading of the variant here 
attributed to Zenodotus is unfortunately doubtful. The ft may be a, and the diagonal 
stroke of the supposed v has disappeared, what actually remains suggesting rather pi. It 
is noteworthy that iteap . [ apparently occurs three lines below, where a proper name is 
expected. But no name Kcapior or Kttpun is known, and Kiapwr fa* would not scan in 
1. 58. There is a further difficulty about the « of i)pt>, the left-hand half of the letter having 
vanished, while the surface of the papyrus is apparently intact. If not », the mark in 
question must be simply a mis-shapen point, and Kc&r&i'jjp could be read; but this is an 
unsatisfactory alternative. 

60. We can find no other trace of this statement concerning the sons of Euxantius. 
A K«'o* in Salamis is mentioned by Hdt. viii. 76 ol afi<f>\ rfjp Kcoy re koI rrfp KvwSowpaw 
T*rayfi€voi, another in Boeotia by Lysimachus in Schol. Soph. 0. C. 91, but both were quite 
obscure. Kiwv for Klu cannot be read. 

61. Kcap . [ and ut4(s) k.t\. below are in a different hand from that of wi]s . . . 
RaT]^KT)90K. Kcap . [ may be a personal name, but the writing is indistinct, and there is 
possibly a correction. The letter after p may be 1 ; cf. note on 1. 58. 'Oiw'np was a son 
of Heracles and Deianira, but he does not seem to fit in with the context. For <S]p(tI row) 
cf. e. g. 1. 4 ; an alternative restoration is 'Apj^oTo^a)]^^), but in the other probable instances 
of that name the p is not written above the line ; cf. note on II. 61. 


V. To Delos. 

1. Cf. Soph. O. T. 154 Ifa Mkit iia&. 

15. A verse has dropped out here. Possibly the marginal insertion opposite 1. 45, 
flai&Spoii *Epcx(6lo$) aticW, is misplaced and really gives part of it, for those words have 
no bearing on the context there, and they happen to coincide metrically with the conclusion 
of the missing line. aZtcXor is obscure ; afxAor according to Hesychius meant al yaviai rov 
jScXow, aU\op was a Lacedaemonian word for df'mvov. Pandoras was a son of Erechtheus ; 
cf. Apollod. iii. ig. 1. 

35-48- ' . . • they took Euboea and dwelt there. O Apollo of Delos, to whom we cry 1 
They made homes in the scattered isles where the sheep abound, and laid hands on 
far-famed Delos, for Apollo of the golden locks gave them the body of Asteria to inhabit. 
O Apollo of Delos, to whom we cry I There may the children of Leto graciously receive 
me your servant, to the honeyed sounding strains of a glorious paean.' 

36. fkop : the subject is ol an6 'aBtjv&p *i»w, as indicated by the context and the 
remains of the scholium opposite 1. 35. 

38. There is little to choose between the alternatives $ep#pqAoi* and iroXupqXovr, though 
in favour of the latter must be set the fact that this compound occurs twice elsewhere 
in Pindar (Ol. i. 12, Pyth. ix. 6) whereas <t»piyLrjkos is not otherwise recorded. The MSS. 
show the same variation in the spelling of -fwjXoc at Ol. i. 12, but the form with 17 is 

39. The scribe began to write a round letter after c/Mxvdca and then corrected 
it to a r. 

40. w in anoXkvr corr. 

42. y K(rr*plas dc/uuv = AqXov. Asteria, sister of Leto, was turned into the island of 
Delos, which is sometimes called simply Asteria, e. g. Callim. Del. 300; cf. Fr. 19. 1L 21 sqq. 

below, and NonnUS 42. 4x0 'AoTcpirjv tf cdt'axce Kal orXrro yrjaos *pr)M* 

44. Ma fie: trochaic (and sometimes also spondaic) words followed by enclitics 
received two accents according to the grammarians, and instances of such accentuation 
are found in MSS.: cf. Ktihner-Blass I. p. 341. Other examples in this papyrus occur 
at VI. 87 and 132, Fr. 93. 4 ; cf. the Berlin Corinna papyrus, Bcrl. KlassiktrUxU V. (2) 

XW. I. l6 TOPUcd W, 2. 89 bdnpOV TC. 

45. Cf. Pyth. viii. 18 cv/um vty Xtvdpuiov ?fcjcro. On the marginal addition cf. 
note on 1. 15. 

48. The papyrus is so rubbed that no part of the addition in the margin, which is 
in a good-sized hand, is clear. It is doubtful whether there were really letters at the 
two places marked by dots outside the brackets, the traces of ink at those points being 
very slight. 

VI. 'For the Delphians to Pytho.' 

1-19. 'By Zeus of Olympus I pray thee, golden Pytho famed for prophecy, and 
ye Graces and Aphrodite, to receive me at the sacred season, the spokesman of the tuneful 
Pierides. For I hear that there are wanting men to dance to the music of the Castalian 
fount by the brazen-gated stream, and am therefore come relieving thy townsmen's need, 
and furthering mine own honour. I have obeyed my heart as a child his kind mother, 
and gone down to Apollo's grove, the home of garlands and festivity, where oft by 
the shady pivot of earth the maidens of Delphi beat the ground with nimble foot as they 
sing of the son of Leto. 9 


i -6= Pindar Fr. 90, quoted by Aelius Aristides ii. 160 (ed. Keil). Hartung was right 
in attributing the lines to a paean, but wrong in connecting them with Pindar Fr. 148. 
A marginal asterisk similar to that here occurs at the end of a poem in the Bacchylides 
papyrus vii. 54 (Facsimile Col. xiv). 

3. Maaofiai XaptT€<r(rt(v) : a(i)aofiai Xdptrh (or -<Ls) t* MSS., emended by W. Canter. 

5. xprfpy, the traditional reading (x">w U, Boeckh) accepted by Keil and Schroeder, 
is confirmed by the papyrus ; 0p6wy Schneidewin, Ty. Mommsen, Christ, x°P<$ Bergk, 
Hartung. CdBtos xpoW here means, as Keil points out, the season of the Pythian festival 
(UpofATfvia a UvBias, C. I. G. 1 688. 44, &c.) ; cf. Nem. iii. 2 h Upopqpiq. Nf/itadi, and the Delphic 
paean to Dionysus, B.C.ff. xix. 393 sqq., 11. 3-4 Tjpiva\h Uov raurlf] Upms «V &pais. The syllable 
-wp occurs in the same position of a corresponding verse at 1. 87, and -ow»- at 1. 127. 
Other similar correspondences in this paean are 11. 6 and 128 -<w, 10 and 132 -«*, 12 and 
134 ttcus, 15 and 137 toBi totc, 16 and 138 topai ko/hu, 17 and 139 napb atamwra kotAotuo*, 
88 and 128 oKwpircov &bop*ov, 98 and 138 -pos; cf. 11. 51 and II2 Btottri [Ot]k. 

6. Either doidtpa* (so Aristid. MSS.) or dwdipuv may be genuine. The interlinear 
« is not certainly by the first hand. Uupfop for Uitpi&ov MSS., emended by Canter. For 
nptxjidrav cf. Bacchyl. viii. 3 Movaav . . . npoctxrras. 

7. The marginal p marks the 1200th line; cf. II. 25, and note on III. 17. The 
brazen lions' heads mentioned by the scholiast do not appear to be otherwise known ; that 
he calls the stream the Cephisus, which was on the northern side of Parnassus, is also 

8-9. A meaning somewhat different from that given in our translation would be 
obtained by connecting KaardXias with Man and yfnfyop with *opcv<ru>f : ' I hear a sound of 
dancing in which men are unrepresented,' i. e. the maidens dance alone (cf. 11. 15 sqq.). 
This construction is preferred by Bury. 

10. Of the variants d[X]t£»r, the reading first written, seems the best (cf. e.g. OL xiii. 9 
dXcgcty "Y/fyur) ; dpffy€t» is used in the same way by Aeschylus and Euripides (e. g. Mc<L 
1275 &fnj(ai <f>6»ov . . . rawer), but not by Pindar. Mfav would not give the requisite 
sense, rot* koiko[C| in the marginal note below refers to the zeugmatic use in this passage 
of oXffciv, which with the ace. means 'ward off' and with the dat. 'assist' The rough 
breathing on the c of Iran in the papyrus is unusual. 

14. rp<xf>6p is far preferable to the marginal ftXvror. Cf. II. 63 and Pyth. i. 1-2. 

18. The correction of Kporti[vri to *porcom is necessary metri gratia. With srodl . . . 
[60$] cf. II. 99 x°P^ v [roxtyoda : [™x*f here would be less suitable to the size of the lacuna. 

50. Perhaps d6w\6ro^ tpa] (Bury), with a reference to 11. 87-9, or tfpis for fpis if the 
shortened final syllable of tvpv$apcrpa» in L 1 1 1 is regarded as illegitimate ; cf. note ad loc. 

51-65. ' The gods are able to persuade the wise of these things, but for mortals it 
is impossible to find the way. But since ye have received this as your ordained right, 
O maidens sharing alike in all things with your father whom the dark clouds hide and 
Mnemosyne, hear me now : my tongue is fain to pay its best and sweetest honey-tribute 
when I have gone down to die broad lists of Loxias at the festival of the gods. For 
sacrifice is made for All-Hellas the glorious, which the Delphic folk prayed (to be saved 
from?) famine . . .' 

51. 6t6Un is a disyllable, if I. 1x2 is rightly restored. It is noticeable that the scansion 
of [0)t6s in that line is similar. 

52. indftr is metrically preferable to ntl&np if the restoration of 1. 113 is correct 

54. The end of this line is a crux, p^rat is inevitable, since po, though imperfect, 
is practically certain, and o and <r are so close together that there is room for only a very 


narrow letter between them. Since the Muses are evidently addressed it seems obvious 
at first sight to write Mo[i]crcu ; but then the difficulty is to find a plausible restitution of 
the preceding dactyl and a construction for wAvra in 1. 55. It is simpler to suppose that 
;xo{i}xai is the termination of a feminine participle in agreement with vapSiva and governing 
muTti. Yet even on this hypothesis some alteration of the text appears necessary. The 
letter after «r, if not o must be another ••, which gives no word. At a short distance from 
this is a vertical stroke which we suppose is the second upright of an * ; it might also 
be 7, t, t, v, or the first half of p or v. With any of these letters, however, with the doubtful 
exception of r, there will be a short preceding lacuna to be filled (e. g. i*o[.]<[), and the 
metre will be wrong. To the reading adopted there is the objection that part of the 
diagonal stroke of a r would be expected to be visible ; but the surface of the papyrus 
is damaged, and the diagonal stroke may have been drawn somewhat higher than usual. 
If tv4>pov in 1. 115 be scanned as a disyllable, as written in the papyrus, the alternatives 
remain of regarding lao . . potaai as a compound verb, in which case the termina- 
tion is incorrect (? la-o^o^f^ijrcu : cf. e.g. Isthm. viii. 35 db\<f>f$Unr, and BacchyL 
i. 34, where the papyrus has pdkol for ]8oXcoi) : or of supposing la . . to conceal Era 
and reading lo(a) [i>c}io[t]crai, the sense of v4p*tp being the same as e.g. in OL ii. ia 
& Kpovt* nai 'Plat, tbot 'OAvfurov P€fia»v. But the t of 7<ror is short elsewhere in Pindar, 
though it is lengthened in the compound io-odai/iw, Nem. iv. 84; and hence we have 
adopted with some hesitation Bury's proposal to write *v<f>pop' in 1. 115 and insert y* after 
fro*. The errors in the papyrus are commonly due to omission of letters ; and diaeresis is 
neglected e. g. in 1. 77. 

55. Only the top of the supposed 17 of [z^vo&rros) survives. A variant *eXa«<£c< seems 
to be indicated, but xtXaw^i produces the right correspondence with 1. 116. KcXacw^ip 
is a Homeric epithet of Zeus not elsewhere so used by Pindar. The Muses were the 
daughters of Zeus and Mnemosyne ; cf. Fr. 16. 1 1 below. 

57. tc0}ao* : sc. the inspiration of poets, t6 m6u* <r<xfxws (1. 52). 

58. A comparison with L 119 shows that the mark of short quantity above pvp is 

59. npoxiw tig is only one of several possible restorations ; KtXa&rjaat e. g. would also be 
suitable, <ls being unnecessary with Kara&dpTa (cf. Pyth. iv. 55 UvBiop vabv Karafidwa), 
A difficulty, however, is raised by the note dr(-rl tou) dtfarou, which would seem to imply 
that its author did not construct forop with an infinitive coming after y\vKvp. The reading 
of Zenodotus is unfortunately beyond recovery ; it ends with a sloping dash which might 
mark an abbreviation or belong to an hastily written p. For the language of L 59 
cf. Isthm. i. 51 yXuaaas aurop, and OL V. I Swop ykvicvp. 

60. tvpvp shows that ay£>va has a local signification as e. g. in OL x. 24 Ay&pa . . . Ak*, 
tv dpxaif <ra/uum nap UiXoKot . . . cVWaaaro. The analogy of this and other passages 
is in favour of the correction Aof la. 

61. fc&v (tvla = e<a£rWotr. In the following lines the institution of this festival is 
referred to the occasion of a famine, — a fact explained in the mutilated scholium but 
apparently not otherwise recorded. The local cults of Apollo were frequently brought 
into connexion with deliverance from such visitations, e. g. Pausan. i. 3. 4, where a statue 
to Apollo d\t(Uaicos is said to commemorate the plague in the Peloponnesian war, and 
viii. 41. 8, where Apollo faiKovptos at Bassae is explained as hnKovprjcram. cV vfoy \oipMti-, 
cf. also schol. on 1. 125 below. 

68-9. Fr. 48 would in some ways be suitable here, — Kpoi{ic www nai] pam&pw \ wpCrapt 
(cf. Aesch. Prom, 169 paicdp^v npvrapts), but the difference in the colour of the papyrus and 
the disparity in the size of the writing are decisive against this combination. 

72. [nvlfi»po^€P : cf. Pyth. v. 105. The transposition of the first syllable from the 


preceding verse is required by the metre ; 1. 93, the corresponding verse in the antistrophe, 
as originally written was also a syllable short. 

74. nduBoos was a priest of Apollo at Delphi and subsequently at Troy ; cf. Verg. 
Aen. ii. 319 sqq. For bavauv k.t.X. cf. hthm. iii. 54 (iv. 36) naifcaatv EWdvav, foot Tpoiattf 

75. For the shortened first syllable in Tpwia cf. e. g. Nem. iv. 25, where the MSS. have 
Tpmav as an anapaest. But several editors substitute Tpotav, and the interlineation in the 
papyrus shows that the question between o» and o in such cases is an ancient one. A 
shortened » (with no variant) occurs in 1. 178 wa\rpmav or Tp»«n>. 

77. mfc [Zipor: i.e. Athene; cf. 01. xiii. 77 Zrjvfc eyx<i**pavrov rraU and, for the 
allusion to Diomedes, Iliad E 115 sqq. The occurrence of irais as a disyllable here is 
of interest in connexion with the corrupt passage in 01. ii. 76, where trait has been 
conjectured, and 659. 70 (Pindar, Partkencion), where the probability of the vocative ndl 
is now increased. 

78-123. '(Diomedes), whom the far-darting god in the mortal form of Paris smote 
with an arrow and estopped from battle. And straightway he put off the capture of Ilium, 
quelling by a bold deed of blood the doughty son of dark-tressed Thetis of the sea, the 
trusty defence of the Achaeans. What was his strife with white-armed Hera, as he matched 
against her his invincible power, what with Polias ! In return for their great pains they would 
have razed the city of Dardanus, had not Apollo been on guard. But Zeus, the ruler of 
the gods, seated on the golden clouds and peaks of Olympus, dared not relax the decrees 
of fate : for high-coifed Helen's sake must the flaming fire's ray blot out wide Pergamon. 
And when they had placed in the sore-lamented tomb the mighty corse of the son of Peleus, 
went messengers over the sea-waves and came again bringing from Scyros Neoptolemus, 
great in strength, who sacked the city of Ilion. Yet saw he not thereafter his kind mother, 
nor roused he forth in the fields of his fathers the horses of the Myrmidons, a brass-accoutred 
host. He reached the Molossian land hard by Tomarus ; but he escaped not the winds 
nor the far-darter with the broad quiver. For the god swore that he who killed aged Priam 
when he had sprung upon the altar in the court should come to no comfortable path in life 
nor reach old age ; and he slew him, as he strove with the attendants about their allotted 
rights, in his beloved enclosure by the broad pivot of the earth. Oh hail, hail ! Now for 
the paean in full measure 1 Oh hail, ye youths I ' 

78-80. Cf. Iliad A 369 sqq. Homer, however, does not ascribe the wounding of 
Diomedes by Paris to any special intervention of Apollo. The a of fopm is corrected. For 
«[«a/9aXo* cf. 1. 1 1 1 below ; the rough breathing is probable, but not certain. 

81. Either 'iXfy or 'IX/ov may stand. The genitive is more natural, but it would 
therefore be less liable to alteration. 

83. The metre shows *rua*oirX<$«Mo to be the right reading. Both kvopouXokos and 
KvaydKopot are &na$ flprjfitua. Kvapon\6*afios is a favourite word of Bacchylides. 

84. A dot has been placed above and below the d in Berths indicating that it should 
be omitted, elrun is the Pindaric form ; cf. 01 ix. 76, Isihm. viii. 52. 

87-9. For fova . . . bra cf. 01. xiii. 107 "hpyttff &a<ra ta\ cV effiats, foar . . . papTvprjvu. 
In the Iliad Apollo appears consistently on the side of the Trojans, Athene on that of 
the Greeks. 

87. fpifr : the Doric aorist is sufficiently common in Pindar, and hardly deserved 
a note ; cf. e. g. 1. 133 ryyvdXiffr. 

88. Both a grave and an acute accent are placed above the a of m{.]fp€i^v f the former 
being enclosed between two dots like the letters of variants (e.g. 11. 81 and 83). The 


purpose was to indicate a choice between the alternative readings dj{r]rpf/foi' (grave accent) 
and «{i-'( a )] *fxM»v (acute). Editors write apnptiaau in Pyth. iv. 37. A similar double 
accent is found in IX. 17. 

89. foa: the variant fotra attributed to Aristophanes implies a syllaba anceps at 
the beginning of the verse, but the syllable is short in the other surviving instances, 11. 7, 
68, and 129. 

trpo = dvri, a sense found in a line of Philemon doCXor np6 dovkav, koirArrfs np6 kovorav 
according to Bekker, Anted, p. 112 ; cf. npotipyov. 01. x. 23 tpyw np6 narrw jSlor? (fxun is 
perhaps a parallel ; avr\ novwp occurs in Isthm. v. 25. 

91. hrpa0(r>)»: ewpafav Pap., but there seems to be no reason, as Bury observes, for 
dissociating Hera and Athene here, and the singular may easily have come in from the 
adjacent verbs. 

92-3. The final o of oXvptroto was added at the beginning of 1. 93 after * was written. 
The omission may have been simply an oversight ; but the papyrus is damaged at the end 
of L 92, and it is possible that the final o was at first placed there, and then deleted ; cf. note 
on 1. 72. There is no sign of okv/inov having been the original reading. 

94. avc[\]u*v: for the Doric infin. cf. IX. 36 avvaytv, 01. i. 3 yapvtv, Pyth. iv. 115 
Tpa<f>cv. (tkottos is used as in Nem. v. 27 Mayvqra>p aictmw (Acastus), &c. 

95 S QQ« Cf. Pyth. xi. 33 apf> 'EXcVa nvp»6ivr»v Tpcpav. 

tyurffjupi cf. Pyth. iv. 172 tyixcurai, an epithet which according to Boeckh vigorem et 
robur indicate according to Fennell, who compares Thucydides i. 6. 3, refers to an eastern 
fashion of wearing the hair. The latter explanation would suit the present passage. The 
accent on the o is not quite certain. 

96. A small difficulty occurs at the end of this line. The supposed 1 is doubtful, 
but to read ttpv d|7<nw<u is unsatisfactory not only on account of the hiatus but because 
a space between v and a would remain unaccounted for. TLipyapot (01. viii. 42) meaning 
Troy is always feminine wherever the gender is determinable, and therefore *tpx[»] is 
inadmissible unless it be here declined as an adjective of two terminations on the analogy 
of 6rj\vs and i)&w. On the whole we prefer 6i|a<nw<u (Soph. Trach. 881), and it is possible 
that an a was actually written after di, for though there is no trace of ink the surface of 
the papyrus is worn, a is long in aUrrovv in the only other Pindaric instance, Pyth. 
in. 37. 

97. aiBofitvos was a slip, perhaps due to uvpos. The s is practically certain. 

99. There was certainly one letter, probably either 1 or (better) v, immediately after 
-da, and some traces of ink beyond may belong to a second. IlijXf t<W would be intelligible 
whether W*w was taken adjectivally or in apposition with the proper name ; but the genitive 
is more likely to be correct 

So far as the general appearance of the papyrus and the recto is concerned, Fr. 66 
might be placed near the end of this line in the gap between Cols, xxix and xxx ; but there 
is nothing in the scholium which suggests any connexion with the text 

107. The marginal numeral is placed midway between this and the following line ; 
1. 107 is the xooth from the preceding p (1. 7). 

108. As the text stands x<iX*. [3}uW is in apposition with tmrovs. There is not room 
in the lacuna for [ff fyukov : perhaps xoX"«>*opi{crr]ai' (ff)[sy. should be read, but the particle 
is not necessary. 

IO9-IO. Cf. Nem. vii. 35-7 Uptdpov iroktv NcovrroXc/iOf cVcl irpaBtV . . . 6 tf ammkfov 
Ixvpov fiiv Hfiaprt, TrXayx&Vrcf A' fir 'E<pvpav Uovto. MoXoo-cria V ipfiaatktvtv 6\iyov xjpdvov. At 

the end of 1. no the choice of supplements seems to lie between c[pa6]t» (cf. Nem. vii. 17-8 
acxfxH bi ficXXoira rptroiov avtfiov tfioBov), and t[\a6]ev t the former being more suitable to 
aytpovs, the latter to itcapoXov. c[Xa0]cv has the advantage of explaining the mark of short 



quantity which is visible above the lost vowel, and might naturally have been added to 
obviate confusion with tAi^er, whereas with tpaBtv no mistake could arise. Cf. moreover 
Pyth. iii. 27 6vV tkade 0x0x6* (sc. Apollo), Nem. i. 37 ov \a6uv xpwrMpovov "Hpav. The 
first three lines of the scholium perhaps contained some reference to Aegina or the 
Aeginetans. It was the following passage concerning the death of Neoptolemus which 
gave offence in Aegina; cf. note on 11. 11 7-9 and introd. p. 20. The three lower 
lines, which are in a different hand, are so nearly effaced that the obliteration seems 

in. The scribe has marked the final syllable of wprxfraptrpav as short, which, if correct, 
implies the existence of a form in -a side by side with that in -as (Pyth* ix. 26), as in the 

Case of InirArrfs and iimoWa ; cf. opaorpiatv&v in Pyth. ii. 12. 

114. Cf. Pausan. iv. 17. 3 NeoirroXcfi? yap r<p *A£iXXca»r anoKrtbfavTi Upiapov M rjj 
ioX&PQ tov 'Epxtiov ovvimo* koi avrov iv AcX^otr npbs r<p ftouy tov 'AjrdXXwo? dtrooifHiyrjvat, and 
Vergil, Atn. ii. 499-553- 

115, /up, to. i. wv: cf. Fr. 19. 24. Fluctuation between the two forms is common 
in the MSS. of Pindar. Mommsen and Bergk practically eliminate piv in spite of a 
consensus of tradition in several passages, uiv stands alone in II. 73, Fr. 19. 26 and 
Fr. 131. 18, viv in IV. 15, Fr. 82. 3a and IX. 47. 

1 1 7-9 = Pindar Fr. 52, preserved in the scholia on Nem. vii. 94 KaBokov yap anokaytivScu 
fiovktrat ir*p\ tov fitonroKipov Bavarov izpbs rovs Alyivrjras' iictivoi yap $twiptq raw Ulvbapov on 
ypatfx&v Ac\<f>6ts rbv rraiapa ?<£ij ap<f>iirokouri uapvdptvov pvpiav ncp\ ripav arroXa>X«W : cf. ibid. 1 50 
ptp<f>6cis imb Alyunjrwv eVi ry boKciv iv nataouf tlrrtiv t6v NfonrAfpoi' «rt IwpoovXia ikrjXvOivai «s 
At\<j>ovt 9 vvv&oir*patro\oy€tTai tUruv ori ov\ Upoovkw *T*\<vrr}<icv dXX* vrrip Kpe&v (f)i\oTiprj$f\s avjjpc&rj. 
The papyrus proves the antiquity of the mis-spelling pvpiav which Boeckh, comparing 
the following words of the schol. on Nem. vii. 94 ov* tyijo-t , . . akka mp\ tov vopttpplvav 
np&v rols AeX^ofc, was the first to correct to potpiav. The letter after v is not indeed certain, 
but the remains suit p better than any other letter and are not consistent with B. pvpiav 
cannot be defended ; and the choice rests between Boeckh's emendation and the reading 
attributed in the margin of the papyrus to Zenodotus, UvOtav. The latter gives an excellent 
sense and may well be right, but it appears on die whole more probable that UvBatv 
was an attempt to emend pvpiav than that pvpiav was a corruption of an original UvOiav. The 
interchange of v and <m is too common to require illustration, papvapwov, if not to be 
explained by the supposition that the citation was made from memory, must be a gloss 
on [drjpi]a(6p€vov. drfptd{ouai is not attested, drjptdopai (firfpiouai, OL xiii. 44) being the regular 
form ; but we can suggest no more satisfactory restoration : dimaQeiv is not used in the 
middle voice. 

For k[p] € ** 1 ' m the note opposite these lines cf. Nem. vii. 42 Kp*»v vtv vvtp pAx** f\tur*v 
dvTiTvxovr awjp uaxaipa, and Schol. on 1. 150 quoted above, which also illustrates % r&v 

XJN)JA<£tCM' K.T.X. 

119-20. The size of the lacuna shows that a syllable is missing at the beginning 
of 1. 120. The reading ktov*\ucv attributed in the marginal note to Zenodotus would be 
metrical ; but a finite verb would be much more natural, and it is probable that the oblique 
construction has been wrongly carried on from 11. 11 5-7. At any rate a future not 
an aorist infinitive would be expected to balance l£ifuv. leravifuv is therefore very likely 
a graphical error for ktcokv cV, due to the influence of xravtiv in the text ; the horacdoteleuton 
would of course make the loss of iv particularly easy, p m tcraviptv is hardly certain, but 
is more suitable than v, 

1 2 1-2. The metre requires If) fij in 1. 121, Ifj only in 1. 122. 

123-40. 'An island of glorious name thou reignest amid the Dorian sea, bright 


star of Hellenic Zeus ! Therefore will we not lay thee to rest without a feast of paeans, 
but thou shalt receive our surging songs, and declare whence came to thee the god who 
guides thy helm and thy care for the right of the stranger. He who brings all things 
to pass in their diversity, the far-seeing son of Cronos, placed in thy hand thy happiness : 
by the waters of Asopus he once carried off from the threshold the deep-breasted maiden 
Aegina ; then the golden tresses of the mists hid the shaded ridges of your land, that upon 
the immortal couch . . .' 

123 sqq. The abrupt transition to Aegina, which is addressed in the following passage, 
is in the Pindaric manner. The point of connexion is to be found in the Aeacid ancestry 
of Neoptolemus, Aegina being the mythical home of the line, as narrated below in the 
legend of the birth of its founder. This pointed juxtaposition of Neoptolemus and Aegina 
helps to explain the soreness of the Aeginetans at what appeared to them an unfortunate 
description of the manner of .Neoptolemus' death; cf. note on 11. 11 7-9 and introd. p. 20. 
But they certainly had no cause to complain of the tone of 11. 123-32. 

6»ofiaKkvra is quoted from Pindar by Schol. T. on Iliad X 51 ( = Bergk Fr. 301) 
perhaps from the present passage; the feminine termination is also found in wwikXvto, 
another Pindaric epithet of Aegina (Nem. v. 9). For Ampul cf. Nem, iii. 3 Aapt'oa vaaov 
Acyuroy, and Pindar Fr. 1. 3. 

1 24. <fx'prrcu in the marginal note probably means ' is found in ', of a reading ; the word 
is so used in an unpublished Oxyrhynchus fragment of Apollonius Rhodius with scholia. 

125. Ai6s 'EWaviov : cf. Nem. v. 10 nap fa>p6v iraripos 'EAAoviou, and for the marginal 
note cf. the SChol. ad he, ffxuri yhp avxpov frorc nu(opTOt r^v 'EXXada, cwoi & KaraxXucrpov, 
awf\66vras tovs "EXX^vaf jca&xcrevcrai rbv Aiokov a>e tvra iraloa Aior *(airf)<ra<r6cu rav r&rt 
avaravrcnf kokwv ttjv laaur, roxrrov oc tv(dfitvov airo6*pantv<rcu rA oVifA kcu ovtu dta rijv rijr 
'EXXddo* aoTTjpiav "EXXqwoy napa r«f Alyivrp-cus TcriprjcrBai Aia. 

128. idopnov : cf. Pindar Fr. 1 24 a ipaxa* &xw {twit* (0 Boeckh) 6otiaw roM (roc) nt/m» 

129. poBta: cf. Aristophanes, Eg. 546 diptaff avry iroXv ro poBtop. The word is 
especially appropriate, like wwirovraw* in 1. 130, in the case of wave-washed Aegina. 

1 30-1. vcnmpvraviv and Btpifrvov are both Arof €lprffUva. On the latter cf. 01. viii. 20-3 

Atytva* . . . tvOa 2&T€ipa Ato? £mov napebpos aaKtiTcu Gc/ur f(ox* dvBptwreov, Nem. iv. II— 12 
Aiaiudap rjvvvpyov Zdot, SUq £<vapK(i koivov <f>€yyos, Nem. v. 8 (ptXav £ciw Zpovpay, and Fr. 1 . 3—4 
vipoma* (SC. the Aeginetans) ov Bipiv ovdc dinar fyivw vjrtp(5aivovT€f. 

In dptrdv two short syllables appear in place of a long one (1. 9 ?X6W, 1. 91 
*Ait4X]X[o»Jj») ; the same variation occurs in the case of the same word in the epode at 
1. 176. Bury notes that this resolution supports the traditional reading in Nem. iii. 14, 
where ayopw in a similar position in correspondence with a spondee has been commonly 

132. Cf. Isihm. V. 52 Zcvr ra rt *a\ ra W/m, and Pind. Fr. 141 foot 6 ndvra tcvx»v Pparotg. 

133. The variant ryyvaAi£ov would presumably imply nal for nais, producing a hiatus. 
The indicative is no doubt correct. 

134. The correction of vbari to vomer*! is necessary for the metre. Asopus was the 
father of Aegina ; cf. Isthm. viii. 1 7 sqq. Sibvpai ytvovro Bvyarpcs 'Aowrioto oirXoYarai, Zipi re 
&dov j&urtXci, o rav fUv . . . o« V (sc. Atyivav) is vaaov Oivoniav ivtyKwv Koiparo, 

135. n[or % a\t6: or perhaps w[o^' ujn-rf. fa&vKokwos is an epithet of the Muses in 
Pyih. i. 12. Cf. faBvfavos. 

136. c[va)pfyaTo : this verb is usually written mnptimaBai (avi)p*fyavro II. Y 2 34, &c), but 
the form dytprfrdptvoi is found in Bekk. A need. p. 401, and dpcVa akin to Apnafa and rapere 
would seem to be etymologically correct. 



138. The meaningless and unmetrical wpv^arav of the papyrus perhaps arose from 
a dittography of ^a. 

172. noivd is an alternative reading. The mark of short quantity rather suggests notrai 
as a variant on irvivai, but a final t was certainly not written. 

175. In the absence of the context there are no means of deciding between y* and the 

V. L T€. 

176. In operas w w — = ; cf. note on 1L 130-1. 

178. irappviav : or ] Tpcwav ; in either case the » is shortened; cf. 1. 75. 

180. vw is apparently a variant for fray. There is a short blank space between the 
final v and the very slight vestige of the following letter, which was perhaps the initial of the 
name of the critic who supported the reading. 

182-3. naiav : naiav Pap. According to Ahrens, De dial. Dor. p. 26, iratdv, 'ldt>, &c, was 
the Doric accent ; but different systems may have obtained among grammarians. If dc = 
' and ' the acute accent shows that an enclitic (t<m?) followed. 

The Zenodotean reading recorded in the margin is obscure. The letters are for the 
most part clear. 


1. If &6i{tifKu (Pindar Fr. 109. 5 w<vias tempo?) is right, the Muses or Graces are 

3. avkav probably means ' temple ' ; cf. Nem. iv. 24 'HpajcXcw 6\ftlav rrp6s avXdr. 

4. In front of the cross at the beginning of this line are some ink marks which might 
represent «*, but are more likely to be accidental. 

1 2. AV = ova. 

15. np6 p<op{ov (-p{S>v ?) : or irpo0<&M[<ot ; cf. Frs. 1 29-3 1. 20 below. 

16. ]Tapo[ is written slightly smaller and less regularly than the adjoining letters, and is 
possibly part of a marginal entry. 

17. Kt\d}dr)<rav avbav: cf. Fr. 1 6. 5 Ke\a&v)<ra0' ffprous. 

18. €vaynjs is not found elsewhere except in Apoll. Rhod. iv. 148 tvatrrea bovpai 


B. Frs. 16-25. On the general characteristics of this group of fragments cf. introd. 
p. 12. Whether any of them belong to Paean VII, or, if so, which, is doubtful. There 
are some resemblances in rhythm, but no correspondence can be established. 

Fr. 1 6. 5. •tc\a&f)<ra6 > is probably a variant for some other verb. The conjunction of 
the words KcXaS^craO* Jpyous here is noteworthy in connexion with Nem. iv. 16, where Bergk's 
emendation of the traditional vpvov KcXabtja* KaKkunxov to vlov «. k. has been accepted by 
Bury and Schroeder. Cf. VII. 1 7 xeXajdi/o-av avbav. 

6. Possibly *ar dfiaiiTdv, as in Pyih> iv. 247 : only the scantiest traces remain of the 
word between i}nrov and dfm(. 

7. Zvpiatfi the first letter seems to be o- rather than o, or Oovpiais would be an easier 
epithet. Cf. Aesch. Pers. 84 2vpi6v ff &pi»a difaw, and for 6» Uwois cf. e.g. 01. i. 41 
Xpv<rcai<riP dp* Irrrrois. The doubtful v may be r. 

8. n)rav6v : cf. Plato, Phaedr. 246 £ Z*vs <\avw>v imjpop apfia. The supposed r is 
represented only by the top of the crossbar, which might belong equally well to e.g. 
y or <r. 

10-7. '(I pray) to the fair-robed child of Uranus, Mnemosyne, and to her daughters 
to grant fullness of resource. For blind are the minds of men, whoever without the maids 

841. PINDAR, PAEANS 101 

of Helicon seeks the steep path of them who walked it by their wisdom. To me they have 
handed on this immortal work . . / 

zo. Some word like hr§vxoftai is apparently to be supplied in the lacuna. For cwmrXf 
. . . je^pa[x]oi r cf. VI. 54-6 and Isthtn. vi. 74-5 K6ptu xpvaoimrXou Mpafuxrwas. 

11. *vfia X aviav: d.Isthm. iv. 2, where the word means rather abundance of opportunity 
than resourcefulness on the part of the poet The latter sense is more appropriate in the 
present passage. 

13-4. avbp&v . . . [&\<rrts : SO 01. Hi. IO-I vlcovr fV avQpunovs aotdol $ rm . . . 

15. If t\6[6v]ra>v is right the sense seems to be 6*ms cpw? rfjp fiaBtiav 6d6v tS>p i\06vr*>v 
tMp rair avrS>v <ro<f>[ais : « whoever emulates the masters of poetry must be guided by the 
Muses.' The allusion is perhaps to Homer; cf. Fr. 17. Bury would prefer to connect 
€\6\6v]r<*v with [o]<rm and a^Uus with IpivJfa, which gives a less involved sentence, but 
makes lk^6»]rw awkwardly placed. cXd^Jrov, however, is insecure ; the doubtful 6 may 
be c or o, and y may replace r. To write <ro$/ac 6Mv (cf. VIII. 4) would be a slight 
simplification, but that is hardly warrantable. For pa6«a» cf. PytL v. 88 i\6s paBtiaw 

xikcvSov <Wya»r. 

16. The paragraphus marks the commencement of a new metrical section. If Fr. 16 
belongs to Paean VII this section will be an epode, since the metre of 1. 16 differs from that 
of VII. 1. 

17. ntrov seems to be the right reading ; n6pov would keep up the metaphor of 6&6v in 
L 15 (cC Isthm. viii. 15 /3/ov n6pov) but combines less easily with djirdo^icav] d$ipar[oy. 

Fr. 17. The appearance of this fragment suggests that it is closely connected with 
Fr. 19, though whether it should be placed somewhere in 11. 1-9 or belongs to the succeed- 
ing column is doubtful ; the recto is consistent with either position. A suitable collocation 
could be produced by making Fr. 17. 1. 1 the next verse to Fr. 16. 1. 17 and connecting 
n6m with 'Orfpov ; the papyrus being broken immediately above the latter word, there is no 
means of determining whether that line was the first of a column. 

Fr. 18. The beginning of 1. 10 in Fr. 16 seems to be a rather likely place for this 
small fragment 

Fr. 19. The first column of this fragment may follow immediately on Fr. 16. Such 
a position would suit the recto, which on the other hand indicates that Fr. 16 is not to be 
placed next to Fr. 19, Col. ii. 

2. SAtou: cf. Kaibel, Epigr. 185. 10 'Opfjpov dcXrov and 471. 1-2 'Ompot vpvn*' rV 
ftcXroir. The occurrence of BAtou here may be a mere coincidence, but perhaps affords 
a slight additional argument for making Fr. 16 and Fr. 19, Col. i successive columns, and 
placing Fr. 17 at the top of the latter. 

10. The scholium indicates a reference to Leto; cf. 1. 12 and 11. 20 sqq. 

12. Either faup|yov or fauplyy, as shown by the accent. Cf. Pyth. ix. 28 Udtpyos 

16-8. Whether Fr. 20 should be assigned to this column is very doubtful ; fao-oro is 
not very suitable to the context in 11. 20 sqq. The fragment is unlikely, owing to its 
difference in colour, to belong to Fr. 19, Col. i, but it may be the top of the column 
represented by Fr. 21. In the first line of the scholium it is tempting to read tV Atj]K[ok 
Xlyci *A[a]r{cyuu' (cf. V. 42, note), but though the supposed ir is quite uncertain and could 
well be r (or y or a), there does not seem to be room for <ttc between the a and p. 

18. Only a short horizontal stroke, which we take for an elongated base of a d, is 
visible before the lacuna ; it is too near to the line above to be a paragraphus. 


20. 7rci<rofu[t : v. I. mlBopai, indicating that trtiovpai is from wtUktp not ndcrxttv. The 
speaker is Asteria, as the next lines show. 

21 sqq. Cf. Call i mac h US, Del. 36 sqq. aXX* ctyrrof nt\ay*aatv cWirXftr, cfivopa V $y roc 
'Atrnpir) to ira\cu6v, firei fia$vv rj\ao rd<f>pov ovpav6$€v <f>tvyov<ra Atoc yafiov aafipt taif. Something 

corresponding to yafiov has to be supplied in 1. 21 after cdcXojWa, and ? perhaps = tyv ; but 
this use does not occur elsewhere in Pindar, and Bury would interpret ? here on the analogy 
of Pyih. iv. 57 ? pa Mrjbtas en-cow <mx«, where however the reading has been called in 
question and $ is taken by some critics as equivalent to fyi. 

22. Koiov Ovydrqp : i.e. Asteria, not Leto. 

23. Of the last five letters the bases only remain ; Wdo[i]«a seems to be right, but w or 
v might be read in place of the following «. Some infinitive such as Xc'yc** or ?$«* seems 
to be required to complete the sentence, though this profession of scepticism on the part of 

the poet is Curious; contrast Pyth. X. 49-50 $€&p rcX«<ra»r«w oW» wort (/xuWai tffifup 

24. For the variant m cf. VI. 115, note. In the incomplete state of the text it is 
difficult to decide between the claims of ip and of. The a is probably by the original 
scribe ; whether the overwritten v in this line and v in the next are also due to him is much 
more doubtful. 

25. *vay<a, v. /. tlavyia : the dot to the right of the interlinear v is lost The present 
passage is one of the few authorities for the spelling ctavyris, which Hemsterhuis wished 
to restore in all passages where the word means 'clear' or 'conspicuous.' In Arist. 
De Mundo 5. p. 397. 16 one MS. has cvavycWaw, and wavyia is found as a variant on 
tvayia in Iambi Protrept. p. 152. 23. It does not seem possible to read the first letter 
of the scholium as c, and if ]aoaye( is right, the stem must be vavay-, which would pre- 
sumably be another v. /., although the entry is in the small cursive hand in which 
explanations, not variants, are commonly given, and vavay in any form would produce 
a difference of metre. The supposed y€ could equally well be p. 

26. For the name 'Oprvyta cf. e. g. Apoll. Rhod. L 537 ? nov iv 'Oprvylji (iv r§ A^Xy 

Schol.) and Schol. Lycophron 401 17 Atjrovs ddeX^j) 'Aorcpfa favyovva rijv rov Atot fufip 
ficrc/SoXcy iavrijv ci* Zprvya Kal rfXaro tls ttjp BaKaaaav cal iyivrro vfftros, ijris i* ravrrjs % Oprvyta 

Ka\ 'Aorcpia cKaXtiro. n is clear before fup ; Blass preferred jcaA[«}k rr. In nakai there is 
a hole between a and 1, which are farther apart than usual, but there would not be room for 
ira\o[io]i unless the o was abnormally small. 

27. Cf. Callim. Del. 53-4 ovictV aoqkos cVcVXtfr, dXX' iv\ w6vrov Kvpaaur Alyaioio rrobvv 
ivtBrfgao pi(as. 

28-30. If rat is right ro(o<t>6pov rcXcVai y6vov will be epexegetical of ipaaaaro, i. e. Zeus 
desired the island as the place for the birth of Apollo. A more natural interpretation 
would be to connect rat with ytvop, but this is inadmissible since rat must refer to Asteria, 
who was not the mother of Apollo. Perhaps rat should be £*= *W (01. x. 51), when 
rfXtVai would be directly dependent on ipdoouro as in Nem, i. 31 ov« tpapai . . . «x« r « 
The metre being uncertain we cannot decide between icpdrurros and Kaprurros ; the confusion 
of spelling is not unfrequent in Pindar, e.g. Pyih. xi. 18, where there is authority for 
both Kpartpav and Kaprcpav. For 6 Kpartarot of Zeus cf. 01. xiv. 12 6(S>v Kparlorov naifcs, 
and for rfXeVoi Pyth. iii. 9 rov pip tvimrov QXtyva Ovydrrjp wplv rcAcWcu puarpawSky atop 'EXcidwp. 
y olyovov has apparently been corrected from <r. 

The present context, as suggested by Blass, would be appropriate to Fr. 90, reading 
in 11. 3-4 x]aX«[a]i pip ro\rt . . . vjnro Ktot[ts; cf. Pindar Fr. 88 dXX' a Kotoytvrjs onor* SAuK<r<n 
Bvlour ay\ir6KOit rVc/9a viv (sc. AJjXov), Si) t6t< riaaapts 6p6al irpippvv aw&povaav gAM***, av 
tf errucpiivoit a\%6av nfrpav a&ajMVToiridikoi Kiovtt. Moreover, the metre in Fr. 90 can be 
brought into correspondence with that in 11. 24-6 : w w — ] lo-tpvBfios i<pa{vtro . . . — xfa*"* 

841. PINDAR, PAEANS 103 

fxh ro]rc . . . w v — i^ro «io»{cV, and the two passages might therefore stand in the relation 
of strophe and antistrophe. The difference of hand creates no real difficulty, for if C and 
D belong to the same MS. as A and B, which there is good ground for supposing (cf. 
introd. p. 23), a change of scribe necessarily occurred at some point, and there is no 
reason why the point should not be at the end of Col. ii of Fr. 19. The appearance of 
the papyrus, however, is very dissimilar in the two fragments ; and the metrical argument 
is not strong, for the line of fracture on the left side of Fr. 90 is practically straight, and it 
is hardly likely that both u u -1 in 1. 24 and u v - v] in 1. 26 would have occupied the 
same space as — x] m !• 2 5* We have therefore refrained from bringing Fr. 90 into 
immediate relation with Fr. 19, though the combination is undoubtedly attractive. 

Fr. 21. The position of this fragment in relation to Frs. 16 and 17 is altogether 
uncertain; it may precede Fr. 16 or follow Fr. 17. The recto is practically illegible. 

7. farcTat, which is probably a variant for [&r]rai, seems to be independent of a/Mi[, 
being not quite in the same straight line, and apparently by a different hand. 

Fr. 22. 3. Neither the circumflex accent nor the rough breathing is clear, Urjj (subj. of 
laaju) is conjectured by Bury in Nem. iv. 91. 

Fr. 26. This fragment and Fr. 27 are distinguished by the fact that the recto is in 
a different hand from that of the rest of A and B, and may be the same as that of D, where 
the text on the verso is by a second scribe. Fr. 27 is of a darker colour than Fr. 26, and 
does not apparently join directly on to it. 

5. wyXei %) /i[ : or possibly Nijp/To* ifap . . . (?), but the letter before p is rather more 
like p than 1, and there is a mark above the preceding letter, which has to be ignored if this 
be read as * but can well be an accent on an 17. 

6. *p({.\ov : the supposed t is rather tall and may be <£. 

7. Cf. Nem. ix. 22 'Ivmvov d* «V 5x0at<ri. A small dot at the base of ]l might be the 
vestige of an a, but [fyda}* alone would not fill the lacuna. 

Fr. 28. 2. /9advd[o£ . . . : cf. II. 58, &c. pa$v{[»p . , . may also be read, but a combina- 
tion with III. 99 is not possible ; cf. note ad loc % 
4. *A$c[va . . . : or oBq[»ot . . . ? 

Fr. 33. 2. Perhaps <b»]ao-<r* or ]as <r* : but the first 9 is possibly a rubbed o, and jXo* or 
\u>t e. g. might be read. 

3. Possibly *a}toXXop; but the relative length of the next four lines renders it unlikely 
that this line is the first verse of a strophe from V. 

4. The first e of it/if is extremely doubtful, but 4 or o are equally unsatisfactory ; Ac or 
Xo may be read for <w. 

Fr. 44. It is not certain which way up this fragment should be placed* 

Fr. 46. 2. The mark of length above the a is not quite certain. 

3. An alternative reading a*0«>p ro[ for avB^v fr{ is apparently indicated by the 
interlinear insertion. 

4. ]okc : or ]»ko. If KcXijff is right the next word may be 'l6v{os : lom[ cannot be read. 

Fr. 47. 2. ]lakto[ : so probably rather than ]fiaX«a[. In any case this line cannot be the 
first of one of the strophes of V (^z« AaXi* "AiroXXo*), since ]ufa> . [ (ffa0]jCnn[ ?) in the line 
below does not suit the metre of the following verse — w w — w w . 

Fr. 48. This fragment cannot be placed at VI. 68-9 ; cf. note ad loc. 


Frs. 49, 50. These two fragments are of the same light colour, but do not join. 

Fr. 54. 2. The letter after rj must be either a or d. The insertion above the line is in 
lighter ink and somewhat blurred. 

Fr. 55. 1. The insertion (which is not certainly by the first hand) is at the distance of 
an ordinary verse from 1. 2 ; the note is therefore a marginal one, and ]rovc[ came near the 
end of a line. 

Frs. 59-60. The appearance of these two small fragments suggests a connexion with 
Col. viii of A owing to the fact that the recto there has a broad strip of papyrus gummed 
on to it, the writing on which runs in the reverse direction to the cursive of the recto, and 
the recto of Frs. 59 and 60 is covered in the same way with pieces from the same document. 
The strip down Col. viii, however, is practically complete except at 11. 102-4, and since 
neither of the fragments can be fitted on there, they may come from quite another part of 
the manuscript. The recto of Fr. 68 is similar. 

Frs. 65-81. Of these seventeen fragments of scholia the recto of five, namely Frs. 71, 
75, 76, 78, and 81 is blank, and they may therefore come from either A-B, C or D; in the 
case of Frs. 77 and 81 the remains on the recto are insufficient to identify the hand. 
The remainder, as is shown by the recto, belong either to A-B or C, the majority more 
probably to the former* Fr. 81, which is in small sloping uncials, should perhaps rather be 
referred to C or D. 

Fr. 66. This fragment is composed of two pieces, the combination of which, though 
probable, is not quite free from doubt. The line of junction is at the lacunae after y«{ 
and rat[. 

Fr. 71. 4. Perhaps 6 W mV&aoo]$ Xlyci [ as in Fr. 82. 3. 

C. The hand of the text changes at this point ; cf. introd. p. 1 2. 


Fr. 82. 1 sqq. This scholium not improbably refers, like 11. 7-1 1, to Clymenus and 
Erginus (cf. note ad loc.), but its subject is obscured by mutilation. 

2. IN]£rjX0cs y[cVcV)K is right the oracle was quoted verbatim. 

4. The word after ijKUa is perhaps k<u; the vestiges are too slight for certain 

7-1 1. Cf. Apollod. ii. 4. II KXv/ifiw t6v Mwv£>p /SacriXca A&ty /SaX&p Mfrourcarc ffvioxot, 
Zropa Ilfptrjprjs, iv OyxWTty Hoo-fioWo* rc/itm rtTpaxricti, 6 &e KOfitaBtis ds 'OpxofMPop fjfuQrip 
intaKtfnrtt rcXcur&f 'Epyivtp r$ ncaSl Mifcrjcrcu (cf. Fr. 65. 5) rbv Oavarop avrov, arpartva'dfupot 
flc 'Epyivoe tn\ 6^/Sas, KTtipas ovk oXtyovr, cWeuraro p*ff opKwp &ir»s viyurwriv avry Qtj&cuot baxrpbv 
cVl cucomv 2ttj nark ?rof ixar 6p /Soar, tnl tovtov t6p baapbv row inipvKas cfc Orffias amAvras 
avvTvx&v 'HpcucXijff ikupvfo-aro . • . *<£' ols ayavwcT&p i<JTp6rrv<rtv orl Bq/9ar. *Hpa$c\ijs W . . . 
*E(yyivou fuv ftcrtiw* row 6< Maw* frprf aro, A similar account is given by Pausanias ix. 37. 2 ; 
cf. Schol. 01 xiv. 2. 

8. Perhaps V[oV but hardly 'Epyij/o^, since 'Epyim is presumably the subject of 
&]irjJTCi. t[o]G, which would be expected, does not seem admissible; the u is extremely 
doubtful, and palaeographically v would be more satisfactory. 

17-9. A paraphrase of 11. 25 sqq. 6WrXc'» in 1. 19 is corrupt. rrX<W is probably 
meant, and du may represent aZ 9 * further ' ; (o-)v rcXlw Ar«rfXf[ow is less likely. 

20-33. ' (Seeing Paris) hasting forth, straightway her godliest inspired heart cried out 

841. PINDAR, PAEANS 105 

with grievous moan and made utterance with such purport of speech : — O infinite far-seeing 
son of Cronos, now wilt thou accomplish the calamity fated of old what time Hecabe 
declared to the sons of Dardanus the vision which she once saw when she carried this man 
in her womb; she thought she bore a fiery hundred-handed Fury, who with cruel violence 
hurled down to the ground all Ilium. And she said . . .' 

20. vwMorr refers to Paris, hastening to set out for Sparta. The removal of the final 
v of cKXay£fv is indicated by a dot placed above and below the letter, as in 1. 25 below; 
cf. II. 67. 

Up{*rraT09: cf. note on Fr. 87. 3. 

21. K*ap: i.e. that of Cassandra, map being used paraphrastically for the person as 
in Nem. vii. 102 tA b* cpAy o0 nort <f>aati Ktap. For Skoaun aTwaxau cf. Iliad * 10 <5XooIo 
. . . y6oio. 

22. The accent and mark of quantity on oronaxoi* show that the scribe carelessly 
mistook the dative for the nominative. 

23. KoptfPq: cf. 01. vii. 68-9 rt\tvra6tv bi "X6y»v Kopv$a\ iv akaBtla ntrdiaat and Pyth. 

iii. 80 \6ywv <nn*p*v tcopv<t>a». The analogy of these passages makes \6y»v in 1. 24 pre- 
ferable to the v. I. \6yop. With what object the curved marks were placed beneath the 
syllables 01 and (pat is not clear; cf. IX. 35 and 41, where the syllables x« of Xc'x« and 
Tip? in the name Tqvtpov are similarly underlined. Such signs are used e.g. in the 
Bacchylides papyrus to connect the constituent parts of compound words (iii. 23 fa/uuriinrov, 
v. 19 cvpvapaicros, Ac), but though the stroke would serve to warn the reader that TV in 
Tjp*pa>> was not the article, and that rouu&t was one word, not two, no similar explanation 
will apply to KopvQai or Xt^t*. In the former word next to the circumflex accent is a mark 
which we can only explain as a sign of short quantity indicating Kopixpai, though this is 
contradicted by the accent and Kopvfai would not construe. 

aapaivcv : the interlinear v is in a lighter ink, and was perhaps added by a later hand. 

24. \6yav : cf. note on 1. 23. The adjective iravantlpuv is found only in Orph. H. 
58. IO v6pav uyvyiov navairtlpopos tMfiov dpxrjt. navairtipir' (Oppian C. ii. 5 1 7) hi the Same 
sense or navamjpav (Hesiod, Op. 8n, Anth. Pal. ix. 525. 17; cf. Pinaar, Pyth. x. 
21-2 &<bs €«7 rnim»v Ktap) are other possibilities. 

25. The reading rtXtU was altered to riku (imperative), a dot having been placed 
above and below the final <r (cf. 1. 20), and the accent of rcXct added. The indicative TcX«r 
is preferable, since Cassandra did not wish for the accomplishment of the ruin of Troy, but 
only foresaw it. 

29. t6p# cmp means of course Paris. 

30 sqq. On this well-known story of Hecuba's dream cf. e. g. Apollod. iii. 12.5 

btvrtpov de ytwaaOai plXXovrof fipiiffovs fto(tv 'EKafiij naff wrap bdkov rttttv dianvpov (so 
Eurip. Troiades 921-2 /9pc'$or, hdkov iwcpbv pi'/ity*', Schol. Eurip. Andr. 294 Xapwaaa, Vergil, 
A en. vii. 320 Nee face tantum Cisseis praegnas, &c), twtw bi natrav cWf/tfcr&u rijv vokw koI 

32. «rl "j** * : c ^ Aesch. Fr. 169 irpfa irety &kj)£, &C. 

33 s^Q- These mutilated lines probably refer to the interpretation of the dream, of 
which different accounts are preserved According to Apollod. /. c. the interpreter was 
Priam's son Aesacus, at whose recommendation the child was exposed, but ineffectually 

(cf. 1. 35 (?) ?<r$a^c vpopaBtta). 
34. For V7rva\\*ov cf. Al 

Anth. Pal. v. 242. 5 iv vnvoAcWi* dvtipois. Either 1 or 17 might be 
read in place of a, but not o. 

35. Perhaps ovrm *A[pitr{Tapxos) or 'A[p(ioro<£a)i{i7f) ; cf. note on II. 61. 

Frs. 83-4. That Fr. 83 should be placed at the top of this column is made almost 


certain by the combination of three considerations : (i) the similar appearance of the verso 
of Frs. 83 and 84, (2) the fact that a strengthening strip from a cursive document has been 
gummed on the recto of both of them, (3) the coincidence that when the fragment is so 
placed a column of exactly the right length results. On grounds analogous to (1) 
and (2) Fr. 85 is also to be placed in the upper part of the column, probably close to 
Fr. 84. 

1-2. cv<o[ and /if . [ are probably the beginnings of lines. 

8. The vestiges at the end of this line may belong to a scholium. 

11. KkiBtis occurs also in 01. i. 92 'AA</woG ir6py «X. and Nem. iv. 15 Bdfia *t *£& pc'Xei 
*X. vl6p (?) KcAafyo-c. k\U)*U in the present passage will mean simply ' reclining.' 

12. npa£o* is apparently the neuter participle future agreeing with cW, though the 
expression is somewhat strange. 

13. If the marginal Xpv<r( ) gives the name of the speaker, possibly the Trojan 
Chryses, who was a priest of Apollo, or the Cretan Chrysothemis, who is said to have 
been the first winner in the contest of singing a hymn to Apollo at Delphi (Pausan. x. 7. 2), 
may be meant. But on the analogy of the other abbreviated names of Pindaric com- 
mentators which occur in this papyrus it is more probable that Xpv<r{ ) stands for the critic 
Xpv<riinros y who is frequently referred to in the extant scholia. 

15. From the conjunction in the scholium of aactarov and df/udor it may be inferred that 
the latter word followed in the text. The reading is practically certain, and r cannot be 
substituted for d, though it should perhaps be restored in accordance with the usual 
Pindaric declension. 

Fr. 86. 1. This line was probably, but not certainly, the first of a column. The frag- 
ment cannot be combined with Fr. 88 ff v\vtprdr^ Sec. 

Fr. 87. 3. There is a remarkable coincidence between the remains of this line and 
Fr. 82. 20 ; the word Up&rarov probably occurs in both verses, and the same ambiguity 
of metre in the preceding word is also found in both cases. But the hypothesis that the 
two verses are in strophic correspondence is open to the objection that Fr. 87. 4 ]nmt 
does not agree with Fr. 82. 21 a\oal\<ri; this difficulty, however, could easily be overcome 
by writing <5Ao«u|<ri. 

Fr. 90. On the grounds for and against bringing this fragment into connexion with 
Fr. 19 see note on 11. 28-30 adloc. 

Fr. 91. This fragment may contain the beginnings of lines, 

Fr, 93. For the double accent on bw\ois cf. note on V. 44. The rough breathing is 
not clear. 

Fr. 95. 5. Perhaps a critical note, if i> run = ' in some copies.' 

Fr. 96. 1. Bpa<rvs seems to be a variant for rax**. If *A\t$ap1$f> below is a reference to 
Paris, the fragment may come from the column following Fr. 82. h ; cf. Frs. 129-31. 1. 

Frs. 103-4. These two fragments are very similar in appearance, and probably go close 

Fr. 107. an[6] bd<f>vtfs da<f>yrj[<f>opLK6v : the poems described as da$pq$opuea were so called 
from the branches of laurel which the singers carried, and according to Proclus, ChresL ap. 
Phot. Bibl 239, they were classed with the nap&Wia, — Uap$. oh *ai ra AaQvriQopiich »* cfc 
y€»o£ fr/irrri. The datpyrtfopia was specially associated with the Ismenion at Thebes. Cf. 
introd. p. 24. 

Fr. 108. np]o(r6di[ov seems a likely restoration ; on its possible significance cf. introd. 
p. 24. 

Fr. 1 09. The occurrence of an elision mark between c and » leads us to regard this 
line as belonging to the text in spite of the rather small size of the letters. 

841. PINDAR, PAEANS 107 

Fr. ni f Probably from the top of a column. The first line may be part of 
a scholium. 

Fr. 116. The vestiges below the third line seem to represent lectional signs rather 
than letters. 

Fr. 117. 2. The supposed high stop may be the end of an acute accent. 

Fr. 124. The writing in this fragment is slightly more cursive than usual in the notes 
by the first hand. 

D. Frs. 126-39 are distinguished from those under C by the presence of a different 
hand on the recto. 

IX. For the Thkbans. 

1-2 1 = Pindar Fr. 107, preserved in Dionys. Hal. De Demosth. diet. c. 7 ravm «u tA 
tyota tovtois, A troXXd (<rriP, tl Xo/3oc fifkrj teal fivBpovs &<m*p ol diBvpapfloi koL rA vvrop^para, 
rott Uipdapov woivfpaaip iouctpm b6£*i*v ay toU its top 17X40* dprjptrois, &s y* ipjoi <pau*rat' 'Akw, 

k.tX The general accuracy of Dionysius' quotation is confirmed by the metre as 
determined by 11. 34 sqq., though some small improvements can now be effected. On the 
class of composition to which the ode belongs cf. introd. p. 23. 

1-2. ri (Dionys.) suits the metre and makes good sense. 

pqataiy & parcp: (fJft Bw fi &rtp Dionys., of which Blass's emendation p^o-tm (or 
tprpao Bergk) & partp is confirmed by the metre. 

3. An additional short syllable is required before tBrjttas to produce a correspondence 
with 1. 43, which there is no reason to suspect. Perhaps wv, which might easily have 
dropped out after jcXfimJirow, or rv y should be inserted. Z&rjKas is likely to be sound ; cf. 

e. g. L 19 below and OL li. 16-7 dnoirjrop . . . Biptp Zpyvp rcXor. 

4. IcrxvP t arbpaat(v) BlaSS, now confirmed by 11. 14, 34. and 44 ; laxyp nravbv avbp. 

Dionys. (nrarbp bpaai* Paris. 1745). Though the syllable may be long or short (short 
in 11. 14 and 34, long in 1. 44), it is better to write -air than -en since ~<rtv recurs in the 
same position in 1. 14. Other similar correspondences in this poem are 11. 5 and 15 top . . . 
-/£«>-, 1L 8 and 38 -*v®. 

7. unros BaBods Dionys., hnrwrSa Boas BlaSS. 

9-1 1. Our identification of Fr. 127 is of course uncertain, but the accents on ]4X[ and 
\h{ both happen to suit, and, moreover, the recto is blank as it should be if the fragment 
belongs to Col. ii of Fr. 126. 

9. [ffrj : fr Dionys., but the syllable is long in IL 19 and 49. 

13. The remains of the first letter are consistent with either o or », but the con- 
ditions seem less difficult if the two initial feet are taken to be [w]»i>oV[— rather than [w — ]ovoo{. 
Above the » or o is a dot which is more probably the tip of a lectional sign, e. g. a grave 
or circumflex accent, than of an over- written letter. The doubtful a might be «, o or », 
but hardly 6. 

iroXfffto&o dc trapa : noKtpav Sis &pa Dionys. Scaliger's aapa has been generally accepted, 
and jtoXc'/aoio Ac can now be confidently restored with the aid of the metre in 1. 43. 

16. (J) ap n-cdoy : aXka ni&ov Dionys., of which Hermann's ty is a natural emendation, 
but then a short syllable is wanting before Sip. (fip) (Blass) would serve. 

17. For the alternative accents on nayrrop cf. VI. 88. The word is commonly made 
Oxytone; cf. Arcad. 81. 14 waytrot, orrcp 6$vpti 7 avprfBtta, EranhlS Philo, p. 172 ndytrot 
pip rb upvos, vayrros di 6 \upav. 


1 8. p*ov Schroeder for Dionys. Up6v. The scholium below this line confirms tj p6rtor 
Mpos, but does not seem to have been illuminating. 

2 2-33. It appears probable that a single column is the extent of the loss between 
11. 18 and 34. This colurnn would have contained fifteen or sixteen lines, giving an epode 
of the very suitable number either of ten verses, which is also the length of the strophe, 
or of eleven, for which there is an exact parallel in IV. 

11. 34-49. ' I have been perfected by some divine influence hard by the immortal 
couch of Melia to compose a noble strain with flute and cunning of the mind, for your 
sake. I supplicate thee, Far-darter, consecrating to the Muses' arts this shrine . . . 
wherein Oceanus' daughter Melia once shared thy couch, O god of Pytho, and bore mighty 
Tenerus, the chosen interpreter of heaven's decrees. To his care didst thou, father with 
unshorn locks, commit the host of Cadmus and the city of Zeathus, on account of his wise 
fortitude. For the sea-dwelling wielder of the trident honoured him above other mortals, 
and he hastened (to ?) the region of the Euripus . . .' 

34. The use of iKpdpfyv is somewhat strange ; the idea appears to be the need of 
divine help if the poet is to attain perfection in his art. cWcXckt&u, which is given as an 
equivalent, occurs in a different sense in Fr. 82. 20. 

35. According to the explanation of the scholiast, the 'couch of Melia' means the 
Theban Ismenion, or temple of Apollo Ismenius. Melia, the daughter of Oceanus, was 
the mother of the seer Tenerus by Apollo, and like her son was revered at Thebes, where 
there was a spring which bore her name, close to the Ismenion; cf. 11. 41-3 below, 
Pyth, xi. 4-6 and Schol. ad, loc. % Pausan. ix. 10. 5, &c. 

36. For the Doric infinitive wvaytv cf. VI. 94, note, and for Bp6ov 9 Nem. vii. 81 nokv4>arop 
Cpoop vfutw dow. In the fragmentary scholium in the margin /*#[ may well be part of the 

name Mf[X6i and nj[ of Tijvcpoc, e. g. «V roi/Ty [n£ Upy tt^v] Mc[\iav rtKtiv <fxuri\ Tr\i\*pov 'AfrrfXXon'c. 

Cf. the preceding note. 

38. The letters to in f*ara3aXe are crossed through, and also have dots above them ; 
that l«i/3oX< is here the correct form is proved by the metre. 

39. aj{a]™0ciff : cf. Pyth. viii. 29-31 apa&tyutv irwrav ftaR/xryop/av Xvp? re *al (f>$iyfuni 
pak6aK$ t where, however, the verb has an abstract object 

40. The latter half of this line presents difficulties. X and o are clear, and if r, which 
is nearly certain, is right, the intervening letter must be p. It is doubtful whether the 
traces before Xo represent two letters or only one ; if there are two a ir would be best 
for the first, though ij, (, (, or perhaps x might also be read ; of the second there is only 
a small speck, which would suit any letter beginning with a more or less upright stroke. 
If on the other hand there is only one letter, it can hardly be other than », and some narrow 

letter should stand between it and the X. Xov r [3*]/, as suggested by Blass, would 

be attractive if a suitable word ending in Xov could be round, though cV 9 in 1. 41 would 
better accord with a single antecedent substantive. It is rather tempting to read [«SWxjXor 
r[r6lp ; the supposed acute accent, of which only a tiny top remains, over the first syllable 
might well be a mark of elision or crasis, and the o, though not very satisfactory, is 
possible. The difficulty lies in reading anything but 1 for the final letter, t and the 
second upright of v are indistinguishable in form, but some part of the diagonal stroke of 
a v would be expected to be visible. The papyrus, however, is damaged, and it is perhaps 
too much to say that a v is to be excluded, though a restoration requiring it cannot be 
regarded as convincing. Bury suggests t[40]i, which might be accepted if no better 
solution is forthcoming. 

41. On the myth of Tenerus cf. note on 1. 35. 

$tfUT[cav: cf. Pindar Fr. X92 ArX^ol Bipurrw {vpvcav} fiavrus ' AnoKkwibai. 

841. PINDAR, PAEANS 109 

44. KAbpov trrparbv *aJ Zta$w ntfXiv : i. e. Thebes and the Thebans. z*a6os is ap- 
parently an otherwise unattested form of Zrfioe, who with his twin brother Amphion took 
and fortified Thebes and was buried there. 

47. There is not too much space for the or of 'opo[or]puupa t which is the regular 
Pindaric form (01 viii. 48, Pyth. ii. 12, Nem. iv. 86), and perhaps 'Opavrp. was written; 
cf. ofXTucnmot and opaip«f>rjf. 'OpairpUuva (Bppvfu) would have a different shade of meaning 

from that of 'Opaarpiau* (4/xnfe). 

48. Cf. Pyth. XL 4—5 v ty McX/ay xP va '^ tav *'? ^ w rparobm* Orjcavpov, ov ncpiaW Mftatrt 

49. Without the complete context the meaning of cnWrapc cannot be clearly defined, 
but it appears to be equivalent to contendit, ' hastened/ a sense found in late writers ; 
cf. Bekker, Anted, p. 64 <rvrr«iV«F* to rpixjtw avprtrapttws, Plutarch Nic. 30 hpopq avvrtipat 

fir TO &OTV. 

The subject of Fr. 139, where some one is said to have gone to Aulis and made 
prophecies there, is very probably Tenerus, but that note cannot be the continuation of 
pmxnt{p9v6^vai \eymu (?), for such an arrangement would make the distance between 
Col. iv and the next too great, and it is pretty clear from the width of its lower margin 
that Fr. 139 ran underneath a column (cf. Fr. 126. ii and Fr. 129), whereas p*rtnr<{pcv6Tjvat does 
not. It is, however, likely enough that Fr. 139 comes from the bottom of the column 
following Col. iv and referred to a passage standing in close relation to Evplnov re <rw««w 

Frs. 129-31. The metre shows that these two fragmentary columns do not belong 
to IX ; the strophe or epode contained at least fourteen verses (11. 2-15). 

3. %ar[ with what seems to be the top of a mark of long quantity above the letter after 
the r is presumably ivara or cWav, and the references to an 4vva9TJipls in the margin opposite 
and below the column are to be connected with this. This Theban da<f>vrj<f>opla was held 
&' Swaenjpidoc according to Proclus, ChresL ap. Photius BibU 239. 

1-5. Scholium. Cf. Homer, H. B 751 sqq. otr aptf Iptprlv Tirapfatov tfpy' Mftovro, 3s p 
is Urpniby irpottt KaXXlppoov v&op . . , SpKov yap dctyov 2rvy6g vdaros tariw anopp&£, the last line being 

partially quoted at the beginning of the note. The sentence is probably complete at 
Utjmov, and the word rwd seems to have occurred in the text. The space between fy[«ov 
K.T.A. and \owrr[ k.t.X. indicates that the two lines belong to distinct notes. 

6. Schol. below line. The number of letters lost in the gap between the two halves > 
of this note is uncertain, but may be estimated at about sixteen. It is not possible to read 
&A 6 c[t)»v, as would be expected (cf. note on 1. 3) ; but perhaps c is a graphical error 
for B f or there may have been some question whether the ba<t>vrrf>opta occurred at intervals 
of five or of nine years. Pausanias (ix. 10. 4) says that a boy called baqywrftopo* was made 
Upia iviavatov. 

Frs. 132-3. If these two fragments are to be assigned to the foregoing column, they 
should be placed so that Jwr^ in Fr. 133 comes approximately over jitovyap (1. 5 schol.), and 
Fr. 132 above and in the same straight line with Fr. 133, the edges of the papyrus in neither 
case directly joining. We are led to this arrangement by the coincidence that the fragments, 
like Fr. 130, have a strengthening strip gummed on to the recto, and also show a selis. But 
since the recto is in both cases nearly blank, it is not absolutely certain (though probable) 
that these fragments belong to D rather than to C. 

Fr. 131. ii. 12 nokidox[ : cf. 01. v. 10 & nokuiox* IlaXXiir. 

14. ttpoKabqs is a &na( \iy6ptvov. 

15. The paragraphus below this line marks the conclusion of a strophic section. 


1 8. i/a[ : or perhaps re[; the tops of the letters are lost. 

19. Ktipov is also a possibility, but not nlvov on account of the accent. 

20. The accent indicates w{p]o/9<»/i[ior or -v. 

Fr. 134. 3. The interlinear wa8[ seems to be the same word as that which occurs 
in the reading attributed to Aristophanes in 1. 9 cka&ar, which, if sound, must be an adjective 
derived from ««k, otherwise attested only as a proper name. According to the Etym, Mag. 
s. v. there was a festival of Apollo on the 20th of the month. 

9. Cf. note on 1. 3. 

Fr. 137. 2. The paragraphia below the line shows that 1px*[<r6at is the beginning of 
a sentence. 

Fr. 139. Cf. note on IX. 49. ]o( ) in L 2 is possibly Efy>wr]o( ). 

Frs. 140-62. The recto of these small fragments is blank or practically so, and there 
is consequently no safe criterion for determining whether they belong to C or D. The 
texture and colour of the papyrus, however, suggests that Frs. 140, 146, and 161 come from 
D, and most of the others from C. Fr. 151 perhaps does not belong to this papyrus. 

Fr. 145. 2. The letters are only slightly smaller than those above, and since the 
two lines are the ordinary distance apart, ]&«»{ may be part of the text, not of 
a scholium. 

Fr. 154. ]u followed by a dot is an interlinear variant. The circumflex accent is doubtful. 

Fr. 156. 1. The supposed mark of length over a may be a mark of short quantity 
or a grave accent. 

Fr. 161. Cf. IX. Col. iv and Fr. 138. 

Fr. 162. 1. This line is in a different hand from that of the rest of the text, and seems 
to be over an erasure. The hand of 11. 2-3, however, indicates that the fragment, which 
probably is from the bottom of a column, belongs to C-D. 

842. THEOPOMPUS (or CRATIPPUS), Hellenica. 

Height 2i«2 cm. Plates IV and V (Cols, v-vi andxi-xii.). 

Since the discovery of the 'AOrjvaCwv IToAircla in 1890 Egypt has not 
produced any historical papyrus at all comparable in importance to these 
portions of a lost Greek historian, obviously of the first rank, dealing in minute 
detail with the events of the Greek world in the years 396 and 395 B. C. The 
papyrus, which with the exception of the manuscript of Plato's Symposium (848) 
is the largest literary text that has been found at Oxyrhynchus, originally con- 
sisted of about 230 fragments of varying sizes. These have been so far pieced 
together that only about fifty-five, none of which is large, remain unplaced, and 
it is improbable that further efforts at combination will yield results of much 
importance. Like the manuscript of Pindar's Paeans (841) the historical work, 
though written in uncials, is on the verso of an official document. This is a 
land-survey register giving a long list of cultivators, and the entries in most 


cases follow the same scheme, which gives (i) the geographical relation of the 
plot of land in question to its predecessor, (2) the name of the owner or lessee, 
(3) the rent and area, (4) the adjacent plots, (5) the changes introduced with 
regard to rent. The village of Ibion Argaei, which was in the south-west of the 
Arsinoite nome, is mentioned as being in the vicinity of one of the plots of land, 
and the land-survey was no doubt drawn up at some village near Ibion, but 
whether the historical work was also written in that district or at Oxyrhynchus 
is uncertain. Various years, ranging from the 4th to the 12th, of an unnamed 
emperor are mentioned, and the handwriting shows that he belonged to the 
second century. Since the survey was probably written soon after the 12th year, 
the reign of Commodus, which in Egypt was reckoned from his father's accession 
and therefore begins with his 20th year, is out of the question ; the reign of 
Hadrian or Antoninus is as likely to be meant as that of Marcus Aurelius. The 
land-survey has of course been of the utmost service in determining the place of 
detached fragments of the historian, and is in itself of no slight interest : the text 
of portions of it will be given in Part VI. The writing in some places is con- 
cealed by strips of papyrus which were gummed on in order to strengthen the roll 
when the verso came to be used. 

Of the historical work at least twenty-one columns are to be distinguished, 
written in two hands. Postponing for the moment the question of the right order 
of these columns, and assuming the correctness of the numbers assigned to them 
by us, the first hand is responsible for Cols, i-iv, vi. 27-xxi, and all the loose 
fragments except Frs. 3 and perhaps 16. The scribe employs a small neat uncial 
of the sloping oval type, representing a transitional stage between the earlier 
specimens of this style, e.g. the Oxyrhynchus papyrus of Demosthenes' Upoolfna 
brjiirryopiKi (26) of the late first or early second century, and the ordinary third 
century type illustrated e. g. by 23 and 232. N at the end of a line is generally 
indicated by a horizontal stroke above the final letter, a practice already found in 
the second century, and a few of the conventional abbreviations occur at the ends 
of lines, / for koL in ix. 25, xiv. 13, xx. 20 and 25, ft' for yAv in xviii. 24 and 35, 
these being similar to the abbreviations found in e.g. the 'Adrivatuv IIoAiTtfe. 
A peculiar characteristic of this scribe is his tendency (especially at the ends 
of lines) to combine the letters M and H or H and N so that the last vertical stroke 
of the first letter serves also as the first of the second, e.g. lo-firfivuw in xiii. 10, 
nrjvuv in xvi. 2, rqv in xix. 36. The beginning of a new section is marked by 
a coronis or paragraphus, a small blank space being left where the transition 
occurs in the middle of a line ; but there are no stops, and only two accents 
(xx. 36, Fr. 45. 3), and a couple of breathings (xi. 2, xx. 32). Diaereses are 
sometimes placed over t and v. In a few cases omitted words or letters have 


been inserted above the line by the scribe himself (xii. 25, xvi. a, xxi. 18 
and 33, Fr. ^ 8), but not nearly so often as was desirable, the number of 
words omitted being considerable ; cf. i. 5, note. Some serious corruptions 
occur, e. g. irpos Hapvtiv tsoXw for irap TafxiroAiu in xv. 26, OiJy?|s (sic) for rTep<njff 
in xx. 36, ovro) for wro in xvi. 31 (cf. also i. 27, vi. 12, xii. 27 , 39, xiv. 15, xx. 31, 
and xxi. 32), and the spelling of proper names is frequently inconsistent, cf. e. g. 
xii. 34-5i note. The second hand, which is responsible for v. i-vi. 27 with 
Frs. 3 and perhaps 16, is smaller and rougher than the first. N at the end 
of a line is often written as a horizontal stroke ; and a diaeresis occurs in v. 44. 
Stops (high points) are freely employed, a slight space being also left to mark 
the pause, and sometimes the space occurs where the stop is omitted ; cf. v. 1, 
note. A paragraphus is found in vi. 10 marking a transition which the first 
hand would have ignored. In the margin against v. 45 occurs 3, perhaps 
denoting the 400th line of the MS. ; cf. note ad lac. Unlike the first scribe, 
the second hand writes 1 adscript. A slip occurs in vi. 18. With regard to 
the date of the MS., the survey on the recto was, as we have said, written 
about the middle of the second century, and we should ascribe the text on 
the verso to the end of that century or the early part of the third. A late 
third-century date is out of the question. The first hand is not very uniform 
either in the size or spacing of his letters ; at the end of a line they are some- 
times very small and cramped, and the beginnings of lines tend gradually to 
move further to the left as the column proceeds. Hence, though the columns 
measure about 16-7 x 9 cm. with tolerable regularity, there is much variation in 
the number of lines in a column and the number of letters in a line. Col. i has 
only 37 lines, but Col. ii has 40, Col. iii 43, and Col. iv. 42 (?). In Col. vii the 
number is as high as 45, the scribe being influenced by the more compact writing 
employed by the second hand, who in Col. v, the only extant column entirely 
due to him, reaches the exceptionally large number of 60 lines ; even Col. vi, 
which is divided between the two scribes, has 53. After Col. vii the numbers 
tend to diminish again. Col. viii has 42 lines, Cols, xi-xii, xv, xviii-xxi 39, Cols, 
xiii, xiv and xvii 40, Col. xvi 38. Few lines by the first hand exceed 45 or 
fall below 35 letters, the average being about 40. In vi. 5-27, the only complete 
or nearly complete lines by the second hand, the average is also about 40. Cols, 
i-ii, vi, and xi-xxi, representing about two-thirds of a total of approximately 
800 lines, are well preserved, and in all but a few passages admit of a satisfactory 
restoration of the lacunae. Of Col. iii only about half of each line is extant, and 
in Cols, v, vii, and viii still less, but the sense can occasionally be caught ; Cols, 
iv, ix, and x, however, are hopeless. 

These twenty-one columns are not continuous, but are divided into four 


distinct sections, separated from each other by gaps of uncertain length in which 
several columns are or may be missing. We have called these sections A, B, C, 
and D. A consists of Cols, i-iv, including Frs. 1 and 2, only i-ii and 
iii-iv being continuous, but that Col. iii with Fr. 1 follows immediately after 
Col. ii is certain both from internal evidence and from the recto ; cf. iii. 1-5, 
note. Whether the small Fr. 2 belongs to iii. 40-43, as we suppose, is more 
doubtful. B consists of Cols, v-viii with Frs. 3-7, and contains Cols, v, vi and 
the beginnings of lines of vii on the same piece of papyrus. The place of 
Frs. 3, 4, and 7, though separated from the main body of B, is definitely fixed 
(cf. notes on v. 41, vii. 1-2, and viii. 3) ; hence it is certain that Col. viii 
immediately follows vii. That Frs. 5 and 6 belong to Col. vii is practically 
secure, and we have assigned them to 11. 16-24 and 35-41 respectively, but their 
exact position is doubtful ; cf. notes ad loc. C contains only the two quite 
fragmentary Cols, ix and x with Frs. 8-15, which seem to belong to this 
section. D, by far the largest section, has Cols, xi-xxi, which are continuous. 

The first problem that arises is the order of these four sections, which 
unfortunately is in some respects not clear, in spite of the fact that our author 
(whom in order not to prejudice the question of his identity with any known 
historian we henceforth call F) seems to have arranged his work on chronological 
principles almost as strictly as Thucydides and much more carefully than 
Xenophon. That D comes after A and B is certain from internal evidence, for 
it contains (xviii. 33 sqq.) the account of the campaign of Agesilaus in the late 
summer and autumn of 395, whereas B narrates (v. 6-vii. 4) his campaign in the 
spring and early summer of the same year, and the general description of 
the anti-Spartan feeling in Greece in A (i. 33 sqq.) must obviously have preceded 
the much more detailed account in D of the Theban intrigues which led first to 
the war with Phocis and then to an open breach with Sparta (xi. 34 sqq.). 
That D comes last of the four sections is also indicated by the land-survey on 
the recto, the writing of which runs in the opposite direction to that of the verso, 
and which accordingly begins on the other side of Col. xxi. For Col. i of the 
land-survey is in a different hand from the rest, and follows a different formula, 
being apparently a register of land Kaff Metros, and concluding yCvo(vrai) kclO' 
foaros (4/oovpai) ^mjZisA/Jfd, &v ff iro<r«ia, referring apparently to the following 
detailed survey-list, though only in a few cases is it stated that individual plots 
were under water. Hence the presumption is that the land-survey on the recto 
of A, B, and C comes later than that of D, i.e. that the writing on the verso of 
A, B, and C precedes D. With regard to the position of C (Cols, ix-x), owing 
to its hopelessly mutilated condition there is no internal evidence to guide us, so 
that beyond the presumption just indicated that it precedes D its relation to the 



other sections is wholly uncertain, and it may be placed before A, between 
A and B, or between B and D. Our choice of the last alternative is quite 
arbitrary, and the question is of secondary importance. The main problem with 
regard to the order of the sections concerns A and B — which of these two is to 
be placed first ? The external evidence is conflicting. On the one hand, before 
Col. i of A is a blank margin 4) cm. in width, whereas the ordinary width of the 
margin between two columns of this papyrus is only i£ cm. Since Col. i. 1 is 
obviously the beginning of a new chapter it is clear that the broad margin before 
it is no mere accident, and that Col. i is either the absolute beginning of the roll, 
or was intentionally separated widely from preceding columns in order to mark 
the commencement of a new division (probably a new book) of the author's 
work. That the roll originally extended beyond the present starting-point of A 
is known from the land-survey on the recto of the margin of Col. i, which breaks 
off in the middles of lines ; but since no regard would be paid to the writing on 
the recto when the verso came to be used, it is quite possible that the vertical 
fracture down the left edge of the margin of A is the result not of injury 
when the MS. was thrown away, but of design when the verso was prepared 
for use. On the other hand A is written by the second of the two scribes who 
appear in B, so that if A follows B it is necessary to assume only one change 
of hands, whereas if A precedes B it must be supposed that the first scribe 
gave way to the second at some point in the gap between Cols, iv and v 
and then resumed at vi. 27. The hypothesis that B comes first has therefore the 
advantage of greater simplicity, and is supported by the analogy of the land- 
survey, in which we justifiably used the identity of the hand on the recto of 
A, B, and C with the second hand on the recto of D as an argument for 
placing the recto of A-C after D. In fact, the priority of B to A has so 
much prima facie probability that at first and for a long time we adopted that 
sequence ; it was only when we came to examine in detail the historical problems 
connected with A that we decided to place it before B. The relative order of 
these two sections makes a considerable difference to the interpretation of A, 
for since B is known from other sources to refer to the spring and early summer 
of 395, the Bipos in A iii. 9, on which the whole chronology of A depends, must, 
if A comes after B, refer to 395, whereas, if A precedes B, the summer of 396 is 
meant, an earlier year being for various reasons out of the question. A unfortu- 
nately mentions no event of which the precise date is fixed by independent 
evidence, for though the arrival of Conon's reinforcements from Phoenicia 
(iii. 23-7) is also recorded by Diodorus, that historian's account of the naval war 
is too brief and his chronology too uncertain to help in choosing between the 
rival dates for the events recorded in A. The two principal difficulties which 


arise from the attribution of A to 395 instead of 396, and which have therefore 
induced us to place A before B, are discussed in detail in the notes on Hi. 9, 21, 
and 23-6. To summarize the results there reached, the view that the Qipos in iii. 9 
refers to 395 inevitably leads to the conclusion that the year which P took as 
a kind of fresh starting-point after the close of the Peloponnesian war corresponds 
to the archonship of Micon 402-1, in which no incident of particular note took 
place, whereas the view that the Qipos is that of 396 will make Ps starting-point 
after the war 403-2, approximately the archonship of Euclides, which is a most 
natural and reasonable year to select for the commencement of a fresh epoch. 
Secondly, the hypothesis that A concerns 395 leads to great confusion with 
regard to the Spartan va6apxot>, of whom two seem to arrive in the same summer, 
an inference which can only be avoided by encountering worse obstacles, whereas 
if A refers to 396 all difficulty is removed. Thirdly, the view that A concerns 
396 has the advantage of allowing more time for the change of policy on the 
part of the moderate democrats at Athens with regard to a war with Sparta ; 
cf. i. 16, note. We therefore prefer the arrangement adopted in the text, 
according to which A precedes B and relates to 396 ; and seeing that A in any 
case begins a new division or book, we are disposed to regard it as the actual 
commencement of the whole roll. A parallel for the changes of hands, whereby 
the portion written by a second scribe comes between two portions written by 
the first, is to be found in the MS. of the 'ABrfvafav IIoAirela. There the third 
band, which begins in Col. xx and continues up to the end of the second roll at 
Col. xxiv, is also responsible for the fourth roll containing Cols, xxxi-vii, the 
intervening roll containing Cola xxv-xxx being written by the fourth hand. 

We proceed to a short analysis of the contents of the papyrus, which for 
the convenience of future reference we have divided into chapters and sec- 
tions, though in the present edition we generally refer to columns and lines 
only. A commences with an account of the sailing from Athens of a trireme 
commanded by a certain Demaenetus without official sanction to assist Con on, 
and the unsuccessful efforts of the Spartan harmost at Aegina to intercept it 
(i. 1— iii. 7). This incident, to which a passing allusion occurs in Aeschines 
(cf. i. 3, note), is of slight importance; but the commotion at Athens caused 
by it enables P to give a very interesting description of the attitude towards 
Sparta of the various Athenian parties at the time (i. 9-ii. 1), from which he 
diverges into an important excursus upon the origin of the anti-Spartan feel- 
ing in Greece (il 1-35). The adjectives used by P in describing the contending 
parties at Athens and his severe judgement upon the extreme democrats, whom 
he not only charges with accepting Persian bribes but with desiring a war with 
Sparta for purely selfish reasons (i. 33, note), betray his aristocratic proclivities ; 

1 % 


but on the other hand he controverts strongly the theory, no doubt put forward 
by the Spartans, that the mission of Timocrates was instrumental in bringing 
about the anti-Spartan league, and exhibits a considerable historical insight into 
the political situation, of which he takes on the whole a very just view. The first 
of a long series of conflicts with Xenophon occurs in connexion with the date of 
the sending of Timocrates, whom Xenophon (supported by Pausanias and Plutarch) 
represents as dispatched by Tithraustes in the summer of 395, while P connects 
him with Pharnabazus (therein agreeing with Polyaenus), and implies that the 
mission took place much earlier, i.e. in 397 or early in 396. P and Xenophon 
also come into conflict on the question of the acceptance of Timocrates' bribes by 
the Athenians, and the part played by those bribes in bringing about the anti- 
Spartan confederacy, on both of which points P's version is again, in our opinion, 
superior (i. 33, note). An allusion to Pharax as 6 itp6r€pov vaAapyps goes far to solve 
the much disputed problem of the date of that admiral's year of office (i. 30, note). 
The mention of Timolaus in connexion with the opposition to Sparta at Corinth 
gives rise to a digression on some former exploits of his in the Decelean war. 
These are not mentioned by Thucydides, and the fact that the second one, which 
probably occurred just after the latest events recorded by that historian, had 
already been noticed by P probably in its proper chronological position, is an 
important indication of the scope of our author's work (ii. 17, note). 

In iii. 7 begins a new chapter (IV), which starts by recording the commence- 
ment of a new year (the 8th) from the event chosen by P as a fresh point 
of departure after the conclusion of the Peloponnesian war. Unfortunately the 
lacunae, which prevent any continuous restoration of Col. iii after 1. 5, render the 
interpretation of this crucial passage doubtful in several respects, and it is 
not clear whether the B4pos with which the new year begins is the spring or mid- 
summer, or what event was taken as the commencement of the epoch. Unless, 
however, A is placed after B (cf. p. 114), the archonship of Euclides (403-2) seems 
to be the first year on the new reckoning, and the Bipos is that of 396, not 395 
(iii. 9, note). The rest of Col. iii (n-43) is concerned with the naval war, 
to which P gives great prominence (cf. xi. 1-34, xv. 33-xviii. 33), and of which he 
shows the most detailed knowledge, especially with regard to Conon. He thus 
presents a marked contrast to Xenophon, who after mentioning the stir caused at 
Sparta in the winter of 397-6 by the news of the Persian naval preparations 
(Bell. iii. 4. 1-2) entirely ignores Conon's proceedings until the battle of Cnidus 
in 394 (which itself is only introduced incidentally in iv. 3. 10-14 in connexion with 
the news of it reaching Agesilaus), in order that the stage may be left free for the 
Spartan king. That Xenophon was himself conscious of his deficiency is shown 
by his excuses in iv. 8. 1, where he justifies his silence concerning the naval war 


on the ground that he was only describing t&v itp&fc&v rhs itionvrjuoveirovs. The 
narrative in Chapter IV is for the most part too incomplete to be intelligible, but 
the arrival of a new Spartan va6ap\o9 t probably Pollis, is chronicled (cf. iii. 21 
note), and at the same time (apparently the summer of 396) Conon, whose head* 
quarters were at Caunus in Caria, receives reinforcements from Phoenicia. This 
event is also referred to by Diodorus in words so similar that they must be 
derived directly or indirectly from P, though probably with an error as to the 
chronology, for Diodorus puts the arrival of the Phoenician ships after the revolt of 
Rhodes, whereas P seems to place the revolt after the arrival of the reinforce- 
ments, which is much more likely to be correct (iii. 23-6, note, where the vexed 
question of the chronology of the naval war is discussed in full). Whether the 
scanty remains of Col. iv, with which A concludes, are also concerned with 
the naval war or deal with a fresh subject is uncertain. The gap between 
A and B need not be very extensive, for apart from Agesilaus* doings in Asia 
no events of much importance took place in 396, unless indeed P took account of 
Sicilian history, which is not probable, and the dispatch of Agesilaus to Asia and 
the early part of the campaign are likely to have been described before Col. i in 
the preceding book or division of P's work. 

B, where it becomes intelligible, begins with an account of Agesilaus 9 
campaign in the spring and early summer of 395, which occupies v. 6-vii. 4, 
v. 1-5 being perhaps concerned with his preparations during the winter, but 
possibly with quite a different subject The narrative is not only more detailed 
than Xenophon's two accounts of this campaign in the Hellenica and Agesilaus \ 
but differs widely from them, particularly as to the disposition of Tissaphernes' 
forces, of which the infantry were according to Xenophon sent by mistake to 
Caria, and the nature of the chief engagement which resulted according to both 
authorities in the capture of the Persian camp. On the other hand P agrees 
closely with the somewhat less detailed account of Diodorus, especially with 
regard to Agesilaus' route (v. 8, note), the part taken in the campaign by the 
Persian infantry, on which point Pausanias supports Diodorus (v. 13-6, note), the 
formation of the Greek troops in column (v. 9, note), the description of the ambush 
by which the Greeks secured the victory (v. 59, note), and Agesilaus' withdrawal 
from the interior owing to unfavourable auspices (vi. 30, note). There are some 
discrepancies between P and Diodorus concerning firstly the number of the 
Persian forces (v. 13-6, note) and of the slain (vi. ai, note), and secondly the 
manoeuvres connected with the ambush ; apart, however, from these inconsiderable 
differences there is, except some conventional details added to Diodorus' account 
of the ambush (e.g. the fact that the Greeks raised a paean, as is usual in 
Diodorus' battles), really nothing in his account of this campaign that is not 


found in P. In fact Diodorus 1 narrative looks like an abridgement of P with 
some variations of the language, which rarely coincides verbally with that of P. 
Whether Fs or Xenophon's account is superior in credibility is open to dispute, 
but P's version has considerable claims to acceptance in spite of the fact that 
Xenophon is apparently describing the campaign from first-hand knowledge 
(v. 59, note). The rest of B, vii. 4-viiL 43 (Chapter VIII), deals in most elaborate 
detail with the superseding of Tissaphernes by Tithraustes and the assassination 
of the former, events which are briefly recorded by Xenophon in a few words. 
This chapter is badly mutilated, and no continuous restoration is possible ; but 
enough remains to trace the close agreement between P and firstly Diodorus, who 
again seems to be giving an abridgement of P, and secondly Polyaenus, who is 
fuller than Diodorus but somewhat less detailed than P (vii. 4, 31-5, 36-41, viii. 
18, 31, 26 1 27-30, notes). The story told by Nepos that Tissaphernes' replace* 
ment by Tithraustes was brought about by Conon finds no confirmation, and the 
date for Conon's visit to the Persian court indicated by Nepos and supported by 
Pausanias (the winter of 396-5), which has generally been preferred to the date 
implied by Diodorus (the winter of 395-4), is clearly inconsistent with P, who 
probably agreed with Diodorus on this point (vii. 4, note ; cf. xv. 37, note). 
Persian affairs are still under discussion when B breaks off. A later reference to 
the negotiations between Tithraustes and Agesilaus (xviii. 37, note) shows that 
the account of these occurred in the gap between B and D, probably in the column 
following viii. This gap also comprised the earlier portion of the account of the 
revolution at Rhodes, of which the conclusion is extant in Col. xi, but whether 
C, containing the two fragmentary columns ix and x, is rightly placed between 
B and D is wholly uncertain ; cf. pp. 1 13-4. Nothing can be made out of these two 
columns except that in Col. x P seems to be giving an appreciative character- 
sketch of some general or politician whose identity is uncertain (ix. 16, note). 

When D, by far the longest and best preserved section of the papyrus, 
begins, P has reverted to the naval war, xi. 1-34 describing a revolution at 
Rhodes whereby the democrats with the connivance of Conon overthrew the 
existing oligarchic government, which was in the hands of the Diagoreans, one 
of the leading Rhodian families. Xenophon ignores this revolution, to which 
there is a brief allusion in a quotation from Androtion in Pausanias. It has 
hitherto been connected closely with the revolt of Rhodes from Sparta, which is 
mentioned by Diodorus, but P now shows that the two events were by no means 
contemporaneous, the revolution taking place in the summer of 395, the revolt 
from Sparta in the preceding winter or earlier (iii. 23-6, xi. 1, notes). The 
mention of the Diagoreans throws an interesting light on the treatment of an 
illustrious member of that family, Dorieus, by the Spartans (xi. 10, note), and 


the reference to Conon's two chief lieutenants, Hieronymus and Nicophemus, 
supplies another point of contact with Diodorus (xi. 10- 1, note). The cautious 
policy of Conon and the moderation displayed by the victorious democrats 
receive due recognition from P, who here shows no trace of an aristocratic bias. 
In xi 34 the subject changes to the war between Boeotia and Phocis in the 
summer of 395, but this is not actually reached until xiv. 16 sqq., since P enters 
upon a series of digressions. A mention of the state of faction existing at 
Thebes (xi. 35-8) leads to what is the most valuable portion of the whole 
papyrus, a description of the constitution of Boeotia in 395 (xi. 38-xii. 31), 
which settles a number of important and highly disputed questions, and provides 
much new information. The nature of the four boulai referred to by Thucydides 
is explained, and while Kohler is shown to be right in connecting them with the 
four boulai which the oligarchs at Athens wished to set up in 411, the surprising 
fact is now ascertained that these boulai belonged to the individual cities of the 
league, not to the federation as a whole, which had a single boule of 660 
members not invested with the supreme powers of the local boulai. The vexed 
question of the number of the Boeotarchs at the time of the Peloponnesian war 
is fixed at eleven, corresponding to a division of the Boeotians into eleven units, 
and what is still more important, we now have for the first time a complete list 
of the states forming the league and their distribution among the several units, 
according to which they shared the rights and duties of membership of the 
confederation (xi. 38, note). Of special interest are the details concerning the 
Boeotarchs appointed by Thebes (xii. 13-3, note), Orchomenus (xii. 16, note), 
and Tanagra (xii. 17, note). In xii 31 P reverts to parties at Thebes, about 
which he shows himself very well informed. The description of the anti-Spartan 
faction is on the whole very impartial, and the analysis of their motives shows 
considerable historical acumen (xiii. 10, note ; cf. xiv. 6 sqq.). A reference to 
the change in the Theban policy caused by the control of public affairs passing 
from the pro-Spartan to the anti-Spartan party leads to another interesting 
digression (xiii. 15 sqq.) upon the causes of the increase of Boeotian prosperity 
in the forty years preceding 395, and this excursus leads on to yet another 
(xiii. 36-xiv. 5) upon the lavish adornment of Attica in the same period. P then, 
after describing the political schemes of the anti-Spartan party (xiv. 6-ai), at 
length reaches the origin of the Boeotian war. His account of the intrigues 
from which it arose (xiv. 31-xv, 15) is not only more detailed than Xenophon's, 
but differs in several important particulars— e.g. on the questions whether the 
Locrians concerned in the border dispute were the Opuntian (so Xen.) or 
the Hesperian (so P and Pausanias), whether the first act of aggression came 
from the side of the Locrians (so Xen. and Paus.) or from the Phocians 


(so P), and what methods were employed by the Theban instigators of the war. 
The unsuccessful attempt of the Spartans to settle the dispute peaceably 
(xv. 7-1 1 ), which is recorded by no other historian, puts the policy of Sparta 
with regard to Boeotia in a new light, and this does not harmonize very well with 
the subsequent state of feeling at Sparta as described by Xenophon, whose 
account of the origin of this war is perhaps preferable in some respects to that 
of P (xiv. 21, note). The details of the invasion of Phocis (xv. 15-32) are all 
new but of no special interest. Incidentally P's treatment of the whole dispute 
between the Phocians and the Locrians provides some important indications that 
he wrote his account before the conclusion, at any rate, of the Sacred War ; 
cf. p. 134- 

In xv. 32-xviii. 33 P once more returns to the naval war, and begins 
by recording the arrival (in the late summer) of a hitherto unknown Spartan 
vafapxos Cheiricrates, thereby producing a conflict with Xenophon, who 
represents Pisander as having been appointed va&apyps by Agesilaus at about 
this period (xv. 33, note). An otherwise unrelated visit of Conon to Sardis in 
order to obtain money (xv. 37, note) leads to a digression on the financial 
difficulties experienced by Greeks in the pay of Persia (xvi. 3-15). A passage 
which implies that the Persian empire was still standing shows that this history 
was composed before the conquest of Persia by Alexander (xiv. 3, note). After 
narrating the results of Conon's mission and the departure of Tithraustes for the 
Persian court (xvi. 16-29), P proceeds to describe minutely a mutiny at Caunus 
of Conon's forces upon the return of their commander. This event, which 
nearly led to the dispersion of Conon's fleet, has been passed over by all 
historians except Justin, whose reference to it, though brief, seems to be derived 
indirectly from P (xvi. 29, note). The revolt was ultimately quelled by the 
efforts of Conon, whose itpoOvpLa receives special praise from our author (xviii. 32). 
In xvi. 33 P reverts to Agesilaus, and describes his campaign in the late summer 
and autumn of 395 up to his arrival at Dascylium, where he passed the winter, 
at which point the papyrus breaks off. Diodorus omits this campaign altogether, 
and, as in the account of the war in the earlier half of the year (v. 6-vii. 4), 
P differs widely from Xenophon, who, omitting the not very exciting incidents 
of Agesilaus* march, concentrates his descriptive powers upon one or two 
episodes which were capable of picturesque treatment, e.g. the negotiations of 
Agesilaus with the king of Paphlagonia and later with Pharnabazus. P, on the 
other hand, gives a plain, straightforward account of the military operations, 
showing considerable acquaintance with the geography of Asia Minor and the 
details of the campaign (xviii. 39, note). When he reaches the Paphlagonian 
incident he devotes only a few lines to it, but manages nevertheless to conflict 


with Xenophon both about the name of the Paphlagonian king (on this point 
being also in disagreement with Theopompus and Nepos), and the method by 
which the negotiations were conducted (xx. 37, note). A description of an 
ambush (xix. 23-39) resembles with slight variations that in v. 59 sqq. Con- 
cerning Spithradates, a Persian noble who deserted to Agesilaus, somewhat less 
information is given than by Xenophon ; but with regard to Spithradates" son 
Megabates P speaks openly of Agesilaus' attachment to him, which is only 
hinted at in the Hellenica, though amply illustrated by the Agesilaus (xx. 9, note). 
The papyrus concludes in the middle of a description of an abortive scheme for 
invading Cappadocia, concerning which country erroneous geographical ideas 
prevailed even down to Roman times (xxi. 35-9, note). The unplaced fragments 
(16-72) are too small to give any historical information. 

To summarize the chief characteristics of our author, we have in this papyrus 
a very elaborate and detailed work of a historian of obviously great importance, 
who shows himself equally well informed whether dealing with events in Greece, 
the campaigns of Agesilaus in Asia, or the naval war. In the arrangement 
of his material he has adopted an annalistic method, evidently imitated from 
Thucydides, whereby events are narrated in chronological order and divided into 
years beginning in the ' summer ' (whether spring or midsummer is not clear), 
and he has not grouped together according to subject events separated by any 
considerable distance of time. Hence there are abrupt transitions to and from 
different parts of the world, e. g. the account of the origin of the Boeotian war is 
inserted between two chapters dealing with the naval war. Whether P adhered 
strictly to this chronological arrangement there is not sufficient evidence to show ; 
but so far as the extant portions of his work go, he seems to keep closely to it. 
On the other hand he is extremely fond of digressions, whether excursions into 
earlier history, e. g. the exploits of Timolaus and the rise of Theban prosperity* 
or general descriptions which serve to illustrate the background of the events 
which he is recording, e. g. the sketch of the constitution of Boeotia. These 
digressions, though adding greatly to the interest and variety of P's work, are 
seldom very relevant, and cause serious interruptions to the narrative. How 
easily he was led on from one excursus to another is well illustrated, firstly by 
i. 20 sqq., where, starting from the privateering expedition of Demaenetus, he 
reaches the achievements of the Corinthian Timolaus in the Decelean war through 
the intermediate stages of the origin of the an ti- Spartan feeling first at Athens, 
then in Greece in general, and at Corinth in particular, — secondly by xii. 31 sqq., 
where, from the war between Boeotia and Phocis, he proceeds through the de- 
scription of parties at Thebes, the causes of the previous preponderance of the 
aristocrats and the growing prosperity of Thebes, to a sketch of the flourishing 


condition of Attica prior to the fortification of Decelea. With regard to the 
scope of his work, it is clear that it included, besides the events of 396 and 395, 
the history of the seven years between 396 and the close of the Peloponnesian war, 
the year 403-2, corresponding approximately to the archonship of Euclides, being 
taken by P as marking a kind of epoch. That his history, however, did not begin 
with 403-a, but comprised that portion of the Peloponnesian war which Thucy- 
dides did not live to narrate, is rendered probable by the reference to a former 
description of an incident of B.C. 411 in ii. 27. Since events prior to 411 are 
several times mentioned, but in no case with a reference to a former description of 
them, there is a strong presumption that P's history began where Thucydides' 
left off, and was intended to be a continuation of it To what point beyond 395 
the narrative was carried there is no internal evidence to show, except that which 
indicates the period of the composition of the work itself. The description of the 
constitution of Boeotia, which is contrasted with the conditions existing in the 
writer's own day, was certainly written after 387, when at the peace of Antalcidas 
the Boeotian league underwent considerable changes. On the other hand the 
fact that the Persian empire is spoken of in terms implying that it was still 
standing (cf. p. 120), proves that Fs history was not written later than 330, and 
the use of the present tense in regard to the border disputes between Phocis 
and Locris, coupled with the absence of any reference to the Sacred War which 
resulted in the destruction of the Phocians, indicates that P's work was com- 
posed before the conclusion of that war in 346, to say nothing of the general 
probability that an author so well informed (cf. e.g. the extremely minute 
description of the mutiny in xvi. 29 sqq., which is likely to have been obtained 
from an eyewitness) was not writing more than a couple of generations later than 
the events which he narrates. It is therefore possible that the history reached 
a point some twenty or thirty years later than 395, but considering its elaborate 
scale this is not at all likely, and there is nothing to suggest that it went further 
than the battle of Cnidus in 394, with which Theopompus' Hellenica concluded. 
That P's sympathies were aristocratic not democratic, and therefore on the 
whole with Sparta, is shown by his description of the parties at Athens, particularly 
his opinion of the motives influencing the extreme section of the democrats. In 
his account also of the intrigues which led to the Boeotian war he seems to 
acquiesce in the Spartan claims to the hegemony of Greece at this period. But 
so far from laying himself open to the charge of exaggerated partisanship, 
P compares favourably with Xenophon by his impartiality. While admitting 
(probably rightly) the fact of the acceptance of Persian gold by the Athenians in 
common with the Thebans, Argives, and Corinthians, he expressly defends those 
states from the accusation of Medizing, by controverting the pro-Spartan view 


and minimizing the extent to which the mission of Timocrates was responsible 
for creating the anti-Spartan league. The moderation of the section of the 
Athenian democratic party headed by Thrasybulus and Anytus and of the 
victorious democrats at Rhodes is plainly recognized, and it is noteworthy that 
the leaders of the anti-Spartan faction at Thebes are classed among the /SlXrurroi 
koX yviopiiiwTaTot. no less than their opponents. Of an anti-Theban bias, which is 
so marked in Xenophon, there is no trace ; and it is clear that P wished to do 
full justice to the chief enemy and destined conqueror of Sparta. A still more 
remarkable example of his fairness towards Sparta's enemies is the prominence 
assigned by him to Conon, who figures no less conspicuously than Agesilaus, 
while there is a noticeable contrast between the dry and unenthusiastic catalogue 
of Agesilaus' achievements, which evoke hardly a word of praise, and the more 
lively narrative of the incidents of the naval war with its outspoken expression of 
admiration for Conon 's skill in overcoming difficulties (xviii. 32). Nothing illus- 
trates P's merits as a historian and his superiority to Xenophon better than the 
correct perspective in which he draws the two chief actors on his stage, refusing 
to allow the brilliant and showy but ultimately fruitless triumphs of Agesilaus in 
the East to obscure the slow but in the end successful steps by which Conon 
destroyed the Spartan sea power and restored Athens to a position among the 
leading Greek states. 

A characteristic of P, which separates him from most Greek historians, 
is his dislike of rhetoric and apparent avoidance of speeches, of which there is 
only one consisting of but nine words (xi. 22-3), so that he almost seems to 
have taken the eighth book of Thucydides as his model. Allowance must, 
however, be made not only for the fact that the events recorded in the extant 
fragments do not offer any very favourable opportunities for inserting speeches 
(even Thucydides in Books i-vii and Xenophon have long sections without 
them), but also for the possibility that speeches occurred in the lost portions of 
T*s history. His seeming divergence from the common method of employing 
speeches to indicate motives and illustrate situations is compensated by a frequent 
analysis of causes, which shows much historical insight into the politics of the 
early fourth century, e. g, the discussions of the growth of anti-Spartan feeling in 
Greece, and of the policy of the anti-Spartan party at Thebes. That our author 
was sparing in comments, whether of approval or of the reverse, upon the actions 
of his characters is clear ; it is unfortunate that the only passage in which he 
seems to have entered on a general criticism of some one's character is hopelessly 
mutilated (Col. x). 

While P's excellences as a narrator of facts, his wealth of information, his 
impartiality, his acuteness of judgement, and his seriousness, entitle him to very 


high place among Greek historians, it is impossible to award much praise to his 
style. This, though correct and easy, is somewhat frigid, colourless, and verbose, 
rather like that of Polybius, and its monotonous flow is but seldom stirred to 
a little life, as in the descriptions of the democratic rising at Rhodes, the 
mutiny of Conon's troops, and the adornment of Attica. So far from displaying 
any richness of vocabulary, he is decidedly careless about repeating words at 
very short intervals, and shows a marked fondness for certain expressions, e.g. 
fiaZL(uv, irapo&ivtiv, and rvyx&vtw with a participle in place of the simple verb. 
flip . . . ii are wont to recur with dull regularity, and the tendency to overload 
sentences with participles and parentheses, e.g. xiv. 8-16, sometimes produces 
a heavy effect. Some words and phrases recall Polybius, e.g. (rah irrfWi) raw 
vpo€iprnUvais (ii. 32), irkrjyrj (xv. 20, xix. 25), fcara£ri/£<w (xix. 18). With x^ €VT€f 
in i. 9 cf. Ar. Pol. Z 5, 1320 b 7. The nearest parallel to the curious expression 
Pofaavros Uttvov riiv [po]r}$ciav in xi. 23 is fioav &Kparov in Menander Fr. 510 (Kock). 
The hypothesis that he wrote his work later than 346 is excluded by internal 
evidence (cf. p. 122), and the style does not suggest a much earlier date. Hiatus 
is as a rule avoided, even at the cost of producing an unnatural order of words, 
e.g. ii. 34 imipfiivoi yjurtiv faav tqvs AaxtbaipovCovs, and xi. 22 fo/iep 2> oVftpcs, tyq, 
TroAirai, inl row rvpdwovs. Eight instances, however (cf. i. 4, note), of hiatus 
occur, and though most of these can be got rid of without difficulty by slight 
alterations of the text, we have preferred to allow them to stand. The avoidance 
of hiatus proves little as regards the date of composition, for it is common to the 
Isocrateans, Polybius, and even Plutarch. 

Turning to P's relation to other historians, everything in the papyrus leads 
to the conclusion that he was quite independent of Xenophon, and it is not even 
certain that Xenophon's Hellenic a was published before P wrote his work, for 
the Hellenica is now generally supposed to have been issued between 360 and 
350, and the limits within which P composed his history are 387 and 346 ; 
cf. p. 122. If the Hellenica was published first, P shows a complete disregard 
for it, not only describing much that Xenophon had omitted, but frequently 
conflicting with him where the two writers cover the same ground. P may even 
have intended his work to be a contrast to Xenophon's onesided and unsatisfac- 
tory account. With Diodorus P exhibits a remarkably close connexion ; Diod. xiv. 
80, which describes Agesilaus' campaign in the early part of 395 and the super- 
session of Tissaphernes, is practically an abridgement of v-viii, and with regard 
to the naval war also Diodorus (xiv. 79. 4-8) has obtained his scanty details from 
P, though in the process apparently disturbing the sequence of events. The 
question whether the use of P by Diodorus was direct or indirect we postpone 
until we reach the question of P's identity (cf. pp. 135-7), but we may remark that 


with the discovery of P the criticism of Diod. xiii and xiv in any case enters on 
a new phase. Another late writer with whom P exhibits some noteworthy cases 
of agreement, though to a less extent than with Diodorus, is Polyaenus, whose 
account of the removal of Tissaphernes (Strat. vii. 16) seems to be an abridge- 
ment of vii-viii, and who alone of ancient writers agrees with P in associating 
the mission of Timocrates with Pharnabazus instead of with Tithraustes, though 
it is possible that this may be due to an accident (i. 33, note). Pausanias, too, 
presents some points of connexion with P, but generally mingled with points of 
difference. Thus he agrees with P that Epicrates and Cephalus took Persian 
gold (i. 33, note), and like P associates Amphitheus (whom he calls Amphithemis) 
with Ismenias and Androclidas (xii. 34-5, note) ; but on the date of Pisander's 
appointment as va6apxps (xv. 33, note) and that of Timocrates' mission and its 
effects he agrees with Xenophon against P, the view which Pausanias accepted 
being expressly controverted in ii. 1 sqq. Again with regard to the origin of 
the Boeotian war Pausanias agrees with P against Xenophon that the Locrians 
concerned were the Hesperian, not the Opuntian ; but the embassy of the 
Athenians mentioned by Pausanias is not at all likely to have occurred in 
Fs narrative, and Pausanias, like Xenophon, makes the Locrians the aggressors. 
On the question whether Tissaphernes' infantry took part in the campaign round 
Sardis Pausanias agrees with P against Xenophon, but his allusion to it is very 
brief, and that he himself used P in composing iii. 9 is most unlikely, though P 
may have to some extent influenced Pausanias' sources. The only ancient 
historian who mentions the mutiny of Conon's troops described in xvi. 39 sqq. is 
Justin, whose reference though brief seems to be derived ultimately from P. 
In the other late writers we have been unable to detect any trace of P's 
influence. With Nepos P comes into conflict both concerning the nature of 
the campaign of 395 and the date of the visit of Conon to the Persian court 
and his responsibility for the dismissal of Tissaphernes, and also in regard to the 
name of the Paphlagonian king, while Plutarch in his Agesilaus closely follows 
Xenophon's account of the campaign of 395, ignoring P altogether, and neither 
his Lysander nor his Artaxerxes betray any use of our author. 

Such being in brief the evidence concerning the character of P's history, the 
way is now clear for the discussion of the most interesting problem of all — can 
he be identified with any of the known historians of the fourth century ? For 
the authorship of so important a historical work the first names that naturally 
suggest themselves are those of the two famous pupils of Isocrates, Ephorus 
of Cyme and Theopompus of Chios. The close agreement between P and 
Diodorus at once suggests an identification with Ephorus, whose history is known 
to have been used by Diodorus in Book xiv ; cf. 98. % 'A/urioi/o-uH tt kclI SrfAtot 


Koi Kimi? iuri\ovT€9 ry iroXlpq> with Ephorus Fr. 134 'A/urio&rtoi & ical 2<(\toi ical 
'Arieiy &vt4xovtcs in t$ iroktyy. Moreover, Hieronymus, one of Conon's lieu- 
tenants, who is stated by Harpocration to have been mentioned in Books xviii 
and xix of Ephorus (cf. Diod. xiv. 81. 4), occurs in xi. 10, and the spelling 
'Aicpaiipviov instead of 'Anpatyiov in xii. 20 is in accordance with Ephorus' use 
(Fr. 67) of the adjectives 'Aiepatynos and 'Aicpai^i/uirijs. Neither of these 
coincidences, however, is really very striking, for any historian of this period who 
(unlike Xenophon) described the naval war in detail would be bound to mention 
Hieronymus, and Harpocration expressly says that other (unspecified) historians 
did so, while the insertion of the v in 'AKpafyiov and its derivatives occurred 
in Theopompus also and was probably a common practice outside Boeotia. 
Some characteristics of P would suit Ephorus very well, e.g. his intimate know- 
ledge of Asia Minor, with which country Ephorus, whose home was at Cyme 
and who was a good geographer, must have been well acquainted, his proneness 
to digressions, of which Ephorus was fond (cf. Polyb. xii. 28 fcuwraro? iariw 
iv rai? TrapcKpao-co-i), and his full information concerning Theban affairs, which is 
thought to have characterized Ephorus also (Busolt, Gr. GescA. iii. p. 710). 
P's divergence from Xenophon and points of agreement with other later writers 
besides Diodorus, e. g. Pausanias, Justin, and Polyaenus, would be in accordance 
with the views of modern critics concerning the relation of these authors to 
Ephorus ; cf. e. g. E. Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. s.v. Ephoros % 
pp. 11-2, Melber, Jahrb. d. Class. PhiloL Supplementbd. xiv. pp. 419 sqq., 
Busolt, op. cit.> iii. pp. 245 sqq., though the explanation of divergences in late 
writers from Thucydides and Xenophon by reference to Ephorus has in our 
opinion often been carried too far. For forming an opinion upon Ephorus' style 
the extant fragments which very rarely quote his actual words afford but slight 
material ; the awkward repetition of the words AcpfcvXAap Htptyav after a brief 
interval (Fr. 130 from Book xviii) recalls P's carelessness in that respect (cf. p. 124), 
and there is at any rate no marked discrepancy of style between the extant 
fragments of Ephorus and P. The judgements of ancient critics who regarded 
Ephorus* style as smooth but tame are by no means inappropriate to P ; cf. 
Cicero Hortens. Fr. 12 quid . . . Ephoro mitius inveniri potest \ Brut 204 lenis- 
sitnutn Ephori ingenium ; Dion. Chrys. xvii. p. 283 "EQopos hi iroAA^ir plv laropiav 
irapabfoaxriv rd b' farnov ko! bvcifiivov croi ttjs ivayyeklas oiic lTnrrjb€iop. The con- 
trast between him and Theopompus is frequently drawn, e. g. in the well-known 
saying of Isocrates that the latter required the bit, the former the spur, and if it 
were necessary to identify P with one of these two the argument from style 
would be all in favour of Ephorus. On the other hand some of the charac- 
teristics ascribed by ancient critics to Ephorus are not illustrated by P, e. g. his 


fondness for moral reflexions (cf. Polyb. /. c. raw hp' airov yiwjioXoy&u?) and his 
use of speeches (cf. Plutarch, Mor. 803 b, quoted on p. 13a) ; and if modern 
criticism (cf. e. g. Busolt, Gr. Gesch. iii. p. 707) is right in supposing that Ephorus 
was a pronounced partisan of Athens and opponent of Sparta, and that he 
abandoned altogether the annalistic arrangement adopted by Thucydides, group- 
ing events together according to subject without sharp chronological distinctions, 
in both these features he differed from P, whose work moreover attains a higher 
degree of historical value than critics have generally been disposed to allow 
to Ephorus. It is difficult for instance to believe that P could have written any- 
thing so unreasonable as Ephorus' account of the causes of the Peloponnesian 
war. But the really fatal objection to the identification of P with Ephorus, and 
one which caused Blass, who was at first disposed to favour that view, to reject 
it decisively, is that Ephorus wrote a universal history, which, although it became 
more detailed as he approached his own times, can hardly have described with 
very great minuteness the period covered by P, whereas not only is P's narrative 
extremely elaborate (compared with the parallel portions of Xenophon P is 
much longer), but there are distinct indications in the work itself that it began at 
the point where Thucydides broke off and not earlier (cf. p. 116). Hence in 
spite of the remarkable agreement between P and Diodorus, we have no hesitation 
in rejecting the view that Ephorus is the author of the papyrus, and the same 
objection to the identification of P with Ephorus is equally fatal to his identifi- 
cation with Anaximenes or any other fourth-century writer of a universal history. 
The primary condition which must be satisfied with regard to the authorship of 
P's work is that the historian whose claims are put forward wrote a continuation 
of Thucydides on a very elaborate scale. 

That condition is fulfilled by Theopompus, whose Hellenica in twelve books 
began where Thucydides left off, and ended with the battle of Cnidus in 394, as 
is known from Diod. xiii. 4a, xiv. 84, and Theopompus is in fact regarded by 
both E. Meyer and Wilamowitz-Mollendorff as the author of the papyrus, 
though that hypothesis was unhesitatingly rejected by Blass. Of Theopompus' 
Hellenic^ which was certainly written before the same historian's more famous 
and longer work, the Philippka % only about twenty fragments survive, of which 
only four (nos. 7, 15, 15 a, and 23) consist of more than a few words. The events 
from 411 up to the close of the war seem to have been related comparatively 
briefly, for already in Book ii there occurs a reference to a Lacedaemonian har- 
most who has generally been thought to have been appointed by Lysander, 
though that inference is not certain. After this, however, the history became much 
more detailed : Book viii, from which the names of certain places in Bithynia are 
quoted by Stephanus Byz., no doubt contained the accounts of the campaign of 


Dercylidas in 398-7. The solitary extant quotation from Book ix cannot be 
dated precisely, but Book x included a character-sketch of Lysander emphasizing 
his moderation (Athen. xii. p. 543), a passage which is also referred to by Plutarch 
(Lysand. 30), who introduces it in connexion with Lysander's death. Hence 
it is probable, as Meyer remarks, that in Theopompus also the sketch occurred 
at the point where he described Lysander's death at the battle of Haliartus. 
Since this event took place in the autumn of 395 and the concluding chapters of 
P narrate Agesilaus 1 campaign in the same autumn, while the battle of Haliartus 
has yet to be related, it is clear that Cols, xi-xxi, assuming that Athenaeus has 
quoted the number of the book correctly, cannot come from a later book 
than x. That they would, if Theopompus were the author, belong to Book x 
not to Book ix is made probable by the statement of Porphyry (ap. Euseb. Praep. 
Evang. p. 465) that Theopompus* account of the negotiations between Agesilaus 
and Pharnabazus corresponding to Xen. Hell. iv. i. 29-40 (cf. p. 120) occurred in 
Book xi ; for these negotiations took place in the winter of 395-4 soon after the 
events recorded in Col. xxi, and it is unlikely that the narrative of events in 
Greece in the autumn of 395 occupied a whole book. Cols, i-x might still come 
from Book ix, but since there is some reason to believe that Col. i commences 
a new book (cf. p. 115), it is more satisfactory to refer Cols, xi-xxi to the same 
book. In that case Book x of Theopompus' Hellenica would comprise an 
account of events from the expedition of Demaenetus in the first half of 396 
(cf. p. 115) down to the end of the year 395, the battle of Haliartus falling near 
the conclusion of this book, and the negotiations of Agesilaus with Pharnabazus 
near the beginning of the next This would lead to the difficulty that Books 
xi and xii together would cover only the period from about January 394 to 
August (the approximate date of the battle of Cnidus is fixed by an eclipse), 
and even allowing for considerable digressions and the possible recital of events 
in other parts of the world such an arrangement seems disproportionate. The 
difficulty could be avoided by assigning Cols, xi-xxi to Book xi and assuming 
either that the sketch of Lysander referred to by Athenaeus occurred in Book x 
not in connexion with the battle of Haliartus or else that Athenaeus has erred in 
referring the passage in question to Book x instead of to Book xi. But Fr. 23 
of Theopompus from Book xi seems to relate to the homeward march of 
Agesilaus from the Hellespont, which is likely to have been narrated in the book 
following that to which Cols, xi-xxi would belong, so that it is preferable 
to suppose that these columns would be part of Book x. Book xii is in any case 
something of a mystery. No quotations from it are extant, and possibly Suidas 
was right in stating that the Hellenica contained only eleven books. 

The hypothesis that Ps important work, which continued Thucydides* 


history and has clearly had a large influence upon later historians, is to be 
identified with a known continuation of Thucydides written by a historian of the 
first rank, who was undoubtedly much used by his successors in the same field, 
possesses obvious advantages and, especially when it comes to be advocated 
by Meyer in his own words, is sure to find wide acceptance. The positive 
arguments by which he in agreement with Wilamowitz-Mollendorff supports it 
against the rival theory of Blass, to be discussed later, are in the main as follows. 
Firstly, Theopompus, who as a child was exiled with his father from Chios on 
account of the latter 's philo-Laconian views, is known to have been an aristocrat 
and on the whole in favour of Sparta as against Athens (cf. e.g. Fr. 17), though 
as would be expected from so great a historian, his personal feelings did not 
lead him into violent partisanship — witness his censure of the Spartans in the 
abstract of Philippic a xii preserved by Photius m 'ABrivat&v rj v6kts rafr vpbs 
fiatnXia ctw&Jkcus tattparo ififiivuv^ Aaiceoaifid'iuoi bi xnripoyKa <f>povovvr€S itaplfiawov 
ris <tw0ijko$ (cf. Blass' defence of Theopompus from the charge of extreme 
partiality in Att. Bereds. iL pp. 415 sqq., and for a much less favourable view 
of Theopompus E. Schwartz, Hermes xxxv. pp. 109-10). This combination 
of aristocratic leanings with a sincere desire for truth corresponds, as Meyer 
thinks, to the attitude adopted by P, especially in his account of parties at 
Athens. Secondly, there is no reason to suppose that the characteristic 
vigour and eloquence of Theopompus were displayed in ordinary narrative 
such as that which occupies so large a part of the papyrus, and in fact the 
extant fragments of the Hellenica are not dissimilar in style from P. Of 
these the four largest are: (1) Fr. 7 iir/ixOrja-av cis XaAicTjSoVa kqI Bv(Avnov 
fitrh rod kotirov orpartf/paro? fiov\6p.cvot, Xpv<r6iro\iv Karaayjdv (for iivay€<r$ai 
cf. i. 7 ; arpinvfia occurs frequently in P) ; (2) Fr. 15 a Iwclkoivovvtcli tQv 
'H/xottiW TtjA.£/><p koX rot? p.€T lictivov fiovkofiivois kclI rbv 'Q,p<airbv vvdp\€w avroi? 
(for fieri in preference to <ri/u cf. vi. 17, &c, and for the historic present 
xvi. ao, xtfii. 17, &c); (3) Fr. 15 rd bi t&v eiAcSraw tOvos vavriiraaiv &fi&s 
fiuiiccirai teal mic/w?. cltrl ycip ovroi fcarefo&ovAajuici'oi irokvv ijbrj \p6vov ivb t&v 
Sirapriarttv, ol fikv avr&v in Mctrorjvrjs Svrcs ol b 9 ikc&rai Karoucovvrts irpdrcpov rb 
KdkovfjLcvov "EXoy rrjs Aafcawuci}? (cf. e. g. xiv. 25 S( N- » Wvoy, biaxclaOai, and rb 
Ka\oAfi€vov are words of frequent occurrence in P ; with the inversion «/*»$ 
ftuifceircu koX micp&s to avoid hiatus with the following d<rC cf. ii. 34 and xi. 2%) ; 
(4) Fr. 23 (from Hell, xi and Philip, xiii according to Athen. xiv. p. 657) icoi ol 
Qdxrioi lircfiyjrav *Ay?j<riA(£<p irpoaiSvri vp6para Ka\ f}ov$ c2 TtOpafifUvovs irpbs rovrois 
bi kclI v4fifiara kcl\ rpayr\pAr<av cldos vavrobairov. 6 b' 9 Aytj<rlkao9 tcL flip itp6^ara koI 
t&s fiovs tkaficv, ra bi itififiara koX to, Tpayrjfiara irp&Tov p.iv ovb 9 3yj/o>, KaTCKtKaXvnro 
yap 9 m bk Kartvbtv inroQiptiv avrovy JK&cvcrei', tlirvv ov v6p.1p.ov c&ai AaMbaifiovloif 



XprjaOai roiot/rois rots ibio-paai. Xnrapovvroav b\ t&v ®a<rl<av, bdr€, ^>tj<rf, <f>ipovrcs JkcIpoi?, 
b*t£as avTOis roits eZ\o>ra?, d-nav 8ti tovtovs bioi biafydtlpevOai. rpdyovras airra vo\v 
paWov 7? airdv Kal tovs napovras AaKebaifxovloyv (the structure of the sentence 
6 V 'Ayrjo-lXaos k.t\. is particularly like the style of P). This argument for the 
general similarity of the style of the Hellenica with that of P can, we may 
remark, be supplemented by the occurrence of certain linguistic agreements 
between P and Theopompus. including two possible references to extant 
portions of P in quotations from Theopompus (p. 131). Thirdly, enough is known 
about the contents of the Philippic^ particularly from the abstract of Book xii 
preserved by Photius, to show that Theopompus was extremely prone to 
digressions on all kinds of subjects, many of them very remotely connected with 
his main narrative, a feature which is notably prominent in P also (cf. p. 121). 
Fourthly, several points in the probably just criticism of Theopompus ad 
a historian by Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Ep. ad Cn. Pomp. pp. 782-7) apply 
very well to P. Thus Dionysius speaks of both Hellenica and Philippka as 
being tvirapaKokovBriToi Kal <ra</>ci9, and praises the careful and diligent preparations 
which Theopompus had made in collecting materials and obtaining information, 
and the wide range of subjects treated (t6 irokvpopaSov ttjs ypa<f>rjs) 9 which included 
descriptions of states, laws, constitutions (itoXmi&v ay^yLara ; cf. P's excursus on 
the constitution of Boeotia), important individuals, &c. Dionysius specially 
singles out as Theopompus* most remarkable characteristic, which distinguished 
him from both older and younger historians, his deep insight into causes and 
power of psychological analysis, rb kclO* ixjloTriv irpafrv py povov rh <pav€pa roi? 
iroAAofr dpav *al kiytip, ak\a $£ct&Chv Kal tcls acfravtls ahCas t&v irpi£ca>v Kal raw 
irpa£&vr<M>v avras Kal ret iraQi) rijs ^rvxns & /xt) pabia rots ttoAAois dbhat, Kal it&vra 
iKKa\vTTT€iv Ta fxuoTTjpia ttjs t€ boKovai}9 ip€Ttjs Kal t^9 ayvoovp.4irqs icaKia? . . . bid Kal 
P&o-Kavos ibofcv eli/cu, with which description may be compared the penetrating 
analysis of the motives of the various anti-Spartan parties in i. 33 sqq. and of 
the policy of Ismenias* party at Thebes in xii. 37-xiv. 21. Fifthly, that 
Theopompus' works were serious histories like that of P, and very far from being 
over-rhetorical, is shown by the unfavourable verdict passed upon him by one of 
his successors, Duns of Samos, a writer who sacrificed historical accuracy to 
mere effect, *E<f>opos bi koI ©cowo/mtos t&v y€vop.ivu>v irkclorov iircXcfyOrjaav, ovre 
yap w$<TC(tis yLtriXafZov ovb (puas ovt€ tfbovrjs tv t<3 <f>pi<rai 9 avrov bi tov ypd^eiv pSvov 
iit€n€\rj0riaav. Sixthly, the blame passed on Theopompus in common with 
Ephorus and Timaeus by Polybius (xii. 35/. 6) for his want of knowledge in 
describing battles would accord with the suspiciously conventional character of 
the account of the two ambuscades in v. 59 sqq. and xix. 22 sqq. 

The combined weight of Meyer's arguments, of which the first three seem 


to us the strongest, is undoubtedly considerable, and we can reinforce them 
by several linguistic coincidences of which the last two are particularly striking, 
and perhaps provide direct evidence of P's identity with Theopompus. Of 
P's favourite expressions (cf. p. 124) rvyxAvctv with a participle in place of the 
simple verb occurs in Theop. Fr. 149, Trapo&tveiv in Fr. 100, while \a>p(ov . . . 
KaTtaKtvaaiilvov Kakm is found both in xx. 30 (/caxcos Pap. by an error) and 
Theop. Fr. 33. The agreement of P with Theopompus as to the insertion of 
v in the name 'AKpafyiov (cf. ' AKpa«f>viov xii. 20, note) proves little, for Ephorus 
used the forms 'Afepatyiuo? and ' AKpaufrvH&Trjs (cf. p. 1 26) and the insertion of v was 
probably common ; moreover, Stephanus Byz. ascribes the form 'Anpatyviov to 
Pausanias, and (to) 'Axpatypia to Theopompus. Similarly the circumstance that 
Theopompus' description of Mesogis and Celaenae (Fr. 290) is in accordance 
with vi. 45-vii. 2 (cf. note ad loc), that of Parapotamii (Fr. 264) with xv. 17-8, is 
of slight account. But the occurrence in xviii. 39 (cf. viii. 22) of the verb Karapai 
in the rather rare sense of JA0cu>, a use which is attributed to Theopompus 
(Fr.327) by a grammarian in Bekk. Anecd. p. 104. 15, is significant in any case, 
and it is possible that this passage in P was the grammarian's authority, while 
a still more noteworthy coincidence between P and Theopompus is found in con- 
nexion with the form Kapiraa-^s (xvi. 37, xvii. 16), meaning a man of Carpasus (in 
Cyprus). Steph. Byz. s. v. KapvatrCa remarks 6 iroAfn/s Kapirao-ewrq? . . . koI rd 
KTt)TiKbv KapTFaacwTtKds koL KapiracTfaiTiKT) &Kpa. GccfarofAiro? tv dexcirq) Kapiraaels avrois 
</>T}<Tii/. l(r<as And tov K6,pTra<ros is 'AvtCo\os 'Avrioxevs, a<f>' ot Kapiracrevs. It has been 
generally assumed that the 10th Book in question belonged to the more com- 
monly quoted Philippica rather than to the Hellenica % and C. Muller explains it 
(Fr* Hist. Gr. Theop. Fr. 93) by the supposition that the Carpasians were 
mentioned in connexion with Cimon's expedition to Sicily, Cimon being men- 
tioned in another fragment (94) of Phil. Book x. But both the assumption and 
the suggested explanation are mere guesses, and if the 10th Book belongs to 
the Hellenica the agreement with P is very remarkable, for, as we have shown 
(p. 128), Cols, xi-xxi, if not the whole of the papyrus, would belong to that 
Book. This coincidence may indeed seem to clinch the argument for the 
identification of P with Theopompus, but before deciding in favour of that view 
it is necessary to examine the objections to it 

In the first place P and Theopompus seem to disagree as to the name of the 
Paphlagonian king, who is called Tvrjs in xxi. 11 but 0ifc by Theopompus accord- 
ing to Athenaeus, while Nepos, who is no doubt following Theopompus, calls 
him Thuys (xx. 37, note). Meyer evades the difficulty by supposing a corruption 
in the papyrus, which is admittedly not very trustworthy, especially as to proper 
names. But Tvqs is not in itself an unlikely form for an Asiatic name which, as 

K 2 


the variations of it in Xenophon (KArvs and *Orw) show, could not be repre- 
sented satisfactorily in Greek, and the apparent disagreement between P and 
Theopompus is prima facie evidence against the identity of the two. Secondly, 
according to Porphyry^. Eusebius, Praep. Evang. p. 465 b-c Theopompus in his 
Hellenica plagiarized from Xenophon (7roAAa tov EwoQ&vtos avrbv iicrariBivTa 
KCLTcCXrjQa) and in the nth Book ncraOtU apyi t€ koX dxfrqra ir€iro6j*cc Ka\ tirpaKTa 
the account of the negotiations between Agesilaus and Pharnabazus which 
Xenophon (Hell. iv. 1. 29-40) had described iriw \apUvrm tal itpenovrvs &p.<t>oiv. 
It is very unfortunate that the papyrus breaks off shortly before that episode was 
reached, but the total disregard of Xenophon exhibited in the extant portions of 
P renders it improbable that he borrowed from that author, and though, as Meyer 
remarks, Xenophon is likely to have been the only historian who could describe 
those negotiations from first-hand knowledge, the divergence between P and 
Xenophon in regard to the treatment of the earlier negotiations between Agesilaus 
and the king of Paphlagonia (xx. 37, note), for the details of which Xenophon 
was equally in all probability the sole first-hand authority, renders it in our 
opinion very difficult to believe that P used Xenophon's account when describing 
the negotiations with Pharnabazus. Hence if P is Theopompus, the general 
charge of plagiarism from Xenophon brought against him by Porphyry must cer- 
tainly be dismissed, and it would, we think, be preferable to explain the specific 
instance alleged as also due to a misunderstanding. Whether Porphyry carries 
very much weight on a question of literary criticism may be doubted, but his 
evidence, so far as it goes, distinctly tells against the identification of P with 
Theopompus. Thirdly, the absence of speeches in P offers a point of contrast with 
Theopompus, who certainly employed them, as is shown not only by the censure 
passed upon him in common with Ephorus and Anaximenes by Plutarch Mor. 
803 b tirl hi t&v 9 E(f>. kclI 0€Oir. icai 'Apa£. jyqTOpciQv koI TTtpiobw &? ircpatvowruf 
i£oTr\t(ravTcs ra orparevjuiara xal itapard^avrts ttrnv Ait€lv* ovbeU tnb'/jpov ravra yuapalvti 
iriXas, but by. two recently discovered fragments of the 4>iAiinriic(£ (Didymus, 
De Demosth. Comtn.> ed. Diels and Schubart, pp. 19 and 35). It is possible 
however that the absence of speeches in P is due to accident; cf. p. 123. 
Fourthly, P's account of Agesilaus does not accord at all well with what is 
known of the treatment of him in Theopompus. That the latter had a very 
high admiration for Agesilaus is clear from the fact that Plutarch quotes his 
piaise {kqX piyta-TOS jue^ tjv dpokoyovpLti'tos kul t&u tot€ favnav iTTi^avitrraTOff &f 
tlprjKi ttov ml QtQisopniQs), and the rather trivial anecdote preserved in Fr. 23 
from HclL xi, and probably in a slightly different form in PhiL xiii (cf, 
p. 129) recalls the stories about Agesilaus which Xenophon tells of his hero* 
P on the other hand shows no tendency to illustrate the personal character 


of Agesilaus nor any enthusiasm over his achievements (though cf. v. 17-9, 
note). It is moreover very noticeable that Plutarch, who is generally con- 
sidered to have derived much information from Theopompus (cf. e. g. Busolt, 
Gr. Gesch. iii. pp. 727 sqq.), and who in his Ages, mentions him four times, 
besides clearly referring in ch. 36 to the version in Theopompus' Philippica 
of the story about the gifts offered to the king, nevertheless ignores the 
divergences between P and Xenophon with regard to Agesilaus' campaigns in 
395 and shows practically no trace of connexion with P anywhere. That P's 
account of the war in 395, which has influenced Diodorus and other writers 
of the Roman period and must have been still extant in Plutarch's time, was so 
completely neglected by him is somewhat remarkable in any case ; but the 
identification of P with Theopompus makes this neglect much more difficult of 
explanation, and the view, which has been widely held, that Plutarch had first- 
hand knowledge of Theopompus, becomes almost untenable, with regard to the 
Hellenica at any rate, if P was the author of that work. Fifthly, while the 
agreements between P and Pausanias, Justin, and Polyaenus present no obstacles 
to Meyer's view, the acceptance of it leads to considerable complications when 
we try to account for the agreement between P and Diodorus, and to reconcile the 
dates at which P's work and Theopompus' Hellenica were probably composed. 
Meyer, from the standpoint of most modern criticism of Diodorus, which believes 
that ' die starke Abhangigkeit Diodors von Ephoros von dem neunten Buche der 
Bibliothek ab (i.e. to Book xv) eines der sichersten Ergebnisse der Quellen- 
forschung ist ' (Bauer , Die Forsckungen zur Gr. Gcsch. 1888-98, p. 265), explains 
the clear dependence of Diodorus upon P by the hypothesis that Diodorus' 
source* Ephorus> was using Theopompus, This leads, however, to a chronological 
difficulty* Theopompus was probably born about 376, since according to Photius 
he was 45 years of age, when through Alexander's intervention he returned 
to Chios from exile apparently in 332 (cf. Blass, op. cit. p. 400 ; Rohde, Rhein. 
Mus. xlix. p, 623), The statement of Suidas that Theopompus, like Ephorus, 
was ytyovm ... in the 93rd Olympiad (D. c. 408) is now universally regarded as 
containing an error in the figures, ycy qp& s meaning not 'born' but 'lived' (cf. 
Blass,/. c). He survived the death of Alexander, for Photius relates that he 
took refuge in Egypt with Ftolemy, but when and where he died is uncertain. 
Concerning Ephorus* life even less is known. Probably he was born about the 
same time as Theopompus and died some time before him, for the latest event 
recorded about him is his refusal to accept an invitation to Alexander's court 
(Plut. De stoic, repugn, c. 20), and whereas part of Theopompus* Philippica must 
have been written after the death of Philip in 336, the 39th Book of Ephorus' 
istory only reached ^6 t the 30th Book which reaches 340 being edited after the 


historian's death by his son (Diod. xvi. 14). Meyer thinks that Theopompus 
wrote the Hellenica not much later than 350, and that the 18th and 19th Books 
of Ephorus, which covered the same ground, were not composed until after 330, 
for it is of course very difficult to reconcile the supposed dependence of Ephorus 
upon Theopompus without assuming an interval of some 15 or 20 years between 
the composition of the Hellenica and the parallel portions of Ephorus* history. 
But to this view there are two serious objections. That P wrote his history not 
much, if at all, later than 350 is probable enough ; for, as Mr. E. M. Walker was 
the first to point out and as Meyer now admits, the account of the border dispute 
between Phocis and Locris in xiv. 25 sqq., where P speaks of the a/m^ur/fynjo-i/ios 
X<£pa as still existing (2<m, in 1. 25 ; cf. imvinov<ri and biapirACov<n in 11. 27 
and 29) and contrasts in 11. 30-37 the former peaceful methods of settling the 
quarrel with the war which was kindled on that occasion, cannot have been 
written after the end of the Sacred War, which began in 356 with a struggle 
between the Phocians and the very same Locrians, and ended in 346 with 
the complete ruin of Phocis, whose place on the Amphictyonic Council was 
transferred to Macedonia. Hence 346 may be regarded as the terminus ad quern 
for the date at which P composed his history. Mr. Walker is even prepared to 
place it before 356, on the ground that a reference to the Sacred War would be 
expected in xiv. 25 sqq. if it had actually begun ; but we do not wish to press 
this point, for the use of the present tense is quite compatible with the war being 
already in progress. If P wrote before 356, it is of course impossible to identify 
him with Theopompus without abandoning the current view concerning the 
date of Theopompus' birth, and even if he was writing between 350 and 346, 
which we regard as on the whole the most likely date for the composition of 
P s work, it is not at all easy to reconcile this with the evidence that Theo- 
pompus was born in about 376. A work so detailed and elaborate as that of 
P implies a large amount of research on the part of its author, especially since 
he disregarded Xenophon. Theopompus may have begun writing his Hellenica 
at the age of 23 or 24, but that he composed the 10th Book before the age 
of 30 seems to us distinctly improbable, so that taking 376 as the correct 
date of Theopompus* birth, the terminus a quo for the date of the composition 
of Book x is 347-6. Since the terminus ad quern for P*s work is, as we have 
said, 346, the margin of time available for the supposed composition of it by 
Theopompus is reduced to the narrowest possible limits, if it does not disappear 
altogether. The margin may be extended for a year or two by supposing that 
when Photius gave Theopompus* age at his return from exile as 45 years, 
that figure was approximate, and he should have strictly said 46 or 47. But 
if the date of Theopompus* birth is pushed back before about 378 it becomes 


necessary to alter the number of the year in Photius' account, and to this there 
are two objections : firstly, that Photius seems to be drawing his details con- 
cerning Theopompus' life from a trustworthy source, and that the mistake, if 
there be one, must be attributed not to him but to his copyists ; secondly, that, 
in view of the fact that Theopompus was living in Egypt under Ptolemy Soter 
and may even have survived the year 300, 376 is a sufficiently early date for his 
birth, and a date before 380 is not at all probable. 

The theory of the identity of P with Theopompus thus leads to a grave 
chronological difficulty with regard to the date of the 10th Book of the Hellenica, 
the composition of which would on general grounds of probability be assigned to 
a year later than 346, whereas in order to satisfy the exigencies of the theory the 
date has to be prior to 346, and it is open to the further objection that P's most 
prominent features as a historian (cf. pp. IM-3) do not in the least suggest the work 
of a very young man, but on the contrary are rather characteristic of maturity or 
even old age ; cf. also p. 139. With regard to Ephorus on the other hand, Meyers 
supposition that he wrote the last twelve out of 29 Books of his history after 
330 seems rather hazardous in view of the fact that he is not known to have out- 
lived that year. The interval, therefore, between the publication of the Hellenic a 
and the composition of Books xviii and xix of Ephorus is likely to have been 
rather brief, and then the question arises whether it is probable that Ephorus would 
have neglected Xenophon and been content to reproduce in a shortened form the 
recently published work of his contemporary Theopompus as (granting that 
Diodorus in Book xiv is closely following Ephorus) he would seem to have done 
for the events of 396-5. Ephorus may have been a writer without much 
originality (cf. Wilamowitz, Arist. u. Athen ii. p. 16), but that he should have 
selected Theopompus as his principal or sole authority for the period covered 
by the Hellenica is strange. If P is identified with Theopompus, can the 
difficulty of admitting that Theopompus was Ephorus' source in Books xviii 
and xix be evaded by supposing a direct use of Theopompus by Diodorus for 
the period from 411-394? 

The question whether Diodorus borrowed from Theopompus has long been 
disputed, but since Volquardsen in 1869 propounded the view that Books xi-xv 
of Diodorus were mainly derived from Ephorus and Theopompus was not used, 
nearly all modern critics have ranged themselves on his side. Neither the scepticism 
of Holm (Gr. Gesch. iii. p. 19) nor the attempt of W. Stern (Cotnmentationes in 
hon. G. Studemund, 1889, pp. &45 sqq.) to prove on stylistic grounds that 
Diodorus had extensively used Theopompus in Books i-xx have won support, 
and the only concession sometimes made to the advocates of a use of Theopompus 
by Diodorus is in connexion with Book xvi, which deals with the period from 


360-336, and of which Volquardsen left the source in doubt. Here F. Reuss' 
conclusion (Jahrb.f. class. Philol cliii. pp. 317 sqq.) that parts of this Book are 
based on Theopompus is accepted by Bauer (op. cit. p. 266), but not by 
E. Schwartz (Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl v. p. 68a), though cf. Reuss, Bursians 
Jahresber. cxxvii. p. 37, where he suggests that Diod. xvi. 34. 5 is derived from 
Theopompus on the evidence of the new fragment in Diels-Schubart, Didymus 
Cotntn. de Demosth. xii. 43-9. The conditions of the problem are now entirely 
altered by the discovery of our papyrus. Volquardsen (Unters. fiber die 
Quellen Diod. pp. 67 sqq.) found five arguments against the use of Theopompus 
by Diodorus: (1) Theopompus is never cited by Diodorus; the mentions 
of his history in xiii. 42 and xiv. 84 do not count, because they belong to 
the extracts from a chronological epitome incorporated in Diodorus' history, 
(a) There is no correspondence between the fragments of Theopompus and 
Diodorus. (3) There is no trace in Diodorus of Theopompus* aristocratic bias. 
(4) The style of Diodorus does not resemble that of Theopompus. (5) For the 
period from 394-360 Diodorus could only have utilized Theopompus if he had 
searched up and down through the Philippic^ and it is unlikely that he would 
have used a work arranged on so unsystematic a plan. If, however, P is 
Theopompus, these arguments break down completely, with regard to the 
Hellenica at any rate. As for (a), there would be a close agreement between 
Diodorus xiv and Theopompus ; as for (3), since Theopompus* aristocratic bias 
would be very slight, and on the whole he would have to be regarded as 
a decidedly impartial historian, there would be no reason to expect an aristocratic 
bias to be traceable in Diodorus. With regard to (4) the identification of P 
with Theopompus necessitates a radical alteration in the ordinary conception of 
Theopompus' style (cf. pp. 137-9)* and so far from the style of Diodorus being 
different from that of Theopompus* Hellenics it would present considerable 
resemblance to it. Volquardsen's fifth reason does not apply to the period 
covered by the Hellenica^ which moreover, being arranged on a chronological 
system, would be more convenient as a basis for a history arranged on Diodorus' 
plan than a less strictly chronological work, such as Ephorus is supposed to 
have written. There remains, therefore, only the first argument, which, seeing 
that Diodorus is not in the habit of quoting his sources (e.g. Hieronymus of 
Cardia is generally thought to have been largely used in Books xviii-xx), is 
hardly serious, and it is clear that if P is Theopompus the whole question of 
the relation of Diodorus to Theopompus will have to be reconsidered. Into that 
problem we do not propose to enter in detail ; what we wish chiefly to insist upon 
is that the identification of P with Theopompus tends to disturb the prevailing 
view of the relation of Ephorus to Diodorus more seriously than an identification 


with e.g. Cratippus, who may well have been used by Ephorus (cf. p. 141), and, 
secondly, the hypothesis which Meyer adopts so readily that Ephorus used 
Theopompus' Hellenica, is based not only on a somewhat hazardous assumption 
concerning the dates at which these historians wrote, but on conclusions con- 
cerning the relation of Diodorus to Ephorus and Theopompus which the 
identification of P with Theopompus goes some way to undermine. That 
Diodorus used P directly does not seem to us probable : for though the general 
agreement between them is very close, the verbal coincidences are not on the 
whole very striking (cf. p. 216); and, as Mr. Walker remarks, the fact that 
Diodorus, though adopting an annalistic arrangement like that of P, never- 
theless commits the egregious blunder of first omitting the events of Greek 
history altogether during the two years preceding that in which he places the 
dispatch of Agesilaus, and then combining into one year his account of the two 
campaigns of Agesilaus which really belong to different years, is almost 
incredible if he was excerpting an author whose chronology was as clear as 
that of P. Such an error, however, is readily explicable on the assumption that 
Diodorus was using an author like Ephorus, who (as is generally supposed) 
grouped events together without strict regard to chronology. That Diodorus' 
close connexion with P is due to his use of Ephorus who was based on P is 
much the most satisfactory hypothesis, but the acceptance of it, so far from 
providing an argument for the identification of P with Theopompus, creates 
somewhat formidable difficulties. It is not Diodorus but Plutarch who, if P is 
Theopompus, ought to exhibit traces of his influence ; but these, as we have said 
(p. 133), are not forthcoming. 

To these objections which we have brought against the identification of P 
with Theopompus may be added the great obstacle, which from the outset led 
Blass (and Dittenberger also) to reject that view, namely the absence in P of 
several of Theopompus* most prominent characteristics, especially in regard to 
style. Thus Theopompus was noted for his comments either of praise or blame 
(principally the latter), a feature which is abundantly illustrated by the extant 
fragments of the Philippic^ whereas P, except apparently in the fragmentary 
Col. x, shows no disposition to moralize upon his characters, preferring to let their 
actions speak for themselves. Even so important a personage as Ismenias 
is introduced (xii. 34) without remark, and Agesilaus 1 relations to Megabates are 
stated, but neither excused nor censured. We hear, indeed, of Conon's irpotfvjua, an 
expression which is also used of Cyrus (xvi. 9) and an obscure Persian general 
(xx. 35), but for Agesilaus the extant portions of P have, except perhaps in v. 
1 7-9 (cf. note ad loc), no word of praise. The notorious bitterness of Theopompus, 
which Cicero singles out when summing him up in a single epithet (Hortens. 


Fr. 12 quid . . . Theopotnpo acrius), and which is exemplified in his diatribes 
against Athens (Frs. 117, 238, and 297), however well deserved these may be, 
goes far beyond the censure, implied rather than openly expressed, upon the 
extreme democrats in ii. 10-14; and in the plain unrhetorical composition of F 
we look in vain for any traces of the fire and passion which Theopompus put 
into his vivid and powerful description of the friends of Philip (Fr. 249), or 
Fr. 125 beginning vola yap it6kis fj itolov fBvos r&v Kara r^v 'Avtav ovk iirpeafScvcTO 
irpds fiao-ikia ; ri 5e t&v Ik rrjs yrjs y€vv(a\xivoiV fj r&v Kara Ti\vrjv litiTtkovpLivmv Kak&v 
ff Tt\xl(nv ovk IkoixIgBt) b&pov o>9 avrov ; ov irokkal p&v Kal woAurcAfls arpwpLval Kal 
\kavlbcs, ra piv akovpyrj to* bi voiKikri ra bi AtUKci, irokkal bi a-Ktjval \pvaai 
KaT€<TK€va<r\xivot Tracrt tois xpT)<TLfxois t irokkal be koI £vor£5e9 koI Kkivai iroAvreAct? ; 
k.t.A., or Fr. 135 NucrforpaTOi; 8c top 'Apyclov tfQs ov x/>^ <f>avkov vop.C(€iv; 69 
irpooT&Trjs ycv6pi€VOS rrjs 'ApyetW 7rrfA«a>? Kal irapakaP&v Kal yivos Kal xprmara kclI 
itokkrjv ovaiav itapa t&v irpoy6va>v Avavras vitcpefiakcro rrj KokaKclq Kal rat? $€ pair (Cats 
oi piovov roifs t6tc arparcCas lUTaayovTas &kka Kal tovs tp.-n povOiv ytvoplvovs. irpQrov 
piv yap o£ra>? ^jyiitrfo-i ttjv irapi, rov papfiapov rifxrjv &ot€ povkoptvos ap4<JKciv Kal 
moT€V€<r0ai jxakkov avcKOpurt itpbs fiavikia rbv v\6v' b t&v tkkwv ovbels v<&vor€ 
4>avrj<rcTat ironjiras* lireira #ca0' iKiorrjv fjfxipav ottotc pikkoi btmviiv€(av TrapcrtOci 
\<apls 6*vo\i&£<av r<j) haljxovi r<p paaikim, iinrkJjo'as atrov Kal &kk<ov iiriTT)btlwv 9 &KOva>v 
fiiv tovto iroiilv Kal t&v Hepo-Qv tovs wepl ray Ovpas btarplpovras, ol6\xtvo$ 5c bia rrjs 
OtpaTTtLas Tavrqs yj>r\yLaTitiaOai P<&kov itapa rod /ta<r(AtW. ffv yap al(rxpoK*pbrjs Kal 
XpripL&T&v £>s ovk 61b 9 *l to trcpos {jimp. That the historian whose superiority to 
Thucydides and Philistus on account of the elatio atque altitudo orationis suae was 
compared by Cicero {Brut. 66) to the superiority of Demosthenes to Lysias, and 
whose kifa Dionysius (Ep. ad Cn. Pomp. p. 786) compares to that of Isocrates, 
KaOapcL yap . . . xal Kotvrj Kal vaQrjs, w/njAij re Kal puyakoitptTtris Kal to TtojxitiKbv l\ovaa 
Ttokv, <JvyK€ip.iirt) Kara rr\v picn\v app.ovlav t fjbiais Kal fiakaK&s pcovaa, could have 
attained so high a reputation as a stylist is incredible, if his other work re- 
sembled these fragments. It is also noticeable that out of three points which are 
censured by Dionysius (p. 787) in Theopompus, his over-anxiety to avoid hiatus, 
his continual rhythmical periods, and his wearisome epideictic figures (rrjs tc 
evpntkoKrjs t&v <l>a>vTi4vTa>v ypapLpAroov Kal rrjs kvkAikiJs tvpvdpXas t&v ircpiabvv Kal ttjs 
6/uwcitetos t&v (rxi?fxart<rfx«v), P exhibits only avoidance of hiatus (a rule which is 
subject to exceptions both in P and the extant fragments of Theopompus). 
Elaborate rhythmical periods and rhetorical antitheses, parisa, and paromoia 
(e.g. rl yap t&v alxrxp&v fj btiv&v avrots oi irpoo'TJv fj ri t&v koA&v koI aitovbaLw 
ovk aitijv ; in Theop. Fr. 249) are foreign to P's sober, unadorned style. In 
order to identify P with Theopompus it is practically necessary, as Meyer and 
Wilamowitz admit, to suppose that the Hellenica was written in a manner much 


less ornate than that of the Philippica. In support of such a view of the develop- 
ment of Theopompus' style can be cited the difference in Xenophon's treatment 
of the period before and after the end of the Peloponnesian war, and the circum- 
stance that Theopompus seems to have begun his historical researches tamely 
enough by writing an epitome of Herodotus, and when composing the Hellenica 
may have been to some extent under the influence of Thucydides. But on the 
other hand the ancient critics draw no distinction between the characteristics of 
the Hell, and Pkil. y and in the case of a writer with so vigorous an individuality 
and such marked features of style as Theopompus it is certainly surprising, 
even apart from the story about the bit and the spur (cf. p. 1 26), that he should 
have been able as a young man (cf. p. 135) to curb his tendency to rhetoric so 
successfully as he has done, if he be indeed the author of the papyrus. That he 
was composing lirtdeifcrucol Aoyot at the same time as the Hellenica appears from 
Fr. a6, which probably is derived from the preface to the Philippica, and the 
conception of history in the Isocratean school was in the words of the master 
himself (Isocr. iv. 9) oX \x\v yap irpd£ci? at vpoytytvr\p.ivai kolvclI iraatv rjpuv xare- 
XctyOrjaav, rb b' tv Kaipy rcrfrai? KaraxpTJ (ra(r ^ ai K0L ^ Ta ^potrrJKovra ire pi iK&oTTjs 
ivBvpriBrjrat kcu rois dvopuuriv cv bia04cr0at tQv €v fypovoivroav Ibiov iartv. 

Our comparison, therefore, of P's work with the Hellenica of Theopompus, 
though it has not presented any single insuperable obstacle to the identification 
of one with the other, if that hypothesis can be made probable on other grounds, 
and though even as regards style there are some points of agreement between 
the two (cf. p. 129), undoubtedly has shown the existence of a number of 
weighty objections to the identification of P with Theopompus. Can these be 
avoided by identifying P with another historian ? To reject Theopompus and 
take refuge in complete agnosticism is most unsatisfactory, for admittedly P was 
a historian of much importance who has largely influenced later tradition, and 
since his work survived far into the second century his name at any rate must be 

This being granted, there is besides Theopompus only one known historian, 
Cratippus, who seems to fulfil the primary condition required for identification 
with P, that he should have written a continuation of Thucydides, and it is 
Cratippus whom Blass wished to regard as the author of the papyrus. Con- 
cerning this writer our information is scanty, and his date has been much disputed. 
Dionysius Halic. (De Thucyd. 16) says (ouccv (sc. Thucydides) &t«Aj} t^v laropCav 
fcaroAiireiv is Kai KpArnrirof i owaKixAvas avr$ Kai ra irapaXtuftOivra vir' avrov 
(Tvvayayaav yiypafav oi \t>6vov raiy itpd&aiv avrhs (sc. Thucydides' speeches) Ifx-nobtov 
ycycvfjaBai \tycov aAAa ko\ tois &KOVov<nv ixkypas eivai. tovto yi roi <rvv4vra avrbv iv 
row reAeuraioi? rrjs laroplas <£tj<tI fxrjbtpLtav T&£ai prjropeCav wo\\&v fiiv Kara ttjv 'Iwviav 


y€voft4v<av ttoXX&v b 9 iv reus 'AOfyats 8<ra did X&yoav kcu brifirjyopi&v i-npa\6n\ (perhaps 
a quotation from Cratippus' itpooiyaov). From this it is clear that Dionysius 
regarded Cratippus as a contemporary of Thucydides, and that Cratippus strongly 
objected to the speeches. More definite information about the period which his 
history covered is supplied by Plutarch (De glor. Ath. p. 345 C-E hv yctp iviXjis 
rovs irp&TTovras ov\ ££ct? rovs ypd^ovras. ivcXc riiv UtpiKXiovs nokiTtlav koX rh 
vavp.aya irpds *PC<p $>opyla>vo$ rpoitaia • . . koX (dovKvblbrjs trot biayiypamau &pcAc r£ 
7T€pl 'EXXfairovrov 'A\i«/Jid5ot; vcavLtvpara Kal rd, irpbs Aiafiov GpaavXXov Kal rrjv iirb 
Ghjpapiivovs rfjs SXiyapxlas KariXvatv Kal (dpavvfiovXov Kal 'Apylvov (MSS. "ApxtitTrov) 
koX Tohs aitb <t>v\fjs ifiboixrJKOvra Kara rrjs 2irapriara>!' fiy^iovias aviara^ivovs Kal 
Kovvva ir&Xtv lp.fii$A.(ovra ras 'AOrjvas els ryv OdXarrav, koI Kpimnros avjiprjTai, 
This shows that Cratippus' work, like Theopompus 1 Hellenica and probably the 
history of P, included the period from 411 to the battle of Cnidus in 394. 
Apparently he went over again part of the ground covered by the last Book 
of Thucydides, for the expulsion of the oligarchs by Theramenes is narrated 
in viii. 89 sqq., and Thrasyllus' proceedings at Lesbos are recorded (very briefly) 
in viii. 100. That Plutarch should have here placed Cratippus on the same level 
as Thucydides indicates that he must have been a very important historian, and 
it is remarkable that there are only two other extant references to him : (1) Ps- 
Plut. Vit. Orat. p. 834, where he is quoted in reference to the Hermocopidae, 
a subject which he may have treated in connexion with the return of Alcibiades ; 
(2) Marcellinus, Vit. Thuc. 33 aXXa bfjkov 8ti K&$obos iboBrj rofc favyovatv, iy Kal 
<PiX6\opos Xiyci Kal Ar)fxrJTpt,os iv rots w Ap\ov<nv. iyi» bi Zdirupov Xrfpciv vopCfa 
Xiyovra tovtov iv &p4 K JI rcTfAftmiic&ai kHv aXrfBevfiv vo\xi§\ Kpdmnros avrov. rb 5* 
iv 'IraAfa TCfxaiov avrbv Kal HlXXovs Xiy€tv KclaOai /uw> koI <r<f>6bpa KarayiXaarov rf. 1 
It appears from this that Cratippus was not older than Zopyrus, and Susemihl, 
identifying this Zopyrus with the friend of Timon of Phlius {Gesch. d. Gr. Lit. in 
d. Alexandrinerzeit, ii. p. 468), thinks that Cratippus lived in the third or second 
century B.C. {pp. cit. i. p. 646). But it is quite uncertain which Zopyrus is meant : 
he may, for instance, have been the contemporary of Socrates (Herbst, PhiloL 
xlix. p. 174). That Cratippus lived even later still has been maintained by Stahl, 

1 I7& 82 «.rA. has hitherto been treated as a remark of Marcellinus, \v &p<f*V (which does not suit 
the sense) being generally altered to l* 'Armey ; but, as Blass suggested, the passage in question is perhaps 
in iambic trimeters, though his proposal to regard it as a quotation from the Chrpm^a of Apollodorus is 
unhesitatingly rejected by Wilamowitz. The lines can be restored thus : 

I7& 9k Zfarvpcv 

Afyorra tovtov (^^ kj) rcrcAcvrqWrcu (or 4r 'ATTiirp rdripr&at) 

\rjpttv vopifa, k&v dXrjOtvuy facy 

Kpdrmot avrbv . . . 

rb 8' Iv 'IraXia Ttftcuov avrbv xAWfovs 

ku<j$o{ \iyuv pi) *al a<j>6&pa Karayikaarov p. 


who boldy emends avr$ (i. e. Thucydides) after trwaKfidaas in the Dionysius pas- 
sage into <roi airy (i. e. Q. Aelius Tubero, whom Dionysius was addressing), and 
would identify Cratippus with the friend of Pompey. This violent emendation 
of Dionysius has however been universally abandoned, and most recent critics 
either defend the date assigned to Cratippus by Dionysius or leave the question 
undecided ; cf. Meyer, Gesch. d. Alt. iii. p. 276 ; Busolt, Gr. Gesch. iii. pp. 631-2, 
where the literature of the subject is surveyed. 

That Cratippus was an Athenian is a tolerably certain inference from the 
context of the Plutarch passage, which relates to Athenian historians, and 
Meyer adduces as an objection to the identification of P with Cratippus the 
circumstance that the Athenians do not occupy in P the prominent position 
which they have in Thucydides, and that his sympathies are rather with 
Sparta. But since Plutarch next after Cratippus proceeds to mention Xeno- 
phon, this objection does not carry much weight, for P is certainly not more 
pro-Spartan than Xenophon, and his just recognition of Conon's merits stands 
in marked contrast to Xenophon's biased attempt to belittle that commander's 

To sum up the scanty evidence with regard to Cratippus, what is known 
about the scope of his history and his avoidance of speeches fits in very well with 
Blass' view concerning the authorship of the papyrus. That he was younger 
than Thucydides is practically certain in any case, and if ovvaKfjA<ras in Dionysius 
be regarded as a loose expression, and the publication of Cratippus', i. e. P's, 
work be assigned to the period between 375 and 350, it may well have been 
used by Ephorus, a hypothesis which would account for the agreements between 
P and Diodorus more easily than the rival view that P is Theopompus; cf. 
pp. 133-7- The style of P hardly suggests so early a date as 375-350, but since 
in any case he wrote his history before 346 (cf. p. 134) that difficulty is not very 
serious, and his independence of Xenophon can be explained by supposing that 
his work was published before Xenophon's Hellenica just as well as by the theory 
that P intentionally disregarded it. Moreover, the identification of P with Cratippus 
in preference to Theopompus would provide a possible solution for the mysterious 
paucity of references to him by name, for if his work was used not only by 
Ephorus but, as is possible, by Theopompus, it is to some extent intelligible that 
an author with so colourless a style was soon superseded by those writers and the 
more elegant Xenophon, although P's great merits as a narrator of facts would 
still be expected to have rescued him from the almost complete neglect into 
which Cratippus unquestionably fell. 

In the absence of any other historian whose claims to be regarded as the 
author of the papyrus seem to be worthy of consideration, the choice lies between 


Theopompus and Cratippus, and having stated the case for and against both as 
impartially as we could, we leave the decision to our readers. The positive 
arguments in favour of identifying P with so shadowy a person as Cratippus are 
inevitably not very convincing ; the strength of his case rests largely on the 
objections to regarding Theopompus as the author of the papyrus, objections 
which have led both Prof. Bury and Mr. Walker to endorse the opinion of Blass. 
For ourselves we should prefer on many grounds to identify P with Theopompus, 
especially as that view can be supported by some direct evidence — the coinci- 
dences with regard to Kapiraaevs and Karapai ; cf. p. 131. The first of these 
can of course be reconciled with the identification of P with Cratippus by the sup- 
position that Theopompus in the 10th Book of the Helknica also mentioned the 
Carpasian leader of the mutiny or that the quotation comes after all from the 
10th Book of the Philippica\ and the second coincidence by itself would not be 
very remarkable. Nevertheless they appeal to us on the whole more powerfully 
than the other arguments for Theopompus, and seem to us to turn the scale 
slightly in his favour, so that in the heading of 842 we have placed Theopompus* 
name before that of Cratippus. On the other hand we feel more strongly than 
Meyer the difficulties (particularly those discussed on pp. 133-7) involved in his 
attractive hypothesis, which results in proving Theopompus to have been in his 
youth a greater historian and a worse stylist than has been generally supposed. 
Call him by what name we will, our authors work entitles him to be classed 
among the select band of Greek historians of the first rank, below Thucydides 
indeed but above Xenophon, and the portions of his history which have been 
preserved constitute a notable addition to the extant evidence. Not only has it 
supplied new facts of importance regarding the events of 396-5 and the con- 
stitution of Boeotia, and thrown a new and unexpected light upon the sources 
Other than Xenophon available to the later historians, but the agreement between P 
and Diodorus is bound to have far-reaching consequences. For quite apart from 

Col. i(=A Col.i). 

vitoSctoi^. ]vcr€^€7r\€var€Tpirjpr}a' 

a6rjvrj0€p[ ]8rjfiouyy<o/irjcri[. . . 

8c8r)paip[. .)o<roK . . loo-ayTTjcrKoiyaxrtfpcvol. . . 
a7roprjT(OT[. .]ov\rfdHrX€y€Tai7r€piTOVirpay[. . . 
5 €7ru8ri[.]vp[. .]Trj<ravairra>7[. . .]noXuT<opavv[. . 

KdTal3a<r€i<nr€ipaiaKauca$[ ]vovv€kt[.]v 

y((o<TOLKCouapayofi€v[. ]?k°K" •]a0o 


the questions of his identity with Theopompus and the relation of Diodorus 
to that author and Ephorus, the discrepancies between Diodorus and Xenophon 
with regard to the events of 396-5 are now known to be due to the fact that 
Diodorus ultimately drew his account of those years from so well informed an 
authority as P ; and henceforth it will be necessary to tak« into consideration 
the probability that throughout the rest of the period from 411-394 the differences 
between Diodorus and Xenophon, e.g. with regard to the campaign of Thibron 
and the return of the Ten Thousand, are largely due to the same cause. 

The credit of reconstructing the much damaged text of the papyrus is in 
a considerable measure due to Prof. F. Blass, who at first worked upon a rough 
copy. In November, 1906 the Greek was put into print, and the proof-sheets of 
it were revised by him shortly before his death. Proofs were also sent to Profs. E. 
Meyer and U. von Wilamowitz-MdllendorfT, and to the latter we are indebted for 
a number of valuable suggestions for the restorations of lacunae, &c., which are 
acknowledged in the notes, while E. Meyer has most generously placed at our dis- 
posal the very elaborate historical commentary upon the papyrus which he wrote 
in the winter of 1906-7, and which will be published shortly. This important 
contribution of the leading historian of Germany has of course been of inestim- 
able service to us in composing our introduction and notes, though the conditions 
of some of the problems have been greatly altered by placing Cols, i-iv before 
v-viii instead of after them, as in the first proofs. Some suggestions on the text 
are also due to the late Prof. W. Dittenberger and to Prof. B. Niese, who were 
consulted by Prof. Blass. More recently the proofs of the whole edition were read 
by Profs. Meyer and Wilamowitz-MdllendorfT, who have made some additional 
suggestions, and by Prof. J. B. Bury and Mr. E. M. Walker. To Prof. Bury we 
owe several excellent restorations in the text, while Mr. Walker's criticisms have 
materially assisted in the elucidation of some of the historical problems connected 
with the papyrus. 

Col. i. 

imh Sk roi{s afrrods xp6vo]vs i£iir\tv<rs Tprfprjs I. 1. 

'A0jjyT)0€v [ov fierci ttJ9 rod] Srjpov yv&pr\T t[oYjt b. C. 396 

Si Arj/iaip[€T]o9 6 k . . toy airrfjs Koivco(rdfi€vo[9 iv 
dirop(j>)rJT<p r[ij P]ov\jj a>y Xiycrai nepl rod irpdy[paT09, 
5 iireiSfj [<r]vv[i<r]Tr}<ray air£ (rives) t[&v] ttoKit&v <rvy- 
icaraj3&? €t? Ilcipaia koI Ka6[e\ici}<ras] vavv €/c t[&]v 
vtaxroiKW dvay6/i€p[of IttXci npb]? K6v[<Dv]a. do- 2 


pvfJovScpcTaTavrayel ]* alT [« -] a ^ 

vcu<ovayavaKTOvvra{ ]w[- • O a 'X a 

10 puvT€<ni<ravKaCkefi. ]/3a[. . -]<nTi|"" 

irc\ivapxovT€<nro\^, ]e8ai/ioy[. 

ov<rKaraTr\ay€VT€<roi(3[ fyOopvfioy<yy~ 


1 5 Toim\f]6ov(TapiaTafi€yoiTa>ya0rjyaiQ>voiT€ 

20 OTtpyovTanapovTaoiSeiroWoiKaiSritiOTUCoi 
Tov8rjfiai[, .Jroyaxrof. . .jTariyoTroAcaxrrat/Ta 

25 TT€7roirfKOTa[. .]irpo<r0[ ]y*8ovairavTaTov 

Xpovov€rap[. .]toit[. . . . .]/<tara/cai7roAAar[.]i<r 

\aK€8aifJLo[. . .]cra[ ]TT€vair€7T€fin[.]v 

/jL€vyapoir\[. . . . ]f>€<rta<reiTiTaavavaTa<T 

/i€TarouK[ ]<f>0T)<ray8€irp€<r{J[. .]o* 

30 <D0-j3a<nAca7r[ ]7r[.]/cparj/re/caiayj'i 

ai"ra*rcA€[. . .)ppoyovo , KaurvWaf3cn'<l>apa£o 

35 emKparriKaiK€<l>a\ovovTOiyap€Tyxoyciri&y 

Col.ii(=ACol. ii). 

Xpv<rioy[ }rrpoT€povKaToiTi[ 

yc<r\cy[ ]airairap€KUvovyj>r^ 

liarai[ m . .]y[ ]Tov<r*yf}oiwroi<r 


pvfJoV Si fJL€TCL TCLVTCL ye[vopeVOV 3 ] Kal t\&v] AOf}^ 

vaioov dyavaKro6yroj[v Saoi yvd>]pip[oi k]al ya- 
10 ptevre? fjcav teal \ey[6vT&v Sri Sia]fia[Xod]cri rfjy 

n6Xiv Apxpvres iroXe[pov npbs AaK]€$aipoy[(- 

ot/y, KarairXayevres ol (2[ovXevral rb]y dSpvfiov ovv* 

fyayov rbv Sfjpov ovSiv 7rpocr[ir]oiovfJL€voi pe- 

reayriKevai rod TTp6.yp.aros. crvyeXrfXv66ro9 Si 
15 rod nXrjBovs dviardpevoi r&v 'AOrivafov ol re 

ire pi OpaoHftouXov teal Alcripov Kal "Awrov hSlSa- 

ckov avroifs Sri pkyav alpodvrai kIvSvvov et 

pfj rijv ir6Xiy dnoXvaovat rrjs ahlas. r&v Si AOrf- 3 

vaUav ol piv eir(i)eiKei$ Kal ris ovcrla? fyovTe? ?- 
ao arepyov rh irapSvra, ol Si noXXol Kal SrjporiKol 

r&re piv <pof3T]6£yT€$ eTreiaOrjaav rois avpfJovXeit* 

owi, Kal trep^avres npbs MiXcova rbv ippoorijv 

rbv Atylvrjs etTro[v] 8nas Sv[v]arai rip&peiaOai 

rbv ArjfiaC[ve]rov, cby o[v pe]rb rrjs nSXeco? raCra 
25 iT€iroirfK6ra' [ep]irpocrb\ev Si afyeSbv Airavra rby 

yjpdvoy erdp{ar]rov r[b\ irpdy]/iara Kal ttoXXA r[o]i9 

AaKeSaipo[vioi]? o\vrinpa]rr(p)v, direTrepTr[o]v 1 1. 1 

piv yip SirX[a re Kal 6rrrj]pea(as etrl riy vaGs riff 

perh' rod K[6v<ovos, eneptyOrjo'av Si Trpeap[ei\9 
30 cby flaviXia ir[ ot irepl .]w(.}c/)<£ri7 re Kal % Ayvl- 

av Kal TeXe[arjy]opov, ofly Kal ovXXa(3oi>v $dpa£ 6 

npbrepov vavapyps dneareiXe irpb? robs A\ajce- 

Saipovlov? ot dweKreivav avrovs. ijvavri- a 

ovvro Si raOra Trapo£vv6vra>v r&v irepl rby 
35 'EmKpdrrj Kal Ke<f>aXov otnoi yhp trv\ov emOv- 

povvre? pdXiora rfjv irSXiv (eKiroXepaaaL), Kal ratirrpr {rfjv yvwprjv) ta\ov 

oiK eireiSfj Tipoxpdrei SieXe^Oriaav Kal [r]b 

Col. ii. 
Xpvcriov [iXaflov, dXXa Kal iroXv] irpbrepov. Katroi n- 
vh Xe^ovaiv atria yivecr$]ai ra Trap* exetvov xpfc 
para r\pv a]^rrr\vai roi/roi/y Kal] rod? iv Boioyroh 



KcuToy<r€[. .]o[ ]ai<nrpo€ipr}fi€i>ai<T[ 

5 ovK€i8oT€o , OTiir[ ]f€/Je/Si7/c€wraAcu 

8v<r/Ji€VGKr€X€iv[ ]yi[.]v<rKai<rKOTrcr m 

oiraxr€K7ro\€fia>[ ]r[ ]<rc/i€i<rwvyapoi 

fi€vapy€ioiKaif$oicoT[ ]ya>ratrot/crXa/ct[ 

8cn/ioviov<roTiTOtcr€vav[. . .JorawiroAciTaw' 
1 o avTour€\pcoyTo^>i\oia[.]i8[.]yTaL(ra$rjyai<r€'n'i[ 
0vpovvT€<ra7r<z\\a£an[. t ]craOrjva[.]ovarfi<rri[ 
<rv)(iao , KaiTr}<r€ipT]vrio'Kai[, ,]oayay€iv€iriT(mo 
X€/i€i^/caiir[. .]u7rpa[.]fJLoy€mvavTOL(T€KTCi>p[ 
15 oifjL€TaoTri<TaiTairpa[. .]aTafyTOWT€<roifiC 
iHo<r8iaK€tfjL€vonTpooTov<T\aK€8aifioyiov<rr[. . 

K\T]/JLaT<X>V€V€Ka7rpOT€p6VaplOTa8iaK€lfl€l>[. . 

2 o Kaipa\iaTaXaKa>yi(<oyoocr(^€(rTiKaTapad€ip[ 
€KT<opKaTaroviro\€fioi'(n{.]f}ai'TQ)VTOv8€K[. • 

25 KaTav\€v<raaKaiirapt[. . .]v<w€T€pa<rr€T[. .}pa<r 

avv7r\rjp<pa'afA[ ]<re<n\iovyavp[. ,]af~ 

rov<rrparriyov{ ]ia>va><nr€p€iprjK[. ,]ov 

KcuirpoT€pwK[. ]«oTa<nroA«/i[.]aa[. . .]j8c~ 

ov<racnrcvT€K[. . ]€fiyfrayrpia[. . . .]a 

30 ji€Ta8€Tavra[ IfX^" 7 /^/^ • -]5 aTa 

wX€i;o , acr€icrflacr[.]i/a7r€irT3(r€Tavri7i'r[.]^aft; 

35 TOV<r\aK€8aipopiov<ro8€pi\a>yoTr}<TaLy[. . 

coy<rvvw\rjpo>crap€yoaTpt7jpr]8LaTa)(€Cc[. . 


Kal rovs i[v r]a[i9 dXXais irSkttn r\at$ vpoctprjpivat?, 
5 ovk ctS&rcs 8rt v[aatv avrois crv]v€/3€fJrJK€t irdXat 

Svo-pev&s fytiv [ n pte AaK€8aifio]vt[o]v$ Kal CKoireiv 

6na>? €Kiro\€fiG{o , w<ri] r[hs irJXct]?. kptaovv yhp ol 

p\v 'Apyuot Kal Botovr[ol . . • .]yarrat rovs Aclkc- 

8at/iov(ov9 8rt rots tvav[r(ot]s r&v iroXtr&v 
10 avroi? i\p&vro <f>iXot9, [o]l 8' [i]v raU 'ABJjvat? im- 

Ov/xoDvres diraXXdgat r[ov]s 9 A0rjva[l]ov9 rfj? ^- 

ovyCas Kal rrjs (tprjvrjs Kal [irp\oayaytiv irrl rh iro- 

Xc/ittv Kal n[o\]v7rpa[y]/iov€Tv, iv avroh iK r&v 

koiv&v # xprmaTt{tv[&\ai. r&v 8\ Koptvdtnv 3 

15 ol ptracrfjaat rh irpd[yp]ara (rjrovvrcs ol p\v 

dXXoi (irapairXrio-fos ?) rot? 'Apyctot? Kal rots Botwrots ltv\ov &/o/i[€- 

vw SiaKtipevot irph? rovs AattSatpovtovs, T[i/i6- 

Xao? 8i /i6vo? auTois 8td<f>opo? yeyov&s I6\(\t»v ly- 

KXtj/idrcov tveica, irporcpov Aptara SiaKttptrfos 
20 Kal fidXiora AaKmvifav, <&? (geort Kara/ia$€tv 

ck r&v Kara rhv ttSXc/iov av\ji]/3dvTo»v rhv Ack[6- 

Xcik6v. ckuvos yhp M /ilv irwr(t)vatav tyfonv 4 

iirSpOrjcre r&v vrjccov rtvhs r&v kir 'A6riva(o[i\$ 

ouo&v, ire 81 /icrh 860 r\p]irjp<0v cfr 'AfiftnoXtv 
25 KarairXcvaas Kal nap 9 i[Kct\vav tripas r€r[ra]pas 

avfnr\rjp<x>o'dp[€V09 iviK^ae 2H\tov vavp[a)^&v 

rhv arparriyiv [r&v 'AOrjva/av, &<rrrep €iprjK[d ir]ov 

Kal irp&rcpov, /c[at Tprfp€]is tA? iroA€/i[/]ay [$Xa]8cv 

oticas irivre Jt[a? irXota & iir^ft^av rpid{Kovr]a* 
30 ji€rh 8\ ravra [ ] €\oi>v rpirjp{€ts] Kara- 

irXtvcra? «'y 0do\o]v dirto-Tricc rcririjv t[&]v p AOt)- 

vafov. ol plv oSv iv rats irSXeat rah irpoti- 5 

prifihais 8th ravra iroXv fiaXXov ^ 8th iapvd- 

fSa(ov Kal rh \pvatov imipfilvot ptcuv 1j[o]av 
35 rov? AaKtSaifioviov?. 6 81 MCXodv 6 rfjs Aly[i- HI. 1 

vtj9 4p/io<m}[y,] a>9 IJKOvae rh iraph r&v 'AQr\v\ai- 
• mv, ov/nrXrjpao'dfievos Tprfprj 8ih ra\icB[v 

L 2 



40 TiKfi<r$. . .]8T)8€7rpo<nr\ev<ra<r€K€ip[.]<nrpc[. 

Col. 111 ( = A Col. iii with Frs. 1 and 3). 

(Fr. 1) 

[ ]eirtX €l Py[ ]av<»pfiri<rcp€irnro\y 

[ ]^vKpaTtjcr[ ]€<n><ravTWVTfjvii€yv 

[ ]yavvonx*[ ]a$oo , avTWKaT€\iir€~ 

[ ]Trjv€KCiy[ ]a<raarov<ravrowav 

5 [ ]?wM-]P?fK Tp-evpaTo/ieTaTov 




] . €T0t{.]€p0VOTTIIlW 

j ]eTO<roy8oov€V€iarrfK€i 


, g ]croTrov<rvP€7r€nrT€V 


2Q ]€8ai/iopian>KaiTar 



25 ]Kia<rai8€\u7rovcrai 





i$i<DKc tov Ar\\LaivtTOv 6 8k Kara rovrov i\bv 
yjpSvov irvye ficvw irepi Bopiicbv tt}$ 'At- 
40 riKrjs. i[ir€i]Sfj 8k irpocnrXcvcas *K€iv[o]? irpb[t 2 

Col. iii. 

[OopiKov] €7T€\uprj[cr€v i/ifiaX]etv, Spfirjaev iirl iroXv 
[irpoirX]€iv Kparrjo[af 8k . . . v)ea>f airr&v rtjv pkv 6- 
[ff> avrip] vavv, Sri \*]}pov fjv rb <r/c]c£0o?, airrov KaTeXinev, 
[eh 8k] rfjv Ik€iv[g>v fi€Ta/3ifJ]<£(ra? rovs airroC vaii- 
5 [ray ir/>]ol9rX[c]i/<rci' [eirl rb 0Tp£\Tev/ia rb /xctA tov 

[K6va>vo$ 6 8k MtX)<ov eh AXytvav /*€- 

\rh rh p]kv ovv iSp&rara t&v IV. 1 

[ ircp]l toOto crv/ifJdvTcw 

[oOtcos eyevero 9 dirb 8k To0]8e rod [6]epov9 tJj pkv B.C. 396 

10 ] trot tySoov eveiorrjicei. 

]apo9 ris rpirjpeis aira- 
e\KeJ 8k KaranXevaas r£y 
]ev, tiv^ev yhp del tov 
/?art<r]/cet;a/ca>? fjv ve&pia 
15 ]y Sttov ovvemirrev 

] rbv 8k tapvdpa(ov a- 
] irapayeveaOai ftovX6- 
[pevo? Jai teal fiicObv diroXa- 

\J3eiv a]po? pkv oSv avrod 8ie- 2 

ao [rpifJev, eirl 8k riy vavs t&v AaK]e8aipov(a>v kcli t&v 
[<TVfjLfid)((oy d<f>iKveiTai II6XX1?] vavap\os Ik Aaice- 

[Satpovos Trj\v 'ApyeXdlSa kcltcl- 

[ kotSl 8k tov av]rbv y^pSvov toivUwv 

[ fjicov iv€vJJK0VT]a vfje? eh Kavvov wv 

25 [Setca pkv ^hrXevaav dirb KiXi]K(as al 8k Xehrowai 

[dirb ] &? "Aktmv 6 2t8&vio$ 

[ flacr]iXei Toh raiJriyy ttjs 

[. . . ne]pl Tfj[v] vavapyjav *a/>- 


30 ] • aipo<nairepiTrivapyr(~ 

35 ]yTr)VK[.]yi>iav€i<r€7r\€U 

m \pVT)[J]avTjp7rcpo'ri<rira 
40 ] . *&*&.] . [. . .JK-K- .]\v<f>i\\[.}av (Ft. t) 

] . o<raiT€iT€fiylr€v<ti{.]{Ja<ri\€\acr\[. . ,]a 

]rfv<rKrjvriyayTOv\[ ]|^?|[» • •]" 

]n , ayy€i\ao , $€Tavr[ ]Jcacra|[. *]y 

Col. iv (= A Col. iv). 

25 lines lost 

36 . [ 




30 a . [ 



rrf* • 'lr?[ 


35 «PX[-W 




[. .]t€/CcX[ 

40 yai'ovJ[ 

«X 0W 4 






ydftafos irapo£wG\vra>v airrhv r&v irapa- 

6 fiiv o$v ....]. apo$ ra ir€pl rijy dpyfiv 

rh oTpaT6]ir€8ov, K[6\vc*v Si irpoa- 

at]<r$6pevos dvaXafJ&v 

ov/i)ir\TipdKras rcfcy rpfypus 

]ara Trorap[b]v rhv Kai- 

yiov KaXovfJLtvov e/* X(fiurj]u rfjy K[a\vv(av uainXev- 

<T€ ro]v $apvafid{ov teal rod K6- 

v&vos ]/M"7[*] dvijp IHpo-T)? ira- 

] r&y wpay/idiwv $? 

ijf}]o6\cT0 Xaficiv [K\ara- 

] . v Si irp{.] . [. . .]"[•]/"[■ .]v </>iX[i]au 

. .] . 09 dnifT€py(t€v fys] fJaatXia o[. . .]a- 

T]tjV <TKT)lrtlV OUTOV \[. ]V^ € • •]" 

ajirayye/Xa? Si rh n[ ]ccura[. ,]v 

Col. iv. 

25 lines lost 

26 . [ 

30 a. [ 


35 *P)&o]vt{ 
kovs iar[ 
<tiv Ta9 p[ 
[.]oKFiy irft 
[. .Vc/ccX[ 

40 voov oiS[ 

(\0PT€9 [ 

ctxpv yi[p 
Some columns lost. 


Kal rod? i[v t]o[?9 dWais ir6\*ai r]afy irpotipfj/iivais, 
5 o&k €tS&r€S bWi n[aaiv avrois ov^efJefirJKei irdXai 

8v<rfi€v&9 *X Hy [irpbs AaKt8ai/jLo]vi[o]v$ Kal cKoirciv 

&ra>y iKiro\€fi<i{<TOV(ri\ r[Ay 7r6A€t]y. i/ilaovv yap ol 

p\v 'Apytioi Kal Boicor[ol . . . .]ya>rai roi/9 Aclkz- 

8atpoviov9 Sri T0T9 ivav[r(ot]s t&v ttoXit&v 
10 avrois hyjp&vro <f>i\oi9, [o]l 8 9 [i]v rats 'AOrjvats im- 

0v/ioOvT€f &rra\\d£ai t[oi>]s 'Adrjva[l]ovs rrjs ij- 

ov\(a9 teal TTJs elprjvris Kal [irp]oayay€iv iirl rb iro- 

Xepetv Kal n[o\]v7rpa[y]povuv 9 tv airoh €K t&v 

koiv&v ft xprjpaT[C€o[0]ai. t&v 81 KopivOfav 3 

15 ol fieracTfjaai ra trpd\fp\ara fyroOrrcs ol p\v 

dXXoi (irapairXrjate? ?) roif 'Apytiois Kal tois Boioytoi? trv\ov &/o/i[€- 

v&s 8iaK€ift€Poi irpbs robs AaKtSatpovhv?, T[ip6- 

\ao9 Si p6vos a&rois 8id<popo$ yeyovws l8[C]tx>v cy- 

KXrjfidTCov tvtKa, irporcpov Apiara 8iaK*(p€v[of 
20 Kal fidXiora AaKcovifav, <2>? ?|€<m KarapaOeiv 

€K t&v Kara rbv ir6\cpov a^ptfidvT&v rbv Ae*[€- 

\mk6v. ckcTvo? yap &t\ p\v ir€VT(c)vatav tywv 4 

iirSpOrjo'C t&v vrjvcov Tivas t&v in 'AOrivaio[i]$ 

ova&Vy &t\ 8\ perct 8vo T\p)trjpo>v c/9 'A/i<f>(iro\iv 
25 Kara7r\€v<ra9 Kal nap* i[K€i\vav tripa? TCT[Ta]pa$ 

av/i7r\rjpciHrdp[evos IvUrfpt 2ix l0y v<wp[a$!>v 

Tbv orpaTfiybv [t&v *A6rjva](oi>v 3 wcnrep €iprjK[d n]ov 

Kal irp6T€pov, K[al Tpirjp€]i? ray iro\€p[i]a$ [?Aa]8ei> 

otfcas nivT€ K[al irXoia a cir^/i^av Tpia\KovT]a* 
30 ji€Ta 81 Tadra [ ] i\<ov Tprfp{ci9] Kara- 

7r\tvaa? (h 8do\o]v diriorrjo'e toOttiv t[&]v 'AOtj- 

vafov. ol fikv oSv iv Tah ir6\€cri Tah irpoci- 5 

prjfiivais 8ta Tadra iro\i> paXXov fj 8ta tapvd- 

fia{ov Kal rb yjpvaiov iin\pp£voi piauv %[o]av 
35 Toi>? AaKeSaifioviovs. 6 8k MCXodv 6 ttjs Aly[t- HI. 1 

vrjs appooTrj[$,] o>y iJKovve Ta irapa t&v % AQr\v\al- 

<ov, crvfiir\rjp<oo'dfi€V09 rpif\pt\ 81a Ta\i<x{v 

L 2 



40 TiKTi<rc[. . .]8rj8€7rpo<m\€vcracr€K€ii{.]<nrpc[. 

Col. iii ( = A Col. Hi with Frs. 1 and 2). 

(Fr. 1) 

[ ] €7r€ X € Wrf ]ciw>p/iri<r€P€miro\y 

[ ]uvKparrja[ )€<o(ravTWVTrjyfA€Pv 

[ ]yavvoTi\(k[ ]a<f>o<ravTovKart\iirf' 

[ ]rriv€K€iy[ ]a<raoTOv<ravTOvvav 

5 [ ^c^M-^ffK ]r€V/iaTo/i€raTov 


) . CTOu[.]c/KWOTty/ft€J' 

1 o \€Toaoy8oovw€urrriKu 


1 5 ]<T<mov<ntv€iruirTW 


20 ]t8aifiovi<WKaiTcor 


25 ]Kia<rai8€\€i7rwcrai 


iSiooKt rbv Arj/iaivtTov 6 8k /cctra tovtov r[bu 

\p6vOV €TV\€ fXtVCdV 7T€pl BopiKOV TtJ9 'At- 

40 Ttxrjs. i[ira]8ti 81 7rpocnr\€v<ra$ c/cefyfojy npb\t 2 

Col. iii. 

[Oopucbv] in€X€ipr)[<r€v €^/3aA]€u>, wpfirjaev inl noXv 
[irpo7r\]ttv KpaTrjo[a? 8* . . . y]ea>9 airr&v rijv fikv £- 
[ff> ai>T<p] vavv, 6ti \*]}pov fy to <nc]d<l>09 f avrov KariXmey, 
[cis 8k] rfjy eK€iy[<ov /*€ra/?t/S]<£<ray rote airroG va6- 
5 [ras irp]o£irX[€\vcr€y [inl to arpd\T€V/ia rb fiera tov 

[K6v<ovo$ 6 8k MtX]oav €iy Atyivav pc- 

[ra t& ji\kv oSv aSp&rara t&v IV. 1 

[ ir€p]l toOto OV/lfJdvTCW 

[ofjT&s iyivtTO* dirb 8k tov]8* tov [0]cpovs TJj fikv B.C. 396 

IO ] €T09 6y800V h€lOTTJK€l. 

]apo9 ray Tpirjpm ana- 
1]ku 8k KaTanXtvo-a? ray 
Yv, iru^tv yap del tov 
KaTC<r]K€vaKa>s fjv ve&pia 
15 ]y Sttov vvvimirrev 

] rhv 8k $apvdfia{oi> a- 
] irapayeviaBai /3ovX6- 
[fitvo? ]ai teal pto-Obv dnoXa- 

[fizlv a]po9 /ikv ovv avrov 8i£- 2 

ao [rpcfJti/, iirl 8k ray vav? t&v AaK]€8aijiov[a>v kcu t&v 
[ovfifid)(<»v d<f>iKV€iTat II6\Xis] vavap\09 €K Acuc*- 

[SaLfiovos Trj\v 'Ap^eXatSa kcltol- 

[..... Kara 8k Tbv avfrbv y^pSvov ioivUwv 

[ fJKOV ivcvrJK0VT]a vrj€9 e/y Kavvov wv 

25 [8ixa pkv %nXevaav dirb KiXi]icia? at 8k Xeinovaai 

[dirb ] ay "Aktohv 6 StSdnnos 

[ jSacrjiXcf T0T9 Tavrrjs ttj? 

[ ir*]pl ttj[p] vavapyiav *a/> 


3° ] . a^ocrrair^piT'qvap^rjr 

]ir€So^.]y<opS€rrpoa t 
35 ]vTi]VK{.)ypiav€to'€ir\€U 

40 ] . j**4.]'. [. . -M-K- >*#]?'' (Fr. a) 

] . oaanen€fiylr€vco{.]fiacri\c\a<T\[. . ,]a 

Ji/i/CP/ciyy^a^TOvXt ]|^|[- • •]* 

]7rayy€*Aa(r$€Ta7r[ ]JcctcrotJ[. .]t/ 

Col. iv(=ACol. iv). 

25 lines lost 
26 ,[ 




30 a. [ 

r?[- • -Irrf 


35 */>X[-M 


[. .]T€K€X[ 

40 va>yovS[ 


u X oyya[ 


\yafia{os 7rapo£w6]iTa>i/ avrbv t&v irapa- 

30 [ 6 jikv odv ....]. apos tA tt€/>2 rfjv &pxh v 

[ rb <rrpaT6]ir€8ov. K[6\vmv S\ npoa-- 3 

[ at]<r$6/ievo9 dva\af3a>v 

[ ov/i)rr\r)p&o'as ra? rptijpcts 

[ ]ara iroTa/i[b]v rbv Ka6- 

35 [1/101/ Ka\ov/iwov c/j \t/ivri]v Tfjv K[d]vvtav ciVcirXcu- 

[<r€ to]v $apvafid{ov Kal rod K6- 

[v<ovos 1/m^M duffp IKptrrjs na- 

[ ] t&v 7rpay/idra>v Sr 

[ iif3]oij\€T0 XaficTv [«c]ara- 

40 [ ] . v Si np[.] . [. . -M-1M- -] v $i>{C\* v 

[ . .] . or dninc/iyfrcv cb[y] (3aat\ia a[. • ,]a- 

[ r]?)i/ (TKTjpiiv ovtov A[. ]*jX0[c . .]v 

[ aJirayye/Aay Si ri n[ ]ea<ra[. .]v 

Col. iv. 

25 lines lost 

26 .[ V 


30 a. [ 

ra[. .]ra[ 

35 *fl([o>T[ 
Kot/y iot[ 

aw tA$ ft[ 

[.janrii/ 7rp[ 

[. .]T€XCX[ 

40 va>v ov8[ 

(\0VT€9 [ 

Some columns lost. 


pvftov Si /icra ravra yc[vo/i(vov,] Kal r[&v] 'AOtj- 

vatev iyavaKTotivrot^y Saot yy£]ptp[ot k\al \a- 
10 pUvrts fjaav Kal X€y[6vr<oy Sti 8ta]Pa[\ov]<n rfjv 

irSXiv &pxovt*$ noX^/iov irpbs Aaic)€8cufiop[(- 

ov9, KarairXayivrts ol (3[ovX€vral rb]v 66pv(3ov avv- 

tfyayov rbv Sfjpov oiSiv irpoofrtytoti/itvoi /*€- 

T€<rxriK4vai rov 7rpdy/iaro9. avveXrjXvOSros Si 
15 roO nXrfOov* dvurrd/icvoi r&v *A9r\va(v>v ol re 

7T€p2 GpaovfioyXov Kal Ataifiov Kal "Avvtqv iSlSa- 

<tkov airrovs Sti piyav alpoVvrai kIvSvvov d 

pf) rijv irSXtv drroXvaovai rrjs abrlas. r&v Si AQr\- 3 

vaioov ol piv iir(i)€iK€Ts Kal ras oitrtas tyovrc? Jf- 
20 arcpyov ra irapSvra, ol Si noXXol Kal SrjportKol 

t6t€ /iiu <f>ofiT)6tvT*$ €7T€(a$rjo'av rots (rv/iftovXeti* 

ovat, Kal Tri/iyfravTC* irpbs McXcova rbv ap/ioorijv 

rbv Alytvris cTiro[v] Sum Sv\v]arai ri/impciaOai 

rbv Ai]fiaC[v€]Toy, Ay c[u pc]ra rrj? Tr6\€ao$ ravra 
25 7r€iroLfiK6ra m [ifJL\npo<r(l\*v Si afocSbv dnavra rbv 

XpSvov irdp[ar]rov r[d 7rpdy]para Kal iroXXa t[o]i$ 

AaKeSai/io[v(oi]s d\vrinpa]rr{p)v. d7r£ir€/in[o]v II. 1 

/iiv yap SnX[a re Kal inrT]]pca(as inl ras vads riy 

ficra' rod K[6vcovo9, inifi](f>0T}<rav Si irpiap[u]s 
30 Ay flaaiXia ir[ ol n€pl .Jnf.JicprfTiy re Kal Ayvt- 

av Kal TcXc[<rrjy]opoi>, ovs Kal ovXXaficov $dpa£ 6 

npbrtpov vavapyos dntoTuX* irpbs rov? A[ajct- 

Sai/iopfovs ot diriKTwav avrovs. fyavTt- a 

ovvro Si raOra napo^vvSvrcov r&v wept rbv 
35 'EmKpdTT) Kal KfyaXov ovroi yap trvypv imOv- 

fiovvrc? /idXiora rfjv nSXiv (iKiroXt/waai), Kal raHrrjv (jfjv yv&fiijv) ttr\ov 

oiK kirtiSii Ti/ioKpdru Si€Xi\Ori<rav Kal [r]b 

Col. ii. 
Xpvaiov [cXaflov, dXXa Kal noXv] np&repov. Katroi r«- 
vis Xiy[ouaty atria yiviaO]ai ra trap ittivov x/>^- 
fiara r[o0 <r]rfoTfjvat tovWous Kal] rovs iv BotwroTs 




iurjjEM T r j^€^r Vi" "wrauraBTCl"" 

fTvrHTiAfjs. . . . . jr jrGMEirmrrycLpai 

perc^yfinfn.Znacrr •ytrtnB«rXt« 

ewopBrgtimtt ijiif hi ti <i if nuff 1,11110 . ^ 

tnnrrXrpwaaif Wtxturn^. . «r~ 

Torerpanfyoy [i wmo r cpcipiyc". . ov 

KavwpoTtpovK jotoottoXc/i . a<r\ . . j3c — 

otKT<unrcvT€K y^arrpia\ . . /a 

30 /uraSeravra [fxaurrptTip. . .Vara 


Vf)&apfio<TTi^.)o^Kwo-€TawapaTmva6T)>{. . 
wovvn\ripwaiuvo<rrpiripri&iaTax^ . 


Kal rovs i[v r]c{h dXXais nSXttri r]ah npotiprjfitvais, 
5 ovk €l86r€S bri n[aaiv airoh <rv]v€(3c(3'fJK€i ndXat 

Svafiw&s e\€ti> [npbs AaKt8aip.o]vi[o]v$ Kal aKonttv 

Swm iicnoXc/i<i[aovai] 7(4* nSXei]?. i/iiaovv yhp ol 

pkv 'Apyeioi Kal Boicor[ol . . . .]yo>rai rov9 AaK€- 

Saipoviovs trt roh hatfjtoi]? r&v noXtr&v 
10 airoh k\p&vro <f>(Xoi?, [o]l 8* [i]v rats 'AOtfvai? km- 

Ov/ioOvrts anaXXd£ai r[oi>]s 'A6r)va[i]ovs rfj? $- 

<rv%ia$ Kal rrJ9 clprjvrjs Kal [np\oayayuv inl rb tto- 

\c/jl€iv Kal n[oX]vnpa[y]fiovcTv, tv airoh €#c r&v 

koiv&v % ypvipaTl{*a\&\ai.. r&v 8k KopivOicov 3 

15 ol /i€Taarfjaai tA npd[yp]ara fyrovvrcs ol /ikv 

&XX01 (napanXrjates ?) rots 9 Apy€iois Kal rots Botcoroh iru\ov &/a/i[e- 

v&9 SiaKeiptvoi npb? rods AaKtSaipovtovs, T[ip6- 

Xao9 8k pSvos airoh SidQopo? yeyowo? l8[(]o»v cy- 

KXrjpdrcov htKa, npor€pov Apiara 8taK€(pcv[os 
20 Kal pdXiora AaK&vifav, a>? ifctrn KarapaOciv 

ix r&v /car 4 rbv nSXcpov orfji]f3dvrci>v rbv Ack[€- 

Xuk6v. €K€ivo9 yhp irk /ikv n€vr(€)vatav iya>v 4 

in6p0T]<T€ r&v vf\<Ttov Tiv&9 r&v in 9 A6rjvaic[i]9 

oia&v, M 8k perk 8vo r[p]i^jp<ov c/y 'ApQtiroXtv 
25 KaranXcvcras Kal nap i[K€(\va>v tripas rlrfrajpay 

avpnXrjpQMrdp[€VO$ iviKrj\<T€ 2i\iov vavp\ay\&v 

rhv orparrjyhv [r&v A0r]va]ia>v, manep €iprjK[d n]ov 

Kal npirepov, *[a2 rpirjpc]is riy noXtp[t\as [tXa]8cv 

odea? nivre ic[a} nXoia A in\€fi^av rpid{KOvr\a* 
30 p.trh 8k ravra [ ] €\a>v rpirjp{as] Kara- 

nXciaas e/r Bdo\d\v dniorrja* ra£rr\v t[&]v 'AOtj- 

vafav. ol pkv ovv iv rah n6Xc<ri rah npou- 5 

ptjpivais 81b ravra noXv fiaXXov fj Stic $apvd- 

{Za£ov Kal to ypvatov inrjppivoi piattv fj[<r]av 
35 rovs AaKcSaipoviQvs. 6 8k MCX<ov 6 rfjs Aly[C- HI. 1 

vtjf Apfio<TTTJ[s 9 ] Ay fJKOvat r4 naph r&v 'A0riv[at- 

wv, ovfinXr]poD<rdfjL€t>os Tpirjpj) 81& ra\ia[v 

L % 



t $LWKeToy8r}/jLaurerovo8€KaTaTWTom-[. 
4Q TtKr)vt[. . .)8r}6effpotnr\aMra(r€KUp[.)0wp€{. 



Col. iii ( = A Col. Hi with Frs. i and a). 

(J<>. I) 

']* w *X €i Py[ }eumpp.riO'€V€rrtwo\y 

'fcwKpaTrjal ]emacarmvTr]Vfi£yu 

)yaui/QTix<[ ]cL^oa'avrauKttT€\nr( mm 

. ,}Tr}v*K*iv{ }oura0TovaravT0uvav 

>\ l }*n)\>)y<T*y[. . yevfiarojieraTov 



] . €T<n^.}epcvaTTifi€r 















]f>iTT][.]vavapxia v <f>*P 

i8ia>K€ rby Atinatvtrov 6 Si Karh tovtov r[by 

XP&VOV %TV\C \kivW TTtpl QopiKhv TTJS 'At- 

40 TiKTJ*. i[TT€i]Sfi Si irpo<rrr\€V(ra$ iicuy[o]? irpb\$ 2 

Col. iii. 

[GoptKby] inc)(€tpri[o'cy i/jL{3aX]uy, &p\jir\<itv iwl noXv 
[irpotrX\civ KparJjo[as Si . . . i>]ca>s avr&v rfjv /iiy #- 
[<f> atrrf] yavy, Sri \*]}pov 1jy to <rK]d<f>o? 9 avroO KariXmty, 
[€ts Si] rfjv ticup[ci>i> /JLtTafiil3]d<ra9 tov? aurod yati- 
5 [ras 7r/>]o€7rA[€]i/<r€i> [tnl rb arpd\T€V/ia rb p€Ta tov 

[KSwovos 6 Si MiXcov c/y AXyivav pc- 

[tA rh p]iy ovv iSpSrara t&v IV. 1 

[ 7T€p]l toOto aVfJL^dvTCOV 

[o6ra>$ iyivero' dnb Si rot>]& tov [6]ipovs Tjj /iiy B.C. 396 

10 ] {fro* SySoov €vciotjjk€i. 

]apos Ta? rptrjpm ana- 
i]icti Si KCLTanXctiaas Ta? 
]*y, irv\€y yap du tov 
KaT€(T]K€vaKoa? fjy vs&pia 
15 ]? Snov crvvimnriv 

) rby Si $apyd(3a(oy a- 
] napayevicrOai /9oi/X6- 
[fjievos ]ai Kal ptaOby dnoXa- 

[fcty a]pos /iiy o$y avroG Sii- 2 

20 [rpifltv, inl Si r£? vavs t&v Aak\^Saiiiovtwv Kal t&v 
[ovpfid\ooy d<j>iKvurai II6XX19] vavapyos Ik Aaict- 

[Saipovos rfj]y ApytXatSa kcltcl- 

[ Kara Si rby av]rby ypSvov $oivikg>v 

[ JjKoy kv€yqKOVT\a yrjc? eh Kavvov 3>v 

25 [Siica /iiy ^nXcvaay dnb X(A(]*/a? al Si Xthrovo-at 

[dnb ] Ay "Aktmv 6 XiSmvios 

[ /3ao]i\u toTs ra&rtjs 7179 

[ n*]pl Tfj[y] vavapyiav $ap- 


30 ^ . apoo-rarcptniyapxi)- 


4° I • r *f lr ?'! • ** • JV><- \*£*M? r (Fr. a) 

fIVKPII'IClTOI'A 1)\Q m • mW 


iv l=A Col. iv). 

25 lines lost 


• ■ 

• i 







WO f T 4 






\ . TCJCcXf 






[vd(3a£os irapo£vvG\vr<»v avrbv t&v irapa- 

30 [ 6 /ilv odv ....]. apos tA ttc/>2 rfjy o,pxh v 

[ to <rrpaT6]irt8ov. K[6\v<w Sk irpo<r- 3 

[ ai\<r06fJL(vos ava\afloi>v 

[ ov/i)rr\r)pwra$ ret* rpiripus 

[ ]<rra iroTa/i[b]v rby Ka6- 

35 [viov KaXotipwov c/f \t/JLvrj\v t^v K[ai]vptav tlaitrXeu- 

[<rc to]v $apvaf$d£ov Kal rod K6- 

[va>vos l/ 91 ^*] ivffp niparjs na- 

[ .] t&v irpayfidTOHv $? 

f iJ/3]ot5A€TO \afiuv [/c]ara- 

40 [ \.vSk 7rp{.] . [. . .>[.;h- -] v Wity* 

[ ] . os dni7T€/i^€v d)[y] fiatriXia a[. • ,]a- 

[ T]fjv aKrjvfjp avroC X[ ]5*0[* • •]* 

[ aJirayyc/Xas* Si t4 w[ ]ea<ra[. .]v 

Col. iv. 

25 lines lost 

26 .[ V 

30 a . [ 


ra[. .]ra[ 

#cow iar[ 

CIV T0L9 /4 

[.jawni' np[ 

[. .]T€X€X[ 

40 w>v ovS[ 
?Xo^w [ 
c?xw yi[p 
Some columns lost. 


Col. v (=B Col. i with Fr. 3). Plate IV. 

2nd hand ]• fiow^cxoj. . . 

]vi7nrecoi{. . . 

]• €VlOl8€7Tfj[. . . 

]amov ti/i€i{. . . 

g ]TOiaVTTjll^. .]*[. 

]t<r ayq<nXo[. .]& 

]*o[. .]rp* 
10 ]oi/<r Tot/rpTraXi - 

]€iy ri(T(ra0€p[.]i7<r 

]Xoi/0«TOl<T€XX I7[.]i|/ 

15 ]yi<rx*Aiot/<rKa[.]#t/ 

20 ]Xa><rjcai*/>a 

jcrao" oi8€{3ap{3a 
25 ^axatawrera 

30 ]KaTa<f>povav 




Col. v. Plate IV. 

], dalv Si ko[. . . VI. 1 
t&]v imrimv [. . . B.C. 395 

], ivioi Si 7Tf[. . . 
]otioi>. ^ A^v [o8v 
5 . ] roiairn *[. .]t[. 

]is. 9 Ayri(r[\a[os] Si 2 
rb] arpaT67r[€]8ov 
rb] Kcfi\fi<r\Tpi- 
\ov mSiov ] rh Spy ra£d/i€- 

10 [vos ]ow, Tatiry ndXtv 

]fJS TOta&TQ <f>$d- 

[<ras ]y rb crrparSireSov 

]uv. T«r<ra0€p[i>]i;r 3 

[Si inrjKo]\ov0€L tois "EXKri[o]iv 

J S 1<-X CW ' imrias fiiv . . . a]Kt<rxi\iovs ko[1] pv- 

[plovs, 7rc(ov9 Si pvptev 0]ifK iXdlTOVS. 

[Ayr)<rtkao$ Si fiy^ad/ievos \aX€- 

[irbv npovfidXkovTas rbvt iro\cfiio]us U napctTd- 
[£€a>r d/wveaOai no\i) r&v 'EWtjvw iifrepixovras, 
20 [2ra£ei> iv ir\iv$t<p rb orpdrcv/ia . .]Xa>y koX tcpa- 
[r ] orparijy/ay 

]aavra ndyitrOcu 
]a>i/ arpdrev/ia 
]*as, oi Si pdpfia- 
35 [pot ]€9 ical ovvT*Ta- 

[ypcv ] i\ouT€S rocrov- 

[r S]vvaTb$ dtyopfiav 

Ka]TCtSov roi>9 "E\\ri- 
[pas o]0re rfjy iropttav 

30 ] KaraQpovciv 

]vt€S avrods 
] rod (rrpaTcij- 
[/icltos ] irpo*f3a\op- 





(Fr. 3 ) 


45 *W 




. a 

o* . [ 


} . coparovaeXXt] 
]\€ova{, .)a>i>au 
]lfoiaxr c[. .]&€ 
]yapa/t0or6/o[. . 
]€r[.]7rpoibi{. . . 

W- • -M- • • 


]?K — ] • ' 4 


]?rM • #?[• 

]tiropo[. . . 
]a/oao*ic€t;a[. . 
]*oi/<r*i>aTi;ji> . [. . . 
]ra[.]€/ioi;(ri[. . . . 
]ooi^i'7roAX[. . 
y3ov\€v<rofj[. . . 
]iToi>€j/ia . [. . . 
]votriP€iq[. * . 
]y<r€yvawca . [. .] 

]o7rXc*raa[. . . .] 

Col. vi (=B Col. 11). 

TaKoaiova-S[. .]ci\wo- kclitq[ 

£ €VOK\€a[.]irapTiaTTivir[ 


u<r/JiaxTiV7{. . .]ccr0flw [ 

5 avaarr}a , a<ra[ ]fP?[* •]?[• •]/??[• 



Plate IV 




iQaOw tov ir\iv- 

35 [Oiov 

]ov irpocirar- 


] T0l>9 Si JTcX07T0l/- 

[vt)(t(ovs Kai Toi>? <rv/i/id)(ovf ]i npoarjy€ no- 

] . (opa robs *E\\ri- 


]Xeov a[. .]a>v del 


6]fiom$ €[. .]&€• 

]v kyyxrrifxp fidX- 


oi]Siv d\\' fj Thv 


] yhp dfi(f>OT€p[. . 


]**[•] irpoi6*{T. . 


o]A/y[. . .]cr[ 




]av[. ...]., ilfyiycr/- 

Xa[oi 81 

] . v[. . . 


OT/o]ar[c]t;/ia[. . . 


]t7ro?o[. . . 

n]apa<rK€va[. . 

]iovy ?ya rrj !/•[... 

*a]ra|y]€/*oi/<n [. . . . 


}a>pr)v 7toXA[. • 


] (3ov\€vaop{€i> • • 


]i> rbv kvia . [. . . 

Of • [ 

" ]j>oir<wa[* • • 


]w ?yw» *a . [. .] 


] . raw r^r wicifa] 4 

60 . i[ 

f*ii>] dirXfray [-•••] 

Col. vi. Plate IV. 

tcikoctiov? S[i ^]iAotfc, Kal tc[6tois eniorriatv Ap\ovra 
EcpoicAca [S]7rapTidri]v n{apayy*tkas &rav yivwrat 

f}aS((ovT€[s] kclt avTote [. 

€is pdxrjv i[d<ro]€<rQa(,. [c/y Si rfjy imovaav . . . .]k[. . 
5 dvaorjaa? S\jia *ip]tp<!> [r]b [aTTjpd^retypa irdXtv] avrj- 


y€i>€ioT07rp{ ]8e(3apl3apoiovi'a[ ]avT€<r 

axr€t<o0€<ra[ Vat/ra>i>7rpo<r€/8aXX[. .tfOKrtXKri * 

trivoiSen'^ ]vovavrovo" oi8€K[.]raT07r€ 

StovaTcucf^ . . .]fiKo\wOow o8€g[.]vok\Ti<r 

10 €7r€i8r]Kaif>[. . . .]e\afi€V€ii'aLTOL(nTo\€fiioicrem 
ytipw ava[. . . .]aa , €Krrja , €V€Spaa'TOv<nr€Xo7rcr 
VT]cnov<r€co0[. . . .]ofjLcoLTCQi>8€(3apfJapai>a>au8oi>€ 
KaaTonrpotrO^ .jracrrovcrcXAiyj/ao" €<f>zvyovKa6anav 
rontSiov ay[. . . ^aoaSeKaTLScoyne^o^Tjpevovcrav 

1 5 Tovcr€7r€fnr€va7roTovaTpaT€vjiaTooTov<rTeKov<l>ova 
[^onnrrpaTKOTw KaiTovo , nnrcacr8ico£ovTao'€KUvovo" 
T<wfiap(3apa>i/['] €iraKo\ov0ricravT€<r8cTot<nro\€fJLt[.]ia 
ov\iav7ro\v[.]xpovov ovyap[. . .]vavT0KaTa\a/i(3a 

20 vuvcavrov<raT€T{.]yiroWa>v[. .] . €Q»i>ovT<WKatyv 

fiVTJT&V K<lTafia\\OV(TlVp.*v{. .]T<DV7r€pi€£aK0<Tl 

over* aTrooravT€<r8€Ti]a8u)i>[. . .]cr fj3[.]£[.]£oj>€7rat/ 
TOTO<TTpaT07rc8oi>TOT<ov(3a[. . .]gcw[' . •jraXa/Soi' 
T€<r8€<f)v\aKr)w ov<nrov8ai[. • .]a0c[. . .]<rav ra\€ 

25 axraipovo-w Ka[.]\afi/3ai>ov<riy[.]yTOi>p[. . .]X^j//iera 
yopav <rvyyo[. .]&eap0/xHro[.]a[*] 7roXX[. . .]<tk€vtj' Kai 

yjprmaraii€v\. .VaXXa>i>ra£[.]r/<r<ra0€; ]avrov (1st hand) y€ 

i/o/i€^i7(r£€T[. .yiax^oraiai/[.]i70-o£/ie[, . ,]f){JapoiKa 
Tair\ay€VT€<r[. . . .]cXXi;j>a<ra7r€)(a>/>i;tf[ ]TC*Tt<r 

30 <T<z<p€pi>€nrpooTa<T<rap8€L<rayT)0'i\ao<r8€7r€p[. . .]ipa<rat/ 
TOVTpuati/icpa<r€vaioTOVcrv€Kpovoviro<rn[. .]8ovcrair€ 
8aK€VToiair[.]k€pioi<rKaiTpoffaioi>coTT)[. .]#catTif~ 
yi7^a7ra<ra^e[. . . ,]i7<rei'7r/>oi7y€i>Too , T/>[. . .]i//ia€i<r 
<f>pvyiavira\ip[. . .]/i€yaXi;j/e7roi€iTO&[.]j;j>7ro/>€iai' 

3 5 ovK€Tt<rvi>T€Tayii€v ovae)(Q)y€VTCimX[.]u0€io)TOV(r 

paa€ni€vaiKaiKaK<o<nroi^ }iro\€p[.]ovoTicrcra<f>€p 

pi7<r&7n/0o/i€i'O<JTOt/<re[ ]a8i£uy€ioTO7rpo<r0e 

avakafiwav0i<FTov<rf^ ]iny[. . . .];/0€«>7n<r0€~ 


yci/ d? to np[6a0€v. ol] 8k ftdpfiapoi ovva[KoXovOrjcr]avT€? 

&? €i(&6c<ra{v ol p.k]v ain&v npocriflaXX[ov] toi? "JEAA17- 

aiv, ol ff ine[ ]vov airov?, ol 8k K[a]ra rh ne- 

8tov aT&Kr[m kir\r)Ko\o66ovv. 6 8k B[€]voKXrj?, 
10 in€t8ff Kaip[bv vn]iXa$tv uvai rots noXtpioi? im- 

ycipiiv, dva[oT^ja]a? etc rrj? iviSpa? Toi>? JTcXotto^- 

vricriovs !{<&}0[€i 8p]6p<p. tS>v 8k fiapfidpeov &? clSov ?- 

kclotoi npocr0^ov]ra? roi/s "EXXrjva? tfevyov tcaff &nav 

rh ncStov 'Ay[rjcriX]ao? 8k KaTi8A>v n€<f>o{3r]phov? av- 
15 tov? ine/inw dnb rod arpaT^fiaros toU? T€ Kovcfwv? 

[t]&v arparKOT&u Kal robs Innia? 8id>£ovra? IkcIvovs* 

ol 81 ptTa r&y $k Tfj? ivi8pa? dvaardyrmv hcKtivro 

t{oi?) j3apj3dp(oi?). inaKoXovOrjaavrt? 8k toi? noXcp([o]i? 

ov Xtav noXi{v] XP^ V0V > ov Y^P [ffltyavTO KaraXapfid- 
20 vuv \f\avToi? &T€ i[£\v noXX&v [ln]nicov 6vra>v Kal yv- 

pvffToav, Karaf&dXXova'tv pkv [ai]r&v ncpl i£aKo<r(- 

ov?, dnoardvr*? 8k ttj? &<o[£eco]y i{3[d]8[i]{ov in av- 

rb rb oTparbntSov rb t&v /?a[p£<£p]coj>. [Ka\TaXafJ6v- 

r€9 8k QvXaKijv ov onovSatyn? /t]a0€[ora>]<r(W' rayi- 
25 m atpovatv, ko[1] Xapfidvovcnv [a]vT&v [noX]X}iv jikv d- 

yopav av\vc[i>?] 8k dv0payno[v]?, noXX[a 8k] (TKct/iy Kal 

XpfyaTa (ra) /iky [t&]v dXXcw ra 8[k] Ttaaaob^fivov?] avrov. y€- VII. 1 

vopivq? 8k r[i}y] pd^y? TOtav\T]tj? ol pk[v fld)p{3apoi kcl- 

TanXayivTC? [tov?] "JEAAi/pay dn€^pr}o\av avv] t$ Tic- 
30 aa<f>ipv€i npb? ra? SdpSti?' 'AyrjaiXao? 8k ncp{ip€](va? aih 

tov rptfc f) pi pas, iv ah rod? vtKpov? vnoan[6v]8ov? dni- 

8<oK€i> toi? n[o]XepCot? teat rpfmatov €<m;[<r€] Kal rfjv 

yfjy dnacrav ilnSpOfyo-w, nporjytv rb OTp[dT€]v/ia ei? 

ipvylav ndXiv [rfjv] /itydXriv. inoietro 8k [r]i)v nopuav 2 

35 ovKin ovvTtraypivovs tycw iv ry nX[i]v6i& Toi)$ 

OTpari&Tafy dXX 9 i&v avrov? iaqv f)flovXovTO rrj? x&- 

pa? intivat Kal KaK&? nou[?v tov?] noX€/i[C\ov?. TiacraQcp- 

vrj? 8k nv06/i€vo? tov? & E[XXi]va? fi]a8tfav €i? rb np6o-0c(y) 

dvaXa(3a>v avOi? tov? /3[ap(3dpov$ i]nt)[KoXo]ij0€t 6mo-0€i> 


40 av7a>viro\\w<roTa8ic{ ]V (Tl )[' • '}8c8i€£c\0[. . 

Ton<[.]iovTOTw\v8ci>v[ ]anai{ ]8iaroc{. 

oponrroovSia/JLetrovK^l ]tij[ ]KCUTrj<r 

(f>pvyiaa-€7r€tS7]S€Si€irop[ ]a<rc 

TOV(T€XXrjya<r€tar^yif[ ]oy 

45 fiaiav8poviroraiiovo[. ] 

va>vi]T<»i'€y<ppvyta/JL€yioTT)[ . 



[.]vfJLfiaxov<Tt6v€TonoT[. ,}a\[. ']8[']a§[ 

50 fi0PT)fitiKai(3a8i(€iv€7riK€\a{. ]oy<r 

arpaTicoTaa'a7ray€Ly<oa8€avv€§[ ]firj 

yciv€a0aiKdkaTai€paircpi/i*[.ya[ ]fW*c 

pavijwrap€ycvcTOKaiTriv€7rio[ If? 70 "" 

Col. vii (=B Col. iii with Frs. 4-6 and Fr. 7 Col. i). 

(Fr. 4 ) 
[ ]\ao<ifi€vov[. . . . 

[ }8povica\ovji€vo[. 

8[ ] • V€jlOVT<Zl\v8[. • 

*[ ] . &/8a(nAet/<r 

5 . [ ]€piT0VTOU<T 

r[ ]aTtiyova/ia[. 

8c[ ] . TuraafeppTj 

er[ ]w€XXj7i/a<r 

01 . [ ]i>ovKCUjia\ 

10 Xo[ ] . 8ix<uc*i 

<"{• M 

•rt- Ivfcrt 

15 Sia[ }anaf{ (Fr. 5) 

Ao[ }ko.[. .]o«t«|[. ....]. o-a[ 

opy[. .]avr(wcari?y|[.] . a[.]a8i[ 


40 avrwv TroAAot/r <rra8io[v$ 8uya>v. 9 Ay]r)<ri\[aof] 8k SitfcXOfov 3 

rb nc[8]tov rb t&v Av8&v [Jjye r^y <TTp]aTiav [ ] 81a t£{v 

ipwu t&v 81a fiiaov K^ipevav . . .] rfj[s Av8ia$] Kal ttjs 
Qpvytav inciSf) Si 8i€irof[€v0rj<rav raxna /caT€/S//S]a<re 
Toils "EWrjva? c/y r^v $[pvytav ?a>9 dfyUovro irpbs r]bv 

45 MalavSpov norapSu, $[? /Sea>v dirb KeXou- 

v&v, fj t&v iv Qpvyia fieyioTrj [ir6\is iarlv, kK8i8a><riv 

e/y ddXarray napa Ilpi^vrjv Jt(a2 Karaarpa- 4 

ToneStvaas 8i rody ne\oTr[ovvr]a(ov9 Kal rody 
[<r]v/i/xd\ov9 iOvtro ir67[ep]a x[P^] S[i]ap[aiv€iv rbv irora- 

50 pbv fj ptj, Kal fiaStfciv inl Ke\a[tva9 fj irdXiv r]oi>9 
orpartaray dndyciv. a>y 8i <rvv€p[aiv€v afrrip] pi) 
ytyveo-Oai KaXa ra Upd % n€pifJL€[i\va[? Ikcl Ttjv t]c f)/i£- 
pav fjv irapeyivcro Kal rijv imo[0aav dirfjy]<ev rbv 

Col. vii. 

[arparby 'Ayrjat^aos fikv oS[v . . . 

[ rb ir*8iov rb Matdv]8pov KaXovfievo[v 

8[ 1 . vifiovrat Av8[ol 

< ] . 81 pa<rt\ti>9 VIII. 

5 . [ ir]€pl TOVTOVf 

rf orp]aTriybv ifia 

8\[ ] . Tt<r<ra<f>ipvTi 

ct[ to]i)s "EWrjvas 

01 . [ }vov Kal /ia\- 

10 \o[v ] . 8t\a ku- 

<rv[ Tt<r<r]a(f[ipy 

°4 '^«fl*Pfl 

15 8ia[. ]anap[ 

Xo[ ]Ka[. .]oitc[ ] . <ra[ 

opy[ ] airy k arrjy[.] . a[.]a 8i[ 


<ro[. . .]T€fJa<rt\€v<ropo\oyovy\T[. .]fjLa\i<Tj[ 

8i[. . . ,]<ra(p€pvr)i/Kanra[.]a>y\€K€iyoy[ 
20 iravro>VKa6aTi6pa\[ ]vro^jca[.] . . [ 

o<T€irei8T]KaTa<f>\[ ]yiavKai\v8[ 

tc[. . . .]waye7T€pylr\[ ]o\a<ra<T€<f>*p[ 

pa[ ]iirpo<rapi\[ .]<r<ra(f>[.]pvi][ 

en[ ](mpo<rfi€ . [. ,]cuoi>\axra . [ 

25 or . [ ]\afi€iv€K€t{. . .]aiS[ 

ev[. ]i^rovyc[. . .]rai[ 

7T€[ ]j^oi^ro[ ]oi{ 

M ] . ^€[.]€X\€^X[ 

<riy[ ]i0pava[ (Fr. 7 Col. i.) 

30 ra . [ ]r[ ]fc 

5o . [ Jriycr 

a7royp€[ ]i/[. . 

oiror€a[ (Fr. 6) 
35 <t>cpvv[> *]irc<TTti\€VT\[ ]? a /?|[- ]o 

ap[.]a[.]oo , €i<r<rap8u<TTo\[ ]wov[ 

vaToa , naa , a(f>€pprj\[ ] . pta . [ 

j9eXTtcTTotTQ)i'<rT/j[. . .]yot>|[. . .] . taverc . [ 

Svp[. .]€pop€^€ivr[. .]arari]\[.]aa[.]pairia[ 
40 w^a[.]. , ?/* € ^ * ; n"€/)t[.]j;i'/iay^|[.]cr[.]aj'€/x > «[ 

7w[. .]^co[ t ]KCUTa>PLmr€Q)\[. . . .]wrrpc[ 

C[. . •joi'df. .]K€lfl€VOV[ 

A[.]v<raXXi;7ro}[. .] . aj>[ 
/3ov\ofia>o<r8[. .]n[.] . [ 
45 arpaT€VfjLaTa[.] . [ 

Col.viii(=Fr. 7 Col. ii). 


[. • • -M 
[• • -]»M 


<ra[. . .Jre /Sa<nAct>y 6fio\oyovvr[ . . ] /id\un[a 

8i[a Ti&\ja<f>€pvr}ir Kal na[.]oi>u Ikuvov [ 

20 ndyrcoy Ka& h Ti$pa[H<rrr}? a]vrhv ko[.] . .[ 

8y iiretSfj Karatf[ $pv]ytav Kal Av8[tav 

tq[. . . .]€v dv€n€fiyff[ev CTnorjoAAy Ay typl* 

pa[ ]i rrpbs 'Api[aiov Ti]<r<ra<f>[(]pvf)[ 

67r[ ]o irpbs Mc[. .]cuov coy a . [ 

25 0T . [. . . .JAajSfU' €K€v[* . .]<u£[ 

€i{ ]vrov ye[. . .}rai[ , . 

w«[ ]youro[ ]ov[ 

M ] • * ^>XX«r iy X [ 

<ru/[ T]tdpaiJ<r[r 

30 ra . [ ]r[. ] A 

&> . [ Jrijr 

<£7T0K/>e[ ]l{. . 


iir&re a[ • Ticro-a- 

35 0€/>i/i;[. d}rr€OT€i\€i' t[ ]o ap[ ]o 

'Ap{i\a[i]os €& SdpScis tc[ ]ovov[ &/- 

varb? Taraa^pvrf ] . pia . [ 

PcXtiotoi t&v aTf{aTi]}y&[v. .] . tav ire . [. . . . d/civ- 

8vp[6r]€pov i£tiv r[h /c]ar4 tj)[v] aa[r\pama[v 'AyrjaXd- 
40 ou Ka[0]t]fiwov ircpl [r]fiv Mayv[r/\a[i]ay epi[ 

7w [tt€]^£[i/] Kal tS>v linr(<io[y. . .]a> irpo[. . 

€[. . .]0V 8[ta]K€lfl€l/0v[ d\- 

A[o]t/y dXXfj 7rot[. .] . av[ 
ftov\6ficvo$ i[. .]xr[.] . [ 
45 or par ev pa ra[.] . [ 

[. . .)irpc[ 

Col. viii. 
2 lines lost 



5 ira/wa£[ 


10 (ptpvT)o[ 
iroXcaxr . [ 

15 • «M[ 




20 riacntara . [ 

. €/JL€lXrj[ 

yfraa-Katra . [ 

T W cyc«or[ 

25 ra&rat^ 




30 [. .]Aoi . iw[ 

A""- [ 

35 r[.]t/£a[. • .]€ao[ 

[. .]€TO0l/0A[ 

[. J\rr€yfiaai\[ 


5 n 'ApraQipt 
ra fi/iipa[f 

ainrhv a[ &pw 

y&f iirta[ 
rhv Ti0p[a6arr)v Tur<ra- 

IO <f>€pVT]$ [ 

npa£tv a[ 0/- 

7t6\€G>s . [ 
inb t&v [ 
15 . € pa%i 

t$ TiOpo^jfrrri 
o[.]at irapa[ 

20 rias Kara . [ 

. e MiXifttri 

yfras Kal ra . [ KOr 

rrjpw €& [ 

'Apiaiov c[ fie- 

25 ri j^ ratfra 


Ifidrta r[ 

vov <rvyap[rra 

KOI fl€Ta7l[ 
30 [. .]Xoi • V I1l[ir 

35 nop £a[criX]&* [ 
to[*]? €moToA[a& 
[. .]e rh 0v0\[(oy 
[. .Jrrey /Ja<riA[e 

M 2 




(Fr. 8) 

(Fr.9) a 5 



[. .javroiwaf 


> [. .]'. . . 




[. .ypappap<f{ 

Col. i with Frs. 8 and 9). 

Col. x (=C Col. ii with Fr. 10). 

15 lines lost 

vonfr.] . aa[ 


afta/i(t{.]oy . [ 





] . /(ran; 

5 miry . . tpaT[ 



• • • 

fajKltf. . .]hi[]t . [ 


[.]q\a>pa> • [ 




10 Kcupiaf . [ 



. . . 



opoi[.]va . [-]of[.]a[ 

few 1 

kchj[.}tiv . [.] . i 


15 /KKT€^y€[ 


. rcpoi/<T€A[.]i^ 


ji^-M-IrfI-W — fr^M 

• • • • 

20 »'aaT6Von"<3o[.]a)/)/ii7(r€»' . [ 
yacKai8ti[. .jriyoor • [.]•??[ 
k€vcuti8ok{. jt/*ra<r5[ 

TG>Vff\€to[. .]?)([ 

•5 [....]'• [..M-.-M 


IO) [.]acr[ 





[• .] aurbv dva[ 


[..]... UV €K . [ 

[d]XXrjy dvay[ 
[t£]v f3apf3dpa>[v 
Some columns lost. 

Col. ix. 

Col. x. 

15 lines lost 


yorrj[.] . cur[ 


d/ia piv [.]ov . [ 


<tyMt"M* . .](T . [ 


] . KTCDTT] 

fia i\ [.]€V€o[ 

]XXi;y au- 

5 €iri rrj . . t/xar[ 


yprjfiivov Airap£c[ 


it €K€IV[. . .]i7r[.]cr . [ 


[.]aXa>^ a> . [ 


\f\epov ttm[ 


10 /cat 0iaf . [ 

• • • 

y(p6vov p[ 


noWfjs ivva[ 


d/iot[.]v a . [.]o<[.]a[ 

] Kara/ia- 

Km [.}tjp .[.]•< 

]v irapa\&* 

15 iiavwriy^ 

] Mcuccio- 

. ripous cA[.]i£ 

• • 

1j roi{s] ix i\o]d n[.]X[. • • .] ytyvop\evovs 
vos 8k rfjv [.] . [.]x[0 al ' dpi*™ A. 

/C€YDT7ii€l'fof .1 01$ VflD (SoTTCO of/ 

• •TO)*' 0U- 

20 pa0Ta/6'}'7itt[j'] &ppr)<r€v • [ 

ya? #ca2 &;[/xo]™ca>T . [.] . <n[ 

/jL€Tairciiirf[/i]€vos €/c[ 

/tevat rt iorfo]vvTas S[ 

r&v ir\€to[ra>]v x[ 

.5 [....] . [. .]<• . .M 





30 rmy[ 


Fragments probably belonging to Col. x. 

Fr. 11. 

Fr. 12. 






] . 8€trpocrr[ 



] • • M 

] . T€\€V[ 



] • [•]*[ 

5 ]a6aircpi/i€ . [ 






• . • « 

] . {.]a\\aTt)V(t^ 

Fr. 13. 

] • [.]tw&0ioi» . 1/9 . [.]T[ 


Jave/MiroXXiji'OT . . . v{ 









6 ].[... -M 

Fr. 14. 

Fr. 15. 


TfXaxrw [ 

8o£av[ Aa- 

30 t<h>v[ 

Fragments probably belonging to Col. x. 
Fr. 11. Fr. 12. 


• • . 

] Kal &<[ 

] . 8\ irpo<n[ 

] • [-W 

]aw €/Xiy[ 

] • • M 

] . TCX«^T 

5 ]«w«$ 

5 ]todv nap' €K€ip[ 


]a$a ncpifi* . [ 


]v iirira{ 



T&v] &\\ct>v (JapfJdpcoty 


10 ] . [.] ciAAi rfjv fi*[ 

Fr- 13- 

] . [.]rov Si fMov . tp . [.]r[ 


]s ncpl noXX^y or . . . <r[ 


/ta]nfyay€i> diri 5v iyya[ 


]? inolrja'€ /tara#cc<[ 

]tv avr[ 

15 7ro]AAaf? /carcw/cfvaf 


] irepi 81 t)jv roi/[ 

5 ]•[... -M 

Fr. 14. Fr. 15. 

M M 

]taKot[ } a '^] l0 [ 


]m[ ]acr7roA[ 

Col. xi(=DCol. i). Plate V. 

[ ]?fi°[ ] • tca$€Ka 

[. . . •]j7#f[«]? , ' e £ 1 7 T [ ]owroi<r6 

[. . . ,]€VT(o\i/i€v[ ]vivafir)pa 

[. . . Jfnrr€ax€ipova[ }rro\€fiovfiov 

5 [. . . .]yo<r8€napao'K<{ ]Tov<rpo8iov<r 

[. . . .]8otxnv€PTOia , c[ ]ra<m]viKav 

[• . . .]j€pyoi(r€Trix^p^[ ]iracni>€7roi 

[. . . .\opavrov€^Ta[ ]/co<rtXa|8ar" 

[. . .]rpiTjpa>i/€^€7rX€v[ ]\ofiwo<r 

10 [. . .]ap€tpaiTrj8ta(f>0o[ ]i'iVpa>i't//*a> 

[. . .]aiV€OC0<t>T]fl<OTrp0<T€[ tyOTJVCUTOir 

[. . .]yfiaTWOV<rivavToimq[ ]€pt/i€ivaT 

[. . .]€K€tufivrrjvfiH€pavTi[ ]Tov€£era 

[. . .]vTrfvar€paiaT<ovarTpaTi[ ]7r€p€ico0e 

*5 [• • >]rov<rfi€vavTa>vnapTjya[ ]<roTr\oia , €ia' 

[. .]v\ificvaT[.]vo'8€ii€iKpov[ ]erayo/>aorar" 

[. .]po8ia>voiovvu8oT€<miviT{ ]<n/7r€Xa/So"" 

[.]aipovcyx€ipuv€U>atTOi<r€f)y[. . . .]ve\cyovTO 

[• • ]v€yx<eipt8ioi<ru<JTT]vayopai'Kat8<DpLfiax oa 
20 [. .]€yarrrci)vavafia(T€7riToyXi$oj/ov7rep€tQ)0€iKTj 

[. *]TT€ivoKrjpv£avaKpaywci>ai]8vvaTO/i€yiaTcr 


[. J]vra)(t<rrTivoi8€\oinoi(3orio'ain'oo'CK€ivovTr]'~ 

[• 9 ]i]d€tav€i<nrrj8i](ravT€a'fier€y)(€ipi8uii>P€iaraav9 

25 [.]i/» # mro)vapx o, ^ a,, ' a7rolfT€il ' al;o ' iTO,;(rT€ ^ ia y o 
[. .];oi;(ricatTo>i'aXXa)i/7roXtTa)i'e^6^a&a7rpa^a 
[• .](T€icicXi7<nai'a/)Tt5c<n;i'€tX€y^€ycDi'ai^-a)i'ifOJ'<» - 

]ni[ ]ar no\[ 

1"H ] • [ 

• • • • • • 

Some columns lost. 

Col. xi. Plate V. 

[ > H ] • Kaff iKd- X. 1 

[artfy] f)/ii[p]av i£$T[a{€ rods vrpartdnas] ai>v rot? 5- B. C. 395 

[xrXoiff] iv r$ \ifJLep[t 9 npo(f>a<rt{6fiei/o$ pk]v Iva jit} fta- 
[Ov/AolpvT€$ \dpovs [ycvavTai irpbs rbv\ nSXtfiov, fiov- 
5 [\6fjLe\vos 8k irapaa-K^ydaas ^aHI\ov9] rods 'PoSiovs 
[Srav ffiaxriv iv rots 8[irXot? avroifs irap6v]ra$ rrjviKaih 
[ra to?]? ipyots imxfiptfiv iircl 8k avvrjOrj] iraaiv iiroi- 
[r)<r€v] ipav rbv e£era[a/i6i>, avrbs /ikv u]ko<tl XajSaV 
[raw] rpiTJpa>i> i£iir\€i^<T*v «V Kavvov, f}ov]\6pevos 

10 [/ifj 7r]apeivcu 177 Sia(f>6o[pa raw Aiayop€tco]v f 'l€/>awt7/4a> 2 

[8k k\ou NiKO(f>rjfjL(p irpoa^ra^€V i7ri/i€\]i]6rjvat raw 
[irpa]yfidra>v ovaiv airrov iraJyxSpoir ot ir]€pi/Ji€h>av- 
[rcy] kK€tvt}v Ttjv fjpipav, ir[ap6vr<K>v im] rbv ifcra- 
[<r/ib]v rjj toartpata raw <TTpaTi\oyr&v Ka6<£\ntp eu»06- 

15 [<rav,] ro^y pkv airr&v iraptfya[yov <ri)v toi]$ SirXois ch 
[rby Xipiva, r[o]fr$ 81 /wcpbv [dnb ri}]y ayopa?. raw 
[8i\ % Po8i<»v ol ovvctS&rcs rijv ir[pa£iv 9 <b]y fmiXafiov 
[ic]aipbv iyxtipuv chat rofy %py[oi9, <ni\v€kiyovro 
[<ri)]v iy\€ipi8iots c/y rijv dyopdv, Kal Accpliiayps 

20 \p\iv (T*y) ai/raw dvafias iirl rbv XiOov ofhrep ucoOet K17- 
\pG\mtv 6 Ktjpv£ 9 dvaKpay&v a>y rjSvvaTO fiiytarov, 
[fjayicp, a> dvSpcs, (<pt), iroXTrat, iirl rods rvpdvvovs 
\rij\v ra\tarriv % ol 8k Xoiirol fJofjo-avTo's iicdvov rfju 
[(3o]rj0€iav €i<nr7i8Ji<ravT€$ jjl€T iyyjtipiSlav e/y ra crvv- 

2 6 [«]$/>*« tw dp\6vrmv diroKTavovai rotJy re Atayo- 
[pe]iov9 Kal raw AXXccv iroXtr&v fvStica, 8iairpa£d- 
\jjl]cvoi 8k raOra ovvr\yov rb nXr}$os rb r&v % Po8tcov 
[*/]? iKKXt]<r(ay. &pn 8k ovvuXtyixtvcov atir&v K6v<ov 3 

JJKt ndXiu €K Kaivov ./xeri raw Tpirjpwv ol 8k rfjy 


30 vipayqvefcpyao-apwoiKaTaXvo'ain-toTTiPTrapovo'ar 




fov (3ota>Toi8€Kai<txx>K€ioTovTovTov6€pov<rct<r 
35 wo\fflLovKaT€OT7i<rav€y€vovTo8eTrio'€K0pa<ravToi<r 



ngo€\0ovT€<rHX€v8€TarrpayiiaTaTOT€Kcd[. .Jri/" 

PoioyriavovTa><rTf<ravKaT€(rTrfKviaiPovXaiT[ ]o 

Col. xii ( = D CoL ii). Plate V. 

T€T€TTc^ ]icaoTTiTai>i>iro\€wa>POi^ 

TOiairoX^ ]vfi€T€\Hva[. . .]ro«ricc#c[ 

ttXi/0oot[ ]r<»vTovT<ov8€Ta>vl3ovXa{ 

/i€po<r€Kao[ ]a67]fjL€VT)Kai7rpofJovX€v[ 

5 7rep*raw7r[ jrcoi/eio-e^epeycioraaTpef. . . . 


l8ia8l€T€XoUV0VT<»8t0tK0V/JL€V0lT08€TCc{. . . . 

€orwrroiVToyT)VTOirrpoirovovvT€Tayficvoy[. . . 

8€Kafl€pT)8l7)pT]l'T07raVT€<TOlT7]V)(a>pai'OLKOVP{. . . 

10 KaiToirrcov€Ka<TTOi'evaTrap€ixcTof3oLOi)Tapxoi>{. . . 
0Tif3aioip€VT€TTapa(Tvv€l3a\XovTo8uofji€vv7r€[. . . 


1 5 Xwvrct>P€i<rra<rOTil3aa8vo8€irap€ixovTol3oimapxao' 




20 (3a8iC€V€£aicpat<f>vi ovKaiKamavKaiyaipaivtiav 




30 <r<j>ayi)v igepyaadpcvoi KaraXvaavre? rfjy irapovcrav 
iroXiTttav Kark<m\aav SrjpoKpartav, Kal t&v no- 
Xlt&v rivas dXfyovs <f>vyd8a9 inotrjo'av. 1) piv oSv 
inavdoraais 1) nepl rijv *P68ov tovto rb tcXos $Xa- 
ficv. Boiorol Si Kal $<dkus toUtov tov depot/? eis XI. 1 

35 rrSX^pov KaricTtjo-ay. kyivovro Si rrj? iyQpas avrois 

[a]iTioL pdXiora t&v iv reus Orjfiats Tivir ov yap noXXois 
\t\rwiv npfoepov hv\ov c& (TTao-iaapov ol Botoarol 
irpoeX66vT€S. sty** ^ € T ^ npdypara t6t€ Ka[ra] t^v 2 

BoLorriav ofrr&v Ijaav KaOeorrjKViat ftovXal to- 

Col. xli. Plate V. 

T€ T€TTa\p€9 trap i\KaOT]J T&V wSXtCOV, &V oi[% &TTa<Tt 

rots 7toX[(tcu9 i£rj]v p€Ti\uv d[XXa) rots K^rrjpivois 
nXrj06* t[i x/ >1 W < *] ra), '> ToCrmv Si r&v /3ovX6c{v Kara 
fiipos iKda[TTf npoK\abr\pivr\ Kal npofiovXtv\jaaa 
5 ir€/>2 r&v n\payp£\ra>v d<ri<fxp*v c/y riy Tpe[tf, 8 ti 

5* i8o£ev e[p] andvais tovto Kvptov iylyvero. k\o! ra piv 3 

ISta SurtXovv oOr<a> SiotKotpevoi, t4 Si tS[v Bot- 
aor&v toBtov Jjv Tbv Tpfmov avvTeraypkvov. \k*$ Iv- 
Scica peprj Si{jpr}VTo ndvrcs ol Tijv y&pav oiKovv[T€$y 
10 Kal tovtq>v iKaorov Iva napefycTO Boiavrdpxrjv [a>8v 

Orjfiaiot fiiv Tirrapas (o)vv€f3dXXovTO, Svo fiiv vni[p Tfjs - 
nSXew, Svo Si itnip TlXaraumv Kal Hk&Xov Kal 'Ep[v]0pa{v 
Kal SKa(f>&v Kal t&v dXXoov \copt<ov t&v irpfocpov 

fliv €K€(vOl? OVpiroXlT€VO/l€Va>V T6T€ Si CTVVTC- 

15 Xovvt(dv eh riy Ofif3as. Svo Si napd^ovro Boioordpxas 
'Opyppivioi Kal 'Tcnaibi, SHo Si Oeontth avv Evrpfoei 
Kal Otafiais, tva Si Tavaypaioi, Kal irdXiv hzpov 'AXidp- 
Tiot Kal AcfiaSus Kal Kopcwets, tv ejrcfurt Kara pi- 
pos iKdorrj t&v n6X€W, tov avrbv Si Tpfmov i- • 

20 fldSifcv i£ 'AKpaufrviov Kal Kam&v Kal Xaipwvcias. 

oCra> piv odv 60cpe ri pipy tov? Apyovrav napstyje- 4 

to Si Kal fJovXeuras l£rJK0VTa Kara Tbv Boic&Tdpxrjv, 




25 OTrXetTao'iTnreao'Se^KaTOParrcoaSeSrjXooa'cuKaTa 





30 KaiTaKOivaTCDvfJoMn'<DVCVTr]Ka8fjL€La<jvi/€Ka 

35 Tov8c\€ovTia8ri<rKaiao'ia<rKaiKoppavTa8a<r€(j>po 





Col. xiii( = DCol. Hi). 

[ ]ro[. .]07}paLoova\X€t\[ 

[ ] • ?( ]€a-\0P€7T€ir0t{ 

[ ] . . . 7T£[. .]pOVVTOfiaW[ 

[ ]€a-KaKdxnroi€iP€Toifiwa , a[ 

5 [• *]£*U'8lCLK^.]ll€ P<Ov8€TG0V€l{ 

[.]aiTT)<T€Tcupeia(r€KaT[. .]?<n<rx[ ]ra 

[. . .]o7)\6opiro\\oiKatTG>P€PTcuo[. ]a 

[. .}p/3oi&TiapKa{.]p.€T([.]xop€K{ ] 

[. . .)W€KCtV0l<r€8waVT08€7[ ] 

10 [. . J)pamp<>T€povoiir€[.]iTOPio'iJLr)[ ]y 

[. . .]poK\€i8r]PKaiirapcwToioTOi[. ]ai 

[. . .}nil3c[* .]T]TG>pf}oioirra>P€fnrp{. ]rrpo 

[. . .]P0lTr[.]ptT0POOTiaPKai\€0P7{ ] 

[. . .]pa<rvx^opKaiTTjvnoXip8LaiT[ ]xoy 

15 [. .]€yapiro\€fiovyT€(roi\aK€8aip{. ]a 


Kal TotJroiff avrol ra Kaff fjpipau AvfjXi<rKov. invrira- 

kto Si Kal OTpaTia iicd<rnp pepti ircpl x'^fo"? fa 
25 brXhras Imriat Si iKariv dnXm Si SrfX&o-ai Kara 

rbv Apypvra Kal r&v koivSw drriXavov Kal ra$ *[L]<r<f>o- 

pits iiroiotivTO Kal StKa<r(tas;) hrtpirov Kal per&ypv dirdv- 

tw dfiouos Kal t&u KaK&v Kal t&p dyaO&v. rb piv 

o$v iOvos Skov ofrtt? iiro\iTCJ€To, Kal ra ovviSpia 
30 {Kat) ra KOtva r&v Boia>T&v iv rfj Ka8p*(a ovvtKd- 

6t{w. kv Si rah OJjfiais irvypv ol (JcXtiotoi Kal yya>- XII. 1 

pipcoraroi r&y itoXit&v, axnrcp Kal irpfapov dpi)- 

Ka, oracruffoiTc? irpbs dXXtfXov?. iiyovvro Si roO pi- 

povs rod fa 'I<rpr)vtas ko[i\ 'ArrtOto* Kal % Av8poKX(et8a)s 
35 rod Si AtoyridSrjs Kal 9 A<rtas Kal KoppavrdSas, k<f>p6- 

vovv Si r&y TroXiT€uofiipa*v ol piv irtpl rbv Atom- 

dSr\v ra AaKcSaipovfav, [0]/ Si nepl rbv *I<rpr)vtav 

alrtav fa €t\oy 'ArrtKifav e£ $>v irpiOvpoi irpb? 

rbv Srjpov kyivovro &s Z<f>vy(c)v ov pfjv k<f>p6v- 

Col. xiii. 

\ri{ov] to\v 'A]Orivafav, dXX 9 ttyfipv 

[.....]. n[ ]€aypv kircl roifo 

[ ] • • • irpfcfllpovvTO fiaXX[ov 

[ ]e$ KaK&s iroittv Irofpovs a [ 'Arn- 

5 [kC\(uv. 8iaK^t]fi£vcov Si r&y kv [Qrjfiats o&tcds 2 

[k]oI ttjs Iraipttas iKar[ip]as Ic^yoHo-rj^, iiru]ra 

[irp]orjX0ov iroXXol Kal t&v kv rats [nSXea-i Kar]a 

[rify Boicortav ko[i\ ptr^afyov it^aripov r&y] 

\ji€p)S»v kttivois. iSvvavro Si i[&rc piv Kal] 
10 [piK]p<p npircpov ol irtfp]l rbv 'I<rprj[vtav Kal rb]v 

[Av8]poKXd8av Kal nap avrols ro«[y Orjfiatois K]al 

[irapa] r# Pc[vX^ r&v Botoor&v, tynpfao-Ocv Si] irpo- 

\&Xo]v ol v[c)pl rbv^A<r{r}tav Kal A€ovr[td8rjv ypSvov] 

[n]va avyybv Kal rijv irSXiv 81a *f. ]xoj>. 

15 [&t]* yap iroXcpovvTts ol AaKc8aip[6vioi rots] A- 3 


[. . .]ai0l<r€V$CK€\€ia6l€Tp€lf}0VKCUO' ..[..]. [.] . j[.]y 

20 rroXivevcpycT^yOaiSiavTwenl ]0iy 

/3aioi7ro\v7rpo<r€v8aipoviavo\oK\[ ]v 

6€oxr(oaoiro\€fJLO<rToiaa6rjvaioia[ ] 

Toi<r\aK€Sai/iovioi<rap£aii€iwvyapav[. . .]*iv 
T<^ya0rjvcu(oin-^PotxoTiaavya>Kia6rj<raf[. .]crav 

25 Ta<roiT€£€pv6p<*)VKai<rKa<f>o(>vKaicnca)\ovKa[. ,]\i 

30 yi<rai/Toi<ra6rivaioia'iL€TaTwvXaK€8aiij[. . .J©*' 

TaT€yapapSpairo8aKaiTa\oirrairavj[ \v 

7roX€[iovdXi<rKOfjL€vafwcpoimv[ ]v r< }P 

€\afif}avopKaiTtiy€KTr)<raTTUCTi[. .Jaraf.Jgcvip 

3S o , avwavT0vvan<rr<»v£vXG>vKaiT0VK€paiicvT0v 

40 a0tjvat(ovouT(oa€^rj <TKTjTOKai8ieireirovriTOKa 

Col. xiv (=D Col. iv). 

. .]pPoXrji/ . [ }8€V7rapavT0ia€7ra[. .] 

. . •]iiri70 > €i[ ]Ko8o/ir)ii€va<rriira 

. .]/(raAAo*a{ J. irocr]]yapain > o>ya9ra 

. .]v€X\rjy[ ] . (Xa/MfJavomoTOX^.] 

. .]ycraypovaa[ ]yv7rpayfiaTaTCUcaT[.] 

]<r6r]l3a<TKcuT{. ]ovrci>aoiS€7r€piTOva[.] 

SpoicXuSavicql ]<nrov8a{ov*KnoX* 


[6r]v]a(ois iv AtKtkda Stfapifiov Kal a ••[-•]•[•] • r [®] 1 ' 

a[i]r&v avfi/id)(ci>v iroXv <rvv€i)(ov, ovtol /i[a]X- 

Xov iSwdorcvov r&v iripuv d/ia pkv ry ir\[rj]<ri- 

ov uvat rods AaK€[S]atfMOv[r\ous, &fia 8k r& iroXXa \r\fjv 
20 n6Xiv €V€py€T€[L]arOaL 81 air&v. in[c8o(rav 8k ol] Otj- 

(Saioi noXi) irpbs c&Sat/iovtav 6X6kX[tjpov e]u- 

Oia>9 a>y 6 irSXcpos roTs 'AOrjvaiois [iveorrj koi\ 

rois AaKcSai/iovlots* dp£a/iiva>v yap dir[€iX)etv 

r&v 'AOrjvatev Tfj Boicoria avvifKiaOrfcrav [tty av- 
25 ray ol r k£ 'EpvOp&v Kal SKa<f>&v Kal Sk&Xov ko[1 Aifyi- 

809 Kal X\otvov Kal Ilorvi&v Kal iroXX&v iripcov roi- 

ovrav yobpiwv a rctyps ovk i\ovra SiirXaatas iiroi- 

rjaev ras Orjfias. ov fifjv dXXa iroXfi ye (3iXnov in rfjv 4 

irSXtv irpa£ai awiircatv a>y rijv AtKtXuav eirerti- 
30 \urav rots 'AOrjvaiots fiera r&v AaK€8atp[ovt]a>v 

rd r€ yap dvSpdiroSa Kal ra Xoina ndvr[a (ra) Kara rb]v 

TrtXcpov aXicrKifiwa jxiKpov rtv[o9 dpyvp(o]v irap- 

cXdfif3avov 9 koI rijv ck rrjs 'ArriKrj[9 k]ara[o]K€uflv 

Are np6a\(opoi KarotKovvres &na<rav /icr€K6/u- 
35 aav &s airrofo, dirb r&v £vXa>v Kal rod K€pdpov rov 

r&v oUt&v dpgdpcvot. r6rt 8k r&v % AQr\va(a>v 1) 5 

X&pa iroXvrcXiorara rrjs 'EXXdSo? jcare<riC€t/aoTO* 

€7r€rr6v$€i yap piKpa KaK&s iv rats ifxfioXais 

rats tpirpoo'Ocv inrb r&v AaKcSatpovtev, inrb 8k r&v 
40 'AOrjvaiCDy o£ra>? itfaKrjro Kal 8i€rr€7r6vt)ro ko- 

Col. xiv. 

[ff iirc]p(3oXiiv . [ ]8kv nap 9 avrots iira[. .] 

[. . . • o]iKJjo-€i[$ <p]Ko8o/itipivas tj na- 

[pa ro]ts dXXoLS [ ] yap air&v arra- 

[. . . .]v *EXXrjv[ ] . cXd/ipavov ck rot>[y] 

5 [. . . .]uy dypovs a[ ra pkv o]dv irpdyfiara ra Kar[a] 

[ra]s 91j(3as Kal r[fjv Bouortav €t\€v] oUtws. ol 8k Kept rbv 'A[v\~ XIII. 1 
SpoxXelSav Ka[l rbv 'Icprivtav i]<nroi}8a{ov iioroXe- 


fiod<raiTO€6voo{ ]ifioviovaf}ovXopcvoi \ 

fi€VKaTaXv<raiT[. ]vivapr]8ta<f>0apQi>o'r~ 1 

10 v7r€K€ivcw8ia[ ^(ovTao-oLopwoiS* 

paSiGxrroirnmfh ]/ijSayoi'T€<r/9a<nA[.]a 

XP r ll JLaTa ' n []p*&*[ ]TrapaTovfJapl3apoirn[.]ii 

<pO€i<r€irr]yy€\\€Tc{ Jo-jccuroi/o-apyciot^.]*' 

rovcra[. tyaiovo-jieO^ ]iroXt/iovrovTovayap 

IS eK6pov<rrot<r\aK€8aifj[ '[vraaavroiaavvirape 

[. .]€va<r€Tou<nro\uTao[. .]avoTj$€VTC<r8€TavTa 



yapoiJT€0T){Jaiov<rovT€Tov(ra\\ovo'l3oia>TOV<nrcL<rOri . 
20 <r€a0ai7ro\cfiHv\aK€8aipoi'ioio'apxou<nTT)<r€Wa 

8oa€ni\ipovvT€a[.]€8iaTatrrricrTria'a7raTr]<nrpoay€r m 



2 5 €crriToio , €6v€aivTovToiaafi(piaf3T}Tr]aifio<TXG>pa7r€ 

piTorn , apvaaaoinr€f^J]T]aKainpoT€poinroT€ir€iro\€ 



30 Tanpo{JaTairpoT€pov/iwovviro\\an'ToioirrG>i'a<p€ 





35 av8powc{. . . J\rrepiTOvav8poKXu8avicaiTOvi<riiri 


Trc{.]yyTOTcoy(f[ t ]K€<DyKaLPofj6€LV€K€Lvov<TairroLcr 
40 [. . . J\yv8iaK€tv[.]ai8€irpo<ravTov<ra€i7roT€<piXiG><T 


p&aai rb tQvos \irpbs robs AaKe8a]f,pov(ovs 3 (3ovX6pevoi 
piv KaraXOaai r[fjv dpx^v &br&]v tva fifj 8ia<p$ap&aiv 

10 bri ixelvwv Slit [robs AaKa>p]l{ovras, olSpevoi Si 
faSiws to&to irp{d£eiv biroXa\p(idvovres fJcun\[e]a 
Xprjpara 7r[a]pl£€[«>, Kaff h 6] iraph rod (iapfldpou n[e]p- 
<f>Oels CTn/yycXXcTo, (roi>9 Si) [Kopivdiov]s Kal robs 'Apyeiotfs] Kal 
robs *A[6rj]valovs peOe[£eiv rov] noXepov, robrovs yip 

15 ex^pobs rots AaKe8aip[ov(ois tyras abrois crvpiraptp)- 

[jK]evdae{Lv) rob? noXtras. [8i]avor)0evres Si ravra 2 

nepl r&v irpaypdrwv ev6pu{ov dirb piv rod <f>a- 
vepov xaAeira)? %X €iy ^Wirtfleo-flai robrots, obSinore 
yip afire Orjpaiovs obre robs dXXovs Boimrobs neicrOrj- 

20 aetrdai iroXepeiv AaKeSaipoviois Apxovcri rrjs 'JEXArf- 
80s. emxetpo&vres [S]i 8ti ravrrjs rr\s dirdrrjs irpodyetv 
els rbv rrSXepov abrobs, dveireiaav &v8pas nvhs $a>- 
K€<ov epfiaXeiv els rijv AoKp&v r&v 'Eaweploop jca- 
Xovpivoov, oTs eyevero rrjs ?xfy> ay a fr/a rotating 

25 fori rots tOvecriv rovrois dp^iaPfir^jtripos x®P a 7rc " 3 

pi rbv napvaaotv, nep[l] f)s Kal nporepSv irore irciroXe- 
prjKaariVy t)v iroWdius imvepovaiv ixdrtpoi r&y re 
$o>k£(w koI r&v AoKp&v, bjr&repoi £* &v rvxctxriv alcr06- 
pevot wore (robs) irepovs ovXXeyevres woXXci 8iapwd{ov<ri 

30 ri wpSfiara. wpSrepov piv ovv woXX&v roiobrw d<f> i- 
Karcpwv ytyvopevav del peri SIktjs ri woXXi Kal X6- 
yav SieXvovro wpbs dXXr]Xovs, r6re Si r&v AoKp&v 
dvOapwaadvrnv dvff &v dwiflaXov wpofidrwv eb- 
$bs ol $<0K€[t]s, wapo£vv6vra>v abrobs eKeiva>v r&v 

35 dv8p&v dfis ol] wepl rbv 'AvSpoKXeiSav Kal rbv 'Iaprj- 
vlav wapeaKebaaav, els r)jv AoKpiSa peri r&v 6- 
irXwv iv£(3aXov. ol 8i AoKpol Sjjovpevrjs rrjs x^P as 4 

wipyjravres wpicrfieis els Botcorobs Karrjyoptav e- 
w<{io]€vro r&v ^[a>]fce<0v 9 Kal PorjOetv eKeivovs abrois 

40 [t£ta]pv 8tdKeip[r]ai 8e npbs abrobs det wore <piX(a>9. 



Col. xv (=D CoLv). 

[. . .]a<ravT€<r8€T0PKaipopacrii[ 

[ yir)VLavKatT0vay8p0K\<[. 

[. .]<prova{2oTi6uvTot<r\oKpoia<f>cc{. . . . 


5 [.]aXipaP€X<opriaavirp€<rP€i<rS[.] . . [. . 
T€<nrpo<r\aK€8aifioyiw<rTi£iovi'CK{. . • 
ntipfJoi&TOicrcioTrivavTwfiaSiQ. . . . 
\€y€ipavrov<rpopi<raPT€<rairioTa[. . . 



10 <fxwc€a<TaW€iTia8iK€io'0aiPOfii{ovo[ 





15 Ta<m\(&a(3ovT€a€(Ja8€[J]{ov€mTov<r<pa>K*[ ] 

\0VT€<r8c8iaTax€ct>p€i<TTriv<lMKi8aKa![. . . .]rj 

20 ov8€vffoiT)aavT€adk\aKatn\T]ycuro\iyci<r\al3ovT€0' 


25 TaaanT)caapiroiou/iepa>p8cTriPairoxa>pricrip 

30 T<ov<rrpaTt<DT<ov<t)<roy8or]KOPTa7ra\ipaptx<Qpq 


Col. xv. 

[Apn]d<ravTCf Si rbv Katpbv d<rp[eviaTara ol ire pi 
[rbv 'I&tyrivtav Kal rbv 'Av8poKXe[t8av ineicrav rod? 
[Boi)oproi>9 PotjOeiv rots AoKpoh. $cc{k€is 8i, dyycXOiv- 
[r]a>v airroh r&v Ik r&v OtjP&v i\6re piv €#c rrjs AoKpiSos 

5 [ir]d\iv dvex&prjaav, rrpicrflus 8[i] . . [ nepyjrav- 

res rrpbs AaKeSaipoviovs fj£iovv ii^eivovs dirti- 
netv Boiaoroh eh rfjv air&v f&a8t(\eiv. ol Si Kainep 
Xeyeiv avrois vopicravres dmara \6pms nepyfravres 
oix eta>v rois Boiarroi? ir6Xepov U[<ptpuv lirl rois 

10 $a>*ea?, dXX' et n dSiKeiaOai vop(£ovo[i Sbcrjv Xaju- 

fidveiv nap' air&v tv rots <rvppd\ois [eKeXevov. ol 8i, ira- 
po£vv6vrot>v airrois r&v Kal rfjv dr^drr\v Kal rb irpd- 
ypara ravra avarrjo'dvTav, rods piv [irpearfieis rods 
r&v AaxeSaipovfav dirpaxrovs drre<rr^[iXav 9 airol 8i 

15 rh BirXa XafJSvres e/3d8[i]{ov eirl rods $a>*f[a9. ip(3a}- 
X6vres Si 8iit raye&v eh rfjv $a>K(8a Kal [nopOyj- 
aavres rJjv re r&v Ilaparrorapfov y&pav Kal Aav- 
X£odj/ Kal Qavorlcov eirey^etpritrav rah irSXeo'i irpo<rf3dX- 
Xeiv Kal AavXla piv wpo<reX06vres dire\copri<rav aSOis 

20 oiSiv irovfjaavres, dXXa Kal irXrjy&s 6X(yas \a{J6vres, 
$avori<0v 8k rb irpodoriov Kara k par 09 efXov. 8ta- 
irpa£dpevot Si ravra rrpofjXBov eh rijv $a>K(8a, ko- 
raSpapSvres Si pepos n rod ireSfov nepl rfjv 'EXd- 
reiav Kal rod? IleSteas Kal rod? ratirfl KaroiKovv- 

25 ras dirjjeaav, iroiovpivMV Si rfjv dnoy&priiriv 

air&v {irpos} trap l T{dp)rroXiv f8o£ev airrois diroireipa- 
aOai rfjs 7r6Xew tori 8i rb y&piov iir(i)eiK&s ta\vp6v. vpotr- 
(3aX6vres Si roh retyetn Kal irpoOvpias. oiSiv eXXi- 
n6vres dXXo piv oiSiv enpagav, dirofJaXSvres 8i 

30 r&v <rrparia>T&v &>s iySo^KOvra trdXiv dvex&prj- 

<rav. Boiwol piv c[v\v roaafrra KaK&, norfaavres [r]ois 

N 2 


(fx0K^.]<ra7TT]\6oi'€i(rrr)i'€auTa>i' KovcovSeirapeiX rj 

fioyi<ovKouTa>y(TV/JLfiaj(a>vocrcul>iK€TOvavap)(oa , Sia 
35 Soxoorawo\\i8iovvw\ripoiHrcur€iKOGriTG>vTpiT)pa>v 

Col. xvi ( = D Col. vi). 


vo<rfii<T6o(nroW<0i'nr)vowfJucr6o8oT[. ,]yroyapv 
noTa>p<rrpaTriya>vKaKGHroiroi€iv€6[. .]€<rriva 
€iToi<nro\efiovo'iV7rcpl3a(rL\€GHr€ir€[. . .]t<itop 

5 8€K€\€lKOV7ro\€fJLOV07rOT€<rV/Jip[. . . .]\atc€8ai 

povLOtricravKO/u8Ti<l>av\cMrKaiy\i<rx[. ,]<nrapH 
* 10 €n€i8av€vaTTf<rrjrai7ro\€/JLOPKarair€iiyfra(r 

a>P7T€[. . . .]<nv€i>ioT€KaTa\vo{jL€p[.]oTao'avTar 

15 [ ^lOTavTa/icvovvovTaxrarvpflau'eiv 


20 y<o<T€X€ivanayop€i^.]ivaffo<jT€\\€iTivaoT<0VfJL€ 


$o>Kc[a]y awfj\6ov c/y r)jv iavr&v. K&vwv 8e f napeiXr)- XIV. I 

0oro9 ^f&j XeipiKpdrovs ray pad? ray 7W AaxeSai- 
fiovtow Kal r&v ov/i/idxuv, 8y d<f>iKero vavapyos 8id- 
35 $o;(oy t$ II6X\i8i, ovfiirXrjpcoaas efroo-i r&v rpirjpcov 
dvaySpevos Ik rrjs *P68ov KarinXevaev c/y Kavvov* 
fJovXSpevos 8k ov/JLpu£cu r£ $apva(3d((p Ka\t] r$ 
TiOpw&oTji Kal yfi^p.ara Xafitiv dvkfiaivtv ix rijy 
Kavvov irpbs avrovs. Myyave 8k rofc arparui- 2 

Col. xvi. 

rats Kara roOrov rbv %p6vov npoaofeiXSpe- 

yoy [iiaBbs noXX&v /itjv&v i/jno-0o8o7[ov]vro yap i- 

irb r&v orparriy&v /ca*a>y, t iroieiv 60[oy] eorlv d- 

€i Tofy iroXe/iovaiv im\p (3a<riXia>9, iire[l {Kal) #ca]ra rbv 
5 JejccXeticdi' irSXe/iov, Swire €ni/ip[a^oi] AaK*8at- 

pSvioi fjaav, KoptSjj <pavX<o$ Kal yXi<rx[pco]$ rrapet- 

Xpvro xprjfiara, Kal iroXXdw &v Kar[e]Xv'6rio'av 

at r&v <rvppd^a>v rp[i]jjp€i9 el fifj 81a r^v Kvpov 

irpoOvpiav. rovrcov 8e fiaaiXevs atriSs ioriv, b? 
10 eirei8av ivarfotjrai irSXepov jcaran-c/u^ray 

Kar dp%a$ ilXtya \prjpara rois Apyovviv dXiyoopei 

rbv eirtXomov xp6 y0v » °i ^ T0 ** irpdy/iaaiv €- 

(fxor&res ovk fyovres dvaXtaKeiv Ik r&v 18C- 

a>v ir€[piop&]<riv evtore KaraXvopetfa]? ray avr&v 
15 [8wdfi]eis. ravra pkv ovv ovroo? cvpflaiveiv 3 

cfa>0e, TiOpaHaTTjs 84, napayevo/ievov rod K6- 

vcwo? m avrbv Kal Xeyovro? Sri KivSvvetiaei ovv- 

rpiftrjvai ra irpdypara 81a yjpy\pjdrtav e*v8eiav 

oh rods vnep ftaaiXem iroXepovvras oifK eiX6- 
20 y»y e%eiv dirayopev\e]iv, dirooreXXet nvas r&v /*€- 

6 9 avroG /3ap/3dp<»v tva fiurObv 8&<ri rot? orparui- 

rais fyovras dpyvptov rdXavra 8taK6aia Kal cf- 

Kocrr iXrj<p$r] 8h rodro (rb) dpyipiov Ik rijy ovaCas rrjs 

Ti<r<ra<f>€pvovs. TiOpatorr)? piv ovv in ntpifMH- 


25 vcuroXiyovxpovovwTauro'apSto'uravefiaivw 

30 S€KV7rpi<»votp€TaT0VKovwo<rKaTair\€ucrav 
a£ovTai8t8ia\vo\. .]<rpovoyra[.]av7rrjpe<riaia' 

35 K(UTOtven-if2aT<uo'xa\€7ra>o'€<ptpoi'KaLcrvi'e\ dcr 
av8paKap7racr€aToy€voo'KaiTc[. .]a)0i/Aa/o?*' 
€8oo , avTOV<ra>/iaTo<r8voo[ ]ayracra(f>€KaaTf]<r 

Col. xvii (=D Col. vii). 

[ M 1* 

[• ]*r? • • [• -M 1 

[ ]tovkov&vc{ ] 

[ .'\xKT€rvy\av€ . [ ]ya[ ] 

5 [ ]jpai€iicaT€X[ jiwoa- .[...] 

[ ]ycT07rcptTa{. . .] . WKOvwSear . [. .] 

[ }w»rT[ ]i/<r<n/K€ccnrc<n-€i/€r" 

[ ] € ?^[*M ]€XKijya>vaX[.]airav 

[ ]arKopi€i<r6aiTauTTiP 

10 [. *. ]€<f>aaK€pPov\€a6ai 

[.]/a[ ]otaoSe<rr parr\y o<roraf" 

[.]wrp[ ]o-€[ ]TrpooTorr\ri$ooTOT&v 

arpaTia[ ]*°*?[ ]€iv[.]u8€awc£opiiti<rav 

7(.]<r€ir€[. . . . .]€vop€t>[. . . .]raTcumv\ao'T]0'avoii€~ 

15 KOVOOV{ ^TVX^yi' ']P^O<T€^\rjXv6€l7TpOT€ 

po<r€KT[. J\T€LXpv<rrov8€a[. JpotmovTovKaprracrtOMr&a 




25 vas iikiyop ypSvov h rats SdpSecriy dyeflaiyev 

&9 f3a<ri\€a 9 KaTaoTJj<ras crrparriyods irrl r&y npa- 

ypdrny 'Apidioy teal IIacri<pipvri, teal napaSods avroTs 

CiV rby ir6\€/M0$r rb KardXu$Q\y dpyipiov kcl\ yj>v- 

niov 8 facri <f>cunjvai ircpi lirroKScrta rdXavra. r&y XV. I 

30 81 Kvirptev ol /i€Tct rod K6ya>yos KaranXG&<ray- 

T€S c/y rfjy Kavvov, ay anucO fares {0} i(ir6) rtv<x>v 

8iafJaX\6vra>y &s avrois pkv oi piXXovaiy dno- 

8i86vai rby pi<r$bv rby dfeiXSpevov, irapcuriceu- 

dfovrai 8\ 8ia\6a[ei\s fiSvoy ra[T\s virrjpcaicus 
35 kou roh emPdrais, xaXe7r&s fy*pw> *«1 aweXOSv- 

rc9 c/y iKKXijatap eiXoyro arpa[r]rjyby abr&y 

Av8pa Kapiraaia rb yfaos, teal ro[vr]p (puXcucijv 

iSotrav rod c&fiaros 860 a[rpari]&ra9 d<f> iicdoTTit 

Col. xvii. 

[nobs ]in[ ]v 

[ ]Kva . . [. .}roi>v[ ] 

[. ] rby K6va>va [ ] 

[ ] &s irtiyxavc . [ Jvof ] 

5 [. ]€pat€i KareX[. . . . . K6]va>vo$ • [...] 

[ ]yero wept rS[y . .] . coy. K6va>y 8h <r . [. .] 2 

[. , . . dicovcras a]ur£>v i[oi>9 X6yo]vs ovk ua morcfaiy 

[ ]«**[-M- • • r&y ] 'EXX^ya>y, dX[X]a rrdy- 

[ras ]r KOfjLi€i<r0ai, ra&rr\y 

10 \8\ rfjv dir6icpi<riy iroirjad/ieyos] fyaatcev fiovXeaOcu 
[8]ia[8r]X&aai kolI rots &XX\oi$ 9 8 Si arparrjybs 6 r&y 
[E]v7rp[((x>y 8 Kapira]<r€[bs airy] irpb? rb nXijOof rb r&y 
orparicc[r&v tj]koXc[v$€i. €k]uv[o]v 8i ovy€£oppfrav- 3 

r[o]t f ine[i8fj 7rop]€v6fi€v[oi kcl]tcl r&y wiXas faay, 8 ply 

15 K6ya>y [iairep] trv^v ^yfotfJ/Kcyoy ifcXrjXvOei irpfoc- 

pos €* r[o0] re^ovs, rov 81 d[yff]pcoirov rod Kapirao-fcot, &9 
Ijy i£i[o)>]y kcltcl rhs TnJAay, imXa/ifidvoyrai r&v Mecr- 
f Tjy[a{y] rivi? r&v KSvcovi irapaicoXovOciv €t'a>- 


0ora>i{. .]p€TaTrj(r€K€iyovyi{.]fir)<remOv/Jiovirr€<rf m 
20 Ttiiro\^\KaTa<ry*ivavTOvo'n\. .]ava>ve^rjpapT€y 
8a>8iK[.]yoi8€ovvaKo\ov0c{. . .yorcovKvnpitovav 

T€\a/i[.]ai^.]vTOT[ )to<TKai8i€K<»\votnovo- 

/*e<r<n;[ } a Y €l [ ]i<r0avofi€vov8cKaiTO 

tcov€{[ ]*a>i{ ]€/3or)0€iT<o<rrpaTr)yoiK{.]€ 

25 KOvoav[ ]ye[ ]roi^.]av6pamova'€i<rrr'q 

8i]craa[ ]va€i^.]icrTrjPTro\tvoi8€Ky 

irpioir[ ]<ra^r[.]/*€i'<n/<rTOVKa[. . 

iracr€oc{. . .]XX[ ]y<ravavT0t8€7rcrr€i<rfi[. . 

voinavraij^ ]ovKOvoovairape 

30 <rK€va<r6aiir€p[ ]8ia8o<riv^. • .]/3[. . 

yoy€[.]<rraoTp[. . .]€*<r€7r[ ]aKrrrpa^earivcoay€ 

riyfcrcXcyo^. .]€AAo»{ ]Trj<rpo8oxmapa\a 

&op[. . .]<T€t<rKV7rpov7r\^ ^vcravrtaSeTtjaa 

^ a K # •]j'*?fOMcaiirapaif[ JreaTOi/<rj8ot/Ao/*€ 

Jinrptaf/Sa&t ]irpoaTfjvaKpono 

]" a />X 1 J , ' T t ]KaraAt/<raxnaxr 

]vovnai{ tyKaKMyopoi 

]oirio[ yavTOKreiar 

]*<ria[ ]ra>v\oya>v 

MJn 1 ' 



Col. xviii (=D Col. viii). 

iro\ivTTj[ )irorr\€vo , cr m 

TcaarroTrjo' . [ ]j8[. . .]fi€vot 

XprjaaaBaiTouravTl ypirjpoovKO 

wvStKaTTjyfjL^ ]t\6a>vnpo<r 

5 \€G>Wfjt0VT0V7[ ]n[.]vavT<iDO 

Ti/iovootivvaTanl ]t(. . .]crt\€co<T€i 

yapavra>(3ov\€Tcu8[ ]vpovarova[. .] 

\rjva<roiTiivKavi>c[ ]ra>VKaponv 

axnr\€ioTov<nrav<r€i[ ]paT<m€8ayra 

10 paxTji>K€\€v<ravTo<r8[ ]ot/Xa/ij3avci M 


66tg>p [ov] fieri rrjs €K€tpov y*{a>]/z?7?, tmOvfiovprcs iv 

20 rj7 tt6Ac[<] Karaa\€lv avrbv &r[a>y] 8lv &v itfuaprcv 
8$ 8tify]v. ol 8\ crvvaKoXovOc[vvr]€S r&v Kvwptnv dv- 
T€\afi[P]<£v[o]irro t\ov Kapna<T€\<o? Kal 8l€k<£>\vop robs 
Mccrmfiyiovs] dyu[v air6v, a]io-8av6/i€vov 8k teal rb 
r&v i£[aKoa]ia>v [trtivraypa ?] ifiorjOn ry orpariyyy. 8 [8]k 

a 5 KSpcop [a>y . . .]7re[ ] roi{?] avBpamovs c/<nnj- 

Srjcras [• ]uaev [c]h rfjv irSXiv ol 81 Ki- 

rrpioi T[ot/9 Meaarjviovs rod]? iifrajtlvovs rod Ka[p- 
7raaia{$ /S<£]AA[<wt€S > cforcKpo]t/<rai>, afoot 8k W€ir€i<r/£[€- 
j/oi ndvra tt[ r]bv KSvava irape- 

30 aKW&crOai rr€p[l rijv rod /iiadou] 8id8oortv c[/oi]/9[ai- 

iw €[i]y Tiy rp[irjp]us lir[l radrais r]afy irpd£eaiv, <&? y€ 
raw eAcyoy, [/iJcXXoi^Tey Tot>y lie] r^9 *P68ov irapaXa- 
@6v[rc\s eh Kfarpov nXtfiv. airoTr\]tv<Tapr€$ 8k rfj? 9 A- 4 

Xav\. .]vioiov Kal irapaic[ofitcrav\r€? rods {JovXo/Jii- 

35 [vovs r&v K]vrrp(a>v 9 fJaS^Covaip] wpbs rfjv dKpfmo- 
[Xiv iva ri)]v dp^fjv r[od KSpgopos] KaraXvowcrip <&? 
[alriov yevoptyov irdp[ra>v airrois r&]v kclk&v, ifiot- 

[a>? 8k rr]oirio[ ]p a&rois eh 

[. irrrr]p]€<r(a[ ] r&v \6ycop 

40 [ MO rfjv 

CoL xviii. 

ir6\iv riy[ d]ironrX€6<rav- 

res dirb rrjs . [ ] fl[ov\6]ficvoi 

XPyvaaOai roif ain\66i r&v] Tpirjpcop. K6- 5 

poop 8k Karr)yii([vcf>v r&v Kinrpicop] lX6i>v irpbs 

5 AttoPVfiop rbv i\ €?|ir[€]y avrip &- 

n p6vo? Svvarai r[a npdy/iara a&aai] i[a f3a]<ri\€<x>?, 61 
yap air<p fioAXerai 8[i86vai rods <f>po]vpoi>$ robs ["-EA]- 
Xrjpas ot rfjv KaCvov [tfwXdrrovm Kal] r&v Kap&v 
&9 irAc/broi/y, ira6<ra[p rfjv Iv ry <rr]paro7ri8<p ra- 

10 payr\v. tccXetaavros 8[k rov A*Qi>pvfi]w Xapfidveiv 


(mo<roua , PovX€raiaTpaT[ typpepTTjv 

T]/jLcpavirapT}K€i>Kaiyaprj[ ]8r)ff€pi8v<rpacr 

€icr8cTT)V€inov<rav7rpu'r)fj[ ]€V€<r6ai\al3a>v 

7rapaTov\€Ot>vvpoxrrcovT€[ ]av\vov<TKaiTov<T 

15 c\\r]i'ao'airai'Tatr€£riyay€v[. . . .]ycreKTT}<r7ro\€C(Hr 
€7r€tTaT0v<r/JLev[. J)p>6€vavTovTovoTpaT<m€8ov7rc[.] 

pi€<rrria'€Prova[ ] . [ ]inrpooT€Ta<rvav<rKcd[.] 

rovcuyia\ov[ ]yra8€7ror]ara<rKcuK€\ev 

<racrtci]pv£cuT[ lyeiveKaoTovTcwoTpa 

20~ Tia>Ta>i>€mTTJ[ tytXafSeT&vKvnpicov 

TovTCKapircur^. ^Mv^tiKovraKatTovcr 

ptvaTTSKT€iv[ }rrjyovav€<rTavpoi>&€~ 

aKov<TavT€<r8[ ]ucaTa\u<f>0€VT€O'€VTri 

po8a>r]yavaK7[ )u>crci/€yKovT€OTOVO'ii 

25 apypvTa<rrovo[ yoaKaTaoTavTao-flaX 

\om€cr€£Ti\ao[ ^TpaTOTTtSoVTOvStXtflZ 

vaKaTakurov[ ]6opv^ovK(UTapayr]V7rap 

[,]a , \0PT0i<rpo8[ ]va>va<j>tKOfjL€VocrtKTTi<r 

[ m ]xvyotrrov<rr[ ]aaavT0DV<rvWaf3a>va7r€KT€i 

30 P€KcuToi<ra\\[. "\y8it8wKtToyLwovvfiain 

XiKovarpaTc[ ]oDcr€iaii€yaPKiv8uvoy 

7rpO€\6ov8iaKOva>v[. . .yrjveKtU'OVTrpoByp.iay 
C7rav<raT0TT]<rTapa)(TJ[. .')fyri<ri\aoo'8e!rapa{.)t>pcu 

op[. .]o<r€(OToi'cXAi;<nr[.]vTOi'a^aTa)<n"/»aT[.]i;/£a 
35 it* • • •]<^^SaifLOvia>vi^\iT<oyavfL^a)(Ci>vo<rovi/ 
X[. . • .]y€Pa8€i(€8iarfj[.yiv8iaa[.]^€VKaKoy€Troi 
[. . . . .]evoucovvTa<rl3[. . .]o/i€voa€fi/j[. J\eivrcu<r<nrov 
[.]ax[. .]aL<nrpo<m6pa\\. .]r)vycvop[. . . .]€ir€i8r)8€Ka 
[.]p/>€i'€«<rTiji'x[ ]rrjv<l>apv[. . .Jtfwirpoiyycro 

Col. xix (=D Col. ix). 


fcira£aAAa£a[. .]or€0i7/9#cnr€&oi'Ka«Tt 

KaXovfjLevov^. .]€^a\€V€i<rTTjypv(Tia[ 


dirScovs fiofiXtrai <rrpa7[u&Tas s ratirtyy /iky ri)y 
r)/ikpay naprJKty, Kal yap 1j[Xios i)v ij]8rj irepL 8v<r/ids, 
us 8k ri)y kmovaay irplv r)p[ipay y]eyiir$ai Xafiwv 
irapa toO Aeanrf/iov r&y t€ [Kap&y] av^yobs Kal robs 
15 'EXXrjyas dwavras kfcf/yayw [abro]bs €K rrjs vikeas' 
hrura robs /iky [J?£]a>0€i> airroO rov orparojriSov ire- 

pt€OTJy<T€V, Tofo [&...]•[••.. .]v Vp6s T€ TaS VaVS KO,[l 

rby alytaXbv [ ra]vra 8k irotrj<ra$ Kal ircXetf- 

<ras KrjpugaL t[. fiat\vuv tKaarrov r&y crrpa- 

20 rio>7w kirl rr)[y , <ru\AXafi€ r&y Kvnptny 

rby t€ Kap7ra<r*[a Kal r&y &\]ka>v i£rJKOvra, Kal rods 

/iky dir€KT€iv[€, rbv 8k <rrpa]rriyby dvearatpaxTtv. 

&Ko4travT€S 8[k rA yty6/i*ya o]l KaraX€i<f>Oiyr€S kv rj} 6 

*P68<p rjyavdKi^ouy, Kal j8apc]a>y ky€yx6yr€S robs /iky 

25 dpyovras robs [birb rod K6v<o]vos Karaardirras /SrfA- 
Xovr€S k£r)Xao[ay Ik rov] orpararrkSov, rby 8k Xi/ik- 
va Kara\in6y[r€S iroXbv] Olpvflov Kal rapa\i)v irap- 
\^\<rypy rots 'Pol{tois. 6 8k K6]va>y d<f>iK6/i€yos kx rrjs 
Kaivov rots t\* dp\ovr]as abr&y ovWafi&v dirdKrei- 

30 ?€, Kal rois d\X[ois fiurOby &€&»*€. rb /iky obv (3a<ri- 
Xucby arpar&[w€8ov otir]us cis /ikyay kIv8vvov 
irpoeXOby 8ta K6ya>y[a Kal] rr)y kKtlyov vpo6v/i(ay 
irrafoaro rrjs rapay(fj[s. 9 A\yTjo'CXaos 8k irapa[ir]op€v- XVI. 1 

6/jS^p]os els rby , .EAAif<nr[o]iTOi' &/ia ry <rr/>ar[c]t//ia- 

35 r[i r&v A]aKt8ai/iovla>v rfa]l r&y crvfi/idx&y, Saoy /iky 
\[p6yoy IfJdSifa 8id rrj[s] AvStas, [o]v8ky Kakbv krroC- 
[ci robs] kyoiKoQyras, f3[ovX]6/i€yos k/i/i[ky]uy rats crrroy- 
[S\ai[s r]ais irpbs TiOpa€[arr]rjy ycyo/i[iyats 9 ] kv€i8r) 8k xa- 
\r]rjp€y tls ri)y )^d>pay] rr)v tapv[a(3d)£ov irpoijyc rb 

Col. xix. 

<rrpdr[€]u/ia XerjXar&y Kal iropO&v ri)[y yfjv. etra 
8k irapaXXd£a[s r)b re Or/fas irtStov Kal r[b 'Arrlas 
KaXo6/i€yoy €[l<r]k/3aX€y c/r ri)y Mva(a[v, Kal kykxei- 



5 TavTG>v€iaiyapoi7ro\[.]oi[.]a>i'fJLV<Ta>vai^ 

/3aai\€wrovxviraK ovop[.]€<to(toi/jl€povp[ 

o , a>yp€T€X€U'ripovvTOTTiGroTpaT€iao[ 



10 <rraT[.]vo\vfiirovTov/JLv<riovKa\oviJL€i^ 


Xop[. . . ,]aar(f>a[. .]<rrropcvdr]vai8iavTr)<Tirep{. . . 
Tiva[. . .]or[. . . .]v<rov<TKai<rn'€io-ap.€i'o<rirpoaa[. . 
tovcttjL ]o[. . . .^vp.a8iarr}<r^pa(nrap€VT^\<T 

15 8&tc[ ]£.)cnrovvTi<ritovKaiTci>vovii[.]a 

X[ ]oioT€\cvTaioi<ravT<»vKaTalJa\ 

X[ tyvoTpari&TwaTaKTwSiaTacr 

ar[ jawayqcnXaoo-fejcarafei/^acr 

t[ )urrivTTivriiicpavTiovxiay 

20 rj[ ]fi[. .]ofjt€vaTOL<rairo6ai>ovari8t€ 

<f>6aprj[, . .]8€7r€piir€yrrjKoyTaTOi)yarTpaTtiooT<oy 
ci<r&€7[. ^TTiov<TayKadiaa<T€i<T€V€8paviroXkov<T 
Tcovp[. . . .]opcoyTa>y8€pKv\i8€toovKaXoup€var 
avcun[. . . .]oTjy€TOOTpaT€Viiaira\ivTa>v8€iiv<rcir m 

25 oiij6[ ]fcaaToi8uiTrivTr\tiyriVTrivTtiirpo 

T€pa[ ]/i€VT]vam€vaiTOvayr)cri\aove£€\ 

6ovt[ ](f>yKcopcov€8La>Koyoo<T€m6rja-ofjL€voi 

toiot[. . . t ]faioiaToyavToyTpoiroyoi8€Twv(Xk7j 
ra>v(p[ ]ovT€<Taxrr)<rai'KaTavTovcr€KirTi8ri 

30 <raKT€<rf[. .fyo-wtSpao-tiirxeipcuTTjeo-avToiaTroXe 
TOt/cra[. . .]y€P7r\r]yaLa'oyTa(r€(f>€uyop7rpooTacrKco 

35 fia<ray[. . . ^aoaSeirpoaayytXBtvTowavrcoTOVTcor 

/i€Ta[ ]vocra7rrjy€ToaTpaT€VfjLairaXtyrrjv 

avrr\v\ ]cwovv€fi€i£€T0i<rwTa[.]j , €V€8patir 


TO TOlf Mv<rc[T]9 /C€\€v[a)]l/ aVT0l>9 OVOTp[aT€V€tV |i€- 

5 r avr&v. c/o-2 yap ol iroX]X*\ol [r]&v Mva&v ai{r6vo/i 
fJaatXia? oi>% imaKoiov[r\ts. 8aot p\v oSv [r&v Mv- 
a&V /l€T€\€tV JjpOVVTO Tfjf OTpaT€iaS [o'J&V €- 

iroUi icatcbv outovs, r&v 81 Xotn&v i8fi[ov rfjv x**" 

pay. iir€i8fi 8k wpolcov iy(v€ro Kara fiiao[v fidXt- 2 

10 ora r[b]v "OXv/inov rbv Mvaiov KaXotifi€v[ov, dp&v 

XaA[c]7r^ teal orcvfiv oSaav rijv 8to8ov \koi )8oi/- 

X6/i[tvo9] da<pa[X&]s iropwOfjvat 81' a&rfjs, irip^as 

nva [irpb]? r[ot>y M]vaoi>9 kcu airctad/icvot irpbf a[u- 

rob$ ij[y€ to] o\rpdr\Evpa 8ta rrjf \cbpas. ira/>€jr[€]? 
15 8\ iro[AAotta r&v IT\€[\]o7royyT]aCoi>u teal r&v ovp[p]d- 

X[<*> y 7 iirtOc/ttvot r]ofy rcAcvra/biy avr&v KarafidX- 

\[ovai nva? r]&v orpartwr&v drdtcrcov 81a ras 

ar^voywplas &r]a>i>. 'AyrjaCXaot 8k Kara{€v£a$ 

r[b arpdrev/ta ra]vrriv rfjv fj/iipav ^av\(av 
20 $y € *oi&v ra vo]p[i(]6p€i>a rots dnoOavoOat' 81c- 

<p6dpr}[<rav] 8i ircpJ ircvrJJKovra r&v arpartw&v 

c/y 8\ rtyv] iirioOaav KaOfoas ch iviSpav iroXXoirs 

r&v p[i<r6o<f>]6pa>v r&v AfptcvXiScfov KaXov/iivwv 

dvao\ra$ 7rp]of}yc to orpdrtvpa irdXiv. r&v 8\ Mva&v 
25 olrj0[ivr€9 fj/caoroi 8th rfjv irXrjyiiv rijv rjj irpo- 

ripa [ycyanfyjLtvTjv dmivat rov 'AyrjatXaov €£eA- 

66vr[e$ €K r]&v k<o/i&v i8ia>Kov, a>y iiriOfjaSficvoi 

rob r[*Xcv\raiot$ rov abrbv rpfmov. ol Si r&v 'EXAif- 

va>v iv[e8p€v\ovT€9, a>? Ijaav tear' avrov?, {jtirqA^- 
30 aavrc? 1[k r]f}9 iviSpas c& \€tpas fcaav T.0T9 iroXe- 

plots. r&v 81 Mva&v ol pkv tiyotifitvot xal irp&- 

rot 8w>Ko\y\r€S egafyvrjs rots "EXXrjai av/i/icCgav- 

rc9 dnofyyjo-Kovaiv, ol 8k iroXXol Kari86vrc? rods irp&- 

rovs a[ifr&]y iv irXrjyats Svra? tfavyov irpbs ras k&- 
35 lias. 9 Ay[rjaCX]ao9 8i irpocayycXOirrw aiJry rofowv 

ficra[fiaX6pc)vo$ dinjyc rb orpdrevpa irdXiv rijv 

aMjv [68bv IJcoy vwi/icigc rot? iv ra\i\s tviSpats, 


*auca[. . . . .]vaHr€V€ioTooTpaTOTT€8ovTiKaiTr) 
7rpor6pa[.]ar€arpaT<wr€^€i;o , ayfi€Ta^€rain B aT©"" 

Col. xx (=D Col. x). 





5 Ka>fi<oirnyaaKa$[ 

T)/icpaoT0V0'O'Tp{ ]TOirpo<r0cy7[. 

OTpaT€v/xaKaiKa[. .]f3i(3a<rao[ ]v\o>pavr<ov<p\Pfj 

ya>vwK€ta[.]vTowTi)OT€poi{. . .]ot/<r€i/€/SaX€i/aX 

[. .i t<r€ [ # •]p a f{'] iro p['b To,f|c ?[ # •]? avri ? , ' 6,roi€|<nrt 

10 [• .]a8aTT)[. • .]a>yt]y€poya[. . . .]oi>vovo8€<rm6pa 
8q[ m ]rioT0ii€vy€V0<rrivircf{. . . .]? r P €t ^? ) [•]?!? , ?/?? 

T»<[>apva/3a(ci>Kcu0cpa7r€va>p[. . . .]i^€W"€;[ ]ey 

dpcwKaTcurTa<nrpo<rairroi'<f>o(3T)6€i<rixTi[. . .JaXp^p 
/cai/ca/coi^riiradi77ra/)ai^ r <«ra/x€[.]an p €[ 

15 €i<riCi/^iicoia;(rT€/9oyJ[.]a>^ayi^.]i[. . .]vrj[. . . .fyaT" 
[. .\ya^aTt\vvovviovovTaKaLKa\ovayr](ri\oLO(T8^ 

20 rf' •]9y*f*ovaTeTr)<roTpaTia<ravTOi<r€<r€<r0aiK' 
[. • . .]a\Xa)(/!>i7crifioi/€ic€ii/oi;<r/i€i/ot;^7{.]i; 
r[. .]€^€/cav7re5€£aT(.]7rpoft;^a)<rairro<r3€7rpo 

25 9rpoo'Xttpioi'o*aX€ira<A€oi'ra>i'*€0aXaijr' 

30 piov€mx<t>p&TO<ra»co8ofiT)iJL€vovKaiKaT€ 


Kal KalTCO-Kfyaxrcv els rb arparbircSov j[ Kal Tfi 

irporkpa [klareorparoiriSevcay. pera 8k raOra r&v 3 

Col. xx. 

ficv Mva&v 3>v fjaav [ol diroOavSvres exaoroi Krj- 

pvKas irip^avres a[ dvtCXov- 

ro robs vexpobs tfiroairSvSovs* diriOavov S\ irXetovs 
fj rpidxovra Kal {{koltSv 'AytiatXaos Si Xa/3a>v iic r&v 
5 KGfifi&v rivas Ka0[qyep6vas Kal dvanavaas .... 
fjpepas robs arf[aridras Ijyev els] rb npteOev i\b 
orpdrevpa, Kal /ca[ra]/?i/3<£<ray [els rij\v \cbpav r&v $[/>]tf- 
y&v, ouk els [tj\v rod irporepov [6ep]ovs ivipaXev d\- 
[\' e]is i[re]pav [d]ir6p{0\Tirov, Ka[K&]s aMjv eirotei % 2m- 

10 [0p]a8drij[v %)flpv IjyepSva [Kal r]bv vl6v. 6 Si XviOpa- 4 

Sd\r]ijs rb p\v yevos fjv IHp[(jr]S, 8i]arptfia{v] Si vapa 
r<p tapvafidftp Kal Oepanefav [avrS\v t $irei[ra Si els] ?X" 
Opav Karaaras irpbs abr6v 9 <f>of3r]6els pfj [Kar]aXt](f>d^ 
Kal KaKSv rt irdOfl, irapavrUa pi\y] dvifyvyev 

15 els Kv{tKov y Corepop S[i] a>s ilyi7[<r]^Aao]i' ffocev i]ya>y 
[Mttyafidrriv vlbv veov 6vra Kal koX6v. 'AyrjatXaos Si 
roiroDv yevopevoav dvekafiev adroit? pdXiora 
pip tveKa rod peipaKtov, Xeyerat yap hriOvprjrt- 
k&s abroG a<f>6Spa i\€w, tireira Si Kal Sia XmOpaSd- 

20 i[rjy 9 ] 1)y€p6va re rfjs arparias (fiyobpevos) abrois iaeaOai Kal 
[irpbs] dXXa xpfjvipov. kKetvovs piv ovv t[o]v- 5 

t[<w] IvcKa ime8e£ai\o] irpoOvpoos, avrbs Si irpo- 
dycav els rb irptoOev del rb orpdrevpa Kal XeqXa- 
r&v ri)i> roO tapva(3d{ov x&pav d<f>iKvurai 

25 irpbs x&ptov h KaXeirat AeSvr&v Ke<f>aXaL Kal 
iroirjadptvos irpbs abrb irpoafioXds, a>? ouSiy 
iirepaivev, dvaortfaas rb orpdrevp[a] irpofjyev 
els rb irp6a0e(y) iropO&v Kal XerjXar&y rrj[s] X&pas rfjy 
dKcpatov. d<piK6ficvos 8k irdXtv irpbs T6p8iov 9 X *- 6 

30 plov iirl x&paros (pKoSoprjpivov Kal Kare- 


npoa(3o\a(nroiwiicyooToua8€<rrpaTiayra<r<[. . ,}o\ 
35 oyovKTi8vyaTo8taTfjvpa6ayovTrpo0v/itayoa€ 
ayctyrovo , aTpaTiaoTa<rK€\€voyTO<rTov<nnOpi 

Col. xxi (=D Col. xi). 

X ov<jr vi ]yia<TKaLTT}<rna<f>\ayoi\. 

ac€K([ ]rparoir€^ci;<r6TOi/^€<nr(. 

6pt8arrj[ ]vo8tirop€vdti<TKaur€i[. 

<ra<r€*€c[ ]aya>yayrja , i\aoo'8€7roiTi[. 

5 aa/i€y[.]a[. ]yna<f>kayoymyaTn]ya[* 

8iaT<i)([ )a\aTTai'<pol3ovfi€i>o<rfj{. 

\€i/ia>y[ }<D(Tl€TrOl€lTo8cTTIVTrop^. 

ayovKer[ ]Tr€prj\0€a\\€T€pavr]yc[. 

pcyoa8ia[ $'*£'?[ ]?? r€ / xt> ?'f[ a 

io <F€<r0aLTOuro[ ]r€tX€[. .] . it[. .]/?[.]i{. . < 

avTcoyvfjaTo[ ]it . . row{ 

Xmr€aap[ }ov<nr€(ov<r8err\€ioi^ ]X[. 

coyKaray[ ]aT€vpaKaTaKiovTT]<rfjLV<7ia<j[. 

[. . .]T0vp[. ]a<rrjp€paaavTov8€KaKaK<iiXT^ 

15 noi€[.]rov<rpvao{. . . .]iyav6<Dyeir€f$ov\€v<ravavTam€[. 

piToyo\v/ivoy[. J]T€poy8cwporiycTou<r€\\Tiyc&8iaTrj[. 

<f>pvyiaoTT]<nrap[. . .^arri8iovK(unpo<rpaK<xiyiTpoay\ c 

pioyroKaXovp[. .]fy/i€iXfirovT€txoa'OVKfj8vyaTc[. 
Xafiayairrjytf. .]y<roTpaTicoTa<Tiroiovfi€yo<r8erT)y[. 
20 nop€iay7rapaTovpvy8<iKoyiroTafioya<p[.]Ky€iTai[. 


(rtceuaafiivov *a(A)a>9, Kal Kara(tv£as rb a"r[p]dr€vpa 
ncpii/icvty ?£ jj/iipas, 7rp[b]s p\v tow iro[X]€p(ovs 
irpoafioXas iroiov/iwos, rout Si orpandyras i[irl ?r]oX- 
\ois dyaOoft avvtywv. inciSf} 8k fJtdaaaOcu rb X^P^ 
35 ov ovk i\8vvaro 8ta rfjy % Pa6dvov irpoOvptav, ts €- 
irijpXW avrov n(ipo)rif &v rb ycpoy, dvaaT^aat Ijytv 
&va> rods orparicoras, KeXtvovros rod XmBpa- 

8drov us HaQXayovtav iroptvurOai. perk 8\ rav- XVII. 1 

ra irpodyav rov? ncXorrowrjO'iov? Kal rod? avppd- 

Col. xxi. 

\ov9 ir[piy ra Spia rrjs $pv)yias Kal rtjs IIa<f>Xayov{t- 
a$ €K€[i rb arpdrcvpia *«T€<r]rpaTairl&t/<rc, rbv 8\ 2ir[i- 
6pa8dTT)[v avrbv irpo£ir*ptyt\v i 8\ iropevOtls Kal irci- 
aas €K€i[vov9 Ijkc 7rp€<rfi€is] dycw. 'AyrjalXao? 8i irott]- 2 

5 cra/x€j>[o]y [atppaya ra r£\v Ha^Aayoixw dirtfya[ye 
8ta ray^iaiv rb arpdr€vpa inl $]iXarray, <f>of3ov/icvos p[tl 
\€ip&p[o9 rfj? Tpo<f>f}9 kv8e]<WTiv. liroiciro 8h r^v irop*[i- 
av ovk€t[i r^v avrfjy 68bv ijy]w€p rjXOtv dXX 9 ire pay, f)yo[v- 
pcvof 81a [ttjs BiOvviSos] 8ie£io[€(ri dfo]na>r€pw 2- 

10 ataOai rots o[rpart&raif. drr(a]T€tX€ [81] . *r[. .]/>[.]«[. • • 

avr$ Tvys ro[ ]vr . . ra>v[ 

iimias p[iv t]ovs 9 7rc(oi)f 8i rr\*lov[s 8iax i ]K*~ 

a>v. Karay[ayo>y 8i rb orp]dr€vpa Kara Ktov rrjs JMW/ay, 3 
[rrp£\rov p[iv ir€pipuv\a$ if pi pa? avrov Sixa kok&9 c- 

15 rrou[i] rod? Mv<ro[v$ ird\]iv dvO 9 &v lirtfJovXeuaav avr!p irc- 
pi rbv "OXvpnov, [Ha]r€pov 8i irpofjyt revs "EXXrjvas 81a Trj[s 
$pvyias rrjs 7rap[a0a]\aTTi8iov, Kal rrpoo'fJaX&v npb? )([a>- 
piov rb KaXovp[ev]ov MiXrjrov TtTxpf, a>y ovk fjSvvaro 
Xaficiv, dirr)y€ [ro]vs arpaTK&raf. noiovpevo? 8i ri)v 

20 rropuav irapa rbv % Pvv8aKOv irorapbv d<f>[i]KvctTat 

7r[p]b$ ri)v AawcvXlriv Xfpyrjv v<f> j[ Kcfrat r[b] Aa(a)KjXio[v, 
\mpiov iyvpov a<f>6Spa Kal KaT€0-K€va<Tp[€]vov irrrb 
(3a<riXicos, o5 Kal rbv $apvdfia£ov tXtyov d[p]y£piov 8[<rov 



7)vavT<DKcuxpvaioi>a7roTiOc<rdaiKaTCOTpaTon[. . 
2 5 8€VKG>a$€TOva<n m paTiayraa€K€i0iptT€ir€iiir€TO7ra[. 


[ ]€yofi€i^ovSeTOV7rayKa\ovSiaTa\€a>yKai 

[ ]i[.]p€<rit'€i<nr\cvo'avToo'€iaTTiv\iiivr)V€KCi 

30 [ ]€K(\€V<r€yoayriaiXaa(r€v0€/i€voyoaaT(ov[. 

[ ]eua>VT]7r\€iopoaa£ia8tayay€iv€i<r7[.]oy[. 

[ ]iKv^iKOvan<oaava7rairr<oufiia0oa^o^S\T[. . 


[ ]y€voiTOTOva8€aTpaTiwaaaTTOTT)a'jj[.]o'iq[. . 

[ ]qo , Ta£ao , airroio'7]KUPUOTO€ap7rapa[. .]ei/a[ 

35 [ ]ov€niovra\iiixovapa8i(Hvu<rKawira 

[ tyvTGLVTflVTTIVX&pavBiaTtlVtWWT 

[ \v(FTtvr\vap^a^vr\vaTroTi\tnrovriKr\tr 

[ ]€XpiKl\lKia<TK{. .}<f>OlV€lKT]aKaiT[,]fJLr]KOCr 

[ ]aiTo<rovrc[. . . .]T€Tov<r€K<rivayrr[.]<rf3a8i 

Unplaced Fragments. 
Fr. 16 (to Cols, i or 11?). Fr. 17 (to Col. iv?). Fr. 18 (to Col. iv?). 

] • [ ]?/*?[ ]y*/w/?[ 

]y*[ ]<Hr[ M 

M • • Waft 

• • 5 Jfjyt 

Fr. 19 (to Col. iv?). 

Fr. 20 (to Col. iv ?). 

Fr. a 1 (to Col. vii ?) 



fe? • [ 


] . awcr . [ 





]. /W)|/[ 



5 ]a)/i€va>[ 

5 }yopw[ 




fjy air<p Kal yjpvtrlop diroriOtaOai. KaT€OTpaTon[c- 4 

25 8evKm Si rov9 <rrpan&rat iicuOi fieTcncpircTo Urf[y- 
kclXop, &s Imfi&Tris t£> pavdp\<p XuptKpdru TrcirXci/Jca^? 
irrcptXuro rod ' EXXtjottSvtov nivrt rpirjpti? (\<op. 
[napay]epop(pov 8k rod IlayKaXov 81k raykw Kal 
[rai9 rp]i[rj]p€a'iv uowXtvaarro? c/y ri)p Xipprjv, iicti- 
30 [vov pip] iici\cv<r€v 6 'AyrjaiXaos ip$ip€POP 8aa t&p 

[ p]ivo»y Ifcv) nXtiopos &gta SiayaycTv tit ?[*]oi{. 

[. . . . n€p]l Kv{ikop, Sirw {ap\ dir avrStv piaOb? t$ [o-]r[/>a- 
[rtvpaTt] yivoiro. rods 8i OT/xtrfcSra? rods dirb rijs M[v]<ria[s «E- 
[iriXvat irp]ooTd£as airrofc f\K*iv c/y rb tap. 7rapa[aK]€va- 
35 [(opwos r\bp imSpra \upS>va {Ja8i(up c/y Kamra- 
[8ok(<zv, aKOv]a>y iwtni\v rfjp y&pav Siartipup &<t- 
[ircp raipia]p aTCpijp ap£apkvr\v dnb rrjt IIovTUcfjf 
[OaXdrrris p]*XP l K&iKto *[ a *l $0 whey? 9 K&i r[b] pfj*os 
[airfjt *Tv]ai to<touto[p <2<r]r€ robs Ik 2ip<ott[ti]s j9adi(foiTa?) 

Fr. 1 7 (to Col. iv ?). 

Unplaced Fragments. 

Fr. 18 (to Col. iv?). 


} Y*P n f{ 
]8op k[ 


5 M 

Fr. 19 (to Col. iv ?). 

Fr. 20 (to Col. iv?). 

Fr. 31 (to Col. vii ?). 

]? rvpa[pv 

]top £[ 




] . a>p cr . [ 



]to rhs ir[ 


] • /*«"[ 

)oav dXX[ 



5 ]popa>p{ 


O 2 


i THE 



] . V0vSfKOl[ 

} • • • ?PX< 
10 W 

] • <*>"?[ 

• • 

] . ovvra[ 

10 ]o(/ratov[ 
]*ra/> X eX[ 
] • ?*/»< 

Fr. 22 (to Cols, vii 
or viii ?). 

Jr. 23 (to Col. x?). 


• • • 

Fr. 24 (to Col. x ?). 

• • 



25 (to Col. x ?). 

• • 

Fr. 26 (to Cols, xvii 
or xviii ?). 

Fr. 27 (to Cols, xvii 
or xviii ?). 


28 (to Cols, xvii 
or xviii ?). 



Fr. 29. 

Fr. 30. 

Fr. 31. 

Fr. 32. 







] . TTjvatt [ 

op. [ 


]o€j/ra . [ 




• • • 


• 1 


5 ]toi/o"ot[ 

Fr. 33. 

Fr. 34. 

Fr. 35- 

Fr. 36. 




] . VOV h\ KGLl{ 

] . ovvra[ 

].. . 'Apxi^atS ? 

]ara rfiv [ 

] . 7T0(T0l{ 

]rjv €ia>0[ 

10 ]rovp[ 

10 ]oi Kal op[ 


rfj]s 9 Apx*\[at8o$ ? 

] • ava[ 

] . a\fi€[ 

] a H 


Fr. 23 (lo Col. x?). 

] ioriv [ 


Fr. 29. 

Fr. 30. 

Fr. 31. 

• # • • 

• • • • 


)V TTJ . [ 


] . Ttlf Vll\ 



] KaT€OX[ 


]o ivra . [ 

]ta>s air[ 


• • • • 

5 ] rods <rr[ 

Fr. 33. 

Fr. 36. 

\]af2ui> tj[ 










S ]<ra . <f>c[ 




5 M 

5 ]««» • [ 





• • 

] • xp»/4 


*[•] • c 

• • • 

Fr. 37. 

Fr. 38. 

Fr. 39. 

Fr. 40. 

Fr. 41. 

















• • 








Fr. 4 a. Fr. 43. Fr. 44. Fr. 45- Fr. 46. 

]ficvr)[ ] . <*[ )irpoaa[ 

}<TK.[ >..'.[ 

Fr. 47. Fr. 48. Fr. 49. Fr. 50. Fr. 51. 


]yy . 










]R9? •[ 












Fr. 5a. 

Fr. 53- 


Fr. 55. 

Fr. 56. 

• • 

• • 


• • 

• • 


« • 

* • 






]ap €IKC[ 


]ov /3aai\[€ 

]vriv iai[€p 


]<ra . <fx{ 

5 W» • [ 



] • xw[ 

]..[.] Ka[ 


Fr. 57. Fr. 58. Fr. 59. Fr. 60. Fr. 61. 






Fr. 62. 

Fr. 63. 

Fr. 64. 

Fr. 65. 

Fr. 66 

• • 


• • 




Fr. 67. Fr. 69. Fr. 71. Fr. 72. 







]a<rop[. , 

}y . . 






]toi<j/*€ - 


Fr. 68. 

• • 

5 jicwaycr" 

5 ]• »" 

. • . • 



] • .'[• •] • [ 

Fr. 70. 

j. • • 



. . . 



• • « . 


]fror[. . 



Cols. i. i-iii. 7 = chs. I— III. 

Expedition of Demaetictus. Anti-Spartan feeling in Greece. 

' About the same time a trireme sailed out from Athens without the consent of the 
people. Demaenetus, the . . . of it, had privately imparted his plan in secret to the 
boule, as it is said, and some of the citizens having conspired with him, he went down 
with them to the Piraeus, and having launched a ship at the docks set sail to join Conon. 
Thereupon an uproar was raised, and the notables and cultivated class among the Athenians 
were indignant, declaring that it would give the city a bad name if they began a war with 
the Lacedaemonians. The bouleutai, frightened by the clamour, held a meeting of the people, 
pretending to have had no share in the enterprise. The populace having assembled, 


Fr. 71. 

]aaov[. . 

]rot9 fikv 
]iav iytiv 

]atca9 €lW- 

to 8i 7T0[.] 
]€TOT[. . 

the party at Athens of Thrasybulus, Aesimus, and Anytus came forward and pointed out 
that the Athenians were incurring great risks unless they relieved the state from the 
responsibility. The moderate and wealthy class at Athens was content with the present 
policy, while the populace and democratic party on that occasion, through fear, yielded 
to their advisers, and sent to Milon, the harmost of Aegina, to inform him that he could 
punish Demaenetus since the latter had acted without the leave of the state. But previously 
for nearly the whole time their policy was aggressive, and in frequent opposition to the 
Lacedaemonians. Not only were they in the habit of dispatching both arms and sailors 
for Conon's fleet, but on a former occasion . . . crates, Hagnias, and Telesegorus with their 
companions were dispatched on an embassy to the king, the ambassadors being captured 


by Pharax, the former admiral, and sent as prisoners to the Lacedaemonians, who put them 
to death. This opposition was stimulated by the party of Epicrates and Cephalus ; for 
it was they who were most anxious to involve Athens in war, holding that view not merely 
since they had dealings with Timocrates and received the gold, but long before. It is 
nevertheless asserted by some that Timocrates' bribes were responsible for the formation of 
the war party at Athens and among the Boeotians and in the other states which I have 
mentioned, owing to ignorance of the circumstance that all of them had long adopted 
a hostile attitude towards the Lacedaemonians, and been on the watch for an opportunity 
to involve the states in war. For the Lacedaemonians were hated by the Argive and 
Boeotian factions for being on friendly terms with the opposing party of the citizens, 
and by the faction at Athens because it desired to put an end to the existing tranquillity 
and peace, and to lead the Athenians on to a policy of war and interference, in order that 
it might be enabled to make a profit from the state funds. At Corinth, of the partisans 
of a change of policy the majority were hostile to the Lacedaemonians for reasons similar 
to those of the Argives and Boeotians, while Timolaus alone had become opposed to them 
on account of private grounds of complaint, although he was formerly on the best of terms 
with them and a strong philo-Laconian, as can be ascertained from the events of the 
Decelean war. On one occasion, with a squadron of five ships, he plundered several of the 
islands tributary to the Athenians, and on another, having sailed to Amphipolis with 
two triremes, and manned four more supplied from there, he defeated Sichius(?), the 
Athenian general, in a sea-fight, as I have previously related, and captured the enemy's 
triremes, which were five in number, together with a convoy of 30 (?) boats ; subsequently 
with [.] triremes he sailed to Thasos and caused the island to revolt from the Athenians. 
Parties, therefore, in the aforesaid states had been induced to hate the Lacedaemonians 
far more by these reasons than by Pharnabazus and the gold. When Milon, the harmost 
of Aegina, heard the news brought by the Athenians, he quickly manned a trireme 
and pursued Demaenetus. The latter at this time happened to be waiting off Thoricus 
in Attica, but when Milon arrived at Thoricus and tried to attack him he hastened to sail 
far in advance. Having gained possession of a ship belonging to them he left his own ship 
behind because the hull was inferior, and transferring his sailors to the other ship 
continued his voyage to Conon's fleet, while Milon • . . with the trireme returned to 

i. 1. A new book apparently begins here (cf. p. 115); and it is quite uncertain with 
what events our author synchronizes the expedition of Demaenetus, which took place in the 
first half of 396 if Cols, i-iv are correctly placed (cf. iii. 9, note), or in the early summer 
of 395 if Cols, i-iv follow Cols, v-viii, as is much less probable. 

2. For \ov n<rd cf. 1. 24. ?[v or ?[px« may be substituted for /[&?, which was suggested 
by Wilamowitz. The construction in 11. 2-7 is not clear ; cf. note on 1. 5. 

3. Af7fMui[cr]or : he is identical, as was perceived by Wilamowitz, with A^patWo* 6 
Bot/fvytyf in Aeschines ii. 78 Oiios dc rjpfrtpos KXc<$/9ovXof 6 TXovkov tov 'Axaprtvt vl6s /trra 
Afifitaiverov tov Bot/fuyov (JvyKar*pavpax r l a ' f XfiXwwi rov AaKi&aipovtoiv vnvapxov, Xti\*p being 
obviously identical with the harmost of Aegina called MtW in i. 22 and ii. 35. Aeschines 
has exaggerated the importance of the naval engagement, which as P shows was a trivial 
affair. The Demaenetus who is mentioned as strategus in 388-7 in Aegina (Xen. Hell v. 
1. 10) and in the autumn of 387 on the Hellespont {Hell. v. 1. 26) is no doubt the same 
person as Demaenetus 6 Bovfuyip; cf. Kirchner, All. Prosopogr. i. p. 216 : but that on the 
present occasion he held the office of strategus is neither stated by P nor in itself likely. 
Meyer well compares the private expedition of Macartatus to Crete in (probably) 386-379 
with a trireme which he had bought (Isaeus xi. 48). The word following &waii{tT}os 


seems to be a title, if avrrjs is right. Kypos could be read, but this would imply that the 
trireme was Demaenelus' own property, ' whereas it was clearly a warship belonging to the 
State. The doubtful « might be a ; the following letter can equally well be y f 1, p, *, ir, r, 
or w ; for .4 (pi ?) a single letter (v ?) may be substituted, and in place of vny (or my) yq 
should perhaps be read. A single word as a family name or a title would be more suitable 
than k . . <of atrip, but Bov(vyrjs is inadmissible, though it is possible that the word in the 
papyrus is a corruption of this.. 

4. /fyvXgw: for other instances of hiatus cf. vi. 39, vii. 7, xi. 22, xii. 24, xvi. 6, 
xviii. 5 and 24. 

irp«fy[iiarof : the end of this line must have projected some distance beyond that of 1. 1 
and 11. 5 sqq. 

5. intity : the vestiges of the letter following d suit 7 somewhat better than * . av» 
[oft instead of aw | would have the advantage of preventing this line from being exceptionally 
short, but the construction of 11. 2-7 is then somewhat awkward. Between aur» and 
iroXf<r»i> the scribe seems to have omitted either r«w or t*v, more probably the former ; 
cf. the omissions of words in i. 36, ii. 16, xi. 20, xiv. 13, 29, xvi. 23, and xx. 20. Or 
possibly <n>v[oi, i. e. cru(x)i{ot should be read, as Wilamowitz suggests. 

6. mvr : rr)v vavw would be expected, especially if nvrijf in 1. 3 is right. 
9. y*»lpi/i[oi] : cf. xii. 31. 

16. Thrasybulus and Anylus are well known as leaders of the moderate democratic 
party at this period. On Aunpof, who is less frequently mentioned, cf. Kirchner, Alt. 
Prosopcgr, i. p. 22. Our author ignores Archinus, who was also prominent at this time 
(cf. p. 140). It is interesting to note the cautious policy pursued by this section of the 
Athenian democrats, who side with the aristocrats in objecting to an open breach with 
Sparta, and for the moment succeed in curbing the warlike spirit of the majority of the 
democratic party headed by Epicrates and Cephalus (1. 35). The course of events was, 
however, too strong for the advocates of peace, and Thrasybulus himself in the late 
summer of 395 proposed the alliance with Boeotia, which was agreed to without opposition 
(Xen. Hell. Hi. 5. 16). If the events recorded in i. i-iii. 7 belonged to the spring or early 
summer of 395, the change of policy must have taken place within a very few months, and 
seems very sudden. It is therefore much more satisfactory to refer chapters I-III to 396, 
and to suppose more than a year's interval between the expedition of Demaenetus and the 
alliance of Athens with Boeotia ; cf. iii. 9, note. 

22. MiXuMi : he is called Xc/Xw* by Aeschines ii. 78; cf. note on 1. 3. Which is the 
correct form is uncertain. 

27. t{trtnpa]rriv (1. awrinparrov) : it is possible that the scribe has himself corrected 
the c to o. 

27-8. For the secret assistance rendered to Conon by the Athenians cf. Isocr. Paneg. 
142 fV df rf froXcpf ry ircpl *P6dov . . . ^p^pcro? dc rau vjnjpcolais rats nap* tyM**, (rrparrjyovrrot 
V ovry KoVt»M>r. 

30. The letter after /fao-iXca, if not ir, can only be y. n[p4r*pov is somewhat too long 
and is not very appropriate, since it occurs immediately afterwards in I. 32. Bury 
suggests w[p&rov 9 i.e. the first embassy to the Persians since the Peace. 'JsWtjcpdViy 
is possible, but in that case we should expect our author to have distinguished this Epicrates 
from the democratic leader of that name mentioned in 1. 35. to can be read in place 
of *[i], and 'lir]ir[o)tpo>i; or Atymrpon; is more likely ; 'ApurjroKpan; seems to be too long. 
One of the three ambassadors, Hagnias, is known from Isae. xi. 8 'AyWa* olv ore farXciV 
frapfo-icrvfiffro vptafitwrmv in\ ravrat ras frpdfw, and from HarpOCration S. V, 'AyWar, roirrov 
mi rovs ovfinpiapruTas avrov <f)ij<r\p 'Ardporiuv Iv iripnry rrjs *Ar$ibos ko\ *cX^opof &* taXwrdw 
tv mu aniBavov. TelesegOlllS is possibly the father of Acapi^r Tt\t<rtfy6pov KoXXvrcvr who 


occurs in an inscription of the middle of the fourth century b. c. (Kirchner, op. ciL ii. 
p. 304). The date of trje embassy, which was previously uncertain, is now fixed within 
narrow limits by the mention of *dpa£ 6 vpfctpov vavapxos, for he is known from Xen. Hell. 
iii. 2. 12, 14 to have co-operated with Dercylidas in the spring and summer of 397. 
Apart from the uncertainty as to the period of the year in which the Spartan vawpxot 
entered on their command, it has been disputed whether Pharax' term of office belongs 
to 398-7 or 397-6. Since his vavapxia is here spoken of as past, the present passage, 
if i. 1 -iii. 7 are rightly assigned to the first half of 396, is strongly in favour of the date 
398-7 ; cf. iii. 9 and 23-6, notes. 

i. 33 sqq. P here diverges into a highly interesting account of the causes of the 
formation of the anti-Spartan league, and in connexion with the mission of Timocrates the 
Rhodian supplies some new information of importance. Xenophon {Hell. iii. 5. 1-2) 
attributes to Tithraustes the mission of the Persian envoy with 50 talents, and specifies as 
the recipients at Thebes Androclidas, Ismenias, and Galaxidorus, at Corinth Timolaus and 
Polyanthes, at Argos Cylon and of per avrov, but says of the Athenians kq\ ov lurakafioms 
tovtov tov xpvaiav &fim vp6Bvpoi faap fir tov nSXtpov pofu(oms re avr&v Spx«r6aL He then 
proceeds to describe the outbreak of the Boeotian war, which he regards as the direct 
outcome of Timocrates' bribes. Pausanias (iii. 9. 8) also connects Timocrates with 
Tithraustes, and gives a list of the recipients of the money (Cylon and Sodamas at Argos, 
Androclides, Ismenias, and Amphithemis at Thebes, Cephalus and Epicrates at Athens, 
Polyanthes and Timolaus at Argos), and like Xenophon treats the Boeotian war, in describing 
which he mentions vitop aKpaCovra, as an effect of the mission. Plutarch too (Artax. 20; 
cf. Lysand. 27, Ages. 15) agrees with Xenophon's date for Timocrates. Only Polyaenus 
(i. 48) connects the episode not with Tithraustes but with Pharnabazus, Koiwv ftipnajSafp 
ovfipax*" 'AyijciAaov ttjv 'Aaiav iropBovvros hrtiat tov HepaTjv xpvuiov irc/A^rai roi? drjfiaytaydis, k,t,\., 
though it is possible that his statement is due to mere carelessness. Diodorus, Nepos, and 
Justin are silent on the subject. Our author, as appears both from i. 37 and ii. 4 and 32 
irrfWi nut irpo*ipT)H£P€ue, had already described the sending of Timocrates, no doubt in its 
chronological position, in his main narrative, but ii. 33 shows that, like Polyaenus, he 
connected it with Pharnabazus, and i. 37— ii. 1 indicates that, like Pausanias, he in opposition 
to Xenophon believed in the guilt of the Athenians Epicrates and Cephalus. In ii. 1 sqq., 
however, he controverts the view that the anti-Spartan league was brought about by 
Timocrates, attributing the hostility of the states to Sparta to other and older reasons. It 
has been generally recognized that Xenophon's account of the origin of the confederacy 
is chronologically untenable, for if Timocrates was sent by Tithraustes, who cannot have 
reached Sardis before June 395, he must have arrived in Greece after the beginning of the 
Boeotian war (of which Pausanias 1 date is now confirmed by xi. 34 tovtov tov Btpovs) 9 and 
therefore cannot have been the cause of it; and historians have usually accepted 
Xenophon's date for Timocrates' mission, and abandoned the connexion between it and the 
outbreak of the war; cf. Beloch, Gr. Gesch. ii. p. 193; Meyer, Gesch. d.Alt. v. pp. 231-2. 
Now, however, in the light of the new evidence another solution of the chronological 
difficulty in Xenophon's account is preferable. The error lies not in making Timocrates' 
mission precede the beginning of the war, but in supposing that he was sent by Tithraustes. 
On the view that he was inspired by Pharnabazus the difficulty vanishes, for it is clear from the 
order of the narrative in P, who does not reach the Boeotian war until xi. 34 sqq., that 
there was a considerable interval of time (more than a year) between the mission and the 
opening of hostilities in the summer of 395. The reference in irpotiptjiUvai nSkcu (ii. 4 and 
32) seems to be to a not very distant passage, and it is possible that the description of 
Timocrates' mission in the main narrative occurred shortly before Col. i. . If so, since the 
expedition of Demaenetus took place in the first half of 396, the journey of Timocrates 


must have occurred not later than the spring of that year. An earlier date for it would 
produce a conflict with Polyaenus, since he synchronizes the mission with the campaigns of 
Agesilaus in Asia, which began in the spring of 396. Polyaenus' statement is not lightly 
to be disregarded, especially as a close relation between him and P has been detected in 
another passage ; cf. vii. 4, note. On the other hand the argument in i. 33-ii. 1 is more 
logical if the dispatch of Timocrates preceded in point of time the embassy mentioned in 
i. 29-33, which took place in 397 (cf. 1. 30, note), and the year 397, in which Pharnabazus 
and Conon set to work to construct a fleet, is in itself a very suitable date. Hence the 
interval between the mission and the outbreak of the Boeotian war may be as much as two 
years. Even if Cols, i-iv are placed after v-viii and belong to the year 395 (cf. iii. 9, note), 
P's date for the mission cannot be brought down later than the spring of 395, so that there 
would still remain an interval of some months between it and the Boeotian war. The 
chronological mistake made by Xenophon and others may well be due, as Meyer suggests, to 
the circumstance that the fruits of the Persian bribes were not apparent till the summer of 395. 
On the question of the date of Timocrates' mission and the Persian who inspired 
it, P is certainly right as against Xenophon. Which account is to be followed in regard to 
the action of the Athenian democrats ? Here, too, we think Fs version is more probable 
than Xenophon's, and that Epicrates and Cephalus, as Pausanias also states, took the 
Persian gold. There was clearly a widespread belief in the fourth century that they did so, 
as is shown not only by our author's own view, but by that of the unnamed nw, which he 
controverts in ii. 1-7, without however disputing the fact of the bribes having been received. 
Moreover, P's explanation of the origin of the anti-Spartan feeling as due not to bribery, 
but to anterior and deeper lying causes, is eminently just, and exhibits his acute insight 
into the politics of the fourth century, in which many of the leading statesmen thought it no 
shame to be in the pay of a foreign power, so long as the policy of which they really approved 
was pursued. And if P is right, as is practically certain, in minimizing the effects of 
Timocrates* bribes, he is probably correct also in his admission with regard to Epicrates 
and Cephalus. Xenophon must have known of the charges against them, but, exaggerating 
the part played by Persian gold in bringing about the league, and, like our author, being 
aware of the strong war feeling at Athens (the corrupt words vopLCovrc* t* avr&v apx^Oat 
probably refer, as Meyer remarks, to the Athenian desire to recover their empire ; cf. Hell. 

iii. 5. IO km firjv Sn (5ov\oioff &p rrjv apxh v h 9 irportpov tKUrqaBt avakafHuv ndirts cn-tora/icda), 

seems to have excepted the Athenians, mainly in order that he might emphasize the accusa- 
tions of Medizing which he brings against the other allies, in particular the Thebans. 
Only in one respect does P compare unfavourably with Xenophon, the desire for personal 
profit imputed as a motive to the Athenian war party (ii. 10-14). Here he seems to be 
influenced by an anti-democratic bias, which is quite in keeping with that of Theopompus 
(cf. p. 129), and to misrepresent the natural patriotic aspirations of the Athenians to which 
Xenophon alludes, thereby coming nearer to the truth. 

36. For the omissions cf. i. 5, note. 

37. Ti/MMrpoTci: so also Xenophon and Pausanias. Plato (Meno 90 A) calls him 
noXvKpdTtfs, but the fault may be due to his MSS. Plutarch in Artax. 20 has the form 
'EppoicpdTrjv and 'Eppoirparow, but in the second case apparently with a variant TtpaKparovt, so 
that the mistake is presumably due to the MSS. 

ii. 1. rive* \rfawrt*: the view which our author here controverts, and which originated 
no doubt in Sparta, coloured the sources from which Pausanias drew his information, 
and Xenophon shared it to a large extent ; cf. note on i. 33. That P included Xenophon 
among the tiw is not likely, seeing that P's work was written little, if at all, later than 
Xenophon's Hellenica (cf. p. 124); the reference may be to historical works which have 
perished or merely to current tradition. 


ii. 8. Kou*t[ ]ywat : if not y, the letter after the lacuna must be r. ]y»roi or rvrat 

is very intractable; and if a correction is necessary the simplest course is to read 
crracrilyurai, i. e. crracrt&rai, the superfluous y being an example of the practice of inserting 
a y between two vowels, which is not uncommon in Ptolemaic papyri. A difficulty, 
however, then arises about the termination of Bou»r[, for the lacuna ought to contain 

Only Six Or seven letters. Botur[u>v ot <Tra<ri\y<vrai is tOO long, and for Bo«»T[i6i ora<n]y«irat 

there is barely room. That the scribe wrote B<m«t[oi is in any case probable (cf. 1. 16), 
but Boivrtff is not used as an adjective at this period, so that with Bouarfoi oracrijywrm two 
corrections are necessary, which is not a very satisfactory hypothesis. If araamrai is the 
word intended, it must apply to the Argives as well as to the Boeotians, for the two 
states are treated as exactly parallel in 1. 16, and the clause on reft cVai{riot]r *.r.X. refers to 
both, which implies that there was a philo-Laconian party at Argos as well as at Thebes. 
Theban politics at this period are discussed in greater detail in xii. 31 sqq. 

13-4. This sarcastic and somewhat unfair criticism of the motives of the Athenian war 
party favours the view that our author is Theopompus; cf. note on i. 33 and p. 129. 

17. l[ifio]Xoof : both Xenophon and Pausanias state that he took Timocrates' bribes 
(cf. i. 33, note), and P no doubt admitted the fact, as he does definitely in the case of 
Epicrates and Cephalus; but he regarded Timolaus' private quarrel with the Spartans 
as the chief reason for his present anti-Spartan attitude. In Xen. Bell. iv. 2. 11 Timolaus 
appears as leader of the Corinthian contingent at the battle of Nemea. 

21-32. Of Timolaus' exploits in the Decelean war (which is again referred to in 
xiii. 16 and 30) the expedition to Thasos must, as Meyer remarks, have occurred towards 
the end of 411. Thucydides (viii. 64) records in that year the fall of the Thasian 
democracy, the fortification of the city, and the expectation of speedy assistance from 
the Spartans, with whom the exiled Thasian oligarchs had taken refuge. In 410 Thasos 
has a Spartan harmost (Xen. Hell. i. 1. 32), so that the arrival of Timolaus with the 
Peloponnesian fleet falls in the intervening period. The incidents related in fl. 24-32 
therefore occurred just after the point at which Thucydides' history breaks off, and the 
reference in 11. 27-8 to a former mention of them (probably in the main narrative) is 
important as an indication that the present work was a continuation of Thucydides; 
cf. p. 122. The earlier exploit, the plundering of certain islands (11. 22-4), probably took 
place in 412 or early in 411, and is passed over by Thucydides. 

26. <nx iw must te corrupt, and more probably conceals the name of the Athenian 
strategus than a reference to Chios. The only name among the known Athenian strategi 
at that period which remotely resembles 2<x«* is iTpopfitxitys (Thuc. viii. 15-79), but he is 
not likely to be meant. 

27. Sxrntp uprj^d irjov kq\ np&rtpov: cf. xii. 32 Sxmtp kq\ np&rtpw tlpqita, and ii. 21— 
32, note. 

29. &r]f/A^av: napfirtpyfrav would be expected (cf. Dem. viii. 25 napairffiwfirBat rh vkota 
ra avriav), but *[a\ A frapcir]f/i^av r/Ua [irXoila is not satisfactory. 

30. Wilamowitz suggests [rat Mma] in the lacuna. 

33. GaprdPaCov: cf. i. 33, note. 

34. The curious order of the words cW^/icW piatlv faa* is due to the desire to avoid 
hiatus; cf. xi. 22, note. 

iii. 1-5. That Fr. 1 belongs to the top of this column is practically certain, (1) from 
internal evidence of its suitability to this context ; (2) from the colour of the papyrus, which 
resembles that of Cols, i — il in being much lighter than the rest ; (3) from the recto, which 
has the beginnings of two lines that suit the first two lines of the column of the land-survey 
on the recto of Col. ii. The remainder of Col. iii (which on the recto has the ends of lines 
of a column of the land-survey) is on a separate, fragment, but the correctness of its 


position admits of no doubt ; cf. 6 W MiX]*? *U Alywap in 1. 6. Since the width of the gap 
separating Fr. 1 from the bulk of Col. iii cannot be determined with absolute precision, 
and the beginnings of lines are lost throughout this column, the size of the lacuna on each 
side of Fr. 1 may be slightly larger or smaller than we have supposed in our restoration, 
which proceeds on the assumption that 5 or 6 letters are missing at the beginning and 8 or 
9 in the middle of 11. 1-5. 

It is not clear whose ship Demaenetus took possession of. Aeschines ii. 78 (cf. i. 3, 
note) states that he avyKart vavpaxw* X*[\wa (i. e. Milon), and Wilamowitz, reading ttj* *]*«* 
in vii. 2, thinks that Demaenetus captured Milon's ship. To this there are the objections : 
(1) that it is not easy to see how Demaenetus obtained possession of Milon's ship without 
capturing Milon himself, who, as appears from 1. 6, returned safely to Aegina ; (2) that the 
plural aura* in 1. 2 suits the inhabitants of a place just mentioned (cf. vi. 24-5 <ls 'Aptfiiirakiv 
KaranXiwras km nap* c[«f fyw) better than the Spartans ; (3) the remains of 1. 7 suggest that 
Demaenetus took flight on Milon's approach rather than that he gave action. Hence 
we prefer to regard alr&* as the inhabitants either of Thoricus or, reading cVrl noXv .... 
or n . op ...., of that place, though we are unable to suggest a suitable place-name. 
puis v]sm is, however, not satisfactory, and rTjs would suit the space better. For roxfc there 
is no room, but rov (Bury) is possible. 

6—7. Something like pija rr\s rpirjpow dntn\fva( is required. 

Cols. iii. 7-iv. 42 = chs. IV-V. The Naval War. 

iii. 9. The mutilation of this passage, which if complete would have explained the 
chronological system adopted by our author, is much to be deplored. If Cols, i-iv are 
correctly placed before v-viii, which describe Agesilaus' campaign in the spring and early 
summer 0^395, the Bipot in iii. 9 must be that of 396, and the '8th year ', of which the 
beginning is noted in 1. 10, is 396-5. An earlier date is excluded by the description 
of Pharax in i. 31-2 as 6 irp6r*po» vavapxos; for he is known to have held that office in the 
spring and summer of 397 (cf. i. 30, note), and since the expedition of Demaenetus, 
in connexion with which he is mentioned, falls within the seventh year of P's reckoning and 
Pharax' term of office was then already over, it is impossible to make the 8th year begin 
in 397. Granted that the Otpos in iii. 9 refers to 396 and is the beginning of the 8th year 
(the possibility of its referring to 395 will be discussed later), it remains doubtful what month 
P precisely regarded as the starting-point. Thucydides, who divides each year of the war 
into two equal parts, 6*po% and x tl f^ v t makes the former begin in the spring (cf. e. g. iv. 1 1 7 
dfia rjpt rov imytyvopivov 6<povs), and Xenophon in Hell. i-ii. 3, where he is influenced by 
the annalistic method of Thucydides, similarly reckons in years beginning with the spring. 
Since Fs work is probably, like Xenophon's, a continuation of Thucydides' history 
(cf. p. 122) and seems to be constructed on chronological principles, which if not as strict 
as those of Thucydides are more careful than Xenophon 's, there is a certain presumption that 
he too reckoned in years which began in the spring ; and iii. 1 1 may even have commenced 
with some phrase like lapos apxopmv. On the other hand Btpos in iii. 9 might very well 
refer to midsummer, the starting-point of the Olympiads and year of the Attic archons. The 
later columns are compatible with either hypothesis : v-viii cover the period from about 
March — June 395, xi-xxi that from about July — November of the same year, and the 
transition from the 8th to the 9th year would, if it was noted and took place in the spring, 
naturally occur in the gap between Cols, iv and v, while if it was at midsummer, it would 
occur in the gap before Col. xi. In xi. 34 rovrov toO tilpovs referring to the war between 
Boeotia and Phocis probably means July, and the fact that the Theban intrigues and the 
dispute between Phocis and Locris, which are narrated in xiv. 21 sqq., began before 
midsummer (cf. xiv. 2 1, note) provides no argument against the view that the 9th year began in 


midsummer, for there is no reason to think that P's arrangement of facts was so strictly 
annalistic as to prevent his grouping together an intimately connected series of incidents 
belonging to the conclusion of the 8th and the beginning of the 9th year. The later 
columns being thus indecisive, the question what is meant by 6*pos in iii. 9 has to be decided 
by the evidence of Cols. i-iv. Assuming — as is most probable but by no means absolutely 
certain — that the incidents in i. i-iii. 7 refer to the conclusion of the 7th year and those 
in iii. 1 1 sqq. to the beginning of the 8th, it is on the whole more satisfactory to regard the 
Mpos in which the 8th year began as midsummer, not spring. The narrative of the 
expedition of Demaenetus does not help, for the only definite mark of date connected 
with it is the mention of Pharax as the former vavapxos, and if Pharax' term of office 
ended, as is likely, in the autumn of 397 (cf. iii. 23-6, note) the expedition may have taken 
place during the winter of 397-6 just as well as in the spring or early summer of 396. But 
the account of the naval war in iii. 1 1 sqq. favours the view that the 8th year began in the 
summer. It would be surprising in the first place that the narrative of the 8th year, if this 
began in the spring, should commence with the comparatively unimportant naval war 
in place of the expedition of Agesilaus to Asia. Secondly, the arrival of the reinforcements 
from Phoenicia (iii. 23-6, cf. note) is more likely to have occurred towards the end than 
at the beginning of 396, for though Diodorus seems to have placed that event too late, 
the view that these reinforcements were available to Conon throughout the campaign of 396 
does not well accord with the statements of Isocrates about the blockade of Caunus. 
Thirdly, the arrival of the new Spartan vavapxos (probably Pollis), which happened soon 
after the beginning of the 8th year (iii. 21, note), suits the late summer better than the 
spring, not merely because the summer or autumn was the normal time in which a new 
vavapxot entered on his duties, but because the arrival of Cheiricrates, the successor of Pollis, 
is definitely fixed by xv. 33 for the late summer (about July or August) of 395. If, therefore, 
the new vavapxos of iii. 2 1 came out in the spring, either he remained in office considerably 
more than a year, or he was not Pollis but some unknown individual, and Pollis' arrival 
occurred later, the notice of it in P being lost. Of these two alternatives the second would 
be preferable to the first, for great as are the irregularities connected with the Spartan 
vavapxia (cf. iii. 21, note), there is no precedent for a vavapxos who took over the command 
in the spring remaining in that position until the summer of the year following, and the 
mention of Pollis in iii. 21 is of course conjectural. No one of the arguments in 
favour of treating the Bipos in iii 9 as midsummer is very strong, but together they seem 
to counterbalance the presumption in favour of the other explanation created by the 
example of Thucydides and Xenophon, and for the present we leave the question open. 
In any case P does not use the Attic archons for dating purposes, but like Thucydides and 
Xenophon reckons back to a fixed point. What this was is owing to the lacuna in 1. 10 not 
definitely ascertainable. It is not the end of the Peloponnesian war as foreshadowed by 
Thucydides v. 26, where he states his intention of carrying his history up to the surrender 
of Athens ; for the capture of the city by Lysander took place on Munychion 1 6 = April 24, 
404 according to Plutarch Lysand. 15, and the 8th year on P's system being 396-5, his 
epoch-year is 403-2, not 404-3. Xenophon, however (or rather, as is generally supposed, 
his interpolator), in Hell. ii. 3. 9 treats the capitulation of Samos in the autumn of 404 
as the end of the war, and in any case it would seem that P connected the events of 404, 
including the capture of Samos and the despotism of the Thirty, with the war, and made 
a fresh start in the spring or summer of 403, i.e. approximately from the archonship 
of Euclides, a well-known landmark in Greek history. The restoration of the Athenian 
democracy and the general amnesty occurred on Boedromion 12 (= Oct. 4) 403 (Plut. dt 
glor. Ath. 7). On this view iii. 9-10 should perhaps be restored tjJ p*v [tlpqvg rrj irp6s 


Our discussion has so far proceeded on the fundamental assumption that Cols, i-iv are 
rightly placed before v-viii, and we have hitherto left out of account the hypothesis that the 
B4po£ in iii. 9 may refer not to 396 but to 395. It is not worth while reviewing in detail 
the consequences that would ensue from the combination of the present arrangement of 
Cols, i-viii with the view that the Bipos belongs to 395, for that hypothesis would remove 
none of the difficulties which have led us to place Cols, i-iv before v-viii, and would not be 
supported by the chief argument for transposing v-viii before i-iv, the fact that Cols, i-iv are in 
the same hand as that of vi. 27-xxi (cf. p. 114). If the Mpos in iii. 9 refers to 395, there 
is not the least doubt that Cols, v-viii should precede i-iv, not follow them. What are the 
results of this arrangement ? 

In the first place the 6*pos of iii. 9 would necessarily mean midsummer not spring, for 
the account of Agesilaus' campaign in the spring and early summer of 395 would have 
preceded ; accordingly Demaenetus' expedition would have occurred in the spring or early 
summer of 395. There is no insuperable objection to this, although the change of policy on 
the part of Thrasybulus and the moderate democrats with regard to a war with Sparta would 
become very sudden, and it is more satisfactory to suppose at least a year's interval between 
the events described in i. 7-25 and the unanimously voted alliance of Athens with Boeotia 
in the late summer of 395 ; cf. i. 16, note. With regard to Pharax, the mention of him as 
6 npfrcpop vavapxot would merely cease to bear strongly on the vexed question of the date 
of his vavapxla, since whether he was yuvapgof in 398-7 or 397-6, he would equally be 
6 wp6T*pop vavapxot in the spring of 395. The really serious difficulties begin when we try 
to imagine what could have stood in the lacuna in iii. 10, and what reasons P had for 
taking as his epoch the remarkably uneventful year 402-1, corresponding to the archonship 
of Micon. That P should have grouped the events of the year of wapxla with the 
Peloponnesian war is perfectly intelligible, but that he should have also included in it 
the whole of the archonship of Euclides, and made a fresh start with the Attic new year 
following the amnesty is very extraordinary. At the time when v-viii were placed before 
i-iv, Meyer suggested for iii. 10 rg piv [tS>v AajcfoaipoviW dpxo or wc/ioW?, i.e. the definitive 
organization of the Spartan hegemony, but we should certainly expect some particular event 
of well-known importance to be mentioned there, not a vague phrase. And, since no 
important historical incident occurred in the archonship of Micon at all, the choice of 
402-1 as a starting-point would remain a complete enigma. Problems of still greater 
difficulty would, however, arise in connexion with the appearance of the new pavapxot; for 
that he was Pollis, the predecessor of Cheiricrates, would be practically certain, and it would 
become necessary to suppose either that he disappeared almost immediately after his arrival, 
or that in iii. 1 1 sqq. P has abandoned altogether the chronological sequence of events and 
reverted to incidents which took place long before the beginning of the 8th year. Neither 
of the two explanations is at all satisfactory; cf. iii. 21, note, and iii. 23-6, note, 
where the whole question of the chronology of this period is discussed more in detail. The 
overwhelming difficulties which ensue concerning the starting-point of P's system of years 
and the mvapxia of Pollis, if the &*pos in iii 9 refers to 395, seem to us much to outweigh the 
advantages which result from placing Cols, v-viii before i-iv : for apart from the argument 
based on the change of hands which is far from conclusive (cf. p. 115), especially as the 
margin before Col. i suggests that it is the commencement of a new book or section, the 
only gain afforded by making Cols, v-viii precede i-iv is that it would then be easy to bring 
P into harmony with Diodorus as to the date of the arrival of the reinforcements from 
Phoenicia recorded in iii. 23-6. It is, however, not absolutely certain that P and Diodorus 
differ on this point even if the depot belongs to 396, and in any case the apparent order of 
events in P possesses such manifest advantages over their sequence in Diodorus that we 
are prepared to admit an error on the part of the latter; cf. p. 213. 



iii. 1 1 sqq. P now turns to the naval war, the fragmentary account of which bristles 
with difficulties. The first is the identity of the person -apos (-tyro cannot be read) who 
occurs in 1. n and again apparently in 11. 19 and 30. The context (especially the mentions 
of Pharnabazus in 11. 1 6 and 36) indicates that he was on the side of the Persians, not of 
the Spartans ; and if 11. 1 1-20 all refer to him he seems to have been in command of the 
fleet and to have had negotiations with Pharnabazus concerning the pay (cf. xv. 37, sqq.), 
while 11. 28-31 perhaps refer to his departure as the result of some new arrangement about 
the command introduced by Pharnabazus, his place being apparently taken by Conon 
(1. 31). Against this interpretation may be urged the fact that in the account of Diodorus, 
who owing to the silence of Xenophon is practically the sole authority for the naval 
operations between the building of the Persian fleet and the battle of Cnidus, Conon is 
throughout in command of the Persian fleet ; cf. xiv. 39. 2 r<j> & K6v»pt irtpi rfjf pavapx"* 
dioAc;(&iff «W<mj<w (sc. Pharnabazus) M M rrjv Odkamur ffycpdva, and 8 1. 4 K6vwp 6 r&9 
Utpa&v vavapxos. At the battle of Cnidus, however, Xenophon (Bell. iv. 3. 11) speaks of 
Pharnabazus as vavapxos, and it seems possible that at the period with which Col. iii is concerned 
Conon, though really directing the operations, was nominally subject to a Persian com- 
mander other than Pharnabazus. That -apos was one of Conon's lieutenants is not likely, 
for both P (xi. 10-1) and Diodorus mention Hieronymus and Nicophemus as acting in 
this capacity (cf. note ad loc.) ; that he was a Spartan wavapxos is still less probable, for even if 
11. 16-8 refer to Conon's negotiations with Pharnabazus, not to -apos, the Spartan fleet 
seems to be mentioned for the first time in 1. 20, and the ap\h of -apos in 1. 30 most probably 
refers to the vavapxla in 1. 28, which in view of the context is almost certainly the Persian, 
not the Spartan. 

12. c]*ct: probably Caunus, the head quarters of the Persian fleet in the Aegean 
(cf. 11. 24 sqq.). That Rhodes, which became the head quarters later, had already revolted 
from Sparta is on the whole unlikely ; cf. iii. 23-6, note. 

17-8. Perhaps /SovAcfyicw r<j> toapva&dCy {n/pfuiQcu ; cf. xv. 37. 

21. nrfXAct]: cf. xv. 32-5, where the arrival of Cheiricrates as successor to Pollis is 
mentioned as having taken place before Conon's visit to Tithraustes and the mutiny. 
Both vavapxoi were previously unknown. Since Cheiricrates' arrival is there mentioned in terms 
which seem to imply that this had not been previously referred to, it is not at all satisfactory 
to restore a<f>U*ro Xtiputp&Ttjs here, and n&Xw may be regarded as practically certain. That 
the vavapxla at Sparta was an annual office is generally agreed, but whether it normally was 
entered upon in midsummer or in the autumn is much disputed. Meyer, who formerly 
(GtscA. d, Alt. iv. p. 619) agreed with Beloch (Philol. xliii. p. 261) in accepting midsummer, 
now agrees with Lohse (Quaest. chronol. ad Xenoph. Hell, ptrtinenks, pp. 43 sqq.) and with 
Beloch's former view (Rhein. Mus. xxxiv. p. 119) in regarding the autumn, i.e. the be- 
ginning of the official Spartan year, as the normal commencement of the term of 
office of the vavapxoi. But whatever may have been the rule, there is no doubt that there 
were great irregularities in practice. Lysander, for instance, was in command not from 
autumn to autumn or even summer to summer, but from spring to spring ; cf. Lohse, /. r. 
But since the episode in connexion with which Cheiricrates is mentioned is related by P 
after the Boeotian war, which took place in the summer (xi. 34), and before the campaign 
of Agesilaus in the late summer and autumn, Cheiricrates' arrival must have occurred soon 
after midsummer, 395. He is mentioned again in connexion with the autumn campaign 
(xxL 26), and was no doubt succeeded in the course of the winter by Pisander, who fell at 
the batUe of Cnidus in August 394 ; cf. xv. 33, note. Cheiricrates' predecessor, Pollis, 
would therefore be expected to have come out in the summer or autumn of 396, and 
the great probability of this date for Pollis' arrival is one of the chief reasons for putting 
Cols, i— iv before v-viii in spite of the difficulty caused by the change of hands ; cf. iii. 9, 


note. For if Cola i-iv are placed after v-viii and the 8th year in iii. 9 is 395-4, not 396-5, 
the advent of Pollis seems to coincide almost with his replacement by Cheiricrates. This 
conflict of evidence can only be explained in one of two ways. It is possible that Pollis 
entered office in the summer of 395, but only held it for a very short time before being 
succeeded by Cheiricrates. It is, however, not satisfactory to suppose that he was recalled 
so soon, still less that he died, for he is likely to be identical with the Pollis who was 
cWroXw in 393-2 (Xen. Hell. iv. 8. 11), and perhaps with the vavapxos of that name in 376 
(Xen. HelL v. 4. 61). Or secondly, Pollis may have entered office in the summer of 396, 
and on the hypothesis that Cols, i-iv follow v-viii the mention of his arrival is out of its 
proper chronological position. It must then be supposed that in relating the naval war 
P has departed from the fairly strict chronological arrangement followed by him in 
narrating the campaigns of Agesilaus and events in Greece, and has grouped together in 
Col. iii sqq. a series of events beginning with some which ought to have been mentioned 
long before. This explanation, however, is also very unsatisfactory, for in the subsequent 
sections dealing with the naval war (xi. 1-34, xv. 32-xviii. 33) the chronological arrangement is 
adhered to at the price of dividing the narrative of Conon's operations into two parts 
separated from each other by the account of the Boeotian war; and since iii. 9-10 seem to 
record the conclusion of one year and the beginning of another, it is singularly difficult to 
regard the events next related as really belonging to the beginning of the year just 

22. 'ApxfXafta : this seems to be the name of a ship rather than of a place ; cf. Frs. 19. 
8 and 20. 11, where it is perhaps mentioned again. Possibly there is some connexion 
with Archelaus king of Macedonia, a country which is mentioned in ix. 29. 

23—6. Cf. Diod. xiv. 79. 8 trapry€VT)$Tj<rav & rj> K6tn»vi rpirjpiis €vevf)K»VTa } &jra piv airb 
KiXudat t oy&orpcovra £* anb fewtKip, hv 6 libvvlvp bvvdanjs fix* ttjw ffytfutviw, a passage which 
is no doubt derived directly or indirectly from P (cf. p. 137), though whether Diodorus and 
P agreed exactly with regard to the numbers of the ships is by no means certain in view of 
the differences between them as to numbers elsewhere; cf. v. 13-6, 60, and vi. 21, notes. 
There is also the difficulty in Diodorus' account that these 90 ships added to the 80 which 
Conon possessed previously (xiv. 79. 6) make 170 triremes, but in his description of the 
battle of Cnidus (83. 4) the Persian fleet consists of only rpufptis . . . trXriW r&v cWv^Kovra, 
against 85 on the side of the Spartans. Xenophon, however, {Hell. iv. 3. 12) states that the 
Spartan fleet was greatly inferior in numbers, so that wXtiovs rftv cWrqcorra seems to imply 
too low an estimate. 

Diodorus* statement concerning the arrival of the 90 ships comes at the end of 
a section dealing with the naval war (79. 4-8), in which he previously recounts the assistance 
offered by the king of Egypt to the Spartans, the blockade of Conon with 40 ships at 
Caunus by Pharax, the Spartan vavapxos, with 120 ships, the relief of Conon by Pharnabazus 
and Artaphernes, the revolt of Rhodes from the Spartans, and the capture by Conon of the 
Egyptian corn-ships which sailed to Rhodes in ignorance of the revolt. These incidents of 
the naval war he synchronizes with the dispatch of Agesilaus to Asia and his first campaign 
(79. 4 tovtuv bi irpaTT0fUi«M>9 } referring to 79. 1-3); the second campaign of Agesilaus, which 
corresponds to Cols, v-viii, follows immediately afterwards (80. 1 furh, & ravra), being 
succeeded by the Boeotian war and the battle of Haliartus (81. 1 r&v M koto rg* 'Aalav tovtop 
rbv rponov difKqpcW), and Conon's visit to Babylon (81. 4-6). The events of all three 
chapters 79-81 are assigned by Diodorus to the year 396-5, but his narrative of the two 
preceding years 398-7 and 397-6 deals only with Sicilian history, and it is clear that in 
those three chapters the events of two or more years have been compressed into one. 
Isocrates (Paneg. 142) speaks of the Persian fleet being blockaded (wokwpKoviuvov) for 
three years «V t$ iroXc^ r$ n*p\ 'P6bov ; but ndkiopKovptvov is clearly a rhetorical exaggeration, 

P % 



and it is not certain whether he is referring to the years 397-5 or 396-4. Beloch (Gr. 
Gesch. ii. p. 146), supported by Lohse, op. a't. pp. 24 sqq., takes the former view, placing 
the arrival of Conon at Caunus and the siege and relief of that place in 397, principally 
on account of the mention of Pharax, who is known from Xen. Hell. iiL a. 12 to have 
accompanied Dercylidas in his campaign of 397, which began in the spring. The revolt 
of Rhodes is referred by Beloch to the summer of 395, by Lohse to the summer of 396. 
Meyer, on the other hand {pp. at. v. pp. 208-9), connecting Paneg. 142 with Evag. 64, 
where it is stated that the king haKtbaipjovinv hrrtn rpt&v tr&v <tyc tXero rtjr apxh** x - e - in the 
three years 396-4 up to the battle of Cnidus in August 394 (cf. Paneg. 154 and Evag. 56 

through Conon's fleet AaxfoaifuSitot pc? Kar€vavfMx^fi f l ataf *"} *■?• *PXV* airfOTf p^cray, ol d* 

"EXX17W TJkfvScpvfyaav), postpones the arrival of Conon at Caunus and the siege of that 
town by Pharax to the spring of 396, placing the revolt of Rhodes at about the beginning 
°f 395- That the naval war did not begin in the summer of 397 is, he thinks, implied by 
Xenophon, Hell. Hi. 4. 1, where the commotion at Sparta caused by the news of the Persian 
preparations of a large fleet brings about the expedition of Agesilaus, which left Greece in 
the spring of 396. The chief objections to this view are (1) that it implies a very long 
term of office as vavapxos for Pharax, who is known to have been already acting in that 
capacity in the spring and early summer of 397, and (2) that if his operations in Asia 
against Conon took place in 396 it is difficult to account for his presence at Syracuse about 
midsummer of that year ; cf. Diod. xiv. 63. 4 and 70. 2, where ttapanton is no doubt identical 
with *apa(, though Diodorus is almost certainly wrong in still calling him vavapxos. More- 
over, as Lohse remarks {op. at. pp. 26-7), the fear aroused at Sparta in 396 by the scale 
of the Persian preparations is not inconsistent with the supposition that the Persians had 
already a fleet of 40 ships in 397, and the three years of Isocr. Evag. in which the king 
a<p€iktro iifv apxn* are likely to be different from the three years of the Paneg. in which the 
Persian fleet was blockaded, and may be 395-3. Lohse's discussion of this point requires 
some modification in the light of the evidence from P that the visit of Conon to the Persian 
court happened not in the summer of 395 but in the following winter, but on the main 
questions of the date of Pharax' pavapxta and the distinction between the three years of the 
Paneg. from those of the Evag. we agree with him against Meyer. 

The account of the democratic rising (Swavdaraais) at Rhodes in xi. 1-34 presupposes 
that the expulsion of the Spartans and the admission of Conon's fleet had taken place some 
time previously, the government of the island being in the interval in the hands of the 
Atay6p*uH. Since the revolution is clearly assigned by P to the summer of 395 (cf. xi. 34 
rovrov rov depot*), the expulsion of the Spartans can hardly have occurred later than the 
winter of 396-5. That P's account of this immediately preceded that of the cnamarwnt is 
unlikely, for there is no reference in xi. 1-34 to the Spartans, and the rising of the democrats 
and the expulsion of the Spartans belong to different years according to P's reckoning. 
The question then arises whether the expulsion of the Spartans took place before or after 
the events recorded in Col. iii. If these belong to 395 it would be necessary to suppose 
that the revolt of Rhodes from the Spartans preceded them, for there would be only 
a very brief interval of time (one or two months at most) between the arrival of Pollis and 
the democratic revolution. P would then confirm Diodorus' statement that the reinforce- 
ments from Phoenicia arrived after the revolt of Rhodes. But it is in any case more 
probable that Pollis' arrival took place in the summer of 396 (cC iii. 9 and 21, notes); 
and if so there is an interval of practically a year between Cols, iii and xi, which gives ample 
time for the expulsion of the Spartans during this period. Unfortunately the remains of 
Col. iii are insufficient by themselves to show definitely whether the expulsion of the Spartans 
from Rhodes had taken place or not On the one hand Caunus not Rhodes seems to be 
the head quarters of the Persian fleet ; and if *Apraxp€]pm{s] be read in iii. 37 the situation may, 


as Meyer suggests, correspond to that in Diod. xiv. 79. 5, when Pharnabazus and Artaphernes 
came to the rescue of Conon at Caunus, Rhodes being still held by the Spartans. On the 
other hand xi. 9 and xv. 36 show that even after Rhodes had become the head quarters of 
the Persian fleet Conon was in the habit of visiting Caunus, and it is possible that 
a mention of Rhodes in connexion with the Persian fleet occurred in iii. 11-2. 
Moreover, if the expulsion of the Spartans occurred after the events recorded in Col iii, 
there is a discrepancy between P and Diodorus as to the date of the arrival of the 
reinforcements, since Diodorus places that event after the defection of Rhodes. In itself there 
is nothing at all improbable in the view that these reinforcements played a part in causing 
Rhodes to revolt from the Spartans, but we have some hesitation, in consideration of the 
agreements between P and Diodorus elsewhere, in accepting so serious a divergence between 
them as to the order of the events described in Diod. xiv. 79. 4-8, especially as the placing 
of Cols i-iv after v-viii would bring P into harmony with Diodorus on this point On the 
whole, however, in view of the advantages gained by the hypothesis that the arrival of the 
reinforcements preceded the revolt, and the inextricable difficulties caused by maintaining 
that the events in iii 1 1 sqq. belong to 395, we prefer to suppose that the order of events 
in Diodorus is erroneous, and that the arrival of the reinforcements occurred in the late 
summer or autumn of 396, the revolt of Rhodes in the same autumn or the following 
winter, the account of the latter event being probably lost between Cols, iii and v. 

The accuracy of Diodorus' narrative of the naval war in xiv. 79. 4-8 having been denied 
in one important particular, it becomes somewhat doubtful how far the rest of it is to be 
trusted. If the siege of Caunus was conducted by Pharax, this must certainly be referred 
to 397, not to 396. For apart from other objections to the supposition that his vavapxla ex- 
tended to 396 (cf. p. 2 1 a), since Pharax is called 6 vpfapap vatapxP* (*• 3 1 ) m tire year preceding 
the 8th year mentioned in iii. 9 and the arrival of Pollis apparently belongs to the 8th year 
(or at any rate to 396), it is very unlikely that he was the immediate predecessor of Pollis. 
And if another vavapxos intervened Pharax' term of office cannot have extended into 396. 
The probable chronology of the *avapx<* is in our opinion 398-7 (autumn) Pharax; 397 
(autumn) to 396 (autumn) unknown ; 396 (autumn) to 395 (summer) Pollis; 395 (summer-* 
winter) Cheiricrates ; 394 Pisander (cf. xv. 33, note). Hence P on the whole seems to 
support Beloch's chronology of the naval war against that of Meyer. To make P 
consistent with Meyer's view that the naval war began in 396, it is necessary to suppose 
that Pharax in Diodorus xiv. 79. 5 is a mistake for Pollis or his unknown predecessor. 
There is, however, as Meyer remarks, a good deal to be said for treating *dpa( there as an 
error, for if the siege of Caunus began in 397, when Pharax was with Dercylidas in Caria, 
Diodorus ought to have mentioned it in his account of Dercylidas' campaign in xiv. 39, and 
the indecisive character of the operations on land, which ended in a tame avoidance of battle 
and a truce for further negotiations, ill accords with the hypothesis that the Spartans had in 
397 so large a fleet as 120 ships in the Aegean, and were taking active measures against 
Conon. It is possible, therefore, to limit Pharax' period of office to 397, and yet to regard 
the naval war as commencing in the spring of 396, for apart from the mention of Pharax 
in Diod. xiv. 79. 4 there is no clear evidence that Conon came to Caunus before 396. The 
substitution of another name for Pharax in that passage would however still be compatible 
with Conon's arrival there in 397, for Diodorus' expression with regard to Conon (diarpi/Soira 
tf cV Kavwf furh wtmv Ttovap&Kovra) is quite vague. And since the rhetorical exaggeration in 
Isocr. Paneg. 14a (cf. p. 211) is more excusable if the three years of the siege refer to 
397-5 instead of 396-4, it does not seem worth while to reject Diodorus' statement that 
Pharax besieged Conon, though the number of the Lacedaemonian ships (120) may well 
be too large. The connexion suggested by Meyer between iii 37 and the relief of Conon 
by Pharnabazus and Artaphernes (cf. p. 212) is therefore not very probable. 


iii. 26. [aw6 <t>oivlicr)s (cf. Diod. /. c.) is unlikely, as QoipUvp occurs in 1. 23, applying to 
the whole fleet. Perhaps \dn6 2A&pos km . . . ; but the division as "Atcrvv is very uncertain. 
The name "Aicrav is not known, and \uraKrwv may be all part of the name of the 

30. ] . apos : the vestige of a letter before a would suit y or r best, but is also com- 
patible with *, <r, v, or *. It is of course quite uncertain how many letters intervene 
between ] . apas and pip oZp. 

34. Perhaps ko\ dtafias &s rdxi]rra irorafj[6]p t as proposed by Bury, who suggested 
KaXovpwov in 1. 35* 

35. cir Xipvijy iifv K[a]vv(av: there was a large lake a little north of Caunus, which was 
connected with it by a river, i. e. the irorafj[6]p t6p Ka{[pwp of l. 34, or Kdk&ts, as it is called 
by Strabo xiv. 651 *1ra Kavpos ko\ narapbs nXijaiov KaXfits fiaOvs tym? ^loayvy^p. 

36. Kofvoarot : the supposed « has been corrected. 

37. V»fc]: perhaps noo-i^fyy^;], who is mentioned in xvi. 27 as having been 
appointed by Tithraustes to command the Persian forces along with Ariaeus, 01 
'Apra^fyi^s], who, according to Diod. xiv. 79. 5, came with Pharnabazus to the help 
of Conon at Caunus (cf. iii. 23-6, note), unless indeed 'Apra^pyqt there is a mistake for 
naaHpfpvrp, a name not known apart from xvi. 27. 

40-3. Fr. 2, containing the letters ]v<£*>[, ]aa[, ]rjk1{, and ]taaa[ t is placed here chiefly 
on the evidence of colour ; the recto is blank at this point, and the proposed arrangement 
is by no means certain. 

Col. v. i-vii. 4 = chs. VI-VTI. Agesilaus in Asia. 

v. 1. The supposed stops at the beginning of this line and 1. 3 may represent the 
tip of a letter. The second scribe sometimes fails to insert stops when he leaves a 
space, e. g. in 1. 6. 

4. ff pkv [ovv: a new section probably begins here. Whether the preceding lines 
concerned Agesilaus' preparations at Ephesus (cf. Xen. Hell iii. 4. 16-9) or events in 
another part of the world is quite uncertain. 

7. w of <rrparon[g]bop is corrected, and the vestiges after at par indicate something more 
than o. Perhaps the scribe began to write arpartvpa. 

8. For Ko[va]rpifov vtdiop cf. DiodoniS xiv. 80. I prrh & ravra 'Ayrjaikaos pip {(ayaybv 
rffP bvvapiv its r6 Kavarpov frcdtov kcu ttjv trtpl liwvkop \&pav ibrjvai rat t&p fyxoptW *rW* l s» 

The Zpri in 1. 9 probably refer to Sipyius. Xenophon does not state Agesilaus' route 
to Sardis. 

9-IO. Possibly Ta(dp<[ros tU nktvBiop; cf. 1. 34 and Diod. /. C. 'KyqvCKaos dc th nktvBlop 
avvrd(at roi/e orpaTtwras. But though the nXipBiop must have been mentioned before 1. 34, 
it would be more naturally introduced after the mention of Tissaphernes in 11. 14-6, i.e. in 
11. 17 sqq., where the manoeuvres of the march are described. Moreover the £ of ra£ap* 
is very doubtful, and the correct division may be rh Sprj rh . apt . . . 

13—6. Cf. Diod. /. C. Tiaaacf^pprfs bi pvpiovs pip Imrrts ircvraKurpvpiovs bi irffov? dBpoiaas 
hrrjKokovOfi rots Acucf&u/iowW. WilamOWltZ proposes nt(ovs pip irorJaiMO'xiXtot/f *a[i] px^piovt 

1x*» v 9 bra-far bi pvp'mp o]U Adrrow, and would bring the figures in Diodorus into agreement 
with P by emending ntproKiapvplow into irrirajeur^iXiovf Kal) pvpiovs. But P and Diodorus 
differ elsewhere in regard to figures (cf. notes on v. 60 and vi. 21), and the hnrug may well 
have been mentioned before the irrfoi, as in Diod. /. c. and in xxi. 12 (though not in 
vii. 41). The restoration suggested in our text produces a conflict with Diodorus as 
to the number of the finrcir, but not necessarily in that of the trefo*, since mpraKurpvpi** 
would suit the space. That figure is very high ; but cf. Pausan. iii. 9. 6 ycpoptpip Ac wp6s 


TuTacKfMpvrjw (rarpainjp r&v ncpl 'laWa* ftagip cV "Eppov lrtbUf Uf9 rt iwrrov r&p Utpa&p €vuajinp 
6 'AyiyaiXaof jcac t6 ir*(6v rcfrr n\tl<rrov aBpourBi* /irra y» rbv X(p(ov arpar6p. The agreement 
between P and Diodorus, supported by Pausanias, concerning the movements of 
Tissaphernes 1 troops is very striking. Xenophon (Hell. iii. 4. 21, Ages. 1. 29) gives 
a wholly different account; according to him, the satrap expected an invasion of Caria, 
and dispatched his infantry thither and his horse to the plain of the Maeander, so that 
Agesilaus reached the neighbourhood of Sardis unmolested and never met the Persian 
iniantry at all ; cf. note on v. 59. 

17-9. The restorations are due to Bury, who further suggests wmtevovrow in 1. 17 and 
continues in 11. 20-2 AA]X«ff ical jcpafrvvar rijp ra^tF, cnotftro di it}s] arparffyias [an6lkt£& airrov, 
a passing compliment to Agesilaus' tactical skill ; cf. p. 123. That the jrAutftop was mentioned 
here is probable in any case ; cf. 11. 9 and 34, notes. 

22. The first a of pax«r6ai is corrected. 

24. <ras- : or craer* without a stop; cf. note on 1. 1. 

34. v\it[6lov : cf. vi. 35 and the passage from Diodorus quoted in 1. 9, note. Diodorus 
proceeds to describe Agesilaus' arrival before Sardis and the plundering of the environs, 
including the wapakuros of Tissaphernes ; but the scanty remains of 11. 36-58 do not offer 
any points of connexion with his narrative, and it is not clear precisely where the battle 
described in v. 59-vi. 27 took place. Xenophon, whose account in HelL iv. 22-4 = Ages, 
1. 30-33 is widely different (cf. v. 59, note), describes it as occurring on the bank of the 
Pactolus before Agesilaus reached Sardis, the environs of which were, according to 
Ages. 1. 33, plundered after the engagement Diodorus, whose description of the ambush 
in xiv. 80. 2-3 closely resembles that of P, represents Agesilaus as turning back 
(fWrptyor) after reaching Sardis, and places the scene of the battle d*i piaov . . . t&p 
rt lapfcv* ml OvPdpwiop, the site of which town is unknown. Pausanias in the passage 
quoted in note on 11. 13-6 vaguely says that the fight occurred in the'Eppov ncdlov, which 
is also mentioned in Ephorus Fr. 131, possibly in reference to this battle. From vi. 29, 
where it is stated that Tissaphernes after his defeat retreated with his troops (arr<x»pi<r™) 
to Sardis, it is probable that in P's account Agesilaus had passed Sardis before the 
battle, and inurrptyat in Diodorus is, as Meyer remarks, likely to be due to a mis- 
understanding, since he uses the same expression (ancxvpw) as P with regard to 

40. A stop may be lost after l/towr. 

41. fuiX|Xo[y: the position of Fr. 3 containing the supposed beginnings of 11. 42-9 
and 54-60 is not absolutely certain, and it might belong to an earlier column. The 
recto gives no help. The combinations /ioX|Xo[y and A[yrf<ri]\a[os and the fact that . 1 [ is 
the last line of a column are the grounds for placing it as we have indicated. If pdX\\c[v is 
correct, the iota adscript of eyyvrcpm is perhaps erroneous. 

45. 8 in the margin opposite this line seems to indicate that this is the 400th line 
of the MS. Similar indications of the successive hundreds are common in poetical texts, 
e.g. 228 and 841; but the only parallel that we can adduce from a prose MS. of this 
period occurs in the Pherecydes papyrus (P. Grenf. II. 1 1), where $■ in the margin opposite 
ii. 3 is more likely to mean the 600th line than the 6th section. 

56. Perhaps tovto^ t6* tpiai[r6p. 

58. There is a spot of ink in the margin before « . [, which might represent ]o, but 
may be merely an accident. That it is connected with S in the margin against 1. 45 
is unlikely. 

v. 59-vi. 53- 

' (Agesilaus sent) . . . hoplites and [.]oo light-armed troops, and appointed as their 
leader Xenocles, a Spartiate, with instructions to form in order of battle when (the main 


body of the army) marched past them. Agesilaus on the next day at dawn roused his army, 
and continued his advance. The barbarians accompanied them as usual, some assaulting 
the Greeks, others . . . them, others in loose order following them over the plain. When 
Xenocles considered that it was the moment to attack the enemy, he started up with 
the Peloponnesians from the ambush, and charged at a run. The barbarians at the sight 
of the advancing Greeks fled over the whole plain, whereupon Agesilaus perceiving the 
panic dispatched from his army the light troops and the cavalry in pursuit, and they 
in combination with the force which had issued from the ambush pressed hard upon the 
barbarians. They followed the enemy for no very long time, as they were unable to 
overtake them because the majority were horsemen or without armour, and after killing 
about six hundred of them they desisted from the pursuit, and attacked the barbarians' 
camp. Finding the guard not strongly posted they soon took it, and captured from the 
enemy large supplies, many prisoners, and much baggage and money, including that 
of Tissaphernes himself. Such being the result of the battle, the barbarians in terror 
of the Greeks retired with Tissaphernes to Sardis, while Agesilaus after remaining there 
three days, in which he restored to the enemy their dead under a truce and erected 
a trophy and ravaged the whole country, led his army forward again into Phrygia Magna. 
He no longer kept his soldiers formed in column on the march, but allowed them to range 
over as much of the country as they liked, and to plunder the enemy. Tissaphernes on 
learning that the Greeks were continuing their advance, gathered the barbarians together 
once more, and followed in the rear of his adversaries, at a distance of many stades. 
After crossing the Lydian plain Agesilaus conducted his forces through the mountains 
which lie between Lydia and Phrygia, and after traversing these brought them down to 
Phrygia until they reached the river Maeander, which rises at Celaenae, the largest city 
in Phrygia, and flows into the sea near Priene and (Myus ?). There he encamped the 
Peloponnesians and their allies, and consulted the auspices whether he ought to cross 
the river or not, and whether he should march against Celaenae or retreat. Since the 
sacrifices proved unpropitious for him, after waiting there during the day of his arrival and 
the next, he retired with his army . . .' 

v. 59 sqq. With the account of the ambush cf. Diodorus xiv. 80. 2-3, which is 
somewhat less detailed, aircorfftXf 3C«pqk\ ca t6p Irraprtartiv perk xiXiaov km rfr/xucoaiW arparwrvp 
wKTog its ripa baavp t&jtqp Znow fatopcvtrg tovs Papffapovs. aMs d* &p *}p*PQ vop*v6pgpos ptra rrjs 
dvpdptvs lircftdi) r^r pip i'ptdpav waprjKka$€P 9 ol di fidpfiapog wpoairiwrotrrts araicTW rois M. rijs 
ovpayias i&tnrorro, napatefas *£ui<f>pTjs tniarpt^tp art rovs Uipaas. yivopi'vrjf 6i Kaprtpas pax*]* 
teal rov ovaorjpov rois Karh t^p ivtbpav apBtvros Utivot pip ircuaviaarrts circ^cpoiro roU iroXcfuW, ol 
dc Iljpacu fo&povwrn avrovs arrokapfiapoptpovs tls piaov KarerrXaytjaop #cal irapaxprjpa *<f>€vyop. ol dc 
WfpH t6v 'Ayrjatkaop p*XP l P* v twos embi&£aprff dvccXay piv vntp. rovs 4£aKurxiXiovg alxpak***v 
& iroXv n\rj$os rjBpotaap, rijp & iraptpfiokrjp diqpircurau ytpovvav no\\u>p ayoBmr. arro di rns 
paxrjt Ti(Taa<f)€pvrfs pip tl$ lapbtis afrfydfyw/o-c JCgrawfirXiyyfifwg rljv rSKpav t&p AaKtbatpovivv. The 

general resemblance between Diodorus and P is very close, though except in the last 
sentence of the extract (cf. vi. 27-30) the verbal coincidences (which are indicated by the 
underlined words) are not striking, and besides minor differences there is a discrepancy 
as regards Agesilaus' tactics, since Diodorus represents him as bringing on a general 
engagement before giving the signal to Xenocles, while in P Xenocles chooses his own 
time for the attack, and is then reinforced by a portion of the main army. Diodorus' 
account has been generally supposed to be derived from Ephonis; and if so Ephorus 
must have been based on P; cf. pp. 135-7. 


Xenophon on the other hand (Hell. iii. 4. 22-4 = Ages. 1. 30-33) gives quite a different 
colour to the engagement. The Persian infantry having been sent to Caria (cf. note on 
v. 13-6), only the cavalry, under an unnamed w f /"» v 9 were engaged, at first with the Greek 
cavalry and subsequently with the infantry, while Tissaphernes himself is stated to have 
been at the time in Sardis and not present during the fighting. That Xenophon is referring 
to the same battle as Diodorus, though that has been doubted, is practically certain, for 
in both accounts the fight results in the capture of the Persian camp with much booty, and 
it is difficult to believe that if there had been two important victories, Xenophon would have 
omitted one of them; cf. Meyer, Gesch. d. Alt. ii. p. 207. Xenophon's account is followed 
in the main by Plutarch, Ages. 10, but with some variation in details (e.g. according to 
Plutarch Tissaphernes was present in the engagement, and Agesilaus' attack is described 
somewhat differendy), which are explained by Sachse (Die Quellen Plutarchs in der 
Lebensbeschreibung des Kbnigs Agesilaos, pp. 8-9) on the hypothesis that Plutarch was using 
Ephorus, who was based on Xenophon. If this view were accepted, it would follow 
that Diodorus' account was not derived from Ephorus; but Sachse seems to us to 
overestimate the extent to which Plutarch in his Ages, has used Ephorus ; cf. xx. 37, note, 
and p. 126. Nepos (Ages. 3) also follows Xenophon, but Pausanias (cf. note on v. 13-6) 
supports Diodorus as to the presence of the Persian infantry. While Diodorus' story 
stood almost alone, and might be explained as a comparatively late invention, historians 
have naturally preferred to believe Xenophon ; but the case is now much altered, and 
the alternative version of Agesilaus' victory found in P and Diodorus, which is clearly 
based on good evidence, has considerable claims to acceptance. The fact that Xenophon 
represents Tissaphernes as repeating in 395 the error which he had made with regard 
to Agesilaus' plans in 396, and again sending his infantry to Caria where they were useless, 
is decidedly suspicious. 

60. The traces of the first letter of the line do not suit c . rf[* «w batrb* r©W (cf. Diod.) 
is therefore inadmissible. Diodorus gives the number of the orporufau as 1400 in all. 
Since it is quite uncertain whether [*€»-], [<5#c-] or [in-] occurred in the lacuna at the end of 
the line, we abstain from inserting a number before ArXiiw, especially as P and Diodorus 
differ elsewhere in respect of numbers; cf. iii. 23-6, note. 

vi. 2. Xtvotkca: cf. Diod. /. c. and Xen. Hell. iii. 4. 20, where it is stated that he was 
one of 30 Spartiates who came out with Herippidas in succession to of n*p\ Kvaa&pop in the 
winter of 396-5, and was appointed one of the two leaders of Agesilaus' cavalry. 

3. In the lacuna the Pabi(ovm were no doubt specified : probably they were 
Agesilaus' troops, e. g. of M rfje otpayfa (cf. Diodorus), rather than the iroXcfum; cf. faMj 
rrpf flip cv&pav waprjXKa$tv in Diodorus. jSadifoyrfff also suits Agesilaus' troops better than 
the enemy, although in the very similar account of the ambush against the Mysians in 
xix. 28 sqq. of & tup 'EWrjvnv cV[cdpfi']oiTCf, &r %<rap tear aurovs, itanfiTjacunts ic.r.X., the Subject 
of fyrap is the enemy. There is, however, this difference between the arrangements for the 
attack in the two cases, that in xix. 28 the troops employed for the ambush were left behind 
when the main army continued its forward march, whereas in the present instance, 
as appears not only from P's account but more clearly from that of Diodorus, the ambush 
was laid on the line of march of the main army, which would thus have to pass it. 

4. [cfr di Hfv fautwra* (cf. xix. 22) is due to Bury. 

5. o^ia w)ip<{i : cf. Diod. and rrjs vvrr{6s] in v. 59 corresponding to wkt6s in Diod. It 
would be possible to read fyrap 1-0 <r]rp4 T «HH •[•••> but the other reading is preferable, 

though r]o [<rr]p4 r *H^ a * s ver ? doubtful. 

8. fof[ \jov: «rf[ic<iX]uo* (Dittenberger)is not long enough ; «rf[rd£«W necessitates 

the alteration of avrofo to airroU, but cf. the error of case in 1. 18. arfaiKp]vo9 avrovs 
is possible, but not very satisfactory. 


VI. 9. araitr[a>r : cf. Diod. /. C. npoairivrorrfs ardjrraf. 

21. i£oKo<Tiovs : Diodorus gives the number of the slain as 6000, which is no doubt an 
error, probably due to a corruption in the MSS. Cf. v. 13-6 and 60, notes. 

28-30. Cf. Diod. and v. 59, note. 

30 sqq. Diodorus (xiv. 80. 5) says only'Ayrjvtkaos V *ircx«p7<rf p*v *U rAr fo» <rarpawtiaf 9 
€v bi tois Upots ov bvpaptvos KaWuprja'at (cf. vi. 5 1 "" 2 ) ir< & uv owtfyay^ rifv dvvafuv ciri Bakarrap, and 

omits altogether the autumn campaign of Agesilaus described in xviii. 33 sqq. Xenophon 
(Bell. iii. 4. 25) says nothing of the advance to the upper Maeander, but proceeds direct 
to the death of Tissaphernes and the negotiations with Tithraustes which led to 
Agesilaus' departure into the satrapy of Pharnabazus. The details provided by P are 
therefore new. 

34. Qpvyiap ndKiP [ttjp] /xcydXi^r : possibly P means to imply that this was the second 
invasion of Phrygia ; cf. xx. 7 rtfy x^P av T *>* •[pJt** °^« «fe [hf ro ^ ^portpov [6*p]mts cW/3aXrv 
(i.e. in 396), Xen. HelL iii. 4. 12-5 and Diodorus xiv. 79. 3, where the first campaign 
of Agesilaus in Phrygia is described. The campaign of 396, however, took place not 
in Phrygia Magna (i.e. the interior) which was in the satrapy of Tissaphernes, but in 
Phrygia wapaBaKarrllUos (cf. xxi. 17) in the satrapy of Pharnabazus; and though the order 
of the words *ls Qpvyiav n&kw [n)?] /xrydAi/p may be intended to express that iraXt* qualifies 

Qpvyiav, but not rijv fitydkijv f a comparison with XX. 29 d(f>u(6fKVOt di wdkw npos Y6p&u>w> 

where iraXiv seems to be used loosely for ' further ' and certainly does not imply a previous 
visit to Gordium, suggests that vtSkw in vi. 34 merely qualifies npofjy**, not Qpvyiav. 

35. avvrrraypivovs . . . cV r$ »rX[i]v^iy : cf. V. 9, note, and Xen. Ages. 6. 7 6w6rt yt firjv 
iropcvcMTO €id&s on Ifclty rots noXtfitois pdx*<r$ai W fiovkoivro (rvvreraypcvop p*v ovrts ijyc rA 
arpdrtvpa «.r.X. 

39. c}n{ieoXo]v^ci ZmaOfv : a hiatus which can easily be avoided by placing etnpraAovdci 
after aww. For other instances of hiatus cf. i. 4, note. 

41. The lacuna after crrpjmdy may be filled up by apax<l (Wilamowitz) or f}<n>x»s. 

42. k*[i/mW by itself does not fill the lacuna; *ai may be inserted after it, but is 
superfluous, and rip] r« [\vdias t though possible, is equally unsatisfactory. In the last five 
lines of this column, however, a blank space about three letters in width has been left 
in the middle of the lines owing to a roughness in the papyrus, and if this blank space 
extended as far as 1. 42 Kf[ipcv»v] would be sufficient. But since it tends to diminish in size 
in 11. 49-50, it is not very likely that it reached as far as 1. 42, though it seems to affect 1. 48, 
where the restoration, which is certain, gives only 16 letters in the lacuna in place of 20. 

44-7. Agesilaus no doubt followed the road taken by Cyrus; cf. Xen. Anab. i. 2. 5-7 
Kvpot dc . . . iappnro an6 2ap$€a>V xa\ c £c Xavm &a rip Avfttar oraBpovs rptis rrapavayyas cfcoai ko\ 
dvo «Vl top Malapbpop norap6v . . . rovrov dutfihs fffXavm dtA Qpvyias . . . tU KoXoaads 
. . . imvQ*v I (rXawci oraBpovs rptis napaaayyae tUoaiv tls KfXamfc , rrjs Qpvytas irokiv ottcovptvrjv, 
ptydkrjp «al tvoaipopo. cvravBa Kvp<p /3a<rtXfia i}v . . . al & mrycu avrov (sc. the Maeander) «<ro» 
€K tvv Pa<rik*ia>K fas otyUom wp6s in 1. 44 was suggested by Wilamowitz, who proposes [ko! 
followed by a second adjective (e.g. xoXXtony) vokis early in L 46, with /{ara^eptrai in 1. 47; 
This verb is however much less suitable than iMbwrw, and the lacuna in 1. 47 may be filled 
up by ft[<u followed by the name of another town (Wilamowitz suggests Mvowra). The coast at 
the mouth of the Maeander has greatly altered since ancient times, and Priene is now far 
inland and some distance from the river. The papyrus confirms the reconstruction of the 
ancient course of the Maeander in Wiegand and Schrader, Priene, pp. 8 sqq. Cf. also note 
on vii. 1-2. 

51-2. Cf. the extract from Diodorus quoted in 1. 30, note. 

vii. 1-2. Agesilaus seems to have marched down towards the coast along the right 
bank of the Maeander, which river at this time probably formed the boundary between 


Lydia and Caria ; cf. the mention in 1.- 3 of the Lydians in the plain of the Maeander with Strabo 
xiii. p. 629 7 dc Mtavyh th r6 dpructifjuvov pjpos dtartuKi p*xfH MvieaAij* anb KtXaawp dp^dfuvow 
(cf. vi. 45), &s <prjai Btdnofiirot, Sxrrt ra pip avrov Qpiryts jcarc^ova'c ra irpbs rats KtXatvatt xai rjj 
*Airap*iQ i ra df Mv<ro\ km Avdoc, ra dc Kap€t iccu "torn, ovrco dc «al ol rrorapol teal pakurra 6 Matavfywf, 
ra flip diopcfoFTCff r&r *&v£>v *c.r.>r. WilamowitZ proposes «[ai Mvtroi, Kapc'ff re kq\ "l»w*s in 1. 4, 

and would regard vi. 44-vii. 4 as the passage in Theopompus mentioned by Strabo. 
This restoration and identification however seem to us very doubtful, even if P is Theo- 
pompus ; for Shf6 Kt\ai]pwv in vi. 45 apparently refers to the Maeander not to the Mesogis, 
about which Theopompus was speaking, and there is no room for anything corresponding 
to &<rr9 ra flip avrov fyvyn . . . 'kiraptia. Hence we attach little weight to the general 
resemblance between vi. 44-vii. 4 and Strabo's allusion to Theopompus as an argument for 
the identification of the latter author with P; cf. p. 131. 

If our restoration of vii. 39-40 is correct, Agesilaus spent a period of inactivity at 
Magnesia. The extant fragments of P do not mention him again until xviii. 33, when he 
goes from Lydia northwards to the Hellespont; but xviii. 37-8 show that our author had 
described his negotiations with Tithraustes, no doubt in the gap between Cols, viii and xi. 
The correctness of the position assigned to Fr. 4 is guaranteed (1) by internal evidence, 
since it clearly contains the transition from Agesilaus' campaign to the arrangements for the 
removal of Tissaphernes, (2) by the suitable combination pBX\\o[v in 11. 9-10, (3) by the 
evidence of the recto, which has ends of lines at the right point, (4) bv the colour and texture 
of the papyrus, which agree with those of Fr. 7, containing Col. viii. Frs. 21 and 22 also 
probably belong to Cols, vii or viii. 

Cols. vii. 4— viii. 42 = ch. VIII. Death of Tissaphernes. 

vii. 4 sqq. P now turns, like Xenophon and Diodorus, to the supersession of 
Tissaphernes by Tithraustes and the assassination of the former. Xenophon {Hell. iii. 4. 

25; cf. Ages. I. 35) Says merely yvovt oc *al avrbs 6 Utpa&v /ScuriXcfc Ttao-a<f>€pvrjp alnop tlvat 
rov kok&s <f>cp*ar$at ra avrov TtBpawmjp Karawipy^as airorcftm avrov rijp Krt/kiAqjr. Diodorus 
(xiv. 80. 6-8) is somewhat more detailed : 'Aprafcpfris W drrjs *Aoiat fkurtkevs rd rt c\arr»para 
nvSoptvos Ka\ Koroppcdfop rbv irpbs rovs 'EAAijkw ndktuop di opyrjs c^c rbv Ti<raa<f>€pvrjp . . . xal 
vn6 rrjs pyjrpbs dc Uapwraribos fjp r}(ia>p*pos TipapfiaaaBai rbv Tioaa<p^pinjv . . . KaTaorfjaat oZp 
TiBpawmpf rfytudwa rovry pip iraprryynXf ovWapfidrcur TuraaqMpprip, wpbs dc rag vdktts «al row 
varpemas hrtpfap inurrokac farm irdrrn rovry irotwri t6 npoorarr6p€vop. 6 de TtBpavorrp 
7rapayrp6p*vos fit Kokoea-at rijt Qpvyia* <mvcXa/3c row Ti<T<ra<f>€pri]P bid nvov *Apiaiov aarpdirov 
XovdpMPOP ko\ rifP Kf<fxskfjv drtoicfyaf dircWciXc irpbt top /ScunXca. A fuller account of the 

methods employed by Tithraustes and Ariaeus to accomplish their object is found in 
Polyaenus, Strat. vii. 16. The account in P, which is unfinished at the end of Col. viii, was 
much longer still ; and although in the scanty remains of Cols, vii and viii only the general 
outline of the story can be perceived, the agreement with Diodorus and Polyaenus is clear, 
and the accounts of both those writers are no doubt derived directly or indirectly from 
P. vii. 4-20 probably describe the complaints against Tissaphernes and the king's resolve to 
get rid of him. In vii. 21 sqq. we have the departure of Tithraustes and appointment 
of Ariaeus, in vii. 35 sqq. the message sent by Ariaeus to Tissaphernes at Sardis to induce 
him to come to Colossae, in viii. 20 sqq. the arrival of Tissaphernes with a bodyguard at 
Colossae, and his arrest while bathing at Ariaeus' house. It is clear that P directly connects 
Tissaphernes' fall with his want of success in the campaign round Sardis, as also in our 
opinion does Xenophon, in spite of Beloch's objection (Gr. Gesch. ii. p. 148) ; and it is notice- 
able that in vii, 4 sqq. there is nothing to suggest that Conon was concerned. According to 
Nepos, Conon 3, the supersession of Tissaphernes was the consequence of the representations 


of Conon, who was sent by Pharnabazus to the king to accuse Tissaphernes, and both 
Meyer (Gesch. d. AIL ii. 209) and Beloch (/. c.) accept Nepos* story and adopt the date for 
Conon's visit implied by him and Pausanias iii. 9. 2 (the winter of 396-5) in preference to 
that of Diodorus, who (xiv. 81.4) places this event between the revolt of Rhodes and the battle 
of Cnidus, i.e. in the winter of 395-4, after Tissaphernes' death. But that P supported 
Diodorus' date admits of little doubt, for it is very improbable that Conon had an interview 
with the king himself before his visit to Tithraustes narrated in zv. 32 sqq., and in Justin 
vi. 1. 1 1-2 Conon's visit to the king is mentioned after the mutiny, which is now known 
from xvi. 29 sqq. to have taken place in the late summer or autumn of 395. Diodorus' date 
for Conon's mission is therefore preferable, as Meyer now admits ; the motive was not the 
removal of Tissaphernes, but, as Diodorus says, the need of money for the fleet and the 
appointment of Pharnabazus as commander-in-chief. 

vii. 15. ]curaf{: there is possibly a reference to Artaxerxes' mother Parysatis; cf. 
Diod. Lc. 

16. That Fr. 5 containing (as we suppose) parts of II. 16-24 belongs to Col. vii is 
practically certain, not only from internal evidence (e. g. the mentions of «Wr]oX« and 
Ti]<r?a$[«']pi>ij[.), but on account of the recto, which contains ends of lines like Fr. 4 (cf. note 
on vii. 1*2) and resembles the recto of both the other portions of Col. vii and Fr. 7, con- 
taining Col. viii, in having some white stains on the surface. The supposed junction in 1. 1 8 is, 
however, not very satisfactory : for the vestiges at the beginning of the third line of Fr. 5 
which, if our arrangement is correct, represent the second half of the p of opokoyovp, would 
suit «» better, and in 1. 22 we should expect ras cVun-loXor, for which there is no room. 
Perhaps therefore Fr. 5 should be placed further to the right and nearer to the ends of 
11. 16-24 or even lower down in the same column. 

17. If Fr. 5 is rightly placed, «aT7>[op]ui[.] is inadmissible, for the tail of the p ought to 
be visible, and the vestiges before a do not suit «. 

19. Perhaps iraTpjcor. 

21-5. Cf. Diocl. /. c. and Polyaen. vii. 16. I 'Apra&pfrjs M ri?)' Turtra^'ppovt <rxiX\r)i\np 
irarrfrf/i^f TiBpavanjp ovo cVtoroXAr Kopi{opra rijv pip npos avrop ir*p\ row nokcpov tow npos raits 
"EXkrjvas tirirpcmoir avry rh ircbra, r^p fte npot 'Apuuov &r»r avrop <n/XXaj9ot ptra TiSpainrrov, 6t in 
1. 21 refers to Tithraustes. For «Wr]aXaf cf. viii. 18 and 36. pa in 1. 23 is very likely 
na]\pa, but though the supposed 1 (or 17) after the lacuna might conceivably be cr, there is not 
room for [jWiXc'oo]*. M« . [. .]au>p in 1. 24 is probably a proper name, perhaps that of another 
general ; cf. irpfo & rat ntikus «al rate varpawaf in Diod. The second letter, if not «, may 
be a or o; with o, the third letter must be r. The word preceding may be c^f/i^] * 
<roX]Xa/9«ii> *k«{pop (cf. Polyaen.) suggests itself in 1. 25, but the doubtful letter after cm suits 
r or X (fftcX[cva« ?) somewhat better than 1. 

30-2. The ends of these lines, which are on Fr. 7, may be shifted one line higher 
up, but cf. the next note. * 

35. At the end of the line it is not certain whether the supposed o, which is on Fr. 7, 
belongs to 11. 34 or 35. But the last letter of L 34 must be a, which does not suit the 
vestiges of this letter. 

36-41. Tissaphernes was at Sardis according to Polyaenus, /. c. r& pip <rrpar6v*6op 
KariXarcp rV lapbtw i hence the army at Magnesia (1. 40) was probably that of Agesilaus, 
who would pass that place on his way down the Maeander to the coast (c£ 11. 1-2, note), 
and 11. 36-41 seem to refer to Ariaeus' message to Tissaphernes, conresponding to Polyaen. 
KoXci TuroxKfHpprjp as 6fxov ^ovktwraaBm o*oi rd rr AXXa *al ntpl r&p *EXX^v«v. That Fr. 6 
belongs to this column is practically certain on account of the recto, which like that of 
Fr. 5, has ends of lines and white stains on the surface ; cf. notes on 11. 1-2 and 16. We 
have assigned it to 11. 35-41 on account of the suitable combination rr{p] aarpawUfc in 1. 39. 


The resulting combination May^ijJ^'ja* in 1. 40 is, however, not very satisfactory. The 
vestige of the supposed a would suit y, «-, or r better, and the traces of the supposed a» are 
compatible with many alternatives. Hence Fr. 6 may well belong to some other part 
of Col. vii. 

37. ] . pta . [ : possibly 1 'Ajn<u[, but the vestiges before p do not suit a very welL 

viii. 3. That Fr. 7, which contains this column, is correctly placed admits of no doubt ; 
for although the ends of a few lines of the preceding column preserved in it do not provide any 
certain combination with the rest of Col. vii, the mentions of Ariaeus, Tithraustes, and Tissa- 
phernes and of the cWraW establish its near connexion with Col. vii, and the texture and 
colour of Fr. 7 closely resemble those of Fr. 4, while the white stains found on the recto of 
both Frs. 5 and 6 and the rest of Col. vii are also present on the recto of Fr. 7. 
The writing on the recto is here too much effaced to allow a combination between the 
middles of lines on the recto of Fr. 7 and the scanty remains of ends of lines on 
Frs. 4-6. 

6. ra is no doubt the termination of a numeral, e. g. hrrd or rptdxtm-a. 

18. art<rroka[s : cf. 1. 36, Diod. /. c, and the extract from Pol/aen. quoted in vii. 21-5, 

21. M1AJ7V1 : cf. Polyaen. /. c. aMs W /wtA t&p \oyd&*p % hpMw *ol M4X701W d(j>uc6fi€Pot. 

23. For Ka ] \njp€v cfc cf. xviii. 38, note. 

26. dugrptfu}[v : cf. XX. J I duxrpipJ[p] M naph ry *appofri(v and Polyaen. /. c. iv 'hptaiov 

27-30. Cf. Polyaen. I.e. ijfdi; di n*p\ Xovrpto fywv TO * dutpdiajp dwMiro *Apuuos firrA r£tp 
Btparrcvrrip&p avpapwdaas ovt6p Ka6*ip£at fh &pfidfia£av KanppafifUvrfp aytiv TiBpawrrg napibwv. 

pop in 1. 28 is very likely the termination o(\ov6p*pop (c£ Diod.) or yvp*6p. 

Cols, ix-x = ch. IX. 

ix. 16 sqq. Whether Cols, ix-x precede or follow v-viii is quite uncertain ; cf. p. 113. 
Frs. 8 and 9 are assigned to Col. ix owing to the similarity of the script, which is here 
somewhat smaller than usual, and the colour of the ink, which is exceptionally black; 
but there is nothing to show whether they should be placed above or below 1L 16-20. 
Fr. 33 also may belong to this column. The reference to Macedonia in 1. 29 is remarkable ; 
cf. Fr. 19. 8, note. In Col. x the ink is fainter and the writing much less compact The 
subject there seems to be a favourable character-sketch of some important general or politician, 
but the fragments are unfortunately not sufficiently intelligible to allow of his identity being 

x. 5. *mT7)&€vpar[ cannot be read. 

x6. The first letter of the line may be a, o, or «, but hardly c ; ir<povs 9 Ek[\\{pat is 
therefore unsuitable. 

17. Perhaps n[o]X[«/ioi;1. 

18. [4M v M4 a,f or [ r *n v Mi]° y (but not [vjavfap]*"!*) may be read. If not * or r, the 
second letter must be y or w. The line may have ended r[ofr npaypam 0ali«nu, as Wilamowitz 

19. o[l irXrioToc is hardly long enough. 

21. &7[po]rucy r ... or ^fio}riff6rcp[o]r <rr[ or dtyiorurararoff t[ is possible. 

Col. xi. 1-34 = ch. X. Revolution at Rhodes. 

4 • • . every day Conon used to review the soldiers under arms in the harbour, on 
the pretext of preventing idleness from causing them to deteriorate in war, but really 
wishing first to render the Rhodians tranquil at die spectacle of his soldiers present under 


arms and then to take action. When he had accustomed them all to the sight of the review 
he himself with 20 triremes sailed away to Caunus, as he did not wish to be present 
at the destruction of the Diagoreans, and Hieronymus and Nicophemus, his lieutenants, 
were ordered to take charge. These two waited during that day, and when on the next 
day the soldiers presented themselves for review as usual, marched some of them under 
arms to the harbour, and stationed others a little distance from the market-place. When 
the Rhodians who were privy to the plot considered the moment for action had come, 
they collected in the market-place wearing daggers, and one of their number, Dorimachus, 
mounting the stone from which the herald used to make proclamations, cried out as 
loudly as he could "Down with the tyrants at once, fellow-citizens". The rest when he 
called for help (?) rushed with their daggers into the council of the magistrates, and kilkd 
both the Diagoreans and eleven of the other citizens. Having accomplished this, they 
collected the Rhodian populace in an assembly, and when they had just met Conon 
returned from Caunus with the triremes. The authors of the massacre put down the 
existing constitution and set up a democracy, sending a few citizens into banishment. 
Such was the result of the insurrection at Rhodes.' 

xi. 1. The revolt of Rhodes from the SpsCrtans is ignored by Xenophon, but mentioned 
by Diodorus xiv. 79. 6 (cf. iii. 23-6, note) and Androtion, op. Paus. vi. 7. 6 'PM*p t# to* 
brjpoif ircicrdcVra wro rov Ktvmros an6 AaKt&aifxoviuv /icra/9aXca'6Vit otyas cr ttjv £a<riXcW xa2 
'A&fpatW trvfifmxiav. That the revolt was connected with a change of constitution was 
clear (cf. Xen. HtlL iv. 8. 20, where the exiled Rhodian oligarchs appeal to Sparta in 
.391), but it now for the first time appears that the two events were not contemporaneous. 
In the interval the government was in the hands of one of the leading families (cf. L 25, 
note), and Conon's fleet had already been admitted to the harbour before the democratic 
rising took place. Conon, though supporting the conspirators, took no active part in their 
proceedings, preferring to be absent at the critical moment. The date of the insurrection 
is fixed by xi. 34 as the summer of 395 ; the expulsion of the Spartans must have occurred 
in the winter of 396-5, if not earlier still ; cf. iii. 23-6, note. 

3—8. npo<t>a(Ti(6fieyos fity, wapaaK^ydtrat rjovxovs in 1. 5, orav in L 6, tirtt&r) ovvtjOij nro/[iprci>] 
in 1. 7 and avr6s piv in 1. 8 were suggested by Wilamowitz. We prefer cirri dc to «md^, since 
a connecting particle is required between the two main verbs cf^fafe in 1. 2 and c£«rA«{ae* 
in 1. 9, and W in 1. 5 only balances the preceding (u]». A somewhat different sense, which 
seems less appropriate, is given to the passage if, abandoning wpo<l>aoiC6ti*vos piy and placing 

a full-Stop after mfXcpoi' in 1. 4, we restore napaaK^vafav wpoBvfxovs] row 'Podiovs [tap i]5Wcv . . . 
cirixfipf[cj', at\ <f>av*p6v dtyra<rip cnxx[ccro] 6par t6p c£crc(o , poV tntira c ijieocrt *.r.X. avrovs vapAw^ras 
in 1. 6 is due to Niese. The lacunae at the beginnings of 11. 6-7 ought not to contain more 
than four letters, and perhaps tap should be substituted for Stop, while in K 7 ra may have 
been omitted by mistake. 

9. For tls Kairvov cf. L 29 ex Kavvov. Conon, having been admitted to Rhodes by the 
ruling oligarchs, was probably unwilling to be compromised by the action of the con- 
spirators, and wished that the revolution should appear to be spontaneous* 

10. rcDv AiayofMico)v : cf. 1. 25. The Diagoreans (cf. Aeschin. Ep. 4. 4) or Diagoridae 
were an illustrious Rhodian family descended from Damagetus, king of Ialysus, and 
renowned for their athletic prowess ; cf. Paus. iv. 24. 5 and vi. 7. 1-7. Diagoras himself 
won the boxing contest at Olympia in 464, the victory being celebrated by Pindar in 
01. vii, and his sons Acusilaus, Dorieus, and Damagetus, and grandsons, Eucles and 
Pisirhodus, were all famous athletes, especially Dorieus, who became the leader of the 
anti-Athenian party at Rhodes. Condemned to death with his kindred by the Athenians, 
he escaped to Thurii, and after fighting for some years on the Spartan side was taken 


prisoner in 407, but released (Xen. Hell. i. 5. 19). According to Androrion, ap. Paus. 
vi. 7. 6, when the revolt of Rhodes from Sparta with which we are concerned took place, 
Dorieus was near the Peloponnese, and was arrested and put to death by the Spartans, 
whose conduct is now much more intelligible in view of the fact that the Diagoridae had 
clearly taken the lead in expelling the Spartan harmosts. 

10-1. The Athenians Hieronymus and Nicophemus are known as Conon's chief 
lieutenants from Diod. xiv. 81. 4, where they are left in charge of the fleet when Conon goes 
to visit the Persian king. NuKtywu* is there called Nucod^por, but Xenophon (Hell. iv. 8. 8) 
and Lysias (xix. 7) agree with P as to the form of the name. Concerning Hieronymus, 

Harpocration (s. V.) says <JAAo* rt funjiAovtvovatv Ka\*E<f>opof iv rjj iytey Kali fecarp kclL iv tji 

ivory «tal dfirdr^, but as he must have been mentioned in any detailed history of the 
naval war, this statement provides no argument for identifying P with Ephorus; 
cf. p. 1 a 6. 

12. ira[p<dpocr was suggested by Dittenberger. 

20. airrnv has no construction and something has dropped out, probably to or a word 
meaning ' leader '. 

22. [TWcr, * &ftp«f, ?$9, iroXIrai, k.t.\. This is the only speech in the papyrus; cf. 
p. 123. The position of tyrj between &dpcr and noklrai instead of after l»t*v is due to the 
desire to avoid hiatus; cf. ii. 34, note. 

23-4. For such an accusative as rfjv Porfauw after /Socorro* there is no near parallel, 
but [Boyfttta* seems inevitable, and the phrase is so easily intelligible that we prefer to 
regard the expression as one peculiar to our author rather than to treat it as corrupt ; 
cf. p. 124. 

26. Zvdeica : the moderation of the victorious democrats is noticeable (cf. nvae okiyout 
in 1. 32), and was clearly appreciated by our author, who here shows no trace of the 
aristocratic bias sometimes discernible; cf. i. 33, note, and pp. 122-3. 

Cols. xi. 34-xii. 31 = ch. XI. Constitution of Boeolia. 

1 In this summer the Boeotians and Phocians went to war. Their enmity was chiefly 
caused by a party at Thebes ; for not many years previously the Boeotians had entered 
into a state of discord. The condition of Boeotia at that time was as follows. There 
were then appointed in each of the cities four boulai, of which not all the citizens were 
allowed to become members, but only those who possessed a certain amount of money ; 
of these boulai each one in turn held a preliminary sitting and deliberation about matters of 
policy, and made proposals to the other three, and a resolution adopted by all became 
valid. Their individual affairs they continued to manage in that fashion, while the arrange- 
ment of the Boeotian league was this. The whole population of the country was divided 
into eleven units, and each of these provided one Boeotarch, as follows. The Thebans 
contributed four, two for the city and two for Plataea, Scolus, Erythrae, Scaphae, and 
the other towns which formerly were members of one state with the Plataeans, but at 
that time were subject to Thebes. Two Boeotarchs were provided by the inhabitants of 
Orchomenus and Hysiae, and two by the inhabitants of Thespiae with Eutresis and 
Thisbae, one by the inhabitants of Tanagra, and another by the inhabitants of Haliartus, 
Lebadea, and Coronea, each of these cities sending him in turn ; in the same way one 
came from Acraephium, Copae, and Chaeronea. Such was the proportion in which the 
chief magistrates were appointed by the different units, which also provided sixty bouleutae 
for every Boeotarch, and themselves defrayed their daily expenses. Each unit was, more- 
over, under the obligation to supply a corps of approximately a thousand hoplites and 
a hundred horsemen. To speak generally, it was in proportion to the distribution of their 



magistrates that they enjoyed the privileges of the league, made their contributions, sent 
judges, and took part in everything whether good or bad. The nation then as a whole 
had this form of polity, and the general assemblies of the Boeotians used to meet in the 

xi. 38 sqq. This digression on the constitution of Boeotia in 395, which is somewhat 
irrelevant to the account of the factions at Thebes, and still more so to the war between 
Boeotia and Phocis, is the most valuable section of the papyrus, and disposes of several 
long debated problems. First, as to the four frvXal; these were only known from Thuc. v. 
38. 2 ol Bouordpxcu tKolumrav rait rta-crapa-i jSovXmr t&p Bourr&v ravra alntp &nav to Kvpos fyotwri 
Mat vapjjvovv ycpfaBai o/moovc reus mSktaar oVrai fhukovrai «V axf*\i$ oxfriat £vpofivvp<u, and their 
relation to each other was uncertain, it being often supposed that the four /SovXcu corresponded 
to four different districts. The present passage shows that Kohler (Siizungsber. d. BerL Akad, 
^95, pp. 455-6) was fully justified in connecting them with the four fiovXm which the 
Athenian oligarchs in 411 proposed to institute tit to* pcXXorra gpoW (Arist Ath. Pol. 30), 
and each of which was to consist of 100 persons and to hold office for a year in turn ; and 
his conjecture that in the case of important matters, such as treaties, the four Boeotian /bvXoi 
sat together is now completely established. The present passage, however, brings out a new 
fact of considerable value, that the four pov\ai were not councils of the Boeotian league as 
a whole, but existed in each of the separate states which formed the federation. Thucydides* 
expression rtus rttrtrapat fiovkw t&p Bou»t&v is therefore somewhat misleading, since the natural 
supposition is that he meant jSouXm of the league. There was indeed, in addition to the four 
favkai in the individual states, one federal 0ovXq for Boeotia (cf. xiii. 1 2), which met in the 
Cadmea and consisted of 660 members, contributed by the several states in the proportion 
of sixty /SovXfvrm for each Boeotarch, but it is clear that Thucydides is not referring to this ; 
and that the state fhvkai, not the federal jSovX^, possessed the supreme authority is indicated 
by the greater prominence given in P's account to the former, as well as by Thucydides' 
words aurtp Snap t6 xvpos fgovo-t, and the circumstance that the treaty in question provisionally 
made by the Boeotarchs depended for validity on the consent of each individual state, not 
on a resolution of the federal council. For membership of the state boulai there was 
a property qualification, so that the numbers of the ruling oligarchies must have varied in 
the different states, of which there were at least ten (v, inf). 

Secondly, as to the number of the Boeotarchs, Thuc. iv. 91 mentions eleven uib.c. 424 

t&p SKKav Boiwrapx&P o? cUriv bd*Ka ov (wtircupovPTUP pax«rO<u . . . Uay&pdat 6 AloXd&ov Botmrupx"* 
itc &tfi*p prr 'Aptap&dov rov Avcripaxftov «.r.X. : but it was formerly disputed whether or not the 
figure eleven included the two Theban Boeotarchs. A strong reason for supposing eleven 
to be the whole number of the Boeotarchs was supplied by Poppo (i. 2, p. 292), namely 
that if of flaw Mffjca referred to t&p SKKvp BoH*rapx£>p exclusive of the Thebans $0-0* not «ViV 
should have been written. The number eleven has also been disputed by Wilamowitz (Hermes, 
viii. p. 440), who wished to alter it to seven, corresponding to theseven Boeotian states mentioned 
in Thuc. iv. 93, a change which has been supported on other grounds and widely accepted 
e.g. by Cauer, Pauly-Wissowa, Jteal-JPncycLiiup. 647. Eleven is however the total number 
of the Boeotarchs in P (xii. 11-20), so that the correctness of the figure in Thuc. iv. 91 is 
vindicated beyond dispute. It is also noteworthy that P uses tyx* p merely as a synonym 
for Boeotarch, and says nothing about an archon of the whole league ; this officer therefore, 
who first appears in third century b.c. inscriptions, is not to be identified with one of the 
Theban Boeotarchs, as was suggested by Wilamowitz, /. c, still less to be regarded with 
Freeman {Hist. 0/ Federal Gov. i. p. 128) as the most ancient official of the league. 

Thirdly, with regard to the members of the league, in 424 seven of them, Thebes, 
Haliartus, Coronea, Copae, Thespiae, Tanagra, and Orchomenus were known from 


Thucydides' account (iv. 93) of the battle of Delium. P now gives the complete list, adding 
the names of, firstly, Acraephium and Lebadea, which Thucydides there referred to in the 
expression Kal ol oAAot ol mpl t^v Xifunjv, and secondly Chaeronea, which in 424 was not 
yet independent (cf. xii. 14, note), and also provides some information about towns which were 
subordinate to the sovereign members of the league. What is still more important, we now 
for the first time learn the proportion in which the eleven Boeotarchs were distributed among 
the various states. Formerly all that was known was that Thebes at the time of the 
Peloponnesian war had at least two Boeotarchs and probably no more (Thuc. ii. 2, iv. 91). 
It now appears that Boeotia as a whole was divided into eleven pep? or units, each of which 
provided one Boeotarch and sixty members of the federal jSovX^, 1000 hoplites and 100 cavalry, 
and that these \iipr\ were distributed among the sovereign states not evenly, but in widely 
varying proportions according to their relative importance. Thus four fitpri were assigned to 
the Thebans, though only two of them belonged strictly to the city (cf. xii. 12-3, note), two 
to Orchomenus, two to Thespiae, one to Tanagra, one jointly to Haliartus, Lebadea, and 
Coronea, who appointed the Boeotarch in turn, and similarly one jointly to Acraephium, 
Copae, and Chaeronea. These units also provided a basis for calculating both the 
contributions paid by the states for the federal taxes, the number of judges sent to the 
federal courts, and for defining in general the rights and duties of the individual states where 
common action was required (xii. 25-8). 

The constitution of Boeotia in 395, which P directly contrasts with the conditions 
existing in his own day by t6t* in xi. 38-9 and the use of the past tense throughout, lasted until 
387, when at the peace of Antalcidas the Thebans were unwillingly compelled to reconstitute 
the league, and even quite small Boeotian towns received complete autonomy ; cf. Xen. Hell. 
v. 1. 32-6, whose statements are confirmed by the evidence of the coins. Besides the 
ten sovereign states mentioned by P, except Acraephium (unless the coin from Acraephium 
ascribed by Head, Coins of Central Greece, p. 44, to 456-447 really belongs to 387-374, in 
which case the exception disappears), Plataea, Pharae, Mycalessus, and perhaps some other 
towns of which the names are uncertain are thought to have had coinages of their own from 
387-374 (Head, op. cit. p. xii). On the other hand the beginning of the period to which 
this constitution in the main applies may be placed at 447-6, when the Athenians were 
driven out of Boeotia and the league reconstituted under the hegemony of Thebes, which 
appears to have been the only Boeotian city to issue coinage between 446 and 387 (Head, 
op. cit. pp. xxxix-xl). Some changes, however, must have taken place between that year 
and 395 with regard to the states belonging to the league. Chaeronea was in 424 still 
subject to Orchomenus (Thuc. iv. 76. 3, cf Hellanicus Fr. 49) : it was no doubt made 
independent soon afterwards by the Thebans in order to weaken their ancient and most 
formidable rival. Plataea, which during the period of alliance with Athens had stood 
outside the league, did not rejoin it until 427, and that before that year two additional 
Boeotarchs were appointed by the Thebans besides the two who represented Thebes itself 
is not likely; cf. xii. 12-3, note. Before 447 the league had probably been in abeyance 
during the ten years in which Athenian influence was predominant, and even from 
480 to the battle of Oenophyta Thebes did not occupy the commanding position in 
Boeotia which she had held previously. From 480-456 the coins of only Thebes, Tanagra, 
and Orchomenus are known (Head, op. cit. p. xxxvtfi), and from 550-480 the members 
of the league were somewhat different from those in 395. The numismatic evidence 
of that period (Head, op. cit. p. xxxvii) indicates seven cities issuing coins with the league- 
symbol, Acraephium, Coronea, Haliartus, Mycalessus (? ; no coin of Mycalessus is ascribed to 
this period on p. 51), Pharae, Tanagra, and Thebes, besides Orchomenus which apparently 
did not adopt that symbol on its coinage before 387, a circumstance of which the importance 
has, we think, been over-estimated; cf. xii. 16, note. 



39. The space between r and o of rorc was, we suppose, left blank owing to a roughness 
in the papyrus. 

xii. 1-3. Cf. Thuc. iii. 62. 3, where in 428 the Theban orator contrasts the twatrrtia 
6\iy<*>vdv8pmt> which existed at the time of the Persian war with the oXiyapxla tVoVopo? of Thebes 
in his own day. 

4. Tr/Kwcja^/i/w?, if correct, is employed in an unusual sense, referring to a preliminary 
sitting. Generally the word means ' presiding over '. Ibi? kJo^^cV^ is too long and would 
cause a hiatus. 

IO. Boioarapxov : SO in 1. 22, but in 1. 15 Boicorapxas. 

12-3. Scolus, Erythrae, and Scaphae were towns in the Parasopia east of Plataea and 
Hysiae, between the Asopus and Mount Cithaeron. Scaphae is called iKapfa by Strabo 
(ix. 2. 24), who states that its earlier name was 'Erfurt, and confirms the connexion of 
these three places with Plataea, row Uapaawriovs . . . faavrat If frro GqjSatoir 6W« (errpot d* 
cV rjj nXarotcttv tfwiai top t* 2k£Xop jrai to* 'Etcwwv mil rag 'EpvGpas). Pausanias also speaks 

of Erythrae (ix. 2. 1) and Scolus (ix. 4. 4) as belonging to rj vXarads, remarking in 

connexion with the latter anoKpiim b* *a\ pvp IVt ajro rrjf Gi//3aiW rrjv HXarau&a 6 'AccmoV. It 

is thus clear that in much later times the boundary between the land of Plataea and Thebes 
was the same as it had been in the period which P calls vaguely wp6r*po», contrasting 
it with roVe, i. e. 395. The question when these three towns became tributary to Thebes 
raises a difficult problem. The most natural interpretation of this passage taken by itself 
would be that Scolus, Erythrae, and Scaphae were traditionally united to Plataea, and only 
became subject to Thebes when that city rejoined the Boeotian confederacy on its capture 
in 427. A necessary corollary of this view would be that the right to appoint two extra 
Boeotarchs was only obtained by the Thebans after the fall of Plataea; before 427 the 
number of the Boeotarchs would be nine, not eleven. To this inference there is no 
particular objection, for eleven as the number of the Boeotarchs is not attested before the 
battle of Delium in 424, and in the scanty evidence hitherto available concerning the 
boundaries of the UXaraus in the fifth century, there is nothing definite to show that Scolus, 
Erythrae, and Scaphae had ceased to be united with Plataea in the fifty years before 427. In 
519 the Athenians made the Asopus the boundary between Thebes on the one hand and 
Plataea and Hysiae on the other (Hdt. vi. 108), and in 507, when Hysiae and Oeno€ were 
captured by the Boeotians, both places are called by Herodotus (v. 74) A^oi* mr cV^a™* 
rrp 'Arruajs, though whether Hysiae really belonged to Attica rather than to Plataea is doubtful. 
In 479 Scolus is indeed mentioned in Hdt. ix. 15 as being by$ 177 e^/SatW, and Erythrae 
and Hysiae, which occur later on in the same chapter, also seem to be Theban and outside the 
UXaraus. But, even if Herodotus is correct on this point, which is by no means 
certain, after the battle of Plataea the territory of the Plataeans may have been 
increased at the expense of Thebes, and at any rate during the period of the Athenian 
predominance in Boeotia, it is unlikely that Thebes possessed any territory south of the 
Asopus. After the battle of Coronea according to Thuc. i. 113 ttjp BouoTiart&Xinov'ABrjpaMi 
iraaavy but whether the Plataeans suffered a diminution of their land is not known. Oenoe in 
431 was on the frontier of Attica and Boeotia (Thuc. ii. 18) and Erythrae and Hysiae, 
mentioned by Thuc. iii. 24 in connexion with the flight of the Plataeans to Athens, are 
called by the scholiast ad loc. bfjpoi Botan-Las and have generally been regarded as not 
belonging to the UXaraUe ; but since Plataea even when allied to Athens continued to be 
included in Boeotia, this evidence is not irreconcilable with the view that the Plataeans 
retained the south bank of the Asopus after 447 until the Peloponnesian war. An 
important fresh piece of evidence is provided by xiii. 23-8, where Erythrae, Scaphae, 
and Scolus occur in a list of Boeotian towns from which the inhabitants, owing to fear 
of an Athenian invasion, moved to Thebes. The date and circumstances of the removal 


are not very clear (cf. note ad loc), but it took place probably about 431 ; and Erythrae, 
Scaphae and Scolus, although coupled with three undoubtedly Theban towns, Aulis, 
Schoenus and Potniae, were, we think, dependent upon Plataea when the transference of 
the population occurred For if Erythrae, Scaphae and Scolus were already in 431 
separated from Plataea and joined to Thebes, it is very difficult to see what period is meant 
by irpSrtpov in 1. 1 3. 

In any case, whatever may have been the relations of those three towns to Plataea and 
Thebes in the fifth century, three such unimportant places as Erythrae, Scolus and Scaphae 
cannot have returned two Boeotarchs by themselves apart from Plataea, so that the Thebans 
are not likely to have appointed more than two Boeotarchs until the fall of Plataea in 
427; and on the other hand it is clear from the agreement between P and Thuc. iv. 91 
as to the total number of the Boeotarchs (eleven), that from 427 onwards they appointed 
four. Hence the manifest indication in Thuc. iv. 91 (cf. p. 224), that only two out of the 
eleven were cV eqP&p in 424 is to be regarded as implying not an increase in the representation 
of Thebes between 424 and 395, but a difference in status and mode of election between 
the two representatives of Thebes itself and the other two, who were, as Thucydides 
shows, not c* eri&&v t and may well, as Dittenberger suggested, have been citizens of 
Plataea and the three dependent towns. 

14. <Tvrr<\ovyr<ot> : this is the technical term for indicating the dependence of the lesser 
Boeotian towns on the sovereign states ; cf. Thuc. iv. 76. 3 Xatpvmait fj & 9 Opxop*p6r • • • 
£urrcAct and Paus. ix. 3. 6 r&v M irdkifffidrmv diroaa iortv iXdaa-ovos \6yov <rvprc\*tap alpowrm. 

16. *Opxofi€vioi: Orchomenus, the ancient and most serious rival of Thebes, issued its 
own coinage without the league-symbol in the sixth century and in the first half of the fifth. 
No coins of the city are ascribed to the period 456-387, and the league-symbol does not 
make its appearance on the coins of Orchomenus till 387-74, though many of the types of 
that period are without it and have the traditional corn-grain of the city. On the strength 
of the numismatic evidence, and in particular the absence of the league-symbol, it has been 
supposed that prior to 447 Orchomenus was not a member of the federation, or at any rate 
was not closely connected with it (Head, op. at. p. xxxvii; cf. Cauer, ap. Pauly-Wissowa, 
Real- End. iii. p. 645) ; but that Orchomenus should have remained outside the league for so 
long is not very likely, and the importance attached to the absence of the league-symbol 
from its coinage prior to 387 seems to us exaggerated, especially as the symbol is not always 
found on the coins of Orchomenus from 387-74. 

'YaiavH : this, as Wilamowitz remarked, cannot refer to Hysiae near Plataea, but must 
mean the inhabitants of 'Yijrror on Lake Copais, east of Orchomenus. It is, however, we 
think, not necessary to alter the text to 'y^ttum, as he proposes. 'Yaidlot here probably indicates 
a real variation in the form of the name ; cf. the ancient identification of Hysiae with Hyria 
mentioned by Strabo ix. 2. 12. Of Hyettus and its neighbour Olmones Pausanias (ix. 24. 3) 

Says K&pai pvp T€ ovaat Kal tv$vs c£ apffl* poipas dc (Jfiot doxciv) rfjs 'OpgojifWaf tlal . . . ; but 

the first statement is inexact, for Hyettus appears as an independent irrfXi* in inscriptions of 
the third century b.c In 395, however, it was probably, as Meyer suggests, dependent 
upon Orchomenus in the same way as Thisbe and Eutresis were subordinate to Thespiae. 

Ofairuis <rv» Evrprjati ko\ elapatt : that Thespiae had two Boeotarchs is not surprising in 
view of its extensive territory at this period ; cf. Thuc. iv. 76. 3, where 2ty« on the Corinthian 
Gulf belongs to it. For Eutresis cf; Strabo ix. 2. 28 EHrptfaiv . . . Kvpiov e«nru»v. Thisbe 
as well as Corsiae, a town further west, became independent in the third century B.C., as is 
shown by inscriptions. 

17. ft* d« Tnvaypatoi: in later times the territory of Tanagra was very extensive, 
including Eleon, Harma, Mycalessus, and Pharae (Strabo ix. 2. 14, Pausan. ix. 19. 4), Aulis 
(Strabo ix. 2. 8, Pausan. ix. 19. 8), and Hyria (Strabo ix. 2. 12); but, as Meyer observes, 


the fact that Tanagra in 395 had only one Boeotarch indicates that it was then much less 
important, and probably most or even all of those six places at that time belonged to 
Thebes. Head (Coins of Central Greece, p. xxxviii) thinks that in 480-456 Tanagra 
aspired to the hegemony of the league, because it was the only town which struck coins in 
the name of the Boeotians as a whole ; but this seems to us a very doubtful inference 
(Cauer /. c. wrongly states that Tanagra issued coins of its own in this period, and hence 
erroneously regards Tanagra as standing outside the league). That Aulis was Theban 
in b.c. 431 is made probable by xiii. 25, where it is mentioned together with Schoenus 
and Potniae, which were undoubtedly Theban ; and of Hyria Strabo (/. c .) expressly say9 
that it was formerly in the Thebais, while Pharae and Mycalessus, which were independent 
both before 480 and after 387, are much more likely to have belonged to Thebes than 
to Tanagra in the intervening period. Delium therefore seems to have been the only 
place of much importance belonging to Tanagra in 395 ; cf. Thuc. iv. 76, Strabo ix. 2. 7, 
Pausan. ix. 20. 1. 

xii. 17-20. On the six minor states divided into two groups with one Boeotarch to 
each group cf. pp. 224-5.* 

20. 'Airpac4>H'ov : the spelling of this name is subject to many variations. P's form 
* Aicpal<j)t>iov has hitherto been found only in Pausan. ix. 23. 5, 24. 1. Inscriptions and the 
older literature have only forms without the v, ff 'AgpatQia, t6 'Atcpatyiou, ra 'Aipatyco, but 
Steph. Byz. states that Theopompus employed the form rh 'Axpatywa (cf. p. 126) and that 
Ephorus used 'Axpatyvtos and 'Axpcu^vMM^r for the €$»ik6v. Outside Boeotia the word seems 
to have been derived from ajcpat^vq*. 

21-3. That the federal boule, consisting of 660 members, was divided like the state 
povkai into four parts, each of which held office in turn, is neither stated by P, nor is at all 
likely. Lines 29-31 apparently refer to general meetings of the federal boule in the 
Cadmea, and another mention of it occurs in xiii. 1 2, but the ultimate decision in matters 
of supreme importance rested less with it than with the boulai of the individual states ; 
cf. p. 224. 

23. avrot: sc. the Boeotians. 

24. The hiatus arparth Udarf can be avoided by placing Uaory pcpct after &; 
cf. i. 4, note. 

Cols. xii. 31-xiv. 5 = ch. XII. Parties at Thebes. 

1 At Thebes the best and most notable of the citizens were, as I have already stated, 
divided against each other, one faction being led by Ismenias, Antitheus, and Androclidas, 
the other by Leontiades, Asias, and Corrantadas. The political party of Leontiades sided 
with the Lacedaemonians, while that of Ismenias was accused of Atticizing, because it 
favoured the Athenian democracy when the latter was exiled. Ismenias 9 party, however, 
was not concerned for the Athenians but .... Such being the condition of affairs at 
Thebes, and each of the two factions being powerful, many people from the cities 
throughout Boeotia then came forward and joined one or the other of them. At that 
time, and for a short period previously, the party of Ismenias and Androclidas was the 
stronger both at Thebes itself and in the boule of the Boeotians ; but formerly that of 
Asias and Leontiades was in the ascendant for a considerable period and (had complete 
control of?) the city. For when the Lacedaemonians in the war with the Athenians were 
occupying Decelea and collected a large concourse of their allies, this party prevailed over 
their opponents both by reason of the proximity of the Lacedaemonians and because the 
latter were instrumental in conferring great benefits upon the city. The Thebans made 
a great advance in the direction of complete prosperity as soon as war between the 
Athenians and Lacedaemonians began ; for when the Athenians commenced to threaten (?) 


Boeotia, the inhabitants of Erythrae, Scaphae, Scolus, Aulis, Schoenus, and Potniae, and 
many other similar places which had no walls, congregated at Thebes, thus doubling the 
size of the city. But it nevertheless came to prosper in a much higher degree when the 
Thebans in conjunction with the Lacedaemonians fortified Decelea against the Athenians ; 
for they took over the prisoners and all the other spoils of the war at a small price, and, 
as they inhabited the neighbouring country, carried off to their homes all the furnishing 
material in Attica, beginning with the wood and tiles of the houses. The country of the 
Athenians at that time had been the most lavishly furnished in Greece, for it had suffered 
but slight injury from the Lacedaemonians in the former invasions, and had been adorned 
and elaborated with so much extravagance that . . . Such was the condition of Thebes and 

xii. 32. Sxrirtp kcX vp&rtpop : i. e. in xi. 36-8. 

34-5. Ismenias and Androclidas are well known as the leaders of the anti-Spartan 
party at Thebes at this period and instigators of the war with Sparta, for the furtherance 
of which they took bribes from Persia ; cf. i. 33, note. The form 'AydpoxAijff which occurs 
here is a slip ; 'AyftpoftXctoar, the correct Boeotian form uniformly employed by Xenophon, 
is found in xiv. 6 and 35, and the Attic variant 'AydpoxXWdip in xiii. 11. *AvriSeos is not 
mentioned by Xenophon, who (Hell. iii. 5. x) in his place associates with Ismenias and 
Androclidas an otherwise unknown Taka£M»pos. Pausanias, however (iii. 9. 8), couples 
Androclidas and Ismenias with 'A/i^ftc/nr, who is obviously identical with our 'Am'd«K, 
while Plutarch (Lysand. 27) calls him 'A^iBtot. Of the leaders of the pro-Spartan party 
Acomabrp (Atorri&as Plut.) is familiar, but 'Aaias (or 'AotiW as he is called in xiii. 1 3) seems 
to be otherwise unknown, for the *Apxlas who is associated with Leontiades in 379 (Xen. 
Hell. v. 4. 2, 6, Plut. Pelop. 5 sqq., Cornelius Nepos, Pelop. 3. 2) is not likely to be the 
same as 'Ao-ia*. With regard to the form of that name, 'Aori'w does not occur elsewhere, 
but favlas is found in a Boeotian inscription. Koppapra&as (cf. Koppwd&at in Boeotian 
inscriptions) may, as Meyer suggests, be identical with the Boeotian general Koipardbas 
mentioned in Xen. Hell. i. 3. 15-22 and Anal. vii. 1. 33 sqq. 

39. Though a plural subject for tyvyor can be supplied out of top drjfiop, the sentence 
is made much clearer by altering tyvyov to tyvyfjr, as proposed by Wilamowitz. The 
reference is of course to the restoration of the Athenian democracy in 403. 

xiii. 1-5. The general sense of this passage appears to be that Ismenias and his party 
favoured Athens not from any regard for Athenian interests but from selfish motives, in 
order that they might use Athenian support in the contest with the pro-Spartan party at 
Thebes; cf. xiv. 6-16. 

10. [fwc]pi npoWtpop : i. e. ever since the conclusion of the Peloponnesian war when 
the ascendency of Ismenias' party caused a complete change in Theban policy, and Thebes 
which had been the bitterest foe of Athens suddenly became leader of the opposition to 
Sparta; cf. Meyer, Gesch. d. Alt v. pp. 213-4. Fs description in xii-xiv of the attitude 
of Thebes and the origin of the anti-Spartan league is much fuller than the short accounts 
in Xenophon, Hell iii. 5. 1-3, Pausan. iii. 9. 9, Plut. Lysand. 27 and Diod. xiv. 81 ; and in 
particular his analysis of the motives of Ismenias' party (xil 37 sqq., xiv. 6 sqq.) is acute 
and just (cf. i. 36 sqq., where he rightly treats the Persian bribes as a factor of secondary 
importance); but he tends to lay too much stress on the mere rivalry of the contending 
factions, and to obscure the underlying cause which brought Ismenias' party to the front, 
the dissatisfaction of Thebes with the Spartan domination in central Greece, which hindered 
Theban ambitions. Here, as in the case of the war party at Athens (cf. i. 33, note), Fs 
sympathy with Sparta causes him to under-estimate the legitimate patriotic aspirations of 
Sparta's chief opponents, but it is noticeable that he does not attempt to cast aspersions 


on Ismenias and Androclidas, who equally with the leaders of the pro-Spartan party at 
Thebes are among the /SeXrurroi *a\ ywpt/Maroroc (xii. 31), and the contest of Theban 
factions is described in quite different terms from the opposition between the yw/xpoft *a\ 
X<*pitvT€s and ol TroXAot xal fyuoTucol in i. 9 sqq. 

xiii. 13. For the spelling 'Acmcr cf. xii. 34-5, note. 

14. [«]«i: there is room for three or even four letters before v, but xpotwJtiTwi is 
preferable to XP°\[ V0P Ti ]* a which seems the only alternative. The beginnings of lines tend 
to be irregular throughout the papyrus. The doubtful n before the lacuna can be y, 4, *, 
P or y. ]*ov may well be «]x«w, but 6*a x[«p£v is inadmissible. 

16. The vestiges after km a do not suit Tp[aTfV[it]a very well, and rpartv/utrto seems too 
long for the space between 0- and the final v. avt\ra]^fx]i (Bury) is also unsatisfactory. 

22. 6ir6\*fwt: from the context, especially the mentions of Deceleia in 11. 16 and 29, 
this would naturally be interpreted as the Peloponnesian war. For some time- we agreed 
with Meyer who suggested a connexion between xiii. 23-8 and the statement of Diodorus 
(xi. 81. 3) that the Spartans in the period preceding the battle of Tanagra rrjt imV t«* 

Qrjpaluv mSXcow pit (ova rbv irtpifiokov Karf<r«fva<rai', ras d* cV Botwrla irSXtis rjrdyKaaa* wrordrrco^eu 

roif erjpaioit, and consequently referred 6 ntfXcpor to the war of Athens against the Spartans 
and Boeotians in 457. But while both writers allude to the increase in the size of Thebes, 
the explanation of it is quite different in the two cases, and Mr. Walker has convinced 
us that the natural interpretation is right, and that P ascribed the transference of population 
to Thebes to b.c 431. Whether he was correct in his statement, particularly in the alleged 
reason for the transference, the fear of Athenian invasion, is not clear. The Boeotians 
may have expected reprisals for the treacherous attack on Plataea, and that Athens 
cherished hopes of recovering Boeotia is shown by the expedition of Nicias against Tanagra 
in 426 (Thuc. iii. 91) and the invasion two years later which resulted in the battle of 
Delium ; but there was of course no attack upon Boeotia in 431, Attica being itself invaded, 
so that the impression conveyed by P's statement is not very accurate. It is noteworthy 
that in his account of the prosperity of Attica (xiii. 36-xiv. 3) P unduly minimizes the 
extent of the injuries inflicted by the Lacedaemonian invasions in the Archidamian war, 
which, as Thucydides shows clearly, caused widespread devastation. If fear of Athenian 
attack was the real reason of the cn/poucio-fufc, it would be more satisfactory to place that 
event in the period after the battle of Tanagra and the withdrawal of the Spartans from 
Boeotia when the Athenians, according to Diod. xi. 83. 1, gained possession of all the 
Boeotian cities except Thebes, which would naturally have become a centre of migration 
from other parts of the country. 

Of the six places mentioned in connexion with the vvvoticurpSs, Erythrae, Scaphae and 
Scolus were in the Parasopia near the Athenian boundary and in 431 belonged to Plataea 
(cf. xii. 12-3, note), while Schoenus and Potniae were Theban and respectively 50 
and 10 stades north of Thebes (Pausan. ix. 8. 1, Strabo ix. 2. 22, 24, 32). A slight 
difficulty arises in connexion with Aulis, which was on the coast and much further 
away from Thebes, especially as in later times it was dependent not on Thebes but 
Tanagra. There is however not much doubt about the reading jXidor, and there are other 
reasons for supposing that the territory of Tanagra was less extensive in 431-395 than 
later ; cf. note on xii. 17. 

23. dfr{f<A]f(i', though it gives a suitable sense, is very doubtful, for there seems to be 
no parallel for the metaphorical use of this word in prose, and y, fi or p can be re^d in 
place of «-. 

38. fUKpd: this is an exaggeration ; cf. 1. 22, note. 

xiv. 1-2.^ ]&«> must be m^* or ob\tev, and for* probably preceded, perhaps immediately 
after farf^foXw while the word after dfKf^u[f must be a comparative adverb. Bury suggests 


«[<tt* x«>paff Ijv oiifir irap avrofc fird[pa|roir, o^ari[* dc Kai koXXiop ^ko&ojuj/mW $ wa\[pa ro^s 
SkXots [<lx°"' 

3. Perhaps rolfr SX\<hs [*EAAij<ti ; but then the repetition of 'EAXi7»[ in the next line is 
somewhat awkward. Probably some of the letters in the lacuna were erased. Before yrfp 
€ unaltered can be read instead of the supposed deleted <r. avrw, like avroU in 1. 1, probably 
refers to the Athenians. 

4-5. The subject of] . tkapfiavov is here more probably the Thebans than the Athenians; 
cf. xiii. 32. rox[t] I [ldlo]w dypovg is not unlikely. 

Cols. xiv. 6-xv. 32 = ch. XIII. War between Boeotia and Pkocis. 

' The party of Androclidas and Ismenias was anxious to involve Boeotia in a war with 
the Lacedaemonians, because firstly they wished to overthrow their supremacy in order to 
avoid destruction at the hands of the Lacedaemonians on account of the Laconizing party, 
and secondly they expected to achieve their object easily, on the supposition that the king 
would provide money in accordance with the promises of the envoy from Persia, and that 
the Corinthians, Argives and Athenians would join in the war, for these states, being hostile 
to the Lacedaemonians, would, they thought, provide support from among their citizens. 
Having this policy in view, they considered that it was difficult to attack the enemy openly, 
since neither the Thebans nor the other Boeotians would consent to a war with the 
Lacedaemonians while supreme in Greece ; but they attempted to incite them to make war 
by the device of persuading certain Phocians to invade the territory of the so-called 
Hesperian Locrians. The enmity between these two states originated as follows. There 
is a disputed area near Parnassus, about which they have gone to war in former times also ; 
this is often encroached upon for grazing by both the Phocians and the Locrians, and 
whichever party perceives the other in occupation collects in considerable numbers and 
plunders the sheep. Many such quarrels had been provoked by either side, which formerly 
they were always in the habit of settling for the most part by legal proceedings or discussion ; 
but on this occasion when the Locrians retaliated by seizing an equivalent of the sheep 
which they had lost, the Phocians at the instigation of the men procured by Androclidas 
and Ismenias immediately took up arms and invaded Locris. Thereupon the Locrians 
when their country was ravaged sent ambassadors to the Boeotians accusing the Phocians 
and asking for assistance, these states having always been 011 friendly terms with each 
other. Gladly seizing the opportunity, the party of Ismenias and Androclidas persuaded the 
Boeotians to help the Locrians, whereat the Phocians on receiving news of the action of 
Thebes withdrew from Locris and sent ambassadors to the Lacedaemonians asking them 
to forbid the Boeotians to enter their country. The Lacedaemonians, although they 
considered the story unworthy of belief, nevertheless sent a message ordering the Boeotians 
not to make war on the Phocians, but if they considered themselves aggrieved on any point 
to take satisfaction at a meeting of the confederacy. The Boeotians, however, at the 
instigation of the men who had arranged the plot and its consequences, dismissed the 
Lacedaemonian envoys with an unfavourable answer, and taking up arms marched against 
the Phocians. They immediately invaded the country, and after ravaging the land of 
the Parapotamii, the Daulii and Phanoteis, they attempted an assault upon these cities. 
They attacked Daulia, but retreated without having effected anything, and even suffered 
some slight losses ; of the Phanoteis, however, they took by storm the suburb of the 
town. After this success they advanced further into Phocis, where they overran part of 
the plain near Elatea and Pedieis and the people of that neighbourhood, and then turned 
homewards. As they were passing Hyampolis in the course of the retreat, they decided to 
make an attempt upon it. The place is remarkably strong, and though they attacked the 
walls and displayed no lack of energy they achieved no success, but had to retire with the 


loss of about eighty soldiers. Having inflicted this amount of injury upon the Phocians 
the Boeotians returned to their own country.' 

xiv. 12-3. xaff A and the insertion of &' were suggested by Wilamowitz; Blass had 
proposed cVftdq in 1. 12 and made pfdcffur dependent on crnryycXXcTo, which is less satisfactory. 
The effects of the bribes of Timocrates and the anti-Spartan feeling at Corinth, Argos and 
Athens have already been described by P in ii. 1 sqq. Though the hopes of assistance 
from Athens were justified by the event, the expectation of help from Corinth and Argos 
proved somewhat premature, for these two states remained passive until the defeat of the 
Lacedaemonians at Haliartus had relieved Boeotia from danger. 

14. The somewhat otiose sentence tovtow . . . iroA<W is corrupt as it stands, and the 
simplest course is to read wimapd^aK^vaativ for <rvfwrapc[<rK]evao'f ; but this does not yield 
a very satisfactory sense, and possibly some words have dropped out. 

21 sqq. With regard to the origin of the Boeotian war, P's account, which is much 
more detailed than those of the extant authorities, agrees with Xenophon's {Hell. iii. 5. 3) and 
Pausanias' (iii. 9. 9) in attributing the ultimate responsibility for the outbreak to the party 
of Ismenias and Androclidas (cf. also Plut. Lysand. 27), and the occasion of it to a border 
dispute between Phocis and Locris. Diodorus, who (xiv. 81. 1) says merely *»*ciff npfa 
Boimovs Zk nimv tyKXr)fxdro>p cfc irSkeftov caraarayrff tirturav rovt Acuabaifioyiovs avpfiax*"' KaT ^ T * p 
Bowtmv, not only gives no details but produces the false impression that Sparta rather than 
Thebes was the aggressor, a view which is defended in vain by Grote, for though Plutarch 
(Lysand. 27) says that some regarded Lysander as the cause of the war rather than the 
Thebans, there can no longer be any doubt that the latter were the prime movers. But 
while P so far supports Xenophon and Pausanias, his account differs widely from theirs in 
point of detail. In the first place Xenophon states that the Locrians in question were the 
Opuntian Locrians, whereas according to P they were the Hesperian Locrians and the 
disputed area was w*p\ i6v Uapyaaaov. Pausanias speaks of ol c£ 'AptyaaTjs Aoxpoc, thus 
agreeing with P, who is likely to be right on this point. In 394 both sets of Locrians were 
allied to Thebes and Athens; cf. Xen. HdL iv. 2. 17, 3. 15. Secondly, while Xenophon 
and Pausanias represent the Locrians as beginning the dispute by encroaching upon the 
disputed area at the suggestion of their allies the Thebans, according to P it was 
the Phocians who originally made a raid upon the flocks of the Locrians in the 
debatable ground, and the Locrians only assumed the offensive as a means of 
retaliation. The subsequent invasion of Locris by the Phocians is also attributed by 
P to the instigation of a band of Phocians in the pay of the Thebans. There is 
further a minor discrepancy with respect to the precise action of the Locrians in the 
disputed area. According to Xenophon they were persuaded xP*ll utra "XcVot (which 
is translated 'levy money' though rcA/<r<u does not seem to be the right word in the 
context), and the Phocians retaliated by taking wolXanXaaia xp^uira. P's account on the 
other hand, according to which the dispute was concerned with the grazing of flocks, agrees 
closely with that of Pausanias, who says that the Locrians t6v t« <mw aK^ovra trtfwp «ai 
ffkaaay \tiav ayovrts. Whether it was really the Locrians or, as P asserts, certain Phocians 
who allowed themselves to be made the tools of Thebes cannot be decided with certainty. 
The intrigue becomes more involved in P's version, which brings out the remarkable 
ingenuity of Ismenias and Androclidas in making the Locrians appear the injured party, 
and displays an apparently very detailed knowledge of the circumstances. Meyer is disposed 
to prefer Xenophon's account on the ground that the Locrians, not the Phocians, were 
allied to Thebes, and that the Phocians fell too readily into the trap prepared for them. On 
the other hand, if the facts were as P states, an abbreviated account of them would easily 
give rise to the version in which the Locrians took the first step. 



The appeal of the Locrians for Theban support (xiv. 37-xv. 3) is also related by both 
Xenophon and Pausanias, but neither of these writers mentions the embassy of the Phocians 
to Sparta and the unsuccessful mission of the Spartans to Boeotia (xv. 3-14) prior to the 
actual invasion of Phocis. According to them the request for Spartan assistance was made 
by the Phocians after the invasion had begun, and then the pretext for a war with Boeotia 
was eagerly seized. Pausanias adds the statement that the Athenians tried to prevent 
a conflict, cTirAa piv <r<f>as (the Spartans) dt6p*voi pff Kivfjaai diicg Ac virip l>v iyitakovoi btaKpiptaBai, 
an improbable story which looks like a perversion of the proposals of the Spartans in xv. 9-1 1. 
P must have described the successful appeal of the Phocians for Spartan intervention in 
a later chapter after the campaign of Agesilaus, in the middle of which the papyrus breaks 
off ; but the narrative in xv. 7-1 1 represents the Spartans as pursuing a pacific policy and 
showing no great anxiety to accept the opportunity for declaring war on Boeotia. This 
does not harmonize very well with Xenophon's eminently just remarks (Hell. iii. 5. 5) upon 
the reasons which the Spartans had for welcoming a war with Boeotia at this juncture, and, 
as Meyer suggests, P may be exaggerating the Spartan moderation. On the other hand 
Xenophon himself in Hell. iii. 5. 3 says — what is probably true — that the Thebans had 
to take the initiative because they knew 5n tl m r« fyfct noXtpov oU Mekfprovaw oJ Aaxc&u* 
navuH \v4ip ras <rrrov&as np6s rovs avppdx°vt, and P's statement that the Spartans, while in 
doubt about the truth of the impending invasion of Phocis, gave the Boeotians the chance 
of settling the quarrel peaceably, is not inconsistent with their ready intervention when 
the invasion was an accomplished fact. The arrogant tone of the Spartan message, in 
which the Boeotians were treated as if they were subordinate members of the Peloponnesian 
confederacy is quite in keeping with their claim &p\ €i¥ *■?* 'EXAado? (xiv. 20). 

25. fim: on the use of the present tense here and in 11. 27 and 40, which has an 
important bearing upon the date of the composition of P's work, cf. xvi. 3, note, and p. 134. 

xv - 3~4- ayy^OivT]cov and r[&r* fUv were suggested by Wilamowitz. 

5. The vestiges after d[c] do not suit p*[ra ravro, 

15 sqq. These details concerning the invasion of Phocis are all new, but of no special 
interest. With regard to the chronology of the war between Boeotia and Phocis, Fs 
remark (xi. 34) that it began in the summer agrees with Pausanias' statement that the 
Locrians cut down i-d* oirov a*pa(orra. Apparently the dispute between Phocis and 
Locris took place about May or June, the invasion of Phocis about July and August, and 
the battle of Haliartus about September or October. 

19. Am/Ac? : for the form cf. Strabo ix. 423 'Oprjpos ph ovv AavX/da cure*, oi cV vortpop 

24. Deduct? : this town is mentioned by Hdt. viii. 33, but ncduar here may mean the 
people of Pedieis ; cf. the similar ambiguity in the case of napanorapuH. 

26. The corruption oinap Yvapirokw into npos TLapvqp iroXtv was detected by both Blass 
and Wilamowitz. 

xv. 32-xvi. 29 = ch. XIV. The naval war. 

1 Cheiricrates, who had arrived as admiral in succession to Poilis, having now taken 
over the command of the fleet of the Lacedaemonians and their allies, Conon manned 
twenty triremes and setting out from Rhodes sailed to Caunus. Wishing to communicate 
with Pharnabazus and Tithraustes and to obtain money, he went inland from Caunus 
to visit them. The soldiers at this time had many months' pay owing to them, for their 
generals paid them badly, as is their invariable habit when fighting for the king. In the 
Decelean war also, when the Lacedaemonians were the allies of Persia, money was provided 
on a very mean and niggardly scale, and the triremes of the allies would often have been 
disbanded but for the energy of Cyrus. The responsibility for this lies with the king, who 



when he begins a war, dispatches a small sum at the outset and neglects the army sub- 
sequently, while those in charge of the campaign being unable to defray the expenses 
privately sometimes suffer their forces to disband. This is what usually takes place, but on 
the arrival of Conon and his declaration that the Persian cause would run the risk of ruin 
through want of money, of which it was unreasonable for the king's soldiers to be in need, 
Tithraustes sent some of the barbarians in his following with two hundred and twenty 
talents for the pay of the soldiers ; this sum was obtained from the property of Tissaphernes. 
After remaining a short time longer at Sardis he then went up to the court of the king, having 
appointed Ariaeus and Pasiphernes to take command, and delivered to them for the purposes 
of the war the silver and gold that was left behind, which proved, as it is said, to be about 
seven hundred talents.' 

xv. 33. On Cheiricrates, who succeeded Pollis as ravapxos in the late summer of 395, 
cf. iii. 21 and 23-6, notes. Neither vavapx** was known previously. Cheiricrates seems 
to have taken no active steps against Conon : probably the bulk of the Spartan fleet was 
at Cnidus ; but Pancalus was stationed with 5 ships at the Hellespont, where he co- 
operated with Agesilaus ; cf. xxi. 25-7. In the course of the winter of 395-4 Cheiricrates 
was superseded by Agesilaus 9 brother-in-law, Pisander, who was killed at the battle of Cnidus 
in the following July or August. Xenophon, who {Hell. iii. 4. 27-9, supported by Plut. 
Ages. 10, Pausan. iiL 9. 6) represents Pisander as appointed vmtapx** by Agesilaus when the 
latter was in the w*Kw vwip Kvpip on his way to invade Phrygia, i. e. in the late summer 
of 395 (cf. HelL iv. 1. 1 and xviii. 38 sqq. and xix. 2, note), has clearly placed the beginning 
of Pisander's vavapxia too early. 

37 sqq. This visit of Conon to Pharnabazus and Tithraustes to obtain money is not 
recorded elsewhere. Diodorus (xix. 81. 4-6) relates that Conon went to the king himself 
at Babylon for the same purpose, synchronizing this event with the Boeotian war. His 
date for Conon's journey to Persia conflicts with that of Nepos (Conon 3) and Pausanias 
(iii. 9. 2), who imply that it took place in the winter of 396-5 ; but the correctness of 
Diodorus 9 date is now amply vindicated (cf. note on vii. 4), and Conon's journey to 
Babylon is to be assigned to the late autumn of 395 or winter of 395-4. That he should 
have found it necessary to go to the king to obtain money is not at all surprising, for 
the 220 talents which he received from Tithraustes cannot have been sufficient to make 
up the arrears of many months' pay upon a fleet of over 100 triremes and numerous Greek 
mercenaries on land, and the serious mutiny described in xvi. 29 sqq. shows the dangers 
to which he was exposed so long as he was ill provided with funds. 

xvi. 2-4. This sentence seems to be the origin of Justin's remark (vi. 2. 11) with 
regard to Conon's soldiers, quos praefecli regis fraudare stipendio soliti erant\ cf. xvi. 
29, note. 

3. #0[o*]<Wv: the use of the present tense here and in 11. 9-16 is important as an 
indication that this history was composed before the fall of the Persian empire ; cf. xiv. 25, 
27, 40, xix. 5 and p. 122. 

5. \axtdaifi6moi faa* : the hiatus can be avoided by reading Aaxcdatporio^r), as Wilamowitz 
proposes. Cf. i. 4, note. 

7. Cf. Isocr. Panegyr. 142 rh fih in «Wwp (sc. the king) iroXXajctr hv bit\v6i)<ra» (sc, ol 

14. p of tpiort is corrected from *. 

17. av of amor is corrected. At the end of the line the v of <rw is written above the v. 

24-6. Tithraustes, having fulfilled the objects of his mission, the removal of 
Tissaphernes and the necessary arrangements for the continuance of the war, had no 
justification for remaining in Lydia; cf. Meyer, oft. ciL v. p. 249. While Pharnabazus 


was at Conon's request made commander-in-chief of the Persian forces (Diod. xiv. 81.6; 
cf. vii. 4, note) and acted as such in 394-3, the successor of Tissaphernes as satrap was 
Tiribazus, who is first heard of in the winter of 393-2 (Xen. Hell. iv. 8. 12). 

^ 27. For Ariaeus cf. vii. 36 and vii. 4, note. From Xen. Hell. iv. 1. 27, it appears 
that he revolted from Persia in the course of the winter of 395-4. Pasiphernes was 
perhaps referred to in iii. 37, but is not mentioned by the other authorities, unless he 
is identical with the general whom Diodorus calls Artaphernes; cf. iii. 37, note. 

Cols. xvi. 29-xviii. 33 = ch. XV. Mutiny of Conori s forces. 

' The Cypriots who had sailed with Conon to Caunus, persuaded by certain persons 
who falsely asserted that there was no intention to give them the arrears of their pay, but 
that preparations were only being made for discharging the debts of the crews and marines, 
were filled with indignation, and having met in assembly elected as their leader a man of 
Carpasian stock, and gave him a body-guard of two soldiers from each ship . . . Conon 
after hearing their story urged them not to believe that (one section would be favoured), 
assuring them that they would all alike obtain their pay. Having given this answer, he said 
that he wished to make it known to the other soldiers also, whereupon the leader of the 
Cypriots, the Carpasian, followed him towards the main body of the troops. They started 
out in company, and when they were passing the gates Conon, being in front, came outside 
the wall first, but the Carpasian while he was going out at the gates was seized without 
Conon's consent by some of the Messenians in Conon's following, who wished to 
detain him in the city in order that he might be punished for his offences. The Cypriots 
who were accompanying him laid hold of the Carpasian and prevented the Messenians from 
arresting him, and the contingent of the 600, perceiving the fight, also came to the 
help of their leader. Conon . . . (went back) to the city, while the Cypriots attacked and 
drove off the Messenians who had seized the Carpasian, and being persuaded that Conon's 
plans with regard to the distribution of the pay were altogether (unjust), thereupon 
embarked on the triremes with the object, as some said, of taking up the Cypriots at 
Rhodes and sailing to Cyprus. Leaving . . . , and conveying with them the Cypriots who 
consented to come, they marched against the acropolis in order to destroy the power 
of Conon, whom they regarded as the cause of all their troubles . . . When the Cypriots landed 
at Caunus, Conon came to Leonymus the . . . and declared that he alone could save 
the king's cause, for if Leonymus would consent to give him the Greek guards protecting 
Caunus and as many Carians as possible, he would put an end to the mutiny in the camp. 
Leonymus having bidden him take as many soldiers as he wished, he remained inactive for 
that day, since it was already near sunset ; but on the next before dawn he took a large 
number of the Carians and all the Greeks, led them out of the city, and proceeded to post 
some of them round the outside of the camp, others ... by the ships and seashore. 
Having done this and given orders to proclaim that each soldier should go ... he 
captured the Carpasian and sixty of the other Cypriots, whom he put to death, while 
the leader was crucified. The Cypriots who were left at Rhodes were enraged on 
hearing of this, and in their indignation first attacked and drove out the officers whom 
Conon had appointed; and then leaving the harbour caused a great tumult and riot among 
the Rhodians. Conon, however, arrived from Caunus, and having arrested their leaders put 
them to death, distributing pay among the remainder. Thus the king's camp, after it had 
reached a condition of extreme peril, was restored to peace by Conon and his energetic 

xvi. 29 sqq. These Cypriot mercenaries were a land force, as appears from the 
contrast between them and the fonyKauu and twifidrm in 11. 34-5. The e£[<um*]f«p [ovvraypa] 


in xvii. 24 seems to be part of them, but that restoration is far from certain. The mutiny 
is only mentioned elsewhere by Justin (vi. 2. 11) Sed Cononem seditio militum invadit, quos 
praefecti regis fraudare stipendio soliti erant : to instantius debita poscentibus quo graviorem sub 
magno duce militiam praesumebant. The sentence quos praefecti . . . eranl closely resembles 
xvi. 2-4, and P is probably the ultimate source of Justin's reference to the mutiny. 

xvi. 31. The correction of wt», which makes an extremely awkward construction, to 
xmo is due to Wilamowitz. 

37. Kapnaaia : it is rather curious that P does not mention his name, for the narrative 
of the mutiny is conspicuous for its wealth of detail, which is likely to have been obtained 
from an eyewitness. The omission may however, as Meyer remarks, be intentional, 
implying contempt ; cf. xvii. 1 6 rov di fyfynmov roO Kapnaafot. With regard to the form of 
the adjective, the agreement between the papyrus and Theopompus (Fr. 93) provides a 
strong argument for identifying him with our author ; cf. p. 131. 

xvii. 1. That the separate fragment containing the middles of 11. 1-8 belongs to the 
upper part of this column is made certain by its colour and the mention of Conon in 1. 3. 
The exact position is then fixed by the recto, which has the beginning of a new section 
an[rj\(uorov) f^WpcVov) cyftaLwovros) partly on this fragment, partly on the piece containing 
the rest of Col. xvii. 

5. ]rpaui : a can be read in place of the first t. am is perhaps a separate word (=<«*) ; 
cf. out in iii. 13. 

6. vtp\ rcf* nuryMv cannot be read. At the end of the line a is possible instead of <r . , 
but there is not room for a^jo-ar, and the division o|[*owar would make the line 
too short. Bury suggests ai{J\irjj. 

8-9. The general sense of Conon's answer is clearly that in the distribution of the 
money no one section of the troops would be favoured, but all would receive their share* 
In 1. 8 the doubtful X may be x or v or possibly r; with the last reading [oMva 
fr\tov]iK7{f)]cr[€iy is possible. Line 9 requires something like wd*[ras IXcyc t6» purtov 0V0 rfjs 
taijy KOfiuiadai. The letter before KopuloBcu, if not <r, can only be y. 

10- 1. iroLTjaajuvos is due to Bury. Wilamowitz suggested rounjv [61 r^v cMxpiw «<■! 
roTr SXXois] fyaattv /3ovXc<rAu [tya^XJMrat or par lariats, which no doubt expresses the sense 
correctly, and most of which we have adopted. The letter before is in 1. 11 cannot be a, 

12. 6 Kap7ra]ac[w avry] is due to Wilamowitz. 

24. i^aKoafnp [trvvraypa] is very doubtful, especially as axoa is rather short for the first 
lacuna, which has room for 5 letters, and this supposed corps is not mentioned elsewhere. 
Perhaps *( followed by a place-name should be read. 

25. Something like [*s c&f] irc[purrdVrar] would suit the sense. 

26. rrfv *6\ip : sc. Caunu^. 

28. anUpoyvav : the v is extremely doubtful, but a and c are inadmissible. 

29. Perhaps v[apit t6 Mkoiov t](5^, if napt<rK*vaa6<u is middle. If it is passive, &a is 
probable before r]ov. In xvi. 33 napavMvdComu is more probably middle, but may be 

31. c*[l ravrais tW was suggested by Wilamowitz. &s yi ru*s fkryov seems to refer 
to the statements of the Cypriots, and is not, we think, to be interpreted as a reservation on 
the part of the author, for which r«m Xryovo-i would be expected ; cf. il 1-2. 

33 s qq* The narrative becomes very obscure at this point rip A\a*[. .]woiov seems to 
be corrupt ; there is not much doubt about the reading vuhov ; the only possible alternatives 
to <H are on or om, but these are less suitable. 177 2a\ap[tl]vi could be read, but yields no 
sense, and that the mutineers reached Cyprus is unlikely, since it is clear from xviii. 1-22 
that they soon returned to Caunus, and &s y* ru« r ttXtyov indicates that they did not carry 
out their original plans in full. Assuming that AXa>{. .Jnotov is the name of an unknown 


place, this was perhaps situated in Rhodes, for irapa«{o/a(rai'W, if correct, seems to refer 
back to rovt ff>] rij* 'Prf&w irapdka^6i{n\, and if r[o0 K6va>vot] (Wilamowitz) is right in 1. 36 
the acropolis might be that of Rhodes. On the other hand if *AXav . . . was in Rhodes 
we should expect the statement that the mutineers sailed thither, whereas anontyvaavrts 
or €Kirk\wra»Tct can hardly be avoided in the light of the following genitive, even though 
the omission of M before r?r is not in accordance with our author's usage ; cf. xviii. 1-2 
aVoffXcvaavrfs mb rrjs . . . Moreover, the account in xviii. 23-8 of the proceedings of the 
Cypriots who were left at Rhodes does not harmonize at all well with the view that 
the acropolis of the city of Rhodes had been attacked previously. It is therefore very 
doubtful whether the mutineers sailed as far as Rhodes, and possibly the acropolis and 
the supposed place AXav . . . were in the vicinity of Caunus. 

37. avTois was suggested by Wilamowitz. 

xviii. 2. The letter after rip might be a, and it is conceivable that the name 
AX<u{. ,]violov (xvii. 33) recurred here ; but several other letters, e. g. d, c, or <r, are 
equally admissible. The verb lost probably had the sense of • returned ', sc. to Caunus. 

3. If rotf is not an error for to!*, some part of the gear of the triremes is probably 
referred to, perhaps Urrims ; cf. Conon's capture of the fMtyaka r&r Awdv&pov v*S>* luria after 
Aegospotami (Xen. Hell. ii. 1. 29). 

4. Kaniyp*[»»v tQ>v Kvnpiuv : Kanjyfit[vot is unlikely, for there is no indication that Conon 
had left Caunus, and Leonymus was clearly posted in the immediate neighbourhood of 
the city. 

5. Perhaps rov i[S>v it<(G>v &px ovTa * as Wilamowitz suggests. 

atn$ m : for the hiatus cf. i. 4, note. avr$ can be omitted without difficulty. 
1 8. Some word like irpocr^yayc is probable in the lacuna. 
v 19. Wilamowitz suggests r[&* xffpvKa &aty*iv, but a compound of fSalvw would rather 
be expected. 

20. Wilamowitz proposes rt{v iavrov, Bury rij^v aicrjvTjv. 

24. '?6bp fjyavaKt\ow : another hiatus; cf. 1. 5. 

30-3. With this favourable criticism of Conon cf. xvi. 8 &A fty Kvpov wpoBvpiav, xx. 
35 diA ttjv 'PaAbw npoBvplay, and p. 123. 

Cols, xviii. 33-xxi. 39 = chs. XVI-XVII. Agesilaus in Asia. 

'While Agesilaus was marching towards the Hellespont with the army of the 
Lacedaemonians and their allies, as long as he was passing through Lydia he did no injury 
to the inhabitants, wishing to abide by the truce made with Tithraustes. But when he 
reached the country of Pharnabazus, he plundered and ravaged the land as he advanced. 
Then crossing the plain of Thebe and the so-called plain of Apia he invaded Mysia, and 
gave urgent orders to the Mysians to take up arms on his side ; for most of the Mysians 
are autonomous and not subjects of the king. Those Mysians who elected to join the 
expedition suffered no injury from him, but he laid waste the land of the rest. When in 
the course of his advance he came to about the middle of the so-called Mysian Olympus, 
seeing that the pass was difficult and narrow, and being anxious to cross it in safety, he 
sent an envoy to the Mysians, and having made a truce with them began to lead his forces 
through the country. The Mysians however, after allowing many of the Peloponnesians 
and their allies to go through, attacked the rear-guard and struck down some of the soldiers, 
who were not in regular order owing to the confined space. Agesilaus encamped his army 
and remained inactive for the rest of that day while he was performing the due rites for the 
dead (about fifty of the soldiers had perished), and on the day following, having posted 
a large number of the so-called Dercylidean mercenaries in an ambush, again started on 
the march with his army. The Mysians all thought that Agesilaus was departing in 


consequence of the loss received on the previous day, and coming out of their villages 
began to pursue the army with the intention of attacking the rear-guard as before ; where- 
upon the Greeks in the ambush, when the enemy came up to them, charged out and 
attacked them at close quarters. The Mysian leaders and those in the forefront of the 
pursuit perished in the sudden onslaught of the Greeks, while the main body perceiving the 
losses of their comrades in front fled home to their villages. On receipt of the news Agesilaus 
wheeled round, and led his army back by the same road until he joined the force which had 
been in ambush, and pitched his camp on the spot where they had encamped on the 
previous day. Afterwards the Mysians, to whom the dead severally belonged, sent heralds 
and . . . took away the bodies under a truce, more than a hundred and thirty being 
killed. Agesilaus after obtaining guides from the villages and giving his soldiers a rest of 
[.]days led his army forward, and having brought them down into the country of the Phrygians 
(not that part which he had invaded in the previous summer but another which was un- 
plundered), proceeded to lay it waste under the guidance of Spithradates and his son. 
Spithradates was by race a Persian, who for some time lived with Pharnabazus and was in his 
service, but having subsequently quarrelled with him, and being afraid that he would be seized 
and come to harm, took refuge for the moment at Cyzicus, and afterwards presented himself 
to Agesilaus with his son Megabates, who was young and handsome. When this happened, 
Agesilaus received them favourably, chiefly for the sake of the youth to whom he is said 
to have been much attached, but partly also on account of Spithradates, who he hoped 
would act as guide of the expedition and be useful in other ways. For these reasons they 
obtained a warm welcome. Continuing the onward march of his army and plundering 
the country of Pharnabazus, Agesilaus reached the town called Leonton Cephalae; and 
after making several assaults, but without success, moved his forces and led them forward, 
plundering and laying waste the unravaged part of the country. Arriving subsequently 
at Gordium, a town built upon a mound and strongly fortified, he encamped his forces and 
remained there six days, making assaults upon the enemy and keeping his soldiers from 
dispersing by affording them numerous comforts. When he failed to overpower the place 
owing to the energy of Rhathanes, a Persian by race, who was in command of it, he put his 
soldiers in motion and led them on, being urged by Spithradates to enter Paphlagonia. 
He next led the Peloponnesians and their allies forward to the borders of Phrygia and 
Paphlagbnia, and encamped his army there, sending Spithradates himself in advance. The 
latter having gone on and come to terms with the Paphlagonians returned with ambassadors 
from them. Agesilaus made an alliance with the Paphlagonians and then retired with all 
speed in the direction of the sea, being afraid that there would be a lack of supplies in the 
winter. He did not march by the same road as that by which he had come, but by 
another, as he thought that it would be easier for his soldiers to cross (Bithynia). Gyes 
. . . sent him . . . horsemen and more than two thousand footsoldiers. Having conducted the 
army to Cius in Mysia, he first remained there ten days, and again harried the Mysians in 
revenge for their treachery at Olympus, and then led the Greeks forward through Phrygia 
on the seacoast, where he attacked a place called Miletou Teichos, but being unable to 
capture it withdrew his forces. As he was marching along the river Rhyndacus he arrived 
at Lake Dascylitis, near which lies Dascylium, an extremely strong place and fortified by 
the king, where Pharnabazus was said to store all his silver and gold. Having encamped 
his army there, he summoned Pancalus, who had sailed with the admiral Cheiricrates and 
was watching the Hellespont with five triremes. Pancalus arrived with all speed and entered 
the lake with his triremes, and was then ordered by Agesilaus to put on board all the more 
valuable part of the (booty) and transport it to ... at Cyzicus, that it might produce pay 
for the army. The soldiers from Mysia he dismissed with orders to return in the spring, 
as he was preparing during the coming winter to invade Cappadocia, having heard that 


that country stretched in the shape of a narrow strip from the Pontic sea to Cilicia and 
Phoenicia, and that the length of it was such that persons journeying on foot from 
Sinope . . . ' 

xviii. 37. Toif <nroy[d]ai[f : Fs account of the negotiations between Agesilaus and 
Tithraustes is lost in the gap between Cols, viii and xi. They are described in some detail 
by Xenophon (Hell. Hi. 4. 25-6). Diodorus (xiv. 80. 8) states briefly that a six months' 
truce was arranged, while Isocrates (iv. 153) calls it eight months. 

38. «o[r]7p«r : Koraifxi* is often used by Thucydides for arriving by sea (e. g. viii. 31 and 
39), but is rare in the sense of coming by land. It was employed by Theopompus as 
equivalent to A&u' according to Stephanus Byz., who was perhaps referring to the present 
passage or viii. 2a ; cf. p. 131. 

39. fir rr)v ^pav\r^¥ Qap^a&atfov : SO Xenophon, Hell iii. 4. 26 §€tM r^v *apvafki(av 

Qpvylav, followed by Plutarch, Ages. 11. Since the whole of the autumn campaign of 
Agesilaus in 395 is ignored by Diodorus, Xenophon has been hitherto practically the 
sole authority for it. The discrepancies between his account in Hell. iii. 4. 26-9 and iv. 1. 
1-16 and that of P are no less marked here than in the campaign of the earlier part of the 
year (v. 6-vii. 4). The two historians are indeed writing from different points of view ; 
with Xenophon the glorification of Agesilaus is the central motive, and in order to illustrate 
his hero's personal character certain more or less dramatic episodes, e. g. the negotiations 
with the king of Paphlagonia and with Pharnabazus, are treated in great detail, so as 
to produce the. impression that the author himself took part in the scenes which he 
describes : but the military operations, with the exception of the fighting round Dascylium 
which led to the desertion of Spithradates, are only sketched in outline. In the Agesilaus, 
Xenophon makes no attempt to give a connected story of the autumn campaign, but some 
anecdotes in the later chapters supplement the Hellenica on a few points, especially as 
to Agesilaus' relations with Megabates. P on the other hand, gives a plain, matter-of-fact 
account of Agesilaus' march, the course of which is now clear, and he shows no 
disposition to enlarge upon the picturesque incidents which enliven Xenophon's narrative. 
Hence while Xenophon (Hell. iv. 1. 1) briefly summarizes the earlier part of the campaign 
corresponding to xviii. 38-xx. 38 in the words 6 di 'AyipriXao? iw*\ ctyUtro &pa ptroir&py <fc 

tt)¥ rov Qapp{iPd(ov Qpvyiav rijv piv \wpap fait *al ciroptffi, irdXfir W rag piv ftia rat d* iKowrat 

npoovXdp&a**, the negotiations with the Paphlagonians briefly described by P in xx. 31-xxi. 
5, occupy Hell. iv. 1. 2-15. 

xix. 2. The plain of Thebe was by Adramyttium, and according to Xen. Hell. iv. 1. 
41 Agesilaus returned thither in the following spring when forced to leave Dascylium. From 
Thebe he turned eastward ; the plain of Apia (An las is due to Wilamowitz) was north 
of Mount Temnus on the upper Macestus; cf. Strabo xiii. 1. 70 and Polyb. v. 77. 9. In 
Hell. iii. 4. 27 Xenophon mentions the irtKov t6 hnip Kv^c as the place where Agesilaus 
heard the news of his appointment to the command of the fleet as well as the army (cf. xv. 
33, note), but in view of the long distance from Cyme to Adramyttium, it is, we think, 
probable that the ' plain beyond Cyme ' refers to that at the mouth of the Caicus, not 
to that of Thebe. 

5. That the Mysians had made themselves independent of Persia at this period was 
known from Xen. Anab. i. 6. 7, 9. 14, Hell. iii. 1. 13, &c. The use of the present tense 
€ur\ . . . /3a<riX<«f oi>x viraKovovrts is another indication that P's work was written before 
the fall of the Persian empire; cf. xvi. 3, note and p. 122. 

15. Wilamowitz would insert row after &. 

22 sqq. Cf. the ambush described in v. 59 sqq., where the tactics are similar but not 
precisely identical, and p. 130. 


23. This band of mercenaries, formed by Dercylidas and handed on to Agesilaus, 
is not mentioned elsewhere* They were no doubt veterans who had served under Cyras. 

zx. 7-8. In the previous summer (i. e. 396) Agesilaus had invaded Hellespontine 
Phrygia (Qpvyia 9 irapadaAarWdior as it is called in zxi. 1 7) as far as Dascylium ; cf. Xen. 
HelL iii. 4. 1 2 sqq., Diod. xiv. 79. 3. On the present occasion after descending from the 
Mysian Olympus he turned eastward along the valley of the Sangarius. 

9 sqq. 2n{0p]a&aTr{v: P has intSpadanfs here twice, but Sind/ndon^ in xx. 19. 37 and 
xxi. 3 in common with the MSS. of Xenophon and Plutarch. The form Siritya&inp, which 
occurs in Ctesias Fr. 52, is more correct ; cf. the variation with regard to 'PaBdnjf (xx. 35). 
Spithradates is mentioned in Xen. A nab. vi. 5. 7 as one of Pharnabazus' lieutenants. The 
circumstances attending his desertion to Agesilaus are described more precisely in HelL iii. 
4. 10 ; it there appears that he was won over by Lysander and joined Agesilaus before the 
campaign of 396, whereas the present passage is vague as to the date of his arrival and 
in the absence of other evidence would produce the impression that it took place in 395. 
Concerning the origin of his quarrel with Pharnabazus (xx. 12) Xenophon in Hell. L c. says 
only that he was tXarrovfuvdv n \mh *ap»a&a(ov, but in Ages. 3. 3 he assigns as the reason 
the fact that the satrap wished to take Spithradates' daughter &cv ydpuv. The detail that 
he first fled to Cyzicus (xx. 1 5) is in accord with Xenophon (HelL L c). With regard 
to Megabates (xx. 16) in the HelL (iv. 1. 6 and 28) Xenophon merely hints at Agesilaus' 
attachment to him, but P's blunt statement in xx. 19-20 is amply confirmed by the stories 
in Ages. 5. 4-5, copied by Plutarch, Ages. 11. The daughter of Spithradates, who playa an 
important part in Xenophon's story of the negotiations with the Paphlagonian king (HelL iv. 
1. 4-15), is ignored by P; cf. xx. 37, note. 

16. Wilamowitz would insert t6p before vi6v. 

25. At6vra>t> Kr$oW : Plutarch (Them. 30) calls it AroprocctyoXoi', and indicates that 
it was on the main road from Susa to Sardis. Appian, who (Milhr. 19) employs the form 
Acrfirw Kc^aXi?, says that it was rrjt QpvyLas oxvp&rarov x»piov. The site of it is uncertain ; 
Ramsay (Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, p. 229) would place it near Ayaz-Inn. Since 
Agesilaus proceeded next to Gordium (1. 29) Atforw Kafnikai seems to be in the parts of 
Phrygia watered by the Sangarius or its tributary the Tymbris. 

29. irdXiv np6s T6pbtov: on the site of Gordium, which was on the Sangarius, see 
A. K5rte, Gordion (ErgHnzungshe/t v d. Jahrb. d. arch. Inst. 1904). Agesilaus had not 
been there previously, and nakt* is really otiose ; cfc vi. 34, note. 

30. icarf<TKfvaap€»op ko(\)S>s : cf. Theopompus Fr. 33 and p. 131. 

35. 'PaBdvov : he is clearly identical with the 'PaBimfs who appears as one of Pharnabazus' 
lieutenants in Xen. Anab. vi. 5. 7, Cyrop. 8. 3. 32, and HelL iii. 4. 13. It seems necessary 
therefore to emend nrjyrjs to nlpmjt, though it is noticeable that the scribe specially draws 
attention to the reading Ufas by a paroxytone accent to distinguish the word from 

37 sqq. P's account of Agesilaus 9 relations to the Paphlagonians is not only much 
briefer than Xenophon's (HelL iv. 1. 2-15), but differs in several important respects. 
That the scheme of making an alliance with them was due to Spithradates is stated by 
both writers, but while Xenophon says that Agesilaus entered Paphlagonia and negotiated 
with the king in person, persuading him to marry the daughter of Spithradates, P represents 
Agesilaus as remaining on the border and using Spithradates as intermediary. Plutarch 
(Ages. 1 1) abridges Xenophon with slight variations, which do not warrant Sachse's sugges- 
tion (op. cit. p. 9) that Ephorus is here Plutarch's authority ; cf. v. 59, note. The name 
of the Paphlagonian king is given as *Otvs in Xen. HelL iv. 1. 3-14, K<fa« in Xen. Ages. 3 
and Plutarch, Ages, n (as Meyer remarks, this seems to be an ancient emendation of 
*Otvs); and the king of Paphlagonia, whom Theopompus in the 35th book of the 


*iAimruca (Athen. iv. p. 144 and x. p. 415) calls Gw (ace. Gw>, but in Aelian V. 77. r. 27 
when copying Athenaeus GOov) and Nepos (Da/. 2) Tftwyj, has generally been regarded 
as the same person, though the events recorded about him (his war with Artaxerxes 
Mnemon and capture by Datames) took place some fifteen or twenty years later than 395. 
P has yet another name for him, rwy*, a form which in itself is not objectionable (cf. rwyip), 
but in view of the errors in the papyrus does not carry much weight; cf. pp. 13 1-2. 
Wilamowitz, who regards eds as the correct form, would restore it both here, where rwys 
may be corrupt for Twj* = Gvr, and in Xen. Hell. iv. 1.2 <l ft Ax Wt i> lla<j>\ayoviav <rvv avr$ 
tA» tw Ua<t>\ay6vw fiaaCkia *U \6yovs afr*, where he would read GCf for avw ovry, which 
Hartmann had already proposed to emend to'Orw. The form'Orv* occurs however several 
times in Bell. iv. 1. 3-14. 

xxi. 9. &A [rrjs BiBvvldos : cf. Xen. Hell. iii. 2. 2, where the invasion of Bithynia by 
Dercylidas is described. Theopompus probably treated of that campaign in the 8lh book 
of the Hellenica, for several Bithynian names are quoted from it by Stephanus Byz. Since 
Agesilaus was anxious to return by a different, i.e. more northerly route, and Cius in 
Mysia on the sea-coast is the next place mentioned on his march (1. 13), he would naturally 
pass through Bithynia. axo]*™™'/** was suggested by Wilamowitz. atro]v»r<fns is also 
possible. The comparative adverb in -«* is attested in neither case, 

IO—2. Cf. Xen. Hell. iv. I. 3 KaWAitrc t$' AyipriAaqi "Otvs x<Xiot/f piv Imrias dur^tX/ov? W 
frrATttoTcfc. ntpl xiXi]ovr is possible in 1. 12, but a number ending in Koaiovs, e. g. cWa*ocr{]ovff, 
is more likely, especially as P and Xenophon do not agree precisely with regard to the 
number of the ir«£bi. 

15. ir6X]iv t unless merely redundant (cf. xx. 19, note), refers to the former plundering 
of Mysia in xix. 8. 

a»ff h» k.t.X. 1 cf. xix. 14-8. 

18. MOirfrav Tfixor is clearly identical with the town near the confluence of the 
Macestus and Rhyndacus (cf. 1. 20), known in later times as MiX^rov ird*A« or MiAfp-oVoAu ; 
cf. Strabo xii. 8. 10, xiv. 5. 29. 

21. Ao{(t)kvXic[v : Agesilaus' arrival at Dascylium is also recorded by Xenophon 
(Hell. iv. 1. 15), who describes the richness of the district surrounding the /ScunXfta of 
Pharnabazus (cf. 11. 22-4), but without mentioning the dispatch of Pancalus with the booty 
to Cyzicus (U. 25-33). His statement that Agesilaus passed the winter there is in accord- 
ance with Fs description of Agesilaus' plans in 11. 33 sqq. 

25-6. Pancalus is only known from the present passage ; nri0anp is somewhat curious 
and is possibly an error for ArurraXfw. The fact that Cheiricrates is still spoken of as 
9avapx°* produces a conflict with Xenophon ; cf. xv. 33, note. 

31. Some participle like [^pnaap]tv»v (Bury) is required. 

33. row an-6 rfj* m[v]jic[s: by these are apparently meant the Mysians who had joined 
Agesilaus according to xix, 6-7, and whose homes were therefore not far from Dascylium. 
That Agesilaus should have disbanded all the soldiers who had served under him in Mysia 
(as the words might mean) is incredible, for his position at Dascylium was far from secure. 
Xenophon (Hell. iv. 1. 17) states that owing to the lack of precautions he was attacked by 

35-9. t]&* hnovra gupon* is to be connected closely with nap<{<rK)tva[(6p*vot, not with 
/Sadi'lrur, a winter campaign being of course out of the question. Agesilaus' intention of 
invading Cappadocia is not recorded by Xenophon, but he credits him even when obliged to 
retire to Thebe with ambitious dreams of conquest (Hell. iv. 1. 41 waptvKtvd&ro ybp 
mptwrSfLfpos <»« bCvairo <Wrur<i>, vopifav &n6aa fariafcv itoitjowto tBvf\ wdrra airoorf prf<r€W /SamX/a* : 
cf. the more rhetorical description in Ages. x. 36 hnvo&v col tXnifav Kara\v<r€w r^r M. rrjp 
9 EXA<ida orpartvaturav np&rtpor dpxov)* Hence there is no reason to doubt P's statement that 



Agesilaus entertained the plan of invading Cappadocia, although not only did unexpected 
obstacles, first the desertion of Spithradates and then his own recall to Europe, prevent any 
attempt to put the scheme into execution, but the plan itself was based on a complete 
misunderstanding of the geography. The description of Cappadocia as ' a narrow strip 
reaching from the Pontic sea to Cilicia and Phoenicia' (i.e the gulf of Issus) is of course 
inaccurate, and the distance from Sinope to the southern coast (11. 37-8) was no doubt much 
underestimated. In this respect however Agesilaus only shared the general misconception 
of the ancient Greek world with regard to the shape of Asia Minor, which even later than 
the fourth century b.c was conceived of as a kind of triangle, of which the apex was formed 
by a comparatively narrow isthmus joining Sinope to the Gulf of Issus ; cf. Strabo's dis- 
cussion (xiv 5. 21) of the views of Apollodorus and Artemidorus. The latter writer had 
estimated the width of the isthmus at 1500 stades, which, as Strabo rightly remarks, are 
just half the correct number, and Pliny is no nearer the mark when he reckons the distance 
as only 200 Roman miles. That the journey from Sinope to 9 optivfj Kikuda could be 
accomplished in five days was the opinion of Herodotus (i. 72, ii. 34), who in the former 
passage uses the word ww* to describe the position of Cappadocia, and five days is also the 
duration of the journey from Sinope to Soli on the Cilician coast according to Scylax 102. 
Scymnus (who is probably following Ephonis), criticizing Herodotus' view, estimates it at 
seven days. Herodotus' statement has been explained (Wiedemann, Herodots sweitcs Buck, 
p. 145) as a misunderstanding of the time occupied by the relays of Persian postal 
messengers, and is certainly wide of the truth. But that Agesilaus was better informed 
is unlikely, and the incomplete sentence in 1L 38-9 may well have continued cWfc %bnt 
W*p»v, followed by th SrfXow iropf vf<r&u or the like. 

Fr. 16. The compactness of the writing makes it almost certain that this fragment 
belongs to Cols, v or vi. It is more probably in the second than in the first hand. 

Fr. if. The apparent mention of Tissaphernes renders it probable that this fragment 
belongs to Col. iv. Like Frs. 18, 23, and 38, it comes from the top of a column. 

Fr. 19. 8. ' ApxfJXoZd ? : cf. Fr. 20. 11 and iii. 22, note. Possibly the reference is to 
king Archelaus of Macedonia (cf. ix. 29), not to the ship (?) Archelais. Fr. 20 is probably 
to be placed in a line above or below Fr. 19, but apart from the supposed connexion with 
Col. iii the position of these two fragments, together with 18 which seems to belong to the 
top of the same column as Frs. 19 and 20 on account of its colour and general appear- 
ance, is quite uncertain. There is a possible mention of Lysander in Fr. 20. 6. 

Frs. 21 and 22. That these two fragments belong to Cols, vii or viii is almost 
certain on account of the colour of the recto. 

Fr. 29. This fragment does not suit iii. 19-22 or vi. 42-5. 

Fr. 33. The exceptional blackness of the ink in this fragment suggests that it 
comes from Col. ix. But it is not certain that it belongs to 842 at all. The recto 
is blank. 

Fr. 44. This fragment is from the bottom of a column, like Fr. 61. 

Fr. 65. That this fragment and 68 belong to 842 is not certain. 

Frs. 71-2. It is very doubtful whether these fragments come from 842. Fr. 71 is 
written in a larger hand and on thicker papyrus than elsewhere, and some traces of writing 
on the recto seem to be in a different hand from the two hands of the land-survey, while 
on the recto of Fr. 72 is some writing proceeding in the opposite direction to that of the 
land-survey and in a different hand. 



843. Plato, Symposium. 

Height 31*1 cm. Plate VI (Cols, xxxi-ii). 

This, the largest literary papyrus found at Oxyrhynchus, consists of the 
latter half of a roll containing the Symposium of Plato. The part covered 
is from 200 B to the end, comprised in thirty-one columns of which four 
(xix-xxii) are missing entirely, while two others (i and xviii) are represented by 
small fragments ; but the remainder is in a very fair state of preservation. The 
space occupied by a column with the adjacent margin is about 10 cm. in 
breadth, and the total length of the roll may thus be estimated at some 23 
or 24 feet. The small and well-formed but somewhat heavy writing exempli- 
fies a common type of book hand, and probably dates from about the year 
200 A.D. N at the end of a line of full length is written as a stroke above the 
preceding vowel ; and the common angular mark is freely added at the end 
of short lines. Double dots are as usual employed to mark the alternations 
of the dialogue, but sometimes appear in other positions than at the end of 
a speech, e.g. in 11. 955 and 1221. A single high point is used, more especially 
in the latter part of the papyrus, to mark a pause ; the marginal paragraphus 
commonly accompanies both forms of punctuation, or stands by itself without 
them. Other lectional signs, apart from the diaeresis, are rare and for the most 
part due to a second hand which has corrected the decidedly careless work of the 
original scribe. The corrector's ink, however, does not differ markedly in colour 
from that of the text, and in the case of minor insertions the two hands are 
at times difficult to distinguish. But as they are certainly not separated by any 
wide interval of time the question has no great practical importance. The 
clearest instance of a rough breathing by the first scribe occurs in 1. 352. In 
cases of doubt we have as a rule credited alterations to the corrector, to whom is 
also due an isolated and seemingly futile scholium at 1. 391. 

The text, as so often with papyri, is of an eclectic character, showing a decided 
affinity with no single MS. Compared with the three principal witnesses for the 
Symposium it agrees now with B against TW, now with the two latter as against 
the former, rarely with T against BW (11. 112, 180, 297, 350, 435, 660) or with 
W against BT (11. 183, 674, 776, 966, 1007, 1015). Similarly in a passage cited 
by Stobaeus some agreements with his readings against the consensus of BTW 

R 2 


are counterbalanced by a number of variations from Stobaeus' text (cf. notes on 
11. 141-79). A few coincidences occur with variants peculiar to the inferior MSS., 
the more noticeable being those with Vindob. 21 alone or in combination with 
Venet. 184 (11. 59, 898, 986, 999, 11 94) and Parisin. 164a alone or with Vat. 229 
(11* 349) 46 2 > 1196). Of the readings for which there is no other authority, 
including several variations in the order of words, the majority, if unobjectionable, 
are unconvincing. The more valuable contributions, some of which are plainly 
superior to anything found in other MSS., are: 1. 92 cir, 1. 112 the omission of nat 
(so Stallbaum), 1. 239 av ciiy, where BTW have a meaningless &?, 1. 368 kqXoh as 
conjectured by Badham for r£ *., 1. 471 fAcr*x« as restored by Stephanus (pcWxctir 
MSS.), 1. 517 T€K€iv confirming a conjecture of Hug (kv&v MSS.), 1. 529 eitidvfiri as 
conjectured by Stephanus (fcriflv/ici MSS.), 1. 577 #ecu <n> omitted by MSS., 1. 699 
flcotfuAci (-1} BTW), 1. 770 Kartic[v (?) (icatffcu' MSS.), 1. 898 pot (probably) with 
Vind. 21 (ixov BTW), 1. 1142 biafiakei as conjectured by Hirschig (biafldky BTW). 
On the other hand in many cases the papyrus once more proves the antiquity of 
readings which modern criticism rejects or suspects. 

In the accompanying apparatus, which is based on Burnet's Oxford edition, 
we usually confine ourselves to the readings of BTW. With regard to the last 
named MS., Prof. H. Schone of Basel has very kindly placed at our disposal his new 
collation which often supplements and sometimes corrects the report of Burnet. 
Occasional references to the readings of other MSS. are derived from the edition 
of Bekker, and that of Schanz has also been consulted. We neglect minor 
orthographical variations such as itC and altt, the interchange of t and «, <r and £ 
idv and &v, occurrence of elision, crasis, and v ^AkvotucoV, and attraction of 

Col. i. 

5 lines lost 
6 ] fiovXot 200 B 

[to uryypos €ivai (pavai rov 2a>K)f>a 
40 lines lost. 

Col. ii. 
\tqvtgh> <w] av evSeia naprjv avToo) 200 E 

[vcu (pavat €\n^€^i Stf tovtoi? avapvrj 201 A 

50 [<r]Qr}Ti i\iv\a>v e<prj<r0a *v ra> Aoya aval 
rov c/o[a>]ra ci & \JJ]ov\ti cya « avafivrj 
<ra> oi/iai yap crc ovraxrei 71x09 aire*?} 


ore rots Owns KaT€(TK€va<r6i] ra irpay 
para St [€]pora[[r]] kclXc&v aia\pa>y yap 
55 [°] VK * l7 l *pw ov\ ovToxrct ira>y eAcyc? 
[€]mjw yap <f>avai Toy Aya&coya : Kai 
[e]m€iKc&$ ye Xcy€[t]y a> craipe tfxzvai) 
Toy Hc&k pan? koi ct tovto ot/ra>?) 

cx^c aXAo r« cpcoy icaAAot/s ay citj [[9]]) 
60 c/x»y acaxQpjJol/? & ov mpoXoyu : ovkov aoi B 

[<x>fLo]koyT)Tai ov €v8€rj$ coti Kai prj 


[ € X €I ] T0V \*)pw* vai uirciy: cv&tyr) 

[ap c]otc Kai ovk 6X Ci ° € P W JcaAAoy) 

[<w]?[y]5Jf <pavai: ti 8* to cpfec? JcaA 
65 [Aot/y] koi prf6\a]/iTj K€KTT)/l€yOy koX 

[X09 ap]a [A]cy€i[y] ot/ KaXov €iyai: ov 8t]Ta: 

[m dtyy opoXoyu? cparra KaXoy €ivai 

[cc Tavr]a oyra>f €\u : Kai tov AyaOco} 

[ya curtiy] a> £a>jc/xcrc? kw&vvsvo* 
70 [ovSey c]i8eyai aw tot* uirov\ icai) aoi C 

\firj\y fcaXoos y€ ciira? <f>avcu a> Aya6a> 

[dXXa o-fwepov] en €f7rc ra ayaOa ot/) 

[/ecu /caXa Aojcc]* croi €ivai : cpoiyc : €i a 

[pa €/m»9 ra>]p AraAa>y CP&179 cony 

75 [ ra *]f a y a ?[ a ] ^aAa jcai> top ayaOco 

[cv8€]tj[s] utj: €ya> 0apai a> 5W/oare? 

[aoi o]uk ay Svvaiprjy avriXeyuv 

aXXa ovrm €\€Tod a>y ov Xcyci? : ot/) 

pw ovy Tff aXt][6]€ta <f>avai <o 0tAc) 
80 [Ay]ab\»y Swacai avriXtytw eiru 

2a>KpaT€i ye ovSw \aXeiroy Kai a*e) 901 D 

/Z€J/ yc iffy facrcD roi> 5c Xoyov Toy 

ir€pi t[ov] cpoyrof ov irorc r^Kovaa) 

yt/i>a[iic]os MayTiviKrjs Jionjj'jjai 


85 [[cr]]i7 ravra tc crcHprj i7v|[ai]] Kai aXXa} 
noW[a] kcu AOqvaioif irore 6Wa/t€ 
vols irpo tov Xoipov Setca en? ava 

fioXrjy [eyroirjaaTO voaov rj 8rj Kai 
€jf€ ra eparriKa c8i8a£€v ov ovv 
90 Xoyov iK€ivrj cXtycp irupacrofiai 
v/ieiv 8i(X0eiv €K raw 01/10X0717) 
pevmy €fioi kcu AyaOwi auros c) 
it (fiavrov ottot av 8vva{ji]ai 8a 
0*17 a> AyaOmv oxnrep av ^[y^o-Jo)) 

Col. iii. 
95 SicXOeiv aurov nparov tis €otiv 201 E 

O C/KO? KOI 0W0109 T19 €1T€lTa TCI €/») 

ya aurov 8oK€i ovv pot paorov €t) 

vai ovtv 8i€X0 L c]iv a>? irorc p€ 17 £c 

V17 avaKptwowa 8irj€i <r\t8ov & 

100 n kcu eya> wyw at^r^y trepa roi) 

at/ra cXcyop oiairtp wv npos €/*€ j4ya6W) 

coy €itj c/x»y /tcya? 0€os €117 Ac raw *aA<w) 

^ € yX € ^ /* € TOl,ro '* T0 ** Xoyois oioirtp) 

€ya> tovtov cos owe kclXos eirj Kara tov) 
105 €fiov Xoyov out€ ayaOo? Kaiym mos c<f>fj 

Xeyctr a) Aioripa cuaaxpo^y 1 ^ apa e/xwy cor* 

^at jraicoy : icai 17 owe ev^tiprjaeis €<prj ^) 

0U1 ori cay /i?; JcaXoi' 17 apayjcacoi' at;) 

ro two* aiaxpov: /laXiora yc: 17 icai av 302 A 

no firj co(f>ov afiaOt? rj ovk rjaOijaai on e) 
any ri /jl€tcl£v <ro<f>La$ Kai apaOias: 
ti tovto: to opOa Sogafav avev tov 

C\9tV XoyOV 80VVCLI OVK OlO-Ba €<f>TJ OTl 

ovre cmo'Tao'Oai eoriv aXoyov yap npay 


115 /ia 7ra>y av eitj cmory/it] ovt€ apa) 

Oia to yap rov ovto9 Tvy\avov iro»y 

av cirj apaOia €<m 8e Srjirov toiovto 

rj opOrj 8o£a fi€Ta£v <f>povr]<r€Ct>$ Kai) 

a/taOias aXrjOtf rjv 8 cya> Xeycis : fiij) %o% B 

120 TOivw avayKafc [0] prj xaXov corns) 

aurypov €ivcu firjS fit] ayaOov Kakb 

ovtq) fie Kai tov €[p]a>ra [eira&q at/ro? 

opoXoyw firj €i[vai ayaOoy pt]]8e kclXo 

fiTjStv n paXXov oiov 8uv a[v]rov aur) 
I2 5 XP° V Kcu Ka *ov tivai aXXa rt: ii€Ta) 

£v toutoiv €0q Kai firjy t\v 8 €ya> 0) 

fio\oyeiTa[t] ye irapa iravra>v /zcyay) 

tfcoy c«i>ai raw /cf| u8orwv €017 irai^ 

raw Xcyct? 17 #fai raw uSotwv : £v/iira 

130 raw /tcp ©«w /cat 17 ycXacrao-a icai ttcop) 

ay €01} a> HcMcpares o/ioXoyoiTO /icyay 20$ C 

0co? €iyai irapa tovtwv 01 (ftaaiv ovto 
w8e Otov €ivai tiv€$ ovroi tjv 8 cya>) 

€i fitv €07 en; fiia 8 cya> jcaiyu> caro?) 

135 na{s tou)to Xeyci?: kcu 17 pa&a>? €017 X€ 

y€ yap [ji\oi ov iravras 6 c ov? 0i7[?] *v8aific[ 

vas uvai Kai kclXov? tj ToX/irjo-ai? av) 

Tiva firj <f>avai koXov re Kai tv8a[i}po 

pa $emv uvai fia At ovk cya>v c<p[rjv 

140 €v8[aifi]ova9 8e 8tj [X]€y«y c[v] rot/y Ta 
y[aOa Ka]i Ta KaXa KtKrrjfuvovs :) 

Col. iv. 

ov tow TayaOa Kai Ta /taXa K€K[Tt)]/i€ 
vow : iraw y€ aXXa firjv cpotrra [ye] a>) 203 D 

fioXoyriKas 81 evSciav raw aya[fl]aw 
145 *ai icaXaw cmOvjiciv ai/raw r[o]tr) 
rail' (»v tvSftfS toriv : a>//oXoyi;) 


Ka yap iro)9 av ovv Ocos €ir) o yc tow) 
Kct\a>v Ka[i ay]aOa>v aftoipos: ovSa} 

ficos coy y€ coiKW. opas ovv €<prj on) 

1 50 Kai av € peer a ov Ocov vopifcis : n [ov 
av €<f>T)i> tirj €/>a)9 6vt)T0$: rjKLar[a 
yc : aXXa ti jitjv : oxnrcp ra irporc 

pa €<f>r} /i€Ta£v Ovtjtov Kai ab\a]va 

tov ti ovv a) AioTipa Saijimv p[e 
x 55 y a $" & SwcpaTcs Kai yap irav to Sat} 

poviov fttragv con Ocov tc Kai) aoa E 

BvrjTOv: riva r\v 8 6yo> Svvapiv) 
€\ov: €p/irfV€VOv Kai SianpoOpcv 

ov Ocois ra nap avOp&nwv Kai av} 
160 Qpamois ra napa $€<ov to&v /icv ra? 

8efjo'€i9 Kai Ovo-ia? t&v 8c ra9 €7n) 

ra£ci9 re Kai afioifias tcov Ovaiw 

(fi ficaro 8c ov apfoTcpuv avjurXTj 

poi oxrrc ro nav avro avTco £vv8c) 
165 8ca0ai Sia tovtov Kai rj fjiavriKt) 

naaa \<op€i Kai tj tg>v i'cpc&v tc\vti 

todv tc ircpi ra9 Ovaias Kat ra9 \?\*) 

[A*]ra9 Kai ra9 ciro&Sas Kai ti\v [p]a 203 A 

[r]aai> iraaav Kai yorjTiav $€09 8c 
170 ai6pco7r<o ov ficiywrai aXXa 81a 

t[o]utov irao'a carrtv 17 o/iiXia Kai 17) 

8[i]aXcKT0$ 6(019 npo? avQpamovs 

[Kat] (yXtfyopoa^jT^i Kai Ka0cv8ovai Kai 


[0 jic]v ircpi ra rotavra 0^09 5a[i]/zo) 

175 [vio]f avrjp 8c aXXo ti o-o<po$ o>v 17) 

ncpi T€\yas r\ ncpi \ctp0vpyta9 t[i]) 

vq[9] Savavaovs ovroi 8rj ot Saiftovcs 

noXXoi tc Kat navroSairoi ciaiv €19 

8c tovtodv car[i Ka]i €/o<»9: irarpo9 
180 8c rjv 8 6yo> Kai fiff7[p]o9 tivos tarivl 


fiatcpoTcpov ficv €<prj 8irjyr]<rao'0ai 203 B 

ofico? 8e <roi e/x» ore yap €y€V€i[o] rj A 

<Ppo8ciTT) IOTKOVTO 01 0€Ol 01 T€ [a\\o]l 

Kai o nyy Mrjri8o9 vios TIopos €7r[€i]8rj 
185 8* eSeinvrjaav irpoo-aiTTjcovaa c[io]v 
8rj €UG>yj,a$ over)? a<f>uc€TO 17 n[t]vi 
a Kai rjv [ir]€pi ras Ovpas ovv Ho[pos 
fieOvaOcis tou v[€K]rapos oivot [yap 

Col. v. 

otrnw rjv €i? tov rov Aios Krjnov c£[t]A) 
190 0<dv {Jef3apr]fi€vo9 cv8cv rj ovv Ilevia 

cmfiovXevovo-a 81a rrjy airrrj? airo) 

piav iraiSiov iroirj<ra<r6cu c* rov Ho) 

pov KaTaxXtiverai re nap aura) koi 203 C 

€tcvr](r€ roy cparra 810 8rj tcai ny? A) 
195 <f{po8€i\Tr)s KaXrjs ovcrj? arc ovv IIo 

[pov a>c]o\ov0o? Kai Otpair&v ytyovtv 

o €pm y€WT)6[€]i9 ev roiy €K€ivrjS ye) 

vtOXiois Kai a pa <f>v<rei cpaarrjs «w) 

W€pi TO KaXoV Kai TTfS AQpoSciTf)? 

200 KaXrj9 ovoTjf arc ovv TIopov ko[i He 

via? vios <ov €p&s €v Toiavrrj [rv) 

X17 KaQeoTtiKtv npoyrov ficv ire) 

vrjs act cotiv Kai noXXov 8ti airaXo? 

re Kai koXo? oiov 01 noXXoi oiovrai) 
205 aXXa o-KXrjpof Kai avyjiripos Kai av) 203 D 

v7ro8i]T09 Kai aoiKos xa/iaurcTTj? 

aiu <dv Kai aarpcoros em Ovpais icai) 

€v 0801s vnaiOpio? Koifi&fievos ttjv 

ttjs firjrpo? <f>v<riv €\oov aei cvSaai 
a 10 <tvv[oik]os Kara 8€ av tov nartpa em) 

ffovXo? €ori [koXois] koi ayaOois av8p€i 

09 coy koi I'ttjs Kai gvvtovos 0Jj[p€V 



rty? 8uvos an Tivas TrAc/tcw [[a]]*** 
/9ay jtai <f>povrf<rea>9 emOvfxrjTrjs teat) 
215 Tjjfpjjopi/xor ff>ikoao<f&v 81a wavro? rov 
fiiov Seivos yoffs (fxipftaKcvs kcu <ro0i) 

ory? Kai ovre a>? aOavaros it€<I>vkcv 203 E 

out€ a>s Ovtjtos aXXa tot* ficv riyy 
17/xepay 0aAAei /ecu fi? ora? amoprj") 

220 <r*7 rorc 5c airoOvrjo-KU naXiv Se a) 

i^aj3io<ric€[[i]]rai $*a nyy rov irarpoy) 

* ifxHTiv to 8e iropt{opcvov cuei Une/cpei 

axrrc ovrc airopei €pa>9 nor* ovrc ir\ov 


T€t ao<f>ias Kai a/ia$ias tv fi€<ra> €<rrZ 
225 €\ei yap oaSe 6ea>y ov8ci? (fuXocoipci ov 204 A 

8 €mOvfJL€i ao<f>of ycveo-Oai cart yap* ov 

8 ei res aXAof cro^o? ov (fuXoaofei ov) 

<S av oi a/Jta0€i9 (f>i\o<ro<f>ovaiv ov8 em} 

Ov/iovci ao<f>OL9 y€V€aOai avro yap tov 
230 to €ai{iy xaXtirrj apaOia to prj oira) 

koXov KayaOov fJLrj8e <f>povipov 80) 


flvficiJJV]] firj oiofjL€i>o9 evSerjs tivai) 
ov av /iff oirjTai €iri8ei<r0ai tivcs ov 
235 [c]<f>r}v €yw a> Aioripa 01 (f>iKo(TO(f>ovv 

Col. vi. 

T€9 €i prjre 01 co<f>oi pyre oi a/iaOas : ) 

[JJifAop 8rj €01; touto ye rj8rj Kai ircu) 204 B 

\S\l oti 01 /iera£v [tov]tc»v ajKpore) 
[p)nv a>v av eirj Kai [0 cpjcoy coriv yap 5iy) 
240 tcov koWiotcov 17 ao(f>ia epcoy 5 corcy) 
cpw 7T€pi ro raXo? cdotc avayxaiov e) 
pa>ra <f>t\oao<f>ov aval (f>i\o<ro(f>ov &) 


ovra pcro£v civat aofyov kcu apadov9 

curia 8c [aura> Kai to)ut&v tj ycpcaw} 
245 irarpos p[cv y]ap owf>ov coriv Kai cvno 

pov pt}i\po9 8c] ov <ro<prj9 Kai anopov 17) 

/icv ow <pi{<ns tov 8]aipovo9 00 0(Xc) 

2a>KpaT€9 carry ov [8]c <rv g>0t]9 epeora 

civai Oavpaarov ovScv ciraOc? 0017) 204 C 

250 #17? 8c a>9 cpoi Sokci TCKpaipopevrj) 

c£ a>v ov cXcyc9 to epapevov ctvai cpa 

ra ov ro epeov 81a tclvtcl aoi oiopai) 

iravKaXo9 ojmuvcto o c/x»? Kai yap am 

ro cpaorov to too ovti koXov *[a]i A[[ya]] 

2 56 P oy Kal tcXciov Kai paxapiorov to 

8c yc epeov aXXrjy i'Scav TOiavrrjv 

cypv oiav cya> StjXOov Kai cya> euro 
cuv 8tf a> gen] KaXm9 yap Xcyci9 toi) 
ovtos <w cpa>9 Tiva yjpciav c\ci T019 
260 av6pamoi9 tovto Srj pcra Tama) 204 D 

€01; a> 2a>KpaTC9 wapaaopai ac 818a 

fax c<m pcv yap 8rj toicuto? yc) 

yovm €pa>9 am 8c tow KaXmv »s) 

ov ^179 a 8c Ti9 rjpas cpoiTo n row) 
265 KaXmv arr[iv o c]pa>9 a> S<oxpaTC9 tc Kai 

Aioripa a{8c S]c aaQcorcpov cpa cpa> 

rmv KaXw[v ti c]pa: Kai cyoo cmov oti 

ycvarOai at{r]a)[[.]] aXA cti woOci c(f>ij) 

17 airoKpiat9 cpan^friv T0iav8ci* ti 
270 corai CKcivm a> cav ycvrjTai ra Ka 

Xa ov naw c<f>rjv cti c%civ cyoo npo9 

ravn\v ttjv cpaynjaiv wpo\ay 

pa>9 awoxpcivaaOai : aXX ctf>ri axnrcp 204 E 

av a Ti9 pcTa(iaXa>v avri tov koXov 
275 ra> ayaOoo yjpoapcvo9 wvvOavoiro) 


<f>€p€ 0), 2cDKp<lT€9 €pCU CfXDV T&V a) 

ya$<oy n epa ycreaOai rjv 8 *ya> at/) 
too Kai ti €<rrou ejcctiw oo av yevrfrai 
ray aOa rovr eviroptorepov y\v 8 *) 
280 ya> ex 6 * airoKpcwaaOai ori €v8ai/ia>v 

corai : KTr)<re[i] yap €<f>t) aya6W 04 cvftatpom 905 A 

•v8ai/JLoi>€9 Kai ovk€ti irpo&8u cpc) 

Col. vii. 

\06a1 tva n 8* p\ou\[crai €v8]aifi<ov «) 

\yai o fiovXo/icvo]? a\[\a tcXo]? o*o*[€i e] 
385 \\€iy 17 airoKpuri? 0X17617 X]cy€i? €«) 

[*w eya> ravTtjv 8\e i[rj\v fiovXtjaiv 

[/cat rov epcora t\wtqv norepa jcoi) 

\vov oici uvai ir\avrmv avOpwrcov 

[/ecu iravra? r]aya0a fiov\ca$ai avrois 
390 [caw] a€i [17] ir[co]s Xcycty ovra>? 171/ 5 cy[oo 

[tfOijj'oy eci^ai irair«r: re 6*17 ovv c<f>rj 

00 ScoKpare? ov iravra{s epa]." 0a/xej>) 

€iw[6]/o yc irairey to^ ai/Jrooy cpam) 205 B 

*ou aict aA[Xa] raw [0a/x]€^ 6/oay rovr 

395 5 ot/: 0at//ia[lo>] 171/ [5 €yo» ic]ai airroy) 

aXXa /X17 6a[vfia{e €<pt) a0]eXoir€[ff]) 

yap apa rov [€/x»]ro9 n 1609 ovo/ia) 

(0/l€P TO T€[v 0\]OV €1TITI0€;>T€9 o) 

Fo/ia epoora 7[a fo] aXXa aXkois *a) 
300 rayjx&ptOa c{vofi\a<ri : axnrep n rjy 

8 eya> axnrep r[o8e oi]o0 on iroirjois € 

0TW' Ti 7roXt/ 17 yap TO €JC TOV |II7 Of) i| w * 

Toy e«9 to ov 'C[6\vri orcoovy atria) 

iraaa tori iroitjotf acre Kai ai viro) 205 C 

305 irao-ai? rai? n^vais epyaaiat not 

170W €101 Kai 01 tovtkov 8rjfiiovpyoi 

irarr€9 iroiTjrai: aXrjOri Xcyct? oX) 


X opus 17 8 17 ourOa on ov KaXovmai 
woirjrcu aXX! aXXa typvcriv ovopa 
310 ra an[o flc ir]a[<r]i7* Trj? iroit)<r€a>? €v 
popic[v cuf>)opicrOcv to mpt rrjv pov 
aiKrjy tcai ra perpa to tov oXov ovo 
pari irpovayopeverai irotrjai? yap) 
rain-a povov /raXctrat /cai 01 exo* 

315 T€S TOVTO TO popiOV Tf)f WOlffac) 

a>y ttoitjtcu; 0X17617 €(f>rj[ti\ Xeyeir) 
ovra> toiwv Kai wept roy [cjpara) 
ro p[c]v K€(f>a\cuov €<mv [n]xaa 17) 
todv ayaBoav eiriOv/ua tcai tov ev 
320 8aipovuv o fieyioTO? re teat JoXe 

po9 C/KD9 irairi aXX 01 /icy aXXi7 t/)€ 
woperot noWaxri eir aurw 17 Kara) 

Xprj/iaTiafjio 17 /cara <f>iXoyvpva<m 

ay 17 Kara <f>i\o<ro<f>iav our cpav jca) 

325 [Xoi/]irai oct cpaorcu 01 8e Kara tv ti et 

809 Xovt€$ re /cat €<rrrov8aKOT€$ to 

tov oXov ovopa toyp* epon-a re kcu e) 

pay /cat epaorcu: kivSvvci^ov^u 0X17) 

• 617 €017? €ya> Xcyc[i]y: /rat Xcyerat pi 


Col. viii. 

[tj <rot ftoicouffi |ia Ai ovk «pot *y]« ^v P «Yfc [*P ov]y t| [8] i| [ov 
[to* airXow «]arr[i Xrytiv or]t ot avtpwirot tov aya#ov 

33° [y* to] €017 Xoy[os 09 ot a]y t[o] i7/i[[€]J«rt/ e) 

[a]vra>y £v r ??t M ' ovrot c]gwri 8 epos Xo 305 E 

yos ovt€ rjp[eiaios <f>ri<Ti]y uvak tov cpao 

Ta 5P5I [o]jt€ [oXov cap] /117 rvyx a|/1 7) 

ye Trot; a> €Ta[ip€ ayaBov ov\ errei avrv 
335 7 € *** iro[#a* aco* \eipas *0ikov<ri\v air© 


T$jiv€<rOcu ot avOpamoi *av d[vroit 80 
[ktj ra €avrav irovrjpa tivai] ov yap to 
[tavTw oipai ckootoi aaira^ovToi 
€[1 /iff €i] j(«9 to /i€P aya$]ov c[i\c€ioy Ka 

340 [Aci k]cu tai\rov to 8e kclk\ov aXXorpid 

w ovSev y[e aXXo €oti]v ov tpwriv av) 206 A 

0p[wr]oi 17 t\ou ayaOov eplpciv vai €<f>rj 
7i d[e] ov v\poa$cT€ov €]<pTj on tcai eivai 
to ayaOov [avrois epaxrt] irpoaOei^a^ov) 

345 [ a ]p ovv €017 Ka[i ov povov] civai aXXa) 

xat aei [c]ti{ac koi t]J[v]to w(p]o<r0€7{[a]]€Oi' : ) 

€<ttiv apa £v[X\q]/38T)v [e]<prj *pat tov 

to ayaOov avrto eivai aicil aXrjOeora 

Ta ttfmv cya> Acya? : ore 8* tovto c) 206 B 

350 pOUS €OTlV OIU T) 8 1) 7C0V TIV€L TpOTTO 

8io>k[ov]tcdv avro teat ev t\C\vi npa) 


£ €i ottovStj tcai 17 ovvra<ri$ *pw av} 
Ka\[o]iTO ti t[ovto T\vyyav€i ov to 

€py0V €\€IS *}*[*]£?]•] W P&VTCLV <T€ c) 

355 <f>yv <ya> 00 AioTipa €0avpa£ov an 
ao<pia Kai c<f>oiTa>v irapa ae aura tov 
Ta: fiaOrjo-ofievof aXX €ya> vol €<f>tf €pa 
coti yap tovto tokos ev koXw tcai) 
Kara to <ra>pa teat Kara ttjv yfrv\rjv 

360 pavruas r\v 8 €ya> jeira* ori itotc 

Xcyeif koi ov pavOavm : aXX €ya> 8rj 206 C 

aatfxartpov epa> Kvovatv yap €0?y) 

a) SaHcparc? iravrts avOpmroi koi 

Kara to acopa kol Kara ttjv ^v\rjv 
365 tcai artiSav ev Tivt rjXiKia yevwv 

Tax tiktciv eiriOvpcdfcv^ rjpcov 17 <f>u 

ais tiktuv Ac ev pev aioypu ov 8v 

varai ev 8c jtaAa> 17 yap avSpos Kai 

yvvaiKO? avvovma tokos €<rrtv 


370 c<m & ravTO Ouov UVot/ro]] to irpay 


(ow> aOavarov eveoriv 17 Jct/17 
<ri? Kai r\ ycwqciff ret 8 ev too avap 
fiocTto aSvvaTov yevcaBai avap/io) 206 D 

375 orov 8 cotiv to aioxpov airavri too) 
0*a> to 8* koKov apfiorrov fioipa ovv 
kcu €i\v0via rj KaXXovrj €otiv rrj yc) 

Col. ix. 

veo[ei 8]i[a Ta]vra ova[v par] ko[Xoo npo<r 

ircXafy to kvovv T\tfa>]v t€ y*yi>[€]Tai) 
380 Kai cvQpaivopevov \8\iaytiTm [k]ai ri) 

ktci T€ kcu y€vva: c[ra]p 8e aic^plfo <tkv 

Opamov re Kai Xvnovfj[<E]vov £i{i>]<nr«) 

parai Kai airorp€nei\a\i ko[i] av[iX]XeTai 

Kai ov yevv[a] aXX i<r\ov to tcvrjp[a X a ft € 
385 ira>9 fepei [oO]cv 8rj t[q>] kvovvti [re Kai]) 

rjStf airapyavn noXXtf 17 htoit)o[i9 ye 

yove irepi to koXov [8]ia to /leyaXfas] o>) 206 E 

Suvo? airo\i{€iy top €\ovra coriv 

yap a> [£a>]*/>a[r]cr e^t] ov tov koXov c) 
390 pa>s 099 o[v] c[i\a : aXXa ti ptivfc] nyy y*") 

Vr]<T€W KOI TOV TOKOV CV TOO KaXoO I €«) I © €v[ii « 

€v tjv 8 eye* : naw par ovv €<prj : ti 8rj p«M 77 . [. 

ovv nys yeyco-cttr ori *€i ytvcais €ori 

Kai a&avarov a>? Ovtjtoo 17 ycvvrjais 
395 aOapaxrias 8* avayKaiov ariOvptiv 207 A 

fkvra ayaOov ck tow oo/ioXoyfj/ievm 

c[i]ir€p tov ayaOov cavro ciyai ai€i e/x»y 

e[o]riv avayKaiov 8tj ck tovtov tov 

Xoyov Kai Tt\s aOavaaias tov €poora 
400 aval' Tavra T€ ovv navra c&£a) 

<TK€ //e otrore irepi toov cpoorucoov Xo 


y[o)j9 JTOIOITO: KCU 7T0TC iyp€TO I Tl 0161 ) 

a> 2a>KpaT€f aiTiov uvou tovtou rou 

epoaro? kcu rrj9 eiridupua? 17 ovk aiaOa 
405 ru a>y 8uva>9 8iari0€Tcu iravra ra 

[ff]rjpia eireiSav cn€i8av yewav c) 

iriOvfii\<ni kcu ra irefa teat ra in-17) 

va yoaovvra T€ iravra kcu epem) aoj B 

jtar 8iari$cii€va irpmov ptv ire 
410 pi to £vp(iiyT]vat aWrjXoi? eirura 

7T6/M rr\v Tpo<f>rjy tou ytvofievov 

kcu croifia eariv Virep tovtw kcu 

8ia/ia\€(r0ai ra aaOcvearaTa toi? 

itryvporarois Kat VirepanoOvrjo-Kel 
415 kcu airrco too Xei/m jrapanvofLwa 

aXJT€ €K€l?a CKTp€<f>€lV KCU CtXXo) 

war iroiowra rov9 fi€v yap avOpn 
nous €<f>rj oioiT ay ns €/c Xoyiapov 
ravra iromv ra & Orjpia m at 
420 ria ovtcds cpwriK&s 8iaTi0€<rOcu 20 J C 

ex*** Xeyew. *ai cyoo cAcyoy ori) 
ovk u8citjv: tj 8 €iir€V Siavoci 

ovv 8uvc{9 7to]t€ y€vr)o , co'0at ra € 
pcuriKa ea[v r]avra prj €wotj? [[17]] 

425 aXXa 81a [Tav]ra roi 00 diori/ia 

Col. x. 

c[ircp] yvv8ri euro? trapa a* [i?*]a yy\ov? 
d\ji 8i\8a<rKa\cw 8eojiai [aXX]a p[ot Ac 
y€ kcu rovrmv ri\v airi[av K]ai i[a>v 
aXXmv tg>v wept ra [c]parr[iKa a rot 

43O WV €<f>Tj 1TIOTCVW €K€lVOV €tl{a]t) 

<f>v<ru roy epcora 6v iroWaKis ayio) 

[\]oyrj<rap€V prj $avpa(€ evravOa 

[y]ap Toy avrov ckuvco \o[yo]i> r\ Ovrj 207 D 


rr\ <f>vo[t]? farti Kara [ftpvarov au 
435 T f *w<u k&i aOavaros 8vvarai & 

ravrtf \10vov ri\ ytvtatt on au 

[K]aTa\uw€i trtpov vcov avri TOU 

iraXaiou enu Kai €v m €v ckclotov 

rmv (mmv (rjv KaXurai kcli et} 
440 vai to avro oiov e/c naiSapiov) 

avro? Xeytrai €»? av irptafivTTjs 

yevrjrai ovros fitvrot oi/&iro) 

re ravra €\mv €v avrm o/za>? 0) 

avros KaXurai aXXa v€09 aui yi 
445 yvo/iwo? ra 8c anoXXvs Kai Kara ra? 

rpiyas Kai aapxa ko[l] oora Kai ai/ia Kai 207 E 

o^ffy/iirav to cm/ia Kai firj on Kara to 

ompa aXXa [K]ai Kara rrjv yfrvyrjv <k) 

rpoiroi ra [tj]0tj 8o£ai ciriOv/iiai t]8o) 
450 vai Xvnai <f>ofioi rourmv cKaara ovSc 

ttot€ ravra naparriv CKaarm aXXa 

ra /i€v yiyvcrai ra 8 airoXXvrai no 

[X]v 8c rourmv aronmrcpov en on Kai 

ai cmory/iai firj on ai /icv yiyvovrai 208 A 

455 ax 8c anoXXvvrai tj/iiv Kai ov8ciro) 

re 01 avroi ecfiev ov8c Kara ra? cm r 

OTTjpas aXXa Kai fiia CKaarrj raw) 

ciriarrffimv ravrov iraayti yap Ka 

Xctrai pcXcrav m? c^iovo-rj? can rrjs 
460 cmarrjfirj? XrjOrj yap C7ri<rrripr)S c) 

£0809 /icXcry 8c iraXiv Kaivrjv cv 

iroiouaa avri rr\? amovaijs /ivrjfirf am 

{a rrjv eirtarriiiTiv more rr\v at/) 

rrjv 8okciv etvai rovrm yap rm rpo 
465 nm nav ro Ovrjrov am(crat ov rm 

navrairaaiv ro avrov au civai) 

maircp ro Ociov aXXa rm ro amov 208 B 




kcu iraXatov/icvov erepov veov ev 


evKaraXinav oiov avro r\v rav) 
470 rr\ ttj prj^avrj o> Sook pares €0iy 
6vr\Tov aOavaaias p.eTe\u kcli 
aoopa Kai raXXa iravra aOava) 

Col. xi. 

[to]v 8e a[Wr] prj ovv Oav/iafc €i] to av 

[tov] airop[\a<rTt)pa <f>v<ru nav] reipa 
475 ab\avaatas yap \apiv iravri a]vrtf rj 

ott[o]i{8t) km epofis arcrai Kaitym a) 

[Kov<ras tov Xoyov eOavpaaa] re kcu} 

[eiiro]v *[iev rjv 8 eya> 00 ao<fxor\aTr} Aio) 

[rt]/ia ravra a>9 [aXrjOm o]ut<ds *X €£ ) 
480 [ko]i fj axnrep 01 re[Xeoi <ro0]iarai €V io'Oi 208 C 

[€(f>]rj a> SWparc? [eir€i k]cu to>i> avOpa 

[irtyv €i eOcXeis c[«9 ttjv] (fxXoripiav 

PXe^ai 6avpa[(oL$\ av n/9 aXoyias 

irepi a cya> €iprjK[a a] firj evvoeis evOv 
485 /ii]6eis C09 8up[<o$ 8t]aK€ivrat epwn 

tov ovo/iaor[oi yev\*vOai tcai /cXcoy 

€ty tov ai€i xpovov aOavarov tea 

TaOecOai /cat Virep tovtou kivSu 

rot/9 T€ Klv8vV€V€lV CTOlflOl tKTl 

490 navras en fiaX\c[v rf\ virep to>i>) 

irai8a>v Kai X/ > W a [ r ] o^aXtaKeiv 208 D 

• Kai Trovov? noveiv [otyoTivaaovv 

Kai vnepairoOvrjo-KUv : enei oiei) 

av e<f>rj AXktjctiv vnep ASprjTOV 
495 airoOaveiv av 17 A^iXXea Tlarpo 

kXq) eiranoOavav 17 irpoairoOa 

veiv tov vperepov KoSpov vnep 

ttjs fiaXeia? roav naiScov prj oio) 


ptuovs aOavarov pvrjprjv ape 
500 rrjs wept eavrcw €<r€<r$ai rjv wv) 

rjpu? c^o/icv woXXov ye Set ^<f>rj) 

aXX oifiai v7T€p aperrjs aOavarov 

Kai roiavrrj? 8o£t]? evtcXeovs) 

navrcs iravra noiovaiv otrco ay a 
505 pcivov? wti To<rovra> paXXov rov 208 E 

yap a$avar[o]j €poo<rr 01 pev ovv ev 

Kv/ioves €<prj Kara ra a&para ov 

r€9 irpo? ray yvvaiKas paXXov rp€ 

novrai Kai ravrr\ tpooriKot eiai) 
510 81a irai8oyovias aOavaaiav Kai 

pvrjprjv Kai €v8aipoviav coy 01 

ovrai avroif e/[y ro]v emra XP°) 

vov iravra 7ropi([o]p€voi 01 &) 

Kara rrjv ifrv\r)v €i<ri yap ovv ec^i; 209 A 

515 oi ev rats y^v\ai? kvovciv en paXXo 

17 €v rois coypaaiv a y^v\rj np[o(r]r]KL 

Kai Kvrjo'a ij[a]]i Kai reject? n ovv irpoo- 

rjK€i <ppovr]<riv r[e Ka]i rrjv aXXrjv 
apcrrjv a>v Stj e[iai k\cu 01 iroirj7[at 
520 7ra[vr]€f y€vvTi[ropt]s Kai roav o\rj 

Col. xii. 

piovpy&v 00*01 Xcyovrai €vp[€r]iKoi) 
^i]vai iroXv if p[€y]tarrj €<f>rj [K]ai icaX) 
Xiottj rrjs <ppovr)<j€ot>$ 17 ircpi ras ra> 
noXeav re Kai oiKrjaeoDv [5]ia/t 007/17) 
525 ai? 17 8rj ovopa ecrriv aax^poavvrj re 
Kai SiKaioavvrj rovrav av orav nt 

€K veov €KKvpa>v 17 rrjv ^v\f)v Otios 209 B 

a>v Kai rjKovarjs rrjf rjXiKias riicrei 
T€ Kai ytvvav 170*17 emOvprj {rjru 
S 2 


530 Srj oi/iai Kai ovto9 ir€pu<w to koXo 

€v a) av y€W7)(T€i€V €v [tod y]ap ao-\pa) 

ov8tiroT€ ycvvrjo-a ra r[c] ovv oxo/ia 

to, ra KaXa fiaXXov 9 t\ol\ a«r)([p]a aaira 

(trou arc kv&v Kai av tv-nr^r! ^v 
535 X 1 ? Ka ^V Kai y^vvaia [Kai] ev(f>V€i ira 

w Srj aana(cTa[i] to £vvav<f>OTepo 

Kai irpc{s] tovtov top avOpamov w 

Ovs cv7i[op)f[i Xo]y[a>v] ntpi aperiyy Kai 

irepi oi[ov xprj] tivai rov ay 8 pa rov 209 C 

540 ayaOov Kai [a €iriT]rj8€veiv Kai em) 

\etpti irai8*v[eiv] airTo/i$y]os yap) 

oi/iai rov koKov Kai ofieiXcov a[vrco 

a naXai €KV€i t[i]kt€1 Kai yevv[a Kai 

irap^ovT^fav Kai anew /i€/jlvtj/i€v[o? 
545 Kai to ycvvrjOcv ovveKrpcfei koi 

VT] /ICT €K€tV0V <HXJT€ TToXu fl€t(<X) ) 

Koivtwiav Ttj$ TW naiScov irpos 

aXXrjXov? 01 toiovtoi ivyovvi Kai) 

<f>iXiav (JePaioTcpav arc KaXXeio) 
550 vcov Kai aOavarcoTtpav 7ra[iS]<ov 

K€K0ii>a>vr]K0T€S Kai ira? dv 8e£ai 

to eavToo toiovtovs iraiSas /laXXo 

ytyovcvai r\ tovs avOpamvovs Kai 209 D 

€<r OfiTjpov airoPXeyjras Kai €19 Ho'ioSb 
555 Kai tov9 aWovs iroirjras roi/y ay a) 

flow {tjXodv 01a tyyova [c]airr<ov Ka 

TaXcurouo-iv a *K€ivoi[s] aOavaTO 

kXcos Kai fivTjfiTjv ira[p]€\€Tai av 

ra roiavra ovra- ei Ac fiovXei €(f>rj 
560 oiou? AvKovpyos naiSas KaTtXine 

to cv AaK€8aifio[v]i (rcorrjpa? riy? 

AaKeSai/iovos Kai coy €7roy ci7r[€i 

TTjf EXXa8o$ Tijiios & ira[p] rjfiiv [Kai 


2oXo>v 81a rr\v tcov vofimv ycj>) 
565 vt\<tiv Kat aXXoi aXXoOi iroX\a%ov 209 E 

av8pes Kai EXXrjat kcu ev [P]ap/3apci$ 
iroXXa Kat aXXa a7ro<f{T]i>]ap€voi) 

Col. xiii. 

epya Kai yeivrjaavref navroiav a) 

perrjv <ov Kai it pa iroXXa rjSi] yeyove) 
570 81a tovs toiovtov? naiSas Sia 8e rovs 

avOpamivovs ovSevos irar ravra pi 

ovv ra epcoriKa i'aoos a> X&Kpares Kav) 

av pvrjOeirjs ra 8c reXea Kat emmrtKa 210 A 

cdv evexa Kat ravra eariv eav ris op) 
575 0a>? pertri ovk 018 et 010s r av ciiyy cps> 

fiev ovv e<f>rjv eyco Kat wpoOvptas ov 

8ev airoXeiyfrco netpoo 8e Kat av eneo'Oai 

eav 0109 re tjs : Set yap e<f>r) tov opOm 

i[o]vra em tovto to irpay/ia apyeaOa\t\ 
580 pev veov ovra tevai em ra KaXa <ra>) 

para* Kat irpa>rov p.ev tav op<9a>? 17) 

yrjrai rjycv/ievos evos avrov aoopa 

tos epav Kai evravOa yevvav Xoyoi/j 

icaXot/? enetra 8e avrov Karovorj^ 
585 aai on ro koXXos to em orwovv acopa 210 B 

ti ra> em erepm acopari a8eX<f>ov ear* 

Kat et Set Smxetv to en etSet KaXov} 

ttoXXt) avota /atj ov% ev re Kai ravrov 

Tjyeio-Oai to en[i] iraai rots acopaai KaX 
590 Xoy tovto 8 evvorjaavTa Karaarrj 

vai navTcov raw KaXcov cat/iara* 

epaorrjv evo? 8e to o , <f>o8pa tovto \a 

Xaaai Karaq^povr^aavra Kai a/iiKpo 

fjyrio'ap.evov per a 8e ravra to ev 

595 rati yfaxatf jraXXo? Tiptoorepov 17) 


yrjaaaOai tov cv ro> c&fiari coo-re Kai 
eav emeiKrjs oov rqv ^XJIV tis Kai 

z&v apiicpov avOos €\tf *£apKuv) aio C 

aCT-a^p]] Kai cpav Kai KqSwOat Kai tl 
600 KTtiv Aoyot/y toiovtovs Kai faruv 
oitivcs iroiTj<rov<ri f3eXT€iovs toi/s) 

pcot/ff iva avayKaOrj av OcacaaOai 

to ev tois cmTTj8cvpa<ri Kai Toiy) 

vofioi? KaXov Kai tovto Tfkiv on) 
605 nav avro avroy ^t/yycm €oriv} 

'iva ro 7r[ep]i to <rw/ia KaXov ajiiKpov 

ti rjyrjoy[T]cu €i[va]i fitTa Se Ta €7n) 

TrjSevfiara ciri ray €7rtori7/*ay) 

ayayciv iva ecSrj av eirioTripcbvy 
610 /caAAoy Kai j8\€7r[a>]i/ irpo? [w]pXv 17&7) 210 D 

to KaXov prjK€Ti to Trap €vi axnrcp 

oiK€Tt]? ayancov iraiSapiov jtaXAoy 

[17] avOpanrov tivos t\ eiriTrjStvfia 

[to]? [[rje^oy SovXevmv (fxzuXos tj Kai 
615 [trpi]KpoXoyos aXX tm to [iroA]v ireXa) 

Col. xiv. 

yoy T[cTpa]fip[evo$ tov koXov] ko[i] 6ea)p[a> 
iroX[Xovs K]ai Ka[Xovs Xoyovs x]ai /icyaAo) 
jrpc[n€i$ ti]k{tu Kai Siavorj]para tv (fnXo 
<ro<f>[ia a<p6ovco ca>y av €vr]av$a paxrOus 
620 Kai av£7]0[ei9 KaTiSrj Tiv]a iirio-Ttipffv 
fiiav [toicwttiv rj €ot]iv KaXov roiodSe 

TTtipoo Si p[oi €<f>rj Toy] vow irpoar€\€iv 210 E 

coy oiov tc p[aXicT]a oy yap av /ie\pi *v 
rocuOa irpo\s] Ta €po>T[iK]a TraiSaycr/rj} 

625 By [$€]lDfl€v[0S] €0€[fiyy] T€ KOI 0/>6W) 

Ta KaXa npos reXoy fj[Srj] iodv toov epa) 


TiK[&y egaupvTjs KaTo[tyc\Tai ti 6av} 
fiaarov ti\v obvaiv tca[Xov tovt]o e) 

KCtVO CO 2<X>Kpa[T€S] OV [8rj CVCKCv] kcll 

630 01 cpirpoaOcv iravr*[s irovoi i7<ra]^) 

irpcorov ficv act ov k[cu ovtc yiyvo 211 A 

pcvov ovt€ arroXXv\jicvov ovtc av 
gavopcvov ovtc $[6 ivov circiTa ov 

Tff flCV Ko[X]ov TJI [8 ai<T\pOV OvSc TO 
635 T€ /JLCV ToSc 8c OV 7Tp[0S flCV TO KaXQV 

irpo? 8c to aivyjpov ov8 [cv]6a [pcv k\a 
\oy cvOaSc 8c aia\pov a>? tici ficv o 
koXov Tiaiv 8c aio[xpop] ov8 av (j>a[vTa 
aOrjo'CTai ai/rco to [tca]Xov oiov ir[po 
640 aconov ti ov8c \cipcs ov $ € «XX[o] ov 
8c cv ca>fia pcTc^u ovSc m Xoyo[s 
ovSc Tit cmory/ifi ovSc ir[ov ov cv c 

T*p[[oi/]] tivi oiov [cv] (wo) rj cv [yrj 17 cv 

ovpavoo 17 cv too [aXXco] a[XX avro tea 21 1 B 

645 avro /act avrov fiovc[ci8c9 act ov 

Ta 8c aXXa iravTa KaXa cf^civov pc 

TcypvTa Tponov Ttva toiov\tov 01 

ov yiyvo/icvo)v tc raw aXX&v [icai 

anoXXv/icvoov firjScv ckclvo [fit} 
650 re irXcov /itjtc cXclttov yiyv[co- 

Oat firjSc iraayciv /itjScv orav [8rj 

Tis airo tcovSc 81a to opOa>$ ira[i8c 

paarciv cnavKov ckcivo t[o] k\ol\ov 

apxyTai /caOopav c\c8[ov av ti a 

655 7TT01T0 TOV TCXOVS TOVTO [y«]/J 6[lJ € 

cm to opOoos cm Ta cpoirru^a icvai 211 C 

17 for aXXov aycaOai apj(op[cvov a 


tea tov KaXov act ciravicv[ai wnrcp 


660 eiravaPaafiois xpot>iitv\ov airo e 

vos €irt Svo kcu airo 8voi[v €iri irav 
ra ra KaXa aw/iara kcu [airo tow 

Col. xv. 

[/ta]A[a>]i/ acofiarcoy art ra KaXa €iriTtf 

8evfiara Kai airo raw emTTjStvpa 
665 ra[y) €iri ra KaXa paOtjfiaTa Kai a) 

no [t]<w fiaOrjfiaTtov €iri skuvo to 

fia[0]i;/i[a] TtXevrrjofy] o €<ttiv ovk a\ 

Xov [rj a]urov *k[€U/ov] tov KaXou pa) 

drjfi[a k]gu yvco avr<o TtXarran^ra^ 
670 €<mv kolXov €v[r\av6a tov fiiov a>) 211 D 

<pi\e 2oi>KpaT€9 e<prj tf MavrwiKr)) 

£wrj €iir€p irov aXXoOi fitoDTOv av 

6p[o>]irco Otaoptvco avro to koXov c) 

av iroTf i'8rjs ov Kara \pvaov t^c]) 
675 Kai [c<r$]r]Ta Kai tovs KaXovs irai8a[? 

re [Ka]c vtavivKov? 8o£u aot eivai 

ovs wv ofxov €Kir€ir\ri£ai Kai €toi 

f?°[* eL *]?M <rv K [ a ] L &XXoi iroX[X]oi o/xwt€S 

ra [irai]8[i]Ka Kai iuv[o]v[T€]9 act a[i/]roiy 

680 CC TTCDy OlOV T€ 1\V fltfT€ €o[ff\l€iy fMJTC 

[m]y€iv aXXa \lovov OcaaaaOat /cat) 

[g\yvewai n Srjra €<f>r] oiopcOa [ei r]» 

yevon[o] avro to kclXo[v iSuv uXiKpi 2 1 1 E 

vcs KaOapov a/iiKTOv a[Wa fit] ava 
685 7rXea> aapKCov re avOpanfiivwv Kai 

[\]fx*>{p]aTa>v Kai aXXrjs iroX[Xr)9 <f>Xv 

apia[? 0]vriTT)s aX\ avro i\o Oeiov Ka 

[\]oi> SvvaiTO povotiScs [KariSuv a 

[p] out €<f>7] <f>avXov fiiov yiy[v]ea6[ai c/cct 212 A 

690 [<r€ p]\eirovTOS avOpomov Kai *k[uvo a> 


[Set 0€a>]p€vov tcai £v[vo]vros a[vra> 17 
[ovk €v6v\fiu €<prj o[n c]yTavOa [avra 
[povayov y]€vr)o[€Tai o]po*vri a> o[paTOv 
[to koXov tiktuv ovk €i8<oX]a apt-fas 
695 [art ovk €t8a>\ov €<f>airTop€v]a> aXX a) 
[XtjOtj arc tov] aXrj6ov[s t<f>a]irTop€v[ci> 
[aXX aXrjOrj a]re tc[v aX]rj$ov? t<f>aTn\o 

[fJL€VG> T€K0]vTl $€ aptTTJV oXt)6[t) KCll 

[6p€ylra]fi€ya> vnap^u OtcxpiXu yt[v€a 
700 [ff]ai [k]cli uirip ro> aXXa> av0pomce[v a 

[0a)yar<p [K]aK€iy<n>' ravra 8rj $ai[8pe 212 B 

[r]€ k[o\i [01] aXXot €<f>tf ptv Aioripa ire) 

ntio[pat] 8 eya> irtirtiapevos St ir€if>[a> 

p[a]i kcli rovt aXXovs wuOciv ort rov 
705 [t]ov tov KTrjpa[T09 Trf] avb\p)pmua 

[<Pva€i £\yytpyov apuvw cpa>r[o? 

ovk [a}v rif qclSuds Xaftoi 810 8rj cya> 

y€ 4>rjpi XPV yal w(a]^T at/Spa tov} 

[c]pa>ra Tipav kcu ai/ro* npto ra 
710 [€]pa>TLKa [k]o,i 8ia<f>€povTco$ a<nca>) 

CoL xvi. 

kcu [rots aXX]ois irapaKtXtvopai icai) 
wv T€ k[cli a]t€i €yK<ofiia{o> tov cpa>) 
to, Tt)v 8[v]vapiv kcli av8puav tov 
tpoyros k[glO oaov] 0109 r eipi tovtov 

715 ovv tov [Xoyov a> $cu8]pe et pev €i pi 212C 

fiovXu a>[y e]yKcop[io]v ets cpavra vo} 
ptaov €iprj<r0a[i] H Ac ort kcli oirrj \ al 
pas ovopafav tovto c[v]opa(e : €t 
-8- itovtos 8* ravra tov SaKparovs 
720 ' tov9 p€v trraivuv tov &c Apioro 
(f>av7j emyzif\*\iv Xtytiv ti on c) 


/ivrjaOrj avrov Xcy&v o S&Kparris 

irepi tov Xoyov kcu €^ai(f>vrf9 nyy) 

avXziov Ovpav Kpovo/icvrjv iroXU 
725 \jro<f>ov irapatr^iv coy KODfiaoT<o 

Kai avXrjrptSos (fxovffv aKovtiv 

tov ovv Aya\Gfova irai8s$ <pavai) 

ov Kcyfrco-Oc Kai av fi€v m tmv c) 212 D 

TTtriy&tov 17 KoX[t]lT€ €1 &€ /IT) Ac 
730 y€T€ on ov nfivofitv aXXa wauo) 

[fieda rj]8rj Kai ov noXv vorepov AX 

Ki[f$ia8]ov ttjv (fxovrjv aKoveiv €V 

[717 at/]Xiy a<f>o8pa fi^ff\vovros Kai} 

[/icya] fiocovros tfXDToovros o7roi/) 
735 Ay[aO]oi>v Kai K€Xivovi[o]9 ayuv) 


napa AyaOwva' ayet ovv avrov na 

pa <r(f>a$ [t]tjv re avXyrpiSa viro) 

Xaftovaav Kai aXXovs Tivas tg>v 

oucoXov[6]coy [K]ai emoTrjvai cin) 

740 r[a]y Ovpas €aT€<f>ava>/JL€vov avro 212 E 

kit[to]v t€ vi (rr€<pava>fi€vov av 

[tov ki]ttov T€ TlVl 0T€0ai>a>) 

[p*v]ov Saai Kai icov Kai raivias 

[*X 0V ?] a eirl Tr l 9 KtfaXrjS navvy 
745 [woXA]a* Kai tmtiv av8p[c]? \aip€ 

[re /i€]6vovTa avSpa nav[v] c<f>o8pa 

[5c]^co-fl[[a]]i {vfinoTtfv i\ a7r[ia>]/uei>) 

[av]a8riaavT€9 \novov AyaOa>va €0 

tt[c]p tjXOojicv eya> yap rot tf>avai €) 
750 \$€S pev ov\ ot[os] t cycvo/JLrjv a<f>i} 

*[«O"0]«[*] VVV $€ TIKOD €7T£ TTJ KtiftfiXr)} 

[c]^a>i' [r]a9 raivias iya airo t\tj\s c) 
lir\S K€<paXrj9 7[rjv] tov <ro<f>ooTai\o\y 
Kai Ka[XX]iCTOV [K€]<f>aXri[v tav €t7ra> 


755 ovrwn ava8[rj\aa> ap[a jcaraycXacrc 
<r0€ /iov o>9 ptOvovros [cya> &c Kav 
Vfitis ycXarc opofo cv 018 ori aXt] 213 A 

Col. xvii. 

6-q Xcya> aXXa [poi Xcycrc avroOcv cm 

pt)Toi9 aaico 17 £jy [ovfiTrieaOt rj ov irav 
760 ray ow avaOopvfJr)o[ai kcu KtXevav €ia 

utvat kcu K[a]raK\c[ti>€<rOai kcli tov Aya 

Owva koXciv avrc[v kcu tov uvai ayo 

ptvov viro tg>v av[6pama>v kcu ttc 

piaipovpcvov a/ia [ras raivias a>9 
765 avaSrjaovra *mirp[o<rO* tcdv o$6aX 

pa>v €\ovra ov Kat{i8uv tov Zcotcpa 

Tij aXXa KaOi{€aO[ai irapa tov Aya 

$a>va €v /it<ra> 2a>Kpa[rovs tc Kai cku 213 B 

vow napayQDpT}(rai [yap tov S&KpaTt) 
770 e>y €K€ivov KaTi8e[v irapaKa6€(o 

fi€vov 8e avrov a[<nra(t<rOai T€ tov 

AyaO&va kcu av[a8tiv eiwciv ovv 

tov AyaOwva tfiroXvcT* iraiSes A\ 
KiftiaSrjv iva €K Tpir[cov KaraKerj 
775 Tail naw y tintiv to[v AXKiffiaSrjv 
aXAa r<9 rj/iciv o8t Tpi[ros £v/JLrrorris 
Kai a pa ptTa(TTpz<f>o}ievov avr[ov 
opav tov ScoKparrj iSovra 8c av[a 
TrrjSrjaai Kai €ineiv : a> HpajcXe*9 tov 

J8o Tl Tl f\V 2<DKpa[TTlS 0VT0S (XXo\ODV 

av fie tvravOa [KaTCKtiao axrrrcp a 213 C 

a>0€t? €£ai<f>VT)$ [avatpaivtaOai 

KaTtKCtaO WOTTtp [tlOodtl? €£dl<pVT]$ 

avaQaivcaOai orrov €ya> [a/irjv tjki 

785 ora <r€ €a[e]<rOai Kai wv ti rjK[eis Kai 

ti av tvTavOa KaTt[KXivr}$ ©9 ov 


irapa [Apiar]o<f>avu oy[8 ct tis aXXoy 
[yJeXtuofy €<t]ti [r]« kcli f2ov\t[rai a\\a 
r[t] €fifi\avrjaxo [<wr]a>£ ira[pa ra> *aX 
790 Xiarco t[oov c]v8o[v KaTCLKtiarj kcu 

[tov 2a>KpaT]ri A[ya0cov <pavai opa e« pot 

€TT[apVV€ls] 0)9 t[fJL0l TOVTOV 6/XttJ TOV 

a[v$pco]n[o]v o[v o^avXov npaypa ycyo 
v[ev] an ckuvov [y]ap r[ov \povov a 
795 $ ov TOVTOV r)paa6[rjy ovkcti €^€ 213 D 

art fioi ovt€ 7r/>o<r)8X€^r[ai ovt€ 8ia 
\€\6rjvat tcaXco ovo\*vi 17 ovTOon 
fa\oTVit\pi>\v /ic icai <p[0oi>a>v Oav 
fiaar[a cpya^crat kcli XoiSopcirai 

800 re tc[at too \ €L P € A 1 ]?/' 9 «[n"*X €Tal °P a 
of*' /Z77 r< /cat vvv [epyaarjTat aXka 
8ia\\a£[ov] ijp[af 17 eav tmyjeipq 
f}[i\a(e(r6at tna\jivvt coy cyco nyy 
tovtov fiav[iav re *ai <f>i\epaaTi 

805 ap iran; o[p/x»6a> aXX 01//C core 

Col. xviii. 

[c^apat] top 4XK[£]/fc[acfyi' c/zcu jcat crot 
[&taAA]ay9° aXXa roi/r[co*/ /ze*' €iy at/dt? 
[ere T€ifxa>]prjo'oiiai' vvv 5c [/xcu AyaBoiv 213 E 

[c^apat] /ictclSos tow toliv\io>v iva 
810 [ayad^crco] *at rgp roi/[roi/ tclvttjvi 
[ttjv 6avfi]aoTT]v Kt[<j>a\T]v tcai firj 
[fioi fi€fi<f>r]]Tai [o]rt [<t€ per avtSrjaa 

Col. xxiii. 

[fiai ^Wjparey €^eX€y[x«] owcyipo) 217 B 

[/ii}? yap a>] avSpss fiov[os] fiovco teat o»/if} 
815 [avTiKa 8i]a\€^a^ea6ai \ol\vtov fioi anep} 


[av epaoriyy] w(a]«[fl]«Ko«[f c]v eprjpia SiaX* 

[X&117 teat e]\aipov tovtodv 8tj fiaXa c[)] 

[yiyvero ouScv aXX axr]Tr[€]/> cimOei SiaXe 

[\0cis av fiot Kctt <rvi>]r][fi]cp€v<ras a>)(€To) 
820 [airuov fi€Ta ravra o^wyvfiva^aai 

[irpovKaXovprjy] avrov kou ovvcyvfiva 217 C 

[(o/irjv coe] ti €vravb\a irt\payo>v ow) 

[€yv/iva(]cTO [ow /io]i ic[at] 7rpo[<r]€ir[a\a]i[€ 

[rroWaKi? ov8*vos n]apo[vT09 k]ol [ti 8u 

825 [Xcyciv ovSty yap fiot 7rX*o[v i)v €]7ret) 

[8rj 8c ov]8aprj tout Tjvyr[ov e]8[o£€ 

\jioi €m$€T€o]v civai to) av8pi Kara 

[TO KapT€p]0V KCtl OVK aV€T^O^€OV €7T€l) 

[Srjirtp €v]€K€i)(€tKfi aXXa ci^kciv^otcov 
830 [170*17 ti] cart to irpaypa* irpotcaXov) 
[fiai 8]rj avrov npo? t[o a]vv8€tirvu 
[aT*\v\m awnrcp cpaorijy naiSiKois 
[mi/3ov\]eva>v kcli poi ovSt rot/ro[[v]]) 


[Ta\v VTr]rjKOva€V 0/K09 8 ov \povooy 217 D 

835 [circio-Ori €]w€i8rj 8c a<f>iK€TO to tt/xdto 

[8etnvrj]aa9 amcvai cftovXtTo* *at) 

[totc fic]v aioyyvo/icvos a[(f>rjKa 

[avrov a]vOit 8 ciri[fJo]v\*[vaa9 tmi 

[0*17 €8€8€i]Trv[rj]K€t SuXeyo/iTjv nop 

840 [po> top w]kto>v Kat eir*i8ri ye cfiov 

[Xcro am€p]ai aK[rj]irTop€yo9 on oyfrai 

[ctiy 7rpo&\iivayK[a\ja avrov /i*vv 

[av€iravc]TO ow [c]v ttj €\ofi€vrj *) 


[fiov kX{\ivti cv T)[ir€p eSeifrvei at ov 
845 [Sets €v] tod oiKf)[fiaTi aXXos KaOrjv 

[8cv] 17 rjfitir p[*XP l l** v ovv $1 & €V 217 E 

[po t]ov Xoyov Ka[Xo»s av €\oi tc]ai npos ov 


\tiv\ovv Acycty [to 8 cjfrcvfci' ovk a 
[fio]y rfKovaare \€[yoi>]r[o]9 €t prj irpa> 
850 \tov fi\tv to Ac[yo]/tf[€i']of' otvos aife]y 
T€ iraiScw Kat p*T[a] naiScoy r\v 
[a]Aiy0i7r eirctra [a<f>a\vi*a 5Wpa) 
[t]ov9 tpyov v7T€p7}[<f>ay]oy €19 €7ra[t 
\yo\v iXOovra aSit^ov] pot <f>aiv*\Tai 

855 [€TC] fc TO TOV 8lJX[d^yT09 V7TO t[0V 

[cx€0)y] iraOos /ca/xe [«x] €t# 0«<r[* y«/» 
[ttoi; r^ya tovto iraOovTa otv\k € 

Col. xxiv. 

ovk eOeXciv Acyc/p ot^ r)v irXr\v tois 8* 
Srjy/icvots a>y fiov[oi? yvc&aofitvoif Kat £vy 218 A 

860 yvaxroptvois u nay [eroXfia 8pav T€ Kat 
\cyuv viro riyy o8v[vi]9 €yo>] ovv SfcSrjy 
fitvo? re viro aXytvorcpov Kat i\o aXyt 
voraTOv oy* av Tit 8rj\0€tri' ttj[v] Kap 

8tav yap q ^v\riv rj ori Set avro o[vo]) 
865 /taaat irXrjyus T€ Kai 8rj)^$€i9 vv\o r]o> 

[c]p (pi\oao<f>ia Xoyoov 01 €\om[ai ex 1 ]) 

[8v]r}S aypionepov viov ^vyyf^ Vfy a 

<f{vov]s oTav XafSavrai Kat 7roiov[<ri Spa 

tc Kat Aey€£[i> orC\ovv [ko\i opa>v av &a[t 
870 Spovs [Ay]a0[cov]a9 Ef>[v£ifi]a\ov9 J7[at/. 218 B 

[aavia? ApLOTo8rjfio]vt T€ Kai A[ptoro 

<f{ava? ScoKpar]rj [8]* avrov ti 8[*t Ac 

y*t[v k]cu oo\oi aA]Aoi* iravrts ya\p kckoi 

vcDvrjKaTe ttj9 (piXoaofov [[^Jo^ta? 

875 T€ Kat fiaKytar 810 iravr*? o[kov 

owflfc] avvyv&aeaOt yap rots t[<e tot* 

[7rpa\]0€io[t] Kat T0t9 wv X€yo/it[vots 

[ot 8 o]tK€Tat Kat €t tis aAAoy €or[tv 0c 


P[r]X]o? T€ kcu ayp[oiKo$] m/Xas ir[a]p[v 
880 [/icyaX]a? rois waiv [«n0]co , 0|[a]]€ B [c]7rci) 
8rj [y]a[p] ovv <o av8pt$ r€ \v)([vos a]ir€ 
<rf3[tjK€i kcu o]l ir[ai8]es c£a> rjaav [*8o 218 C 

[£c /ioi Xpr\vai p]rj8[€]v irouaXX[ciJ' 
[npo? avrov aXX c]Xct/0c/>a>r uirtiv a 

885 \jlOL CJOJCCI KCLl Cl7r]oi> Kai JCCIS'qO'a?) 

avr[ov HcDKparts jrajdcisfct? : ov 8ij 
r[a 7] 8 os oiaOa ovv a fio]i SeSoKrat} 

rt fia[\tara €<f>rj <rv c/io]i 6Wct? 171/) 

8 cya> [c/to]i/ €pa[oTt]S «]£[*]©* ycyoi{c]i>ai 
890 fiovdfi Kai] fioi <f>a{iv]u okvgiv fivt]} 

<r07)p[ai irp]o? /ie cya> 6*c ovraxri' [ex]®' 

naw [curo]yi[o]v -qyovpai aval aoi firj 

ov Kai [tov]to \a\p\iaaa6ai Kai u ti aX 

Xo 17 ttj[s] ovo-ias riy[y] c/ii/y Scoio rj tg> 
895 [^i]Xa>^ i[(o]v €/ta>p[ m ] c/io[i] /icy ya/> ov 318 D 

i[cy coti] irp€a(3vT€p{ov t]ov m on) 

[/J]cXtiot[o]i> c/ic y«/[c(r0ai]' rovro[v 

5c o[i]/ia[i /io]i ovWrjTifropa o]v8t[va 

Kvpi&Ttpov e[i]vai o-o[t/ cya> J17 roi 
900 ovto) avSpi iroXv fia[Wov a]v firj 

Xapi(o/iwot cuax[vvoifiT]v] rovs 

<Ppovipov9 rj \api[{oiitvo$ r]ot/r) 

Col. xxv. 

T€ [noXXov? Kai atf>]povas Kai [ovros a 
[Kovaa? fiaXa €ipa>]viKC09 Kai c(p[o8p]a 

905 [tav\rov [re Kai cia>0]ora>? cXc£c : <o AX 

[Ki]Pia8rj Ki[v8\y[i>]ev(t$ ra> ovn ov) 

<f>avXos €i[vai c]i[tr]ep [a]XTj6rj rvyyavti 

ov[ra] a Xcycir irepi e/iov Kai tis €<tt c 218 E 

v [c/101 8\vva/us 8 rjs av [o]v ytvoio a 


910 peivc&y a{iirj\xavov [r]oi jtaXXo? opa> 

179 ay t[y *]poi tcai tt)s irapa <roi cvpop 
<f{i]as ira\ji]rro\v 8i[a](f{<ep]oy ei Srj kclOo 
[pcov avTo] ifoiv^MTao'Bai re pot cth) 
\x\if>w feat aX[X]a£a<r6ai tcaXXo? ayri 

915 koXXovs ovk oXiyoo pov irXtovtKTW 
Stavott aXX aim [£]o£i?r aXrjOeiav} 


KaX^ofy KraaOai eiriytiptis Kai ra>) 

ovri yjpwna \aXKfi<ov \&tapufls<rOai 219 A 

yow aXX o> paicapu apsivov [<tko 

920 7TH prj (re XavBavco [ov$\*v coy 17 roi 

riyy 8tayoias o^is ap^rat o£v /?Xe 

iruy oray q ra>y opparoov riyy) 

aKprj9 Xyyfii' €mx^pv (rv [&] r0l/ ) 

r<»y eri [7r]o/>par tcai eya> a*ot/o-af:) 
925 ra p*y nap cpov ffay [ra]vra ecr[rZ] 

coy ovS[€]y aXXm eip^rai 17 a>[y] &a[)] 

f[oot///]a* oy [Se avros o]vr[ct>] fiovXev 219 B 

[ov <roi re] on q{pioTov Kai *p]oi riyc[i :] 

aXX [€^17 tovto y ev Xeyeiy e]i> yap ro> 
930 eir(oi{ri yfiov<o fiovXtvopeyoi] irpa 

iop^y ay] <fxuvr)Ta[i y&y rrcpt 

re rovT&y tcai irepi [raw aXXcov 

apt<rroy[:] e[ya>] p*y S[rj ravra atcou 

0-aJfyjJ re tfai €trr]a>y Ka[i] a<f>as a{<nrep 

935 j8«Xei rer[pa>]a0cu avroi> ayt^i' #rcu 

• ayaara[s ye] ot/i eirirpetya? r[<wra> 

€(7r€^ ot/£[e^ ere] a/i^e[o*]a[9 to ipa 

rtov to epa[vTo]v r[ovro]y Kai [yap 

j]v ytipwv vn\o roy Tpi(3a>]ya *a[) 
940 TcucXiyei? rc[y tovtovi 7r]e/>(/?aAa> 

too x 61 / 96 To[t/ra> ra> ^<"]A col ' ia) w 219 C 

aXrjOcos Ka[i 6avpa<rr]co *ar€*ei) 


gTJ[y rr\v WKTa oXtj]v Kai oi/Sc) 
tov[t av o> $g>k pares «]p€*? [o]ti [^]v 

945 8op[at iroirjaavTO? Se 8r) tclvtcl 
c/iov [ovtos Toaovrov ir€pi€y€]vc 
to t[c] *{ai KaT€<f>povTj<rtv Kai k]clt€ 

Col. xxvi. 
ycAaow ttjs tfirj? copas Kai vf}pi<rev [Kai 

7T€pl €K€lVO y€ COpTJV Tl UVOLl 00 aj>[fy>€9]) 

950 SiKaarat SiKaorai yap ctc ttjs S[a>Kpa 

[tovs] v7T€pri<l>av[ta]9 : ci; y[ap i]or[e pa Otovs 

[pa 6*a$ o]y[8cv] ir€piTr[oTcpo]v K[ara8e 

8a[pO]r)K{ct>}f ave[<TTriv p.*\ra 2wKpa[rovs] 219 D 

17 ei fi€ra 7raTp[o9 Ka0rjv]8ov 17 a8tX(f>ov 


955 irp€<rfivT€pov : [to 8]$ pt tovto T[i\va 
oi€(r$€ /i€ 8iav[oia]v €\*[iv] rjyovptvo 
ptv T)Tipa<r6[ai a]yapcv[ov 8e] ti\v tov 
tov <f>v<riv r[€ Kai <r<o]<ppoovvriv ko[i av 

Spciav €vr[e]TV^r]KOTa av6p[a>]iroi>y 

960 toiovtco oiod c[y]a) [o]vk av a>prjv 7r[o]r€) 

svTvytw as (f>povr)a[iv k]<zi «[y cy 

* 1 

Kparuav a>or[€ o]i[[0]] 07ra>[y] ovv opy(oi) 

pr\v uypv €i K[ai a^oarcprjOtiriv) 
[rjiyy tovt[o]u [av]vov^ff^cria9' ovtc otn\ 
965 irpoaayayoiprjlv] avrov tvnopovv 

[c]i/ yap rjSav ori xprjpao'i yc troAi/) 219 E 

paXXov arpcoros rjv TTavTa\r\ i\ 
ai8rjpa> Aiav a> T€ ooprjv avrov po 

i/a> aXcwtOai Suncfevyei /*€ t/tto) 
970 povv 8rj KaTa[8]e8ovXa>p€vo9 T€ v 
wo tov avOpamov a>y ov8u$ vir [ov 


Scvos a\\ov ncpirjflj^ia ravra re [y]ap 
fiOL airavra wpovycyovu Kai p.*) 

ra r[a]uTa o-rparia rjpeiy [e]is Ho) 

975 [r]€[<]5ai«y eyci/cro koivtj Kai o[v\v 

€<T€lTOVjl€V €K€l m ITfXOTOV flW OV 
TOIS 7TOP019 OV \LOVOV €flOV W€[p]l[^] 

[a]XXa Kat t&v aWcov atravro^y 
\mo\rav avayKaaOtiripw airo} 
980 [\€Hp6]€i>T(? nov oa 8t) em orpartt 

[a? aazi\Tav ovStv rjaav 01 aXXot rrpos 220 A 

T[o] K[d]pT€p€tV *V T dU TCUS €V<H>%iaiS 


fiovos anoXXvav 010s r r\v ra r aX 
Xa Kai mvsiv ovk €0€\<ov ojtot* a) 
985 v[a]yKa<r6ari navra? €*/>arcf Kat 


[0] ir[av\Toav Ovfiaai&Tarov 2 00 k pa 
[r]rj /itOvovra 01/6W ira>iroT€ €a>) 
/?[ a ]yff &vOpwr&v TOVTOV pcv OV 
fi[o]i 8oK€i Kai avrtKa cXcyxo* c) 
990 [a€a$]at 71700? flc av ra? rov X €i f^ a> 

[vo* Kapytprjo^afr S[€]ivo[i] yap avro 

[6t x€f^cDr]cs> 0avp[a]<rta upyafc 

[to ra T€ a\]\a [Kai] nor* ovros [[vjjira 220 B 

yov oiov S[€tPo]Tarov Kai travrw 

Col. xxvii. 

995 n ovk *£iovroi>v [c]v8o0cv rj ci [t]is 6> 
£toi fifufHeaptvcDv [[J]] re Oavpaara St] 
oaa Kat VTroStStptvtov Kai w[€i]\iy 
pwvv rovs [noSas *]i* irciXo^y] Kai 
apvaKtSas ovros [e]v r[ovroi\9 €^[1761 
xooo ex<w ipanov p[cv] rotovrov [oio]v 


7T€/> Kai rrpoTcpov ticoGa (popt[tp] av 
y7ro8ri[T]os 8* 81a tov Kpvara[\]\ov 
pa[o]p €irop€V€To 17 oi aXXoi vttoSc 
o\cp]€p[o]i 01 it <rrpaTict>Ta{i] i'[ir€{J]K€ 
1005 ir[op] ov[t\ov a>y KaTa<f>popo[v)u[T]a cr) 220 C 

${oop] Kai ravra p*v 8t\ ravra oiop 
8 [av] to8 *p[€]£f [ic]ai ctXtj KapTtpos 
ap[rj]p €ir[ct tto]tc cm arpartas a£iop 
aK[o)vc[ai avppotyaas yap avroOi) 

IO IO [€O)0€!/ Tl €]iaT[riK€)l OKOTTQOP Kai €1Tl 

8y oy irpov[xa>pt]i aVrco ovk aveirj) 

a[X\a] €iarrj[K€i (]r]TQt>p Kai ffStj rj 

fitarjfifipia [Ka]i avOpconot rja[6]apd 

to K[ai] 0avp[a]{ovTC$ aXXo? a\\a> 
1015 cXeye? or 1 ScoKparr]? cos *£ €a>5[[c]]f 

v[o]i/ <ppovTi(<ov ti €orrjK€ : rcAei; 

T[a>p]Tts 6\t tip]cs twp Ioopoop c) 

iruSt) [coirtpa rjp 8*i\wvriaavT*s 

K[ai y]ap 0€pc{s ror]f yc [17 p ^afievpia} 220 D 

1020 c£[*]p€yKap€[poi] apa pev €v ra> ^v\€i 

K[a0rj\v8ov a[pa 8 c]<f>v\aTrop avrop) 

[€l Kai T7\V WKTO] €OTi)£oi 8c tlQTJ] 

K€i [p*XP l 6<w cycpjcro Kai rf\io[s] av*) 

a X €y €[iT€iTa od^t]o amcop 9rpo<rct/£a 
1025 p[ep]o9 [too rjXioj a] S[e] /SouAccrdc Kai cp) 

rais p.a[\ais tovt]o yap St) SiKaiop ye 

avrco [ano8ovp]ai ore y[a]p rj payr) 17 

€ £ 179 cpoi [Kai r]a ap[i]or[u]a tSoaap oi 

orpaTri[yoi ov8]ei9 [a]AAoy cp* tawo-tv 
1030 a[v6]pW7rcoi> [17 OVTOi] TtTp&pwov) 220 E 

[ovk tff\€Xc»p a[rroXiiru]v aXXa avvSie 

cr[axr€ Kai] ra oirXa [Kai av]rop *pe Kai cya> 

p[cp] 00 X&KpaTcs k[cli to]t€ €KeX(vopy 

ao[i 8\i8opai ra apta[T€ia] tovs arpaTi]) 
T 2 


1035 y[ovs] Kai tovto ye p[oi\ oi/re /*e[[i/]]^rei ovt€ e) 
p[et?] on yfrev^ofxai] a[XX]a yap tow or pa) 
\rT\y<ov\ 7rp[o9 to €/io]v a£[i]cojJia airofiXe 
[rrovTODp] k[cli f}ovX]ojicv<nv e/ioi 8180) 
[vat ra apiaraa} ayro[$\ 7rpo0vfior€po9 

1040 [eyepot; tcw 0T/0a]ri7ya>i> e/ie Aa/fet?) 
[tj aavrov €ti toi\vw <o a[v8)p[€]s a[£)io 

Col. xxviii. 

[rjv $€aa]aaOai SoucpaTrjv or* airo AtjXiov 

[<f>vyrj a]vtyo)pii to arpaToirttiov €TV)(o %21 A 

y[ap 7rap]ay€vo/i€VOS iinrov €%[o>v] ovtos 

1045 5[e oirXa)' ave\o>p€i ovv €aK[€8acrfie]y[co]u 
rj[8rji] tow at/OpamcDv ovtos re a/ia fc[ai 
[A\ayt]$ Kat cya> n€piTvy\avoj[* K]ai I'Sco 
€V0U9 7rapaK€\cvo/iai re avroiv Oap 


piv Kai eXeyov oti ovk anoXwtyo) avroo 

1050 €[vT]av6a 8rj Kat KaXXaov cOeaaa/irj 

[X^oKparq 17 [ey] IIoT[€i]8aia' ai/ro? yap) 

TfTTOv w <p[op)® V ^M a to e^ imrov uvai 

7rpa{To]v fi€V o[aov\ n^pirjy Aa\rjTos to> 221 B 

€i><pp[<»]i> sivai tirtiTa e/x[o«]ye eooiret go A 

io 55 pio-TO(f>ai/€S to o\o]v 8rj tovto Kai eice*) 
8ia7rop€vt[(r6]at axnre/> icai wOaS* (3p€v 

Ovofievo^ re kol [r]a> o<f>aXpa> \ira\pafiaX 
Xow rjptjia 7rap{a]crK07ra>i> K[ai) tovs </>i 
Xovs Kai roi/y noXefiiovs oq[A]oy a>i>) 

1060 iravTi Kai iravv nopp<o6[e]y oti e* ny 
ayfrairo t\ovtov to]u av8po$ fiaXa} 
€ppcop€i>[oo$ a]pvi>€tTaf 810 Kai aaxf>a 
Xo>[y a]irrj(i Kai avros Kai €T€pos 07(e) 
8c[v] yap ti tw [o]trra>y SiaKtifitva 

1065 ep ra> 7roAe/*a> ovSc airTOVTai a[AA]a 


[to]i/j nporponaS^y <f>€vyovTa[s 81 221 C 

caKovaiv' noXXa p*v ovv a[y] tis ko[i 

aX[X]a €\ot S<oKparrjy erraiveaai Kai} 

Oavfiatria a[\\a r<ov aX]Xa>y [(\mTrjSeu 

1070 fiarcov ra\ ay r[is] Ka[i] irtpi a[X]Xov roi} 

avra ciiror to Jc 8rj jirj8€y[i a]yOpa>y 

O/IOIOV €iv[at] flf}T€ TCC[v] 7TaX[ai]C0P fit] 

T€ ray [yvy oy]rcav [tovto a£i]ov nay 
tos 0avfi[aro]s 0109 yap [AxiX]Xevs €y*yc 
1075 to an€iK[a<ru]€i> ay r[i? Kai] Bpaai8a[v] 

Kai aXXovs t^ai o]ios a[v Il€piKX]r)s Kai Nc) 
oropa Kai Ayrr)y[o)pa' uai 8* [K]ai €T^p]ot koi toi* 

aAAovt KTa ravra ay t[is] Kai rovs aXXotffi a]) 22 1 D 

7T€iKa(oi 0109 8[€ o]xrro<Ti ytyovtv i[rj]y 
1080 aroniay avOpamos Kai avros Kai 01 X[o] 

yoi avrov ov8 €yyi/y ay evpoi tis fyxtoy 

out€ rmv yvy owe top iraXaioDy c< 

/iff apa 019 cya> [Acy]a> air€iKa{oi ti* av 

roy ayOpom[a>y /icy] /irjScyi rots [8]*) 
1085 cu\r)y[ois] ko[i <raTvp]oi[s] avrov *a[i]) 

rovs Xoyc[v9 Kai yap ovy K]ai rovi\o i\y) 

row [irpa>Tois irapiXiirov o]n ko[i] 01 Xo 

Col. xxix. 

yoi avrov opo[i]oraroi aai toi[s <T€]iX7]yois 

T019 8ioiyop{tvois] €i yap *$€X[oi ri]s tod 221 E 

1090 2[<OK]parovs a*oi{6t]i> Xoya>y <j)[av€i€]y [a]y 
ir[a]w ycXoio[i] t[o] ir[p]ioToy roiavra ko[i 
oyo/iara ko[i] prjfiara tgcoOtv irepi} 


apS^fffyxpyrai aarvpov nva vfipiarov 
8c{pa]y ovovs yap KayOrjXiyovs Xeyu 

1095 Kai [x]aA*€a? nvas *ai o'Kvtoto/iovs 

koi fivp(ro8[€yff]as koi act 81a raty avra> 


ravra (paiverat Xcyetp oxrrc awtipo* 

Kai aporjTos avOpomd^y^ iras av tow) 222 A 

Xoy[o>]i> Karay€[X]aa€t€v Sioiyo/uvovs 

1 100 8c iSav av ris Kai ei/jro]? avrcav yiyvo 
/i€vos irpovrov ptv v[ovv) €\OVTa^ €I>) 
8ov fiovovs cvprjau row Xoycov circi 
ra Ociorarovf Kai irXuora [a]yaX/ia 
ra apcrris cv avrois €\ovras Kai c) 

1 105 m irXtiarov rivovras /idXXov 8 cm 
irav oaov 7t/jo<ti;x[ci <t\koituv ro> /itX 
Xopti KaXto KayaOto tatadar ravra 

ravra tarty a> avSpe? a cya> S<oKpa 
rrj eircuvco Kai av a fi€fi<f>ojiai <rv/i 


1 1 10 fia£as Vf*ei[v} tinov a fit vf&pivev) 

Kai /itvroi ovk €/i€ /iovov ravr[a]) 222 B 

7T€Tr[o]iT]K€v aXXa Kai Xap/iiSrjv r[o 
r\avK[a)]i>09 Kai Ev6[v}8t]fiov rov [Ai\ 

okXcovs Kai aXXovs iroXXovr ovs ov 
1 1 15 r[o]s c£a7rara>v a>y epaori?? rraiSiKa 
paXXov avros KaOiararai avr €/>a) 

arov a 8tj Kai <roi Xcya) AyaOcov firj e) 


SanaraaOai viro r[ovro]v aXX |[t/]]iro ra 
rjpcrcpw ira6rj[fiara>]u yvovra) 
1 1 20 €vXa/3r]6r]vai Kai /i[rj Ka]ra rrjv 7ra) 
poi/jtiav axnrep vfi[mo]v iraOovra} 

vL [y]va>vai' cinovros 8rj ravra rov 222 C 

— P - ■ 

/p AXKi(3ia8ov yeXmra ycveaOai [cjth 


T17 7rap7]<ria avrov on *8ok€i r[i] € 

1 1 25 pOOTlKCD? €)((IV rOV XoiKpOTOVS) 

rov ovv So}Kparrj[\] vrj<f>€iv fioi 

Sokus H*])0v 0) AXKifiiaSrj [o]v yap 


av nor* ovtco /?o/i^ra>? kvkXgo} 
7r€pi/3a\\ofJLCv[o]s a<f>avi<rai c[p]€ 
1 1 30 [xc]ipci9 ovvckcl rayra na[v]ra 

[c/ptyKay ic[a]t a>y [e]v [Trapjcpy© ^[[Xc]]) 
[XeyW em T€A[€]wr[i;y aji^o e^qjra?) 

Col. xxx. 

a>? air iravra tovtov wskcl €ipqjra>?) 

tov €fie kcli [A]ya0<ova SiafiaXXtiv 01 222 D 

11 35 [op]wo9 8uv €/i€ /i[cy <r]oi/ epav tcai firj} 

[8]wo? aXXoy [A]yaO<ova Se vwo <rov cpao-Oai 

icai prjS v<p [c]vo9 aXXov aXX ovk cXaOt?) 

aXXa to varupiKov <rou Spafia tovto 

k[cli] (rtiXrjviKou KaraSrjXov tycve 
1 140 to' aXX Q) 0tXc AyaOw /irjSw nXeov 

avra> ytmyrai aXXa wapaaiava{ov 

O7T0D9 €/i€ KCU <T€ /Z7/5c(J JiajSaXci TOV 

[o]vv AyaOtova unuv Kai jir\v a> 5©) 
KpaT€9 KivSvvevus aXrjOi] Xcy[e]iv 222 E 

it 45 TtK/iaipopat fc KOLL €09 koltckXivti 

W /i€(TO> €/JLOV T€ KCLI GOV IVOL X^l'?) 

^/iay SiaXa^rj' ovSw ovv wXiov) 

ai/roo carat aXX cya> Trap cAtf^cJJv icara 
JcXu'r;a'o/ia[i] : iraiar ye <f>avai tov 

1 150 2<DKpaT7] Sevpo VnoKciTCD tfjLov *ra) 
Ta/cXetvov: o> Zci; eiTrciy top jIXki 
fiiaSrjv 01a av naa\ci> vwo tov av0pa> 

irov oicrai fiov Stiv navra^rj nepi 

aXXo t 

i€i/ai' aXX ct fit] ti a> 6avp.aai tv (J/* 6 !! 
TI 55 /*t[ca> ^]/ia)i/ ea AyaOwva /carairci) 
[<rdai] aXX ahvvaTov <f>avai tov} 
S&KpaTT] ov pi[*\v yap €/zc cntipcaa? . 

Aei 5c €/x€ at; top ctti &£t eiravu. 


cav ovv ihro cot KaTcucXiOrj Aya6a> 

i i 
1 1 60 ov Srjnov €/*€ naXtv eiravco-CTa npi 

vtt cpov paX[X]ov tTraivcOrji/aiy 

aXX caaov a> 6\at]povi€ Kat prj <pOovri 0,2,$ A 

<ttj9 too fi€ipa[K]ico vn €fxov enavtOrj 

vat kcu yap travv €irtOvpa> avrov) 

1 165 tyKcapiaaai I'ov i'ov obavai rov Ay a) 

6a>va AXKiptaStj ovk €<rO oir<o9 av) 

evdaSe petvaipt aXXa navToa^a^ paX 

Xov pcTavaarr][o]opai tva viro 2a> 

Kparovs ciratvcOw. ravra €K€tva) 

1 1 70 <f>avai rov AXicifJiaSrjv ra €ta>Oora 

2 cok parous napovTos raw tcaXoovy 

peTaXa[fJ]c[iv] aSvvarov aAA[a>] Kai vv 

a>? cvnopOD tfai] mOavov X\o\y[ov rj\vf[w] 

ohttc nap at^rja) tovtovi Ka[ra#C€]i<r0ai 
1 1 75 rov /i€v ov[v] AyaOoava a>y jrar[a]K€! 223 B 

[vo]p€Vov Tr[ap]a too 3Wpar[€i] ay[i]<nra) 

[a6]ai (£auf>vT)s £c Kcopaaras rjKctv 

Col. xxxi. Plate VI. 

napnoXXovs cm ras Ovpas Kat tin 

Tv^ovras av^afy&ypcvai? *£tov) 


1 1 80 tos rtvos €£<ro> avrucpvs nopcvcOat 

ira[pa a]<pa$ Kat KarakXtivsaQai /cat 

Oopvfiov pcara iravra ctvat Kat ov 

Keri ev Koo-pa ovStvt avayicafc 

aOat netveiv irapiroXvv otvov rov 
1 185 ptv ovv Epv£tp.a\ov Kat rov $ai) 

8pov Kat tovs aXXovs rtvas €0q 0) 

ApioroSrjpo? otyjevOat amovras c) 

avrov 8* virvov Xafctv koi Kara} 223 C 


ir v 

SapOciv avjfc]] ttoX[v cl]t€ [p}aKpa>v ra> 
i i 90 wktcdv ovcrwv cfcypcaOai fie 717009 
Tjpcpav tjStj aX€Krptfo)va>v atSov 
tcdv €{eypo/JLcvo[s] S[e] ISav tout} 


pev aXKovs KaOt^S]oyra9 Kai oi\o} 

ptvovs AyaOoava 8* Kai ScoKpanj 
1 195 Kai ApioTO<f>avrj en povovs cyprjyo 

pcvai kcu irivuv cy peyaXrjf <piXa} 

A17S C7T4 8*{ia rov ovv ScoKparrj 

avrois SiaXtyeaOai Kai ra p*v aX 

Xa Apiaro8rjpo9 ovk €09; pcpvrj 223 D 

1200 aOcu rwv Xoyoov ovr* yap c£ apx 1 ?*) 

irapayevtaOou virovvvrafciv T€ 


to pev K€<paXcuov €<pT} irpovavay 

Kafciv rov ScoKparr] opoXoyciv 

avrovs rov avrov avSpo? uvai) 
1205 KcofiwSiav kcu rpaya>8iav eiriora 

aOcu noitiv Kai rov re\vri rpayto} 

Sonoiov ovra K<Dpw8o7TOlOV uvai 

ravra 8rj avayKafaptvovs avro)foi\ 

Kai ov cipoSpa inopevovs vvvrafci 

1210 Kai irportpov ptv Kara^jr^apOtiv to 

Apiaro(f>ay^ov9^ 170*17 fie qpepas yi) 
yvoptvrjs rov AyaOtova rov ovv 
ScoKparrj KaraKoipiaavra €*€«) 

vov9 atruvai Kai axnrtp €ia>0€i ewe 
1 215 aOai Kai eXOovra cty Avkiov ano} 
v[i]yfrap€vov axnrep aXXore rrfv} 
aXXrjv rjfiepav 6\i]aTpipav Kai) 
k[o[i ovtg> 8iar[p]€i[yfr]avra €is €<r7rc 
vl pav oikoi a[vairavcaff\ai : 




Col. xxxii. 

T220 n\OLTQ>VO$ 

Sv/moaiou : 

Plate VI. 









• • 

• . 


]• f»f{ 



















• • • 






. . . 

• • • 

. . 






• • • 

• • • 


• • 





• • 


• • 

• • 






• • 

• • 


• • 



• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 


48. iraprjv : 1. iraprj. 

54. cpura has been corrected (by the first hand ?) from qxuror. 

59. oAXo «: soBTW, Burn(et); the corrector's reading aXko n 17 is found in Ven. 184, 
Vind. 21. The letter at the end of the line has been so effectually deleted that its identity 
is doubtful ; the repetition of the article would be a natural blunder. 

62. -rov was omitted owing to 6/*oiot«X«utoi>. 

66. The final s of Aryc« has entirely disappeared, although the surface of the papyrus 
does not show signs of damage. 

69. co SflMpartr fftydvvffVtt : Kivd. & 2a>*. MSS. 

71. «ir« : so Vat. 227 ; *h*s other MSS. 
79. <t>iX( : (t>i\ovn<v€ MSS. 

84. The original scribe blundered over the name Aiortpas, writing a v (or perhaps n) 
for /i and separating the final *. W has luivruaj* for Mamw*i;r and similarly fiavriKq at l. 671. 

85. q of 17* is altered from «, i. e. twat was first written ; the correction may be by the 
first hand. 

88. cirovyraro : ?tr<H7<7f MSS., which agree with the corrector's ttjs. 

89. The addition of the rough breathing on ov is due to the second hand. 

90. Xoyoir tKtivrj cXcyw : cV. cX. X<Jy. MSS. 

92. fir : so Burn, who attributes this reading to W, but wrongly, W having an-' like 
BT. tV is found as a correction in the Cod. Coisl. and Paris. 1642. 

93. dct 87 : so TW ; &&17 B. 

94. &9[w<r]a : so MSS. ; by fiyfata Burn, with Schanz. 

96. ojtow : irocor MSS. The second c in orctra was inserted after the * had been 

98-9. The word frvrj was originally wrongly divided. The scribe also began to write 
some other letter in place of the first a of awupc uovcra. 

99. df : yap MSS. There is an apparently accidental diagonal mark below the line 
after &?«. 

105. €(f>jjv Xeyftr: Xf'yeis Zcprjv MSS. 

107. *<fav was originally written for c^i; 17 : the correction is probably by the second 
hand, which at the same time accented otn. 

112. to op$a bo(a(civ : SO T, Burn, ra 6pBd W, to 6p6obo£d(tiv B, &c. 
av€v : kq\ fotv MSS. Schanz omits «ri with Stallbaum. 


12 5. The double dots and paragraphus marking a change of speaker are misplaced; 
they should have come at the next line. 

126. rovrouf €<f>rj: C$17 tovt. MSS. 

131. The first o of opokoyoiro has been corrected from «, perhaps by the second hand. 
135. The papyrus omits «tf>ip, which the MSS. read before Xcy««r. 
141. ra KaXa : so B ; om. ra Bum. with TW, Stobaeus. W inserts dyadois koL after tows. 
142-3. The dittography is marked by a line drawn above the superfluous letters. 
Cf. II. i95> 333» 695-6, 71a, &c. 

147. not op: so B, Stobaeus ; n&t &' «»TW, Burn. 

ye rtov : so Burn, with TW, Stobaeus ; y &v B. 

14& a of afiotpos seems to have been converted from an o. 

153- *4>*i ' so TW ; tyijv B, Stobaeus, Burn. 

156. tc : so BT, Burn.; om. W, Stobaeus. 

158. 6unrpo$fuvop: the common Egyptian spelling at this period. 

163. o of ov corrected from ». 

167. rat [r]^\t]raf: so B, Stobaeus; om. ras TW, Burn. 


168. [p]ai{rViai> : so MSS. ; paytiav Badham, Burn. 

173. 1. typijyopoai ; the interchange of X and p is common. The deletion of the superfluous 
a was probably by the second hand. 

175. Stobaeus omits «»• 

176-7. ntpt x*ipovpyias: so Stobaeus ; om. mpi BTW, Burn. 

was: the reading is not certain, a has been corrected (by the second hand?) 
apparently from o, and above the spot where of favavcrovt would be is the top of a 
rounded letter, which is probably /3 or cr. Perhaps twos was first written, and the correction 
of o obscured the s which was rewritten above the line ; but the remains suit a j9 rather better. 

fiai/awravs is a mistake for ffavavaos, 

178. ttoXXoi re: so Stobaeus; om. t« BTW, Burn. 

179. There is a dot between v and c, and the two letters are rather farther apart than 
usual ; but no pause here is possible. Stobaeus omits cor*. 

180. kcu fflrpos wo* tariv : so originally («m) T ; in BW rims tari precedes «« p. 
183. ivtiupto : so Wbt (flcrr.) ; garuwro Burn, with T, ffar.B. 

189. f£[«]X6W: cW^cov MSS. 

190. tvfov : so some MSS. ; ijflofv Burn, with BTW. 

194. k<u: so BT, Burn.; om. W. 

195. Kaktjs . . . no[pou came in here froml. 200, the error being caused by the repetition 

Of A<f}pO&€tT7)S. 

202. ntpqs : SO TW J ircwV B. 

203. The second a in anakos has been corrected from o. 

207. aifi : but ace in 11. 203 and 209. 

208. vncuOpios : so Burn, with BW, Origen ; -w T. 
211. [koAoj?] xai ayaBois : rots k. koI tois ay. MSS. 

213. apo&as was apparently originally written, pas having been converted from /10*; 
^t)\avat MSS. 

215. nopipoe is a correction from ippovtpoe, perhaps due to the original hand. wopwpAs 
(B) and <t>oprurp6s are also found. 

216. fappwcm : 1. Ka\ <f>. with MSS. 

218-9. ri)t ijptpas : rip aMp fin. MSS.; the omission is to be accounted for by the 

219. xai: so B; rt xai TW, Origen, Burn. 

220. The corrector took the first naXw with anodvrjaiut, but there is little to be said for 
his reading, which has no other support. 

avafiiooKfrai : 1. ava&icov*. The deletion of 1 is probably due to the corrector. There 
is a small dot between at and a, but it may well be accidental. 
224. av Kai : re av xai T, Burn., tf av xai Origen, re xai B. 

229. ao^oir : 1. otch^oi. t was apparently written originally in place of the first a-. 

230. xaktTJTj : xoXcttoV MSS. 

232. avrtal SO T (avr.), Wb (avr.) ; avro B. 
237. brj : so TW, Burn. ; an B. 

239. op tit) : aV BTW, omitting tlrj. av Burn., who wrongly attributes this reading 
to W ; it is found in Ven. 184, Vind. 21. The papyrus is probably right. 
243. furo$v is a common spelling. 

248. wBtfS : 1. UT)$7)f. 

251. fXrycr: Xcyctc MSS. 
cu><u tpura : Kpvra cZrai MSS. 

252. oiofiai : so some late MSS. ; oipat Burn. The o of ™ is corrected from ». 
254. affpov is a correction by the second hand from aynBov. 


255. Ttktiov : rfkiov MSS. 

262. The addition of koi ovtw brings the papyrus into accord with the MSS. 

265. re : so B, Burn. ; om. TW. The letters s a> 2a> are corrected. 

266. tpa : so BTW and other MSS. (<pa) f ip$ b; ipS> is necessary. Cf. 1. 276. 

267. The accent on « is dubious. There are two short dashes visible above the line, 
meeting like a v. 

268. The termination of avr<a and nX in aXX have been altered, but it is doubtful what 
was first written. Perhaps ovrow aXX should be read. 

en irotfc* : so TW, Burn. ; cWo&i B. 

269. roiardrt seems to be for toiop&i, though this form is not Platonic, rotdydc MSS. 
The t has been corrected from a &. It is unlikely that oiav 8« was intended. 

270. X of iraXa corrected from *. 

272. x of npoxeipas corr. 

273. B of anoKpttvaaBai seems to have been altered, and the final t was perhaps not 
originally written. 

276. *pfo: so BTW as in 1. 266; om. Ven. 184 and Schanz; ip& Burn, with the 
Aldine edition, 

281-2. The second hand has made good the omission of the repeated tvbatfAom. b in 
1. 281 is over >. 

282. €i ep blotted. 

286. a> : so B; d.} TW, Burn. 

297. apa: so T, Burn. ; om. BW. The supposed base of an e above idot may be the 
left-hand dot of a diaeresis on ». 

302. t»: ™ BTW, T<u Vind. 21, Burn, no may be right, but the marginal & is 

308. ov is mistakenly omitted by W. 

309. *x ovaly : so TW ; t£ov<rtp B, Burn. 

311. pjopu[v: so BT, Burn. ; pAvov W with fioptov as a variant. 

314. ravra : 1. tovto with MSS. 

316. *<t>ri[vj XryfiC \tytis i<f>tj» MSS. 

323. xp^Mo^flrfw) was first written : the correction is likely to be by the second hand. 

327. €<TX 0V : «TXOV<ril> (BTW) Or €XOV(TtV MSS. 

328. r in the termination of Kiriw€i*ie has no doubt been converted from a <r, KivSwtvovcri 
having been originally written. 

333. fiwii, which was repeated by mistake, is cancelled by the line drawn over it ; cf. 
1. 142, note. 

341. avOp[wfyi\ so BT; oJ &v(0p<*ir)oi W ; av$p<*moi Bekker, Burn. 

342. The recurrence of tov ayaOov led to the omission of 17 0-01 doKovat . . . ayadov, 
which has been supplied by the second hand in the upper margin, tov ayadov there is 
in agreement with BW ; rayaOov T. 

344. wpoaOiraiov was written originally both here and in 1. 346. 

345. ow : so BT, Burn. ; om. W. 

348. auT» : SO TW ; airro B. 

349. to : so Paris. 1642; &} BTW, Burn. 
tovto : so MSS. ; tovtov Bast, Burn. 

350. rw : so Tb, Burn. ; tov B, tov with v.L t&v W. 

351. o of avro has been corrected from «. owtoi^ T. 

352. ovvraais : SO B, Burn. ; avoraats TW. 

357. The two dots marking the end of the speech are misplaced as at 1. 125. The 
a of pa6tj<TOfM€vos has been corrected. 


361. di;: ijfcq MSS., as regularly; $ tf lj Bekker, Burn. 

363. *<u : so T\V, Burn. ; om. B. 

364. rrjv : so BW, Burn. ; om. T. 

368. *aXw: so Badham; r£ *aX£ MSS. Burn, brackets rj yap . . . tokos «mr 
with A st. 

370. tovto is crossed through, probably by the corrector. 

372. €»timv : so B, Burn. ; darw TW. 6 in aOaparov is corrected from v. 

373. to : so B, Burn. ; ravra TW. The second r of yewnymr is blotted. 
376. &«: so B ; $ti v T (vJ. 0*$) W. 

382. £i[i/<rirciparai : avaTrtiparai T and (with Z/./. -era*) W, Burn. ; oworyrc/prrat B. 

383. a^iXTXcrai : there is not room for ai{ctX]X*rai (BW, Burn.); aWXXetrai T. 
386. nrotqo-if : so TW, Burn. ; nolrf<ns B. 

388. ajroXt(fi]* : SO TW, Burn. ; aVoXawtv B. 

391. The marginal note is obscure. It seems to begin dp{r\ rov) ov(r»s) 1$h and 
possibly refers to nev, though that word hardly required explanation.. The letter after p« 
may be y and the following doubtful s may be c or perhaps o. For dv(ri rov) cf. e. g. 
841. II. 79. 

393* y*v*v***s ' y«w»}<re»f MSS. act y*p€ais : 1. aeiycpcr with MSS. 

402. r of n corr. 

404. atcrdam : alaOdvj) Burn.; cf. 1. 422 dtavott, 1. 692 cpdi/jpft. 

406. cniBvprjin) has been corrected from -fw>cn, probably by the second hand. 

412. rov™* km : so BT, Burn.; om. *at W. 

415. avro: atrd MSS. The final a of Traparctvoptva has been corrected from «. 

421. t\tyov : a$ fAeyoi* b, Burn. ; dveXcyop B, a» fkryov TW. 

425. AtoTt/xa is perhaps intended, but Ator. was first written. 

431. a of w/ioXoyi/cra/ic v is corrected from o. 

432. There is a high dot between 6 and a of BavpaC*, but it is presumably accidental. 

435. rr : the papyrus is rubbed, but the vestiges suggest re (so T, Burn.) rather than 
ro (W). B has to tlvai aOavaros, omitting km. 

436. nj ytvtait is bracketed by Burn., following Vermehren. a of o« corr. 

438. The letters *v after «at have dots over them, which may mean that *v was to 
be cancelled ; but *v cannot be spared, and they are possibly unintentional. 
443. Tovra = ravra ; to avrd MSS., Burn. ; similarly inl. 451. 
449. rponoi : toVoi B. 

452. The second y of yiyvtrat seems to have been altered from v, and Xu in airoXXvrat 
also shows signs of correction. 

453. en : so B, Burn. ; iartv TW. 

462. pnim : so Paris. 1462, Vat. 229, Sauppe; ^wi v BTW, &c, bracketed by Burn, 
with Baiter. Either ftcXcYtf . . . m"?/"? or /mXcVi? . . . pvfftig would give a sense. 

465. The lectional marks added to ov to warn the reader against the reading ovrm 
which is actually found in B. 

466. avrop : so B (Bekker) and some other MSS. ; 1. avro. 

469. tvKarakiTMP, the reading of the first hand, occurs in some inferior MSS. ; tyKara- 
Xf/ir«i» BTW, Burn. 

471. pcrcxft: the papyrus is the only authority for this reading, which was restored by 
Stephanus ; p*r*x"" MSS. 

472. aOaparov: so MSS. ; advvarov Burn, with Creuzer. 

481. [f^}; : so BT, Burn. ; om. W. The size of the lacuna indicates that the papyrus 
read «ret simply (B), not mi yt (TW, Burn.). 
487. f«: so TW ; n B, Burn. 


490. narras I SO BT, Burn. ; naprce W. T. omits paXkop. 
495-6. W omits air . . . irpoairoOavfiv owing to the 6fxotoTi\€vrov. 
498. 1. {Zatriktias. 

507. Kara ra: so Paris. 1812, <fec. ; om. ra BTW, Burn. 

517. KvrjtrtTat was first written, at and e interchanging as commonly. Cf. 1. 747, &c. 
om. T# MSS. 

rtKtw confirms a conjecture of Hug (tiktuv Jahn) ; Kvtiv MSS., Burn. 
523. rar: so MSS.; ra Burn, following Sommer. 
526. av : so B ; V ad TW, Burn. 

527* €JMCV/4»V I 1. tyKVfJWV. 

6<ios : so MSS. jjOtos Burn, with Parmentier. 

529. tnt$vfui agrees with a conjecture of Stephanus, punctuating after up. cWv/m 

530. 87 : so BT, Burn. ; oe W. B has ntpH &v for ntpuw. 
539. mpi : so MSS. Burn, brackets with Stephanus. 

544. napuv Kai anav is the order of BW, Burn. an. ku\ ir. T. The deletion of opt is 
probably by the second hand. 

551. The accent distinguishes nas av from waaav, and the mark of short quantity 
shows that aV is not equivalent to *6v. 9 in the termination of k<koiv<oyt)kotis is a correction 

554. etc Haio&ov: om. riff MSS. 

560. icarc Xurero : SO b, Burn.; tear iXiirtv . . . t6 B, KaTf\<iniTo TW. 

563. The papyrus probably had 9/ui>, as B ; vpSp TW, Burn. 

564. o 2oXft>v : om. o MSS. 

566. EAAr/cn: cV*E\A. MSS. 

567. oXXa : 1. icaXa with MSS. 

568. «<u: om. MSS. 

571. The p of opBpumpovs has been corrected from some other letter, perhaps c 

576. t4>rjpl 1. caty. 

577. Kai av: om. MSS. ; the addition adds emphasis and may be right. 

578. tap : &p MSS., Burn. The double dots after rjt follow from the mistaken reading 
*<f>T)p in 1. 576. 

582. avrop: so TW ; avTwp B, Burn. 

584. xa in koXovs is corrected, perhaps from iroX. 

585. to tm : so rightly BT ; ry M W. 

586. r» : so T W rightly ; r6 B. T omits m. 
♦ 590. tovto : so BW, Burn. ; rowry T. 

592. There are small oblique dashes, which are presumably accidental, over the a of 
xakaaai and after cay in l. 597. 

597-8. Kai tap : so BT, Kai op W ; Kttv Hermann, Burn. 

600. Kai : so MSS. ; Burn, brackets with Badham. 

601. W. has u Tim. 

609. cidiy is probably meant for thy (TW ; IV did^i B). 
611. to nap: so MSS.; rynap Burn, with Schleiermacher. 
614. <vos is a correction from tow, perhaps by the first hand. 

618. rtxrct is the reading of the great majority of the MSS., but the papyrus may of 
course have had the right reading tikttj. 

619. pwrBtis: pa>$<is W. 

631. The final v of yiyvoptvov is corrected from or, and the same alteration was perhaps 
made in the case of avgapoptpop in the line below. 

635. rod* : 1. Tore. The omission of ovdr was probably caused by the preceding ov. 


637-8. as . . . atcrxpov is bracketed by Burn, with Voegelin. 

639. avro) : so BT, Burn.; avr6 W. 

640-1. ovfa tv : 1. ovdtv top with MSS. or ovdt tp &p. 

645. per : so apparently the papyrus ; 1. ptB. 

647. rpoirov rival SO B, Burn.; rurarp. TW. 

649. €kuvo : so B, Burn. ; fw/wu TW. 

/ii^-e : so Vind. 31, Paris. 1642, and others; fifa t* BTW, Burn. 

651. It is most unlikely, on account of the space, that the papyrus had 6v ty as TW ; 
drj simply B, Burn. 

652. There is an oblique mark like an accent above the o of am, but it may be 
unintentional ; cf. note on L 592. 

660. cirapafkurfiots : SO T and Other MSS. inavafiaBpols W, Burn., cV dvafiaBfiols B. 
665. km : so MSS. ; &s Burn, with Schanz. 

669. awn : the » is almost certain ; 1. avro. 

670. There is a dot above the v of t<mp, which may mean that the letter was to be 
cancelled ; but the practice of the writer as to the use of r c^cXxvcmxov is quite inconsistent. 

674. Aw : so W, Burn. ; *i&S* BT. 
Xpwop : xpvviov MSS. 

675. There is an (apparently accidental) curved mark above the w of ir<uda[s. 
679. 1 of avrois added later. 

68 1. fxovop BtaaaaBai : 6. fi6vop B ; BtavBai p6vov T W, Burn. 

684. 6 of KaBapov has been altered from a r. 1. avan\«ov. 

689. c^iy: so BW, Burn.; om. T. The X of <f>av\op is rewritten; a high dot before 
the <f> is probably meaningless. 

695-6. The dittography was caused by the recurrence of «txtnToptv». 

699. 0fo<£&Xti : so t, Burn. ; Bt<xf>i\fj BTW. 

701. ^a<[dp€: & Qaibpc MSS. 

708. The final a of apdpa is corrected from 1. 

712. top tputra was written in careless anticipation of the sense. 

718. The coronis, which is similar to those in the Pindar papyrus (841), marks the 
close of the section. Others occur at 1. 1 122 and at the end of the dialogue. 

721, €iri^fip[«]u^ Xeyfiv rt : \ty. n err. MSS. 

724. avKuopi so t, Burn.; aCXiop BT (? W). The testimony of the papyrus on such 
a point is, however, of little value. 

$epo\fofi€Pfjv : so B W, Burn. ; Kporovpiv^v T. 

728. 1. vMifnaB*. The scribe perhaps took the words for ovk (oty) tyco-lc 

op: ti»MSS. 

730. iravoptBa: dpanav6pc$a MSS. 

741-3. The scribe blundered badly here. The fact that he wrote w (the termination 
of tivi) <rr«t>avap€voif in 1. 74 1 is an indication that he also wrote oT€</>aw»/i««>i> in 11. 742-3, 
though the corrector may have deleted the superfluous ptvop. The line drawn above the 
letters should have extended to re either in 1. 741 or 742. 

747. [oflfcotfc (B, Burn.) is corrected from [btywBai. 3*'£a(r0« TW. 

748. oirjfjp : so TW ; Qmp B, Burn. 

749. rjXBoptp : so TW, Burn. ; faBoptv B. 
fjflfs: xfc'ff MSS. 

754-5. tav «7r»l ovraxri : so BT ; W adds icc^oXi^. The words are bracketed by 
Burn, with F. A. Wolf. 

755. W has ffarayrXdVracr0at. 

763. A low dot between -pop and vno is probably meaningless. 


770. «* htivov KaOlfav BTW, &c, which is unsatisfactory, and is bracketed by Burn, 
with Badham. The papyrus has quite clearly xarid^, which may be a mistake for jca&ffu', 
caused by Karifciv in 1. 766. But it may also be interpreted as xar{*)idty, which would give 
a good sense : Socrates made room as soon as he saw Alcibiades. 

776. ode rpi[rof : so W, Burn.; ejfo rp. B, rp. ftc T. 

77^* opew: B has 6pf . 

779-80. tovti ritiv: soTW, Burn. ; tovt dim* B and as a variant W. 

783. o of KOTCKticro is corrected from r. The dittography has been eliminated in the 
usual way. 

786. »* : we print the reading of the MSS.; teal Hermann, wm Hug. 

789. The first letter of the line was almost certainly r, i. e. the papyrus had ri efirjx **!™ • 
fawxavrjo-o* MSS. There is an oblique stroke, no doubt accidental, immediately below 
the p. 

797. It is unlikely that anything stood in the papyrus after ovroo-i. oWofii , . . T, 

ovroai m*s Coisl. 

798. 6av]fuun{a: so B, Burn.; Bavfuuna TW. The r though rubbed is practically 

8lO. [aam&ijau] km: SO TW, Burn.; dmdrjaa>fxf$a B. 

815. dtyk*£«rdat: &oAc£ai was first written, 
817. «iy: &* oi MSS. (pfo Angel. C. 1. 9). 

820. 1. <rvvyvfxvaC*(r$cu; the 6 does not seem to have been added above the line, but the 
papyrus is rubbed. 

828. avtrtunp was originally written ; the alteration may be by the first hand. 

829. The reading of the first hand, whatever it was, does not appear to have made 
sense. There was probably some alteration also at the beginning of 1. 830. The accent 
on e was added by the corrector. 

839. tfc$(i]m{i)}c(i: so MSS.; cfofcurvrjMncv Bum., dcftctiri^Kaficy Bekk., Anecd. i. 346. 23. 
dtfXfyoprjv: so MSS. ; dicX. dc/ Bum. with Bekker, Anecd. I. c. 

840. entity ye : om. yt MSS. 

841. o^at is for oyfrt ; cf. 1. 828, note, &c. 

842. fuveun ftovoif was originally written. 

846. The papyrus probably agreed with B and T marg. in reading fy, the omission of 
which would make the line unnaturally short; om. TW. 

847. The supplement in the middle of the line is somewhat long, but not impossible. 
ex]oi cannot be read ; perhaps av was omitted. 

852. L a<f>avtaai: there is no trace of the final 1. 

859. ywo-o/ifvotf : yv % rt MSS., but the supplement is already somewhat long. 

862. re: so BT, Bum. ; re kclL W. 

863. op is a correction from cor. B has dftxd/7 for tyx^ ur J- 

864. yap 17 irvxnv: so TW; § ^v\r)v y&p B. Burn., following Usener, brackets $ tyxn* 
as not read by Schol. B. 

867. p}) : so BW ; *ai pq T, Burn, v of mov seems to have been corrected from /*. 

876. r[# Tort : so TW, Burn. ; but r[on (B) is just as likely to have been written. 
(According to Schanz, B has tc and T omits it.) 

877. The letters vw A are converted from <n/Ay. 

878. ns : rt B. 

880. The termination of [emQtvB* is corrected from An. 
885. koi is superfluous : om. MSS. 
891. [«*]•: so B, Burn.; f X " TW. 

893. \<£j)\<Tacr(ku\ xaplfccrdai MSS. 



<i n : so B, Burn. ; *« TW. 
896. «? on : so TW, Burn. ; Say n B. 

898. fw]i : the vestige of the letter before <r is too small for certainty, but suits 4 con- 
siderably better than v. 1*01 Vind. 21, Burn.; pov BTW. 
905. « <£iAc AX*, is the ordinary reading. 
910. [r]oi : so BTW, Burn. ; ™ other MSS., Bekker. 
913. re : so BT, Burn. ; om. W. 

924. There may have been two dots after », the lower one of which is effaced. 

925. €fiov : so TW, Burn. ; rpoi B. 

928. <roi tc] on : or* <roi tc MSS. The o is quite' doubtful, but the letter after r is 
plainly t, not *. 

935. 3A« : so TW ; /ScXiy B, Burn. 

940. The size of the lacuna suits rovrovt (TW, Burn.) better than tovtov (B). 

944. B has av, but ravra without av (TW) is equally possible here. 

948-9. [koi] ircpt ck*wo: Ktilntp rWvo TW, icaintp Kflvo B, tcalroi \<Ipo Burn. trf/M, which 

gives no sense, is doubtless a slip for irrp. 

954. 17 « : so B, Burn. ; om. « TW. 

955. * of p* is converted from 17 ; to which hand the correction is due is doubtful. 

960. The Attic form apqv (so MSS.) required no alteration. 

961. ty^cparcuw: Kaprt plav MSS. 

962. ov0, which was first written, is the reading of BTW; oW Paris. 1810, 1642, 
Vat. 229. opyiCotprjv has been altered from opiCotprj*. 

963. « dat : om. « MSS. rightly. 

964. [(rvjpovo-uiff : <rwrj$ti(K was originally written. 
966. rj&civ : so W ; §&i) B, Burn. 

7* : so T W ; r* B, Burn. 

969. The scribe first wrote aXwcrmu. 

970. 67 : so BT, Burn. ; tc W. 

979. {ono]rav: so BT ; Mr W, Burn. 

an6k€«t>$crr€s is the reading of the MSS. ; airoXi^d. Cornarius, Burn. 

983. The erroneous X has not been struck out. 

986. [o] it[a»)rci>p : SO T W rightly ; 6irorap B. 

OavfuuruBTOTov : so Vind. 2 1 ; OavfiaardraTop BTW, Burn. 

987. The slight vestiges suit eay>[a]*er (TW, Burn.) not e»p[a)c« (B). 

992. e in the termination of [x«/i«v]« is a correction from o. 

993. nayov: so B, Burn.; rod n. TW. 

995. 17 ovk : so B, Burn. ; om. 17 TW. 

996. dri : so TW, Burn.; 17 B. The 17 of w<piicrptvG>t> was corrected from e, and r%B from 
170, i. e. the scribe at first omitted re Bavfjuurra. 

999. ovros : so Vind 21 ; o&W 6* BTW, Burn. 

1000. [oioWfp: so B, Burn.; olov TW. 
1003. * or aXXoi is corrected from u. 

1005. The scribe misunderstood trtfxop, connecting the a with Karatyporovrra; cf. 
1. 1015, note. 

1007. [ av ] T0 & : so W, Burn. ; aw-o BT, B having also ?/>/ȣ*. 

1008. Probably no significance is to be attached to the fact that whereas in 1. 974 an 
c has been added above the t of o-rparta, here there is no such insertion. Burn, reads 
arpariat with Cobet; arparilat MSS. 

IOII. avttJ) : L avta. B has irpo\a>p*i for irpov\. 

1 01 4. c of 0avp[a](orri£ is corrected from o. 


1015. m: om. MSS. The first scribe unintelligently divided the word <t>6u{o]v as 

€W0€W I ov. 

1 01 6. W adds «« before rcXcvrfw]™?. 

10 1 7. I»pfi>y is the traditional reading, in place of which various conjectures have been 

1025. «u : om. MSS. 

I030-.I. rrrpufupov [ovK^fXu*: so BW, Burn. ; ouk €0. rtrp, T. The second X of akka 
is corrected, apparently from cr. 

1042. 2<oKfxnrjv: cf. 1. 1068, though [2]»Kpartj is rightly written in 1. 1051. 
1048. o of napaK€\(vofuu is altered from « and a of Gapptiv from c. 
1058. </>cXow: so some MSS., Stephanus; <f>i\lovt BTW, Burn. 

1 06 1. atfraiTo: fytrtu MSS. 

1062. B has dpvvrjrai. 

1063. avros: ov rot MSS. 

mpos : so MSS. ; iraipos Aristides, Burn. 

1069. There is not room in the lacuna for fiev (so MSS.) after t<*v. 

1071. dtj: om. MSS. <fy6pw is a slip for a\p6p«nr»v. 

1072. [""V* Mr*' S° TW, Burn. ; *hraifi€ B. 

1077-8. The transposition of «<u . . . aXXovs and koto . . . ru was necessary. W has 
tovt for rovra (ravr'). 

1080. to of aroTJw is converted from a r, and the first upright of it was originally 
curved, i. e. the scribe began to write avQpwnos. 

1083. ocr : so T W ; <l oU B, Burn. B has Xcyw for [X«y> (T W, Burn.). 

1089-90. raw . . . \oyvv : so TW, Burn. ; ror . . . Xrfyov B. 

1091. it[av)u: so TW, Bum. ; om. B. 

1093. nva: so B ; oV rum TW, dq rtva Burn, with Baiter. 

1094. *a»OrjkuH>vf : KavBrjkiovs MSS. 

1099. B has oWyov/MPOvr. 

1 100. ay: so MSS. ; av Bekker, Burn. 

1 102. t«* Xoyaor: so TW, Bum.; roi» Xoyov B. 

1 105. woira* . . . eirt : SO T W (t«v.) Burn. ; rcivapras . . . In B. 

1 106. A high point after oaov is apparently meaningless; there is another between 
and a of t(r€<r$ai in the line below. 

1 108. The scribe began to write a instead of p after o-»«e. 

1 1 10. 17 of ijfu{v] has not been crossed out : cf. 1. 983. 

1 114. iroXXot* : frdVv iroXXovr MSS. 

1 1 17. *$airara<r$ai: SO TW, Bum.; -0t B. 

1 1 24. «6o*c ti c or tc seems to have been first written; it is uncertain to which hand 
the correction is due. 1. napprjaia. 

1 1 27. (fxivai is a correction from *<£»?. 

1 1 30. omica : 1. ov ciwffa (TW, Bum.). The p is corrected from a d, and it is curious 
that B has ovV instead of ov. 

1 142. dca/3aX« : so Bum. following Hirschig. btafiaX^ BTW. 

1 1 48. The first 1 of KOTaxXiwycro/iai is corrected from 17. 

1 1 53. 1. iripitivat. 

1 157. €/*: so B, Bum.; /a* TW. 

1 159. KaraKkL0rj: Kara «A 077 MSS. 

1 1 60. ir of diprov is corrected from /*, and « was twice written for a* in ciratiwo-mu. 

1 167. iravro<re : MSS. iravrot, which is unexceptionable, though rravroa* would also give 
a good sense. The d of cvOabt was converted from <r. 

U a 


1 173- €uiropa>: 1. rvnopas. 

x 1 79. avauryptvais was first written. 

1 180. €iera : cb t6 MSS. 

1 186. rev*: om. MSS. rightly. 

1 187. tavrov & : * ft' BW, fedf T. 

1 1 89. The first scribe wrote arc iroAv. 
1 1 91. Below the o of aibovrw are some accidental marks. 

1 194-5. 2ancfXTrr] koi kpivToQavr) : this is alsothe order in Ven. 184 and Vind. 21. *kp. 
Ka\ 2™. BTW, Burn. 

1 196. ftcyakrjs <f)t{\}aKris : so Paris. 1642, Vat. 229; (f). ficy. BTW, Burn. 
1207. Koytadoirotov : so BTW; koi tup. Vind. 21, Burn. 
1 2 10. irpcr€pov: so TW; wp&rov B, Burn. 

121 I. 1. Apt(TTO<f>aVTJ, 

1 2 13. Jcaraicoi/iMram-a :' SO BW, Bum.; Karaimifiitravra T. 

12 1 4. *u acnrrp: so MSS. ; Burn, inserts (e) before awnrcp with Hermann. 

12 18. kcu was apparently repeated by mistake, and overlooked by the corrector. 

1 2 20-1. The title is placed opposite the middle of the preceding column. 

Fr. (h). The letters after wr have been altered or deleted. But it is possible that the 
fragment should be turned the other way up. when the reading would be ]j[«]]«{- 

Fr. (1). This small fragment from the top of a column clearly comes from this papyrus, 
but cannot be certainly placed in any of the columns remaining. It might belong to Col. i, 
where &>«« probably stood in the first line, but there would be no «> underneath the J 
unless there was a variation as to the position in the sentence of fiovkotr £r. 

Fr. (») is from the bottom of a column. 

844. ISOCRATES, Panegyricus. 

Height 3 1. 1 cm. Plate VII (Cols, ix-x). 

These considerable remains of a roll containing the Panegyricus of Isocrates 
extend from § 19 to § 116, though with some serious lacunae. Forty-seven 
columns were occupied by the ninety-six sections, and the total number would 
have been about eighty-six, for which it may be estimated that some 24 feet 
of papyrus would have been required. The manuscript was a handsome one 
written in a rather large calligraphic uncial hand very similar to that of the 
Rossal Demosthenes, of which a facsimile is given in Kenyon's Palaeography, 
PL 16 ; cf. also the Hawara Homer (i6id. 9 PI. 20) and 20. Kenyon attributes the 
Demosthenes to the end of the first century, but it is perhaps more likely to 
belong to the earlier decades of the second, to which we should assign this 
Isocrates papyrus. There is often a marked decrease in the size of the letters at 
the ends of lines, and in order to save space T is lengthened so that the crossbar 


comes above the tops of the letters adjoining. Short lines are filled up by the 
usual angular sign. A paragraphus is used to mark a pause, and is sometimes 
accompanied by a short blank space at the end of the sentence ; the three 
varieties of stop, high, middle, and low, are also freely added, though in a good 
many cases probably by the second hand, to which a number of corrections and 
alterations are due. No other lectional marks occur beyond a rare sign of 
elision or breathing inserted by the corrector. Iota adscript was originally not 
usually written, but has mostly been supplied later. 

Like the British Museum papyrus of the De Pace, the present text of the 
Panegyricus is unfortunately of a distinctly poor quality, and does little beyond 
establishing still more clearly the superiority of the codex Urbinas (r). It 
is characterized by a number of additions, some of which are evident inter- 
polations and none is convincing; the most flagrant example is at 11. 344-50, 
where a sentence founded on a subsequent passage is inserted without apparent 
reason; cf. 11. 17, 4a, 77, 164-5, 258, 30a, 355, 356, 421, 558, 561. On the other 
hand the papyrus occasionally exhibits a shorter text, either on its own authority 
(11. 449, 562) or in agreement with T against the vulgate (11. 202, 264, 395, 480, 
497, 608, 609, 669). Though on the whole the coincidences with T predominate, 
agreements with MSS. representing an inferior tradition are frequent. Sometimes 
the corrector has changed a reading of T into that of the vulgate or vice versa. 
Certain variants also appear which are otherwise only found in MSS. of the 
lUpl 'AiH-i&oo-coos, where a large section of the Panegyricus is repeated ; cf. notes 
on 11. 230-1, 400, 449, 558, 613-5. In view of the general character of the 
papyrus its variations in the order of words carry little weight ; and it may 
be doubted whether there are more than a couple of readings for which an 
independent value can be claimed, 1. 290 eXarro) y« as conjectured by Cobet, and 
1. 659 (rviJLTr€v$rjaovTa9 i a variant recorded by Victorius but actually found in 
no MS. The archetype from which this text was derived appears to have been 
defective in places ; cf. 11. 33-5, 291, and 605. 

In the collation given below we have made use of the Teubner edition of 
Blass, the apparatus of which is unfortunately very limited. Proofs of the text 
of the papyrus were sent to Prof. E. Drerup in order to be utilized for his forth- 
coming critical edition of Isocrates, and to him we owe some references to 
individual MSS. of the vulgate. Differences with regard to elision, insertion 
or absence of v tycAKvoriicov, interchange of ti and 1, &c, are not separately 



Col. i. 

vcov thiols e8i8a£atr € .t^, $i $ 19 
fioi 8 ow afufxyrtpoav ^* v 
€V€ica irpo<rriK€i ircpi 
ravra iroirj<ra<rOai rr\v 
5 it\€iottiv 8[i]aTpil3i]v 
fiaXiora (iev iva irpovp 
yov ti y*vi\Tav Kai irav 
aapcvoi ttjs irpos 7 

lias avrovs <f>i\ovuu 
10 as koivt) rots fiapfia > 

pois iroXcprjo-oypw 

ci 8e tovt ear [[cu]j aSvva £ 20 

top. iva StjXqxtoo tovs 

tfnroScov ovras Tif 
15 [t]o>j> EXXtji/cov evSai 

fiovia** teat iravi ycvrjTai 

[<j>]av€pov on xai to irpo 

\r]epov ijficov 17 [iro]\is 

[8i]Kaia>s ttjs Oa[\aT]rrjs 
20 [ii]p$€v Kai wv o[vk] a8i 

[k]ods a/£(f>i<rPrjT[€i 7r]kpi 

[r]rjs rjyepovias [to]v $ 21 

[to p*]v [y]a[p u &]* > 

Col. ii. 

a[vTois irapap&vuv a 
25 £{iov<rt 8e ttjv rjycpovi 
a[v €\€iv axrrrtp aXXo ti 
ye[pas 17 tovs irpcorovs tu 
X op[ras 


Col. v. 

T]as T[€ 
30 [evepyeo-ias Kai r]as XP €l 
[as Kai Tas Q>(f>eX€]ia$ Tas 
[air avTO&v yiyvop]evas 

§ 2 9 



Col. vii. 
yov/ievovs Kai ri[pa>]rovf 


35 [[y«'Of£ej'ay]J rexvas cv 
0i/€or[ar]oi;r oj>ray Kai 
[vpo]f [ra ^aw flea)!' cv 
a(€j8€<r]TaTa SiaKeipc 

v[0V9] KCU \L7\V 0<T1JS 

40 [7r/>Oj<ri7K€i T«/*179 [Tvy]x<* 

[v€l]v TOV$ TT)\lKo[VT]<»V 

[aya]ffa>v airiov? y[«]y€ > 
[vrfji^vovs ircpiepyov 
[8t]$[a<r]K^i]v ov8^i]s yap 

45 M" 8wai[ro 8wp\eav to 
[o-ayrrjv r[o p]*y*0os cv 
\pti]v T)Ti[f] urri tois wc 
[irpa}yitcvc{i]s carur 7rc 
[pi] /i[c]i> ovv tov pcyi > 

50 [ot]ov to>v evepytTTjpa 
[to>]v Kai irpomov ycw/ic 
[vov Kai ira]<ri koivoto, 
[tov ravr cfoopev tmuv 
[irepi 8* tovs] avrc[v]s XP° 

55 [vovs opaxra] tc[v9 p]cy 
[fJapfJapovs] ti\v 7r[Xci 
[oti;i> ttjs x\a>pa[s icarc 
\Xpvras t]ov9 8 [E]KXtj 
[vas €iy n]tKpov rtmov 

60 [KaTaK€K]\lfi€V0[v]9' 

[icai 81a <r]iraviOTTiTa 

[ri;y yijy cjirc/Stat/Xci/oj' 

[ras re <r<f>i]<riv avrois* 

[tcai crr/>ar]ia? ciraXXrj 

Col. viii. 
$33 [(3ovt€s] tovs pa\[i]ora 

75 [0*ot/ 8€o]fi€vov$. Kai > 

[orparq]yoi KaravTavrts 

[avTcov]* Kai ttoXc/ud 1 Kpa 

[TT)0-av]T€S tovs (3 a p (3d 

\p0v9] woWas /iw €</> € 
80 K[aT€]pa* rrjs T)irupo[v] no 

X«[*9] €KTio-av airaaas 

8* ras vrjaov? Karoo 1 ki 

<rav afufxrrepovs 8e > 

Kai tovs [aKo]\oudr)o-av 
85 [ras Kai tovs v]ir[o]/i€i 

[vavras €o-<o&]av tois J 36 

[/i€v yap i]Ka[t/]t]v rr\v 

[OIKOI X C0 P] ay KaT€\l7T0V 

[toi9 8e 7rX€t]a> rrj? wrap 
9° x[ 0V(rr l* eiropi\<rav a 

ira[vra yap ircpiyXafiov 

to r[ov tottov ov v\jv rvy 

X<n{ofi€v KaT€XOv]T€S' a><r 

[re Kai tois vore]pov j8ov 
95 [Xi70€i<rii> anoi\Kiaai n 

[v]a? Kai p[ifi]r}<rao-dai 

[r]qv iro\iv ttjv rffiere 

pay. iroWrjv [pai\oroi>i 

vr\v €Troiri<rav ov yap 
100 [avrov]? Sei rfr)®p€vov9 

[X<°P a ] v 8iaKiv8vv*v 

[civ a]XX €iy t*i[v] v<f> r l> 

\jia>v\ a(f)opta[0]€io'av. > 

[cif ra^rrriv c[i]kuv iov 
105 Ta[s Ka]iroi t[i]s av tov § 37 

TT)S T)y^fJLOl/]LKODT[€p]a[y 



65 [Xovs noiov]pevovs' > 
[KCLl TOVS ft]€V 81 evSci 
[ay to>v kol]0 rjpepav > 
[tovs 8e 81a] rov iroXepov 
[airoX\vp]cpovs ov8e 

70 [tovO ovr]a>s expvra 
[irtptaSev]- aXX Tjyc/io 
[vas us Tas) iroXciy € > 
[ieire/iyfrev] 01 irapa\a> 

Col, ix. Plate VII. 
[(3]apov? ayaorarovs iroi 
rfa-aa-rfs tovs 8 EXXrjyas 

[tl]S TOVaVTTJV €V7T0pi 

[av\ irpoay[ayo]u<rw ov toi 
1 30 [wv] €ttu8t] ra p€yi[&]ra 
[<rw]8i€n[p]a£cv. tow aX 
X[a>v] a>\[i]ya>p7]<rcv aX 
X' <*p\Xn]v /*[*]* eiroirjo-aTO 
to[v]ti]v tw evtpyeo-i 
125 a>v [rpwf>]rjv tois Scope 
poi[s €vp]^t]v rjvwep ypri 
Totfs p€]XXovras kcu m 
pi r[w aXjXcov koXods 
8io[ik]t)<tuw rjyovpc 
130 vi\ [8t] rov fiiov tov em 

T0v[t]01S pOVOV OVffOb 

tov [{]$ cmOvpuv a£[« 
a>y ^X €lv ] wrm «r[€]> 
p*\XfiOrj\ KCLl tw Xo[i] > 
135 uw cd[<t]t€ tw ira[pd\v 
rmv [toi]? avOpomois 
ayaOw [o]ca prj irapa 
decov €\opw aXXa 81 



> ari8i£t[iw rj] irarpLKco 
Ttpav Tt\s [irpo]T€pov y{* 
vop€V7)9 [irpiv] Tas irXu 
no uras oiKia[Orjvai] toou 
EX\tjvl8oo[v 7roX€]a>v a 
17 [p]aX\oi> o[vp<f>€p]ov 
a[a]v Ttjs tc[vs pcv] (3ap 

) Tavn)t ipfc [povtav •mfi«i£€t«v 
115 i) iraTpum(pav) [ 

CoLx. Plate VII. 
155 paSaypa iroi[r)]<ra<ra irpa 
ti\ yap Kai vopovs €0c 



aTT]<r[aT]o' SrjXov 8 € > J 40 

KtiQw 01 yap €v ap\r\ 
160 irepi top tyoviKcav > 
€yKaX€[<r]avT€S kcu (3c{v 
XtjOcvtcs pera Xoy[ov 
Kai pi\ pera jSiay 81 
aXvcaOai Tas irpos aX 
165 XrjXovs €\6pas w tois 
vopois TOIS rjpcT* 
pois Tas Kpic€is €ir[oi 
rjaavTO irtpi avra>[v 
Kai per 8rj Kai tod[p t€ 

170 ypw Tas irpos Tavay 
[K]aia tov fiiov XP 1 ? * 1 > 
[p]as koi Tas irpos tjSo 
vr\v ptpr)yavr\p* 
vas Tas ptv evpov<ra 

175 Tas 8e [8]oKipaaaa-a.> 
Xprjo-Oai tois a[[j>< 


aXXrjXovs rjpiv yeyo 

I4O VtV. fJLT]8w fJL€V aV€V 
TTJS 7T0X€[a)]y TTJ9 TJfl€ 

T€pa9 eivcu- ra 8e irXct 
ara 81a ravrr\v yeyevr) 
<r0ar irapaXafJovaa yap 
145 row EXXrjvas avopw? 
favTas* tcai a-rropaSrju 


oiKovvTCLS- rovs ptv v 
no 8vvaorua>v vfipi{o 
pwovr tovs tie 81 avap 
150 \iav airoXXvpwovs. > 


avrovf a7Tf)\\a£€v 
t&v fiw tcvpia^t 1 ^ ycvo 
pcrrf. tois $ a\m\v ira 


[[irjoiy irap[€]8a>K€* rr\v 
toivvv aXXrjp Sloiktj 
aiv 0VTC09 <f>iXo£€va>s 
180 KaT€<TK€va<raTO tcai 
r irpos airavras olku 

a>y. <kxtt€ Kai toi? \PV 
parcov 8eopevo[i]9 
tcai tois anoXavaai r<av 
185 vnapxpvrw €m6vpov 
aw a/i<j>OTcpoi9 appor 

T€IV Kai pi)T€ TOIS €V 

Saipovovai* prjT€ tois 
Bvarw^ovaiv ev tois € 
190 avTcov axprjoTMS ^X €lv 
aXX cKdTepois avrcov 
etvat nap rjpiv tois jicv 
tjSioras 8iaTpifia[s] tois 
8s a<T<f>aXeoTaT7]v Kara 


Col. xviii. 
• • • • • 

195 • • f]0 CTtpOlf 

[ovras 7rapa]Xnrct>v tovs 

Col. xix. 

• • • • • 

p[iKpov €7roirj<rav aXXa 
To<ro[vrov Tas Tvyas 
€K[a]T€p[oov pert]XXa 
200 £aj>. a>o\6 fuv ucercv 
$57 tiv i7/*a[* a£ut><ras fiia 

tcov €[\6p(oy atravQ 
ow €8€tj[0i] 8iairpa£a 
pevos air[riXOcv Evpva- 
205 [0]eus 8* p[ia<ra<rdai irpotx 
[8oKti<ras avros aix/ia] 
[Xwos y€VOfl€VO]f tAcfe 
[ttjs TjvayKa<rO]rj Kara 




[arrjyat koi t&] /icv v 

2IO [ir€p€V€yk]0VTl Tf\V 

[av6pamiv\qv tfwaiv. 


Col. xx. 

[€T]€[\€vrri<r€v iroXXw 
[8 v\TrafS L yQV<roi>v rj/iiv 
[€v]€py^<na>i> ciy rr\v iro 
215 [Xt]y rrj[y AaK€8]a[ipovi 
[cov]. irtffii Tav]rrjs p[ovr)S 

[p6]l OVfj[P^Pr]]K€V €[l7T€ll' 

[a(f>]opp[r]v yap] \a/3ov[T€9 
[rr]]v 81 [tj/icov] auroi[s ye 

a 20 [v]ofi€[v7]i> &]a>Trjpia[v 
[01] irpoy[ovo]i ficv tco[v 
[v]vv ep [Aaye8aifi[ovi 
[j8]a(T(X£vow«y. cyyc[voi 
[8 Hp]aK\eovs kcltt)\[0ov 

225 \/i€]v €i[s] n€[Xo]iroyvrj[aoy 

[* a M €0 Xl 01 ' M Apyo? xa[i 
[AaK€8aifi]oy[a] kcu Mtofrr] 
[vt}v oiKi<r]Tai 8* 2ira[p 
[ttjs €ywov]TO* kou tcc[v 

Col. xxii. 

0XTT6 TT€/l[<] fl*V TTjf €V 

tois EWtjo-i 8vva<TTua$. 

OVK 0l8 01T(Q9 av T19 (TCL 

(f>€OT€pov eiriSugcu 8v 
250 vrjOtit)' 8oK€i 8e fMoi 

kcu irepi T<ov irporepov 
irpo? tous fiapfiapovs ttji 
iroXu mirpayptvav > 

§ 61 

230 [irapovTtov] ayaOw [a 
[iravTcov avrjotr apfx 1 ? 
[yoi KaT€OTT)]<rav oo[v e £ 62 

[vT)fi€vo]vs prj8[€7ro 
2 35 [t €iy rtjv] x<x>pav raxrf^v 

[€i<r{Ja\€i]v €£ qs opplji 

[deyrc? c]i$ Toaavrfav 

[€v8aifio]via[i> Karearrj 

[<rav prjS c]*[s] KivSt^vov^ 
240 [KaOiorava)i ttjv iro[\iv 

[Tf)v vlprep r<oy irat[8a>v 

[ra>i/] HpatcXeovs np[o 

[Kiv8}vy€v<raaair p[rj 

[8e tog] p*v an €kh[vov 
2 45 \y*vo}ji€vois 8i8ova[i 

Col. xxiii. 
§ 65 285 8ov\a><raa[0]at tovs EAX17 


vas t<f> Tj/ias npcai^rf^ 1 


ovtw €7T£0ay€oraT([a]j9 § 68 

§ 66 fitv ovv t&v iroXtpcov 

IIcpo-iKOS ytyovw ov 
290 prjv eXaTTOD yc rcK/iiy 

a iraX 

pia 7Qa>]]<tta t»v cpyuv eari^y]] 

irpoarjiceiv eiireiv 




255 Xa>y t[[€]J eireiSrj kcli tov 


Xoyoy KaT€OTafir)i> ire 
pi rrjs rj[y]epovias ttjs e 

V €K€lVOV9 €0"( 



aw-array fiey ovv e£a 

260 pi0pwv rovf kivSv > 
you? aY ay patcpoXoyoi 

rjv irepi & raw /*cyt 

otcdi' top aiToy rpoirov 


0P7r6p oXiyo) trporepov 
265 ireipaaopai Kai irepi tov 

todv 8ieX0eiv eori yap 

[a]p\atoTaTa pev t<ov 

[e]0va>v kcli f[a]y peyioras 

[8]vvaareias eypvTa > 
270 [X]kv6cli Kai Bpaices Kai 

[Ileyxrai* rvy^avovai 8 ov 

[toi] pev airavTes rjpiv 

[€7T]LPovX€V^O^frr€9 r\ £[[€]]|i€T€pa 

[7ro]A(y irpo? anavras 
275 [tov]tov9 SiaKivSvvev 

[<ra]<ra* kclitoi ti Xomov 

[€<r]rai roiy avriXey[o]vo t tv 

[rj\v eiri8ei\0<oai t<dv 

[p]w EXXtjv&v 01 pr\ 
280 [8v]vapev[o]i rvy^a 

[v]eiv tg>v 8tKa[i]coy rj 

[p]a? ucerevetv a£iovv 

[res]' [t)x>v 8e ftapfjapw 

[01 {3o]vXopevoi Kara 

tois irepi tcov narpuav 
aptfH&fJrjTOvaiv eri yap 

Taireivrj? ovat)s ttjs EX 
295 XaSos rjX0ov eis rr\v \a> 
pav rjpcov Qpaices pev 
per EvpoXirov tov Ho 
aiS&vos* XkvOcli 8* pe 
t Apagovav t&v Ape 
300 (os Ovyarepcov ov Ka 
[ra tov] avrov yjpovov 
[aXXa\ Ka[0 o]v Kaipov e 
[Kare]poi tijs Evpayirrjs 
[cirr}pxo]v piaovvres > 
305 [pev a]irav to twv EXXtj 
[vcnv y]evos* i8i[af- 8e irpos 
[qpas ey]KXrjp[ara] n[o]i 
rjo-apevor vop^ov 

T€? €K [t]0VT0V TOV T[pO 

310 irov *r[pos] piav pev [iro 
Xiv Kiv8v[ve]vaeiv aira 
acov 8e ap[a] KpaTrjo-eiv 
ov prjv K[aT]<Dp0a><rav 
aXXa irpos povovs roi/s 

315 irpoyovovs tovs rjpe 
Tepovs ovpfJaXovre?' 
opoitof 8ie(f)0apTjaav. 
ce[a]irep av ei irpos airav 
ray av0pamovs eiro 

320 Xeprjaav SrjXov 8e to 
peye0o9 tg>v KaK<ov 
tcov yevopevcov eKei 

vois 9 ov yap • no0 01 Xoyoi 




Col. xxiv. 
ircpi cl[vt]<ov Toaovrov %po 

325 vov Supeivav. €i Kai 

toov aXXcov 8[i]r)v€yK€v 
Xeycrai 8 ovv irepi ptv j 70 
Apa£ovo*v a>y r<ov ptv 
330 tXdovo-cov. ovSepia ira 

Xiv airqXOw [a]i 8c viroXu 
(pOeiaai' 8t[a r]rj[y] evOaSt 
avp<pop[av €]*c ttjs [[cfjj ap 
X^y €£€f}\[tiO]T}o'av ircpi 

335 8* BpaKwv oti tov aXXov 
Xpovop o/iopo[i] ol irpoa 

01K0VVT€S TJ/llV* 8l<L TTJV 

tot€ ytvop*vi\v arpa 
ruav tovovtov 8uXi > 


£v nyy \c0pa9 cOvy ttoX 
Xa> Kai yevt) travTo8aira» 
kou iroX*[i]s ptyaXa? kcl 
ToiKiaOrjvou['] TOirra>v 

345 & OVTafo] €j(0v[TO)]y OV 

k oKvr\T\*\ov eor[i] ir€pi 

tow viroXoma>[v] eiireiv 

a 8tj <rvp<pep€i rots irpa 

ypauriv \lvt\vQj)v<li > 
350 ire pi avr&v KotX* |uv ow icai J 71 

ravra Kai irp€iro\y\Ta 

tois Trcpi riyy i?y€[/*]oyi 

as ap<f>i<r{}iiTOWi[v\ a 

8e\<pa fc rcov €tprj[p]€ 
355 ww Kai ra roiai\0 01a 

Col. xxv, 

Klv8uVG>[v €IS TOV aVTOV 

Xpovov (n^pir€<rovTcoy 
365 Kai TCt>v p^[v iroXepi 
o>y awiro[aTaT<ov 010 
fi€vcoi> uv[ai 81a to 
irXr)Oos> ra>[v fie jtrvpfia 
X&V awir[€pPX^T0V 
370 rj[y]ovfi€va{v *X HV rr \ v 
apery v. ap[<por€pow 
K[p]anjo-atrr[es cds €*a 
Ttpcov npo[j7jK€u Kai 
irpos airav\ras tovs 
375 KivSvvox^s Sievcy 
Kovres. erfOvs p*v 
tow apiar[ciwv rj£i 
(odrjo-au o[v ttoXXco 

8 vorepov r[rjv apyjiv 
380 rrjs OaXar[Trjs tXafiov 
8ov[t]w p[€V row aX 
[Xcov] EXXrjv[cov ov 
[k afi]<pio-(3i][T0VVTC<>v 
[8* tg>]v wv \r\pas a 
385 [</>aip€]io'Oa[i {tjtovv 
[to>]i/* koi p[rj8eis 01 
€0-00) fi€ ay[votiv 
ti Ka[i] AaK€[8aipovi 
01 7r[e]pi Totfrovs tovs 
390 Kaipovs ir[oX\a>v 

[aya]Oa>v oit[ioi tois 
[£XX]i;<ri #car[coTi7<rai' 


[aXX]a 81 a tovto [Kai 
[pa]XXop €irai[veu> 





7T€/> C£KO? TOVS €K [tg>V 

toiovtcdv ycyoi^rar 
[[?]] 01 irpos Aapuov [ko]i 
B*p£yv no\€/it]a-a[vT]€9 
360 errpafcav ficyiorov ya[p 

€K€lVOV TToXtflOV (TV 

arayroy. kgu nXuaroov 

395 ^X] 09 Tr l v iro\i[v on 
[toi\ovt<ov avr[aya> 
[i/]i<rra>v rv\Qt^<ra TO 
trovTOv avrcov [Sitj 
vtyicw fiovXo\jiat 

400 8c fiiKpm parfj>OT€ 

pa ircpi to>v iroX[c<w ci 
7«? M?[ l M *]y av [™X V 

Col. xxviii. 

[c<TK01TOVV 07r]a>? CLKpi 

[0a>r Kai koKcos] c£ov > 

405 [<TLV OV\ OVTO) TOVt] tTC 
[pi TCOV iSlODV (Tv]pf3o 

[Xaicov a>y rot/y irc]pi todv 
[icaO CKaorrjv rrj\v rj/tc 
\pav eirtTT)8€VfiaT)np' 


] woXX(«v) «[ 

]«Ta T»va.()[ 


Col. xxix. 
(78 c<rOai Kai <rtt)ri7/}«[9 aX 

415 Xa /117 Xtz/^ejeBm [a7ro 
jcaX€*[<rdcu tg>] 7ro«€[£i> «/ 
7r/>oo-a[yo/>€];/[o]^€[*'(n ray 

iroXcis aXX^a prj^ fita [k<i 
Taarpc(f>opcvoi' mo\To 

420 TCpOlf pCV TOIS Xoyoi[y rj 

[k]cli WV T019 op/coif XPJ 
[pc]vor raiy 8c <rvvQr\ 
[kcu]9 axnrcp avayKais 
[cp]/i(v[civ] a£[io]wTc[f 
425 ov% [<wra»y cm] Ta[i9 

1 1 lines lost. 
[axrrais] 8[iavoiai9 \pa> 

[flCVo]l Ka[l TOVS V]C<*{T€ 

440 [povf c]v t[olovtol]s TJ0C 
[<ri irai8]€vov[T€S o]ura>y 
[avSpas] ayab\ovs alprcSa, 
[£av TOi/]y iroXe[prj]<rav 
[ras irpo]? tovs ck ttis 

445 [Aria? a>]<rrc pijfiP'fcva 

[wwttoJtc 8vvr\6rivai 


$ 82 



[lT€pi av]T<OV flTJT€ TCOV 

[iroirjTofy Wi[c] T<OV 
[ t]»v 

[ao(f>ioT<o]v a£[i]w ire 
45° [irp*y/Lc]va>v [c]iir€[i]v 

Col. xxx. 

7ra)[y yap av ycvoivro <rvp 
fierpo[i toiovtois av 
Spaai[v 01 roaovrov pcv 
ra>v cnfi Tpoiav arpa 
455 t€va[afi€vci>v Sirjvey 


Col. xxxi. 

[\c]vTrj<rat€v aXXa rcov J 84 

[avr\tov \r]ois €k todv 0€<ov 

[ytyo\vo<nv Kai KaXou 
460 [fjL€voi]? rjfjLtOeois a£i 

[a>0uc]v Kai yap c*€i 

[voi] ra fi€v a&fiara 

[r]ai9 ttjs (f>v<r€a>9 avay 

[k]ois arrcSoo-av t^s S a 
465 [pefrris aOavarov rr\v 

[fi]vrjfii]v eiroirjo-av 

[au] fi€V ovv 01 [rifi]e j 85 

[repot] irpoyovoi Kai A a 

[Kt8ai\fiovioi <f>i\ori 
470 [poos np]os aXXrjXovs 

[ci\ov o]v firjv a[XXa 

Col. xxxii. 

40 £ > ^P * to]** «£ airo<ri|f tt)[i EXXa8]oi Kara 
$povT|]<ravT€i airqvT[cov] 

[iro\e]/JLOv iSiov iroiTjaa 

) [fi€v]oi. irpos tovs aira> 

arj9 Tys EXX[a8os Ka]ra 

500 <ppovr]<rav[Ta? rrj]v 01 

k[uo]v Svva[fiiv *]x°v 

rcy aSjrriv]^] oXi[y]o[i 

npo? [iroXXas] fiy[piaSas 

(oo-jr^p cv aXXorpiai? 
505 yjrvxa[is /jl€\\ovt€9 


K [€]<f{0ao-av TrvOopevoi 
r[ov ire pi ttjv Attiktjv 
irc[\€/jLOv Kai iravr&v 
510 t[<dv aXXcov apeXrjo-av 



[irtpi Ka]\\tOToc{v ev € 
[tceivots:] tois \[povot9 € 
[<f>i\ori]KTjo[av ovk €% 

475 [Opo]us* a[X\ avTayoovicr 
[ras\ <r<pas [av\roi^s eivai 
[vo/ii]£ov[t€9]' ovSe c[7ri Sou 
[Xeia r^rf to{v E]X\t]v[a>v 
tov {Japl3[ap]ov 0*[pairw 

480 [o]i/T€£. aXX[a] 7r[€pt fi€V 
[t]t)S Koiv[rf\9 o\a>Tr)pia$ 

[o/to]vOOv[v]Tc[9 07T0T€ 

\poi S\e ravTf)9 a[iTtoi ye 
[vrj<r]ovTai. nep[t tovtov 

485 [lTOlOV]fi€VOl TT}[v a 

[pi\\]av eireSeiQavro 
[8e Tas] avT&v cvyjrv 
[X«ay] irparrov [£€v €v 
[tois v]iro Aapuov ir[e[£ 
490 [<f>0€io]iv airofiavTav 
[yap avTco]v €is ttjv At 

[tIKTjV Ol] fl€V OV 1T€pi 

[efitivav] t[o]v$ <r[v]/jLfia 
[X ov $ a\\a] t[o]v k[oivov 

Col. xxxtii. 

535 Ktvo\v\va>V' 01 8e <f>0t)vat 
avp[p]aXoPT€9 irpiv €X 
[Octv] rovs (3or)0T)<rov> 
[tcls fjL€]ra 8* ravra ye 

[vO/l€Vrj]9 TTjS VOTtpOV 

540 [arparcias rj]v avro? U*p 
[&V* *\yaysv €]K\iira>v> 


M 8 

[rcy tjkov rjfiiv a/w] 
[vovvtcs TO<r]a[vTrjy 
[iroirjaafievo]} .<nro[i; 
[Srjv q<ti\v 7T€]/) av T[fJ9 

515 [avrwv X^P]*?? T?R[0° v 
[/i€vrj9 o"rj\fi€iov 8[e 
[tov ra^oji/ff koll ttjs a 
f/i/XjXijy roi/r ptv ya[p 
[rj]/i€T€pov9 irpoyovov[s 

520 [0]«f[*] ttjs avrrjs rj/ie 
p[ay 7rv]0€(r0ai r[e] ttjv> 
a[iro/3a]o-iv ttjv tcov Pap 


j8[a/x»i>] Kai fioriOfaa^o'^v 
ra[? em] roi/y opov? ttjs 


525 x4p«y] fA a xv] n[ Kt i] a€ i v 

Taf T[po]irai[ov oTrj\aai> 

TCDV 7TO\€fj[l<IOV TOVf 8 €V 

Tpioiv rj/i[€pais Kai to 
aavrais [i>i/£i Siclko 
530 o-ia Kai x[ L ^ ta <rra8i]a 6\i 
tXOciv o-frparoTrcfi]® 1 tro 
p€uop€vov[s] op[To>J[y]] 
[<r0o]fy>'[[a]] TjwuxQyo-av 
[01 pe]v [fi]eTao'X^v tcov 

Col. xxxiv. 

vov. anfavTav SieXo/ie 
vol tov [kivSvvov AaK€ 

575 8aip[ovioi pev as Sep 
pon[vXa9 irpos to nc£ov 
X«Xioi{y avTcvv €7nXe 
fai/rcy. ko[i t&v ovjjl 
paxoov o)[iyovs irapa 




[pcv ra ftcunXcia] (Trparr\ 

[yo? 8e KaraoTTjyai toX 

[prjaaf airavTas] & rot/y 
545 [€K ttjs Avias ov]yay€i 

[pa? n€pi ov r*y oi/]x v 

[w€p(3o\a$ 7rpo6vp)rj 

[Otis €ineiv ]e 

5 lines lost § 89 

o[a]o[0\tii. Poy\[rjO]w [8e 
555 i{ot)ovTO pv[rj]p€[io]v> 

KaToXiirciv pi\ riyy 

avOpanrivt)? <f>v<reoo[s 

$PV]?Y €OT£J' OV 7TpOT€ 

p[o]v ciravaciTO irpiv € 
560 £*vpcv kcll (ruvqvayKa 
<rev TravT*[$\ avOpamoi 
OpvXovaiv* o)[<r]r€ arpa 

tottc^od 1 ir\€[v<r]ai pw 

81a [r]r]9 rjiru[pov] irefcv 
565 <ra[£] & 81a ttjs OaXaTT'qr 

tov fitv EXXtjottovtov 

£€t/£ay. tov 8e A 600 81 

[op]u£af. irpos 8rj tov ov J 90 

[ra>] ficya <j>povr)o-avra 
570 kcu TrjXiKavra Siairpa 

£(Zfl€VOV kcu tocov > 


68d \a(3o[v)rcf [ooy cv tois 

ore[voi\9 #ca[Xt/<roiT€r 

ca^rovs] wcp{aiT€pat> irpo 

[eXOuv] ot 8 [rjfierepoi 

[ircLTepes] eir [Aprc/iio-i 

10 lines lost £ 91 

595 \pa6wi /ia]^rjr *a[i £7 

[to\w\t*s a\vrovs [[[avrol^Jl^rvM *]* 

[e]£ urc[v #c]ara<rn7<rcu > 

[icai] 8<:8iot€? m o\eJ c[[t]J 

[0*£iyy 17] firoXiy i7/ia>i> 
600 ama [ycj^JTa* roiy JEX 
[X]iy<n Tfyr owrri\pia$ m o[i 
[8] T)fi€T€f{oi] irpoyovot 
paXtora pev fiov\o> 
ptvoi 8ta<j>v\a£cu ttjv 

605 irapovcr SogaV KCU Tidal 

iro[irj\aai (fxivepov on 
[k]cu irpoT€pov 81 apeTTjv 
[a]XX ov 81a Tvxqv evci 
Krj[o]av €7rcira 8* /cat 

Col. xxxv. 

• • • • • 

610 k[gl8c KarairXevcav 
r[cy OVTC09 efiovXcv 
aa\yro irtpi tcdv Xomcov 
omt[t€ ttoXXoov avrois 



ko[i kclXcdv Trpoetpya 
6*5 vpfevw 

€V [rOI* T€\€VTCUOlf 
T*i{v KlvSvVOW €71 irXsOV 

8ii)[vcyKav a&Vfioos K g 3 

ya[p anavTcov todv av/i 
620 /ia[xoov Siaiceipevw 
kcu [IleXoTropprja-iQiv 

tc[v IaOfJLOV 


Col. xliv. 
• • • • • 

[nap €xoira>]i> k[clitoi 

625 [fiovXofitvoi ir]X€0[^€ 
[ktuv ovk a]v 8ij irov> 
[tij? /jl€v 2]Kian>au»r 
[yrj9 C7rc0v]iiT)O'afi€v 
[rjv n\aTai€co]v to[is a>r 

6 3° [if*** KaTa<f>vyou<ri] <f>a[i 
[vopeOa 7rapa8ov]T€? 
[TwravTrjv #c X<»pa]v 
[irap€\iirop€v 17 ir]atr 
[ras av rjpas €wro/>]a» 

<>35 [rcpovs tiroirja-ev r]ot 


[ycycvrj/ievan/ ko\i 

Col. xlvi. 
6 lines lost 

[tW5 <TVfJL7T€]v6[TJ<TOVTaS 

§ *°9 


Col. xlv. 

• • • • 

• [ 

C[V SlfgrjXOoV 01 701/9 
OT07{aTOVf W0fll(0V 

Toifo 8* irpoSoras »<r 

1T€p €[V€py€TCL$ C$€pa 

nci^ov T)povvTO 8e t<dv 

645 d"]] Ei\[a>Tot>v €vl &>!/]Xcv 

uv afar €19 rat at/7]a>p 

irarp[i8as vfipi((iv) fiaX 

\ov €[ti/hw tov]? avro 

\X €l ]P a l* KC " <fx>vca]s tcov 

650 [iro]Xi[ra>v rj rovs yove 

[as] to[vs avmv 6*9 

[tovto 8 00/10717709] a 



Col. xlvii, 
Kpivev <j>vyas 8e kcli <n\a\ j 114 
<T€LS KOI vopwv av/i 



660 [€7Tl 8c TTJS TO]vr[<QV dp 

[XW Sta to ir]Xrj0[os to>v 
[oikckov Ka]K<o[v eir]av 
[(raped aX]XrjXo[vs c]Xc 
[ovvtcs ov]0cvi y[ap t]o 

665 [<ravTT)i> a^o]Xrfv [irap]c 
[Xiirov oxr]6 cTc[po>] 
[ovva\0ca]Or)vai tivos 
[yap ovk €<j>i]kopto tj 
[tis ovro) ir]oppo> touv 

670 [iro\iTiK<»]v rjv cgc 
[orrjKW np]ay/£a[T]o>v 
[ocms ov]k [c]yyvs q[v]ay 
[k]oo-Oti ycvcaOai to>v 
[a]vpipopa>v cis as ai toi 

675 [a]vrai <J>vo-cis was 

[jc]arc<m7<ra*' cit ovk ai 
\a\yyvovTai Tas caurcov 
[ifyXcis ovrtos avopus 
Sia^ri^OcvTCS Kai Tt)S 

680 tj per e pas [[ovrooyjj aSi 
kg>s KaTtjyopovvrcs' 
dWa irpos tois aXXois 
[K]ai ircpi tow Sikoiv- 
[ic]at tcov ypatfxov todv 

685 [7ro]rc Trap rjp.iv ycvo 
p[c]va>v Xcyciv to\> 
poxriv avroi irXciovs 

KpiTOVs airoKTCivav 
690 tcs aw 17 itoXis cm 
ttjs apxrjs anaaris c 

[[^Jt/o-eiy Kai n[o]Xn{€]io>v 
695 pcrafioXas cti 3[c] ircu 
8a>v vfipcis Kai y[wai) 

kcov aKr[x& a * [ K ] a [ l ] XP 1 * 
paTtov [[£]] [ap]iray[as] ns 
av 8vvan{o] 8ic£cX0civ 
r fI 700 itXtjv tocovtov ciirciv 
[cfooijicv av Kara irav 

TOW or! Ta pcv [[^H^ f l> 

pmv Suva pa8S^ov^ av 

Tis cvi yjrrjcpio-paTL 81 

705 cXvvcv Tas 8c a<f>ayas 

Kai Tas avopias Tas 

cm Tovroyv ycvopc 

vas ovOcis av laaavQai 

SvvaiTO' Kai pi\v ov 

710 8c ttjv irapovaav ciprj 

vqv ovSc ttjv avro 

vopiav ttjv c[v Tais 

iroXiTCiais pcv [ovk cv 

^v^ovo-av cv 8c rais [a-vv 

715 OrjKais avaycypap[pc 

vrjv a£iov cXco"0[ai 

paXXov tj ttjv ap[xn v 

ttjv rjpcTcpav t[is 

yap av TOiavrrjS d[ara 

720 o^KCvrffts cmOvp^a-cicv 
cv 17* KaTa7rovTi[arai 
pcv Tt)v OaXai[Tav 
KaTcxov&^y^ irc[XTa 
oral 8c ras iroXc[is Ka 

§ "5 


1 2 5 [r]a\anfiavovo[iv av $ 116 

r[l] #C TOV 1Tp09 €T^pOUS 
ITtpi TTj[9] X°°P a [^ 7ro ]^ € 
Jl€lV WTOS T€[iy\0U$ 

01 noXirai irpos aXXrj 
730 Aot/s jiayo[vr]aL ttAc[i] 

• • 

(0 (J) w w 

• • • • • • • 

]o.[ ]«.[ ]•«![.[ M 

M K K M 

ferf[ . . . . . . 

• • a • •• •• 

] • «;[ 




<*) . 


. . 6[ 







• • 























X 2 


to to {*) (t) 

• • * • •• •• 

M M M ]•< 

• • 

to to H to 



• • 

• • 

• • 







• • 


• • 

• • 

x. €&ilfo$av : so rE ; the marginal variant Mofu is parallel to the vulg. diraXXa£u. 

9. ^Xoyrueiaf is also the spelling of E, and is preferred by Drerup ; but in a question 
between 1 and c» the testimony of a papyrus of this period is of course valueless. 

ia. The original corm, altered by the second hand, is condemned by the hiatus; 
cony B(lass). 

17. to: om. MSS. 

18. Tjfiav tj [irctyis : 9 ir&iff fjp&P MSS. 

21. ir]epi : so vulg. ; the dots signifying deletion were superscribed by the second hand. 
Om. mpl r. 

23. The supplement at the beginning of the line is somewhat short for the lacuna. 

29-31. r« tvfpytalat ml t&s xpcw is the vulg. reading. r[c after t]k is very doubtful, 
and t]os [c]v|[c/»yffO'uiff is a quite likely alternative, rat xpcfo? Kt & T ^ *py*urias r, ris r* xp**** 
k.tX e, B. 

33-5. ofioXo]yovfMw>w : so MSS., with ycyopcpov* after irp4rovr. A blank space was 
left by the scribe at the beginning of 1. 34, and in this the corrector has inserted something, 
the slight vestiges of which suit [ytytaBcu, at the same time deleting y*vop*vas in 1. 35 which 
reflected the omitted yivopevovs after irpwow. The result is an intelligible sentence in itself 
not inferior to that obtained by emending 6fio\oyovfUvow to ofwXoyovpAw (B. with H. Wolf 
and others) though not making a serious claim for consideration, ir/w re is the reading of 
the MSS. 

42. ^*]y*[vrj]fUPow I om. MSS. irfpupyop is the reading of T; frdptpyop vulg. 

45. d»p]civ rc[axt^fryjp : 80 T ; b»p*as roammjs vulg. 

53. fyofxcv cnrciv : so vulg. ; Wire?* txw** r. 

60. irarcucfie]\(/A«iro[v]f : SO T (-xXcifi.) ; *arc MJcXfta/*. E vulg., KorcwcicX^fu M. 

75. jeai: om. MSS. 


79. c^orc]p<v : so r, B. ; itdrtpa, which originally stood in the papyrus, is the vulg. 

81. amuratl SO T ; veuras vulg. 

100. fa: L ffdfi. 

106-7. rrY^wti]LKnr{tp]cip cannot be correct, since with this there is nothing for ravnp to 
refer to except raWipr in L 104. The reading inserted by the corrector at the foot of the 
column agrees with the traditional text warpucwnpa* was perhaps influenced by tjyipDPucar 
T*pav : varpwr., as in the margin, MSS. 

109. rat: so r ; om. vulg. 

118. [ft]* : so r; M vulg. 

123. nroirjaaro ra[vytfp : ravrrjr Ar. MSS. 

128. aAjXw* xaX«ff : SO vulg., B. ; £XX*y koX&p xaX&ff rE. 

138. Bi»w : so r ; r&p St&v E and vulg. 

157. The alternative reading voXtniap is that of the MSS. 

164—5. faXwccrdn* rar npos aWrjXovs *x0pas : faAvinur&u ra vp6s aXXfjkovt MSS. 

1 68. avrcc[p; SOT; rovrtntvulg. 

176. oXXoif, the reading of rE, has been substituted by the corrector for avSpwrott. 
Xonroif vulg., and so B. on account of the following SXXrjp. 

196. napa^tvw. so r: vulg. irapaXtirtfarfff, with rimt instead of W*. 

202. fa<0p*r crowd : SO T ; fyd. Kpdripraff Aw. vulg. 

207. yfi^i€vo]r (r) is better suited to the space than yryorwr (vulg.). 

213. fffuw cv)tpy{<rt*w : SO T; cvcpy. 7/iiV vulg. 

215. Tiy[y : so r ; r&y E 1 vulg. 

223. ryyo[roi : SO ; Iffyovoi T, &C. 

230-I. ayocfoi' [aironw ovtJcw ; SO vulg. in the Antidosis; ay. avr. an. TE 9 B., avr. ay. dir. 
vulg. in the present passage. 

234. The supplement at the beginning of the line hardly fills the lacuna, which would 
be expected to contain eight or nine letters ; perhaps there was some correction. 

236. [f«rj3aAci]*: so TE and An/id. vulg.; there would not be room for the vulg. c>- 

opfJyGiprn : SO FE Antid. ; 6pp. avr&p ol npoyopoi vulg. 

237—8. «]tf • . . KOTioTTjaap : SO Vulg. ; tckt, cvd. jcarcan^rayro r, too*, fvd. KarcKrqcrairo E, B., 
too-, tfa. frr^rajTO, Antid, vulg. 

245. [Too^tfvoir : so A and vulg. ; ytiwc$<n(p) TE Antid. vulg. 
y" 251. nponpov : so E; the omission of nparipop indicated by the line drawn over the 
letters (by the second hand) is in accord with r and Antid. vulg. 

255. The correction is by the second hand. 

258. ttrofupift : om. MSS. 

261. ayap was apparently first written in place of Xiov aw. 

262. w*pi; so 6; M r, <fcc. The papyrus omits ards, which is found after pr/tar** 
in E 1 A 1 . 

264. trpmpop : SO T ; irp. bttjjKBop E vulg. 

267. faWawroro : SO in the Antid. 6, apxauurrara A ; 1. apgiMmira with MSS. 

268. [fjiWy: so vulg.; yaw* rEO*. rar, the elimination of which is indicated by the 
superscribed: dots (probably by the corrector), is omitted in the MSS. 

8 73- 7 & [*o^iff, the original reading, is that of r ; the addition of wurcpa is in 
accordance with the vulg. 

290. cXarrco y€ I SO Cobet ; om. y* T ; iK tovtvp E 1 vulg. 

291. After mcfuipia the first hand wrote rur, and left a blank space between this 
and tarip. 


302. Ktupop: om. MSS. 

31a. E has tnucparqo-fi*. 

323. The dot in the middle of the line apparently marks the place of the omitted op. 

336. w, which is superfluous, is slightly smudged, and was perhaps intended to be 

337—8* &a . . . arpartuur: om. V and An/id. ; dtA rip t6t€ arp. E 1 , B., ycyryi/ficnjv for 
y*yofKVT)u vulg. 

344-50. This passage, which has no other authority, is evidently based on the latter 
part of § 74. Its insertion here seems pointless. The X of xaXa in 1. 350 is converted from 
t, after which there was originally a blank space. 

355. to : om. MSS. ; cf. 1. 356. 

356. Wvp : three or four letters are required to fill the line, and to in 1. 355 points the 
way; om. MSS. 

357-8. The first hand probably made the wrong division ytyopara o<h. 
^361. cwtrav iroXff/iov avaravros: SO vulg.; itqX. over. tie. I\ 
366. Om. otopevop E 1 , om. ciivi E 1 . 

376. A low stop after * seems to have here been substituted for a high one. 
379-80. So r ; rrjs Oak. tijv apx- vulg. 

389—90. rovfrov? tow] Kcupovs : SO vulg. ; rvus tcaip. tout. T, tow avrow Kcup. rovr. Antid. 
393. [oXX]a: SO vulg., B. ; ak\a icai E 1 , Kot I\ 

dta tovto is the reading of the MSS. ; the corrector's & avro tovto is no improvement. 
km after tovto is omitted by E*. 

395. iroX^ : SO T ; wSkiv Tq* ypgrtpap E 1 vulg. 

400. fxiKpoi : so ex in the Antid. ; oXtyy MSS. here. 

401. T<av froX[c»y : roiv noXcoiv r, B. ; tout n. tovtow and rat* w. ravraip Other MSS. 
40a. a)yap [t<*xv : ratf Xiav MSS. For ayav cf. 1. a6i ; the reading here is not certain, 

but XJuip at any rate is impossible, ayaw produces a hiatus. 

408. Tiy]* : so r ; om. vulg. 

410 sqq. The marginal adscript indicates that this fragment comes from § 78, but its 
position is not clearly marked, and there was evidently a divergence from the ordinary text. 
]c in 1. 410 may be fy^o™, and the word after yp*pjp.[<x)r»v is very likely aX(Xa) ; but some- 
thing certainly intervened between iroXX(w) and ypa\Lp[a]rwv m The penultimate letter in 
1. 412 is either r or y. 

417. irpo*o[yop«]v[o]p<[i>fM : so e in An/id., the mistake being occasioned by the pre- 
ceding irpo(rayopn*<r6at ; but the v in the papyrus is very uncertain. irpwrarfptwot MSS. 

431. [kIoi: om. MSS. 

435. E 1 adds avrmv after roir. 

440. t[oiovtoi)s : so vulg., with and without *V. roU toiovtois r. 

449. The MSS. add cicrfvoie after t&p, which was here originally omitted. cW«h* is 
also omitted by 6A in the Antid. 

450. The column contained one or two more lines. 

453. It is not certain that the papyrus read p*v with rE© 8 ; om. vulg. 
461. The space points to €««[*><] (e 1 vulg.) rather than *k*i{vwp] (r), but not very 

466. *iroi*)<rav : SO TES* ; Korikmov E marg., vulg. 

471. Kai (vulg. ) was possibly written after a[Xka 9 though the line is not too short without it. 

480. v[*pi p*v : SO T; &pa flip mpl vulg. 

487. <tnp[vxuis : so vulg. in the Antid., B. ; tirvxtas 6 1 , operas TE. 

497. liiov: so rE, B. ; 8. Ktpdvpow vulg. 

498 sqq. row awacnj* : so MSS. The corrector has inserted ff before ancurrjs here and 


at the top of the column (11. 495-6), where the passage is rewritten. The intruded <( is 
there accompanied by the variant KaraQpowrioxun** for -rat, a reading also found in A in the 
Antid., amjvrup on the other hand being placed in its traditional position instead of after 
iXorr«s as in 1. 501. As the original scribe gives the ordinary text in 1. 497 it is likely that 
he wrote correctly KaTafypomrjaavras in 1. 500. 
517. aj/uAjXip : d>. avruv in the Antid. 

522. rr\v\ om. Antid. 

523. /9oi;6[i7<r]oiTa[f, the original reading, is also found in 6A in the Antid. 

5 2 5- K a X*] : so TE ; the reading is uncertain, but there does not seem to be room for 
*ai paw 

532-3. The corrections are by the second hand. 

535- ^Apw : so TE and Antid. ; 6<f>6rjvai vulg. ; the termination at is written over an 
angular complementary mark. 

536. The letter after r looks like o, but this is probably owing to the disappearance of 
some fibres of the papyrus. 

548. After tin* lv the ordinary text has Aarr* rvv vnapx&*r»v (tprjKtp, which cannot be 
reconciled with the remains in the papyrus ; perhaps <iprjKrp] c |Xarra». 

555- rfoijovro : so A here and in the Antid. ; towvtov other MSS. 

558. There is no word in the traditional text here between <fn><rt»r and 4<mv % but 6A in 
the Antid. have ?pyo», which no doubt stood in the papyrus. The final v is fairly certain, 
and the first letter must be either * or 6. 

561. av6pamoi: om. MSS. 

562. 6pv\ov<n»: SOT; BpvWovaiv vulg. 
orporoircdtti : t$ orp. MSS. 

569. iitya is omitted by E*. 

596-7. ajyrovs [f]£ uro[v <c]ara<7nj<rai : so vulg. ; the marginal adscript gives the reading 
of r and B. 

598. The second hand, besides rightly emending fc to fa, proceeded to alter the 
division of «$«£9f , but changed his mind. 

602. wpoyopot : so £ and vulg., om. r ; watiptt Antid. vulg. ol d* 17/i. narip** had 
occurred in the previous section, ol ff 17^. vp6yo*oi in § 85. 

605. A blank space was left by the first hand before bofrw ; cf. 1. 34. 

607. npoTfpov : so vulg. ; t6 irp6r. r. 

608. Tv^iyr : SO r ; njy tvx. vulg. 

609. & : so vulg. and Antid. ; om. r. 

6lO-I. In the MSS. of the Antidosis the words teal KaraaKtvao-avrcs ra ntpi rrjv n6Xw 

intervene between KaTanhtvaavrts and ovr»r, and the papyrus would admit of their restoration 
(x[eva<ravT€£ ra ircpc | t[t)v noXiv ovras k.tX) ; but this would make Col. xxxv a rather long 
one, whereas 1. 623 stands higher than 1. 609, and it seems more likely that there was 
no disagreement here with other MSS. of the Panegyricus. kcu . . . irrfXi* is bracketed 

613-5. avrou I Ka[t Kakw. so 6A in the Antid. To read koi | xo[X»y avrois produces 
too great a disproportion in length between 11. 613 and 614. As to what followed 
irpo*ipya(rp*va>v there is no clue. 

630. The papyrus most probably had xora^vyoven ; ^vyovat r originally. 

638. The slight vestige points to a round letter at the beginning of the line, above and 
slightly to the left of which there is a r by the second hand. Perhaps the original scribe 
wrote «r instead of r»u. 

645. m : so r, B. ; *viois (vulg.) would be too long for the lacuna. The deletion of v 
at the beginning of the line is probably by the second hand. 


647. rapi[&ar was originally written for warpAas ; the correction is probably due to the 
second hand. 

659. wfarfyfarorras : SO VictorillS, B. ; wfiirt^royras r, trvpnaB. E and vulg. The 
¥ is broken, but a cannot be read, 

664. ov]0m : ovkwi edd. ; cf. 1. 445, where the corrector has substituted A for 6. 

669. ovro : SO T ; our* roamrrov vulg. 

670. €^[<rrrjKml om. MSS. Cf. § 171 tws r&p vo\itik*w cftoTiptfcri. 
677. ras: SOT; to* /*cV vulg. 

679. x<u np: so r; t5* <V E, vulg. The deletions in this line and the next are 
probably due to the corrector. 

688. The appearance of the papyrus suggests that the scribe partially erased the 
superfluous letter, which is most probably an ij, at the beginning of the line. 

693. The corrector omitted to alter the p of crop. 

698. It is unlikely that kapvaya* was originally written. 

701. [c]xo</mv op: fyc* MSS. 

Kara narruv : SO vulg. ; naff awdpraw I\ 

708. ovOw : cf. 1. 664, note. 

713. cvawra* was originally wrongly divided f|mv<w. 

719. The corrector's t{ara]rraa^w is the reading of the MSS. 

729. 01 iroX&rm vpos aX\rj\ovt : 80 T; wpog aXX. ol iroX. VUlg. 

Fr. (d). This fragment might be placed above 1. 29, ]amr being restored as cffjcurrw 
and an intervening line being lost 

Fr. (s) 9 which is from the top of a column, may be the end of 1. 363. 



Addenda and Corrigenda to ' Oxyrkynchus Papyri \ Parts III and IV. 

For the literature connected with these volumes see the various bibliographies of 
papyri by U. Wilcken and F. Blass in Archiv fUr Papyrusforschung iii, S. De Ricci in >>~ 

Rev. des /hides grecques 1905, and P. Viereck in Bursian's Jahresber. 1907. After comparing \ 

with the originals the suggestions which have been made, we give a list of most of those 
which, whether right or wrong, affect our transcriptions. Supplements of lacunae and 
readings already indicated in our notes are generally ignored. Where the source of the 
correction is not indicated, it is our own. 

III. 404. 4. /uapov r[< (Deissmann), cannot be read. 

408. 57. ovX[ocr (Schroeder) is possible, as is his suggestion «4»v£« in 1. 61. The 
following suggestions by him or Fraccaroli are unsuitable: 25. ap<f>i [0ou]iw, 33. 
wawrtfuw Ap<t>iTpv<»vtadas, 62. Xur[o«r<u, 64. Kap[rf/M&, Whether Fr. (d) belongs to 408 
is very doubtful ; the verso is in a different hand. 

409. 6. ry> nat&apiow (Leo) is possible. 35. napJpmt]<rat (Leo) is possible. 41. 
o&ffo]ff f<m (Leo) is unsuitable. 45. abJ^parw (Kretschmar) is possible. 65. ir]aXu> 
(Leo) does not suit the vestiges very well. 58. dcja] tovtov (Leo) can be read. 63. 
our[oi d] «w (Leo) is possible. 80. fuB^iuw (Leo) is possible, but not Pka^us in 
1. 8 1. 100. ro \o{nop ov is inadmissible. 

410. 84. &la[0f]ttyi€j<or (Fuhr) can be read. 

411. 36. tj{s arpart]is (Fuhr) is possible. 

412. 6. 1. tHontvfoa otror for vwmvfc aarow (Hefermehl, Berl Phil. Wochenschr., 
March 31, 1906). 9. 1. mpa (sic) for trapa. 33. ftXarc] r Qpuv (Ludwich, 
Berl. Phil. Wochmschr. % Nov. 14, 1903) is possible, and in 1. 35 *]«r can be read. 55. 
For €iru*[ni]e there is not room. 

418. 6. fyXjoroYi (Sudhaus) is possible, 28. *f*}yp6f (Crusius, Herondas, Mimiambi, 
1905, pp. 101 sqq.) does not suit the vestige of the letter before p which seems to be 4 or o. 
53. ol vtpjOovvns (Cms.) is unsuitable. 57. Crusius 1 proposed reading r d Www [irp]6* 

<SXXq[Xovf is possible but very doubtful. 91. irapoXXd[£ (Cms.) may be right. 112. 

/*]a/j*a(&H) noifi<r(tts) (Sudh.) is possible, but the first letter after the lacuna is more like d. 

1. $[<flf ff[o]i for p . . [. .]p. 113. 6a]rrov (Sudh.) is unsuitable. Il6. ap] rovfr lbo\vras 

(Sudh.) is unsuitable. 118 marg. 1. <TKkr)p6r*p(of) for trkXrjp6(/) re (Sudh.). 130. ml 

f«[fi]i{oc) (Cms.) is possible, but the next word is not tycums (Sudh.) or Mpam (Cms.). 
130. Karayyd<[\* (Cms., Sudh.) is possible. 132. fyttyvyop (Cms., Sudh.) cannot be 

read. 133. cVapa<r(4)a* (Cms.) is possible. 134. Neither Crusius' Mwpn<r<rop M 

ra popi(6ptpa nor Sudhaus' tmntacip 5pt»s vfuv <fxup6p(pa suits the vestiges. 139. [7]^ 1jp 

Spa (Cms.) is possible, but noW«]«r &pa (Sudh.). 147. pi w for m fa* (Sudh.) is probably 
right 148. Neither Syapai nor Kara]K«fuu (Crus.) nor Kapavra (Sudh.) is suitable. 151. 
jrojrc (Sudh.) or ?p»s] r* (Cms.) can be read. 152. «Wx]i/*fw (Sudh.) is unsuitable. 
178. ay»p(ia?) which we printed in the margin against 1. 213 probably refers to this line 
(Cms., Sudh.). 181. Xc'£» (Sudh.) is possible. 186. Xrfyy (Sudh.) is unsuitable. 

186. ir[oT]c' (Sudh.) is possible, but not v{pty (Crus.). 



420. 2. ^[i]\or[i7<rW (Fuhr) or 9[ir]Xor(t]a»v (G. G. A. Murray) is possible. 7. 

tK$pr^as (Fuhr) is possible, but there is not room for wot in the lacuna before it. 

448. A new fragment belonging to the bottom of Col. xviii contains the beginnings 

of 11. 263-73 TT ) V 3' o[ira/i«ij9., &up[op4i7, ciir[cft«f, ov ji[«i>, X<up[tt, cX^cu>, us [, aw{pts t ovd a[pa, 
ovd c[vrjpc, arjfia f . 

452. 10. 1. npayroi for irparov. 

464. 3. crepe™ (Kroll) is inadmissible. 5. ax ?]""! 9 (Ludwich) is possible. 6. f]< 
bovkov and £t[i*(T<i (Kroll, Ludw.) are possible. 12. p[t\\ovros (Ludw.) is possible. 

13. Km[povo\juov (Ludw.) can be read. 14. Kpar*\pov (Kroll) is unsuitable. 15. (fxwkov 
(Kroll) is possible. 16. B(f\a (Kroll) can be read. 18. *\oitv (Kroll) is inad- 

missible. 19. ir^>o3o/i[a>i» (Ludw.) is inadmissible, but 9 o[r] *[w\p*v<rwn is possible, while 

dr)]\tv<ra>iTi kokoi nakip (Kroll) is inadmissible. 20. kq]l aXXw (Ludw.) can be read, but 

not &\»fui. 21. 1. curidoc (for tcri&oi) Ludw., but vpo[p is inadmissible, as is »/*{oto]*oi> 
(Kroll). 22. Ari]fio<f>iXov (Kroll) and jco]u/k>0cXov (Ludw.) are not long enough. 28. 

na<£u? (Kroll) is inadmissible. 35. joAXa yip (Ludw.) is possible. 37. *aic]os (Ludw.) 

or 4><*}>s (Kroll) can be read. 38. kip[ovpovs (Kroll, Ludw.) is possible. 39. goX/mii 

(Kroll, Ludw.) can be read. 40. 7roXvr««w[woff (Ludw.) is inadmissible. 43. 

1. aptdrjXos (Kroll, Ludw.). 45. futprvfMs 17 rjs (Ludw.) is inadmissible. 54. 1. «c owi-cup 
(Kroll). 55. arr<{v (Ludw.) is possible. 58. ^tj^c (Ludw.) is possible. 61. 

p\(ts (Ludw.) is possible. 

471. The Maximus against whom this speech is directed seems to be the praefect 
in 103-7, Vibius Maximus. De Ricci suggests that the erasure of his name on the 
Coptos tariff and^the Abu Tufa milestone may be due to these proceedings. 6. 1. £u 
i. e. v*r(«p) ov for lv ( Wilcken). 1 8. dovtrfp (i. e. <rnovbri») can be read for dovXi?* (De 
Ricci). 20. 6ki&ofi*vo»v (Cr6nert) is possible. 24. o]tWi] (Cr6n.) is unsuitable, but his 
suggestion irajrcfc is possible. 28. yap (Crdn.) is unsuitable. 62. do\\ ]««i» (Wilck.) 
can be read. 75. ow can be read for <rv, as suggested by T. Nicklin ana Cronert, but 
the letters seem to have been deleted. 108. o[ x xWr (Cr6n.) is unsuitable. 131. 
1. Mdfcp* (Wilck.). 142-3. 1. c[laX(\pw (Wilck.). 145. 1. t[£>* Uu (Wilck.). 
146. 1. dp[x^v <ttj &c|«a (Wilck.). 147: Wilcken restores ira<fe[ta r* xa\ to|. 151-3. 
Wilcken conjectures nap* [avrov n<p\ | tS>p toiovt[»9 a<f>pobi\<ri»p. 1 54. Wilcken's suggestion 
6 [dc does not suit ; *[al can be read. 

472. 24. Karaypa(p6vr<0y (Crdn.) is possible. 25. wap^x^Y 9Tnv (Cr6n.) cannot be 
read. tovto^s tf owe] (Cr6n.) is possible. 37. The mutilated word is not ovkovp 
(Cron.). 48. bUartB^wat (Cr6n.) is unsuitable. 

481. 2. 1. irpwjwr for ovjrwr ; cf. P. Tebt. II. p. 132. 
485. 3. 1. U for fra(pa). tvwnov cannot be read in 1. 36. 
488. 22. 1. [to]/?*; cf. P. Tebt. II. 327. 28 and 487. 18. 

491. 5. Cronert suggests taff Spbrprvrovp rp6nov after alptjrat, but the passage is 
hopelessly illegible. 19. 1. icv^tpv^arjs (Cron.). 

492. 9. The word before c7rr«'<n is not km (Cr6n.). 

494. 44. Probably wap]rrt$rj ; cf. 713. 1 irapcT€0(if). 

495. 9-10. nap &t€v6v\[ptip <U hv ctvrj) &oicjj (Crdn.) is possible. 

496. 10. tap iroTf <rvp&rj (Cr8n.) is unsuitable, as also is his suggestion alprjirai in 1. 15. 

499. 15. 1. xtpry for xtprov. 

500. 1 1-2. 1. a\ir 9 'l]ov6W«* and o^Xjjpovo/i^w (cf. B. G. U. 868. 12) (Cr6n.). 

504. 16. &ort]\ xp«<r6ai avroU (Cr6n.) is unsuitable. 20. [n-jcpi rovro (Cr6n.) is 

possible. 44. tov dia\fi6xov (Cr6n.) is not very suitable. 

506. 28. [toJuferTroff (Cr6n.) can be read, but the following tov renders a proper name 
more likely. 38. napaypa<pyjs (Cr6n.) is possible. 


525. 8. An[/9«] r (Cr8n.) for \o[ro)u is possible. 
530. 8. fir) for M (Cron.) is unsuitable. 

538. 13. rffX[c<o»r] (Cr8n.) is unsuitable. The letter after yap might be almost anything. 
17. 1. fU nci[*«)>iaj. 

611. 1. Marpia (cf. 529. 1 3) for furpta (Cron.). 
653. 18 sqq. 1. Kapn[oi for xaprjov. 

IV. 659. 64. f[vr}Ktp (Schroeder) is unsuitable. 
660. 9. fiaXa (Wilamowitz) is unsuitable. 

662. 34. arwraXvv to nptv (Wilam.) is unsuitable. 39. nap Evprjrao (Wilam.) is 
unsuitable. 51. Neither avaAcor nor awrraktop (Wilam.) can be read 

663. 5. ityurtv (Kdrte) is probable. 8. The corrupt mv is emended by Rutherford 
to ir(<p<) v&9, by Korte to *(*pi) t»v, the next word being woui(t*v) in either case. 

664. 155. A]uKo(f{pct>v (Wilam.) is unsuitable. 

665. 12. 1. Atcpc^yav^Aivw cwi. 

666. 163. ex ro[v (Wilam.) is possible, but the vestiges suit «* better than c«. 

668. Fr. (c) should be turned the other way up and read as diu, belonging to 1. 164, 
where \.gla^ium. 

680. 3. 1. fura for fuya, 

681. 4. a^cpov crv^[irfye{p]r[ (Fuhr) is unsuitable. 1 1. [<w]r (Fuhr) is unsuitable. 

682. 5. vcpJ[o}t[*Xk« (Fuhr) is possible. 

696. 90. i. c[Xo&, 3 lines being lost between this and the line beginning a (Fuhr). 

697. 38. Perhaps ror[c] fyaijvm ciwu, as Fuhr suggests. 

701. 26-8. Perhaps r»* vo\fj[»v ovfa tois oX|X[otf, as Fuhr suggests. 

705. 41. 1. i^p6s t6 ro|fiffto[y] (Wilam.). 78. Wilcken prefers xi"!*)™ to x[6p T ) av ' 

717. 5. p*t6. rovrojv (Wilam.) is unsuitable. 

720. 7. Catsarib{us) c[oss (De Ricci) can be read. 5. sena[/us consulto (Gradenwitz) 
after et is unsuitable. 15. Wilcken's suggestion Itgi for cepi is very doubtful, especially 

the supposed g. 

785. 1. api6p$ 9 for apiBpmv (De Ricci). 14. ad cognlega is resolved by Wilcken 

ad cogn(pscendum) lega(tur\ by De Ricci ad cogn(itionem) kga(/i). 15. Serraeus for 

Ierraeus (De Ricci) is possible. 16. "1. Gaddius for Gradius (De Ricci). 22. Salmeus 
(De Ricci) is possible. 27. De Ricci suggests cum epistrat(ego) at the beginning of the 

line, which is possible. 29. 1. Eponuchus (De Ricci). 

736. 81 SfKowrw (Wilam.) is unsuitable. 


List of Papyri distributed. 

We give here a list of published Oxyrhynchus and Hibeh papyri which have been 
presented to different museums and libraries in Europe and America in addition to those 
of which a list was given in Part IV, pp. 265-71, and also some further details about those 
Oxyrhynchus and Fayum papyri which in the former list were assigned to America without 
a more precise indication. We have added the present reference numbers (where ascertained) 
of the several institutions to which the papyri now belong. The papyri which do not 



appear in either list are still at Queen's College, Oxford. The following abbreviations are 
employed : — 

B. M. = British Museum. The numbers refer to the Catalogue of Greek Papyri. 

Bodl. = Bodleian Library, Oxford. The references are to the hand-list of MSS. 

Bolton = Chadwick Museum, Bolton, Lancashire. 

Bristol = Bristol Museum. 

Brussels = Musdes Royaux, Brussels, Belgium. 

Cairo = Museum of Antiquities, Cairo, Egypt. These papyri remain temporarily with us 

at Oxford. 
Cambridge = Cambridge University Library. The numbers refer to the ' Additions '. 
Carnegie = Carnegie Institute, Pittsburg, U.S.A. 
Charterhouse = Library of Charterhouse School, Godalming, Surrey. 
Chicago = Haskell Oriental Museum, University of Chicago, U.S.A. 
Columbia = Library of Columbia University, New York, U.S.A. 

Cornell = Library of Cornell University, U.S.A. The papyri are numbered MSS. A 101. 
Dublin = Library of Trinity College, Dublin. 
Edinburgh = Library of Edinburgh University. 
Gen. Theol. = General Theological Seminary, New York, U.S.A. 
Graz = Library of Graz University, Austria. 
Harvard = Semitic Museum of Harvard University, Mass., U.S.A. 
Holyoke = Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass. U.S.A. 

iohns Hop. = Library of Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, U.S.A. 
Manchester = Museum of Manchester University. 

McCormick — Library of McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, U.S.A. 
Michigan = University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. 
Morgan = Pierpoint Morgan Collection, New York, U.SA. 
Pennsyl. = Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. 
Princeton = Library of Princeton College, New Jersey, U.S.A. 
Smithsonian = Smithsonian Institution, Washington, U.S.A. 
Toronto = Museum of Victoria University, Toronto, Canada. 
Union Theol. = Union Theological Seminary, New York, U.S.A. 
Vassar = Library of Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York, U.SA. 
Wellesley = Wellesley College, Mass., U.S.A. 

Western Res. =s Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A. 
Yale = Library of Yale University, U.S.A. 

Oxyrhynchus Papyri. 


34. Bodl. Gr. class. 
a. 9 (P). 


211. Harvard. 

213. Yale. 

219. Yale. 

250. Pennsyl. 2797. 

254-6. Union Theol. 
257. Michigan. 
259. Pennsyl. 2798. 

267. Johns Hop. 

268. Yale. 

271. Harvard. 

272. Michigan. 
274. Union Theol. 
276. Yale. 

287. Columbia. 
293. Columbia. 

294. Princeton. 

295. Columbia. 

297. Columbia. 

298. Princeton. 
392. Princeton. 
395. Michigan. 


401-2. Harvard. 
403. Gen. Theol. 

404. Bodl. Gr. theol. 

405. CambridgeAdd. 


406. McCormick BH 
88470. 1. 

408. Yale. 

409. Bodl. X}r. class. 

c 55 (P). 

410. Bodl. Gr. class. 
d. 75 (P). 


411. B. M. 1523. 

413. BodL Gr. class. 

414. Columbia. 

415. Graz I. 1930. 

416. Brussels. 

417. Smithsonian. 

418. Harvard. 

419. Brussels. 

420. B. M. 1524. 
421-3. Harvard. 

424. Graz I. 15)26. 

425. Brussels. 

426. Toronto. 

427. B. M. 1525. 

428. Harvard. 

429. Manchester. 
430-1. Harvard. 

432. Graz L 1929. 

433. CambridgeAdd. 


434. Harvard. 
435-6. Yale. 

437. Brussels. 

438. Yale. 

439. Bolton. 

440. Manchester. 

441. Brussels. 

442. Dublin Pap. £. 

443. Graz L 1927. 

444. Yale. 
446-7. Harvard. 
448. Cornell. 

458. Harvard. 

459. Columbia. 
460-2. Harvard. 

464. Bodl. Gr. class. 

d. 75 (P). 

465. B. M. 1526. 

466. Columbia. 

467. Bodl. Gr. class. 

/ 73 (P). 

468. Edinburgh. 

469. Chicago. 

470. Dublin Pap. F. 

471. Bodl. Gr. class, 
a. 10 (P). 

472. Morgan. 

473. B. M. 1527. 

474. Manchester. 

475. Charterhouse. 

476. Chicago. 

477. Columbia. 

478. Brussels. 
479-80. Chicago. 

481. Gen. Theol. 

482. Chicago. 

483. Pennsyl. 2822. 

485. Bodl. Gr. class. 
c 56 (P). 

486. Columbia. 

487. Chicago. 

488. Brussels. 

489. B. M. 1528. 

490. Graz I. 1920. 

491. Morgan. 

492. Dublin Pap. C. 4. 

493. Toronto. 

494. B. M. 1529. 

495. Brussels. 

496. Bodl. Gr. class. 
a. 9 (P). 

497. Yale. 

498. Toronto. 

500. Graz III. 1918. 
502-3. Cornell. 

504. Bodl. Gr. class. 

c 57 (P). 

505. Cornell. 

506. Harvard. 

507. Brussels. 

508. Cornell 

509. Brussels. 

510. Chicago. 

511. Graz L 1931. 

512. Chicago. 

513. Toronto. 

514. Vassar. 

515. Smithsonian. 
516-8. Pennsyl. 

519. Brussels. 
520-1. Columbia. 

522. Yale. 

523. Cornell. 
524-5. Vassar. 
526-7. Pennsyl. 


528. Dublin Pap. F.9. 

529. Pennsyl. 2804. 

530. B. M. 1530. 
531-2. Pennsyl. 

533. Harvard. 
534-40. Columbia. 
541. Cornell. 
543-9. Cornell. 
551. Princeton. 
552-3. Harvard. 
555-7. Harvard. 
559. Harvard. 
561-72. Johns Hop. 

574. Bodl. Gr. class. 


575. Chicago. 
577-8. Chicago. 

579. Gen. Theol. 

580. Johns Hop. 
582. Johns Hop. 
583-4. Michigan. 
585-8. Johns Hop. 
590-8. Holyoke. 
599. Gen. Theol. 
605-7. Yale. 
609-10. Chicago. 

611. Carnegie. 

612. Pennsyl. 

613. Princeton. 
615. Princeton. 
616-7. Yale. 
618-20. Princeton. 
621-7. Yale. 
628-32. Pennsyl. 

633. Union Theol. 
638. Yale. 
639-43. UnionTheol. 

645. Yale. 

646. Manchester. 
648-50. Pennsyl. 


652. Pennsyl. 2796. 

653. Bodl. Gr. class. 
c. 58 (P). 


654. B. M. 1 53 1. 

655. Harvard. 


656. Bodl. Gr. bibl. 
d. 5 (P). 

657. B. M. 1532. 

658. Yale. 

659. B. M. 1533. 

660. Graz I. 1923. 

661. Cairo. 

662. B. M. 1533. 

663. CambridgeAdd. 


664. Cairo. 

665. Toronto. 

666. Bodl. Gr. class. 
d. 76 (P). 

667. Dublin Pap. F. 

668. B. M. 1532. 

669. Cairo. 
670-2. Wellesley. 

673. Brussels. 

674. Dublin Pap. F. 

675. Graz I. 1922. 
676-8. Wellesley. 

679. Brussels. 

680. Manchester. 

681. Johns Hop. 

682. Edinburgh. 

683. Manchester. 

684. Johns Hop. 

685. Bodl. Gr. class. 

/ 75 (P> 

686. B. M. 1534. 

687. B. M. 1535. 

688. B. M. 1536. 

689. Wellesley. 

690. Brussels. 
691-2. Wellesley. 
693-5. Princeton. 

696. Pennsyl. 2814. 

697. Dublin Pap. E.9. 

698. Wellesley. 

699. Dublin Pap. F. 

700-2. Harvard. 

703. Bodl. Gr. class. 

*. 5i (P). 

704. Pennsyl. 2820. 

705. CambridgeAdd. 



706. Pennsyl. 2823. 

707. Morgan. 

708. Manchester. 

709. Bodl. Gr. class. 
e. 88 (P). . 

710. Brussels. 

711. Grazl. 1925. 

712. Cairo. 

713. B. M. 1537. 

714. B. M. 1538. 

715. Bristol. 

716. CambridgeAdd. 

717. Cairo. 

718. Columbia. 

719. Yale. 

720. Bodl. Lat. class. 
d. 12 (P). 

721. Cairo. 

722. Columbia. 

723. Cairo. 

724. Carnegie. 

725. Toronto. 

726. Cairo. 

727. B. M. 1539. 

728. Cairo. 

729. B. M. 1540. 

730. Cairo. 

731. Manchester. 
732-4. Cairo. 
735. Morgan. 

736. Brussels. 

737. Western Res. 

738. Graz I. 1921. 

739. Cairo. 

740. CambridgeAdd. 


741. CambridgeAdd. 

742. B. M. 1541. 

743. Brussels. 

744. Toronto. 

745. Columbia. 

746. Brussels. 

747. Charterhouse. 

748. Western Res. 

749. Cairo. 

750. Western Res. 

751. Cairo. 

752. Western Res. 

753. Toronto. 
754-5. Princeton. 
756-8. Yale. 

759. Brussels. 

760. Graz I. 1928. 

761. Harvard. 

762. Pennsyl. 2815. 

763. Cairo. 
764-5. Harvard. 
766-9. Johns Hop. 

770. Bolton. 

771. Manchester. 

772. Bristol. 

773. Brussels. 

774. Johns Hop. 

775. Pennsyl. 2821. 

776. Pennsyl. 2817. 

777. Cairo. 

778. Pennsyl. 2818. 

779. Cairo. 

780. Dublin Pap. F. 

781. Pennsyl. 2819. 

782. Pennsyl 2816. 

783. Edinburgh. 

784. B. M. 1542. 

785. Morgan. 

786. Cairo. 

787. Columbia. 

788. Morgan. 
789-91. Columbia. 
792. Toronto. 
793-4. Cairo. 
795. Morgan. 
796-7. Columbia. 
798. Morgan. 
799-801. Cairo. 

802. Graz I. 1933. 

803. Harvard. 

804. Toronto. 

805. McCormickBH 
88470. 2. 

806. Cairo. 

807. McCormickBH 
88470. 3. 

808. Cairo. 

809. Carnegie. 

810. Cairo. 
811-2. Vassar. 

813. Brussels. 

814. Carnegie. 
815-7. Cairo. 

818. B. M. 1543. 

819. Vassar. 

820. Cairo. 

821. Vassar. 

822. Wellesley. 

823. Brussels. 

824. Wellesley. 

825. Cairo. 

826. Wellesley. 

827. Cairo. 

828. Graz I. 1934. 

829. Wellesley. 
830-1. Gen. Theol. 

832. B. M. 1544. 

833. CambridgeAdd. 

834. CambridgeAdd. 


835. Gen. Theol. 

836. Brussels. 
837-8. Cairo. 

839. Bodl. Gr. class. 
c. 59 (P). 

Fay&tn Papyri. 

9. Holyoke. 

14. Michigan. 

19. Chicago. 

20. Pennsyl. 2776. 

22. Pennsyl. 2782. 

23. Chicago. 

53. Pennsyl. 2789. 

58. Pennsyl. 2791. 

59. Pennsyl. 2788. 

60. Pennsyl. 2783. 

63. Pennsyl. 2781. 

64. Yale. 

65. Pennsyl. 2779. 
77. Pennsyl. 2780. 

80. Pennsyl. 2787. 

81. Pennsyl. 2790. 
86. Pennsyl. 2792. 
86 (a). Yale. 

94. Princeton. 
103. Princeton. 
106. Princeton. 
110. Columbia. 
113. Yale. 
115. Yale. 
117. Pennsyl. 2785. 

119. Pennsyl. 2786. 

120. Pennsyl. 2784. 
137-8. Yale. 

145. Harvard. 
147-50. Harvard. 
154. Michigan. 
156. Michigan. 
158-9. Michigan. 
190-5. Princeton. 
222. Harvard. 
225. Harvard. 
227. Harvard. 
230. Harvard. 
239. Princeton. 
241. Cornell. 
243. Cornell. 
245-7. Cornell. 

250. Chicago. 

251. Cornell. 

253. Pennsyl. 2777. 
255-7. Michigan. 
261. Pennsyl. 2778. 
263. Columbia. 
265. Yale. 

267. Yale. 

268. Holyoke. 
271. Princeton. 
272-3. Yale. 
274-7. Chicago. . 
291-3. Union Theol. 
296. Johns Hop. 


3 r 9 

299. Harvard. 
304. Johns Hop. 
306. Johns Hop. 

314-7. Cornell. 
320-1. Harvard. 
331. Johns Hop. 

333. Johns Hop. 
335. Yale. 
338. Cornell. 

343. Johns Hop. 
347-8. Johns Hop. 

Hibeh Papyri. 

35-6. Harvard. 
37. Carnegie. 
39. Brussels. 

42. Graz I. 1924. 

43. Carnegie. 

44. Yale. 
46. Morgan. 
49. Yale. 
54. Toronto. 
55-6. Yale. 

60. McCormickBH 
88442. 1. 

61. McCormickBH 
88442. 2. 

62. Brussels. 

75. Pennsyl. 2824. 

79. Pennsyl. 2825. 

83. Harvard. 

86. Carnegie. 
103. Carnegie. 
114. Carnegie. 
118. Columbia. 
120. Smithsonian. 
122. Smithsonian. 

123. Western Res. 
125-7. Gen. Theol. 
129. McCormickBH 

88442. 3. 
134. Brussels. 
135 McCormickBH 

136. Cairo. 

138. Graz I. 1932. 

139. McCormickBH 
88442. 5. 

140. Brussels. 

141-4. Columbia. 
149. Princeton. 
152-3. Princeton. 

154. Vassar. 

155. Smithsonian. 
157-8. Harvard. 
159-62. Yale. 

163. Princeton. 

164. Cairo. 

165. Princeton. 
168. Graz I. 1919. 
170. Smithsonian. 


dyioe 14, 21, 29. 

ayvtvTTipiov 8, 1 3. 

ahutup 1. 

«XX<j 2, 5, 16, 45. 

aXkaavtip 19. 

dXXor 18. 

av4px*<r6ai 27. 

SvOpuvos 5, 39. 

oiro 44* 

anoKpuHO-Bat 30. 

awokapfifocw 4. 

dpXMpcvs IO. 

av\ijrp<s 36. 

«Wf 3, 7,8, II, 24, 30. 

/&SXW 33. 

ftwT'M' 43. 

fanmtw 15, 42. 
/Saowof 7. 

W 3, *5- 

Aavftt 25. 

*W« 35- 
dtd 25. 

tyi> 4«, 42. 


cZrai 17, 23. 


fladyfw 8. 

cxfinor 24, 39. 

««nfc 35. 

*» 4, 9. 23. 25, 33, 43- 
MoOtp 39. 
MvcaOai 27* 
Mvfui 19, 27* 
irravBa 23. 
imBvfUa 38. 
imrpcirtt* 12. 
7p X f<rAu 28, 44. 

CTfpOff 25, 26. 

INDEX I. 840. 


WP° 34. 
«€^9,I7, 23. 

ioTOMU 21. 

icatfapevciv 23, 24. 
Ka6ap6t 18, 28. 
Mixta 41. 
Kcucovpyos 5. 
«iXX»ir^Ciy 38. 
KarepxwrOai 26. 
«At/ia£ 26. 
fcAtum 6. 
kv*p 33. 

X^f^ii, 24, 31,42. 

Acwfc 10 (?). 

Xrvmfc 27* 

X//4W; 25. 

Xowwr 14, 19, 24, 32, 37. 

paBrrtt 15, 22, 42. 

m 2, 18, 31, 42. 

M7 1 "* *4« 
fiokvrtw 16. 
/uko* 4. 
fMipffw 36. 

vLmwBai 34. 

£/xow 3. 
fropa II. 
^ *3> 20, 3 1 - 
& 18, 33. 42. 
Joircp 35. 


•W 31, 45. 

ovb* 20. 
oWe/j 18. 

c&» 23. 

°^» i3» *7. 3 2 * 

wapakafifidv€iP 7* 
way 1. 
vArx«» 3. 
frarctv 1 7, 20. 
wtptvarciv 9. 
irXijpovi' 40. 
irokw 6. 
wrfpin/ 36. 
www 15. 
np6 1. 

«P* 3°> 38. 
npwrfSKiirup 29. 
wpoiT€px*<r6cu 9. 
wpoiT€X*w 2. 
np&rtpop I. 
fr»t 2. 

o-icfvor 14, 21, 30. 
(TKopniot 35 
W«" 35, 37- 

o&fU&trdai I. 
<rv 12, 15, 23, 32. 
aw 22. 

oi/rrvyxarffU' II* 
<nm)p 12, 3a 

Wf 12. 
riff IO. 
Tairof 17. 
t6ti 28. 
rv<f>\6s 31. 

«&* 33i 43- 
ty"«* 3- 
imofuptiv 6. 

♦apwraZor IO, 

xw 32. 
X°«ipo* 33- 

//. 841 


INDEX II. 841. 
Large Roman numerals refer to poems: sch. = scholium. 

'Afrtjpa II. 5 sch. ; Fr. 2. i sch. ; II. 69 sch.; 
Fr. 5. 5 sch. 

'A/Sfypmu II. 3 Sch. 
"Afrtjpot II. I, 104. 

aya86t II. 43 sch. ; III. 95 sch. 

dya*Xfi}r IV. 12 ; V. 48. 

ayaixfc IX. 36. 

dyyAXcut II. 77. 

ZyytXot VI. 101. 

£pw I. 8 ; VI. 103. 

dycur&u Frs. 1 29-3 1. II. 

dyKaia III. 5. 

dykao- III. I. 

*y\a6s VI. 62 ; VII. 3 ; Fr. 26. 6 (?). 

dyWfctp Frs. 129-31. 6 sch. 

Syptoc II. 61. 

ay X ^rof VII. 10. 

Zyv, VI. 60. 

ddaffOTfpof IV. 27. 

Adopirof VI. 128. 

Stffkov IV. 22. 

<M V. 1. II. 52. 

<UW IX. I. 

<2S£«» V. 1. VI. 10. 

<*W VI. 137. 

'A6a[ra . . . Fr. 28. 4. 

oAuwoff VI. 50; Fr. 16. 17. 

'AA7KU01 II. 29 sch.; V. 35 sch. 

20W II. 57 sch. 

Mp6ot IV. 42. 

A$mt II. 63 sch. 

Alycuos Fr. 19. 27* 

Afyua VI. 125 sch., 134 sch., 137. 

aito II. 51. 

afci II. 52 (v.l. dfi). 

&* VI. 8. 

aWfff&u VI. 97. 
«%III. 17; VII. II (?). 
a&Xo* V. 45 sch. 
alptlr V. 36. 
alra II. 58. 
cuxfunfo II. 62. 

dxrp<rtic6fias IX 45. 
Aoapimw VI. 88. 
dffoXov&w Fr. 95. 4 sch. 
&ot IV. 26. 
&coTos I. 3. 
dent IX. I. 

'AX*(avdpos Fr. 96. 2 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 1 

Mfril VI. 10 (v. 1. d^tH* and iK£«A 
flu* IV. 3*. 
Skis IV. 24. 

oXtrtyMor Frs. 1 29-3 1. I sch. 
aXxa II. 37 and sch. 
dXfti/iot VI. 98. 
dXkd II. 55 sch., 73; IV. 28; VI. 54, 105, 

128; IX. 7. 
£XXoA IV. 48. 
*XAo*II. 63; VI. 118 sch. 
*V« Fr. 33. 5. 
Sks VI. 100. 
Ska-ot VI. 14* 
Skooats VI. 82. 
fy IX 16. 

a/ia... Fr. 21. 7 sch. 
afiofircfr Fr. 16. 6. 
dpap II. 76. 

dfiaxatfla IV. 26 ; VI. IO. 
^id X a*os VI. 53 ; IX. 3. 
afi/Bpovia Fr. 46. 2. 
dpftpdaios IX. 35. 
tyPporoe III. 16; VI. 140. 
aiuifav&u IV. 15. 
ajupa IX. 3. 
apfl-fXrffi* II. 25. 

dpwcaOu II. 63 sch. / 

aptfu II. 97. 
dpif>i . . . Fr. 26. 3. 
iliifHfkdvu* Fr. 33. 2. 
dfjufUwokof VI. 117. 
**II. 48 sch. = feSVII. 12. 
diri IL 97 ; III. 16. 4* IX. 16. * VII. 12. 
iaraboatt III. 96 Sch. 



a*uWAu iv. 36. 

avwfKi* VI. 118 sch.; Fr. 8a. 7 sch. 
dvaphtt<rBat(?) VI. 1 36. 
dyaXvciP VI. 94 (inf. ayoXvcy). 
&°* IV. 35. 
dwartBivai IX. 39. 

dvfyKca II. 55 sch., 57 sch. 

&t*l*os VI. IIO. 

<tp*v0< Fr. 16. 14. 

d^p II. 37 and sch., 57; IV. 33; VI. 9; 

Fr. 16. 13 ; Fr. 82. 29 ; Fr. 86. 1 ; Fr. 92. 

1 (?); IX. 4, ao; Fr. 134. 3 sch. 
dvfopo* Fr. 46. 3. 
dvOos I. 10. 

Mpwirae Fr. 103. 1 sch. 
arUa Fr. 82. 26. 
£wvof IV. 27. 
droiyrvmu Fr. 87* 2. 
d*op4a IX. 45* 
arret II. 69. 
drrfpcttrir VI. 88. 
ZntoBai II. 42. 
dm, owl tow II. 79 sch.; IV. 4 sch., 61 

sch. (?); VI. 59 sch.; Fr. 84. 10 sch.; 

IX. 35 sch. 

dvrlvakos II. 43 sch. 

doiWIII. 12; VI. 128. 

dot&tpoc VI. 6. 

dtpurros VI. 87 sch. 

aira&rctv Fr. 82. 7 sch. 

anas Col. XXV sch. 

dir*ip*>9 VI. 176. 

dwrjpur IX. 8. 

Snurros Fr. 1 9. 23. 

and II. 3 sch.; V. 35 sch.; VI. 135, 183 

sch.; Fr. 21. 10; Fr. 107 sch.; Frs. 

129-31. 4 sch. 
dirod<A6W IX. 36 sch. 
Airouror II. 3 sch. 
dvoKTuru* II. 73 sch. 

9 Antiik»> I. 8 ; II. 5 ; V. x et saep. ; VI. 14, 
91; Fr. 84. 13; IX. 40 (?); Fr. 134. 2 

diroXoyft<r&u Fr. 70. I Sch. 

dnoiMMpLQtw Frs. 129-31. 6 sch. 

diropta Fr. 19. 16 SCh. 

djrtppota Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 

diroondv VI. 134 sch. 
dna>6*lo0ai IV. 47. 
dpa VI. 96. 

'Apyos IV. 29 and sch. 

opera IV. 22; VI. 131, 176. 

dptrrf Fr. 124 SCh. 

dpfrytw V. 1. VI. IO. 

9 Apurrapx<K (?) II. 6 1 sch.; Fr. 82. 35 

sch. (?); Fr. 94. 3 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 6 

sch.; Fr. 134. 9 sch. 
•A/HirTo^di^ff (?) II. 75 sch.; VI. 89 sch., 181 

dpKCi* II. 31. 
dpi* Fr. 16. 8. 
dpwpa IV. 25 ; VI. 106. 

"Aprtfus IV. I. 
apX*a6aj, VI. 50. 
dpxd IX. 20. 

dpxh II. 3 sch. 

'Acnrrpui V. 42. 

darts II. 48; Frs. 129-31. 13, 

darpov VI. 1 26 ; IX. 2. 

Sarv I. 7 ; IV. 32. 

'Acrardff VI. 134. 

drpawds IX. 5. 

a* II. 80; Fr. 82. 19 sch. 

aMd II. 101; IV. 3; VII. 17. 

avXd VII. 3. 

AvXis Fr. 139. 2 sch., 3 sch. 

avXcfc III. 94; VII. n (?); IX. 36 sch. 

avrapxfhf IV. 37. 

avrfa II. 43 sch. ; VI. 7 sch. ; Fr. 82. 4 sch. 

a\>x*i* II. 37 sch. 

avxp6s VI. 125 sch. 

i1<j>ap VI. 81 ; Fr. 82. 22. 

•AtyooYrall. 5; VI. 4. 
•Axcuo/ VI. 85. 

doros VI. 59 and sch. 

Ba0uA»p IV. 15. 
/Sort*** II. 58 ; Fr. 28. 2 (?). 
0afltf»por Fr. 47. 3 (?). 
faBvKokvos VI. 135. 

/Sa^IV. 44; Fr. 16. 15. 

paivcw VI. IOO. 
Patds II. 74. 
/SdXXtiv IV. IO. 
PapvKTunot IV. 41. 
piards VI. 84. 
04dfc»pof IV. 26. 
/SiorlV. 26 sch.; VI. 117. 
/9X<br«fij> I. 1 ; II. 73. 
(Oovropla IV. 27. 

//. 8 4 i 


fipanftrtos VI. 79. 
/9por*VI. 55; IX. 48. 
fim&UL 9; VI. 114; VII. 15. 


your ix. 41 , l^V 
yrpaufc VI. 113. 
ycpar IV. 30. 
yfjfxw I. I; VI. Il6. 

ylyptvBtu II. 57 sch., 79 and sch.; IV. 50 

sch.; Fr. 66. 2 sch. 
•ytyvowwiv IV. 23. 
yXt/rv/xaxaj** II. 80. 
yXvKvr II. I OI ; VI. 59. 
yXwraa VI. 59. 
yorrvr II. 55 sch., 73 sch. 
yrfwf Fr. 19. 30. 

ypdfotp VI. II9 Sch., 121 SCh., 122 
yvv* IV. 4. 

&atis6noc Fr. 82. 21 ; IX. 34. 

daipmvVL 131. 

da/* I. 8. 

AdXwr V. i et saep.; Fr. 47. 2. 

AaXor IV. 12; V. 17 (?), 40. 

&anos Fr. 28. 4. 

d$o* II. 40. 

Aapbaria VI. 90. 

Aapdanbtu Fr. 82. 27. 

daptfp I. 9. 

&i^j>9 Fr. 107 sch. 

daif>vTj<f>opuc6t Fr. 107 sch. 

fedouccW Fr. 19. 23. 

&h> II. 55 sch., 57 sch. 

foixfr Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 

dcXm Fr. 19. 2. 

AcX^olII. 98; VI. 1 sch., 1 6, 63; Fr. 134. 5 sch. 

tyar V. 42 ; VI. 80. 

W x «rAuV. 45; VI. 5, 129. 

dyXoptfn VI. 1 1 sch. 

Aqftyvoff II. 5. 

&7f*a{f<rd<u VI. 119. 

dtd VI. 7 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 3 sch., 6 sch. 

dtaytyvwrKtiP IV. 21. 
buAMvai Fr. 16. 16. 
bumipfow VI. 104. 
&iapna(ci» VI. Il8 Sch. 
diforovir VI. 96. 
biarpifriv VI. 134 SCh. 
diaftpttv II. 43 SCh. 

&M«u II. 53 ; III. 101 (?); IV. 52 ; V. 41 ; 

Fr. 16. 12. 
3« . . . Fr. 66. 2 sch. 
AueaiW Fr. 84. 12. 
U VI. 118 sch. 

Aiofirfbrjt VI. 76. 

dfr Frs. 129-31. 1 sch. 

duBfftu' II. 4. 

AiAiwor IV. 25. 

facetr II. 43 sch.; Fr. 82. 29. 

te£a Fr. 49. 2. 

dorctpa VII. I (?). 

fy>i* IV. 52. 

&v*apis I. 4. 

dvra<rAu II. 33 sch., 37 sch., 73 sch.; Frs. 

129-31. 1 sch., 4 sch. 
bwar&s VI. 52. dvvarvTtpoe IV. 5. 
bva-futn/s II. 69. 
dwrx*paii*i9 VI. Il8 Sch. 
da>/ia Fr. 26. 6. 
toptyta IV. 26 SCh. 
Aupuvs VI. 123. 

fdy II. 31 SCh., 43 SCh. 

to* IV. 50, 51. 

fttop* IV. 38. 

*yyva\i(<u> VI. 1 33. 

/yf<fK<» VI. 108. 

fyKaran$€Ptu II. 6l. 

rycctcr&u II. 52. 

#y* II. 26, I02 ; IV. 21, 49; V. 44; VI. 5, 

58; Fr. 16. 16; Fr. 19. 23; Fr. 84. 14; 

Fr. 94. 2 (lAir); Frs. 129-31. 19 (/fib), 
tow? IV. 4. 
fjffffAuFr. 19. 18. 

tffXw II. 79 and sch.; IV. 28; Fr. 19. 21. 
ftW VI. 64. 

d II. 31, 57 sch.; VI. 91. 
ctoo* Fr. 35. 1. 
tldwXonoulv VI. 130 sch. (?). 
cltdbios Fr. 134. 9 sch.; cf. Fr. 134. 3. 
ffcco/uu? (?) v. 1. VI. 183. 
ffcu II. 3 sch., 28, 48 sch, 75 (fr = ttv); 

Y 2 



IV. 27, 35, 49, 52 ; VI. 11 sch. ; Fr. 21. 

1\ Fr. 73 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 1 sch., 3 

sch.; Fr. 134. 2 sch. 
*i II. 75 sch.; IV. 13 sch. 
tls II. 33 sch. ; VI. 1 sch., 7 sch., Col. xxv 

sch., 118 sch.; Fr. 19. 4; IX. 9 ; Fr. 

139. 2 sch. 
«Vc III. 95 sch.; Fr. 84. 14 sch. ; Fr. 134. 4 

sch. c£ opxag IX. 20. 
'Exdfia Fr. 82. 27. 
&a/3dX« VI. 79, in ; IX. 38. 
Ucupyot Fr. 19. 12. 
fed* IV. 35. 
ckootos VI. 62 sch. 
'EKara II. 78. 

Uanpos Fr. 82. 15 sch. 

ckoiii IX. 46. 

Uartyxup Fr. 82. 31. 

€kot6p IV. 37. 

tK/StftXciv II. 63 sch. 

fffducia VI. 118 sch. f7c&[* . . . Fr. 134. 3 sch. 

cVefi IV. 50 sch. 

fKfrovfiy II. 43 sch. 

«W II. 102. 

cX . . . II. 27 sch. 

tkavpcir III. 16 ; IX. 6. 

cXagviwror IV. 1 4. 

•EXcVa VI. 95. 

iXiuLfinvt III. 15. 

'EXucau'iafa Fr. 16. 14. 

ffXiffwrtr II. 99. 

'EAAcW VI. 125. 

'EAXiptot VI. 125 Sch. 

'EXXaffr IV. 23. 

•EXX<k VI. 62 sch. 

Am'? IL 43 sch. 

c/i/3aXX«y VI. 78. 

§fifxoyii¥ II. 57 Sch. 

c>fc II. 29 ; IV. 44; VI. 11 and sch.; Frs. 
129-31. 17. 

Ipvav II. 29. 

fyircdor II. 27. I/Mrcdov IV. 49. 

cV II. 31 sch., 43 sch., 48 sch., 69 sch.; III. 
12; VI. 5, 61, 98, 106, 119 sch., 120, 
124 sch., 125 sch. ; Fr. 19. 24; Fr. 95. 5 
sch.; IX. 3, 17 sch., 36 sch., 40 sch., 41 ; 
Fr. 162. 2 sch. 

€vaip*iv VL 114. 

Ivaras Frs. 1 2 9-3 1. 3. 
ivtiiKU, VI. 123. 

Ma V. 44. 
hiavrfc I. 5. 

twamjpU Frs. 129-31. i sch., 6 sch. 

'Ewotrcdar IV. 41. 

cMMfffu> II. 63 Sch. 

tvrta II. 74. 

?mpor VI. 1 1 sch. 

ivimviov Fr. 82. 19 sch. 

€$aip*Tos IX. 42. 

l£cpx«rAu Fr. 82. 2 sch. 

«£<*mcr0ai VI. IIO. 

t(oiriaa> II. 27. 

Jfr IV. 39. 

rfraufiv IV. 36. 

nrW IV. 50 sch.; V. 40; VI. 7 sch., 98; 

Fr. 17. 3 ; Fr. 84. 15 sch. 
ftr«ra II. 65 ; IV. 46 ; VI. 105. 
MvSpwmuf VI. 114. 
€ir*px«r6w I. 7 ; II. 63 sch. 
rn«rdai Fr. 22. 3 (?). 
firrjXvs II. 48 sch. 

ML 3; IV. 16 sch.; VI. 7 and sch., 100, 
116, 134 and sch., 140; Fr. 19. 10 sch., 
27; Fr. 26. 7; Fr. 82. n sch. 

cirwr/irrfi* II. 64. 

Ma kotos IX. 5* 

Mt€\hp Fr. 82. 18 sch., 19 sch.; IX. 34 

MtcWhp IX. 28-9 sch. 

Mri0€oBai II. 48 Sch. 

Mrptmtp IX. 46. 

M x »ptos IV. 46; VI. 138. 

hm-lV. 5; VI. Col. xxv sch.; VII. 2 sch.; 

Fr. 84. 10. 
IpaaBat VI. 58 ; Fr. 19. 29. 
tpyov Fr. 87. 3. 
fpenrtuf L 9. 
fpiww Fr. 16. 15. 
'Eptx^w V. 45 sch. 
4w<w IV. 47. 
cplfriv VI. 87 and sch. 
c/Mxvdtyt V. 39. 
'Eptvvs Fr. 82. 30. 
^hVw7 V. 21 sch. 
ipK*ios VL 114. 

C/MTCiy II. 26. 
cppriv II. 33 Sch. 

tpx*o6ai II. 68; VI. 9, 100; Fr. 16. 15; 

Fr. 82. 5 sch.; Fr. 137. 2 sch. 
•VIV.44; VI. 115; VII. 3. 

//. 841 


«VA<fc II. 1 02. 

Iras VI. IO. 

tin Frs. 129-31. 21. 

fror VI. 62 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 6 sch. 

cvayrfs V. L Fr. 1 9. 25. 

tvayopia II. 6f . 

c*a*Ti}* VII. 18. 

fvatryrjs Fr. 1 9. 25, V. 1. cuay^ff and 


E*/9o«a V. 35. 

fi>Pov\la II. 50. 

cvdia II. 52. 

tv€pKr)s IV. 45. 

tvenjpia VI. 62 Sch. 

<v0€T<7v II. 43 sch. 

c^WFr. 82. 18 sch. 

fvOvfiia I. 2. 

cfteapfror II. 26. 

cfcXfqr II. 103. 

tliiaxaana Fr. 1 6. II. 

cv/icvij* II. 78 ; V. 45. 

cwa Fr. 19. 20. 

cfoaffi* VI. 128. 

tvPOfua I. IO. 

Ev£uTiOf IV. 35, 60 sch. 

fCodfxos II. 97. 

c&rarXor Fr. 1 6. IO. 

fvirXficip III. 12. 

EGpiiros IX. 49. 

*vpi<TKtiv VI. 53. 

cvpv&at VI. 103 ; IX. 41. 

tvpvona VI. 134; Fr. 82. 24. 

tvpw VI. 60, 96, I20. 

evpirtfraprrpa VI. II. 

€ikf>p»¥ VI. 115. 

cCfxco-Au VI. 64, 1 25 sch. 

c^odos II. 43 sch. 

tyopav II. 29. 

? x «» IV. 48; V. 39 ; VI. Col. xxv sch., 57; 

Fr. 26. 3 ; Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 
i x Bp6t II. 32, 54. 

fjfcorlL 63; VI. 5. 


Zc'ador IX. 44. 

ffuyiwM Frs. 129-31. 20. 

z»w IV. 41 ; VI. 1, 94, 125 and sch.; Fr. 

19. 21; Fr. 92. 3; IX. 7. 
ZfjMoros IV. 58 sch.; VI. 55 sch., 59 sch., 

118 sch., 119 sch., 183 sch. 

8 sch.; 

H II. 37 sch., 43 sch., 48 sch.; VI. ill 

IX. 6, 14-7, 17 sch., 19. 
? IV. 21, 25. = flfo (?) Fr. 19. 21. 
fa II. 55. 
frm II. 55 s * 1 - 
rjfUrtpos II. 73 sch., 77 sch. 
TfvtKa II. 29 sch.; Fr. 82. 4 sch. 

Hpa VI. 88. 

ftw IV. 58 sch. (?). 

ffov X ia II. 33 ; IV. 7. 

if™, VI. 118 sch., 130 sch. (?). 

IJTOp VI. 12. 

Bakia VI. 14. 

BdWtiv H. 52. 

Bapd II. 98 ; Fr. 19. 27. 

Bapu^d VI. 16. 

6ap.»ot IV. 52. 

Bapptl* II. 23 sch. 

6*d III. 15 ; VI. Col. xxv sch. 

Otfdyowos I. 6. 

fcfufrvos VI. 131. 

Bqus Fr. 84. 15 sch.; IX. 41. 

Btpcmw V. 45. 

Bipos IX. 1 7 and sch. 

B*<nrco*tos VII. I. 

Berts VI. 84. 

&<fc II. 54, 65 and sch.; IV. 17 ; VI. 51, 61, 

80, 94, 112; Fr. 82. 4 sch.; Fr. 95. 3 

ec«y II. 37 sch. 

Oripa I. 7. 

ei}0rw Fr. 82. 11 sch.; IX. 9, 40 sch. 
erjPahi Fr. 134. 7 sch. 
6fip Fr. 26. 5. 

Bvfrriuw II. 55 sch. 

Boat IX. 7. 

Bo6t VI. 18. 

Bpaxnfs VI. 86; v. 1. Fr. 96. 1. 

epdUia II. 25. 

epovla II. I. 

Bp6os IX. 36. 

Bvydrrfp Fr. 16. io ; Fr. 19. 22. 

AW III. 96 sch.; VI. 62. 

dvrfw III. 8. 

B&pat II. i sch. 

'Umw II. 3. 

Zc»iu Fr. 17. 2. 

Uttqmp IV. 31, 62. 



Up6v VI. 125 sch. 

Upfa III. 93. Upv/rarw Fr. 82. 2 ; Fr. 87. 3. 

*» VI. 93. 

lq I. 5; IV. 31, 62; VI. 121, 122. 

Ifiof II. 35, 71, 107; V. i et saep.\ Fr. 

28. 3. 
iffad . . . (W«a&of ?) Fr. 1 34. 3 sch. 
Umvciv IX. 8. 
\kvuvQqi VI. Il6. 

*IXiof VI. 81, 104; Fr. 82. 32. 

Ificp. ..Frs. 129-31. 18. 

ha VI. 11 sch., 140. 

'Mmm Fr. 46. 4 (?). 

Zinrucrfi' II. 43 sch. 

ttnrtos Fr. 26. 3. 

imros II. 41, 43 sch.; VI. 107 ; Fr. 16. 

6 (?), 7. 
bnroaSas IX. 7* 
imroxapiias II. 1 04. 
7cra/u Fr. 2 2. 3. 
'I«rfi[^... Fr. 161. 
'l<r/tyM0r IX. 35 sch., 40 sch. 
'ivftrpnos Fr. 26. 7. 

•icr^wk Fr. 138. 1 sch. (?). 

I*6pv6pns Fr. 90. 2. 

foot VI. 54. taut II. 106 sch. 

XaraaBai II. 38, 99. 

laxvs IX. 4. 

1 X A5* IV. 20. 

'Iawia II. 3 SCh. 

Kdfyior IX. 44. 

*aw iv Frs. 1 2 9-3 1 . 1 9. 

monk IV. 38 SCh. 

Kmpfc II. 31 SCh., 34. 

Kakapos IX. 36. 

KaXrip II. 5 sch., 96; Fr. 19. 26. 

*a\6s II. 66. 

xdfJLvtt» II. 27. 

ffairvrfr III. 96 sch. 

KapOaia IV. 13. 

xapnfo IX. 14. 

Koprtaros v. 1. Fr. 19. 28. 

KaoraXia VI. 8. 

KaoraAtof Fr. 134. 1 sch. 

koto II. 43 sch. ; IV. 6 ; VI. 1 1 sch. 

Karapaii*u> II. 34 ; VI. 1 3, 60. 
KarcucXv&ur IX. 19. 
Karakiyiw VI. 1 29; Fr. 84. 1 5 sch. 
tfaracnuof VI. 1 39. 

KOT*p*lir*iP Fr. 82. 33. 

KOTot*€iv IV. 60 sch. ; Fr. 1 39. 3 sch. 

«(ir)IV. 50; VI. 9O. 

Map IV. 61 sch.; Fr. 82. 21. 

xM IV. 58 sch.; VI. 12, 105. 

kcIpos II. 68; Frs. 129-31. 19. 

kcAo&Iv II. 101 ; VII. 17 ; v. 1. Fr. 16. 5. 

KfXadcwrff V. 46. 

ffrAaut^ip VI. 55. 

KtXrjs Fr. 46. 4. 

cci*axrif IX. 1 6. 

Kcw IV. 60 SCh. 

Kfpawfc IV. 43. 

Kew IV. 7, 13 SCh. 

K#unfc VI. 7 SCh. 

«W Fr. 90. 4. 

jcXdttfiv Fr. 82. 20. 

JcXapor IV. 48. 

kA*Vt«v IX. 3. 

ffX&vty Fr. 84. 1 1. 

kA&u> VI. 58. 

KXvptyos Fr. 82. 8 sch. 

KKvr6pavrv VI. 2 ; Frs. 1 29-3 1. 22. 

k\vt6s v.l. VI. 14; Fr. 84. 13. 

jcowfc, jrarA jcoivou VI. 1 1 sch. 

Kotvaafou Fr. 84. II. 

Koior Fr. 19. 22. 

«S/«i VI. 138. 

*6pa VI. 16; Fr. 16. 11; IX. 43. 

«opv<£d VI. 93; VII. 12; Fr. 82. 23. 

Kpaivtiv II. 103 ; IX. 34. 

KparuTTos Fr. 19. 28 (v.l. Kciprurror). 

Kpc'aff VI. 118 sch. 

Kpijnj IV. 50 sch.; Fr. 134. 4 sch. 

KpW VI. 68 ; Fr. 26. 6. 

Kpovivw Fr. 82. 25. 

Kp6mm VI. 1 34. 

Kpvnrttw VI. 138. 

xrao-Aif II. 59. 

KTfivuP VI. 119; inf. fcraifi' VI. 119 sch. 

Krlfap II. 29 sch. ; V. 39. 

Kvav6*opos v. 1. VI. 83. 

Kvav4ir\oKos VI. 83 (v. 1. Kvcufottopos). 

Kvpa VI. IOO. 

Kvntipurovf IV. 50 and sch. 

Kvptog Fr. 116. 2 sch. 

KtaXiHiv VI. Il8 SCh. 

\ayxdniv IV. 53. 
Xa/i^aWur II. 3 sch. ; VI. 


//. 841 


\dfiwtiv III. 95 sch. 

Xav&bcw VI. no. 

Xcufcl. 9; II. 3, 48; VI. 179. 

iUmuftor VI. 15 ; Fr. 33. 4 (?). 

Aaroo V. 44. 

X^«u> IV. 39; VI. 11 sch.; VII. 13; Fr. 

19. 16 sch.; Fr. 71. 4 sch.; Fr. 82. 33; 

IX. 35 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 4 sch., 7 sch. 
Xf«r«ir II. 36, 72, 108; IV. 29, 45. 
Acvic£XrKv VI. 87. 

X«'x<« VI. 140; Fr. 19. 10 sch.; IX. 35, 42. 
Um, VI. 7 sch. 
Xtjftfta II. 37 sch. 
Xfev IV. 48; Fr. 162. 1. 
X.^ VI. 64. 
X6r<r«rAu VI. 3. 
Xtrupt vfur IX. 38. 

Xrfyoc II. 77; IV. 35; Fr. 82. 24; Fr. 84. 

14 sch. 
Xotmfc II. 33 sch.; Fr. 84. 8. 
Aoflar VI. 60. 
Xo X cia Fr. 19. 10 sch. 
Xtmfc Fr. 86. 3 (?). 
palcotiai IV. 36. 
pawap IV. 46 ; Fr. 48. 2. 
pdXa Fr. 84. 12. 
fiaXaiufe II. 52. 
pSXXow II. 48 sch. 
pa» II. 39. 
fuxvUiv II. 46. 
fuatrtla Fr. 65. 2 sch. 

liamviaBai Fr. 82. i sch.; Fr. 129. 3 sch. 
fuiFrw Fr. 26. 9 ; Fr. 84. 13; Fr. 95. 6 sch. (?). 
pappooticu II. 39. 
p&rwos IV. 34. 
fUm, P II. 28, 29; III. 6; IV. 44; VI. 12, 

105 ; IX. 2. 
parpvs Fr. 27. 2. 
firyaXAcoro* IX. 17 Sch. 
ptyas II. 26; IV. 48; VI. 90; Fr. 84. 10. 
fudtmw VI. 124. 
MAoMirot IV. 28. 
McXap^vXXor II. 69 and sch. 
lUKi VI. 59. 
MfXto IX. 35, 43. 
p*\iyapvt III. II ; V. 47. 

fiAXciy II. 57 sch., 77 sch. 

pfkn€*6m VI. 17. 

*•* II. 53; IV- 22; VI. 51; Fr. 84. 14; 
Fr. 90. 3; Frs. 129-31. 18. 

pcW VI. 88. 

furroi VI. 1 1 sch. 

lUpot IV. 38. 

/wto II. 43 sch.; Fr. 95. 5 sch. (?); IX. 21, 

36 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 
furairoptvtaBtu IX. 49 sch. 
ptrpias I. 3 sch. 
pirpw I. 3; VI. 121. 
fUxpi VI. 62 sch. 
m II. 26; IV. 16 sch.; VI. 91, 115. 

fiffitaSat IX. I. 
p*fl<x IX. 37. 

w* II. 75. 

/uprorf II. 36, 72, 108; Fr. 84. 14 sch. 

/«}tc VI. 116. 

fuywvvat Fr. 19. 29 ; IX. 43. 

fuv II. 73; VI. 115 (v. L w); Fr. 19. 24 

(v. 1. pur), 26; Frs. 129-31. 18. 
Mpafuxrwa VI. 56; Fr. 16. II. 
poipa II. 64. 

poipios (uvptos Pap., v. 1. rJv&of) VI. 118. 
MourolV. 24; VI. 181. 
Moiamot IX. 39. 
MokovvU VI. 109. 
pokird II. 96. 
povapx*ir IV. 29. 
p6pw* IIL 95 sch. 
ptpatpos VI. 94. 
Mowra Fr. 95. 3 Sch. 
p6x0ot II. 33 and sch. 
Mvpfjutevts VI. 107. 

»afri»IL 24; IV. 21; V. 36. 

Natf II. I. 

KKfc III. 7. 

WKTOff V. 39; VI. 124. 

vavayrft (?) v. 1. Fr. 1 9. 25. 

wawpvravis VI. 130. 

yauraff Fr. 1 9. 26. 

W*t* VI. 98. 

WfMir VI. 54 ; Fr. 33. 4. 

fftfooXw II. 28. 

Nroimftcpo* VI. 102. x 

Wof VI. 122 ; IX. 20. Pt&npos IX. 6. 

rtyoff VI. 92. 

H7X1}* Fr. 26. 5. 

ri)<W IV. 16 sch. 

vita* II. 63 sch. 

vucaffcopia Fr. 48. 3. 

vacf; II. 43 sch., 106 Sih. 

328 INL 

w IV. 15 ; v. 1. VI. 1 15 ; VI. 180 ; v. 1. Fr. 
19. 24; Fr. 82. 32; IX. 47. 

puptrfo IX. 14. 
m*v II. 54. 


wettw 11. 54. 

p6fipa I. 3 ; II. 43 sch. 

p6pos II. I02. 

rop6s IV. 51. 

*6os V. 45. 

pmtpAs IX. 1 7 sch. 

rtfnoff IX. 17 and sch. 

wl. 5; VI. 121. 

^ VI. 58. 

£«4i VI. 6l. 
(wMcadip Frs. 129-31. 


6 demonstr., rw Fr. 19. 28. ry IX. 44. 

rot II. 59 ; IV. 42. ra km ra VI. 132. 
Mc II. 3; Fr. 82. 29. 
tfcfclV. 6; Fr. 16. 15; IX. 4. 
6&vrrjp6s I. I. 
o$€P Fr. 134. 5 sch. 
oifffur V. 42. 
oWcr IV. 32. 
ofafflcrof I. 4. 
oW IV. 45. 
olfios VI. 115. 

oW II. 3 sch., 43 sch., 55 sch. 
o*x«ctAm II. 55 ; IV. 61 sch. 
ot»pon6\os IV. 30. 
Ut& III. 10. 

3A0ofII. 60; VI. 133; IX. 9. 
Skiyof IV. 52. 
oXodff Fr. 82. 21. 
Skos IV. 45. 
6\(xf>vp€<r6cu IX. 21. 
'OXvpmof VI. I. 
"OXv/iirof VI. 92. 

'Ofufpos Fr. 17. 1 ; Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 
4uXo* VI. 108. 

Sppa IX. 2. 
<5/ivuwu VI. 112. 

3/ioio* II. 37 sch. 
o>*<i III. 94 ; V. 48. 
6ptf>dk6f VI. 16, 120. 
6p*wfios Fr. 134. 6. 
•(Wrip IV. 61 sch. (?). 
<3£<W II. 48 sch. 

dVopdftXuror VI. 1 23. 

oVicra VI. ioi. 

oVXo* Fr. 93. 4. 

oW II. 5 sch.; VI. 125 sch. 

4>o> I. 3 ; VI. 106. 

Jpcor Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 

6pwv€ur IV. II. 

'OpvoTpia&a IX. 47. 

'Oprvyta Fr. 1 9. 26. 

&pf>av6s VI. 9. 

& II. 79 sch. ; III. 95 sch. ; IV. 36 ; VI. 62 

sch., 77, 104, 113, 118 sch.; Fr. 82, 27; 

IX. 41. 
foot, oWo* VI. 87, 89 and sch. 
oWt VI. 63. 
forts Fr. 16. 14. 
Stw Fr. 86. 1. 
fa IX. 21. 
oi, ovk IV. 28, 53 ; VI. 94, 127 ; Fr. 19. 21 ; 

Fr. 86. 3. 
ov&t II. 55 sch. ; VI. 1 10, 1 1 1 . 
ottf/rlX. 21. 
auxin II. 55 sch. 

ov\6p*vof IX. 15* 

OVPffffP VI. 127. 

Ovpavfo Fr. 16. 10. 

OCT* VI. 105, 106. 

ovros II. 43 sch., 69 sch., 105 sch.; VI. 51, 
57; Fr. 16. 16; Fr. 82. 17 sch.; IX. 36 
sch. ; Frs. 129-31. 1 sch., 4 sch. ; Fr. 162. 
3 sch. ovTw Fr. 69. 1 sch.; Fr. 82. 35 sch. 

tytVtpot VI. 82. 

vaytr6s IX. 17. 

nar/KMPOS IX. IO. 

vaBa Fr. 82. 26. 

ndSos Fr. 82. 17 sch. 

vauiv II. 4, 35, 71, 107 ; V. 47 ; VI. 182. 

waiffaap VI. 121, 127. 

Uaioptt II. 61. 

worn II. 2; IV. 60 sch.; V. 44; VI. 12, 74, 

77(ir&), 83, 134; Fr. 28. 3. 
fraXoi II. 56; Fr. 19. 26. 
irdpncw IV. 47. 
irayantipvv Fr. 82. 24. 
ndpdnpos V. 45 sch. 
navrXXoff VI. 62. 
ndvOoos VI. 74. 
iravrfXip I. 5. 
navro&airof II. 43 sch. 

//. 841 


nap, irapd VI. 17, 120; IX. 17 ach.; Frs. 
I29-3 1 . 18, 19. 

naparvyx<H*t» II. 43 Sch. 
irapi\up IV. 24. 

napOwos II. 77, 100 ; VI. 54, 136 ; Fr. 26. 4. 

Uapts VI. 79. 
JIapvdfrinot II. 97. 
irripof IX. 6. 

*£* IV. 6; VI. 55, 132; Fr. 82. 32; Fr. 
84. 10 and sch., 15 sch.; Fr. 87. 3 ; IX. 21. 
Uatrupaa IV. 38. 
na<rx* iV IX. 21. 

varlfp VI. 56, 118 sch.; Fr. 21. 10; Fr. 82. 
8 sch.; IX. 45; Frs. 129-31. 9. 

WOTfHOt II, 2 Sch. 

narpU IV. 29. 

frnrpfcor VI. 106, 1 68 (?). 

wtdap VI. 86. 

*Mx* iV IV. 16 (?), 37. 

trfdiof IV. 16 and sch. 

nidov Fr. 82. 32 ; IX. 16. 

ircfcvfir IL 43 SCh. 

irtiOup VI. 13, 52; Fr. 19. 20. 

nctpap IV. 46. 

iFfXayo? Fr. 19. 24. 

frcXa* IX. 35. 

vMfantp IV. 43 ; Fr. 88. 1. 

fwdot IV. 53. 

ntvranoku IV. 1 3 sch. 

wttrpmpjpos Fr. 82. 26. 

mpauHLP Fr. 21. 9. 

frfpav II. 6l. 

Hipyapop VI. 96. 

ircp&u VI. 91. 

mpl IV. 58 ; VI. 62 sch., 95, 118, 125 sch. 

ntplakka IX. 48. 

ncpt&aiot IV. 51. 

Uiptrai II. 29 sch. 

rrrrpa II. 98 ; Fr. 1 9. 25. 

ItyXfiftat VI. 99. 

Urpnuk Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 

Uapito VI. 6. 

uiudapot Fr. 82. 3 sch.; IX. 1 sch. 
nWoi II. 97. 

fTMmfc VI. 85. 
frXdotr«fty II. 30. 
w\tjp*v Fr. 82. 17 sch. 
irXovrof IV. 46. 
trmr Fr. 96. 2. 
intof* VI. 50, 130. 

woirjfui IX. 37 SCh. 

noiwa VI. 172. 

irrfXfpof II. 43 SCh., 57 SCh., 59, 105; IV. 

40; IX. 13. 

vokifuos II. 30, 31 SCh. 

iroXiaoxor Frs. 1 29-3 1. 12. 

UoKias VI. 89. 

iroXufc Fr. 33. 3. 

frrfXw II. 3 sch., 29 sch., 48 sch.; IV. 13 

sch., 37 ; VI. 104 ; Fr. 99. 2 ; IX. 44. 
nokiTtvttp II. 48 sch. 
noMdxiVI. 182. 
vokv&apos II. 60. 
wokvprjkos V. 38 (v. 1. fapcptjXos). 
vokve II. 48 sch., 75 ; IV. 50 sch. 

noklKTKOKOf IX. I. 

ndkvorovos VI. 99. 

wovti* II. 66. 

irrfvw VI. 89; Fr. 16. 17. 

n6»rux VI. 83 ; IX. 47. 

v6pto* VI. 124; IX. 16. 

nopBfuk Fr. 139. 2 sch. (?). 

nopos Fr. 162. 2 sch. 

Uoct&av II. 2. 

rJo<reidaMOff II. 41. 

voTttftfo II. 73 ; Fr. 138. 1 sch. 

frort IV. 42 ; VI 73, 135 ; Fr. 82. 5 sch., 

28; IX. 41. 
irort II. 75; IN. 14. 
irorucvprur II. 45. 
ir&rvta IX. IO. 
not* VI. 18. 
irpdaatip Fr. 84. 1 2. 
Uptapot VI. 1 1 3. 
npiv I. I, 2. 
irpSVl. 89; VII. 15. 
irpo0«0dffi* II. 106. 
npoftofiios Frs. 129-31. 20. 
npo6vr]<rK€iP II. 56 and sch. 
np6Bvpo» VI. 134 sch., 135. 
npokiyti* II. 77 sch. 
npopaOtia Fr. 82. 35. 
npoirapotBw II. 70. 

ir/df II. 43 sch., 57 sch. ; VI. 1, 114 ; IX. 7. 

npovMiop Fr. 108 sch. (?). 

npoaraKTucm VI. 177 sch. 

irporpcrrtip Fr. 82. I O sch. 

wpoxjxbas VI. 6 ; IX. 42. 

irpvratns VI. 69. 

wpims II. 76; Fr. 107 sch. 


nrapos Fr. 1 6. 8. 

n^wv.l. VT. n8; IX. 43. 

Uv6* VI. 1 sch., 2. 

nvfoutfry VI. 72. 

iri/p II. 30 ; III. 95 sch. ; VI. 98. 

nms IV. 49. 

fair VI. 7 sch.; IX. 18. 
pim-tuf Fr. 19. 25. 
/xttw VI. 129. 

aapa IX. 1 3. 

aa/taunt* Fr. 82. 23. 

aatypw IX. 46. aartftpv* I. 10. 

<r«Xap II. 44 ; VI. 97. 

o-ftW&u IX. 5. 

arjfiahmw III. 95 sch. 

<r&W HI. 93; IX. 14. 

<rjruif<fj> I. 2 ; VI. 180. 

cictbts VL 1 7. 

cncXifyxfc Fr. 82. 31. 

crffoirfXoff IV. 21. 

crKoircfc VI. 94. 

2tcvp6$** VI. 102. 

<r6s VI. 133. 

<ro#*a Fr. 16. 15; IX. 4. 

cro^rfr VI. 52. 

airrvdciv Fr. 82. 20. 

(mXdyxpop Fr. 82. 28. 

anopds V. 38. 

orocrtafeiv II. 48 sch. 

cmicrtf IV. 53 ; IX. 1 5. 

orSpytur IV. 34. 

OT€(M>V IV. I4. 

<rrt<f>avof VI. 13, 1 80 and sch. 

(rropaxa Fr. 82. 22. 

frrparwta-Bai Fr. 82. I O sch. 

vrparfa II. 73 sch., 75, 104 ; IV. 42 ; IX. 44. 

2rv£ Frs. 129-31. 4 and sch. 

<rv II. 3 (<rfor) and sch.; III. 13 (rfc); VI. 

1, 127; Fr. 82. 25; IX. 7, 43; Frs. 

129-31. 18 (riV). 
GvyyttKxa IV. 33. 
oTjfxtf>tp*w II. 57 sch. 
<rvfi<t>opot Fr. 26. 12. . 
<riJv II. 59, 74, 80; V. 18, 47; VI. 4. 55; 

Fr. 26. 4 ; Fr. 94. 3 sch. ; Fr. 112. 1. 
awayttp IX. 36 (inf. awaytv). 
<rvva<p*ia Frs. 1 2 9-3 1. 4 BCD. 
<rvv<px«r$ai VI. 125 sch. 

crvM^ttf VI. Il8 sch. 

<rvrr€u«i¥ IX. 49. 

owrikup II. 65. 

Ivptot Fr. 16. 7 • 

o^f ts 9 <npt(w) IV. 40 ; V. 40. op*** Fr. 84. 1 1 . 

(Tx*tev L 1 ; II. 73 ; VL 109. 

(T&t>fw>9 I. 10. iratypw IX. 46. 

Taprapot IV. 44. 

ravpos VII. 14. 

rctyor VL 98. 

ragvirovf II. IOO. 

raxvs Fr. 96. I (v. 1. Spaovs). 

rriptsIV. 47; VI. 57. 

Tfijcw II. 37. 

TfXtlr II. 65 sch.; Fr. 19. 30; Fr. 82. 25. 

rcXcW Fr. 82. 19 sch. 

reXcvraSof IL 105. 

rtXot Fr. 21. 7. 

rc/MVor VI. 1 20. 
TCcfc VL II. 

ripas IV. 39 ; Fr. 82. 34 ; IX. 10. 

Tfvx^ty VI. 132. 

Tt^wi IX. 39. 

Tc»r II. 3 sch., 29 sch. 

Tfftot II. 3 sch. 

T*X . . . IV. 61 sch. 

Tffvtpos IX. 41. 

Wctv IX. 48. 

tiMwu IV. 30 ; VI. 81, 99 ; IX. 3, 19. 
TiKT«tp II. 29 sch.; Fr. 82. 30; IX. 42; 

Frs. 129-31. 21. 
rtfid VI. 11 and sch., 118. 
rcr Fr. 19. 20; IX. 1. 
rtf I. 2; II. 31, 66; IV. 25, 60 sch.; VI. 

130 sch.; Fr. 26. 4 (?); Fr. 95. 2 sch. (?). 

5 sch.; IX. 6, 9, 13, 34; Frs. 129-31. 4 


Tiraprjaios FrS. 1 2 9-3 1. 4 Sell. 

rXa* II. 64. 

r6Bi VI. 15. 

tm IV. 21, 40 ; VI. 70 (?), 132. 

roufcrdc Fr. 82. 23. 

roiovror II. 43 sch. 

TOKtvf II. 57. 

roXficw VI. 94. 

T6papos VI. 109. 

ro£o0dpor Fr. 1 9. 30. 

r6nos II. 5 Sch., 69 Sch. 

r&rt VI. 137. 

//. 841 


rpaxys II. 32. 

Tfxlv IV. 40. 

rpcirciy II. 43 8ch. ; IX. 9. 

TfMovs IV. 43. 

rpo^o? II. 63; VL 14. 

Tpvia VI. 75. 

Tvy\av*iv II. 76. 

rv<t>\6s Fr. 16. 13. 

Tw^a Fr. 21. 8. 

vPpcfctr II. 48 sch. 

vd»p VI. 7 and sch., 134 ; IX. 18 and sch.; 

Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 
v\As IV. 38, 61 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 21; Fr. 

152- *• 
vfUTfpw V. 46 ; VI. 139 ; IX. 37. 
vfir... Fr. 21. 10. 
vfufur IV. 4 sch. ; Fr. 94. 1 sch. 
vftpos Fr. 16. 5. 

vnarruifap II. 32. 

vntp II. 63 sch.; VI. 62; Fr. 84. 14, 15. 

vmpyawav III. 95 sch. 

{mepraroi II. 68 ; Fr. 86. 4 ; IX. 2. 

vntp<t>aTOf IX. 15* 

vnvaXcor Fr. 82. 34. 

vw6 Fr. 82. 28 ; Fr. 90. 4 ; IX. 34. 

vfTo/irrfur II. 65 sch.; Fr. 144. 2 sch. 

\m<rri6«rdai II. 43 sch. 
bfrUs II. 98. 

tytKO/iO* VI. 95. 
tytXTTOS II. 38. 
Uf(5^111. II. 

^atwfcUL 17; VI. 126. 

^a/pcir Fr. 19. 25; Fr. 90. 2. 

<t>a¥*p6f VII. 13. faiKp&s Fr. 74. 2 sch. 

fpeyyos II. 68. 

<M*«* II. 33» 43» 57; IV. 25; VI. 76, 124 

sch.; Fr. 82. 29; IX. 13. 
<t>€p€fufkos v. 1. V. 38. 
$&W IX. 14. 
4>fo**iv II. 46 sch., 55 sch. 
*AW II. 55. 
<£iX... VI. 178. 
4>ika . . . VII. 7. 
tfwXctr VI. 67 (?). 
4>t\ri<ruTT€<f>avot I. 8. 
$t'Xunror I. 7* 

#Xw II. 31 ; IV. 33 ; VI. 12, 120. 

<t>Uy<t> II. 67. 

(^ootxcfercfa II. 77* 

tfxW VI. 86. 

(^opclv Fr. 19. 27. 

<t>pd(ui> Fr. 49. 1. 

4>p4» IV. 50; Fr. 16. 13; IX. 37. 

<£uXacr<m* VI. 91. 

^v/mi* II. 73 and sch. 

X&k*os II. 100; VI. 7 sch.; Fr. 90. 3. 

XaXtuoyfr III. 94. 

XoXKo6a>pa( II. I. 

XaXtcoKopviTTas VI. 1 08. 

XoXmSirvXor VI. 7 and sch. 

jrfpif II- 103; IX. 37. 

xdpiT« III. 2 ; IV. 13 ; VI. 3 ; Fr. 112. 1. 

Xao-pariotf VI. 7 sch. 

X^* II. 60; IV. 14, 42; VI. 16; Fr. 8. 
14; IX. 17. 

Xoptvttv IV. 2 (?). 

xApcvais VI. 9. 

Xop6s II. 99; III. I Ol. 

xpap Fr. 82. i sch. xpn II- 57- xp5 v VI. 96. 
W^f"* Fr* 82. 14 sch. 

Xf^pa VI. 1 18 Sch. 

xwvpfc Fr. 82. 9 sch. 

Yonarnotov VI. 71 : VII 


ftyot VI. 8 and sch. 

& VI. 125; Fr. 28. 2 ; Fr. 82. 24; IX. 2, 

* IV. 31,62. 

<fif) II. 102 sch., IX. 36 sch. 
mtc*av6s Fr. 84. 1 5 and sch.; IX. 43. 

*Qpat I. 6. 

&pUK III. 14. 

<J>f Frs. 129-31. 4 sch., 6 sch. 
itycXfta II. 37 sch. 



INDEX III. 842. 
Numerals in thick type refer to columns. 

ayafav 12. 28 ; 20. 34. 

dyavaxrii* 1. 9 ; 18. 24. 

oyyAAfi* 15. 3. 

&y€tv 17. 23; 19. 14, 20; 20. 15, 36; 21. 

4; Fr. 71. 5. 
'AyijcnXon* 5. 6, 47 ; 6. 1 4, 30, 40 ; 7. 1, 39 ; 

18. 33 ; 19. 18, 26, 35 ; 20. 4, 15 ; 21. 4, 


'Aypiat 1. 30. 

ayopd 6. 25; 11. 16, 19. 

dypds 14. 5. 

d&iKtlv 15. 10. 

6hp6raros 8. 7* 

«« 5. 39; 14. 31, 40; 16. 3; 20. 23. 

oiti a. 13. 

f A$fjvat 2. IO. 

•A^wuoi 1. 8, 15, 18; 2. 11, 23, 27, 31, 36 ; 

18. 1, 15, 22, 24, 30, 36, 40; 14. 14. 
'Ad^dr? 1. 2. 
alytakds 18. 1 8. 
Atytval. 23; 2. 35; 8. 6. 
aV*ir 1. 17 ; 6. 25; 10. 6(?); Fr. 13. 4 (?); 

15. 21; 16. 36; 19. 7. 
aurtiavtaOai 8. 32 ; 14. 28 ; 17. 23. 
Ataifiot 1. 16. 

atria 1. 18 ; 12. 38 ; 14. 24. 
curios 11. 36 ; 16. 9. 
aK€paio£ 20. 29. 

OKlV&Vv6TfpOV 7. 38 (?). 

okoKovBuv 17. 13. 

<ixo7ra>rfpa»r 21. 9. 

axovfiv 2. 36 ; 18. 23 ; 21. 36. 

*AKpai<f>tnoi> 12. 20. 

dicp6iro\is 17. 35. 

AXai{ . . ]»tou>v ? (gen.) 17. 33. * 

'AXtdpuoi 12. 17. 

akiaKtatiai 18. 32. 

*A«ra>*(?)8. 26. 

dXXd 6. 36; Fr. 11. 10; 12. 2; 18. I, 28; 

15. io, 20; 17. 8; 20. 8; 21. 8. dXX' fj 

5. 42. 
dXX?X<»* 12. 33 ; 14. 32. 
ctXXoff 2. 16; 6. 27; 7. 42, 43; 8. 41; 

Fr. 11. 9; 11. 26; 12. 13; 14. 3, 19; 

15. 29; 17. 11; 18. 21, 30; 20. 21. 
SKkas 5. 20 (?). 
Spa 6. 5 ; 1.6; 10. 2, 3 ; 18. 18, 19 ; 18. 

dpxf>L<rf$qTT)<Tipos 14. 25. 

1 Apxf)lwc\ts 2. 24. 

&p4>4r*pos 5. 43. 

a* 14. 28 ; 16. 7 ; 17. 20. 

dva&aivuv U. 20 J 15. 38 ; 16. 25. 

d«»y«» 1. 7 ; 6. 5 ; 15. 36. 

dpaipct* 20. 2. 

dvajrpdfciy U. 21. 

avaXa^Sdvciy 8. 32 ; 6. 39 ; 20. 17. 

avakitTKUP 12. 23; 16. 1 3. 

avanciOciv 14. 22; 16. 3 1. 

aAmipntiv 7. 22. 

dyaoTavpov^ 18. 22. 

dpax<»p*i* 15. 5, 30. 

dvdpdirodoi/ 18. 3 1 . 

'ApfyxurXft'dar 14. 6, 35 ; 15. 2 ; (-fy*) 18. 11 ; 

('Apdpoickrjs) 12. 34. 
a^P 8. 37 : 11. 22 ; 14. 22, 35 ; 16. 37. 
dv6apndfau> 14. 33. 

foBpamos 6. 26 ; 17. 16, 25. 

dviaravai L 15 ; 6. 5, II, 1 7 ; 19. 24 ; 20. 

27, 36. 

dro'Fr. 11. 13; U.33; 21. 15. 
Mot 12. 34. 

avrtkapfiavw 17. 2 1 . 

avTinpaTTttv 1. 27. 

*Awror 1. 16. 

*w 20. 37. 

££cor 21. 31. 

d^tovy 14. 40 ; 15. 6. 

dnayytKkuv 8. 43. 

«irdy«i* 6. 51, 53 ; 19. 36 ; 21. 5, 19. 

airayopcvci* 16. 20. 

anaWaTTtiir 2. 1 1 . 

Swas 1. 25; 6. 13, 33; 12. 6, 27 ; 18. 34; 

18. 15. 
drrarrj 12. 21 ; 15. 12. 
dnttXtiv 18. 23 (?). 
cnrfiirfiy 15. 6. 
dn*px€<r9ai 15. 32. 

///. 842 


*Airuw nt&iov 19. 2. 

ami*™ 15. 25 ; 10. 26. 

cfrrtorof 15. 8. 

6ir\£>s 12. 25. 

dmS 6. 15 ; 13. 35; 14. 17, 30; 16. 38 ; 18. 

2 ; 21- 32, 33i 37- 
airo&dXkctv 14. 33 ; 15. 29. 
anobiMvai 6. 31 ; 16. 32. 
dno$rjj<TKtiv 10. 20, 33. 
anoKpovcw 17. 28 (?). 
diroxrciwiy 1. 33; 11. 25; 18. 22, 29. 
an-oXa/j/Sdjtfiy 3. 1 8. 
airoXawu' 12. 26. 
airoXvciv 1. 1 8. 
ammtipaaBai 15. 26. 
dnowipww 1. 27 ; 8. 4. 
airoirXfur 17. 33(F) ; 18. I. 
ditdptirjros 20. 9. 
dir6pprjrot 1. 4. 
aircNrrcXXfur 1. 32; 7. 35 ; 16. 1 4 ; 16. 20 ; 

21. 10. 
anorUKpat 21. 34. 
airofavytur 20. 1 4. 
&nox*p*w 6. 29 ; 15. 1 9. 
< * 3ro X"P l 7 <ri( 16. 25. 
SnpoKTot 15. 14. 
An-ft? 17. 27. 
'Apyriot 2. 8, 16; 14. 13. 
dpyvpiov 13. 32 ; 16. 22, 23, 28; 21. 23. 
'AfHaiot 7. 23, 36, 37(?); 8. 24 ; 16. 27. 
apurra2. 19; 10. 1 8. 
-apos 3. If, 19, 30. 
Appoaryt 1. 22 ; 2, 36. 
&pnd(fi» 15. I. 
'Apra&p&is 7. 14 J 8. 5. 
'Apra^p^B. 37 (?). 
dpri 11. 28 
&PXW 1. 11 ; 4. 35; 18. 23, 36; 14. 20; 

21. 37. ap X »v 11. 25 ; 12. 2 1, 26 ; 16. 1 1 ; 

18. 25, 29. 
% Ap X *\ais 3. 22 ; Frs. 19. 8 (?), 20. 11 (?). 
<wrf3. 3°; 16. 11; 17. 36. 
'Aawl2. 35; (Aartat) 18. 1 3. 
daputvivrara 15. I. 
d(T(f>a\S>s 10. 12. 
&tm 6. 20 ; 13. 34. 
araicrvs 10. 7. ard*r»ff 6. 9. 
'Attu^2. 39; 13. 33. 
•Arrija'C«*12. 38; 18. 4(?). 
aiBts 6. 39; 15. 19. 

AvXU 13. 25. 

avr<tfi 18. 3. 

ainopopos 10. 5. 

<rir<fc L 3, 5, 17, 33; 2. IO, 13, 18; 8. 2\ 
29, 42 ; 5. 31 ; 6. 3, 7, 8 (?), m/^o, 21, 
22, 25, 27, 36, 405 7. 17, 20; 8. 7, 39; 
11. 15, 20, 28, 35; 12. 23; 18. 11, 20, 
24 ; 14. 1, 3, 9, 15, 22, 34, 40 ; 15. 4, 8, 
11, 12, 26, 39; 16. 17, 27, 32; 17. 7, 
20, 28, 38; 18. 5, 15, 16, 29; 10. 4, 5, 
8, 12, 13, 16, 29, 35; 20. 9, 12, 13, 17, 
19, 20, 26; 21. 11, 15, 24, 32, 34. 
avrow 8. 3, 19; 6. 30; 20. 36; 21. 14. 
6 avrds 3. 23 ; 12. 19 ; 10. 28, 36. 

atrov 8. 4; 6.18(?); 11. 12; 18. 17, 35 J 
14. 39; 15. 7, 32; 16. 14, 21, 36; 18. 
7 ; 10- 33- 

(tyloiw 10. 3. 

(tyiowurAu 15. 34 ; 18. 28 ; 20. 24, 29 ; 21. 

20; Fr. 29. 3. 
d<f>iardrai 2. 3 1 ; 6. 22. 
d<f>oppd* 5. 27. 

pa&iC*u>6. 3, 22, 38, 50; a 15(0; 12- *9; 
15. 7, '5 ; 17. 35 ; 18. 36 ; 21. 35, 39. 

/3aiWl8. 19(F). 

0dAAfurl7. 28(?); 18. 25. 

Pdpfapos 5. 24; 6. 6, 12, 18, 23, 28, 39; 

8. 42; Fr. 11. 9; 14. 12; 16. 21. 
pap*m 18. 24. 
paaiXtvs 1. 30 ; 8. 27, 41 ; 7. 4, 18; 8. 35, 

38; 14. 11; 16. 4, 9, 19, 26; 18. 6; 

10. 6 ; 21. 23 ; Fr. 33. 4. 
pauiXucds 18. 30. 
/3cXT«m>r7. 38; 12. 31. 
/SfXnW 13. 28. 

/SidfcaAw 10. 10; 20. 34; Fr. 18. 4. 
BiBwis 2L 9 (?). 
/Si'ck Fr. 11. 11. 
fioap IX 23. 
poffitta 11. 24. 

frni$*i* 14. 39 ; 15. 3 ; 17. 24. 
Bot»rdpxns 12. 15. (-*<*) 12. 10, 22. 
Bouoria 11. 39; 13. 8, 24; 14. 6. 

Boun-o/ 2. 3, 8, 16; 11. 34, 37 ; 12. 7, 30; 

13. 12 ; 14. 19, 38; 15. 3. 7> 9» 3*- 
frvXrcrdat 3. 1 7, 39 ; 6. 36; 7. 44; 1L 4. 

9; 14. 8; 15. 37 ; 17. 10, 34; 18. 2, 7, 

11, 37; 10. 11. 
(OovXfVfo-Oai 5. 55. 


/SovXcvrqc L 12 ; 12. 22. 

/SouXrJ L 4 ; 11. 39; 12. 3; 18. 12. 

/9i/0Xc'or 8. 37. 

W 1. 28, 35 ; 2. 7, 22 ; 8. 13 ; 4. 42 ; 6. 
43; 6. 19; 10. 19; 11. 36; 18. 15, 31 ; 
14. 3, 14, 19; 16. 2; 18. 7, 12; 19. 5; 

20. 18 ; Fr. 18. 2. 
y* 18. 28; 17. 31. 
ycWl6. 37; 20. 11, 36. 

W 6. 33- 

yiy*€*6ai L 8 ; 2. 2, 18 ; 6. 27, 52 ; 10. 17 ; 

11. 35; 12. 6, 39; 14. 24, 31; 17. 37; 

18- I3> 3 8 ; I®. 9, 26 ; 20. 17 ; 21. 33 ; 

Fr. 71. 3. 

yiypwiKti* 6. 58. 

y\laxp*>f 16. 6. 

y»»iui 1. 2 ; 17. 19. 

yvvpifios L 9. yvapifturaros 12. 3 1. 

T6pdiov 20. 29. 

T^t 2L II. 

yvpvfjTTjs 6. 20. 

AaowXioy 21.-21. 

Aacnct/Xim Xifitnj 21. 21. 

AavXta 15. 1 9. 

AavKuH 15. 1 7. 

dc'ica 21. 14. 

A<«ecXcia 18. 16, 29. 

A(K€\€lk6s ir6\tpos 2. 2 1 ; 16. 5. 

AfpftvXideiot 10. 23. 

&T)\oi>v 12. 25. 

AtfpauHTos 1. 3, 24 ; 2. 38. 

trjiAOKparia 1L 31. 

tffwil. 2, 13; 12. 39. 

bfiporucfc L 20 ; 10. 2 1. 

V** 14. 37 ; 10. 8. 

*« 2. 33, 37 ; 6. 41, 42 ; 7. 19; 10. 7 ; 18. 

14, 20; 14. 10, 21; 15. 16 ; 16. 8, 18; 18. 

32, 36; 10. 12, 14, 17, 25; 20. 19, 35; 

21. 6,9, 16, 28. 

dca/SaiVci? 6. 49. 
haPaMttwl. 10; 16. 
di^yciy 21. 3 1. 
Aury6p*iot 11. IO, 25. 
dtadi^Xovy 17. 1 1. 
dtadMvai 18. 30. 
toafloois 17. 30. 
dtddoxos 15. 34. 
IkaifM* 12. 9. 


duiffcurAu 2. 17, 19 ; 7. 42 ; 18. 5 ; 14. 40. 

duucfouH 16. 22. 

duucuXi/fij' 17. 22. 

&aXcyf<r&u 1. 37. 

duikv€iM 14. 32. 

diaXvcnr 16. 34. 

diavocty 14. 1 6. 

diaaoptiv 18. 40. 

dicuroptv«r$<u 6. 43. 

dunrparrciy U. 26 ; 12. I. 

tUapird(*iP 14. 29. 

dun-fiVccy 21. 36. 

durrtXc Iw 12. 7. 

6taTpi&civ 3. 19; 8. 26; 18. 16; 20. 11. 

dca^tff ^xcy 14. 9; 10. 20. 

&ia<f>6opd 11. 10. 

dutyo/x* 2. 18. 

MdaKfip L 16. 

dt&faul6. 21, 38; 17. 21; 18. 7. 

du(ipX*<rOa* 6. 40. 

dufapcu 2L 9 ; Fr. 36. 3. 

dunmrfs 12. 27. 

Maj 14. 31 ; 17. 21. Cf. 12. 27. 

dtb&w 10. 1 1. 

dioutcu' 12. 7. 

AurXaaio? 18. 27. 

3«rx»XicH 21. I2(?). 

fc X «7. I0(?), 

AtoKar 2. 38 ; 6. 16 ; 10. 27, 32. 

divfrs 6. 22. 

doxfty 10. 23 ; 12. 6 ; 15. 26. 

M*»10. 28(?). 

&p6fun 6. 1 2. 

dvrapir 10. 12 (?); 16. 1 5. 

dwaatfcu 1. 23 ; 6. 19 ; 11. 21 ; 18. 9 ; 18. 6 

20. 35 ; 21. 18. 
dvva<rrcvf tv 10. 19; 18. 18. 
dwartft 5. 27 ; 7. 36. 
bwriiams 2. 6, 1 6. 

dvo 2. 24 ; 12. n f 12, 15, 16 ; 16. 38. 
bvapfj 18. 12. 
Avpifiaxot 11. 19. 

fav & 36; 15. 9; 17. 7. 
tap 21. 34. 
cyyvrcpos 5. 41. 
JyKttaOat 6. 1 7. 
hykXrjfia 2. 1 8. 
iyXUpciv 11. 18. 
eyX^tpidiov 11. 19, 24. 

///. 842 


ftta', cfodeW 6. 7; 11. 14, 20; 16. 16; 17. 


IOkx 12. 29 ; 14. 8, 25. 

ZBos 16. 3. 

ill. 17; 15. 10; 16.8; 18.6. 

ccdcW 2. 5. 

cucoori 11. 8 ; 16. 35 ; 16. 22. 

emu 1. 10; 2. 14, 24, 29; 6. i ; 6. 10, 20; 

11. 12, 18; 13. 19; 14. 15, 25; 16. 27; 
16. 3, 6, 9; 17. 14, *7 ; 10- 5» «• »8, 29, 
34; 20. 1, 11, 16, 20, 36; 21. 9, 24, 31, 
39 ; Fr. 23. 1. 

clnelv 1. 23 ; 18. 5. 
tiprjmj 2. 12. 

cbL 6; 2. 24; 3. 6, 24; 6. 4, 6, 33, 38, 
44,47; *• a 3; U. !5> 19,24, 28, 34, 37; 

12. 5, 15; 18. 24; 14. 4, 22,23, 36, 38; 
18. 7, 16, 22, 32, 36 ; 16. 28, 31, 36 ; 17. 
31, 38 ; 18. 13, 31, 34, 39 ; M. 3, 22. 3©» 
38 ; 20. 8, 9, 15, 23, 28, 38 ; 21. 29, 31, 

34, 35. 
<ir 12. 10, 17. 
tlafiaivtw 17. 30 (?). 
tlafOaWfi* 10. 3. 
ucmrjday 11. 24 ; 17. 25. 
*i<rn\€~i» 8. 35 ; 21. 29. 
€t*<t>€pcu> 12. 5. 
tlafopd 12. 26. 
«L6; 2. 13, 21 ; 6. 1 1, 17 ; 1L 29 ; 18. 

25, 33; 15. 4, 3 6 > 38; 16. 13, 23; 17. 

16; 18. 15, 28; 21. 39. 
inaoros 6. 12 ; 11. I ; 12. I, 4, IO, 19, 24 ; 

16. 38; 18. 19; 19. 25. 
Uartpoi la 6, 8 ; 14. 27, 30. 
Ucn6v 12. 25 ; 20. 4. 
<«: 8. 12; 6. 52; 21. 2. 
cTrctft 21. 25. 
<K<~iros 2. 2, 22, 25, 40; 8. 4; 6. 16; 7. 19; 

10. 7 ; Fr. 12. 5; 11. 13, 23 ; 12. 14; 13. 

9; 14. 10, 34, 39; 15. 6; 17. 13, 19; 

18. 32; 20. 21 ; 21. 4, 29. 
<KKkti*ia 11. 28 ; 16. 36. 
iianfiay 10. 29. 
iicwMv 1. I ; 11. 9. 
*K*ok*povv 2. 7 ; 14. 7. 

€K<f)*p*t9 16. 9. 

*EXAr*ia 16. 23. 
eXArruv 5. 16. 
'EXAci* 18. 37 ; 14. 20. 
ikktinuv 15. 28. 

'EXkri* 5. 14, 28, 38 ; 6. 7, 13, 29, 38, 44 ; 

7. 8; 14. 4; 17. 8 ; 18. 7, 15; 10. 28, 

32 ; 21. 16. 
'£XA^nroiTof 18. 34 ; 21. 27. 
4<0rfXXct* 8. 1 ; 14. 23, 37 ; 16. 15; 20. 8. 
itfokn 11. 38. 

JflfXfWtlP 18. 37. 

Ipnpoafor 1. 25 J 18. 12, 39. 

«V2. 10, 32; 6. 31, 46; 11. 3, 6, 36; 12. 6, 

31 ; 13. 5, 7, 16, 38 ; 15. 1 1 ; 16. 25 ; 17. 

19 ; 18. 23 ; 10. 34, 37 5 Fr. 30. 3. 
fnom'or 2. 9. 
cVomouoAu 1. 33. 
tocia 16. 18. 
cV&ir21. 7. 
frdcca 11. 26 ; 12. 8. 
Mbpa 6. II, 17; 10. 22, 30, 37. 
tvfdprvftv 10. 29. 
mica 2. 19; 20. 18, 22. 
I>tavr6t 5. 56 (?). 
frtoi 6. 3. 
cVt'ort 16. 14. 
burnipai 8. IO ; 16. IO. 
evoacctv 18. 37. 
ffVri&W 21. 30. 
c£ 20. 32. 
cfiyciy 18. 1 5. 
€(ai<t>prjs 10. 32. 
c'fut&rcot 6. 2i; 17. 24(F). 
*(aiiapra»*tv 17. 20. 
*$aaKchr 18. 40. 
cffiwu (?£«m) 2. 20; 12. 2. 
€$t\avwfUf 18. 26. 
€$£pyaC*(r6ai 11. 30. 
%<aA» 17. 15. 
*£*">{"" H« 2. 

tfcrcuTfits 11. 8, 13. 

Ifproira 12. 22 J 18. 21. 

c(uW17. 17. 

1^5. 34; 18. 16. 

cirayytWuv 14. 1 3. 

ciraifxtv 2. 34. 

cmucoXou&ir 5. 14: 6. 9, 1 8, 39. 

eiraKScmuriff 11. 33. 

ardpxcu, 20. 35. 

cW 18. 2 ; 16. 4. 

tntt&dp 16. IO. 

&w*9 1- 5> 37; *• 4o; 6. 10, 43; 7. 21; 

17. 14; 18. 38; 10.9J 20 -34. 
eirccra 18. 6; 18. 16; 20. 12, 19. 

33 s 


ini 1. 28 ; 2. 12, 23 ; 8. 1 ; 6. 22, 50 ; 10. 

5; Fr. 12. 7; 11. 20, 22; 15. 15; 16. 

26; 17. 31; 18. 20; 20. 30, 33. 
tni&arrjsie. 35; 21. 26. 
cVi^ovXcucur 21. 15. 
tin&iuantwai 6. 8 (?). 
briditevai 18. 20. 
fTrifixTjs 1. 19. eniMuc&s 15. 27. 
cVifvoi 6. 37, 53 ; 18. 13 ; 19. 22 ; 21. 35. 

*n6tyfiVl. 35; 2. IO; 17. 19. 

Artdvpyrur&ff 20. 1 8. 

'Eirucpan;* 1. 35. 

itFikapfMuHiv 17. 1 7. 

€ni\oiiros 16. 1 2. 

rirififArurAit 11. II*, 21. 27. 

cnu*ptuf 14. 27. 

fVMrroXj} 7. 22 ; 8. 18, 36. 

cirm&rcrcfi- 12. 23. 

nrtrc&xifcu' 18. 29. 

cWioVwu 14. 18; 19. 27. 

intxaptiv 8. i ; 6. io; 11. 7 ; 14. 21 ; 15. 

fanuHfotoft 16. 29. 
epyov *• 7> *8- 
c'pc<V2. 27; 12. 32. 
'EpvBptu 12. 12; 18. 2 5. 
?PX«r6\i4 3. 42 (?); 18. 4; 21. 8. 
'E<nre/>toc Aotpoi 14. 23. 
haiptia 18. 6. . 
mpor 2. 25; 12. 17; ia 18, 26; 14. 29; 

20. 9 ; 21. 8. 

CrOI440f 18. 4. 

fro* 3. 10; 1L 37. 

fvbcupovia 13. 21. 

cvtpytTU* 18. 20. 

cvoYw 18. 21. fvdvr 14. 33. 

cvXoyw 16. 19. 

Etfrpiprcr 12. 1 6. 

ifJHardvai 16. 1 2. 

?X«»- 1. 19, 36 ; 2. 6, 22, 30 ; 4. 41, 42 ; 5. 

26; 6. 35; 7. 39; 1L 38 ; 12. 38; 18. 

1, 2(?), 14(F), 27; 14. 18; 16. 13, 20, 

22 ; 20. io, 19; 21. 27. 
1 K 6pa 11. 35 ; 14. 24 ; 20. 12. 
€ X 6p6sl4t. 15. 
car 19. 37. 

(nr*a>2. 15. 

if 5. 42 ; 6. 50 ; 14. 2 ; 20. 4. 

i 19. 38. 

hiatal 5. 17(F); 12. 33 ; 17. 15; 19. 31 ; 

?yffUM> 20. IO, 20. 
4&j 15. 33; 18. 12. 

f»u> 11. 29 ; 20. 15 ; 21. 34. 

9X40* 18. 12. 

^pa 6. 5,31,52; 8.6; 11. 2, 13; 12. 23; 

18. 12, 13; 19. 19; 20. 6, 32; 21. 14. 
ri<rvxla 2. II ; 19. 19. 

Gakarra 6. 47 ; 21. 6. 

Bdtros 2. 31. 

&u> 6. 12. 

Otpatrcvcw 20. 12. 

depot 8. 9 ; 1L 34 ; 20. 8. 

earwuis 12. 16. 

erfiai 11. 36 ; 12. 15, 31 ; 18. 5, 28 ; 14. 6 ; 

16. 4. 

eif/Siuoi 12. Ii; 18. II, 20; 14. 9. 

Brj&rjs ircoW 19. 2. 

e/a#Hl2. 17. 

Gopuufc 2. 39 ; 8. 1. 

Mpv&osl. 7, 12; 18. 27. 

QpaovfiovXos 1. 1 6. 

Bvtw 6. 49. 

foot 2. 18 ; 12. 7 ; 16. 13. M* 1. 2 (?)• 

tiwai U. 22; 19. 30. 

Upfa 6. 52. 

'Upvwvfios 11. IO. 

Ifidnop 8. 27. 

fra 2. 13 ; 5. 52 ; 11. 3; 14. 9 ; 16. 21. 

ftnrcvff 5. 2, I5(?); 6. 1 6, 20; 7. 41; 12. 

25; 21. 12. 
•icr/AJji-c'a* 12. 34, 37; 18. io; 14. 7, 35; 

15. 2. 
iorvpcu 6. 32, 
laxvtiw 18. 6. 
Iaxyp6t 15. 27. 

Ka&fuia 12. 30. 
KaOarr€p U. 14. 
jeaoVXxvw L 6. 
Ka0Tjy*ti<i>p 20. 5. 
KoBrfoBcu 7. 40. 
Jta#f<4* 19. 22. 

Ka6iardpai 6. 24 ; 11. 31, 35, 39 ; 16. 26 ; 18. 

25; 20. 13. 
KaOopav 5. 28 ; 6. 14 ; 19. 33. 

///. 842 


Kai yap 18. 12. 

tempos 6. 10 ; 11. 18 ; 15. 1. 

KQlTOi 2. I. 

ffomfc 12. 28 ; 15. 31 ; 17. 37 ; 18. 36 ; 10. 

8; 20. 14. Ktucm 6. 37; 18. 4, 38; 16. 

3; 2O.9; 21. 14. 
xaXtlv 20. 25. KaKovfitpog 7. 2 ; 14. 23 ; 10. 

3, 10, 23; 21. 18. 
kq\6s 6. 52 ; 20. 16. Kak&t 20. 31. 
Kcnnradoicta 21. 35. 
Kapcr 18. 8, 1 4. 

Kapiraa-fvs 16. 37 ; 17. 1 1, 1 6, 22, 27 ; 18. 21. 
Mard 2. 21, 38; 6. 3, 8, 13; 7. 20, 39 ; 11. 

1, 38; 12. 18, 22, 23, 25; 18. 7, 40; 14. 

5; 15. 21; 16. 1, 4, 11; 17. 14, 17; 10. 

9, 29; 21. 13. 
KarafidKktip 6. 21 ; 10. 1 6. 
Karapipafriv 6. 43 \ 20. 7. 
Karaytiv Fr. II. 1 3 ; 18. 4; 21. 1 3. 
OTaftvyruKu 10. 1 8 ; 20. 31. 
Karaipttp 8. 22 ; 18. 38. 
KaraXafifidtm* 6. 1 9, 23 ; 20. 1 3. 
Karakuntur 8. 3; 16. 28 ; 18. 23, 27. 
KaraXvfip XL 30 ; 14. 9 ; 16. 7, 14 ; 17. 36. 
KtrrapavBavtip 2. 20. 
Karavtfutp 5. 53. 
jcannrcfurciy 16. IO. 

Karawktw 2. 25, 30; 8. 12 ; 15. 36 ; 16. 30. 
KaTairXffTTfiv 1. 12 ; 6. 28. 
Kara*Ktva(cu> 8. 14 ; 18. 37 ; 20. 30 ; 21. 22. 
KaraaKfVT) Fr. II. 1 5 (?) J 18. 33. 
Karaaiajpovv 10. 38. 

xaraaTparoircdfwu' 6. 47 ; 10. 39; 21. 2, 24. 
jcararpcjtcii' 15. 22. 
Kara<f>popup 5. 30. 
Korfpx^&ai 17. 5 (?). 
xarc'x<u' 17. 20 ; Fr. 31. 3. 
Karrjyopia 14. 38. 
xaroucfiv 18. 34 ; 15. 24. 
Kavpia Xiftprj 8. 35. Kavpios norap6s 8. 34. 
Kavvos 8. 24 ; 11. 9 (?), 29 ; 15. 36, 39 ; 18. 

31 ; 18. 8, 29. 
Kavarpiov ntdlop 5. 8. 
KuaBm 6. 42 ; 7. IO. 
KfXaW 6. 45, 50. 

Kg\€V€t» 18. 10, 18 ; 10. 4 ; 20. 37 ; 21. 3a 

Ktpafu* 13. 35. 

Kt^aXoi, A€6vtup K. 20. 25. 

Kc'tfxiAo* L 35. 
Ktjpvfll. 21 ; 20. 1. 

KtfpVTTtlP U. 20; 18. I9. 

KiXwc/a 8. 25 ; 21. 38. 

KlpdvPtVUP 16. I7. 

Kiy&vyos 1. 17 ; 18. 31. 

Kiof 21. 13. 

Koaxfc 2. 14; 12. 26, 30. 

jcotyot/y 1. 3. 

Kopibj) 16. 6. 

Kopi&ip 17. 9. 

K<W 1. 7, 29 ; 8. 31, 36 ; 11. 28 ; 15. 32 ; 

16. 16, 30; 17. 3, 5, 6, 15, 18, 25, 29, 
3<>(?); 18. 3, 25, 28,32. 

KopivSioi 2. 14; 14. 13. 

KoppavrA&as 12. 35. 

Kopupfls 12. 18. 

xoityo? 6. 15. 

Kpartiv 8. 2. 

Kpdrog 15. 21. 

Kparvvtw 5. 20 (?). 

KToaOai 12. 2. 

Kufiiof 20. 15; 2L 32. 

Kwrptorie. 30; 17. II, 21, 26, 35 ; 18. 4, 20. 

Kwrpo* 17. 33. 

KVplOS 12. 6. 

Kv/kw 16. 8. 

«£ot 10. 27, 34 ; 20. 5. 

K&irai 12. 20. 

Aaxf&u/Mfaoi 1. II, 27, 32; 2. 6, 8, 17, 35; 
8. 20; 10. 28; 12. 37; 18. 15, 19, 23, 

3°. 39; I*. 8, 15, 20; ie. 6, M. 33; 16. 
5 ; 18. 35. 

AoKc&alpup 8. 2 1 . 

Aaiccoi>i(tiP 2. 20 ; 14. IO. 

Xa/i/3dm* 2. 28; 8. 39 J 6. 25; 7. 25 (?) 

11. 8, 33; 14. 4; 15. 10, 15, 20, 38; 16. 

23; 18. 10, 13; 21. 19; Fr. 36. 2. 
Atfiadth 12. 18. 
Xcyciy 1. 4, 10 ; 2. 2 ; 8. 34 ; 15. 8 ; 16. 17 ; 

17. 32 ; 20. 18; 21. 23. 
Xtijkarttp 10. I ; 20. 23, 28. 
Xuncip 8. 25. 

Afomdfy* 12. 35, 36; 18. 13. 
A*6ptvp Kc^aXai 20. 25. 
Ac&pvfus 18. 5, IO. 
Xiar 6. 19. 
XiBot 11. 20. 
Xijii}* 11. 3, 15 ; 18. 26. 
XifuniB. 35; 21. 21, 29. 
X<*ye*14. 31; 17. 7> 39- 



Aoiirfc 11. 23; 18. 31; 19. 8. 

hoKpis 14. 36 ; 15. 4. 

Aojcpo* 14. 28, 32, 37; 15. 3. Aoic. € E<nr€- 

pioi 14. 23. 
Avbla 8. 42 (?) ; 7. 21 ; 18. 36. 
Avdoc' 6. 41 ; 7. 3. 

Mayptycrta 7. 40. 
Maiay&pos 6. 45 ; 7. 2. 
Majrcdopi'a 8. 29 (?). 

paXurra 1. 36 ; 2. 20 ; 7. 18 ; 11. 36 ; 19. 9 ; 

20. 17. 

f*5XXov 2. 33 ; 5. 41 ; 7. 9 J 13- 3, *7- 

fjujx.c<r6ai 5. 22. 

p*m 8- 4> 28. 

Mcya/Sanp 20. 1 6. 

mowL 7; e-34; 18. 31. 

P*$utt6pcu 2. 15. 

fuipaxtop 20. 18. 

pfXAfi* 7. 28 ; 18. 32 ; 17. 32. 

jifVL 19, 21, 28; 2.8, 15, 22; 8. a, 9; 8. 

7, 21, 25, 27, 28; 10. 2; 11. 3, 15, 20; 

12. 11, 14, 24, 34, 36; 18. 18 ; 14. 9, 17 ; 

15. 13, 19, 29; 18. 32; 17. 14; 18. 11, 

22,24,35; 19.3i; 20.1,11,14, 18,32; 

21. 12, 14 ; Fr. 71. 4- V™ °&* 2 - 3 2 5 &• 
7, 19; 5. 4; 7. 1 ; 11. 32; 12. 21, 28; 

14. 5. 3°; I 6 - 3 1 ; 1°- "5. 2 4; 18. 3°; 

19. 6; 20. 21. 
fUvtiv 2. 39. 

pipot 12. 4, 9, 18, 21, 24, 33 ; 18. 9 ; 15. 23. 

fUaos 8. 42 ; 19. 9. 

M€(t<tt)vioi 17. 17, 23, 27. 

/i€to 1. 8, 24, 29 ; 2. 24, 30 ; 8. 5, 6 ; 8. 
17; 8. 24; 11. 24, 29; 18. 30; 14. 31, 
36; 18. 20, 30; 17. 19; 19. 4, 39; 20. 

fitraflaXXtip 19. 36. 
fLCTa&ipdfciv 8. 4. 

fliTOKOfliCilV 18. 34. 

furairtfiVfUf 10. 2 2 \ 21. 2 5. 

Iiwr*x«v 1. 13; 12. 2, 27; 18. 8; 14. 14; 

li€ X pt 21. 38. 
Mc[. . .lawr (?) 7. 24. 

ri 1. 18 ; 8. 50, 51 ; 11. 3 ; I*. 9 ; io- s ; 

20. 13; 21. 6. 

fiTjKos 21. 38. 

/uj*' 18. 2. 

/upr, ov ft. 12. 39. ov fi. aXXa 18. 28. 

fxucpfc 11. 16 ; 18. 10, 32, 38. 

MlXqOYOt 8. 21 (?). 

MiXrjrov Ttlxos 21. 1 8. 

MiXoNrl. 22; 2. 35; 8. 6. 

/""»*» 2. 7, 34. 

iwr66s 8. 18 ; 18. 2, 21, 33; 18. 30; 21. 32. 

fjLUrOodorelv 18. 2. 

fiur6<xf>6pos 19. 23. 

fuW 2. 18; 18. 34 ; 18. 6. 

fAVfHOl 5. I 5. 

Mvaia 19. 3; 21. 1 3, 33. 

Mvaios'OXvfiffXK 19. IO. 

Mwroi 19. 4, 5» 6 > *3. 24, 3 1 J 20. i ; 21. 15. 

vavap\ia 8. 28. 

rauapxos 1. 32 ; 8. 21 ; 15. 34 ; 21. 26. 

rav/tax*** 2. 26. 

ww 1. 6, 28 ; 8. 2, 3, 24 ; 15. 33 ; 18. 17. 

pavrrjs 8. 4* 
v*Kp6s6. 31; 20. 3. 
v*p*tr 7. 3. 

1*0* 20. l6. 

vt&ptov 8. 14. 

nv&aoiftof 1. 7. 

rijtrag 2. 23. 

yucaj' 2. 26. 

Nuntyi/fiof 1L II. 

w>m*C«» 14. 17 ; 15. 8, 10; 19. 

w£ 5. 59. 

EcvoKXrp 8. 2, 9. 
(vXov 18. 35. 

ay&Hpcomra 15. 30. 

oydoor 8. IO. 

ftc 8. 9. 

ou<r&u 14. 10; 19. 25. 

obcuv 12. 9. 

oIkt)<tis 14. 2. 

otWa 18. 36. 

o«o6ty««v 8. 1 1 ; 14. 2 ; 20. 30. 

3Xiyw 5. 45 ; 11. 32 ; 15. 20 ; 18. 1 1, 25. 

dXiyopt'tv 18. II. 

6\6k\tjpos 18. 21. 

3Xos 12. 29. 

¥ OXv/iTrof 19. 10; 21. 16. 

opotorlO. 13. 6/i0mw5.4o(?); 12.28; 17.37. 

SfioXoyiiv 7. 18. 

fantrfov 6. 39. 

JirXinp 5. 60; 12. 25. 

ftrXop 1. 28 ; 11. 2, 6, 15 ; 14. 36 ; 15. 15* 

, 20. 

///. 842 


6n6aos 18. II. 

dirrfrf 7. 34 ; 16. 5. 

Snort pos 14. 28. 

faov 8. 15. 

brat 1. 33 ; 2. 7 ; 17. 20 ; 21. 32. 

6pa» 6. 12; U. 6, 8. 

6pyi{*<r6cu Fr. 21. 2 (?). 

6pfxap 8. 1 ; 10. 20. 
Spot 6. 9 ; 6. 42. 

*Opxop*ri<H 12. 16. 

& 1- 3*> 33 ; 3. 24, 26, 38; 6. 31, 45, 46, 

53; 7. 20,21,22; Fr. 11. 13; 12. 1, 18; 

18. 27; 14. 24, 26, 27, 33, 35; 16. 34; 

16. 3» 9i *9> 2 9 i 17. 20 ; 18. 8 ; 19. 38 ; 

20. 8, 25, 35; 21. 15, 21, 23, 26. 
foos 6. 36; 18. 35; 19. 6, 21, 23, 30. 
Samp 21. 8. Cf. ovntp. 
3rf 18. 15. 
M 2. 22. 

*n 1. 17; 2. 5, 9 ; a 3; 16- 17 ; 18. 5- 
od 1. 24, 37; 2, 5; 6. 16; 6. 19, 24; 10. 

19; 11. 36; 12. 1, 39; 18. 27, 28; 15. 

9; 16. 13, 19, 32; 17. 7; 19. 6; 20. 8, 

35; 21. 18. 
otoffr 1. 13 ; 5. 4 2 ; 14. 1 (?) ; 15. 20, 28, 29 ; 

18. 36 ; 20. 26. 
otonrorc 14. 18. 
ovmti 6. 35 ; 21. 8. 
olv. See fiiv oZv. 
ofrrtp U. 20. 
owrial. 19; 16. 23. 
o0rc 5. 29; 14. 19. 
otm 1. 8, 24, 34, 35, 36; 2. 30, 31, 33, 38 ; 

8. 8, 27; 6. 10; 6. 1 ; 7. 5; 8. 25; U- 

27> 33> 34 ; 12. 3» *> 8, 10, 23 ; 18. 17, 

14. 11, 14,16,18,21,25; 15.13,22, 24; 

16. 1, 9> i5» 23, 37 ; 17. 9 ; 18. 11, 18 ; 

18. 19. 35» 39; 20. 17, 21, 38; 21. 36. 

oiJr»(s) 11. 39; 12. 7, 21, 29; 18. 40; 

14.6; 16. 15; 18. 31. 
tyfiXccj' 16. 33. 
&XPP&* 21. 22. 

IlaymiXoff 21. 25, 28. 

wakai 2. 5. 

mSXiv5. 10; 6. 34; 12. 17; 16. 5, 30; 19. 

24, 3 6 ; 20. 29; 21. 15. 
vapd 2. 2, 25, 36; 8. 29(F); 6. 47 5 Fr. 12. 

5; 18. 11; 14. 1, 2, 12; 15. 11, 26; 18. 

14; 20. 11; 21. 20. 

irapayyekXtiv 9. 26. 

irapayetv 11. 1 5. 

napayiyvtaOai 8. 1 7 ; 6. 53 ; 16. 16; 21. 28. 

napabi&6vai 16. 27. 

irapatfaXfirrridtof 21. 1 7. 

irapaKokovSeur 17. 1 8. 

rrapcucopifciv 17. 34. 

TrapaXapfii'imv 9. 28(F) ; 18. 32 ; 15. 32 ; 17. 

napaWarrtiv 19. 2. 
napa(TK€vdCtiv 6. 5l(?); 1L 5; 14. 36; 16. 

33; 17. 29; 21. 34. 
napanoptvtaOat 18. 33. 
Hapanora/uoi 15. 1 7. 
frapara£iff 5. 1 8. 
napavrUa 20. 1 4. 
iraptdpot U. 12 (?). 

ira/mwul. 20; 7. 19(F); 11.6, IO, 13(F), 30. 
nap€'x€i9 12. 10, 15, 21 ; 14. 12 ; 16. 6 ; 18. 27. 
napuvat 18. 12 J 19. 1 4. 
Uapvacr<j6s 14. 26. 

vapotvvci* 1. 34 ; 8. 29 (?); 14. 34 ; 16. 11. 
nBs 7. 20 ; 11. 7 ; 12. 9 ; 18. 31 ; 17. 8, 29, 37. 
naa«t><pvT)s 8. 37 (?) ; 16. 27. 
ndax«" 18. 38; 20. 14. 
naveur 18. 9, 33. 
Ua(f>\ay6vfs 21. 5. 
Ila(p\ayovia 20. 38; 21. I. 
Ilfdtftff 15. 24. 

irt&ioy 6. 8, 14, 40; 7. 2 ; 15. 23 ; 19. 2. 
ir«£<fe 5. i6(?) ; 7. 41 ; 21. 12. 
irctfctr 1. 21 ; 14. 19; 17. 28; 21. 3. 
Utipaitvs 1. 6. 
ntXonopvrjaioi 5. 36; 6. II, 48*, 19. 15; 20. 

n-c/iircty 1. 22, 29; 2. 29 ; 6. 15 J 12. 18, 27 ; 

14. 12, 38; 15. 5; 19. 12; 20. 2; 

Fr. 71. 6. 
iron-* 2. 29 ; 21. 27. 

ntvrtvata 2. 2 2. 

rrfwTjjKovra 19. 21. 

ntpaiKi* 20. 27. 

ntpi 1. 4, 16, 34 ; 2. 39 ; 8. 8, 28, 30 ; 6. 4 ; 
7. 5, 40; Fr. 11. 12, 16; 11. 33; 12. 4, 
24, 3 6 » 37 5 18. 10, 13; 14.6, 17, 25, 26, 
35; 16. 23; 16. 29; 17.30; 18. 12; 19. 
21; 21. 15, 32. 

ntpHoravai 18. 1 6. 

7rtpifjuv€iv 6. 30, 52; 11. 12; 16. 24; 20. 
32; 21. 14. 



mpiopap 16. 14. 
UgpaffsS. 37; 20. II, 36. 
martvu* 17. 7» 
TtkarauU 12. 12. 

irXfi* 1. 7 ; 17. 33 ; SL 26. 

irXcurrof 18. 9. 

irXctW 21. 12, 32. 

irAiryijlS. 20; 19. 25, 34. 

irXj}doc 1. 15 ; 11. 27 ; 12. 3 ; 17. 12. 

nXqaiop 18. 1 8. 

nkt»6iop 5. 34 ; e. 35. 

vouv 1. 25; 6. 34, 37; Fr. 11. 14 ; 11. 7, 

32 ; 12. 27 ; 18. 4, 27 ; !*• 3^ ; 15. 20, 

25,3i; 1*3; 17. 38; 18.18, 36; 19. 7; 

2O.9, 26,33; 21-4, 7i*4. 19- 
noUfitiy 2. 12; 18. 15; 14. 20, 26; 16. 4, 

iroXe/uoff 2. 28 ; 5. 18 (?) ; 6. 10, 18, 32, 37 ; 

19. 30; 20. 32. 
irrfXr/MK 1. 11 ; 2. 21 ; 9. 18 ; 10. 17 (?) ; 11. 

4, 35; 18. 22, 32; 14. 14, 22; 16. 9; 
16. 5, 10, 28. 

irrfXir 1. 11, 18, 36; 2.32; 8.13; 12. 1, 12, 
19; 18. 14, 20, 29; 15. 18, 27; 17. 20, 
26; 18. 1, 15. 

iroXircta 11. 3 1. 

froXircvfcrdai 12. 29, 36. 

froXi'np 1. 5; 2. 9; 11. 22, 26, 31 ; 12. 2, 
32 ; 14. 16. 

iroXXdw 14. 27 ; 16. 7. 

ndXXi* 8. 21 (?); 16. 35. 

rrokvwfKtyfiovuv 2. 1 3. 

nokvs 1. 26 ; 8. i ; 5. 54 ; 6. 19, 25, 26, 40 ; 
10. 12; Fr. 11, 12, 15; 11. 36; 18. 7, 
19, 26; 14. 29, 30, 31; 16. 2; 19. 15, 
22 ; 20. 33. ol iroXXot 1. 20; 6. 20; 19. 

5, 33. iroXv adv. 2. 33 ; 18. 17, 21, 28. 
irokvTtktoTara 18. 37* 

noirixi) Odkarra 21. 37. 

noptia 6. 29 ; 6. 34 ; 21. 7, 21. 

noptutcBai 17. 14 ; 19. 12 ; 20. 38 ; 2L 3. 

nop6ttw2. 23 ; 6. 33 ; 16. 16; 19. 1 ; 20. 28. 

iremyufc 8. 34 J 6. 45, 49 ; 21. 20. 

irorc'14. 26, 29, 40. 

n6repa 6. 49. 

Uorviai 18. 26. 

wov 2. 27. 

vpayiM 1. 4, 14, 26 ; 2. 15; 8. 38 ; 11. 12, 

38; 12. 4; 14. 5, 17; 16. 12; 16. 12, 

1 8, 26. 

npa(is 8. 11 ; 11. 17 (?); 17. 3»- 

irparrftv 18. 29 ; 14. 1 1 ; 15. 29. 

npiafivs L 29 ; 14. 38 ; 16. 5. 

Ilpifa 6. 47. 

uptV 18. 13. 

wpo&ytt*2. 12; 6. 33; 14. 2i; 18. 39; 19. 

24 ; 20. 22, 27, 39 ; 2L 16. 
irpoaipcor 18. 3. 
npodarwp 16. 21. 
irp6&arov 14. 30, 33. 
irpofiovkevtiP 12. 4. 
vpo€pUP f wpo€iptj t Upot 2. 4, 32. 
wfxxpxtv&u 1L 38 ; 18. 7 ; 15. 22 ; 18. 32. 
npo€x*iv 18. 1 2. 

wpoBviua 16. 28; 16. 9; 18. 32 ; 20. 35. 
irp6$vfu>s 12. 38. wpoOvfuos 20. 22. 
wpoupcu 6. 44 ; 19. 9. 
7rpoKa&ja$ai 12. 4 (?). 
wptmkthf 8. 2 (?), 4. 
np6s 1. 7, 22, 32 ; 2. 17, 40; 6. 30; 7. 23, 

24; 8. 19; 12. 33, 38; 18. 21; 14. 32, 

40; 16. 6, 39; 17. 12,35; 18. 4, I7.3 8 ; 

19. 13, 34 ; 20. 13, 24, 26, 29, 32 ; 21. 

1, 17, 21. 
irpoo-ayyeXXcty 19. 35. 
ir/Mxraycu' 6. 37. 

vpoo-frdk\€iv 6. 33 ; 6. 7 ; 15. 18, 27 ; 2L 17. 
irpwrpokri 20. 26. 33. 
wpo<rtpx*<r0ai 16. 1 9. 
irpwrfcw 6. 13. 
vp6*0t 6. 38 ; 20. 28. vpfodtp 6. 6 ; 20. 6, 

irpoaofaiXtip 16. I. 
wpoarrkctr 2. 40. 
7rpo<moi€iaBcu 1. 1 3. 
ir/KHrraTTfiy 6. 35 ; 11. 11 ; 21. 34. 
irpAr^wpoff 18. 34. 
irp&rtpoe 17. 15," 19. 25, 39; 20. 8. irpo- 

T€pov 1. 32 ; 2. i, 19, 28 ; lL 37 ; 12. 13, 

32; 18. 10; 14. 26, 30. 
irp&ros 19. 31, 33. npvrop 21. 14. 
irvX7l7. 14, 17. 
trv»6dvt<yBai 6. 38. 
. . . ir[ . yparrp 1. 30. 

fo&ia: 14. II. 
'PaBcanjs 20. 35. 
pq&vp*iv 11. 3. 
. . . pvtit 8. 37. 

'Prf&oill. 5, 17, 27; 18. 28. 

///. 842 


•P&e* 11. 33 ; 16. 36; 17. 32 ; 18. 24. 

'Pvr&cucos 21. 20. 

2apd*ts a 30 ; 7. 36 ; 16. 25. 

aarpairia 7. 39. 

StdttPior 3. 26. 

2iva«n7 21. 39. 

2/ X ior(?)2. 26. 

Sicci^mu 12. 13; 13. 25. 

ottctyof 3. 3. 

ITKffVOf 6. 26. 

crioyin} 8. 42. 

(TKoniiv 2. 6. 

Sx&Xor 12. 12; 13. 25. 

Sirapriarqff 6. 2. 

antvdtip 19. 13. 

ItriBpadarrp 20.9, IO - &n0p& 20. 19, 37; 21. 2. 

<nroi£a/ 18. 37. 

cnrovdafrcy 14. 7. 

cnrovdaiW 6. 24. 

oTadcoi 6. 40. 

OTacnaffiv 12. 33. 

oraauuriifc 11. 37. 

araatoonjs 2. 8 (?). 

orcwfc 19. Ii; 21. 37. 

OT€Pox<opia 19. 18. 

artpyur 1. 19. 

arpartia 19. 7* 

ffrpcfew/ia 8. 5 ; 6. 23, 32, 46, 49 ; 6. 5, 15, 

33; 7. 45; 18- 34; 19. 1, 14, 24> 36; 

20. 7, 23, 27, 31 ; 21. 13, 32. 
arpaniyia 6. 21. 
<rrpanry6s 2. 27 ; 7. 6, 38 ; 16. 3, 26, 36 ; 

17. ii, 24; 18. 22. 
<rrparia 6. 41 ; 12. 24 ; 20. 20. 
arpariimis 6. 16, 36, 51 ; 1L 14 ; 16. 30, 39 ; 

16. 21,38; 17.13; 18. II, 19; 19. 17, 

21 ; 20. 6, 33, 37 ; 21. 10, 19, 25, 33. 
orparfatdov 8. 31 ; 6. 7, 12 ; 6. 23; 18. 

9, 16, 26, 31 ; 19. 38. 
orpartfc 7. I. 
ovyKaOtfctp 12. 30 
ovyKarapaunur 1. 5 (?). 
mikXafjL0a»tt¥ 1. 3 1 ; 18. 20, 29. 
crvXAcyny lL 1 8, 28; 14. 29. 
mpPau*u> 2. 5, 21 ; 8. 8; 6. 51 ; 16. 15. 
<rv/i/3aXXciy 12. II. 
ovfx&ouk*vfw 1. 21. 

<rvwa X <* 6- 49; 13- *1 1 !*• "» 34 1 !•• 5» 

8; is. 35; 19. 15; 20.39. 

wwuyyuvm 16. 37 ; 19. 32, 37. 

ovfAnapaaK€vd(«w 14. 1 5. 

avpviiTTfir 3. 1 5 ; 18. 29. 

avfiirKrjpovv 2. 26, 37 ; 8. 33 ; 16. 35. 

avfAwdhrtvtaBai 12. 1 4. 

<rvv 1L 2, 19. 

trvwaytuf 1. 12 ; 11. 27. 

<tvpoko\ov6<iv 6. 6; 17. 21. 

awafmdfcw 8. 28. 

enWfyMW U. 24 ; 12. 29. 

avwidcVat U. 1 7. 

<rvvc(oppav 17. 13. 

crvpcpx*<r6ai 1. 1 4 ; 18. 35. 

owcxcw 13. iy ; 20. 34. 

<rwurra»ai 1. 5 ; 16. 1 3. 

<rvpouu{ur 13. 24. 

awrarrtw 6. 25 ; 6. 35; 12. 8. 

OVVTtktiv 12. I 4. 

(rvvrplfbiv 16. 17. 

(rvarparevftp 19. 4. 

<ru^ 6. 26; 18. 14; 18. 14. 

tnj>ayfi 11. 30. 

cr</x$fya 20. 19; 21. 22. 

cr^tM* 1. 25. 

Sgoiyor 18. 26. 

cr&pa 16. 38. 

. . . tok6<tioi 6. I. 

rdXayrov 16. 22, 29. 

Taraypaloi 12. 1 7. 

rapdrrtitf 1. 26. 

rapaxn 18. 9, 27, 33. 

rdrrciy 6. 9 ; 6. 4. 

Ta X vt,b& ra X cW 2. 37; 16. 16 ; 21. 6, 28. 

ra^cwf 6. 24. rfjp raxitrrqv U. 23. 
T€i X otlS. 27; 16. 28; 17. 16. 
T*\i<rtjyopot 1. 31. 
rcXcvraior 19. 1 6, 28. 
rcXfvray Fr. 12. 4 (?). 
rcXor 11. 33. 

Ttrrapts 2. 25 ; 12. I, II. 
rrjptKavra 1L 6. 
Tifyawmyff 7. 20, 29; 8. 9, 16; 16. 38; 16. 

16, 24; 18. 38. 
TtfioKpanjs 1. 37. 
TtfuSXaor 2. 17, 
rifjM>pci<r$ai 1. 23. 
nr 2. 1, 23; 8. 2 (?); 10. 23; 11. 32, 36; 

12. 3; 13. 14, 32; 14. 22; 16. 10, 23; 

16, 20, 31 ; 17. 18, 32 ; 19. 13 ; 20. 5, 14. 



Tiaaa&pvrjs 5. 13; 6. 27, 29, 37; 7. 7, 13, 19, 
«3» 34, 37 ; 8.9; 16. 24 ; Fr. 17. 1, 3 (?). 

roiovros 5. 5, 11 ; 6. 28; 18. 26; 14. 24, 30. 

roaovros 5. 26 ; 15. 31 ; 21. 39. 

Tfa 1. 21 ; U. 38, 39; 12. 14 ; 18. 9, 36; 
14. 32 ; 15. 4. 

TfKue. 31; 12. 5. 

TfMOKOvra 2. 29 ; 20. 4. 

rptJiprp 1. 1; 2. 24, 28, 30, 37; 8. 11, 33; 

U. 9, 29; 16. 35; 16. 8; 17. 31; 18. 3; 

21. 27, 29. 
Tpdncuov 6. 32. 
rpfaos 12. 8, 19 ; 19. 28. 
Tvyx&w 1. 35; 2. 16, 39; 8. 13; U. 37; 

W.31; 14. 28; 15.39; 17.4, 15- 
rvpavros U. 22 ; Fr. 19. I (?). 

'YapiroXiff 15. 26. 

vl6t 20. IO, 16. 

vncLKOvttv 19. 6. 

imdpx<iy 10. 6 (?). 

imip 12. n y 12 ; 16. 4, 19. 

vntppokr] 14. I. 

vn*p€X*w 5. 19. 

vmfptaia 1. 28 ; 10. 34 ; 17. 39. 

wd 1. 1 ; 8. 14 ; 18. 39 ; 14. 10 ; 16. 2.31; 

21. 21, 22. 
%mMx*v6ai 20. 22. 
vnoXapPaxtv 6. io ; 11. 17 ; 14. 11. 
vn6mrwdog 6. 31 J 20. 3. 
'Y (TiaToi 12. 16. 

VOTtpdtOS 11. I4. 

vartpop 20. 15; 21. 16. 

<(>aiv€iv 16. 29. 

(pdvaiU. 12; 16. 29. 

<fxu/€p6s 14. 1 7« 

Qavorcis 15. 18, 21. 

*dpa( 1. 31. 

+apv60a(os 2. 33; 8. 16, 28, 36; 15. 37; 

18. 39; 20. 12, 24; 21. 23. 
<j)daK€iv 17. IO. 
<Pav\cos 16. 6. 

<$>ip*iv 7. 22; 12. 21 ; 16. 35 ; 18. 24. 
<f*vy*u> 6. 13 ; 12. 39; 19. 34. 

(pOdiKtP 5. 11. 
4>tkia 8. 40. 
<tnko£ 2. 10. 
<pi\icK 14. 40. 

<t>oPtio4at 1. 21 ; 6. 14 ; 20. 13 ; 21. 6. 
ftotViKCff 8. 23. 
♦ourfw; 2L 38. 
(f>por*h> 12. 35. 

<t>pOVTl(fl9 12. 39. 

(ppovpfc 18. 7. 
tyt/yer 20. 7. 

ipvyia 8. 43, 44, 46 J 7. 21 ; 8. 7 (?); 21. I. 
♦p. fuydkri 6. 34. *p. irapadaXam&o* 21. 1 7. 
(fwXaicr] 6. 24; 16. 37. 
♦uiccfc 1L 34; 14. 22, 28, 34, 39; 15. 3, 10, 

15, 32- 
♦axtiV 15. 1 6, 22. 

Xaipcbifta 12. 20. 

XaXcirckS. 17; 10. II. x a ^**c«14. 18; 16. 35. 

Xapkis 1. 9. 

X€«M»» 21. 7, 35. 

X«> 19. 30. 

Xfipucparrjs 15. 33 J 21. 26. 

X«><w 8. 3 ; 1L 4. 

X&101 12. 24. 

Xf>5f*« 2. 2 ; 6. 27 ; 12. 3 ; 14. 12 ; 15. 38 ; 

16. 7, 11, 18. 
XpnparifoOai 2. 1 4. 
XP*jrai 6. 49. 

X/MJodcu 2. 10; 10. 19; 18. 3. 

Xpfaipos 20. 21. 

Xp6vot L 1, 26; 2. 39; 8. 23; 6. 19; 10. 

11; 16. 1, 12, 25; 18. 36. 
Xpvatop 2. I, 34 ; 16. 28 ; 2L 24. 
X&pa 20. 30. 
X«pa 0. 36 ; 12. 9 ; 18. 37 ; 14. 25, 37 ; 16. 

17; 18. 39; 19. 8, 14; 20. 7, 24, 28; 

21. 36. 
X^piov 12. 13 ; 18. 27; 15. 27 ; 20. 25, 29, 

34; 21. 17, 22. 

+iX6s 6. I. 

& 11. 22. 

w (prep.) L 30; 8. 41 ; 13. 35; !«• *7, **) 

20. 15. 
ios (conj.) 1. 4, 24; 2. 20, 36; 6. 7, 12, 51 ; 

7. 24; 11. 17, 21; 12. 39; 18. 22, 29; 

16. 30; 10. 32; 17. 4, 16, 31, 36; 18. 

9; 19. 27, 29; 20. 26; 21. 18. 
&amp 2. 27 ; 10. 19; 12. 32 ; 21. 36. 
florc 2L 39. 








" ft 


~ A 


ft L g 

% ;rVT3 ft e 1 5 1 

if Jfl^ 6 # £ * 

^ * ? ? 


l< p 

- 5 


3 £ 2'i$ o * 

4 i t I i l ^ .* 

.-2 <j' rc?w h,3 c x 3 i : 
i<!?. v --M 37*3 a> ,? -r 


^ 'i 

-4 o p 





1 ; 







iVf ■•£ ^ - J 

h ,....c. *'(- 

5. 4 * 

t ******* 



, A/i>*r/ 


-r*y TtJt'*0*f*ft*:F*. % ****** 









NO. 842, COLS. V. AND VI 


: 4 

£ ft ^ 7 c v r T * 

? f ^f7 £ 



j. p 





» .s&$&^*ff]p*ifY- i 'f-jpt ******** \. 

' ill" ? . *' ' * ■' 

' ■ : Ur ••< 

'W^^T^f'ii^^Hf^oM^^AfenNf* , . : ..'; f : •:.,- ■ 

■•n ;« 


*' i'i Kir' . ■ > " * 

no. 843, cols, xxxi and xxxii 


Xf oyl\ j*jxot.xToyc r °i 
exc rt c 1 o Ye lie X xh J w 
•Toe, /TB^YT^Or 1 
npo/ < Vci ^ 


i°v ■■/?,:, v>Y-xu i? * -►'■ 
■T.wr u - 'n%*\ 

s • 

CrtNuYNVV- -TO. „,,..,„ 





. I 


orivAX^ ' n^oKxi;. 
VHoen ; eaCH?TXX.cM 

KXlJLVr .'JLr:i ."VRlXOAi 

xxveco nx'^riroox 1 
; xnxoYoe.vo rxc,e K 1 
H oJUo'm t ■■•> I '" -H-XA e l 


I<* v ftextfc p YXC Vlo KXi 


t\> o*a> o reH xri bi c X*f h 

jl \ M ooh4 \i? oxve H U c 

K AfttJio vncxvVc xrnT' 

Y i \\? N *Jp • SJ^e? * i o v^- 


\\.!A (6 HOV01 -'.-Hl^ i° ,v ' 

0$U K X l V PO 1 OX Y j^»H 

XfX^XXoVn VI » HKXia 

NO. 844, COLS, ix AND X 



J^HE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND, which has conducted Archaeological research 
in Egypt continuously since 1882, in 1897 started a special department, called the Graeco- 

Roman Branch, for the discovery and publication of remains of classical antiquity and early 

Christianity in Egypt. The exploration of the site of Oxyrhynchus has now been completed, 

and owing to lack of funds further excavations have been suspended for the winter of 

1907-8 ; but it is hoped to resume work in Egypt in 1908-9. 

The Graeco-Roman Branch issues annual volumes, each of about 250 quarto pages, with 

facsimile plates of the more important papyri, under the editorship ofDrs. B. P. Grenfell and 

A. S. Hunt. 

A subscription of One Guinea to the Branch entitles subscribers to the annual volume, and 

also to the annual Archaeological Report. A donation of £25 constitutes life membership. 

Subscriptions may be sent to the Honorary Treasurers— for England, Mr. H. A. Grueber, 

British Museum ; and for America, Mr. Gardiner M. Lane, Pierce Building, Copley Square, 




For 1883-4. By Edouard Navillb. Thirteen Plates and Plans. (Fourth and Revised 
Edition.) 35/. 

II. TANIS, Part I. For 1884-5. By W. M. Flinders Petri*. Eighteen Plates 
and Plans. (Second Edition.) 35J. 

Ill NAUKRATIS, Part I. For 1885-6. By W. M. Flinders Petri*. With 
Chapters by Cecil Smith, Ernest A. Gardner, and Barclay V. Head. Forty-four Plates 
and Plans. (Second Edition.) 2$s. 

By Edouard Naville. Eleven Plates and Plans. (Second Edition.) 251. 

V. TANIS, Part II; including TELL DEFENNEH (The Biblical 'Tahpanhes') 
and TELL NEBESHEH. For 1887-8. By W. M. Flinders Petrie, F. Ll. Griffith, 
and A. S. Murray. Fifty-one Plates and Plans. 35*. 

VI. NAUKRATIS, Part II. For 1888-9, By Ernest A. Gardner and F. Ll. 
Griffith. Twenty-four Plates and Plans. 35/. 

Antiquities of Tell-el-Yahudlyeh. An Extra Volume. By Edouard Naville and 
F. Ll. Griffith. Twenty-six Plates and Plans. 2$s. 

VIII. BUBASTIS. For 1889-90. By Edouard Naville. Fifty-four Plates and 

Plans, a 5 j. 

Containing THE SIGN PAPYRUS (a Syllabary). By F. Ll. Griffith. THE 
GEOGRAPHICAL PAPYRUS (an Almanac). By W. M. Flinders Petrie. With 
Remarks by Heinrich Brugsch. (Out of print.) 


By Edouard Naville. Thirty-nine Plates. 35*. 
XL AHNAS EL MEDINEH. For 189 1-2. By Edouard Naville. Eighteen 
Plates. And THE TOMB OF PAHERI AT EL KAB. By J. J. Tylor and F. Ll. 
Griffith. Ten Plates. 35J. 

XII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Introductory. For 1892-3. By Edouard Naville. 
Fifteen Plates and Plans. 35J. 

XIII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part I. For 1893-4. By Edouard Naville. Plates 

I-XXIV (three coloured) with Description. Royal folia 30*. 

XIV. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part II. For 1894-5. By Edouard Naville. Plates 

XXV-LV (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30/. 

XV. DESHASHEH. For 1895-6. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Photogravure and 
other Plates. 351. 

XVI. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part III. For 1896-7. By Edouard Naville. Plates 

LVI-LXXXVI (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30*. 
XVII. DENDEREH. For 1897-8. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Thirty-eight Plates. 
25J. (Extra Plates of Inscriptions. Forty Plates, ioj.) 
Flinders Petrie. Sixty-eight Plates. 35*. 
XIX. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IV. For 1899-1900. By Edouard Naville. 
Plates LXXXVII-CXVIII (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30*. 

XX. DIOSPOLIS PARVA. An Extra Volume. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. 
Forty-nine Plates. {Out of print.) 

A a 

1900-1. By W.M. Flinders Petri e. Sixty-three Plates. 35J. (Thirty-five extra Plates, icj.) 

XXII. ABYDOS, Part I. For 1 901-2. By W. M. Flinders Petri*. Eighty-one 
Plates. 25J. 

XXIII. EL AMRAH AND ABYDOS. An Extra Volume. By D. Randall-MacIver, 

A. C. Mace, and F. Ll. Griffith. Sixty Plates. 35J. 

XXIV. ABYDOS, Part II. For 1902-3. By W. M. Flinders Petroc. Sixty-four 

Plates. 2 5 J. 

XXV. ABYDOS, Part III. An Extra Volume. By C. T. Currelly, E. R. Ayrton, 
and A. £. P. Weigall, &c. Sixty-one Plates, asj. 

XXVI. EHNASYA. For 1903-4. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Forty-three Plates. 25*. 
(ROMAN EHNASYA. Thirty-two extra Plates. 10s.) 

XXVII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part V. For 1904-5. By Edouard Naville. Plates 
CXIX-CL with Description. Royal folio. 30J. 

For 1905-6. By Edouard Naville, H. R. Hall, and £. R. Ayrton. Thiitv-one 
Plates. 2$s. 

XXIX. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part VI. For 1906-7. By Edouard Navuxe. Royal 
folio. {In prtparatUn.} 


Edited by F. Ll. Griffith. 

I. BENI HASAN, Part I. For 1 890-1. By Percy E. Newberry. With Plans 
by G. W. Fraser. Forty -nine Plates (fonr coloured) 35*. 

II. BENI HASAN, Part II. For 1891-2. By Percy E. Newberry. With Appendix, 
Plans, and Measurements by G. W. Fraser. Thirty-seven Plates (two coloured). 351. 

III. EL BERSHEH, Part I. For 1892-3. By Percy Newberry. Thirty-four 

Plates (two coloured). 351. 

IV. EL BERSHEH, Part II. For 1893-4. By F. Ll. Griffith and Percy E. 

Newberry. With Appendix by G. W. Fraser. Twenty-three Plates (two coloured). 251. 

V. BENI HASAN, Part III. For 1894-5. By F. Ll. Griffith. (Hieroglyphs, 
and manufacture, &c, of Flint Knives.) Ten coloured Plates. 351. 

EXPLORATION FUND. For 1895-6. By F.Ll. Griffith. Nine coloured Plates. 351. 

VII. BENI HASAN, Part IV. For 1896-7. By F. Ll. Griffith. (Illustrating 
beasts and birds, arts, crafts, &c.) Twenty-seven Plates (twenty-one coloured). 351. 

SAQQAREH, Part I. For 1897-8. By N. de G. Davies and F. Ll. Griffith. Thirty- 
one Plates (three coloured). 351. 

SAQQAREH, Part II. For 1898-9. By N. de G. Davies and F.Ll. Griffith. Thirty- 
five Plates. 351. 

X. THE ROCK TOMBS OF SHEIKH SAID. For 1899-1900. By N. dr G. 

Davies. Thirty-five Plates. 35J. 

N. de G. Davies. Twenty-seven Plates (two coloured). 35*. 
XII. DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part II. Fori 901-2. Thirty Plates (two coloured). 251. 

XIII. THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part I. For 1902-3. Forty-one 

Plates. 3 £f. 

XIV. THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part II. For 1903-4. Forty-seven 

Plates. 351. 

XV. THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part III. For 1904-5. Thirty-nine 
Plates. 24s. 
Davies. Forty-five Plates. 35*. 

Davies. (/« preparation.) 


I. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part I. For 1897-8. By B. P. Grenfbll 
and A. S. Hunt. Eight Collotype Plates. *&. 

II. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part II. For 1898-9. Eight Collotype 
PUtei. 35/. 

HI. FA YUM TOWNS AND THEIR PAPYRI. For 1899- 1900. By B. P. Grenfell, 

A. S. Hunt, and D. G. Hogarth. Eighteen Plate*. 35*. 

IV. THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI. Double Volume for 1900-1 and 1901-a. By B. P. 
Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. Shyly. Nine Collotype Plates. (Nttfor sale.) 

V. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part III. For 1902-3. Six Collotype 
Plates. a$s. 

VI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part IV. For 1903-4. Eight Collotype 
Plates. 35/. 

VII. THE HIBEH PAPYRI, Part I. Double Volume for 1904-5 and 1905-6. By 

B. P. Grenfill and A. S. Hunt. Ten Collotype Plates. 454. 

VIII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part V. For 1906-7. By B. P. Grenfill 
and A. S. Hunt. Seven Collotype Plates, s&r. 
IX. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part VI. For 1907-8. By B. P. Grenfell 
and A. S. Hunt. (In preparation.) 


(Yearly Summaries by F. G. Kenyon, \V. E. Crum, and the Officers of the Society, with Maps.) 

Edited by F. Ll. Griffith. 
THE SEASONS WORK. For 1 890-1. By Edouard Naville, Percy E Nkwbkrry, and 
G. W. Fraser. is. 6d. 
For 1893-3 and 1893-4. is. 6d. each. 
„ 1894-5. 3*. 6d. Containing Report (with Plans) of Mr. D. G. Hogarth's Excavations in 

„ 1895-6. 3*. With Illustrated Article on the Transport of Obelisks by Edouard Naville. 
,, 1896-7. is. 6d. With Articles on Oxyrhynchus and its Papyri by B. P. Grenfell, and a Thncydides 

Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus by A. S. Hunt. 
„ 1897-8. is. 6d. With Illustrated Article on Excavations at Hierakonpolis by W. M. Flinders 

„ 1898-9. 2/. 6d. With Article on the Position of Lake Moeris by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 
1, 1 899-1900. 2s.6d. With Article on Knossos in its Egyptian Relations by A. J. Evans. 
And six successive years, ax. 6d. each. 


AoriA IHSOY : 'Sayings of Our Lord/ from an Early Greek Papyrus. By B. P. Grenfell 

• and A. S. Hunt. 2s. (with Collotypes) and 6d. net 

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

Hunt. ij. net. 
ATLAS OF ANCIENT EGYPT. With Letterpress and Index. {Second Edition.) 

( Under revision.) 


COPTIC OSTRACA. By W. E. Crum. 10s. 6d. net. 

Slides from Fund Photographs may be obtained through Messrs. Newton &• Co., 3 Fleet Street t E.C.; 
and Prints from Mr. R. C. Murray, 37 Dartmouth Park Hill, N.W. 

Offices of the Egypt Exploration Fund: 








1735 078 

3 2044 016 937 856 

The borrower must return this item on or before 
the last date stamped below. If another user 
places a recall for this item, the borrower will 
be notified of the need for an earlier return. 

Non-receipt of overdue notices does not exempt 
the borrower from overdue fines. 

Andover-Harvard Theological Library 
Cambridge, MA 02138 617-495-5788 

Please handle with care. 

Thank you for helping to preserve 
library collections at Harvard.