Skip to main content

Full text of "The Oxyrhynchus papyri"

See other formats


ΐ%Τ »- I 











iP«^ioaj)^ l^ 











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





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

AND 8 Beacon Street, Hoston, Mass., U.S..A. 

KEGAN PAUL. TRENCH, TRUBNER & CO., Paternoster House, Charing Cross Road, W.C. 

BERNARD QUARITCII, 15 Piccadilly, W. ; ASHER & CO., 13 Bedford St., Covent Garden, W.C. 

and HENRY FROWDE, Amen Corner, E.C. 


V. f 



'^ >ΊΊ-ΑΙ,Ν, 


All the theological and most of the classical and the non-literary 
papyri in this volume were discovered in our second excavations at 
Oxyrhynchus in 1903, described in the Archaeological Report of l/ie 
Egypt Exploration Fund, 1902-3, pp. 5-9, and more briefly in the 
Archiv fiir Papyrnsforschung, III. pp. 139-40. The rest came from 
the original Oxyrhynchus find of 1897. Owing to the comparatively 
small space here available for non-literary documents and the discovery 
in 1903 of a group of papyri, mostly of the early Augustan period, 
which is rarely represented, we have published all these together with 
a selection of documents belonging to the next three centuries, instead 
of limiting the documents to the third century, as foreshadowed in the 
preface to Part III. 

In editing the classical pieces, we have, as usual, availed ourselves 
largely of the most generous and valuable assistance of Professor Blass, 
to whom is due much of the reconstruction and interpretation of the 
new classical fragments and the identification of several of those from 
extant authors. The help which we have received on particular points 
from other scholars is acknowledged in connexion with the individual 

In the Appendices we give a list of addenda and corrigenda to 
the OxyrhyncJms Papyri, Part II, and Fayum Towns and their 
Papyri, a revised text of Part III, no. 405, which has been identified 
as a fragment of Irenaeus, and a list of all the Oxyrhynchus and 
Fayum papyri which have already been distributed among different 
museums and libraries. 



April, 1904. 

a 3 



Preface ν 

List of Plates vii 

Table of Papyri viii 

Note on the Method of Publication and List of Abbreviations . . . . xi 


L Theological Fragments (654-658) .... 

II. New Classical Fragments (659-684) 

III. Fragments of Extant Classical Authors (685-704) 

IV. Documents ; chiefly of the Roman Period : 

(a) Official (705-712) 

{i) Applications to Officials (713-716) 

{ή Petitions (717-720) 

(d) Contracts (721-731) 

(e) Receipts (732-734) 
(/) Accounts (735-741) 
{g) Private Correspondence (742-747) 

V. Collations of Homeric Fragments (748-783) . 
VI. Descriptions of Miscellaneous Documents (784-838) 





I. Addenda and Corrigenda to Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Part II, and Fayum 

Towns and their Papyri . . . . . . .260 

II. A Revised Text of Part III, no. 405 (Irenaeus, Contra Haereses, iii. 9) 264 
III. List of Oxyrhynchus and Fayum Papyri distributed .... 265 


I. New Literary Fragments . . . 272 

II. Kings and Emperors . . . . . 282 

III. Months and Days 283 

IV. Personal Names 284 

V. Geographical 288 




VL Religion 290 

VII. Official and Military Terms 291 

VIII. Weights, Measures, and Coins 292 

IX. Taxes '..... 293 

X. General Index of Greek ανή Latin Words 294 


I. 654, ββ5 

II. 655, 656 [c) verso 

III. 659 (Cols, i-ii and Frs. («)-{/)) 

IV. 659 (Cols, iii-v and Frs. (w)-(r)) . 

V. 661, 735 

VI. 668 (Col. viii) 

VII. 686, 687, 688, 720 

VIII. 737 (Col. i) 

y at Ike end. 


654. New Sayings of Jesus (Plate I) . 
665. Fragment of a Lost Gospel (Plate II) . 
β5β. Genesis (Plate II) 

657. Epistle to the Hebrews .... 

658. Certificate of Pagan Sacrifice 

659. Pindar Παρθίιχων and Ode (Plates III and IV) 

660. Paean 

661. Epodes (Plate V) 

662. Epigrams 

663. Argument of Cratinus' ΑιονυσαΧίξανδροι 

664. Philosophical Dialogue .... 

665. History of Sicily (Plate I) . 

666. Aristotle, Προτριπτικάί .... 

667. Aristoxenus ? 

668. Epitome of Livy xxxvii-xl and xlviii-lv (Latin) 

(Plate VI) 

669. Rletrological Work 

670-678. Poetical Fragments .... 
679-684. Prose Fragments .... 

685. Homer I/iad xvii 

686-688. Homer niad ii, iii, and xi (Plate VII) . 

689. Hesiod Scu/um 

690-691. Apollonius Rhodius Argoiautica iii 

692. Apollonius Rhodius Argonaulica iv 

693. Sophocles Ekclra 

694. Theocritus Idyl xiii . 

695. Herodotus ν 

696. Thucydides iv . 
6Θ7. Xenophon Cyropaedia i 

698. Xenophon Cyropaedia i 

699. Theophrastus Characters 

A. D. 


3rd cent. 



3rd cent. 



Late 2nd or early 

3rd cent. 

. 28 

Early 4th cent. 

• 36 

250 . 


■ 49 

Late I St cent. b.c. 

■ 50 

Late I St or early 

2nd cent. 

. 61 

Late 2nd cent. 


. 62 

About A.D. I 

, . 


Late 2nd or early 

3rd cent. 


3rd cent. 



2nd cent. 



2nd cent. 


. 82 

3rd cent. 

. 86 

3rd cent. 

. . 


Early 4th cent. 



ist-3rd cent. 


ist cent. B.c.-3rd 

:ent. . 


2nd cent. 



About A.D. I 



Late 2nd cent. 



3rd-2nd cent. 


2nd cent. 


Early 3rd cent. 


2nd cent. 


3rd cent. 



ist cent. 


Early 3rd cent. 


Early 3rd cent. 



Early 3rd cent. 







Demosthenes De Corona 

2nd cent 156 


Demosthenes Contra Timocratem 

Late 2nd or early 3rd cent. . 

1 58 


Demosthenes Contra Bocotum 

2nd cent. 



Aeschines In Ctesiphontem . 

3rd cent. 



Isocrates Contra Sophistas . 

3rd cent. 



Two Petitions to the Emperors with RepHes . 

200-2 . 



Report of Legal Proceedings 

About 115 



Report of Legal Proceedings 

About 136 



Two Letters to a Strategus 




Tour of Inspection .... 

About 50 



Order for Payment .... 

B.C. Ill 




About B.C. 14 



Collection of a Debt .... 

Late 2nd cent. 



Claim of Ownership .... 




Selection of Boys {ιπίκρισιή 




Registration of Property 




Auction of a Slave .... 




Petition ...... 

Late ist cent 




Petition to the Epistrategus 




Registration of a Deed 

193 • 



Request for a Guardian (Latin) (Plate VII 

247 . 



Sale of Crown Land .... 

• 13-14 • 



Emancipation of a Slave 
Papyrus Edmondstone 

. 91 or 107 
354 • 




Emancipation of a Slave . 




Apprenticeship to a Shorthand-Writer . 

155 • 



Apprenticeship to a Weaver 

183 . 



Appointment of a Representative 

• 135 • 



Delegation of the Duties of a Guardian 


. 210 


Sale of a Crop 

. 142 

. 212 


Lease of a Vineyard .... 

• 137 



Lease of Domain Land 

. 130 • 

. 221 


Engagement of Services 

. 8-9 



Receipt for the Tax on Ferry-boats . 

• 150 ■ 

. 224 



• 147 

• 225 



. 165 . 



Graeco-Latin Military Account (Plate V) 

• 205 

. 227 


Private Account .... 

About A. D. I 

. 228 


Latin Account (Plate VIII) 

About Λ. D. I 



Account of Food .... 

About A.D. I 



739. Private Account 

740. Account of Corn 

741. List of Articles . 

742. Letter of Antas . 

743. Letter to a Friend 

744. Letter of llarion 

745. Letter to Gaius Rustius 

746. Letter of Recommendation 

747. Invitation to a Feast . 
748-783. Homeric Fragments 
784-83Θ. Miscellaneous Documents 



About A.D. I 


About A.D. 200 


2nd cent. 


B.C. 2 . 


D.C. 2 . 


B.C. I . 


About A.D. I . 




Late 2nd or 3rd cent. 


I St cent. B.c.-4th cent. . 


2nd cent. B.c.-2nd 




The same general method is followed in the following pages as in preceding 
volumes. As before, a few of the new literary texts are printed in a dual form, 
a reconstruction in modern style accompanying a literal transcript. In other cases, 
and in the fragments of extant authors, the originals are reproduced except for 
division of words, addition of capital initials to proper names, expansion of 
abbreviations, and supplements, so far as possible, of lacunae. In 669, how- 
ever, which is on a rather different level from the other literary pieces, accentua- 
tion and punctuation have been introduced as well as in 658, which strictly does 
not belong to the literary section at all. Additions or corrections by the same 
hand as the body of the text are in small thin type, those by a different hand 
in thick type. Non-literary documents are given in modern style only. Abbre- 
viations and symbols are resolved ; additions and corrections are usually incor- 
porated in the text and their occurrence is recorded in the critical notes, where 
also faults of orthography, &c., are corrected wherever any difficulty could arise. 
Iota adscript is printed when so written, otherwise iota subscript is used. Square 
brackets [ ] indicate a lacuna, round brackets ( ) the resolution of a symbol or 
abbreviation, angular brackets ( ) a mistaken omission in the original ; double 
square brackets [[ ]] mean that the letters within them have been deleted in 
the original, braces { j 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 underneath them are to be con- 
sidered doubtful. Heavy Arabic numerals refer to the texts of the Oxyrhynchus 
papyri published in this volume and in Parts I-III ; ordinary numerals to lines; 
small Roman numerals to columns. 


The abbreviations used in referring to papyrological publications are prac- 
tically the same as those adopted by Wilcken in ArcJiiv I. i. pp. 25-2H, viz.; — 

P. Amh. I and 11 = The Amherst Papyri (Greek), Vols. I and II, by B. P. 

Grenfcll and A. S. Hunt. 
Archiv = Archiv fur Papyrusforschung. 

B. G. U. = Aeg. Urkunden aus den Konigl. Museen zu Berlin, Griech. Urkundcn. 
P. Brit. Mus. I and II = Catalogue of Greek Papyri in the British Museum, 

Vols. I and II, by F. G. Kcnyon. 

C. P. R. = Corpus Papyrorum Raineri, Vol. I, by C. Wessely. 

P. Cairo = Greek Papyri in the Cairo Museum, Catalogue by B. P. Grcnfell and 

A. S. Hunt. 

P. Catt. = Papyrus Cattaoui {Archiv iii. .55 sqq.). 

P. Fay. Towns = Fayum Towns and their Papyri, by B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, 

and D. G. Hogarth. 
P. Gen. = Les Papyrus de Geneve, by J. Nicole. 
P. Goodsp. = Greek Papyri, by E. J. Goodspeed {Decennial Publications of the 

University of Chicago, Vol. V). 
P. Grenf. I and II = Greek Papyri, Series I, by B. P. Grenfell ; Series II, by 

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

P. Oxy. I, II and III = The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts I, II and III, by B. P. 

Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 
P. Par. = Les Papyrus Grecs du Musee du Louvre {Notices et Extraits, t. xviii. 

2), by \V. Brunet de Presle et E. Egger. 
P. Petrie = The Flinders Petrie Papyri, by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy. 
Rev. Laws — Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus, by B. P. Grenfell, with 

Introduction by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy. 
P. Tebt. I = The Tebtunis Papyri, Part I, by B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and 

J. G. Smyly. 
Wilcken, Ost. = Griechische Ostraka, by U. Wilcken. 


654. New Sayings of Jesus. 

244 X 7-8 «Λ. Plate I. 

By a curious stroke of good fortune our second excavations at Oxyrhynchus 
were, like the first, signalized by the discovery of a fragment of a collection of 
Sayings of Jesus. This consists of forty-two incomplete lines on the verso of 
a survey-list of various pieces of land, thus affording another example of the not 
uncommon practice of using the back of ephemeral documents for literary texts. 
The survey-list, which is in a cursive hand of the end of the second or early 
part of the third century, provides a ierniinns a quo for the writing on the other 
side. This, which is an upright informal uncial of medium size, we should assign 
to the middle or end of the third century ; a later date than A.D. 300 is most 
unlikely. The present text is therefore nearly contemporary with the ' Logia ' 
papyrus discovered in 1897, which also belongs to the third century, though 
probably to an earlier decade. In its general style and arrangement the present 
series of Sayings offers great resemblance to its predecessor. Here, as in the 
earlier ' Logia,' the individual Sayings are introduced by the formula ' Jesus saith,' 
and there is the same mingling of new and familiar elements ; but the second 
series of Sayings is remarkable for the presence of the introduction to the whole 
collection (11. 1-5), and another novelty is the fact that one of the Sayings 
(11. 36 sqq.) is an answer to a question, the substance of which is reported 
(11. 32-6). It is also noticeable that while in the first series the Sayings had little 
if any connexion of thought with each other, in the second series the first four 
at any rate are all concerned with the Kingdom of Heaven. That the present 



text represents the beginning of a collection which later on included the original 
' Logia ' is very probable ; this and the other general questions concerning the 
papyrus are discussed on pp. 10-22. 

Excluding the introduction, there are parts of five separate Sayings, marked 
off from each other by paragraphi. In three cases (II. 5, 9, and 36) a coronis 
indicates the end of a sentence, which in the two first cases is also the end of 
the Saying, but in the third is the end of the question to which the Saying is 
the answer. In all three instances the words Xe'yei 'IrjaoCy followed immediately 
after the coronis. In 1. 27, however, there is no coronis at the end of the Saying, 
but there is one after the succeeding kiyn Ίησοΰί. The scribe is thus inconsistent 
in his employment of this sign, and would seem to have misplaced it in 1. 37, 
unless, indeed, his normal practice was to place a coronis both before and after 
Ae'yet '{ησοΐί, and the absence of a coronis after «nr in 1. 27 is a mere omission. 
It is noteworthy that in 1. 27 a blank space is left where the coronis was to be 
expected. The single column of writing is complete at the top, but broken at 
the bottom and also vertically, causing the loss of the ends of lines throughout. 
From 11. 7-8, 15, 25, and 30, which can be restored with certainty from extant 
parallel passages, it appears that the lacunae at the ends of lines range from 
twelve to sixteen or at most eighteen letters, so that of each line, as far as 1. 33, 
appro.ximately only half is preserved. The introduction and the first and fourth 
Sayings admit of an almost complete reconstruction which is nearly or quite 
conclusive, but in the second, third, and fifth, which are for the most part entirely 
new, even the general sense is often obscure, and restorations are, except in a 
few lines, rather hazardous. The difficulties caused by the lacunae are enhanced 
by the carelessness of the scribe himself The opening words oi τοιοι oi Aoyot are 
intolerable, even in third century Greek, and γνωσθΐ in 1. 20 and αττοκα\νφησ-ίτ[αί 
in 1. 29 are forms that require correction ; while several instances of the inter- 
change of letters occur, e.g. ei and ;; in 1. 8 βασιλίνση, ai and e in 1. 23 cnepwnjo-e, 
and probably in 1. 18 yvwaeadai (cf note ad /oc), τ and θ in 1. 31 θ(θαμμ(νον, 
and perhaps ν and η in 1. 10 (cf. note ad he). In two cases (II. 19 and 25) 
words which the scribe had at first omitted are added by him over the line. 
The only contraction which appears is hjs for Λησοΰί ; -πατήρ in I. 19 and ουρανοί 
in 11. 11-2 are written out, as usually happens in the earliest theological papyri. 

We proceed now to the text ; in the accompanying translation supplements 
which arc not practically certain are enclosed in round brackets. 

For valuable assistance in connexion with the reconstruction, interpreta- 
tion, and illustration of 654, we are indebted to Profs. Blass and Harnack, 
Dr. Bartlet, and Mr. F. P. Badham, but for the general remarks on pp. 10-22 
we are alone responsible. 



AHceN mc ζωΝ κ[ ρωΝ επερωτΗοε πΑ[ 

ΚΑΙ βωΜΑ ΚΑΙ eineN [ ρωΝ περι του τόπου τη[ 

ΑΝ τωΝ ΛΟΓωΝ τογτ[ εετ6°ϊθΑΛθΐ ecoNTAi π[ 

^ω: ΜΗ reYCHTAI ^ [ \^ g^^^^Q, ^p^^Q, ^^,• \ 

ΜΗ πΑΥΟΛεοω ο ζη[ ^,^ ^^^^, _^ / 

εΥΡΗ ΚΑΙ ΟΤΑΝ €ΥΡΗ -^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ ^^,^ 


HCeTAI > — Aerei Ι[ ^^^ ΚΡΥΠΤΟΝ ο ου ΦΑΝβΓ 

ΙΟ 01 eAKONTeC HMAC [ ^^, Θ€ΘΑΜΜ€Ν0Ν ο ο[' 


ΤΑ πετεΐΝΑ του ουρ[ [. .]6tazoycin αυτόν ο[ 

τι Ϋπο ΤΗΝ ΓΗΝ ecT[ [. .]roYciN πωο νηοτ€Υ[ 

01 iXOYeC THC ΘΑΛΑ[ [ ]Μ€0Α ΚΑΙ ΠωΟ [ 

15 Tec VMAC και η BAC[ 35 [ ]'^' ΤΙ nAPATHPHC[ 

eNToc ΫΜωΝ [.]CTi [ [. . . . ]ν ^— Aerei mc [ 
ΓΝω TAYTHN €ΥΡΗ[ [ ]€ΐτΑΐ ΜΗ ποιειτ[ 

CAYTOYC ΓNωCeCΘA! [ [. . . . .]HC AAHeeiAC ΑΝ[ 

YM€IC [ ]Ν Α[.]0ΚεΚΡ[ 


20 ΓΝωοβε CAYTOYC €ν[ ^ ]φ ecj|- 

ΚΑΙ YMCic ecTC Ηπτο[ |-' \ ' ' '_ ' ' '_ ' ' '_ '_ ' jj^j- 

Introduction. 11. 1-5. 

\oi\ Totoi oi Xoyoi ot [ ovi eXo- 

Χησίν 'Ιη{σον)ί ό ζων fi^ypLO^ ? 

και Θωμά και imiv [αϋτοΐί• nas οστίί 
αν των Xoyav τούτ\<ΰν άκούστ] θανάτου 
5 οΰ μη γΐύσηται. 

' These are the (wonderful ?) words which Jesus the living (lord) spake to . . . and 
Thomas, and he said unto (them), Every one that hearkens to these words shall never taste 
of death.' 

The general sense of the introduction is clear, and most of the restorations are fairly 
certain. In 1. i an adjective such as θαυμάσια is necessary after oi [. For άκοίκιν with the 
genitive in the sense of ' hearken to ' as distinguished from merely hearing cf e. g. Luke 

vi. 4 '7 πάι ό . . . άκοίων μου των λόγωκ και ποιών airrovs. For θανάτου^ ον μη ytvinyrat, cf. 

Matt. xvi. 28, Mark ix. i, Luke ix. 27, and especially John viii. 52 ΐάν Tit tw λόγο» μου 

τημήση, οΰ μη -γήσηται θάνατον (It τϋν aiwm. In these passages of the S) noptists θαι>άτου 

■γ(ΰ<σθαι simply means 'die' in the literal sense; but here no doubt, as in the passage in 

6 2 


St. John, the phrase has the deej)er and metaphorical meaning that those who obey Christ's 
words and attain to the kingdom, reach a state unaffected by the death of the body. The 
beginning of 1. i requires some correction, oi τοίοι οί Xciyot ο! being extremely ugly. 
The corruption of οίτ-οι into oi roioi is not very likely, though cf. Luke xxiv. 44 flntvhi n-pAr 

avTiivs, οίτοι οι Xo'yoi μον otc (λάλι/σα npos νμάί en t>v σνν ίμ'ιν. But since Toiot is found in 

late prose writers for τοιόσίί, the simplest course is to omit the initial o/. The i of this 
oi being in a crack is not clear in the photograph, but is quite certain. The restoration of 
1. 2 presents the chief difficulty, ψριοί is very doubtful ; κ[αί followed by e. g. αποθανών 
is equally likely, and several of the possible supplements at the end of the line require 
a longer word than κύριος to precede. A dative before και Θωμά is necessary, and three 
alternatives suggest themselves: — (i) a proper name, in which case Φιλίππω or Ματθία (or 
Ματθαίω) are most likely in the light of the following words κα\ Θωμά. Apocryphal Gospels 
assigned to Thomas, Philip, and Matthias are known, and in Pislis Sophia 70-1 Philip, 
Thomas, and Matthias (so Zahn with much probability in place of Matthew found in 
the text) are associated as the recipients of a special revelation ; cf. Harnack, Altchrist. 
Litleral. I. p. 14 ; (2) a phrase such as toIs t* SKKan or ruis (1') μαθηταΐι (so Barilet, cf 1. 32 and 

John XX. 26 Ka\ . . . ήσαν ϊσω οι μαθηται αίτον κα\ Θωμάς μ(τ αίτών^ J (3) ΙοΟδα τω και Θωμά, 

suggested by Prof. Lake, who compares the frequent occurrence of the double name 'loCSas 
ό κα\ Θωμάς in the Ac/s of Thomas. The uncertainty attaching to the restoration is the more 
unfortunate, since much depends on it. If we adopt the first hypothesis, Thomas has only 
a secondary place ; but on either of the other two he occupies the chief position, and this 
fact would obviously be of great importance in deciding the origin of the Sayings; 
cf. pp. 18 sqq. On the question whether the introduction implies a post-resurrectional 
point of view see pp. 13-4. 

There is a considerable resemblance between the scheme of 11. 1-3, u! λόγοι . . . oCt 
(KaKr)atv Ίι/σοΟί . . . και Λτ!(ν, and the formulae employed in introducing several of the 
earliest citations of our Lord's Sayings, especially I Clem. 13 μαΚιστα μιμνημίνοι τών λόγων 

ToC κυρίου Ίησοϋ ονς (ΧάΚησ(ν Βιδάσκων . . . όντως γαρ finfv, ActS XX. 35 μνημυν(ΰ(ΐν Tf τώκ 

λόγων τον κυρίου Ίησοϋ οτι αϋτος tmev. Rendel Harris had already (Conlemp. Rev. 1897, 
pp. 346-8) suggested that those formulae were derived from the introduction of a primitive 
collection of Sayings known to St. Paul, Clement of Rome, and Polycarp, and this theory 
gains some support from the parallel afforded by the introduction in β54. 

First Saying. II. 5-9. 

5 [ λίγίί Ίτ]{σο\))<!• 

μη πανσάσθω ό ζη[των fooy αι> 

(ϋρτ] και όταν evprj [θαμβηθήσ€ται και θαμ- 
βηθ(ΐί βασιλΐύσίΐ κα[ϊ βασιΧΐύσαί άναπα• 

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

The conclusion of this Saying is quoted from the Gospel according to the Hebrews by 

Clement of Alexandria (S/rom. ii. 9. 45) 17 καν τώ Kaff Εβραίους (ΐαγγιλίω ύ θαυμάσας 


βασιΚΐΰσ(ΐ yiypairmi και ό βασι\(ίσαί αναπαήσ(ται. In Sirom. V. 14. 96 (a passage to which 
Zahn first called attention, Gesch. d. NT. Kan. ii. p. 657) he quotes the Saying in 
a fuller and obviously more accurate form which agrees almost exactly with the papyrus, 

but without stating his source : — ού τχανσ^ταί ό ζ,ψών ίως αν fvprj, (ϋρων δ( θαμβηθήσ(ται, ϋαμΰηθι'ιί 
b( βασιλιίισα, βασί\(ϋσα! δί ϊπαναπαήσίται. The word after ζη[των in 1. 6 is very likely 

the object of ζητών (τήν ζωην ? ; την βασιλίίαν is too long), but it may be another participle 
depending on παυσάσθω or an adverb. This part of the saying is parallel to Matt. vii. 7 
( = Luke xi. 9) ftriire iciii (ίρήσ(τ(. The supplements in II. 7-8 are already rather long 
in comparison with the length of lines required in 11. 15, 25, and 30, so that it is improbable 
that (παναπαήσίται is to be Supplied or that ό occurred in the papyrus before θαμβηθίίς 
and βα<τι\(ίσα! (cf. the first quotation from Clement), ό fit in place of rat is of course 
jx)ssible in 1. 7, but since the papyrus has rat and not Se in 1. 8 rat is more likely also 
in 1. 7. The occurrence of θαμβηθίίς, not θαυμάσας, in 11. 7-8, confirms Zahn's acute 
suggestion {Gesch. d. NT. Kan. ii. p. 657) that θαμβηθ^ίί was the original word; but we 
should not accept his ingenious explanation of it as a mistranslation of a Hebrew or 
Aramaic verb which could also mean θορυβηβιϊί, and his view that (τνντιτριμμίνης (cf. 
Luke iv. 18) would have been the right term. The attractiveness of this kind of conjecture 
is, as we have recently had occasion to remark (403 introd.), only equalled by its uncer- 
tainty. Now that the Saying is known in its completer form, and if we disregard the particular 
object (to show that the beginning of philosophy is wonder) to w^hich Clement in the 
first of his two quotations turns it, this description of the successive stages in the attainment 
of the kingdom of Heaven seems to us decidedly striking, and by no means so far removed 
from the 'Anschauungen des echten Urchristenthums ' as Resch {Agrapha, pp. 378-9) 
considers. To the probable reference to it in II Clem. v. 5 (cf. the next note) 17 hi 

(παγγ(\ια τοΰ Χριστού /jeydXr; και θαυμαστή (στιν κα\ άνάπανσΐ! της μ(\\ονσηί βασι\(ίαί καΙ Cayijs 

αΐωι/ίου, quoted by Resch (I.e.), Mr. Badham adds a remarkable one in the Ac/s of Thomas 

(ed. Bonnet, p. 243) o\ άξίως μιταλαμβάνοντα των (Kf'i αγαθών όναπαίονται και άναπανόμ(νοι 
βασΐΚίνσανσιν . 

As Dr. Bartlet aptly remarks, the idea of the necessity for strenuous effort in order 
to attain to the kingdom has much in common, not only with the 3rd Saying ούκ άποκνήσ(ΐ 
άνθρωπο! κ.Γ.λ., but with the 5th Logion ('Raise the stone and there thou shall find me'); 
cf. pp. 12-3. 

Second Saying. 11. 9-21. 

Aeyet Ί[η(σοΰ5' riiffS 

10 ol (λκοντΐς ημόίί [hs την βασιλίίαν d 

ή βασιλύα ΐν ονρα[νω ΐστίν ; 

τά w^Ttiva τοΰ ούρ[αΐ'θΰ και των θηρίων 6- 

' Since this volume was put into type, Hamack has expressed his ^news of this Affrafhon in 
Sitzungsber. d. Berl. Akcui. 1904, pp. :75-9. He there shows in opposition to Zahn that astonishment 
is to be interpreted here as a sign of joy, not of fear, and strongly repels the unfavourable criticisms of 
Resch upon the Saying, of which Hamack in fact maintains the substantial genuineness. Incidentally, 
as he .also remarks, the close parallelism between the language of the papyrus and Clement is important, 
for from whatever source this Saying found its way into the present collection, it cannot have come through 
Clement. There is, therefore, good reason to think that the Gospel according to the Hebrews (or at 
least a part of it) was known in Egypt in a Greek version at an early period, a view which has been 
disputed by Zahn. 


Ti νπο την γήν (στ[ιν η ίπϊ τήί γήί καϊ 
οί Ιγθύίί τήί θαλά[σσηί ούτοι οι (λκον- 

15 Tfi νμαί, και ή βασ[ιλΐΐα των ουρανών 
eiTos ΰμων {ϊ]α•τι \κα\ οστίί άν ίαντον 

■γνω ταύτην €νρή[σ£ΐ 

iavTovs γνωσεσθί [και ΐΐδήσετί Οτι υΙοΙ 
ίστί νμΐΐί τον πατροί τον τ[ 

2θ γνώσ(ίσ)θ€ iavTovs kv\_ 

καΐ νμΐΐί (στ€ ηΐΓΤθ[. . . . 

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

The reconstruction of this, the longest and most important of the Sayings, is extremely 
difficult. Beyond the supplements in 1. 15 which are based on the parallel in Luke xvii. 21 
with the substitution of των οίρανων, St. Matthew's phrase, for St. Luke's τον ifoC which 
is too short for the lacuna, and those in 11. 12-3, 16, and 18, the general accuracy of 
which is guaranteed by the context, it is impossible to proceed without venturing into 
the region of pure conjecture. There seems to be no direct parallel to or trace of this 
Saying among the other non-canonical Sayings ascribed to our Lord, and the materials 
provided by 11. 10-12 — οί ίλκοντί!, the kingdom of Heaven and the fowls of the air — are 
at first sight so disparate that the recovery of the connexion bet\veen them may seem 
a hopeless task. But though no restoration of 11. 9-14 can hope to be very convincing, and 
by adopting different supplements from those w-hich we have suggested, quite another 
meaning can no doubt be obtained (see below), we think that a fairly good case can 
be made out in favour of our general interpretation. The basis of it is the close parallelism 
which we have supposed to e.\ist between 1. 15 Tfr v/i5t κα\ ή βασ[ι\(ία των ουρανών and, 
on the other hand, 1. 10 oi ί\κοντ(ί ημάς followed in 1. 11 by η βασιλιία iv οίρανω, whereby we 
restore οί (λκο»] at the end of 1. 14. If this be granted 11. 9-16 divide themselves naturally 
into two parallel halves at the lacuna in 1. 11, 11. 9-10 corresponding to 11. 12-5, and 1. 11 
to 11. 15-6. How is this correspondence to be explained? The simplest solution is to 
suppose that 11. 9-11 are a question to which 11. 12-6 form the answer ; hence we supply 
Ti'cii in 1. 9 ; cf. the 5th Saying, which is an answer to a question. A difficulty then arises 
that we have c^'niTct ήμας in 1. 10 but (\κον]\τ(ί vpat in 11. 14-5. This may be a mere 
accident due to the common confusion of vptU and ήμΛς in papyri of this period, and 
perhaps ίμίκ should be read in both cases. But ημάς in 1. 10 can be defended in two ways, 
by supposing either that Jesus here lays stress rather on His human than on His divine 
nature, and associates Himself with the disciples, or that the question is put into the mouth 
of the disciples, i. e. the word before τίνα was ίραηάτ( or the like. There remains, however, 
the greatest crux of all, the meaning of tAxon-et. In the two passages in which this word 


occurs in the New Testament it has an unfavourable sense ; but here a favourable meaning 
is much more likely, as with ιΚκίίΐν in John vi. 44 fav μη 6 πατήρ . . . ίΚκίσ-η αίτόν and xii. 32 
ηάνταΐ ίλκΰσω npos ('μαντόν : ]\Ir. Badliam compares Clem. Alex. Sirom. vi. 6 τοιέ μϊν yap (i.e. 

wild beasts of sinners) nporpenet 6 Kvpws τοίι fie η6η (γχιφήσασι κα\ χ(Ίρα opiyti κα\ άκί'λκίΐ, and 
ibid. V. 1 2 η Ισχνί τον AtSyou , . . πάντα τον κατα^ίζάμΐνον κα\ eirros (αντον προς ίαντην Γλκα, 

Α phrase such as eh την βασιλύαν is required to explain ίλκοντα, though even with this 
addition the use of that word in such a context must be admitted to be difEcult. The idea 
in 11. 12-6 seems to be that the divine element in the world begins in the lower stages 
of animal creation, and rises to a higher stage in man, who has within him the kingdom of 
Heaven ; cf Clement's discussion {Sironi. v. 13) of Xenocrates' view that even akoya ζωα 
possibly had some toC 6(ίον ίννοια, and the curious sanctity of certain animals in the various 
Apocryphal Acts, e. g. Thecla's baptized lioness, Thomas's ass, Philip's leopard and kid 
buried at the door of the church. It is possible that there is some connexion between this 
Saying and the use of Luke xvii. 21 by the Naassenes; cf. p. 18. The transition from 
the inward character of the kingdom to the necessity for self-knowledge (11. 16-21) is 
natural. Since the kingdom is not an external manifestation but an inward principle, 
men must know themselves in order to attain to its realization. The old Greek proverb 
yvSiOt atavTOv is thus given a fresh significance. Mr. Badham well compares Clem. Paedag. 

iiL I ην ίίρα ώί foiKf πάντων μί'γιστοί' μαθημάτων το yvciivaL αντόν' €ΐχντ6ν yap τΐζ (αν γνωη 

θ(6ν ιΐσίται. For the restoration of 1. 16, cf. 1. 18. ταΰτην in 1. 17 is the βασιλύα. 
This line may have ended with something like όπως ουν, if we are right in correcting 
yvaafaeai to yvaaeadf (cf. the similar confusion in 1. 23). For υιΌί, which is required 
by the context in 1. 18, cf. e.g. Luke xx. 36. τ[ in 1. 19 (nf is equally possible) is perhaps 
the beginning of an adjective, but τούτ[ου χάριν, e. g., might also be read. How yvaa^e 
in 1. 20 is to be emended is uncertain; we suggest yvaa{fa)e(, but the corruption may 
go deeper. €>{ is perhaps c'lros rijt βαπικάας. ηπτο\ in 1. 21 is very obscure; the letter 
following τ may be f, ο or ω ; but neither if η is the article, nor if ηπτο[ is one word, does any 
suitable restoration suggest itself, ιριττοί can hardly be a participle, for if Xtyti Ίη{σου)ς 
occurred, as would be expected, at the end of the line, there is room for only about four 
more letters in the lacuna. It is tempting to read ή π[τ\6,\ις, with eV j-j πόλί» τοΟ Beoi in 1. 20, 
as Blass suggests, comparing for the omission of όντας Mark vi. 20 ei5a>r αυτόν avhpa bUaiov. 
Another and quite different restoration of the early part of this Saying is suggested by 

Dr. Bartlet, who would read Xiyti 'ίη(σον)ς• μη φοβύτωσαν^ οΊ ΐΧκοντις νμαί [ίττΊ τηί yrjs, νμων 
yapλ ή βασιλ(ϊα tv οϋρα^νω και ίφ' ίμΐν ίσται] τα πιτ(ίνα τον οΰρ[ανοΰ κα'ι πάν ζωον 5^ τ» νπο την yrjv 

f'aTiiv τά Tf (πι γης κα'ι] οΐ ιχθν(ς της θαλά[σσης . . ., comparing the idea in Epistk of Barnabas, 

vi. 12 and l8 τΊς ουν 6 &υνάμ(νος viv Spxdv θηρίων η ιχθύων η π(Τ(ΐνων τοΰ οίρανοΰ ; αΙσθάν(σβαι 
γαρ οφ(ΐ\ομ(ν ότι τό άρχίΐν (ξονσίας (στίν. Ίνα τις ('πιτάξας κυρκΰση. d ουν ui γαχται τοντο 
νυν, άρα ημ'ιν (ΐρηκίν πότ(• όταν και αύτοι τ(\(ΐωθώμ(ν, κληρονόμοι της διαθήκης κνρίον γ(ν(σθαι, 
and II Clem. v. 4 elnev ό Ίησοϋς τω Ώίτρω' μη φοβήσθωσαν τα άρνία Tout λκκουί . . . 
κα\ γινωσκ(τ(, ά^Χφοί, ότι η (πώημία ή iv τω κάσμΐύ τοι-τω της σαρκός ταύτης μικρά «ση και 

όλιγοχρόνιος, ή 8( (παγγίλία του Χριστοί κ.τ.λ. (a passage resembling the ist Saying; cf. 
note, ad loc). The parallels from Barnabas and Clement perhaps give this restoration 
some advantage over ours, but ΤΚκοντίς alone without an explanatory phrase is not 
a satisfactory word for ' persecute,' and the transition from the promise of the kingdom 
of Heaven to the fowls of the air is very abrupt and almost inconsequent, while it is difficult 
to find the connexion between the fowls of the air and the second mention of the kingdom 
of Heaven. This, the chief problem in the 2nd Saying, seems more easily explained by 
the hypothesis of a repetition of (\κοντ(ς and the resulting parallelism between the two 
halves of 11. 9-16 which we have suggested. 


Third Saying. 11. 21-7. 

[ Xeyet Ίη{σον)ί• 

ουκ άποκνησΐΐ άνθγρωπο^ 

ρων ΐπ(ρωτησαι πα.[ 

ρων irepl τον τόττον τή[! 

25 σΐτΐ ό'τί ΤΓολλοΙ ίσονται ■π[ρωτοι ίσγατοι και 

οΐ ίσχ^ατοι πρώτοι καΙ [ 


' Jesus saith, A man shall not hesitate ... to ask . . . concerning his place (in the 
kingdom. Ye shall know) that many that are first shall be last and the last first and 
(they shall have eternal life ?).' 

Line 24 may well have continued ri)[s fiaatKtias followed by a word meaning 'know' 

(? (ISijcrfTf , or γνώσ(Τ( Or άκούσίτ^, for γνωσιται 0Γ άκονσ(ται), but the double -ρων in 

11. 23 and 24 is very puzzling, and in the absence of a clear parallel we forbear to restore 
the earlier part of tlie Saying. Dr. Bartlet suggests a connexion with tlie Apocalypse 

of PeieKj e. g. § 4 καγώ ίίφην αντω' και τΓοΟ flat πάντα οί δίκαιοι η noioi ΐστιν 6 αΙων Ιν ω (Ισι 
ταΰτην (χυντίς την δόξαν, § 5 οίτόί ΐστιν 6 τόηοί των άρχίμων (1. αρχαίων, Bartlet) νμων των δικαίων 
ανθρώπων, taking αρχαίων tO be equivalent to πρ>σβυτίρων ΪΥί Heb. xi. 2, or to πάτερων ; 

cf. Matt. V. 21, 33 ('ρρίθη τοϊγ άρχαίοΐ! and Luke ix. 8, 19. But the problem was an old one. 

Lines 25-6 πολλοί . . . πρώτοι follow Mark X. 31 (^Matt. xix. 30) ττολλοϊ δί ϊσονται πρώτοι 

ίσχατοι και οί ίσχατοι πρώτοι. In the insertion of οί before ίσχατοι the papyrus agrees with 
BC and many MSS. in Mark x. 31; i^D and other ]\ISS. omit οί there, and in 
Matt. xix. 30 οί is generally omitted, though found in C and some others. Luke xiii. 30 

is rather longer, καΊ Ιδού (ΊσΊν ίσχατοι οί ϊσονται πρώτοι κα\ (ΐσ)ν πρώτοι οί ίσονται ίσχατοι. 
σιν in 1. 27 is no doubt the termination of a verb : ζωψ (αΐώνιον) κληρονομήσου]σιν (Matt. 
xix. 29) and pfT ΐμοϊι βασΐΚήσον\σιν are too long, but ζωψ αΙώνιο» ίζου]σιν (cf. John iii. 16, 36, 

V. 24, &c.) is possible. 

Fourth Saying. 11. 27-31. 

λίγα 'Ιη[σον)ί• [παν rb μη ίμπροσ- 
βΐν τηί οψίως σου και [το Κίκρυμμίνον 
άπο σον άποκαλυφ{θ)ήσ(τ[αί σοι. ού γάρ ίσ- 
3θ τιν κρνπτον ο ου φανί[ρον •γ(νήσίται 
και τΐθαμμίνον δ ο[ύκ ΐγ€ρθήσ€ται. 

' Jesus saith. Everything that is not before thy face and that which is hidden from thee 
shall be revealed to thee. For there is nothing hidden which shall not be made manifest, 
nor buried which shall not be raised.' 

The sense of this Saying is clear, and the supplements are fairly certain. Lines 29-30 


are parallel to Matt. X. 26 oi&kv yai> ίστιν κικάΚυμμίνον ό ουκ άποκη\υφθήσ^ται και κμνπτοιι ό ού 
■γνωσθήσιται, Luke Χίί. 2 ovSfV fie ίηΓ/κ(κάΚνμμ(νον ('στιν ο ούκ άποκαλυφθήσιται και κρνπτον ο οϋ 
γνωσθηαιται : cf. Mark iv. 2 2 oi γιψ (στιν κρνπτον (άν μη ίνα φανιρωβή oiSe «yii/fTO άπόκρυφον αλλ' 

ίνα 'ίΚθΐ] els φαν(ρόν. Ιπ general arrangement the papyrus agrees with Matthew and Luke 
perhaps more than with Mark ; but the language of the first half of the sentence is 
much closer to that of Mark (whose expression e'av μή Ίνα φαν(ρωθη instead of the more 
pointed ό oi φανιρώθησιται suggests the hand of an editor), while that of the second half 
diverges from all three, τ^θαμμίνην makes a more forcible contrast to κρνπτον than 
the corresponding word in the Synoptists, which is merely a synonym. Instead of 
(γιρθησιται a more general word such as γνωσΰήσίται can be supplied ; but this detracts from 
the picturesqueness of what is in any case a striking variation of a well-known Saying. 

Fifth Saying. 11. 32-42. 

[ίζ](τάζονσιΐ' avTou o[i μαθηται αντοΰ και 

[\4]γουσιν• πώί νηστ€ϋ\σομ.ίν και πώί . . . 

[ ]μ€θα και πως [ 

35 [. . . . κ]αι τι παρατηρήσ[ομΐν 

[ ]ν•, λίγΐΐ Ίη(σον)ς• [ 

[ ]ΐΐται μί) 7Γ0ί€Γ7[€ 

[ ]»jy άΧηθύαί άν[ 

[ ]ν ά[π]οκΐκρ[υ 

40 [ μα]κάρι[6ς] ϊστιν [ 

[ ]β) ϊστ[ι 

[ η 

' His disciples question him and say, How shall we fast and how shall we (pray ?) . . . 
and what (commandment) shall we keep . . . Jesus saith, ... do not . . . blessed is he . . .' 

Though this Saying is broken beyond hope of recovery, its general drift may be 
caught. It clearly differed from the other Sayings, both in this papyrus and the first 
series of Logia, in having a preliminary paragraph giving the occasion, which seems 
to be a question put by the disciples; cf. p. 15. For 4ξ(τάζ(ΐν in reference to them 

cf. John xxi. 12 olheis Se ίτοΚμα Των μαθητών ίξιτάσαι αντόν' σύ re's f'j eldoTft ότι ό Kvpws {'στιχ. 

αντον in 1. Ι is not very satisfactory, but something more than μαθηταί is required, and 
cf. 665. 17-8. Φαρισαιοι is not likely in the light of what follows. The question clearly 
consisted of a number of short sentences, each beginning with πωι or W, and so far 
as can be judged, they were concerned with the outward forms of religion, fasting, 
prayer (προσ(υξά]μ(θα ?), and almsgiving. How far, it is probably asked, are existing Jewish 
ordinances to be kept? The answer of Jesus appears to have been a series of short 
commandments insisting on the inner side of religion as the pursuit of virtue and truth, and 
very likely concluding in 1. 40 with the promise ' Blessed is he who doeth these things.' If 
this explanation is on the right lines, there is a general parallelism between this Saying and 


Matt. xix. 16-22 and Luke xviii. 18-22, but the occurrence of αΚ!]θ(ΐα and ά[π\ηκ(κρ[νμμ(ΐ>ον (?) 
suggests that the language was more Johannine in character. Line 39, as Prof. Lake 
remarks, could be restored on the basis of Rev. ii. 1 7 το ΐίάν\να [τ]6 κ(κρ[νμμ<ι/ον. The 
reference to fasting in 1. 33 suggests a connexion with the 2nd Logion (' Except ye fast to the 
world '), which may well have been an answer to a similar question by the disciples. 

We do not propose to enter upon a detailed examination of the numerous and compli- 
cated problems involving the Canonical and Apocryphal Gospels and the ' Logia ' of 1897, 
which are reopened by the discovery of the new Sayings. But we may be permitted to 
indicate the broader issues at stake, and in the light of the wide discussion of the Logia of 
1897 to point out some effects of the new elements now introduced into the controversy. 

We start therefore with a comparison of the two series of Sayings (which we shall 
henceforth call 1 and 654). Both were found on the same site and the papyri are of 
approximately the same date, which is not later than about the middle of the third 
century, so that both collections must go back at least to the second century. The outward 
appearance of the two papyri is indeed different. 1 being a leaf from a handsomely-written 
book, which may well have been a valuable trade-copy, while 654 is in roll form and was 
written on the verso of a comparatively trivial document. The practice of writing impor- 
tant literary texts on such material was, however, extremely common, and the form of 654 
lends no support to the hypothesis that the papyrus is a collection of notes made by the 
writer himself. In the uncial character of the handwriting, the absence of abbreviations 
and contractions other than those usually found in early theological MSS., and the careful 
punctuation by the use of the paragraphus and coronis, 654 shares the characteristics of an 
ordinary literary text such as 1. Since 1 is the nth page of a book, it must have formed 
part of a large collection of Sayings, while 654 comes from the beginning of a manuscript 
and provides no direct evidence of the length of the roll. But the document on the recto 
is not a letter or contract which would he. likely to be short, but an official land-survey 
list, and these tend to be of very great length, e.g. P. Brit. RIus. 267, P. Tebt. L 84-5. The 
recently published Leipzig papyrus of the Psalms (Heinrici, Beitr. z. Gesch. d. NT. iv), 
though incomplete at the beginning and end, contains as many as thirty-six columns written 
in cursive on the verso. So far therefore as can be judged from externals, 654 like 1 
probably belongs to an extensive collection of Sayings which may well have numbered 
several hundreds. 

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


first four Sayings in 654 in omitting the context rather than with the 5th obviously produces 
no serious conflict between the two documents. 

We proceed to a closer examination of the two series. In 1 the 7th Logion (' A city 
built on a hill ') is connected with St. Matthew's Gospel alone ; the 6th (' A prophet is not 
acceptable') has a noticeable point of contact with St. Luke in the use of the word idtrdr, 
and the ist also agrees with St. Luke. The 5th ('Wherever there are') starts with a parallel 
to St. Matthew, but extends into a region far beyond. Nowhere in 1 can the influence of 
St. Mark be traced, nor was there any direct parallel with St. John's Gospel ; but the new 
Sayings, both in thought and expression, tended to have a mystical and Johannine character. 
In 654 we have one Saying (the 2nd) of which the central idea is parallel to a passage 
found in St. Luke alone, but of which the developments are new ; the conclusion of the 3rd 
Saying connects with St. Matthew and St. Mark rather than with St. Luke, while the 4th is 
a different version of a Saying found in all three Synoptists, and is on the whole nearer to 
St. Mark than to the other two Evangelists. The ist Saying and, so far as we can judge, 
the 5th have litde, if any, point of contact with the Canonical Gospels. As in 1, so in 654 
the new elements tend to have a Johannine colouring, especially in the 2nd Saying; but 
some caution must be observed in tracing connexions with St. John's theology. The ist 
Saying, if the papyrus had been the sole authority for it, might well have seemed nearer in 
style to St. John than to the Synoptists ; yet as a matter of fact it occurred in the Gospel 
according to the Hebrews, a very early work which is generally admitted to have been 
originally written in Hebrew and to have been independent of the Canonical Gospels, most 
of all St. John's. On the other hand, while the Sayings in 654 contain nothing so markedly 
Johannine in style as e.g. Ί stood in the midst of the world . . .' in 1. 1 1 sqq., the introduction 
contains a clear parallel to John viii. 52. This at first sight may perhaps seem to imply 
a knowledge of St. John's Gospel on the part of the author of the introduction, but it must 
be remembered (i) that St. John may well not have been the sole authority for the attribu- 
tion of that Saying to our Lord, and if so, that the author of the introduction may have 
obtained it from another source, (2) that a knowledge of St. John's Gospel on the part of 
the author of the introduction does not necessarily imply a corresponding debt to that 
Gospel in the following Sayings, which, as we have said, stand on a somewhat different 
footing from the introduction. 

In our original edition of 1 we maintained {a) that the Sayings had no traceable thread 
of connexion with each other beyond the fact of their being ascribed to the same speaker, 
(b) that none of them implied a post-resurrectional point of view, (f) that they were not in 
themselves heretical, and that though the asceticism of Log. 2 and the mystic character of 
Log. 5 were obviously capable of development in Encratite and Gnostic directions, the 
Sayings as a whole were much nearer in style to the New Testament than to the apocryphal 
literature of the middle and end of the second century. If these positions have been 
vigorously assailed, they have also been stoutly defended, and about the second and third no 
general agreement has been reached ; with regard to the first the balance of opinion has 
been in favour of our view, and the various attempts to trace a connexion of ideas running 
through the Sayings have met with little acceptance. What answer is to be returned to 
the corresponding problems in 654 ? 

We will take the third question first. Is there anything in 654 to show that the 
Sayings originated in or circulated among a particular sect ? We should answer this in 
the negative. There is nothing heretical in the introduction, the ist, 3rd, and 4th Sayings, 
or, so far as can be judged, the 5th. The Encratite leanings which have been ascribed to 
the 2nd Logion are conspicuously absent in 654 ; the remains of the 5th Saying in fact 
rather suggest an anti-Jewish point of view, from which however the 2nd Logion itself 


was not widely distant, if, as we strongly hold, vηστfΰσητf and σαββατίζητ( are to be taken 
metaphorically. The absence of any Jewish-Christian element in 654 is the more 
remarkable seeing that the ist Saying also occurs in the Gospel according to the Hebrews. 
The only Saying that is at all suspicious is the 2nd, which like Log. 5 is sure to be called 
in some quarters ' Gnostic' That the profoundly mystical but, as it seems to us, obviously 
genuine Saying of our Lord recorded in Luke xvii. 2 1 ' The kingdom of God is within you ' 
should have given rise to much speculation was to be expected, and from Hippolytus 
Reful. V. 7 it is known that this Saying occupied an important place in the doctrines of the 
Naassenes, one of the most pronounced Gnostic sects of the second or early third century. 
That there is a connexion between the Sayings and the Naassenes through the Gospel of 
Thomas is quite possible and this point will be discussed later (pp. 18-9); but to import 
Naassene tenets into the 2nd Saying in 654 is not only gratuitous but a ύστερον πμότίρον. 
Moreover, though the other ideas in the Saying connected with the parallel from St. Luke, 
the development of the kingdom of Heaven through brute creation up to man (if that be 
the meaning of 11. 9-16), and the Christian turn given to the proverbial γνώδι aeavrav 
(11. 16-21), may point to a later stage of thought than that found in the Canonical Gospels, 
the 2nd Saying as a whole, if 'Gnostic,' presents a very primitive kind of Gnosticism, and 
is widely separated from the fully-developed theosophy of e. g. the Pislis Sophia. In any 
case the ' Gnosticism ' of 654 is on much the same level as that of 1. 

Do any of the Sayings (apart from the introduction) imply a post-resurrectional point 
of view ? This too we should answer in the negative. There is not only nothing in them 
to indicate that they were spoken after the resurrection, but substantial evidence for the 
opposite view. The familiar Sayings in the Canonical Gospels which are parallel to those 
found in 654 are there assigned to our Lord's lifetime, including even John viii. 52. The 
Gospel according to the Hebrews with which the ist Saying is connected covered the same 
ground as the Synoptists, and there is no reason to suppose that this Saying occurred 
there as a post-resurrectional utterance. But the best argument is provided by the 5th 
Saying, especially its context which is fortunately given. The questions there addressed to 
Jesus clearly belong to a class of problems which are known to have been raised by our 
Lord's disciples and others in his lifetime, and, if (^(τάζουσιν is in any case a somewhat 
stronger term than would be expected, seeing that the disciples seem to be the subject 
(though cf. John xxi. 12), it is most unlikely that this word would have been used with 
reference to the risen Christ. In fact none of the five Sayings in 654 suggests a post- 
resurrectional point of view so much as the 3rd Logion (' I stood in the midst of the 
world'); cf. pp. 13-4. 

Can a definite principle or train of ideas be traced through the Sayings ? The first 
four are certainly linked together by the connecting idea of the kingdom of Heaven, which 
is the subject to a greater or less degree of all of them. But between the 4th and 5th 
Sayings the chain is certainly much weaker and threatens to snap altogether. It is very 
difficult to believe that if 654 was part of a large collection of similar Sayings a connexion 
of thought could have been maintained throughout, and the Sayings in the later columns of 
654 may well have been as disconnected as those in 1. Even in the five which are partly 
preserved in 654 there is a constant change in the persons addressed, the ist and 3rd being 
couched in the third singular, the 2nd and almost certainly the 5th in the second plural, and 
the 4th in the second singular. Moreover the real link is, we think, supplied by the intro- 
duction, the consideration of which can no longer be delayed. Only before proceeding 
further we would state our conviction that in all essential points, the date of the papyrus, 
the form of the Sayings, their relation to the Canonical Gospels, and the general character 
of the new elements in them, to say nothing of the parallelism of thought between the ist and 


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

' These are the . . . words which Jesus the living . . . spake to . . . and Thomas^ and he said 
unto them " Every one that hearkens to these words shall never taste of death." ' Such is the 
remarkable opening prefi.xed to the collection of Sayings in 654 by its unknown editor. 
The first point to be noticed is that the name given to the collection is, as was acutely 
divined by Dr. Lock {Two Lectures on the Sayings of Jesus, p. 16). λόγο» not λόγιπ, and all 
questions concerning the meaning of the latter term may therefore be left out of account in 
dealing with the present series of Sayings. The converse of this, however, in our opinion 
by no means holds good, and as we have pointed out (p. 4), the analogy of the present 
document has a considerable bearing upon the problems concerning an early collection of 
λόγια. Secondly, the collection is represented as being spoken either to St. Thomas alone 
or to St. Thomas and another disciple or, less probably, other disciples. Does the compiler 
mean that the Sayings were the subject of a special revelation to St. Thomas and perhaps 
another disciple, from which the rest were excluded ? In other words is this introduction 
parallel to that passage in the Pistis Sophia 70-1 in which mention is made of a special 
revelation to SS. Philip, Thomas, and Matthias (or Matthew; cf. p. 4)? The case in favour 
of an affirmative answer to this query would be greatly strengthened if the introduction pro- 
vided any indication that the editor assigned his collection of Sayings to the period after 
the Resurrection. But no such evidence is forthcoming. We do not wish to lay stress on 
ό (,ΰιν in 1. 2 owing to the uncertainty attaching to the word that follows ; but the phrase 
ό ζων certainly does not point to the post-resurrection period. In the Canonical Gospels 
St. Thomas is made prominent only in connexion with that period (John .\x. 24 sqq.), but 
this circumstance, which is probably the strongest argument in favour of a post-resurrectional 
point of view, is discounted by the fact that the Gospel of Thomas, so far as can be 
judged, was not of the nature of a post-resurrectional Gospel but rather a Gospel of the 
childhood (cf. pp. 18-9), and, secondly, seems to be outweighed by the indications in 
the Sayings themselves (cf. p. 12) that some of them at any rate were assigned to Jesus' 
lifetime. The force of the second argument can indeed be turned by supposing, as 
Dr. Bartlet suggests, that the standpoint of the collection, both in 1 and 654, is that 
of a post-resurrection interview in which the old teaching of Christ's lifetime is declared 
again in relation to the larger needs of Christian experience. But such a view necessarily 
implies that II. 1-3 define a particular occasion (e. g. that contemplated in John xx. 26) on 
Λvhich the Sayings were spoken in their present order, and to this hypothesis there are grave 
objections. The use of the aorists ?ΚαΚτ\σ(ν and (m(v in 654. 2-3 does not prove that one 
occasion only was meant. The repetition of ΧΙγι 'lijaoCs before each of the Sayings seems 
very unnecessary if they are part of a continuous discourse. The difficulty of tracing 
a connexion of ideas throughout 654, and still more throughout 1, and the frequent 
changes in the persons addressed provide fresh obstacles to such an inteφretation ; and the 
inappropriateness of the word i^tra^ovoi in connexion with the risen Christ has already been 
alluded to (p. 12). To suppose that 654. 3-31 is a speech in itself, that II. 32-6 revert 
to the original narrative broken off at 1. 3 and that 1 is part of a later discourse appears to 
us a very strained interpretation. 

We are not therefore disposed to consider that the introduction to the Sayings, any 
more than the Sayings by themselves, implies a post-reserrectional point of \iew on the part 


of the compiler, still less that the background of the Sayings is at all the same as that con- 
templated in the Pisiis Sophia, which belongs to a later stage of thought than the Sayings. 
Hence we are not prepared to accept an analogy derived from that or any other similar 
treatise as an argument for thinking that the editor by his introduction meant to imply 
that St. Thomas or St. Thomas and some one else were the sole hearers of the Sayings. 
What we think he did mean to imply was that the ultimate authority for the record of 
these Sayings was in his opinion St. Thomas or St. Thomas and another disciple. This 
hypothesis provides a satisfactorj^, in fact we think the only satisfactory, e.xplanation of the 
frequent changes of persons and abrupt transitions of subject which characterize the Sayings 
as a whole. 

Thirdly, the editor enforces the momentous claim which he has made for the authori- 
tative character of the Sayings by quoting a sentence which, with several variations of 
language, but not of thought, occurs in John viii. 52, and which in the present context 
forms a highly appropriate prelude. Does this imply that the editor adapted the verse in 
St. John to his own purposes ? On this point, since we are not prepared to maintain that that 
passage in St. John is essentially unhistorical, we cannot give a decided opinion ; and in 
any case the probable relation of 654 to St. John's Gospel must be considered from the 
point of view of the collection of Sayings as a whole and of the conclusions adopted as to 
the editor's claim, rather than made a starting-point for an investigation of that claim and 
the source of the Sayings. For as we have said (p. 10), the introduction necessarily stands 
on a somewhat different footing from the Sayings, and even if knowledge and use of the 
Canonical Gospels by the author of the introduction was certain, this would not prove 
a corresponding dependence of the Sayings themselves upon the Canonical Gospels. All 
that can at present safely be inferred from the parallelism between the introduction and 
St. John is that the editor of the collection lived in an atmosphere of thought influenced by 
those speculative ideas in early Christianity which found their highest expression in the 
Fourth Gospel. 

AVhat value, if any, is to be attached to this far-reaching claim — that the collection of 
Sayings derives its authority, not from the traditional sources of any of the four Canonical 
Gospels, but from St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple ? The custom of invoking the 
authority of a great and familiar name for an anonymous and later work is so common in 
early Christian, as in other, writings, that the mere statement of the editor carries no weight 
by itself, and is not worth considering unless the internal evidence of the Sayings themselves 
can be shown to point in the same direction or at any rate to be not inconsistent with his 
claim. We pass therefore to the problem of the general nature and origin of the Sayings 
in 654 and 1, and as a convenient method of inquiry start from an examination of the 
various theories already put forward in explanation of 1. Not that we wish to hold any of 
our critics to their previous opinions on the subject. The discovery of 654, with the intro- 
duction containing the mention of Thomas and a close parallel to St. John's Gospel, with 
one Saying coinciding with a citation from the Gospel to the Hebrews and another having 
the context prefixed to it, introduces several novel and highly important factors into the 
controversy; and, being convinced of the close connexion between 1 and 654, we consider 
that all questions concerning 1 must be studied de novo. But since most of the chief New 
Testament scholars have expressed their views on 1, and an immense variety of opinion is 
represented, it is not likely that we shall require to go far outside the range of solutions 
which have already been suggested. A convenient bibliography and resumd of the contro- 
versy will be found in Profs. Lock and Sanday's Two Lectures on Ihe Sayiitgs 0/ Jesus. 

In our original edition of 1 we proposed a.d. 140 as the latest date to which the 
composition of the Sayings could be referred. This terminus ad quern has generally been 


accepted, even by Dr. Sanday, who is amongst the most conservative of our critics ; and 
the only notable exception is, so far as we know, Zahn, who would make the Sayings as 
late as 160-70. But his explanation of 1 has met with little favour, and, as we shall show, 
is now rendered still less probable. Accordingly, we should propose a.d. 140 for the 
terminus ad quern in reference to 654 with greater confidence than we felt about 1 in 1897. 

The chief dividing line in the controversy lies between those who agreed with our 
suggestion that 1 belonged to a collection of Sayings as such, and those who considered 
1 to be a series of extracts from one or more of the numerous extra-canonical gospels 
which are known to have circulated in Egypt in the second century. Does 654 help 
to decide the question in either direction ? One argument which has been widely used 
in support of the view that 1 was really a series of extracts, viz. that the Sayings had 
no contexts, is somewhat damaged by the appearance of a Saying which has a context. 
But we are not disposed to lay stress on this contradictory instance, which is clearly 
exceptional, though we may be pardoned for deprecating beforehand the use of the 
converse argument that the occurrence of a context proves the Sayings to be extracts. 
This argument may seem to gain some support from the use of alrrov (and probably αΐτου) 
in 654. 32 ; and it will very likely be pointed out that such a passage as 655. 17-23 would 
by the insertion of 'ivauCs after Aeyt i make a context and Saying in form exactly resembling 
654. 32 sqq. But the use of αντόν causes no ambiguity where it is found in one of a series 
of Sayings each beginning \i'y« Ίησοί^, a formula which itself recurs later on in the same 
context; a>nd the argument from the analogy of 655. 17-23 is open to the obvious retort 
that such a passage may equally well have been transferred from a collection of Sayings 
with occasional contexts, like 654. The fact is that the formal presence or absence 
of contexts in a series of Sayings can be employed with equal plausibility to prove or 
disprove the view that the series consisted of extracts, and would therefore seem a very 
unsound argument to introduce into the discussion. The matter of the context of the 
5th Saying, however, has perhaps a more important bearing than the form upon the 
question of extracts. The phrase Xlyn Ίησοίι there follows two historic presents, (ξιτάζυνσιν 
and λί'γουσιΐ', and is therefore presumably itself a historic present ; and if Xt'yei Ίησαΐΐ! 
is a historic present in one case, it should be so throughout 654 and 1. This context 
therefore confirms the explanation of \(yei Ίησοίς in 1 suggested by Zahn. Are we to 
follow him in his next inference that the formula λ/γί» 'ϊησυΟί has been taken over without 
alteration by the editor from his source, which was therefore presumably a Gospel narrative? 
To this we should answer by a decided negative. As Dr. Lock remarks {Two Lectures, 
p. 18), 'it is not likely that \tyti should have occurred uniformly in a narrative,' a criticism 
which is strengthened by the recurrence in 654 of at least three more instances of Xty« Ίι/σοΟι 
(II. 9, 27, and 36), and by the comparison of 654. 32 sqq. and 655. 17-23, which suggests 
that if the former had been taken directly from a Gospel like that to which the latter belonged, 
Ίτ;σοΟί would have been omitted. It is, we think, much more probable that the formula Xf'yti 
^\r\ao\it is due to the editor of the collection than to his sources, whatever they were. And 
though there is now no longer any particular reason for interpreting the tense of Xfy<» as 
more than a historic present, a secondary meaning is not excluded, and may be present in 
1. 36 just as much as in the other instances where there is no context. We should be inclined 
to paraphrase Xe'yfi Ίι/σοΟί as ' This is one of those λόγοι of Jesus to which I referred in the 
introduction,' and to explain the uniform repetition of it as marking off the several λόγο• 
from each other, and giving greater impressiveness to the whole. The fact that the editor 
used the aorist and not the historic present in his introduction suggests that by his 
employment of the present tense Xiyn throughout the Sayings he intended to produce 
a slightly different effect from that which would have been caused by Vktytv or tlmv. But 


this new light shed upon the formula Xiyei Ίησοϋι does not bring with it any new reason for 
regarding the Sayings as extracts from a narrative Gospel. 

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

We begin therefore with a brief enumeration of the different Gospels to which 1 has 
been referred, premising that all theories in favour of extracts have now to face at the outset 
a difficult, and to some of them, we think, an insurmountable obstacle in the shape of the 
introduction in 654. Of these the most generally accepted is probably that maintained 
with all his usual brilliant powers of analysis by Harnack {Die juiigst entdeckten Spriiche 
Jesu), that 1 consisted of extracts from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. The 
question was, however, complicated by the extremely divergent views held concerning that 
Gospel, to which only one passage of any length can be assigned with certainty. At 
one extreme stands Harnack's view that this with the Gospel according to the Hebrews was 
the Gospel first used in Egypt, that it was not really heretical, and that it is the source 
of the non-canonical Sayings found in the Second Epistle of Clement. At the other 
extreme is the view of Resch [Agrapha, pp. 316-9), that the Gospel according to the 
Egyptians was not used by the author of the Second Epistle of Clement, and that it 
was thoroughly Gnostic and Encratite, as Origen and Epiphanius declared ; the view 
of Zahn {Gesch. d. NT. Kan. ii. pp. 628 sqq.), which seems to us the most reasonable, 
stands midway between, assigning to this Gospel neither the importance given to it by 
Harnack nor the heretical character ascribed to it by Resch, with whom, however, Zahn 
is in accord in considering that it was not used by the author of II Clem. Disagreeing 
as we do with Harnack's view of the Gospel according to the Egyptians, we have never been 
able to regard his explanation of 1 as satisfactory, and the insecurity of his hypothesis 
is illustrated by the attempt of Mr. Badham {Athenaeum, Aug. 7, 1897), from a point of view 
not far from that of Resch, to reach the same conclusion. The evidence of 654 provides 
fresh objections to the theory. There is no direct point of contact between 654 and 
the Gospel according to the Egyptians, and where one of the uncanonical Sayings happens 
to be known, it occurs not in this Gospel but in that according to the Hebrews. There is, 
indeed, more to be said for regarding 654 as extracts from the latter Gospel, as was 
suggested in the case of 1 by Batiffol {Revue Biblique, 1897, p. 515) and Davidson 
{Internal. Journ. of Ethics, Oct. 1897), than from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. 
In their divergence from the Canonical Gospels, the striking character of much of the 


new matter, the Hebraic parallelisms of expression, the Sayings are quite in keeping with 
the style of the most venerable and important of all the uncanonical Gospels, which 
is known to have been written originally in Hebrew, and which is now generally 
regarded as independent of the four Canonical Gospels. To these points of connexion 
has now to be added the far more solid piece of evidence afforded by the ist Saying 
in 654. There remain indeed the objections (cf. Sayings of our Lord, p. 17) that the 
Gospel according to the Hebrews would be expected to show greater resemblance to 
St. Matthew than we find in 1 and 654, which is even further away from St. Matthew's 
Gospel than 1, and secondly that the Johannine colouring traceable in the new Sayings 
is foreign to the extant fragments of the Gospel according to the Hebrews, which seems 
to have been quite parallel to the Synoptists. But on the other hand, if Harnack is right 
(Gesch. d. Altchrist. Lil. ii. pp. 646-8) in supposing that the resemblance of this Gospel 
to St. Luke's was not much less marked than its resemblance to St. Matthew's, the points 
of contact between the Sayings and St. Luke, which are at least as strong as these with 
St. Matthew, constitute no great difficulty. And it is quite possible that the Gospel 
according to the Hebrews had a mystical side which is revealed to us occasionally (as 
e. g. in the curious passage in which Jesus speaks of his ' mother, the Holy Ghost,' and in 
the Saying found also in 654), but which owing to the paucity of references has hitherto 
been underestimated. A far graver and in fact almost fatal objection, however, to regarding 
the Sayings as extracts culled from either the Gospel according to the Hebrews or the 
Gospel according to the Egyptians is the irreconcilability of such a view with the introduc- 
tion of 654. It is very difficult to believe that an editor would have had the boldness to 
issue extracts from such widely known works as an independent collection of Sayings 
claiming the authority of Thomas and perhaps another disciple. Even if we supply 
Ματδαιω at the end of 654. 2 and suppose that the mention of Thomas is of quite 
secondary importance, it is very hard to supply a reasonable motive for issuing a series 
of extracts from the Gospel according to the Hebrews with such a preface as we find 
in 654, and to account for the popularity of these supposed extracts in the century 
following their publication. We are therefore on the whole opposed to the view, 
attractive though it undoubtedly is, that the Sayings are all directly derived from the Gospel 
according to the Hebrews. But that there is a connexion between them is certain, 
and it is significant that the Slromateis of Clement of Alexandria, in which work Mayor 
(ap. Rendel Harris, Contemp. Rev. 1897, pp. 344-5) has with much probability detected 
references to the 2nd Logion (cf. the parallels adduced on p. 7), are also the source 
of the quotation from the Gospel according to the Hebrews which is closely parallel to the 
I St Saying. It is not at all unlikely that the 2nd Logion (' Except ye fast ') also presented 
a strong similarity to a passage in the same Gospel. 

The obstacle which prevents us from accepting the Gospel according to the Hebrews 
as the source of all the Sayings, in spite of the evidence in favour of such a view, applies 
Λvith equal force to Zahn's hypothesis that they were derived from the Gospel of the 
Ebionites or Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, which is open to grave objections on other 
grounds. The instances adduced by Zahn to show the use of collections of extracts 
in the second century, (i) a series of ΐκλο-γαί from the Old Testament composed by Melito 
of Sardis, and (2) a list of heretical passages from the Gospel of Peter appended to a letter 
by Serapion, were singularly inapt even as regards 1 (cf. Sanday, Two Lectures, p. 45, 
note), and still less bear any relation to 654. Even admitting for the sake of argument 
Zahn's theory of the relation of the Gospel of the Ebionites to the Gospel according to the 
Hebrews (on which Harnack throws doubts, op. cit. ii. p. 626), and his proposed date for 
1, about A. D. 170 (which has generally been regarded as too late), and for the Gospel 


of the Ebionites (which if we follow Harnack, op. cil. ii. p. 631, is too early), the character 
of the extant fragments of this thoroughly Gnostic Jewish-Christian Gospel is very different 
from that of 1 and 654, to say nothing of the other arguments against Zahn's theory 
brought l)y Dr. Sanday in Tivo Lccliircs, p. 46. 

The views which we have discussed so far have, whether satisfactory or not on other 
grounds, all been confronted by the initial difficulty of the introduction. Let us now 
examine those Gospels ascribed to disciples whose names either occur or may with reasonable 
probability be supposed to have occurred in 11. 2-3. It is obvious that the introduction 
would suit a series of extracts from e. g. the Gospel of Thomas much better than one 
from the Gospel according to the Hebrews. The Gospel of Thomas is known to have 
existed in more than one form, namely as an account of Jesus' childhood which is extant 
in several late recensions of varying length, and as an earlier Gospel condemned by 
Hippolytus in the following passage (Reful. v. 7) ού μ<5ι/οι> 8' αντΰιν (πιμαμτυρύν φασ\ (sc. the 

Naassenes) τω λόγω τα *Ασσνρίων μυστήρια αΚ\α καί ^ρνγων ιτ€ρ\ την των •γ(γηνότων κα\ -γινομίνων 
κα\ ζσομίνων (τι μακαρίαν κρνβομίνην όμον κα\ φαν^ρονμίνην φύσιν ηνττίρ φησί την (ντυς ανθρώπου 
βασϊΚίΙαν ουρανών ζητονμίνην^ 7Τΐρ\ ηί διαρρήδην €V τω κατά θωμαν ΐπιγραφομ^νω ΐναγγΐΚίω 
τταραδώόασι XeyovTcs ούτως' tpe 6 ζητών ΐΰρησα iv παιδι'ϋΐϊ άπο (τών ίτττά' ΐΚ€Ϊ yap «V τω 

τ6σσα/3ίσ/(αιδ€κάτω αΐώνι κρυβόμινο! φανιροΰμαι. Here we have two remarkable points of 
contact with 654, the mention of Thomas coupled with the ivTos ανθρώπου βασιλέα 
(cf. the and Saying). 

The parallels between 1 and one of the later forms of the Thomas Gospel have been 
\vorked out with great ingenuity and elaboration by Dr. Taylor on pp. 90—8 of T/ie 
Oxyrhytichus Logia and the Apocryphal Gospels. There is much to be said for his view 
that the extant Gospel of Thomas contains some traces of 1, and the probability would 
be increased if 1, which Dr. Taylor was inclined to regard as extracts from the Gospel 
according to the Egyptians, be supposed to be derived from the earlier Gospel of Thomas. 
654 does not seem to contain any clear points of connexion with the later Gospel of 
Thomas, but this is compensated for by the remarkable parallel from Hippolytus quoted 
above. It is moreover noteworthy, as Mr. Badham remarks, that the Acts of Thomas, which 
may well have been partly built upon the Gospel, exhibit a knowledge of that Saying which 
occurs both in the Gospel according to the Hebrews and in 654, and that, as Prof. Lake 
informs us, an Athos ]\IS. [Sludia Billica, v. 2, p. 173) asserts that the πιρικοπή of Christ 
and the woman taken in adultery (which has found its way from the Gospel according 
to the Hebrews into St. John's Gospel) occurred in the Gospel of Thomas. But there 
are serious objections to regarding 1 and 654 as extracts from that Gospel. In the 
first place though it is possible that Thomas is the only disciple mentioned in the 
introduction, it is equally possible that he stood second, and in that case the Gospel 
from which the Sayings may have been extracted is more likely to have been one 
which went under the name of the person who stood first ; though indeed, if there were 
two disciples mentioned in the introduction, it is not very satisfactory to derive the Sayings 
from any Gospel which went under the name of only one. A much greater difficulty 
arises from the divergence of the Sayings from what little is known about the earlier 
Gospel of Thomas. The saying quoted by Hippolytus is widely removed in character 
from those in 1 and 654, and it is significant that, though the doctrine of aeons 
seems to be known to the author of the Gospel of Thomas, 654 employs in 1. 24 
the neutral word τόπο: in a passage in which υΙών, as is shown by the parallel from the 
Apocalypse of Peter, would have been highly appropriate, if the composer of the Sayings 
had known of or been influenced by that doctrine. The Gospel of Thomas, which 
Harnack thinks was known to Irenaeus, is indeed placed before a. d. 180, but from 


the quotation in Ilippoljtus, coupled with the form of the Gospel in later times and the 
scanty evidence from other sources, it has been considered to have been mainly at any 
rate a Gospel of the childhood and of an advanced Gnostic character. If the Sayings 
are to be derived from it, the current view of the Gospel of Thomas must be entirely 
changed ; and it is very doubtful whether this can be done except by postulating the 
e.xistence of an original Thomas Gospel behind that condemned by Ilippolytus. This 
would lead us into a region of pure conjecture into which we are unwilling to enter, 
at any rate until other less hazardous roads to a solution are closed. That there is 
a connexion between the earlier Gospel of Thomas and the Sayings is extremely likely, 
but this can be better explained by supposing that the Sayings influenced the Gospel 
than by the hypothesis that the Gospel is the source of the Sayings. 

The Gospel of Philip, which is assigned by Zahn to the beginning of the second 
century, by Harnack to the second century or first half of the third, would, even if it 
were certain that ΦίΚίππω occurred in 654. 2, be an unsuitable source for the Sayings. 
The extract quoted from it by Epiphanius shows much more highly developed ascetic and 
Gnostic tendencies than can be found in 1 and 654. 

The only other Apocryphal Gospels which seem to be worth consideration are the 
works connected with IVIatthias, of which there are three; (i) the παρα&όσιις of Matthias, 
a few extracts from which are cited by Clement of Alexandria, (2) a Gospel according 
to Matthias mentioned by Origen, and (3) certain λόγοι άιτόκρυφοι in use among the 
Basilidians Avhich are thus described by Hippolytus {RefiU. vii. 20) Βασιλ(ΐίι;ϊ τοΊνυν 

και ΊσιδωροΓ . , , φασιν ΐψηκίναι Ματθίαν αντοϊς Xoyuvs άττοκρνφους, ονς ήκονσί πάρα του σωτηροί 

κατ Ιδίαν διδαχίίΐΓ. The nature of these three works and their relation to each other 
are very uncertain. Zahn considers all three to be identical ; Harnack, who at first 
{op. cit. i. p. 18) was disposed to accept the identity of (i) and (2), subsequently {pp. cit. 
ii. p. 597) reverts to the view that these two at any rate were distinct. The suggestion 
that the irapahaads of Matthias might be the source of 1 Λvas thrown out by Dr. James 
{Conlemp. Rev. Aug. 1897), only to be immediately rejected on the ground of the 
dissimilarity of form between 1 and the extant fragments of the παραδοσίκ, which seem 
to have been a work of a mainly homiletic character. The TrnpafioVfit are now altogether 
excluded from the likely sources of the Sayings owing to the fact that Clement quotes 
an extract from them, βανμασον τα παρόντα, side by side with the very citation from the Gospel 
according to the Hebrews which is parallel to the ist Saying. Of the Gospel according 
to IMatthias practically nothing is known except its name ; the hypothesis that it is the 
source of the Sayings is therefore incapable of proof or disproof, but being based on pure 
conjecture has nothing to oppose to the antecedent improbability (cf p. 16) that the 
Sayings are something quite different from what they profess to be. There remain 
the λόγοι απόκρυφοι mentioned by Hippolytus. The occurrence of the word λόγοι suggests 
a connexion with the Sayings, but this cannot easily be canied much further. The λόγοι 
απόκρυφοι were, according to Hippolytus, revealed to Matthias κατ 'ώίαν, whereas if Matthias 
occurred at all in the introduction, it was in conjunction with Thomas. The particular 
Gnostic ontological speculations which according to Hippolytus were found in these λόγο» 
απόκρυφοι belong to another plane of thought from that found in the Sayings ; but the 
question is complicated by the confused and untrustworthy character of Hippolytus' 
discussion of the Basilidians, vii. 20 being among the most suspicious passages. And even 
if there were a connexion between these \ayoi απόκρυφοι of Matthias and the Sayings, 
this would bring us no nearer to a proof that the Sayings were extracts from a narrative 
Gospel rather than a collection of Sayings as such. There is moreover another objection 
to connecting the Sayings with any work professedly under the name of Matthias, because 

C 2 


such a view would necessarily entail the supposition that the Sayings are post-rcsurrec- 
tional; and this for the reasons given on pp. 12-3 we do not think justifiable. 

Our conclusion, therefore, is that no one of the known uncanonical Gospels is 
a suitable source for the Sayings as a whole. Shall we regard them as a series of extracts 
from several of these Gospels, as was suggested with respect to 1 by Dr. James ? So long 
as the discussion was confined to 1, such an explanation from its vagueness was almost 
be3Ond the reach of criticism. The recovery of 654 alters the situation. On the one 
hand the occurrence of a Saying, which is known to have been also found in the Gospel 
according to the Hebrews, side by side with other Sayings which it is difiicult to ascribe 
to the same source, rather favours the theory of an eclectic series derived from different 
Gospels. But the introduction connecting the Sayings with particular disciples is not 
very suitable for such a collection which ex hypolhesi is of an altogether miscellaneous 
character ; and it would be difiicult for any one to maintain that the Sayings are derived 
from several Apocryphal Gospels and at the same time in face of the mention of Thomas 
to deny that one of the chief elements was the Gospel of Thomas. But the inclusion 
of the Gospel of Thomas among the sources of the Sayings to a large extent involves 
the hypothesis of extracts from several Gospels in the difficulties which are discussed 
on pp. 18-9. 

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

The opinions of those critics who agreed with our general explanation of 1 as against 
the various theories of extracts may be divided into two classes: (i) those who regarded 
1 as a collection of Sayings independent of the Gospels and belonging to the first century, 
and who therefore were disposed to admit to a greater or less extent and with much 
varying degrees of confidence the presence of genuine elements in the new matter 
(Drs. Swete, Rendel Harris, Lock, and Heinrici) ; (2) those who, like Dr. Sanday, regarded 
the new Sayings in 1 as the product of the early second century, not directly dependent 
on the Canonical Gospels, but having ' their origin under conditions of thought which 
these Gospels had created' (Sanday, op. cit. p. 41), a view which necessarily carries with it 
the rejection of the new matter. It remains to ask how far 654 helps to decide the points 
at issue in favour of either side. 

With regard to the relation of 654 to the Canonical Gospels, the proportion of new 
and old matter is about the same as in 1, and the parallels to the Canonical Gospels 
in 654 exhibit the same freedom of treatment, which can be explained either as implying 
independence of the Canonical Gospels, or as the liberties taken by an early redactor. 
The introduction in 654 contains a clearer parallel to St. John's Gospel than anything 


to be found in 1 ; but even if it be conceded (and there is good reason for not con- 
ceding it; cf. p. 11) that the introduction implied a knowledge of St. John's Gospel, 
and was therefore probably composed in the second century, the Sayings themselves 
can (and, as we shall show, do) contain at any rate some elements which are not derived 
from the Canonical Gospels, and go back to the first century. So far as the evidence of 
654 goes, there is nothing to cause any one to renounce opinions which he may have formed 
concerning the relation of 1 to the Canonical Gospels. No one who feels certain on 
this point with regard to the one, is likely to be convinced of the incorrectness of his 
view by the other. 

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

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


been influenced to some extent by the thought and literature of the apostolic and post- 
apostolic age, and which may well itself have influenced the Gospel of Thomas and perhaps 
others of the heretical Gospels, but which is ultimately connected in a large measure with 
a first-hand source other than that of any of the Canonical Gospels ? Some such view has 
been maintained by scholars of eminence, e.g. Heinrici and Rendel Harris, with regard to 1 ; 
and if the claim made by the editor of the collection in his introduction, that his source was 
St. Thomas and perhaps another disciple, amounts to but little more, the internal evidence of 
654 provides no obvious reason why we should concede him much less; while the occurrence 
of one uncanonical Saying, which is already known to be of extreme antiquity and 
has been accepted as substantially genuine by several critics, lends considerable support to 
the others which rest on the evidence of 654 and 1 alone. 

That is as far as we are prepared to go ; for a really weighty and perfectly unbiassed 
estimate of the ultimate value of any new discovery, resort must be made to some other 
quarter than the discoverers. We conclude by pointing out that, if the view with regard 
to 1 and 654 which we have just indicated is on the right lines, the analogy of this 
collection has an obvious bearing on the question of the sources of the Synoptic Gospels, 
and that the mystical and speculative element in the early records of Christ's Sayings which 
found its highest and most widely accepted expression in St. John's Gospel, may well have 
been much more general and less peculiarly Johannine than has hitherto been taken 
for granted. 

655. Fragment of λ Lost Gospel. 

Fr. {ύ) 8-2 X 8.3 cm. Plate II. 

Eight fragments of a papyrus in roll form containing an uncanonical Gospel, 
the largest {b) comprising parts of the middles of two narrow columns. None 
of the other fragments actually joins (b), but it is practically certain that the 
relation to it of Frs. (a) and {c), which come from the tops of columns, is as 
indicated in the Plate. Frs. {d) and (c), both of which have a margin below the 
writing, probably belong to the bottom of the same two columns which are 
partly preserved in {b) ; but how much is lost in the interval is uncertain. Since 
the upper portion of Col. i admits of a sure restoration of the majority of the 
lacunae, the first 23 lines are nearly complete ; but the remains of the second 
column are for the most part too slight for the sense to be recovered. The 
handwriting is a small uncial of the common sloping oval type, which in most 
cases belongs to the third century, among securely dated examples being 23 
(P. Oxy. I. Plate vi), 223 (P. Oxy. II. Plate i), 420 (P. Oxy. III. Plate vi), 
P. Amh. II. 12 (Plate iii). But this kind of hand is found in the second century, 
e.g. 26 (P. Oxy. I. Plate vii), 447 (P. Oxy. III. Plate vi), and continued in the 
fourth ; for late third or fourth century examples see P. Amh. I. 3 [b) (Part II. 
Plate xxv) and 404 (P. Oxy. III. Plate iv). 655 is a well-written specimen, 


suggesting, on the whole, the earlier rather than the later period during which 
this hand was in vogue, and though wc should not assign it to the second century, 
it is not likely to have been written later than A. D. 250. Lines 1-16 νμίαν give 
the conclusion of a speech of Jesus which is parallel to several sentences in the 
Sermon on the Mount. Then follows (II. 17-23) an account of a question put to 
Him by the disciples and of the answer. This, the most important part of the 
papyrus, is new, but bears an interesting resemblance to a known quotation from 
the Gospel according to the Egyptians ; cf. note ad loc. A passage in Col. ii 
seems to be parallel to Luke xi. 52. On the general questions concerning the 
nature and origin of the Gospel to which the fragment belonged see pp. 27-8. 
In 11. 7-1 1 of the text the division between Frs. (λ) and [b) is indicated by double 
vertical lines ||. No stops, breathings, or accents are used, but a wedge-shaped 
sign for filling up short lines occurs in 1. 27 and a correction in a cursive hand in 
1. 25. An interchange of «i and j; causes the form iikix-iav in 1. 14, and 1. 13 
requires some correction. 

The key to the general restoration of 11. 1-3 was supplied by Mr. Badham, 
that to 11. 41-6 by Dr. Bartlet. 

Col. i. Col. ii. 

{a) [. . .]Γτο πρωι e[ (c) θ 

[. . . .]e ΑΦ ecTT[ 30 Λ6[ 

[. . . .]ρωι yWHTe [. . . o[ 

[ ]ΜωΝ τι ΦΑ[ ΤΑ[ 

5 [ ] ΤΗ Cri. ΓΥ[ 

[ ] τι εΝΔΥ[. ΚΑ[ 

{b) [. .]C0e||[. . .μω KPej[. 3S ν . [ 

[. . .]ec . ||[. . .] τωΝ [. . κα[ 

ΝωΝ ATIli[. . .]ΥΞΑ[. ΗΜ[ 

ΙΟ Ν€Ι ΟΥΔΕ Ν||[. .]€! . [. C![ 

eN exoNT]i[. . .]νδ[. [ 

ΜΑ τι eN[. . . .] ΚΑΙ 4° [ 

YMeiC TIC AN nPOC0H {b) eA[ 


IS ΥΜωΝ AYTO[. .]ωceι kpyt[ 


ΜωΝ AeroYciN AY 45 eicep[ 


ποτέ HMeiN €μφα δ€ rei[ 

20 NHc ecei ΚΑΙ ποτέ Μθΐω[ 

ce ΟΨΟΜΕΘΑ Aerei κ€ραι[ 


ΟΤΑΝ eKAYCHcee και 



50 PA[ 









]K. [ 





. . aJTTo ττρωι ε[ωί oye 
[^7;t]€ ά0' eV7r[epay 
[icoy π]/οα)ί /i>7re [τ^ 
[τροφί) ύ]μων τι φά- 
5 [γητί μήτ(] rfj στ[ο- 
[Xrj νμων] τ( ΐνδν- 
[σ•η\σθ(. [πολ]λω κρύ^σ- 
[σον]ίί [ίστε] των [κρί- 
νων aTL[va α]νζά- 
ιο vei ovSe ν[ήθ](ΐ . [. 
(V ()(^0VT[es e\vS[v- 
μα τι ίν[. . . .] καΐ 

νμΰί ; Ti'y άν προσθ((ί)η 
ΐπϊ την ήλικίαν 

15 νμων ; αύτο[9 δ]ώσΐΐ 
νμΐν το (νδνμα ν- 
μων. λίγονσιν αύ- 
τω οι μαθηταϊ αύτοΰ• 
TT&re ήμΐν ΐμφα- 

20 νηί (crei και ττότβ 
(re οψόμΐθα ; Xeyef 
όταν ΐκδνσησθΐ και 
μΫΐ αίσ)(ννθητ(, 

41 eA[fye' την κλίΐδα 
τήί [γνώσ(ω? e- 
Kpvy^[aTt• αύτοΙ ούκ 
ΐίσήλ[θατί, και Toiy 

45 (ί(Τ(ρ[χομ(νοΐ! ού- 
κ άν[(ωξατί .... 


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

41-6. '. . . He said. The key of knowledge ye hid; ye entered not in yourselves and 
to them that were entering in ye opened not.' 

1 — 7. Cf. Matt. vi. 25 fij μί^ημυΰτί Ttj ψνχη υμών τι φάγητί μη&( τω σώματι ίμων τι ΐνδίσησθί. 
ονχί η ψνχη ττ'Κί'ίόν ΐστι της τροφή: Ktu το σώμα τοΰ €ΐ/8νματος , , Luke χϋ. 22—3 μη μ(ρίμνάτ( τη 
ψνχη τι φάγητί μη^ί τω σώματι τι ΐν8ύσησθί, ή yap ψνχη πλύόι/ ίστιν της τροφής κα\ το σώμα τοΰ 

ϊΜματος. The papyrus probably had μη μ(ριμνατ( at the beginning of the sentence but 
differs (i) by the addition of <'mo ■πρω\ . . . ΐως πρωί, (2) by the use of a different word for σώμα 
and probably for ψυχή, though it is possible that τω σώματι or τη ψυχή preceded <m6 πρωί in 

I. I, (3) by the omission of the second half of the Saying as recorded in the Gospels. In 

II. 1-2 there is not room for «[σπφαί μήτ\. στ[ολή in 11. 5-6 is not quite the word that 
would be expected, being used in the New Testament for grand ' robes ' rather than a plain 
garment, but if the division τι; στ\ is correct στολή cannot be avoided, and with the reading 
της t[ it is difficult to find any suitable word; cf. also e.g. 839 ήλθΐ μοι -γυμνός . . . ήγόρασα 

αυτώι στολήν, 

7—13• Cf. Matt. vi. 28 κα\ π€ρ\ ϊνδΰματος τι μ(ριμνατ€ ; καταμάθ(Τ( τα κρίνα τοΰ aypoi πώς 
αύζάνουσιν' ου κοπιώσιν ούδί νηθονσιν' Xc'-yw δ€ ΰμίν οτι οΰδί Σολομών iv πάση τη ^όξη αυτοΰ π(ρι€- 
βαΚίτο ώς ίν τούτων, Luke χϋ. 27 κατανοήσατ( τα κρίνα πώς ai^avfi' oi κοπιά oiS( νήθίΐ' λί'^ω δί 
ίμ'ιν ονΒί κ.τ,λ. and Matt. vi. 26 οΰχ ίμ(Ίς μάλλον διαφ(ρ(Τ( αΰτώρ (sc. των πίτίΐνώι/) ; Luke χϋ. 24 

πόσω μάλλον ύμί'ις 8ιαφ(ρ(τ( τών πίτιινών. The Corresponding passage in the papyrus is not 
only much shorter, but varies considerably, though to what extent is not quite clear owing 
to the uncertainty attaching to the restoration of 11. 10-2. Our reasons for placing Fr. (<?) 
in the particular relation to Fr. {b) indicated on Plate II are the facts (i) that Fr. (a) is from 
the top of a column which is presumably, judging by the general appearance and lacunae 
in Fr. (a), Col. i of Fr. (b) ; (2) that though there is nothing in the external appearance of 
Fr. {a) to show that it contains any actual ends of lines, the connexion of 11. 8-9 and 9-10 
which results from our proposed combination of the two fragments, τών [κρί\ΐ'ων and α]νξύ\ν(ΐ, 
is so suitable to the context that it is unlikely to be fortuitous. The connexion of 1ί. lo-i 
and 1 1-2 is, however, more difficult. With the readings and punctuation which we have 
adopted ev in 1. 12 suggests nothing but iv\&t'iT(\ w^hich does not suit τι, and there are many 
points of uncertainty. At the end of 1. 10 the letter before I is more like Γ, C, or Τ than 
e, so that ούδί ν\ήθ^(ΐ (cf. Luke xii. 27) is not very satisfactory. MATION can be read in 1. 12, 
and would in the context be expected to be the termination of a word meaning ' garment' ; 
but with the reading [ΐγάτιον it is hard to explain the vestiges of the two letters on 1. 1 1 of 
Fr. ((?), which suit respectively a straight letter such as H, I, Μ or Ν and Δ or, less probably, 
A or Λ. Μυμάτιον, a rare word not found in the N. T., but not inappropriate here, is 
possible ; but kv ΐχοντ^^ς (\νξ[υ^•μάτιόν [ί'στί] is Unlikely. It is also possible to connect κα\ ύμιΊς 
with τις instead of with the preceding words, but this does not help towards making the 
restoration of 11. 10—2 easier. These difficulties could be avoided by supposing that Fr. {a) is 
to be placed much higher up in relation to Fr. (1^), but this involves the sacrifice of any 
direct connexion between Frs. {a) and {b), and 11. 8-9 and 9-10 afford very strong grounds 
for our proposed combination of the two fragments. 

13~5• Cf. Matt, vi, 27 τίς δί ΐζ υμών μερίμνων Βύναται προσθΰναι (πι την ήλικΐαν αντοϋ πήχυν 


ίνα;, and Luke xii. 25 tU Se ΐξ ίμων μιρψνων δύναται cVi την ήλικίαν αντοϋ προσθήναι ττη\νν ; 

The papyrus version is somewhat shorter, omitting μ(ρψνων and πηχνν. The position in 
which this Saying is found in the papyrus is also slightly different from that in the Gospels, 
where it immediately precedes instead of following the verse about the κρίνα. In 1. 13 προσ- 
θα(τι) could be read in place of προσθ{(ΐ)η : there does not seem to be room for π/)οσί«[ΐ)]. 

15—6. Cf. Matt. vi. 31—3 μη ovv μ(ρίμνησητ€ Xfyovres τί φάγωμ^ν η τι 7τίωμ(ν η τι fffpi- 
βα\ωμ(βα . . . tiiBfv γαρ ό πατήρ νμών ό ουράνιος οτι XPfjC^TC τούτων απάντων, ζητ€ΐτ€ fie πρώτον την 
βασι\(ίαν κα'ι την δικαιοσΰνην αΐιτοϋ κα'ι ταντα πάντα πpoσrfθήσcτa^ ύμΐν, and Luke χϋ. 2 9~3'' which 
is nearly identical and proceeds μη φοβοΰ τ6 μικρόν ποίμνιον ότι (Οόκησίν ό πατήρ ίμων ioivai 

ίμ'ιν την βασιλήαν. The papyrus has the corresponding idea but expressed with extreme 
conciseness. αίτό[ί δ ώσίΐ, unless 8ώσ(ΐ is an error for δώσω, raises a difficulty, for we should 
expect ό πατήρ or ό ieo'r. Apparently αύτόι refers back to πατήρ or θ(0! in the column pre- 
ceding, or the author of the Gospel may have here incorporated from some source a Saying 
without its context which would have explained avros (cf. 654. 32). 

17—23. For the question cf. John xiv. 19 sqq. ίτι μικρόν κα\ ό κόσμο; pt οΐκίτι θιωρΛ' ίμίϊί 
de θ(ωρ(\τ€ μί' οτι ί'γώ ζω κα\ ίιμ^'ις ζήσ€Τ€ .... λί'γίΐ αύτω 'lovdai , . , Kvptc, τι yiyovfv οτι ημΐν μ€λ\€ΐς 
(μφανίζίΐν afavTuv και ονχΊ τω κόσμω ; άπικριθη . . . ίάν τιι αγαπά pe τον λόγοι» μον τηρήσιι και ό 

πατήρ μου άγαττήσ(ΐ αυτόν, και προ! αύτόι/ (\(νσόμ(θα. The answer ascribed in the papyrus to 
Jesus bears a striking resemblance to the answer made to a similar question in a passage of 
the Gospel according to the Egyptians which is referred to several times by Clement of 
Alexandria, and which is reconstructed by Hamack (Chrotiol. i. p. 13) thus: — τη ΣαΧώμα 

πννθανομίνη μΐχρι πότ€ θάνατος ισχνσ(ΐ «ίπ-ίΐ» ό κύριος' μίχρις &ν ΰμΰς αί γνναΐκΐς τικτ€Τ€, ηλθον yap 
καταΧνσαι τα fpya της ΰηλύας, και η Έάλωμη ίφη αντώ' καλώς ουν ^ποίησα μη Τΐκονσα ; 6 δί κύριος 
ημίΐψατο \(γων πάσαν φάγ( βοτάνην, την δϊ πικρίαν ίχουσαν μη φάγης. πννθανομίνης 3e τ^ί Σαλώμι;; 
iroTe γνωσθήσΐται τα πίρι S>v ήρ€το ίφη ό κύριος' όταν ουν το τής αισχύνης ένδυμα πατήσητ€ κα\ όταν 
γίνηται τα δύο ίν, κα\ τό apptv μ(τα τής θηλήας οΰτί άρριν οϋτ€ θήλυ. Cf. II Clem. 12. 2 
ίπΐρωτηθΑς yap αύτυς 6 κύριος νπό τιρος πότζ ήζίΐ αντοϋ ή βασιλΐΐα €ΐπ€ν' όταν ttrrai τα δύο fv, και τό 
€^ω ώϊ τό €σω, και τό apaev μετά της θηλείας οϋτ€ αρσΐν οΰτ€ θήλυ. Both όταν (κδύσησθί και μη 

αισχυνθήτε and όταν τό Tijf αισχύνης ίνδυμα πατήσητ( express the Same idea, a mystical reference 
to Gen. iii. 7, ' And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and they were not 
ashamed,' the meaning in either case being that Christ's kingdom on earth would not be 
manifested until man had returned to the state of innocence which existed before the Fall, 
and in which sexual ideas and relations had no place. The chief differences between 
the two passages are (i) the setting, the questioner being in the Gospel according to 
the Egyptians Salome, and in the papyrus the disciples, (2) the simpler language of the 
papyrus as contrasted with the more literary and elaborated phrase τό t^s αισχύνης ίνδυμα 
πατήσητί, (3) the absence in the papyrus of the Encratite tendency found in the earlier part 
of the quotation from the Gospel according to the Egyptians. On the relation between 
the twO see p. 27. Whether the papyrus continued after αΐσχυνθήτι with something 
like κα\ όταν γίΊ/7)ται τα δύο ΐν, κ.τ.λ., is of course uncertain, but Fr. {d), which probably 
belongs to the bottom of this column, is concerned with something different. 

25. φωτίίνω: the corrector's spelling φωτεινός is commoner than φωτινός. Perhaps 
this passage was parallel to Matt. vi. 22—3 (Sermon on the Mount) εάν rj 6 οφθαλμός σου 

άπλοϋς, Σλον τό σώμα σου φοττεινον εσται, κ.τ.λ.; cf. Luke xi. 34-6. But the papyrus muSt 

in any case have differed largely in its language, and κ]όσμω{?) in L 26 suggests a Johannine 

30. The Λ of Λ6ί projects somewhat, but since the whole column trends to the 
left, probably no importance is to be attached to the circumstance ; cf. the initial δ in 1. 47. 

42-6. With the remains of these lines Bartlet well compares Luke xi. 52 οΰαΊ 


νμ'ίν τοΪΓ νομι,κοΧί οτι ηματ( (D and SOIJie IMSS. (κρΰψατ() την κ\(Ίδα (D leXflf) τής γνώσεως' 
αυτοί (D and some MSS. κα\ αυτοί) ουκ (1σήλθατ( και τούι (Ισιρχομίνου: (D flσπup(υoμ€ιιoυί) 

(κωΚνσατ€, οπ which our restorations are based. If they are in the right direction, the 
papyrus agreed with D in having (κρίψατι in place of ηρατ(, but with the other uncials 
against D in having a participle of (Ισίρχισθαι not of (Ισπορίΰ^σθαι, while D's reading 
<a\ avToi is too long for 1. 43. But the papyrus certainly differed from all the MSS. 
in 1. 46 and probably in 1. 42, where τηί γνώσιω! « makes a line of only 11 letters, which is 
a little too short, so that perhaps either a different word from γνώσίωί {άΧηθύας ?) or 
a compound of ΐκρίψατι is to be supplied. 

51. Below K0[ is what seems to be an accidental spot of ink rather than part of 
a letter. 

655 seems to belong to a Gospel which was closely similar in point of form to the 
Synoptists. The narrator speaks in the third person, not in the first, and the portion preserved 
consists mainly of discourses which are to a large extent parallel to passages in Matthew 
and Luke, especially the latter Gospel, which alone seems to be connected with II. 41 sqq. 
The papyrus version is, as a rule, shorter than the corresponding passages in the Gospels ; 
where it is longer (11. 1-3) the expansion does not alter the meaning in any way. The 
chief interest lies in the question of the disciples and its answer, both of which so closely 
correspond to a passage in the Gospel according to the Egj-ptians and the uncanonical 
Gospel or collection of Sayings used by the author of the Second Epistle of Clement, that 
the Gospel of which 655 is a fragment clearly belongs to the same sphere of thought. 
Does it actually belong to either of those works, which, though Harnack regards them 
as one and the same, are, we think, more probably to be considered distinct ? In the 
Gospel according to the Egyptians Salome was the questioner who occasioned the 
remarkable Saying beginning όταν τό t^s αίσχϋνηί evSvpa πατησητί, and it is much more 
likely that 655 presents a different version of the same incident in another Gospel, than 
a repetition of the Salome question in a slightly different form in another part of the 
Gospel according to the Egyptians. Nor is 655 likely to be the actual Gospel which 
the author of II Clem. Λvas quoting. It is unfortunate that owing to the papyrus breaking 
off at αίσχυνθητ^ there is no security that όταν γίνηται τα dio ΐν, or at any rate something very 
similar, did not follow, and the omission in the Clement passage of a phrase corresponding 
to 11. 22-3 may be a mere accident. But the fact that the question in II Clem, is worded 
somewhat differently (πότΕ ij^ti ή βασίλύα), and is put into the mouth of ns instead of 
the disciples, as in 655, is a good reason for rejecting the hypothesis that the two works 
were identical. 

The evidence of 655 as to its origin being thus largely of a negative character, we do 
not propose to discuss in detail whether it is likely to belong to any of the other known 
Apocryphal Gospels. There are several to which it might be assigned, but direct evidence 
is wanting. If the Gospel according to the Hebrews were thought of, it would be necessary 
to suppose that the resemblances in 655 to Matthew and Luke did not imply dependence 
upon them. In its relation to the Canonical Gospels 655 somewhat resembles 654, and 
the view that 655 was, though no doubt at least secondary, dependent not on Matthew 
and Luke, but upon some other document, whether behind the Synoptists or merely parallel 
to them, is tenable, but is less likely to commend itself to the majority of critics than the 
opposite hypothesis that 655. i-i6 is ultimately an abridgement of Matthew and Luke 
with considerable alterations. In either case the freedom with which the author of this 
Gospel handles the material grouped by St. Matthew and St. Luke under the Sermon 


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

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

656. Genesis. 

Height 24-4 an. Plate II (c verso). 

Parts of four leaves from a papyrus codex of the book of Genesis in the 
Septuagint version. The MS. was carefully written in round upright uncials 
of good size and decidedly early appearance, having in some respects more 


affinity with types of the second century than of the third. To the latter, 
however, the hand is in all probability to be assigned, though we should be 
inclined to place it in the earlier rather than the later part of the century ; in 
any case this may rank with the original Oxyrhynchus Logia (1) and the frag- 
ments of St. Matthew's and St. John's Gospels (2, 208) as one of the most 
ancient Greek theological books so far known, and it has some claim to be 
considered the oldest of the group. Another mark of age is perhaps to be 
recognized in the absence of the usual contractions for fleo's, κύμιοί. Sec, but this 
may of course be no more than an individual peculiarity. The only abbreviation 
that occurs is the horizontal stroke instead of v, employed to save space at 
the end of a long line. Both high and middle (11. 13, 19) stops are found, but 
are sparingly used : more often a pause is marked by a slight blank space. 
A few alterations and additions have been made by a second hand, which seems 
also to be responsible for the numeration in the centre of the upper margin of 
each page. 

The evidence of so early a text is of particular value for the book of Genesis, 
where the uncial MSS. are most weakly represented. The only first-class 
MS. available for comparison practically throughout the parts covered by the 
papyrus, namely, xiv. 21-3, xv. 5-9, xix. 32-xx. 11, xxiv. 28-47, xxvii. 32-3, 
40-1, is the Codex Alexandrinus (A). The Vatican and Ambrosian codices do 
not begin till later in the book, the Sinaiticus (X) is defective except for occa- 
sional verses in the twenty-fourth chapter, the readings of D, the Cottonian MS., 
which for the most part survives only in a collation { = D), are unascertainable in 
XX. 4-1 1 and xxiv. 28-30, and the Bodleian Genesis (E) fails us in xxiv. The 
result of a collation, where possible, with these MSS., is to show that the 
papyrus, while seldom supporting E, does not side continuously with either K, A, 
or D, though, of course, too little of Ν remains for a satisfactory comparison. As 
a general rule the readings favoured by the new witness are the shorter ones ; 
cf. e.g. notes on 11. 16, 27, 47-8, ^■^, 62, 67, 74, 129, 138-9, 154, 183, 185, i88, as 
against 11. 42, 81, 144, 163. Not infrequently variants occur otherwise attested only 
by cursive MSS., though here too no consistent agreement can be traced, and the 
mixed character of the cursive texts is further emphasized. The papyrus is 
certainly pre-Lucianic, but it has two readings characteristic of Lagarde's Luci- 
anic group ( = Holmes 19, 108, 118), yh'ovs for τοΰ γίνου? in xix. 38 and the 
omission of (KfWev (with the Hebrew) in xxiv. 38. Readings common to this 
group and other cursives are (κύνγ for ταύττ) in xix. ^^, and avbpfs for άνθρωποι in 
XX. 8. On the other hand, the papyrus opposes the Lucianic group in the 
addition of την νύκτα (κΐίνην in xix. 35, and the omission of (φοβηθην . . . αυτήν in 
XX. 2, in the one case against, in the other with, the Hebrew. The number of 



variants which are altogether new, considering the scope of the fragments, is con- 
siderable ; see 11. 48, 55, 56, 81, 114, 154, 155, 160, 163, 181. A peculiar feature is 
the tendency to omit the word Kvpios when applied to the Deity ; this occurs in 
no fewer than four passages (11. 17, 123, 155, 166), in three of which (11. 17, 122, 
166) the omission has been made good by the second hand. A blank space was 
originally left where the word occurred in 1. 17. In the version of Aquila the 
Tetragrammaton was written in Hebrew letters, and this peculiarity reappears in 
a few Hexaplaric MSS. of the Septuagint. The papyrus offers the first example 
of a similar tendency to avoid the sacred name in a text otherwise independent 
of the Aquila tradition. 

The collation with the chief uncial codices given below is based on the 
edition of Swete, while the occasional references to the cursives are derived from 
Holmes ; for some additional information we are indebted to Mr. N. M'^Lean. 


Verso xiv. 21-3. 

Recto XV. 5-9. 

[Αβραμ δοί] μοι tovs αΐ'δρα[ί 
[την 3e ιπτΓο]^ Χαβΐ σΐαυτω 
[ΐίπ(ΐ> 8( Αβραάμ προί βασιλ€α 
[Σοδόμων e^JTefriTjiO) τηι• χ([ι] 
5 [ρα μου προί τ]ον θΐον τον ν 
[ψιστον 09 €κ]τίσ€^ τον ονρα 
[νον και την γ]ην €ΐ απο σπαρ 
[τιον €0)9 σφ]αιρωτηρα ν 
[ποδηματος] λημψομαί 

ΙΟ [σπ](ρμα σ-[ο]υ [και (πιστίυσίν 
[Α]βραμ τω θ(ω [και ΐλογισθη 
αντω eis δίκαίοσ[υνην unev 
δί ττροί αυτόν- iy{<i> ο θίΟί ο (ζα 
γαγων σε ΐΚ χα)/3[αΓ Χαλδαιων ωσ 

15 τί δούναι σοι τη[ν γην ταυτην 
[κ]ληρονομησαι• [fiTTiv δ( δΐσπο 
τα κυρίί κατά τι γ[νωσομαι οτι 
[κ]ληρονομησω α[υτην (ΐττΐν 
[δΐ α]υτω- λαβ( μ[οι δαμαλιν τρΐ€ 

20 [τι]ζουσαν και αίγα [τρίΐτιζουσαν 

(ί>) Verso xix. 32-χχ. 2. 

μ(Τ αυτού κ[αι ΐξαναστησο) 
μ€ν (Κ του [ττατροί ημών σπίρ 
μα ίποτισα[ν δβ τον πατίρα 
25 αυτών οινο[ν ev τη νυκτι fKei 
νη κα[ι] ΐΐσΐΧ[θουσα η πρίσβυτΐ 

Recto XX. 2-1 1. 
[δ( Αμ(ΐβ(λΐχ /SJaffiXevs Γίρα 


65 [ρων και (λαβίν τ]ην Σαρρα και 
[ίΐσηλθ(ν ο θ(05] προί Αμιβί 
[λίχ tv νπνω την] νύκτα και (ΐ 
[π(ν ιδού συ απ]οθνησκ(ΐΐ n[e 



pa ΐκοιμηβη [μίτα του πατροί 
την νύκτα (κΐ^ίνην και ουκ et 
δη €f τω κοιμη[θηΐ'αι αυτήν και 

30 ανασ[τ]ηναι iy[eviTO 8e τη ΐτταυ 
[ρ]ιον και emev [η πρ(σβυτ(ρα 
τη νΐωτΐρα ϊδ[ου ίκοιμηβην txflis 
μίτα του πατρ[ογ ημών] π[ο]τι 
σωμΐν αυτόν ο[ινον και τη]ν νυ 

35 κτα [τ]α[υτην] κα[ι (ΐσ(λθουσ]α κο[ι 
μηθητι μξτ α[υτου και (ξανά 
στησωμεν €Κ [του πατρός ημών 
[σ]π€ρμα ΐποτισ[αν Se και fv τη 
νυκτι ίκΐΐνη 7[ον πατ€ρα] αν 

40 των οινον και ([ισί\θου]σα τ] [ve 
ωτΐρα ΐκοιμη[θη μ(τα τον πα 
τρο9 αντηί τη ν νύκτα ΐκ]([ινην 
και ουκ ΐΐδη e[v τω κοιμη 
[θ]τ]\να]ι και αν[αστηναι και συν 

45 [ί\]αβον αι δ[νο dvyuTepes Λωτ 
fK T[o]y πατρός α[υτων και ΐτΐκΐν 
η τί[ρ(]σβντ(ρα ν[ιον και (κα 
\e[a€] όνομα αυ[του Μωαβ ΐκ του 
πατ[ρ]ος μου ουτ[ος πατήρ Μωαβι 

5θ των ίως της σ[ημΐρον ημέρας 
(ΤίΚίν Se κ[αι η ν€ωτ(ρα νιον 
και [e]KaXea'ev [το όνομα αντου 
Αμ[μ]αν νϊος γ[ΐνονς μου ου 
τος πατήρ Αμμ[ανιτων ΐως 

55 TJiS ημέρας ταύτης 

[(κινη]σ(ν δε (Κΐΐθΐν [Α]βραα[μ 
[ΐΐς] γην προς λίβα κϊαι] ωκτι[<7(]ν 
[α]να μΐσον Καδ[η]ς κα[ι] αγα με 
[σο]ν Σουρ και παρ[ωκ]ησΐ[ν ev Pe 

60 [papoi]s ΐΐπΐν δε [Α]βρα[αμ] περί 

[ρι της γυναικός] ης έλαβες αυ [ 
70 [τη δε εστίν σνν]ωκηκυϊα ανδρ[ι 
[Αμιβελεχ^ δε] οι/χ ηψατο αυτη[ς 
[και ειπεν κνριε]• έθνος αγνοονν 
και δι[καιον απ]ολεις ουκ αντος 
μοι ει[πεν αδε]λφη μον εστίν 
75 και αυτ[η μοι ειπ]εν αδελφός μον 
εστ[ιν εν καθαρ]α κάρδια και ε[ν δικαι 
[οσ]νν[η )(ειρων ε]ποιησα τοντο 
[ειπεν δε αυτω] ο θεός καθ i'7rj'[o] 
[καγω εγνων ο]τι εν καθαρά κα[ρ 
8ο [δ^α [εποιησας τ]οντο και εφισα 


[μ]ην κ\αγ<ύ σου το]υ μη αμαρτειν σε 
[ει\ς εμ[ε ένεκεν] τούτου ουκ αφη 
[κ]α σε [αψασθαι αυ]της νυν δε απο 
[δο]ς τ[ην γυναίκα τ]ω ανθρωπω ο 

85 [τι] πρ[οφητης εστ]ιν και π[ρ]οσευ[ξε 
[ται περί σον και ζη]ση ει δε μη α 
[ποδιδως γνώθι ο]τι αποθανη 
[σν και πάντα τα σα και ωρθ[ρισ]εν 
[Αμιβελεχ^ το] πρωϊ κα{ϊ] εκα[λε]σ^ν 

9© [παντας τους π]αιδας αυτο[ΐ'] κα[ι 
[ελαλησεν παντ]α τα ρήματα ταυ 
[τα εις τα ωτα αντω]ν εφοβηθη 
[σαν δε πάντες οι α]νδρες σ[φΌδρα 
[και εκαλεσεν Αμ](ΐβελεχ^ τον 

95 [Αβραάμ] και ειπεν αυτω τι τον 
[το] εποιησας ημ[ι]ν μη τι ημαρ 
[το]μεν εις σε οτι επηγαγε[ς] ε[π ε 
με και επι την βασιλειαν μον α[μαρ 
[τ]ιαν μεγάλη ν έργον ο ονδε[ι]ς π[οι 
100 [ησει πε]7Γ0ΐηκας μοι ειπεν δ[ε 

[Α]μειβελεχ τω Αβραάμ τι ενι[δων 



[Xa]ppai τηί γννα[ικο]ί αυτού 
[α8(]\φη μου (.<}\tl]v α\ν-(\στΐί\(ν 

[ΐ]ποιησα$ τούτο einef δ( Αβρ[ααμ 
[ΐΐ]πα γαρ [α]ρα ουκ (στιν θ(ο&[(β(ΐα 
[e]i> τω τοπω τούτω e/xe τ[( απο 


105 [κτίΐΐ']ουσιΐ' fvfKfv της y\yvai 


Recto xxiv. 28-37. 


δραμονσα η Ίταΐί απηγγΐίλί[ΐ' 

fij Tou Οίκον τηί μητροί αυτηί 

κατα ρήματα ταύτα τη Se Ρίβΐκ 

110 κα [α]δΐλ[φοί ην ω όνομα Λαβαν 
και (δραμεν Λαβαν ττροί τον αν 
βρωηον €£<» «ττί τη$ πηγής και 
€γ€ν(τ[ο] ηνικα eiSfv τα ίνωτια 
και τα ψ(λια πΐρι ταί χ^ΐΐραί τη? 

115 <ιιδ(λψηί αυτού και ο[τ]( ηκου 
aev τα ρήματα Ρφ^[κ'\καί της 
αδ[€]λ<ρης [αντ]ου λΐγουσης ου 
τως \ΐΚα\\η]κΐν μοι ο ανθρωπο[ί 
και ηλθίν [τΓρ]ος τον ανθρωπον e 

120 στηκοτοί αυτού ΐττι των καμη 
λων em της ττηγης και ΐΐπ([ν αυ 
τα> [S]evpo (laeXOe €υλογητος κ[υριο5 
ϊνα τι (στηκας (ξω εγω Se ητ[οι 
μακα την οικιαν και τόπον ται[ς 

125 καμ[ηλ^Λΐς eισηλθev Se ο ανθρω 

[π]ος fis τ[η]ν ο[ικια]ν και aπeσa^[ev 
\τας κα]μηλους κ[αι] eSωκev αγι^ρα 
[και •)(ορτ]ασματα ταις καμηλοι[ς 
[και vS\mp τοις ποσιν αυτού και τ[οις 

130 [ποσι] των av[Sptav τω]ν μ^τ] α[υ 
[του και πa]peθ[ηκev 
3 lines lost 

Verso xxiv. 38-47. 

150 £ 

[πο^ρευση και ίΐς την φυ[λη]ν μου 
κ[α]ι λημψη γυ[ν]αικα τω υϊω μου 
€ίπα Se τω κυ[ρι]ω μου μη πoτe 
ου πορευθησ€ται [γ]υνη /ζίτ eμoυ 

155 '^"' eιπev μοι ο ueoi ω eυηpeστη 
σα evavTiov αυτού αυτός απο 
aTikei τον αγγΐλον αυτού με 
τ[α] σον και [[«]] eiO&Bo-et την οδον 
σ[ο]υ και [λη}μψη γννα[ι]κα τω υϊω 

1 6ο μ[ο]ν ίκ της φυλής μου η €κ του 
οίκου τον πατρός μου TOTe αθω 
ος εση απο της αράς μου ηνικα 
γα[ρ] eav εισελθης εις την (μην 
φυ[λ ην και μη σοι 8ωσιν και (ση αθω 

165 ο ς] απο του όρκου μον και ελθ]ων 
[ση]μερον ΐπ[ι τ]ην πηγην ε[ι^πα κυ 
[ρΐ€ ο θ]εος του κυρίου μου Αβρ[αα]μ ei συ 
[ευό\δο[ι]ς την οδον μον η ν[νν] €γ[α) 
[πo^pevoμa[ι] «ττ [αυτήν ιδ]ου ε[γ]ω εφ[€ 

1 70 [στ]ηκα ίπι της [π\ηγης του [ύδατος 
[αι Sje θυγατέρες των ανθρ[ωπων 
[τη^ς ποΧεως e^eXei/iroi'T^ai αντλη 
[σαι] ιιδω/3 και εσται η παρθ[ενος η 

[eaV eiTTO) πότισαν με με[ικρον υ 
175 [δωρ] ε[κ] τ[ης υδρίας] σον [και ειπη 
[μοι πιε συ και ταις καμηλοις σον ν] 



135 [τταΐί Αβραάμ] eyco ΐί[μι 

[ τον] Kvpiof [μον σφοδρά 

και νψωθη [και] eS[wKev αυτω 
πρόβατα κα[ι μοσγουί και 1 8ο 

3 αργυριον και π[αί8ισκαί και 

Ι40 [κ]αμη[λο]νί και of[ovs και ίΤίΚΐ 

[Σαρ]ρα [η -γυνή του κυρίου μου νιον 
[ίνα τω κυριω μου μ]ΐ[τ]α το [γηρα 
[σαι αυτόν και ΐδωκ]ίν αυ[τω τταν 185 
[τα οσα ην αυτω και <ύ]ρκισίν μ£ ο 

145 [κυριοί μου λίγων ου] λημψη [γυ 
[ναικα τω νιω μου απο των] θυγα[τί 
[ρων των Χαναναιων ev] οΐί [e 

a lines lost 190 

[δρίυσομαι αυτ]η [η γυνή ην ήτοι 
[μασίν κυριοί τ]ω θ[ίραποντι αυτού 
[Ισαάκ και] (ν τουτ[ω γνωσομαι ο 
[τι πίποιη]κα5 €Xe[oy τ]ω [κυριω 
[μου Αβραάμ] και ίγΐνίτο ΐν τω 
[συντΐλίσαι μ(] λαλουντα ev τη 
[διάνοια] ίυ[θυ5] Ρ[ί]β(κκα ίξίπο 
[ρίυίτο] ί)([ουσ]α την υδίρι\αν em 
[των ωμ]ων κ[αι κ]α.[τίβη en]i τ[ην 
['τηγη]ν και v[δpeυσaτo eiwa δe αυ 
[τη πο]τισον [μί και σπίυσασα κα 
[eeiKe]v την [υδριαν αφ (αυτηί και 
[ei]nev ne[ie συ και Tas καμηλουί 
[σο]υ ποτ[ιω και entov και Tas καμη 
[Aoi/jy μου [eπoτισev και ηρωτησα 
[αυτήν] κ[αι 


Recto xxvii. 32-3• 

Verso xxvii. 40-1. 

eξ]eστη [δe 
195 μeγa\η]v σψ^οδρα 
eισeveγ]κas [μοι 

] eκ\υ[σeιί 
200 τ]ω ϊακ[ωβ 
αυτο]υ e\inev 

Ι. [Αβραμ ίοί] is somewhat short for the lacuna, but to add npot would make the 
supplement rather long. 

4. The deletion of ι may be due to either the first or second hand ; (κτίνω AD. 

13. προί αυτόν: SO most cursives ; αντω KD. The e of ίν[ω seems to have been 
altered from some other letter. 

I 6. [κ^ηρονομησαι : SO A ; κΚ. αυτήν D. 

17. A blank space, sufficient for four letters, was left by the original scribe between τα 
and κατά, and in this κυμιι was inserted by the second hand; cf. 11. 122, 155, and 166. 
25. tKtt]in] : so a number of cursives, including the ' Lucianic ' group ; ταύτη ADE. 
27. αυτη( which is read after narpos by ADE seems to have been omitted by the 



papyrus, the line being quite long enough without it. On the other hand τψ νύκτα txfiuqv 
is omitted in ΰ. 

28. f ιδ^ : the same spelling for ηΒιι recurs in 1. 43 ; (γνω D in both places. 

32. T17 vt<i,Te(>a : so the Code.x Caesareus and several cursives ; ixpoi την vaarfpav KUL• 

(χθα has been added at the end of the line by the second hand. 

36. μ of μ(τ has been altered from a. 

37—8. (K , . . [σ]7Γ€ρ/ια : SO AD ; σπ. (Κ του π. ημών Ε. 

39-43• The position of the small fragment at the ends of these lines is made 
practically certain by the recto (cf. note on 1. 81); but the scanty vestiges in 1. 42 do 
not suit particularly well and the reading adopted is very problematical. Moreover above 
the line between the supposed α and 7 is a curved mark which does not suggest any 
likely letter and remains unexplained. One cursive (108) has και η «ωτίριι, but there 
is no ground for attributing this to the papyrus. 

42. τη[ν ννκτα (κ]([ινην: om. ΑΒΈ.. The papyrus reading is found in the cursives 
56 (margin), 74, 106, 130, 134, 135. 

43. (ΐ8η : cf. 1. 28, note. 

47. There would be room for two or three more letters in this line. 

47-8. ίκαλί[σ€] όνομα: (καλ(σίν τυ υνομα ΑΖΈ. There is not Sufficient room in the 
lacuna for the usual ν Ιφ(\κνστίκόν, still less for το. 

48. Xf-youffu which is read after Μω«β by ADE was certainly omitted by the papyrus 
(so Jerome), the passage being thus quite parallel with the explanation of the name ^.μμαν 
in the following verse. 

53. vios yfevovi : SO the ' Lucianic ' cursives ; ο mos του -yevous A, not του y. D, υιον του 

55. τη! ημιρας ταυτηι : της σημιρον ημι^μα! ADE. The rest of the line was left blank, 
a new chapter commencing at 1. 56. 

56. [fKitn^'jjfv 8c : και (κινησ(ν ΑΰΈ,. 

57. πμοί \ιβα : SO AD ; (ω! λίβα Ε. 

62. Α has ΟΤΙ before αδίλψτ;, but on is omitted, as in the pap3Tus, by D and E. After 
ίστιν the papyrus omits the second half of the verse ιφοϋηθη γαρ (mciv {^οτι) -γυνή μου (στιν 

μη ποτ( αποκτανωσιν αυτόν οι auSpfS της ττολεωΕ δι αυτήν (ADE), aS do the CUrsiveS 1 5 (first 

hand), 82, 106, 107, 135. 

64. Αμ(φ(λ(χ or Αμίβ(\(χ is the regular spelling of the name in this text. Αβιμ(\(χ 

67. There is evidently not room in the lacuna for A's reading (tnev αυτω ι8ου συ 
αποθνησκίΐί, and the omission of αυτω is more probable (so DE and many cursives) than that 
of συ (om. E). 

74. Ε inserts on before α8(λφη here and αδΛφοΓ in 1. 75. 

79. καθαρά κα[ρδ1ια : SO A ; κάρδια καθαρά Ε. 

80. Γφισα[μ]τ;ν : (φ^ισαμην A, {φησαμην Ε. 

8ι. ι{αγω {(γω ΑΕ) may have been merely repeated here from 1. 79, but, as Mr. McLean 
points out, it is supported by the Hebrew and may well be a genuine reading. The other 
letters on this fragment (11. 80-5) suit so exactly that there can be no reasonable doubt 
that it is rightly placed here, although there is also a slight difficulty with regard to 
the verso. 

αμαρτίΐν, the reading of the first hand, is that of AE. 

86. ζη^σ-η : so A ; ζησιι Ε. 

93• aji-e/jes: so a number of cursives; άνθρωποι AE. 
104. τ[ί : so A ; 8f E. 


105. The reading of the interlinear insertion is very uncertain, but the alteration 
apparently concerns the termination of the verb, and it seems more probable that 
ατΐοκτίίνονσι was Corrected to αποκτίνουσι than vice versa, αποκτινονσι ΛΕ; αποκτανουσι occurs 

in the cursive 72; ci 1. 165, note. 

109. The reading of A here is exactly parallel to that of the papyrus, τα after 
κατά having been originally omitted and supplied by an early corrector. NDE are 

112. τηί ττηγηι: Την πηγηρ Α. The genitive seems to have come in from the 
next verse. 

113. eiSfv : ifiei» A. 

114. πί/Η : fTTt A, iv ταΐί χιρσί a number of the cursives. 

122. «[vpiof has been added at the end of the line by the second hand: « ASD. 

123. ΐ)τ[οι^α<(α : SO i^Z) ', ητοιμασα A. 
126. antaa^fV, SO t^D ; ιττισαξιν A. 

129. The papyrus agrees with A in omitting viyJAaaOai which ND add after υίωρ. 
135-6. The reading of the papyrus here cannot be determined; i^A have Kvpios 

8e €ν\ογησίΐ>, D \κϊ ί^υοΒωσιν, κύριοι S( (ν\λογησ(ν ΟΓ (υΙοδωσίν τον makes the end of 1. I35 

a little long, but a blank space may have been originally left for Kvpios as in II. 122 and 
126 or Sf may have been omitted. 

138-9. The papyrus here omits several words and its exact reading is not quite dear. 

A has πρόβατα και μόσχου: και apyvptov και χρνσιον ττίΐίδαί- και ππι^ισκαί καμήλους και oi'ouf, 

D leaves out the και after μόσχου?, transposes αργυριον and χρνσιον and inserts και before 
παώας. It is just possible that the papyrus agreed with D in reading μοσχουε χρυσιον 
και, but π[αιδιΐΓ και παιίισκα! και Can evidently HOt be got into 1. 139, and more probably 
both χρνσιον and και παώυς were Omitted and και was written with each substantive. The 
words originally missing were probably supplied by the second hand at the bottom of 
the page, for opposite 1. 139 is the semicircular sign commonly used to mark an omission ; 
cf. e.g. 16. iii. 3. 

141-2. It is quite possible that the lines were divided wijovand that efo was omitted, 
as in ΰ. 

143. αυτοί/: ΟΤ αντην (^Ό). 

1 44• The length of the lacuna indicates that the text agreed with D and the second 
corrector of Ν in adding πάντα before the simple οσα of ί<Α. 

152. After μ6 υ h<AD add (κ(ΐθ(ν. The papyrus here supports the 'Lucianic' cursives 
19 and 108. 

154. πορ(νθησ(ται : SO a number of cursives; ποριυθη Λ, πορίυσ^ται NZ*. 

[y ;«>") : 1 y"") ANZ?. 

155• ° ^fs : Kvpios ο θ(0! A, om. ο Seos NT). 

156. evavTiov. SO AD and the second corrector of l^; α/ωπιον Ν. 

αποστ(\(ΐ•, SO i^D ', (ξαποστ(\(ΐ Α. 

ΐ6θ. ι; : και MSS. 

102. απ-0 : SOUD; ck Α. 

163. ιισιλθης: (λθης Αΰ. 

την (μην φυ^Κ^ιν : SO Ζ) j την φυΧην μου Α. 

164. σ•ϋ( δωσιν: this is the order in many of the cursives; Βωσιν σοι A-D. και before 
(ση is omitted by D. 

165. όρκου: so the cursive 72 (cf. note on 1. 105) ; ορκισμου NAZ). 

166. κυ[ρΐί (so NAZ?) is again due to the second hand; cf. 1. 17, note. 

168. i; ((υν]: there is not room in the lacuna for more than two letters, so ψ [mv\ 
(tiAZ)) is inadmissible, ή is found also in the cursives 75 and 106. 

D 2 


169. (φ\ιστ\ηκα•. (στηκα {^AZ>; there is an erasure before ισ-τηκα in A, and apparently 
(φ(ΤΓηκα (which also occurs in several cursives) was the original reading. 

170. της [rr]i)-yi)s : SO ^Ό ; την πηγην Α. 

171. [πι δ]*: SoZ>; Kill ηι ti Α. 

172. (ξ(\(υσονι[αι : SO AD; (κπορ(υοιιται i^. The papyrUS seems to have had αντ\ησαι, 

which is found in some of the cursives ; νδριυσασθαι, the better supported reading, is 
too long. 

174. \(a]v : the papyrus follows the vulgar spelling, «γω was originally omitted, and 
was added by the second hand. 

μίίκρον is also the spelling of t^. 

175-6. The reading printed is that of A, which on the whole seems to suit the space 
best ; but p.m may have been written at the end of 1. 175, and the variant of ti πκ και συ or 
of D και (TV πΐί is quite possible. 

178. &f(panovTi. αυτόν (ίί) seems more likely than «[αυτού θίραποντι (AD), for though the 
supposed θ may equally well be ί the line is already rather long and the lacuna in 1. 179 is 
sufficiently filled with [ίσαακ και'. 

1 8 1. (11 τω : προ την ΝΑ, πριν η D. 
183. [θιανοια] : SO Ν; διάνοια μου AD. 
cv[6vs] : so ΝΑ : και ιδον D. 

185. Though the κ of κ'αι is not quite certain and still less the α of κΥτίβη, the 
papyrus clearly agreed with AD in omitting αυτή: which is read after ωμών by N. 

188. A here has την vbpiav cm τον βραχίονα αυτή: αφ (αυτηί και finfv, while ΝΖ) Omit (πι 

τον βραχίονα. The papyrus reading was still shorter, since not more than about 15 letters 
should stand in the lacuna, and there can be little doubt that outijs was left out, as in some 
of the cursives. 

189. πι\ΐ( : 1. πκ. 

192. This line may have been the last of the column, but the recto has one line more. 

657. Epistle to the Hebrews. 

Height 26-3 cm. 

This considerable fragment of the Epistle to the Hebrews is written on the 
back of the papyrus containing the new epitome of Livy (ββ8). The text is in 
broad columns, of which eleven are represented, corresponding to Ch. ii. X4-V. 5, 
X. 8-xi. 13, and xi. 28-xii. 17, or about one-third of the whole. The columns 
are numbered at the top, those preserved being according to this numeration 
47~5°) ^3~5, ^7~9 > it is thus evident that the Epistle to the Hebrews was 
preceded in this MS. by something else, probably some other part of the 
New Testament. The hand is a sloping uncial of the oval type, but somewhat 
coarse and irregular, and apparently in the transitional stage between the 
Roman and Byzantine variety. It is very similar in appearance to the hand 
of 404, a fragment of the Shepherd of Hermes, of which a facsimile is given in 


P. Oxy. Ill, Plate iv ; and we should attribute it to the first half of the fourth 
century, while it may well go back to the first quarter. As stated in the introd. 
to 668, the papyri with which this was found were predominantly of the third 
century, and it is not likely to have been separated from them by any wide 
interval. The fact that the strips of cursive documents which were used to 
patch and strengthen the papyrus before the verso was used are of the third 
and not the fourth century points to the same conclusion. There is no sign 
anywhere of a second hand, and such corrections as occur are due to the original 
scribe, who is responsible for occasional lection signs and the punctuation by 
means of a double point inserted somewhat freely and not always accurately 
(cf. e.g. 1. 19); a single point is occasionally substituted. This system of 
punctuation is remarkable, for it seems to correspond to an earlier division 
into στίγρι longer than those in extant MSS. and frequently coinciding with 
the arrangement in the edition of Blass (Halle, 1903). The contractions 
usual in theological MSS. are found, IC being written for Ίτ/σοΰί. Orthography 
is not a strong point, instances of the confusion common at this period between 
t and et, e and at, υ and 01, being especially frequent ; but apart from minor 
inaccuracies the text is a good and interesting one. Its chief characteristic 
is a tendency in Chs. ii-v to agree with B, the Codex Vaticanus, in the omission 
of unessential words or phrases ; cf notes on 11. 15, 24, and 60. This gives the 
papyrus a peculiar value in the later chapters, where Β is deficient ; for here too 
similar omissions are not infrequent (cf. notes on 11. 118, 135, 151, 152, 161, 224), 
and it is highly probable that they were also found in B, particularly when, as 
is sometimes the case, D (the Claromontanus, of the sixth century) is on the 
same side. Of the other MSS. the papyrus is nearest to D (cf. notes on 11. 60, 
125, 145, 152, 154, 178, 222, 224-6), but the two sometimes part company (cf. 
notes on 11. 139, 163, 180); only in one doubtful case (note on 1. 168) does it 
support Κ against the consensus of the other MSS. Variants peculiar to the 
papyrus, apart from the omissions already referred to, are noted at 11. 32, ^"J, 
106, 115, 156, 162, 227, 229. We give a collation with the Textus Receptus 
and the text of VVestcott and Hort, adding particulars concerning the readings 
of the principal authorities. 

Col. i. 


[κατάργηση τον\ το κρατοί (\0fTa του θανάτου ϋ. 14 

[τουτ^στι τ6\ν ΒιαβοΧον : και απαλλαγή του 
[τουί όσοι φοβω θ]ανατου δια nau{Tof\Tos τον ζην 
5 [(voyoi ήσαν ioyjXetay : ου yap δηπου αγγέλων 


[(πιΚαμβαν^ταϊ] άλλα σπΐρματοί Αβραάμ (πι 
[λαμβανίται oejev ωφιλΐν κατά πάντα τοίί α 
[δΐλφοίί ομοίωθ]ηναι : ϊνα (λΐημων γ€νηται 
[και πιστοί ap^ie]pevs τα προί τον θν eii το (ΐλασ 

ΙΟ [κΐσθαι ταί αμαρ\τίαί τον λάου : ev ω γαρ π(πον 
[θ(ν αυτοί πίρασ]θΐίί : Βυναται τοίί πιραζομΐ 
[νοίί βοηθησαι ο]θΐν αδίλφοι άγιοι κλησ^ωί e 
[πουρανωυ μ€το)(]οι : κατανοήσατε τον απόστολο 
[και αρχ^κρΐα Ttji ο]μολογιαί ημών Ιν πιστον οντά 

15 [τω ποιησαντι] αυτόν : ωί κΐ Μωϋσηί ev τω οίκω 
[αντου πλ€ΐο]νοί γαρ 8οζηί ουτοί πάρα Μωϋσην 
[ηξιωται καθ ο]σον πλίΐονα τιμηίν) €\ei του [ο]ικου : ο 
[κατασκίυα]σαί αυτόν : παί γαρ οικοί κατασκ^υ 
[αζΐται υπο] τινοί : ο ie πάντα κατασκεύασαν ; θί 

20 [και Μωυση]ί μεν πιστοί ev ολω τω οίκω αυτού 
[ωί θΐραπω]ν ety μαρτύρων : των λαληθησομε 
[νων Χί δΐ] ωί ύιοί ΐπι τον οίκον αυτού ου οικοί 
[(σμίν ημ€ΐ]ί : (αν την παρρησιαν και το καυγτ) 
[μα τηί (λπ]ιδοί κατασχωμίν : δια καθωί λ(γ(ΐ 

25 [το πνα το α]γιον σημ(ρον (αν τηί ψωνηί αυτού 
[ακονσητί] μη σκληρννητί ταί καρδιαί ϋμων 
[ωί (V τω πα]ραπικρασμω κατά την ημ(ραν του 
[πιρασμου] (ν τη (ρημω ου (πιρ(α)σαν οι πατ(ρ(ί νμώ 

Col. ϋ. 


30 (V δ[οκι]μασια και (ΐδον τα (ργα μου τ(σσ(ρακον[τα ϋϊ. η 

€τη [δι]ο προσωκθίίσα τη γ(ν(α ταντη και (ΐπ[ον 
α(ΐ [πλ]αν[ω]νται (ν τη κάρδια αυτών διο ουκ (γνο:[σαν 
τα[ί οδονί μο]υ ωί ωμοσα (ν τη οργή μου (ΐ (ΐσ[( 
λ€ΐι[σ-θί'Γ]αι ([ΐί] την καταπανσιν μου ; βλ(π(ται α[δ(λ 
35 φο[ι μη] ποτ( (στ( (ν τινι ϋμων κάρδια πονηρ[α 

[απι]σ[τια]ί : (ν τω αποστηναι απο θυ ζωντοί : αλ [ 
[λα] πα[ρά]καλ(σατ( (αυτουί καθ (καστην ημ[( 


[pa.]v aly^^i ov το σημίρον καλ([ι]ται : t'ya μ[η σκλη 

[ρυι/]6[η Tis e]i νμων άπατη τ[η]ί αρματιαί [μ(το 
4ο [χοί] γα[ρ του Χ]ν •/(■γοναμΐν : (ανπΐρ την α[ρχην 

[τ]η5 νποστασίω! μ(χρι reXoi/y βΐβαιαν [κατά 

[σ]χ6ΰ//€ί' ev τω λ(γ(σθαι σημΐρον ΐαν τηί φ[ω 

νηί αυτού ακουσητΐ : μη σκΧηρυνητί ταί κ[αρ 

Seias ϋμων ως ev τω τταραπικρασμω : T^ffJ 
45 γαρ ακουσαντα παρΐπικραναν αλλ ου ira[vTei 

οι (^(λθοίντΐς €|] Αιγύπτου δια Μωϋσΐωί τισ'ιν 

δί προσωγ\^θΐΐσ€ν] τΐσσ^ρακοντα ετη ουχί τ[οΐί 

αμαρτησασιν ων τα κωλα ίπΐσίν ev τη ε[ρη 

μω : T£<r[t]i/ 5f (ομοσΐν μη ίΐσΐΧευσζσθαι e[£y 
50 τ[η\ν καταπαυσιν αυτού et μη Tois απιθησασ([ιν 

κ[α]ι βλ(πομ(ν οτι [ο]υκ ηδυνασθησαν ίΐσε[\ 

θΐΐν δι α[πιστ](ΐαν : φοβηθωμΐν ονν μη π[ο 

τΐ κατα[\ι]πομ(νης επαγγελία? tiaeX6e[iv 

[ejty την καταπαυσιν αυτού δοκη tis (ξ υμ[ων 
55 ϋστερ[η]κ(ναι : και γαρ ίσμεν (υηγγ€λισμ(ν[οι 

Col. ϋΐ. 

[καθαπίρ κ]ακ(ΐνοι αλλ ουκ ωφίλησεν ο λόγος iv. 2 

[της ακοής] εκανονς μη σννΚΐΚΐρασμΐνους 

[τη πιστι το^ις ακουσασιν : €ΐσ€ρχομΐθα γαρ ας 
6ο [καταπα]υσιν οι πιστ(υσαντΐς : καθώς €ΐρηκ€ν 

[ως ωμο]σα ev τη οργή μου et (λευσοντΐ ΐΐς την κα 

[ταπαυ]σιν μου : καίτοι τ[ω]ν ΐργων απο καταβο 

[λης κοσ]μου γ(νηθ(ντων αρηκεν που π(ρι της 

[ίβδομ]ης ούτως : και κα[τΐ]παυσ(ς ο θς ev τη ημΐ 
65 [ρα τη (β]δομη απο παντ[ων] των ΐργων αυτού : και 

[fv τουτ]ω 7Γα[λ]ί;' (ΐσΐλ(υ[σο]νται ίΐς την καταπαυσΐ 

[μου €π]ί ονν απολιπ€Τΐ τινας etaf\6(iv eiy αυτή 

[και οι πρ]οτ(ρον (ναγγΐλισθ(ντΐς ουκ (ίση[λθ]δ 

[δι απιθι]αν πάλιν τίνα οριζίΐ ημΐραν σημ^ρό 


70 [iv Δαυ]ΐί8 λβγωΐ' //era τοσούτον χρονον [κα]θ[<ο]ί 
[προειρη]τα.ι : [σ]ημ(ροΐ' iav τη? φωνηί αντ[ου α 
[κονσητ]ί μ[η] σκΧηρυνητ^ τα? KapSiai νμ[<ΰν 
[ΐΐ γαρ a^vTovs Is κατΐτταυσΐν ουκ αν ir[ipi α\ 
[λ?;? €λα]λί μζτα ταντα ημέρας : αρα απ[ολί 

75 [τΓίται σ]αββατισ•μοί τω λαω του θυ ο γαρ [ΐίσ 
[(Χθων] €i[s την] καταττανσιν αυτ\ου] : και α[ν]τοί 
[κατΐπ]αυα\€ν] απο των βργων αι^του] ω(τ[τΓ€ρ] α 
[iro των ι]διων ο θί• σττουδασωμΐν [ο]ν[ν] €i(re\ 
[θ€ΐν et]y ΐΚΐΐνην την καταπανσι[ν ινα μη ev 

80 [τω αντ]ω τα νποδιγματι π^ση τη? απίθ[ί\α? ; ζω 

[γαρ ο \ο]γο? του θυ και βνΐργη? : και [τ]ομ[ωτΐρο]ί υ 

Col. ίν. 

7Γ6/3 πασαν μαγα[ιραν διστομον και διικνονμΐ ίν. 1 2 

νο? αχρΐΐ μΐρισ•μ[ου ψνχη? και Wvs αρμών Τ€ 
85 και μνΐλων και κ[ριτικο? ΐνθυμησ^ων και ev 

νυων KapSeia? : [και ουκ ΐστιν κτισι? αφανή? 

(νωπιον αυτού : [πάντα St γυμνά και τΐτραχ^η 

λισμΐνα τοι? οφ'βαλμοι? αυτού προ? ον ημιν 

ο λόγο? : ΐ)(οντΐ[? ουν αρχκρΐα μεγαν Sie 
90 ληλνθοτα του[? ουρανού? Ιν τον υιον του θυ 

κρατωμ(ν τη? [ομολογία? ου γαρ ΐχομΐν αρχι 

pea μη δυναμ[ΐνον συνπαθησαι ται? ασθΐ 

νΐΐα[ι]? ημών [πΐπφασμΐνον Se κατά πάντα 

καθ ομοιότητα [χωρι? αμαρτία? προσΐρχωμΐ 
95 θα ουν μίτα [παρρησία? τω θρονω τη? χαριτο? 

[ιν]α λαβωμ([ν ΐλ(0? και χάριν (υρωμΐν ti? (υ 

[καϊ\ρον βοηθ[ΐίαν πα? γαρ αρχίΐρευ? e| ανθρω 

[πω]ν λαμβα[νομ(νο? νπΐρ ανθρώπων κα 

[θι]στατα[ι τα προ? τον θν ινα προσφΐρη δώρα 
100 [και θν]σια? υ[π€ρ αμαρτιών μετριοπαθών δυ 

ναμ(νο? TOL? α[γνοουσι και πΧανωμενοι? enti 


και αυτοί ιτΐρ[ικΐΐται ασθΐνααν και Si αυτήν 
οφιλίΐ καθω'ς wepi του λάου ουτωί και ιτΐρι (αυ 
τον ττροσφΐρ'ΐΐν πβρι αμαρτιών και ουχ^ e 
105 αυτω τΐί λαμβ[αν€ΐ την τιμήν άλλα καλονμΐ 

VOS νπο του [θν ουτω^ και ο Χί ονχ^ ΐαυτον (δο 
ζασίν γίνη[θηναι αρχ^ΐίρΐα αλλ ο λαλησαί 

12 columns lost. 

Col. V. 

[προσφέρονται το]τΐ (ΐρη[κ(ν ι]δον η[κω του ποιησαι το χ. 8 

Ι ΙΟ [θ(λημα σου] : αναιρεί το [πρωτ]ον ϊνα [το δεύτερον στη 
[ση εν ω βε]\ηματι ηγιασμεν[ο]ι εσμ[εν δια τη? προσ 
[φοράς του σού\ματο5 Ιυ Χ[ν] εφαπαζ : [και παί μεν ιε 

[ρεν5 εστη]κεν καθ ημεραν λιτου[ργων και ray avTas 

[πολλάκις] προσφεροον] θυσίας αιτινες ον[δεποτε 
11 5 [δύνανται] περιελειν αμαρτιαν : οντος δε [μιαν υ 

[περ αμαρτιών] προσενενκας θυσιαν εις το διη[νεκες 

[εκαθισεν εν δεξιά] του θυ το λοιπόν εκδε)(^ο[μενος 

[εως τεθωσιν] οι εγθροι νποποδιον των ποδ{ι\(ο[ν αυτού 

[μια γαρ προσ]φορα τετελειωκεν εις το διηνεκές τους 
120 [αγιαζομεν]ους : μαρτυρεί δε ημειν και τ[ο πνα 

[το αγιον μετ]α yap το ειρηκεναι αυτή δε η δια[θηκη 

[ην διαθησο]μαι προς αυτούς μετά τας ημερ[ας εκι 

[νας λέγει κ]ς διδονς νομούς μου επι καρδια[ς αυτώ 

[και επι τη ν διανοιαν αντων [Γα]] επιγράψω αν[τους 
125 [f*" '■'^*' αμ]αρτιων και [τ]ων ανομιών αυτών ου μι 

[μνησθησο]μαι ετι : οπον δε αφεσις τον[τ]ων ουκ 

[ετι προσφο]ρα περί αμαρτιαις : έχοντες ουν αδελ 

[φοι παρρ]ησιαν εις την εισοδον των άγιων εν τω 

[αιματι Ι]υ ην ενεκενισεν ημιν οδον προσ 
130 [φατο]ν και ζωσαν δια του καταπετασματος 

[τουτ] εστίν της σαρκός αυτού ; και ϊερεα μεγαν 

[επι] τον οίκον του θυ προσερχωμεθα μετά 


Col. vi 

7Τ(,[σω SoKUTt χ^^ίροΐΌ! αζιωθησίται τιμωριαί ο τον χ. 29 

ν[ιον] j[o]v [θυ καταπάτησαν και το αίμα της 8ιαθηκης 

135 κοινον τ][γησομ(ΐΌ9 ΐΐ> ω ηγιασβη και το πνα της χα 
ριτος (νυ[βρισας οιδαμΐν γαρ τον ΐίποντα (μοι (κ 
δικησις €γ[ω ανταποδώσω και πάλιν κρινΐΐ ics τον 
Χαον αντο[υ φοβίρον το ΐμπ€σ(ίν eiy ^eiyaay θυ 
ζώντος : [αναμιμνησκίσθΐ Se τα! προτ(ρον ημ€ 

140 ρας fv α[ις φωτισθίντΐί πολΧην αθλησιν νπΐμ(ΐνατε 
παθημ[ατων τούτο μίν ονίΐδισμοις Τ6 και θλί•ψ(σιν 

Col. νϋ. 

[θ(α]τριζομ(νοι : τούτο δι κοινων[ο]ι των όντως χ. ^3 

[ανα]στρ((Ι)ομ(νων γΐνηθίντβς : και γαρ τοις δΐσ 

145 [/"θί]ί σννίπαθησατΐ : και την αρπαγην των νπαρ 
[γον]των νμων μΐτα χαράς προσ(δ€^ασθ[ί] ; γινωσ 
[κο]ντ(ς (χιν (αυτούς κρισσωνα νπαρζιν και μ(ν[ο]υ 
[σαν] : μη αποβαλητί ουν την παρρησιαν νμων 
[ητΎς €;(€£ μΐγαλην μισθαποδοσιαν υπομονής 

150 [γαρ] ΐ\(ται χρΐίαν ϊνα το θΐλημα του [θ]ν ποιησαντΐς 
[κο]μισησθ€ την (παγγ(λ(ΐαν : (τ[ι] μικρόν όσον : 
[οσο]!» ο ΐργομίνος ηξΐΐ και ον χρονισιι ο δΐ δίκαιος 
[€κ] πιστΐως ζησ(ται : και (αν υποστίίληται : [ο]υκ ev 
[δοκ](ΐ μου η 'ψυχή ΐν αντω ; ημις δΐ ονκ €σμ(ν [ν]ποστο 

155 [λί?]Γ ΐΐς απωλΐίαν : αλΧα πιστΐως (ΐς πίριποι[η]σίν yj/v 
[χη]ς : (στι δΐ πιστις (Χπιζομίνων πραγματ[ω]ν αποστα 
[σις] (ΧΐΧ^ΐνχος ου βΧ(πομΐνων : fv αντη γαρ (μαρτνρη 
[θησ]αν οι πρΐσβντΐροι ; πιστι νοονμΐν κατηρτΐΐσθαι 


[rot/]? αιώνας ρηματι θυ (ΐς το μη ΐκ φ^ΐ^νομΐνων το 
ι6ο [βΧ]ΐπομ(νον γΐγονίναι : πΐΐστΐΐ πΧΐΐονα θυσιαν Αβΐ'Χ 


πάρα. Kaeiy προσηνΐν Kiv δι ηί (μαρτνρηθη eivai S[i 
[KJaios μαρτνρονντοί ίπι tois δωροΐί αντω του θυ και S[i αυ 
της αποθανών (τι XaXei : πιστίΐ Ενωχ μ€Τ€Τ€θ[η] του [μη 
ϊδΐΐν θάνατοι/ και ουχ (νρισκΐτο διότι μετΐθηκΐν α[υτον 
ι6$ ο θί : προ γαρ τηί μΐταθ(σ(ωΐ μίμαρτυρηται (νηρ[ίστηκ( 

Col. viii. 

ναι τω θω [χωρίί δΐ πιστΐως αδύνατον (υαρΐστησαι χϊ. 

πιστΐνσαι γ[αρ δ(ΐ τον προσίρχομΐνον θω οτι ΐστιν 
και Toii ζη[τουσιν αυτόν μισθαποδοτηί γίνεται πιστΐΐ 

'7° χρηματι[σθ(α Νω( πίρι των μηδίπω βλ^πομΐνων 
(νλαβηθ€[α κατΐσκΐυασΐν κιβωτον en σωτηριαν του 
οίκου αυτού [δι ης κατ(κρινίν τον κοσμον και τηί κατά 
πισ[τι]ν δικα[ιοαυνηί εγΐνΐτο κληρονόμος πιστ€ΐ κάλου 
μ(νος Αβραα[μ υπηκουσεν (ζΐλθαν eiy τόπον ον ημΐλ 

175 λεν λαμβαν[(ΐν eis κληρονομιαν και (ξηλθΐν μη (πι 
σταμΐνος π[ου ΐρχςται πιστ(ΐ παρωκησίν eis γην της 
(παγγΐλιας [ως αλλοτριαν (ν σκηναις κατοικησας μ(τα 
Ισακ και Ιακ[ωβ των συνκληρονομων της (παγγίλιας της 
αυτής : (ξ[(δ(χετο γαρ την τους θίμίλιους (χουσαν πο 

ι8ο λιν : 7;y τΐχν[ιτης και δημιουργός ο θς πιστίΐ και αυτής 
αρρα δυναμ[ιν ΐΐς καταβολην σπέρματος (λαβίν και πα 
ρα καιρόν ηλ[ικιας (πΐΐ πιστον ηγησατο τον (παγγΐΐλαμΐ 
νον δια και [αφ (νος (γΐννηθησαν και ταύτα νΐνΐκρω 
μίνου : κα[6ως τα άστρα του ουρανού τω πληθΐΐ και 

1 85 ως η άμμος η [τταρα το χ(ΐλος της θαλάσσης η αναρίθμητος 
κατά πιστιν α[π(θανον ούτοι πάντες μη κομισαμΐνοι τας 
[e]7rayyfA€ia[y άλλα πορρωθίν αυτας ιδοντις και ασ 
[π]ασαμ(νοι και ομολογησαντΐς οτι ^evoi και παρεπίδημοι 
[(\ισιν ΐπι της [γης 

ι column lost. 



Col. ix. 

[πρωτότοκα θιγη α]ντωρ : πίστα 8ί(βησαν την Ερυθραν χί. 28 
[θάλασσαν ωί δια ζηρ]αί γη! : η[ί] πΐΐραν λaβovτes οι Aiyv 
[πτιοι κατΐποθησαν] πίστα τα τιχη lept^co έπεσαι/ κύκλω 
[θ(ντα (πι (πτα ημ(ρα]9 : πιστίΐ Ρααβ η πόρνη ου σνναπω 

195 [λίτο T01S απιθησασιν] δίξαμΐνη τονί κατάσκοπους μ(τ 

[ΐίρηνηί και τι €Τ£ λ(]γω €πιλιψ(ΐ γαρ μΐ διηγουμΐνον ο )(ρο 
[vos nept Γίδζων Βαρ]ακ Σαμψω Ιίφθαΐ Αανΐΐδ' τΐ και Σαμουήλ 
[και των προφητών] οι δια πιστίωί κατηγωνισαντο βασιλ(ΐας 
[ηργασαντο δικαιοσυ]ΐ'ην : ίπΐτυχον (παγγίλιων [:] ΐφρα 

200 [ζαν στόματα λ(ον]τ<ον : ίσβΐσαν δυναμιν ττυροί [:] ΐφυ 
[γον στόματα μα)(]αιρη! : ίδυναμωθησαν απο ασθΐνΐΐ 
[αί ΐγΐνηθησαν ισ]\νροι ΐμ πολίμω παρΐμβολαί €κλ(ΐ 
[ναν αλλότριων (λ]αβον γυνΐκα[. .] €| αναστασίωί τους 
[νΐκρου! αυτών α]λλοί δ€ (τοιμ[πα]νισθησαν ου πρόσδιδα 

205 [/if ο< την απολντ]ρωσιν ίνα κρείττονος αναστάσεως 
[τυχωσιν (τεροι δε] εμπεγμων και μαστειγων πειραν 
[ελαβον ετι δε δεσμ]ων και φυλακής : ελιθασθησαν 
[επρισθησαν ε]πι[ρα]σθησαν : εν φονω μαγαιρας α 
[πεθανον περ]ιη[λ]θον εν μηλωταις εν εγιοις δέρμα 

2 ΙΟ [σιν υστερουμενοι] θλειβομενοι : κακουγρυμενοι 

[ων ουκ ην άξιος] ο [κο]σμος : επι ερημειαις πλανωμε 
[νοι και ορεσι και σ]πηλεοις και ταις οπαις της γης : και 
[ούτοι πάντες μαρτυρηθε]ντες δια της πίστεως ουκ εκομι 
[σαντο την επ]αγγε[λ]ειαν του 6υ περί ημών κριττον 

215 ['"ί προβλεψα]μενου ϊνα μη χωρίς ημών τελειωθω&^^] 
[τοιγαρουν και] ημείς τοσούτον έχοντες περικιμενον 

Col. χ. 

ημ[ιν ν]εψθί μα[{τ]υρων ογκον ; απο6[εμενοι\ πάντα και χϋ. ι 

τη[ν ευπ]εριστατον αμαρτειαν δι υπομονής τρεχωμιν τδ 


220 •π[ροκ^μ\ίνον ημΐΐν aycava, αφορωνπί eti τον τηί ττιστΐως 

αρχτ]γορ και τΐλ(ΐ<ύτην Ιν OS αντί τηί προκΐΐμ(νηί αυτω γα 
pas νπΐμίΐν€ν τον σταυρόν aισyυvηs καταφρονησαί ev 
δΐξια Τ€ [τ]ον θρόνου του βυ Κζκαθί[κΐίν : αναΧο-γισασθαι yap 
τοίαντην ϋπομ^μίνηκοτα νπο των αμαρτωλών, fis αν 

2 25 TOVS αντιλογιαν ϊνα μη καμητΐ Tais ylrv-^ais €κλ(λνμΐ 
vol : ονπω μ^χρι aιμaτos αντικατΐστητ€ vpos την α 
μαρτιαν αγων[ι]ζομΐνοι και (κλίλησβαί τηί παρακΧησίωί 
ητΐ5 ϋμΐΐν ws viois δίαλ(γ(ται vie μου μη ολιγωρίΐ naiSei 
as κϋ και μη ΐγλυου ϋπ αυτού ΐλ(γ\ομ(νοί : ον γαρ α 

230 γαπα icy neSeuei μαστ€ΐγοι Se πάντα ϋιον ον παραδίχ^(τα[ι 
ets παιδζίαν νπομ[(]ν(ται toy v[i]ois ϋμΐΐν προσφέρεται 
ο Os Tts γαρ uios ον ον πείει/ει πατήρ ei Se χωρίί [€στ]αι 
πaιSΐlas η! μετογοι γΐγονασι παντίί : αρα νο[θοι και] ουκ 
νιοι εστε : (ΐτα tovs μεν τηί σαρκοί ημών π[aτ]fpa[s (]ιχο 
235 Α'**' π^αιδευταί και ίνΐτρεπομίθα : ου πολύ 8e μαλ 

λον ϋποταγησομΐθα τω πατρι των πνευμάτων και ζη 
σομεν : οι μεν γαρ vpos ολιγαί ημεραί κατά το δοκού 
avTOis επαιδενον : ο δε επι το συμφέρον ειs το μετά 
λαβείν τηί aγιoτaτηs αυτόν : πάσα δε παιδεία προ{ί) μεν το 

240 παρόν ου δοκει yapas eivai άλλα λυπηί ύστερον δε καρ 
πον ειρηνικον τοίί δι αντηί γεγυμνασμενοΐί αποδιδα^σΐ 

Col. xi. 

διι^αιοσυνηί διο ταί παρειμεναί χειραί και τα παραλελυμε χϋ. 1 1 
να [γόνατα ανορθώσατε και τρογιαί ορθαί ποιείτε τοίί 

245 7Γθ[σίν υμών ινα μη το χωλον εκτραπη ιαθη δε μάλλον 
ειρ[ηνην διώκετε μετά πάντων και τον αγιασμον ον χωρίί 
ου[δεΐί οψεται τον κν επισκοπουντεί μη τΐί υστέρων απο τηί 
γα[ριτοί του θυ μη tis ρίζα πικpιas ανω φυονσα ενοχλη 
κα[ι δι ovTTjy μιανθωσιν οι πολλοί μη tis πoρvos η βεβηλοί 

250 ωy [Ησαν Οί αντί βρωσεωί μιαί απεδοτο τα πρωτοτοκια αυτόν ισ 


T6 [γα/3 071 και μΐΤΐπΐΐτα θΐλωι/ κΧηρονομησαι την ivXoyi 
αν [ 

14. ΐ(ΐ)σου)ν: so NABCD, &C., W-H. ; Χριστοί» Ιησουν EKL, &C., T-R. 

ΐ5• (V τω οίκω : SO Β ; (V ολω τω οίκω NACDE, &C., T-R., W-H. ολω may have come 
in from verse 5. 

16. Βοξη! ovTos : so KL!\I, &c., T-R. ; ουτοί ?ίοξη! NABCDE, &c., W-H. 

19. πάντα : so ^^ABCDKIM, &c., W-H.; τα π. EL, &c., T-R. 

23. (av : so NBDE, &c., W-H.; tavnep AC, &c., T-R. κ of καυχη[μα has been altered 
apparently from χ. 

24• ίλπ\θοί κατασ;(ωμ(ΐ/ : SO Β; «λπ. μ^χρί Τίλουί βφαιαν κατασχ. MACDE, &C., T-R., 

W-H. The phrase μ^χρι t(\ovs βφαιαν κατασχωμιν recurs in verse 1 4 and may have come 
in here from that passage. 

31. 7τροσωκθ€ίσα•. 1. προσώχθισα ; the θ has been altered from τ. 

32. fv τη Kapdia αντων dio : τη Kapdia avroi 6f Μ So. 

36-40. The position of the narrow strip placed near the beginning of these lines is 
uncertain, but it suits very well here. The recto being blank does not help to decide the 

37. πα[ρα]κά\(σατ( is another Otherwise unattested reading: napaKoKfiTc MSS. 

38. a[χ^pι. : so Μ ; αχρα Other MSS., T-R., W-H. 

39. Tit f]i νμων : SO i^AC, &C., T-R., W-H. ; (ξ νμων TXf BDE, &C. 1. ΰμαρτίαί. 

42. A double point may be lost after α-χωμ^ν. 

51. η8ννασθησαν : η8υνηΡησαν MSS. The form ηΒυνάσθην occurs e.g. in Matt. xvii. 16 

(B), Mark vii. 24 (NB). 

The first e of (ΐσ([λ]θ(ΐν is written over a double point. 

58. συνκ(κ(ρασμ(νοιΐ! : SO ABCD, &C., W-H. in text ; σννϋίκιρασμινο! ti, W-H. mg., 
συγκίκραμίνος T-R. 

59. yap : SO BDE, &c. ; ow ίί AC. 

60. την was certainly omitted before καταπα^νσιν as in BD ; την is found in other MSS. 
and is read by W-H. and T-R. 

63. που: yap που T-R., W-H. with all MSS. except 109'"'• which agrees with the 
papyrus in omitting yap. 

64. κα^τ(\^παυσ(ί is a mistake for κα[τΕΤπ•αυσ€ΐ'. 

66. (ΐσ(\(υ[σο\νται•. SO D and some cursives; « (ΐσ(Κ(υσονται other MSS., T-R., W-H. 

70-1. The vestiges of [Kajfl[wy are very slight, but are a sufficient indication that the 
papyrus read προιφηται with NACDE, «&c., W-H., rather than αρηται (correctors of DE, 
KL, T-R.), since the division κα\θω! does not account for the traces of ink at the end 
of 1. 70. 

80. σ of π(ση was converted from τ. 

81. (v(pyη,■. so NACDE, &C., T-R., W-H. ; (vapyηs B. 
85. (ν^ννων is for (νΥοιων. 

96. It is almost certain that the papyrus read (υρωμα•, since without this word the line 
would be unaccountably short ; Β stands alone in omitting it. 

99. The line is sufficiently long without τι after δώρα (om. Β and an early corrector of 
D), and in view of the tendency of the papyrus the omission is probable. 

106. ουτωί, κ.τ.λ. : the MSS. here have καθωσπ^ρ (NABD) or καθαπιρ και (om, και CD) 

Ααρών ουτω<•, κ.τ.λ., but there is evidently not room for all this in the papyrus. The only 


other authority for any omission here is K, which leaves out ούτω: και ο X/jtorot; but even 
without tliese words the line would remain rather too long. To omit καθωσπ€ρ και Ααρών 
suits the space better and does not damage the sense. 

112. The papyrus may of course have read αι]ματο! (DE) for σω^το! and apxupevs 
(AC) for ifp^v! (NDEKL). 

115. αμαρτιαν: αμαρτιαί MSS. 

116. The second v, if it be v, in ■προσ(ν(νκας was converted from ι or v. The previous 
V also seems to have been altered. 

118. (χθροι: (χθροι αυτού MSS. The Superfluous 1 in πο8ιω[ν was a slip due to the 
preceding νπυπο8ιον. 

124. The scribe apparently began to write awovs before ιπιγραψω, but that the a was 
meant to be deleted is not certain and its partial effacement may be accidental. 

125. αμ\αρτιωιι: SO D and some cursives; αμαρτιών αίτών T-R., W-H., with other MSS. 

125—6. μι\^μνησβησο\μαι '. I, μη \μνησ6ησο]μαι. 

127• αμαρτιαις : αμαρτία! MSS. The Second f οί (χοντ€ς has been altered from a. 

139. Tat TTpoTepov ημ€]ρα! : SO T-R., VV-H., with moSt MSS.; Tos πρ. αμαρτία! H, Tais 
npoTcpais ημ(ραΐ! D. 

144. 8(a[piot]s: SO AD, W-H. ; Sfo-pois μου i<iEHKL, &c., T-R. We cannot of course 
be sure that the papyrus did not have Siapoit, but the absence of μου is the important thing 
and is much in favour of δισμιοΐί. 

147. (αυτού! : SO ΝΑ, W-H. ; fnvToif DE, &c., ex (ηυτο'ΐ! T-R. With a fcw minuscules. 

κρισσωνα = κρύσσονα : SO ΝΑ, W-H. ; κριιττονα DE, &C., T-R. 
υτταρξιν : SO NAD, W-H. ; υπ. ev ουρανοις Ε, &C., T-R. 

151. There is an apparently accidental diagonal dash passing from the top of the 
supposed μ through the «. 

ίτ[ί] : fTt γαρ MSS. 

152. xpoviau : SO ND, W-H.; χρονκι AE, &c., T-R. 

152-3. The papyrus certainly agreed with DE, &c., in omitting μου, which is found in 

NA after biKaios. δίκαιο; [μου] W-H., δίκαιος T-R. 

153. 7Γΐστ«ι)£ : πιστίωϊ μου D. 

154• μον η ψυχή : so DE; τ; ψ. μου T-R., W-H., with other MSS. 

156. πραγματ[ω]ν απυστί^σα] (1. ίπόστα[σις]) is the reverse order to that of all the MSS.; 

πριιγματων is usually connected with βλίπομ^νων. 

157• αυτή: so two cursives (47, 115) ; €v ταύτη other MSS., T-H., W-H. 
159-60. TO [βλ](πομ(νον : so NADE, W-H. ; τα βλίπομ^να KL, Slc, T-R. 

161. ττροσηνΐνκ^ν '. 7τροσην(γκ(ν τω θ(ω ]\ISS. 

162. αυτω του θ[(ο)υ : αυτού was Originally written but was altered to αυτω. αυτού τω 
β(ω NAD, αυτού του θ(ου EKL, &C., T-R., W-H. 

163. λολ« : so ΝΑ, W-H., T-R. ; ληλητ-α. DE, &ο. 

164. (υρισκ(Τ0 : SO KL, &C., T-R.; ηυρισκ(Τ0 NADE, W-H. 

165. fDi;pfcaTi)(cf]rai : SO NDE ; eimp. AKL, W-H., T-R. If tuijpfOTijicf rai was correctly 
written this line was somewhat longer than those preceding. 

168. (>{ί)ω: so N; the pap)yrus may of course have had τω β{()ω like ADE, &c. (so 
T-R., W-H.), but in view of its tendency to shortness this is less probable. 

169. ζη[τουσιν•. SO Ρ only; «κζητουσιν Other MSS., T-R., W-H. 
175. λαμβαι/[(ΐν CIS κλ. : the usual reading ; κ\. λαμβαΐίΐν Ν. 

178. Ισακ is also the spelling of D ; Ισααχ other MSS., T-R., W-H. 

180— I. αυτής | appa is for «υπ; Σαρρα. The papyrus agreed with ΝΑΕ, &c., in omitting 
(TTcipa or στίίρα ούσα w'hich is found after lappa (or after δυυαμιν or (Καβ(ν) in D and 
other MSS. 


182. It is practically certain that the papyrus did not read (t(k(v after ^Xiiciaf with EKL 
and other MSS. (so T-R.). It is omitted in SAD, W-H. 

185. ως η: SO all the best I\ISS. ; ωσίΐ T-R. with a few minuscules. 

186. Considerations of space make κομισαμινοι (Ν, &c., W-H.) preferable to Xa/3oi/ret 
(DE, &c., T-R.). 

187. The papyrus evidently omitted και nuaueiTts which is found in some minuscules 
and read in the T-R. 

188. This line is rather long, and the papyrus may have had πάροικοι for παρ(πι&ημοι, 
as P. 

192. ξηρ]ας γη! : SO NADE, W-H.; Om. γης KL, &C., T-R. 

193. tneaav. SO NAD, W-H ; (πισ( EKL, T-R. 

194. πόρνη: ίπιΚ(•γομ(ρη πόρνη i^. 

196. yap μί : SO EKL, &C., T-R.; pe yap NAD, W-H. 

197. The papyrus agrees with NA (so W-H.) in the omission of conjunctions between 
the names as far as Δακίΐδ. Β. τί κα\ Σ. κα\Ί. T-R. with other MSS. The spelling Σαμψω 
is attested as a variant by D. The e of AuwiS was originally omitted ; AavdS ND, W-H., 
Δ,αυώ, Δ58, and Δαβώ (T-R.) Other MSS. 

201. μαχ]αιρη!•. SO NAD, W-H.; μάχαιρα! Other MSS., T-R. But the papyrus is 
inconsistent and has μάχαιρας in 1. 208. 

(Βνναμωθησαν : NAD, W-H. ; (ν€8υναμωθησαν EKL, &C., T-R. 

203. The size of the lacuna is inconclusive as to whether the papyrus read yu>'«a[t] 

(NAD) or γνν€κα[ις], i.e. γνναϊκις (EKL, &C., T-R., W-H.). 

208. \(πρισθησαν f\i' ρα^σθησαν : this is also the order of AE, &C., and T-R.; fV€ip. <πρ. 

ND, &c., W-H. 

μάχαιρας: cf. 1. 201, note. 

211. (πι : so NA, W-H. ; €v DE, &c., T-R. 

2 1 6. τοσοκτοί' : Ν τη\ικοντον. 

22a. Toi/ σταυρόν: SO D ; om. τον other ]\ISS., T-R., W-H. 

223. κ(καθι[κ](ν: so the uncials, W-H. ; «άόίσίν T-R. with some minuscules. 

224. The papyrus agrees with D in omittmg τον which is read before τοιαυτην in other 
MSS. and by T-R., W-H. 

αυτούς : SO a corrector of Ν ; (αυτούς NDE, W-H., (αυτόν A, αυτόν KL, T-R. 

225. (κ'Χ(\υμ(νοι : soD; ίκλυομ(>/ηι other MSS., T-R., W-H. 

226. μ(χρι: so D;• μ(χρις other MSS., T-R., W-H. 

227. αγων^ι\ζομ€νοι : ανταγωνιζομ(νοι MSS. 
229. και μη : μι^έΐ MSS. 

23 1• "ί : so most MSS., W-H.; €ΐ T-R. with a few minuscules. 

232. Tit γαρ: so NA, W-H.; τις yap (trriv DE, S.C., T-R. 

233-4. KOI ονχ υιοί (στ( is also the order of NAD, W-H. ; fori κ. ο. υι. KL, &c., T-R. 
235. ίτολυ Be 8( is also attested as a variant by D and was added by the third 
corrector of Ν ; πολύ NAD, W-H., πολλω KL, &c., T-R. 

239. αγιότατης is a graphical error for ayiorijTor. πααα 8e is the reading of AKL, &c., 

T-R ; πάσα μιν Ν, &C., W-H. 

241. The ( of (ΐρηιικον has apparently been corrected and the η of αυτής was altered 
from ο or oi, which perhaps reflects the variant δι αυτού recorded in D ; but it may well 
have been a mere slip. 


658. Certificate of Pagan Sacrifice. 

1 5-5x7 i""'• 

An interesting sun^ival of the Decian persecution of the Christians in 
a. D. 250 is preserved in this papyrus, which is an example of the libelli or 
declarations which suspects were compelled to make that they had sacrificed 
to the pagan gods. Two only of these libelli have hitherto been published, one 
at Berlin (B. G. U. 287 : Krebs, Sitziingsb. Berl. Akad. 1893 ; Harnack, Theol. 
Literaturs. 1894, p. 38), the other at Vienna (Wessely, Sitziingsb. Wien. Akad. 
1894; Harnack, Thcol. Liieraittrz. 1894, p. 162). Both of those documents were 
from the Fayiim ; the present specimen, though from another nome, has the 
same characteristic phrases, which were evidently a stereotyped formula, and 
confirms in all respects the emendations and deductions proposed by Harnack 
in connexion with the Berlin papyrus. Like them also it is addressed to a 
commission which was specially appointed to conduct the inquisition against 
the Christians. 

Toii iiri των tepSiu [και αμα τω υΐω μου Ανρη- 

βνσιων w6A[ea)y \ίω Διοσκόρω και Tfj 

παρ Αυρηλίου Λ 15 θνγατρί μου Αύρηλία 

θίωνοί θ(ο3ώρου μη[τρο9 Ααίδι. άξιω ύματ ύπο- 

5 ΤΙαντωνυμίΒοί άπο TJj[y σημιώσασθαι μοι, 

αΰτήί νόλΐωΐ. del μ\ν {ίτουί) α Αύτοκράτοροί Καίσαρος 

βύων και σττίνίων [τοΓ|γ Ταίου Μΐσσίου Κυίντου 

Θ(0Ϊ9 [δ]ί(Τΐλ[(σα ί\τί Se 20 Τραϊανού Αίκίου 
και νυν ϊνώπιον ύμωρ Εύσΐβοΰ[ί Εν]Γυγοΰί 

10 κατά τα Κ(λ€υσθ[(]ι{τα [2ΐβασ]τοΰ [Παϋ]νι κ. 

ΐσπίίσα και ίβυσα KoaJ. [ ]ΐ'( ) [ 

των kpoov (γ(υσάμην ...... 

Ι. if/)<i)v Pap. ; so in 1. 12. 12. ιγευσαμή Tap. i6. λαΐδι Pap. ο of «wo above 

the line. 19. yaiov Pap. 20. τραϊανου Pap. 

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



request you to certify my statement. The ist year of the Emperor Caesar Gaius Messius 
Quintus Trajanus Decius Pius Felix Augustus, Pauni 20.' 

1-2. The Berlin and Vienna libelli are addressed roit cVl τω» θνσιων βρημίνοκ, omitting 


6. ά(\ μίν is written in the original rather below the line and there are traces of ink 
over άίί, so there seems to have been some correction. 

13-4. Tji θυγατρί: women were clearly included in the Decian Edict ; cf. the Vienna 
libellus, which is from two men with their wives, and the 5th Edict of Maximin (Euseb. 

de Mart, Pol. ix. 2), quoted by Hamack, -navhripti πάη-αΓ 5i/Spas 3μα -γνναίξΐ και οΐκίταΐ! 
κα\ αντοίς νπομαζίοί! παισι θΰΐΐν κα\ σ7ΓfVδfίI', κ.τ.λ, 

23. Α signature begins at this line, though whether it is that of the sender of the 
declaration or of an official is doubtful. The stroke above the supposed ν which we have 
taken to represent an abbreviation may be only part of a long paragraphus below 
the date. 


659. Pindar, Παρθίν^ον and Ode. 

1 2-8 X 49 cm. Plates III, IV. 

Fragments of a roll containing parts of at least five columns of lyric poetry 
in Pindaric dialect, written in good-sized round uncials, which we assign to the 
latter half of the first century B.C. Occasional accents, breathings, and stops 
(high and middle point) have been added by the original scribe, who has also 
made a few corrections of his work ; the text, however, was not left in a very 
perfect condition, and several alterations are necessary on metrical and other 
grounds. The first three columns, but for the loss of a few lines at the beginning 
of each, are in good condition ; the fourth becomes more fragmentary, while 
Col. V, which probably succeeded immediately and to which the majority of the 
small unplaced pieces appear to belong, is hopelessly broken. The position of 
these is to some extent fixed by the fact that the verso of Cols, i-iii was utilized 
for a collection of epigrams (ββ2) ; for since the verso of most of the scraps 
is blank, they must be placed later than the upper half of the third column. 

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


any rate of the two odes comprised by the papyrus (11. 21 sqq.) belongs to 
a class hitherto practically unrepresented in what survives of Pindar's works. 
This poem was composed in honour of Aeoladas (1. 29) the father of the 
Pagondas (1. 30) who commanded the Thebans at the battle of Delium 
(Thucyd. iv. 91-6), and his praises are put in the mouth of a maiden (11. 26, 
46, &c.) — a circumstance which at first led us to suppose that the writer was 
a woman. But Blass, to whom we are especially indebted in connexion with 
this papyrus, is clearly right in regarding the piece as one of the ΪΙαρθΐνίΐα, or 
choruses for girls, which figure in the lists of Pindar's works, and are exemplified 
in a few meagre quotations (among which is perhaps to be reckoned 221. vii. 
6-12). Can the poem be characterized still more closely? In near relation to 
the Ylapeiviia there stood a series known as Ααφνηφορικά, so called because the 
singers bore branches of laurel. The catalogue of Pindar's works as given 
by Suidas distinguishes the Παρθίν^ια from the Ααφνηφορικά, while the list given 
in the Codex Ambrosianus, which is usually recognized as the superior authority, 
does not mention the latter class, and apparently includes it in the Υϊαρθίνΐΐα ; 
cf. Proclus, Chrest. ap. Phot., Bibl. 239 Παρβ. o'y κα\ τά Μφνηφορίκα ώ? di ytvos 
■πίττίΐ. It is then quite possible that in the present poem the rather prominent 
allusions to δάφΐ'7/ (11. 27-8, 73), in one of which the speaker actually describes 
herself as carrying a laurel branch, may possess a special significance. On the 
other hand there is here no sign of the religious character which seems to have 
belonged to the Ααφνηφορικά (cf. Proclus, idid.) ; Pindar is indeed said in the 
Vi(a Ambrosiaiia to have dedicated one of these poems to his son Daiphantus, 
but the circumstances are unknown. For the present, therefore, it is sufficient 
to call attention to these references, and to assign the ode provisionally to the 
more comprehensive class of the Ylapuivua, or possibly to the κίχωρισμίνα των 
Παρθ(ν((ων mentioned in the Ambrosian list and elsewhere. The obscurity of 
the latter category might have the advantage of covering the other poem 
partially preserved in the papyrus, which was also in honour of Aeoladas (1. 1 2), 
but, as is shown by the occurrence of a masculine participle (1. 11), was not 
designed for a female chorus. No doubt if both pieces were Ααφη^φορικά, the 
difference of sex would cause no difficulty ; but in the absence of further 
allusions to Ιάφνη such an assumption has little to commend it. Perhaps this 
ode was an ίγκώμιον or simply Epinician in character, and the juxtaposition of 
the two pieces was merely due to their identity of subject. 

The metre of the UapOeveiov is distinguished, like its language, by an ease 
and simplicity which fully bear out the reputation of this class of Pindar's 
odes ; cf. Dionys. Halicarn. Dcmosth. 39, where after citing the poetry of 
Aeschylus and Pindar as an example of want of connexion, abruptness, and 

Ε 2 


unexpected changes of construction, the critic proceeds χω/:)ίϊ δη μή τα Παμθ^ναα 
και ίί τίνα τοΰτοΐί όμοίαί άπαιτίΐ κατασκίνα!' bia<f>aCv(Tai be ris όμοια καν τοΰτυΐί 
eiryfveia καΐ σΐμνότηί αρμονίας rdv άρχαϊον φν\άττονσα -πίνον. Strophes and epodes 
consist alike of five verses having a prevailing choriambic element. The 
scheme is as follows : — 

Stroplus. Epodes. 

ο — 

— — — WW — w— , — — \J — — — — WW — — 

— — — WW — \j — J — — w — — w — ^^w — w — 

— — WW — W — — — WW — — 

— l=i — WW — \j — I — — — WW — w — 

— — w*^ — — — — WW — — 

Lines i and 3 in the strophe, i, (2) and 4 in the epode stand in synaphia with 
the lines succeeding ; and a single long syllable before or after a choriambus 
is probably to be regarded as lengthened by ' syncope ' to the extent of an 

additional short syllable, e. g. — ww = L-ww- j, or -w-ww — w-. 

The commencement of each new strophe is marked in the original by an 
elaborate coronis, and the antistrophes and epodes are commonly denoted in 
the same way by paragraph!, which are, however, sometimes omitted. The 
metrical scheme shows that the number of lines missing at the tops of Cols. 
iii and iv must be either 8 or 33 — a larger figure is out of the question. 
A loss of 8 lines would give a roll of the likely enough height of about 
20 an., and is a satisfactory supposition in other respects. Each column 
would accordingly consist of from 28-39 lines, and a lacuna of about 8 or 9 
lines may therefore be postulated at the beginning of the first two columns. 
On this view the remains of the second poem extend to the second verse of 
the eighth strophe, or the 107th line from the commencement ; the numeration 
given in the text below refers only to the lines actually preserved in the papyrus. 
The length of the strophe of the first poem (Col. i and the lost portion 
of Col. ii) is also five verses ; the epode was longer, how much longer depends 
upon the number of lines lost at the top of Col. ii. If it be assumed that no 
space was left between the end of this ode and the commencement of the next, 
as the analogy of the Bacchylides papyrus and 408 would indicate, the epode 
extended to the rather unexpected length of 14 verses; if on the other hand 
the division was marked by a blank space, this number would be lowered by 
two or three lines. A different figure would of course result from the adoption 
of the hypothesis that the loss in Cols, iii-iv amounts to 23 verses, which would 
bring down the epode of the previous poem to a maximum of 9 lines. 

We append the scheme of the metre : — 

Strophes. Epodes. 


\^ \j — ,^ — _ — 
\^ yu — \j — \j \j -^ 

— V-'W — WV»/ — i^ — — 

— — \-i \J — ^-/U» — 

— »^ — — ^__^_ 

— \j — (^ — — 

— — \^ y^ — \^ KJ ~• \^ \j 

— \^ — — w — 

------ (=l-5-) 

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

Col. i. 

[ 21 letters ] . ω[.] 

[ ] 

[ ]oc[. . . .]©eiAicep 

[ 1ΔΙΑΙ 

SvL ΜΑΝτιεωετεΛ€[.]οω 












20 Ρ0ΝΤΟΓ[.]ΡπΡΙΝΓ€Ν€ 

. . . οσ . . . . θΐίαΐί tp- 
. . . δια 
5 μάντίί ώί τ(λΐ[σ]σω 

UpanoXos' τιμαΐ στρ. 

Se βροτοϊσι Κ(κριμίναι• 

παντί 5" ϊιτί φθόνος άνδρι κΐϊται 

aperas, ό Se μηδΐν ΐχων νπο σι- 
ιο γα μΐΚαίνα κάρα κίκριτπται. 

φίλιων δ αν ίύγ^οιμαν άντ. 

Κρονίδαΐ! €7Γ Αίολάδα 

και yevfi evrvyjav τ^τάγβαι 

όμαλον •^ρόνον άθάναται δβ βροτοϊς 
15 αμίραι, σώμα δ' ίστϊ θνατόν. 

αλλ' ωτινι μη λιπότΐ- tw. 

KVOS σφαλίΙ ττάμπαν οίκοί βιαί- 
α δαμ€ΐί ανάγκα, 

ζώΐΐ κάματον προφνγων άνια- 
20 ρόν, ΤΟ γ[α]ρ πριν γΐνί-]^ισθαι 



Col. ii. 



35 vL 




[ ]xPYCorr[ 


[. . .]ΔωΜ[. . .]/\eCHCT[. , . .]Μ€ . [ 

[. . .]ΙΓΑΡΟ[. . .]IAC 










AITHPAC• οποτΑΝτεχείΜωΝοεοΘεΝει 




_ ^ _ ^ ν^ χρι»σθ7Γ[€πλ >=; _ ^ _ στρ. α 

_ 8<ΰμ — VJ Xearji τ kj — μ€ ~ w — 

[_ ejt γαρ ό [Λοξ]ία9 

[π]ρ[6]<ρρω[ΐ'] άθανάταν χάριν 
25 Θήβαις ΐπιμίξων. 

άλλα ^ωσα/ζει^α re πέπλοι/ ώκίως άντ. α 

γίρσίν τ (Ρ μαλακαΐσιν ορττακ άγλαον 

δάφναί ογίοισα πάν- 

δοζον Αίολάδα σταθμον 
30 νιου τβ Παγώνδα 

ϋμνησω στΐψάνοισι θάλ- «π. α 

λοισα παρθίνιον κάρα, 

σΐίρηνα δ\ κόμπον 

αϋλίσκων ΰπο λωτίνων 
35 μιμήσομ' άοιδαΐί, 

Kiivov δί Ζίφνρου τ€ σιγάζει πνοα? στρ. β 

αίψηράί, οπόταν Τ€ χβιμωνοί σθίνίΐ 

φρίσσων Bopeas km- 

σπέρχτ] πόντου τ ώκύαλον 
40 [β]ΐ7ταν ίμάλα^ίν Ι καΐ 

Col. iii. 



. . .]ΑεΐΚΜ[.]ΖωΝΝΑ[ 
. .]ΑΑΜεΝ[.]ΑπΑΡΟΙΘ[ 

.] ΑΙ ΔΑΑΛΟ Ι εεπεε Ι ν ταδα[ 


ΓΛωεεΑίτεΑεΓεοΘΑΐ • 

— — — φ^ν y_, — ^ - 

— ασ ^ ^ — — 

[πολ]λά μΐν [τ]α πάροιθ ^ _ ^ _ ν> — στρ. y' 
[δ]αίίάλλοίί ίπ^σιν τα δ' ά !=: _ ^^ _ 
45 Ζΐύί οίί", e/i€ δβ πρίπΐΐ 
παρθΐνήϊα μ\ν φρονίϊν 
■γλώσσα Τ€ λίγ^σθαι. 
άνδροί ί" οΰτ€ γυναικός ών θάλίσσιν '4γ- άντ. γ 







ιππωΝτωκγποΔωΝπο[. .] 
J, ΓΝωτοιοεπίΝίκΑίο' 




6ο χΑιτΑΝΟτεΦΑΝοιεέκόο 

ΜΗΘ€Ν" eNTenicAinepirT[ ] 

Κΐΐμαι γ^ρή μ[ΐ] Xauecf aoiSav πρόσφορον. 
50 πιστά, δ' 'Α•γασικ\{β)(ΐ 

μάρτυς ήλυβον h yopw 

iaXois Τ€ yoveCffif 

άμφΐ προξίΐ'ίαισι τι- in. γ 

μαθίΐσιν τα πάλαι τα νυν 
55 τ άμφικτιόν^σσιν 

ϊππίύν τ ώκνπόδων πο[λΐ'-] 

γνώτοΐί ίπι viKais, 

αίί kv άϊόν^σσιν Όγγτ)[στον κ\υ]τα.ς στρ. δ 

ταΐί δι vaby Ίτωνίαί ο.[μφ ίύκ\ί\α 
6ο γαίταν στ(φάΐΌΐς έκόσ- 

μηθΐν, €v τ( Πίσα mpi- 

Col. iv. 


J, επτΑΠΥΛοιο . [ 

65 τ €ΝΗΚ€ΝΚΑΙ€πε!Τ[ ]AOC 



π[.] . Αε€ΦΙΛΗ[. .]Ν• 
70 ΔΛΜΑΙΝΑ€πΑ[.] ...[.. .]ωΐΝΥΝΜΟΐπθΔΙ 





εΚΗς€ΜΗΔ€ς[. .] • • • ΛΑ[. .] 

ΑΔ€Ρ[. .]ACA[ ] 

ΜγριωΝε[ ]ic 

^ίζα τ€ W 

[σζ\μνον au κ^ ^ — KJ — 

— έπταπνλοισι[ΐ'. 
65 ϊΐ'ήκΐΐ' και (π(ΐτ[α δυσμΐνηί χό]λο? στρ. t' 

τωνδ ανδρών '4νί[κΐ]ν μίρίμναί σώφρονος 

ίγθράν epiv ού παλίγ- 

γλωσσον άλλα δίκαί [δ\ιδού5 

π[ισ]ταί (?) ϊφί\η[σ€]ν. 
70 Ααμαίναζ 7Γθ[ΐ,] w — ^ ω ννν μοι πόδι άντ. ί' 

στβιχων άγίο• [τ]ιν γαρ ([ν]φρων (ψ(ταί 

πρώτα θνγάτηρ [ο\δοΰ 

δάφναί €νπ(τάλου σ\(δ[ο]ν 

βαίνοισα πΐδίλοις 
75 ^f Δαισιστρότα, άν ίπά- ίπ. e' 

σκησ€ μήδ(σ\ι _ ^ — 

f ft» - .J \* 

a ο (ρ . . ασα — — 

μυρίων ί w — >^ <Γ 


d. Ζ€ΥΞΑ[ ] ζΐύζα[σα w στρ. <;' 

8οφΜΗΝΥΝΝ€ΚΤΑ[ ]NACeMAC 80 μη vw νίκτα[ρ ίδόντ άπο Kpajvai (μάί 


ΔΙΤωΝΤ€Α[ ΙΠΑΡΑΛΜΥΡΟΝ διψωντ ά ^^ - ^ - nap άλμνρον 

OIXeCXON • 6[ ] οΐχίσθον e - ^^ - 

Col. ν. 





— — — »-/ W 

— IT 

*-* — 


— V — \.^ W 

_ αδ 



— — \^ Vj — 


] . ΙΝΑΡ 


— ~ y^ y^ 

— IV 



— — ^ W — 



— — — WW 

— \j 

vos ■ 

τι ίστίαν 


\J \J 

— \j 








95 ]AIT![ 






105 NAIO[ 

• • • 

] •[ 
] . A!KQ . [ 

€7Γ. ζ 

στρ. η 






no ]ΑΝΤ![ 

] • ΝΑ[ 

115 ]ΑΤ![ 







Ι20 . [ 



{k) (/) {m) («) {0) 

l[ ]Α!Λ[ 

125 [.]QIA[ 










■ ]NA . [ 


ΑΥΞ€ΐ . r 



130 T[.] . [ 

ip) ii) (^) 

]ωκρεο . [ 

] • . [ 

] . MNNAC . [ 



mo] ν". [ 


• . . 


]KP. [ 
135 ]M0[ 

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

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

7. Κ(κριμίναι : cf. Nem. vi. 3 δκίργα Si πάσα κικριμίνα Βίναμίί. 

12. At the end of this line is a TT with a dot or small ο between the two upright 
strokes, like the abbreviation of noXCs or ttoXis. The surface of the papyrus is damaged 
immediately after the TT and one or two more letters may have followed. It is difficult 


to see what can have been meant, for neither sense nor metre requires any word between 
Αΐολο'δα and και ; cf. 1. 6 1 , note. 

13. The diple-shaped marginal sign which appears in the facsimile opposite this line 
really belongs to 1. 17; the small fragment containing it was wrongly placed when the 
photograph was taken. For another case of the use of an Aristarchean symbol in 
a non-Homeric papyrus cf. 442. 52. 

14-5. The meaning is that, though the individual dies, the race is perpetuated. 

17. There are spots of superfluous ink about the letters ΟΙΚΟ, creating rather the 
appearance of an interlinear insertion in a smaller hand ; Κ was perhaps corrected. Another 
blot occurs above ΚΑΜΑΤΟ Ν in 1. 19. 

21-4. A fresh ode begins at 1. 21, the change being marked in the margin by 
a symbol of which vestiges appear opposite this line and the next. The name of the 
person to whom the poem was dedicated and its occasion may have been added, 
as in the Bacchylides papyrus. The small fragment placed at the top of this column 
and containing parts of 11. 22-4 is suitable both with regard to the recto and the verso 
(cf. 662. 39-40, note), but its position can hardly be accepted as certain. None of 
the remaining fragments can be inserted here, their verso being blank. For [π]μ[ό]ψρω[ΐ'], 
a favourite word of Pindar, cf. e. g. Pylh. v. 1 1 7 dtos hi ol to viv τ( πρύψρων reXe'i δύνασιν. 

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

30. After ΠΑΓίΟΝΔΑ an I seems to have been smeared out, but the appearance of I 
may be merely due to a blot ; cf. note on 1. 17. 

33. σαρήνα S( κόμπον ... or Ζ(φ{ιρον, κ.τ.λ. : cf. Schol. On Homer, Od, μ. 168—9 (νλ^κΐ) 
«n^XfTO νηνιμίη κοίμησ( Si κύματα ίαίμων^ (ντ(ϋβ(ν Ήσίοδοϊ και TOvs άνίμουί θίλγίΐν airas (sc. τάί 
Sciprjvas) ίφι;. 

34• AAICKOUN is apparently a mistake for αϋλίσκων; cf Οι. iv. 2 lipai ύπ6 ηοικιλοφόρμιγγοί 
άοώάς (λισσόμίναι. The initial Λ could equally well be Δ but hardly N, nor does νάίσκων 
give so good a sense. 

37. Μ of ΧείΜωΝΟε has been altered from N. 

38-9. φρίσσων Bopias : oS.. Pyth. iv. 81 φρίσσοντας όμβρους which a scholiast explains 
φρίσσαν noioivTas. eniCnePXHC is a mistake for eTTICnePXHI ; cf. for the word Od. f. 304 

(τάραξί S( πόιτοκ, ('πισπ€ρχουσι δ' άίλλαί. We transpose ωκΰαΧον and ττύρτου On accOUnt 

of the metre though this change does not effect an absolute correspondence, ow — 

taking the place of ^ ^ — ^—. ίόκΰαλο! ριπή occurs in 0pp. J/ai. 2. 535. 

40. The sense seems to require the substitution of ΐμά\αξ(ν for the GTAPAHe of the 
papyrus; cf. Fr. 133 (probably Pindar) of the Adespota in Bergk, Poet. Lyr. lisepx&pimv 

re μαλάζοντας βίαιον πόντον ωκ(ίας τ ανέμων ριπάς. The displacement of ('μά\αξ€ν by (τάραξ(ν 

would be easy in such a context ; cf. the passage from Od. e quoted in the note on 
11. 38-9. ΚΑΙ belongs to the next line. 

42. The reading of this line is diflScult. There is a stroke passing through the 
middle of Κ to I and another above the K, and perhaps this letter or both I and Κ were 
to be cancelled. The facsimile rather suggests that Θ was first written in place of IK, 
but that is deceptive. The doubtful Ζ may be Ξ. The dot which appears above the 
first Ν is very likely the tip of a letter like Ρ or Φ from the line above. 


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

44. Cf. Pindar, N'em. xi. 18 μ^Κι-^^οϋποισι 8αώάΚΘ(ντα μίΐ\ίζίμ(υ αοιδαίτ. The A of ΤΑ was 
altered apparently from O. 

46—7. fi" . . . Tf : cf. e.g. 01. vi. 88—9 πρώτον μίν . . . yviivai τ ίπιιτ , 

49• αοώάν πρόσφορον: the phrase recurs in Nfm. ix. 7. 

50. The alteration of AfACIKAei to Άγασικλ/€ΐ is necessary for the metre. Who this 
Agasicles was is obscure ; perhaps he was the irals αμφιθαλή! who ήρχ^ι τη! Βαφνηφορίας 
according to the account of Proclus ap. Photius Bt'il. 239, or he may merely have been 
some member of the family of Aeoladas. The rather abrupt way in which his name is 
introduced and the context in which it occurs might suggest that a third poem commenced 
in Col. iii, a supposition which would be strengthened if the loss at the tops of the columns 
were extended by another fifteen lines (cf. introd.). But the hypothesis of two consecutive 
odes in the same metre would require to be justified by stronger evidence than that 
supplied by the passage before us. For πίστα μάρτυ! cf. Fy//i. i. 88, and xii. 27 πιστοί 

χορίυταν μάρτυρα. 

53. τιμαθί'ισιν : TIMASeNTAC the papyrus, and the accusative may possibly have been 
justified by the sequel ; but as the passage stands τιμαθίϊσιν τα πάλαι or τιμαθίντισσι ττάλαι 
seems an improvement, though the accumulation of datives is not elegant. In any case the 
division of the lines is wrong, as in 11. 40-1 and 66-7. For the language cf. Isi/i. iii. 
25-6 Ti/jafi»Tes αρχάβ(ΐι λίγονται ■πρόξίνοί τ αμφικτιόνων. It is noticeable that the papyrus 
has the spelling άμφικτίοια which was restored to the text of Pindar by Boeckh in 
place of the MSS. reading άμφικτύονα. 

58. κλν]τά! is by no means certain. The letter before AC is possibly T, but more 
of the crossbar should be visible. 

59. ναήν is a necessary correction of the papyrus reading NAOT. 

61. The metre is complete at πφι-, and probably the lines were wrongly divided again 
— unless indeed the same addition was made as at the end of 1. 12. 

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

64. Another disturbance in the metre has occurred in this line, which will not scan 
with ί'τΓΓαττΰλοΐί as the first word. The vestiges before the lacuna suggest a round letter 
like e or Θ, and €ΤΤΤΑΓΓΥΛΟΙ€ΘΗΒΑΙΟ, e.g. may have been written for Θή1ι3αΐί (τπ-απίλοισιν. 
But it is just possible to read 6ΠΤΑΠΥΛθί€Ι[Ν, and to suppose that the missing syllable 
at the beginning of the line was transposed to I. 63. 

65. The first Ν of 6Ν Η KEN is rather cramped; but the writing becomes smaller and 
more compressed in this column. 

66. The transference of σώφρηνοί to this line is necessary nulri gralia. For μίριμνα in 


the sense of ambition for distinction in the games cf. e.g. 01. i. 109-11 θ(0! ίπίτροποί ίων 

ΤΐαΊσί μη^ΐται . . , Ίίρων μΐρίμναισίν. 

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

The reading (χθραν tpw is fairly satisfactory, though Ν 6 hardly fills the space between 
the A and P. 

69. With jr[iff]rat the letters ICT must be supposed to have been very close together ; 
cf note on 1. 65. 

70. Here again is a difficulty. There is no sign of the second leg of Π in TTA[.] and 
a Τ would in some respects be more satisfactory, but on the other hand the space between 
this letter and A is more consistent with a ΓΤ. The name Αάμαινα has no authority, but 
is in itself unobjectionable, standing in the same relation to Δάμων as Aemva to Αίων or 
Ύρνφαινα to Τρύφων. The person addressed may be Aeoladas or Pagondas, but his identity 
is of course quite obscure. With regard to the mutilated adjective agreeing with nobi, 
immediately following the first lacuna is a vertical stroke (not very clear in the facsimile) 
Λvith an angular base, which might be the second half of a Ν or the lower half of a letter 
like I or Τ ; in the latter case two letters might be lost in the lacuna. The vertical 
stroke is not long enough for p, so πά[τφ is excluded. The next letter could be an A or A, 
but the traces on the papyrus are very indistinct, and there may have been a correction. 
If πα[ί] is right the succeeding word must begin with a short vowel, unless indeed ιτά[ϊ\ 
is read as a disyllabic ; πάυ has been conjectured in 01. ii. 84. <λ(υθ(ρω is unsuitable ; 

(ναισίμω might do. 

73. CX€A[.]N : the facsimile is again deceptive, transforming the X into € and € 
into C. There might be room for two narrow letters between Δ and N, but σχ(^^ο\ν is 
hardly to be avoided, though δάφνα: (ΰπ€τάλον σχ(&[ο\ν βαίνοισα is not very satisfactory. 

73. Δαισιστρο'τ-α is another name for which no authority can be cited, but it is quite 
a possible form, στροτόι being the Boeotian for στρατός. Whether the reference is to 
a goddess or a woman is doubtful. A second name must have followed in 1. 76 ; 
cf 11. 80-2, note. For the anaphora of the relative cf. the reading of some MSS. in 

Pindar, Fr. 75. 10 ov (l<. I. τον') Βρύμιον &v {v. I. τον) Έριβόαν τ( βροτοΊ κά\(ομ(ν. The A of the 

second AN is more like A. ΐπασκΰν is a Pindaric word ; cf Ncm. ix. 10 ΐπασκήσω κλυτάί! 
ήρωα TipaU, and Fr. 194. 4. 

80-2. ' Do not when in sight of the nectar from my spring go thirsty away to 
a salt stream.' νίκτά^ρ seems right, though the Τ is not very satisfactory, the length of the 
vertical stroke rather suggesting Ρ ; Τ, however, is an irregular letter. Cf for the metaphor 

O/. Vll. 7~9 **'' ^^ νίκταρ χντόν^ Μοισαι/ δόσίν, άΐθλοφόροις άνδράσιν ηίμττων^ γλνκνν καρπον 

φρ(νΟ!, ίλάσκομαι. The pcrsons addressed are presumably the two named in 11. 75-6, 
the masculine form of the dual being used of a feminine subject as e. g. in Soph. O. C. 
1 1 13, 1676. In 1. 81 the original reading 8ιψώντ(() seems preferable to the correction 
or variant διψίύντ{ι) since there is no certain instance in Pindar of the latter elision ; but 
of course the question cannot be decided without the following words : 8ιψάιντ{ι) ά&ν, 
e. g., would give a good sense. It is noticeable that in the next line, though the substitution 
of Θ for the second X is necessary, the X has not been crossed out. 

Frs. (a) and {δ). On the position of these two fragments see note on 11. 1-4. 

Fr. («) 128. CHPA[ is very intractable, leading only to Σήρ or σηραγξ in some form; 
but the first letter is plainly C and not Θ. 

Fr. (r) 140. Above Ν to the right is a mark like a grave accent. 



660. Paean. 
Fr. (a) 131 X 9 cm. 

Two fragments, each from the top of a column, which is probably though 
not certainly one and the same, containing part of what is evidently a Paean. 
The lines seem to be rather long, and it is hardly possible to make out the 
sense or to discern in whose honour the paean was composed. Neither is there 
much clue to the identity of the author ; but Blass points out that, while ίάοισα 
(1. 8) indicates a lyric poet, the form via^ for vaas is decisive against Pindar 
or Bacchylides. Perhaps the piece may be attributed to Simonides, but a 
later date is not impossible. 

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

Fr• (λ) [. .].[.. -^Xfo^L• •]?' a'rei/Dar[ 

^ay ΐΐπαιηοΐ' ανα()σιων τ[ 
οιστοον Sovpu>v τ€ σι5άρο[ 
βρΐσα viis aiOecof μαλίσ[τ 
5 η πολίμονδί κορυσσομ.([ν 
Oecrrrfaias δ απο κνίσας μ[ 

κ[ ] πολλάκις Πνθοι ιτ[ 

ά. μ^ν ταντ αίοισα γΐ'αμψΐΐι 
ΐσσομ[€]νου 5" veoi ου μ(λλ( . [ 
ΙΟ [ΐ€]παιασ[ι]ΐ'• συν αλιοί τρίτα[ 
[ίΐ]παιασιν α . χ€ΐ/ . . ονλα . [ 
[. .joy αντίκα Se σκοπιάς οι [ 
[. .]ι^το μΐταχρονιαι . [ 
[. .]vofTi . γαν eparay [ 

15 [κ 

αρα νύκτα κ[ 

[μα\ρτυραμίναι δ[.]<[ 
[. .]«• 'ΰπα[ιηο]ν• . [ 

]οΐ' ζσσ^σθ^αι 

] άμμορον [ 

Ίμων φα[ 

] . χοών 5[ 



Fr. (δ) 


[. .]v στο\[ 
20 [. .] . ova.[ 

[. . .] βροτο[ 

[. .] , χρύσ[ 

[. . .]aoi5[ 

[. .]ακυ^^ 
25 [. . ,Ια^• ϊΐ\παίηον 

1-6. The small fragment does not seem to join on directly to the larger, for though 
that position works well in the first three lines — ατ:(ΐρατ\ον, τ {τ')\αμμορον, σώαρο,το'μων — 
difficulties arise in the remainder. In 1. 4 χ^ων is possible, but not, we think, χοροί- ; the 
letter before χ is probably η, i, or v, but not a. In 1. 5 the doubtful ω might possibly be v, 
but κορνσσομ^,νω^ could not be got into the space if there was no gap in 11. 1-2, nor could 
μ^f\b]nμ(ι/(^^ (cf. Homer, H. xxi. 363) be read in 1. 6. On the other hand it is not easy to 
reconstruct 11. 1-2 on the h)-pothesis of a loss between the two fragments of only one or two 
letters. In 1. 2 there appears to be something above the a of αμμορον besides the accent and 
it is perhaps intended for a smooth breathing, but the effect is rather that of a sign of short 
quantity. μ[ in 1. 6 may be a[ or λ[. 

•J. Πυίοι πί : or ηνθοίτ . [ ? 

II sqq. There is some uncertainty with regard to the number of letters lost at the 
beginnings of the lines. In 1. I ο two letters are required before παίασ[ι]ν, and since there 
are three other instances of κπαιαν or κπαιηων in the fragment [tf'-nataaiv can hardly be 
avoided. In 1. 11 there is rather less room, but something must have stood before παιασιν, 
and if the column leaned slightly to the right there would not be much difficulty in getting 
[if] into the space. [μα]ρτνραμ(ναι in 1. 16 also looks very probable ; and if that be 
right, there must be two letters missing at the commencement of the preceding and 
following lines. 

1 1 . Possibly av^fvi . ou or avxevd^. 'Όν. 

13• μfτaχpot'^aι : cf. Hesiod, Theog. 269 μ(ταχρόνιαί yap ίαλλοκ (of the Harpies), whefc 
μ(ταχρόι>ιαί is explained as equivalent to μιτίωροι. 

661. EroDES. 

14-1 X 16-4 fw. Plate V. 

This fragment contains the beginnings and ends of lines from two 
columns of Epodes in the Doric dialect. Iambic trimeters alternate with 
trochaic verses of half their own length. Archilochus, the father of this style 
of poetry, cannot of course be the author on account of the dialect ; and Blass 
considers that the piece may be attributed to Callimachus, who appears to have 



tried almost every variety of poetic composition and employed different dialects. 
Unfortunately the longer lines are so incomplete that to make out the general 
drift is impossible. 

Palaeographically this fragment is of considerable interest. It is written 
in handsome round uncials, of a type not infrequent in papyri (cf. 25, 224, 678, 
686, 701), and also exemplified in the great Biblical codices. On the verso of 
the papyrus are parts of two columns in a cursive hand which is not later than 
the beginning of the third century, and is quite as likely to fall within the 
second. The text on the recto then can be assigned with little chance of error 
to the latter half of the second century. Accents, &c., have been added by two 
different hands, some being very small and neat, others larger and in lighter ink. 
To the smaller hand may be attributed also the occasional corrections and the 
punctuation, but whether this hand can be identified with that of the body 
of the text is doubtful. The document in cursive seems to be a series of medical 
prescriptions or directions ; it is too fragmentary to give any connected sense, 
but the occurrence of the words τρΐίβανον, σν<άμ(ΐνο$ and apparently χιραλ4ο5 
may be noted. 

Col. i. Col. ii. 



]pos άριω μίΐΌί. 

5 ]j/ καταρροον 


κα\ί μι δικτνοΐί 


jof ώ ΤΙα\αιμον€ί 

.0 ] 

]το βηριον 


'\ον ώ ΤΙαΧάιμονΐί 

15 ] αττωθΐ τοι> φθόρον 

iroras ifpas βλ[ 
και τνχ^ αμπνριξ . [ 
ίληγ' ο μνθοί• κα.[ι 
πνρδάνωι 7rv\eij[ 
20 κηγω π ΐκίιναν [ 

ταΐί epais ίπω5α[ίί 
οι δ ΰπαν [. .]vt[ 


μη TV y' avTis (^λ]^θ[ηις 


η• κάι μι π[[£τ]]ο[[ι;]]-ο_ί' [ 

25 ί^%]] 

e σανίΊαστί 


(ρι^αν αΰθι δ (ξ a\o[s 

π[.]/)[[κ]]αλθί' κατάγρ[ 

([κ] ras θάλασσα! τ[ 


3. The corrector apparently wished to alter αριω μ(νο! to aypim pcms, but the ω is not 
crossed through. Blass suggests θη^ρο! αγριω (icraf, and notes that in Α>ι/Λ. Pal. xii. 162. i 
ονπΐύ τοξοφορων οίδ' Spins the same corruption or the same word occurs. 

9. The plural Παλαιμονα means sea-gods. 

16. noTat is for rroTTOs, i. e. τιοτι Tat. 

17. ? αμπνριξα[!, but the vestigcs of the letter following ξ do not suggest a, though that 
letter cannot be said to be impossible, τνχαμ πυριξ . . gives no sense. 

19. πνλ(π[ is a vox nihili: the letters are all quite clear. 

24. I) — 1], as the punctuation shows; but the apparent use of the singular form with 
a plural subject is -peculiar. The deleted letters are crossed through and besides have dots 
over them, ν above υ might be read as λ<, but that is less likely. 

26. Above the 1 of αίΛ is a small circular mark which seems to be accidental. A high 
point might be recognized after eppt^av. 

27. κατάγρ[ may be κατάγρ[η = καθήριι, but then the preceding word should be a noun, 
and it is difficult to find anything suitable. The β above the deleted κ is almost certain, and 
the vestiges of the first letter of the line strongly suggest π, which leaves us with π[α^βά\ον 

or Tfj^i/]/) βαλον. 

662. Epigrams. 
12-8 X49 cm. 

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

The copyist, who wrote an irregular uncial hand, was a careless and 
unintelligent person, and there are frequent mistakes and corruptions, while 
a dislocation of the lines has apparently occurred at the top of Col. ii. The 
date of this text seems to be not much later than that on the recto, and probably 
it falls within the reign of Augustus like the majority of the papyri with which 



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



Col. i. 


Tii Tifos (υσα yvvai Παριην υττο κ]ίιονα κ[ι]σαι 

Πρήζω KaWiTeXfvs και ποδ]α7Γη ^αμιη 

Tiy 5e σι και κτ€ρ€ΐξ€ Θ(θκρ]ιτοί ω μ€ yeyan/ey 

(ζΐδοσαΐ' θνησκΐΐί δ ΐκ tivos] ίκ τ[ο]κίτου 

ίυσα ποσών ^τίων δυο κΐΐκοσί\ν η ρα γ ατ€κνο5 

ουκ αΧΚα τρίφτη Καλλιτ€ληΐ' eXi'^rov 

ζωοι σοι Kfivos ye και es βαθύ] γηραί ικοιτο 

και σοι ^eive πόροι πάντα Τυχ]τ) τα καλά 


φραζζ γυναι γΐν^ην ονο]ιχα γβονα : ΚαΧΚιηληί μΐν 

ο σπΐΐραί Πραζω δ ουνομ]α γη δί ^αμοί 

σαμα δί tis τοδ εχωσβ Θΐο]κριτο9 ο πριν άθικτα 

αμ€Τ(ραί λυσαί αμματα παρθ]ΐνιαν 

πω? δ€ 6av(s λοχ^ιοισιν ίν] αλγ(σιν ΐΐπΐ δ€ ποιαν 

ηλθΐί ΐί ηλικιην δισσακι]ί (νδΐκΐτΐί 

η και απαΐί ου ζ(ΐν€ λ€λ]θίπα γαι ev ν(οτατι 

Καλλιτίλη ] • Γ/^ ντιίπιαχον] 

ΐλθοι (S ολβιστην πολιην] τριχ[α και σον οδ]ιτα 

ουριον ιθυνοι πάντα Τνχη βιοτον] 

Col. ϋ. 
αυχ^μαλΐας νοπ[.] . ον υπ οφρυοί ανθΐσι δάκρυ 
ν[.]λων €νβα.[.]σ(ΐ! y}f{.] . ρο[.]απΐ)ί σπιλαδι 
φραζ( γυναι tis (ουσα κ[α\ ίκ tivos (ΐπ( re πατρην 


25 .•"?[[•]1ο'''? ΐθανΐί νουσου υπ αργαλΐηί 

ουνομα Κΐν Πράξω Χαμιη ξΐνί e/c δ( γονηοί 



KaWiTiKivs -γΐνομαν αλλ ίθανον τοκίτω• 

Tis Sf ταφον σταλωίΤΐ Θΐουκριτοί η μί συνίυνον 

avSpi Βοσαν ποιην 8 ηλθΐς ey ηΚικιην 

30 ΐπταΐτΐί τρίί €ΐ>ος γ^νομαν ίτι η ρα γ ατβκνοί 
ου Καλλιτίλη^ τρκτη παι8α 8ομω Χιττομαν 

ras πίααροί ατρΐστον Λακΐδαιμονα ταί Κΐρα μουναί 
ΊτοΚΧακι^ αν ττολεσί ^Ιη^ριν ίφρι^ΐν Αρης 

35 'Ί"' νπ ανίκατωι ΦιΧοποιμΐνι δουρι τ Α-)^α\ΐ(ύν 
νρηνη! εκ τρισσαν ηριττΐ μυριαδαν 
ασκΐποί olcdvoi Se περίζμυχ^ηρον iSovres 
μύρονται weSiov δον . €[. . .]φΐ(τιτΓ0ί 
[κ]απνον δ €κθρωσ[κοντα .]€ρ€η[.] , [.]ο Xoerpois 

40 [. .]δα.ί δΐρκομΐνα[ α]κροπο[λ , .] 

Col. Hi. 

Ακρωριται Πανί και (νπα ] ννμφαΐί 

[Γ]λημΐί ο (τννγΐΐτων δώρα κ[υνηγίσί]ηί 


ταυταν re προτομαν και δ[ ]ησ• , [.]_£ 

45 βνρσαν και ροθιονί τουσδ ανεθηκί] πόδα! 

Παν ω και νυμοαι tovS[ αγ]ρ€ντηρα 

Τληνιν αίξησαιθ aieS[ 1ρ 


σιλαινων αλοχ^οΐί αντρτμσιν -ηδΐ κΐρασται 
5θ τασδ Ακρωριται Πανί και ηγεμονι 

και προτομαν ακμητα και αυτό veov τοδε κάπρου 

δΐρμα το μηδ αυτω ρηγννμΐνον χαλι/οί 

Γληνις ανηίρτησ€ καλαί -χαριτησίω^ αγραί 

δακνυ5 ιφθιμου κουροί Οναφαν([.]ί 

55 ■'^[^^]ν;β]°^ 




{a) ].[ {b) 60 ]απ . [ 

4. yf■yωl'eΓ (or τίγωκί^) is for yoi^fr. 

12. Πράξω : SO 1. 26 ; Π(ϊΐ)|ώ MSS. But the spelling of the papyrus is too inconsistent 
to merit much attention. Thus we have in a single epigram αυ}(μα\(αί and apyoKajs 
(11. 22, 25), jTotar and ποίην (11. 25, 29) ; i; however tends to predominate after a vowel or^j in 
the epigrams of Amyntas, a elsewhere. 

14. παρθ^νιαν: 1. vapdfvlas or -ηί. 

1 7. The f above the line is clear enough, and the letter below is apparently ι and not 
p. yap is of course the right reading. 

18-20. The question of the position of the two fragments (a) and (i) at the bottom of 
this column has already had to be considered in connexion with the text on the recto ; cf. 
note on 659. 1-4. They might well be put here so far as the appearance of the papyrus 
and of the writing is concerned ; but the letters will certainly not coincide with any known 
version of 11. 18-20. The scribe is far from being reliable no doubt, and sometliirig has 
evidently gone wrong in 1. 18, which should be Καλλιτίλη τρ^τη παίδ' ?τι νη-πίαχυν. Before 
νη'πιαχον\ howevcr there is a clear « ; perhaps fn e or cTre for fn was written, τρίχα and 
ο&ιτα being in their right places it is scarcely admissible to postulate a divergence from the 
ordinary reading in the intervening words. Combining the two fragments, κα\ σΰ γ' ό[8'7τα 
[ονρίον leivois — <_/ w — βίοτ]ον would give an intelligible variant ; but apart from the difficulty 
of reading συ and ]ον this also upsets νηπίαχην, with which the first line of Fr. {i) is incon- 
sistent, and does not account for the space between τριχ[α^ and rat ; moreover on turning to 
the recto the resulting readings αιτ{.]σα\\, afi5fopotr[, [.]ω . erai»{ (cf. 659 Frs. (a), {i)) are, 
to say the least, unattractive. We therefore prefer to suppose that these fragments came 
earlier in the papyrus ; they do not seem to belong to the lost half of this column. 

22-3. These two very puzzling lines do not combine at all easily with what follows and 
may be displaced ; perhaps, as Blass suggests, they belong to the next epigram, which is 
apparently defective at the beginning; cf. note on 11. 33-4. The construction would 
indeed be improved by a verb for fovaa in 1. 24 to depend upon (as in the first line of 
Leonidas' epigram nV πΊόγ (ίσα . . . κήσαι), but the word φράζ€ is the natural commence- 
ment (cf 1. 1 1 and Anlh. Pal. vii. 165. i «Ve, yiVoi, nV «φκί), and the participle is not 
unintelligible. With regard to the reading, in 1. 22 the letter after vo may be y, and there 
are traces of ink above ο which may indicate a correction ; before ov is the end of a high 
cross stroke which would suit y, σ or τ. νστ\(\ρον is just possible though not satisfactory, 
and would of course leave the line a syllable short. In 1. 23 ίν^λ[ could be read for ii'3n[ 
and the following word is perhaps some form of ■^νχρόί ; but there is hardly space for 
a letter between the (very doubtful) ο and the a (which may be another o). The ^ might 
be φ. Blass suggests λ(ίβων (μβλίψ^ΐ! . . . , and this may well be right, but was certainly 
not written. 

24-31. ' " Say, lady, who you are and who your father, and tell your country and of 
what grievous sickness you died." " My name, sir, is Praxo of Samos, and I was the 

F a 


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

24. f of ίκ was converted from t and the letters ivo have also been corrected. 

25. 1. Koi ποίας ΐθανα. νήπια! seems to have been originally written, the π being 
subsequently converted into ο and another π added above the line. Whether the initial v, 
of which only a slight vestige remains, was at the same time altered is doubiful owing to 
a hole in the papyrus. 

26. Kfv is a mistake for μ(ν. 

28. 1. θίόκριτο! ω. Cf. 11. 15-6 above and An/h. Pal. vii. 165. 3-4 θιόκριτοί 5s μί 

σννίυνον jjytTO, 

3 1 . The superfluous ηυ at the beginning of the line is due to the analogy of the two 
previous epigrams: cf. II. 7 and 17. 1. Καλλιτίλΐ}». 

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

33-4. 1. ταν πάροί . . . τ5γ χ^ρα . . . ποΧλάκΐ! fv ποΚίσιν. The last word is however very 
doubtful ; πο may be τω and σ may be f, while of the supposed f only a slight vestige of the 
base is left. Blass would retain άν and read πόλίωι/ or ποΚ(ων. A couplet has fallen out either 
before or after 11. 33-4, since there is nothing to govern Λα«δ(ΐιμο»α. Perhaps, as suggested 
above, 11. 22-3 should come in here, though they do not seem particularly appropriate. 

35. i' should perhaps be inserted after νυν. 

36. 1. μυριάδων. 

37. ζ of πίριζμυχηρον (^ π(ρισμυχηρόν) has been corrected. 

38. The letters in the latter part of the line are much damaged ; the φ could equally 
well be ψ•, ea- may be ατ or . f, and for the supposed π, which is not satisfactory, . t should 
perhaps be substituted. 

39-40. The letters ]'ΐρ€η[ and ]κ/ϊοτγο[ are on a detached fragment, the appearance of 
which decidedly points to the position here assigned to it. The contents of the recto 
create no difficulty (cf. 659. 21-4 note) and άκράπολι: in some form fits the context in 1. 40 
very well ; moreover above ρ of ](ρ(η[ is the end of a long stroke descending from the line 
above, which just suits the φ or ψ• after the lacuna in 1. 38. The cumulative effect of these 
considerations is undeniably strong. 

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

42. 'Ακρώρ(ΐα was the name of a mountain peak in Sicyon, and 'λκρωρΰτης is given by 
Steph. Byz. as a local epithet of Dionysus. The mutilated word before ννμφακ was 
probably some adjective ending in -ισι (cf. 1. 49), but the space is very short for ^i^ — w w 
as required by the metre, and a corruption may be suspected. 

43. 1. Γλήι /tr as in 11. 47 and 53. For ιί^yvηyeσι]ηί cf. Anlh. Pal. vi. 183. 2 ; σ[υαγρβσι]ι;Γ 

(vi. 34. 4) could also be read. 

44. The first a of ταυταν has been corrected, and to make the result clearer another τ 
was added above the line. 


4δ• Cf. Anth. Pal. vi. 34. 2 κπΊ κάπρου roiabt καβά-ψ( πο'δαι. καθαψ( might of COUrse be 

read for ανιθηκι here, but the meaning would not be affected. 

46. 1. ννμφαι. IpcvTijpa muSt be θηptvτηpa Or aypfvTrjpa ; perhaps TOvS [άλκιμον άγ^ρ€ντήρα. 

47• 1. ά(ξήσαιτ' followed by something like aUv Sypaiai KaXaU ; but the remains of the 
letter after me suggest δ, ζ, or |. Cf. A>i//i. Pal. vi. 158. 3-4 aClfTt δ' aU\ niiv iyCK^v ΐ^ίμφαι 
πίδακα, and vi. 34. 5—6 αλλ" 2> Ώαν σκοπίητα κα\ (Is οπίσω ΏοΧίαινον tvaypov πίμποί! vUa Σιμύλ€ω. 

49-54• ' To the cave-dwelling mates of the Sileni and to horned Pan of Acroria their 
chief these trophies, a scathless head and new boar's hide, that not even steel may rend, 
were hung up to view as a thank offering for a goodly quarry by Glenis the son of noble 

49. 1. 2ι\ηνων. 

50. 1. ταΐτ for τασ8. 

51. ακμητα may be interpreted in the sense of 'uninjured' or 'permanent' on the 
analogy of πυλαΊ ακμητα in Αη/Λ. Pal. vs.. 526 or may be regarded as an epithet which 
strictly applies only to the living animal (cf. Soph. Antig. 353 ovptiov τ άκμήτα ταΰρπν). 

52. χαλυοι is for χάλυβι ; cf. ημοαι for ννμφαι in 1. 46. The top of the ο is missing, 
but β seems excluded. 

54. 1. ΌΐΌ^σι^φιί^^υ f ? 

56, 1. δρυμονόμου or δρνμον όμοϋ. The rest of the epigram was pever added. 

663, Argument of Cratinus' ΔΙΟνυοαλεξανδρος. 

19-8 X 12-3 cm. 

Of all the lost Greek classics there are few of which the recovery would be 
of greater importance than the plays of Cratinus or Eupolis, and though the 
present fragment does not give any actual portion of Cratinus' works it never- 
theless throws some interesting and much wished for light upon the plots of his 
comedies, about which almost nothing was known previously. It consists of 
the argument of the ΔωινσαλίξανΙροί, one of Cratinus' most famous plays, 
written in a small uncial hand in the late second century^ or the first half of the 
third. The title Δωι•ν(τα\ίξαιύρο5 fj (i.e. the 8th drama) Kpareivov occurs, not 
where it would be expected at the end, but at the top of the last column, and 
is written in much larger uncials. What is meant by this comedy being called 
the ' 8th ' is uncertain. Similar numbers are assigned to extant Greek plays in 
their arguments, e.g. the Antigone of Sophocles is the '32nd,' the Alcestis of 
Euripides the ' 1 7th,' the Birds of Aristophanes the ' 35th.' That the numbers 
refer to the chronological order is barely possible in the first two of these 
instances and impossible in the third ; and in the case of the Dionysalcxandrus 
also it is very improbable that the arrangement according to which that play was 


the 8th was chronological. Korte would make it an alphabetical arrangement. 
As frequently happens in scholia, there are numerous abbreviations in the te.xt 
of the argument. In most cases the last letter written of an abbreviated word 
is above the line ; 'Ep^(ijs) in 1. 5 and ■καραΐιοθη(τόμΐνο[ι<) in 1. 40 are written «ρμ' 
and ■ηαραοοΟησομίνο . καί takes various forms, / in 1. 6, kJ in 11. 9, 17, 33, and 43, 
<; in 11. 11 and 31. μ' for μί'ι» occurs in 11. 7 and 38, and δ' for δ€ in 11. 23 and 40. 
The high stop is occasionally employed. The MS. is not very accurate, cor- 
ruptions occurring in two lines ; cf. notes on 11. 8 and 12. The extant fragments 
of the Διοί/υσαλί'^ανδροί, apart from single words, number nine, and how little 
these and the title of the play served to indicate its contents may be judged 
from the fact that Meineke considered 'AKiiavbpos to be Alexander the Great, 
and therefore wished to assign the play to the younger Cratinus. Kock on the 
other hand inferred from the common occurrence of well-known mythical 
personages in the titles of comedies that Alexander was the Trojan Paris, and 
favoured the authorship of Cratinus the elder. The acute hypothesis of Kock 
is now verified by the papyrus, which shows that Άλίξανδροί in the title is indeed 
the Trojan, and that the plot turned upon an amusing perversion of the story 
of the Trojan war, in which Dionysus played the part assigned in the legend 
to Paris. That the play was the work of the elder Cratinus is moreover 
proved by the note appended at the end, stating that Pericles was attacked 
for having been the cause of the war. The date of its performance is thus 
fixed to the year B.C. 430 or 429. 

The earlier part of the argument, contained in the upper portion of Col. i 
and probably in a preceding column, is lost, and where the papyrus becomes 
intelligible it is describing the ■παράβασίί (11. 6-9). The chorus apparently 
consisted of satyrs in attendance upon Dionysus (cf 1. 4a and 1. 6, note), and 
the action took place for the most part on Mount Ida. The τταράβασίί is 
follo\ved (11. 9-12) by a scene between the chorus and Dionysus, in which they 
mock at him, very likely on account of the guise in which he presents himself. 
Possibly Cratin. /";-. inc. 281 ττοιμην καθ^στηκ αίττόλος καϊ ;3ουκολο$ refers to this 
incident. Then comes (11. 12-9) a parody of the judgement of Paris. Aphrodite, 
who promises to Dionysus that he shall be the most beautiful and most beloved 
person in the world, naturally is victorious. Dionysus next goes to Sparta and 
brings back Helen to ]\Iount Ida (11. 20-3). Upon the approach of the Achaeans 
they both take refuge in the house of the real Alexander, Dionysus turning 
himself into a ram and hiding Helen in a basket (11. 23-33). ^^ is easy to 
understand the boisterous fun to which this scene must have given rise. A 
glimpse of it is afforded by the familiar quotation from the Dionysalcxaridrus ό δ' 
ηλίδιοϊ ωσττίρ ττρόβατον βη βή λίγων βabίζiι, which ηο doubt refers to Dionysus' 


appearance in the character of a sheep. Alexander himself now comes on the 
stage, and detects the lovers ; the denouement is that Helen remains with him 
as his wife, while Dionysus is sent off in disgrace to be delivered to the Achaeans, 
but accompanied by the faithful satyrs (II. 33-44). 

The papyrus concludes with the scholiast's remark already mentioned, 
showing that the play was directed against Pericles, who may well have been 
satirized in the principal character as Dionysus. Imperfect as it is, the argu- 
ment well illustrates the perversion of familiar legends which seems to have 
been a favourite resource of the older comic poets, and of Cratinus in particular. 

We are indebted to Prof. A. Korte for several suggestions on this 

Col. i. 

[ ] • 

[ W{ ) 

[ Vai' 

[ ] αυτόν μη 

5 [ Μ•]'""'" » ^PMil^) 

[ jerat κ{αι) οντοι 

/i(€f) ΤΓβ(οί) Tovs θίαταί 

τίνα πνων ποιη{ ) 

διαλΐγονται κ{αι) 
ΙΟ ιταραψανίντα τον 

Διονυσον (πισκα{πτονσί) (και) 

■)(λ(ναζονσ{ιν) ο S{e) πα 

ραγΐνομΐνων αντωι 

πάρα μ(ν [Hpas] TvpavviSo{i) 
15 ακίνητου πα[ρ'\α δ Αθήνα! 

€Γτνχί(αί) κ(α]τ(α) ιτολ(μο{ν) Tijy 

δ Αφρο8ί{τηί) καλλίστο(ν) τ€ κ{αι) 

enepaaTov αυτόν υπαρ 

γ(ΐν Kptvei ταντην νικαν 
20 μ{ΐ)τ{α) fie ταυ(τα) ττλΐνσα! ΐΐί 

Αακΐδαιμο(να) {και) την Ελ(νην 

Col. ϋ. 

Ζν [ 


τον Αλ(ξαν[^ρον) κ(αϊ) την μ((ν) Ελ(νη(ν) 
5θ eiy ταλαρον ωσ7Γ[€/> τνρον ? 

κρυψαί ΐαυτον δ eii κριο(ν) 

μ{ί]τ{α)σκίυασαί νπομίνα 

το μΐλλον παραγίνο 

μ(νο5 δ Α\(ξανδ(ρο9) κ{αι) φωρα 
35 σα? (κατίρο(ν) aye.Lv ent ταί 

ναυί πρ(οσ)ταττ(ΐ cay ηαραδωσων 

Toiy Α)(^αίοι(ί) οκνουση^ fie τηί 

Ελΐνη{ί) ταυτην μ((ν) oiKTfipas 

(US ywai\ ίζίον €ΐΓί«οτίχ(€ί) 
40 τον δίΐ) Αίονν(σον) ωί παραδοθη 

σομ(νο(ν) αποστΐλλα συν 

ακολου6{ονσι) δ οι σατυ{ροι) παρακαλούν 

Tes τε κ(α.ί) ουκ αν πρόδωσαν 

αυτόν φασκοντα κωμω 

45 δΐΐται δ ev τω δραματί Π( 

ρικληί μαλα πιθανωί δι 


ΐξαγαγων ίπαι>ΐρχίτ{αί) (μφασίίΰί ωί ΐπαγΐίοχω! 

eiy την Ιδην ακου{σας) δ{() μ€ τοις Αθηναίοι! τον πολΐμον 

τ ολίγον Tovs Αχαιονί ττνρ 
2 5 [ΊΤθλ]ίΐν την χ(α{ραν) φ[ίνγ{ΐή προί 

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

6. Perhaps mrfpx^jiTai, as Korte suggests, ovror. sc. the satyrs (cf. 1. 42), as Blass 
thinks. Though of course this is not a satyric play, there seems no reason why a chorus 
should not be composed of satyrs, especially in a comedy in which Dionysus is the chief 
character. The verbs in 11. 11-2 are very appropriate too to the satyrs, who occur in 1. 42 
as if they had been mentioned before. 

8. πύων ποίΐ)( ) is corrupt. Blass suggests vnep του ποιΐ)(του), which makes good sense 
but is a rather drastic change ; cf. however the next note. Korte prefers n((pi) των 
ττ(ηη{των), which is nearer to the text of the papyrus. 

12. ^!aρayfvoμfvωv Seems to be a mistake for some word like προτ(ΐνομίνων. Korte 

suggests ναραγ^(Κ\ομ(νων. 

30. Perhaps ωσπ tp τνρον or ταριχίο;) ; cf. Ar. Ran. 558-60 το πολύ τάριχηί ουκ (φηκά 
πω. μά Δί*, ovSf τον τνρον ye τον χΚωρόν, τάλαν, ον ούτος αντοίς τοΐί ταΧάροις κατησθκν. yapov IS 

also possible; cf. Cra.t. Rr. inc. 280 ό τάλαρος ίμΐν διύπλίωε ίστοί γύρου. Korte prefers opvtv 
or χήνα, τάλαρον being the technical word in Aihenaeus p. 122 for a bird-basket. 

664. Philosophical Dialogue. 

Height 29 cm. 

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


movements at the time of the usurpation of Pisistratus. He had left Athens 
after that event took place and joined Solon in Ionia ; subsequently at the 
instance of his friends, including Pisistratus himself, and on the advice of Solon, 
he returned to Athens and was there invited to the house of Hagnotheus, a 
relative of his own and grandfather of Thrasybulus son of Philomelus, a young 
man whose guardian he himself was. Of the second column we have no more 
than the first few letters of the lines ; but in the lower part of it other speakers 
evidently intervened (1. 68 e ψ?; ω [, 1. 8i ντίο\αβώ[ν). Fr. {b), containing another 
nearly complete column, is also in dialogue form. Here the persons are, 
besides the narrator (Ιφηι;, 11. 7, I2), Pisistratus, Ariphron, and Adimantus, and the 
principal subject of conversation is the career of the tyrant Periander of Corinth, 
in whose company Ariphron professes that he and Adimantus had recently 
been, and whose misfortunes he proceeds to describe. Most probably Fr. {a) 
comes from near the beginning of the work, and the narrative portion of Col. i 
is introductory to the whole dialogue. How much, if anything, is lost between 
Col. ii and Col. iii (Fr. (3)) is of course quite uncertain, but it is improbable 
that there is any considerable gap. The anonymous narrator in Col. i will 
accordingly be the same person as the speaker in Col. iii. 11. 92-102 ; but the 
identity of this intimate friend (1. 13) of Pisistratus and sharer in the exile 
of Solon remains a puzzle. Ariphron is perhaps to be recognized as the grand- 
father of Pericles ; and Thrasybulus, son of Philomelus, of whom it is here 
remarked (1. 29) that he was popularly supposed to be in love with the tyrant's 
younger daughter, is evidently the Thrasybulus of whom Plutarch tells the story 
{Apophth. Reg. et Imp., p. 189 c, de ha Cohib., p. 457 f, cf. Val. Max. v. i. 2) 
that he kissed the daughter of Pisistratus at a chance meeting, and that the 
latter instead of being angry gave him her hand in marriage. Polyaenus, who 
adds an episode cf the abduction of the girl by her lover [Siratcgem. 5. 14), 
substitutes Thrasymedes for Thrasybulus, but agrees with our author as to the 
name of his father, Philomelus. 

But who was the author of this dialogue ? It is written in remarkably good 
Attic (except (h οίκον for eiy (την) οΐκίαν in 1. 40), and so far as the style is concerned 
it may be a product of the Aristotelian age. Biass, indeed, suggests that it might 
actually be attributed to Aristotle, with whom Pisistratus was a favourite 
figure. In support of such a view appeal could be made to certain resemblances 
in language between this fragment and the Άθηναίίον UoXada — assuming the 
authenticity of that work : — compare e.g. 11. ^-6 {Σόλων) -ρολίγων \\θηναίοΐί ότι. 
Πίίσι'στραΓΟί (τιιβονλίν(ί τυραιτίδι τι^ίθΐΐν avrovs ονκ ην hwaros with Ath. Pol. 14. 2 
όσοι μίν yap αγνοονσι ΪΙίΐσίστρατου ΐΤ!ΐτιθΐμ.(νον Tvpav[vihi\ . . . (irel δέ λέγων [ουκ 
(ττΐΐ]θίν, 11. 8-9 άτιοδημίαν (ντ(ϋθ(ν ■πθίησάμ(νο, with Α i/l. Pol. 11. I, 13. ι ατΐο^ημίαν 


ίτΓΟίησατο, 11. 23-4 δια ti]V των ττιιαγμάτο'ν κατάστατιν with Ai/t. Pol. 42. I i\ iriv 
κατάστασίϊ 7τ}ϊ ττολιτίΐαί, 11. 25-6 oideis «πίδίδώ/ίίΐ τροί μ^γαΚοφύίίαν with Α//ι. Pol. 
37• 2 ΤΓολίι Trpos ωμότητα (cf. 1. Iia) κοί ττονηρίαν (ττΐδοσαν ; cf. also I. Ι15 τ/η ταΰτ?/ 
ίφ[ί;] and Arist. Fr. 44 '"' ioOt' ίφη. V>ut such coincidences arc not very con- 
clusive ; and on the other hand these fragments do not conform to the normal 
type of Aristotelian dialogue, in which, as we know both from the allusions of 
Cicero {ad Ait. iv. 16, xiii. 19) and his imitations, the leading part was taken by 
the philosopher himself. It will be safer then to leave the writer anonymous, 
though he may well be as early as the third or even fourth century H. C. 

As will have been obsei-ved, this papyrus reopens some important questions 
of history and chronology, upon which some remarks are made in the commentary 
(notes on 11. i-io, 106-9). If Solon went to Asia when Pisistratus became 
tyrant, his famous meeting with Croesus may have occurred then, and the 
' beautiful myth ' be after all a sober fact. The synchronism of the tyrannies 
of Pisistratus and Periander is another very interesting point, which with the 
testimony of Herodotus partly on the same side should not be dismissed too 
lightly. It is no doubt a question how far the setting of an imaginary dialogue 
can supply a basis for historical conclusions ; but a comparison with such a 
work as Plutarch's Symposium is hardly fair to the present fragments, which 
may probably be regarded as an index to the average opinion of the day, and 
as such deserving of consideration, in spite of the conflict with the ' so-called 
systems of chronology, the contradictions of which a thousand correctors have 
not yet succeeded in harmonizing.' 

The papyrus is written in tall columns measuring 22 χ 7 cvi., in a round 
uncial hand rather resembling that of 412 (P. Oxy. Ill, Plate v), which dates 
approximately from the year 245 A. D. ; the present example is more regular 
and graceful, but no doubt belongs to about the same period. A second hand 
has made one or two small corrections, and seems also to have added some 
at least of the paragraphi and stops. Of the latter all three kinds are found 
(middle at 11. 26, 38, 105, 153 ; low at 1. j8) ; but they are not used with much 
discrimination. The double points, which as usual mark a change of speaker, 
also look more like the second hand than the first. The occasional diaereses, 
however, and marks of elision, as well as the angular signs sometimes employed 
for filling up a short line, are with little doubt by the original scribe. 

(λ) Col. i. Col. ii. 

■npoTtpov η Πισιστρατον Aa/Setc [θίωι 

την αρχήν απΐδημησίν ΐπΐΐ [ 



δη ττροΧί-γων Αθηναίοι^ on 
Πιαιστρατοί (πιβονλευα τυ 
5 ραννιδί πιθΐΐν αντονί ουκ ην 
δυνατοί• «γω δί καταμζίναί 

ηδη ΊΊίσιστρατου Tvpavv\o'yv 
τοί αποδημιαν euTevOev 
ποιησαμ^νοί ev Iwyiai μίτα 
ΙΟ SoXmvos δΐΐτριβοι/• γ^ρονωί 

δΐ των φίλων σπούδαζαν 
των ηκαν μΐ• και μάλιστα 
ΙΙίσιστρατου δια την oiKeio 
τητα• Πολωνοί κΐλΐυοντοί 
15 επανήλθαν Αθηναζε κατ€ 

λιπον μ(ν ονν (νταυθα παι 
δα Θρασυβουλον τον Φίλο 
μήλον. κατΐίληφΐΐν δ€ μ(1 
ρακ[ι]ον ηδη μαλα καλόν καγα 
20 θον και την όψιν και τον τρο 
ΤΓον ΤΓολυ διαφέροντα των 
ηλικιωτων τεταπίΐνωμε 

νων yap των άλλων δια την 
των ττραγματων καταστασιν 
25 ονδΐΐί ΐπεδίδωκΐΐ irpos με 

γαλοφυαν• παντας δΐ vnepe 
βαλΐν ϊπτΓοτροφιαίί και κυ 
νηγιαίί και Tais αλλαΐί δαπα 
v[ais] δ[ΐ(^β(βλητο δ ΐν τηι πο 


5ο σω[ 

30 λ[€]ί της νίωτΐρας των του 
του ΙΙίσιστρατου θυγατέρων 
ΐραν ϊδων αρρηφορουσαν 

Αγνοθεοί ουν ο παπποί αυ 
του παρ ωι και τρεφόμενο? 







τον πατ[ροί 











τησ . [ 

του α[ 


φη ω [ 






^ά ' 












35 iTvyyavfv ο Θρασύβουλο^• 
δια το του πάτρα και τη! 
μητρο! ορφανον KaraXei 
φθηναι• τραχνιΌίΐί τι μοι 

SoK([i] προ? αυτόν KaXet μ' 
40 (ΐί οίκον συγγΐνη τε αυτοα 
οντά και καταλΐλ(ΐμμ€νον 
ίπιτροπον νπο του Φιλομη 
λου• καγω μαλα προθύμων 

(βαδιζον και γαρ ην iv ηδο 
45 »"7 μοι το συνδιατριβίΐν Αγνό 



γαρ η[ 

ρον .[ 

85 μν Υ[ 


γουν [ 
90 αυτο[ 

(ί) Col. iii. 

μ^ν ουτωί πιθανωι eoiKfv 

ΐΐ τοινυν €ψην αληθή ταυτ [ί 
στιν ουτ αν Πίριανδρωι λν 
σιτΐλοιη μάλλον αρχ^ΐΐν η ϋ 
95 φ (Tepov α[ρ)(\(σθαι• ουτ αλλωι 
ονθΐνι τω[ί'] φαυλωί αργοντων 
δοκω γαρ α.[υτ]ον ΐφην ev τοίί 
φιλτατοΐί [κομίγισθαι ταί αμαρ 
τιαί• τι γαρ [φιλ]τ€ρον ανδρι 

100 νουν ()(^ο[ντι] πατρίδος- και 
[κ]ατα φυσιν [οϊ\κ(ΐων ανθρω 
[π]ων : νπο[λαβ]ων ουν ο Αρι 
[φ]ρ(θν αλη[θη ν]η Δι ίφη λ{ 
[γ](ΐί' και βον[λ]ομΐθα σοι μαρ 

105 [τ]υρησαι «γω και Αδίΐμαντοί 
\ο]υτοσϊ παραγίνομ^νοι νυνι 
[Πΐ^ιιανδρωι δια την ωμοτη 
[τ]α μεγάλη πάνυ συμφοραι 
[π]{ριπ€σοντι : και ο Πισιστρα 

Ι ΙΟ [τ]οί τινι ταυτηί (φ[η :] eyco ΐΐ 

Col. iv. 


140 €φα[ 









TTJe»' φρασω• προ τ[ον yap] Κυ 

■ψ•€]λοί' τοί' n.epiavSp[ov π\ατΐ 

ρα\ λαβΐίν την α.ρ\η[ν ΐκ\ρα 

τό\υν τηί πολίωΓ ο[ι καλο]υ 

μ]ΐνοι Βακχυ[α8αι] σν[γγ€ΐ/(ΐα] 

με]γαλη• λαβ[οΐ']τοί [Se αν] 

το]ν την αρχήν το[υτων το] 

μΐν] πληθοί (φυγ€ τ[ ] 

.]ιν ο\ιγο[ι] Se και[ ] 

• .]ίΐιτ[ο]ν ουν ι;ί'€£ί [ ] 

•>""[• • •]γ«<^ • ?[ ] 

.]ρχον[. . .]μΐραι[ ] 

.](νηί θ[. . .]vTiS €σ-[ ] 

.]ωί οι €7γ[.] . WS Si0[ ] 

7r]poy το[ν Π]€ριανδ[ρον . .] 

.]σι μοι [τΓλ]ησίαζΐ[ιν . . . 

. .]ν7Γοτ[. .] ϋπίρ το[υ He 
[ρια]νδρου• κ[αί] jis eiaa[. . . . 
] Κ(λ(νσα . [. .]στινο[. , , , 

.]νίΐν ω[. . .]\ΐταί• .[,... 

.]η φι ι[. . .]προπι[. . . . 

.]\ομαι κ[. . .] βουλ[. . . . 


, . .] . €101'Τ[ 

. .] . evTo[ 

145 7-ωΚ 
τρα . [ 


Ι50 ]<ι[ 


Ϊ55 ]νμο'α 


]μ€ α(Γπ[ 
] και πα\[ 


1 6ο ]οί ea[ 
] €vpoy[ 
] . σασί 


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

i-io. This statement that just before the establishment of the t}Tanny of Pisistratus 
Solon left Athens and went to Ionia is not only new but conflicts with the account of 
Plutarch (6Ό/. 30-1), who represents Solon as refusing to fly and as living on at Athens in 
friendly relations with the usurper. The 'Αθηναίων Πο\ιτ€ία (14. ζ) does not suggest that 
Solon retired from Athens, though on the other hand there is nothing there inconsistent 
with such a view; it is simply stated that Solon's warnings and opposition proved fruitless. 
Diogenes Laertius indeed asserts (i. 51, 62) that Solon died in Cyprus, and this statement 
may now have to be treated with more respect than heretofore. A new light is thus turned 
upon the much discussed question of the meeting between Solon and Croesus as king of 
Lydia. The usurpation of Pisistratus and the accession of Croesus to sole sovereignty are 
placed in the same year, B.C. 560, and there will be no chronological objection to the 
interview described by Herodotus, if it is transferred to this period. With regard to the 
date of Solon's death, χρυνωι in 1. 10 here is too vague to build any argument upon ; 
according to Heraclides Ponticus he survived the overthrow of the constitution συχνον χμόνον, 
according to Phanias of Ephesus less than two years (both ap. Plutarch, Sol. 32). 

5. 1. TTfiufiV. 

II. This construction of σπούδαζαν with the infinitive is common in Aristotle, e.g. A/A. 

Pol. 38. 4 ovff αίιτος taTTOvdaafv fKBttv. 

15. καΤ€\ιπον is probably for KariXfrnov. 
26. 1. νπ€ρίβάΧ(\^(ν. 

29-32. This is the first mention of a second daughter of Pisistratus. With αρρη- 

φορηυσαν cf. PolyaenUS, Slrategem. 5• 14 θρασ-υμη^η! Φύίομηλον Trjs ΪΙ(ΐσιστρ:ιτου θυγατρος 

fpaauels πομττίΰονσαν αντην προσΒραμων ίφίλησιν. Apparently the author of our dialogue 
either did not know of or did not accept this more romantic version, for αρρηφορονσαν 
and πομπ(νονσαν can hardly refer to different occasions. For διαβάλΧ^σθαι wilh the 
infin. cf Hdn. 2. 6. 10 άλλ' amp ίφην δκβλή&η! μισοβασίΚ^υί (ΐναι, but the Construction is 

37. ορφανον: 1. ορφανοί. 

82. All that remains of the supposed τ over the line is a rather coarse horizontal 
stroke, immediately above a break in the papjTUS. 

88. The letters οστ have each had a short horizontal stroke drawn through them, 
probably b}• the first hand ; the doubtful ι was perhaps also deleted. 


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

98. \κομι\ισθαι. τας αμαρτία! in the senSe of κομιύσθαι τα (Κ των αμαρτιών is a CUriouS 

expression, though cf. Arist. Σίλ. Nic. ix. 7 κομιουμίνονί tos χάριται. 

106-9. Unless the present conversation is to be supposed to have occurred while 
Pisistratus was still a private person, which is eminently improbable, this passage plainly 
implies that Periander of Corinth was not yet dead when the tyranny of Pisistratus was 
established at Athens. The ordinary chronology places the accession of Periander in 
B.C. 625 and his death in 585, thus leaving a very considerable interval before the first 
tyranny of Pisistratus, which no one desires to put earlier than b.c. 560. According to one 
passage of Herodotus, however, Periander and Pisistratus were contemporaries; for he 
makes the former arbiter in a war between Athens and Mytilene which followed upon the 
capture of Sigeum by Pisistratus (v. 94-5). The usual method of avoiding this difficulty is 
to suppose that there were two wars with Mytilene, and that the arbitration of Periander 
occurred in the first. But for this there is no kind of evidence, and, as Beloch has pointed 
out (^Rheinischts 3iuseum, vol. xlv. p. 466 sqq.), the difficulties involved in this explanation 
are hardly less than those which it attempts to solve. He himself suggests that the mistake 
of Herodotus consists in referring an arbitration by Periander in a dispute between Tenedos 
and Sigeum (Arist. Rhet. i. 15. 13) to the period of the war against ^lytilene; at the same 
time Beloch considers that the chronology of Periander is quite insecure, and that he 
might with advantage be put several decades later. But other references in Herodotus 
clearly point to the earlier date, for the tyranny of Periander at Corinth synchronized with 
that of Thrasybulus at Miletus (Hdt. i. 20, v. 92), which was established at the beginning 
of the reign of Alyattes king of Lydia (i. 18-22) ; while the eclipse of the sun which ended 
the war between Alyattes and Cyaxares of IMedia (i. 74) provides a securely fixed point of 
departure (approximately B.C. 585). Herodotus' chronology is probably past mending. 

108. μιγαλη πάνυ συμφοραι : to what this refers is not clear. As the Bacchiadae were 
in some way involved, the misfortune is apparently not one of those ordinarily ascribed by 
tradition to the private life of Periander. 

115. Cf. Hdt. V. 92 ην ολιγαρχ'^η^ κηι οντοι Βακχιά^αι κα\€Ομΐνοι ίνξμον την ττολιν' ΐ5ί8οσαν ic 

και ήγηντο ΐξ άλλ^λω!'. It is doubtful whether the mistake of the original hand in the 
spelling of the name was anything more than υ for t ; but there is barely room in the 
lacuna for [αδαι]. 

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


11. 1 2 8 ] T15 «σα[ ... 1 3 2 ] βου\[ are also on a detached fragment the position of which, though 
probable from the appearance of the papyrus, is by no means secure. 

150-63. This fragment from the bottom of a column very likely belongs to Col. iv ; 
it does not appear possible to find a place for it in Col. iii. 

665. History of Sicily. 
Fr. (a) 105 X 4-6, Fr. {b) 103 χ 4•6 ctn. Plate I. 

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

The period to which the fragments refer seems to be that immediately 
following the general overthrow of the tyrannies in the Sicilian cities which 
took place about the year 465 B.C. (Died. xi. 68.^). This period is indicated 
by the frequent mentions of conflicts with the ^«joi, by whom are meant the 
mercenaries settled in the cities by the tyrants as a support of their rule. 
Diodorus, who is the sole authority for the history of this time, narrates the 
course of the hostilities at Syracuse between these new comers and the older 
citizens (xi. 73, 76) ; and implies that Syr^^se was not peculiar in this respect : — 
'Almost all the cities,' he says (76. 5), '. . . vvith one consent came to terms with 
the strangers (feVot) settled there.' The papyrus fills in some of the intermediate 
details passed over by the historian. We hear of an expedition of ζΐυοι from 
Enna and Cacyrum against Gela, which received aid from Syracuse. This was 
apparently followed by overtures from the ξίνοι to the Syracusans (cf. note on 
1. 5), which, however, proved ineffectual, for the next event is a battle between 
them. Shortly afterwards the mercenaries settled at Minoa were defeated 



by the combined forces of Syracuse and Agrigentum. The activity displayed 
by Syracuse warrants the inference that she had herself already got the upper 
hand of her own ξΐνοι, who, as Diodorus relates, were finally defeated in a 
pitched battle. The campaign of the Syracusans against Catana mentioned at 
this time by Diodorus (76. 3) is part of the same anti-foreign movement. But 
hostilities seem to have extended beyond the opposing sections of the various 
city states. The fragments also supply information of an expedition of 
Agrigentum against Crastus, and an engagement subsequently occurred at the 
latter place between the Agrigentines and forces from Himera and Gela, which 
may be supposed to have come to the assistance of Crastus. These new 
facts may not be very weighty, but they convey a more adequate idea than 
was before possible of the period of unrest, the στάσα^ and ταραχαί, which 
intervened between the overthrow of the tyrannies and the establishment of 
general peace. 

[tcbJi' fy Ομφα[λωί και 
Κακνρωι ξίΐ'Ιωΐ' (.πι 
[ΤγΚαν στρα\τ€ΐα 

βοη[θ]ίΐα Χνρα[κ]ο[σιων 
Γ([λω]ιοΐ9 και π . [. . . 
των ^(.νων ττροί [Σνρα 

μάχη ^νρακοσίιωΐ' και 

των ^ίν[ω]ν [ 

Γλαυκών πί[ 

[ Μ 

Κραστον στρ{ατ€ΐα 

η γ€νομ(ν[η πΐρι 
15 Κραστον Ιμ€ρα[ιων 

και Γίλωιων προί Α[κρα 
γαντινονί μαχ[η 

ωί οι την Μινωιαν 
των ξίνων οιι^ι 
20 ^ovTes νπ Ακρα 

γαντινων και S[vpa 
κοσιων ηιρ(θτ][σαν 

[. Ακρ]αγαν[τιν . . . 

Ακρα[γαν]τινων €πι 

Ι. Ομψα[λω( : cf. Cic. Verr. 4. 48 Hennevsium nemore, qui locus , . . umbilicus Siciliae 
nominalur, and the spurious line in Callim. H. in Cer. 6. i g rplr fi' tVl κάΚΧΐστης νήσου ίράμα 

ομψαλυν "Evvaif, 

2. Κακιιρωι : the site of this town, which is mentioned by Ptolemy, has been placed 
at the modern village of Cassaro, near Palazzolo ; the present passage seems to indicate that 
it should be looked for further west, and the position given in Kiepert's Topogr. Hist. Atlas 
is probably not far from the truth. 

5. All that remains of the letter at the end of the line is a straight stroke which 



suggests f, η, or i. ρ is not imf)ossible, but there is no trace of the tail, and we therefore 
hesitate to introduce np'eafiua, which is otherwise attractive, into the text. 

10. Γλαυκωΐ' is evidently a personal name, but nothing is known of this bearer of it. 

11. The gap between the two fragments probably extends to about lo lines, but 
it may be larger. 

13. Crastus is described by Steph. Byz. as πόλιτ 2t>teXiat τάν ΐικανων, citing the SucAuca 
of Philistus. Its position is unknown; no doubt it was in the neighbourhood of Agri- 

22. The vestiges of the letter after ηφf do not suggest 6, but can hardly be said to be 
inconsistent with that letter, since there is no other example of a 5 in the text. If the shape 
of the β was tall and narrow, as in the Bacchylides papyrus, the effect of mutilation 
might be that actually presented in the fragment. Of the supposed η only a small speck 

23. A fresh entry probably commences at this line, and in that case there would 
be one or even two letters before Ακρ]αγαι{τίν . ., e.g. ») or τό ' Ακρ]αγαι{τίνων. 

666. Aristotle, npoTpenriKOs. 

27-2 X 9-8 cm. 

A sheet containing two practically entire columns, preceded by the ends of 
lines from a third, the text of which includes a lengthy passage quoted by 
Stobaeus (Flor. 3. 54) from Aristotle, and now generally assigned to the 
Aristotelian dialogue nporpevTiKOi or Exhortation to Philosophy (Rose, Fr. 57). 
Besides additions at the beginning and end of the excerpt the papyiois supplies 
a sentence omitted by Stobaeus in the middle of his quotation. The evidence 
of these supplementary passages, though bringing no direct proof of the identity 
of the treatise of which they formed part, tend to support the attribution to the 
UpoTpcnriKOs, in particular 11. 161 sqq., where the foregoing argument on the 
worthlessness of external goods as such results in a recommendation of philo- 
sophy (cf. note on 1. 170). 

The text is written in narrow columns (width 4 cm.), placed very close 
together, in rather small informal uncials, which we should date about the 
middle or latter part of the second century. No breathings or accents occur, 
and stops are also absent, the sentences being divided off by paragraphi only. 
The common angular sign is used to fill up short lines. Parts of the initial 
letters of the first few lines of a fourth column remain, but all that is recog- 
nizable is a doubtful e opposite 1. 118 and an ω opposite 1. 120. The papyrus 
is dirty and rubbed in places. 

The appended collation is derived from Hense's edition of Stobaeus, iii. 



3. 25. The MSS. referred to are the Escurialensis Mendozae (M), Parisinus (A), 
and Marcianus as embodied in the edition of Trincavelli (Tr.). Other authorities 
are Maximus Monachus, Gnomologmm, c. 17 (= Max.), where the earher part 
of the quotation in Stobaeus is given with some slight textual variations, and the 
Florilegitim Laiiretitiamnn (Laur.), where the extract of Maximus reappears 
(Meineke, Stobaeus, iv. 225, 25). The papyrus sometimes supports one, some- 
times another, of these witnesses, and occasionally corrects them all. It is, 
however, itself far from being impeccable, and in one or two places where it 
is the sole authority emendation is necessary. 




Col. i. 














23 lines lost. 


Col. ii. 
T€ ττραττΐίν των 
SiovTiuv τι προ 
6o aipovpfvovs 
κωλνηί διο Set 

την τούτων 
θεωρούσαν ατν 
χιαν φΐυ-γΐΐν 

65 και νόμιζαν 
την ίνδαιμονιαν 
ουκ €v τωι πο\ 
λα Κίκτησθαι γι 
νίσθαι μαΧΧον 

70 η iv τωι πο)ί 
την ψυχ^ην δια 
Κΐΐσθαι και γαρ 

σώμα ου το Χαμ 

πραι ΐσθητι Ke 
75 κοσμημΐνον 

φαιή TIS αν ([ι 

ναι μακαριον 

αΧ[Χα] το την ν[γΐΐ 

αν ^χ^ον και σ[που 
8ο δαιω! διακ€[ιμ]€ 

νον καν μηδΐν 
G 2 

Col. iii. 

115 δια TT/y ψυχηί αγα 
θων πΧΐονασασα 
(ΐ αντων eivai 
τα κτήματα παν 
των αισ-χιστον 

Ι20 ωστΓίρ γαρ ei Tis 
των οικίτων 
των αυτού γΐΐ 
ρων ΐΐη καταγΐ 
Χαστοί αν γένοιτο 

125 "<"' αυτόν τρόπον 
01S πΧΐονοί αξιαν 
την κτησιν (ΐνα[ι 
<τυμβ(βηκ€ν τηί 
ίδιας φυσίωί αθ[Χι 

1 3ο ουί τούτους uva\i 
δ(ΐ νομιζίΐν 

και τούτο κατ α 
[Χ^ηθίίαν ουτωί 
[ίΐχΐΐ τίκτΐΐ γα[ρ 
'35 <*'? φησιν η παρ 
οιμια κοροί μί[ν 
νβριν απαιδ([ν 
σια δΐ μίτ ΐζου 



] . vL Trap 
50 ]αυτ(ύν 
]ση yap 

] . κυων 

]!> οταν 


55 ]Ί°<^ 

των προίίρημΐ 
νων αντωι παρηι 
τον αντον δ[€] τρο 

85 ττον και ψνχην 
eav ηι irewaiSiv 
μΐνη την τοιαυ 
την και τον τοιον 
τον ανθροΰπον 
9θ (νδαιμονα προσ 
αγορΐντΐον €στιν 
ουκ αν τοις (κτοί 
ηι λαμττρως κΐ 
95 avTOS μη8ΐνοί 

a^ios ων ovSe γαρ 
[ι]πττον eav -ψαλια 
χ^ρνσα και σκΐν 
ην (χηι πολντ€ 

ιοο λ»; φανλο5 ων 
τον τοιούτον 
άξιον τίνος νομι 
ζομςν ^Tivoi νο 
μιζομΐν'^^ eivai 

105 αλλ eav διακΐψΐ 
VOS (τ]ΐ) σπονδαιωί 
τούτον μάλλον 

γωρίί δι των €ΐ 
Ι ΙΟ ρη μένων συ μ 

βαίνει T01S μηδέ 
VOS αξιοΐί ονσιν 
οταν τυχωσι χο 
[ρηγι]α5 και των 

σιαί ανοιαν τ(^ις 

140 yap διακ€ΐμ€[νοΐί 
τα nepi την ψυ 
χην κακώς ου 
Te πλούτος ουτ ι 
σ-χυς ουτΐ κάλλος 

145 ■'■«"' αγαθών (στ[ιν 
αλλ οσωι ττίρ αν α[υ 
ται μάλλον αι δια 
θ€σ(ΐς καθ V7r[ep 
βολην υτΓαρξ[ωσι 

150 τοσοντω μ(ΐζ[ω 
και πλΐΐω τον 

βλαπτουσι {ίαν) αν[(υ 
φρονησ€ως [ττα 

155 ραγ(νωντα[ι το 
γαρ μη παιδ[ι μα 
γαιραν τουτ [εστί 
το μη τοις φ[αυ 
λοις την ίξου[σι 

1 6ο αν €γχ^(ΐρι^ΐ[ιν 

την 8e φρον[ησιν 
απαντάς αν ο[μολο 
γησΐίαν €ΐς το [μαν 
Oaveiv γιγν(σθ[αι (/cat) 
165 ζητΐΐν ων τας [δυ 
ναμεις φιλοσοφ[ια 
ττερκιληφΐν ω[σ 

τί πως ουκ απ[ρο 
φασιστως φιλο[σο 
170 φητΐον εστί και 


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

61-4. This sentence might be correct if, as Diels suggests, Λωρουσαν referred to some 
preceding substantive such as ή τών σπουδαίων lupiois. But more probably some correction 
is required ; the simplest perhaps is to emend βιωρονσαν to θιωρουιη-α or θ(ωρουντας, with the 
sense given in our translation. Other expedients would be to read τούτ οί for τούτων, 
' the wretched state of mind which neglects this,' or to insert τι after τοντων, ' which pays 
great consideration to any of these external things,' but the latter inteφretation of θιωρουσαν 
is hardly so natural. 

65. The extracts of Stobaeus and INTaximus Mon. begin after «cat. νημίζα Se M, νόμιζα 
A, νόμιζαν Tr., νομίζομιν 8f Max., νόμιζαν Sa Laur. 

68. ■yiMffiai : so Max., Laur. ; yiyvfadai I\IA, Tr. 

69. μάΚ\ον η : μάλλον 8(e) ΜΑ, Max., Laur., ΰλλ' ev Tr. 

70-2. πωί την ψνχην: την ψ. ev ΜΑ^, τή ψνχή ev Α', Tr., Max., Laur. Above the ω of 
πω! there are in the papyrus some faint vestiges, which if not accidental might perhaps 
represent a cursively written (i> ; but we have considered this too doubtful for insertion in 
the text. In any case πω: has not been cancelled, and if the intention was to indicate 
a reading el πω? the ev should have been written further to the left. 

73. σώμα υυ το: SO ΜΑ, Max., Laur.; oiSe TO σώμα αυτό Tr. 

76. Tit nv. SO MA-, Max., Laur.; τα ev A', tis Tr. 

78. Considerations of space made it more probable that vyiav or vyeuiv (A, Tr., INIax., 
Laur.) was written than vyteiav (M). 

82. πpoeφημevωv : SO MSS. except Max., where παρακαμίνων is found. 
85- ψνχη" '■ so M, Tr., I\Iax., Laur. ; ψυχή A. 

86. eav ηι ntn. : SO M, Tr., Max., Laur. ; eveariv ISeiv 7Τ£7Γ. Tr. 

88. και : Laur. substitutes eh. τοιοΟτον is omitted in Max. 
92. Toȣ : so MA, Laur. ; tis Tr., Max. 
(KTos: so MA, Max., Laur.; « τούτων Tr. 


93. λομπρωί : SO RIA'^, Max., Laur. ; Χαμπράί A', Tr. 

Κ(χορηγημ(νθ! : κίκησμημίνοΫ MSS. (κίκοσμίκοί Laur., putting λαμπρά)! after Κίκοσμ.). 

95• αυτοΓ : Max. and Laur. add &f. 

96. ovSe : so A' (and conjecturally Meineke) ; oCrt A' and the other MSS. 

97. fav ψαλια: tav ψ(λ\ια MA, Max., LaUT. ; κάν ψίΚΧια Tr. 

98-9. A places ΐχη before χρυσά. 

1 00. The papyrus does not support Meineke's insertion of aurof before φαΰλο; which 
is adopted by Rose. 

105. rav: ot nv MSS. except Laur., which has a>s άν and adds ό before σπ-ονδαΐοΓ. 

io6. The insertion of i)i (so MSS.) is necessary. 

109-19. The excerpts of Stobaeus and Maximus omit this passage, and unfortunately 
its meaning and construction are obscured by a corruption. Apparently iiKtovaaaaati. con- 
ceals something like πΚίονος άξια, and we may either add σνμβη (cf. 11. 125-7) ^"^ place 
a comma after κτήματα, when the sense will be as in the translation above, or connecting 

των δια τηί ψνχη! αγαθών with τνχωσι insert ο ΟΓ 5πιρ (sO Diels) before πάντων αισχιστον. ' It 

sometimes happens that worthless persons have both external and mental gifts, and value 
the former above the latter, which is the most disgraceful thing of all.' Corruplio opiimi 
pessima. The latter remedy produces an easier construction and a more pointed sentence. 

122. των is omitted in the MSS. 

126. πλί oi/oi : TrXfiovor AISS. 

128. σνμβ(βηκ€ν : συμβίβηκί MSS. 

130. τούτου? «trnfi: SO MSS. except A, which transposes the words. 

131. The excerpt of Maximus ends here. 

150— I. μ«^[ω] και ττλίΐω : και irXfi'w κα\ μ(ίζω Tr., πλίίω και μ(1ζω ΜΑ. 

153—5• Stobaeus here has χωρ'α φρονήσιως πapayfvόμfvaι, which is the conclusion of his 
quotation. In I. 153 we have supposed that the repetition of av led to the loss of (av. 
To read {()av [χωριι would make the line too long. 

155-60. Cf. lamblichus, Proirepticus, 2 β\αβ€ρα μαΚιστα τροφή: μΐν αφθονία τω το 
σώμα, κτησ(ωί 8e τώτην ψνχην ίιακαμίνω κακώς, κάί ("πισψαλίΓ και ομοιον μαινομίνω hovvai μάχαψαν 

κα\ μοχθηρά ίι/ΐΌμικ, which looks like an imitation of the passage before us. On the close 
connexion of part of the treatise of lamblichus with the Aristotelian dialogue cf. Bywater in 
Journal of Philology, ii. 55 sqq. 

164. There would hardly be room for the necessary και after yiyviaS^ai, but the 
homoioteleuton may easily have caused its omission; cf. note on 153-5. 

169. φιλοσοφητίον was the key-note of the Προτριπτικόι, as of the similarly named work 
of lamblichus : cf. Bywater, I'iid., pp. 68-9. 

667. Aristoxenus ? 

18x8 cm. 

Parts of two columns, the former of which comprises thirty complete lines, 
containing an analysis of certain musical scales. To the authorship of the 
fragment we have no real clue. It is natural in such a case to think first of 


Aristoxenus, the greatest name among the ancient writers upon musical theory ; 
and there is no reason why the piece should not come from his 'Αρμονικά Στοιχίΐα 
or some similar work. But on the other hand there is no particular reason why 
it should, for any treatise on the same subject might include some such dis- 
cussion as that found here. The papyrus probably falls within the third century. 
It is written in a clear semi-uncial hand, without stops or other lection marks ; 
a short space, which is indicated in the transcript below, is used to divide the 
several sentences. 

The highly technical language employed in the fragment can hardly be 
understood or discussed without some preliminary explanation of the composi- 
tion of the Greek scale. We must here acknowledge our great indebtedness 
to Mr. H. S. Macran, to whose excellent edition of the Harmonics of Aristoxenus 
the reader is referred for further information. 

The fundamental unit which was the basis of the Greek scale in all its 
later developments was the tetrachord, typically consisting of two dieses, i.e. 
semitones or smaller intervals, and a complement, or the interval remaining 
when the dieses were subtracted from the concord of the fourth. The magnitude 
of the three intervals determined the genus of the tetrachord as enharmonic or 
chromatic, the enharmonic variety containing two quarter-tones and a ditone, 
and the chromatic other divisions, e.g. two semitones and a tone and a half. 
The more familiar diatonic tetrachord, composed of a semitone and two tones, 
was distinguished by having only one diesis. Larger scales were effected by 
the arrangement or combination (αρμονία) of such tetrachords in two waj-s, (a) 
by conjunction (ανναφη}, when the last note of one tetrachord coincided with 
the first note of the next ; or {6} by disjunction (bLάζ(vξιs), when the tetrachords 
were separated from each other by a tone. The combination of a pair of 
tetrachords in these two methods produced respectively the heptachord and 
octachord scales of the seven-stringed and eight-stringed lyres. Further 
additions resulted in what was known as the perfect scale, which took the 
following form [i = tone, d = diesis, and c = complement) : — 

νητων (συνημμένων) 

d ■ d ' c- 




d • ,ί > 



' ./ 

ντρ'ών (5if ^ffy/if'i'a'i') 






or in modern notation : — 

μισών σνναφη νητών (^σννημμίναη') νη€ρ0ολχύων 


Ξ ^Ξ^ 

^^ i J=^ 

m ^j J- ^ 


It will be observed that this system diverges at a certain point into a 
conjunct and a disjunct scheme, the heptachord scale being the basis of the 
one (the ' lesser complete system ') and the octachord that of the other (the 
' greater complete system '). The additional note at the bottom was technically 
known as the -προσλαμβανόμίνοί. 

To come now to the passage before us. The writer is examining and 
locating different scales, and has proposed for consideration a heptachord 

scale of the form " ■ , ' " » — -j-^ — r^ • A scale of this type 

a a c d a c 

would be enharmonic or chromatic (11. 1-2) and also a conjunctive arrangement 

(11. 2 sqq.). Such conjunction would occur in three places in the perfect scale 

(11. 10 sqq.; see the scheme above), i.e. in the tetrachords νττατων and μΐσων, 

μΐσων and νητων (σννημμίρων), νητων {^Ιΐζ(νγμένων) and ντΐρβοΚαίων. Disjunction, 

on the other hand, is only found in the case of the tetrachords μΐσίαν and νητίαν 

{Ιιφνγμίνων). To the given scheme is then (11. 19 sqq.) added at the lower 

extremity a tone, corresponding to the -προσλαμβανόμΐνοί (see above), and the 

resulting eight-note system is said to occur in the same three combinations as 

before (II. 22 sqq.). Here, however, a difficulty arises, for as will be seen on 

reference to the perfect scale such a scheme occurs in it not thrice but twice 

only, i. e. in the two halves of the ' greater complete system.' The simplest 

remedy is to suppose a defect in the text ; cf. note ad loc. 

Col. i. Col. ii. 

\itv ίναρμονιον η χρω e[ 

ματικον eneiTo, ev τ[ 

συναφή κΐΐμίνον ei λ[ 

Τ€ ολη €ΐτ€ και iv μ€ λ[ 

5 pet και fire Sia των e 35 'Ί 


I?;? μ(\ω8οιτο τα πολ o[ 

λα (ΐθ νπΐρβατωί η e[ 

μ(.ν yap διαζ(υξίί aei τ . [ 

νηταί και μΐσαί ζφαι μ[ 

ΙΟ νΐτο ποίΐΐν την Se 4° ^ 

σνναφην συνίβαινζ μ\_ 

κοινωναν τριών ({ 

συστημάτων ώστε 5[ 

σήμαιναν ίξαντηί μ[ 

15 c τοπωι τινι ποτΐ 4δ η[ 

ρον δύναται ιητατα? α . [ 

και μίσαί [[«]] η ν^<ι^ητα$ τα[ 

και μΐσαί η νπΐρβο 7γ[ 

λαια$ και νητας «στω e_i[ 

20 δΐ και τονιαιον em ζο S . [ 

το βαρύ προσκίΐμ€νον αι . [ 

em τούτοις κοινον αια{ 

yap ΐσται το σ\ημα του κα[ 

το του οκταχ^ορδου 3ei[ 

25 των (ΐρημίνων τρι 55 ^«ί [ 

ων συστημάτων κα δ([ 

[e]anep eyeveTO yvω λ'"/;'[ 

ριμον και ev τοίί α τοι^ 

νωτ€ρον OTTOTe προ ^'Ί'^ 

30 φίρομ€νον σύστημα 6ο νον[ 

Kei [ 

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

2-7. μίλωδοιτο is to be taken with ολι; and tv ^fpet as well as with i«i των (ξηι and 


νπιρβατω!. Scales might be curtailed either by diminishing their compass, i.e. dropping 
notes at the extremities {«v μ(ρ(ή, or by omitting inner notes {υπιρβατω!) ; of. Aristox. Harm. 

p. 17. 30 (Meibom), and Aristid. Quint, pp. 15-6 τη μίν αντων ίστι σνιχχή, ω? τΰ διΰ των (ξη( 
φθόγγων^ τα δ* ίπίρβατά^ ως τά δια των μη (φ^ζης μΐλω^ονμξνα. For σννπφη and διάζίνζίί 

generally cf. Aristox. Harm. p. 58. 15 sqq. τα πολλά in 1. 6 seems otiose. 

13 sqq. The construction and sense of this passage are not very clear. If the words 
are to be left as they stand, something like hfiv ήμαί must be understood with σήμαιναν ; but 
the change of subject is very awkward, and we prefer to suppose with Mr. Rlacran that μη 
was dropped out before cnj^atwii'. The similarity of the following syllable ση would help to 
account for the loss. 

15. <" τοπωι Tivi : SC. «ritrni ή σνναφη ΟΓ κι'ίσθαι την σνναφήν, according aS Tici IS accented 

TiVi or TIKI. τότΓΟΓ means technically region or direction of the scale. 

22 sqq. This sentence is the crux of the fragment, for, as already explained in the 
introduction, the series of notes apparently indicated only occurs twice in the perfect scale, 
not three times as here stated by the author. The easiest way out of the difficulty is 
to adopt Mr. Macran's suggestion that fiuotr has fallen out of the text before των (ψημ(νων. 

668. Epitome of Livv, XXXVII-XL and XLVIII-LV. 

Height 26 cm. Plate VI (Col. viii). 

Literary papyri from Egypt which are now numbered by hundreds have 
hitherto, with a few trifling exceptions, been Greek ; and Latin literature has 
been represented only by a small piece of Vergil and a few unimportant 
historical or juristic fragments. The discovery of an important literary text in 
Latin is therefore a welcome novelty. This consists of parts of eight columns 
of an epitome of a history of Rome, the events being grouped together in strict 
chronological order under the different consular years, and the division of the 
several books being noted. That the author of the history in question was 
Livy, though not stated, is obvious from a comparison of the arrangement of 
the books as numbered in the papyrus with that of the corresponding books in 
Livy's work. 

The epitome is written on the recto ; on the verso is the text of part of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews (657). The presence of the latter enables us to decide 
the relative position of the different fragments of the Livy with the exception 
of a few small pieces, two of which had been gummed over places of the 
recto in order to strengthen the roll, and one of which seems to have been cut 
off from a much later portion of it (11. 218-25). The handwriting is a medium- 
sized upright uncial, with some admixture of minuscule forms (i, d), and 
belongs to the same class as the Vergil fragment (P. Oxy. I, Plate viii) and 


the Bodleian Chronicles of Eusebius (Palaeographical Soc. ii. Plate 130), but 
is an earlier example of the mixed style than has hitherto been known. The 
papyrus was found with cursive documents varying from the second to the 
fourth century (chiefly third), and the text of the Epistle to the Hebrews is 
certainly not later than the fourth century (cf. introd. to 657). The Livy 
epitome must therefore have been written not later than the beginning of the 
fourth century, and it more probably belongs to the third. Abbreviations are 
commonly employed in praenomina, in official titles such as cos.,pr.,trib. pi., 
and liber in the headings is written lib. Other abbreviations are rare ; but 
cf. II. 15 pass{a), 122 Masiniss{ae), 207 omnib{us). A middle point is placed 
after abbreviations, but there are no stops. Each column consists of 27-28 
lines which are broad and contain on an average 37 letters, but the ends 
are very uneven although the scribe has no objection to dividing a word 
between two lines. The lines which mention the consuls for the year project 
by about three letters into the left margin. In spite of the handsome appearance 
of the MS., which has a broad margin above and below the calligraphic writing 
and is certainly not the work of a schoolboy, the text is extraordinarily corrupt. 
Mistakes in proper names, the occasional omissions of letters, and easy palaeo- 
graphical errors such as the confusion of c and g (e. g. I. 27 intergessit) are not 
surprising; but forms such as coniitrium for connubitcm (1. 17), fictie grimonibus 
for ficiis criniinibtis (1. 72), planus for primus (1. 217), and still more pug- 
namentasi (? Pergamenos viissi, 1. iii), trigem reddcterbuit (? . . . ens deter ruit, 
I. 184), show that the scribe understood little of what he was writing. It is 
strange that having swallowed such monstrosities he should have in a few 
places taken the trouble to make minor corrections, Chartaginientium e. g. being 
altered to Chartaginiensium in 1. 22, fodevi to fdcm in 1. 95, and the super- 
fluous s of Lussitattorum in 1. 187 being erased. The epitome briefly chronicles 
events one after the other in the barest manner with no attempt at connexion 
or literary style, thereby presenting a marked contrast to the extant epitome of 
Livy ; but this bald, strictly chronological arrangement hardly excuses the 
grammatical errors both of accidence and syntax which are scattered through- 
out the text. The lack of confidence which the scribe's Latin necessarily 
inspires, coupled with the length of the lines, renders the task of restoring the 
lacunae, which occur in nearly every line, exceptionally difficult, and we have 
generally abstained from conjectures which did not seem fairly certain. Yet in 
spite of all these drawbacks, and though it is just when it reaches a new and 
therefore specially interesting fact that the papyrus is apt to present unusual 
obstacles to interpretation, the historical value of the new epitome is considerable, 
as will presently be shown. 


The papyrus falls into two main divisions, the first (Cols, i-iii) covering 
Books 37-40, where Livy's history is extant, the second (Cols, iv-viii) covering 
Books 48-55, of which only an epitome constructed on quite other lines has 
been preserved. The first section, which deals with events between B. c. 190 
and 179 and necessarily contains no new information, is chiefly interesting 
because it enables us to see the principles on which the epitome was composed, 
and hence to form a better estimate of the value of the second section, where 
no comparison with the actual work of Livy is possible. When allowances are 
made for the point of view of the compiler, the impression which he leaves is by 
no means unfavourable. Being limited to the barest catalogue of actual events, 
he naturally ignores Livy's discussions of origins and causes as well as speeches, 
but he does not omit any of the more important occurrences. With regard to 
the less striking incidents his choice is capricious ; he tends to insert notices of 
picturesque stories, e.g. that of Ortiagon's wife (11. 14-7), the tents in the forum 
(11. 60-3), Theoxena (11. 70-1), even when rather trivial ; and the amount of 
space which he devotes to an event is often in inverse proportion to its im- 
portance. The account of the war in Ambracia, to which Livy gives nine 
chapters, is for instance dismissed in two words (1. 12). It is noticeable that he 
is more interested in home affairs than the author of the extant epitome, who in 
Books 37-40 mentions fewer events though entering into more details about 
them. The language of the papyrus is in the main borrowed from Livy, from 
whom whole phrases and even clauses are reproduced (e.g. in 11. 78-80), but the 
epitomizer frequently summarizes Livy in his own words (e.g. 11. 8-10) — a 
process which sometimes leads to apparent errors (cf. 1. 3, note). Twice he 
seems to have distorted Livy's chronology through combining two separate 
notices (cf. notes on 11. 7 and 17), but in other respects the chronology of the 
papyrus faithfully represents that of Livy. 

After Col. iii a good many columns are lost which contained the epitome 
of Books 41-7. With Col. iv begins the second and important section of the 
epitome, giving a few lines from the end of Book 48 and most of Books 49-55, 
Col. iv-vi and vii-viii are continuous, but between Cols, vi and vii one column 
is lost, as is proved by the lacuna in the Epistle to the Hebrews at the corre- 
sponding point. Books 50, 54, and S5 ^^^ ^^^ best preserved, then come 49 and 
51. Of Book 52 we have only the beginnings of lines, and Book ^'^, which was 
treated at exceptional length, is spoilt by the loss of a whole column. The 
period with which the papyrus deals, B.C. 150-137, is one of great interest. 
Abroad there were the Third Punic, Fourth Macedonian (against Pseudophilippus), 
Achaean, and Spanish Wars, and at home events were leading up to the 
Gracchan revolution. The existing authorities are far from satisfactory. For 


foreign affairs the only sources of the first rank are the fragments of Polybius 
and the extant epitome of Livy. Where these fail we are dependent mainly 
upon Appian, supplemented occasionally by such writers as Valerius Maximus, 
Floras, Eutropius, and Orosius. Of the internal history almost nothing is known 
except what is to be gleaned from the epitome of Livy and some references in 
Cicero. Thus wherever the papyrus supplements the existing epitome, the 
information is extremely welcome, and fortunately they differ from each other 
in two important respects. The extant epitome (henceforth called Epit.) is 
a connected narrative, and though the sequence of events is chronological to 
the same extent as the original history, the epitomizer has not thought it worth 
while to make clear to which year every event recorded belongs. The papyrus 
on the other hand being arranged on strict chronological principles, not only 
do we learn the precise year to which each event mentioned in it was assigned 
by Livy, but the dates for the parallel portions of Epit. can now be exactly 
determined, a proceeding which entails several changes in the chronology 
which Epit. has hitherto been supposed to prove. Secondly, though Epit. 
is as a rule much longer than the papyrus because it often describes events in 
greater detail, the brief summary in the latter frequently includes events which 
are passed over in Epit. Some of these are naturally trivial (e. g. 11. 84-5, 
1 11-5, and 164-6), but others are quite important. The proportion allotted 
to the different books in Epit. is very uneven. Thus Book 49 in Epit. 
occupies a good deal of space, the epitomizer entering into some detail both 
with regard to the Third Punic War and the rise of the pretender in Macedonia. 
Beside this the account of Book 49 in the papyrus (11. 87-105) is very meagre, 
though even so it mentions at least one event which does not occur in Epit. 
On the other hand Book 53 of Epit. is dismissed in a few lines, the author 
apparently attaching little importance to the events of B. C. 143-1, and Book 54 
(b. c. 141-139) does not occupy much space. Here the papyrus is considerably 
fuller than Epit., the proportion assigned to each book being more equal. Which 
of the two epitomes was constructed first is uncertain. The extant one is now 
generally considered to have been composed not earlier than the second century, 
and Zangemeister {Fesischr. d. xxxvi philol. Vcrsamml. 1882, pp. 86 sqq.) would 
assign it to the fourth, while the author of the compilation in the papyrus no 
doubt lived in the second or third century, when chronological epitomes were 
much in vogue in Egypt ; cf 12, 665, and the Strassburg fragment edited by 
Keil. The numerous errors in the text show that we have to deal with a copy 
some degrees removed from the original composition ; but the interval of time 
need not be long, as is shown by the Oxyrhynchus fragment of Julius Africanus' 
Κίστυί (412), which though written within about fifty years of the composition of 


that work is already quite corrupt. The discovery of an epitome of Livy in 
which the names of the consuls in the ablative case are prefixed to the events 
of each year goes far to confirm an acute conjecture of Mommsen {Abk. d. k. 
Sac/is. Ges. viii. p. 552), who inferred from the internal evidence of Cassiodorus 
and Orosius that an epitome of such a character, rather than Livy's complete 
work, lay at the basis of those authors' compilations ; the papyrus is, however, 
much less elaborate than the epitome of which the existence was postulated 
by Mommsen, and which Zangemeister (ibid) even regards as the basis of the 
extant epitome of Livy. 

We append a brief summary of the chief historical results to be gained from 
the new find. In foreign affairs the papyrus gives no new information about 
the Third Punic and Achaean Wars and confirms the generally received view. 
The chronology of the Macedonian war against Pseudophilippus, which was 
previously somewhat uncertain, is now fixed more precisely; cf. 11. loi, 106, and 
136-7, note. The names of the ambassadors to Bithynia in B. C. 149, which are 
given in 11. 112-3, enable us to emend a corruption in the name of one of them 
as found in Polybius ; and a hitherto unknown defeat of the Romans in B. c. 141 
in Illyria is recorded in 1. 175. But much more valuable are the references to 
the Spanish war, especially the campaigns against Viriathus. Not only does the 
papyrus supply new facts of importance, a victory (apparently) in E. c. 147 
(1. 136), the defeat of L. Metellus in B. c. 142 (1. 167), and the delay of Q. Caepio 
(11. 182-4) ; but it is now for the first time possible to construct the right 
chronology of the governors of Southern Spain in B. C 145-39, and the chief 
events connected with them. Hitherto the few references to the Spanish war 
in Epit. were insufficient to correct the unsatisfactory account in Appian, whose 
text is in parts defective. A detailed examination of the changes introduced 
into the received chronology of this war and of the new light thrown upon 
Appian is given in the note on 1. 167. More interesting, however, than defeats 
and victories are the references in the papyrus to home affairs. With regard to 
events previously known the most striking novelty is the date of the famous 
accusation of L. Aurelius Cotta by Scipio Africanus, which is placed by the 
papyrus in B.C. 138 in place of B.C. 133-29, a change which brings about 
a conflict between Livy and Cicero. Lines 115-6 probably fix the hitherto 
uncertain date of the Lex Scantinia. Among details which are new are the 
important military reform introduced by Appius Claudius in B. c. 140 (11. 177-8), 
the dispute between the consul and the tribunes in the same year (11. 182-4), 
and the statement about the ancestry of A. Gabinius, author of the Lex Gabinia 
(I. 193). It is also a matter of interest that we can now connect with Livy 
several statements of later writers, e.g. Dio Cassius (11. 195-6, note), Valerius 



Maximus (notes on 11. 161-3, 164-6, and 192), Frontinus (II. 188-90, note), and 
Obsequens (11. 127-9, note). Though the sadly imperfect condition of the text 
prevents this list from being much longer, and the numerous fragmentary 
references to hitherto unknown events serve only to accentuate the sense of loss, 
the papyrus is nevertheless a very serviceable addition to the authorities for the 
period from B.C. 150-139, and is a welcome violation of the monopoly hitherto 
enjoyed by Greek philology in the recovery of classical literature from Egypt. 

For many suggestions and references in the commentary on this papyrus 
we are indebted to Mr. W. Warde Fowler. The first proofs of our publication 
were submitted to Profs. Kornemann, Reid, and Wissowa, who have also 
contributed much to the elucidation of several problems. 

Col. i. 

[in Hispa]nia Romani caesi. Book 37 (B.C. 190). 

\M, Fulvio] Cn. Manlio cos. B.C. 189. 

[ \s pax itcrnm data est. P. Lepidinns {maxim?is} 

\pontif\ex maximus Q. Fabium priaetorem) quod flamen 
5 [Quirin]alein erat proficisci in Sardiniam 

[ \ant. Antfftcho regi pax data. Lusitani 

\x>astati?^ Rhodonia desoli deducta. 

[Glabrio censitram petens viinantes 

\accusdtionem compellitoribus composite 
10 \destiti\t. 

lib(er) xxxviii Book 38. 

\Ambrd}fia capta. 

\Gallog\raecis in Pamphylia proelio vastatis 

[ \a liberata. Origiacontis captian nobilis 

15 [centuri^pnem cuius vim pass(a) erat aurum admit 

[t ] poscentem occidit captitque eius ad viriim 

[secum ? iulit.] Campanis coniurium datum. [ ] 

[inter Achae]os et Lacedaemonios cruenta [pr'pelia. 
[M. Valeria L]ulio Calinatore cos. B.C. 188. 

20 [ p]racda ex Gallograecia per Cra .[.... 

[ducta. L. M]inucius Myrtilus et L. Man{i\liti\s 


[per legat]os Chartaginien\t\ium qui 
[pidsi erant (^avecti?). 
[M. Aemilio C. Flaminio cos. B.C. 187. 


25 [P. Scipio] Africatms a Quiiitis Metellis die{s]\ 
[dicta in Li\tratuin abi{i')t, qui ne revocarettir 
[Gracchus tyib{unus) pl{ebis) intergessit. L. Cornelius 

3. 1. Licinius for Lepidinus. 5. 1. \quirin\alis. 7. 1. Bononia for Rhodonia ; cf. 

p. 102. 8. \. viinantibus. 9. \. competiloribus proposito. 14. 1. Ortiagoniis captiva. 

17. \. connubium ioT coniurium. 19. \. L]ivio Saltnalore. 20. \. per Thrap'am. 25. 
1. Pelilliis for Metellis. 26. 1. Lt^Jerninum. 27. 1. inlercessit. 

Col. ii. 

Scipio datnnatus ....]. eni. 

[lib{er) xxxv]iiii Book 39. 

30 per C. Flamhiium et M. Aemiliu]m cos. Ligures 

perdomiti. yjae Flaminia e t Aemiliana viunitc^e. 

Latinorum [ ^inum coacta 

ab Roma re\dire. Manlitis . .]w de Gallo- 

graecis in f^riump/to ]λ«[. pe]cunia 

35 quae iran^lata erat ^is p\e]t\s\oliita. 

Sp. Postum{t)o [Q. Marcio co]s. B.C. 186. 

Hispala Fdcenia merctri'ce et pupillo 

Aebntio qti\em T. Sempronius\ Rutilius 

tutor et ma[ter Duronia ci]rcu7nscribserant 
40 iudiciuni re[fcrcniibus Bdccha- 

(^n)alia stibldja His]pan[{\ 

subacti. afjilctariim cer\tamina 

primum a Fu[lvio Nobilior\e edita. 

Gallics') in Itaiyiam transgressis Ma'rcellum 
45 [p\ersuasit [ut trans Alpes redirc]nt. L. Cornelius 

Scipio pos'J bclluni Antiocht] ludos voti- 

vos con[lata pccunia fcci\t. 
App[{^ Clau[dio M. Scmpronio cos. B. c. 1 85. 

Ligures fii[gati \llis accept a 

50 P. Claudia Pulchr\o L. Porcio Lfpitiio cos, B.C. 184. 

homini ccd 00 [a Naevio pr(aetore) ven\eficHi) damnati. 

L. Qnintius Flcijnininus . . . .] Gallia 

quod Philippg [Poeno scorto] s7io dcside- 

rante gladiditorium specta]culum 

37. 1 Fe[cem'a. 39. 1. ci]rcumscripseranl. 40. 1. indicium. 44. 1. Ma]rcellus. 
51. 1. kominum circa d(uo) {millia)i 


Col. iii. 

fS sita manu Bofiu[m 7tobikm occiderat 
a laiiatone ceti sore seiiatu motus est. 
vastaita Porcia [facta. 
M. Claiidio Marcello [Q. Fabw Labeone cos. B.C. 183. 

P. Licini Crassi fo'jitificis maximi 

60 litdis fune{b')ribus [ in for ο 

iabernacidis po\sitis evetiit id quod 

nate\s c]ecin[e]rat [tabertiactda 

in foro futtira. f' 16 letters 

Λν«[ . . \. .m. Hannibal 12 letters 

6s ff[ ]uhe[ 19 letters 

[^ib{er) xxxx Book 40. 

L. A\eniilio C\n. Berio \cos. B.C. 182. 

[ ] bellutn /{ 16 letters 

[ ]ellitesin[ 16 „ 

?o [ ] Theoxen[a 15 „ 

in mare t>\ . y(gien[ Demetrius 

fictie grimonibus [accusatus 

per patrem coactu[s 14 letters 
P. Lenttdo M. Paebio {cos. B.C. 181. 

75 in agro L. Nerylli sc[ribae libri Nuniae inventi. 

A. Postumio C. (^Calpurnio) \cos. B.C. 180. 

cntn Lignribiis Hispani siibacti. 

L. Livius trib{unus) pl{ebis) quod [aniws nati quetnque 
magistraium petejent rogatio lata 
80 est. 

Q. Fulvio M. Manlio c\os. B.C. 179. 

M. Lcpidi et Fulvii Nd\bilioris 

55. 1. Boiu[m. 56. 1. M. Catone for lanatone. 57. 1. basilica for vastaita. 

62. 1. vate\s\ for nate[s\ 67. 1. Baebio for Berio. 72. \. fie lis criminibus. 74. 

1. Cornelia (or Cethegd) for Lentulo and Baebio for Paebio. 75. 1. Petillii for Nerylli. 78. 
1. a L. Villio for Z. Livius and quot for quod. 

Col. iv. 

adversus Cha[r]taginienscs. Ltisitani vdjtati. Book 48 (b. C. 130). 

C Cornelin'j . . . .]ccus quod P. Dccim su[ 



85 a . ictam ingenil^dm stupraverat d cd 


li[b{er)] xxxxT/^i]iii Book 49. 

L. March Ccnsorino M. Man{i)lio cos. B.C. 149. 

bellum Piiniciim tertiiim exortum. Utic[enses 
90 [b]enigne locant auxiliate. Chartagin[iy\tises 
[t^t {dfdicionem venerunt, iitssi gmn[i\a [sua 

in aliitm locum trqnsferr^f mp[ 

redierunt. Roman\os \s' 

pepiderunt. Scipio{ 21 letters 


95 Aemiliani f\p\dem p\ Aemi- 

liani virtitte exet\citus qui obsessns 
a Pocnis erat liber \aUis. 16 letters 

per Caridemum poe[ Ser. Galba a Ltisi- 

tanis reus product[ 20 letters 
100 fili quos flens coirS^plexus est. Audrisco . . . 

tii se Philippi philiu[m ferente Macedonia 

per artna occupata. [ 20 letters 

Man{i'}lio et Marc{i)o c[os. quarti ludi saecula- 

re\s\ factos quos opdjtuit Diti ex Sibyllinis 
105 car minibus [Ter^piji facii sunt. 

[ lib{er) I Book 50. 

per socios popu'Ji Romani Pseudophilippus 

in ultimam 4 24 letters 

/αή. . .]/[. .]λ/[ ι 7 „ Prusias ? 

90. \. auxiliati ; cf. p. 104. loi. X.fiUtijn. 

Col. V. 

110 \rex Bithy\niae positus est. ad Attalum regem 

[ ] in pugnamentasi sunt legati Marco 

[. . . poda]gricus A. Hostilius Mancinus capite 

[ \a quondam L. Manilius Volso stolidus 

[ ] ligationem dixerunt 31. Cato respondit 

115 \nec caput] nee pedes nee cor habere{nt\. M. Sca\iiti(ni)us 

[ \am tulit (de) in stupro deprehensiis). 

\Sp. Albino L. Piso]He cos. B.C. 148. 


[Masinis{sa) uWimae senectuiis liberos IIII 

[ ]s reliquit decedens, cuius re- 

1 20 [gnum natu max]imis filis per miliaanmnn distributum. 

[Marcelliis leg\aius ad Masinissam missus 

[obruius. Ha\sdrubal quod adfinis Masiniss{ae) erat 

[ \ta subselli socius est. Scipio Aemilianus 

[consul creafjfs. 
125 [M'. Manilius] in Africa {m} pr'^o\spere diinicatiis \es\t. 

[luveniii pr{aetoris) {\n Thessalia exercittis caesus. 

[Philippus a] Metello captus. sacrariuin 

\. . . . et laurus soci viaximo incendio 

\inviolata. ] 
130 [ lib{er) li\ Book 51. 

[P. Cornelio C. Livio] cos. B. c. 147. 

[ Carthci\ginein Appius crudelissime 

[ W obsidentiis Romanes non 

\ Carthag\inem crebris proeli^is'). 

'35 [per Achaeor\im pr{aetorem) Corinthi legati Romano 

[pulsaii. Liisitani subalii. 

III. 1. in Pergamenos Q) missi for pugnamenlasi (cf. p. 105) and 31{arcus) .... for 
Marco. 114. 1. legalionem. 120. 1. Aemilianum for miliaannum . 123. 1. occisus 

{ox socius. 125. \. dimicavit ioT dimicatus [es\t. i^^.Loosiden/es. 135. \. Romani. 

136. 1. subacli; cf. p. 107. 

Col. vi. 

Cn. Corndjio L. Mummio cos. B. c. 146. 

[p\er Scipiottem Carthago 

[d\irepta. qu[ 
i.(o visset uxo[rem 

duobus fil[is 

potestate [ 

Aemilia qu[ 

[ lib[er) Hi Book 53. 

145 L. Mumanus C[orinthum dim it. 

uxore dy 

peruriam[ a Lusitanis clades 

cucepta. [ , 

Η a 



Q. Fabio 3Ia3\imo L. Hostilio cos. 
150 M. Petron[i 

adversu[s Viriathum 
Ser. Galba L. \Coita cos. 
L. Metell[us 
sulatum [ 
15s Qui invis[us plebi 
petitiir i{ 
Syria vd\stata 

[ lib{er) liii 

160 Q. Metello \Appio Claiidio cos. 
liber OS t .[ 
proposito ij[ 

145. 1. Mummius. 

One column lost. 

B. C. 145• 

B.C. 144. 


Book 53. 
B. c. 143. 

Col. vii. 

occidit, a Tyresio quern devicij gladiu\m 

165 dono accept t sagidoque remi\sso am\ici- 
[ii^fl£ dextrani dedit. 
[M^tellus COS. a Lusitanis vex\aius. ] 
\s^gna statu(^a)s tabulas Corintk'Jas L. Μ ^ummius 
distribuit circa oppida ct Rom[ ]vii. 

170 [Cyi. Caepione Q. Pompeio cos. 

Q. Fabius Maximus Lusitanis ca[esis ] 
Viriathum fugavit. 

lib{er) liiii 
Pompeiiis cos. a{n] Nu{a]mantinis d^evictu^^. in 

17s Scordiscis cladis accept a. 

\Q. Cae\pione \C.\ Laelio Salasso o^os. 

Appius Claudius evicit ne duos [delectus?] annus 
haberet. Uemilius Torquaius D. S[ila]num 
filiuni suu[m] de Macedonia dqmn[avii, f\uneri 

180 nan interfuit, eademque die [in du[wio] sua 
consultantibus respondit. 

B.C. 141. 

Book 54. 

B.C. 140. 


\C\aepio cos. indclcgem Ti. Claudiam Assiliuni 
tr(^i')b{itnnnt) pl(ebis) inUrpellaiiian profectionent 
[s]iiam r^t\c tores trigcm rcddeterbuit. 

185 \Q\ Fabhis Maxiniiis a Viriaih{i}o devicius de- 
[f\ormem cum hostibus pacem fecit. Q. Occius 

[ ΐρ insidiis Lit\s^ilanorum fortissime 

\pyugnavit. . .]mae devota est aqita An{n}io. aqua 
\Marcia in Capi\tolium contra Sibyllae carmina 

190 [per due ta, ] 

176. 1. Sapiente {or Salasso. 178. I. T. Manlius for Uemilius. 182. 1. Claudium 
Asellum. 184. 1. . . . ens deterruii ; cf. p. 112, 

Col. viii. 

Cn. Pisone C. Polli[o cos. B.C. 139. 

Chaldaei urbe tit[ 20 letters 

A. Cabinius vernd^e rogationem ttilit 

suffragium per tdfiellam ferri. 

195 Servilins Ccupio d\b equitibus qiios pcriculo 

obiecerat clavo [ictus 15 letters 

Audax Minurus (^D)itciJco 17 „ 

Viriathum iugula[verunt. 

lib{er) [Iv Book 55. 

200 P. Sc\i]pione D. lunio [cos. B.C. 138. 

interfcctores Viri\athi praemium 

negatum. c'jim Scipi]on[em Nasicam et 

decemviru\m co]s. Licinvjts et Curiatius 

trib{itfii) pl{ebis) in carcer]em [c^lF^ocarent, 

305 precibus popiili midj]a r^missa 

trib(iinus) pl{ebis) pro commodis pof^uli 

07nnib{us) lucti cxpiravit. cd^ . ]un[ de- 

sertores in comitio virgis cad^si scstertiis 

singulis vetiicrunt, 
2IO P. Africanus cum L. Cot tarn [accu]sar[et 

magnitudiiiem nom'iiiis . .] . caa^ 

Lusitaui vastati. a{n\ N[uvian]tiit[is clades accepta. 

Diodotus Tryphon Atitiochum [regepi occi- 

dit Snriague potitus ojst, ] 


315 M. Aemilio C. Hostilio M[a]ncino [cos. 

Decimus Brutus in Hispania re b\ene gesta 
Oblivionis flumen planus tran^ivit. 

B.C. 137. 

191. 1. M. Popilli\o for C. Polli\o. 192. 1. urbe el Ιίαΐ^ία; cf. p. 113. 193. 

1. Gabinius. 201. 1. interfectoribtis. 203. 1. Decimum Brutum for decemviru\m. 

207. 1. (ab) omnib{us) luctus. 214. 1. Syriaque. 217. 1. Oblivioncm and primus for 


Fr. (a). 

Fr. (0). 

Fr. {ή. Fr. (d). 

] Sullanis [ 





]«^«>« [ 

] [ 

] [ 


]e non re{ 

] [ 
] . samin{ 


] [ 

]v f[ 

] [ 


]avit /[ 


] ■[ 

] [ 

1. Cf. Livy 37. 46. 

2. Cf 37. 47. 

3. ]j is probably Aelolis, for it is difficult to see what chapter can be referred to if not 51 ; 
but pax iterum data est somewhat perverts the truth, since the embassy of the Aetolians 
was summarily ordered to depart under threats of punishment and no terms were offered 
by the Senate. A negative would seem to have been omitted. 

P. Lepidinus: his correct name was P. Licinius (37, 51). maximus is a repetition of 
part of his title. 

6. [ \ant•. this word must be corrupt; lenuit or retinuit (cf. 37. 51) would be 


AnfJ]ocho regi pax data : cf. 37. 55. 

Lusitani [vastali] : cf. 37. 57 and for vaslatiW. 13, 83, and 212. 

7. Two events seem to be confused here, the Rhodian embassy about Soli (ch. 56 
ad fin.) and the foundation of Bononia (ch. 57), the latter being what is really meant, 
as shown by the intervening mention of the Lusitanians. de Soli{s), if more than a mere 
interpolation from ch. 56, probably represents colonia or de Gallis. 

8-10. Cf. 37. 57 ; destilit is the word used by Livy. 

12. Cf 38. 1-9. 

13. Cf 38. 12 sqq. in Pamphylia, as Prof. Kornemann remarks, is not strictly 
accurate, the Gallograeci being defeated in Galatia. 

14. Probably [Phrygifl or [Asia toiyt. 


14-17. For the story of Ortiagon's wife see 38. 24. caption must be captiva, but 
uxor is much wanted and nobilis is probably corrupt. Possibly an nobilis is due to 
a reminiscence of the words Ancyram nobilem which occur at the beginning of the chapter. 

admit . . . also seems to be a corruption of a word meaning ' promised,' while 
poscentem is ίοτ pensantem, the word used by Livy. 

17. On the right of intermarriage granted to the Campanians see Livy 38. 36, where 
the event is placed in b.c. 188, and is the consequence of the census ordered to be taken 
in B.C. 189 which is mentioned in ch. 28. The papyrus records the event mentioned in 
ch. 36, but puts it in the place corresponding to ch. 28. Cf. note on 11. 44-5. 

18. Cf. 38. 30. 

19. Cf. 38. 35. 

20. Cf. 38. 40-1. 
21-3• Cf. 38. 42. 
24. Cf. 38. 42. 

25-7. Cf. 38. 50-3. Though die dicta or dicto is necessary for the construction, it is 
very likely that the scribe wrote dies dicta or dictus. 

27-8. Cf 38. 55, 58-60. 

30-1. Cf. 39. 2. 

32-3• Cf 39. 3. 

33-5- Cf. 39. 6-7. 

36. Cf 39. 6. 

37-41. Cf 39. 9-19. 

41-2. His fan i\ subacti: cf 39. 21, referring to the victory of C. Atinius. 

42-3. Cf 39. 22. 

44-5. Cf 39. 22, where the incursion of the Gauls is described. But the apparent 
mention of Marcellus refers to ch. 54, where it is stated that in b.c 183 they retired to 
their own country, Marcellus being then consul (cf. also ch. 45). The epitomizer seems 
therefore to have made the same kind of mistake as in connexion with the concession to 
the Campanians; cf 1. 17, note. 

45-7. Cf 39. 22 L. Scipio ludos . , . quos bello Antiochi vovisse sese dicelat ex collata 
ad id pecunia . . .fecit. 

48. Cf 39. 23. 

49. The defeat of the Ligurians by the two consuls occurs in 39. 32, and the next 
event related is the elections. What VZ/'x accepta refers to is not clear. Possibly mulla 
mi'llia capta was meant (cf 39. 32 mulla millia hominum in iis cepii); or l/Z/'j may represent 
part of cladis, and in or a Hispanis may be supplied (cf. 11. 174-5 and 312), the reference 
being to the defeat mentioned in ch. 30. This however was soon remedied, and a 
mention of this campaign would have been expected to precede instead of following 
the allusion to the Ligurian war. 

50. Cf 39. 33. 

51. Cf 39. 41. 

52-6. Cf. 39. 42. If ... .1 Gallia is not corrupt it is out of place, and ought to follow 

57• Cf 39. 44. 

58. Cf. 39. 45. 

59-63. Cf 39. 46. 

63-4. A reference to the capture and death of Philopoemen at the hands of the 
Messenians probably occurred here ; cf 39. 49-50. 

64. Han[nibal•. a reference to his death; cf 39. 51. 


67. Cf. 39• 56. 

68. Perhaps \Hispam] should be restored before helium ; cf. 40. i. 

70-1. Cf. 40. 4. Prof. Raid suggests in mare{m\ \J"irigien[s se dcdit (or iecit). 
Livy's phrase is in mare sese deiecii. 

72. Cf. 40. 6-16. It is not clear whether /ir patrcm coactd^^ in 1. 73 also refers to the 
accusation against Demetrius or to his death by poisoning, which is described in 40. 24. 
coaclu's does not seem to be right on cither hypothesis. 

74. Cf. 40. 18. 

75. Cf 40. 29. The restoration is however rather long for the lacuna. 

76. Cf 40. 35. 

77. Cf. 40. 39-41. 

78-80. Cf. 40. 44 eo anno rogalio primum lala est ah L. Villio iribuno plehis quoi 
annos nati quemqiie magistratum peierent caperentque. 

81. Cf. 40. 45. 

82. Cf. 40. 45-6. composila inimicilia may be supplied. After this several columns 
are lost, corresponding to the break between 657. iv and v. 

83. advtrsus Cha[r]laginienses•. i.e. the war with Masinissa; cf. Epit. 48 ad fin. 
Carihaginienses cum adversus foedus helium Masinissae inlulissenl . . . 

Lusitani va[siali; cf. 1. 212. The reference is to the treacherous attack of Sulpicius 
Galba (cf 1. 98), on which see Appian, Iher. 59-60, Orosius, iv. 21. 10, Val. Max. i.x. 62, 
and Sueton. Galba 3. Epit. 48 has Scr. Sulpicius Galba praetor male advcrsus Lusitanos 
pugnavit, which has generally been interpreted as implying a defeat of the Romans. But, 
as Kornemann remarks, it is now clear that male means not ' unsuccessfully ' but 
' dishonourably.' 

84. Probably Celh]ecus, i.e. Celhegus; cf. 1. 14 Origiacontis for Orliagontis. The 
incident is not recorded elsewhere, nor Is any C. Cornelius Cethegus known at this period. 
L. Cornelius Cethegus was one of the accusers of Galba (Epit. 49) and M. Cornelius 
Cethegus was consul in B.C. 160. 

Decim seems to be corrupt for Decimi or Decii, and ja[ is ver}' likely the beginning of 
a cognomen. What a . ictam (or auclam) in 1. 85 means is obscure ; Reid suggests 
ancillam. Kornemann prefers Deciia)m . . . ingendu]m, comparing Val. Max. vi. i. 10 
quod cum ingenuo adulesceniulo sltipri commercium habuisset. The doubtful u after d c 
can be i. 

87-93. ' Book 49. Consulship of L. Marcius Censorinus and M'. Manilius. The 
Third Punic War began. The inhabitants of Utica willingly assisted (the Romans). The 
Carthaginians surrendered; being ordered to transfer all their possessions to another site 
they returned . . .' 

90. auxiliate is for auxiliati (sc. sunt), and locant perhaps conceals the object 
(.' Romanis). locant auxilium, though in itself a possible phrase, is unlikely, for the verbs 
in the papyrus are uniformly in the perfect tense and generally come at the end of the 

91-3. Cf. Epit. 49 tunc cum ex aucloritate palrum inherent (sc. consules) ut in alium 
locum dum a mari decem milia passuum ne minus remotum oppidum facerent, indignitate rei ad 
rebellandum Carthaginienses compulerunt. Υ οτ facerent Gronovius had conjectured trans- 
ferrent, which seems to have been the verb employed in I. 92. The embassy of the 
Carthaginians mentioned in 11. 90-1 came to Rome (cf Epit. legati triginia Romam 
verurunt pjtr quos se Carthaginienses dcderunt); but the demand to evacuate Carthage was 
made by the consuls after reaching Africa, and if rcdierunt refers to the return of the 
ambassadors to Carthage, the statement of the papyrus is inaccurate. It is more likely that 


redierunl refers to the renewal of the war. m after Irdnsferfe ma}• well be a mistake for 
in. The whole phrase would then be an antithesis to in dedicionem veneruni in 1. 91. 

93-5. The subject of pcpnlcrimt must be the Carthaginians, since the siege began 
with the repulse of the Romans. Lines 94-5 refer to the distinction gained by Scipio 
Aemilianus in the early engagements; cf. Epit. 49 and Appian, Pun. 98-9. 

95-7. This refers to the occasion on which Scipio saved the Roman army at Nepheris; 
cf. Epit. and Appian, Pun. 102-3. 

97-8. Who this Charidemus was is unknown, pol^ is possibly ^(5//λ7λ. 
98-100. Cf. Epit., where the prosecution of Galba is described more fully. In 1. 99 
tiihcr produclus agreeing with Galba, οτ product i agreeing w'whfli may be read. 

loi. Unless Philippi is an error for Persei, Reid is probably right in correcting '/ti 
se Philippi to Persei se Philippum ; cf. Epit. Persei se filitim ferens et mulato nomine Philippus 
vocatus .... iotam RIacedoniam aui voluniaie incolenlium atit armis occiipavit. 

103-5. The Epitome of Book 49 ends with the description of the revolt of Macedonia, 
but car minibus in 1. 105 strongly suggests that this passage refers to the celebration of 
the games of Dis at Terentum in accordance with the Sibylline books, a fact which is 
mentioned near the beginning of Epit. 49 Dili pairi ludi ad Terentum ex praecepto 
librorum Sibyllinorum facli, qui ante annum centesimum prima Punico bello quingentesimo et 
altera anno ab urbe condila facti erant. This is confirmed by a passage in Censorinus, 
De die natali 17. 8, to which our attention was called by Kornemann and Wissowa, de 
quartorum ludarum anno triplex senlentia est. Antias enim et Varra et Livius relalos 
esse prodidcrunt L. JSlarcio Censarina, M. Manilio consulibus post Pomam conditam anno 
sexccntcsima quinto. at Pisa Censorius et Cn. Gellius sed et Cassius Hemina qui illo tempore 
vivebat post annum facias tertium affirmant Cn. Carttelia Lcntula, L. Mummia Achaico 
cansulibus, id est anno sexcentesimo octavo, in quindecim virorum autem commentariis 
notantur sub anno sexcentesima vicesimo octavo Ma?n. Aemilio Lepido, L. Aurelio Oreste 
consulibus. The restorations of 11. 103-4 are due to Wissowa, who (Religion und Kultus 
der Romer, p. 364) considers that Livy's date for the games (b.c. 149) is wrong, and that 
Cassius Hemina was right in assigning them to B.C. 146. 

107-8. Cf. Epit. 50 Thessalia cum et illam invadere armis atque occupare Pseudo- 
philippus vellet per legatas Romanorum auxiliis Achacorum de/ensa est. 

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

no. The death of Prusias is noticed in Epit. If Prusias in 1. 109 is χ\φ.\., positus is 
probably corrupt for some wOrd meaning 'killed' {}accisus, cf 1. 123); but (de)positus is 
just possible, for Prusias seems to have been first abandoned by his subjects (Justin 
34. 4). depano in the sense of ' depose ' is however not classical. Kornemann would 
retain positus and supply Nicomedes in 1. 109. 

1 10-5. The embassy which gave rise to the jest of Cato is also mentioned in the 
Epitome immediately after the death of Prusias, though the incident took place in 
Prusias' lifetime. 

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


the earlier part of the republic, and members of it were consuls as late as b. c. 189 and 178. 
Marco in 1. in is probably M{arciis) followed by the first pari of another name which was 
more probably a cognomen Q Archias) than Licinius. 

The first half of 1. 113 seems lo be corrupt, λα may be the termination of test^p (cf. 
Polybius, /. c. κφα/ιίδοΓ fi'f TT)v κ(φαλην ίμπ(σονση!) \ but a participle is also required, and even 
if there were space for it before lesla the order of capiie .... quondam would be awkward. 

1 1 5-6. This event is omilled in the Epiiome. Should deprehensi be corrected to 
deprehensus, and some word like reptilsain be supplied ? A certain tribune C. Scantinius 
Capitolinus was accused of sltiprum by M. Claudius Marcellus, as aedile, in b. c. 222 
(Val. I\Iax. vi. i. 7 ; cf. Plutarch, Vil. Marc. 2), but the Marcus Scantinius here must 
be different. As Warde Fowler remarks, it seems very unlikely that there were two 
Scantinii condemned for sUiprum, one in B.C. 208, the other in b.c. 149, and that there 
should also be a Lex Scantinia on the same offence, of which the dale is unknown 
(INIommsen, Slrafrechl, p. 703). He therefore thinks that the present passage refers to 
the passing of the Lex Scantinia, and that \am is corrupt for the termination of plebiscitum, 
while in slupro deprehensi is for de in stupro deprchensis. 

118-21. ' Masinissa dying in extreme old age left four children, and his kingdom was 
divided by Aemilianus among the elder sons.' Cf. Epit. Masinissa Numidiae rex maior 
nonaginia annis dccessit . . . adco eliam in seneclam viguil ul post sextum et octogesimum annum 
filium genuerit. inter trcs liberos eius, maximum natu Alicipsam, Gu/ussam, Maslanabalem . . . 
P. Scipio Aemi/ianus . . .partes administrandi regni dirisit. The fourth legitimate son who 
received no share of the kingdom was no doubt the one bom when his father was 86 ; 
but other writers differ from Livy regarding the number of Masinissa's children. The 
death of Masinissa is placed by Mommsen at the end of b. c. 149, but according to the 
papyrus it took place early in b.c. 148. 

1 2 1-2. Cf Epit. ex tribus legatis qui ad Masinissam missi fuerant, Claudius Marcellus 
coorta tempestate obrutus est. 

122-3. Cf. Epit. Carthaginienses Hasdrubalem Masinissae nepotem . . . proditionis 
suspectum in curia occiderunt. Appian (Pun. iir) in describing the death of Hasdrubal 
uses the equivalent of subsellium οΊ δί τίπτοντα αΐτον tois ίποβάθροί! κατίβαΚην. ία is very 
likely />v7^/«i'«/KW in some form. Kornemann aptly compares Orosius, iv. 22. 8 Asdrubal . . . 
subselliorum fragmentis . . . occisus est. 

123-4. Cf Epit. P. Scipio Aemilianus cum aedilitatem peteret . . . legibus solutus et consul 
criatus est. 

125. The Epitome is more explicit: M'. Manilius aliquot urbes circumposilas Carlhagini 

126-7. Cf. Epit. Pseudophilippus in Macedonia caeso cum exercitu P. luventio praetor e 
a Q. Caecilio victus captusque est el recepta Macedonia. Mommsen places the defeat of 
Juventius doubtfully in b.c. 149, and the victory of Metellus in B.C. 148. It now appears 
that both events took place in b. c. 148. 

127-9. The burning of the sacrarium is not mentioned in Epit., but is explained, 
as Kornemann and Wissowa point out, by Obsequens 19(78) vasto incendio Romae cum 
regia quoque ureretur, sacrarium et ex duabus altera lauriis ex mediis ignibus inviolata 
exstiterunt, upon which passage the restorations of 11. 128-9 are based, soci \% corrupt, 
possibly for Opis. 

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


inviolata or an equivalent is required for 1. 129, and to suppose the omission of the title 
' liber W ■AxiA to assign 11. 131-143 to the 50th Book would introduce a serious conflict 
between the papyrus and the extant Epitome with regard to the arrangement of Books 50-53. 
If the title therefore of Book 51 was omitted, this was probably a mere accident. 

132-4. This passage is very corrupt. No Appius is known in connexion with the 
operations at Carthage at this period, crudelissime suggests that Appius is a mistake for 
Hasdrubal, and that 11. 132-3 refer to the cruelty of Hasdrubal towards the Roman 
prisoners described by Appian {Pun. 118). 

135-6. Cf. Epit. quod kgati populi Romani ab Achaeis pulsati sin/ Corinthi. The 
Achaean praetor referred to was Critolaus. 

136. The simplest correction for subalti is subacii, but no victory over the Lusitanians 
at this period is known. Appian {Iber. 60-1) passes straight from the treachery of Galba 
(cf 11. 83 and 98) to the defeats of Vetilius and Plautius (cf 11. 146-8, note). The Epitome 
does not mention Spanish affairs in this book, but gives an account of Viriathus' earlier 
successes in Book 52. If however there was really a victory over the Lusitanians in 
B.C. 147 the explanation may be as follows. The reverse sustained by Vetilius recorded 
by Appian {Iber. 61) is represented as the direct and immediate result of a preliminary 
success obtained by the Romans, but it is not unlikely that Appian has combined the 
events of two separate campaigns by Vetilius into one and that Lusitani subacti here refers 
to his success, while his reverse took place in the next year, B.C. 146; cf. 11. 146-8, note. 
The papyrus mentions only one defeat by the Lusitanians. 

138. The destruction of Carthage is mentioned in the Epitome before the attack upon 
the embassy at Corinth, but owing to the strictly chronological system adopted by the 
author of the papyrus it is here correctly placed in b. c. 146. 

139-43. These lines, as Kornemann and Reid suggest, probably refer to the story of 
the death of Hasdrubal's wife, who first threw her two children into the flames; cf. Epit. 51. 

145. Cf. Epit. Corinlhon ex senalus consullo diruit. 

146. uxore: probably, as Kornemann remarks, this entry refers to the death of Diaeus 
by poison after killing his wife ; cf. Pausan. vii. 16. 2-4, Zonaras ix. 86, Auctor de vir. ill. 60. 

147-8. a Lusiianis cladcs] accepta (cf. 1. 175) may refer to the defeats of Vetilius 
and C. Plautius mentioned in Epit., or to one of them ; cf. note on 1. 136. 

150. A certain C. Petronius who was an ambassador to Attains and Prusias in 
B.C. 156 is mentioned in Polyb. 32. 26, but no M. Petronius is known at this period. 

151. adverstis: this probably refers to the dispatch of the consul Q. Fabius Maximus 
Aemilianus against Viriathus ; cf. Epit. 52 tanlumque terror is is hostis inlulit ul adversus 
aim consulari opus esset el duce el exercitu, and note on 1. 167. If the reverse mentioned 
in 1. 148 (cf. 11. 147-8, note) refers to Vetilius, possibly the defeat of Plautius occurred in 
B. c. 145, instead cf 146, as has been generally supposed. 

153. L. Metellus is perhaps the brother of Quintus and the consul in b. c. 142; 
cf. 1. 167, note. But the mention of considatum suggests a reference to the two failures 
of Q. Metellus' candidature for the consulship before he obtained it for B.C. 143, and 
Kornemann is probably right in regarding L. as a mistake for Q. On the confusion of 
the two brothers cf. notes on 11. 164-6 and 167. For invis'us plehi cf. Auct. de viris 
illusl. 6 1 invisus plebi ob nimiam sevcritatcvi el idco posl duas repuhas consul aegre faclus. 

1 6 1-3. Reid is no doubt right in connecting this passage with the story told by 
Valerius Maximus (v. i. 5) of Rhoetogenes' children, to save whom Q. Metellus abandoned 
the siege of a town in Spain. 

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


of the second is idem Pyressum (v. 1. Pyresuni) nobililale ac virlule Cdliberos cmncs 
praestantem. . . . succumbere sibi coegit ; nee eruhuil flagrantissimi pee torts iuvenis gladium 
ci siium el sagu/um . . . iradcre. ilk vera eliani peliil ut hospitii iure inltr se iuneli essent . . . 
This corresponds to a Tyresio, &c. ; occidit in 1. 164 belongs to the story of the first 
exploit (the killing of a Celtiberian warrior) described in the lost column. In Val. Max. 
sagulum is coupled with gladium, but the order of words in 11. 164-5 indicates that 
sagiiloque remi[sso is an ablative absolute and saguloque is not to be altered to sagulumque. 
With regard to the name of the Celtiberian, the form Tyresius found in I. 164 is supported 
by Orosius v. 8. i (a reference which we owe to Dr. Greenidge), where a Cellieus princeps 
called Thyresus is mentioned in connexion with the pacification of Spain after the fall 
of Numanlia. Clearly the same name, and very likely the same person are meant, so that 
the ]\ISS. of Val. ]\Iax. are probably wrong in giving the forms Pyressus or Pyresus. 
There is also a slight divergence between the papyrus and Val. Max. concerning the 
date of Q. Occius' achievements, which the former assigns to B.C. 142 while Val. Max. 
repreFents Q. Occius as Q. jMetello consuli legatus, thus indicating the year b.c. 143. Since 
Q. Occius in any case remained in Spain until n.c. 140 (1. 186) and Q. Metellus was there 
in both B.C. 143 and 142 (1. 167, note) the inconsistency is trifling, but Q. Melello eonsuli 
may easily be a mistake for L. Melello consuli or Q. Melello proconsuli ; cf. notes on 
11. 153-6 and 167. 

167. This fact that L. Metellus, consul in b. c. 142, went to Spain and was there 
defeated by the Lusitanians is new, and is the first of a series of references to the war 
against Viriathus which throw much light on its history. Owing to the extreme brevity 
of the extant Epitome of Books 53 and 54 the principal authority has hitherto been Appian, 
whose account of the Spanish war is preserved in a single very corrupt codex. The 
generally received chronology from b.c 143-37, s- R• ^^^^ of Mommsen, is as follows: — 

B.C. 143. Q. Caecilius Metellus, governor of Northern Spain, is successful, but the 
praetor Quinctius, governor of Southern Spain, is defeated by Viriathus. 

B.C. 142. Q. Metellus as proconsul continues to be successful. Q. Fabius Maximus 
Servilianus, consul, who succeeded Quinctius in Southern Spain according to Appian 
{Iber. 67), invades Lusitania, but is compelled to retreat. 

B.C. 141. Q. Fabius Maximus as proconsul is at first victorious, but is afterwards 
defeated and compelled to conclude a disgraceful peace. Q. Pompeius, consul, the new 
governor of Northern Spain, is also defeated. 

B.C. 140. Q. Caepio, consul, the new governor of Southern Spain, invades Lusitania. 
(The death of Viriathus is placed in this year by e.g. Peter, Zeiltafeln, p. 69.) Q. Pompeius 
remains as proconsul in Northern Spain. 

B.C. 139. A^iriathus is killed at the instigation of Q. Caepio, who remains in Southern 
Spain as proconsul. M. Popillius, consul, became governor of Northern Spain. 

B.C. 138. M. Popillius, proconsul, is defeated by the Numantines. D. Junius Brutus, 
consul, becomes governor of Southern Spain, and in this year and B.C. 137-6 subdues the 
country, and is the first Roman to cross the river Oblivio. 

From this chronology the papyrus has important variations after b.c 143, of which 
year the account is unfortunately lost. 

B.C. 142. Victory of the Lusitanians over the consul L. Metellus, who must therefore 
have been governor of the Southern province. The success of his brother, Q. Metellus, 
in the Northern province, which is mentioned in Epit. 53, was no doubt referred to in 
the lost portion of the account of b.c. 142. 

B.C. 141. Victory of Q. Fabius Maximus over Viriathus (11. 171-2). Defeat of 
Q. Pompeius (1. 174). 


B.C. 140. Q. Caepio delayed in starting for his province (11. 182-4). Q• Fabius 
is defeated, and concludes a disgraceful peace with Viriathus (11. 185-6). Q. Occius 
distinguishes himself in an engagement with the Lusitanians, in which the Romans fell 
into an ambush (11. i86-8). 

B.C. 139. Death of Viriathus (11. 197-8). 

B.C. 138. Refusal of a reward to the murderers of Viriathus (11. 201-2). Victory over 
the Lusitanians, and defeat by the Numantines (1. 212). 

B.C. 137. D. Brutus crosses the river Oblivio (11. 216-7). 

Comparing the two arrangements, we may note that no conflict arises in conne.xion 
with events in Northern Spain, nor in B.C. 138-7 with those in Southern Spain. The 
death of Viriathus is assigned by the papyrus to B.C. 139, not 140, thus confirming 
the opinion of IMommsen ; and if our conjecture in 1. 147 is correct, the papyrus perhaps 
supports the date assigned to the defeat of Plautius. But in the years b. c. 142-0 there 
are marked differences between the new evidence and the received chronology. Beginning 
at the end, only one campaign (b.c. 139) is obtainable for the governorship of Q. Caepio 
instead of two (b.c. 140-39). The governorship of Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus is 
assigned to the years b.c. ι 41-0 instead of b.c. ι 4 2-1 ; and while the papyrus agrees with the 
ordinary chronology in placing his victory in b.c. 141, his defeat and the peace are assigned 
not to B.C. 141 but to B.C. 140. Lastly in b.c. 142 the papyrus tells us of a hitherto 
unknown governor of Southern Spain, the consul L. Metellus. 

It will hardly be disputed that Livy's chronology of the war against Viriathus, now 
that more detailed information on it is obtained, carries much more weight than that of 
Appian or the other still inferior authorities. It remains to investigate how far in the 
light of the new evidence there is a real inconsistency between Livy and the other 
authorities, and to explain, if possible, the origin of the divergences. As to the governorship 
of Caepio there is no great difficulty. The events related by Appian {Iber. 70-1) need 
occupy no more than one year. The fact that Valerius Maximus (ix. 6. 4) and Eutropius 
(iv. 16) speak of Caepio as consul when Viriathus was assassinated, and therefore assign his 
principal campaign in Spain to B.c. 140 instead of B.C. 139, is of trifling importance in the 
face of the explanation afforded by the papyrus (11. 182-4) oi his delay in starting. More- 
over, although the campaign in the summer of b.c. 140 was conducted by Fabius Maximus 
Servilianus, Caepio may well have arrived in Spain before the end of the year. The 
reason why two years have hitherto been assigned to his governorship was that he had 
to occupy the interval between Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus and D. Brutus, and that the 
former of these had been assigned to b.c 142-1. 

Nor does the transference of Q. Fabius Maximus Servilianus' governorship to b. c. 1 4 1 -o 
produce any serious conflict with other statements. That Livy assigned these two years 
to him rather than b.c. 142-1 might have been guessed from the extant Epitome, for 
he was consul in b.c. 142, yet Epit. 53 mentions his successes as proconsul, and Epit. 54 
(ad fin.) his defeat. But these indications that Fabius was already proconsul when he 
became governor of Southern Spain — a fact which is made quite clear by the papyrus — 
were disregarded, partly owing to the statement of Orosius (v. 4) that Fabius in his consul- 
ship (i.e. in b.c. 142) fought against Viriathus, partly owing to an inference from Appian, 
Jber. 67, where the opening words τοΟ δ' eViiiiTos cruus Κοΐντω μΐν 6 άδ(λφΟΓ ΑίμιλιαιοΟ Φάβιοι 

Μά|»μοΓ 2fpovi\iav6s (Αίμίλιανοί MS.) ηλθ(ν ΐπΐ την στρατηγίαν διάδοχος have in connexion with 

the preceding events been supposed to refer to b.c 142. To leave for the moment the 
question which year Appian meant by τοΟ ϊπιόι/το! trovs, his account of Fabius Servilianus' 
achievements accords well enough with that of Livy. It is true that the successes of Fabius 
in Appian's account seem to belong to the later rather than to the earlier part of his 


governorship, but it is not difEcuIt to suppose that Appian omitted to record some trifling 
successes such as the capture of Baccia mentioned by Orosius (/. c), probably one of 
the urbes which were expugnalae according to Epit. 53; cf. 11. 17 1-2. Two campaigns 
are implied by Appian, as is more clearly stated by Livy; but Appian does not call 
Servilianus consul. Where the facts known from Livy conflict seriously with at any rate 
the present text of Appian is in the events which took place between the departure of 
Fabius Maximus Aemilianus and the arrival of Fabius Maximus Servilianus. The 
governorship of Aemilianus is expressly stated by Appian to have lasted two years {Iber. 65). 
Aemilianus was consul in b.c. 145, and that the years of his governorship were b.c. ι 4.5-4 
is unquestionable; cf. Epit. 52 lantumque timoris is hostis iniulit ul adversus eum consular i 
opus esse! el duce el exercitu. The disaster to Plautius which led to sending an experienced 
general is, as we have said, very likely alluded to in 1. 147 of the papyrus, and 1. 151 may 
well refer to the dispatch of Aemilianus. So far as is known, Aemilianus had both Spains 
under his command; but who succeeded him on his departure in b.c. 143? Northern 
Spain at any rate seems to have fallen to the consul for b.c 143 Q. Caecilius Metellus 
(cf. Val. JIax. iii. 2. 21, ix. 3. 7; Appian, Iber. 76), and that he remained as proconsul 
in B.C. 142 is attested by Epit. 53; but the question who obtained Southern Spain is very 
complicated. From Val. Max. ix. 3. 7, where Q. Melellus utramque Hispaniam consul prius, 
deinde proconsul . . . subegisset is the reading of the MSB., it would be inferred that Metellus 
wzs, governor of both Spains; but utramque has been altered by some editors io provinciam 
on the ground that Metellus was only governor of Northern Spain, the governorship of 
Southern Spain in b.c. 143 being generally assigned to Quinctius, who is supposed to have 
been a praetor and to have been the immediate predecessor of Fabius Servilianus on the 
evidence of Appian, Iber. 65-7. This passage, which is very corrupt, now requires a fresh 
examination in the light of the new evidence. After recounting the achievements of Fabius 
Aemilianus in b.c. 145 and b.c 144, Appian proceeds (ed. Mendelssohn): καΊ raie μϊν 6 

Αιμιλιανός (ΣίρονιΚιαρος ΛΙ5.) (ργασάμ€Ρος es 'Ϋώμην άπ^ρ€ tiahe^apivov την άρχην Κοιντου ϋομπηίον 
(joi^ λΰλον. (ό δί άδιΧφόί αϋτοΰ Μά|ιμοτ ΑΐμιΧιανο! MS., omitted by editors), ΐφ' ott ό 
Ονρίατθοί ονχ ομοίως €Τί καταφρονωρ Αρονακονς καιΎίτθους και ΒίλλουΓ . . . άτιίστησΐν άπο 'Ρωμαίων, 
και ιτο\(μ6ν άλλον oide (φ* ίαντων (ττολΐμονν ον (Κ η6λ(ως αντων μιας ^ομαντίνον ηγούνται . . . και 
συνάξω και τόν&ι ft ίν μ(τ' Ονρίατθον. Ονρ'ιατθος μϊν fVl θάτ(ρα της Ιβηρίας ίτίρω στρατηγφ 

'Ρωμαίων ΚοΙιτιω [Q. Pompeio in a 1 6th century translation of Appian made from another 

MS., now lost) συν€πλ€Κ(το, κα'ι . . . fKTfivf των Κοϊντίου ί'ς {τοίις Κυιντκίονς MS.) χίλιους και 
σημύα τίνα ηρπασί .... Κοϊντίου (^Κιντίου MS.) δια δΐΐλίαν κα\ aizeipiav ουκ (πιβοηθοΰντος^ άλλ* «V 
Κορίύβη χίΐμάζοντος (Κ μίσον μ(τοτπώρου . . . του δ' ίπιόντος ϊτους Κοιντω {ΚοΙντίω Other editors) 
μίν ο ά^ίλφος .\ίμιλιανοϋ Φάβιος ^ϊάξιμος Σίρουίλίανυς (^Αιμιλιανός AIS.) ηλθ(ν eVl την στρατηγία» 

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


nowhere else in history, is a distortion of the defeat of L. Metellus mentioned by Livy. 
With two brothers, Q. ^letellus and L. Wetellus, governing the two Spains in 142 b. c. it is 
not at all surprising that mistakes should arise, and if KoiVioe in Iber. 66-7 is a corruption 
of Aowios or ΚαικιλιοΓ, there will be no conflict between Livy and Appian as to the pre- 
decessor of Fabius Servilianus. Dismissing therefore the supposed Quinctius, there still 
remains the governorship of Southern Spain for B.C. 143 to be accounted for. The 
passage in Appian referring to Aemilianus' successor Κοίιτου Πομττηίου Αϊίλου is obviously 
quite corrupt. The insertion of τοΟ before ΑυΧου (Schweighauser, followed by Mendelssohn) 
does little to mend matters. There is no point in the mention of the father's praenomen and 
there is clearly a confusion in the text between this person and the KoiWm ϊίομπηίω ACXa> 
mentioned in I6er. 76. That Q. Pompeius was consul in b.c. 141 and succeeded Q. Metellus 
as governor of Northern Spain in the same year (cf. I. 174). His cognomen was Rufus, so 
that editors bracket ΑυΚω in ch. 76. In any case this Quintus Pompeius cannot be the 
successor of Aemilianus in B.C. 143, and the best course seems to be to fall back on the 
statement of Valerius Ma.ximus (is. 3. 7, v. sup.) that Q. IMetellus governed uiramque 
Hispaniam. Seeing that Aemilianus governed both provinces for two years, there is not the 
least difficulty in supposing that his successor did the same for one, but that in the second 
year a separate governor was sent to the Southern province. On this hypothesis we would 

suggest that Κούτου Πομπ?7ίου ACKov in Iber. 65 is corrupt for Κοίκτου Κπικιλίου MerAXou, and 

that the following words ό 6e άδίΧφος αίτοϋ Μάξιμο! Αίμιλιαι/ο!, which are simply omitted by 
editors, really contained a reference to the brother of Q. Metellus, L. Metellus. The 
sentence is in that case incomplete and the lacuna may well have supplied some details 
about the events of b.c. 143-2 which would have made ch. 66 much more intelligible. 
Our conclusion therefore is that the divergence between Livy and Appian's account of the 
war against Viriathus is due less to mistakes on the part of Appian than to the extra- 
ordinary perversions of the proper names in the MS. of the Iberica, and that Appian's 
chronology of this war can without much difficulty be made consistent with the newly found 

For the sake of clearness we append in parallel columns a list of the governors of 
Southern Spain from b.c 145-37 as they are known from the two epitomes of Livy, 
compared with the list given by ISIommsen. Concerning the governors of Northern Spain 
there is no dispute, Q. Fabius Maximus Aemilianus holding office in b.c. 145-4, Q• Caecilius 
Metellus in b.c. 143-2, Q. Pompeius Rufus in r.c. 141-0, and I\L Popillius Laenas in 
B.C. 139-8:— 

B.C. Livy. Mommsen. 

'45~4 Q• Fabius Maximus Aemilianus. Q. Fab. Max. Aemilianus. 

"43 (Q• Caecilius Metellus cons. ?) Quinctius praetor. 

142 L. Caecilius Metellus cons. Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus cons. 

141 Q. Fab. Max. Servilianus proc. Q. Fab. Max. Sen'ilianus proc. 

140 Q. Fab. l\Iax. Servilianus proc. Q. Servilius Caepio cons. 

(Later Q. Servilius Caepio cons.) 

139 Q. Servilius Caepio proc. Q. Servilius Caepio proc. 

138 D. lunius Brutus cons. D. lunius Brutus cons. 

168-9. Epit. mentions the triumph of Mummius at the end of Book 52, L. Mummius 
de Achads Iriumphavil, signa aerea marmoreaque el tabulas piclas in Iriumpho itilit. Epit. 53 
begins with a mention of Appius Claudius, consul in b.c. 143; hence the triumph of 
Mummius has naturally been assigned to b.c. 145, the year after the destruction of Corinth. 


The distribution of the works of art mentioned by the papyrus is to be connected, as 
Kornemann remarks, not with Mummius' triumph, which can hardly have taken place so 
late as b.c. 142, but with his censorship which occurred in that year. By oppida are meant 
the country towns of Italy, and perhaps of the provinces as well. 

1 7 1-2. On the victory of Q. Fabius (Maximus Servilianus) cf. Epit. 53 a Q. Fahio 
proconsule pars magna Lusitaniae expugnatis aliquot urhibus recepta est, and, for the 
chronology, 1. 167, note. 

174. This defeat of Q. Pompeius by the Numantines agrees with the received 
chronology; cf. Epit. 54 ad init. and 1. 167, note. For d\evictii\s cf. 1. 185. 

175. The defeat of the Romans by the Scordisci, a Pannonian tribe, is a new fact. 
The Roman commander may have been the other consul, Gn. Caepio. 

176. The corruption q{ Sapienk into Salasso seems to be due to a reminiscence of the 
campaign of Appius Claudius against the Salassi in B.C. 143; cf. Epit. 53. 

177-8. What was this obviously important measure due to Appius Claudius, one of the 
most striking figures at this period ? The papyrus fails us at the most critical point, and 
in the absence of any other reference to this reform, we are reduced to conjectures. We 
have adopted in 1. 177 duos '\dekctus\ a suggestion of Mr. Wardc Fowler based on 
duo s[lipendia\ proposed by Dr. Greenidge. The old Roman system of a single annual 
levy in which the soldiers swore allegiance to a general for a single campaign could not 
survive the growth of Rome as a world-city, and though the successive modifications which 
were introduced in the later period of the Republic cannot be clearly traced, it is in itself 
likely enough that the wars of the third and second centuries B.C. had led to the occasional 
or frequent holding of levies twice instead of once in the year. Such an attempt to 
frustrate the constant demands of the generals as we have attributed to Appius Claudius does 
not seem improbable, and may even be connected with the refusal of the senate a few years 
later to send Scipio the reinforcements which he asked for at Numantia. 

178-81. Cf. Epit. 54, where the incident of the condemnation of Silanus by his father 
is related more fully. 

182-4. These lines are very corrupt, and in the absence of any parallel account of the 
incident it is diificult to restore them in entirety. So much is clear that the consul 
Q. Caepio's departure for Spain was delayed by the interpellation of a tribune, but that 
Caepio successfully overcame the obstacle. It was doubtless owing to this episode that 
Caepio arrived in Spain late in the year after the defeat of Fabius Ma.\imus (11. 185-6); cf. 
1. 167, note. Assilium is for Asellum; cf. Gell. 3. 4, where a tribune called Claudius 
Asellus is mentioned as having accused the younger Scipio Africanus poslquam de Poem's 
irmmphaverat censorqucfuerat. Since Scipio was censor in b.c. 142 {Fast. Capitol), B.C. 140 
is very suitable as the year of Asellus' tribunate, reddeterbuit is probably for deterruit, and 
if ijctores is right trigem probably represents a participle ending in ens, e.g. adhibens. 
Omitting indekgem, which is hopeless, the passage may be restored thus : Quinlus Caepio 
consul . . . Tiber ium Claudium Asellum tribunum plebis interpellantem profectionem suam 
liitores . . . ens deterruit. What form the interpellation took is not clear. Did the tribune 
veto the Lex Curiata conferring imperium upon the consul? Possibly, as Greenidge 
suggests, he tried to prevent the consul from taking out his troops, as in Sail. Jug. 39 
consul impeditus a tribunis plebis ne quas paraverat copias sccum portaret. From the mention 
of the lictors it seems that Caepio actually ventured to retaliate by using force of some kind. 

185-6. On the date of Fabius' defeat see 1. 167, note. 

186-7. Valerius Maximus (iii. 2. 21) relates two exploits of Q. Occius; cf. 11. 164-6, 
note. The present incident is one of the rcliqua eius opera which Valerius Maximus 
passes over. 


188-90. A verb such as pugnavit is wanted at the beginning of I. 188, and there is 
then not room for more than two or three letters before \inae. Probably devota est 
is to be connected with aqua Ant'o (cf 11. iii and 116, where the verb does not come 
at the end of the sentence), and aqua Marcia begins a fresh sentence. On the repair 
of the aqua Anio and the construction of the aqua Marcia see Frontinus, De Aquaeduciibus 
i. 7. He there states that in B.C. 144 the praetor Marcius Re.x was commissioned to 
repair the Appian and Aniensian aqueducts and to construct a new one, his praetorship 
being extended for a year on that account. Then follows a passage which is much 
corrupted in the editions of Frontinus, and which we quote from the reproduction of 
the best MS. in C. Herschell's edition : eo tempore decemviri dum aliis ex causis libros 
Sihyllinos inspiciunt invenisse dicunlur (space in MS.; supply yi/i) aquam Martiam 
seu potius Anietiem, de hoc enim constantius traditur, in Capitolium perduci, deque ea re 
in senatu M. Lepido pro collegia verba faciente actum Appio Claudia Q. Caecilio consulibus 
(b. c. 143); eandemque post annum tertium a Lucio Lenlulo relractatam C. Laelio Q. Ser- 
vilio C07isulibus (b. c. 140), sed utroque tempore vicisse gratiam Marcii Regis atque ila in 
Capitolium esse aquam perductam. Frontinus' statements about the construction of the 
aqua Marcia are thus in complete accord with Livy, from whose history they were no 
doubt derived. But what is the meaning of seu potius Anienem, de hoc enim constantius 
traditur, and has this anything to do with the mention of the aqua Anio in 1. 188? That 
passage in the papyrus is unfortunately extremely obscure. If devota est is correct, it 
must mean that the Anio aqueduct was consecrated to some deity; but devota does not 
seem the right word, and it is more likely to be corrupt, possibly for some word like rencvata 
or refecta. The aqua Marcia began not far from Tibur, the water being apparently 
taken from a tributary of the river Anio from which the aqua Anio was also derived. 
But the two aqueducts were quite distinct, and seu potius Anienem, de hoc enim constantius 
traditur seems, as Reid remarks, to indicate that there were two interpretations of the 
oracle, one permitting the aqtia Anio to be brought to the Capitol, the other the aqua 
Marcia, but the general opinion was in favour of the former interpretation ; cf. the 
statement in 1. 189 that the construction of the aqua Marcia was contra Sibyllae carmina. 
Since Frontinus implies that the aqua Anio was not carried up to the Capitol, to read 
in 11. 189-90 aqua Anio (<•/) aqua 3iarcia in Capitolium . . . perductae is unsatisfactory, 
apart from the difficulty of placing a stop after devota est. 

192. Probably the scribe wrote urbetilia meaning urbe ct Italia; cf. Val. Max. i. 3. 2 
C. Cornelius Hispallus praetor peregrinus M. Popilio Lacnatc Cn. Calpurnio coss. edicto 
Chaldaeos intra decimum diem abire ex urbe atque Italia itissit, a passage no doubt based 
upon Livy. 

i93~4• On the Lex Gahinia tabellaria see Cic. Legg. iii. 33. Cicero says that it was 
lata ab homine ignoto et sordido, which confirms the present reference to Gabinius' base 
ancestry. What degree of relaiionship to the verna was alleged by Livy is uncertain. 
verna\e filius is unlikely, for the son of a slave could not be made tribune, and though two 
cases at least of the son of a freedman becoming tribune are known (ISIommsen, Staats- 
recht,\. p. 460), the phrase vernae filius does not suggest the meaning 'son of freedman' or 
' of a frecdwoman,' though perhaps not incompatible with it. vernde nepos is better, but 
of course some more indefinite word may have been employed. It has been generally 
supposed that A. Gabinius the tribune was the son of the Gabinius who held a command in 
Illyria under L. Anicius in b.c. 167 (Livy 4,'',. 26); but this is quite uncertain. 

195-6. As Warde Fowler suggests, it is probable that these two lines refer to the 
mutiny of Caepio's cavalry mentioned by Dio (Fr. 78 Boissevain), in consequence of his 
apportioning to them a specially dangerous operation. Caepio had to take refuge from 



their violence in flight, and with this clue the passage may be restored on the lines which 
we have suggested. Since a nail is not a very effective weapon of attack, clavo may be 
altered to clava, a ' cudgel ' or ' foil.' Reid well compares Oros. v. 9 clavae ictu (of Tiberius 
Gracchus' death). 

197-8. The nimes of the murderers of Viriathus are not given in Epit., but occur in 
Appian, Iber. 74, where they agree with the papyrus, and in Diodorus exc. c. 24, where 
Nikorones is found instead of Minurus. 

201-2. For the refusal of a reward to Viriathus' murderers cf. Dio, Fr. 80, and Eutro- 
pius, iv. 16. Appian {Ibtr. 74) mentions the bribe, but not the refusal, διαφθαρίντα ίπο τον 
Καΐ7Γΐωι/ο; θώροι; τί ^fyoAoit και ίποσχία-ισι noWais. The Epitome does not mention either, 
but has Viriathus a prodiloribus consilio Servilii Caepionis inler/ecius esl. From the fact 
that the refusal took place in the year after Viriathus' death it clearly came from the senate; 
and if there is any truth in the story of Dio and Eutropius about the answer given to the 
murderers that the Romans did not approve of a general being killed by his own soldiers, 
this must have been made by the senate, not, as they state, by Caepio. 

202-5. Cf. Epit. 55 P. Nasica, cui cognomen Serapion fuit ab iriidenie Curialio Iribuno 
pubis imposiium, el D. lunio Bruto consuUbus delectum habentibus in conspectu iironum res 
saluberrimi exempli facta est: nam C. Malicnus accusatus est apud tribunes plebis quod exer- 
cilum in Hispania deseruisset, damnatusque sub/urea din virgis caesus est, el seslertio nummo 
veniit. tribuni plebis quia non impetrarent ut sibi denos quos vellenl mililes eximere liceret, 
consules in carcerem duci iusserunt. The papyrus presents several new details. In the first 
place the condemnation of deserters (11. 207-9) comes after the dispute with the tribunes, 
not before it. Besides the probable mention of Curiatius, to whom Cicero {Legg. iii. 9) 
assigns the responsibility for throwing the consuls into prison, the papyrus names another 
tribune, Licinius, thus justifying the plural tribuni in Epit. From 1. 205 it appears that the 
imprisonment was unpopular and that the tribunes had to yield. For the use of multa 
by Livy in the general sense of ' penalty ' cf. 24. 16. In 1. 202 Scipi'on'ein is very doubtful. 
There may have been some corruption as in the case of Decimum Brulum in 1. 203. 

205-7. (flb) omnibus luctus seems a better correction of omnib. lucti than omnibus 
luctui, though whether Livy would have used luctus is doubtful ; cf. note on 1. no. These 
lines refer to the death in b.c. 138 of a popular tribune who ' having done much for the 
good of the people expired amid universal regret.' His name was given at the end of 

I. 205. It would be expected that this individual was important enough to be known to 
history, and, as Warde Fowler and Reid suggest, there may well be a connexion between 

II. 205-7 ^"'1 ^ passage in Pliny {H. N. xxi. 10) florum quidem populus Romanus honorem 
Scipioni tantum habuit. Scrapie cognominabatur propter similitudinem suarii cuiusdam 
negolialoris. obierat in tribunatu plebei admodum gratus dignusque A/ricanorum familia, nee 
erat in bonis funeris impensa. asses ergo contulit populus ac funus elocavit quaque praeterfere- 
batur flores e prospectu omni sparsit. Whether by Scrapie Pliny meant Scipio Nasica 
Corculum, the consul of B.C. 162 and 155, or his son, the consul of B.C. 138, in either case 
the statement that he died as tribune is an extraordinary error. It is very significant that 
the papyrus also mentions the death of a popular tribune immediately after a mention 
of Scipio Nasica the younger, and, as Warde Fowler remarks, if something like Nasicae 
filitis ox f rater be restored at the end of 1. 205 and Pliny's Serapio be the same person, the 
difficulties in the Pliny passage would be largely reduced. 

207-9. '^"'cf'K ™*y be the beginning of a short sentence complete in itself. If it is 
connected with 11. 208-9, it probably refers to the part taken by the consuls in the punish- 
ment of the deserters. On this cf. the passage from Epit. 55 quoted in 11. 202-5, note, 
where only one individual, C. Matienus, is mentioned. Frontinus, however {Straleg. 


iv. I. 20), agrees with the papyrus, gut exercilum deserueranl damnati, vtrgis caesi publice 
venierunl. seslertiis singulis is equivalent to seskrlio nummo singuli. 

210-1. It is probable that these lines refer to the famous accusation of L. Aurelius 
Cotta by Scipio Aemilianus. This resulted in the acquittal of the accused because the 
judges did not wish the influence of Scipio to appear too overwhelming, if we may believe 
Cicero, Pro Afurena 58 saepe hoc viaiores nalu dicer e audivi hanc accusatoris eximiam 
digniiateni plurimum L. Cottae profnisse. noluerunt sapieniissivii homines qui turn rem illam 
iudicahani ila quemqiiam cadere in iuJicio ul nimis adversarii viribus abiecius videretur (cf. 
Divin. in Caec. 21), though Appian I^Bell. Civ. i. 22) is probably right in saying that 
bribery was employed, [propltr') magniiudinem nom'inis \vould accord very well with the 
eximia dignilas of Cicero. The objection to this interpretation is that Cicero (Pro Mur. 
and Divin. in Caecil. locc. cill) says that Aemilianus had been twice consul when he 
brought the accusation, and the second consulship of Aemilianus was in b.c. 134 while the 
event recorded in the papyrus took place in B.C. 138. Against the endence of Cicero, 
however, must be set the circumstance that in the earliest editions (based on the Codex 
Sangallensis, now lost) of the commentar)' of Pseudo-Asconius upon that passage in the 
Divin. ad Caecil. occurs the remark L. Cottam P. A/ricanus ante secundum consulaium el 
censuram dicitur accusasse. Other MSS. of Pseudo-Asconius have posl instead of ante, and 
post has generally been regarded as correct, though the remark is then rather pointless 
since it simply repeats the statement of Cicero. But the agreement between the papyrus 
and one version of Pseudo-Asconius is remarkable, though it is difficult to believe that 
Pseudo-Asconius can be right in placing the trial before Scipio's censorship, which look 
place in bc. 142. The question is further complicated by the uncertainty regarding the 
nature of the accusations made against Cotta and the official standing in which he had 
rendered himself liable to them. Was he the consul of B.C. 144 or the consul of b.c. 119 
(so Jahn in his note on C\c. Brut. 81).'' If the former, the date which the papyrus suggests 
for the trial, b.c. 138, is more suitable than Cicero's. If the latter, then Cicero's date is the 
more probable, for the younger Cotta might well have been praetor about B.C. 133-29, and 
his insignificance would suit the peculiar feature of the case which seems to have impressed 
itself upon the popular imagination. 

On the whole, in spite of the evidence of Appian who connects the acquittal of Cotta 
with C. Gracchus' law de iudiciis, and the circumstance that Cicero mentions it {Div. in 
Caec. I. c.) together with the trial of Aquillius which certainly seems to have taken place 
after Scij)io's return from Numantia, we incline to the view not only that Livy placed the 
trial of Cotta in b.c. 138 but that he was right in so doing. Cicero, in the Pro Murena 
passage at any rate, had a point to make which would be helped by assigning the trial to 
the period after Scipio's second consulship, and it is not difficult to suppose him guilty of 
a chronological error in a speech. Moreover, the commentary of Pseudo-Asconius seems 
to indicate that there were ancient doubts as to Cicero's correctness on this matter ; and if 
Livy was right with regard to the date of the trial, L. Cotta was probably the consul of 
B.C. 144, who, as Valerius Maximus states (vi. 4. 2), was in that year prevented by Scipio 
from going to Lusitania, and against whom Scipio may well have continued to bear 
a grudge. 

212. Lusilani vaslali: the proceedings of D. Junius Brutus in Southern Spain are 
meant; cf. Epit. 55 Junius Brutus consul in Hispania iis qui sub Viriatho militaveranl 
agros el oppidum dedit, quod Valenlia vocatum est, Appian, Iber. 71, and notes on 11. 167 
and 216-7. 

a Ν umantinjs clades accepta : for the restoration cf. 1. 175. The allusion is to the 
defeat of 1\I. Popilius; cf. Epit., which is more detailed, and 1. 167, note. 

I 3 


213-4. C(. Epit. which is longer in its account of Antiochus' death but mentions it at 
the end of the book after the successes of Brutus, and omits the detail that Diodotus took 
possession of Syria. The year to which Antiochus' death is referred by the papyrus 
(B.C. 138) conflicts with the date (b.c. 143-2) recently proposed by Niese {GescA. d. gr. u. 
mak. St. iii. p. 283). chiefly on the evidence of coins. 

zid-l• Cf. Epit. D. lunius Lusilaniam triginla urbium expugnalionibus usque ad occa- 
sum el Oceanum perdomuit ; el cum fluvium Oblivionem Iranstre nollenl mililes ereptum signt- 
fero si'gnum ipse Iranslultl, el sic ut Iransgrederentur persuasil. The account of Book 55 in 
the papyrus probably ended here. 

218-25. This fragment which was gummed on to Col. iv probably, if Sullanis is 
correct, belonged to a much later book. 

226-32. This fragment was gummed on to Col. v. 

669. Metrological Work. 

17-5 X 153 '■w• 

On the recto of this papyrus are parts of two columns of an account of 
corn, mentioning the second = first and third = second years, i.e. of Diocletian 
and Maximian (a. D. 285-6 and 386-7). On the verso, written in a cursive 
hand not more than a few years later than the writing on the recto, are parts 
of two columns of a series of metrological tables concerning measures of length 
and area. As in the contemporary metrological fragment from Oxyrhynchus 
(9 verso) the spelling is bad, and from the unsystematic way in which the 
details are arranged they seem to be private memoranda compiled from a larger 
treatise. Lines 1-4 deal with the σγοινίον, the measure of length usually 
employed in land-surveys, of which the square was the aroura. In II. 5-8 we 
have a general description of cubits arranged according to the three dimensions 
of space ; 11. 9-10 treat of the οΐκοττίδικό? πήχυ?, a peculiar kind of cubit which 
differed from the three previously mentioned, and 11. 11-24 of the measurements 
and uses of the ξύΚον. Col. ii begins with a list of measures of length in which 
Graeco-Egyptian and Roman names are, as would be expected at this period, 
mixed (11. 26-30). There follows (11. 30-42) a table of the sizes of these from 
the δάκτυλο? or ταλαιστης to the άκαινα or perhaps αμμα. Then begins another 
section describing the δάκτυλο?, in the middle of which the papyrus breaks off. 
In both columns the lines are incomplete, and it is impossible in some cases to 
fill up the lacunae ; but the papyrus usefully supplements the existing evidence 
concerning the σχοιί'ίον and οΐκοπίδικόί πζ/χυ?, and provides some interesting new 
information about the names and length of different kinds of τ^χίΐϊ used in 
Egypt. The section dealing with the ζύλοι; most of which can be restored with 


certainty, not only shows that there were two kinds of ξύλα which stood to each 
other in the ratio of 9 : 8 , but provides an important indication of the size of 
that much discussed measure, the νανβιον, which was probably a cubic ξύλον ; cf. 
note on 11. 11-20. 

It is to be hoped that the whole subject of Graeco-Egyptian metrology 
will soon be rehandled by a new writer. The Metrologie of Hultsch is now 
antiquated, and the recent articles of the veteran metrologist in the Archiv fitr 
Papyrusforschung and Abhand. d. kon. Sachs. Ges. d. Wiss. 1903: Die Ptole- 
vtdischeK Miinz- und Rechnungswerte, show an inability to appreciate the new 
evidence of papyri. 

Col. i. 

[e^ei TO σγοινίον\ το γΐωμ^τρικοί' ωγδοα η, 

[το Se oySoov «χίί] τ^ήχΐί Φ, ωστΐ ΐχαν τΙ> 

[σγοίνίον το γ€ω]/ί€τ/)[ίκ]όί' πηχα)ΐ> ας•• 

[το 8ζ ]κ6ι> ΐστιν πήχεων ρ. 

5 [ό (ύθνμίτρι]κοί ιτήχ^ίί5 kcrriv 6 κατά 

[μήκος μόνον] μ€τρονμΐνοί, (μβαδικο5 

[Sk ό κατά μήκο]ί και πλάτοί, aTtpebs Se δ κα- 

[τα μήκοί και πλ]άτοί και βάθος ηται νψοί. 

[ό ] . S (ρ)Ικοπίδικος ηήχ^ις ?- 

ΙΟ [)(€t ίμβαδικονς τΓή]χΐί ρ. 

[τω δι ξνλω καταμ]€τρΐ[τα]ι τα νανβια• το μίν βα- 

[σιλικδν ΐστι ΐΓ]ηχων γ, 

[παλαιστών ] ιη, 

[δακτύλων ] οβ. 

15 [το δΙ ] ίστιν πηχών ββ', 

[παλαιστών ] ις•, 

[δακτύλων ] ζδ. 

[ωστ (χ€ΐν το σχοινίον] το γ(ωμΐτρικον 

[ζνλα βασιλικά ] λβ, 

20 [ξύλα ] λτ. 

[ τ(τ]ΐ}αγώνου e^ei ξνλον α, 

ι ]' 


δη]μ6σιοΐ' vav- 

25 [/3' 

1. 1. όγδοα. 3• 1. πηχοί. 5. 1. ^ιηχυς. 8. 1. ητΜ. 9• «οτίδ^οί Pap. 

1. πήχυί. 1 9• λ of λ^ corr. from ο. 

Cul. ii. 

μίτρων ί$η ίστϊν τ\άδν δάκτυλοί 
naXeaTTjS λιχ{ΐ'\αί σττ[ίθαμη πους πυγων 
ττήχυ! βήμα ivXof [όργνια κάλαμοί 
aKeva άμμα πΧίθρον [lovyepov στάδι- 

30 ον δίαυλοι^ μίλιον. δ[ 

οι β παλίσταΐ λί^{ΐ'}α[Γ, οί γ παλίσταϊ 

σπιθαμή, οί δ πούί α[ , οί e 

πήχνς λινοϋφικοί [και ήτοι 

ττυγών, οΐ τ παλΐσταΐ [ηήχυί δημό- 

35 0-IOS κβ τΐκτονικόί, οι [ζ παλίσταΐ πήχν! 

Νιλομβτρικόί, οί η πήχ^ν! 

Οί ι βήμα, βήμα δι ίστι[ν ή διάστασι^ 
των ποδών, οί γ πήχ[€ΐί ζύλον δη- 
μόσιο^ν, οί δ οργυιά, οργνιά δΐ ΐστιν 

40 7J δίάστασίί των ^j.pS)[v, οί . πήχίΐ5 

κάλαμο?, οί τ/?' άκίνα, οί [ 

οι ΰσι πήχ^ίί. [ 

δάκτνΧοί ω πάντα κατ[ τού- 
τοι» μίζονα και σννμΐτρα [και τα ίλάσ- 

45 crova τούτου μΐσ€ΐτίυίται [ 

5 ...[.] . λ,χΚ•] . λ;χ/ 

27. 1. παληιστήί : SO in 11. 31, 34- 33• λινούφιχΟΓ Pap. 35• '• 

Pap. 39• opy^"» Pap. 42. πηχιι' Pap. 

37• °'' 

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


100 cubits. The linear cubit is that which is measured by length alone, the plane 
cubit is that which is measured by length and breadth ; the solid cubit is that which 
is measured by length and breadth and depth or height. The . . . building cubit contains 
100 plane cubits. 'Savβίa are measured by the i^Xoy; the royal ξύ\ον contains 3 cubits, 

18 παλαισταί, "J 2 διίκτυλο/, while the . . . ξύ\ον contains 2§ cubits, 1 6 παλαισταί and 

64 hUKTv\oi ; so that the schoenium used in land-survey contains 32 royal ξί\α and 36 

. . . ζυΚα. 

31—41. '2 πηλαισταί make a λιχόί, 3 τ^οΚαισταΙ a σπιθαμή, 4 παλαιστηί an (Egyptian?) 

foot, 5 a cloth-weaver's cubit . . . , 6 παλαισταί a public and a carpenter's cubit, 7 πί.λαισταί 
a Nilometric cubit, 8 παλαισταί a . . . cubit, 10 παλαισταί a βήμα, which is the distance 
of the outstretched feet. 3 cubits make a public ξίλον, 4 cubits an opyvia, which is the 
distance of the outstretched hands. . . cubits make a κάλαμο!, 6§ an άκαινα.' 

1-4. On this σχοινίην, which was unknown when Hultsch wrote his Melrolc^ie, see 
Kenyon, P. Brit. Mus. II. p. 130, and P. Tebt. I. p. 386. The details of the papyrus 
exactly fit the previous evidence, which was that the σχοίνίον corresponded to the ancient 
Egyptian measure klul or khel η nuh of 100 royal cubits, but nevertheless was divided 
into the series \, \, j^g, 3^5 and so on like the aroura. The papyrus now shows that 
in surveying land the σχοινίον was sometimes treated as having 96 cubits, probably for 
the sake of convenient fractions, but that there was also a σχοινίον of 100 cubits. The 
name of the latter in 1. 4 may be οΙκοτ.Μκόν. The ratio of these two σχοινιά of 96 and 
100 cubits corresponds, as Mr. Sm}ly remarks, to the ratio of 24 : 25 between two kinds 
of cubits in Roman times ; cf. note on 11. 34-5. 

9-10. The οϊκοτΓίδικόί πήχν: was supposed by A. Peyron (P. Taur. I. pp. 133-6) 
to be a parallelogram measuring 100 cubits by i cubit. His explanation, which has 
been accepted by all editors, is now confirmed by the papyrus, which states that an 
oiVon-fSiicot π^,χνί contained 100 square cubits. The adjective lost in the lacuna is very 
likely π<ριστ{ ) which is found in P. Brit. Mus. 119 and Wilcken, Osl. II. 1301 before 
πήχιΐί as a measure of area. But how the abbreviation is to be resolved is uncertain. 
Wilcken (Ost. I. p. 780) suggests ίΓίρ«ττολτικόί : πίριστατικόί seems to us more likely. 

11-20. The restoration of this important passage, though at first sight it may seem 
rather hazardous, is really practically certain. It is clear from το μίν in 1. 11 that the 
figures in 11. 12-4 are contrasted with those in 11. 15-7, and since those in 11. 12 and 15 
refer to πήχ^κ, those in II. 13 and 16 must refer to παλαισταί, of which there were 6 in 
an ordinary πήχνί (cf. II. 34-5), and those in II. 14 and 17 to δάκτυλοι of which 4 make 
a παλαιστής. This being granted, the figures in II. 12-7 refer to a measure of length, 
and the substantive to be supplied with τό μίν cannot be νοίβων, which is known to 
be a measure of cubic capacity. There is only one measure of length known to have 
contained 3 πήχαι, and that is the ξΰλον (1. 38), and though no ξίλον of 2| πήχιΐ! was 
known previously, the fact that in 11. 38-9 the ξίλον of 3 πήχιΐ! is called δημόσιον indicates 
that, as would be expected, more than one kind was in use. If then τό μίν in 1. n 
means a particular kind of ξίλον, some such restoration as [τω δί ξίλω κaτaμeτptJa\ 
becomes necessary, and the correctness of this hypothesis is confirmed by II. 18-20. 
The figure in 1. 20 stands to that in I. 19 in the same proportion (9 : 8) as those in 
11. 12-4 to those in 11. 15-7. τΰ -γιωμίτρικόν (1. i8) has already (1. i) been applied to 
the σχοιί'ίοΐ', and I. 19 with the restoration suggested will be the corollary of 1. 3. The 
only difficulty that arises is that the ξίλον of 3 πήχπϊ is in I. 11 called βα[σίλικύν while 
in 1. 38 it is said to be 6η^μάσι[ο'ν ; but in view of the extent to which δ>;/ιόσιοί in Roman 


times supplanted the Ptolemaic term βασΐΚικό: (e. g. in connexion with τράπιζα and yfapyat ; 
cf. 500. 13, note), this objection is not serious. The chief interest of this section about 
the ξϋΧον lies in the light which it throws upon the size of the ναίβιον (1. 1 1). On 
that obscure cubic measure used in digging operations see P. Tebt. 5. 15, note, and 
P. Petrie III. From the fact that the ξύλον was the particular measure used for calculating 
νανβια, it is difficult to avoid the inference that a νανβιην was a ^ΰλον in length, and 
since there is every reason to think that its dimensions were equal, most probably 
a ναϋβίον was a cubic ξί\ον, and as there were two sizes of ξύλα so there were also 

two kinds of ναΰβια. 

21-5. The subject of these lines is obscure; but from the occurrence of τιτράγωνον 
in 1. 2 1 it appears that some area was under discussion. It is not unlikely that τό μίν 
μηκοί is to be supplied at the beginning of 1. 21 and [τό 8ϊ πλάτο! ξίλην] in 1. 22, and 
that the four-sided figure in question was the square face of a ναΰβιοί' or cube measuring 
3 ττηχ(ί! each way. ναϋβια are probably still under discussion in 1. 24. 

26-30. For this list of measures of length cf the Tabulae Heronianae, especially 
I (Hultsch, Script. Metrol. i. pp. 182 sqq.). 

29. ά /tfra : both forms OKtva and ϊίκαινα are commonly found, but the latter is the more 
correct ; cf. Hultsch, op. cit. p. 29. 

30. It is probable that the list ended with μίλιον like those in Tabulae Heronianae 
ΠΙ and VII. The only larger measures of length were the σχοινοί and παρασάγ/η?. 
δ[ may be the beginning of δάκτυλοι, since the following details proceed in an ascending 
scale, and ought to have begun with the smallest measure. But we should expect 
ΟΪ S δάκτυλοι πηλαιστήί, which is much too long, and the δάκτυλος has a section devoted 
to it in 11. 43 sqq. 

31. The size ascribed in the papyrus to the λιχάί, στηθαμή (1. 32), ττυ-γών (1. 34), 
βήμα (I. 37). opyvin (1. 39), and άκαινα (1. 41), agree with the statements of the Tabulae 
Heronianae and add no new facts. 

32. The names given by the ancient metrologists to the ordinary foot of 4 παλαισταί 

to distinguish it from the 'Ρωμαϊκά! or Ιταλικός nous of 3^ παλαισταί are βασιλικός, ϋτολίμαικός, 

and Φιλ(Γπιρικ(!Γ ; but none of these will suit. Α[ιγύπτίθΓ is not unlikely ; the first letter 
is certainly a or λ, δ or μ being excluded. 

33. και might be supplied in 1. 32 instead of oi «, which would then follow λινοΰφικός; 
but no cubit smaller than the normal one of 6 παλαισταί was known previously, and it is 
therefore much more probable that the ' cloth-weaver's cubit ' contained 5 παλαισταί 
than 4. 

34-5. This cubit of 6 παλαισταί is the common πήχυς, found in the Tabulae 

Heronianae, but is there also called λιθικός and ξυλοπριστικός. A ττήχυς τ/λαοΓ ^υλικός τικτονικάς 

occurs in P. Brit. Mus. 154. 7 ; for δημ6]σιος cf 1. 38 ξύλον δη]μόσι[ο]ν and 11. 11-20, note. 
There was another cubit introduced into Egypt in Roman times which stood to the 
cubit of 6 παλαισταί in the ratio of 25 : 24 (Hultsch, ap. Wilcken, Osl. I. p. 753), but 
this does not seem to be mentioned here by the papyrus, though it is perhaps, as 
Mr. Smyly suggests, implied by the number, 96, of cubits in a σ;^οιΐ'ίοΐ' in 1. 3. 

35-6. The title ^!ιλομ€Γρικος πήχυς is new, but that the cubit used in measuring 
the rise and fall of the Nile contained 7 παλαισταί instead of 6 was known from the 
inscriptions on the subject at Elephantine; cf. C. I. G. 4863. This cubit of 7 παλαισταί 
is that normally used in official measurements upon ancient Egyptian monuments, and 
Mr. Smyly thinks that it was also employed in measuring the mysterious άωίλια which 
occur in the Petrie papyri. Its usual title (not found here) was the ' royal ' cubit 
(Hultsch, Introd. to Scrip/. Metrol. p. 25, (fee, is wrong on this point). 


36. This cubit of 8 παλαισται ΟΓ 2 feet is frequently mentioned in the Tabulae 
Heronianae, but without any special designation. Since it was apparently introduced 
into Egypt by the Romans (Hultsch, Script. Metrol. p. 42, Metrol. p. 618), 'Ρωμηικόί 
or ΊταλικίΪΕ is very likely to be supplied in the lacuna. 

37. The /3ίμα of 10 παλαισται is the ordinary one, but βήματα of 8 and 12 παλαισταί 

also occur; cf. Hultsch, Scrip/. Metrol. pp. 194. 3 and 197. 23. 

38-9. No Ιύλοί' except that of 3 cubits was known previously ; on the δι;/χόσιον 
and the other ^vKov with which it was contrasted see 11. 11-20, note. 

40. The κάλαμοΓ, which was according lo Tabulae Heronianae I an ancient Egyptian 
land-measure, is stated in the same table (Hultsch, Script. Metrol. p. 183. 3) to contain 
6| cubits or 10 feet of 4 παλαισταί. This is also the size assigned in the Tabulae 
Heronianae to the άκαι,να or Mtva; cf 1. 41. Hence Hultsch supposed that κάλαμος 
and ακΜΐ/α were convertible terms. But from the position occupied by the κάλαμος here 
between the opyvta of 4 πήχ^α and the (ίκαινα of 6|, its size should be not 6| but 
something between 4 and 6§ cubits. A μίτρην τοϊι καλάμου which differs apparently from 
the ordinary κάλαμος occurs in a passage quoted by Hultsch, op. cit. p, 153, but the 
language seems to be corrupt, and if Hultsch is right in inferring from it a κάλαμος 
of 1 1 cubits in length, that cannot be the κάλαμος meant here. There is more reason 
to connect the κάλαμος of the papyrus with the κάλαμο? of 27^ παλαισταί mentioned by 
Pediasmus, a Byzantine writer of the fourteenth century (Hultsch, op. cit. i. p. 58 and ii. p. 147)• 
This κάλαμος would Contain 4I cubits of 6 ηαλαισταί, and 4I would satisfy the conditions 
which, as we have said, the number found in 1. 40 would be expected to fulfil. Assuming 
that this is correct, the κάλαμος of 4f cubits is much older than has been supposed ; 
but there is no particular objection to this, for the information provided by ancient 
metrologists is extremely defective. 

41-2. After the ακαινα, which has the customary 6| cubits, came no doubt a higher 
unit of measurement, very likely the άμμα (40 cubits), which follows the άκαινα in 1. 29. 
o» ίίσι πηχtις may be corrupt for oi (a figure) πήχ(ΐς, followed by another unit of measurement 
omitted. But it is more likely to be something like τοί]ΐ1οί tiVi πί)χί« (cf. 654. i), 'so 
much for cubits.' 

43-5. The meaning is that the 8άκτνλος being the smallest measure of length 
with a name, all other measures of length are referred to it as the unit ; cf. Tabulae 

Heronianae I and Η ΐλάχιστον Si τούτων ί'στϊ &άκτνλος κα\ πάντα τα (λάττονα μόρια καλίΐται, 

and ΠΙ Βάκτυλος πρωτός «στίκ ώσπ<ρ και μονάς. Line 43 '^ probably to be restored 

κατίαμίτρΰται τα τοι;|τον, with [και ωΐηΐ. 44> cf. 1. II. 

670-678. Poetical Fragments. 

These nine miscellaneous pieces in verse do not appear to be extant, but are 
too fragmentary to call for detailed treatment. 

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


and apparently a reference to Hephaestus in 1. ii. Some corrections have been 
made by a second hand, which also inserted the diaeresis in 1. 26. 

671 is from a series of epideictic epigrams, as is made clear by the heading 
in 1. I Ttjay hi' tX-noi [\oyov<s . . . , a formula frequent in the Anthology (cf e.g. 
Atith. Pal. ix. 126, 449, &c.). Opposite 1. 3, where the epigram commences, is 
the abbreviation vi{ ) — or iv{ ) — which may give the name of the poet, e. g. 
Nicarchus, or of the speaker. The handwriting is an irregular uncial, dating 
probably from the latter half of the third century. 

672. A small fragment from the bottom of a column, containing the latter 
parts of nine lines, written in a rather irregular uncial hand of, probably, the 
first century. Lines 4-8 may be hexameters, but the metre of 1. 9 seems to be 
different. There is no clue to the subject. 

673 contains parts of eleven lines from the top of a column, written in well- 
formed sloping uncials of the common oval type, and dating most probably 
from the third century. In the margin at the top are the beginnings of three 
blurred lines of cursive, apparently mere scribblings ; the writer was perhaps the 
{ erson responsible for some corrections and accents in the text below. This 
seems to be of a lyrical character, though the majority of the verses might 
also be hexameters. 

674. written in careful round uncials of about the latter part of the first or 
the beginning of the second century, is a fragment of a lyric poem, which may 
be by Pindar. The form lafm (1. 6) is indeed not found in the traditional 
Pindaric dialect, but it has a parallel in σΜο /os {01. iii. 14, 18). The high stops 
and the accents which have been occasionally added may be by the original 
scribe, but there is a question of a second hand in 11. i and 7 ; cf note ad loc. 

675. The upper parts of two columns of a lyrical poem written in rather 
short lines, and evidently to be classed as a paean (cf. 11. i and 12). The mention 
of Alexandria in 1. 4 is an indication of a comparatively late date, but Blass 
thinks that the piece may be by Callimachus, who is known to have composed 
μί'λτ) of this description. The paragraphus below 1. 2 may mark the commence- 
ment of a fresh strophe, but no metrical correspondence can be followed out 
between the two columns. The MS. is in a large uncial hand of an early type, 
and seems to date from about the middle of the first century. 

676. This small fragment contains the ends and beginnings of lines from 
two columns of a tragedy, written in a sloping uncial hand of the third century. 
High stops occur at 11. 2, 6 and 7, and a middle stop apparently at 1. 3. The 
correction in 1. 9 and the rough breathing in 1. 14 are no doubt original, and the 
accents may be so ; but the addition of the iota adscript in 1. 15 seems to be 



677 and 678 are fragments of comedies. 677, containing the latter parts of 
nine lines from the bottom of a column, is written in neat round uncials which 
may be assigned to the latter part of the first century. 678, from the top of 
a column, is in an upright and rather heavy calligraphic hand similar to 661, and 
probably, like that papyrus, of the latter part of the second century. The 
accents seem to have been added later. 

670. 15-6x3 7 iw 

\\(is TL δ αν aWo π . [ 
\v Se και avTOS απ[ i; 

].[..] αυτόματο? Xintv [ 
]<By [. .]καζον(ηΐ' an γΐ[ 
5 ]Xe Ταρταριησιν αλυκτ[οπ(δησι } 

]e φιΧη Xovaeief ΐπιζω[ 
ΐΓαι>]τοθΐγ [αμ]ψφΐβηκΐ τ[ 
(OS α]ρ (φη [. . . .Vijy μ^μιΊ 

]ν αστυ[φΐλί]κτον €ωσ[ 


jmieX^ . . .] τ€Κ€ί ϋι[ 
τΐχ^ιγηίΐί [και] y;co\os ί(ον . [ 
]ί προ[σθί ir]oS(uU αγαθ[ 
]ΐχ(ΐ/ω[. . .''τΐΐΐσκοτΐ . [ 



6. υ of λουσ is corrected apparently by ihe second 
18. The mistake corrected was the common one 
has happened in 1. 25. 

]νμτ][. . . ."cDi/ σ€ Teas . [ 
]o και [. . .]€ουσα φιλο[ 
]σι χωομ([ι/ . .] . και μ . [ 
V αρ (ίσωμΐσθα σιδηρ[ 

] γαρ παραιασι t(ois • [ 

] ημίΤ(ροι 7Γ . . ντοφ[ 

]ν «ν'χοί . . €σχε τα[ 
]ην 'iSe . [. .] και παλ[ 
] και Αιονυσοί e . [ 

]epoi μη δηριν iy(i\p 

]ν ΰφ ημίτΐροΐί πε[ 

]ασθαι yXvKepcov €7γ[ 
jecey Ίταϊί ουτοί e/<o[ 

hand from ι. 
of writing at for c ; the same thing 

671. Fr. (rt) 9-6 χ 7-3, Fr. {i) 15-5 χ S-i cm. 

Tivas av einoi [Xoyovs προ? [ ] . y και νυν e[ 

τον υ[ϊ\ον του At[ [ ]μΐ^[ 

/p aTpfKes αιγΧηΐσσα[ [ ] . βασιΧ[ 

κ[. . . .Vet βασιΧΐν! [ . • • • 

5 α[. . . .]ασδνσιασπ[ ι ζ [σκη]πτρον (χΐΐ . [ 

[ ] . ικΧίΐτην [ -^ρυσίον αθρησαν[ 

[ ]νη (ζησι[ αΧΧ[α] κΧνοα ί /ioy οσ[ 


. [. . . .jTTJjr ΟΤΙ τ . [ και κουρ[ο\ί . [ 

[ ^_t . τον ir€pe[ ουπω πορφνρΐηί π[ 

ΙΟ [.V . [.] θίσπΐσιον € . [ 2θ ουττω σκ77π7ρ[ 

[ ]ΐνησΐΤΐκ[ 8ηθνναί βασιλίυ κ[ 

ιμαρω aeo παιδα μα[ 

1-2. Α name, possibly Νι( ) (cf. introd.), is to be supplied after Xoyovc. Δο[ may 
be read in place of Af[ in 1. 2. This may be the top of the column. 

14. There is a break in the papyrus at this point, and four or five lines at least 
are lost. 


8 X 5-5 <^'"• 


10x4-7 '^'"• 

^ov δο[ 
]φαι λτι[ 

]ισΐ{' (Τίμησαν [ 
]ί Νηρηιδ(! 
]ηον (δι8α\θη 
]σ(ΐί ταφον αντιασ([ 
]ν• βηρ όσον f^eSiSa^([ 
ypv ίίχα €ίί πολνποικι\[ 

]ίδ(ύν θ(ρα[ 
]μ€να γλνκ[ 
] . ΐ7ηΓοβοτο[ 
5 ]νομοις ολν , [ 
]yTos ΐ'7Γοπ[ 
]ρ αΐονων ([ 
π]λοκαμοΐί θ(αΐί [ 
ΙΟ jeflfSJafioKov^ 

672. 9• The high point is really over the ν and is possibly to be connected with 
the point between >> and θ in the line before. The double point usually indicates a change 
of speaker, but is also found as a mark of punctuation, e. g. in 657. 

673. 1-2. Perhaps Πΐ(ρ]ώων θιραπων and οβρι^οττατρα, as Blass suggests. 

4. The letter before ίπποβοτο[ has been corrected. 

5. The mutilated letter before the lacuna might be e. g. μ or κ ; ? oXiTiVoi/. 

9. π^λοκπμοκ is no doubt part of a compound adjective like (ίπΧόκαμοί or καλλιπλόκαμοΓ. 

10. The doubtful r has been converted from co by a second hand, which also crossed 
out the δ. 




5-1 X5-2 cm. 

]ωί'€ΐ'α)[. ..]..[ 

jerot Αΐλφοι vaSi 
5 ]e Παρνασσού θίμ([θ\α 
]θ£ί Τΐρφθίν ιαροΐί [ 
]άματ αγλαοΐί- iSioii [ 


]ιναπο\λω[. .] . [ 
]ay• τοι S ai/r[ 
10 ]ορ0[. . .]κ[ 


Ι. The letters of this first line are smaller than those in the lines below and differently 
formed, and they might be by another hand ; but there is no trace of an erasure, nor can 
the words be an interlinear addition. 

4. If or ισ might be read in place of α between ν and δ. 

5- θί'μ/θ\α : cf. Pindar, Pj/A. iv. 180 Πηγγαίου θ(μίθ\οΐ{. Perhaps τρψ( δ< κ.τ.Χ., 
as Blass suggests. 

7. The letters of tSiois are smaller than usual and have a slight slope, while elsewhere 
the hand is upright ; they seem to have been written by the original scribe, but may 
be a marginal note or gloss. 

8. Something like an ο enclosed between two dots (cf. e.g. 16. ii. 4) has been 
written above the letter after πολλ, which is probably ω. The words may be divided ]iva 

πολλ ... or ^iv Απολλ . . . 



vaiavi φίλοστΐφαίνω] 
μΐλ7Γ[ον]τ(ς a[ ] 

1 1-8 X 14-5 cm. 

ifpay κ[α]τ(χωι/ [ ] 

Αλ(ξαΐ'[8ρ](ΐαι> . [ ] 

5 noXif [. . .] και βα[ ] 


Ke[. . .] μ(λψο[. . 
κΐλαδου παιαν[. . 
/ίίλεσί στΐψα[. . 
fviepcof π€λα[ι•ωΐ' 
15 θύμα δ(δωκατ[( . 


ομον 7r[. .]ω//€_«'[ ] σταΐί ev ω8α[ι]ί [. . 

ταΐί Se . [ ποίΚυαύνυμοι tX[. . . . 

σ7Γ0ί'5α[ [ ]?■**' ^* ψ[• 

Βοισνμ . [ [ ]oi;roj/[. . . 

ΙΟ σ(βια[ .... 

Ι. παιανι: the vesliges of the last two letters are very slight, but ι is much more 
probable than a. 

2. There is a short blank space between μ(Κιτον]τ(ς and the letter following. 

3. ι^ατίχων is very uncertain ; the letter after ν could be almost anything. 7r'o]r «χωκ 
is quite possible. 

9. Probably -δο;ϊ u/ipf. 


Col. i. 

5 X 7-4 cm. 



5 ] 

10 /Kevrpots [ 
€K της 7γ[ 
oy vii/ 7r[ 
σπασας π[ 


15 €χβ/χϋ ;ra[ 
σφάλοί S[ 
τταλαι τίτ\ 

Ι. ]ωΐ', if right, no doubt ended the line, but there would be room for two 
letters more. 

8. There is a blank space before μί>{, -which is possibly the name of the speaker, 
e. g. Mii(eXaor. Apparently there was also a slight space between this and the preceding 

16. σφάλοΓ is a word of the use of which there is no other example. The root 

is that of σφάλλίσίαί and άσφαΚψ, 




8-6 X 39 cm. 


] • <^f • [ ] Ί<ίΚ^ 

]τ/»€χίί«/ iK yiifou 

]ri Χνπησαί Tvyj:^ 

γα πΐίθαργουντα [ 

5 ] τρόπον τΓροσιο[ντ 

] τινι XaXfii [ 

^ιαν Νονμηνκ [ 

je/Doy ΐΐνΐ-γμαι μ[ 

μα TJouy 8ωδΐκα θ([ονί 

11X4 <rm. 


ΐαν Κ(λ(υη[ 


ουκ ίστιν [ 




σου : κακόν 

ω προστατ[ 
αραν δννα[ 




5 ] 




677. 6. There is a blank space in the papyrus on either side of tiki \a\fis. Probably 
two feet are to be supplied at the end of the line. 

8. (ΐνιγμαι is apparently for ϊνήικγμαι or ψΐΊγμαι. The doubtful γ might be «, but 
that gives no word. 

9. Cf. 409. 86, &c 

678. 1-7. It appears on the whole probable that the fragment preserves the 
beginnings of the lines and that there is no loss on the left side till 1. 7, which must 
have projected somewhat, owing to the column having, as often happens, a slight slope. 
But this is not at all certain, and what we have taken to be a paragraphus between 11. 4-5 
may be a rough breathing over ω. 

8. The syllable preceding τη had an acute accent. 

679-684. Prose Fragments. 

The following group of unidentified prose fragments corresponds to the 
foregoing collection of minor poetical pieces. The first, 679, is historical, and 
consists of the upper paits of two columns, both unfortunately fragmentary, 
written in neat upright uncials of the first century B. C. Military operations are 
being described, and there is a mention in 11. 2-4 of some one dispatched by an 
Alexander in Cilicia. and of a king or kingdom in 1. 42. Perhaps, then, this is 
a fragment from a history of the campaigns of Alexander the Great, and it may 
even belong to the lost work on that subject by the first Ptolemy. 


680 seems also to come from some historical work, but its sense is not 
easy to follow. Parts of 15 lines from the top of a column are preserved, con- 
taining mentions of Cilicians, Attica and the Athenians, and Soli in Cyprus. 
The hand is a sloping uncial of the middle or latter part of the third century. 
A low stop apparently occurs in 1. 3. 

681 is a piece from the top of a column containing the latter parts of 
15 lines from a geographical or historical treatise. A description of some 
Thracian tribes, among which are the Triballi and Paeonians, is given, but the 
passage is too mutilated for satisfactory restoration. The fragment is written in 
rather irregular, but not ill-formed, uncials, which may date from the second 
century ; a high stop is used. 

682. Two fragments, both probably from the same column, of which one 
of them forms the top. The graceful upright hand seems, like that of 699, to be 
a rather early example of the oval type, and it may go back to the latter part 
of the second or the beginning of the third century. The common angular sign 
is used for filling up a short line (1. 12). The pieces are part of an oration, 
perhaps a lost speech of Hyperides. 

683 contains the ends of lines of part of a column, with some traces of the 
column following, r[ and r[, opposite 11. 16 and 19, being all that is legible. 
The fragment is not easy to classify ; citations of previous writers are made in 
11. 4 and 13-3, and a Dionysius is mentioned in I. 9. The piece is written in 
rather small round uncials, which may be assigned to the latter half of the 
second century. An angular sign is used at the end of short lines. On the 
verso are parts of two lines in cursive of about the time of Septimius Severus. 

684, containing 23 nearly complete lines from the bottom of a column, is 
much more intelligible. The fragment comes from some ethical treatise, the 
comparatively late date of which is indicated by the occurrence of the form 
■ηροσ^λΐνσομαι (II. 6 and 22) as well as by the subject, the characteristics of 
sovereigns and advice for intercourse with them. The piece is written on the 
verso of the papyrus — the recto being blank — in sloping oval uncials, probably 
of the middle or latter half of the third century. 


Col. i. 
la)i/ 1Ε\\ϊ)νικ(ύν 






λρ τον iy Κιλικι 



απ(στ]α\μ(ΐΌΐ' νπ AXe 

ξαν8ρου νσ]τ(ρον .[•].. au 25 


.] . τον παραδοΟτ/ι/αι 

] . as άλλα τω μτ) eX 

] την ησυχίας € . [. 

.... λα]μβαΐΌντίί μη €ίσ 

ΙΟ jrovs τωγ καθιστώ 

των . . . .Jf ίβ διαμβρισθω 

σιν '\ον στρατοπί 

So ] . των μ€ρι 

15 letters ]νται 

15 ]Τί'"} ^fcif 

] δοξαντων 

]αν αποστΐΐ 

λ ] υπηρζταί e[t]y 

Jjjf των προ 

20 ι\ΐΓπίων α[.γκα 

ΙΟ letters \'τ(μο .[...] 




35 ου 


σ . 

α . . [.]α 
40 διο[ 

its ην κ[ 

45 ο .[ 

38-45• These lines are written smaller and closer together than the rest. 


6•5Χ4 cm. 

[. . . .]ων Κιλικων [ 
[. .]λτιστο οι δΐ ολ[ 
[. .]α. μΐγα τι . . [ 
[€]iiλθHV <f>[ 
5 Aτ'τ^κηs μίτ[ 
TOVS Aθηvaι[o]vs [ 
π αυτόν τίθΐίσιν [ 
TOVS αναστρ(ψη[ 

δΐ (IS Σoλovs τοι{ 
ΙΟ fey TOVS ev Κνπ[ρω 
[.]αι TOVS δΐ ΐζο[ 
[.]ω ιητοστρΐ-^αι [ 
[.] . as ΐ7Γΐτΐτριμ[ 
[.]ΐκτον υπο των [ 
'5 [ ]λ« ??ί 




3. « is very doubtful; the vestiges representing τ might be taken for a double point. 

14. Or υτΓογω. 

681. 11 X 7-1 cm, 

]ταρο[. .]. [ n]f)OTe 

]tf αυτά βια[• ...]... 
] . τοικ .[.].. [•]ϊ" ^°τ[• • •] • '° 
]κρονσυμ . . το . τ[. .] 
5 ] και κρατηθΐΐΊτωΙν των 

Τριβα\\λων o[i\ μΐγ α.[\]λοί κατά 
yrts ΐΐλον Γ€ 3[. .]ei 


] γίγονασι Tots a . . a . ι 
] πλαστοί τ[α)]ΐ' προσπΐ 
^γταν Τ ριβαΚ\[ΐύ\ν και 
] npoTfpoy μ^ν . , τ 
] μονην την προί τον 
κ]αθηκουσαν• ννν Se 
τ]<αν Παιονων των α 
] κα\ουμ€ν<ον• και 

6. If Ύρφαλ^αν is right not more than six letters are missing at the beginnings 
of 11. 1-9 or from seven to eight in the remainder. 

8. The letter between a and t is very likely σ. Above the ο of rots is a spot of ink 
which seems to be accidental. 


Fr. (a) 8 χ 2-8, Fr. {b) 5-1 χ 4•; cm. 

Fr. {a) [rjaty δημοκρ[ατιαΐί οι 
νομοί ΐΓαντ[(θν εισι των 
[€]ν τηι TToXeft κύριοι και 
[υ]μων ΐκασ[τ 

5 μου! ?■?•[■]•[ 

[.]y ouiif 12 letters 

Fr. (ύ) 

7 [ 12 letters ] δτιμ[. 

[ ΐΐσ]αγγΐ\ια[ 

[ 12 letters ]yiy»'€[ 
10 [ 10 „ ] τούτων [ 
αυτοΐ νομον Θη(Χΐΐν 
και Ίταυσίΐν τους fv 
TOis δικαστηριοΐί ρ[αι 
διωί απο<ρ€υγον[ταί 

15 [.] Se 8ημο[ ω 

[a]v8p€s Α[θηναιοι 

Ι. [τ]αΐΓ was probably preceded by tv. Mr, Smyly aptly quotes Hyperides, Euxenip. 

Xxi. «V ίημοκρατία κύριοι οί νόμοι ΐσονται και ai ίίσ•αγγ£λ/αι και αΐ άΚΚαι κρ'ισίΐ! κατά rms νόμους 
ίΐσίασιν els το δικαστηριον. 

8-10. Nothing need be missing at the end of these lines. 

15. [o] if dij/io[t or Λημο[σθίνηΐ or [17] 5f 6ημο[κρατια are possible supplements. 




9-3 ^ 4•4 cm- 

]τα Kvpi\ov 
]αβαση! αν 
]e φησι ras 
5 ] πολΐΐτΐΐαΐί 
]Tacray ejy τα 
]/ioytwi διαπρα 
]ασιν οι τα πε 
]τ€Γ Δίονυσι 
ΙΟ ]πλ€ . ήσαν 

]τηί .[.].. Ki 

15. ακατον may be a complete word; cf. 1. 18 «pw. 



]aj (V τηι 
]y ιστοριών 
]πο Se Tovs 
]ακατον λα 
]ντα πρΐσβίν 
]σΐν ο κοι 
]α κΐργα δι 
]ι>τωΐ' κομι 
]eivcuv ΐΐσ 



12x6-5 cm. 

. . .]τιδοσίκ ο . l'[-]iSa[ 

. . .]ν (py<ov (voi ίίσιν .[ 

, . . .^σων βονΧονται ττρα•/ματ[. . . . 

. .]v(iv ίχ€< Se Τίνα και αυ[. . . . 

(]ν€ργ€στ(ρα[ν] τ] τρόπο . . [τι ic 
χρη] μα\[λ]ον naiSfveiy TOi'[s'] προ[σ(λ(ν 
σο]μ(νονί βασιλ(ΐ η τον αξΐ(ύμ[ατοί 
τα] 8[ια]φορα τι μεν ταρασσΐΐ [. . . . 
. .] . βουσινον τι ^[e] (ννηται [τι δΐ 
ΙΟ . .]τη οψ(ΐ νπ[.] . ον τι δΐ ττ] α[. . . . 
(σ]τιν iTipov το[ί]οι;τοΐ'? ατ ...[... . 
δΐΐ] •γιγν(σ[θ]αι npos tovs βασιλΐα[ί και 

μα]λα ΐΐκοτ{<ο]ί aKfiai μ^ν yap ΐΐσ[ι . . . 
. . .]ανματ(ΰν θαλάσσιων ...[.... 

15 • •] . τον και πνρο9 [ο]νδ€ν δΐ οντω [. . . . 
. ΐ]ι και κνμαινίΐ και αναζ([ι ωί 
ΰν]μοί /3α(7(ι]λ€ω[ί] ατ€ γαρ μΐγας ω[ν και 
αν]τοκρατωρ κ[α]ι παλρ τη (ζον[σια 
χρ]α>μ(νο5 οζνί (στιν και ακατα[σ\ί 

20 Tos] και irpos re τας τίΐμαί προγ[ΐΐροί 
ϊΓ/3θ]ί Τ€ ταί κολασίίί ακωλντο! [χρη 
ονν] τον προσΐλΐνσομΐνον τω το[ιω 
Se κ]αι τηλικωδί χ[ρ]ησθαι μεν [ 

ζ. t]vcpytaT€pa[v]: the final ν scarcely fills the available space, and another letter 
may be lost. 

6. The second λ of ;ίαλ[λ]οΐ' if written would be very cramped and may have been 

9. The traces of the supposed after ].β are rather closer than they should be 

Κ 2 


both to the β and to the following υ and perhaps do not represent a letter, and on the 
other hand a narrow letter may be lost between the doubtful σ and «. βυα[σ\ινον . . . 
ίυνψου might be read, but would make no sense here. Perhaps there is some corruption. 

14. κυμάτων would be expected and should no doubt be restored (of. 1. 16 χυμαιν»); 
perhaps καυμάτων was written b)' mistake. 

18. πάλη: 1. πάλα» Or ττολλ.ν ? There is room for a letter between π and a, but 
the α seems clear. 

23. The final ν of /le» is rather spread out and was possibly the last letter of 
the line. 



685. Homer, Iliad XVII. 

12-5 X 105 cm. 

This fragment, containing the ends of II. 725-32 of the Iliad, from the top 
of a column, is of interest owing to the presence of some marginal scholia, one 
of which, that on 1. 728 mentioning a reading of the Koin;, is with little doubt 
by the original scribe, while those below were added subsequently in cursive. 
The MS. was a fine specimen of Greek calligraphy, being written with great 
care in a large, round uncial hand, very similar to that of ββΐ (Plate v). It 
is probably to be assigned, like 661, to the latter half of the second century, 
a date to which the cursive adscripts opposite 11. 730-1 also point. High and 
middle stops (11. 728-9) occur, and accents and breathings are used in the first 
scholium. There is a broad margin at the top of the column. 

725 iJTTi καπρωί 

π(ποιθ](ύί• η κ αλλ' ίτ( ίή ρ' 

] aWos• 


730 (ΤΓ6\ντο 

, Ί ti αμΓ4)0Τ<ρων 

αμ(ρι\γυοίσίν ^ -ρ,,Γμ . " . . . 


]λο« avTt [ 

728. The marginal note βλΐίίοηΐΐ}• refers to the Aristarchean method of ■writing ore ίή, 
namely ότ(8η, and implies that the word had the Aristarchean accent in the text. Cf. 

Schol. A on A 493 Άρίσταρχα ότ(Βή wt δηλαδή napaXoyat άνι-γίνωσκί, and the disCUSSion of the 

question in the scholia of Ammonius, 221. i. 1-8, where the ordinary accentuation is 
upheld. For the reference to the Κοινή cf. 445. 

731. The scholium appears to be an explanation of the word αμφιγίοισιν which it 
inteφrets in the sense of 'pointed at both ends'; cf Apollonius' Lexicon, s.v. rots ΐξ 

(κατίρον μίρονί γνωσαι δυναμίνον!. After μιρων something like άκρον ΐχονσιν mUSt be Supplied J 
cf. Schol. A on ν 147 ol ic μεταφορικών απο των γυίων, ότι ίκατέρωθ(ν άκρον ίχ<ι. The note 

may have been continued in a third shorter line, and there is a faint mark below the ν of 
μ(ρων which (if it be ink) would suit an e. 

732. The marginal note below this line, which should refer to 1. 733 σταίησαν των ti 
τράπΐτο χρώί, οϋδί tis (τ\η, is obscure. The only word here of which an explanation seems 
at all likely to have been given is τράπιτο, which in the Schol. Didymi is glossed ^λλάσσίτο 
ή Ιδία τοϋ προσώπου ; but the present note was phrased differently. The doubtful λ may be 
μ and four or five letters may be lost in front of it since 1. 733 is not a long one. Auun- . [ 
cannot be read. 

686 688. Homer, //?W //, ///, and XI. 

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

686. 7•3Χ5•ΐί•;«. Plate VII. 

ii. 50 [αυταρ ο κηρυ]κΐσσί λί'γνφθογγοισι 



[κήρυσσαν αγ\ορην Se κα'ρηκομοωντα^ 
[οι μίν ζκηρυ]σσον τοι S η[γΐίροντο 
[βονλην δ( πρ]ωτον μΐγαθυμ'ων 
[Νΐστορΐη παρ]α νηι IIvXoiy(v[ios 
55 [τουί ο γΐ συνκ\α\(σαί •ιτνκινη[ν 
[κΧυτΐ φίλοι Θ]€ί05 μοι ewnvilov 
[αμβροσιην SCa νύκτα μάλιστα [ 
[dSos τ€ μΐγ\θοί Τ€ φυην τ αγ[χιστα 

53- The papyrus probably read βονλην, as do the great majority of the MSS. ; but the 
lacuna is too large to give a real clue, βουλή Ludwich, with Aristoph. and Aristarch. 

54. nv\oiyei[(os : SO Lud. With AB, &C. ; Ώυληγ. SM, &C. 

56. ejfios: so MSS. and Aristarch.; uttov Zenod. 


Col. i. 

7-9 X 4-5 ^w- 

Col. ii. 

Plate VII. 

iii. 185 αιολοπ]ωλουί 




> του[ί δ (γω 
αλλ ο[τ( 

> αμφ[ω 
αλλ ο[τΐ 

ουδ α[φαμαρτοίπηί 
αλλ οτ[ΐ 


207• There is a diple against this line in Ven. A with the note on παραλλ^λωί ίξ(ίνι<τα 

και ίψίΧησα' το yap φιλί'ιν ivloTf άντΧ του ζ(νΙζ(ίν τίθησιν, 

211. Ven. Α has a diple periesligmene opposite this line. 


8-1 X 4-5 cm. 

Plate VII. 

01 δ ΐτι καμ μΐσα[ν 
as τ( λίοΰν ίφο[βησε 

[a]iev αποκτ(ΐν[(ΰν 
πολλοί δι πρη[ν(ΐί 


πασαί τη Se τ ιη αν[αφαινίται [Ατ\ρΐΐ8ί(ύ νπο [ ι8ο 

χί• «75 Ι"»?? ^ ^i ο-ν\ΐν ea^[e [αλλ] ore 8η τα[χ 

■πρώτον (πΐΐτα S[e [ιξί]σθαι τοτ€ [8η 

COS Tovs Ατρ(ΐ3{η! [Ι8η]ί eu [κορνψηίσι 

179-80• These two lines were athetized by Aristarchus and oniilted by Zenodolus; 
Ludwich prints them in small type. 

689. Hesiod, Sciihim. 

Fr. (a) 9-2 χ 3-6 cm. 

Three fragments from the top of a column, containing the concluding 
fifteen lines of the Senium of Hesiod. The text is written in round, rather heavy 
uncials of medium size, which appear to date from about the end of the second 
century. The occasional accents, &c., and the punctuation are probably due 
to the original scribe, as well as the corrections in 11. 475 and 4F0. In the 
collation we have made use of the edition of Rzach (1902) ; a couple of other- 
wise unrecorded variants occur. 

[ίττποι/Γ μαστίίτην ικοντο δ]ΐ μακ\ον Ολνμπον 
[vtos S Αλκμηΐ']ηί και κν[δα]λιμο9 Ιολ[αο5 
[KvKVOf σκνλί]νσαΐ'[τ]([ί α]π ωμωγ [τ(υ]•^(α καλά 
[νισοντ αιψα] δ €πΐΐτα 7Γ[ολί]ί' Τρηχ^ι[ΐΌ5 ι]κοντο 
470 [ιτττΓοίί ωκνηο]8(σσιν• ατα[ρ γ]λανκωττ[ις] Αθηνη 
[e^LKtT Ου\ν]μπον τε μί•γ[α]ν και 5<ομ[ά\τα πατρός- 
[Κνκνον S αν Κ]ηυ^ θαπτίΡ [κ]αι λαοί α[πΐΐ]ρ(ΰΐ' 
[οι ρ (γγνί ραιο^ πόλιας κ\ΐ[ί]τον βασιλ[η]θΐ 
[Ανθηρ Μνρμί]δοΐ'ο.Ί' τ€ πο[λί]ΐ' κ\€ΐτη[ν] τ Ιαωλκοι/ 


475 [Αρνην τ ηδ Ελ]ικηι>• πολλοί [δ (]πΐ{ι}γ(ρ[(Τ0 λα]θ! 
[τιμωντΐί Κηυκ]α φιλον μ[α]καρ([σσι βΐοισι^ν 
\του 8f ταφον και σ\ημ αϊδί[ί ποιησίν Afavjpos 
[ομβρωι χ(ΐμ(ρι]ΰΰΐ πληβων [τωί yap μιν Απ\ολ\α)ν 


[Λητοίδη^ ην<ύξ ο\τί pa /cXei[TOS• €κατομβα]ς 
480 [os Tis αγοι Πυθοιβΐ] βιη σΰ\[ασκ€ δοκΐνων 

466. μακ\[ον is for μακρόν, a Case of the common confusion of λ and p. 

473. jroXias : πόλιοΓ Rzach with E, πόληα! Other MSS. ; the papyrus reading will at 
least scan. 

474-5. Rzach follows Goettling in regarding these two lines as a later addition. The 
papyrus shows that they belong to an ancient tradition. e]rT(y(ip[fro in 1. 475 is a new 

variant ; ηγίΐρ(το, iydptro or ηγάρατο MSS. 

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

690, 691. Apollonius Riiodius, Argonautica III. 

690 13x52 fw., 691 3-3X3-3f»z. 

We here group together a couple of fragments from the third book of the 
Argonautica o{ A^oWonius Rhodius, but derived from two distinct MSS. The 
larger fragment, 690, which is from the bottom of a column and comprises 
11. 727-45, is in a third century semi-uncial hand. A variety of lection signs 
occur, of which the marks of elision are certainly due to the original scribe ; 
the breathings and accents have rather the appearance of being a later addition. 
691, containing parts of 11. 908-14, is earlier in date, being written in rather 
heavy, but not very regular, round uncials, which may be attributed to the 
second century. The texts are remarkable for the confirmation of two con- 
jectures. Person's ναυτίλοι for ναΐται appearing in 1. 745, and Stephanus' 
correction of ^ero for κατά in 1. 909. Our references to the two chief codices, 
the Laurentianus and the Guelferbytanus, are taken from the edition of 
R. Merkel (1854). 


[Χαλκιοπη ωί] νμ[μι 
[ωί (pi<o μη γ]αρ μ[οι 


[ηωί μηδΐ μ(] 8ηρ[ον 691. 

730 [et ert σης '^v]yr]s n[po(pfpeaTepov 

[σων θ]ΐΐην \ο]ι δη μοι [ 

[κηίδΐμονίς Τ€ φίλοι και 

[φη]μι κασί-γνητην re [ gio 

[ίσον] (net κίΐνοΐί μ€ τ[(ω 
735 [νη]ιτυτιην• ως auv [ 

[αλλ] ϊθι Κ(νθ( δ' (μη[ν 

[λησο]μαι (ντννονσ[α 
738 [οισ]ομαι (is Εκατηί θ[(λκτηρια 
740 [ωί] η γ' eK θαλαμοιο [ 

[αν]τοκασιγνητηί [ 

[at5]cuy τ€ στυγ<ρον [re 

[τοια] nape^ οΰ πάτρ[ογ 

[ννζ] μΐν ετΓβίτ 67γ[ι yaiav 
745 [ναυ]τιΚοι ety '■Ελίκην [ 

δασο]μ€σθα μ[ΐτα 
τ]α)ί δ αντ€ κακ[ωτΐρον 
α]πονοσ•φι π[(\(σθΐ 
πασηι]σι S (πικ\[οπο! 
Αισονί]δ[η]ν [ 

690. 73°• ""ί: the papyrus probably had the ordinary reading, which would quite 
fill the lacuna ; <i yt τι Merkel, ci « τι Wellauer. 

733. κασιγνητην : SO L ; 1. κασι-γνψη with G, Merkel. 

735. <us: so L (<5)s): a>s G, Merkel. 

738. The papyrus agrees with the other MSS. in omitting the line (739) cited in the 

scholia of L οίσομίνη ξιίνω νπϊρ ο J τό&ί νιΊκοί opwpe, with ύσομαι for οισομαι in 1. 73^. 

745• [""Κοίλοι: ρανται MSS., ναντίλοι Porson, which restores the metre and is adopted 
by Merkel. ναΟται should disappear from future editions. 

691. 909. μ[(τα: so Stephanus, a correction which has generally been accepted in 
place of the MSS. reading κατά. 

692. Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica IV. 

ιι•5χ8•7 cvi. 

Two fragments from the bottom of a column, containing parts of 11. 77-90 
of Apollonius Rhodius' Argonautica, Book iv. The handwriting, a neat upright 
uncial, has a certain resemblance to that of the Thucydides papyrus (16, 696), 
and is apparently a rather later specimen of the same type ; we should assign 
it to the second century. Occasional accents and stops (high usually, but 


a middle point apparently occurs in 1. 89) arc used, and may be due, like the 
insertion of an iota adscript in 1. 90, to the original scribe. 

[ηρωίί μΐ]τα [τηΐΎΐ θοοίί ίΧαασκον (ρΐτμοΐί 
[ονττω ΐΓ€]ισματα νηοί «[ττ ηπΐΐροιο πΐραιηί 
[βαλλον ο] Se Kpainvovs [yepao) noSai ηκίν Ιησων 

8ο [v]y^ov or ικριόφιν μ(τα [Se Φροντίί re και Αργο! 
[υι\€ 8υω Φριξ[ον] χ^αμα8[ΐί θορον η δ αρα τονσγΐ 
[γουΐνων [αμφο]τΐρηι[σι η](ρισ\ο[μ(νη προσ€(ΐπ(ΐ' 
[€κ] μί φ[ι\οί ρνσασθ( 8νσα]μμορον• ω? [S^ και avTOVi 
[υμΐ]αί Αι[ηταο προ γαρ τ α]ναφανδα [τίτνκται 

85 \π\αντα μαλ ovSe τ[ι μηχ]θ9 ικανΐτίαι αλλ (Vi νηι 
\<Ρΐ\νγωμΐν πριν τον y[e] βοών (πιβ[ημΐναι ίππων 
[δω]σω 8ΐ χρυσΐΐον (γω Sepos ίννη[σ•α(τα 
[φρο^ρρον όψιν τννη Se Oeovs [ev]i σθίσ[ιν eraipois 
[$€ΐ]νε• remv μύθων ΐπι[ι'\στο[ραί] ov[s μοι υπΐστη? 


90 [ποι]ησαι• μηδ ίνθΐν €ΐ^αστ(ρ]ω ορμ[ηθ€ΐσαν 

8ο. fn: so L ; άπ G, Merkel. 

86. τον ^[f]: Toi/fie G (Merkel), rajcSe L; the letter before the lacuna is certainly not δ. 

go. The size of the lacuna makes it pretty certain that the papyrus had the right 
reading ίκαστίρω ; ίκατίρω GL. The iota adscript was probably added by the person who 
put in the accents, but whether he is to be identified with the original scribe is doubtful. 

693. Sophocles, Elecira. 

8-6x3.6 cm. 

A narrow strip from the top of a column, containing 11. 993-1007 of 
Sophocles' Ekctra. The MS., which is a good specimen of the oval type 
of uncials, was probably written in the first half of the third century. The 
correction in 1. 1002 and the occasional lection signs, with the exception of the 
mark of elision in 1. 993, are probably all by the original scribe. A rare variant 
occurs in 1. 995. Our collation is derived from the Jahn-Michaelis edition 
of i88a. 


[ΐτνγ•)(^αν' αυτή μη [κακών ίσωζζτ αν 
[την (]νλαβ(ΐαν [ωσττίρ ουχί σωζίται 
995 [τοί] γαρ ποτ( βλΐ[ψασα τοιούτον βρασοί 
[αυτή 5]' οπλιζη κα[μ νπηρ€Τ€ΐν καλείς 
[ουκ f]iaopas• -γυνή [μεν ου8 ανηρ ίφυί 
[σθ€]ν€ΐ9 S (Χασσον [των ενάντιων χ^ερι 
[8αιμ]ων δε roty μ[εν ευτυ-χ^η! καθ ημεραν 
ιοοο [ημι]ν δ απορρει κ[απι μηδέν έρχεται 

[τις ο]υν τοιούτον α[νδρα βουλευων ελΐΐν 

[αλυ]πο ατής εζαπα[λλαχθησεται 
[ορα κ]ακωί ΐΓρασσο[ντ( μη μειζω κακά 
[κτησ]ωμεθ' ει tis το[υσδ ακουσεται λογουί 
1005 [^νει γ]αρ ημάς ο[νδεν ουδ επωφελει 

[βαζιν] καλην λ[αβοντε δυσκλεω? θανειν 
[ου γαρ θ]α[ν]ΐΐν [εχθιστον 

995• 'f"" βλβ[ψασα: SO the Cod. Monacensis (Herwerden, Anal. Grit. p. 12): vm 

('μβλίψασα L, &C. and vulg. 

996. οπλι^τ; : so all the chief MSS. (όπλί^^ι) ; 6π'Κίζ(ΐ editors. 
998. {λασσοκ: SO Bruiick and vulg.; «λαττοι/ MSS. 
1002. Perhaps αλλ νπο was originally written. 

694. Theocritus, /dy/ XIII. 

1 4• 2 X 8-4 cm. 

A small fragment from the thirteenth Idyl o{ Theocritus, written in a good- 
sized upright round uncial hand of the second century, probably the earlier 
half of it. Numerous stops (high point), breathings, accents, &c. occur, all of 
which, as well as a few corrections or variants inserted above the line, seem to 
be due to the first hand. The text has a new variant in 1. 34, and an error in 
1. 30, but elsewhere agrees with the MSS. Our collation is with the edition 
of Ziegler. 


iKeTO κω ταλα.(ρ[γο5 
20 Αλκμηναί νϊοί f 

avf ί* α[ΐ']τα) κατ€/3[αίί'€ΐ' 
aris Kvavidv ovj(_ 

άλλα 8[ί](ζα(ϊ'σ€• βαίθυν 

αΐ€7θ[$•] ώ[ί] μ€γα λά[ιτμα 

25 αμοί δ α»'Τ€λλοΐ'[7ί 

άρνα νίον βοσκο[ντι 

τ[α]μοί ί/αΐ'τίλι[α][[ί]]Γ [ 

ηρώων κο[ίλ]αί' 5e [ 

£λ[λ]ά(Γ7Γ0ΐ'Τθί' ϊκο[ντο 

30 είσω 5 όρμοι/ ΐκονίτο 

αύλακας €i'/5i5rofr[t 

ΐκβαντΐί δ (ΤΓί θ€Ϊ[να 

[δ€ί]ί[λ]ινο[ί\• πολλοί 5[e 

[λ€ΐμ]ων [<τ]φ[ι]γ πα[ρ(Κΐΐτο 

ig. κω : χω MSS. 

20. ΑΧκμηνα!: SO most MSS. 'Αλκμήνη! Z(iegler) following the Ambrosianus. 

21. Against this line are two dashes, of which the meaning, if any, is obscure. 
22-4 were rejected by Ahrens. In 1. 23 8[ί]ίξαίίσ€ is corr. to δ[ι](ξαϊξ(. 

25. It is not certain what was written above the initial a. The supposed η between 
two points (i.e. ημοι for αμοή is possibly an accent and breathing. 

30. «ocfro: iifiTo MSS., Z. tKovTo is a repetition from the previous line. 

34. [σ^ψ πη[ρ(«ιτϋ : yap σφιν ΐκατο MSS., Ζ. 

695. Herodotus V. 

24-3 χ 7-6 cm. 

Part of chapters 104-5 of Herodotus, Book V, written in a good-sized third 
century uncial hand of the broad oval type. Two corrections and a breathing 
have been inserted by a second hand. The text offers no variants from that 
of Stein. On the verso, in a late third or early fourth century cursive hand, 
is part of a list of names of persons, with sometimes a statement of the villages 
to which they belonged, e. g. . . . οπό Θώλ6(Εωϊ), *€va^oi*r(is) από Ταλαώ. 


\Tas Κύ\πρίον[ί συνατη 
στασθαι τουί μίν Sji [αλ 
λονί afeneiae Afia\6ov 
σιουί S( oy βον\[ο]μΐ[ΐΌνς 
5 [[«"Πο"/ παθίσθαί (πολ[ιορ 
Κ€€ προσκατημβι^ΟΫ 
Ονησιλοί μΐν νυν ΐ[ττο 
λίορκΐΐ Αμαθουντ[α 

βασιλ(ί £e Ααρζί[ω] cos 
10 αα]γγ[(]λ{θ]τ, [:^:αρ[4[? α 
λ[ωσαί ΐ]μπ(πρησβα[ί 
υπ[ο re] Αθ[η]ναιων [και 
Ι[ω]νων τον δΐ ηγ(μ[ο 

να yeveaOai τηί σι/[λλο 
15 [y?]? ωστ€ ταύτα (τυ\νυ 
φανθηναι τον Μίλ[7;σ£ 
ον Αριστα[γ\ορην 7τ(ρα)τα 
μ[(ν] X[e]y€ra£ [α]υτον [ω? 
€πνθ€τ[ο] ταύτα Ιων[ων 
20 ονδίνα λο[γ]ον ποίησ[α 
μΐνον ev ΐΐδοτα α)[ί ον 


[τ]οι ye ου κα^π^α.ηροϊξ[ον 
[ται] αποσταντ€9 (ΐρ[( 
[(ri]a[i] oiTives euv οι A [ 
25 [θην]αιο[ι μ(τα] 5e [ττυθο 

2 2. The second a of κατά has been corrected from o; i.e. the first hand wrote 

ovK αποπροιξονται, which was altered to ov κηταπροιξονται. 

23. Final s of απ-οσταιη-ίί• was put in (by the first hand) later. 

696. Thucydides IV. 

Fr. (c) 15x19 cm. 

In view of the peculiar excellence of the Oxyrhynchus Thucydides papyrus 
originally published in the Egypt Exploration Fund's Arcliacological Report 
for 1896-7, and reprinted as P. Oxy. 16, the discovery of some more frag- 
ments of the same MS. was a welcome surprise. The new pieces comprise 
portions of six more columns, covering, with considerable lacunae, chapters 
38 to 35 of the fourth book ; and at the same time supply some of the missing 
beginnings of lines in the first column of the fragment originally found, which 
succeeded immediately. 

The present part of the MS. possesses the same features which distinguished 
that published previously, and readers are referred to the description given in 
P. Oxy. I. p. 40. We see no reason for altering the date (first century A. D.) 
there proposed for the papyrus. We are, however, inclined to doubt whether 
the final ν which has been inserted occasionally in the text is after all by a hand 
different from that to which the other numerous corrections and variac Icctioncs 



are apparently due, and which is not to be distinguished from that of the original 

As before, the papyrus shows a number of small differences from the 
ordinary text, the most noteworthy being those in II. 4, 13, 16, 38, 62-3 and 87. 
Our collation is with the text of Hude. 

Fr. {a) 

Col. i. aS. 4. 

Col. ii. K). 3. 

[Ιμβριουί tovs παρόντα^ και] ττίλ 

αμαρτημ[ατα αιστί προσπα 

πτΐΐν α.\ν avTovs απροσδοκη 


5 τ•ω•5 η βου\[οιντο «ττ €/c€t 

ίΌ£Γ yap uv[aL αν την ΐπιγίΐ 
[ρη]σιν [ 

Ι column lost. 

Fr. φ) Col. iv. 34. I. 


[φύλακας oty ΐπ(δρα]μον ivBvs 
10 [διαφθΐΐρουσιν ev re] raty evvaii ίτ[ι 
[αναλαμβανοντ]αγ •ϊτΊ• τα οττλα 
[και λαθοντΐ! τ]ην αποβασιν οι 

Tos vavs 

[ομΐρων αντ]ων κατά το ειω 

[θοί ey ΐφορμον τη$] νυκτός nXeiv 



[αμα 8e ΐωι γιγνο]μ(νηι και ο 
[αλλοί στρατοί] απΐβαινίν 
[ΐκ μ(ν νιων ΐ\βδομηκοντα 
[και ολιγωι irXeijovcuv παν 
[rey πλην θα\αμι\<ΰν ωy ΐκα 
[στοι (σκΐνασμΐ]νοι τοξοται 
[Se οκτακόσιοι και 7Τ€]λτασται 

Fr. (<γ) Col. ν. 32• 4- 

χωρησγιαν οι Tr[o\]e 
[μιοι ΐσΐσθαι \/^€ίλο]ί και οι απο 
[ρωτατοι] τοζ[€υμα]σι και α 
25 [κο]ντιο[ΐΐ] και λιθ[ο]ΐί και σφ(ν 

Col. νϋ. 34• 3• 
[^σ]τ[ω]τοί και ουκ ()(\οντί\ί «λ 
ΤΓίδα καθ οτι ')^ρ]η α[μυ]νομΐ 
I'ouy σωθηναι Τ€λ[οί] 8( τραυ 

ματίζομΐνων ηδη πολ 
[δο]ναΐί ([κ] πολλού [(]χοντ(ί αλ 6ο λω»' Sia το iV τωι αντωι ανα 


\κη\ν o([y] μη^ΐ. ίπίΚθαν olov 
[τ ην] <f>ivyov[TiS!] re γαρ e 
[KpaTovf] κα[ί αναχοοίρονσι" «Tre 

Col. vi. 33. a. 

χωρι]απ/ τ[< ] 

30 [ττο\τητ[ί και] υπο τη[ί πριν e 
[ρη]μια9 τραχειών [ορτωι^ tv 
[θί]ί οι ΛακίδαιμοΐΊΟΐ [ο]ν[κ €S]v 
[ναντο] διωκίΐν όπλα (χον 

χρο]ΐΌΐ> μ^ν ου\ν τ]ινα 


στρΐφΐσθαι συγκλησ-αντί? 
"'(χωρησαν ίί το (σχατον ΐρυ 
μα TJjy νήσου ου πολύ απ^γον 
και τους πάντων φυλακαί ω? 

65 . 5* ΐνΐδοσαν ενταύθα δη πολ 
'^λωι €Γί πλ6•ί•ο^ί βοηι Τΐθαρ 
ρηκοτίί οι ψΐΐλοι (πίκίΐντο. 

και των Λακεδαιμονίων 
όσοι μεν υποχωρούντα (ν 

70 κατ[(λαμβαν]οντο απίθνη 

σκον ο[ι δ( πολ]λοι διαφΐνγον 
TiS π[ροί] το ΐρ[υ]μα μετά των 
ταυτ[ηι\ φυλάκων έταξαν 
το παρ[α πα]ν ως αμυνουμε 

75 [νο]ι [ηιπ](ρ ην επιμαγρν [ 

[οι δ Αθη]ναιοι επισπο[μΐνοι 

4θ τους ο\ϊ\ ψειλοι βρ\α]διίτ(ρουί ηδη , r ι γ s» ι r 

L J r Γ-Γΐ J ι. r ' / \π{ψ^ιοδον /ijec αυτ(ύ^ν και 


35 [ολίγον ο]υτω'' προς αλλήλους 
[ηκρο]βολισαντο των δ( 
[Λακ]ΐδαιμονιων ουκετι ο 
[^icus] (πεχΐΐν ηι προσπίίπτοι 
[ev δυ]ναμίνων γ[νο]ντίς αυ 

οντάς τωι αμυνΐσθα[ι και 


αυτοί τηι Τ€ οψΐΐ τ•οϋ• 6αρρ[ΐΐ]ν 

το π[\]ειστον ΐΐληφ[ο]τες πολ 

λαπλασιοι φαινόμενοι και 

45 ζυν•€ΐ•θισμενοι μάλλον μη 

Κΐτι δεινούς αυτούς ομοίως 

σφισι" φαινεσθ[αι] οτ[ι] ουκ ευθύς 

άξια της πρ[ο]σ[δ]οκια[ς ε]πε 

[πονθεσαν ωσ]περ οτε πρω 

50 [τον απεβαινον] τηι γ[ν]ω[μηι 
[δεδουλωμενοι] ms επ[ι] Λακε 
[δαιμόνιους] καταφρονη 
[σαντες και εμ]βοη[σα]ντε[ς 
[αθρόοι ωρμησαν ε]π oi;roi'[y 

55 [και εβαλλον λι]θο[ις 

κυκλ[ωσιν χωρ]ιου ι[ο'χνι 
ουκ ειχον προσιο[ντες 

8ο δ' εζ ενάντιας ωσασθ[αι επει 
[ρων]το και χρ'ονον μεν 

[πολύν και της ημέρας το πλει] 
[στον ταλαι]7τ[ω]ρ[ουμε]νοι αμ[φο 
[τεροι υπο] τε της μάχης κ[αι 

85 [διψης και] η[λιο]υ αντ[εί]χ[ον 
[πειρωμενο]ι ο[ι μεν 


Col. viii ( = 16. Col. iii). 36. 2. 

2 lines lost. ^ \\ωι 

ii[i]\oi Γ 

' f ot 

π|ωί Ρ 

oo eliaTTii'ny ,, 

' ξ\υμπτωματι 

^ too μ^οττυλαα 


4. απ•ροσδο(ο;]τωί : for the variant απροσδόκητοι!, which is not otherwise recorded, cf. 
e.g. ii. 93. 4 απροσΒοκητοί! ('πιπίσύιηα. It may be doubted whether avruCs was retained with 
this reading or was replaced by airoir. 

5. η : the omission of iota adscript is unusual in this papyrus. 

6. tii{ai av : this is the order of CEGIVIfj ; ίκ (iiai ABF. 

lo-i. αναλαμβανοντα: (τι was the Original order, but tn was subsequently inserted 
at the end of 1. 10 and cancelled in 1. 11. en άνάΚαμβάνοιη-αί is the reading of all MSS. 
Hude prints κάνολαμβάνοντα!, a modification of Abresch's conjecture και ΰνά\αμβ. 

12. It is unfortunate that the beginning of this line is lost since editors have suspected 
a corruption in λαθόντα την άπόβασιν. The ordinary reading suits the size of the lacuna 
well enough. 

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

(ΐω[θο!: (θα! MSS. The new variant is supported by other examples in Thucydides 

of κατά or τταρα το (Ίωθάί, e.g. in this book 17. 2, 55. 2, 67. 4. 

14. [Oos ff (φορμον TT/s] is rather long for the lacuna, and possibly τη! was omitted. 

16. ατφαινίν : (πίβαινον, the reading of the MSS., has been commonly changed by 
editors to άπίβαινον, an alteration which is now sanctioned by the papyrus. The singular 
απ(βαιν(ν may also well be right. 

22. Eleven lines are lost at the top of this column. 

23. ■ψ'ίΐλο]! και οι: so the MSS. The papyrus gives no support to the suggested 
emendations (ψι\ο\ κα\ οίοι Cobet, υί ψιλοί και Madvig). 

28. ([κρατούν]: there would not be room for Hude's conjecture ΐκρατοΰντο. 

21). Similar insertions of ν ιφιλκυστικόν occur in 1. 47, 16. ii. 9, &c. 

30. The original omission of χωρίων tc may have been caused by the homoioarchon 
of χάΚ(ποτητι, but it is noticeable that the words have not been supplied in quite their right 

35. The addition of the t of ουτωΓ is parallel to the insertions of final v; cf note 
on 1. 29. οΰτω MSS., Hude. 

38. tntxtiv : ΐπ(κβ(Ίν MSS. (π(χ(ΐν here might be supported by such a use as τάί 


eVi σφίσι ναΰί ίπ^χοϋσα! (viii. 105. 3), but it may be a mere graphical error ; (τ^κθαν would 
be more likely to become €πίχ«ι/ than vice versa. The 1 has been rewritten. 

41. The superscribed reading, αμννασθαι, is that of the IMSS., but αμυνισθαι is far 
preferable. It is noticeable that the interlinear a has a stroke above it instead of, as 
usual, the letter which was to be replaced. 

42-3. The 1\ISS. reading in this passage is toC βαρσΓιν το ■τΧΛστον, Dobree's 
conjecture πιστυ'ι/ for πλείστοι/ having been generally adopted by subsequent editors. 
It is nearly certain that the papyrus agreed with the ^ISS. in having ττ^αστον, for though 
there is a hole at the crucial point, the distance between the letters rr and f strongly 
suggests that another letter had intervened. There is no trace of any correction. It 
may then be assumed with little chance of error that the tradition of toC θαρρΛν or θαρσιΐν 
TO ηλύστον goes back at least to the first century a.d. ; and this reading is no doubt 
intelligible, if not very satisfactory. The interlinear variant τωι θαρρών, so far from helping 
matters, only creates fresh difficulties, and seems indeed quite impossible. It may be 
noted that the top of the υ of του has been rewritten (by the first hand), but no importance 
should be attached to this circumstance ; the same thing has been done again in the case 

of υ of π-ολυ in 1. 63. 

45. The ι written above et of iuvfiAurfiei/oi has been again cancelled. 
47. σφισι IMSS., H. ; cf. 1. 29. 

59. The blank space at the end of this line has been filled up by two angular marks ; 
elsewhere one only is usually employed for this purpose. 

60. δια TO aid is the MSS. reading. The ο of το has been corrected from e (?). 

61. σ\τ/ΐί\ησα\ηα : elsewhere in the papyrus |w is written. 

62. αναχώρησαν : the first Syllable was added afterwards, most probably by the first 
hand ; ΐχώρησαν MSS. 

63. ov ποΧν απαχον : ο ov πο\ν άπ(ΐχ€ RISS. 

65. For the insertion of an elided c in Se cf. 1. 80, and 16. iii. 8 ; δ< MSS. 
6η : ή8η MSS. 

66. The alternative spelling πλιονι is that of the MSS. 
τ(θαρρηκοτ(ί : so ABFG; ταθαρσηκότ^! Η. with the other MSS. 

71. &ίαφανγοιη€! : 1. 8iaφυyόmfs, with the MSS. 

72. vpns'^ : f'i MSS. The π is quite certain. 

76. [oi S Αθηναίοι: κα'ί οί Άθ. ^ISS. It is just possible, though unlikely, that the 
papyrus had κω at the end of the previous line ; there is not room in 1. 76 for και 
before 01. 

80. For the inserted e cf. 1. 65, note. 

86. [π(ΐρωμίνο\ scarcely fills the lacuna, in which three or four more letters w^ould be 

87-102. The papyrus here supplies some of the letters missing at the beginnings 
of lines at the top of the first column of 16. The vertical strokes in the text show the 
line of fracture. 

87-8. jTiffTfvoiTft : πιστίίσαντα MSS. The reading of the pap}Tus may be right. 


697. Xenophon, Cyropaedia I. 
24-4 X 12-5 cm. 

A leaf from a codex of Xenophon's Cyropaedia, containing most of i. 6. 
3-1 1, and a small piece of another leaf containing a few letters from ii. i. 30, 
written in a neat uncial hand which is probably not much later than A. D. 200. 
Several corrections or variants have been added above the line, chiefly by 
a second and more cursive hand. The numerous stops (high, middle and low 
point) are for the most part due to the original scribe. 

The condition in which the text of the Cyropaedia still remains after 
centuries of use as a schoolbook is deplorable. Dindorf's Oxford edition, which 
alone gives a serious critical apparatus, omits several of the most important 
MSS., and the accuracy of the collations is not to be depended on. Hug's 
Teubner edition is mainly based on C, a Paris MS., which is one of the best, 
but since Hug's apparatus is not sufficiently detailed for his silence about the 
readings of C to be a trustworthy argument, we are unable to infer what they 
are except where he actually records them. Mr. E. C. Marchant, however, 
whose forthcoming edition of the Cyropaedia may be expected to reduce the 
existing chaos to order, has very kindly placed at our disposal for the passage 
covered by the papyrus his unpublished collations of two of the chief MSS., 
the Bodleianus (Bib. Canon. 39, which in the Anabasis is generally called D, 
though different from Dindorf's D), and the Etonensis, which is closely 
related to C. 

The MSS. of the Cyropaedia divide into two main families ; one group 
consists of AG, which are the basis of Dindorf's edition, C, which in the early 
part of the Cyropaedia supports AG and is the basis of Hug's edition, and the 
Etonensis (Et.) ; while the other group consists of Dindorf's D and the Bod- 
leianus (Bod.), and is supported through a large portion of the passage covered 
by the papyrus by Stobaeus. The character of Dindorf's R and the relation 
of it to the two main groups is uncertain. The papyrus on the whole supports 
the group represented by D, Bod. and Stobaeus, with which its readings agree 
against the AGC, Et., group about twice as often as vice versa, and adds a 
number of variants peculiar to itself. Though not of equal importance to that 
of the Oxyrhynchus fragment of the Anabasis (463), the text of which seems 
to represent the archetype from which the existing MSS. of that work are 
descended in two main traditions, the papyrus is of considerable interest. 

Our collation is with the edition of Dindorf, supplemented occasionally by 
that of Hug. But the only MSS. of which the accurate collation is guaranteed 


are the two for information about which we are indebted to Mr. Marchant. 
Fortunately these are typical and important representatives of the two main 


yap €φη ακουσαί ττοτΐ σου on (ΐκοτωί αν KdJ\ πάρα θΐ Ι. 6. § 3 

(ΰν TTpaKTiKCuTepos ίΐη• ωσττβρ και παρ ανθρ<ύ[π](ΰν. οστίί 

μη ο[π]οτΐ if αποροίί €ΐη. Tore κολακ€νοί• αλλ [ο]τΐ άριστα 


πραττ[οί\ τοτΐ μάλιστα των θΐων pepv'^oi^TO• [κα]ι των φι 
5 λων 8 ΐφησθα χ^ρηναι ωσαντωί ΐπιμ(λ€ΐσθα[ι] ουκονν νν § 4 

(φη ω πα[ι\ δι €Κίΐναί ταί €πιμ(λ€ΐα9 ηδίΐον μΐν (ρχη 
ir[p]os τονί θΐονί δ(ησομΐνος ΐλπιζίΐς Se μ[α]λλον Tev^e 
σθαι ων eav δίη οτι avveiSevai σαυτωι io/c6i[y ου\ πωποτβ 
αμΐλησαί αντων πανν μβν ονν (φη ω πατ[€]ρ ω? προ! 

ΙΟ φιλονί μοι TOVS Oeovi ovTas ούτω 8ίακίΐμ[α]ι [[ω]]• τι γαρ € § 5 

φη ω παι ΐΚίΐνα μβμνησαι α ποτ€ ΐδοκ(ΐ ημ[ιν]• οποσα γαρ 
δηπον δΐδωκασιν οι θ([οι] μαθονταί ανθρω[π]ου5 βίλτΐΐ 
[ο]ν πραττΐΐν. η ανΐπιστημοναί αντων οντ[ας\. και ΐργαζο 
ptvovi μάλλον αννταν η αργουνταί και (πι]μΐλομ€ 

15 ν[ο]νί ασφαλ(στΐ\ρ]ον αν διαγίΐν η αφυλακτο[ν]νταί τούτω. 
[π]α[ρ\•)(ονταί avTovs oiovs Sfi- οντωί ημιν (δο[κ^(ΐ δ(ΐν και 
[αιτ]ΐ\ι]σθαι τα αγαθά πάρα των θΐων ναι μα Αι ΐ[φ]η ο Kvpos ξ 6 

σον• γ 
μίμνημαι μίντοι [^σοι;]] τ[αύ\τα άκουσας και αρ α[να]γκη ην 

ιι[^]βΐσβαι τωι λογωι τουτωι• και οιδα σί (πιτιθ€ντα αν 

2θ τ[ωι] ω$• ονδΐ θΐμΐί ίΐη αιτ€ΐσθαι πάρα των βεων οντί 

ιπ[π](ν(ΐν μη μαθονταί ιππομαγονντας νικαν οντ( 

μ[η €]πισταμ€νον5 TO^eveiv TO^evovTas κρατΐΐν των € 

[πιστ]αμΐνων τοξΐυαν ουτΐ μη (πισταμ[ί]νονί κυβΐρ 

να[ν] σωζίΐν ΐυ)^ΐ]σθαι ναυν κνβΐρνωνταν [ο]ντ( μη σπΐΐ 

25 [/30i']ra[y] ye σιτον [(]ν\ΐσθαι καλόν αντοις φνΐσθαι• οντΐ μη 

φ[υλα]τ[τ]ομ€νου[ί] ye ev πολίμωι σωτηριαν αιτΐΐσθαι• πα 

ρ\α yap] τους τω\ν &\ΐων β[{\σμονί ταντα και τα τοιαντα πά 

L 2 


•r[a tivai\ του[ί 8]( [α]θ€μιστα (νχ^ομ€ΐΌνί. ομο[ι]ως ίφησθα 
[€ΐκο]ί f[i]yai πάρα θ^ων ατυ^ΐΐν. ωσπΐρ και παρ ανθρωπώ 

30 [απρ]ακ[τ]ΐΐΐ' τον? παράνομα Seo/xeiOi/y fKuvoDV Se f § 7 

[φη] (Ο παι (πελαθου α ποτί ΐγω και συ (\ογ[ί]ζομ(θα• ως 
[iKayolf] ?f f.'T? '^'" KaXoy αν[δ]ρι ep[y\ov €ί tls δυναιτο (πιμ€ 
[λη]θτ][ναί OTTjCuf αυτοί καλο[ί] τ( καγαθοί δοκ[ι]μωί γ{ΐΌΐτ[ο] 
[και] τα ([πιτη]δ(ΐα [ο]7Γωί αυτ[ο]5 τ( και οι οικΐται ικανωί 

35 {^χοκν το 8ΐ\ τοΐ'[το]ΐ' //ey[aX]oi/ (p[yo'\v oi/[r]ft)y [ojfror υφ[ι\στ[α 
[σθαι ανθρωπ]ω[ν α]λλ(ϋ[ΐ' π]poσ\τ\aτeυ[f\ιv ο[7Γ]α)ί (^ουσ[ιν 
[άπαντα τα ίπιτηδ^ια ίκ[π\]ΐί(ύ και οπωί €[σο]νται α[παν 
[τΐ5 οιουί Sei τουτ]ο θανμ[ασ]τον ^ηπου] ημ[ιν] joTe [e 
[φαινίτο ναι μα Δ\ι €φη [ω π]ατΐ[ρ μΐμνημαι] κα[ι του § 8 

40 [το σου λΐγοντοί σ]υνί8[οκ](ΐ κα[ι ΐμοι υπfpμe]γ^θ€S et 

[ναι ΐργον το καλώς αρ]χ€ΐ[ν κα]ι νυ[ν γ €φη ταύτα] μ[οι So 
[κ(ΐ όταν προί αν]το το [αρχ]ίΐν [σκοπών λογιζω]μ[αι ο 
[ταν μΐντοι προς αλ]λου[ί άνθρωπου! ιδων κατανο 
[ησω οίοι τί οντΐί 8i\ayi[yvovTai apyovTfS και οίοι οντίί 

45 [ανταγωνισται ημι]ν €[σονται πάνυ μοι SoKei αισχ^ρον et 

] ον[τα8 

[ναι τοιούτους υποπ]τη[ξαι 

14 lines lost 



6 1 (ρχη T01S πάρα Κυαζαρΐ^ω^ -χρημασιν eycoye (φη ο KvpoS' § 9 

οισθα S( (φη οποσα αυτωι €στιν• μα τον Δι ΐφη ο Κυροί• 

ου μ(ν δη όμως δη• τούτοις πιστίυίΐς τοις αδηλοις• οτι 
δΐ πολλών μ(ν ου δΐησ(ΐ πολλά δ( και άλλα νυν αναγ 
65 κηι δαπαναν αυτόν γινωσκΐΐς• γινωσκω (φη ο Κύρος• 


(αν ουν (φη αυτόν (πιλιπη η δαπάνη και (^^^ων ψίυδη 
ται• πως σοι (ξ(ΐ τα της στρατιάς δηλον οτι ου καλώς• 

αταρ (φη ω πατ(ρ συ (ΐ (νοραις τίνα πορον και απ (μου 


γ€ vo 

av προσ^γιγνο^ΐΐ'ον etay ^tl iv ψιλιαι ζσμΐν Xeyg• 6 § 10 

70 pcuTas ίφη ω παι τούτο ei Τί? [aV απο σον ποροί προσγΐ 
νοιτο• απο τινοί Se μάλλον [ίΐ]κο9 ττορον yev^aBai η α 
7γ[ο] του 8υναμίν ΐ^χοντ[θ9\• συ Se ιτ(ζην μ^ν δυναμιν e 
γων ΐνθ(.ν8ί €[/3χ]»7 ο-νθ j;y 018 οτι πολλαπλασιαν αλλή 
ουκ αν δ(ξαιο• [ι]ππικον Se σοι οπ^ρ κρατιστον [το'\ Μη8ώ 

75 σνμμαγον ίσται• ποιον ουν (θνοί ταν πΐριζ ου δοκΐΐί και 
γαριζ^σθαι βουλομΐνον νμιν υπ[η^ρΐτησ€ΐν• και φόβου 
μΐνον μη τι πάθη α χ^ρη σ€ συν Kva^apei κοινή ι σκοπΐΐ 


σθαι μηποτ (ττιλιπη [[τιΤ] υμαί ων Sei νπαργ^ιν και eOovt 
evsKa μ[η]χ^ανωμίνον προσόδου πορον το\8γ 8e [παν 

8ο [των μάλιστα μοι μ^μνησο μηδίποτΐ αναμ(ν(ΐν το] 

ποριζίσ[θα]ι τα €πιτη[δΐ]ια [(σ]τ αν η χρ€ΐα σ€ α[ναγκαση αλλ 
οταρ μάλιστα ίνπορηί τοτ€ προ τη! αποριαί μ[αΧλον μη 
χαι^ω και γαρ Tev^ei μάλλον παρ ων αν 8er} μτ) α[πορΐΐν 
δοκών και αναίτιοι ^[σίΐ\ π\α\ρα τοίί [σ](αυτου στρ[ατιωταΐί 

85 ίκ τούτον δς μάλλον [κ]α[ι] υπο ολλω[ΐ'] α[ι8ουί τΐνξη και ην 
Tivas βουλή ευ ποιησα[ι τηι δνναμΐ]ι η κακωί μάλλον 
ems αν «X'js τα δΐοντα οι στρατιωται νπηρίτησουσι σοι 
και πιστικωτατουί Se λογουί σαφ ισθι τοτΐ δυνησπ λ€ 
yeiv. oτavπep και evδeικvυσ\θaι μα^^ιστα 8[υνη πο^ιν ι 

ρο κανοί ων και ei» και κα[κως αλλ] eφη ω π[α}τ€ρ α[λ]λω[Γ τί § ιι 


μοι SoKeis ταύτα πάντα καλώ! λeγeιv και οτι [[ωΐ'ΤΙ [μ(ν 
νυν λημψονται οι στρατ[ιωται o'i{5j«[y αυτών ΐμοι χάριν 
ΐΐσ^ται• ισασι yap eφ οΐί avTOVS Κυαξαρηί ay[eTai συμμάχου! 


οτι δ αν πpoy tois (ΐρη[μ]€ν[ο]ΐ9 λαμβανη τ[ΐί ταύτα και τι 
95 /"?[*' »']o//[to]y[(rt] κα[ι χάριν τούτων eiKos etSevai τω SiSov 

τι• το δ' €χοντα δχ/^ναμιν ηι €στι μ€ν φιλονς €υ ποιουνταί αντ 
[ω]0[€λ]€[{]σ5α[ί] €στι S[e ΐχθρους €χ]οντα [πe\p[aσθaι τισασθαι ( 

[n]eiTa aμΐλe[ιv] τ[ο]υ πορι'ζΐσθαι out τι [(φη ήττον τι τούτο αι 
[<^]χρον eivai η ei TiS (χων [μ(ν a]ypo[vs (χων 8e epyaTai 


100 [ots av βργαζοίτο (π(ΐ]τα [ίοιη 8]τ] Trfv γην αργούσαν ανω 
[φίΧητον iLvai ωί γ ΐμον (ψη μηδ(ποτ€ αμίΚησοντοί του] 
[τα ΐπιτηδΐΐα tois στρ]ατ[ιω]ται[ί σνμμη^ανασθαι 

[ ] 

»05 ] • [ 

προί] σί [ 

]Τ [ 

όλον και τα^ιν [ο\ην €καλ(ΐ Se και ΐτιμα οποτ( Τίνα^ iSoi II. 1. § 30 
109 και τούτο [ 

Ι. €φη: so AGR, Et., Dind. ; οιη. D, Bod., Stob. Flor. 48. 68. 

θιων : so AG (first hand) R, Dind. ; των βίων DO (corr.), Bod., Et., Stob. 

2. TTpaKTKWTfpos : SO ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind. ; πραγματικώτιρη! Et. 

3. KoXaxevot : SO ADG, Bod., Et., Dind.; κολακ(ΰ€ΐν R first hand. 
άριστα : τα άριστα CDGR, Bod., Et., Dind. ; άριστα A, Stob. 

4. μίμνωτο : SO AG (first hand, with ij above the line in a later hand), Et., Dind. ; 

μίμνητο L ; μ^μνοΊτο corrected by the first hand to μίμνητο Bod. ; μ(μνοίωτο D ; μίμνψαι 


5. ωσαντω! : SO DR, Bod. ; ωσαύτωί οΰτω! AG (with dotS OVCr οΖτω!), Et., Stob., Dind. 
(Ήΐμ(Κ(ΐσθα\ι]^ : SO MSS. ; (πψίλίσθαι Dind. 

6. at: SO b. Bod., Stob. ; 5m y AG, Dind. ; δια Et. 
(ρχη : so MSS. ; ίρχιι Dind. 

7. efovs 8(ησομ(νος : SO ADG (first hand) R, Et., Dind. ; θ(ον! SvTas οΰτω θιακ(ΐμ(ΐΌΐ>ι 

G marg. in later hand, and with οΰτω: Bod. which adds (λπίζια Si οΰ πώπ-οτ'. 
Τίνξ(σθαι : SO AGR, Bod., Et., Dind. ; τ(ύξασθαι D. 

8. (av : so ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind. ; 3v Et. 

avveiSfvai σαυτωι: SO MSS., Dind. ; ^vveiStpai ίαυτω Stob. 

9. npos φίλου!, the original reading of the papyrus, agrees with AGR, Et., Dind. ; 
■προσφιλής, the correction, with D, Bod., Stob. 

10. Touf BfovsovTas: SO D, Bod., Stob. ; ovTas tovs e^ois AGR, Et., Dind. 

11. ω παι: SO DR, Bod., Stob.; ό ηατήρ AG, Dind.; S> παΐ ό πατήρ C, Et., which has 
ό above ώ. 

(Kdva μίμνησαι : SO D, Bod. ; μ€μνησαι (Kfiva AGR, Et., Stob., Dind. 
οποσα γαρ 8ηπον : SO Bod., Stob. ; όπόσαπ(ρ δήπου D, with dots over πο by a later 
hand ; ώ? 5ncp R ; is άπιρ AG, Et., Dind. 

12. δίδωκασιν : SO MSS., Dind.; θίδώκασί!» ήμ7ν Stob. 

14. ainiTfiv: SO AG (second hand), Dind.; awfivO, Stob.; άνΰττ€ΐν G (first hand) R 
in an erasure, Et. 

ί[ίη]μίλομ«ΐ'[ο]υί : SO DR, Stob., Dind.; cVi/ifXoi//iew)vr AG, Et. For /3{λτίΐ[ο]ΐ', κ.τ,λ; 
Bod. has καϊ ^ργαζομίνονς μαΧλον avvtiv η apyovs omas και ΐπιμίλονμίνονς άσφαΚίστιρορ y ίιν 

15• u" : SO MSS. and Stob. ; om. Dind. following Stephanus. 


τούτων. SO MSS., Dind. : om. Stob. ; τ•ντων (vrepl) Madvig followed by Hug. 

16. avTovt (i.e. ain-ois): invTovt D, Bod., Slob. ; oil» τοιοΰτονί ΰινταν: AGR, Dind.; 
δ* Qvv ToiovTovi favTovs Et. 

17. τα αγαθά: SO D ; τάγαθά AGR, Et., Stob., Dind. ; τα αγαθά τά Bod. 

18. τ[αι-]τα : SO D, Bod. ; τοιούτων G; τοιαύτα AR, Et., Dind. There is certainly 

not room for τ[οιαυ]τα. 

η»: so D, Bod., Stob.; μι AGR, Et., Dind. 

19. τουτωι: SO D, Bod., Stob. ; om. AGR, Et., Dind. 

και οιδα σί (τητιθιντα αυτ' ωιΐ : 80 D, Bod. ; κα\ οι?α προστιθίντα αντω Stob. ; ΐττίτιθίντα 

αυτω G (second hand in marg.) ; και yap οΐδά at Xtyovra (iei AG (first hand) R, Et., Dind. 

20. otrre : οντω£ corr. to ovT( by second hand Bod. ; υντί other MSS., Dind. Similarly 
with ouTf in 1. 21. 

23. To|fu(ir : so D, Bod., Stob. ; om. AGR, Et., Dind. 

24. (υχ(]σθαι : SO DGR, Bod., Et., Stob., Dind.; ίχβσίαι A. 
vavv. so Stob. ; καϊί MSS., Dind. 

[o]trrf : so Stob. ; ούδί MSS., Dind. 

σ7Γ€ΐ[ροιΊτα[5] : SO MSS., Dind. ; στπΊραντας (Stob.) is equally possible. 

25. auToit σιτοκ : SO DG (second hand). Bod., Stob. AG (first hand) R, Et. agree 
with the original reading of the papyrus in omitting σιτον (so Dind.). 

ουτί : ouic MSS., Stob., Dind. 

26 πσρ[α : SO ADR, Bod., Et., Stob., Dind. ; wfpi G. 

27. ταύτα και τα τηιαυτα 7ran{a ; SO Bod., Stob., and (with the omission of πη'ι/τα) D; 
Τϊάντα τα τοιαίτα AGR, Et., Dind. 

28. [α]θιμιστα: SO AG (corrected) LM, Bod., Stob.; άθίμιτα DEHRG (first hand), 
Et., Dind. 

29. θ(ων: SO ADG, Stob., Dind. ; τώι» θ(ων R, Et. 
nap : so Stob. ; παρά MSS., Dind. 

30. ■παράνομα : SO ADGR, Bod , Stob., Dind. ; τα παράνομα Et. 

be ([φη : so G (second band in marg.), Bod. ; ίίΐφηΌ ; δί AG (first hand) R, Et., Dind. 

31. a TTOTi : so ADG, Bod., Et., Dind.; όπ-οτί R. 

32. av: om. MSS., Dind. After &ίναιτο Bod. has avbpi (sic). 

33. oTT^cos: so D, Bod. ; on-wt Λ AGR, Et., Dind. 
KaAo[r] Ti : T£ Ka'hos MSS., Dind. 

δοκ[ι^;/ω5 : SO ADG, Bod., Et., Dind. ; om. R. 

34. τα ί[πιυ)^δ{ΐα : SO MSS. here and in 1. 37 ; τάτπτήδΕία Dind. 
[ο]πωί : SO D, Bod. ; om. AGR, Et., Dind. 

01 : so AD, Bod., Et., Dind. ; om. G. ; above the line in R. 

35. ον[τ^ως [o^vTos : SO D, Bod. ; ovTos οίτωΓ AGR, Dind.; άγαθοΰ ovTot οϋτωί Et. 

υφ[ι]σ-Γ[α'σ5αι : SO DR, Bod. ; ('πίστασθαι AG, Et., Dind, ; (φι with dots Underneath 

before ΐπίστασθαι L. 

36. ί|ουσ[ι>' απαιτο : SO D, Bod. ; ίξονσι πάντα AGR, Et,, Dind. What reading the 
papyrus had is uncertain. 

37. a[vavTfs : πάντα MSS., Dind. 

38. TOTi \(φαιν(το : (ψαίκτο (tvat MSS., Dind. 

40. σου: so AGR, Bod., Et., Dind.; ore σου D. It is unlikely that the papyrus 
had D's reading for it τοντο is rather long for the end of 1. 39. 

σ]ιι«δ[οκ^ίΐ : so D, Bod,, Stob. ; συ^δόκίΐ ουν AGR, Et,, Dind. 

41. νυ[νγ: y is omitted by R, Et., and Stob., inserted in ADG, Bod. (so Dind.). 
Considerations of space make it probable that the papyrus read y. 

ταύτα] μ[οι δοκ<ι : the restoration of this is uncertain. We have followed the reading 


of Stobaeus ταίτά μοι δοκύ, which suiis the lacuna best. ταΟτή μοι τά αίτά AG, and, with 

the addition of SukU, CR, Et. ; ταίτά μοι SoKe'i ταΰτα D. 

43. [/leiToi]: so D, Stob. ; /itWoiyc AGR, Et., Dind. Which reading the papyrus had 
is uncertain. 

44. [0101 Tt]: so D; om. τ€ RG (second hand in marg.), Dind.; 0Γ01 rt oirfs Sia- 
yiyvovTm Άρχοντ(5 και is Omitted by AG (first hand), Et., owing to homoioteleulon. 

46. The restoration is uncertain. CR, Et. have ftvai τΰ τοιούτον! avTovs ovras ίποπτηξαι, 

and so D with the omission of ro ; e'rai το τοιούτου ύποπτ. A (so Dind.) ; (irai το τοιούτουΓ 

(apparently) ΰπ-οπτ. G, αντοϋί ovras being added over the line by a later hand. Probably 
the papyrus originally had (tvai τοιουτουί υποτπ-ηξαι, ονταί and perhaps qutous being added 
over the line by the corrector. 

61. (ρχη: so MSS. ; «ρχίΐ Dind. 

Κυαξαρα, the corrected reading of the jjapyrus, agrees with D. CAGR agree with the 
reading of the first hand Κναξαρ(ω. Κυαξάρα Bod., Dind. 

ίγωγί : eywy Dind. 

61—2. ο Kvpos οισθα Sf (φη: 6 Kipos τί Κ ϊφη οίσβα CDR, Bod., Et., and in marg. 
by a later hand G, Dind. ; om. AG (first hand). 

62. (στίν: e'oTi MSS., Dind. 

63. όμως 8η, the reading of the first hand, is clearly an error, and ought to have been 
erased by the corrector when he inserted όμως Sf. oi μϊν Si) οΙσθα δμω? Sc D ; oi μίν &η 
ο>ωί δί AGR, Bod., Et., Dind. 

πιστ(υ{ΐ5 : SO most MSS., Dind. ; viareieiv Bod. 

64. ου δ«ι;σίΐ : σοι διήση D, Bod. ; σοι ί(ήσ(ΐ CR ; δίήσίΐ AG, Dind.; σοι 8(ήσοι Et. 
ττϋλλη 8( και ηλλπ wv αναγκηι δαπαναν αντυν : om. αΰτόΐ' AGR, Et., Dind. ; πολλά 8e άνιίγκη 

αντ6ν ννν daTTavap D, Bod. 

65. yti/aaKf IS : Om. Bod. ; eVira oi -yiyfuff/ffis AGR, Et., Dind. ; iVfico oi γιγι/ώσκίΐΓ 

D in marg. by later hand ; δαπηνάκ ίκύνον ού y^yvώσκ(ιs Hug following Madvig. 

66. tav ovv (φη αντον (ττΐΚίττη η Βαπανη και : fav ουν €φΐ] αντον η dairtimj υττολίΐπϊ? η και D, 
and with άπολ^ΐπη for ΰπολιίπη Bod. ην ουν (φη ('πιλίπη αΰτορ ή δαπάνη η και Α, Et., Dind., 

R (with ('πιλίίπη hy the first hand) and (with r" added by a later hand) G. 
ψίυδηται : SO D ; ψίνδή A ; ψ(ΰσ(ται G, Bod. ; ψ(ΰσητ<ιι CR, Et., Dind. 

67. ηως σοι (ξ(ΐ: SO CDR, Bod., Et. ; ώ η-αί πώί Sp' (ξ(ΐ (οΓ perhaps V) G, Dind.; 

ώ παΐ πως ορίζη Α. 

δηΧον ΟΤΙ ου καλωί : SO AGR, Et., Dind. ; ού καλώς δήλον οτι D and (reading δηλονότι) Bod. 

68. (φη ω πατ(ρ : SO AGR, Et., Dind. ; 2> πάτ(ρ (φη D, Bod. 

69. πpoσy(voμ(vov: SO DR, Bod., Dind. AG, Et. agree with the reading of the first 
hand προσγι(γ)ΐΌμ(νον. 

70. ω παι τούτο : SO AG (first hand) R, Dind. ; toCto ω παΊ DG (in marg. second hand), 
Bod., Stob. F/or. 48. 70 ; i παί Et. 

(I Ttr [n]v : SO DG (second hand in marg.), Bod. ; f? Tit Stob. ; πως S.v R ; jtoC ttv AG 
(first hand), Dind. ; Ws ίίν Et. 

πpoσy(vυιτo : SO D, Bod., Stob., Dind. ; -yeVoiTo AG (first hand, τακτικόν being added in 
in the margin) R, Et. 

71. fie: so ADGR, Et., Stob., Dind. ; fiel Bod. 

[iijiot : so D, Stob.; (Ίκής (στι CAGR, Et., Dind.; om. Bod., which also omits πόρον. 
γ(κσθαι: SO D, Bod., Et., Stob. (Hug) ; πρoσy(κσβaι AGR, Dind. 

72. μ(ν•. so AGR, Bod., Dind. ; om. D. Et. places piv after δύναμιν. 
(χων (νθ(νδ(: SO D, Bod., Et. ; cVoeVfie (χων AGR, Dind. 

73• f[px\i '■ so MSS. ; (ρχα Dind. 

οιδ : so AG (first hand) R, Et., Dind. ; d οίδ' DG (second hand), Bod. 


74. Μί/δωι/: SO ADGR, Dind. ; των MijSui/ Bod., Et. 

75. συμμαχον : SO ADG, Bod., Dind. ; Om. R; Sokh eivm σύμμαχου ίσται Et. 

SoKcts : SO Bod. ; δοκ« η (apparently) D ; BoKci σοι AGR, Et., Dind. 

77. πάθη : SO ADGR, Bod., Dind. ; πίί^οι Et. 

Κυαξαριι : SO ADL and (in an erasure) R, Et. ; Κυαξάρη G, Bod., Dind. 
κοίνηι : this word is placed before συν by the MSS. and Dind. 

78. (πιΚιπη : SO AGR, Et., Dind. ; ύποΚ(ίπη D, Bod. 
νμ<ΐ! : so ADGR, Bod., Dind. ; ήμάί Et. 

teovs: (θους Sf Dind. with all I\ISS. except Et., which has κα\ ΐθους μοι μϊμνησο added 

by a second hand in the margin against ivtKa μηχανάσβαι προσόδου πύρον το'δί 6e πάντων μάλιστα. 
79• μ[η]χανωμ(νον : SO D, Bod. ; μηχανάσβαι AGR, Et., Dind. 

το[δ]€: so CDR, Bod., Et., Stob. F/or. 48. 71, Dind.; τό AG. 

81. τα ί7Γΐ7Τ)[δ{ ]ta : cf. note on 1. 34. 

[eajr : so ADG, Bod., Et., Stob., Anon. ap. Boisson, Anecd. i. p. 113, Dind. ; fcat R. 

82. όταν . . . (υπορης: SO AGR (second hand), Et., Stob., Anon., Dind.; ore . . . eun-opflr 
D ; ore μίν . . . cinopets Bod. ; όταν . . . (νποριις R (first hand). 

μ[ηλλοΐ' μη]χανω : SO DG (in marg. by second hand), Stob. ; om. μάλλον AG (first hand) 
R, Et., Anon., Dind. 

83.' TfK|ei: so D, Anon. (?), Et., Dind.; τοξίΰη A; τιΰξη GR, Bod., Stob. 

afTTopeti'] 8οκων : SO D, Bod., Stob. ; 'ιποροι 8οκων (ivai A, Et., AnOn., G (omitting δοκών), 

and (απορο! being added in marg. by a later hand) L, Dind. α[ττοροί eivai is too long 
for the lacuna. 

84. rat: so D, Stob.; ral ΐτι GR, Bod., Et., Dind.; rai οΊτι A. 

[σ\(αυτον : SO perhaps R (first hand, σ being over an erasure) ; αίτοϋ AL (first hand) ; 
ίπυΓοΟ D ; σαντοϋ G, Et., Stob., Dind. ; σαντοϋ (σ corr. from e) Bod. 

85. τούτον: so ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; τούτων Έχ. 
fie: so ADR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; δ,^ G. 

αλλω[ΐ'] : SO AGR, Et., Dind. ; των άλλων D, Bod., Stob. 

86. rivas: so AG (second hand) R, Bod., Dind.; τίνα DG (first hand?), Et., Stob. 
βουλή : so ADGR, Bod., Stob., Dind. ; ^oiXe. Et. 

(υ: so D, Bod., Et. ; η d AGR, Stob., Dind. 

ποιησα'ι : SO ADG, Bod., Et., Stob., Dind. ; ποιιΐσθαι R (first hand apparently). 

[τηι dwapf'^i : SO here AGR, Et., Dind. ; D, Bod., and Stob. place it after βούλη. 

87• ίωτ αν (χη! τη Scovra οι στρατιωται υττηριτησουσι σοι: SO, with the exception of ΐχωσι 
for ΐχ^ι^, AGR, Et., Dind. ; fws tiv ίχωσιν ΰπ. σοι οι στρ. (χοντα τα δί'οιτα D, Bod.J υπηρ€ττισουσιν 
οΊ στρατιωται ϊχοντα τα δίοντα Stob. 

88. πιστικωτατον! Be Xoyous σηφ ισθι Tore ^υνησιι \eyeiv: SO, with δννήσι; corrected from 
Βννησ(ΐ by second hand, D, and, with Βυνηση, Stob. ; πιστικώτ^ρον tous 8e λόγους κ.τ.λ. corr. 

to Ka\ πιστικωτάτους tovs λόγου? κ.τ,λ, Bod. ; και πιστοτίρους σάφα ισθι Βννηστ) λόγους τότ€ 
λίγίΐν Et. ; πιστικωτι'ρυνς σάφ' ισθι λόγους δυνηση τότί λ(γ(ΐν AG and, with δυνηση λόγους, R ; 

πιιστικωτίρους σάψ' 'ισθι λόγους δυνήσ^ι τάτ( λ(γ(ΐν Dind. It is tolerably certain that the 

papyrus had δυνησ(ΐ not δννηση. 

8g. oTavnep : SO CDR, Bod., Stob., Dind.; Ζθίνπιρ A; όσαπιρ G; όσονπιρ Et. 

ποκιν ι\ανος ων και iu : SO D, Stob. ; κα'ι et ποκΐν ικανοί ων AGR, Et., Dind. ; el ποιιιν 
Ικανός ίιν κα\ κακώς (κα'ι κακώς in rasura) Bod. 

91. δοκίΐΓ ταύτα πάντα καλώς λeγeιv : SO D; καλώς hoKe'iS ταύτα λeγeιv πάντα .\GR ami 

(with λ/γίΐί) Et., Dind., and (omitting πάντα and with κάΚώς . . . ταύτα in rasura) Bod. 

α \μev\ νυν λημψονται : SO DR ; a μίν αυ νύν λήμψ. Bod. ; 5 μίν hv νύν λήμψ. G (first hand^, 

with μ(ν at νύν added in marg. by a later hand ; ών μϊν νύν λίγονται λή\|/eσθaι A, Et., Dind., 
with which the reading of the first hand in the papyrus so far agrees in having !>v. 


92. τούτων χάριν MSS. (except Et. χάριν τούτων) Dind. ; but there is not room for 
τούτων in the lacuna. 

93. avTovs : so ADGR, Bod., Dind. ; ainas Et. 

Κυαξαρη! cr/fTai: SO AGR, Et., Dind.; nyeTot Κυαξάρη! D, Bod. ; tnaytToi Cobet, 

followed by Hug. 

95. For fiKor D and Bod. have πΜστην fiKOs, and πλίίστην is added in the margin of 
G by a later hand. There is not room for πΚαστην in the lacuna, so the papyrus probably 
agreed in omitting it with AG (first hand) R, Et., Dind. 

96. TO : so AG, Dind. ; τόν D, Bod. ; τώ Et. 

(χοντα: so ADG (second hand) R, Bod., Dind.; ίχοντι G (first hand); ΐχοντι (with a 
above «) /«V Et., omitting μίν after cVti. The supplement at the end of the line is longer 
than it should be by three or four letters, but the only variant is ποιοϊντα (R) for ποιοΰι/ταί 
ADG (corrected), Dind. 

97. tan : so DGR, Bod., Et., Dind.; in A. 
ίχοντα is bracketed by Hug, following Madvig. 

€[ττ\ιτα : SO AG, Et., Dind. (ίπιη) ; άπ αντων DR, Bod., which has τικτάσθαι for 

98. ποριζ\σθαι: SO ADG, Dind., agreeing with the first hand; πορίζαν R, Bod., 
agreeing with the corrector. 

Ti : so ADG, Dind. ; τοι R, Et. 

ήττον τι τοντο ata^pov aval : τοντο αίσχρον ήττον (tvat D ; τοΰτο αχσχρον ήττον eivat δ* (α( δ' 

in an erasure) Bod. ; ζττοκ toCto uvcu αΙσχρόν AG, Dind., and (with τοι for τι in an erasure) R ; 

ησσόν τι τοΐτο (ΐναι αΙσχρόν Et. 

99• «χω" [μο': so ADGR, Bod., Dind. ; μΐν ίχων Et. 

100. i]i) : so G in marg. ; om. ADR, Et., Dind. The reading of the papyrus is 

1 09. και Toirro : τοιούτο AD ; τοιούτον G, Dind. 

698. Xenophon, Cyropaedia I. 

235 X 7-9 ^«• 

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

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


oval uncials of the common type, is to be assigned to the earhcr part of the 

Col. i. 

υπ αυτών τούτων ^ί^κην [ μ[ΐ]\ρί των ορί]ων τ[η5 Π(ρ 

ΐδοσαν πολλοίς δ ο]νκ τ]ρ [ -=- σιδο?• 


10 ^€νοφων[το5 

Κυρου [ 


Col. ϋ. 

[ofieV θαυμαστ[ον ου 
γα[ρ αν]αγκη αυτο[ΐ5 ΐστιν 
5 <ο[ΐ' α]ν μ[η] (θΐλωσιν [(πι 
μ[(λί]σθαι τοιαύτα [μ(ν δη 
αφ[ι]κοντο δ[ια]λΐγο[μ€νοι 

5. The vestiges are rather in favour of (θίΧωσιν (R), but βιλωσιν (ADG) is not 

6. τοιαύτα : SO AD ; ταύτα G corr. marg. 

As already observed in the introduction, this sentence commences the next Book 
.according to the ordinary division. 

699. Theophrastus, Characters. 

7x4-2 cm. 

The text of the Characters of Theophrastus is notoriously insecure, and 
offers a problem upon which an early papyrus of any part of the book might 
be expected to throw some light. The present fragment, which contains the 
end of ch. 25 and the beginning of ch. 26, is however disappointing in this 
respect, giving a version which seems to be not less of the nature of a com- 
pendium than that of the Codex Monacensis. Unfortunately that MS. includes 
onl)• the first twenty-one chapters so that an actual comparison is not possible. 
The interest of the papyrus, therefore, chiefly lies in showing the antiquity 
of such compendia of the Characters. It is written in rather small oval uncials, 
which probably date from the earlier part of the third century. 


[■ • •]\[ '3 Ict-tei's [k]os τοιούτοι tSiah 

[κ]αι Xeyeii» 7r[ μ(ν λεγωΐ' ουκ [αγαθόν 

[ajvTov σωσ[αί ίπι σκη ίο [πο]λνκοιραΐ'ΐη (t[i κοιρα 

[ν]ην [ V09 (στω e[is] βασιλ[(υ5 

5 [η ολι]γ[αρ-χ]ια ΐστ[ίν φιλαρ)(ΐ και του δημον \f[ipoTO 

[α] τίΓ ίσχυοΓ if yov[y\TOS πολλού? [Aeyei πα 

[γ]λίχ^ομ€νη [ο Se ολιγαρχι [ρ€λθ]ων apKeaf[if era 

ι-4• The conclusion of ch. 25 (πίρϊ ftiX/ns) in the ordinary version is καΙ Βιηγΰσθ^ ir 

Kivhvvfvaas ίνα σίσωκα των ή ίλων' Km eiaayttv προς τον κατακ^Ιμίνον σκίψομί'νονς τοις ^ημότας και 
Toi'f φνλίταί, κα\ τούτωΐ' άμα €κάστω Βίη-γήαθαι i>s niros αντον ra'ts ίαυτοϋ χιρσ'ιν eWt σκηνην Έκόμισιν. 

If λίγίΐν in 1. 2 is right there is no room for (κομι.σ(ν. \ίτην (not φν\(την), which is an 
alternative, suggests nothing. In 1. 4 after [νψ is a broad blank space marking the end of 
the chapter. 

5. Ch. 26 {ττ(ρ\ ολιγαρχίας) begins So^ettv (O') Άν €ivai ή 6).ι.γαρχία φιΚαρχία Tit ισχυρώς 
κίρ^ονς •γ\ιχημ(νη. 6 δί ολιγαρχικός τοιούτος οίος τον ^ημον βονΧβνομΐ'νον (βονλομ. ]\ISS.) τίνας τω 
άρχοντι προσαφήσοιται {ττροαιρ. MSS.) της ττομττης xois σνν(πιμ(\ησρμ(νονς τταρίλθίον άποψήνασθαι 
ίαποφηνας €χ(ΐ AISS.) ως δβΐ αυτοκράτορας τούτους etvai' κΐιν ttKKoi προβάΧλωνται δί'κα \eyeiv Ικανός 
(ΐς (στιν, τοϋτον ίί ότι δ(ί avSpa ιιναι. κα) των Όμηρου (τιων toCto ei» μόνον κητίχίΐν, ότι οΰκ αγαθόν, 

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

700. Demosthenes, De Corona. 

14-5 X 4-4 t-m. 

This fragment is a strip from the bottom of a column containing parts of 
pp. 230-1 of the £)e Corona. The lines being incomplete both at beginning 
and end, it is doubtful how they should be divided ; the arrangement given 
below is therefore hypothetical. The hand is a rather irregular upright uncial 
of medium size, and more probably of the second century than the third. A 
high point is occasionally used, this and the diaeresis being the only lection 


marks that occur. Our collations in this and the other oratorical fragments 
(701-4) are with the Teubncr edition of Biass. 

Αθηναίοι και πρ[οσηκον ισωί 
ωί κατ eJKfiiOVi τοι /y x/)oi'[oyy €ίχ€ 
τα πρα]γματα αναμνησ^αι ινα 
npos τον] ^παροντα^ ϋτταρχο[ντα και 

5 ροι> ΐκα]στα θίωρητ^αι^ το[υ γαρ Φωκι 

κου συΐ']σταντο9 πολΐμ[ου ου Si e 

μ( ου γαρ] eycoye (πο\ιτ(υ[ομηΐ' π<ύ 
τοτ( πρώτον μ^ν v//]eti ο\ντ<ύ δΐΐ 

[κίΐσθί ωστΐ Φωκίας μ(ν βουλΐ] 
ΙΟ σθαι σωβηναι κα[ιιτ(ρ ου δίκαια ποι 

ουντα]ς ορωντα [Θηβαιοΐί δξ ο 

τιουν αν] ίφησθηναι πα[θονσιν 

ουκ αλογω]ί [ο]υδ αδικω9 α[υτοΐί οργι 

ζομΐΡοι o]is γαρ €ντυχτ]Κ€[σαν ev 
15 Λΐυκτρο]ις [ο]υ μΐτριως €Κ€[χρηντο e 

πΐΐτα η ΙΙ(\λ[ο]ποννησο5 απ[ασα δι 

(ίστηκίΐ] και ουθ ο[ι] μισου[ντα 

Λακΐδα]ιμονιου5 ισχύον [ουτωί 

(ΰστΐ a]ve\iiv αυτούς ου[θ οι ττρο 
20 ηρον δ]ι €Κΐΐνων αρχον[τΐί κυ 

ριοι των] ηολΐων ήσαν α[λ\α τΐ! 

ην ακρι]τοί και πάρα τουτο[ΐ5 .... 

. . . eptjy και ταραχηι• ταυ[τα ie ο 

ρων ο Φιλ]ιπποί ου γαρ ην α[φανη 
25 Toty παρ] (καστοΐί προδοτα[ΐγ χρη 

ματα αν]αλισκων πανταί [ 

]Β]λλησι αν 

3- ΰμα!, which Bl(ass) omits after άναμιησαι with SL, may have stood in the papyrus. 

4. παρόντα which was first written was a mere slip. 

5. The correction is probably by a second hand. 



8. The papyrus most likely had either rort or ποτί, like the other MSS. [wf] Bl. 

14. (υτνχτ]κ^\σαν: ηυτνχηκισαν 1Ά. 

1 8. ισχνον Γ οιτωί : οΰτω^ Χσγνον I\ISS. 

22-3. The usual reading here is «oi napa Toit aWms άπασιν Χρις, but some MSS. 
(including FYQO) omit παρά, Ο adding "ΈΧΚησιν after άπασιν, which is noticed as a variant 
also in FQ. It is manifest that none of these readings suits the papyrus, for only six or 
seven letters are required between Touro[if and fpijf. και πα\σιυ or απα\σιν might be read, 
or we may suppose that the scribe was led by the homoioteleuton of τούτοΐί and ίλλου to 
write simply τούτοις απα\σιν. The entry at the bottom of the column (probably by a second 
hand), where O's variant Ε]λλΐ)σι is followed by αν^ύ (cf. e.g. 223. 1 26), evidently refers to 
this passage ; but how much, if anything, stood before Ε]λλ>;σ« cannot of course be 
determined. In I. 23 1, ταραχή. 

701. Demo.sthenes, Contra Timocrateni. 

1 5-7 X 14-6 «■»'• 

Parts of three rather short and narrow columns (about 16x5 cm), covering 
pp. 720-1 of Demosthenes' speech against Timocrates. Of the first and third 
columns only a few letters remain, but the lower portion of the intervening one 
is complete. The text, which is written in handsome round uncials (cf. ββΐ, 
Plate v), probably of the end of the second century or of the first half of the 
third, seems, so far as can be judged, to be a fairly good one. 

Col. i. 

[Sefca 6t? ro 8\ικαστη 

[piov τριακονψ η 
[μΐρων αφ ηί α^ 

Col. ϋ. 

5 η α•ιτοτ^ί^ισα[ι (αν 

Sf αργνριο[υ τιμή 
θηι δΐ8€σθω re 
(By αν ΐκτισηι ο τι 
αν αντου καταγνω 

15 ^αν 6e αργυρίου τι 

μηθηι δΐδΐσθω 

τΐως αν ΐκτ^('^ίσηι• 


πΐΐταυσο (στιν 

ονν οπ(ύί evav 


10 σβηι aKOViTf ω 


aySpiS δικασται Xe 

ye avToii αυτό του 
το πάλιν 


20 τιωτίρα tis δυο 
θ(ΐη του δΐδΐσθαί 
τεββί au €/CT[[e]]ia(u 
(Tti/ τουί aXoyras 

Col. ίϋ. 

evavTia αυτοί 
25 α[υτϋα νομοθίΤ(ΐν 
τιίξιωσίν ουδΐ τοΐ9 
α[λλοΐί των ιό 
lj[c>>v (ωντων ίμοι 
ΐχ[€ν γαρ (ΐνΐκα αν 
30 a[iSeiat ο τοιου 

7[os SoKei παν 
α[ν (τοιμωί ep 
γ[ον ποιησαι ωσπ^ρ 
το[ίνυν ω aySpei 
35 Α[θηναιοι των π( 
ρι [ταλλα 

3- The length of the line indicates that (vros was omitted before τριακον]θ, as in A ; so 

7. Teat: so Bl. with B; rt ews SA. Cf. II. 17 and 22, where S has reait, A τ( ίωί as 

5. For the deletion of the f of αποτ(ίσα[ι cf. II. 17 and 22, and 1. 8, where ίκτισψ is 
written. -τ«σ- Bl. in all these passages. 

19. av is similarly omitted before (vaimwrepa in A. evavriiiTep Sv Bl., following a con- 
jecture of Weil. 

24-33. The vestiges of the initial letters here are with two or three exceptions too 
slight for certain recognition, and the arrangement of the lines is therefore insecure, ιί and 
μ[ in II. 27-8 are not very satisfactory, more especially the latter, in place of which α or λ 
would be more suitable. A greater difficulty however arises in 1. 32, where the traces 
would suit i{ much better than a[. But the division πα\ν is extremely improbable, especially 
as 1. 31 is a short one; moreover the papyrus is rather rubbed, and a can therefore hardly 
be absolutely e.xcluded, though very doubtful. 

702. Demosthenes, Contra Boeotum. 

135 X 6-5 m. 

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



type, though 6 and C have a tendency to become narrow, and which we should 
ascribe to the second century, and perhaps the earlier part of it. The text has 
no variants of importance. 

6η και [τ\αυτα, Xeyfo) 

€κ τούτων των μ[αρ 

τνριω[ν] (ΐσΐσθΐ 
> — - 


5 τοσαυτα τοινυν [e 

μου €λ[α]ττοΐ'/χ€ί'[οι; 

φανΐρωί ουτοσι [ 

νυν σ-^ΐ\τ\ιαζων \και 

7. οκτοσί : so MSS. ; oJtos Bl(ass). 

8. νυν : so Bl. with S, &c. ; vwi FQ. 

9. τη^ν : so FQ ; κα\ τήν Bl. with S, &c. 

10. μου: so r; μ( Bl. with S, &c. 

5ίΐνοπαθων τη[ν 
ΙΟ προίκα μου τηί μ[η 
Tpos αποσ•τ(ρησ•([ι 

αλλ f/iety ω ai^SpfS 
δικασ[τα]ι προ[^ Διοί 
κα[ι θίω]ν μη κ[ατα 
15 [ττλαγητΐ] νπο τ[η9 

ρ. 1024 

703. Aeschines, /η Ctesiphontem. 

gxg cm. 

This small fragment, containing parts of §§ 94 and 96 of Aeschines' speech 
against Ctesiphon, belongs to what must have been an exceptionally interesting 
text, for in spite of its insignificant size it has three new readings, all of which 
are or may be improvements. The handwriting is in oval sloping uncial of the 
usual third century type. High stops and a paragraphus occur. 

Col. i. 

Col. ii. 

10 [αλλο]ΐ'[$'] τ[ω]ν [Ε]λλην[ων 
ovs βουλΐσθαι [κ''^ινων[(ΐν 
τη^ σννταζίωί• ωστ[( 
ουτΐ χ^ρηματων οι/^τΐ 
στρατιωτ[ω]ν απορια[ν 

15 ΐσίσθαι• και ταύτα μίν 

8η τα ψανίρα• (ψη $[( 


flpeo'y [(ηιν] 
[ra^fiS και Tas] e| Eperpi 
[as τα 8ΐκα ταλ]αντα ζων 
\των ] 

και π[ρα^ίΐί πρατηιν 
erepa[y Bl απορρήτων 
και τ(/\υτων eivai τιναί 
20 μαρτ[νραΐ 

2 lines lost 

8. ζων\τα>ν; the MSS. have όρώντων φρονοΰντων βλιπόντωρ. Whether the papyrus 
inserted ζώιπ-ων before όρώντων or had ζώντων in place of one of the other three verbs 
(probably όρώντων) cannot be determined, ζώιη-ων makes a more forcible prelude than 

όρώντων to φρονοΰντων βΚιπόντων. 

1 4-5. απΌρια^»] tataBai : ΐσίσθαι. άπορίαν Bl. with MSS. The papyrus reading avoids 
a hiatus. 

16. δι;: cm. MSS., BI. The insertion of δή is an improvement. 

704. I SOCRATES, Contra Sophistas. 

7-9 X 10-3 cm. 

Parts of two columns containing portions of §§ 16-18 of Isocrates' oration 
(xiii) against the sophists, written in sloping oval uncials of the usual third 
century type. The text contains no striking v^ariants. 

Col. i. 

Col. ii. 

\Ίτρο{Κίσ&\αι και 
[μιξασθαι npos aX] 
[ληλαί] και ταξα 
[σί]α_ί κατά τρόπον 
5 (ΤΙ δι των καιρών 
μη διαμαρτΐΐν αλ 
[λα] και Τ019 (νθνμ[η 
μασ[ι π]ρ(ποντω5 
ολο[ν] τον λογον κα 
ΙΟ τα[π]ο[ι]κΐΐΧαι κα[ι 
τοίί ονομασιν ev 

§ 16 

TCDV 8[ι3ακτων 
παραλ[ιπ€ΐν π(ρι 
Se των λ'οιπων 
τοιουτο[ν αυτόν 
20 παραδίΐ[γμα πάρα 
σχίΐν ωσ-τ[β τονί 
(κτνπωθ[€νταί και 
μιμησί[σθαι δυ 

§ ι8 



ρνθμως ic[at μ]ονσι ΐ'ηθ(ΐ>τα[ς (vOvs 

[κ]ως untLv ταύτα § 17 25 ανθηρ[οτ€ρον τι ? 

Sf πολληί €πιμ€ και γ^αρΐίστ(ρον 

15 [Xetajy [8(ΐσ\θαι και τ<ύ[ν αΧΧων φαι 

2. [μιξασθαί•. SO ΓΔ (first hand) Εθ ; Β1. follows Plan, and Δ (corr.) in reading μίξαι, 
which is too short to suit the papyrus. Cf. the next note. 

3-4. ταξα[σθ]αι : SO ΓΔΕΘ ; τάξαι Bl. 

23. μιμησ([σβαι•. μιμήσασΰαι Bl. With ΓΔΕΘ ; μιμΰσθαι VulgO. The papyrUS reading Is 
an error for μιμήσασθαι. 

δυ]νηθ(ντα[! : SO in the Antidosis of Ε and vulgo ; δυναμίνου! Bl. with all the best MSS. 
25. ανθηρυτίριιν by itself is not sufficient to fill up this line ; re or n, which is not found 
in the MSS., may be inserted. 




705. Two Petitions to the Emperors with Replies. 

21-2 X 46 cm. A.D. 200-2. 

A generous effort to lighten some of the burdens which weighed upon the 
unfortunate Egyptians in the Roman period is recorded in these copies of two 
petitions to Septimius Severus and Caracalla, to which the Emperors' replies 
are, as usual, prefixed instead of being appended. The document, which is 
written in a rude uncial hand on the verso of 740, contained four columns, but 
of these the first and last are too incomplete to have any value. A mention of 
the praefect Laetus in 1. 40 fixes the date within the years 200-2. 

The writer of both petitions is Aurelius Horion, who had held high offices 
at Alexandria and was a rich landowner in the Oxyrhynchite nome ; his object 

705. OFFICIAL 163 

in both cases was to secure the Imperial guarantee that certain benefactions 
which he proposed to found in that district would be permanently maintained. 
In the first petition (11. 15-53) it is Oxyrhynchus itself which is to be the 
recipient of his favour, and the earlier part of the letter, as far as 1. 42, is 
devoted to an interesting sketch of the claims which that city possessed upon 
the Imperial consideration. After the lengthy introduction (11. 15-31), which 
can be restored on the analogy of 11. 65-8, and nine mutilated lines, Aurelius 
Horion reminds the Emperors (11. 31-5) of 'the loyalty, fidelity, and friendship 
towards the Romans which the Oxyrhynchites had displayed both by helping 
them in the war against the Jews, and continuing up to the present to celebrate 
the day of victory by an annual festival.' This war refers to some Jewish 
rising in Egypt which perhaps took place not long before the date of the 
letter, like the Jewish rebellion in the reign of Hadrian mentioned in B. G. U. 
889 ; but it would seem from the use of the word ■ηόλίμοί to have been on 
a larger scale than the revolt in Hadrian's time. Aurelius Horion's next 
argument (11. 36-9) is ' Moreover, you yourselves honoured the Oxyrhynchites 
when you visited the country, by allowing them to enter your judgement-seat 
first after the Pelusiots.' This well illustrates the importance which Oxyrhynchus 
had attained by A. D. 200, when it was one of the chief towns in Egypt, and 
already ranked above Memphis. Thirdly (11. 39-42), Aurelius Horion appeals 
to the opinion of the city held by the praefect, Laetus, who will, he says, bear 
evidence in its favour. After these preliminaries the writer comes to his scheme 
(11. 43-51). Owing to the imperfect condition of 11. 43-6 the details are not 
quite clear, but apparently Aurelius Horion proposed to devote, nominally in 
the form of a loan, a large sum of money which was to be invested, and of 
which the interest was to be expended upon maintaining the annual contests 
of ephebi at Oxyrhynchus upon the same scale of splendour as that of similar 
contests elsewhere, perhaps at Antinoe (cf 1. 50, note). The petition concludes 
(11. 51-3) with the request that the Emperors will give orders forbidding the 
diversion of the benefaction to any other purpose than that intended by its 
founder. The answer of the Emperors (11. 1-14) is for the most part lost, but 
that it was of a favourable character is made certain by direct references to 
it in their answer to the second petition (cf 1. 59 καΐ ταύτης, 6i τ[υ] όμοιον δ?; καΐ 
ί[π]ι τούτον φνλαχθησίταή. It is pleasing to know that Oxyrhynchus enjoyed the 
fruits of Aurelius Horion's generosity for more than a century ; for in 60, 
written in A. D. 333, we find the logistes, unmindful of the clash of empires, 
quietly issuing a notice that the gymnastic display by the ephebi will take 
place on the following day. 

The second petition (11. 65-90) is practically complete, so far as it goes, and 

Μ 3 


deals with a plan for benefiting certain villages in the Oxyrhynchite nome, the 
inhabitants of which had been so exhausted by the annual λΐαουμγίαι in the form 
of contributions to the State and compulsory obligations to act as guards that 
there was a prospect of the land being deserted. Aurelius Horion therefore 
proposed to present each village with a sum of money to be invested in hay, 
the yearly revenue being devoted to the assistance of the inhabitants on whom 
the λατουργίαί fell. To this the Emperors reply (11. 54-63), signifying their 
approval of this scheme as of the former one, and guaranteeing the continuance 
of the benefaction. 

Col. i. 
[Αυτοκράτωρ Καίσαρ Λούκίοί Χ]ίπτίμ[ί]ο[9 
[^(ουήροί Εύσββηί Ιΐίρτίνα^ Χ]ίβαστοί 
['Αραβικοί ΆδιαβηΐΊκοί Πα]ρ[θικ]ος 
[Μέγιστος καΐ Αντ]οκράτ(ύρ Κ[αι]σαρ 
5 [Μάρκοί Αύρηλιοί Αν\τωνΐνοί Ευίσ^αβηί 

[Χφαστοί ] 

[Ανρηλίψ 'ί1ρ(ίω]ΐΊ γαίρ^ιν. 

[ 15 letters ] . ηχα[ ] ίπΐδο- 

[ 13 „ τω]ν Οζνρνγχ^βιτωγ [.]οσ- 
10 [ ι6 „ ]αΐ'τιιια . . . αγ ■ [.]»' 

[ ι6 „ ]a."V[.]er....[.]X[. .] 

[ 15 .. ]/^ey f'y τ\ Ι" 

[ 15 „ ]τίασ•ί . [ ]ν 

[ 15 η ] • fo-Tif [Se ή ά]ξί[ωσΐ5• 

15 [toIs ίύμΐνίστάτοις Αύτ]οκράτορσιν [Χ\€(^υή\ρ<ο 

[καΐ Αντωνίνω τοΐί] 7Γάί'[τ]ωί/ [αίνθρώπων 

[σωτήρσι και (ύ(ρ]γΐταΐί Αυρήλιος 

^ίΐρύων yfvopi]vos στρατηγοί και άρχι- 

[βικαστηί τηί λαμ]προτάτη9 π6λ[€]ωί τωι/ 
2θ [Αλί^ανδρίων] γαίρ^ιν. 

[ ώ ψι\ανθρα>ΐΓ\ότατοι Αντοκράτορ^ί 

[ 14 letters ] . t t[s πό]λ€ί μΐγάλτ) 

[ 14 ,, ](Vfi και ΐτι [σ]ωζονστι 

[ 13 » ] • [•]•'*?.'' κατίο^κισίν . . y 

25 ■ [ 15 » ]Γ"ΐ•]?ΤίΓ[ ]?■ 

705. OFFICIAL 165 


[ 15 letters ] . ίνωτ([ ]«'€ 

[ 15 ,. Η«λ . . . [ ].v 

[ 14 „ ]So^.[.].,i[ v.]. 9 

Col. ii. 

a[ ]ov και αλ[. ■]craij.[. , .]λα 

3o ... [.] π[λ]είω ων ό [Xjoyoy e'/i€ τ[. . . λ]αί'ίό[ί'€ί,] 

7Γ/5[όσ€]σ7[ί] δ€ αΰτοΓί και ή προί 'Ρωμαίους (w[oi- 
ά τ€ και πίστίί και φιλία ην eyeSet^ai'TO κα[ι 
κατά τον wpos ElovSaiovs πόλεμον σνμμαχ^η- 
aavTei καΐ ίτι και νΰν την των ίηινΐΐκίων 
35 ήμίραν εκάστου 'ίτουί ηανηγυρίζονταί. 

ίτειμησατ€ μεν οΰν και ύμεΐί avTovs ΐπιδη- 
μήσ[αν]τε9 τω εθνει ττρώτοΐί μετά. Πηλον- 
σιωτας μεταδόνταί της eh το 3[ικ]αστήριο[ν ύμω]ν 
εισόδου, -γνωρίζει δε την η6λ[ιν] και ό λαμτΓ[ρ6τα- 
40 TOS Λαΐτοί επί τε τοΐί καλλίσ[το]ι.ί και έλ^νθερω- 

τάτουί εγονσαν τονί ενοικο[νν]τ[αί κα]ι ιτ[ 

μειο[.] επιεικέστατους, διαδί 13 letters 
Tfjv πάλιν ηθέλησα μηδε[ 13 ,, 

τω[ν] ημέτερων καταλιπε[ 13 „ 

45 ■''/?.'?[•]'^/^'/'' '^"' ■'"o^y ΐ'πυσμ[ 13 „ 

ούκ [ε]λ[α]ττον 'Αττικών μυρι[. . . .]ι τω_ΐ'[ 

Tas δανείζεσθαί τε και (ρυλ[άσσε]σθαι καθα έπ[ι 
των προτέρων ωρισται, το[ν δε] σ[υ]ναγ6μενον 
τ[ο\κον γωρεΐν εΐί έπαθλα εφήβων των παρ' αύ- 

5ο '"[ο]'!?] '^«τ' iTOS άγωνιουμενων έφ' ois κα[ϊ] οι Αν- 

τ[ι\ν\οΐί ?] νΰν άγωνίζοντε. καϊ άξιώ κελεΰ[σαι ν]μά5 
κα[ϊ τ]αΰτ[α] τα χρήματα μηδενι εξεΐν[α]ι εΪ! άλ- 
λ[ο μηδέν] πε[ρ]ισπαν. 

32. ττιστ of πιστίΓ COrr, 35• '• ΐ'ΐ^νη'/νρίζοντα. 38. 1• μeτahάvτ(ς. ^Ο. 1. «λί^υ- 

ί€ρω]τ<ίτο«. 4'• υσαν of ίχουσα» above ιταί erased. 45• ΐ"Γ Pap. 5'• 1. ayuw'foi/rat. 


Col. iii. 
Αυτοκράτωρ Καίσαρ Λ[6\νκιοί [Ζγπτίμ\ιοί Σ]([ού\ηροί 

55 Εϋσ(β[η]ί ΙΊ(ρτίι>αζ Σΐβαστοί 'Αραβικού Α8ιαβηι>ικοί 

Παρθικού Μ(γίσ[το]ν [κ]αΙ Αυτοκράτωρ Καίσαρ 
Μάρκο[$'] Αυρήλιος Άντωνΐνοί Ενσΐβηί Σίβαστοί 
Ανρηλίω Ώρύωνι γαίρζΐν, 

άιτο8(γόμΐθα σ€ και ταύτης της ίττιδόσίωί ην 

6ο άζιοΐί kmSovvai ταΐς κώμαις των Ο^νρνγγίΐτων 

άποδι8ονί αμοιβών ίνκτήσίως. τ[ο] ομοιον δη και 
ί[π]ϊ τούτον φνλαχθήσΐται και καθ6τ[ι ή]θ(Χησαί άμί- 
τάστρίίττον e/y eTepoy τι δατταΐ'ήσ[ΐσ]θαι τ^ν χάριρ. 
(στιν 06 η αξιωσίΫ• 

65 τοϊί (ύμΐν^στάτοΐί Αϋτοκράτ[ο]ρσι 2([ουήρ]ω και Άντωνίνω 
τοϊί πάντων ανθρώπων σωτήρσιν [κ]αι evepyfraii 
Αυρήλιο? Ώρβίων γΐνόμίνος στρατη[γ]ύί καΐ άρχιδικασ- 

Tr)s τήί λαμ[π]ροτάτηί πόλΐως των Αλίξανδρίων yaipuv. 
κώμαί TivfS τοΰ Οζνρνγχβίτου νομον, ω φιλανθρωπότα- 

70 τοι Αυτοκράτορα, kv ah εγώ re (/cat) ο'ι υιοί μου χωρία κ€κτήμ€- 

θα σφ[ο\δρα έζησθίνησαν ίνοχλούμίναι ΰπο των κατ eroy 
λειτουργιών τοΰ τΐ ταμΐίου και της παρα[φ]υ\λ'\ακης των 
τόπων, κινδυνεύουσί Τί τω μεν ταμίίω παραπολί- 
σθαι την δ( νμετίραν γήν άγΐώργητον καταλιπίΊν. 

75 ϊγω \ο\υν και τον φιλάνθρωπου καΐ τοΰ χρησίμου στογα- 

ζ[6μΐ\νος βούλομαι f/y άνάκτησιν αύτων ΐπίδοσίν 
τ\ινα\ βραγίΐαν Ικάστη ποιήσασθαι eh συνωνην 
γ[6ρτ]ου ου ή πρόσοδος κατατΐθήσίται eh τροφας και 
ί{απά]νας των κατ troy λΐΐτ ου ργησ όντων ΐπι τω 

55• ί σφαστος inserted later, τογ being above the line. 1. 'ApajSiicor. t of α^ιαβηνικυ: 
corr. from v. 56. 1. Παρθικός Μίγισ[το]ι. 57. Final t of (νσ(βηί inserted above the 

line. 70. dot Pap. 74. 1. ήμ(Τίραι/{}). 

Col. iv. 

(80) lost, (81). [, (82) λ[, (83) t[, (84) τα[, (85) βρ . [, (86) €7γ[, (87) vai.[, 
(88) μητ[, (89) τοχ[, (90) φ..[ 

705. OFFICIAL 167 

8. The first word probably was or corresponded to απο^(χόμ€θα ; cf. I. 59. 
20. The position of χαίραν after, instead of before, the nominative (cf. 1. 68), is 

42. Perhaps ίιά ί[ί ταντα. 

46. ονκ ΐλαττοιι Αττικών μυρίων would refer to the sum which AureHus Horion proposed 
to spend, but if ταλάντων is supplied at the end of 1. 45 (it cannot come in 1. 46) the amount 
seems enormous. Possibly Αττικών is masculine and should be separated from μυρι[. 

47• ίαν(ίζ(σθαί: the benefaction apparently took the form of a loan to the city, but 
since the interest was devoted to public purposes, it was to all intents a gift ; cf the similar 
case in 11. 76-8. 

50. "Avt[iJ>{°'S'^ "i'•' 'S very doubtful, though a proper name would be expected. The 
V at the end of 1. 50 is fairly certain, the only alternative being yo, but the second ν could 
equally well be ». For wv, (ων can be read. 

54-79. 'The Emperor Caesar Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus 
Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Waximus and the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius 
Antoninus Pius Augustus to Aurelius Horion, greeting. We approve of this benefaction 
also which you request leave to confer upon the villages of the Oxyrhynchite nome, giving 
(to different persons) a succession in the enjoyment of it(?). I'he same rule shall be 
observed in this case also, and, as you wish, no change shall be introduced which would 
divert the gift to any other purpose. 

' The request is as follows : — 

' To the most gracious Emperors, Severus and Antoninus, the saviours and benefactors 
of the world, Aurelius Horion, formerly strategus and archidicastes of the most illustrious 
city of Alexandria, greeting. Certain villages in the Oxyrhynchite nome, most humane 
Emperors, in which both I and my sons own estates, are utterly exhausted by the burden- 
some demands of the annual XeiTovp-yim required both for the Treasur}• and the protection 
of the districts, and there is a danger of their being ruined as far as the Treasury is 
concerned and leaving our (?) land uncultivated. Accordingly having before me a both 
humane and useful object I wish, in order that they may recover, to make a trifling 
benefaction to each one for the purchase of hay, the revenue of which shall be devoted to 
the maintenance and support of those who are annually subject to the λατονργίαι on condition 
that ' 

6 1 . άμοιβην ίνκτήσιωί πο doubt refers to something which was explained more fully ir» 
11. 80 sqq., and owing to the loss of these the meaning is uncertain. We have supposed 
the sense to be that the inhabitants would enjoy the fruit of the benefaction successively as 
they were called upon to undertake the XfiToipyim. 

62-3. άμ(τάστρ(Τ!τον fis fTfpoi• κ.τ.λ. : two ideas seem to be confused, (i) the gift is to 
be αμ(τάστρ(πτον, (ζ) it is forbidden (sc. μη ί|(στα») to spend it on other purposes. 

74. vptTfpav may be right, referring to βασΛική or ούσιηκ^ γη ; but since the scribe is 
not very accurate, and Aurelius Horion has mentioned his own land in 1. 70, the correction 
ήμκτίραν is more probable. 

77. ii't συνωνήν χ[όρτ]ου : cf. 507. 24. The details of the scheme are somewhat 
obscure, but it is clear that the benefaction would extend over a series of years, and unless 
the (π'ί&οσκ was an annual present (in which case the necessity for having an Imperial 
guarantee for its continuance seems pointless), it must have been a capital sum of money 
which produced a yearly revenue ; cf the first petition, especially 11. 48-9. Apparently 
the revenue of the eViioair was to be assigned to the different villages, i.e. placed in charge 



of the chief men, and invested in ha_v, the profits from the sale of which were to be assigned 
to the persons who in any year were burdened with Xdroxipyiiu. Why Aurelius Horion 
selected this particular form for his benefaction we cannot say ; but 507 suggests that 
good profits were to be made out of hay, presumably by buying it cheap and selling it dear. 

706. Report of Legal Proceedings. 

i6-6x IO-8 cm. 

About A.D. 115. 

Conclusion of a report of a case tried before M. Rutilius Lupus, praefect 
in A.D. 1 14-7. The litigants were Damarion, apparently a freedman, and his 
patron Heraclides ; but owing to the mutilation of the papyrus the precise 
nature of the question at issue is not clear. Damarion asserted that Heraclides 
had accepted from him a sum of money in settlement of all claims, but the 
praefect nevertheless gave an entirely adverse judgement, and threatened to 
have him beaten if further complaints were made. The most interesting point 
is the opposition between the native Egyptian law and the άσηκοι νόμοι, ί. e. 
the law of Alexandria, which conferred certain powers upon the patrons of 
liberated slaves in relation to the slaves so liberated, and upon which the 
decision of the praefect is based. No doubt Heraclides was an Alexandrian 


11 letters ] παρ Αιγύπτιοι' s 18 letters 

Tovs άπ(λ(νθ](ρουί τοϊί πάτρωσι, τον S( Ήρα[κ]λ(ΐ8ηι/ 

άπ(ΐ\η]φ(ναί παρ αύτον apyvpiov και γίγρα- 

φίναι γΐΐρόγργιφον π^ρΐ τοϋ μηδ^ν f^e'i' πράγμα 
προί αυτόν, κα^Ι avayvovTos το ^(ΐρόγραφον Λονπο! 
βονλΐνσάμβνος μίτα των φίλων άπίφήνατο οντωί' 
kv μ\ν τοΐί των] Αιγυπτίων νόμοΐί ovSfv πΐρΐ της 

14 letters ]ris ΐξουσίας των άπίλ(νθ(ρωσάντων 

15 „ ] ά[κο]λονθω9 τοίί άστικοΪ! νόμοΐί 

12 „ Δαμαρί]ωνα 'HpaKXeiSr] τω πάτρωνι 

ΙΟ „ κ]ατα τον νόμον. και τω Ααμαρίωνι ΐϊπΐν 

II „ ]ου και προστίθημι ϊάν σ€ μίμψηται 

9 „ ζυ]λοκοπηθήναί σ€ κ(λ(ύσω'. 

707. OFFICIAL 169 

6. βον\(νσιΊμ(νο\! κ.τ.λ. : cf. e.g. P. Catt. iv. 12, 19, and P. Goodsp. 29. iii. i, where 

read ίίΐβ(ραΚ'ΐί (?) λαλι^σατ. 

9• Tols άστικοϊΕ ΐΌ'μοΐί : cf. the common use of άστ09 and άστη to designate citizens of 
Alexandria, e.g. 271. 3, 477. 14. That Alexandrians enjoyed certain privileges, especially 
with regard to taxation, is well-known, but the present seems to be the first direct reference 
to a peculiar code of law. Lumbroso had indeed already inferred (I'EgiHo, p. 65) from the 
distinction drawn between citizens of Alexandria and others in the matter of corporal 
punishment (Philo, in Flac. c. 10) that there were also differences of law and procedure; 
and this view now finds ample confirmation. Cf. the contrast in the Ptolemaic period 
between the ττολιτκυΐ νόμοι (i.e. laws particularly affecting the Greeks, P. Tebt. I. p. 58) and 
the T^f χώραί νόμο% in P. Taur. i. iv. 17 and vii. 9. 

13. ^v%0K(mr\&i\vai : cf. 653 iav μη ποιήστ/ί oi μόνον κατακριθήσα αλλά και 8αρήσ ei. Perhaps 

Ήρακ\(ί&η! is to be supplied at the beginning of the line, though this would place Damarion 
entirely at his opponent's mercy. 

707. Report of Legal Proceedings. 

26χ3ΐ•5ί•«?. About A. D. 136. 

What remains of this account of a trial before some magistrate — the 
particular court is not specified — consists chiefly of the opening speech of the 
counsel for the plaintiff Plutarchus. The prime cause of the dispute was the 
failure of one of the defendants, Philinus, to fulfil the terms of a contract, a copy 
of which is prefixed (Col. i), made by him with a woman named Demctria for 
the lease of a vineyard and orchard. Philinus had undertaken to carry out 
certain improvements, in consideration of which he had received from Demctria 
a sum of 2000 drachmae. The promised improvements, however, were not 
effected ; and the obligations of Philinus were subsequently taken over by his 
brother Antistius. At the expiration of the term of the lease the land seems 
to have been let to a new tenant, the plaintiff Plutarchus (cf. note on 11. 15-7) ; 
but the 'papyrus breaks off before the relation of the latter to the two brothers 
or the occasion of the present dispute are elucidated. 

This document is on the verso of the papyrus. The recto is occupied with 
three columns of a survey of different pieces of land, written probably early in 
the second century. Mention is made of ψιλ(οι) το7γ(οι) ei» ol[sj κίΧλαι (μτ,{οωύ- 
μ(ναι?) ντ!ο των Ιουδαίων and of τοπ(οί) ιερατικοί. 

Col. ί. 

]β''Ίΐ[• ■ 
V 8ημοσί<ΰν και 


]π[ {)]iTip φόρου οϊνου 

ΐ\ζα(τίαί ίκτακτα 
g ^αγ kirl την α[υ\την i^aertap 8ημο- 

σί(ον ]y τ^ o-iiTfl (ζαΐτία ίπάναγκον Sk «oy 

οΙκο8ομη]σα> τρόπον (κ καινήί των ΐπάνω μΐ- 
ρ&ν ]]} '"'"■R^ ■'■^y Δημήτρια^ [Βραγ^μα^) Β αφ ων ίίσιν 

] Δημήτρια^ ζ(υ{γ ) β βοών {8ραχμ ) νξ καΐ καταΰη- 
10 ]ν πάντα σύμφυτα και 'ίμφορα και ακολ{ονθ ) 

]κ . [. . . .\ίσα«' και eiSoKco. ΧΡ[ό{νοί)] ό ού(τΟΓ). 

Col. ϋ. 

[ίΐλοιίταρχοί πρό]ί Φιλΐν[ο]ν και Άνθίστιον άμφοτίροι^ς 

[ άπο Όζνρύγχων 7Γ]6λ[(ω]ί. Χαραηίων ρήτωρ ΰπ\ρ 

[Πλοντάρχον (ϊπΐν ό σννηγορονμ](νθ9 ΤΙΧούταργο^ ΐμισθώ- 

15 [σατο πάρα Δημητρίαί τίνα π](ρϊ τον Ο^νρυ-γγΐίτην ύπαρξιν 
[ 21 letters ]τ] Δημήτρια προπΐποίηται τοΪ5 

[ ι6 „ μίσθ]ώσ{ω[!] ο yeoTepoi των άντιτ(τ[α]γμί- 

[νων Φιλ(ΐνο\ί μισθωίτάμίνοί παρίι αντήί άπο τοΰ tS (^(του!) 
Ά8ρια[νοϋ Καίσ]αρογ τοΰ κυρίου fh (τη ίξ άμπΐλωνα και πω- 

2θ μάρ[ιον πίρϊ κώ^μην 'Σΐρΰφιν κατ ίνγραπτον μίσθωσιν Si η? 
δίδήλω[τ]αί ΐν μ\ν ττ] πρώττ} τ(τρα(τία μη8\ν ΰπ\ρ φόρου 
Τΐλίσαι άλλα μόνα [τ]α δημόσια διαγράψαι ΐπι τω πάσαν 
την ίν τω κτ[ή]ματι διάψΐΐλον γήν άνάξαι άμπίλω τη 
δ\ λοιπή SifTta τΐλίσαι τα δια τηί μισθώσΐω^ ϋπΐρ φο- 

25 ρου άνίίλημμίνα άνασ[τη\σα( Τ€ ray τοΰ κτήματος 
και πωμαρίου πλάταί ίπΐ μίτροΐί και λαμβάνοντα 
πάρα τήί Δημήτρια! {δραχμαί) 'Β άνοικοδομησαι τροχον ΐκ και- 
νής fi 6[πτήί] πλίνθου (πι μίτροΐί ώρισμίνοΐί. ον- 
πΐρ λαβόντα ray (δραχμας) 'Β τον μΐν τροχον μη πΐποιηκίναι 

3θ ΐπϊ τοΐί δ[η]λωθ(ΐσι μίτροΐί άλλα άσυντίλ(στον κατα- 
λΐλοιπίναι τον re κ[τ]ήματοί τίλΐΐον ημ{ληκί.ναι 
καΧ μηδ\ ray πλάταy πίριβφληκίναι. τούτων οντω! 
ί\όντων τω ιθ [(Τ(ΐ) Άδριανοΰ Καίσαρος τοΰ κυρίου ίνγνητης 

707. OFFICIAL 171 

yeiferai τοΰ άδΐλφοΰ ΦιΚύνου ^Α]νθίστίο^ πάντων των 
35 5ίά τηί μ[ι.]σθώσί[ω^\ άνΐΐλημ[μί]νων και ea-\e avTOS τα συν- 
γ^γραμμίνα α[. , . .] , . ν . αλ[. . .] γη μη άναγβΰσα άμπΐλω 
άχρι τούτου δ[ 13 letters ]τ]μ . . as δΐ ίκ τον ϊποικίου 
και iTe[p 16 „ ό] άντιτΐτα-γμίνοί και . . [. . 

ουκο\[ ι8 „ "[aTos και δραχμα[ί 

40 κοσία[ί ι6 „ μ](ναί ΰπό tivos y({ 

^vhvl'^p^"- ^5 .. ]«?■[ ]" «?■[ 

αΰτον τ[ 17 „ ] ■ ^v[ 

λωσ . [ 

τω κ (ίτ«) [ 

9• κα ο{ κατά written above πα. ly. 1. «ώτ(ροΓ. μ of ai/TiTfrfa^-y/if corr. from λ? 

2 2. αι of τ«λ<σαι written above r;• 27. In the left margin against this line is an oblique 

dash. 36. a of αλ[ corr. and λ above the line over a deleted letter. 

Col. ii. ' Plutarchus son of . . . against Philinus and Antistius, both sons of . . ., of 
Oxyrhynchus. Sarapion, advocate for Plutarchus, said : — RIy client Plutarchus leased from 
Demetria a property in the O.xyrhynchite nome following upon (?) a lease previously made 
with Demetria by Philinus, the younger of our opponents, who rented from her for 6 years 
from the 14th year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord a vineyard and orchard at the village of 
Seruphis in accordance with a written agreement, in which it was stated that in the first 
four years he should be charged no rent but only pay the taxes on condition of his planting 
vines over the whole of the open space in the vineyard, that for the remaining two years he 
should pay the rent set forth in the lease, that he should restore on a certain scale the 
walls (?) of the vineyard and orchard, and on receiving from Demetria 2000 drachmae should 
build on a fixed scale a new wheel of baked brick. It appears that having taken the 2000 
drachmae he did not make the wheel according to the stated scale, but left it uncompleted 
and entirely neglected the vineyard, not even putting up the walls round it. In these 
circumstances in the 19th year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord Antistius became surety on 
behalf of his brother Philinus for all the obligations of the lease and himself took over . . .' 

4. (κτπκτα: cf. 646 & ίσται καί (κτακτον τοΰ . . . άψήλικος. 

8-g. The value of the two pairs of βόίί, 460 drachmae, was apparently included 
in the 2000 drachmae received by Philinus from Demetria (cf. 11. 26-9), and 1. 9 is 

probably to be restored τιμή i>v ϊχω πάρα τψ] ΑημητρΙα: fiu(ytt>r) β βοών {8ραχμαΊ) νξ. Cf. 

729. 39 sqq., where βόί! are a good deal more expensive, καταθη might perhaps be read 
τά κηθή\[κοντα (?), the κα being above the line. 

10. σύμφυτα: cf. 729. 2 2. ίμφορο! is Otherwise known only from Hesychius, ΐμψορα• 
νροβίβλημίνα• άγ(\η προβάτων, where Commentators have supposed some corruption. 

15-7. The restoration of these lines, which involve the relations of Plutarchus to 
Demetria and the brothers, is a doubtful matter. If Αημητρία is made the subject of 
προπ(ποΐηται, the nominatives ό vfOTepot . . . μισθωσάμ^νος, are left suspended. \Ve are 


therefore inclined to read Αημητρία, connecting ό vfoirtpos with προπ(πηίηται, and suggest 

νπαρ^ιν [άρουρωρ €ζ ηζ Tj) αντ^η (or σνν τ jjj Αημητρία προπΐποίηται τοΐ? 1ίμπροσθ(ν χρόνοι: 

μισθ]ώσ(ω[!\ κ.τ.λ. π](ρ\ τον 'οξυρ\ιγχ(ίτην is unusual ; fv τω Ό. would be expected. 

23. 8ta\lffi\ov γην : this phrase, which here occurs for the first time, throws light 
upon two passages in the B. G. U. which have hitherto remained unexplained (cf. Wilcken, 
Os(. I. p. 404). These are entries in two very closely related taxing-lists from Socnopaei 

NeSUS, B. G. U. 10. 8 ψυγμοΰ κα\ 8ίαψ(ίλ(ον Or -ων) {άρονρών) ι/δ and 277• ''• S δ'πψ'''7Μ'''"'*'' 

και διαψίΐλων wpos (\αιω[νή (^άρουρων) vS, the heading in each case being followed by two 
or three names. The 54 arourae are evidently the same in both documents, and consisted 

of a ψυ-γμόί or Βιαψύγματα (cf. P. Tebt. 86. 45 and 522. 4) and 5ιά\Ι^(ΐλα or ίιάψα\η! yi, 

upon which certain payments had to be made by the persons named. How 8io\//iXot 
differed from ψιλή y^, if at all, does not appear. The word is found in Hesychius, ψηνόι' 
ψίδνος^ ^ίάψιΧος. 

2$. άναΧημμίνα: the Verb recurs in the same unusual sense in 1. 35. B. G. U. 277. 
ii. 10 oi φίΧροι) (V ονσίπκω λόγω άναΧαμβύνονται is hardly parallel. 

26. πωμαρίου is of course the Latin pomariiim. The use of πλάταΓ here is strange. 
The word τ^Κάτα: or πλάττ/ί occurs in several inscripdons from Aphrodisias (e. g. C. I. G. 
2824 ; cf. Boeckh's remarks ad loc.) meaning apparently the substructure of a funerary 
monument. Here the πλύτ-αι seem to be surrounding walls; cf. 1. 32 rat πλάταί πιρφί- 


37. Apparently not jv^fiOs. The supposed δ of δ/ is more like a. 

708. Two Letters to λ Strategus. 

19-2 X 9-7 cm. A.D. 188. 

The recto of this papyrus contains part of an account of corn, very large 
amounts in artabae (e.g. 168, 486 \ -^^) being mentioned, as well as the κ]αταστ{ορα) 
κθ {(Tovi), which refers to the reign of Commodus more probably than to that 
of Caracalla. On the verso are copies of two letters from Antonius Aelianus, 
a high official whose rank is not stated, but who was probably cpistrategus 
or dioecetes, to the strategus of the Diospolite nome in the Thebaid, stating 
that two ship-loads of wheat from that nome had on examination proved to 
be adulterated with barley and earth, and ordering the strategus to exact the 
deficiency from the sitologi responsible for it. From a mention of a chiliarch in 
1. 13 it appears that the corn was required for military purposes. The first 
letter, which is practically complete, is dated in the 29th year, probably of the 
reign of Commodus. The second follows the same formula, so far as it goes. 

^Ayryavios AiXiafbs στρα{τηγψ) /ύ ιοττίολίτου) Θηβ{αί8οί) χ^α{ίρ(ίν). 
[τον] καταγβίντοί γόμον ϊκ τοΰ ύπο σοι νομοΰ 

708. OFFICIAL 173 

Slo, .^avaios Χιπωτοί καΙ των συν αΰτω ίν {ηνρον) {άρτάβαίί) Β 
ev τ.ν] τ[ώ]ν 8(ΐγμάτων αρσίί οΰ καθαρού ψανίντοί 
ΐκ]€λ€υσα ημιαρτάβιον κριθολογηθήναι 
και] βωλολογηθηι/αι, και (ζίβη ΐλασσον 
κρι]θη! μ€ν ^(άρτάβαι)'^ ΐκατοσταϊ Svo βώλου Se όμοί- 
ω! έ]κατοστηί ήμισυ, τούί [ο]νν τον ττυρον [e]/i/3a- 
10 \Χο]μίνουί σιτολόγονί ττραξον τω σω κιν8ύνω 

τα]9 σνναγο(μίνον) σίτο[υ) διαφόρω {πυροΰ) {άρτάβαί) ν (ήμισυ) δ' κα[ι] τά 
προ]σμ(€τρούμΐνά) καϊ ray aXXas δαπανάς, και προσθίμζ- 
vos] τω λόγω τον χι{λιάρ)(^ον) δήλωσαν μοι. (eroi/y) κθ Φαω(φι) λ. 
] ϊκο{μισάμην }) δύο, / β. 

15 [<ίλλ]»;ί. 'Αντώνιος Αιλιανός στρα(τηγω) Αιοπ{ολίτον) Θηβ(αίδοί) χα(ίρ(ΐν). 

τοΰ] καταχθίντος γόμου ϊκ του ΰπο σοι νομ[οΰ) δια 

. . .]νν\ου [Π]ανγορσαούιος kv [πυροΰ) (άρτάβαις) σν 

kv τ]^ των 8[ΐϊ\γ μ[ά]των αρσίΐ οΰ καθαρ[οΰ ψανίν- 

το]ς ϊκίλΐυσα (ήμισυ) (άρτάβης) κριβο{λογηθήναι) καϊ βωλο[λ]ογηθ(ήναί) 
[και ϊξίβ{η) 
20 [ΐλασ]σον κριθής μίν εκατοστή αδ' [βώλου δ\ όμ(οίως) . 

τους] ούν τον [π^ρον ΐμβαλομίνους [σιτολ(όγους) πραξον 

τω σω] κινδύ(νω) [τ]ας σνναγο(μίνον) σ(ίτον) ^ια]ψ[όρω) (πυροΰ) (άρτάβας) 
. . και τα 

2-1 3• 'Antonius Aelianus to the strategus of the Diospohte nome in the Thebaid, 
greeting. Since the cargo dispatched from the nome under you in charge of [.Jausis son of 
Sipos and his companions, amounting to 2000 artabae of wheat, appeared at the weighing 
of the samples to have been adulterated, I ordered that the amount of barley and earth in 
half an artaba of it should be ascertained, and it proved to be under measure by 2 per cent, 
of barley and likewise ^ per cent, of earth. Accordingly exact at your own risk from the 
sitologi who shipped the wheat the difference on the whole amount of the corn, 5o| artabae 
of wheat, and the extra payments and other expenses, and when you have added this total 
to the account of the chiliarch let me know. The 29th year, Phaophi 30.' 

1 1, ν (ημισν) δ" : 2^ per cent, on 2000 artabae (1. 4) is 50 artabae, so Antonius Aelianus 
has added on f art. 

13. χι.(\ιάρχου) : or perhaps (SfKa8a)p(xov). The t is drawn through the χ. 

14- The meaning of this line is obscure. For ί'κο(μισάμι;>/) of. P. Petrie II. 12(1) verso. 
β might be read instead of κ, and there is a horizontal stroke above 0. (κα(τοσταί) cannot be 
read. iVioroXdr is apparently to be supplied after δύο. 


709. Tour of Inspection. 

147 X ιι•5 f»i. About A.D. 50. 

This fragment of a letter gives some important geographical information 
about Egypt in the first century. It describes a tour of inspection throughout 
the country about to be taken by a high official, probably the praefect or 
δικαιοδοη;ί. Starting from a place which is not mentioned (Alexandria ?), he 
was to go first to Pelusium, thence through the nomas situated along the eastern 
side of the Delta, the Tanite and Sethroite, Arabia, and another nome, not 
previously found in Greek (1. 6, note), to Memphis. Next he was to travel 
direct to the Thebaid, and come back through the Heptanomis, the Arsinoite 
nome, and the other nomes in the Delta which he had not visited on his upward 
journey, finally reaching Alexandria. The chief point of interest is the mention 
of the Heptanomis and Arsinoite nome. Wilcken {Ost. I. pp. 433-7) attributes 
the creation of the Heptanomis to the period between A. D. 68, when the edict 
of Tiberius Alexander seems to be ignorant of its existence, and 130, and 
adopts the view of Schwarz {Rhein. Mus. 1896, p. 637) that the Arsinoite nome 
originally belonged to the Heptanomis, but was separated from it by Hadrian 
to make room for the newly-founded Antinoite nome. The papyrus, however, 
which quite certainly belongs to the first century and yet mentions the Arsinoite 
nome as distinct from the Heptanomis, disposes of Schwarz's hypothesis 
altogether, and pushes back the latest possible date of the creation of the 
Heptanomis far into the first century. The handwriting of the papyrus is by 
no means of a late first century type, and we should assign it to the reign of 
Claudius or Nero rather than to that of one of the Flavian emperors. In any 
case it is now clear, on the one hand, that the Arsinoite nome was on account 
of its isolated position never reckoned in the Heptanomis, and on the other, 
that some hitherto unsuspected nome belonged to the Heptanomis before the 
creation of the 'Αντίνοίτη^. The most probable explanation is that Antinoite was 
a new name given to a previously existing nome, and that Hadrian only did 
what Ptolemy Philadelphus had done in the case of the λψ^ι; (Rev. Laws, 
p. xlix). Strabo, who is a little earlier than the papyrus, does not help ; but 
his list of nomes has not so far accorded very well with the evidence of Ptolemaic 
and Roman papyri. 

[ ]?.'?.'' ■ [•] ■'■^ \ο•γίστηρι[ον 

710. OFFICIAL 175 

\βια\ο^•γισμοΰ ΐστάθηί ΐνα τρ [ 

[ \ων TOf άνάπΧουν ττοιήσηται και 

[ ] €ty ΤΙηΧονσιον άιτίΧθων SiaXo- 

5 [γίσητ^αι Τανίτην ϋΐθροίτην 'Αραβίας 

[Αύ^ίαν, (f Μίνφΐΐ γίνόμΐνοί όμοίωί 

θηβαίδαν επτά νομούί Άρσινοίτην, 

TOvs Se Χοιπούς τήί κάτωι γώραί ν\ομούί 

ei'i ΆΧ(^άν8ρΐΐαν. ταΰτα Sk ω[ 

ΙΟ ίστάθηι eis Se τα Χογιστήριά τιγα 

κατ avSpa ττάντοαν τίον απ[ 

αίτοι{μ]ΐθα. Χοιπον ονν e[ 

.[.... γ]ραμματΐΐί άχρι . [ 

[ ] άσττοροί τήί δι . ωτ[ 

15 [ σ]τα.Χίίσαί . [ 

[ τα5α . [ 

[ Μ ' ' ' 

On the verso Θίωνι δ[ 

3• Second η of ποιησηται corr. from α. 6. μ of μινφα corr. from φ. 

6. [Αυ]ίαν (or possibly [Α^αν) was suggested by Mr. Griffith. It refers to the district 
called in hieroglyphics 'An situated on the Eastern side of the Delta (Brugsch, Oi'ci. Ge'ogr. 
p. 119), and kno^vn to Pliny (^H. N. vi. 29) a sinu Laeanitico (1. Aelanilicd) alter sinus quern 
Arabes Aean vocanl in quo Heroon oppidum est. Brugsch considers it to have been part of 
the Memphite nome. 

710. Order for Payment. 

Fr. (a) 7Χΐ3•5ί•»/. b.c. hi. 

This papyrus, which is one of the few Ptolemaic documents found at 
Oxyrhynchus, contained an order, probably addressed to a royal bank by an 
ofiicial, to pay various sums of money to 47 persons. Of these 44 were carrying 
documents, and they were accompanied by a ωρογράφος, i. e. a precis-writer, 
a title not hitherto found on a papyrus, an ίφυδοϊ who acted as escort, and 


a ' camel-man/ this being one of the rare references to the use of camels in 
the Ptolemaic period. The 7th year mentioned in 1. 5 must on palaeo- 
graphical grounds belong to the reign of Ptolemy Soter II. In Fr. (6) ωρογΐ}άψω• , 
ίφόδωι or καμηλίτψ. is probably to be supplied at the beginnings of 11. 7 and 8. 

(a) {b) 

[ ] •^ρημ\ά]τίσ\ον To]i[f ] {ταΧαντ ) [ 

tv τωι 'Οζυρνγ)(ίτηί βυβλίαφόροΐί ] α (raXayTOf) a [ 

άρδράσι μδ ώρογράφωι α ] α (τάλαντον) α [ 

ίφόδωι α καμηλίτηι α, ^/ μζ, .... 
5 τοΰ Θωύβ τον ζ (erovi) κατά 

711. Census-List. 

7x18-5 cm. About B.C. 14. 

A fragment from an official statement or list connected with the census and 
poll-tax. There are parts of two columns, but the first has only the ends of 
lines (not printed), and the second is, unfortunately, disfigured by lacunae which 
deprive it of much of its value, though any fresh items of information may be 
welcomed on the interesting question of the Egyptian census in the early years 
of Augustus. The existing evidence on the subject was collected in P. Oxy. II. 
pp. 207-14, where it was shown that the fourteen years' census-cycle could be 
traced back with security to A. D. 19-20, and with probability to A. D. ζ-6 and 
B. C. 10-9, but no further, although censuses and poll-tax are attested still 
earlier in Augustus' reign, and now appear from the Tebtunis papyri (103, 
introd.) to go far back into the first century B. C. The present document 
mentions certain 'youths {(φηβ(νκότ(ί) registered (or 'entered') on a poll-tax list 
by us (the λαογράφοι?) in the 15th year of Caesar,' (φηβίίικότίί in this context 
probably meaning boys above the age of fourteen, when they became liable to 
the tax in question. Reference is also made to a wrong entry in a previous list 
of some persons ' as having . . . before the 6th year.' This is too vague to be 
of much use ; but the 6th year (b. c. 25-4) would seem to be a recognized 
landmark in the history of the census or the poll-tax, and some important step 
in the reorganization of the system may possibly have then been made. The 

712. OFFICIAL 177 

6th year, however, does not fall in with the fourteen years' cycle, being one 
year too early. 

On the verso of the papyrus are parts of two columns, written not much 
later than the recto, of a series of names with some figures opposite, no doubt 
a taxing-list of some kind, and not improbably also concerned with the poll-tax. 

ΐκαστα ..[...].[ ]α/ρ[ 

ray ομοίως κατά το παρόν . . . [. .]μζνα . [. . .](Τ•[. . .]α, 

και άλλων των ΰφ' ή(ΐων ίπΐ τον le (tTovs) Καίσαρος λΐλα- 


ογραφημίνων €π[. . .]φ[. .]ων €φηβΐυκ6[τω]ν coy 
5 και ίκ παραλογισμ[οΰ . . .] . μενοί ω? πρ[ο τ]οΰ 

9 (ίτονί) Καίσαρο\ί . .]φ[. . . .\των ττ[.\ρων i[ \ν[. .] 


2. TOS may be the article and connected with the participle following παρόν, or the 
termination of a word in the previous line like TcKuiin-ai. Cf. P. Tebt. 103. 1-3 λαογρ(αφια) 
. . . τ(λοΰ[ΐ'Γ]ωΐ' σΰρταξιΐ', and τ(λων (so Wilcken) σΰιιταξίν in P. Grcnf. I. 45. 8. 

4. ]φ[ is quite doubtful, since all that remains of the letter is part of a long vertical 
stroke projecting above the lacuna, which might equally well represent e.g. the sign for 
frof. But it does not seem possible to get either another year or a conjunction into the 
short space available, and we therefore conclude that λ^λαογραφημίνων and ίφηβινκάτων are 
to be taken together, with some qualifying term between them ; tV [άμ^^φό&]ων might suit. 
At the end of the line ωι with ου written above the ω is difficult ; if oCs was intended the 
accusative may be governed by ] . μ^νος in I. 5. 

5-6. ώϊ πρ[6 τ\ον ς (eTovt) : cf. similar instances of the use of πρό in 257. 25, 481. 15. 

712. Collection of λ Debt. 

1 1-5 X ιο•3 cm. Late second century. 

The imperfect condition of this papyrus is much to be deplored, for if more 
complete it would probably have gone far to solve the uncertainties attaching 
to the functions of that much discussed official, the ξα'ίκων τιράκτωρ. As it is, 
the lines being throughout incomplete both at the beginnings and ends, and the 
amount lost being shown by U. 12-3 to exceed 40 letters between each line, 
the papyrus whets our curiosity without satisfying it. There arc two documents, 



the first written (11. 9 sqq.) being an application to the overseers of the ^ίΐ'κώι; 
ττρακτορία of the Athribite nome from a member of the Sosicosmian tribe, stating 
that he had in A. D. 1 46-7 lent 300 drachmae at interest to two brothers, called 
Potamon and Pathermouthis, upon the security of some house-property at 
Monthmereu. Repayment not having been made at the proper time, a writ 
was served upon the brothers (11. 16-7), but since this had no effect, the applicant 
requests the overseers to foreclose upon the house and exact payment (11. 18-21). 
In the margin above this application is (11. 1-7) a letter from the overseers to 
the keepers of the record office, apparently requesting them to take possession 
of the property and collect the debt and interest, as well as the miscellaneous 
charges for collection made by the State. The title, i^rmjpijral ξενικών irpaxropiay, 
is new, and, since ΐηιτηρηταί are generally connected with ώναί, suggests that the 
profits made by the State from collecting debts were farmed out, like most 
other revenues. That this was actually the case is proved by 825, an account 
rendered to the μισθωτοί ξ(νικων ττρακτορίαί by one of their τΐραγματίυταί. By 
the second century therefore, at any rate, the functions which in the Ptolemaic 
period and perhaps still in the first century A. D. seem to have been combined 
in the person of the ^ivikSiv -πράκτωρ (cf. P. Tebt. 5. 221, note, and 286), were 
divided, and we find side by side the parallel bodies of official (ττιτηρηταί and 
private μκτθωταί with subordinate ■πραγματ(νταί. But while 712 and 825 are 
a valuable illustration of the second term in the phrase ξίνικων ττρακτορία, they 
throw little light upon the first, in which the main difficulty lies. The explana- 
tion of ζίνικων which we offered (//. cc.) that it means debts contracted by ξΐνοι, 
ί. e. persons living at places outside the district to which they properly belonged, 
still remains the only one which rests on the evidence of parallels from the use 
of ^evos in papyri, though it is not clear why e. g. in P. Tebt. 5. 221 debts of 
^fvoL should be a subject of legislation and not debts in general. Our hypothesis 
gains some support from the circumstance — which may be a mere accident, but 
if so is a very remarkable coincidence — that both 712 and 825 have to do with 
debts from persons who were not living in the Oxyrhynchite nome. In 712 the 
e7rtri)p7jTai belong to the Athribite nome, but about the property distrained upon the 
only fact that is certain is that it was not in the Oxyrhynchite nome (ΜωνΟμιρΐύ 
and its toparchy, Νορασΐίτη?, in 1. 20, are both unknown), while the nome to 
which the officials addressed by the ίπιτηρηταί belonged, as well as that of the 
writer of the application, is doubtful ; cf. notes on 11. i and 13. In 825 the 
ιτραγματ(ντήί was concerned with the Memphite nome, but that the μισθωταί 
belonged to the Oxyrhynchite nome has only a general probability resting on 
the provenance of the document. 

The date of the papyrus is lost, but it was certainly posterior to the 10th 

712. OFFICIAL 179 

year of Antoninus mentioned in 1. 13 (cf. 11. 16-8), and may be as late as the 
beginning of Commodus' reign ; cf. note on 1. 7. 

Koi ων ίπιτη{ρηται) ξίνικ^ων) πρα]κτ[ορ(ίαί) 'Αθρί[ιβ^του)] 

βι[βλ]ιοφνλ(αξιν) Ιγκ]τ{ήσ(ων) [.]ατο[. .] . [ 

]ομα)ί παρα8(ίξ€ωί ΰψ' ήν ίστιν e . [ 

] κατάσγίτί ow προί ΐΐ'ίχνρασίαΐ' fju παρΐί[ 

Παθΐρμοΰθΐί και ό aSeXrpoi] αύτοΰ Ποταμών Θανώχιοί τον [.]ζ . ητιοί άπο . [ 

5 την νπ]άρχονσαν αϋτώι και τώι άδΐλφω αύτοΰ Παθΐρ- 

(μ)ονθι οΐι^ίαν και αΰλην 
] άργν(ρίον) (δραχμαί) τ και tokovs και Τΐλη 
και δαπ{άναί), πρω(τοπραζία9) οΰσ-η{ί) τω δη'μοσίω) κα[ί 
(eroi/y) . .] // Παΰνι κ. 
2nd hand και ω]νι ίπιτηρηταΐί ζΐνικων ηρακτοριαί Άθρείβιτον 

παρά ]ωνοί τον Νβοπτολίμον Σωσικοσμΐίου τον και Ηλι[ 

ΙΟ ]ν )(ρη[μ]ατισμον ίνεχνρασίαί ων το ίτίρον άι\ 

ί\πί πρά^ΐωί των όφΐΐλομ€νων μο[ι ΰ]πο Ποτά- 

μωνοί [θανώχ^ιοί τον . . . ητιοί, 

και τον Ποτάμωνοί άδ](\φον Παθ^ρμονθιοί (ζ άΧληλΐγγνηί κατά 

δημ6σ[ιον γ^ρηματισμον γεγονότα 

δια τον «V π6λ(ΐ άρ]χΐίον τω δ(κάτω tTe[i Άνγωνύνου Καίσαρος 

το[ν κνρίου 
'\νου τον ίΓοτ[ά/ί]ω[»'θΓ δραχμ]ων έκατον τόκων 

•5 ]••0[•]•?β[•]•ίέ ά\λη\[ΐγγν^^η5 άργνρίον δραχμ[ων 

τήί άποδ6]σΐω5 μη γΐγοννΐίηί μ([τα]δοθίντοί τΐ τον τήί 

(ν(χν[ρασίαί άντιγράφον 
Π.αθ(ρμούθι κα\ τω άδΐΚφίΰ] αύτοΰ ΤΙο[Γ\άμωνι δια Εΐρ[η]νίωνοί νπηρίτου 

τχι ιη τ[ον 
και δΐ(Λ]θ6ντο[ί] πλΐίονοί χρόνον άντι των δια τοΰ προστ[ 
κατασχΐΐν ττ/οόί ΐν](χ[νρ]ασίαν τω ΐδίω μου κινδύνω τοΰ ΤΙοτάμωνοί κατατ\ 
20 Ti]v νπάργονσαν] αύτω kv κώμτ] Μωνθμΐρΐν τοΰ Νορασΐίτον άνω οΐκίαν 

κά[ι αύλ^ιν 
Ν α 


- αργυρίου 8ραχ^μαί τ\ριακοσίαί και τόκου! <c[a]t Τ€[λ]?; και ττρακτορικλί κα\ 

ταί αλλα[Γ Sanafai 
]ια τοΰ ο[ ] ΧουΧπικίου Χιμΐ^^ίωί δί[ 

Ι, [Λ]ατο[πολινου is possible at the end of the line. 

7. The occurrence of two dashes after the number of the regnal year and the omission 
of the Emperor's name point to a date in Commodus' reign, when both these practices 
became common. The difficulty is that the debt was contracted in a.d. 146-7; of. 1. 13. 
The mention of Sulpicius Similis in 1. 22 recalls the praefect of that name in 237. viii. 27, 
whose date is not certain; cf. p. 262. 

13. άρ]χ(ίου•. the use of this term suggests that O.xyrhynchus was not meant, since 
there ά-/ορανομΛον Or μνημονύον are the more usual terms, though an άμχήον probably at 
Oxyrhynchus is found in 509. 3. 

713. Claim of Ownership. 

38-5x9 cm. A.D. 97. 

A declaration addressed to the keepers of the record office by a certain 
Leonides, requesting the formal registration (πα/ίά^εσυ) of his prospective right 
to some property at present in the ownership of his mother. The claim to the 
property in question depended upon the marriage contract of the writer's 
parents, in which their joint possessions were secured {κατίσ-γον) on their demise 
to their children. The father had died, and his property had been duly divided 
between Leonides and his brother and sister. The mother was still living, and 
had already made over two-thirds of her real estate to this brother and sister 
upon the marriage of the pair. Leonides, who was probably the younger son, 
therefore wished that note should be taken of this division, and that his own 
title to the remaining third of the property should be placed on record. 

The document is dated in Phamenoth of the ist year of Nerva, i.e. A.D. 97. 
It is not known that a general απογραφί] of real property occurred in that year, 
while 481 shows that such a registration took place in A. D. 99. There is 
evidence that general άττογραφαί, separated only by a two years' interval, were 
held in A.D. 129 and 131 (75, 715, B. G. U. 420, &c.), but that these both 


affected the same nome is not yet ascertained. Pending further data it will 
therefore be best to suppose that the present was a special declaration called 
forth by the peculiar circumstances of the case. 

1st hand παρετίθ{η). 

Αημητρίωι και .<47Γθλλ(Β[ί']<α)ί και 

Αίογίνίΐ βιβ\ιοφύ(\αξι) 
and hand τταρα AtcoyiSov Αιοδώρον τοΰ 

5 Αιοδώρου μητρός Sapaevros Λίοι- 

νίδου άπο Ό^υρύγγων w6\e<os. 

καθ' rju oi γορΐΐς μου Αιόδωροί Αι[ο- 

βώρου τοΰ ΆγαθίίΐΌυ και Sapaevs 

Αΐωνίδου τοΰ Άλΐξάνδρον μη- 
ιο Tpbs Ίσιδωραί Κάλα άπ[ο] ttjs αύτήί 

πόλίωί τηποίηνται προς ά\- 

ΧηΧουί τοΰ γάμου συγγραφτ^ν δια 

τοΰ kv Ό^υρύγγων πόλίΐ άγορανο- 

μίου τω δωδίκάτω eret Oeou 
15 Κλαυδίου μηιΊ S (βαστώ κατίσ- 

γρν ττ) (ξ αλλήλων yevea τα 

(αυτών πάντα ηρο? τδ μ(τά την 

Τ(λ(ντην αυτών β(βαίως και 

άναφαιρ(τως ΰναι των τ(κνων, 
2θ €7Γ€ί δ( 6 πατήρ (Τ(λ(ύτησ(ν (π' ί- 

μοϊ και άδίλφοΐί μου Αιοδώρω 

και Θαίδι και τα αύτοΰ ds ημάς 

κατήντησί, ή δ^ μήτηρ άφ' ων 

(χ(ΐ π(ρϊ μίν Ν(σλα άρουρων 
25 (vvea ήμίσους π(ρι δ( \π(ρι δ(\ 

Π((ννω (Κ τήί Θρασυμάγου παρ- 

(ΐμίνης άρουρων δύο ημίσους 

των ίπΐ το αντο άρουρων δ(κά- 

δυο (μ(ρισ€ τοΐς προγίγραμμί- 
3θ V01S μου άδ(λφο[ΐ]ί άπο των π(- 

ρΐ Νίσλα έκατίρω άρούρας τίσσα- 


pas Sia TTJi nepi γάμου αϋτοΰ συγγρα- 

[φήί] αΐ iiVt το τρίτοι/ τώι/ ττροκΐΐμί- 

vcov άρονρων SfKaSvo, άηογρά- 
35 φομαι και αυτοί npos παράθΐσιν 

κατογτ]ν των λοιπών της μη- 

Tpbs άρουρων τεσσάρων, η ίβ προ- 

κίΐμίνη των γονίων μου συγγρα- 
φή Ιστιν ίνθίσμοί και anepi- 
40 XvTOS its την ϊνίστωσαν ήμίραν. 

(ίτου'!) α Αΰτοκρά[τ]οροί Νίρ[ού]α [Καίσαρος 

Χ(βαστοΰ (ist hand) Φαμίνωβ ιθ. 

3rd hand Δημήτριος σ^ση^μύωμαι). ίτους νρώτου 
Αυτοκράτορας Νΐρούα Καίσαρος 
45 Χίβαστον Φαμινωθ ιθ. 

8. Second ο of aapaivs corr. 

' Inserted on the register. 

To Demetrius and Apollonius and Diogenes, keepers of the records, from Leonides 
son of Diodorus son of Diodorus, his mother being Saraeus daughter of Leonides, of 
Oxyrhynchus. My parents, Diodorus son of Diodorus son of Agathinus, and Saraeus 
daughter of Leonides son of Alexander, her mother being Isidora daughter of Calas, of the 
said city, in accordance with the contract of marriage made between them through the 
record office of the said city in the month Sebastus of the 12th year of the deified Claudius 
settled upon their joint issue the whole of their property, in order that after their death it 
might be the secure and inalienable possession of their children ; and whereas my father 
died leaving me and my brother and sister, Diodorus and Thais, his heirs, and his property 
devolved upon us, and whereas our mother possesses at Nesla 9^ arourae and at Peenno 
2^ arourae of the concessional?) land of Thrasymachus, together making 12 arourae, and 
bestowed upon my brother and sister aforesaid through their marriage contract 4 each of 
the arourae at Nesla, that is one-third of the aforesaid 1 2 arourae : I too declare for 
registration my right to the remaining 4 arourae of my mother ; and the aforesaid contract 
of my parents remains in force and uncancelled to the present day. The ist year of the 
Emperor Nerva Caesar Augustus, Pharmenoth 1 9.' Signature of Demetrius and date. 

I. ηαρατιθίναι and παράθισΐ! (cf. 1. 35 below) are specially used of the declaration and 
registration through the βιβλΐίφίλακ€ί of claims to property. The verb has this technical 

sense e.g. in 237. iv. 38 ηαρατΐθ(σθαι δια Toi βιβ\ίοφν\ακίου and viii. 34 ιταρατιθίτωσαν S( και ai 
γυναίκα ra'ts νηοστάσισι των άν&ρων. Cf. also Β. G. U. 73• ΙΟ sqq. eViOTfiXur Tois . . . [3 ι3λ<ο- 
φΰ\αξιν . . . 7Γ0ίΐ)σασδ]αι τα τη! παραθ(σ(ω(, and 243• 9 ('"δίδωμι tis τό την παράθισιν yevfauat, 
and 14 ττροπαρακ(Ί(μ(νον) δια τον βιβ\{ιοφυΚακίον)^. 

' The editor reads κωλ^ιίίΐν), but this makes no sense, and the correction proposed, which is palaeo- 
giaphically very close, seems in the light of the passages quoted above practically secure. The context in 
the Berlin papyrus further requires a negative like μηΒίν in place of «αϊ τψ before ίσίαβαι ΐμπΟιον, 



12. The marriage contract referred to contained also testamentary dispositions; cf. 
C. P. R. 28. 8 sqq. 

20. iV f'fiul και άδίλψοίι : SC. κΚημονόμοί! ', cf. 481. I 7~8, &C. 

26. της θρασυμάχου ιταριιμίνης : itapumi as a technical term applied 10 land seems to be 
new, and the present passage gives no clue to the meaning ; perhaps ' conceded to ' or 
' abandoned.' 

714. Selection of Bovs {ίπίκρισιή. 

Fr. (a) 4-2 X 5, Fr. {6) 29x5 cm. 

A.D. 122. 

An application addressed to a variety of officials by an Oxyrhynchite who 
enjoyed the privilege of paying a reduced poll-tax of i3 drachmae, requesting 
that a slave who had been born in his house and had reached the age of 
thirteen might be placed on the same privileged list. This papyrus thus 
confirms the evidence of 478 and B. G. U. 324, that the liability of slaves in 
respect of poll-tax was determined by that of their owners. A discussion of 
the general question of «πύρ.συ is given in P. Oxy. II. pp. 217 sqq. 

This papyrus is interesting palaeographically, being carefully written in 
a semi-uncial hand approximating to the sloping oval type, examples of which 
are often too indiscriminately assigned to the third century. 

Φιλοι/ίίκωι [τωι 
και Έρμοδωρω βα[σ{ιλικω) 
γρα(μματΰ) και Αιοννσίω καΐ 
ίτίρω Αιονυσίω 
5 βιβλ^ιοφνλαξι) και ΐττικριταϊς 
και Άπολλωνίω (ξτιγτ](τίνσαντί) 
γραίμματΐΐ) πόλ(€ωί) 
πα[ρα] ^7Γολ[λωΐ'ίΌι/ 

[ άΐΓ Όξνρύγ-] 

ΙΟ [χωΓ TroXecoy ίπ άμ-] 
[φό8ον Νότου Κρη-] 

πΰδοί [ 

pos δον[\6ί μου 

2 ο Καίσαρος τον 

κυρίου, oOiv ^η- 

λώ uvai μ( {δωδίκάδραχ^μον) 

δια λαογραφί[α5 

β (tTOVs) Αδριανού 
25 Καίσαρος τοϋ κ[νρίο{υ) 

ΐπι τοϋ αύτοΰ [άμ- 

φόδου και όμν[ύα) 


Καίσαρα Τραιανον 
3θ Άδριανον Χίβαστον 

μτ] ΐψΐνσθαι. {ίτουί) ς• 


Καίσαρος Τραϊα- 
νού 'Αδριανού 


οΙκογΐ[νη$ eK 35 ^φαστον Mi- 

15 8ονλη[$ χίίρ κ. 

Py}\ ' [■ • • Ρ ' ^ 2nd hand κατ€χ{(ύρίσθη) 

βίβηκΐ\ν fls (τρισκαι8ίκαίτίΐί) ' j > \ /, s , ,, > ^ 

\r , eniK{piTais), χρο[νοί) ο αυ{το?). 
τω SieXeiofTt 

€ (erei) 'Αδρια[νον 

' To Philonicus also called Hermodorus, basilico-grammateus, and Dionysius and 
a second Dionysius, keepers of the archives and officers in charge of the selection, and to 
ApoUonius, ex-exegetes and scribe of the city, from Apollonius ... of the city of 
Oxyrhynchus, living in the West Quay quarter. My slave . . . , born in the house to my 
female slave . . . , has reached the age of 1 3 years in the past 5th year of Hadrlanus Caesar 
the lord. I therefore declare that I am rated at 12 drachmae by a poll-tax list of the 2nd 
year of Hadrianus Caesar the lord at the said quarter, and I swear by the Emperor Caesar 
Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus that I have made no false statement.' Date and docket of 

1-7. The papyrus is incomplete at the top and there are traces of ink above the first 
line, so no doubt the strategus (cf. 257. 14) preceded the βασιΚικ&ς γραμματιΰί. It is 
noteworthy that only two persons in this long list of officials, namely the βιβ\ίοφΰλακ(!, are 
called (ττικρίται (cf. P. Fay. Towns 27. 3, and B. G. U. 562. 15, where ίπίκ{ρίτου) should be 
read) ; while 478 is addressed to the βφλιοφύλακα alone. The βασιλικοί ■γραμματ€ύ! recurs 
in this connexion in 257. 15 and B. G. U. 562. 17. Applications of this class from the 
Fayum are usually sent to ex-gymnasiarchs όντα irpos τξ ^'πικρίσα. 

13-4. The supplements hardly fill the available space, but the lines vary a good deal 
in length. 

23. δια λαογραφι[(ΐ5 : cf. 478. 22—3 (^&ω5(κά6ραχμον) dt ομολόγου λαογραφία!. 

37-8. A similar docket occurs in 478, and ίττικρίταις may now be supplied there at the 
end of 1. 49 on the analogy of the present papyrus ; cf. also 786. 

715. Registration of Property. 

307 X 1 1-5 cm. A.D. 131. 

A return of house-property in the Heracleopolite nome, addressed, as usual, 
to the keepers of the archives, in A. D. 131, when a general απογραφή of real 
property took place; cf. B. G. U. 420 and 459, and 237. viii. 31, note. The 
formula is practically the same as that found in the Oxyrhynchus returns, 
e.g. 75 and 481. At the end is a docket of the βφλιοφύλαξ. 


Ήράι και Ώριγίνΐΐ γΐγυμίνασιαρχ^ηκόσι) βιβλιοφνλακί ίΐ'Κτή[σΐθΰν) Ήρα- 

πάρα Γοργίον και Γαλίστον άμφοτίρων 

Πολίμωνοί τοΰ Γοργίον μητροί Διονυσιά- 
5 5oy τηί ΤαΧίστου των άπο κώμης 

Τοίμίσΐωί. άπογραφ6μ(θα ϊδίωι 

κινδννωι Koivm e| ϊσου eis το eve[a- 

τοί ΐ€ (eTOs) 'Αδριανού Καίσαρος τοΰ κυρίου 

κατά τα Κΐλΐυσθίντα τα (ληλνθ6τ[α) 
ΙΟ eis ήμάί άπο ονόματος τοΰ μΐτηλ- 

λαχ^ότος ημών πατρός Πολίμωνος 

Γοργίον μητρός Ταποντωτος άπο 

της αυτής Τοΐμίσΐως, το €πιβά\λ[ον 

αΰτώι kv τήι ανττ} Τοΐμίσ€ΐ τρίτον 
15 μίρος οικίας και τδ ΐπιβάλλον αΰτώι 

μίρος ψιλοΰ τόπου, και πρότίρον 

της άδ()<φής αϋτοΰ Έλίνης Γοργίον 

μητρός της αυτής Ταποντώτος 

κατά διαθήκην την και λνθάσαν 
2ο τώι ιβ {ΐτ(ί) Άδριανοΰ Καίσαρος τοΰ κνρίου 

π(ρι κώμην Ιβίωνα Παγνοΰβιν ΐκ τοΰ 

Ζωίλου και Νονμηνίον κΧηρον γής 

κατοικικής ήμισυ τίταρτον 

ογδουν και π(ρ\ Ψ(λ€μαχ{ ) ίκ τοΰ Μ(νίπ- 
25 πον και Άρτΐμιδώρον κλ{ήρου) γής κατοικ[ι]κή[ς 

άρονρης τίταρτον. και ομννομίν 

την Αύτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Τραιανοΰ 

Αδριανοΰ Χΐβαστοΰ Tvyij]v) καΐ τούΙ^ς) πατρωο(νς) 

θίούς ίξ νγ{(.ίας) και ίπ' άληθ[ίίας) ΐπιδΐδωκ^ίναι) την 
30 προκιμίνη(ν) άπογραφη{ν) καΐ μηδ\ν δΐίψΐΰσθ{αι) 

ή €vo\oi (ϊημΐν τώι ορκωι, (ίτονς) le 

Αύτοκράτορος Καίσαρος Τραιανοΰ 

Άδριανοΰ ΙΙΐβαστοΰ μηνός Καισαρΐίου ϊπ[αγο(βίνων) e. 
2nd hand Γοργίας ό προγίγραμμίνος €πιδ[ίδο}- 


35 κα. (3rd hand) 'Hpas γ(γν(βΐ'ασ-ίαρ\ηκωί) Sia Ίπττο5( ) γραμμ{ατ(α>5) 
κ[α\τακ(•)(ά{ρικα.) ά8ίακ(βίτωί ?) κιν8(ύνω) TWf άπογραΐ^φομίνων) μηΣίνύί 
[δ]ημοσίου ή ΐδιωτίκο(ΰ) καταβλαπ{τομίνού). ϊπα•γο{μίνων) e. 

Ι. 1. βφ\ιοφύ\αζι. 12. μη θ{ μητρο! ΟΟΓΓ. ΓγΟΙΠ τυυ. Ι4• ω of αυτωι COTT. from η. 

ΐ8. ijt of Ti;s corr. from απ. 24. 1. ογδοοκ. 

' To Heras and Origenes, ex-gymnasiarchs, keepers of ihe records of real property in 
the Heracleopolite nome, from Gorgias and Galestus both sons of Polemon son of Gorgias, 
their mother being Dionysias daughter of Galestus, from the village of Toemisis. We 
register at our own risk jointly and equally for the present 15th year of Hadrianus Caesar 
the lord in accordance with the command the property which has devolved upon us from 
our deceased father Polemon son of Gorgias and Tapontos, from the said Toemisis, viz. 
the third share which fell to him of a house at the said Toemisis and his share of a piece 
of open ground, and what previously belonged to his sister Helene daughter of Gorgias and 
the said Tapontos, in accordance with a will which was opened in the 12th year of Hadrianus 
Caesar the lord, near the village of Ibion Pachnoubis in the holding of Zoilus and Numenius 
I J arourae of catoecic land, and near Pselem3ch( ) in the holding of Menippus and 
Artemidorus ^ aroura of catoecic land. And we swear by the Fortune of the Emperor 
Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus and by our ancestral gods that we have honestly and 
truly presented the foregoing declaration and that we have made no false statement, or 
may we be liable to the penalties of the oath. The 15th year of the Emperor Caesar 
Trajanus Pladrianus Augustus, 5th intercalary day of the month Caesareus. 1, Gorgias the 
aforesaid, have presented the declaration. I, Heras e.x-gymnasiarch, through Hippod( ), 
scribe, my representative, have entered it on the register jointly at the risk of the declaring 
parties, no public or private interests being injured. 5th intercalary day.' 

10. Above the ο of άπό the scribe has written μη, which makes no sense and seems to 
be a mere error. 

36. ηδία/((ρίτωί) apparently corresponds to κoι^ώί ϊξ ίσου in 1. 7. 

716. Auction of a Slave. 

ι8•8χ 1 1-8 cw. A.D. 186. 

An application to a gymnasiarch from the guardians of three minors for 
a public auction of their wards' respective shares, amounting to two-thirds in 
all, of a male slave. The remaining third part of the slave was the property 
of the minors' half-brother, but had been emancipated by him ; and this com- 
bination of circumstances led to the present request for an auction (υθίν «πιδίδομ^Γ, 
1. 1 8), though the legal point involved is not very clear. It is however certain, 
as Professor Mitteis remarks, that neither this papyrus nor 722, where a partial 


manumission is also concerned, can be brought under Roman law, according 
to which, at this period, in the case of a joint ownership of a slave, a manu- 
mitted share simply passed to the other owners (Ulpian, Fr. i. 18). There can 
therefore be only a question of Greek or Egyptian law ; and in the absence 
of parallels recourse must be had to more or less probable hypotheses. At the 
outset a doubt arises whether or not the partial manumission was the direct 
cause of the public auction. It is quite possible that the parties concerned 
merely wished to wind up their joint ownership, and that the details respecting 
the liberated share are accidental. If, however, the manumission was an 
essential factor, as οθΐν in 1. 18 would rather indicate, the course here followed 
may be supposed to have been prescribed either in the interest of the slave 
or of the owners. In a sale by public auction the rights of a partially freed 
slave could be safeguarded in a manner which would not be practicable in 
a private treaty ; and this consideration supplies a veiy likely explanation 
of the present proceedings. Or, on the other hand, as Mitteis suggests, a sale 
by auction would protect an owner who wished to retain his share of a slave 
against a partner or partners who desired manumission. A sale of this kind 
would place the larger owner at an advantage against the smaller, since the 
former, if successful, would pay the latter only a fraction of the purchase-money, 
while the higher the bid of the small owner the greater the sum due from him 
to the predominant partner. 

Άσκληπιάβτ) τω καΐ 'Χαραπίω[νί ■γνμν]ασιάργω 

πάρα Ώρ[ί]ωνοί Πανΐγώτου τοΰ Αωράτος μη- 
τρός TaovTOi και 'Απολλώνιου Δωρίωνοί 
5 τοΰ Ήράτος μητρός Θαήσίοί καΐ Αβασκάντου 

άπ(λ(ύθ(ρου Χάμου Ήρακλΐίδου των τριών 

άπο Όξυρύγχων ηόλΐως ίπιτρόπων άφηλί- 

κων τίκνων Θίωνος τοΰ και Αι[ον]υσίου 

Εύ8αιμονί3οί μητρός Χινθίΰτος και Al- 
io οννσίου και θαησιος άμψοτίρων μητρός 

Ταύριος των τριών άπο τ[ή]ς αυτής π6λ(ως. 

xmapyii τοϊς αντο'ις άφ[ήλ]ι^ι τί} μίν Εΰδαι- 

μονίδι ΐκτον μίρος τω Se Διονυσίω και 

θαήσΐΐ ήμισυ μίρος το (πι το αύτο δίμοι[ρ]ον 
15 μίρος πατρικού αυτών δούλου Χαραπίω'νος 


toy (ετώί') λ ου το Χοιπον τρίτον ον του όμοττα- 

τρίου αΰτων ά8(λφοΰ Aioykvo\y\i ηΧίυθί- 

ρωται υπ αύτοΰ. οθΐν ΐπιδίδομίν το βιβΧί- 

δων άξιοΰντΐ! κατά τδ δηλούμενορ 
20 των άφηλίκων δίμοιρον μίροί την προ- 

κήρνξιν γΐνίσθαί καϊ Tfjv άμίίνονα 

αΐρΐσιν διδόντι παραδοθηναι. (eroi/y) κζ 

Αυτοκράτορα! Καίσαρος Μάρκου Αυρηλίου 

Κομμόδου Άντωνίνου Εΰσ(βοΰί Εντυγονς 
25 Σΐβαστοΰ Άρμΐνιακον Μηδικού Παρθικού 

Σαρματικοΰ Γ(ρμανικοΰ Μΐγίστου 

Β ρ(τανν[ι]κοΰ θώθ. (2nd hand) Ώρίων Πανΐχώτου 

ΐπιδίδωκα. (3rd hand) [^7Γθ]λλώί'_ίο[ί Δω^βίωνο! σ]/^y- 
ΐπιδίδωκα. (4th hand) 'Αβάσκαντο[ς] antXiiOfpc^s 
30 ^άμου Ήρακλΐίδου συνΐπι[δεδ]ωκα. Αιο[γίνηί 
Θίωνο! το[ΰ] και Διονυσίου (γραψα ύπ([ρ αύτοΰ 
μη ΐΐδότοί γράμματα. 

'Το Asclepiades also called Sarapion, gymnasiarch, greeting, from Horion son of 
Panechotes son of Doras, his mother being Taous, and from ApoUonius son of Dorion 
son of Heras, his mother being Thaesis, and from Abascantus, freedman of Samus son 
of Heraclides, all three of Oxyrhynchus and guardians of the children of Theon also 
called Dionysius, namely Eudaemonis, Avhose mother is Sintheus, and Dionysius and 
Thaesis, whose mother is Tauris, being minors and all three of the said city. The 
said minors own, Eudaemonis one-sixth and Dionysius and Thaesis a half, together two- 
thirds, of a slave of their father's named Sarapion, aged about 30 years, the remaining 
third share of whom, belonging to Diogenes their brother on the father's side, has been 
set free by him. We therefore present this memorandum requesting that in respect 
of (?) the aforesaid two-thirds a public auction should be held, and that the property should 
be handed over to the highest bidder. The 27th year of the Emperor Caesar Marcus 
Aurelius Commodus Antoninus Pius Felix Augustus Armeniacus Medicus Parthicus 
Sarmaticus Germanicus Maximus Britannicus, Thoth.' Signatures of Horion, ApoUonius 
and Abascantus, that of the last-named being written for him by Diogenes son of Theon. 

19-20. The exact meaning of this passage is uncertain owing to the ambiguity of 
κατά, which may be connected with either olioiWfi or την προκήί>νξιν γα/ίσθαι. In the former 
case κατά means ' because of,' and the request would be for the sale of the whole slave ; 
in the latter κατά signifies 'in respect of (cf. 722. 14), and no more than the two-thirds 
would be involved, — a sense which would have been more clearly expressed by the simple 
genitive toC . . . μίρουί. 

22. αΐρ€σιι> δίδόιτί : cf. Β. G. U. 656, an advertisement of property to let, oJ βου\ϋμ€ΐιοι 

μίσθάσασθαι . . , προσ(ρχίστωσαν rots irpos tovtoh fpfafiv (L aipcaif) didovrts. 

717. PETITIONS 189 


717. Petition. 

17-5 X 205 cm. Late ist century b.c. 

Part of a complaint addressed, no doubt, to some official, with reference to 
a dispute about the fairness of a measure between the writer, who seems to have 
been responsible for a cargo of corn, and another person. Owing to the im- 
perfect condition of the papyrus, of which a preceding column or columns are 
lost, and of which only the first line is complete, the details are obscure. A 
curious new word, hiKtrov, occurs in 11. 5 and probably 12, apparently denoting 
some kind of measure. The writer's style suggests that he was still labouring 
under much excitement. 

μίτρωι ίνβαΧοΰμαι. (κβοωντοί Si μου και κράζοντας τα. τοσαΰτα 

]\//-ατο /i€ λίγοαν οτι TOty μίτροις σου ου θίλωι ίσ-χρήσασθαι, ή- 

νάγκασμα]ι Se ύπ αυτοΰ [(ί]λλο μίτρον άγοράσαι. άγοράσαντο! Si μου 
αϋτο πα'ρί^ωι ίγων τον κυβ^ρνήτην και συνβάλΧο αύτο κατ(- 

] (ύρίσκωι αύτο προί το SCX^tov, (ΐσττορΐύομαι els την αύ- 

. ίχων ά]ΰτο και παραλαμβάνωι Άσίην τον aSeXaoy Έρασίπττου 

] . ουν (ΐσπορ(ύομαί προί τον στρατηγον ίνων αύτο και 

συμβάλλω] αύτο προ! το χαλκονν μiτpov iv τώι σννΐ8ρ(ίωί, ΐΰρίσ- 

κω αύτο ] μύζ(ΰΐ 8ύο ταΪ5 εκατόν. ίγω οΰν ίβόων και ίκραζον 

ΙΟ Ι ]fP<"' '■ο χαλκοΰν ά8ικ6ν ίστι και ούκ ίστιν δίκαιον 

12 letters kv τωι συν\δρύ(ΰΐ συν τώι στρατηγωι (κ{ρ)άζοσαν 

22 „ βοώντων S" αυτών (tσφipω το ί/λί- 

τον 21 letters ] βοών και κράζων οτι τοΰτο ίστι 

26 letters ήν]άγκασμαι βοάν αύτώι οτι 
15 [ 28 „ ] Se ούκ (νβάλλομαι wSe 

28 „ ] . Ιντυγ^^άνωντος ηυκνά 

24 „ τ]οΰ δρόμου τ[ 

4. 1. (τνμβά\λω. 1 6. 1. ίντχ/γχάνοντοΐ. 


2. [. . . ημ^ι^ατο 0Γ [<irr;;/ifil\^aTO would Suit the context. For η\\νά•^κασμα^λ cf. 1. 1 4. 

5. The meaning and even the construction of npos τ6 διλίτον (the reading of which 
is quite certain) is very obscure. From 1. 12 it appears that the hiKeTov was portable, 
and perhaps it was a species of measure, though whether it was that to M-hich the writer's 
opponent objected (1. 2) or an official measure of some kind is not clear. Assuming 
this to be the meaning of δίλετοι», it is templing to connect προς τΌ διλ. with σνμβάΚΚω 
αυτό in 1. 4 i but the intervening words ινρίσκω αντό are then very difficult. Possibly 
TTpot TO δίλ. is parallel to μάζω δύο rait ίκατόν in 1. 9, since the general construction of 
11. 4-5 and 8-9 seems to be the same ; but ττροΓ τό διλ. can by itself hardly mean ' equal 
to the SlXfTov' and ίσον would have to be supplied. 

fit την ai\i : probably tU την αϋ\'τον, i.e. the person referred to in 1. 2, or την Αύ|Γ . . . 

8. For the use of bronze in official measures cf. P. Tebt. 5. 85-92, and P. Amh. 
43• 9-10• 

718. Petition to the Epistrategus. 

25-8 X 17-5 fW. A.D. 180-192. 

A petition from Antistius Primus, who had held the chief priesthood and 
other offices at Oxyrhynchus, complaining that a payment due to the govern- 
ment upon 4 arourae of Crown land had been demanded from him, although 
his property included no land of that character. The land in question had 
perhaps been the subject of a perpetual lease, and owing to lapse of time and 
deficiencies in the survey-lists its identity had become doubtful ; cf. a similar 
case in P. Amh. 68. 52 sqq. 

From the character of the handwriting the papyrus must belong to the 
latter half of the second century, and there can be little doubt that the Xenophon 
here addressed, who was evidently a high official, was T. Claudius Xenophon, 
known to have been epistrategus in the reign of Commodus (C. I. L. III. 6575, 

[Τίτω ΚλανΒίω "Β,Ιΐνοφωντι [τω κρατίστω ΐπίστρατήγω 

[ιταρα ] 'Aveeariov ΊΊρύ[ΐ[ον του και ΛολλιαίΌΰ 

[ 12 letters σ]αντοί και άρ^ΐΐρ[ατίύσαντο5 
[ ΙΟ „ τ^γ] Όξνρυγχΐΐτών [πόλεω? 
5 [. . . . ίπριάμην μ]^ν πάρα Αίθννσίο[υ 

[ 12 letters ο]ι/ συν τω 'Αλ(^άν[δρω ταί irepi Xivviv 

[ ύπαργούσα]^ αΰτω ΐκ διαφ[€σεω5 γενομένης προί 

[ και τον άδ(λ]φον ΆιτοΧλώνιον νίώτΐρον apovpas [σ(ΐ]τικ&ί ικντήκον- . 

718. PETITIONS igi 

[τα 8ύο ημισ\ν και ΐν οΙκοπίΒο\ί άρονρηί ήμισυ καθαραί anh βασ-ιλικηί και 

ΙΟ [ονσιακή^ καΐ iepas άκολούθωί τ) τηπο'.ημαι npos τονί άΒΐλφούς διαιρίσΐΐ 
[τ(λοΰντόί μου τα] τήί ιδιωτικής μόνης δημόσια, y^povm δί παμπόλλω νστ€- 
[pof μίτα τ](σσΐράκοντα ίτη ουκ οΐδ' όπως τον πράτον Διονυσίου άποθανόν- 
\τοί 6 τήί . . .] . α κωμογραμμαηνς π(ρι όν ΐστιν κα\ ή Seyvis ώί (ζ tnepco- 
[τήσ€α>ς κτήτ]ορο9 παρ ου δΐήσ^ι την άπαίτησιν ποίησα σβαι δημοσίων 

15 [άρουρων τ(σ]σάρων βασιλικής ίν πνρον άρτάβαις δ(κάπΐντ€ προσίφώνησεν 
[ταί τίσσαραί ταύ\τας άρούρας της βασιλικής σνναναμίγονς ςΐναι ttj ύπαρ- 
[χ^ονση μοι γ^ τω]ν πεντήκοντα τριών ας ΐπριάμην πάρα τον Διοννσίον και 
Γ 13 letters ]ον, ως ΐκ τούτου δΐΐν τχ δημόσια ύπ ΐμοΰ άποδοθήναι 
[ 13 „ ]υ μήτ€ βασιλικήν σννανάμιγον ΐσχηκότος μηδ' αν γΐωρ- 

2θ [γοΰντος μηδ' όλω]ί γνωρίζοντος τι των νπο τον κωμογραμματίως 
[προσφωνηθίντων] (τι δί άνωθ[€]ν των δημοσίων αποδιδόμενων 
[νπΐρ Tcov αυτών] άρονρών τεσσάρων ως ΰκος νπο έτίρων. ΐπίΐ οΰν 
[βλάβη (παθόν ον]κ ολίγα, άδικον δ( μή γεωργονντα άπαιτύσθαί μΐ δημό- 
[σια νπΐρ άλλοτρία]ς γής, δίομαι, (άν σοι δόζη, γράψαι τω τοΰ νομοΰ στρατηγώ 

25 [ίνα ω προσήκον] ΐστιν τοντο ηραξη ΐπιστίίλτ) κατά τα διατΐταγμίνα (νΐΐυ 
[ 13 letters τ]α[ς] νπο τον κωμογραμματίως προσφωνηθ(ίσας 
[άρονρας τεσσάρας βα^σιλικής συ[ν]αναμιγονς είναι τή ιδιωτική μον 

[και πρ]οσφωνήστ) τον επικρατονντα παρ ου και ευλόγως ή 

[άπαίτησις τών δημοσίω]ν γενήσετ[α]ι. περί γαρ ων άπτ]τήθην οΰ δέον δημο- 

30 [σίων μενεΐ μοι ό λόγος πρ]ος τον φ[α]νησόμενον άντιποιονμενον, ΐν ω 
[βεβοηθημενος. διε]υτ[ύ\ει. 

2nd hand [ Άνθεστιος Πρεΐμος ό και] Λολλιανος δια Άπολλωνίον 

[ επιδεδωκα] 

25• 1. πράξαι. 26. π θ( νπο corr. ? 

' Το his highness the epistrategus Titus Claudius Xenophon from . . . Antislius 
Primus also called Lollianus, . . . , e.x-chief-priest ... of the city of OxyrhjTichus . . . 
I bought from Dionysius . . . with Alexander the land at Sennis . . . belonging to him 
in consequence of the division made with . . . and his brother Apollonius the younger, 
namely 52^ arourae of corn-land and | aroura of building-land, free from obligations in 
respect of Crown land or Imperial estates or temple land, in accordance with the division 
made by me vith the (my .') brothers, the taxes upon the private land only being paid by me. 
A very long while afterwards, forty years having elapsed, it somehow happened after 
the death of the seller Dionysius that the komogrammateus of . . . , to whose district 
Sennis also belongs, in answer to an inquiry concerning the landlord from whom the 


demand should be made of the imposts for 4 arourae of Crown land amounting to 
15 artabae of wheat, stated that these 4 arourae of Crown land were included in the 
53 arourae belonging to me which I bought from Dionysius and . . . , and that therefore 
the imposts ought to be paid by me . . . , although I have never had Crown land included 
in mine nor cultivate any and am altogether ignorant of the statements of the komo- 
grammateus, and although the imposts for the said 4 arourae have for years been paid 
in the regular course by others. Therefore since I have incurred no small loss and it is 
unjust that I should be asked to pay the imposts on land which does not belong to me 
and which I do not cultivate, I beg you, if you think fit, to write to the strategus of the 
nome, in order that in accordance with the decrees he may direct the officials whose 
duty it is to . . . the 4 arourae of Crown land declared by the komogrammateus to be 
included in my private land, and may state the owner from whom the demand for the 
imposts may reasonably be made; for I shall retain a claim for the sums with which I was 
wrongfully charged against the person proved to be responsible for the payment, that 
so I may obtain relief. Farewell. (Signed) Presented by me, . . . Antistius Primus 
also called Lollianus, through Apollonius . . .' 

3. Probably α•γορανομήσ\αντο!, the municipal titles being usually arranged on an 
ascending scale; of. Preisigke, Sladiischcs Beamtenwescn in rom. Aeg. p. 31. 

8. [σα\τικάς•. or possibly [ΐδίω]τΐίίάί (cf. 11. n and 27), but [σ(ϊ\τικά! makes a better 
contrast to iv οί^κοπί^ο\ις, if that be right. 

9. καθαρά: απο βασιλική! κ.τ.λ, : cf 50β. 37 nOte, and β33. 

13. . . .1 . α is the name of a village or ίποίκιον. 

14. κτήτΌρος, if right, is an objective genitive depending upon ίπίρω[τήσ€ωί ; cf. I. 28. 
An alternative supplement is ιτράκτ'^ρρο! constructed subjectively, but the relative nap oZ 
is then awkward. 

δημοσίων : i. e. the rent, the rate of which upon βασιλική -γή was usually about 
4 artabae the aroura ; in the present case it was 3I artabae. In 1. 1 1 on the other hand 
δημόσια has its ordinary meaning of taxes. 

16. σννανάμιγο! appears to be a new compound. 

18. Perhaps [τον 'Αλ(ξάρ$ρ]ηυ or [του ΆπολλωΜ']ον. But it would appear from 1. 12 
that there was only one πράτηι. 

25- (viev at the end of the line is clearly written, but suggests nothing; some word like 

(πισκίψασθαι is wanted. 

719. Registration of λ Deed. 

ig-Sx 166 cm. A.D. 193. 

A notice addressed to the strategus by a certain Didymus of an authoriza- 
tion received by him from the archidicastes in answer to an application which 
he had made for the registration of a purchase of some house property. A copy 
of the application, itself enclosing a copy of the agreement of sale, is appended, 
and gives some interesting information concerning the formalities attending this 
process of registration, which we think has not hitherto been understood. Texts 

719. PETITIONS 193 

of the same class already published are B. G. U. 455, 578 and 717, to which an 
important Leipzig papyrus will shortly be added (cf. P. Grenf. II. 71. 6, B. G. U. 
970. 20-a, 983. 10). The object in all these cases is to effect the ' publication' 
(δ);μοσίωιτίν) of private agreements made by note of hand (χΐΐρόγραφα), and the 
publication consisted in the registration of the agreements at the Library of 
Hadrian and the Nanaeum at Alexandria (cf. I. 35 below, B. G. U. 578. 19, and 
34}. For such registration of a copy of an agreement the fixed charge of 
13 drachmae was payable (11. 30-1), to which is added in the Leipzig papyrus 
a tax proportionate to the value involved ; a declaration had to be made 
that the document registered was really written by the person by whom it 
purported to have been issued (11. 33-4, B. G. U. 717. 36, &c.) ; and a notice of 
the transaction was served in the ordinary way through the strategus upon the 
other contracting party, who would of course raise objections if any irregularity 
had occurred (11. 3-4)• We are unable to find here, with Gradenwitz {Eiufiihr- 
ung, pp. 36-7), any question of a comparison of deeds or handwriting. The 
purpose was rather to obtain for the agreement concerned a validity which, as 
a mere χΐΐρόγραφον, it did not previously possess, notwithstanding the formula 
ώϊ (V δϊίμυσιω κaτaκf\ωpίσμfvη (1. 28, &c.). In B. G. U. 578 the ^ημοσίωσίί was 
preparatory to an action at law arising out of the non-fulfilment of the terms of 
the γΐΐρόγραφον. In the other cases no such purpose is specified, and the step 
taken is only precautionary. This δΐίμοσιωσίί of χΐΐρόγραφα is to be distinguished 
from the simple notification to the archidicastes of contracts without any 
reference to καταχωριαμόί at the two libraries (cf. 727, introd.). 

The papyrus bears the date Phaophi of the 3nd year of Pescenniu3 
Niger ; other documents dated shortly before the collapse of his power are 801 
and P. Grenf II. 60. 

Άχ^ιλλΐ τω καΙ Κασίω στρα(τηγω) 
2nd hand πάρα διδύμου Αμμωνίου μητροί Έλίνηί άπ[οί\κου Ήλιου π6[\ίω]ς. 
ο[ν ίπ6]ρ[ισ]α 
ΐκ τον καταλογΐίον χρηματισμού Ιστιν άντίγρα{φοΐ')• ΟνιτάΧίος [ό iepevi και 
[άρχ^ιδ]ικαστηί 0[ζ]νρυγγ^(ίτον στρα(τηγω) χα^ίραι•). τον δΐδομίνον ύπο- 
μ{νήματοί) avTi[ypa{cf)Ov)\ μίταδο{θήτω) ώί 
5 [ύπ6κ{ΐΐταή. (]ρρωσο. {ίτουί) β Γαίου Τΐ€σκ(ννίου Niytpos Ίονστου 
Χίβαστ[ο]ΰ Φαωφι κτ]. 

[ ] . rjpr/ . ( ) [σ](σημ{(ίωμαι). ΠολίμΙω]^ Πα ..[...] ■γραμματ{({>ς) 

KaTa\oy[dov .] . 7γο( ) ίγ[ραψα. 



Ού[^ϊ\τα\ί<ύ upl άργ^ιΒ'ικα\σττ) καΙ ττρ o]y [τ^] ίπι\μ\ί\\ΐ\ία των χρηματιστών 
και των άλλων κριτηρίων πάρα ^ι[8νμον Άμ]μω[νί]ου μη[τ]ροί \^Ελ(νηΐ 
ano[Pjcov Ήλίον πόλεως, τοΰ προημίνον μοι άπλοΰ \eipoypa<f^ov] άντί- 
[yp{a(fiov)] ΰπ6κ(€ίται). 

ΙΟ Παποντωί Βίθυοί μητρός Τσ€νπαγοΰτοί άττο τοΰ Τρύφωνος [Ε1σύ6\υ [τον 
Ό^νρν-γγίίτου νομοΰ Δι8νμω 'Απολλώνιου μητρός Έλίνης άπ[οί]κου 
Ήλιου πόλΐως γαίρ^ιν. ομολογώ π^πρακίναι καΐ παρακΐ•)(<ο\ρ\η[κίν'^μι 
σοι άπο τοΰ νΰν els τον o€t ypovov άπο των υπαρχόντων μοι iv τω [αΰ]τω 
Τρύφωνος Εΐσΐίω kv τοις άπο νότου μίρ^σι της κώμης ήμΙ^σ^ους [μί]ρος 

15 οικιών δύο διστίγον και αίθριου κοινών προς τον άδΐλφόν μου Παοΰν, 
ων γΐίτονΐς της μ\ν μιας τοΰ αίθριου νότου (ίσοδος και ίξοδος βορρά [κλ]η- 
ρονόμων Διογάτος άπηλιώτου κληρονόμων " ίΐρου λιβός δημοσ[ί]α ρύ- 
μη, της (δ() δίυτίρας νότου Παποντώτος Μούθιος βορρά Ήρακλίίδου 
Ήρίίωνος άπηλιώτου δημοσία βύμη λιβός Μιύσιος Μέλανος, 

2θ τιμής της συμπεφωνημένης προς αλλήλους ύπ\ρ παραχωρητι- 
κού αργυρίου Χφαστοΰ νομίσμα[τος δ]ρα•χμών δισ•)(ζΐλίω\ν,\ ας 

αυτόθι άπίσγον πάρα σον δια, [γΐΐρος ]δραση γ€ΐνόμ€νος 

βίβαιοΰν 8e μ€ αύτάς τ\άς οικίας καθαράς] άπό τ€ δημοσίας 
κα[ϊ ΐδιωτική]ς όφιλής και άπο απογραφής ανδρών κ[α]ι [(]ιδους 

25 οΰτινοσοΰν άλλου και ίζουσίας σοι ούσης έτίροις παρ[αχωρ(ΐν και 
διοικ€[ΐ]ν κα[ϊ] ΐπιτ€λ€Ϊν π(ρΙ αυτών ώς kav aipfj. κυρία [ή ομολογία 
γραφύσα υπ ϊμοΰ τοΰ Παποντώτος ΐδ[ι]όγραφος μου χαΙ^ρις άλΐίφατος 
και επιγραφής ώς kv δημοσίω κατακί)(ωρισμεν[η. (βτους) α Ταίου 
ΊΊεσκΐννίου Ni'[y]epos Ίούστου Χεβαστοΰ Παΰνι κ. βου[λόμίνος ούν 

3θ kv δημοσίω γενέσθαι το αύθεντικον γειρόγραφον διδοι^ς τάς 

ορισθείσας (δραχμάς) ιβ ένεκα τον μί) περιεγειν με τάς περί [δημοσιώ- 
σεως διαστολάς και μοναχον δημοσιοΰσθαι άζιώ άν[αλαβόντα 
το αύθεντικον γειρόγραφον εχειν μου γειρογραφίαν \περΙ τοΰ 
είναι αύτο ίδιόγραφον τοΰ Παποντώτος σννκαταχωρ[ίσαι τωδε τω 

35 ύπομνή[ματι] εις τ[ην Άδριανην βϊ\β\λι'\οθήκην εις [ 

2. Second δ of δίδυμου οοΓΓ. from first half of a μ. 5. φαωφι apparently over an 

erasure. 7. Upi Pap. 9. 1. προ^ιμίνου, lo. χ οί τσιντταχουτοί corr. from y by 

another hand. 11. αποΚΚωνων corr. from αμμωνίου by another hand. 14. 1. ημισν. 

31. A correction after /le; cf. note below. 33. 1. ΐχον. 

719. PETITIONS 195 

' To Achilles also called Casius, strategus, from Didymus son of Ammonius and 
Helene, a settler from Heliopolis. Appended is a copy of the oiTicial response received 
by me from the record office. " Vitalius, priest and archidicastes, to the strategus of the 
Oxyrhynchite nome, greeting. Let a copy of the petition which has been presented 
be served as follows. Good-bye. The 2nd year of Gains Pescennius Niger Justus 
Augustus, Phaophi 28. Signed by me . . . Written by me, Polemon son of . . . scribe 
of the record office. . . . To Vitalius, priest, archidicastes and superintendent of the 
chrematistae and other courts, from Didymus son of Ammonius and Helene, a settler 
from Heliopolis. Appended is a copy of the bond issued singly to me. Papontos son 
of Bithys and Tsenpachous, of Ision Tryphonis in the Oxyrhynchite nome, to Didymus 
son of Apollonius and Helene, a settler from Heliopolis, greeting. I acknowledge that 
I have sold and ceded to you from henceforth for ever of my property in the said Ision 
Tryphonis in the southern part of the village a half share of two houses, one having two 
storeys, the other a yard, owned jointly by me and my brother Paous, the boundaries of which 
are, of the one with the yard, on the south an entrance and exit, on the north the property 
of the heirs of Diogas, on the east that of the heirs of Horus, on the west a public road, 
and of the other, on the south the property of Papontos son of Mouihis, on the north 
that of Heraclides son of Horion, on the east a public road, on the west the property 
of Miusis son of Melas, at the price agreed upon between us for the cession namely 
2000 drachmae of the Imperial silver coinage, which sum I have received immediately 
from hand to hand . . . ; and I guarantee the houses free from public and private debts 
and unaffected by persons' property-returns or any other claims, the right resting with 
you to cede to others and to manage and dispose of them as you choose. This contract, 
written by me, Papontos, in my own hand without erasure or insertion, is valid as though 
publicly registered. The ist year of Gaius Pescennius Niger Justus Augustus, Pauni 20. 
Being therefore desirous that the authentic bond should be publicly registered I offer 
the prescribed 12 drachmae, in order that the regulations concerning publication may 
not apply to me (?), and that a single copy may be published, and request you to take this 
authentic bond bearing my attestation that it is the autograph of Papontos and register 
it together with this petition at the Library of Hadrian . . ." ' 

3. (K Toi : in 485. 3 « should also be read instead of -iraifia). 

6. ■γραμματ[(ί/!) KtiTa>ioy[(iov : this no doubt was also the position of Hephaestion 
in 485. 8 and Flavius Aurelius in B. G. U. 578. 8. The κατάΚαγύον was presumably at 

22. ]8ραση looks like the termination of a place name. 

23-4. καθαράς] . . . από άπο-^ραφη! : cf. 577 καθαρον (a share of a house) mo άπογραφηι 
πάση! και airo yfwpy(ias) βασιΧικηί κα\ οίσιακη! κιιΊ παντός tlSovi. 

27-8. A["[f"* άλίίφατοί^ και (πιγραφης: cf. Β. G. U. 666. 3Ι, 7'7• 24ι &C. 

31-2. This is an obscure passage, the difficulties being increased by a slight un- 
certainty concerning the reading of μf, which is followed in the original by something 
having the appearance of a tall v. To read μου is unsatisfactory because the t does 
not seem to have been touched, and we prefer to suppose that the tail of the φ of 
χαρόγριιφον in 1. 30, which is immediately above, descended into the line below and 
was cut off by a curved cross-stroke, so producing the effect of a v. With μον, supposing 
that were intended, the meaning would be ' because it (the χορογράφοι/) does not comprise 
my ίωστολαί ' ; and the words may be construed in a somewhat similar sense with the 
more probable reading μ( 'because I do not possess the orders for publication,' the 
reference to the διαστολαί being in either case quite unexplained. On the view adopted 

Ο 2 


in our translation the διαστοληΐ nepi &ημοσιώσ«ύ! may be supposed to have prescribed certain 
penalties or disabilities if the form of procedure followed by the petitioner was neglected. 

720. Request for a Guardian. 

21-5 X 9-8 fw. A.D. 247. Plate VII. 

A petition in Latin addressed to the praefect, Claudius Valerius Firmus, 
by a woman named Aurelia Ammonarion, that he would appoint a particular 
person as her guardian in accordance with the lex lulia ct Tiiia, This measure, 
which is supposed to have been passed in B.C. 31, empowered the praefects 
of provinces to assign guardians to women and minors who were without them. 
Appended to the document, which is signed in Greek by the petitioner and her 
proposed guardian, is the reply of the praefect making the appointment as 
desired. The rarity of accurately-dated specimens of Latin cursive gives the 
papyrus a considerable palaeographical interest. 

\CY{audio) Valeria Firm[o praef(ecto) Aeg{yptt) 
ab Aurelia{e'\ Amtnc{uario. 
rogo domine des mijii 
attctorem Aurel{ium) PJutammottem 
5 e lege lulia Tiiia et ....[... 

dat{uni) do{viims) no{stris) Philippo Aug{usto) it e[t 
Philippo Caesaris c'\o{n)s{tdibus). 

and hand \Ayjf)r\\ia Άμμωνάριοί' [ίπι8€8ωκα, 
3rd hand [Α]νρηλία Πλουτάμμ[<ΰΐ' (ΰδοκω τ^ 

ΙΟ [8(]ήσι. 
4th hand (eroi/y) δ Τΰβι ι. [ 

5th hand, guo ue al/^ 

abeal Pl^itavnnonctn 
e leg{e) Iul(ia) et [Tiiia auciorem 
15 do. (6th hand?) cepi. 

6. d^d°• n°n° Pap. 7. 1. Caesare. 9. 1. Αίρηλιοι. 

' To Claudius Valerius Firmus, praefect of Egypt, from Aurelia Ammonarion. 
I beg, my lord, that you will grant me as my guardian Aurelius Plutammon in accordance 
with the lex lulia Tiiia . . . Dated in the consulship of our lords Philippus Augustus 

721. CONTRACTS 197 

for the 2nd time and Philippus Caesar. (Signed) I, Aurelia Ammonarion, have presented 
the petition. T, Aurelius Plutammon, assent to the request. The 4th year, Tubi 10. 
(Endorsed) In order that . . . may not be absent, I appoint Plutammon as guardian in 
accordance with the lex lulia el Tilia. Received by me.' 

I. Valerius Firmus is already known as praefect at this time from P. Amh. 72 
(a.d. 246) and 81 (a.d. 247). With regard to the date of P. Amh. 72 Wilcken considers 
{Archiv, II. p. 127) that the regnal year should be read as ς instead of y, as in our text ; 
but we still hold that γ is right and that the facsimile, so far from throwing any doubt 
upon our reading, thoroughly confirms it. 

5. lege lulia Tilia: cf. Gains, hul. i. § 185 si cui niillus omnino lulor sit, ei datur 
in urbe Roma ex lege A tilia . . . in provineiis vera a praesidibus provinciarum ex lege 
lulia el Tilia. In the official signature below (1. 14) the more usual and probably more 
correct form lulia el Tilia is used. The el has sometimes been regarded as a reason 
for supposing that there were two leges, a Julia and a Titia, but the conclusion is by no 
means necessary. 

Of the mutilated word at the end of the line the first letter may be a, e, i, s, or /, 
and the second a, r, m, ;;, or x. 

721. Sale of Crown Land. 

«5x16-5 (^ni. A.D. 13-14. 

An offer addressed by two persons to Gaius Seppius Rufus, perhaps 
idiologus, for the purchase of 19 arourae of land which had reverted to the 
State and was at the time uncultivated, at the price of 1 2 drachmae per aroura. 
The document follows, so far as it goes, the same formula as P. Amh. 68. 17-24, 
which Mitteis is no doubt right in explaining, not as a sale in the strict sense, 
but as an example of emphyteusis or hereditary lease {Zcitschr. Savigny-St. 
1901, pp. 151 sqq.) — a custom for which we now have evidence in Egypt as early 
as the second century B. C. (cf P. Tebt. I. 5. 12). That this is the true nature of 
the transaction, in spite of the use of the term ώι•7;(τασ(ίαι, is shown both by the 
lowness of the price — in P. Amh. 68. 21, 20 drachmae, here only 12 — and by 
the provision in the Amherst papyrus for an annual rent. Cf. 835, which is 
a similar offer for the ' purchase' of land addressed to the same official as 721, 
and P. Amh. 97. The document was never completed, blank spaces being left 
for some of the dates. 


Ταίωι ΣίτΓπίω 'Ρονφωι 

τταρα ΊΊοΧίμωνοί τον Τρνψωνο! και [Αρ)(ΐλάου 

βονλόμΐθα ώνησασθαι kv τωι Οζυρνγχ^ΐίτηι άττο 

υπολόγου βασιλικής «oy τοΰ (ίτους) Καίσ[α]ρ[οί κλήρων e- 

5 ΐΓΐ τοΰ ((Tovs) Καίσαρος άνΐίλλημίνων και άφ6ρ[α)]ν 

γίγονότων και κλήρων των ΐως τοΰ άηιλλημίνων 

και αντον (βτουί) Καίσαρος άναλλημίνων πλην Upas els κα[ρπού! (?) 

τοΰ ίσιόντοί τίτάρτου και τεσσαρακοστού έτους Καίσαρος, [ο μ\ν 
Πολίμων περί θωσβιν και Τίποΰιν τί][ς] άνω τοπ[α]ρχ[ίας 

ΙΟ άρονρ'ας) δεκάπεντΐ, / άρουρ{αι) le, δ δΐ Αρχέλ[αος nepi της 

Θμοισΐφω τοπαργί^ας) άρονρ{ας) τίσσαρες, /^ άρονρ[αι) [δ, / άρουρ(αι) ιθ, 
ίφ' ω παραδίΐγθίντΐς ταύτας διαγράψομ[€ν els την επϊ των τό- 
πων [δη]μοσίαν τράττΐζαν ttjv κεκ^λευσμίνην τιμήν έκαστης 
άpoύp'as) [άργυ{ρίον) (ίραχ/ϋάί)] δεκάδυο, ίζομΐν δε els την τού[των άνα- 
γωγήν και κα- 

15 [τεργασίαν άτίλίίαν ε]τηι τρία άπο τοΰ [ίίσιόντος μδ (ίτους) Καίσαρος 

5- Ι. άν(ΐΚτ)μμίνα>ν; SO in 1. 7• 

' Το Gaius Seppius Rufus from Polemon son of Tr}'phon and Archelaus son of . . . 
We wish to purchase in the Oxyrhynchite notne of the Crown land returned as unpro- 
ductive up to the . . . year of Caesar, from the holdings which were confiscated in the . . . 
year of Caesar and became unfruitful and the holdings confiscated up to and including the 
. . . year of Caesar, exclusive of temple land, for cultivation in the coming 44th year of 
Caesar — namely Polemon at Thosbis and Tepouis in the upper toparchy fifteen arourae, 
total 15 arourae, and Archelaus at ... in the toparchy of Thmoisepho, four arourae, total 
4 arourae, total 19 arourae, with the understanding that on these being assigned to us we 
shall pay into the local State-bank the price ordered for each aroura, 1 2 drachmae of silver, 
and shall have for their reclamation and cultivation immunity from taxation for three years 
from the coming 44th year of Caesar . . .' 

I. For Seppius Rufus cf. VVessely, Pap. Script. Graec. Specim. no. 8, and P. Brit. Mus. 
276, which shows that he was of higher rank than strategus. 

4. vKo\6yov βασιλική! : ΰπολογο! and τό fcoXoyoi/ are terms frequently used in the 
Tebtunis papyri to describe Crown land out of cultivation ; cf. P. Tebt. I. p. 540. The 
only other example of this use of the word in the Roman period is P. Amh. 68. 

4-5. [κλήρων] . . . άν(ΐ\λημίνων : cf. P. Tebt. I. 61 {ύ). 74 &c. and P. Amh. 68. 18, which 
can now be restored on the analogy of the present passage κλήρων . . . άν(]ίλημμ(νων κα[1 

άφορων και (?)..]... των (perhaps αχρήστων) y( γονάτων. 

7- πλην (foaf is apparently to be connected with ωνήσασθαι rather than άναλημμίνων. 

722. CONTRACTS 199 

The saleable land ίττολόγου βασιλική? is regarded as including both the confiscated κΚηροι 
and certain Upa -yi which must also have reverted to the government. 

12. παρα&(ΐχθ(ΐη-(! raCras : cf. P. Amh. 68. 20, where πηρπδ«χ5ίΐΓ [ταν]ται is nO doubt 

to be read, P. Tebt. 79. 16, &c. 

13. την Κ(Κί\(υ<τμ(νην τιμήν; cf. P. Amh. 68. 20 την κ^ίΚ^υσβΛσα'ν τιμήν Ιτπο Αονκίον 
ΊονλιΌιί ι Ο ύί;σ• TitVou το\ν ήγίμόνοί. 

14-5. The supplements are taken from P. Amh. 68. 21. Other conditions on the 
lines of P. Amh. 68 presumably followed. 835 concludes αξίω ίττίστάλαι? . . .] και Toit 

■γραμματίΰσι ΐκίόσΰαι μοι τον s . ■ ■ irepi Toujrnr χρηματισμούς, and Something of this kind 

apparently underlies P. Amh. 68. 23-4. 

722. Emancipation of a Slave. 

24-3 X 10 cm. A.D. 91 or 107. 

This document, which contains a formal emancipation of a female slave, 
drawn up before the agoranomi and concluding with an acknowledgement of 
the ransom, is of great interest as being the first specimen of its class from 
Egypt which is prior to the introduction of the constiiutio Antoniita, and 
illustrating the differences between Graeco-Egyptian and Roman law on the 
subject of manumission. Of the two previously known parallels, B. G. U. 96, 
which is a mere fragment, belongs to the third century and the Papyrus 
Edmondstone (facsimile in Young's Hieroglyphics, ii, Plate 46 ; text in Curtius, 
Anec. Dclph. App. i, W'essely, JaJiresber. dcs k. k. Staatsgym. in Hcrnals, xiii, 
pp. 47-8) to A. D. 354. Since the publications of the latter papyrus are some- 
what inaccessible, we append the text of it on p. 202. Other papyri concerning 
the emancipation of slaves are 716, 723, a similar but much shorter example 
of a second century manumission, 48-9 and 349, which are letters to the 
agoranomi authorizing them to liberate slaves. "The ends of lines are lost 
throughout 722, but can in part be restored either from the context or from 
a comparison with another and quite complete specimen of an emancipation, 
written in the reign of Commodus, which we opportunely found in January, 1904. 
The most striking feature of 722 is the circumstance that it is concerned, not 
with the emancipation of an individual whose status was entirely that of a slave, 
but with a joint manumission by t\vo brothers of the third part of a slave who 
as regards the other two-thirds had already been made free ; cf. the parallel case 
in 716 and, as it now appears, in P. Edmondstone 6. That the previous owner 
of the f was a different person from the two owners of the \ is not stated 
directly but is in the light of 716 likely enough. It is also noticeable that the 


ransom is paid, not by the slave herself or by a banker, but by a private 
individual, perhaps her prospective husband, and that a distinction is drawn 
between the λύτρα paid to the owner and a small sum in silver which probably 
went to the State ; cf. note on 1. 19. 

"Etovs SiKUTOv Αντοκράτορ[οί Kaiaapos Δομιτιανοΰ 

Χΐβαστοΰ Γίρμανικοΰ 'Τπ([ρβ(ρεταίον 

ίπα•γο{μίνων) (2nd hand) τ Σ(βα{στί)) (1st hand) μη{ΐ'οί) Kaiaapeiov 
([παγο{μίνο)ν) (2nd hand) τ Χ€βα{σττί) (ist hand) iv Ό- 

ξνρύγχωΐ' πάλα τήί Θηβαίί[ογ en άγορανό- 
5 μα)ν Ψαμμίων τριών [ 

άώΐΐκαν ίΙυ\\€νθίραΐ' ύπο Δία Τ[ην "Ηλων 'AypO^ivi 

ώί {ίτων) κ μισοί μ(λίχρωί μ[ακροπρ6σωποί 

[ού(λη) μ](τώπα> μίσω καΙ Xapaw[as ώί (ϊτων) . μίσοί 

[μΥλ'ίγ^ρωί μακροπρόσωποί οΰ(λ^) 

ΙΟ [. . ά]ριστ(ρ[. άμφότ€ροί τοϋ 

[Άμ]μωνίου μητροί Χαραποντοί [ 

\tS>\v απ Όζυρύγχων πόλΐως [ep άγνια το ύ- 

[πάρ]χον αϋτοΐί ϊξ ίσου τρίτον μί[ροί τη! ϊξαπη- 

[λ(ν]θ(ρ(ύμίνηί κατά το άλλο 8[ίμοιρον 8ού- 
15 λτ;? Άπολλωνοντοί cuy (ϊτΖν) κτ μΐσ[ηί μΐλίχρωτοί 

[μα]κροπροσώπον ούλη ttoSI 8[(ξίω 

ΐ^απηλΐνβΐρωμίνηί (ταλάντων) δ[ 

[. .]ν των τοΰ άπ(\ΐνθ(ρονμίνου .... τρίτου 

[μ(ρου]5 αργυρίου ίπισήμου 8ρα[γ_μων 

20 \τ\ΐ[τ]ρωβ6λου καΐ ων τίτακται [. . . . Α)(^ίλλΐΐ 

καΐ Χαραπά Ήρακλαί Τρύφων(\ί τοΰ 

μητρο9 Ταοννώψριοί Παν(σι[ άπο τηί 

[α]ντηί πόλΐωί ώί {ίτων) λα μίσο[ί μίλίχ^ρως 

μακροττρόσωπο! ον{λη) vnep γ6{νυ) 8e^[iov λύτρων 
25 αργυρίου Χΐβαστοΰ νομίσμα[τοί δραχμών 

διακοσίων χ^αλκοΰ ταλάντω[ν 

γ^ιλίων, οΰκ Ι^όντοί τω 'Αχ^ιλλΰ ού^ άλλω 

[ύ]π€/ο αύτοΰ άπαίτησιν ποΐί[ΐσθαί rrapa τηί Αττολ- 

\}CfuVOUTos ονδ( των π[αρ' αΰτήί των προκΗ- 

722. CONTRACTS 201 

30 [μ?βν(ύν λύτρων ovS' «Vie[ 

γνωστηρ τηί ΐλ(υθ€ρώ[σΐα)ί 

του Π^τΐήσιοί μητρός [ άττο της αϋτήί 

πόλβω? ώί («τώΐ') μ μ[€σοί μίλίχ^ρωί μακρο- 

πρόσωποί ού{λη) άντίκ[νημ(<ύ kv άγνια. 

35 ^ή αύτήι. (2nd hand) Άχι\λ[(ύ! 

πίπνημΐ σ[νΐ' τω άίβλ^ω 

^(ραπάτι τη[ν ΐλίνθίρωσιν 

τοΰ τρίτου [μίρου! δούληί 

Ά7Τθ\οΐΌντ[οί και άττίχω 
4θ τα λύτρα ά[ργνρίου δραχ(βα.ί) 

δίακοσία[5 )(^αλκοΰ 

[■ •Μ 

On the verso 

ΐπα•γο{μΐνων) ς [ 

1 6. π of ΤΓΓ,δί corr. from δ. ^6. 1. πιποίημαι. 39• '• Άπολλω>Όίτ[θΓ, 

'The loth year of the Emperor Caesar Domitianus Augustus Germanicus, on the 6th 
intercalary day of Hyperberetaeus, dies Augustus, which is the 6th intercalary day of the 
month Caesarius, dies Augustus, at Oxyrhynchus in the Thebaid, before three agoranomi 
called Psammis, Achilleus, aged about 20 years, of middle height, fair, having a long face 
and a scar on the middle of his forehead, and Sarapas, aged about . . . years, of middle 
height, fair, having a long face and a scar on his left . . . , both sons of . . . son of 
Ammonius, their mother being Sarapous daughter of ... , all of O.xyrhynchus, have set 
free under sanction of Zeus, Earth, and Sun (the deed being drawn up in the street) the 
third part which they jointly own of the slave who has been freed as regards the other two- 
thirds, ApoUonous, aged about 26, of middle height, fair, having a long face and a scar 
on the right foot, . . . for . . . drachmae 4 obols of coined silver and the ransom paid to 
Achilleus and Sarapas by Heraclas son of Tryphon son of . . . , his mother being Taonnophris 
daughter of . . . of the said city, aged about 31, of middle height, fair, having a long face 
and a scar above his right knee, namely 200 drachmae of Imperial silver coin and . . . 
talents 1000 drachmae of copper ; Achilleus or any one else on his behalf being forbidden 
to make any demand of the aforesaid ransom from ApoUonous or her assigns, or to . . . 
The certifier of the manumission is . . . son of PeteSsis, his mother being . . . , of the said 
city, aged about 40, of middle height, fair, having a long face and a scar upon his . . . shin, 
in the same street. 

' 1, Achilleus, have with my brother Sarapas effected the emancipation of the third 
part of the slave ApoUonous, and I have received the ransom, two hundred drachmae of 
silver , . .' 


I. Since the papyrus must on palaeographical grounds be assigned to the end of the 
first or the early part of the second century, the coincidence of a 6th intercalary day with 
the loth year of an emperor called Germanicus fixes the reign as that of either Doniilian 
or Trajan. The supplement at the end of 1. i is in any case long compared with the 
10 letters which are missing in I. 2, and Domitian is therefore preferable. 

6. Cf. the similar beginning of P. Edmondst. 6 sqq. For Δι'η rfijp'HXioi•, of. 48. 6, &c. 

12. cV ayvth is Supplied from the newly found emancipation (cf. introd.); cf. tv άγυια\ 
τη airrjt in 11. 34-5. We are inclined to think that this formula, which so far is only known 
at Oxyrhynchus, regularly implies the execution of the document before the agoranomi, 
who are mentioned much less frequently in Oxyrhynchus contracts than elsewhere. 

16-9. The newly found emancipation proceeds straight from the description of the 
slave to the mention of the apyipiov ('πίσημον corresponding to 1. 19, and owing to the 
lacunae it is not clear whether the sum mentioned in 1. 17 is the ransom of the whole 
slave or of the § previously set free. On the whole we think the latter hypothesis is more 
likely. The talents are in either case probably copper. 

19. αργυρίου ίπισήμου: the newly found emancipation has apy. ΐηισ. ίραχμων 8ίκα και i>v 
Τίτακται ΰπίρ αϋτοΰ (sc. the slave) τω θίωνι (the Owner) . . . \ϋτρω» άργ, δμιιχ. π(ΐτακοσίων, ΟΠ 

the analogy of which we have supplied λύτρων in 1. 24. It is clear from that papyrus that 
a distinction was drawn between the pajTnent in άργϋριον ίπίσημον and the ransom paid to 
the owner, and from 48 and 49 in which the same amount of apyipiov ('πίσημον, lo 
drachmae, is coupled with different sums expressed in copper, there WOuld seem to have 
been a normal charge of 10 drachmae in addition to the ransom, in spite of 722. 19-20, 
where the amount of άργ. ίπισ. cannot be 10 drachmae. The divergence of 722 at this 
point may be due to the fact that it is concerned with the emancipation of only part 
of a slave. To whom these 10 drachmae were paid is not made clear, but it is probable 
that the State in some form was the recipient. Nowhere in connexion with these 
emancipations under Graeco-Egyptian law is there a mention of the vicesivia liherlalis 
levied under Roman law, which appears in B. G. U. 96. 8 (τψ \(1ΐύψυ(ίαν (Ικοστήν) ; but if, 
as we are now disposed to think, the status of the persons who wrote 48-9 was that of 
farmers of the ίγκΰκλιον and 48-9 stand towards such documents as 722 in the same kind 
of relation as 241-3 towards contracts for sale or mortgage, there must have been a tax 
upon the emancipation of slaves apart from the 10 drachmae αργυρίου ίπισημου. 

Papyrus Edmondstone. a.d. 354. 

ei?rtt( ) ύππτ€[ϊα1? των δ(σποτων ημών Κωνσταντίου Αυγούστου τυ ζ Km Κωνσταντίου του 

€ΤΓΐφ(ΐν(στάτου Καίσαρος το γ 
Ύΰβι ιζ της ιγ ΙνΒικτίονος, iv *ΈΧ(φαντίΐ'η\ς^ πόλίί της ανω θηβαϊκής. 
ΑύρηΧία Ύηρουτηρου ϊΐασμητος μητρός Ύσ^νηα^νοΰμςως πττύ ^Έλίφαντίνης ττόΧίως μ€τά 

συνίστύΤΓ^ο ς 
[τ]οΰ κυρίου αΰτης ΰν6ρ6ς Αυρηλίου Δωροθίου Σιρηνου άπο της αίτης ττο'λίωϊ Ανρηλίω 

5 μητρός Ύαπαμωνος κα\ Τϊπλήτι e'lc μητρός θαησιος κα\ (τ)η ταΰτη(^ς') θυγατρι Αΰρηλία Αουσία 

μοί 5ovXoi(s) ΰττίρ του €-πιβά\λοντος μίρηυς χαίρίΐν. ομολογώ (κουσίως κα\ αυθαιρέτως κα\ 
αμΐτανοητως άφικίναι υμάς (λ(υ6(ρους τον €πιβάλλοντος μοι μ€ρους ίττο Την και Ονρανόν κατ* 

Τ|θ1ν παν^λ^ημονος θίοΰ (λθΰντος els ΐμί άπο κληρονομιάς της μητρός μου άπο τον νυν (π\ 

TOP άπαντα χράνον 

723. CONTRACTS 203 

και aiiff ίν (νιίύξωσθί μοι κατά χρόνον (ΰνοίας κάί στοργή! (Τί τ( κα\ Οττηρ^σίαί. ρ(Τ!>σθ( 

οΖν ίμα! 
ΙΟ κατά τ[ο1 προκύμινύν μου μίρο! καθωί προήπον και νϊμίσβί els ovs iav βονλητί τόπουί 

και άνίπιλήμπτωί, evBoKf'iV yap κ<ι\ π(ϊθ(σθαι ίμϊ την ίΚ(υθ(ρονντα τοΓγ (Κ(υθ(ρονμ(νηκ els 
TTjv8f [τ^ην fKevOiptaaiv ηκΐΐν Tols iXevufpovpevois καθω5 προΒΐ^ήΧονται καί τοΐ? (ζ αντώρ 
tVofitVi^oJir eiTf «V! ^Xd'oir τίκνοκ (ΐτι eVi (Ttpnis tKyovots' μήτ( μην ois (άν κτήσησθί τρό(πω) 
/ΐϊ;[δεν11 napfvptafi μη^ίμια etnevufv ακώλυτοι* ίσται Trjs dovXeias, και μη ΐζΐσται δί μη?ί€ν\ των 
15 €μών κληρονόμων άπαξαπλώς άντιΧίγΐΐν μου ταύτη τη ΐυσΐβ^ια ττίρΐ μη^ΐνϋς κατά μη^ίνα τρόπον 
€κ μηheμιas αφορμής τω καθόλου ϋι ην κα\ αυτοί τω χρόνω evedei^oiv μοι (ΰνοιαν K<u 

κα[1] αΰτη άμοιβόμ(νος Tas αμοιβαί ίκίον και ■Πίττισμίνη ξκοκ fir Trjvht την ίλ.(υθ(ρίαν ήνπιρ 
ίβίμην κυρίαν κα\ βξβαίαν άπλην γραφύσαν ττανταχοΰ ίττιφΐρομίνην ΐφ υπογραφής (μοΰ Αωρο- 
θ€ου τοΐι άν^ρος αντης προς αΐωνίαν νμων άσφάΚααν^ κα\ ΐττίρωτηθίίσα ωμοΧυγησα. 
20 (2nd hand) Ανρηλία Ύηρουτήρου IIaσμψ■os ή προκαμίνη ίβίμην την iXnftfplav και (Ιδοκώ 

πάσι το7ς Ινγ^γραμμίνοις 
ώς πρόκίΐται. Αυρήλιος Δωρόβ(ος 2€ρήνου 6 προγιγραμμίνος άνηρ avrijs συνίστην τή γυναικί 

μου κα\ έγραψα 
imep αυτής γράμματα μη (ΙΒη^ίης. {^^^ hand) Αυρήλιος Tiviaaels Αμμωνάτος μαρτυρώ, 

(4th hand) Αυρήλιος Άμμωνίυν 
Σωκράτους μαρτυρώ. (S'h hand) Αυρήλιος Φιτονσΐας Άιτωκίου μαρτυρώ. (6th hand) Αΰ- 

ρήλιος Κύριλλος ϋαησίου μαρτυρώ. 
(yth hand) Αυρήλιος Ύιμόθίος Απολλώνιου άπο προιστώτων Έλιφαντίνης μαρτυρώ. 

5• Ύκάλήτι : ΟΓ perhaps Ύηαλήψι. 6. 1. μου for μοι. 9• 1• ('ν(&(ίξασβ(. Final ( of 

ρ(π(σθ( COrr. from α; 1. (τ)ρί'π(σθαι ? ΙΟ. 1. νίμ(σθαι . . . βούλησθι. II. Ι. (Κ(υθ(ροϋσαν. 

12. 1. προδίδήλωται. 1 6. 1. (ν($(ΐξαν. Ι 7• 1. άμ(ΐβομίνη. 2 2. 1. (ΙδυΙας . . . Αμμώνιος. 

Τινισθ(Ίς can be read for Ίινισαΰς. 

723. Emancipation of a Slave. 

17-3 Χ2Ι•2 COT. A.D. I38-161. 

This document, recording the formal emancipation of a female slave, follows 
the same formula as 722, but is simpler and more compressed. A good deal 
is lost at the beginnings of the lines, including, unfortunately, the details con- 
cerning the \ντρα ; but a comparison with 722 renders the general sense clear 
enough. Cf. the introd. to that papyrus. 

I ["Erovi Αύτοκρατόροί Καίσαρος Τίτου ΑΙλίον 'ASpiavov Άντωνίνου Xe]- 
βαστοϋ Εϋσφοΰς (2nd hand) Δνστρου α Τνβι α (ist hand) iv 
O^vpvyycuv ποΚΐΐ τήί θηβαίβοΐ 


2 €7γ' άγορανόμων άφΐΐκΐν ϊΧΐυθίραν ύπο Δία Γήΐ' "Ηλιον ] Διό- 

δωρου του 'AyaBi'ivov μητροί Tatei Θίωνοί 'HpaKXetSov 

3 3° letters απ Όξυρύγ-χων πόλΐω! ϊν άγυια τη^ ύπάρ)([ου]σαν αύτω 

οίκογΐνη ΐκ δούλης Αημητροΰτοί 

4 δονλην 5° letters ]δ€ . . [. γν'ωστηρ τήί (λίυθίρώσΐωί Χαραπίων 


5 55 letters (2nd hand) ώί] {ίτων) ν ο[ι)λ^] πο5(ί) άριστ{ΐρω) (ist hand) 

kv άγνίο. TTJ avrfj (2nd hand) δια Χαιρήμ{οΐΌ5) τοΰ συν άλ(λοΐί) 

6 5° letters ] 

Ι. θηβαϊκοί Pap. 3• ^'Ί^ορχονσαν Pap. 5• «"y'o Pap. 
2. τοΰ seems to have been omitted before Ήραΐίλ€ΐδου. The name Taed occurs also in 

76. 5 ί^ψ'ρο! Τσ6€ί Καλλιου. 

4. The vestiges following ]if possibly represent the yv of γνωστήρ, the intervening space 
being accounted for by the junction at this point of two selides. Shorter blank spaces 
have been left in the corresponding part of the two preceding lines. In that case ϊστιν] 8c 
γνωστήρ should be read ; but the traces do not suit yv particularly well, and there is no «στιι/ 
he in 496. 16 where a γνωστήρ is mentioned" at the end of a contract. A description of the 
slave and perhaps the amount of the λίτρα were given at the beginning of this line (cf. 722. 
1 5 sqq.) ; but ] Sera is not a possible reading. 

5. After σϊψ c'\{\ots) the papyrus not improbably proceeded tVi τη! ί'γκυκλίου ; cf 96. 2 
(corr. by Wilcken) ό σΰν nX(Xoit) eVi τη{ς) ^νκυκλίον]. This restoration would accord very 
■well with our present explanation of the position occupied by the writers of 48 and 49 
(cf. 722. 19, note); but what exactly διό implies here is uncertain. 

724. Apprenticeship to λ Shorthand-Writer. 

ι8•3χ 21-3 CM. A.D. 155. 

Contract whereby an ex-cosmetes of Oxyrhynchus apprenticed his slave 
to a shorthand -writer for two years to be taught to read and write shorthand, 
the teacher receiving 120 drachmae in all. The contract was drawn up by an 
unprofessional scribe, and the language is often confused. 

ΠαΙν^χώτηί ό και ΊΊανάρηί των κ(Κοσμητΐυκ6των της Ό^υρυγγΐΐτων 
πό\(ω! δια ΓίμίλΧον φίλου Απολλωνία) σημιογράώω vaipfiv, σννίστησά σοι 
Χαιράμμωνα δοΰλον προί μάθησιν σημείων ων ΐπίαταται ό υΙός σου 
Δι[ο]νύσιοί ΐπΐ χρόνον ίτη δύο άπο τοΰ ΐνΐστωτο! μηνοί Φαμΐνωθ τοΰ 

724. CONTRACTS 205 

5 6κτωκαι8(κάτου (τουί Άντωνίνου Καίσαροί τον κυρίου μισθοΰ τον σνμπΐφω 
νημίνου trphs άλληΚουί αργυρίου βραχμών έκατον (ίκοσι χ^ωρίί ΐορτι- 
κων, (^ ών ίσγίί την ττρώτην 8όσιν kv δρα)ζ^μαΐ? Τίσσαράκοντα, την 8e 
SfVTfpav λήψ;] τον naiSos άναληφότοί το κομίντάρ^]ον okov kv δρα- 
χμ''αίς τ[ΐσσ•]αράκοντα, την δΐ τρίτην λήψομαι (πΐ TfXei τοΰ \ρόνου τοΰ 
ΙΟ παιδο9 kK παντοί λόγου τηζοΰ γράφοντος και άναγ(ΐνώσ[κον tos άμΐμπτωί 
Tcts {ie} \oiwas δραχ^μαί τίσσαράκοντα. kav δί kvTos τον ■^[ρ]6νου αύτον 
άπαρτίσΐ]ί ονκ ίκδεξομαι την ΤΓροκΐΐμίνην ΐΓροθ€σμ[ί]αν, ούκ k^ovTOS 
μοι kvTos τον χρόνον τον παϊδα άποσπάν, παραμΐνΰ δί cr'^o^t /ίίτά [το\ν y^pd^vov 

kav άργηστ] ήμίραί ή μήνας, (ετοι/ί) ιη Αντοκράτορο! Καίσαρος Τίτον 
Αίλίον Άδριανον 
15 Άντωνύνον ^ίβαστον Ενσφονς Φαμενωθ e. 

3. σ of σου corr. from μ. 7• Χ ο^ δραχμαι^ corr. from y. 9• '• ^ήψ^^• ' 2. 

ξ of (κδ(ξομαί ΟΟΓΓ. from χ. 14•'? of ημιρα! rewritten. 

'Panechotes also called Panares, ex-cosmetes of Oxyrhynchus, through his friend 
Gemellus, to ApoUonius, writer of shorthand, greeting. I have placed with you my slave 
Chaerammon to be taught the signs which your son Dionysius knows, for a period of two 
years dating from the present month Phamenoth of the 1 8th year of Antoninus Caesar the 
lord at the salary agreed upon between us, 120 silver drachmae, not including feast-days; 
of which sum you have received the first instalment amounting to 40 drachmae, and 
you will receive the second instalment consisting of 40 drachmae when the boy has learnt 
the whole system, and the third you will receive at the end of the period when the boy 
writes fluently in every respect and reads faultlessly, viz. the remaining 40 drachmae. 
If you make him perfect within the period, I will not wait for the aforesaid limit ; but it is 
not lawful for me to take the boy away before the end of the period, and he shall remain 
with you after the e.xpiration of it for as many days or months as he may have done 
no work. The 1 8 th year of the Emperor Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus 
Pius, Phamenoth 5.' 

6. χωρίΓ ίορτικών: sc. ήμερων (cf. 725. 36-7), though the phrase is out of place. 

8. Ko/iekTopVoi/ : a Graecized form of commentarium seems to be intended, though the 
doubtful μ is more like λο. 

11-3. The clause ούκ i^ovroi κ.τΧ., which is regularly found in contracts of apprentice- 
ship (cf e. g. 725. 53-6), comes in somewhat awkwardly here after the clause Vav hi e'lnos κ.7•.λ. 
The meaning is that if the boy was perfect in less than two years, his owner would not 
insist on his staying with the teacher unless the teacher wished to keep him, but the boy's 
owner was prevented from taking him away before the boy was perfect and so evading the 
payment of the second and third instalment^. 


725. Apprenticeship to a Weaver. 

30-7 X n cm, A.D. 183. 

A contract between Ischyrion and Heraclas, in which the former apprentices 
to the latter a boy called Thonis, probably the ward of Ischyrion, for five years, 
to be taught the trade of weaving. Arrangements are made for the provision 
of wages (after two years and seven months) and clothes for Thonis by Heraclas 
on an ascending scale, and for the case of Thonis' absence from his work for 
more than the 20 days allowed for holidays. Cf 275, a similar contract with 
a weaver written lao years previously, upon which the supplements in 11. 1-5 
are based. 

^ΟμοΧογοΰσιν άΧΚήλοις 'lajxvpimu 'HpaSiw^os 

[μητρο5 άτΓ 'Οζν\ρύγχωρ πόλΐωί και 

[Ήρακλάί ^αραπίωνοί το\ΰ και Aeofros Ήρακλΐί- 

δ[ο]ν ιι\ητροί άπο] τήί avrijs πόλΐω^ 

5 [yep]Sio[s 6 μ\ν Ίσγυρίων ίγ]δ(δ6σθαι τω Ήρα- 

[κλα] τον το[ΰ ]••[•••] αδΐλφον 

. [.] . Of Θωΐ'[ιΐ' ά]φήλ[ικα π]ροί [μ]ά6ησιν τήί δη- 

λ[ο]νμίνη9 [τί]χΐ'η9 άπο νίορηίνίαί τον] έξήί 

μ[η\νο5 Φαΰ)φ[ι] ΐπι χρόνον ίτη ΐΓ(.[ντ€, κ]αί πάρ- 
ιο e^et αύτον προσίδρίύοντα τω διδασκάλω 

έπϊ τον δηλο[νμ(]νον )(ρ{6]νον καθ" ΐκάστην 

ημίραν άπο άν\ατο\η^] ^[λίΌι;] μίχρι δύσ^ωί, 

ποιοΰντα πάντ\α, τα ίπιταχθ^ησόμίνα [α]ΰτω 

νπο τον αύτον δ[ιδασκάλ]ον ώί ΐπΐ των όμοί- 
ϊ^ ων μαθητών, [τρ(φ6μ]ΐνον vπb τον Ίσχν- 

[ρί]ωνο5. κ[αι τα μίν] πρώτα ίτη δύο 

και μήναί έπτα τον τρίτον Ινιαυτον 

ονδ\ν δώσίΐ ίιπΐρ μισθοί) τον παιδοί 6 Ήρα- 

κλά5, τοΓί δΐ λοιποΐί μη σι πίντί τον αν- 
2θ τοΰ τρίτον kviavTOV χορηγήσ(ΐ ό Ήρα- 

κλάί νπ(ρ μισθών τον αύτον μαθητον 

κατά μήνα δραχμα! δΐκάδνο κ[α]ί τω τ€- 

725. CONTRACTS 207 

τάρτω ei /ιαντω όμοίωί κατά μήνα 
vwep μισθών δραχμάί SeKae^ και τω 

25 πίμτΓτω ΐνιαυτω ομοίως κατά, μή- 
να δραχμάς (ΐκοσι τεσσάρας, καϊ κατασκΐυ- 
άσει ό Ήρακλάς τω αντω μαθητΐί τω μ\ν 
(νΐστωτι τίτάρτω και ίίκοστω (τΐΐ 
^ί\τωνα άξιον δραχμών δίκάΐξ, τω [fie 

30 Ισιόντι Κί (iVet) 'έτΐρον γλίτωνα άξιον S[pa- 
χμών ύ'κοσι, και [τ]ω κς• {(τβι) ομοίως άλλο[ν 
χιτώ[ν]α άξιον δραχ^μων ΐΐ[κ]οσι τί[σσάρων, 
κ[α]ι τω κζ («Vet) άλλον χιτώνα [ά]ξιον δ[ρα•χμών 
ΐΐκοσι οκτώ, και τώ κη {ίΤ€ΐ) ομοίως άλλ[ον] χιτώ- 

35 t'a άξιον δραχμών τριάκοντα δύο. αρ- 
γήσει δβ ό παις (ίς λόγον εορτών κατ (τος 
ήμίρας (ίκοσι, ούδΐνος ϊκκρουομίνου 
τ[ώ]ν μισθών τούτων αφ' ου χρόνου kav 
χορηγηθίϊ μισθός, ίάν δΐ πλΐίονας τού- 

4θ τών άργήστ] [ή άσ^θΐνήσ]] ή άτακτήστ] η 
δι άλλην τίν[ά αΐ]τίαν ήμίρας ΐηϊ τάς 
[ισ]ας e7rai'ayKe[y] παρίξΐΐ αΰτον ό Ίσχνρί 
ων τω διδασκά[λ]ω ήμίρας παραμένον- 
τα καΐ ποιονντ\α\ πάντα καθώς πρόκειται 

45 χωρίς μισθού, τρεφόμενον νπο του αύτον 
Ισχυρίωνος, δια το ίπι τούτοις έστάσθαι. 
ό [fi]e Ήρακλάς (ύδοκών τούτοις πασι καΐ ίκ 
δειδάξίΐν τον μαθητήν την δηλουμέ- 
νην τίχνην ϊν τώ πενταΐτΐ χρόνω 

5ο καθώς και αύτος ίπίσταται και χορηγήσειν 
τους μηνιαίους μισθούς καθώς πρόκΐΐ- 
τα[ι] avh του ογδόου μηνός του τρίτου ίνιαυ- 
τοΰ. καϊ μή ΐξΐΐναι μηδενι αυτών παρα- 
βαίνων τι τών προκείμενων ή ό παραβάς 

55 εκτείσι τώ ενμενοντι έπιτείμου δραχμάς 

εκατόν και εις τδ δημόσιον τάς ισας. κύριον 

το όμολόγημα. (ετονς) κδ Αυτοκράτορας Καίσαρος 


Μάρκου Αυρηλίου ΚομμόΒου Άντωνίνου 
Χΐβαστοΰ Άρμ^νίακοΰ Μη8ίκοΰ Παρθικού 
6ο ^αρματικοΰ Γΐρμανικοΰ Μΐγίστου Θωθ κ(. 

2nd hand Ήρακλας Σαραπ(ίωι/ο9) του κ{αΐ) Λέοντος τίθαμαι Th 
όμολόγημα και (ύδοκω πασι τοΐί προκ{ζΐμίνοι$;). 
Θώνΐί ό κ{αΐ) Μωρονί Άρθώνιοί €γραψ[α 
ΰπίρ αΰ(τοΰ} μτ^ €ί(5(ότοί) γράμμ(ατά). 

ι6. τ of err; corr. from ξ. 30. 'ίσιοντι Pap. 34• αλλ[οκ above the line. 35. 

|t of afiov COrr. from So. 52. ογδόου corr 56. ϊσ -as Pap. 63. s oi μωρού! 

rewritten (?). 

' Ischyrion son of Heradion and . . ., of Oxyrhynchus, and Heraclas son of Sarapion 
also called Leon, son of Heraclides, his mother being . . ., of the said city, weaver, agree 
with each other as follows : — Ischyrion on the one part that he has apprenticed to 
Heraclas . . . Thonis, a minor, to be taught the art of weaving for a period of five years 
starting from the ist of next month, Phaophi, and will produce him to attend the teacher 
for the stipulated period every day from sunrise to sunset, performing all the orders that 
may be given to him by the said teacher on the same terms as the other apprentices, 
and being fed by Ischyrion. For the first 2 years and 7 months of the 3rd year Heraclas 
shall pay nothing for the boy's wages, but in the remaining 5 months of the said 3rd year 
Heraclas shall pay for the wages of the said apprentice 12 drachmae a month, and in 
the 4th year likewise for wages 16 drachmae a month, and in the 5th year likewise 
24 drachmae a month; and Heraclas shall furnish for the said apprentice in the present 
24th year a tunic worth 16 drachmae, and in the coming 25th year a second tunic worth 
20 drachmae, and likewise in the 26th year another tunic worth 24 drachmae, and in 
the 27th year another tunic worth 28 drachmae, and likewise in the 28th year another tunic 
worth 32 drachmae. The boy shall have 20 holidays in the year on account of festivals 
without any deduction from his wages after the payment of wages begins ; but if he exceeds 
this number of days from idleness or ill-health or disobedience or any other reason, 
Ischyrion must produce him for the teacher during an equivalent number of days, during 
which he shall remain and perform all his duties, as aforesaid, without wages, being fed by 
the said Ischyrion, because the contract has been made on these terms. Heraclas on the 
other part consents to all these provisions, and agrees to instruct the apprentice in the 
aforesaid art within the period of 5 years as thoroughly as he knows it himself, and to pay 
the monthly wages as above, beginning with the 8th month of the 3rd year. Neither party 
is permitted to violate any of the aforesaid provisions, the penalty for such violation being 
a fine of 100 drachmae to the party abiding by the contract and to the Treasury an equal 
sum. This agreement is valid. The 24th year of the Emperor Caesar Marcus Aurelius 
Commodus Antoninus Augustus Armeniacus Medicus Parthicus Sarmaticus Germanicus 
IMaximus, Thoth 25. I, Heraclas son of Sarapion also called Leon, have made this 
contract and consent to all the aforesaid provisions. I, Thonis also called Morous, son 
of Harthonis, wrote for him as he was illiterate.' 

726. CONTRACTS 120^ 

726. Appointment of a Representative. 

20 X 9-2 cm. A.D. 135. 

This is an agreement by which Apollonius authorizes another person to 
appear for him in some legal proceedings in which he was concerned, being 
prevented by illness from attending in person ; cf. 97 and 261, which are 
contracts of the same kind. The document is incomplete, the name of the 
representative and the date not having been filled in. 

"Etovs ίννίακαι8ίκάτου Αυτοκράτορας διαλογισμ[6]ν, αύτόθΐν συν- 

Καίσαροί Τρα[ι\αΐΌΰ 'Αδριανού ΐστακίναι τον 

Χΐβαστοΰ Τνβ[ι] kv Όξνρνγ- τον ύπ\ρ αΰτοΰ λόγον ττοιησό- 

νων πόλεί τηί Θηβαίδοί, όμο- 15 μΐνον π(ρΙ των ττροί αΰτον 

5 λογΐΐ Απόλλων LOS Απολλων[ί^ον ζητη6ησομίν](ύν Ιπί τ( τοΰ 

του Αι[ο]γΐνον9 μητρός Τανίγω- κρατίστου ήγ€μ[6 νοί Πίτρωνίον 

ταρίου της [καΐ] Εύτίρπης Αίογί- [Μαμ](ρτ(ίνου και τοΰ ϊττιστρατή- 

νους άπ Όξυρνγνων πόλΐως [Υ"]" Γΐλλίον Β(ζ[σ]σου ή ι^α,]ι ϊφ Ιτί- 

20 ρων κριτών κ[αι\ πάντα ΐπιτ(λί- 

άπο της αυτής πόλΐως, (ν άγυια, σοντα περί των [κ]ατα την σύστασιν, 

ΙΟ ού δννάμΐνος δι' ά[σ]θίν(ΐαν (ϋδοκβΐ γαρ ΐπϊ τούτοις, 

πλίΰσαι ΐπϊ [τ]ον τοΰ νομοΰ [κνρια ή όμολο]γία. 

'The 19th year of the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus, Tubi , at 
Oxyrhynchus in the Thebaid. Apollonius son of Apollonius son of Diogenes, his 
mother being Tanechotarion also called Euterpe, daughter of Diogenes, of Oxyrhynchus, 
acknowledges to , of the said city (the contract taking place in the street), since 

he is unable through sickness to make the voyage to the assize of the nome, that he 
has forthwith appointed to represent him in the inquiry to be held against him 

before his highness the praefect Petronius Mamertinus or the epistrategus Gellius Bassus 
or other judges, and to carry out everything concerned with the trial; for he gives his 
consent on these terms. The agreement is valid.' 

10. δι* α^σ\θ€ν€ίαρ '. cf. 261. 12 δίά yvvaiKftau aa$iu€Lnif. 

14. τυν vnip airov : SO no doubt in 97. 3; the word after Nkcuio/jo there is perhaps 
a patronymic. 

1 9. Γίλλίου ϋά[σ]σου : Bassus is mentioned as epistrategus seven years earlier in 
237. vii. 22. 


727. Delegation of the Duties of a Guardian, 

33-3 X 15 ^'«• A.D. 154. 

This is a deed drawn up by two brothers, who were Roman citizens and 
owned property at Oxyrhynchus, authorizing an agent to act in their absence 
from Egypt for a nephew and niece whose guardians they were. The document, 
which is called a συ^χώ/^/ιηί, is addressed to the archidicastes, whose official 
cognizance of the transaction was desired. Other instances of private contracts 
being sent to the archidicastes are 268, B. G. U. 729 and 741, the juristic 
significance of which is discussed by Gradenwitz, Eiiifiihrioig, pp. 91-2, and 
Mitteis, Archiv, I. p. 350. It is noticeable that, with the exception of 268, the 
persons concerned in all these cases are Roman citizens, and that the documents 
usually take the form of a συγχωρησι^. The procedure here is apparently to be 
distinguished from that exemplified in 719 ; cf introd. to that papyrus. 

I[.]^[.]/i[. .]€i 'Ισι[8]ιί>ρου γ^νομ-ίνου ϊξηγητοϋ νίω 

•/(νομίνω στρατηγώ τήί π6λ€ως lepei άρχ^ίΒικαστί} 

και προ5 ττ} (ΤΓΐμ[ΐ]λία των γ^ρη ματ ιστών και των άλλων 

κριτηρ[ί]α)ν δια [Α]ημητρίου 'Ηρακλ(ί8ου γίνομίνου 
5 ^VYVi''']''^ ^'■ψ δύπ[οντ]ι τα κατά την άρχιδικαστΐίαν 

πάρα Γαίων Μαρκίων Απίωνο! τον και Διο- 

yiv[6\vi και Άπολιναρίον τον και Ίονλιανοΰ και ώί 

χ^ρηματίζομΐν και παρά 'ίΐφΐλά τον 'ίΐφίλάτοί των 

απ' [ 0]ξ[ν]ρννχων πόλΐωί. σννγωροΰσι οι Γάιοι Μάρκι- 
10 οι Απίων 6 και Αιογένης και Άπολινάριοί ό και Ίονλιανοί 

ον δνν[ά]μ€νοι κατά το παρόν τον Is Αΐγνπτον πλουν ποι- 

ήσασ6[α]ι σννΐστακίναι τον προγίγραμμίνον 'ίΐφίλαν 

όντα και των ύπαργόντων αντοΐί ΐν τω Όζνρννγΐί- 

τγι νομω φροντιστην και κατά τήνδί την σννχώρησιν 
15 φροντιοΰντα και ΐπιμΐλησόμΐνον ίν και αντοι ίπι- 

τροπήονσιν άφηλίκων έαντών ά8€λφιδων ΟύαλίρΊ- 

ων Θίοδότον τον και Πωλίωνοί και Άπολλωναρίον 

TTJs και Νίΐκαρίτηί ίτι Se και άπαιτήσοντα φόρονί 

και (γμ[ι]σθώσοντα ά kav [δ]ίον ην και καταστησόμΐνον 

727. CONTRACTS 21 1 

20 TTpos ούί tav 8(τ} και γίνη βιαττωλήσοντα ά (αν δίον 

fj rfj αντον πίστα, Slo tovs προ9 τούτοΐί oVray σννχρημα- 
τίζίΐν τω Ω,φΐΧα 'ίκαστα \τ]ων προκαμίνων (πιηΚοΰν- 
τι, καΐ Χ[6γο]υί ων tap ΐπιτίλΐστ) κατά μήνα (καστον 
δια7Γΐ[μ]ψ6μΐνον [αύτοΐ]? πάντα Se ίπιτίλίσοντα κα- 

25 θα και αύτοΐί παρονσι ΐζήν, ΐπΐΐ καΐ 6 συνιστανόμΐνο? 
'ίΐφΐλάς evSoKfi TrjSe ttj σννχωρήσίΐ, κυρίων όντων 
ων ίγονσι 6 Τ€ Απίων 6 και Aioytvij^ και Απολινάριοί 
ό και Ιουλιανοί αλλήλων γραμμάτων παντοίων πάν- 
των. άξ[ι]οΰ{μΐν). ΐτουί έπτακα[ί\δ(κάτου Αντοκράτοροί Καίσαρο{ί) 

3θ Αΐλίου 'Αδριανού 'Αν[τ]ωνΐίνου Χΐβαστοΰ Εϋσΐβοΰί 
Μ(χΐΐρ β. 

2nd hand Αμμώνιοί . . . . ο( ) 

5. 1. ΐ'ΐΌΟ δΐ£π[οΐ'τ^οΓ. 6. ο of διο corr. from α ? 8. 1. ΏφίλάτοΓ τοϋ Ώ. or ΏφίλάτοΓ 

Ώ. ? ΙΟ. iofXiai/of Pap. 24. 1. δ(α7Γί[^]ψο/ΐ£Ί'ω . . . cVircXeVoKT». 

' To . . . , son of Isidorus the ex-exegeles, late strategus of the cit}', priest, archi- 
dicastes and superintendent of the chrematistae and the other courts, through the deputy 
archidicastes Demetrius son of Heraclides the ex-exegetes, from Gaius Marcius Apion also 
called Diogenes and Gaius Marcius Apolinarius also called Julianus and however we are 
styled, and from Ophelas son of Ophelas, of Oxyrhynchus. Gaius Marcius Apion also 
called Diogenes and Gaius Marcius Apolinarius also called Julianus, being at present unable 
to make the voyage to Egypt, agree that they have appointed the aforesaid Ophelas, 
who is the agent for their property in the Oxyrhynchite nome, by the terms of the present 
authorization to act for and take charge of their brother's children Valerius Theodotus 
also called Polion and Valeria Apollonarion also called Nicarete, who are minors and their 
wards, and further to collect rents and to make such leases as may be necessary, and 
to appear against persons and to sell off produce as may be needful on his own authority. 
Accordingly let those concerned do business with Ophelas in the discharge of all the 
aforesaid duties ; and he shall forward to the said parties accounts of all his acts every 
month, and shall have power to act in all things no less than they themselves would 
have if present. Ophelas the appointed representative assents to this authorization ; 
and all bonds of every kind which Apion also called Diogenes and Apolinarius also called 
Julianus hold of each other remains in force. We request (your concurrence). The 
17th year of the Emperor Caesar Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Mecheir 2.' 

19. καταστησ6μ(ΐΌΐ/ : for καθίστασθαι in the Sense of appearing at legal proceedings 

cf. e.g. B. G. U. 613. 14 κατίστημίΐι <π\ Ofn' &ώρου, and the frequent instances of κατάστασα. 

21. The construction is here somewhat awkward, the series of future participles wliich 
depend upon συνίστακί^αι in 1. 12 being interrupted by the parenthetical sentence 810 tovs . . . 
σνγ χρημάτιζαν . . . (π-ιτίλοΟιτι, which would better have been kept till the end. 

29. άξ[ί]ι>ϋ{μ(ΐι) : cf. 268. 19 άξίοΐμ(ν ώί καβήκ[(]ι, and Β. G. U. 729. 19 where (!{ιοϊ(μΕΐ•) 

Γ 3 


stands by itself, as here. Wilcken {Archiv, I. p. 176) and Mitteis (ibid. p. 350) both 
consider that the object to be supplied after άξιοΖμ^ν is σωματισμάν, on the strength of 268, 
where the preceding sentence is fv ie toU προκίΐμίνηα οΰκ (vtart σωματ{ισμιΊ!). This was also 
our own view when editing that papyrus ; but in consideration of the uncertainty concerning 
the meaning of the word σωμαησμόί, and the fact that here as well as in B. G. U. 729 
άiιoi{μfv) is found by itself, we retain the doubts expressed in the note upon P. Fay. Towns 
33. 18-9 as to whether in 268 άξιoϋμfv is to be connected with the clause immediately 
preceding. We should therefore prefer to understand some more general term. 

728. Sale of a Crop. 

27 X 1 19 cm. A.D. 142. 

A contract of a somewhat novel character, called a καρττωι^ίίσ, by which two 
tenants sell part of their crops standing, the money to be paid by the purchaser 
within a given time direct to the landlord, who has the same rights of execution 
as in the case of a loan. At the end is an acknowledgement from the landlord 
of the receipt of the money. 

^Εκαρ^ηώνησαν Παθώτη^ και Λ[ί]βιθί αμφότεροι χρη- 

[μaτίζoι']τ'e]ί ΐγ μητροί 'ApaiiTo[s] άπο κώμης θω- 

[σβ(ωί /Jiolyeffi Άμόιτοί μητροί Άβατος άπο 

TTJs αύτήί Θώσβίωί άφ ών κ'αϊ] αύτοΙ γΐωργον- 
5 ο[ι] ΆπίωΐΌί 'ίΐρίωνοί άπ 'Οζυ[ρνγ χωΐ' πόλίωί 

ιτΐρϊ TTju αντην θωσβιν ϊκ τον Χαριζύνον 

κλ[η\ρου άπο άρονρών ΐΐκ[οσ ι ΐκ τον άπο άπη- 

\Κΐ(Χ)\του μίρονς χόρτου άρονραί τρΰς ΐκ 

γ[(ω]μ€τρίαί αργυρίου δρ[α]χμωΐ' διακοσίων 
ΙΟ [έβδ]ομήκοΐ'τα ίξ, ΐπΐ [τ]ω TOf {κί)καρ/πωνη- 

[μ\ίνον έαντω κόψαι και μΐτβι/ίγκαι δ- 

[η]ον eaif αίρήται καΐ ταί τυΰ άργνρίον Spa- 

\χμαί] διακοσίαί ΐβδομήκοντα ΐζ μ€τα- 

[βαλίσβαι τω προγΐγραμμίνω Άπίωνι 6ν- 
15 [τ]ι κνρίψ τοΰ ίδάφους ePTos Έπύφ δ(κά- 

[τηί] τον ΐι/€στωτο? πίμπτου erofy 

\/ίί'τ]ωΐ'ΐίνου Καίσαρος τον κυρίου, ίαι/ δϊ 

728. CONTRACTS 213 

μη άτΓοδοΐ rfj ωρισμίνξ) ιτροθ^σμία 

(κτίσΐΐ τάί τον αργυρίου δρα^μάί διακο- 
20 σίαί έβΒομήκοντα ίξ σίν ήμιωΧία καΙ τ6- 

κον Βραχ^μιαΐορ Ικάστηί μνάί κατά μήνα 

'ίκαστον, τηί ηρά^ΐως οϋση^ τω Απίωνι 

6Κ Τ€ τοϋ Aioyivovs και ΐκ των υπαργόν- 

[τ]ων αύτω πάντων καθάπ€ρ ΐγ δίκηί. 
25 [κ]υρία ή καρττωνύα. ίτουί ιτίμπτον Αύτοκράτορος 

[Kai(r]apoi Τίτου Αίλίου 'ASptavov Άντων^ίνου 

['Σΐ]βαστοΰ Εϋσΐβοϋί Φαρμοΰθι κγ. (2nd hand) Παθώ- 

[τ]ηί και Αίβιοί άμφότίροι ίκ μητροί 
'ApaetTos (κ)(καρπονήκαμ(ν τω Αίόγίνΐΐ 

3θ Tas τοϋ γόρτου άρούραί τρύί ίκ γίωμί- 
Tpias φόρου αργυρίου δραγ^μων δια- 
κοσίων όδομήκοντα ί^ ώς ττρόκίΐ- 
ται. Αιοννσίοί Διοννσιοί (γραψα 
ύτΓβρ αυτών μη ίϊτότων γράμ(β)ατα. 

35 χρόνο! 6 αυτός. 

3rd hand Απίων 'ίΐρβίωνο! Atoyevei Αμόίτος 

γαίρΐΐν. εσχον πάρα σου τάί σννπ€- 
φωνημίνας νπίρ τιμήί χόρτου άργνρί- 
[ο^υ δραχμας διακοσίαί έβδομήκοντα 
4θ [e^ κ]αϊ οϋδίν σοι ΐνκαΧω ώί πρόκαται. 
[{ίτουί) ΐ Α]ντων(ίνου Καίσαρος τον κυρίου 
[Έπ(]}φ β. 

20. 1. ήμΐυλία. 32. 1. ΐβδομηκοντα. 33• ^• ^lOfiVior Atovvnlov, 34• ^• ('^"των. 

' Patliotes and Livius, both styled as having Harseis for iheir mother, from the village 
of Tliosbis, have sold to Diogenes son of Amois and Abeis, from the said Thosbis, out of 
the land belonging to Apion son of Horion, of Oxyrhynchus, which they cultivate at 
Thosbis in the holding of Charixinus, consisting of 20 arourae, the crop of hay upon three 
arourae as fixed by a survey in the eastern part for 276 drachmae of silver, on condition 
that Diogenes may cut the crop bought by him and transport it to any place that he may 
choose, and shall hand over to the aforesaid .\pion who is the owner of the land the 276 
drachmae of silver before Epeiph 10 of the present 5th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord. 
If he fails to pay it within the stipulated date he shall forfeit the 276 drachmae of silver 
increased by one half, with interest at the rate of a drachma a month for each mina, Apion 


having the right of execution upon both Diogenes and all his property as if in accordance 
with a legal decision. This sale of a crop is valid. The 5th year of the Emperor Caesar 
Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Pharmouthi 23. We, Pathotes and 
Livius, our mother being Harseis, have sold to Diogenes the crop of 3 arourae of hay as 
fi.xed by a survey for the payment of 276 drachmae of silver, as aforesaid. I, Dionysius 
son of Dionysius, wrote for them as they were illiterate. The same date. 

Apion son of Horion to Diogenes son of Amois, greeting. I have received from you 
the 276 drachmae which were agreed upon for tlie price of the hay and I make no complaint 
against you, as aforesaid. The 5th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, Epeiph 2.' 

729. of a Vineyard. 

21 X 29-7 cm. A.D. 137. 

A contract for the sub-lease of a vineyard for four years from Sarapion, 
who was himself a lessee (of 1. 14), to Ammonius and Ptoilas. The body of 
the document (11. 1-35) is written in a very small hand in lines of exceptional 
length, of which the first 35-40 letters on the average are lost, while a few 
lines at the beginning are also wanting, being represented only by a detached 
fragment which is illegible and half decayed. 

No extant lease of the Roman period has been drawn up with such 
elaboration of detail as the present document, and though P. Tebt. I. 105, of 
the second century B. c, is equally long its formula is quite different. Of the 
known leases of vineyards C. P. R. 244 is a mere fragment, and P. Brit. Mus. 163 
is incomplete in the most important part. Hence the restoration of the lacunae 
in 72Θ, which was moreover written by a somewhat careless scribe, is far from 
easy, and the sense of some of the provisions is obscure, though the general 
construction and meaning are usually intelligible. 

The rent paid for the άμ-πίλών, the extent of which does not appear, was 
(11. 36-7) half the vine produce in addition to 50 jars of wine and perhaps 
a sum of money or corn ; but that does not seem to include the rent of a piece 
of dry land which had once been a vineyard (χίρσά/χπίλοί, 1. 30). This is leased 
(II. 30-32) for three years, starting from a year after the date of the contract 
itself, and was to be cultivated as the lessees chose with the usual exceptions 
of the more exhausting crops, the rent being 60 drachmae and perhaps half 
the produce. The άμττΐΚώΐ' is subdivided in 1. 22 into a κτήμα and a κα\αμύα. 
The former term refers mainly to the vines (though including a rose garden, 
V. inf.), the latter apparently to a crop of some kind of reeds ; but the passages 
dealing with the καλα/χίΐ'α (11. 3-4 and 25-7) are unfortunately very imperfect, 

729. CONTRACTS 215 

and the connexion between the vines and the κάλαμοι is not made clear ; cf. 1. 3, 
note. Lines 5-10 deal with the embankments (χωματισ/ϋόν), 11. lo-ii with the 
manuring (κοπρισμο'ϊ), 1. ii with the watching of the fruit (όπωροφνλακίά), 11. i2-8 
with the irrigation, for which the lessees were to receive a loan of both money 
and cattle, 11. 18-22 with the payment of the rent and penalties for failure 
to carry out the terms of the contract. Lines 23-7 regulate the condition 
in which the vineyard was to be delivered up at the end of the lease, while 
II. 27-30 are concerned with the apportionment of the various epya. After a 
section dealing with the lease of the χίρτάμπίλοί (11. 30-2) follows one concerning 
a rose garden in the κτήμα (11. 32-3), and the lease concludes with the usual 
clause assigning the taxes to the lessor (11. 33-4), and another by which two 
rooms in a farmhouse are secured to the lessees (1. 34). Lines 35-8 contain the 
signature of the lessees, written for them in a large uncultivated hand by 
Ptolemaeus, while in 11. 38-46 is a supplementary agreement in a third hand, 
drawn up a year after the original contract, and acknowledging firstly (11. 38-44) 
the loan of the cattle mentioned in 1. 16, and secondly (11. 44-5) another loan 
of which the previous mention is lost. 

1 [ 67 letters ] . ov και[ι^ letters ]>?«' Se . [ ] • • • [ ]αΐ'αθ€ 

[ 1 8 letters ] . • • [ 

2 [ 40 letters ] . άρταβ€ΐ[ li letters τον (Ισι]όντοί ίτους 

αγρα[. . . .jo/iira κατά , . . ήμισν μ[ άπΐ^ργασίαί 

κα[ ]•/?[••]• οΐ'ταί ίΐσ . . u . [ 

3 [ 39 letters ]ey ίτι τΓα[ 15 letters ] . ν fXPJ) ■ • οντο οί μΐμισθωμίνοι 

το ημ'ι]συ και 6 μίμισθωκως το [eJTepoy V/ii^ την δι <([o]7r^f τ[.] 
ττρο[ί] καΧαμΐίαγ οί αύτοΙ μ(μ[ι- 

4 [σθωμίνοί ^2 letters ]ιΐΊκων 07γ[ο τον ΐίσιόντοί] (τονί ϊπϊ την λοιπην 

τρατίαν kavntp χρ(ία [^V eh rf/y καΧαμονργίαν irepov καλάμον 
παρίζονται iavTois οΐ μΐμισθωμίνοι τον δίοντ[α 

5 [ 37 letters ](Τ(ΐ ύπο τον μ[ΐμ]ισθωκ6[τοί] Σαραπίωνοί (ίσάξονσι (ίί το 

[κτ]ημα ο τΐ \ο\ μίμισθωκως και οί μΐμισθωμίνοι κοιι^^ω'ί κατά το 
ημισν τω δίοντι καιρώ και kirl την Χοιττην τρκτι- 

6 [αν 29 letters οΐ τ( μΐ]μισθωμίνοί και δ μΐμισθω[κ]ωί κοινώς κατά το 

ημισν άργνρ^ο]ν δραχμας τριακοσίας, ovnep χ^ονν (ίσοίσονσι et'y το 
κτήμα κατ ίτος κοινώς, νποΧΐίψονσι δι τον άναβφΧημίνον yoi'v 


7 [ ^6 letters 8\ρα•^μων τριακοσίων, την Sk άν[α]βολην ττοιήσονται άπο 

των (θίμων αναβολών. την Se τοΰ άπο βορρά, τον αρχαίου κτήματοί 
γωματοί νβροφνλακίαν μίχρι τοΰ opovs 

8 [ 37 letters ] τω τοΰ άργαίου κτήματοί μισθωτή, τήί κατ eroy 

άπίργασίαί τοΰ αύτοΰ χώματοί kavntp xpfia ην Ισται προί μόνον 
τον μίμισθωκότα, των τον αύτοΰ νΐωφύτον χω- 

9 [μάτων 32 letters ] 7rpo{y}y μόνονί τού! μίμισθωμίνουί, όμοίωί και τον 

νοτίνου γώματοί f^^XP'• ''"<'*' opovs, τον μΐμισθωκότοί Χαραπίωνο^ 
παρίχοντοί αντοΐί κατ (τος άμισθύ ovovs δΐκάττ^ντί 

ϊο [ , άπο δ( τοΰ ΐίσιόντοί τρίτου και] ΐίκοστοΰ erovi ίπϊ την 

λοιπην τρκτίαν δώσονσι τω μζμισθωκότι κατ eTOS Tvpovs όβολιαίονς 
εκατόν. την Se ανταρκίαν κόπρον ττΐριστίρόον προ9 κοπρισμον 
τοΰ κτή- 

11 [ματοί δώσονσιν οί μΐμισθωμίνοι κατά το ήμισυ] και ό μ^μισθωκωί κατά 

το (τ[ΐρο]ν ήμισυ. ον Se eav βούληται ό Χαραπίων όπωροφύλακα 
φνλάσσι(ν) τω τη! οπώρα? καιρώ φύλακα π6μψ<ι, τοΰ οψωνίον οντοί 
προί αύτον 

12 [ 37 letters ] μηχανήί και τήί ταύτης κ[. . . .]αί eστaι τά μ^ν ξύλα 

vpbs Thv ϋαραπίωνα, οί Se TeKTOviKot μισθοί και ή τοΰ τίκτονο! 
σύνταξις ίσται προί τους μ(μισθωμίνονί. eav Se καινού 

13 [τροχοΰ 3^ letters ] και δώσΐΐ tois αΰτοΐί μeμισθωμev[o]lί eis λόγον 

προχρείαί αργυρίου 8ραχμαί τρισχίΐλίαί, e^ ων ΰπολογι(σ)θήσονται 
αΐ διδόμevaι τοΐί νδροπαρόχοΐί ΰπ\ρ ποτισμων τοΰ αύ- 

14 [τοΰ κτήματοί άπο Φαόοφι eίκάδoί τοΰ e^ecrrcujroy δ(υτ4ρου και (ίκοστοΰ 

€701/? «coy Φαίΰφι €ίκάδοί τοΰ eίσιόvτos τρίτον και ΰκοστοΰ eTOVS 

άκολούθωί fi 'έχΐΐ 6 ϋαραπίων μισθώσ€ΐ ην και (Ίναι κνρίαν δραχμαί 

'5 [ 3^ letters &]s άπoδώσeι αντοΐί τω μ\ν Άθύρ μηνι δ[ρ]αχμαί διακοσίαί 

Τΰβι {διακοσίαί) και Mexeip ταί λοιπαί δραχμα,ί ίξακοσίαί, Tas δ\ 

eVi το αΰτο δραχμας τpισχeιλίa9 άποδώσουσι e^eviav- 
ι6 [τα ^β letters ]τονσι οίνον άτόκουί. τα {Se) [δίο]ντα κτήνη πάρα τω 

νδροπαρόχω βόαί πίντ€ καΐ μόσχους Tpeis παραλήμψονται οί αΰτοϊ 

μeμισθωμevoι kv σνντιμήσ^ι ttj eiKaSi τοΰ 
17 [Φαίΰφι τοΰ τρίτου και eiKoaTOV eTOVS, και συ]νγράψονται τήί σνντιμ[ήσ]€ωί 

729. CONTRACTS 217 

άπό8οσιν τον Χή-γοντο^ γ^ρόνου. kav δ( XptM γίνητί ίτίρας ττρο- 

γ^ρήσεοί δώσΐΐ αύτοΐί ό μ(μισθωκώί, λαβόντα καΐ τάζονται δρα- 
'δ \χΗ• 3 1 letters enafjayKOf ow οι αύτοΙ μ(μ[ι]σθωμίΐΌΐ ίκαστα ίπιτβλΐί• 

τωσαν ώί πρόκιται άμίμπτως μηδέν 'ίκκαίρον Ιωντοί γύνεσθαι προί 

το μη καταβΧάπτεσθαι την άμπεΚον μηδί 
^9 ί 35 letters άπ]οδ6τωσαν τω μΐμίσθ^ω]κ6τί τον μεν οΐνον πάρα ληνον 

veov άδολον 4κατΐρον μίρονΐ ηαρίγοντο^ πάρα ληνον τον αυτάρκη 

κίραμον, ον δ( iav μη κατά καιρόν Ιρ- 

20 [γάζωνται 29 letters ]ομίνου φντον το βλάβοί διπλούν, τον δ( κατα- 

λιπεΐν την μίσθωσιν ϊντοί τοΰ χ^ρόνον ΐπιτίμον άργνρίον δραχμαί 
πεντακοσίαΐ και (ΐί το δημόσιον ras ΐσαί χω/??? 

21 [τον την μίσθωσιν μίνειν κνρίαν \ν, και ή πράζΐί ίστω [τ]ώ 

μ[€μι]σθωκ6τι ίκ Τ( των μΐμισθωμίνων αλληλέγγυων όντων «tV 
ίκτισιν και εζ ον εάν αντών αίρήται και εκ των υπαρχόντων 
αύτοΐί πάν- 
2 2 [των καθάπερ εγ δίκηί. και μετά τον χρόνον παραδότ]ωσαν οΐ μεμισθω- 
μενοι τ[ο κτ'\ημα και την καλαμείαν σννφυτα και επιμεμελημενα 
και καθαρά από τε θρνον και βοτάνηί και δείσηί πάσης και τά 
φντά εύθαλοΰντα και 

23 [ 37 letters ]τι κεχαρακωμενας και τά [το]ν κτήματος χώματα εστε- 

γασμενα και ΰδροπεφυλακημενα και Sis αν παραλάβωσι θνραί και 
κλεΐς και την μηχανην v(y)irj πλην 

24 [ 34 letters ποί]ήσονται τους ποτισμούς τον [κτή]ματοί και τήί καλα- 

μ[είαί] πεμπταίουί προί άρεσκί[αν] τοΰ Χαραπίωνος και την τοΰ 
κατά τον Χαραπίωνα ο'ίνου μεταφοράν άπο Ttjs 

25 [ 4° letters ]εινησίν κ[ ] έφ' όσον ενην . ε . . [ ]γται, 

ετι δε και οι αύτοϊ μ[εμι]σθωμενοι ΰπολείψουσι μ[ετ]ά τον χρόνον 

τον τότε τήί καλαμείαί κάλαμον 
20 [ 4° letters ^ΐ' τω εζη^ς ετι διά το και .[ Va 

έτερω μισ-[θ ] • *' επικείμενον ttjs κ[α]λαμείας κάλαμον 

Βν "■[.]/)[.]»?? τοΰ διελθόντος ετoυs 
27 [ 3^ letters Ι!α]ραπιων . [ ι6 letters ]οκειμ[ε]ΐ'[. 14 letters ]ον 

oiyqy [ 15 letters ]ον φ μετρώ 7γ[. .] . . ί οινικον 

τοΰ Sapaπίωvos 


28 [ '^6 letters τ]ω μίσω τον ι^τήματοί τ^ν Se μη]χαΐ'ην άναβαΧΰ ό 

μΐ[μί\σθωκω! ISiati βαπάναΐί άττο μηνοί Παχών, τήρ Se σκαφην τήί 
irXaKUSos του νποδοχίου ίσται υπό 

29 [τε των μΐμισθωμίνων κατά το ήμισυ καΐ\ ύπο τον μ^μισθωκότοί κατά το 

fTfpov ήμισν. την δβ κατ ΐτοί ξνλοτομίαν και ίκαστον των κατά 
και\ρ]ον (ργων ποιήσονσι οι μ^μισθωμίνοι ίπακοΧουθονν- 

30 [roy τοϋ ^αραπίωνοί 2θ letters ]a)y αϊ/τω πάντα γΐνίσθαι. μισθώσίΐ 

Se ό μΐμισθωκωί τοΐί μΐμισθωμίνοΐί άπο τοΰ ΐίσώντοί τρίτου και 
(Ικ[ο]στοΰ iTovs ίπϊ χ^ρόνον ΐτη τρία την ίντο! πλαστών γ(ρσάμπΐ- 

31 \λον ^"^ letters ά''ρονρηδοΰ ωστ€ κατ ίτοί σπΰραι και ξνλαμήσαι oh 

kav αίρώνται γίν^σι χω/ίί? ΐίσάτΐο^ και ίγομίνίον φόρου άποτάκτου 
κατ eras δρα)(μων έξήκοντα και ήμισυ μίρος των 
33 [ 37 letters ] . ev αΐί ΐστιν τροχοί ώί eav κατ ίτοί κοινότΐρον συν- 
φωνήσωσι τον φόρον. τον δζ kv τω κτήματι ροδώνα κατ €Τ05 ovtos 
τοΰ καρπού τοΰ Σαραπίωνος των μ(μι- 

33 [σθωμίνων 29 letters ]τα-[•] ""Ό-Ρ^ζ τήί ζυλολογςίαί, των κατ ίτοί 

πάντων των αυτών άρουρών καΐ τοΰ άμπΐλωνοί όντων προί τον 
Σαραπίωνα δημοσίων, δτ και e^et ό αυτοί Σαραπίων 

34 [ 2<S letters και παρίζα] ό avTos Χαραπίων τοΐί μίμισθωμίνοΐί προς 

ΐνοίκησιν χωρίί ΐνοικίου kv τω ίποικίω καμάρας δύο. κυρία ή 
μίσθωσίί. (βτουί) δίυτίρου και ΰκοστοΰ Αΰτοκράτορος 

35 [Καίσαρος Τραιανοΰ Άδριανοΰ Χΐβαστοΰ Φαω]φι le. (2nd hand) Άμμώνις 

ΆποΧλωνίδου και ΠτολΧάς Λονκίου μΐμισθώμ^τα τον άνπΐΧονα (πι 
τα τίσσαρα ίτη 

36 [φόρου τήί ήμισίίαί τοΰ (κ]βησομ(νου οίνικοΰ γ(νήματοί καΐ άπο τήί 

ήμώ{ν) ήμησίαί άλλα οίνου Κίράμια πεντήκον- 

37 [τα 20 letters ]α και (κα(σ)τα ποιήσομεν 6ί πρ6κίΐτ€. ΠτοΧΐμαΐί 

ΖωίΧου (γραψα ΰπ(ρ αυτών μή ΐΐδότον 

38 [γράμματα, ΐτονί δΐντ^ίρον και (ίκοστοΰ Αύτοκράτοροί Καίσαροί Tpaei- 

ανοΰ Άδριανοΰ Χ(βαστοΰ Φαοφι ΐΐ. (3rd hand) Άμμώνΐί 

39 [ΆποΧΧωνίδου και ΠτοΧΧ&ί Λονκίου ΐσ]χομΐν πάρα τοΰ αν{τοΰ) Σαρα- 

πίω(^νοί) και τή κ τοΰ Φαώφι τοΰ δΐυτίρου ΐτουί Τίτου ΑϊΧίου 
Άδριανοΰ Άντωνΐίνου Καίσαροί τοΰ κυρίου βοίΐκα κτήνη μόσχονί 
μ\ν τ(λ(ίου5 

729. CONTRACTS 219 


40 Γ 22 letters βόα^ ie τΐ'λύαί τρύί πάντα h συνταμήσα άργνρύ 

δραχμών δισχαλίων πίντακοσίων, anep κτήνη ΐπάναγκον θρίψομίν 
τηί κατ ίτο? γο- 

41 [νή^ 27 letters ]ων, μΐτα Se τον χρόνον τήί μισθώσΐωί αίρίσίωί και 

ϊγλογήί ουσηΫ σοι τψ Χαραπίωνι eav μ\ν alpfj την σνντύμησιν των 
κτηνών λαβΰν 

42 [ 3 1 letters ]υ τηί T&re ΐσομίνης α[ν]των σνντ(ΐμήσ€ωί, καν μ\ν ίλάσ- 

aoves συντΐΐμηθ^ άποδώσομΐν τον is συνπλήρωσιν τήί ττροκΐΐ- 

43 [μίνηί σνντΐΐμήσίωί, ίαν Se και μύζο]νοί άπο8ώσ€ΐί ήμΰν συ ό] Sapa- 

π[Γων το του ... υ [ΐ]σον, (αν 8e αίρώμίθα άλλάσσΐΐν κτήνη ή πωλύν 
ίξίσται ήμΐΐν μ(τα γνώμης 

44 [ 3θ letters Th Vxra. ίτ{ι δ]\ κα\ίσχ[ομΐν kv]iXvpoip[e]va ά>{ ]}ΐ(να 

ΐκατ[ον . . . .]κοντα ά μΐτα f^ov χρο\γον τταραδόσωμΐν τα Ίσα σίΐ- 
τίνου αυ . . 

45 [ 35 letters ]«τ[. ...]..•[ ].'•[■■]■■■[ "ο^)? 

δ€υτ(β[ον Αύτοκράτ]ορο9 Καίσ[αρος Τίτου Αίλίου 'Αδριανού [Αντ]ω- 

Ufivov 2!ί[βαστοΰ 

46 [Εϋσίβονς Φαωψι κ. ] 

8 Ι ϋΰσης for ίστ,η. 9• ' ί"»"»'* ^^ο^^ the line, vs of Tot-r corr. from v. μα• of 

μ,μ^σθωμ(„ου! COTT. from κότα. 10, 1. κόπρου. 1 3• α of Μομ,να, COrr. from o. π of 

υδροτταροχο» corr. from σ. 14- First r of τρίτον corr. from 8. μ of 6ραχμα, corr. from <r. 

\ ϋραχμαι S,axi\ia>. 16. πα oi νΒροπαροχω COn. (wm φυ. I ;. y ol yfrTTC COrr. 

from ^. 1. yiV,7-a.. I. προχρήσ^ω,. e of δωσί . COrr. from ο. l8. 1. iWt. ^2. α κηί 

hefoTe καθαρά COTT. 23. και before υδροπ. corr. 24. σ\αμ[ of καΧαμ[ COTT. ^ ^ 28. 1. η 

δί σκαφή. τη, corr. 30. " of μ.σδωσ€. corr. from ,a„. 3t• 1• '<'»"<»f "»' οχομ««ου. 

^K. I μ^μ^σθώμ,θα riv άμπ^λύνα. 36. 1. V^.crWai. 37. «. of προ«.Τί COrr. i. ω, προ- 

«iTOi . . . €•'δ<«-ω». 38. 1. Φαώφί. 39- τάρα του αυτ(ου) σαραπιω{νοή above the Ime. 

42. 1. ίλ<ί<τσοΐΌ5. 44• 1• παρα8ώσομ(ν. ίσα Pap. 

3. καλαμύαν: that a Special connexion exists between the cultivation of κΛομοί and 
vine-growing is apparent not only from the present document (cf. especially 11. 22 and 24, 
where the κτήμα is coupled with the καλάμια), but from other leases of "/"^'λω^ί ; cf. C. f.K. 

224. n-2 ]ων καΚαμουργίαν (Κ καινή! . . . t]w αυτάρκη κάλαμον κα'ι σχοινιά, Ρ. Bnt. ftlUS. ΙΟ3. 
2 2-5 where read και τψ oiaa> καλάμια» άναχώσομιν κατ ίτο! ij(adTov κα\ τΐ,ν ιίμτη (JXira τηι 
κΜαμονργί^α o]pev κατ .'τοί ... , and Ρ. Tebt. Ι20. Ι41 και καλαμ.ονργη{α,,) 

... ίκαστο! και αντλήσει. On the Other hand κάλαμο: was sometimes cultivated by 
itself, as is shown by B. G. U. 558. 13, where a κα\αμία corresponds to an Amo,.; cl. 
Ρ Brit. IMus. 195 (d). II and B. G. U. 619. ii. 19 and 776. 10, which mention «oXa/iot 
•EXX^w^dt, contrasted apparently with κάλαμο! 'UbiKO! (P. Brit. Mus. 191. 11 ; cf. Wilcken, 
ArMv, I. p. 150). In P. Tebt. 5• I99 «αλαμ^'α is mentioned as being required tor 


embankments (cf. note ad loc.) ; but though this section dealing with κάΧαμο! in 729 is 
immediately followed by one dealing with embankments (cf. P. Brit. Mus. 163. 22) the 
καΚαμύα in an άμπ(\ών would seem to be a crop of reeds planted between or under the vines. 
According to 1. 22 the καΚιιμύα equally with the κτήμα had to be handed over σννφυτα κη\ 

ί•ηίμίμί\ημ€να κ.τ,λ. 

5- x"iv is to be supplied as the object of (ϊσάξαυσι; cf. 1. 6. In the first year of the 
lease the responsibility for the χωμαησμός was shared equally by the lessor and lessees. In 
the succeeding three years (11. 6-7) the responsibility continues to be equally divided, but 
a payment of 300 drachmae comes in, the nature of which is obscure. 

7-9. Apparently the contract is concerned with the lease of the newly reclaimed κτήμα, 
and the adjoining άρχαΐον κτήμα was leased to some one else, the μισθωτής of 1. 8. The 
embankment which is the subject of 11. 7-8 probably divided the two κτήματα, and the 
arrangement is that for the ίδροφυλακία Sarapion and the other μισθωτής arc jointly re- 
sponsible, but for the άπιρ-γασία Sarapion alone. For certain embankments of the ιχόφυτον 
κτήμα on the other hand the lessees were responsible, as well as for the ' southern embank- 
ment' (11. 8-9), Sarapion supplying them with 15 donkeys annually, in return for which 
they were to pay him in each of the last three years of tlie lease 100 cheeses worth an 
obol apiece (11. 9-10). 

10-11. ' The necessary amount of pigeon's dung for manuring the vineyard shall be 
provided half by the lessees and the other half by the lessor. Sarapion shall send any 
guard whom he chooses in order to protect the fruit at the time of bearing, being himself 
responsible for the payment of him.' 

12. A new waterwheel (sabye/i) was required, Sarapion paying for the wood, the 
lessees for the construction. 

13-6. A loan of 3000 drachmae is to be advanced by Sarapion to the lessees, but 
from this is to be deducted 2000 dr. paid to the persons who supplied the water for the 
current year in accordance with Sarapion's lease of the land from them. The remaining 
1000 dr. were to be paid in three instalments in the earlier half of the year. In 1. 15 only 
800 dr. are accounted for, but it is more likely that διακοσίας has been omitted after TO^t 
than that it is to be supplied at the beginning of 1. 15. The whole 3000 dr. were to be 
repaid to Sarapion without interest at the time of the vintage towards the end of the first 
year of the lease. The large amount paid for water makes it probable that this came not 
from a well but from a newly-made channel. For (ξ(ΐ/ίαυ[τα in 1. 15 cf. P. Amh. 85. 14, 
86. II, and P. Par. 25. 12. "The second of these instances, in which (ξινίαντα follows κατ' 
ίτος, shows that it must have meant something different ; and the sense ' annually ' would 
not suit the present passage, for it is clear that the loan which is the subject of 11. 13-6 
refers to a single occasion; cf 1. 17, where it is contrasted with the hipa πρόχρησκ. The 
inost suitable meaning for (ξαιίαντα in all these contexts is 'within (or 'for') the whole year.' 
In B. G. U. 920. 18 the editor reads heviavTa κατ eror, where loo (ξιρίαυτα was probably 
intended if not the actual reading. 

16-7. With this passage cf. 11. 39-44, which refer to the carrying out of this stipulation. 
The o.xen were required for working the waterwheel, and according to 1. 39 were actually 
supplied a year after the date of the lease by Sarapion, but from the present passage they 
would seem to have been deposited with the persons who sup])lied the water. They were 
to be received ' at a valuation ' and an agreement was at the same time to be made about 
the return of this valuation at the expiration of the lease. The details of the repayment are 
specified in 11. 41-4. 

17-8. The 2000 drachmae for water (1. 14) were probably an annual charge, and 
hence a second loan from the lessor might be required. For this the lessees paid interest, 

if we restore δρα'χμιάϊον τόκην. 

730. CONTRACTS 221 

18-24. 'The said lessees are therefore required to perform all the aforesaid duties 
blamelessly, leaving nothing undone at the right season, so that no damage may accrue to 
the vineyard . . . and they shall pay to the lessor the wine at the vat, new and unadulterated, 
each party providing at the vat a sufficient number of jars, and for every failure to perform 
work at the proper time... twice the amount of the damage, and forgiving up the lease before 
the end of the period a fine of 500 silver drachmae and to the Treasury an equal sum 
without affecting the validity of the lease, and the lessor shall have the right of execution 
both upon the lessees who are each other's sureties for payment, and upon whichever of 
them he chooses and upon all their property, as if in accordance with a legal decision. And 
at the end of the period the lessees shall deliver the vine-land and reed-land planted, well 
cared for, free from rushes, grass and weeds of all kinds, and the plants healthy . . . , and 
the . . . palisaded, the embankments of the vineyard firm and watertight, and also any doors 
and keys they may have received, and the waterwheel in good repair except . . . ; and they 
shall irrigate the vine-land and reed-land every fifth day to the satisfaction of Sarapion, and 
shall transfer Sarapion's share of the wine from the . . . .' 

28. The μηχανή is presumably that mentioned in 1. 12, but the technical meaning of 
άναβά\Κ(ΐν here is obscure, πλακάς is a new word meaning the lower part of the wine 
receptacle, which was below the ground level. 

30. The lacuna at the beginning may be filled up ώστί πάντα άρ(σκόντ\ως \ cf 1. 24. 

30—2. This χιρσύμπιλυ! is distinct from the αμπιλών which is the subject of the main 
contract; cf. inlrod. eVrot πλαστών in 1. 30 seems to mean ' enclosed by a mud wall.' 

32. poSoiva: this is the first mention in a papyrus of the cultivation of roses. In 
P. Brit. Mus. 163. 17, where for the editor's άφιι[ο]&ι[σί''ων Wilcken {Arc/iiv, I. p. 150) 

suggested apy(av) μίοίΛιωκ, the correct reading is άγρίοΐδρύωί', i.e. άκροδρΰων. 

40-4. The total number of calves to be provided according to 1. 16 was 3, and of 
βόί! 5- Here however the calves were probably 5, for the βόα are 3. The cattle were 
valued at 2500 dr. altogether, and at the end of the lease Sarapion had the choice of 
receiving this sum or the animals at a new valuation. If this was less than the former one, 
the lessees had to make up the difference to Sarapion. If the fresh valuation was higher, 
apparently Sarapion paid them the difference. If the lessees wished to change or sell the 
cattle, they might do so with Sarapion's consent. 

44-5. These lines clearly refer to something contained in the main contract, but 
though we should expect a mention here of the χ(ρσάμπ(λοί (11. 30-2) which was to be 
leased after one year, the remains of 1. 44 suggest something quite different, which must have 
occurred in one of the lost provisions. 

730. Lease of Domain Land. 

•9-5 X 7-3 f'"• A.D. 130. 

A sub-lease of 5 arourae of domain land at Sencpta fcr one year, at the 
rent of 24 drachmae per aroura, with an extra payment of 4 drachmae. The 
crop specified is grass, while the other provisions follow the usual formulae ; cf. 
e. <?. 499. 



Εμίσθωσίν ΣαραπΙων Ήρώ8ον 
άπ Ό^ΐ'[/»]ι5γχω»' πόλεωϊ OvaXipis 
jino\Xa>fiov άπο κώμης Χΐνίπτα 
Πίρστ] [τ ης ΐτΓίγονηί eh το epea- 
5 TOS ΊΓ(ντίκαι8(κατον ίτοί 
Ά8ριανοΰ Καίσαρος τον κυρίου 
άπο της άνα-γρ(αφ)ομίνης ί/ί αυ- 
τόν βασιλικής γής άρονρας ττ[ίν- 
Τ€ ίκ τοϋ Δάμωνος κλήρου, 

ΙΟ ώσ•τ[€] ταύτας ^υλαμήσαι χόρ- 
τω (ϊ[ς κοπ^ν κα^ι ίπ[ινο]μήν, 
φ6ρο[υ] άποτάκτον αργυρίου Spa- 
χμων ίκατον (ΐκοσι και σττον- 
δής των όλων παιδαρίοις δρα- 

15 χμας τεσσάρας ακίνδυνου 
παντός κινδύνου, των νπ(ρ 
της γής δημοσίων όντων 
προς τον μίμισθωκότα, ον και 
κυρκύίΐν των καρπών 

20 (ως άν τον φόρον κομίση- 
ται. τής δ( μισθώσεως β{- 
βαιουμίνης άποδότω ό μΐ- 
μισθωμίνος] τον φόρον τω 
Παΰνι μηνΐ τοΰ αύτοΰ (τους, 

25 t ^ άν προσοφΐΐλίση 6 μ(- 
μισθωμίνος άποτίΐσάτω 
μ(β' ήμιολίας, και ή πρα- 
ζις ΐστω τω μ(μισθωκ6τι 
(Κ τΐ τοΰ μΐμισθωμίνου 

30 και (Κ τίΰν υπαρχόντων 
αύτω πάντων, κυρία ή μί- 
σθωσις. [ίτους) le Αυτοκράτορας 
Καίσαρος Τραϊανού 'Αδριανού 
Χΐβαστοϋ Άθνρ ιθ. (2nd hand) 

35 Απολλώνιου μ^μίσθω- 

[μαι τη]ν γηγ [..]..[•.]••• 
[. . . άρ]γυ'ρίου δραχμίον ίκα- 
\τον ΰκοσι . . . 

On the verso 

ΐΐ (ίτους) μί{σθωσις) άρονρ[ω]ν e [..].... Xivίπ{Ja). 

2. 1. Ova\fpiu). 

a(iifn(Ta) above [. .] 

20. ο of τον corr. from a. 

2 1. ί of 3f corr. from t (?). 


' Sarapion son of Herodes, of Oxyrhynchus, has leased to Valerius son of Apollonius, 
of the village of Senepta, a Persian of the Epigone, for the current 15th year of Hadrianus 
Caesar the lord, out of the domain land standing in his name 5 arourae in the holding 
of Damon, to be cultivated with grass for cutting and grazing at a fixed rent of 1 20 silver 
drachmae and 4 drachmae for the slaves for a libation on account of all the land, the 
rent being secured against every risk, and the taxes on the land being paid by the lessor, 
who shall also be the owner of the crop until he receives the rent. If this lease is 
guaranteed, the lessee shall pay the rent in the month Pauni of the said year, and the 
lessee shall forfeit any arrears increased by one half; and the lessor shall have the right 
of execution upon the lessee and upon all his property. This lease is valid. The 15th 

731. CONTRACTS 223 

year of the Emperor Caesar Trajanus Hadrianus Augustus, Athur 19. (Signed) I, Valerius 
son of ApoIIonius, have leased the land at a rent of 120 silver drachmae . . .' 

8-9. βασιλικής . . . « τοΰ Αάμωνος κλήρου : i. e. the land was part of a confiscated 
κληρο! ; cf. 721. 4-6. 

10. ξύλαμήσαι χόμτω : cf. 101. II, 280. 12, 15, and 409. 15 where χόμτω is to be 
read for χόρτον. 

13. σπυνΒης . . . παι8αρίοΐί : for the payment on account of σπονδή in leases cf. 101. 19 
and 610, and note on 525. 7. In the present case it was for the benefit of the slaves 
employed in the cultivation of the land. 

35. The paragraphus below this line marks the conclusion of the lease, and the 
signature was intended to begin below it. 

36-7. [φό^ρον [άπ]οτάκ\τον] is perhaps to be read, but does not very well suit the 
remaining vestiges of letters. 

731. Engagement of Services. 

I 1-7 X 13-4. A.D. 8-9. 

A contract for services to be rendered on certain specified occasions, among 
which are the festivals of Isis and Hera, at a salary of 40 drachmae a year, 
besides an όψωηον of 13 drachmae 3 obols. The commencement of the contract 
is lost, and the nature of the services to be performed is uncertain ; but it may 
be conjectured on the analogy of e.g. 475, P. Grenf. II. 67, and P. Brit. Mus. 331 
(cf. Archiv, I. p. 153), that the person engaged was an artiste of some kind, 
though to judge from the scale of remuneration, not of a very high class. The 
document was drawn up by a careless scribe, who makes a number of mistakes. 

συιι[ 20 letters jj; κα\ o[ 

σίΟί? \τ\οϋ ίνάτου καΧ τριακοσ[τ6\ΰ €το[ΐ']ί Καί- 
σαρος μίχρί Θωύθ τοΰ τρί[α]κοστοΰ erovs 
Καίσαρος ϊφ' ώ λιτονργήσω νμΰν κατά μη- 
5 να ΐνάτΐ) καϊ δΐκάτη και Είσίοίς ημίρας 

δυο και TOis άστροις "Ηρας τρΐί, και (ψ ω ΐά» 
μου •νρηαν ίχητ€ παρ ήμίραν δώσ(- 

Τ€ μοι άργυ^ρίον) (δραχμην) μίαν όβολούς δύο, μισθοΰ τοΰ 
ΐσταμί^/^ου το ίτοί άργυ{ρίον) {δραχμας) τίσσαράκον- 
10 τα, k<f> ω [δ'ωσίτί μοι κατ όψώνιον άργν{ρίον) 


8ραχμ[α.ί δ(κ]α.τρΐί δυο όβολούί. fji 7)- 
μίρας τ)[. . . .j€ άργ[η]σ(ύ (.[κτ]ίσα) άργν(ρίον) δραχ^μη^ μί- 
αν δύο 6β[ολον]!. ή 6μ{ομ\ολογία της Ια\πα- 
ραμονήί ήδί κυρία ί[στω ώ? κατακεχωρισ• 
15 μίνη. (βτονί) λη [Καίσαρος 

3• 1. τ(σσαρακοστοϋ for τρι[ακοστον, 

'. . of the 39'h y^^^ of Caesar to Thoth of the 40th year of Caesar, on condition 
that I give you my services on the 9th and loth of each month and for two days at the 
festival of Isis and three days at the time of the stars of Hera; and if you require me 
you shall pay me I drachma 2 obols of silver daily, or a fixed yearly salary of 40 
drachmae of silver, and a present of 13 drachmae 2 obols of silver; and for every day 
that I am unemployed I will forfeit i drachma 2 obols of silver. This contract of 
engagement shall be valid as if publicly registered. The 38th year of Caesar . . .' 

5-6. For the feast of Isis cf. P. Fay. Towns 118. 13. The star of Hera was another 
name for the planet Venus (cf. Arist. <fe Jl/uJiJo, p. 392 a 27 ό toC Φωσφύιΐον tv Αφροδίτη: 
ο! fie Ήριις προσα-^ορίϋηνσιν, ΡΗπ}•, //. Λ'. 2. 8, &c.) ; but why the plural (Ίστροι! is here 
used is not clear. References to the cult of Hera in Egypt are rare ; cf. 483. 3, note. 

8-9. The 29 days in the year specified in II. 4-6 seem to be treated as 30, which 
at I dr. 2 obols a day make the 40 dr. 

1 1-2. ζί ήμίραί if (άν would be expected, but this was certainly not written. The 
e after the lacuna is nearly sure and this may represent fije; but the letter after ημίραΐ 
if not η must be ν and is certainly neither S nor f. 

14. There is not room for (V 8ημοαίω. 


732. Receipt for the Tax on Ferry-Boats. 

ι8•2 X 23 cm. Α.Ώ. 150. 

A receipt issued by two farmers of the ωνη ■πορθμί^ων at Oxyrhynchus and 
certain villages to two persons who apparently were ferrymen at one of these 
villages, acknowledging the payment first of 200 and subsequently of ico 
drachmae for φόρα τιόρθμίΐοί, the total, 300 drachmae, being probably the whole 
sum due from them for a year. This impost, the title of which is new, seems 

733. RECEIPTS 225 

to be a tax upon the profits of privately owned ferry-boats rather than a revenue 
derived from a State monopoly, though the latter interpretation is also possible. 

Ηλιόδωρος 'Ηλιοδώρου και Λ€θντ[α.ς Π]ίκύρ'ιθί] άπ Όξνρύγ^^^α)]ν π6λ([ω5 
Τ€λώΐ'αι ώνηί προθμίδων πόλ^ωί και Ίσιου !4 . [. . κ^αί άλλων τ[δ] ίν^στοί 

ιγ (eroy) 
Άι-ταινίνου Καίσαρος του κυρίου Άχιλλατι Θοώνιος [κα]ι 'Αηΐτ[ι] ^Ιηΐτ[ο]ς 

άπο της αύ{τηί) 
πόλΐωί χαίρΐΐν. ίσγομ^ν παρ' νμων αφ' ων [ο\φιλίΤΐ ήμΐν ΰπ[€^ρ φόρου προ- 
5 θμύου Πανκύλΐωί ίπΐ λόγου δραγ^μας διακ[οσί]αί, •γίν{ονταΐ) [δραγ^μαΧ) σ. 

(ΐτους) ιγ 
Αντοκράτοροί Καίσαρος Τίτου ΑΙλίου Αδριανού Αντωνίνου Χφαστοϋ Εύσ(βοϋί 
Τΰβι κζ. (and hand) Ηλιόδωρος ό προγζγραμμίνΐΐ ισ- 
χύον σύν τω Αΐωντάτι τας προ{γ€^κιμίνας 

δραχμας διακωσίας, γί{νονται) {δραχμαϊ) σ. (3rd hand) Α(οντάς Πΐκνριος 
ΙΟ ό προγΐγραμμύνος ΐσχον συν τω Ήλιοδώρω 
[τ]ά[ί προκιμίνας δραχ^μας δι[α]κοσίας. γ^ρόνος 
ό αυτός. (2nd hand) 'Ηλιόδωρος ίσγον σ\υ]ν τω Αίοι\τά'\τι 
τας λυπαζς) δραχμάς έκα[τό]ν. (3rd hand) Α(οντάς €(Γ[χοΐ' συν 
τω 'ίίλίο5ώ(ρω) coy πρ[όκι]ται. 

2. 1. πορθμί8<ύν. ίσιου Pap, 4• 1• ΐΌρθμΰον. '], 1. προγιγραμμίνο!. 8. κ of M/icwit 

COrr. from y. 9. 1. διακοσίας. 1 3. 1. λοιπά($). 

' Heliodorus son of Heliodorus and Leontas son of Pekuris, of Oxyrhj-nchus, farmers 
of the contract for the tax on ferry-boats at the city, Ision A . . . , and other (villages) 
for the present 13th year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, to Achillas son of Thoonis and 
Apeis son of Apeis, of the said city, greeting. We have received from you on account 
out of the sum which you owe us for the revenue from ferry-boats at Pankulis Ιλνο hundred 
drachmae, total 200 dr.' Date and signatures of Heliodorus and Leontas, followed by 
their further acknowledgements of the remaining hundred drachmae. 

733. Tax-Receipt. 

12X9-7 ^'"• A.D. 147. 

A receipt for the tax on pigs (cf 288, introd.) and poll-tax paid by an 
inhabitant of Oxyrhynchus and his son. The payments are no doubt instalments 
of the whole amount due for a year. 



I (erovi) Άντων€ί[ΐΌυ] Καίσαρος τοΰ κυρίου 
Παχών δ. [δ]ΐ€γρα{ψΐ) Αιογ{ίν(ΐ) πρά^κτορϊ) άργυ{ρικων) 
Μ . [. . . .] ττλατ^εί'αί) 'Apois ό κ{αι) Παπο{ντώί) Διοδώ{ρου) 
ΰικ{ήί) [τοΰ] αύ{τοΰ) ι (ΐτους) (δραχμής) μίαν {ττΐντώβοΧον) (ήμιωβΐλιον), / 
(δραχμτι) α (πίντώβολον) (τιμιωβίλιοί'). 
5 Τ . ρ[. .] . ο[. .]y υίο{ί) μη(τροί) Ταπο{ντωτθ5) λαογρα{φία5) 

τοΰ αΰ{τοΰ) ι [eTovs) (δραχβαί) τ[€σ]σαρα5, ΰικ^ής) α (ιτΐντώβολον) {ήμιωβίλιον). 

2. π of παχών corr. from 8. The following ί is corrected. 

'The loth year of Antoninus Caesar the lord, Pachon 4. Amois also called Papontos, 
son of Diodorus, has paid to Diogenes, collector of money taxes of Μ . . . street, for the 
pig-tax of the said loth year i drachma 5-| obols, total i dr. 5j ob. Τ . . . , his son, 
his mother being Tapontos, has paid for the poll-tax of the said lolh year 4 drachmae, 
for the pig-tax i drachma 5-| obols.' 

734. Tax-Receipt. 

IO-4X9-7 cm. A.D. 165. 

A receipt for the payment of i drachma 4 obols by Cleon to an agent 
of the tax-collectors of a subdivision of the middle toparchy. The names of 
the taxes, which are abbreviated γλ.~ and σ', are uncertain, being probably 
both new. 

Ε (froi/y) ΑϋρηΚίων Άντωνίνου και Οϋήρου των 

κυρίων Χΐβαστων Φαμ({νωθ) κζ. δύγρα^ψΐ) Κλάρω 

χι{ριοττ}) πρα^κτόρων) άργν(ρικων) μ((σ-ηί) τοτΓ{αρχίας) Πίτνη Τακο\{ ) 

τ6π{(ύν) δι(α) 
'Αμμω(νίου) βοηίβοΰ) yAi{ ) καΐ συ( ) € [ίτουί) Κλέων 
5 [. . .]του Τακολ{ ) δραχ{μην) μία{ν) τΐτρύίιβο\[ον), 
y/ {δραχμή) α {τ(τρώβολον). 

3- The ntVwj τόποι are known from 595, but the addition of Τακο\{ ), which recurs 
in 1. 5, is new. 



735. Graeco-Latin Military Account. 

12-5 X 16-4 cm. 

A.D. 205. Plate V. 

This is a fragment of a Graeco-Latin register or account, concerning a 
detachment of troops (cf. 43 recto). Lines 5-1 1 contain a copy of a receipt 
in Greek from an optio, or adjutant, to an imperial deputy-procurator for 
50 artabae of wheat paid to a number of cavalrymen, whose names in Latin 
precede. A list of si.x footsoldiers follows, which was presumably succeeded 
by another receipt in Greek recording a payment to them. There are a few 
Latin letters (apparently belonging to names) from the ends of lines of the 
previous column, and what remains of Col. iii is occupied with more names 
in Latin. One or two of these soldiers' names indicate Hebrew extraction. 

The receipt is dated in the 14th year of a joint reign, which on palaeo- 
graphical grounds is probably that of Septimius Severus and Caracalla. 

Col. ii. 

Col. iii. 

Soi/us [ 

Marrius Coi;iqr[ 
Vakrius Isidori 
5 WaK(uyai<i M[. .]»'av[o]i' οπτίων Ούίκτω- 
pi Κωμαρίνω Καισάρων οικονόμου 
ονικαρίου yaiptiv. ΐμΐτρήθησαν 
οι προκίμΐνοι iTTweis ττραίτων αριθμών 
ύπ(ρ μηνός θωθ πνροΰ άρτάβα$ πΐν- 
ιο τήκοντα. (ετοιτ) ιδ των κυρίων Χφαστων 
θωθ ζ. 
item peditcs vi Belei 

ad cognlega Claudius 
15 lerraeus 


Μ ace hail a 

Q 2 

Tebael [ 
ricx Barichiiis [ 

20 Sadus [ 
Themes [ 
Salmes [ 
Zebidius [ 
Malichus Sd^ 

25 Pseiiosirius [ 
Roman{us'{) A[ 
Cumesii^s] et Trufon H\ 
lulius .[ 
Etiopius Chii . [ 

30 Pacebius P[ 


6—7. 1. ΤίωμαρΊνου . . , οικονόμα ουικαρίω, "]. First e of (μ<τρηθησαν COTt. ffOIIl (?). 

8. I. npώτωu, 

3-4. The pairs of names here and in 11. 13-7 are placed rather far apart and look 
at first sight as if they were independent ; but with one exception either the second name 
has a genitive termination or the first may be a gentile name, while unless the names 
are connected the number z'l in 1. 10 is wrong. The only case in which any difficulty 
arises is in 1. 1 3, where Bclcus and Zabdius certainly seem to be separate names ; but the 
distance between them is greater than in any of the other cases. Possibly Gradius and 
Avidus in 1. 16, where again the space is very wide, should also be separated, thus making 
the number 6. In I. 3 the second name is perhaps Comaryini; cf. 1. 6. 

5. Μαλωχωί: hardly Μπλωχάϊ, though that name occurs in a Palmyra inscription, 
C. I. G. 4497. 

6. ΚαισόρΛ» οικονόμου ονικαρίου : cf. Β. G. U. 1 56. 3 and I02. I, where oiicoi/0/ior is 

probably to be read between Καίσαρα and οϋικάριοί. 

14- The marginal additions here and in 1. 19 are obscure ; cogitkga is perhaps collega, 
but what is riex ? The first letter may be a but the second does not at all resemble p, nor 
would apex be a very likely word here. 

736. Private Account. 

173 X 54-3 cm. About A.D. I. 

Of this lengthy account of private expenses parts of seven columns in all 
remain, five on the recto and two on the verso ; the first column of the recto, 
however, which is separated from those following by a broad blank space, is too 
fragmentary to be worth reproducing, and the same may be said of a narrow 
half-effaced column corresponding to this one but written in the reverse direction 
on the back. The remainder is in fairly good condition, but the papyrus is 
broken at the top and bottom, and the short column on the verso is sometimes 
difficult to decipher owing to discolouration. The various payments are 
arranged according to the days of the month, and some interesting items and 
prices occur. 

Col. ii. 

κα. φα\ ] 

ety [ 15 letters ] . . (δραχμαι) δ, 
βα .[...]. .[. .]a(f{. . .] δια 
Ζμ[.] . . y φαιν6\[ο]υ Κοράξον (δραχ^μαι) ι, 
5 γο[γ]γνλίδοί els rapiyeiav {δραχμή) α {ρβολοϊ δύο), 

736. ACCOUNTS 229 

γαΚκίου μισθοΰ eli βάψαι (οβολοϊ Svo ?) 

άλόί (ό/3ολόί ?), 

άλβστρα {πνρον) (άρτάβης) α ίττί Trjs ιη {τριώβοΧον ?), 
θρύων et'y τούί άρτους {οβολοϊ Svo), 

10 ήπητρα e/y φαιν6\{ην) Κορά^ου {ρβοΧοί) (ήμιωβίλίον), 

eii κατανθρωπισμον yvvaiK[os) 

Γΐμέλλου (τίτρώβολον ?), 

μύρον eh άποστοΧην ταφήί 

θυγατροί Φνάί {τ^τρώβοΧον). 

15 κβ. ίλαίου χο'οί) α [8ραχμαϊ) δ {τΐτρώβολον), 
κηροΰ καϊ γραφίίον παιδίωΐ') (o/3oXoy), 
άρτου καθαρού ΙΙρίμα[!] {ημκΰβίλίον), 

fis κ[α]τανθρωπισμοι> Τύχ^ης {τριώβοΧον). 
Μ(χ{€ΐρ) θ. [ 3θ letters ] {δραχμή) α {τριώβοΧον) 

3• Φ of ]αφ[ rewritten (?). 

Col. iii. 

Ends of 3 lines. 
<. oX[. . .]*ro . [.] άρ(σ[τω γ](ρδί{ου) {όβοΧόί), 
κρ[. .] . ν . . . {ήμιωβ(Χιον), 

25 etJ το Σαραπιΐον {οβολοϊ δύο), 

άρτου καθαρού παιδ{ών) {ήμιωβίλιον), 
ζντου γ[ΐ^ρδί{ον) {οβολοϊ δύο), 

πράσων άρίστω γ(ρδί{ου) (ο/3ολόί), 

π(ριστ€ράί {όβολό^), 

3θ Άντΰτι {δρα\μαϊ) β {οβολοϊ δύο), 

άνω ίν τ{} πόλ(€ΐ) άλΐστρα άρτων 

{ττυρον) {άρταβων) β διά \ΙΙ\σάτοί {δραχ^μη) α {οβολοϊ δύο), 
ια. ΐν ■παρΐμβο[λ]ί} δια Θεοδώρου 

άλ(σ[τρα] άρ[τ]ω{ν) {πυρον) {άρτάβης) α {τ(τρώβολον), 
35 άρίστω [γ(]ρ[δί{ου)] {οβολόί). 


άσπαράγω[ν) [8ί]πν(ΰ Άντ^όίτοί) οτ els 

το ■ιηρίβ[ι]πνο{ν) Άθη{ ) γναφί(ι>{ς) {ήμιωβίλιον), 
και παί8αρί[οι]ί δίπνω κράμβη{ί) {ήμιωβίλιοί'), 
π ..[.]. . παιδίω (ήμιωβίλιον) 

Parts of 2 lines. 

25. Second 1 οι σαραπαον COrr. from o(?). 36. First a of ασπαραγω{ν) corr. from 8. 

Col. iv. 

Parts of 4 lines. 
46 t<r• προ[σφαγ]ίου {ήμίωβίλιοί'), 

θρν[ων €]/[ί] άρτονί {ρβολοί δύο) {ήμιωβίλίον). 
ιζ. -γάΧακτοί παιδ[ων) {ήμιωβίλιον), 
άρτου καθαρού (ήμιωβίλιον). 

50 ιη. Χΐκονντα παιδ{ων) Ίτρίου (ήμιωβίλιον). 
ιθ. τισάνηί 6μ{οίωί) (ήμιωβίλιον). 

κ. οψαρίου (6βολ05), 

άρτου καθαρού (ήμιωβίλιον), 

eh κατανθρωπ(ισμον) Άντα^νία^ ?) (οβολοι δύο), 
55 f αί f'S Ταητολλοντοί Καικιλ[ίου ?) (τριώβολον), 

yeveaiois Τρυψάτοί aTe<pa(vmv) (οβολοι δύο), 
Ye{ve)aiois [•] .[.].. ω( ) στeψά(vωv) (οβολοι δύο). 
κα. βόαί παιδ(ων) [ ] (οβολόί), 

παιγνίω(ν) και €πουριω(ν) παιδ(ων) (ήμιωβίλιον), 
6ο ζύτου (τριώβολον), 

6ψον (οβολόή. 

κβ. 6•^αρί\ο\υ (οβολός). 

Part of I line. 

50. 1. 'Σίκούντφ (cf. 1. 8i). 54. αντ οί ηντω{ ) rewritten. 

736. ACCOUNTS 231 

Col. V. 

Parts of 4 lines. 

Θαησίί [. . . ίι]μί[ρων) β [{πevτώβoλoι'), 

μήτηρ [''Αμ]μωΐ'άτο{ί) τ]μ((ρώΐ') [ 
"JO Τ ααρπαησίί ημί{βα>ν) [β\ τηντώβολον , 

Bepovs 6μ{οίωί) ήμ({ρων) ι {βραχμαΐ) δ {οβολόή. 
κδ. άλ€στρα {πνρον) {άρτάβηί) α [τΐτρώβολοί'), 

άλμνρίδοί μα{ ) β {όβολοϊ δύο), 

aXhs {οβολόή, 

75 λίνου και βαφίδοί (όβολό?), 

άλίστρα {πνρον) (άρτάβηί) α δια. Θ€θδώ{ρον) {τΐτρωβοΧοί'), 

Κ(ρκισ[τ]ρα 0α[ί]ί'όλ(οι;) {δραχμή) α {οβολοι δύο), 

άρτ(ύ{ν) καβαρω{ν) Φα[. . .]τω( ) {δραχμή) α, 

nepianpcis [πα]ιδ{(ΰΐ') (ό/3ολόί), 

8ο άρτου κ[αθαρον ό]μ(οίως) {ήμιωβίλιον), 

Χίκούντω παιδ{ών) ίτρ[ίου] {ήμιαιβίλιον) 
και σ(μιδάρ(ωγ ξηρά9 {ήμιωβίλιον), 

γάλακτος {ημιωβίλιον), 

μύρου €[i]s ταφής θυγατροί 
85 [Π]άσιτ[ο]ί {^ραχμ^) «■ 

82. 1. σ(μιδά\(ω!. 

On the verso opposite Col. v. 
Parts of a lines. 

I. αμ[ . .]γ{ ) γν[ΐ']αιξϊ συι/α[. . . .] {δραχμαϊ) β {τριώβολον), 
πρ[ο]σφαγί{ων) ταΊί γυναιξί 
90 ϊ]μΐ{ρών) β {οβολοι δύο) {ημιωβίλιον), 

κόλλητρα λυχνίας {οβολοι δύο) {-ημιωβίλιον), 

ΐρΐβίνθων [ό']τε ά>δ( 

ϊδίίπνα .[....]. ι[6\ς {όβολος) {ημιωβίλιον). 


fis κατανθρωπισμον 
95 Λα[οβίκη9 {όβολοϊ Svo ?),. 

[[.]] €ίί τα αρτ .[...].... (όβολοι Svo), 

Στράτου ety τηΐν .]e . απ . s ΐΐσβο\{ην) {δραχ^μαΐ ?) δ, 

[....] δαπανη{ ) ... τα y [ 

Hf)[w]fi ety τ . . . ρ . . . κίθα/^να ?) {δρα\μ ?) [• .], 
100 κόλλητρα )(^αλκ[ίό\υ {ήμιωβίλιοί'). 

'11. 1-95• The zist : . . . through Zm ... for the cloak of Coraxus, lo drachmae ; 
turnips for pickling i dr. 2 obols ; for the kettle, payment for enamelling 2 ob. ; salt 1 ob. ; 
cost of grinding i artaba of wheat on the i8th 3 ob. ; omelette for the bread 2 ob. ; cost 
of mending the cloak of Coraxus i^ ob. ; for treating (?) the wife of Gemellus 4 ob. ; 
perfume for the dispatch of the mummy of the daughter of Phna 4 ob. The 22nd: 
a chous of oil 4 dr. 4 ob. ; wax and stilus for the children i ob. ; pure bread for Prima 
^ ob. ; for treating Tyche 3 ob. 9th IMecheir ... the loth : ... for the weaver's breakfast 

1 ob. ; ... for the Sarapeum 2 ob. ; pure bread for the children ^ ob. ; beer for the 
weaver i ob. ; leeks for the weaver's breakfast i ob. ; a pigeon i ob. ; to Antas 2 dr. 

2 ob. ; up at the city for the bread, cost of grinding 2 arlabae of wheat, through Isas, 
I dr. 2 ob. The nth: at the camp, through Thcodorus, for the bread, cost of grinding 

1 artaba of wheat 4 ob. ; for the weaver's breakfast i ob. ; asparagus for the dinner 
of Antas when (he went) to the funeral feast of Athe . . . the fuller ^ ob. ; and to the 
slaves (?), for a cabbage for dinner ^ ob. ; to the child ^ ob. ; . . . The 1 6th : a relish 
•i ob. ; omelettes for the bread 2^ ob. The 17th: milic for the children ^ ob. ; pure 
bread ^ ob. The i8th: to Secundas, a cake for the children ^ ob. The 19th: barley 
water for the same •| ob. The 20th : sauce i ob. ; pure bread ^ ob. ; for treating Antonia 

2 ob. ; and for TaptoUous daughter of Caecilius 3 ob. ; on the birthday of Tryphas, for 
garlands 2 ob. ; on the birthday of . . . for garlands 2 ob. The 21st: pomegranates 
for the children i ob. ; playthings and ... for the children i ob. ; beer 3 ob. ; sauce i ob. 
The 22nd: sauce i ob. ; Thaesis ... for 2 days 5 ob. ; the mother of Ammonas for 
. days . . . ; Taarpaesis for 2 days 5 ob. ; Berous similarly for 10 days 4 dr. i ob. The 
2 4ih: cost of grinding i artaba of wheat 4 ob. ; 2 ... of pickle 2 ob. ; salt i ob. ; 
a needle and thread i ob. ; cost of grinding i artaba of wheat, through Theodoras, 4 ob. ; 
cost of weaving a cloak i dr. 2 ob. ; pure bread for Ph . . . i dr. ; a pigeon for the 
children I ob. ; pure bread for the same •| ob. ; to Secundus for a cake for the children 
^ ob., and for dry meal ^ ob. ; milk ^ ob. ; perfume for the mummy of the daughter 
of Pasis I dr. . . . The loth: ... for the women 2 dr. 3 ob. ; relishes for the women 
on 2 days 2\ ob. ; cost of tinkering a lamp 2 J ob. ; pulse when . . . was dining here 
I J ob. ; for treating Laodice 2^ ob.' 

7. αΚίστρα : cf. 1. lO ήπητρα, 1. 77 κίρκια\τ\ρα, 1. 9I κόλλΐ)τ/)α, 739. 4 σιτοπόητρα. 

τϊπητρα had already occurred in P. Tebt. 120 introd., where it shoiJd be regarded as 
a neuter plural, as should also υφάντρα in P. Tebt. 117. 37, &c. 

II. it'f κατανϋρωπισμόν : cf. 11. 1 7, 53, and 92, where the expression recurs, the object 
being apparently always a woman. Neither κατανθρωπισμόι nor κατανθμωπϊζίΐν appears to 
be otherwise attested. 

28. The ω of αρΊστω here and elsewhere is written above the line (so too in 

737. ACCOUNTS 233 

1. 38), but probably the dative singular and not the genitive plural was intended ; a final 
letter is similarly overwritten e.g. in 1. 10 Kopu^on, 1. 56 Ύρυφΰτα. 

36. St (Is : SC. ηλθ(, 

55• Ύαπτολλιιΰτο! : SC. καταρθρωπισμόν. This is preferable to reading τά ΠτολλοΰτοΓ. 

5g. (πουριω(ν) : the word is unknown and the reading quite doubtful, «π may be 

σπ or (ΐσ. 

84. t\l]f ταφής: SC. άποστοΚήν ; cf. 1. I3. 

96. The marks at the beginning of the Una look more like a deleted letter than an 
abbreviation. The day of the month should have been further away to the left. 
99. Possibly «is t[u]v . , , , but there is hardly space for [o]. 

737. Latin Account. 

Height 22•3 cm. About a.d. i. Plate VIII. Col. i. 

An account of wages paid on different days to ' weavers,' ' hired persons,' 
and a ' master ' or ' foreman.' The wages, which are reckoned in asses, arc at 
the rate of 3 J for a weaver, 4 for a 'hired man,' and 6 for the foreman. We 
give the text of two columns, which are contained on separate pieces of papyrus 
but seem to be consecutive ; there is a large blank space after Col. ii, which was 
the end of the roll. A few small fragments of some other columns also remain. 
The account is written in a clear cursive hand which is probably of the reign of 
Augustus, the papyrus being one of a large find belonging practically entirely 
to that period. Points are commonly used after abbreviations (but not with 
a for asses) and the numerals of the days of the month, and are not infrequently 
added after words which are not abbreviated. 

Col. i. 

[a{>iU•) d{ietn) . Nonas Iu]lias 

\coiidii^tei iv a{sscs) xvi 

]?V texior{cs) ii [a{sses)] vii 

conductei ii \a{ssesy^ viii 

5 t^x Idiis tcxior{es) ii a[sses) vii 

conductei ii a{sses) viii 

vii Id lis tcxtor{es) ii a{sscs) vii 

conductei ii a[sses) viii 

vi\ Idus textor{es) ii a{sscs) vii 

10 c<^H]diiciei ii a{sses) viii 


V Idiis textor{cs) in a{sses) χ s(cmis) 

viagister a{sscs) vi 

iv Idtis textor(es) Hi a(sscs) χ s(emis) 

magister a[sscs) vi 

15 Hi I\dtis\iextor(es) Hi a{sses) χ s{<einis) 

\nt)pgister a{sses) vi 

Col. ii. 

]_« Idus textor(es) Hi a{sses) χ s{emis) 

magister a{sscs) vi 

y Idtis textor{es) Hi a{sscs) χ s{emis) 

20 magister a{sscs) vi 
a{)itc) d{ieiti) xiix K{alendas) SextiHas 

textor{es) Hi a{sses) χ s{cmis) 

magister a{sses) vi 

21. β of sextilias corr. from /(?). 

2. a(sses)•. this abbreviation is common in the Pompeian inscriptions; cf. C. I. L. IV, 
index. The occurrence of asses in an account of this kind is however very singular. 
Presumably the money though reckoned in asses was paid in obols, three of which would 
be the equivalent of 2 asses. 

5. fix: cf. 1. 21, where xiix is written for xviii; for the sums of asses, on the other 
hand, viii is regularly used. 

17-9. If this column immediately follows Col. i, which from the dates seems most 
probable, there is nothing lost at the beginnings of these lines and i in 1. 19 stands for 

21. Sextilias is a curious form ; the a has been corrected, but was apparently altered 
from another letter, not itself deleted. For the numeral xiix cf. note on 1. 5. 

738. Account of Food. 

13-5 X 10-3 cm. About Λ.η. i. 

A fragment of an account of articles of food consumed on difTerent days ; 
cf. 108. The ends of lines of a preceding column are preserved. 

Siwvcoi e- 8ίπνωι ζ• 

739. ACCOUNTS 235 

Κανωττικον apriSia β, 

ήπαρ. opvLS σίδντη (^ ύ8α{τοί) α, 

δίπι/ω ?■• ΙΟ πτίρυγα β. 

5 οστρεα ι, ...... 

θρίδαξ α. 

'For dinner on the 5th a Canopic liver; for dinner on the 6th 10 oysters, i lettuce; 
for dinner on the 7th 2 small loaves, i bird . . . from the water, 2 snipe (?).' 

9. σώυτη is a new word. The πτίρυγα were probably smaller than the Spvis. 

739. Private Account. 

32 X 10 cm. About a.d. i. 

Λ private account for a month, reckoned in silver drachmae and copper 
obols. Lines i-3 mention a receipt, 11. 3-32 give an account of expenditure 
for various purposes. The account is written on the verso, the recto being blank. 

"Εχεί Ίσα? πάρα ΆπολλωνίοΙν 

άπο Κννου {δραχμας) μ . [ 
ί. δα{πάνηή• τι{μηί) χι{ ) [Ν]€χ6(ντι (δραχμαι) κη, 

σίΐτοποήτρων [δραχμή) α [τίτρώβολον), 
5 ^(λαίον (δραχμαι) δ {όβολοϊ δυο).]] 

δ. άλΐστρα [πΐντώβολον), 

κονίου €<y πρ[ο]σφαγίου (όβολόί). 
e. κοψίνων γ [τΐτρώβολον) [ήμιωβίλιοιή. 

ς-. βατανίων (όβολοϊ δύο), 

ΙΟ προσφαγίου οίκοδ(6μον) (όβολόΐ), 

(λαίον χοϋί (δραχμαι) δ (οβολοι δυο). / μ (τριώβολον) (ήμιωβίλιον). 
ζ. προσφαγίον οίκοδ(όμου) (οβολόί). 
θ. (ργάτου (τετρώβοΧον ?), 

οίκοδ(6μον) πρ(οσφαγίον) (ό/3ολόί), 
15 τεκ7θί'[θΓ ] 

ιγ. τί{μηί) £λα[£Όΐ'] (δραχμαι)] δ (τριώβολον ?), 


πορφύρας {Spa -χμαι) κ, 

στήμον[οί els γυναι.]κ[ΕΪ]ον 
ίμάτ(ΐ[ον . ] 

20 Φιλονταρίω [..]. [,] ..[..]. β . [ 

κβ. τι{μήί) ΐλαίου [{δραχμαΐ) δ] (οβολοί δύο). 

5- This line enclosed in round brackets. 7. 1. irp[o\c<f>ayiov. 

' Isas has received from Apollonius, an inhabitant of Cynus, 4[.] drachmae. Deduct 
on account of expenses : price of . . . paid to Nechtheus 28 dr., for making bread 
I dr. 4 ob., (for oil 4 dr. 2 ob., erased). On the 4th, for grinding 5 ob., powder (?) 
for a relish i ob. 5th, 3 baskets 4J- ob. 6th, plates 2 ob., a relish for the builder 
I ob., a chous of oil 4 dr. 2 ob. Total 40 dr. 3^ ob. 7th, a relish for the builder i ob. 
9th, for the workman 4 ob., a relish for the builder i ob., the carpenter . . . 13th, price of 
oil 4 dr. 3 ob., purple 20 dr., thread for a woman's robe . . ., to Philoutarion . . . 22nd, 
price of oil 4 dr. 2 ob. Total . . .' 

2. Kwov, if correct, is the name of a village, but the writer is careless about his cases 
(cf. 1. 7), and he may mean Κυνων, i.e. Cynopolis. 

4. σ(ίτοποήτΐ)ων: cf. the similar forms uXcarrpa (1. 6), ηηητρα, Sec. (736. 10 and note 
on 736. 7). 

5. The amount of oil which is not stated here and in 1. 21 was no doubt i xois: 
cf. 1. II. 

740. Account of Corn. 

21-2x46 cm. About A. D. 200. 

An account of corn, arranged according to dififerent villages, apparently 
from tlie day-book of a private individual rather than an official. Of Col. i 
only the ends of lines are preserved, but Col. ii is practically complete, and 
Col. iii has lost only a few letters at the ends of lines. There is also a detached 
fragment (not printed) belonging to another column. 

Cols, i and ii are apparently concerned with corn paid out, and the sum 
given in 11. 28-9, added to the 30 artabae accounted for in 11. 30-1, is subtracted 
from a previously mentioned total, leaving the remainder stated in 1. 33. The 
rest of Col. iii deals with receipts from rents. The papyrus provides some 
interesting new information about the names and character of dififerent measures 
of corn, and a curious conversion occurs in 1. 29. On the verso are copies of 

740. ACCO.UNTS 237 

petitions to Septimius Severus and Caracalla (705), and the 9th year men- 
tioned in 1. ^6 of the recto no doubt refers to these emperors. 

Col. i. 

Ends of 13 lines. 

14 [Μΐρμΐρθύύν γ\νησί<ίί)ΐ' 8η- 

15 [μοσίων ]oy 8ι8ομΐ- 

ι6 [u Sia γΐ\ωργ{ον) Μ.(ρμ{ίρθ(ύΐ') 

Col. ii. 

17 μιάί άντΙ μιαί μίτρω <τιτολ{ογικω }) Ήρων[. . .] . ν {άρτάβαή [. . 

1 8 ΈΙΐρύφΐως• μ(τ{ρΐύ) 8[ημοσίω) μια[ί] άντΙ μιαί (μβ{ ) {άρτάβαή κβ χΐοίΐΊΚΐ!) ζ, 

19 κα\ ίδόθησαν vnep φορίτρον όνηλ^ατών) {άρτάβαι) . )((oiVi/C€r) γ. 

20 ΊΊίΧα• Ιδιωτικωί μ€τ(ρω) δη^μοσίω) δια ΙΙασαλνμιο[5 

21 γ(ωργ(οϋ) ΊΊίΧα θίμίατος) άπο [άρταβων) κτ το y {άρτάβαι) η [ήμισν] 

χ{οίνίΚ(!) ζ, 

22 καΙ (δ6θ{η) vntp φορίτ{ρον) 6νη\{ατΖν) και σιτολο[γικο]ΰ και 

23 σιτομ€τρικοΰ των προκ{ΐΐμ(.ν(ΰν) {άρταβώιή η [ημίσουί) χ{θίρίκων) ζ 

(άρτάβηί) {ήμισυ τίταρτον) χ{οίΐΊΚΐ9) β. 

24 Παώμίω^• ϊμΐτρή6{ησαν) σιτολ{6γοΐί) [ ] . {άρτάβαι) if, 

25 και €δόθ{ησαν) ύπ{ΐρ) φορ(τ{ρου) 6νη\{ατων) και σιτομ[ίτ(ρικον) των 

προκ{ΐΐμίνων) {άρταβων) κ {άρταβ ) . χ(ο«'ίΚ€ί)] γ. 

20 Χ(ν€Κίλ(ύ• €μΐτρήθ{ησαν) σιτολ{6γοΐί) θ(μα[τοί {άρτάβαι)] . , 

2 7 και ίδ6θ{ησαν) νπ{(ρ) σιτο\ογ{ικοΰ) καΐ φορίτ{ρου) χ{οίνιΚ€ς) [.] 

28 / άναλώμ{ατο9) ίδΐ(ΰτ{ικωί) {πυροΰ) {άρτάβαι) νβ δ \{oiviKes) β, 

29 at θίματοί δημοσίου καθαρού {άρτάβαι) μθ {ήμισυ τίταρτον) χ{οίνιΚ€5) Θ. 

30 και ϊπράθησαν ώί ίττάν(ύ [δια τον] γ λογοΟ δίδήΧωται 

31 km μηνοί Μίσορη ^{άρτάβαι) λ]] {πυροΰ) {άρτάβαι) λ. 

Col. iii. 

32 λοίτται [ΐ]δΐ(ύτικω5 πνρ[οΰ άρτάβαι . . 

33 κλΪ (V θίματι ομοίως διδομίνου ΰπο •γ[ΐωργ{ων) 

34 κατά μισθωσιν [{άρτάβαι) . . 


35 Θώ\θί<ΰ^ (μΐ-Γίρήθησαν) δια Ήρατοί γΐωργ^ον) Θ€α>[. . . (πνροΰ) [άρτάβαι) . . 

36 ό αΰ{τοί) άπο σΊΤ( ρμ{άτων) θ {ίτουί) (ττνροΰ) (^άρτάβαι) γ, / ^ττυρον) 

(άρτάβαι) . 

37 ΠίΧα• Ιν πΐδίοΐί Έ!(νοκωμ[.] . . πάρα [ 

38 Aioyivovi τον Χαραπ{ίωνοί) yiw[py{pvvTOi)] . . . ( ) nepi Πίλα [ 

39 σα? ΣΐνοκωμΙ ) . . άπο [άρταβών) λ το [ 

4θ Κ(σμονχΐω5• πάρα Παθώτον Μοιμ(σ[.]χ( ) yf[a>py{oDvTOs) 

41 [apovpai) η [ήμισυ τίταρτον) άπο [άρταβων) κη το γ' [(άρτάβαι) θ . . . 

42 πάρα Ήρακλίίδου ϊπιτρόπον Ήρ[α]κλ[(ί]ας . . [ η ή- 

43 σπόρησίν ΐπϊ Μαγδώ\(ων) κοι(νη) προς Ήρακλ(ί(δηΐ') κατ[α το (ημιαν) y 

44 fai προί την μήτ((ρα) των άφηλ(ίκων) κ[α]τα. το η ko^J προί τούί 

45 άφήλ(ικας) κατά το kS' , άβρόχ(ον) (άρονραί) κδ .[..]. λ[ 

46 ey μ€ρ[ο]ν(9) (άρονρων) («τ, χίρσον και χω(βάτων ?) και άλμ(νρίδοί) 

47 τον αν(τον) [μ](ρο(νί) των άφηλ(ίκων) (άρονρα) α (ήμισν) .[.•]. (πη( ) y 

48 [..]■•[•]•( )4•]?•0'( )ο\ωνγ'^[ ]..( )(άρτάβαι)ι.[ 

49 / θ(μα\το]'! (άρτάβαι) [.]y (ήμισν). 

14. Μίρμίρθων (cf. 823) IS restored from 1. i6; cf. the position of ΠΛα in 11. 20-1. 
The genitive Μίρμίρθων occurs in a papyrus found last winter. 

■γ\νησίων &η[μοσίων : cf. P. Amh. 86. 10 and note, άρταβκία and ναύβιον are meant, 
though perhaps not exclusively. 

17. pias iiiTi μιάί: cf. 1. 18, and P. Amh. 87. 21-2, note. The meaning here is that 
half the artabae were paid on one measure (the name of which is lost in 11. 14-6), half on 
the measure σΐΓολ( ), which is new and which we have supposed to be σιτολ(ο7ΐκώ) on the 
analogy of μίτρω άγορανομικω in 836. 

18. ψβ( ): this measure is also new. Perhaps ί/χ/3(ολ«ώ), i.e. the measure generally 
used in corn sent by boat to Alexandria. It was no doubt smaller than the &ημύοιηι> 
μίτρον; cf. 1. 21, note. 

20. ϊδιωηκώί: the point of this remark (cf. 11. 28 and 32) is not quite clear. We 
might suppose that the writer was contrasting the present private payment with other 
official ones in the same account, but from 1. 28 it apjiears that all the items in Col. ii 
concern his private account, and to assume that he failed to keep official and private 
accounts distinct is not satisfactory. An alternative explanation is to suppose that ϊίιωηχώί 
refers not to the nature of the account but to the character of the corn ; cf. 11. 28-9, where 
an amount of corn which is apparently ϊδιωηκώΓ is converted into a slightly smaller sum 
βήματος δημοσίου καθαρού, and note αιί loc. But since the payment in 1. 19, although 
Ιδιωτικά)!, is μ(τ(ρω) δη(μοσίω), Ιδίωτικως cannot refer to a private measure, and would be 
a curious expression to imply that the corn in question was not καθαρό!. 

21. A of 26 artabae is 8| art., a sum which the writer expresses by 8| art. 7 choenices. 

741. ACCOUNTS 239 

This implies, if his arithmetic is correct, the artaba of 42 choenices, the largest of the 
different artabae in use in Egypt, and in the fourth century called the artaba ψορικω 
{μίτρω) (P. Brit. RIus. 125; cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 232-3). The fiict that it is the artaba 
of 42 choenices which is here μ^τρω 8ημοσΙω is important, for the official artaba in Roman 
times has been often supposed to be much smaller, though, as we pointed out (P. Tebt. 
ζί>ιιί.), on insufficient grounds. But it would not be safe to infer from the present passage 
alone that the mention of μίτρω δημοσίω in Roman times always implied an artaba 
of 42 choenices. 

22-3. These charges for donkey transport, with the σιτολογικύν (a new term, probably 
meaning a bakhshish for the σίτολο'γοί) and σιτομ(τρικι')ν (also new as an impost for 
measuring the corn), all of which are supplementary of the main payment (cf. 11. 19, 25, 
and 27), are probably included in the προσμ^τρηΰμινα which occur in the official receipts 
of this period; cf. P. Tebt. I. pp. 41 1-2. 

24. σιτολ(ογοίΓ) : this does not necessarily imply that the payment was for taxation 
purposes; cf. P. Oxy. III. p. 251. 

28-9. The sum of the foregoing items, 52i artabae 2 choenices, is here converted 
into 49f art. 8 choen. θίματος ΒημοσΙον καθαρού, whatever that precisely means. The 
reduction is probably due to two causes at least, (i) the fact that in the preceding items 
artabae of different sizes were employed, and that some of them were smaller than the 
artaba meant in 1. 29, which very likely contained 42 choenices (cf. 1. 21, note); (2) the 
fact that these artabae Ιδιωτ{ικω!) were partially or even wholly not καθαραί ; cf. P. Tebt. I. 
92. 9-1 1. 

30. The doubtful γ has a horizontal stroke over it and seems to mean ' 3rd '. ηΰ(τοϋ) 
cannot be read. 

35. ecw[: θώλθίωί (cf. 1. 14, note) or at least a place name would be expected. 

41. Since we do not know which artaba was being employed, it is uncertain how the 
writer expressed A art. at the end of the line. 

44. The μήτηρ των άφηλίκωΐ', if Ήρακλ{ί(δΐ)ΐ/) is right in 1. 43, is the ΉρακΚύα mentioned 
in I. 42. 

741. List of Articles. 

1 6-5 X 9-5 cm. Second century. 

A list of miscellaneous articles, containing, as such lists commonly do, 
a number of rare or unknown words. 

Δόγ^οί) ϊντοΧικων Εϋγ^νίτο- Ιπιτικον a, 

[po]r kv 8ίσακι8ίω• κίλλάριον τριλάγυνοι/ a, 

σφυρίί 8ιπλή καρύων α, βι . [.jouc άι/αβυλη α, 

άλλα μΐίκρα e, ηροχΐίρια β, 

5 γ(ργαθοί α, 15*'' "ί* ύ(λα(ΐ) ΐ]μισνν- 

άρνακίί ο, Θίσΐΐί γ, 


ψήκτρα a, 

σάλια άρσ(νικα ζ(ύγ{η) η, 

[γυ]ναικ(ΐα ζ(νγ{η) τ, 

ΙΟ σανδάλια δνικ{α) β, 

20 οξύβαφον 


κατ{ ) δ ποτ{ ) α, 




7- τ of ψήκτρα above the line. 

1 1 . ϊππικον Pap. 

15. ί'ίλπ Pap. 

'Account of articles at order of Eugenetor in a double sack: — i double basket of 
nuts, 5 other small ones, i wicker crate, i sheepskin, i scraper, 8 pairs of men's . . . , 
6 pairs of women's ditto, 2 donkey straps (?), i horse's ditto, i three-flagon jar, i bag (?) 
of ... , 2 hold-alls containing 3 half-sets of glass, 4 . . . cups and i . . . , 4 plates, 
2 bowls, I saucer.' 

4. άλλο(ι) /if«pa(;) should perhaps be read, as the writer seems to have a tendency 
to omit final ι (cf. 1. 15) and five baskets must be meant; but the neuter may refer to 


5. ytpyados is probably for yvpyauos, meaning a wicker basket. 

8. σάλια : or perhaps σ/λιπ, which however is still more diiTicult. σόλων might be 
a diminutive of σολος or an adjective from Σόλοι, but neither is very suitable. It is hardly 
likely that the word is connected with στολή, for which σολή was a late Attic form (cf. 
Du Cange s. v.), though some article of attire is evidently meant. Mr. Smyly suggests 
a connexion with the Latin so/tar. 

10. σανδάλια may mean 'bands' of some kind, the word being used for a medical 
bandage by Oribasius. But the reading is extremely doubtful ; the second letter could 
be e and of the first only the smallest vestiges remain. 

12. For κ(λλάριον cf P. Brit. Mus. 191. 9. 

13. αναβολή, since it governs a genitive plural, looks like a receptacle of some kind, 
a sense in which άναβολί^ιον is found in IMacarius, Apophlh. Pair. 33 άναβολϋιον fiearof 
ψωμιών. In the preceding word the vestiges before the lacuna suit only a round letter 
such as β, θ, ο, or σ ; possibly βίβ[λ]ων. There are two dots like a diaeresis above the «, 
but they are perhaps accidental. 

14. προχίίρια are cases or bo.xes, since they contained glass; but the word is 
apparently new. 

15. Mr. Smyly compares Martial iv. 46. 15 seplenaria synthesis. 

17. The cups are divided into two kinds, but what these are is obscure. 

1 8. βάτ(λ\αι : probably the Latin patella. 

19. σκουτλία: cf. P. Brit. Mus. 191. 10 and a gloss cited by Du Cange from Cod. 

Reg. 2062 τρύβλιον σκοΰτλον. 



742. Letter of Antas. 

26*5 X 13-7 cm. B.C. 2. 

A letter from Antas to Faustus, chiefly concerning reeds [κάλαμοί), written 
like many other letters of this period in vulgar Greek. 

AvToLs Φ[ανσ\τωι ηΧί'ϊστα γαίρίΐν. 

παράλαβε πάρα Πόθου τον κάλα- 

Ιί\ρ\ν πανα[ρ]ιθμώί και άπόσηιλόν 

μ[ο]ι πόσα? 8ίσμαί παρύληψΐ? 
5 καΐ 5[€]γ αύταί ei'y τόπον άσ- 

φαλωί ίνα ttj άναβάσα αΰταί 

άξωμίΡ. παράδοί Si τινι 

των φίλων άρίθμω αύτας ίνα 

πάλιν φ[ί]λοί ήμίΐν παραδοι 
ΙΟ άσφ[αλω9,] και kav τι δνντ} 

συ «[. . . .'\νά[ μοι δοί ίργασί- 

α[ν ]σα ΐμ( ήγορακίναι 

παρ[α . . . ο]υ την νιλίαν δίσμην 

(δραχμών) δ[(κάπ]€ντβ. μη άμΐλήστ]!• 
15 (ρρωσο. 

(βτονί) KTj [Κα]ίσαρος Παννι α. 

On the verso 

Φαυστωι [ ]ΐΤ(νν . ( ) etV Νΐκλη. 

' Antas to Faustus, many greetings. Take over from Pothus the reeds all together, 
and send me word how many bundles you have received, and put them in a safe place 
in order that we may take them on the journey up. Deliver a certain number of them 
to one of our friends in order that a friend may deliver them to me safely, and if you can 
. . . give your attention to it . . . I have bought from (Pothus?) the 1000 bundles for 
I r; drachmae. Don't forget. Good-bye. The 28th year of Caesar, Pauni i. (Addressed) 
To Faustus ... at Nekle.' 


743. Letter to a Friend. 

21-5 X 17-7 C7n. B.C. 2. 

A letter in two columns, of which the first is much broken. The greater 
part is concerned with the explanation of the writer's reasons for sending 
Damas, whom he recommends to his friend's good offices. 

Col. i. 

Parts of 16 lines. 
17 ] θίΧω Si σ€ Koi τον Καίσαροί 

] avayvovvai, Su γαρ ere 

Col. ii. 

(I και ττ[ρ]οί aWovs d^ov πράγμα 
20 βοηθον αντοΰ γΐΐΐνίσθαι Sia ην 

iyoiii{y) προί έατούί φιλίαν. και 

γαρ ίγω ό'λοί διαπον[ο]νμαι fi Ελ(- 

VOS χαλκονί άπ6λ([σ](ν, τταραγΐνομ{ίνον) 

γαρ Ααμ&τοί eh 'AXe^avSpeiav ή\- 
25 θαμίν επί Ετταφρόδΐΐτον και ivpi- 

θη μήτε (ίληφως μήτ€ δ€6ωκώ{ί). 

ωστ άν τοντό σε ίίλω γανώσκΐΐν 

ΟΤΙ ίγω αντψ διαστολάί δίδώκίΐν 

το βαδίσαι els Τακόνα χάριν των (Κ- 
3θ φορίων και τα νυν ΐπαπίπομφα 

αντον πάντα σννλίξαι και πΐρϊ πάν- 
των αντφ την ίπιτροπ^ν δίδωκα. 

ev ois eav σοΰ προσδίήται συνπροσ- 

γίνίσθαι αύτώι ώ? άνθομο\ογη{σομίν(ύ) 
35 ύττίρ σου οΰτω! coy νπ{ίρ) μου. kv τψ δί 

μΐ περισπάσθαι ουκ ηδυνάσθην 

συντυχΰν 'ΑποΧ\(ΰ{νί(ύ) τω Λιβικω ίνα 

αύτω αύτα ταΰτα ΰποδίζω. και συ 



5e vntp ων ίαν βίλτ/ί γράφΐ μοι και άνό- 
4θ Kvws ποήσω, Ααμάί yap μοι άνθωμολ{ογήσατο) 
πάντα, καλώί Se -γίγον^ν το ταχύ 
αύτον ίΚβίΙν, νφηγήσίται γάρ σοι. 

[σ]εατο(ΰ) ϊπιμΐ(\ου) ΐν νγι{αίΐ'Τ}9). ίΐησκοΊτ{οΰ) τους σους πάΐ'Τΐ[ς). 
ίρρω[σο.] {eTOVS;) κθ Καίσαρος Φαά{ψι) ς-. 

20. ν θ{ ην COrr. 22. 1. όλωί. 23• 1• ά7Γώλί[σ1{». 43• '■ ^ovra{^s). 

' . . . Ι wish you and the . . . of Caesar to read this (?), for although I (?) have had trouble 
with others you must assist him for the sake of our friendship. I am quite upset at 
Helenos' loss of the money ; for when Damas arrived at Ale.xandria we came to 
Epaphroditus, and it was discovered that he had neither received nor paid anything. 
I wish you therefore to know this that I had given him orders to go to Takona for 
the rents, and now I have dispatched him to collect them all and have entrusted to him 
the care of the whole matter. Whatever service he may require from you, stand by him, 
as he will agree in everything for you just as for me. Owing to my worries I was unable 
to meet Apollonius the Libyan in order to inform him of this. Write to me yourself about 
anything you want, and I will do it without hesitation ; for Damas has agreed in everything 
with me. It is well for him to come quickly, for lie will instruct you. Take care of 
yourself so that you may remain in good health. Look after all your household. 
Good-bye. The 29th year of Caesar, Phaophi 6.' 

18. Some word like οίκονάμην is probably to be supplied at the beginning. 

19. (Ίχον whether first singular or third plural is difficult ; (i\ei would be expected. 
34. άνβομολογη^σομίιιω): cf P. Tebt. 21. 6, P. Par. 42. 7. 

744. Lettkr of Ilarion. 

25 X 14-7 <^'"• B.C. I. 

A letter from a man who had gone to Alexandria, addressed to his sister 
(who was no doubt his wife), and to two other women, regarding certain domestic 
matters. A curious injunction occurs in 11. 9-10. 

Ίλαρίωρ\α\ Άλιτι τηι άδΐλφήι πλ(ΐστα γαί- 
ptiv και BfpovTi ttj κυρία μου καΐ Άπολλω- 
νάριν. γίνωσκ€ ώί ίτι και ννν (ν Ά\(ξαι•- 
δρΐ(ί)α (()σμ(ν• μη άγα>ι/ιαί fay οΧωί (ίσ- 
5 πορεύονται, ίγω ίν Άλ(ξανδρ((ί)α μίνω. 

R 3 


(ρωτώ σε καΐ παρακαλώ σ( ίπψΐλή- 
θ(τ]τ)ι τω παι8ίω και ΐαν (ϋθνΫ όψων; 
ον \άβωμ€ΐ> άποστίΚω σ€ άνω. kav 
πολλαπολλων τ(κτ]ί kav ην αρσί- 
10 νον άφ(9, kav ην θηΧία ίκβαλΐ. 
ΐΐρηκαί Se Άφροδισιατι οτι μή μ€ 
ίπιλάθτ]ί• πώί δνναμαί σΐ ϊπι- 
λαθ(ΐν ; ϊρωτω σε οΰν 'ίνα μη ayw- 

15 {tTovs) κθ Καίσαρος Παΰνι κγ. 

On the verso 

Ίλαρίων "ΑΧιτι άπόδοί. 

2. 1. ΆττοΧΚωναρίω. 8. 1. σοι. II. S( above the line. 

' Ilarion to Alis his sister, many greetings, and to my dear Beroiis and Apollonarion. 
Know that I am still even now at Alexandria ; and do not wOrry if they come back 
altogether (?), but I remain at Alexandria. I urge and entreat you to be careful of the 
child, and if I receive a present soon I will send it up to you. If (Apollonarion .') bears 
ofTspring, if it is a male let it be, if a female expose it. \Ou told Aphrodisias " Don't 
forget me." How can I forget you? I urge you therefore not to worry. The 29th year 
of Caesar, Pauni 23. (Addressed.) Deliver from Ilarion to Alis.' 

8-10. eav πολλαπολλων Te'iciji is Very obscure. If the second person t/k'/s is right, this 
passage must refer to the exposure of a female infant. But πολλά would be most extra- 
ordinary, apart from the difTiculty of constructing πολλών. If TeVfls is altered to τίκη we 
might suppose that an animal was the subject and divide πολλ(α) Απόλλων ; but 'Απόλλων 
is not a likely name for an animal. Perhaps πολλαπολλω!» conceals Άπολλωνύρων (cf. 1. 2) ; 
for the use of the second person cf. e. g. 295. 7. 

745. Letter to Gaius Rustius. 

ii-i X ι8•8 fOT. About A. D. I. 

Conclusion of a letter, chiefly concerned with money matters. The writer 
had evidently been in financial difficulties, and was afraid of their recurrence ; 
but the loss of the beginning of the letter makes the transactions under discussion 
rather obscure. The addressee has a Roman name. 


■ ■■••••• • • • • • 

άδίλφή^ μ[ον ο]ΐΐΌυ κβράμια e^ri[KOi'T]a [nejvTe και δραχίμα^ Sijica τ[ο]ι/ 
δΐ otvov ηγόρασα^ ΐκ (δραχμών) ?ξ, ΰπ\ρ ωι/ καΐ ίθου γΐΐρόγραφον [δια 

μοι irepl τοΰ αύτον τον Αντάν άποστήσίίν δια το κ • [ ^κίναι 

ώί και νττίσχ^ον δια τοΰ ττολΐΐτάρχον Θΐοψίλου, μ[η . .]i'e[.] . η[. •]να &ν<ύ- 
5 θΐν ■γΐίνηται πάντα και πάλιν earovs άνα<7Κίνάζα)μΐ[ν] μη οΰσηί 

χρήαί. ουκ olSas γαρ ττώ? μοι ΐχρήσατο ίν 'O^vpvyyois ούχ ώ? λνσα(ν)τι 
αλλ ώί τινί πθΓ€ άποστίρητηι μη άποδΐδωκότι. ΐρωτω οΰν ae 
μη αλλωί ποήσαι, οΐδα δί οτι πάντα καλώί ποήσ€ΐ$' ού θέλω 
γαρ άμψισβήτησιν προί σΐ 'ίχαν φίλον μου ο[ν]τα. ά[σ]πάζου πάντα! 
10 τούί σούί και σΐαυτοΰ ίπιμίλου 'ίν ΰγιαιντ]?. (ρρωσο. 

On the verso 

Γαίωι 'Ρουστίωι [ 

6. υ of ουκ corr. from t. 

' . . . from my sister 65 jars of wine and i ο drachmae, and you bought the wine at 
6 drachmae, for which you drew me up a bond through Artemas that the said Antas 
would make the repayment because you had ... as you promised through the politarch 
Theophilus, in order that everything may not be completely . . . and we go bankrupt again 
without any necessity. You don't know how he treated me at Oxyrhynchus(?), not like 
a man who had paid but like a defrauder and a debtor. I ask you therefore not to do 
otherwise ; but I know that you will do everything well. I do not want to have any 
dispute with you, as you are my friend. Salute all your household, and take care of your 
health. Good-bye. (Addressed) To Gaius Rustius . . .' 

4. πολίΐτάρχου : πολ^ιτάρχαι are known at Thessalonica from Acts xvii. 6 and C. I. G. 
1967, but the title is new in Egyptian papyri. 

The mutilated word before άνωθεν is most likely a perfect participle ; the letter before 
ij[ seems to be λ, σ, or r. 

6. iv Όξυρύγχοΐί : a village Όξύρνγχα is known in the Fayum but not in the 
Oxyrhynchite nome, and it is difficult to believe that the metropolis is not here meant, 
though Όξνρΰγχωι/ or Όξυρνγχιτων πόλΐί is the normal form. The sentence οΰκ oiSas . . . 
άποδ(δωκότι may be interrogative. 


746. Letter of Recommendation. 

23-2 X 13-5 cm. A.D. 16. 

A letter from Theon to his brother Heraclides, a basilicogrammateus, 
introducing the bearer, Hermophilus. Theon is perhaps the same as the writer 
of 292, a similar letter of recommendation addressed to the dioecetes on behalf 
of a brother named Heraclides. Cf. also 787. 

θίων Ήρακλ(ί8ηι τώι άδίλφώι 

πλΐΐστα •)ζαίρ(ΐν και ύγιαίνΐΐν. 
Έρμόφιλος (ό) άπο8[ί]8ούί σοι την 
ίπιστολην [(]στ[ι] .[..]. κ[. .]fi . φ[•]ΐΐρι 
5 [.]fpiov, καΐ ηρώτησίν pe γράψαι σοι. 
[π]ροφίρ(ται (χ^ιρ πραγμάτων 
[kv τηι\ KepKfpovvi. τοντο ουν ΐάν 
σοι φα[ί\νηται σπον8άσΗί κατά το 
SiKaiov. τα 3* άλλα σεαντοΰ iwipeXoO 
10 ΐν νγιαίνυ^. 

(iTovs) γ Τιβΐρίου Καίσαροί Σΐβαστον Φαωφι γ. 
On the verso 

Ηρακλ^ίδηι βα(σι\ικωι) γρ{αμματΐΐ) 'Οξυ{ρνγχίτου) ΚυνοΐΓ{ο\ίτου). 

' Theon to Heraclides his brother, many greetings and wishes for good health. 
Hermophilus the bearer of this letter is (the friend or relative) of . . erius, and asked me 
to write to you. Hermophilus declares that he has business at Kerkemounis. Please 
therefore further him in this matter, as is just. For the rest take care of yourself that you 
may remain in good health. Good-bye. The 3rd year of Tiberius Caesar Augustus, 
Phaophi 3. (Addressed) To Heraclides, basilicogrammateus of the Oxyrhynchite and 
Cynopolite nomes.' 

4. The letters ]στ{ are on a separate fragment, the position of which is doubtful. 

13. There seems to be an ellipse of καί after 'οξυ{ρυγχίτου), though the fact that 
a basilicogrammateus should have more than one nome under his jurisdiction is 


747. Invitation to a Feast. 

5-1 X 7-3 cm. Late second pr third century. 

An invitation to a feast given by a cavalry officer ; cf. 110 and 523. 

KaXei (Γί ό {δζκά8αρ)χ(οί) tis την ifi'i• 
αν iavToD rfj τ ΚαΧάν- 
Sais άπο <Sp(ay) η. 

2. υτ of favTOV COTT. from v. 

' The decurion invites you to his party on the sixth day before the Calends at eight 


(The collations of //. i-xii and the Odyssey are with the text of Ludwich, those 
of //. xiii-xxiv with that of La Roche.) 

(λ) Iliad. 

748. i6ix6.6 cm. Ends of i. 107-116, with occasional stops and elision- 
marks. 108 o]v6[e] Γίλίσσαί. 1 13 Κ[λυται]//))στρ'ίϊ• Third century, written 
in sloping oval uncials of good size. 

749. I0'3 X 10 cm. Ends of i. 160-176 from the bottom of a column. Second 
century, written in heavy round uncials. 

750. 8 X 6-3 cm. Parts of ii. 57-73• 62 τ]οσσσ[ο. d•^ e/xe^Je?. 65 e](ciXiue. 
Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. 

751. 19-6 X 9-2 cm. Part of a column containing iii. 30-55, with numerous stops 
and accents, and several corrections (probably by a second hand). 37 υιο$. 
40 οφί^λοϊ. First of ayovos above an α crossed out. 47 ayf ipa[s corrected 
from eyftp€i[s. 48 y of ai'i(y€s above the line. 50 TroXtj't corr. from ττολι?/. 
51 κατηφύη. 5^ ] [[. .]]φωτοϊ. s of «xets above the line. 54 ot of χράισμοι 
above τ; crossed out. Late second or third century, written in a neat 
uncial hand of the oval type. 

752. 11x8 cm. Beginnings of iv. 87-96, with numerous stops, breathings and 
accents. 93 The first hand had η ρ a]y μοι ; a second hand seems to have 
corrected ν and has added h( above /λοι. Third century, written in sloping 
oval uncials. 

753. 192 X 6-4 cm. On the recto part of a second or third century account. 
On the verso parts of iv. 364-398, with numerous stops, breathings and 
accents. 369 is omitted, as in A. 378 «στ/ιατοωί'] |[.]]θ' [. 381 ττάρ άι[σια. 
382 ώχο^Γο ιδ[€ corn to ωχοιτ 7;δ[€(?). i^^ e of io)v above the line. Third 
century, written in sloping oval uncials. 

754. 5-5 X 2-5 cm. On the recto ends of 7 lines of a document mentioning 
a ζνμουργ{ό$). First century. On the verso a few letters from iv. 532-539. 
535 τΐώΐ[μι\θη. First century, written in a good-sized irregular uncial hand. 

755. 19x6 cm. On the recto part of a document in a cursive hand of the 
early part of the third century. On the verso a few letters from the ends 


of V. 130-173, forming a complete column, with numerous stops, accents, 
breathings, and marks of elision and quantity (all probably added later). 
134 eV[[e]]t\0r;. 151 φνα^ριξΐν. 153 ι of λυy]fJω^ added by a second hand. 
Third century, written in an upright hand of the oval type. 

756. 6-8 X 8-2 cm. Fragment of the bottom of a leaf from a book, containing 
on the recto the ends of v. 324-334, and on the verso parts of 379-390, 
with elision-marks. 332 Kvpaveovaai. 382 τ(τ]\ατί. 384 \y of aAyef corr. 
388 θ of evO added above the line (?). απόλυτο. 390 η of ΐξηγγ(ΐΚ€ν above α, 
which is crossed through, ξ having been also corrected. Late third or 
fourth century, written in a semi-uncial hand. 

757. 4-2 X 3 cm. Parts of v. 578-586. 582 ey δ. First century, written in 
round uncials. 

758. 9-6 X 1 1-4 cm. v. 583-596, the lines being nearly complete, from the top 
of a column, with stops, breathings, accents and elision-marks. 583 ΐλ{φ[αν]τα. 
586 be και. 587 ίΐστηκΐΐ. 588 ιττ-ηων . . . ττεσοι» ev. Late second or third 
century, written in a neat uncial hand of the oval type. 

759- 127 X 2-9 cm. A few letters from the ends of v. 662-682, from the end 
of a column, with stops (high and low point) and accents. 667 αμ]φΐ5 
eTTovr[es, confirming the conjecture of Brandreth. Third century, written in 
a neat upright uncial hand of the oval type. 

760. Fr. (ύ) 7-3 χ 49 cm. Two fragments, the first containing a few letters 
from the beginnings of v. 715-718, the second parts of 720-729. 724 e of 
χρνσ(η above the line. First century, written in round upright uncials. 

761. 21 XII cm. On the recto part of an effaced document. On the verso 
vi. 147 and 148, and, after a lacuna which may have contained 2 lines, 
parts of 11. 147 and 149 and another line, the whole being a writing 
exercise. 148 τηλεθωσα. Late first century B.C., written in a large semi- 
uncial hand. 

762. 198 X 85 cm. On the recto ends of lines of a list of persons, written 
in a cursive hand in the late second or early third century. On the verso 
the latter parts of vii. 1-35, forming a complete column. 5 (λατησιν. i6 
δυί'Γο. 30 μαχησ]ομ(θ. 3 1 omitted. Third century, written in small upright 

763. 24.4 X 10 cm. Part of a leaf from a book, containing on the recto the 
latter portions of vii. 68-ici, and on the verso the earlier portions of 69-134, 
with stops, breathings and accents. 72 1/ of ποντοποροισιν added by a second 
hand. 73 ΐϊτιαναχαιων. ηη ι of ίληι added above the line by a second hand. 
112 Final t of Πριαμώηι added above the line by a second hand, τοί' re 
τρομ[(ονσι (a new reading; cf. νποτρομίονσί in Vindob. 61). 113 Αχίλλο;?. 


133 ι of ωκυροωι added above the line by a second hand. Third century, 
written in good-sized oval uncials. 

764. 9-6 X 2-8 cm. A few letters from the beginnings of viii. 109-122, with 
stops, breathings and accents. Third century, written in oval uncials. 

765. 8.1 X5-4 cm. Ends of ix. 320-333, with stops, breathings and accents 
(oxytoncs having a grave accent on the final syllable). 333 First ι of 
τχροφίρψσι, added above the line. 324 hi re. 325 ν of lavov above λλ crossed 
out. Third century, written in oval uncials. 

766. 5-8 X 5-8 cm. A few letters from the ends of x. 542-547, from the bottom 
of a column, with occasional accents. Third century, written in sloping 
oval uncials. 

767. 6-6x4.3 cm. A few letters from the ends of xi. 555-561, with stops. 
Second century, written in good-sized round uncials. 

768. 14x12-9 cm. Fragment from the top of a column, containing parts of 
xi. 736-764. 739 Αυ[γ]ΐώαο. 740 ξ]ανθ[η]ν [.]ya[μη]b[η]v. 750 ατταλαξα. 755 
[α]υΓθϊ. y^6 Βονβρ[ασ]ίον. y^J A\eai[ov]. 758 Παλλαί A^iji»»/. 760 Βοιι/3ρασιου. 
Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. 

769. Fr. (a) 4-5x3.1 cm. Two fragments containing a few letters from 
xiii. 308-317 and 342-347, with accents. 316 omitted. 344 γΐ)θησ](ΐΐ λ.[ 
with V ϊδ[ above λ. Late second or third century, written in a neat uncial 
hand of the oval type. 

770. 4-7 X 7-9 cm. A few letters from the ends of xiii. 372-377 and the 
beginnings of 405-413, with stops, breathings and accents. 372 ■πη]ξ(ν. 
374 In the margin (παίν[ΐσομαί and below it αινιξομ[αι, referring to the 
variants αΐνίζομαι and αΐνίζομαι; cf. Schol. A αΐνίζομ' φίρ^ται καΐ δια τοΰ ξ 
αΐνίξομαί άντΙ τοΰ Ιτταινίσομαι. Ζηνόδοτο? αΐνίσσομαι. 41° Ιπ the margin 
between this and 1. 411 is a critical sign shaped like ^. Second century, 
written in round upright uncials. 

771. 14 X 7-8 cm. On the recto beginnings of xv. 736-746, with occasional 
breathings and accents. 740 καικ\ιμ[(νοι. 742 at and first ω of μαιμωων 
above e and o. 744 t of κη\(ΐω added later (by a second hand ?). At 
the end a coronis and the title in large letters Ιλιαδ[ο9 ο. Late second or 
early third century, written in handsome good-sized uncials of the oval 
type. On the verso 12 nearly complete lines of a money-account in 
third century cursive. 

772. 10-2 X5-9 cm. Ends of xvii. 353-373, with stops, breathings and accents. 
361 αγ]χησην[οι. 363 αν αιμωτι. 369 Final ι of Mevo^nahηι added above 
the line. 371 α of aiuepi corr. from e. Second or third century, written 
in a rather small uncial hand. 


(ύ) Odyssey. 

773. Height of roll 24-4 cm. Seven fragments from four columns of a MS. 
of ii, containing a few letters from 304-312, 339-S57 (top of a column), 
ends of 362-374 (top of a column), and parts of 386-410 (a whole column), 
with stops (high and middle point) and occasional accents. 341 above 
ΐχον]τΐ5 is 6t[. . .lo. 368 δασ^ωίται. 369 ν of ουδέ corr. 372 (end of the line) 
]ττη or ] . 17). 401 [itJoo/Liei'Tjfi']]. 407 omitted. 408 e of θ€ΐνί added above 
the line by a second hand. Αχ]αιο[υί. Second century, written in very 
large heavy uncials (cf. 661), the letters measuring 5 mm. in height. 

774. 4-5 X 7-5 cm. Parts of iii. 226-231. 227 ΐΐπ](9, the e being added by 
a second hand above α crossed through. 328 deos e[, the s being corrected 
from t (?). Third century, written in good-sized sloping oval uncials. 

775. 8-4x4• I cm. Parts of iv. 388-400 from the bottom of a column, with 
occasional breathings and accents. 396 α of α\(η[ται above 7j crossed 
through. 399 omitted. Third century, written in sloping oval uncials. 

776. 6-2 X 24 cm. A few letters from iv. 520-529 from the bottom of a 
column, with occasional accents. First or early second century, written 
in round uncials. 

777. 12-2 X 8-8 cm. Part of the lower portion of a leaf of a book, containing 
on the recto the beginnings of v. 7-1 7 and on the verso the ends of 34-44, 
with stops, breathings and accents. Fourth century, written in good-sized 
sloping oval uncials, in brown ink. 

778. 2θ•6χΐ7•2 cm. On the recto a nearly complete column containing 
X. 26-50, with stops (high, middle and low point). 27 Second t of 
αφραοιηισιν added above the line ; similarly final ι of δίκατηι in 29, τωι and 
αλλωι in 32. 31 ίπίλλα/ίβ. 34 ('Τΐ(Τ<η. 38 (σσι. 42 ι•(ΐσομ(θα. 4^ βουλή 
τ(. Late second or third century, written in handsome round upright 
uncials. On the verso parts of the last 7 lines of a letter in a cursive hand 
of the late third century. 

779• 6-2 X 96 cm. x. 124-130 from the top of a column, the lines being nearly 
complete, with breathings and accents. Late second or third century, 
written in a clear cursive hand. 

780. 17-7 X 8-5 cm. A few letters from the ends of xi. 471-493, and the 
earlier portions of 523-545, from the bottoms of columns, with stops and 
occasional accents. 533 δ») Ύραχσσι with ων (in a second hand) above εσσι. 
539 βιβωσα. 544 φ of νοσφιν above Γ Crossed out. αφ^ιστηκα. 545 μιν 
with e above t added by a second hand. Second century (?), written in 
an uncial hand of the oval type and archaic appearance, Ξ being formed ^. 


781• 6 X 3•8 cm. Fragment of a leaf from a book, containing on the recto 
parts of xvi. 243-256, and on the verso the ends of 288-301, with stops, 
breathings and accents (in h'ghter ink). 293 6e δαιτα. 295 δ of hovpt corr. 
Third century, written in rather small sloping oval uncials. 

782. 7*3 X 5-3 cm. Fragment of the bottom of a leaf of a book containing 
on the verso parts of xvii. 137-148, and on the recto ends of 182-193, with 
stops and accents (in lighter ink). 187 yivi^Oai. Third century, written in 
rather small sloping oval uncials. 

783. 1 1-7 X4-4 cm. Ends of xvii. 410-428, with stops. 417 αλλωι. Late first 
century E. c, written in good-sized irregular uncials. 



784. Fourteen fragments of a document containing on both sides several 
columns, the recto consisting for the most part of lists of persons, the verso 
of a private account (continued on the recto), which mentions καΐ ττροσ/ (i. e. 
TTpoayivovTai) τιμη(ί) (τυρον) (ημίσουί) τον Έΐίτραμένου ΔιδνμωΆρ(ί.6. ΙΙΟΟ copper 
drachmae), [λ]:υτρα ίΐρων ey Μουχ€ω(ί) φ, Ιχθυοίον κ, ζντονς ι, ωων β κί, e\aiov 
κο{τνληί) α ρ-, οϊνον κ{ΐραμί(ύν) β (τάλαντον) α, and payments for 'Ελληνικών, 
A conversion of silver into copper drachmae occurs, Tt/i)/(s) αργν(ρίον) (δραχ- 
μων) η νιτ{(ρ) τοΰ waTpo(s) Έι// (a ratio of 337^' ^' which is unusually low; 
cf. P. Tebt. I. p. 580 1). First century B. c. 

785• 14-7 X 9 cm. An undertaking by a surety to produce a certain individual 
who had been committed to his charge ; cf. 259. After the first 5 lines, 
which seem to have contained the address but are much broken, the 
papyrus concludes 6μυλο[γω) 7rape[t]A7j</)eVat Ζίνωνα Ίΐρακλίον^ τιαρά σου ΰν 
και Έαρίξομαι iv τώι Ιμφανύ ίκτόϊ ie/joC βωμοΰ re^e'iOi/s ττάση^ σκt^:ηs. About 
Α. D. Ι. Τ 3 lines in all. 

78β. 14-3 ^ ^'4 cm. Conclusion of a census-return on oath, written by Aristion 
and Didymus on Tubi 30 of the third year of Hadrian (.\. D. 119), the 
portion preserved corresponding to 480. 7 sqq. Έρογίγραμμ^νωι• (cf. 480. 15) 
is apparently written ayey. Below the signatures in two different hands 
are official dockets κατ€χ(ωρίιτβϊ;) λαογρ(άφοΐί) Νο(του) Δρό(μου) χρό(ΐΌϊ) δ 
αν{τόί), and κατίχω^ρίσθη) λαυγρ(άφοΐί) 'l7r(77^a>i') Παρ((μβοληί))(ρό(νοί) ό av(TOs). 
20 lines, which are complete except the first. 

787- 19-9 X ^3-3 cm. Concluding part of a letter of recommendation (cf. 746). 
The first 5 lines are is iariv ημίτΐροί. (ρωτώ σ* ουν ίχΐΐν αντον σννΐσταμίνον 
κοί (V oXs (άν σοι νροσίρχηται [[■ffot]] ίκ δίκαιου f is την ε[μ]ί)ΐ' καταλογής ΐ7οΐϊ;σίΐϊ 
αντώι, [σ]ύ δέ νττΐρ ων eav aipfj γράφΐ. Dated in the second year of Tiberius, 
Pharmouthi 11 (a. D. 16). 9 lines. 

• The problems of Ptolemaic copper coinage have recently been discussed by Hiiltsch in Ah/ianJ. d, 
KSnigl. Siuhs. Gis. d. ll'iss., 1903. We regret to be compelled to obsen-e that owing to the adoption 
of Revillout's long exploded theories based on demotic, and the failure to appreciate the evidence of the 
Tebtunis papyri with the arguments brought against the 120 : 1 ratio in onr App. ii to that volume, the 
article seems to us a step backwards rather than forwards. 


788. 11-7x10 cm. On both recto and verso parts of two columns of a private 
account in copper drachmae. A conversion of silver into copper (δραχμαΐ) δ 
ΆΤμ (a ratio of 485 : 1 ) occurs ; among the other items are άρταβΰν παρη( ) 
Ά, αΐτητήί ρ, Te'Xos οΐνον 'Βυ, μίμβράδυί (• anchovy ') [. Early first century Β. C. 
In Col. i of the recto the first 8 lines are complete, the rest being imperfect 

789. 97 X 13 cm. Part of a letter. Lines 2-9 fbωκά σοι iv Όζνρ[ύ{γχων)] 
Δίονυσίου Φανίον fTnaroXeibiov κ()(^αραγμί(ι>ον) (is ιδ μηνο(^ς) Καίσαρ(ίον τον 
hifXeoi'TOS ί (erovs) ττίρΐ τοΰ ere Ιοΰναί μοι ϊσοί ων και aiirbs ο Διθ2ίν(σιο$) ίσγΐν 
παρ' ίμοΰ (ττυροΰ) (αρταβων) δδ' χ{οινίκων) Τ. The tenth year probably refers 
to Tiberius or Claudius. 11 lines. 

790. 87 X 12-8 cm. Beginnings of 8 lines of an official letter from Dionysius 
to Ptolemaeus enclosing a copy of another letter, «πιστάται των ί-πτιάρχων 
are mentioned. Late second century B. c. Written across the fibres. On 
the verso beginnings of 6 more lines in a different hand. 

791. 147 x6 cm. Letter from Didymus to his brother Apollonius, beginning 
(■πιμέμνησμαι Άμμωνίω τώι άδίλψω irepl άργν(ρίον) (δραχμών) τ«τσαράκοΐ'τα όκτω 
els σνναγορασμ(6ν) (ρίων . . . Addressed on the verso Άττολλωνίωι. About 
Α. D. I. Incomplete, the end being lost. 12 lines. 

792. 8-4 X 272 cm. On the recto an incomplete account of payments of wheat 
to various persons, containing 19 lines. On the verso another practically 
complete account of receipts and payments, mentioning \iro\v^jpyo{ls) ρμ, 
Φωσφόρω και τω άλλω Ζ. κ, ναν(Κον) Τ!ορ({ίων) h L• η, Φωσφόρω και αν . . νζ( ) (Is 
€φοδ(ια ) ^ μ- ^ perhaps means δραχμαί. 13 lines. The writing on the 
recto is across the fibres, that on the verso along them. First century B. c. 

793. 24 X 11-5 cm. Acknowledgement of payments of wheat ds τό δημόσιον by 
various persons άττύ οιαστολ{ηί) of other persons. Dated in the seventh 
year of Domitian, Caesarius 16 (a. D. 88). Nearly complete. 18 lines. 

794. 21-2 X 15-6 cm. Conclusion of a contract for the sale of I4V arourae of 
catoecic land, with the signatures, which are nearly complete, and following 
the same formula as 504. The seller was Asclepiades, the buyer a woman 
called Σιντότι? (?) or Σιντότον, and the price 500 drachmae of silver. The 
land was Trepl Θ . θωθα' (κ τον Ενφρωνο5 αλα κληρον (stc). Written in the fifth 
year of Domitian (a.d. 85-6). 36 lines. 

795. Fr. (λ) 4-5 χ 13-3 cm. Two fragments of a marriage-contract dated in 
the reign of Domitian (a.d. 81-96). The husband is called Heraclides, the 
wife (?) Sarapous. Line 4 γ]αμ(Τ7}ν φίρνην ττροσφίρομίνην δα[κτν\ιον] χρνσονν 
τ(ταρτω[ν (cf. 496. 6, note), and lower down ]τ(νμίνην κατά tovs rijs χώρο[ί 
ro /χοΐ'ί occurs. Written across the fibres. Parts of 1 2 lines in all. 


796• 3 X ^'3 cm. Parts of 7 lines from the beginning of a marriage-contract 
written in the reign of Trajan (a. D. 98-117), mentioning ίν τΐαραφίρνοΐί 
κλα\ίων άργ[νρων ζίΰγος (?). For κλαλίον = κλανίον ('bracelet') cf. 114. II. 
Written across the fibres. 

797• SSx 10 cm. On the recto an entry concerning the measurement of the 
land of Thotsutaios, Ιιάφορον σ)(οι(ΐΊσμοί)) Θοτσυτοΐοί τοΰ "ίΐρου των er τηι 
σν( ) των πα( ) άπο τοΰ te τοΰ καΐ φ {(tovs) irtpl κώ(μην) . . . For Ζιάφορον 
σχοίνίσμοΰ cf. Ρ. Tebt. Ι. ρ. 229. The reign is that of Cleopatra III and 
Ptolemy Alexander (b. C. 103-2). 4 lines. On the verso 2 lines from the 
beginning of a document mentioning ^(μίρα κω{μο)γρ(αμματΐύί). 

798• 7-8 χ 9-3 cm. Conclusion of a letter, ending άπο Tijs τιμη^ τοΰ αγοραστού 
•jrpbs ταΰτα άττοΐονναι, ώ? δ δι; τταραγ^νωνται οι σιτολόγοι (ττΐ την τίαράΚηψιν των 
σιτικών αΈομίτρησομΐν αμα και ταΰτα. ίρρωσο. (Ιτουί) κγ Φαωφι. The twenty- 
third year probably refers to Epiphanes (b. c. ι 83). 8 lines. 

799• 30*5 X 35 cm. One complete and one incomplete column of an account 
of sums owed and interest upon them, beginning των iv 'AXi^avbpija ασσχηκ€ 
(? 1. h ίσχηκ() χίψο'- Θίωνο{ί} (v ττλοίω. Then follows a list of names and 
amounts, e.g. Ταυ/Κείνου καΐ Σΐνΐίθου (δραχμαϊ) τ τόκ(ον) eios Μ(σομη (Ρραχμαϊ) οζ. 
The second column is also concerned with loans ; eis Ιανισμόν occurs. 
About A. D. I. 34 lines. 

800• 18-7 X 12-5 cm. Beginnings of 19 lines of an official document enclosing 
a letter of Valerius Athenodorus. Lines 4-10 (which begin a new section, 
as is indicated by the size of the initial letter) Και δια Ao'yo(D) {ΙωΙ(κα}μτ\νον [, 
ί^ηλώθη διαγΐγράφθαι [, νομοΰ τούτον τύν τρόττον τοΐτον [, τιοταμοΰ τω ΐς (erei) 
^Αντωνίνον Καίσαροί τ[οΰ κυρίου, Φι/λικοϊ τοΰ ηγ€μονΐνσαντο5 ίργατ([α (κ τω[ν, 
αίρΐθίντων (ξ (ΐισχημόνων νττύ Ήρακ[λ . . ., προχρεία? ΐκ τον κνριακοΰ λόγον eU την [. 
Written about Α. D. 153• 

801. Ι9•2 χ 12-3 cm. Fragment of a notification addressed to Euangelius also 
called Sarapion, strategus, by Diogenes, enclosing an authorization to the 
strategus from the archidicastes in answer to a petition by Diogenes. 
Cf. 485 and 719. In the upper margin is a short note from the strategus 
(cf. B. G. U. 578. 1) dated in the second year of Gaius Pescennius Niger 
(a. D. 193). The letter of the archidicastes to the strategus is dated 
Thoth 18 (probably of the same year). 35 lines, of which the ends are lost. 

802. 7x7 cm. Parts of 1 1 lines from the beginning of a contract, one of the 
parties being called Σιμάριστοί. Dated in the i[.]th year of Ptolemy 
(Alexander the god) Philometor and Berenice, i.e. B.C. 101-95. On the 
verso a docket. 

803. 15 X 5 cm. Fragment of an official letter or petition, containing 3 com- 


plete and 3 incomplete lines, with traces of a preceding column. Lines 2-5 
KOI άττό ίΤΐΐ,στατίίαί φ\ν\λακιτΰ>ν αντΧ τ&ν κατ Ιγοϊ eis το bημόσιov δμολογουμίνων 
ίίαγράφΐσθαι (βρα\μων) 'Γ άτΐΊ]τησθαι /3ιαιό[τ]€ρου tovs αττο τον νομοΰ φύλακαί 

νττό τΐ τον [ καΐ] Πτολεμαίου του στρατηγού , . . Late first century 

Β. C. On the verso parts of two columns of an account. 
804• Width 9-9 cm. Horoscope dated in the twenty-seventh year of Au- 
gustus, Phaophi 5 irepl ωρα(ι>) γ τηί ημίρα{ί) (Oct. 2 (?) Λ. D. 4)• The sun was 
in Libra, the moon in Pisces, Saturn in Taurus, Jupiter in Cancer, Mars in 
Virgo. Taurus was setting, and Aquarius at the nadir. After the astro- 
nomical details the papyrus concludes e^ei. ki.i'5wous" φνλάσσον έ'ω? ημΐρω(ν) 
μ χάριν τον 'Apetoy. Incomplete, being broken in the middle. 15 lines in all. 

805. 6-6 X 7•6 cm. Conclusion of a letter written on Epeiph 30 of the fifth 
year of Augustus (b. c. 25). Lines 2 sqq. ζήτω γαρ τονί άνθρώττονί. h hi 
ToZi (ργρμίνοι^ •π•λ[ο]ίοι$ κάΚαϊ φάσΐΐί (λήσονται παρ' [(]μον, ά£ιώ be άντιφωνΐΐν 
[μ]θί ττυκνότΐρον. άσπάζον ττάντα^ tovs nap' ΐίμωΐ' και σΐαντηί εττι/χίλοΰ ΐν' iyiairj/j 
(ντν(\ονσα). ί/ψω(σο). 9 lines. 

806. i5'9 ^ 35*4 cm. Account, in two columns, of expenditure of copper 
money for various purposes in the tenth year (of Augustus, i. e. B. c. 21-0). 
Among the items are lepev(Ti θοηριοί 'Δ, Κΐφαλα χρνσοχύω Τσ, Σαραττίωη «is 
■πραγματήαν Άφ, δια τί/ί 'Λσκλ);7ΐ•ιάδου τραπΐζηί λάξοίί (τάλαντον) α. Complete. 
31 lines. 

807• ι6•8 χ 2ΐ•ι cm. Fragment of an official list of sheep and goats belonging 
to different persons at a village. Col. i contains the ends of 5 lines. 
Col. ii has ων αντον ίδια ττ, a?y(es) δ, και Αρσινόης φορικα μ(, Αχορίνιοί ίδια μ 
aiyes γ. / ρζΐ aiyss ζ. γίνεται Tjjy κώμηί τ:ρό(βατα) Άσμα alγ(s τλΤ, ων Αρσινόης 
φορικ(ά) σμ. The sheep which were 'Αρσινόης φορικά as contrasted with 
those that were private property seem to have been subject to a special 
impost {φόρο5), payable nominally to Arsinoe (i• e• Arsinoe Philadelphus 
probably), but really of course to the State ; cf the α-ηόμοιρα in the Revenue 
Papyrus. About Λ. D. i. On the verso part of an account. 

808• Height 2>^ cm. A list of abstracts (διαστ/3ώ(;ίαΓα) of contracts for loan ; 
cf 274 and P. Oxy. II. p. 176. One column, numbered at the top ρμΐ, is 
practically complete, and there are parts of another in three separate 
fragments. The first entry is \(\v Παλώσίΐ* δμο\(ογα) "Αρπαλοί "Έ,ρμωνΙοί 

τον . . . .^ ovs απ' Όζν(^ρΰγ)(ων) πο'λίωί ΥΙανσίρα ΥΙίτσίριο^ άπο tj';(s) αν{τη^) 

κωμηί Παλώσεωί Θμο(ισ6φώ) τοτ;(αρχία3) άττίχ^ίΐν) τταρ' αντοΰ άργν{ρ[ου) (δραχμάϊ) 
σι κίφαλ(αιου) hs ΐbά(^vfισev) αντωι bia τον ev Trj av^rrj) κώ /xj; γραφίου τω {ΐ'€σ(Γώτι) 
(ίΤίΐ) μηνΐ Νερωί'ίίωι Σΐβαστωι. (Second hand) ■ηθ((τισται) μη{ν\) Νίρωνύωι 
Σΐβαστωι ιδ, ά•ΐΓθ'δ(οσΐ5) λ [/n]j;(rus) Nepcoretou του ια (erous), ΐνχ( ) Κ(λν(μΐνη?). 


A marginal note (probably by the second hand) has ] . ττοχ{ ) ίι• άτ;ο{γραφΐ) 
ι (erovs). The other entries refer to loans ev Σίφώι, L• Κ(σμονχ{ΐΐ) or h Ύήα, 
and follow the same formula with similar later additions. The month 
after ι)θ({ησται), (which is once written ηθίτίσ(ταί)), is uniformly that in 
which the contract was drawn up. Otlis Κλαιίδίο? is mentioned, and the 
papyrus was probably written in the reign of Nero (λ. d. 54-68). 43 lines 
in Col. i, besides the marginal notes. 

809. 167 χ6•4 cm. Ends of 22 lines from the beginning of a contract drawn 
up before the agoranomi for the sale(?) of a female slave called Ύΐχωσον$. 
Dated in the reign of Trajan (a.d. 98-117). 

810. 14-6 X 10 cm. Proposal {(πώίχομαι, μισθώσασθαϊ) addressed to Claudia 
Ptolema by Dioscorus for the lease of 3 arourae of βασιλική yij near Sinaru 
in the κληροί of Xenon for the nineteenth year of Hadrian (a.d. 134—5). 
The land, being ίκ μίρονί iv άβρόχου (1, -χω), was to be irrigated by the lessee 
at his own expense and cultivated χόρτ(ύ els κο-πην και θΐρινην ίπινομην 
at the total rent of 120 drachmae, the δημόσια being paid by the lessor. 
Cf. 730, the formula of which is almost identical. Nearly complete, but 
broken at the bottom. Title on the verso. 27 lines. 

811. 7-7 X 9-4 cm. 8 lines from the beginning of a letter from Πελλυ to 
Ant[as ?] beginning και τ6 ττρωτον ίγρ[α-ψά σο]: ευχάριστων Έρμίττπον (1. -ττω) ^τι 
■ηάντα μοι τιού ets τχ]ν σην καταλογην (cf. 787), και τα νΰν (ϊ σοι φαΓιν(]ται γράψον 
αντω. . . Address on the verso. About A.D. i. 

812. 10.2 X 8-3 cm. Fragment of a letter containing in a postscript (1. 5) ττεπί- 
ασται Αοκρίων [, (1. 6) ρικαρίί ΰπο Αονκίου (ΰπ. Λ. above the line) ηκονσα γαρ 
δ[τ]ι [, (1. 7) την λωρΐκαν αυτόν [. Dated in the twenty-fifth year of Augustus, 
Athur (B.C. 5). 8 lines. 

813. 15x117 cm. Conclusion of a letter in which the writer requests that 
a cargo of barley may be sent to him. About A.D. i. 7 lines. 

814• 21-5 XI 1-6 cm. Fragment of an account in two columns. Among the 
entries are ττακτωνίταΐί . . . από &(λβωι . . ., Κί5ϊΌί Πτολψαίου των αττο Eiepye- 
r[i6os . . . Written in the fourth year (probably of Tiberius, i.e. A.D. 17-8). 
15 incomplete lines in Col. ii. 

815. 27'9Xii-3 cm. Fragment of an account containing names and sums of 
money arranged under different dates, the beginnings of lines being lost. 
The proper name Όνθονόβΐΐ (dative) occurs. About A.D. i. 19 lines. 

816• Fr. (λ) ΐ4•3χΐ3•ι cm. Three fragments of an account containing names 
and sums of money. ]ί 'Ισιδώρου και Ίησοΰί occurs, ίο incomplete lines 
in Fr. (a). On the verso part of another account mentioning the twenty- 
fifth year (of Augustus, i.e. B.C. 6-5). 



817• 9-7 X 20 cm. 5 nearly complete lines from the top of a column containing 
a list of names and sums of money, a larger and a smaller, the second being 
probably interest, e.g. ].δ( ) δια Άιτίρωτοϊ \οκρητίου Παχών β (δραχμαΐ) 
ρν [ΐιραχμαι) η. The twenty-first year (of Augustus, i.e. B.C. 10-9) is men- 
tioned. On the verso part of another account. 

818• 6<S X 9 cm. Ends of the first 7 lines of a contract dated in the thirty- 
fourth year of Augustus (A. D. 4-5), written in a semi-uncial hand. 

819. S.6 X IO-6 cm. Conclusion of a letter concerning the sale of wine or oil, 
ending τά δί τιροκίίμίΐ'α x{oas) δ ■π(•πρασ{σ}θαί δι' ίμοΰ ανά δραχ(μάί) nivTf, τα 
κορι(α?) (Κ ζραχ{μων) ίξ (τριωβόΚον). About A.D. Ι. 6 lines. 

820. ιο•2 χ 17-9 cni• End of a letter containing the date (twenty-seventh year 
of Augustus, Tubi i[.], i.e. B.C. 3) and a po.stscript of 7 lines, giving various 

821. 1 15 X 6-2 cm. Ends of the first 9 lines of a letter to a daughter. About 
A.D. I. 

822. 54x13 cm. Beginning of a letter from Lysimachus to his brother. 
«5 τΐράσσΐΐν takes the place of χαίρων. About A.D. i. 4 lines. 

823. 24 X 10• 2 cm. Fragment of the conclusion of a lease of land near 
Μ(ρμ4ρθ[α ? Cf. 277. Dated in the twenty-fifth year of Augustus, Phaophi 
(b. C. 6). Written on the verso, the recto being blank. 13 incomplete lines. 

824• A•^ X 2-5 cm. Fragment containing parts of the first 10 lines of a contract 
dated in the sole reign of Ptolemy (Alexander the god) Philometor 
(B.C. 101-88). 

825. 7-8 X 15-9 cm. Beginning of an account of which the heading is Αημητρίω 
■ και ^Αμμωνίί^ και rolj συν avTols μισθωταΐί ζΐνικηί ττρακτορΐίαί τιάρα Σαρα7Γίωΐ'ο[ί] 

■πραγματίντοΰ Μί'μφίωί Μ[€]μφ[€]ίτου. Xo'yos λημματοί και άναΧ.(ϋμ[α]τοί μηνών 
τριών &ττ[ο] Φαρμοΰθι ?ωϊ Παννι τοΰ e [(erous) . . . The beginnings of lines of 
a second column are preserved, containing a list of entries each commencing 
with 7r(a/)u). On the importance of this papyrus for the ξ(νικη -ηρακτορίία 
see 712. introd. Second century. On the verso in a different hand (?) 
parts of the first 6 lines of a document mentioning the ίγκτησΐων βιβλιο- 
φνΚάκίον, perhaps the draft of a declaration. 

826. 9'5xii"9 cm. Fragment of the conclusion of a notice sent to some 
official, apparently an announcement of a death. Lines i sqq. Δβυ/χ[οϊ] 
ΧαρίΓ . ( ) yfpbios [μΐτηλλαξΐ ? τον] βίον τώι ίνΐστωτι μηνΐ Ύνβι τοΰ bevTepo[v) 
{καΐ) τρίακο[σ]τοΰ eTovs Καίσαροϊ. διό ά^ιώι tav φαίνηται καταχωρισθηναι, τοντο 

[ iv] Γοΐί Ttapa σοι βιβλίοίί ... Α. D. 3• 9 lines. On the verso the 

beginning of an account. 

827• 135 X 6-8 cm. Part of a list of names. AboutA. D. i. 18 lines. 


828. 5-8x10 cm. Parts of 6 lines of a petition concerning the measurements 
of a piece of land. Early first century B. c. On the verso parts of 6 much 
effaced lines of another document. 

829. i2.3X9'3cm. Part of a letter from SwyiVijy to his sister. About A.D.i. 
13 lines. 

830. 15-3 X 5-6 cm. End of 17 lines of an official letter, enclosing other 
documents. Phaophi 28 of the twenty-first year (of Philometor probably, 
i.e. B.C. 155) is mentioned. Written across the fibres. On the verso part of 
a line. 

831. Fr. (a) 61 χ 9-2 cm. Two fragments of a contract beginning erovy ζ 
[. . . . kv\ ^0^{vpvy\u>v) ΤΓΟ(λ€ΐ) τί;? @ηj3'^a'ώ^os). όμο]\ο•/ίΙ \ίτττίν[ηί . .]^ώι•ακτοϊ 
Μακεδώι/ των Scoyyii'dptos Έίζων Ήρακλείδι/^ι .... The sovereign is Ptolemy 
Soter II, and the date therefore B.C. i ii-o. 8 lines. 

832. 14x21-3 cm. Parts of two columns of a taxing-list of some kind. 
Col. ii begins yii'erat to τι^άν}) ίττικίψαλαίου, Τίώτοϊ αρσενικά, ρμ, Οηλνκά ριζ, 
/[σνζ.] ΒΎ\σατο{ί) . . The fifteenth year of Augustus (B.C. 16-5) is mentioned 
in Col. i. In the blank space between the columns a second hand has 
written Zev μάκαρ αθανάτων, and a third the beginning of an acknowledge- 
ment of a payment at the Serapeum of Oxyrhynchus. On the verso traces 
of two other documents. 

833. 11-8x16 cm. Beginning of an official report concerning ήμιολίαι 
στί€ρμάτων. Lines 1—7 σννάγονται άττο ημωΚία5 (ητ(ρμ[άτων] Όζυρνγ\[ίτου)' 
των ittb των κατά τόπον σιτολ[όγων] ωμολο(γημίνων) κί\ορη(γησ-θαι) eis κ\η- 
ρουχ( ) αϊ y . . [. . .] avfi{ ) (ττνρον) aoeb', δι(αφορου) μr\L•h', λ[ο(ηίαϊ)] σκ(^ς')^• 
άΚληί ημιολίαί' των (τημαινομίνων ύ[πό] των του νομού τοτ!θγραμμα{τίων) πλΐΐωι 
κΐχορϊ\[•γησθαι ... Cf. Ρ. Tebt. Ι. pp. 226-7. About A.D. ι. 8 lines. 

834. 4'5 ^ 9'^ cni- Conclusion of a letter dated in the twenty-sixth year of 
Augustus, Mesore (B.C. 4), mentioning a voyage «iy Όμβονί. 6 lines. 

835. 19-8 X ia-8 cm. An offer to purchase confiscated land at Pela, addressed 
to Gaius Sep[p]ius Rufus ; cf. 721, which has the same formula. The 
purchase price, which was to be paid ίπΐ την iv τω Σ[α]ρ[ατ!ίίω Ιη^μοσίαν 
[τρατίίζαν, was not less than 100 drachmae. The earlier portion is much 
mutilated. For the conclusion see 721. 14-5, note. About A.D. 13. 
14 lines. 

836. 13-5 X 1 2-8 cm. Loan of 32 artabae τνροΰ στΐρΐον from Theoxenus to two 
Πί'ρσαι [τη? (i!iyov]i\s and a third person. Lines 6 sqq. ά-ol•ότωσav δ« oi 
hf.l•avuσμivo<, Θΐοξίνω τά$ τριάκοντα buo άρτάβαί των πυρών iv μηνΐ Ώαννι του 
(κκαώΐκατου «τουί «ν Όζνρΰγχ^ων ττολίΐ ττυρον arepeov νΐον καθαρον liboXov μ4τρψ 
Τίτραχοινίκω σγζ^ο^ρανομικω κατασΓΐΊσαντ€ί toIs ίδιου &^']ηΚώμασι κ.τ.λ. For 

S 2 


μίτρον αγορανομικού cf. 740. 17, note, and for the formula cf. the late 
Ptolemaic loans from Gebelcn, e.g. P. Grenf. I. 23. First century B.C.; the 
sixteenth year refers to Neos Dionysus (B.C. 66-5) or Augustus (B.C. 15-4). 
Nearly complete, but broken at the beginning. 30 lines. The papyrus 
has been gummed on to two similar documents, of which parts of a few 
lines are preserved. 

837. ι8•6 X 15-5 cm. Will of Apollos daughter of Paesis, leaving her property 
at Kerkemounis jointly to Didymus son of Dioigenes], probably a son 
by her first marriage, and to the offspring of her present marriage with 
Apollos son of Ophclas, with provisions for the φίρνη and -παράφίρνα of 
a daughter and for the guardianship of the children. Dated in the second 
year of Hadrian (a. D. J 17-8). Cf. 489-95. Written across the fibres. 30 
lines, of which only the beginnings are preserved. 

838• 30'5 X 9'5 cm. Lease of land at the Ήρακλίίδου (-ποίκίοΐ' from Diogenes 
to two persons, with the signature of the lessor. The formula follows that 
of e.g. 499. The conclusion is της ίπινομης ovayjs τοΰ Διογΐΐ'υνί. κυρία η 
μίσθωσα. Dated in the twenty-first year of Hadrian, Thoth (Λ. D. 136). 
Incomplete. 52 lines. 

839. 27-5 X 17•! cm. Letter from Eutychides to his mother, the earlier part 
describing an accident to a boat. Lines 6 sqq. ώί (νανάγησΐν κατά Πτολίμαίδα 
καΐ ηλθ( μοι γνμνύς K€KivbvveVKUis. fvOfcas ήγόρασα αυτώί στολιμ: Α μαχαφοψυρυϊ 
is mentioned, apparently as the bearer of the letter. Early first century A. D. 
Incomplete. 26 lines. 


Addenda and Corrigenda to Oxyrhynchus Papyri Part II 
and Fayum Towns and their Papyri. 

For the literature connected with these volumes see the successive bibliographies of 
papyri by Wilcken in the Archiv, and by de Ricci in the Revue dcs audes grecijues. 
After an examination of the articles in question and a comparison witli the papyri, we give 
here a list of those suggestions which both affect our transcriiitions of the texts and 
are satisfactory. Proposed alterations which are unsuitable, or are based upon alternatives 
mentioned in our notes, or in the case of literary texts are confined to the supplements 
of lacunae, are generally ignored. Where the source of the correction is not indicated, 
it is our own. 


Part. II. 211. 34. ί[ραμω]ΐ' for a[ jw (Weil) is possible. 

214. Recto 7. The vestige of a letter before a[ is too slight to afford any clue. The 
same remark applies to the two letters after ^t in 1. 15. 

18. Possibly ΐ'οΐυσοί' (χιιυ (Ludwich). 

Verso II. Possibly ofs ff]fXaiylo[f (Piatt), but it is not certain that a letter is lost after eXa, 
and the following vestiges suit e better than o. Perhaps iftKayi ιζων (Boiling). 

12. t[. . .^f|.] . Of : the doubtful r may be π, but neither jr[i7rtj(7-[/ie]w>r (Piatt) nor η•[ίπο]ί[0]ωι 
(Boiling) seem to suit. 

13. li . . \oy : the first letter is more like ν than μ. 

14. 1. ασ[Γυ^φ(λικτοί (Ludwich) at the end of the line. 

215. i. 28. ωσιν should very likely be read in place of θηο-ιν, but there is not room for 
[ιι•γα]θο[ν νο'ωσι (Fraccaroli). 

216. i. 2. λην is a misprint for λι;$•. 

218. The position in Col. ii conjecturally assigned by us to Fr. (c) may be considered 
certain. Line 26 is pav (r[v^f'(pei[ (or, as Cronert suggests, (πιφ](ρ(ΐ), 27 vnep τ[?)γ] 

ολτ/ί [, 2 8 Ap;(fX[aoV και Ζην[ο8οτος (cf. OUr note ad loc), 29 perhaps [(x toisI ntpi τάφου {ei> 

Tots Cronert). Fragment (1^) probably joins Fr. (a) so that F"r. (a) i. 18 and Fr. {i) 1 
form one line, i.e. Ίζωντα τη-. Fr. (e) probably belongs to the bottom of Fr. (a) ii. 

219. II. λιθο[ΐ! κι]σαι (i.e. Keia-in) (Piatt) is possible. 

17. For fpyi(/v] τροφην Wilamowitz suggests ορνι^ιο\τροφιν. θ in place of ο is possible, but 
the first letter is more like e than o. The η of τροφην is certain. 

220. A newly-found fragment, apparently from the top of a column, contains the 
beginnings of two lines τν/χίΐ[ν and μα• y[. Cf 221 ad fin. 

X. 16. The penultimate letter before αι/α[ is or κ. 

xi. 20. f7r[i σ\ηχον (Leo) is possible, but fi]f π[ω1ί for the preceding letters is unsuitable. 

221. i. 1 . 1. οΓί for re (Ludwich). 

2. τα ^apvTov\a (Ludwich) is not very suitable. 
17. To\v before hwppovp (Ludwich) is possible. 

21. Possibly arrp[0fi)yfi (Ludwich), but the doubtful letter is more like η or t. 

ii. 3. 1. v(]Kpott (Allen). 

9. 1. TcXcvray [ (Wilamowitz). 

iii. 2. The traces of a letter before σιλαν suit ω or 1 better than v. The papyrus has 


SifXio]!-, i.e. the first hand wrote 8ic\ov which was corrected to S(f\uv (Diels). 

3. 1. Tpapfs for y Mapa (Diels). 
6. 1. TrXfio for fnXeio (Diels). 

23—4. 1. (Cf κ I [ησο ίίλα]ι/το (Lud\\ich). 

25. [πτ]ωτ7;ΐ' (Ludwich) is possible. 
26-7. 1. yfyfovf iCfi; (Ludwich). 

iv. 18. The vestiges before m are too faint to afford a clue, 
vi. II. φαιν^ηται ο yovos (Ludwich) is possible. 

vii. 5. πα'ρ] Κυακ\ρ(οντί (Piatt, Ludwich) cannot be read, but ουτωί δί και kvwlpfwv is 

15. 1. ταντην for raff . . v. 

ix. 1 . 1. aavras [ . . .]ya[. •^fac-'y for σαν rai. . .] . «:a[. .1 . πησ[. 

9. 5f η(ρ^ησ\ηί for δ (ΐτορ[£\θ\η! (Ludwich) is just possible, but the letter following η is 

more like ο than t. 
15. 1. Kpava MfXi^aiO^s for κραναν (W^iko\ (Wilamowitz). 
xii. 10. The vestiges on either side of ν are too slight to give a clue. 

26. irov might be read instead of των. 


xiv. 25. xi at the end of the hne is extremely doubtful. There are more probably two 

26. στίνοιιμίψί] γ?;ί (Ludwich) is possible. 

xvi. 20-1. ί]|πι v(uiv (Ludwich) is possible, but the π is extremely doubtful. 

xvii. 12. (^ αφη (Ludwich) is possible. 

Fr. (a) 5. ίίθην\οκ\η! (Cronert) is possible. 

The beginnings of 1 2 lines are contained on a new fragment which the recto (cf. 220) 
seems to show is from near ihe bottom of a column, while 1. 9 νπ aaios (cf. //. .\xi. 318-21) 
indicates that it belongs to the column lost before Col. xvi. 

[.]....[ τα ποταμ[ 

a . οσ . [.] . [ τοναπγΐ 

ογτω[ νπ aaios [ 

10 μαί (Κ τ[ 


τον 8ia[ 

5 {■"Υρίοντ[ 

[• .]?λ«έ[ ^-^ ""• ^ _ 

222. ΐ7• οι/(τωί) Kparrjt (Diels) can be read. 

230. 32. ιη^τουμην is a misprint for (ζη\τονμην. 

282. 2. Insert η after ώίκασθ[η. 

237. iv. 8. 1. (κλιγομίνην (Gradenwitz). 

17. 1. τω ΆσκΧηπιύδη [άπ]ρ8ι&ωκ(ναί (Grad.). 

21. 1. τοϋ yap Άσΐ(\η\πιάο'ρυ τω kS (e^it) [<ΐ1παιτοΟ[ι/]τθί (Grad.). 

26. 1. αρμολογήματα γίγινησθαί μ[(] (or /^[οι]) (Grad.). 

30. 1. T^s Se μητ[ρωα! οΰσι'αί] (Grad.). 

33• <πισταμ(νο[ν] (Grad.) is possible. 
V. 7. {ου} is a mistake for or (Grad.). 

7—8. 1. κατα\άβ7]ς u^iov in (μ€ άι/άττ^μψον, 
l6. I. άρ[α7Γθ]μπή! ήξίον (Blass). 

34. 1. δια before χρηματισμών (Grad.). 
38. ]. 5ύι>ασ{6]αί (Grad.). 

42. 1• μη [ά'μξληθήναι, 

vi. 18. 1. ovTivos (Blass). 

21. 1. ατΓ ί'μοΰ for άπλώζ. 

24• 1. ίττΐ τη! μ[η^^τρφα! ουσίας βου\ηθ(ί(Γη συνίυδ, (Grad.). 

25. 1. άπαλ\[αττ . . . (Grad.). 

31. 1. το ... . ίΓασία[ι] €Ϊ ουκ (ξόν. 

νϋ. 22. 1. ΰπό λοίπη! (i.e. λύπη!) for νπο\οίιτηί (Wilamowitz). 

23. 1. ήννκίναι for TjKovKfvai (Wilam.). 

26-7• (veyKavTO! is a mistake for iviyKavra (Wilam.). 

40. 1. μ(τ' ά'λλα for /ΐ€τάλλα (Grad.). 

viii. 24—5. 1• Toif γαμουμίν\αΐ!\ δια το κα\ (Grad., G— Η.). 

2 7- 1. ΰπό for ToO. ly (referring to Trajan's reign) can be read, as Stein suggested, for 
κγ, but cf. 712. 7, where a Sulpicius Similis is mentioned certainly long after Trajan's 
time and perhaps in the reign of Commodus. 


255. 16. 1. [f]| [ujyioOf for [. . . .]τίω5. 
265. 39. 1. ί^ίυμάτων. 

269. ii. 2. 1. \μ\ηκ(>ώ for [Μ]<ίκρω (Wilam.). 

270. 25. A line has dropped out of the text. 1. κα\ ωνημίνης «/mi/mii «^ ίιμΊ.η(ΐ rais ΐπΐ τϋ αΰτϊ) 
κατοιίκικης και ώvημfpηί (Is κατυικίαν κ.τ.λ, (Goodspeed). 

273. 5• 1. '""''' ί'Ρω^/ίαίωΐ' ΐ^θη νττ<> κ.τ.λ. 

8. The letters following ου might be read as του. 

274. 22. 1. iViKaTa/3oX(i';t) for ίπικατακοΚ{ονθιιϋν) (Wessely). 
24-5. [ΐμβα&(ν\σ(ω{ (Wessely) is possible. 

277. 9—13. 1. Ciiom\alov η t\j)^s yrjs [un-joXoyiiTaji αυτουγ . . .}κ . [.]x | ονκιωί ημισν, 

[βιβαίιούτωι 8e Αι[ονύσιθ! την μίσθωσιν] | πάσηι \β](ίβαν^ώσ(ΐ, β(βαιου'^ίνηί δ( α ΰτης κυμιζίτωσαι/ | 
κηιρως τα \'^€]νημα(τίη ([ηι] ras πίμι Π'Jiμιv ν^πα[ρχονσας^ \ αλωι (1. ίϊλωί) κ.τ.λ. 

286. 19. 1. άττοδωσ(ΐν (i.e. άποδώσικ) for άπο8ώσ(ΐν (Wilam.). 

287. 7. 1. πάντα for πίίΐ'τ(α). 

289. 3• The abbreviation beginning with a which recurs in this pajiyrus is probably 

σν[μ)πα{ν) ; of 574. 
298. 42. γ is a misprint for v. 

Fayum Toiuns and their Papyri. 

2. iii. 16. δ (Κκίύν [τ]ρ[ι]χπ for σί . . ^i|/[. .1 . f.J . α (Weil) is possible. 
23. ![στ]αβ for [.] . . αθ (Weil) is possible. 

32. 1. αιγδοι» for aiy^rj^v (Weil). 

8. 10. [f] is a misprint for [τ^Ι. 

10. This fragment has been identified by Plasberg and Ferrini as coming from Ulpian, Lib. 

xlv. {Dig. xxix. I. i). 3. 1. proferri for pro/essi. 6. 1. er^ga for a^sc. 10. 1. miliUs 
f^estamcnla. 11. \. facia nt for emc\. 

11. 22. 1. r^o] »:^αλJά)f Εχο» (Wilcken). 

20. introd. p. 117. 1. 5. CjwaTor (de Ricci) for ]τατοΓ is possible. The edict is assigned by 
Dessau to Julian instead of Severus Alexander. 
6. « ri (Wilamowitz) can be read in place of ewt. 
8. (ir) before και ταύτα is corrected by Wilamowitz to ΐτι. 
15. ίξ (ίτιάντα^ν κρατΰν | χρημάτων (Wilamowitz) is better than our ΐξ άπάντα{ν I χρημα- 


23. introd. 1. Ύαμαί(ω{ς) for Ύαμανσω( ) (Smyly) ; cf the modern Tainia. 

23 (fl). 5—6. 1. Ka/SufffiTou . . . Μίτ;;λιτ[ουΙ 

27. 32. 1. γι/ωρι'ίω for . τσιρίζω (Wessely). 

42(a). 15. 1. -^ραμματ[ικον) for ^ραμματ^ίωί); cf. P. Tebt. I. p. 28. 

46. 3. 1. π /jo? for . . ■y( ). 

48. 3. 1. πρόγο(ΐΌί) 'stepson' (Wilcken). 

50. 5. 1. hpop(o\i) for Δώμ(ατο5) (Wilcken). 

67-76. 1. τ€Τ€λ(ώι/Γ)ται) for τ€Τί'λ(ίστίΐΛ (Wilcken). 

73. I. 1. άντ(σνμβοΚ{τ^σ() Ιίαησίί τ(λ{ωνησύμ(νοί) (Wilcken). Similarly in 71. I. I uvre- 

96. 1. A.D. 143 for A. D. 122. 

110. I. 1. Βίλλι^ΐΌΕ (Wilamowitz). 

15. 1. ποτ[ισ]άτωσακ for λο;ι[σ]άτωσαι» (WilamOwitz). 


112. 4. 1. hiβu\^τ\p}ovs■, cf. Γ. Amh. II. 91. 11 note. 

116. 3-4. 1. φά||ν]μουί for φά\ρουί (Wilaniowitz). 

138. I. KpfivfToi = KflivfTf (VVilamowitz). 

2-14 is probably written across the fibres of the recto, not on the verso. 

284 is dated in the loth year of Antoninus (λ. d. 146). 


A revised text of Part III, no. 405 (Irenaeus, Contra Haercses, iii. 9). 

The seven fragments of an early Christian work published as 405 were identified 
by Dr. J. Armitage Robinson as belonging to the lost Greek original of Irenaeus' treatise 
Conlra Hacreses, which is extant only in a Latin translation, and when fitted together 
correspond to part of iii. 9. A provisional reconstruction was given by him in Athcnccum., 
Oct. 24, 1903 ; cf. our note, ibid., Nov. 7, and that of Dr. Rendel Harris, ibid., Nov. 14. 
We now print a revised text of the whole. The chief interest of the discovery lies in the 
resulting correspondence between the readings of Irenaeus' quotation from Matt. iii. 16-7 
in 11. 23-9 and those of the Codex Bezae. The Latin translation there has the ordinary 
reading Hie est {filius incus), whereas the original agrees with D in having (1. 28) σύ f[t in 
place of oirds ίστιν, and a variant peculiar to D(ir for ώσίί before πίριστίραι-) occurs in 1. 25 
(Lat. quasi). ' These two unsuspected coincidences between Irenaeus and D, of which the 
one is misrepresented, the other inevitably obscured by the Latin translator, indicate that 
the extent of the agreement between Irenaeus' quotations and the text of the Codex Bezae 
is even larger than what the imperfect evidence of the Latin translation has led critics to 
suppose' {Aihen., Nov. 7). 

Col. i. Col. ii. 

[....].[.]..[ xpt [ \ιβ\αν\ον Se οτι θ: ο 

[στον] σου [ωμοσΐν icy τ]ω .^[αυ [και γΐ']ωστοί [ev τη Ιουδαία 

[fiS α]ληθ[(ΐα]ν κα[ι ο]ν μη αθΐ 20 [γΐν^μΐνοί κ[αι ΐμφανηί tois 

[τ]τ][σ(]ι [α]υτοΐ' ΐκ κ[αρ]7Γου τηί μη ζητουσιν [αυτόν και €πι 

5 κοιλιαί σου θησ[ομ]αι (τη θρο του βαπτ[ισμου φησι Ματβαι 

[νου σου κα]ι 7Γ[αλ£ί']• γνωστός > oy. αν(ω[-)^θησαν οι ουρανοί 

[fv τη Ιουδαία ο 6s κ]αι (γ(νη > και €ΐδ€ν τ[ο πνα του θυ κατά 

[θη ev ΐψηνη ο το]ποί αυτού 25 > βαινον toy ττ[(ριστ€ραν και 


\και το κατοίκητηρ]ιον αυτού > ΐρχομΐνον e[iy αυτόν και 

ΙΟ [ίν Σίων (ίί ον]^ και ο αυ > ιδού φωι^^η €Κ των ουρανών 

[τοί Os ο υπο των] τΓροφη[τ]ώ > λβγονσα συ (\ι ο ΰς μου ο aya 

[κηρυσσομζνο]^ και υπο του > πητο? [ΐ]ν ω [(υδοκησα ου 
[ευαγγελίου .]ταγγίλ[λ]ο/ί€ 3° y^P '''OTe ο χ? [κατφη eis 

[vos και ο ΰ? e/f] παρθίν[ου] τον Ιν ουδ α.[Χλοί μΐν ο ^y 

15 [ ] ου και το [ασ- αλλοί 5e I[s άλλα ο λογοί του 

[τρον Ησαΐα! μ(ν ον]τωί [e θν ο σωτ[ηρ πάντων και κυ 

[προφητίυσΐν ανατ€]λ[€ΐ ρΐ(υω[ν ουρανού και γη9 

13. (παγγ(\\ομ(ΐιο! would be expected {annunliaius Lat.), but the letter before ayy is 
more like τ or γ ihan π. 

14-5. The Latin has et huius filius qui ex fructu ventris David, id csi ex David 
virgine ei E?nma7iuel, cuius el slellam &c. The papyrus version is much shorter. 

16. For Ησιιιπί instead of Βαλααμ cf. Rendel Harris, Athcn., Nov. 14. 

31. The Latin has ΐ7ΐ Jesum, neque alius qiiidcm Chrislus. The supposed ν of Ik is 
more like η, but it is impossible to read Τψι, and for the omission of ij in the earliest con- 
tractions of Ίι/σοΟί cf. e. g. 1. 


List of Oxyrhyiulms and Fayihn Papyri distributed. 

We give here a list of the papyri published in Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Parts I-IIl, and 
Fayum Towtis and Ihcir Papyri, which have been presented to different museums and 
libraries. Those papyri which do not appear have for various reasons not yet been dis- 
tributed and are still at Queen's College, Oxford. Where ascertainable, we have adtled the 
present reference numbers in the catalogues of the several institutions to which the papyri 
now belong. The following abbreviations are employed : — 

Am. = America. The papyri under this heading have only recently been sent to America, 

and details of the distribution are not yet forthcoming. 
B. M. = British Museum. The numbers refer to the catalogue of papyri. 
Belfast = Belfast Museum. 

Bod. = Bodleian Library, Oxford. The references are to the band-list of MSS. 
Bolton = Chadwick Museum, Bolton, Lanes. 
Bradfield = Library of Bradficld College, Berks. 
Bristol — Bristol Museum. 



Brussels = IMusees Royaux, Bmssels, Belgium. 

Cairo = Museum of Antiquities, Cairo. The numbers are those of the inventory ; cf. our 

Catalogue of Greek Papyri in the Cairo Museum. 
Camb. = Cambridge University Library. The numbers refer to the ' Additions.' 
Chicago = Haskell Museum, University of Chicago, U.S.A. The papyri are all numbered 

'Accession 33.' 
Clifton = Library of Clifton College, Bristol. 
Columbia = Library of Columbia University, New York, U.S.A. 
Dublin = Library of Trinity College, Dublin. 
Dundee = Library of University College, Dundee. 
Edinburgh = Library of Edinburgh University. 
Eton = Library of Eton College, Windsor. 
Glasgow = Library of Glasgow University. 
Graz = Library of Graz University, Austria. 
Haileybury = Library of Haileybury College, Hertford. 
Hamilton = Hamilton College, U.S.A. 
Harrow = Library of Harrow School. 

Harvard = Semitic Museum of Harvard University, Mass., U.S.A. 
Holloway = Library of HoUoway College, Egham. 

Johns Hopkins = Library of Johns Hopkins University, Maryland, U.S.A. 
Liverpool = Liverpool Free Public Museum. 
Melbourne = Library of Melbourne University, Victoria. 
Owen's Coll. = Museum of Owen's College, Manchester. 
Pennsyl. = Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. 
Princeton = Library of Princeton University, N.J., U.S.A. 
Repton = Library of Repton School, Burton-on-Trent. 
Rugby = Library of Rugby School. 

Smiths. = Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., U.S.A. 
St. Andrews = Library of St. Andrews University. 
Toronto = Toronto University, Canada. 
\'assar = Library of Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, U.S.A. 
Vict. = Museum of Victoria University, Toronto, Canada. 
Winchester = Library of Winchester College. 
Yale = Library of Yale University, U.S.A. 

Oxyrhynchiis Papyri. 

\. Bod. Gr. th. e. 7 


2. Pennsyl. 2746. 

3. Chicago. 

4. Camb. 4027. 

5. Bod. Gr. th./. 9 


6. Camb. 4028. 

7. B. M. 739. 

8. Harvard 22 11. 

9. Dublin Pap. B. i. 

10. Yale. 

11. B. ΛΙ. 740 

12. Camb. 4029. 

13. Columbia. 

14. Edinburgh. 

15. Glasgow. 

16. Pennsyl. 2747. 

17. Johns Hopkins. 

18. B. M. 741. 

19. Princeton 0132 
692. 19. 

20. B. M. 742. 

21. Chicago. 

22. B. M. 743- 

23. Camb. 4030. 

24. Yale. 

25. Johns Hopkins. 

26. B. M. 744. 

27. Chicago. 

28. St. Andrews. 

29. Pennsyl. 2748. 

30. B. M. 745. 

31. Camb. 4031. 

32. Bod. Lat. class. 

c. 3 (P). 

35. Pennsyl. 2749. 

36. Bod. Gr. class. 

d. 60 (P). 

37. B. M. 746. 

38. Cairo 10002. 

39. Cairo loooi. 

40. Camb. 4032. 

41. Cairo 10073. 



42. Β. Μ. 747. 

43. Β. Μ. 748. 

44. Β. Μ. 749• 

45. Pennsyl. 2750. 

46. Harvard ?2ΐ2. 

47. Β. Μ. 750• 

48. Harrow. 

49. Dublin Pap. Ε. ι. 

50. Dublin Pap. F. ι . 

51. Edinburgh. 

52. Glasgow. 

53. Β. Μ. 751. 

54. Chicago. 

55 (3 copies). Camb." 


56. Camb. 4036. 

57. Johns Hopkins. 

58. B. M. 752. 

59. B. M. 753. 

60. Dublin Pap. D. i. 

61. Camb. 4037. 

62. Bod. Gr. class. 
d. 61 (P). 

63. Cairo 10007. 

64. Princeton 0132. 
692. 64. 

65. Pennsyl. 2751. 

66. Camb. 4038. 

67 (2 copies). B. M. 


68. Owen's Coll. 

69. Chicago. 

70. Vassar. 

71. B. M. 755. 

72. Glasgow. 
72(a). Chicago. 

73. Owen's Coll. 

74. Hamilton. 

75. Chicago. 

76. Camb. 4039. 

77. Dublin Pap. D. 2. 

79. B. M. 756. 

80. Winchester. 

81. B. M. 757. 

82. B. M. 758. 

83. Rugby. 
83(a). Repton. 

84. B. M. 759. 

85. B. M. 760. 

86. Camb. 4040. 

88. Pennsyl. 2752. 

89. Cairo 10008. 

90. B. Vi. 761. 

91. HoUoway. 

92. Harvard 2213. 

93. B. M. 762. 

94. B. M. 763. 

95. Holloway. 

96. Camb. 4041. 

97. Edinburgh. 

98. B. M. 764. 

99. B. M. 765. 

100. Edinburgh. 

101. Chicago. 

102. B. M. 766. 

103. B. I\I. 767. 

104. Camb. 4042. 

105. Dublin Pap. C.I. 
lOG. Chicago. 

107. Cairo 10006. 

108. Pennsyl. 2753. 

109. Harvard 2214. 

110. Eton. 

111. Clifton. 

112. Harrow. 

113. Cairo looi i. 

114. Eton. 

115. Yale. 

116. Clifton. 

117. Chicago. 

118. Camb. 4043. 

119. Bod. Gr. class. 
/ 66 (P). 

120. Haileybury. 

121. Chicago. 

122. B. M. 768. 

123. Cairo 10014. 

124. Winchester. 

125. Cairo 10062. 

126. Cairo 10085. 

127. Cairo 100S4. 

128. Cairo 10121. 

129. Cairo 10082. 

130. Cairo 10072. 

131. Cairo 10063. 

132. Cairo 10133. 

133. Cairo 10056. 

134. Cairo 10053. 

135. Cairo looiS. 

136. Cairo 10103. 

137. Cairo 10034. 

138. Cairo loioo. 

139. Cairo 10049. 

140. Cairo 10057. 

141. Cairo 10096. 

142. B. M. 769. 

143. B. M. 770. 

144. Cairo 10071. 

145. Cairo 10066. 

146. Cairo 10076. 

147. Cairo 10074. 

148. Cairo 10075. 

149. Cairo 10045. 

150. Cairo 10051. 

151. Cairo 10094. 

152. Cairo 10048. 

153. Cairo 10044. 

154. Cairo 10102. 

155. Cairo 10020. 

156. Cairo 10035. 

157. Cairo 10042. 

158. Cairo 10043. 
159-63. Chicago. 

164. B. M. 771. 

165. Camb. 4044. 

166. Bod. Gr. class. 

c. 47 (P). 

167. Bod. Gr. class. 

/• 67 (P)• 

168. Pennsyl. 2754. 

169. Vassar. 

170. Harvard 2215. 

171. Camb. 4045. 

172. Melbourne Pap. 


173. St. Andrews. 

174. Johns Hopkins. 

175. Bristol. 

176. Brussels. 

177. Bod. Gr. class. 

d. 62 (P). 

178. Hamilton. 

179. B. M. 772. 

180. Harvard 2216. 

181. Pennsyl. 2755. 

182. Bod. Gr. class. 
/ 68 (P). 

183. DubHnPap.F.2. 

184. Dublin Pap.E.2. 

185. Glasgow. 

186. Bod. Gr. class. 
/ 69 (P). 

187. Melbourne Pap. 

188. Bod. Gr. class. 
d. 63 (P). 

189. B. M. 773. 

192. Camb. 4046. 

193. B. M. 774. 

194. Pennsyl. 2756. 

195. B. M. 775. 

197. B. M. 776. 

198. B. M. 777. 

199. B. M. 778. 

200. Harvard 2217. 

201. B. M. 779. 

202. Camb. 4047. 

204. Edinburgh. 

205. B. M. 780. 

206. Yale. 

207. B. M. 781. 

208. B. M. 782. 

209. Harvard 2218. 

210. Camb. 4048. 

211. Am. 

212. B. M. 1 180. 

213. Am. 

214. B. M. 1181. 

215. B. M. 1182. 

216. Yale. 

217. Camb. 4049. 

218. B. ]\I. 1 183. 

219. Am. 

220-1. B. M. 1 184. 

222. B. M.I 185. 

223. Bod. Gr. class. 
,;. 8 (P). 

224. B. M. 783. 

225. B. M. 784. 

226. Columbia. 

227. B. M. 785. 

228. Bod. Gr. class. 
d 64 (P). 

229. B. M. 786. 

230. Johns Hopkins. 

231. Camb. 4050. 

232. B. M. 787. 

233. PennS^-l. 2757. 

234. St. Andrews. 

235. Camb. 4051. 



23G. B. M. 788. 

237. Bod. Gr. class. 
a. 8 (P). 

238. Dublin Pap.E.3. 

239. Pennsyl. 2758. 

240. B. M. 789. 

241. Princeton 0132. 
692. 241. 

242. Graz. 

243. B. M. 790. 

244. B. W. 791. 

245. Pennsyl. 2759. 

246. Camb. 4052. 

247. Glasgow. 

248. Camb. 4053. 

249. Yale. 

250. Am. 

251. B. M. 1 186. 

252. Liverpool. 

253. Graz. 
254-7. Am. 

258. Brussels. 

259. Am. 

260. Dublin Pap. D. 


261. B. M. 792. 

262. Columbia. 

263. Melbourne Pap. 


264. Camb. 4054. 

265. Vict. 

266. B. M. 1 187. 

267. Am. 

269. Pennsyl. 2760. 

270. B. M. 793. 

272. Am. 

273. Brussels. 

274. Am. 

275. B. M. 794. 

276. Am. 

277. B. M. 1188. 

278. B. M. 795. 

279. Camb. 4035. 

280. Camb. 4056. 

281. Holloway. 

282. Yale. 

283. Bristol. 

284. Harvard 2219. 

285. B. M. 796. 

286. B. M. 797. 

287. Am. 

288. B. M. 798. 

289. B. M. 799. 

290. Pennsyl. 2761. 

291. B. M. 800. 

292. Camb. 4057. 
293-5. Am. 

296. Johns Hopkins. 
297-8. Am. 

299. Bradfield. 

300. Bradfield. 

301. B. M. 801. 

302. Bod. Gr. class. 

g- 47 (P). 

303. Bod. Gr. class. 

g. 48 (P). 

304. Camb. 4058. 

305. Bod. Gr. class. 

c. 48 (P). 

306. Cairo 10003. 

307. Cairo 10012. 

308. Dublin Pap. B. 2. 

309. Edinburgh. 

310. Glasgow. 

311. St Andrews. 

312. Owen's Coll. 

313. Camb. 4059. 

314. Harvard 2220. 

315. Bod. Gr. class. 

d. 65 (P). 

316. Bod. Gr. class. 

e. 78 (P). 

317. Columbia. 

318. B. I\I. 802. 

319. Johns Hopkins. 

320. Princeton 0132. 
692. 320. 

321. Bod. Gr. class. 

d. 66 (P). 

322. Bod. Gr. class. 

c. 49 (P). 

323. Pennsyl. 2762. 

324. Bod. Gr. class. 

e. 80 (P). 

325. Bod. Gr. class. 

d. 67 (P). 

326. Bod. Gr. class. 

e. 79 (P). 

327. Pennsyl. 2763. 

328. Harvard 2221. 

329. Yale. 

330. Columbia. 

331. Johns Hopkins. 

332. Princeton 01 32. 
692. 332. 

333. Princeton 0132. 

692• 333• 

334. Johns Hopkins. 

335. Camb. 4060. 

336. Dublin Pap. F. 3. 

337. Edinburgh. 

338. Glasgow. 

339. B. ύ. 803. 

340. St. Andrews. 

341. Owen's Coll. 

342. Camb. 4061. 

343. Dublin Pap. E.4. 

344. Pennsyl. 2764. 

345. Columbia. 

346. Melbourne Pap. 


347. Camb. 4062. 

348. Pennsyl. 2765. 

349. Pennsyl. 2766. 

350. Camb. 4063. 

351. Yale. 

352. Columbia. 

353. Johns Hopkins. 

354. B. M. 804. 

355. Camb. 4064. 

356. Dublin Pap. E.5. 

357. Princeton 0132. 

692- 357• 

358. Columbia. 

359. Glasgow. 

360. Bod. Gr. class. 
e. 81 (P). 

361. Bod. Gr. class. 
e. 82 (P). 

362. Harvard 2222. 

363. Camb. 4065. 

364. Dublin Pap. F. 4. 

365. Dublin Pap.E.6. 

366. Dublin Pap. E.7. 

367. B. M. 805. 

368. Graz. 

369. Hamilton. 

370. B. M. 806. 

371. Brussels. 

372. Vict. 

373. Bod. Gr. class- 

/ 70 (P)• 

374. B. M. 807. 

375. Camb. 4066. 

376. Edinburgh. 

377. B. M. 808. 

378. B. M. 809. 

379. Bod. Gr. class. 
.. 83 (P). 

380. Camb. 4067. 

381. B. M.810. 

382. B. M. 811. 

383. Camb. 4068. 

384. B. M. 8x2. 

385. Dublin Pap.F.5. 

386. Bod. Gr. class. 

/ 71 (P)• 

387. Bod. Gr. class. 

e. 84 (P). 

388. DublinPap.F.6. 

389. Bod. Gr. class. 

c. 85 (P). 

390. Bod. Gr. class. 

d. 68 (P). 

391. B. M. 813. 

392. Am. 

393. Yale. 

394. Camb. 4069. 

395. Am. 

396. B. M. 814. 

397. Bod. Gr. class. 
d. 69 (P). 

398. Bod. Gr. class. 

c. 50 (P). 

399. Columbia. 

400. Bod. Gr. class, 

d. 70 (P). 
401-2. Am. 
407. B. M. 1 189. 
445. B. M. 1 190. 
446-8. Am. 

449. Brussels. 

450. Graz. 

451. Vict. 
452-3. Am. 

454. Bod. Gr. class. 

c. 54 (P). 
455-6. Am. 
457. Vict. 
458-62. Am, 



463. Bod. Gr. class. 

a. 7 (P). 
469. Am. 
476. Am. 
479-80. Am. 
482. Am. 
484. Brussels. 
487. Am. 
499. Vict. 
502-3. Am. 
505. Am. 
508. Am. 
510. Am. 
512. Am. 
516-8. Am. 

522-3. Am. 
526-7. Am. 
529. Am. 
531-2. Am. 
534-41. Am. 
542. Owen's Coll. 
543-9. Am. 
550. B. M. 1 191. 
551-3. Am. 
554. Graz. 
555-7. Am. 

558. Belfast. 

559. Am. 

560. Vict. 
561-72. Am. 

573. Brussels. 

575. Am. 

576. Brussels. 
577-8. Am. 

580. Am. 

581. Dundee. 
582-8. Am. 
589. Graz. 
590-8. Am. 

603. Graz. 

604. Bolton. 
605-7. Am. 
608. Vict. 
609-10. Am. 
612-3. Am. 

614. Owen's Coll. 
615-33. Am. 

634. Bod. Gr. class. 

d. 73 (P)• 

635. Bod. Gr. class. 

e. 86 (P). 

636. Graz. 

637. Vict. 
633-43. Am. 

644. Graz. 

645. Am. 
647. Graz. 
648-50. Am. 

651. Belfast. 

652. Am. 

Fayuin Papyri. 

1. Camb. 4070. 

2. B. M. 1 192. 

3. B. W. 815. 

4. B. M. 816. 

5. Dr. W. C. Win- 

6. Cairo 10764. 

7. B. M. 817. 

8. Toronto. 

9. Am. 

1 0. Bod. Lat. class. ^. 


11. Cairo 10765. 

12. B. j\l. 818. 

13. Smiths. 217860. 

14. Am. 

15. Graz. 

16. B. M. 819. 

17. Bod. Gr. class. 

c. 52 (P)• 

18. B. M. 1193. 

18 (<i). B. M. 1 194. 

18 (i^). Brussels. 

19-20. Am. 

21. Cairo 10766. 

22-3. Am. 

23 (ίί). Bod. Gr. class. 

c- 53 (P)• 
24. Cairo 10869. 

25. Yale. 

26. Cairo 10767. 

27. Brussels. 

28. Vassar. 

29. Pennsyl. 2767. 
30-1. Toronto. 

32. Princeton 0132. 

340• 32- 

33. Johns Hopkins. 

34. Cairo 10768. 

35. Cairo 10769. 

36. Cairo 10770. 

37. Cairo 10235. 

38. B. M. 820. 

39. Cairo 10771. 

40. Brussels. 

41. Smiths. 217853. 

42. Columbia. 
42(<7). B. M. 1 1 95. 

43. B. ]\I. 821. 

44. B. M. 822. 

45. B. M. 823. 

46. Owen's Coll. 

47. Cairo 10772. 
47 (rf). Cairo 10773. 

48. Cairo 10774. 

49. Cairo 10775. 

50. Cairo 10776. 

51. Cairo 10777. 

52. Cairo 10778. 
52 (a). Cairo 10779. 

53. Am. 

54. Cairo 10780. 

55. Vict. 

56. Cairo io78r. 

57. Cairo 10225. 
58-60. Am. 

61. Cairo 10782. 

62. Cairo 10221. 
63-5. Am. 

66. Cairo 10231. 

67. Vict. 

68. B. M. 824 (<?). 

69. Cairo 10239. 

70. Cairo 10240. 

71. Pennsyl. 2768. 

72. Graz. 

73. Cairo 10236. 

74. Cairo 10237. 

75. Johns Hopkins. 

76. Princeton 0132. 
340. 76. 

76 (a). B. M. 824 {b). 

77. Am. 

78. Smiths. 217856. 

79. Cairo 10241. 
80-1. Am. 

82. Cairo 10783. 

83. Cairo 10784. 

84. Cairo 10224. 

85. Cairo 10785. 

86. 86 (a). Am. 

87. B. M. 825. 

88. Pennsyl. 2769. 

89. B. M. 826. 

90. Cairo 10786. 

91. Cairo 10787. 

92. Harvard 2223. 

93. Brussels. 

94. Am. 

95. Cairo 10788. 

96. Cairo 10789. 

97. Cairo 10790. 

98. Cairo 10791. 

99. Cairo 10792. 

100. Cairo 10793. 

101. Smiths. 2x7851. 

102. Cairo 10794. 

103. Am. 

104. Cairo 10795. 

105. B. M. 1 196. 

106. Am. 

107. Cairo 10796. 

108. Cairo 10797. 

109. Cairo 10798. 

110. Am. 

111. Vict. 



112. Smiths. 217852. 

113. Am. 

114. Cairo 10799. 

115. Am. 

116. Graz. 

117. Am. 

118. Bristol. 
119-20. Am. 

121. Cairo 10800. 

122. Cairo 10801. 

123. Cairo 10802. 

124. Cairo 10803. 

125. Cairo 10804. 

126. Cairo 10805. 

127. Cairo 10243. 

128. Cairo 10806. 

129. Cairo 10807. 

130. Cairo 10808. 

131. Cairo 10809. 

132. Rugby. 

133. Cairo 10795. 

134. Cairo 10810. 

135. Columbia. 

136. Cairo 10811. 
137-8. Am. 

139. Cairo 10812. 

140. B. M. 

141. Cairo 10217. 

142. Cairo 10247. 

143. Cairo 10242. 

144. Cairo 10219. 

145. Am. 

146. Bolton. 
147-50. Am. 

151. B. M. 827. 

152. Cairo 10220. 

153. Graz. 

154. Am. 

155. Vict. 

156. Am. 

157. Harvard 2224. 
158-9. Am. 

160. Cairo 10218. 

161. Cairo 10234. 

162. Cairo 10232. 

163. Cairo 10233. 

164. Columbia. 

165. Johns Hopkins. 

166. Princeton 0132. 
340. 166. 

107. B. M. 828 (λ). 

168. Harvard 2225. 

169. B. M. 828 (i). 

170. Toronto. 

171. Glasgow. 

172. B. M. 828 (f). 

173. B. M. 828 (r/). 

174. Pennsyl. 2770. 

175. Edinburgh. 

176. Vassar. 

177. Camb. 4071. 

178. Camb. 4072. 

179. B. M. 828(f). 

180. Yale. 

181. B. M. 828(/). 

182. Owen's Coll. 

183. Hamilton. 

184. B. M. 828 (,^). 

185. B. M. 828 (Λ). 

186. Melbourne Pap. 

187. B. M. 828(0. 

188. B. M. 828 {k). 

189. St. Andrews. 
190-5. Am. 

19C. Pennsyl. 2771. 

197. Harvard 2226. 

198. Cairo 10230. 

199. Cairo 10227. 

200. Cairo 10228. 

201. Cairo 10245. 

202. Cairo 10246. 

203. Cairo 10226. 

204. Cairo 10244. 

205. Cairo 10222. 

206. Cairo 10223. 

207. Cairo 10229. 

208. Brussels. 

209. Cairo 108 13. 

210. Cairo 10814. 

211. Yale. 

212. Cairo 10815. 

213. Cairo 10816. 

214. Columbia. 

215. Cairo 10817. 

216. Princeton 0132. 
340. 216. 

217. Brussels. 
218-9. Am. 

220. Cairo 10818. 

221. Cairo 10819. 

222. Am. 

223. Cairo 10820. 

224. Cairo 10821. 

225. Am. 

226. Smiths. 2 1 7859 

227. Am. 

228. Brussels. 

229. Graz. 

230. Am. 

231. Cairo 10822. 

232. B. M. 829. 

233. B. M. 830. 

234. B. M. 831. 

235. B. W. 832. 

236. B. M. 833. 

237. Cairo 10823. 

238. Cairo 10824. 

239. Am. 

240. Cairo 10825. 

241. Am. 

242. Cairo 10826. 

243. Am. 

244. Cairo 10827. 
245-7. Am. 

248. Liverpool. 

249. Brussels. 
250-1. Am. 

252. Vict. 

253. Am. 

254. B. M. 1197. 
255-8. Am. 

259. B. M. II 98. 

260. Graz. 

261. Am. 

262. Brussels. 

263. Am. 

264. Graz. 

265. Am. 

266. Vict. 
267-8. Am. 

269. Brussels. 

270. Graz. 
271-7. Am. 

278. Cairo 10828. 

279. Cairo 10829. 

280. Cairo 10830. 

281. Cairo 10831. 

282. Cairo 10832. 

283. Cairo 10833. 

284. Cairo 10834. 

285. B. M. 1199. 

286. Cairo 10835. 

287. Cairo 10836. 

288. Cairo 10837. 

289. Cairo 10838. 

290. Cairo 10839. 
291-3. Am. 

294. Cairo 10840. 

295. Smiths. 217855. 

296. Am. 

297. Brussels. 

298. Smiths.217857. 

299. Am. 

300. Cairo 10841. 

301. Cairo 10842. 

302. Cairo 10843. 

303. Cairo 10844. 

304. Am. 

305. Cairo 10845. 

306. Am. 

307. Vict. 

308. B. M. 834. 

309. Cairo 10846. 

310. Pennsyl. 2772. 

311. Cairo 10847. 

312. Cairo 10848. 

313. Bod. Gr. class. 
d. 71 (P). 

314-7. Am. 

318. Cairo 10849. 

319. Cairo 10850, 
320-1. Am. 

322. Graz. 

323. Cairo 10851. 

324. Bod. Gr. class. 

c. 51 (P). 

325. Bod. Gr. class. 

d. 72 (P). 

326 Cairo 10852. 

327. Cairo 10853. 

328. Cairo 10854. 

329. Brussels. 

330. Cairo 10855. 

331. Am. 

332. Cairo 10856. 

333. Am. 

334. Cairo 10857. 

335. Am. 

336. Smiths. 217854. 




Cairo 10858. 


Cairo 10859. 

Cairo 10860. 


Cairo 10861. 


Cairo 10862. 

345. Cairo 10863. 

346. Cairo 10864. 
347-8. Am. 

349. Pennsyl. 2773. 

350. Harvard 2227. 

351. Yale. 

352. Columbia. 

353. Johns Hopkins. 359. Penns}!. 2774. 

354. Princeton 0132. 

340• 354• 

355. Hamilton. 

356. Princeton 0132. 
340• 3.56• 

357. Columbia. 

358. Johns Hopkins. 

360. Harvard 2228. 

361. Yale. 

362. Harvard 2229. 

363. Johns Hopkins. 

364. Princeton 0132, 
340. 364. 

365. Columbia. 
36C. Yale. 



αβάστακτο! p. 262. 
αγαθοί 664. 19 ; 666. 115; 
670. 12. 

Άγασικλ^ί 659. 5°• 
Syetv 663. 35. 
όγ\αιζ(σθαί 659. 9,3. 
ayXaos 659. 27 ; 674. 7. 
ΆγνύθίΟ! 664. 33, 45. 
<?ypa 662. 53. 
aypfVTijp 662. 46 {?). 
άγριος 661. 3 (?). 
ΆίίΐμαντοΕ 664. 105. 

ά(ί 667. 8 ; 670. 4. 
ai'leti' 662. 47. 
άθάνατο! 659. 14, 24. 

ΆθηνΒ 663. Ι5• 

'Aiijvaff 664. 15• 

Άθηνα'ιο! 663. 48 ; 664. 3 ; 

680. 6; 682. 1 6. 
άθρί'ιν 671. 1 6. 

aiySov ρ. 263. 
ai'yXijdf 671. 3• 
άύίν 660. 8. 
Αΐολάδίΐί 659. 12, 29- 
αφίΐν 665. 2 2 ; 681. 7• 
αισχρός^ αισχιστος 666. ΙΙ9• 
αίσχΰνην 655. 23 ; 666. 48• 
αίψηρύς 659. 37• 
άκατάσχίτο! 684. Ι9• 
άκητο! 683. Ι5• 
aKtfijTOs 663. 15* 
ακμή 684. Ι3• 

άκ/ιήί 662. 5ΐ• 

(λ) Greek. 

ακοχκιν 663. 23. 
ΆκραγαντΐΐΌί 665. 12, ΐ6, 20, 

άκρόπολίΓ 662. 4© (?)■ 
Άκρωρίτηί 662. 42, 5"• 
ακώλυτο! 684. 21. 
Άλ(|ύν8ρ(ΐα 675. 4• 
Άλίξανδροϊ 663. 29, 34 Ί 

679. 3- 
uXijifla 654. 38. 

άληθη! 664. 92, 103. 

άλιοί 660. ΙΟ. 

αλλά 659. 26, 68 ; 662. 27 ; 

671. Ι 7 ; 679. 7• 
άλλοί 664. 23, 28, 95 5 β70. 

Ι ; 681. 6. 

ά\μνρΟ! 659. 8 1. 
άλοχοί 662. 49• 
άλ! 661. 26. 
άλυκτοπ(&αι 670. 5 (?)• 
αμαρτία 664. 98. 
άμμορο! 660. 2. 
αμττυρίζαν 661. Ι 7. 
Άμύι/ταΓ 662. 21, 32. 

άμφί 659. 53. 59• 

αμφίβαίνιιν 670. 7• 

άμφικτίονα 659. 55• 

Λι- 654. 4; 659. 1 1 ; 662. 
34 (?) ; 663. 43 ; 664. 93 ) 
666. 1 62; 670. ι; 671.1. 

ανάγκη 659. 1 8. 
avafprav 662. 53• 
άναζ(ΐν 684. 1 6. 

αναπαί^σθαι 654. 8. 
ΰνάρσιο! 660. 2. 
άναστρίφίΐν 680. 8. 
avev 666. Ι53('')• 

άνήρ 659. 8, 48, 66; 662. 
29; 664. 99 ί 682. ι6. 

άνθο! 662. 2 2. 

άνθρωπο! 654. 2 2 ; 664. ΙΟΙ. 

άνίαρο! 659. Ι9• 

ανίκητα 662. 35• 

άνοίγνΰναι 655. 4^• 

άντίάζαν 672. 7• 

Αντίπατρο! 662. 48. 

άντρηΐ! 662. 49• 

ανώτίρον 667. 2 8, 

nfiof 662. 112, ιι6(?). 

αξίωμα 684. 7• 

άοώή 659. 35. 49; 660. 


airas 666. 162. 
άπίίρατο! 660. Ι. 
από 654. 29 ; 655. Ι, 2 ; 
660. 6. 

α7Γο6.;μίΐΐ/ 664. 2. 
αποδημία 664. 8, 8θ. 
άποκαλνπτΐΐν 654. 29. 
άττοκνΕΐκ 654. 2 2. 
απόκρυπταν 654. 39• 
Άπο-λλω!- 674. 8 (.?). 

άποστί'λλίΐι/ 663. 41 ; 679. 3) 

άποφ(ίγ(ΐν 682. Ι4• 
άπροφασίστω! 666. ΐ68. 

Excluding 658 and 669, which are classed with the non-literary documents. 



,"Γ.ωθ( ββΐ. ly. 

ίΊρη 660. 15 ; 670. 8, ly. 
αρά 678. 6 (.'). 
ajtynXiot 662. 25. 
άρ(τή 659. 9• 
"Apjjt 662. 34. 
"ψίο! (?) 661. 3. 

Άρίφρων 664. 102. 
άρρηφορίΧν 664. 32- 

άρχ(ΐν 664. 94. 95> 96- 

^Αρχ^λαοί ρ. 201. 

αρχή 664. 2, Ι 13, ΙΙ7• 

ησίί ρ. 262. 

(Ίσκ(πος 662. 37• 

(ΐσπιφίλικτοί 670. 9! Γ• 201. 

άτ€ 684. 17. 

"ιτΐκνος 662. 3θ• 

HT/jf/te'f 671. 3• 

ατριστιις 662. 33- 

'Αττική 680. 5• 

πτιι;^ί'(ΐ 666. 63. 

(ΐίΛ 661. 26. 
αίίίίί (ίΐίπί) 681. 23. 
ονΧίίΓΚυς 659. 34- 
ανξιΊιΐίΐν 655. 9• 
αϋξαν 659. Ι 29. 
αντίκα 660. Ι 2. 
nuroicpurw/j 634. 18. 
αυτόματος 670. 3• 

αΰτόί 654. 32; 655. 15, 1 7, 
ι8; 662. 5t, 52; 663. 4, 
13' 18. 44; 664. ό'/ί'"•/»-; 
666. 50{ί}, 117; 670• 2; 
680. 7; 681. 2; 682. 1 1. 

ανχμαλίο! 662. 22. 

Άφρο81τη 663. 17- 

"Αχαιοί 662. 35 ; 663.24,37- 

βα8ίζ(ΐν 664. 44• 
βαίναν 659. 74- 
Βακ;^ιύδ«ι 664. 115. 

/3(φΜ 667. 2 1 . 

βασΐκύα 654. II, 15; 679. 

0n(7iXfueti/ 654. 8. 
βα(τιλ(ύ! 671. 4ι 14 (?)) 21 ; 

684. 7. 12, Ι7• 
βίαίοί 659. 17. 
βυήθίΐα 665. 4• 
βουλ^ 664. 132. 

β:,ύ\(.<θ,η 664. 104 ; 684. 3• 
Β.ψί'ίΐΓ 659. 38• 
βρίθίΐρ 660. 4• 

Ajot(;s659. 7, 14; 660. 2ΐ(?). 
βύρσα 662. 45• 

yap 659. 20, 23, 7' ; 664. 

23, 44, 83. 99; 666. 5'• 

156; 667. 23; 670. 18; 

684. 13, 17• 
■ye 661. 23; 662. 30. 
yf'iToiv 677. 2. 
ViXa 665. 3. 
Γ(λώοι 665. 5, 1 6. 
ycVot 659. 13. 
γίύίσΛιι 654. 5• 
yn 654. 13; 660. 14. 
yiyvfadai 659. 20; 662. 27, 

30; 665. 14 ; 666. 164 ; 

667. 27; 681. 8; 682. 9; 

684. 12 ; p. 261. 
yiyvaiaKtw 654. ly, 18, 20. 
ΤΧαύκων 665. ΙΟ. 

Τληνΐ! 662. 43, 47, 53. 
yXi^xpos 678. 7. 
y\vK^ 673. 3. 
yXvKepas 670. 25. 
γλώσσα 659. 47• 
yvapnTfiv 660. 8. 
yi'aipipoi 667. 27. 
yoi/euf 659. 52 ; 662. 26. 
yow 664. 87. 

ywi659. 48; 662.24; 663. 
39 ; 664. 58. 

iaiSiiXXfiK 659. 44. 
Ααισιστρότα 659. 75- 
δάκρυ 662. 2 2. 
Sapa(ftv 659. 18. 
Aapaifu 659. 70• 
δαπάιιη 664. 2 8. 
δάφνη 659. 28, 73. 
Ae[ 671. 2. 

BeiKvCvai 662. 54 ; 679. 43. 

δ(ΐν 666. 6l. τά δίοντα 666. 

Δίλφοί 674. 4. 
δίρκίσθαι 662. 40. 
δίρμα 662. 52. 
SfVft 679. Ι5(.')• 

δηθΰναν 671. 2 1. 

δήρΐ! 662. 34 ; 670. 23. 

δημοκρατία 682. Ι, Ι5(•')• 

διά 663. 4^ ; 664. 13. 23, 
36, 107; 666. 115; 667. 

διαβάλλαν 664. 29. 
διάζιυξα 667. 8. 
StaXeyfaOai 663. 9• 
διαμ(ρίζαρ 679. II. 
διατρΊβ(ίν 664. ΙΟ. 
διαφίρην 664. 2 1 . 
διάφορος 684. 8. 
διδάσ«ιι/ 672. 6. 
8ιδώπ< 655. 15; 659. 68; 
662. 29 ; 675. 15. 

δικαστήριον Q82. Ι 3• 
δίκη 659. 68. 
δίκτυορ 661. 7• 
δι,ί 666. 6ι. 
Λιο^νσι 683. 9• 
Δίοι/ι;σολ(^αΐ'δρο5 663. 26. 
Λιόννσος 663. II, 4°; 670. 

δίχα 672. 9. 

διψήν 659. 8ι. 

δο^ίν 664. 39. 97 ; 679. ι6. 

δάμος 662. 31- 

δόρυ 660. 3 ; 662. 35• 

δράμα 663. 4ό• 
δρνμονόμος 662. 56 (?). 
δύιαμίΓ 666. 165. 

δίνασθαι 667. ι6 ; 678. 6(?). 

δυνατός 664. 6. 
δώδ£κα 677. 9• 
δώρον 662. 43• 

eaV 666. 105 ; 678. Ι. 

ί'αυτ-οΟ 654. 1 8, 20 ; 668.31• 

e'yfi'piii/ 670. 23. 

ϊγκΰσθαι 659. 48. 

f'yX€ipi(eiv 666. 160. 

ίγχος 670. 20. 

ίyώ 659. 45, 49, 7° i 661. 7, 

20, 24 ; 662. 28 ; 664. 6 

(/ sucp. ; 670. 23. 
(I 664. 92. 

eiWrai 659. 45; 670. 17. 
(Ικότως 684. 13. 
etvai 654. 13 <■/ ί<7ί/, ; 655. 



8, 20, 28; eS9. 15; 660. 
Ϊ, 9 ; 662. 24 ; 664. 5, 
41, 44, 92; 666. 112, 117, 
170; 667. 19, 23; 670. 
11; 674. 3(.>); 678. 2; 
684. 2, II, 13, 17, 19. 
tU 663. 20, 23. 30, 31 ; 664. 
40; 666. 163; 672. 9 ; 

679. 18, 41 ; 680. 9 ; 
683. 6. « 659. 51; 662. 

i't 655. 1 1 ; 662. 30; 634. 2. 
itffayyfXi'a 682. 8. 
ί}σ(ρχ(σ(αι 655. 44, 45- 
,ϊτ, 667. 3. 4. 5. 7• 
« 661. 28 ; 662. 24, 20, 36 ; 

676. 12; 677. 2. 
ίκαστοί 682. 4• 
fraVf/jof 663. 3.ΐ• 
«νδιδάίΓΚί*!' 672. 8. 
ίκαΰ(σθηι 655. 2 2. 
fVflios 661. 20 ; 664. 77• 
ίκθρώσκΐΐν 662. 39• 

'Ε}•ίνη 663. 2 1, 38. 

»λ«ιμ 654. ΙΟ. 

Έλλι/ΐΊκ^ί 679. Ι. 

ίμός 659. 8ο; 661. 2 1 ; 671. 


!μπροσθ(Ρ 654. 27. 
ί'μφανήί 655. Ι9• 
ΐμφασί! 663. 47• 

fV 654. ιι; 659. 27, 58, 6ι; 
663. 4.Τ ; 664. 9, 29, 44> 
97 ; 665. Ι ; 667. 2, 4. 
13, 28; 675. ι6; 679. 2; 

680. το; 682. 3. '2; 
683. 12. 

(ναρμόνιος 667. Ι. 
Μΰ<σθαι 655. 6. 
ίνίυμα 655. II, 1 6. 

(vfKev 659. 66. 
f'vtpyiaTfiios 684. 5• 
tViiVui 659. 65. 

ίνταϋθα 664. 1 6. 

iv7(iefv 664. 8. 
ί'ιτόί 654. 1 6. 
ff 661. 26. 
f'iuyfiv 663. 22. 
ίξαυτ^ί 667. ΐ4• 
ίζίμχίοθαι 680. 4• 

ί^<τάζ(ΐν 654. 32. 

f^it 667. 5• 

ίξΐΓ 664. ΐ3ΐ(?)• 

ί'^ουσια 666. 159 i β84. 1 8. 

cotKttim 664. 9 Ι • 

inayeiv 663. 47- 

(πανίρχισθαι 663. 2 2 ; 664. 


ϊπασκίίυ 659. 75• 
eVfiSij 664. 2. 

?π«τα 659. 6.5; 667. 2. 

ίττίρηστος 663. 1 8. 

(Τ7(ρωτύν 654. 23. 

£77ίσίαι 659. 7Ι• 

fVi 655. 14 ; 659. 8, 12, 57 ! 

661. 20 ; 663. 3Ο ; 665. 

12 ; 667. 20, 22. 
£'πΐ/3ουλίΐ(ΐι/ 664. 4• 
eViSiiimii 664. 25. 
(7;ικατίχ<ιν 663. 39• 
ίπιμί\(ια 679. 6. 
fniptyvvviU 659. 25. 
ίτΐίσκωπτΐ.ν 663. Ι Γ. 
ίττκτπίρχαν 659. 3^• 
(πιτρίβαν 660. 13- 
eniTpoTins 664. 42. 
€1705 659. 44- 
ΐπταίτις 662. 30. 
ίπτάττνΧικ! 659. 64. 
(■πωΐ>ή 661. 2 Ι . 
ffjiii/ 664. 32. 
ipuTi'ii 660. 14. 
epyop 684. 2. 
ipel-nav 662. 36. 
i>t 659. 67. 
Έρ^ήί 663. 5. 
(ρχισθαι 659. 51 ; 661. 23. 

25 (i'l-iijf, ii'flf) ; 662. 29. 
e'r 659. 51 ; 662. 29. 
ίσβίαν 655. 4. 
ίσΚός 659. 52. 
ίσπίρα 655. 2. 
iVWii 659. 92. 

(σχατοί 654. 20. 

en 662. 30. 

ertpns 664. 95; 684. II. 

eiitpos 675. 14. 

iixXf^f 659. 59. 

cuiaf 684. 9. 

fir.cTnXot 659. 7.3• 

fiplaKuv 654. 7, 17; 664. 

(ΐτυχία 659. 13; 663. 1 6. 
(ϋφρωρ 659. 7'• 
(ϋχισθαι 659. I I. 
f Vf" 655. 1 1 ; 659. 9 ; 663. 

39; 664. 100; 670. 20 ; 

671. 15; 684. 4. 
<χθρύ( 659. 67 ; 676. 15. 
ίω! 655. I ; 670. 9 (.?). 

ζίνγννιαι 659. 79• 

Zfi's 659. 45 ; 664. 103. 

Ζίφνρης 659. 36. 

ζψ 654. 2. 

ZijpiiSoTor p. 261. 

ζητι',ι, 654. 6 ; 663. 2 (?) 

666. 165. 
ζώίΐν 659. 19. 

^ων^ύι/ίΚ 659. 26. 

ή 663. 2 7. 

V 660. 5; 664. Ι. 

94 ; 687. 

η octu. ο , ΌΌ'±. 1. 94 » utJ/ 
Ι, 17, 18; 684.51?), 7• 
ί 662. 30- 
ήγ€Ίαθίη 659. 7 Ι• 
ηγΐμών 662. 50. 
ήίί 662. 49• 
ηϋη 664. 7> ΐ9• 
^8^)117 664. 44• 
ήίίίοΓ 660. 4• 
ίίών 659. 58 ; 673. 7• 
jjKfti/ 664. 12. 
ήλικι'α 655. 14 ; 662. 29. 

ήλικιώτη! 664. 2 2. 

ήμι'α 654. ΙΟ ; 655. ΐ9• 

ήμίρα 659. Ι5• 
ήμ(Τ(ρυί 670. 19, 24. 
ήμί 661. 2 4. 
ιίσυχία 679. 8. 

θύ\ασσ(ΐ 654. 14 ; 661. 28. 

β<ι\άσσιηί 684. Ι4• 

θά\λ€ΐ•> 659. 31. 

(ίύλ.,ί 659. 48. 

βαμβιΐν 654. 7• 

5α'πτ(ΐι/ 654. 3ΐ• 

δ«; 673. 9. 

θιατήί 663. 7• 

ΑίΓοί 659. 3• 



Οίμ(θ\η 674. 5. 
θ(όκριτοί 662. 28. 
β(6! 677. 9- 
θιράπων 673. I (?). 
θ(σπ(σιυς 660. 6 ; 671. ΙΟ. 
β(ωι>(Ίν 666. 03- 
θ^,ί,ιι 659. 25- 
θήμ 672. 8. 

ilJiil'i;»- 661. Ι Ι . 

βνήσκίίν 662. 25, 2 7• 
ii'V''<'f 659. 15• 
θρασύ^^ουλος 664. 17, 33• 

ί)ΐ7"'•';Ρ 659- 72 ; 664. 3'• 
Λ>α 675. ΐ5• 
Θνμ0! 684. 17. 

Θωμά! 654. 3• 

Ί5ι; 663. 23- 
"Αος 674. 7- 
ifi-niiii' or ΙίπΜΐ'ιων 660. 2 ί/ 

ί^ρηπόλο? 659. 6. 
I'fpo'i 661. ι6; 674. 6(;ap.'s); 

675. 3• 
Ίι^σοϋί β.ό4. 2 (•/ saep. 

Ιμίίρ(ίν 671. 2 2. 
Ίμίρηϊηι 665. Ι5• 

iVn-fi't 679. 20. 
Ιπττάβοτοί 673. 4• 
Γ77ποΓ 659. ^6. 

ίπποτροφία 664. 27. 
ίστορί'η 683. Ι 3• 
ΊτωΐΊα 659. 59• 
'φθιμο! 662. 54• 
ΐχίιίί 654. 14. 
Ιωνία 664. 9• 

καθύπη) 667. 2 6. 
καθίμΐίν 681. 13- 
/co^(rTiirai 679. ΙΟ. 

KiiKo't 678. 4• 

^άκνρον 665. 2. 

καλάν 664. 114; 691. 15• 
ΚαλλιτΛΐ)^ 662. 2 7, 3ΐ• 
καλοί 662. 53• ""λόί κά -y .^Jt 

664. 19. «ύλλιστοϊ 663. 


Λίί^ιατοί 659. Ι 9• 
καπίΊΪι 662. 39• 
κάπρο! 662. 51. 

«ίίρα 659. ΙΟ, 32. 
κατά 663. 1 6 ; 664. ιοί. 
καταγρίίν 661. 27 (?'. 
καταλ<ιμ,ίί(ύ ciK 634. Ι 8. 
KaraXflnfiv 664. 15, 37> 4Ι• 
κ<ιΤίΐμιΊ'(Ιΐ' 664. 6. 
κατ<ί,)ροο5 661. 5• 
κατάστασις 664. 24• 
κατ(χαν 675. 3• 

<fii"it 659. 3''• 

Kf'taOai 659. 8 ; 667. 3• 

«λαδοϊ 675. Ι 2. 

«λί wiK 664. 14,129; 678. Ι. 

Ketnpov 676. ΙΟ. 

κιραία (ΟΓ uicpnios ?) 655. 49• 

)tfp«arijs 662. 49• 

Κ(μνης 683. Ι 8. 

ΚιΆικίί 680. Ι. 
Κιλι« 11 679. 2. 
-cXftTof 671. 6 (?). 
k\v;iu 671. 17• 
κλυτόί 659. 58. 
κνίσα 660. 6. 
(cotvu's 667. 2 2. 
Kntvwiew 667. I 2. 
κόλασίΓ 684. 2 Ι. 

κημίζ^ν 664. 98 ; 683. 19• 

«υ'μΤΓΟΓ 659. 33• 

καρίσσ^ιν 660. 5• 

κιισμι'ιν 659. 6θ. 

κάσμηί 655. 20. 

itoOpot 662. 54 ; 671. 18. 

KpaUTOi 665. 13, 15• 

icpiirfif 664. 113; 681. 5• 

Κρατ'ινοί 663. 2 8. 

κριίσσων 655. 7• 

T/jij>'>; 659. 80. 

κρι'^ιι- 659. 7 ; 663. 19• 

κρίνον 655. 8. 

κριοί 663. 3ΐ• 

Κροηδ.ιι 659. 12. 

κρίπτ(ΐν 655. 43 1 659. ίο; 

663. 3ΐ• 
KpvnTOs 654. 30. 

κτήμα 666. II 8. 

κΟμ.! 684. 1 4 (•'')• 

κυμιιίι /fll' 684. Ι 6. 
κννη-γ^ϋ'ια 662. 43 ,•')• 
icwijyia 664. 27. 
Kufrpos 680. 10. 

Ki^piot 654. 2(.'); 633. ι. 
Kiy^tXo! 664. HI. 
κίων βββ. 52 (•')• 
κωλι,'(ΐι/ 666. 6 1. 
κωμω^ύν 663. 44• 

\ακώαΙμων 662. 3 3 ; 663. 2 Γ. 
ληλ^;./ 654. Ι ; 677. 6. 
\αμ3άν(ΐν 664. Ι, 113, Ι '6; 
679. 9• 

Xavdi'weiv 659. 49• 

Xeyfti/ 654. 3 *■/ ■f'?*'/'• ; 655. 

17, 21 ; 659. 47 J 661. 

22 ; 662. 24; 664. 103, 

110; 666. 109; 667. 25; 

671. I. 
λίίτΓκι/ 662. 31 ; 670. 3. 
ΧίωνΙ&ης 662. 41, 55- 
XiiyfiV 661. 18. 
'Κιηότίκνης 659. I 6. 
Xoyof 654. I, 4. 
λοίτρόν 662. 39. 
.\ofiur 659. 23. 
Xouf(f 670. 6. 
Xim-tii' 677. 3. 
\νσιτί\ΰν 664. 93. 
λώτιΐΌί 659. 34. 

μαθητής 655. I 8. 
μακάριος 654. 40. 
μιίλα 663. 46; 664. 19. 43! 

684. 1 3. pt'tWov 664. 94 ; 

684. 6. μήλιστα 660. 4 ; 

664. 12. 

μαλπ<ό{ 659. 27. 

μαλιίσσίΐν 659. 4^* (ταράτσιιν 


μανθάν(^ν 666. Ι 63. 

μάντίς 659. 5• 

μαρτνρύν 664. Ι04• 

μαρτϊρίσθαί 660. Ι 6. 

μάρτυς 659. 5Ι• 

μιίχαιμα 666. 1 56. 

μίί,ν) 665. 8, 17. 

μιγαλοφυΰι 664. 25. 

μίγας 664. ιο8, ιι6; 680. 

3; 684. 17- 
μ(ΐρ<Ίκίον 664. 1 8. 
μίΧας 659. 10. Μ«'λαί ρ. 201. 
μίλλαν ββΟ. 9 '); 633. 33• 


μίΧης 675. Ι3• 
μίΚπ(ΐν 675. 2, II. 
μ(\ω8(Ίν 667. 6. 

μίν 659. 43• 46; 660. 8 ; 

662. 26 ; 663. 7- '4• .3*^; 
664. 91 ; 667. ι, 8; 676. 
9 ; 681. 6, 1 1 ; 684. 8, 
13, 23- μΐ" οί" 664. 1 6. 

μίνηί 661. 3• 
μϊριμνα 659. 66. 

Μ^μύ679. ΐ3(?). 
fif'pos 667. 4• 

μίση 667. 9> Ι?. 1 8. 
μ(τά 663. 20, 2 3 ; 664. 9- 
μ(τασκ(υάζ(ΐν 663. 32. 
μίτηχ^ρόνιο! 660. Ι3• 

Μ 654. 6, 37; 655. 23; 
659. ι6, 8ο; 661. 23; 

663. 4; 664. 85; 666. 
156, 158 ; 670. 23; 679. 
η, 9. οϋ μή 654. 5• 

μη5ί 662. 52- 

μη8(ίί 659. 9; 666. ιιι. 

μη8θ! 659. 76. 

μήτ( 655. 2, 3; 666. 57• 

μήτηρ 664. 37• 

μιμνήσκαν 659. 35; 670. 


νΐινώα 665. 1 8. 

,ιόΐΌί 662. 33; 681. ι 2. 

μΟίοί 661. ι8. 

μίψισθιη 662. 38. 
/ιυριήί 662. 36. 
μνρίο! 659. 78. 

vaidv 659. Ι05(?). 

rads 659. 59• 

vavt 660. 4 ; 663. 36. 

vcKpos p. 261. 

νίκταρ 659. 8o. 

«Of 662. 51. Vfarepos 664. 

inj 664. 103. 
νήθίΐν 655. 10. 

ΐ^ηρηίί 672. 5. 
νηστίίκιν 654. 33. 
vijTij 667. 9, 17, 19. 
N.( )(?)671. 3. 
viKov 663. 19. 
νίκη 659. 57. 


viv 676. 13. 

«i/ioc 682. 2, II. 

Vo/iof 673. 5. 

vorroi 662. 25. 

Νοΐ)μΐ)ΐΊθί 677. 7. 

ιόΟγ 664. 100. 

ι/ίμφΐ) 662. 42, 46. 

viv 659. 54, 70, 80; 662. 

35; 671. 12; 681. 13. 

will 664. 106. 
ήξ ββΟ. 15. 

icVos 682. 26; 665. 2, 6, 9, 

οβριμοπάτρη 673. 2 (?). 

Όγχίϊστύϊ 659. 58. 

5δί 659. 66; 662. 45- 46(?), 

51 ; 677. Ι. 
ό5οΓ 659. 7^. 
οΐ«ίο£ 664. ΙΟΙ. 

OiKdt'yrqs 664. Ι 3• 
οΐκίζαν 665. 19- 
οΓκοΓ 659. 17; 664. 40. 
oltcTttpfiv 663. 38. 
οϊστός 660. 3• 
mxeaem 659. 82. 
οιωνός 662, 37• 

ϋκνήν 663. 37• 

οκτάχορδης 667. 24. 

OXiyof 663. 24; 664. 119. 
iXns 667. 4• 
"Ολυμπάς 673. 5 (•'')• 
ομαλός 659. Ι4• 
o^oXo-yeli/ 666. Ι 62. 

όμοί 662. 56(?); 675. 6. 
'Ομφαλός 665. Ι. 
Όνη(^α-ι.)φιίνης 662. 54• 
οΐΌμα 662. 26. 
οι/ομαστός 683. 3• 

οξύς 684. ΐ9• 

οπόταν 659. 37• 

όπότι 667. 29. 

ό/)ίι/655. 21 ; 662. 37; 664. 

32 ; 670. 21 (?). 
όρπαξ 659. 27. 
ορφανός 664. 37• 
5ς 654. 3θ> 3' > 659. 36. 

48,58,75; 662. 28; 664. 

34; 666. 1 65; 676. 13; 

678. 5(?). 
ίσος 664. 89. 
ooTis 654. Ι 2 ; 655.9; 659. 

Βταν 654. 7 ; 655. 22; 666. 

54, ιΐ3• 
ότι 654. 25; 664. 3; 671.8. 
oiSi 655. 10. 
oiofi's 664. 25; 684. 15. 
οϋθύς 664. 96. 
ού μή 654. 5• 

0^1/664. ι6, 33, Ι02, ΐ20. 

ονπω 671. 19, 20. 
oupal'ny 654. II, 12. 

aire 659. 48 ; 664. 93> 95• 

οίτοί 654. 4 ; 660. 8 ; 662. 
44, 50 ; 663. 6, 19, 2θ, 
38 ; 664. 92, Ι ΙΟ, 117 ; 
666. 62, 157 ; 667. 22, 
23; 670. 26; 682. ιο. 
οντοσι 664. Ιθ6. 

ο{ίΓω684. Ι5• οϋτωΓ 664. 9'• 

οχύν 659. 28. 

όι/Ίί 654. 28; 664. 20 ; 
684. ΙΟ. 

ΐϊα-γων^ας 659. '^Ο. 

παιάν 675. 1,12. 

nai&fiifiv 684. 6. 

riaiOwt 681. 14• 

παΙς 659. 70 ; 662. 31 ; 664, 

ι6; 666. 156; 670. 26; 

671. 22. 

παλ[ 670. 21. 

πάλαι 659. 54; 676. 17; 

684. ι8(?). 
ϋαλαίμονις 661. 9- Ι3• 
παΧίγγλωσσος 659. 67. 
πάμπαν 659. 17• 
Πάν 662. 42. 46, 5°• 
ττάν^υξος 659. 28. 
πάντοθ^ν 670. 7• 
πάνυ 664. Ιθ8. 
πάππος 664. 33• 

παρά 659. 8ι ; 663. 14, 15; 

664. 34• 
παρα-γίγν(σθαί 663. 12, 33 J 

664. 106. 



vapahihavM ββ3. 36, 40 ; 679. 

παρακαΚίΙν 663. 42. 
ιταραλαμβάν(ΐν 633. 21 (?). 
παρατηρύν 654. 3.5. 
παραφαίνΐΐν 663. ΙΟ. 
napf'imi 670. Ι 8. 
παρθ(ντμο! 659. 4^• 
ττηρθίΡίΟί 659. 32. 
Ώαρνασσός 674. 5• 
■napoiSf 659. 43• 
ττάρο! 662. 33• 
Tras 659. 8 ; 663. 4 (?) ; 664. 

26; 666. 118; 682. 2. 
ίτατήρ 654. 19 ; 664. 36, ο^ι 

νάτρα 662. 2 4. 
narpis 664. ΙΟΟ. 
παν(ΐι/β82. 12. παΰ(σβαί 664. 

Β-ίδιλοι» 659. 74• 
jreSiV 662. 38• 
τταθαρχάν 677. 4• 
πύθίΐν 664. 5• 
Πίίσιστ/κιταί 664. Ι ί/ ίίϊί/'. 
ιτΛαΐΌΓ 675. 14• 
πί'πλο! 659. 20. 
rrfpi 654. 24. 

UfpiavSpoi 664. 93 e/ saep. 
Πξριΰναι p. 262. 
π(ριζμύχηρος 662. 37. 
Πφικλ^ί 663. 45• 
ηίριΚημβάνιιν 666. 167. 
π(ριπίπτ(ΐν 664. Ι09. 
πιτανϋν 654. 12. 
nif^iSft 673. Ι (?). 
»Γίΐ9αι/ΟΓ 663. 46; 664. 91• 
ηίσα 659. 6ι. 
■πιστοί 659. 5Ο, 69. 
πλάι/ 663. 20. 
ττλίΐωΐ' 66. Ιΐ6(.'). 7Γλ«στθΓ 

681. 9- 
7τ\ήθο: 664. 1 1 8. 
Ι7λτ)σιά^(ΐΐ' 664. 120. 
]πλόκαμοΓ 673. 9• 
πι/οι; 659. 36. 
froifii/ 654. 37 ; 664. 9 ; 667. 

n-oii)ri7$ 663. 8(?). 
ΤΓοίοι 662. 25, 29. 

Tt6\(pns 663. 16, 48. πόλί- 

μύρ&, 660. 5. 
πόλΐΓ 664. 29, 114 ,' 675. 5 ; 

682. 3. 

ΤΓολιτίία 683. δ• 
7Γολλά«ί 660. 7 ; 662. 34• 
τΐοΚνγνωτοί 659. 5^. 
ΤΓολνποι'κιλυί 672. 9• 
7roXvs654. 25 ; 655. 7 ; 659. 

43; 662. 34{•'); 664.21; 

667. 6 ; 674. 8 (.^;. 
ττοΚνώνυμπί 675. Ι7• 
ττοιτιάί 673. 8. 
TTUVTOS 659. 39; 661. 24. 
πορφίριο! 671. 19. 
ποταμοί ρ. 2 02. 
πο'τ-Ε 655. 19, 20. 
nOTepol• 667. 15• 
ποτί, ποττάς 661. 1 6. 

πϋύΓ659. 7ο; 662.45; 670. 

πράγμα 664. 24 ; 684. 3. 
Πρα^ώ 662. 26. 
π^άσσίίΐ' 666. 58. 
π[.ί/,./3ίΐλοι/(.') 661. 27. 
πρίπαν 659. 45- 
πρ€σβ(υ 683. Ι 6. 
ττρηνήί 662. 30. 
πρίχ 659. 2θ. 
πρό 664. III. 
προαψύν 666. 59• 
TTpo&ihovai 663. 43- 
πμοθίμΐύί 664. 43• 
npo\(yfii> 664. 3• 
προξίΐία 659. 53• 
πρόί 663. 7 ; 664. 25, 39. 

125; 665. 1 6 ; 681. 12; 

684. 12, 20, 21. 
ττροσίρχίσβαι 684. 6, 2 2. 
ττ^ύσΛ 670. 12. 
πρυσαναί 677. 5• 
ττμοσκίΐσθαι 667. 2 1. 
ττροση'ισσΐΐν 663. 3^. 
προστάτης 678. 5• 
προστίθίνίΐι 655. Ι3• 
πρόσφορος 659. 49• 
πρότίρον 664. Ι ; 681. Ι (.'), 

προτομή 662. 44, 5'• 
προφίραν 667. 29. 

πpυφ6lryfίc 659. Ι 9. 

πρόφρων 659. 24. 

πρόχαμο! 684. 2 0. 

πρωί 655. Ι, 3• 

πρώτοί 654. 25, 26; 659. 72. 

Πυθώ 660. 7 ι.')• 

πυλίπ, 661. Ι9• 

πννθάΐ'ίσθαι 660. 7 (?)• 

πΓρ 684. 15. 

πΰ/>δαΐΌΐ/ 661. Ι 9. 

πνρπολ('ίΐ> 663. 24. 

πως 654. 33. 34 ; 666. 1 68. 

πωϊ 666. 70. 

ρα 662. 3θ. 
ροδι'ωί 682. 13. 
ρηγνίναι 662. 52. 

(5i'f<i 659. 62. 
ρίπή 659. 4θ• 
ρίπτ(ΐν 661. 2 0. 
ρύίίΐϋΓ 662. 45• 

2ά/χΐ05 662. 26. 
ΣάτΐίροΓ 663. 42. 
σαννιαστης 661. 25. 

σ(ΐρήν 659. 33• 

σ(μνόί 659. 63• 

σήμαιναν 667. Ι4• 

σΐ7/)α[ 659. 128. 

ffofW 659. 37• 

σιγάζίΐν 659. 36. 

σιγή 659. 9• 

σιδνρΙ 670. Ι 7• σώηρο' 660 3• 

2iXi)TOs 662. 49• 

σκηπτρον 671. 15, 20. 

σκοπιά 660. ι 2. 

2υ'λοι 680. 9• 

2όλωι/ 664. ΙΟ, 14. 

σπάν 676. Ι4• 

σπιλάί 662. 23. 

σπονδή 675. 8. 

σπουδάζίιν 664. II. 

σταθμός 659. 29. 

στ(ίχ(ΐν 659. 7 Ι. 

στίφανο! 659. 3Ι> 6ο. 

στίφίΐν 675. 13. 

«πτ/λοΟι/ 662. 28. 

στολ[ 660. 19• 

στολή 655. 5• 

στρατίία 665. 3, Ι3• 


στρητάπιϋον β79• 12• 

σύ 654. 28, 29; 655. 2 1 ; 
659. 71 ("■"); 661. 23 
(rv); 664 104; 671. 22; 
676. 9 ; eV8• 4• 

αιτγγ€ίτων 662. 43' 
(rvyy^Vfia 664. 1 15* 
συγγίνη! 664. 40• 
σνμβαίνιιν 666. Ι ΙΟ ; 667. 

σνμφορά 664. ιο8, 
σίιρ 660. ΙΟ. 
σνι/Λκϋλου^ίΐΐ' 663. 4 ^ * 
σνναφή 667. 3• •'• 
σννΒιατρίβον 664. 45• 
σννιυνος 662. 28. 
Σνρακύσιοί 665. 4> 6, 8, 2 1. 
σύστημα 667. 13, 26, 3°. 
σφύλλαι/ 659. Ι7• 
σφάλο! 676. 1 6. 
σχfδό^' 659. 73• 
σχ^μα 667. 2 3. 
σώμα 659. Ι 5• 
σώφρων 659. 66. 

τάλαροΓ 663. 3°• 
ταπίΐνοϊιν 664. 2 2. 
ταράσσων 659. 4° (1• μολύσ- 
σ».-?); 684. 8. 

Ταρτάριοί 670. 5• 

τάσσίΐΐ" 659. ι 3• 

τίίφοί 662. 28 ; 672. 7. 

TiXfii/ 659. 5• 

τ(\ίυτάν ρ. 201. 

Tfot 670. 14, 18. 

T(pntiv 674. 6. 

rfxr^df 670. 1 1 (.'). 

τηΧικόσ&ί 634. 23. 

τίΕίν 659. 92. 

TiiiVm 666. I5(?); 680. 7; 

682. II. 
TixTfti/ 670. 10. 
τιμά^ 659. 53; 672. 4. 
ημή 659. 6; 684. 20. 
m 663. 8; 664. 38, 128; 
666. 59; 667. I.'-,; 684. 4. 
TiV 654. 3-,; 655. 4, 6, 12, 
13; 662. 24, 28; 664. 
99, no; 670. I ; 671. i ; 
677. 6; 684. 8, 9, 10. 


Ύμάρα ]). 26 I. 
Τίιίνυν 664. 92. 

τοίοΓ 654. 1. 

τοιόσδί 684. 2 2. 

ToioCrot 684. 1 1. 

To«Tot 662. 27. 

τ-ολμ[ 664. 64. 

Tovia'ios 667. 20. 

rdffot 651. 24; 667. 15• 

τραχΰναν 664. 3°• 

rpf'n 667. 12, 25. 

τρΙφ(ίν 664. 34. 

τρίχ(ΐν 677. 2. 

Τ/)ΐίίαλλοι' 631. 6, ΙΟ. 

τρύτηί 662. 3•• 

rplt 662. 30. 

τρισσόί 662. 36. 

τρίτά 660. ΙΟ. 

τριώβολον 678. 3• 

τράκη; 664. 2ο; 677. 5; 

684. 5- 
Tuyxiivftf 661. 17; 664. 3,5• 

666. 113; 677. 3; ρ. 261. 
τνρηννΰν 664 7• 
τυραννίς 663. 14 ; β^*• 4• 

v!of 659. 30 ; 660. 9 ; 664. 

120; 670. 10; 671. 2. 
ii/iflt 654. 15 <■/ ίΛί/. ; 655. 

4 ί/ ίί7>/. ; 682. 4• 
vpfetv 659. 31- 
u/ivor 675. 9 (•')■ 
νπάρχ^ιν 663. 1 8. 
ΰτΓίίττ; 667. 1 6. 
νπί',) 664. 127. 
ΰπ(ρβάλ\(ΐν 664. 26. 
νπίρβατω! 667. 7• 
νπ€ρβο\αία 667. 1 8. 
νπηρίτη! 679. Ι 8. 

ύπ-ό 654. 13 ; 659. 9- 34 ; 
662. 22 25, 35; 664. 42, 
94; 665. 2ο; 670. 24 ; 
679. 3; 680. Ι4• 

ΙποΧαμβάνιιν 664. 8 1, Ι02. 

vTTopevtiv 663. 32. 

νηοστρίφ(ΐν 680. 12. 

ίστιρην 679. 4 (0• 

φαίνισθαι 667. 9• 

φάναι 664. 92, 97> ι°3' • '° i 
670. S; 633. 4• 

φανίράί 654. 30. 

φάσκ(ΐν 663. 44• 

φ^τ;", 666. 53 (?)• 

φί.Ολοί 664. 96; 666. 158. 

φΐρην 677. 8 {?). 

4>(iyetv ββ3. 25; 664. ιι8; 

666. 64. 
φθόνο! 659. 8. 
φθάρο! 661. 15• 
φιλί!!- 659. II, 69. 

Φίλόμηλ••! 664. 17, 42. 
Φιλοπιιίμην 662. 35• 

φι'λοί 664. II ; 670. 6, 15. 

φί\τ>ρΓ,ς 664. 99- φ'λτατοΓ 

664. 98. 
φίΚοσοφΛν 666. ι69• 
φιλοσοφία 666. Ι 66. 
φι\οστ(φΊΐ•ος 675. Ι. 
φρά^ίΐκ 662. 24; 664. ιιι. 
φρίσσην 659. 38 ; 662. 34• 
φρονιΐν 659. 46. 
φρόνησα 666. ι6ΐ. 
φϋσΐ5 664. ΙΟΙ. 
φωράν 663. 34• 
φωτ(ΐνΟ! 655. 25. 

χαίπ) 659. 6ο. 
χαΧίτταίναν 664. 78 (?). 
χίίλυι/Λ 662. 52. 
χάρΐί 659. 24. 
χαριτήσιον 662. 53• 
χίΐ/ιώκ 659. 37• 
Xfip659. 27; 662. 33• 
χΚ(νάζ<ίν 663. 12. 
χόλοί 659. 65. 
]χοοί 660. 4• 
XO/)i)yfi>' 666. 93• 
χορηγία 666. Ι Ι3• 

χορό! 659. 5ΐ• 

χρζχαι 659. 49• 

χρησθαι 684. 19, 23• 

χρόνοί 659. μ; 664 ίο, 


χρνσ^ 660. 2 2. 
χρύσιο! 671. ι6. 
χρυσότΓίΤτλοί 659. 2 1. 
χρωματικοί 667. 1. 
χώίσίαί 670. 1 6. 



χωλόι 670. II. 
χώρα 663. 25. 
χωρίί 666. 109. 

ψνχή 665. 115. 

w 661. 9. '3; ββ2. 46. 
ωδι) 675. ι6. 
ωκίωί 659. 26. 
ώ/ιναλοί 659. 39• 
iiKimovs 659. 56• 

ωμότη! 664. ICJ. 

ώί 659. δ ; 663. 36, 39• 4°, 

47; 665. ι8. 
ώστΓψ 663. 3°• 

ωστ( 666. 16; ; 667. 13• 

a 25. 43. 56, 97> ι64• '67, 
174, ι85, 212. 

ab 33• 

abire 26. 

accipere 49, 1 48, 165, ΐ75• 

accusatio 9. 

ad 16, 1 10, 121. 

admittere 15. 

adversus 83, 151. 

Aebutius 38. 

Aemilia 143. 

Aemiliana via 31. 

Aemilianus 95, 120, 123, aW 
see Scipio. 

Aemilius, L Aem. 67. I^I. 
Aem. 215. 

affinis 122. 

Africa 125. 

Africanus, P. Cornelius Sci- 
pio A. (ihe elder) 25, (the 
younger) 2 1 o, a>td see 

ager 75. 

alius 92. 

Ambracia 12. 

amicitia 165. 

Anio 188. 

annus 177. 

Antiochus 6, 213. 

Appius (=Hasdrubal ?) 132. 
Appius Claudius {a) 48, 
(δ) 177- 

aqua 188. 

arnia 102. 

Asellus 182. 

athleta 42. 

Attalus 110. 

Audax 197. 

(d) Latin (66S). 

Aulus 76, 112, 193. 
aurum 15. 
auxiliari 90. 

Bacchanalia 40. 

Baebius, Cn. Baeb. 67. M. 

Baeb. 74. 
basilica 57. 
bellum 68, 89. 
benigne 90. 
Bithynia no. 
Boii 55. 
Bononia 7. 
Brutus 203, 216. 

caedere i, 126, 171, 208. 
Caepio, Cn. Caepio 170. 

Q. Servilius Caep. 176, 

182, 195. 
Caius 30, 76, 84. 191, 215. 
Campani 17. 
canere 62. 
capere I2, 127. 
Capitolium 189. 
captiva 14. 
caput 16, 112. 
career 204. 
carmen 105, 189. 
Carthaginienses 22, 83, 90. 
Carthago 132, 134. 
Cato 56, 1 14. 
censor 56. 
Censorinus 88. 
censura 8. 
centurio 15. 
certamen 42. 
Chaldaei 192. 
Charidenius 98. 

circa 51 (?), 169. 
circumscribere 39. 
clades 175. 
Claudius, Appius Claudius 

(3)48, (<5) 177. M.Claud. 

Marcellus 58. Ti. Claud. 

Asellus 182. P. Claud. 

Pulcher 50. 
clavus (clava ?; 196. 
Cnaeus 2, 66, 137, 170, 191. 
cogere 32, 73. 
comitiuni 208. 
commodum 206. 
competitor 9 
compositum (1. propositum ?) 


conferre 47. 

coniurium. See connubium. 

connubium 1 7. 

consul passim. 

consulatus 153. 

consultare 181. 

contra 189. 

cor 115. 

Corinlhius 168. 

Corinthus 135. 145. 

Cornelius, C. Corn. 84. Cn. 
Corn. 137. L. Com. Scipio 
27, 45. P. Corn. Scipio 
see Scipio. 

Cotta 210. 

Crassus 59. 

creber 134. 

crimen 72. 

crudelissime 132. 

cruenlus 18. 

cum (conjunction) 210. 

cum (preposition) 77, 186. 



a ( = duo?) 51. 

Flamininus 52. 

damnare 28, 51, 86, 179. 

Flaniinius 24. 

dare 3, 6, 17, 166. 

flere loo. 

de 33, 179• 

flumen 21 7. 

decedere 119. 

fortissime 187. 

Decimus 178, 200, 203, 216. 

forum 63. 

Decius(?) 89. 

fogare 49, 172. 

deditio 91. 

Fulvius, Q. Fulv. 81. Fulv. 

deducere 7. 

Nobilior 43, 82. 

defoiniis 185. 

funebris 60. 

deprehendere 1 16. 

desertor 207. 

Gabinius 193. 

desiderare 53. 

Galba 152. 

deterrere(?) 184. 

Gallia 52. 
Gallograccia 20. 

devincere 164, 185. 

devovere 188. 

Gallograeci 13, 33. 

dextra 166. 

Gallus 44, 

dicere 114. 
dies 25, 180. 

gladiatorius 54. 

dimicare 125. 
Diodotus 213. 
diripere 138. 
distribuere 120, 169. 

habere 115, 178. 

Hannibal 64. 
Hasdrubal 122. 

Ditalco 197. 

Hispala 37. 

domus 180. 

Hispani 41, 77. 

donum 165. 

Hispania i, 216. 

duo 141, 177. 

homo 51. 

Hoslilius, A. Host. Mancinus 

edere 43. 

112. C. Host. Mancinus 

esse 5, 63, 122. 


et 18, 21, 37, 38, 82, 103, 

hostis 186. 


evincere 177. 

idem 180. 

ex 20. 

in 5. 34, 63, 71, 7,5, 91, 92, 

exercitus 96, 126. 

108, III, ii6, 125, 126, 

exoriri 89. 

174, 180, 187, 2q4, 208, 

exspirare 207. 


incendium 128. 

Fabius, Q. Fabius 4. Q. Fa- 

indicium 40 (?). 

bius Maximus 149, 171, 

ingenuus 85. 


insidiae 187. 

facere 104, 186. 

intercedere 27. 

Fecenia 37. 

interesse 180. 

ferre 1 16. 

interfector 201. 

fides 95. 

interpellare 183. 

filius 100, loi, 120, 141, 

invisus 155. 


Italia 44. 

fingere 72. 

iterum 3. 

flamen 4. 

iubere 91. 

Flaminia via 30. 

indicium. See indicium. 

iugulare 198. 

lunius Brutus 200, 203, 216. 

Lacedaemonii 18. 

Laelius 176. 

Latini 32. 

legatio 114. 

legatus III, 121, 135. 

Lentulus. See P. Cornelius 

liber 11, 66, 87, 173, 199. 
libcrare 14, 97. 
liberi 118, 162. 
Licinius 203. P. Licin. Cras- 

sus 59. P. Licin. 3. L. 

Porcius Licin. 50. 
lictor 184. 
Ligures 30, 49, 77. 
Literninum 26. 
Livius 19, and see Villius. 
locus 92. 
Lucius 21,27,45, 52,67,75, 

78,88,113, 145, 152,153, 

ludus 46, 60. 
lugere (?) 207. 
Lusitani 6, 83, 98, 136, 167, 

171, 187, 212. 

Macedonia 179. 
magistratus 79. 
magnitude 211. 
Mancinus 112, 215. 
Manilius, M'. Manil. 88, 103. 

L. INIanil. Vulso 113. 
Manius 88. 
Manlius, Cn. Manl. 2. L. 

Manl. 21. M. ]\Ianl. 81. 

T. Manl. Torquatus 178. 
manus 55. 
Marcellus 44. ]\L Claudius 

Marcell. 58. 
Marcius Censorinus 88, 103. 
Marcus 58, 74, 81, 82, iii, 

114, 115, 150, 215. 
mare 71. 

Masinissa 121, 122. 
mater 38. 

maximus 3, 4, 120, 128. 
Maximus 149, 171, 185. 



Metellus, L. INIetcIl. 167. Q. 
Metell. 127, i53(?), 160. 
millia (piglum) 51. 
niinari 8. 
Minucius 21. 
Miliums 197. 
mittere 121. 
multa 205. 
Miimmius 145, 168. 
munire 31. 
Myrtilus 21. 

ne 26, 177. 
nee 115. 
negare 202. 
Nobilior 82. 
nobilis 14. 
nomen 211. 
non 133, 180, 220. 
Numantini 174, 212. 

obicere 196. 
Oblivio 217. 
obsidere 133. 
occidere 16, I23(?), 164. 
Occius 186. 
occupare 102. 
omnis 91, 207. 
oppidum 169. 
Ortiagon 14. 

Pamphylia 13. 

pater 73. 

pati 15. 

pax 3, 6, 186. 

pccunia 34. 

pellere 94. 

pensare (?) 16. 

per 20, 30, 73, 98, 102, 107, 

120, 138, 194. 
perdoniare 31. 
Pcrgameni (?) 1 1 1 . 
persolvere 35. 
persuadere 45. 
pes 1 1 5. 

petere 8, 79, 156. 
Petillius, L. Petill. 75. Q. 

Petill. 25. 
Petronius 150. 

Pliilippus loi. Phil. Poenus 

Piso 191. 

planus. See primus, 
plebs 27, 78, 183, 204, 206. 
podagricus 112. 
Poenus 97. 
Pompeius 170, 174. 
pontifex 4. 
Popilius 191. 
populus 107, 205, 206. 
Porcia basilica 57. 
poscere. See pensare. 
post 46. 
Postumius, A. Post. 76. Sp. 

Post. 36. 
potestas 142. 
potiri 214. 
praeda 20. 
praetor 4, 135. 
prex 205. 
primutn 43. 
primus 217. 
pro 206. 
producere 99. 
proelium 13, 18, 134. 
profectio 183. 
proficisci 5. 
propositum 9 (?), 163. 
prospere 125. 
Publius 3, 50, 59, 74, 84, 

200, 219. 
Pulcher 50. 
pupillus 37. 
Punicus 89. 

-que 16, 165, 180, 214. 

qui 5, 22, 26, 35, 38, 100, 

104, 119, 155, 164. 
Quirinalis 5. 
Quintius 52. 
Quintus 4, 25, 81, 149, 160, 

170, 171, 186. 
quod 4, 53, 84, 122. 
quondam 1 1 3. 
quot 78. 

redire 93. 
referre 40. 

regnum 119. 

relinquere 1 19. 

remittere 165. 

res 216. 

respondere 114, 181. 

Rethogenes 161. 

reus 99. 

revocare 26. 

rex 6, no. 

Roma 33, 169. 

Romanus i, 93, 133, 135. 

Rutilius 38. 

sacrarium 127. 

sagulum 165. 

Salassus. See Sapiens. 

Salinator 19. 

Sapiens 176. 

Sardinia 5. 

Scantinius 115. 

Scipio, L. Cornelius Scipio 
27, 45. P. Corn. Scipio 
Africanus 25. P. Corn. 
Scip. Aemilianus 74, 94, 
120, 123, 138, 210. P. 
Corn. Scip. Nasica 200, 

Scordisci 175. 

scriba 75. 

se 1 01. 

senectus 118. 

Sergius 152. 

Servilius Caepio 176, 182, 

Sibylla 189. 
signum 168. 
Silanus 178. 
singuli 209. 

socius 107, awi/jei• occidere. 
spectaculum 54. 
Spurius 36. 
statua 168. 
stolidus 113. 
stuprare 85. 
siuprum 1 16. 
subigere 42, 136. 
subsellium 123. 
suffragium 194. 
SuUani 218. 



suus 53, 55, 179, 180, 184. 
Syria 157, 214. 

tabella 194. 
tabernaculum 61. 
tabula 168. 
tertius 89. 
Tiberius 182. 
Titus 178. 
Theoxena 70. 
Thessalia 126. 
tollere 41. 
Torquatus 178. 
transferre 35. 

transire 217. 

tribunus 27, 78, 183, 204, 

Tryplion 213. 
tutor 38. 
Tyrcsius 164. 

ullimus 108, 118. 
urbs 192. 
Uticenses 89. 
uxor 140, 146. 

vastare 13, 83, 157, 212. 
vates 62. 

vcneficium 51. 

venire (veneo) 209. 

venire (venio) 91. 

verna 193. 

vexare 167. 

ViUius 78. 

vir 16. 

virga 208. 

Viriathus 172, 185, 198, 

virtus 96. 
vis 15. 
votivus 46. 
V'ulso 113. 

Αρσινόη (Philadelphus?) 807. 
Ptolemy Alexander I. 

Πτολ. [ό και ' Α.\(ξαι>δρθ! ueos] ΦΑομήτωμ και Bepevixq 802. 0//1. Ώ(ρ(νίκη 824. 


Κα'ισαρ 711. 3' 6; 721. 4 elsaep.; 731. 2, 4, 15; 742. 16; 743. 17, 44) 744. 
15; 826. 


TijSf'pcot Καίσηρ 'ί,φαστόί 74Θ. 12. 


etof Κλαύδιοί 713. 15; 803. 


Αίτοκρ. Καΐσ. Δομιτιανοι ΣίβαστοΓ Γ<ρμανι<όι 722. 2. 


Αϋτοκρ. titpovas Καΐσ. Σ(βαστόι 713. 41» 44• 


Αίτοκρ. Καίσ. Tpaiavot 'Abpiavos 2(β. 714. 2^, 32 ; 715. 27, 3^ ; 72β. 2 ; 729. 34, 3^; 

730. 32- 

'ASpiavbs Καίσ. ό κύριοι 707. ίρι 33 '> Ί*• ^9, ^4 ; 716. 8, 20 ; 730. 6. 

Antoninus Pius. 

Αντοκρ. Καίσ. Tiror Αϊλιοϊ 'ASpiavos ΆντοΗ-ϊνο» ΐφ. Έΰσφή! 723. Ι ; 724. 14 ; 728. 25 ; 
729. 45 ; 732. 6. om. ΤΙτογ 727. 29. 

Ύιτος ΑιλίΟί Άίμιανόϊ Αντωνιι/ος ΚαΙσ. 6 κνριος 729. 39• 

'AvTwv'ivot Καϊσ. ό κύριος 712. 13 ; 724. 5 ; 728. 17, 4^ ; 732. 3 ; 733. Ι ; 800 


Marcus Aurki.ius and Verus. 

Αΐιρηλιοι Άντωνΐνο! και Ονηρο! οί κύριοι 2fj3. 734. Ι. 


Αυτοκρ. Καίσ. Μάρκος Αίιρήλιιΐί Ko/i/xoSus Άντων'ιυοί Εϋσιβη! Ευτυχή! 2(/9. Άρμ. Mij8. Ώαρβ, 
Σαρμ. Γ(ρμ. M/yiaror Βρίτ. 71Θ. 23- 

Αυτοκρ. ΚϋΤσ. MapKus Αΰρηλιοί Κο/ί^ίοδοϊ Άιτωνΐνο! Σίβ. Ά/)μ. MijJ. Π<ι/)5. Σαμμ. Γίρ/χ. 
Μί'γισΓΟΓ 725. 57• 

Pescennius Niger. 

Γάιθ£ Π<σ«Ίτιοί Niyip Ίοϋστοϊ Σ€/3. 719. 5ι 28. Cf. 801. 

Septimius Severus and Caracalla. 

Αΰτοκρ. ΚαΊσ. Αοΰκιος Σ(πτίμιο! Σ(θυηροί Κΰσ(β!)! Τ1(ρτίναξ 2fj3. Άραβ. Άίιηβην. ΤΙαρθ. 
Μέγιστος και Αΰτοκρ. Καΐσ. Μάρκος Ανρηλιος ^ΑντωνΙνος 1ίυ'Τ(βη•ί Σ^β. 705. ϊ, 54• 
Αΰτοκρ. Σ(ουηρο! και ΆντωνΊνυς 705. Ι5ι ^5• 
οΊ κύριοι Σ(β. 735. ΙΟ. 
Αυτοκράτορα! 705. ig, "JO. 


Philippus Augustus ii et Philippus Caesar cos. 720. 6. 

Αΰτοκρ, Kuta. Yaws Μίσσιος Κίιντος Tpaiai/os Δί'κιο$ Έ,ΰσαβ. Κΰτυχ. 2€,3. 658. 1 8. 

{a) Months. 

ΔίσΓροί {τΰβή 723. I . 

lulius 737. I. 

Kaioapdoc (Mee-opij) 715. 33; 722. 3; 789; 

Nfpuw(or (Χοι'ακ) 808. 

J^(p<uv(ii>s Sf βαστάς (Xoi'iiif) 803. 
2(βαστά: (θώί) 713. 1 5- 

Sextilis 737. 21. 
'Χπίρβιρίταιος {ίιί(σορη) 722. 2. 

(ί) Days. 

ί'παγίμίναι ήμίραι, e 715. 33ι 37 J 5" 722. 

3. 43• 
Idus 737. 5 ei saep. 

Καλάι-δαι 747. 2. 

Kalendae Sextiliae 737. 21. 
Nonae luliae 737. i. 

Σφαστή (Caesarius, 6lh intercalary day) 
722. 3. 




'Κβάσκαντοί 71β. 5, 29. 
Άβύς 728. 3. 

'Ayaffivoi father of Diodorus 713. 8; 723. 2. 
•λθη{ ) 736.3 7. 

'λθηνόίωροί, OvaKtpws ΆΘ. 800. 
ΑίλιαίΌΓ, Άντώνιοί Αίλ. 708. 2, 1 5. 
Άλίξαν&ρο! 718. 6. 

'AXfiavS/jos father of Leonides 713. 9. 
Άλίί 744. I, 1 6. 

Άμμωνάς 736. 69. 

Ά/ίμώποί 734. 4 ; 791 ; 825. 
'Αμμύν>ο! father of Achilleus 722. 11. 
Άμ/ιώΐΊοί son of Apollonides 729. 3η, 38. 
Ά/ιμώΐΊοι (or Άπο\\ώηοή father of Didymus 

719. 2, 8, II. 
Άμόΐί father of Diogenes 728. 3, 36. 
Άμόΐί also called Papontos, son of Diodorus 

733. 3. 
ΆνθίστίΠ! 707. 12, 34. 
'AuBtaTius Ώρί'ψο! also called Lollianus 718. 

2 ^2. 

•Αιτ5ί 736. 30, 36 ; 742. i ; 745. 3 ; 811 (.')• 
Άντίμως SOU uf Liicietius 817. 

ΆντωνΙα 736. 54- 

Αντώνιο! Λίλιακύί 708. 2, 1 5. 

ΆπίΪ£ son of Apeis 732. 3. 

Άπίων, ΓάιοΓ Mapicior Άπ. also Called Diogenes 

727. 6, 10, 27. 
Άπίω!- son of Horion 728. 5, 14, 22, 36. 

'AjroXiwiptos, rdios Μάρκιοί Άπ. also called 

Julianus 727. 7, 10, 27. 

Απόλλωνήριον 744. 2. 

Άπολλωνάριον, oiaXfpla Άπ. also called Nica- 

rete 727. 17. 
Άπο^ωΜηί father of Ammonius 729. 35. 
Άπολλώι/ιοί 714. 8 ; 718. 8, 32 ; 739. i ; 791. 
ΆπολλώνιοΓ son of Apollonius 726. 5. 

Απολλώνιο! βιβλιοφύλαξ 713. 2. 

Απολλώνιο! (or Αμμώνιο:) father of Didymus 

719. 2, 8, II. 
Απολλώνιο! son of Diogenes 726. 5. 
Άπολλώι/ίοΓ father of Dionysius 724. 2. 
ΆπολλώΐΊΟί son of Dorion 716. 4, 28. 
ΆπολλώΐΊΟί Libyan 743. 37. 
ΆπολλώίΊΟί scribe of the city 714. 6. 
Άίτολλώνιοί father of Valerius 730. 2, 35. 
Άπολλύίνον! 722. 15, 28, 39• 

Άπολλώ! son of Ophelas 837. 
Άπολλώς daughter of Paesis 837. 
Άρη! ])lanet 804. 

Άρθώνΐ! father of Thonis also called Morous 
725. 63. 

*Αριστίων 786. 

Άρπαλο! son of Hermon 808. 
Άρσΰ! 728. 2, 29. 

Άρτιμα! 745. 2. 

'AprfpiSapos 715. 24. 

Άρχϊλαο! 721. ΙΟ. 

Άσί7;5 717. 6. 

Άσκληηιιίδη! 794; 806. 

Άσκληπιά^η! also Called Sarapion, gym- 

nasiarch 716. i. 
Άσκληπιά^ηί father of Sarapion 723. 4. 
Ανρηλία Άμμωνάριον 720. 8. Aurelia Ammo- 

narion 720. 2. 
Αΰρηλία Λαΐ5 daughter of AureliusL thion 

658. 15. 
Αυρήλιο! Αιόσκορο! son of Aurelius L thion 

658. 13. 

Αίρήλιιΐ! A 6ίων son of Thcodorus 658. 3. 

Ανρήλιο! Πληντάμμων 720. 9, 1 3. Aurelius 

Plutammon 720. 4. 
ΑίρηλιοςΏρίων e.x-archidicastes 705. 7, 18.58, 

[.Ιαυσίί son of Sipos 708. 4. 
Avidus, Gradius Av. 735. 16. 
Ά;^ιλλ«5 son of Thonis 732. 3. 
Άχιλλtίs son of Ammoniu-s 722. 27, 35. 
Άχιλλ(ν! also called Casius, strategus 719. i. 
Άχηρ7νΐ! 807. 
ΆφροΒισιάί 744. 1 1 . 

Barichius 735. 19• 

Βίίσσοί, Γί'λλιοί Β. epistrategus 726. 19• 

Beleus 735. 12, 13• 

BfpoCs 736. 71 ; 744. 2. 

Βησά! 832. 

Βίθυ! father of Papontos 719. 10. 

Chu[ 735. 29. 

Claudius Valerius Firmus praefect 720. I. 

Claudius Sabinus 735. 14. 

Comariinus (?) father of Marrius 735. 3. 

Cumesius (?) 735. 27. 



ΓίίιοΓ Mupiciof Άπίων also called Diogenes 

727. 6, 9, 27. 
rdiot Μάρκίος Άπο\ινάριο! also called Julianus 

727. 6, 9, 27. 

Γάιοϊ 'PoijaTinf 745. 1 1. 

raiof ΣίπτΓίος 'Ρϋίφοϊ 721. I ; 835. 

rnXfVros 715. 5. 

Γαλί'στοΓ SOU of Polemon 715. 2. 

ΓΛλιοί Βασσοϊ cpistrategus 726. 19. 

Γίμ(λλι>! 724. 2 ; 736. 1 2. 

Γ^ 722. 6. 

ropyiaf father of Polemon 715. 3, 12, 17. 

Γοργία? son of Polemon 715. 2, 34. 

Gradius Avidus 735. 16. 

Δαμαρίων 706. ΙΟ, II. 

Aapas 743. 24, 40. 

Αάμων 730. 9• 

Αημητρία 707. 8 ί/ ίίίί/. 

Αημήτριο! 825. 

Δημήτριο! βιΐ^λιοφνλαξ 713. 2, 43• 

Δτϊ/χήτριοί deputy archidicastes, son of Hera- 
clides 727. 4. 

Δημητροϋς 723. 3• 

Δι'δυμοί 784; 786; 791. 

Δίδυμος son of Ammonius or Apollonius 719. 

2, 8, II. 
Δίδυμος sOH of Charit . . . 826. 
Δίθιμοί son of Diogenes (?) 837. 

Atoyat 719. I 7. 

Aioyc'i/.]? 726. 7 ; 801; 838. 

Aioyfifljr son of Amois 728. 3, 23, 29, 36. 

Διογίνη! father of Apollonius 726. 6. 

Δίογίνη! βιβλιοφνλαξ 713. 3. 

Διογίρηί, Γήιοι Μάρκίοί Άττιωκ alsO Called Diog. 

727. 7, ΙΟ, 27- 
AioyiVi/t father of Didymus 837. 

Aioyfvr}s πράκτωρ 733. 2. 

Δ(ογ(';/?)5 son of Sarapion 740. 38. 

Aioyc'fTjr son of Theon also called Dionysius 

716. 17, 30. 
Διόδωρο! father of Amois also called Papontos 

733. 3. 
Διόδωροί father of Agathinus 713. 5, 7 ; 

723. 2. 
Διό8ωρο{ son of Diodorus 713. 4, 21. 
Διονυσία! daughter of Galestus 715. 5. 
Διονύσιο! 718. 5, 12, 17; 790. 
Διονύσιο! son of ApoUonius 724. 4. 
Διοια^σιο; βιβλιοφύλαζ 714. 3, 4. 

Διονύσιο! father of Dionysius 728. 33. 
ΔιοΐΊ/σιοί son of Dionysius 728. 33. 
Διονύσιο! SOU of Phanias 789. 
Διονύσιο! also called Theon 716. 8, 31. 
Διονύσιο! SOU of Theon also called Dionysius 
716. 9, 13. 

Δίόσκορο! 810. 

Διο'σκοροί, Αυρήλιο! Δ, SOU of Aurclius 

L thion 658. 13. 

Δωράι father of Panechotes 716. 3. 
Δωρίων Son of Heras 716. 4, 28. 

Έιρηνίων 712. 17• 

"Ελί'ι/ΐ) 719. 2, II. 

'Έ.\ίνη daughter of Gorgias 715. 17. 

°Eλf^os 743. 22. 

Έπαφρόδ(ΐτο! 743. 2 ζ, 

Έρόσιπηο! 717. 6. 

"Ερμιππο! 811. 

Έρμόδωρο! also Called Philonicus, basilico- 
grammateus 714. 2. 

Έρμύφιλο! 746. 3. 

Έρμων father of Harpalus 808. 

Etiopius (?) 735. 29. 

ΕναγγΆιο! also Called Sarapion, strategus 

Έυγξνίτωρ 741. I. 

Ενδαιμυνί! daughter of Theon also called 

Dionysius 716. 9. 12. 
Εΰτίρττη also called Tanecholarion, daughter 

of Diogenes 726. 7. 
Εϋτυχίδη! 839. 
Εϋφρων 794. 

Firmus, Claudius Valerius F. praefect 720. i. 

Zabdius 735. 13. 
Zebidius 735. 23. 
ZfOs 722. 6. 
Ζμ... 736. 4. 

Ζώιλοϊ 715. 2 2. 

ΖώιλοΓ father of Ptolemaeus 729. 37. 

ΉλιοδωροΓ father of Heliodorus 732. i. 
Ήλιόδωρ"! son of Heliodorus 732. i eJ saep. 
Ήλ.οΓ 722. 6. 
Ήρα goddess 731. 6. 

Ήραδίων 725. I. 
■Ηρακλ[ 800. . 



'HpanXat £on of Sarapion albO called Leon 

725. 3 el saep. 
'HpaicXof son of Tiyphon 722. 21. 
Ήρακλίία 740. 42. 
Ή/)(ΐκλ(ΐδ<;Γ 70β. 2, ίο; 740. 42, 43; 795; 

'UpaKKfihrii basilicogrammateus 74β. ι, 13• 
'HfioKXflSijs ex-exegetes, father of Demetrius 

727. 4- 
'H/jintXfiS;;s• son of ΠοΓΙΟΠ 719. I 8. 
'H^a)cXfi5i)f father of Samus 716. 6, 30. 
'HpnitXfiS?)! father of Sarapion also called Leon 

725. 3. 
'HpnxXd'Sijf flither of Theon 723. 2. 
Ηρακλής father of Xenon 785. 
'H,m: 740. 35. 

'Hpat βιβλιοφν\αξ 715. I, 35. 

'Hpas father of Dorion 71Θ. 5. 
ΉρώΗη! father of Sarapion 730. i. 
Ήρων 738. 99 ; 740. i 7 (!"). 

θηήσΐ! 716. 5; 736. 68. 

θηψτΐ! daughter of Theon also called Diony- 

sius 716. 10, 14. 
Θπι'γ daughter of Diodorus 713. 22. 
θαιωχΐ! son of . . . etis and father of Pather- 

mouthis 712. 4. 
ΘίόδοτοΓ, OwiXf'piuf Θ. also called Polion 727. 

θιό5ωρο! 736. 33, 76. 

θιόδωρα father of Aurelius L thion658.4. 

etoieios 838. 

θ(όφίλο! politarch 745. 4. 

©tW 740. 35 (.''); 748. i; 799. 

θί'ωι/ also called Dionysius 716. 8, 31. 

θί'ω» son of Heraclides 723. 2. 

θυψί! god 808. 

θοτσυτιήο! son of Horus 797. 

θοώΐΊί father of Achillas 732. 3. 

θρασνμηχος 713. 26. 
θωνί! 725. 7- 

θώχΐΓ also called Morous, son of Harihonis 
725. 63. 

lebael 735. i8. 

lerraeus son of Macchana 735. 15. 

Ίι^σοΓί 818. 

Ίλαρίωυ 744. I, l6. 

'louXiawJt, ΓιίιοΓ MapKtot 'ArroXu lipios alfO called 
J. 727. 7, 10, 28. 

ΊΐΓπ-οδ( ) 715. 35. 

I .ρ.μ. . archidicastes, son of Isidorus 727. i. 

Ίσάί 738. 32 ; 739. i. 

Ία-ώώρα daughter of Galas 713. lo. 

Ισίδωρος 818. 

Ίσι'ΛωροΓ ex-exegetes, father of I . r . m . . 

727. I. 
ΊσίΒωρΐ)! father of Valerius 735. 4. 
Ίσχυρίων son of Heradion 725. 1,15, 46. 
lulia Titia lex 720. 5, 14. 
lulius 735. 28. 

Κηικίλιος 736. 55• 

Kt'iXat 713. lo. 

ΚάσιοΓ, 'A;(iXX(t's also Called C. 719. t. 

Kf^aXif 806. 

Κλάροί 734. 2. 

Κληυδια Πτολίμά 810. 

κλαίδιπΓ, Tirof Κ. 3(νοφων epistrategus 718. I . 

Κλίων 734. 4. 
Κι'ψίΐξυί 738. 4) ΙΟ• 

Kvvos son of Ptolemaeus 814. 
Κωμαμΐνη: father of Victor imperial steward 
735. 6. 

ΛαΐΓ, Αυρηλία Λ. daughter of Aurelius 
L thion 658. 15. 

Aaims praefect 705. 40. 

Ααυ&ίκη 738. 95. 

AiovTOs son of Pekuris 732. i c/ saep. 

Αίπτίνη! £on of . . monax 831. 

Af'wii, Ίαραπίωυ also called L., son of Hera- 
clides 725. 3, 61. 

Ae^viirjs son of Alexander 713. 5, 9. 

Α«ύνΙ&ης son of Diodorus 713. 4. 

Λ βίων, ΑίψηΚιο! Λ. son of Theodorus 

858. 3. 

Μβιος 728. I, 2 8. 

Αακρψιο! father of Anteros 817. 

Αοκρίων 812. 

AoWiavot, Άνθίστιο! Upf'tpot also called L. 
718. 2, 32. 

Amnios 812. 

AovKins father of Ptollas 729. 35. 
Αοϊπος praefect 706. 5. 

Αυσιμαχος 822. 

Macchana father of lerraeus 735. 
Malichus son of Saj 735. 24. 
Malichus father of "IhenKS 735. i 

I. ς• 



Μιιλωχώί Ο/'/ΪΟ 735. 5- 

Mn^e/j7€iiOf, ΠίτρώΐΊΟί Μ. praefect 72β. 17. 
Μι'ψκιης, Γ.ιΊοΕ Μ. 'λπίων also Called Diogenes 

72β. 6, 9, 27• 
Miipicios, ΓιίιοΓ Μ. 'Απολιι/ίί()ΐοί also called 

Julianus 727. 6, 9, 27. 
Marrius son of Comarinus (?) 735. 3. 
Mf'Xaf father of Miusis 719. 19. 

MfViTTTTOs 715. 24. 

ΜιΟσίί son of .Alelas 719. 19. 

Μοιμ,ισ . x{ ) father of Pathotes 740. 40. 

ΜηίΛϊ father of Papontos 719. 18. 

Μωροίί also called Thonis, son of Harthonis 

725. 63. 
. . μωναξ father of Leptines 831. 

Ν€θ7ΓΓολψο5 father of . . . on 712. 9. 
Nf^ofOf 739. 3. 

ΐ^ικαρίτη, OiuXf^m ΆποΧΚωνιψων also called N. 

727. 18. 
^ουμην.Οί 715. 22, 

Sii /οφώΐ', TiVot κλαυίιοί ΐ. cpistrategus 718 r. 

Afftvu 810. 

Zf'fav son of Heracles 785. 

'θι>θονό3ΐί 815. 

ouiiXfpi'a '.λτΓολλωκπριοι/ also called Nicarete 
727. 1 6. 

OtiaXf'pios Άβηνόϋωρο! 800. 

OvnXfpioi son of Apollonius 730. 2, 34. 
OinXi'piof BeoSoros also called Polion 727. i6. 
Ονίκτωρ imperial steward, son of Comarinus 

735. 5. 
Omrakios archidicastes 719. 3, 7. 

Pacebius 735. 30. 

Ώαησί! 837. 

Ώαθ(ρμοϋθΐί son of Thanochis 712. 6, 12. 

Πηθώτη! 728. I, 2 7• 

Παθώτης son of Moimes . ch . . . 740. 40. 
Πανάρης also Called Panecliotes, e.x-cosmetcs 

724. I. 
UiivyopaaoCi.t father of . . . nychus 708. 17. 

Πακσι . . . 722. 22. 

Παΐίχώτη! son of Doras 716. 3, 27. 
Πανίχώτηί also called Panares, e.K-cosme:es 
724. I. 

Τίαντωνυμί! 653. 5• 

Παοΰϊ son of Bithys 719. i",. 

Παπ-οχ^ώί also called Amois, son of Diodorus 

733. 3. 
Παποντώς son of Bithys 719. lo, 27, 34. 
Παποντώί son of Mouthls 719. 18. 

ΠασαλΟμίί 740. 2 0. 

Πίΐσ.ί 736. 85(?V 

ΠυυαΙρί! son of Petsiris 808. 

rif κϊρις father of Leontas 732. i, 9. 

ΠΛλ.ί 811. 

IlcTeqat! 722. 32. 

Πίτσ'φΐ! father of Pausiris 808. 
Π(τρώΐΊος Mn/jfprfii/oi praefect 726. 17. 

Πλούταρχος 707. 1 4• 
Πάθος 742. 2. 

noXiVwi' 719. 6. 

Πολί^ωι/ son of Gorgias 715. 4, 1 1. 
Πολ£'μωί' son of Tryphon 721. 2, 9. 
Ποταμών son of Thanochis 712. 4 e/ saep. 

Πρ'ύμης, ' Κνθΐστιος Π. also Callctl LollianUS 

718. 2, 32. 
Πρίμα 736. 17• 
Psenosirius 735. 25. 

Πτολίρά, ΚλπυΛία Πτ. 810. 
Πτο\(μα\ος 790. 

ΠτολίρίηοΓ father of Kunos 814. 
riT-oXfpaios strategus 803. 
ΠτοΧίμαιος son of Zoilus 729. 37. 
Πτολλάί son of Lucius 729. 35. 

Πωλίωι», OvaKipiOt θίόδοτοί also called P. 727. 


Romanus 7P5. 26. 

'ΡούσηοΓ, Γά(05 'P. 745. 1 1. 
'Ροΰφης, Γάιος Σί'ππ -ios Ί'. 721. I 


Sabinus, Claudius S. 735. 14. 

Sadus 735. 2, 20. 

Salmes 725. 32. 

2άμος son of Heraclides 716. 6, 30. 

SnpoiCf daughter of Leonides 713. 5. 8. 

Σαραπας son of Ammonius 722. 8, 21, 37. 

Έαρππίων 707. 1 3 ; 716. 1 3 ; 729. 3 e/ saep. ; 

806; 825. 
Σαμηττιωκ also called Asclepiades,gymnasiarch 

716. I. 
Σαραπίων father of Diogenes 740. 38. 
Σαραπίων also Called £uangelius, strategus 

Σαριιπίων son of Hcraclides 723. 4. 



Σ<φα7Γίων son of Hcrodes 730. i. 

Σαραττίων also called Leon, son of Heraclides 

725. 3, 6 1. 
Sufyanois 722. I I ; 795. 
Σικουιτάί 736. 50. 
Σ(κονντος 736. 8 I. 
SfveWos 799. 

Σίππιο!, Fdiof 2. 'Ρυίφο! 721. I ; 835. 
Σtμύριστns 802. 

Σίμιλις, Σονλπίκιο: Σ. praefect (?) 712. 22. 
Σινθίΰ! 716. 9. 
Σιντότις (or -τον) 794. 

Σιπώί father of [.lausis 708. 4. 

ΣουλτΓΐ'κιοϊ 2ιμιλΐί praefcCt (.?) 712. 2 2. 
ΣτράτοΓ 736. 97• 
Σωγγινΰρι^ 831. 
Σωγ^ΐ'ης 829. 

Ύηαρπαησί! 736. 70• 

Ύανιχωτάριον also called Euterpe, daughter of 

Diogenes 726. 6. 
Τααννωφρις daughter of Panes! . . . 722. 22. 
TiioCs 716. 4. 

Ύαποι>τω! 715. 12, i8 ; 733. 5. 
TanroWms daughter of Caecilius 736. 55. 

Tavpf'ivos 799. 

Toipif 716. II. 

Tf;(wCToCs 809. 

Τίώί 832. 

Themes 735. 21. 

Themes son of JMalichus 735. 17. 

Titia, lex lulia et Tiiia 720. 5, 14. 

TiVot KXuvhos ΑΟΌφών epistrategus 718. i. 

Ύρνφίΐ! 736. 56. 

Τρύφων father of Heraclas 722. 21. 

Τρύφων father of Polemon 721. 2. 

Truphon 735. 27. 

Ύσ((ί daughter of Theon 723. 2. 

Ύσίνπαχον! 719. 10. 

τύχη 736. 1 8. 

Valerius, Claudius V. Firmus praefect 720. i. 
Valerius son of Isidorus 735. 4. 

Φιινίας father of Dionysius 789. 

ΦηϋστοΓ 742. 1,17• 

ΦηΧιξ praefect 800. 

ΦιΚ(ΐνος 707. 12, 1 8, 34. 

Φιλόι /fiitot also called Hermodorus, basilico- 

grammateus 714. i. 
Φίλοντύριον 739. 20. 
Φι•5 736. 14. 

Φωσφόρος 792. 

Χαιράμμων 724. 3• 
Χωρημων 723. ζ. 
Χαρίξηνης 728. 6. 

Χαριτ . ( ) father of Didymus 826. 

Ψάμμις agoranomus 722. 5• 
^(ναμοννίί 695. introd. 

'Qpiye'xijs βφ\ιοφν\αξ 715. I . 

Ώριων father of Apion 728. 5, 36. 
Ώριων father of Heraclides 719. 19. 
Ώριων son of Panechotes 716. 3, 27. 
ΏροΓ 719. 17- 

Ώρος father of Thotsutaius 797. 
Ώφίλάί father of ApoUos 837. 
Ώφίλίί father of Ophelas 727. 8. 
Ώφ(\ά! son of Ophelas 727. 8, 12, 22, 26 

(a) Countries, Nomes, Toparchies, Cities. 

Aegyptus 720. i. 
Άθρφίτη! 712. I, 8. 

Αιγύπτιοι 706. I, 7• 
Aiyun-TOf 727. II• 

Ά\(ξάν8ρ,ια 709. 9; 743. 24; 744. 3, 5; 

799. 'Α\(ξαν&ρ(ων πόλΐί 705. 20, 68, 
ή πό\ις 727. 2. 
'AvTiVOf'is 705. 50 (?)■ 



Αραβία 709. 5. 
Αρσινοίτης 709. 7• 
'Λττικ(!γ 705. 46. 
[Λύ]ια 709. 6. 

Διοπολίτης 708. 2, 15- 

'EXXr;n«ot 784. 
Επτά ρομοί 709. 7• 

Ηλίου πόλΐ£ 719. 2. 9, 12. 
'Ηρακλίο7Γθλίτ7)Γ 715. Ι. 

θηβαί! 708. 2, 15 ; 709. 7 ; 722. 4 
72β. 4 ; 831. 

Ίοι;8(ΐϊ»ι 705. 33 ; Ό'- iiitrod. 

Καβπσίτης ρ. 263. 
Και/ωπικόί 738. 2. 
καΓω χώρη 709. 8. 
ΚυΐΌπολιτί)? 74Θ. 13. 
Κύνου (for Κυνών?) 739. 2. 

AtiSiKOr 743. 37• 

Μακεδών των ^ωγyίvάpίoς π(ζων 831. 
Μ#>ψ.Γ 709. 6 ; 825. 

ΐιίίμφίτηι 825. 

723. Ι ; 

MeriyXiVi/s ρ. 263. 

"0/j;3oi 834. 

Ό|υρΐ)γχίταί 705. 9. 6°• 

Όξυρνγχίτηί (lO/i-Jt) 705. 69; 707. 15; 710. 
2; 719.4, ϊΐ; 721. 3; 727. ij; 746. 13; 

Όξιιρνγχιτών πάλα 718. 4 ', 724. Ι . 
Όξυρΰγχων πό\ΐ{ 707. 13! 713. 6, 1 3 ", 71β. 

7 ; 722. 4. ϊ 2 ; 723. ι ; 725. 2 ; 726. 

3, 8 ; 727. 9 ; 723. 3 ; 730. 2 ; 732. ι ; 

789; 808; 831; 836. 

Όξύρυγχοι (?) 745. 6. 

ΐΐίμσηί τηί f'niyovrjs 730. 4 > 836. 
Πι;λοι'σιο;' 709. 4• 
Ώηλυυσίωται 705. 37* 
Πτολί/ιαίί 839. 

'Ρω/^αϊοι 705. 31 ; Ρ• 263. 

Σίθροίτη! 709. 5• 

Ύανίτη! 709. 5• 
τοιταρχία, άνω 721 9• 

θ/ιοισ(φώ 721. 1 1 ; 808. 

μίση 734. 3• 

Νορασίίτη! (not Oxyrh.) 712. 20. 
χώρα, ή κάτω χ. 709. 8. 

(ί?) Villages, ^ποίκια, τΰττοι. 

Εύ</)γίτ[ΐί 814. 

ΉρακΚίίίου (ττοΐκιον 838. 

θ€λ/3ώ 814. 

θίω[ 740. 35- 

θ . BiBis 794. 

θώλΛί 695. introd. ; 740. 35• 

θώσβΐ{ 721. 9 ; 728. 2, 4, 6. 

Ί|3ίων Τΐαχνοϋβΐ! (Heracleop.) 715. 21. 

Ίσιον Ά . . . 732. 2. 

Ίσιοκ Ύρϋφωνοί 719. ΙΟ, 14. 

ΚίρκίμοΰνΐΓ 746. 7 ; 837. 
ΚίσμοίχΐΓ 740. 40 : 808. 
Κϋνου (^Κυι-ών?) 739. 2. 


Μαγδώλα 740. 43• 

Μ(ρμ(ρθ{α?) 740. ι6 ; 823. 

ΜοΟχίί 784. 

Μων^μψίΰ (not 0χ}τΗ.) 713. 20. 

Νί'κλτ) 742. 1 7- 

Nffitpa 797. 
Nf'crXa 713. 24, 3'• 

Όξνρί•γχηΐί (Dat. ? = Όξ. πο'λΐί) 745. 6. 

ΠαγκΟλίΕ 732. 5• 
Π(ΐλώσΐ5 808. 
ΙΙαώμΐ! 740. 24. 
Παννώ 713. 26. 

Πί'λη 740. 20, 21, 37• 3^; 835. 

Πί'τνΐ) Τι«υλ( ) τύποι 734. β. 



Σ(ν€Κ(\(ΰ 740. 26. 
7,(ν(πτα 730. 3, 39. 
SfVcit 718. 13. 
Σ€ΐΌκω/ι[ 740. 37, 38. 

Σίρϋφΐί 707. 20 ; 740. ι8. 
Σίφώ 803. 
Σιναρύ 810. 

Τα«:ολ( ) 734 3, .5• 

Ύακόνα 743. 29. 

Ταλαώ 695. introd. 

Ύαμανί! (FayOm) ρ. 263• 

Ύίπονίί 721. 9• 

Τήΐί 808. 

Το€/χϊσΐί (Heracleop.) 715. 6, 13, 14- 

Τρύφωνηί'ίσιην 719. ΙΟ, Ι4. 

*Λίμα;(( ) (Heracleop.) 715. 24. 

Δάμανοί 730. 9- 

ΐ,ΰφρονοί α\η 7Θ4. 

Ζωιλου και ΐ^ονμηνίον 715. 2 2. 

θρασυμάχον παριιμίνη 713. 2 6. 

(ί) κληροί. 

Μίνίττπου κπί ^Αρτ^μί^ωρον 715. 24. 

Sf'paiiios 810. 

Χαριξ(ίνου 728. 6. 

Ίΐ7ΐΓ<ων Παρ(μ/3ολ^; 7ββ. 

(ί/) άμφοδα. 

Νότου Δρόμου 788. 
Νότου Κρι;πΐδοΓ 714 II. 

(ί) Buildings, &c. 

'Λδ/>ιαι/ή βιβλιοθήκη 710. 35• | Sapairtfiov 738. 25 ; 832 ; 835. 

(/) Deme and Tribe. 

Σασικόσμιοί 6 κα\ Ηλι[ (?) 712. 9- 

Τη 722. 6. 

Zfur 722. 6, 
ΉλιοΓ 722. 6. 

(α) Gods. 

Ήρα 731. 6. 

6f6s 858. 8 ; 715. 28. Cf. Index ii. 
Θηήρΐί 806. 



a^y^tfpaTfvaa'i 718. 3. 

{b) Priests. 

iepfvs θοήριοΓ βΟβ. lep. και άρχιίικαστη^ 71Θ. 

3 ; 727. 2. 

άστρα 'Hpas 731. 6. 
θνσία 658. 2. 
I't/xi SC. yi 721. 7. 

(<r) Miscellaneous. 

iepariKo'i τόποί 707. introd. 

Upav (' oiTering ') 658. 1,12: 784. 

ifpof (■ temple ') 785. 

Ίσ€ΐα 731. 5. 


άγορανήμη! 722. 4. 

οίτητήί 788. 

αριθρός, πρώτων αριθμών 'ητπιίί 735. 8. 

ίϊρ;(ΐδίκαστΐ7ϊ, Ί . . . Ισίδωρου itpfui και αρχώ. 

(α. D. 154) 727. 2. Οϋιτάλιη: Up. Κίΐ\ άρχω. 

(α. D. 193) 719. 3> 7• Δι;μι)τριθ5 Ήρακλί ίδου 

^ιίττων τα κατά Ttju αρχώικαστίίαν ^Α. D. 154) 

727. 4• 

/3<ισ(λ(κό; γραμματινς, ΉρακΚήδη! (λ. D. 1 6) 746. 

1,13. Φιλοιχικο; ό και Έρμόδωροί (a.C 1 2 2) 

714. Ι. 
βιβλωφύλαξ 712. Ι ; 713. 3 ; 714. 5 ; 715. ι. 
βοηθύ! 734. 4• 

γίγνμΐ'ασιαρχηκώς 715. Ι, 35• 

γραμματίίαΙΟΒ. 13 ! 715. 35 > 835. βασιλικοί 

■γρ. Sec βασιλικοί, γ/). KaTii\iiy(lov 719. 6. 

yp. ΤΓο'λεωΓ 714. "] . 
γυμνασίαρχο: 716. 1. 

8(κάδαρχη! 747. Ι. 

(ξηγητ(ί'σα! 714. 6. 

(ξηγητής (of Alexandria) 727. ι, 5• 
ϊπικριτήί 714. 5, 3^- 
ΐΤτιστατ^Ία φνΧακιτών 803. 
ί'πιστάτηί των Ιππάρχων 790. 
ΐπιστράτηγο:, Γί'λλιοί Βάσσοί (a.D. 1 35) 726. 
ι8. ΕίΐΌφώι/ (a.D. 180-92) 718. 1. 

('πιτηρητη: ξf νικών πρακτορείας 712. Ι, 8. 
Ι'φοδοΓ 710. 4• 

η•/ίμονΐνσαί, ΦηΚιξ (ο. A.D. Ι 53) 800. 
ήγ(μών, AoCwor (c. 1 1 5) 706. 5• Π{τρώΐΊ0Γ 
Μαμιρτΰνοζ (a.D. 135) 726. 17. Σουλπικιοί 

2φΐλΐΓ 712. 2 2. Λιιίτοί (a.D. 200-2) 705. 
39• Claudius Valerius Firmus (λ. d. 247) 
720. I. 

iepSiV, oi (π\ των UpSiv και θυσιών 653. I. 

ϊττπαρχο! 790. 

iTTTriur πρώτων αριθμών 735. 8. 

κ(κοσμητ(υκΰ>ί 724. Ι. 

κριτηί 726. 20. 

κωμογραμματ(ύ! 718. Ι3ι 20, 20. 

λαογράφος 786. 

μαχαφοφόρος 889. 

οικονόμος ουικάριος 735. 6. 

οτττίων 735. 5. 

οι'ικάριοί, οίκο«^^θ5 οΰικ. 736• 6. 

pedes 785. 1 2. 
π(ζός^ οι Σωγγινάριος ηίζοί 831. 
ΐΓθλιτάρ;^ι;£ 745. 4• 
πραγματ€υτηί 825. 

υ a 


πρακτορεία ξινικων 712. 1,8; 825. 
πράκτωρ άργυρικων 733. 2 ; 734. 3• 

σιτολήγο! 708. ΙΟ, 21 ; 740. 24, 26; 798; 

στρατηγό! 708. 2, ι8; 717. 7, 1 1 ", 718. 24- 
(Of Alexandria) Ί . . . . 'Ισιδώρου γινόμινος 
στρ. (a.D. 154) 727. 2. Αίρήλιοί Ώριων 
yfW/x. στρ. (a.D. 2ΟΟ-2) 705. 18, 67. (Of 

Oxyrhynchus) ΠτολψαίοΓ (late ist cent. 

B.C.) 803. Άχιλλίν! 6 Kui Κάσιοί (a.D. I93) 

719. I, 4. 


τοπογραμματίΰί 833. 

ίπηρίτη! 712. I 7. 

φυλακίτη! 803. 
φύλαξ 803. 

χαριστή! 734. 2. 
χιλι'αρΧ"£ 708. Ι3• 
χρηματιστής 719. 7 ; 727. 3- 

ώρογράφο! 710. 3• 

(a) Weights and Measures. 

ύίκαινα 669. 29, 41. 
ίμμα 669. ZQ. 

npuupa 713. 24 ct saep.; 716. 26 ; 718. 8 et 
saep.; 721. 10, 11, 14; 728. 7, 8, 30; 
729. 33 ; 730. 8, 39 ; 740. 41 et saep. 

ϋρτάβη 708. 4, II, 17, 19 ; 718. if,; 735. 
9 ; 736. 8 el saep. ; 788 ; 789 ; 836. 

βήμα 669. 28, 37. 

Sl'lKTvKn! 669. 14, 17, 26, 43. 

Κίσμη 742. 4, 13. 
δίαυλοι/ 669. 30. 

{κατοστή 708. 8, g, 20. 

κάλαμο! 669. 28, 4I. 

Ktpapwv 729. 36 ; 745. ι ; 784. 

κοτύλη 784. 

λιχάί 669. 2 7, 3'- 

μίτρον 669. 26 ; 707. 26, 28, 30 ; 717. ι, 2 ; 

729. 27. μ. άγορανομικύρ 83β. μ. 5ημ6σιον 
740. ΐ8, 20. μ. ('μβ{ολικόν?) 740. 1 8. 
μ. σιτολογικόν 740. Ι7• μ• τίτραχοίι/ικον 
άγορανομικύν 836. μ, χαλκονν 717. 8. 
μίΚιον 669. 3°• 

ι/αΰ/3ιοι/ 669. II, 24- 

ξίλον 669. II, 20, 2 1, 2 8. ξ. βασιλίκόν 669. 
II, Ι9• ί• δημόσιον 669. 38. 

SySoof 669. Ι, 2. 
όργυιά 669. 28, 39• 

παλαιστή! 669. 13, ΐ6, 27, 3^> 34• 

τΓ^χυί 669. 2 ί/ Ji2f/>. π. δημόσιο! 669. 34• 
π. ϊμίϊαδικός 669. 6, ΙΟ. π. (Ιθνμ(τρικΟ! 
669. 5• "■• λ'ΐ'οί'φικόί 669. 33• "■• NfiXo- 
μίτρικο! 669. 35• '"■ οικοπ(δικΟ! 669. 9• 
π. aTcpfui 669. 7• "■. τίΚ70ΐΊκΟ£ 669. 35• 

πλίθρον 669. 2 9- 

ποίΐ! 669. 2 7, 3^• 

πυγών 669. 27, 34• 

σπιθαμή 669. 27, 3^• 
ffTOSiof 669. 29. 
σχοινίον 669. 1,3, 1 8. 

τετάρτη 795. 

χοΣι/ι| 740. 1 8 et saep.; 789. 
χοίί 736. 15; 739. ιι ; 819. 



{b) Coins. 

apyiprnv 708. 3; 712. 6, 15; 724. 6 ; 728. 
9 el saep.; 729. 6, 13, 20, 40; 730. 12, 
37; 731. 8, 9, 10, 12; 784; 788; 791; 

808. cipy. (ττίσημον 722. 1 9. apy. 2f- 
βαστοΰ νομίσματος 719. 2 1 ; 722. 2$. 
as 737. 2 ί/ SOfp. 

δραχμή 707. 8 f/saefi.; 712. 6, 14, 15, 21; 
719.21,31; 722.19,25; 724:. 6 e/ sae/}.; 
725. 22 e/ saep.; 728. 9 et saep.; .729. 6 
i/ ίίΖί/>. ; 730. 12, 14, 37; 731. 8, 9, ii, 
12 ; 732. 5 i/ ίΛί/. ; 733. 4, 6; 736. 2 
etsaep. ; 739. 2 i/ jrtf/>. ; 742. 14 ; 745. i ; 
784; 788; 791-2; 799; 803; 808; 
817; 819. 

hpaxpia'ioi τόκος 712. 14; 728. 20. 

ήμιωβΆίον 733. 4, 6; 73β. 1 2 et saep.; 739. 
8, II. 

μνά 728. 21. 

οβοΚιαΧος 729. ΙΟ. 

ό/3ολ(5ί 731. 8, II, 13 ; 738. ^elsaep. ; 739. 

7 ei saep. 

πιντώβολον 733. 4, 6; 738. 68 ί/ iai/. ; 
739. 6. 

semis (^ as) 737. 1 1 <■/ saep. 

τύλαντον710.6-8; 722.17,20; 784; 808. 
τ^τρύβολον 722. 20 ; 734. 5, 6; 738. 1 2 

et saep. ; 739. 4, 13• 
τριώβολον 738. 8 ί/ jaf/. ; 739. 11, 16; 


χαλκό? 722. 20. χαλκοί 743. 23• 


apyvpiK('i 733. 2 ; 734. 3• 
>λν( ) 734. 4• 

γραμματικύν ρ. 263. 
(πικίφάΚαιον 832. 
\(ΐογραφία 714. 23 ; 733. 5• 
ι/αΰλοί' πορ(ίων 792. 
iiwra 712. 1, 8; 825. 
ol'i/uu τΛ<)£ 788. 

πρακτορικαι 8απάναι 712. 2 Ι . 
προσμ€τρονμ(ΐια 708. Ι 2. 

σιτικά 798. 

σιτολογικόΐ' 740. 2 2, 2 7• 
σιτομ(τρικόν 740. 23, 25. 
σπον&ή 730. Ι3• 
σι{ ) 734. 4• 

rAos 712. 6 ; 788. 
fiKi) 733. 4, 6. 

φορικά, Αρσινόη! φορ. 807. 
φόρο! nop'pfws 732, 4• 




abire 720. 13. 
ι'βροχο! 740. 45 ; 810. 
I'yttv 742. 7. 

ay(uip-f]Tos 705. 74- 

ayopaCdv 717. 3 ; 742. 12 ; 745. 2 ; 839. 

ά•^ορανομ(Ίον 713. I 3. 

ayopavopiKOs 836. 

ayopav6μoί 722. 4. 

(ΐγομαστόϊ 798. 

«yum 722. 12, 34; 723. 5; 726. 9. 

ayaviav 744. 4, 13. 

aywulCfaBai 705. 50, 5 1. 

ΰδΛφί 716. 17 ; 744. i ; 745. i. 

ιΊδίλφιδοϋς 727. 1 6. 

<l&(\(f>6s 707. 34; 712. 5, 12 ; 713. 21, 30; 
716. 17; 717. 6; 718. 8, 10; 719. 15; 
725. 6 ; 743. i ; 791. 

αδιακρίτως 715. 36. 
t'diKos 717. 10; 718. 23. 
ίίδολυ! 729. 19; 836. 
ad 658. 6; 719. 13. 
αθ€τίζ(ΐν 808. 
α'ιθριον 719. 15, 1 6. 
αίί 807. 

aipeiv 719. 26; 728. 12; 729. 21, 31, 41, 
43; 787; 800. 

αφισΐ! 716. 22; 729. 41. 
αΐτΰν 709. 12. 
αΐτητη! 788. 
αιτία 725. 4Ι• 
άκαινα ββθ. 29, 4Ι• 
άκίνδυνοί 730. Ι5• 

άκολοί^ωί 706. 9 ; 718. ίο; 729. Ι4• 


ολα (sic) 794. 

άλιστρα 736. 8, 31, 34. 72, 7*5; 739• 6• 

άλή^ίΐα 715. 29. 
άλλάσσαν 729. 43• 
aXXijXcyyi;?; 712. 12, Ι5• 
ΰλλτ/λί'γτυοΓ 729. 21. 

άΧλήλοι,! 713. II, ι6; 719. 2θ; 724. 6; 

727. 2 8. 
ά\μυρίί 736. 73; 740. 46. 
«λί 736. 7, 7•<• 
άμα 658. 13; 798. 
άμ^ίνων 716. 2 Ι . 

a^fXiii/ 707. 31 ; 742. 14. 
άμψπτως 724. ιο; 729. 1 8. 
(ϊμΕτάοτρ^πτοί 705. 02. 
(ΐ/ιισ(9ί 729. 9• 

άμμα 669. 29• 
αμοιβή 705. 6ΐ. 

άμπ(\ο! 707. 23, 36; 729. ι8. 
άίΐπ•6λών 707. 19; 729. 33. 35• 

άμφισβήτησις 745. 9• 

■νψοδοι/ 714. 26. Cf. Index V (</). 
άμφάτίρο! 707. 12; 715. 2; 716. ιο^ 728. 

Ι, 28. 
άναβά\\(ΐν 729. 6, 28. 
άι/ά/ϊασίΓ 742. 6. 
αναβολή 729. 7 ; 741. Ι3• 
άνάγ(ΐν 707. 2 3, 3^• 

avayiyvwaKfiv 70β. 5; 724. ΙΟ ; 743. ι8. 
άvayκάζeιv 717. 2, 1 4. 
άναγράφίΐν 730. 7• 
άνάκτι^σΐΓ 705. 7 6. 

άναλαμβάνιιΐ' 707. 25, 35 ; 719. 32 ; 721. 5, 

6, 7 ; 724. 8. 
άνάλωμα 740. 28 ; 825 ; 836. 

ακύπλου; 709. 3• 

αναπομπή ρ. 202. 

ακαιΓΧίυά^ίΐι. 745. 5• 

άναφαιρ(τω! 713. 19• 

ανατολή 725. 1 2 . 

αΐ'«( ) 833. 

άκήρ 710. 3; 719. 24. κατ' άκίρα 709. 

άvβυμoλoyt^v 743. 34. 40• 

Λίρωττοί 705. 1 6, 66; 805. 

αΐΊστανα» 707. 25. 

άνοικοδομΰν 707. 2 7• 

άνόκνω! 743. 39• 

αντίγραφαν 719. 3, 4, 9• 

άιτ£κι.ήμιον 722. 34• 

άντιποιΰν 718. 30• 

αντισυμβϋλίΐϊ. ρ. 263. 

άιτιτάσσίΐϊ. 707. 17, 3^• 

αντίφωνων 805. 

avveiv ρ. 202. 

«κω 712. 20 ; 721. 19; 736. 31 ; 744. 8. 

άνα^θιν 718. 2 1 ; 745. 4• 

άξιοί 725. 2g-35• 


u^ioC» 658. 16; 705.51,60; 716. 19; 719. 
32; 727. 29; 805; 826. 

ι]|ιωσίί 705. 14, 64. 

anaiTt'iv 718. 23, 29; 727. 18; 803. 
αηα'ίτησκ 718. 14 ; 722. 28. 
άπαρτίζ(ΐν 724. 12. 
offiXfuifpof 70Θ. 2 ; 716. 6, 29. 
άτΐ(\(ΐ•θ(ροΙν 706. 8 ; 722. 1 8. 

dnfpyaaia 729. 2, 8. 

άπίρίλντοί 713. 39. 

ηπίρχίσθαι 709. 4• 

aWxitv 719. 22; 808. 

άπηΧιώτη! 719. 1 7, 19! 728. 7• 

djrXois 719. 9- 

απόγραφαν 713. 34 ! '15. 6, 36. 

απογραφή 715. 3°; 719. 24) 808. 

άποίίχίσθαί 705. 59• 

άποΒιδόναι 705. 6ι ; 718. 1 8, 2ΐ; 728. ι8; 

729. 15, 19, 42, 43; 730. 22; 744. ι6; 

746. 7 ; 74Θ. 3 ; 798 ; 836. 
άπό&οσΐ5 712. ι6; 729. 17; 808. 
απόθνησκαν 718. 12. 
άποίκο! 719. 2, 9, II• 
αΐ7θλα/χ;3ά>'€ΐΐ' 706. 3- 
άπολλΰΐ'αι 743. 23• 
άπομίτράν 798. 
άποσπάν 724. Ι3• 
άποστ(Κ\αν 742. 3 ; 744. 8. 
άποστίρητήί 745. 7• 
αποστολή 736. Ι3• 
άττόταχτ-οΓ 729. 31 '< 730. 1 2. 
anoTivfiv 730. 26. 
άποφαίναν 706. 6. 

d^T^fiv 724. 14; 725. 35> 40 ; 731. 1 2. 
άργυρικά 783. 2 ; 734. 3- 
άργύριον. See Inde.\ VIII (^). 

apyvpois 796. 
άρ(σκία 729. 24. 

άριόμόί 735. 8 ; 742. 8. 
dpiCTTfp(5t 722. 10; 723. 5• 
άριστον 736. 23, 28, 35• 
άρνακίς 741. 6. 

Spovpu. See Index VIII (a). 
όρονρη86ν 729. 31. 
αρσ€«κΟΓ 741. 8 ; 832. 
άρσίνοί (?) 744. 9• 
ά/)σ« 708. 5. 1 8. 
άρτάβη. See Index VIII (c/). 
dpTifiioi- 738. 8. 
t'pTos 736. 9 f/ saep. 

αρχαίοι 729. 7, 8. 
άρχάυν 712. 1 3. 

ΰρχιδικαστΐ)Γ. See Index VII. 

αρχΐ(ρατ€ί(ίν 718. 3. 

as 737. 2 i•/ ίαί/. 

ασθίναα 726. ΙΟ. 
άσίίΜΪΐ' 725. 4°• 
άσηάζίσθαι 745. 9 i 805. 
ίίσπάραγο! 736. 3^. 
άσπορ(ΐν 740. 4'• 
άσποροί 709. 14- 
άστικϋ'ϊ 706. 9• 
άστρον 731. 6. 
ϋσυ»σ<λ«στοί 707. 3^• 
(ΐσφαλώί 742. 5, ΙΟ• 
ητακτίΓν 725. 40• 
Stokos 729. 16. 
ai5 718. 19. 
auctor 720. 4• 

ανθιντικύί 719. 30. 33- 
αυτάρκη! 729. 1 9. 
αΰταρκία 729. ΙΟ. 
αϋτο'όίν 726. 12. 
αίτοΛ 719. 22. 

άφήλίξ 716. 7, 12. 2ο; 725. 7 1 727. ι6; 

740. 44. 45. 47• 
άφιίναι 722. 6 ; 744. ι ο. 

άφιστάναι 745. 3• 
άφορο! 721. 5• 

ίχρι 707. 37• 

βαίίζαν 743. 29. 
3<l^ot 669. 8. 
βάπταν 736. 6. 

βασιλικοί, βασ. (γη) 718. 9. 15. ΐ6, 19. 2? ί 
721. 4 ; 730. 8 ; 810. β. γραμματ(ίς. 

See Index VII. β. ξύλον 669. 1 1, 19• 

βατάνιον 739. 9• 
βίίτίλλα 741. 1 8. 
βφαιοίν 719. 23; 730. 21. 

βφαίω! 713. 1 8. 
^ήμα 669. 28, 37• 
βίαιος 803. 

β(3λιδιο>. 716. 1 8. 

βιβλιοθήκη 719. 35• 

/ί<ι^3λιΌι. 826. 

βιβλιυφόρος 710. 2. 
>3ι/ί:^λιοφυλάχ(ον 825. 
βιβΧιοφίλαξ. Sec Index VII. 
/3ύ>; 826. 



β\ήβθ! 729. 20. 

β<•Βι> 717. 9, 12. 13. Ι4• 

βονίίόί 734. 4 ; 743. 2θ. 

ίίοίκίίί- 729. 39• 

βοίλ(σβαι 705. 76 ; 719• 29 ; 721. 3 ; 729. 


eovXdfiv 706. 6. 

βορράς 719. 1 6, ι8; 729. 7- 

βυτάνη 729. 2 2. 

/3uff 707. 9; 729. 16. 
βριιχίς 705. 77• 
ίίωλίίλη-^ίίΐ' 708. 7. '9• 
ίίώλοί 708. 8, 2θ. 
/3κμ(5ί 785. 

capere 720. 15. 
collega(?) 735. 14. 
conduceie 737. 2 et saep. 
consul 720. 7. 

ya\a 736. 48, 83. 

■γαμίτόί 795. 
>άμοΓ 713. 12, 32. 
γΓίτω». 719. 1 6. 
■yo/ta 713. 1 6. 
ytviaia 736. 56, 57. 
■γίνημα 729. 36. 

yii'Of 727. 20; 729. 31. 

•yf/jiiot 725. 5; 736. 23, 27, 28, 35; 826. 

ytitaSai 658. 12. 

ytwpfTpia 728. 9, 30. 

yfu/i(T()iKOs 669. I, 3, 18. 

y(ωpyt'ίv 718. 19, 23; 728. 4; 740. 38, 40. 

y^ωpyόi 740. 16, 21, 33, 35. 

•)^705. 74; 707.23,36; 715.22,25; 718. 

24; 730. 8, 17, 36; 810. Cf. βασίΚικο! 

and Upoi. Vfj 722. 6. 
y'lyvtaeai "JOS. 18, 67; 707. 34; 709. 6; 

712.16; 716.21; 718. 29; 719.22,30; 

721. 6 ; 727. 1,4; 729. 17,18,30; 732. 

5, 9 ; 743. 20, 41 ; 745. 5 ; 807 ; 832. 

yiyfaaKfiv 743. 37 ; 744. 3. 

yU{ ) 734. 4. 

yvaφ(ίς 736. 37. 

γνησιο! 740. 1 4. 

yvo>pn 729. 43. 

yvωpίζ(ιι' 705. 39 ; 718. 20 ; p. 263. 

yvwaTr,p 722. 31 ; 723. 4. 

•yo-yyiXi'i 736. 5. 

•yofiot 708. 3, 16. 

yoi/evs 713. 7, 38. 
yovij 729. 40. 
yam 722. 24. 

7ρπ/χ;ια 716. 32; 725. 64; 727. 28; 728. 

ypaμμaτ(ύs. See Index VII. 

ypaμμaτ^κόv p. 263. 

ypa(f)(ii'10e. 3; 716. 31; 718. 24; 719. 6, 

27; 724.10; 725.63; 728.33; 729. 

37; 743.39; 746. 5; 787; 811. 
ypaφ(Ίov 736. 16 ; 808. 

yυμι/aσtapχfll' 715. I. 
yvpvnaiapxo! 716. I. 
yD/ni/of 839. 

yvvniKelos 739. 1 8 ; 741. 9. 
ywii 736. II, 88, 89. 
■yvpya^iJr (yipyuius) 741. 5• 

διικτι'λιοκ 795. 

δπ'κτιιλοί 669. 14, 17, 26, 43. 
δανήζΗν 705. 47 ; 808 ; 836. 
δανίΐσμό: 799. 
δαπαναν 705. 63. 

ίατ^άνη 705. 79; 708. 

736. 98; 739. 3• 
dare 720. 3, 6, 15. 
StV's 720. 10. 

ielypa 708. 5. 18. 
iflv 718. 14, 18, 29; 727. 19, 
Setadat 718. 

712. 6 ; 729. 28 ; 

20 : 

729. 4, 

5, 16; 743. f 
SfiTrmi. 736. 93. 
Sf'mvov 736. 36; 738. I, 4, 7. 

fieiV.? 729. 2 2. 

δίΚ(ίδαρ;^οί 747. I. 

δ«α7( ) 741. 17. 

δί|(οί 722. 24. 

δί'σμτ) 742. 4, 13. 

δή 705. 6ι. 

&η\οίν 707. 21, 30 ; 708. 1 3 ; 714. 2 1 

716. 19; 725. 7, 1 1, 48; 740. 30; 800 
δτ/ρίίσιοί 669. 24; 707. 2, 15; 715. 37 

(τ-ύ) δ>,/α. 712. 6; 719. 28, 30; 725. 56 

729. 20 ; 793 ; 803. (™) δημ. 707. 22 ; 

718.11 etsaep.; 729.33; 730.17; 740 

14; 810. δϊ)μ. βίμα^) 740. 29- δ.;μ 

μίτρον 740. 1 8, 20. δημ. ξίλον 669. 38 

δημ. ϋφαλή 719. 23. δημ. πήχν! 669. 34 
δημ. ρύμη 719. 17, Ι9• ^1β• τράτΓίζα 721 
13; 835. δημ. χρηματισμό! 712. 12. 
δημοσιοϊν 719. 32. 


^ημοσίωσα 719. 3 1. 

ίιαγράφον 707. 22; 721. i2; 733. 2; 734. 

2; 800; 803. 
διαθήκη 715. ig. 
Siaipeais 718. 7, lO. 
StiiXoyifiat'ai 709. 4. 
διαλογισμέ 709. 2; 726. 12. 
διαττί'μτΓίίΐ' 727• 24. 
διαπαΐ'Εΐΐ' 743. 2 2. 
διπιτωλίΓι/ 727. 20. 
δΐίίστασ(5 669. 37> 4°• 

διαστολή 719. 32 ; 743. 28 ; 793. 

διατάσσαι^ 718. 25- 
δΐΗΤ(\(Ίν 658. 8. 
διανλοί' 669. 3°• 

διάφορον 708. II, 22 ; 797; 833. 

διηψίΰδίοΛιι 715. 30- 
διάψιΧος 707. 23. 
διδάσκπλοΓ 725. ΙΟ, 1 4, 43- 

hibovm 716. 22 ; 719. 4, 3°; 725. 18; 729. 
10, 13, 17; 731. 7, 10; 740. 15 cl satp.; 
742. II ; 743. 26, 28, 32 ; 789. 

hUneiv 727. 5. 

δύρχισθαι 712. i8; 714. 18; 729. 26; 

δΐίτι'α 707. 24. 
δι^ντνχ(\ν 718. 3Ι• 

δι'καιοΓ 717. ιο; 746. 9 ; 787. 

δικαστηρίον 705. 38. 
δίκη 728. 2 4. 

δίΙ(τον 717. 5, 12. 

δίμοιρο! 716. 14, 20. 

δ« 727. 21 ; 826. 
δίοικΰΐ! 719. 20. 

δίττλοΟί 729. 20 ; 741. 3- 

δισακκίοιον 741. 2. 

δίστί•)ΌΓ 719. 15. 

δοκί!!/ 718. 24. 

doniinus 720. 3, 6• 

δύα-ίς 724. 7• 

δοΟλ, 714. 15; 722. 14; 723. 3• 

δοϋλοί 714. 13 ; 716. 15 ; 724. 3• 

δραχμή. See Index VIII (ύ). 

δραχμια'ιοί 712. Ι4; 728. 21. 

δρόμο! 717. 17 ; ρ. 263. 

δίνασβηι 726. 10 ; 727. II ; 742. ίο; 743. 

36; 744. 12. 
δνσΐί 725. Ι 2. 
δωδfκά^^H^χμ^ts 714. 2 2. 
δωδίκάμηνυρ 800. 

6 720. 5, '4- 

eai/ 729. 18. 
eavntp 729. 4ι 8. 
(γγραπτοί ΙΟΊ. 20. 
ίγγνηφ 707- 33• 
ί'γκαλίίΐ' 728. 40. 

fyκτησι! 705. 6 1 ; 712. ι ; 715. ι ; 825. 
(δηφο! 728. 15. 
ίθίΧαν 705. 43. 62. 
(βιμο! 729. 7• 
Wms 705. 37• 

(θο! ρ. 263. 

(iiiVai 716. 32; 718. 12; 725. 64; 728. 

34 ; 729. 37 ; 745. 6, 8. 
(ΓδοΓ 669. 26 ; 719. 24. 
(ΐ«ΟΓ 718. 2 2. 

fir, μιαί άντ\ μια! 740. 17, 1 8. 
(laaydv 729 5, 6• 

(Ισβολή 736. 97- 

(Ισιίναι 721. 8 ; 725. 30 ; 729. 2, 14. 3°• 

ίϊσοδοί 705. 39 ; 719. 1 6. 

(Ιηττορίύίσθαι 717. 5• 7 > 744. 4• 

flσφίp(lv Πνί . 12. 

(Ισχμήσθαι 717. 2. 

«αστοί 705. 35. 77 ; 711. ι ; 725. ιι ; 727. 

22 ; 728. 2 1 ; 729. ι8, 29, 37• 
(KOTfpos 713. 31 ; 729. 19• 

ίκατοστή 708. 8, 9, 20. 

ϊκβαίνιιν 708. 7. '9; 729. 36. 

(κβαΚ\(ίν 744. 10. 
(κβοάν 717. Ι . 
^κδίχ/σθαι 724. 12. 
(κδίδάσκξίί' 725. 47• 

«διδόι/αι 725. 5 ; 835. 
(κκαιρο! 729. 1 8. 
iKKpovftv 725. 37• 

(κ\ογή 729. 4Ι• 

ίκμισθοϊν 727. 19- 

ΐκτακτα: 707. 4• 

.'(cnWv 725. 55; 728. 19; 731. 12. 

ίκτισΐ! 729. 2 1. 

ίκφύριον 743. 29. 

rXuiov 736. 15; 739. 5, 1 1. 1 6, 2ΐ; 784. 

ίλάσσων 669. 44; 705. 46; 708. 7. 2ο; 

729. 42. 
{Keiefpot 705. 40 ; 722. 6. 
f\(vd€poiv 716. 1 1. 
€'\(νθ(ρωσΐ! 722. 31 ; 723. 4. 
ϊμβ(ο\,κ6!?) 740. 1 8. 
('μβάδίυσίί p. 263. 



ίμβΆΧιιν 708. 9, 21 ; 717. 1,15. 
('μμίναν 725. 55• 

('μποιύν{?) 707. introd. 

ίμφορο! 707. ΙΟ. 

ΐνδίίκννναί 705. 3^• 

ίνικα 719. 31- 

ivfxvpaaia 712. 3, ΙΟ, ΐ6, If)- 

(Vi\vpovv 729. 44• 

ΐνθ(σμοί 713. 39• 

fwauTOf 725. 17, 20, 23, 25• δ2• 

ίΐΊστάναί 713. 40 ; 715. 7 ; 724. 4 ; 725. 2.S ; 

728. ι6; 729. 14; 730. 4; 732. 2; 808; 

(voiKfiv 705. 4'• 
ίνοίκησί! 729. 34• 
(νοΊκιυν 729. 34• 
«νοχλάι/ 705. 11. 
ίνοχοί 715. 3ΐ• 

iWoXilfni 741. Ι. 

ivTOi 724. II, 13; 728. 15; 729. 20, 30. 
(VTvy\avtiv 717. 16. 
(νώττίον 658. 9• 
(ξαπ(\(υθ(ροϊν 722. 1 3, 17• 
e'ficTi'a 707. 4• 5• 
(ξασ6(ν(ΐν 705. 71. 

eieira» 705. 52; 722. 27; 724. 12; 725. 
53; 727. 25; 729. 43• 

(ζινίαντα 729. 1 5. 
ίξηγητ(ί«ίν 714. 6. 
ϊξηγητή! 727. Ι, 5• 

ii?is 725. 8 ; 729. 26. 

(ξη^οί 719. 1 6. 

(ξυνσία 708. 8 ; 719. 2 5. 

e'opr^ 725. 36. 

iopTiKos 724. 6. 

fVtiyeiv, fVayu/jevat ήμίραι. Slc Index HI (i). 

(παθλοι/ 705. 49. 

('■πακολουθύν 729. 29. 

eVnvaymjs 725. 42. 

eVoi/ayxot 707. 6; 729. 18, 40. 

ίπάνω 707. 7 ; 740. 30. 

fVfi 713. 20 ; 718. 22 ; 727. 25. 

(TTf ρώτησα 718. 1 3. 

tV; TO αντό 713. 28 ; 716. 14 ; 729. 15. 

e7rij3uXXeii' 715. 1 3, 1 5. 

eTTiyofi] 730. 4. 

(τιιγραφή 719. 28. 

ί•ηίδίχ(σθαι 810. 

(πι^ημύν 705. 36. 

ίπιδιδώαί 705. 6o ; 715.29,34; 716. 18,28. 

imboais 705. 59, 76. 
ί'πκικη! 705. 42. 
ίπικαταβολη p. 263. 
ίν<«ΐσ5α( 729. 20. 
€'π«(ψύλαιο» 832. 
ίτηκρατ(Ίν 718. 28. 
ίτικριτη! 714. 5, 3^• 
eTTiXatoiii'i»» 744. 12. 
enipiXfia 719. 7 ; 727. 3• 
ί'πιμιλ(Ίσθ<η 727. 15; 729. 22; 743. 43; 
744. 6 ; 745. ίο ; 746. 9 ; 805. 

('πιμιμνησκαν 791. 
ίττινίχια 705. 34• 

fVi>O^i7 730. 1 1 ; 810 ; 838. 

ίπιττίμπαν 743. 30. 
(Τΐίσημο! 722. Ι 9. 
ίτησκοπιίν 743. 43• 
ΐπιστασθαι 724. 3 ; 725. 50. 
(πιστατίία 803. 
ί'πιστάτη! 790. 
{πιστίλ\<ιν 718. 25. 
(πιστοΧή 746. 4• 
ΐττιστοΚί^ίον 789. 

ί'τΓίστράτηγο!. See Index VII. 

ίΉΐτάσσ€ΐν 725. 1 3. 
fViTeXe:>'719.26;72e.2o; 727.22-4; 729. 18. 

('πιτηρητη! 712. Ι, 8. 
ίπίτιμον 725. δδ ; 729. 20. 
(wirpondeiv 727. Ιδ• 
ΐπιτροττη 743. 32. 
(πίτροπο! 716. 7 ; 740. 42- 
ίττηίκιον ΙΟΊ. 37 ; 729. 34 ; 838. 

Έπτα νομοί 709. 7• 
('ργάζ€σθαι 729. Ι 9• 
(ργασία 742. 1 1 . 
ΐργατίία 800. 
('ργύτη! 739. Ι3• 
e/jyov 729. 39• 

ϊρφίνθο! 736. 92. 

fptoi- 791. 

tpxea^m 715.- 9 ; 743.24,42; 805; 839. 

(ρωτ5ι/ 744. 6, 13 ; 745. 7 ; 746. 5 ; 787. 

erfpos 705. 63; 712. 10; 714. 4; 718. 22; 

719. 25; 725. 30; 726. 19; 729. 3, 4, 

II, 26, 29. 
ert658. 8; 705.23,34; 718. 21; 727. 18; 
^ 729. 3. 25, 44 ; 744. 3- 
(V Ίτράσσίΐν 822. 
tiboKt'iv 707. 11; 725. 47, 62; 726. 22; 

727. 26. 


(ΰ(ργίτηί 705. 17, 66. 
fieaXUp 729. 2 2. 

€ΰθ(ω! 839. fWi's 744. 7. 

(υθυμίτρικύί 669. 5• 
ίύλόγωί 718. 28. 
(ϋμινη! 705. 15, 65. 
firoia 705. 31• 

(ίψίσκίΐν 717. 5. 8 ; 743. 25. 

(ΰσχήμων 800. 
ivrv_;^fii' 805. 
(υχαριστΰν 811. 
ίφηβ(ΰ(ΐν 711. 4• 

ίφηβο! 705. 49- 
ΐφόδιον 792. 
?φοδθΓ 710. 4• 

ffi>yoi 707. 9 ; 741. 8, 9• 
fijTfii/ 726. 16; 805. 

ζυμoυfyγόs 754. 

fCros 736. 27, 60; 784. 
ήγιμονίΰαν 800. 

ήγ(μών. See Inde.x VII. 

η\ιο! 725. 12. 'HXiot 722. 6. 

ί/χφα 705. 35; 713. 40; 724. 14 ; 725. ι 2, 

37, 41, 43; 731. 7, ΐ' ; 736. 68-71, 9°; 

804. (Τ!α-γόμ(ναι ήμ. See Inde.\ III (ι^). 
ήμίτ^ρος 787. αι. 
ημιαρτάβιον 708. 6. 

ή/ϋολ/α 728. 20 ; 730. 27; 833. 

ήμίσαα 729. 36- 

ημισΰνβίσα 741. Ι5• 

ήμιωβίΚιον. See Index VIII (ί). 

Ττταρ 738. 3• 
ηττητρα 736. ΙΟ. 
ήτοι 669. 8. 

όίλαι/ 717. 2; 743. 17, 27, 39; 745. 8. - 

βί'/ΐ" 740. 21, 26, 29, 33, 49• 

βίο'ί. See Index VI (α). 

fleptTOS• 810. 

θηλυκό! 832. 

ίήλυί 744. ΙΟ. 

βρί&αξ 738. 6. 

Αρίον (θρΐον) 736. 9, 47• 

βρίον 729. 2 2. 

θνγάτηρ 658. 15 ; 736. 14, 84. 

eveif 658. 7, ιΐ• 

ίί/χι 729. 23. 

θυσία 668. 2. 

ιδιόγραφο! 719. 27, 34• 

ί3ιοί712. 19; 715.6; 729.28; 807; 836. 
Ιδιωτικό! 715. 37; 718. II, 27; 719. 24. 

Ίδιωτικώι 740. 2 Ο, 28, 32• 

'κρατικό: 707. introd. 
Upeii. See Index VI (3). 
I'fpov 658. 1, 22; 784; 785. 

tfpO!, lepii (γή) 721. "J. 
Ίμάτιην 739. ig. 

ha 709. 2; 718. 30; 742. 6, 8; 743. 37, 
43; 744. 13; 745. 10; 746. 10; 805. 

ίππαρχος 790. 

Ίππ(ΰι 735. 8. 

Ίηπικόί 741. II. 

Ίσάτΐ! 729. 31- 

Ίσ«α 731. 5• 

ίαοι715. 7 ; 722. 13; 725. 4^. ό^; 729. 2θ, 

43, 44; 789. 
'κττάΐΌΐ 709. 2, ίο; 725. 46 ; 731. 9• 
item 735. 12. 
ϊτριον 736. 5ο, 8 1. 

καθά 705. 47 ; 727. 24. 
καθάπιρ 728. 24. 

καθαρό! 708. 5, ι8; 718. 9 ; 729. 22 ; 736. 
17, 26, 49, 03. 78, 8ο; 740. 29; 836. 

καθιστάναι 727. 19; 836. 
καθότι 705. 62. 
καθω! 725. 44, 5", 5'• 
Kaifoi 707. 7, 27 ; 729. 12. 
καιρό! 729. 5, II, 19, 29• 

κηλαμύα 729. 3, 22, 24-6. 

»ύλαμο£β69. 28, 41 ; 729. 4, 25. 26 ; 742. 2. 

Κίΐλαμουργία 729. 4• 

Καλάνδαι 747. 2. Kalendac 737. 21. 

καλί ϊκ 747. Ι . 

καλοί 705. 40 ; 805. «αλώί 745. 8. 

καμάρα 729. 34• 
καμηλίτη! 710. 4• 

καρποί 721. 7 ; 729. 32 ; 730. 19. 

καρπωνύα 728. 25. 

καρπωνΰν 728. Ι, ΙΟ, 29. 

κάρνον 741. 3• 

καταβΧάτττίΐν 715. 37; 729. 1 8. 

κατάγίΐν 708. 3, '6. 

KaTaXfiTrfii- 705. 44. 74; 707. 30; 729. 20. 

KaTaXoyfiov 719. 3, 6. 

κατηλογτ) 7S7 ; 811. 

KaropfTpiii' 669• II. 

κατανθρωπισμο! 736. II, ΐ8, 54> 94• 



καταντΰν 713. 23. 

κατασκ(νάζαν 725. 20. 

κατασπορά 708. introd. 

κατατιθίναί 705. 7 8 ; 707. 9• 

καταχωρί^ηΐ' 714. 3? ; '15. 36 ; 719. 38 ; 731. 

14; 78Θ; 820. 
κατίχ(ΐν 712. 3; 713. 15- 

κατοίκ'ίζ(ΐν 705. 24. 
κατηικικόί 715. 23, 25. 
ιτατο;^ιί 713. 36. 
κάτω 709. 8. 

KfXfieiv 658. 10; 705. 51 ; 706. 13; 708. 

6, 19; 715. 9; 721. 13. 
κίλλα 707. introd. 

KeWilpiov 741. 12. 

κ(ράμιον 729. 36 ; 745. ι ; 784. 

«ραμοΓ 729. 19. 

κίρκιστρα 736. 77• 

«ίφύλαιοι/ 808. 

κί;ρΟΓ 736. Ι 6. 

κιίώΐ' ( = xiraf) 736. 99. 

KivSvi/fwii' 705. 73 ; 839• 

κίν&ννο! 708. ΙΟ, 22; 712. 19; 715. 7, 3^ ; 

730. ι6; 804. 
κλαλίον 796. 
k\(Is 729. 23. 

κληρονόμος ΊΙΘ. ΐ6, Ι7• 

κλζροί 715. 22, 25; 721.6; 728.7; 730-9; 
794 ; 810. Cf. Inde.x V (c). 

κ\ηρου}(( ) 833. 

κοινοί 719. 15; 729. 32; 740. 43• "«'"ώί 
715. 7 ; 729. 5, 6. 

κυλλι/τρα 736. 91, 1°°• 

KopevTiipiov 724. 8. 

κημίζην 708. Ι4; 730. 20. 

KoVioi/ 739. 7• 
κοπν 729. 3 ; 810. 
κοπρισμόί 729. ίο. 
KOTrpns 729. 10. 
κόπτιιν 728. II. 
κόριον 819. 
κοσμητίΰαν 724. Ι. 
κοτυλί? 784. 
κόφινοί 739. 8. 
κράζίΐν 717. Ι, 9. II. Ι3• 

κρύτιστοί 726. Ι 7• 
κριθή 708. 8, 20. 
KpiioXo-yeii/ 708. 6, 19• 

κριτήριο» 719. 8 ; 727. 4• 

κριτή? 726. 20. 

κτασθαι 705. 7θ. 

κτήμα 707. 23, 25, 31 ; 729. 5 e/ saep. 
κτψο! 729. 1 6, 39~4ΐ> 43• 

κτήτωρ 718. Ι4• 
κυβίρνήτης 717. 4• 
κυριακοί "Ki'tyos 800. 
Kvpifitiv 730. 19. 

«cipiof (' lord ')728. 15 ; 744. 2. Cf. Index II. 
κΰριοΓ (' valid ') 719. 26; 725. 56; 727. 26; 

728.25; 729.14,34; 730.31; 731.14; 

κώμη 705. 6o, 69 ; and see Index V (i). 

κωμογραμματ(ύ! 718. 13, 20, 26. 

}^αμβάνιν 707. 20, 29 ; 724. 8, g ; 729. 17, 

41; 743. 26; 744. 8. 
λαμπρό! 705. 19, 39, 68. 
Xav6avtiv 705. 30. 
λάξοι 806. 
λαο-γραφήν 711. 3. 
λαογραφία 714. 23 ; 733. 5• 
λαο-γράφης 786. 

λ<'γ«ν 706. II ; 707. 14; 717. 2; 744. 1 1. 
λΐίτουργιΊν 705. 79! 731. 4• 
XeiTovpyia 705. 7 2. 
λίΐτουργΟ£ 792. 

lex lulia et Titia 720. 5, 14. 
λήγιιν 729. 17. 
λήμμα 825. 
ληνός 729. Ι9• 

λίνον 736. 75• 
λι^οϋφικϋ? 669. 33" 

λιχάς 669. 2 7, 3Ι• 

λίψ 719. 17, ΐ9• 

λογιστήμιον 709. Ι, ΙΟ. 

λό -yof 705. 30 ; 708.13; 724. ίο; 725.36; 

726. 14; 727. 23; 729. 13; 732. 5; 

740. 3θ ; 741. ι ; 800 ; 825. 
λοιποί 707. 24; 709. 8, 12; 713. 36; 716. 

ι6; 724. II ; 725.19; 729. 4 *"/ •ί«ί/• ; 

732. 13; 740. 32- 
λύ(,ν 715. 19; 745. 6 ; 808. 
λίτρον 722. 30, 4° ; 784. 

λυχνία 736. 9 1. 
λωρίκα 812. 

μα{ ) 736. 73• 
magister 737. 1 2 α/ saep. 
μάβησί! 724. 3 ; 725. 7• 
μαθητή! 725. 15, 21, 2 7, 4^ 


μακροπρόσωπο! 722. "J, l6, 24, 33• 
μαχαψοφόροί 83Θ. 
μfyas 705. 22. 

μ(ίζων 669. 44 ; 717. 9 ; 729. 43. 

μ(\ίχρωί 722. 7, 9. 
μ(μβμύί 788. 
μ(μφ(σβαι 706. 12. 
/lei' ουν 705. 36- 

HcVfif 744. 5- 

μιρίζίΐν 713. 29. 

/ji>ot 707. 7; 715. 15, 16; 716. 13-5. 20; 

71Θ. 14; 722.13; 728.8; 729. 19,31; 

740. 46, 47 ; 810. 

μ(σιτ(ν€ΐν 669. 45• 

ft«Vot 722. 7 'V saep. ; 729. 28 ; 734. 3• 

μ(ταβύλλ(ίΐ/ 728. Ι3• 

μίταίώόραι 705. 38 ; 712. ι6 ; 719. 4. 

μfτa\λάσσeιv 715. ΙΟ. 

μ>ταφίρ(ΐν 728. H. 

μίταφορά 729. 34• 

μίτράί/ 669. 6 ; 735. 7 ; 740. 24, 26, 35• 
μίτρον. See Index VIII (α). 

μίτωπον 722. 8. 

^itVpi 725. 12 ; 729. 7, 9; 731. 3. 
fiV^ios 669. 6, 7- 
fiTjciaiof 725. 5Ι• 

μήπ/ρ 658. 4 ; 713. 5, 9. 23. 36 ; 715. 3, 1 2, 
ι8; 716. 3> 5, 9. ίο; 719. 2, 8, ίο, ιι; 
722. II, 22, 32 ; 723. 2 ; 726. 6 ; 728. 
2, 3, 28; 733. 5; 736. 69; 740. 44• 

μηχανή 729. 12, 23, 28. 

μικρό: 741. 4• 

μίλίον 669. 3°• 

μισθός 724. δ; 725. 1 8 ei saep.; 729. 12 ; 

731. 8 ; 736. 6. 
μισβοίνΙΟΊ. 14, ι8; 72Q. 3 (/ saep.; 730. ι 

ί/ ίΛ/. ; 810. 
μίσβωσΐ! ΙΟΊ. 17, 20, 24, 35! 729. 14, 20, 

34, 41 ; 730. 2 1, 31,39; 740.34; 838. 
μισθωτή: 729. 8 ; 825. 
μνά 728. 2 1. 
μοναχοί 719. 32. 

μόνοί 707. 22; 718. ιι ; 72Θ. 8, 9• 
μόσχο: 729. 1 6, 39• 
μύρον 736. 13, 84. 

vavaytlv 839. 
ναίβίο» 669. Ι Ι, 24. 
νανΚον 792. 
nc 720. 12. 

Νίΐλομίτρικόί 669. 3^. 
Ρ(ομηνία 725. 8. 

«OS 707. 17 ; 718. 8 ; 729. 19; 836. 

νΐύφντοί 729. 8. 

νόμισμα 719. 21 ; 722. 25. 

νόμυς^ των Αιγυπτίων ν. 706. 7• αστικοί ν. 70Θ. 

9• τήϊ χώρα: ν. 795. 
vo/uor. Επτά ι/ομοί 709. 7• 
i/iinvot 729. 9• 
«Srof 719. 14, 16, 18. 
ννν^ τα νΰν 811. 

|iWa 747. Ι. 

ie^-tiJi 712. Ι, 8; 825. 

ξηρό: 736. 82. 

ζνλαμάν 729. 3 1 ; 730. ΙΟ ; 

ξυΧοκιηαΊν 706. 1 3. 

ξυΚοΚογύα 729. 33• 

Ι^λο.- 729. 12. Cf. Index VIII {a). 

ξυλοτομία 729. 29. 
ϋβολια'ιο: 729. ΙΟ. 

όβολό:. See Index VIII {δ). 

oySooi/ 669. I, 2. 

55(1/714. 21 ; 716. 18. 
οικία 712. 5, 20 ; 715. 15; 719. ΐ5- 
οΊκογινή: 714. 14; 723. 3• 
οΊκοΗομύν 707. 7• 

οϊκοδόμοΓ 739. ΙΟ, 12, Ι4• 
οικονόμο: 735. 6. 
oiVoTreiiieus 669. g. 
ιιΙκόπ(8ον 718. 9• 
οινικό: 729. 36. 

οΓχοί 707. 3; 729. ι6, 19, 24, 27; 745. ι, 
2; 784; 788. 

ολίγο: 718. 23- 

ίλο, 724. 8; 730. 14; 740. 1 8. 5\ω: 743. 

2 2 ; 744. 4• 
ομνϋίΐν 714, 27; 715. 20. 
όμοιο: 705. 6ι ; 725. 14. όμοίω: 708. 8; 

709. 6; 711. 2; 725. 23. 25, 31, 34; 

729. 9; 736. δΐ. 7ΐ, 8ο; 740. 33• 
ήμοληγύν 719. 12; 725. ι ; 726. 4; 785; 

803; 808; 831; 833. 

όμοΚόγημα 725. δ7• ^2. 
ομολογία 726. 23; 731. 13. 
όμοττάτριο: 716. 1 6. 
ϋνηλάτη: 740. 19, 22, 25. 

όΐΊΚϋί 741. ΙΟ. 

όνομα 715. ΙΟ. 



όι /ot 729. 9. 

όξΰβαφον 741. 2 Ο. 

όπου 728. II. 

όπ-τίωκ 735. 5• 

ότΓτοΓ 707. 28. 

(ιπώρα 729. II. 

οπωροφίλαξ 729. II• 

οττωΓ 718. 12. 

opyvid 669. 28, 39• 

όριζαν 705. 48; 707. 28; 719. 31; 728. 

ι8, 36. 
ορκο! 715. 3ΐ• 
όρνι: 738• 9• 
ipos 729. 7, 9• 
όσο5 724. 13 ; 729. 25• 
5σπ(ρ 729. 6, 40. 
όστισοΟ»' 719. 2 5• 
όστριον 738• 5• 
07-€ 73β• 36, 92• 
5τ< 717• 2, 13 ; 743• 28 ; 744. 1 1 ; 745. 8 : 

811; 812. 
ουικάριο! 735. 6. 

ουλή 722. 8, ι6, 24, 34; 723. 5• 
οντω! 706. 6; 707. 32; 743. 35• 
6φ(ί\(ίν 712. 1 1 ; 732. 4. 
όψΕίλή 719. 24. 

οχομίνίον 729. gl• 
όψάριοι/ 736. 52, 62. 

οι/όι/ 736. 6 1. 

όψώνιον 729. II ; 731. ίο; 744. η. 

7Γα( ) 797. 
παίγνιον 736. 59• 
παιθάριον 730. 14; 736. 38• 
τταώίον 736. 39 ; 744. 7- 
note 724. 8, 10, 13; 725. 18, 36; 736. 16 
e/ saep. 

πακτωνίτη! 814. 

iraXaicrrrjs. See Index VIII (α). 
ττάλΐΛ' 742. 9 ; 745. 5- 

πάμπολυί 718. II. 

παναριθμό: 742. 3• 

πανηγύριζαν 705. 35• 

παη-οΐηΓ 727. 2 8. 

παράβαιναν 725. 53> 54• 

napuyiyveauai 743. 23; 798. 

napaSfiKvvvat 72L 12. 

παράδίΐξΐί 712. 2. 

παραδί&οναι 716. 22 ; 729. 22, 44 ; 742. "J, g. 

παράθίσΐ! 713. 35• 

παρακαλάν 744. 6. 

παραλάμβαναν 717. 6; 729. 1 6. 23; 742. 2, 

4 ; 785. 
παράλ;)ψ•ΐ5 798. 
τταραλογισμόί 711. 5• 
παραμίναν 1%^. ι^; 725. 43• 
παραμονή 731. Ι3• 
ΤΓαρητΓολλύι/ηι 705. 73• 
παρατίθίναι 713. Ι. 
παράφερνα 796 ; 837. 
παραφνλακή 705. 72• 
ίΓαρα;(ω/>(ΐν 719. 12, 25• 
παραχωρητικόν 719. 20. 
παρ^ναι 711. 2; 727. II, 25. 
παρεμβολή 736. 33• 
παρί'ί 729. 33• 

παρίχαν 717. 4 ί 725. 9• 42 ; 729• 4. 9< '9 ; 

παρη{ ) 788. 
παρκ'ναι, παραμίνη 713. 20. 

πατΐ7ρ 713. 20 ; 715. 1 1 ; 784. 
πατρικό! 716. Ι5• 
πάτρων 706• 2, ΙΟ. 
πατρώο! 715. 28. 

pedes 735. 12. 

τΓίδίον 740. 37- 

πίζός 724. ίο; 831. 

πίμπαν 729. II. 

π(μτΓταΊο! 729. 24. 

ffiVTOfTTjf 725. 49• 

τΓίΐτώ^ολοί'. See Index VIII (i). 

π^ριβάλλαν 707. 32. 

πίρϋατΓνον 736. 37• 

πιριίχαν 719. 3 1 • 

πιρισπαν 705. 53 ; 743. 36. 

π(ρΐ(η-(ρά 729. ιο; 736. 29, 79• 

πήχν!. See Index VIII {a). 

πιάζαν 812. 

πιπράσκαν 719. 1 2 ; 740. 30 ; 784 ; 819. 

m'(TT<s 705. 32 ; 727. 21. 

πλακά: 729. 28. 

πλαστοί 729. 30. 

πλατάα 733. 3• 

πλάτη! 707. 26, 32. 

πλάτο! 669• 7, 8• 

πλίθρον 669. 29- 

πλίίν 726. II. 

πλάστα 742. Ι ; 744. Ι ; 746. 2. 

πλώχ 705. 30 ; 712. ι8; 725. 39 J 833. 

πλψ 721. 7 ; 729. 23- 


πλίνθος 707. 28. 
π\οΊον 799 ; 805 
nXoiis 727. II. 

ποκ'ιν 705. 77 ; 707. 29 ; 709. 3 ; 713. 

mo ΤΛ τ J • 1700 OQ -.ΐΛ . TOR TO 

10, 14; 722. 28, 36; 725. 13, 
14; 727. 11; 729. 7, 24, 29, 


72β. 14; 727. II ; 729. 7, 

743. 40 ; 745. 8 ; 787 ; 811 

uKeuos 705. ^q. 


πύΧιμο! 705. 33. 

πόλΐΓ (= Alexandria) 727. 2. (=0.xyrhyn- 

chus) 658. 2, 6 ; 705. 22, 39, 43 ; 714. 7 ; 

732. 2 ; 736 31. Cf. Index V (a). 
πολίτάρχη! 745. 4. 
πορίων 792. 
πόρθμ(ίοί 732. 4. 
ΤΓορθμίς 732. 2. 
πορ'ιζαν 719. 2. 
πορφύρα 739. 1 6. 
ΐΓΟσο£ 742. 4• 
ποταμοί 800. 
ffoTi 745. 7• 
ποτήριον 741. 17• 
ιτοτϊζ(ΐν ρ. 263. 
η-οτισ/χοΓ 729. 13, 24. 
ποίί 669. 27, 32. 38; 722. ι6; 723. 5 
πράγμα 706. 4 ί 743. 1 9. 
npaypareia 806. 
πραγματίντήί 825. 
πρα-γμάτιον 746. 6. 
πρακτορύα 712. Ι, 8; 825. 
πρακτορικόί 712. 21. 
πράκτωρ 733. 2 ; 734. 3. 
ιτράΙΐΓ 712. II ; 728.22; 729. 2ΐ; 730.27. 

πράσοι/ 736. 28. 

TrpaVo-fiv 708. ΙΟ, 21 ; 718. 25; 822. 

πράτη! 718. 12. 

πριάσθαι 718. 5> Ι?- 

πρόβατου 807. 

34; 727. 12 

ττρυ^ιη υν ον / . 

πρόγραφαν 713. 29; 715 

14; 732. 7, ίο; 786 
προθεσμία 724. Ι 2 ; 728. 
προιίναί 719. 9• 
προκύσθαι 713. 33ι 37 > "715. 30; 

725. 44, 51. 54. 62; 727. "22; 

4θ; 729. ι8, 37, ■"' "' 

735. 8; 740. 23 
προκήρυξα 716. 20. 
προποκ'ιν 707. 1 6. 
προσβαίναν 714. ΐ6. 
προτγΐ-γνίσθαι 784. 
προσίίΐσθαι 743. 33• 







8, H, 

Ι 2 ; 

npooeSpevftv 725. ΙΟ. 

προσάναι 705. 3 1 • 

προσίρχισθαι 787. 

προσμιτρΰν 708. Ι 2. 

προ'σοδοϊ 705. 78• 

προσοφ(ίλ(ΐν 730. 25. 

προστιί'ίΊ'πι 706. 12; 708. 12. 

προσφάγιον 736• 46, 89; 739. 7. ΙΟ, 12, Ι4. 

προσφ(ρ(ΐν 795. 

προσφωνάν 718. 15, 20, 28. 

TTpOTf^or 705. 48. πρότιρον 715• 1 6 

προφ(ρ(ΐν 746• 6. 

προχάριον 741. Ι4• 

προχριία 729• 13; 800. 

πρόχ^ρησίί Π%9. ΐη. 

πρωτοπραξία 712. 6. 

πρωτο!, πρώτοι ά,Ηθμοί 736. 8. 

ητφΐ'ί 738. ΙΟ. 

Trvy^v 669. 27, 34• 

TrvKcrft 717. 16. nvKvOTfpov 805. 

TTupot 708. 4 ί/ ί<7ί•/.. ; 718. 1 5 ; 735. 9 ; 736. 

8 ί/ saep.; 740. 28, 31, 32, 40 ; 784; 

789; 833; 836. 
πωλύν 729. 43• 
πωμάριον 707. 19. 26. 
jrit 744. 1 2 ; 745. 6. 

quo 720. Ι a. 

ραφίί 736. 75• 
ρήτωρ 707. 1 3. 
ρ6α 736. 58. 
ροδώκ 729. 32. 
rogare 720. 3• 
ρίιμη 719. 17, Ι9• 

ρωνννναι, ΐρρωσο 719. 5 ; 742. Ι•; ; 743. 4 t ■ 
745. 10; 746. 11; 798; 805. 

σανδάλιον 741. ΙΟ. 

σΕμίδίΐλίί 736. 83. 

σημαίνίΐν 633. 

σημ(ίογράφθ5 724. 2. 

σημΰον 724. 3• 

ίτημαοΰν, σ(σημί!ωμηι 713 43 ί 719. 6. 

semis 737. 1 1 e/ srtfp. 
aibvTOs 738. 9. 
σ»τ«<ίί 718. 8 ; 798. 
σΐτινοί 729. 44• 
σ4Γολογ«όί 740. 17, 22, 27• 
σιτοΧάγοι. See Index VII. 



σιτομ(τρικόν 740. 2 3, 25. 
σιτοπύητρα 739. 4• 
σίτϋί 708. 11,2 2. 
σκαφή 729. 28. 
σκίπη 785. 
σκουτΧίοΡ 741. Ι9• 
σόλιο^ 741. 8. 
σπύραν 729. 31• 
aTrivbdv 658. 7> "• 
σπίρμα 740. 3^ ; 833. 
σηιθαμη 669. 27, 3^• 
σπορ8ή 730. 12. 
σπουδόίίΐΐ' 746. 8. 
στάδιον 669. 2 9- 
στίγά^Είν 729. 23• 
(TTfpeos 669. 7 ; 836. 
στίφανο! 736. 56, 57• 
στημων 739. Ι 8. 
στολή 839. 
στοχάζίσθαί 705. 75• 

στρατ;;•)/0£. See Index VII. 
συ( ) 734. 4 ; 797. 
σκγνράφίΐΐ' 707. 35! 729. ΐ7• 
συγγραφή 713. 12, 32, 3•"• 
(τυγκαταρ^ω/ίί^ίΐκ 719. 34• 
σνγχρηματίζαυ 12,1 . 21. 
συ)';^ωρείί' 727. 9• 
συγχώ/^ΐϊσΐί 727. 14) ^6. 
σΐ'κ<ίμιΐΌ£ 661. introd. 
σχΧΚίγην 743. 3Ι• 
σνμβάλλίίν 717. 4• 
σιιμ/χαχίίΐ' 705. 33• 
σύμμίτρο! 669. 44• 
συμπλήρωσα 729. 4^• 
σνμττροσ•γίγν(σθαι 743. 33• 

σι;μφΐ'το5 707. ιο; 729. 2 2. 

σνμφωνύν 719. 20 ; 724. 5; 728. 37; 72Θ. 

aui/iiyeii- 705. 48; 708. II, 22; 833. 
σνναγορασμός 791. 
σνίΌνάμιγο! 718. Ι 6, 1 9, 27. 
ovvfdpfvftv 717. 8, II. 
avventSiSovai 716. 28, 30. 
avi^yopety 707. 14• 

ffuwiTTiirai 715. 35; 724. 2 ; 726. 12; 727. 
12, 25 ; 787. 

σνι^αξί! 729. 12. 
<ηιντιμάν 729. 42. 
σνντίμηση 729. ι6, 17, 40-2. 
σιψτνγχάνίΐν 743. 37• 


συνωνή 705. 77• 
σΰστασίί 726. 21. 
σφαίρα 705. 71• 
σφυρίί 741. 3• 
σχοινίον 669. Ι, 3» 
σ;^οιΐΊσ/χ<ίΓ 797. 
σώ^ίΐν 705. 23. 
σωτήρ 705. 7, 66. 

TaXai/Tuu. See Index VIII {/>). 

Tapciov 705. 72, 73. 

τά viv 811. 

ταριχύα 736. 5. 

τάσσίΐι/ 722. 20) 729. 1 7- 

τπφή 736. 13, 84. 

ταχύ! 743. 21. 

τίκνον 713. 19; 716. 8. 
τίκτονικύί 669. 35 ; 729. 1 2. 
τίκτων "729. 12; 739. 15. 

reXf'iv "JOT. 22, 24. 

Tf'XdOf 707. 31 ; 729. 39ι 4°• 
TfXfVTOv 713. 20. 

τιλίυτή 713. I 8. 

re^oi 712. 6, 21 ; 724. 9; 788. 

TfXwceiv p. 263. 
τιλώνηι 732. 2. 
Tf'pfvos 785. 
Τίτάρτη 795. 
τίτράγωίΌΓ 669. 21. 
τ(τρα(τία 707. 2 I. 
Τίτραγο'ινικο! 836. 

τίτ-μώ/Ϊ.Λοι/. See Index VIII (i^). 

Tt;^!/!) 725. 8, 49. 

textor 737. 3 el sae/>. 

TiBivai 725. 61 ; 742. 5; 745. 2. 

τίκτίΐν 744. 9. 

τιμάν 705. 36. 
τιμή 719. 20 ; 

734; 798. 

ησάνη 736. 51 • 

TOKOS 705. 49; 712. 6, 14, 21; 728. 20; 

τοπαρχία 734. 3 I 808. Cf. Index V {a). 

τοηογραμματ€νί 833. 

ToVos 705. 73 ; 707. introd. ; 715. 16 ; 721. 

12; 734. 3; 742. 5; 833. 
τοσοντο! 717. I. 
τράπίζα, ίημοσία τρ. 721. I3; 835. Άσκλη- 

πιάδου τρ. 806. 

τρ/φαν 725. Ι5> 45 ; 729. 4°• 

728. 38; 739. 3, ι6. 

21 : 


2; 805. 

τμΐβανον ββΐ. introd. 
τρκτΐα 729. 4, 5, ΙΟ. 
TpCKayvvot 741. 12. 
τρισκαιίΐ(κα(τή'! 714. Ι7• 

τριώβιΑον. See Index VIII (ί). 

τρόποί 800. 

τροφή 705. 78. 

τροχό: 707. 7. 27. 29; "^^θ. 32. 

τυροί 729. ΙΟ. 

τύχη 715. 27. 

iyfi'a 715. 29• 

vyialufiv 7^3. 43 J 745. 10; 746. 
νγιηί 729. 23; p. 263. 
vdptvpa p. 263. 
ίΒροττάροχο! 729. 1 3, 1 6. 
ν8ροφνλακ(Ίν 729. 23. 
ν8ροφν\ακία 729. 7• 
νδωρ 738. 9• 

ύίλοΟί 741. 15- 
νική 733. 4, 6. 
υι'οΓ 658. 13; 705. 7°; 724. 3; 727. g. 

ΰπαρξΐ! 707. Ι5• 

inapxfiv 712. 5 ; 716. 12 ; 718. 16 ; 719. 13 ; 

722. 12; 723. 3; 727. 13; 728. 23; 

729. 21 ; 730. 30• 
νπηρίτη: 712. Ι7• 
ΰπίσχνύσθαι 745. 4• 
vnoSeiKvvvai 743. 38. 
imaSoxtov 729. 28. 
ύπο\(ίπ(ΐν 729. 6, 2 5- 
ΰπολο^ίίΐ" ρ. 263. 
υπολόγιζαν 729. Ι3• 
tmoKoyos 721. 4• 
υπόμνημα 719. 4, 35• 
ύποσημαοϋν 658. 1 6. 
νστίρον 718. 1 1. 
ΰφη-γΰσθηι 743. 42• 
υψ Of 669. 8. 

φάγρο! ρ. 264. 

φαιν,,ι, 708. 5, ι8; 718. 3°; 746. 8; 811; 

φαινόλη! 736. 4, ΙΟ, 77• 
φάσΐ! 805. 

φ(ρνή 795; 837. 

φιλάνθρωπος 705. 21, 69, 75• 

φιλιΊι 705. 32 ; 743. 2 1. 

φίλοί 706. 6 ; 724. 2 ; 742. 8, 9 ; 745. g. 

φόριτρον 740. 19, 22, 25, 27• 

φορικο! 807. 

φόρ -s 707. 3, 21, 24; 727. ι8; 728. 31; 

729. 31, 32; 730. 1 2, 20, 23; 732. 4• 
φροντίζίΐν 727. 15. 

φροντιστής 727. Ι 4. 

φυλακίτη! 803. 

φύλαξ 729. 1 1 ; 803. 

φυλάσσην 705. 47, ^2 ; 729. 1 1 ; 804. 

φιττόν 729. 20, 2 2. 

χαίραν 705. 7, 20, 58, 68 ; 708. 2, 15 ; 716. 
2 ; 719. 4, 1 2 ; 724. 2 ; 728. 37 ; 732. 4 ; 
735. 7 ; 742. ι ; 744. ι ; 746. 2. 

χαλκίον 736. 6, ΙΟΟ. 

χαλκοί 722. 26; 743. 23• 

χαλκού! 717. 8, ΙΟ. 

χάρι.! 705. 63. χάριν 743. 29 ; 804. 
χ(ίρ 669. 40. 

χΐίρίστη! 734. 2. 

χίΐρο{ ) 799. 
χορογραφία 719. 33• 

χιφάγραφον 706. 4, 5 ; 719. 9, 30, 33 ; 746. 2. 

χίρσήμπίλοί 729. 30. 
χίρσο! 740. 46- 
Χ'{ ) 739. 3- 

χίλιαρχοί 708. 13. 

χψαΚίο! 661. introd. 

χίτών 725. 29-34 ; (κ'^ώχ) 736. 99• 

χοΊνιξ 740. ι8 (/ sacp. ; 789. 

χορτ;γ(ΐι/ 725. 20, 39, 5°; 833. 

χόρτοί 705. 78; 728. 8, 38; 730. ίο; 

χοϋί (' mound ') 729. 6. 
χοΟί (measure). See Index VIII (α). 
xpei'a 729. 4,8,17; 731. 7 ; 745. 6. 

χρήμα 705. 52. 

χρημάτιζαν 710. Ι ; 727. 8 ; 728. ι . 
χρηματισμό! 712. ιο; 719. 3; 835. 
χρηματιστής 719. 7 ; 727. 3- 
χρήσθαι 745. 6. 
χρήσιμο! 705. 75• 

χρήνο! 707. 1 1 ; 712. 1 8 ; 714. 38 ; 718. 1 1 ; 
719. 13 ; 724. 4. 9, 1 1, '3; 725. g. 11, 
38, 49: 728. 35; 729. 17 el saep.; 732. 
II ; 786. 

χρυσοί! 795. 

χρίίσοχο'οί 806. 

χί,μα 729. 7. 8, 9. 23 ; 740. 46 (')• 

χώρα 709. 8 ; 795. 

χωράν 705. 4 Ο. 



χωρίον 705. Jo. 

χωρίι 719. 27; 724. 6; 725. 45; 729. 30, 

31. 34• 

ψ>ΰ8(σθα) 714. 31. 
ψήκτρα 741. 7• 

ν^ίλόί 707. introd. ; 715. 16. 

i8f 73β. 92. 

ΰιν(ΐσθαι 721. 3. 
ώΐΊ7 732. 2. 
ωόΐ" 784. 

ώρα 747. 3 ; 804. 

ωρογράφο! 710. 3• 

ώσΓί 729. 31 ; 730. ίο; 743. 27. 


I I 

, ^ yiAHTd^ e^c; ^^ '"^^ 

;\TE I 

I >- 


NO. 654 ' • v*| 


\ <«;./>>, 

i<: >M r->>.Mf<^»,'*' r*T P* t/ 

-2:: w-j r-i: c.v r» ^K^ r i 

^ • 'if • ί■-- 


NO. 665 



.r ;■ 1-!• "^ < .^ i^^w, 



.. /' ) 


< <ι. r 




.if'ii^ >ei. ^ij^iiim•**^*'*• 



■j^ ? 8 l.f-i^?'^* |>#i isEf It'^lv 





V 1 


* γ ~' 



r-^ -. 













Ό Ο 

■■•*; f ■ 



•, »■ 










,, ...; 2V•^^" t- .-'-•■, ', ^ PLATE 

f ,>;.*J -"^J^^f^^ ^κίί'^•' . 




f^rif> — 


' IN 

5 V J. V ' I pi/» 


Γ>ο• 735 


•"^^ii^r' -■ '^♦'^ ^■*^^' 

: .,•• i^i 4 ' 


> Μ .■^J'Wiiw > ■ — .a- 

3. :i.k' 


.NO. 66 1 


A c aUi |-i ι u V u ef^ Λ 
Γμ f f t^A c ι u m f e-JVT- 

^^I^HC-iirf^T" c\amo 




ί 1 


VtX' - .^^ 

ni Aet Λ u ο, c Κ ο ίτι U •^ Φ *^ » η ^ 


i . — ^ - ^- J 

"w J 


NO. 668, COL. viii 




Λ '•>. \ k A ?'- ^'o• 688 

Vx ^. 

^• ,»■•'■ 



NO. 087 



<>- ; 

i -.3 

NO. 720 

NO. 686 




κ f V 0» 




( Λ/α f 

ίϊΐτώ* : i«;M 

ί : 




'm•^, "■ 

i*•! (>•- 4• 


Λ * 0»«i\ 


NO. 737, COL. 1 



'T^HE EGYPT EXP LOR A TION FUND, which has conducied Archaeological research 
in Egypt coniimwusly since 1883, in 1897 started a special department, called the Graeco- 

Roman Branch, /or the discovery and publication of remains of classical antiquity and early 

Christiariity in Egypt. It is hoped to complete in the next few years the systematic excavation 

of t lie site of Oxyrhynchus under the direction of Ors. B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. 

The Graeco-Roman Branch issues annual volumes, each of about 300 quarto pages, with 

facsimile plates of the more important papyri, under the editorship of Drs. B. P. Grenfell 

atid 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 £2 ξ, constitutes life membership. 

Subscriptions may be sent to the Honorary Treasurers—for England, Mr. H. A. Grueber ; 

and for America, Mr. Gardiner M. Lane. 




For 1883-4. By Edouard Naville. Thirteen Plates and Plans. {Fourth and Revised 
Edition^ i%s. 

II. TANIS, Part I. For 1884-5. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Sixteen Plates 

and two Plans. {Second Ediiiun,\SSS.) 2^5. 

III. NAUKRATIS, Part I. For 1S85-6. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. With 

Chapters by Cecil Smith, Ernest A. Gardner, and Barclay V. Head. Forty-four Plates 
and Plans. {Second Edition, 18S8.) 25X. 


By Edouard Naville. Eleven Plates and Plans. {Second Edition, 1S8S.) 251. 

V. TANIS, Part II ; including TELL DEFENNEH (The Biblical ' Tahpanhes ') 
and TELL NEBE.SHEH. For 1887-8. By W. M. Flinders Petrie, F. Ll. Griffith, 
and A. S. Murray. Fifty-one Plates and Plans. 35i. 

VI. NAUKRATIS, Part II. For 1888-9. By Ernest A. Gardner and F. Ll. 
Griffith. Twenty-four Plates and Plans. 2c,s. 


Antiquities of Tell-el-Yalmdiyeh. An Extra Volume. By Edouard Naville and 
F. Ll. Griffith. Twenty-six Plates and Plans. 25/. 

VIII. BUBASTIS. For 1889-90. By Edouard Namlle. Fifty-four Plates and 

Plans. 25i. 


Containing : 

I. THE SIGN PAPYRUS (a Syllabary). By F. Ll. Griffith. 

II. THE GEOGRAPHICAL PAPYRUS (an Almanack). By W. M. Flinders Petrie. 
With Remarks by Professor Heinrich Brugsch. {Out of print.) 

By Edouard Naville. Thirty-nine Plates. 251. 

XI. AHNAS EL MEDINEH. For 1891-2. By Edouard Naville. Eighteen 
Plates. And THE TOMB OF PAHERI AT EL KAB. By J. J. Tvlor and F. Ll. 
Griffith. Ten Plates. 25f. 

XII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Introductory. For 1892-3. By Edouard Naville. 
Fifteen Plates and Plans. 25i. 

XIII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part I. For 1893-4. By Edouard Naville. Plates 

I-XXIV (three coloured) with Description. Koyal folio. 30i, 

XIV. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part II. For 1894-5. By Edouard Naville. Plates 

XXV-LV (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30Λ 

XV. DESHASHEH. For 1895-6. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Photogravure and 

other Plates. 25J. 







DEIR EL BAHARI, Part III. For 1896-7. By Edouard Naville. Plates 

LVI-LXXXVI (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30i. 
DENDEREH. For 1897-8. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Thirty-eight 

Plates, asi. (Extra Plates of Inscriptions. Forty Plates. loi.) 

Flinders Petrie. Sixty-eight Plates. 251. 
DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IV. For 1899-1900. By Edouard Naville. 

Plates LXXXVII-CXVIII (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30J. 
DIOSPOLIS PARVA. An Extra Volume. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. 

Forty-nine Plates. 25J. {Out of print.) 

1900-1. ByW.M. Flinders Petrie. Sixty-three Plates. 25^. (.Thirty-five extra Plates, lOi.) 

ABYDOS, Part I. For 1 901-2. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Eighty-one 

Plates, iis. 
EL AMRAH AND ABYDOS. An Extra Volume. By D. Randall-MacIver, 

A. C. Mace, and F. Ll. Griffith. Sixty Plates. 25^. 
ABYDOS, Part II. For 1902-3. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Sixty-four 

Plates. 2 5 J. 


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 (four coloured). 255. 
Π. 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), i^s. 

III. EL BERSHEH, Part I. For 1892-3. By Percy E. Newberry. Thirty-four 

Plates (two coloured). 25i. 

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^ 25^. 

V. BENI HASAN, Part III. For 1894-5. By F. Ll. Griffith. (Hieroglyphs, 
and manufacture, cScc, of Flint Knives.) Ten coloured Plates. 25^. 

EXPLORATION FUND. For 1895-6. By F.Ll. Griffith. Nine coloured Plates. 251. 

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). 25i. 

Part L For 1S97-8. By N. de G. Davies and F. Ll. Griffith. (Including over 400 
facsimiles of hieroglyphs.) Thirty-one Plates (three coloured). 255. 

Part II. For 1S98-9. By N. DE G. Davies and F. Ll. Griffith. Thirty-five PUtes. 251. 

X. THE ROCK TOMBS OF SHEIKH SAID. For 1899-1900. By N. de G. 

Davies. Thirty-five Plates. 25^. 

N. de G. Davies. Twenty-seven Plates (two coloured). 25J•. 


N. DE G. Davies. Thirty Plates (two coloured), asi. 

XIII. THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part I. For 1902-3. By N. de G. 

Davies. 25J. 


I. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part I. For 1897-8. By B. P. Grenfell 

and A. S. Hunt. Eight Collotype Plates. 255. 

II. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part II. For 1898-9. By B. P. Grenfell 

and A. S. Hunt. Eight Collotype Plates, aji. 


Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and D. G. Hug.^rth. Eighteen Plates. 25J. 

IV. THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI. Double Volume for 1900-1 and 1901-2. By 

B. P. Grenfell, A. S. Hunt, and J. G. Smyly. Nine Collotype Plates. {Not for salt.) 

V. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part III. For 1902-3. By B. P. Grenfell 

and A. S. Hunt. Six Collotype Plates, jji. 

VI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part IV. For 1903-4. By B. P. Grenfell 
and A. S. Hunt. Eight Collotype Plates. 35i. 


(Yearly Summaries by F. G. Kenvon, \V. E. Crum, .ind the Officers of the Society, with Maps.) 

Edited by F. Ll. Griffith. 
THE SEASON'S WORK. For 1890-1. By Ed. Naville, Percy E. Newberry, and 
G. W. Eraser. 2s. 6d. 

For 1892-3. 

2J. 6,/. 

» 1893-4• 

2J. 6d. 

„ 1894-5• 


„ 1895-6. 


„ 1896-7. 

2S. 6d. 

Containing Report (with Plans) of D. G. Hogarth's Excavations in Alexandria. 
With Illustrated Article on the Transport of Obelisks by Ed. Navii.le. 
With Articles on Oxyrhynchus and its Papyri by B. P. Grenfell, and 
a Thucydides Papyrus from Oxyrhynchus by A. S. Hunt. 
1897-8. 2i. 6J. With Illustrated Article on Excavations at Hierakonpolis by W. M. Flinders 

1898-9. 2i. 6ίί. With Article on the Position of Lake Moeris by B. P. Grenfell and 
A. S. Hunt. 
With Article on Knossos in its Egyptian Relations by A. J. Evans. 

„ 1 899- 1 900. 

2i. 6d. 

„ I900-I. 

2S. (,d. 

„ I90I-2. 

2S. (>d. 

.. 1902-3- 

IS M. 

ΛΟΓΙΑ IH20Y: ' Sayings of Our Lord,' from an Early Greek Papyrus. By B. P. Grenfell 

and A. S. Hunt. 2s. (with Collotypes) and 6d. nett. 

O-tyrhynchus. By B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. is. nett. 

ATLAS OF ANCIENT EGYPT. With Letterpress and Index. {Second Edition.) 3J•. 6d. 


COPTIC OSTRACA. By W. E. Crum. 10s. 6d. nett. 

Slides from Fund Photographs 

may be obtained through Messrs. Newton 4' Co., 3 Fleet Street, E.C. ; 

and Prints from Mr. R. C. Murray, 37 Dartmouth Park Hill, N.W. 

Offices of the Egypt Exploration Fund: 


Agents : 






University of California 


305 De Neve Drive - Parl<ing Lot 17 • Box 951388 


Return this material to the library from which it was borrowed. 


'ii I'ffirsm»?}!;, f ί , ,wmm LiBBAi 

3 1210 00985 183 




iBMiM-iiJ-"i^ τ