Skip to main content

Full text of "The Oxyrhynchus papyri"

See other formats






07 T^u 









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





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

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

KEGAN PAUL, TRENCH, TROBNER & CO., Dryden PIouse, Gerrard St., \V. 

BERNARD QUARITCH, 11 Grafton St., New Bond St., W. 

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

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


All rig /its reserved 




Of the five texts comprised in this volume, the four long classical 
papyri (nos. 841-4) formed part of a large find of literary fragments 
from about twenty MSS., which was made on Jan. 13, 1906 in 
circumstances described in the Times of May 24, 1906 and the 
Archaeological Report of the Egypt Exploration Fund, 1905-6, p. 10. 
Of the other literary papyri which were discovered at the same time, 
the portions of the Hypsipyle of Euripides and of a new commentary 
upon Thucydides Book II will be published in Part VI, which we 
hope to issue in the summer of 1908. The vellum fragment of 
a lost gospel (no. 84o) was unearthed in a different mound in December, 

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

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



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

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

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


Queen's College, Oxford, 
October, 1907. 



Note on the Method of Publication- 





I. Theological: 

840. Fragment of an Uncanonical Gospel ..... i 

II. New Classical Texts: 

841. Pindar, Paeans . . . . . . . . .11 

842. Theopompus (or Cratippus), Z^c/Zd'wVa . . . .110 

III. Extant Classical Texts : 

843. Plato, Symposium . . . . . . . .243 

844. Isocrates, Panegyricus . . . . . . .292 


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


I. 840. 

II. 841. 
III. 842. 




I. 840 verso, 841 A. Col. xxiii 

II. 841 A. Cols, iv-v . 

III. 841 Frs. 82 and 128 

IV. 842 Cols, v-vi 
V. 842 Cols, xi-xii 

VI. 843 Cols, xxxi-xxxii 

VII. 844 Cols, ix-x 

y at the end. 


The same general method is followed in this volume as in its predecessors. 
The three new literary texts are printed in dual form, a reconstruction in modern 
style in the case of 840 following, in that of 841 and 842 facing, a literal 
transcript. In the two texts of extant authors, 843 and 844, the originals are 
reproduced except for division of words, addition of capital initials to proper 
names, and supplements of lacunae. Additions or corrections by the same hand 
as the body of the text are in small thin type, those by a different hand in thick 
type. Square brackets [ ] indicate a lacuna, round brackets ( ) the resolution 
of an abbreviation or contraction, angular brackets ( ) a mistaken omission in 
the original or a correction made by us ; double square brackets [[ ]] mean that 
the letters within them have been deleted in the original, braces { } that the 
letters so enclosed, though actually written, should be omitted. Dots placed 
within brackets represent the approximate number of letters lost or deleted ; 
dots outside brackets indicate mutilated or otherwise illegible letters. Letters 
with dots under them are to be considered doubtful. Heavy Arabic numerals 
refer to the texts of the Oxyrhynchus papyri published in this volume and in 
Parts I-IV ; ordinary numerals to lines ; small Roman numerals to columns. 


840. Fragment of an Uncanonical Gospel. 

8-8 X 7'4 cm. Plate I (verso). 

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

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



which is of a dramatic character, being preserved almost complete. It is pre- 
ceded by the conclusion of a speech of Jesus to His disciples, exhorting them to 
avoid the example of certain wrong-doers and warning them of the penalties 
which await the latter both in this world and the next (11. 1-7). What particular 
class is referred to by the word avTois in 1. 3 is not clear. Jesus, who throughout 
thefrac^ment is called simply o crcorTjp, then takes His disciples with Him inside the 
Temple to the ayvtVTi]piov, by which term the author of the gospel perhaps meant 
the ' court of the men of Israel ', though how far this use of it is legitimate is doubt- 
ful (11. 7-9 ; cf. 1. 8, note). They are there met by a chief priest who is also 
a Pharisee, but whose name is quite uncertain (1. 10, note). The chief priest 
reproaches them for having neglected to perform the necessary ceremonies 
of ablution and change of garments before entering the holy place and looking 
upon the sacred vessels (11. 12-21). A short dialogue ensues in which Jesus asks 
the chief priest if he is pure, and the latter answers recounting the different 
purificatory rites which he had himself observed (11. a 1-30). To this Jesus 
delivers an eloquent and crushing reply contrasting outward with inward purity, 
the external bathing prescribed by Jewish ritual with the inward cleansing which 
He and His followers had received in the Avaters of eternal life (11. 30-45). 
Before the conclusion of the speech is reached the fragment breaks off. 

In its general outline the episode described resembles Matt. xv. 1-20, Mark 
vii. 1'%'^, though the scene is there not Jerusalem but near Gennesaret, and the 
other details are of course different. The contrast between outward religious 
observance and inward purity was one of the most salient points in Christ's teach- 
ing, and is illustrated not only by the canonical gospels but by other uncanonical 
utterances ascribed to our Lord, e. g. the two series of Sayings of Jesus (1. 5-1 1 
lav {XT} vr]aTivariT€ k.t.A., 654. 33 sqq. [i^]iTd(ovaiv avTov k.t.K.). Even more clearly 
than 655, 840 belongs to a narrative covering the same ground as the canonical 
gospels. That this was composed with a view to advocating the tenets of 
a particular sect is not indicated by anything in our fragment ; for though 11. 41-4 
when separated from their context might conceivably be adduced as an argument 
for denying the necessity of the use of water at baptism, jia-miC^iv is not there 
used in its technical Christian sense (cf. 1. 15, note), and in other respects the 
fragment is quite orthodox. A possible point of connexion with the Gnostics 
may be found in the noticeable fact that our Lord is called not 'Irjo-oCs or 6 Kvpio<i 
but 6 cTMTTjp, a title which Irenaeus (I. i. 3) reproaches the Valentinian Ptolemaeus 
for using to the exclusion of Kvpios ; cf. Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, 
i. p. 124. But the use of acoT/jp or salvator simply to designate Jesus is of course 
common in other early Christian writers, and though its employment indicates 
that this gospel belongs to a later stage of development than the canonical gospels, 


in which it only occurs in Luke ii. n hiyOi] vixiv (jcdti'ip, os (o-tiv Xpioro? Kvpio^ 
and John iv. 43 oiSa/zer ort o5ro9 ecrriv 6 o-con/p roi3 koV^ov, this is not sufficient to 
establish a Gnostic origin for the fragment. It is, however, enough to exclude 
the likelihood that 840 comes from either the gospel according to the Hebrews 
or that according to the Egyptians. For though aoiri'ip is used in introducing 
quotations from those gospels by Origen (In loawi. ii. 6 to KaQi' 'E,3paiovi 
^vayyikiov (vda avTos 6 crooTyp cf)r](rt''' apTL eAa/3e ix€ k.t.X.) and Epiphanius {Hacr. 
62. 2) (V avT<^ (sc. the gospel according to the Egyptians) y!>p ttoAAq Toiaira ws iv 
Ttapa^vcTTt^ piVaT-qpKobMS (k irpoa-foTTOV tov a-WTfipoi avaipip^rai ws avTov §7jAoCito? toij 
lxa9i]Tals K.T.X., the evidence of the extant quotations themselves indicates that 
Kvpios was the title commonly employed, as in the Gospel of Peter. In the 
absence of any definite resemblances between 840 and the scanty remains of the 
various uncanonical gospels composed in the second or third century, the frag- 
ment is best classed as belonging to a gospel distinct from any of them. The 
chief point of interest in it lies in the references to Jewish ceremonies of purifica- 
tion in connexion with the Temple-worship, about which the author at first sight 
shows an intimate knowledge. On some points the statements in the fragment 
find support in the extant authorities for the Temple-ritual at the time of Christ. 
Thus Josephus states that no Jew who was unclean had the right to be admitted 
to the inner court of the Temple, i. e. that known as the ' court of the men 
of Israel ' (cf. 1. 8, note), and the statement put into the mouth of the chief priest 
concerning the necessity of ceremonial washing and putting on white garments is 
in accordance with the regulations for priests described in the Mishnah (cf. 11. 25 
and 27, notes). But that an ordinary Jew before visiting the inner court of the 
Temple had to wash and change his clothes as stated in 11. 18-20 is not confirmed 
by any other evidence ; and neither the term ayvevn'jpLov in 1. 8 nor the XtVi'»? tov 
Aav€Lb in 1. 25 are mentioned elsewhere, while considerable difficulty arises 
in connexion with the ' sacred vessels ' which are stated to have been visible 
from the court to which Jesus and His disciples had penetrated ; cf. 11. 12-21, 
note. Moreover the two stairways leading down to the ' pool of David ' and 
still more the statement that dogs and swine were cast into it (11. 33-4) seem to 
be details invented for the sake of rhetorical effect, for that a high priest washed 
himself in a pool of the character described in the fragment is incredible. So 
great indeed are the divergences between this account and the extant and 
no doubt well informed authorities with regard to the topography and ritual 
of the Temple that it is hardly possible to avoid the conclusion that much of the 
local colour is due to the imagination of the author, who was aiming chiefly at 
dramatic effect, and was not really well acquainted with the Temple. But if the 
inaccuracy of the fragment in this important respect is admitted, the historical 

B 2 


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

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




5 <jLvoLKaKOvpyoiTa>vavodva\\a[.\aL 
^aaavov- Kai7rapaXa(3(oi^avT0V<T 
lo 6(oi'(papi(TaioaTi(Tap^L€pev(T\^y[. . .] 

TO0UOfia<TVV€TU)(^euaVTOl(TKaL([. . •]  [ 

Tco(r(opi-Tiae'mTpe\l/(i'<TonTar[. . . . 
TOVTOToayu€VTrjpioi'KauS€iv[. . . . 

TaTaay ia(XKivr]p.r)\ovcra[.^fy[ .]/Lt[. . 

15 TiT0i>Vlia6r)T(OV(T0VT0V(TTT[ 





20 fiaTaTraT€L-ovSeo[ 


. [. . .]oi(TiJLadr]Tai[ 

a-yoyifevTavOacoi^euTCoiepco- KaOa 

25 fxr]vyap€UTr]XiiJLvr]T0vS8-KaiSi€Te 
30 (TK^veaiV' O aaipn poaavTOvano 
[. . .]6€i<T€nr€v-ovaiTV(pXoifir}op(b 
[. . .]vvKToaKaLT]iJi(pa(TKaLviylrafi€ 





. . .]ianropyaiKaia[.]av\')]TpLSecrfJ.vpL 
. •]oy[. . . .}aiXovovaivKai(TiJLr]yovai 
. . . .]aXXQ)7n^ovai7rpoa€Tn6ufii 


]Kcaa- (ycoSeKaioi 



]creXdov(rLa7ro . . [.] 

]Aaoi;ai[.]oicr[. . .]. 

TTpoT^pov npo (tov) dSiKfjaat. ndvTa aorfyi- 
^erai. dXXa Trpoaeyjere p-rj ncos KoX 
v/ieis Tcc opota avTols TrdOrjTe- ov yap 
kv Toh ^(0019 p6voi9 dnoXapl3dvov- 
5 criu 01 KaKovpyoL tSov dv[6 pu)rr)a)v dXXd [K]al 
KoXadiv vTTopkvovdiv Koi 7roA[A]r)z/ 
^daavov, koX ivapaXa^oiv avTov? 
€ia-^yayeu e/y avrb rb dyu€VTi]ptoi^ kol 

TT^pidlTdrU kv T(0 UpZ. Kol TTpO(X^[X\- 

10 Bcbv ^apiaalos ris dp^upevs Aev[€ls ?] 
TO ovopa avvhvy^^v ai/Tots Kal e[i7rei'] 
TO) crco(Tr])pi, ris eTrirpeylriv croi iraT[dv 
TOVTO TO dyv(.VTrjpiov kol ISeij/ [tuv- 
Ta TO, dyia aK^vrj prjTe Xovaa[p.]h'[a>] p'jj- 

J5 re pr]v t5)V paQrjTcav aov tovs 7T[68a? (3a- 
TTTLcrOevTOiv ; dXXa pepoXv[pp€i/os 
inaTrja-as tovto to Upov t\ottov ov- 
Ta KaOapou, ov ovSd? d[XXo9 €i pr] 
Xovadp^vos Kal dXXd[^as to. kv8v- 

20 paTa TraTU, ovSl 6[pdu ToXpd ravra 

ra dyia (tk^vt]. Kal (r[Tay evdioD? 6 crco(Tr))p 
(t[vi/ T]oh pa6T]Ta7[9 d-rnKptOr] avT^, 


(TV ovi> kvravda o^v kv tco Upu> KaOa- 

p€V(i9 ; Xiyei avrco Ikuvo^, Kadap^voo' kXovad. 
25 fir^v yap kv Trj Xifivrj rov A{av^\)S xal Si' e're- 

pa? kXi/jlukos KaTfXOcbv Si iripa? 

d[i^]rjX6oi' , Kal XevKo, ivSufiaTa kuc- 

Sucrdfiiji/ Kal Kadapd, Kai t6t€ rjXdou 

Kal 7rpoai^X€\lfa tovtois Toh dyioi? 
30 (TKivecTLi'. 6 a-co{Tr])p npos avTov dno~ 

[Kpi]d€h diT^v, ovai, TVCpXol fif] opan/- 

T[e]9' av kXovcrdo tovtois T0T9 ^^oixivois 

v[S]a(nv kv oh Kvues Kal )(oTpoi ^efiXrjv- 

[rai] UVKT09 Kal rj/xipas, Kal I'lyjrdfjLe- 
35 [^]oy TO e^7oy Sep/xa ia/XTJ^o), onep 

[Ka]l at TTopvai Kal a[/] avXtj-piSes /ivpi- 

[^]ov[(Jii' K]al Xovovdiv Kal criiriy^ovcTi 

\Kal K\iXXoini(ov(Ti npos kiriOvixi- 

\av t]S}v dv{6 pd)Tr)o)v' 'kvSoOci/ Sk iKei- 
40 [vai 7re7rX]77pa) (r)Tai aKopnioou Kal 

[ndcry]? KalKias. eyco Se Kal ol 

[fiaOrjTai fxov] ovs Xiyeis /jltj j8e/3a- 

[nTiadai ^€^d]iJ.fjLeda kv vSaai ^co- 

[rjs aloaviov Tol\s kXOovdiv diro • • [•] 
45 [ aX]Aa oval [rjory [•••]• 

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


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

3-7. This sentence is very obscurely worded, and perhaps corrupt. The contrast is, 
we think, between punishment in this life and in the world to come ; hence we prefer 
i<i>o\i ' living ' to foWf ' animals '. The use of f<cdr, a poetical word employed also by 
Xenophon, is curious, but eV to'h fwoi? seems to yield no sense. The absence of an 
object for a-noKa^i^avovuw (e.g. tov iiiaQov) is awkward, even if one could be supplied from 
the sentence preceding 1. i ; and after dAXa *cai a phrase to balance Iv toIs fwoly w'ould be 
expected. Possibly some words have dropped out ; the scribe seems to have been rather 
prone to omission. For KnXaan in reference to the next world cf. INIatt. xxv. 46 dnf^evaovTiu 
oi'Toi els KoKaa-iv qImviov : (ido-avos is not SO used in the N. T., though cf. IMatt. xviii. 34. 
vTTOfjLtvovaii' may be future, but the present tense makes a better contrast to airoXanfiavovcnv. 

8. ayvevrrjpiov : this term is not found elsewhere in connexion with the Temple, and 
what the author of this gospel exactly meant by it is not clear. The context shows that it 
was within the inner enclosure, and 11. 1 2-3, where 7raT[eri/] tovto to dyvevTrjpiov corresponds 
to TTfpundTei iv lepm, suggest that it was a large open court rather than a particular room, 
especially as the term dyvevrripiov is not a suitable description for any of the known rooms in 
Herod's Temple. The ' Chamber of Washers ' {J\Iiddoth v. 4) was employed for cleansing 
the inwards of the offerings, not for ceremonial ablutions. If dyvevrfipiov implies a place 
where rites of purification were performed, the only part of the Temple to which the name 
would be at all appropriate is the space round the brazen laver, which stood between the 
Temple-porch and the altar, having succeeded to the ' molten sea ' of Solomon's Temple 
(cf. 1. 25, note). But this is not likely to be the meaning oi dyvevrfipiov, for the. brazen laver 
was in the court of the priests, which could not be entered by lay Israelites except for 
purposes of sacrifice {Kelim, i. 8 quoted in Schiirer, Gesch. d. Jild. Volkes, ii. p. 273), and 
other indications in the papyrus (cf. 11. 12-21, note) besides the general probabilities of the 
case suggest that Jesus and His disciples had not penetrated further than the ' court of 
the men of Israel ', which was outside the priests' court. If ayvevrrjpiov is legitimately used 
of the ' court of the men of Israel ', the term seems to be applied to it not because it was 
a place where purification was performed but because it could only be entered by Israelites 
who were perfectly pure; cf. Josephus, Bel/. lud. v. 5 dvhpu>v 8' o! p.i] Kaddinw rjyvevKOTes 

(ipyovTo Ttji fudov auXijs Kal tcov Uptcov naXiv oi fifj Kcidapfvovres f'lpyovTo, and Co7ltra AplOTl. 
ii. 8 m tertia (sc. porticti) masculi ludaeorum mundi exisientes atqiie purificati (sc. ingredie- 
haniur). But it may be doubted whether the author of this gospel had any clear conception 
of ihe topography of the Temple, and the employment of the term dyvivTi]piov may be 
a mere error ; cf. introd. 

10. *a/3t(raio'f r<s dpxiepivi : by apx^pfis in the N. T. and Josephus are meant primarily 
the high priest actually in office and his predecessors, but also secondly members of the 
families from which the high priests were drawn; cf. Schiirer, op. cit. ii. pp. 221-4. There is 
therefore no necessity for this person to have been the high priest in office at the moment. 
Most of the high priests were Sadducees, and hence are often in the N. T. contrasted with 
the Pharisees, but instances of high priests who were Pharisees occur ; cf. Schurer, op. cit. 
II. p 201. The combination *api</a;o'f rtj dpxi.epfvs is therefore quite legitimate, and such 
a person is particularly appropriate as the champion of external purity ; cf. 11. 24-30. 

\(i[us] : the reading is extremely doubtful, but neither "Ai'v^as nor Kai[d(pas is admissible. 
The first two letters, if not Xe, seem to be acr, and the third, if not v, to be i or k. 


12-21. From this speech of ihe Pharisee it appears firstly that entrance to that part of 
the Temple to which Jesus and His disciples had penetrated was permiiied only to those 
who had either bathed (1. 19 Xoucru/ifwy ; cf. 1. 24) or at any rate had washed their feet, and 
had put on fresh clothes, secondly that from this part of the Temple the holy vessels 
were visible. The principal holy vessels, e.g. the table of shewbread and the seven- 
branched candlestick, stood in the hekal or larger room of the sanctuary ; but this was 
only entered by the officiating priests, and the writer of this gospel is not likely to 
have been so ignorant of the facts concerning the Temple-service as to suppose that 
Jesus and His disciples could have wished to enter the sanctuary, much less that they 
could have succeeded in doing so without opposition from the Temple guards and with 
no stronger remonstrance from the high priest than that related here. Other sacred 
vessels were kept in the small chambers (38 in number), which surrounded the sanctuary 
on all sides except that of the porch ; cf Middolh iv. These chambers were apparently 
entered from the inside of the building, so that in order to reach them it would be necessary 
to pass through the Temple-porch, and their contents can hardly have been visible from the 
priests' court which immediately surrounded the Temple-building, much less from the 
court of the men of Israel which was outside the court of the priests. Since the court of 
the priests was only accessible to lay Israelites for the purpose of sacrificing at the great 
altar, it is almost as difficult to suppose that Jesus and His disciples penetrated to these 
chambers as that they entered the sanctuar}-. The nature of the remonstrance addressed to 
them by the chief priest, who reproaches them not with being laymen but with being 
unclean, suggests that the scene of the conversation is the court of the men of Israel, 
which, as Josephus says, could only be entered by the mundi alque purificati or KaQattav 
r]yviVK6Tis (cf. 1. 8, note). Hence if ayia uKivr] implies more than the bronze laver, and 
the rings, tables, and other accessories of the sacrifices, all of which objects, being outside 
the Temple-building, would be visible from the court of the men of Israel, the author of 
this gospel has fallen into a somewhat serious error. Moreover, the statement in 11. 18-20 
that bathing and changing of clothes were required from ordinary Israelites when visiting the 
Temple is not confirmed by anything in the authorities, which record the observance of 
these formalities only in the case of the officiating priests ; cf 11. 25 and 27, notes. Josephus' 
reference to KaQairav rjypfVKOTfs probably means merely persons who were Levitically pure, 
and does not imply the performance of special rites of purification. Schiirer, therefore, 
seems to be right in supposing that the author of the gospel has by mistake referred to laymen 
the regulations applicable only to priests. 

15. l3a]nTta6ei>T(ov : ^aTTTiCtiu is uscd here and in 1. 42 not in the ordinary technical 
sense of baptizing, but with reference to ceremonial ablution, as in Luke xi. 38 6 8( <Papi<Taioi 

Idaiv (Oaviiaa-fu on oii npcorov elSanrlaBrj npo rov apiarov, and perhaps in Mark vii. 4 i'av pf] 

^anTiaavTai ovu tadiovai, where the reading is doubtful ; cf. also Sir. xxxi. 25 ^anrtCopfvos dn6 


20. 6[pav : o- may be read in place of o. 

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


the ofiicialing priests before entering on iheir duties ; cf. Tesiam. XII Patriarch., Levi 9 
Kdi Trpo Tov €l<j('K6('u' (h Tu ayta Xoi'ov, and the authorities from the Wishnah cited by Schiirer, 
/. c. This room, ^vhich is called in Middolh i. 9 'the house of baptism', was reached by 
a passage from the Temple-building, and was clearly outside the Temple-enclosure. That 
the author of the gospel had in his mind the ' brazen sea ' seems to us improbable, since 
the Xi'/ii"; is called after David, not Solomon, and while the brazen sea stood close to the 
Temple-building itself, the XZ/jj/^ which had two KXifiaKa leading down to it (11. 25-6) and 
into which dogs and swine are cast (1. 33) is evidently conceived of as being outside the 
Temple (presumably in the valley below), and thus fulfilling the functions ascribed in the 
Mishnah to the 'house of baptism". Whether a pool called after David really existed is 
however very doubtful, for the details concerning it are more picturesque than convincing. 
The subtle distinction of the different stairways for the use of the clean and unclean, though 
plausible in itself, is, in the absence of corroboration, more likely to be due to the imagination 
of the author of the gospel than to have a historical basis, and the casting of dogs and 
swine into the pool looks like a rhetorical exaggeration ; cf. note ad loc. 

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

31. ova'i, Tv<j)Xoi: the dative is more common after oiui, as in 1. 45; but cf. Luke vi, 
25 oiiai, ol yfXoiVTfs vvv, on nevdrjcreTe, where there is an ellipse of vfiiu, and Rev. xviii. 16 oval 

oiiai, f) noXis 17 /ifyaXt). 

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

36. a'l TTopvai Koi a j] av\T]Tpi8(s '. cf. for this CoUocation rptli ycip BuvXovs nepidxf tov fxev 
KaTa(f)ay6vTa rfjv vnap^iv /xfra nopvoip koi av\r]rpl8(i>v in the 'Ej3pa'iKols x"po-KTi]puiv evayyeKwv quoted 

by Eusebius in his Theophatiia (Resch, Agrapha, p. 388). 

39. fvBodfv de K.T.X.: cf. the denunciations of the Pharisees in Matt, xxiii, 25 oval vpTiv, 

ypapparui Ka\ ^apKToioi vnoKpnai, on Kadapi^tre to i'^cci6fv tov TTOTrjplov Kai rrjs napo^itos, faatdtv 6e 
yipnvmv i^ apnayris Koi oKpaaiai, 33 o(f>(is yfvvTjpara ixihvwv, Luke xi. 39 to be i'aoiSfV ifxcov ytpei 
apnayris Kai novrjpias (cf. Kolfctar in 1, 41). 

40. 7T67TX]i5p<B(r)rat : it would be possible to retain TrevrXjijpcoTat by reading eKetra in place 
of fVdi'ot, but such a use of the neuter plural is unlikely. 

42. l3(^a\[TTTi(j6ai: or 0(^o[iT\\[Ti(r6ai ; but cf. 11. 15-6 ^a \nTi(r6evT(ov. 

43. fiffia[ppL(6a: a, 8, ov X could be read in place of the doubtful ft, but not a or r, 
so that \(Xo]vn(6a and ^(^anTi\(rp.i6a (which is also too long) are excluded, and 0e0diip(6a is 
practically certain. IBdnrnv is a less technical word than ^aTVTiCdv, but there is, we think, 
no real distinction intended between the two terms here, since ^amiCiiv is not employed in 
its technical sense ; cf. 1. 15, note. 

43-4- f^^r: or iui\cn, with another word in place of alaviov. The letter before iXdoixnv 
may be t or u instead of o-, so that Ka\TeX6oi(Tiv is possible, vbwp fwj/ occurs in John iv. 10, 
II, vii. 38, vb(x>p fw^y in Rev. vii. 17, xxi. 6, xxii. i and 17. otto', if correct, was no doubt 
followed by some words like twv ovpuvu)v or tov naTpos, 



841. Pindar. Paeans. 

Height 1 8 cm. Plates I-lII (A Cols, iv, v, xxiii, 

Frs. 82 and 128). 

It is a somewhat remarkable circumstance that though several Pindaric 
fragments have been found at Oxyrhynchus (408, 426 (?), and 659 besides 841), 
none of theni has contained any part of the Epinician poems. Eustathius tells us 
{Opusc. p. 60. 22) that that section of the poet's works was the most popular 
as being fuller of human interest, less concerned with myth and less obscure 
in expression, — 6\ Kal "nepiayovTai [j.d\t(rTa bia to avdpu^-niKdiTipoL etrat koI o\iy6\j.vdoi, 
Kal ixrjbi TTavv €\eLV aa-a(pa>i Kara ye to aWa : but this, so far as the evidence goes, 
hardly seems to have been the general verdict in Egypt during the Roman 
period. Recent discoveries moreover happily enable us to form our own opinion 
as to the character of some of the other categories. 659 provided for the first 
time a specimen of the UapOiveia ; and now the following much longer and more 
valuable text presents the material for an adequate estimate of the important 
class of Ylaiaves. 

The paean, which is a very ancient form of poetry, was a hymn originally 
sung in honour of Apollo or Artemis, whether in thanksgiving to, or propitiation 
of, the deity. Both of these motives appear in Homer ; the Achaeans are to 
return to their ships singing a paean of victory (X 391), and try to divert the 
wrath of Apollo with a paean at a sacrificial feast (A 472-3). In later times 
paeans were dedicated to other gods than Apollo ; Xenophon, for instance, speaks 
of a paean to Poseidon {//ell. iv. 7. 4) : cf. Proclus, CJirest. ap. Photius, Bibl. 239 
6 h\ TiOLiav ((TTLv elbos (riS^s CIS irdvTas vvv ypa(\>6\m'os deuvs, to be iraXaibv toTcos Airfve- 
pi€To Tw 'ATToAAoji't Koi Tjj 'ApT^ixibi, (Til KaTaTTavcreL KoLixcav koI v6<tu)v qbopLevoi' Kara- 
Xp^joTiKcSs 6e Koi TO. Trpoaobia TLves iraiavas Xiyovciv. The sound odi] was especially 
characteristic of the paean ; Athenaeus, xv. pp. 696 e, f (cf. 701 b, c), calls h)T:ai6iv 
the -naiavLKov iT:lppr]p.a or i7rL(f)dey[xa, a description which the papyrus well illustrates ; 
cf. also 660. 

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


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

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


the presence of a different document, part of a land-survey list, on the recto of D. 
while the recto of C is the same as in A and B. Two isolated fragments, 26-7, 
where the text on the verso was written by the scribe of A-B, also have a different 
cursive, perhaps the same as in D, on the recto. The changes of hand in the 
verso and recto respectively make the order A-B, C, D the natural one ; but it is 
not impossible that D preceded C or that C-D preceded A-B, for the case 
of Frs. 26-7 indicates that the recto of the roll as made up to receive the literary 
text on the verso was of a somewhat heterogeneous character. There is some 
internal as well as external evidence for distinguishing C-D from A-B, since it is 
doubtful whether the poems represented in C-D are also to be regarded as 
paeans ; this question will be considered later (p. 2^). 

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

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


resemblance to that found c. g. in the Bacchylides papyrus and 223. In diph- 
thongs, as usual, an acute accent falls on the first of the two vowels, while 
a circumflex generally covers both ; a grave accent is placed by the scribe of A-B 
on the second vowel (III. 12, VI. 130), by the scribe of C-D in two instances on the 
second (Fr. 82. 25 reAei?, IX. 39 amn^ets), in one (IX. 39 iioKraiais) on the first. 
Unaccented syllables often bear a grave accent, usually one or more of those 
preceding the accented syllable (e. g. I. 8 0tX?Vto-rec^ayoi', V. 38 c/)€/jefx?yAous), but 
a following syllable is similarly treated in Fr. 82. 21 oXoatjo-t, IX. 42 iTeK[i. The 
article is written in I. 5. Oxytone disyllables as a rule only have a grave accent 
on the first syllable (IV. 51 vbjxov, VI. 14 rpucfiov, &c. ; an exception is dafxa 
Fr. 20. 27), and a similar method is sometimes followed in polysyllabic words, 
e.g. VI. 16 dajxlva, IV. I2 ayaKXea for ayaKkia. Syllables preceding enclitics 
arc accented (IV. 27 avi-nr^o'i eijxt, &c.) even in the case of paroxytones, 
e. g. V. 44 ^vda jae, VI. 87 6(rad re. Instances of mistaken accentuation are II, 98 
6una for Oaixd or Oaixa, IV. 28 MeAufXTjo? for MeAa/xTros, IV. ;^6 os for 6s, 37 (Karov 
for eKarov (or eKarov), similarly IX. 39 avoTLOels for avariOeLs, and Fr. 82. 25 rtAets for 
TfAetj. Punctuation is commonly effected by means of a high dot, which is freely 
supplied. At the ends of lines it is placed some little distance away at a level 
varying between the middle and top of the letters. The exact height is apparently 
immaterial, and therefore has been disregarded in our transcript ; e. g, in IV. 34 
the stop after KaTa^aivrnv is opposite the middle of v, in 70 after Trpoirdpoidev it is 
at the top, the length of the pause being exactly the same in the two cases. 
Stops occurring in the course of lines are placed, as in the Bacchylides papyrus, 
well above the letters ; but there is one genuine case of a dot in the middle 
position, where the pause is represented by the modern comma (VI. 15 ; cf. 182), 
and one instance of a dot just below the line (IV. 48), at the end of an interrogative 
sentence. A paragraphus is only used in the text to separate the metrical sections 
which are, apparently, always distinguished. Plain paragraphi are employed at 
the end of strophes and antistrophes, but at the commencement of new strophes 
they are accompanied by a conspicuous coronis, as in 659. Paean V, which 
consists only of strophes, accordingly has this coronis at the end of each one. 
The commencement of a fresh poem is denoted by a separate sign (VI. 1). In the 
scholia by the first hand of C-D paragraphi are frequently inserted to mark off 
the notes, and in A-B they appear sporadically for a similar purpose. In some 
other respects an apparent difference of practice in the two main divisions of the 
manuscript is to be noted. In C-D a curved line has in several cases been 
placed below letters or syllables, with no very clear object (cf. note on Fr. 82. 23) ; 
this does not occur in what remains of A-B. In the latter on the other hand 
there occur before lines certain critical signs, consisting of the ordinary t/tp/r, 


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

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

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

These additions are in several hands which are not always readily distin- 
guished. The textual notes in A-B are mostly in uncial or semi-uncial script, 
and sometimes are certainly due to the first scribe, e.g. the variants at V. 38, 
VI. 55, Sec. This scribe was moreover a careful if not an elegant writer, and made 
few slips which he did not himself correct ; an instance occurs at \TI. i. To 
a distinct class belong certain other entries in a more sloping hand (H 2), includ- 
ing II. I OwpaKOS, 37 Kot, 40 Sdiois, IV. 4 cTttTO, V. 21 epiTTk'ais, VI. I title (?), lO ae^wk*, 

14 kXutoi- a\CT09, 52 interlinear e and tti Ocu- (?), the note opposite 11. 108-9, VII. 2 


€TT€ai] (?), Fr. 1 6. ■; KeXaStio-ae ujjli'ous, Fr. 21. 7 ea(T€Tai. A third more rapid and 
licjhter hand (H 3) is responsible for II. 2 Trarpiou, 27 cX[ (?), V. 45 TravSwpoo K,r.A.,and 
perhaps IV. 62 uio(s) k.t.A. ; while a ^t\v more variants, namely 1 1. 52 interlinear i and 
aci, 75 cf 8c, IV. 58 Zt)(vo8otos) k.t.A., VI. 180 (7Te4>ai/oi(7i vw . [. . ,], are in the cursive 
(S i) of the explanatory scholia. Here again a distinction has to be drawn. Two 
groups of these cursive notes are traceable throughout the papyrus, (a) = S i, 
in a small and as a rule clear writing, and (b) = S 2, in a more rapid and 
negligent and generally rather larger cursive, the ink of which also is of a lighter 
shade ; e. g. in the scholium opposite II. 43 to voriixo. . . . eX-n-iSas belongs to S i, the 
rest of the note to S 2. Evidently these two groups were written on different 
occasions., and at first sight would be put down to different persons ; but they are 
of a similar character and at times approximate closely in style, and we hesitate 
to say that they could not proceed from a single hand. It is a question too how 
far the various readings classed under H 2 and H 3 may not be the work of the 
scholiast or scholiasts ; H 2 and S i, at any rate, are not unlikely to be identical. 
In C-D such variants as occur and many of the scholia proper are in the hand of 
the text, but S i and S 2 are responsible for a number of additions. 

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

Iw" ^ V-^ 

— v^ — 

yj — 



>-l — 

— <_> — 

— (^ — 

^ — 



w — w 

^ ^ \J 

w ^ 




\y ^ ^ 

— v^ v^ 



\_/ — ^ 

— — w 
y^ \j ^ 

— \-J 



^- ^ 

\^ — \^ 

— i_y — 

— v-" 




v_/ K^ 

v_/ — 



v-i w v^ 

— v-/ — 

— w V^ 




— v^ ^ 

— y^ \j 

— ^ 


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



a half columns comprising it being wholly lost and another badly damaged ; the 
remainder however, amounting to three-fifths of the whole, which consisted of 
108 verses, is in good condition. Abderus, the mythical comrade of Heracles, 
who is said to have founded the city to perpetuate his memory, is addressed 
in the opening line ; and the subsequent fortunes of the place, the failure of 
a settlement from Clazomenae (11. 55-6, 63-4), its successful colonization from 
Teos (11. 3, 65 sqq.), and its later prosperity (11. 25-7), arc appropriately 
commemorated. There are some rather obscure allusions (11. 39-40, 104-7) ^o 
a war in which the Abdcrites were taking part. The date is subsequent to the 
battle of Salamis, since the occupation of Athens by the Persians is referred to in 
11. 28 sqq. Perhaps the poem was written about the time of the formation of the 
confederacy of Delos, when hostilities directed against the Persians were still 
going on in the region of Abdera ; or a struggle with some Thracian neighbour 
may have been in progress. The whole ode is characterized by a distinctly 
warlike note. It consists of three systems, the strophe having eleven and the 
epode fourteen logaoedic cola, and each epode ending with the refrain ujte 
Taiav, tTjie" iraLav 8e /^t/ttotc Xdiroi. Similar refrains are found in IV and V. 

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


v^ — <^ w 

_ V _ ^ 

— o — sj — — 

\J \J \J — \^ \J — v^ — 

^ _ ^ ^ — I 

5 ^v^ \j - 

^ <^, 

— — v^ — — \^ — \J ^^ — 

\^ \^ \J — o>^ — — 

— — ^ \^ — v^ 

\^ — K^ \J 

10 — — WW W — 

WW — ^-z — — 

(better ww ^-ww w^ 


— w — v-/ w 


— — wv_( — — WW — 

wv^v-'W — v-/ — — 

— \^W — — W — WW — , 

— W— — — — WW 

(better -ww w-ww '-■-I 

— — — — — WW — — ) 



- - -[ I ] 

\_/v^ — \^ \U — v^v^ 
\y \^ \j \-> — v^ — — 

wwv^ — >_/^^ — — 

\^ — K^ ^^ — — v^ 

10 w — v^vj — v^ — — 

w \^ — — 

— — v^v^ v^ — \^«^ — — 

V^ KJ \U 

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

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

(I^ov, o) ^■noWoiVidi (sc. Delos)* aiJ.(f)OT(pai> rot y^apiTiav (tvv di.o'i^ C^v$m re'Ao?, 
Kut Tov aii€i.peK.6[xav <l>ot/3or yopiviav 
kv Ke'w a.p.(f)LpvTq. avv TtovrCois 
avbpdcnv, koI rav aAiepjce'a 'lcr9[xov 
bdpdb' , 

and the scholia upon the occasion of the poem: — 01 Keiot A-qXiaKov Traiava rj^tovv 
TOV TT0iT]T7]v ypd\}raL . . . ix4WovTos yap Ketots ypdcjatv TTpocrobiaKov itaiava . . . sacra's 
d(TvpLTT€pa(TTov TO ciy A7]\ov TToirjixa (rvvTdTT€L T(u 'Hpo8or<p TOV tTrCviKov. It is now 
clear that the well-known fragments 87-8 x^^Vs ^ ^eo8juara k.t.X. which have been 
referred to this Cean paean (Schneider, Find. Fragm. p. 29 ; so Schroeder) have 
no connexion with it. On the other hand the conjecture of Dissen and Fennell 
that the poem was sung at the temple of Apollo at Carthaea is corroborated by 
the allusion in 1. 13. The central idea is the virtue of contentment with a simple 
life like that of the Ceans in their rocky island, which was nevertheless celebrated 
as the home of athletes and poets. This lesson finds further illustration in the 
stories of Melampus (11. 28 sqq.) and of the local hero Euxantius (11. ;^^ sqq.), in 


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

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


V^V^ \J >U V^l„< \^ 

w >^«^ — v^^ I 

— — v.^ — — w^^-' — — , 

w I 

wv^w — — ^J ^ \^ — — — — v^v-* 

5 v-/ — v_» ^iw* — \^ <y — ^_/C 

— \J \^ — v^v^ — v^v^ 

v^v^ — \^ — — \^ \^ — — — , 

— vU — v^ «-! — , 

l^l *_/ — • — >^ v^ , 

10 \J ^^ — ^v^ — \J <J — >^ — 



\U V^lw/V-" — \J KJ — 

V_/ 1^ 1^ 

^ y^ — yj — {syll. aiiceps ?) 

5 — — iw^w — — |w>^ — ^ \j — 

{syll. anceps ?) 

\j \^ — v-*^ — y^ \J ^ 

KJ V.^ \y V.^V^ V-ZN.^ >_» — 

— \J \J \J — v^ v^ 

10 v^v^v^ \^ ^ >_/ 

1^ — v^ — — >-<w — — 

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

C 2 



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


v^ — \^ \^ — v^w— — 

— \J \y — KJ ^ — — 

— \^ — v^^ — ^w I 

— 1^1^ — \u '■^ — — 

5 — v_/ \^ — \^ \j — , 

— KJ \^ — \J "U — 

VI. Paean VI is inscribed ' For the Delphians, to Pytho,' and was composed 
for performance at the Theoxenia (11. 6i-a), one of the three principal festivals in 
the Delphic calendar. Like its predecessors this long ode has sustained con- 
siderable damage ; three columns have disappeared entirely, two more are 
hopelessly mutilated, and another is very imperfect. Still even with these deduc- 
tions about half of the 183 lines are complete or easily restored. The first 
eighteen, after which there is a gap, belong to an extremely graceful exordium, the 
commencement of which was already familiar in a citation by Aristides, though 
its classification was a matter of doubt ; Schroeder puts it in the Prosodia. The 
body of the paean (11. 74-120) is occupied with a sketch of the fate of Troy and 
the subsequent fortunes of Neoptolemus, including the passage, already partly 
known from a quotation, which offended the susceptibilities of the Aeginetans 
(cf. notes on 11. 11 7-9 and 123), and to which reference is made in the seventh 
Nemean. Pindar there repeats, in language very similar to that used in this 
paean, his version of the story of Neoptolemus' death (cf. 11. 104-20 with Netn. 
vii. 35-42), and protests that he had no intention of disparaging the Aeacid hero 
{Nem. vii. 64 sqq., 102 sqq.). The date of our paean is therefore prior to 
B.C. 461, the year of the victory which Ne7n. vii celebrates. From Neoptolemus 
the poet turns with characteristic suddenness to the praises of Aegina and the 
myth of the bride of Zeus whose name the island bore ; and here the thread 
is lost. 

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



\^ \j — \j — \j 

v^ <-< — \u 

— ^ — \J \J — . 

— I^W — \J — v-* — ^ ^ 

v> — -^ \J — ^ — — 

\^ \J \J — v^>^— — KJ \u 



— \u — *_/ — <-» — — I 

5 — WW — w w — I 

w — w — — WW — w — — 

wwww — — WW — 

— WW 

W — WW 


lO T-, — ^ — \J^— ^ — 


W — WW — w — — 

— wwww — — WW — WW 

— WW — WW — I WW — , 

— WW — wv-/ — »-'\^. 

— — — WW — 

5 — WW — — W— WW — — 

W — WW — — W — WW — w 

— — w — WW — www 

— W/W — WW — WW — WW 

— W — WW — 
lO v^ — '<J — WW — 

\^ — — w — WW — w w. 

— w 

WW — W v^ 



w w 

w w 





w w v-/ w 

W — WW — w — 

w — w — , 


W — W ^^ W W T-; 

w — w — www 

— WW — w — — 

— WW — w — — , 


— i^^ — w ^^ — »^, 

15 — W — WW 


— W — WW — w — 

— WWWWW — — W — WW — — 
W — W — W — WW — — w, 

— W — WW — 

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

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


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

i=f — <u \^ \j Y — v^ — 

\J KJ — v_/ ^ 

^ ^ —, 

— v^ ^ — v^ — 

^ \^ \J 


-^^ ^ 

w [- v./ -, 

1^ 1^ — ^ i_^ — 

v^ — ^ v^ — 

v^ — vy — v^ — 


\y KJ — <-< v^ — 

<-< w — ^\y >U — <J 

— yj — v^ \^ — 

_ _ 

(_/ 1^ w 

C/ — V-* ^^ 

\y \J ^J <J 

— i^y 

\^ \J — — 

— <J ^ — 1 

— y^ \_l 

V^ W !_/ 

I J — i^w — v^[v-» — 

[ ]^^--^ 

• • • • • 

Most of the other fragments of C may well belong to the same poem. 
'A\e^ay8[po? (?) is mentioned in Fr. 96 ; but the only other piece which has 
any complete lines is Fr. 84, which gives the beginning of a speech of a person 
whose identity is unknown. 

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


<-»!-' <J \J WV^ P-*" 

v^ — <u \J \j — v_; — 

V-* — V-* — — KJ \J — Ky \J — V./V^ — V-llw/ 
W — — <^ \J — v^v^ 


<-> — v^v^ — >^w — \J ^-J 

— — — v^v^ — v^>_/ — \^ — 

\J KJ — \J \J — WW I 
W WV_/ W 

10 — — WW — — — w 


WW — WW — www — — WW — w — 

Some of the minor fragments of D are no doubt also to be assigned to IX ; but 
the only pieces of any size, Frs. 129-31, containing parts of two consecutive 
columns, arc proved by the metre to belong to a different ode. 

It remains to be considered whether the poems represented in C-D are 
to be ranked, as those in A (with which B is naturally connected) undoubtedly 
are, as paeans. External evidence is inconclusive, for though there is a change 
of scribe at C the continuity of the sections is in a measure preserved, as has 
been explained above, by the recto and part of the scholia, as well as by the 
similar height of the papyrus and the columns of writing. The contents of 
the fragments must therefore be the main guide ; and here it must be admitted 
that in certain respects C-D appear to be peculiar. There is no sign in these 
sections o^ lr\ or naiav \ and though the importance of this argument a silcntio 
might easily be exaggerated, the fragments are sufficiently extensive to make the 
absence of those characteristic words remarkable. Secondly, it is curious to what 
an extent C-D are concerned with seers and soothsaying ; see Fr. 82 throughout, 
Fr. 84. 10 sqq., Fr. J28 (Tenerus), Fr. 131. 20-2, and Fr. 139. There is a refer- 
ence to an oracle in II. 73 ; but here such subjects almost monopolize the field. 
If however these poems are not paeans, what are they ? Boeckh assigned the 
fragment on the eclipse of the sun to the 'T7ropx7//xara on the strength of the 
passage prefacing the quotation in Dionys. Hal. de Deviosth. diet. c. 7 ravra 
(sc. certain passages from Plato's PJiacdriis) . . . d Ad/3oi /u«Atj koL pvdfxov'i wa-nep ol 
btOupajX/Soi KOL TO. vTiOj)yji]\xaTa, tois Ylivhapov TTonjiJLacnv (otKevai bo^eiev av tois (h rbv 
ij\Lov eiprjuivois. Hence Boeckh infers that the fragment must either come from 
a dithyramb or a h} porcheme, and that, since there is nothing Dionysiac in it, the 
latter must be the right category — a conclusion accepted b}- Schroedcr. In 
favour of this classification may now be set the consideration that the paeans 
and hyporchemes were closely connected ; cf. Menander Rhet. de Encom. p. 27 
rov^ jxiv yap (tQv vp.i'cov) eis 'ATToAAojra Tratoray sal vTTOp\ypiaTa i-opi^opfi; Tovi be cij 
Aiovvjov hidvpap-ftovs k.t.X. On the other hand Boeckh's argument that the men- 


tion by Dionysius of biOvpafi^oi and vTropxii^iaTa limits the choice to one or other 
of those classes is unconvincing. Since the fragment cannot be included in both 
it need not necessarily belong to either ; if Dionysius meant to imply that 
it came from a h}porcheme why did he go out of his way to mention dithyrambs ? 
Boeckh further considers that the metre is well adapted to dancing, and therefore 
favours a hyporcheme ; but this argument is counterbalanced by the apparent 
unsuitability of the predominant themes of C-D to an orchestic accompani- 
ment. There is moreover another class of Pindar's works to which the paeans 
stood in close relation, and whose claims should be considered, namely the 
irpoaobia, — witness the passage already cited (p. ii)from Proclus : KaraxpTjortKws 
8e Kol ra -rrpoaobia Tivh Tratavas \iyov<nv. It is noticeable that the word 7rp]o(To'8i[oy 
is not improbably to be restored in a mutilated scholium in Fr. io8, though this 
of course no more justifies the inference that the odes were -npoaohia than the 
occurrence of ba(f)vr][(})opiK6v in Fr. 107 authorizes us to hold that they were ba(j)vr]- 
ipopLKu. That references to the Theban ba(t>vr}(f)opLa should be found in both 
C and D (Frs. 107 and 129-31, notes) is not surprising if VIII as well as IX had 
a Theban setting ; there is an allusion to the same festival in I, which is 
doubtless a paean. The ba(^vr]<\>opiKa, like the TrapOeveia of which they were 
a subdivision, were designed for a female chorus (cf. 659), of which there is 
no trace in these fragments, while the masculine participle in the gloss on IX. ^6 
points in a contrary direction. 

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

A. Col. i (Fr. I). 

7rpivoSvi>T]payT]pao(ra[ ]oX€iu 

vor]fidKoroi'kn[.]/j.eTpa'iS(oi^ fffTpiws 


5 [,]r]iT]vvP0Trai'TeXr)a€uiavT0(r 
[. . . .]L7nToua(rTv6r]Pa(r€Trrj\dov 
[. . . .]X(oviSa?Ta(plXrjalcrTi(f>ai/oi'ayouTi(T' 
[. .]^'5eXacot/ye^'ea^'5apo^'€p€7^70t 
10 [. .\(ppovo<Tav6i(TLVivvonia(T' 


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

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

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


• •••••• 

TTp]v oSvuTjpa yi]pao9 a[^e56t' /ijoXetV 

vorip. aKOTOv e7r[i] [lerpa, i8(oi^ (itrpiws. 

SvvafllV OLKoOiTOV, 

'flpa[L] re Qefiiyovoi 
[0r\]t7r7roi' darv Oij^a? enrjXOou 
[An6X\\Q)i't Saira (piXTjaiarecpai/ov dyouTH' 
[Ta]v 8k \aa>u yei^ear Sapov epinrot 
10 [(Ta)](ppouo? dvOicriv evi^ofiia?. 



aTTO<rovT'apX'»lv\oPciJVoiovaiT [ 

1 i> - irarpiov 

\eidai'oaT€7rai • • *^ 


]ai'a[. .jco^O) 




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

Opposite 11, 26-; 



• « 

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

[ 13 letters ]■•«[• •] 

[. .]aTiva[ yaiQ) 

25 ^u X 0[.]aLKiavy[. .]avapn€\o[. .] 

KafioK^oTTLaco^povoaepTreSocr' *^[ 



[."... ■.];y-.[.].[.]t[ 


X (TaviiB^TicrapKiaiv^iXoia 







KaipCOlKaralSaiVCOP" 8vva raiojioxOoox' 



arp. a 1 [Nar(5]o? Qpovia^ "AfiSr]p€ ^aXKoOwpa^ OwpaKos [ 

2 [noa]eiSdi'69 re irai, irarpiov. 

r'/M 'T' '!> \^ o'TO vov t(tiv) apvTiv XaGoiv olov a.n[6 . . . 

3[(Te6]€V laOVl rOvSe Xa<0 dcotKOi yap «tcrtv ol -ApSriplTai TT,tU T,'u,s 

5 [Ari]pr]vou !/47r[6]XXa)j/a nap t 'A<ppo[SiTai' ^^ tottos .V •A_p8T|pois oOto, kgXov- 

Lines 6-20 lost = str. 6-1 1, antistr. 1-9. 
Fr. 2, Col. i, opposite 11. 26-7. 

 • • 


^r)— — ^^ — — y^ — 

1 1 (-/ V-i — v^ — w 

€7r. a 1 — — ^>^^-' — — v^w— OoppoOo-av w'^. . . 

r , ., . [ ]  V . [.j . [.]if 

2 \^ ariva \Tavo€\ vaico 

25 n @[p\a'CK(av y[a'L\av a/x7reX6[ea-]jraj' re kol 
4 (VKopnou- firj pot p^yas '^pncov 

r. KapoL e^OTTiaco ^p6uo9 (pneSo?. *^L 

6 vioTToXh (Ipi' parpo? 

7 Sh parip' kpd^ (.{ttlS)ov 'ipnav tt|v xeKJ^ofio-av woXiv . . 

^ „ rT«pcru>v -qvi Ka . . . 

30 ? TToX^piCp TTVpl nXayei- ?KTicrav ol 'A^GTivaioi Ttu). 

} r.A > / , /•n tav tv Kail pai . . . 

o-ttF. €i de Ti? a/j/cecof (/itAot? ^^^^ tovs irix^tjxiovs . 

A " r A •* «15 TOV Xo IITOV XPO^'OV . . . 

II poyOos -qav^iav (pep^i *PP"- 

IJ KaipCO KaTa^aiVQiU. Bvvarai 6 (loxOos t[ 

35 13 iT^t'e naidv, irjie- naidv 


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

[j3 letters ]ot 

[. .JvaraiT] . [. . .]p(i)V(u4)€\€iaTjoavxov(nvT)ToXT]fxjxa 
[ jj ^xXKaLSiT^L^OaavSpcOV kov ee*^ op,oiovTCdnTOT€ 

c , pov8iKaT<ixoo-v4/iaTOVT)aKo 

L )» )» I?/ Xiaiaairaraia 

[ll „ ]f)a'fiapi'a/xaifiap 

40 [13 J, ] cr- 8aioicr 

[11 .J ]ei5aj/_fo[. .]ej^O(r 

[ ,, „ '\Ta)vyafiayTOjxevoi>v 

\ ^tbepeaOai TovoTj[i.aT[.]iovTO€voi<rYapSia4)«p€iv 

'- " " ^ 8oKovaivoiavTi.TTa\oiKaTaTToX«p.ovTav 

[j2 ] . CreActcr Ta€KTrov€ivaYa9acrvTrOTi9€TaiviKr)o- 

«X7riSao- T)T)nnroo-«v0€T€i'n-pocrTVav 

45 L^^ J> piKvpcr Jl TiiTa\a)viravTo5a-n"r)V€(J)o8ovoiov«avT€ 

r ]ludvUL <l.eov€u iT€?€VOJO-iV€avT*|X€enTTrcov-iTapa 

 " >> J. r^ T TVi7x°'V(O(TivTp€vJ/op.€0aavrov(T 

r 1 TOJUTTirlKOJl 

[18 , IdOVaCTCOV «nf)vppio-aiTOVcrevTi]nroX€i 

, .. aTacria5ovTaa8€KanroXi.T«[.]ovTao' 

L J TroXXa)ip,aXXovTovcreiTT)XvSacr«'n-iTi6e 

50 [16 „ ]orTbSev^ov 'J"^°^*'^*" 

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

\iaiT€Kaia[. .]ot. 

eyKeifi€vo[.]a€i6aXXcifia\a aei 


Oeqo[. .] (x6[.]auoT]aaicr 

55 '^8ri(f)6ovqcrOL^eTai oiovovk«ti8[ ]o-<|>9ov€i<r0ai 

- /, T'YOV€ti)vnu,[. . . .loOavovTojvaXXov 

TOiVTraXanrpodaVOVTOiV' 8€Kaiav8p[: .]ao-€9ay9yYaR ' 

XpriSavSparOK^Va-Kp^petV g.^^ ]eMav8p«ia«vixoYil<rai 

'(SaOvSoiouaLaaw ^ •' )v^^C- • t>p[.>Tovtt€X 

' . ° ... .JyTaiToAejjiova'tiYevoiVTO 

ToiavviroX€p(oiKTr](Tap[. ... ] 

60 )(^6oi'a7roXvSa)poi'oX[ ] 

.7. ap'- 

€yKaTeOr]Kav7r(paua[ ] 

TraLovcuvaL-^paTav'^ ](r 

^a6ea(TrpO(f)OV-aXXa[ .] . [.]p[. .jyaeuieKpX-rieevTeo- 

. ^/ r , Ol«voiKo[.lvTi.](Tfn-nX0ov 

€7re7r(aeixoLpa-TXavT[.]y |xvvovji[. . . .]vo-€KpaXov 

65 8'i7r(lTa6€Ol(rVPeTeXe<Taa[. . . .]. TaaKauyu[. . .]av 

V'iTOp,€ivav[ ] 

Ol6<0lT€Xo[ ] 


* L " ' J  [8v]vQTai -f) t(u)v) [av8]pu)V ui4)«'X«ia -fj o auxovcriv t| to X-fjji^ia 

<TTp. B'\\-^-^^-'\ akKO. 8k rervoy dvSpSiV {a\-)Ka\. Bi^ v onoiov tu) 'tt6t.- 

"■ J i /\ p^y 5iK9 T€lx°S VlVpiaTOV TJ <7KO- 

2 [i/>l/"icrTOi/ fo"Tar]a£ Xuxls dTTdrais.' 

3 [^ >-^ "^ — ^]pa' [idpyafxat p.av 

40 4 [— — ^ w 8ao\i.S' Saiois. 

[ v^ n.oaYL8dvLo\y y]ej/oy [t'TTTrcoi' v^ ^ 

6 Toov yap avToixkicou 

7 [>-/ w >o' — ^1 <p€p€(Tdai TO v6T|[ia t[o]io{)to" «v ois ^dp 8ia4>«p(iv 

, SoKovaiv 01 QVTiiraXoi Kara iroXeiiov rav- 

8 j^— — w >_/ — J (jeAay ra tKirovetv dyaOds {rn-OTiGtrai viktjs 

C •. / tX-iriSas. f\ T] iirnos €u9«T€i irpos t t|v) t(uv) dv- 

45 9 [- s^ - TTO\TlKVpar} TiirdXwv -TravToSa-rniv t<j>oSov, oiov €dv t« 

10 — — ^ w W U,aVL€i d>tfOV€l. » , 1 ' n . ' '^ 
L J ' TVYX*vwavv Tpeij/ofxcUa auTOVs 

11 [v^ ^ — w J 

TOl ITTTlKti). 

at'7. ^'i[— v^ — v^v^ — — — v-/ XjaOf a(TT(i)V *^■•(\ vPpi<rai tovs «v tq irdXei 

axacridJovTas 5t Kal iToXiT€[u]ovTas 

2 [q — — — >->' —J iroXXti jxdXXov Tovs tTTTjXvSas €TriTi9€(<T0ai) 

r 1 V t>* »/D dv -n 6f«ws. 

50 3 [v^ U ^ — ^ ^\0L' TO ivpOV- ' 

4 Xloc re Kal a[LS]o7 

s ey/f€t7iei/o[j/] aUl OdWci fxaXaKah e[v]Siai[9-] dtC. 

6 Kal TO p.\v SlSoTQi 

7 ^eof [6 5]' ex^[P]^ vorjaats 

55 8 ^5?; (bOovOS o'i-^^Tai olov ouKtri 8[ti Tijxd's 4>6ovfia9ai 

^ , T((Jiv) YOV«a>V T](l^(I>V T^tiv; TTp^oOavovTwv dXX ou- 

9 TCOV TrdXai TTpodaVOVTOaV 84 Kal dv8p[«ijas' tOavov Ydp. 

10 Ypn ^ dvSpa TOK^v(xdv) (bipay ^,^ . „„. , ,.,,,„, . 

11 ^aOvSo^ov atcray. [o-vp.<})«po]v<Tvv irp djs to\j(s> (x«'X- 

, ^ , , - Xo]vTa(s) iToXtnovs «i y*^^''^'"'®- 

€7r. p 1 TOL avu TToAeixcp KTr](Tafi[evoi 
60 2 yOova noXvScopou, 6X[fioy 

8 kvKaTiOrjKav nepau a[ypiW] Uaiovcav 
\ al'^lxaTau [re "XTpviiovias ya]? 

B taOias Tpo6ov- dXXa [S' dyoiad toi (?) u]it[«]p Td> "aOu) JKpXTia«vT«s 

^ ol »voiko[v]vt[<]s «'TrfjXOov 

8 €7r€7r€(re /XOipa' TXdvT[(o\u {a.)^^wo\J^^[^vo\. to vs iVpaXdv- 

^ o' V /\ \ '\ r , Tas, Kal «vi[KTio-]av. 

65 7 5 eTretra 0€Ot (n;j/ereXeo-(ra[i' ] . 

v)-n-op.«ivdv[TO)v ] 

ol e«ol T«Xo[0<TlV. 1 



(x[. .]a}ji<|>vXXov 

Col. vi (Fr. 3, Col. iii). 


70 tpvXXovTrponapoidiP' 


L [.]XXa/JiivTroTafxa)i(r\eSoufioXoi/Ta(pvp(rei w . [ 

>frC „ ^ o . I 

J paiOlOraVVei/TfCriP 8waTai4)vpo-«iawoKTtv€i[ 

Q^' OT)H€T«poaaTpaTocrT'YOV«[ 

75 TTOTtiToXvvaTpaTOVivSep.'qvoa- iv8« 

rov^BiXovTay^veaOaL' uoyrj9€X€VY<v€(r9a[ 

80 \J^v8avy\p^Kvixa-)(^av(cv 





Col. vii lost. 

Col. viii (Fr. 4, Col, i). 



.]iaiaTr€[. .jaia-vyjrrjXaiaddfidS^. . .]<»}p 

•j/ccoTT . [. .]ai'aTajx€i'af^opov 

.]7ro8aTr[. .j^erot^aA 

.]/c€Aa5[. . .]TiyXvKvvavSai 

.]ov'€/JLo[ ]'. ecr[.] t'wi8tiv 

.]fAcAea[ JfX'^H"' 

.]r]p€KaiaT[. . . .^7ino\dp/jidu 

.]ldl7roX€[.]a)lT€X€v[ ] owoo-KaioI 

]a>nrpo^i[.]a^oia- ior«o-Tnivi[ 




8 6 <5e KoKov Ti noi'iq[a]ai9 

9 evayopiaiaiu 0Xeyci* 

10 KiLi'ois 8' vTT^praTov ^Xde ^eyyoy 

11 dvTa Svapiiv^wv MeXafi- 

70 12 (puXXov npondpoidei'. tottos ov(tos^ iv 'ApS-ripois 

13 tTjte iraiav, irjic iraiav ^ ^ ^^ 

u (5e fxqnoTe X^ittoi. 
o-rp. y' 1 [a]AXa /xfi/ TrorafiO) (r\eSbt/ fxoXovTa (pvpa€i ^ _" ^ 

/J - \ v Bvvarai <|>v>pa(i ciTTOKTtvti f 

75 3 TTori TToXur aTparov tv 8k nrjub? «v 5«. 

* npcoTov rvx^^ afxap' 
sayyeXXe 81 (poiuiKoneCa Xoyov wapdeuos 7rpo^X«Y€v t^V) Hi^XX[ovaav k^xtiV 

6 eiJ/ze^^9 'E/cara "^« V«T«pocs. 

7 rot' e^eXoi^ra yeveadar dv(Tl tov) Sv Ti0«X«v Y«v«a0a[t. 
80 8 [<t]vv 8' av y[X]vKuixa)(^di^cov 

Lines Hi-95 lost = str. 9-1 1, antistr. i-i r, ep. 1. 

€7r. y' 2 [w]e KaX^ovri ixoXnal 

3 [Ho'^o]!/ ar' tvo8pov dfxcpi re 17ap[i'a(ra]taiy 
 Tre[Tp]ai9 v\lrT]Xai9 6afj.a J[eX0]o5j' 
5 [iXi.]Ka>'m[8e]9 iarTdfieuai x^^P^^ 
100 e [Ta^v]Tro8a 7r[ap]6ivot X^'^" 

7 [/cea] K(XaS[(vy]TL yXvKvv av8a 

8 [i/6y;x]oi/- ifjLo\l 8k iKco]v ka- t(V) ¥8t|v 

9 [Xcor e]i/K:Xea [/cpa<Va)]i^ X^P'-^> 

10 [^/35]7/pe, /cat (7-T[paroi/] linro^dpixav 
105 11 [-]£« 7roXe[/u]a) reXei/- ovtos Kal o[ 

12 [TaL](o 7rpo^i[^]d^ot?. lo-ws t^ yi[K^. 

13 [trjie Tzaidv, L\rj'u' iraiav 

11 \8\ fiT]noT( Xei'JTTOi. 


[ ] . vayXao 

[ ]vaLxapLTt[.] 

Fragment of Col. vii (?). 

Fr. 5. . . . 





5 ]ia|38[ 


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

5 ay\a'CdvT\^ 
Pcofiov [ 

10 X OKT(>iK[ 

vyj/o6ei^ [ 


yapv'i T[.]u8€'Xpv(ro[ 


15 6eaa^Te^€XiKa/nrvK[ 



5 columns lost. 

Col. XV (Fr. 6). 

• 01- 

Ijon avXoi/ofX(f>av 

J. IXoo" [.]i\ovjiopiauTr€pYova«iTCi)iin;[ 

"" ■» • Xajiir€i«|ovTaaYa0ao'Tj|jL[ 

^uVOVTCOV T]ava8oo-ia-TOVKa-irvou 



Fr. 5. 


]oX*[ ] 


> 'Ap8[T,p 


.] . V dyXao- 




.6. . [. .]0C[ 

dyXaiidv t[ 
vaov o[ 

^(CfJ-OV [ 

' ^ r 
O/CTO) K[ 

vyjroOev [ 

doiSai? ku ivTrX^K^a-L (pcova fi^Xt- 

ydpvi, T[iy Se )(pv(ro[ 

(opiov itotI -^povov [ 

Beds & iXiKdfxnvK[os HeXduas, dvUa (?) 

kXavv[(i\L^ dv dfi^poT[ov K€X€v0ov, dficfi Sh XdjiuiL (?) 

(paivvos aWrjp. 

Lines 18-92 lost. 

]i/ a6ivo9 Updv 
•)(aXK\ioir avXSov oficpdv 

1\ r.]iXov pL6pia i-iT«pYQva<i. ri 'Tu'pi . . 

J Xd|XTT€i t'l ov TO. aYaOd crr]|ji[aiv«' 

1 dvoVTCOV T) dvd5o<Tis tovp KarrvoO. 






]. [....].v 
]oXar[. • .] 

]v . Tr]L[ ]• 







] . 8ev^(cv8vvaT(i)Tipov' 

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


. . .]aXXerar 

. .'\v)(^povovoppyiL 


. . . .^^api(TL'Ka.p6ai 7'?^[ ](AiaTT)o-TT«vTaiTo\€too-n]o-[. .] 


. .^ix^lVTreSian/' [15 letters] . . . aio- . . iAT]TiO€a-0ai 

. - " [ )) )) ]€l'IT€8lC0V«1TlT<i)WT)[.]«V 

.Jorpe<Bj/ [ ]  

Col. xvii (Fr. 7, Col. ii). 
T]ToiKaieya>a[. . .]eXo^'^'ata)^'5ta[ 




] . [....]. V 

]oXaT[. . .] 
]v . Tiy 


arp. a 




di'T. a 1 



15 B 

20 10 


v^v^ — w>^ — v^v^] "ApTffill'' 

\j — — ^ ^JL'cro/zat 

— — v^ — — <-/ ^^0? avSdv 

^ ^ w — — w w yvi']aLKCOy iSvaxmaf -o-aro. av(Tl tov) vijivT)6Ti[atTai. 

Kj — Kj ] • ^' ^T^^(>>v SvvaToiiTepov 

^ \J\a KUTo. Tvaaav oSw 


— w s-/ /S]aXXerai* 

— ji' \p6vov opvviL 

o — «>y — ] ^aXoj/ aya/cXea 

^ — v^ — trt'l/] Xdpiaf Kdp6ai- 'it6X[is avTr)] jiia Tf^s -rrcvTaTroXtus Tf,8 [Kf(«).] 

a p\v d\a6i(D9 eXaJx^rcoroj/ ar^pvov \dop69, 
opens ye /iar ovtol\ vlv Ba^v\6i>vo<5 dpeL-^opar 
— \^ yy — v^je^cii/ TreSicop' [ 

w v^ — v^ — 

— \j — s-/ v^ 

— >^ V^ — — »_/ V-l 
1^ ^ — V^ ^ — <J 

v^ v-i — ^ ^ 

\^ \-> 

^ (-z — v^ — — »^ vw/joi' Oeoyy 



] . . . ai<T . . (XTi TiGtaOai 
]«i iT«8ia)v »iTi Tuv VT] cr'wv 

— "w" Iw" — — v_/ V-l 

CTT. a' 1 -q TOL Kol e'yoj ^[kottYXov vaiodv 8ia- 

2 yiyvdiaKopai pkv dp^Tals diBXoov 

3 ^EWaviaiv ytyrc«)o-K[o]/xa[t] ^e icai 

D 2 


25 [^]t/fairi5i(»[. . .]ovapo[. .]a^epei 

^LoBcopovaiiay^aviaa-aKoa' ScopTjfxaTcoipvui 

dvi7r7r6(r€ifiiKai^ovvofj.La(raSa€aTepo(T pj., 8 Col. 1. 

X a\\oye/jL€Xdfj.7roa-ovKr]6eXev [ ]iv . . [n letters] . t[. . . .] . [.] 

At7ra);/7raryo[.jda/zo[. -J^Xh- -J^py^' [ „ ,, Japyovo- 

30 6€/jievo(roi[.]i'07roXoi'yepaa- 
i Li)'iri(o'C€7ra\. . . .1 


Kai(TVvykviL ap8pL(p[ 
crrep^arfiaT[. .]ct)j/5e[ 
35 > €KacreoyTcop'Xoyo[. . .] . KToaev^ai'[ 
e7raiveaa[. . . .]a)j///aio/zei/a)i'Ocrai/a[ 

Col. xviii (Fr. 8, Col. ii). 


/j.€poa€(3SofXouTraai(p[.]acrvL Kaiv<oo-[ 

[. .Jarreyoacrb eovii 
40 Treva(piv'Tpe(oroLnoX^ixov 

X yOovaTOLTTOTeKaKTTparovaOpoov 


iarov^aBwrapTapov^liav [j.a 
45 T€paXnroi^T€(TKatoXovoiKouev€pKia' 

TeB fxoPTr\.'\fnrav€pr) pLovaTTaxTafiiVoa- 
payavaXXoOLKXapoveyoy.X l av 

pLO^. . .](T€jXTT€SoV€L 

50 T]K€Pea(ppr]VKV7rapi(r TT)VKpTr]Ttiv€iT€nToX\ai€K€i[ 

^j ^ - .. TTapicrcroiYivovTai 


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

52 ]^OTaiea[ 


•1 fioTcrau 7rapi)(co[i''\ aXi9' 
25 s ^ Kai Ti Aio)[uva]ov dpo[vp]a <p(pet 

7 dviTTTTOs dpi Koi ^ovvopias dSaia-rcpo^' 


8 aXX' ye MiXapnos ovk rjOeXev [. . 

9 XfTTO)!/ 7rarp[t']5a po[ua]p)(^€[ii/] '^Apyei [ 
30 10 Oepevo? oilco^uoTroXou y^pas. 

11 /t; Irj CO /67ra[far.] 
crrp. /3' 1 TO 8\ oLKo6i\y\ darv Ka\\ dXiKis 

2 Kal crvyykvd duSpl (f>\}X' ware Kal 
s arip^ar paT[ai\x)u Sh [paKap di'Spcou 
35 4 e/cay kovToov X6yo\y dV]a/CToy £t'^at'[rtoi; 
5 knaiv^a , a[X/x]a)^' paiopevcov Sy afa[/r€ro 

.]iv . . [II letters]. t[. . . .] . [.J 
26 letters '€ji[. . 

M ., ] 'Apyovs 

6 avTapyjelv, ttoXiccv S' iKarou 7reSi-^€i[v 

7 p€po9 'i^Sopov II acn(f)[d]as vi[ot]- Kaivw(r[ 

, -, ,, -- mx. o[ ]. .[.>«t) . [ 

8 (n(uy repay eot' ei- 

40 9 Trej/ (T^r rpeco tol TToXepov 

10 ^ioy ' EvvoaiSav re /3a/)[i']<rL'7roj/. 
ai'r. /3' 1 -yOova tol rroTe Kal (jTpaTov dOpoov 
2 nip-^av K^pavvat Tpi68ovTL re 
s ey Tov ^aOvv TdpTapov, kpdv pa- 
45 < Tepa Xltt6vt€S kol oXov o'lkov evepKew 

5 eVeira TrXovroi/ Treipcou paKapcov t km^wptov 

6 TiOpov TT\a\pnav kpfjpou dircocrdpivos 

7 pkyav dXXoOt KXdpov e^co ; A/'a>' 

8 poi [TTcojy ipireSov ef- 

50 97; /Cei/ ; ea (f>pr]V KVndpiCr- ■rr\v Kp-f\Tir]v iird TToXXai €K€i [kv- 

V fix X ft y. -rrdpio-o-oi YW^ovTai. 

10 (70J/j ea oe vopov nepLoaiou. 

kn. /3' 1 [e/iOi 5' oXiyoj/ SkSorai, Odpuos Spvor ^^J^"^*" <'°/'L»'<'J 
53 a \ov TTd/dkcou S' 'kXa\ov, ov (TTaaioov. ] \4xo[»' 


4 lines lost. 

68 yTipi J Kc8vovT)p&i 

5q ]orTwv6v^avTvovira[. . .] . ttjvk«ov 

Fr. 10. .... Y^^.x^i^^^ ^'•'^ ""^^D •] • 9ov«v"*'[ 

[.]?/t*77[ The rest blank. 


• • 

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

• « • 

X 6[ 
lO /f[ 

i X[ 



15 a7r[ 

. 8a\{ 
£ c^y^'5[ 

• • • 

Col. xxi (Fr. II, Col. i). 

jO" CplTTVatS 

1 1 lines lost. 

36 ]<?'''''<"i9t)vaiwv 



60 9 


Lines 54-7 lost = ep. '^-6. 

—1 TTCpi Zt|(v68otos) k«8v6v TJpo)'. 

— ^ — — yj —J 

Tvv«]s Tiiv EuJavTiovi Tra[i8ci)]v xrjv Kc'ov 

\^ — v^ — \^ — — •^ <j — >^w 

— \j 'u <j 

\^ — — \j \^ \y — — — — 

V^V-'V-' — — v_.v-i — (-< — 

i\r) IT] [CO lenaiai^. 

KaxjWKTjaQv. K€ap .[•..] 

A]i'(t» tov ?) o'xoftai. vlo(s) Tt)X[. .] . o( ) *Ovh,t[ 

V. [Els' JHAON]. 

<TTp. a 1 iT^i'e A[d\L 'AnoWoy 
3 lines lost. 

5 [- w v^ - ^ v^ -] 
« 0"[— v^ Vm/ — »-'<-' — — 

(TTp. /3' 1 /[jyl'e AdXi '^AttoWov 

2 €[v^ «-/ — w ^ — — 

3 of— VJ — — — VjIVJ — i>^w — 
10 4 <[— v^ "^-i — vj w — — 

5 [ — <u \^ — yy ^ —J 

6 A[ — v_/ (.^ — ij v-» — — 

arp. y 1 i[j7te AdXi "AttoWov 

2 jf — \.^ w — ^>^ v-* — — 
15 S ([— \j — — ■— \j\j — \j^ — 

4 a7r[v-' v^ — v/" w — 
6 ^aX[^ ^ — w ^ — 

6 (JW o[>^ »^ — v-» x.^ — — 

orp. ^ 1 [t]i7t'€ J[aXi' '^ttoXAoj/* 

20 2 [ — ^^ w — ^-' w — —J 


s[— »-» — \j \^ — \j ^ — — ]y «ptiTvais. 

Lines 22-32 = str. h' 4-6, str. e' 1-6, str. <r' J -2. 
(rr/3. "7 3[— v^ — — — v-'v^ — v^i-/ — ]a 

356[— v-zw — WW jEy- ] tt'TO 'AOT)vai«v 



Col. xxii (Fr. ii, Col. ii). 

i BoLav' 

^ (1 (• 

■? i.r)'u8a\iaTTo\\ov 

Kai(r7ropa8aar(l)€p€fj.rj\ovcr noXvfi-a.xova- 
40 8aXov€7reia<pivaTroXXa)y 

£ aaTipia(T8e[iaiT0LK€LV' 
r iTjieSaXiaTToWou 
X XaToo(riv6du.€7raL8€(r 


45 ev/xivei8e^a(r$eyocoi0epa7rouTa aiK\ov 



£. dvoaayaKXeocroiKpdi' •[••]•[•• •]9'TVR9YV 
>-6rC — 

Trpo<ToXvinnov8LO(7ai-)(jpv\. .]a 



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


X aoL8LiJ.'0'VTTUpi8covTrpo(l)aTav' 

■)fl X v8aTLyap€7rL^aXKOTrvXa>l t7rei8iaxaXK(i5vX€OVTa>yxo[ 

'^ . ,. ,_ Tiwvpti€i,a-avT'oK-n4)i<rocr[ 

vrocpovaLcoi/KacrTaXiacr — - » \ nR 

op(f)avovav8p(cv)(pp^v(no(TrfX6ov i|/o<)>ov 

reOia-irey^ai(TTeri/z[.]iO" KaTaK0iy'.]v€(iato-TiH'€\«gev}i€v^iva5T) 

KaiOaXLdvrpofpovaXaocra KXvxovaXo-oo- 

15 TToXXoivocr'roBiXaToi8dv 


6 ^oiau '4\ov Kul (.vaaaav 
CTTp. ^ 1 Irjl'e AdXi "AnoWov 

2 Koi CnropdSaS (l)€p€fii]X0V9 iroKvudKovi (-/iijAous). 

3 eKTiaav vdaov^ kpiKvSka r ea-)(ov 
40 4 AdXov, kirei acpiv AnoWcov 

B Sa>K(u 6 ^pvaoKop.a'i 
6 'A(rT€pia9 Sefia9 oiKeiy 
CTTp. T] 1 liju AdXi "AttoWov 

2 Aaroos 'ivBa /ie rratSe^ 
45 3 e{>fi€i'el Se^aade voco 6€pdnouTa navScopov J.p.x(e«os) 

4 vfx.iT€pov Ki^KaSivva 

5 (Tvv fieXiydpvL nai- 

6 aj/oy dyuKXios 6fj.^S.. •[..].[.. .]<T'npovi 

VI. AEA^oix Eix nren. 

arp. a 1 Ilpbs OXv/xttiov Alos ere, ^pi;[ae]a 

2 KXvTOfiauTL IIvOoI, 

3 Xapirea- 

4 cr/'(i/) re K^at crt't' 'AcppoSiTcc, 
5 ei' ^adeo) yue Si^ai y^pouco 

6 doiSificov UiepiScoi' TTpo(f)dTav. 

7 £/5aTi yap evrt xa'^'^OTri^Acs) .-^.^ 5,^ ^^^XkJ^v Xcovtcov xa'<T|.a. 

8 >i.60o;/ ai'o)!/ JTaaraXtay ^'rM' *> <^"J.V) ° KjnJ.aos. 

' ~ Tov €iTi Ta> xci^'^O'"^^''' [v^Oari 

9 6p(fiavov dvSpSiv )(op€vai09 rjXOov il/64)ov. 
10 eraiy dfiayaviav d\X'\^^(ov dtjwv. 

n reoTcTil' kjxals re ri//[a]ry Kara koiv[ojO «yais tijji(qis^. IXcgtv fn'vT(oi) tva Stj- 

12 rjTopi oe 0fAa) Traiy are jxaT^pi K^Ova 

13 neiOofiei/os KaT^^av aT€(pdi'Coi/ 

14 /cat ^aXiar Tpo<pov dXao? A- kXutov aXo-os. 
15 TToAAcoi'os'. ro^i AarotSav 



7rapaa-Kio€VTaixe\n[.][J.€yaL[ ] 
7roSiKpoT€v[ F [ ] 

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

Col. XXV (Fr. 12, Col. i). 
Opposite 11. 52-3. Opposite 11. 58-9. Opposite 1. 62. 

jToaScao- ]v 

] . €io-aiTav Jpovtoi lo'xov 

JcrGsacrsirocr l^^yT} 

' ] ' 

Col. xxvi (Fr. 12, Col. ii). 

50 Kai7ro6eva6av[ ]^^<^'''?[ 

X TavTa6€oiai[.]€y 

X 7nd€ivao(l)oy[.]Syi'aTOi>[.]- iti[ 

^poToiai8aixa-^ai^o[. . .]pe/xei/ 

7raTpijxvafxoa[. .]atTe 

TOVTOV€(r)(€T[. . . .]/iOJ/ 

AcXi5r€j/i;i/*e/oa[. . .]5e^o[.] 

H']oy-[ 1- ^ 

> yX()oa(Tap.eXiTO<rao)TOi/y\vKvv[ ] aawxov 

60 aycovaXo^idiKaTajSavT €vpvv[ 

2 > — 

■= Ov^TaiyapayXadavirepnaviX [ ]•[••• •It' . TtjveWaSa 

. 5, 1' „ . , • . ; Vpi«[.]€Tr]pia<r 

XaOO(raVTediX(pa>y [ ]ayao-Kaiji,expi 

€d[.]0(r€V§aTOXt r ] 

Col. xxvii (Fr. 12, Col. iii, with Fr. 13). 
65 /ioL'a[ 




13 TToSl KpOTko\yTL ydv 6o(X)\ 

Lines 19-49 lost = str. 19-21, antistr. 1-21, cp. 1-7. 


] xds e«ds 

] . *is a-rrav 
Tcijs Otds ttros 

Scholia on Col. xxv. 


5 Jpovcp 


50 CTT. a 3 Kol TToOeu dOau[aT - ^ kj a]p^aTO. 

10 TTlOelu <X0(f)0v[9] SvvaTOV, m[6*iv. 

n ^poTolaiiv) 5* djxdyavoly ev]p€[xcv' 
12 dXXa TTapdivot yap laov (ye v)\e\p.o\i\(jaL 
55 13 irdvTa Ke[Xat]t'e0er avv [z]v(»'o5otos) \_K](\a[ivt<pit. 

li irarpl M.vaiioa\yv\a re 

18 TovTov (.(ryjeT\e rc^j/zof, 

1. KAOre ri/i/-^ e>a[ra:] 5e //o[i] ^ ^^^^,>^„,^^ ^^^,y . ^ ^ . 

17 yXa)(r(ra /xiXiTOS dcorou yXvKvv [irpoyieLv €i?] **'(''^ ■^*'*) '*'^tou. 

60 18 aycova .<4o|ta{t} Kara^dvr ivpvv 

19 61/ ^€c3i/ ^ivCa. 

crp. j8' 1 Overai yap dyXads unep Uav^X- [ ]•[••• h^ • tt|v 'EXXdSo 

a Aadoy avT€. AcAfcov [ ]av ds koI jitxp^ 

»'i5r T J'> \ fToO VVV ? 1 iKdoTTiO'v) »TOVS 

J (d[v]oi iv^aro Xl- r •• 1 

65 « {MOV a\y — w — vj — — 

6 iV^^y v.^ _ 1^ _ _ v^ _ 

6 d)tXf[w — — v^vy — w — ^ 

7 Apoi/[ie (^ v_/ "-I — v^ w — 


70 T0i7ra[ 

/fat7T-0Te[ Fr. 13, Col. i. 

7rav6oo[ ]«»• 



Col. xxviii (Fr. 13, Col. ii). 

80 (rLCOLSenalOeocr' 




X oacraT epl^eXcvKcoXevcoi aopicrxoo-TepiSw 

oaaTiTToXLaSrTrpOTTOVCOP avoaaa 

90 SeKc/xeyaXccvSapSaviai/ 

OKaLKopv(pa[. . .]i't^(»i^ 

Col. xxix (Fr. 13, Col. iii). 
95 /xa'7repiSvyjnK6iJico[. .]X(vaL 


8 TTpvTa\yL w — — w w — 

70 '.1 TOL TTO^y — — ^ — ^^ — — 

10 XP^^M'^IP' — \j <u — y^ 

11 \Tlv\6a)v66\(^v — \~> 

12 Kai TTore [v^v^ — — w>^ — *^w — — 

13 ndi'6oo[9 — Aava(oi/ ore nal- ]«i 
75 14 Ses Tp(ioto.\y w — ^ w 

15 ■^veyKl\y ^ — Aiofjif]- 

16 Sea Trdl? [Zt]1'0^ — ^ ^ — v^ — 

17 8r e/x/3a[Xcoi/ iof eV^e fid-^as 

18 Hapftjoy e[/ca/36Aos ^port]- 

So 19 (r/o) Sifia'i ^eoy 

20 'iXiov Se 6fJK€i^ dc^ap 

21 6y\rLTepav dXcoaLu, 

dvT. /3 1 KvavoirXoKOLO iraiSa ttovtcus Hva[v]oie6ixoio. 

2 ©eTiO? ^LaTOLV 

85 3 TTiaTov epK09 'A)(^aL- 

4 5iv 6paa€i (povo) TreSdaai?' 

B ocrcra r €/)f^e Xfu/ccoXei/oi) dopicrros to(v) tpifco. 

8 dKvafjLTTTOv "Hpa fxevos dv\f\€pd8(ov 

7 o<ra re UoXidSi' npo novcou 'A{pLaTO(pd)v{f]i'i) uaaa. 
90 8 Se K€ /xeydXcov AapSaviav 

9 iTTpa6{p)v, €1 fjLTj <f)vXaacr€u 'ATr6[X]X[(o]u' 

10 v€(pea(ar)L Se )(pvcriois 'OXvp-noL- 

11 Kal Kopu(pa[iai\u t^cov 

11 jxopo-ifM dua[X]vev Zei/^ 6 Oecov aKoirh^ ov roX- 

95 18 p.a- nepl 8' vyj/iKOfMco ['E]Xiva 
u \pfjv dpa Ukpya\iov ivpv [5]f- 
iB {a)aTa)aai aiXas ai6ofiiuo(y) 
19 TTVpos' eVet <5' dXKifiov viKVv \t\v ra[0co 



TToXvaTovcoiBevTonriXiLSa . . [ 
loo aXo(re7riKVfxa^ai^Tea[.]\ 




105 aXX6vTe/xaTep€TreiTa[.](8i>ai'[. . . .] 

iL8€i/6vT€7raTpa)Lo[.](reuapo[ ] 

nnrova-fivp/ii Soucou 

^yc \aXKOKopy[. .]ay[.]/iiAo_r^€ye[ J 

X a-)(e8ov8\. . .'\p.apovp.oXocraL8aya[.'\au 
no €^i/fer •oi;^.]i'6/zofo-e[. " .]er 



•lo-ivL ]v<»" 

. . .]<raou[. .] . 

. .]TP°'''[-] • • ^ 

, . .] . vro . [.] . KaL[ ]] 

..]■«??.[■]•[•>• [ D 
•]7'P.99"[-] •]] 

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

co[. .]cre[. . . .]iO(T- 
yc[. . .y[. .]7rpia/j,ov 

115 [. . .]6opouTa-pr]/xii'iv(f)pop(croi[.]op 
[.]r]T€7ny'>] paai^e 

[.]vp[.: Anepiriuap (.ve^au JTO.TccvKpcov^Buip^aSovTcovaw,! 

L J rci- • •!. .r:. r- » 6a)crT<ova[. . .]o)v«ovcrx«paiv€KaieKtoAv«[ 

[. . . .^l^opevOVKTavelu ^KTavftiiV'f\_. . . .']iv 8i.0Kaiavi]i.pT]TaiTi 

r T J \ ^ J \ Ta)VYp"nu.aTtova8iapirat«v 

120 [ ]u^LCl>LXmyaaTrap0p.ct>aX0ViVpVV ,,^,^\^Lrov^a-rpo^a.r^.p.i^ 

[. . . .]i'vi'fj.eTparraLr]o -fi-qm 

( [.]a)J/i^[. .]t'eo[.]- y[.]7?(77rej/€Ot 

>^~C [. . .jfjiaKXvTdyei>€aaL8a>pi€i 

/x[.'\8eOLaa.[. .'\uT(jo[.] (vrm .[..].. 7r^[ ^(ptpiTai 

125 i'aa"ocr[.]5£ocreA 


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


17 TToKva-Tovcp OivTo IlrjXftSa, 
100 IS dXoy eVt KVfxa ^dvre^ \ji9^' 

19 60V dyyi\o\L 6nia<o 

20 ^KvpoOiv iV[€]o7rr6Xeyu[oj' 

21 (vpv^iap d'yoi'Tey, 

eV. /S 1 0? SiiTTepaei' iXiov n6X[Ly 

105 2 dAX' ovT€ fxarep' (ncira [/c]e(5i'df 

3 tiSei', ovre 7raTp(M)'io[i]9 Iv dpo[vpai9 

4 imrov9 MvpfjLiSovcoi/ 

6 )(^aXKOKopv[(rT]du [6]fxiXoi/ €ye[t/3e. [ ]ai.Y[ ]w 

« cr^e^ot' <5[e T6\p.dpov MoXotraiSa ■Ya[i]au [ }"Po<t[.] . . v. 

I 10 7 €^IK€T , 01>S[' d]ve/JL0V9 e[Xad]€i/ 

8 ou5e ror \/\vpv(papirpav tKa^oXov 

10 yi[paLo\v [0?] Tipiafiov 

11 7r[p]os' ipK€?oi> iji/ape ^(ojiov k- 

115 12 [7ret']^op6t'Ta, ^^77 yLt/r iiicppov' h ' ol[p\ov 
13 [/xJT^r' CTTt yfjpa? i^i- 
1* /16V /Stby [d]/z0i7r6Aoi? Sk 

16 ^ST]pl\a^6fJ.(P0V Krdvl^e^V Z{i)v6^otos) KTavf(^v') iv yp^CLiptTcu) [itravyi: 6i6 Kai dvp'pTjTai f\ 

120 i7f(6j/) r€/ie>6r 0rAo) yd? nap 6u6aXhv iipvv. t-v _xp>ifiiTu.v _i StapTrdf a,v 

i-N/'^J ri' I r r r ti5 (KOiKiav tow irarpos avgp«&Tj. 

18 \ifj (Irj) re] i/i5r fiirpa nairjo- yp{a(p(Tat) lij lij rt. 

19 [l']cDl', Ifj [re] I/eo[i.] yp'^a<pfTai) [i]^ «jj t< >'«'oi. 

arp. y 1 [oi'o]//aAfXi^ra y eVecrcri /icopiei 

2 /i[e]5eOiO"a [Trojl^rCO <»' T(p .[..].. irp[ ]v tpiperai. 

I2r; 3 j/do-oy, [c5] JlO? 'EX- ^*P°^ ^'"^ 'E\[X]t)viov [«> Ai[Y]i»Ti oTTOv auv«X96vT«s 
*• •' «v|a[v]TO irtpl Tov auxi^ov. 

< Xaviov (paevuou darpov. 


dSopTTOv^vva^oixivaWaoiSdv Fr. 14, Col. i. 

poOiaSeyouei/aKaTepcia- ° ''- -' 

,. , o V , ^^[ '8 letters ]T,y 

130 TTodeveXapeavavTTpvravtv QTr[ „ ,, ]vtiv€o- 

8aLfxouaKairauBefiL^euovapeT[  ^^ j^' ^" ]x7ilo?€i 



evpvo[. .]Kpoi'ov7raLa'vSaTLS'[.]iraa[ n letters Jarpipou 
135 7roL'77-[. . .]nonpoOvp(oypavuKo\ [ ^^ ^^ ]o 
7rora[,] . peyjraTonapOevov 

> aiyivav'TOTey^pvaeaia 

> €poa€Kpv\lraTavKOfj.['.]L€Tn)(^copioy[ 
KaTaaKiovvoiTovvjx^Tepov t[ 

140 > iva\()(e(ove7ranJ3poTcov ^ 

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



145 8io[ 

1 50 Ki)[ 



155 Cv[ 

Col. xxxiii lost. 
Col. xxxiv (Fr. 15, Col. i). 

[ ]^o[. . . .]€J/0(r irbiva, 

[ ] 

[• ] 


e dSopTTOu (vyd^o/jLef, dXX' doiSdv 

7 poOia SiyojXfiVa KUTipus 

46«[ ] 

//,,/. o , t)t[oi? 16 letters jrjv 

130 8 TTOoey eAape? vavnpvravLv dTT[ 18 „ ]v -nvcs 

P' ^^/]'> »r'.ri8,. Is Ttva 

10 6 ndvTa tol rd re Kal rd Tivyo)v 

11 croi' lyyvdXi^^v oK^ov 

1-2 €upi;o[7ra] Kpovov rrais, vSdT{e(Ta)i S' [cjir' !4(T[a)- tt|v Aiyivav StaTp^pou- 

135 ISTTOU 7r[0T aJTTO npodvpOiy ^aOvKoX- \e«v d7T€0-TrdaaT>. 

H TTor G[r'a]p€'\^aro rrapOf^vov 
15 ^Tyiraf rore )(^pu(T€ai d- 
\G ipo9 eKpv\lfa\Taju K6fx[d\L kin')((ji>pLou 
17 KaTdcTKiov vS>TOv vperepou, t[ 

140 18 I'ua Xe;(ea)i' e7r' d/x^porcou 


21 itfl^ v^ — ^ — w 

afa[v^ — ^ — 

avT. y 1 roA[>-/ — i^ — w — v^ — ^ — 
145 2 (5io[— "^ 

3 7re[w — w ^^ — 

4 7ro[v-/ — ^ — w — — 

B 7ra[w ^ _ ^ _ _ v_/ — 
6 ^e[- V. - 

150 7 ACl'[«. 

8 cO|>-^ v^ >^ — — WW — 

9 V0[^ w w-wwi=^!=^ 

WW — w — — 

U-i >^ ^y v_/ W — ^^ W 

r^[^ - w - 

0-5[w - 

155 ^2 4'/[^ www — — WW — WW — — 

10 T P\^^ _^_^v^_^__ 


11 (rC7 w — w w — w — 

Lines 156-171 lost = antistr. 13-21, ep. 1-7. 

€7r. y 8[— WW — WW — '-'jx^f — ]eros voivs.. 

[— w — w w — 1 
10 [w — w — w w — 1 



• T- 

175 [ ]vyi8^ 

[ ^eLpovaaap^Taa 

\ 1 Trpoo-TaKTiKucr 

[ Ypoolau'cpi 

[........ ,]aXaoy 

180 [ yoicrnrai' o-T«4)ovoiaiviv .[...] 

[ yKia^ere-fioiaai^ ^^^^^ 

[ ]7roXXaKL-7raidi>Se 

I \au . .. L- . 

[ ]i/Te^ec77riO)t'5oT[ 

[ ] *-T.a[.] 

[ ]op[. .]XadifTeaav\av [ 9 letters ]wo-Tovay , 19 . [ 

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


2 lines lost. 

[. . . .]€i(f)iXa[ 

[. . . .]y8i '. \ [ 

[ ]^'ra[ 

10 [ ]ayx'?[ 

[. . .]TavXovaL6ep[ 

[ ]€avKopv(j>aY[ 

[. .yepovXeyo/xevl 
[. . . .]aTavpQ)i'€i[ 
15 [ y-rrpolScopl 

[ ]0tT[.]T . po[. . . .]TTapd[ 

[ '\8r]crai/av8ay 

[. .'\arTf.(TL\pr](TTr]pLov 

B. Fr. 16. 

[ ]af 

[ ]0<T 

[ l^a^ 


• T- 

I75n[>-' \j — ^ \^ — ]j/ ye 5e- 

2 [— w — v^ — w ttTTJe/yooi'aS' dperai 

a f— V^ W — W — — 1 TTpOO-TaKTlKlOS. 

4 [— ^=^^ TTa\Tpmav <pi- 

5 [A — >^ — v^]a Aaof 

180 J6 [— <-/ — (Tr^(f)a\yoL(TL irdv o-xtcfxivoio-i viv .[...] 

7 [- v^ w w w v^ Icr/cmYere- Moktocv 'A/);«(rTo</.d)i/(7js?) < 

8 [^ — w — v^] TToXXaKi' rraidv 8e 

r T - TWV UTTO T(I>V € . I .1 . KUV. 


[ ]i/ re Oeaneaicov S6T[€tpai (?) 

[ ] €V€<r[i.] 

[ ]ov [ay]XaaF r e'? avXav [ 9 letters ](i>s tov av . 10 . [ 

• [ 

2 lines lost. 
[. . . .]et 0iXa[ 
[. . . .]. <5e . . [ 

[ l^T^^l 

10 [ ] <^yxA^ 

[. . .jrauAoj/ ai6€p[ 

[ ]e' oil' Kopv(pdu [ 

[(Pa]uipou Xeyo/n€t'[ 
[. . . .]a Tavpcoy ef[ 

15 [ y Trpb po)p[ov (?) 

[ ]oir[.]T . po[. . . .]7ra/3o[ 

[ KeXd^S-qaav av8dv 

\tv\avT^aL )(pr](TTrjpLoy 

Fr. 16. 

[ ]«^ 

[ ]o^ 

[ ]/oai' 

E 2 



[ ]X<^^ 

^ f It^OUCr K6\a8T)<TaOvp.vovcr 

[ ]7nroi/ . [.] . afia^iTOv 

[ ] . crvpiaiaai^L7r7roi[.]' 

[ ]Tavouapfia 

[ >• 

lo [ ]Sovi3ayovTev7r€nXooL6vyaTpi 


[.]i'^Aa[. . .]pau8pcou(ppei'€<r 
15 Pa6iLavek6[. .]rcot/e/)et;[. .]£[.]o^tato-o5oi'' 
eiioi8eTOVTo\. .]f€5co 

[. . . .]a^ai/aT[.]i'7ropoj/ 

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

ofJ.r]pov[ ] . otcr[ 


• • [" * 

 • • 

Fr. 19, Col. i. 


5 ] 




[ IX^*' 

I- r VjAvOVS K«Xa8Ti0-aO' v^vovs. 

[ L]7nrov . [.] . dfia^iTOv 

[ ] . XvplaLS av tTnToi\s\ 

[ TT'\ravov apfjia 

[ >"• 

10 [ ] ^ Ovpavov T ^vnenXco dvyarpl 

Mvap[o]a-i{v]a K6pa[i]aL t ei)- 
pay^aviav SiSofiiv. 
\T'\v<p\a\L ya]p (xv8pa>v (f)piu€S 
[o]aTi9 dvev6' 'EXiKoavidScov 
15 ^aOdav €\6[6v\Ta)v epivv\a cr]o<piaLS oBov 
oivT. or 67r. e/xoi 8\ tovtc^v 5]ie5cw- 
\Kav\ d6dvai\o\v ttovov 

Fr. 17. 

'Ofirjpov [ 
loured a[ 
CTTCi Sa[ 

Fr. 19. 

1 SjXtov. 

5 ] 



] . . aT\.]avT6- 








Fr. ] 9, Col. ii, with Fr. 20. 



20 [.]uj/aa-7i7rei(ro/za[ 

v .a. 


25 pi(f)6€i(rai/evayea7r€Tpav(J)avr]i/aL[ . .']ayay([ 
Tri(popr}ToS eTT aiyaLOvOaiid' 

Td(TOKpaTl(TTO(T -KapTiffTOff- 

30 TO^o^opovreXicraiyovov 

Fr. 21, 







]v)(di<rv[. .] . uov 




](wror €Kaep 

y ] 





]ov X«Y<i dTr[olpiar 

S[ ]o eVcraro [ 

[ M 

20 [e]yj/ay ri n€iao/xa[i . . . 

rj Albs ovK €d€\o[icra . . . 

Koiov Buy (XT rip 7r[ 

dnco-Td ij.[o]l SeSo[i]Ka ku . [ 

Se fiiv kv 7reX[a]ye[£ . . . 
25 pLcf)6€.laav ^vavyia Trerpav (pavrjvar [ ? v]ava-y«[ 

KaX[e]ovTi fXLv 'OpTvyiav vavTai TrdXai. 

7r€(f)6pr]TO 8' €77 Alyaiov Oafxd- 

rds 6 KpdnaTOS KapnaTO^ 

epdcrcraTO fii^Oel? 
30 TO^o^opou TeXiaai ybvov 

Fr. 21. 



5 ] 

]•[ ] 

] . V TeXo9 [ea-yar af,a[ ... J •<'«'"»^ 

] 7r€paivoi9 
10 ]u dno Koi iraTpo^- vfjL-[v . .) 


Fr. 2 2. . . . Fr. 23. . . Fr. 24. . . . Fr. 25. 

]v ]fi[ ] • • . If . y . [ 

](T\ar}ikiTi[ ]7r[ ] 

] . . .... 


Miscellaneous unplaced fragments. 
Fr. 36. . . . . Fr. 27 (to Fr. 26 ?)..,. 

[ M-] • [ M 

[ ] . vTiV€i\^ ]/zar/3Ci)[ 


5 Xf • • ^[\YV ' !i??7M 
Kpq\.'\iov8a>fi ay\ao\^ 

[ ]i(re7ri(j)U77i^«a[ 

[. . .]oXg)[. .]a[:\iTp[ 

[. . . J^fiavrKTay . [ 

10 [....] . [. .]vfi7]Se[ 

[ M.]F^4 

[ ]f^(t>opo[ 

Beginnings of lines, 

Fr. 28 Fr. 29. . . Fr. 30. . 

• [•]!?■[ f[ M 

(opa6yS[ . [ . [ 


• • • • 

Fr. 31. . . Fr. 3a. . . 

y?! • • 




Fr. 22. 



Fr. 26. 

[ ]/^[-] • [ 

[ ] . VTiVii[ 

[f'JTrTrioy d^ dfi<pi . . [ 
TL TTap6\k^v(£) aijv tto\\ 
^e . . e[.]t vrjXu drjp /x[ 
^/3o[i']ioj/ (J»yu' dy\ao[ 
. . . .]is ctt' 'IaixrjVLa\i^ 
. .]oAo)[. .]a[.]iT/9[ 
. . .] lidvTLS av . [ 
...].[. .]v firjSe[ 


. . . av]fj,(f)opo[ 

Fr. 27. 



] fxdTpa>[ 

Fr. 28. 

. [.]ea[ 

/?7r6 Tral yue[ 
Sdfiov 'A6a[va 



Ends of lines. 

I^'r. 33- 

]ag-aaiJ.(})[. . .](3ai<:€y[ 

]o'o[.] . ia(n^efi€\aTo[ 



Fr. 36. 

• • 

Fr. 37. 


• • 



Fr. 34. 


Fr- 35- 


Fr. 38- 

• • 


Fragments having blank margin above. 

Fr. 39- 

Fr. 40. 

Fr. 41. Fr. 42. 


' KOV(f>[ 

'anoi>[ ]^§^' • ^^i. 

]r« • [ 


' ... 

Fr. 43- 

Fr. 44. 


' pia- . 

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



Fr. ^■^. Fr. "io-  • • - 

]a . [. .] ] d8ia t[ 

] TToXiby .... 

]cro[.] . las v^iJL^ AaTo\LSasQ) 
5 ] a^/^? 

] . LV€TT(\.\ . /'€([ 



Fr. 46. 



]ovi^' 6[ 

Fr. 47- 


Fr. 4H. 

Fr. 49. 






• • • 

Fr. 50. 


Fr. 51. 


Fr. 55- 


Fr. 52. 

Fr. 56. 

Fr. 53- 




' av 

J • • u 



T . 


Fr. 57- 


Fr. 54. 


• • 

Fr. 58. . 


• • 

Fr. 59. . . . 

] . oov[ 

Fr. 60. . . Fr. 61. . . Fr. 6a. . 

]vS[ >. [ ]oj/[ 


• • 

Fr. 63. 

Fr. 64. 


] . KTay[ 

• • 

• • • 


Fr. 46. Fr. 47. • • . 

]7r4 ^ M 

d]fi^po(rid[ ] JaXio[ 

] di'6efia>i/ I3a[ 

]o KeAr/y loy . [ 
]ovv' 6[ 


Fr. 4(S. .... Fr. 49. . . . . 

] . [ ]y <Ppa(j[(r 

] fiaKcipcov [ ] So^au [ 

(?) viK]a(popiau [ .... 



Fr. 6r^. . . . 

Fr. 66 

1. . 


Fr. 67. • . 



68. . . 


IvL- ■]* • [ 

• • • 



]Rff[-><n[-] • [• • •>P'j[ 


jwvoi . 

• • 




^r. 69. . . 


70. . . . 



I. . . . 



• • 
• • • 

f r 



]ovKai0 . [ 


] . €t . [ 



• • • 

Fr. T^ Fr. 74. . . . Fr. 75. . . Fr. 76. . . 

1 ]9'-''"p[ 1 3"f9'^''[ 

]4>av€pwor[ ^^^^ 3- [••]••[ 

] 3yv • • 



Fr. 77. . . Fr. 78. . . . Fr. 79. 


]«y9 • [ 



• • 


• • • 




Fr. 80. 


Fr. 81. 

• • • 


3. [•].[. 






• • • 



Fr. 6s. 

]aX< ^ 
] fiavT€ia[ 

Fr. 66 


]vo|jLoi Y€v[6](ji€voi 8ik[ 

]P,a[.]t<u[.] . [. . .]apa[ 
]oa. . [. . . .]«[.> [ 

Fr. 69. 

o5(t«os) . [ 


Fr. 70. 

] d-n-oXoY«[i . 

]ow Kai e . [ 

]«V TOV[ 

Fr. 71. 

]s X«Y€i [ 

Fr. 73. 


Fr. 74. 


] <t>av6pu>s [ 



Fr. .S2. Col. i. Plate III. 


]|T)\6€o-y[.]y€T)v8[. , 

]T]vo8€iTiv8ap[. .] 
jUTCOio9€0crr)ViK[.] . . i 
5 ]p,€vovTOv-rroTe€X«v 



] • • • "taioxpn 

I O ]€»J;€crTpaTev 







1 5 ]KaT«po(r 

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

[ ~\qTo\_J\Tort\.rjpia\_ 


20 o"7ret'5oi'r*€/cAay^ej/rete^[ 

25 p\j^oTraKpovmv'Te\(.l^a\ 
[. .^roT ^iSepvTrocrnXay^ 
30 TeK€ii'7rvp(p6povepi[ 


Fr. 82, Col. i. 

tJjTJXOtS y[€]v«T)V 6[. . 

]t]v 6 8i niv5ap[os] 
X«Y€i OTV txPT'"* TavTa aJvPTxS 6 Ocos TiviK[a] . . i 

5 ]H€V0V TOV 1T0T« l\iV- 

O-6(Jl«V0V (?) It^oiC ) 

} . 

a]iT-jjT€i dvaipt- 
^fVTOS ] . [o]v iraxpos KXu- 

fX€vov VTTO riepiTipovs ^?) ] • • • ^^^■^ ° XP^" 

I O CTjios ■irpovTp]*\};« (TxpaTstJ- 

«o-0ai iiTi 0Ti1|3as 




] o^ «XPT1?« 

I t) «]K(iT€pOS 

] . V . . TO €4.]X«( ). 

Fr. 82, Col. ii. 

[ri 7ra^o]s To[i)]TO vXripcs [ 

[inL\T(\iatis tiiOfws, rots S[i Tpojai to 'E/cd/S^j 
(vvnt'iov (a)5 T<A«a;(y) «7rjT«A.«[(T^J7(T«Ta(. 

20 (TTT^vSovT , eKXay^i 6' Up[coTaToi^ 

Saiiiouioi/ Keap oXoai- 

(TL arova^ah acpap, 

Kai ToiaSe Kopv(f)a ad- 

fxaiv€u Xoycov a> 'navdTT\^Lpov ei5- 
25 p[v\ona KpouLiov, reAeT? a[v vvv rav irdXai 

7r[€]7rpmfX€yay irdOav a- 

vLKa AapSaviSai^ 'EKd(S[a <ppda€i' 6-^ivQ) 

[aV] TTOT eiSey vtto cr7rXay^[i'o/y 

(pipoicra touS' dvep', eSo^[e Se 
30 T€K(iu nvpcj^opov 'Epi[vvu 



7 * 

KaTepei-^arielneSe . [ 
[....' .]diTepaav7n/a[ 


35 [ ]\€npop.a6iia 

Frs. 83 and 84. 

5 -rijl 

\oin[ 13 letters ]yX[.] . [ 
?o[ ] 

10 /^ey[ ^afScTTOCr ay'^iracral 

KXi6ei[.]eKo[ ]<T(piaiv 

fia\aiTpd^ov\. .jicatcoo- 
K\vTOiiiavTi,[. .]a7roXXa)roo- jyvxpv" 
\.]ya)Hivvnepy6ovos j^v^oeoXo-^offfHT[ 

, , u)K«avowO€fxi8oa«w«iKa[ 

15 [.]Tr € pT CO Kea[. ojf jra>'Taff/(aTtjpT7/«'T0Vff[ 


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

](rKp[ ]u8poa6T[ ]ya>a[ 

Ioo-ovXvtI '*"' .. , 

, ]avTa>pepyovi€pQ>T[ 

]irfpTaTau[ i r v 

5 ]w '•"^- •'""" 


iKaroy^apa, aKX-qpa [(5e /Sm 
"iXiov TTdadv viv knl 7r[e5oj/ 
KaT€p(i\lrai' cctTre 8k . [ 
[ ]a Tipa? imva[Xiov 

ovTOJi a[ 

35 [ ]Xe npofiddeia 

Frs. 83 and S4. 

. . S[ 
5 riT[ 



o-o[ 13 letters iuX[ 

10 /^eyf 7^^d^' €7rOP ai'T(i roC) iraaa^i' T^f dX^fl««av (?) 

/xdXa TTpd^ov \8L\Kams. 

kXvToI flduTl[e9 'AttoXXcovo^, iyw Xpvff{iinros 1). 

[ejyo) fiky vnkp ^douo? nn^od' <5 \u-yoi «« t[ 

, , , „ wKtavoO Oc^iSos itrti Ka[ 

15 [uJTre/) r Co^€a[t'0]lJ ndt'Taf KardpTjKf tovs [ 

Fr. «6. Fr. 87 

d]vSpb9 ot[€ ]i'(oa[ 

]rpV Ka[ ] duoiiafi[€]u . [. .] 

loy ov Airr[oy(?) 7r]dvTa>i' epyoou U pd)T[aTov (?) 

v]7r€pTdTa . [ ]Ta[. .jeVrcy 

5 ]• ov[ ] 

F 2 



Fr. 88. 

Fr. 91. 


Fr. 92. 

Fr. 89. 


] [ 


. avB 






. • 6 



]a7[- •] 

• • 9*yif[ 

] • V[.] • 

0)V . . [ 

• • 

i. 1 . y w 

U . . 



. . 


"■' JTro/cIof 

5 ] • . 

Fr. 93. 


Fr. 94. 


]i'r[. . .']yfLvv\>.y(\ 



5 ] 

Fr. 95. 



5 ]fJ'T(CT(/^<Ta[ 

Fr. 96. 

Fr. 97. 



Fr. 98. 


Fr. 99. 


] [ 

Fr. 100. 


Fr. loi. . 


Fr. IC3. . 


Fr. .103 . . . 

Fr. 104. . 

Fr. 105. 

Fr. 106. 


• • 

• • • 

Fr. 92 

841. PINDAR, 


Fr. 88. . . . 




V . . 


] IcropvOfioi e(pai[i'€TO (?) 

.] . dv[ 

X]aAK<[-]t /^ei' TO 

• • • 

I'JTTO Ki'oj/ 



Fr. 93. . . 


Fr- 94 




] • <i^S[p (?) 

' Tl 

]»'t[. . .]v(tV V\JiVt[lv 


a Aios' t[ 

1 r ll/fl. .1 VdiLV 
(ULS- 0/j[ J • L J 

] 'Ap[«<r(Ta/)xos?) <7]ti/ T<}) r 

orrAoty [t€ , 

. • e 




1 ^^t 

• • • • 

• • 

• • 

5 ] *•[ 

Fr. 95. . . . 

• • 

Fr. 96 

]aT 5*(p /iou'Ta[ 

] 'AKt^aydlp 



]i in'iva[ 


5 ] tv jiai /i*To[ 

Fr. 99. 

]«• 7roXXa[ 
1 [ 

Fr. 103. 

t]ov ii'0ptun[ov 

]Lrrj . [.]r[ 


Fr. 107. 

Fr. ic8. 




• • • 

Vv. 109. . 

Fr. no. . 

Fr. III. . . 


Fr. 1 12. 



Fr. 113. 


• • 

Fr. 1 14. 


• • 

Fr. 115. . 


Fr. 116. 


Fr. 117. . . . 

• • • 

Fr. 118. . 

]a(r x[ 


Fr. 119. 

• • 

] . va . [ 

• • 

Fr. I30. . . . . 

]VY[ ] . [ 

Fr. 121. ... 


• • 

Fr. 122. 


• • • 

Fr. 123. 

Fr. 124. 

• • 



Fr. 125. 


• • 

• • • 


Fr. 107 Fr. 108. . . . 

1 9p]oa6ii\pv (? ) 

. , - , 1 • V 

1 • • • 


Fr. 112. 



] avv XapiT[€(xcri. ? 

Fr. 116. . . 

t • 

] rd KVp[iov 

] y^p [ 

1 . . . [ 

Fr. 124. . 



] "?"■( )~K 

• • • • 


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

Opposite lines 16-17. 

• • • • 




Fr. 127. 

Fr. 126, Col. ii. 

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

• • 


a • • • 

[. .]®t'00r[ 





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

Opposite 1. 37. Opposite 11. 40-41. 


opposite 1. 44. Between 11. 47 and 48. 

]<r<TVva[.] ]. 


IX. [eUBAIOl^]. 

crrp. a i ['AktI? diXiov, ti voXvaKOTre firjacai, \ 

2 [co nardp o\i\iar(jc>v ; aa-Tpov vnepTaTOu i ^ ^ ' 

3 \kv dfjLepa kX^tttoiuvov (y) (Idy^Ka^ dpd^ai'ou] 

4 [la)(vu T di'SpdcTLV Kal aocpia^ oSoi/,] 
5 [€7ri(TK0T0i' drpaTTov kcrav[i(.va\ 

6 \k\avviLv Ti t'edoTcpov 17 TTapos ;] 

7 [aAAa ere Trpo? /I toy, imToaoa 6od^,\ 

8 [/>f€r€i/G), aTTTj^Oftt] 

9 [e/y] oX[(3ou rivd Tpdnoio 07J(3aLS,] 
10 [o) 7r]oT[i'ia, irdyKOLvov repay. 

cci/T. a 1 [—]/'«[— ^w — ^w — w^ — v^ — 

2[— — vy — 'w^ — — v^vj — v-/ —1 

3 [v^]®t'oo"[ noXifxoLO Se adjia (pep(.is tlvos, 

4 rj \K'\apTTOV (P\Bl(tlv, rj vL(f)€TOV adiyos 
15 B t[7r]ep0aroi', [17 crrdaLv ovXojxevav 

8 77 7r6/^T[oU KiVi.(OaLV (y) dp. TT(.8ov, 

7 7) Tray^Tov y^Oovo^, rj votlov depo9 

8 vSaTL ^a/c67[a) /de'oj/ 

^ I'oTioi' d{ipos) iv [^ foTos 7n'€r(?) 
^ fifyaXoKoTw [ydart . . . 
fj irapa rd voTt\j)6i'. 

9 [rj yalav KaTaKXvaaicra Orjcrds] 
20 10 [duSpcoi' v^ov i^ dp)^d9 ytt'oy] 

€7r. a 1 \oXo(f)vpopai ovSku oti iravTOiv pira TretVo^at] 

Lines 22-33 lost = ep. 2-10, str. 1-3. 
Opposite 11. 40-41. 






Col. iv (Fr. 128, Col. ii). 


Tcui[. .]/i»;«'iw(X«7€i ^ 

35 X€)(^eiir€Xa<ra/j.l3poai(oiiJ.€Xia<r av'tyyl 

fi[.]Tav\ovTi]t'cv^^r)i'viT[.]5iSovff €i'TOi;Taj[ 

ayavouKaXafia)L(rvi^ayei'6f)6oy /*«[ 

TowrTroiTjfJioo-t ti][ 


40 )(p7]arTT]pL0u[[ .] . [•]X01't[. .]i- TOivOrjl 

[. . .'\Kd8fxovaTpaTouKai^€ddov7ro[ 
45 aK€p(T€KO/iandT€pai'opeaa 

KaiyapoiTovTO(Topa[. .]piaipdyiu 
mpiaXXa^ poToavTL eu 

€Vpi7r0VTCayU€TeiV€\a)p0U /Luranoi 

Plate III. 

Frs. 129-31, Col. i. 

[. .]K.[ 


d7rda-aT[ ]^o . [ 

mrontptaOrjaofid'wvT . [ 

]  o-XP" 

]. KO. ..[...]. [. .jaKOVTtt 

] . [.]a\iTT]piov 
]w[,] . [ ]/^[. . .]5taTuvi(aTat 

]1<ov<tt[ ]aTaiKatfi(TaTavTa 

^Kovyap5[ ]TvyoiTv rivaXtyfi-nrjvtiov 

]yvB«T[.']p[ ]ir. .] . €oT(€cn/va<|)€iavT<iJi.TVTopT]criwi. 

[. , .]'n'o[.]poiavttTi[.j(TTVYO(7€X<iw<yK[]iOM.Tjpoa 


]yw(jhaii[. .]a)v 
]aiayvta$r^(To[. .Ivwv 




arp. ^' 4 (Kpdvdrju viro SaifMOvico tiv\ 

rw ['I<j]ptj;i'('y ktyfi. 
35 5 A^X^^ 7r€Aa9 dfl^poaiO) McXia? avrQ rov) i-fy[vs rov Itpov {7) 
^[<]t' aiiKov T^i' tfjSrjv (^d.^ir[o]SiSovs. (V TovT<f> [ 

6 dyavoi^ KaXdfiO) avvdy^v Opoov //«[ 

TOis iroiT|fjiaai. tjj[ 

T firj8^a{a\C re (ppeub^ vp[(]T(pau xdpiv. 
%\iTavivoo, iKa^oXe, 

Moi(raiai9 di'[a]Tt6us Tcx*'^['0"]t 

40 10 XprjaTrjpLOU — — Aoi'T[^]i, to ti/ 0T)[/3ais 'lanrjvioy. 

dvT. ^' I kv (i Trjvipov ivpv^iav Bipii^cav nore 

1 k^aipiiTOv Trpocpdrav €T€k[€v ^^X^' 

3 Kopa p[L]yeT<T ^flKeauov MeXia ako TIvBi\(.' 
< [t£] KdSjxov (TTpaTov kuI ZedOov Tr6[\iv, 
45 3 dK^pcr^Kopa ndrep, dvopea^ 
fi knirpiy^a^ iKari aaocppovos- 

7 Kal yap 6 nouTtos ' O pa[oT]piaii'd viv 

8 7r€p(aXXa ^porwi/ tUv, 

3 EvpiTTOV re afJ^ereit'C ^copov n(Tairo\p(V&fjyai Kiytrai (?) 

Frs. 129-31, Col. i. 

[. .]<< 
Kal x[ 

' ' r 



5 ^M^ 

array (rr[ ]^o . [ 

#»^a«T[f;^(j] ...[.]. t( ) 'Api[(aTapxos ? 
<iirotitpia6rjtTOfiiywv r , [ 

] 'AX*|av. 

] • « XPw- 

). Ka ..[...]. [. ,]aK0VTa 

two€T]ijp(So(s) kqI toOtov Kai«rdai 
]p[.}v 8u«aTQi (tvat K[.]ivtt 8ls av- 
] . [.] dXiTf|piov 
]ir[.] . [ ]fji[. . .] StaL Tov f iarai 

]Xoi;<tt[. . . i\iv]aTai Kal /xtrd ravra 

'vp]Kov yap S[r(i'oG ^]Tvyos tiS(arot)- th'A \iyft TlTjvfiuv 
]w8fT[.]p[ ]i[. ,] . fcr\f cruva<})«iov t<^ TiTapTio-io) 

iKal a]ir6[p]poiav dTT[^oj iTvyos i\f\ ws •<[<i> O^tjpot 

]v wt Old t e[T]a;i' 

n]al ayvta0i](To[ni]i'wv , 



Two fragments perhaps from this column. 
Fr. 132. Fr. 133. . . . 

l^'^^/'t ]avTa\ 

} ] 

J ]a;(rf[ 

... ]•[ 

Fr. 134. 

Fr. 131, Col. ii. 

e/i[. .]t5o[ 

10 /cai^py(ro[ 

- ' r 


1 5 ra/f [ 

TlVlie[. . .]p/Xll>lfjl[ 

20 ^(VxO(i(ran[.]oPa>n[ 

VlOuiTtT€^[.]t'TOVa . [ 


Fr. 135. 





Col. ii. 

. [.]a\X[ 
«/x[. .]i5o[ 

trar^p S€i[ 
10 Kai )(pvao[ 
ayijaeTai- t[ 
dcTTolcri Tc[ 

15 TaK[ 
avT. ? C(rTa[ 

Tti/ //e[r 7ra]/3 fxiv lfi[(p (?) 
€//(V 5€ 7ra[p] /cetVoi[? . . . 
20 ((^v-^^BiTaa 7r[p]o/?o)/z[ios' . . . 
vlov iTL re|[e]f ror a . [ 
KXvTOfxdyru? TO) 5[ 

Fr. 134. 


K]a(TT<iA(Oi' <^[ 
f](TTiv 6' 'AtroXA<x;[i' 

iKa8[io (?) 
H]al dvipuiv iKSi[ic 
]it( ) tK 8J KpT]TTji a[ 



Fr. 136. 

5 \ifK<poLo6tvKatK\_ 

]cr 6r}$aioia7rpoa[ 


]oay/fiKaSioaapt'' . [ 

10 ] 

Fr. 137. 


Fr. 139. 

« • 




■• • 


Fr. 138. . . . 






• • 

]  7o[ ] 


Fr. 140. 

Fragments which may belong to either C or D. 

Fr. 141. . . . Fr. 142. . . . Fr. 143. . 




]. rc4 


] "[ 
].o [ 

• • 


t « 

Fr. 144. . 

• • 

Fr. 145. . 

Fr. 146. 

Fr. 147. . 




]«»' [ 

]T(vvofifiy[.']i [ 




;\€cra [.>.a.[ 

• ••••• 


• • • 


• • • 

• • 


5 o]l A(\<pol oOtv leai k[ 

]i' 6fjLa)^'VfJ.o[ 

J9 &T)0aioti iTpoa[ 


]os. fiKciStos 'Apia{Tapxoi ?) . [ 

10 ] 

Fr. 137 Fr. 138 

1^ it0T]afi6y [t'] 'l<Tfi[T}ydv (?) 

] ] 

• • • • 


Fr. 139. 

] • ^o[ ] 

]o( ) teal [fl]i Tdv rrji AvXtSos irolpO/xoi'^^.) 
ToTi] T^f AvXiSa KaroiKovaiv f).avT(v([a6ai (?) 

Fr. 144. 


]t« iiro/x<ri'[a](. 




Fr. 148. . . . 

Fr. 149. . . . 



• • • 

Fr. 151. 

• • 

] . 8a(o[ 








• • • 

•  • 


• • • 

'. [ 


Fr. 152. . . 

Fr. 153. . . 



t • 

Fr. 155- 

• • 






• • 


• • 

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

]•?■>[ ... 

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

]  ].t ]   

1 • • • ] 

Fr. 163. 

] (VKatn6pova[^ 
] tovt' Ka\_ 

I. For the Thebans. 

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


Fr. 152. . . 

Fr. 159 Fr. 161 

]aX/"?( ) otC ]ros 'lan{riv (?) 

] ] 

] . ] 

Fr. 162 

jira Xiav .[ 

] kv Kal nopov a[ 
] toi»t( ) Ka[ 

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

I. The letter before the lacuna may also be o. For npiu . . . npiv cf Fy//i. ii. 91-2 

npucrdf . . , npif. 



3. Ibav k.t\. seems to be epexegetical of eVi (lerpa, i.e. the more a man has the 
greater should be his thankfulness. aiKoBeros is a new compound. 

6 Ge/xt'yovot : cf. Find. Fr. 30 Qtfxiv , . . uko^oii Albs . . . d 8f ras xpvcrdiJLTrvKas dyXaoKiipnovs 
TiKTev akadias "Slpas, 

8. Sa'iTQ (fiiKrjdia-Tfcfjavov : i. e. the festival of the Daphnephoria, which was celebrated 
at Thebes in honour of Apollo Ismeni us every ninth year; cf. Frs. 107 and 129-31. 

9. [rajj/fie: or [raji/Sf, which Prof. Bury would prefer. For ipf-nroi cf. Pyih. iv, 240 

aTfcpdvoicri Te ptv noias (pemov. 

II. For the Abderites. 

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

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

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

3. [(Tf^jej' is used as in Nem. i. 4 AaXov KacnyvfiTa, (Tedev advfnrjs vfivos opparm 6epfv alvov, 

the termination -6ev having its proper ablatival meaning, dTro aou rr\v dpxV Xapoii' as the 
scholiast rightly remarks. a-iroiKoi ydp k.t.\. explains 'laoi/t. For the colonization of 
Abdera by the Teians in the middle of the sixth century b.c. cf. Hdt. i. 168, Strabo 
xiv. p. 644. 

4. [Sijco^o) : cf. Simonides Fr. 29 KapnvXov ptXos Sicu/ccof, and Isthm. iii. 21 (iv. 3) dperas 
vpva 8i(i>Kfiv. pi could be read in place of the doubtful o), but [7Tai]av d[va\pi^(o, though 
it might be supported by an appeal e. g. to Isthm. vi. 2 Sdrepov Kparrjpa Moiaalav peXfwv 
Kipvaptv, is less suitable to [af6](i>. 

5. [Arj]pT]vov : cf. Pindar Fr. 63 (schol. ad Lycophron A/ex. 440 Aijpmvov Kwfi) Afipaivoi' 

TOTtos ovToi KoXovptvos ev A^drjpois, ffda Arjpaivov ' KTTo>0\.a>vos Upov eariv, uv pvtjpovevei Koi IllvSapos 

iv Uaiacriv. The majority of the MSS. of Lycophron show the spelling Arjpalpov, one, Par. A, 
having Afip. A supplement of three letters would suit the papyrus better than one of only 
two, but there is hardly any difference in the space occupied by rj and et. There was 
perhaps a reference to the temple after [oj-rrou [, as in the scholium on Lycophron /. c. 

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

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


fiercely withstands the enemy, his efforts coming to the conflict in season bring peace. 
O Paean, to whom we cry, we cry 1 may Paean never leave us.' 

24. vaiu) : the speaker is the personified Abdera. 

25. The marginal i marks the goolh line; cf. introd. and 659. 67. We transpose 
-aav re Kai to this verse in order to avoid the internal hiatus Ka\ evKapnop. 

26—7. Cf. 01. viii. 28—9 6 S' (TravTfWoiv XP^^°^ rovro iTpu<Ta<oi' /xtj ku/xoIi and for 6/x7r«8(if, 
Neni. vii. 57 Motpa rAoy funeSov apt^f. 

28-9. parpoi liaTfp' (pas : i.e. Athens, which took a prominent part in the colonization 
of Teos (Strabo xiv. p. 633, Pausan. vii. 3. 6) which in turn was the parent-city of Abdera 
(cf. schol. on 1. 3 above). The meaningless fTfKnv of the papyrus requires some such 
emendation as that adopted in the text. The mark of length enclosed beiween two dots 
over the second syllable of ennav was intended to replace or to be an alternative to the 
quantity mark first written. The a is long in fpnm; short in (pna. Either a long or short 
syllable would be admissible at this point ; cf. 1. 65. For eX[ Bury suggests e\[i>'uoi as 
a gloss on Kiipoi. 

31. dpKtuv is to be scanned as a disyllabic. The marginal note iav iv Kai'pw is a 
paraphrase of the text and may be restored in various ways. 

32. Cf. Pyih. viii. 10— i rpaytla 8v<Tp(i'(cjv vnavTid^aiaa Kpdrfi. The interlinear ^, 
signifying a variant vtravTid^ti, is not certainly by the first hand ; the present tense is 
probably sound. In the marginal note opposite this line (and also in that on 1. 34) it 
is not clear whether SuVarat is used impersonally = ' The sense of the passage is,' as 
apparently in the scholium on 1. 36, or whether 6 |j.dx6os is the subject, for which cf. 1. 73 
Buk'araL <})up(rei divoKTek'ei. 

34. For Kara^aivoyv here cf. Pj'/h. viii. 78 p(Tpa> KaTa^alvdv, though whether the verb 
in these two passages means ' to descend into the arena ' or has a wider sense ' to 
proceed ' (with seasonableness or moderation), is uncertain. The former meaning is very 
appropriate in the present context. 

37-8. The scholium 8u]»'aTai . . . XT)|i,/i,a apparently refers to dXica, though it does 
not seem very apposite. Perhaps fj should be read for r\ ; of the following letter only the 
barest vestige remains, but this, so far as it goes, suits the base of a r. In the second 
scholium we suppose that koI, which is in a different hand from that of ©iii){v) . . . dTrdxais, 
indicates a variant aXfca for the oXkol of the text ; cf. 1. 40 Saiois, IV. 4 craro. It is true 
that there is only a very slight remnant of the supposed mark of short quantity above 
oXkoi, but there is certainly a trace of ink which it is not easy to interpret otherwise. The 
remainder of the note cites in comparison another passage of Pindar (Fr. 213), to which 

may be added Isthyn. v. 44—5 Ter€i;(icrr«t hk TrdXm irvpyos {j\ln]Xcils dpfTois dva^aivdv. W hy 

the citation is introduced by the word Q€(x){v) is not clear. Possibly 6eS>v occurred 
in the lacuna before dXKa. To connect 0ew(t') with kqi and suppose a crasis of Ka\ aWtuv 
is unsatisfactory on account of (i) the difference in the hands, (2) the abisence of diaeresis 
over I, (3) the difficulty of completing the sentence [- w iaWfcov]. A better hyjothesis, 
we think, is to regard Qfa{p) as a critic who read oXko.; cf. the references to Zenodotus 
and others in II. 61, IV. 58, &c. The grammarian Theon, who flourished about the time 
of Augus^tus, wrote commentaries on poets, and it has been argued from an allusion in 
Schol. 0/. v. 42 that these included a work on Pindar; cf Susemihl, Gesch. der Griech. 
Litt. ii. pp. 215-7. This view is now corroborated by the papyrus, ovj/iarok' in the citation 
is inferior to the ordinary reading Z'^iov and is probably due to the occurrence of v'^iarov 
in 1. 38, where the superlative is appropriate. At the end of that line ai. is most 
probably the termination of a verb, and IdTaTaL (Bury) has the advantage of being possible 
with either dX/coi or dXica. Other possibilities are yii'tr'nt or perhaps eaafrai, though a future 

G 2 ' 


is not so natural; verbs like u'iptrai or (BdWeTai would necessarily involve oXku. The 
supposed at may, however, be v, though that is a less suitable reading. 

39-44. Bury proposes to restore these lines as follows: fxnpvafxai nav [fiirAd/ioo-t bao\ii' 

[epKor be Yi.o(T'fibavio\v yleVoy Imrcov \fieya'] rmv yap dvTOfiivcou [noXtp-ov afrnj (pepfcrBiu [^Kpaiwvov, 
iTvpos &)\ aiXas. For avropivcov iroXepov of. A^e?n. i. 67-8 orav 6eoi . . . fidxn" dvTidCuaiv, and 
for duTop.fV(>)v . . . avra, Isthni. vii. 28 \oiyov avra (pep(t)v (J) evavrla a-Tpara. This ingenious 

restoration is attractive, but it is not very close to what the scholiast gives as to v6r)pa. In 
1. 44 the vestige before o-fXa? would suit o-, but a supplement of 14 letters is rather long ; 
Kpanrvol would be slightly shorter and perhaps clearer. In 1. 41 on the other hand /x«ya 
is hardly sufficient. 

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

41. Cf. 01. v. 2 1 U.o(Teihavlai.(nv lirnoiv inLTipn6p.evov, and the reference to r\ iTTTTOS in 

the scholium opposite 11. 43 sqq. At the beginning of the verse Blass suggested rt/xw 6e. 
For the metrical arrangement of the lines here cf, 1. 5, note. 

46. <j)0ovei suggests that ]t {lavUi not ^pav hi is the right division. p.avUiv is not found 
elsewhere in Pindar, but pdvn occurs in Pylh. iv. 159. 

48. The scholium here is difficult and apparently corrupt (cf. 11. 57-8, note), and 
owing to the mutilation of the passage to which it refers emendation is hazardous. The 
termination of the participles in the second line is probably -ras rather than -res ; either 
uPpiVai or uPpiaei may be read, and eiriTiOefAcVY] is just possible in place of eTriTt0e(<T0ai) 
hv y\, but the letters ixe^ would be run together in an abnormal manner. None of these readings, 
however, produces a straightforward sentence, though the general sense is evident, that 
internal sedition gives external enemies their opportunity. aTaCTia'^ofTas Kal TroXireuov'Tas 
might be interpreted in the sense of the revolutionaries and the Government, but it is 
not improbable that some word like 8ia(p6pods (Blass) has dropped out after iroXiTe[u]oi'Tas. 
To the emendation €7riTi0e(CT0ai) &y (ei)T] there is the objection that the object of eTnTldeadm 
should be in the dative, not the accusative, and that either a-Taa-in^nva-iv 8e koI noXiTtvovaiv 
(Sia(/)opa)j) or araa-iaCovToiv Be Kai ■noKiTevovroav (bin(f)6p(os) would be expected. Another remedy 
would be to alter 8e' to re and make tous . . . o-Taaid^oi'Tds (T)e Kal TroXiTcuocTas the subject 
of uPpicrai, inserting Skttc (Bury) before ttoWw. |ji,a\Xoi' . . . t] o^eu; would then mean 
' with more energy, or quickly.' This also, however, is hardly convincing ; perhaps the 
corruption goes deeper, and something like el rj vl^pis (alprja)ei tovs iv rfj noXei a-raa: (f) 
Kai (diafpopuii) noXir., rroXXw paWov roiis in. iniTid. av (f'i)r) o^ecos was really intended. For the 
omission of av with Cir) uPpio-ai cf. e. g. Schol. ad Soph. 0. T. 175 'dWov in aXXw i'Soey. A 

dot over the u of oPpiaai possibly represents a diaeresis. The first a in araaia^oi'Tas 
was altered from an i. 

Whichever view of the scholium be preferred, it seems likely that v^ptr or v^pl^eiv 
occurred in the text ; cf. the antithesis of t6 8' ev[3ov\ia k.t.X. in 11. 50-2 with the opposition 
in 0/. xiii. 6-10 ofY^pis to ' the daughter of ev^ovXos Qipis. Bury considers that 
o^vs in some form may also be restored, and suggests [p.T] nod' v^pis eXola-a rovSe X]a6v 
da-Twv [8v(Tr]pis o^eas | iroXepiiovs indyjoi. This may well be the sense, and it is highly 
probable that jot in 1. 50 is an optative termination ; but the disparity in the length of the 
supplements proposed for 11. 48 and 50 is too great. 

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



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

50. The letters Xi in (v^ovXim are corrected. 

52. For iyKtififvov cf. 659. 48 (Pindar, Pariheneioii) liv 6(i\e(T(Tii> fyKUfiat, and for 6d\\ti 
Pyth. xi. 53 fxaKpoT(p(o o\i3co TfOaXora. aid is, the Correct Pindaric form when the first syllable 
is long. 

54-6. The (pGovos is that of the gods, traceable in the early vicissitudes of the colony ; 
cf. 11. 63-5 and Py//i. x. 20 (pdovfpais <V dtuv fifuiTponUus. The schol. takes rav ... as equivalent 
to «Vi Tols . . ,, but the genitive is more naturally explained as simply objective. The 
reading of the third line of the note is far from secure. The second o of irpodavoiToiv in 1. 56 
of the text is corrected from f. 

57-8. The meaning is that the descendant of ancestors who had shown such a good 
example should himself carry to them the tribute of a nobly spent life. Cf. Nem. vi. 46 

tT7fi acpiv (sc. the bards) AinKiSat (TTOpov t^oxov aldav aptras aTToddKvvpevoi peyaKas, which 

the scholiast ex[)lains eVfiS^ airols xop^yav napfx^ova-iv ('naii'oov ot AiaKidai. The scholium 
on the present passage Sei [toIs aj0\(ots) k.t.\. gives a practical interpretation which diverges 
rather widely from the general precept of the text, though it is not out of harmony with the spirit 
of the passage. It seems necessary to suppose an omission of the final s of tous and 
fxe'X Xoi'Vas ; for other mistakes in the marginalia cf. I. 64 and note on 1. 48. 

61. fPKaredrjKGv : cf. Theognis 276 xi'^para 8' eyKaradfis. The interlinear insertion 
apparently indicates the not very important fact that a critic whose name began with 
Ar wrote iyKaridriKav. Which of the commentators on Pindar is meant is however 
not clear ; the name is nowhere written out in full, and several other abbreviations occur, 
which may or may not refer to the same person. In the present passage there is ap with 
an angular mark above p, in Fr. 134. 9 (cf. Frs. 82. 35, 94. 3, and 129-31. i) a/5i<^; elsewhere 
we find a or ap followed by a v having a vertical stroke drawn through the middle : 
for the former cf. II. 75, VI. 89, for the latter VI. 181. «[ in VIII. 35 may also well be 
one or other of these forms. If they all represent a single name, then that of Aristophanes 
of Byzantium is the most probable. But since Aristarchus. Aristodcmus, and Aristonicus 
were also Pindaric critics who are quoted in the extant scholia, and four different compendia 
occur in the papyrus, it is not impossible that there may be references to all four scholars. 
At any rate it seems preferable to differentiate the group having a v , and here there is 
the choice between Aristophanes and Aristonicus, a grammarian who flourished under 
Augustus and therefore not too late to be mentioned in this manuscript ; cf. the possible 
allusion in II. 37 to his contemporary Theon. On the whole we are inclined in view of the 
greater importance of Aristarchus and Aristophanes to suppose that ap and apia stand for 
the former, apv and av for the latter. Some support for the expansion of apv as Aristophanes 
is to be found in the Paris Alcman papyrus, where in ii. 3 the analogous compendium 
apix no doubt stands for \\p'i.aTapxos, apia-ro in i. 32 probably representing 'A^)tcrro<^»'r;c. 

63. For TjM(poii cf. Pyth. ii. 1 — 2 IvpaKOcrai, . , . dfdpiov Ittttcov t« aiHapnxappav taipoviai 

Tpo(f)oi and VI. 14 below. The scholium on ('Wa k.t.X. apparently refers to the failure 
of a previous attempt by Timesius of Clazomenae to establish a colony at Abdera, 

recorded in Hdt. i. 168 Tiprjaios Kriaas ovk dn6vr]TO dXX' itto Qpr)tKU>v i^tKadfi^ • • • ] cf. 

11. 54-6, note. 

65. T€Xo UCTIV : or tAo S ^TT^GTlKaC ? 

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


and a dot placed above, but is necessary for the metre. (pXfynv intr. has a similar sense in 

]SieTH. vi. 38 napa Ku(TTa\iav t( Xapircov icrntpios opcidco (pXeytv. 

69. MfMpcj^vWov is not otherwise known. According to Pliny, H. N. iv. 11. 18, 
Melamphyllus was the name of a Thracian mountain, and possibly this is here 

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

73-5. The future indicative in 4>vp!Tei seems unintelligible except on the view that these 
three lines give the substance of an ancient oracle, which Blass suggested may have run 

in some such form as aXX oTTorav Tvorapa (TX^^ov f^df) 8fj TOTf (l)vpcrfi fvTf(Ti (Tvv j3aio7(Ti. rroXvv 

arparov . . . The author or occasion of the prognostication was probably named in the 
lost marginal note opposite 1. 73. The second o of po\oi/ra was corrected from a and 
the final a has also been altered. eV is a Doric form for e6u : cf. e.g. C. I. G. 5774.1 1 7, &c. 
(VTfs, Alcman ap. Eustath. Od. p. 1787. 43 ■napivTu>v. If our reading is correct, the form 
in the present passage had the sanction of Aristophanes (?), there being also a variant tv, 
of which the meaning is not easy to see. The supposed a is however doubtful, the 
remains being an oblique stroke which might be taken for a grave accent. But a grave 
accent here would be mistaken, and the papyrus is distinctly rubbed, while the analogy of 
VI. 89 is strongly in favour of the reading in the text. 

Bury suggests that the word beginning with o in the scholium here and at 1. 105 may 
be the name of the people with whom Abdera was at war, and proposes to make them 
the Thracian Odomanti ; but the vestige of the letter after o does not well suit 8. 

77. (jioiviKonf^a is applied to Demeter in O/. vi. 94, where the epithet has been supposed 
by Boeckh and other critics to refer to the red colours of harvest ; but no such allusion can 
be claimed in the case of Hecate, and no doubt in both passages the adjective is used like 
po86nr)xvs of personal charms simply. 

In the first line of the scholium the letters taken for eXX are blotted and apparently 
corrected ; perhaps fAdxti V was the word intended. 

79. edeXovra = peXXovra, a use which, though not actually found in Pindar, has good 
classical support, e.g. Hdt. i. 109 d 6e\rjcrfi dvajBrji/ai f] rvpavvii. The scholiast gives an 
erroneous interpretation. av{T\ tov) (cf. VI. 59, Paris Alcman iii. 11) is written av^ 
in Fr. 84. 10 and IX. 35. 

81. The object of KaXfovn is probably Apollo, and eKara-|/3o\]e, as Bury suggests, 
is a likely supplement. 

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

97-102. Cf. VI. 15-8. dp(f)L in 1. 97 does not imply more than vicinity, the scene of the 
choruses being of course Delphi. 

98. T) in v\j/i]Xai<r was altered from an a. 

99. [(\i]K6}Tri[8(]s (cf. Pj///i. vi. I eXiKcomdos 'A</)po5iVaf) is a very doubtful restoration. 


The accent and the ir are on the main fragment, the kw being on a smaller detached strip 
which extends from this point as far as 1. 106 ]wiitpo^i[; and though metre and sense 
make the place of this strip in Col. viii sufficiently secure, its exact position at 1. 99 is 
not certain. The recto being blank gives no assistance. The objection to the reading 
Kmn is that the accent would be expected to fall more to the right than it actually does; 
of the letter before the supposed w only a tip remains, and eatn would be palaeographically 
rather more satisfactory. The letter after n is represented by the merest speck. It must 
also be noticed that the supplement [fXt] scarcely fills the lacuna, and [Ka\v\<6iin^(i (Bury; 
cf. Homer, H. Devi. 8, &c.) would in this respect be more suitable, though on the other hand 
in 11. 102 and 104 also somewhat short supplements in a similar position seem to be justified 
by the context. 

100. xn^i^ff'?] can hardly be avoided, for x^« , which might be read, gives no possible 
word. Though at first sight a not very appropriate epithet to apply to the song of maidens, 
a good parallel to xa^[f«?J here occurs in Anth. Pal. ix. 505. 15 aKinrto ;(aX>c6o0coioi/ 
<'7rt'7rr€'/j;(ov<rai/ aoibi}v lsie\non(vr}v, while the use of ;((iX»cfof of the human voice is as old as 
Homer, e.g. E 785 SreWopt . . . ji^aAKfoc^cbrcu, 2 2 22 oira )(d\Kfop AluKidao. Cf. the name 
XciXkiotti], and III. 94, where ^aX^Wa apparently occurs. 

loi. KfXa5[fri']rt : or KfXnS; eofjrt ; but the papyrus gives Kporfvpn in VI. 18, and cf. 
Bacchyl. viii. 43 oiKfvm. k of -yXv/cvi/ is over an erasure. 

102-3. The right restoration of this passage is not obvious. If the emendation 
Trpo/3i[/3'f/tot were adopted in 1. 106 (cf. note ad loc.) a satisfactory sense would be obtained 
by reading [yav (]vK\(a Wav ua]v ;^apti' ; cf the conjunction of x^ova and orpardi/ in IV. 42, 
and (jfifTepav xap"' in VIII. 37. But the word at the end of 1. 102, where a bacchius is 
required after 8f. would remain a problem. Before the lacuna any round letter may stand, 
f, 6, o, a, (f), or CO, and the letter preceding, if not e, must be a-, next to which is part of 
a vertical stroke suggesting i or v ; further to the left the top of an acute accent is 
recognizable. The meaning of x"?'" moreover is quite uncertain, and the word may well 
be taken with f]rKXea, when it might mean 'gladness,' as in Pindar Fr. 75. 2 Ker' fV x^po" 
(cf. 1. 99 above), 'OXvfxirioi, tnt Tf kXvtuv ntfjineTf ^dpti/, deoi, or ' glory,' as in Isthm. ii. 1 9 

KK(ivai.% . , . ;(apt'recr(7ti', or even ' SOllg,' aS in O/. X. 7S~9 (TTcovvfxiav xapt" . . . K(\a8r](Toii(6a 

^poirrdv, &c. ; for (VKXfa in connexion with the last sense cf. e.g. Nt'?n. vii. 16 iniuiv 
aoihah. Possibly, indeed, the marginal 'r{r\v) <JSi%-f\v really alludes to x^P'"- though being on 
a level with 1. 102 this gloss is more naturally referred to [vop^pv. The reconstruction 
adopted in the text was suggested by Bury ; it is close to the data of the papyrus and 
appropriate in itself, though Kai in 1. 104 seems rather otiose, ipoi of course is Abdera. 

104. The second it in Imroxappav seems to have been corrected. 

105. Perhaps [o\ipj.a, as Blass suggested, though this produces a mixture of metaphors, 
and barely fills the lacuna (cf., however, note on 1. 99); Bury would prefer \<Ta /3]ta. On the 
allusion in noXepa rfXei(roi]a) cf. introd. p. 17. 

106. Blass wished to omit the final s of 7r/joi3i[/3]afotf and so make Apollo the subject 
instead of Abderus. This may be right, but the mutilation of 11. 102-5 renders the 
correction hazardous. Our restoration assumes that the text is sound. 

Fr. 5. The fifth line shows that this fragment belongs to the foregoing paean, and it 
may come either from Col. ii or Col. vii. L. 5, however, cannot be brought into direct 
connexion with Fr. 2. i. i by reading *Ap8[Ti pots. 

4. ]oC[ : there has perhaps been some correction, but o is clear. 

8-9. dv6f[inra . . . \^(tip6i> : cf. Pindar Fr. 75-3 '"^Teot 6p<PaX6v 6v6fna. 


12. There is a small mark rather high above the o- of aoiSair, but it may be 

13. T[i]v'. Apollo is addressed, XP'"^°\ being an epithet like xp^^'o^'o^' or xpva-oKOfia 
or xP'^^oxai-'^a. There ^vould not be room for a broader letter than t between r and v. 

15. ^iKdvas '. a mention of the moon-goddess seems appropriate in this context. The 
epithet eXiKaixnv^ is applied to Semele in the only other passage where it occurs in Pindar 
(Fr. 75. 20). 

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

94. x"^'f]«07r' : cf. note on II. 100. The superscribed variant avXav is more probably 
right than alXov. 

95. Schol. The letter between the supposed \ and u seems to have been altered, but 
is probably intended for o ; there is not room for [kt]iXou. 8 might replace X, and perhaps 
iSou should be read. 

99, ]oXar[. . .] may well be -oi]o AaT[ovs], but a combination with Fr. 28 w l3a6v^[a)vot]o 
Aa7-[o{;f] I ifjie Ttal (cf. Pindar Fr. 89 ^aOvCavov re Aarw) is shown by the recto to be inad- 
missible. Fr. 47 (/3a^]i;^a)i/[oi]o) is also unsuitable. 

1 01. ]8o[t](: or ]S' %]«? 

IV. For the Ceans to Delos. 
1-2. Blass suggests the very attractive restoration [Tov oKetpeKo^av re koi] "Apreiiiv, 

[w AaXf, Aqto) Tf ;^o/jf]i;o-o^aj, comparing Isthm. i. 7~8 Km Tov aKfiptKO/iau i>oi^ov x^P^^^^ *'" ^^V 

ducfiipira criiv ttovtiois dvdpdaiv, which is most probably a reference to the present paean. 
The future xopfwo-o/xat occurs in Aesch. Ag. 31. 

3. ]os is probably the termination of a participle -6fji€p]os. 

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

12. The accent on ayoKXea is somewhat doubtful. 

13. The sense of the scholium is plain, though its right restoration is a matter of 
uncertainty. The slight vestiges before la suit fA better than a, and jxia is therefore pre- 
ferable to Kap0]aia. 

14. eXaj^wcoToj/ : or ^pa\xvvcoTov (oracle ap. Strabo vi. 262), when some other supple- 
ment than d\a(9eQ)f, which is somewhat long for the supposed size of the lacuna, will become 

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

16. Perhaps 7T(b]fXftv: cf. 1. 37 where TrfSex"" stands in a corresponding verse, and 
note on 1. 15. 

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


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

22-3. For the hypallage of 'EWavlmv which in sense belongs to df6\<ov cf. e.g. 
Py/k. vi. 5 nvdioviKos v}xvav drja-avpos. The athletic prowess of the Ceans is emphasized 

in Bacchyl. ii. 6 sqq. oa' <V KXffPva ai;^«V» 'ladnov . . . eVeSfi^fi/i«i' ilSSofiTjKovra aiiv (TTtfpdvoicriv, 

vi. 5-7 Kfov afiadv nor' 'oXvfinia ttv^ t( koI crrdStoi' KpaTfv[(rav] ; their Service to the Muses was 
witnessed by the illustrious names of Simonides and Bacchylides. 

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

25. Only a tip of the letter before kqi remains, but 7 is not enough to fill the space, 
and Tji was probably written by mistake, although the smooth breathing shows that there 
was no confusion with 17. The breathing, however, is imperfectly preserved, and might be 
taken for the second half of a superscribed 7, in which case something other than 7 must 
be supposed to have stood before koi. 

Aiw[vv(Tov : we owe this reading to Mr. Nairn, who suggested Aio[vi:(r]ov, comparing 
Bacchyl. vi. 5 d^ne\oTp6(f)ov Ktov. After St any round letter would suit the remains, but 
only o or £0 will give any likely word. Aio'dtv ir]ov is a possible but less attractive alterna- 
tive. Aio'(t86t]ov would be an unlikely epithet of dfjiaxavias, and A(o[prjov, besides being 
unattested, would not fill the lacuna. 

26. (iiobcopov: cf. Soph. Phil. 11 62 j3w8apos ala. The scholiast's explanation 'given to 
life ' is not happy. 

28-30. This is not the ordinary form of the myth concerning Melampus as given 
e.g. in Hdt. ix. 34, Apollod. i. 9. 12. 8, w'hich represents him as sharing with his brother 
Bias in the sovereignty of Argos. It is, however, noticeable that the later kings of Argos 
traced descent from Bias through Adrastus, not from Melampus. Besides Pj'//i. iv. 126 
there is a reference to Melampus in 426. 12 f^'Apyevs M(\dp[TTovs, which may be Pindaric. 
MeXd/xTTor is accented in the papyrus as if it were MfXdfinovs. 

29, rraTp[i]!ia : SC. Pylos. 

29-30. There is a break in the papyrus after apyei, but sufficient margin remains after 
the I to indicate pretty clearly that the line is complete. It is therefore inadmissible to read 
[dTTo\6efievos ] but though ridfcrdai in the sense of dnoTidfo-dm is not found elsewhere in Pindar, 
such a use does not seem impossible ; cf. the phrase 6ia6ai to. on\a meaning to lay down 
one's arms, and Aristoph. Lysist. 312 dafxeada 87 t6 (poprlov. Or, as Bury observes, depLtfos may 
be taken outside the negative and mean ' having made his own, adopted ' ; cf. nai8a 
Btadat, Sec. 

34. The letter after 8 is either « or o. 


35. av\aKTOs'. cf. e.g. Nevi. iii. 33 UriKevs ava^, Pyth. iv. 89 'Ei/jidXra ava^. But the 

reading is very doubtful, and we adopt it without much confidence. The surface of the 
papyrus is damaged, and if k is right, it must be supposed that the lower diagonal stroke 
has entirely disappeared, giving the letter more the appearance of v. The a also is not 
very satisfactory, for rather more than the speck which actually survives would be expected 
to be visible. We had also thought of [eV] avr6%, but that is a weak alternative. 

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

Xr]va Koi 'ATToXXtora \] ^(iviaae MaKeXXcoi/ 

Koi ^Xeyvas ore Tvavras aveppi^axTt doKdaarj 
vrj(Tov oKrjV rpioSovn diapprj^as Kvocri^dav 
afKpoTepas e(pvXa^€ Kai ov 7rpy]vi^( rpiaivri. 

There is a lacuna between 11. 35 and 36, which contained a substantive agreeing with pijj, 
and the only necessary alteration in the traditional text is the simple correction of MaKeXXuu 
to MfiKfXXw. The emendations adopted in A. Kochly's Teubner edition (1857), Tpane^ji for 
MuKeXXmv and dp-fporepovs for dp<poT€pas, are put out of court, as Jebb remarks \Bacchylides, 
p. 444), by the Ibis scholia. But what are the Phlegyae doing in this context ? Jebb suggests 
(/. c.) that Nonnus here alluded to two distinct legends : {a) the destruction of the Telchines 
by Zeus, {h) that of the Phlegyae by Poseidon (Euphor. Fr. 154 ap. Serviusyi^«. vi. 618 iratus 
Neptunus percussit tridente earn partem insulae guem Phlegyae letiebanl, et omves obruit). But 
the striking similarity of language in the lines of Nonnus and the present pa'^sage of Pindar 
(cf. vr\(jov o\r]v . . . ftpvXa^e with 11. 41-5 below) Strongly suggests that if Nonnus was not 
copying Pindar, he was at any rate following the same tradition. The vrjaos can hardly be 
other than Ceos, and unless the appearance of the Phlegyae is to be ascribed to a confusion 
on the part of Nonnus, which would be a rash assumption, it must be concluded that 
one form of the legend brought the Phlegyae and Telchines together at Ceos, and represented 
their destruction by Zeus and Poseidon as simultaneous. 

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

36. tnaivetr : the corresponding word in the antistrophe (1. 46) also begins with the 
syllable eV- ; cf note on 1. 15. 

37. (Kmov : cf. Iliad B 649 KprjTt]v eKaropTTokiv. 

38. pepos i'^Sopov : Pasiphae is credited with four sons, one of whom, Androgeos, 
predeceased his father Minos (Apollod. iii. 15. 5-7). If Pasiphae's sons had a double 


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

The transposition of the second syllable of ui[ot]<7-tv is required for the correspondence 
with 1. 48. Bkiss thought that it would be an improvement to place the final syllable -viv 
also in this line, and transfer fioi in 1. 49 to the previous verse. At the end of the second 
line of the scholium r\a<j\^6. t] is a possible reading, but the letters are much mutilated. 

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

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

44. fiarepa: i.e. Dexithea ; cf. note on 1. 35, Bacchyl. i. c. 8, Apollod. iii. i. 2. 

46. rrXovTov n(ipo)i^ : cf. NcTTl. V. 30— I w[i(f)(ias tneipn . . , evvas. 

48. A point has been inserted immediately below the line between w and X, this being 
the only instance in the papyrus of the use of a low stop. If [ttcoV (Bury) is rightly restored 
in 1. 49 the neuier ep.n(hov must be taken as referring vaguely to the preceding sentence. 
Blass proposed to read [o-cojf (cf. Pindar Fr. 221) and insert ov before Xtai-, ffiirtfiov being 
adverbial as in Pyth. x. 34 iv daXuus tp-inbov . . . 'AttoXXwi' x^'P^'- The abnormal accentua- 
tion of f^o) might be explained as a survival of the lost negative ; but the punctuation woultl 
make the synizesis of fx<" \ C"^) particularly awkward, and the sentence (ov) . . . Kt» 
\vould be weak. To read [o-w^y without {ov) and regard the words as ironical is also 

The quantity of i in Xtav may vary, but it is short in the only other Pindaric instance 
{Pyih. i. 90), and is more likely to be the same here. There is a similar ambiguity in 
the corresponding syllable of the strophe 1. 38 vioi\- (for the short quantity cf. e. g. 
Nem. vi. 25 vliuiv). 

49. [ttm]? : the corresponding syllable in 1. 39 is short, but there is no great objection 
to a syllaba anceps here, and the difficulty would be still slighter if txoi were transposed 
to the end of the preceding verse ; cf. note on 1. 38. 

50-3 = Pindar Fr. 154, quoted by Plutarch, De exil. 9. p. 602, where the MS. 
tradition is now shown to be very corrupt. The lines there appear in the following form : 

t\a(Ppav KvnapKTcrnv (piXffiv tav 8( vopbv KpfjTas TTfpiSaiav' (po\ b' oXiyov fiiv yai St'Sornt, o6fv aSpvs, 

iTfv6ewv B' ovK eXaxov oiiSf cTToaicov. Hermann altered Trepi8aio}v to irepidaiov, but that rather 
obvious correction is the only one proposed by modern editors which is confirmed by 
the papyrus, and the passage affords a good illustration of the precariousness of the attempt 
to emend lyrics where the metre is uncertain. The genesis of some of the corruptions 
is now apparent : cfiiXtdp was added to explain eo, and the proximity of this infinitive led 
to (av 8f for ea 8e. The construction being thus obscured ta <l)p!]v {(pput) would easily 
become f\a(f)pdv, which fits in with the general sense of the passage {sim/'/icrs libcralium 
hominum delia'ae, says Schroeder) ; and Kpijrnr no doubt came in from tlie margin ; cf. the 
scholium of the papyrus. With regard to the latter part of Plutarch's citation the new 
evidence is somewhat ambiguous, but fortunately just sufficient is preserved to enable, with 
the help of the metre, a satisfactory restoration 10 be made. At first sight, what remains 
of the two topmost lines of Col. xix appears to belong to the main text, the writing being 
of the normal size ; but to this view there are grave objections, ^horai must represent 
Plutarch's SeSorai, which is required by the metre in the middle of the verse, as also is 
(Xaxov in the second line. I^ut in the first place the break down the left side of the papyrus 
follows a practically straight line, and therefore something of lines 54 and 56, containing 
10 and 12 syllables respectively, would be expected to remain; the papyrus, however, 
is blank until 1. 58 is reached, where before j^rfpi as many as 13 syllables have to be 
supplied. This disproportion is too great to be accounted for by collocations of vowels 
or variations in the size of the writing (cf. note on 1. 24). Secondly, there is not sufficient 


room in the lacunae to the right of 11. 52-3 for the completion of the verses. We therefore 
prefer to suppose that the remnants of 11. 52-3 are marginal variants added by the first 
hand, in favour of which, moreover, there is the positive consideration that before X«x4 
in 1. 53 is a blank space large enough for 1^-2 letters. The size of the writing is no 
doubt something of a difficulty; but analogous cases occur at V. 38, VI. 83, 172, 
Fr. 20. 28, where marginalia have been written by the original scribe in letters not 
appreciably smaller than those of the accompanying text. 

To turn to the reconstruction of these two lines, modern criticism has rightly been 
suspicious of o6(v adpvs, which produced no tolerable sense, and is now shown not to 
scan ; but attempts at emendation have been wide of the mark. After 8e jfiorai the papyrus 
has a clear 6 followed by a curved stroke, which pretty certainly represents either a or w, 

and given the metrical conditions ( w — ) Blass's ddnvos dpvos seems convincing ; this 

involves the ejection of the superfluous piv yas, which was no doubt added as an explana- 
tion of oXiyov. To alter oXiyov to oXiyoi is Unnecessary, and the suitability of the epithet 
might be called in question. A certain species of oak is still the characteristic tree 
of Ceos, and the acorns are the chief commercial product of the island. The metre of 
the last verse may be restored by means of a few simple alterations. What stood in the 
original text in place of fi«'8orat 0dfjivos remains a riddle which is not likely to be solved. 
The 6 above x of ^n^^" is also difficult. There is a dot to the left of it (to the right is 
a lacuna) indicating an alternative reading ; for a similar variant on a variant cf. V. 38. 
(e)\a6ov would not give a sense. As for Xdxo[v, the writer may merely have wished to 
emphasize the possibility of the division 8e \dxov as against 8' eXaxov, and it is therefore 
unnecessary to suppose that a different verb figured in the text. 

In connexion with KVTrdpia-aov and the remark of the scholiast it may be noted that, as 
Bury reminds us, the Cretan ptXaOpov at Delphi mentioned in Fy//i. v. 39 sqq. is described 

as Kvirapiaaivov. 

58. Zt](k68otos) : cf. VI. 55, &c., and note on II, 61. The reading of the variant here 
attributed to Zenodotus is unfortunately doubtful. The 8 may be a, and the diagonal 
stroke of the supposed v has disappeared, what actually remains suggesting rather pi. It 
is noteworthy that Kcap . [ apparently occurs three lines below, where a proper name is 
expected. But no name Kedpios or Kebpios is known, and Kidpiov T]pa>' would not scan in 
1. 58. There is a further difficulty about the w of tjpw, the left-hand half of the letter having 
vanished, while the surface of the pap3'rus is apparently intact. If not w, the mark in 
question must be simply a mis-shapen point, and K€%vbv r\p could be read ; but this is an 
unsatisfactory alternative. 

60. We can find no other trace of this statement concerning the sons of Euxantius. 
A Kf'oy in Salamis is mentioned by Hdt. viii. 76 ol dp(p\ rrjv Keov re Ka\ ttju Kwda-ovpau 
reray/ifVot, another in Boeotia by Lysimachus in Schol. Soph. O. C. 91, but both were quite 
obscure. Kiuv for Ke'w cannot be read. 

61. Kcap . [and ulo(s) k.t.X. below are in a different hand from that of rii'ejs . . . 
KaTjw'KTjcrav'. Kcap . [ may be a personal name, but the writing is indistinct, and there is 
possibly a correction. The letter after p may be i ; cf. note on 1. 58. 'Opeirrjs was a son 
of Heracles and Deianira, but he does not seem to fit in with the context. For d]v{T\ tov) 
cf e. g. 1. 4 ; an alternative restoration is 'Ap(toTo0a)]r(r7j), but in the other probable instances 
of that name the v is not written above the line; cf. note on 11. 61. 


V. To Delos. 


I. Cf. Soph. 0. T. 154 i!]if AdXie Uauw. 

15. A verse has dropped out here. Possibly the marginal insertion opposite 1. 45, 
Dat'Swpoo 'Ep€X'0€os) aiKXoc, is misplaced and really gives part of it, for those words have 
no bearing on ihe context there, and they happen to coincide metrically with the conclusion 
of the missing line. aiKXot' is obscure; oIkKos according to Hesychius meant nt yuiviai roO 
^fXovs, niKXov was a Lacedaemonian word for dflnvoi'. Pandorus was a son of Erechiheus ; 
cf. Apollod. iii. 15. i. 

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

36. (Xov : the subject is ot anb '\6i]V(ov "iwi/ff, as indicated by the conte.\t and the 
remains of the scholium opposite 1. 35. 

38. There is little to choose between the alternatives <f)epfixfi\ovs and ttoXv/ii^Xov?, though 
in favour of the latter must be set the fact that this compound occurs twice elsewhere 
in Pindar {O/. i. 12, Py//i. ix. 6) whereas ({)fp(fj.rj\os is not otherwise recorded. The MSS. 
show the same variation in the spelling of -fxTjXos at 0/. i. 12, but the form with t] is 

39. The scribe began to write a round letter after (piKv8fa and then corrected 
it to a r. 

40. av in anoWutv corr. 

42. 'Aarepias bepas = A^Xof. Asteria, slster of Leto, was turned into the island of 
Delos, which is sometimes called simply Asteria, e.g. Callim. Pel. 300; cf. Fr. 19. II. 21 sqq. 

below, and NonnUS 42. 410 'Aarfpirjv S' e'Sioxe koI enXero vrjcros f'pTjpt]. 

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

XIV. I. 16 Tavina vw, 2. 89 daKpoi re. 

45. Cf. Pj'//i. viii. 18 (vpfytl i/o'w SfvopKeiov (5(kto. On the marginal addition cf. 
note on 1. 15. 

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

VI. ' For the DELrHiAXS to Pytho.' 

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


1-6 = Pindar Fr. 90, quoted by Aclius Aristides ii. 160 {ed. Keil). Hartung was right 
in attributing the lines to a paean, but wrong in connecting them with Pindar Fr. 148. 
A marginal asterisk similar to that here occurs at the end of a poem in the Bacchylides 
papyrus vii. 54 (Facsimile Col. xiv). 

3. 'kiaa-onai \apiTf(T(Ti(v) : o(^i)aofjiai Xcipirei (or -ay) Tt MSS., emended by W. Canter. 

5. xP^'''t'> the traditional reading (x<i'pM U, Boeckh) accepted by Keil and Schroeder, 
is confirmed by the papyrus ; Bptva Schneidewin, Ty. Mommsen, Christ, x^PV ^^^''g'^j 
Hartung. fa^fos- xp^^o^ here means, as Keil points out, the season of the P\thian festival 
{ifpofir]via a Ilv^idy, C. I. G. 1 688. 44, &c.) ; cf. A^em. iii. 2 eV Upoprjvlq Ne/^ieaSi, and the Delphic 
paean to Dionysus, B.C.H. xix. 393 sqq., 11. 3—4 ^pti/n[ts Imv rato-S'] lipai.^ iv wpais. The syllable 
-1-6) occurs in the same position of a corresponding verse at 1. 87, and -ovm- at 1, 127. 
Other similar correspondences in this paean are 11. 6 and 128 -av, 10 and 132 -(ov, 12 and 
134 nais, 15 and 137 ■'"o^' TOTf, 16 and 138 Kopai Kofxai, 17 and 139 nnpa uKiofVTa KUTudKiov, 
88 and 128 aKvapirrov ahopirov, 98 and 138 -poi ; cf. 11. 51 and 112 6(oicn [6e\6s. 

6. Either iwihpov (so Aristid. MSS.) or doifii'/x'^^' ^^Y be genuine. The interlinear 
w is not certainly by the first hand. Uupiav for Uupibuiv MSS., emended by Canter. For 

TTpuc^arav cf. Bacchyl. viii. 3 Movo-ar . . . npo(()dTas. 

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

8-9. A meaning somewhat different from that given in our translation would be 
obtained by connecting KaaraKins with vSan and x/^d^oi/ with xop^va-tos : ' 1 hear a sound of 
dancing in which men are unrepresented,' i.e. the maidens dance alone (cf. 11. 15 sqq.). 
This construction is preferred by Bury. 

10. Of the variants u[K]e^aiv, the reading first written, seems the best (cf. e.g. 0/. xiii. 9 
akf^dv "Y^pi-v) ; aprjytiv is used in the same way by Aeschylus and Euripides (e. g. Med. 
1275 aprj^at (povov . . . t€kvols), but not by Pindar, de^onv would not give the requisite 
sense. Kara Koiro[uj in the marginal note below refers to the zeugmatic use in this passage 
of dXe^eiv, which with the ace. means 'ward off' and with the dat. 'assist.' The rough 
breathing on the e of eratj in the papyrus is unusual. 

14. Tpo(p6v is far preferable to the marginal kXvtov. Cf II. 63 and Pyf/i. i. 1-2. 

18. The correction of KpoTei[vTi. to xpoTfovri is necessary metri gratia. With 770S1 . . . 
[dow] cf. II. 99 xopo" '[rax'o^o^a.: [rn;^e]i here would be less suitable to the size of the lacuna. 

50. Perhaps d6a\\ciToi% epu] (Bury), with a reference to 11, 87-9, or S^pty for f'pjs if the 
shortened final syllable of eipvcfyaperpav in 1. in is regarded as illegitimate ; cf. note ad loc. 

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

5 1 . Qioiui is a disyllabic, if 1. 112 is rightly restored. It is noticeable that the scansion 
of \6\i6i in that line is similar. 

52. TiiQiiv is metrically preferable to nfideiv if the restoration of 1. 113 is correct. 

54. The end of this line is a crux. /xo'[i]o-ai is inevitable, since po, though imperfect, 
is practically certain, and o and o- are so close together that there is room for only a very 


narrow letter between tliem. Since the Muses are evidently addressed it seems obvious 
at first sight to write isio[(yat ; but then the difficulty is to find a plausible restitution of 
the preceding dactyl and a construction for iravTa in 1. 55. It is simpler to suppose that 
/xo['(]frai is the termination of a feminine participle in agreement with -napBivoi and governing 
Tvavra. Yet even on this h}pothesis some alteration of the text ajtpears necessary. The 
letter after la-, if not o must be another o-, which gives no word. At a short distance from 
this is a vertical stroke which we suppose is the second upright of an v\ it might also 
be y, I, r, V, or the first half of v or ir. With any of these letters, however, with the doubtful 
exception of r, there will be a short preceding lacuna to be filled (e. g. i(to[.\), and the 
metre will be wrong. To the reading adopted there is the objection that part of the 
diagonal stroke of a i/ would be expected to be visible ; but the surface of the papyrus 
is damaged, and the diagonal stroke may have been drawn somewhat higher than usual. 
If eC^poi/' in 1. 115 be scanned as a disyllabic, as written in the papyrus, the alternatives 
remain of regarding lao . . noiam as a compound verb, in which case the termina- 
tion is incorrect (? l(Tovoy.(e)o[i]aai : cf. e.g. Isthm. viii. 35 ah(K(^eolaiv, and Bacchyl, 
i. 34, where the papyrus has \io\o\ for jJoXeoi) : or of supposing tV . . to conceal lua 
and reading laia) [i^f ]yo[t](rat, the sense of vi.\i(iv being the same as e. g. in 01. ii. 1 2 
Z> KpoVtf 7r«i 'Peas, eSof 'OXvfinov viixu>v. But the i of 1(tos is short elsewhere in Pindar, 
though it is lengthened in the compound la-oSalficov, Nem. iv. 84 ; and hence we have 
adopted with some hesitation Bury's proposal to write iv^^ov \\\ 1. 115 and insert ye after 
to-oi/. The errors in the papyrus are commonly due to omission of letters ; and diaeresis is 
neglected e.g. in 1. 77. 

55. Only the top of the supposed r] o{\z}^[vohoTo%) survives. A variant KeXni'e(/)e'i' seems 
to be indicated, but KeXaivfcPfl produces the right correspondence with 1. 116. K(\aiv((pTjs 
is a Homeric epithet of Zeus not elsewhere so used by Pindar. The Muses were the 
daughters of Zeus and Mnemosyne ; cf. Fr. 16. 11 below. 

57. Te6'\a6v : sc. the inspiration of poets, t6 m^eiK a-o(f)ovs (1. 52). 

58. A comparison with 1. 119 shows that the mark of short quantity above vw is 

59. TTpoxfdv fls is only one of several possible restorations ; KeXa^aai e. g. would also be 
suitable, fls being unnecessary with Karafiidvra (cf. Pyih. iv. 55 nCdiov vahv Kara^aiTo). 
A difficulty, however, is raised by the note 6.v{Ti toO) dcixou, which would seem to imply 
that its author did not construct au>Tov with an infinitive coming after yXvKw. The reading 
of Zenodotus is unfortunately beyond recovery ; it ends with a sloping dash which might 
mark an abbreviation or belong to an hastily written v. For the language of 1. 59 

cf. Isthm, i. 51 yXcacro-ay acorov, and 0/. V. I cioiTov yXvKvv. 

60. fipvv shows that dywva has a local signification as e.g. in 0/. x. 24 dywvn . . . Atw, 
oi> dpxaia adpari Trap UfKonos . . . tKTiaaaTo. The analogy of this and Other passages 
is in favour of the correction Ao^i'a. 

61. 6(oyv ^(vla =. eeo^einoti. In the following lines the institution of this festival is 
referred to the occasion of a famine, — a fact explained in the mutilated scholium but 
apparently not otherwise recorded. The local cults of Apollo were frequently brought 
into connexion with deliverance from such visitations, e. g. Pausan. i. 3. 4, where a statue 
to Apollo dXf^LKaKos is said to commemorate the plague in the Peloponnesian war, and 
viii. 41. 8, where Apollo iniKovpioi at Bassae is explained as fniKovptjaavTi eV voau Xoi/xtiSei ; 
cf. also schol. on 1. 125 below. 

68-9. Fr. 48 would in some ways be suitable here, — Kpoijte ^ \^ \^ nal] fiaKiipav | irpdravt 
(cf. Aesch. Prom. 169 p.aKdpu>v TrpvTans), but the diff"erence in the colour of the papyrus and 
the disparity in the size of the writing are decisive against this combination. 

72. [nv]0a>v6^ev : cf. Py//i. V. 105. The transposition of the first syllable from the 


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

74. uivOooi was a priest of Apollo at Delphi and subsequently at Troy; cf. Verg. 

Aen. ii. 319 sqq. For ^avauv k.t.\. cf. Isthm. iii. 54 (iv. 36) TraiSeo-crij' EXXaVcor, oo-ot Tpoiaj/S* 

75. For the shortened first syllable in Tpwta cf. e. g. Nem. iv. 25, where the MSS. have 
Tpwiai/ as an anapaest. But several editors substitute Tpotaif, and the interlineation in the 
papyrus shows that the question between a> and o in such cases is an ancient one, A 
shortened co (with no variant) occurs in 1, 178 TrajrpcaiW or Tpootav. 

"J 'J. nais [Zt]v6s : i.e. Athene; cf. 0/. xiii. 77 Zrjvbs fyxeiKfpavvov Trais and, for the 
allusion to Diomedes, I/i'ad E 115 sqq The occurrence of nais as a disyllable here is 
of interest in connexion with the corrupt passage in OL ii. 76, where TrdiV has been 
conjectured, and 650. 70 (Pindar, Partheneioi^, where the probability of the vocative Trdi" 
is now increased. 

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

78-80. Cf. Iliad A 369 sqq. Homer, however, does not ascribe the wounding of 
Diomedes by Paris to any special intervention of Apollo. The a of 6e/zat is corrected. For 
t[/cai3dXos cf. 1. 1 1 1 below ; the rough breathing is probable, but not certain. 

81. Either 'iXi'w or 'iXi'ou may stand. The genitive is more natural, but it would 
therefore be less liable to alteration. 

83. The metre shows KvavoTrKoKoio to be the right reading. Both KvavoiiKoKoi and 
Kunvd/co/xoy are arra^ f\pr)\iiva. KvavonXoKOfios is a favourite word of Bacchylides. 

84. A dot has been placed above and below the 8 in dendos indicating that it should 
be omitted. etTios is the Pindaric form ; cf. O/. ix. 76, Isthm. viii. 52. 

87—9. For Q<Tcra . . . oo-a cf. 01. xiii. 107 "A.pyft 6" oaaa Koi iv Qi]liais, ovar , . . fiapTvprjorei. 

In the Ih'ad Apollo appears consistently on the side of the Trojans, Athene on that of 
the Greeks. 

87. ept^e : the Doric aorist is sufficiently common in Pindar, and hardly deserved 

a note; cf. e. g. 1. 133 eyyvaXi^fv. 

88. Both a grave and an acute accent are placed above the a of ap[.]fpei8cov, the former 
being enclosed between two dots like the letters of variants (e.g. 11. 81 and 83). The 


purpose was to indicate a choice between the alternative readings «.[T]fp«»Sw«' (grave accent) 
and (^r'(a)] (pdbi^v (acute). Editors write uvrtpdmui in Fylh. iv, 37. A similar double 
accent is found in IX. 17. 

89. oaa: the variant oo-o-a attributed to Aristophanes implies a syllaba anaps at 
the beginning of the verse, but the syllable is short in the other surviving instances, 11. 7, 
68, and 129. 

TrptJ = avrl, a SCnse found in a line of Philemon hovkoi npo SovXov, dea-jrorrji irpo ^fO-Korov 
according to Bekker, Anted, p. 112 ; cf. npovpyov. 01. X. 23 epycoi/ tt^o -navruiv ^ioT(f (^(iof is 

perhaps a parallel ; dir\ novoiv occurs in Is/Am. v. 25. 

91. fnpae{u)i> : (irpaetv Pap., but there seems to be no reason, as Bury observes, for 
dissociating Hera and Athene here, and the singular may easily have come in from the 
adjacent verbs. 

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

94. ava\\'\vei': for the Doric infin. cf. IX. 36 uwayfv, 01. i. 3 yapCtv, Pjih. iv. 115 
Tpd(f)fv. (TKOKos is used as in N^em. v. 27 Mayvr^nov a-Konov (Acastus), &c. 

95 ^QQ' C^' Py^h- ^i- 33 "M<^' 'EXtVa nvpa>6(VT0ii> Tpojcoi/. 

v\//(>co>a) : cf. Fj//i. iv. 172 v\lrixaiTiu, an epithet which according to Boeckh vigorem et 
rohiir indicat, according to Fennell, who compares Thucydides i. 6. 3, refers to an eastern 
fashion of wearing the hair. The latter explanation would suit the present passage. The 
accent on the o is not quite certain. 

96. A small difficulty occurs at the end of this line. The supposed t is doubtful, 
but to read ivpv ajiaTcoo-ai is unsatisfactory not only on account of the hiatus but because 
a space between v and a would remain unaccounted for. Mipyapo^ {01. viii. 42) meaning 
Troy is always feminine wherever the gender is determinable, and therefore «vpi[i'] is 
inadmissible unless it be here declined as an adjective of two terminations on the analogy 
of QiiKvi and ijSiif. On the whole we prefer h^aaroidai (Soph. Track. 881), and it is possible 
that an a was actually written after 6t, for though there is no trace of ink the surface of 
the papyrus is worn. a is long in annovv in the only other Pindaric instance, Pyth. 
iii. 37. 

97. ai6np(i>os was a slip, perhaps due tonvpot. The s is practically certain. 

99. Tliere was certainly one letter, probably eiiher t or (better) v, immediately after 
-8a, and some traces of ink beyond may belong to a second. Tli]\(t6av would be intelligible 
whether vfKvp was taken adjectivally or in apposition with the proper name ; but the genitive 
is more likely to be correct. 

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

107. The marginal numeral is placed midway between this and the following line ; 
1. 107 is the 1 00th from the preceding fi (1. 7). 

108. As the text stands x"^^- [oj/niXof is in apposition with innovs. There is not room 
in the lacuna for [6' o]hlXov : perhaps xu^KOKopi[<TT]dv (6') [o]/x. should be read, but the particle 
is not necessary. 

109—10. Cf. Nem. vii. 35—7 npia^ov -noKiv ^fonroXepos enfl TtpdOfV ...68' dnonXfav 
^Kvpov pev dpaprt, nXayxdivra 8' fls 'V.(f)vpav Ikoito. MoKoacrta 6' fp^aaiXtvfP dXLyov xt^ovov. At 

the end of 1. no the choice of supplements seems to lie between i pu6\ei' (cf. N'iin. vii. 17-8 
(To(\>o\ 8( pfXXovra Tpirotoi/ livepov ffj.a6ov), and {,Xud]fi>, the former being more suitable to 
d\v€povi, the latter to i<u,-i<jXov. f[\a^ «»/ has the advantage of explaining the mark of short 



quantity which is visible above the lost vowel, and might naturally have been added to 
obviate confusion with eXrjdev, whereas with ffia6fv no mistake could arise. Cf. moreover 
Py//i. iii. 27 6v8' fXa6e a-Konov (sc. Apollo), A^'em. i. 37 ov \adwv xpvcrodpovou "Hpav. The 
first three lines of the scholium perhaps contained some reference to Aegina or the 
Aeginetans. It was the following passage concerning the death of Neoplolemus which 
gave offence in Aegina; cf. note on 11. 11 7-9 and introd. p. 20. The three lower 
lines, which are in a different hand, are so nearly effaced that the obliteration seems 

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

case of tTTTTor/^s and ImroTa ; cf. opa-orpiaivav in Pyth. ii. 12. 

114. Cf. Pausan. iv. 17- 3 NeoTTToXe/icp yap Ta 'A;^tXX€a)y diroKTflvavTi, Hpiapov tVi rfj 
((Txcipa Tov 'EpKfiov avveneae Koi avrov iv AfXtpols irpos tq5 (Scopta rov 'ArroWavos uTToa-cpayrjvai, and 

Vergil, Aen. ii. 499-553- 

115. piv, V. I. viv. cf. Fr. 19. 24. Fluctuation between the two forms is common 
in the MSS. of Pindar. Mommsen and Bergk practically eliminate piv in spite of a 
consensus of tradition in several passages, piv stands alone in II. 73, Fr. 19. 26 and 
Fr. 131. 18, viv in IV. 15, Fr. 82. 32 and IX. 47. 

117-9= Pindar Fr. 52, preserved in the scholia on iV^;«. vii. 94 KaQokov yap dnohoyfiadai 
jSovXfTat TTfpi rov NeoTTToXe/zov Savarov npbs rovs Alya'fjTas' e'/cetrot yap rfrtavTo rov Illviiapov on 
ypa(f)(Liv AfX0ois tov naiava f(f)T] apcpmoXoiai papvaptvov pvpiav nepl ripav ajroXcoXfVai : cf. ibid. 150 
pep({)6f\i vno Alyivr]TU)V enl tu BoKelv eV waiaaiv ilneiv rov ^ioKToKfpov iTri UpoavXia f\r]\v6evac (Is 
A(K<povs ,vvv axTTTep mroKoytlTai fnroav on ov)( UpocrvXuiv ereXcvTrjcrfv c'tXX' vntp Kpewv (piXoriprjGf'is dvrjpedrj. 

The papyrus proves the antiquity of the mis-spelling pvpiav which Boeckh, comparing 

the following words of the Schol. on JVem. vii. 94 ovk fcpijae . . . dXXa nepl tS>v vopi(opev(ov 

npoiv Tols AeX(f)o'is, was the first to correct to poipiav. The letter after v is not indeed certain, 
but the remains suit p better than any other letter and are not consistent with 6. pvpiav 
cannot be defended ; and the choice rests between Boeckh's emendation and the reading 
attributed in the margin of the papyrus to Zenodotus, nvdiav. The latter gives an excellent 
sense and may well be right, but it appears on the whole more probable that nv6idu 
was an attempt to emend pvpiav than that pvpiav was a corruption of an original ilvOidv. The 
interchange of v and 01 is too common to require illustration. papvaptvov, if not to be 
explained by the supposition that the citation was made from memory, must be a gloss 
on \pr]pi\a^up€vov. trjpid^opai is not attested, 8r] [Srjpiopai, 01. xiii. 44) being the regular 
form ; but we can suggest no more satisfactory restoration : dvndCeiv is not used in the 
middle voice. 

For k[p]€wi' in the note opposite these lines cf. A^em. vii. 42 Kptwp viv virtp pAxas tXaa-ev 
dvnrvxovT dvf]p p.axaipa, and Schol. on 1. 150 quoted above, which also illustrates t] twj' 
XpTjjj.drwv' K.T.X, 

119-20. The size of the lacuna shows that a syllable is missing at the beginning 
of I. 120. The reading KTavi\pev attributed in the marginal note to Zenodotus would be 
metrical ; but a finite verb would be much more natural, and it is probable that the oblique 
construction has been wrongly carried on from 11. 11 5-7. At any rate a future not 
an aorist infinitive would be expected to balance l^ipev. Kravepev is therefore very likely 
a graphical error for KTavev iv, due to the influence of Kravilv in the text ; the homoioteleuton 
would of course make the loss of iv particularly easy, p in Kraviptv is hardly certain, but 
is more suitable than v. 

1 2 1-2. The metre requires trj t^ in 1. 121, l^ only in 1. 122. 

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


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

123 sqq. The abrupt transition to Aegina, which is addressed in the following passage, 
is in the Pindaric manner. The point of connexion is to be found in the Aeacid ancestry 
of Neoptolemus, Aegina being the mythical home of the line, as narrated below in the 
legend of the birth of its founder. This pointed juxtaposition of Neoptolemus and Aegina 
helps to explain the soreness of the Aeginetaiis at what appeared to them an unfortunate 
description of the manner of Neoptolemus' death; cf. note on 11. 117-9 and introd. p. 20. 
But they certainly had no cause to complain of the tone of 11. 123-32. 

ovoyniKKvTa is quoted from Pindar by Schol. T. on Iliad X 51 ( = Bergk Fr. 301) 
perhaps from the present passage ; the feminine termination is also found in vavaiKXvTa, 
another Pindaric epithet of Aegina {Nem. v. 9). For Atoptei cf. Nem. iii. 3 AapiSa vacrov 
AiyLvav, and Pindar Fr. i. 3. 

124. (fifperai in the marginal note probably means ' is found in ', of a reading ; the word 
is so used in an unpublished Oxyrhynchus fragment of Apollonius Rhodius with scholia. 

125. Aios 'EWaviov: cL Nem. V. 10 TTiip I3(j)fj.nv naTfpos'EXXaviov, and for the marginal 

note cf. the schol. ad loc. (])aa-\ yap avxP'Oi TTOTf iTu^ovTOi rrji) 'EXXdSa, tvioi 8e KaraKXvapov, 
(Tvvf'KBovTas rovs "EWrjvas ica6iKtT(vaat. rbv AuiKov tos ovra naiSa Aios i^aiTTjaacrOai Totv t6t( 
av(TTavTu>v kukoiv ttjv lacrtv, tovtov fie fv^dpevov airodepanfvcrat, ra Kai ovTut bia rrjv rrjt 
'EXXdfios fT<x>Ti)piav 'EWtjvcov Tvapa rois Atyiv^ran TfTipTJadai ^^ia. 

128. aSopnov : cf. Pindar Fr. 124 a eparau oxrip {oyxnp i^) Boeckh) aoibav TovTO (^ot) irtpnui 

129. podia: cf. Aristophanes, £g. 546 aXpeaff avr^ noKv TO p66iov. The word is 
especially appropriate, like vuvnpvravtv in 1. 130, in the case of wave-washed Aegina. 

130— I. vavrrpCraviv and depl^tpov are both aira^ flprjptva. On the latter cf. 0/. viii. 20-3 

Aiytfai^ . . . fvda Scorfipa Aio? ^(viov naptSpos dcKe'iTai Qfpis f^ox dvOpancov, Nem. iv. II— 12 
AlaKibdv Tjinvpyov (80s, BUa ^fvapKti koivov (fieyyos, Nem. V. 8 cf)i\ai' ^iviov apovpav, and Fr. I. 3-4 
vipovrai (sc. the Aeginetans) ov depiv olbi biKav ^tivav infp^aiuovTfs. 

In dperdp two short syllables appear in place of a long one (1. 9 ^\6ov, 1. 91 
'A7ro[X]X o)]!/) ; the same variation occurs in the case of the same word in the epode at 
1. 176. Bury notes that this resolution supports the traditional reading in N'em. iii. 14, 
where dyopdv in a similar position in correspondence with a spondee has been commonly 

132. Cf Isthm. V. 52 Zeiiff rd n Ka\ tu vtp.(i, and Pind. Fr. 141 dibs 6 Travra Tfvx<^v ^porols. 

133. The variant (yyvdkL^ov would presumably imply nal for nals, producing a hiatus. 
The indicative is no doubt correct. 

134. The correction of vSan to vbuTtaaL is necessary for the metre. Asopus was the 

father of Aegina ; cf. Isthm. viii. I 7 sqq. h'lhvpai ykvovro Bvyarpts 'Aa-cojrtficoi/ onKoTarai, Zrjvl Tt 
&00V /3acrtXfV, 6 rav ptv , . . at b' (sC. Aiyivavj ts vdaov Olvoniav (vfyKOiv Koi^dro. 

135- 'f[o^' d]7i6: or perhaps 7i[od' v]n6. ^a6vKo\nos is an epithet of the Muses in 
Fy/h. i. 12. Cf. ISadCCwvoi. 

136. d[va]p(\lraTO : this Verb is usually written dvepfUfaOai {dmjpdyl/avTO II. Y 234, &c.), but 

the form dvtpi^^dpfvoi is found in Bekk. Anecd. p. 401, and dpeVw akin to dpTrafw and rafere 
would seem 10 be etymologically correct. 

H 2 


138. The meaningless and unmetrical (Kpvy\raTav of the papyrus perhaps arose from 
a dittography of -^a. 

172. TToiva is an alternative reading. The mark of short quantity rather suggests noivai 
as a variant on noivai,, but a final i was certainly not written. 

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

176. In aperas ^ v^ — = ; cf. note on 11. 130-1. 

178. Trajxpcowi/ : or ] Tputtav ; in either case the w is shortened; cf. 1. 75. 

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

182-3. Tvauiv : rraiuv Pap. According to Ahrens, Ve dial. Dor. p. 26, Trmai^, 'lay, &c., was 
the Doric accent ; but different systems may have obtained among grammarians. If hi = 
' and ' the acute accent shows that an enclitic (rot ?) followed. 

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


1. If 8dT[ftpai (Pindar Fr. 109. 5 itivia^ hompav) is right, the Muses or Graces are 

3. avKav probably means ' temple ' ; cf. Nem. iv. 24 'HpafcXto? oK^lav jrpos alXdu. 

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

12. av ■=. ava. 

15. irpo j3(,}p[ov {-hImv?): or 7rpo3&)/x'tor ; cf. Frs. 129-31. 20 below. 

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

17. Ke'Kd drjaav aiddv : cf. Fr. l6. 5 KeXa8i]aa0' 3p.vou^. 

18. evauT7]s is not found elsewhere except in Apoll. Rhod. iv. 148 eiavria bovvai 


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

Fr. 16. 5. KeXaSrjaaO' is probably a variant for some other verb. The conjunction of 
the words KcXaSTJaad' ujxvous here is noteworthy in connexion with Nem. iv. 16, where Bergk's 
emendation of the traditional vpvov Kf\d8t]a-f koXXIvikov to vl6v k. k. has been accepted by 
Bury and Schroeder. Cf. VII. 17 kAo S^o-ai/ aiddv. 

6. Possibly kot dpa^irov, as in Py/A. iv. 247 : only the scantiest traces remain of the 
word between i^ttttov and dpa^. 

7. ^vpiais: the first letter seems to be o- rather than o, or dovpiais would be an easier 
epithet. Cf. Aesch. Pers. 84 Svpiov ff apua diuKCDv, and for dv tmroLs cf. e.g. 01. i. 41 
xpvaecuaiv dv tmrois. The doubtful v may be T. 

8. n]rav6v : cf. Plato, Phaedr. 246 E Ztvs tXavvcou TTT-qvov appa. The supposed T is 
represented only by the top of the crossbar, which might belong equally well to e.g. 
y or o". 

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

841. PINDAR, PAEANS loi 

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

10. Some word like enevxofiai is apparently to be supplied in the lacuna. For cwrtn-Xo) 

. . . KofiaCal T cf. VI. 54—6 and Isthm. \\. 74—5 Ko^mi ■)^pvaoTTt-n\ov Mva^iocrwas. 

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

13—4. av^pcjv . . . '^o^cm.s'. SO O/. iii. 10- I vicrovT tn dvdpoinovs doiSni « rivi . . . 

15. If (\6 6v]tcov is right the sense seems to be oitth fptwa rrjv fiaOdav 6hbv tQ>v (\6iivT0iv 
avTTjp rnis aiircov a-o(f)iaii : ' whoever emulates the masters of poetry must be guided by the 
Muses.' The allusion is perhaps to Homer; cf. Fr. 17. Bury would prefer to connect 
fXd^ovTuv with ^ooTis and (r]o<^tatj with fp(vv[a, which gives a less involved sentence, but 
makes fK&^6i>\(ov awkwardly placed. A^oi/jTwf, however, is insecure ; the doubtful 6 may 
be t or o, and y may replace t. To write (TO(f)iai 6^6i> (cf. VIII. 4) would be a slight 
simplification, but that is hardly warrantable. For ^aOdav cf. Pyth. v. 88 aXo? fiaBtlav 

KfXfvdov dvoiyav. 

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

17. novov seems to be the right reading; nopov would keep up the metaphor of SSov in 
1. 15 (cf. Isthm. viii. 15 /3(ou -nopov) but combines less easily with SVeSw^Kni/] d6dvai\o\v. 

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

Fr. 18. The beginning of 1. 10 in Fr. i6 seems to be a rather likely place for this 
small fragment. 

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

2. SeXrou : cf. Kaibel, Epigr. 185. xo'Op^pov BeXrov and 471. 1-2 "Ofxrjpos vpvqcr' iv 
ieXroti. The occurrence of Sc'Xtou here may be a mere coincidence, but perhaps affords 
a slight additional argument for making Fr. i6 and Fr. 19, Col. i successive columns, and 
placing Fr. 17 at the top of the latter. 

10. The scholium indicates a reference to Leto ; cf. 1. 13 and 11. 20 sqq. 

12. Either fKafp\yov or fKatplyco, as shown by the accent. Cf. Pyth. ix. 28 tKuepyot 


16-8. Whether Fr. 20 should be assigned to this column is very doubtful; tcra-aTo is 
not very suitable to the context in 11. 20 sqq. The fragment is unlikely, owing to its 
difference in colour, to belong to Fr. 19, Col. i, but it may be the top of the column 
represented by Fr. 21. In the first Hne of the scholium it is tempting to read tth* At)]X[ov' 
Xc'yci 'A[a]T[£]piai' (cf. V. 42, note), but though the supposed ir is quite uncertain and could 
well be T (or y or o-), there does not seem lo be room for ore between the a and p. 

18. Only a short horizontal stroke, which we take for an elongated base of a 5, is 
visible before the lacuna ; it is too near to the line above to be a paragraphus. 


20. 7reio-o/Li( [i : V, I. iTtidonai, indicating that Trda-Ofiai is from ntideiv not naaxfiv. TJie 

speaker is Asteria, as the next lines show. 

21 Sqq. Cf. CallimacllUS, Del. 36 Sqq. aXX' acfxros ireXayfa-aiv enfTr'Kffs, ovvofia B' ^v roi 
'AcrT(pir) TO naXaiov, fVet jiadiiv rp^ao Td(()pou ovpavodev (fxuyovo'a Aios yafiov dat^pi 'icttj. Something 

corresponding to ydfj-ov has to be supplied in 1. 21 after €(9fXo[io-«, and rj perhaps = k'4>r] ; but 
this use does not occur elsewhere in Pindar, and Bury would interpret rj here on the analogy 
of Pj'//i. iv. r^'j ?! pa MrjBflas (TTfUiv arix^s, where however the reading has been called in 
question and rj is taken by some critics as equivalent to €^17. 

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

23. Of the last five letters the bases only remain ; SeSo[(]<a seems to be right, but n or 
V might be read in place of the following k. Some infinitive such as Xe'yfii/ or addv seems 
to be required to complete the sentence, though this profession of scepticism on the part of 

the poet is curious; contrast Pyth. X. 49-50 B^^v rikiudviaiv ovbh norf <^aiV«Tat fpptv 

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

25. (vayia, V. I. tvavyta: the dot to the right of the interlinear v is lost. The present 
passage is one of the few authorities for the spelling evavyrjs, which Hemsterhuis wished 
to restore in all passages where the word means ' clear ' or ' conspicuous.' In Arist. 
Pe A/undo 5. p. 397. 16 one MS. has tvavyfa-Taros, and fvavyla is found as a variant on 
fvayta in Iambi. Protrept. p. 152. 23. It does not seem possible to read the first letter 
of the scholium as €, and if ]auaY€[ is right, the stem must be vavay-, which would pre- 
sumably be another v. /., although the entry is in the small cursive hand in which 
explanations, not variants, are commonly given, and vavay- in any form would produce 
a difference of metre. The supposed ye could equally well be v. 

26. For the name 'OpTvyt'a cf. e. g. Apoll. Rhod. i. 537 ^ ttou «V 'Oprvylrj {iv rfj Ai^Xw 

Schol.) and Schol. Lycophron 401 17 Arjrovs ddeXc^fj 'Aa-repia ^fvyovaa ttjv tov A169 pl^iv 
fifTf^oKfV iavTTjv fls oprvya Koi fpiaro fli ttjv OciXaacrav Koi iyiviTO vrjcros, fJTis fK TavTrjs Oprvyia 

Kai 'AaTepia eKoXelro. rt is clear before piv ; Blass preferred KdX[f]oi/ t€. In naXai there is 
a hole between a and t, which are farther apart than usual, but there would not be room for 
7raX(i[to]t unless the o was abnormally small. 

27. Cf. Callim. Pel. 53~4 ovKtr' ildrfKos fVfVXffy, dXX eVt novTOv KvfjLacriv Alyaioio irobaiv 
fVtdrjKan pL^as. 

28-30. If ras is right To^o(f)6pov T(\f(Tai yovov will be epcxegetical of ipda-a-aTo, i. e. Zeus 
desired the island as the place for the birth of Apollo. A more natural interpretation 
would be to connect to? with yovov, but this is inadmissible since ray must refer to Asteria, 
who was not the mother of Apollo. Perhaps ras should be as =. ecus (01. x. 51), when 
TfXf'a-ai would be directly dependent on (pdcra-aTo as in N^em. i. 31 ovk tpapai . . . fx^iv. 
The metre being uncertain we cannot decide between KpdriaTos and KapnaTos ; the confusion 
of spelling is not unfrequent in Pmdar, e.g. Pyth. xi. 18, where there is authority for 

both Kparepav and KapTfpdv, For 6 KpcLTioTOS of ZeuS cf. 01, xiv. 12 6f5)v KpaTi(TTOv TToibfs, 
and for rfXetrnt Pyth. iii. 9 tov pkv (vIttttov ^}<fyva dvyaTTjp irp\v reXeVirai paTpoiroXoi crvv 'EXadvia. 
y o^ yovov has apparently been corrected from a. 

The present context, as suggested by Blass, would be appropriate to Fr. 90, reading 

in 11. 3—4 ;^]aXK«[a]i pev T6\Te . , . vJtto Kiov^ts ', cf. Pindar Fr. 88 dW d Koioy(V7]s OTTOT a)8iv(a-(Ti 
Bvioia dyxi-TOKOis tne^a viv (sc. A^Xof), 817 t6t( Ttcrcrapfs 6p6ai npepvoiv dTTwpovrrav ^(^ow'wi', av 

B' eniKpdvois axfGov nerpav dSapavronebikoi Kiovfs. Moreover, the metre in Fr. 90 can be 
brought into correspondence with that in 11. 24-6 : «-/ v-i — ] laopvQpos i^a^vtTo ... — x]«XKfat 

841. PINDAR, PAEANS 103 

fxiv To]r« ...WW — v\no kIov\Js, and the two passages might therefore stand in the relation 
of strophe and antistrophe. The difference of hand creates no real difficulty, for if C and 
D belong to the same MS. as A and B, which there is good ground for supposing (cf. 
introd. p. 23), a change of scribe necessarily occurred at some point, and there is no 
reason why the point should not be at the end of Col. ii of Fr. 19. The appearance of 
the papyrus, however, is very dissimilar in the two fragments ; and the metrical argument 
is not strong, for the line of fracture on the left side of Fr. 90 is practically straight, and it 
is hardly likely that both v-/ w — ] in 1. 24 and w w — v] in 1. 26 would have occupied the 
same space as — x\ in 1. 25. We have therefore refrained from bringing Fr. 90 into 
immediate relation with Fr. 19, though the combination is undoubtedly attractive. 

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

7. eo-aerai, which is probably a variant for [eo-Jrat, seems to be independent of o^lc^, 
being not quite in the same straight line, and apparently by a different hand. 

Fr. 22. 3. Neither the circumflex accent nor the rough breathing is clear, la-rj (subj. of 
to-ap) is conjectured by Bury in Neni. iv. 91. 

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

5. vrfKe'L 6fjp fi[ : or possibly 'Srjpeiov lfj.[fp . . . (?), but the letter before /x is rather more 
like p than t, and there is a mark above the preceding letter, w'hich has to be ignored if this 
be read as v but can well be an accent on an rj. 

6. Kpo[.]ioi' : the supposed t is rather tall and may be 0. 

7. Cf. A^em. ix. 22 'lo-^r/i'ov 8' fV 6x6ai<n. A small dot at the base of ]t might be the 
vestige of an a, but [o;(^a]ts alone would not fill the lacuna. 

Fr. 28. 2. ^a6vh[o^ . . . : cf. II. 58, &c. (iadvC[(ov . . . may also be read, but a combina- 
tion with III. 99 is not possible ; cf. note ad loc. 

4. ^ h6a.\ya . . . : or d5c;[i/nT . . . ? 

Fr. 33. 2. Perhaps ai^jaaff' or ]as o-' : but the first o- is possibly a rubbed o, and ]Xo9 or 
]fx&f e. g. might be read. 

3. Possibly 'AJn-oXXoi/ ; but the relative length of the next four lines renders it unlikely 
that this line is the first verse of a strophe from V. 

4. The first t of ce/xe is extremely doubtful, but t or o are equally unsatisfactory ; X? or 
Xo may be read for a(T. 

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

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

3. An alternative reading dv6(ixa vo[ for dvdffiuiv /3o[ is apparently indicated by the 
interlinear insertion. 

4. oKf : or Wa. If KiKr]i is right the next word may be 'l6vios : iovT[ cannot be read. 

Fr. 47. 2. ]<^aXto[: so probably rather than ]SaXia[. In any case this line cannot be the 
first of one of the strophes of V (iijiV AfiXi' "Atj-oXXoj/), since ]u(<o . [ {0a6]v(o)t{ ?) in the line 
below does not suit the metre of the following verse — ww — ww . 

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


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

Fr. t^4. 2. The letter after r; must be either a or 8. The insertion above the line is in 
lighter ink and somewhat blurred. 

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

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

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

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

Fr. 71. 4. Perhaps 6 8e riiVSapojs Xcyei [ as in Fr. 82. 3. 

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


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

2. If e]^TiX9es '<f[€ve'r\v is right the oracle was quoted verbatim. 

4. The word after ■i\v[Ka is perhaps Kai ; the vestiges are too slight for certain 

7— II. Cf. Apollod. ii. 4. II KXu/ifrof tov Mtwoiv (3aai\fa X/'^o) ^aXwv MfPoiKfcos rjvioxos, 
ovoixa JJfpiTjpris, iv OyxfjcrTOi JJoaddcovoi Ttfxfvei Ttrptotr/cfi, 6 8« KOfiiadels eh Op^ofievov fjfjLidurjs 
fTria-KrjnTfi. reXeuTa)*/ 'EpytVai ra> Traifit (KSiKijcrai. (cf Fr. 65- 5) ''°*' ^^varov avrov, crTparevcnifievos 
8e ^Epylvos enl Ofj^as, KTtivas ovk okiyovs, eaireKTaTO p,f6 opKiov OTTwf irepLiraxTiv avToi Orj^aioi datTfiov 
fVi fiKoaiv fTT] Kara eVor eKarov /Sdas. eVl tovtov tov dacrpov tovs KrjpvKas fli Qr]^as aTTMVTas 
avvTVx<>^'' 'HpaKXrjs iKai^j}(TaTO . . . e'^' ois ayavaKTwv iaTpartvcrtv (iri Ofj^as. HpaKK^s 8e . . , 

'Epyhov pev cKTtipe tovs 8e Mcvvas iTp6\}/aTo. A similar account is given by Pausanias ix. 37. 2 ; 
cf. Schol. OL xiv. 2. 

8. Perhaps y,oy, but hardly 'Epyiyo]v, since ^Epylvos is presumably the subject of 
d]7rTJT€i. T^o^u, which would be expected, does not seem admissible ; the u is extremely 
doubtful, and palaeographically y would be more satisfactory. 

17-9. A paraphrase of 11. 25 sqq. SvreXfo) in 1. 19 is corrupt, reX/coy is probably 
meant, and 8v may represent av, ' further ' ; (o-)ii reXewy eVireX€[o-€ty is less likely, 

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

841. PINDAR, PAEANS 105 

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

20. <TiT((jhovT refers to Paris, hastening to set out for Sparta. The removal of the final 
V of (K\ay^(v is indicated by a dot placed above and below the letter, as in 1. 25 below; 
cf. II. 67. 

Up[u)TaTov: cf. note on Fr. 87. 3. 

21. K(ap: i.e. that of Cassandra, Ktap being used paraphrastically for the person as 

in Nem. vii. 102 t6 S" ipw ov nort (f)d<T(i Ktap. For oKouiai <Trova\a'is cf. Iliad 4' ID oXooio 
. . . yooio. 

2 2. The accent and mark of quantity on (rrovaxais show that the scribe carelessly 
mistook the dative for the nominative. 

23. Kopv(f)a: cf. 01. vii. 68-9 Tf\(i.Tn6(v B( Xoywi/ Kopvcf)a\ iv aXiiOda nfToia-at and Pyih. 

iii. 80 Xdywv (Tvufpfv Kopv(f)av. The analogy of these passages makes Xdycoi- in 1. 24 pre- 
ferable to the v. I. \6yov. With what object the curved marks were placed beneath the 
syllables ai and <^at is not clear; cf. IX. 35 and 41, where the syllables x*' of Xex^t and 
T771/ in the name T^vfpoi/ are similarly underlined. Such signs are used e.g. in the 
Bacchylides papyrus to connect the constituent parts of compound words (iii. 23 bapaa-innov, 
V. 19 evpvdvaKTos, &c.), but though the stroke would serve to warn the reader that Trjv in 
Trjvfpov was not the article, and that rotatSf was one word, not two, no similar explanation 
will apply to Kopvcpdi or Xt'^fi. In the former word next to the circumflex accent is a mark 
which we can only explain as a sign of short quantity indicating Kopvcpai, though this is 
contradicted by the accent and Knpv<^ai would not construe. 

(Tcipaivtv: the interlinear i' is in a lighter ink, and was perhaps added by a later hand. 

24. 'K6ya)v: cf. note on 1. 23. The adjective navandpav is found only in Orph. H. 

58. 10 vopov wyvyiov TTCivanfipovos fvvopov dpxTJi. navanfipiT (Oppian C. ii. 5^7) '^ ^he Same 

sense or TravanTjpov (Hesiod, Op. 811, Anth. Pal. ix. 525. 17; cf. Pindar, Pj/A. x. 
21-2 0(6i fi»; dnripav Keap) are Other possibilities. 

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

29. t6v8' dvip' means of course Paris. 

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

hfVTtpov Se ytwdadai pfKXovTos l3p€(f)ovs efio^ei/ 'EKd/3r; Kti6' vnap SaXuv rfKflv Sianvpov (so 
Eurip. Troiadcs 921-2 ^pi<pos, 8aXov niKpov piprjp', Schol. Eurip. Andr. 294 Xa^TrdSn, Vergil, 
A en. vii. 320 Nee face tanlum Ctsseis praegtias, Sec), tovtuv 8e ndaav emvfpfcrOai rrjv noXiv koi 


32. eVt 77[«5oi' : cf. Aesch. Fr. 169 irphs ntSat 0dXr]s, &c. 

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

(cf. 1. 35 (.'') eo-0o]Xf TTpopiidfia). 

34. For v7rva[X€ov cf. Anth. Pal. v. 242. 5 tv virvd\(oia-iv ovdpois. Either t or rj might be 
read in place of a, but not o. 

35. Perhaps ovrws ' A^pia-{Tapxos) or 'a p(ioTo(^d)i/(»jf) ; cf. note on II. 61. 

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


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

1-2. (va[ and n« . [ are probably the beginnings of lines. 

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

11. KKiQtls occurs also in 01. i. 92 'A\(j>eov n6pa> kK. and IVem. iv. 15 ddna k« rmbe fifXd 

k\. vlov (?) KeXdSrjcre. KXidfU in the present passage will mean simply ' reclining.' 

12. irpa^ov is apparently the neuter participle future agreeing with en-or, though the 
expression is somewhat strange. 

13. If the marginal y^pva{ ) gives the name of the speaker, possibly the Trojan 
Chryses, who was a priest of Apollo, or the Cretan Chrysothemis, who is said to have 
been the first winner in the contest of singing a hymn to Apollo at Delphi (Pausan. x. 7. 2), 
may be meant. But on the analogy of the other abbreviated names of Pindaric com- 
mentators which occur in this papyrus it is more probable that Xpvo-( ) stands for the critic 
Xpva-innos, who is frequently referred to in the extant scholia. 

15. From the conjunction in the scholium of MKeavov and 6(pi8os it may be inferred that 
the latter word followed in the text. The reading is practically certain, and r cannot be 
substituted for S, though it should perhaps be restored in accordance with the usual 
Pindaric declension. 

Fr. 86. I. This line was probably, but not certainly, the first of a column. The frag- 
ment cannot be combined with Fr. 88 ^' iiJTrepTdrg, &c. 

Fr. 87. 3. There is a remarkable coincidence between the remains of this line and 
Fr. 82. 20; the word Up(l>TaTov probably occurs in both verses, and the same ambiguity 
of metre in the preceding word is also found in both cases. But the hypothesis that the 
two verses are in strophic correspondence is open to the objection that Fr. 87. 4 ](VTes 
does not agree with Fr. 82. 21 o\oa(|(rt ; this difficulty, however, could easily be overcome 
by writing 6\oiai\(n. 

Fr. 90. On the grounds for and against bringing this fragment into connexion with 
Fr. 19 see note on 11. 28-30 adloc. 

Fr. 91. This fragment may contain the beginnings of lines. 

Fr. 93. For the double accent on wXotj cf. note on V. 44. The rough breathing is 
not clear. 

Fr. 95. 5. Perhaps a critical note, if iv nai = ' in some copies.' 

Fr. 96. I. dpaavi seems to be a variant for raxw. li'A\(^av5[p below is a reference to 
Paris, the fragment may come from the column following Fr. 82. ii ; cf. Frs. 129-31. i. 

Frs. 103-4. These two fragments are very similar in appearance, and probably go close 

Fr. 107. dn[6] 8d(f)VT]s da(})vr)[(popiK6v : the poems described as Sa0i'7j0opi(ca were so called 
from the branches of laurel which the singers carried, and according to Proclus, Chrest. ap. 

Phot. Bibl, 239, they were classed with the napdfftia, — llapd, oh kui ra /::^a(^vrj(^opi.Kd as eh 

yivos ninrfi. The 8acj)vr](f)opia was specially associated with the Ismenion at Thebes. Cf. 
introd. p. 24. 

Fr. 108. Trp]o(7o8i[oj' seems a likely restoration ; on its possible significance cf. introd. 
p. 24. 

Fr. 1 09. The occurrence of an elision mark between f and w leads us to regard this 
line as belonging to the text in spite of the rather small size of the letters. 

841. PINDAR, PAEANS 107 

Fr. III. Probably from the top of a column. The first line may be part of 
a scholium. 

Fr. 116, The vestiges below the third line seem to represent lectional signs rather 
than letters. 

Fr. 117. 2. The supposed high stop may be the end of an acute accent. 

Fr. 124. The writing in this fragment is slightly more cursive than usual in the notes 
by the first hand. 

D. Frs. 126-39 ^•'6 distinguished from those under C by the presence of a different 
hand on the recto. 

IX. For the Thebaxs. 
1-21 = Pindar Fr. 107, preserved in Dionys. Hal. De Demos/h. diet. c. 7 raxn-a Km rh 

ofiota toCtoh, & TToXXa ((ttiv, tt Xci^oi fifXr] Koi pvdfiovs acrnep o'l 8i6vpafji^oi koi to i'Trop^.^fiara, 
Tois TlivSapov TTOiripaaLV ioiKevai do^tieu &v roii fis rov fjXiov (IpTjfitvois, cor y' (poi (f)ai.u(Tai' 'AktU, 

ie.T.\. The general accuracy of Dionysius' quotation is confirmed by the metre as 
determined by 11. 34 sqq., though some small improvements can now be effected. On the 
class of composition to which the ode belongs cf. introd. p. 23. 

1-2. W (Dionys.) suits the metre and makes good sense. 

fifiatai, S> fiarep : f'pris 6(a> p.^ arep Dionys., of which Blass's emendation p^rjo-tai (or 
ifiTiaao Bergk) 2) parep is confirmed by the metre. 

3. An additional short syllable is required before fdrjKas to produce a correspondence 
with 1. 43, which there is no reason to suspect. Perhaps vw, which might easily have 
dropped out after KXtnTonevop, or tv y should be inserted. WriKa^ is likely to be sound ; cf. 
e. g. 1. 19 below and 01. ii. 16-7 dnoiqTov . . . Ofptv fpyav t(\os. 

4. icrxvv T av5pdcn{v) Blass, now confirmed by 11. 14, 34. and 44 ; lax^" mavw dvbp. 
Dionys. (irravov Bpdaiv Paris. 1745). Though the syllable may be long or short (short 
in 11. 14 and 34, long in 1. 44), it is better to write -(nv than -at since -aiv recurs in the 
same position in 1. 14. Other similar correspondences in this poem are 11. 5 and 15 -rov . . . 
-ptv-, 11. 8 and 38 -fi'w. 

7. tTTTTOj 6a6odi Dionys., Imroaoa Bods BlaSS. 

9-ir. Our identification of Fr. 127 is of course uncertain, but the accents on "'oX[ and 
]dT[ both happen to suit, and, moreover, the recto is blank as it should be if the fragment 
belongs to Col. ii of Fr. 126. 

9. [fjy] : (s Dionys., but the syllable is long in 11. 19 and 49. 

13. The remains of the first letter are consistent with either o or w, but the con- 
ditions seem less difficult if the two initial feet are taken to be \y (>)voa\-- rather than \j — ovoa^. 
Above the w or o is a dot which is more probably the tip of a lectional sign, e. g. a grave 
or circumflex accent, than of an over-written letter. The doubtful o- might be f, o or w, 
but hardly 6. 

•noKepoLo 8e adpa : TToKtpov Sir ap.a Dionys. Scaliger's adpa has been generally accepted, 
and KoXfpoio Bt can now be confidently restored with the aid of the metre in 1. 43. 

16. (v^) ap ntBov : dWd niSov Dionys., of which Hermann's np is a natural emendation, 
but then a short syllable is wanting before (1p. (ap) (Blass) would serve. 

17. For the alternative accents on nayerov cf. VI. 88. The word is commonly made 
oxytone ; cf. Arcad. 81. 14 ndytTOi, on(p o^vvti 17 avvi]B({.a, Eranius Philo, p. 172 irdytros 
piv TO Kpvos, naytTos 6« 6 x'^t^^v. 


1 8. pfov Schroeder for Dionys. Up6v. The scholium below this line confirms ij vonov 
6epos, but does not seem to have been illuminating. 

22-33. It appears probable that a single column is the extent of the loss between 
11. 18 and 34. This column would have contained fifteen or sixteen lines, giving an epode 
of the very suitable number either of ten verses, which is also the length of the strophe, 
or of eleven, for which there is an exact parallel in IV. 

11. 34-49. 'I have been perfected by some divine influence hard by the immortal 
couch of JNIelia to compose a noble strain with flute and cunning of the mind, for your 
sake. I supplicate thee, Far-darter, consecrating to the Muses' arts this shrine . . . 
wherein Oceanus' daughter Melia once shared thy couch, O god of Pytho, and bore mighty 
Tenerus, the chosen interpreter of heaven's decrees. To his care didst thou, father with 
unshorn locks, commit the host of Cadmus and the city of Zeathus, on account of his wise 
fortitude. For the sea-dwelling wielder of the trident honoured him above other mortals, 
and he hastened (to ?) the region of the Euripus . . .' 

34. The use of tKpdvdrjv is somewhat strange ; the idea appears to be the need of 
divine help if the poet is to attain perfection in his art. eVireXeto-^at, which is given as an 
equivalent, occurs in a diff"erent sense in Fr. 82. 20. 

35. According to the explanation of the scholiast, the 'couch of Melia' means the 
Theban Ismenion, or temple of Apollo Ismenius. Melia, the daughter of Oceanus, was 
the mother of the seer Tenerus by Apollo, and like her son was revered at Thebes, where 
there was a spring which bore her name, close to the Ismenion; cf. II. 41-3 below, 
Pj'/h. xi. 4-6 and Schol. ad. loc, Pausan. ix. 10. 5, &c. 

36. For the Doric infinitive avvdyev cf. VI. 94, note, and for 6p6ov, Nem. vii. 81 itoKv^arov 
Bpbov vfivatv 86vfi. In the fragmentary scholium in the margin p.t[ may well be part of the 
name Mf[Xta and rr][ of TTj[^i>epoi, e. g. eV Tovra [to Upa TJjr] M€[Xtaj^ rtKuv (jiaai^ Triv[epou ' AttoXKcovi, 

Cf. the preceding note. 

38. The letters ra in fKaralioXe are crossed through, and also have dots above them ; 
that (Ka^oXe is here the correct form is proved by the metre. 

39. dp\ayideii : cf. Pyth. viii. 29—31 dva6ep.ev ndaav fiaKpayopiav Xupa re Km (pdtyfiaTi 
fioKdaKa, where, however, the verb has an abstract object. 

40. The latter half of this line presents difficulties. X and o are clear, and if r, which 
is nearly certain, is right, the intervening letter must be v. It is doubtful whether the 
traces before Xo represent two letters or only one ; if there are two a n would be best 
for the first, though r], f, §, or perhaps k might also be read ; of the second there is only 
a small speck, which would suit any letter beginning with a more or less upright stroke. 
If on the other hand there is only one letter, it can hardly be other than a>, and some narrow 

letter should stand between it and the X. Xov t [o7r]t, as suggested by Blass, would 

be attractive if a suitable word ending in \ov could be found, though eV w in 1. 41 would 
better accord with a single antecedent substantive. It is rather tempting to read f w 7ro[XJXoi' 
T[f6]v ; the supposed acute accent, of which only a tiny top remains, over the first syllable 
might well be a mark of elision or crasis, and the o, though not very satisfactory, is 
possible. The difficulty lies in reading anything but t for the final letter, i and the 
second upright of v are indistinguishable in form, but some part of the diagonal stroke of 
a V would be expected to be visible. The papyrus, however, is damaged, and it is perhaps 
too much to say that a k is to be excluded, though a restoration requiring it cannot be 
regarded as convincing, Bury suggests t[66]i, which might be accepted if no better 
solution is forthcoming. 

41. On the myih of Tenerus cf. note on 1. 35. 

6{lxiT[^a)v ; cf. Pindar Fr. 192 AeXcjiol dffiia-rwv [vfivcov] fiavrifs 'ATToXXwriSat. 


44. Kuh^iov (TTpaTov KOI ZfcWov n6\\ii> : i. e. Thebes and the Thebans. ZtaOoi is ap- 
parently an otherwise unattested form of Zrjdoi, who with his twin brother Aniphion took 
and fortified Thebes and was buried there. 

47. There is not too much space for the or of 'opaoT^fiaiva, which is the regular 
Pindaric form {O/. viii. 4S, Fy/k. ii. 12, N'em. iv. 86), and perhaps 'Ofxrirp. was written; 
cf. opcTiKTvnoi and 6p(rtv((})r]s. 'OpaiTpiaifa {opvvfjii) wouid have a different shade of meaning 

from that of'OpaoTpiaim (opcrdr). 

48. Cf. Pylh. xi. 4—5 wap MfXtav ■^(pvfTkwv tV ahvrov rpinoSav drjaavpop, ov ntpiaW tTifxaat 

49. Without the complete context the meaning of a-wereivt cannot be clearly defined, 
but it appears to be equivalent to contendit, ' hastened,* a sense found in late writers ; 

cf. Bekker, Anecd. p. 64 awrtivtiv' to rpex^dv awTiraptvdis, Plutarch Ntc. 30 8p6pa) a-vvrdvas 
fls TO aarrv. 

The subject of Fr. 139, where some one is said to have gone to Aulis and made 
prophecies there, is very probably Tenerus, but that note cannot be the continuation of 
fifTatro' pfvB^tai Xt'yerat (?), for such an arrangement would make the distance between 
Col. iv and the next too great, and it is pretty clear from the width of its lower margin 
that Fr. 139 ran underneath a column (cf Fr. 126. ii and Fr. 129), whereas ptTanop^vd^vai does 
not. It is, however, likely enough that Fr, 139 comes from the bottom of the column 
following Col. iv and referred to a passage standing in close relation to Ei/pinov re awiTtivt 


Frs. 129-31. The metre shows that these two fragmentary columns do not belong 
lo IX ; the strophe or epode contained at least fourteen verses (11. 2-15). 

3. fi'ai-[ with what seems to be the top of a mark of long quantity above the letter after 
the T is presumably (vdra or ivaTav, and the references to an twatrnpis in the margin opposite 
and below the column are to be connected with this. This Theban Sacpi/rjcpopia was held 
6t' (vvatTTjpibos according to Proclus, ChresL ap. Photius Bibl. 239. 

1-5. Scholium. Cf. Homer, //. B 751 sqq. oIt a/x0' ip.(pT6v TiTaprjmov tpy (vffioiTo, or p 
ts HTjvtiov npotei KaWippoov i/Swp . . . opKov yap 8fivov 2Tvy6s vSaTos ((ttiv dnoppoj^, the last Ime beuig 

partially quoted at the beginning of the note. The sentence is probably complete at 
Urjvdov, and the word Tivd seems to have occurred in the text. The space between op^Kov 
K.T.X. and Xou(7t[ /c.t.X. indicates that the two lines belong to distinct notes. 

6. Schol. below line. The number of letters lost in the gap between the tw-o halves 
of this note is uncertain, but may be estimated at about sixteen. It is not possible to read 
8ia 6 f'[r]a>«', as would be expected (cf. note on 1. 3) ; but perhaps e is a graphical error 
for 6, or there may have been some question whether the 8a(pvr](popia occurred at intervals 
of five or of nine years. Pausanias (ix. lo. 4) says that a boy called 8a(j)VT](p6poi w'as made 

Upfa fi/iavcriov. 

Frs. 132-3. If these two fragments are to be assigned to the foregoing column, they 
should be placed so that ]co(r«[ in Fr. 133 comes approximately over lKoiiyap(l. 5 schol.), and 
Fr. 132 above and in the same straight line with Fr. 133, the edges of the papyrus in neither 
case directly joining. We are led to this arrangement by the coincidence that the fragments, 
like Fr. 130, have a strengthening strip gummed on to the recto, and also show a sells. But 
since the recto is in both cases nearly blank, it is not absolutely certain (though probable) 
that these fragments belong to D rather than to C. 

Fr. 131. ii. 12 77oXtdox[ : cf. 0/. v. 10 to TroXtno;^* IlaXXny. 

14. ^tvoKaSr}! is a ana^ Xtyoptvov. 

1 5. The paragraphus below this line marks the conclusion of a strophic section. 


1 8. ni[ : or perhaps Ta\^ ; the tops of the letters are lost. 

19. Kfivoxi is also a possibility, but not Kehov on account of the accent. 

20. The accent indicates 7r[p]o/3a)/j[toj or -v. 

Fr. 134. 3. The interlinear iKaSf seems to be the same word as that which occurs 
in the reading attributed to Aristophanes in 1. 9 ei/cdStoj, which, if sound, must be an adjective 
derived from ffVay, otherwise attested only as a proper name. According to the Etym. Mag. 
s. V. there was a festival of Apollo on the 20th of the month. 

4. ]cr( ) : or V( ) (Kp]r,r( )?). 

9. Cf. note on 1. 3. 

Fr. 137. 2. The paragraphus below the line shows that tpx^^^'^'- is the beginning of 
a sentence. 

Fr. 139. Cf. note on IX. 49. ]o( ) in 1. 2 is possibly Ei>/)i7r]o( ). 

Frs. 140-62. The recto of these small fragments is blank or practically so, and there 
is consequently no safe criterion for determining whether they belong to C or D. The 
texture and colour of the papyrus, however, suggests that Frs. 140, 146, and 161 come from 
D, and most of the others from C. Fr. 151 perhaps does not belong to this papyrus. 

Fr. 145. 2. The letters are only slightly smaller than those above, and since the 
two lines are the ordinary distance apart, ]S€oj/[ may be part of the text, not of 
a scholium. 

Fr. 154. ]<u followed by a dot is an interlinear variant. The circumflex accent is doubtful. 

Fr, 156. I. The supposed mark of length over a may be a mark of short quantity 
or a grave accent. 

Fr. 161. Cf. IX. Col. iv and Fr. 138. 

Fr. 162. I. This line is in a "different hand from that of the rest of the text, and seems 
to be over an erasure. The hand of 11. 2-3, however, indicates that the fragment, which 
probably is from the bottom of a column, belongs to C-D. 

842. Theopompus (or Cratippus), Hellenica. 

Height 21-2 cm. Plates IV and V (Cols, v-vi and xi-xii.). 

Since the discovery of the 'AdrivaCcov rioXiTeta in 1890 Egypt has not 
produced any historical papyrus at all comparable in importance to these 
portions of a lost Greek historian, obviously of the first rank, dealing in minute 
detail with the events of the Greek world in the years 396 and 395 B. c. The 
papyrus, which with the exception of the manuscript of Plato's Symf>ost?mt (843) 
is the largest literary text that has been found at Oxyrhynchus, originally con- 
sisted of about 230 fragments of varying sizes. These have been so far pieced 
together that only about fifty-five, none of which is large, remain unplaced, and 
it is improbable that further efforts at combination will yield results of much 
importance. Like the manuscript of Pindar's Paeans (841) the historical work, 
though written in uncials, is on the verso of an official document. This is a 
land-survey register giving a long list of cultivators, and the entries in most 


cases follow the same scheme, which gives (i) the geographical relation of the 
plot of land in question to its predecessor, (2) the name of the owner or lessee, 
(3) the rent and area, (4) the adjacent plots, (5) the changes introduced with 
regard to rent. The village of Ibion Argaei, which was in the south-west of the 
Arsinoite noma, is mentioned as being in the vicinity of one of the plots of land, 
and the land-survey was no doubt drawn up at some village near Ibion, but 
whether the historical work was also written in that district or at Oxyrhynchus 
is uncertain. Various years, ranging from the 4th to the 12th, of an unnamed 
emperor are mentioned, and the handwriting shows that he belonged to the 
second century. Since the survey was probably written soon after the 12th year, 
the reign of Commodus, which in Egypt was reckoned from his father's accession 
and therefore begins with his 20th year, is out of the question ; the reign of 
Hadrian or Antoninus is as likely to be meant as that of Marcus Aurelius. The 
land-survey has of course been of the utmost service in determining the place of 
detached fragments of the historian, and is in itself of no slight interest : the text 
of portions of it will be given in Part VI. The writing in some places is con- 
cealed by strips of papyrus which were gummed on in order to strengthen the roll 
when the verso came to be used. 

Of the historical work at least twenty-one columns are to be distinguished, 
written in two hands. Postponing for the moment the question of the right order > 
of these columns, and assuming the correctness of the numbers assigned to them 
by us, the first hand is responsible for Cols, i-iv, vi. 27-xxi, and all the loose 
fragments except Frs. 3 and perhaps 16. The scribe employs a small neat uncial 
of the sloping oval type, representing a transitional stage between the earlier 
specimens of this style, e.g. the Oxyrhynchus papyrus of Demosthenes' Upooiixia 
hi]ixi]yopiKa (26) of the late first or early second century, and the ordinary third 
century type illustrated e. g. by 23 and 232. N at the end of a line is generally 
indicated by a horizontal stroke above the final letter, a practice already found in 
the second century, and a few of the conventional abbreviations occur at the ends 
of lines, k for Kai in ix. 25, xiv. 13, xx. 20 and 25, \i for /xeV in xviii. 24 and '^^, 
these being similar to the abbreviations found in e.g. the 'A^Tjra/^coi; IloAireia. 
A peculiar characteristic of this scribe is his tendency (especially at the ends 
of lines) to combine the letters M and H or II and N so that the last vertical stroke 
of the first letter serves also as the first of the second, e.g. la-p.-ifviav in xiii. 10, 
Hrji'cov in xvi. 2, Ti]v in xix. ^6. The beginning of a new section is marked by 
a coronis or paragraphus, a small blank space being left where the transition 
occurs in the middle of a line ; but there are no stops, and only two accents 
(xx. 36, Fr. 45. 3), and a couple of breathings (xi. 2, xx. 32). Diaereses are 
sometimes placed over i and v. In a few cases omitted words or letters have 


been inserted above the line by the scribe himself (xii. 25, xvi. a, xxi. 18 
and '3,'^, Fr. o,'^. 8), but not nearly so often as was desirable, the number of 
words omitted being considerable ; cf. i. 5, note. Some serious corruptions 
occur, e. g. Trpo? Wapvr]v -noXiv for -nap Tap-iroXiv in xv. 26, O^yr^s {sic) for IlepcrTj? 
in XX. 36, ouro) for v-no in xvi. 31 (cf also i. 27, vi. 12, xii. 27, 39, xiv. i^, xx. 31, 
and xxi. 32), and the spelling of proper names is frequently inconsistent, cf. e.g. 
xii. 34-5, note. The second hand, which is responsible for v. i-vi. 27 with 
Frs. 3 and perhaps 16, is smaller and rougher than the first. N at the end 
of a line is often written as a horizontal stroke ; and a diaeresis occurs in v. 44. 
Stops (high points) are freely employed, a slight space being also left to mark 
the pause, and sometimes the space occurs where the stop is omitted ; cf. v. i, 
note. A paragraphus is found in vi. 10 marking a transition which the first 
hand would have ignored. In the margin against v. 45 occurs 8, perhaps 
denoting the 400th hne of the MS. ; cf. note ad loc. Unlike the first scribe, 
the second hand writes t adscript. A slip occurs in vi. 18. With regard to 
the date of the MS., the survey on the recto was, as we have said, written 
about the middle of the second century, and we should ascribe the text on 
the verso to the end of that century or the early part of the third. A late 
third-century date is out of the question. The first hand is not very uniform 
either in the size or spacing of his letters ; at the end of a line they are some- 
times very small and cramped, and the beginnings of lines tend gradually to 
move further to the left as the column proceeds. Hence, though the columns 
measure about 16-7x9 cm. with tolerable regularity, there is much variation in 
the number of lines in a column and the number of letters in a line. Col. i has 
only 37 lines, but Col. ii has 40, Col. iii 43, and Col. iv. 42 (?). In Col. vii the 
number is as high as 45, the scribe being influenced by the more compact writing 
employed by the second hand, who in Col. v, the only extant column entirely 
due to him, reaches the exceptionally large number of 60 lines ; even Col. vi, 
which is divided between the two scribes, has 53. After Col. vii the numbers 
tend to diminish again. Col. viii has 42 lines, Cols, xi-xii, xv, xviii-xxi 39, Cols, 
xiii, xiv and xvii 40, Col. xvi 38. Few lines by the first hand exceed 45 or 
fall below 35 letters, the average being about 40. In vi. 5-27, the only complete 
or nearly complete lines by the second hand, the average is also about 40. Cols, 
i-ii, vi, and xi-xxi, representing about two-thirds of a total of approximately 
800 lines, are well preserved, and in all but a few passages admit of a satisfactory 
restoration of the lacunae. Of Col. iii only about half of each line is extant, and 
in Cols. V, vii, and viii still less, but the sense can occasionally be caught ; Cols, 
iv, ix, and x, however, are hopeless. 

These twenty-one columns are not continuous, but are divided into four 


distinct sections, separated from each other by gaps of uncertain length in which 
several columns are or may be missing. We have called these sections A, B, C, 
and D. A consists of Cols, i-iv, including Frs. i and 2, only i-ii and 
iii-iv being continuous, but that Col. iii with Fr. i follows immediately after 
Col. ii is certain both from internal evidence and from the recto ; cf. iii. 1-5, 
note. Whether the small Fr. 2 belongs to iii. 40-43, as we suppose, is more 
doubtful. B consists of Cols, v-viii with Frs. 3-7, and contains Cols, v, vi and 
the beginnings of lines of vii on the same piece of papyrus. The place of 
Frs. 3, 4, and 7, though separated from the main body of B, is definitely fixed 
(cf. notes on v. 41, vii. 1-2, and viii. 3) ; hence it is certain that Col. viii 
immediately follows vii. That Frs. 5 and 6 belong to Col. vii is practically 
secure, and we have assigned them to 11. 16-24 and 35-41 respectively, but their 
exact position is doubtful ; cf. notes ad loc. C contains only the two quite 
fragmentary Cols, ix and x with Frs. 8-15, which seem to belong to this 
section. D, by far the largest section, has Cols, xi-xxi, which are continuous. 

The first problem that arises is the order of these four sections, which 
unfortunately is in some respects not clear, in spite of the fact that our author 
(whom in order not to prejudice the question of his identity with any known 
historian we henceforth call P) seems to have arranged his work on chronological 
principles almost as strictly as Thucydides and much more carefully than 
Xenophon. That D comes after A and B is certain from internal evidence, for 
it contains (xviii. '>>?> sqq-) the account of the campaign of Agesilaus in the late 
summer and autumn of 395, whereas B narrates (v. 6-vii. 4) his campaign in the 
spring and early summer of the same year, and the general description of 
the anti-Spartan feeling in Greece in A (i. '>^'>, sqq.) must obviously have preceded 
the much more detailed account in D of the Theban intrigues which led first to 
the war with Phocis and then to an open breach with Sparta (xi. 34 sqq.). 
That D comes last of the four sections is also indicated by the land-survey on 
the recto, the writing of which runs in the opposite direction to that of the verso, 
and which accordingly begins on the other side of Col. xxi. For Col. i of the 
land-survey is in a different hand from the rest, and foUow^s a different formula, 
being apparently a register of land ko^' vhaTo<i, and concluding yivo^vTaC) KaO' 
vbaros {&povpai) \//-KTjZtsA/3£6, S>v fj Troo-fta, referring apparently to the following 
detailed survey-list, though only in a few cases is it stated that individual plots 
were under water. Hence the presumption is that the land-survey on the recto 
of A, B, and C comes later than that of D, i.e. that the writing on the verso of 
A, B, and C precedes D. With regard to the position of C (Cols, ix-x), owing 
to its hopelessly mutilated condition there is no internal evidence to guide us, so 
that beyond the presumption just indicated that it precedes D its relation to the 



other sections is wholly uncertain, and it may be placed before A, between 
A and B, or between B and D. Our choice of the last alternative is quite 
arbitrary, and the question is of secondary importance. The main problem with 
regard to the order of the sections concerns A and B — which of these two is to 
be placed first ? The external evidence is conflicting. On the one hand, before 
Col. i of A is a blank margin 4^ cm. in width, whereas the ordinary width of the 
margin between two columns of this papyrus is only i^ cm. Since Col. i. i is 
obviously the beginning of a new chapter it is clear that the broad margin before 
it is no mere accident, and that Col. i is either the absolute beginning of the roll, 
or was intentionally separated widely from preceding columns in order to mark 
the commencement of a new division (probably a new book) of the author's 
work. That the roll originally extended beyond the present starting-point of A 
is known from the land-survey on the recto of the margin of Col. i, which breaks 
off in the middles of lines ; but since no regard would be paid to the writing on 
the recto when the verso came to be used, it is quite possible that the vertical 
fracture down the left edge of the margin of A is the result not of injury 
when the MS. was thrown away, but of design when the verso was prepared 
for use. On the other hand A is written by the second of the two scribes who 
appear in B, so that if A follows B it is necessary to assume only one change 
of hands, whereas if A precedes B it must be supposed that the first scribe 
gave way to the second at some point in the gap between Cols, iv and v 
and then resumed at vi. 27. The hypothesis that B comes first has therefore the 
advantage of greater simplicity, and is supported by the analogy of the land- 
survey, in which we justifiably used the identity of the hand on the recto of 
A, B, and C with the second hand on the recto of D as an argument for 
placing the recto of A-C after D. In fact, the priority of B to A has so 
much prima facie probability that at first and for a long time we adopted that 
sequence ; it was only when we came to examine in detail the historical problems 
connected with A that we decided to place it before B. The relative order of 
these two sections makes a considerable difference to the interpretation of A, 
for since B is known from other sources to refer to the spring and early summer 
of 395, the df:pos in A iii. 9, on which the whole chronology of A depends, must, 
if A comes after B, refer to 395, whereas, if A precedes B, the summer of 396 is 
meant, an earlier year being for various reasons out of the question. A unfortu- 
nately mentions no event of which the precise date is fixed by independent 
evidence, for though the arrival of Conon's reinforcements from Phoenicia 
(iii. 23-7) is also recorded by Diodorus, that historian's account of the naval war 
is too brief and his chronology too uncertain to help in choosing between the 
rival dates for the events recorded in A. The two principal difficulties which 


arise from the attribution of A to 395 instead of 396, and which have therefore 
induced us to place A before B, are discussed in detail in the notes on iii. 9, 21, 
and 23-6. To summarize the results there reached, the view that the ^e'poj in iii. 9 
refers to 395 inevitably leads to the conclusion that the year which P took as 
a kind of fresh starting-point after the close of the Peloponnesian war corresponds 
to the archonship of Micon 402-1, in which no incident of particular note took 
place, whereas the view that the O^pos is that of 396 will make P 's starting-point 
after the war 403-2, approximately the archonship of Euclides, which is a most 
natural and reasonable year to select for the commencement of a fresh epoch. 
Secondly, the hypothesis that A concerns 395 leads to great confusion with 
regard to the Spartan vavapxpi, of whom two seem to arrive in the same summer, 
an inference which can only be avoided by encountering worse obstacles, whereas 
if A refers to 396 all difficulty is removed. Thirdly, the view that A concerns 
396 has the advantage of allowing more time for the change of policy on the 
part of the moderate democrats at Athens with regard to a war with Sparta ; 
cf. i. 16, note. We therefore prefer the arrangement adopted in the text, 
according to which A precedes B and relates to 396 ; and seeing that A in any 
case begins a new division or book, we are disposed to regard it as the actual 
commencement of the whole roll. A parallel for the changes of hands, whereby 
the portion written by a second scribe comes between two portions written by 
the first, is to be found in the MS. of the 'AOrivaiaiv IToAtreia. There the third 
hand, which begins in Col. xx and continues up to the end of the second roll at 
Col. xxiv, is also responsible for the fourth roll containing Cols, xxxi-vii, the 
intervening roll containing Cols, xxv-xxx being written by the fourth hand. 

We proceed to a short analysis of the contents of the papyrus, which for 
the convenience of future reference we have divided into chapters and sec- 
tions, though in the present edition we generally refer to columns and lines 
only. A commences with an account of the sailing from Athens of a trireme 
commanded by a certain Demaenetus without official sanction to assist Conon, 
and the unsuccessful efforts of the Spartan harmost at Aegina to intercept it 
(i. i-iii. 7). This incident, to which a passing allusion occurs in Aeschines 
(cf i. 3, note), is of slight importance ; but the commotion at Athens caused 
by it enables P to give a very interesting description of the attitude towards 
Sparta of the various Athenian parties at the time (i. 9-ii. i), from which he 
diverges into an important excursus upon the origin of the anti-Spartan feel- 
ing in Greece (ii. 1-35). The adjectives used by P in describing the contending 
parties at Athens and his severe judgement upon the extreme democrats, whom 
he not only charges with accepting Persian bribes but with desiring a war with 
Sparta for purely selfish reasons (i. 2,3, note), betray his aristocratic proclivities; 

I 2 


but on the other hand he controverts strongly the theory, no doubt put forward 
by the Spartans, that the mission of Timocrates was instrumental in bringing 
about the anti-Spartan league, and exhibits a considerable historical insight into 
the poHtical situation, of which he takes on the wholea very just view. The first 
of a long series of conflicts with Xenophon occurs in connexion with the date of 
the sending of Timocrates, whom Xenophon (supported by Pausanias and Plutarch) 
represents as dispatched by Tithraustes in the summer of 395, while P connects 
him with Pharnabazus (therein agreeing with Polyaenus), and implies that the 
mission took place much earlier, i.e. in 397 or early in 396. P and Xenophon 
also come into conflict on the question of the acceptance of Timocrates' bribes by 
the Athenians, and the part played by those bribes in bringing about the anti- 
Spartan confedemcy, on both of which points P's version is again, in our opinion, 
superior (i. 33, note). An allusion to Pharax as 6 irporepov vavap^os goes far to solve 
the much disputed problem of the date of that admiral's year of office (i. 30, note). 
The mention of Timolaus in connexion with the opposition to Sparta at Corinth 
gives rise to a digression on some former exploits of his in the Decelean war. 
These are not mentioned by Thucydides, and the fact that the second one, which 
probably occurred just after the latest events recorded by that historian, had 
already been noticed by P probably in its proper chronological position, is an 
important indication of the scope of our author's work (ii. 17, note). 

In iii. 7 begins a new chapter (IV), which starts by recording the commence- 
ment of a new year (the 8th) from the event chosen by P as a fresh point 
of departure after the conclusion of the Peloponnesian war. Unfortunately the 
lacunae, which prevent any continuous restoration of Col. iii after 1. 5, render the 
interpretation of this crucial passage doubtful in several respects, and it is 
not clear whether the ^e'po? with which the new year begins is the spring or mid- 
summer, or what event was taken as the commencement of the epoch. Unless, 
however, A is placed after B (cf. p. 114), the archonship of Euclides (403-3) seems 
to be the first year on the new reckoning, and the ^e'po? is that of 396, not 395 
(iii. 9, note). The rest of Col. iii (11-43) is concerned with the naval war, 
to which P gives great prominence (cf. xi. 1-34, xv. 33-xviii. 33), and of which he 
shows the most detailed knowledge, especially with regard to Conon. He thus 
presents a marked contrast to Xenophon, who after mentioning the stir caused at 
Sparta in the winter of 397-6 by the news of the Persian naval preparations 
{Hell. iii. 4. 1-2) entirely ignores Conon's proceedings until the battle of Cnidus 
in 394 (which itself is only introduced incidentally in iv. 3. 10-14 in connexion with 
the news of it reaching Agesilaus), in order that the stage may be left free for the 
Spartan king. That Xenophon was himself conscious of his deficiency is shown 
by his excuses in iv. 8. j, where he justifies his silence concerning the naval war 


on the ground that he was only describing tO>v TTiid^ecDv ra'i u$]ixnr€VTovi. The 
narrative in Chapter IV is for the most part too incomplete to be intelligible, but 
the arrival of a new Spartan ravap^os, probably PoUis, is chronicled (cf. iii. 21 
note), and at the same time (apparently the summer of 396) Conon, whose head- 
quarters were at Caunus in Caria, receives reinforcements from Phoenicia. This 
event is also referred to by Diodorus in words so similar that they must be 
derived directly or indirectly from P, though probably with an error as to the 
chronology, for Diodorus puts the arrival of the Phoenician ships after the revolt of 
Rhodes, whereas P seems to place the revolt after the arrival of the reinforce- 
ments, which is much more likely to be correct (iii. 23-6, note, where the vexed 
question of the chronology of the naval war is discussed in full). Whether the 
scanty remains of Col. iv, with which A concludes, are also concerned with 
the naval war or deal with a fresh subject is uncertain. The gap between 
A and B need not be very extensive, for apart from Agesilaus' doings in Asia 
no events of much importance took place in 396, unless indeed P took account of 
Sicilian history, which is not probable, and the dispatch of Agesilaus to Asia and 
the early part of the campaign are likely to have been described before Col. i in 
the preceding book or division of P's work. 

B, where it becomes intelligible, begins with an account of Agesilaus' 
campaign in the spring and early summer of 395, which occupies v. 6-vii. 4, 
v. 1-^ being perhaps concerned with his preparations during the winter, but 
possibly with quite a different subject. The narrative is not only more detailed 
than Xcnophon's two accounts of this campaign in the Hcllcnica and Agesilaus^ 
but differs widely from them, particularly as to the disposition of Tissaphcrnes' 
forces, of which the infantry were according to Xenophon sent by mistake to 
Caria, and the nature of the chief engagement which resulted according to both 
authorities in the capture of the Persian camp. On the other hand P agrees 
closely with the somewhat less detailed account of Diodorus, especially with 
regard to Agesilaus' route (v. 8, note), the part taken in the campaign by the 
Persian infantry, on which point Pausanias supports Diodorus (v. 13-6, note), the 
formation of the Greek troops in column (v. 9, note), the description of the ambush 
by which the Greeks secured the victory (v. 59, note), and Agesilaus' withdrawal 
from the interior owing to unfavourable auspices (vi. 30, note). There are some 
discrepancies between P and Diodorus concerning firstly the number of the 
Persian forces (v. 13-6, note) and of the slain (vi. 21, note), and secondly the 
manoeuvres connected with the ambush ; apart, however, from these inconsiderable 
differences there is, except some conventional details added to Diodorus' account 
of the ambush (e. g. the fact that the Greeks raised a paean, as is usual in 
Diodorus' battles), really nothing in his account of this campaign that is not 


found in P. In fact Diodorus' narrative looks like an abridgement of P with 
some variations of the language, which rarely coincides verbally with that of P. 
Whether P's or Xenophon's account is superior in credibility is open to dispute, 
but P's version has considerable claims to acceptance in spite of the fact that 
Xenophon is apparently describing the campaign from first-hand knowledge 
(v. 59, note). The rest of B, vii. 4-viii, 42 (Chapter VIII), deals in most elaborate 
detail with the superseding of Tissaphernes by Tithraustes and the assassination 
of the former, events which are briefly recorded by Xenophon in a few words. 
This chapter is badly mutilated, and no continuous restoration is possible ; but 
enough remains to trace the close agreement between P and firstly Diodorus, who 
again seems to be giving an abridgement of P, and secondly Polyaenus, who is 
fuller than Diodorus but somewhat less detailed than P (vii. 4, 21-5, 36-41, viii. 
18, a I, 26, 27-30, notes). The story told by Nepos that Tissaphernes' replace- 
ment by Tithraustes was brought about by Conon finds no confirmation, and the 
date for Conon's visit to the Persian court indicated by Nepos and supported by 
Pausanias (the winter of 396-5), which has generally been preferred to the date 
implied by Diodorus (the winter of 395-4), is clearly inconsistent with P, who 
probably agreed with Diodorus on this point (vii. 4, note ; cf. xv. 37, note). 
Persian affairs are still under discussion when B breaks off. A later reference to 
the negotiations between Tithraustes and Agesilaus (xviii. 37, note) shows that 
the account of these occurred in the gap between B and D, probably in the column 
following viii. This gap also comprised the earlier portion of the account of the 
revolution at Rhodes, of which the conclusion is extant in Col. xi, but whether 
C, containing the two fragmentary columns ix and x, is rightly placed between 
B and D is wholly uncertain ; cf. pp. 11 3-4. Nothing can be made out of these two 
columns except that in Col. x P seems to be giving an appreciative character- 
sketch of some general or politician whose identity is uncertain (ix. 16, note). 

When D, by far the longest and best preserved section of the papyrus, 
begins, P has reverted to the naval war, xi. 1-34 describing a revolution at 
Rhodes whereby the democrats with the connivance of Conon overthrew the 
existing oligarchic government, which was in the hands of the Diagoreans, one 
of the leading Rhodian families. Xenophon ignores this revolution, to which 
there is a brief allusion in a quotation from Androtion in Pausanias. It has 
hitherto been connected closely with the revolt of Rhodes from Sparta, which is 
mentioned by Diodorus, but P now shows that the two events were by no means 
contemporaneous, the revolution taking place in the summer of 395, the revolt 
from Sparta in the preceding winter or earlier (iii. 23-6, xi. i, notes). The 
mention of the Diagoreans throws an interesting light on the treatment of an 
illustrious member of that family, Dorieus, by the Spartans (xi. 10, note), and 


the reference to Conon's two chief lieutenants, Hicronymus and Nicophemus, 
SLipph'es anotlier point of contact with Diodorus (xi. io-i,note). The cautious 
poHcy of Conon and the moderation displayed by the victorious democrats 
receive due recognition from P, who here shows no trace of an aristocratic bias. 
In xi. 34 the subject changes to the war between Boeotia and Phocis in the 
summer of 395, but this is not actually reached until xiv. 16 sqq., since P enters 
upon a series of digressions. A mention of the state of faction existing at 
Thebes (xi. 35-8) leads to what is the most valuable portion of the whole 
papyrus, a description of the constitution of Boeotia in 395 (xi. 38-xii. 31), 
which settles a number of important and highly disputed questions, and provides 
much new information. The nature of the four boulai referred to by Thucydides 
is explained, and while Kohler is shown to be right in connecting them with the 
four boulai which the oligarchs at Athens wished to set up in 411, the surprising 
fact is now ascertained that these boulai belonged to the individual cities of the 
league, not to the federation as a whole, which had a single boule of 660 
members not invested with the supreme powers of the local boulai. The vexed 
question of the number of the Boeotarchs at the time of the Peloponnesian war 
is fixed at eleven, corresponding to a division of the Boeotians into eleven units, 
and what is still more important, we now have for the first time a complete list 
of the states forming the league and their distribution among the several units, 
according to which they shared the rights and duties of membership of the 
confederation (xi. 38, note). Of special interest are the details concerning the 
Boeotarchs appointed by Thebes (xii. 12-'^, note), Orchomenus (xii. 16, note), 
and Tanagra (xii, 17, note). In xii. 31 P reverts to parties at Thebes, about 
which he shows himself very well informed. The description of the anti-Spartan 
faction is on the whole very impartial, and the analysis of their motives shows 
considerable historical acumen (xiii. 10, note ; cf. xiv. 6 sqq.). A reference to 
the change in the Theban policy caused by the control of public affairs passing 
from the pro-Spartan to the anti-Spartan party leads to another interesting 
digression (xiii. 15 sqq.) upon the causes of the increase of Boeotian prosperity 
in the forty years preceding 395, and this excursus leads on to yet another 
(xiii. 36-xiv. 5) upon the lavish adornment of Attica in the same period. P then, 
after describing the political schemes of the anti-Spartan party (xiv. 6-21), at 
length reaches the origin of the Boeotian war. His account of the intrigues 
from which it arose (xiv. 21-xv. 15) is not only more detailed than Xenophon's, 
but differs in several important particulars — e.g. on the questions whether the 
Locrians concerned in the border dispute were the Opuntian (so Xen.) or 
the Hesperian (so P and Pausanias), whether the first act of aggression came 
from the side of the Locrians (so Xen. and Paus.) or from the Phocians 


(so P), and what methods were employed by the Theban instigators of the war. 
The unsuccessful attempt of the Spartans to settle the dispute peaceably 
(xv. 7-1 1 ), which is recorded by no other historian, puts the policy of Sparta 
with regard to Boeotia in a new light, and this does not harmonize very well with 
the subsequent state of feeling at Sparta as described by Xenophon, whose 
account of the origin of this war is perhaps preferable in some respects to that 
of P (xiv. 21, note). The details of the invasion of Phocis (xv. 15-32) are all 
hew but of no special interest. Incidentally P's treatment of the whole dispute 
between the Phocians and the Locrians provides some important indications that 
he wrote his account before the conclusion, at any rate, of the Sacred War ; 
cf. p. 134. 

In XV. 32-xviii. '^'^ P once more returns to the naval war, and begins 
by recording the arrival (in the late summer) of a hitherto unknown Spartan 
vavapxos Cheiricrates, thereby producing a conflict with Xenophon, who 
represents Pisander as having been appointed vavapxos by Agesilaus at about 
this period (xv. 33, note). An otherwise unrelated visit of Conon to Sardis in 
order to obtain money (xv. 37, note) leads to a digression on the financial 
difficulties experienced by Greeks in the pay of Persia (xvi. 3-15). A passage 
which implies that the Persian empire was still standing shows that this history 
was composed before the conquest of Persia by Alexander (xiv. 3, note). After 
narrating the results of Conon's mission and the departure of Tithraustes for the 
Persian court (xvi. 16-29), P proceeds to describe minutely a mutiny at Caunus 
of Conon's forces upon the return of their commander. This event, which 
nearly led to the dispersion of Conon's fleet, has been passed over by all 
historians except Justin, whose reference to it, though brief, seems to be derived 
indirectly from P (xvi. 29, note). The revolt was ultimately quelled by the 
efforts of Conon, whose irpodvixia receives special praise from our author (xviii. 32). 
In xvi. 33 P reverts to Agesilaus, and describes his campaign in the late summer 
and autumn of 395 up to his arrival at Dascylium, where he passed the winter, 
at which point the papyrus breaks off. Diodorus omits this campaign altogether, 
and, as in the account of the war in the earlier half of the year (v. 6-vii. 4), 
P differs widely from Xenophon, who, omitting the not very exciting incidents 
of Agesilaus' march, concentrates his descriptive powers upon one or two 
episodes which were capable of picturesque treatment, e.g. the negotiations of 
Agesilaus with the king of Paphlagonia and later with Pharnabazus. P, on the 
other hand, gives a plain, straightforward account of the military operations, 
showing considerable acquaintance with the geography of Asia Minor and the 
details of the campaign (xviii. 39, note). When he reaches the Paphlagonian 
incident he devotes only a few lines to it, but manages nevertheless to conflict 


with Xenophon both about the name of the Paphlagonian king (on this point 
being also in disagreement with Theopompus and Nepos), and the method by 
which the negotiations were conducted (xx. 37, note). A description of an 
ambush (xix. 23-39) resembles with slight variations that in v. 59 sqq. Con- 
cerning Spithradates, a Persian noble who deserted to Agesilaus, somewhat less 
information is given than by Xenophon ; but with regard to Spithradates' son 
Megabates P speaks openly of Agesilaus' attachment to him, which is only 
hinted at in the Hdlcnica, though amply illustrated by \\\& Agesilaus (xx. 9, note). 
The papyrus concludes in the middle of a description of an abortive scheme for 
invading Cappadocia, concerning which country erroneous geographical ideas 
prevailed even down to Roman times (xxi. 35-9, note). The unplaced fragments 
(16-72) are too small to give any historical information. 

To summarize the chief characteristics of our author, we have in this papyrus 
a very elaborate and detailed work of a historian of obviously great importance, 
who shows himself equally well informed whether dealing with events in Greece, 
the campaigns of Agesilaus in Asia, or the naval war. In the arrangement 
of his material he has adopted an annalistic method, evidently imitated from 
Thucydides, whereby events are narrated in chronological order and divided into 
years beginning in the ' summer ' (whether spring or midsummer is not clear), 
and he has not grouped together according to subject events separated by any 
considerable distance of time. Hence there are abrupt transitions to and from 
different parts of the world, e. g. the account of the origin of the Boeotian war is 
inserted between two chapters dealing with the naval war. Whether P adhered 
strictly to this chronological arrangement there is not sufficient evidence to show ; 
but so far as the extant portions of his work go, he seems to keep closely to it. 
On the other hand he is extremely fond of digressions, whether excursions into 
earlier history, e.g. the exploits of Timolaus and the rise of Theban prosperity, 
or general descriptions which serve to illustrate the background of the events 
which he is recording, e. g. the sketch of the constitution of Boeotia. These 
digressions, though adding greatly to the interest and variety of P's work, are 
seldom very relevant, and cause serious interruptions to the narrative. How 
easily he was led on from one excursus to another is well illustrated, firstly by 
i. 20 sqq., where, starting from the privateering expedition of Dcmaenetus, he 
reaches the achievements of the Corinthian Timolaus in the Decelean war through 
the intermediate stages of the origin of the anti-Spartan feeling first at Athens, 
then in Greece in general, and at Corinth in particular, — secondly by xii. 31 sqq., 
where, from the war between Boeotia and Phocis, he proceeds through the de- 
scription of parties at Thebes, the causes of the previous preponderance of the 
aristocrats and the growing prosperity of Thebes, to a sketch of the flourishing 


condition of Attica prior to the fortification of Decelea. With regard to the 
scope of his work, it is clear that it included, besides the events of 396 and 395, 
the history of the seven years between 396 and the close of the Peloponnesian war, 
the year 403-2, corresponding approximately to the archonship of Euclides, being 
taken by P as marking a kind of epoch. That his history, howev^er, did not begin 
with 403-2, but comprised that portion of the Peloponnesian war which Thucy- 
dides did not live to narrate, is rendered probable by the reference to a former 
description of an incident of B.C. 411 in ii. 27. Since events prior to 411 are 
several times mentioned, but in no case with a reference to a former description of 
them, there is a strong presumption that P's history began where Thucydides' 
left off, and was intended to be a continuation of it. To what point beyond 395 
the narrative was carried there is no internal evidence to show, except that which 
indicates the period of the composition of the work itself. The description of the 
constitution of Boeotia, which is contrasted with the conditions existing in the 
writer's own day, was certainly written after 387, when at the peace of Antalcidas 
the Boeotian league underwent considerable changes. On the other hand the 
fact that the Persian empire is spoken of in terms implying that it was still 
standing (cf. p. 120), proves that P's history was not written later than 330, and 
the use of the present tense in regard to the border disputes between Phocis 
and Locris, coupled with the absence of any reference to the Sacred War which 
resulted in the destruction of the Phocians, indicates that P's work was com- 
posed before the conclusion of that war in 346, to say nothing of the general 
probability that an author so well informed (cf. e. g. the extremely minute 
description of the mutiny in xvi. 29 sqq., which is likely to have been obtained 
from an eyewitness) was not writing more than a couple of generations later than 
the events which he narrates. It is therefore possible that the history reached 
a point some twenty or thirty years later than 395, but considering its elaborate 
scale this is not at all likely, and there is nothing to suggest that it went further 
than the battle of Cnidus in 394, with which Theopompus' Hellenica concluded. 
That P's sympathies were aristocratic not democratic, and therefore on the 
whole with Sparta, is shown by his description of the parties at Athens, particularly 
his opinion of the motives influencing the extreme section of the democrats. In 
his account also of the intrigues which led to the Boeotian war he seems to 
acquiesce in the Spartan claims to the hegemony of Greece at this period. But 
so far from laying himself open to the charge of exaggerated partisanship, 
P compares favourably with Xenophon by his impartiality. While admitting 
(probably rightly) the fact of the acceptance of Persian gold by the Athenians in 
common with the Thebans, Argives, and Corinthians, he expressly defends those 
states from the accusation of Medizing, by controverting the pro-Spartan view 


and minimizing the extent to which the mission of Timocrates was responsible 
for creating the anti-Spartan league. The moderation of the section of the 
Athenian democratic party headed by Thrasybulus and Anytus and of the 
victorious democrats at Rhodes is plainly recognized, and it is noteworthy that 
the leaders of the anti-Spartan faction at Thebes are classed among the (HKtkttoi 
Koi yvo)pi[X(oTaTot no less than their opponents. Of an anti-Theban bias, which is 
so marked in Xenophon, there is no trace ; and it is clear that P wished to do 
full justice to the chief enemy and destined conqueror of Sparta. A still more 
remarkable example of his fairness towards Sparta's enemies is the prominence 
assigned by him to Conon, who figures no less conspicuously than Agesilaus, 
while there is a noticeable contrast between the dry and unenthusiastic catalogue 
of Agesilaus' achievements, which evoke hardly a word of praise, and the more 
lively narrative of the incidents of the naval war with its outspoken expression of 
admiration for Conon's skill in overcoming difficulties (xviii. 32). Nothing illus- 
trates P's merits as a historian and his superiority to Xenophon better than the 
correct perspective in which he draws the two chief actors on his stage, refusing 
to allow the brilliant and showy but ultimately fruitless triumphs of Agesilaus in 
the East to obscure the slow but in the end successful steps by which Conon 
destroyed the Spartan sea power and restored Athens to a position among the 
leading Greek states. 

A characteristic of P, which separates him from most Greek historians, 
is his dislike of rhetoric and apparent avoidance of speeches, of which there is 
only one consisting of but nine words (xi. 22-3), so that he almost seems to 
have taken the eighth book of Thucydides as his model. Allowance must, 
however, be made not only for the fact that the events recorded in the extant 
fragments do not offer any very favourable opportunities for inserting speeches 
(even Thucydides in Books i-vii and Xenophon have long sections without 
them), but also for the possibility that speeches occurred in the lost portions of 
P's history. His seeming divergence from the common method of employing 
speeches to indicate motives and illustrate situations is compensated by a frequent 
analysis of causes, which shows much historical insight into the politics of the 
early fourth century, e.g. the discussions of the growth of anti-Spartan feeling in 
Greece, and of the policy of the anti-Spartan party at Thebes. That our author 
was sparing in comments, whether of approval or of the reverse, upon the actions 
of his characters is clear ; it is unfortunate that the only passage in which he 
seems to have entered on a general criticism of some one's character is hopelessly 
mutilated (Col. x). 

While P's excellences as a narrator of facts, his wealth of information, his 
impartiality, his acuteness of judgement, and his seriousness, entitle him to very 


high place among Greek historians, it is impossible to award much praise to his 
style. This, though correct and easy, is somewhat frigid, colourless, and verbose, 
rather like that of Polybius, and its monotonous flow is but seldom stirred to 
a little life, as in the descriptions of the democratic rising at Rhodes, the 
mutiny of Conon's troops, and the adornment of Attica. So far from displaying 
any richness of vocabulary, he is decidedly careless about repeating words at 
very short intervals, and shows a marked fondness for certain expressions, e.g. 
fiabiCeiv, TTopo^vvdv, and Tvyxavetv with a participle in place of the simple verb. 
(jL€v , . . 6e are wont to recur with dull regularity, and the tendency to overload 
sentences with participles and parentheses, e.g. xiv. 8-16, sometimes produces 
a heavy effect. Some words and phrases recall Polybius, e.g. (raiy ttoAco-i) toXs 
TTpotip-qixivais (ii. 32), 7rXrjy7j (xv. 20, xix. 25), KaraC^v^as (xix. 18). With xapUvTis 
in i. 9 cf. Ar. Pol. Z 5, 1320 b 7. The nearest parallel to the curious expression 
/SoTjo-aiTos iKiivov Ti]v [l3o]i]d€iav in xi. 23 is^oai; aKparov in Menander Fr. 510 (Kock). 
The hypothesis that he wrote his work later than 346 is excluded by internal 
evidence (cf. p. 122), and the style does not suggest a much earlier date. Hiatus 
is as a rule avoided, even at the cost of producing an unnatural order of words, 
e.g. ii. 34 k-n-qpixivoi p.icre'iv ri(Tav tovs AaKfbaLixovCovs, and xi. 22 tcapav w avbpes, €<py], 
TToklrat,, (ttI tovs Tvpdvvovs. Eight instances, however (cf. i. 4, note), of hiatus 
occur, and though most of these can be got rid of without difficulty by slight 
alterations of the text, we have preferred to allow them to stand. The avoidance 
of hiatus proves little as regards the date of composition, for it is common to the 
Isocrateans, Polybius, and even Plutarch. 

Turning to P's relation to other historians, everything in the papyrus leads 
to the conclusion that he was quite independent of Xenophon, and it is not even 
certain that Xenophon's Hellenica was published before P wrote his work, for 
the Helletiica is now generally supposed to have been issued between 360 and 
350, and the limits within which P composed his history are 387 and 346 ; 
cf. p. 122. If the Hellenica was published first, P shows a complete disregard 
for it, not only describing much that Xenophon had omitted, but frequently 
conflicting with him where the two writers cover the same ground. P may even 
have intended his work to be a contrast to Xenophon's onesided and unsatisfac- 
tory account. With Diodorus P exhibits a remarkably close connexion ; Diod. xiv. 
80, which describes Agesilaus' campaign in the early part of 395 and the super- 
session of Tissaphernes, is practically an abridgement of v-viii, and with regard 
to the naval war also Diodorus (xiv. 79. 4-8) has obtained his scanty details from 
P, though in the process apparently disturbing the sequence of events. The 
question whether the use of P by Diodorus was direct or indirect we postpone 
until we reach the question of P's identity (cf. pp. 135-7), but we may remark that 


with the discovery of P the criticism of Diod. xiii and xiv in any case enters on 
a new phase. Another late writer with whom P exhibits some noteworthy cases 
of agreement, though to a less extent than with Diodorus, is Polyaenus, whose 
account of the removal of Tissaphernes {Sirat. vii. 16) seems to be an abridge- 
ment of vii-viii, and who alone of ancient writers agrees with P in associating 
the mission of Timocrates with Pharnabazus instead of with Tithraustes, though 
it is possible that this may be due to an accident (i. '^t,, note). Pausanias, too, 
presents some points of connexion with P, but generally mingled with points of 
difference. Thus he agrees with P that Epicrates and Cephalus took Persian 
gold (i. 33, note), and like P associates Amphitheus (whom he calls Amphithcmis) 
with Ismenias and Androclidas (xii. 34-5, note); but on the date of Pisander's 
appointment as vavapyo^ (xv. 33, note) and that of Timocrates' mission and its 
effects he agrees with Xenophon against P, the view which Pausanias accepted 
being expressly controverted in ii, i sqq. Again with regard to the origin of 
the Boeotian war Pausanias agrees with P against Xenophon that the Locrians 
concerned were the Hesperian, not the Opuntian ; but the embassy of the 
Athenians mentioned by Pausanias is not at all likely to have occurred in 
P's narrative, and Pausanias, like Xenophon, makes the Locrians the aggressors. 
On the question whether Tissaphernes' infantry took part in the campaign round 
Sard is Pausanias agrees with P against Xenophon, but his allusion to it is very 
brief, and that he himself used P in composing iii. 9 is most unlikely, though P 
may have to some extent influenced Pausanias' sources. The only ancient 
historian who mentions the mutiny of Conon's troops described in xvi. 29 sqq. is 
Justin, whose reference though brief seems to be derived ultimately from P. 
In the other late writers we have been unable to detect any trace of P's 
influence. With Nepos P comes into conflict both concerning the nature of 
the campaign of 395 and the date of the visit of Conon to the Persian court 
and his responsibility for the dismissal of Tissaphernes, and also in regard to the 
name of the Paphlagonian king, while Plutarch in his Agesilaus closely follows 
Xcnophon's account of the campaign of 395, ignoring P altogether, and neither 
his Lysander nor his Artaxerxes betray any use of our author. 

Such being in brief the evidence concerning the character of P's history, the 
way is now clear for the discussion of the most interesting problem of all — can 
he be identified with any of the known historians of the fourth century ? For 
the authorship of so important a historical work the first names that naturally 
suggest themselves are those of the two famous pupils of Isocrates, Ephorus 
of Cyme and Theopompus of Chios. The close agreement between P and 
Diodorus at once suggests an identification with Ephorus, whose history is known 
to have been used by Diodorus in Book xiv ; cf. 98. 2 'A/ia^ovcrioi h\ koI 2oAiot 


Kol Ktneis olvt^xovt^^ rw iroXe^xiD with Ephorus Fr. 1 34 'A/ia^ovo-toi 8e /cat SoAtot xat 
'llrteij ayre'xorre? In t<5 iroXeixio. Moreover, Hieronymus, one of Conon's lieu- 
tenants, who is stated by Harpocration to have been mentioned in Books xviii 
and xix of Ephorus (cf. Diod. xiv. 81. 4), occurs in xi. 10, and the spelling 
*AKpaL(f)viov instead of 'AKpaL(f)iov in xii. 20 is in accordance with Ephorus' use 
(Fr. 67) of the adjectives 'AKpai(pvios and ' AKpai(f)VL(oTr}s. Neither of these 
coincidences, however, is really very striking, for any historian of this period who 
(unlike Xenophon) described the naval war in detail would be bound to mention 
Hieronymus, and Harpocration expressly says that other (unspecified) historians 
did so, while the insertion of the v in 'AKpaC(pLov and its derivatives occurred 
in Theopompus also and was probably a common practice outside Boeotia. 
Some characteristics of P would suit Ephorus very well; e.g. his intimate know- 
ledge of Asia Minor, with which country Ephorus, whose home was at Cyme 
and who was a good geographer, must have been well acquainted, his proneness 
to digressions, of which Ephorus was fond (cf. Polyb. xii. 28 beivoTaros eorty 
(V rats irap^K^aaiai), and his full information concerning Theban affairs, which is 
thought to have characterized Ephorus also (Busolt, Gr. Gesch. iii. p. 710). 
P's divergence from Xenophon and points of agreement with other later writers 
besides Diodorus, e.g. Pausanias, Justin, and Polyaenus, would be in accordance 
with the views of modern critics concerning the relation of these authors to 
Ephorus ; cf. e. g. E. Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. s.v. Ephoros, 
pp. 11-2, Melber, Jahrb. d. Class. Philol. Supplementbd. xiv. pp. 419 sqq., 
Busolt, op. cit., iii. pp. 245 sqq., though the explanation of divergences in late 
writers from Thucydides and Xenophon by reference to Ephorus has in our 
opinion often been carried too far. For forming an opinion upon Ephorus' style 
the extant fragments which very rarely quote his actual words afford but slight 
material ; the awkward repetition of the words AepKvAiSai- €T:ep.\\rav after a brief 
interval (Fr. 130 from Book xviii) recalls P's carelessness in that respect (cf. p. 124), 
and there is at any rate no marked discrepancy of style between the extant 
fragments of Ephorus and P. The judgements of ancient critics who regarded 
Ephorus' style as smooth but tame are by no means inappropriate to P ; cf. 
Cicero Hortens. Fr. 1 2 quid . . . Ephoro mitius inveniri potest^ Brut. 204 lenis- 
simuni Ephori ingetthan ; Dion. Chrys. xvii. p. 283 "E^opo? h\ ttoKXi^v p.^v laropiav 
"napahihuxTiv to b' vtttiov koX aveip-^vov croi rrjs airayyeXLas ovk €7nTi]beiov. The con- 
trast between him and Theopompus is frequently drawn, e. g. in the well-known 
saying of Isocrates that the latter required the bit, the former the spur, and if it 
were necessary to identify P with one of these two the argument from style 
would be all in favour of Ephorus. On the other hand some of the charac- 
teristics ascribed by ancient critics to Ephorus are not illustrated by P, e. g. his 


fondness for moral reflexions (cf. Polyb. /. c. rats d(/>' avrov yi'co/ioAoyiaij) and his 
use of speeches (cf Plutarch, 71/^?^ 803 b, quoted on p. 132) ; and if modern 
criticism (cf e. g. Busolt, Gr. Gesch. iii. p. 707) is right in supposing that Ephorus 
was a pronounced partisan of Athens and opponent of Sparta, and that he 
abandoned altogether the annalistic arrangement adopted by Thucydides, group- 
ing events together according to subject without sharp chronological distinctions, 
in both these features he differed from P, whose work moreover attains a higher 
degree of historical value than critics have generally been disposed to allow 
to Ephorus. It is difficult for instance to believe that P could have written any- 
thing so unreasonable as Ephorus' account of the causes of the Peloponnesian 
war. But the really fatal objection to the identification of P with Ephorus, and 
one which caused Blass, who was at first disposed to favour that view, to reject 
it decisively, is that Ephorus wrote a universal history, which, although it became 
more detailed as he approached his own times, can hardly have described with 
very great minuteness the period covered by P, whereas not only is P's narrative 
extremely elaborate (compared with the parallel portions of Xenophon P is 
much longer), but there are distinct indications in the work itself that it began at 
the point where Thucydides broke off and not earlier (cf. p. 116). Hence in 
spite of the remarkable agreement between P and Diodorus, we have no hesitation 
in rejecting the view that Ephorus is the author of the papyrus, and the same 
objection to the identification of P with Ephorus is equally fatal to his identifi- 
cation with Anaximenes or any other fourth-century writer of a universal history. 
The primary condition which must be satisfied with regard to the authorship of 
P's work is that the historian whose claims are put forward wrote a continuation 
of Thucydides on a very elaborate scale. 

That condition is fulfilled by Theopompus, whose Hellenica in twelve books 
began where Thucydides left off, and ended with the battle of Cnidus in 394, as 
is known from Diod. xiii. 42, xiv. 84, and Theopompus is in fact regarded by 
both E. Meyer and Wilamowitz-Mollendorff as the author of the papyrus, 
though that hypothesis was unhesitatingly rejected by Blass. Of Theopompus' 
Hellenica, which was certainly written before the same historian's more famous 
and longer work, the P/iilippica, only about twenty fragments survive, of which 
only four (nos. 7, 15, 15 ^, and 23) consist of more than a few words. The events 
from 411 up to the close of the war seem to have been related comparatively 
briefly, for already in Book ii there occurs a reference to a Lacedaemonian har- 
most who has generally been thought to have been appointed by Lysander, 
though that inference is not certain. After this, however, the history became much 
more detailed : Book viii, from which the names of certain places in Bithynia are 
quoted by Stephanus Byz., no doubt contained the accounts of the campaign of 


Dercylidas in 398-7. The solitary extant quotation from Book ix cannot be 
dated precisely, but Book x included a character-sketch of Lysander emphasizing 
his moderation (Athen. xii. p. 543), a passage which is also referred to by Plutarch 
{Lysand. 30), who introduces it in connexion with Lysander's death. Hence 
it is probable, as Meyer remarks, that in Theopompus also the sketch occurred 
at the point where he described Lysander's death at the battle of Haliartus. 
Since this event took place in the autumn of 395 and the concluding chapters of 
P narrate Agesilaus' campaign in the same autumn, while the battle of Haliartus 
has yet to be related, it is clear that Cols, xi-xxi, assuming that Athenaeus has 
quoted the number of the book correctly, cannot come from a later book 
than X. That they would, if Theopompus were the author, belong to Book x 
not to Book ix is made probable by the statement of Porphyry [ap. Euseb. Praep. 
Evang. p. 465) that Theopompus' account of the negotiations between Agesilaus 
and Pharnabazus corresponding to Xen. Hell. iv. i. 29-40 (cf, p. 120) occurred in 
Book xi ; for these negotiations took place in the winter of 395-4 soon after the 
events recorded in Col. xxi, and it is unlikely that the narrative of events in 
Greece in the autumn of 395 occupied a whole book. Cols, i-x might still come 
from Book ix, but since there is some reason to believe that Col. i commences 
a new book (cf. p. 115), it is more satisfactory to refer Cols, xi-xxi to the same 
book. In that case Book x of Theopompus' Hellenica would comprise an 
account of events from the expedition of Demaenetus in the first half of 396 
(cf. p. 115) down to the end of the year 395, the battle of Haliartus falling near 
the conclusion of this book, and the negotiations of Agesilaus with Pharnabazus 
near the beginning of the next. This would lead to the difficulty that Books 
xi and xii together would cover only the period from about January 394 to 
August (the approximate date of the battle of Cnidus is fixed by an eclipse), 
and even allowing for considerable digressions and the possible recital of events 
in other parts of the world such an arrangement seems disproportionate. The 
difficulty could be avoided by assigning Cols, xi-xxi to Book xi and assuming 
either that the sketch of Lysander referred to by Athenaeus occurred in Book x 
not in connexion with the battle of Haliartus or else that Athenaeus has erred in 
referring the passage in question to Book x instead of to Book xi. But Fr. 23 
of Theopompus from Book xi seems to relate to the homeward march of 
Agesilaus from the Hellespont, which is likely to have been narrated in the book 
following that to which Cols, xi-xxi would belong, so that it is preferable 
to suppose that these columns would be part of Book x. Book xii is in any case 
something of a mystery. No quotations from it are extant, and possibly Suidas 
was right in stating that the Hellenica contained only eleven books. 

The hypothesis that P's important work, which continued Thucydides' 


history and has clearly had a large influence upon later historians, is to be 
identified with a known continuation of Thucydides written by a historian of the 
first rank, who was undoubtedly much used by his successors in the same field, 
possesses obvious advantages and, especially when it comes to be advocated 
by Meyer in his own words, is sure to find wide acceptance. The positive 
arguments by which he in agreement with Wilamowitz-MoUendorff supports it 
against the rival theory of Blass, to be discussed later, are in the main as follows. 
Firstly, Theopompus, who as a child was exiled with his father from Chios on 
account of the latter's philo-Laconian views, is known to have been an aristocrat 
and on the whole in favour of Sparta as against Athens (cf. e.g. Fr. 17), though 
as would be expected from so great a historian, his personal feelings did not 
lead him into violent partisanship — witness his censure of the Spartans in the 
abstract of PJiilippica xii preserved by Photius ws ^\Q^]valuiv fj ttoAis rals trpdi 
[3a(Tt\4a (Tvi'di]Kais (TTdparo (fxfxiveiv, AaK^baiixovLoi 6c v-nepoyKa ffypovovvres TrapifSaivov 
Ta9 avvOi'jKas (cf Blass' defence of Theopompus from the charge of extreme 
partiality in A if. Bereds. ii. pp. 415 sqq., and for a much less favourable view 
of Theopompus E. Schwartz, Hermes xxxv. pp. 109-10). This combination 
of aristocratic leanings with a sincere desire for truth corresponds, as Meyer 
thinks, to the attitude adopted by P, especially in his account of parties at 
Athens. Secondly, there is no reason to suppose that the characteristic 
vigour and eloquence of Theopompus were displayed in ordinary narrative 
such as that which occupies so large a part of the papyrus, and in fact the 
extant fragments of the Hellenica are not dissimilar in style from P. Of 
these the four largest are: (i) Fr. 7 h.vt]y^6y](Tav ets XaXKTjoo'm ku\ ^vC,avTiov 
ixera rod Xoittov arparevixaTos ^ouAo'/xerot Xpva-OTToXw Karao-xeiy (for ivdyeaOni 
cf i. 7 ; orparev/xa occurs frequently in P) ; (2) Fr. 15 a avaKOLvovvrai to^v 

'Q.pU)1TL(t)V TtjA€0&) KoL TOtS fJLCT €K(U'OV /3ouAo/AerOlS Koi TOV 'XlpcOTroy V1Tdp\€l,V ai/TOLS 

(for /xera in preference to (tvv cf. vi. 17, &c., and for the historic present 
xvi. 20, xvii. 17, &C.) ; (3) Fr. 15 to be tQu elXwrcov edvo^ TTavTaTracnv (i/jta)!> 
SioKeirai kqI ttik/jw?. etcri yap ovtol KoreSeSouAco/xe'roi ttoXvv ijbi] \p6vov vtto T(t>v 
^irapTiaTcov, oi fxkv avTcov ck Meaarivr]s ovres 01 6' lAedrai KaroiKOvvTfs irporepov to 
KaXovpievov "EA09 ttjs AaKoyvLKTJi (cf. e.g. xiv. 25 sqq. ; e^ro?, biaKelcrdai., and ro 
KaXoviJLevov are words of frequent occurrence in P ; with the inversion ci/xois 
hioLKeiTai KOL TTiKpu>s to avoid hiatus with the following etVt cf. ii. 34 and xi. 22) ; 
(4) Fr. 23 (from He/l. xi and Philip, xiii according to Athen. xiv. p. 657) koI 01 
000-101 eTT€ix\l/av 'AyrjcrtAaoj TrpomoiTt irpo^iara koX fiovs ev redpamxivovi Ttpos tovtois 
5c Kai "niiifxara koX Tpayr]\xaTOiv iXho'i -navToha-nov. 6 8' 'AyjjcriAao? to. y.\v irpofSaTa Kal 
TO? j3ovi cXa^ev, to, 8c TTip.p.aTa koX to. Tpayrjixara TtputTov ixev ovS' cy^'co, /caTCKCKaAvTrro 
yap' u>s 8c Kareibev airoipepav avTovs CKcAcvo-ey, ciiTiav ov vofxiixov cirat AaK(bat.[xovioLS 



\pri(rdai roiovroi? roi? eSeV/uaa-i. XLirapoviTOiV be tG)v Qaaioyv, bore, (/jtjcti, (f)€povT€s (Kftvots, 
bei^as avTols tovs etAcoras, eiTrwv ort tovtovs Se'ot bia^diip^aQai rpc^yovTas avra tto\v 
jxaXXov 7) avTov koi rev's Trapovras AaKebatixovicov (the structure of the sentence 
6 8' 'Ayr^a'iXaos k.t.X. is particularly like the style of P). This argument for the 
general similarity of the style of the Helle7iica with that of P can, we may 
remark, be supplemented by the occurrence of certain linguistic agreements 
between P and Theopompus, including two possible references to extant 
portions of P in quotations from Theopompus (p. 131). Thirdly, enough is known 
about the contents of the Philippica, particularly from the abstract of Book xii 
preserved by Photius, to show that Theopompus was extremely prone to 
digressions on all kinds of subjects, many of them very remotely connected with 
his main narrative, a feature which is notably prominent in P also (cf. p. 121). 
Fourthly, several points in the probably just criticism of Theopompus as 
a historian by Dionysius of Halicarnassus [Ep. ad Cn. Pomp. pp. 782-7) apply 
very well to P, Thus Dionysius speaks of both Hellenica and Philippica as 
being (i-napaKoXovdi]Toi koL cra^eis, and praises the careful and diligent preparations 
which Theopompus had made in collecting materials and obtaining information, 
and the wide range of subjects treated (to 'noXviJ.op(f)ov rrjs ypacfifjs), which included 
descriptions of states, laws, constitutions (-TToAtretcSi^ cxTj/ixara ; cf. P's excursus on 
the constitution of Boeotia), important individuals, &c. Dionysius specially 
singles out as Theopompus' most remarkable characteristic, which distinguished 
him from both older and younger historians, his deep insight into causes and 
power of psychological analysis, to Kad' eKdarriv Trpa^iv jutj fxovov to. (f)avepa tois 
TToXXoh opav Kal Xiytiv, hXXa i^era^eLv /cat tols acpavels airias t&v TTpd^ewv Koi tQv 
TTpa^dvTiov avTOis Kal to. TrdOr} ttjs ^I'X'i^ ^ M^? pqbia rot? ttoXXoIs elbfvai, kqI Travra 
€KKaXvTTTeiv TO. fxv(rTi]pia Trjs n bonovcr-qs dpeTrj^ koi rrjs ayvoox^p.ivr]s KUKias . . . bid Kai 
j3d(rKavos (bo^ev dvai, with which description may be compared the penetrating 
analysis of the motives of the various anti-Spartan parties in i. ^^ sqq. and of 
the policy of Ismenias' party at Thebes in xii. 37-xiv. 21. Fifthly, that 
Theopompus' works were serious histories like that of P, and very far from being 
over-rhetorical, is shown by the unfavourable verdict passed upon him by one of 
his successors, Duris of Samos, a writer who sacrificed historical accuracy to 
mere effect, "Eipopos be koI Q^ottoixttos twv yevoixivmv TrXela-TOv OTreAei^^rjo-ay, ovre 
yap fxipL'qaecos [xeTeXa^ov ovbepnas ovtc ijbovrji kv tw cf)pd(Tat, avrov bt tov ypd(f)€ii' p.6vov 
(T;eij.(X-)]6r]<Tav. Sixthly, the blame passed on Theopompus in common with 
Ephorus and Timaeus by Polybius (xii. 25/. 6) for his want of knowledge in 
describing battles would accord with the suspiciously conventional character of 
the account of the two ambuscades in v. 59 sqq. and xix. 22 sqq. 

The combined weight of Meyer's arguments, of which the first three seem 


to us the strongest, is undoubtedly considerable, and we can reinforce them 
by several linguistic coincidences of which the last two are particularly striking, 
and perhaps provide direct evidence of P's identity with Theopompus. Of 
P's favourite expressions (cf. p. 124) rvyxdvecv with a participle in place of the 
simple verb occurs in Theop. Fr. 149, -napo^vrnv in Fr. 100, while xwpCov , . . 
KaTi(TK€va(T\xivov KakGi's is found both in xx. 30 (Kaxcos Pap. by an error) and 
Theop. Fr. '^•^. The agreement of P with Theopompus as to the insertion of 
V in the name 'kKpai^Lov (cf. ' AKpaicpvCov xii. 20, note) proves little, for Ephorus 
used the forms ' AKpaicfyvios and 'AKpaLcfiVKOTi-js (cf. p. 126) and the insertion of v was 
probably common ; moreover, Stephanus Byz. ascribes the form 'AKpaL(f)vtov to 
Pausanias, and (tcl) 'A/cpat^z'ta to Theopompus. Similarly the circumstance that 
Theopompus' description of Mesogis and Celaenae (Fr. 290) is in accordance 
with vi. 45-vii. 2 (cf. note ad loc), that of Parapotamii (Fr. 264) with xv. 17-8, is 
of slight account. But the occurrence in xviii. 39 (cf. viii. 22) of the verb KarapaL 
in the rather rare sense of eXddv, a use which is attributed to Theopompus 
(Fr. 327) by a grammarian in Bekk. Anecd. p. 104. 15, is significant in any case, 
and it is possible that this passage in P was the grammarian's authority, while 
a still more noteworthy coincidence between P and Theopompus is found in con- 
nexion with the form KapTrao-evs (xvi. 37, xvii. 16), meaning a man of Carpasus (in 
Cyprus). Steph. Byz. s. v. KapTrao-ia remarks 6 TtoKirqs KapTrao-cwrTj? . . . /cat rd 
KTiiTLKOv KapiraaeoiTiKos Kai KapTrao-ecorUTj a/cpa. QeoTTOfxiros ev bcKari^ Kap-acrels avrovi 
<f>i)cnv. to-cos and tov Kdpiracro^ W9 'AvTto\os 'AvTio)(ivs, cicf)' ov Kapiraa-^vs- It has been 
generally assumed that the 10th Book in question belonged to the more com- 
monly quoted Philippica rather than to the Hellenica, and C. Muller explains it 
{Fr. Hist. Gr. Theop. Fr. 93) by the supposition that the Carpasians were 
mentioned in connexion with Cimon's expedition to Sicily, Cimon being men- 
tioned in another fragment (94) of Phil. Book x. But both the assumption and 
the suggested explanation are mere guesses, and if the loth Book belongs to 
the Hcllenica the agreement with P is very remarkable, for, as we have shown 
(p. i^H), Cols, xi-xxi, if not the whole of the papyrus, would belong to that 
Book. This coincidence may indeed seem to clinch the argument for the 
identification of P with Theopompus, but before deciding in favour of that view 
it is necessary to examine the objections to it. 

In the first place P and Theopompus seem to disagree as to the name of the 
Paphlagonian king, who is called Fv)/? in xxi. 11 but &m by Theopompus accord- 
ing to Athenaeus, while Nepos, who is no doubt following Theopompus, calls 
him Thuys (xx. 37, note). Meyer evades the difficulty by supposing a corruption 
in the papyrus, which is admittedly not very trustworthy, especially as to proper 
names. But Fvtjs is not in itself an unlikely form for an Asiatic name which, as 

K 2 


the variations of it in Xenophon (KoVus and "Otvs) show, could not be repre- 
sented satisfactorily in Greek, and the apparent disagreement between P and 
Theopompus is prima facie evidence against the identity of the two. Secondly, 
according to Porphyry «/>. Eusebius, Praep. Evang. p. 465 b-c Theopompus in his 
Hellenica plagiarized from Xenophon {■noKka tov Sevo(f)(ivTos avTov \iiTarLdivTa 
KaT€iXri(f)a) and in the iith Book jjnTaOels apyd re koI aKivi-jTa ireiToiriKc kol airpaKTa 
the account of the negotiations between Agesilaus and Pharnabazus which 
Xenophon [Hell. iv. l. 29-40) had described rk6LVv yapiivrui's /cat TTpeTiovTws ap.4>olv. 
It is very unfortunate that the papyrus breaks off shortly before that episode was 
reached, but the total disregard of Xenophon exhibited in the extant portions of 
P renders it improbable that he borrowed from that author, and though, as Me)'-er 
remarks, Xenophon is likely to have been the only historian who could describe 
those negotiations from first-hand knowledge, the divergence between P and 
Xenophon in regard to the treatment of the earlier negotiations between Agesilaus 
and the king of Paphlagonia (xx. 37, note), for the details of which Xenophon 
was equally in all probability the sole first-hand authority, renders it in our 
opinion very difficult to believe that P used Xenophon's account when describing 
the negotiations with Pharnabazus. Hence if P is Theopompus, the general 
charge of plagiarism from Xenophon brought against him by Porphyry must cer- 
tainly be dismissed, and it would, we think, be preferable to explain the specific 
instance alleged as also due to a misunderstanding. Whether Porphyry carries 
very much weight on a question of literary criticism may be doubted, but his 
evidence, so far as it goes, distinctly tells against the identification of P with 
Theopompus. Thirdly, the absence of speeches in P offers a point of contrast with 
Theopompus, who certainly employed them, as is shown not only by the censure 
passed upon him in common with Ephorus and Anaximenes by Plutarch Mor. 
803 b (ttI be T&v 'E<|). KoX ©eow. koI 'Ava^. pr]Top€iS>v koI irepiobcov hs Trepaivovaiv 
i^oT;Xl(TavT€s to. arpaT€vp.aTa kul TrapaTa^avTes ecrrti' eiTreiy* ovbels (ribrjpov ravra ixoopaCvei. 
TTeXas, but by two recently discovered fragments of the ^iXLinnKd (Didymus, 
Pe Demosth. Conim., ed. Diels and Schubart, pp. 19 and '>^^). It is possible 
however that the absence of speeches in P is due to accident; cf. p. 123. 
Fourthly, P's account of Agesilaus does not accord at all well with what is 
known of the treatment of him in Theopompus. That the latter had a very 
high admiration for Agesilaus is clear from the fact that Plutarch quotes his 
praise (kcI p-eyia-Tos p-ev i)i> opoXoyovpevoos kol t&v t6t€ C^vT(a)V kuKpavicTTaTO's, 0)9 
i'iprjKi TTov KOI ©eoTTo/xTToy), and the rather trivial anecdote preserved in Fr. 23 
from Hell, xi, and probably in a slightly different form in P/iil. xiii (cf. 
p. 129) recalls the stories about Agesilaus which Xenophon tells of his hero. 
P on the other hand shows no tendency to illustrate the personal character 


of Agcsilaus nor any enthusiasm over his achievements (though cf. v. 17-9, 
note). It is moreover very noticeable that Phitarch, who is generally con- 
sidered to have derived much information from Thcopompus (cf. e. g. Busolt, 
Gr. Gcsch. iii. pp. 727 sqq.), and who in his Ages, mentions him four times, 
besides clearly referring in ch. 36 to the version in Theopompus' Philippica 
of the story about the gifts offered to the king, nevertheless ignores the 
divergences between P and Xenophon with regard to Agesilaus' campaigns in 
395 and shows practically no trace of connexion with P anywhere. That P's 
account of the war in 39,5, which has influenced Diodorus and other writers 
of the Roman period and must have been still extant in Plutarch's time, was so 
completely neglected by him is somewhat remarkable in any case ; but the 
identification of P with Theopompus makes this neglect much more difficult of 
explanation, and the view, which has been widely held, that Plutarch had first- 
hand knowledge of Theopompus, becomes almost untenable, with regard to the 
Hcllcnica at any rate, if P was the author of that work. Fifthly, while the 
agreements between P and Pausanias, Justin, and Polyaenus present no obstacles 
to Meyer's view, the acceptance of it leads to considerable complications when 
we try to account for the agreement between P and Diodorus, and to reconcile the 
dates at which P's work and Theopompus' Hellenica were probably composed. 
Meyer, from the standpoint of most modern criticism of Diodorus, which believes 
that ' die starke Abhangigkeit Diodors von Ephoros von dem neunten Buche der 
Bibliothek ab (i. e. to Book xv) eines der sichersten Ergebnisse der Quellen- 
forschung ist ' (Bauer, Die Forschnngen zur Gr. Gcsch. i888-g8, p. 16^), explains 
the clear dependence of Diodorus upon P by the hypothesis that Diodorus' 
source, Ephorus, was using Theopompus. This leads, however, to a chronological 
difficulty. Theopompus was probably born about 376, since according to Photius 
he was 45 years of age, when through Alexander's intervention he returned 
to Chios from exile apparently in 332 (cf. Blass, op. cit. p. 400 ; Rohde, Rhcin. 
Mus. xlix. p. 623). The statement of Suidas that Theopompus, like Ephorus, 
was yeyoycus ... in the 93rd Olympiad (B.C. 408) is now universally regarded as 
containing an error in the figures, y^yovdts meaning not ' born ' but ' lived ' (cf. 
Blass, /. c). He survived the death of Alexander, for Photius relates that he 
took refuge in Egypt with Ptolemy, but when and where he died is uncertain. 
Concerning Ephorus' life even less is known. Probably he was born about the 
same time as Theopompus and died some time before him, for the latest event 
recorded about him is his refusal to accept an invitation to Alexander's court 
(Plut. De stoic, repugn, c. 20), and whereas part of Theopompus' PJiilippica must 
have been written after the death of Philip in 336, the 29th Book of Ephorus' 
history only reached 356, the 30th Book which reaches 340 being edited after the 


historian's death by his son (Diod. xvi. 14). Meyer thinks that Theopompus 
wrote the Hellenica not much later than 350, and that the 18th and igth Books 
of EphoruSj which covered the same ground, were not composed until after 330, 
for it is of course very difficult to reconcile the supposed dependence of Ephorus 
upon Theopompus without assuming an interval of some 15 or 20 years between 
the composition of the Hellenica and the parallel portions of Ephorus' history. 
But to this view there are two serious objections. That P wrote his history not 
much, if at all, later than 350 is probable enough ; for, as Mr. E. M. Walker was 
the first to point out and as Meyer now admits, the account of the border dispute 
between Phocis and Locris in xiv. 25 sqq., where P speaks of the a\i.^i(T^y]TT](Ti\xos 
Xwpa as still existing (eVrt, in 1. 25 ; cf. l-nivi\x.ov(Ti and hiap-naCovtri in 11. 27 
and 29) and contrasts in 11. 30-37 the former peaceful methods of settling the 
quarrel with the war which was kindled on that occasion, cannot have been 
written after the end of the Sacred War, which began in 356 with a struggle 
between the Phocians and the very same Locrians, and ended in 346 with 
the complete ruin of Phocis, whose place on the Amphictyonic Council was 
transferred to Macedonia. Hence 346 may be regarded as the tennunts ad quern 
for the date at which P composed his history. Mr. Walker is even prepared to 
place it before 356, on the ground that a reference to the Sacred War would be 
expected in xiv. 35 sqq. if it had actually begun ; but we do not wish to press 
this point, for the use of the present tense is quite compatible with the war being 
already in progress. If P wrote before 356, it is of course impossible to identify 
him with Theopompus without abandoning the current view concerning the 
date of Theopompus' birth, and even if he was writing between 350 and 346, 
which we regard as on the whole the most likely date for the composition of 
P's work, it is not at all easy to reconcile this with the evidence that Theo- 
pompus was born in about 376. A work so detailed and elaborate as that of 
P implies a large amount of research on the part of its author, especially since 
he disregarded Xenophon. Theopompus may have begun writing his Hellenica 
at the age of 23 or 24, but that he composed the loth Book before the age 
of 30 seems to us distinctly improbable, so that taking 376 as the correct 
date of Theopompus' birth, the terminus a quo for the date of the composition 
of Book X is 347-6. Since the terminus ad quern for P's work is, as we have 
said, 346, the margin of time available for the supposed composition of it by 
Theopompus is reduced to the narrowest possible limits, if it does not disappear 
altogether. The margin may be extended for a year or two by supposing that 
when Photius gave Theopompus' age at his return from exile as 45 years, 
that figure was approximate, and he should have strictly said 46 or 47. But 
if the date of Theopompus' birth is pushed back before about 378 it becomes 


necessary to alter the number of the year in Photius' account, and to this there 
are two objections: firstly, that Photius seems to be drawing his details con- 
cerning Theopompus' life from a trustworthy source, and that the mistake, if 
there be one, must be attributed not to him but to his copyists ; secondly, that, 
in view of the fact that Theopompus was living in Egypt under Ptolemy Soter 
and may even have survived the year 300, 376 is a sufficiently early date for his 
birth, and a date before 380 is not at all probable. 

The theory of the identity of P with Theopompus thus leads to a grave 
chronological difficulty with regard to the date of the loth Book oi iht Hellenica, 
the composition of which would on general grounds of probability be assigned to 
a year later than 346, whereas in order to satisfy the exigencies of the theory the 
date has to be prior to 346, and it is open to the further objection that P's most 
prominent features as a historian (cf. pp. 122-3) '^'^ ^^^ ^" ^^^ least suggest the work 
of a very young man, but on the contrary are rather characteristic of maturity or 
even old age ; cf. also p. 139. With regard to Ephorus on the other hand, Meyer's 
supposition that he wrote the last twelve out of 29 Books of his history after 
330 seems rather hazardous in view of the fact that he is not known to have out- 
lived that year. The interval, therefore, between the publication of the Hellenica 
and the composition of Books xviii and xix of Ephorus is likely to have been 
rather brief, and then the question arises whether it is probable that Ephorus would 
have neglected Xenophon and been content to reproduce in a shortened form the 
recently published work of his contemporary Theopompus as (granting that 
Diodorus in Book xiv is closely following Ephorus) he would seem to have done 
for the events of 396-5. Ephorus may have been a writer without much 
originality (cf. Wilamowitz, Arist. u. At/ten ii. p. 16), but that he should have 
selected Theopompus as his principal or sole authority for the period covered 
by the Hellenica is strange. If P is identified with Theopompus, can the 
difficulty of admitting that Theopompus was Ephorus' source in Books xviii 
and xix be evaded by supposing a direct use of Theopompus by Diodorus for 
the period from 411-394? 

The question whether Diodorus borrowed from Theopompus has long been 
disputed, but since Volquardsen in 1869 propounded the view that Books xi-xv 
of Diodorus were mainly derived from Ephorus and Theopompus was not used, 
nearly all modern critics have ranged themselves on his side. Neither the scepticism 
of Holm {Gr. Gesch. iii. p. 19) nor the attempt of VV. Stern {CoDimetitationes in 
hon. G. Studemund, 1889, pp. 245 sqq.) to prove on stylistic grounds that 
Diodorus had extensively used Theopompus in Books i-xx have won support, 
and the only concession sometimes made to the advocates of a use of Theopompus 
by Diodorus is in connexion with Book xvi, which deals with the period from 


360-336, and of which Volquardsen left the source in doubt. Here F. Reuss' 

conclusion {Jahrb.f. class. PhiloL cliii. pp. 317 sqq.) that parts of this Book are 

based on Theopompus is accepted by Bauer {op. cit. p. 266), but not by 

E. Schwartz (Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl. v. p. 682), though cf. Reuss, Biirsiaiis 

JaJiresber. cxxvii. p. "i,"], where he suggests that Diod. xvi. 34. 5 is derived from 

Theopompus on the evidence of the new fragment in Diels-Schubart, Didymus 

Comni. de Demosth. xii. 43-9. The conditions of the problem are now entirely 

altered by the discovery of our papyrus. Volquardsen {Unters. iiber die 

Quellen Diod. pp. 67 sqq.) found five arguments against the use of Theopompus 

by Diodorus : (i) Theopompus is never cited by Diodorus ; the mentions 

of his history in xiii. 42 and xiv. 84 do not count, because they belong to 

the extracts from a chronological epitome incorporated in Diodorus' history. 

(2) There is no correspondence between the fragments of Theopompus and 

Diodorus. (3) There is no trace in Diodorus of Theopompus' aristocratic bias. 

(4) The style of Diodorus does not resemble that of Theopompus. (5) For the 

period from 394-360 Diodorus could only have utilized Theopompus if he had 

searched up and down through the Philippica, and it is unlikely that he would 

have used a work arranged on so unsystematic a plan. If, however, P is 

Theopompus, these arguments break down completely, with regard to the 

Hellenica at any rate. As for (2), there would be a close agreement between 

Diodorus xiv and Theopompus ; as for (3), since Theopompus' aristocratic bias 

would be very slight, and on the whole he would have to be regarded as 

a decidedly impartial historian, there would be no reason to expect an aristocratic 

bias to be traceable in Diodorus. With regard to (4) the identification of P 

with Theopompus necessitates a radical alteration in the ordinary conception of 

Theopompus' style (cf. pp. 137-9), and so far from the style of Diodorus being 

different from that of Theopompus' Hellenica, it would present considerable 

resemblance to it. Volquardsen's fifth reason does not apply to the period 

covered by the Hellenica^ which moreover, being arranged on a chronological 

system, would be more convenient as a basis for a history arranged on Diodorus' 

plan than a less strictly chronological work, such as Ephorus is supposed to 

have written. There remains, therefore, only the first argument, which, seeing 

that Diodorus is not in the habit of quoting his sources (e.g. Hieronymus of 

Cardia is generally thought to have been largely used in Books xviii-xx), is 

hardly serious, and it is clear that if P is Theopompus the whole question of 

the relation of Diodorus to Theopompus will have to be reconsidered. Into that 

problem we do not propose to enter in detail ; what we wish chiefly to insist upon 

is that the identification of P with Theopompus tends to disturb the prevailing 

view of the relation of Ephorus to Diodorus more seriously than an identification 


with eg. Cratippus. who may well have been used by I'lphorus (cf. p. 141), and, 
secondly, the hypothesis which Meyer adopts so readily that Ephorus used 
Theopompus' Hiilcnica, is based not only on a somewhat hazardous assumption 
concerning the dates at which these historians wrote, but on conclusions con- 
cerning the relation of Diodorus to Ephorus and Theopompus which the 
identification of P with Theopompus goes some way to undermine. That 
Diodorus used P directly docs not seem to us probable : for though the general 
agreement between them is very close, the verbal coincidences are not on the 
whole very striking (cf. p. 216); and, as Mr. Walker remarks, the fact that 
Diodorus, though adopting an annalistic arrangement like that of P, never- 
theless commits the egregious blunder of first omitting the events of Greek 
history altogether during the two years preceding that in which he places the 
dispatch of Agesilaus, and then combining into one year his account of the two 
campaigns of Agesilaus which really belong to different years, is almost 
incredible if he was excerpting an author whose chronology was as clear as 
that of P. Such an error, however, is readily explicable on the assumption that 
Diodorus was using an author like Ephorus, who (as is generally supposed) 
grouped events together without strict regard to chronology. That Diodorus' 
close connexion with P is due to his use of Ephorus who was based on P is 
much the most satisfactory hypothesis, but the acceptance of it, so far from 
providing an argument for the identification of P with Theopompus, creates 
somewhat formidable difficulties. It is not Diodorus but Plutarch who, if P is 
Theopompus, ought to exhibit traces of his influence ; but these, as we have said 
(p. 13/!), are not forthcoming. 

To these objections which we have brought against the identification of P 
with Theopompus may be added the great obstacle, which from the outset led 
Blass (and Dittenberger also) to reject that view, namely the absence in P of 
several of Theopompus' most prominent characteristics, especially in regard to 
style. Thus Theopompus was noted for his comments either of praise or blame 
(principally the latter), a feature which is abundantly illustrated by the extant 
fragments of the Philippica, whereas P, except apparently in the fragmentary 
Col. X, shows no disposition to moralize upon his characters, preferring to let their 
actions speak for themselves. Even so important a personage as Ismenias 
is introduced (xii. 34) without remark, and Agesilaus' relations to Megabates are 
stated, but neither excused nor censured. We hear, indeed, of Conon's -npoOvixia, an 
expression which is also used of Cyrus (xvi. 9) and an obscure Persian general 
(xx. ^^), but for Agesilaus the extant portions of P have, except perhaps in v. 
1 7-9 (cf. note ad loc), no word of praise. The notorious bitterness of Theopompus, 
which Cicero singles out when summing him up in a single epithet {Hortens. 


Fr. 12 quid . . . Thcopompo acrius), and which is exemplified in his diatribes 
against Athens (Frs. 117, 238, and 297), however well deserved these may be, 
goes far beyond the censure, implied rather than openly expressed, upon the 
extreme democrats in ii. 10-14; and in the plain unrhetorical composition of P 
we look in vain for any traces of the fire and passion which Theopompus put 
into his vivid and powerful description of the friends of Philip (Fr. 249), or 
Fr. 135 beginning Trota yap ttoAis 7) -ndiov cdvos t&v Kara r-qv ^Acriav ovk (itp^a-^^vtTo 
•npos ^aaikea ; tL 6e tG>v en rrjs yrjs yevvoipiivoov ij tG>v Kara Ti\vr]v (TTtT^Xovpfvcov koAwj' 
fj TL[j.L(av OVK (Koixia-Or] h(apov ws avTOv ; ov TtoKXaX p.\v koX TToAvreAeis arpoipval Kal 
X^avCbes, to. p-ev aXovpyfj to. 8e TroiKiAra to. hi XevKO., TroAAat 8^ aKi]i'ai \pvaai 
KaTecTKevaa-pevoi iraa-i, tois xP^^'V^'^j '''oAAat be nal fyortSes Kal Kklvai TToAureAeis ; 
K.T.A., or Fr. 135 NiKoo-TpaToy 8e t6v 'Apyclov ir&s ov ^pi] (pavKov vopi^eiv ; bs 
TTpocTTaTris yevopfvos rfji 'Apyetcov TToAews kul TTapa\a(3a)v Kal yh'Oi Kal xpi'jpara Kal 
TToXXrjV ovcriav irapa t5>v irpoyovuiv airavTas VTrepejSaXeTo Tfj KoAa/ceta Kal rat? depa-miai^ 
ov povov Tovs t6t€ (JTpaTeCas ptTaayovTas &.XXa Kal Tovi ep-npocrOev yevopivovs. -npStTov 
pkv yap ovTM'i 7}ya7T7]<re ri]v Ttapa tov fiap^apov TLpi]v uxttc /BovXopevos inpioKeiv koI 
TTia-revea-Oai. paXXov av(K6pi<T( irpos /BacriX^a tov viov' o tUv aXXcav ovbels TTcoTrore 
(pavyjaerai TTOUjcras' tTretra ko^' kKaari^v rjpepav ottoVc peXXoi. beLirveiv rpdireCav irapeTLdei 
)(^u>pls ovopd^MV r<{) baipovi to) /SacrtAecos, (pTrXrjcras (tltov koI dXXcov (TnTr]beioiv, clkovojv 
pev TovTo Ttoielv Kal T&v Ylepa&v tovs irepl rds dvpas btarpilSovTas, oiopevos 8e bta rrji 
depaireCas TavTi]? ■)(^pr]paTiti(T6ai pdXXov Trapd tov fSacriXeMS. ^v yap aia-)(poKepby]s Kal 
Xp-qpaToiv COS ovk 018' et tls eVepos rJTToov. That the historian whose superiority to 
Thucydides and Philistus on account of the e/atio atqne altitudo orationis suae was 
compared by Cicero {Brut. 66) to the superiority of Demosthenes to Lysias, and 
whose Ae'fis Dionysius {Ep. ad Cn. Pomp. p. 786) compares to that of Isocrates, 
Kadapd yap . . . Kal kolvt] Kal aa(pi]S, vxffriXi] re Kal peyaXoTrpeirris Kal to ttopttikov ^xovcra 
TToXv, (TvyKeipevrj Kara Tr]V piarjv appovlav, rjbeoos Kal paXaKCoi peovaa, could have 
attained so high a reputation as a stylist is incredible, if his other work re- 
sembled these fragments. It is also noticeable that out of three points which are 
censured by Dionysius (p. 787) in Theopompus, his over-anxiety to avoid hiatus, 
his continual rhythmical periods, and his wearisome epideictic figures (ttjs re 
avpirXoKT]S T(av ^coyijeWcoy ypappaTcov koI ttjs KVKXiKrjs €vpvdp.ias tS>v irepLobaJV Kal ttjs 
opoeLbeias tG)V (TxqpaTKTpSiv), P exhibits only avoidance of hiatus (a rule which is 
subject to exceptions both in P and the extant fragments of Theopompus). 
Elaborate rhythmical periods and rhetorical antitheses, parisa, and paromoia 
(e.g. ri yap tS>v ala-x^pSiv r] beivdv avTols ov Tipoarjv ?; ri rwy koXmv Kai a-novbaicau 
OVK dTT?> ; in Theop. Fr. 249) are foreign to P's sober, unadorned style. In 
order to identify P with Theopompus it is practically necessary, as Meyer and 
Wilamowitz admit, to suppose that the Hellenica was written in a manner much 


less ornate than that of the Philippica. In support of such a view of the develop- 
ment of Tlicopompus' style can be cited the difference in Xenophon's treatment 
of the period before and after the end of the Peloponnesian war, and the circum- 
stance that Theopompus seems to have begun his historical researches tamely 
enough by writing an epitome of Herodotus, and when composing the Hellcnica 
may have been to some extent under the influence of Thucydidcs. But on the 
other hand the ancient critics draw no distinction between the characteristics of 
the Hell, and Phil., and in the case of a writer with so vigorous an individuality 
and such marked features of style as Theopompus it is certainly surprising, 
even apart from the story about the bit and the spur (cf. p. 126), that he should 
have been able as a young man (cf. p. 135) to curb his tendency to rhetoric so 
successfully as he has done, if he be indeed the author of the papyrus. That he 
was composing eTrtSei/crtKoi Ao'yoi at the same time as the Hellenica appears from 
Fr. 26, which probably is derived from the preface to the Philippica, and the 
conception of history in the Isocratean school was in the words of the master 
himself (Isocr. iv. 9) al fxkv yap Trpd^eis ai irpoyeyevrjixivai Kotval iraa-iv 7]p.'iv Kore- 
\€L(p6y](rav, to d' (v KOtpoi ravrais Kara^priaaadai, kuI to. TTpocrrJKoi'Ta ircpl e/cdo-njs 
(vdvp.ri6T]rat koL toIs 6v6p.acnv ev biadia-dat t&v ev <f)povovvTwv Xhiov kariv. 

Our comparison, therefore, of P's work with the Hellenica of Theopompus, 
though it has not presented any single insuperable obstacle to the identification 
of one with the other, if that hypothesis can be made probable on other grounds, 
and though even as regards style there are some points of agreement between 
the two (cf. p. 129), undoubtedly has shown the existence of a number of 
weighty objections to the identification of P with Theopompus. Can these be 
avoided by identifying P with another historian ? To reject Theopompus and 
take refuge in complete agnosticism is most unsatisfactory, for admittedly P was 
a historian of much importance who has largely influenced later tradition, and 
since his work survived far into the second century his name at any rate must be 

This being granted, there is besides Theopompus only one known historian, 
Cratippus, who seems to fulfil the primary condition required for identification 
with P, that he should have written a continuation of Thucydides, and it is 
Cratippus whom Blass wished to regard as the author of the papyrus. Con- 
cerning this writer our information is scanty, and his date has been much disputed. 
Dionysius Halic. {De Thucyd. 16) says eot/cev (sc. Thucydides) areA?/ ti]v IcTTopiav 
KaTaKtireiv ws Kal KpariTTTTOs 6 (TwaKpLaaai avrio kqI to. TrapaKf-KpOh'Ta vtt' avTov 
avvayayuiv yiypa<^iv' oh p.6vov rat? Ttpd^icnv avras (sc. Thucydides' speeches) e/x7ro5wi/ 
yeyevijaOai At'ycoi; oAAa Kat Tols clkovovctiv dxArjpa? elvaL. tovto ye tol (TVvivTa avrbv (if 
Tols TcAeuraiots ttjs Icrro/n'as (^>|cri iJ.rib(p.Cav rd^at prjTopeCav ttoWqji' p.€v Kara rrjv 'luivCav 


ytvoixevoov TToWciv 8' ev rals 'AOrjvais oaa bia Xoyoov nal brjfjirjyopiSiv kirpayOi] (perhaps 
a quotation from Cratippus' TrpooCixtov). From this it is clear that Dionysius 
regarded Cratippus as a contemporary of Thucydides, and that Cratippus strongly 
objected to the speeches. More definite information about the period which his 
history covered is supplied by Plutarch [De glor. Ath. p. 345 C-E hv yap di^e'A?/? 
Tovs TTpuTTovTas ov;( e^€i? TOvs ypdcpovTas. aviXe rrjv YlepLKk^ovs TToXiTeiav koi to, 
vavpia-)(^a Trpos 'Ptw 4>opp.i,u>i'Os rpoTrata . . . Kal &ovKvbCbris <tol biayiypaTtrai. av(\€ ra 
776/31 'EWrjrrvovTov 'A\Ki/3idbov veaviivp.aTa nal to. irpos Aea-^ov &paav\\ov koI ttjv vtto 
©■qpajxivovs Tfjs okiyapx^as KaraXvcnv Koi &paav^ov\ov koL ^kp^nov (MSS. " Apyj.-n'nov) 
Koi TOVS d-nb 4>uAr^s k^bopi.i']KOvTa Kard rfjs ^irapriaTciv ijyepiovias dviUTafx^vovs nat. 
Kovcova Trdkiv (pL^ifidCovTa rds 'Adrjvas et9 ti]v OdXarrav, koi KpariTTTros dv]]pr]Tai.. 
This shows that Cratippus' work, like Theopompus' Hellenica and probably the 
history of P, included the period from 411 to the battle of Cnidus in 394. 
Apparently he went over again part of the ground covered by the last Book 
of Thucydides, for the expulsion of the oligarchs by Theramenes is narrated 
in viii. 89 sqq., and Thrasyllus' proceedings at Lesbos are recorded (very briefly) 
in viii. 100. That Plutarch should have here placed Cratippus on the same level 
as Thucydides indicates that he must have been a very important historian, and 
it is remarkable that there are only two other extant references to him : (i) Ps - 
Plut. 'Vit. Orat. p. 834, where he is quoted in reference to the Hermocopidae, 
a subject which he may have treated in connexion with the return of Alcibiades ; 
(2) Marcellinus, Vit. Thiic. '^'>f dXXd bijXov on KdOobos (boOrj toTs (l>cvyov<nv, ws koI 
<l>iAoxopos X4y(L Koi Ai]p.i]Tpios ev rots ''Ap)(^ovaiv. eyol) 6e Zwirvpov Xrip^lv vo/xt^'co 
XiyovTa TovTov iv GpaKy TercXevTrjKevai. Khv dX7]dev€t,v vop-iQ) KpartTTTros avTOV. to 8' 
€V 'IraAia Ti/jiaioy avTov koi HXXovs Xiyeiv KctaOai fxi] koi (rcpobpa KaTayiXacrrov f]} 
It appears from this that Cratippus was not older than Zopyrus, and Susemihl, 
identifying this Zopyrus with the friend of Timon of Phlius {Gesch. d. Gr. Lit. in 
d. Alexafidrinerzeit, ii. p. 468), thinks that Cratippus lived in the third or second 
century B.C. (op. cit. i. p. 646). But it is quite uncertain which Zopyrus is meant : 
he may, for instance, have been the contemporary of Socrates (Herbst, Philol. 
xlix. p. 174). That Cratippus lived even later still has been maintained by Stahl, 

' I7W 5e «.T,X. has hitherto been treated as a remark of Marcellinus, Iv ©pa/cTj (which does not suit 
the sense) being generally altered to ec 'ArriKy ; but, as Blass suggested, the passage in question is perhaps 
in iambic trimeters, though his proposal to regard it as a quotation from the Chronica of ApoUodorus is 
unhesitatingly rejected by Wilamowitz. The lines can be restored thus : 

iyw 6^ Ttwnvpov 

Xfyovra rovTov Q=^^ kJ) TfTeXevrrjKtyat (or iv 'Attuc^ Ttdi'TjKivai) 

Xtjptiv vofJ.i^ai, Kav dXtjOivdv Sonfj 

KpaTiirnos aiirov ... 

TO 5' (V 'IraKiq. Tinaiov avrov xarepovs 

KilaOat kiyuv fxfj Hal atpudpa KarayiKaOTOv ^. 


who boldy emends avr^Z (i. e. Thucydides) after avvaK\'i in the Dionysius pas- 
sage into (To\ avTU) (i. e. Q. Aclius Tubero, whom Dionysius was addressing), and 
would identify Cratippus with the friend of Pompey. This violent emendation 
of Dionysius has however been universally abandoned, and most recent critics 
either defend the date assigned to Cratippus by Dionysius or leave the question 
undecided ; cf. Meyer, Gesch. d. Alt. iii. p. 276 ; Busolt, Gr. GcscJi. iii. pp. 631-2, 
where the literature of the subject is surveyed. 

That Cratippus was an Athenian is a tolerably certain inference from the 
context of the Plutarch passage, which relates to Athenian historians, and 
Meyer adduces as an objection to the identification of P with Cratippus the 
circumstance that the Athenians do not occupy in P the prominent position 
which they have in Thucydides, and that his sympathies are rather with 
Sparta. But since Plutarch next after Cratippus proceeds to mention Xeno- 
phon, this objection does not carry much weight, for P is certainly not more 
pro-Spartan than Xenophon, and his just recognition of Conon's merits stands 
in marked contrast to Xenophon's biased attempt to belittle that commander's 

To sum up the scanty evidence with regard to Cratippus, what is known 
about the scope of his history and his avoidance of speeches fits in very well with 
Blass' view concerning the authorship of the papyrus. That he was younger 
than Thucydides is practically certain in any case, and if crwa/c/iao-a? in Dionysius 
be regarded as a loose expression, and the publication of Cratippus', i. e. P's, 
work be assigned to the period between 375 and 350, it may well have been 
used by Ephorus, a hypothesis which would account for the agreements between 
P and Diodorus more easily than the rival view that P is Theopompus ; cf. 
pp. 133-7- The style of P hardly suggests so early a date as 375-350, but since 
in any case he wrote his history before 346 (cf. p. 134) that difficulty is not very 
serious, and his independence of Xenophon can be explained by supposing that 
his work was published before Xenophon's Hcllcnica just as well as by the theory 
that P intentionally disregarded it. Moreover, the identification of P with Cratippus 
in preference to Theopompus would provide a possible solution for the mysterious 
paucity of references to him by name, for if his work was used not only by 
Ephorus but, as is possible, by Theopompus, it is to some extent intelligible that 
an author with so colourless a style was soon superseded by those writers and the 
more elegant Xenophon, although P's great merits as a narrator of facts would 
still be expected to have rescued him from the almost complete neglect into 
which Cratippus unquestionably fell. 

In the absence of any other historian whose claims to be regarded as the 
author of the papyrus seem to be worthy of consideration, the choice lies between 


Theopompus and Cratippus, and having stated the case for and against both as 
impartially as we could, we leave the decision to our readers. The positive 
arguments in favour of identifying P with so shadowy a person as Cratippus are 
inevitably not very convincing ; the strength of his case rests largely on the 
objections to regarding Theopompus as the author of the papyrus, objections 
which have led both Prof. Bury and Mr. Walker to endorse the opinion of Blass, 
For ourselves we should prefer on many grounds to identify P with Theopompus, 
especially as that view can be supported by some direct evidence — the coinci- 
dences with regard to Kapt:a(Tivs and Karapai ; cf p. 131. The first of these 
can of course be reconciled with the identification of P with Cratippus by the sup- 
position that Theopompus in the 10th Book of the Hellenica also mentioned the 
Carpasian leader of the mutiny or that the quotation comes after all from the 
loth Book of the Philippica; and the second coincidence by itself would not be 
very remarkable. Nevertheless they appeal to us on the whole more powerfully 
than the other arguments for Theopompus, and seem to us to turn the scale 
slightly in his favour, so that in the heading of 842 we have placed Theopompus' 
name before that of Cratippus. On the other hand we feel more strongly than 
Meyer the difficulties (particularly those discussed on pp. 133-7) involved in his 
attractive hypothesis, which results in proving Theopompus to have been in his 
youth a greater historian and a worse stylist than has been generally supposed. 
Call him by what name we will, our author's work entitles him to be classed 
among the select band of Greek historians of the first rank, below Thucydides 
indeed but above Xenophon, and the portions of his history which have been 
preserved constitute a notable addition to the extant evidence. Not only has it 
supplied new facts of importance regarding the events of 396-5 and the con- 
stitution of Boeotia, and thrown a new and unexpected light upon the sources 
other than Xenophon available to the later historians, but the agreement between P 
and Diodorus is bound to have far-reaching consequences. For quite apart from 

Col. i ( = A Col.i). 

VTToh^TOv\ ]vae^€7rX€V(T€TpLt]pr](r 

a6r]vr)dep[ ]Sr]fioiryi'(i)/XT](Ti[. . . 

8t8rjnaLv[. ApaoK . . LO(TayTr](TKOLva)aa[Xivo[. . . 
aTTopriT(OT\. .]ovXi]a)<TXey€TaLn€pLTOV7rpay[. . . 
5 e7r€t5r;[.]fj'[. .]TrjcravavTCOT[. . .]TroXeiTCOi^(rvy[. . 

Kara^aaei(nreipaiaKaLKa6[ '\vavveKT[.]v 

viOiaoLK(cvavayop.€v\^ ](J^kov[. .yxOo 


the questions of his identity with Theopompus and the relation of Diodorus 
to that author and Ephorus, the discrepancies between Diodorus and Xenophon 
with regard to the events of 396-5 are now known to be due to the fact that 
Diodorus ultimately drew his account of those years from so well informed an 
authority as P ; and henceforth it will be necessary to take into consideration 
the probability that throughout the rest of the period from 41 1-394 the differences 
between Diodorus and Xenophon, e.g. with regard to the campaign of Thibron 
and the return of the Ten Thousand, are largely due to the same cause. 

The credit of reconstructing the much damaged text of the papyrus is in 
a considerable measure due to Prof V. Blass, who at first worked upon a rough 
copy. In November, 1906 the Greek was put into print, and the proof-sheets of 
it were revised by him shortly before his death. Proofs were also sent to Profs. E. 
Meyer and U. von Wilamowitz-MoUendorfif, and to the latter we are indebted for 
a number of valuable suggestions for the restorations of lacunae, &c., which are 
acknowledged in the notes, while E. Meyer has most generously placed at our dis- 
posal the very elaborate historical commentary upon the papyrus which he wrote 
in the winter of 1906-7, and which will be published shortly. This important 
contribution of the leading historian of Germany has of course been of inestim- 
able service to us in composing our introduction and notes, though the conditions 
of some of the problems have been greatly altered by placing Cols, i-iv before 
v-viii instead of after them, as in the first proofs. Some suggestions on the text 
are also due to the late Prof. W. Dittenberger and to Prof B. Niese, who were 
consulted by Prof. Blass. More recently the proofs of the whole edition were read 
by Profs. Meyer and Wilamowitz-Mollendorff, who have made some additional 
suggestions, and by Prof. J. B. Bury and Mr. E. M. Walker. To Prof. Bury we 
owe several excellent restorations in the text, while Mr. Walker's criticisms have 
materially assisted in the elucidation of some of the historical problems connected 
with the papyrus. 

Col. i. 

VTTO Sk T0V[S aVTOV? ^pOfC^VS €^€7rX€VCr€ Tpir]pT}9 I. I. 

'AOrjvrjOiV [ov jxeTa Ttj? tov] Sijfiov yi'dofirj^- i[8ia B.C. 396 

5e Arifiaiv[iT^os 6 k . . 109 avrfj^ K0Lua)crd/j.eud^9 Iv 
a.TTop/^p)riT(p t[tJ P'ovXrj 009 Xiyerai nepl tov 7rpdy[fx.aT0f, 
5 ineiSf] [cr]vv[e(r]Tr]crai' avrSi (rirey) tJov] ttoXltwv avy- 
KUTa^a^ €iy Ileipaid Kal KaO^eXKvaas] vavv Ik t[co]i/ 
v€(0(roiK(ou dvay6fi.iv[os enXd Trpojy K6u[Q)u]a. 60- 2 


pv^ovSeficraTavTayil ]/cafT[. .]a6r] 

vaLa)vayavaKTOvvTa)[ ]/''/'[• • •]ft-i-X'^ 

lo pi€i'T€crT]cravKaiX€y[ ]/?«[• • •]<^'^T!1~' 

7ro\ipapxoyTi(nroXe[ ]€Saifioi'[. 

ovcrKaTa7rXay€PT€<TOiP[ .]i'6opvBoi'(Ty~' 


15 rovnXr}6ovcrav'L(TTapevoLTa)va6r}vaL(i)voLT€ 

20 <jr€pyovTaTrapouraoLS€7roXXoiKai8r]poTLKoi 
TOi^aiy€ii'r](T€nro[.]o7rcoa8v[.]aTaiT€LpQ)pei(r$aL\. .]ror(W(7o[. . J\TaTr]a-noX^a)crTavTa 

25 TreTroLrjKOTa[. .]7rpo(rdi ]x€8ouaTTavTaTov 

Xpouoi^erap[. .]rovT[ ]fiaTaKaLTroXXaT[.]ta- 

XaKe8aifio[. . .](Ta[ ]TTe^'a7^e7^e/x7^[.]^' 

[ievyapoTvX[ jpeaiacreTrLTacri' 

jxeTarovKl ](p6rjaav8€npe<T^[. .]cr 

30 axT^acnXiaiT^ '\n[.]i<paTriT€Kaiayvi 

avKaiT^Xe[. . .jopovovaKaiavXXa^coucpapa^o 

35 €7riKpaTr]KaiKe(paXoi'ovTOiyapeTvxove7n6y 

Col. ii( = ACol. ii). 

\pV<nOv[ ]Tr pOT(pOVKaTOLTL[ 

ve(TXey[ ^aLTaTTapiKfLvovy^prjJi^ 

ixarar[. . .]y[. ]roi/cre///3otQ)TOio- 


pv^ov Se fxija ravra yi[vo^ivov,] Kal T[(ioi^^ 'AOt]- 

vaLcau dyavaKTovvT(i)[v oaoi yrc6]/Ji/i[oi K]al ■)(a- 
10 pi€VT€9 ri<Tau Kal \€y[6uT(jou on Sia]^a[\ov](Ti T7)r 

TToXiu dp\oi'T€9 TToXe fxov TTpoy AaK iSaifiOU'J- 

0V9, KaranXayivres ol ^[ovXevTal rby Oopv^ov avv- 

riyayov Tov Br)p.ov ov8\v TrpoaijT oiovpu'Oi p€- 

Tia-^rjKivai rov rrpdypaTO?. crvveXrjXvOoros Sk 
15 TOV ttXtjOov^ di'iaTa/Kuoi Tcou 'AOrfvaicov o'l re 

TTipl 0pa(Tv(3ovXou Kal Al'atpov Kal "Avvtov iSiSa- 

aKov avTOVs on ixkyav alpovuTac kivBvvov el 

firj TTjv ttoXlv dnoXvaovai 7779 ahias. tccv 8\ A$t]- 3 

paicou OL p.\v eTr{L)€iKU9 Kal Ta^ ovaia? exoirey e- 
20 crrepyov to. Trapovra, 01 Si noXXol Kal St]ij.otckoi 

Tore fxeu cpo^TjOeuTe? iTreiadrjcray T019 crvp^ovXiv- 

oval, Kal Trip.yjrai'Tes npb^ MiXcoi^a rov dpiiocrrr]v 

TOV AlyLvr]^ dTro[v] on cos Sv[v]aTai Ti/jLcopeiaOaL 

Toy ArjjxaC^ye^Tov, coy o\y jJLi\Ta ttj^ TToXeoo? TavTa 
25 TmroLrjKOTa' [e/z]7rpocr6[ez/ Si cr^^eSbu atravTa tov 

^povov kTdp[aT]Tov T\a rrpdyjiaTa Kal rroXXa r[o]rs 

AaKiSaipid[vtoL\s d[vTiiTpa\TTio)v. diT(.TTipTT\o\v 11. 1 

p.\v yap 6iTX[a re Kal V7rr]]p(cria9 lirl Ta? vavs Tas 

fiiTo, TOV K\ovoovos, i7rip](p6r]crav Sk Trpea^^ei]? 
30 o)? ^aaiXia 7r[ 01 mpl .]Tr[.]KpdTi] re Kal Ayvi- 

av Kal T€X([a-ijy]opov, ovs Kal avXXa^cov ^dpa^ 6 

npoTepov vavapyos aTrecrretXe irpos tovs A[a'Ki- 

Saipoviov? ot drreKTeivav avT0V9. rjvavTi- a 

ovvTO S\ TavTa rrapo^vvovTcov tcov irepl tov 
35 'EniKpdTT] Kal KecfiaXov ovtol yap iTv^ov i-rndv- 

fiovvT€9 fidXicTTa T7]v TToXiv (e/CTToXe/xcocrai), Kal TavTrjv (r^v yvdprjv) ea^ov 

ovK e-rreiSr] Ti/xoKpdT€i SiiXe-^Q-qaav Kal [t^o 

Col. ii. 

Xpvaiov [eXa^ov, dXXa Kal ttoXv] irpo-epoi'. KaiToi tl- 
i^ey Xey[ovaiv a'lTia yiviaOai to. nap' kKUvov XPV- 
paTa t[ov (r]v[(jTTJvaL tovtov9 Kal] roi'y eV Boicotoi? 


KaLToy(T^[. .]a[ ^ai(Tnpo^ipr]iXivaLa\ 

5 ofKe^5orecror/7r[ ]v€P€l3r]Kenra\ai 

8v(rfX€i^coa€)((ii'[ ^vi[.]vcrKaicrKOir€r' 

o7rco(reK7roX€/jLQ)[ ]r[ ]aefX€i(TOVpyapoi 

HevapyiioLKai§oi(or[ ]ya)TaiTOi'(jAa/ce[ 

8ailiOVlOV(TOTLTOL(Tevav\. . .\jT(OVTro\iLT(aV 

I o avToiae^pa>vTO(pi\oia[.YS[.'\vTaL(TaBrjvaL(TeTn\ 
6vjjLOvuT€aa7raXXa^aiT[. .]<Ta6r]va[.]ovaTT]<7r][ 
av)(^iaa-KaiTr]a€ipr]i^r]aKai[. .^oayay hvhtltotto 
X€/x€LVKaiTr[. .]v7rpa[.]iJioveii'iuavTOL(TeKT(iii'[ 

15 0Lfi€racrTr](TaiTa7rpa[. .]aTa^r]TOVvTecroLjX€~ 

p(oaSiaK€iijL€i'oi7rpo(TTOV(TXaK€SaifJ.oviov(rT[. . 
KXt]naTCoy€veKa7rpor€pouapi(rTaSiaKeifiep[. . 

20 KaifxaXL(TTaXaK(oui^copcoa-e^€crTLKaTafiad(iy[ 
eKrcoyKaTaroj/TroX€fjLouo-y[.]^ai/TcoPTOp8€K[. . 

25 KaTanXevaaaKanrapel. . .]j/a)^er6/)acrTeT[. .]pa(r 

avpTrXr) pcoaafxl ]<Te(Ti)(Lovpavp.[. .](o~ 

TOvaT parity ov[. . ^LCcvocxnnp^iprjKy. ^pv 

Kai7rpoT€pouK[ ^ca■Ta(n^oX€p[.]aa[. . .]/3e~ 

0V(Ta(T7revTeK[ yfiy^avTpia\. . . .]a 

30 /xeTa8(TavTa[ ]€)^a)UTpir]p[. . .]KaTa 


35 Tov(TXaKe8aipovLov(To8eiiiX(ovoTriaaLy[. . 
pr)(rapp.O(rTr][.]a>ariKovcr€Ta7rapaT(i>i'a6r]i'[. . 
a)V(TVvnXrjpa)(Ta[XivoaTpiripri8iaTa-^e(c[. . 


Koi T0V9 e[v T]a[h dWai^ TroXecri T]ai9 TrpoeipTjfiivai?, 
5 ovK elSore^ oti 7r[acrir avTol9 <Tv]viP(PriKei ndXai 

Svajiivu)^ f^Xav [7r/Joy ^a/fe(5a//xo]r/[o]uy Kal aKOTTilv 

oTTCof iKTToXefioo'aoua-i] T[as nSXd]^. kfiicrovv yap oi 

fikv 'Apyeioi Kal Bolci)t[oI . . . .]y<OTai tov9 /la/ce- 

Sai/ioi'iovs OTL Tols iyav[Tioi]9 roov ttoXitmu 
10 avToTs k\poovTO ^tXois, [o]i 8 [i\v Ta?9 'Adi]i>ai9 Ittl- 

6v/j.ovi^T(9 dnaXXd^ai t\ov]s A6rji/a'iov9 ttj^ 1)- 

av)^Las Kal r^y ilprjvqs Kal [np]oayay€Li' IttI to tto- 

XcfjLUv Kal n'oXjvnpa'y p.ove?u, \v avroli c/c rojf 

Koivcov u xpr] fiaTi^€a[6]aL. Tcov Sk KopivOmv 3 

15 ol p-iTaarfjcraL to, TTpd[yjx\aTa ^rjTovuTfS oi ^\v 

aXXoi (TTapa7rXr}(Ti<os ?) Toh 'Apyeiot? Kai to?9 BoicotoIs <eTV)(^ov Svcr/jC^e- 

voos SiaKei/xevoL npb? rov? AaKeSaifxauiov?, T^i/j.6- 

Xao9 Sk fiovos avTOL? Sidcpopo? yeyoi'coy lS^^C\oi)u ky- 

kXt] fidTcou iviKa, TTpoT^pov dpiara SiaK€ifj.€v[o9 
20 Kal fxdXKTTa AaKcoui^cov, coy e^ecrxi KaraiiaOdv 

€K Tcof Kara tou noXefxav av[fj.]^di'T(ou tou A€k[€- 

XiLKov. ^Kuvos yap ore jxlv iriVTie^^vatav e^coj/ 4 

k-nopOr^ae Tcou vr}cra>v rivd's tcov kir 'A6r]vaLo[i\<} 

ovacou, ore Sk fx^TO, Svo TpiTqpcoi' e/y 'Ajx^lttoXlv 
25 KaTaTrX^vaa'i Kal Trap k[Kdv<jC)V kTepa^ TkT[Ta]pas 

avfi7rXr]poocrdiJ.[€vos kiHKr}]a€ X^X'^ov vavix\ax^fiov 

rhu (TTpaTTjybv [toou AQ-qvaiatv, coanep upT]K[d 7r]ov 

Kal npoTepoi', K[al Tpir]p€]is ray 7roXefji[i as [eXa]Qev 

ovaas nkuT€ k al 7rXo?a a eTr](fjLylrav Tpid[KOUTa- 
30 fieTo. Se TavTU ' ] €;(G)j/ Tpirjpjis kutu- 

TrXivaa^ f/y &d(r,ov d-rrkaT-qae. ravTrju T[(io]u 'Adrj- 

vaL(t>v. ol fikv ovv kv Tah noXicn TaT? npoei- 5 

prjiikvaLS Sia TavTa noXv fidXXou rj Sid ^apvd- 

(3a^op Kal TO xpvaiou kmjpfxki/oi yuauv rj\a]av 
35 rovs AaK€SaLfiouiov9. Se MiXaiv 6 Trj'i Aly't- HI. I 

fr/y ap/ioo-77j[y,] coy iJKOvai Ta napd twu A6r]v ai- 

<£)V, avp.7rXr]p(:oa-d/j.(i'0S Tpiijpi] Sid ra^eci)[_i' 

L 3 




40 TiKr}(7e\^. . .]8ri8i7rpoaTr\iV(TaaeKeiv[.\cnrpo\_. 

Col. iii ( = A Col. iii with Frs. i and 2). 

(Fr. 1) 

[ Y'^^X'^'^PVl YivcopurjaiviinTToXy 

[ yivKpaTr](T[ YoaaavTOiVT-qv fiivv 

[ ^yavvoTL\i\^ ]a(f)0(TavTOVKare\iiTf~ 

[ Yr)v€KeLv[ '\a(Ta(TTOvcravTOVvav 

5 [ ]oe7rX[.]u(ret'[ ]T€VfiaTOfi€TaTov 

] . iTOv[.]i£pov(TTr]p.^v 
10 Y'^oaoySooviv^KTTtjKii 

15 ]a-07rovavi^eiTei7rTei' 

20 Y8aLp.ovLa>vKaLr(i)~ 



25 ]/f£ao"ai5eXet7rofcrai 


kSioxf. rov AT]^atviTOV' 6 8k Kara tovtov t[ov 

40 TiKr]9. i[7rci^Sf) Sk npoanXevcra? €kui'[o]9 npoy^ 2 

Col. iii. 

[QopiKou kiT€\i.iprj\(Xiv k[jL^a\\lv, oop/jLTjaeu tnl noXv 
[7rpo7rX]up- KpaTTJa[a^ Se . . . v](m avroov ttju fikv v- 
[d) avT(o] vavv, oTt ^(^ejpoi' r}v to ctk d(f)0?^ avrov KareXiTTd', 
[ety Si] TTjv €Ke«/[ooi/ neTa^i^]d(Ta9 tov9 uvtov vav- 
•t [ray iTp^okTTX\i^y(y(.v ' kirl to aTpd]T€Vixa to fiCTCc tov 
\K6p(oi'09 6 Sk MlX cov ei? A'lyLvav fie- 

[to, TO, /x]€V GUI' dSpOTUTa TOiiV \\ , I 

[ mpXl- TOVTO avfi(3duToov 

[ovTcos kyki'iTO- dnb Se roi'i^e tov 6^<ipov9 Trj fieu B.C. 396 

10 ] eroy oySoov kvncTriKei. 

]apoy Tas TpirjpcL^ ana- 
k]K€L 8k KaTanXevcra? ray 
]€J/, €Tf^ej' yap act tov 
KaT€(r]KevaKa>9 "qv veciopia 

15 ]y OTTOV aVViTTnTTiV 

] TOV 8k ^apudfia^ov a- 
] 7rapay(via6ai fiovXo- 
[fi€U09 ]ai Kai fiia66u dnoXa- 

[/SeTr alpoy /xku ovv avTov 8ii- 2 

20 [Tpc^cf, knl 8k ray uavs tcou AaK]i8ai.[xovi(i)v kol tcou 
[(TVfifj.d)(^(i)v d(f)tKvuTai TIoXXi?^ vavapyo'i €< AaK^- 
\ Saifiouo? TT)]v 'Ap\iXai8a Kara- 

[ KUTO, Sk TOU av]T0l' -^pOVOV ^OLvUcDV 

[ rjKOV lvivrjKOi>T\a vrjes el? Kavvov d>i/ 

35 [8kKa fxkv 'inXivcrav dno KiXL]Kia9 ai 8k Xeinovaai 

[dnb 1 &y "Aktcov 6 ^iScono? 

[ (3aa-]iXd TOis TavTr]9 T^y 

[ 7re]pt Tf][v] vavapyjav ^ap~ 


30 ] . apodTaTTipiT'qvapyrf 


TrXrj pcoaaaTaaT pirjp^KT 
35 \vTr]VK[.]yvLaveL(T€7rX€V 

40 ] . v8i7rp[.] . [. . .]y[.]ix€[. .]\v(piX\[.]au (Fr. 2) 

] . oa-a7re7refi-^evQ)[.]^a(rLX€\a<r\[. . .]a 

]r]V(TKr]ur]yayTOvX[ ]|^^^1[' • •]" 

]iTayy€LXa(T8(TaTT[ ]|eatra][. .]y 


iv (= A Col. iv). 

25 lines lost 







a . 



TCC . , . T(t 

• « L J« • L 

noyra ' 






\ .]reiceX[ 



• I. 







vd^a(os 7rapo^vu6]vTcov avTovo. tu>v irapa- 

6 ^\v ovv . . . .1 . apoy ra nepl ttjv dpxv^ 

TO (TTpaTO\ni8ov. K[6]voov 8k -npod- 

al]ad6fi(V09 dvaXa^oiv 

avfi^nX-qpaxra? ra? Tpujpci? 

jcrra noTafi[b]v tov Kav- 

uiov KaXovfievou (Is Xifjii'7]]i^ ti]v K'\a\vvLav ilcrenXeV' 

<Ti Tolu ^apva^d(ov Kal rod K6- 

i/cwfoy ]pvri[9] dufjp Tl^parjs ira- 

] T(i>v Tvpayp.d~(£tv oy 

rj^'pvXiTo Aa/ScTj/ ^xlara- 

} . V 8\ 7r/!)[.] . [. . .]i'[.]/X€[. .]u <f)i.X[i]ai' 

] . oy dni7r€iJ.\lfeu 0)^?] (SacriXia o[. . .]a- 

t]t]u aKrjffjU avTov X[ ]l^^[^ • •]" 

d]iTayy€iXas Si ra 7t[ ]€a<Ta[. .]v 

Col. iv. 

25 lines lost 

26 . [ V 

30 a . [ 
Ta[. .]Ta[ 


35 ^PX[oyT\ 


atv Tas /i[ 
\^.'(ii<nv 7rp[ 
[. .yexeX[ 
40 v(t>v ov8[ 
^xoi^re? [ 
efj(oi' yd'ip 
Some columns lost. 



Col. V (=B Col. i with Fr. 3). 

2nd hand 

]• eL<TLv8iKa[. . . 

vnrTre<ou[. . . 

]' €VLOL8(7rfi[. . . 

a-TLOV T)fJ.€P[. . . 


'TOiaVTT]lK[. .]l[. 

]i(T ayr](rLXa[. .jSc 


]Ka[. .]Tpi 



ova- TavTrjnaXC 



]iLV Tt<T(Ta(p€p[.]r]<T 











' aauTafiax^o-OaL 


]a-aa' oi8€(3ap(3a 











]7r po(T^aXou 

Plate IV. 


Col. V. Plate IV. 

1, dalu Sk Ka[. . . VI. i 

T(o]v iTnrioiv [. . . B.C. 395 

\ euioL Se 7rp[. . . 

^ ] TOlaVTt} k[, .]l[. 

]iy. 'Ayr](Ti\a[o9] Sc 2 

to] (TTpaTOTT.iSoV 
to] Ka[v(T]TpL- 
[OV TTiBioV ] TO, SpT] Ta^dp€- 

10 [vo9 ]ov9, TavTTj ttolXlv 

JT^y ToiavTT] (pdd- 
\(ras ]y T^ cTTpaTOTreSou 

]€tv. Tiorcracpep^u'ri^ 3 

[Sk €iTriKo]\ovdeL Toh " E\X7][cr]iu 

^5 [^'X'^'^ Imria? p.\v . . . a]KL(T\L\iovs Ka\l] /iv- 

[piOV9, TTi^OV? Si fXVpiOOU o]vK kXcLTTOVS- 

[Ayr]aiXao^ B\ r)yr}]<Tdpevos X«^^- 

[nbv rrpoa^dWovTa^ tovs iroXcfjiLo^vs ck Trapard- 
[^60)? dfjivueadaL noXv tcou 'EXX-qvwv vTripeyoma^, 
20 \iTa^(.v kv irXLvOico to aTpdTev/xa . .]X<09 Kal Kpa- 
[r ] (TTpaTijyia? 

]aavTa pidyjiaOaL 
]0i)V CTTpdTivpa 

](Tas, ol 8k ^dp(3a- 
35 [poi ]ey Kal avvT€Ta- 

[ypev ] e)(0UT€9 Toaov- 

[r 8]vi'aT09 d(f)oppdu 

Ka]TuSoV T0V9 "EXXt]- 
[i/ay ojure T7]v Tropeiau 

30 ] KaTa(ppov€iv 

]VT€S avTovs 

] TOV (TTpaT€V- 

[paT09 ] TTpoa^aXov- 





(Fr. 3) 


_ vy[ 


50 [ 



65 . a 

Oi . [ 


60 . i[ 


] . coparova-eWr] 
]\€oua[. .]a>i'a(L 
]lJ.oia>cr e[. .](St€ 
]yapaiJ.(l)OTep[. . 
]€T[.]TrpoLov[. . . 


• a[. 

jfoycTifarr/ij' . [. . . 

]Ta[.]€flOV<Tc[. . . . 

]a>PT)V7ro\\[. . 
]^ovXev<TOfi[. . . 
]uTov€via . [. . . 

]voiTiv(ia[. . . 

]y(reyv<i)Ka . [. .] 

] . Ta)VTr]<J-VVKT[. .] 

]o7rX€iTa(T[. . . .] 

Col. vi (=B Col. ii). 

Plate IV 

TaKO(novaS[. .]€iXov(T' KaiTo[ 



€icrfia)(7]VT[. . .](<T$aL' [ ]k[. . 

5 aua(TTr]<ra(ra[ ]fP?[" •]9[' ']R9[' • ']v[ ]^^V 



c^loj^ej/ rou nXiu- 

35 [^^ou 

ov npoairaT- 


] Tovs Sk TLtXonov 

vrjcriovs KOi 

Tovs avuiidyov^ ]t Trpoafjye no- 

. (opa T0V9 " EXXi]- 


Xeov a[. .]a>i' del 


6]/XOlC09 ([. .]Su- 

]v kyy vTipci) fxdX- 


ov]8kv dX\' 17 rou 


yap dp(poT€p[. . 


€r[.] TTpOi6v[T. . 

45 H 

o]X(y% . .V[ 




' av[. ...]., 'A[yr]<Ti- 

\a[os S^ 

. i;[. . . 


(rT/?]aT[e]t;/za[. . . 


]nrovo[. . . 

7r]apa<TKeva^. . 

' lovs '(-va Trj V . [. . . 

Ka]TaJ,v]efj.ov(TL [. . . . 


(cvrjv 7roXA[. . 

55 • 4 

^ovXivaop.[iv . . 

TT . 

]v Tov kvLa . [. . . 

OL . 

VOlTiViLa\. . . 


]vy eyro) Ka . [. . 

. [ 

. TOiv Trj? vvkt[os 

60 . i 

/xcfl onXCra? [. . . . 

Col. vi. • Plate IV. 

raKoaiovs S[\ y^]i.Xov9, Kal to[vtol9 iuiCTTrjaiu dpxoura 
aevoKXia [^]7rapTidTi]v n apayyeiXas orav ykvcavrai 

^a^i^ovT^^ KaT avrovs [ 

€£? lJidyr]v T[d(T(T]i(T6ai. [et'y (5e Tr]v kmovaav . . . .'<[• • 
5 dvaaT-qaas a[/ia rjfiypa [T]b [aT'jpd^reyjia TrdXii>] dufj- 


yii^eia-Tonpl ]SePap^apoiavi/a[ jai/rea 

coaeicodeaa' payT(oP7rpo(re(3aXX[. . jOKTiXXr} 

(nvoi8€TT€[ ]vouavTova- oiSeK[.]TaT07re 

SlovaTaKj. . . .]r]KoXov6ovu' oS€^\.]poKXrj(r 

10 €7r€iSr]Kaip[. . . .yXaftei/eiuaiTOKnroX^fiioicmn 
y^apHv ava[. . . .^a(T€KTr]<Teu€SpaorTOva7r€XoTTO~ 
vr)(nov(TiOi6[. . . .jo/xcoLTcovSe^ap^apcoifcoaciSoue 
Ka(7Toi7rpocr6€[. .\ra(xrovaiXXrjvaa- €(p€vyouKada7rau 
tott^Blov ay\_. . . .]aocr8^KaTi8(iovTT€(po^r)p.evovaav 

1 5 Tov(Te7r€iJ.7reva7rorovcrTpaTev/xaTO(rToV(7T€Kov<pov(T 
[.]a)i'(rTpaTicoTa)U' KaiTovaiinriaaSLCo^ovTaai.KHvovcT' 
rcovl3apl3apoou[-] (7raKoXov6-)]arauTe(r8eroLa7roXeixi[.]i(r 
ovXiavTroXv[.])(poi>oi>' ovyap[. . .^vavTOKaTaXapL^a 

20 veLveavTovaaT^T[.'\v'TroXX(j>v[. .] . ecopovTCOPKaiyv 
/xvr]T(ov KaTa^aXXovcriv niv[. .]TOi)V7r€pLe^aKocrt 
ova- a7roaTapTea8€TT](r8L0o[. . .]o- e^[.]5[.]^oz/e7rau 
roToaTpaToiTe8ovTOT(ov^a[. . .]p(»v[- . .^raXa^ov 
reaBecpvXaKrjp- ovcr7rov8ai[. . .]a^e[. . .jcraj/- Ta)(^e 

25 (naaLpovaiv Ka[.]Xap.PavovaLv[.'\yT(»iv[. . .^Xrjvp.iva 

yopav (TV-^vo\. .](5ear^/3&)7ro[.]o'[-] 7roXA[. . .^crKevq' Kac 

)(pT]lj.aTa/j.€i'[. . vaXX(x)VTa8[.]Ticr(Ta(f)e' ]avTov (ist hand) ye 

vopLivr](T8iT[. .]pLay^r]aTOL(xv[?ir}a'OLiie[. . .]p^apoiKa 
Ta7rXayepT€a[. . . .](XXr]pa(ra7r€^a)pr](T[ ]T(i)Ticr 

30 aa(pepv€i7rpoarTa(T(rap8€La-ayr]cnXaocr8€7rep[. . .]ivaaav 
TOVTpeL<xr]H€pa(r€pai(rTOV(TP(Kpov(ru7ro(T7r[. .]Sov<7a7r€ 
8(oK€VToi(nT[.]X€p.iot(TKaLTponaiou€(rTr][. .]KaLTr]~ 
yT]i>aTTacraue[. . . .]r](T€V7Tpor]yevTO(TTp[. . .]upaeicr 
(ppvyiavTTaXiv[. . .]p€yaXr]i/€7roi€LTo8e[.]T]u7TopeLap 

35 OVKeTl(TVl^T€rayp€UOV(T€XO)V€VTC07rX[.]u6€lQ)TOV(T 


paaeTTLivaLKaiKaKooanoul ]7roX€p.[.]ovaTi<T(ra(f)€p 

vr]ar8€7rv6o/x€j/0(TTOv<T([ ]a8i^€iu€icrT07rpoa6€ 

avaXa^(i>vav6L(TT0v<x^[ ]7r7;[. . . .]yB(.L0Tncy6i~ 


yiv €19 ru irpoaOiv. ol] 81 (Sdp^apoi avva KoXov6rja]avT€9 
0)9 (l(Jo$eaay ol fie i' avrcoi' Trpoai(3aXX[oi'] to?? ' EXXt]- 

aiv, ol 8' erref ]voi^ avTOVs, ol 8e K[a]Ta rb n(- 

8[ov aTa/CT[ct)y kiTr\KoXov6ovv. 6 81 HieVo/cAT/y, 

10 ineL87j Kaip[bv I'TTJeXajSei' ihaL T019 TToXepiiois Ittl- 
•^(eipuv, dva^ aTri<T\a9 Ik tt)? iut8pas 701)9 TleXoiTov- 
I'-qa-LOV^ e{(u}^[€t Spo/jLcp. Tcou 5e ^ap^dpcoi' m (i8ou e- 
Kaaroi iTpoa6e\ov]Ta? tov9 " EXXrjua? €(f>evyou Ka& dirav 
TO 7re8iou- Ay[T]crLX^ao9 8k KaTi8o)v iTe(f)0^r]pevov9 av- 

15 Toi/s eirefxrreu dnb tov (TTpaT(vfJ.aT09 tov? re Kov(f)OV9 

[tJcoU O-TpUTlCOTcioV Kul T0V9 iTTTTeay 8Ld>^0VTa9 kK^VOVS- 

01 Se fiiTa TCOU iK TTJ? kue8pa9 dvaaTdvTcnv kuiKUVTo 
t{o?9) (3ap^dp(oi9). knaKoXov6rjcravT€9 5e Tory noX(fii[o]i^ 
ov Xiav TToXvlu] y^povov, ov yap [r]8v\vavT0 KaTaXap.^d- 

20 VHV {e\avT0V9 uTe T[Siv TToXXuiv [liT^nk(t)v ovToov Koi yv- 
lxvriT(£>v, KaTa^dXXovcrtf fxeu [av]TO)U mpl l^aKoat- 
0V9, dnoa-TduTe? 8e r^y Sico'Jeco^^ e^[d]8[i\^ou krr av- 
To Tb (TTpaT6'm8ov Tb TCOU (3a[p^dp](ou. [Ka]TaXa(36u- 
rey 8h (pvXaKT]u ov (Tnov8at^co9 K]a6€[(TT(o]aai' TOLyk- 

25 coy alpovaiu, Ka'J Xap^dvovcriv [a\uT(ov [ttoXJA^i^ pikv d- 
yopdv av)Q/o[v9] 8\ du6pd)7ro[vy, 7roXX[a Se] aKevr] koI 

yprj/xaTa {rd) fiku [tco]^ dXXcou Ta 5[e] TLaaa(f)k[pvov9 avTov. yc- \''II. i 
uofiivT]? 8e t[t]9] fjidyv^ T0Lav[T]r)9 ol fJik[v ^d]p^apoL Ka- 
TairXayiuTiS [tov?] "EXXrjva? drrcx^PV^i^^ ^^^] '''V '^'■^' 

30 aacpkpuei npb? Ta? SdpSiL?; 'AyrjaiXao? 8^ 7r€p[ifie]iua? av- 
Tov Tpe7? j)fxkpa?, ku al? Toii? ucKpov? vTroa7r[6u]8ov? dnk- 
ScoK(u TOi? 7r[o]X(fiioL? Kal TponaLOV e(rrT7[cre] koi ti]v 
yfju diraaav k[TT6pO\qaev, nporjyeu Tb a-Tpi[dTe]vfxa et'y 
^pvyiav rrdXiv [Tr]v] fX€ydXr}i>. ktroiUTo 8\ j]r]v nopeiau 2 

35 ovKiTL crvvTeTayfikvov? '4)(cou kv T(Jo TrX[L^y6i(o tov? 

aTpaTid)Ta?, dXX' tcou auTOV? oa-rjv r](3ovXopTO Trj? \C0' 
pa? kmiuaL Kal KaKoo? noteju tov?] 7ToX€p[i]ov?. Tiacracpep- 
UT]? 8k 7Tv66fi(PO? TOV? "E[XXT]i'a? ^]a8i(iiv d? Tb irpoaOdiv) 
duaXa^cou avOi? tov? ^[ap^dpov? k]TrTj[KoXo]vd€i oiridO^v 


40 av7aiVTroWova-a-Ta8Lo[ ].'7o-'^[- • .]8iBu^i\6[. . 

roTTi[.]LOVTOT(t>v\v8(ov[ ']arLav[ '\8iaT(c[. 

opcovTccivSiafie(TOVK([ ]Tr][ ]KaiTr](r 

(PpvyiaaeTreiSrjSeSieTTOpl ]aa€ 

Tovai\\r}vacrei(TTqv(p[ W 

45 fxaiav8pouTTOTafj.ouo[ 1 




[.]ufifia)(^ov(Te6veT07roT[. .]ax[. •]^[-]a/3[ 

50 fiovrj/jLT] Kai^aSi^€ipe7nK€\a[ ]ova- 

aTpaTKOTaaaTrayeivQxrSeavye^l ]/ir] 

y€iP€a-6aiKaXaTai€pa7r€pi/j.c[.]va[ ]^Vf^^ 

pavrjVTTapeyeviTOKaiT-qviTnol jei^To" 

Col. vii ( = B Col. iii with Frs. 4-6 and Fr. 7 Col. i). 

(Fr. 4) 

[ ]\aoafiivov[. . . . 

[ ^SpovKa\ovjiivo\. 

8[ ] . viixovTai\v8[. . 

k[ ] . Si^acriXevar 

5 . [ ]€piTOVTOVa- 

t[ ]aTr]yovafj.a[. 

Sel ] . Tiaaacpepvr] 

€t[ ]y(reXXr]ua(T 

oi . [ ]vovKai/xaX 

10 Xo[ ] . 8i\aK€i 

av[ ]a0[ 

OTr[ ]€piri[ 

15 Sia[ ]airap[ (Fr. 5) 

opy[ ]avT(»KaTr]y\[.] . a[']o(.8i[ 


40 avTwv TroXXov9 aTa$to[v9 Su^ccv. 'Ay\r](ri\\(io^] 8\ Si€^€Xd[(ou 3 

TO n([S]iov TO TU)V AvSoou [rjye Tr]v (TTp\aTiau [ ] 8ia Ta>\y 

opaJu TUiu Sia fxeaov Ke[tfi€yQ)i> . . .] t^[9 AvSia^] Kal Trj9 
^pvyias' eneiSTj Se Sc€7rop[iv6T](Tau TavTa KaTe^il3 aae 
ToifS "EXXr]i'a9 ci? Tr)i> ^^pvyiav eco^ a<piK0VT0 irpoi t-oi' 

45 MatavSpov noTapov, Oi? yoeoji/ otto KfXai- 

v<ov, Tj tS)v kv ^pvyia p-cyicrTt] [ttoXis ecrriu, eKSiSooaiu 

f/p OdXaTTav irapa TIpLrjvqv K[a\ KaTuaTpa- 4 

TOTTiBivcra^ Sk tov9 Tl€Xon[ovvr]aiov<i Kal tov? 
[<r]v/jLp.d\ov9 kOviTo Tr6T[ep]a XlP^] 8[i\a^\aLvHv tov nora- 

50 jjLov rj p.ri, Kal ^aSi^^iu inl K€Xa[iva9 rj ndXiv t]ov^ 
arpaTicoTai aTrdyeip. cuy ^e crvve^[aiv€if avTw] pi] 
yiyvicrOai KoXd to, Upd, irepLp.ii va[s c/cef ttjv r]e ^p^- 
pav 7)1/ Trapcyei'eTO Kal Trju i7rio[vaau dTrfjy'^y tov 

Col. vii. 

[aTpaTou 'Ayt](riXao9 filv ov[v . . . 

[ TO TTiSiov TO Maidu]Spov KaXoCpi(.vo[v 

8[ v^povTai AvS'^yol 

k[ ] . $€ ISaaiXeij? VIII. 

5 . [ 7r]c/9i T0VT0V9 

T\ (TTp'^aTriyov apa 

8\ [ Tiaa-acpipvr) 

€t[ To'^v'i "EXX-qvas 

01 . [ yov Kal pdX- 

10 Xo[y ] . Si\a Kei- 

arv[ Tia(T]a^[epi> 

07r[ 'ApTai]ipi[ 

15 8ia[ ]a7rap[ 

Xo[ ]<a[. .]oiT€[ ] . aa[ 

opy[ j avTco KaTT]y[.] . a[.]a 81^ 


aa[. . .]rej8aa'iX6i'(70//oXoyowJT[. .]/xaXi(rT[ 

20 7ravTa)VKa6aTi6pa[ ]vTovKa[.] . . [ 

ocre7re(5?//cara0 [ ]yiavKai\vS[ 

To[. . . .]ei/aye7rejj.ylr[ ]oXa(racre0e/D[ 

pa[ ]iTrpo(Tapi\[ ](Taa(f) .]pvT][ 

€tt[ ]o7rpoaixe . [. .]aiou\co(ra. . [ 

25 or . [ ]Xa(3eLP€Key[. . .]ai5[ 

ef[ ^VTOvyi\j. . .]Tai[ 

7re[ ]vovTo[ ]ov[ 

Xco[ ] . j^6[.]eXXei^7;x[ 

aiu[ ]idpava[ (Fr. 7 Col. i.) 

30 ra .[ ]t[ p 

So . [ ]Tr](r 

(^TroKpel ]i>[. . 


07roT€a[ (Fr. 6) 
35 (pepvr][. .]7recrT€tX€rr|[ ]9^r\[ ]9 

ap[.]a[.]o(T€La-(TapSeiaTo\[ ]ovov[ 

i'aTO(rTLacra(pepi'rj^[ ] . pia . [ 

^e\Ti(TToiTa)P(rTp[. . •]ya)[[. . .] . layere . [ 

8vp[. .]e/30J'e|e(i^T[. .]aTaTr]\[.](Ta[.]pa7rta[ 
40 0VKq.[.]r}fjiei/0V7repi[.]T]v/xayp\[.](T[.]au€/jLi[ 

Tcop[. .]^cc[.]KaiTcovL7nT€<a\[. . . .]co7rpo[ 

€[. . ']oi'S[. .]k€1/X€P0v[ 

X[.]v(raXXr)7roiJ^. .] . ay[ 
^ovXofievoa8[. .]it[.] . [ 
45 crTpaT€v/xaTa[.] . [ 

Col. viii (=Fr. 7 Col. 11). 


[• • • -M 

[. . .]7rpo[ 


<Ta[. . .]re (3aai\iV9 6/zoXoyoi;rr[ . . ] /xd\iaT[a 

5t[a Ti<T^cra(pepu7]v Kai 7ra[.]<i)u kK^'ivou [ 

20 ndpTCov Kad' a Ti6pa[vaTT]9 a]vTou Ka[.] . .[ 

09 eireiSf) KaTa(f)[ ^pv]yiau Kal AvS'Jav 

To[. . . .]€J/ dv^iT(ixy^\iv eTTiarjoAa? a? ^06^^^ 

pa[ ]l irpos 'Apilouov Ti]a(Ta(p[i]pi/T][ 

€7r[ ]o rrpoy Me[. .]aLou coy a . [ 

25 ar . [. . . .]Aa/3eJ"j/ €/cei^[. . .]aiS[ 

(v[ ]vTOv y€[. . .]rai[ 

7re[ ]uovTo[ ]ov[ 

Aa)[ ] . 1/ ef/zVXXej/ t])([ 

(Tiv[ T]i6pav(r[T 

30 ra . [ ]r[ ] Se 

So . [ yrjs 

diroKp^l ]v[. . 


6tt6t€ a[ Ttaaa- 

35 (p^pt^vi- d]ni(TT€iXev r[ ]o ap[ ]o 

'Ap[i]a[1]os e/y XdpSei's to[ ]ovov[ Sv- 

varo^ Tia-a-ac^epi/T] ] . pia . [ 

^iXriaroL roov <rTp[aTr]]ya>[v. .] . lai' ere .[.... aKiu- 

8vu[6t]€Pov €^€iv T\a. K]aTd T^V] crcC(T pairia\y AyqaiXd- 
40 ov Ka[6]r]fj.euov nepl [T]fji' M.ayv\ii\a\i av e/it[ 

rSiv [7reY<i^[i'] kol tccv l7r7r^(o[v. . .](o 7rpo[ 

€[. . .]ov 8[ia]Keifievov[ d\- 

X[o]v? dXXr] 7roi[. .] . ai/[ 

^ouXop-evo? 8[. .]7r[.] . [ 
45 arpdnvfia Ta[.] . [ 

Col. viii. 
2 lines lost 

[. . .]7rpo[ 



5 Trapra^l 


lo (p€pvr]a[ 


TToXecocr . [ 
15 . e^aS[ 

• • • L 

20 TiaaKara . [ 

yjraa-KaiTa . [ 
25 TaS(Tav[ 


30 [. .]Xoi . »'i7r[ 


fi(]^ . [ 


35 'r[-]yl3a[. . .]e(oa[ 


[. .yro^v^Xl 

[. .]Trev/3acrfX[ 


5 TV 'ApTa^[ipi 
ra 7]fiipa[9 

avTov a ^pv 

y/a? kTna[ 

rov Ti6p[avaTT]i/ Tia-a-a- 

10 (pepi/T]? [ 

TTpd^iv a[ 0/- 


7r6\€Q)S . [ 
VTTO T(i>V [ 

15 . e /3a5[i 

tS) T l6 pa\y<TTrj 

a\.\xi- 7rapa[ 


Trpo? rriv a[ 
20 Tfay Kara , [ 

. € ML\ri[(rL 

^//■ay Koi ra . [ Ka- 

T7]p€U ih [ 

'ApLoiov e[ fxf- 

25 ra 5e Tav[Ta 


IfiaTia r[ 

fot/ avvaplira 

Kal p.€Ta7r[ 

30 [. .]\0i . I' f77-[7r 

fx^v . [ 

TT]9 S[ 

35 Tl^]^ /3a[o-tX]eG)y [ 
Ta[r]s' €TriaToX[ah 
[. .]€ TO ^vfi\[ioy 
[. .]tt(u ^aai\[e 

M 2 



[. .'\avTovava[ 
40 [..]... eiveK . [ 

[. .]u^apl3apa>[ 

Col. ix ( = C Col. i with Frs. 8 and 9). 



(Fr. 8) 

(Fr. 9) 25 

15 lines lost 

] . KTCOTT] 


• • • 





Col. X (=C Col. ii with Fr. 10). 

voTri[:\ . aa{ 
a/xa/xei'[.]ou . [ 
a(f>Bo\p^a)[. . ^cr . \_ 

5 emTrj . . if^ajl 
SL€K€iy[. . .]r]T[.]o- . [ 
[.jaXcBi^o) . [ 

10 KUL^LU^ . [ 



Ofi0i[.]ua . [•]o'[-]a[ 

Ka)a[.]r]v . [.] . €[ 
15 fjiaarfVT]y€[ 

. repova€X[.]r][ 

Vrov[.]eKT[.]yTT[.]X[. . . .]yiyvofi[ 

vo(r8eTr]y[.] . [.])([.]ayapLaTaT[ 

K€)(pr]fieu[. .]ovyapco(rTr€po[ 
20 t/aaT€Voi^T(o[.]Q)pp.r]a-eu . [ 

ya<TKaLSr)[. .]tli<(ct . [.] . (Tt[ 



roovTrX€Lcr[. .^xi 
25 [. . . .]" . [. .]e[. . .]r[ 

(Fr. 10) [.]a)cr[ 


[. .] avrov dva\ 
40 [..]... ilV €K . [ 
[d\X\Tjif di^ay[ 
[t(o]v ^ap^dpci>[y 
Some columns lost. 




Col. ix. 



15 lines lost 


voTrj[.] . aa[ 


dfxa p.\v [.\ov .  


a0^o[i/]ft)[p . .](r . 


. laoiTt] 

fia Sk [.]€Uf(r' 

]XXr)P av- 

5 €7ri TT] . . IflUT 


rjprjfiivov V7rap^o[ 


Si €K€lv[. . .]T]T[.]cr . [ 


[.jaXcui' CO . [ 


[T](pov 7rci)[ 


10 Kal /3ta^ . 

• • • 

Xpovov p 


noXXrj^ Suva 


6poL[.'\v a . [^\ol[^^a 


Ka>9 [.]r)i' . [.] . e 

V irapaXa- 

15 pa(r€VT)ye[ 

] MaKeSo- 

. Tepov9 €X[.]r]' 

• •  • 

77 TOL'[?] e'/c t[o]u 7r[.]X[. . 

• •] yiyvop\evov^ 

V09 Se Trju [.] . [•]x[*']<^'' 



K€Xpripiv[o9,] ov yap axnrep o[i 

. .Tiou Bv- 

20 vacrT€v6uT(o[p] copprjaeu . 


ya? Kal St][po]tlkq)T . [. 

. (rr[ 

pera7r€p7r6[p]€vo9 €k' 

tc€i'at ri SoK[o]vvTa9 S[ 

T(ji)v TrX^ia\r(i)\v \ 

25 [....] . [. .]<• . ']A 




30 TOi>y[ 

Fragments probably belonging to Col. x. 

Fr. II. 

Fr. 1 2. 


• • • 

' KaiSet ' 

] . S^irpoafi 

] . [.]VTOO[ 

]<i)U€iXt] ' 

] • • f^il 

. reXev 

J • 

5 ]aTe8[ 


' . [.jex; 

5 ]adan€pi/i€ . [ 



 « L 

J • • • L 


" aXXcop^ap^apca[ 

• • « < 

10 ] . [.]a\\aTr]VfjL€[ 

Fr. 13. 

] . [.]T0y8€^L0V . Ifi . 


-» • 

^ampiTroW-qvcrT . . . 


]e . [ 





15 ]\Xai(TKaTaa-Keva[ 



5 ] . [. . . .]t[ 

Fr. 14. 

Fr. 15. 

J. • L 

]a€[.]lO . [ 


T]\(0(T€l> [ 

30 Ta>i^[ 

• • 

Fragments probably belonging to Col. x. 
Fr. II. Fr. 12. 


] Kol 8il[ 

] • ['^VTa{ 
] . . //i[ 
5 ]aTiS[ 


10 ] • [.] dWa Tr]v /H€[ 

] . [.]tov 8\ Piou . ip . [.]r[ 
]y nepl voWrju ar . . . <r[ 
Ka]TT]yay€}' durl a>v ^ya[ 
]y knoirj(T€ KaTa/f€t[ 
15 no^Xah KaTa(TK€va[ 
] Trepf 8\ rfju tov[ 

] . . . [ 
] . 8€ 7rpo<n[ 

] . T€Xev[r 
JTCBj/ nap' eK€Lu[ 
]ada 7T€pifji€ . [ 
]u €7rtra[ 

• • • 

Fr. 13. 

• • • 



Fr. 14. 

Fr. 15. 



]tlt[ ]«o'7'o^[ 

Col. xi( = D Col. i). Plate V. 

[ ]o"/?o[ ] . KadeKa 

[. . . .l'?i«e[.]ai^€^?7T[ ](7VVT0i(r6 

[. . . .](i^T(oXL{[ yii^a/xrjpa 

[. . . .]vyT€cr)(eipov(T[ JTToAe/xof^oi' 

5 [. . . .]voa8€7rapaaKe[ ]Tovcrpo8iov(T 

[. . . .]8(o(rii'€yToiao[ ]Ta(TTr]piKav 

[. . . .]arepyoicreni)(eipe[ ]Tracnue7roL 

[. . . .]opai'Tov€^€Ta[ ]KoaiXa^(i)~ 

[. . .]Tpirjpcoi/e^€7rX€v[ ]\ofj.(Pocr 

lo [. . .]ap(iuaiTr]8ia^6o[ ]ui€pa>i>v/xa> 

[. . .]cciP€iKO(f)r)fLC07rpocr€[ ]T]6r]vaiT(o~ 

[. . .]y/jiaTa>vova-ivavTOV7ra[ ]€pifi€ii'ar 

[. . .]eK€ivrjvTr]vr]fiepav7r[ ]rove^€Ta 

[. . .]uTr)VaT€paiaTcov(TTpaTi.[ ]Tr€p€icod€ 

15 [. . .]T0Vcr/x.€vavTCOP7rapr}ya[ jcroTrAoicreicr 

[, .]uXLfjL€uaT[.]va8(fX€i.Kpou[ ]a-ayopa(Tr(o~ 

[. .]po8ia>voia-vveL8oTea-Trj}/TT[ jai'VeXa/So" 

[.]aLpouey)(€ipeiV€iuaiToi(T€py[. . . .]i>€X€yovTO 

[. .]v€yy^eipL8iOL(T€i(TTr]vayopapKaL8a>pLiJ.ay^o(T 
20 [. .yvavTCCvava^aaiTTLTOvXiOovovirepeLOiOeiKr] 

[. .]TTeivoKr]pv^avaKpaya)V(oar]SvvaTOfj.eyiaTo~ 


[. .'\vTa')(j.crTr}voL8eXoLTTOL^or]cravToaeK€LvovTrf 

[. .]r]6€iav€icrnr}8r]cravT€afJ.€T€y^€ipi8icopei(XTaa-vp 
25 [.'\8piaT(AvapyovT(cva7roKT^ivovcnTovcrTi8Layo 

[. .^LOv(TKaLT(jcivaXX(cvTToXn(i)vev8eKa8i.aTTpa^a 


[, .]<r(KKXr]aiavapTL8€avy€iXey/J.€pa)PavTC0PK0pa>~ 


]Tn\ ]as 7roX[ 

VM ] . [ 

• • • • . • 

Some columns lost. 

Col. xi. Plate V. 

[ ]? /3o[ ] . Ka6' iKd- X. 1 

[o-TT/c] 77/ie[p]ai' e^J7r[a^e tov9 (TTparicoTai] avv roi? 0- B. C. 395 

[TrXoiy] €y t(o Xf/zei'[t, 7rpo(paai^6fj.ei'os yuejr I'ua fir) pa- 
[6vfio]vi^T€9 \dpovs [yu'OiVTai irpo'S tov\ TroXefiOf, ^ov- 
5 [X6/ie]i'oy Se 7rapacrK€[vdaa9 r}(TV)(^cv9] tov9 'PoSiovs 

[oTav t]Sco(nv Iv T019 o[7r\oL9 avT0V9 napoi^ya^ rrjuiKav- 
[ra TO?]? epyoi? €7rix€ipe[Tv iml Sk a-vvi]6r}] Trdaiv enoi- 
[r](r€v] opdv tov €^€Ta[cr/j.6i>, avros fi-^v u]KoaL Xa(3o)i' 
[toou] TpL-qpccv e^e7rXef[crei' e/y Kavvov, (3ov]X6/j.€i'09 

10 [fjLT] Trlapelvai rrj Sia(p6o[pa roov ALayopeia)\Vj 'lepcouvfico 2 

[8e K]al NiKO(f)rifjLa) iTpoae\Ta^iv i7nfx.e\]r]6fjvaL ratv 
[Trpa]yfidToou ovaiv avrov 7ra[pi8poi9' 01 TrYpindvav- 
[rey] eKeivrju rrjv rjpiepav, napovTOiv krrl] tov (^€Ta- 
[(rixo]u Trj vcTTepaia Tan/ a-TpaTi[coTd>u Ka6d]Tr€p elcoOe- 

15 [crat',] TOILS' fJ.€v avTa)V naprjya\yov criiv toTs ottXoi? ez'y 
[Thy Xifxeva, t[o]v9 Se (iLKpov [diTo ttj]? dyopd?. tcou 
\8i\ 'PoSi(ou ol avveiSoTei Trjv Tr[pd^Lv, cojy virkXa^ou 
[K\aLpov ky\HpHV klvai toIs epy[o/y, a-v\viX€yovTo 
[(Tv]v ky^eipiSiois e/y Tr]V dyopdv, koI Awptfiayo? 

20 [/i]fi' ij'-^^ avrdtv dua^d? enl tov XlOov ovirep elciodei ktj- 
[pv\TT€tv 6 KTJpv^, dpttKpayoDu ctfy rjSvvaTO /xiyiaTov, 
[t]coix€v, CO dvSp€9, ^(PV) TToXiTai, kirl Tovs Tvpdvvov9 
[r^lf Ta')(i(XTr]v. ol 8k Xonrol ^orjcravTO? eKeivou ti)v 
\^^6\rjOeLav elaTrTjSrjaavTe? {MeT ey^€ipi8icov Ci'y tu avv- 

25 \i\8pLa Toou dp^ouTcov d-rroKTeivovai roi/y re Aiayo- 
[pe]iov9 Kal TCOU dXXcov ttoXltcov eV^e^a, Sianpa^d- 

\jl\iV0l 8\ TaVTCL QVVr\yOV to TtXtJOo? to T(0V 'Po8lCtiV 

[ei]y €KKXr](riav. dpTi 8e (rvv€iXeyfievcov avTcov Kovoiv 3 

rjKi ndXiv €< Kavvov jx^Ta tcov Tpiy^pcov ol 8k ttjv 


30 (T<payr]V€^(pyaaaii€voiKaTa\vcrai>T€(TTr]V7rapovaa'^ 

/Sei/ l3oL(OTOlSeKai(pQ)KClcrTOVTOVTOvd€p0V(T€l(r 

35 7roX€fjLovKaT((rTr](rav€y€voi'To8€Tr]creK6paa-auToi(r 
npo€X0ouT€cr€i)(^ev8era7rpayfj.aTaTOT€Ka[. .]Tr)~ 
^oi(OTLavovTco(jT]aavKaT€(rTr]Kvl'aL(3ovXaLT[ ]o 

Col. xii ( = D Col. ii). Plate V. 

T(T€TTa.[ ]Ka(rTr)TQ)i'7roXe(oua>vov[ 

TOLCnroX^l ]l/fl€T€)(€lVa[. . .]TOl(rK€K\ 

7rXr}6oaT[ jrcovTovTccvSeToovfiovXoi^ 

fi€po(r€Kaa[ ]aOr]/jL€vr]Kai7rpoPovXev[ 

5 7repiTQ)i/7r[ ]Ta>u€icr€<p€p€vei(TTa(TTpe[. . . . 


i8La8l(TeXoVl'OVTCi)8lOLKOVfX€l^OLTo8€r<i)[. . . . 

cdTOiVTOVTOvqvTOVTpoTrovcrvvreTaynivov'^. . . 
8iKanepr]8Lrjpr]VTOTravTecroiTriv)(a>pavoLKOVY[. . . 
10 KaLTOVTa)V€KaaTOV€vaTTapei)(^erol3oLa>Tapxoi'[. . . 
6rjj3aioifxei^T€Trapaavu(l3aXXouTo8uofievvTr€[. . . 


1 5 XovvTOi>v^L<TTa(T6ri^a(T8vo8^Trap^LyovTo^oi(£)Tapxa(r 




20 Pa8i^€V€^aKpaL(puiovKaiKa>7r(ouKaL)(^aip(oveia(T 

ovTcofievovuecfx p(TafJ.( prjTov(Tap)(^OPTa(T7rap€i)(^€ 



30 <T(f>ayr]v i^epyaad/jLeuoi KaraXvaavTi'S tt]v napovaav 
TToXiTeiau KaTicrrrjcrav SrmoKpaTiav, Kal tcov tto- 
XiTcof Tivas 6Xiyov9 (pvydSa^ knoiriaav. r] filv ovv 
kiravdaTaais r] iTcpi ttjv 'PoSov tovto to TeXo? eXa- 
fiiv. BoLcorol Se Kal ^coku^ tovtou rov Sepov? el? XI. i 

35 noXffioi^ KaTiarrjaav. eyepovTO <5e r^y ty^Qpas avroh 

\(i\tTLOL fidXiara tcov kv rai? &rj^ais rii^e?- ov yap noXXoT? 
[i]r(aiv irpoTipov tTV)(ou el? (TTaaiaapov oi BotcoTol 
npoeXOovT^?. ff'x^'' "^^ "^^ irpdy/jLara Tord /fa[ra] rr\v 2 

BoicoTiau ovTQ)?' rjaau KaOeaTrjKVtai fiovXal t6- 

Col. xii. Plate V. 

re TeTTa[p€S nap' eJKacrr; rooy noXecou, oov ov\j(^ diraai 

Toh 7roX[lTaiS e^ri]v fliT^\iLV d\XXa\ TOI9 K€K[TT)fJl€V0l9 

nXr]66? t[i -ypT] ixd]Tcov , rovTcov 8\ rwv ^ovX(i)\y Kara 
likpo? (.Kda\Tr] TTpoK\aQr]\ikvr\ Kal Trpo^ovX€v[a-a(Ta 
5 ircpl Ta)v TT^pay nd\T(ov (i(r4(f)€p(i/ e/y ra? Tpi[i?, ti 

S' ^8o^€u €[v] andaai? tovto Kvpiov kyiyv^To. K\al to, p\v 3 

tSia SuTkXovv ovTCo SioiKOVfxevot, to Se Ta)[i' Boi- 


SfKa fikprj 8ij)pr]VT0 nduTe? ol ttju y(ji)pav olKovviji?, 
10 Kal TovToov 'kKaaTov ^va Trapeiy^eTO BoiooTdp)(T]v [coSi' 

Grj^aiot pev TkTTapa? {a)vve^dXXovTO, Svo pkv i'7re[p ttj? 

TToXco)?, Svo Se vnep IlXaTaikwv Kal ^KoyXov Kal 'Ep\y\Opu^v 

Kal XKacpSiv Kal tS)v dXXcov ■ycopicou Toiv vrpoTipou 

fikv (KeiuoLS av/j.TroXLT€VO/xkua>u t6t€ Se (rvvT€- 
15 XovuTcov €('$■ TO.? Orj^as. Svo Sk TTapH)(^ovTO BoLOHTdpyas 

Op')(opkvLOL Kal 'Tcriatoi, Svo Se Gecnriei? aiiv EvTprjcrei 

Kal Qicr^ai?, '4va Sh Tavaypaloi, Kal ndXiv €T€pop 'AXidp- 

Tioi Kal Af^aSeh Kal Kopcopu?, tv eTre/iTre KaTo. p.k- 

po? €<daTt] TCOV TToXiCOV, T0l> aVTOV S\ TpOTTOV k- 

20 PdSi(ev k^ 'AKpaicpvLov Kal Kconooi/ Kal Xaipooveia?. 

OVTCO p\v ovv 'i(f)epi to. p-kprj tov? dpy^ovTas' nap(i)(i- 4 

TO ct Kal (3ovX(vra9 k^i]KOUTa KaTo. tou BoLcoTdpyriv, 




25 onXeirao'iTr'neacrSeeKaTovaTraxTSeSrjXcocraiKaTa 

30 KaiTaKOiifaTa)u^oia)Tcov€VTrjKa8fX€iaaw€Ka 

35 Tov8€X€ourLaSr](TKaiaaia(TKaiKoppavTa8a<7€(ppo 

Col. xiii ( = D Col, iii). 

. . .]t<o[. .]6T]i'aia}vaXXeL)([ 

. . .] . 7r[ ]€a-)(OJ^e7reLToy[ 

....]... 7r^[. .]povpTop,aXX[ 

. . .](crKaK(ocnroL€ii^€TOip.ovaa[ 



. .]^€iv8LaK([.]fJ.ei'a>p8eTcopeu[ 

.]aiTr]a€Taip€iaa€KaT[. •]c(-cr'i''o'x[ ]t(^ 

. . .]or]X6ouTroXXoiKaLTa>u€i^Taia[ ]a 

. .]y^oicoTLavKa[.]fj.€Te[.]^oveK[ ] 

. . .]cou€K€ivoia€SvyavTo8eT[ ] 

, . .]pcoTrpoTepovoi.Tr([.]iTOvi(rfJ.r][ ]j/ 

.]poKXei8r]VKanrapavToicrToi[ ]ai 

. . .]Tr]^o[. .]r]T(Di^PoL0OTa>v€nnp[ Jtt/OO 

. . ,]vonr[.]pLTova(rTLavKaiX(ovT[ ] 

. . .]va(XV)(^i'ovKaiTr]V7roXiv8ia7i[ ]X°^ 

. .]eyap7roX€ixovi/T€croiXaK€8aip[ ]a 



Kol TovTOi^ avTol TO. Ka& r)fxipau df/jXicTKou. ^mreTa- 
KTO S\ Kol arpaTia iKoicrTco fifpei nepl )(iXiov9 fikf 
25 onXhas iTnrias Se ^KaTOv ccttXcos Sk SrjXcocrai Kara 
rbi/ dp'^ovra kol tcov kolucoi/ direXavov Kal tocs e[i]cr0o- 
pas inoiovvTO Kal SiKacr{Ta9) enennoi/ Kal piTil'^ov dndv- 
Toov 6fioi<09 Kal T(Jov KaKOiv Kal tcou dyaOoiiv. to /xku 

OW idv09 SXOU OVTCOS klToXLTiV^TO, Kal TO, (TVl/iSpia 

30 {/caij- TO. KOLva Ta>v BoicoTcov ku rfj KaS/j.€ia crvviKa- 
Oi^iv. (.V Sk Tais ©rivals trvyoi' 01 (SeXricrToi Kal yvco- 
pLfidoraToi Tcou iroXtToiv, coairep Kal irpoT^pov (iprj- 
Ka, aracnd^ovTis npos dXX-qXovs. rjyovvTO S\ tov fxi- 
pous TOV jxkv 'IafiT]uia? Ka[l] 'Aurideos Kal 'Ai'SpoKX{€iSa)? 

35 TOV Se AiovridSris Kal 'Aatas Kal KoppaurdSa^, k(f)p6- 
vovv Se TOiv TToXLTiVQiiivoau ol pikv Trepl tov A^ovtl- 
dSrjv TO. AaKeSaifJ.oymi', [o]l Sk irepl tov 'lafxrjVLav 
atTiav p.\v uyov 'Attiki^^iv e^ wu npoOvfioi 7rpo<5 
TOV Stjjxov iyevovTO coy e0i'y(e)i^' ov fj.7]v ecppov- 


Col. xiii. 

[rt^oi/] Ta)[v 'A]6T)vaicov, dXX' ci)([ov 

[ ] • '^i ]€a)(ov eVei tov[9 

[ ] • • • 'n'p[oT)]povvTO fxdXX[ov 

[ ]ey KaKco? noiuv Itoi/xov? a [ 'Attl- 

5 \Kt\(iLv. 5m/fe[^]//€ra)i/ 8\ tcov kv [Qrj^aLS ovtcos 
[K]al TTJs iTaip€ta9 iKaT[ip]a9 la"^vovarj9, CTreijra 
\TTp'\or}X6ov TToXXol Kal T(ov kv Tah [irSXeaL /car]a 
\Trf\v BoiooTiav Ka[i] fX€Te[cr])(^ov iK[aT€pov tcov] 
[fiepjciov kKiivoLS. kSvvavTO Se t[6t€ jxlv Kal] 

10 \_nLK\pS> TTpOTepov ol 7rf[p]i TOV Ia-firj[viav Kal To]v 
\^AvS]poKX€iSav Kal nap avToT? toi[? Qrj^atoLS K]al 
[napb,] TTJ Po[vX]fj tcov Bolcotcov, (fjLTrp[oa-6cv Sk] npo- 
[cr^oji^ OL 7r[e]pi TOV A(T{T\iav Kal A€OVT[id$i]v )(^p6vov] 
[Ti.]vd crv^vov Kal ti]v ttoXiv Sid rr[ ]x°''' 

15 [oVje yap ttoXc/jlovvt^s ol AaK(8aiji[6vioL tois] 'A- 



[. . .]aLOi(r(vSeKeX€iaSieTpeLPoi'KaL(r ..[..]. [.] . 

20 TroXiv€vepy€T€[.]a6aiSLavTa>v€7r[ ]6t] 

^aLonroXv7rpo(T€vSaifxouiavoXoKX ]v 

6€(ocra>aoTroXefJ.O(rTOLaadr]uaiOL<T[ ] 

ToicrXaKeSaipoi/ioi(rap^afiev(ovyapaTr[. . .](iu 
T(i)va6rjvaL(i)VTri^0L(i)TLaavv(i0KLa6r](Tav[. .Jaau 

25 Taaoir€^epv6pcoj/Kai(TKa(p(opKaL(rKODXovKa[. .]Xi 

30 \ia-avTOL(Ta6-qvaLOL(xp.iTaTaivXaKe8aLfi[. . .jcoj/ 

TaTiyapav8paTro8aKaiTaXonTaTTavT[ ]f 

7roX€iJ.oi/aXL(TKop.ei>a/xiKpovTii^[ ]v7rap 

€Xa/i(3avovKaiTr}i'^KTT]craTTiKr}[. .]aTa[.]K€vr]~ 

35 aai'coaavTova-anoTcoi'^vXcouKaLTOVKepafj.oVTOV 

40 a$T]i/atoouovT(i>a€^r]crKT]TOKaiSL€7re7roi'r]TOKa 


Col. xiv ( = D Col. iv). 

.]p(3oXi]v . [ ]8^u7ra.pavTOi(T€7ra[. .] 

. .]iKr](r€i[ ]Ko8ofj.T]jj,€i'aa-r]7ra 

.]i(raXXoiff[ jj^. iToa^yapauTcoyana 

.]v€XXt]1/[ ] . €Xap.(3aU0l'€L(TT0V[.] 

.]yaaypovaa[ ]yv7rpayfiaTaTaKaT[.] 

](r6T]^a(TKaLT[ ]ovTOi)(roL8e7repiToya[.] 

8poKX^L8avKa[ ]<nrov8a^oviKTToX€ 


\6r)v\aiOi^ kv Je/ccXet'a SiiTpi^ov Kal (t ..[,.].[.] . T[(t>]v 

a[v]r(ioi/ avfjifid^ooi/ ttoXv avvH')(Ov, ovtol /^[a]A- 

Xoy k8vvd<JT(.vov to)v iripcou dfia filv T(o 7rX[T]^(Ti- 

ov ilvai T0V9 AaK€[8\ai/jLOu[L]ov9, dfia Sk tco noXXa r]^j/ 
20 TToXiv iv^pyiTi\l]a6aL Sl avToiiv. kTT[i8o(Tav Se ol] Srj- 

(Saioi TToXv Trpo9 (vSai/ioviau 6X6kX[t]poi/ €/>- 

6eco9 coy 6 noXcfio^ T019 'Adrjvatois [ei/eo-r?/ /cat] 

Tols AaKeSaLfioi'ioL?' dp^ap.ii'Oii^ yap d7r[eiX]eiv 

Tcou ABrjvaioiv ttj Bolcotio. crvyctxiadijaav [e/]? av- 
25 Ta? ol T k^ 'EpuOpcou Kal ^/ca0a)// Kal HkcoXov Ka[l AvXi- 

S09 Kal S)(^OLvov Kal HorvLoiv Kal noXXcoi^ iripan' tol- 

ovTcov yoiptcov d T(i)(^09 ovk eyovra SnrXaaia^ knoi- 

Tjo-^v rds Orjfia?. ov firji/ dXXd rroXv ye ^kXriov €ti tt]v 4 

TToXiv irpd^ai crvuiTreaet/ coy ttjv A^KkXeiav knerei- 
30 ■^icrav roFy Adrjpaiois [lerd roov AaKe8aL[i\QVL^^<i)v' 

rd re yap dySpdiroSa Kal rd Xoind TrdvT[a (rd) Kara To\i^ 

TToXefiou dXiaKofiepa /jiLKpov tiu[o9 dpyvpi6\v irap- 

eXdjx^avov, Kal ttjv kK r^y 'AttikijiS K]aTa[a]Kevfji/ 

are irpocryoopoL KaTOLKOvvres dnacrav fieTeKOfii- 
35 (rav coy avTovs, dnb t5>v ^vXcov Kal tov Kepdfiov rov 

t5)v oIkiSjv dp^dfievoi. rbre Se tcov 'AQ-qvamv rj 5 

^copa TToXvreXeaTara rfj^ ^EXXdSo9 KarecrKevaaTo- 

kirenovOeL ydp fiiKpa KaKco^ kv Tats k/jt^oXah 

TaT? ep.npo(T6ev vno Toiv AaKedaifiovioov, vtto Se tcou 
40 A6i]va[o)v ovTO)9 e^rjaKr]To Kal SLenenoi/rjTo Ka- 

Col. xiv. 

[0' VTre]p(3oXriv . [ ]Sei' irap' avTois eTTa[, .] 

[. . . . o]iKri(rei[9 <p]KoSonr]neyas ^ na- 

[pd To]i9 dXXoi? [ ] ydp avraiv ana- 

[. . . .]v ^EXXr]v[ ] . eXdii^avov eh tov^] 

5 [. . . .jf? dypov9 a[ rd per ovr Trpdyfiara Ta KaT[d] 

[ra]y Gij(3a9 Kal T[r]v BoicoTiau ei)(^er] ovtcos. ol Se nepl Tor 'A[u]- XIII. I 
SpOKXeiSar Ka[l tov 'Iap.rjVLav kjcrnovSa^ov kKuoXe- 


/jLO)<TaLTO€6i'oa[ ]ifioviovaPovXofJ.eyoi 

fxei/KUTaXvaaiTl yi'uafx.rjSiacpdapaxn'' 

10 vrreK€ivcoi'8ca[ y^oi'TacroiOfj.ei'OLSe 

pa8LcoarovT07rf)[ ]/j.PavouT(aPa(nX[.]a 

Xprj fj.ara7r[.]pe^€[ ]TrapaTOvPap^apov7T[.]fJ, 

(pd€L(TeTrriyyeXX€ro[ ](TKaiTOva-apy€LOv[.]< 

Tov(ra[. .]i/aiov(rfi€d€[ ]7roXe/j.ovrovTovayap 

15 €KdpovaToiaXaK€Saifx[ ]i'TaaavroLacrvunape 

[. .]eva(TeTov(T7roXeLTao[. .^^avoriOevrecrSeravTa 

20 aea6aL7roXep.eLvXaK€SaL/j.opLOL(Tap)(^ovaLrr](T€XXa 

25 €(7TLTOL(re6vecnvTOVTOL(Tap.(f)La^-qTr]aLiiocrya>paTTe 

30 TaTrpo^aravpoTepovn^vovvTToXXoovTOLOvTaivac^e 

35 avSpcoj/ol. . . .]7repiTovap8poKX€L8avKaiTOi'Lafir] 
7re/J,yj/ayTea7rpea^€iaei.a^oicoT0vcrKaTr]y opiate 


40 [. . . .]yv8iaK€Lv[.]ai8enpo(TavTova-a€nroT€(pLXi(0(r 


ficoaai TO eOio? [tt/jo? tov9 AaK(Sa]ifJioi'iov9, ^ouXofxei^oi 
fiei/ KaraXvaai t[7)i' dp-^i]u avT(i>\v iva fir] SiacpOapcJoaLi^ 

10 VTT iKfU'cof Sia [rov9 AaKcoi'Y^oi'Tai, olofxeyoi 8k 
paSicoi TOVTO Trp\a^iLv vTTo\a\p^dvovTi^ /3a(riA[e]a 
-^prjiiara 7r[alp€^e'a', Ka& Si. 6] napa Tov ^ap^dpov 7T[i]p- 
(f)6(l? €7r7;yyeAXeT0, {tov9 Se) [KopiuOiov]? kuI tov9 'Apy€iov[9] Kal 
Tovs 'AlOrj^uaiovs ped€[^€ii^ tov] noXepov, tovtov9 yap 

15 e)(6pov9 Tols AaKi.8aLp\ovLOis o\vTa'i avT0i9 avpirapia)- 

[(rK]€vda€{iu) tov9 rroXiTa?. [Si]avori6iuT€9 Sk TavTa 2 

mpl Toov npaypdTccu kvopi^ov dno p\v tov 0a- 

vipov ^aXeTTcos" ^X^'*' inLTideaOai tovtoi?, ovSeTTOTe 

ydp ovTe ©rjfiaiov? ovTe tov9 dXXov9 Boicotov? TTHcrOrj- 

20 aeadaL TroXepeTv AaKeSaipovioi^ dp-^ovcn Trj^ 'EXXd- 

S09. eiri-^eipovvTes [(5]e Slo, TavTr]^ r^y drrdTT]^ npodyeiv 
ety Tou TToXepov avTOVs, dv^mLcrav dvSpa'S TLvh.s $&)- 
K(.a>v (pjSaXeir el? ttju AoKpSiV rcor 'Eanepicoi^ ku- 
Xovpipcov, oh kyiviTO Trj? €\6pa? aWia ToiavTrj' 

25 ecrri to?s 'iOveaiv tovtols dp(Ptal3rjTi]a-ipo? X'^P^ ^re- 3 

pi TOV Uapvaaaov, 7rep[f] rjs Kal TrpoTepov noTe nerroXi- 
fiTJKaaiv, Tju TToXXdKL? kirtvepovaiv iKUTepoi tcov re 
^coKicov Kal Tcou AoKpuiv, OTTOTcpoi 8' dv TvyocxTiv alcrOo- 
pevoi TTore {tovs) eTipov? crvXXeyii/Te? noXXol 8iapnd^ovai 

30 TO. Trpo^aTU. TrpoTepov p\v ovv iroXXoiv toiovtcov d(p e- 
KaT€p(ou yiypopii'coy du /xeTcc 8ikt]9 toc noXXa Kal X6- 
ycav SieXvovTO npb? dXXrjXov?, t6t€ 8k tcov AoKpcov 
dv6ap7raadvTcov dv& wv dni^aXou npo^dTCov ev- 
6v? 01 4>Q)K([T]9, napo^vvovTCxiv avTob? eKeivcov tcov 

35 dv8p5)v o\p? oi] nepl tov 'Av8poKXei8av Kal tov Icrpr]- 
viav nap((TKiva<Tav, ei? Tr]v AoKpiSa peTO, tcov 6- 
nXcov kvi^aXov. oi 8k AoKpol 8r}ovpivr]? tt]? xcopa? 4 

7rip-^avT€9 7rpecr/?ei? e/y Boicotov? KaTrjyopiav k- 
7J-o[io]i)i'ro Tciv ^[aiykcov, Kal ftorjdnv kKUvovs avTois 
40 [r]^io]vv' 8idKeii'[T]aL 8i iTpos avTOV? dii ttotc cpiXicoy. 



Col. XV ( = D Col. v). 

[. . .'\aaavTi(78(iTOVKaipova(xii[ 

[ '\firivLavKaLTOvav8poK\€[. . . . 

[. .'\aiTOV(T^or)6^LVTOLa\oKpoi<j<pco[. . . 

T€<nrpo(rXaKe8aLfiovLovcrr]§iovi'€K[. . . 
7r€ivPoi<i)TOio-ei(TTr]uavTQ>p^a8t^. . . . 
XeyeivavTOvai'OfXiaavTecraTiLa-Tal. . . 




o (pcoK€aaaX\€iTLa8iK€La6aiuo/xL^ov<x[ 





15 rao7rXaXa/3oj/r€(7-e^a56[.]^or€7riTOi'o-0G)/fe[ ] 

\ovT€(T8e8LaTa)(ia)V€L(TTr]v^(OKi8aKai[. . . .^r] 

20 ov8€viroir]aauTi(raXXaKaL7rXT]yaaoXiyacrXa^oPT€a- 

25 Tacra7rT]e(Tav7roiovn(U(i)u8€TT]va7ro'^a)pr](nv 


30 Ta>v(rrpaTi<OT(ovooaoy8or]KOVTaTraXLyave^a)pq 



Col. XV. 

[apTTJacraj^re? ^e tov Kaipbu d(Tfi[cvi<TTaTa 01 nepl 
[tov 'Icr\iir]vLav Koi tov 'AvSpoK\€[i8au iirdaav tov? 
[Boi]a)Tov? ^or]6ilv T019 AoKpoi?. ^co[k€?9 Si, dyyiXOev- 
[rjcoj/ avToh Tcof eK Ta>u Orj^aJv t[6t€ fxlv e/c tt)? AoKpiSo? 

5 [7r]dXii/ dve^caprjcrav , npia^^i? 5[e] . . [ nipyjfav- 

rey rrpo? AaKeSaijioviov? rj^iovu €k[€ii^ov9 oltt^l- 
neiu BotcoToIs fi? ttju avTcoy Pa8i^[€iu. 01 8k Kaiirep 
Xiynv avTovs vojxiaavTi<i dniaTa [o//cuy iTip.y\ravTi? 
ovK €i(ou TOV? BoicoTov? TToXe/j-oi/ iK[(pepeiy enl tov? 

10 ^coKea?, dXX' t'l ti dScKeiadai vopi^ovcr\L Sikt^u Xajx- 

^dv€tv Trap avTciov kv Toi? avppdyoi? [kKeXevou. ol 8i^ rra- 
po^vvovTOiv avTOv? t5>v Kal Tr)u dTr[dTr]v Kol to, Ttpd- 
yfiaTa TavTa avcTrjcrdvTCOv , tov? p.\v [vpea^ci? tov? 
Ttiv AaKi8aifxovL(av dnpaKTOv? d7ricrT€[iXav^ avTol 8k 

15 ra onXa Xa^ovTe? e(3d8[i^^ou k-rrl tov? ^coKe[a?. kfi^a]- 
XouTC? Sk 8id Ta-^e(jL>i/ e/y ttji/ ^coKiSa Kal [7rop$]q- 
cravTi? TTJi/ re tcoj/ UapanoTafjiicou yd>pav Kal Aav- 
Xicov Kal ^avoTiOiv (Trc^eiprjaau tuc? iroX^aL vpoa^dX- 
Aeit" Kal AavXia p.kv npoa^XOoi'Te? dn^^copriaay avOt? 

20 ov8ky noirjaapTe?, dXXd Kal nXrjyd? oXtya? Xa^6uT€?, 
^avoT^oiv 8k TO TTpodcTTLOv KaTo. KpdTO? (.iXov. 8ia-  
IT pa^d pivot. 8k TavTa nporjXOov d? ttjv ^(OKiSa, Ka- 
Ta8papovTi? 8k pipo? tl tov mSiov nepl ttjv 'EXd- 
T€iav Kal Toil? TleStca? Kal tov? TavTTj KaTOLKovv- 

25 Ta? dnTjeaav. 7roiovp€vo)v 8k ttjv dTTO')(d)pT]cnv 

avT(i>v \'npo?\ Trap '^T{dp)TToXiv iSo^iv avTol? diroTTHpa- 
a6aL TTJ? noXeco?' icTTL 8k to yoopiov fLn{C)iLK5>? layypov. Trpoa- 
l3aX6vT€? 8k TOi? T€i\€cn Kal rrpodvpLa? ov8kv eXXi.- 
TTouTf? dXXo pkv ov8kv (TTpa^av, dTro(3aX6vT€? 8k 

30 Ta>v (XTpaTiccTcov d>? 6y8orjKOVTa ndXiv dvc^copr]- 

crav. BoicoTol pkv o[v\v ToaavTa KaKo. noirjaavTi? \t\ov? 

N 2 


(p(t)K^[.](TaTrr]\6ov€LaTi)V(iavT(t)v Koi^couSenapetX r] 

35 SoyoaTconoXXiSLa-vuTrXrjpcoaaa-eiKocnTccvTpLripaiv 

Col. xvi( = D Col. vi). 


voa p.icrBo(nroX\(i)V jirivcov iiLa6o8oT\. .^vToyapv 
7roTan'aTparr}y(ovKaKa)ao7rouiue6[. .^ecTiva 
€LTOLa7roXeiJiovcnv7rep^aaLX€cocr€Tre[. . J^Tarov 

5 S€K€X€LKOU7roX€fiOV07rOT€aVfi/J.[. . . .]XaK€SaL 

fxovLOir](javKop.L8rj(pavXci>(TKaLyXLa-^. .^cnrapH 
10 €7r€i8au€V(rTr]aT]Tai7roX€/j.ovKaraTr€fj.-\lra(T 

&)i'7re[. . . .'\(TLv(.vioT€KaTaXvoiJLev\^(7TaaavTa>~ 

15 [ '\€iaTavTafJ.€vovi'ovTa)cravnl3aii'€Lu 

20 ya)(re)(^€iva7rayop€v[.]ii'a7roaTeXXetrii'aaT(oi'/j.€ 


$a)Ke[a]y dirfiXOou (h ti]v iavToiv. Kovccv Si, napuXT]- XIV. I 

(pOTOi rjSrj XeipiKparovi ra? vavi ras rcoi' AaKcSai- 
fioi'icoif Kal roiv (rvfiixdyan', 09 dcpiKero i>avap^o? Sid- 
35 So^o? T(i) IIoWiSi, (rvfi7r\r]pcoaa9 UKOcri Tcoy rptripcov 
dvay6p.ivos (.K ttj^ ^PoSov KUTenXevaey eh Kavvov 
fBov\6p.€i'os 8e avfifiu^ai tS> ^apva^d^co Koyi] tS> 
TiOpavaTj] Kal •^(^prjp.aTa XafSeiy dvifBawev €k T^y 
Kavvov npos avTov^. krvy^ave Sk T019 o-TpaTico- 2 

Col. xvi. 

Tai? Kara tovtov Tof '^povou TrpoaotpeLXo/jLe- 

vos fjLLaOb? TToXXcou firji'cov e/xiadoSoT[ov]vTO yap v- 

nb tZv (XTpaTr]yS>v KaKa>9, noieiu ed[oi] icrTiv d- 

€1 T019 TToXejxovaLV vTvep ^acriXeo)?, €7re[£ (<««) Acajra Tov 
5 AeKfXiLKOP TToXf/iov, oTTOTe cru/i;i[a^oi] AaKiSai- 

fiovioL -qaav, KO/xiSfj <pavXa)S Kal yA/cr^[p(u]y napii- 

\ovTO )(pT]fiaTa, Kal noXXaKi^ dv KaT[(i]Xv6ricrav 

at ra>v av/J-iid^cou Tp[i]rjp€i^ et fir) Sia ttjv Kvpov 

npodvpiav. TOVTcov Sk (3acnXev9 aiTios eariu, o? 
10 kneiSdv iucrTTJcTTjraL noXefiov KaTaTrejxy^as 

Kar dpya.<i oXiya y^pr]p.ara T019 dp)(^ov(nv oXiycopeL 

rbv kniXoLTTOv •)(^p6vov, oi 8k toi? npayixacnv k- 

(peaTa)T€9 ovk c^otrey dvaXiaK^Lv e/c tociv ISi- 

(ov TTe[pLop(i>\(TLV kvioTi KaTaXvoiikv\a'\'i rd? avToiv 
15 [(Jfi'a/ijeiy. ravra fikv ovv ovtco? (TVfi^aLyeiu 3 

€ico6€, TidpavaTijs Si, Trapayevo/xivov rov K6- 

pmvos cuy avrbv Kal Xiyovros on KwSvvevaei crvv- 

Tpi^TJuaL rd TTpdy\Lara Sid ■)(^pT] /xdrcov iySeiau 

o/y T0V9 vnep ^aaiXeco? TToXepovvTas ovk evXo- 
20 ycoy e)(^€iv dTrayop€v[e]ii', dnoa-TeXXei Tiud? tS)v fie- 

6' avTov ^ap^dpcov 'iva fiiadbu SSxtl T019 arpaTid)- 

Tai9 e)(^ouTa9 dpyvpiov rdXavTa SiaKOcria Kal (i- 

Koa-r kXri<p6T) S\ Tovro {to) dpyvpiov Ik Tfj9 ovaia? T^y 

Tiaaa(l>ipvov9. Ti6pav(TTrjs jikv ovv (.ti nepifiei- 


25 i'acro\iyou)(poi/oyevTaL(T(xapSeaiyay€^aiu€u 

30 8eKVTrpLcovoLfX€TaTovKoi'copo<TKaTa7rX€vcrau 
a^ovraL8eSia\v(T[. .](r/jioyoi'Ta[.]crvrrT]pecnai(T 

35 KaLTOL(TiTn^araia")(a\eTr(ii)a-i(p^povKai(TVvi\6o~ 
av8paKap7ra<T€aToyevo(rKaiTo[. .]cw0uXav?7i/ 
€So(rai^TovacofiaTO<78vo(T[ ]a)Ta(Ta(peKaaTr](T 

Col. xvii ( = D Col. vii). 

[ M 1." 

[ l^."? • • [• -Ir^K ] 

[ ]TOVKouQ)ya[ ] 

[ , .](o(r€Tvy)(^av€ . [ ]ya[ ] 

5 [ ]epa(€i/far€X[ ]ua>i'oa .[•••] 

[ ]yeTon€piTa)[. . .] . (cvKOVCOvS^cr . [. .] 

[ ]i;TOi)i'T[ Juo-ouKetaTTia-reuet" 

[ ]^?^[-M Y\\r]voi>vaX[?^anav 

[ ]a-K0/XLeL(T6aiTavTr]u 

10 [ ]€(pa(TK€vl3ovX€adai 

[.]ia[ ]oLcro8€aTpaTT]yocroTar' 

[.]v7rp[ ](re[ ^TrpocrTOTrX-qOocrTOTcov 

(TTpaTia^ ]?°^?[ ]eLv[,]v8€avve^op/xr](Taj/ 

T[.]cre7re[ ]€vo/JLey[. . . ,]TaTa<T7rvXaa-r)aavon€~ 

15 KOP(i)i/[ ]^t^X^^''TY[' '^l^^voai^iXrjXvOenrpoTi 

poaeKT^. .'\TeL')(OV(Trov8ea\^. .]pconovTovKap7raaeco(7Q)<r 



XV. I 


25 ray oKiyov \p6i'0i> iv rals XdpBtaiv dyi^aivev 

6)S ^aaiXea, KuraaTTjaa? aTparriyovs (rrl to)v -rrpa- 

yfxdrcov 'Apia7ou Kal IJacncpepi'T], kuI napaSov? avToi? 

€iV Toj/ TToXefiOu TO KaTaX€i(f)6iu dpyvpiov Kal XP^' 

criov 6 (paai ^ai'fjuaL irepl eTTTaKocria rdXapra. tcoi/ 
30 Se Kvirpicou 01 fiird rov Kovccvos KaTanXevaau- 

T€9 e/y TTji/ Kavuou, dvamiaBiVTiS {0} v{7t6) tivcou 

SLa(3aXX6i'TQii' <iy avT0i9 [ilv ov p.^XXovaLv dno- 

SiSoi'ai Toy fiiaObv tov ocp^iXoneuov, irapacrKiv- 

d^ouTai Se 8LaXva[€i]9 p.6vov Ta\l'\^ vnrjpiaiai^ 
35 Kal T0T9 liTL^dTai^, xaXerrco? ecpepov, Kal avv^XOov- 

Tes €£? €KKXr]criau el'Xoi'TO (rTpa[T]riyoy avTcof 

dv8pa Kapnaa-ia to yet'o?, Kal to[vt](o <pvXaKfju 

(.Soaav tov ad>/j.aT09 Svo o[TpaTi]d)Ta9 d(p' iKdcTTt]^ 

Col. xvii. 

vews ]nr[ ]v 

]Kva . . [. .]rco»'[ ] 

] Tou Kovccva [ ] 

] (uy kTvy^oi-vi . [ ]i;cr[ ] 

Ypaui KaTeX\ Ko\v(ovos .[...' 

Y/^TO TTepl T(i)\y . .] . a)v. KSvoiv 5e tr . [. .] 

. . . aKOvcras a\vTS>v t\ovs Aoyojuy ovk ua TncrTiVHv 

]e/cX[.]o-[. . . Tcav] ^EXXrjvoiv^ aA[X]a irdv- 

ray ]y Ko/xuiadai, TavTrjv 

10 [Se TTjv aTTOKpicru' Troirjadfxevo?] ecpacrKey ^ovXiaOai 
5]ta[5?7X (Serai Kal to?9 dXX]oi?, 6 Sk aTpaTr]yo9 6 Ta>v 
IC\vnp\La)V 6 KapTra?\a^\p^ avTu>\ npo? to nXfjOo? to tcov 
aTpaTia>[TU)y Tj]KoXo[vdei. e/c]ea'[o]u Se auve^oppiqaau- 
r[o]y, €7rc[t<5^ 7rop]ev6fiiy[oi Ka]Td ray TTO'Aay tjcrau, 6 fxlv 
15 Eovcov [axxnep] ^tv^cu ^y[ov]/jm'os e^cXrjXvdfL npoTe- 

pos iK t[ov] Tityovs, TOV 8k d[i/6]p(i)7rov TOV Kap7raa€(09, m 
riv €^<[a)]f KaTo. Ta.9 rrvXa?, iTTiXap^dvovTai tS>v Mea- 
arji/icclu] Tiuk9 TOiv Kovcovi TrapaKoXovOilv (lo)- 


BoT(ov[. .]fieTaTr](TeK€iyovyp[.]fj.i](Te7n6ufjLovi'T€ae~ 
20 TTj7roX([.]KaTa(Txeii'avTOvo7r[. .]av(ci/e^r]fj.apT€i/ 
8a>SLK[.]i>oiS€avvaKo\ovdo[. . .]€a-Ta)VKVTrpL(ovai/ 

T€Xa/x[.]ap[.]uTOT[ ]a>(TKaiSieKa>XvovTOvcr 

fj,€(Tcrr][ ]«y€4 ]ia6ai'Ofi.evoy8€KaLTO 

TQ)i/e^[ If^'K ](^or]SeiTa)aTpaTT]ycoo[.]e 

25 Koi'Cov[ ]7r6[ ]Tov[.]av6pco7rova€icr7n] 

Sr]<ra(r[ ]v(reu[.]i.(rTr]V7roXivoiSeKy 

7rpL0LT[ ]cra\j/[.]p.€i^ovcrTOVKa[. . 

7ra(reco[. . .]AX[ '\y(TavavT0L8eTT(.TT^i(Tix\. . 

voLuavTaTT^ '^^ovKOvcovanapc. 

30 (TKevaadaLTrepl ]8iaSo(rive[. . .]^[. . 

pov([.](rTa(TTp[. . .]€i(ren[ jaLaTrpa^eaivcoa-ye 

Tivea-€X€yov[. .]€XXou[ ]rr)(rpo8ov7rapaXa 

^oy[. . .](TeicrKV7rpoj/7rXe[ ]eva-avr€(rSeTrjaa 

Xai'[. .]yLoiovKai7rapaK[ ^TeaTova^ovXoiie 

'\viTpLa)vPa8i[ ]irpo(TTr]i'aKpo7ro 

]i^ap)(r]i'T[ ]KaTaXvacocrioo(T 

....... .]vovTray[ ]uKaK<oi/op.ot 

]oir]a-[ ]vavTOLaei(T 

]^^^?[ ycouXoycov 




Col. xviii ( = D Col. viii). 

7roXtvTT][ ]7roTrX€v<Ta' 

TecranoTrja- . [ ]/3[. . .]p.evoi 

Xprja-aa-OaLTOia-avrl Ypi-qpcovKo 

v(x>v8iKaTr}yp.e[ jeX^coj/Trpocr 

5 Xim>viiovrovT[ ]7r[.]rai'ra)o 

rifiovocrSwaTaLT^ ]r[. . .jcrtAeoxret 

yapavTco^ovXeraiSl ]vpov(TTOv(j^. .] 

Xrjpao-oiTrji/Kavi'ol ^rcovKapcov 

(oa7rX€i(rTov(nrav(r€i[ jparoTre^cora 

10 pa)(r}vK€X€vaavTO(r^ '\ovXaix^avn'~ 


OoTOiv [ov\ fi€Ta T7J? Ik^lvov y^[a)]/zr/9, (ni6vfiOvvT(9 eV 

20 TTJ 7r6Xe[i] KaTaa-yilv avTov 07r[ca9] ai' coi/ k^rjiiapT^v 
S5> SLK\ri\i'. 01 Sk (rvvaKoXou6o[vi'T]€^ toov Kvnpiaiu du- 
T€\afi\p]ai'\o\vTO t\ov Kap7racr^]Qi9 Kal SieKcoXvoi^ tov9 
Me(T(TT][viov9] aye([// avrov, a?\lcr6av6nevov 8e Kal to 
T(oi> i^[aKoay(ov [avurayfia ?] l^orjOn tco crTpaTrjyu). 6 [S]k 

25 Kovoav [coy . . .]7re[ ] Toi)[y] dvOpconou^ da-nrj- 

Sijcra? [ ]u(Teu [e]/y TTjy iroXiv 01 Sk Kv- 

iTpiOL t[ov9 M.€(ja-r]viov^ Tov]^ d'^ap.^vovs Tov Ka[p- 
Tra(T€Q)[9 ^dWlouTes dn(Kpo]v(Tau, avTol Sk 7re7rcia-/i[e- 
voi Trdvra 7r[ t\ov Koucova nape- 

30 CTKevdaOai 7rep[l ttji/ tov piaOov] SidSoa-iu ( Icre J3 ai- 

vov €[/]? Tas Tp[irip'\eL<i kn\l ravrais T]ai9 Trpd^eaw, coy y€ 
Tiv€9 eXeyov, [fi]eXXop[Tes rovs «/c] rfj9 'PoSou napaXa- 
^6p[Te]? els Kvirpov TTXe\lv. aTTOTrXjei^o-at'rcy 8\ rrfs A- 4 

Xaj/[. .^yLoiov Kal 7rapa/c[o/zib-ai']re? tov9 l3ovXo/xi- 

35 [V0V9 TCOV K]v7rpiO)U, ^a8l[^0V<Tlu] TT/JO? TTjl' UKpOTTO- 

[Xlv 'iva rr\\v dpyr]v 7\qv ^ov(xiVO<f\ KaraXvauxTLv coy 
\alTLOV y(.vo\ik\vov Trdp[Ta)y avToh Ta)]v KaKcov, ofioi- 

[coy 8e 7r]oLr]a-[ ]r avToTs e/y 

[ V7rr}p]eaia[ ] tS>v Xoycou 

40 [ M-] TV^ 

Col. xviii. 

noXiv Trf d^TTonXivaav- 

rey dno T-q^ . [ ] ^'ouXopevoL 

Xpijaaadai T019 avT[66i. tcoi^] TpiTJpcov. K6- 5 

vcov 8i KaTr]yfii[va)v tS)v Kvnpicov] eXOatv npo? 

5 Aecouu/jLOu TOV t[ eri7r[6]»' avT^ 0- 

Ti [iovo^ 8vvaTaL T[a npdy/xaTa crcoo-at] T[a /SajcriXecuy, d 
yap avT(o ^ovXeTai S[i86t'ai tovs <ppo]vpov9 Toi/s [' EX]~ 
Xrjva? ot TTju Kavvov [(f)vXdTTovaL Kal] Tcof Kapcov 
coy nXeiaTOv?, nava€i[v ttji^ kv tS) (rT]paToni8co Ta- 
10 payjjv. KiXevaavTos 8[e tov A€coui>p]ov Xap^dreiu 


OTToaova-^ovXeTaicrTpaTl ]r]v/xeuTr]u 

r]/j,€pai'7rapT]K€VKai.yaprj[ ]Sr]TrepLSvcrfj.acr 

€iaS€Tr]ve7novcraP7rpiPT]fi[ '\ivecr6aCKa^(i)v 

napaTovX^covvfiovTcourel ](TV)(^i'OV(TKaLTovcr 

15 eXXrjuaa-aTTauTaa-e^Tjyayivl. . . .]yo-eKTr]a7ro\coi<r 
€n€iTaTovcr/ji€p[. .]a>d€vavTovTovaTparoTr€8ov7r€[.] 

pi€(TTr]crevTOva[ ] . [ ]u7rpocrT€Ta(Tuav(rKa[.] 

Toi'aLyiaXou[ ]yTaS€7rorjcra(rKaiK€Xev 

cracrKr]pv^aLT[ ^veiveKacTTOVTaivcrTpa 

20 ri(OTaiviTnTTj\^ ^yeXa^ercovKvir pioiv 

TOUTeKapiraael ]XQ)U€^r]KovraKaiTOV(r 

fi€va7reKT€Li>[ ]Tr]yoyaueaTavpcoa-e~ 

aKovcravT€(T8[ ]iKaTaX€i^6ePT€crePTr] 

po8airiyavaKT[ ]coaev€yKoi'r€(TTOvcrii 

25 ap)(^ovTacrTov(r[ yoaKaracrrauTacr^aX 

XovT€ae^r]Xaa[ ]arpaToir€8ovroi'SeXi/jL€ 

vaKaTaXLnov[ ]0opv^ouKairapa\r]V7rap 

[.](r)(^ovTOicrpoS[ ^i^copacpLKO/ievocreKTrjcr 

[.]avyovTova-T[ ]a(ravTQ>v(rvXXa^a)t/an(Kr€i 

30 v€KaLToia-aXX[ ]ySLeSooK€Tonepow^a(n 

XiKOV(TTpaTo\ ](ocr€i(rix€yavKLvSvi'ot/ 

7rpoeX0ovSLaKOvcov[. . .]Tr)V(KeivovTrpodyfj.iay 

€7ravcraT0Tr](7Tapa^r][. .]yr]cnXao(rSe7rapa[.]op€V 

> — 

op[. .]oa€LaToveXXrjo-7r[.]i'ToifafiaTa>(rTpaT[.]vixa 

35 T[- ' ' •]oi'K^8aifjiOvia>vK[.]LTa)V(Tv/jifia)((oi/ocrov{i'^ 
X[. . • .ye^aS€i^€SiaTr][.]Xv8Laa[.]uS€VKaKOV€Troi 

[ y.i'oiKOVPTaa^[. . .]o/x€j/ocre/i/x[. .]€ivTaiaaTrou 

[.]a.i[. .]ai(T7rpoaTL$pav[. .]7;j/yet'0/z[. . . .]in€LSr]8(Ka 
[.]r]p€i'€i(TTr]v^[ ]Tr]V(papu[. . .]^0VTrp07]y€T0 

Col. xix (=D Col. ix). 


8€TrapaXXa^a[. .]oTe6r]^T](r7reSiovKaij[ 

KaXovfJi^pov€[. .]e^aX(i'€ia-Tr]uixvaia[ 


oTToaovs ^ovXerai aTpaT[icoTa9, TavT\r]v fxkv ttju 
Tjfiipav 7rapfjK€V, Kal yap t][\io9 rji' i]]8ri ncpl Svafid?, 
els Se Tr]v kinovaav Trplv rjn^lepav yjei'ea^ai Xa^oiv 
napa rov Aea>vvp.ov tcou re [Kapcoi/] avyvovs Kal tov? 

15 " EXXrjuas atravras e^'/yayer \avTo'\vs e< rr)y TroXecoy 
tiTiiTa T0V9 iikv [i^^ooOeu avTOv rov arpaTOTriSov ttc- 

piia-TTja^y, tov9 [5e . . .] , [ ]u npo? re ras vavs Ka[i 

Toi^ alyiaXov [ rajura 8\ TToirjaa? Kal k^X^v- 

aa? KTjpv^ai r[ /3at]fe(j/ 'iKacxTOv rSiv arpa- 

20 rionTUiV k-rrl Tr]\y , (Tv\vkXa^e ran' Kvirpiaiv 

Tov re Kap7raak[a Kal tcov dX]Xa>u e^rJKOura, Kal tovs 

p.\v dTTkKTHv]^, roi' Se (TTpa]TT]ybv aveaTavpooaiv, 

aKOvaavTiS 5[e Tci yivojxeva o]t KaTaXeKpOiifTes kv rfj 5 

'PoSco r}yavdKT\ovv, Kal ^apk]Q)9 kveyKovns rov? fikv 

25 dpyovTas tovs [vtto rov K6v(»i\uo9 Karaardvras /3aA- 
Xovns k^riXaa\av kK rov\ (rrparonkSov, rov Se Xifii- 
va AcaraXt7r6j'[rey ttoXvv] Oopv^ou Kal rapa-)(r]v rrap- 
\k](T\ov ro?9 ^PoS[ioi9. 6 5e K6]i/03u dcpLKop-^vos kK rrjs 
Kavvov rovs r[e dp\ovT]a9 avrcou avXXa^cbu dneKra- 

30 i/e, Kal roTs dXX[ois fiia-Oby SckScoKf. ro fikv ovu ^a<TL- 
XiKov arpar6\ne8ov ovr\os ety [ikyav klv8vvov 
TrpoeXQov 8td K6vcov\a /cat] rrjv kK^ivov rrpoOvfiiau 
knavcraro rfjs rapa^^[y. 'A]yr]aLXao9 8e 7rapa[n]opiv- XVI. I 

6/i[e»/]oy e/y rov ' EXX-qcrn[o]vrov dp.a r5> (Trpar\{\vna- 

35 r[i r(tiv A]aKe8aifiovicou K[a]l rcov avfx^dyaiv, oaov p.\u 
y[pov6\v k^d8i(i 8id rfj[s] Av8ia9, [o]v8ev KaKov knoi- 
[et royy] kvoiKOvvra?, /3[oi;A]6/xei/oy kfip[ev]€iv rah a-irov- 
\8]aT[9 r^als npos TLOpav[<Tr]r]u y€V0fx[kvai9'] eTrei^f; Se Ka- 
\r\ripev e/y rrjv y^dipav^ rrjv ^apv[a^d^^ov nporjyf ro 

Col. xix. 

(Trpdr[(]vp.a XerjXarcou Kal rropdcov rf][v yfjv. elra 
6e TrapaXXd^a[? r]6 re @rj^r]9 neSiou Kal ro Airias 
KoXovfifiVov t[i<T]kPaXiv (is rrjv Mv(Tia[v, Kal kviKH- 



5 TavTaiveL(TLyapoLTTo\[.'\oi[.'\ooviivacc>vav[ 





lo (rTaT[.'\vo\vp.TrovTOvpvaLovKa\oviiev\^ 


Xo/f[. . . .]acr0a[. .]cr7ropev6r]i/aiSLavTr]a7rep[. . . 
Tiva.[. . .]crT[. . . .]v(rovcrKaia7r€icra/jL€PO(T7rpocra[. . 
Tova-r)[ ]o-[. . . .]evnaSiaTr]axcopaanapei^T[.](r 

15 SeTro[ ]e[.]o7roi'i'rj(na>i'KaiTcoi'crvp[.]a 

X[ ]0i(rTeXevTaL0L(ravTC0PKaTal3a\ 

A[ ]coya-TpaTicoT(oi'aTaKT(ovStaTa<T 

<tt[ ](oi'ayr](riXaocr8€KaTa^GV^a<T 

t[ \jrriVTrivrjfi^pavT}(xvyj.av 

20 ?;[ ]yu[. .]o/i€i^aToiaano6ai'ovai8i€ 

(f)Oapr)[. . .]8€7repnreuTT]Koi'TaT(op(TTpaTLa>TO)v 
€i(j-8eT[. .]e7novaai>Ka6L(Taaeia€P€8pav7ro\Xovcr 
Ta>i/p[. . . .'\op:ovTcov8epKvXi8(.LOi>vKaXovp.ev(si~ 
ava(TT[. . . .]or]y€TO(rTpaTevpanaXiyToopS€pva(o'' 

25 0iT]6[ ]Ka(TTOi8LaTr]U7rXr]yT]UTr]VTr]Trpo 

T€pa[ ]fJ.€vr]va7ri€i'aiToi^ayr]aiXaove^€X 

6ovt[ ]a)VKCO/j.(oi'e8i(OKOP(oa€7ri6r]ao/X(voi 

toi<7t[. . . .]Taioi(TToi'avTovTpo7rovoL8eTcoyeXXr] 
i'0>i/€t'[ ]oi^T€a-(oar]aavKaTavTova-eK7rT)Sr] 

30 aayT€cre[. .]T]a€V€Spaa€i(r)(€Lpa(Tr)€aavTOia7roX€ 
T0vcra[. . .\vevirXriyai(TOVTa(T€(f>ivyovnpoaTa<TK(t) 

35 p.a(Tay[. . . .]aoo-8e7rpoaayyeX6evT(oi'avT(OTOVTCi)~ 

fi(Ta[ ]poaaTrriy€TO<TTpaT€vpa7raXivTr}v 

avTr}v[ ](oa(rvi^€fjL€i^^T0i(T(vTa[.](TC}/€8pai(T 


TO Toh Mvao[l]9 K€Xev[(o]u aVTOV^ (TV(rTp[aT(V€lU fX€- 

5 T avTcof. €i<tI yap oi ttoX\K\oI [t^o^v Mvaiav av[T6i/o/x 
(SaaiXico? ov^ vTTaKovov[T\'i<i. oaoi jxkv ovv [rSiv Mv- 
(Tcoy fieriyeiv ^povuro r?jy arpareia? [ojSkf i~ 

TToUl KaKOV aVTOV^, TOOV 8k XoiTTCOl^ eSr][0V T>]V X(o- 

pav. eneiSfi Sh Trpo'mv eyiuiTO Kara fiicro[i/ fxciXi- 2 

10 crra r[b]i/ "OXvjjlitov tov Mvaiov KaXovii(v[ov, 6p5)v 

\aX[<i\TTr]v Kal aTivr]v ovaav rrju SioSof [Kal /3ou- 

X6fi[€uo9] da(pa[Xa)]s nopevOrjuai Si' avrrjS, 7r6//[\//'ay 

TLva [7r/)o]y t\ovs M\vcrov^ Kal an^iadix^vos npos a\y- 

T0V9 ^[y€ rb] a[TpdT]evna Sia r^y ^6opa9. 7rapej'T[e]y 
15 8k 7ro[XXov9 Tcou n]i[X]o7roui'r}aicov Kal rcov (xvii[ix\d- 

X[g)i/, imdefjievoi T]oh TeXeyraioty avrSiv KaTa(3dX- 

X[ov(ri Tiva^ rjcof arpaTKCTcou drdKToov Sia rd? 

CTTleyoxcopia^ 6vt]cov. 'AyrjaiXaos 8k Kara^^v^a? 

T[b arpdTevfjia Ta]vTr]u rrju rjfiipau r]avytav 
20 ■^[ye TTOicop TO, uo]iJL[i^]6fX€i'a toIs diroOavovaL' 8i€- 

(pddpr}[(ray] 8k nepl nevTijKovTa Ta>u (TTpaTLa>T5>v' 

€19 8k T[r]u] kiTLOvcrav KaOiaas e/y kvi8pav noXXov? 

t5>v fi[Lado(p]6p(ov Toiv A^pkvXlSucov KaXovjievoiv 

dvaa\Tds irp^orjyi to aTpdT€Vfia TrdXiu. tccv 8k MvacJov 
25 oir)6\€VT€9 V[Ka(TTOL 8id TTjv TrXrjyfji/ ttjv ttj irpo- 

Tepa [y€y€VT]]fi€UT]y dmivaL Tbv 'AyrjaiXaou e^eX- 

66uT[e? eK t]cou Kcoficoi' kStcuKov, <wy iTriOrjo-SfjLeuoL 

T019 T[eX€v]Taioi9 TOV avTov Tpowov. ol 8k tS)v *EXXrj- 

vcov kv\€8piv\ovTiS, (iy rjaav KaT avTov?, kKnrjSrj- 
30 aai/Tes ([k rJTjy €ui8pa9 eh )(€?pa9 fj^crav T0T9 noXe- 

fj.L0i9. T(Sj/ 8k Mvcrcioy ol p.kv -qyovixei/oi Kal Trpco- 

TOL 8L(i>Ko\y\T€S k^aLc^vrj^ T019 ' EXXrjaL avfx/jiei^av- 

rey dnoOlvyja-KOvariy , ol 8k noXXol KaTL86uT(? tov? npa>- 

T0V9 a[vTco]y kv nXrjyat? ovTa? c^euyor Trpoy ray /fco- 
35 /Ltay. 'Ay[r]atX\aos 8k Trpoa-ayyeXdkuTOii/ avTco tovtcou 

fj.€Ta[^aX6fie]uo9 dnrjyc to aTpdTiVfia ndXiv ttjv 

avTTju [d8bv e](oy (Tvv€[x^L^e Toh kv 7a[i]9 kviSpai?, 



KaLKa.\^ ^vaxxiViiaToa-TpaTOTr^^ovqKaiTr} 


Col. XX ( = D Col. x). 





5 KCOfxcouTivacTKadl , 

rj fj.€pacrTovcr(Trp[ ]T07rpo(TdeyT[. 

(rTpaT€VfiaKaiKa[. .]/3i^ao-a(r[ y)((opavTa>i^(p[.]y 

ya)uovK€icr[.]i'Tov7rpoT€poy[. . .]ov(r€V€^aX€i'aX 
[. .]fO"e[. .]pay[.]7rop[.]r}TOVKa[. .](TavTr]V€Trocei(nn 

10 [. .]a8aTr][. . .]coi/r]y€poi'a[. . . .]ouvouoS€cr7ri6pa 
Sa[,]r]aTO{X€i^yevocrr]V7r€p[. . . .]aTp(L^(o[.]8eTrapa 

T(o(papva^a((OKaL6epaTrivoov\. . . •]i'eTrei[ ]€k 

BpavKaTa(TTa(nrpoaavTov^o^r}6eiaiiri\. . '](}Xrj(f)dr] 

15 (i(TKv^iKoi>vaT€pop6[.]a)a-ayrj[,]i[. . .]vr][. . . .]y(o~ 
[. .]ya^aTr]vvouv€ovovTaKaiKaXoyayr)<nXaocr8e 

20 t[. .]T]y€/JL0vaTiTr)acrrpaTiaaavT0Lcr€cr€(x6aiK 
[. . . .]aXXa-^pr]aiiJLOveK(iuov(7jx€vovvT[.]y 
r[. .]€veKav7re8e^aT[.]7rpo6viJ,cocravroa-8€7rpo 

25 npoa)((t)piouoKaXiiTaiXeoi^TcovK€(paXaiK' 

30 piOV€m)((OliaTO(T<OKo8ofir)ljL€VOVKaiKaT€ 

• t 


Kal Ka^TiaKrj^voDcriv €i? to arpaToneSoi' 77 /cat rfj 

TTpoTepa [K]aTeaTpaTOTreSev(ray. pera Sk raCra tcHv 3 

Col. XX. 

yuef Mvacoy wr rjaav [ol ano6av6vT^^ (Kacrrot Krj- 

pvKa9 TTf/zx^avrey a[ dvuXou- 

To Tovs u€Kpov9 {'[noanouSovs' dnedauov 8k rrXeiov^ 
^ rpiaKovTa Kal e[Kar6f AyrjcriXao^ Sk Xaficov t/c tcoj' 
5 KOipcov TLvas Kad[qy€p6ya9 Kal di'aTravcra? .... 
Tjpepas Toil? <TTp\aTLaiTas rj-yev ety] to rrpoaO^v t\o 
(TTpaTivpa, Kal Ka[Ta](3il3d(Ta9 [eh Tf]]u yciipav twv $'p]f- 
yS>v, ovK e/y [rj\v toD npoTepov [6ep]ov9 iye(3aXii/ d\- 
[X' c]ty 4[Ti]pau [d]n6p[6]T]Tou, Ka[KQ)]9 avT^v knoUit Xttl- 

10 \6 p^aSaTTj^v 6;(]a)j/ -qyepoua [Kal T]bv vlov. 6 Sk HiriOpa- 4 

Sd[T]r]9 TO p\v yei/oy -qv nip[ar]s, Si]aTpi^co[p] Sk irapa 
T(o ^apva^d^ca Kal OepaiTivcoy [avT6]u, €7ret[ra Sk els] ev- 
6pau KaTaa-TO,? irpos avTov, (po^rjOel? pr) [KaT]aXr]^6fj 
Kal KaKov TL Trddrj^ wapavTiKa pk[u] d7ri[(pvy(v 

15 e/y Kv^LKOv, vaTepov S\k'\ coy !4y7;[o-]i|Aao]»' r)[Kiv £\yaiv 
[M.e\ya^dTT]v vlov viov ovTa Kal KaXov. 'AyqaiXao? Sk 
TovTcov yevopivoiv duiXa^eu avTOvs pdXiaTa 
pkv '4veKa Tov peipaKiov, XiyeTai yap iTriOvp-qTi- 
KcSy avTov acpSSpa €\€iVi ineiTa Sk Kal Sia XmOpaSd- 

20 t[77I',] r]y(p6va t€ ttj? crTpaTid? (jiyovpivo?) avTOis eacaOai Kal 
[TTpoy] dXXa y^prjo-Lpov. iKeiuov? pkv ovv t[o]v- 5 

t[(ov] evcKa L'7re5e^aT[o] TrpoOupco?, avrb? Sk npo- 
dycov e/y to npocrOev del to aTpaTevpa Kal XerjXa- 
tS>v ttjv roC ^apvafSd^ov yo>pav dcpcKvuTat 

25 Trpoy ^(CdpLov h KaXeirat AeovTcov Ke(paXai. Kal 
TTOL-qadpevo? irpos avTO irpoa^oXd?, coy ovSkv 
iTripaivev, dvaaTrjcra? to crTpdTivp[a] irpofjyiv 
et'y TO TTpoa-Qeiv) nop6u)V Kal XerjXaTcov Trjl?] -^(apa? ti)v 
dKepaiov. d(f)iK6pevo? Sk ndXiv Trpoy TopSiov, yco- 6 

30 piov IttI -^(lipaTO? (pKoSoprjpivov Kal /care- 


Trpoa-^oXaaTroiov/jLivoa-TovcrS^crTpaTicoraa-el. . .]o\ 
35 ovovKT)8vvaTo8iaTT]ppa6ai'ovTrpo$vfiLayo(Te 


Col. xxi ( = D Col. xi). 

yovcnrl^ ]yiao'/catr/;cr7ra0Xayoj'[. 

a(7€ice[ '\TpaTOTTi8^V(TiTOv8i(nr\. 

6pL8aTT][ ]t/o8e7ropiv6ei(rKaL7rii[. 

aa(TeKei[ ]aya>vayriaiXao(T8e7roirj[. 

5 (rafiei'[.](r[ ]i/7ra(pXayoi'0ova7rr]ya[. 

8iaTa)([ ]aXaTrau(l)o^ovfj.€voafi[. 

\€Lfx<i)v[ ]a)(rienouiro8tTT]VTrop€[. 

ai^ovK€T[ ]Trepr]Xd€aXX€T€paur]yq[. 

ix€voo-8ia[ ]§'-^i''9[ ]V^'''^P^?^[- 

lo cr€adaLTOicra[ ]reiXe[. .] . it[. ■]p[-]y[. . 

avTCi)yv7]aTo[ ]i'T . . Tcoi'[ 

i7nr€a(T/ji[ ]oi'cr7re^oi;(r5e7rXeioi;[ ]X[. 

covKaTay[ ]aTevfiaKaraKioi^Tr)crpvaiaa[. 

[. . .]toi'p[ '\aaT]/xepaaavT0v8€KaKaKa)(je[. 

15 noLe[.]Tov(TiJ.v(To[. . . .]iyav$cove'm(3ovXiV(TayavTa)7re[. 

piTovoXv/J.7roy[. .]Tepov8e7rpor]y€Tov(T€XXT]yaa8LaTT)[. 

^pvy ia(TTr}(nrap\. . .]XaTTL8LOVKat7rpoal3aXQ}y7rpoa)([. 


piouTOKaXovfj.[. .]ovfieLXr}TovTei-^oaovKr]8vyaTo[. 
Xa^eiuanr]ye[. .]v(raTpaTicoTaa7roLOVfi€VOa8iTT]v[. 
20 7ropeiav7rapaToypvy8aKov7roTafiova(p[.]KueiTai[. 


iTKivaafihov Ka(\)co?^ Kai Kara^iv^as to aT[p]dTevfxa 
7re/Jie/x€i/cr e^ ijfifpa?, 7rp[o]y /uej/ tov9 7ro[\]efiiov9 
npoa-PoXas noiovfid'o?, rov? 5e arparicoTa? ([nl ttjoX- 
X019 dyaBoh avve-^Oiv. imiSy] Se ^idcraadai rb X(op(- 
35 ov ovK TjSvuaro Sia ttju 'PaBdvov irpoBvpiav, oy l- 
TTfjp-)(€v avrov II(^(pa)i]? u>v to yevo9, dvaaT-qcra^ r}yiv 
dv(o T0V9 arpaTicoTa?, KcXevovTos rov SmBpa- 

Sd-ov e/? ria(l)\ayoviav Tropev^aBai. perd Se tuv- XVII. I 

Ta TTpodyoiv rov'i UeXoTroyu-qcriov^ Kal tov^ crvppd- 

Col. xxi. 

\ov9 7r[poy Toc opia rrj^ ^pv^yia? Kal r^? TlacpXayoyJ- 
ay €K([i TO arpdrcvpa Kar€(r]TpaTon€S(va€, tov Sk ^7r[i- 
6pa8drr][v avTov TrpoeTrfpyj/i]}^' 6 Sk nopevB^h KUi nu- 
aay e/ce/[j/Ofy rjK^ Tr/olcr/Sety] dycoi>. AyrjaiXao? 8k nou]- 2 

5 crdpei/[o]9 [avppa)(a rd Tai\y JJacfiXayovodv a7rr;ya[yc 

Sid ra^decou to aTpdT€vpa inl B]dXaTTav, (^o^ovpevo^ p[t] 
)(ei/zcot'[oy TTyy Tpocpfj^ euSi^^aiv. tTroiUTO 8k ttji^ 7rop([i- 
au ovKeT[i TTju avTiju c8oy T/V]7rep tjXB^u dXX' iT(pav, T/yo[u- 
p€vos 8id [Tri'i BlGvi'iSo^] 8ie^io[vaL a/foJTrcoTepcoy e- 

10 creaBaL ToTy a\TpaTid>Tai9. ctTreajreiXe [Sk] . it[, •]p[.lf[. • • 

avTOi rvn^ Tc\ Vr . . rmi^l 

/TTTreay p[ki/ t]ov9, 7re^oi)y 8k 7rXeiov[? 5^cr^(]A[t'- 

(DU. KaTay[aya)i' 8k to aTp]dT€vpa kutu Klov ri^y Mvaias, 3 

[7rpd>]T0i/ p[ki^ n€pipeiu]a9 i]pepa9 avTOu 8iKa kukco^ i- 

15 7roi'e[t] T0V9 Mvao[v? 7rdX]L}/ dvB' wv ine^ovXevaay avTU) ni- 
pt roj/ "OXvpnov, [V(T\T€pov 8k Trpofjye tcv9 " EXXrjuas 8id T^[y 
^pvyias TTjS 7rap[aBa]XaTTi8Lov, Kal npoa^aXoiv Trpoy x[^" 
ptov TO KaXovpl^v^pv MiXrJTOu Tu)(o?, <wy ovk ■t)8vi'aT0 
Xa^dv, d7rfjy€ [ro]i)y aTpaTLooTa^. noiovpei'os Sk ti]v 

20 nopeiav Trapd tov * Pvi'8aKov TroTapov d(p[i]Ky€iTai 

7r[p]oy TTjv AaaKvXlTLv Xipvqv v(p' 77 KUTai t[o] jda{a)Ki'Xio[v, 
^oipiov 6)(ypbv a<p68pa Kal KaTe<TK€va(Tp[(]i'oy vnb 
^aaiXico9, ov Kal Tbv ^apvd^a^ov 'iX^yov d.[p\yvpLov o[(tov 



Tji'avT(oKai)(pvcnoi^a7roTid€a6aiKaTeaTpaTon[. . 
25 S€VKQ)(T8erov(TO-TpaTi(ora(TeK€L6LneT€7reinreT07ra[. 


[ yi/ofi€i'Ov8eTOV7rayKa\ovSLaTa)(^ecoi>Kai 

[ '\i[.]pearLyeL(T7r\ev(ravT0(reiaTr]vXifii^i]i'(K€i 

30 [ yKeXeva-eyoayrjcnXaoa-eudeixei'OuoaaTcoyl. 

r ]eycoyrjTrXeioi>oaa^iaSiayay€ivei(rT[.]oy[. 

[ ]LKV^iKOi^oTr(oaauaTravTcoufj.i(Tdo(n(c[.]T[. . 


[ 'Y/iV0LT0T0V(T8€(TTpaTL<X>Ta(TaiT0Tr]Cril[l\(TLa\^. . 

[ '\ocrTa^acravroLa-qK€i.vH(TTO€apTrapo.\^. .]€i'a[ 

35 [ '\pveTTL0VTa')(^L[x(cii'a^a8L^iLvu(TKaTnTa 

r '\oavTavrr]VTrivy((opav8Lareiv(Li'Ciicr 

[ ]vaT€vr]uap^a}j.(i'r]i'a7roTrjaTroyTiK7]a 

[ ]e^/)£/fiXiKiacrK-[. .](()CiyeiKT]aKaiT[.]fir]Kocr 

[ ]aiTO(TovTo[. . . .]T€TOva€K(Tii'(t)n[.]a-j3a8i 

Unplaced Fragments. 
Fr. 16 (to Cols, i or ii ?). Fr. 1 7 (to Col. iv ?). Fr. 1 8 (to Col. iv ?). 

]yX[ ]rp^p[ ]8oyK[ 

]t[ . . ]iaCoi[ 

' ' 5 ]ffr[ 

Fr. 19 (to Col. iv?). Fr. 20 (to Col. iv ?). Fr. 21 (to Col. vii ?). 

'\(JTVp(x[ ]T0^§[ ]?.' • [ 

'\aTTaaL[ ] . wviT . [ ]^y/<^/^f[ 

]ai>TaT[ ]roracr7r[ ]V • • [ 

] . //&)!/[ ]cot/aXX[ 
5 ]co/z€ww[ 5 ]yopooy[ 

]fi€Tev[ ]Xvcrau[ 


■r}v avT(p Kal y^pvaiov aiTOTiOiaOai. KaT€<TTpaTon[€- 4 

25 $(VKa}9 Se TOO? (TTpaTiu)ra9 iKuOi //ereTre/zTTfro i7a[y- 

KaXor, 09 liTL^dri]^ tco vavdp-^co XeipiKpareL TreTrXfi/^ccu^y 

(TTfUiXeiTo Tov ' EWrjcnroi'Tov Tretre rpiijpeis c^coi*. 

TTapay}(:Vop.(.vov 8k tov UayKaXov Sia Tw^ioiv Kal 

Tai9 Tpi[7]]p€(Tii' ei(nr\(vaayT09 ti? ttju \ip.vr]i>, e/ceT- 
."{o |t/oz' /iO'l €KeXeva€y 6 'AyrjaiXao? kvOipivov oaa roiv 

pMi'cav -qii'") nXiiouos d^ioc Siayayeiu ety t[.1oi'[. 

.... TTfpM Kv^iKoi', OTTO)? { «»' } aTT* avTUiv piaOos rut [<T]T[pa- 

rci5/xar<] yivoiTO. rovs 81 arparKora^ rovs dno tt]s M[v]cria[9 d- 

■niXvae TTp]o(Trd^as avrols i}Kiii' el? rb 'iap. Trapa[crK^eva- 
35 [Cofieuo? T]bu tnioi'Ta ^e//ia)j/a ^aSi^uv eh Kamra- 

8oKiay, dKov](jji/ ravTrjv ttiv ^d)pau 8iaT€ii'eiy cocr- 

mp raii'la^v (rrevriv dp^afxevriv dno rfj? TIovTLKr}? 

OaXdrrrj? f^\^xpi KiXiKia? '<[«'] ^oiuikt]?, Kal t[6] jirjKOS 

avTTJ? eli'^ai to(tovto[v coo-jre tovs €k Siyd>TT[r]9 ^a8i{(ovTas:) 

Unplaced Fragments. 

Fr. 1 7 (to Col. iv ?). 


Fr. 1 8 (to Col. iv ?). 

.8 01' K 


5 >€'i 

Fr. 19 (to Col. iv?). 

]9 Tvpa[vv 


5 a>p.ev(j>l 

Fr. 20 (to Col. iv?). 

]tov ^ 
^ . oov 6r . [ 
'\to 70,9 tt[ 
]a)»' dXX[ 
^ ]i'op<oy[ 
O Z 

Fr. 21 (to Col. vii?). 

* * * * 






. vovSeKai 

. ovvra 

Fr. 22 (to Cols, vii 

]"  «PX< 


or viii?). 

] . TTocrov 


• • 

10 ]T°^h. 

10 ]oiKaiov 


. • • • • L 

f ^f f 



] . (ouq 

] . aXfi€[ 



• • 

» • 


• • 

Fr. 23 (to Col. X 


Fr. 24 (to Col. X 



25 (to Col. X ?). 


* • 

r • 

.  ?li -[ 




Fr. 26 (to Cols. 



27 (to Cols. 



28 (to Cols, xvii 

or xviii ?). 

or xviii ?). 

or xviii ?). 

• • 

• • 


J* • L 

• • 

' ra 

• » 

• • 


Fr. 29. 

Fr. 30. 

Fr. 31. 

Fr. 32. 

^VTT] . [ 

. a 





. TTjaaii 

OjX . [ 


0€l'Ta . 




• • • 



« • 

5 ]tov(T<tt 

Fr. 33. 

Fr. 34. 

• t • 

Fr. ^i:,. 

Fr. 36. 





] . voi> Sk KaL\ 
j . . . 'Apxf[\atS ? 

1 . TT0<T0V\^ 

10 ]tou/z[ 
] . a)i/a[ 

] . ovvTa[ 
'\aTa rrfv [ 

10 jot /cai orl 

] . a\fxi[ 

Fr. 23 (to Col. X ?). 
] kaTiv [ 

• • 

Fr. 29. 

Fr. 30. 

Fr. 31. 

• • • • 

• • • 


]• [ 

1/ rr; . [ 

] . a 

. TTjy aiu 





]o kvTa . 


60)9 an[ 


• • • 




• • • « 

Fr. ^3. 

• • * • 



Fr. 36. 

« • • « 

]a /iei' 7r[ 


' apuKo 

7 , 




' ovBaaiy 




5 ]aa . (po[ 




5 ].'< 

5 ]p.t^<»  [ 





• • 

] • XP*^[ 

• • 



• • • 

Fr. 37. 

Fr. 38. 

Fr. 39. 

Fr. 40. 

Fr. 41. 

• • 

. 7r 

• • 


• • 











• • 





J • L 

• • 

• • 

• • 


Fr. 42. 

Fr. 43- 

Fr. 4-1. 

Fr. 45. 

Fr. 46. 

• • 

• • 

• • 


J • L 

• • 




(TK . 

J L 

]y ' • • ' 


• • 


a • 



Fr. 47. Fr. 48. Fr. 49. Fr. 50. Fr. 51. 


'. ' i9. 

• • . 


^otr . [ 




• 9.4 

• • • • 


t • 

• • 

• « 


* • 

Fr. 52. 

Fr. 53' 

Fr. 54. 

Fr. 55' 

Fr. 56. 

• • 

• • 

• • 

9 • 


• • 

•% • 

• • 

• • 


. a 


lap iiK0\ 8li\^l6v7(UV 

]ov l3aaiX[( ]vr)v vaT[(p 

5 ]<ra . (f)o[ 5 Ip/iO) . [ 

aypaTo[ .... 


Vw ^y. Vv. 5H. Fr. 59. Fr. 60. Fr. 61. 

• • •• •• •• •• 

M ]^-[ M ]•[ M 

M . . . . ]i[ M 

• • • • 

Fr. 62. Fr. 63. Fr. 64. Fr. 6^. Fr. 66. 

»• >• •• •• •• 

]yoi(T[ ]ra[ ] . (TL a[ ]iS[ 

]ai[ ]iy[ . . . [ ]p'4 

Fr. 67. Fr. 69. Fr. 71. Fr. 72. 

• • • 




]x • ■• [ 

]o . 

acroi'[. . 

y . . J' 







1 . e 

Fr. 68. 

• • 

5 jtarayei— 

5 ] . ft)j/ 

• • • • 


• £ • • • 

Fr. 70. 

' aKaaeiaa 

J • • • 


' oina [ 

• • • 


• • 

• • • • 


'f^^^L- • 


• • • 

• • 

Cols. i. i-iii. 7 = chs. I-III. 

Expedition of Dcviacnctns. A nti- Spartan feeling in Greece. 

'About the same time a trireme sailed out from Athens ^\•ithout tlie consent of the 
people. Demaenetus, the . . . of it, had privately imparted his plan in secret to the 
boule, as it is said, and some of the citizens having conspired with him, he went down 
with them to the Piraeus, and having launched a ship at the docks set sail to join Conon. 
Thereupon an uproar was raised, and the notables and cultivated class among the Athenians 
were indignant, declaring that it would give the city a bad name if they began a war with 
the Lacedaemonians. The bouleutai, frightened by the clamour, held a meeting of the people, 
pretending to have had no share in the enterprise. The populace having assembled, 


Fr. 7 I . 



]toi9 fi\v 
\au ay(.iv 

]aKa? (i(xa- 
]tj 8i 7ra[.] 

]iTOT[. . 

the party at Athens of Thrasybulus, Aesimus, and Anylus came forward and pointed out 
that the Athenians were incurring great risks unless they relieved the state from the 
responsibility. The moderate and wealthy class at Athens was content with the present 
policy, while the populace and democratic party on that occasion, through fear, yielded 
to their advisers, and sent to Milon, the harmost of Aegina, to inform him that he could 
punish Demaenetus since the latter had acted without the leave of the state. But previously 
for nearly the whole time their policy was aggressive, and in frequent opposition to the 
Lacedaemonians. Not only were they in the habit of dispatching both arms and sailors 
for Conon's fleet, but on a former occasion . . . crates, Hagnias, and Telesegorus with their 
companions were dispatched on an embassy to the king, the ambassadors being captured 


by Pharax, the former admiral, and sent as prisoners to the Lacedaemonians, who put thcni 
to death. This opposition was stimulated by the party of Epicrates and Cephalus ; for 
it was they who were most anxious to involve Athens in war, holding that view not merely 
since they had dealings with Timocrates and received the gold, but long before. It is 
nevertheless asserted by some that Timocrates' bribes were responsible for the formation of 
the war party at Athens and among the Boeotians and in the other states which I have 
mentioned, owing to ignorance of the circumstance that all of them had long adopted 
a hostile attitude towards the Lacedaemonians, and been on the watch for an opportunitv 
to involve the states in war. For the Lacedaemonians were hated by the Argive and 
Boeotian factions for being on friendly terms with the opposing party of the citizens, 
and by the faction at Athens because it desired to put an end to the existing tranquillity 
and peace, and to lead the Athenians on to a policy of war and interference, in order that 
it might be enabled to make a profit from the state funds. At Corinth, of the partisans 
of a change of policy the majority were hostile to the Lacedaemonians for reasons similar 
to those of the Argives and Boeotians, while Timolaus alone had become opposed to them 
on account of private grounds of complaint, although he was formerly on the best of terms 
with them and a strong philo-Laconian, as can be ascertained from the events of the 
Decelean war. On one occasion, with a squadron of five ships, he plundered several of the 
islands tributary to the Athenians, and on another, having sailed to Amphipolis with 
two triremes, and manned four more supplied from there, he defeated Sichius (?), the 
Athenian general, in a sea-fight, as I have previously related, and captured the enemy's 
triremes, which were five in number, together with a convoy of 30 (?) boats ; subsequently 
with [.] tiiremes he sailed to Thasos and caused the island to revolt from the Athenians. 
Parties, therefore, in the aforesaid states had been induced to hate the Lacedaemonians 
far more by these reasons than by Pharnabazus and the gold. When Milon, the harmost 
of Aegina, heard the news brought by the Athenians, he quickly manned a trireme 
and pursued Demaenelus. The latter at this time happened to be waiting off Thoricus 
in Attica, but when IMilon arrived at Thoricus and tried to attack him he hastened to sail 
far in advance. Having gained possession of a ship belonging to them he left his own ship 
behind because the hull was inferior, and transferring his sailors to the other ship 
continued his voyage to Conon's fleet, while Milon . . . with the trireme returned to 

i. I. A new book apparently begins here (cf. p. 115); and it is quite uncertain with 
what events our author synchronizes the expedition of Demaenetus, which took place in the 
first half of 396 if Cols, i-iv are correctly placed (cf iii. 9, note), or in the early summer 
of 395 if Cols, i-iv follow Cols, v-viii, as is much less probable. 

2. For \ov fitrd cf. 1. 24. vl" or ^[/)xf may be substituted for i[8ia, which was suggested 
by Wilamowitz. The construction in II. 2-7 is not clear; cf note on 1. 5. 

3. Ar]^au[eT]<)s : he is identical, as was perceived by Wilamowitz, with Arjuntveros 6 

Bov^vyrjs in Aeschines ii. ']S Bflos S« TjfxfTepos KXed/3orXof 6 rXavKov Tov 'Axappfws vlos fxtra 
Arjfiaiverov Tov Hov^vyov (TvyKaTevavfidxTjae XeiXwro roc AaKthaifxovlojv pavap)(uv, XfiXcoj/ being 

obviously identical with the harmost of Aegina called MiXcov in i. 22 and ii. 35. Aeschines 
has exaggerated the importance of the naval engagement, which as P shows was a trivial 
affair. The Demaenetus who is mentioned as strategus in 388-7 in Aegina (Xen. J/e/l. v. 
I. 10) and in the autumn of 387 on the Hellespont {He/L v. t. 26) is no doubt the same 
person as Demaenetus 6 BovCvyijs; cf Kirchner, A//. Prosopogr. i. p. 216 : but that on the 
present occasion he held the office of strategus is neither stated by P nor in itself likely. 
Meyer well compares the private expedition of Macartatus to Crete in (probably) 386-379 
with a trireme which he had bought (Isaeus xi. 48). The word following A>;|iaiV[<TJof 


seems lo be a liile, if (iiV/> is li^^ht. Ki'y/or could be read, l)ui this would imply that the 
trireme was Demaenclus' own propcrtj-, 'whereas it was clearly a warship belonging to the 
State. The doubtful k might be « ; the following letter can equally well be y, 1, n, v, n, t, 
or u; for . I (/ji ?) a single letter {v ?) may be substituted, and in place of vtt] (or ittj) yq 
should perhaps be read. A single word as a family name or a tide would be more suitable 
than (c . . loy (uV^f, but MmCvyn^ is inadmissible, though it is possible that the word in the 
papyrus is a corruption of this. 

4. i3]oi/X,v ojsr : for other instances of hiatus cf. vi. 39, vii. 7, .\i. 22, xii. 24, .\\i. 6, 
xviii. 5 and 24. 

Tipa-^ixarm : the end of this line must have projected some distance beyond that of 1. i 
and 11. 5 sqq. 

5. ivfibl] : the vestiges of the letter following S suit 7 somewhat better than t. aiv 
[oir instead of aw | would have the advantage of preventing this line from being exceptionally 
short, but the construction of 11. 2-7 is then somewhat awkward. Between mxco and 
TToXfircoi' the scribe seems to have omitted either nvn or rur, more jtrobably the former ; 
cf. the omissions of words in i. 36, ii. 16, xi. 20, xiv. 13, 29, xvi. 23, and xx. 20. Or 
possibly (Tvvoi, i. e. o-i;(;^)t/'ot should be read, as Wilamowitz suggests. 

6. vavv: rqv vaiv would be expected, especially if niVr'/s in 1. 3 is right. 
9. yi'w],jt/j[ot] : cf. xii. 3 1 . 

16. Thrasybulus and Anylus are well known as leaders of the moderate democratic 
parly at this period. On \'(nfjLos, who is less frequently mentioned, cf. Kirchner, A//. 
Prosof>ogr. i. p. 22. Our author ignores Archinus, who was also prominent at this time 
(cf. p. 140). It is interesting to note the cautious policy pursued by this section of the 
Athenian democrats, who side with the aristocrats in objecting to an open breach with 
Sparta, and for the moment succeed in curbing the warlike spirit of the majority of the 
democratic parly headed by Epicrates and Cephalus (1. 35). The course of events was, 
however, too strong for the advocates of peace, and Thrasybulus himself in the late 
summer of 395 proposed the alliance with Boeoiia, which was agreed to without opposition 
(Xen. //(■//. iii. 5. 16). If the events recorded in i. i-iii. 7 belonged to the spring or earlv 
summer of 395, the change of policy must have taken place within a very few months, and 
seems very sudden. It is therefore much more satisfactory to refer chapters I-III to 396, 
and to suppose more than a year's interval between the expedition of Demaenetus and the 
alliance of Athens with Boeotia ; cf. iii. 9, note. 

22. MiXci)«/a : he is called \(t\ayv by Aeschines ii. 78 ; cf. note on 1. 3, Which is the 
correct form is uncertain. 

27. u\iT(T:pa\TTtv (1. avTiTTpaTTov): it is possible that the scribe has himself corrected 
the ( to o. 

27-8. For the secret assistance rendered to Conon by the Athenians cf. Isocr. Paneg. 

142 «V hk rw noK(p.<a t<S Trep) 'PoSov . . . ;cpa)/i€:'oj fit rais vnrjptaian rals Trap' i]ixu)v, OTparrjyovtnot 
I) aiTW K.6i>a}pos. 

30. The letter after ^aaiKfa, if not n, can only be y. v[p6Ttpov is somewhat too long 
and is not very appropriate, since it occurs immediately afterwards in 1. 32. Bury 
suggests 77[p&)Toi', i. e. the first embassy to the Persians since the Peace. "E T^[i]KpaTri 
is possible, but in that case we should expect our author to have distinguished this Kpicrates 
from the democratic leader of that name mentioned in 1. 35. to can be read in place 
of 7r[i], and 'l7r]r[o]»fpdTr? or Ai>]ro»f/)dr7 is more likely ; '.\/3«r]roKp(jTf; seems to be too long. 
One of the three ambassadors, Hagnias, is known from Isae. xi. 8 'Aymu ovv art tKn^uv 

nap(aK(vd((To v ptcr^daav in\ Tairas ras npa^tis, and from IlarpOCratiOH S, V. 'Ayri'af, tovtov 
Koi Tovi crvfinpt(T^firTiis uvtov (J)T)(t\v Avbporiuu tv nffXTrroi rrji 'Ardiios Kai ^iXo^opoi its faXoocrdv 
Tt Kn\ anidavov. Telcsegorus is possibly the father of \fu>pri^i TiKtarjyopnv KoXXvrfif who 



occurs in an inscription of the middle of the fourth century b. c. (Kirchner, op. cH. ii. 
p. 304). The date of the embassy, which was previously uncertain, is now fixed within 
narrow limits by the mention of *a/)a^ o nporfpov vavapxos, for he is known from Xen. I/ii/, 
iii. 2. 12, 14 to have co-operated with Dercylidas in the spring and summer of 397. 
Apart from the uncertainty as to the period of the year in which the Spartan vavapxoi 
entered on their command, it has been disputed whether Pharax' term of ofl^ce belongs 
to 398-7 or 397-6. Since his vavapxia is here spoken of as past, the present passage, 
if i. i-iii. 7 are righdy assigned to the first half of 396, is strongly in favour of the date 
398-7; cf. iii. 9 and 23-6, notes. 

i. 33 sqq. P here diverges into a highly interesting account of the causes of the 
formation of the anti-Spartan league, and in connexion with the mission of Timocrates the 
Rhodian supplies some new information of importance. Xenophon [He/l. iii. 5. 1-2) 
attributes to Tithraustes the mission of the Persian envoy with 50 talents, and specifies as 
the recipients at Thebes Androclidas, Ismenias, and Galaxidorus, at Corinth Timolaus and 
Polyanthes, at Argos Cylon and ol fier avrov, but says of the Athenians kcu ov fifToXalBovTfs 

TOVTOV Tov XP'^'^'-^'^ opios TTpodvpoL ^(Tov (If Tov TToXfpov vopl^ovTis Tf avT(ov (ip\(adai,. He then 

proceeds to describe the outbreak of the Boeotian war, which he regards as the direct 
outcome of Timocrates' bribes. Pausanias (iii. 9. 8) also connects Timocrates with 
Tithraustes, and gives a list of the recipients of the money (Cylon and Sodamas at Argos, 
Androclides, Ismenias, and Amphithemis at Thebes, Cephalus and Epicrates at Athens, 
Polyanthes and Timolaus at Argos), and like Xenophon treats the Boeotian war, in describing 
which he mentions crlrov aKfxdCoura, as an effect of the mission. Plutarch too {Ar/ax. 20 ; 
cf. Lysand. 27, Ages. 15) agrees with Xenophon's date for Timocrates. Only Polyaenus 
(i. 48) connects the episode not with Tithraustes but with Pharnabazus, V^wmv ^apvajSaCo) 

(Tvppaxiov ' AyrjaiXdov Trjv 'Ao-t'nv nopdovvroi tTreiaf tov HepcTTjv p^pvaioi/ 7r(p\l/ai to'is bqpaywyois, k.t.X., 

though it is possible that his statement is due to mere carelessness. Diodorus, Nepos, and 
Justin are silent on the subject. Our author, as appears both from i. 37 and ii. 4 and 32 
noXeai rmy irpoecprjpevais, had already described the sending of Timocrates, no doubt in its 
chronological position, in his main narrative, but ii. 33 shows that, like Polyaenus, he 
connected it with Pharnabazus, and i. 37-ii. i indicates that, like Pausanias, he in opposition 
to Xenophon believed in the guilt of the Athenians Epicrates and Cephalus. In ii. i sqq., 
however, he controverts the view that the anti-Spartan league was brought about by 
Timocrates, attributing the hostility of the states to Sparta to other and older reasons. It 
has been generally recognized that Xenophon's account of the origin of the confederacy 
is chronologically untenable, for if Timocrates was sent by Tithraustes, who cannot have 
reached Sardis before June 395, he must have arrived in Greece after the beginning of the 
Boeotian war (of which Pausanias' date is now confirmed by xi. 34 tovtov tov Oepovs), and 
therefore cannot have been the cause of it ; and historians have usually accepted 
Xenophon's date for Timocrates' mission, and abandoned the connexion between it and the 
outbreak of the war; cf. Beloch, Gr. Gesch. ii. p. 193; Meyer, Gesch. d.Alt. v. pp. 231-2. 
Now, however, in the light of the new evidence another solution of the chronological 
difficulty in Xenophon's account is preferable. The error lies not in making Timocrates' 
mission precede the beginning of the war, but in supposing that he was sent by Tithraustes. 
On the view that he was inspired by Pharnabazus the difficulty vanishes, for it is clear from the 
order of the narrative in P, who does not reach the Boeotian war undl xi. 34 sqq., that 
there was a considerable interval of time (more than a year) between the mission and the 
opening of hostilities in the summer of 395. The reference in Trpoeipi^ptmi nokeis (ii. 4 and 
32) seems to be to a not very distant passage, and it is possible that the description of 
Timocrates' mission in the main narrative occurred shortly before Col. i. If so, since the 
expedition of Demaenetus took place in the first half of 396, the journey of Timocrates 


must have occurred not later than the spring of that year. An earlier date for it would 
produce a conflict with Polyaenus, since lie synchronizes the mission wiih the campaigns of 
Agesilaus in A^ia, which began in the spring of 396. Pol)aenus' statement is not lightly 
to be disregarded, especially as a close relation between him and P has been detected in 
another passage ; cf. vii. 4, note. On the other hand the argument in i. 33-ii. i is more 
logical if the dispatch of Timocrates preceded in point of time the embassy mentioned in 
i, 29-33, which took place in 397 (cf. 1. 30, note), and the year 397, in which Pharnabazus 
and Conon set to work to construct a fleet, is in itself a very suitable date. Hence the 
interval between the mission and the outbreak of the Boeotian war may be as much as two 
years. Even if Cols, i-iv are placed after v-viii and belong to the year 395 (cf. iii. 9, note), 
P's date for the mission cannot be brought down later than the spring of 395, so that there 
would still remain an interval of some months between it and the Boeotian war. The 
chronological mistake made by Xcnophon and others may well be due, as Meyer suggests, to 
the circumstance that the fruits of the Persian bribes were not apparent till the summer of 395. 
On the question of the date of Timocrates' mission and the Persian who inspired 
it, P is certainly right as against Xenophon. Which account is to be followed in regard to 
the action of the Adienian democrats ? Here, too, we think P's version is more probable 
than Xenophon's, and that Epicrates and Cephalus, as Pausanias also states, took the 
Persian gold. There was clearly a widespread belief in the fourth century that they did so, 
as is shown not only by our author's own view, but by that of the unnamed ni'tr, which he 
controverts in ii. 1-7, without however disputing the fact of the bribes having been received. 
Moreover, P's explanation of the origin of the anti-Spartan feeling as due not to bribery, 
but to anterior and deeper lying causes, is eminently just, and exhibits his acute insight 
into the politics of the fourth century, in which many of the leading statesmen thought it no 
shame to be in the pay of a foreign power, so long as the policy of which they really approved 
was pursued. And if P is right, as is practically certain, in minimizing the effects of 
Timocrates' bribes, he is probably correct also in his admission with regard to Epicrates 
and Cephalus. Xenophon must have known of the charges against them, but, exaggerating 
the part played by Persian gold in bringing about the league, and, like our author, being 
aware of the strong war feeling at Athens (the corrupt words vofii^ovrti t( avrwv np\(o^6ai 
probably refer, as IMeyer remarks, to tlie Athenian desire to recover their empire ; cf. Hell. 

iii. 5* ^'^ *'''' y-h^ "'"' ^oCXoicrff &v TTjv afi^rfv jjv irpoTtpov (KfKTrjadt dvaXa^flv nuirra tViTTa^t^tiV 

seems to have excepted the Athenians, mainly in order that he might emphasize the accusa- 
tions of IMedizing which he brings against the other allies, in particular the Thebans. 
Only in one respect does P compare unfavourably with Xenophon, the desire for personal 
profit imputed as a motive to the Athenian war party (ii. 10-14). Here he seems to be 
influenced by an anti-democratic bias, which is quite in keeping with that of Theopompus 
(cf. p. 129), and to misrepresent the natural patriotic aspirations of the Athenians to which 
Xenophon alludes, thereby coming nearer to the truth. 

36. For the omissions cf. i. 5, note. 

37. Tt/joKpuVft : so also Xenophon and Pausanias. Plato {Mctio 90 A) calls him 
UoKvupuTTfi, but the fault may be due to his MSS. Plutarch in ArUix. 20 has the form 
'EpfioKpoLTTfv and 'EppoKpdrovs, but in the second case apparently with a variant TtfxoKpaTovt, so 
that the mistake is presumably due to the INISS. 

ii. I. Tivii 'K(y[ovaiv: the view which our author here controverts, and which originated 
no doubt in Sparta, coloured the sources from which Pausanias drew his information, 
and Xenophon shared it to a large extent ; cf. note on i. 33. That P included Xenophon 
among the Twis is not likely, seeing that P's work was written little, if at all, later than 
Xenophon's /:/i//e/iua [cf. p. 124); the reference may be to historical works which have 
perished or merely to current tradition. 


ii. 8. Bo(W7[ jywrat : if not y, the letter after the lacuna must be t. ]ya)rat or Twrat 

is very intractable ; and if a correction is necessary the simplest course is to read 
<na<Tt\y(x>Tai, \. e. (TTaaiiiTai, the superfluous y being an example of the practice of inserting 
a y l)et\veen two vowels, which is not uncommon in Ptolemaic papyri, A difficulty, 
however, then arises about the termination of Bota)T[, for the lacuna ought to contain 
only six or seven letters. Bo(a)T[u)i' oi araai^yutTai is too long, and for Boia)7[iot oTa<ji'\yu)Tui 
there is barely room. That the scribe wrote BotwT[ot is in any case probable (cf. 1. i6), 
but Boi(UTc)s is not used as an adjective at this period, so that with Boiwr oi crrao-«]ywTai two 
corrections are necessary, which is not a very satisfactory hypothesis. If (rracrtwrai is the 
word intended, it must apply to the Argives as well as to the Boeotians, for the two 
states are treated as exactly parallel in 1. i6, and the clause on rots «Wi'[T£oi]y K.r.\. refers to 
both, which implies that there was a philo-Laconian party at Argos as well as at 'I'hebes. 
Theban politics at this period are discussed in greater detail in xii. 31 sqq. 

13-4. This sarcastic and somewhat unfair criticism of the motives of the Athenian war 
party favours the view that our author is Theopompus; cf. note on i. 33 and p. 129. 

17. 'i[t/Li<;].\aoy : both Xenophon and Pausanias state that he took Timocrates' bribes 
(cf. i. 33, note), and P no doubt admitted the fact, as he does definitely in the case of 
Epicrates and Cephalus ; but he regarded Timolaus' private quarrel with the Spartans 
as the chief reason for his present anti-Spartan attitude. In Xen. Hell. iv. 2. 11 Timolaus 
appears as leader of the Corinthian contingent at the battle of Nemea. 

21-32. Of Timolaus' exploits in the Decelean war (which is again referred to in 
xiii, 16 and 30) the expedition to Thasos must, as Meyer remarks, have occurred towards 
the end of 411. Thucydides (viii. 64) records in that year the fall of the Thasian 
democracy, the fortification of the city, and the expectation of speedy assistance from 
the Spartans, with whom the exiled Thasian oligarchs had taken refuge. In 410 Thasos 
has a Spartan harmost (Xen. Hell. i. i. 32), so that the arrival of Timolaus with the 
Peloponnesian fleet falls in the intervening period. The incidents related in W. 24-32 
therefore occurred just after the point at which Thucydides' history breaks off, and the 
reference in 11. 27-8 to a former mention of them (probably in the main narrative) is 
important as an indication that the present work was a continuation of Thucydides ; 
cf p. 122. The earlier exploit, the plundering of certain islands (11. 22-4), probably took 
place in 412 or early in 411, and is passed over by Thucydides. 

26. (Ti.x*'Ov must be corrupt, and more probably conceals ihe name of the Athenian 
strategus than a reference to Chios. The only name among the known Athenian sirategi 
at that period which remotely resembles "2,1x105 is ^Tpon^ixitrjs (Thuc. viii. 15-79), but he is 
not likely to be meant. 

27. (oantp t'lpTiK^i TT^ov Kai n pore pop '. cf. xii. 32 wa-nep Koi nporepou flprjua, and ii. 21 — 

32, note. 

29. (Trypyj/nv : napenepyj/av would be expected (cf. Dem, viii. 25 napantpTTfadai ra nXo7a 
ra avTO)v), but K^al a 7rapeV]f/x\//ai' rpia [n\oi^i is nOt Satisfactory. 

30. Wilamowitz suggests [ths fp8(Ka\ in the lacuna. 

33. <Papvdl3a(ou : cf i. 33, note. 

34. The curious order of the words ii;rfppivoi ptaeiv Tja-av is due to the desire to avoid 
hiatus; cf xi. 22, note. 

iii. 1-5. That Fr. i belongs to the top of this column is practically certain, (i) from 
internal evidence of its suitability to this context ; (2) from the colour of the papyrus, which 
resembles that of Cols, i-ii in being much lighter than the rest ; (3) from the recto, which 
has the beginnings of two lines that suit the first two lines of the column of the land-survey 
on the recto of Col. ii. The remainder of Col. iii (which on the recto has the ends of lines 
of a column of the land-survey) is on a separate fragment, but the correctness of its 


position admits of no doubt ; cf. 6 fie MiX]ooi/ th Alyivav in I. 6. Since the width of the gap 
separating Fr. i from the bulk of Col. iii cannot be determined with absolute precision, 
and the beginnings of lines are lost throughout this column, the size of the lacuna on each 
side of Fr. i may be slightly larger or smaller than we have supposed in our restoration, 
which proceeds on the assumption that 5 or 6 letters are missing at the beginning and 8 or 
9 in the middle of 11. 1-5. 

It is not clear whose ship Demaenetus took possession of. Aeschines ii. 78 (cf. i. 3, 
note) states that he avyKUTtvavfjiuxncrf XeiXava (i.e. INIilon), and Wilamowitz, reading t^s i-jfwj 
in vii. 2, thinks that Demaenetus captured INIilon's ship. To this there are the objections : 
(i) that it is not easy to see how Demaenetus obtained possession of Milon's ship without 
capturing Milon himself, who, as appears from 1. 6, returned safely to Aegina ; (2) that the 
plural aiVcoj/ in 1. 2 suits the inhabitants of a place just mentioned (cf. vi. 24-5 dt 'A/i-^tVoXii/ 
(caran-XeL-o-aj koi irnp f[K(i vav) belter than the Spartans; (3) the remains of 1. 7 suggest that 
Demaenetus took flight on Milon's approach rather than that he gave action. Hence 
we prefer to regard atrwi/ as the inhabitants cither of Thoricus or, reading inX Uo\v .... 

or U . ap of that place, though we are unable to suggest a suitable place-name. 

/iiaj v\fa)s is, however, not satisfactory, and r^? would suit the space better. For Tiv6i there 
is no room, but tov (Bury) is possible. 

6—7. Something like lifja t^c Tpirjpovs arreVXfuo-e is required. 

Cols. iii. 7-iv. 42 = chs. IV-V. 7Vie Naval War. 

iii. 9. The mutilation of this passage, which if complete would have explained the 
chronological system adopted by our author, is much to be deplored. If Cols, i-iv are 
correctly placed before v-viii, which describe Agesilaus' campaign in the spring and early 
summer of 395, the Btpos in iii. 9 must be that of 396, and the '8th year ', of which the 
beginning is noted in 1. 10, is 396-5. An earlier date is excluded by the description 
of Pharax in i. 31-2 as o npurepop vnCapxos; for he is known to have held that office in the 
spring and summer of 397 (cf. i. 30, note), and since the expedition of Demaenetus, 
in connexion with which he is mentioned, falls within the seventh year of P's reckoning and 
Pharax' term of office was then already over, it is impossible to make the 8th year begin 
in 397. Granted that the depos in iii. 9 refers to 396 and is the beginning of the 8th year 
(the possibility of its referring to 395 will be discussed later), it remains doubtful what month 
P precisely regarded as the starting-point. Thucydides, who divides each year of the war 
into two equal parts, Oipoi and x^'M'^") niakes the former begin in the spring (cf. e.g. iv. 117 
apa ^pi Tov f'myiyvnptvov Otpovs), and Xenophon in //tl/. i-ii. 3, where he is influenced by 
the annalistic method of Thucydides, similarly reckons in years beginning with the spring. 
Since P's work is probably, like Xenophon's, a continuation of Thucydides' history 
(cf. p. 122) and seems to be constructed on chronological principles, which if not as strict 
as those of Thucydides are more careful than Xenophon's, there is a certain presumption that 
he too reckoned in years which began in the spring; and iii. 11 may even have commenced 
with some phrase like fapos apxopivov. On the other hand Btpot in iii. 9 might very well 
refer to midsummer, the starting-point of the Olympiads and year of the Attic archons. The 
later columns are compatible with either hypothesis : v-viii cover the period from about 
March — June 395, xi-xxi that from about July — November of the same year, and the 
transition from the 8th to the 9lh year would, if it was noted and took place in the spring, 
naturally occur in the gap between Cols, iv and v, while if it was at midsummer, it would 
occur in the gap before Col. xi. In xi. 34 tcvtou tov Btpovi referring to the war between 
Boeolia and Phocis probably means July, and the fact that the Theban intrigues and the 
dispute between Phocis and Locris, wliich are narrated in xiv. 21 sqq., began before 
midsummer (cf. xiv. 2 1, note) provides no argument against the view that the 9th year began in 


midsummer, for there is no reason to think that P's arrangement of facts was so strictly 
annalistic as to prevent his grouping together an intimately connected series of incidents 
belonging to the conclusion of the 8th and the beginning of the 9th year. The later 
columns being thus indecisive, the question what is meant by Otpos in iii. 9 has to be decided 
by the evidence of Cols. i-iv. Assuming — as is most probable but by no means absolutely 
certain — that the incidents in i. i-iii. 7 refer to the conclusion of the yth year and those 
in iii. 11 sqq. to the beginning of the Sth, it is on the whole more satisfactory to regard the 
Bfpos in which the 8th year began as midsummer, not spring. The narrative of the 
expedition of Demaenetus does not help, for the only definite mark of date connected 
with it is the mention of Pharax as the former vavapx'j^, and if Pharax' term of office 
ended, as is likely, in the autumn of 397 (cf. iii. 23-6, note) the expedition may have taken 
place during the winter of 397-6 just as well as in the spring or early summer of 396. But 
the account of the naval war in iii. 11 sqq. favours the view that the Sth year began in the 
summer. It would be surprising in the first place that the narrative of the 8th year, if this 
began in the spring, should commence with the comparatively unimportant naval war 
in place of the expedition of Agesilaus to Asia. Secondly, the arrival of the reinforcements 
from Phoenicia (iii. 23-6, cf. note) is more likely to have occurred towards the end than 
at the beginning of 396, for though Diodorus seems to have placed that event too late, 
the view that these reinforcements were available to Conon throughout the campaign of 396 
does not well accord with the statements of Isocrates about the blockade of Caunus. 
Thirdly, the arrival of the new Spartan vavapxos (probably Pollis), which happened soon 
after the beginning of the Sth year (iii. 21, note), suits the late summer better than the 
spring, not merely because the summer or autumn was the normal time in which a new 
vavapxn-: entered on his duties, but because the arrival of Cheiricrates, the successor of Pollis, 
is definitely fixed by xv. 33 for the late summer (about July or August) of 395. If, therefore, 
the new vavapxos of iii. 2 1 came out in the spring, either he remained in office considerably 
more than a year, or he was not Pollis but some unknown individual, and Pollis' arrival 
occurred later, the notice of it in P being lost. Of these two alternatives the second would 
be preferable to the first, for great as are the irregularities connected with the Spartan 
vavapxia (cf. iii. 21, note), there is no precedent for a vavapxos who took over the command 
in the spring remaining in that position until the summer of the year following, and the 
mention of Pollis in iii. 21 is of course conjectural. No one of the arguments in 
favour of treating the Oepos in iii. 9 as midsummer is very strong, but together they seem 
to counterbalance the presumption in favour of the other explanation created by the 
example of Thucydides and Xenophon, and for the present we leave the question open. 
In any case P does not use the Attic archons for dating purposes, but like Thucydides and 
Xenophon reckons back to a fixed point. What this was is owing to the lacuna in 1. 10 not 
definitely ascertainable. It is not the end of the Peloponnesian war as foreshadowed by 
Thucydides v. 26, where he states his intention of carrying his history up to the surrender 
of Athens; for the capture of the city by Lysander took place on Munychion 16 = April 24, 
404 according to Plutarch Lysand. 15, and the Sth year on P's system being 396-5, his 
epoch-year is 403-2, not 404-3. Xenophon, however (or rather, as is generally supposed, 
his interpolator), in Hell. ii. 3. 9 treats the capitulation of Samos in the autumn of 404 
as the end of the war, and in any case it would seem that P connected the events of 404, 
including the capture of Samos and the despotism of the Thirty, with the war, and made 
a fresh start in the spring or summer of 403, i. e. approximately from the archonship 
of Euclides, a well-known landmark in Greek history. The restoration of the Athenian 
democracy and the general amnesty occurred on Boedromion 12 (= Oct. 4) 403 (Plut. de 
glor. Alh. 7). On this view iii. 9-10 should perhaps be restored r.^ plv [(Ipijv;] t>i npos 



Our discussion has so far proceeded on the fundamental assumption that Cols, i-iv are 
rightly placed before v-viii, and we have hitherto left out of account the hypothesis that the 
^€/jor in iii. 9 may refer not to 396 hut to 395. It is not worth while reviewing in detail 
the consequences that would ensue from the combination of the present arrangement of 
Cols, i-viii with the view that the 6(pos belongs to 395, for that hypothesis would remove 
none of the difficulties which have led us to place Cols, i-iv before v-viii, and would not be 
supported by the chief argument for transposing v-viii before i-iv, the fact that Cols, i-iv are in 
the same hand as that of vi. 27-xxi (cf p. 114). If the dipoi in iii. 9 refers to 395, there 
is not the least doubt that Cols, v-viii should precede i-iv, not follow them. What are the 
results of this arrangement ? 

In the first place the dipoi of iii. 9 would necessarily mean midsummer not spring, for 
the account of Agesilaus' campaign in the spring and early summer of 395 would have 
preceded ; accordingly Demaenetus' expedition would have occurred in the spring or early 
summer of 395. There is no insuperable objection to this, although the change of policy on 
the part of Thrasybulus and the moderate democrats with regard to a war with Sparta would 
become very sudden, and it is more satisfactory to suppose at least a year's interval between 
the events described in i. 7-25 and the unanimously voted alliance of Athens with Boeotia 
in the late summer of 395 ; cf. i. 16, note. With regard to Pharax, the mention of him as 
6 npoTfpov vavapxos would merely cease to bear strongly on the vexed question of the date 
of his vaviipxia, sincc whether he was vavapxos in 398-7 or 397-6, he would equally be 
6 npojfpov vdvapxos in the spring of 395. The really serious difficulties begin when we try 
to imagine what could have stood in the lacuna in iii. 10, and what reasons P had for 
taking as his epoch the remarkably uneventful year 402-1, corresponding to the archonship 
of IMicon. That P should have grouped the events of the year of duapxla with the 
Peloponnesian war is perfectly intelligible, but that he should have also included in it 
the whole of the archonship of Euclides, and made a fresh start with the Attic new year 
following the amnesty is very extraordinary. At the time when v-viii were placed before 
i-iv, Meyer suggested for iii. 10 r^ ph [rmv \aKf8aipoviuv dpxn or fiytpovlq, i.e. the definitive 
organization of the Spartan hegemony, but we should certainly expect some particular event 
of well-known importance to be mentioned there, not a vague phrase. And, since no 
important historical incident occurred in the archonship of IMicon at all, the choice of 
402-1 as a starting-point would remain a complete enigma. Problems of still greater 
difficulty would, however, arise in connexion with the appearance of the new vavapxos; for 
that he was Pollis, the predecessor of Cheiricrates, would be practically certain, and it would 
become necessary to suppose either that he disappeared almost immediately after his arrival, 
or that in iii. 1 1 sqq. P has abandoned altogether the chronological sequence of events and 
reverted to incidents which took place long before the beginning of the 8th year. Neither 
of the two explanations is at all satisfactory; cf. iii. 21, note, and iii. 23-6, note, 
where the whole question of the chronology of this period is discussed more in detail. The 
overwhelming difficulties which ensue concerning the starting-point of P's system of years 
and the I'avap;^^ of Pollis, if the depos in iii. 9 refers to 395, seem to us much to outweigh the 
advantages which result from placing Cols, v-viii before i-iv : for apart from the argument 
based on the change of hands which is far from conclusive (cf p. 115), especially as the 
margin before Col. i suggests that it is the commencement of a new book or section, the 
only gain afforded by making Cols, v-viii precede i-iv is that it would then be easy to bring 
P into harmony with Diodorus as to the date of the arrival of the reinforcements from 
Phoenicia recorded in iii. 23-6. It is, however, not absolutely certain that P and Diodorus 
differ on this point even if the depos belongs to 396, and in any case the apparent order of 
events in P possesses such manifest advantages over their sequence in Diodorus that we 
are prepared to admit an error on the part of the latter; cf. p. 213. 



iii. 1 1 sqq. P now turns to the naval war, the fragmentary account of which bristles 
with difficulties. The first is the identity of the person -apoi {-8pos cannot be read) who 
occurs in 1. ii and again apparently in 11. 19 and 30. The context (especially the mentions 
of Pharnabazus in 11. 16 and 36) indicates that he was on the side of the Persians, not of 
the Spartans; and if 11. 11-20 all refer to him he seems to have been in command of the 
fleet and to have had negotiations with Pharnabazus concerning the pay (cf. xv. 37, sqq.), 
while 11. 28-31 perhaps refer to his departure as the result of some new arrangement about 
the command introduced by Pharnabazus, his place being apparently taken by Conon 
(1. 31). Against this interpretation may be urged the fact that in the account of Diodorus, 
who owing to the silence of Xenophon is practically the sole authority for the naval 
operations between the building of the Persian fleet and the battle of Cnidus, Conon is 
throughout in command of the Persian fleet ; cf. xiv. 39. 2 tw 8e Kovavi TupX r^? vavapxuis 

tiaXfx^^'^ f7re<TTT](Tfv (sc. Pharnabazus) airov iiTi Ti}V ddXaTTOv rjyfpova, and 8 1. 4 Kovcov 6 rav 

Ufpaav vavapxos. At the battle of Cnidus, however, Xenophon {^Hell. iv. 3. 11) speaks of 
Pharnabazus as vavapxos, and it seems possible that at the period with which Col. iii is concerned 
Conon, though really directing the operations, was nominally subject to a Persian com- 
mander other than Pharnabazus. That -apo^ was one of Conon's lieutenants is not likely, 
for both P (xi. lo-i) and Diodorus mention Hieronymus and Nicophemus as acting in 
this capacity (cf. note ad loc^ ; that he was a Spartan vavapxos is still less probable, for even if 
11. 16-8 refer to Conon's negotiations with Pharnabazus, not to -apos, the Spartan fleet 
seems to be mentioned for the first time in 1. 20, and the dpxrj of -apos in 1. 30 most probably 
refers to the vavapxia in 1. 28, which in view of the context is almost certainly the Persian, 
not the Spartan. 

12. e]Kfi: probably Caunus, the head quarters of the Persian fleet in the Aegean 
(cf. 11. 24 sqq.). That Rhodes, which became the head quarters later, had already revolted 
from Sparta is on the whole unlikely; cf. iii. 23-6, note. 

17—8. Perhaps ^ovX6\^pevos rw ^apmlid^u> avppfi^jai; cf. XV. 37. 

21. ndXAt?] : cf. XV. 32-5, where the arrival of Cheiricrates as successor to Pollis is 
mentioned as having taken place before Conon's visit to Tithraustes and the mutiny. 
Both vavapxoi were previously unknown. Since Cheiricrates' arrival is there mentioned in terms 
which seem to imply that this had not been previously referred to, it is not at all satisfactory 
to restore d^iKero XsipiKpdrrjs here, and ndXXts may be regarded as practically certain. That 
the vavapx'ia at Sparta was an annual office is generally agreed, but whether it normally was 
entered upon in midsummer or in the autumn is much disputed. Meyer, who formerly 
{Gesch. d. Alt. iv. p. 619) agreed with Beloch {Philol. xliii. p. 261) in accepting midsummer, 
now agrees with Lohse {QuaesL chronol. ad Xenoph. Hell, pertinentes., pp. 43 sqq.) and with 
Beloch's former view {Rhein. Mus. xxxiv. p. 119) in regarding the autumn, i.e. the be- 
ginning of the official Spartan year, as the normal commencement of the term of 
office of the vavapxoi. But whatever may have been the rule, there is no doubt that there 
were great irregularities in practice. Lysander, for instance, was in command not from 
autumn to autumn or even summer to summer, but from spring to spring ; cf. Lohse, /. c. 
But since the episode in connexion with which Cheiricrates is mentioned is related by P 
after the Boeotian war, which took place in the summer (xi. 34), and before the campaign 
of Agesilaus in the late summer and autumn, Cheiricrates' arrival must have occurred soon 
after midsummer, 395. He is mentioned again in connexion with the autumn campaign 
(xxi. 26), and was no doubt succeeded in the course of the winter by Pisander, who fell at 
the battle of Cnidus in August 394 ; cf, xv. 33, note. Cheiricrates' predecessor, Pollis, 
would therefore be expected to have come out in the summer or autumn of 396, and 
the great probability of this date for Pollis' arrival is one of the chief reasons for putting 
Cols, i-iv before v-viii in spite of the difficulty caused by the change of hands ; cf. iii. 9, 


note. For if Cols, i-iv are placed after v-viii and the 8th year in iii. 9 is 395-4, not 396-5, 
the advent of Pollis seems to coincide almost with his replacement by Cheiricrates. This 
conflict of evidence can only be explained in one of two ways. It is possible that Pollis 
entered ofiice in the summer of 395, but only held it for a very sliort lime before being 
succeeded by Cheiricrates. It is, however, not satisfactory to suppose that he was recalled 
so soon, still less that he died, for he is likely to be identical wiih the Pollis who was 
(TTKTTuXfvi in 393-2 (Xen. Ne/I. iv. 8. 11), and perhaps wiih the fuCipx'*^ of that name in 376 
(Xen. I/el/, v. 4. 61). Or secondly, Pollis may have entered office in the summer of 396, 
and on tiie hypothesis that Cols, i-iv follow v-viii the mention of his arrival is out of its 
proper chronological position. It must then be supposed that in relating the naval war 
P has departed from the fairly strict chronological arrangement followed by him in 
narrating the campaigns of Agesilaus and events in Greece, and has grouped together in 
Col. iii sqq. a series of events beginning with some which ought to have been mentioned 
long before. This explanation, however, is also very unsatisfactory, for in the subsequent 
sections dealing with the naval war (xi. 1-34, xv. 32-xviii. 33) the chronological arrangement is 
adhered to at the price of dividing the narrative of Conon's operadons into two parts 
separated from each other by the account of the Boeotian war; and since iii. 9-10 seem to 
record the conclusion of one year and the beginning of another, it is singularly difficult to 
regard the events next related as really belonging to the beginning of the year just 

22. 'Ap;^fXat8a : this seems to be the name of a ship rather than of a place ; cf. Frs. 19. 
8 and 20. 11, where it is perhaps mentioned again. Possibly there is some connexion 
with Archelaus king of Macedonia, a country which is mentioned in ix. 29. 

23—6, Cf. Diod. xiv. 79-8 napfyfvrjdrjcrav 8e Ta Kovavi rpirjpeis fVtvijKDvra, bcKa fitv airb 
KiXiKt'ay, oyBoijKovra S' dno ^owiK-qs, Ziv 6 ^idcoficov 8vvda-Tt]s u)^€ Tr]v rjyffinvlav, a passage which 

is no doubt derived directly or indirectly from P (cf. p. 137), though whether Diodorus and 
P agreed exactly with regard to the numbers of the ships is by no means certain in view of 
the differences between them as to numbers elsewhere; cf. v. 13-6, 60, and vi. 2r, notes. 
There is also the difficulty in Diodorus' account that these 90 ships added to the 80 which 
Conon possessed previously (xiv. 79. 6) make 170 triremes, but in his description of the 
battle of Cnidus (83. 4) the Persian fleet consists of only Tpifii)fis . . . nXelovs rav iv(vi)KovTa, 
against 85 on the side of the Spartans. Xenophon, however, {Htll. iv. 3. 12) stales that the 
Spartan fleet was greatly inferior in numbers, so that n\tiovs rav ivfvr]KovTa seems to imply 
too low an estimate. 

Diodorus' statement concerning the arrival of the 90 ships comes at the end of 
a section dealing with the naval war (79. 4-8), in which he previously recounts the assistance 
offered by the king of Egypt to the Spartans, the blockade of Conon with 40 ships at 
Caunus by Pharax, the Spartan vaCapxos, with 120 ships, the relief of Conon by Pharnabazus 
and Artaphernes, the revolt of Rhodes from the Spartans, and the capture by Conon of the 
Egyptian corn-ships which sailed to Rhodes in ignorance of the revolt. These incidents of 
the naval war he synchronizes with the dispatch of Agesilaus to Asia and his first campaign 
(79. 4 TovTOiv 8c irpaTToptvoiv, referring to 79. 1—3); the second campaign of Agesilaus, which 
corresponds to Cols, v-viii, follows immediately afterwards (80. i /xfra 5< Taiira), being 
succeeded by the Boeotian war and the battle of Haliartus (81. i rav be Kara rijv 'ficrlap tovtov 
Tov rpoTTov di(OKr]p(vu)v), and Conon's visit to Babylon (81. 4-6). The events of all three 
chapters 79-81 are assigned by Diodorus to the year 396-5, but his narrative of the two 
preceding years 398-7 and 397-6 deals only with Sicilian history, and it is clear that in 
those three chapters the events of two or more years have been compressed into one. 
Isocrates {Paneg. 142) speaks of the Persian fleet being blockaded {noXiopKovptvov) for 
three years iv tw noXtpa rw Trfpl 'P68ov ; but noXiopKovpfvov is clearly a rhetorical exaggeration, 

P 2 


and it is not certain whether he is referring to the years 397-5 or 396-4. Beloch {Gr. 
Gesch. ii. p. 146), suppoited by Lohse, op. cit. pp. 24 sqq., takes the former view, placing 
the arrival of Conon at Caunus and the siege and relief of that place in 397, principally 
on account of the mention of Pharax, who is known from Xen. Hell. iii. 2. 12 to have 
accompanied Dercylidas in his campaign of 397, which began in the spring. The revolt 
of Rhodes is referred by Beloch to the summer of 395, by Lohse to the summer of 396. 
Meyer, on the other hand {op. cit. v. pp. 208-9), connecting Paneg. 142 with Evag. 64, 
where . it is slated that the king AaKf8aifjLovi<ov €vt6s rpimv irCiv ac^tiKfTo Tt)u apx^v, i. e. in the 
three years 396-4 up to the batde of Cnidus in August 394 (cf. Paneg. 154 and Evag. 56 

through Conon's fleet i\aKtbai\i6vio>. \iiv KciTtvavnaxTjOrjaav Koi Tijs apxTjS dneaTtpTjdrjaav, oi d' 

"EXXrjpfs r]\(v6fpa)6r]aav), postpones the arrival of Conon at Caunus and the siege of that 
town by Pharax to the spring of 396, placing the revolt of Rhodes at about the beginning 
of 395. That the naval war did not begin in the summer of 397 is, he thinks, implied by 
Xenophon, I/e/l. iii. 4. i, where the commotion at Sparta caused by the news of the Persian 
preparations of a large fleet brings about the expedition of Agesilaus, which left Greece in 
the spring of 396. The chief objections to this view are (i) that it implies a very long 
term of office as vavapxos for Pharax, who is known to have been already acting in that 
capacity in the spring and early summer of 397, and (2) that if his operations in Asia 
against Conon took place in 396 it is difficult to account for his presence at Syracuse about 
midsummer of that year ; cf. Diod. xiv. 63. 4 and 70. 2, where ^apaKibas is no doubt identical 
with ^dpa^, though Diodorus is almost certainly wrong in still calling him vavapxos. More- 
over, as Lohse remarks {op. cit. pp. 26-7), the fear aroused at Sparta in 396 by the scale 
of the Persian preparations is not inconsistent with the supposition that the Persians had 
already a fleet of 40 ships in 397, and the three years of Isocr. Evag. in which the king 
a(j)e[XfTo rriv dpxrjv are likely to be different from the three years of the Pafitg. in which the 
Persian fleet was blockaded, and may be 395-3. Lohse's discussion of this point requires 
some modification in the light of the evidence from P that the visit of Conon to the Persian 
court happened not in the summer of 395 but in the following winter, but on the main 
questions of the date of Pharax' vavapxia and the distinction between the three years of the 
Paneg. from those of the Evag. we agree with him against Meyer. 

The account of the democratic rising {eTravdcTTaais) at Rhodes in xi. 1-34 presupposes 
that the expulsion of the Spartans and the admission of Conon's fleet had taken place some 
time previously, the government of the island being in the interval in the hands of the 
^tiayopeioi. Since the revolution is clearly assigned by P to the summer of 395 (cf. xi. 34 
toCtov roil dfpovs), the expulsion of the Spartans can hardly have occurred later than the 
■winter of 396-5. That P's account of this immediately preceded that of the enavda-Tacris is 
unlikely, for there is no reference in xi. 1-34 to the Spartans, and the rising of the democrats 
and the expulsion of the Spartans belong to different years according to P's reckoning. 
The question then arises whether the expulsion of the Spartans took place before or after 
the events recorded in Col. iii. If these belong to 395 it would be necessary to suppose 
that the revolt of Rhodes from the Spartans preceded them, for there would be only 
a very brief interval of time (one or two months at most) between the arrival of Pollis and 
the democratic revolution. P would then confirm Diodorus' statement that the reinforce- 
ments from Phoenicia arrived after the revolt of Rhodes. But it is in any case more 
probable that Pollis' arrival took place in the summer of 396 (cf. iii. 9 and 21, notes); 
and if so there is an interval of practically a year between Cols, iii and xi, which gives ample 
time for the expulsion of the Spartans during this period. Unfortunately the remains of 
Col. iii are insufficient by themselves to show definitely whether the expulsion of the Spartans 
from Rhodes had taken place or not. On the one hand Caunus not Rhodes seems to be 
the head quarters of the Persian fleet ; and if 'Apra0e]p»'7[r] be read in iii. 3 7 the situation may, 


as Meyer sugt^ests, correspond to that in Diod. xiv. 79. 5, when Pharnabazus and Artaphernes 
came to the rescue of Conon at Caunus, Rhodes being still held by the Spartans. On the 
other hand xi. 9 and xv. 36 show that even after Rhodes had become the head quarters of 
the Persian fleet Conon was in the habit of visiting Caunus, and it is possible that 
a mention of Rhodes in connexion w'ith the Persian fleet occurred in iii. 11-2. 
Moreover, if the expulsion of the Spartans occurred after the events recorded in Col. iii, 
there is a discrepancy between P and Diodorus as to the date of the arrival of the 
reinforcements, since Diodorus places that event after the defection of Rhodes. In itself there 
is nothing at all improbable in the view that these reinforcements played a part in causing 
Rhodes to revolt from the Spartans, but we have some hesitation, in consideration of the 
agreements between P and Diodorus elsewhere, in accepting so serious a divergence between 
them as to the order of the events described in Diod. xiv. 79. 4-8, especially as the jilacing 
of Cols i-iv after v-viii would bring P into harmony with Diodorus on this point. On the 
whole, however, in view of the advantages gained by the hypothesis that the arrival of the 
reinforcements preceded the revolt, and the inextricable difficulties caused by maintaining 
that the events in iii. 11 sqq. belong to 395, we prefer to suppose that the order of events 
in Diodorus is erroneous, and that the arrival of the reinforcements occurred in the late 
summer or autumn of 396, the revolt of Rhodes in the same autumn or the following 
winter, the account of the latter event being probably lost between Cols, iii and v. 

The accuracy of Diodorus' narrative of the naval war in xiv. 79. 4-8 having been denied 
in one important particular, it becomes somewhat doubtful how far the rest of it is to be 
trusted. If the siege of Caunus was conducted by Pharax, this must certainly be referred 
to 397, not to 396. For apart from other objections to the supposition that his vavapxia ex- 
tended to 396 (cf. p. 212), since Pharax is called 6 Trprfrfpor i/aua/jp^oy (i. 31) in the year preceding 
the 8th year mentioned in iii. 9 and the arrival of Pollis apparently belongs to the 8th year 
(or at any rate to 396), it is very unlikely that he was the immediate predecessor of Pollis. 
And if another vavapxoi intervened Pharax' term of office cannot have extended into 396. 
The probable chronology of the vavapxoi is in our opinion 398-7 (autumn) Pharax; 397 
(autumn) to 396 (autumn) unknown ; 396 (autumn) to 395 (summer) Pollis; 395 (summer- 
winter) Cheiricrates ; 394 Pisander (cf. xv. 33, note). Hence P on the whole seems to 
support Beloch's chronology of the naval war against that of Meyer. To make P 
consistent with Meyer's view that the naval war began in 396, it is necessary to suppose 
that Pharax in Diodorus xiv. 79. 5 is a mistake for Pollis or his unknown predecessor. 
There is, however, as Meyer remarks, a good deal to be said for treating ^apa^ there as an 
error, for if the siege of Caunus began in 397, when Pharax was w^ith Dercylidas in Caria, 
Diodorus ought to have mentioned it in his account of Dercylidas' campaign in xiv, 39, and 
the indecisive character of the operations on land, which ended in a tame avoidance of battle 
and a truce for further negotiations, ill accords with the hypothesis that the Spartans had in 
397 so large a fleet as 120 ships in the Aegean, and were taking active measures against 
Conon. It is possible, therefore, to limit Pharax' period of office to 397, and yet to regard 
the naval war as commencing in the spring of 396, for apart from the mention of Pharax 
in Diod. xiv. 79. 4 there is no clear evidence that Conon came to Caunus before 396. The 
substitution of another name for Pharax in that passage would however still be compatible 
with Conon's arrival there in 397, for Diodorus' expression with regard to Conon {haTpiiiovra 
8' fv Kaifo) p.(Ta v(d)v TftraapaKovTa) is quite vaguc. And since the rhetorical exaggeration in 
Isocr. Pancg. 142 (cf. p. 211) is more excusable if the three years of the siege refer to 
397-5 instead of 396-4, it does not seem worth while to reject Diodorus' statement that 
Pharax besieged Conon, though the number of the Lacedaemonian ships (120) may well 
be too large. The connexion suggested by Meyer between iii. 37 and the relief of Conon 
by Pharnabazus and Artaphernes (cf. p. 2 1 2) is therefore not very probable. 


iii. 26. [aTzb i>oivLKT)s (cf. Diod. /. c.) is unlikely, as ^mviKcou occurs in 1. 23. applying to 
the whole fleet. Perhaps [ano ^iBuvos koI . . . ; but the division as"AKrw«/ is very uncertain. 
The name "Akt<ov is not known, and ]a(raKTcov may be all part of the name of the 

30. ] . apos : the vestige of a letter before a would suit y or r best, but is also com- 
patible with K, (T, V, or X- It is of course quite uncertain how many letters intervene 
between ] . apos and fxtu ovv. 

34. Perhaps koi Sta/Soy as Taxi](TTa 7roTop[<>]v, as proposed by Bury, who suggested 

KctXovpei'ov in 1. 35. 

35. fis Xipvrjju ri}v Y^a^jvlav : there was a large lake a little north of Caunus, which was 
connected with it by a river, i.e. the 'i:oTap\o\v tov Yi.av[viov of 1. 34, or Kak^is, as it is called 

by Strabo xiv. 651 ft^a KaCvos koi norapos Tthrjaiov KaA/3is 0a6vs f)(0)v (la-aywyrjv. 

36. Ko[v(oios: the supposed k has been corrected. 

37. ]p«"?[y] : perhaps na(ri<pe]jvr][s], who is mentioned in xvi. 27 as having been 
appointed by Tithraustes to command the Persian forces along with Ariaeus, 01 
' ApTa(p€'\pi>r}[s], who, according to Diod. xiv. 79. 5, came with Pharnabazus to the help 
of Conon at Caunus (cf. iii. 23-6, note), unless indeed 'Apracpfpvrjs there is a mistake for 
Uaai^fpvris, a name not known apart from xvi. 27. 

40-3. Fr. 2, containing the letters ]i'0i>[, ^lo^, ^rfk^, and ](a(Ta[, is placed here chiefly 
on the evidence of colour ; the recto is blank at this point, and the proposed arrangement 
is by no means certain. 

Col. V. i-vii. 4 = chs. VI-VII. Agesilaus in Asia. 

V. I. The supposed stops at the beginning of this line and 1. 3 may represent the 
tip of a letter. The second scribe sometimes fails to insert stops when he leaves a 
space, e. g. in 1. 6. 

4. T] pev [oiiv: a new section probably begins here. Whether the preceding lines 
concerned Agesilaus' preparations at Ephesus (cf. Xen. Hc/L iii. 4. 16-9) or events in 
another part of the world is quite uncertain. 

7. 77 of (TTpaTon[e'pov is corrected, and the vestiges after arpar indicate something more 
than o. Perhaps the scribe began to write arparfvpa. 

8. For Ko[ij(T]rpt[oJ' rredlov cf. DiodorUS xiv. 80. I /xfTCt 8e ravra 'AyrjaiXaos pev f^aynywv 
TT)V hvvapiv (IS TO Kavarpov 7rt8'ioi> Km tyjv Trep\ SittvXov \aipav f'SrJajtre ras twv eyxcoptcov KTTjatis. 

The opr) in 1. 9 probably refer to Sipylus. Xenophon does not state Agesilaus' route 
to Sardis. 

9-10. Possibly Ta^ap([uos (Is lAivBiov ; cf. 1. 34 and Diod. /. c. 'Ayrjo-iXaos 8( ds TtkivBiov 
(TvvTa^as Tovs arpuTiwras. But though the nXivdiov must have been mentioned before 1. 34, 
it would be more naturally introduced after the mention of Tissaphernes in II. 14-6, i. e. in 
11. 17 sqq., where the manoeuvres of the march are described. Moreover the $ of ra^ape 
is very doubtful, and the correct division may be ra Sprj ra . ape . . . 

13—6. Cf. Diod. /. C, Tiaaa(f)(pvrjs 8( pvpiovs p(v lirirds ■n(VTaKi(Tpvpiovs h( iv(^ovs ddpoiaas 
(jrrjKoXovdd To7s AaKebaifjoptois. Wilamowitz proposes Trefoils pev n(VT\iKiaxi-X.lovs f"['] pv[piovs 
(Xoiv, iTTTTeas 8( pvpiav o]vk (XdrTovs, and would bring the figures in Diodorus into agreement 
with P by emending nevTaKicrpvpiovs into ^(VTaKiai^xiXiovs <cal) pvpiovs. But P and Diodorus 
differ elsewhere in regard to figures (cf. notes on v. 60 and vi. 21), and the Imrds may well 
have been mentioned before the n((oi, as in Diod. /. c. and in xxi. 12 (though not in 
vii. 41). The restoration suggested in our text produces a conflict with Diodorus as 
to the number of the tTrTreiy, but not necessarily in that of the n(Coi, since 7r(VTaKiapvpio)v 
would suit the space. That figure is very high; but cf. Pausan. iii. 9. 6 yevopevtjs Bi npbs 


Tiaaacjx'jWTjv (T(iTp<'nrT)v rutv ntpi 'loovlap fi'i'^V? iv''V.pfjLOv TreSi'w tx^v re innou tUv lifpawu (viKrjatv 
6 ^AytjniXaoi Actil to ntC^v rtJre nXtiaTop a^/jota^eV fitrd yt top Aqi^ov (TTparov. The agreement 

between P and Diodorus, supported by Pausanias, concerning the movements of 
Tissapherncs' troops is very striking. Xenophon (/feU. iii. 4. 21, Ages. i. 29) gives 
a wholly diflferent account ; according to him, the satrap expecied an invasion of Caria, 
and dispatched his infantry thither and his horse to the plain of the Maeander, so that 
Agesilaus reached [he nt-ighbourhood of Sardis unmolested and never met tlie Persian 
inlantry at all ; cf. note on v. 59. 

17-9. The restorations are due to Bury, who further suggests KaTi8o)v avrovs in 1. 17 and 

continues in 11. 20—2 aAlAcus sal Kpa[TVPas Ttjp ra^tp, frroitlTo 8e t^j] iTTpaTrjyias 'nnu8fi^ip avTov, 

a passing com])liment to Agesilaus' tactical skill ; cf. p. 123. That the TrAtv^iW was mentioned 
here is probable in any case ; cf. 11. 9 and 34, notes, 

22. The first a of piaxfa-ffai is corrected. 

24. <Tas' : or o-no-i without a slop; cf note on 1. i. 

34. n'Kii^diov : cf. vi. 35 and the passage from Diodorus quoted in 1. 9, note. Diodorus 
proceeds to describe Agesilaus' arrival before Sardis and the plundering of the environs, 
including the irapadfia-os of Tissaphernes ; but the scanty remains of 11. 36-58 do not offer 
any points of connexion with his narrative, and it is not clear precisely where the battle 
described in v. 59-vi. 27 took place. Xenophon, whose account in Il^t//. iv. 22-4 = Ages. 
I. 30-33 is widely different (cf. v. 59, note), describes it as occurring on the bank of the 
Pactolus before Agesilaus reached Sardis, the environs of which were, according to 
Ages. I. 33, plundered after the engagement. Diodorus, whose description of the ambush 
in xiv. 80. 2-3 closely resembles that of P, represents Agesilaus as turning back 
{(TrKTrpi^as) after reaching Sardis, and places the scene of the battle ava p-iaov . . . rap 
T€ 2dp8(oop Koi evlBdpvap, the site of which town is unknown. Pausanias in the passage 
quoted in note on 11. 13-6 vaguely says that the fight occurred in the"Epp.ov neSiop, which 
is also mentioned in Ephorus Fr. 131, possibly in reference to this battle. From vi. 29, 
where it is stated that Tissaphernes after his defeat retreated with his troops (dn-fxwp'jo'ai') 
to Sardis, it is probable that in P's account Agesilaus had passed Sardis before the 
battle, and (Tnarpfylras in Diodorus is, as Meyer remarks, likely to be due to a mis- 
understanding, since he uses the same expression [dnexotpw^) as P with regard to 

40. A stop may be lost after ^fioicus. 

41. /iaXlXoJ^i/: the position of Fr. 3 containing the supposed beginnings of 11, 42-9 
and 54-60 is not absolutely certain, and it might belong to an earlier column. The 
recto gives no help. The combinations /iiaX|Xo'i/ and A[yri(ri\\a[os and the fact that . « [ is 
the last line of a column are the grounds for placing it as we have indicated. If /iaXlXo[i' is 
correct, the iota adscript of eyyvrepaii is perhaps erroneous. 

45, 8 in the margin opposite this line seems to indicate that this is the 400th line 
of the MS. Similar indications of the successive hundreds are common in poetical texts, 
e.g. 223 and 841; but the only parallel that we can adduce from a prose MS. of this 
period occurs in the Pherecydes papyrus (P. Grenf. II. 11), where 5- in the margin opposite 
ii. 3 is more likely to mean the 6ooth line than the 6th section. 

56. Perhaps ToCroji/ top fpun\r6p. 

58. There is a spot of ink in the margin before * . f, which might represent ]o, but 
may be merely an accident. That it is connected with S in the margin against 1. 45 
is unlikely. 

V- 59-vJ. 53- 

' (Agesilaus sent) . . . hoplites and [.'00 light-armed troops, and appointed as their 
leader Xenocles, a Spartiate, with instructions to form in order of battle when (the main 


body ofthe army) marched past them. Agesilaus on the next day at dawn roused his army, 
and continued his advance. Tlie barbarians accompanied them as usual, some assaulting 
the Greeks, others . . . them, others in loose order following them over the plain. When 
Xenocles considered that it was the moment to attack the enemy, he started up with 
the Peloponnesians from the ambush, and charged at a run. The barbarians at the sight 
of the advancing Greeks fled over the whole plain, whereupon Agesilaus perceiving the 
panic dispatched from his army the light troops and the cavalry in pursuit, and they 
in combination with the force which had issued from the ambush pressed hard upon the 
barbarians. They followed the enemy for no very long time, as they were unable to 
overtake them because the majority were horsemen or without armour, and after killing 
about six hundred of them they desisted from the pursuit, and attacked the barbarians' 
camp. Finding the guard not strongly posted they soon took it, and captured from the 
enemy large supplies^ many prisoners, and much baggage and money, including that 
of Tissaphernes himself. Such being the result of the battle, the barbarians in terror 
of the Greeks retired with Tissaphernes to Sardis, while Agesilaus after remaining there 
three days, in which he restored to the enemy their dead under a truce and erected 
a trophy and ravaged the whole country, led his army forward again into Phrygia Magna. 
He no longer kept his soldiers formed in column on the march, but allowed them to range 
over as much of the country as they liked, and to plunder the enemy. Tissaphernes on 
learning that the Greeks were continuing their advance, gathered the barbarians together 
once more, and followed in the rear of his adversaries, at a distance of many stades. 
After crossing the Lydian plain Agesilaus conducted his forces through the mountains 
which lie between Lydia and Phrygia, and after traversing these brought them down to 
Phrygia until they reached the river Maeander, which rises at Celaenae, the largest city 
in Phrygia, and flows into the sea near Priene and (Myus ?). There he encamped the 
Peloponnesians and their allies, and consulted the auspices whether he ought to cross 
the river or not, and whether he should march against Celaenae or retreat. Since the 
sacrifices proved unpropitious for him, after waiting there during the day of his arrival and 
the next, he retired with his army , . .' 

V. 59 sqq. With the account of the ambush cf. Diodorus xiv. 80. 2-3, which is 

somewhat less detailed, anetTTfiXt SevoKXea t6v ^napridTrjv fifTU ;(tXtwj' Kul TerpaKoaiuiv OT/Jartcurcoj/ 
vvKTos (U riva baavv toitov ottccs evdipfvaj] tovs ^apjBdpovs. aiiros S' o/m' rjfiepa ivopfvopuvos fiera t^s 
dvi'dpf(i)s (Tr€i8r) Tt/v jxfv ivtbpav napfjWa^eu, o'l 8e ^dpjiapoi TrpocnrinToirres draKTais rots eTTi rrjs 
oipayiai f^rjTTTovTo, Trapafid^cos i^ui(pvqs (nearpfyp-ev enl tovs Tlfpaas. ytvopfvrjs Si Kaprfpds pd^rji 
Kal Toil (Tvcrcrrjpov Tails Kara ttjv tvehpav dpdfUTos fKtlvoi ptv naiavlaavrts ('nfCpfpovTo rol? TroXf/it'ot?, ol 
ti Tlfpa-ai OtaipovvTes aiiTOVs unoKap^avofifVovs fls fieaov KaTcirKdyrjcrav Kiii irapa^pripa k'cfxvyoj), oi 8f 

TTfpl Tov 'AyrjaiXaov pixP'- H-^" ''""'os' eVtStco^airey cifelXai' fifv vnfp tovs f^aKia)(iXiovs alxpaXaiTcou 
be TToXii TrkfjOos rjBpoicrav, ttju 8e wapf fi^oXijp Sirjpnaaav yepovaav TfoWiov dyadcov. dno Se rf}s 

tid)(r]i Tiaaa(f)€pvT]s p,fv (is 2ap8fi? dirtxapiicre Karanenhrjypfvos Trjv T6\p,av t5>v AaKtbatpoviav, 1 he 

general resemblance between Diodorus and P is very close, though except in the last 
sentence of the extract (cf vi. 27—30) the verbal coincidences (which are indicated by the 
underlined words) are not striking, and besides minor differences there is a discrepancy 
as regards Agesilaus' tactics, since Diodorus represents him as bringing on a general 
engagement before giving the signal to Xenocles, while in P Xenocles chooses his own 
time for the attack, and is then reinforced by a portion of the main army. Diodorus' 
account has been generally supposed to be derived from Ephorus; and if so Ephorus 
must have been based on P; cf. pp. 135—7. 


Xenophon on the other hand {Hcll.'xW. 4. 22-4 = Ages. i. 30-33) gives quite a difTerent 
colour lo the engagement. The Persian infantry having been sent to Caria (cf. note on 
V. 13-6), only the cavalry, under an unnamed l]y(^io3v, were engaged, at first with the Greek 
cavalry and subsequently with the infantry, while Tissaphernes himself is stated to have 
been at the time in Sardis and not present during the fighting. That Xenophon is referring 
to the same battle as Diodorus, though that has been doubted, is practically certain, for 
in both accounts the fight results in the capture of the Persian camp with much booty, and 
it is difficult to believe that if there had been two important victories, Xenophon would have 
omitted one of them ; cf. Meyer, Gesch. d. Alt. ii. p. 207. Xenophon's account is followed 
in the main by Plutarch, yi^vj-. 10, but with some variation in details (e.g. according to 
Plutarch Tissaphernes was present in the engagement, and Agesilaus' attack is described 
somewhat dilTercntly), which are explained by Sachse (Z?/V QuelUn Plutarchs in der 
Libensbeschreibung des Konigs Agcsilaos, pp. 8-9) on the hypothesis that Plutarch was using 
Ephorus, who was based on Xenophon. If this view were accepted, it would follow 
that Diodorus' account was not derived from P2phorus ; but Sachse seems to us to 
overestimate the extent to which Plutarch in his Ages, has used Ephorus ; cf. xx. 37, note, 
and p. 126. Nepos {Ages. 3) also follows Xenophon, but Pausanias (cf. note on v. 13-6) 
supports Diodorus as to the presence of the Persian infantry. While Diodorus' story 
stood almost alone, and might be explained as a comparatively late invention, historians 
have naturally preferred to believe Xenophon ; but the case is now much altered, and 
the alternative version of Agesilaus' victory found in P and Diodorus, which is clearly 
based on good evidence, has considerable claims to acceptance. The fact that Xenophon 
represents Tissaphernes as repeating in 395 the error which he had made with regard 
to Agesilaus' plans in 396, and again sending his infantry to Caria where they were useless, 
is decidedly suspicious. 

60. The traces of the first letter of the line do not suit f. e? j nva baavv T()Voi'(cf. Diod.) 
is therefore inadmissible. Diodorus gives the number of the orrpaTiirm as 1400 in all. 
Since it is quite uncertain whether \nev-'\, [ok-] or [eV-] occurred in the lacuna at the end of 
the line, we abstain from inserting a number before o/rXtTas, especially as P and Diodorus 
diff"er elsewhere in respect of numbers ; cf. iii. 23-6, note. 

vi. 2. AfvoKkta'. cf. Diod. /. c. and Xen. Hell. iii. 4. 20, where it is stated that he was 
one of 30 Spartiates who came out with Herippidas in succession to ol n-fpl hvaavbpov in the 
winter of 396-5, and was appointed one of the two leaders of Agesilaus' cavalry. 

3. In the lacuna the ^abi^ovrts were no doubt specified : probably they were 
Agesilaus' troops, e. g. ol tVl r^s oipaylas (cf. Diodorus), rather than the jroXe^iot ; cf. inei8i] 
TTjv fifv fvebpav naprjWa^tv in Diodorus. ffabi^ivrfi also suits Agesilaus' troops better than 
the enemy, although in the very similar account of the ambush against the Mysians in 

xix. 28 Sqq. ol dt tcov 'EWtjvxv tv (Bpfv'lovTfs, &>? ^crav kcit avTois, (KnrjSrjcravTfs k.t.X., the Subject 

of ^a-av is the enemy. There is, however, this difference between the arrangements for the 
attack in the two cases, that in xix. 28 the troops employed for the ambush were left behind 
when the main army continued its forward march, whereas in the present instance, 
as appears not only from P's account but more clearly from that of Diodorus, the ambush 
was laid on the line of march of the main army, which would thus have to pass it. 

4. [(Is tf TTjv (TTiovcrav (cf. xix. 22) is due to Bury. 

5. a\y,a vm]«V'[' '• cf. Diod. and rljf vvKT 6i. in v. 59 corresponding to wktos in Diod. It 
would be possible to read a\nav to (T\p6\TfY{iia\ .[..., but the other reading is preferable, 
though t]6 foT]pa[T«]y'^a is very doubtful. 

8. «7r«[ ]iioj' : <7rf[KwX]uo»' (Dittenberger) is not long enough ; (nt\T6^f\mv necessitates 

the alteration of alTod to cwto'is, but cf. the error of case in 1. 18. (TT([btiKv^vop avrovs 
is possible, but not very satisfactory. 


vi. 9. aTdKT[[i)s : cf. Diod. /. C. vpna-rrlTrTovrfs araKTwr. 

2 1. f^aKoaiovs : Diodoius gives the number of the slain as 6000, which is no doubt an 
error, probably due to a corruption in the MSS. Cf. v. 13-6 and 60, notes. 
28-30. Cf. Diod. and v. 59, note. 

30 Sqq. DiodorUS (xiv. 80. 5) says only 'AyrjalXaos S' (ntx^ipW^ M*" *'f ■'""^ """» a-arpanfiat, 
€V 8e Tois Upo'is ol BvpufjLfvoi KaXXifpr](rai (cf. vi. 5 1— 2) ttuXiv dnrjyaye rfjv hvvap.iv tni daXiirrav, and 

omits altogether the autumn campaign of Agesilaus described in xviii. 33 sqq. Xenophon 
{He//, iii. 4. 25) says nothing of the advance to the upper Maeander, but proceeds direct 
to the death of Tissaphernes and the negotiations with Tithraustes which led to 
Agesilaus' departure into the satrapy of Pharnabazus. The details provided by P are 
therefore new. 

34. ^pvyiav naXiv [rfiv"] p-fydXr^v : possibly P means to imply that this was the second 

invasion of Phrygia ; cf. XX. 7 rrj^ x^Jpav rav <I>[p]vywi/ ovk tls [f/^ rod TTporepuv [Bep^ovs ivi^nkfv 

(i.e. in 396), Xen. He//, iii. 4. 12-5 and Diodorus xiv. 79. 3, where the first campaign 
of Agesilaus in Phrygia is described. The campaign of 396, however, took place not 
in Phrygia Magna (i.e. the interior) which was in the satrapy of Tissaphernes, but in 
Phrygia napa6a\aTTi8ios (cf. xxi. 17) in the satrapy of Pharnabazus; and though the order 
of the words us ^pvylav naXiv [rfjv] p.eyaKr]v may be intended to express that naXiv qualifies 

(ppvyiav, but not rr^v peyaXrjv, a comparison with XX. 29 dcpiKopitvos 8e ndXiv Trpos Fopdiov, 

where irdXiv seems to be used loosely for ' further ' and certainly does not imply a previous 
visit to Gordium, suggests that ndXiv in vi. 34 merely qualifies nporiyev, not 'Ppvyiav. 

35. (TvvTerayph'ovs . . . iv tw 7rX[t]i/^tw : cf. V. 9, note, and Xen. Ages. 6. 7 onore yf prjv 
nopevoLTo eiSojy on e^dr] rois noXfpiois pdx^ea-dai et ^ovXoivto awreraypevov pev ovtcds J/ye to 
(TTpdrtvpa K.T.X, 

39. e]Trri[KoXo]ii0ei omadfV. a hiatus which can easily be avoided by placing (nrjKoXovdei 
after avrcov. For other instances of hiatuscf. i. 4, note. 

41. The lacuna after (TTp]aTidv may be filled up by dpaxfi (Wilamowitz) or f]crvxS>s. 

42. Ke[tfiev(ov by itself does not fill the lacuna; Kai may be inserted after it, but is 
superfluous, and rjjy] re [AvS/ar, though possible, is equally unsatisfactory. In the last five 
lines of this column, however, a blank space about three letters in width has been left 
in the middle of the lines owing to a roughness in the papyrus, and if this blank space 
extended as far as 1. 42 Kf[in€va>v] would be sufficient. But since it tends to diminish in s'ze 
in 11. 49-50, it is not very likely that it reached as far as 1. 42, though it seems to affect 1. 48, 
where the restoration, which is certain, gives only i6 letters in the lacuna in place of 20. 

44-7. Agesilaus no doubt followed the road taken by Cyrus; cf. Xen. Auad. i. 2. 5-7 

Kvpos 8e . . , appcLTO dnb SapSfwi'" Koi e^eXavvei Sia ttjs Avblas aradp-ovs rpe'ts rrapaadyyas fiKom koI 
8vo fVi Tov Maiavbpov TTorapdv . . . tovtov Sio/3aj (^(Xavvei Sta ^pvyias . . . fls KoXocrads 
. . . (VTtiidev f^eXavvft, (TTodpovs rpus mtpaardyyas UKoaiv fls KeXaivds, rrjs ^pvyias TrdXif oiKovfjievrjv, 
p^tydXrjv Koi (vba'ipova. ivrav6a Kupw ^aaiXeia rjv . . , al 8f Trrjyai nvrov (sc. the Maeander) fl(nv 
(K Tu>v /Sao-iXeiW, ecBf d^Uovro irpos in 1. 44 was suggested by Wilamowitz, who proposes [/cat 
followed by a second adjective (e.g. KokXiaTrj) ttoXls fo-rlv in 1. 46, with K[aTa<p€peTai in 1. 47. 
This verb is however much less suitable than fKblbaa-iv, and the lacuna in 1. 47 may be filled 
up by «[at followed by the name of another town (Wilamowitz suggests Mvovvra). The coast at 
the mouth of the Maeander has greatly altered since ancient times, and Priene is now far 
inland and some distance from the river. The papyrus confirms the reconstruction of the 
ancient course of the Maeander in Wiegand and Schrader, Priene, pp. 8 sqq. Cf. also note 
on vii. 1-2. 

51-2. Cf. the extract from Diodorus quoted in 1. 30, note. 

vii. 1-2. Agesilaus seems to have marched down towards the coast along the right 
bank of the INIaeander, which river at this time probably formed the boundary between 

Lydia and Caria ; cf. the mention in 1. 3 of the I.ydians in the plain of the Macander with Strabo 

xiii. p. 629 }] b( Mftrwylr fly to aPTiKfififvou fifj)OS 8iar(ivft fi-fXP'- ^VKuXr/t otto KfXati'aji' iip^<ifi(vov 
(cf. vi. 45), tot (f)rjcn Qfonofinoi, wcrrf rii fiiu nirov <J?piryfs K(^T(;^oval to. npoi raii KfAanatv koi rrj 
' Anafifia, to 8( Mvcroi Ka\ \v8oi, to di Ktipfi Ka\ l<opfs. ovto) 8( Koi oi noTafiiu <cat /KiXiora 6 Mauii/Spor , 
Ta piv 8iopi(om(t twv (Bvoov k.tX. \\'ilamo\vitZ proposes K^m Mutrot, Kiipii T( Kin "icoi/tf in 1. 4, 

and would regard vi. 44-vii. 4 as the passage in Tljeopompus meniioned by Strabo. 
This restoration and identification however seem to us very doubtful, even if P is Thco- 
pompus ; for imo K(\at\vuv in vi. 45 apparently refers to the Maeander not to the Mesogis, 
about which Theoponipus was speaking, and there is no room for anytliing corresponding 
to oio-Tf Ta piv avTov ^pvyfs . . . 'Anapda. Hence we attach liule weight to the general 
resemblance between vi. 44-vii. 4 and Strabo's allusion to Theopompus as an argument for 
the identification of the latter author with P; cf. p. 131. 

If our restoration of vii. 39-40 is correct, Agesilaus spent a period of inactivity at 
IMagnesia. The extant fragments of P do not mention him again until xviii. 33, when he 
goes from Lydia northwards to the Hellespont; but xviii. 37-8 show that our author had 
described his negotiations with Tithraustes, no doubt in the gap between Cols, viii and xi. 
The correctness of the position assigned to Fr. 4 is guaranteed (i) by internal evidence, 
since it clearly contains the transition from Agesilaus' campaign to the arrangements for the 
removal of Tissaphernes, (2) by the suitable combination ^aX]Xo[i; in 11. 9-10, (3) by the 
evidence of the recto, which has ends of lines at the right point, (4) by the colour and texture 
of the papyrus, which agree with those of Fr. 7, containing Col. viii. Frs. 21 and 22 also 
probably belong to Cols, vii or viii. 

Cols. vii. 4-viii. 42 = ch. VIII. Death of Tissaphernes. 

vii. 4 sqq. P now turns, like Xenophon and Diodorus, to the supersession of 
Tissaphernes by Tithraustes and the assassination of the former. Xenophon iyHcll. iii. 4. 

25; cf. Ages. I. 35) says merely yvovi 8f koL atroj 6 Ilfpcrciiv ^acnXtvs Ti(Tcru(f)fpvr]v aiTiov tivat 
Tov KaKws (pepta6ai ra avTOv TiOpavcTTju KarcTttp^as dnorfpvd avrov tjju Kf(pd\r]v. DiodorUS 
(xiv. 80. 6-8) is somewhat more detailed : 'Apra^ep^rjs fie 6 r^s 'Aat'nr ^mnXfvs ra T€ eXaTTapara 
TTvddpei'os Koi KOToppcodap top npos roiis "E\Xt]Pai noXtpop 8i opyfjs «i;^e top Ticraa(p(pvT]v , . . »ccu 
vno T^f ptjTphs d< riapucraTtSof t)p T]^ia>p(POi Tipatpfia-aadai to;/ Tia(Ta(pfpvr}p . . . Karaorijo-as ovv 
TidpavdTTjp Tiyepopa tovto) pep napfiyyaXt (rvXXap^ui'dP Tiaaacpfpirqp^ npos 8f ras noXtis koi tovs 
(xaTpdnas tnepylrtv fTnaroXat ottcos ndpTts tovto) rroiaxTi to npocrTUTTopfPop. 6 8f TiSpuCcmjs 
TTapny(v6p(voi fli KoXoaaat rrji <Ppvyias crvPfXa^f top TiaaucPfpprjp 8id tipo^ *Apiaiov aaTpdnov 
XovopfPOP Koi TTjv K((f)(iXr]P dnoKoylras (iTreoTftXe 7rp6s top ^aa-iXta. A fuller aCCOUnt of the 

methods employed by Tithraustes and Ariaeus to accomplish their object is found in 
Polyaenus, S/raf. vii. 16. The account in P, whicli is unfinished at the end of Col. viii, was 
much longer still ; and although in the scanty remains of Cols, vii and viii only the general 
outline of the story can be perceived, the agreement with Diodorus and Polyaenus is clear, 
and the accounts of both those writers are no doubt derived directly or indirectly from 
P. vii. 4-20 probably describe the complaints against Tissaphernes and the king's resolve to 
get rid of him. In vii. 21 sqq. we have the departure of Tithraustes and appointment 
of Ariaeus, in vii. 35 sqq. the message sent by Ariaeus to Tissaphernes at Sardis to induce 
him to come to Colossae, in viii. 20 sqq. the arrival of Tissaphernes with a bodyguard at 
Colossae, and his arrest while bathing at Ariaeus' house. It is clear that P directly connects 
Tissaphernes' fall with his want of success in the campaign round Sardis, as also in our 
opinion does Xenophon, in spite of Beloch's objection (6V. Gcsch. ii. p. 148) ; and it is notice- 
able that in vii. 4 sqq. there is nothing to suggest that Conon was concerned. According to 
Nepos, Conon 3, the supersession of Tissaphernes was the consequence of the representations 


of Conon, who was sent by Pharnabazus to the king to accuse Tissaphernes, and both 
Meyer {Gesch. d. Alt. ii. 209) and Beloch (/. c.) accept Nepos' story and adopt the date for 
Conon's visit implied by him and Pausanias iii. 9. 2 (the winter of 396-5) in preference to 
that of Diodorus, who (xiv. 81.4) places this event between the revolt of Rhodes and the battle 
of Cnidus, i.e. in the winter of 395-4, after Tissaphernes" death. But that P supported 
Diodorus' date admits of little doubt, for it is very improbable that Conon had an interview 
with the king himself before his visit to Tiihraustes narrated in xv. 32 sqq., and in Justin 
vi. I. 1 1-2 Conon's visit to the king is, mentioned after the mutiny, which is now known 
from xvi. 29 sqq. to have taken place in the late summer or autumn of 395. Diodorus' date 
for Conon's mission is therefore preferable, as Meyer now admits ; the motive was not the 
removal of Tissaphernes, but, as Diodorus says, the need of money for the fleet and the 
appointment of Pharnabazus as commander-in-chief. 

vii. 15. ]a7ra/3[ : there is possibly a reference to Artaxerxes' mother Parysatis ; cf. 
Diod. I.e. 

16. That Fr. 5 containing (as we suppose) parts of 11. 16-24 belongs to Col. vii is 
practically certain, not only from internal evidence (e. g. the mentions of eVto-T^oXay and 
i:i\uaa^[e]pvr][.), but on account of the recto, which contains ends of lines like Fr. 4 (cf. note 
on vii. 1-2) and resembles the recto of both the other portions of Col. vii and Fr. 7, con- 
taining Col. viii, in having some white stains on the surface. The supposed junction in 1. 1 8 is, 
however, not very satisfactory : for the vestiges at the beginning of the third line of Fr. 5 
which, if our arrangement is correct, represent the second half of the v of oiio\oyovv, would 
suit 0) better, and in 1. 22 we should expect ras fVto-TJoXdr, for which there is no room. 
Perhaps therefore Fr. 5 should be placed further to the right and nearer to the ends of 
11. 16-24 or even lower down in the same column. 

17. If Fr. 5 is rightly placed, /carv),[op]io[.] is inadmissible, for the tail of the p ought to 
be visible, and the vestiges before a do not suit i. 

1 9. Perhaps Tra\p]a)V. 

21-5. Cf. Diod. /. C. and Polyaen. vii. 16. I 'Apra^fp^rjs eVl ttjv Tiaa-acfifpvovi avWr^yp^iu 
KaTfiTfuy^f Ti6pav(TTT]v tvo (ttkttoXcis Kopi^ovra ttjv fifv irpos avTov 7T(p\ toO it6K(imov rov npui tovs 
"EWrjvas iiTiTpiiTatv avTco to. ndvra, ttjv bt npos 'Apiaiou OTTwf avTov avWa^oi yura Tidpavarov. oj 111 

1. 21 refers to Tithraustes. For tTnorjoXaf cf. viii. 18 and 36. pa in 1. 23 is very likely 
»ral|pa, but though the supposed t (or rj) after the lacuna might conceivably be a, there is not 
room for [/3ao-tXfw]f. Me . [. .]aiop in 1. 24 is probably a proper name, perhaps that of another 
general ; cf. npos Se ras noXtis Ka\ Toiis aarpdnas in Diod. The second letter, if not f, may 
be a or o ; with o, the third letter must be t. The word preceding may be fn[ffiyl^aT]o. 
(ri;X]Xn/3«ij' iK('i[vov (cf. Polyaen.) suggests itself in 1. 25, but the doubtful letter after «*« suits 
y or X (f'KfX[(v(T( ?) somewhat better than t. 

30-2. The ends of these lines, which are on Fr. 7, may be shifted one line higher 
up, but cf. the next note. 

35. At the end of the line it is not certain whether the supposed o, which is on Fr. 7, 
belongs to 11. 34 or 35. But the last letter of 1. 34 must be a, which does not suit the 
vestiges of this letter. 

36-41. Tissaphernes was at Sardis according to Polyaenus, /. c. t6 jiiv (TTpaTontbov 
KaTtKmtv tv Idpdtaiv : hence the army at Magnesia (1. 40) was probably that of Agesilaus, 
who would pass that place on his way down the Maeander to the coast (cf. 11. 1-2, note), 
and 11. 36-41 seem to refer to Ariaeus' message to Tissaphernes, corresponding to Polyaen. 

KoiXtl Tin-(Ta(f)epvt]v ms opov ^ovXtvaacrdai 8eoi rd rt aX\a koI ntpl ribu 'EWtjvcov. That Fr. 6 

belongs to this column is practically certain on account of the recto, which like that of 
Fr. 5, has ends of lines and white stains on the surface ; cf. notes on 11. 1-2 and 16. We 
have assigned it to 11. 35-41 on account of the suitable combination Tr)[v] aaTpania[v in 1. 39. 


The resulting combination Mayi'[»7]<T[»]a»' in 1. 40 is, however, not very satisfactory. The 
vestige of the supposed a would suit y, tt, or r better, and the traces of the supposed av are 
compatible with many alternatives. Hence Fr. 6 may well belong to some other part 
of Col. vii. 

37. ] . pta . [ : possibly ] *Ap(at[, but the vestiges before p do not suit a very well. 

viii. 3. That Fr. 7, which contains this column, is correctly placed admits of no doubt ; 
for although the ends of a few lines of the preceding column preserved in it do not provide any 
certain combination with the rest of Col. vii, the mentions of Ariaeus, Tithraustes, and Tissa- 
phernes and of the tmaroXat establish its near connexion with Col. vii, and the texture and 
colour of Fr. 7 closely resemble those of Fr. 4, while the while stains found on the recto of 
both Frs. 5 and 6 and the rest of Col. vii are also present on the recto of Fr. 7. 
The writing on the recto is here too much effaced to allow a combination between the 
middles of lines on the recto of Fr. 7 and the scanty remains of ends of lines on 
Frs. 4-6. 

6. ra is no doubt the termination of a numeral, e. g. firra or rptdKovra. 

i8. fm(TToKa[s : cf. 1. 36, Diod. /. c, and the extract from Polyaen. quoted in vii. 21-5, 

21. M«Xj; <rt : cf. Polyaen. /. C. avros 8e jifTa Tmv Xoydbap 'ApKadav Koi MtKijaiuv dcpuciiixtfos. 

23. For Ka\Trjpfp els cf. xviil. 38, note. 

26. 5iarpt/3a)[«/ : cf. XX. II 8tarpi/3cD[i'j 8e Trapa T(p ^apva^d^co and Polyaen. I.e. iv \\piaiov 


27—30. Cf. Polyaen. I.e. rj^rj Be ntpl \ovTp6v tx^av t6v dKipdKr]v dfTfOtTO 'Apimos pftd roip 
dfpajTfvTrjptov avvapnd(ras avrov KaOdp^as (Is ippupa^ai/ Kartppappfvrjv dyeiv TiOpavcrTjj napfdutctv. 

vov in 1. 28 is very likely the termination oiXovdpivov (cf. Diod.) oryv/ifdv. 

Cols, ix-x = ch. IX. 

ix. 16 sqq. Whether Cols, ix-x precede or follow v-viii is quite uncertain ; cf. p. 113. 
Frs. 8 and 9 are assigned to Col. ix owing to the similarity of the script, which is here 
somewhat smaller than usual, and the colour of the ink, which is exceptionally black; 
but there is nothing to show whether they should be placed above or below 11. 16-20. 
Fr. 33 also may belong to this column. The reference to Macedonia in 1. 29 is remarkable ; 
cf. Fr. 19. 8, note. In Col. x the ink is fainter and the writing much less compact. The 
subject there seems to be a favourable character-sketch of some important general or politician, 
but the fragments are unfortunately not sufficiently intelligible to allow of his identity being 

x. 5. (ni.rr)h(vpai\^ cannot be read. 

16. The first letter of the line may be a, o, or &>, but hardly »; cV/poiT ''EX[X]/;[»'af is 
therefore unsuitable. 

1 7. Perhaps 7r[o]X[tVovl 

18. ['7]'^[v]x[t']aj' or [ajT[u];([i]a«' (but not [v]ax.\ap\xiav) may be read. If not <r or r, the 
second letter must be y or n. The line may have ended -i^ois npdyfiacri cf>aivtTui, as Wilamowitz 

19. o'l nXe'taroi is hardly long enough. 

2 1 . S»j[/iojTt»c6) T ... or S»j[/io]riKcor*p[o]f ar^ or 8T]p.oTiK<i)TaTos t[ is possible. 

Col. xi. 1-34 = ch. X. Ra'olulton at Rhodes. 

* . . . every day Conon used to review the soldiers under arms in the harbour, on 
the pretext of preventing idleness from causing them to deteriorate in war, but really 
wishing first to render the Rhodians tranquil at the spectacle of his soldiers present under 


arms and then to take action. When he had accustomed them all to the sight of the review 
he himself with 20 triremes sailed away to Caunus, as he did not wish to be present 
at the destruction of the Diagoreans, and Hieronymus and Nicophemus, his lieulenanls, 
were ordered to take charge. These two waited during that day, and when on the next 
day the soldiers presented themselves for review as usual, marched some of them under 
arms to the harbour, and stationed others a little distance from the market-place. When 
the Rhodians who w-ere privy to the plot considered the moment for action had come, 
they collected in the market-place wearing daggers, and one of their number, Dorimachus, 
mounting the stone from which the herald used to make proclamations, cried out as 
loudly as he could " Down with the tyrants at once, fellow-citizens ". The rest when he 
called for help (.'') rushed with their daggers into the council of the magistrates, and killed 
both the Diagoreans and eleven of the other citizens. Having accomplished this, they 
collected the Rhodian populace in an assembly, and when they had just met Conon 
returned from Caunus with the triremes. The authors of the massacre put down the 
existing constitution and set up a democracy, sending a few citizens into banishment. 
Such was the result of the insurrection at Rhodes.' 

xi. I. The revolt of Rhodes from the Spartans is ignored by Xenophon, but mentioned 
by Diodorus xiv. 79. 6 (cf. iii. 23-6, note) and Androtion, ap, Paus. vi. 7. 6 'PoS/wi' re tov 

^ij/iov TViicrdiVTa iiiro tov Kovcovos cnrb AaKf8atfxovia>v fieTa^akfcrdat atpas es ttjv jSafftXe'ws Kal 

'A6r)vai(ov avfifiaxiav. That the revolt was connected with a change of constitution was 
clear (cf. Xen. J7e/L iv, 8. 20, where the exiled Rhodian oligarchs appeal to Sparta in 
391), but it now for the first time appears that the two events were not contemporaneous. 
In the interval the government was in the hands of one of the leading families (cf. 1. 25, 
note), and Conon's fleet had already been admitted to the harbour before the democratic 
rising took place. Conon, though supporting the conspirators, took no active part in their 
proceedings, preferring to be absent at the critical moment. The date of the insurrection 
is fixed by xi. 34 as the summer of 395; the expulsion of the Spartans must have occurred 
in the winter of 396-5, if not earlier still ; cf. iii. 23-6, note. 

3—8. npo(f)aaiC6fj.evos 1^^]^, napaaKe^vaaas fjavxovs in 1. 5, orav in 1. 6, cVfiS^ crvvrjdi] 67ro/[Tjo-ej'l 

in 1. 7 and avros pev in 1. 8 were suggested by Wilamowitz. We prefer (irA 8e' to eneibrj, since 
a connecting particle is required between the two main verbs e^T]i[aC€ in 1. 2 and (^en\tv[(Tev 
in 1. 9, and 8e in 1. 5 only balances the preceding /Lteji/. A somewhat different sense, which 
seems less appropriate, is given to the passage if, abandoning Trpo^ao-ifo'/iei/os jue'li/ and placing 

a full-stop after noXffxoi' in 1. 4, we restore napaaK/vaCfiv npodvpovs] tovs 'Po8iovs [(av i]Scoo-ti/ . . . 
eVixftpfL'", afi (pavepov a^namu fTroi^^elro} opav tov e^era[cr^oy (nfira ei'l/coo-t K.r.A. avToiis napovWas 

in 1. 6 is due to Niese. The lacunae at the beginnings of 11. 6-7 ought not to contain more 
than four letters, and perhaps fdv should be substituted for orav, while in 1. 7 to may have 
been omitted by mistake. 

9. For fh Kavvou cf. 1. 29 6k Kavvov. Conon, having been admitted to Rhodes by the 
ruling oligarchs, was probably unwilling to be compromised by the action of the con- 
spirators, and wished that the revolution should appear to be spontaneous. 

10. Tcot) Aiayopeico]v : cf. 1. 25. The Diagoreans (cf. Aeschin. JS'p. 4. 4) or Diagoridae 
were an illustrious Rhodian family descended from Damagetus, king of lalysus, and 
renowned for their athletic prowess ; cf Paus. iv. 24. 5 and vi. 7. 1-7. Diagoras himself 
won the boxing contest at Olympia in 464, the victory being celebrated by Pindar in 
01. vii, and his sons Acusilaus, Dorieus, and Damagetus, and grandsons, Eucles and 
Pisirhodus, were all famous athletes, especially Dorieus, who became the leader of the 
anti-Athenian party at Rhodes. Condemned to death with his kindred by the Athenians, 
he escaped to Thurii, and after fighting for some years on the Spartan side was taken 


prisoner in 407, but released (Xen. JIcll. i. 5. 19). According to Androtion, ap. Paus. 
vi. 7. 6, when the revolt of Rhodes from Sparta with which we are concerned took place, 
Dorieus was near the Peloponnese, and was arrested and put to death by the Spartans, 
whose conduct is now much more intelligible in view of the fact that the Diagoridae had 
clearly taken the lead in expelling the Spartan harmosts. 

10— I. The Athenians Hieronynius and Nicophcmus are known as Conon's chief 
lieutenants from Diod. xiv. 81.4, where they are left in charge of the fleet when Conon goes 
to visit the Persian king. ^iKocprjfios is there called Nt»«i8v/xof, but Xenophon [/It//, iv. 8. 8) 
and Lysias (xix. 7) agree with P as to the form of the name. Concerning Hieronymus, 

HarpOCralion (s. v.) says liXXoi rt nvrj/ioffvova-iv /<aj*E0opor tV rfj oyboj] Koi dfKuTi) Koi (V TTJ 

fVi'iTij Ka\ bfKaTTj, but as he must have been mentioned in any detailed history of the 
naval war, this statement provides no argument for identifying P with Ephorus ; 
cf. p. 126. 

12. 7ro[p€Spots was suggested by Dittenberger. 

20. avT&)i/ has no construction and something has dropped out, probably rtr or a word 
meaning ' leader '. 

22. [i &)/:i€»', 2) ai'Spf r, €077, TToXiToi, >c.T.X. This is the only speech in the papyrus; cf. 
p. 123. The position oi ecpij between avbpts and n-oXirat instead of after loifitu is due to the 
desire to avoid hiatus; cf ii. 34, note. 

23-4. For such an accusative as ttji/ ^orjOfiav after ^orja-auTos there is no near parallel, 
but ^&o'i]d(iav seems inevitable, and the phrase is so easily intelligible that we prefer to 
regard the expression as one peculiar to our author rather than to treat it as corrupt ; 
cf. p. 124. 

26. (vbfKa: the moderation of the victorious democrats is noticeable (cf. nvai 6\iyovs 
in 1. 32), and was clearly appreciated by our author, who here shows no trace of the 
aristocratic bias sometimes discernible ; cf. i. 33, note, and pp. 122-3. 

Cols. xi. 34-xii. 31 = ch. XI. Constitution of Boeotia. 

' In this summer the Boeotians and Phocians went to war. Their enmity was chiefly 
caused by a j)arty at Thebes ; for not many years previously the Boeotians had entered 
into a state of discord. The condition of Boeotia at that time was as follows. There 
were then appointed in each of the cities four boulai, of which not all the citizens were 
allowed to become members, but only those who possessed a certain amount of money ; 
of these boulai each one in turn held a preliminary sitting and deliberation about matters of 
policy, and made proposals to the other three, and a resolution adopted by all became 
valid. Their individual aff'airs they continued to manage in that fashion, while the arrange- 
ment of the Boeotian league was this. The whole population of the country was divided 
into eleven units, and each of these providt-d one Boeotarch, as follows. The Thebans 
contributed four, two for the city and two for Plataea, Scolus, Erythrae, Scaphae, and 
the other towns which formerly were members of one state with the Plataeans, but at 
that time were subject to Thebes. Two Boeotarchs were provided by the inhabitants of 
Orchomenus and Hysiae, and two by the inhabitants of Thespiae with Eutresis and 
Thisbae, one by the inhabitants of Tanagra, and another by the inhabitants of Haliartus, 
Lebadea, and Coronea, each of these cities sending him in turn ; in the same way one 
came from Acraephium, Copae, and Chaeronea. Such was the proportion in which the 
chief magistrates were appointed by the diff"erent units, which also provided sixty bouleutae 
for every Boeotarch, and themselves defrayed their daily expenses. Each unit was, more- 
over, under the obligation to supply a corps of approximately a thousand hoplites and 
a hundred horsemen. To speak generally, it was in proportion to the distribution of their 


magistrates that they enjoyed the privileges of the league, made their contributions, sent 
judges, and took part in everything whether good or bad. The nadon then as a whole 
had this form of polity, and the general assemblies of the Boeotians used to meet in the 

xi. 38 sqq. This digression on the constitution of Boeotia in 395, which is somewhat 
irrelevant to the account of the factions at Thebes, and still more so to the war between 
Boeotia and Phocis, is the most valuable secdon of the papyrus, and disposes of several 
long debated problems. First, as to the four /SovXai ; these were only known from Thuc. v. 

38. 2 01 BoLoariipxai i<oiva>(Tav Toii T((T(Tapcn jSouXatr Tutv Boicorwi' ravra alntp anav to Kvpos (xovai 
Kui wapjjvovv yevtaddi opKovi rms noXeaiv ocrai ^nvXovrai eV ox^eXta (T(pi(n ^vvoyivvvai, and their 

relation to each other was uncertain, it being often supposed that the four ^ovKai corresponded 
to four different districts. The present passage shows that Kohler {Silzungsber. d. Berl. Akad. 
1895, pp. 455-6) was fully justified in connecting them with the four ^ovkai which the 
Athenian oligarchs in 411 proposed to institute (h tov fiiKKovra xp^vov (Arist. Ath. Pol. 30), 
and each of which was to consist of 100 persons and to hold office for a year in turn; and 
his conjecture that in the case of important matters, such as treaties, the four Boeotian /3ovX«t 
sat together is now completely established. The present passage, however, brings out a new 
fact of considerable value, that the four ^ovKal were not councils of the Boeotian league as 
a whole, but existed in each of the separate states which formed the federadon. Thucydides' 
expression Toi^ rea-a-apcri ^ovXats rmv Bokotcdv is therefore somewhat misleading, since the natural 
supposition is that he meant /SouXat of the league. There was indeed, in addition to the four 
^ovXai in the individual states, one federal /3ouXr; for Boeotia (cf. xiii. 12), which met in the 
Cadmea and consisted of 660 members, contributed by the several states in the proportion 
of sixty ^ovXfvrai for each Boeotarch, but it is clear that Thucydides is not referring to this ; 
and that the state ^ovXai, not the federal ^ovXfi, possessed the supreme authority is indicated 
by the greater prominence given in P's account to the former, as well as by Thucydides' 
words a1w€p anav to Kvpos fxov<^^^ and the circumstance that the treaty in question provisionally 
made by the Boeotarchs depended for validity on the consent of each individual state, not 
on a resolution of the federal council. For membership of the state boulai there was 
a property qualification, so that the numbers of the ruling oligarchies must have varied in 
the different states, of which there were at least ten {v. i»/.). 

Secondly, as to the number of the Boeotarchs, Thuc. iv. 91 mentions eleven ins.c. 424 

T<ov aXXcov Boici)Tapxb)V o1 daiu fpbf Ka ov ^vvfTraivovVTUv |ud;^f o-^at , . . ITaywi/Sas 6 AioXaSou BoiaTapx^^" 

fK erj^oiv (xtT 'ApiavBibov tov \v(Tinaxi8ov k.tX : but it was formerly disputed whether or not the 
figure eleven included the two Theban Boeotarchs. A strong reason for supposing eleven 
to be the whole number of the Boeotarchs was supplied by Poppo (i. 2, p. 292), namely 
that if ot (la^iv €v8(Ka referred to tS)v aXXuv Bonarapx^" exclusive of the Thebans ^crav not elaip 
should have been written. The number eleven has also been disputed by Wilamowitz {Hermes, 
viii.p. 440), who wished to alter it to seven, correspdnding to the seven Boeotian states mentioned 
in Thuc. iv. 93, a change which has been supported on other grounds and widely accepted 
e.g. by Cauer, Pauly-Wissowa, Real-Encycl.\\\.y^. 647. Eleven is however the total number 
of the Boeotarchs in P (xii. 11-20), so that the correctness of the figure in Thuc. iv. 91 is 
vindicated beyond dispute. It is also noteworthy that P uses apx<^v merely as a synonym 
for Boeotarch, and says nothing about an archon of the whole league ; this officer therefore, 
who first appears in third century b.c. inscriptions, is not to be identified with one of the 
Theban Boeotarchs, as was suggested by Wilamowitz, /. c, still less to be regarded with 
Freeman {Hist, of Federal Gov. i. p. 128) as the most ancient official of the league. 

Thirdly, with regard to the members of the league, in 424 seven of them, Thebes, 
Haliartus, Coronea, Copae, Thespiae, Tanagra, and Orchomenus were known from 


Thucydides' account (iv. 93) of the battle of Delium. P now gives the complete list, adding 
the names of, firstly, Acraephium and Lebadea, which Thucydides there referred to in the 
expression Ka\ oj aWoi ol n(p\ ttjv XI^vtiv, and secondly Chaeronea, wiiich in 424 was not 
yet independent (cf. xii. 14, note), and also provides some information about towns which were 
subordinate to the sovereign members of the league. What is still more important, we now 
for the first time learn the proportion in which the eleven Boeotarchs were distributed among 
the various states. Formerly all that was known was that Thebes at the time of the 
Peloponnesian war had at least two Boeotarchs and probably no more (Thuc. ii. 2, iv. 91). 
It now appears that Boeotia as a whole was divided into eleven nfprj or units, each of which 
provided one Boeotarch and sixty members of the federal ^ovXrj, 1000 hoplites and 100 cavalry, 
and that these /uepr? were distributed among the sovereign states not evenly, but in widely 
varying proportions according to their relative importance. Thus four fitprj were assigned to 
the Thebans, though only two of them belonged strictly to the city (cf. xii. 12-3, note), two 
to Orchomenus, two to Thespiae, one to Tanagra, one jointly to Haliarius, Lebadea, and 
Coronea, who appointed the 13oeotarch in turn, and similarly one jointly to Acraephium, 
Copae, and Chaeronea. These units also provided a basis for calculating botii the 
contributions paid by the states for the federal taxes, the number of judges sent to the 
federal couris, and for defining in general the rights and duties of the individual states where 
common action was required (xii. 25—8). 

The constitution of Boeotia in 395, which P directly contrasts with the conditions 
existing in his own day by Tore in xi. 38-9 and the use of the past tense throughout, lasted until 
387, when at the peace of Antalcidas the Thebans were unwillingly compelled to reconstitute 
the league, and even quite small Boeotian towns received complete autonomy ; cf. Xen. Ne/i. 
V. I. 32-6, whose statements are confirmed by the evidence of the coins. Besides the 
ten sovereign states mentioned by P, except Acraephium (unless the coin from Acraephium 
ascribed by Head, Coins ofCen/ral Greece, p. 44, to 456-447 really belongs to 387-374, in 
which case the exception disappears), Plataea, Pharae, Mycalessus, and perhaps some other 
towns of which the names are uncertain are thought to have had coinages of their own from 
387-374 (Head, op. cit. p. xii). On the other hand the beginning of the period to which 
this constitution in the main applies may be placed at 447-6, when the Athenians were 
driven out of Boeotia and the league reconstituted under the hegemony of Thebes, which 
appears to have been the only Boeotian city to issue coinage between 446 and 387 (Head, 
op. cit. pp. xxxix-xl). Some changes, however, must have taken place between that year 
and 395 with regard to the states belonging to the league. Chaeronea was in 424 still 
subject to Orchomenus (Thuc. iv. 76. 3, cf Hellanicus Fr. 49) : it was no doubt made 
independent soon afterwards by the Thebans in order to weaken their ancient and most 
formidable rival. Plataea, which during the period of alliance with Athens had stood 
outside the league, did not rejoin it until 427, and that before that year two additional 
Boeotarchs were appointed by the Thebans besides the two who represented Thebes itself 
is not likely; cf. xii. 12-3, note. Before 447 the league had probably been in abeyance 
during the ten years in which Athenian influence was predominant, and even from 
480 to the battle of Oenophyta Thebes did not occupy the commanding position in 
Boeotia which she had held previously. From 480-456 the coins of only Thebes, Tanagra, 
and Orchomenus are known (Head, op. cit. p. xxxviii), and from 550-480 the members 
of the league were somewhat different from those in 395. The numismatic evidence 
of that period (Head, op. cit. p. xxxvii) indicates seven cities issuing coins with the league- 
symbol, Acraephium, Coronea, Haliarius, Mycalessus (? ; no coin of Mycalessus is ascribed to 
this period on p. 51), Pharae, Tanagra, and Thebes, besides Orchomenus which apparently 
did not adopt that symbol on its coinage before 387, a circumstance of which the importance 
has, we think, been over-estimated ; cf. xii. 16, note. 


39. The space between r ando of rore was, we suppose, left blank owing to a roughness 
in the papyrus. 

xii. 1-3. Cf. Thuc. iii. 62. 3, where in 428 the Theban orator contrasts the ^waarda 
oXi'ycoi/di/Spcoi' which existed at the time of the Persian war with the oKiyapxia la-ovofios of Thebes 
in his own day. 

4. Tri)0K]a6T]nfvrj, if correct, is employed in an unusual sense, referring to a preliminary 
sitting. Generally the word means ' presiding over '. Idia Kadrjfjifvrj is too long and would 
cause a hiatus. 

10. Boiarapxov : SO in 1. 22, but in 1. 15 Boiarapxai. 

12-3. Scolus, Erythrae, and Scaphae were towns in the Parasopia east of Plataea and 
Hysiae, between the Asopus and Mount Ciihaeron. Scaphae is called iKupcf^rj by Strabo 
(ix. 2. 24), who states that its earlier name was 'Ereavos, and confirms the connexion of 

these three places with Plataea, tovs Uapaauniovs . . . annvras 8' vno Qr]0ainis ouTos {erepoL 8' 
fv Til liKarauwv (paal rov re SkcoXoi' koX tov 'Etcwj'cij' kqi ras 'Epvdpas), Pausanias also speaks 

of Erythrae (ix; 2. i) and Scolus (ix. 4. 4) as belonging to jj UXnTaus, remarking in 

connexion with the latter anoKpivd, Se koi vvv (ti dno ttjs Qrj^aicov TTjv nXaratiSa 6 'A(ra)7roy. It 

is thus clear that in much later times the boundary between the land of Plataea and Thebes 
was the same as it had been in the period which P calls vaguely irpoTfpov, contrasting 
it with TOTf, i. e. 395. The quesUon when these three towns became tributary to Thebes 
raises a difficult problem. The most natural interpretation of this passage taken by itself 
would be that Scolus, Erythrae, and Scaphae were tradidonally united to Plataea, and only 
became subject to Thebes when that city rejoined the Boeotian confederacy on its capture 
in 427. A necessary corollary of this view would be that the right to appoint two extra 
Boeotarchs was only obtained by the Thebans after the fall of Plataea; before 427 the 
number of the Boeotarchs would be nine, not eleven. To this inference there is no 
particular objection, for eleven as the number of the Boeotarchs is not attested before the 
battle of Delium in 424, and in the scanty evidence hitherto available concerning the 
boundaries of the nXarattr in the fifth century, there is nothing definite to show that Scolus, 
Erythrae, and Scaphae had ceased to be united with Plataea in the fifty years before 427. In 
519 the Athenians made the Asopus the boundary between Thebes on the one hand and 
Plataea and Hysiae on the other (Hdt. vi. 108), and in 507, when Hysiae and Oenoe were 
captured by the Boeotians, both places are called by Herodotus (v. 74) drjpovs tovs eaxdrovs 
T^s 'Attik^s, though whether Hysiae really belonged to Attica rather than to Plataea is doubtful. 
In 479 Scolus is indeed mentioned in Hdt. ix. 15 as being eV 717 rrj erjjSalcjv, and Erythrae 
and Hysiae, which occur later on in the same chapter, also seem to be Theban and outside the 
nXaTaiii. But, even if Herodotus is correct on this point, which is by no means 
certain, after the battle of Plataea the territory of the Plataeans may have been 
increased at the expense of Thebes, and at any rate during the period of the Athenian 
predominance in Boeoda, it is unlikely that Thebes possessed any territory south of the 
Asopus. After the battle of Coronea according to Thuc. i. 113 TrjvBoKaTiavf^e'Xinov'Adrjvaioi 
■rraaav, but whether the Plataeans sufl"ered a diminution of their land is not known. Oenoe in 
431 was on the frontier of Attica and Boeotia (Thuc. ii. 18) and Erythrae and Hysiae, 
mentioned by Thuc. iii. 24 in connexion with the flight of the Plataeans to Athens, are 
called by the scholiast ad loc. hrnxoi Boia>Tias and have generally been regarded as not 
belonging to the nXorau'j-; but since Plataea even when allied to Athens continued to be 
included in Boeotia, this evidence is not irreconcilable with the view that the Plataeans 
retained the south bank of the Asopus after- 447 until the Peloponnesian war. An 
important fresh piece of evidence is provided by xiii. 23-8, where Erythrae, Scaphae, 
and Scolus occur in a list of Boeotian towns from which the inhabitants, owing to fear 
of an Athenian invasion, moved to Thebes. The date and circumstances of the removal 


are not very clear (cf. note ad loc), but it took place probably about 431 ; and Erythrae, 
Scaphae and Scolus, although coupled with three undoubtedly Theban towns, Aulis, 
Schoenus and Potniae, were, we think, dependent upon Plataea when the transference of 
tiie population occurred. For if Erythrae, Scaphae and Scolus were already in 431 
separated from Plataea and joined to Thebes, it is very difTicult to see what period is meant 
by npiWepov in 1. 13. 

In any case, whatever may have been the relations of those three towns to Plataea and 
Thebes in the fifth century, three such unimportant places as Erythrae, Scolus and Scaphae 
cannot have returned two Boeotarchs by ihemselves apart from Plataea, so that the Thebans 
are not likely to have appointed more than two Boeotarchs until the fall of Plaiaea in' 
427; and on the other hand it is clear from the agreement between P and Thuc. iv. 91 
as to the total number of the Boeotarchs (eleven), that from 427 onwards they appointed 
four. Hence the manifest indication in Thuc. iv. 91 (cf. p. 224), that only two out of the 
eleven were «'« er],3<ov in 424 is to be regarded as implying not an increase in the representation 
of Thebes between 424 and 395, but a difference in status and mode of eleciion between 
the two representatives of Thebes itself and the other two, who were, as Thucydides 
shows, not (K QrifiSav, and may well, as Dittenberger suggested, have been citizens of 
Plataea and the three dependent towns. 

14. ovvTfKoiirrav : this is the technical term for indicating the dependence of the lesser 
Boeotian towns on the sovereign states ; cf. Thuc. iv. 76. 3 XaipuiVfiav ^ is 'Opxoiifvov . . , 

^vuTf\(i and PaUS. ix. 3. 6 to)v 5< Tr(i\i(TiJ.dTO}v oTrocra f<TT\v tXacro'ovoi Xo-you avvreXdav aI,joCwat. 

16. 'OpxofjLfvioi : Orchomenus, the ancient and most serious rival of Thebes, issued its 
own coinage without the league-symbol in the sixth century and in the first half of the fifth. 
No coins of the city are ascribed to the period 456-387, and the league-symbol does not 
make its appearance on the coins of Orchomenus till 387-74, though many of the types of 
that period are without it and have the traditional corn-grain of the city. On the strength 
of the numismatic evidence, and in particular the absence of the league-symbol, it has been 
supposed that prior to 447 Orchomenus was not a member of the federation, or at any rate 
was not closely connected with it (Head, op. cit. p. xxxvii; cf. Cauer, ap. Pauly-Wissowa, 
Real-End. iii. p. 645) ; but that Orchomenus should have remained outside the league for so 
long is not very likely, and the importance attached to the absence of the league-symbol 
from its coinage prior to 387 seems to us exaggerated, especially as the symbol is not always 
found on the coins of Orchomenus from 387-74. 

'Yo-tnlot : this, as \\'ilamowitz remarked, cannot refer to Hysiae near Plataea, but must 
mean the inhabitants of "\r]TTo% on Lake Copais, east of Orchomenus. It is, however, we 
think, not necessary to alter the text to 'Ytjttioi, as lie proposes. 'Yaialoi here probably indicates 
a real variation in the form of the name ; cf. the ancient identification of Hysiae with Hyria 
mentioned by Strabo ix. 2. 12. Of Hyettus and its neighbour Olmones Pausanias (ix. 24. 3) 

says Ktopai viv T( ovcnii Koi (vdvs f^ "/'X^^ fxoipai b( (<V"ji Sokuv) t»]s 'Op)(oufvias utrl . . . ] but 

the first statement is inexact, for Hyettus appears as an independent noXn in inscriptions of 
the third century b. c. In 395, however, it was probably, as Meyer suggests, dependent 
upon Orchomenus in the same way as Thisbe and Eutresis were subordinate to Thespiae. 

efffTrtfij (Txjv EvTp^(T(i Acni oia^ais : that Thespiae had two Boeotarchs is not surprising in 
view of its extensive territory at this period ; cf. Thuc. iv. 76. 3, where Ti(f>ai on the Corinthian 
Gulf belongs to it. For Eutresis cf. Strabo ix. 2. 28 Evrprjaiv . . . Kwp^iov Qttmuuiv. Thisbe 
as well as Corsiae, a town further west, became independent in the third century B.C., as is 
shown by inscriptions. 

17. (va b( Tnvaypaioi : in later times the territory of Tanagra was very extensive, 
including Eicon, Harma, Mycalessus, and Pharae (Strabo ix. 2. 14, Pausan. ix. 19. 4), Aulis 
(Strabo ix. 2. 8, Pausan. ix. 19. 8), and Hyiia (Strabo ix. 2. 12); but, as Meyer observes, 

Q 2 


the fact that Tanagra in 395 had only one Boeotarch indicates that it was then much less 
important, and probably most or even all of those six places at that time belonged to 
Thebes. Head {Cows of Central Greece, p. xxxviii) thinks that in 480-456 Tanagra 
aspired to the hegemony of the league, because it was the only town which struck coins in 
the name of the Boeotians as a whole ; but this seems to us a very doubtful inference 
(Cauer /. c. wrongly states that Tanagra issued coins of its own in this period, and hence 
erroneously regards Tanagra as standing outside the league). That Aulis was Theban 
in B.C. 431 is made probable by xiii. 25, where it is mentioned together with Schoenus 
and Potniae, which were undoubtedly Theban ; and of Hyria Strabo (/. c.) expressly says 
that it was formerly in the Thebais, while Pharae and Mycalessus, which were independent 
both before 480 and after 387, are much more likely to have belonged to Thebes than 
to Tanagra in the intervening period. Delium therefore seems to have been the only 
place of much importance belonging to Tanagra in 395; cf. Thuc. iv, 76, Strabo ix. 2, 7, 
Pausan. ix, 20. i. 

xii. 17-20. On the six minor states divided into two groups with one Boeotarch to 
each group cf. pp. 224-5. 

20. 'AKpai(f)viov : the spelling of this name is subject to many variations. P's form 
* AKpai(pvi.ov has hitherto been found only in Pausan. ix. 23. 5, 24. i. Inscriptions and the 
older literature have only forms without the v, fj 'AKpaK^la, to 'AKpnlcpiov, ra 'AKpai(pia, but 
Steph. Byz. states that Theopompus employed the form to. 'AKpai<pvia (cf. p. 126) and that 
Ephorus used 'AKpai(pvios and ' AKpaicpviuyTrji for the iOviKov. Outside Boeotia the word seems 
to have been derived from dKpmcppijs. 

21-3. That the federal boule, consisting of 660 members, was divided like the state 
/3ot;Aai into four parts, each of which held office in turn, is neither stated by P, nor is at all 
likely. Lines 29-31 apparently refer to general meetings of the federal boule in the 
Cadmea, and another mention of it occurs in xiii. 1 2, but the ultimate decision in matters 
of supreme importance rested less with it than with the boulai of the individual states ; 
cf. p. 224. 

23. avToi: sc. the Boeotians. 

24. The hiatus aTparia UaaTa can be avoided by placing Uaara p-tpei after S« ; 
cf. i. 4, note. 

Cols. xii. 31-xiv. 5 = ch. XII. Parties at Thebes. 

' At Thebes the best and most notable of the citizens were, as I have already stated, 
divided against each other, one faction being led by Ismenias, Antitheus, and Androclidas, 
the other by Leontiades, Asias, and Corrantadas. The political party of Leontiades sided 
with the Lacedaemonians, while that of Ismenias was accused of Atticizing, because it 
favoured the Athenian democracy when the latter was exiled. Ismenias' party, however, 
was not concerned for the Athenians but .... Such being the condition of affairs at 
Thebes, and each of the two factions being powerful, many people from the cities 
throughout Boeotia then came forward and joined one or the other of them. At that 
time, and for a short period previously, the party of Ismenias and Androclidas was the 
stronger both at Thebes itself and in the boule of the Boeotians; but formerly that of 
Asias and Leontiades was in the ascendant for a considerable period and (had complete 
control of?) the city. For when the Lacedaemonians in the war with the Athenians were 
occupying Decelea and collected a large concourse of their allies, this party prevailed over 
their opponents both by reason of the proximity of the Lacedaemonians and because the 
latter were instrumental in conferring great benefits upon the city. The Thebans made 
a great advance in the direction of complete prosperity as soon as war between the 
Athenians and Lacedaemonians began ; for when the Athenians commenced to threaten (?) 


Boeotia, the inhabitants of Kr3thrae, Scaphae, Scolus, Aulis, Schoenus, and Potniae, and 
many other similar places which had no walls, congregated at Thebes, thus doubling the 
size of the city. But it nevertheless came to prosper in a much higher degree when the 
Thebans in conjunction wiih the Lacedaemonians fortified Decelea against the Athenians ; 
for they took over the prisoners and all the other spoils of the war at a small price, and, 
as they inhabited the neighbouring country, carried oflf to their homes all the furnishing 
material in Attica, beginning with the wood and tiles of the houses. The country of the 
Athenians at that time had been the most lavishly furnished in Greece, for it had suffered 
but slight injury from the Lacedaemonians in the former invasions, and had been adorned 
and elaborated with so much extravagance that . . . Such was the condition of Thebes and 

Xii, 32. SxTTTtp KOi TTpOTfpOV: I.C. ITl \\. 36—8. 

34-5. Ismenias and Androclidas are well known as the leaders of the anti-Spartan 
party at Thebes at this period and instigators of the war with Sparta, for the furtherance 
of which they took bribes from Persia ; cf i. 33, note. The form 'Av8poK\qs which occurs 
here is a slip ; 'Av8poK\(idas, the correct Boeotian form uniformly employed by Xenophon, 
is found in xiv. 6 and 35, and the Attic variant 'Av8poK\(i8T]s in xiii. 11. 'Avridtoi is not 
mentioned by Xenophon, who {Hell. iii. 5. i) in his place associates with Ismenias and 
Androclidas an otherwise unknown VaKa^'ihwpoi. Pausanias, however (iii. 9. 8), couples 
Androclidas and Ismenias with 'Ap(f)i6€pii, who is obviously identical with our 'Avridfos, 
while Plutarch {Lysand. 27) calls him 'Ap(f)i6(os. Of the leaders of the pro-Spartan party 
Aeoj/TiafiTjf [AfovTidas Plut.) is familiar, but 'Aa-ias (or 'Ao-rt'af as he is called in xiii. 13) seems 
to be otherwise unknown, for the 'Apxlas who is associated with Leontiades in 379 (Xen. 
Hell. V. 4. 2, 6, Plut. Pelop. 5 sqq., Cornelius Nepos, Pelop. 3. 2) is not likely to be the 
same as 'Ao-ia?. With regard to the form of that name, 'Ao-tui? does not occur elsewhere, 
but fao-iay is found in a Boeotian inscription. Koppnj/raSaf (cf. V^oppivahai in Boeotian 
inscriptions) may, as Meyer suggests, be identical with the Boeotian general Y..oipaTa8ai 
mentioned in Xen. Hell. i. 3. 15-22 and Anab. vii. i. 33 sqq. 

39. Though a plural subject for t(\>vyov can be supplied out of rlv Stjpov, the sentence 
is made much clearer by altering e({)vyov to e(j!)vyfi', as proposed by Wilamowitz. The 
reference is of course to the restoration of the Athenian democracy in 403. 

xiii. 1—5. The general sense of this passage appears to be that Ismenias and his party 
favoured Athens not from any regard for Athenian interests but from selfish motives, in 
order that they might use Athenian support in the contest with the pro-Spartan party at 
Thebes; cf xiv. 6-16. 

10. [piK]pa> TTpoTtpov: i.e. ever since the conclusion of the Pcloponncsian war when 
the ascendency of Ismenias' party caused a complete change in Theban policy, and Thebes 
which had been the bitterest foe of Athens suddenly became leader of the opposition to 
Sparta; cf. Meyer, Gesch. d. Alt. v. pp. 213-4. P's description in xii-xiv of the attitude 
of Thebes and the origin of the anti-Spartan league is much fuller than the short accounts 
in Xenophon, Hell. iii. 5. 1-3, Pausan. iii. 9. 9, Plut. Lysand. 27 and Diod. xiv. 81 ; and in 
particular his analysis of the motives of Ismenias' party (xii. 37 sqq., xiv. 6 sqq.) is acute 
and just (cf. i. 36 sqq., where he rightly treats the Persian bribes as a factor of secondary 
importance) ; but he tends to lay too much stress on the mere rivalry of the contending 
factions, and to obscure the underlying cause which brought Ismenias' party to the front, 
the dissatisfaction of Thebes with the Spartan domination in central Greece, which hindered 
Theban ambitions. Here, as in the case of the war party at Athens (cf. i. 33, note), P's 
sympathy with Sparta causes him to under-estimate the legitimate {patriotic aspirations of 
Sparta's chief opponents, but it is noticeable that he does not attempt to cast aspersions 


on Ismenias and Androclidas, who equally with the leaders of the pro-Spartan party at 
Thebes are among the ^/Xtio-toi ku\ yuiopifiwraroi (xii. 31), and the contest of Theban 
factions is described in quite different terms from the opposition between the yvotpifioi kuI 
^api(VT€s and 01 TToXXoj Koi BrjuoTiKoi m 1. 9 ^qq* 

xiii. 13. For the spelling 'A<rriav of. xii. 34-5, note. 

14. [rtjm : there is room for three or even four letters before v, but xpo»'o'''['"'^''a is 
preferable to xP"\[''of "j^a which seems the only alternative. The beginnings of lines tend 
to be irregular throughout the papyrus. The doubtful tt before the lacuna can be y, i, k, 
fi or v. ]xoi> may well be d^xov, but dia xi^pw" is inadmissible. 

16. The vestiges after km a do not suit Tp[ar€]u[Ai]a very well, and TpaTfVfinTO) seems too 
long for the space between a- and the final v. o-w[ra jy[/i]a (Bury) is also unsatisfactory. 

22. 6 woXfuos: from the context, especially the mentions of Deceleia in 11. 16 and 29, 
this would naturally be interpreted as the Peloponnesian war. For some time we agreed 
with Meyer who suggested a connexion between xiii. 23-8 and the statement of Diodorus 
(xi. 81. 3) that the Spartans in the period preceding the battle of Tanagra ttjs ph ru>» 

Qrj^aiav TTcJAewy pei^ova rov irtpifioXov KareaKevaaav, ras 8' iv Boiwria TrdXeis rfvajKacrav vnoTciTTfcrOai 

Tols QrjlSaiois, and consequently referred 6 n6\(poi to the war of Athens against the Spartans 
and Boeotians in 457. But while both writers allude to the increase in the size of Thebes, 
the explanation of it is quite different in the two cases, and Mr. Walker has convinced 
us that the natural interpretation is right, and that P ascribed the transference of population 
to Thebes to b.c. 431. Whether he was correct in his statement, particularly in the alleged 
reason for the transference, the fear of Athenian invasion, is not clear. The Boeotians 
may have expected reprisals for the treacherous attack on Plataea, and that Athens 
cherished hopes of recovering Boeotia is shown by the expedition of Nicias against Tanagra 
in 426 (Thuc. iii. 91) and the invasion two years later which resulted in the battle of 
Delium ; but there was of course no attack upon Boeotia in 431, Attica being itself invaded, 
so that the impression conveyed by P's statement is not very accurate. It is noteworthy 
that in his account of the prosperity of Attica (xiii. 36-xiv. 3) P unduly minimizes the 
extent of the injuries inflicted by the Lacedaemonian invasions in the Archidamian war, 
which, as Thucydides shows clearly, caused widespread devastation. If fear of Athenian 
attack was the real reason of the (rvvoiiaapos, it would be more satisfactory to place that 
event in the period after the battle of Tanagra and the withdrawal of the Spartans from 
Boeotia when the Athenians, according to Diod. xi. 83. i, gained possession of all the 
Boeotian cities except Thebes, which would naturally have become a centre of migration 
from other parts of the country. 

Of the six places mentioned in connexion with the a-woiKta-pSs, Erythrae, Scaphae and 
Scolus were in the Parasopia near the Athenian boundary and in 431 belonged to Plataea 
(cf. xii. 12-3, note), while Schoenus and Potniae were Theban and respectively 50 
and 10 stades north of Thebes (Pausan. ix. 8. i, Strabo ix. 2. 22, 24, 32). A slight 
difficulty arises in connexion with Aulis, which was on the coast and much further 
away from Thebes, especially as in later times it was dependent not on Thebes but 
Tanagra. There is however not much doubt about the reading ^jXtSos, and there are other 
reasons for supposing that the territory of Tanagra was less extensive in 431-395 than 
later ; cf. note on xii. 17. 

23. an[fiK]fiv, though it gives a suitable sense, is very doubtful, for there seems to be 
no parallel for the metaphorical use of this word in prose, and y, /* or v can be read in 
place of jr. 

38. piKpd: this is an exaggeration; cf. 1. 22, note. 

xiv. 1-2. ]§«/ must be ^r/j^ef or oilSeV, and wore probably preceded, perhaps immediately 
after vnt]p^o\^v, while the word after ojUrja-dj must be a comparative adverb. Bury suggests 


us^tTTf xoipas Tjv oi'jSti' Trap avTois ('ndlpdWov, o^lKrjad s di kcu kuXXioi/ u KoSofirjptuai *; tto' pa to Is 
aWois [(?;^oi'. 

3. Perhaps ro^ls aXXois ['eXXijo-* ; but then the repetition of 'EXX7i{ in the next line is 
somewhat awkward. Probably some of the letters in the lacuna were erased. Before ydp 
f unaltered can be read instead of the supposed deleted a-, airwi/, like ai/roU in 1. i, probably 
refers to the Athenians. 

4-5. The subject of] . tXap^avov is here more probably the Thebans than the Athenians; 
cf. xiii. 32. Toi{r] I [tbioys dypovs is not unlikely. 

Cols. xiv. 6-xv. 32 = ch, XIII. War between Boeotia and Phocis. 

' The party of Androclidas and Ismenias was anxious to involve Boeotia in a war with 
the Lacedaemonians, because firstly they wished to overthrow their supremacy in order to 
avoid destruction at the hands of the Lacedaemonians on account of the Laconizing party, 
and secondly they expected to achieve their object easily, on the supposition that the king 
would provide money in accordance with the promises of the envoy from Persia, and that 
the Corinthians, Argives and Athenians would join in the war, for these states, being hostile 
to the Lacedaemonians, would, they thought, provide support from among their citizens. 
Having this policy in view, they considered that it was difficult to attack the enemy openly, 
since neither the Thebans nor the other Boeotians would consent to a war with the 
Lacedaemonians while supreme in Greece ; but they attempted to incite them to make war 
by the device of persuading certain Phocians to invade the territory of the so-called 
Hesperian Locrians. The enmity between these two states originated as follows. There 
is a disputed area near Parnassus, about which they have gone to war in former times also ; 
this is often encroached upon for grazing by both the Pliocians and the Locrians, and 
whichever party perceives the other in occupation collects in considerable numbers and 
plunders the sheep. Many such quarrels had been provoked by either side, which formerly 
they were always in the hatjit of settling for the most part by legal proceedings or discussion ; 
but on this occasion when the Locrians retaliated by seizing an equivalent of the sheep 
which they had lost, the Phocians at the instigation of the men procured by Androclidas 
and Ismenias immediately took up arms and invaded Locris. Thereupon the Locrians 
when their country was ravaged sent ambassadors to the Boeotians accusing the Phocians 
and asking for assistance, these states having always been on friendly terms with each 
other. Gladly seizing the opportunity, the party of Ismenias and Androclidas persuaded the 
Boeotians to help the Locrians, whereat the Phocians on receiving news of the action of 
Thebes withdrew from Locris and sent ambassadors to the Lacedaemonians asking them 
to forbid the Boeotians to enter their country. The Lacedaemonians, although they 
considered the story unworthy of belief, nevertheless sent a message ordering the Boeotians 
not to make war on the Phocians, but if they considered themselves aggrieved on any point 
to take satisfaction at a meeting of the confederacy. The Boeotians, however, at the 
instigation of the men who had arranged the plot and its consequences, dismissed the 
Lacedaemonian envoys with an unfavourable answer, and taking up arms marched against 
the Phocians. They immediately invaded the country, and after ravaging the land of 
the Parapotamii, the Daulii and Phanoteis, they attempted an assault upon these cities. 
They attacked Daulia, but retreated without having effected anything, and even suffered 
some slight losses ; of the Phanoteis, however, they took by storm the suburb of the 
town. After this success they advanced further into Phocis, where they overran part of 
the plain near Elatea and Pedieis and the people of that neighbourhood, and then turned 
homewards. As they were passing Hyampolis in the course of the retreat, they decided to 
make an attempt upon it. The place is remarkably strong, and though they attacked the 
walls and displayed no lack of energy they achieved no success, but had to retire with the 


loss of about eighty soldiers. Having inflicted this amount of injury upon the Phocians 
the Boeotians returned to their own country.' 

xiv. 12-3. Kaff a and the insertion of Se were suggested by Wilamowitz ; Blass had 
proposed innhf) in 1. 12 and made fxfQi^tiv dependent on iVjyyye'XXfTo, which is less satisfactory. 
The effects of the bribes of Timocrates and the anti-Spartan feeling at Corinth, Argos and 
Athens have already been described by P in ii. i sqq. Though the hopes of assistance 
from Athens were justified by the event, the expectation of help from Corinth and Argos 
proved somewhat premature, for these two states remained passive until the defeat of the 
Lacedaemonians at Haliartus had relieved Boeotia from danger. 

14. The somewhat otiose sentence tovtovs . . . iroXirai is corrupt as it stands, and the 
simplest course is to read (Tvfnrapa\o-Kyvda-fiv for o-vfiTrapt^aK^evaa-f ; but this does not yield 
a very satisfactory sense, and possibly some words have dropped out. 

2 1 sqq. With regard to the origin of the Boeotian war, P's account, which is much 
more detailed than those of the extant authorities, agrees with Xenophon's {Hel/. iii. 5. 3) and 
Pausanias' (iii. 9. 9) in attributing the ultimate responsibility for the outbreak to the party 
of Ismenias and Androclidas (cf. also Plut. Lysmid. 27), and the occasion of it to a border 
dispute between Phocis and Locris. Diodorus, who (xiv. 81. i) says merely *co««iy Trpo? 

BoiwTovs €K Tiro)!/ fyKXT]p.dT(op (li noXfiiof KaTaardvTfs eTrecaav rovs Aatcedaip-ovtovs (Tvfip.a)(elv Kara toiv 

BoioiToip, not only gives no details but produces the false impression that Sparta rather than 
Thebes was the aggressor, a view which is defended in vain by Grote, for though Plutarch 
{Lysattd. 27) says that some regarded Lysander as the cause of the war rather than the 
Thebans, there can no longer be any doubt that the latter were the prime movers. But 
while P so far supports Xenophon and Pausanias, his account differs widely from theirs in 
point of detail. In the first place Xenophon states that the Locrians in question were the 
Opuntian Locrians, whereas according to P they were the Hesperian Locrians and the 
disputed area was 7re/ji rof Uapvaaaov. Pausanias speaks of ol (^ 'Ap(f>i(Ta-i]s AoKpol, thus 
agreeing with P, who is likely to be right on this point. In 394 both sets of Locrians were 
allied to Thebes and Athens; cf. Xen. He/l. iv, 2. 17, 3. 15. Secondly, while Xenophon 
and Pausanias represent the Locrians as beginning the dispute by encroaching upon the 
disputed area at the suggestion of their allies the Thebans, according to P it was 
the Phocians who originally made a raid upon the flocks of the Locrians in the 
debatable ground, and the Locrians only assumed the offensive as a means of 
retaliation. The subsequent invasion of Locris by the Phocians is also attributed by 
P to the instigation of a band of Phocians in the pay of the Thebans. There is 
further a minor discrepancy with respect to the precise action of the Locrians in the 
disputed area. According to Xenophon they were persuaded xRW"-"^"^ TtXeVat (which 
is translated ' levy money ' though reXtam does not seem to be the right word in the 
context), and the Phocians retaliated by taking iroWanXdata xpwnra. P's account on the 
other hand, according to which the dispute was concerned with the grazing of flocks, agrees 
closely with that of Pausanias, who says that the Locrians t6v t€ (tItov aKpa^ovra erepov koI 
rjXaaav \eiav ayovres. Whether it was really the Locrians or, as P asserts, certain Phocians 
who allowed themselves to be made the tools of Thebes cannot be decided with certainty. 
The intrigue becomes more involved in P's version, which brings out the remarkable 
ingenuity of Ismenias and Androclidas in making the Locrians appear the injured party, 
and displays an apparently very detailed knowledge of the circumstances. Meyer is disposed 
to prefer Xenophon's account on the ground that the Locrians, not the Phocians, were 
allied to Thebes, and that the Phocians fell too readily into the trap prepared for them. On 
the other hand, if the facts were as P states, an abbreviated account of them would easily 
give rise to the version in which the Locrians took the first step. 


The appeal of the Locrians for Theban support (xiv. 37-xv. 3) is also related by both 
Xenophon and Pausanias, but neither of these writers mentions the embassy of the Phocians 
to Sparta and the unsuccessful mission of the Spartans to Boeotia (xv. 3-14) prior to the 
actual invasion of Phocis. According to them the request for Spartan assistance was made 
by the Phocians after the invasion had begun, and then the pretext for a war with Boeotia 
was eagerly seized. Pausanias adds the statement that the Athenians tried to prevent 

a conflict, on-Xa \k(v (r(^nr(the Spartans) hf6\nvoi lif] Kifiiam 8ikt] fit vnip !ii> (yKoXoiJai huiKinvtaQai, 

an improbable story which looks like a perversion of the proposals of the Spartans in xv. 9-1 1. 
P must have described the successful appeal of the Phocians for Spartan intervention in 
a later chapter after the campaign of Agesilaus, in the middle of which the papyrus breaks 
off; but the narrative in xv. 7-1 1 represents the Spartans as pursuing a pacific policy and 
showing no great anxiety to accept the opportunity for declaring war on Boeotia. This 
does not harmonize very well with Xenophon's eminently just remarks {Hell. iii. 5. 5) upon 
the reasons which the Spartans had for welcoming a war with Boeotia at this juncture, and, 
as Meyer suggests, P may be exaggerating the Spartan moderation. On the other hand 
Xenophon himself in Hell. iii. 5. 3 says — what is probably true — that the Thebans had 
to take the initiative because they knew on d ni) ns lip^a noXtfjiov oLk €dfXfiaov(Tip ol AaKtbat- 
fionoi \v€iv ras a-irovftcii npos rovs a-vpfjidxnvs, and P's Statement that the Spartans, while in 
doubt about the truth of the impending invasion of Phocis, gave the Boeotians the chance 
of settling the quarrel peaceably, is not inconsistent with their ready intervention when 
the invasion was an accomplished fact. The arrogant tone of the Spartan message, in 
which the Boeotians were treated as if they were subordinate members of the Peloponnesian 
confederacy is quite in keeping with their claim apx^eiv ttJv 'EXXdfioy (xiv. 20). 

25. ecTTi: on the use of the present tense here and in 11. 27 and 40, which has an 
important bearing upon the date of the composition of P's work, cf. xvi. 3, note, and p. 134. 

XV. 3-4. dyytXdfVTcov and T[dre pev were Suggested by Wilamowitz. 

5. The vestiges after d'J] do not suit pf[Ta ravra. 

15 sqq. These details concerning the invasion of Phocis are all new, but of no special 
interest. With regard to the chronology of the war between Boeotia and Phocis, P's 
remark (xi. 34) that it began in the summer agrees with Pausanias' statement that the 
Locrians cut down top a-hop ciKpa(opTa. Apparently the dispute between Phocis and 
Locris took place about May or June, the invasion of Phocis about July and August, and 
the battle of Haliartus about September or October. 

19. Aav\la: for the form cf. Strabo ix. 423 ''0/:i7poj ptv ovv AavXiSa (Ltrtv, 01 8' vcTTtpov 

24. u.(hua<:: this town is mentioned by Hdt. viii. 33, but UtbUas here may mean the 
people of Pedieis ; cf. the similar ambiguity in the case of UapanoTapioi. 

26. The corruption ol nap YvnpnoXip into npos Tlapvrjv TToXip was detected by both Blass 
and Wilamowitz. 

XV. 3 2 -xvi. 29 = ch. XIV. The naval war. 

' Cheiricrates, who had arrived as admiral in succession to PoUis, having now taken 
over the command of the fleet of the Lacedaemonians and their allies, Conon manned 
twenty triremes and setting out from Rhodes sailed to Caunus. Wishing to communicate 
with Pharnabazus and Tithraustes and to obtain money, he went inland from Caunus 
to visit them. The soldiers at this time had many months' pay owing to them, for their 
generals paid them badly, as is their invariable habit when fighting for the king. In the 
Decelean war also, when the Lacedaemonians were the allies of Persia, money was provided 
on a very mean and niggardly scale, and the triremes of the allies would often have been 
disbanded but for the energy of Cyrus. The responsibility for this lies with the king, who 


when he begins a war, dispatches a small sum at the outset and neglects the army sub- 
sequently, while those in charge of the campaign being unable to defray the expenses 
privately sometimes suffer their forces to disband. This is what usually takes place, bat on 
the arrival of Conon and his declaration that the Persian cause would run the risk of ruin 
through want of money, of which it was unreasonable for the king's soldiers to be in need, 
Tithraustes sent some of the barbarians in his following with two hundred and twenty 
talents for the pay of the soldiers ; this sum was obtained from the property of Tissaphernes. 
After remaining a short time longer at Sardis he then went up to the court of the king, having 
appointed Ariaeus and Pasiphernes to take command, and delivered to them for the purposes 
of the war the silver and gold that was left behind, which proved, as it is said, to be about 
seven hundred talents.' 

XV. 33. On Cheiricrates, who succeeded Pollis as valapxoi in the late summer of 395, 
cf. iii. 21 and 23-6, notes. Neither vavapxos was known previously. Cheiricrates seems 
to have taken no active steps against Conon : probably the bulk of the Spartan fleet was 
at Cnidus ; but Pancalus was stationed with 5 ships at the Hellespont, where he co- 
operated with Agesilaus ; cf xxi. 25-7. In the course of the winter of 395-4 Cheiricrates 
was superseded by Agesilaus' brother-in-law, Pisander, who was killed at the battle of Cnidus 
in the following July or August. Xenophon, who {^Hell. iii. 4. 27-9, supported by Plut. 
Ages. 10, Pausan. iii. 9. 6) represents Pisander as appointed vaiapxoi by Agesilaus when the 
latter was in the ne^iov vntp Kvfirjs on his way to invade Phrygia, i. e. in the late summer 
of 395 (cf. He//, iv. I. I and xviii. 38 sqq. and xix. 2, note), has clearly placed the beginning 
of Pisander's vavapxla too early. 

37 sqq. This visit of Conon to Pharnabazus and Tithraustes to obtain money is not 
recorded elsewhere. Diodorus (xix. 81. 4-6) relates that Conon went to the king himself 
at Babylon for the same purpose, synchronizing this event with the Boeotian war. His 
date for Conon's journey to Persia conflicts with that of Nepos {Conon 3) and Pausanias 
(iii. 9. 2), who imply that it took place in the winter of 396-5 ; but the correctness of 
Diodorus' date is now amply vindicated (cf. note on vii. 4), and Conon's journey to 
Babylon is to be assigned to the late autumn of 395 or winter of 395-4. That he should 
have found it necessary to go to the king to obtain money is not at all surprising, for 
the 220 talents which he received from Tithraustes cannot have been sufficient to make 
up the arrears of many months' pay upon a fleet of over 100 triremes and numerous Greek 
mercenaries on land, and the serious mutiny described in xvi. 29 sqq. shows the dangers 
to which he was exposed so long as he was ill provided with funds. 

xvi. 2-4. This sentence seems to be the origin of Justin's remark (vi. 2. 11) with 
regard to Conon's soldiers, quos praefecti regis frandare stipendio so/iti erarit; cf. xvi. 
29, note. 

3. i6\os\iin\.v\ the use of the present tense here and in 11. 9-16 is important as an 
indication that this history was composed before the fall of the Persian empire ; cf. xiv. 25, 
27, 40, xix. 5 and p. 122. 

5. KaKihaipoviQi ^crav : the hiatus can be avoided by reading .\aKe8aip.ovLoi{s), as Wilamowitz 
proposes. Cf. i. 4, note. 

7. Cf. Isocr. Panegyr. 142 rh pkv en e/cetW (sc. the king) noWaKis av bu\v6r)aav (sc. 01 

14. v of iviore is corrected from k. 

17. av of avTov is Corrected. At the end of the line the v o^ crw is written above the v. 

24-6. Tithraustes, having fulfilled the objects of his mission, the removal of 
Tissaphernes and the necessary arrangements for the continuance of the war, had no 
justification for remaining in Lydia ; cf. Meyer, op. cit. v. p. 249. While Pharnabazus 


was at Conon's request made commamler-in-chief of the Persian forces (Diod. xiv. 81. 6 ; 
cf, vii. 4, note) and acted as such in 394-3, the successor of Tissaphernes as satrap was 
Tiribazus, who is first heard of in the winter of 393-2 (Xen. Hell. iv. 8. 12). 

27. For Ariaeus cf. vii. 36 and vii. 4, note. From Xen. Hell. iv. i. 27, it appears 
that he revolted from Persia in the course of the winter of 395-4. Pasiphernes was 
perhaps referred to in iii. 37, but is not mentioned by the other authorities, unless he 
is identical with the general whom Diodorus calls Artaphernes; cf. iii. 37, note. 

Cols. xvi. 29-xviii. 33 = ch. XV. Mutiny of Conon s forces. 

' The Cypriots who had sailed with Conon to Caunus, persuaded by certain persons 
who falsely asserted that there was no intention to give them the arrears of their pay, but 
that preparations were only being made for discharging the debts of the crews and marines, 
were filled with indignation, and having met in assembly elected as their leader a man of 
Carpasian stock, and gave him a body-guard of two soldiers from each ship . . . Conon 
after hearing their story urged them not to believe that (one section would be favoured), 
assuring them that they would all alike obtain their pay. Having given this answer, he said 
that he wished to make it known to the other soldiers also, whereupon the leader of the 
Cypriots, the Carpasian, followed him towards the main body of the troops. They started 
out in company, and when they were passing the gates Conon, being in front, came outside 
the wall first, but the Carpasian while he was going out at the gates was seized without 
Conon's consent by some of the Messenians in Conon's following, who wished to 
detain him in the city in order that he might be punished for his offences. The Cypriots 
who were accompanying him laid hold of the Carpasian and prevented the INIessenians from 
arresting him, and the contingent of the 600, perceiving the fight, also came to the 
help of their leader. Conon . . . (went back) to the city, while the Cypriots attacked and 
drove off the Messenians who had seized the Carpasian, and being persuaded that Conon's 
plans with regard to the distribution of the pay were altogether (unjust), thereupon 
embarked on the triremes with the object, as some said, of taking up the Cypriots at 
Rhodes and sailing to Cyprus. Leaving . . . , and conveying with them the Cypriots who 
consented to come, they marched against the acropolis in order to destroy the power 
of Conon, whom they regarded as the cause of all their troubles . . . When the Cypriots landed 
at Caunus, Conon came to Leonymus the . . . and declared that he alone could save 
the king's cause, for if Leonymus would consent to give him the Greek guards protecting 
Caunus and as many Carians as possible, he would put an end to the mutiny in the camp. 
Leonymus having bidden him take as many soldiers as he wished, he remained inactive for 
that day, since it was already near sunset ; but on the next before dawn he took a large 
number of the Carians and all the Greeks, led them out of the city, and proceeded to post 
some of them round the outside of the camp, others ... by the ships and seashore. 
Having done this and given orders to proclaim that each soldier should go ... he 
captured the Carpasi.m and sixty of the other Cypriots, whom he put to death, while 
the leader was crucified. The Cypriots who were left at Rhodes were enraged on 
hearing of this, and in their indignation first attacked and drove out the ofllicers whom 
Conon had appointed, and then leaving the harbour caused a great tumult and riot among 
the Rhodians. Conon, however, arrived from Caunus, and having arrested their leaders put 
them to death, distributing pay among the remainder. Thus the king's camp, after it had 
reached a condition of extreme peril, was restored to peace by Conon and his energetic 


xvi. 29 sqq. These Cypriot mercenaries were a land force, as appears from the 
contrast between them and the vnrjpfaim and im^drai in 11. 34-5. The i^aKocrYav \ijvvrayy.a\ 


in xvii. 24 seems to be part of them, but that restoration is far from certain. The mutiny 
is only mentioned elsewhere by Justin (vi. 2. 11) Sed Coti07ie?n sedih'o mtli/um invadit, quos 
praefecti regis fratidare siipetidio solili erant : eo itistanthis dehita poscc7iiihus quo graviorem sub 
magno duce mtlih'atn praesumcbanf. The sentence quos praefecti . . . erant closely resembles 
xvi. 2-4, and P is probably the ultimate source of Justin's reference to the mutiny. 

xvi. 31. The correction of ourw, which makes an extremely awkward construction, to 
vTTo is due to Wilamowitz. 

37. Kapnacrea: it is rather curious that P does not mention his name, for the narrative 
of the mutiny is conspicuous for its wealth of detail, which is likely to have been obtained 
from an eyewitness. The omission may however, as Meyer remarks, be intentional, 
implying contempt ; cf. xvii. 16 tov 8e a[v6'^a>Trov rov Kapnaa-eas. With regard to the form of 
the adjective, the agreement between the papyrus and Theopompus (Fr. 93) provides a 
strong argument for identifying him with our author ; cf. p. 131. 

xvii. I. That the separate fragment containing the middles of 11. 1-8 belongs to the 
upper part of this column is made certain by its colour and the mention of Conon in 1. 3. 
The exact position is then fixed by the recto, which has the beginning of a new section 
av[r]\(^iwTov) (x]o(nfvov) iy^iaivovTos) partly on this fragment, partly on the piece containing 
the rest of Col. xvii. 

5. ]fpaiet : a can be read in place of the first f. aui is perhaps a separate word (=a«/) ; 
cf. ai€i in iii. 13. 

6. iT(p\ To\v pi(r^p6v cannot be read. At the end of the line a is possible instead of o- . , 
but there is not room for o[Kou]^(Tay, and the division o|[Koucraf would make the line 
too short. Bury suggests crt|^co|7r//. 

8-9. The general sense of Conon's answer is clearly that in the distribution of the 
money no one section of the troops would be favoured, but all would receive their share. 
In 1. 8 the doubtful X may be *c or i/ or possibly r ; with the last reading \ovbiva 

7:\fov\€<T[ri](T[eiv is possible. Line 9 requires something like 77ai/[ray eXeye tov pia-dov dnu T^s 

'ia-rj^f Kopifladai. The letter before Kopitiadat, if not u, can only be y. 

lo-i. TToi-qaaptvos is due to Bury. Wilamowitz suggested toCttjv [Se rr]v dn6Kpicnv koI 
Toh nXXotrl ecpacTKfv ^ovXeadaL [S]ia[5j;Xco<7ai (rrpariWjat?, which no doubt expresses the sense 
correctly, and most of which we have adopted. The letter before is in I. 11 cannot be a. 

12. 6 KapTra\(Tf[vs avrm] is due to Wilamowitz. 

24. (^[aKoa]ia)v [(rvPTaypa] is very doubtful, especially as oKoa is rather short for the first 
lacuna, which has room for 5 letters, and this supposed corps is not mentioned elsewhere. 
Perhaps e| followed by a place-name should be read. 

25. Something like [w tiSe] 7T([pi(TTavTas] would suit the sense. 

26. TTjv TToXiv : sc. Caunus. 

28. dn(Kpo]u(Tav : the v is extremely doubtful, but a and e are inadmissible. 

29. Perhaps 7r[apQ t6 dUaiov T^v, if napfCTKfvda-dai. is middle. If it is passive, 8td is 
probable before t]oV. In xvi. 33 napaaKfvdCoPTai. is more probably middle, but may be 

31. «7r[i ravrais rjalf was Suggested by Wilamowitz. cos yk rivis eXfyov seems to refer 
to the statements of the Cypriots, and is not, we think, to be interpreted as a reservation on 
the part of the author, for which rtMs Xeyova-i would be expected ; cf. ii. 1-2. 

33 sqq. The narrative becomes very obscure at this point, rijs A\ai'[. .]uioiov seems to 
be corrupt ; there is not much doubt about the reading uiowv ; the only possible alternatives 
to 01 are on or at, but these are less suitable, rrj 2a\ap[ei]i'i could be read, but yields no 
sense, and that the mutineers reached Cyprus is unlikely, since it is clear from xviii. 1-22 
that they soon returned to Caunus, and cos ye nves eXtyou indicates that they did not carry 
out their original plans in full. Assuming that AXa»'[. .]vioiov is the name of an unknown 


place, this was perhaps situated in Rhodes, for rrapaK[o^i(Tav'\T(i, if correct, seems to refer 
back to Toiii fV] rrjs 'P680V Trapu\aj36v Tf]i, and if t[o{) Kdvcofoy] (Wilamowitz) is right in 1. 36 
the acropoHs might be that of Rhodes. On the other hand if 'A\av . . . was in Rhodes 
we should expect the statement that the mutineers sailed thither, whereas dnon\]fC(Tai'Tfs 
or €Kn\](v(TavTf5 can hardly be avoided in the light of the following genitive, even though 
the omission of dn6 before rrjs is not in accordance with our author's usage ; cf xviii. 1-2 
a\nuTr\(v(javTti dno rrfs . . . Moreover, the account in xviii. 23-8 of the proceedings of the 
Cypriots who were left at Rhodes does not harmonize at all well wiih the view that 
the acropolis of the city of Rhodes had been attacked previously. It is therefore very 
doubtful whether the mutineers sailed as far as Rhodes, and possibly the acropolis and 
the supposed place AXnt/ . . . were in the vicinity of Caunus. 

37. avTo'is was suggested by Wilamowitz. 

xviii. 2. The letter after ttjs might be a, and it is conceivable that the name 
AXnff. .jftotov (xvii. 33) recurred here ; but several other letters, e. g. 8, t, or w, are 
eqXially admissible. The verb lost probably had the sense of ' returned ', sc. to Caunus. 

3. If rois is not an error for rais, some part of the gear of the triremes is probably 
referred to, perhaps Io-tIois ; cf. Conon's capture of the fteyaXa rav .\v(Tdv8,)nv vfu>i> ioTia after 
Aegospotami (Xen. Hell. ii. i. 29). 

4. KaTqyixi\v(,iv tu>v Kvnpiatv. KaTr]yfii\yo<: is Unlikely, for there is no indication that Conon 
had left Caunus, and Leonymus was clearly posted in the immediate neighbourhood of 
the city. 

5. Perhaps tov T[<ii/ tt((Q)v tipxavra, as Wilamowitz suggests. 

avrw oTi : for the hiatus cf. i. 4, note, ovtm can be omitted without difficulty. 

18. Some word like npoariyaye is probable in the lacuna. 

19. Wilamowitz suggests t[(W KrjpvKu I3ai]v(iv, but a compound of ^aivftv would rather 
be expected. 

20. Wilamowitz proposes rrf^v iavrov, Bury Tr/[i/ a-Krjv^v. 

24. 'PoSw T)yaidKr[ovv : another hiatus ; cf. 1. 5. 

30-3. With this favourable criticism of Conon cf. xvi. 8 8ia tIjp Kvpov npoduplav, xx. 

35 810. Ti)i> 'Paddvov npodvpiav, and p. 1 23. 

Cols, xviii. 33-xxi. 39 = chs. XVI-XVII. Agesi'laus in Asia. 

' While Agesilaus was marching towards the Hellespont with the army of the 
Lacedaemonians and their allies, as long as he was passing through Lydia he did no injury 
to the inhabitants, wishing to abide by the truce made with Tithraustes. But when he 
reached the country of Pharnabazus, he plundered and ravaged the land as he advanced. 
Then crossing the plain of Thebe and the so-called plain of Apia he invaded Mysia, and 
gave urgent orders to the Mysians to take up arms on his side ; for most of the Mysians 
are autonomous and not subjects of the king. Those Mysians who elected to join the 
expedition suffered no injury from him, but he laid waste the land of the rest. When in 
the course of his advance he came to about the middle of the so-called Mysian Olympus, 
seeing that the pass was difficult and narrow, and being anxious to cross it in safety, he 
sent an envoy to the Mysians, and having made a truce with them began to lead his forces 
through the country. The Mysians however, after allowing many of the Peloponnesians 
and their allies to go through, attacked the rear-guard and struck down some of the soldiers, 
who were not in regular order owing to the confined space. Agesilaus encamped his army 
and remained inactive for the rest of that day while he was performing the due rites for the 
dead (about fifty of the soldiers had perished), and on the day following, having posted 
a large number of the so-called Dercylidean mercenaries in an ambush, again started on 
the march with his army. The Mysians all thought that Agesilaus was departing in 


consequence of the loss received on the previous day, and coming out of their villages 
began to pursue the army with the intention of attacking the rear-guard as before ; where- 
upon the Greeks in the ambush, when the enemy came up to them, charged out and 
attacked them at close quarters. The Mysian leaders and those in the forefront of the 
pursuit perished in the sudden onslaught of the Greeks, while the main body perceiving the 
losses of their comrades in front fled home to their villages. On receipt of the news Agesilaus 
wheeled round, and led his army back by the same road until he joined the force which had 
been in ambush, and pitched his camp on the spot where they had encamped on the 
previous day. Afterwards the Mysians, to whom the dead severally belonged, sent heralds 
and . . . took away the bodies under a truce, more than a hundred and thirty being 
killed. Agesilaus after obtaining guides from the villages and giving his soldiers a rest of 
[.]days led his army forward, and having brought them down into the country of the Phrygians 
(not that part which he had invaded in the previous summer but another which was un- 
plundered), proceeded to lay it waste under the guidance of Spithradates and his son. 
Spithradates was by race a Persian, who for some time lived with Pharnabazus and was in his 
service, but having subsequently quarrelled with him, and being afraid that he would be seized 
and come to harm, took re'^uge for the moment at Cyzicus, and afterwards presented himself 
to Agesilaus with his son Megabates, who was young and handsome. When this happened, 
Agesilaus received them favourably, chiefly for the sake of the youth to whom he is said 
to have been much attached, but partly also on account of Spithradates, who he hoped 
would act as guide of the expedition and be useful in other ways. For these reasons they 
obtained a warm welcome. Continuing the onward march of his army and plundering 
the country of Pharnabazus, Agesilaus reached the town called Leonton Cephalae ; and 
after making several assaults, but without success, moved his forces and led them forward, 
plundering and laying waste the unravaged part of the country. Arriving subsequently 
at Gordium, a town built upon a mound and strongly fortified, he encamped his forces and 
remained there six days, making assaults upon the enemy and keeping his soldiers from 
dispersing by aff"ording them numerous comforts. When he failed to overpower the place 
owing to the energy of Rhathanes, a Persian by race, who was in command of it, he put his 
soldiers in motion and led them on, being urged by Spithradates to enter Paphlagonia. 
He next led the Peloponnesians and their allies forward to the borders of Phrygia and 
Paphlagonia, and encamped his army there, sending Spithradates himself in advance. The 
latter having gone on and come to terms with the Paphlagonians returned with ambassadors 
from them. Agesilaus made an alliance with the Paphlagonians and then retired with all 
speed in the direction of the sea, being afraid that there would be a lack of supplies in the 
winter. He did not march by the same road as that by which he had come, but by 
another, as he thought that it would be easier for his soldiers to cross (Bithynia). Gyes 
. . . sent him . . . horsemen and more than two thousand footsoldiers. Having conducted the 
army to Cius in Mysia, he first remained there ten days, and again harried the Mysians in 
revenge for their treachery at Olympus, and then led the Greeks forward through Phrygia 
on the seacoast, where he attacked a place called Miletou Teichos, but being unable to 
capture it withdrew his forces. As he was marching along the river Rhyndacus he arrived 
at Lake Dascylitis, near which lies Dascylium, an extremely strong place and fortified by 
the king, where Pharnabazus was said to store all his silver and gold. Having encamped 
his army there, he summoned Pancalus, who had sailed with the admiral Cheiricrates and 
was watching the Hellespont with five triremes. Pancalus arrived with all speed and entered 
the lake with his triremes, and was then ordered by Agesilaus to put on board all the more 
valuable part of the (booty) and transport it to ... at Cyzicus, that it might produce pay 
for the army. The soldiers from Mysia he dismissed with orders to return in the spring, 
as he was preparing during the coming winter to invade Cappadocia, having heard that 


that country stretched in the shape of a narrow strip from the Pontic sea to CiHcia and 
Phoenicia, and tliat the length of it was such that persons journeying on foot from 
Sinope . . . ' 

xviii. 37. Tm? <Tnov[h]ais : P's account of the negotiations between Agesilaus and 
Tithraustes is lost in the gap between Cols, viii and xi. They are described in some detail 
by Xenophon {Hell. iiL 4. 25-6). Diodorus (xiv. 80. 8) states briefly that a six months' 
truce was arranged, while Isocrates (iv. 153) calls it eight months. 

38. »to[r]r;p<j/ : Karaipdv is oftcn Used by Thucydides for arriving by sea (e. g. viii. 31 and 
39), but is rare in the sense of coming by land. It was employed by Theopompus as 
equivalent to tKBtlv according to Stephanus Byz., who was perhaps referring to the present 
passage or viii. 22 ; cf. p. 131. 

39. (li rrju x[<^P"^] T')" *<'pf[a3a]C"W : SO XenOphon, //el/, iii. 4. 26 r'fi eVl rqv <P(ipi>a^ii(ov 

^pvylav, followed by Plutarch, J^fs. 11, Since the whole of the autumn campaign of 
Agesilaus in 395 is ignored by Diodorus, Xenophon has been hitherto practically the 
sole authority for it. The discrepancies between his account in //e//. iii. 4. 26-9 and iv. i. 
1-16 and that of P are no less marked here than in the campaign of the earlier part of the 
year (v. 6-vii. 4). The two historians are indeed writing from different points of view ; 
with Xenophon the glorification of Agesilaus is the central motive, and in order to illustrate 
his hero's personal character certain more or less dramatic episodes, e. g. the negotiations 
with the king of Paphlagonia and with Pharnabazus, are treated in great detail, so as 
to produce the impression that the author himself took part in the scenes which he 
describes : but the military operations, with the exception of the fighting round Dascylium 
which led to the desertion of Spithradates, are only sketched in outline. In the Agesilaus, 
Xenophon makes no attempt to give a connected story of the autumn campaign, but some 
anecdotes in the later chapters supplement the //elknica on a few points, especially as 
to Agesilaus' relations with Megabates. P on the other hand, gives a plain, matter-of-fact 
account of Agesilaus' march, the course of which is now clear, and he shows no 
disposition to enlarge upon the picturesque incidents which enliven Xenophon's narrative. 
Hence while Xenophon {//ell. iv. i. i) briefly summarizes the earlier part of the campaign 
corresponding to xviii. 38-xx. 38 in the words 6 hi 'AyrjaCKaos (ivf\ ucpUeTo Spa pfT0T7wpat di 

TTjV Tov ^apva^i^ov ^pvyiuv rffv piv \<i)pav tKnt Ka\ fuopdfi, iTuXds fit ras p(v jSia t<ij 8 (Kovcrns 

TTpoaekap^avf, the negotiations with the Paphlagonians briefly described by P in xx. 31-xxi. 
5, occupy //ell. iv. i. 2-15. 

xix. 2. The plain of Thebe was by Adraniyltium, and according to Xen. //ell. iv. i. 
41 Agesilaus returned thither in the following spring when forced to leave Dascylium. From 
Thebe he turned eastward ; the plain of Apia ('ATriuf is due to Wilamowitz) was north 
of Mount Temnus on the upper Macestus; cf. Strabo xiif. i. 70 and Polyb. v. 77. 9. In 
//ell. iii. 4. 27 Xenophon mentions the ntbiov to vntp Kvprj^ as the place where Agesilaus 
heard the news of his appointment to the command of the fleet as well as the army (cf. xv. 
33. note), but in view of the long distance from Cyme to Adramyttium, it is. we think, 
probable that the ' plain beyond Cyme ' refers to that at the mouth of the Caicus, not 
to that of Thebe. 

5. That the Mysians had made themselves independent of Persia at this period was 
known from Xen. Anal/, i. 6. 7, 9. 14, //ell. iii. i. 13, &c. The use of the present tense 
f(Vi . . . ^(laiXKot oiix ImiKovovTfs is another indication that P's work was written before 
the fall of the Persian empire; cf. xvi. 3, note and p. 122. 

15. Wilamowitz would insert roOy after hi. 

22 sqq. Cf. the ambush described in v. 59 sqq., where the tactics are similar but not 
precisely identical, and p. 130. 


23. This band of mercenaries, formed by Dercjlidas and handed on to Agesilaus, 
is not mentioned elsewhere. They were no doubt veterans who had served under Cyrus. 

XX. 7-8. In the previous summer (i. e. 396) Agesilaus had invaded Hellespontine 
Phrygia {^pvyia t] napadaXaTTibios as it is called in xxi. 17) as far as Dascylium ; cf. Xen. 
He//, iii. 4. 12 sqq., Diod. xiv. 79. 3. On the present occasion after descending from the 
Mysian Olympus he turned eastward along the valley of the Sangarius. 

9 sqq. 2nt[dp]a8dTr}[v : P has 2Tri6pa8aTTjs here twice, but ^mOpiBaTrjs in xx. 19. 37 and 
xxi. 3 in common with the MSS. of Xenophon and Plutarch. The form "S.nidpabdrrjs, which 
occurs in Ctesias Fr. 52, is more correct ; cf. the variation with regard to 'TaOdvr^s (xx. 35). 
Spithradates is mentioned in Xen. Aiiab. vi. 5. 7 as one of Pharnabazus' lieutenants. The 
circumstances attending his desertion to Agesilaus are described more precisely in He//, iii. 
4. 10 ; it there appears that he was won over by Lysander and joined Agesilaus before the 
campaign of 396, whereas the present passage is vague as to the date of his arrival and 
in the absence of other evidence would produce the impression that it took place in 395. 
Concerning the origin of his quarrel with Pharnabazus (xx. 12) Xenophon in He//. /. c. says 
only that he was ikarrovpivav n vTTo 4>npj/a/3a^ov, but in Ages. 3. 3 he assigns as the reason 
the fact that the satrap wished to take Spithradates' daughter wev yapov. The detail that 
he first fled to Cyzicus (xx. 15) is in accord with Xenophon {He//. /. c). With regard 
to Megabates (xx. 16) in the He!/, (iv. i, 6 and 28) Xenophon merely hints at Agesilaus' 
attachment to him, but P's blunt statement in xx. 19-20 is amply confirmed by the stories 
in Ages. 5. 4-5, copied by Plutarch, Ages. 11. The daughter of Spithradates, who plays an 
important part in Xenophon's story of the negotiations with the Paphlagonian king {He//, iv. 
I. 4-15), is ignored by P; cf. xx. 37, note. 

16. Wilamowitz would insert t6v before vlov. 

25. Aewrcoi/ Ke(})a.\ai : Plutarch {Them. 30) calls it AeovroKecfyaXov, and indicates that 
it was on the main road from Susa to Sardis. Appian, who {Miihr. 19) employs the form 
hiovTinv K((f)aki], says that it was r^r ^pvyias oxvpoiTaTov xa>piov. The siic of it is uncertain ; 
Ramsay {Cities and BisJioprics of Phrygia, p. 229) would place it near Ayaz-lnn. Since 
Agesilaus proceeded next to Gordium (1. 29) hfovrutv Ke(f)a\ai seems to be in the parts of 
Phrygia watered by the Sangarius or its tributary the Tymbris. 

29. TrdXti' irpos TopSiov : on the site of Gordium, which was on the Sangarius, see 
A. Korte, Gordion {Erganztmgsheft v d. Jahrb. d. arch. hist. 1904). Agesilaus had not 
been there previously, and tiakiv is really otiose ; cf. vi. 34, note. 

30. KaT((TKeva(Tpevov Ka(X^m : cf. Theopompus Fr. 33 and p. 131. 

35. 'Paddpov : he is clearly identical with the 'Pa^i'i/^y who appears as one of Pharnabazus' 
lieutenants in Xen. Anad. vi, 5. 7, Cyrop. 8. 3. 32, and He//, iii. 4. 13. It seems necessary 
therefore to emend nijy?;? to nf'po-j;?, though it is noticeable that the scribe specially draws 
attendon to the reading nfjyt^s by a paroxytone accent to distinguish the word from 


37 sqq. P's account of Agesilaus' relations to the Paphlagonians is not only much 
briefer than Xenophon's {He//, iv. i. 2-15), but differs in several important respects. 
That the scheme of making an alliance with them was due to Spithradates is stated by 
both writers, but while Xenophon says that Agesilaus entered Paphlagonia and negotiated 
with the king in person, persuading him to marry the daughter of Spithradates, P represents 
Agesilaus as remaining on the border and using Spithradates as intermediary. Plutarch 
{Ages. 1 1) abridges Xenophon with slight variations, which do not warrant Sachse's sugges- 
tion {op. cit. p. 9) that Ephorus is here Plutarch's authority ; cf. v. 59, note. The name 
of the Paphlagonian king is given as "Orvs in Xen, He//, iv. i. 3-14, KoVw in Xen. Ages. 3 
and Plutarch, Ages. 11 (as Meyer remarks, this seems to be an ancient emendation of 
"Otvs); and the king of Paphlagonia, whom Theopompus in the 35ih book of the 


*tXt7nr(»ca (Athen. iv. p. 144 and x. p. 415) calls 90$ (ace. Qvv, but in Aelian V. H. i. 27 
when copying Athenaeus Qvov) and Nepos {^Dai. 2) Thuys, has generally been regarded 
as the same person, though the events recorded about him (his war with Artaxerxes 
INInemon and capture by Datames) took place some fifteen or twenty years later than 395. 
P has yet another name for him, rv;;y, a form which in itself is not objectionable (cf. rvyrjr), 
but in view of the errors in the papyrus does not carry much weight; cf. pp. 131-2. 
Wilamowitz, who regards Gvy as the correct form, would restore it both here, where Tvj;? 

may be corrupt for Tut;? = GOy, and in Xen. Hell. iv. 1.2 t\ t^Ooi ds ttjv Ua<pXayov[av aiv avraJ 
Tov tS)V na^Xayoicof ^aaiXea fls Xoyovi (i^oi, where he WOuld read Qip for aiiv ai/ra, which 

Hartmann had already proposed to emend to "Otvv. The form 'Otvs occurs however several 
times in //ell. iv. i. 3-14. 

xxi. 9. 8ia [rris Bi,0vvi8os : cf. Xen. Nell. iii. 2. 2, where the invasion of Bithynia by 
Dercylidas is described. Theopompus probably treated of that campaign in the 8lh book 
of the Hellenica, for several Bithynian names are quoted from it by Stephanus Byz. Since 
Agesilaus was anxious to return by a different, i. e. more northerly route, and Cius in 
Mysia on the sea-coast is the next place mentioned on his march (1. 13), he would naturally 
pass through Bithynia. aKoJn-wTf'pcoy was suggested by Wilamowitz. ano^vwripaii is also 
possible. The comparative adverb in -cor is attested in neither case. 

10—2. Cf. Xen. Hell. iv. I. 3 KareXiTTf tw 'A-yfjo-tXaw "Otvj ;^£Xioir ^(u inufas Sto-;(tXiovf 8f 

TreXraordf. ntpi ;(iXi]our is possible in 1. 12, but a number ending in Koalovs, e. g. fweaKoaCovs, 
is more likely, especially as P and Xenophon do not agree precisely with regard to the 
number of the neCol. 

15. Tj-dXjti', unless merely redundant (cf. xx. 19, note), refers to the former plundering 
of Mysia in xix. 8. 

dv$' wv K.T.X. : cf. xix. 14-8. 

18. MiXijTou Ttixos is clearly identical wiih the town near the confluence of the 
Macesius and Rhyndacus (cf. 1. 20), known in later times as MiX^rov iroXis or MiXrjTonoXn ; 
cf Slrabo xii. 8. 10, xiv. 5. 29. 

21. Aa{cT)Kv\io[v : Agesilaus' arrival at Dascylium is also recorded by Xenophon 
{Hell. iv. I. 15), who describes the richness of the district surrounding the ^aa-iXna of 
Pharnabazus (cf. 11. 22-4), but without mentioning the dispatch of Pancalus with the booty 
to Cyzicus (11. 25-33). His statement that Agesilaus passed the winter there is in accord- 
ance with P's description of Agesilaus' plans in 11. 33 sqq. 

25-6. Pancalus is only known from the present passage ; im^iWTjs is somewhat curious 
and is possibly an error for eVtoToXfvf. The fact that Cheiricrates is still spoken of as 
vavapxos produces a conflict with Xenophon ; cf. xv. 33, note. 

31. Some participle like '8iTjpTTaan]evav (Bury) is required. 

33. Tovs dno TTjs M[v](Tin[s: by these are apparently meant the Mysians who had joined 
Agesilaus according to xix. 6-7, and whose homes were therefore not far from Dascylium. 
That Agesilaus should have disbanded all the soldiers who had served under him in Mysia 
(as the words might mean) is incredible, for his position at Dascylium was far from secure. 
Xenophon {Hell. iv. i. 17) states that owing to the lack of precautions he was attacked by 

35-9. t]')!' e'niovra xfipt^fa is to be connected closely with napd (TK^(va[(ofi(vos, not with 
pabiCdv, a winter campaign being of course out of the question. Agesilaus' intention of 
invading Cappadocia is not recorded by Xenoplion, but he credits him even when obliged to 
retire to Thebe with ambitious dreams of conquest {Hell. iv. i. 41 jrapta-KtvdCfTo yap 

noptvcrupfvos oii bvvaiTo dvcoTUTu), vopi^tov onoaa onirrOfv TTotTjfraiTO (dm] ndvra aTTOcrrfpijcrfiv ^atriXfcos '. 

cf. the more rhetorical description in A^'es. i. 36 imvoav Koi ikniC<^v KaraXvadv tt)v tm rfjp 
'EXXdSa aTpardauaav irpirfpov apx^v). Hence there is no reason to doubt P's statement that 



Agesilaus entertained the plan of invading Cappadocia, although not only did unexpected 
obstacles, first the desertion of Spithradates and then his own recall to Europe, prevent any 
attempt to put the scheme into execution, but the plan itself was based on a complete 
misunderstanding of the geography. The description of Cappadocia as ' a narrow strip 
reaching from the Pontic sea to Cilicia and Phoenicia' (i.e the gulf of Issus) is of course 
inaccurate, and the distance from Sinope to the soudiern coast (11. 37-8) was no doubt much 
underestimated. In this respect however Agesilaus only shared the general misconception 
of the ancient Greek world with regard to the shape of Asia Minor, which even later than 
the fourth century B.C. was conceived of as a kind of triangle, of which the apex was formed 
by a comparatively narrow isihmus joining Sinope to the Gulf of Issus ; cf. Strabo's dis- 
cussion (xiv 5. 21) of the views of Apollodorus and Artemidorus. The latter writer had 
estimated the width of the isthmus at 1500 siades, which, as Strabo rightly remarks, are 
just half the correct number, and Pliny is no nearer the mark when he reckons the distance 
as only 200 Roman miles. That the journey from Sinope to 17 opdvt] KiXtKia could be 
accomplished in five days was the opinion of Herodotus (i. 72, ii. 34), who in the former 
passage uses the word avxTjv to describe the position of Cappadocia, and five days is also the 
duration of the journey from Sinope to Soli on the Cilician coast according to Scylax 102. 
Scymnus (who is probably following Ephorus), criticizing Herodotus' view, estimates it at 
seven days. Herodotus' statement has been explained (Wiedemann, Herodots zweites Buck, 
p. 145) as a misunderstanding of the time occupied by the relays of Persian postal 
messengers, and is certainly wide of the truth. But that Agesilaus was better informed 
is unlikely, and the incomplete sentence in 11. 38-9 may well have continued eVros nivTe 
f]iJLfpa>v, followed by ds 26Xovs noptvta-dai or the like. 

Fr. 16. The compactness of the writing makes it almost certain that this fragment 
belongs to Cols, v or vi. It is more probably in the second than in the first hand. 

Fr. 17. The apparent mention of Tissaphernes renders it probable that this fragment 
belongs to Col. iv. Like Frs. 18, 23, and 38, it comes from the top of a column. 

Fr. 19. 8. 'Apx([Xa'i8? : cf. Fr. 20. 11 and iii. 22, note. Possibly the reference is to 
king Archelaus of Macedonia (cf. ix. 29), not to the ship (.'') Archelais. Fr. 20 is probably 
to be placed in a line above or below Fr. 19, but apart from the supposed connexion with 
Col. iii the position of these two fragments, together with 18 which seems to belong to the 
top of the same column as Frs. 19 and 20 on account of its colour and general appear- 
ance, is quite uncertain. There is a possible mention of Lysander in Fr. 20. 6. 

Frs. 21 and 22. That these two fragments belong to Cols, vii or viii is almost 
certain on account of the colour of the recto. 

Fr. 29. This fragment does not suit iii. 19-22 or vi. 42-5. 

Fr. 33. The exceptional blackness of the ink in this fragment suggests that it 
comes from Col. ix. But it is not certain that it belongs to 842 at all. The recto 
is blank. 

Fr. 44. This fragment is from the bottom of a column, like Fr. 61. 

Fr. 65. That this fragment and 68 belong to 842 is not certain. 

Frs. 71-2. It is very doubtful whether these fragments come from 842. Fr. 71 is 
written in a larger hand and on thicker papyrus than elsewhere, and some traces of writing 
on the recto seem to be in a different hand from the two hands of the land-survey, while 
on the recto of Fr. 72 is some writing proceeding in the opposite direction to that of the 
land-survey and in a different hand. 



843. Plato, Symposium. 

Height 311 cm. Plate VI (Cols, xxxi-ii). 

Tins, the largest literary papyrus found at Oxyrhynchus, consists of the 
latter half of a roll containing tiie Symposium of Plato. The part covered 
is from 200 B to the end, comprised in thirty-one columns of which four 
(xix-xxii) are missing entirely, while two others (i and xviii) are represented by 
small fragments ; but the remainder is in a very fair state of preservation. The 
space occupied by a column with the adjacent margin is about 10 cm. in 
breadth, and the total length of the roll may thus be estimated at some 23 
or 24 feet. The small and well-formed but somewhat heavy writing exempli- 
fies a common type of book hand, and probably dates from about the }'ear 
200 A.D. N at the end of a line of full length is written as a stroke above the 
preceding vowel ; and the common angular mark is freely added at the end 
of short lines. Double dots are as usual employed to mark the alternations 
of the dialogue, but sometimes appear in other positions than at the end of 
a speech, e.g. in 11. 955 and 1221. A single high point is used, more especially 
in the latter part of the papyrus, to mark a pause ; the marginal paragraphus 
commonly accompanies both forms of punctuation, or stands by itself without 
them. Other lectional signs, apart from the diaeresis, are rare and for the most 
part due to a second hand which has corrected the decidedly careless work of the 
original scribe. The corrector's ink, however, does not differ markedly in colour 
from that of the text, and in the case of minor insertions the two hands are 
at times difficult to distinguish. But as they are certainly not separated by any 
wide interval of time the question has no great practical importance. The 
clearest instance of a rough breathing by the first scribe occurs in 1. 352. In 
cases of doubt we have as a rule credited alterations to the corrector, to whom is 
also due an isolated and seemingly futile scholium at 1. 391. 

The text, as so often with papyri, is of an eclectic character, showing a decided 
affinity with no single IMS. Compared with the three principal witnesses for the 
Symposium it agrees now with B against T\V, now with the two latter as against 
the former, rarely with T against BW (11. 112, 180, 297, 350, 435, 660) or with 
W against BT (11. 183, 674, 776, 966, 1007, 1015). Similarly in a passage cited 
by Stobacus some agreements with his readings against the consensus of BTW 

R 2 


are counterbalanced by a number of variations from Stobaeus' text (cf. notes on 
11, 141-79), A few coincidences occur with variants peculiar to the inferior MSS., 
the more noticeable being those with Vindob. 21 alone or in combination with 
Venet. 184 (11. 59, 898, 986, 999, 11 94) and Parisin. 164a alone or with Vat, 229 
(11. 349, 462, 1196). Of the readings for which there is no other authority, 
including several variations in the order of words, the majority, if unobjectionable, 
are unconvincing. The more valuable contributions, some of which are plainly 
superior to anything found in other MSS., are: 1. 92 ctt, 1, 112 the omission of aai 
(so Stallbaum), 1. 239 av eit], where BTW have a meaningless av, 1. 368 KaXca as 
conjectured by Badham for rw k., 1. 471 /xerexf as restored by Stephanus (juerexeiy 
MSS.), 1. 517 T€K€iv confirming a conjecture of Hug (kv^Iv MSS,), 1. 529 iT:idv\ir] as 
conjectured by Stephanus {k-ni6v\x€^l MSS.), 1. 577 nai av omitted by MSS., 1. 699 
^eo0iAet {-f] BTW), 1. 770 KaTLbe[v (?) {KaOiC^iv MSS.), 1. 898 ixoi (probably) with 
Vind. 21 (fiov BTW), 1, 1142 8ia/3a\et as conjectured by Hirschig (biafBakj] BTW), 
On the other hand in many cases the papyrus once more proves the antiquity of 
readings which modern criticism rejects or suspects. 

In the accompanying apparatus, which is based on Burnet's Oxford edition, 
we usually confine ourselves to the readings of BTW. With regard to the last 
named MS., Prof. H. Schone of Basel has very kindly placed at our disposal his new 
collation which often supplements and sometimes corrects the report of Burnet. 
Occasional references to the readings of other MSS. are derived from the edition 
of Bekker, and that of Schanz has also been consulted. We neglect minor 
orthographical variations such as det and aid, the interchange of i and et, a and $, 
edv and avy occurrence of elision, crasis, and v e^eAKuoruoV, and attraction of 

Col. 1. 

5 lines lost. 
6 ] PovXoi 200 B 

[to i(r)(ypo9 uvai (f>avai rov HcoK^fia 
40 lines lost. 

Col. ii. 

[tovtcou a>v] av cvSeia Traprju avrcoy 200 E 

[vai (fiavat €]7r[[e]]i Br) tovtois avafxvr] 201 A 

50 \a-'\6riTt t\iv\<X)V ecprjcrOa €v tco Xoyco eivai 
rov e/)[a)]ra ct 8^ [/SjofXei cyoo (re ava^vr] 
(TO) oijiuL yap ere ovTcoaei noi? €t7reir) 


OTL T019 $€019 KaT€aK(vaadri ra irpay 
fxara Si [€]pcBTa[[?]] koXcov aiay^pcov yap 

55 \o'\vK ilT] €p(09 0V)( OVTOXTil TTCO? eXey€9 

[ejiTTOf yap (^avai rov Ayadcoua : Kai 
[i]Tri€iK(o9 ye Aeye[t]s' a> (raipc (fiavaiy 
Tov XoiKparrj Kai ei tovto ouro)?) 

^X^* aXXo ri (pco? KaXXov9 av clt) [[9]]) 
60 6/xi)y ato-xff/ojloL'y Se ou cofioXoyn : ovkov 2oi B 

[a>fjio]Xoyr]TaL ov (uSer]^ €aTi Kai p.rj 


[ap (]o-Ti Kai ovK €X€i ^pois KaXXos} 

[o-i']cc[y]KT] (jiavai : ti Se to evSees KaX 
65 [Aoi/y] Kai jxr)S[a]p.r] KCKTrj/xevov KaX 

[Aoy cip]oi. [A]eye£[y] av KaXov (ivai : ov Sr^ra : 

[€Ti o]vu ofioXoyns €pcoTa KoXov iivai 

[ef TavTlq. oyrccf e^ei : Kai tov AyaOcoy 

\ya ^nT€iv\ co HcoKpaTC^ KivSvvevco 
70 [ovSiv €]i8^vai (OV TOT€ (ivov '. Kai^ 201 C 

[/jLT]]v KaXcos ye eiTray cpavai <o AyaOa> 

[aXXa a-fjiiKpov] €ti (ine Ta aya6a ov) 

[Kai KaXa 8ok{\l ctol civai : e/ioiye : ei a 

[pa e/ocoy Ta)]v KaXcov cvSerj^ caTiv 

75 [ra S]€ aya6[a] KaXa Kav toov ayaOoi 

[iv8e\rj[s!\ €ir] : eyw (fyavai co ^coKpaTCS 

[aoi o]vK av Svvai/xrjv avTiXeyeiv 

aXXa ourcwy e^fTco toy av Xeyeiy : of) 

fi(v ovv Ttj aXT][6]€ia (f)avai co 0(Xe) 
80 [Ay^adav Svvaaai avTiXeyeiv eirei 

HcoKpaTei ye ovScv yaXenov Kai ere) 301 D 

fiiv ye rfSr^ eaaco tov 8e Xoyov tov 

mpi r[of] (p(oT09 ov Trore rjKovaay 

yvva[iK]oi MavTiVLKT]^ AiOTi^y^as 


85 [[o"]]?/ ravra re ao^r] r]v^aL^ Kat aXXa} 
7roXX[a] Kai AOrji/aioi? nore dvaafie 

P0L9 TTpO TOV XoifJ.OV S^KU €TT/ ava 


^oXrjv [e]7roit](raTO vocrov r) Srj Kai 
€fj.€ ra €pa)TiKa eStSa^ev ov ovv 
90 Xoyov eKdvr] fXeyev TreipaaofiaL 
ijfieiv SieXOeiu e/c tcov cofioXoyqy 
fxeucou c/jioi Kai Ayadcovi avro^ e) 
7T ejjiavTov OTTCos av hvv(i\}ji\ai Sei 
81] CO AyaOcof coo-irep av Sir][yr](T](oy 

Col. iii. 

95 SieXdeLf avTov irpwTov T19 eariv 201 E 

fpcoy Kai o7roio9 T19 eireiTa ra ep) 

ya avTov SoKei ovv /xol paarov et) 

vaL ovTco 8uX0[^]lv ms ttotc /ze t] ^e 

vT] avaKp^Lvovcra SirjeL a")(e8ov Se 

100 Ti Kai eyo) npo^ avTrjv crepa toi} 

avra eXeyou oiarrep vvv Trpos e/xe Ayadco^y 

0)9 eiT] epcoy pay as Oeo? urj Se raav KaXcov^ 

rjXey^i 8t] pie TOVTOLS TOiS XoyoLS oLCTTrepy 

eyo) TOVTOV co? ovre KaXo? nr] Kara rov^ 

105 epov Xoyov ovTe ayaBos Kaiyca iron's ecprj 

Xeyet? co Aioripa aLaa-)(^po^v'^ apa (poo9 ((tti 

Kai KttKO? : Kai 7} ovK ev(f)r]pr](r€is ((f)r] i)) 

oiei OTL eav prj KaXov rj avayKaiov af) 

TO iivai aia^pov : paXiaTa ye : rj Kai av ao2 A 

no pr] aocpov apaOfs rj ovk rjaOijaai on e) 
(TTiv ri pcTa^u (xo(pia? Kai apaBias : 
Ti Tovro : TO opOa So^a^eiv avev tov 

^X^iv Xoyov Sovvai ovk oicrOa e^?/ oti 
ovT€ (.mcTTaaOai eaTiv aXoyov yap npay 


115 fia TTO)? av en; iniaj-q^r] ovre afxa) 

Oia TO yap tov outo^ Tvy^^auov nco^ 

av iiTj afxaOia (an 5e Srjnov tolovto 

T) opOrj So^a fiera^v (ppourjaico? /cat) 

a/jLaBia9 aXrjdr] -qv 8 eyco Xeyet? : /x?;) 2C2 B 

120 TOLvvv avayKa(i [0] fir] KoKov ^ariy} 

aia-^^^pov ciuai p.r}8 firj ayaQov KaKO 

ovTCo Se Kai tov f[p]a)ra [eTret^T? avTos 

ofioXoydS fir) (i[vai aya6ov fir]]8€ KaXo 

fiTjSiv TL fiaXXov oiov 8f.Lv a\v\TOv aio-y 
T25 XP°^ '^^'- x^KOv (ivat aXXa tl: fiiTa) 

^v TOVTOiv i(prj Kai firju tjv 8 eyco 0) 

/xoXoyeiTa[i] ye irapa TravTcav /zeya?) 

0eop iivat T(ov firj (i8oT(ov ec^r] Tvav 

roav Xeyety r] Kai tcov et8oTo>v : ^vfina 

130 TCOV fi€v ovv Kai rj yeXaaacra Kai ttcus) 

av €(pri (o X(OKpaT€S ofxoXoyoiTO /ieyay 202 C 

0eoy uvai napa tovtcov ol (^acnv avTO 
ov8i diov iivai Tivis ovTOL rfv 8 eyco) 

et fxiv (.<pr) (XV fiia 8 eyco Kaiyco inrovy 
135 7rco[y tov]to Aeyeiy : Kai rj pa8L(o? e^?; Xt 
ye yap [/x]ot ov vavTa? 6(ov9 ^^[?] (v8aifio[ 
ray eivai Kai KaXov9 rj ToXfir]aai9 av") 
Tiva firf <pavaL KaXov re Kai iv8a\i\fio 
va BiU)v iLvai fia Ai ovk eyoy f0[';»^ 

140 €vS\aifi\ovas 8e 8r) [Xjeyety o[v] tovs Ta 
y[a^a Ka]i Ta KaXa KeKTrjfjuvovs :) 

Col. iv. 

ov Tovs TayaOa Kai Ta KaXa K€K[Tr)]fi€ 
V0V9 '■ navv ye aXXa firjv epcoTa [ye] co) 202 D 

fioXoyr]Ka9 81 ev8€iav tcov aYa[d]cov 
145 Kai KaXcov tnidvfieiv avTQ)v t[o]i') 
TCOV Q)v ti'5er;y iaTW '. cofioXoyi]^ 


Ka yap ttco? av ovv Beos €ir] ye rcouy 
KoKoiv Ka[t ay\aQ(i)V aiioipos'. ovSay 

ficos cos ye eoiKev : opas ovv €(f)r] oTiy 
150 KttL av epoora ov Oeov vojxi^hs '. ri \ov 
av €(pr]V eiT] epa)S 6vtjtos '. T]KLcrT[a 

y€ : aXXa ti jurjv '. (txnrep ra rrpoTe 

pa e^rj para^v dvrjTOV Kai a6[a]ya 

TOV TL ovv ft) ALOTLfXa Saifioov p[€ 

155 y^S' CO HcoKpares Kai yap nav to Sai^ 

fiovLov /xera^v eari Oeov re Kai^ 202 E 

OvrjTov '. Tiva rjv 8 eyco Svvapivy 
i^ov : epfxrjvevov Kai SiaTrpodfiev 

ov ^eoiy ra Trap avdpconoyv Kai ar) 
160 OpcoTTOis ra Trapa Oecov tcov pev tu? 

Serjaeis Kai 6vaia9 tcov Se ras €7rt) 

ra^ety re Kai apoi(3a9 tcov Ovcricov 

e/i peaco Se ov apc^orepcov avprrXr] 

poi coare to rrav avro avrco ^vvSe^ 
165 SeaOai Sia tovtov Kai t] pavTiKrj 

nacra X^P^'- '^'^' ^ '"'"^ I'epecov re^i^rj 

TCOV re nepi Tas Bvaias Kai Ta? ["rje) 

[Xejray Kai Tas c-rrcoSas Kai ttjv [p]d 203 A 

[T]efaj/ Tracrav Kai yor]Tiav $€09 <5e 
J 70 aidpcoTTCo ov peiyvvrai aWa Sia 

t[o]vtov nacra ecrTiv t] opiXia Kai 7;) 

8[i]aX€KT09 0eoi9 irpos avOpconovs 

\^Kai\ eyXT/yopoo-ITo-TIi Kai KadevSovcri Kai 

[0 /ze]f Trepi Ta TOiavTa ocpos 5a[i]/izo) 

175 [vio]s avrjp Se aXXo ti aocpos cov ijy 

irepi Teyvo-S rj irepi ^^ipovpyia? T[f]) 

vo[s] ^avavcrovs ovtol 8rj 01 8aipoves 

TToXXoi re Kai vavToSairoi eicriv ei? 

8e TOVTcov eaT[i Ka]i epcos I iraTpos 
180 Se rjv 8 eyca Kai pr}T'[p^ps Tivos eariv : 


fiUKpoTcpov fM€V 60r; Siriyrjcracrdat. 203 B 

o/xco? Se aoi (pco ot€ yap eyej/eT[o] rj A 
(PpoSenq laTicofro 01 6(ol 01 re [aAXo]t 

KUL Tr]9 Mt]TiSo9 V109 IIopO? €Tt[(l]8ti 

185 Se eSdnuTjcrai' irpoaair-qaovaa o\i6\v 

a Kai rjv [7r]e/3t ras 6vpa9 ovv Tlo^pos 
p^dvad^iS Tov j'[e/c]rapoy oiuos [yap 

Col. V. 

ovTTOo Tjv ety tov tov Aios ktjttov f^[f]A) 
190 6a)u (3((3aprjp€V09 evSev rj ovv Ilevia 

iTTL^ovXevovcra Sia ttju avTrj? arro) 

piav naiSiov TTonjaaaOai (k tov JTo) 

pov KaTaK\(iv€Tai re nap avTco Kai 203 C 

fKvrjae tov epooTa 810 Srj Kai ti]9 A ) 
195 (f)[po8(i\Tr)s KaXrjs ovcrrjs aT€ ovv Ho 

[pov aK]o\ovdo9 Kai Oepanoiv yeyovev 

o epo)? y€vvT)6[e]i9 €v tois €K€ivr]9 ye) 

v(6\ioi9 Kai a pa (pvcrei €paaTT]9 coi') 

n(pi TO KttXov Kai ttj^ AcppoSeiTt]? 
200 KaXT]9 ovar]9 are ovv JJopov Ka[i Tie 

vias V109 oov epo)? ev ToiavTrj [ri/) 

\r] KaOecTTTjKfv npcoTov pev 7re) 

vi]9 an €<TTiv Kai noWov 8(1 anaXo? 

re Kai KaXos oiov 01 noXXoi oiovTai') 
205 aXXa (XkXtjpos Kai av)(prjpo? Kai av} 203 D 

v7ro8r]T09 Kai aoiKOS ^(^apanreTrjs 

aiei Qiv Kai acTTpooTos cm Ovpais Kai ) 

€V 08019 VTTaiOpiOS KOipOipevOS TT]V 

TT]S pr]Tpo9 (pvcriv eyoiv aei ev8(iai 
210 avv[oiK]o? KaTa 8e av tov naTfpa emy 
/JotXo? €(TTi [KaXoi^] Kai ayaOoi^ av8p(i 
09 a>v Kai t'rr;y Kai avvTOvo? dT][p(v 




/Say Kai (ppovqaiO)? enL6viJ.T]Tr]9 Kai} 
215 TT^p^optfios (jyiXoaocpcov Sia navTO^ tov 
(3iov Seivo^ yor]9 (papfiaKiV^ Kai aocpi^ 

(TrrfS Kai ovre coy aBavaro^ neipVKev 203 h. 

ovT€ coy Bvr]Tos aXXa tot€ fiev tt)9 
ij/xepas 6a\XH Kai (r] orav (vnoprj) 


2 20 ar) TOT€ 5e airoOvqaKH iraXiv (5e a) 
va^iocTKe^i^Tai Sia ttjv tov narpos} 
(hvaiv TO Se 7ropi^ofi€vov aui vTr^Kpei 
cocrre ovt€ aTTopei e/)coy Trore ovre irXov 


Tel aocpias Kai ajxaOia^ ev fxeaco iarl 
225 €X^i yap co5e Oecou ovSeis (piXoao(pei ov 204 A 

S iTTiOvfiei ao(po9 yeveaOai eaTi yap- ov 

8 €1 Ti? aXXoy (ro0oy ov (piXoao^ei ov} 

S av oL afiad^LS (piXoaocpova-LU ovS eTTi) 

Ovfjiovcri crocpoii yeveaOai avTO yap tov 
230 TO €crr[i]i' \aX€TTr] afiaOia to fx-q oi^ra) 

KaXov KayaOou fxrjSe (^povLjiov 5o) 

K^Lv auTco eivai iKavov ovkovv €7n 

Ov/xH^i^li fir] oiofieuos evSeT]^ eivai} 

ov av fir} oirjTai eniSnaBai Tives ov 
235 [e](})r]v eyo) co AioTifia 01 (piXoao^ovv 

Col. vi. 

rey et /iTjre 01 aocpoi fxrjTe oi ajiaBeis '.y 

[S\r]Xov St] ((fir] TovTo ye r]Sr] Kai nai} 204 B 

[S]i OTi 01 fi€Ta^v [Tov]Ta)u afxcpoT^y 
[p](ou (OV av €17] Kat [0 epjcoy ecrTiu yap Stj^ 
340 Ta>v KaXXiaToov rj aocpia epcoy 8 ecrTivy 
epcoy irepi to KaXov coore avayKaiov e) 
poora (j)iXo(TO(pov eivai (piXo(TO(f)ov 5e) 


ovra fxiTo^v €iuai aocpov Kai a/j.a$ov9 

aiTia 5e [avrco Kai roji/rcoi/ rj yei'eo-f?) 
245 7raTpo9 /^[c y]a/3 cro(pov eariv Kai ^vno 
pov ijlt]t[po9 S(\ ov (ro(f)Tj9 Kai anopov 77) 
p^v ovv 0r[(rty tov S^aLpovo^ co 0iAc) 
^coKpares aVTT] oy [5]e <tv ooOtjs (poora 
(wai Oavpaarov ov8(.v enaOe? cot;) 204 C 

250 6t]9 Sc 009 €pOl SoK€l TiKpaipopf^VT]^ 

e^ aiv (TV eXeyey to epcopevoi' (ii'ai epco 
ra ov TO epcov Sia tuvtu <tol oiopaiy 
navKaXo^ e^airero e/^coy kul yap ^cttl 
TO ipacTTOV TO TO) ovTL KoXov K\pL\i. affya]] 

255 ^ov Kai TdXiLov Kai paKapiaTov to 

Se ye epwu aWrji/ 'iSeai/ TOiavTrju 

€)(0J/ oiav €ya> SrjXOov Kai eyco eind 
iuv 8t] CO ^€vr] AfaXcoy yap Xeyeiy tol^ 
0VT09 0)1/ epcoy Tiua y^p^iav e;(e£ roiy 
260 avOpconoi? tovto Stj pcTa TavTa} 204 D 

€(f)r) CO ^'oo/cparey neipacropaL ae SiSa 


^ai eoTi /Liev ya/) Srj tolovtos ye) 

yofcoy 6/00)9 eo-rt ^e TCi>f /faXa)j/ coy) 

av 07/9 €i 5e Ti9 7;/iay epoiTO tl toov^ 
265 AcaXo)!/ 6o--[ii' ejpcoy ft) XcoKpaT^^ re /cat 

AioTLpa co[5e 5]6 cracpcaTcpov epa cpcJo 

Tcoy KaXa)[i/ tl e]pa : /cai eyo) ftTTOi' ori 

yfvcadai ai'[T]a)[[.]] aXX ert Tro^ei e^j;) 

?7 aTTOKpicris epcoTrjcriu TOLauSd- ti 
270 €(TTaL (Kiivco CO €av yfvqTai Ta Ka 

Xa ov TTavv ((pr]u ert ^X^"^ ^V^ npo^ 

TavTr}v TTjv ipooT-qaiv npoyjei^ 

/xoy aTTOKpecfacrOaL : aXX e(f)r] coarr^p 204 E 

au €1 TLS piTafiaXwv avTi tov KaXov 
275 TO) aya$(ti y^poop^vos irvvOavoLToy 



0epe 0) Sa>KpaT€9 fpat o epMv tcop a) 
yaB(£)V Ti €pa yeveaOaL r]v S eyco af) 
TO) Kai Ti earai iK^Lvoa co av yeurjTat 
Taya6a tovt iVTropcorepou r)v 8 e^ 
280 yct) 6^0) anoKpeiyaa-dai on €v8aiH(oi/ 

ccTai : KTT]are[i\ yap €(pT] ayaOcov 01 euSaijjiovss 
tvSaifMoyes Kai ovk€tl rrpoaSei epe) 

205 A 

Col. vii. 

[(T$ai iva Ti Se /3]oi'A[erat €vS]aiiJ.cov ei) 
[pai /3oi;Xo/x€t'o]y aX[Xa reXo]? 8oK[ei e] 

585 [x^if V aTTOKpKTis a\T]6r] X]€y€i9 6i) 
[iTOP cyco TavTTjif 8]€ tItj^v ^ovXrjatv 
[kul Toy epcoTa t\ovtov Trorepa Koiy 
\yov oi€i eiuaL n]avTa>y audpcowcop 
[Kai nauTa? T]aya6a ftovXecrOai avTois 

290 [etrat] aet [7;] 7r[a)]y Xeyety ouroo? rjv 8 ey[co 
[Koi\vov €iuai navTcov : ti 8r] ovv €(pr] 
<o HcoKpuTiS ov 7ravTa[9 e/pajr ^afi^vy 
€i7r[e]/j ye rravTis Ta)\y av\T(ov epoaai) 
Kai auL a\\Ka\ Tiuas [^a/zjev epaj/ tov? 

295 8 ov : ^au/z^^ft)] r)v [8 eyco K]aL avTos} 
aXXa /XT] 6a[vfjia^€ €(l>r] a0]eXot're[?]) 


yap apa tov [cyOooJToy ti l8os ouo/xay 

^0fl€U TO T0[v 0X]0V (TTlTldeUTfS o) 

vofia €p(0Ta T[a 8e] aXXa aXXoi9 /ca) 
300 Tay^poaixfOa o\yoiJL\a(n '. coa-mp ti tjv 

8 cyo) coa-irep t[o8€ ot](TO oTi Troirjai? e 

(TTIV TL TToXv Tj yap t5> €K TOV /IT] 01^} i\ yap *» 
T09 €19 TO OV l[o]vTl OTWOVV aiTLa^ 

Tracra €(ttl iT0ir]ai9 ooaTC Kai ai vno^ 
305 7ra<Tai9 TaL9 re;(i/aiy epyaaiai noi 
r]a-€i9 €ia-i Kai oi tovtcov 87]fxiovpyoi 

105 B 

205 C 


iravT^S TToirjTaL : aXT]dr] Xeye^y aX) 

A o/zcoy T] 8 r] oiaOa otl ov KoKovvTai 

noirjTai a\\' aWa e^ovaiu ovofxa 
310 Ta a7r[o 5e 7r]a[cr]7/s' Tqs TTOirjaeco^ cj/ 

fiopLo\y a(f)\opLa6ev to mpi r-qv fiou 

aLKr]v KUL ra fxerpa t(o tov oXov ovo 

p-OLTi irpo(rayop€veTai ttoitjo-l^ yap) 

ravra p.ovov KaXiirai kul ol €)(^ou 
315 rey tovto to fxopLOv rrj^ TroiTjaey 

(OS TTOirjTai : aXrjdrj €^r)[v] Xeyety) 

OVTQ) TOLVVV KUL TTipi TOV [i\p(i>Ta^ 20^ D 

TO /^[e]f KC(paXaiou ea-Tiu [7r]acra t;) 
Toov ayaOcou ^nLOvjua Kai tov €V 
320 SaijxoviLv o fieyiaTO? re Kai SoXe 

poy epcos iravTL aXX oi ficu aXXr} Tpe 
TTOfievoi TToXAa^j; €7r avTOV rj KUTa^ 


XpTjp.aTia/j.0 T] KUTa (f)iXoyvfivacrTL 
av 7} Kara (piXo(TO(f)iau ovt epav Kay 
325 [Xov]vTaL OVT epaaTai oi Se kutu €u ti et 
<5oy i'oj/rey re kul eanovSaKOTes to 
TOV oXov ovofia €<r\ov epwTa re kul f) 

pav Kai epaa-Tui : KLvSvpev^ov^it aX?;) 
6r} ((prjv iyco \€ye[c]v : Kai Xeyerai /zi 

Col. viii. 

[tj (Toi BoKoucri p.a Ai owk «|ioi y]« ^v [8 ty]<o [ap ov]y tj [8] ij [ov 
[to)s ttirXovv «]ot[^ X€Y*iv ot]i 01 avOpwTrok tou ayaOou 

330 [y€ Tiy] €07; Xoy[oy coy ol a]u t[o] rjfi^i^icrv €> 

[ajfTG)!/ ^TjTa>a[Lu ovtol e]poo<TL o 8 e/xoy Xo 205 E 

yoy ovT€ J7/z[et(jioy (p7]ai]u civai tov €p<o 

Ta eivai [o]vt€ [oXov eav] firj Tvy^^avq^ 

ye TTOv CO €Ta[ip€ ayaQov oi'] CTrci aurco 
335 yc fa* 7ro[5ay /cat \<ii.pas ^Qi.Xov<T(\v a-rro 


Tflni'eaOaL oi ai/Opconoi eau a]vT0i9 So 
[kt] tu iavToav irovrjpa ^ivai] ov yap to 
[eavTo)}/ oifiai iKaa-Toi aaira^^ovrai, 
e[f iirj 6i] T[iS' TO fiev aya6Y>v o^lY^iov Ka 

340 [Aef K\aL €av\Tov to Se KaK\ov aWoTpio 

coy of^er y[e aWo ^(ttC\v ov epaxrtu av^ 206 A 

6p[co7r]oL 7] t\ov ayaOov (p\(a<nv vai ecpfj 
Ti ^[e] ov Tr[pocr6€T€Ou e](pT] otl kui eiuai 
TO ayaBov \avT0is e/xwcrt] 7r/90(r^€T[ral]€Oj/) 

345 [«]/£> ovv €077 Ka\i ov fiouoi/] eivai aXXa) 

Kat aei [€]tv[aL Kai T'\q[v'\T0 7r[/3]o(r^er{]^aTJ€or : ) 

iaTLv apa ^v\k\iii\I^Sr]v [e]077 €pcoy tov 

TO ayaOov avT(o nvai aiei : aXr]$€(7Ta 

Ttt 607;!^ eyo) Aeyeiy : ore Se tovto e) 206 B 

350 poo? ecTTii^ auL t) 8 rj tcov Tiva Tpoiro 
8ia)K\ov'\T(i)v avTO Kai ^v t\i\vi irpa) 


^€1 anovSr] Kai rj avfTaa-is epcyy ai/) 
KaX[o]iTO TL t\ovto T'\vy)(av€L ov TO 
ipyov ^X'^i? f.'^[^l'^' ['] °^ /jL€vTav (re e) 

355 (Pv^ fy^ ^ ALOTLfia edavfia^ou erri 

ao(f)ia Kai i^oiTcov irapa ae avTa Tav 
Ta : fiaOijao/jievo? aXX eyco <tol €(f)T] epco 

€(JTl yap TOVTO TOKO? €V /CaXo) Aftti) 

KaTa TO crcofxa Kai KaTa ttju "^v^-qv 

360 fiavTeia? rjv S eyo) S^iTai oti ttotc 

Xeyeiy Kai ov /iap6ava> : aXX eyo) Stj 206 C 

aa(pe<TTepov epco Kvovaiv yap e07?) 

Q) X(OKpaT€? navTes avOpconoi Kai 

KaTa TO (Tcajia Koi KaTa tt]v '^v)(r]v 
365 Kai (ireiSau ev tivi rjXiKia yevcov 

 Tal TIKTCIV ^TTldvfid^u'^ TJ/XCOU 7] (f)V 

(Tty TLKTUv Se €v /xeu aia")(p<o ov Sv 
vaTai ev Se KaXco rj yap avSpo? Kai 
yvvaiKOS avvovcria tokos eaTiv 


370 ecTTi (5e TovTO O^LOV [Troi'roT] to it pay 

fia Kai TOVTO €.V OurjTCO oyTL T(o 

^(oco adavaTOv u>€<7Tiv rj Kvq 
ens Kai T] y^vvrjdLS Ta 8 e^' tco avap 

fioaTOi aSvvaTov yei^eaOaL ai^apfioy 206 D 

375 aToy 8 io-TLv TO aia\poi^ a-jvavTi ro)) 
Bioi TO 8e KaXou apfiOTTOv fxoipa ovv 
Kai eiXvdvl'a rj KaXXoufj (cttiv tt] ye) 

Col. ix. 

vea[et 8 i[a Ta]vTa 0Ta[i' fieu] Ka[X(o irpoa 

neXa^T} to kvovv tAe[(w]i' re yfyi/[e]rat) 
380 Kai evcppaivopevoy [S]ia)(€iTaL [/c]ai ti) 

KT€L T€ KUL y^vva \ ©[xajf 8^ aia-;([/j]co (jkv 

6pa>nov re kul XvTTOvii\i\vov ^^[i/jcrTrei) 

paTUL Kai aTT0TpeTr^T[a'\L Ka[i\ a//[tX]Aera£ 

KaL ov yevula] aXX layov to Kvqp[a \a]\^ 
385 TTcuy 0e/)e£ [odyv 8r] t[co] kvovvti [re /cat]) 

ri8rj (TTrapycouTi ttoXXt] t] 7rT0CT]a[i9 ye 

yo^e 7re/3i to KaXov [8']ia to /zeyaA[77y] cu) 206 E 

8(iuos a7roXv[€i]r tov ^yovTa eaTiv 

yap CO [l!co]Kpa[T]€? €(f)t] ov tov KaXov e) 
390 p(09 cos (r[v] o[i]ei : aXXa tl iJi-qv[.] ttjs y^u) 

i'-ncr€Q)9 KaL tov tokov iv tco KaXo) : eA ^ '^ r 

' / a o tx[*\. t 

(V r]v 8 eyco: TTavv fiiv ovv ^cp-q : tl St] pus <rr .[. 

ovv TT]9 yerecreG)? otl acL yerecns ecrTi 

KaL aOavaTOv coy Ovtjtco rj y^vvqcTLS 
395 aOavaatas (5e avayKaiou iniOviiiiv 207 A 

[i^Ta ayaOov €K tcov co/xoXoyrjpeva) 

([L]7r€p TOV ayaOov eavTCo (luul ai(L epco? 

i[cT]TLi/ avayKaiov 8rj e/c tovtov tov 

Xoyov Kai TTjs aOavaaias tov cpcoTa 
4C0 (ivaL' TavTa re ovv TravTa e8i8ay 

aKe fif 07r0T€ nepi tcov (pcoTiKcov Xo 


y[o]uy TTOiOLTo: Kai irore. Tjpero: tl oici) 

Q) ^coKpares aiTiov ^ivai rovrov tov 

(p(0T09 Kai Tr]9 inidufjiiai r] ovk aiaOa 
405 v€L coy 8€LV(09 SiarideTaL iravra ra 

\B'\r]pia eiTiiSau eneiSau yivvav e) 

Trt^uyLtTjo-T) Kai to, Tre^a Kai ra tttt]} 

va vodovvra re iravTa Kai ^pcmi) 207 B 

KO)y SiaTi6€jJ.€va npcoTov fi€v ttc 
410 pi TO ^vfifjiiyrjvai aWrjXoi? 67reira 

irepi Tr]v Tpocp-qv tov yivojxivov 

Kai eToi/xa eaTiv vnep tovtcov Kai 

Siafia)(^ea6ai Ta aaO^v^aTara T019 

i(r)(ypoTaTois Kai virepaTroOvrjcTKU 
415 Kai avTO) TOO Xeifico irapaTivojxeva 

a>a-T€ €K€iva €Krp€(f)€ip Kai aXXo") 

irav TTOiovvTa tous fiev yap avOpco 

TTOVS e077 oiOLT av T19 €K Xoyia/xov 

Tavra voieiu Ta Se Orjpia Tiy ai 
420 Tia ovroo? epcoriKcos SiariOecrdai 207 C 

e^ety Xeyeiv: Kai eyco eXeyoi/ oriy 

OVK €i8eir]v : r] 8 airev 8iavoii 

ovv 8iivo\^ 7ro]r€ yevqa-eadai Ta e 
pcoTiKa (a[i/ T]avra jirj ^vvo-q^ [[?/]] 

425 aXXa 8ia \Tav'\Ta toi a> AioTi/xa 

Col. X. 

o[7rep] yvu8rj einov rrapa o-e [r]K]a> yv[ovs 
o[ti 8i]8a(TKaX(ov \aXX\a ii\oi Xe 
ye Kai tovtcov ttju aiTi[av K]ai T[a)j/ 
aXXcoi' T<ov Trepi Ta [€]pa)T[iKa et toi 
430 vvv €^r] TTto-Teueiy CKeii/ov eiJ'[a]i) 
(f)V(rei TOV epcoTa 6v 7roXXaKi9 (Ofio") 
[X]oy7;cra/xej/ jxr] Oavjxa^e evTavBa 
\y\ap TOV avTOV CKeivco Xo[yo]v r] dvij 207 D 


rr; (pva[i\<i ^i]r(t Kara [S]vraTOu an 

435 ■'■^ (ii'ai KttL aOavaro^ SvvaTai Se 

ravTT] liovov rrj y€i>€cr(t on act 

[K]aTaXei7r€i iTepov ufou avri tov 

TTaXaiou €7rei Kai ev co ev (Kaarov 

Tcov (cocov (rjv KaXeiTai Kai ei} 
440 fai TO avTO OLov (k naiSapiovy 

avro9 XiyeruL ^co? av Trpea-^vTrji 

yivrjraL ovro^ fxevroL ovSenoy 

T€ ravTa e^oji/ er avro) o/icop 0) 

avT09 KaXitrai aXXa v€09 atei yi 
445 yvoiii.vo'i ra 5e airoXXv^ Kai Kara rai 

TpLyca Kai aapKa Ka[i] oara Kai aifxa Kai 207 E 

oj^^jju/zTTai/ TO acofia Kai fjirj oti kutu to 

o-cofia aXXa [/cjai Kara Tr]v y^v-^rjv oi} 

TponoL Ta [T]]6r] So^ai (iriOvniaL rjSoy 
450 i-aL Xvnai (f)0^0L tovtoov ^KaaTa ovSe 

TTore TavTa napecrriv (KaaTCo aXXa 

Ta [j.€v yiyv^Tai Ta S anoXXvTai no 

[X]v 5e TOVTCOl/ aTOTTMTfpOU €Tl OTI Kai 

at eniaTTjfiai p.r] oti ai fx^u yiyvovTai 2o8 A 

455 ai Se anoXXvuTai ij/jlcu Kat ovSeiroy 

T€ 01 avToi (afi€i/ ovSe Ka-a Ta9 €Trt 

crTTjfia^ aXXa Kat fiia ^KaaTij tcov^ 

ini(TT'qiJLO)v TavTOV Traa^ft yap Ka 

XciTai fieXeTav cuy €^iovar]9 ^(ttl ti]^ 
460 (.ni(7Trjp.rj9 Xt]6i] yap eTTtcTTrifirj^ e) 

^oSo9 fieX^TT] 5e rraXiv KaLvrjV ^v 

TTOLovaa avTL ttjs aTTiovarj^ ^.v-rj^rj aco 

^€L T-qv €niaTrjfxr]i/ (ocrTe t->]v af) 

Tr]v SoK^Lv eii'at TOVTOi yap too Tpo 
465 nco TTav TO 6i>r]T0v aa>^iTai ov tm 

iravTairacnv to avrov an ^luaiy 

coamp TO OiLov aXXa t<o to auLov 208 B 



Kai TToKaioviiivou erepou i^eoy eu 

iVKaTaXiTTiiv oLov aVTO r)v Tav^ 
470 TT] T7] fiTj^aur) ft) l!cDKpaTe9 ^(j)r] 
6vr]rov aBavaaia^ iieTe)(eL Kai 
(Tcojxa Kai TaXXa iravTa aQava) 

Col. xi. 

\j6\v 8e a[\Xr] fiJ] ovv Oaujia^e ei] to av 

[tov\ aTro^[\a(rTr]fia (j)V(TeL rrav] reifia 
475 a6[apaaia9 yap X^P'-^ ttupti a]vTT] tj 

(rn[o\y[Srj Kai epooy enerai /cat]yco a) 

[Kov<xa9 Toy Xoyov eOav/xaa-a] re /cat) 

[eiTTOJr e[i€y r]v S eyco 00 o-0(p(OT]aTr] Ato} 

[Ti]ijLa TavTtt ft)? [aXr]6o)S o]utoo9 €)(€i} 
480 [Ka]i 7] coa-TT^p 01 T^\XeoL ao^]ia-Tai. ev laOi 208 C 

[€0]?; ft) ^coKpaTes [enei /c]ai toou avOpoi 

[Tr\oov €1 eOeXeis €[ty ttjv] (ptXoTijiLav 

^Xdy^rai 6avixa[^0Li\ av ttjs aXoyias 

nepL a eya) €ipi]K[a ei] fJ.r] €ui'0€i9 evdv 
485 f^i]6ei? CO? 8iip[o)S 8L]aK€iyTaL epcoTL 

Tov ovofiacrT[oi y€u]eo'daL Kai kX€09 

ei? Tou aiei xpouov aOavaTov Ka 

TaOeaOai Kai vTrep tovtov klp8v 

I'ov? re Kiv8vveveiv eTOi/xoi eLcri 
490 TTavTa<5 eTi iJiaXXo[u tj] virep twv^ 

7raL8oi>v Kai ^/37;/xa[r] avaXicrKeiv 200 D 

Kai TTovovs TTOViiv \o'\vcrTivaaovv 

Kai vTT^paTroOvrjCTKeLv : eirei oi€t) 

av ecpT] AXKr](TTiv vnep A8fxr]T0u 
495 arroOav^iv av rj A^iXXea UaTpo 

kXco (.TvaiToOavHV rj npoairoOa 

v(iv TOV V/xiTepov Ko8pov VTTep 

TTjS ^aXeias tcov iTai8(x)v prj oio} 


fKyov^ aOavaTov fxvrifii]v ape 
500 Tr;y nepi eavTcou eacaOuL rjv vvy} 

rjfid'i e^ofiiu TToWov ye Sd f0'/) 

aXA oifxai vncp aperi)S aOavaTov 

Kai TOiavT7]9 So^T]^ eu/cXcouy) 

TravT(9 iravTa rcoiovcnv oaco ay a 
505 /i€iuov9 coac ToaovTQ) fxaXXoy tov 208 E 

yap a6ayaT[o]u epcocrf ol h^u ovu ev 

KVjxoves €(pr] Kara ra (rcofiara ov 

rey TT/aoy ray yvvaiKa<5 paWov Tp€ 

TTOvrai KaL ravrrj epcoTiKOL ezat) 
510 Sia naiSoyoyia? aOavaaiav Kai 

fJLvrjjxriv KaL evSat/xoytai/ coy ol 

ovTaL avToi^ e/[y to]i/ tTTira xpo^ 

vov TTavra nopi([6\p.(iVOL ol Se} 

Kara ttju yj/v^iju €Lai yap ovv €07/ 209 A 

515 OL €y TaL9 ij/'f^aty kvovctlu ^tl /xaAXo 

7; ei^ roiy (rcc/xacTLy a ^/'"fX^ np[oa]r]KL 

Ktti Kvrja-a T\[^a'^i KaL tckclv tl ovv TTpoa 
r]K€L (ppovrjCTLv t[€ /fa]i rrjv aWrjv 
apiTrjv a)V Si] e[(cri /c]at ol 7roLr]T[aL 
520 7ra[i'T]€y y€yyr)[Tope]9 KaL rcov S[7] 

Col. xii. 

HLOvpyoav oaoL XeyouraL €vp[€T]LK0Ly 
€[L]yaL TToXv Se /i[ey]((rT7; e(f)t] [K]aL KaXy 
XicrTT] TTj^ (ppoy7]aeco9 rj irepL ray r<o 
TToXioiv re kul oLK-qaecov [(5]iaKO(r//7;) 
525 (Tzy 7] 8rj ouofxa iaxLv aaxppocrvyri re 
KttL SiKaioavyrj tovtcov av orav T19 

€K yeov iKKvjKou 7; T11V '^V)(^T]y 6^109 209 B 

coy KaL r]KovaT]9 tt]^ rjXiKLa^ tlktcI 
T€ KUL yeyyay r]Sr] eTTLOv/XTj (rfTU 

S 2 


530 8-q oi/xat KUL ovros Trepucoi' to KaXo 

(p CO av yi.vvr\ai.i^v ^v [rcu y\ap^ aay^pco 
ovSeTTore yevvr^an ra T[e] ovv (Toojia 
ra ra KaXa /xaXXou t] T[a] ai(r)([p]a aana 
^(Tai are kvoov Kat au ei^rv^rj A^f 
535 X^ kuXt] Kai yeyyaia [/cat] ^v^vei ira 
vv Brj aaTTa(iTa\L\ to ^vvavipOT^po 

Kai 7rpo[?] TOVTOV TOV avOpOOTTOV (V 

6 us ev7r[op]€[L Xo]y[a>u] nepi apeTrjs Kai 

TrepL oi[oi/ XP''l] ^'■^(^'- T<^^ auSpa tov 209 C 

540 ayaBov Kai [a ^TTLT^qS^veiv Kai em} 

X^'-P^'- 7raiS€v[€ip] a77"royue[r/]o9 yap} 

oifiai TOV KaXov Kai o/xeiAcoj/ a[vTco 

a waXai €KV€i T[i]KTei Kai y(.vv\a Kai 

7ra)o[[ot'Tl]a)j' Kai aircoi^ fX€/xi'rjiJ.€v[os 
545 Kai TO yevvrjOiv avueKTpecpei Koi 

vq /j.€T €K€iuov ocKTTe TToXv yizet^co) 

Koivoiviav T7J9 Tcov TTaiScou Trpoy 

aXXrjXovs 01 ToiovTOL I'axovai /cat) 

(^iXiav ^e^aioTepav aT€ /caAAe^o) 
550 pcop Kai aBavaT(iiTep(i)v 7ra[f(5]a»t' 

KiK0lUQ)V7]K0T€9 Kai TTas dv S^^ai 

TO eavTCo toiovtovs TratSas /xaXXo 

yeyouej/ai t) tovs avOpodTnvovs Kai 209 D 

eiS" Oixrjpov avrolSXe-yj/as Kai ei? HaioSo 
555 Kai TOVS aXXovs noirjTas Tovs ay ay 

60VS (rjXoov oia (.yyova \i\avT(jiv Ka 

TaXenrovaiu a eK€fi'Oi[s] aBavaTO 

kX(.os Kai [ivriyLTqv 7ra[|o]e^eTai av 

Ta TOiavTa ouTa' ei Se ^ovXei e^rj 
560 oiovs AvKovpyos naiSas KUTeXine 
TO ev AaK^Sainol^y acoTrjpas ttjs 

AaKeSaipouos Kai coy ctto? €nr[d 

TT]S EXXaSos Ti/j-ios 5e 7ra[p] rjjjiiy [Kai 


Xo\(av Sia 7TjV Tcoi' ro/zcoj' yef) 
565 vqaLv Kai aWoL aWoOi 7roWa)(^ov 209 E 

ai^Spi9 Kat EXXijai Kac d' [I3]ap^apci9 
TToXXa KOL aXXa a7ro(p[r]i']afX(i'Oiy 

Col. xiii. 

e/jya Kai yavrjaavT^s iravTOLav a) 

perrji' cor Kat I'epa vroXXa ?/5j; yeyoj'e) 
570 Sia Tov? roiovTov9 naiSa^ iia Se rovi 

auapcoTTivovs ovS^i'os nco' ravra pi 

ovv ra epcoTLKa i'crco? co ^coKpar^s Kav^ 

(TV /xv7]6eii]^ ra Se reXea Kai enoTrriKa 210A 

coi/ ei'GKa KUL ravTa ^anv (au T19 op} 
57.5 ^^^ perirj ovk ciS ei 0109 r av uris' dpji 

//ef ovv ((prji/ eyco Kai -npoBvpias ov 

Siu anoXei-^co rreipoo Se Kai av eneadai 

eaV 0109 re 7/y : Sei yap 60?; rov opOcos 

i[o]yTa €TTi rovTO TO Trpayfxa ap\€(T6a[i\ 
580 pev I'eof ovra levai em ra KaXa crco) 

para' Kai irpcorov pei' (.av opOco^ ??) 

y-qrai i]ycvp€vo9 evo? avrov acopa 

roy (par Kai (vravda yevvav Xoyov9 

KaAoi'? (TTdra Se avrov Karovot]} 
585 aai on ro KaXXo? ro em orcoovv acopdi 2iO R 

ri ro) (TTi erepco acopari a8(X(f)ov eart 

Kai €1 Set Si(OK(iv ro err eiSd KaXovy 

noXXi] avoia p.rj ou^ (v re Kai ravrov 

■qyeicrOai ro e7r[i] Traai rois crcofiacri Ka\ 
590 Xoy rovTo S evvorjcravra Karaari] 

vai navrcov rcov KaXcov acoparm 

fpacrrrjv €vo9 Se ro ac^oSpa rovro \a 

Xacrai Karacppovqaavra Kai crpiKpo 

riy-qaapevov pera Se ravra ro ev 

595 rai9 ■^v^ai? >caAAo? ripicorepov 7;) 


yrjo-acrOai rov ev too acojiaTL coore kul 

eau €7rieLKJ]S (ou Trjv ■\\fV')(j]v tls Kat 

€dv (TULKpov auOo? e)(7] ^^apKeii'} 2io C 

aiTCoITi']] Kai (pav Kai KrjSeaOat Kai tl 

600 Kreiv Xoyov? toiovtov? Kai ^r]TeLv 

oLTives TTOL-qa-ova-L ^€Xt€LOVS Tov^y 

i'eov9 iva avayKaOrj av OeacracrOaL 

TO (.V TOLS €niTr]Sevp.aaL Kai roiy) 


605 nav avTO avTco ^vyyeves ((rnuy 

iva TO 7r[€p]i to acofxa KaXov crpiKpov 

TL r]yri(Trj\T\ai ^i\yd\L /xeTa Se to. ^-ni) 

TTjSevfxaTa em Ta9 eiriaTijpa^y 

ayayeif iva etSt] av eTnaTrjpS>vy 
610 KaXAoy Kai pX€Tr[co]u 7r/3oy [ttJoXu 7;5r;) 210 D 

TO KaXov fJ.r)K€TL TO Trap ivi coairep 

oLKeTTjs ayairoov TraiSapiov KaXXo^ 

[77] avBpCidlTOV TLVO9 7] €7riT)]SeVfia 

[rojy [rr]]€i^oy SovXevcov (f>avXo9 r] Kat 
615 [(jixC\KpoXoyos aXX em to [noX]u neXay 

Col. xiv, 

yo9 T[eTpa]fip[ei'0S tov KaXov] Ka[i] de(op[(b 
7roX[Xov9 K]ai Ka[Xov^ Xoyov^ K]ai peyaXoy 
7rpe[rr€L? Ti]K[Tei Kai Siauor]]piaTa ev (f>iXo 
<xo(p[La acjiBovoo ecu? av evT^avOa poixrOeis 
620 Kai av^j]6[ei9 KaTiSr] Tiv]a eTn(TTrip.r]v 
fiiav [ToiavTTjv rj ecxT^iv KaXov TOLOvSe 

Treipoo 8e p[oL e(pr] tov] vow npoaexeiv 210 E 

eoy oiov re p[aX!.aT]a oy yap av pe-^pi ev 

TOuOa 7rpo[s] Ta epoiT\iK\a naiSaycoy-qy 
625 6rj [Oe]co/xev[o?] e0e[^7;y] re Kai op6(09y 
Ta KaXa npo? TeXos dI^v] '-^^ '''^^ ^P^ 


TiK[ai]i' e^aicpi'T]^ Karc[ylre]Tai. ri Oav) 
fiacTTOV Tr]v (pvaiv Ka\\ov TOVT]p e) 
KiLvo o) 2'a)/fpa[rey] ov [8rj iViKev] ko.l 
630 OL (firrpoadd' TravT([^ ttovol Tja-a.]^^ 

TvpooTov fx^f a€i ov K\ai ovre yiyuo 211 A 

fiivov ovTe aiToX\v[n(i'OV ovt€ av 

^ai'ofid'ou ovTi (f,[divov eireiTa cv 

Ti] /zej/ Ko[X]oi/ rrj [S aia\pov ovS( to 

635 re fxeu ToSe Se ov rrp 0? fi^' to koKov 

irpo^ Se TO alcrxpou ouS [ev]da [fiei/ /c]a 

Xou evdaSe Se aia\pov w? TLdi (jl^u b 

KaXov Tiaiu 5e ai<j[)(pou] ov8 av 0a[i/ra 

crO-qaTaL avTco to Ka}^ov oiov 7r[po 

640 a(OTT0v TL ovSe X€ipe9 ovSe a\X[o\ oy 

Se ev 0-cofj.a fx^Tiy^eL ovSe T19 Xoyo[y 

ovSe T19 ^maTTJijLr] ovSe n[ov ov €v e 

repn^oi;]] TivL oiov [^v] ^aco j; €V yt] r) (.v 

Gvpavco 77 ev tco [oXAoj] a[XX avTO Ka 21 i B 

645 B avTO fX€T avTou /Jiovo[eiS€S aei ov 
Ta Se aXXa iravTa KaXa eK[eLvov fi€ 

TeyOVTa TpOTTOV Tiva T010V\T0V OL 

ov ytyvofxevcov re Tcov aXXcoi/ [Kac 

anoXXv/xevcov iirjSev eKetvo [fxr] 
650 re nXiov p.r]T€. eXaTTOv yiyr[ea 

6ai fn]Se iraayeiv /xrjSev OTav [Sr; 

Ti? ano TccvSe 8ia to opO(09 7ra[iS€ 

paaT€iv enavicov CKeivo t[o] K[aXov 

ap-vrjTUL KaOopav <T)(^€S[ov av ti a 
655 TTTOLTO Tov TfXoi/y TOVTO [ya]p 6[r] e 

art TO opOoi? em Ta €p(OTiK[a tevai 21 I C 

77 vTT aXXov ayeadai apy(Ofi[e.vov a 
no TCOvSe tcov KaXcov €K[eivov eve 
Ka TOV KaXov aiL e7rav'iev[ai coanep 


660 €7rai'af3a(TfiOis )(p(ofiiu[ov ano e 

V09 e/ri Svo Kai ano 8voL\y cm nav 
ra Ta KaXa crco/xaTa Kai [ano tcou 

Col. XV. 

[^a]A[a)]i' (Toofxarcau em Ta KaXa cmrrj 

Sev/iara Kai airo rcov enLTrjSevfia 
665 Tco[u] em ra KaXa fiaOijfiara Kai ay 

TTO \f]a)v fxaOr]fj.aTO>u em eKeivo to 

/xa[^]?7//[a] Te.XevTr](T[q\ eaTiv ovk a\ 

Xov [t] a]uTOV €K[eLyov] Tov KaXov fxa") 

Or]fi[a K]ai yuco avTOi TeXevTCOv^w^ 
670 ecTTLv KaXou ev\T\av6a tov ^lov o)) 211 D 

0iXe HcoKpaTe? ecprj rj MavTiyiKt]} 

^evrj eiirep irov aXXoOi ^lcotov av 

6p\(o\TTa> Oeoo/xei^co avTO to KaXov e) 

av TTOTe I'St]^ ov KaTa )(pvcrov t[€]) 
675 KaL [e(r6]T]Ta Kai tovs KaXovs 7raiSa[9 

re [Ka]L veaviaKovs Bo^ei aoi eivai 

0V9 vvv opoiv eKirenXri^ai Kai eTOL 

fj.o[i €1 K]a[i] av K[a]L aXXoi noX[X]oi opcovTes 

Ta [TraL\8[i\Ka Kai iyY[o\v[Te\s aei a[v]ro\.9 
680 ei TTOiS oiov re t^v fxrjTe e(T[6]ieiy /ir]T€ 

[myeiv aXXa jxovov OeacracrOaL Kaiy 

[^]yu€Lyai Ti SrjTa €(p7] oiofxeda [ei t]o 

yevoLT[o] avTO to KaXo[v iSeiv eiXiKpi 2 1 1 E 

re? KaOapov ap-iKTOv a\XXa firj at/a 
685 TrXeco a-apKCOu re avOpooirliucov Kai 

[)(^pco[fji\aT(ov Kai aXXrj9 7roX[Xr]9 0Xf 

apia[9 6yr]Tr]S aXX avTO t[o Oeiov Ka 

\X'\ov 8vvaiT0 povoeiSes [KariSeiv a 

[p] oiei e(f)r) ^avXov (Siov yiy[i/]e(r$[ai eKU 212 A 

690 [ere ^^XeiTOVTOs avOpoiirov Kai eK\eivo o) 


[5ei ^eco]/iet'Of Kai. ^v\i'o\vto^ a\yTco rj 

[oVK €i>dv]jJ.eL €(f)r] o[ti (]yTav6a [avT<o 

[fjLoi'a)(ov y]€i^T]<x[€Tai olpcofTi 0) o[paTOu 

[to KaXov riKTdu ovk €i8oi\\a ap€T[rj^ 
695 [aT€ OVK €iS(o\ov e(paTrTOfm'](o a\\ a) 

[\T]dr] aT€ Tov] a\T]6ov[? e0a]7rro;zej/[a) 

[aXX aXrjOri a]re to[v aX]r}6ov9 ^(f)aiTT[o 

[ll€VOi TiK0]vTL Sc apeTTju aXj]6[jj kul 

[6p€'^a.]fi€i'<o vnap^d 6G0(f)iX(L ye[re(r 
700 \^6]'xi [K]ai einep tco aXXco ai>6poin(D\y a 

[Oa^vaTco [K^aK^Lvo)- ravra Srj ^at[8pe 212 B 

[r]e /c[a]i [01] aXXoi ecpT] jx^v Aioripa ttc) 

7rffo-[/zai] 8 eyco 7re7reiap.(vo? 8^ 7r€ip\(o 

p[a]i Kai T0V9 aXXovs Trcideiu on tov 
705 [t]ov tov KTrjfxa[To^ ttj] ai'6[p]od7r€ia 

OVK [a]u TLS pa8i(09 Xa(3oi 810 Stj eyco 
ye <P^fxc ^pr]vai 7r[a]rr' auSpa toi'^ 
[€]pa>Ta Tip-av Kai avTo? rifio) Ta 
710 [e^pcoTLKa \K]at 8ia(f)ipovT(£><i aaKoo^ 

Col. xvi. 

Kai [toi9 aXX]oi9 napaK^Xevofiai Kai^ 
vvv re K[aL ajiei eyKcofiia^co tov epco) 
Ta Tt]i' 6[f]//a/i/j^ Kai avSpeiar tov 

€pa)TO? K[ad OCTOV] 0109 T (Ifll TOVTOU 

715 ovv TOV [Xoyov CO ^ai8]p€ €i fiev n pk 212C 

(3ovX€i co[? e]y/Cft)yu[io]i^ et? (pcoTa ro) 
picrov e/pT/o-^a[i] h 8e. oti Kai oni] \ai 
peis ovopa^oov tovto o[v]ofj.a^€ : €i 
-8- TTOUTO^ 8e TavTa tov ScoKpaT0v9 
'20 ' Tovs peu enaweii' tov 8e ApiaTo 
(pavrj €7ri^e£p[e]it' Xcydv Ti oti e) 


fxvqaOrj avrov Xeycou o ^a>KpaTr]9 

nepi Tov Xoyov kul ^^ai^vr]<i r-qv^ 

avXeiov Ovpav Kpovojxeurju noXu 
725 y\ro(pov Trapaayeiv co? KoafxaaTco 

Kat avXrjrpiSos (pcourju aKOveiu 

TOV ovv Aya\6]iX)va waiSe? ^arai) 

ov K^yjrecrOe Kat av fiev tls tcov e) 212 D 

TTiTTjSeLcov rj KaX[e]LT€ €L Se fir] Ae 
730 yeT€ oTi ov TT€ivopiv aXXa Travo') 

[[iiOa r]]Sr] kul ov ttoXv vcrTepov AX 

Ki\fiLa8]ov Tr]v (poiurjv aKOveLv €V 

[tt] av]Xr) (r(f)oSpa jj.e[6]vouT09 Kai^ 

\_fi€ya\ ^ocouTO? epcorcovro^ ottov^ 
735 Ay\a6'\(x)v Kat KeXiVOVT\o'\i ayeti/) 


irapa AyaOwva' ay^L ovv avjou na 

pa (T(pas {T^rjv re avXy]TptSa vtto^ 
Xa^ovcrav Kai aXXov? TLvas rcov 
aKoXov[6]coi' [K]aL ^Tnar-qvai einy 
740 T[a]? 6vpa9 €aT€(f)ava)fievov avro 212 E 

Kn\To'\v re vt arecpavcojievou av 
\tov kl\ttov re tivl ar^cpavcoy 

[fX.ep]ov Sacri Kai ia>y Kat raivia^ 
\^yovT\a em rrj^ K€(f)aXrj? Travv") 
745 [7roXX]ay Kai enreiu- ai'5p[e]? X^'-P^ 
[re ix€]6vouTa avSpa TTav\y'\ acpoSpa 
[(5e]|eo-^[[a]]€ ^vpLTrorrju r] a7r[£a)]|uer) 
[av]a8T]aai'Te9 fiovov Aya$(oi>a e0 
7T[e]p rjXOojiev eyo) yap roL (^avaL e) 

750 X^^^ l^^^ ^^X ^'\pA "^ ^yevopiqv a<^C) 
K\e<j&\c^i\ vvv Se r]K(0 eiri rrj KecpaXr]^ 
\e'\x(*>v [r]a? raivia^ 'iya ano r[7/]9 e) 
fiT]^ Ke(paXr]9 T[rjv] tov ao(p(OTaT[o]y 
Kai Ka[XX]i<rTCV [K(:](f)aXi][v eav enrco 


755 ovTOia'C ai'aS[i]\croi ap\a KarayeXaae 
aOe fxov coy fXidvouTo9 [eyco Se kuv 
vfjLfis yeXare o/U(i)[y ci^ oiS cti aXr] ^^3 A 

Co!, xvii. 

6t] Aeyft) aWa [fxoL Aeyere avrodeu em 

pi)TOLS (1(71(0 rj firj [criz/iTTiecr^e rj ov irav 
760 ras ovu ai'a6opv^7]cr[ai Kai KeXeueii^ eicr 

iievai Kai K\a'\TaK\f:\Lve(x6aL Kai tov Aya 

6xva Kokuv avTo\y Kai tov uvai ayo 

fievou vTTo Tcou av\6p(i>TT(ov Kat ne 

pLaLpovjxevov afia [ra^ raiuia^ coy 
765 ava8r]crovTa eTmrplocrde roiv o(^Qa\ 

llOiV eyOVTO. ov KaT[L8eLV TOV SoOKpU 

TTj aXXa Ka6i^€a6[aL Trapa rov Aya 

Ooii'a e^' //ecrco Ii(OKpa[rov^ re Kai €K€i 213 B 

vov Trapa)((Dpr](rai. [yap tov ^coKpaTt] 
770 coy iK^LVov KaTi.8€[y napaKads^o 

fxivov Se avTOv a[a7ra('€adai re tou 
Aya6(oua Kai (xv[a8€ii/ mreiv ovv 

TOV AyaBcava i'[7roXfere 7rai8€S AX 
Kil3ia8r]v 'iva €K TpiT[(i)V KaraK^rj 
775 Tai : Travv y eirreiv to[v AXKi^ia8r)v 
aXXa T19 rjfieiv o8e Tpi[T09 ^vfinoTrj^ 

Kai ajia fX€TaaTp€(f)op.evov avT[ov 
opav TOV XooKpaTT] i8ovTa 5e av[a 
Trr]8i]aai Kai nvreiv : co HpaKXeis tov 

780 TL TL i)v X(oKpa[Ti]9 ovTos eXXoyoiv 

av yue evTavda [KaT€Kei(ro coanep €i 213 C 

co^ety €^ai(pvrjs \ava(f)aLvea6ai 

KaT€Keiao (oanep [eico^ety €^ai(pvr]S 

ava(paivecr6aL onov eyco [co/xriv rjKi 
785 crra ere e(T[i](rdai Kai vvv tl riK[(i^ Kai 

Ti av evTavda KaT([KXivr]9 coy ov 


napa [ApiaT]o(f)avei oy[S ei Ti9 aXXo9 
[y]€\oLo[9 ea]Ti [r]e Kai Pov\e\TaL aXka 
T[i] (firj'^avrjaco [o7r]cti9 TTa[pa too kuX 
790 Xkttco t[(cu e]u8o[i' KaraKeiarj Kai 

[tov X(OKpaT]ri A[yaOcoy (^avai opa ei fioi 

€7T[afiVP€LS] coy ([P'Ot TOVTOV €pa>9 TOV 

a.\yBpa>\iT[o\v o\y (f)avXov Trpayfia yeyo 

i/[ej/] aTT eKeifov [y]ap t[ov y^povov a 
795 ov TOVTOV ■npa(r6[r]V ovk^tl e^e 213 D 

(TTL fiOL ovT€ Trpo(T^Xey^[aL ovTe Sia 

Xiy6r]vaL KaXco ov8[€i^L rj ovToai 

^r}XoTV7T[co]u fjie /cat (pldovcor 6av 

jxaaT\a epya^eTai Kai XoiSopeiTai 
800 Tf K[aL TOO X^Lp^ A'j?)''? a[7T€)(^eTaL opa 

ovv fXT] Ti Kai vvv [epyaarjTat aXXa 

SiaXXa^[ov] r)fx[as rj ^av eTnyeiprj 

/3[i]a^ecr^ai iira^fxvve co? eyo) ttjv 

TOVTOV /xav[iai> re Kai (piX^paaTi 

805 av Tvavv o[ppa)Sco aXX ovk ^(ttl 

Col. xviii. 

[(j)avaL\ TOV AXK[i\^i\a8i-]v efxoi Kai aoi 
[SiaXX]ayr]- aXXa tovt[(ov /xef ety avOis 
[ere T€ifxco]pr]aofiaL- vvv Se [fxoc Aya$a>v 213 E 

[(f)avaL] fieTa8o9 tcov Taiv[ia>v iva 
810 [avaSrjaco] Kai ttjv tov[tov TavTrjvl 
[tt]v 6av/j.]aaTr]V Ki[^aXr]v Kai /xt] 
[fioi fi€iJL(prj]TaL [o]ti [ae /xev aveSrjaa 

Col. xxiii. 

[pai l!coK]paTes ^i^X€y[\i] avveyivoy 317 B 

[p-rjv yap (o] avSp^s /zoi'[oy] jxovo) Kai cofirj 
815 [avTiKa <5i]ctXe|[[a]|ecr^a£ [a]vT0v p.01 avrep) 


[av epao-TT;?] TT[a\i\P]iKOL[s eji/ (pi^jiia ScaXe 

[X^C'V 'fot' e]\atpov TOVTcav S-q fxaXa e[)] 

[yiyu€TO ou8iv aXX a)(r]7r[€]/9 ^looda SiaXe 

[xOeis av /xoi kul (ri/j/]_7j[/z]epei;o-a9 (oy^ro^ 
820 \aiTL(Dv fi€Ta ravra a]vvyv/^eaaL 

[npovKaXovfj.T]i'] aVTOv Kai avviyvfiva 2 1 7 C 

[^ofjiTji' coy] TL evTav6[a Tr€]paya)u aui^y 

[€yvfiua^](TO [ovy fjLo]i K[aL] 7rpo[a]eTT[aXa]i[i 

[ttoXXukls ovS(vo9 7r]apo[i/T09 K]ai [tl Sei 
825 [Aeyeii^ of^fV yap fioi irXeoyi/ rjv eJTret) 

\8r} <5e ov]Sap.T] ravT rji'vjlov (]S[o^€ 
[/xoi e7ri^€Teo]j/ eii'at rcu avSpi Kara 
[to KapTfip^ov Kai ovk ai/erfTaTjeor cTrti) 

[(Jr^Tre/J et/je/cei^ei/cr; aXXa ei[[/ce<j/]]o-Teov 
830 [t/^t; tl] €<TTi TO Trpayfxa- irpoKaXov') 
[/xat 6]rj avTov irpo^ t\o a^vvSeLnvu 
[are^j/jo)? coa-nep epaaTrjs 7raiSiK0i9 
[€ni^ovX]evQ)v Kai jxol ovSe roi;ro[[ uTj) 


[raxy V7r]T]Kovar€V' ofiois S ov xpoucoy 217 D 

835 [eneiaOt] €]Tr€iSr] Se a(f)LKeTO to irpcoTo 

[S€nrvr]]cra9 airieuai c^ovXeTO' >cat) 

[tot€ /xejf aia)(vvofX€vo9 aycp-qKa 

[avTov d\v6LS 8 e7r/[/3o]L'Xf[fo-ay €7r«5t 

\8-q €Bi8ii.]iTv[rj\KeL SuXeyofx-qv nop 
840 [/3C0 toiv vv]KTa)v Kai eneiSt] ye e^ov 

[XeTo aiTUv^aL o-K\ri]nTop.ivo<i otl o-yjraL 

[eiT] npoa]T]vayK[a'aa avTOv [ni'iv 
\avenavi\TO ovv [e'j/ 77 iyoii^vq e) 


[p-ov kX^^lvi) eu rj\Trep e5et]7rfet aL ov 
845 [Sei9 €v] Tco oiKr][paTL aXXo9 KaOrju 

[S€v] T] 7/;xeiy p[^XP'- H-^^ ^^'^ ^'/ ^^^ 2 1 7 E 

[po t]ov Xoyov /ca[Xa)? av (^01 KJai npo? ov 


\tiv\ovu Xeyetr \ro S ejrref^ei' ovk a 
[/L/o]y r]KovaaT€ Xi['Yoi']T[o'\9 €l fJLrj wpoo 

850 [toi/ fj.]€v TO Ae[yo]yu[e^']o^' 011^09 g.u[€]u 
re ttulScou kul /J.^T[a] TraiScov rjy 
[a]\r]dr]9' cneiTa \a(f)a\vi(ra 5'<»/cpa) 
[r]oi/s epyov v7r€pT)[(pap]ov ety e7ra[i 
[vo]u iXOovTa aSiK^ov"] }xoi (paLue[TaL 

855 [^7"^] ^^ '"o Tou 57j>([^e]t'70S' VTTO r[ov 

[TToy r\Lva TOVTO iraBovra of[/c e 

Col. xxiv. 

OVK iOeXeiy Xeye/f oio[v rjy TrXrjv T019 Se 
Sriyjiivoi^ coy /zoi'[oiy yrcocro/zeroiy Kai ^uy 218 A 

860 yi^ataofi^uois €i nav [eroA/za ^pai' re /cat 
X^yiLV VTTO Tr)S oBv[vr)S eyco] ovv S[eSi]y 
fX€i^09 re i/Vo aXyivonpov Kai t\o aXyt 
voTarov oav av ri.9 Stj^Oeii]' Tr][v] Kap 

Biav yap t) ■^v)(^t]i/ rj on Sei avro o[i'o]') 
865 jxaaai 7rXr]y€i9 re kul 8r])(^6€i9 V7r[o t]oo 

[e]u (piXoaocpia Xoycov 01 e)(^ouT[ai ^X']) 

[Si']r]9 aypicoTepov viov '^V)(r][9 fi]T] a 

<P[vov]9 orav Xaficovrai Kai 7roioi;[crt Spa 

T€ Kai Xeyei[i' OTi\ovv [icajt opcav av ^a[t 
870 8pov9 \_Ay^a6\cciv\as Ep[v^Lfji\a)(^ovs n[av 2l8 B 

[o-aj/my ApiaToSr}p.o]v9 re kui A[pLcrTo 

(p[ava9 X(OKpaT\rj [5]e avTov ri 8[eL Ae 

yef[r K\aL ocr\oL aA]Aoi' iravT^s yo-l^p k€KOL 

voavrjKare Tr)9 (piXoaoc^ov [r0T]a[t'iay 

875 re Kai ^aK)(^Las' Sio iravres a[Kov 

o-ecr^[e] avuyi^coaeade yap tols r[e Tore 

\TTpay^6€.L(j'[L\ Kat roiy vvi/ XeyofXili'OL? 

[01 S o]iK€Tai Kai ei ris aAAoy ea-r[tj^ /3e 


/?[r;X]oy re kul ayp[oLKos:] Tri/Aay 7r[a]i/[i/ 
880 [iiiyaX^as toc9 coaii^ [e7ri^]eo-^[[a]]e- [eJTrci) 

St) [y]a.[p] ovv o) ai^Spe^ re XL';([roy aJTre 

(t^[t]K(l Kai o\l 7r[a((5]€S' 6^co r^aav \i8o 21 8 C 

[^6 /ioi \privaL ix\ri8[{\v ttoikl\\[(lv 

[irpos avTOv a\X ejXeu^epcoy ^nreii' a 
885 [/xoi €SoK€i Kai €nr]ou Kat Kciurja-a^} 

avT[ov ScoKpare? Ka]devS€is '. ov St] 

T[a T] 8 09 oiaOa ovv a /xo]l S^Soktui) 

Ti fJ.a[\L(rTa ic^r] av €fio]i 8ok€L9 rjv') 

S eyco [€/uo]i; (pa[<JTri9 <x]^[i]o9 y€yov[e]uai 
890 fiopo[9 Kai] /xoL ^a.[Lp]ei okv^lv p-vq^ 

(x6r]i'\aL Trpjoy /ie- eyco 5e ovTooal' [^x]^' 

Tvavv \avo\r}T\o\^v -qyovpat eLvat croc prj 

ov Kat [tov]to x«[p]io-ao"^ai f<oci €i n aX 

Xo T] Tr][s] ovaias T7/[y] e/iT/y Sioio rj to) 
895 \(f)i\Xa>v t[(o\v ^pa)v[-] e/uo[i] jxev yap ov 2l8 D 

S\(.v ecrrt] 7rpe(T^VTep[ou r]ov coy otl} 

[ft]eXTiaT[o]v e/xe yep[ea6ai]- tovto[v 

5e o[t]//a[f fio]i avXXr]n[Topa o]vSi[pa 

KvpiQiTepov e[i]i^aL ao[v eyco Sr) toi 

900 ovTco avSpL TToXv pa[XXou a]u prj 
^apt^op^vo? ata-xlwoLprju] tov9 
(ppoftpov^ T} xc^pi.[(opivo^ TJoyy) 

Col. XXV. 

T€ [TToXAoyy Kat a<p]pova9 Kai [ovro^ a 
[Kova-a? paXa eipa)]viKco^ Kai a(f)[oSp]a 


905 [(av]Tov [t€ Kat €ico6]orco9 eXe^e : co AX 
[Ki]^iaST] Ki[vS]y[u]ivei9 tco ovtl ov^ 
(^avXo? €i[i/ai €]i[7r]ep [a]Xrj6T] Tvyxavci 
oflra] a Xeyeiy nepi epov Kai ri9 ear e 218 E 

V [epoi 8]vvapi^ S T]i av [(j]v ycvoio a 


910 iiHV(i)V a[ixrj\)(avov \t\ol kuXXo? opco 

rjs av t\y €]/uoi KaL tt]^ ixapa <jol tv/xop 

0[i]as 7ra[iJ.]7roXv St[a](p[ep]oi^ ei Srj kuOo 

[poov avTo] K[oii^](ocra(T6at re fioL €7rf) 

[xl'/?f^^ /cai aX[X]a^acr6ai KaXXos olvtl 
915 KaXXovs ovK oXiyco fiov TrX^oveKTeiv 

Siauoei aXX avTi \p]o^rjS aX-qOaav^ 

KaX^o^v KTaaOai iTny^ap^LS Kai too} 

ovTi )(pvaLa ^aX/cacoi/ [SiafxeilSeaOaL 219 A 

yoeis' aXX a> fiaKapu ap-^ivov [ctaco 

920 Trei /z>/ ere XavOavo) [oySjer a>v 77 tol 

rrjs Siavoia^ o-^ls ap^erai o^v /3Ae 

Treii^ oTav rj tcou ofifiaroDv rrj^y 

aKjirjs XrjyHu (7ri)(€ipr] av [<5e] Tov^ 

rcou (Ti [n]oppa)' Kai ^yco uKovaa^ '.} 
925 ra fiev nap €fiov €(f)r]u [Ta]vra e(r[Ti] 

oiu ovS[e]u aXXcoy eiprjrai rj co[s'] 5ia[)] 

v\ooviJL\aL ay [(5e atroy o]i'T[(a] ^ovXev 219 B 

[ov aoL re] otl a.[piaTOV Kai €jx]ol r]ye[L :] 

a\X [e0J7 TOVTO y ev Xeyeiy e]t^ yap rco 
930 €Tnoy[TL y^povoi ^ovXevo/xepoi] npa 

^0fj.€[v av\ ^aLpr)Ta[i voav mpi 

re TOVTCov KaL nepi [rcoj/ aXXcoj^ 

apiaTOu[:] e[y<i)] fiev S[r] ravra aKov 


crajTj'T] re K[ai (i7r](>)y Ka[i] a(pei9 cci[aTr€p 

935 ^fXei TeT[poo]a6aL avTOV a)p\r]v Kai 

apaaTa[? ye] ovS emrpe-^as T\ovTa> 

enreiu ov8[eu eri] an<pi€[a]a[9 to ifia 

Tiou TO €p.a[vTo]v T[ovToy KaL [yap 

rjv )(^eifi(ou v7r[o tov Tpi^(o]va /fa[) 
940 ra/cXi^'eiy ro[i/ tovtovl nypL^aXo} 

TOO x^Lpi. To\yT(i) TO) 8aL\jxovia> coy 219 C 

aXrjQcos Ka\L 6av/j.aaT]a> KaTiK^L^ 


^L^fy 77]}' vvKTa o\-q^v Kai ovSe} 

Tav[T av 0) ^<CKpaTe9 elpei? [o\i [^cjf' 

945 Sofx[at TToirjo-avTO^ 8(. Sfj ravra 
({xov [ovTO^ roaovTOu TreyOieyej^^e 
TO r[e] Af[at KaTe(ppovr)aiv Kai /clare 

Col. xxvi. 
ye\a(T€P t>)9 f/^?;? copas Kai v^pia^v [kul 

nepi eKeifo ye cofi-qu re ^ivai a> af[5/3e?l) 


950 SiKacrrai SiKaaraL yap ere rr]<i l![coKpa 

[tovs] v7repr](paj/[La]9 ; ev y[ap t]o"T[e pa deov^ 

[pa 6eas o]v[Sev] TrepiTT[oTepoy K[aTaSe 

Sa[pO]r]K[(o]s ave[aT7]u pe]Ta l!ooKpa[TOv9] 219 D 

T) ec pera naTp^os KaBriv]8ov t] a8e\(pov 


955 TTpeafBvnpov : [to S^rj pe tovto T[i]fa 
oieaOe pe Siai'[oia]i^ ^X{['-^] VY^^H-^^^ 
pev rjTipaa6[ai a'^yapev\ov 8e'^> r-qv tov 
Tov (fivcnv T\e Kai aod (ppoavvriv Ka[i av 

SpeiaV €UT[€]TV)(T]KOTa ai'Op^CO^TTO)) 

960 TOIOVTCO 01(0 ([y](0 [o^VK av 0)pi]V 77[o]7€) 

evTv^eiv €19 (Ppovr]a[iv K\ai ei\_<i ey 

Kpareiav (i)ar[e o\]^&^ O7rco[9] ovv opy^oi) 
pi]i' €i)(^ov ei KjxL a^TroarepqOeiTjv) 
[tIt;? TOVT[o]y [a-v]i'0V^d^aia9- ovre ott?; 
965 Trpoa-ayayoiprj^yl avrov evnopovv 

[ely yap rjSeiv on y^pqpaai ye ttoXv^ 219 E 

paWov arpcoro? qv navray^Tj ?/ 
aiSrjpco Aias' (o re coprjv avrov po 

vco aXcoaeOai SienecfievyeL pe rjnoy 
970 povv St] KaTa[S]eSovXQ)pevo9 re i) 
no rov avOpcoTTov coy ovSei^ in [ov 



Seyoi aXXov 7r6piJ?[[e]]t"a Tavra re [y]a/3 
fiOL a-rravra npovyeyovH Kai /xe) 


Ta T[a]uTa a-rpaTia rjfieLv [e]i? ITo) 
975 [T]e[i]8aiav eyei^ero Koiurj Kat a{v\v 
eaeiTovfieu e/cer npcoTou fiev ov 
TOis nouoi? ov (iovov ejxov 7re[p]t.[ri] 
[a]\Xa KUL Tcou aXXcou a7rauTco[u 
[oTr6\Tav avayKaaOeLrfpevano^ 

980 [X€l(f)6]€VT€9 TTOV Oa St] eTTl (TTpaTil 

[ay a(Tii\Tiiv ovSey -qaav oi aXXoi tt/jo? 2 20 A 

t[o] K[a]pr€peiu ev r av rais ev(0)(^tai9 


povos aTToXXveiu 0L09 r i]v ra t aX 
Xa Kai TTiviiv ovk eOeXcoi' oirore a) 
985 p[a]yKa(T6eir] naura^ eKparei- Kai 


[0] 77•[a^']ra)^' OvpaaicoTaroy ^coKpa 
[T]r] peOvovTa ovSeis TTOorroTe eco) 
p[a]KeY avBpcoTTOiv tovtov pev ov 
p[o]c SoK€i Kai avTiKa eXeyxop e) 
990 [(rea6]ai irpos 8e av ra<i tov x^ipco 


[i/oy /fa/D]repT?o-[[a]]y 5[e]£ro[t] yap avTO 

[61 )(€ip(ou](? Oavp[a](na eipya^e 

[to Ta T€ aX]Xa [Kai] noTe opto? ^v^^Ta 220 B 

yov oiov S[(iuo]raTOV Kai ivavTOiv 

Col. xxvii. 

995 77 OVK t^lOVTCOV [e^vBoBeV 7] €1 [t]i9 e) 

^loi rip(f)ie(Tpev(t>v O]] r€ OavpaaTo. Sr] 
oaa Kai vrroSeSepei^oiu Kai €p[ei]Xiy 
pevoov T0V9 [noSas ejty 7reiXoi;[y] Kai 
apvaKiSas 0VT09 [e]v t[ovtoi]9 ^^[rjei 
1000 €-^a>i/ CpaTiov p[iv'\ toiovtov [oio\v 



TTep Kai TTpoT(pov eicodei <popf[ii^] av 
i'7ro577[T]oy (5e Bia rov KpvaTa[X]Xov 
pa[o]f €7ropev€TO -q 01 aWoi vnoSe 
S[€fi]ey[o]i 01 Se aTpaTia}Ta[i] t[7re/3]Xe 
1005 n[oi>] av[T]oy cos KaTa<ppouo[v]u[T''a cr) 2 20 C 

(P[q)u] Kai TavTa pev Stj ravra oioi^ 
8 [av] ToS fp^^l^e ['^j"^ ^tXt] Kaprepos 
av[ri]p 6>c[ei TTOjre €m arparias a^iov 
aK[d\vo[ai crvvv6\r](Tas yap avroOi') 

10 to [eco^ef TL e]iO"7[7//c€li o-kottcou Kat em 

Srj cy Trpov[-)(^oopi]L avroo ovk ai'en;) 

a[X/\a] (iaTT][KeL ^]t]T(ou Kai rjSrj rj 

p€a-rip(3pia [Ka\ avOpQuroi rja[6]avo 

TO K[aL\ 6avp\a\(ovTi^ aXXo? aXXco 
10 r 5 eXeyer on X(OKparr]<i 009 e^ ea)^[[e]li 

v[o]v (ppovTL(cov Ti ecTTrjKf : reXev 

7[a>v]T€S S[e riu]€9 Tcou looucoi' e) 

rreiSr] [canepa ?;z/ S€i]TryT]aapTes 

K[aL ylap 6€po[9 tot\ ye [r]v ^]afj.€vpiay 220 D 

1020 e^ieVey/ca/ie[i/oi] a/xa pev €i^ rco "^v^^^ei 

H[a6ri'^vSou a[pa S ej^uXarroi/ avrouy 

[ei KaL Tr]v rf/cra] iartj^oL S^ eiarrj 

Kei [p^XP'- ^^^ eyei'lero Kat 7;X£o[?j are) 

o-)(ej' ([ireiTa co^erjo amcov 7rpo(rev^a 
1025 p[€v]os [too TjXcco d] 6[e] ^ovXeade Kai e/') 

rajy yua[xaty roi/rlo yap 5?; SiKaiov ye 

ai^TO) [a7ro(5ofj/ja£ ore y^a'p 7; pa^i] rj 

e^ ^y e/zoi [Kai rla ap[i](rr[ei]a eSoaau 01 

(TTpaTrfyoi oi/^lety [a]XXo9 e/ze eo-coo-ci/ 
1030 a\y6]p(x>TT(jov [rj ovTOs] TeTpoop^vov^ 220 K 

[ovk i&\iX<i)v a[-noXnTii\v aXXa avi'Sie 

a[coa€ Kai] Ta onXa [Kai aflroi' e//e Kai eyo) 

/i[ej/] 0) HcoKpar^? Kai rolre e^eXefoi') 

o"o[( 5]t5or'at ra apta[r€ia] tov9 a-TpaTrj^ 

T 2 


1035 y[ouy] Kai tovto ye /i[oi] ovre /ie[[i']]\/Aei ovre e) 

p[€is] OTL ^jfcvSiofiaL] a[XX]a yap rcoj/ arpa) 

[Tr]y(jciv] 7rp[oy ro 6/ioli/ a^[£]a)//a ano^Xe 

\7T0VT(i)v] K[aL ^ ovX]o fxev (£)V epoi SlSo") 

[yai Ta apiaTeia] ayTo[9] npoOv/xoTepo^ 
1040 [cyeyov rcov aTpa]Triy<ov e//e Xa^eivy 

[t] aavTOV €TL ToC\vvv 0) a[i'5]p[e]9 a[^]fo 

Col. xxviii. 

[■qv 6ea<T\aa6aL ^(oKparrjv ore. arro ArjXiou 

[(f)vyr] d\veya>pii ro aTparoinSou- €tv)(^o 321 A 

y[ap 7rap]ay€uofiei'o? 'Cirirov exl®*'] of^^^ 

1045 5[e OTrXa\ avex<opei ovv e<r>c[€5aa-/ie]_i^[a)]j' 
r)[8r{\ TOiv audpconcou ovtos re a/xa K[ai 
[A]a^T]^ Kat eyo) 7r€pLTvy)^avoo[- K]ai I'Sco 
evOus irapaKeX^vofxai re avTOLv 6ap 


piv Kai eXeyov oTi ovk aTToXei-yj/co avTco 

1050 €[uT]av6a 8r) Kai KoXX^iov eOeaaaiiJ) 

[X](OKpaTr] tj [eu] noT[ei]Saia- avT09 yap) 

r}TTOv ey (p[o^](o t} B[L\a to €(p nrnov ewai 

7rpci)[To]u fi€v o[a-ov] nepirjv Aa)(^rjT09 too 221 B 

€P(f)p[(o]i> uvai €7T€LTa €/j.[oi]y€ eSoKei 0) A 

1055 pi(TT0(pau€9 TO a[o]u 8r] TOVTO Kai e/fei)[a6\iL coanep Kai ei'6a8e /3pej/ 

Ovojxevo^ re Kai [t^*) 0(f)aX/xa) [7ra]pa^aX 

Xccv Tjpefia Trap[a\(XKOTT(ov K[ai\ rovs (pi 

X0V9 Kai T0V9 TToX^fXlOVS 8r)\X'\o^ (ov) 

1060 nauTL Kai iravv Troppa>6[€]u oti ei Ti? 
a\lraLTo t[ovtov to]u av8pos paXa) 
eppa)//er[<i)y a'\fxvveiTaL' 810 Kai aac^a 
Ac«j[y aJTTTyei Kai avT09 Kai CTepos or^e) 
8o[y] yap n tcov [oji/ro)? 8iaKeifxei'a> 

1065 ef TO) TToXcpco ovSe aiTTovTai a\XX\a 


[rojuy TrpoTpoiTa8rjv (p€vyouTa[9 Sl 221 C 

(OKOvcrw noXXa /xei' ovu a[p] T19 Ka[i 


aA[Xla €)(oi SooKpaTr]i' €nau/€<TaL kul} 
davfiacria Q[\Xa ro^v aXlXcou [(]TnTT]S€v 

1070 fiaTcov Tax ^^ ^L'^] '^°['] ^^/^' a[X]Xov Toiy 
avra enror to Si Si] fir]S€u[i a]v6p<ou 
ofioiov iLv[aL\ fjiT]Te TCo[v] 7raX[ai]coif /xtj 
re Tcof [vvv ov^toov [tovto a^i}pv irav 
TO? 6avn[aTo]9 ocas yap [A)(^iX]X€V9 ey^ue 

T075 TO a7reiK[acru](i/ av T\is Acai] 'BpacnSa\v\ 

Kai aXXov9 K[aL ojioy a^v /Tept/fX]?;? Kai JVe) 
(TTopa Kai AvTr]v[o]pa- eiat 5e [K]ai €T€[p]oi Kai tovi 

aXXovs KTa TttVTa av t\ls\ Kai tovs aXXov[s a]) 221 D 

TT^iKa^oi oios S[( o]vToa-L yfyoveu T[ri]u 
1080 aroTTLav av6pcono9 Kai. avros kul ot X[o] 
yoL avTov ovS eyyur au ^vpoi rty (r]Ta>v 


/XT] apa OLS eyo) [Xeyjoo aneiKa^oi Tis av 
Tov av$p(on[cov /xev] p.r]Sivi T019 [^je) 
1085 (T€iXt]v[oi9] Ka[i (raTvp]oi[s!] avTov ^a[(]) 

T0V9 Xoyo[uy Kai yap ovv K]ai tovt[o ejf) 
TOL? [rrpcoToi? irapiXLiTov o]ti Ka[i\ 01 Xo 

Col. xxix. 

yoL avTov of/.o[i\oTaToi eiai tol[s (Te]iXt]voL9 

TOis Sioiyon[€voi9] €L yap id€X[oL rt]y tq) 221 E 

1090 S[ci>K]paT0V9 aK0v[€L]v Xoycov (p[av€ii]y [a]y 
7r[a]vv y(Xoio[t] t[o] 'n[p](OTOv ToiavTa Ka[i 
ovo/xara Ka[L] p-qfxaTa e^codev Trepi} 


afj.]^(P^€X0VTai aaTvpov TLva v^piarov 
So[pa]v ovov? yap KavOrjXLvov? Xeya 

1095 KttL [x]aX/feay Tivas Kai. aKVTOTOfj.ovs 

Kai Pvp(ToS[(\lr]as Kai an Sia tcov avToi) 


TavTa ^aiverai Xeyeiv ooan aneipo^ 


KUL avorjTOS audpco7ro]ly'T\ ira? av tcov^ 322 A 

\oy[(t)\v KaTayi\X\aa€L^v SiOLyofXivov? 

1 1 00 Se I'Scou av tls kul et'[ro]y avToav yiyvo 
fX(vos TTpcoTov fj-ev v[ovv] eyovTa^ ei/) 
80V fiovovs evprjcrei tcou Xoycov enei 
Ta 6€ioTaTov9 Kat TrXeio-ra [a]yaA/ia 
ra apeTr]9 iv avTOLS i^ovras Kai €) 

1105 TTL 7r\iL(TT0V TLVOVXa^ fXaWov S ilTL 

Trav o<Tov Trpoa-qK^ei <T\KorreLv roa /xeA 
\ovri KaXco KayaOco iaeaOai- ravra 

TavTa €(TTiu CO avSpes a €yco ^coKpa 
TT] iTraLvo) KaL av a p.€/x( crvp. 


mo pei^as r]/j.€L[v] 'httw a pe v^pta^v^ 

Kai p€VTOi ovK e/ze povov TavT[aY) 22 2 B 

7r67r[o]i77K€v aAXa Kai XappiS-qv t\o 
T\avK[oi)\vo'5 KaL EvO[v]Sr]pou rov \Al\ 

OKXeovs KaL aXXovs noXXovs' ov? ov 
H15 t[o]s e^aTrarooy co^ epaaTrjS naiSiKa 
paXXov avTos KaOiaraTaL avr ^pa") 


aTov a St) KaL aoL Aeyco AyaOcou pr] ey 


^anaTaaOai vtto t[ovto]v aXX ^v^tto tod 

rjpcTepmu Tra6r][p.aT(o]v yvovTa^ 
1 1 20 (vXa(3r)67]vaL KaL p[r) Ka]Ta rrju nay 

poipiav axTirep yr][7rio]i/ rraOovTay 
vL [y]yaivaL' eLTrouTos 8r] ravra rov 2.22 C 

<Tv AXKi/StaSov y^Xcora yevecrOai [eJTTi 

TT] TTaprjcria avrov on eSoKei t[l] e 
1 1 25 pcoTLKcos ex^'*^ ^°^ ScoKpaTOV^y 
TOP ovv XooKpaTif^.] vqcpnv poi 

a ax, 

SoKei? [[e]]0v 0) AXKi^iaSrj [o]v yap 

843. PLATO, SYMPOSli'M 279 

7r€pi^a\Xofi(y[o'^S a(f)ai'LcraL €[»/]€ 
1 1 30 ij(el^pei9 ovviKa Tayra TTa\y\Ta 

[(iip]riKas' K[a]L cos ^eji/ [7rap]€py(o ^//[[At]]) 
[Xeyltui/ eTTi TeX[e]vT[T]9 a]vTO e^r;/cay) 

Col. XXX. 

0)9 ou nai'Ta tovtov ^v^Ka eipi^Kco?} 

Tov €/ze /cat [A^ya^cofa Sta^aXXdu 01 -22 D 

1135 [o/zleroy Bnv e/xe //[e^ o-^^oi/ e/aat' Kai /^r/) 

[5^eroy aXXou [i41ya^a)i/a (5e j^tto croi/ epaadai 

Kai firjS V(f> [eVop aXXou aXX ovk eXa^e?) 

aXXa 70 aaTvpiKov aov Spa/ia tovto 

K[ai< creiXrjviKOv KaraSijXou eyere 
1 140 TO- aXX (t) 0iXe AyaOcou jxrjSiv nXeoi/ 

avTO) yeurjraL aXXa napaaKCva^ov 

oncos efie kul ere ixr]8eLS SLa(3aX€L rov 

[o^vv AyaOcova enriiv Kai p.r]v co 5*0)) 

Kpar€9 KivSvfevd? aXrjOrj Xiy\e\LV 222 E 

1 145 TiKfxaipofiat Se Kai cos KaTiKXivr) 

ev pLio-co ipov re Kai aov iva \(£>pis^ 

■qpas SiaXa^T]' ovSev ovv nXeov) 

avTQ) earai aXX tyco nap ^XB^e^u Kara 
KXiuTjcro/jia'yi] : nauu ye (pai^ai top 

1150 HcoKparr] S^vpo vnoKarco epov Ka} 
TaKX^Lvov. CO Zev (nr€Li> tov AXkl 

^laSrju oia av -nacryco vtto tov ai'Opco 
TTov ouTat pov Seiu iravTayj] nfpi 

aXXo € 

levar aXX ec pi] tl co Oavpaai ev [T/^e]] 

1155 //e[cra) rfpcov ea AyaQo^va /cara^cet) 

\(jBai\ aXX aSvvaTov (pauai tov^ 

ScoKpaTT] av p[(]i^ yocp e/ie (nrji'eaas 

Set (5e e/xe av tov em Se^i eiravel 


iav ovv VTTO croi KaraKXiOi] AyaOo) 

1 1 60 ov SrjTTOv efj.€ TTaXiv eiravea^Ta Trpi 
VTT (fxov fj.aX[\]ov €7TaLV(.6r]vaL') 
aXX eaaov co (5[a(]^orte /cat [i-q cpOovrj 223 A 

crr}s TO) /xeLpa[K]i<o vtt e/iov errav^Orj 
vai Kai yap iravv CTnOv/xco avrov^ 
1 165 eyKcof^iacrai I'ov I'ov ^avai tov Aya) 
Ocoua AXKi^iaSr) ovk ecrO ottco? ai^) 

eudaSe fieivaLjXL aXXa Trat-rocrlTal] fxaX 
Xop ix€Tavaarr][a]ofMaL iva vtto Sco 
Kparov? (TraLveOoo : ravra e/ceti^a) 

1 1 70 cpauai TOV AXKL^iaBrjv Ta €i(cOoTa 

^(oKpuTOvs napovTos tcov /caXcor) 

/ieTaXa[/3]e[tf] aSvvaTov aAA[ci)] Kai vv 

CO? (VTTopco /c[ai] TTiBavov X\o'\y[ov r]\yp\(iv\ 

co(TT€ Trap av[T]co tovtovl /ca[ra/ce]io-^at 
1 1 75 TOV jxcv ov[v] AyaQoiva coy /caT[a];ce£ 223 B 

[(To]iievov 7r[ap\a Ta> 5'co/cpar[ei] ay[l'](7Ta) 

[(r6]ai e^ai(f)VT]i Se KCOfxaaTa? rjKeiv 

Col. xxxi. Plate VI. 

TTafjLTToXXovs em Tas Ovpas Kai em 

TvyovTa^ av^a^icayiievaLS e^Lov^ 

1 1 80 Toy Tifoy eicrco avTiKpus TTopeveBai 

TTa[pa (r]0ay Kai KaTaKXeivecrdai Kai 

Oopv^ov /lea-Ta iravTa eivai Kai oy 

KeTi ev Koafxco ovSevi avayKa^e 

crOai neiveiv Tvap-TToXw oivov tov 

1 185 nev ovv Epv^ifiayov Kai tov ^ai} 

8pov Kai T0V9 aXXovs Tivas e(pr] 0) 

ApKrToSrjfxo^ oi^eaOai amovTa^ e) 

avTOv Se vTTvov Xa^eiv Kai /cara) 223 C 


■n V 

11 go vvKToav ouaoou (^eypcadaL S( irpo^ 

7]pepau rjSr] aXeKTpvioycou atSov 

TOiv i^iypoiJL(.vo[s] 5[e] I8iiv tovs) 

fiei^ aXXovs Kadv[8]oyTa9 kul ol'^o) 

fMiuov9 Ayadcova Se Kai HccKpari] 
1 195 Kai ApLcrTO(j)avq iTi /xoi^ov? ^yprjyo 

pivai Kai TTLviii' ey /x€ya\i]9 0iXa) 

\t]9 evL Se^ia tou ovv ScoKpaTt] 

avToi? ScaXeyiO-dai Kai ra p.iv aX 

Xa Apia-ToSi-j/jLo? ovk ecpi] fx^pivr] 223 D 

i:iuo (jQai T(ov Xoycop ovt€ yap e^ apxri^y 

iTapayivi(T6ai virovvaTa^^LV t€ 


TO [i^v Kf:(f)aXaiov e0r; -rrpoaavay 
Ka^iiv Tov ^coKpaTTj o/xoXoyeiu 
avTOvs TOV avTOv avSpos fti/ai) 
1205 KcopcoSLau Kai rpaycoSiav e-niara 

(xdai TTOuiv Kai tov re^vr] Tpayo)} 

SoTTOLOP OVTa K(i)\X(i)boTTOlOV ilVai 

TavTa 8r] av ay Ka(oiX(:VOVS avToy[s\ 
Kai ov (T(poSpa e7rofX€POV9 vvaTa^n 


12 10 Kai npoTepou p.iv KaTa^O^apBeiu to 

^/Oio-ro0ai'[[oL'9]] r)8r] Se J]fi€pa9 yt) 
yvop.(.vr]S TOV AyaOaiva tov ovv 
^coKpaTT] KaTaKoi/xiaavTa eKCi} 


vov? aTTKvai Kai oxnrep €i(o$€i (ne 

1 2 15 (xOai Kai iXQovTa ety AvKiov atro') 

v\iWrapevov (oanep aXXoTe T-qv^ 

aXX-qv rj^epav S[i]aTpi^eiv Kai) 

K[a]i ovTCo 8iaT[p]€i[\lr]avTa ei? eane 

J. pav oiKOi a\yaTTav€crO]ai : 




Col. xxxii. Plate VI. 

1 2 20 n\aTcopo9 
HvfiTToa-iov ; 


Unidentified Fragments. 





• • 



. pw 


, m L 




• • 

• • • • 


• • 


(e) if) (g) {h) 


J • ^ 



] . va 

°?"[[" • 



- • • • L 


• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

« • • 





J • • 

• • • 

• • * 

• • 


J • • L 




. aia 

]o . \ 

• • vat ••• •• 

(W) («) (^) (/) 

]l : k[ ]a>K[ ]kX[ ]aK<o[ 

• • • • • • • 

(^) (r) (s) (ty (u) 

M M H ]«•[ ]f 

• t • • • • J*' 



48. naprjv : 1. nap']. 

54. fpcoTd has been corrected (by the first hand?) from f/jwroj-. 

59. aXXo Ti: soBTW, Burn(el); the corrector's reading aWo n 7 is found in Vcn. 184, 
Vind. 21. The letter at the end of the Hne has been so eflectually deleted that its identity 
is doubtful ; the repetition of the article would be a natural blunder. 

62. -Tov was omitted owing to o/ioioWXti/Tof. 

66. The final s of Xtytn has entirely disappeared, although the surface of the papyrus 
does not show signs of damage. 

69. CO '2u)KpaT(s Kivdvvfvu) : Kiv!i. 2i 2a)»c. I\1SS. 

71. (inas: so Vat. 227 ; una Other I\ISS. 
79. 0iXf ; <pi\o\ifjifv( I\ISS. 

84. The original scribe blundered over the name Aion/xa?, writing a v (or perhaps n) 
for n and separating the final s. W has [xavuK^i for MavnviKrjs and sim\\a.r\y ixapriKt) at 1. 671. 

85. r] o( i]u is altered from (i, i. e. uvai was first written ; the correction may be by the 
first hand. 

88. (noirjcraTo : tnoirjcrt MSS., which agree with the corrector's ti]s. 

89. The addition of the rough breathing on ov is due to the second hand. 

90. \oyov (K(ivr) tXcytv ; «V. eX. Xoy. ^ISS. 

92. tn: so Burn, who attributes this reading to W, but wrongly, W having an-' like 
BT. eV is found as a correction in the Cod. Coisl. and Paris. 1642. 

93. 8(1 8n : so TW ; 8([\rj B. 

94. Strj[yj?cr 'CO : SO MSS. ; 8f) T]yfi(ro) Burn, with Schanz. 

96. onoios : noios MSS. The second « in (nfira was inserted after the * had been 

98-9. The word ^(vij was originally wrongly divided. The scribe also began to write 
some other letter in place of the first a of avrnpfivovcra. 

99. b( : yap MSS. There is an apparently accidental diagonal mark below the line 
after 8iT]ti. 

105. ((f)T]v \fytti : Xfyf IS ((firjv ^ISS. 

107. tcpTjv was originally written for ((firj t) : the correction is probably by the second 
hand, which at the same time accented ot€(. 

112. TO op6a 8o^a(fiv: SO T, Burn. ra 6p6d W, r<) 6pdo8o^d^(iv B, &c. 
ap(v : Ka\ civfv I\ISS. Schanz omils Kai with Stallbaum. 


125. The double dots and paragraphus marking a change of speaker are misplaced; 
they should have come at the next line. 

126. TovToiv t(f)r] : i'(f)T) Tovr. MSS. 

131. The first o of onoXoyoiTo has been corrected from <o, perhaps by the second hand. 
135. The papyrus omits f0»?^', which the MSS. read before Xfyeir. 
141. Tn KaXa : SO B ; om. ra Burn, with TW, Stobaeus. W inserts uyaBovs Kai after rovi. 
142-3. The dittography is marked by a line drawn above the superfluous letters. 
Cf.ll- 195, 333- 695-6, 712, &c. 

147. 770)5 av: so B, Stobaeus ; nw 8' ai^TVV, Burn. 
yt Tcov : so Burn, with TW, Stobaeus ; y av B. 

148. a of afioipos seems to have been converted from an o. 
153- f^*? : so TW ; (4>vv B, Stobaeus, Burn. 

156. re : so BT, Burn.; om. W, Stobaeus. 

158. 8ianpodfievov: the conimon Egyptian spelling at this period. 

163. o of 01* corrected from w. 

167. ray [T]«[Xf jraf : SO B, Stobaeus; om. rat TW, Burn. 


168. \iji\av\T\i.ttv : SO MSS. ; naydav Badham, Burn. 

173. 1. fypTjyopnai ; the interchange of X and p iscommon. The deletion of the superfluous 
(T was probably by the second hand. 

175. Stobaeus omits 0)1'. 

176-7. 77fpt xf'poi'p'yiar : so Stobaeus ; cm. nept. BTW, Burn. 

Tivas : the reading is not certain, a has been corrected (by the second hand ?) 
apparently from o, and above the spot where /3 of (Sovavcrovs would be is the top of a 
rounded letter, which is probably j3 or or. Perhaps nvos was first written, and the correction 
of o obscured the s which was rewritten above the Hne ; but the remains suit a /3 rather better. 

fSavava-ovs is a mistake for ffavava-os. 

178. TToXXoi T( : so Stobaeus; om. re BTW, Burn. 

179. There is a dot between v and t, and the two letters are rather farther apart than 
usual ; but no pause here is possible. Stobaeus omits ecm. 

180. Kai p.r]Tpos Tivos farip : SO Originally (fcrri) T ; in BW rlvos ((ju precedes Ka\ p.. 

183. Vo-T-icoiTO : so Wbt (ficTT.) ; r)(TTici)VTO Bum. with T, rjar.B. 

189. t^[f\ecov: dae'KewvUSS. 

190. (v8(v : so some MSS. ; r}vb(v Burn, with BTW. 

194. Kai: so BT, Burn.; om. W. 

195. KaXr;s . . . Uo[pov camc in here from 1. 200, the error being caused by the repetition 

of AcppoBfirrjs. 

202. TTfvrjs : SO TW ; 7r<j'i'>;y B. 

203. The second a in anaXos has been corrected from o. 

207. aifi : but an in 11. 203 and 209. 

208. vnaiBpios: so Burn, with BW, Origen; -on T. 

211. [koXois] km ayadois '. rols k. koI toIs ay. IMSS. 

213. apoil3as was apparently originally written, ra? having been converted from poi; 
pi]Xavdi MSS. 

215. TTopip.<is is a correction from (^povifios, perhaps due to the original hand, nopiarpos 
(B) and (fjopna-pos are also found. 

216. (})appaKfvs : 1. Kai (p. with MSS. 

218-9. TJ]i T]p.fpas : Ttjs avTfjs T]p. MSS.; the omission is to be accounted for by the 


219. Kai: SO B ; re Kai TW, Origen, Burn. 

220. The corrector took the first naXiu with ano6vt](TK(i, but there is little to be said for 
his reading, which has no other support. 

avalStoaKfTai : 1. ava^iaxTK. The deletion of I is probably due to the corrector. There 
is a small dot between at and 8, but it may well be accidental. 

224. av Kai : Tf av Kai T, Burn., S' av Kai Origen, rt Kai B, 

229. ao^pois : 1. a-o(/)of. e was apparently written originally in place of the first o-. 

230. ;^fiXe7r7j : ;^aX€7roc MSS. 

232. auro) : SO T {avT.), Wb (avT.) ; avTo B. 

237. trj: SO TW, Burn. ; on B. 

239. av fir] : av BTW, omitting ('irj. av Burn., who wrongly attributes this reading 
to W; it is found in Ven. 184, Vind. 21. The papyrus is probably right. 
243. p.{To^v is a common spelling. 

248. Ci)6r]s : 1. <x>r]6r]s. 

251. eXeye y : Xeyfty MSS. 
(ivai epu>Ta ; tpcora (ivai MSS. 

252. oiopat : SO some late MSS. : olpai Burn. The o of to is corrected from w. 
254. afipov is a correction by the second hand from ayaOov. 

843. PLATO, SYMPOSIl'M 285 

255. rf\(iov : T(\(ov ^ISS. 

262. The addition of Kai ovrui brings ihc pLipyrus into accord with the MSS. 

265. T€ : so B. ]5urn. ; om. TW. The letters -s w Su are corrected. 

266. tpa : so BTW and other MSS. {(pa), ip<a b ; *>w is necessary. Cf. 1. 276. 

267. The accent on n is dubious. There are two short dashes visible above the line, 
meeting like a v. 

268. The termination of niTw and <i\ in «XX have been altered, but it is doubtful what 
was first written. Perhaps nurwt nXX should be read. 

(Tt TTofid : so TW. Burn. ; fmnnfffl B. 

269. ToiavSfi seems to be for touiM, though this form is not Platonic. Tou'tvSt MSS. 
The T has been corrected from a S. It is unlikely that mav 8(t was intended. 

270. X of *:aXa corrcctcd from k. 

272. X of Trpoxnpios corr. 

273. of anoKpfivaa-dai. seems to have been altered, and the final t was perhaps not 
originally written. 

276. fpdi: so BTW as in 1. 266; om. Ven. 184 and Schanz ; (pS> Burn, with the 
Aldine edition. 

281-2. The second hand has made good the omission of the repeated fvBaifioi'a. 5 in 
1. 281 is over >. 

282. ft (p blotted. 

286. 8]( : so B ; 8,', TW, Burn. 

297. apn: so T, Burn.; om. BW. The supposed base of an e above t8of may be the 
left-hand dot of a diaeresis on 1. 

302. rw : Ti BTW, Toi Vind. 21, Burn, rw may be right, but the marginal i is 

308. ov is mistakenly omitted by W. 

309. f^ovatv : so TW ; f^ova-tv B, Burn. 

311. popio^v: so BT, Burn.; povnv W with popmu as a variant. 

314. ravra : 1. tovto with AISS. 
316. (Cf^rj^v, Xtytii : Xtyfis f(f)r]v MSS. 

323. xP'7Mai''o'/^«^ ^^'^s fif'st written : the correction is likely to be by the second hand. 

327. taxov : lo-xouo-fi' (BTW) or e^"^'^"' ^ISS. 

328. ( in the termination of KifSwevtis has no doubt been converted from a a, Kiu^wtvovin 
having been originally written. 

333. fivni, whieh was repeated by mistake, is cancelled by the line drawn over it; cf. 
1. 142, note. 

341. avBpuiiToi'. so BT ; al av{6payn)ni W; avBpoinoi Bekkcr, Bum. 

342. The recurrence of tod ayadov led to the omission of t] <toi Sokovo-i . . . aya6ov, 
which has been supplied by the second hand in the upper margin, tov ayadov there is 
in agreement with BW ; Tayadov T. 

344. npoadiTQiov was written originally both here and in 1. 346. 

345. ovv : so BT, Burn. ; om. W. 

348. avTco : so TW ; ai/To B. 

349. 8( : so Paris. 1642 ; S17 BTW, Burn. 
TOVTO : so MSS. ; TovTov Bast, Burn. 

350. Ta>p : so Tb, Burn. ; t6v B, TOf with v./. tu)v W. 

351. o of avTo has been corrected from w. avrnv T. 

352. (TvvTacns : SO B, Burn. ; aCaTaan TW. 

357. The two dots marking the end of the speech are misplaced as at 1. 125. The 
a of padrjaoptroi has been corrected. 


361. S-r- r/'Sr; MSS., RS regularly; v S* '; Bekkcr, Burn. 

363. Kui'. SO T\V, Burn. ; om, B. 

364. rrjv'. so BW, Burn. ; om. T. 

368. KaXw : so Badhani ; tw KoKa ]\ISS. Burn, brackets r) yap . . . tokos (cttiv 
with A St. 

370. TovTo is crossed through, probably by the corrector. 

372. (vfdTiv : so B, Burn. ; (anv TW. 6 in aBavarov is corrected from i'. 

373. Ta : so B, Burn. ; Tavra TW. The second v of yevvrjais is blotted. 
376. etco: so B ; ^f.'w T (^'-Z- ^f«) ^V. 

382. ^i[u<nrfipaTai: ava-TTeiparai T and (with V.l. -frai) W, Burn.; avva-neipeTai B. 

383. ai/|tX''Aernt : there is not room for av\ti}OXfTai (BW, Burn,); dveiXXtirat T. 
386. 7TToitj(Tis : so TW, Burn. ; Trotrjcm B. 

388. o77oXD'et]i/ : so TW, Burn.; dnoXavnu B. 

391. The marginal note is obscure. It seems to begin uv{t\ tov) ov{t(cs) e'xfei and 
possibly refers to eitv, though that word hardly required explanation,. The letter after pw 
may be y and the following doubtful s may be e or perhaps 0. For di;{r\ tov) cf. e. g. 
841. II. 79. 

393. yeve(T€(os : y(vvf]crf(i)S MSS. afi ytpeais : 1. afiyevfs with MSS. 

402. T of rt corr. 

404. mcrBavtL : alddavr] Bum. ; cf. 1. 422 biavofi,\. 692 evdv^^fifi. 

406. fTJidvprjcrr] has been corrected from -naai, probably by the second hand. 

412. TovTav KM : so BT, Burn. ; om. koi W. 

415. avTco: aiird MSS. The final a of irapaTeivoptm has been corrected from a. 

421. fXfyo;^ : av fXtyov b, Burn. ; dve'keyov B, av eXeyov TW. 

425. ^lOTipa is perhaps intended, but Amr. was first written. 

431. a of cop.o'XoyTjcraptv is corrected from o. 

432. There is a high dot between 6 and a of davpa^e, but it is presumably accidental. 

435. re : the papyrus is rubbed, but the vestiges suggest re (so T, Burn.) rather than 

TO (W). B has TO fjvai dddvaTos, Omitting Kai. 

436. TT] yevea-ei is bracketed by Burn., following Vermehren. a of aei corr, 

438. The letters tv after Km have dots over them, which may mean that tp was to 
be cancelled ; but tv cannot be spared, and they are possibly unintentional. 
443. TavTa = TdvTu ; tu aiird ]\ISS., Bum. ; similarly inl, 451. 

449, TpOTTOl : TOnOL B. 

452. The second y of yiyv(Tai seems to have been altered from r, and Xi^ in anoXXvTai, 
also shows signs of correction. 

453. fTi : so B, Burn. ; eaTiv TW. 

462. pvrjpr] : so Paris. 1462, Vat. 229, Sauppe ; ptn]iir]i> BTW, &c., bracketed by Burn, 
with Baiter. Either pfXtTr] . . . pvljpi] or /xeXeVi? . . . pvfjprj would give a sense. 

465. The lectional marks added to ov rw warn the reader against the reading ovtco 
which is actually found in B. 

466. avTov : so B (Bekker) and some other ]MSS. ; 1. arro. 

469. (VKaTaXmew, the reading of the first hand, occurs in some inferior MSS. ; iynaTa- 
Xdneip BTW, Burn. 

471. pfTex^i : the papyrus is the only authority for this reading, which was restored by 
Stephanus; ^fre'xetv ]\ISS. 

472. aBavaTov. SO MSS. ; dhvvuTov Burn, with Creuzer. 

481. [e0]r/ : SO BT, Burn. ; om. W. The size of the lacuna indicates that the pappus 
read eTiet simply (B), not en-et ye (TW, Burn.). 
487. (is: so TW ; (s B, Burn. 


490. 7r(«T(jf : so BT, Burn. ; TTuvTa \\. T. omits tiaWov. 

49;'')-6. W omits av . . . npoanodai'fH' owini; tO llie o/:iO(or(Xfi;TOi'. 
498. 1. ^a<Ti\fias. 

507. KiiTu rn: so Paris. 1812, &c. ; om. ra BTW, Burn. 

517. Ki'r](T(Tm was first written, (n and e interchanging as commonly. Cf. 1. 747, &c. 
om. re MSS. 

T(K(ii> confirms a conjecture of Hug {rUrdv Jalni) ; Kve'iv MSS., Burn. 
523. Tiis : so MSS.; rd Burn, following Sommer, 
526. nv: so B ; 6' av T\V, Burn. 

527. (KKVfl(i)V : 1. fyKVflOiV. 

dnoi-. SO MSS. rjd(ns Burn, with Parmentier. 

529. (TTidi'iir] agrees with a conjecture of Stephanus, punctuating after wi/. tmdi'nu 

530. 8q : so BT, Burn. ; Se W. B has ntpl wt> for ntpuav. 
539. TTfpt : so INISS. Burn, brackets with Stephanus. 

544. napu>v Kai ajrwi/ is the Order of BW, Burn. an. Ka\ TV. T. The deletion of ovt is 
probably by the second hand. 

551. The accent distinguishes nas tw from naaav, and the mark of short quantity 
shows that au is not equivalent to (dv. t in the termination of KiKoiv(.ivr]KOT(t is a correction 

554. f(c HrrtoSoi/ : om. fty MSS. 

560. KariKiireTO : SO b, Burn. J KaT(\nT(v ... to B, KariKdrKTo T\\'. 

563. The papyrus probably had t^/itc, as B ; vpXv TW, Burn. 

564. o '2o\(x>v : om. MSS. 

566. E\\i]<Ti: fVEXX. MSS. 

567. aWa : 1. KoXa with MSS. 

568. km: om. MSS. 

571. The V o( avdpcoTTivovs has been corrected from some other letter, perhaps t. 

576. ((f)t]i': 1. fcpij. 

577. Kai (TV : om. INISS. ; the addition adds emphasis and may be right. 

578. (w. av MSS., Burn. The double dots after r]s follow from the mistaken reading 
tcfirjv in 1. 576. 

582. avTov: so TW ; ai'Twj/ B, Burn. 

584. Kit in KoXovs is corrected, perhaps from n-oX. 

585. TO fni : so rightly BT ; rw (ni W. 

586. TO) : so TW rightly ; to ]j. T omits fm. 
590. TovTo : so BW, Burn. ; toi^tw T. 

592. There are small oblique dashes, which are presumably accidental, over the a of 
xn^aixai and after tav in 1. 597. 

597-8. Kai fav: so BT, Kul liv W; Kiiv Hermann, Burn. 

600. Kai : so MSS. ; Burn, brackets with Badham. 

601. W. has (I Tivfs. 

tog. (i8r) is probably meant for 1% (TW ; 11' mSrji B). 
611. TO nap: so MSS.; runap' Burn, with Schleiermacher. 
614. fi'os is a correction from nuot, perhaps by the first hand. 

618. TiKTd is the reading of the great majority of the MSS., but the papyrus may of 
course have had the right reading riKTrj. 

619. pmcrdfii : po)6fitW. 

631. The final v o( yiyvoptvov is corrected from a, and the same alteration was perhaps 
made in the case of av^apo^ifvou in the line below. 

635. ToSf : 1. TOTf. The omission of oi-Sf was probably caused by the preceding ov. 


637-8. cof . . . mcTxpov is bracketed by Burn, with ^^oegelin. 
639. avTui : so BT, Burn.; mVo W. 

640—1. ouSe ev : 1. ov8(V wv with jMSS. or ovSe (V Of. 

645. /ier : so apparently the papyrus ; 1. ti(6. 

647. Tponov Ttva : SO B, Burn.; Tiva rp. TW. 

649. (Keivo : so B, Burn. ; tKtivw TW. 

/ir?Tf : so Vind. 31, Paris. 1642, and others; pr]T( n BTW, Burn. 

651. It is most unhkely, on account of the space, that the papyrus had S« brj as TW ; 
fiiy simply B, Burn. 

652. There is an oblique mark like an accent above the o of cmo, but it may be 
unintentional; cf note on 1. 592. 

66c. enavalSaafxius : SO T and other MSS. inava^a6p.ois W, Burn., eV ava^a6p.oh B. 

665. K«t : so MSS. ; w? Burn, with Schanz. 

669. avTO) : the 0) is almost certain ; 1. avro. 

670. There is a dot above the v of eanv, which may mean that the letter was to be 
cancelled ; but the practice of the writer as to the use of v effxXKva-TiKov is quite inconsistent. 

674. ibrjs: so W, Burn. ; flSjjs BT. 

XpvcTov : ;^pv(r/oi' MSS. 

675. There is an (apparently accidental) curved mark above the n of 7raiSa[r, 
679. I of avTois added later. 

681. fjLOVov OtaaaaBai : 6. \x6vov B ; dfacrdai novov TW, Burn. 

684. 6 of KaBapov has been altered from a r. 1. avairXfav. 

689. €(^r;: so BW, Burn.; om. T. The X of (j^avXou is rewritten; a high dot before 
the 4> is probably meaningless. 

695-6. The dittography was caused by the recurrence of ((f)anTopfvu. 

699. 6€0(t)iKei : so t. Burn. ; 6eo<piXi^ BTW. 

701. *fli[Sp€ : S) '^a78pf MSS. 

708. Tlie final a of av8pa is corrected from i. 

712. rov eparn was Written in careless anticipation of the sense. 

718. The coronis, which is similar to those in the Pindar papyrus (841), marks the 
close of the section. Others occur at 1. 1 122 and at the end of the dialogue. 

721, f7rt;cf<p[f III' Xfyfii' ri '. Xe'y. ti in. MSS. 

724. avkdov. sot, Burn.; avAtoz/ BT (?W). The testimony of the papyrus on such 
a point is, however, of little value. 

Kpuvopevrjv : SO BW, Bum. ; KpOTOvp.ivrjv T. 

728. 1. (TKc^fcrBf. The scribe perhaps took the words for ovk {ovx) i^tdBf. 

av : (dv MSS. 

730. TTavnp,(6n: avannv6p.(6n ]\ISS. 

741-3. The scribe blundered badly here. The fact that he wrote vi (the termination 
of Tivi) (TTi<^av(^fxfvuv in 1. 741 is an indication that he also wrote (TT((f>avu>}xevov in 11. 742-3, 
though the corrector may have deleted the superfluous pavov. The line drawn above the 
letters should have extended to n either in 1. 741 or 742. 

747. [bA^ecrSf (B, Burn.) is corrected from iSfjtfff^ni. bi^avei TW. 

748. on[«]/): so TW ; W7re/) B, Bum. 

749. rfkOoixev : so TW, Burn. ; >'jx6opev B. 
fX^«: x^«^^ISS. 

754-5. €au finw] ovTwai : SO BT ; W adds K((pa\i]t'. The words are bracketed by 
Burn, with F. A. Wolf. 

755- ^^ ^^^S KaTaye\a<Taa6ai. 

763. A low dot between -vov and vno is probably meaningless. 


770. wi (Kf'ivnv KuBiCiiv ViTW , Sec , w\\\c\\ is unsaiisflxctory, and is bracketed by Burn, 
witli Badham. The papyrus has quite clearly Knrtfif'", which may be a mistake for KaOi^tiv, 
caused by Kunbdv in 1. 766. But it may also be interpreted as KaT(()ihf\_v, which would give 
a good sense : Socrates made room as soon as he saw Alcibiades. 

776. oSf rpiTo<! : so W, Burn.; <aSe rp. B, rp. o8( T. 

778. npav : B has 6pq. 

779-80. TovTi Ti i)v : so TVV, Burn. ; tovt dnuv B and as a variant \V. 

783. o of KareKeiao is Corrected from t. The dittography has been eliminated in the 
usual way. 

786. cor: we print the reading of the MSS. ; Kai Hermann, nut Hug. 

789. The first letter of the line was almost certainly r, i. e. the papyrus had n eptjxavrja-o) : 
huprixavl](T(ji MSS. There is an oblique stroke, no doubt accidental, immediately below 
the p. 

797. It is unlikely that anything stood in the papyrus after ovrovi. ovto(t\ . . . T, 

ovToai TTCos Coisl. 

798. 6av]pa(ji^ji : so B, Burn.; davpaam TW. The T though rubbed is practically 

810. [ofaS»;(rwl Kai : SO TW, Burn.; avaBrjaapfSa B. 

815. 8i\a\€^((T6at : 8ia\f^ai was first written. 
817. bt]-. 6' 01^ MSS. {oiu Angel. C. i. 9). 

820. I. a-vvyvpvaCfadai ; the 6 does not seem to have been added above the line, but the 
papyrus is rubbed. 

828. averaiop was originally written ; the alteration may be by the first hand. 

829. The reading of the first hand, whatever it was, does not appear to have made 
sense. There was probably some alteration also at the beginning of 1. 830. The accent 
on e was added by the corrector. 

839. fSfSei]^-!' >?]<fi : so MSS. ; e'SeSttTri-vKfAifc Burn., SeSetTri'jyKo/ifi' Bekk., .(4//<'f</. i. 346. 23. 
8it\tyopr}v : £0 ^ISS. ; die\. dfi Bum. with Bekker, Afurd. I. c. 

840. fTTftSr; ye : om. ye MSS. 

841. o^ai. is for o^i ; cf. 1. 828, note, &c. 

842. pfvfiv: pnvov was originally written. 

846. The papyrus probably agreed with B and T marg. in reading br^, the omission of 
which would make the line unnaturally short ; om. TW. 

847. The supplement in the middle of the line is somewhat long, but not impossible. 
tx^oi cannot be read ; perhaps av was omitted. 

852. 1. a(j)cwi(Tai : there is no trace of the final t, 

859. yvcocTopfvois ; yv. Te MSS., but the supplement is already somewhat long. 

862. TC so BT, Burn. ; re Kai W. 

863. coj/ is a correction from wr. B has Set^^.v for drix^firj. 

864. yap T] ^l/vxn"'- so TW; ^ ^vx^v yap B. Bum., following Usener, brackets fj \l^vx>iv 
as not read by Schol. B. 

867. p]t]; so BW ; koI pf) T, Burn, p of venv seems to have been corrected from p. 

876. T€ TOTf : so TW, Burn.; but rore (B) is just as likely to have been written. 
(According to Schanz, B has re and T omits it.) 

877. The letters vw \ are converted from avXy. 

878. Tis : Ti B. 

880. The termination of [tnid fade is corrected from 6at. 
885. Kai is su{)erf]uous : om. ]\ISS. 
891. [tx]*»' so B, Burn.; ex'^" I'W. 

893- X^IP "'^"*^^*'* • Xnpi^faOiu MSS. 



fi Tt: so B, Burn. ; eVi TW. 
896. CO? oTi : so TW, Burn. ; oaw n B. 

898. /^o]t : the vestige of the letter before a is too small for certauity, but suits i con- 
siderably better than v. fioi Vind. 21, Burn.; /xou BTW. 
905. o) </)iXe AXk. is the ordinary reading. 
910. [r>t: so BTW, Burn.; ri other MSS., Bekker. 
913. re: so BT, Burn.; om. W. 

924. There may have been two dots after v, the lower one of which is effaced. 

925, fnov : so TW, Burn. ; efioi B. 

928. aoi re] on: on aoi re MSS. The o is quite doubtful, but the letter after t is 
plainly t, not e. 

935. /SeXef. so TW ; /3eX»; B, Burn. 

940. The size of the lacuna suits rovrovt (TW, Burn.) better than rovrov (B). 

944. B has av, but ravrn Avithout av (TW) is equally possible here. 

948-9. [koi] TTtpi eKfivo: Knintp tKelvo TW, Kainep Kt'ivo B, kuitoi \(luo Burn. T^eph whlch 

gives no sense, is doubtless a slip for -ntp. 

954. T) ei: so B, Burn. ; om. ft TW. 

955. f of pe is converted from rj ; to which hand the correction is due is doubtful. 

960. The Attic form Cfopijv (so MSS.) required no alteration. 

961. ey^Kpareiav: Kapreptai^ MSS. 

962. OV0, which was first written, is the reading of BTW; oiS' Paris. 1810, 1642, 
Vat. 229. opyiCoiprjv has been altered from opi^oiprjv. 

963. ft k\<.u : om. ft jNISS. rightly. 

964. [av'\vovaias : (Tvvrjdeias was Originally written. 
966. j;Sfti' : so W ; j]8r] B, Burn. 

yc: so TW; re B, Burn. 

969. The scribe first wrote aXajcrfxat. 

970. 8r}: so BT, Burn.; re W. 

979. [o7io]rav: so BT ; oTToV W, Burn. 

aTroXeicj)6evres is the reading of the MSS. ; dnoXTjcfid. Cornarius, Burn. 

983. The erroneous X has not been struck out. 

986. [o] 7r[ai'jra)i/ : SO TW rightly ; Snorav B. 
BavpadicaraTOv : SO Vind. 21 ; Bavpaarorarov BTW, Bum. 

987. The slight vestiges suit e(x>p[a\Kev (TW, Burn.) not ewp[a]Kei (B). 

992. f in the termination of ; xft/^<")>]fs is a correction from o. 

993. nayov: SO B, Burn.; rov IT. TW. 

995. t; ovk: SO B, Burn.; om. rf TW. 

996. S?/ : so TW, Burn.; t) B. The ?/ of r]p(t)iea-peva)v was corrected from e, and red from 
Tjo, i. e. the scribe at first omitted re davpaa-ra. 

999. ovros : so Vind. 21 ; ovros S' BTW, Burn. 

1000. [otOjtTrep : so B, Burn.; olov TW. 
1003. t of aXXot is corrected from u. 

1005. The scribe misunderstood oc/xoi/, connecting the ct with Karacppovovpra ; cf. 
1. 1015, note. 

1007. [av] T08 : so W, Burn. ; avrn BT, B having also eppf^e. 

1008. Probably no significance is to be attached to the fact that whereas in 1. 974 an 
f has been added above the t of crrpana, here there is no such insertion. Burn, reads 

aTparids with Cobet ; (TTpareiai MSS. 

lOII. aveirj : 1. aviei, B haS TTpo)(U)pei for rrpovx- 

1 014. € 0^ davp[a]^ovres is corrected from o. 


1015. cor: om. MSS. The first scribe unintelligently divided the word fto^ii/'oV as 

faddv I ov. 

1 01 6. W adds Kai before TtXev/wi/Vtr. 

101 7. iwi'coi^ is the tradiiional reading, in place of which various conjectures have been 

1025. Kai : om. ]\ISS. 

1030-1. TfTpufifvov ovKtOfXoiv. so B\V, Burn. ; ovk id. Ttrp. T. The second X of «XXa 
is corrected, apparently from <t. 

1042. SuKpaiijf: cf. 1. 1068, though 1^2 <uK/j«Tj; is rightly written in 1. 1051. 
1048. o of ■naiiaKfXtvofiai is altered from w and a of dapixiu from e. 
1058. (f)i\ovs : so some MSS., Stephanus; cj>iX{ois BTW, Burn. 

I 06 I. a\//-atTO : a\l/(T(u INISS. 

1062. B has dfiivrjTai. 

1063. avTos : ovros iMSS. 

fTfpos: so MSS.; «Vai/joy Aristides, Burn. 

1069. There is not room in the lacuna for fifv (so MSS.) after tov. 

1071. Br] : om. INISS. a vdputv is a slip ^ov av6p(o-noiv. 

1072. (w ai nryre: SO TW, Bum. 3 uvni p( B. 

1077-8. The transposition of km . . . aXXuvs and Kara . . . ns was necessary. W has 

TOVT for TavTU (rnvT j. 

1080. TO of aTOTTinu is converted from a v, and the first upright of tt was originally 
curved, i. e. the scribe began to write avBpoinos. 

1083. ois : so TW; flols B, Burn. B has Xeywy for [Xf-y^o) (TW, Burn.). 
1089-90. Tcov . . . \ny(Du: SO TW, Burn. ; rw . . . Xoyop B. 
1091. Tr\av]v: SO TW, Burn.; om. B. 

1093. Tiva: SO B ; uv nva TW, 817 riva Burn, with Baiter. 

1094. KavdrjKwovi : Kiivdr/Kiovs ^ISS. 

1099. B has 8iotyoviX€vovs. 

1100. av: SO MSS.; a5 Bekker, Burn. 

I 102. TCOV Xoyoji; : SO TW, Bum. J Tov Xoyov B. 

1 105. Tivovrns . . . fTTt : so TW (Teif.) Bum. ; TflvavTm . . . (ti B. 

1106. A high point after oaop is apparently meaningless; there is another between 
6 and a of fcrfadai in the line below. 

1 108. The scribe began to write a instead of p after o-wk. 
1 1 10. r) of Tjpfiv'^. has not been crossed out : cf. 1. 983. 

I I 14. TToXXoVS '. TT(ivV TToXXiiVS ^ISS. 

1 1 17. f^anaTaaOai : SO TW, Bum.; -^6 B. 

1 1 24. (boKf Tt e or T( seems to have been first written; it is uncertain to which hand 
the correction is due. 1. napprjnm. 

1 1 27. (jiavai is a correction from (cfyrj. 

1 1 30. ovveKa : 1. ov fvfKa (TW, Burn.). The v is corrected from a 8, and it is curious 
that B has oiS" instead of ov. 

1 142. BiniSaXd : so Burn, following Hirschig. S«n/3(iX.v BTW. 

1 148. The first t of /<ara/cXti/?;crofiai is corrected from rj. 

1 153. 1. Tvepidvai. 

1 157. (pe: SO B, Burn.; p.( TW. 

1159. KuTaKXidrj \ AC(iraAcXi'i/_7 i\ISS. 

1160. TV of Sjjttov is corrected from /x, and « was twice written for at in cnaiveafTai. 

1 167. v:avTo<T( : IVISS. TTfifToj, which is unexceptionable, though navToae would also give 
a good sense. The b of tvOabt was converted from a. 

U 3 


1 1 '73- fVTropoi : 1. €VTTopa>s. 

1 1 79. awtcoy/ifmir was first written. 

1 180. eierco : fls to ]\ISS. 

1 186. Tovs: om. JMSS. rightly. 

1 187. eavTov 8t : I Sf BW, eaSe T. 

1 1 89. The first scribe wrote are noXv. 
1 191. Below the o of aiSovraiv are some accidental marks. 

1 194-5. ^coKparrj koi Apiarocpavri : this is also the order in Ven. 184 and Vind. 21. 'a^, 
Ka\ 2<oK. BTW, Burn. 

1 196. peya\T]s (f)i{\}a\T}s : SO Paris. 1642, Vat. 229 ; (f). p.ey. BTW, Burn. 
1207. KcopccboTTocov : SO BTW; Kal Koap. Vind. 21, Burn. 

12 10. trpoTfpov : SO TW; npcorov B, Burn, 

121 1. 1. ApicrroffyavT], 

I 2 13. KaraKoipia-avTa : SO BW, Burn. J KaraKoipjfaavTa T. 

1214. KM aanep: SO MSS. ; Burn, inserts (e) before axmep with Hermann. 

1 2 18. nai was apparently repeated by mistake, and overlooked by the corrector. 

1 220-1. The title is placed opposite the middle of the preceding column. 

Fr, (//). The letters after oa have been altered or deleted. But it is possible that the 
fragment should be turned the other way up. when the reading would be ].[[(u]]fo[. 

Fr. (/). This small fragment from the top of a column clearly comes from this papyrus, 
but cannot be certainly placed in any of the columns remaining. It might belong to Col. i, 
where 8o/<« probably stood in the first line, but there would be no w underneath the S 
unless there was a variation as to the posidon in the sentence of ^ovXoit' civ. 

Fr. («) is from the bottom of a column. 

844. ISOCRATES, Panegyriciis. 

Height 31-1 cm. Plate VII (Cols. ix-x). 

These considerable remains of a roll containing the PanegyiHais of Isocrates 
extend from § 19 to § 116, though with some serious lacunae. Forty-seven 
columns were occupied by the ninety-six sections, and the total number would 
have been about eighty-six, for which it may be estimated that some 24 feet 
of papyrus would have been required. The manuscript was a handsome one 
written in a rather large calligraphic uncial hand very similar to that of the 
Rossal Demosthenes, of which a facsimile is given in Kenyon's Palaeography, 
PI. 16 ; cf. also the Hawara Homer [ibid., PI. 20) and 20. Kenyon attributes the 
Demosthenes to the end of the first century, but it is perhaps more likely to 
belong to the earlier decades of the second, to which we should assign this 
Isocrates papyrus. There is often a marked decrease in the size of the letters at 
the ends of lines, and in order to save space T is lengthened so that the crossbar 


comes above the tops of the letters adjoining. Short lines are filled up by the 
usual angular sign. A paragraphus is used to mark a pause, and is sometimes 
accompanied b)- a short blank space at the end of the sentence ; the three 
varieties of stop, high, middle, and low, are also freely added, though in a good 
many cases probably by the second hand, to which a number of corrections and 
alterations are due. No other lectional marks occur beyond a rare sign of 
elision or breathing inserted by the corrector. Iota adscript was originally not 
usually written, but has mostly been supplied later. 

Like the British Museum papyrus of the De Pace, the present text of the 
Pancgyricus is unfortunately of a distinctly poor quality, and does little beyond 
establishing still more clearly the superiority of the codex Urbinas (F). It 
is characterized by a number of additions, some of which are evident inter- 
polations and none is convincing ; the most flagrant example is at 11. 344-50, 
where a sentence founded on a subsequent passage is inserted without apparent 
reason ; cf. 11. 17, 42, 77, 164-5, 258, 302, o,^S> 35^, 42i, 55^, 5^^- On the other 
hand the papyrus occasionally exhibits a shorter text, either on its own authority 
(11. 449, 562) or in agreement with T against the vulgate (11. 202, 264, 39.5, 480, 
497, 608, 609, 669). Though on the whole the coincidences with T predominate, 
agreements with MSS. representing an inferior tradition are frequent. Sometimes 
the corrector has changed a reading of F into that of the vulgate or vice versa. 
Certain variants also appear which are otherwise only found in MSS. of the 
riepi 'AyriSoo-eco?, where a large section of the Panegyriciis is repeated ; cf. notes 
on 11. 230-1, 400, 449, 558, 613-5. In view of the general character of the 
papyrus its variations in the order of words carry little weight ; and it may 
be doubted whether there are more than a couple of readings for which an 
independent value can be claimed, 1. 290 eAarro) ye as conjectured by Cobet, and 
1. 659 aviJ.-ev9r]aovTas, a variant recorded by Victorius but actually found in 
no MS. The archetype from which this text was derived appears to have been 
defective in places ; cf 11. 33-5, 291, and 605, 

In the collation given below we have made use of the Teubner edition of 
Blass, the apparatus of which is unfortunately very limited. Proofs of the text 
of the papyrus were sent to Prof. E. Drerup in order to be utilized for his forth- 
coming critical edition of Isocrates, and to him we owe some references to 
individual MSS. of the vulgate. Differences with regard to elision, insertion 
or absence of v ((fxXKva-TiKor, interchange of et and t, &c., are not separately 



Col. i. 

voiv rjfiai eSiSa^av e ,^^^as 8i 

fj.01 S ovv afx^OTepuiv *^"''' 

iv^Ka Trpoa-TjKet Tvept 

ravra Troi-qaaaBaL rrjv 

5 TrX^iarriv 8[i]arpil3rip- 

/jLaXicrra f/.ep Lva npovp 

yov ri yevi^rar Kai nav 

(yan^voL rr]9 Trpos rj 

fias aVT0V9 (plXovLKL 

lo a? KoivT] TOLS (Sap^a > 
poi9 7roXepr]cr(OfjL€v 
ei Se TovT ear' [[ail] aSuva 
rov. Lva S-qXcocrco rovs 
€fj,7roSa)V oura9 rif 

15 [t]cov EXXrji/oou evSai 
povia}-- Kat iracTL yevrjTaL 
[(f)\avepov- OTL Kat to Trpo 
\T'\(pov rjfxcov Tj [7ro]XL9 
[5i]/caiCi)y rr?? 6a[Xar]Tr]S 

20 [r}]p^€u- Kai vvv o[vk] aSi 
[KJcoy ap(pi(T(3r]T[€i. Tr]€pi 
[T]r]9 T]y€povia9 [to]v 
[to pey [y]a[p €i 8e]i > 

^ 19 



Col. ii. 

• • • • 

a^vTois 7rapap€veii/ a 
25 ^[lova-i Se TTjv -qyepovL 
a\y ^Xi^iv coaTrep aXXo ti 
yelpas rj tovs npcoTovs tv 


Col. V. 

• • • • • 

T]as T[e 
30 [(vepyeaLas Kai. TJas XP^* 
[a? KttL ra? co^eXeJtay ray 
[aiT avTdov yLyvop\eva^ 

§ 29 



Col. vii. 
yovixdi'ov^ Kai n pco]T0vs 

[•y€]yto-6qt KUl TTpOS Ta<i 

35 [[yffo/ifi'a?]] Ti\i'as ei; 
0uecrr[ar]oi'? ovTa<i kul 
[vpo]? [ra t]coi' Oecoi' ff 
cr[6/3ecr]Tara 5iaKet/ie 
v[ovs] Kai fJ.J]u ocn]'i 

■40 [Trpo]ariKeL Tifx-qs [T^y]^^^ 

[vh'\v T0V9 Tri\lK0[vT]<i)V 

[aya\d(jiv aiTLOVi y[e]ye > 
[vrf\jiivov^ nepicpyov 
[8L]8[a<r]K€[iy ovSe[iy yap 

45 [a]v 8vvaL[TX) ScopYav to 
[cra]vTr]v t[o /I'eye^oy €y 
[pet]!/ T/ri[y] icrr; tois ttc 
[7rpa]y/xei/o[i]s' eo-rtz^- ttc 
[pi] /i[e]i/ oui/ Tou //eyi > 

50 [(TT^pv roDV evepyeTTjfia 
[tco]v Kai npcoTOv yero/xe 
[vou Kai 7ra](TL KOLvora 
[tov ravT ej^o/xej/ ^ltthv 
[Trepi 5e rou?] avTo[v]s XP° 

55 [i/ov? op(»(ra] To[v? fj.]€y 
[^ap^apov?] TTju 7r[\€i 
[aTT]v TT}9 x]copa[9 Kare 
[XOVTas t]ov9 8 [EXXtj 

[vaS €L9 IJ.]lKpOU TOTTOV 

60 [KaTaKiK\\iiievo[v]<i- 
[Kai 8La a]7rauL0Tr)Ta 
[rr/y yr;? i]7ri^ov\€vou 
[ras re cr^ijcra' avToi^- 
[Kai (XTpaT]ias enaXXT] 

Col. viii. 
§ i3 [/Soj^re?] Tovs fiaX[i](TTa 

75 [filOU S€0]fi€U0VS- Kai > 

[(TTpaTTj^yoL KaraaravTiS 
[avTmv]- Kai TToXe/ico*- Kpa 
[rriaav'p-e^ tovs fiapjSa 
[pov^] TToXXay fieu e0 e 
80 K[are1pa5 tt;? i]neLpo[v] no 
Xe[iy] iKTiaav anaaas 

8€ Ta9 Vrj<T0V9 KaTOO^-Kl 

aav afj.(poT€pov9 8e > 
/cat rov9 [aKo]XoudT]<Tav 
85 [ray /cat rouy i;]7r[o]/i€t 

[i/afray eo-oxr'ai'- roiy § 36 

[pef yap tj^aH^^' t^*^ 
[oLKoi ■vcop]ai^ KareXiTTOv 
[roiy 8e TrXeijo) ri^y uTrap 
^^ 9° X^,ovaT]9 €TTopL](rav a 

ira[vTa yap Trepi]€Xa^ou 
TO t[ov tottov ov v]vi' Tvy 
Xai'[ofX€U KaTexofjn?. oxr 
[re Kai tol^ vaTe]pov (3ov 
95 [XrjdeLcriu anoL\Kia-ai tl 
[v]as Kai fi[l/x]r)a-a(Tdai 

[t]i]1^ TToXlU TT]V T]/i€T€ 

pav. TToXXr]v [pat]crra)i 

vqv €TroiT]aap' ov yap 
100 [avT0v]i 8ei K[T]o)fji(uov9 

[vcopoc]v 8iaKLv8vv(v 

[€iv a]XX ii9 rrfv] v(p r]> 

[fioou] a(popia-[d]ei.a-av. > 

[fiy Ta]yTr]u o[i]k€Lv lov 
105 ra[y Ka ltoi r'tjy ay tov § 37 

rr;y ■qy€[p.ov]LK(>iT[ip]a[v 



65 [Xouy ITOLOV^liiVOVS' > 

[kui T0V9 /x]€i/ 81 epSei 
[aj/ Tcou Ka]$ T]/x€pav > 

[tOVS $€ Sia] TOV TToXefiOP 

[aTToXXvfijevovs ovSe ^35 

70 [ravO ovt]co9 €-)(ovTa 
[TTcpuiSev]- a\\ -qyefio 
[vas €19 ray] iroXciS e > 
[|e7reyu\/rer] 01 irapaXa > 

Col. ix. Plate VII. 
[^]apov9 avaaraTOVS ttol 
rja-ao-rjs tovs S EXXrjvas 
[€i]s ToaavTrfv eviropt 
[av] 7rpoay[ayo]va-r]r ov tol ^38 
120 [vvv] (TT€L$rj ra fieyi[(T]Ta 
[(rvi^]Su7r[p]a^€i^. tcov aX 
X[a)}/] (ioX[i]yaipri(T€v aX 
X' ap[xr}]i^ /i[ejr iTTOirjaaTO 
Ta[v]rr]v twv evepyem 

125 (01/ [TpO(f)]r}P T0C9 Seofi€ 

j/oi[s evp]e[i]u rjvnep ^prj 
Tov[9 p.€]XXouTa9 Kai ne 
pi r[(ci/ aXjXoou /caXcoy 
Sid^iKJrjaeiu- rjyovfie 
130 VT) [5e] TOV ^lov TOV em 

TOv[T]ot9 jlOVOV OVTTCi 

rov [^]r} €7ri6v/x€iv a^[t 
a>S ^Ix^ip] ovT(09 e7r[6] > 

/^€[Xt]6t]] Kai TQ>V Xo[i] > 

135 7r(DV' ci)[cr]re tcov 7ra[p6]v 
Tcov [roijy avOpconois 
aya$cov [o]cra ptt] irapa 
Oicov €x<^/j.€v aXXa Si 

> €7nSl^€[l€V T)] naTpLKCO 

Tepav Tr]9 [TTpo]T(pov y[e 
vo/x€vr]9 [npiv] Ta? irXei 
no crray 0LKia[$r)vai] tcov 
EXXr]vi8(o[v 7roXe](ov 
77 [/i]aXXov a[vfi(p€p]ov 
o[a]v TTjs To[v? jxev] ^ap 

) TavTt)S T)Y€[jioviav «Tri8«i^€itv 
115 "H 'TraTpiWT€(pav) [ 

Col. X. Plate VII. 
155 paSeiy/xa 7roi[T]](Taa-a npco 
TT] yap Kai vopovs €$€ 


TO' Kai noXiTeia^ KaTe 
crTr]a[aT]o' BrjXov 8 e > 
KeiBev 01 yap €v apxj} 

160 nepi Tcov (poviKcov > 

eyKaXe[<T]avTe9 Kai ^o[v 
XrjdeuTes pera Xoy[ov 
Kai pt] peTa ^las 81 
aXveadat Tas rrpos aX 

165 XtjXous €)($pa9 €v roiy 
popois Tois TjpeTe 
pois Ta9 Kpiaeis e7r[oi 
rjaavTO irepi avT(>i[v 
Kai pev 8r] Kai tco[v re 

170 x^cov Ta9 TTyOoy Tavay 
\K\aia TOV ^Lov XPT^i- > 
[yu]ay Kai Tas irpos i]8o 
vrjv pcprjxavrjpc 
va9 Ta? pev cvpovaa 

175 ray Se [8]oKipa(ra(ra.> 

XPW^<^'- Tois a^vBpco^ 




akXriXovs rj^iv yeyo 

140 j't/'. jirjSiv fxeu ai'(u 
rT]s 7roAe[a)'? tt;? -qfie 
repa? ayai- ra Se ttX^l 
(TTa Sia Tavrrjv yey^i'Tj 
adai- napaXa^ovaa yap fi 39 

145 Tovs EXXr]pa9 avop.oi's 
^ooi/Tas- Kai a-rTopa8y]v 

OLKOvvras- tovs f^(u v 
TTO SvvaaT€icor v^pi^o 
fi(uov9' TOVS Se Si avap 
150 XLOLv airoXXvp-efov?. > 


avTOv? anrjXXa^^u- 
TCitV [i^v Kvpia^L^ y(.vo 
jxevT]- TOi? 8 avj-qv na 

[[TrTjoi? TTap[€\8(iiKe' rt]^ 
TOLVVv aXXr]v Sloikt) 
aLV 0VT0)9 (piXo^ei'cos 

180 KaTe(TK(vaaaTO Kai 
npos anavras oik€l 
(09- (oaT€ Kai Toii xpr] 
fiarcoi/ SfOfievO^i]? 
Kai TOis anoXavaai TOiu 

185 VTrap')(ovT(i)v ^niOvfiov 
(Tiv aficfiOTepoi? apfior 

T€IU' KaL fJ-y]T€ TOIS €V 

SaipiovovaL- p-rjT€ rots 
SvcTTvyovcnv eu rats e 
190 avTcov a\pr]aTOiS ^X^^*' 

aXX eKarepois avTcou 
aval. Trap rjp.Lv tois p.ev 
rjSLcrTa? SiaTpi(3a[9] rois 
Se aacpaX^crTaTTji/ Kara 

J 41 



Col. xviii. 

• • • • • 

195 . . v](p €Tepoi9 

[ovTa? TTapaXiTTCov tovs 

/j.[iKpov iiroirja-av aXXa 
Toao[vTOP Tas TV)(^as 
(K[a]Tep[oou jieTTjXXa 

200 ^ay. a)a-[d p.€V iKfTev 
§ 57 €iv r]fjLa[s a^icoaas (3ia 

Toav €[x^pcot' anavO 
accu (S€1)[6j] Sianpa^a 
p.€i'os arr T]X6ey Evpva 

205 [6]ivs S( ^laaaaOai irpoa 
[SoK-qaas avros aixpa] 
[XoiTos y(i'op.ei'o]s ik[€ 
[t7]9 r]vayKacrdlT] Kara 




[(TTrjvai KaL tco] fx^v v 
210 [7ripeveyK\ovTi ti)v 
[av6p'j)TViv\T]v (pvaiu- 


Col. XX. 

[€T]€[XevTr]a€j/ noXXcoi' 
[S v]7rap[)(ovacou rj/xiu 
[€v]€py€[(ncov ety tt/j/ no 

215 [Xiy TrfyV AaK^Z\a\ni.ovi 
\<jiiv\ Tre[pi rauJTT^y p.[ovris 
[p.o\ a-v/x[PePr)]Kev e[nr^Lv 
[a(p]opp.\r]v yap] Xa^ovir^s 
[rri]v St [r]fxa>i^] avT0L[9 ye 

220 [y]ofji€[vr]v (T](OTr]pLa[v 
[ol] 7rpoy[opo]L jxev t(i)[v 
[v\vv €v [Aa\Ki8aiii[ovi 
[/SjacTiXeuorrooi/. eyyo[voL 
[8 Hp]aKXeov9 KaTr]X[6ou 

225 {p-€]v €l[s] n€[Xo]Tr01/VT][(TOV 

[/ca]T[e(r^]oi/ [S] Apyo? Ka[i 
[AaKe8aip.]ov[a] Kai M€cr[(Tr] 
[uT]v oiKi(T]Tai Se ^7ra[p 
[ttjs eycfovyo- kul r(ii[v 

Col. xxii. 
(can TT^p[i-] /J'€u TrjS ev 
TOLS EXXrjaL Svj/acmias. 
ovK ol8 ottoos av tl^ aa 
(f)^<mpov CTTiSei^at 8v 
250 vrjOuT]' SoKSi Se poi 

Kai Trepc tcov irporepov 
npoi rov9 ^ap^apovs rrji 
TToXet Tren pay fji€ucov > 


230 [napovTcoi'] ayadcou [a 
[navTccv atrjoiy ap[x^ 
\yoL KaTi(TTri]aav (i)\y e 
[Xpriv iK€LVOv\s p.e\p. 

235 [t f^y T"'?^ -^^oypav TavT[r}v 
[iL(r^aXeL\v e^ i/y oppJj] 
[^erre? e]i9 Toaavr[r]v 
[(v8ai/j.o]uia[v Kar^arr} 
\crav pr]8 e]^'?] ki.v8v[vovs 

240 \Ka6L(TTava\L Trjv 7ro[XLv 
[ttji/ v]Trep tcov 7raL[8cov 
[tcov] HpaKXeovs 7rp[o 
[Kiv8]vvev(xaaav p.[t] 
[5e Toty] p.€v an eKei[vov 

245 [yevo]ixevoL9 8L8ova[c 

Col. xxiii. 
^ 65 285 SovXcoaaa[6]aL tov9 EXXt) 


vas 60 r]jia^ npooT^r]^^ i 


ovT€9' eTri^aj/ecrraTfTaTly 
^ 66 p^u ovv TCOV noXepcov 

UepcriKos yeyovev ov 

J 6: 


290 pr}v eXaTToo ye T€Kpr] 

a TraX 
pta rlTcoTjaia Twv epywv earilTt'T] 



7rpoai]K(iu €L7reii'- a\ 

255 Aooy 7''[[e]] eTTdSr] kul tov 
\oyov KaTecTTafirji/ 7re 

pi TT]^ rj[y\/xouia9 tt]9 e 

T019 TTfpi TO)v TTarpicov 
afi(picr^r]Tovcrii'- en yap 

airauTa? pi.v ovv e^a 

260 pidfiCOl' TOVi Kiv8v > 

vov^ aV au [xaKpoXoyoL 

r]v irepi Sc rccv fx^yi 

aroiv TOV avrov rponou 

ovrrep oXiyo) irpor^pov 

265 7r€ kul wepc tov 

Ta)V SieXOeiv ecrTi yap 




J 67 

a]p)(^aioTaTa p.^v tcou 
€]6vcov Kat tIo,]? {xeytcTTa? 
8]vuacrT€ia9 €)(^ouTa > 
l!]Kv6aL Kai @paK€? Kai 
Ile^paar Tvyy^avovai 8 ov 
Toi] fX€u a7rauT€9 tjixlv 

era •>] 

7ro]Xi$' Tvpos anavTa^ 
tov]tov^ 8iaKiv8vi/ev 
cra](ra- KaiTOi ti Xoinov 
icr\Tai T019 ai/7iXey[o]i'crtJ' 
Tjjv €7n8eL^0a><TL tchv 

ll\^V EXXrjVCOl/ OL fjLT] 

8v^vafJi€v[o]t Tvy-^a 

v\ilV TCdV 8lKa[l\(i)V T] 

//jay tK€T€veii/ a^Lovv 
rey]- [tIcov 8e ^ap^apcov 
01 (3o]uXofi(uoi KaTa 

TaTTiLvr]<i ov<Tr)<i tt]^ EX 
295 Xa8o9 r]X6ov e<? T-qv yo) 
pav Tjpoiv OpuKe? fiev 

p.€T EvfioXnOV TOV IIo 

(n8(ovo?- ^Kvdai Se pe 

T Apa(ov(£)V Tcou Ape 
300 CO? OvyaTcpcov ov Ka 

[ra TOv] avTOv ^povov 

[aXXa\ Ka[6 o]v Kaipov € 

[KttTi'^poi TT]^ Evpconrj^ 

[irrr)p^o]u piaovi/T€9 > 
305 [p(u ajnav to tcov EXXt] 

[vcop y]evo9- i8i[a~y Se Trpo9 

[r]fia9 ey]KXT]p[aTa] 7r[o]i 

TjaapevoL' vopi[^ov 

rey €/c [TpvTOv tov T[po 
310 TTOV ^[poy] jxiav peu [tto 

Xlv KivSv[v€V(T€iu' ana 

acou 8e ap[a] KpaTrjaeiw 

OV fxrju K[aT]a>p6a)crav' ^ 69 

aXXa Trpos povov^ tov^ 
315 trpoyovovi tov9 rjpe 

T€pov9 avp^aXouT€9- 

opoico9 Si((pOapr]crav. 

a)[(r'7re/) av ei npos airav 

Tas avQpcoTTOVi (no 
320 Xeprjaav 8t]Xou 5e to 

peyeOos TOiv KaKcov 

tcop yevopiivoiv eK€i 


vois' ov yap  no$ 01 Xoyoi 



Col. xxiv. 
Trepi a[vT\(cv toctovtov y^po 

325 vov Siejj.ei.vai'. ei Kai 

[[/xj^]] ra -npayO^vTa ttoXv 
Tcav aWcov 8[L\r}veyKiv 
Xey^TUL S ovv irepi /xev ^ 70 
Afia^ovoiv o)? roiv /xeu 

330 eXOovacoi^. ovScfxia na 

Xiu airrjXOeu' [a]L 5e viroXei 
(pOeia-ai- Si'a t]t)[u] ei/BaSe 
(Tvn<pop[av €]/c TTjy [[f^]] (^P 
\r]S e^e(3X[T]6]T](Tai^' nepi 

335 5e OpaKcov on tov aXXov 
\povov ofiopo i] OL irpoa 
oiKovvres rjniv. Sia rrji/ 
Tore yevofJ-euTju arpa 
THav Toaovrov BuXl > 

340 770^', cocrre iv rco [lera 
^v rr]^ -^copa^ eOyr] ttoX 
Xa- Kai y€.vrj navroBaTra' 
KUi 7J-oAe[i]y fieyaXas Ka 

T0LKl(r6r]Vai['] TOVTCOV 

345 Be 0VTa)[9] €-^ov[r(o]v ov 

K OKvr]r\i]ov ^(Tt\l\ TT^pi 

Tcop V7roXonra>[}/] eiTreiv 

a Br] crvfJi^epeL rots irpa 

y\ia<nv iivr]<jQr\vai > 
350 nepi avTcov koKo. [lev ow Kaw ^71 

ravTa Kai TTpeno\y\Ta 

TOis Trepi TTjS r]ye\ii\ovi 

as afjL(pLa^r]Tov(n[v] a 

BeX^a Be rcou eiprjl/xje 
355 J'®^ '^<^' "^^ T0Lav[6 oia 

Col. XXV. 

KLv8vV(o[v €19 TOV aVTOV 

)(^poi'ov crv/j.necroPTQ)i/ 
365 Kai Tcov p.e[v TToXefxi 
(jdv avvnoaTaroiv olo 
fievoov eivaL Bia to 
ttXtjOos- tco[u Be crvjifia 
yoov avvTr[ep^Xr]rov 
370 ri\y'\ovfi€V(io[v €\€cu rrjv 
ap€Tr]p. ajx[(poT€pcoi' 
K[p]aTr](ravT[e9 coy e/ca 
repoov 7rpo[arrjKev Kai 
Trpoy aiTav\Tas tovs 
375 KtvBvuov[9 Buvey 
Kovres. ev\6v9 /j.€p 
rwu apiaT[€Loou tj^l 
(oOrjcrav oj^f ttoXXw 

B varepov T[r]v apy7]v 
380 Tr]9 6aXaT[Tr]9 eXa^ov 

Bov[T\a>V fl[€V TCdV aX 

[Xcov] EXXr]v[aiu ov 
[k afi](pLa^r][TOVi/T(cu 
[Be rcojf vvv [r]p.a9 a 

385 [(paLpe\Lo-$a[L ^r]T0vi^ 
[Ta>\p' Kai p.[T]BeL9 ol 
ecrOco fie ay\voeiv 
TL Ka[L] AaKe[BaLixovt 
OL 7r[e]pi tov\tov? tov9 

390 Kaipovs Tr[oXX(i}v 

\aya\6aiv ai-i^toi TOis 
[EXX]r]ai KaT[€crTr](rav 


[aXX]a Bi a tovto [Kai 
[fiajXXov eTrailfeiy 






Trep eiKO^ rovs e< [rcov 
ToiovTccv y^yovoWa^ 
[[?]] OL Trpoy Aap^Lov [Ka\i 
^(p^T]i/ noXefjLT](ra[i/T]€^ 
360 iirpa^av /xeyiaTov ya[p 

iKetfOV TToXe/XOV (TV 
(TTai'TO?. Kai TrX^lCTTCiiV 

395 [^X!(0 T-qV 1T0\l[v OTl 

[toi]ovtcoi^ avT\ay(o 
[v]iaTcov Tv^ov[aa to 
(TOVTOv avTcov [Sir] 
veyK^v ^ovXo[fiai 
400 5e fjiiKpcoi /xai^pore 

pa irepi rcou 7roX[ecov ei 

Col. xxviii. 
[eaKOTTOvv OTTJcoy aKpt 
[^(09 Kai KaX(cs] €^ov > 
405 [ail' ov^ ouTOi T0V9] ire 
[pL Tcov lSioov (rv]ix(3o 
[Xaiooi/ cos Tovs TrejjOt rcoi/ 
[Ka6 CKaa-TTjv Trj\v rjfxe 
[pav eiriTT]8evfj.aT]cov' 


J TT0XX(ci>v) «[ 


Jara tuv a . () [ 


Col. xxix. 

^ 78 ecrdai Kai a-a)rT]pe[9 aX 

415 Xa jir] Ai'//[ejQ)i/eS' [ano 

KaXei[(TdaL TO)] 7roi€[iu (v 
7rpoaa[yop€]y[6\fie[i/oi ras 


TToXeis aXX^a prj'^ (3ia [ku 
Ta(TTp€(f)Ofxevor ttlct'to 

420 repoi9 fJL^v T019 Xoyoi[9 rj 
[/f]at VVU TOl? OpKOLS XP^ 
[p.{\voL' raty Se avvOrj 
[<ai]9 ooanep avayKULS 
\€ii\ii(v^€iv\ a^'Lo]vvTe^s 

425 ofx [oi^Tco? €7ri] TOCl'S' 

II lines lost. 
[avraLs] S lauoiais XP^ 
[fievo]i Ka[t T0V9 u €a)[T€ 

440 [pOV9 €]V t[010VT0i]? T]d€ 
[(Tl TraiS eVOV T€9 0]VTC09 

[avSpa?] ayad[ov9 aJTrcSei 

[^av Tov]9 7roX€[/XT]]aai' 

[ras 7rpo]s tovs €k tt]? 
445 [A<Tia9 (o]<rT€ fiT]^6'^(i'a 

[TTCOTTOJre 8vvri6r]vaL 

I 8) 




[iT^pi av\T(iiV lir]T€ TOiV 
\TTOir}T(»i\v /XJ?T[e] T(i>V 
[ T]a)V 

[(jo(pL(TT(iC)\v a^[i\(i>s ne 
450 [7rpayfjLe]vcou [e]nTe[c]v 

Col. XXX. 

TTco^y yocp av yevoLvro av/x 

IJ.€Tpo[l TOIOVTOI? av 

8paai.[v 01 Toaovrov fiev 
Tcoi/ €7r[L Tpoiav arpa 
455 r€V(r[a/x€vcoi' SiTjvey 


Col. xxxi. 

[X€]vTr)(Tai€i' aXXa toov ^ 84 

[avT]oou [t]ol9 e>c tcou Qiccv 

\yiy6\voaLv Kai kuXov 
460 [/zei'O/]? r]iJ.i6^oi9 a^i 

[codeiey- Kai yap €Kei 

[vol] ja fxev crco/xaTa 

[T]ais rrjs (f)vai(x)S avay 

\K'\ais an^Socrav rrj^ S a 
465 [pe]TT)S aOavarov rr]v 

[fx\vT]fjLr}v eTTOLTjcrav 

[a€i] {lev ovv 01 6 [rj/xle ^ 85 

[Tcpot] irpoyovoL Kai Aa 

[Ki8aL\nOVLOL (f)lX0Tl 

470 [/icoy 7rp]o9 aXXr]Xov9 
[^i-X^v o]v /j.r]v a[XXa 

Col. xxxii. 

40 r- ) irpos To]vs «| aiTacrT)S tt][s E\XaS]o3 Kara 
(})povT)](ravT€S a'n"qvT[cov] 

[TToAej/xoi' iSiov TTOLTjaa 

) [fX€v]oi. TTpoy Tous" ana^ 

(JTjs Tr]9 EXX[aSo9 /ca]ra 

500 (ppovr]aav[ra9 tt]]v ol 

K[eia]v Svva[fiiv ejx^^ 

rey a[7rT]v]Ta)[v] oXL[y]o[i 

npos [TToAXay] {iy[pia8as 

oi)cr7re[p ev aXXorpiais 
505 y\rvya[L9 /leXXovTe^ 

Kiv[Svva>a€Lv ol S ov 

K [^^(^^[Oaa-av ttvOoji^vol 
r\ov TTepL rrjv Attlktjv 
7ro[X€iJi.ov KaL Travrcov 
510 t[(ov aXXoov ap.eXrjiav 



[*fea'0£9] roi? y^povois e 
[0iAoi't]/fr/cr[aj/ oi//c 6^ 
475 \Ppo\v^- a[XA avTaycjovicr 
[Tas'\ (r(f)a^ [av\Toy[s eivac 
[vofxi^^ou[rc^]- ovSe ([m Sov 

[Xeia T]rj' T(c[v E]\Xt]i^[(i)u 
Tov ^ap^[ap\ov Bi[panev 
480 [o]i/r€9- aXA[a] 7r[epf fi^v 
[rJT^y Koiv[ri\<i cr[(0Tr]pia9 

[0fJi0y00v[l/]T([9 OTrOT€ 

^poi S]€ ravTi)^ a[LTioi ye 
[vr]a]oi'Tai. 7Tep[i tovtov 

485 [7roiov]fjiei/oi rrj[v a 
[HiX\]av' e7^e5e£^[a^'TO 
[$€ ray] avrccv evyjfv 
[X^a?] TrponTov pi^v er 
\tois fjTTO Aap^Lov Tv'ep 

490 [0^eicr]tr' arro^auTcou 

[yap aurcoV et? tt/i' ^r 
[ri/cT/i' oi] fxfu ou Trepi 
[efieivai/] t[o]v9 a[v]ppa 
[^oyy aAXa] t[o]i/ /c[o/i/oi/ 

Col. xxxiii. 

535 KivS[u]vcoy- 01 8e ^Brjvai 
cri'//[j8]aAoi'T€y Trpiv eA 
[6^iv] Tovs l3or]dT]aoi'> 
[ra? pe]Ta Se ravra ye 
[vojievTf^'S T7]9 var^pov 

540 [o-T/oareiay t/Ii/ ai/ro? He/3 
[^^5' rjyayev e]KXin(DU> 

J 86 

[rey 77/cof 7/;//t' ^A*^] 
[j/offrey Tocr]a.[vT7]i' 
[noLTjaapet'oy cnro[v 
[Stji^ oarjv 7re]/3 av XiT/y 

515 [afTa)i' ^(£>pa^ 7rop[6ov 
[/J.€i^r]9 (Tr]\jJi€iov <5[e 
\tov Tayovs Kai ttjs a 
f/ztAjATjy rofy yuev ya[p 
[7;l^€Te/J0i;y irpoyovov[s 

520 [^jao-[t] TT^y avTT]9 r)iii 
p[a? 7rv]6ea6ai r[e] Tr]v> 
aTToPa.]aiv ttju rcoi' (Sap 


^[apcov] Kai /3o7;^[t;o-1[[o]]i' 
Ta[y CTTt] TOV? opovs rr)9 

525 x4p«?j K«X^] .''.<'f'7>4'' 
ray T[/90j7rai[oi' (TT-q^(TaL> 


Tpiaiv T]p[€paL? Kai to 
aavTai? [vv^l SiaKo 
530 (Tia Kai Xi^ia aTa8i]a 8[i 
(Xdciu a[TpaT07r€8]co' no 
p(Vop.(vov[s] oi^>co]Jy]] 
[o-0o]5yo'[[a]] 7]Tr(i)(drj(rau 
[01 pey [p]eTaa)(€iv tcoi' 

Col. xxxiv. 

vou. an[T]i/Tcoi' 8i€Xofi€ 
vol TOV [kivSvvov AaK€ 

575 8ain[ovioi p(v ety ©ep 
§ 88 po7T[vXa? Trpos to ne^ov 

\iXtov[s avT(t)i' eniXi 
^avTiS- Ka[L Tcov crvfi 
pa-^cov oA[£yofy irapa 




[//€!/ ra (SacriXcia] crrparr] 

[yo9 5e KaTa(TTr]]vaL roX 

[jXTjcra? aTTaPTa?] Se rovs 
545 [eK Tr)9 A(Tia9 a-vjuaya 

[pa? nept ov ti9 of];( v 

[nep^oXa? 7rpo$vp]rj 

[Oeis enreiu ]e 

5 lines lost § 89 

a[a](T[6]aL. l3oyX[T)6]a9 [5e 
555 t[ol]ovto fiu[T]]fie[io]p> 

KaTaXnreiv prj ttj? 

avOpcoTTLvq'S 0i'crea)[s' 

€[/3y]ot' ^(TTLV ov 7rpOT€ 

p[o]v (TTavcraro irpiv e 
560 ^evpfv KaL crvvr}vayKa 

crev TravT€[s] avOpconoi 
BpvXovaiu- ft)[(r]r€ crrpa 

TorreSco' 7rXe[v(r]aL {.l^v 

Sia [T]r]S r]Tr€i[pov] Tre^ey 
565 aa[i] Se Sia ttj? OaXarrr]?- 

Tov fiev EXXrjcnrovTOv 

^ev^as- TOV Se Adco Si 

[op]v^a9- 7rpo9 Sr] tov ov ^ 90 

[to)] /zeya cppovqaavTa 
570 Kai TTjXiKavTU Siairpa 

^a/j.(vov Kai Toaou > 

Toov ScanoTrjv yevojxe 

580 Xa/3o[i/]rey [coy er roiy 
<7re[t'0i]y Kco[Xv(TOVTe9 
af[rofy] 7rep[airepa) Trpo 

[eXdeiv] OL 8 'T]peT€p0L 

[Trarepey] ctt [ApT€fiicri 

10 lines lost & 91 

595 fpa^coj/i l^a]xv^' '^"i'- Cl 

[ro]i'i'[rey a]vTov? ^'^'^To\f^o.\v]T{ov]% 


[e]| Lao[v K\aTa(TTr}(TaL > 


[Kai] SeSiOTe? /xr] ^[[e]] e[[cj)]] 
i^^e^T^y 7;] TToXiy T/yiicot' 
600 airta [yevrj^Tai tols EX 
[X]r]ai t[t]? (r(0TT}]pia9' o[l 
[S] Ty//erep[oi] irpoyovoi 

fxaXiaTa jx^v ^ovXo > 
/x€voL SiacfyvXa^ai ttjv 

605 irapoucr So^av Kai TTaCTL 

7ro[ir]^(TaL cpavepov on 
[/cjai irpoTepov 81 ap^Trjv 
[a]XA ov Sia TV\r)v €vei 
Kr][a-]av' eneiTa 5e Kat. 

Col. XXXV. 

• • • • • 

610 /c[a5e KaTairXevaav 
r[€S ovTco? e^ovXev 
cra[vT0 Trepi toov Xoittcov 
(ocr[T€ noXXcov avTois 

J 9' 



Ka[i KaXcov npoeipya 

615 a-fi[€VQiU 

€V [toi9 TfXcvTaioi? 

Ta)[u KLvBvVOiV €Tl wXiOl' 

Sir][u(yKau a6ufi(o9 
ya[p airavTQiv ratv avfi 
620 p.a[)(aiv SiaK€ifi€ua)v 
Kat [IlfXoTrouvTjcricDU 

ro[j/ laOfiov 

§ 93 

Col. xliv, 

• • • • • 

[nap €)(ovTa>]y K[aiToi 
625 [^ovXofi€yoL Tr]X€o[u€ 

[kt(iu ovk a\v Stj 7rov> 
[rr/y /xiv ^JKLCovaio)!/ 
[yr]9 €7r€6v^fiJ](rafi€u 
[rjv nXaTaLeco]f to[is cop 
630 [r]fia9 KaTa(pvyovai\ 0a[t 
\yoixida TrapaSoi/JTi? 
[TO(ravTT)u $€ )(^copa]u 
[napcXiTro/Kv t] njay 
[ra? av i]p.a9 €vnop]i) 
635 [repovs €7roir](reu t]oi 
[ovrcoy tolvvv T]/i]a)i^ 
[y(y€UT]fX€v(i)v Ka]i 

§ 109 



Col. xlv. 

o[v Slc^tjXOov 01 royy 

640 fiej/ [ai/ofxcoraTovs m 

aTOT[aTov? (vofii^ov 

roi{y 5e npoSora? coa- 

nep €[v(py€Ta9 (depa 

TTd/^ou rjpovvTO Se tcov 

645 [[l^]] ElX[(iiT(OV (PI Sov]X€v 

(IP a>[crT eiy Tas avT^cop 

7raTp[iSa9 v^pt^fip] fxaX 

Xop ([rificop Tov]9 avTO 

[Xc«]/3a y Kai <popea]9 Ta>p 

650 [7ro]Xl[TCOP T] T0V9 yoP€ 

[ay] To[v9 avToyp (i? 

[tOVTO S COfX0TT]T09] a 

1 1 1 

I 12 

Col. xlvi. 
6 lines lost 

[tOV9 aVIXTr€]p6[T](TOPTa9 

Col. xlvii. 
KpiPiP <pvya9 Se Kai crr[a] ^114 
<T(i9 Kai poficop avp 



660 [eiTL Se Trjs To\yT[(ov ap 
[X^y ^'a TO 7r]Xr]6[o^ roav 

[oiK^LClOV Kd\K(o[v €TT]aV 

[aafi€6 a\]\r]Xo[vs e]Ae 
[oirrey ov]6€ul y[ap t]o 
665 [cravTrji/ cr^o]XT]i/ [7rap]e 
[XiTTOi' coa]6 ere[/3Co] 
[(rvi'a-^$€cr]6T]i'aL rivo^ 

[yap OVK e^LJKOPTO T) 

[ti9 ovtco TT^oppoi rcdv 
670 [TroXiTLKa>\v r]v e^e 

[a-rrjKoo^ tt p\ay fia[TY>iv 
[ooTiy ov]k [ejyyuy 'f][v]ay 
[K]aa-6r] yiveadaL rcov 
^(r]viJ.<popcoi/ €19 a? ai rot 
675 [a]vTaL (pvaei9 rjpa^ 

[K]aT€<TTr]aai/ eiT ovK at 
[(T\)(yvovraL ras ^avrcov 
[TrJoAety ovtoos ai'o/xco^ 
8ia]^ri'^6eyT€9 kul ttjs 
680 T]p€Tepai [[ofTco?]] aSi 
Kcoy KaTrjyopovuT€S- 
aXXa TTpos Tois aXXoi9 
[K]aL irepi rcou Slkoov- 
[K\aL T(£>v ypa(f)(i)v rcov 
685 [tto\t€ Trap rjiiiv y^vo 
fi\e\v(ov Xeyetv toX> 
fiooaiu avTOL nXeiovs 
[[?/]] ej/ T/9t(r([[i']] fiTjaiP a 
KpLTOv^ airoKjeLvav 
690 rey cov -q noXi^ ent 
Tr]9 apyr]9 aTraar]^ e 

[[0]]fo-ef9 KUL 7r[o]X(r[e]£a)i/ 
695 fitTa^oXas €Ti S[e] Trai 
Scov v(3p€i? Kai y\yvaL\ 
Kcou aia[)(v]va9 ['^]^[^] XPV 
jxarccv [[5]] [ayo]7ray[ay] rty 
av 8vvaLT[o\ Sic^eXdftu 
R no 7°o 7rXr]v roaovrov UTreiv 
[ej^ot/fci/ au Kara Trap 

Tcov OTi Ta fiey [[i^Jj^ V> 
I cos 

fMCop Seii/a paSi^ov^ av 

T19 €VL ylrri(picrfj.aTi Si 

705 eXvcrev ray Se a^aya? 

Kai Ta9 avopia9 ray 

eTTi TOVTCov yevofxe 

va? ov6eL9 av taaaaOai 

SvvaiTo- Kai /XT)v ov 

710 Se Tr]v rrapovcrav eipij 

vrjv ovSe rtjv avTO 

vo/xiav rrjv €[v Tai9 

TToXlTiLaL? [lev [oVK €V 

^v^ovaav ev Se rais [crvv 
715 OrjKais avay€ypafjL[n€ 
vrjv a^Lov eAecr^[a£ 
fiaXXov 7} rrjv CLp[^riv 
TTjv rjfierepav' t[c9 

yap av roiavT-q^ K[aTa 

720 a-[[Acei;?/J]? €Tndvp.[7](rei(v 
ev rji KaraTrovrilcrTai 
ftev TTjv 6aXar[Tav 
Kar^xovai^v^ 7re[Ara 
arai 5e ray TToAe'iy Ka 



725 \T\a\anPavov(x[iv av ''^ 

t[i\ $€ Tov npo9 €r€[pOV9 
nepi Trj9 \a>pa[9 7ro]\€ 
p.iiv ivros T€[<^lou? 
OL noXirai rrpos oKXtj 

730 Aoi;? ixa')(o\yT\aL 7rXe[t] 

Unidentified Fragments. 
{a) (^) {c) (d) 

** •• •• «•• 

• • § [ ] • c ]^f^i- ]•[• • 

(t[ ]ar ]Xov9 aarou 

••• J* J* -• 

^[ •• •• ••• 

(^) if) {g) (/^) 

• • •• •• ■• 

1 • :«^ jTI jt?[ 

]av ]m Yiv[ ]. .[ 

]v> . . jOfO^ jTO) . [ 

]€X[ ] . [ 

• • • • 

• • «• •• •• 

]o . [ > . [ ] • '4 • [ >?L 

l*?i ]< ]< 

]co5[ . . . . 


(m) («) (.,) (/) 

• • »• •• •• 

]fr[ M ].r: ].[ 

'/o[ . . . , 

X 2 


(q) {r) {s) (0 

. . • • • • • • 

M M H ].r[ 

. • • • • • • " 

(«) {v) {w) {x) 

• • 

M ] • i[ 

• • • 

iy) (^) 

• • • 

]6icr[ \tov 

• • 

• • 

• • 



• • 


• • 


• « 

I. eSiSa^ai' : SO TE ; the marginal variant biba^m is parallel to the vulg. anaWa^ai. 

9. (pikovfiKias is also the spelling of E, and is preferred by Drerup; but in a question 
between i and ft the testimony of a papyrus of this period is of course valueless. 

12. The original eo-rai, altered by the second hand, is condemned by the hiatus; 
ia-Tiv B(lass). 

17. to: om. MSS. 

18. rjficov T) [ttoJXis : ^ TrdXtf f)fia>v MSS. 

2 1 . TTJepi : so vulg. ; the dots signifying deletion were superscribed by the second hand. 
Om. TTtpi r. 

23. The supplement at the beginning of the line is somewhat short for the lacuna. 

29-31. ras fvepyeaiai Koi ras xpfta? is the vulg. reading. T[e after T]as is very doubtful, 
and r]aj [6]u|[f/)yf(rtaf is a quite likely alternative, ras xpfw? *«' tos tpyaaias r, rds Tt xpf^os 
k.tX e, B. 

33-5. ofioXo]yovfitvovs '. SO MSS., with yfvofxivovs after TrpwTouf. A blank space was 
left by the scribe at the beginning of 1. 34, and in this the corrector has inserted something, 
the slight vestiges of which suit [yejj/eff^at, at the same time deleting ytvoyievas in 1. 35 which 
reflected the omitted ytvofitvovs after Trpwrovj. The result is an intelligible sentence in itself 
not inferior to that obtained by emending 6/xoXo-yov/ieVous to 6ixo\oyovfjL(v<os (B. with H. Wolf 
and others) though not making a serious claim for consideration, npos re is the reading of 
the MSS. 

42. 7[<F]y([i'j?}xei/ovr : om. MSS. Tvtpitpyov is the reading of r; naptpyov vulg. 

45. Scopjeai' To[(Ta\vTr}v : SO F ; daptas Toaavrr): Vulg. 

53. «]xopev finup: SO Vulg. ; flfTfiv exopfv T. 

60. KaTaKfK\\ip.€vo[v]s : SO r (-(cXet/n.) ; KaT(KfKK(i(rp. E VUlg., KaTaKfKXrip.. M. 

75. KM', om. MSS. 


79. €(c[fJTt^p«r : so r, B. ; (Kintpa. which originally stood in the papyrus, is the vulg, 

81. anatras : SO F ; ndaai \u\g. 
100. fict : 1. fbfi. 

106-7. 'ry«[Mo»']""*^^*''^''''' cannot be correct, since with this there is nothing for raiTrjf to 
refer to except Ta]vTr]v in 1. 104. The reading inserted by the corrector at the foot of the 
column agrees with the traditional text. naTpiKa>Tfpav was perhaps influenced by riytpoviKU)- 
Ttpav : Trar/jKur., as in the margin, MSS. 

109. TQs : so r; om. vulg. 

118. [fi\ : so r; ini vulg. 

123. (noiri(TaTO Twxiyrjv \ rairnju tn, MSS. 

128. aXAwi; KoXas : SO Vulg., B. ; aWuv KaXSyv KaXms FE. 

138. 6(iov : SO F ; Tbov 6(U)v E and vulg. 

157. The alternative reading troKiTdav is that of the RISS. 

164—5. ^lakvfaddi rat TTpos aX\r}\ovs fxdpas : SiaXvaaadai ra npoi dXXrjXovf INISS. 
168. a\jTa>\v : SO F ; TouTWi' vulg. 

176. aXXotf, the reading of FE, has been substituted by the corrector for avOpm-non. 
XotjToIf vulg., and so B. on account of the following aWrjv. 

196. TTopajXtTTwi' : so F: vulg. napakiirovrfi, with TiVer instead of rtj. 
202. fYxOpaiv atravO : SO F J (x6. Kparfjaas an. Vulg. 

207. ytvopfvo]: (f) is better suited to the space than y(yoi/d>s (vulg.). 
213. Tjfiiv ev](pyt[(na>v : SO F ; evtpy. fjp.iv VUlg. 

215. TT)[v : SO F ; tS)u e* vulg. 

223. fyyo[voi : SO ; fKyovoi F, &C. 

230-1. ayadutv \aTtavT(i)V aurjoty : SO VUlg. in the AtltidosiS \ ay. airr. an. FE, B., avT.dy. in, 

vulg. in the present passage. 

234. The supplement at the beginning of the line hardly fills the lacuna, which would 
be expected to contain eight or nine letters ; perhaps there was some correction. 

236. [iiar^a\ft.]v. SO FE and Antid. vulg.; there would not be room for the vulg. */x- 


opprjdfVTfs : SO FE Antid. ; 6pp. avrav oi npoyovoi Vulg. 

237—8. eltj . . . KaTtarrjaav : SO Vulg. ; Tocr. (v8. KaTfarrjaavTo F, roa. (iid. KaTeKTijcravTO E, B., 
TO(T. ti8. fKrfia-aiTo, Anltd. vulg. 

245. \y(vo\^(vo(.s : SO A and vulg. ; ytvovoaiiy) FE Attiid. vulg. 

251. npoTfpov : SO E ; the omission of nportpov indicated by the line drawn over the 
letters (by the second hand) is in accord with F and An/id. vulg. 

255. The correction is by the second hand. 

258. ((Top(VT]i : om. MSS. 

261. ayav was apparently first written in place of Xiai/ av. 

262. TTfpt : so G; en-i r, &c. The papyrus omits <rrds, which is found after /xeytoT«i» 
in -E? \\ 

264. npoTfpov : SO F ; np. duj'Kdov E vulg. 

267. \a\p\aioTaTu : SO in the Antid. 0, apxi'^Kiirara A ; 1. apxt.Ku>raTa with I\ISS. 

268. \tfv<iiv'. SO vulg.; y(va>v FEG^ ray, the elimination of which is indicated by the 
superscribed dots (probably by the corrector), is omitted in the MSS. 

273. T] 8f [nolXis, the original reading, is that of F; the addition of rjpfTfpa is in 
accordance with the vulg. 

290. fXarrw y( : SO Cobct J om. yt F ; A. rovTijiv E' Vulg. 

291. After T€Kpt]pia the first hand wrote rmv, and left a blank space between this 
and tvTiv. 


302. Kaipop-. om. MSS. 

312, E has fTTLKpnTl](T(lV. 

323. The dot in tlie middle of the line apparently marks the place of the omitted av. 
336. ot, which is superfluous, is slightly smudged, and was perhaps intended to be 

337—8. 8ia . . , arpciTeiav : om. T and An/td. ; 8ia ti)v t6t( arp. E\ B., yfyfvtjfi(vr]v for 
•ytvofjLfVTjv vulg. 

344-50. This passage, which has no other authority, is evidently based on the latter 
part of § 74. Its insertion here seems pointless. The X of ecaXa in 1. 350 is converted from 
I, after which there was originally a blank space. 

355. ra : om. MSS. ; cf. 1. 356. 

356. [rwr : three or four letters are required to fill the line, and to in 1. 355 points the 
way; om. MSS. 

357-8. The first hand probably made the wrong division yeyovora aoi. 

361. tKdvov noX(p.ov (TvaTavTos : SO VUlg. J ttoX. crvar. (k. F. 
366. Om. oiojifvcov E^, om. fivai E". 

376. A low stop after s seems to have here been substituted for a high one. 
379-80. So r; TTJs 6a\. TTjv apx- vulg. 

389—90. Tov^Tovi Tovs] Katpovs '. so vulg. ; Tovs Kaip. TOVT. r, Tovs avToiis Kaip. TovT, Antid. 
393. [aXX]a : so vulg., B. ; aWa Kai E\ Kai V. 

bia TovTo is the reading of the MSS. ; the corrector's St avro tovto is no improvement. 
Km after tovto is omitted by E*. 

395. 7ro\i[v : so r ) noXiv ttjv rjfieTfpav E* Vulg. 

400. piKpcoi: so eA in the Antid. ; oXi'yw MSS. here. 

401. TU)v TroX^fo)!/: Tolv TTokeoiv r, B. ; Tolv TT. TovToiv and Toiv IT. TovTaiv other MSS. 

402. a]yav [toxv : raxv Xiai/ MSS. For ayav cf. I. 26 1 ; the reading here is not certain; 
but \\inv at any rate is impossible, ayav produces a hiatus. 

408. TT]]v : so r ; om. vulg. 

410 sqq. The marginal adscript indicates that this fragment comes from § 78, but its 
position is not clearly marked, and there was evidently a divergence from the ordinary text. 
]e in 1. 410 may be 8]e\r]aei, and the word after Ypa|jifi;a]Twi' is very likely aX(Xa) ; but some- 
thing certainly intervened between TroXX(wv) and YptiH'|Ji[a]T<«'>'. The penultimate letter in 
1. 412 is either r or y. 

417. 7rpoa-a[yope]v[o'^iJ.([voi : SO 6 in An/id., the mistake being occasioned by the pre- 
ceding npoa-ayopfvtadai ; but the v in the papyrus is very uncertain. irpoaayoyKvoi MSS. 

421. [kIoi : om. MSS. 

425. E* adds avTtov after rah. 

440. T[oiovToi\£ : so vulg., with and without eV. toU toiovtois r. 

449. The MSS. add (kcIvois after rav, which was here originally omitted. (Ktivon is 
also omitted by GA in the Antid. 

450. The column contained one or two more lines. 

453. It is not certain that the papyrus read ytev with TEe^ ; om. vulg. 
461. The space points to fK(i[voi\ (e^ vulg.) rather than (K(i[v<av\ (r), but not very 

466. fnoirjo-av : so TEQ"^ ; KareXnrov E marg., Vulg. 

471. Kai (vulg.) was possibly written after a[}^\a, though the line is not too short without it. 

480. 7r[*pi fiev : so r; aixa fxfv irepi Vulg. 

487. tv^[vxias: SO vulg. in the Antid., B. ; drvxias Q^, dperas TE. 

497. ibiov. SO TE, B. ; 18. kMvvov vulg. 

498 sqq. TOVS anaarjs : SO MSS. The corrector has inserted (^ before anaarji here and 


at the top of tlie column (11. 495-6), where the passage is rewritten. The intruded e^ is 
there accompanied by the variant KaTu4>pov>](TavTei for -ras, a reading also found in A in the 
An/id., anrjvToiv on the other hand being placed in its traditional position instead of after 
e^oi/rfs as in 1. 501. As the original scribe gives the ordinary text in 1. 497 it is likely that 
he wrote correctly KaTa(f)fwvi]aafTas in 1. 500. 
517. a /:i(X]Xij9 : (ifj.. (tvTU)v in the AnliiL 

522. TTjv : om. Atitid. 

523. /Sor/^j/fTJovTfl'f, the original reading, is also found in 9A in the Aulid. 

525. ml^A^j- so TE ; the reading is uncertain, but there does not seem to be room for 

Kai iiaxn- 

532-3. The corrections are by the second hand. 

535. (f)dr)vai: so TE ^wA Anlid.) o^Orivai vulg. ; the termination ai is written over an 
angular complementary mark. 

536. The letter after r looks like o, but this is probably owing to the disappearance of 
some fibres of the papyrus. 

548. After tliTt'iv the ordinary text has AarTw tu>v vnapxoirruii' eXpr^Ktv, which cannot be 
reconciled with the remains in the papyrus ; perhaps eiprjKfv ([Xarro). 

555. t\oi]ovto : so A here and in the Antid. ; rotovrov other MSS. 

558. There is no word in the traditional text here between ^uo-fur and foriv, but 9A in 
the Antid. have tpyov, which no doubt stood in the papyrus. The final v is fairly certain, 
and the first letter must be either « or Q. 

561. avdp(jonoi : om. MSS. 

562. OpvXovaLv : so r ; dpvWoiaiv vulg. 
<TTpaTone8ot)i : tw arp, 1\ISS. 

569. peya is omitted by E^ 

596-7. avTovs 6j^ i(jo[v KyiTaaTtja-at : SO vulg. ; the marginal adscript gives the reading 
of r and B. 

598. The second hand, besides rightly emending 8e to 8is, proceeded to alter the 
division of (cpe^rji, but changed his mind. 

602. npoyovoi : so E and vulg., om. r ; narfpa Antid. vulg. 01 5' r]p. narfpa had 
occurred in the previous section, 0I 6" rjp.. irpoyovoL in § 85. 

605. A blank space was left by the first hand before ho^av, cf. 1. 34. 

607. npoTfpov. so vulg. ; TO npoT. r. 

608. TvxT}v : so r ; rrjv Tvx- vulg. 

609. hf. so vulg. and Antid. ; om. r. 

610— I. In the MSS. of the Aniidosis the words Ka\ KaraaKfvaaavTfs TCI 7Tfp\ Tt]P JToXif 

intervene between KnTun'XfCaavTfs and ovtco^, and the papyrus would admit of their restoration 
[Kfvaaat'Tfs ra ntpi \ t[t}v tt(>\ii> nvro)s k.t.\.) ] but this would make Col. XXXV a rather long 
one, whereas 1. 623 stands higher than 1. 609, and it seems more likely that there was 
no disagreement here with other MSS. of the Panegyricus. Ka\ . . . noXip is bracketed 
by B. 

613-5. nvTots I Ka[i KoXoiP : SO ©A in the Antid. To read Km j KaXui/ avrms produces 
too great a disproportion in length between 11. 613 and 614. As to what followed 
irpotipynrrptvuiv there is no clue. 

630. The papyrus most probably had *cara0vyov(r» ; <^vyoxai T originally. 

638. The slight vestige points to a round letter at the beginning of the line, above and 
slightly to the left of which there is a r by the second hand. Perhaps the original scribe 
wrote <av instead of rav. 

645. tvi: so r, B. ; (vion (vulg.) would be too long for the lacuna. The deletion of v 
at the beginning of the line is probably by the second hand. 


647. n-np([Saj was Originally written for itaTpibas ; the correction is probably due to the 
second hand. 

659. (TVinT(\v6\T}iT0VTas : SO VictoriuS, B. ; uvfiiriBf^aovrai T, crvfinad. E and vulg. The 
V is broken, but a cannot be read. 

664. ov]d(Pi : oiibfvi edd. ; cf. 1. 445, where the corrector has substituted 8 for 6. 

669. ovTco : so r; ovTO) ToaovTov vulg. 

670. t^t[(TTr]Ko>i: om. MSS. Cf. § 171 ''"'^ '"'^'^ 7ro\iriKa>v (^iarr^Koai, 
677. Tfls: so r ; Tas /leV vulg. 

679. KOI T>7s: so r; TTfi 5' E, vulg. The deletions in this line and the next are 
probably due to the corrector. 

688. The appearance of the papyrus suggests that the scribe partially erased the 
superfluous letter, which is most probably an r], at the beginning of the line. 

693. The corrector omitted to alter the p. of erv/i. 

698. It is unlikely that hapnayas was originally written. 

701. [f];(0(/ie»' av : e^co MSS. 

Kara ttovtcov : SO VUlg. ; Kaff anavTOiv F. 

708. ovdfit : cf. 1. 664, note. 

713. fvovaap was originally wrongly divided (\vov(Tav. 

719. The corrector's /c[ara](rracrfo)s is the reading of the MSS. 

729. 01 ncikiTai TTpos aWrfKovt '. SO F ; rrpos aXX. 01 ttoX. Vulg. 

Fr. {d). This fragment might be placed above 1. 29, ]a(TTov being restored as (K]a(TTov 
and an intervening Hne being lost. 

Fr. (z), which is from the top of a column, may be the end of 1. 363. 



Addenda and Corrigenda to ' OxyrJiyncJius Papyri ', Parts III and I V. 

For the literature connected with these volumes see the various bibliop^raphies of 
papyri by U. Wilcken and F. Blass in Archiv fiir Pafyrusforschung iii, S. De Ricci in 
Rev. des eludes grecques 1905, and P. Viereck in l^xxvs.x^n's.Jahrtster. 1907. After comparing 
with the originals the suggestions which have been made, we give a list of most of those 
which, whether right or wrong, affect our transcriptions. Suj)plcmcnts of lacunae and 
readings already indicated in our notes are generally ignored. Where the source of the 
correction is not indicated, it is our own. 

III. 404. 4. /xto/^'oi/ T[t (Deissmann), cannot be read. 

408. 57. avX[o«y (Schroeder) is possible, as is his suggestion av^cov^f in 1. 61. The 
following suggestions by him or Fraccaroli are unsuitable: 25. a/i<^t [/3ouVa«r, 33. 

rravatfifv AficpirpvcopiaBas, 62. Xnr[oi(Tai, 64. Kapjffxidi. Whether Fr. [d) belongs tO 408 

is very doubtful ; the verso is in a different hand. 

409. 6. t]o TratSaptof (Leo) is possible. 35. TrapffpTrvVaf (Leo) is possible. 41. 
oSiKojy (o-Ti (Leo) is unsuitable. 45. a8v[vaTop (Kretschmar) is possible. 65. n^Xiv 
(Leo) does not suit the vestiges very well. 58. fi/a^ tovtov (Leo) can be read. 63. 
ovt[oi S] (laiv (Leo) is possible. 80. ;i«^>?[»car (Leo) is possible, but not /3Xa>/^ftt in 
1. 81. 100. TO Xoinov ov is inadmissible. 

410. 84. di\a6t]a}fx(vos (Fuhr) can be read. 

411. 36. Tri[s (TTpariai (Fuhr) is possible. 

412. 6. 1. vfontvdfa oitop for v(on(u6( aarov (Hefcrmehl, Bcrl. Phil, Wochftischr.y 
March 31, 1906). 9. 1. ntpa (sic) for irapa. 33. |tXaTf] t QpKv (Ludwich, 
Berl. Phil. Wochenschr., Nov. 14, 1903) is possible, and in 1. 35 (\m can be read. 55. 
For f7rfi(f[nj]f there is not room. 

413. 6. brl\\i)i'6Ti, (Sudhaus) is possible. 28. (pt\yp6i (Crusius, Herondas, ]\fitniatubi, 
1905, pp. loi sqq.) does not suit the vestige of the letter before p which seems to be i or o. 
53. oi 7S(v\doxivT{i (Crus.) is unsuitable. 57. Crusius' proposed reading r S lovrav \np6i 
ak\r{\uvs is possible but very doubtful. 91. 7rapaAX(i[| (Crus.) may be right. 112. 
/i]atVfa(^(it) ■iTOii](T(fii) (Sudh.) is possible, but the first letter after the lacuna is more like h. 

1. (-[djf A<[o]t for M • • [• •]"• I 13- Ga]rTOv (Sudh. ) is Unsuitable. I 16. or] Toi[f oSojn-nt 

(Sudh.) is unsuitable. 118 marg. 1. <7(cX»7poTfp(ot) for (T*cXr;po(f) t* (Sudh.). 130. Ka\ 

f<c[*(]i'(oi) (Crus.) is possible, but the next word is not a(^avfl.s (Sudh.) or iwpnroi (Crus.). 
130. KaTavyt\\\u) (Crus., Sudli.) is possible. 132. ^{k' ^vyoi/ (Crus., Sudh.) cannot be 

read, 133. <7rapa(r(dJ)ai (Crus.) is possible. 134. Neither Crusius' trrjVp/^fj-ffoj' fie 

TO vopi(6pfva nor Sudhaus' (mntauv ovt<i)s iip'iv (\>mv6p(va suits the vestiges. 1.39- [7 ^' 7" 

apa (Crus.) is possible, but notfVjfti'' apa (Sudh.). 147. pi m forM* 'p<r (Sudh.) is probably 
right. 148. Neither liyapai nor /cardi>c«/xat (Crus.) nor KwpnrTTd (Sudh.) is suitable. 151. 
7To]rf (Sudh.) or fpas] T( (Crus.) can be read. 152. >c]f»c[x]i/i€V«f (Sudh.) is unsuitable. 
178. dya)i/(i'a ?) wliich we printed in the margin against 1. 213 probably refers to this line 
(Crus., Sudh.). 181. X/^to (Sudh.) is possible. 186. Xdyw (Sudh.) is unsuitable. 

186. 77[ot]€ (Sudh.) is possible, but not nj)i]i> (Crus.). 


420. 2. <^[i\\oT[r]a-\u)v (Fuhr) or q[iT\oT[i\iiaiv (G. G. A. Murray) is possible. 7. 

(Kdpfy^ai (Fuhr) is possible, but there is not room for ttot in the lacuna before it. 

448. A new fragment belonging to the bottom of Col. xviii contains the beginnings 

of 11. 263-73 ^'J" ^' alrrafifi^., 8aiij[oi'ir], (i.iT\(jxev, ov fx[ev, X'^^p['^> f^^[«"'> f'S [, ave[pes, ov8 a[pa, 
ov8 e[vr]pe, (rrffia [. 

452. 10. 1. TTpcoTOL for irpcdTOV. 

464. 3. orepeo-ei (Kroll) is inadmissible. 5. axop]fvriv (Ludwich) is possible, 6. (]< 
8ov\(ov and $i[vfaei. (Kroll, Ludw.) are possible. 12. p[e\XovTos (Ludw.) is possible. 

13. »fni[poj'o]/ioi' (Ludw.) can be read. 14. KpaTe^poj/ (Kroll) is unsuitable. 15. (f)av\(ov 

(Kroll) is possible. 16. BefJ^a (Kroll) can be read. i8. f^otf" (Kroll) is inad- 

missible. 19. 7v^po8op[u)v (Ludw.) is inadmissible, but tj o[r] ([ir'^veva-oxn is possible, while 

8r]]Xev<Ta)ai kukoi ttoKiv (Kroll) is inadmissible. 20. Ka\i. aWoi (Ludw.) can be read, but 

not fiiwjLia. 21. 1. u(tl8oi (for eo-tSot) Ludw., but apo\y is inadmissible, as is ap[oTo]Kov 
(Kroll). 22. ^r)\pio<pi\ov {KvoW) and Ko]upo0iXou (Ludw.) are not long enough. 28. 

na(^(r; (Kroll) is inadmissible. 35. jaXXay?;? (Ludw.) is possible. 37. /ca/cjos (Ludw.) 

or (i)a\os (Kroll) can be read. 38. kiv[8vvovs (Kroll, Ludw.) is possible. 39. x'^^^J^'^'- 

(Kroll, Ludw.) can be read. 40. TroXureKw^t/To? (Ludw.) is inadmissible. 43. 

1. api8T]Xos (Kroll, Ludw.). 45. paprvpes rj t]s (Ludw.) is inadmissible. 54. 1. e/c <xKOTfiris 
(Kroll). 55. ai/ro[ I' (Ludw.) is possible. 58. 0a'i]f6)[i' (Ludw.) is possible. 61. 

p^tfts (Ludw.) is possible. 

471. The INIaximus against whom this speech is directed seems to be the praefect 
in 103-7, Vibius Maximus. De Ricci suggests that the erasure of his name on the 
Coptos tariff and^the Abu Tufa milestone may be due to these proceedings. 6. 1. ov 
i. e. i'7r(fp) ov for ov (Wilcken). 18. 8ov8r)v (i. e. a-novSi'jv) can be read for dovXTjv (De 
Ricci). 20. 6Xi^opfvcov (Cronert) is possible. 24. o]i.Wa i] (Cron.) is unsuitable, but his 
suggestion rrai/Tos is possible. 28. yap (Cron.) is unsuitable. 62. 8o[X]€t wi/(Wilck.) 
can be read. 75. ov can be read for av, as suggested by T. Nicklin and Cronert, but 
the letters seem to have been deleted. 108. o'xX]7poi' (Cron.) is unsuitable. 131. 

1. Md^[ipf (Wilck.). 142-3. 1. olvaXelpios (Wilck.). 145. 1. r[av ixe'i (Wilck.). 

146. 1. dp[xriv (TTj 8i\Ka (Wilck.). 147. Wilcken restores 7rai8f[ia re Km eW|. 151-3- 

Wilcken conjectures TTap'\avTov Trtpl [ rav toiovt[cov d(f)pobi\(ria)v. 154. Wilcken's suggestion 
6 [be does not suit ; ^[m' can be read. 

472. 24. (caTaypa^oi/rcoi^ (Cron.) is possible. 25. 77apf[x^]eVra)y (Cron.) cannot be 
read. tovtoi[s 8' ovk] (Cron.) is possible. 37. The mutilated word is not ovkovv 
(Cron.). 48. Siarf^^rat (Cron.) is unsuitable. 

481. 2. 1. TrpMTuis for ovjrcos; cf. P. Tebt. H. p. 132. 
485. 3. 1. eK for 7ra(pa). ivunnov cannot be read in 1. 36. 
488. 22. 1. \l8'i(w] cf. P. Tebt. IL 327. 28 and 487. 18. 

491. 5. Cronert suggests Ka6' 6v8r]TTOTovv rpoirov after aipryrai, but the passage is 
hopelessly illegible. 19. 1. Kv^epydoa-ris (Cron.). 

492. 9. The word before eKTfia-i is not Kai (Cron.). 

494. 44. Probably nap]fT€dri; cf. 713. I napeT€d{rj). 

495. 9-10. rrav 8ifv6v\[veiv ws av nvrfj 8oKfj (Cron.) is possible. 

496. 10. e'llv wore avp^fj (Cron.) is unsuitable, as also is his suggestion alprjirai in 1. 15. 

499. 15- 1- x^P'''^ ^or x^P'"""* 

500. 1 1-2. 1. d\7T 'l\ov8aia>v and a[K\]r)povopi]T(jav (cf. B. G. U. 868. 1 2) (Cron.). 

504. 16. w(TTi\ xpaa-dai avTo'is (Cron.) is unsuitable. 20. [Trjepl TotTo (Cron.) is 

possible. 44. Tov 8ui[86xov (Cron.) is not very suitable. 

5O6. 28. [l8]L6KTrjTos (Cron.) can be read, but the following tov renders a proper name 

more likely. 38. napaypa(p]^<: (Cron.) is possible. 


525. 8. Xn[3w]iy (Cron.) for Xa)[ro]C is possible. 

530. 8. Tjbq for fTTt (Cron.) is unsuitable. 

533. 13. T*\ t'tor] (Cron.) is unsuital)le. The letter after ^'ap might be almost anything. 

17- 1. f'J n<i[»fe'L»c;;. 

611. 1. Mar/)«a (cf. 529. 1 3) for fUTpfa (Cron.). 
653. I 8 SC]q. 1. »C'i/>7rfoI for KnpTrov, 

1\'. 659. 64. ({ir}K(v (Schroeder) is unsuitable. 
660. 9. /iaXa (Wilamowitz) is unsuitable. 

662. 34. avTimiKuiv TO TTpiv (W'ilam.) is unsuitable. 39. nap Evprjrao (Wilam.) is 
unsuitable. 51. Neither avaXfov nor ai-o-ToXfoj/. (Wilam.) can be read. 

663. 5. k'^ktiv (Korte) is probable. 8. The corrupt nvav is emended by Rutherford 
to ■rr{fp'i) imv, by Korte to if{tp\) tS)v, the next word being noitj^Tcov) in either case. 

664. 155. AjVifo(/>[pa)r (Wilam.) is unsuitable. 

665. 12. 1. Ak pa\ ynvfr ivcov fni. 

666. 163. fK Tcyv (Wilam.) is possible, but the vestiges suit (is better than «. 

668. Fr. (c) should be turned the other way up and read as dtu, belonging to 1. 164, 
M'here 1. gld^ium. 

680. 3. 1. fitra for pitya. 

681. 4. ajxpov o-v/Lt^7rfVo[''^T' (Fuhr) is unsuitable. 11. [aijr (Fuhr) is unsuitable. 

682. 5. 7rfpf[(r]T[eXX« (Fuhr) is possible. 

696. 90. 1. f\\adf, 3 lines being lost between this and the line beginning a (Fuhr). 

697. 38. Perhaps tot[(\ «[0ai|i/<ro (ivm, as Fuhr suggests. 

701. 26-8. Perhaps t<x>v vo\p[y>v ov8e rois uXjX ojf, as Fuhr suggests. 

705. 41. \. n pas TO Ta\nf'iov\ {\\i\a.m.). 78. Wilcken prefers ;^[wpioi; to x[°P'"^''»'' 

717. 5. pera toito v (Wilam.) is unsuitable. 

720. 7. Caesarid{us) c^oss {De Ricci) ca.n he read. 5. sefia[/us cofisu//o {Gradenwhz) 
after ef is unsuitable. 15. Wilcken's suggestion /egi for cepi is very doubtful, especially 

the supposed g. 

735. 1. dpiOpat V for apiBpav (De Ricci). 14. ad cognlega is resolved by Wilcken 
ad cogn{oscendum) lega(/ur), by De Ricci ad cogn{itiotteni) lega{li). 15. Serraeus for 
lerraeus (De Ricci) is possible. 16. 1. Gaddius for Gradius (De Ricci). 22. Sabmus 
(De Ricci) is possible. 27. De Ricci suggests cum epislrat{ego) at the beginning of the 
Une, which is possible. 29. 1. Eponuchus (De Ricci). 

736. 81 2fAcoi;;Taf (Wilam.) is unsuitable. 


List of Papyri distributed. 

We give here a list of published O.xyrhynchus and Ilibeh papyri which have been 
presented to different museums and libraries in Europe and America in addition to those 
of which a list was given in Part IV, pp. 265-71, and also some further details about those 
O.xyrhynchus and Fayftm papyri which in the former list were assigned to America without 
a more precise indication. We have added the present reference numbers (where ascertained) 
of the several institutions to which the papyri now belong. The papyri which do not 



appear in either list are still at Queen's College, Oxford. The following abbreviations are 
employed : — • 

B. M. = British Museum. The numbers refer to the Catalogue of Greek Papyri. 

Bodl. = Bodleian Library, Oxford. The references are to the hand-list of MSS. 

Bolton = Chadwick Museum, Bolton, Lancashire. 

Bristol = Bristol Museum. 

Brussels = Musees Royaux, Brussels, Belgium. 

Cairo = Museum of Antiquities, Cairo, Egypt. These papyri remain temporarily with us 

at Oxford. 
Cambridge = Cambridge University Library. The numbers refer to the * Additions '. 
Carnegie = Carnegie Institute, Pittsburg, U.S.A. 
Charterhouse = Library of Charterhouse School, Godalming, Surrey. 
Chicago = Haskell Oriental Museum, University of Chicago, U.S.A. 
Columbia = Library of Columbia University, New York, U.S.A. 

Cornell = Library of Cornell University, U.S.A. The papyri are numbered MSS. A loi. 
Dublin = Library of Trinity College, Dublin. 
Edinburgh = Library of Edinburgh University. 
Gen. Theol. = General Theological Seminary, New York, U.S.A. 
Graz = Library of Graz University, Austria. 

Harvard = Semitic Museum of Harvard University, Mass., U.S.A. 
Holyoke = Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass. U.S.A. 
Johns Hop. = Library of Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, U.S.A. 
Manchester = Museum of Manchester University. 

McCormick = Library of McCormick Theological Seminary, Chicago, U.S.A. 
Michigan = University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A. 
Morgan = Pierpoint Morgan Collection, New York, U.S.A. 
Pennsyl. = Museum of Science and Art, University of Pennsylvania, U.S.A. 
Princeton = Library of Princeton College, New Jersey, U.S.A. 
Smithsonian = Smithsonian Institution, Washington, U.S.A. 
Toronto = Museum of Victoria University, Toronto, Canada. 
Union Theol. = Union Theological Seminary, New York, U.S.A. 
Vassar = Library of Vassar College, Poughkeepsie, New York, U.S.A. 
Wellesley = Wellesley College, Mass., U.S.A. 

Western Res. = Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A. 
Yale = Library of Yale University, U.S.A. 

Oxyrhynchiis Papyri. 




Bodl. Gr. 



211. Harvard. 

213. Yale. 

219. Yale. 

250. Pennsyl. 2797. 

254-6. Union Theol. 

257. Michigan. 

259. Pennsyl. 2798. 

267. Johns Hop. 

268. Yale. 

271. Harvard. 

272. Michigan. 
274. Union Theol. 
276. Yale. 

287. Columbia. 

293. Columbia. 

294. Princeton. 

295. Columbia. 

297. Columbia. 

298. Princeton. 
392. Princeton. 
395. Michigan. 


401-2. Harvard. 
403. Gen. Theol. 

404. Bodl. Gr. theol. 

405. CambridgeAdd. 


406. McCormick BH 
88470. I. 

408. Yale. 

409. Bodl. Gr. class. 

c. 55 (P). 

410. Bodl. Gr. class. 

d. 75 (P). 



411. B. M. 1523. 

413. Bodl. Gr. class. 
b. 4 (P). 

414. Columbia. 

415. Graz I. 1930. 

416. Brussels. 

417. Smithsonian. 

418. Harvard. 

419. Brussels. 

420. B. M. 1524. 
421-3. Harvard. 

424. Graz I. 1926. 

425. Brussels. 

426. Toronto. 

427. B. M. 1525. 

428. Harvard. 

429. Manchester. 
430-1. Harvard. 

432. Graz I. 1929. 

433. CambridgeAdd. 

434. Harvard. 
435-6. Yale. 

437. Brussels. 

438. Yale. 

439. Bolton. 

440. Manchester. 

441. Brussels. 

442. Dublin Pap. E. 

443. Graz I. 1927. 

444. Yale. 
446-7. Harvard. 
448. Cornell. 

458. Harvard. 

459. Columbia. 
460-2. Harvard. 

464. Bodl. Gr. class. 

d. 75 (P). 

465. B. M. 1526. 

466. Columbia. 

467. Bodl. Gr. class. 

/• 73 (P). 

468. Edinburgh. 

469. Chicago. 

470. Dublin Pap. F. 

471. Bodl. Gr. class. 
a. 10 (P). 

472. Morgan. 

473. B. M. 1527. 

474. Manchester. 

475. Charterhouse. 

476. Chicago. 

477. Columbia. 

478. Brussels. 
479-80. Chicago. 

481. Gen. Theol. 

482. Chicago. 

483. Pennsyl. 2822. 

485. Bodl. Gr. class. 

c. 56 (P). 

486. Columbia. 

487. Chicago. 

488. Brussels. 

489. B. M. 1528. 

490. Graz I. 1920. 

491. Morgan. 

492. Dublin Pap. C. 4. 

493. Toronto. 

494. B. ^r. 1529. 

495. Brussels. 

496. Bodl. Gr. class. 
a. 9 (P). 

497. Yale. 

498. Toronto. 

500. Graz III. 1918. 
502-3. Cornell. 

504. Bodl. Gr. class. 

c- 57 (P). 

505. Cornell. 

506. Harvard. 

507. Brussels. 

508. Cornell. 

509. Brussels. 

510. Chicago. 

511. Graz I. 1931. 

512. Chicago. 

513. Toronto. 

514. Vassar. 

515. Smithsonian. 
516-8. Pennsyl. 

519. Brussels. 
520-1. Columbia. 

522. Yale. 

523. Cornell. 
524-5. Vassar. 
526-7. Pennsyl. 


528. Dublin Pap. F.9. 

529. Pennsyl. 2804. 

530. B. M. 1530. 
531-2. Pennsyl. 

533. Harvard. 
534-40. Columbia. 
541. Cornell. 
543-9. Cornell. 
551. Princeton. 
552-3. Harvard. 
555-7. Harvard. 
559. Harvard. 
561-72. Johns Hop. 

574. Bodl. Gr. class. 

/ 74 (P). 

575. Chicago. 
577-8. Chicago. 

579. Gen. Theol. 

580. Johns Hop. 
582. Johns Hop. 
583-4. Michigan. 
585-8. Johns Hop. 
590-8. Holyoke. 
599. Gen. Theol. 
605-7. Yale. 
609-10. Chicago. 
611. Carnegie. 
012. Pennsyl. 
613. Princeton. 
615. Princeton. 
616-7. Yale. 
618-20. Princeton. 
621-7. Yale. 
628-32. Pennsyl. 

2807-1 r. 
633. Union Theol. 
638. Yale. 
639-43. UnionTheol. 

645. Yale. 

646. Manchester. 
648-50. Pennsyl. 


652. Pennsyl. 2796. 

653. Bodl. Gr. class. 
c. 58 (P). 


654. B. M. 1531. 

655. Harvard. 

656. Bodl. Gr. bibl. 

J. 5 (P). 

657. B. M. 1532. 
058. Yale. 

659. B. M. 1533. 

660. Graz I. 1923. 

661. Cairo. 

662. B. M. 1533. 

663. CambridgeAdd. 


664. Cairo. 

665. Toronto. 

666. Bodl. Gr. class. 
d. 76 (P). 

667. Dublin Pap. F. 

668. B. M. 1532. 

669. Cairo. 
670-2. Wellesley. 
673. Brussels. 

074. Dublin Pap. F. 

1 1. 
675. Graz I. 1922. 
676-8. Wellesley. 

679. Brussels. 

680. Manchester. 

681. Johns Hop. 

682. Edinburgh. 

683. Manchester. 

684. Johns Plop. 

685. Bodl. Gr. class. 

/ 75 (P). 

686. B. M. 1534. 

687. B. M. 1535. 

688. B. M. 1536. 

689. Wellesley. 

690. Brussels.' 
691-2. Wellesley, 
693-5. Princeton. 

696. Pennsyl. 2814. 

697. Dublin Pap. E.9. 

698. Wellesley. 

699. Dublin Pap. F, 

700-2. Harvard. 

703. Bodl. Gr. class. 

g' 51 (P). 

704. Pennsyl. 2820. 

705. CambridgeAdd. 



706. Pennsyl. 2823. 

736. Brussels. 

772. Bristol. 

807. McCormickBH 

707. Morgan. 

737. Western Res. 

773. Brussels. 

88470. 3. 

708. Manchester. 

738. Graz I. 1921. 

774. Johns Hop. 

808. Cairo. 

709. Bodl. Gr. class. 

739. Cairo. 

775. Pennsyl. 2821. 

809. Carnegie. 

e. 88 (P). 

740. CambridgeAdd. 

776. Pennsyl. 2817. 

810. Cairo. 

710. Brussels. 


777. Cairo. 

811-2. Vassar. 

711. Graz I. 1925. 

741. CambridgeAdd. 

778. Pennsyl. 2818. 

813. Brussels. 

712. Cairo. 


779. Cairo. 

814. Carnegie. 

713. B. M. 1537. 

742. B. M. 1541. 

780. Dublin Pap. F. 

815-7. Cairo. 

714. B. M. 1538. 

743. Brussels. 


818. B. M. 1543. 

715. Bristol. 

744. Toronto. 

781. Pennsyl. 2819. 

819. Vassar. 

716. CambridgeAdd. 

745. Columbia. 

782. Pennsyl. 2816. 

820. Cairo. 


746. Brussels. 

783. Edinburgh. 

821. Vassar. 

717. Cairo. 

747. Charterhouse. 

784. B. M. 1542. 

822. Wellesley. 

718. Columbia. 

748. Western Res. 

785. Morgan. 

823. Brussels. 

719. Yale. 

749. Cairo. 

786. Cairo. 

824. Wellesley. 

720. Bodl. Lat. class. 

750. Western Res. 

787. Columbia. 

825. Cairo. 

d. 12 (P). 

751. Cairo. 

788. Morgan. 

826. Wellesley. 

721. Cairo. 

752. Western Res. 

789-91. Columbia. 

827. Cairo. 

722. Columbia. 

753. Toronto. 

792. Toronto. 

828. Graz I. 1934. 

723. Cairo. 

754-5. Princeton. 

793-4. Cairo. 

829. Wellesley. 

724. Carnegie. 

756-8. Yale. 

795, Morgan. 

830-1. Gen. Theol. 

725. Toronto. 

759. Brussels. 

796-7. Columbia. 

832. B. M. 1544. 

726. Cairo. 

760. Graz I. 1928. 

798. Morgan. 

833. CambridgeAdd. 

727. B. M. 1539. 

761. Harvard. 

799-801. Cairo. 


728. Cairo. 

762. Pennsyl. 2815. 

802. Graz I. 1933. 

834. CambridgeAdd. 

729. B. M. 1540. 

763. Cairo. 

803. Harvard. 


730. Cairo. 

764-5. Harvard. 

804. Toronto. 

835. Gen. Theol. 

731. Manchester. 

766-9. Johns Hop. 

805. McCormickBH 

836. Brussels. 

732-4. Cairo. 

770. Bolton. 

88470. 2. 

837-8. Cairo. 

735. Morgan. 

771. Manchester. 

806. Cairo. 

839. Bodl. Gr. class. 
c- 59 (P). 



9. Holyoke. 

80. Pennsyl. 2787. 

145. Harvard. 

250. Chicago. 

14. Michigan. 

81. Pennsyl. 2790. 

147-50. Harvard. 

251. Cornell. 

19. Chicago. 

86. Pennsyl. 2792. 

154. Michigan. 

253. Pennsyl. 2777. 

20. Pennsyl. 2776. 

86 {a). Yale. 

156. Michigan. 

255-7. Michigan. 

22. Pennsyl. 2782. 

94. Princeton. 

158-9. Michigan. 

261. Pennsyl. 2778. 

23. Chicago. 

103. Princeton. 

190-5. Princeton. 

263. Columbia. 

53. Pennsyl. 2789. 

106. Princeton. 

222. Harvard. 

265. Yale. 

58. Pennsyl. 2791. 

110. Columbia. 

225. Harvard. 

267. Yale. 

59. Pennsyl. 2788. 

113. Yale. 

227. Harvard. 

268. Holyoke. 

60. Pennsyl. 2783. 

115. Yale. 

230. Harvard. 

271. Princeton. 

63. Pennsyl. 2781. 

117. Pennsyl. 2785. 

239. Princeton. 

272-3. Yale. 

64. Yale. 

119. Pennsyl. 2786. 

241. Cornell. 

274-7. Chicago. 

65. Pennsyl. 2779. 

120. Pennsyl. 2784. 

243. Cornell. 

291-3. Union Theol. 

77. Pennsyl. 2780. 

137-8. Yale. 

245-7. Cornell. 

296. Johns Hop. 



299. Harvard. 

314-7. Cornell. 

333. Johns Hop. 

343. Johns Hop. 

.SOI. Johns Hop. 

320-1. Harvard. 

335. Yale. 

347-8. Johns Hop 

3UG. Johns Hop. 

331. Johns Hop. 

338. Cornell. 

Hibch Papyri. 

35-6. Harvard. 

61. McCormickBH 

123. Western Res. 

141-4. Columbia. 

37. Carnegie. 

88442. 2. 

125-7. Gen. Theol. 

149. Princeton. 

39. Brussels. 

62. Brussels. 

129. McCormickBH 

152-3. Princeton. 

42. Graz I. 1924. 

75. Pennsyl. 2824. 

88442. 3- 

154. Vassar. 

43. Carnegie, 

79. Pennsyl. 2825. 

134. Brussels. 

155. Smithsonian. 

44. Yale. 

83. Harvard. 

135 McCormickBH 

157-8. Harvard. 

46. Morgan. 

86. Carnegie. 


159-62. Yale, 

49. Yale. 

103. Carnegie. 

136. Cairo, 

1()3. Princeton. 

54. Toronto. 

114. Carnegie. 

138. Graz I. 1932. 

164. Cairo. 

55-6. Yale. 

1 1 8. Columbia. 

139. McCormickBH 

165. Princeton. 

60. McCormickBH 

120. Smithsonian. 

88442. 5. 

168. Graz I. 1919 

88442. I. 

122. Smithsonian. 

140. Brussels. 

170. Smithsonian. 

Syios 14, 21, 29. 
ayvfVTTfpiov 8, 13* 
abiKeiv I. 

aXXd 2, 5, 16, 45. 

dXXdo-o-fti' 19. 

fJXXof 18, 

dv{p)(((Tdai 27. 

nudpwnos 5 1 39- 

QTrd 44. 

anoKpivecrQai 30. 

dnoXap^dvdv 4. 

dp)(i(p€vs 10. 

avXrjTpls 36. 

avTOf 3, 7, 8, II, 24, 30. 

^tlXXfii; 33. 
/3drrTfi«' 43. 
Pa7rri(fiu 1 5, 42. 

^daavoi 7« 

y«/> 3. 1 5- 

Anv*i8 25. 

^<>M« 35- 
d(d 25> 

«-ya) 41, 42. 

«' 18. 

nj/at 17, 23. 

etj 8. 

flcrdydv 8. 

(Ktlvoi 24, 39. 

tWdf 35. 

f** 4, 9> 23, 25, 33, 43. 

fv5o6(p 39. 

€vbv(a6ai 27. 

(vhvpa 19, 27. 

ivraxiOa 23. 

emOvpiia 38. 

fTTiTptneiv 12. 

(pXtcrdai 28, 44. 

(Ttpos 25, 26. 


INDEX I. 840. 

Cwi? 44 (?)• 
fcudr 4. 

17/iepa 34. 

ifpdi/ 9, 17, 23. 
la-Tauai 2 I . 

KndapeCfiv 23, 24. 
KaOapos 18, 28. 
KaKi'a 41. 
KUKOvpyos 5- 
(caXXcon'tXfH' 38. 
KaTep)(e(T6ai 26. 
KXlpa^ 26. 
/cdXacrts 6. 
*cwa)j/ 33, 

Xfyeti/ II, 24, 31, 42. 

AfVfis 10 (?). 

XfVKOj 27. 

\ip.vq 2 5- 

Xovfii; 14, 19, 24, 32, 37. 

paeT}TT}s 15, 2 2, 42. 
M^ 2, 18, 31, 42. 
H^v 15. 
^ijre 14. 
fioXvvfiv 16. 
fiovoi 4, 
fivpi^fip 36. 

viTTTfaBai 34. 
•^^ 34. 

opoios 3. 
ovofia 1 1 . 
dpdi/ 13, 20, 31. 
Of 18, 33, 42. 

OO-TTfp 35. 
Oir 3. 

ova/ 31, 45. 
oti6'c 20. 
ovSfis 18. 

ov«' 23. 

oJrof 13, 17, 32. 

tvapa\apj5dv(iv 7. 
Trdf I. 
irdaxfiv 3. 
rrarfii' 1 7, 20. 
TrfptTrnrflv 9. 
irKrjpovf 40. 

TToXvf 6. 
TTOpvl] 36. 
TTOVf 15. 

Trpd I. 
jrpdy 30, 38. 
irpoa-^Xenfiv 29. 
irpoatpxta-dai 9. 
npoaexfiv 2. 
Tvpdrepov I. 

77(1); 2. 

(TKfvof 14, 2 I, 30. 

(TKOpTTlOS 35 

0-pjjx"*' 35. 37- 

ao(f)i(KT6ai I. 
cr^ 12, 15, 23, 32. 
O-UV 2 2. 

o'Ui'Tvy;(di'fii' 1 1. 
(TWTTjp 1 2, 30. 

Tt's 12. 
Tlf lO. 

Tonos 17. 

TOTf 28. 

Tv(f>K6s 31. 
i'S'^P 33. 43- 

vpflf 3. 
vnofifvfiv 6, 

^apto-aiof 10, 

x*'" 32. 

XoZpor 33. 

//. 841 


INDEX II. 841. 

Large Roman numerals refer to poems : sch. — seholinm. 

'A^Srjpa II. 5 sch. ; Fr. 2. i sch. ; II. 69 sch.; 
Fr. 5. 5 sch. 

'A^Srjp'iTai II. 3 sch. 
"A^Srjpos II. I, 104. 

dyaffot II. 43 sch. ; III. 95 sch. 

uyaKXerji IV. 12; V. 48. 
uyavoi IX. 36. 
tiyyeXXfH^ II. 77- 
SyytXos \ 1. 1 01. 
ayftv 1. 8 ; VI. 103. 
Ayeiadm Frs. I 29-3 I. XI. 
dy\aia III. 5. 
dyXao- III. I. 

dyXaos VI. 62 ; VII. 3 ; Fr. 26. 6 (?). 
dyi'tX^i' Frs. 129-31. 6 sch. 

liypios II. 61. 
ay \ideos VII. 10. 
dytii' VI. 60. 
dhaiartpoi \\ . 27. 
aSopTTOs VI. 128. 
ae^Xoi/ IV. 2 2. 
Het'v. 1. 11.52. 
df'Xtos IX. I. 
df^eiv V. 1. VI. 10. 

d^p VI. 137. 

'A^a^i/a . . . Fr. 28. 4. 
ddduaros VI. 50; Fr. 1 6. 1 7. 

*\6rjvaloi II. 29 sch.; V. 35 sch. 
iOXop II. 57 sch. 

ddpoos IV. 42. 

"A^ojf II. 63 sch. 

A(yarof Fr. 19. 27. 

Aiyiva VI. 125 sch., I 34 ScH., I 3 7. 

aiScof II. 51. 

aid II. 52 (v. 1. dfi). 

duti' \ I. 8. 

aXd(cj6ai VI. 97. 

«;% III. 17; VII. II (?). 

aiKknv V. 45 sch. 

alptiv \ . 36. 

Qiaa II. 58. 

al\paTdi II. 62. 

dxfpo-fjfo^af IX. 45. 
aKvafJUTTos \ I. 88. 
aKoXov^cdr Fr. 95. 4 Sch. 
oKos IV. 26. 
rtKOTor I. 3. 
dwrif IX. I. 

'A\('$avdpus Fr. 96. 2 sch.; Frs. 129-31. i 

dXt^eiv VI. 10 (v. 1. dpTj^nv and at^ctv). 

5Xi^ IV. 36. 

Ski, IV. 24. 

d\tT)7ptof Frs. 129-31. I sch. 

dX(cd II. 37 and sch. 

ciKKipos VI. 98. 

axXci II. 55 sch., 73; IV. 28; VI. 54, 105, 

128; IX. 7. 
«XXo^t IV. 48. 
aWos II. 63; VI. n8 sch. 
SKpa Fr. 33. 5. 

(lAf VI. TOO. 
(jXcroj \ I. 1 4. 
aXoxric \ I. 82. 

.V IX. 16. 

apa ... Fr. 21. 7 sch. 

dpa^iTOi Fr. 16. 6. 

2/iiap II. 76. 

dp.a)(avia W . 26 ; \ I. lO 

dpdxavos VI. 53 ; IX. 3. 

dpfSpoaia Fr. 46. 2. 

dp^poaioi IX. 35. 

dpfipoToi III. 16: VI. 140. 

iiptl^taBai. W. 15. 

aptpa IX. 3. 

(i/xrrfXof(t II. 25. 

n/nvi'fo-^at II. 63 sell. 

d/i</)i II. 97. 

d^(^t . . . Fr. 26. 3. 

dp(})i^aiv(iv Fr. 33. 2. 

dpipinoXoi \ I. 117. 

a./ II. 48 sch. = di-d VII. 12. 

drd II. 97; III. 16. aplX. 16. auYU. 12. 

dcuSoo-ij III. 96 sch. 




79 sch.; IV. 4 sch., 61 
Fr. 84. 10 sch. ; 

avaiveadai IV. 36. 

'avaipelvW. 118 sch. ; Fr. 82. 7 sch. 

afopewtcT-^ai (?) VI. I 36. 

avakveiv VI. 94 (inf. avaKvev). 

ava^ ly. 35. 

oi'<irt^ti'at IX. 39- 

di/Spet'a II. 55 sch., 57 Sch. 

(ipenos \ I. I 10. 

avtvde Fr. 16. 14. 

th^P II. 37 and sch., 57; IV. 33; VI. 9; 
Fr. 16. 13 ; Fr. 82. 29; Fr. 86. i ; Fr. 92. 
I (?); IX. 4, 20; Fr. 134. 3 sch. 

avdffiov Fr. 46. 3' 
tivdos I. 10. 

avdpcoTTOS Fl. 103. I sch. 
avUa Fr. 82. 26. 
ai-innoi IV. 27. 
dvoiyvvvai Fr. 87. 2. 
dfopea IX. 45- 
aira II. 69. 
dvTepfiSfiv VI. 88. 
avTfadai II. 42. 
acTi, ai/Ti ToO II. 

sch. (?); VI. 59 sch. 
IX. 35 sch. 

dvTinaXos II. 43 Sch. 
doiBd III. 12; VI. 128. 
doi8ipos VI. 6. 
dopio-ror VI. 87 SCh. 

diraiTfiv Fr. 82. 7 sch. 

OTrar Col. XXV Sch. 
dTTflpaiP VI. 176. 
dnripaiv IX. 8. 
(iniaTos Fr. 19. 23. 

uTrd II. 3 sch.; V. 35 sch.; VI. 135, 183 
sch.; Fr. 21. 10; Fr. 107 sch.; Frs. 
129-31. 4 sch. 

dno8i86vai IX. 36 Sch. 
anoiKos II. 3 sch. 
aTTOKTet'i/etz' II. 73 Sch. 

*An6\\(ov I. 8; II. 5; V. I et saep.\ VI. 14, 
91; Fr. 84. 13; IX. 40 (?); Fr. 134. 2 

d-noKo-^t\fj6ai Fr. 70. I Sch. 

dnoptpi^fiv Frs. 129-31. 6 sch. 

dnopla Fr. 19. 16 sch. 
diroppoia Frs. 129-31. 4 SCh. 
dnoandv VI. 134 Sch. 
dTraj^fiCT^oi IV. 47. 
tipa VI. 96. 

"Apyof IV. 29 and sch. 

dperd IV. 22; VI. 131, 176. 

dptTTj Fr. 124 sch. 

dpTjyeiv V. 1. VI. 10. 

'Api'o-Tapxof (?) II. 61 sch.; Fr. 82. 35 
sch. (?); Fr. 94. 3 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 6 
sch.; Fr. 134. 9 sch. 

' hpi(TTo(f)dvr]s (?) II. 75 sch.; VI. 89 sch., 181 

dpK€lV II. 31. 

dppa Fr. 16. 8. 

apovpa IV. 25 ; VI. 106. 

"Aprtpis IV. I. 

(ipXevBai. VI. 50. 

dp)(d IX. 20. 

apX"? IJ- 3 sch. 

*A<TTfpin V. 42. 

darosll. 48; FrS. 129-31. I3. 

aarpov VI. I26 ; IX. 2. 

a(TTv I. 7 ; IV. 32. 

'A(7W7rds VI. 134. 

drpaTrds IX. 5. 

av II. 80; Fr. 82. 19 sch. 

ni^8a II. 1 01 ; IV. 3; VII. 17. 

av\d VII. 3. 

AiiVis Fr. 139. 2 sch., 3 sch. 

aiXos III. 94; VII. II (?); IX. 36 sch. 

aiiTap)(f7v IV. 37. 

avTOi II. 43 sch. ; VI. 7 sch.; Fr. 82. 4 sch. 

aiixe'iv II. 37 SCh. 
avxpos VI. 125 sch. 

«(^ap VI. 81 ; Fr. 82. 22. 

'Ac^poStVa II. 5 > ^I' 4" 
'Axaioi VI. 85. 

awTos VI. 59 and sch. 

Ba^vXav IV. 1 5. 

^a^uSo|os II. 58 ; Fr. 28. 2 (?). 
^aBvCoiVOi Fr. 47. 3 (?). 
^advKoXnos VI. 1 35. 

iSa^iJf IV. 44; Fr. 16. 15. 

^aivfiv VI. 100. 
/Sato J II. 74. 
^dXXeiv IV. 10. 

^apVKTVTTOS IV. 41. 

/3iards VI. 84. 
jSidSwpos IV. 26. 

^t'os IV. 26 sch.; VI. 117. 
^\o)(TK(iv I. I ; II. 73. 
(iovvopia IV. 27. 

//. 841 


^/Joror VI. 55 ; IX. 48. 

/3a)/ior III. 9; VI. 114 ; VII. 15. 

ya II. 62 ; VI. 120. yajd II. 25; VI. 109; 

IX. 19. 
yop II. 3 sch., 42, 43 sch., 5=; scli.; VI. 7, 

54, 62; Fr. 16. 13; Fr. 116. 3; IX. 47; 

Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 

7. IV. 28; VI. .r^i (?), 123, n^. 

sch.; IV. 50 


y. IV. 28; VI. 54(?), 123, 175 

ytvfa I. 9. 

■yfj/fij Fr. 82. 2 sch. 

yivoi II. 41 ; IX. 20. 
y(pai6<: VI. 1 1 3. 
ytpui IV. 30. 
y^pas I. 1 ; VI. 1 1 6. 

ylyvtadai II. 57 sch., 79 and 
sch.; Fr. 66. 2 sch. 

yiyvaxrKfiv IV. 23. 
yXvKviiaxavos II. 80. 
yXvKvs II. lOI ; VI. 59. 
yXuxTcra VI. 59- 
yovfvs II. 55 sch., 73 sch. 

yovos Fr. 19. 30. 

ypa(f)(iv VI. 119 sch., 121 Sch., 122 S 
yvud IV. 4. 

titupoiaos Fr. 82. 21 ; IX. 34. 

8uifi(i)v VI. 131. 

dais I. 8. 

AdXtos V. I et saep.\ Fr. 47. 2. 

AaXof IV. 12 ; V. 17 (?), 40. 

hapoi Fr. 28. 4. 

haoi II. 40. 

^apBavia VI. 90. 

AapdaviSai Fr. 82. 27. 

Sapov I. 9. 

5(101^ Fr. 107 sch. 
8a(f)pr](popiK6i Fr. 107 sch. 
8f8o«(ct«'at Fr. 19. 23. 
8(7p II. 55 sch., 57 sch. 
8(iv6i Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 

deXros Fr. 19. 2. 

AeXc^oi II. 98; VI. I sch., 16,63; Fr. 134. 5 sch. 
bf'fMis V. 42; VI. 80. 

tfxfadm V. 45; VI. 5, 129. 
dq'Koi'itTi VI. I I sch. 
£^T)pr)VOi II. 5. 
drfpid^eadai VI. I 19. 

did VI. 7 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 3 sch., 6 sch. 

dtayiyv(j)aK€ii> I\ . 2 1. 
diahihovai Fr. 16. 16. 
bum(p6(i.v \ I. 104. 
8«fip7raf*if VI. 118 sch. 
biq<TTOvv VI. 96. 
diarpl^av VI. 134 Sch. 
dia(f)fp(iv II. 43 sch. 

Siajfat II. 53 ; III. loi {?); IV. 52 ; V, 41 ; 

Fr. 16. 12. 
Skc . . . Fr. 66. 2 sch. 
diKaiuii Fr. 84. 12. 
8.0' VI. 118 sch. 

Aiop.T]dris VI. 76. 

8c'f Frs. 129-31. I sch. 

dl<j>K(lV II. 4. 

Atcofi'O'os' IV. 25. 

doKfiv II. 43 sch.; Fr. 82. 29. 

d6$a Fr. 49. 2. 

8oT«pa VII. I (?). 

fipOf IV. 52. 

dvuapis I. 4- 

Sviao-^ui II. 33 sch., 37 sch., 73 sell.; Frs. 
129-31. I sch., 4 sch. 

Svvaros VI. 52. dvvaroiTfpos IV. 5. 

8vcrpfVT]s II. 69. 

8vcrxfp»ivftv Yl. 118 sch. 

bo}pa Fr. 26. 6. 

8ojpr}pa IV. 26 sch. 

Aioptfvs \ I. 123. 

fill/ II. 31 sch., 43 sch. 

(iv IV. 50, 51. 

f^Sopos IV. 38. 

fyyvaXi^fiu VI. I 3 3. 

iydptiV \ I. 108. 

eyKuraTt^t'i'at II. 6 I. 

iyKttadai II. 52. 

fyo) II. 26, 102 ; IV. 21. 49; V. 44; VI. 5, 

58 ; Fr. 16. 16 ; Fr. 19. 23 ; Fr. 84. 14 ; 

Fr. 94. 2 (pcotc); Frs. 129-31. 19 {fpiv). 
ibvoiiv IV. 4. 
((fo-dai Fr. 19. 18. 

(6(\(iv II. 79 and sch.; IV. 28; Fr. 19. 21. 
!duos VI. 64. 

«t II. 31, 57 sch. ; VI. 91. 
(ISoi Fr. 35. 1. 
(IduXonoif'iii VI. 130 sch. (?). 
«Vu8iw Fr. 134. 9 sch.; cf. Fr. 134. 3. 
flXiopav (?) V. 1. VI. 183. 
uvm II. 3 sch., 28, 48 sch., 75 {tf = tui>) ; 

y z 



IV. 27, 35, 49, 52 ; VI. II sch. ; Fr. 21. 

7; Fr. 73 sch.; Frs. 129-31. i sch., 3 

sch. ; Fr. 134. 2 sch. 
fis II. 75 sch.; IV. 13 sch. 
fh II. 33 sch.; VI. I sch., 7 sch.. Col. xxv 

sch., 118 sch.; Fr. 19. 4; IX. 9; Fr. 

139. 2 sch. 
(K III. 95 sch.; Fr. 84. 14 sch. ; Fr. 134. 4 

sch. f'l ap)^as IX. 20. 

'Ekq/So Fr. 82. 27. 

<Va/3dXof VI. 79, III ; IX. 38. 

fKatpyos Fr. 19. 12. 

fKClS IV, 35. 

fKaaroi VI. 62 SCh. 
'Emra II. 78. 

tKUTfpos Fr. 82. 15 sch. 

e/cart IX. 46. 
(<aToy)(fip Fr. 82. 31. 
(Karov IV. 37. 
eV/3aXXeii/ II. 63 Sch. 

fK^iKia VI. 118 sch. e»cS([ic . . . Fr. 134. 3 sch. 
f K€t IV. 50 sch. 

fKUOVuv II. 43 sch, 

tKCOf II. 102. 

*X . . . II. 27 sch. 
fXnvvfiv III. 16 ; IX. 6. 
(Xax^vvwTOs IV. 14. 
•EX^Va VI. 95. 
fXiKapTiv^ III. 15. 
'EXtKaji/idSfS Fr. 16. 14. 

fXtKCOTTtS II. 99. 

'EXXdi/toj VI. 125. 

'EXXtj^o? VI. 125 sch. 

'EXXaw IV. 23. 
'EXXdy VI. 62 sch. 

fXTTt's II. 43 sch. 
ffji^dWdv VI. 78. 
f'ppoyHV II. 57 sch. 

tpos II. 29 ; IV. 44 ; VI. II and sch.; Frs. 
129-31. 17. 

(fxnai/ II. 29. 

(pntbus II. 27. fpneSov IV. 49. 

eV II. 31 sch., 43 sch., 48 sch., 69 sch.; III. 
12; VI. 5, 61, 98, 106, 119 sch., 120, 
124 sch., 125 sch. ; Fr. 19. 24; Fr. 95. 5 
sch.; IX. 3, 17 sch., 36 sch., 40 sch., 41 ; 
Fr. 162. 2 sch. 

(vaipeiv VI. 114. 

fvciTos Frs. 129—31. 3. 

iviivai VI. 123. 

tv6a V. 44. 

fviavTOs I. 5. 

epvatrripii FrS. I29-3I. I Sch., 6 Sch. 

'Efi'ocri'Say IV. 41. 

ivoiKfiv II. 63 sch. 

^vTta II. 74- 

iVTirfios VI. II sch. 
ivvvviov Fr. 82. 19 sch. 

f^aipfTos IX. 42. 

f^epx^o-Gai Fr. 82. 2 sch. 

f^iKVficrdai VI. I 10. 
e^onicra II. 27. 
(OS IV. 39. 
fwaivdv IV. 36. 

eVei IV. 50 sch. ; V. 40 ; VI. 7 sch., 98 ; 
Fr. 17. 3 ; Fr. 84. 15 sch. 

eTTfira II. 65 ; IV. 46 ; VI. lOg. 
fTrtvdpaxTKeiv \^1. 114. 
f'nepxfcrBai I. 7 ; II. 63 Sch. 
enfadai Fr. 2 2. 3 (?). 
f7rr]\vs II. 48 sch. 

fTj-t I. 3; IV. 16 sch.; VI. 7 and sch., loo, 
116, 134 and sch., 140; Fr. 19. 10 sch., 
27 ; Fr. 26. 7 ; Fr. 82. 11 sch. 

eTTlTTlTTTfCV II. 64. 
(TTiaKOTOi IX. 5- 

eniTeXflv Fr. 82. 1 8 sch., 1 9 sch. ; IX. 34 


eniTiWuv IX. 28-9 sch. 
eniTidfaOai II. 48 Sch. 
iniTptTTfiv IX. 46. 
(Tvix^P'-os IV. 46; VI. 138. 

fTTOf IV. 5 ; VI. Col. xxv sch. ; VII. 2 sch. ; 
Fr. 84. 10. 

epaadai VI. 58 ; Fr. 1 9. 29. 
fpyov Fr. 87. 3. 
epenrfiv I. 9. 
ipfvvav Fr. 16. 15. 
'Epfj^^fuy V. 45 sch. 
fprjpos IV, 47. 

fplCfiv VI. 87 and sch. 

ipiKvhi]<i V. 39. 

'Epti/vj Fr. 82. 30. 

eplnvrj V. 2 1 Sch. 

ipKelos VI. 114. 

(pnfiv II. 26. 

fppnv II. 33 sch. 

tpxf<T6ai II. 68; VI. 9, 100; Fr. 16. 15; 

Fr. 82. 5 sch.; Fr. 137. 2 sch. 
«1V. 44; VI. 115; VII. 3. 

//. 841 


fo-Xiir II. 102. 
tras Vi. lO. 

(Ti Frs. 129-31. 21. 

fTos VI. 62 sell.; Frs. 129-31. 6 sch. 

(vayrjs V. 1. Fr. 1 9. 25. 

fvayopia II. 67. 

fiaiT^j VII. 18. 

(vauyijf Fr. 19. 25, V. I. e^ayijf and vava- 

•yijs (.'). 
Ei'^ota V. 35. 
(v^ovXla II. 50. 
fi'Si'a II. 52. 
(vtpKfjs IV. 45. 
(VfTTjpla VI. 62 sch. 
ti'^erfii' II. 43 sch. 

fiWojf Fr. 82. 18 sch. 

(i'dvfiia I. 2. 
(vKapnos II. 26. 
(vK\fT}s II. 103. 
(Vfin^nvia Yr. 1 6. II. 
fVfxevijs II. 78 ; V. 45. 

fvi/d Fr. 19. 20. 

fvva^dv VI. I 28. 

€vvofiia I. 10. 

Ei'^diTiOf IV. 35, 60 sch. 

fhodfios II. 97- 

fvnenXos Fr. 1 6. lO. 

(i<7r\(Kf]s III. 12. 

EvpiTTos IX. 49. 

tvpicTKdv VI. 53. 

evpv^iai VI. 103 ; IX. 4I. 

(ipvona VI. 1 34; Fr. 82. 24. 

<irpvr VI. 60, 96, 120. 

(vpv(f)apfTpa VI. I I . 

(\j<f>pa)v \ I. I I 5- 

(v^fo-^ai VI. 64, 125 sch. 

((f)oSoi II. 43 sch. 

€(})opav II. 29. 

t^ft" IV. 48; V. 39 ; \'l. Col. XXV sch., 57; 

Fr. 26. 3 ; Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 
f'xBpos II. 32, 54. 

Cddfoi 11. 63 ; VI. 5. 

(uKOTOi IX. 18. 

Zf adot IX. 44. 

ftuyj/vi-ot Frs. 129—31. 20. 

Z(vs IV. 41 ; VI. I, 94, 125 and sch.; Fr. 

19. 21 ; Fr. 92. 3 ; IX. 7. 
Zr)v68nTos IV. 58 sch. ; VI. 55 sch., 59 sch., 

118 sch., 119 sch., 183 sch. 

8 sch. 

t) II. 37 Sch., 43 sch., 48 sch. ; VI. 1 1 

IX. 6, 14-7, I 7 sch., 19. 
7 IV. 21, 25. =t(t>'i (?) Fr. 19. 2t. 
n^n n. 55. 
f}fi(ls II. 55 sch. 
fiptrepoi II. 73 sch., 77 sch. 
rjviKa II. 29 sch.; Fr. 82. 4 sch. 

'Upa VI. 88. 

ijpa,s IV. 58 sch. {>). 

i](Tvxln II. 33 ; IV. 7. 

rjroi VI. I 18 sch., 130 sch. (?). 

^TOp VI. I 2. 

ea\la VI. 14. 

$a\\fip II. 52. 

da/jid II. 98 ; Fr. 19. 27. 

Oiipivd W. 16. 

ddpvos IV. 52. 

dappuv II. 23 sch. 

0(d III. 15; VI. Col. XXV sch. 

Qtpiyovos I. 6. 

dffii^fvos VI. 131. 

^e/its Fr. 84. 15 sch.; IX. 41. 

6(p(ina>v \ . 45. 

^e'por IX. 1 7 and sch. 

dfo-TTfcrios VII. I. 
emy VI. 84. 

(9fdf II. 54, 65 and sch.; IV. 17; VI. 51.61, 
80, 94, 112; Fr. 82. 4 sch.; Fr. 95. 3 

eeW II. 37 sch. 

eijiia I. 'J. 

e^iSdt Fr. 82. II sch.; IX. 9, 40 sch. 

Orj^aioi Fr. 134. 7 sch. 

6qp Fr. 26. 5. 

dinjtTKdv II. 55 sch. 

6oai IX. 7. 

eo6i VI. 18. 

0pa(TVi VI. 86; V. I. Fr. 96. i. 

Opa'iKta II. 25. 

Qpovia II. I . 

^pdor IX. 36. 

dvyuTTjp Fr. 16. 10; Fr. 19. 22. 

^ij«tj' III. 96 sch. ; VI. 62. 
(9vdf,f III. 8. 
66ip<i^ II, I sch. 

'laa>v II. 3. 

uVni Fr. 17. 2. 

UTTdKii' IV. 31, 62. 



Upov VI. 125 sch. 

Upoi III. 93. ItpaTaTov Fr. 82. 2 ; Fr. 87. 3. 
tC^iv VI. 93. 

»7 I. 5; IV. 31, 62 ; VI. 121, 122. 
Irj'ios II. 35, 71, 107; V. I e/ sacp.; Fr. 
28. 3. 

iKa8 . . . (etVaSioy?) Fr. I 34. 3 Sch. 

IKiTiVdV IX. 8. 

iKi>el(r6ai VI. 1 1 6. 

"iXtoi/ VI. 81, 104 ; Fr. 82. 32. 

J/icp . . . Frs. 129-31. 18. 

tva VI. II sch., 140. 

'Uvios Fr. 46. 4 (?). 

inntKSv II. 43 Sch. 

iwTTtos Fr. 26. 3. 

tTTTTos II. 41, 43 sch.; VI. 107; Fr. 16. 

^ 6(?),7. 

imroaoas IX. 'J. 
'nrnoxiipp-dS II. IO4. 
laa/xi Fr. 2 2. 3. 
'I(r//[»j»' ... Fr. 161. 
'lafMTjviov IX. 35 sch., 40 sch. 
l(Tp.Tjvios Fr. 26. 7- 
'la-fiT^fo? Fr. 138. I sch. (?). 
laopvSfins Fr. 90. 2. 
to-os VI. 54. luas II. 106 sch. 
laraaOai II. 38, 99. 

t;(^i;f IV. 2 0. 
'lavia II. 3 sch. 

KdS/itof IX. 44. 

Kaifiv Frs. 129-31. 19. 

Kaivos IV. 38 sch. 

Kaipos II. 31 sch., 34. 

Ka.Xap.os IX. 36. 

KaKf7v II. 5 sch., 96; Fr. 19. 26. 

KaXos II. 66. 

Ka/iKfti/ II. 2 7- 

Kanvos III. 96 sch. 

KapOaia IV. 1 3. 

KopTTOS IX. 14. 

KapridTOS V. 1. Fr. 19. 28. 
KaoraXm VI. 8. 
Kno-raXtos Fr. 1 34. I SCh. 

Kara II. 43 sch. ; IV. 6; VI. 11 sch. 

Kara^aivtiif II. 34; VI. I 3, 60. 
KaTaK\v{^fiv IX. 19. 

KaraXeynv VI. 1 29; Fr. 84. I5 Sch. 
KaraaKios VI. 1 39. 

Karepfinfiv Fr. 82. 33. 

KUToiKeiv IV. 60 sch.; Fr. 139. 3 sch. 

Kf{v) IV. 50 ; VI. 90. 

Kfap IV. 61 sch.; Fr. 82. 21. 

KfBvos IV. 58 sch.; VI. 12, 105. 

(ceTi/oj II. 68 ; Frs. 129-31. 19. 

KfXadfh II. loi ; VII. 17 ; V. I. Fr. 16. 5. 

K(Xa8(vv6s V. 46. 

K(\aiv((f)r]s VI. 55- 

KeXrjs Fr. 46. 4. 

KfPfOXTlS IX. 16. 

Keos IV. 60 sch. 

Ktpavvos IV. 43. 

Kfcof IV. 7, 13 sch. 

K»7^to-dy VI. 7 sch. 

Kiu>v Fr. 90. 4. 

(cXd^eii/ Fr. 82. 20. 

Kkapos IV. 48. 

KXfTTTeiv IX. 3. 

Kkiveiv Fr. 84. 1 1. 

kXCuv VI. 58. 

KXii/Ltej/or Fr. 82. 8 sch. 

KXvTopavTK VI. 2 ; Frs. 129—31. 22. 

kXvtos v. 1. VI. 14; Fr. 84. 13. 

Koivos, Kara Koivov VI. II SCh. 
KoivacrOai Fr. 84. II. 
Koloy Fr. 19. 2 2. 
Kopa VI. 138. 

Kopa VI. 16; Fr. 16. 11; IX. 43. 
Kopvcjid VI. 93; VII. 12; Fr. 82. 23. 

Kpaiudv II. 103 ; IX. 34. 

KpOTia-TOS Fr. 19. 28 (v. 1. KUpTKTTOs). 

Kpe'as VI. 118 sch. 

VLpTjTr) IV. 50 sch.; Fr. 134. 4 sch. 
Kpovios VI. 68 ; Fr. 26. 6. 
Kpovicov Fr. 82. 25. 

Kpovos VI. 134. 

KpVTTTflV VI. 138. 

KTacT^ai II. 59> 

KTeivf IP VI. 119; inf. KTaj/ei/ VI. II9 Sch. 

KTi((iv II. 29 sch.; V, 39. 

KvavoKopos V. 1. VI. 83. 

KvavonXoKos VI. 83 (v. 1. KvavoKOfios), 

KVfia VI. 100. 

KvT{(ipi(T(Tos IV. 50 and sch. 
Kvpios Fr. 116. 2 sch. 
KoiXvfiv VI. 118 sch. 

Xa-y;^di/e(i/ IV. 53. 

XapfSdvfiu 11. 3 sch.; VI. 130. 

//. 841 


Xi'iyLirtiv III. 95 sch. 

"KavOnvfiv VI. 110. 

Xoof I. 9; II. 3, 48; VI. 179. 

AaroiSof VI. 15 ; Fr. 33. 4 (?). 
AaTo) V. 44. 

\iy(iv IV. 39; VI. II sch.; VII. 13; Fr. 

19. 16 sch.; Fr. 71. 4 sch.; Fr. 82. 33; 

IX. 35 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 4 sch., 7 sch. 
\(ln(iv II. 36, 72, 108; IV. 29, 45. 

'KfVKoikfVOS VI. 87. 

Xf^os VI. 140; Fr. 19. 10 sch.; IX. 35, 42. 
\(aiv VI. 7 sch. 
Xriufxa II. 37 sch. 

\iav IV. 48; Fr. 162. I. 
Xi/iof VI. 64. 
\i(T(Te<T0ai VI. 3. 
\iTavfu(ip IX. 38. 

Xoyof II. 77; IV. 35; Fr. 82. 24; Fr. 84. 

14 sch. 
\oin6s II. 33 sch.; Fr. 84. 8. 

Ao$ias VI. 60. 
\oxeia Fr. 19. 10 sch. 
\vt6s Fr. 86. 3 (?). 

fxaifadai IV. 36. 

fiaKap IV. 46 ; Fr. 48. 2. 

/iaXa Fr. 84. 12. 

Hd^aKos II. 52. 

fiaWov II. 48 sch. 

Ata«' II. 39. 

/xavieiv II. 46. 

fuivTfia Fr. 65. 2 sch. 

navTivtaOai Fr. 82. I sch. ; Fr. 129. 3 sch. 

fxdvTis Fr. 26. 9 ; Fr. 84. 13; Fr. 95. 6 sch. (?). 

fjuipvncrdai II. 39. 

/iaratof IV. 34. 

fiaTTjp II. 28, 29; III. 6; IV. 44; VI. 12, 

105 ; IX. 2. 
fujTpa>s Fr. 27. 2. 

/ifyaX<5((0T0f IX. I 7 sch. 

^tyar II. 26; IV. 48 ; VI. 90; Fr. 84. 10. 

ptbibiv VI. 124. 
MAa^TTOf IV. 28. 

MfXd/j(^vXXoi/ II. 69 and sch. 
/i/Xt VI. 59. 
MfX.'a IX. 35, 43. 
fifXiyapvi III. 1 1 ; V. 47. 

/itXXfiiy II. 57 sch., 77 sch. 

p(\n€affai VI. 17. 

/i«V II. 53; IV. 22; VI. 51; Fr. 84. 14; 
Fr. 90. 3; Frs. 129-31. 18. 

pivoi VI. 88. 
pfvrm VI. II sch. 
pipoi IV. 38. 

/MTo II. 43 sch.; Fr. 95. 5 sch. (?); IX. 21, 
36 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 

ptTanoptvfaOai IX. 49 Sch. 

pfTpiws I. 3 sch. 

ptTpov I. 3 ; VI. 12 1. 

pixp'- VI. 62 sch. 

MI? 11. 26; IV. 1 6 sch. ; VI. 9 1 , 115. 

prj^tadai IX. I. 
p^dos IX. 37. 
pffv II. 75. 

prjnoTf II. 36, 72, 108; Fr. 84. 14 sch, 

p^Tt VI. 116. 

piyvvvai Fr. 19. 29 ; IX, 43. 
piv II, 73; VI. 115 (v. 1. fii/); Fr. 19. 24 
(v, I. i/n/), 26; Frs, 129-31. i8, 

Mvapoavva VI, 56; Fr. 1 6. II. 

polpa II, 64, 

poipios [pvpios Pap,, V. I. Ilvdioi^ VI. 118. 

Molera IV, 24; VI, 181, 

MoKToios IX. 39. 

MoXoaals VI. 109. 

p6\7rd II, 96. 

povapxf'iv IV, 29, 

popioy III. 95 sch, 

popcTipLos VI. 94, 

MoCo-a Fr. 95, 3 sch, 

pox^oi II. 33 and sch, 

Mvppi86v(s VI, 107, 

J/aifii/ II. 24; IV. 21 ; V. 36. 

Nuts II. I. 

j'flOf III. 7. 

j'So-os V. 39; VI. 124. 

i'avayi7r (?) V, 1. Fr, 19. 

pavnpvTavis VI. I 30, 

vaCras Fr. 1 9. 26, 

j/fViif VI. 98. 

vfptiu VI. 54 ; Fr. 33. 

ffOTToXtS II. 28. 

NfOTTToXf/ZOC \ I, 102, 

v/of VI. 122; IX. 20. VfUTfpOS IX. 6. 

V€(f)OS VI, 92. 

i'rjXi7r Fr. 26. 5. 
i>^(TOi IV, 16 sch, 

v^Klw II. 63 sch. 
uiKa<f)npia Fr. 48. 3. 

wVt; II. 43 sch., 106 si-h. 





vivlY. 15; v.l. VI. 115; VI. 180; V. 1. Fr. 
19. 24; Fr. 82. 32; IX. 47. 

vicperos IX. 1 4. 

voflv II. 54- 

v6r]fia I. 3 ; II. 43 Sch. 

vofios II. 102. 

vofjios IV. 51' 

voos V. 45. 

voTf/jo'y IX. 17 sch. 

i/ortoy IX. 17 and sch. 

viiv I. 5; VI. 121. 

wi/ VI. 58. 

voiTov VI. 139. 

^cw'a VI. 61. 

\tvoKahris FrS. 129-31. 14. 

6 demonstr., ras Fr. 19. 28. tw IX. 44. 

Toi II. 59 ; IV. 42. TO Ka\ TO. VI. 132. 
oSf II. 3; Fr. 82. 29. 
ohoslY. 6; Fr. 16. 15; IX. 4. 

«58vj^poy I. I. 

o&iv Fr. 134. 5 sch. 

oiKfiv V. 42. 

OlKodfV IV. 32. 
OlKodfTOS I. 4. 
0?KOS- IV. 45. 

orjiior VI. 1 15> 

oW II. 3 sch., 43 sch., 55 sch. 

o"iXf(T0ai II. 55; IV. 61 sch. 
oltovonoXos IV. 30. 

OKTOi III. 10. 

SX0osll. 60; VI. 133; IX. 9. 
oXi'-yos IV. 52. 
oXodf Fr. 82. 21. 
oXoy IV. 45. 
oXocfivpfaOai IX. 21. 
'OXvflTTlOS VI. I. 

OXvfjLTTos VI. 92. 

"Ofxripos Fr. 17. I ; Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 

ofxtXos VI. 108. 
Ofjina IX. 2. 
ofivvvai VI. 112. 
o/ionog II. 37 sch. 
6/x0a III. 94 ; V. 48. 
6fi(f)a\6i VI. 16, 120. 
ofxddvvfioi Fr, 134. 6. 
'OvfiTT): IV. 61 sch. (?). 
o^«a)r II. 48 sch. 

ovonaKXvTos VI. 123. 

onicrco VI. loi. 

OTrXoi/ Fr. 93. 4. 

oTTou II. 5 sch.; VI. 125 sch. 

opav I. 3 J VI. 106. 

opKos Fts. 129-31. 4 sch. 

opvvfiv IV. I I . 
'Opa-OTplaiva IX. 47. 
'Oprt/yt'a Fr. 1 9. 26. 
6p(f)av6s VI. 9. 

oy II. 79 sch. ; III. 95 sch. ; IV. 36 ; VI. 62 
sch., 77, 104, 113, 118 sch.; Fr. 82, 27; 
IX. 41. 

oa-os, oaa-os VI. 87, 89 and Sch. 

S<TTf VI. 63. 

Sans Fr. 16. 14. 
ore Fr. 86. I. 

OTl IX, 21. 

ov, otiAc IV. 28, 53 ; VI. 94, 127 ; Fr. 19. 21 ; 

Fr. 86. 3. 
oiSe II. 55 sch.; VI. no, III. 

oibfii IX. 2 I . 
ovKeri II. 55 sch. 
ovXc/xei/oy IX. I 5. 
ovvfKep VI. 127. 

Ovpavos Fr. 16. 10. 

oijTe VI. 105, 106. 

oiiTos II. 43 sch., 69 sch., 105 sch.; VI. 51, 
57; Fr. 16. 16; Fr. 82. 17 sch.; IX. 36 
sch.; Frs. 129-31. I sch., 4 sch. ; Fr. 162. 
3 sch. ovTois Fr. 69. I sch.; Fr. 82. 35 sch. 

oi^'iTepos VI. 82. 

7ray€T<Js IX, I7> 
ndyKOivos IX. lO, 
irada Fr. 82. 26. 

na6os Fr. 82. 17 sch. 

naiav II. 4, 35, 71, 107 ; V, 47; VI. 182. 

naiijatv VI. 121, 1 2 7. 

Uaiovfs II. 61. 

nais II. 2; IV. 60 sch.; V. 44; VI. 12, 74, 

77 (nah), 83, 134; Fr. 28. 3. 
ndXai II. 56; Fr. 19. 26. 
Trdpnav IV. 47. 
7ravanfipo)p Fr. 82. 24. 

ndvdcopos V. 45 sch. 

navfXXds VI. 62. 

ndv6oos VI. 74. 

TravTfXrjs I. 5. 
TraiToSaTTos II. 43 Sch. 

//. 841 


nap, napd VI. 17, 120 ; IX. 1 7 sch. ; Frs. 

129-31, 18, 19. 
TTapaTvyxf'vdi' II. 43 Sch. 
nnpfx^eiv 1\ . 24. 

napOivoi II. 77, 100 ; VI. 54, 136 ; Fr. 26. 4. 
ndpif VI. 79. 
Hapva<T<Tioi II. 97. 
ndpoi IX. 6. 

n-ar IV. 6; VI. 55, 132; Fr. 82. 32; Fr. 
84. 10 and sch., 15 sch. ; Fr. 87. 3 ; IX. 21. 

Ila<Ti(pda IV. 38. 
TracTj^fif IX. 2 I. 

TTOTijp VI. 56. 118 sch.; Fr. 21. 10; Fr. 82. 
8 sch.; IX. 45; Frs. 129-31. 9. 

Trarptof II. 2 SCh. 

Trarpis IV. 29. 

nnrpuios VI. 106, 1 68 (?). 

nfSav VI. 86. 

iTtbfXfiv IV. 16 (?), 37. 

TTfSioi' IV. 16 and sch. 
TTfSov Fr. 82. 32 ; IX. 16. 

nfCf'^eiv II. 43 sch. 

TTfi^ftf VI. 13, 52; Fr. 19. 20. 

rrfipav IV. 46. 
TTeXiiyos Fr. 19. 24. 
ntXas IX. 35. 

nep-rrtiv IV. 43; Fr. 88. I. 
■nivdos IV. 53. 
TTtfTaTroXts IV. 13 sch. 
TTtTrpcopfvoi Fr. 82. 26. 
nfpaivfiv Fr. 21, 9- 
nipav II. 6 I. 
llfpyapov VI. 96. 
ntpOfiv VI. 9 1 . 

fr*p« IV. 58 ; VI. 62 sch., 95, 118, 125 sch. 

ntpiahXa IX. 48. 
jreptSaVor IV. 51. 
n/po-at II. 29 sch. 
rrtrpa II. 98 ; Fr. 1 9. 25. 
nr;Xci^8af VI. 99. 

ni]Vfi6s Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 
Uitpibfs VI. 6. 

lliVSapof Fr. 82. 3 sch.; IX. i sch. 
DiVSof II. 97. 


TrXacrcTfti' II. 30. 
nXripti Fr. 82. 17 sch. 
trXot" TOf IV. 46. 

TTi'fli' Fr. 96. 2. 

7ro5«i» VI. 50, 130. 

nnirfpn IX. 37 ^ch. 
noivd VI. 172. 

TToXf^ov II. 43 sch., 57 sch., 59, 105; IV. 

40; IX. 13. 
noXtpiot II. 30, 31 sch. 
noXidoxoi Frs. 129-31. 12. 

rioXidf VI. 89. 
TToXidr Fr. 33. 3. 

TToXts II. 3 sch., 29 sch., 48 sch.; IV. 13 
sch., 37 ; VI. 104 ; Fr. 99. 2 ; IX. 44. 

TToXlTfVttV II. 48 sch. 
TToXXflKt VI. 182. 
7To\v8oipOS II. 60. 

7roXv^;;Xof V. 38 (v. 1. ^fpe'/ijjXor). 
noXvs II. 48 sch., 75; IV. 50 sch. 
noKvcTKonos IX. I. 

7To\v(JTOVOS \ I. 99. 

irovflu II. 66. 

ndvos VI. 89; Fr. 16. 17. 
7r(5»n-tor VI. 83 ; IX. 47. 
TTovTos VI. 124; IX. 16. 
TTopdpos Fr. 139. 2 sch. (?). 
nopos Fr. 162. 2 sch. 

IToaftSai' II. 2. 

IIocTeiBdvios II. 41. 

norapos II. 73; Fr. 1 38. I Sch. 

noTf IV. 42; VI. 73, 135; Fr. 82. 5 sch., 

28; IX. 41. 
TTOTt II. 75 ; III. 14. 

ITOTlKVpflv II. 45. 

nSrvia IX. lO. 
novs \ I. 18. 
irpdaafiv Fr. 84. 12. 
Ilpiapot VI. 113. 
jrpiV I. I, 2. 
Trpd VI. 89; VII. 15. 
npo^ifid^dv II. 106. 
npn^atpios Frs. 129-31. 20. 
npodinjo-Kdv II. 56 and sch. 
npodvpov VI. 134 sch., 135. 
TrpoXt'yfiJ' II. 77 sch. 
npnpddda Fr. 82. 35. 
npondpoidfv II. 70- 

np6i II. 43 sch., 57 sch. ; VI. 1,114; IX. 7. 

npncTodiov Fr. 108 sch. (.''). 

npoaraKTiKws \ I. 177 ^^^• 

npoTpeirtiu Fr. 82. I O Sch. 

npocpdras VI. 6 ; IX. 42. 

irpvTavis VI. 69. 

npunot II. 76; Fr. 107 sch. 



nravoi Fr. 1 6. 8. 

uiBios V. 1. VI. ii8; IX. 43. 
UvBoi VI, I sch., 2. 

Uvda^voBfv VI. 72. 

nvp II. 30 ; III. 95 sch. ; VI. 98. 

TToJf IV . 49. 

pt'ivVl. 7 sch.; IX. 18. 
piTTTfiv Fr. 19. 2 5« 
podios VI. 129. 

crafia IX. I3. 

orafiaivdv Fr. 82. 23. 

cra6(ppa>v IX. 46. aaxppcop I. 10. 

(TfXas II. 44 ; VI. 97. 

<T(v(a6ai IX. 5- 

(rrjpaiveiu III. 95 Sch. 

ade'vos III. 93; IX. 14. 

o-Afta^fti/ I. 2 ; VI. 180. 

<TKl6flS VI. I 7, 

(tkXtjpos Fr. 82. 31. 

O-KOTTfXof IV. 2 1. 

(TKonos VI. 94. 
2Kvp60ev VI. 102. 
o-dr VI. 133. 

(ro(/)ta Fr. 16. 15; IX. 4. 
(To(f)6s VI. 52. 
anfvddv Fr. 82. 20. 
(77r\dy;^i'oj' Fr. 82. 28. 
anopas V. 38. 
<TTacrid((iv II. 48 Sch. 
arraa-is IV. 53 ; IX. 1 5. 
oTfpydv IV. 34. 

(TTfpVOV IV. 14. 

<TT((f)avos VI. 13, 180 and sch. 

fTTOi'a;^d Fr. 82. 2 2. 
a-TpareiKadai Fr. 82. I O Sch. 
crrpaTos II. 73 sch., 75, 104 ; IV. 42 ; IX. 44. 
2tv^ Frs. 129-31. 4 and sch. 
(TV II. 3 {(Tfd(v) and sch. ; III. 1 3 {riv) ; VI. 
I, 127; Fr. 82. 25; IX. 7, 43; Frs. 

129-31. 18 (jiv). 
avyyevfia IV. 33. 
avp(f>ep(iv II. 57 sch. 
(rifKpopos Fr. 26. 12. 

•TV./ II. 59, 74. 80; V. 18, 47; VI. 4. 55; 
Fr. 26. 4 ; Fr. 94. 3 sch. ; Fr. 112. i. 

(Tvmydv IX. 36 (inf. avvdytv). 
a-vvd(l)na Frs. I 29-3 1. 4 Sch. 
(Tvvepx((x6ni VI. 125 Sch. 

a-vvridcas VI. 118 sch. 
avvTflvdv IX. 49. 
(ruw€Xf7y II. 65. 

2vpi.os Fr. 16. 7- 

a-tpels, (r</)i(i') IV. 40 ; V. 40. a-(f)i(Tiv Fr. 84. 1 1 . 
crxf86v I. I ; II. 73 ; VI. 109. 
(ro)^p<i>p I. 10. (Ta6(f)puv IX. 46. 

Taprapos IV. 44. 

ravpos VII. 14. 

Ta(f)os VI. 98. 

rax^TTovs II. lOO. 

Ta;^iif Fr. 96. I (v. 1. Opaavs). 

Te0p6s IV. 47; VI. 57. 

Tt'lXOS II. 37- 

reXeii/ II. 65 sch. ; Fr. 19. 30; Fr. 82. 25. 

reXeo)? Fr. 82. 1 9 Sch. 

reXevToioi II. I05. 

reXos Fr. 2 1. 7. 

reptvos VI. I 20. 

Tfds VI. II. 

repay IV. 39 ; Fr. 82. 34 ; IX. 10. 

revxeiv VI. I 32. 

Tfxva IX. 39. 

Tewj II. 3 sch., 29 sch. 

Tijiot II. 3 sch. 

T;;A ... IV. 61 sch. 

Trjvepos IX. 4 1. 

Tieiv IX. 48. 

Tidfvai IV. 30 ; VI. 81, 99 ; IX. 3, 19. 
TiKTfiv II. 29 sch.; Fr. 82. 30; IX. 42; 

Frs. 129-31. 21. 
Tipd VI. II and sch., 118. 
Tis Fr. 19. 20; IX. I. 
Tis I. 2; II. 31, 66; IV. 25, 60 sch.; VI. 

130 sch.; Fr. 26. 4 (?); Fr. 95. 2 sch. (?). 

5 sch.; IX. 6, 9, 13, 34; Frs. 129-31. 4 


TiTapTjcrios FrS. 1 2 9-3 1. 4 Sch. 
rXav II. 64. 
ToOi VI. 15. 

TOl IV. 21, 40; VI. 70 (?), 132. 

T0t6(r8e Fr. 82. 23. 
ToiovTos II. 43 sch. 
TOKevs II. 57. 
ToXpdv VI. 94. 
Topapos VI. 109. 
To^o(f)6pos Fr. 19. 30. 
ToTToj II. 5 sch., 69 sch. 

TOTt VI. 137. 

//. 841 

33 ^ 

rpn)(\K II. 32. 
Tpt'iv IV. 40. 

rptiTfiv II. 43 sch. ; IX. 9. 

TptoSoUf IV, 43. 

Tpn(f}6s II. 63 ; VI. 14. 
Tpaia VI. 75. 
Tvy)(av(iv II. 76. 

Tv(f)\6s Fr. 16. 13. 

Ti^;(a Fr. 2 1.8. 

vffpiCfiv II. 48 sch. 

v8a>p VI. 7 and sch., 134 ; IX. 18 and sch.; 

Frs. 129-31. 4 sch. 
vidf IV. 38, 61 sch.; Frs. 129-31. 21; Fr. 

152. 2. 
vfi€T(pos V. 46 ; VI. 139 ; IX. 37. 
vfjiv . . . Fr. 21.10. 
vfivf'iv IV. 4 sch. ; Fr. 94. i sch. 
vp,vos Fr. 16. 5- 

imavTid^dV II. 32. 

{mtp II. 63 sch.; VI. 62 ; Fr. 84. 14, 15. 

vntpyavav III. 95 Sch. 

inepraroi II. 68; Fr. 86. 4 ; IX. 2. 

vn(p(f)aTos IX. 15- 

vnvaiXeos Fr. 82. 34. 

iiTrd Fr. 82. 28 ; Fr. 90. 4; IX. 34. 
xmofifvfiv II. 65 sch. ; Fr. 144. 2 sch. 

inoTidfo-dai II. 43 Sch. 
{jylrrfKos II. 98. 
v>//i(co/iof VI. 95. 
V^f/l(TTOS II. 38. 
i'V'd^ei' III. II. 

(f)atvvos III. 17 ; VI. 126. 

(paivfiv Fr. 19. 25; Fr. 90. 2. 

<f)av€p6s VII. 13. (PavfpHs Fr. 74. 2 Sch. 
(^iyycK II. 68. 

(^tpci./ II. 33, 43. 57; IV. 25; VI. 76, 124 

sch.; Fr. 82. 29 ; IX. 13. 
(f)tpip.riKoi V. 1. V. 38. 
(f>0i(Tis IX. 14. 
(pdovuv II. 46 sch., 55 sch. 

ipdovoi II. 55. 

0iX... VI. 178. 

(^tXa. .. VII. 7. 

(|)iX«v VI. 67 (?). 

(Pi\T)<Ti(TT((f>avos I. 8. 
<f>i\i7r7TOS I. 7- 

(^.-Xor II. 31 ; IV. 33; VI. 12, 1 20. 
(f)\fyfiv II. 67. 
(f)oii'iK6TrfCa II. 77" 
(pSfot \ I. 86. 

(f)opf'iv Fr. 19. 27. 
(f>pd(€tu Fr. 49. I. 
<j()/)i7i' IV. 50; Fr. 16. 13; IX. 37. 

(f)v\(i(T(T(lV Wl. 91. 

(f)vp(iv II. 73 and sch. 

xd^xeoi II. 100; VI. 7 sch.; Fr. 90. 3. 

XnXKfo\l/ III. 94. 
)(a\Ko6d)pa^ II. 1. 
X^aKKOKopv(TTds VI. 108. 

xnX(td7rvXo9 VI. 7 and sch. 

Xn>f II. 103; IX. 37. 

XapiTti III. 2 ; IV. 13 ; VI. 3 ; Fr. 112. 

)^a(rpcirioy VI. 7 Sch. 

X^cii/ II. 60; IV. 14, 42; VI. 16; 
14 ; IX. 17. 

^opfvfiv IV. 2 (?). 
xdpevais VI. 9. 

xopos II. 99 ; III. loi. 
Xpav Fr. 82. I sch. xpn II- 
xpnC^^" Fr. 82. 14 sch. 
xprjf^a VI. 118 sch. 
Xpri<Tix6s Fr. 82. 9 sch. 
Xpr](rrfipiop VI. 71 ; VII. 18; IX. 40. 
Xpovos II. 27 ; III. 14; IV. II ; VI. 5. 
xpva-fos VI. I, 92, 137 ; Frs. 129-31. i sch. 
XpvannTos Fr. 84. 1 4 Sch. (?). 
Xpv<ro . . . Frs. 129-31. 10. XP^*^°' ' • ' HI" 

XpvaoKopas V. 4 I . 
xS>pos IX. 49. 

Fr. 84. 

57- XP^^VI. 96. 

yl^6<f>os VI. 8 and sch. 

i VI. 125; Fr. 28. 2; Fr. 82. 24; IX. 2, 

<5 IV. 31, 62. 

a)fli7 II. 102 sch., IX. 36 sch. 
»>Kfav6s Fr. 84. 15 and sch.; IX. 43. 

*Qpat I. 6. 
o)pios III. 14. 

wf Frs. 129-31. 4 sch., 6 sch. 

u)(f)€\fia II. 37 sch. 



INDEX III. 842. 
Numerals in thick type refer to columns. 

aya66v 12. 28 ; 20. 34. 

ayavaKTfiv 1. 9 ; 18. 24- 

dyyeXAeii' 15. 3. 

ayuv 17. 23; 19. 14, 20; 20. 15, 36; 21. 

4; Fr. 71. 5. 

*Ayr;fn'Xaos 5. 6, 47 J 6. I4, 30, 40 ; 7. I, 39 ; 

18. 33 ; 19. 18, 26, 35 ; 20. 4, 15 ; 21. 4, 

'Ayvias 1. 30. 

ayopa 6. 25 ; 11. 1 6, 1 9. 

aypos 14. 5- 

abiKflv 15. 10. 

dbpoTaros 3. 7- 

del 5. 39; 14. 31, 40; 16. 3; 20. 23. 

aUi 3. 13. 
'Adrjvai. 2. 10. 
'A0rivaloil. 8, 15, 18; 2. II, 23, 27, 3 1, 36; 

13. I, 15, 22, 24, 30, 36, 40 ; 14. 14. 

AdrjmjdfV 1. 2. 
alyiaXos 18. 1 8. 
AVal. 23; 2. 35; 3. 6. 
alpe'ivl. 17; 6. 25; 10. 6(?); Fr. 13. 4(?); 

15. 21 ; 16. 36; 19. 7. 
aladdvtadai 3. 32 ; 14. 28; 17. 23. 
Ataifios 1. 16. 

mri'al. 18 ; 12. 38 ; 14. 24. 
atrios 11. 36 ; 16. 9. 
oKepaios 20. 29. 
aKivdwoTtpov 7. 38 (?). 
iiKoXovOfiv 17. 13. 
aKonaiTepais 21. 9. 
oKot^fti/ 2. 36; 18. 23; 21. 36. 

AKpai(jiviov 12. 20. 

dfcpoTToXtj 17. 35- 

AXav[ . . li/toioi; ? (gen.) 17. 33. 

'AXiapTioi 12. 17. 

iiKiaKeffOai 13. 32. 

''Akt6)i/(?) 3. 26. 

axxd 6. 36; Fr, II. 10; 12. 2; 13. i, 28; 

15. 10, 20; 17. 8; 20. 8; 21. 8. dXX' fj 

5. 42. 
dXX^Xtoi/ 12. 33 ; 14. 32. 
aXXos 2. 16; 6. 27; 7. 42, 43; 8. 41; 

Fr. II. 9; 11. 26; 12. 13; 14. 3, 19; 

15. 29; 17. 11; 18. 21, 30; 20. 21. 
SiWm 5. 20 (?). 
aixa 6. 5 ; 7. 6 ; 10. 2, 3 ; 13. 18, 19 ; 18. 

dp.(f)t(T^qTr](ripoi 14. 25. 
Apcfiinokis 2. 24. 
dp(f)6Tfpos 5. 43. 

au 14. 28 ; 16. 7 ; 17. 20. 

dva^alvetv 11. 20 ; 15. 38 ; 16. 25. 
dvdyeiu 1. 7 > 6. 5 > 15. 36. 
dvaipeiv 20. 2. 
di'fKcpdffti' 11. 21. 

dvakap^dvdv 3. 32 ; 6. 39 ; 20. 17. 

dvaKicTKfiv 12. 23; 16. 13. 

dvaireiBeiv 14. 22; 16. 3 1. 

dvaufpTTdv 7. 2 2. 

avanTavpovv 18. 2 2, 

dvax<i>p('i-v 15. 5) 3*^' 

dvbpdTTohov 13. 3 1 . 

'AvdpoK\d8ai 14. 6, 35 ; 15. 2 ; (-S^y) 13. 1 1 ; 

(^Ai/dpoKXrjs) 12. 34. 

a«"7P 3. 37 : 11. 22 ; 14. 22, 35 ; 16. 37. 
dvBapnd^eiv 14. 33. 

avdpoiiTos 6. 26 ; 17. 16, 25. 

dviardvai 1. 15 ; 6. 5, II, 17 ; 19. 24; 20. 

21, 36. 

dvTi Fr. II. 13; 14. 33; 21. 15. 

'AvTidfos 12. 34. 
dvriKapi^dveiv 17. 2 I . 
dvrnrpdTTdv 1. 2 7- 
AvvTos 1. 16. 
aVoj 20. 37. 
a^ios 21. 31. 

ci^toOi' 14. 40 ; 15. 6, 

aTrayyeXXeii' 3. 43. 

uTrdyeti/ 6. 5 1, 53 ; 19. 36 ; 21. 5, 19. 

aTTayopfveiv 16. 2 0. 
dTraXXdrreii' 2. II. 

&nas 1. 25; 6. 13, 33; 12. 6, 27 ; 13. 34; 
18. 15. 

dTrdrr] 12. 21 ; 15. 12. 
dneiXfiv 13. 23 (?). 
dneiTrdv 15. 6. 
diTtpxtaOai 15. 32. 

///. 842 


'ATTtaf Tietiov 10. 2. 
um€Viu 15. 25 ; 19. 26. 
aninrot 15. H. 
arrXcoj 12. 25- 

dTTo 6. 1 5 ; 13. 35 ; 14. i 7, 30 ; 16. 38 ; 18. 
2; 21. 32, 33, 37. 

a7ro/auXX<(f 14. 33; 15. 29. 

iiTToSiBovai 6. 31 ; 16. 32. 

dnoBvjjcrKfiv 19. 20, 33. 

annKpovfivn. 28 (.'). 

anoKTfivdv 1. 33; 11. 25; 18. 22, 29. 

d7roXa^j3(ii'f(i' 3. 1 8. 

anoXaCfii' 12. 26. 

oTToXi/fti' 1. 18. 

airoiTfipaa6ai 15. 26. 

aiTonifi'nfiv 1. 27 J 3. 4. 

UTTOiiKt'iv 17. 33(?) ; 18. I. 

an6pdi]Tos 20. 9. 

d7r<)/jp»;ros 1. 4. 

dnocTTiX'Kfiu 1. 32; 7. 35; 15. 14; 16. 20; 

21. 10. 
unoTi6a'ai 21. 34. 
dwocfievyeiv 20. I 4. 
dnoxutpi'iv 6. 29 ; 15. 19. 
dTTOxaipi](Tis 15. 25. 
(inpaKTOi 15. I 4. 
a-nrtiv 17. 27. 
'Apynoi 2. 8, 16; 14. 13. 
dpyvpiov 13. 32 ; 16. 22, 23. 28; 21. 23. 

'Apia'ios 7. 23, 36, 37 (?); 8. 24 ; 16. 27. 
upiara 2. I9 ; 10. 1 8. 
-apoi 3. II, 19, 30. 
upfioariji 1. 22 ; 2. 36. 

UpTTu((lP 15. I. 
'ApTa$(p^r,i 7. 14; 8. 5. 
' Aprafpfpvrji 3. 37 (?). 
tlpri 11. 28 

apx^c 1. II ; 4. 35; 13. 23, 36; 14. 20; 

21. 37. 'ipxoii' 11. 25 ; 12. 21, 26 ; 16. II ; 

18. 25, 29. 
'Apx(>^nis 3. 22 ; Frs. 19. 8 {?), 20. 1 1 (.?). 
dpxn 3. 30 ; 16. 1 1 ; 17. 36. 
'Affi'af 12. 35 ; (.\o-Ttus) 13. 13. 
dafifPfirrara 15. I . 
d(T(f)a\oii 19. I 2. 
«r€ 6. 20; 13. 34. 
itTaKTui 19. 7* drd»tTci)f 6. 9. 

'Att.k^ 2. 39 ; 13. 33. 

'ATTiKlCftp 12. 38 ; 13. 4 (?). 
aiJ^ij 6. 39 ; 15. 19. 

AvXii 13. 2;-. 

avTo^i 18. .^,. 

auToco^os 19. 5- 

avT6i 1. 3, 5, 17, 33; 2. 10, 13, 18: 3. 2, 
29, 42 ; 5. 31 ; 6. 3, 7, 8 (?), 14. 20. 21, 
22, 25, 27, 36, 40; 7. 17, 20; 8. 7, 39; 
11. 15, 20, 28, 35; 12. 23; 13. II, 20, 
24 ; 14. I, 3, 9, 15, 22, 34, 40 ; 15. 4, 8, 
II, 12, 26,^39; 16. 17, 27, 32 ; 17. 7. 
20, 28, 38; 18. 5, 15, 16, 29; 19. 4, 5, 
8, 12, 13, 16, 20. 3.5; 20. 9, 12, 13, 17, 
19, 20, 26; 21. II, 15, 24. 32, 34. 
avToi 3. 3, 19; 6. 30; 20. 36; 21, 14. 

6 avTiis 3. 23; 12. 19; 19. 28, 36. 

avToi 3. 4; e. 8(.>); 11. 12; 13. 17, 35; 

14. 39; 15. 7, 32; 16. 14, 21, 36; 18. 

7 ; 19- .33- 

d({)din'0)s 10. 3. 

d(j)iKv(l(T6ai 15. 34 ; 18. 28 ; 20. 24, 29 ; 21. 
20 ; Fr. 29. 3. 

d(f)iaTduai 2. 31 ; 6. 2 2. 
dcpoppuf 5. 27. 

^aSlCfiv 6. 3, 22, 38, 50; 8. i5(.'); 12. 19; 

15. 7, 15; 17. 35; 18. 36; 21. 35, 39. 

^alvfiv 18. 19 (.'). 

^aWdv 17. 28(.'); 18. 25. 

^iipfiapoi 5. 24; 6. 6, 12, 18, 23, 28, 39; 

8. 42 ; Fr. II. 9 ; 14. 12; 16. 21. 

^ap((os 18. 24. 

^aaiXfCi 1. 30 ; 3. 27, 41 ; 7. 4, 18 ; 8. 35, 
38 ; 14. II ; 16. 4. 9. 19, 26; 18. 6; 
19. 6 ; 21. 23 ; Fr. 3^. 4. 

jSufflXtKOS 18. 30. 
^f\TI(TTOi 7. 38; 12. 31. 

^(Xtiov 13. 28. 

^uiCfadm 10. 10; 20. 34; Fr. 18. 4. 

Bidvvis 21. 9 (?). 

/3toy Fr. II. II. 

^odv 11. 23. 

^ot)6(ia 11, 24. 

iior^df'iv 14. 39 ; 15. 3 ; 17. 24. 

BoLa>T(ipxt)S 12. 15. ("X"*") 12. 10, 2 2. 
Botaria 11. 39 ; 13. 8, 24 ; 14. 6. 

BoicoToi 2. 3, 8, 16; 11. 34, 37 ; 12. 7, 30; 

13, 12 ; 14, 19, 38; 15. 3, 7, 9, 31. 
ffoCXtadai 3. 17. 39; 6. 36; 7. 44; 11. 4, 

9; 14. 8; 15. 37 ; 17. 10, 34; 18. 2, 7, 

II. 37 : 19. II. 

^ovXevfrrdai 5. 55. 



^ovXtvTTji 1. 12; 12. 22. 

/SouXr; 1. 4 ; 11. 39; 12. 3; 13. 12. 

^v^Xiov 8. 37. 

ydp 1. 28, 35 ; 2. 7, 22 ; 3. 13 ; 4. 42 ; 5. 

43; 6. 19; 10. 19; 11. 36; 13. 15, 31 ; 

14. 3, 14, 19; 16. 2; 18. 7, 12; 19. 5; 

20. 18; Fr. 18. 2. 
y( 13. 28; 17. 31. 

yevos 16. 37 ; 20. II, 36. 

yn 6- 33- 

yiyvtaeai 1. 8 ; 2. 2, i8 ; 6. 27, 52 ; 10. 17 ; 

11. 35; 12. 6, 39; 14. 24, 31; 17. 37; 

18. 13, 38 ; 10. 9, 26 ; 20. 17 ; 21. 33 ; 

Fr. 71. 3. 

yiyvoxJKdv 5. S^- 

■yXt'o-j^po)? 16. 6. 

yvu>ixr) 1. 2 ; 17. 19. 

■yfcopt/jo? 1. 9. yvoipifiQiTaros 12. 3 1. 

rdpSto^ 20. 29. 

rv»/s 21. II. 

yvfivT/rris 6. 2 0. 

Aao-KuAtoc 21. 2 I. 

Aao-zcuAmf Xifivt] 21. 21. 

AavX/a 15. 19. 

AavXioi 15. I 7- 

Sem 21. 14. 

A«(ce\eta 13. 1 6, 29. 

AfKfXeiKoy TToXf/xos 2. 2 I ; 16. 5' 

Afp/cvXi'Setoi 19. 23. 

8r}Xovi> 12. 25. 

Ar;/iatV«Tor 1. 3, 24 ; 2. 38. 

SrjfioKpaTia 11. 3 I . 

fi»>os 1. 2, 13; 12. 39. 

8t]fjiOTiK6s 1. 20; 10. 2 I . 

fivoCi' 14. 37 ; 19. 8. 

^'" 2. 33, 37 ; 6. 41, 42 ; 7. 19 ; 10. 7 ; 13. 

14,20; 14. 10, 21; 15. 16 ; 16. 8, i8; 18. 

32, 36; 19. 12, 14, 17, 25; 20. 19, 35; 

21. 6,9, 16, 28. 

Bia^alveiv 6. 49. 
dta^dXXeivl. 10 ; 16. 32. 
tidytiv 21. 31. 
Aiay6p€ioi 11. lO, 25. 
diabrjXovv 17. 1 1. 
diadiBovai 18. 30. 
tidSocrii 17. 30. 
didbox^os 15. 34, 
dtatyjeti/ 12. 9. 

fiia/cfto-^at 2. 17, 19 ; 7. 42 ; 13. 5 ; 14. 40. 

SiaKOiTlOl 16. 2 2. 
8iaKU)Xveiv 17. 2 2. 
8taXfyfadai 1. 37. 
8iaXvfip 14. 32. 

8idXv(rii 16. 34. 

SiafOfri/ 14. 16. 

StaTTomf 13. 40. 

biaiTopeve(Tdai Q. 43. 

Stan-paTTfti' 11. 26 ; 12. I. 

Siapnd^eiu 14. 29. 

Biardueiv 21. 36. 

StaTeXeti' 12. 7- 

diarpi^fw 3. 19; 8. 26 ; 13. 16; 20. il. 

Staipdfipfiv 14:. 9; 19. 2C. 

8ia(f)6opd 11. 10. 

8id(f>opos 2. 18. 

SiSatTKf tf 1. 1 6. 

8tSdratl6. 2 1, 38; 17. 21; 18. 7. 

8Le^fp^(a6ai Q. 40. 

8if^uvai 21. 9 ; Fr. 36. 3. 

8iKa(TTr]s 12. 27. 

Si»c»; 14. 31 ; 17. 21. Cf. 12. 27. 
8iodos 19. II. 
8ioiK(iv 12. 7. 
StTrXdo-tor 13. 27. 
bia-xlXtoi 21. I2(.?). 
Sc>7. io(?), 

SidiKfiv 2. 38 ; 6. 16 ; 19. 27, 32. 
8ia)^is 6. 22. 

8oK(lv 10. 23 ; 12. 6 ; 15. 26. 
6o^a 10. 2 8(?). 
8p6pos 6. 12. 

8{,uafAts 10. 12 (?); 16. 15. 
8vmadai 1. 23 ; 6. 19 ; 11. 21 ; 13. 9 ; 18. 6 
20.35; 21. 18. 

8vi>a(TT(veiv 10. 19; 13. 18. 

Su^/ards 5. 27 ; 7. 36. 

bvapivcis 2. 6, 16. 

6vo 2. 24 ; 12. II, 12, 15, 16 ; 16. 38. 18. I 2. 

Aaplp-axos 11. I 9. 

eai/ 6. 36; 15. 9; 17. 7. 

eap 21. 34. 

(yyvTfpos 5. 41. 

(yKflcrdai 6. 1 7. 

fyKXrjpa 2. 1 8. 

(yxeipf'iv 11. 18. 

f y;(6i/ji8toj' 11. 19, 24. 

III. 842 


fOfiv, (lo>eiyiii Q. 7; 11. 14, 20; 16. 16; 17. 

f(9«'or 12. 29 ; 14. 8, 25. 
t6o, 16. 3. 

u 1. 17 ; 15. 10; 16. 8; 18. 6. 
(Ihtviu 2. 5' 

fiKocrt 11. 8 ; 15. 35 ; 16. 22. 
flvai 1. 10 ; 2. 14, 24, 29 ; 5. I ; 6. 10, 20 ; 

11. 12, 18; 13. 19; 14. i.-„ 25; 15. 27; 
16. 3, 6, 9; 17. 14, 17 ; 19- :5- II- 18, 29, 
34; 20. I, II, 16, 20. 36; 21. 9, 24, 31, 
39; Fr. 23. I. 

(Inuv 1. 23 ; 18. 5. 
fipijvt] 2. I 2. 

flsl. 6; 2. 24; 3. 6, 24; 6. 4, 6, 33, 38, 
44, 47 ; 8- 23 ; 11. 15, 19. 24, 28, 34, 37 ; 

12. 5, 15; 13. 24; 14. 4, 22, 23, 36, 38; 

15. 7, 16, 22, 32, 36 ; 16. 28, 31, 36 ; 17. 
31, 38 ; 18. 13, 31, 34, 39 ; 19. 3, 22. 30, 
38; 20. 8, 9, 15, 23, 28, 38; 21. 29,31, 

34, 35. 
««• 12. 10, 17. 
tla^aivdv 17. 30 (.'). 
€icr/3(iXXeii' 19. 3. 
fl(nTr)8av 11. 24 ; 17. 25. 
(la-n'Kdp 3. 35; 21. 29. 
(l(T(f)fpfiu 12. 5. 
(la(fiopd 12. 26. 

fK I. 6 ; 2. 13, 21 ; 6. II, 17 ; 11. 29 ; 13. 

25, 33; 15. 4, 36, 38; 16. 13, 23; 17. 

16; 18. 15, 28; 21. 39. 
fKaa-TOi 6. 12 ; 11. I ; 12. I, 4, lo, 19, 24 ; 

16. 38 ; 18. 19; 19. 25. 
tVarfpof 13. 6, 8 ; 14. 27, 30. 
fKaTou 12. 25 ; 20. 4. 

fKf'i 3. 12; 6. 52; 21. 2. 

(KtWi 21. 25. 

(Ktlvui 2. 2, 22, 25, 40; 3. 4 ; 6. 16 ; 7. 19; 

10. 7; Fr. 12. 5; 11. 13, 23; 12. 14; 13. 

9; 14. 10, 34, 39; 15. 6; 17. 13, 19; 

18. 32 ; 20. 21 ; 21. 4, 29. 
fKK\Tj(Tiii 11. 28 ; 16. 36. 

fKrTqdav 19. 29. 
eWXfiv 1. I ; 11. 9. 
eKnoXtfiovv 2. 7 j 14. 7. 
fK(p(p(iv 15. 9. 
'EAuTfia 15. 23. 
eXaTTooi' 5. 16. 

'F.XXtlf 13. 37 ; 14. 20. 
(XXfinfiv 15. 28. 

'EXX^K 5. 14. 28, 38; 6. 7. 13. 29, 38, 44 ; 
7. 8 ; 14. 4 ; 17. 8 ; 18. 7, 15; 19. 28, 
32 ; 21. 16. 

'E\\r](T7T0in-oi 18. 34 ; 21. 27. 

ffi^<i\\ui> 3. I ; 14. 23, 37 ; 15. 15; 20. 8. 
(p-jidXi] 11. 38. 
(ppivnf 18. 37. 
j (finpocrdfu 1. 25; 13. 12, 39. 
(V2. 10, 32 ; 6. 31, 46; 11. 3. 6, 36; 12. 6, 

31; 13. 5, 7, 16,38; 15. 11; 16. 25; 17. 

19; 18. 23 ; 19. 34. 37; Fr. 30. 3. 
fvaiTios 2. 9. 
fvavTitivvOui 1. 33. 
(vbna 16. 18. 
(vbf'iv 21. 7. 
fvbtKa 11. 26 ; 12. 8. 
(vibpaQ. II, 17; 19. 2 2, 30, 37. 
evebpfvfiv 19. 29. 
fVfKa 2. 19; 20. 18, 2 2. 
ii'iavTos 5. 56 (?). 

6^(04 5. 3. 

(vioTf 16. 14. 
ivKTTaviii 3. 10 ; 16. 10. 
evoiKfif 18. 37. 
ivTiBfvaL 21. 30. 


i^dyfiv 18. 15. 

f^a[(f)vT]s 19. 32. 

f^aKoaioi 6. 21 ; 17. 24 (?). 

i^apaprdvdV 17. 2 0. 

(^a<TKUv 13. 40. 

($flmi (f^fo-Ti) 2. 20; 12. 2. 

{^(Xavvfip 18. 26. 

(^£pyd(fiT6iH 11. 30. 

f^epXfcrdui 17. 15. 

(^(TU^flV 11. 2. 

i^fTaufxoi 11. 8, 13. 

f^i]KovTa 12. 2 2 ; 18. 2 1. 

(ii(V(H 17. 1 7. 

«|co(9*i' 5. 34 ; 18. 16. 

tVayytXXfii' 14. 1 3. 

firalpfiv 2. 34. 

eVaicoXoi'^tii' 5. 14 : 6. 9, 18, 39. 

(TTnvdcrraiTii 11. 33. 

(udpxfi-v 20. 35. 

*V<i 13. 2 ; 16. 4. 

tTretfijip 16. 10. 

tVf.fiv 1. 5, 37 ; 2. 40 ; 6. 10. 43 ; 7. 21 ; 

17. 14; 18. 38; 19. 9; 20. 34. 
intiTii 13. 6; 18. lO; 20. 12, 19. 



im 1. 28 ; 2. 12, 23 ; 3. i ; 6. 22, 50 ; 10. 

5; Fr. 12. 7; 11. 20, 22; 15. 15; 16. 

26 ; 17. 31; 18. 20; 20. 30, 33. 
f'mlSaTTjs 16. 35; 21. 26. 
eVi/3ovXei'en' 21. 15- 
fnibfiKvvvai 6. 8 (?). 
(TTi8i86vai 13. 20. 
(TTifiKrii 1. 19. enifCKoJs 15. 27. 

eVieW 6. 37, 53 ; 18. 13 ; 19. 22 ; 21. 35. 

(nidvfidvl. 35; 2. 10; 17. 19. 

(TTlOvfiTjTlKCOi 20. 18. 

'En-iKpaT»;f 1. 35- 
fTTiXafi^dfeiv 17. I 7» 
(TTlXolTTOS 16, I 2. 
fTTt/xfXeto-^at 11. 11; 21. 27. 
fTTivefxeiv 14, 27. 
(TTiaTokri 7. 22 ; 8. 18, 36. 
enirdaafii' 12. 23. 
(TriTfi^^L^dv 13. 29. 
fiTiTidevai 14. 18; 19. 27. 

eTTixftpft" 3. I ; 6. 10; 11. 7 ; 14. 21 ; 16. 

1 8. 

fTTTaKoaioi 16. 29. 
(pyov 1. 7) 1 8. 
f/««>' 2. 27 ; 12. 32. 
'EpvOpai 12. 12 ; 13. 25. 
('pXfireai 3. 42 (?); 18. 4; 21. 8. 

'EcTTTfpiOl AoKpo'l 14. 23. 

(Tdipfia 13. 6. 

€Tfp'iy 2. 25 ; 12. 17 ; 13. 18, 26 ; 14. 29 ; 
20. 9 ; 21. 8. 

tTOllXOS 13. 4. 

eros 3. 10 ; 11, 37. 

€v8aiiJL0Via 13. 2 1. 

fVfpyfTf'iV 13. 20. 

(vBiws 13. 21. ei^uf 14. 33. 

tiiXdywr 16. 1 9. 

TLvrprjaii 12. 1 6, 

((pidTuvai 16. I 2. 

fV"/ 1. 19, 36 ; 2. 6, 22, 30 ; 4. 41, 42 ; 5. 

26; 6. 35; 7. 39; 11. 38; 12. 38; 13. 

I, 2(?), i4(.?), 27; 14. 18; 16. 13, 20, 

22 ; 20. 10, 19 ; 21. 27. 
^X^pall. 35; 14. 24; 20. 12. 
exdpoi 14. I 5. 

tojf 19. 37. 

ClTf'iV 2. 15. 

V 5. 42 ; 6. 50; 14. 2 ; 20. 4. 

n 19. 38- 

r,ytlaeai5. 1 7 (?) ; 12. 33; 17. 15; 19. 31 ; 
21. 8. 

fjytpdiv 20. 10, 20. 

7S'7l5. 33; 18- 12. 

rJKfiv 11. 29; 20. 15; 21. 34. 

17X405 18. I 2. 

i]fiepa 6. 5, 31, 52 ; 8. 6 ; 11. 2, 13 ; 12. 23 ; 

18. 12, 13; 19. 19; 20. 6, 32; 21. 14. 
fjavxla 2. II ; 19. 19. 

^dXarra 6. 47 ; 21. 6. 
Gao-oy 2. 31. 
Sflv 6. 12. 
^epaTTfueif 20. 12. 

Btpos 3. 9 ; 11. 34 ; 20. 8. 
Ofo-nifls 12. 16. 

e^3m 11. 36 ; 12. 15, 31 ; 13. 5, 28 ; 14. 6 ; 
15. 4. 

erj^aioi 12. II ; 13. II, 20; 14. 9. 

e7;i3?;s TreSiW 19. 2. 
GiViSat 12. 17. 

QopiKos 2. 39 ; 3. I. 
66pvl3os 1. 7, 12 ; 18. 27. 
Qpa(Tv^uvXos 1. 16. 
^i^eti* 6. 49. 

rStor 2. 18 ; 12. 7 ; 16. 13. I8ia 1. 2 (?). 
uVm 11. 22 ; 19. 30. 
itpos 6. 52. 
'l(p<i)vvp,os 11. 10. 
ipdriou 8. 27. 

iva 2. 13 ; 5. 52 ; 11. 3; 14. 9 ; 16. 21. 

Irnrevs 5. 2, 15 (?) ; 6. 16, 20 ; 7. 41; 12. 
25 ; 21. 12. 

'la^irivlai 12. 34, 37; 13. 10 ; 14. 7, 35-; 

15. 2. 

la-ravat 6. 32. 
Icrxvfiv 13. 6. 
ta-;(i^/aos 15. 27. 

KaSyuei'a 12. 30. 
Kaddnep 11, 1 4. 

Ka6(\KV(lV 1. 6. 

KadrjytpoiV 20. 5> 

KadrjcrOai 7. 40. 

KaQl^dv 19. 2 2. 

Ka^itrrai/ai 6. 24 ; 11. 3 1, 35, 39 ! 16. 26 ; 18. 

25; 20. 13. 
KaOopav 5. 28 ; 6. 14 ; 19. 33. 

///. 842 


K(U -yii/j 18. I 2. 

Ktnp(k 6. 10 ; 11. I M ; 15. 1 . 

KillTOl 2. I . 

KnK6i 12. 28 ; 15. ,-;i ; 17. 37 ; 18. 36 ; 19. 

8 ; 20. I 4. KiiKCji 6. 37 ; 13. 4, 38 ; 16. 

3; 20. 9; 21. 14. 
ica'ke'iv 20. 25. Ka\(>v^(vos 7. 2 ; 14. 2;^ ; 19. 

3, lo, 23; 21. 18. 
K(i\6s 6. 52 ; 20. 16. icaXwr 20. 31. 
KamraSoKia 21. 35. 
Kdpft 18. 8, 14. 
Kapnaatvi 16. 37 ; 17. I I, I 6, 22, 27 ; 18. 2 1. 

Kara 2. 21, 38; 6. 3, 8, 1 3 ; 7. 20, 39 ; 11. 
I, 38; 12. 18, 22, 23, 25; 13. 7, 40; 14. 
5; 15. 21 ; 16. I, 4, II ; 17. 14, 17; 19. 
9, 29; 21. 13. 

Kara^dWdv 6. 2 I ; 19- 1 6. 
Kara^ilSii^dV 6. 43 ; 20. 7. 

KdTiiyfiv Fr. II. 13 ; 18. 4; 21. 13. 

Kara^fvyvCvai 19. 1 8 ; 20. 31. 
Karaipfiv 8. 22 ; 18. 38. 
KaTaXap^dvfiv 6. I9, 23; 20. 13. 

KaToKiiiTdv 3. 3 ; 16. 28 ; 18. 23, 27. 
KaTa\v€Lv 11. 30 ; 14. 9 ; 16. 7, 14; 17. 36. 

KaTapavdavfLV 2. 20. 

Karavipnv 5. 53- 

KaranefjiTTfiv 16. lO. 

KaTanXe'iv 2. 25, 30; 3. 12 ; 15. 36 : 16. 30. 

KaraTrXrjTTeiv 1. I 2 ; 6: 28. 

KaTaaKeva^eiv 3. I4 ; 13. 37 ; 20. 30 ; 21. 2 2. 

KarncrKevT] Fr. II. 1 5 (?) J 13. 33. 

KaTaaKTjvovv 19. 38. 

KaTaarpaTOTTfdfVfiv Q. 47 ; 19. 39; 21. 2, 24. 

KaTarpfxfip 15. 2 2. 

Karacppovf'iv 5. 30. 

KUTipxfoBat 17. 5 (.''). 

KaTf^fiv 17. 20; Fr. 31. 3. 

KaTTfyopia 14. 38. 

KaTOiKt'iv 13. 34 ; 15. 24. 

Kavvia Xipirj 3. 35- Kaui'tos noTapos 3. 34- 

Kaifos 3. 24 ; 11. 9 (.?), 29; 15. 36, 39 ; 16. 

31; 18. 8. 29. 
KavdTpiov nediov 5. 8. 

Kfladui 6. 42 ; 7. 10. 

KfKaivai 6. 45, 50. 

K(\fviiv 18. 10, 18 : 19. 4 : 20. ,17 ; 21. 30. 

Kepapos 13. 35. 

K«pa\ai, Afot'ToJi' K. 20. 25. 

Kt^aXof 1. 35- 

K^pv^ 11. 21 ; 20. I. 

KrjpvTTfii' 11. 20: 18. 19. 

KiXiKui 3. 25 ; 21. 38. 

Ktl/fivi'flHf 16. I 7- 

KiVSvi'oy 1. 1 7 ; 18. 3 I . 

Kt'or 21. I 3. 

(coti/tif 2. 14 ; 12. 26, 30. 

>coii'ovi' 1, 3. 

KOpidfl 16. 6. 

Kopl^fiu 17. 9. 

Krf^wi/ 1. 7, 29 ; 3. 31, 36 ; 11. 28 ; 15. 32 ; 

16. 16, 30; 17. 3, 5- 6, 15, 18, 25, 29, 

36 (.?); 18. 3, 25, 28, 32. 
K.opiv6ioi 2. 14 ; 14. 13. 

KoppavrdSas 12. 35. 

Kopwvus 12. 18. 

KOV<f>os 6. 15. 

lepuTf'tv 3. 2. 

Kpdros 15. 2 1. 

Kparvvfiv 5. 20 (?). 

KTuardai 12. 2. 

Kv^iKoy 20. 15 ; 21. 32. 

KvTrptoy 16. 30 ; 17. 1 1, 2 1, 26, 35 ; 18. 4, 20. 

Kvn pos 17. 33. 

Kvpios 12. 6. 

KOpoy 16. 8. 

K<i}prj 19. 27, 34 ; 20. 5. 

Kwnai 12. 20. 

AaKe8aip6vtoi 1. II, 27, 32; 2. 6, 8, 17, 35; 
3. 20: 10. 28; 12. 37; 13. 15, 19. 23, 
30, 39; 14. 8, 15, 20; 15. 6, 14, 33; 16- 
5; 18. 35- 

AaK(5aipo3i' 3. 21. 
\aK<ovi(fiv 2. 20; 14. 10. 

'Kaplidixiv 2. 28; 3. 39; 6. 25; 7. 25 (?) 
11. 8, 33; 14. 4; 15. 10, 15, 20, 38; 16. 
23; 18. 10, 13; 21. 19; Fr. 36. 2. 

Af^abfls 12. 1 8. 

Xc'yftf 1. 4, 10 ; 2. 2 ; 8. 34 ; 15. 8 ; 16. 1 7 ; 
17. 32 ; 20. 18; 21. 23. 

XfrjXaTfiv 19. I ; 20. 23, 28. 

XftTTfii' 3. 25. 

\foirru'tt7]i 12. 35, 36 ; 13. 13. 

Af6i>T(ov K((j)a\ai 20. 25. 

Afm'vpoi 18. 5- ' '^• 

Xt'oi/ 6. 19. 

\i6oi 11. 20. 

Xip^u 11. 3, 15 ; 18. 26. 

Xi>T 3. 35; 21. 21, 29. 

Xoyo9 14. 31 ; 17. 7, 39- 



XoiTTos 11. 23; 13. 31 ; 19. 8. 
AoKpis 14. 36 ; 15. 4. 

AoKpoi 14. 28, 32, 37 ; 15. 3. AoK. 'Ea-TTf- 

pioi 14. 23. 
Avbia 6. 42 (.?) ; 7. 21 ; 18. 36. 
AvSoi 6. 41 ; 7. 3. 

Ma-yr/jcria 7. 40. 
Mai'aj/S/3oy 6. 45 ; 7. 2. 
Ma»feSoi/('a 9. 29 (?). 

paXiara 1. 36 ; 2. 20 ; 7. 18 ; 11. 36 ; 19. 9 ; 

20. 17. 

paXKov 2.33; 5. 41; 7. 9; 13. 3, 17. 
fid)(«Tdai 5. 2 2. 
fidxi] 6. 4, 28. 
Meya^dTr]s 20. 1 6. 

/icyay 1. 7; 6. 34; 18. 31. 

fxtdia-rdvai 2. 15. 
fieipdKiou 20. 18. 

peliXeiv 7. 28 ; 16. 32 ; 17. 32. 

pfv 1. 19, 21, 28 ; 2. 8, 15, 22 ; 3. 2, 9; 6. 

7, 21, 25, 27, 28; 10. 2; 11. 3, 15, 20; 

12. 11,14, 24, 34, 36; 13. 18; 14. 9, 17; 

15. 13, 19, 29; 16. 32; 17. 14; 18. II, 

22, 24,35; 19- 31 ; 20. 1, II, 14, 18,32; 

21. 12, 14; Fr. 71. 4. pev ovv 2. 32 ; 3. 
7, 19; 5. 4; 7. I ; 11. 32; 12. 21, 28; 
14. 5, 30; 15. 31; 16. 15, 24; 18. 30; 
19. 6; 20. 21. 

pevfiv 2. 39. 

pfposl2. 4, 9, 18, 2 1, 24, 33; 13.9; 15.23. 

pfcros 6. 42 ; 19. 9. 

Mfora-fjvioi 17. 17, 23, 27. 

perd 1. 8, 24, 29 ; 2. 24, 30; 3. 5, 6 ; 6. 
17; 8. 24; 11. 24, 29; 13. 30; 14. 31, 
36; 16. 20, 30; 17. 19; 19. 4, 39; 20. 


pfTal3dW{iv 19. 36. 

ptra^i^d^fiv 3. 4. 

ptTCiKopi^fiv 13. 34. 

pfTaTTfpntiv 10. 22; 21. 25. 

ptrexup 1. 13; 12. 2, 27; 13. 8; 14. 14; 

19. 7. 
pexpi 21. 38. 

Me|, . .]atoy (?) 7. 24. 

M>7 1. 18 ; 6. 50, 51 ; 11. 3 ; 14. 9 ; 16- 8 ; 

20. 13; 21. 6. 

pTjKOS 21. 38. 

prjv 16. 2. 

pr]v, oil p. 12. 39. ov p. dXAci 13. 28, 

piKpos 11. 16 ; 13. 10, 32, 38. 
MiXi^a-ioi 8. 2 1 (?). 
MiXrjTov Te'ixos 21. 1 8. 
Mt'Xcoi/ 1. 22; 2. 35; 3. 6. 
pia-HV 2. 7, 34. 

pia-dos 3. 18 ; 16. 2, 2 1, 33 ; 18. 30 ; 21. 32. 

pivBohoTeiv 16. 2. 

pia6o<p6pos 19. 23. 

/LtoVos 2. 18; 16. 34; 18. 6. 

pvpioi 5. 15. 

M^(7t'al9. 3; 21. 13, 33. 

Mv(Tios"0'Kvp7ros 19. lO. 

Muo-ot 19. 4, 5, 6, 13, 24, 31 ; 20. 1 ; 21. 15. 

vavapxia 3. 28. 

vavapxos 1. 32 ; 3. 2 1 ; 15. 34 ; 21. 26. 

vavpax^iv 2. 26. 

vavsl.6, 28; 3. 2, 3, 24; 15. 33; 18. 17. 

vavTT]s 3. 4. 

i^eK/joff 6. 31 ; 20. 3. 

Vfpfiv 7. 3. 

veos 20. 16. 

P€a>piov 3. 14. 

VfoxrotKoy 1. 7» 

prjaos 2. 23. 

MKar 2. 26. 

'NlK6<pT]pOS U.. II. 

voniCeiv 14. 17 ; 15. 8, 10; 19. 20. 
ri^l 5. 59. 

Sei'0(cX^9 6. 2, 9. 
|u\oj/ 13. 35. 

oySo^Koi/ra 15. 30. 

oyboos 3. 10, 

oSe 3. 9. 

olW^at 14. 10; 19. 25. 

OlKfll' 12. 9. 

oiKrjats 14. 2. 
oiKi'a 13. 36. 

ohoSopuv 8. 11; 14. 2 ; 20. 30. 

oXiyos 5. 45; 11. 32; 15. 20; 16. II, 25. 

oXiyapi'iv 16. II. 

oXokXtjpos 13. 2 1 . 

oAoy 12. 29. 

"OXvpnos 19. 10; 21. 16. 

opoios 10. 13. 6/ioiW5. 40 (?); 12. 28 ; 17. 37. 

opoXoydv 7. 18. 

oTTKrOev 6. 39. 

onXiTTjs 5. 60; 12. 25. 

oTrXo;/ 1. 28; 11. 2, 6, 15; 14. 36 ; 15. 15. 

///. 842 


6ir6(Tos 18. II. 
onoTf 7. 34 ; 16. 5. 

oniWtpos 14. 28. 

oTrof 3. 15- 

oirtos 1. 23 ; 2. 7 ; 17. 20 ; 21. 32. 

opav 6.12; 11. 6, 8. 

opyi(((T0ai Fr. 2 1.2 (.'). 

opfxav 3. I ; 10. 20. 

opos 5. 9 ; 6. 42. 

'OpxopevLoi 12. 16. 

OS 1. 31, 33 ; 3. 24, 26, 38; 6. 31, 45- 46 
53; 7. 20, 21, 22; Fr. II. 13 ; 12. i, 18 

13. 27; 14. 24, 26, 27, 33, 35; 15. 34 
16. 3, 9, 19, 29; 17. 20; 18. 8; 19. 38 
20. 8, 25, 35; 21. 15, 21, 23, 26. 

o<ros 6. 36; 18. 35; 19. 6, 21, 23, 30. 

OdTTtp 21. 8. Cf. OVTTfp. 

orf 13. 15. 

ore 2. 2 2. 

Sril. 17; 2. 5, 9; 3. 3; 16. 17; 18.5- 

oi> 1. 24, 37; 2, 5; 5. l6; 6. 19, 24; 10. 

19 ; 11. 36 ; 12. I, 39 ; 13. 27, 28 ; 15. 

9; 16. 13, 19, 32; 17. 7; 19. 6; 20. 8, 

35; 21. 18. 
ovdfis 1. 13 ; 5. 4 2 ; 14. I {?) ; 15. 20, 28, 29 ; 

18. 36 ; 20. 26. 

ov8fnoT€ 14. 18. 
ovKeri 6. 35 ; 21. 8. 

ovu. See pfv ovi/. 

OVTTfp 11. 20. 

ovtri'a 1. 19 ; 16. 23. 

ovTf 5. 29 ; 14. 19. 

oItos 1. 8, 24, 34,35, 36; 2. 30, 31, 33, 38 
3. 8, 27; 5. 10; 6. I ; 7. 5; 8. 25; 11 
27. 33- 34; 12. 3. 6, 8, 10, 23; 13. 17 

14. II, 14, 16, 18, 21, 25 ; 15. 13, 22, 24 
16. I, 9, 15, 23. 37; 17. 9; 18. II, 18 
19- 19. 35, 39; 20. 17, 21, 38; 21. 36 

ovTu>[s) 11. 39; 12. 7, 21, 29; 13. 40 

14.6; 16. 15; 18. 31. 

6(f>(t\(iu 16. 33. 
6)(vp6s 21. 22. 

TIuyKaXns 21. 25, 28. 

TrtiXai 2. 5- 

ndXiu 5. 10; 6. 34 ; 12. 17 ; 15. 5. 30 ; 19. 

24, 36 ; 20. 29 ; 21. 15. 
TTapd 2. 2, 25, 36; 3. 29(?); 6. 47 ; Fr. 12. 

5 ; 13. 1 1 ; 14. 1 , 2, I 2 ; 15. 1 1 , 26 ; 18. 

14 ; 20. II ; 21. 20. 

rrapayye'AXfti' 9. 26. 

TTtipaytiv 11. 15. 

napayiyvfaOcu 3. I 7 ; 6. 53 ; 16. 16 : 21. 28. 

napabidovai 16. 27. 

Trapa6u\(iTTi8io( 21. I 7. 

TrnpoKoXoii^fij/ 17. 18. 

TrapaKopi^fiu 17. 34. 

irapaXap^avdu 9. 28(?) ; 13. 32 ; 15. 32 ; 17- 

7ropaXX«Trf(»' 19. 2. 
iTapa(TK(vd((LV 5. 5 1 (.') ; 11. 5; 14. 36; 16. 

33; 17. 29; 21. 34. 

naptinoptiKcrOai 18. 33. 
IlapanoTiipioi 15. I 7. 
napuTa^ii 5. 1 8. 
napaVTiKa 20. 14. 
Trdpefi/joj 11. 12 (.i*). 

TTapeii/at 1. 20 ; 7. i9(.'); 11.6, 10, i3(.''). 30. 

■7rapex(ivl2. lo, 1 5, 21 ; 14. 1 2 ; 16. 6 ; 18. 27. 

■napuvai 18. 12 ; 19. 1 4. 

Ylapvacrcro^ 14. 26. 

wapo^vvfiv 1. 34 ; 3. 29 (?) ; 14. 34 ; 15. 11. 

iras 7. 20 ; 11. 7 ; 12. 9 ; 13. 31 ; 17. 8, 29, 37. 

naai(})(pvr)s 3. 37 (.?) ; 16. 27. 

nda-xftv 13. 38 ; 20. 14. 

iraveip 18. 9, 33. 

IIa(f)\ay6v(s 21. 5- 

na(f)\ayopla 20. 38; 21. I. 

IlfSterf 15. 24. 

wfblov 6. 8, 14, 40 ; 7. 2 ; 15. 23 ; 19. 2. 
TTftoV 5. i6(.') ; 7. 41 ; 21. 12. 
7rei'(9e(i/ 1. 2 1 ; 14. 1 9 ; 17. 28 ; 21. 3. 

Tlfipaifiis 1. 6. 

ntXo7roj'i'i7(Ttot 5. 36; 6. II. 48; 19. 15; 20. 

nepn€iv 1. 2 2, 29; 2. 29 ; 6. i^ ; 12. 18, 27 ; 

14. 12, 38; 15. 5 ; 19. 12 ; 20. 2 ; 

Fr. 71. 6. 

TreVre 2. 29 ; 21. 27. 

nfVTtPina 2. 2 2. 

nfVTi]KovTa 19. 21. 

ntpaivdv 20. 27. 

TTfpi 1. 4, 16, 34 ; 2. 39 ; 3. 8, 28, 30 ; 6. 4 : 
7.5,40; Fr. II. 12, 16: 11. 33; 12.4, 
24, 36, 37 ; 13- 10, 13 ; 14. 6. 17, 25, 26, 
35; 15.23; 16. 29; 17.30; 18. 12; 19. 
21 ; 21. 15, 32. 

7Z(pii<TTdvaL \Q. 16. 

TTfpipfvtiu 6. 30, 52; 11. 12; 16. 24; 20. 
32; 21. 14. 



TTtpiopav 16. 14- 

uipcrrji 3. 37 ; 20. ii, 36. 

Tn(rTfv(w 17. 7* 

nXoTnieij 12. 12. 

7rX«i/l. 7; 17. 33; 21. 26. 

TrXeTcrrof 18. 9. 

TrXficBf 21. 12, 32. 

irMyl^ 15. 20; 19. 25, 34. 

7rX^(9os 1. 15 ; 11. 27 ; 12. 3 ; 17. 12. 

nXrja-iov 13. 18. 

Trkivdiov 5. 34 ; 6. 35. 

i7ou2v\. 25; 6. 34, 37; Fr. II. 14; 11. 7, 

32 ; 12. 27 ; 13. 4, 27 ; 14. 38 ; 15. 20, 

25,31; 16. 3; 17. 38;18. 18, 36; 19. 7; 

20.9, 26, 33; 21. 4, 7, 14, 19. 
TToXe/zeii/ 2. 12; 13. 15; 14. 20, 26; 16. 4, 

no\(fj.ios 2. 28 ; 5. 18 (?) ; 6. 10, 18, 32, 37 ; 

19. 30; 20. 32. 
TToXf/xoy 1. II ; 2. 21 ; 9. 18 ; 10. 17 (.?) ; 11. 

4, 35; 13. 22, 32; 14. 14, 22; 15. 9; 
16. 5, 10, 28. 

noXis 1. 1 1, 18, 36 ; 2. 32 ; 8. 13 ; 12. 1,12, 
19; 13. 14, 20, 29; 15. 18, 27; 17. 20, 
26; 18. I, 15. 

TToXtreta 11. 3 1. 

noXirevfadaL 12. 29, 36. 

■no\iTT]s 1. 5; 2. 9; 11. 2 2, 26, 31 ; 12. 2, 

32 ; 14. 16. 
TToXXuKis 14. 27 ; 16. 7. 
noXXjs 3. 21 {?) ; 15. 35. 

TToKvnpayp.oveLV 2. 1 3. 

TToXu? 1. 26 ; 3. I ; 5. 54 ; 6. 19, 25, 26, 40 ; 
10. 12; Fr. II, 12, 15; 11. 36; 13. 7, 
19, 26; 14. 29, 30, 31; 16. 2; 19. 15, 
22 ; 20. 33. 01 TToXXoL 1. 20; 6. 20; 19. 

5, 33. TToXu adv. 2. 33 ; 13. 17, 21, 28. 

TToXuT-fXe'crrara 13. 37- 
TIofTiKfj daXuTTa 21. 37. 

TTopfia 5. 29 ; 6. 34 ; 21. 7, 21. 
TToptvea-dai 17 . 14; 19. 12, • 20. 38; 21. 3. 
7rop6(lv2. 23 ; 6. 33 ; 15. 16; 19. i ; 20. 28. 
TTorapos 3. 34 ; 6. 45, 49 ; 21. 20. 

7roTel4. 26, 29, 40. 

TTorepa 6. 49. 

UoTviai 13. 26. 

TTOV 2. 27. 

7rp5y/xa 1. 4, 14, 26 ; 2. 15; 3. 38 ; 11. 12, 

38; 12. 4; 14. 5, 17; 15. 12; 16. 12, 

18, 26. 

npa$is 8. II ; 11. 17 (.?); 17. 31. 
irpdrTdv 13. 29 ; 14. II ; 15. 29. 
TrptalBvs 1. 29; 14. 38; 15. 5. 
TlpiTji/r] 6. 47. 
TTpiv 18. 13. 

npoayfiv 2. 12 ; 6. 33 ; 14. 2 1 ; 18. 39 ; 19. 
24 ; 20. 22, 27, 39 ; 21. 16. 

Tvpoaipeiv 13. 3. 

npoatjTiov \5. 21. 

Trpo^arov 14. 30, 33. 

irpo^ovKeveiv 12. 4. 

npoepuv, 7rpofipr]pfvos 2. 4, 32. 

TTpoepxtcrBm 11. 38 ; 13. 7 ; 15. 22 ; 18. 32. 

npoexei-v 13. 12. 

TTpoOvpia 15. 28; 16. 9; 18. 32 ; 20. 35. 

npodvpos 12. 38. Trpodvpas 20. 2 2. 

TvpoUvai 5. 44 ; 19. 9. 

TrpoKa6fja6(n 12. 4 {?). 

nponXeiv 3. 2 (?), 4. 

7r/3oVl. 7, 22, 32; 2. 17, 40; 6. 30; 7. 23, 

24; 8. 19; 12. 33, 38; 13. 21; 14. 32, 

40; 15. 6, 39; 17. 12,35; 18. 4, 17.38; 

19.13,34; 20.13,24,26,29,32; 21. 

I, 17, 21. 
TrpocrayyeXXeiv 19. 35. 
TTpoa-dydv 5. 37. 

npoa^dXXeiv 5. 33 ; 6. 7 ; 15. 18, 27 ; 21. 17. 
Tvpoa^oXr] 20. 26. 33. 
7rpo<Tfpx(cr6ai 15. 1 9. 
irpofrBfiv 6. 13. 
7r/3oo-(9f 6. 38 ; 20. 28. npoa-dtu 6. 6 ; 20. 6, 

7rpo(7o(peiX€iv 16. I. 
TTpoa-nXeiv 2. 40. 
Trpoanoifia-dai 1. 1 3. 
TTpoa-TaTTfiv 5. 35 ; 11. II ; 21. 34. 
irp6(TX<i>pos 13. 34. 
TvpoTfpos 17. 15; 19. 25, 39; 20. 8. Trpd- 

Tf/joi/ 1. 32 ; 2. I, 19, 28 ; 11. 37 ; 12. 13, 

32; 13. 10; 14. 26, 30. 
TTpwTos 19. 31, 33. TrpS}Tov 21. 14. 
ttvXt] 17. 14, 17. 
TTVvddveadiii 6. 38. 
. . . 7r[ . ypdrrjs 1. 30. 

pablcos 14. 1 1 . 
'Pa6dvr)s 20. 35. 
paOvpiiv 11. 3. 
. . . pvr]s 3. 37. 

'P(56tot 11. 5, 17, 27 ; 18. 28. 

///. 842 


•pJSof 11. 3;, ; 15. 36; 17. 32 ; 18. 24. 

'PvvdaKOi 21. 2 0. 

liipBfis 6. 30: 7. 36 ; 16. 2,^. 

aaTpania 7. 39. 

S(5o)f(Of 3. 26. 

Sti'coTrT/ 21. 39. 

2t'x«of (.?) 2. 26, 

2Kn0at 12. 13 ; 13. 25. 

(TK(i(f)oi 3. 3- 

CTfCfCoy 6. 26. 

o'K'/i'iy 3. 42. 

(rKOTTftf 2. 6. 

2»c(iXof 12. 12 ; 13. 25. 

27ropTtaT7)f 6. 2. 

(TnevSdv 19. 13. 

27ri^paSar7;y20.9, 10. 2;rt^piS. 20. I 9. 37; 21.2. 

(TiTovbai 18. 37- 

CTTTOllSaffll' 14. 7- 

(TTTOuSat'coy 6. 24. 

crrabLOi 6. 40. 

(rTa<Tia(,tiv 12. 33. 

aracnacrfios 11. 37. 

oracTfcorT/f 2. 8 (?). 

a-revos 19. II ; 21. 37. 

crT6i/o;^ci)pin 19. I 8. 

(TTfpyeiv 1. 19. 

(TTparda 19. 7- 

CTrparev/xa 3. 5 ; 5. 23, ^2, 46, 49 ; 6. 5, 1 5, 

33; 7. 45; 18. 34; 19. I, 14, 24, 36; 

20. 7, 23, 27, 31 ; 21. 13, 32. 

arpaTTiyia 5. 2 1. 

arpar>?yoj 2. 2 7 ; 7. 6, 38; 16. 3, 26, 36 ; 

17. II, 24 : 18. 22. 

arparia 6. 41 : 12. 24 ; 20. 20. 

orparicorrjj 6. I 6, 36, 51 ; 11. I 4 ; 15. 30, 39 ; 

16 21, 38 ; 17. 13 ; 18. 11, 19 ; 19. 17, 
21 ; 20. 6, 33, 37 ; 21. 10, 19, 25, 33. 

arpaTontdop 3. 3 1 ; 5. 7, 12; 6. 23; 18. 
9. 16, 26, 31 ; 19. 38. 

arparoi 7. I. 

(TvyKa6i((iv 12. 30 

avyKara^nivfiv 1. 5 (•^)' 

ai^\apL(idv€iv 1. 31 ; 18. 20, 29. 

(TvKkiyfiv W. 18, 28; 14. 29. 

avp^nivav 2. 5, 2 I ; 3. 8 ; 6. 51 ; 16. 15. 

crv/i/SfiXXtu' 12. I I. 

(Tvp.dovk(\j(iv \. 21. 

(TX)(xp.axot 6. 49; 13. 17; 15. II, 34; 16. 5. 

8; 18. 35; 19. I.-,; 20. 39. 

(TvtttityvCvM 15. 37 ; 19. 32, 37. 
crvp.iiapaaK(V(.i^tiv \^. 15. 
avfintirrdv 3. 1 5 » 13. 29. 

avfinXrjpovf 2. 26, 37 ; 3. 33 ; 15. 35. 

(\iT(v((T6at 12. 14. 
(Tvv 11. 2, I 9. 
(Twdydv 1. I 2 ; 11. 27. 
(TVvaKoXnvdtiv 6. 6 ; 17. 2 I. 
<rvvapnd(€iv 8. 28. 
(Tvpedptov 11. 24 ; 12. 29. 
(Tvi>(i8(vai 11. I 7. 
(Tvvf ^opfidu 17. 13. 
(Tvvepxtcrdai 1. 14; 16. 35. 
a-vvtxf^" 13. 17 ; 20. 34. 
avfiarduai 1. 5 ; 15. I 3. 
avvoiKi^du 13. 24. 
(TvvrdTTdv 5. 25 ; 6. 35; 12. 8. 

avvTfXelu 12. I 4. 

(TvVTpi^euv 16. I 7. 

(TvaTpaTfVfiv 19. 4. 

o-v;^^! 6. 26; 13. 14; 18. 14. 

(T(j)ayr] 11. 30. 

a-cpobpa 20. 19; 21. 2 2, 

(T^fdov 1. 25. 

2;^oIj'Of 13. 26. 

o-&)/ia 16. 38. 

. . . TaKoaioi 6. I . 

rdXavTOP 16. 2 2, 29. 

Tavaypaioi 12. 17. 

TapdTT€iv 1, 26. 

Tapaxi7 18. 9, 27, 33. 

raTTtiv 5. 9 ; 6. 4. 

raxiii, Sin raxfcoi/ 2. 37; 15. 16 ; 21. 6, 28. 

Tn\(Wi 6. 24. Ti]V TCXtCTTTJV 11. 23. 

Tfixoj 13. 27 ; 15. 28 ; 17. i6. 
TtXftrijyopor 1. 3 I. 
TfXfvralos 19. 16, 28. 

TfXtvTav Fr. 12.4 (.•'). 

rfXof 11. 2;^. 

TfTTapfs 2. 25 ; 12. I, I I. 

TrjvtKavTn 11. 6. 

Ti6p(W(TTr]i 7. 20, 29 ; 8. 
16, 24; 18. 38. 

TifioKpdrrjs 1. 37- 
Ti/ioXn«9 2. 17* 
Tifio)ptia6(u 1. 23. 

r.f 2. I, 23; 3. 2 (.'): 10. 2r,; 11. 32, 36; 
12. 3; 13. 14. 32; 14. 22; 15. 10, 23; 
16. 20, 31 ; 17. 18, 32 ; 19. 13 : 20. 5, 14. 

9, 16; 15. 38; 16. 



Ti(r(Ta(f)fpvrjs 5. I3; 6. 27, 29, 37; 7. 7, 13, 19, 

23. 34, 37 ; 8. 9 ; 16. 24 ; Fr. 17. i, 3 (?). 
ToiovTos 5. 5, II ; 6. 28 ; 13. 26; 14. 24, 30. 
TocTovTos 5. 26 ; 15. 31 ; 21. 39. 
t6t€ 1. 21 ; 11. 38, 39; 12. 14 ; 13. 9, 36; 

14. 32 ; 15. 4. 
T/3f?y 6. 31; 12. 5. 
rpiaKovra 2. 29 ; 20. 4. 

rpiijprjs 1. i; 2. 24, 28, 30, 37; 3. II, 33; 

11.9, 29; 15. 35; 16. 8; 17. 31; 18. 3; 

21. 27, 29. 
Tponaiov 6. 32. 
rpoTTos 12. 8, 19 ; 19. 28. 
Tvyx^vui^ 1. 35; 2. 16, 39; 3. 13; 11. 37; 

12. 31; 14. 28; 15. 39; 17. 4, 15- 
Tvpavvos 11. 22 ; Fr. 19. I (?). 

'YdpTTokii 15. 26. 

vtoy 20. 10, 16. 

vnaKovtiv 19. 6. 

imapxeiv 10. 6 (?). 

i77ep 12. II, 12 ; 16. 4, 19. 

{jTTfplSoXf] 14. I. 

VTTtpexfiv 5. 19. 

vTvr^pfdin 1. 28 ; 16. 34 ; 17. 39 

vTvo 1. i; 8. 14; 1? -"• 1^ 

21. 21, 22. 
VTrohtx^aBai 20. 2 2. 

VTTrjpeaia x. zo , j.o. ^4 , x/. jy. 

iTTo 1. I ; 8. 14 ; 13. 39; 14. 10; 16. 2. 31 ; 

21. 21, 22. 
VTrohtx^aBai 20. 2 2. 
vnoKap^dveiv 6. lO ; 11. 17; 14. II. 
(iTToaTTovBos 6. 31 ; 20. 3. 
'Ya-iaioi 12. 1 6. 
v(TT(paiOi 11. 14. 
vdTepov 20. 15 ; 21. 16. 

<l)a'iv€iv 16. 29. 
fpavai 11. 12 ; 16. 29. 
(f)av€pus 14. I 7 • 
^avoTfis 15. 18, 21, 
^dpa^ 1- 31- 

^apvd^os 2. 33; 3. 16, 28, 36; 15. 37; 

18. 39; 20. 12, 24; 21. 23. 
(f)daKeii' 17. 10. 
(})av\<cs 16. 6. 

(fifpdv 7. 22; 12. 21 ; 16. 35 ; 18. 24. 
(})fCy€iv 6. 13; 12. 39; 19. 34. 

<})6dvfiv 5. 1 1. 
^(Xi'a 3. 40. 
<;t)iXos 2. 10. 
(piKicos 14. 40. 

(j)olS(l(r6m 1. 21 ; 6. 14 ; 20. 13; 21. 6. 

4>oii'j/cfy 3. 23. 

^OIVIKT] 21. 38. 

(fypoi/uv 12. 35. 
(jipopTi^fiv 12. 39. 
cppovpos 18. 7- 
^piiyfy 20. 7. 

•fpuy/a 6. 43, 44, 46; 7. 21 ; 8. 7 (.?); 21. i. 
$p. peydX?; 6. 34. ^p. napadaXarnSios 21. 17. 
cfiv\aKT] 6. 24 ; 16. 37. 
^(OK(h 11. 34; 14. 22, 28, 34, 39; 15. 3, 10, 

15, 32. 
4>wk/? 15. 16, 22. 

Xaipojvfia 12. 20. 

XaXfTTo's 5. 17; 19. II. x«^f'^^fl4:. 18; 16. 35. 

Xnplfis 1. 9. 

X€ip(lyv 21. 7, 35. 

Xf<> 19. 30. 

XeipiKpdrrjs 15. 33 ; 21. 26, 

Xf '><"" 3. 3 ; 11. 4. 

xl^ioi 12. 24. 

XP7Ma 2. 2 ; 6. 27 ; 12. 3; 14. 12 ; 15. 38 ; 

16. 7, II, 18. 
Xp>]paTL^€adni 2. 1 4. 

xpn''"!- 6. 49. 

Xpr](r0ai. 2. lO ; 10. 19; 18. 3. 

XpW'^H-os 20. 21. 

Xpdvos 1. I, 26; 2. 39; 3. 23; 6. 19; 10. 

11; 16. I, 12, 25; 18. 36. 
xpvaiov 2. I, 34 ; 16. 28 ; 21. 24. 
Xf^l^a 20. 30. 

X«pa 6. 36 ; 12. 9 ; 13. 37 ; 14. 25, 37 ; 15. 

17; 18. 39; 19. 8, 14; 20. 7, 24, 28; 

21. 36. 
xapiov 12. 13 ; 13. 27 ; 15. 27 ; 20. 25, 29, 

34; 21. 17, 22. 

yl^iXos 6. 1. 

S) 11. 22. 

6>s (prep.) 1. 30 ; 3.41; 13. 35 ; 16. 1 7, 26 ; 

20. 15. 
wf (conj.) 1. 4, 24; 2. 20, 36; 6. 7, 12, 51 ; 

7. 24; 11. 17, 21 ; 12. 39; 13. 22, 29; 

15. 30; 16. 32; 17. 4, 16, 31, 36; 18. 

9; 19. 27, 29; 20. 26; 21. 18. 
wanep 2. 27; 10. 19; 12. 32 ; 21. 36. 
ware 21. 39. 


J V ~ •T^ 









^ J5^ i 

£ \^ 




y \j * - 







- P 

\ -3 

iT o ^-- 

t- ^ 




> ■»■ 

^ 1=^ B I 


r -*■-■' 






^ ^. 


-s -c 

I T ^ \ •\ - r ,^ " 


^ -x' 

I'LAIK 111 





^'' ^ i -^ 

7. ^ '-l .\.-i- 




< :i 

"- -V I 

C H -^ ■'"'' 

O 3 



' o. h 


' 5- ^ 
; U «> > 

> r 


r , 

A " fill •»»-i ^ .*--v -v_^^ 

^/- ^: 

t 1 



If fil 

:rR:^^ --^-^ 

> Nl 

• -' ^ 

jd" ,/ , A- u ^ 


-> fW^fA 


f /v^N n 


*» At-* '^ A 1 

,->f ^,y//p.-./ "'^'Y^ '^ClC^^r ^'^ '' 


'^ < ^ r tS C: 


<? J. H i ) 

^ * < I i 

^ V4 r- 
"l ^« **a J 

^ u^ t .^ *^ ^ ,^ 

I'l.Al h \ I 

-«^'^*>*^-^f-r-*y r-AAAoyr-rl M -4 r r ^^^''''^ 

... I 

r« j. T»ir)M>c>AjT-*>; .-^>f^J^^r^'^^ '» ' 
#J^-yx^nTFVa-M^<^>'(^»'^Tppf)otffJ>^ff ' 

r>AA T 



xroYL\^xcTATovc?sOi I'weirA' ^ ' "?' ;^- J 

C6AJ ,ri A^r • .,, .XK'p.vuv. yrUf-- aH ly^i/ivV* "OVa*- 

f■^^4AelCu?•:^"•■^-''''^• ' ^ Au.a;ohoYO.-V.:kioIok 



J^HE EGYPT EXPLORATION FUND, which has conducted Archatologkal research 
in Egypt continuously since 1882, in 1897 started a special department, called the Graeco- 

Roman Branch, /or the discovery and publication of remains 0/ classical antiquity and early 

Christianity in Egypt. The exploration 0/ the site of Oxyrhynchus has now been completed, 

and ozving to lack of funds further excavations have been suspended for the ivintir of 

1907-8 ; but it is hoped to resume work in Egypt in 1908-9. 

The Graeco-Roman Branch issues annual volufnes, each of about 2 50 guar to pages, with 
facsimile plates of the more important papyri, wider the editorship (fDis. B. P. Grf.xfell and 

A. S. Hunt. 

A subscription of One Guinea to the Branch entitles subscribers to the annual volume, and 

also to the annual Archaeological Report. A donation ^ £25 constitutes life membership. 

Subscriptions may be sent to the Honorary Treasurers—for England, Mr. H. A. Gruebkr, 

British Museum ; and for America, Mr. Gardiner M. L.\ne, Pierce Building, Copley Square, 





For 18S3-4. By Euouard Naville. Thirteen Plates and Plans. {Fourth and Revised 
Edition.) 25^. 

H. TANIS, Part I. For 1884-5. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Eighteen Plates 
and Plans. {Second Edition.) 25^. 

HI. NAUKRATIS, Part I. For 1885-6. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. With 
Chapters by Cecil Smith, Ernest A. Gardner, and Barclay V. Head. Forty-four Plate* 
and Plans. {Second Edition.) 25J. 


By Edouard Naville. Eleven Plates and Plans. {Second Edition.) 25^. 

V. TANIS, Part II ; including TELL DEFENNEH (The Biblical ' Tahpanhes ') 
and TELL NEBESHEH. For 1887-8. By \V. M. Flinders Petrie, F. Ll. Griffith, 
and A. S. Murray. Fifty-one Plates and Plans. 2 55. 

VI. NAUKRATIS, Part II. For 1888-9. By Ernest A. Gardner and F. Ll. 
Griffith. Twenty-four Plates and Plans. 25J. 

Antiquities of Tell-el-Yahfldiyeh. An Extra Volume. By Edouard Naville and 
F. Ll. Griffith. Twenty-six Plates and Plans. 25^-. 

VIII. BUBASTIS. For 1889-90. By Edouard Naville. Fifty-four Plates and 

Plans. 255. 

Containing THE SIGN PAPYRUS (a Syllabary). Bv F. Ll. Griffith. THE 
GEOGRAPHICAL PAPYRUS (an Almanac). By W. M. Flinders Petrie. With 
Remarks by Heinrich Brugsch. {Out of print.) 

By Edouard Naville. Thirty-nine Plates. 25^. 

XL AHNAS EL MEDINEH. For 189 1-2. By Edouard Naville. Eighteen 
Plates. And THE TOMB OF PAHERI AT EL 'KAB. By J. J. Tylor and F. Ll. 
Griffith. Ten Plates. 251. 

XII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Introductory. For 1892-3. By Edouard Naville. 
Fifteen Plates and Plans. 25J. 

XIII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part I. For 1893-4. By Edouard Naville. Plates 

I-XXIV (three coloured) with Description. Royal folio, yas. 

XIV. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part II. For 1894-5. By Edouard Naville. Plates 

XXV-LV (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30X. 

XV. DESHASHEH. For 1895-6. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Photogravure and 
other Plates. 25J. 

XVI. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IIL For 1896-7. By Edouard Naville. Plates 
LVI-LXXXVI (two coloured) with Description. Royal folio. 30J. 

XVII. DENDEREH. For 1897-8. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Thirty-eight Plates. 
25J. (Extra Plates of Inscriptions. Forty Plates. loj.) 


Flinders Petrie. Sixty-eiyht Plates. 25^. 

XIX. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part IV. For 1 899-1 900. By Edouard Naville. 
Plates LXXXVII-CXVHI (two coloured; with Description. Royal folio. 30^. 

XX. DIOSPOLIS PARVA. An Extra Volume. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. 
Forty-nine Plates. s^Out of print ^ 

A a 

1900-1. By \V. M. Flinders Petrie. Sixty-three Plates. 25J. (Thirty-five extra Plates, IC5.) 

XXII. ABYDOS, Part I. For 1 901-2. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Eighty-one 
Plates. 2S.S. 

XXIII. EL AjMRAH and ABYDOS. Ati Extra Volume. By D. Randall-MacIver, 

A. C. Mace, and F. Ll. Griffith. Sixty Plates 2^s. 

XXIV. ABYDOS, Part 11. For 1902-3. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Sixty-four 

Plates. 25.?. 

XXV. ABYDOS, Part III. An Extra Volume. By C. T. Currelly, E. R. Ayrton, 
and A. E. P. Weigall, &c. Sixty-one Plates. 25^. 

XXVI. EHNASYA. For 1903-4. By W. M. Flinders Petrie. Forty -three Plates. 25J. 
(ROMAN EHNASYA. Thirty-two extra Plates. los.) 

XXVII. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part V. For 1904-5. By Edouard Naville. Plates 
CXIX-CL with Description. Royal folio. 30^. 

For 1905-6. By Edouard Naville, PI. R. Hall, and E. R. Ayrton. Thirty-one 

Plates. 25J. 

XXIX. DEIR EL BAHARI, Part VI. For 1906-7. By Edouard Naville. Royal 
folio. {In preparation^ 
















With Plans 


Edited by F. Ll. Griffith. 

BENI HASAN, Part I. For 1 890-1. By Percy E. Newberry. 
by G. W. Eraser. Forty-nine Plates (four coloured). 25J. 

BENI HASAN, Part II. For 189 1-2. By Percy E. Newberry. With Appendix, 
Plans, and Measurements by G, VV. Eraser. Thirty-seven Plates (two coloured). 25J. 

EL BERSHEH, Part I. For 1892-3. By Percy Newberry. Thirty-four 
Plates (two coloured'. 25J. 

EL BERSHEH, Part II. For 1893-4. 
Newberry. With Appendix by G. W. Eraser. 

BENI HASAN, Part IIL For 1894-5. 

and manufacture, &c., of Flint Knives.) 


By F. Ll. Griffith and Percy E. 

Twenty-three Plates (two coloured). 25^. 

By F. Ll. Griffith. (Hieroglyphs, 
Ten coloured Plates. 2 55. 


EXPLORATION FUND. For 1895-6. By F. Ll. Griffith. Nine coloured Plates. 25.^. 

BENI HASAN, Part IV. For 1896-7. By F. Ll. Griffith. (Illustrating 
beasts and birds, arts, crafts, &c.) Twenty-seven Plates (twenty-one coloured). 25J. 

SAQQAREH, Part L For 1897-8. By N. de G. Davies and F. Ll. Griffith. Thirty- 
one Plates (three coloured). 251. 

SAQQAREH, Part II. For 1898-9. By N. de G. Davies and F.Ll. Griffith. Thirty- 
five Plates. 255. 

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). 255. 
DEIR EL GEBRAWI, Part IL For 1901-2. Thirty Plates (two coloured). 25^. 

THE ROCK TOMBS OF EL AMARNA, Part L For 1902-3. Forty-one 

Plates. 25^. 

Plates. 255. 

Plates. 24.?. 

Davies. Forty-five Plates. 25^. 


Davies. {In preparation.^ 

For 1903-4- 
For 1904-5. 
For 1905-6. 
For 1906-7. 

By N. DE G. 


I. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Purt I. For 1897-8. By B. P. Grenfell 

and A. S. Hi NT. Eight Collotype IM.ites. 2£j. 

II. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part II. For 1898-9. Eight Collotype 
Plates. 25J. 

III. FAYUM TOWNS AND THEIR PAPYRI. For 1899- 1900. By B. P. Grenfell, 

A. S. Hunt, and 1). (J. Hogarth. Eighteen Mates. i-iS. 

lY. THE TEBTUNIS PAPYRI. Double Yolume for 1 900-1 and 1 901-2. By B. P. 
Grenfell, A. S. Hint, and J. G. Smyi.y. Nine Collotype Plates. (A'ot/or salt.) 

V. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Pari III. For 1902-3. Si.\ Collotype 
Plates. 25J. 

YI. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Pan lY. For 1903-4. Eight Collotype 
Plates. 255. 

YII. THE PIIBEH PAPYRI, Part I. Double Yolume for 1904-5 and 1905-6. By 

B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt. Ten Collotype Plates. 45J. 

YIII. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part V. For 1906-7. By B. P. Grenfell 
and A. S. Hunt. Seven Collotype Plates. 25J. 

IX. THE OXYRHYNCHUS PAPYRI, Part YI. For 1907-8. By B. P. Grenfell 
and A. S. HuNT. In prepare ticti.) 


(Yearly Summaries by F. G. Kenyon, W. E. Cri'M, and the Officers of the Society, with Maps.) 

Edited by F. l.L. Griffith. 
THE SEASON'S WORK. For 1 890-1. By Edolard Naville, Percy E Newberry, and 
G. W. Eraser. 2s. f)d. 
For 1892-3 and 1893-4. 2s. ()d. each. 
„ 1894-5. 3J. (>d. Containing Report (with Plans) of Mr. D. G. Hogarth's Excavations in 

1895-6. },s. With Illustrated Article on the Transport of Obelisks by Edouard Naville. 
1896-7. 2s. Gd. With Articles on O.vyrhynchus and its Papyri by B. P. Grenfell, and a Thucydides 

Papyrus from Ox\rhynchus by A. S. HUNT. 
1897-8. 2s. 6d. With Illustrated Article on Excavations at Hier.ikonpolis by W. M. FLINDERS 

1898-9. 25. 6rf. With Article on the Posilion of Lake Moeris by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. HUNT. 
,, 1899-1900. 2s. 6d. With Article on Knossos in its Egyptian Relations by A. J. Evans. 
And six successive years, 2s. 6d. each. 


AOriA IH20Y : 'Sayings of Our Lord,' from an Early Greek Papyrus. By B. P. Grenfell 
and A. S. Hunt. 2s. (with Collotypes) and 6d. net. 


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

Hunt. is. net. 
ATLAS OF ANCIENT EGYPT. With Letterpress and Inde.x. {Sfcotid Edition) 

( Under revision.) 


COPTIC OSTRACA. Bv W. E. Cri'm. ioj. 6d. net. 

Slides from Fund Photographs may he obtained through Messrs. Newton &* Co , j, Fleet Street, E.G.; 
and Prints from Mr. F. C. Murray, 37 Dartmouth Park Hill, N. W. 

Offices of the Egypt Exploration Fund: 








PA The Oxyrhynchus papyri